A journalist of the Saudi paper, Arab News, interviewing the Murtad ruler of Najdi-Saudi Darul Kufr state, asked:

“You spoke previously about moderation. What is the concept of moderation in your opinion?”

MBS responded: “Of course, this is a broad term. All Muslim jurists and scholars have been talking about the concept of moderation for over a thousand years. So, I do not think I am in a position to clarify this concept, as much as I can … abide by the Saudi constitution, which is the Quran, the Sunnah, and our basic governance system and to implement it fully in a broad sense that is inclusive of everybody.”


The ‘broad term’ concept of ‘moderation’ in Islam is baseless. His suggested more than thousand years of discussion on this concept is a sly hallucination designed for according credibility to his kufr transformation of the country – transforming it into Darul Kufr. Moderation in Islam is not an ambiguous concept left to the vagaries of man’s wildly fluctuating nafs.

There is no ambiguity in any of the concepts of Islam. Allah Ta’ala has finalized and perfected Islam during the very era of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Thus, the Qur’aan Majeed states:

“This day have I perfected for you your Deen, and complete for you My favour, and chosen for you Islam as your Deen.”

The Aayat and the Finality of Nubuwwat debunk the idea of ambiguity in the Ahkaam of the Shariah. This Shariah of Allah Azza Wa Jal is not subject to an evolutionary process. It is a well-defined, perfected Deen which precludes any scope for interpolation and misinterpretation which is the satanic weapon of the munaafiqs, zindeeqs and deviates in their conspiracy to demolish Islam. If Islam had not been a perfected and finalized code of life, Nubuwwat would not have terminated. There would then have been the need for change and amendment to this Shariah as was the case with the Shariats of all previous Ambiya (Alayhimus salaam).

“Moderation” is a well-defined Islamic concept. The Qur’aan Majeed states:

“These are the limits of Allah. Whoever transgresses these limits, verily he has committed oppression on himself.”

Any idea of ‘moderation’ which culminates in the abolition of any hukm of the Shariah, is satanism and kufr.

The entire Shariah is moderation. Nothing of this Divine Shariah is immoderate. Rajam (stoning to death), flogging, cutting the hand of the thief, all the Hudood punishments, and all the Ahkaam of the Shariah from Kitaabut Tahaarah to Kitaabul Meeraath are within the confines of Moderation – the Moderation prescribed by Allah Ta’ala, not the satanic moderation which is the whimsical fancy of the zanadaqah (heretical murtaddeen such as the MBS character).


The Qur’aan and Sunnah are not open for interpretation in terms of some confounded concept of moderation fabricated by heretics and atheists masquerading as Muslims such as the MBS Najdi character. The concept of moderation to which the Saudi Darul Kufr regime subscribes fully accommodates all the kufr, fisq and fujoor of the western kuffaar at the expense of the abolition of the Shariah – the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

It is a despicable canard to claim that the Qur’aan and Sunnah are the constitution of the Najdi Darul Kufr. Nothing is further from the truth than this blatant shaitaani LIE. There is nothing Qur’aanic and nothing of the Sunnah remaining today in the Najdi state. The country has been thoroughly transformed into Darul Kufr. The entire Shariah has been abolished. The Qur’aan and Sunnah are the Shariah. Thus, in reality the Qur’aan and the Sunnah have been abolished.

In fact, practising in terms of the Qur’aan and Sunnah is a criminal offence – treason – punishable with arrest, torture and cast into dungeons to languish and perish in cruel detention for years according to the whimsical emotions of the Najdi ruler and his cohorts. Every Muslim is aware of the massive kufrization scale to which the country has been submitted. The kufr transformatory process is ongoing. The satanic metamorphosis which is brutalizing Arabia, pillaging and plundering the Qur’aan and Sunnah is to appease the western kuffaar, especially the droves of prostitutes of which
there is now an influx in the guise of tourism.

This type of tourism in terms of the Shariah is prostitution and it comes with every imaginable kind of western immorality. No stone is left unturned by the murtad MBS to appease the kuffaar tourists and to lick the boots and hinds of America in particular.

The Haramain Shareefain have been transformed into weird temples, and the sanctity of both Harams is in the process of being satanically violated. Soon the Ka’bah and Musjidun Nabawi will become attractions for the kuffaar tourists.

