SANHA’S HARAAM, KUFR BCCSA MOVE.
“What! Do they search for the hukm (decree/ decision/resolution) of Jahiliyyah? And whose law can be more beautiful than the Law of Allah for people who believe with conviction (in Allah).” (Aayat 50, Surah Al- Maaidah)
THE BROADCASTING Complaints Commission of S.A. (BCCSA) is a government-created body like a secular court. It is a non-Muslim (kuffaar) court for deciding disputes pertaining to radio broadcasting issues.
SANHA (South African Haraam Authority) has created a purely nafsaani dispute with Mufti A.K. Hoosen. It is a SANHA-created dispute designed to humiliate Mufti A.K. Hoosen in the kuffaar BCCSA court. It is a case of baying for blood. The objective of this article is to alert Muslims of the type of entity SANHA is so that Muslims begin to realize that they are consuming carrion chickens and carrion meat products halaalized by a clique of men who are either hovering on the brink of kufr or are munaafiqeen masquerading as Muslims.
What exactly is the issue of ‘dispute’? According to the Shariah there is absolutely no dispute. SANHA, goaded on by ulterior motives , has fabricated a ‘dispute’ in the light of kufr law – the kufr code of conduct of the BCCSA. SANHA’s haraam carrion dispute has three ludicrous elements: The primary grievance of SANHA is that Mufti A.K. Hoosen has unequivocally proclaimed SANHA’s halaalized chickens to be HARAAM. This was the last straw which broke SANHA’S backbone. SANHA is prepared to tolerate any other type of criticism emanating from the Mufti. But to proclaim its halaalized carrion to be HARAAM carrion is unbearable and intolerable to the Carrion Cabal of SANHA.
The Carrion Cabal’s only source of livelihood and for living a life of pomp and opulence is the haraam boodle it extracts from those connected to the Carrion industry. Mufti A.K. Hoosen’s Fatwa that the chickens are Haraam struck at the very roots and heart of SANHA, hence this haraam carrion-halaalizing entity has cast aside the Qur’aan and the Divine Shariah to seek aid and succour from the kuffaar BCCSA in diametric conflict with the Qur’an’s commands. While the first and foremost
grievance of SANHA is the Fatwa of Haraam, the second complaint is that Mufti A.K. Hoosen has labelled the Carrion Cabal, ‘scholars for dollars’. The third grievance is that Mufti A.K.Hoosen had likened his student, Yusuf Patel to a kalb (dog).
Leaving aside all issues, purely in terms of the Shariah, SANHA has absolutely no grounds for creating this haraam dispute. All three complaints registered by
SANHA in the court of its lord, the BCCSA, have no val idi ty in the Shariah. Firstly, it is Mufti A.K. Hoosen’s Shar’i right to proclaim SANHA’s halaalized chickens to be Haraam carrion. In fact, the Mufti is under Shar’i duress to make the proclamation. Abstention from issuing the Fatwa of Haqq is Kitmanul Haqq (Concealing the Truth). It is also aiding in haraam and allowing the community to consume haraam, diseased carrion chickens by deception. Secondly, it is the right of an Aalim to label carrionhalaal izers as Ulama-e- Soo’ (Evil scholars), scholars for dollars, Kilaab (dogs) and Khanaazeer (pigs) because the Qur’aan Majeed and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had described evil scholars with these epithets. Either SANHA’s carrion ‘scholars’ are scholars for dollars or they are not. When a Muslim is accused with an evil or labelled with an evil or insulting logo or epithet, the ta’leem (teaching of the Hadith) is that he should reflect and do some soul-searching to fathom the reality of the accusation. If, after sincere meditation he understands that the epithet does apply to him, then he should repent, make Taubah and recite Istighfaar.
If after deep and sincere reflection, he is satisfied that the accusation against him is false and slander, then he has no ground for concern. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had explained that in this event the slandered person’s sins are effaced, and the slanderer’s good deeds are transferred to him (i.e. to the slandered one). Thus, in both cases he has nothing to lose. On the contrary, he stands to gain immensely. Thirdly, the Ustaadh has the full right of likening his treacherous student to a dog. The Qur’aan Majeed compares treacherous and evil scholars to dogs, and the Hadith likens them to khanaazeer (pigs). Thus, this issue is not for a kaafir court to adjudicate. The implications of SANHA embracing the BCCSA are indeed spiritually catas trophic for the Carrion Clique of SANHA. This haraam clique consists of E.B. Lockhat, M.S. Navlakhi and Yusuf Patel. Either they are munaafiqeen concealing their kufr or they are incorrigible morons who are totally bereft of Aql. Hence, they fail to understand the consequences of their BCCSA action.
