SO-CALLED ‘TAKAFOL’ IS BLATANT HARAAM INSURANCE

The financial venture being marketed in South Africa for Muslim consumption called Takaful is Haraam. The product being offered to the Muslim community has been called ‘Takafol’ by its sellers, Takafol S.A.Ltd. This company states in its introductory letter of advertisement:

“Takafol S.A., has with the mercy of Allah Ta’ala, been launched in March 2004: aiming at providing an Islamically acceptable alternate to the conventional insurance schemes.”

A perusal of the rules and conditions applicable to the new scheme offered by this company, establishes beyond the least shadow of doubt that there is absolutely no difference between ‘conventional’ insurance and the insurance of Takafol (S.A.) Ltd.

It is the same product with a name having an Islamic hue. It is the same wine in a different bottle. It is plain ‘zina’ described as nikah.

FUNDAMENTALS

The very same two fundamentals which render conventional insurance haraam exist in the ‘takafol’ scheme. The two fundamentals which make insurance haraam are riba and gambling. Everyone understands what riba is. It is commonly called interest although interest is just o­ne aspect of riba.

The suspension of gain o­n a risk or o­n an unsure future development in an agreement requiring both parties to tender wealth is qimaar or gambling in the Shariah. Both these elements are found par excellence in the takafol scheme. In fact there is nothing new in the product which this company is offering. It is the same as conventional insurance. It has o­nly changed the name.

SHAMELESS

The aggravating factor here is that the company is shamelessly offering its riba-qimaar product in the name of Islam and as a consequence of “the mercy of Allah Ta’ala” whereas Allah’s mercy never offers Muslims something which is glaringly haraam in the Shariah.

Even a layman who browses through the brochure of the company will quickly understand that there is no difference between conventional insurance and takafol insurance. Whether zina is committed by the kuffaar or by Muslims calling it ‘nikah’, it remains haraam.

It is essential to understand that a haraam scheme does not become halaal merely by a name-change and giving it a title which sounds Islamic to the Muslim ear.

TAKAFOL

Takafol is a mutual pledge between two parties. The o­ne pledges to pay money for a possible future gain of an unstipulated amount, the gain being suspended o­n damage to his property which he insures with the takafol company. If the party does suffer a future loss of the insured assets, the other party (the takaol company) will pay him an amount after exhaustive investigations conducted with the desire to escape payment in exactly the same way as all insurance companies act.

The takafol company after being driven into a tight corner in consequence of the correct manipulation of its many haraam conditions by the o­ne who has been insured, is forced to reluctantly pay up in consideration for the haraam premiums which the insured person has made over a period of time. There is, therefore, not the slightest doubt in the prohibition of the takafol product which Takafol (S.A.) Ltd is presently marketing in the Muslim community.

DEVIOUS

In a devious endeavour to convince Muslims of the acceptability of their Haraam takafol product, the company manipulates the names of senior Ulama who have departed from this world some decades ago. Thus, this company states:

Read more ...

A CALL FOR FAJR SALAAT IN THE MUSJID-THE BACKBONE OF THE UMMAH

PART 1

Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said: "The most burdensome prayers for the hypocrites are the ‘Ishā and Fajr prayers. If they were to know the virtue of them, they would come to them even if they had to crawl. I sometimes thought of ordering for the prayer to be commenced, and I would appoint a man to lead the people in prayer, and then I would go, along with some men having bundles of firewood, to the people who are not attending the prayer and burn their houses with fire upon them."
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

While everyone is ready to call for the help of Allah Ta’Aala in Gaza and anticipate the coming of Hazrat Mahdi, the question is, are WE ready for his coming?

Unlike our fantasy of the Hazrat Mahdi merely coming and helping everyone and anyone with a Muslim name, the Ahadith foretell of those following the Mahdi being only those who have a very high level of Imaan, while Dajjal shall filter out those that do not have such.

They will conquer Constantinople with Tasbih and Takbir and will acquire such spoils of war as has never been seen before.” [Ibn Maja]

This will be the extent of their imaan,they would transcend material means and be rooted in imaan and good actions to such an extent that they will conquer with such alone

According to Nabi sallalaahu alaihi wasallam a guage of one's standing in terms of Imaan and hypocrisy is Fajr Salah. We can sit scrolling through the news for hours, attend haraam marches and write hour to hour updates, yet we are falling short in the most important fundamental that Nabi sallalaahu alaihi wasallam has made a criteria for our success or failure.

It was ever a duty incumbent upon Us, to help the believers. (Quran)

When Allah Ta'Aaala has taken it upon himself to assist the true Mumineen, it would only make sense to try our utmost to fit this criteria in order to gain the help of Allah Ta'aala for the Ummah.

Abu al-Ahwas reported: Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, May Allah be pleased with him, said,
“Whoever would be pleased to meet Allah tomorrow as a Muslim, let him guard over these prayers when they are announced. Verily, Allah has instituted for His Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, practices of guidance, for they are indeed practices of guidance. If you were to pray in your houses like one who keeps to his house, you would have abandoned the practice of your Prophet, and if you were to abandon a practice of your Prophet, you have been misguided. No man purifies himself in the best manner and then proceeds to one of these Musaajid but that Allah records a good deed for every step he takes, raises him by a degree, and erases a sin. We have seen a time when no one leaves it but a hypocrite whose hypocrisy is known, whereas a weak man would come being carried by two men until he was placed within the rows.” (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)

It is very easy upon the Nafs to walk on the road and shout slogans, however our true concern shall show itself when we conform to what Allah and Nabi Sallalaahu alaihi wasallam desire from us. The very same Nabi (Alayhis Salaatu Was salaam) that we claim to love and follow!

There is the well known incident of Sayidina Hanzalah Radiallahu Anhu wherein he himself out his love for Allah and His beloved Nabi Alayhis Sallatu was salaam declared himself to be a Munaafiq, saying "Hanzalah has turned Munaafiq", until Nabi Alayhis Salaam pacified him and explained to him that he was a true Muslim and not a Munaafiq.

In this spirit of the Sahaaba Radiallahu Anhum, should we not be reflecting on the state of our own imaan?

Let us make a firm determination that we will do everything possible to make Fajr with Jamaat part of our lives, for indeed this is the gauge of our faith.

Moulana Zaheer Mangerah Saheb

A Call To All From Qalamul Haq

DARUL ULOOM NEWCASTLE REUNION/PARTY OF MERRYMAKING WHERIN THEY ARE HOSTING FUSAAQ

Sayyiduna Anas ibn Malik (radiyallahu ‘anhu) said: “When a fasiq is honoured, Allah gets angry and the ‘Arsh shudders on account of [Allah’s anger].”

It is indeed sad that Molvies of and linked with Darul Uloom Newcastle have degenerated to the point of having a “reunion” weekend. This reunion is merely a party of waste and merrymaking no matter what name is given to such.

We at Qalamul Haq and others as well are very disturbed by this and write this with sad hearts.

Bus transport arrangements being made from Cape Town to Newcastle for people to have a “get together” and people coming from all parts of the country, when we all should be involved in Dua and Ibaadat in solitude at this time when the Ummat is faced with so many challenges.

A few points for the organisers, participants and others to think of regarding this event of waste and futility:

1. What’s the point of ladies facilities if it’s a reunion of men (even if such was acceptable)?

2. Are they not honouring fusaaq Ulama who are involved in photography by giving them the platform to speak from?

3. Will the outspoken Ulama for Haq who are attending this reunion condemn photography when it is a known fact that photography is rampant at Darul Uloom Newcastle or at least by many of it's students, Azaatiza and well wishers/supporters?

4. Are they not then emulating Kuffaar school students and Fussaaq with such reunions?

5. They even have Molvis who sold out Deen giving lectures and possibly crying for the plight of the Ummat and then they will enjoy their meals while our brethren in Gaza die and starve.

6. Why was a Quran Ayat e Kareema misused for such an occasion? Does the Quran Ayah apply to the YouTube videos that the guest speaker had conducted then to merry make now?

For ulama who claim to be on Haq to attend and share platform with the type of Ulama they speak out against themselves is perplexing to say the least.

We advise Ulama as well as the layman to abstain from such futility and use their time, money and resources in a way that is better suited to assist thid ailing Ummat.

The organisers and students, former and current, should search their hearts and ask themselves if this is the legacy that Hazrat Moulana Qasim Seema Rahmatullahi Alay left and would he have approved of such!

May Allah ta’aala have mercy on on this wayward Ummat. Ameen.

Issued by: Qalamul Haq

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

TIMELESS JEWELS

Trying to Extinguish Allah's light

يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِـُٔوا۟ نُورَ ٱللَّهِ بِأَفْوَٰهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى ٱللَّهُ إِلَّآ أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُۥ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْكَـٰفِرُونَ

They wish to extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths, but Allah will only allow His light to be perfected, even to the dismay of the disbelievers.
Quraan 9:32

No matter our situation, we have to propagate deen. The propagation of deen involves calling people towards good and warning them of evil. In this day and age, the fitnah, misguidance, and danger in Islam is not external, but it is internal.

This deception is such that they parade themselves as people who care for the betterment of muslims while being selfish, they name themselves as houses of ilm and Ihsan while being arrogant and ignorant, they advertise themselves as radio Islam and Hilaal tv while airing haraam content.

This is all part of the illusion. Make us look one way while they do what is beeded to bolster their reputation and fill their pockets. This is all a method to trick people and win their trust, and trust means obedience.

A duck quacks, a dog barks, a cat meows, a cow moos, and a lion roars. These are just noises they are expected to make and does not define their personality or show who they really are. Similarly, many organisations and individuals may talk the talk, they speak the truth, but it is not an endorsement or validation of their reality and good intent. For that, we have to look past the words they utter, the deception they spew, and the manipulation they propagate, and look at their true agenda and purpose while keeping a close eye upon their actions.

We must speak out openly against the evils and expose the reality of those organisations and individuals, whose actions and sins are a source of misguidance and confusion for the ummah. Peoples personal life is something we should cover and hide, but when peoples actions become a fitnah, that when they need to be warned, and when they don't rectify their ways, then is when we have to speak out and warn the public. They may not like it, because they are being laid bare, and their only reaction will be crocodile tears accompanied by misusing the sayings of pious predecessors to declare themselves as correct and those who speak out against them as incorrect.

Notice, how these agents and workers of the devil, the ones who are a slave to their evil hearts, will never make an effort to justify their intoxicated and corrupt beliefs using quran and sunnah, because they are scared and fearful, they know they are lieing and they know they will immediately be slammed and exposed by those who stand up for islam. Don't be fooled by their words and actions because they are peddling the same evil methodology that the mushrikeen of the past practised.

May Allah open our eyes and hearts, so we are able to recognise and walk on the path of deen.

Ameen

TIMELESS JEWELS

Taunting and Mocking Allah and his Deen.

When the jews had attempted to mock Allah's Deen and attempted to legalize fishing on the Sabat, which Allah had prohibited, Allah mocked those who made a mockery of his Deen by changing their appearance and transforming them into apes.

In today's time we have those who have followed the footsteps of these transgressors and have sold out the priceless jewel of Islam by halaalizing free mixing, interest (Takaaful Riba fake laundering fund) and every wrong under the sun.

Just as it is prohibited to praise and innovator, the opposite is true for those who's temperament demands such, i.e., it is commendable to deplore an innovator as a means of reducing his status in the eyes of the unwary who may fall into the trap of following him and destroy his Deen.