In preparation for this satanic transformation, all highway signs prohibiting the kuffaar have been removed.

On his Deathbed, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) repeatedly instructed the Sahaabah: “Expel the Yahood and Nasaara from the Arabian Peninsula.” The expulsion was not restricted to the Haram Shareef. It applied to the entire Arabian Peninsula. This expulsion at the command of Allah Ta’ala is within the bounds of Islamic Moderation. But today, the MBS shaitaan, in addition to welcoming the droves of impure kuffaar wallowing in janaabat and najaasat, to enter and pollute Arabia, is paving the way for their entry into the Haramain Shareefain. What is now left of the Qur’aan and Sunnah? By what stretch of even satanic logic can a man claim that the constitution of the Najdi-Saudi Darul Kufr is the Qur’aan and Sunnah?



I am writing this email to enquire from Mufti Saheb in light of concerns from some Ulama on fatwas of irtidaad being passed on other Ulama. I wanted to know what is the Islamic procedure if one is accused of apostasy and the recourse the person according to Fiqh. Or what is the shuroot before a person can be declared a murtad. Should the matter be referred to a Qadhi or Haakim for the issue to be heard by both parties? If so, does Mufti saheb have a suggestion on who qualifies to be a Qadhi or Haakim on this issue? Should it be someone with an Ijaazat in Qadhaa? Or alternatively, can it be a panel of Muftis from the official Lajnat of Muftis to preside over such matter or any matters involving matters requiring an Islamic judgment concerning disputes or accusations of Irtitdaad.
In the introduction of the Kitaab, Ikfaarul Mulhideen, authored by Hadhrat Allaamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri (Rahmatullah alayh), Hadhrat Maulana Yusuf Binnuri (Rahmatullah alayh) states:

“In our age the Mulhideen and Zanaadaqah enjoy total freedom (of expression), hence they refute with greater audacity the Fataawa of Takfeer of the Ahl-e-Haqq. They describe these Fataawa and the terms kaafir, murtad, mulhid, zindeeq and jaahil as being abuse (vulgar words). They say that the Ulama know only swear words. The reality is that just as Salaat, Zakaat, Saum and Hajj are of the fundamental Ahkaam and Ibaadaat of Islam, so too are kufr, nifaaq, ilhaad, irtidaad and fisq among the foundational ahkaam of Islam. In the Deen these acts have specific meanings. The Qur’aan Kareem and Nabi Kareem (Alayhis Salaato Was Salaam) have categorically affirmed these. It is the obligation of the Ulama of the Ummah to show the Ummah the occasions that these terms (mulhid, kaafir, etc.) are used………………….If the limits of Imaan and Kufr are not elucidated and specified then the difference between Imaan and Kufr will be eliminated and the Deen of Islam will become an orphaned baby, and Jannat and Jahannam will become fairy tales. Therefore, the Ulama of this Ummah will apply the Fatwa of Kufr regardless of what happens, regardless of criticism. They will not care for anyone’s criticism and insults. They will apply the Fatwa of kufr to anyone who deserves it…. ‘They do not fear the insults of any insulter.’ (Qur’aan) Kaafir, Faasiq, Mulhid, Murtad, etc. are ahkaam and attributes of the Shariah and will be applicable to the beliefs of individuals and organizations. If these terms are correctly applied, it will be jahaalat or religiosity (bad-deeni) to describe them as terms of abuse. When the Ulama-e-Haqq make Takfeer of any group (organization), they (the Ulama) do not make them kaafir. They of their own volition become kaafir by their voluntary adoption of kufr beliefs, statements and acts. Thus they make themselves kaafir. The Ulama merely expose their kufr. The touchstone (kasoti, criterion, the instrument of recognition) does not make gold false. It merely shows that it (the metal) is false (and not gold). Therefore it is shameful ignorance to say that the Ulama only render people kaafir.” Allah Ta’ala states in the Qur’aan Majeed: “Verily, those who commit ilhaad in Our Aayaat, they cannot remain hidden from Us. Is that person who will be cast into the Fire better than the one who will come on the Day of Qiyaamah in safety? Do as you please. Verily, He (Allah) sees whatever you are doing.” Presenting the tafseer of the term Yulhidoona mentioned in this Aayat, Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Abbaas (Radhiyallahu anhu) said: “They misappropriate the Kalaam of Allah (using it wrongfully). Qaadhi Abu Yusuf (Rahmatullah alayh) said: “So is it with the zanaadaqah who commit ilhaad whilst they professed Islam.” Miyar Sayyid states in Sharh Mawaaqif: “Remember! That refrain, ‘Do not proclaim the people of the Qiblah are kaafir’, is the opinion of Shaikh Abul Hasan Ash’ari and Fuqaha. However, when we investigate the Aqaaid of deviant sects we find numerous such beliefs which are absolutely kufr, e.g.
(1)Existence of gods besides Allah Ta’ala.

