Un-Islamic Masjid Guidelines

Un-Islamic Masjid guidelines

“Verily, he among you who lives long will see much conflict. Therefore, keep to my
Sunnah and to the Sunnah of the Khulafa-ur-Raashideen (the rightly guided Khulafa), those who guide to the Right Way (Deen). Cling to it (the Sunnah) firmly. Beware of the new norms (Bid’ah in Deen), for verily, every Bid’ah (new norm) is misguidance (Dhalaalah). And every Dhalaalah is in the Fire of Jahannam.” (Abu Dawood and Tirmizi)

NIKAH NOT VALID

NIKAH NOT VALID WITH THESE MUNAAFIQ BOOTLICKERS

Question

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah

A very senior Mufti of Bangladesh named Mufti Mansurul Haq (who is the Khalifah of Hardui Hazrat Abrarul Haq Rahimahullah) has recently issued the following verdict :-

If any Muslim believes that Diseases are contagious, then he will loose his Iman. One must not marry such fellows having such corrupt beliefs. Nikah with such person will be invalid.

Is this a unanimous position of the Ahle Sunnat wal Jamaat ?

May Allah Azza Oa Jal keep you all with ‘Aafiyaat.

ANSWER

What the honourable Mufti Mansurul Haq has said is 100% correct. We have mentioned the very same verdict of the Shariah in numerous of our publications.

Those who reject the explicit declaration of ‘La Adwa’ of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) cannever be Muslims. They are munaafiqeen and Murtaddeen.

Alhamdulillah! In this world darkened with kufr and nifaaq there are still some Rays of Allah’s Haqq which the world full of Satanist molvis and sheikh will not be able to extinguish.

The position stated by the honourable Mufti Saheb is most certainly the unanimous position of the Ahl-e-Haqq of the Ahlus Sunnah Wala Jama’ah.

The modernists, munafiqeen, scum molvis and sheikhs of this era have embraced kufr, hence they are bootlicking the atheists and denying Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). These Kilaabun Naar (Dogs of Hell-Fire) will understand their villainy when their souls are stuck in their throats at the time of Maut, and in Qiyaamah at Haudh-e-Kauthar. They are worse than khanaazeer. In this dunya they are not contented with licking the boots of the atheists. They descend to the most despicable act of licking even their hinds and ingesting their excrement.

May Allah Azza Wa Jal destroy and utterly deracinate the bootlickers – these vile molvis and sheikhs – and also their atheists devils who have introduced this reign of satanic terror.

5 Zil Qa’dh 1441 – 27 June 2020

FONG KONG CONGREGATIONS

DO NOT JOIN THE KUFR FONG KONG CONGREGATIONS

A Concerned Brother from Newcastle complains:

May you Allah preserve you and reward you abundantly.

Jamiah Darul Uloom Newcastle Musjid personnel prohibits us from performing salah standing shoulder to shoulder.

One would think a Darul Uloom would uphold the Sunnah and hold firm on the Quran. The opposite is true. The gaps they the authorities have made and we are forced to pray our salah are so horrendous and despicable.

Some Mussalees are standing literally five meters apart. It is such a disgusting and incomprehensible situation to be in. Wallahi this is insanity in the extreme. Words fail me. How can our salah ever be accepted and complete ? What answer will we give to our Rabb on yaumul qiyamah ?

Are we so pathetic and weak that we grovel and worship the filthy regulations that our salah is compromised in this fashion ?

I brought this to the attention to the authorities as I refused to social distance yesterday. I was forced to social distance despite my objections. I was reprimanded and hammered to do so. I do not want to expose their inconsistencies and hypocrisy yet they force us to social distance. I decided to just make sabr and make dua for this to end.

My heart bleeds every single time the imam says Allahu Akbar and we are standing like there is a blazing fire like a trench filled with smoldering coals between us mussallees. The sad reality is that even the mussallees now believe it is incumbent to social distance. The very same mussallees who shout at the top of their voices to social distance are the ones who have massive wholesales yet their customers conveniently do not social distance on their premises. Such is the deplorable state of our affairs.