The Quran has allowed one to retaliate according to temperament to the amount one is wronged, therefore when one is mocked, the shariah will, as per its justice, allow for the like of its retaliation. Therefore when an individual publicly mocks the Deen of Allah by sugar coating haraam with Islamic terms and justifying transgression due to greed, the retaliation of such mockery of Allah and his Deen and its end result is none other then mockery, as the true slaves of Allah take mockery of Deen to be more severe then mockery of their own selves.

When that humiliation befalls these individual instead of taking lesson they play victim instead of rectifying the rot in their belief system.

The pious predecessors and their difference in expressing hatred for those who corrupt Deen

“The ways of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen (radhiyallahu anhum) would differ in expressing hatred for the sake of Allah towards the perpetrators of sins (i.e. private sins which do not affect or influence others). However, ALL of them reached consensus on expressing hatred for the oppressors and innovators, and all who disobeyed Allah with a sin that extends from himself to others…”

وكلهم اتفقوا على إظهار البغض للظلمة و المبتدعة وكل من عصى الله بمعصية متعدية منه إلى غيره

Imam al-Ghazali explains why the issue of condemning these charlatans who misguide the masses is more severe than it is for the Kuffaar:

“…the matter in condemning him is more severe than it is for a Kaafir, because the evil of a Kaafir does not extend [beyond himself] as Muslims believe he is a Kaafir so will pay no attention to his speech as he makes no claim for himself of being a Muslim and believing the truth. As for the innovator who propagates his innovation, and claims what he calls to is true, he is a cause for the misguidance of people, and thus his evil does extend [beyond himself]..”

في الإنكار عليه أشد منه على الكافر لأن شر الكافر غير متعد فإن المسلمين اعتقدوا كفره فلا يلتفتون إلى قوله إذ لا يدعى لنفسه الإسلام واعتقاد الحق أما المبتدع الذي يدعوا إلا البدعة ويزعم أن ما يدعو إليه حق فهو سبب لغواية الخلق فشره متعد

Hence, the Shariah demands exposing, belittling and disparaging such charlatans:

“Thus the desirability of expressing hatred of him, hostility towards him, disassociation from him and belittling him, and disparaging him for his innovation, and driving people away from him, is greater.”

فالاستحباب في إظهار بغضه ومعاداته والانقطاع عنه وتحقيره والتشنيع عليه ببدعته وتنفير الناس عنه أشد

To these individuals and organizations we say, today you mock the Muslim Ummah and Allah's Deen with your publicity stunts, thus your downfall is around the corner by the will of Allah.

The above applies to the Ulama who have the temperament stated and not the general masses,it also applies to public deviance that effects others and not private sins

"If you ridicule us, then we will ridicule you just as you ridicule."(Surah Hud 11:38)

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART 6

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Question 5
Re: Line Speed – Of slaughter

I recently asked SANHA the following questions:
“At the poultry plants supervised by SANHA and where chickens certified Halaal,…..
a)…how many chickens are slaughtered per slaughterer per day / or per shift? (on average, during high season, during low season)
b)…can the above be broken down per hour and per minute per slaughterer? (again… on average, during high season, during low season)
c)…simply put, in the “busy” abattoirs that SANHA supervises, what is the average line speed? (and the high season and low season line speeds) “

SANHA’s EBI Lockhat replied as follows (to a,b,c above):
“The number of birds slaughtered at “busy” abattoirs range from 25,000 to 150,000 per shift. The line speed would accordingly vary. However, the number of slaughterers on line are proportionately increased to facilitate higher line speeds which average at 135 – 140 birds per minute.”
(the above response by SANHA’s EBI Lockhat by email on the 21st October 2010)

Clearly it can be seen that SANHA evaded answering my questions (a,b,c above) directly and responded with a very superficial answer.
My questions are very simple and a person with elementary English knowledge should be able to grasp my questions and answer appropriately.

Nevertheless, I once again ask SANHA the following (very simply) and request proper and direct answers this time around:

Question 5.1.1
How many chickens are slaughtered per slaughterer per day / or per shift on average in the high volume plants that SANHA certifies?

Question 5.1.2
How many chickens are slaughtered per slaughterer per day / or per shift during high season (busy periods) in the high volume plants that SANHA certifies?

Question 5.1.3
How many chickens are slaughtered per slaughterer per day / or per shift during low season (quieter periods) in the high volume plants that SANHA certifies?

Question 5.2
SANHA states as follows:
“However, the number of slaughterers on line are proportionately increased to facilitate higher line speeds which average at 135 – 140 birds per minute.”

Question 5.2.1
If the line speeds average 135 – 140 birds per minute, then what are the top end (high end) line speeds during really busy periods? (perhaps 180 birds per minute??, perhaps 160 birds per minute???)

Question 5.2.2
Now that we have established what the line speeds are,… how many slaughterers are there (max. no? and min no.?) active on the line at any one time? And how many birds per minute is each slaughterer slaughtering (during high speed busy time?)?

Question 5.2.3
Briefly, giving key points, what is each slaughterer’s job description? (What exactly are their responsibilities?)
And
What does each slaughterer (on average) earn per month? And who pays their salaries?

Question 5.3
Do slaughterers slaughter at the rate of around 40 birds per minute? (And this; whilst checking for dead birds, whilst reciting the Tasmiyah for each and every bird, whilst severing the minimum number of vessels required by Shari’ah, whilst “taking a breather”, whilst cleaning their goggles, whilst sharpening their knives, whilst checking for dead birds…. etc etc ….???) (If not 40, then how many? 35? 33? 30? 45? 50?)

Question 5.4
Is Tasmiyah recited by every slaughterer for each and every bird that they slaughter? (even in busy periods when the line speed is at its fastest)

Question 5.5
Is SANHA of the view that Tasmiyah is in the heart of every Muslim, hence no need to read the Tasmiyah for each and every bird slaughtered at high speed?

Question 5.6
Do slaughterers continue slaughtering whilst it is the time for Juma Salaah?

Question 6
RE: Contamination

What if some of the chickens slaughtered at commercial plants are indeed Halaal and others not (that is they are Haraam) for various reasons …. (skipped Tasmiyah, or all vessels not severed, or died as a result of stunning etc…) …. And these chickens are all together (resulting in possible contamination)? What would be SANHA’s view be on the fact that one now has a “mixture” of (so called) Halaal and (definitely) Haraam?

(To be continued Insha Allah Ta'aala)

THIS WORLD – THE ARENA OF STRUGGLE AND CONFLICT

“Thus shaitaan caused them (Hadhrat Aadam and Hadhrat Hawwaa) to slip (into error) by means of it (the forbidden tree), expelling them from that (heavenly abode) in which they were.

We said to them:
‘Get down as enemies to each other. For you on earth will be a (temporary) abode and provision for a while.” (Qur’aan)
“Verily, this world is but play and amusement while the Abode of the Aakhirah is best for those who have Taqwa. What, do you not understand?”
(Qur’aan)

Allah Ta’ala has dispatched man to earth for an extremely short sojourn. He created man physically weak, hence the Qur’aan says: “Man has been created weak.” All animals are physically stronger than man. Along with his physical weakness, Allah Ta’ala created in him a thoroughly evil nafs. Describing this Nafs, Nabi Yusuf (alayhis salaam) said: “I do not exonerate my nafs. Verily, the nafs is a greater commander of evil.” (Qur’aan)

Further compounding the problems for man, Allah Ta’ala created shaitaan, our avowed enemy. About this enemy, the Qur’aan says: “Do not follow in the footsteps of shaitaan. Verily, he instructs you with only evil and immorality and that you fabricate on Allah what you know not.”

The nafs, shaitaan, man’s weaknesses and deficiencies and the variety of mundane impositions and hardships which he has to encounter in this worldly life constitute a formidable array of forces lined up against him. Alone, man can never confront and overcome this coalition. But all these forces have been placed in this arena of life by Allah Ta’ala. Allah Ta’ala has sent man into this world to combat and vanquish all these evil and destructive forces which are constantly attacking him.

Despite his inherent weakness and the formidable coalition of forces against him, Allah Ta’ala has equipped man with adequate means to combat and defeat them. Along with man’s superior Aql (intelligence), Allah Ta’ala has promised His aid for those who sincerely struggle against these forces and maintain their focus on the original abode of the Aakhirah. Thus, the Qur’aan says: “Those who struggle in Our Cause, verily, We shall guide them to Our avenues. Verily, Allah is with the Muhsineen (those who practise virtue).”

This world is the field for struggle and battle against the nafs and shaitaan. It is in Allah’s Scheme that man should struggle in this world which is a veritable minefield of evil. If Allah Ta’ala had desired only comfort and pleasure for us, He would not have sent us into this defective world nor would He have created in us an evil nafs nor would He have created shaitaan and allowed him to mislead us. Allah Ta’ala would have created us all in Jannat where our ancestors, Aadam (alayhis salaam) and Hawwaa (alayhas salaam) were created and resided for a while.

Since conflict between vice and virtue and struggle are requisites of life on earth, there should be no surprise and no panic when calamities overtake us. People are surprised and lapse into a quandary when difficulties and hardships settle on them. It is unintelligent to expect life to progress smoothly and happily on earth. Earth is not the abode of happiness. It is the abode of struggle and hardship. Happiness, comfort and pleasure are the ingredients of life in Jannat.

Trials are integral constituents of worldly life. Allah Ta’ala says:
“Most assuredly, We shall test you with some fear, hunger, and reduction in wealth, life and provisions. Give glad tidings to the Saabireen (the patient ones).”

People are baffled when difficulties settle on them. They fail to realize that all such developments are divine enactments designed for life on earth. The difficulties are even more in the moral and spiritual path. The desires of the nafs for worldly comforts lightens the struggle for the attainment of material pleasures and worldly success. However, in the moral and spiritual spheres, it is a lifelong struggle which has to be sustained until Maut.

All requirements for moral reformation and spiritual perfection are abhorrent to the nafs, hence the struggle is uphill and constant, and no one should be surprised nor feel dejected in this process. There is no achievement without struggle. With struggle against the nafs, the Mu’min emerges victorious and at the end of life, the war against shaitaan and the nafs is decisively won.

(AWAKE-RAMADHAAN)

JAMIAT KZN DAMAGE CONTROL INTERFAITH BAYAN TOUR

Imam Tirmidhi (rahimahullah) has recorded this Hadith on the authority of Sayyiduna Abu Hurayrah (radiyallahu ‘anhu). The full Hadith is as follows:

“In the end of time there will be men who will deceive through religion [They will be seeking the dunya through Din], deceiving the people by wearing wool [wearing garments that ascetic ones wear], their tongues will be sweeter than sugar but their hearts are the hearts of wolves. Allah Ta’ala says: ‘[Is it due to My Tolerance and Mercy] that you are deceived or are you courageous enough against me? I take an oath by Me, I will send upon these people such a trial that will leave those who are [generally] calm and collected utterly baffled”

(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2404)

It is about time that people begin to open their eyes to reality.

SANHA, JUSA, EBRAHIM BHAM, all have one thing in common. Pulling the wool over the public's eyes!

The unfortunate reality is that the Ummah has become extremely naïve and are falling for sweet words.

Nabi Alayhis Salaatu was salaam warned us about this (people with sweet tongues).

It is a reality that is happening all around us every day.

Look at Sanha calling out the recent poster against them which they came out to defend (and rightfully so). But when it comes to a myriad of other questions posed and points made, then they become like chickens!

Perhaps the torture of chickens has made them into such. They cluck away when they find a worm but run when about to be caught.