The BCCSA is the hukm of jaahiliyya law mentioned in the Qur’aanic aayat cited above. In bootlicking the kuffaar forum, SANHA has flagrantly and rebelliously
rejected Allah’s statement in this aayat. Allah Ta’ala asks: Whose law is better than Allah’s Law for the Mu’mineen? SANHA’s treacherous and rebellious rejection of
the Qur’aans resolution forum implies that for them (the Carrion Cabal), the law of jaahiliyyah, viz., BCCSA law is more beautiful and more reliable than Allah’s Law. This implication is categorical kufr. Furthermore, Allah Ta’ala states in the Qur’aan Majeed: “Those who do not decide (decree/resolve issues) according to that (Shariah) which Allah has revealed, verily they are kaafiroon.” (Aayat 44, Surah Al-Maaidah). “Those who do not decree according to that (Shariah) which Allah has revealed, verily they are zaal i – moon.” (Aayat 45, Surah Al- Maaidah) “Those who do not decree according to that (Shariah) which Allah has revealed, verily, they are faasiqoon.” (Aayat 47 Surah Al Maaidah).
All three terms refer to the kaafiroon. To highlight the villainy of the kuffaar who prefer the law of kufr, Allah Ta’ala describes them as faasiqoon and zaalimoon. These three verses apply to SANHA without ta’weel (interpretation). The applicability is explicit. SANHA has vigorously, flagrantly and treacherously rejected all the Qur’aanic aayaat which command disputes to be resolved by a Muslim forum. Thus, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “If two parties/groups among the Mu’mineen fight/
dispute, then (O Believers!) make peace between them.”
Despi te the fact that SANHA had no valid Shar’i grounds for creat ing a ‘dispute’ which is nothing but hallucination of the nafs, Mufti A.K. Hoosen had proposed that Maulana Radhaul Haq Sahib, senior Ustaadh at Darul Uloom Zakariyya mediate and arbitrate the fictitious dispute. Noteworthy is that Maulana Radhaul Haq Sahib is the Ustaadh of both Mufti A.K. Hoosen and M.S.Navlakhi. In addition, Mufti A.K. Hoosen is the Ustaadh of the Kalb, Yusuf Patel. SANHA’s entire rubbish case submitted to the BCCSA is based on the affidavits submitted by the Kalb, Yusuf Patel against his Ustaadh, Mufti A.K.Hoosen. Furthermore, it should be noted that
SANHA, for its carrion chicken objective, had proclaimed Maulana Radhaul Haq as the Grand Mufti of South Africa. For the purposes of its carrion industry, SANHA had eked out support from the Grand Mufti of S.A. Now, suddenly the Navlakhi clique demotes their Ustaadh, Maulana Radhaul Haq Sahib, stripping him of the Grand Mufti of S.A. title to justify taking their haraam dispute matter to the kuffaar BCCSA.
It is of imperative importance for Muslims to reflect on this dastardly kufr plot in which SANHA is entangled. The carrion molvies rejecting their own senior Ustaadh whom they themselves have elevated to the pedestal of ‘Grand Mufti of S.A.’ They are not interested in a Qur’aanic resolution. They are determined to spill the blood of their Ustaadh, Mufti A.K. Hoosen in the kuffaar BCCSA court, and that too over something which is a non-issue in terms of the Shariah.
How can the Muslim community consume these carrion chickens on the word of such a treacherous gang of nimak haraam ‘molvies’ who may be munaafiqeen? How can Muslims accept the meat and chicken products of the kuffaar to be ‘halaal’ on the word of men who flagrantly reject the Qur’aan and their senior Ustaadh’s arbitration proposal?
This issue is not a private argument between SANHA and Mufti A.K.Hoosen. It concerns the entire Muslim community in that this SANHA clique which has now openly displayed its treachery, nifaaq and kufr, is feeding haraam, diseased carrion chickens to the Muslim community. The word of a born non- Muslim has more weight than the word of the SANHA molvies who have betrayed the Deen and the Ummah for gratifying their monetary greed. It truly boggles the mind to contemplate
that molvies who claim to be Warathatul Ambiya (Heirs of the Ambiya), groveling like sewer rats, scraping the very bottom of sewer gutters to extract vengeance from an Aalim who is stating the Haqq – that the chickens are Haraam carrion. They scrape the very bottom of sewerage drains, licking the boots of kuffaar forums in their blind rage to seek revenge. If they indeed are Muslims, then we can safely say that 100% of their brain cells have become inoperative in this BCCSA kufr saga
initiated by them. If they believe that they are Muslims, they should apply their brains and submit to the Qur’aan and Sunnah, withdraw their haraam kufr BCCSA malafide petition, and submit to the arbitration of their senior Ustadh, Maulana Radhaul Haq.
However, it is most despicable for molvies to become so antagonized by an epithet hurled against them that they could even discern the need for arbitration. Did they not ever sit in the company of Mashaaikh? Did their Mashaaikh teach them to react in such kuffaar fashion when criticized or even slandered? It appears that Iblees is their shaikh.