(2) Hulool (incarnation) of Allah Ta’ala into a human being

(3) Denial of the Nubuwwat of Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam)

(4) Abusing and denigrating Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam)

(5) Proclaiming the prohibitions of the Shariah to be halaal

(6) Abolishing the Faraaidh of the Shariah, etc.
Therefore we are not in agreement with this principle of Shaikh Ash’ari. On the contrary, if any Muslim sect (group/organization) adopts such beliefs, statements and practices which are kufr, then we shall most assuredly proclaim them kaafir even if they perform Salaat facing the Qiblah and regard themselves to be Muslims.” Hadhrat Shah Abdul Aziz (Rahmatullah alayh) states:
“The meaning of ‘Ahl-e-Qiblah’ does not refer to every person who faces the Qiblah when performing Salaat. This term refers to those people who do not refute the Essentials of the Deen (Dhururiyaat-e-Deen). The term Qiblah in this context is synonymous with ‘Deen’. Thus it means the people who believe in the Deen. It does not refer to a person who only faces the Qiblah when performing Salaat. There is no doubt in the fact that the Imaan of a person on Kitaabullah and the Ambiya is not valid if he denies these kinds of Aqaaid and Ahkaam (i.e. the Dhururiyaat-e-Deen).”
(End of excerpts from Ikfaarul Mulhideen) The above is a very brief presentation of the meaning of Ahl-e-Qiblah. A whole volume could be compiled on this topic. After this brief introduction , we now turn to your queries.
1) If the kufr of a person is confirmed, then undoubtedly he has become a kaafir. If this person disseminates his kufr idea, belief or practice, then it is obligatory on the Ulama to expose him in order to safeguard the Imaan of the masses.
2) If the kufr is stated in privacy, without the person disseminating his kufr view, then those in contact with him should explain his folly in privacy. They should endeavour to divest him of his kufr idea and urge him to repent and renew his Imaan.
3) The declaration of kufr, ilhaad, irtidaad, etc. is reliant on confirmation of the kufr of the person.
4) Firstly, in our scenario there is no Qaadhi with coercive power. In fact there is no Qaadhi appointed by the Jamaatul Muslimeen. The Muslim community in South Africa is severely splintered. Every organization is independent of the other. If a group of Muslims appoints someone as their qaadhi, this will never be binding on others who are independent and who reject that organization or that person being qaadhi. A valid Qaadhi is in fact appointed by the Ameerul Mu’mineen. However, since the Institution of Khilaafat is non-existent, the question of such an appointment does not develop.
5) The Muslim community is currently in absolute disarray and hopelessly fragmented in a myriad of splinter groups. There is no hope of succeeding in appointing a Qaadhi for the community or for even a substantial segment of the community.
6) There is in fact no ‘official’ Lajnah of Muftis in South Africa. All Darul Iftas and Ulama groupings are today self-appointed.
7) However, there are many Muslims who follow specific Ulama or Ulama bodies. They do turn to such institutions for Shar’i directives. The Ulama are acting in this role although they are devoid of the power of enforcing their rulings on even their own followers.
8) In the current scenario, only such Ulama will be able to preside over issues, on whom their respective constituencies have confidence. There is no possibility whatsoever for the appointment of a national Qaadhi or a grand mufti. Such appointments will be mere paper appointments, futile and ineffective. May Allah Ta’ala keep you with aafiyat.