Jamiat KZN has behaved inconsistently in the matter of interfaith and also being a member of UUCSA. They seem to be trying to play both sides of the fence unfortunately.

If one has to apply one's mind to the slightest degree, one would realize that Jamiat KZN attempts to have their bread buttered on both sides. They wish to appease the senior Ulama of Durban and KZN, while still being bed fellows with The UUCSA liberal Cartel.

Our question is a simple logical question:

If an organization runs bayan tours after bayan tours on Shiasm, yet invites and promotes a Shia speaker what would we say? Would we say they are sincerely against Shiasm or would we raise a hue and cry for bringing a Shia on the mimbar?

The same principle applies here. They can run a million bayan programs on interfaith but they promoted someone who attends temples and promotes interfaith?

Last we checked our major Darul Ulooms state that attending these places of worship is not permissible. Does Jamiat KZN hold a different view?

Is it fine to speak against interfaith in theory but accommodate those that do such in practice?

These are questions that sensible individuals should ponder over.

And our duty is to deliver (ONLY) a clear message (of Truth)

(Qalamul Haq)
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Musjid Open Days

Q: Is it permissible to have a musjid open day where non-Muslims are invited to the musjid with the intention of dawah and presenting Islam to them? In today’s times, we find that this practice is becoming common in various places. Is this practice in conformance with the sunnah?

Answer:

At the onset, it is important for one to understand that Islam is a complete, perfect and comprehensive religion. Islam has provided complete and perfect guidance to man in every department of his worldly and deeni life and showed him the way to fulfil the rights he owes to Allah Ta‘ala and the creation in every situation. Rasulullah’s (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) Mubaarak life is the best example for the ummah to follow and to take guidance.
In order for one to remain on the path of guidance, it is incumbent upon him to ensure that his actions conform to the Mubaarak Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) and the way of his Sahaabah (radhiyallahu ‘anhum). Hence, the sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) is the criteria for acceptance in the sight of Allah Ta‘ala.
Many a time, an action is not found in the sunnah, yet it is not impermissible. However, due to it not conforming to the sunnah, it will not receive the guarantee of guidance and goodness from Allah Ta‘ala. In many cases, though at the beginning a certain action seemed to be beneficial, but after a period of time, the harms, problems and complications became manifest.
It cannot be denied that during the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam), certain kuffaar entered the musjid. However, these were few incidents which cannot be used as a basis to prove the new trend of allowing musjid open days for the following reasons:
1) Despite Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) regularly extending the dawat of Islam to the non-Muslims, he never adopted this practice of inviting the kuffaar to the musjid and having a program or musjid open day program.
2) Towards the end of the blessed life of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam), the following verses of the Qur’aan Majeed were revealed,
يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ فَلَا يَقْرَبُوا الْمَسْجِدَ الْحَرَامَ بَعْدَ عَامِهِمْ هٰذَا
O you who believe, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not come close to al-Masjid al-Haraam after this year. (Surah Towbah v. 28)
From this aayah, some of the great Imaams, the likes of Imaam Maalik (rahimahullah), are of the opinion that it is not permissible to allow the kuffaar to enter any musjid.
Sayyiduna Umar bin Abdul Aziz (rahimahullah) wrote (to his governors), “Do not allow the Jews and Christians to enter all the Musjids of the Muslims.” He then quoted the Aayat, “Indeed the Mushriks are impure”’. (Tafseer Tabari 14/192)
3) According to all the Imaams of fiqh (i.e. Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam Shaafi’ee and Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal (rahimahumullah)), the kuffaar should not be allowed to enter the musjid if they have any impurity on them or they are in an impure state. Overall, all the imaams will discourage the kuffaar entering the musjid for the following reasons:
1) This trend is alien to Islam and it has its roots in the Kaafir culture. Hence, through Muslims adopting these new trends, they will be emulating the kuffaar.
2) One will not be able to control the dressing of the kuffaar and their behaviour. It should not happen that they begin to take photos and videos of themselves or others in the musjid, or they enter the musjid while part of the women’s body and hair are open, or men enter with short pants while part of their satr area (knees) are exposed.
3) Women are discouraged from coming to the musjid. In the time of the Sahaabah (radhiyallahu ‘anhum), women were stopped from coming to the musjid due to the fear of fitnah. By allowing these kuffaar women to enter the musjid, we will be opposing the way of Islam.
4) Women who are in the state of haidh cannot enter the musjid. It is possible that some of the women who enter may be in the state of haidh. Hence, if open permission is granted, then Muslims will be allowing the non-Muslim women to enter the musjid in the state of haidh.
Likewise, people in the state of janaabat (requiring fardh ghusl) should not enter the musjid. By allowing the disbelievers to enter the musjid, we will be allowing people in the state of janaabat to come into the musjid, leading to the sanctity and respect of the musjid being violated.
5) Islam commands segregation between the sexes, and the kuffaar will not uphold these values of the Muslims and respect the sanctity of the musjid. Hence, through allowing the kuffaar males and females to enter, a great amount of sin will be taking place in the musjid.
Overall, opening this new door will be satisfying the kuffaar, following their culture and opening our masaajid to them. This will have a negative impact on our deen and the kuffaar will thereafter expect the Muslims to reciprocate by gracing their occasions and attending their church and synagogue open days. The fear is that the kuffaar may then begin to have a hand in our places of worship, stop the azaan when they want, decide when our musjid must open and close, decide how we must perform our salaah, with masks and distancing, and a whole host of other vices that will impact on our deen.
And Allah Ta'ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

Answered by:
Mufti Zakaria Makada
Checked & Approved:
Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART 5

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

When Is This Ummat Going To Wake Up And Stop Consuming Haraam Endorsed By This Cartel

(Qalamul Haq)

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Question 4
Re: Immersing into hot water for de feathering

A practice that is prevalent here at all the major slaughter plants is that the poultry, very shortly after being slaughtered, are immediately (before removing any impurities from inside the stomach) immersed into hot (either Very hot or Scolding Hot or Boiling hot) water to facilitate the feather peeling process.

I recently asked SANHA the following question:
Are any birds that SANHA certifies Halaal subjected to de-feathering in boiling hot (alternatively very hot) water whilst still alive (resulting in a possibility of such bird dying by drowning)?

And SANHA responded (with a very curt response as follows):
“No! And the allegation of boiling water being used is a blatant untruth”
(above response by EBI Lockhat of SANHA on 21st October 2010)

As far as this is concerned my questions are as follows:

Question 4.1
Exactly how long after slaughter are the birds immersed into hot water in the various large plants that SANHA certifies (please give the shortest period and the longest period)?

Question 4.2
What is the water temperature normally set at in these water tanks wherein the birds are immersed to facilitate the feather peeling process?

Question 4.3
Irrespective of the temperature of the water, are the birds immersed into the hot water with all their impurities and insides still in the stomach and in the bird?

Question 4.4
How often is this water changed?

Question 4.5
Is there any chance whatsoever (even 1 iota of a chance?) that the birds are immersed into the water so quickly after slaughter that there may well be birds that are not yet totally dead when immersed,… resulting in these birds dying of drowning?

Question 4.6
Muslim scholars are of the view that when birds are immersed into hot water en mass with their impurities and insides still in the stomach and inside the bird that a very real possibility exists that the meat absorbs such impurities and such meat is rendered Nijis/Napaak.

Western scientists too carry the view that such a practice results in impurities being absorbed into the meat.

What is SANHA’s view?

Question 4.7
Darul Uloom Deoband has ruled as follows:
“(Fatwa: 190/31/TL=1431)
If chicken is put in hot water without taking out impurities inside its stomach to an extent that the impurities are absorbed in the meat, so the chicken turns impure (najis/napak). Therefore, the chicken should not be put in hot water without taking out the impurities.
Allah (Subhana Wa Ta’ala) Knows Best
Darul Ifta, Darul Uloom Deoband “

My understanding of the above is that the IFTA Department of Darul Uloom Deoband have definitely “considered” that the immersing of chicken into hot water with its impurities still inside the stomach could well result in such impurities being absorbed into the meat turning such meat impure (najis/napak).
We obviously are aware of the fact that any meat that is impure, that is najis/napak is Haraam meat (just like pork which is napaak and can never be Halaal).

What is SANHA’s view of the above?
(Could the considerations of the Ulema at Darul Ifta Deoband be nonsensical? Could the brilliant and pious minds at the IFTA department of Darul Uloom Deoband all be on the wrong track?)

Question 4.8
The very reputable IFTA department of Darul Uloom Deoband has ruled as follows:
“chicken should not be put in hot water without taking out the impurities.”

The above ruling has been endorsed by ALL the senior Ulema whose rulings I have access to.

My question is;
Based on whose rulings has SANHA considered this practice of immersing into hot water (just stunned/electrocuted and just slaughtered) birds with all impurities, intestines etc still inside the stomach, with Feaces still inside the bird as acceptable?
(Please furnish evidence of the rulings of acceptability of this practice from any senior Ulema)

Read more ...

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART 4

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

When Is This Ummat Going To Wake Up And Stop Consuming Haraam Endorsed By This Cartel

(Qalamul Haq)

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Question 3.6
With regards to the Fatwa quoted above (of Mufti Taqi Usmani) does SANHA even understand the learned Mufti’s ruling?
Can SANHA perhaps please comment (individually on each of points a,b,c,d,e of Mufti Taqi’s Fatwa above) and educate us on SANHA’s understanding of the Fatwa and on whether SANHA takes note of and accepts Mufti Taqi’s Fatwa….. (Or not?)
(SANHA in deeming stunning acceptable surely thinks that the learned Mufti Taqi has erred in his ruling’s?? and by default that Darul Uloom Ifta departments of Deoband and Karachi have erred as well… and have got it wrong???)

Question 3.7
In detail, what is SANHA’s exact reasons for accepting stunning? (Especially as SANHA always proclaims to lean on the side conservatism, e.g. on the gelatin issue etc where SANHA preaches a rather safe then sorry approach)

Question 3.8
SANHA’s following comment refers;
“Where controlled stunning is applied, the stun is of a reversible nature and such bird will not die as a result thereof. If however, there are birds which may have died either pre or post stunning, such birds are removed from the line and disposed of accordingly.”
(Above by EBI Lockhat in an email dated 21st October 2010)

It is now established from SANHA’s comment above that birds that die pre stunning or post stunning are “removed from the line”

Question 3.8.1
What are the quantum of birds that die pre stunning and are removed from the line?

Question 3.8.2
What are the quantum of birds that die post stunning and are removed from the line?

Question 3.8.3
What are, in general, are the causes of death of birds that die pre stunning? (Could these birds be unhealthy in the 1st place and hence just falling down dead? Could they be treated inhumanely and be dying as a result thereof??)

Question 3.8.4
What are, in general, the causes of death of birds that die post stunning? (Could these birds perhaps be dying as a direct result of the stunning??)

Question 3.9
Please explain how exactly birds that die post stunning are removed from the line pre slaughter?
[Removed by whom? When? At what point? Perhaps removed by the same slaughterers who are already tasked, and stressed, with slaughtering birds at extremely high speed?]

Question 3.10
How exactly is a (dead) bird that dies post stunning (pre slaughter) differentiated from a live but effectively unconscious / comatose bird (for purposes of removing the dead birds from the line?

Question 3.11
SANHA claims that:
“the stun is of a reversible nature and such bird will not die as a result thereof”

Is SANHA willing to subject itself to a “surprise” random and unannounced survey where at one of the plants that it certifies 1000 birds that have been stunned are all one after another removed from the line pre slaughter and then waited on to see in how many of the 1000 the stunning process is actually reversed (as SANHA claims “the stun is of a reversible nature”) and to check if we’re left with 1000 (out of a 1000) “healthy” birds??