Kindly proffer advice to those who have made this incomprensible decision and please make dua for us here in Newcastle.

Jazakallah

(End of letter)

The gaps are filled by the shayaateen. The Musaajid have become haunts for devils. The haraam ‘social distancing’ evil is being given preference over the command of Allah Ta’ala. In the adoption of this evil is the denial of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Thus, the satanic gaps are KUFR – real KUFR which the Munaafiqeen are implementing at the behest of the atheists.

No one can force a person to adopt this evil act. It is not permissible to join such a congregation engaging in mock ‘salaat’. The Salaat is not valid. Do not attend the Musjid which has been converted into a new style temple. Perform Salaat at home. Form your own Jamaat. If no Jamaat, perform alone, but do not join the Munaafiqeen who are bootlicking the atheists.

23 Shawwaal 1441 – 16 June 2020

‘ISLAMIC’ DA’WAH ACADEMY OF U.K.

THE SO-CALLED ‘ISLAMIC’ DA’WAH ACADEMY OF U.K.

IS A SHAITAANI ACADEMY

Question

The Islamic Dawah Academy in Leicester UK, run by the titled Shaikhul Hadith, Shaykh Moulana Saleem Dhorat has provided the following advice to Muslims who intend coming to the Musjid. Is his advice in line with the Shariah?

Screenshot_20200613-022031
(End of the message of Iblees)

ANSWER

His advice is in line with satansim. This fellow who masquerades as a ‘shaikhul hadith’ is in reality shaikhush shaitaaniyat. The advice which this government bootlicker has proffered is tantamount to kufr. These are the types of molvis who will be in the frontline to condemn Imaam Mahdi (Alayhis salaam) when he arrives.

These miserable molvi characters who have treacherously betrayed Islam and Allah Ta’ala will issue fatwas of Satanism to brand Imaam Mahdi (Alayhis salaam) a heretic. They are vermin employed by Iblees to undermine and destroy Islam. They are converting the Musaajid into some kind of bizarre temples.

DO NOT PERFORM SALAAT IN A MUSJID WHERE THERE HAPPENS TO BE A FONG KONG HARAAM KUFR CONGREGATION ENGAGING IN MOCK SALAAT. THOSE WHO HAVE SUFFERED THE CALAMITY OF BEING PRESENT IN SUCH A SHAITAANI CONGREGATION, SHOULD REPEAT THEIR SALAAT.

We are in Aakhiruz Zamaan. About the molvis of this era, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that “They will be the worst of the people under the canopy of the sky. From them will emanate fitnah and the fitnah will rebound on them.”

Under the canopy of the sky are also mushrikeen, Yahood, Nasaara and khanaazer. These illegitimate molvis who prevent Mu’mineen from the Musaajid are worse than even this conglomerate. About their villainy, the Qur’aan Majeed says:

“Who is a greater zaalim (oppressor) than the one who prevents the Thikr of Allah in the Musaajid (and added to this villainy) he strives in the destruction of the Musaajid?” (Al-Baqarah, Aayat 114)

22 Shawaal 1441 – 15 June 2020

Q&A: RESPONSE TO SPURIOUS ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF SOCIAL DISTANCING

TIE THE CAMEL, CIRCUMSTANCES, FLEE FROM THE LEPER, AND THE SPEAR’S LENGTH HADEETH
Allah Ta’ala states: “Ask the people of Thikr (Knowledge) if you do
not know.” (Qur’aan)

Q. The proponents of social distancing are quoting a Hadeeth in Tirmizi where Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam told a bedouin to tie his camel first and then put his trust in Allah. Based on this Hadeeth, they argue that one has to take precautions. Accordingly, trustees and ‘Imaams’ have published Masjid guidelines. What is the response to their argument?