Question 3.12
If the survey is done as per 3.11 above and a few birds actually die (or just one) then what would SANHA’s view be of the obvious contamination between (so called) Halaal birds and those that cannot be Halaal due to dying pre slaughtering as a result of the stunning?

Question 3.13
SANHA’s words above where SANHA says that:
“ ……….stunning in commercial abattoirs may be considered.”
are very ambiguous.

What exactly is SANHA saying / suggesting?
On whose authority?
Following exactly whose Fatwa’s and who’s rulings … (please give some references to these Fatwa’s and rulings)?

Question 3.14
During SANHA’s “pre-planned” site visits / inspections to one of the plants Mufti Elias asked the supervisor to immerse his hand into the “stunning water” where the tiny birds that consumers consume are stunned. The supervisor refused.

Why did he refuse?
(he, the supervisor, told Mufti Elias that it would “kick” him or shock him)
(if the stunning would “kick” a 80kg’s+ mountain of a man then what would it do to a tiny 1kg bird??)

Question 3.15
SANHA states that;
“Senior Ulema and pious predecessors have laid down the rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter based on their interpretation of public need decades prior to the formation of SANHA.”

Question 3.15.1
What (or who) exactly is SANHA’s definition of Senior Ulema and especially of Pious predecessors?
[My understanding of the term “Pious Predecessors” is that when the term ‘Pious Predecessors’, i.e. Salf-e-Saaliheen, is mentioned, it refers to the Ulema, Sulaha, Fuqaha and Auliya of the three initial eras of Islam , which are known as Khairul Quroon (the Noblest Ages).] Is this correct??

Question 3.15.2
There is not a single personality from the Salf-e-Saaliheen who condones what Sanha is saying and doing (refer to 3.4 above).
Can SANHA cite the name of a single Faqeeh or Aalim from
among the Salf-e-Saaliheen who had contended the permissibility of
pre-slaughter injury (stunning)?

Question 3.15.3
Irrespective of SANHA’s understanding of who the Pious Predecessors are can SANHA cite tangible evidence that the Pious Predecessors have “laid down the rules” for acceptability of;
• slaughter without the direction of the Qiblah,
• stunning pre slaughter,
• immersing the chickens in blood filled scalding water with its intestines and feaces still inside,
• hanging the chickens upside down and slaughtering in motion on a tremendously fast-moving conveyor belt…..
• etc etc etc?

Read more ...

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART 3

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

When Is This Ummat Going To Wake Up And Stop Consuming Haraam Endorsed By This Cartel

(Qalamul Haq)

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Question 3
Re: Stunning

Almost all (or ALL) the commercially slaughtered chicken (that are certified Halaal by SANHA) are stunned prior to slaughter.
My research, purely from a layman’s perspective shows that Stunning (prior to slaughtering) is highly detested by respected Ulema around the globe (past and present) and by respected non Muslim Western Scientists as well and that Senior Ulema and Pious Predecessors have, across the board, ruled against this practice.
I have posed the question to SANHA in the recent past asking SANHA what alternatives are SANHA looking at (instead of stunning)?
SANHA’s response to this question was:-
“SANHA acknowledges the different viewpoints on the position of stunning but are of the view that controlled stunning in commercial abattoirs may be considered.
Senior Ulema and pious predecessors have laid down the rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter based on their interpretation of public need decades prior to the formation of SANHA.”

I had also recently asked SANHA if SANHA could guarantee that each and every stunned bird is still alive (after stunning) and prior to slaughtering?
SANHA’s response to this question was:-
“Where controlled stunning is applied, the stun is of a reversible nature and such bird will not die as a result thereof. If however, there are birds which may have died either pre or post stunning, such birds are removed from the line and disposed of accordingly.”
(SANHA’s above responses were emailed to me on the 21st October 2010 by SANHA’s EBI Lockhat)

Based on SANHA’s responses and stance on stunning I make the following comments and ask SANHA to respond to the following questions:

Question 3.1
SANHA’s comment above insinuates that Senior Ulema and Pious Predecessors have “condoned” or deemed acceptable the act of stunning (of poultry prior to slaughter) and SANHA says that Senior Ulema and Pious Predecessors have laid down their rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter decades back.

My question here to SANHA is to please enlighten the public on exactly which Senior Ulema and exactly which Pious Predecessors have deemed acceptable the act of stunning of poultry prior to slaughter (and please give some references in this regard so that we may review the Ulema’s and the Predecessors rulings 1st hand)?

To clarify my question further;
SANHA states that it is SANHA’s view that ”that controlled stunning in commercial abattoirs may be considered”.
On exactly which Senior Ulema’s and Pious Predecessors authority (or Fatwa, or advises) have SANHA subscribed to the view of accepting stunning?

Question 3.2
Can SANHA provide some Shari’ah evidence of SANHA’s contention of ‘acceptability” of stunning?
Or to be a little more clear, can SANHA provide some Shari’ah evidence that there is room for the fact that “controlled stunning in commercial abattoirs may be considered”?

Question 3.3
I further ask SANHA to enlighten the public on which Senior Ulema and which Pious Predecessors have and had laid down the rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter of poultry in the manner that SANHA certifies Halaal now or decades back (and please give some references in this regard so that we may review the Ulema’s and the Predecessors detailed rulings that ratify, or that “rubber stamp” exactly the systems and procedures of commercial chicken slaughter that SANHA certifies Halaal)?

Question 3.4
Can SANHA produce even one single Ulema who can categorically state that:
• It is permissible to slaughter without facing the direction of the Qiblah (the way SANHA does and condones).
• It is permissible to stun pre slaughter (the way SANHA does and condones)
• It is permissible to immerse the chickens in scalding water (the way SANHA does and condones)
• It is permissible to hang the chickens upside down and slaughter in
motion on a tremendously fast-moving conveyor belt (the way SANHA does and condones)
• It is permissible to plunge the slaughtered chickens into the
filthy, feaces and blood filled scalding water (sometimes while there are still
signs of life in the chickens) (the way SANHA does and condones)

(I’d really be surprised to see even just one recognized senior Ulema comes forth and condones any of the above acts!- which SANHA obviously considers acceptable)

Question 3.5
I have researched (to the best of my ability the Fatwa’s of Senior Ulema and Pious predecessors on this stunning issue and I have found that ALL the Senior Ulema and Pious predecessors (whose Fatwa’s and comments I have access to) seem to be unanimous in ruling against stunning and (at best) detesting the stunning of animals (especially Poultry) prior to slaughtering.

(I am only in a position to research English medium Fatwa and commentary,…. Hence I will not know if any Senior Ulema or Pious Predecessors in Urdu or Arabic medium have accepted and ratified the stunning of poultry prior to slaughter. I do doubt that such ratification exists though.)
Essentially I am saying that (from my research) I have confirmed that current Pious and well respected Senior Ulema of today and of yester-year have very strongly ruled against the stunning process.

I quote below a recent Fatwa issued by Mufti Taqi Usmani on the stunning issue which in a nutshell spells out the evils of stunning (pre slaughter) and the obvious negative consequences:
– (for those who are not aware, Mufti Taqi is a very learned Aalim of international repute and standing)
Mufti Taqi Usmani concluded his Fatwa with the following ruling:
“Due to these reasons, it is not correct in terms of Shari’ah to render an animal unconscious before slaughter. “

His Fatwa (the full text) is as follows:-
“
The practice of rendering animals unconscious before slaughtering, which is carried out in different ways, consists of a number of undesirable and objectionable elements, for example:

a. If this act is such that it causes the animal to lose all its senses and consciousness completely, then there is a risk that it will have caused the animal’s death before slaughter, especially if the animal was weak or ill.

b. If this act is such that it does not cause the animal to lose all its senses and consciousness completely (such as a mild electrical shock that merely immobilizes the animal), then there is a strong possibility that the animal’s pain and suffering will have been unnecessarily increased, since the pain of slaughter remains due to its not being unconscious, and the pain and stress of the electrical shock will have been administered additionally without any need.

c. If this act makes the animal weak (compared to its normal and natural condition), and at the time of slaughter the animal is not at its full physical strength, then there is a risk that this will cause a reduction in the amount of blood that will flow from it at the time of slaughter, compared to what might have flowed in the case of the animal being fully conscious and In full possession of its senses and physical strength, and to undertake such a course of action deliberately is to oppose and counter a Shar’i requirement of slaughter (i.e. the discharge of flowing blood).

d. If the amount of blood discharged is reduced due to the animal’s weakness, then there is a risk that the remaining (non-discharged) blood will be absorbed into the meat of the animal, and this is an undesirable outcome both from a medical point of view and also according to Shari’ah.

e. If the person undertaking this way of slaughter believes it to be a less stressful and painful method than the prescribed Shar’i manner, then this is tantamount to believing an invented method to be superior to a revealed one, and it means that the person believes the revealed method of slaughter to be painful and cruel, which is ‘close to disbelief ‘.
(Ref: Imdadul-Fatawa, Vol. 3, P. 605-8 and Ahkamuz-zaba-ih, P. 55-6)

Due to these reasons, it is not correct in terms of Shari’ah to render an animal unconscious before slaughter.
“

(The above by Mufti Taqi Usmani, also ratified and endorsed by several senior Ulema at Darul Ifta Karachi).

I have found further (translated) quotes authentically attributed to Hakimul-Ummah Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (Rahmatullahi Alaih) who used the words ‘evil innovation, corruption of faith’ and ‘against Shari’ah’ to describe this practice (of stunning).
Also refer to Imdaadul Fataawa Page 406 Vol.3 for further proofs of Hakimul Ummah’s ruling of impermissibility of Stunning.

[SANHA seems to have a habit of calling for proof of a Fatwa or of quoted text from sources, hence below please find Mufti Taqi Usmani’s details from whom SANHA can personally verify his Fatwa and from whom SANHA can obtain countless other references to Senior Ulema and Pious Predecessors ruling against stunning in any form:
The above Fatwa of Mufti Taqi Usmani, who is undoubted a brilliant Aalim of repute and standing, can be checked and confirmed with him. His contact details are:
Personal email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Contact No’s for Mufti Taqi at Darul Uloom Karachi (best to call Mufti between 12h00 and 13h00): 011-9221-5043499, 011-9221-5042705, 011-9221-5040923)
Mufti Taqi will also comment on Hakimul-Ummah Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (Rahmatullahi Alaih)’s comments and point you to the written proofs of such comments. Mufti Taqi will also detail to you the views of his illustrious father Mufti Mohamed Shafi as well as other illustrious Aalims from whom he has 1st hand heard of their utter detest of this non Shari’ah act of stunning]

I have also read extensively some of Darul Uloom Deoband’s works and Darul Uloom Karachi’s works all of which concur with Mufti Taqi’s Fatwa and Hakimul-Ummah Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (Rahmatullahi Alaih)’s views and rulings that the act of stunning is against Shari’ah (refer to Fatwa’s issued by the Ifta departments of these Darul Ulooms).

In light of SANHA’s comment and I once again quote your EBI Lockhat;
“SANHA acknowledges the different viewpoints on the position of stunning but are of the view that controlled stunning in commercial abattoirs may be considered.
Senior Ulema and pious predecessors have laid down the rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter based on their interpretation of public need decades prior to the formation of SANHA.”

Now my question to SANHA is:
I am really keen on hearing from SANHA exactly whom (amongst today’s Senior Ulema as well as decades back) has refuted the Fatwa (and rulings) of the abovementioned great luminaries on the issue of Stunning? And what their reasoning and basis is for refuting and negating the abovementioned Fatwa of Mufti Taqi and the rulings of Maulana Ashraff Ali Thanwi (Rahmatullahi Alaih) and other giants of the Muslim world like Mufti Mohammed Shafi??

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART 2

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

When Is This Ummat Going To Wake Up And Stop Consuming Haraam Endorsed By This Cartel

(Qalamul Haq)

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Question 1.1
Is SANHA of the view that that the Islamic method of slaughter detailed above is a correct method?
(Are all ten points correct?)
Are there any other necessary or important points that may have been overlooked?)

Question 1.2
Does SANHA regard any of the points listed under Islamic Method (above) as menial or trivial or just not important?

Question 1.3
What is SANHA’s view of the UN-Islamic method of slaughter detailed above?

Question 1.4
The 10 points listed under Un-Islamic method … are they correctly stated as Un-Islamic practices?

Question 1.5
Are these (the UN-Islamic methods listed above) practices that go against the grain of Rasullulah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) teachings?

Question 1.6
Is SANHA of the view that Muslims must necessarily refrain from all the Un-Islamic method listed above?)

Question 1.7
In the large poultry plants that SANHA certifies Halaal (Rainbow, Earlybird etc), is the system of Thabah FULLY in keeping with the Islamic Method or in keeping with the UN-Islamic method (as detailed above) or is the system in keeping with a little of both (some aspects in line with the Islamic Method and some in line with the UN-Islamic Method)?

Question 1.8
In the event that the poultry certified as Halaal by SANHA is more in keeping with the UN-Islamic method above (or even if certain aspects are in keeping with the UN-Islamic method above) then what exactly is SANHA doing to ensure that the chicken plants conform to proper Shari’ah compliance so that the Halaal certification is actually worth the paper it is written on and that the poultry certified as Halaal are done so properly and entirely in line with Islamic methods?

Question 1.9
Or, is SANHA of the view that no more needs to be done for the plants to conform to proper Shari’ah compliance as SANHA’s system is perfect?

Question 1.10
If the answer to 1.5 above is that more needs to be done to conform to Shari’ah compliance then what exactly are the aspects that SANHA has in mind that SANHA is addressing? That SANHA needs to address? And how is SANHA addressing these?
(And why has SANHA not addressed these decades back already?)

Question 1.11
Which Mazhab does SANHA follow / prescribe to? (Hanafi? Shafi? Maliki? Hambali?)

Question 2
Re Facing Qibla when slaughtering

SANHA is on record to have recently stated (with regards to the poultry that it certifies):
“SANHA has not taken a survey to determine whether plants slaughter areas are Qibla facing or not and therefore cannot comment on this. However, whilst facing the Qibla is a desirable act, in terms of the Shari’ah inability/failure to do so does not render slaughtered animal/birds Haraam”
(The above was stated in an email to me by SANHA on the 21st October 2010 by SANHA’s EBI Lockhat)

The above begs the following comments and questions:

Question 2.1
It is rather obvious and can most definitely be inferred from SANHA’s official statement above that SANHA places either no importance or at best very little importance on the fact that animals (poultry especially) need to be facing the Qibla when slaughtered. The extent of SANHA’s nonchalance on this issue is summed up by SANHA’s statement that “SANHA has not taken a survey to determine whether plants slaughter areas are Qibla facing or not “ (this in SANHA’s own words).
By stating that “SANHA has not taken a survey…..” i think it is fair to assume that SANHA does not even know whether their Halaal certified poultry face Qibla when slaughtered and does not even take cognizance of this very important requirement. This is despite the fact that SANHA has been certifying these poultry for years now.
It actually boggles the mind to have been informed by SANHA that SANHA has not even bothered to determine whether the plants slaughter areas are Qibla facing or not, despite the fact that hundreds of millions of birds have “passed through SANHA’s hands” over the years and been certified Halaal!

For purposes of clarity I repeat SANHA’s EBI Lockhat’s narrative to me:
“SANHA has not taken a survey to determine whether plants slaughter areas are Qibla facing or not and therefore cannot comment on this. However, whilst facing the Qibla is a desirable act, in terms of the Shari’ah inability/failure to do so does not render slaughtered animal/birds Haraam”

My question is:
Why this senseless, cavalier and reckless neglect of this very important aspect of slaughtering?

Question 2.2
Now Ulema are of the view that in a plant/s where mass slaughter takes place and on a continuous basis, day after day, month after month and year after year, and where the issue of the slaughtered poultry facing the Qibla is totally ignored and totally dispensed with then such poultry will be Makrooh and that this is a highly detested act.

Is SANHA also of the view that continuous neglect and unnecessary failure of slaughtered animals facing the Qibla whilst being slaughtered on a mass scale throughout a lengthy period of time is a detested act and that the birds will be deemed Makrooh? Or is SANHA of the view that it is “ok”, “just one of those things”?
(PS. Some Ulema are even of the view that such an act renders the bird Haraam)

Question 2.3
SANHA states that “whilst facing the Qibla is a desirable act, in terms of the Shari’ah inability/failure to do so does not render slaughtered animal/birds Haraam”.

My question to SANHA is do you have an inability to ensure that your slaughterers have the birds face Qibla whilst slaughtering?
Or
Does SANHA simply fail (is there a failure) to take this necessary step of ensuring that the birds face the Qibla whilst being slaughtered?
(I am trying to ascertain if there is an “inability” here, and if so why? Or a “failure”, and if so why?)

Question 2.4
Does SANHA actually believe that all chicken that are slaughtered should be facing the Qibla when slaughtered?

Question 2.5
2.5 (a)
If yes (to 2.4 above),… what is SANHA’s understanding? Why and on what basis must the chicken be slaughtered whilst facing the Qibla?
2.5 (b)
If no (to 2.4),… again why and on what basis must poultry be slaughtered on a continuous basis in the millions year after year and not be facing the Qibla?

Question 2.6
What is SANHA’s view of the following comments (2.6-A &2.6- B)?

2.6-A) It is incumbent for all chickens to face the Qiblah when being
slaughtered. This is a Sunnatul Muqqadah requisite. It is not
permissible to abandon it (especially purposely).

2.6-B) In terms of Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)
instruction, it is necessary to face the animals towards the Qiblah.
The fact that it is a command of Allah Ta’ala should be sufficient to convince a Muslim of its imperative importance. Sahaabah would abstain from eating the meat of an animal which had been slaughtered while it was not facing the Qiblah.

(To be continued Insha Allah Ta'aala)

UNANSWERED QUESTIONS-PART1

THE QUESIONS THAT STILL REMAIN UNANSWERED-THE POINTS THAT ARE STILL NOT CLARIFIED-THE ROT THAT STILL CONTINUES TO THIS DAY

When Is This Ummat Going To Wake Up And Stop Consuming Haraam Endorsed By This Cartel

(Qalamul Haq)

OPEN REQUEST TO SANHA TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS BELOW (TO EACH QUESTION INDIVIDUALLY & DIRECTLY) RE THE POULTRY THAT SANHA CERTIFIES AS “HALAAL” AND TO RESPOND TO OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO SANHA’s BUSINESS

Submitted by Ahmed Laher

Date: 9TH December 2010

Re: Halaal certification granted by SANHA to large commercial poultry plants (and other Halaal related issues)

Since SANHA is (or “claims” to be) a NGO that is “representing the Muslim community of South Africa” and since “SANHA is the ONLY Halaal certifying organization that provides full accountability and transparency to the Consumer” (quotations direct from SANHA’s website representations) … This is an Open Request for SANHA to provide full accountability and to answer the following questions and educate the general public on SANHA’s stance on various issues that are very pertinent to the consumers of the poultry certified as Halaal by SANHA:

Background:
I have been monitoring the raging debate that has brewed over the past few years on the issue of SANHA (and other Halaal certification organizations) declaring the mass slaughtered commercial poultry (emanating from the likes of Rainbow, Early Bird etc) as Halaal.

I have read with interest both sides of the “story” and I am of the view that SANHA (amongst other certifying bodies) has a lot of questions to answer and owes especially the Muslim (and for that matter Non-Muslim) public a detailed explanation and direct and straightforward answers to the questions below that I have posed. This is especially so as it seems as though there are a number of irregularities that are condoned in the issuing of Halaal certificates that are in conflict with Islamic Shari’ah and that are in conflict with ordained Islamic Methods and that are in conflict with basic animal rights and that are in conflict with basic human rights and that are conflict with the way human beings must necessarily conduct themselves (humane methods, humane systems, dignity) in the treatment of any animal.

I also confirm that I am not aligned to nor affiliated with any organization or body and am asking these questions in my personal capacity. I also hasten to add that as I am exposed to a large spectrum of the Muslim community from all walks of life I have found that the questions that I have are at the very tip of many consumers’ tongues and that the public at large deserves a direct, specific and detailed public response from SANHA. (I state my non alignment to any organization or body as SANHA often automatically assumes that any perceived criticism of its systems and certifications stems from De Deur and/or The Majlis or that it stems from some sort of conspiracy theory).

I must add at this point that I have posed most of these questions previously (via email and via the Q&A section of SANHA’s website) to SANHA in the near past and SANHA in its responses has by and large “kicked the ball into touch”, or given superficial answers or in most cases completely neglected to even answer the questions that I posed that I am of the view are most pertinent to the Halaal certification of the poultry in question.

Admittedly, SANHA has invited me to meet with and discuss my questions with their Theological Director to avoid a “trial by correspondence” which I am happy to do but due to my schedule currently I am not in a position to schedule such meeting in the very near future. Nevertheless, I am also of the view that my questions are very basic, are straightforward and are very relevant and that SANHA should be in a position to give the public answers and proper explanations to the questions and not hide behind the guise of wanting to avoid a “trial by correspondence” (and to do this swiftly as the answers to my questions should be elementary to SANHA’s Theological department). The intelligence of the general public should not be underestimated, as if SANHA addresses my questions individually and sticks to answering the questions directly then the public will absorb the information and if a “trial by correspondence” arises due the public needing to be further enlightened then SANHA as a organization that ultimately derives its income from the pockets of the public should indulge the public and answer any further queries that the public has. I remind SANHA that, SANHA claims to be “representing the Muslim community of South Africa on all matters pertaining to the general application of the term Halaal with specific reference to Islamic dietary laws” and that SANHA further preaches the following; “Pass on all information to as wide a circle as possible”. I urge SANHA to practice what it preaches and to actually live by the doctrine of its own utterances.