A. Did any ill people attend the Masjid in the time of Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi
Wasallam? Since the above answer is obviously yes, how did the sufoof of Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam look like? Were there gaps in the Sufoof? NO! So, why did Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam then not ‘tie the camel’ when it comes to social distancing in Salaat? Do these people misinterpreting the Ahaadeeth understand the Ahaadeeth better than the speaker himself? Do they understand the Ahaadeeth better than Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam? Obviously NOT! So, why misconstrue and
twist Ahaadeeth to prove the kufr concepts of ‘social distancing’ in Salaat?
Furthermore, tying the camel will refer in this age to locking your car. It does not apply to the sufoof. All the Covid-19 Masjid regulations are KUFR Rubbish! They are stupidly trying to project themselves as holier and greater than the Sahaabah Radhiayallahu anhum and Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam with their ludicrous socalled guidelines. Plagues took place during the era of the Sahaabah Radhiyallahu anhum; and Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam did not prevent any Muslim who had
symptoms of illness from the Masjid. All the guidelines and protocols of the Masaajid which are under the control of those ‘wearing masks’, are in rejection of the Fatwa of Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam who said: “There is no contagion.”


Q. I approached a senior Molvi in my town who is also sometimes the Imaam and told him that all this social distancing in Salaat is not valid. He responded with one word: ‘circumstances!’ Please do advise?

A. Let him elaborate on circumstances. The senior Molvi of your town is perfidious to say the least. Maybe he does not know the importance of the sufoof, despite being even an Imaam. Despite the circumstances, the Sahaabah stood shoulder to shoulder. Why didn’t plagues and sicknesses inspire Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam to make the Sahaabah stand apart from one another in Salaat?


Q. A person says that according to the Ahaadeeth, we should flee from the leper. He then states that this is even more than social distancing. If one has to flee, then social distancing is a lesser concept than fleeing which should not be condemned?


A. Laughable indeed! If according to his lopsided understanding of the Ahaadeeth, one should flee from people, then he should flee! Why was he still talking to you? He supposed to flee as if he is escaping from a lion.
If the Hadeeth says something, then you must act on it! Don’t come with ‘lesser concepts’ of nonsense here. One cannot speak of Ahaadeeth, and then hypocritically speak of ‘lesser concepts’.
Follow Ahaadeeth according to its correct interpretation as explained and practically demonstrated by Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam and the Sahaabah Radhiyallahu anhum. Did Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam ban any leper from the Masjid? No! So, especially for those misapplying this Hadeeth to the Corona disease, people with covid-19 may not be banned from the Masjid, let alone even the talk of healthy people. Then, did Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam instruct the leper to stand apart from other Musallis in Salaat? NO! Did Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam instruct
those without leprosy to stand apart from the leper? NO! This sufficiently debunks the misinterpretation of those quoting the Ahaadeeth.
Nevertheless, the fact of the matter is that the advice pertaining to lepers was for people of weak Imaan. One should not give one’s own interpretation to Ahaadeeth. This is dangerous for one’s Imaan. Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam ate together with a leper from the same utensil. So, those arguing in favour of social distancing are undoubtedly displaying hypocrisy (Nifaaq). They argue in favour of social distancing, selectively quote Ahaadeeth, misinterpret them, tear them out of context, then interfere with the Sufoof and the Masaajid AND then they say they follow Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam. Why do they profess feelings they do not have? The Munaafiqeen should say straight: we believe diseases are contagious and we reject what Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said. Nauthu Billah! Why are they zigzagging so much?
Afterall, if one believes in Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam who negated the
contagiousness of diseases, then one will automatically frown and reject all the stupid Covid-19 Masjid guidelines as well as the silly concepts of social distancing – all which reek of Kufr.