(I have also requested to SANHA that the questions that I posed to SANHA be loaded onto their website Q&A section as this is the forum that I first used in raising the majority of my queries.
However SANHA has chosen not to post any of my questions posed on their website to date for reasons best known to SANHA.
Perhaps the questions are too controversial and too probing for an organization that is supposed to “provide full accountability and transparency to the Consumer” and would get the public to think twice before consuming SANHA certified products??)
My Questions are as follows (listed in no particular order of importance or priority):
(I once again urge SANHA to individually answer each question below directly rather then to issue ambiguous and lengthy narrative on general issues)

Question 1
Re: The Islamic Shari’ah system of thabah

From my very basic and layman’s understanding the Islamic method of Thabah/Slaughter would entail the following (and these are not an all encompassing list but are some of the very basic and essential tenants):

Islamic Method
1. Knife not to be sharpened in front of animal
2. Birds must not see another being slaughtered
3. Birds must face Qibla
4. Tasmiyah to be verbally recited (audibly for each and every bird being slaughtered)
5. Birds to be taken to death with dignity (appropriate restraining method etc)
6. Birds to be treated humanely (no stunning etc)
7. Birds to be slaughtered with ease & given water to drink before thabah
8. Birds must necessarily be Healthy and disease free
9. Good overall hygiene standards
10. 4 vessels to be cut (minimum 3)

UN-Islamic Method
1. Knife sharpened in front of animal
2. Birds slaughtered in full view of the other animals (to the extent that blood spurts from one slaughtered animal to others around it)
3. Birds face any direction (total neglect in ensuring that birds face Qibla when slaughtered)
4. Tasmiyah not prerequisite (on the basis that Tasmiyah is in all Muslims hearts or just being ignored or “forgotten” on a repeated basis!)
5. Birds dragged & shackled up-side down on mega conveyor belts at high speed
6. Poultry stunned / electrocuted
7. Poultry slaughtered in motion at fast speed
8. Birds from the time they are born to the time they are put to their unceremonious death are a product of cruelty that extends throughout their 36 day to 40 day lifespan (live their entire lives in very confined space, fed massive doses of antibiotics and growth stimulants, literally live in and eat their own filth and feaces, broken bones / bruises/ blisters are a norm, feet rotting from the exposure to feaces and the resulting ammonia burns, etc etc …. These are just the tip of the iceberg).
Can the birds actually be Healthy and disease free??
9. Before removing any impurities from inside the stomach, poultry immersed into very hot filthy water to facilitate the feather peeling process.
10. Less then 3 vessels being cut

(If any of the points listed above under both Islamic and Non-Islamic methods are incorrect then please excuse me as I write as a layman and not as an Aalim or a Mufti or a Theological Director and I will be happy if the relevant points are corrected)

(To be continued Insha Allah Ta'aala)

MAJLIS CLARIFIES ERRORS MADE AND SETS THE RECORD STRAIGHT

SEE BELOW ARTICLE

SANHA – THE KHINZEER SCROUNGING THE GUTTERS TO BOLSTER ITS CARRION CERTIFICATION

The latest, absolutely futile attempt, of the SANHA Khinzeer trapped in the quagmire of its own excreta of baatil, is its desperate scrounging of the sewer drain, like a pig and gutter-rat, to find some crumb or straw to cling on for according some sort of satanic credibility to its business of halaalizing carrion chickens.

SANHA’s moral and spiritual bankruptcy and the gutter operation of its vermiculated brains, added to the total lack of any Shar’i daleel for its halaalization of jeefah (carrion), have constrained this vile carrion-halaalizer to dig into Rainbow’s carrion archives. In the book which visitors usually sign after viewing the haraam killing scenes, to the absolute delight of this SANHA Khinzeer was a statement confirming the ‘halaal’ status of Rainbow’s carrion chickens.

If this vile, rubbish carrion certifier had even a vestige of Imaani honesty, it would not seek to capitalize on an error made 43 years ago by a Molvi who at that time was ignorant of the Masnoon process of Thabah. The Khinzeer is aware that in over several decades, we have published thousands of pages in condemnation of the Devil’s slaughtering systems and in condemnation of all carrion certifying outfits. The Khinzeer is aware and so is the Ummah that The Majlis has branded all commercially killed chickens to be HARAAM.

The error committed 43 years ago does not cancel the view of HURMAT which we have propagated for more than thirty years subsequent to the incorrect confirmation. We say unequivocally, that the confirmation 43 years ago was the effect of jahaalat. The innumerable articles and fatawa issued by the Mujlisul Ulama of S.A. constitute an effective RETRACTION of the error. It is not the other way around. That silly and incorrect confirmation in no way whatsoever cancels our retraction which has been vehemently stated and elaborated in thousands of pages of articles and booklets.

That silly statement on which the Khinzeer is basing its satanic and stupid gloating has absolutely no worth and no significance. It is a piece of scrap paper fit for the refuse bin.

Let it be known that the satanic halaalization of carrion was initiated by Jamiatul Ulama Natal. The Ulama of the Jamiat half a century ago were our seniors and our guides. We were juniors who blindly followed our seniors. The statement of confirmation was the effect of the instruction of the senior Ulama of the Jamiat who had taken the junior along for an inspection. The seniors of the Jamiat deemed it prudent to have the signatures of many molvis on Rainbow’s register in a bid to offset the stance of Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal.

Present at the inspection were also Mufti Ebrahim Sanjalvi, Maulana Ebrahim Mia, Mufti Ahmad Mia and others. Mufti Sanjalvi had unequivocally proclaimed the chickens to be HARAAM on the plant after the inspection. To counter his fatwa the Natal Ulama scrounged for the support of juniors such as us.

Wallaah! At that time the only aspect of Thabah we were aware of was that the neck-vessels had to be severed by a Muslim reciting the Tasmiyah. That was the be-all of our understanding 43 years ago. The Masnoon methods of innumerable acts of the Deen are not taught at Madrasah. The Madrasah’s primary concern is to create Isti’daad (academic ability) in students. The balance is left to the molvi’s research.

Forty three years ago we had no reason to delve into this subject. Our seniors had issued their Fatwa and we followed without at that time realizing the deviation and the gross error of the satanism of halaalizing the carrion products of kuffaar plants.

We draw attention to another greater error or blunder committed by The Majlis 40 years ago. The early editions of The Majlis carried many articles vociferously in support Khomeini and the Shiah revolution. This was due to our ignorance. When the Haqq became apparent, we issued a huge retraction and initiated a campaign in condemnation of Khomeini and Shi’ism.

All Ulama, even the illustrious Fuqaha and Aimmah Mujtahideen are on record of having committed many, many errors – errors followed by retractions. No one acted like the SANHA Khinzeer to gloat on the past errors of the Fuqaha.

There is absolutely no capital for the Khinzeer in the silly and incorrect confirmation stated for the carrion of Rainbow – the carrion which the SANHA Khinzeer halaalizes and feeds to Muslims – the chicken and meat carrion which according to the Shariah are not fit for even dogs.

I, the undersigned:

MOOSA OLGAR

do hereby declare under oath as follows:

1. I am an adult male and I reside at 52 Ocean Terrace, Isipingo Beach, Durban.

2. I am a qualified Islamic theologian and I am an executive member of the Jamiatul Ulama KZN which is a Council of Islamic Theologians in the province of Kwazulu-Natal.

3. The facts herein contained are within my own personal Knowledge and both true and correct.

4. In the year 2004 at one of our Jamiatul Ulama KZN weekly meetings it was mentioned by the then administrator, Moulana Ahmed Kahthrada that slaughterers from the Rainbow chicken plant at Hammarsdale had complained that they could not recite the Tasmiyah on all the chickens due to the excessive line speed and time duration.

5. It was resolved at that meeting that there was a need for us to make a spot check at Rainbow chicken plant without the knowledge of SANHA. Mufti Zubair Bhayat who was the then secretary-general of Jamiatul Ulama KZN arranged with Yusuf Desai of Stanger to organize access for us to the Rainbow plant as he (Yusuf Desai) was a big buyer of Rainbow chickens. Accordingly, he arranged for us to undertake an inspection. At that time our Council, the Jamiatul Ulama KZN was an executive Member of SANHA (South African National Halaal Authority).

6. On the appointed date of the inspection, our delegation included Mufti Bashir Amod of Stanger, Mufti Ebrahim Desai of Darul Ifta Camperdown and myself. The specific purpose of the inspection was to establish whether the Tasmiyah was being recited on every
chicken or not. Our inspection established that:

(a) The line speed was excessive. The speed of the line on which the chickens were shackled upside down was 135 birds per minute.

(b) Three slaughterers were slaughtering. This means that each slaughterer had to slaughter 45 birds per minute.

(c) The slaughterers did not/could not recite Tasmiyah on every bird.

7. Thereafter two ex-slaughterers came to our office, who had resigned due to their conscience troubling them, to lodge the same grievance of their inability to recite the Tasmiyah on every chicken. We wrote down all the details and their testimonies.

8. Moulana Haroon Abbasomar, our then Ameer (President) of Jamiatul Ulama KZN then contacted the Jamiatul Ulama Fordsburg to arrange a meeting with them to sort out the Rainbow chicken issue as the Ummah (Muslim community) was consuming Haraam (non-halaal).

9. Mufti Zubair Bhayat and I then met with the Jamiatul Ulama Fordsburg, including Moulana Navlakhi of SANHA. At this meeting I stated that Rainbow chickens are Haraam (not halaal) on the basis of the testimonies of past and present slaughterers. Moulana Navlakhi was displeased because we did not consult with SANHA, but went as ‘businessmen’ to make the inspection. However, it was resolved at this meeting that there be a follow-up meeting with SANHA.

10. A meeting was then held at O.R.Tambo Airport in the Jamaat Khana (Prayer Room). Jamiatul Ulama KZN was represented by Mufti Ebrahim Desai and myself. The Jamiatul Ulama Fordsburg members were Moulana Ebrahim Bham, Mufti Minty and Moulana M.S.Navlakhi.

11. At this meeting I was immediately asked by SANHA’s Moulana:
“Moulana, do you still declare Rainbow Haraam?”

Before I could answer, Mufti Ebrahim Desai said to Mufti Minty that when a Muslim bears testimony regarding an issue of this nature, a doubt is immediately introduced. Mufti Ebrahim Desai also mentioned that he had personally questioned the slaughterers who had testified in the presence of our other members that they were unable to recite Tasmiyah on every bird.

It was decided at this meeting that a joint visit of Jamiatul Ulama KZN and SANHA be conducted of the Rainbow chicken plant. Sadly, on two occasions the date and time were confirmed with SANHA, but they cancelled the visit.

ABRAHAMIC ACCORD VS THE ACCORD OF IBRAHEEM ALAYHIS SALAAM

THE WISDOM AND GOOD INSTRUCTION OF THE AMBIYAA

“Remember when he (Ibraaheem) said to his father: ‘O my father! Why do you worship something which does not hear nor see nor benefit you in anything whatsoever?

O my father! Verily there has come to me such knowledge which has not come to you. Therefore, follow me. I shall guide you to the Straight Path.

O my Father! Do not worship Shaitaan. Verily shaitaan unto Ar-Rahmaan was disobedient.

O my father! I fear that the Punishment from Ar-Rahmaan will befall you, then you will become the friend of shaitaan.” (Maryam, Aayaat 42, 43, 44 and 45)

“Verily, you (O Mushrikeen!) and the entities you worship are fuel for Jahannam.” (Al-Ambiya, Aayat 98)

“Ibraaheem said to his father and his people: ‘What do you worship?’ They said: ‘We worship idols… He (Ibraaheem) said: ‘Do they hear you when you call or do they benefit you or harm you?’ They said: ‘We found our forefathers doing so.’ He said: ‘Now see (that is open your ears and hear) that which you and you forbearers worship, verily they are my enemies…” (Ash-Shu’raa’, Aayaat 70 – 77)

“Verily for you there is a beautiful pattern in Ibraaheem and in those with him. Remember when he said to his people: ‘Verily, we dissociate from you (mushrikeen) and from the (idols) you worship besides Allah. We have rejected you, and animosity and hatred have developed between us and you for all time until you believe in Allah, The One… (Al-Mumtahinah, Aayat 4)

“Say (O Muhammad!): ‘O Ahl-e-Kitaab (Yahood and Nasaara)! Come to (an agreement) on a matter which is common between us and you (namely) that we worship only Allah, and that we do not commit shirk with Him in anything, and that some of us should not take others as deities besides Allah.’ Then if they turn away, say: ‘Bear witness that verily we are Muslimoon’.” (Aal Imraan, Aayat 64)

And, how did Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) interact with the Mushrikeen when he presented Tauheed to them? The kuffaar had tried a variety of ruses as a compromise for ‘coexistence’ and ‘harmony’, but Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had rejected every conciliatory proposal of the mushrikeen. ‘Harmonious coexistence’ based on kufr and shirk was unequivocally rejected by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

The ‘wisdom’ and ‘good instruction’ commanded by Allah Ta’ala constrained Hadhrat Ibraaheem (Alayhis salaam) to say to the mushrikeen:

‘Now see (that is open your ears and hear) that which you and you forbearers worship, verily they are my enemies…”

‘Verily, we dissociate from you (mushrikeen) and from the (idols) you worship besides Allah. We have rejected you, animosity and hatred have developed between us and you for all time until you believe in Allah, The One…

This is the meaning of the Aayat: “Call to the Path of your Rabb with wisdom and beautiful advice and argue with them with them in a way which is best.” (Am-Nahl, Aayat 125)

The Hikmat and Mauizah Hasanah mentioned in this Qur’aanic aayat do not mean participation in non-Muslim functions and celebrations. It does not mean adopting silence regarding their false deities and false ideologies. It does not mean bootlicking.