Q. Another Hadeeth making its rounds on social media is:
SOCIAL DISTANCING – The Prophet Muhammed Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam
said: “When you speak to someone (who is afflicted with a contagious illness), there should be between you and them a space of the length of a spear (approximately two meters).” [Musnad Imam Ahmed]
Kindly confirm if this Hadeeth is authentic? Is this the correct translation and interpretation of the Hadeeth? Some words are in brackets which is somewhat funny. Your input will be appreciated.


A. Whilst the Hadeeth appears in Musnad Ahmed which may not be rejected, it should be remembered that it is not permissible for the Muqallideen to refer to Ahaadeeth for Masaail. This was the function solely of the Mujtahideen. Only a Mujtahid may refer directly to the Qur’aan and Hadeeth for Masaail – not Muqallideen like us. By referring directly to Ahaadeeth, we will make blunders and remember that misinterpreting what Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said, is undoubtedly Kufr. Thus, it is incumbent that we refer to the Fuqaha. Even the Ulama have to incumbently refer to the Fuqaha. Let us not refer directly to Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth like the wayward Salafis! No wonder the Salafis (antiTaqleed morons) are so deviated, insulting great Ulama such as the Four Imaams of
Fiqh, and not realizing that they are plodding the path of Baatil and Kufr!

The Hadeeth under discussion has been selectively translated and misinterpreted. The words in brackets (who is afflicted with a contagious illness) are not the words of Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam, but are the kufr interpretations of the dishonest translator whoever he or she maybe.
The full Hadeeth is as follows. Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: “Do not look constantly (i.e. stare) at the Majzoomeen (lepers). And when you speak to them, then there should be between you and them, the distance of a spear.”
The first thing is that the translator conveniently omitted the first part of the Hadeeth and added his own interpretation in brackets for obvious reasons.
Secondly, the Hadeeth refers to lepers. It is misleading to infer that the Hadeeth refers to someone ‘who is afflicted with a contagious illness’ because Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: ‘There is no contagion.’ The Hadeeth does not speak about any other illness besides leprosy. When Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam negated the contagiousness of diseases/illnesses, then it is obvious that this Hadeeth does not refer to Covid-19.
Thirdly, why should one not look at the majzoomeen despite the fact that Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: ‘There is no contagion.’? This is because when a leper sees a healthy person, his calamity increases, he feels despondent and his grief increases. Thus, the person should flee from a leper, don’t stare at him and stay a distance of a spear away from him. These commands were for those of weak Imaan so that their beliefs remain correct. A person with strong Imaan and correct Tawakkul is capable of warding off from himself the false beliefs of contagion which the people of Jaahiliyyah held that one person is the cause of the next person’s illness.
Fourthly, the distance of a spear relates to speaking – not Salaat. In Salaat, the lepers, etc. stood shoulder to shoulder with the rest. There was no social distancing in Salaat.
Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam practically refuted the Kufr idea of disease being contagious, by eating together with a leper from the same bowl.
And most importantly, health and illness are in the Hands of Allah. Diseases do not operate on their own. Diseases are under the Divine Control of Allah Ta’ala. All such Ahaadeeth which the protagonists of social distancing have cited, were to refute corrupt beliefs. ‘Social contact’ does not transmit diseases. This is the Islamic concept stated with clarity by Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam. When Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: ‘Laa adwaa’, a Bedouin said: “O Rasulullah! My camels in the desert are (healthy) like wild bucks. When a camel with scurvy mingles with them, they all get scurvy.” The mushrikeen held the same belief as the atheists of today regarding diseases being contagious. In refutation of this corrupt belief, Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam asked the Bedouin: “Who infected the first camel?” That Being who gave the disease to the very first camel, is the One Who gives the disease to the others.
While Allah Ta’ala directly caused the disease to infect the first one, He uses this one as the worldly vehicle to transmit the disease to all those whom He has earmarked. Without Allah’s command, the disease will not befall those who have not been destined to contract it. Thus, all the measures of Shaytaan being adopted are in vain. The progress of the virus will not be thwarted. It will take in its grasp and stride everyone whom Allah Azza Wa Jal has targeted. Finally, the Zindeeqs are arguing in favour of social distancing between healthy people whereas Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam did not advocate healthy people staying apart from one another due to others having illnesses. The Hadeeth has no relevance to social distancing and healthy people standing a spear’s length or two
meters apart from one another. Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam did not state that people should be apart from one another for the fear of contracting a disease. The Zindeeqs should not quote Ahaadeeth just as they feel like, since Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: “Whoever attributes a lie to me intentionally, should prepare his
abode in the Fire.”