(Issued By Mujlisul Ulama)

CONSISTENCY OF THE DEOBANDI AKAABIR REGARDING THE MAWLID

[By Maulana Zameelur Rahman]

The Deobandi view on Mawlid consists of the following ingredients:

1. To discuss, commemorate and mention the birth of Rasulullah (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is in itself rewarding and recommended just as commemorating any other aspect of his person (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam)

2. The commemoration that is observed at the time of Rabi’ al-Awwal is customarily attached to and inseparable from a number of innovated or unlawful conditions, like specifying it to the date of the 12th and narrating fabricated reports.

3. These conditions make the commemoration impermissible, bid’ah or makruh

4. As this commemoration-with-unawful/innovated-conditions is the common and widespread (murawwaj) form of “mawlid” functions held in Rabi’ al-Awwal, a general fatwa of impermissibility ought to be given to prevent the ‘awamm from falling into evil. This is known as “Sadd adh-Dharaa’i” (blocking the means), a principle proven from rulings of Hanafi fiqh.

Such a position is self-consistent.

There is nothing inherently contradictory in this position. If all these ingredients are kept in mind, then one will be able to make sense of all pronouncements on mawlid made by the Akabir of Deoband.

It is often insinuated by Barelwis that Deobandis are inconsistent, or even coy and deceptive, in their views about Mawlid. For instance, it is claimed that there is a contradiction between what Mawlana Khalil Ahmad al-Saharanpuri (rahimahullah) wrote on the Mawlid in al-Muhannad (in 1325 H/1907), after the death of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahimahullah) to the Arabs, and what he wrote in al-Barahin al-Qati’ah (in 1304 H/1887 CE) with the approval of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahimahullah), to the Indians.

In fact, what was mentioned in Muhannad is almost identical to what is found in al-Barahin al-Qati’ah.

On p. 8 of al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, it clearly states:

ﻧﻔﺲ ﺫﻛﺮ ﻣﻴﻼﺩ ﻓﺨﺮ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺴﻼﻡ ﻛﻮ ﻛﻮﺋﻰ ﻣﻨﻊ ﻧﮩﯿﮟ ﻛﺮﺗﺎ ﺑﻠﮑﮧ ﺫﻛﺮ ﻭﻻﺩﺕ ﺁﭖ ﺹ ﻛﺎ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺫﻛﺮ ﺩﯾﮕﺮ ﺳﻴﺮ ﻭﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻨﺪﻭﺏ ﮨﮯ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﭽﮧ ﻳﮧ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻓﺘﻮﯼ ﻣﻮﻟﻮﯼ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﯿﺼﺎﺣﺐ ﻣﺤﺪﺙ ﺳﮩﺎﺭﻧﭙﻮﺭﯼ ﻣﯿﮟ ﺻﺮﺍﺣۃ ﻣﺬﮐﻮﺭ ﮨﮯ

“We make no prohibition of the essence of commemorating the birth of the Pride of the World, upon him peace. Rather commemorating his birth, just like commemorating his other conditions and states, is praiseworthy. Thus, this matter is mentioned explicitly in the fatwa of Mawlawi Ahmad ‘Ali Sahib Muhaddith Saharanpuri.” (Al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, p. 8

In Muhannad, he says, reiterating this same message:

“Commemorating the states which have the least connection with the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) is from the most desirable of recommended acts (ahabb al-mandubat) and the greatest of preferable acts (a‘la l-mustahabbat) according to us, whether it is the commemoration of his noble birth or commemoration of his urine, faeces, standing, sitting, sleeping and waking as is stated clearly in our treatise called Al-Barahin al-Qati‘ah at various junctures therein.”

He also refers to the fatwa of Mawlana Ahmad Ali Saharanpuri (rahimahullah) in Muhannad. The fatwa states that if the commemoration of the birth is free of impermissible activities, like narrating fabricated narrations, missing obligatory prayers, introducing polytheistic and innovated practices, giving it greater importance than it has, restricting its timing, then it is a rewardable practice. Mawlana Saharanpuri adds to the impermissible activities: free-mixing, extravagance and the belief in its obligation.

However, in Muhannad, he adds that the mawlid gatherings of India are rarely found to be free of these impermissible practices. Therefore, based on the principle of Sadd adh-Dhara’i, , the fatwa will be of general impermissibility.

For details on this, one may refer to the 2nd and 3rd principles discussed here: Mawlid, Deoband and Hanafi Fiqh and this article: The Principles of Blocking the Means .

Similarly, Al-Barahin al-Qati’ah says:

ﺍﻟﺒﺘﮧ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻋﮧ ﺟﻮ ﺍﺱ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺎﺗﮫ ﺿﻢ ﮨﻮ ﮔﺌﮯ ﮨﯿﮟ ﺍﺱ ﻛﻲ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺳﮯ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﮧ ﭘﺮ ﺑﺪﻋﺖ ﻭﻣﻨﻜﺮ ﮨﻮﻧﮯ ﻛﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺷﺮﻙ ﻭﺣﺮﻣﺖ ﻛﺎ ﻟﮕﺎﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﺗﺎ ﮨﮯ ﺍﻭﺭ ﻳﮧ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻥ ﻗﻴﻮﺩ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻋﮧ ﮐﮯ ﮨﮯ ﻧﮧ ﺑﻮﺟﮧ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺫﻛﺮ ﮐﮯ

“However, those unlawful things that have become attached to them (i.e. Mawlid functions), due to this, a ruling is given to the sum-total of being bid’ah and abomination or of shirk and prohibition. And this ruling is by consideration of those unlawful restrictions, not because of the commemoration itself .” (p. 8)

Keep in mind that these are passages from al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, the book written by Mawlana Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri (rahimahullah) and approved by Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahimahullah)

It is clear from this passage from al-Barahin and the answer in al-Muhannad, that there is essentially no difference in what they say.

From reading all of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi’s (rahimahullah) fatwas on this issue, and not looking at only some of them selectively as Barelwis usually do, we get the same message. Thus in one fatwa, he explicitly says:

ﻧﻔﺲ ﺫﻛﺮ ﻭﻻﺩﺕ ﻣﻨﺪﻭﺏ ﮨﮯ ﺍﺱ ﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺍﻫﺖ ﻗﻴﻮﺩ ﮐﮯ ﺳﺒﺐ ﺁﺋﻲ ﮨﮯ

“The birth-commemoration itself is recommended, and its reprehensibility is a result of the [innovated] restrictions [in the general Mawlid functions].” (Fatawa Rashidiyyah, p. 258)

Furthermore, in several places of the Fatawa, Mawlana Gangohi (rahimahullah) clearly qualifies the prohibition with the “widespread” ( murawwajah) Mawlid functions.

For example, on p. 174, he says:

“The widespread mawlud function is bid’ah, and because of being mixed with reprehensible matters it is prohibitively disliked.” On p. 270, it explicitly states that because most mawlid and ‘urs functions are not free of bid’ah (innovated restrictions) and unlawful practices, all of them should be avoided.

There are other fatwas that give the general ruling of impermissibility. This is not a contradiction as one who understands the above-mentioned principles will appreciate. This ruling reflects the general condition of the Mawlid functions of that time for which the fatwa of impermissibility was given, regardless of whether the unlawful aspects are present in the specific function in reference or not. Those that are free of the impermissible activities are not excused from the fatwa for the principle of blocking the means (sadd adh-dhara’i’); that is, to prevent the public from falling into the impermissible aspects that such functions could could lead to.

Hence, there is no inconsistency between what is found in Fatawa Rashidiyya, al-Barahin al-Qati’ah and al-Muhannad on the issue of the Mawlid, if all are read in context.

In sum, Barahin and Fatawa Rashidiyyah clearly states that the essence of the birth-commemoration is permissible and desirable. Mawlana Gangohi’s (rahimahullah) fatwas in general opposition are based on the principle that even those gatherings free of the impermissible activities that have become associated with them could eventually lead to these abominations and evils.

There is, therefore, no contradiction in the Deobandi view regarding the Mawlid as expressed by Mawlana Gangohi and Mawlana Saharanpuri (rahimahumullah).

One may summarise the Deobandi position in one sentence as follows:

The birth-commemoration in its essence is praiseworthy, but because the Mawlid functions held in Rabi’ al-Awwal have become inseparable from impermissible and innovated aspects, the fatwa is given of general impermissibility, to prevent the masses from falling into sin and to block the means to these evils.

Maulana Bham Caught Name Dropping AGAIN To Justify His Intermingling And Adoring Secular Education

Did Imaam Shaafi Rahmatullahi alaih approve of these gatherings of intermingling where women address men openly and Hijaab is relegated to nothing?

Did Imaam Saheb refer to the medical association, and the mafia pharmaceutical industry who gain directive from WHO or was he referring to Tibb and pure sciences of medicine, unlike the commercialized Medical field we find today?

The Muslim Medical association divorces medicine from Islamic standards, that is why they have no qualms in transgressing the laws of Shariah by having a mixed gathering event. This medical association should be ashamed of themselves and having the word Islam in their name. What is Islamic about such flagrant disregard for Pardah and open intermingling. It is no surprise that Ebrahim Bham and by extension JUSA are proud to be part of such as it has become norm for them!

They care two hoots about the shariah and the Ulama who supposed to be guiding them merely joins in the party.

It is this same organization that through Islam under the bus and the houses of Allah during Covid, as well as who are still being dishonest regarding the reality of the killer shots even after it has become clear.

(Issued by Qalamul Haq)
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

MAULANA BHAM SAYS JUSA IS BEING MALIGNED

Maulana Bham lulls the community to sleep by playing victim.

We would like to enquire:

When he lied and said he didn't call for musjid closure. We have articles quoting his call for such, the JUSA statement and the fact that JUSA lawyer called for such.
Was it a malignment or reality?

*When he let a lady speak about how all religions lead to same place and he sat next to her smiling in an interfaith discussion.
Was it malignment to say he has done so?

When you attend gatherings wherein free mixing takes place is that you or a clone?
Was it a deepfake?

When JUSA fabricated the notion that surah Kaafiroon enjoins interfaith relations.
Was that a malignment when it was exposed?

When people state the fact that JUSA are engaging in interfaith prayer and you, oh Maulana Bham ,deflect the issue and start talking about guarding with various religions?
Was it also a malignment?

Your participation in the Nelson Mandela joint prayer.
Was this also a malignment, or did it take place?

*When you attended the world cup.
Was that a malignment or did you really attend?

When you are shown to promote Chelsea, the pro Gay club and watching soccer time and time again.
Was that some robot or Jinn that had taken your form?

When JUSA promotes modernism, brings women on TV and hosts intimacy programs with them!
Was that all a dream or did it take place?

NB
Maulana Bham harps about living as a community with Non Muslims in a harmonious manner and then refers to interfaith!
Muslims have been living in harmony with them for centuries in South Africa so why is this called interfaith? In fact living with different groups of people from different religions has been the norm since time immemorial.
Why speak about it so much all of a sudden and engage in these panel discussions?
Did the lady who spoke about all faiths leading to one destination mean guarding, helping and coexisting!
What did She refer to when she was speaking about tolerance despite being gay and lesbian and what does it have to do with the type of Interfaith JUSA say they attend!

So we ask:
What exactly is being maligned/foisted/smear campaigned?

THE PROMISE OF ALLAH NEVER FAILS

"Who could be more unjust than the one who forbids Allah's name to be mentioned in his places of worship and then tries to get them destroyed? They should be afraid to enter them. They will have shame in this world and terrible punishment in the Hereafter"(Surah Baqarah)

Those who have sold out the houses of Allah are suffering disgrace day by day.

The recent cog of disgrace being the MJC president seeking legal recourse to remain in power and at the realm of financial gain. The financial misconduct of the MJC even appeared in Kuffar media. How can one ever trust such an organization with halaal status only Allah Ta'aala knows!

Next in line for financial prodding should be JUSA. What are JUSA'S Financials?
Have they ever been audited?
What are the monthly salaries of the fat cats who sell Deen?

The Muslim public should demand Financials and those that have legal clout should demand their auditing.

Keep in mind that public funds are being used, so the public have aright to know how such funds are being used?

May Allah safeguard the Ummah from these entities of falsehood.

JAMIAT KZN GOING AGAINST THEIR INTERFAITH INITIATIVE BY PROMOTING AN INTERFAITH PROPOGANDIST

It is with utter disappointment that we bring to the attention of the public that jamiat KZN have gone against their own interfaith initiative by promoting SWAMI Molvi Arshad Madani, the interfaith propogandist.

We are not surprised though as Jamiat KZN is part and parcel of the UUCSA interfaith Liberal Cartel who form part of the global imaams charter.

Anyone who has Ghairah for Deen should boycott this program.

What is the Jamiat KZN logic behind running a bayan tour on interfaith and thereafter promoting a person who engages in Interfaith?

All should ask this question!

COMPROMISING DEEN TO PROTECT MUSLIMS?

QUESTION
Is it fine for Muslims to attend temples and churches etc in order to protect Muslims who are in a minority?

ANSWER
Firstly the objective of Insaan(Mankind)is to establish divine system on this world and to be a means of the Deen of Allah reigning Supreme on earth.Therefore Muslims ought to be ready to sacrifice themselves for this purpose rather then sacrificing Deen for the purpose of self preservation.

Infact,whenever the Muslim Ummah engaged in the responsibility of sacrificing to preserve Deen,the amount of casualties of the Ummah was minimal as opposed to when they ignored this responsibility.

Secondly,The Quran has stated that the disbelievers would never be pleased until the Muslims follow their way, therefore compromising and carrying out the haraam act of attending their prayers and prayer places would not serve to protect the Muslims ,rather they would keep pushing until they eventually force Muslims to assimilate and become like them,we see this in countries like France.

Thirdly,The basis of Imaan is the understanding that Allah alone is one's protector and helper,disobeying Allah to gain protection defies this belief.

Fourthly, If it becomes impractical or impossible for Muslims to practice Islam in a place,it becomes necessary to migrate to a land wherein they could practice without duress, not change Islam to stay in the place.

From the above it is quite apparent that these type of compromises are not permitted, regardless of the objective.

May Allah safeguard the Ummah

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Interfaith gatherings and discussions
(Mufti Muhammad Desai)

Question:-
What is the ruling in regards to interfaith gatherings and discussions which is becoming common in the Ummah?

Answer:-
There is no scope for interfaith gatherings and prayers in Islam. The Deen of Islam is the only way of life that is accepted by Allah Ta’ala as mentioned in Surah Aa’le Imraan,
إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللّهِ الإِسْلاَمُ

Verily the way of life accepted by Allah Ta’ala is Islam (total submission to the will of Allah Ta’ala ) [A’ale Imraan, Verse 19]
In another verse Allah Ta’ala states,
وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الإِسْلاَمِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

Whoever seeks a Deen besides Islam, it shall never be accepted from him and he will be among the losers in the Aakhirah. [A’ale Imraan, Verse 85]

By uniting with the Kuffar and engaging in Ibaadat, we are indicating (to them) through our actions that we as Muslims are open to their way of Ibaadat and religion, whereas, we are aware that they are upon Kufr. The scholars have written that being happy (by means of our approval) with Kufr is Kufr, hence participating in such gatherings is indeed a dangerous practice.
{فَلا تَقْعُدُوا مَعَهُمْ حَتَّى يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ} أي غير الكفر. {إِنَّكُمْ إِذاً مِثْلُهُمْ} فدل بهذا على وجوب اجتناب أصحاب المعاصي إذا ظهر منهم منكر ؛ لأن من لم يجتنبهم فقد رضي فعلهم ، والرضا بالكفر كفر (الجامع لاحكام القراٰن ص418 ج5)
Secondly, the mercy of Allah Ta’ala and tranquillity descend upon those engaged in the Ibaadat of Allah Ta’ala, whilst the Kuffar and their Kufr draw the displeasure of Allah Ta’ala. By uniting with them we as Muslims are deprived of the mercy of Allah Ta’ala, whereas our problems will only be solved when the mercy of Allah Ta’ala descends.
Thirdly, the Kuffar of Makkah also negotiated with Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam in regards to their Deen. They said that they were prepared to accept Islam if Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam worshipped their idols or even kissed them. Allah Ta’ala revealed the verses of Surah Kaafiroon wherein Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam was instructed to inform the Kuffar of Makkah that he will never worship their deities. In the final verse of this Surah Allah Ta’ala says,
لكم دينكم ولي دين
For you is your religion and for me is mine.

We learn from this Surah that interfaith gatherings and compromising in matters of Deen is not something new, rather such negotiations existed from the time of Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam. The Quraan Sharif provided a clear cut ruling on the matter that there is no compromise in the matters of Deen. The Kuffar should continue with their Deen and acts of worship, and we the Muslims will continue with our Deen and Ibaadaat. After all, they are really not interested in adopting our Deen of Islam, rather they want us to adopt their Deen as they feel that they are also on the truth.
Obviously, this is in no way means that we shouldn’t given them Dawat towards the oneness of Allah Ta’ala. Our mission of inviting the Kuffar towards the oneness of Allah will continue but at no stage will we negotiate in matters of Tawheed, Ibaadaat or any other fundamental aspects of Deen.
Fourthly, it seems that we engage in these interfaith dialogues, prayers, gatherings to curry favour with the Kuffar. Perhaps, many Muslims and even Ulama are of the opinion that if we are on good terms with the Kuffar then we will be protected and safe. Our trust should be on Allah Ta’ala alone, as He alone is our Protector. Yes, we have been permitted to be kind and courteous to the Kuffar, if it is beneficial to the Muslims at large, but this is no way means that we should compromise in our Deen to gain such benefit. The Kuffar will never be loyal and satisfied with the Muslims (irrespective of our kind attitude towards them) until we follow their Deen, as stated in the following verse of the Quraan Sharif,
وَلَن تَرْضَى عَنكَ الْيَهُودُ وَلاَ النَّصَارَى حَتَّى تَتَّبِعَ مِلَّتَهُمْ
The Jews and the Christians will never be satisfied with you until you follow their religion (Surah Baqarah, Verse120)

When Quraan is informing us that they will never be pleased with us, how can we then place our trust on them and have hope of them coming to our aid and assistance. We should strengthen our connection with Allah Ta’ala and seek assistance from Him, as Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam and the Sahaaba had done on the occasion of Badr and other occasions. This is when the divine assistance of Allah Ta’ala will arrive from the unseen.
By us uniting with these Kuffar we are in reality weakening our connection with Allah Ta’ala and further depriving ourselves of the mercy and help of Allah Ta’ala. We think that we are benefitting and gaining by such activities, but in reality we are putting ourselves into destruction. Hadrat Sheikh ul Hadith, Maulana Muhammad Zakariyya Rahimahullah laments, that when people regard poison as the cure and the cure as poison, then we can only complain to Allah Ta’ala and unfortunately this is our condition. May Allah Ta’ala open our hearts and guide us towards that path in which lies our ultimate success in Dunya and Aakhirah. Ameen!

ALLAH TA’ALA KNOWS BEST!
ANSWERED BY:
Mufti Mohammed Desai
25 Rabi-ul-Aakhir 1444 / 30 November 2021

JUSA'S GUEST PAINTS THE PICTURE

It is now obvious that JUSA are agents who are pushing the Liberal agenda.

Every day that passes proves and will continue to prove to anyone who is sincere that JUSA have an agenda to fulfil and will not relent In their efforts in indoctrinating one and all in this regard.

Their latest stunt is to invite Maulana Arshad Madani,only to play on the name of his respected father, Maulana Husain Ahmed Madani Saaheb Rahmatullahi Alay ,to try desensitize the masses to accept their interfaith prayers and participation.

JUSA have no academic leg to stand on and neither do they wish to come out in the open with their interfaith prayer stance as they would then lose even more credibility amongst the sincere Ulama and masses,they therefore resort to inviting those who push the same agenda and trying to snatch credit with the name dropping game once again.

Arshad Madani and his acts cannot be justified by who his father is any more then JUSA'S actions be justified by the silent seniors who Lurk in the background and silently approve of the reverends Bham, Raghie and their cronies and their agenda.

Arshad Madani falls perfectly in line with the Abrahamic agenda that JUSA subscribe to in practice,by his open participation in Hindu events, attending temples and even wearing the "holy" garments of the Hindus.

It is no "coincidence that JUSA have invited him as the key speaker at their event,rather it is a well calculated plan of action.

The question that needs to be asked is:

Does JUSA ifta department agree with Arshad Madanis actions and attending the temples and hindu programs?

Does Maulana Ebrahim Pandor and the other seniors also agree with this as mashwara must have been taken before inviting him over?

While we are still waiting for a fatwa on interfaith prayer and participation from JUSA, all should understand the following:

ALL THIS IS HARAM. THESE ARE SCHOLARS FOR DOLLARS AND TRAITORS TO ISLAM.
MAY ALLAH TA’ALA PROTECT US FROM THE EVIL SCHOLARS, AAMEEN.

(Video Breaking It Down To Follow Insha Allah Ta'Aaala)

REQUEST FROM QALAMUL HAQ
ALL OUR SENIOR ULAMA HAQ ARE SPEAKING OUT AGAINST INTERFAITH AND THE OTHER AGENDAS GOING ON AND EDUCATING THE MASSES.

WE REQUEST, ENCOURAGE AND URGE ALL ULAMA TO SPEAK OUT. YOUNG AND OLD. LOUD TONED AND SOFT TONED.

PLEASE. WE NEED TO HEAR MORE OF THE ULAMA SPEAKING OUT TO ADD TO THE MESSAGES OF OUR AKAABIR/SENIORS