MAY ALLAH GRANT US ALL THE TAWFEEQ TO PRACTISE ACCORDING TO THE SUNNAH. AAMEEN

Was Salaam

Jamiatul Ulama Northern Cape

SHAITAANI GAPS AND MASKS

SHAITAANI GAPS AND MASKS INVALIDATE IMAAN

The satanism called ‘social distancing’ and the masks invalidate not only Salaat. This shaitaaniyat invalidates the Imaan of those who deliberately introduce it in the Musaajid. The innovaters of this shaitaaniyat, in addition to destroying their own Imaan, involve the ignorant ones in haraam acts.

Why does this shaitaaniyat invalidate Imaan?

(1) The Saff (Salaat row)

Those who have initiated these practices are atheists, kuffaar and mushrikeen.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commanded: “Stand shoulder to shoulder!” The atheists command: “Don’t stand shoulder to shoulder. Stand wide apart.” In obedience to the atheists, the molvi/imam or committee of the Musjid gives preference to the instruction of the atheists.

The instruction of the atheists is adopted on the basis of it being valid and correct while the command of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is denied and rejected on the basis of it being flawed and being a threat to life and health. This is glaring KUFR.

The articles and statements issued by the likes of Bogus uucsa, Bogus jusa, Jaahil mjc and others of this kufr-nifaaq hue, have made it abundantly clear that these vermin believe that standing shoulder to shoulder is a danger to health and life. It spreads the disease.

For a detailed explanation of the shaitaaniyat of ‘social distancing’, read our booklet: “TARAAS-SOO!” – HARAAM SATANIC SAFF FORMATION, SOCIAL DISTANCING

Insha-Allah, a further treatise on this subject shall be published.

(2) Masks

The atheists advise and instruct wearing masks. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited wearing masks in Salaat. Again, preference is given to an innovation of the atheists on the basis of the belief that performing Salaat without masks constitutes a danger to health and life.

This preference for the act of the atheists and rejection of the prohibition of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) intentionally and deliberately is KUFR.

Those in charge of Musaajid, who profess to be Muslims, are enforcing these artefacts of KUFR because they believe that the theories of the atheists are correct, and that the methods of Salaat (i.e. saff-formation and prohibition of masks) are baseless and a danger to health and life. Their attitude and belief have eliminated their Imaan. They are no longer Muslims. Salaat behind such renegades is not valid.

Duress, Arrest, Compulsion, Majboori, etc.

This is a bogey of the Munaafiqeen who enforce the shaitaani kufr regulations on ignorant musallis. The argument that the government is enforcing the wide gaps thereby allowing the shayaateen to occupy the vacant spaces, is baseless and false. Non-observance of the shaitaaniyat of ‘social distancing’ is not a criminal offence.

Social distancing, Spacing, Masks and Sanitizers

In a letter issued by the South African Police Services to the entire police hierarchy of the country, some of the salient statements are:

(5) “Complaints of torture, excessive use of force, inhumane treatment and punishment of the community by enforcement officers (including members of the SAPS) during the State of Disaster have come to the attention of the National Commissioner. Conduct of this nature by members of the SAPS is unacceptable and will be dealt with in terms of the criminal law and the disciplinary process of the SAPS.”

(6.2.1) “A member may under no circumstances arrest a person in order to punish, scare or harass such a person or to teach him or her a lesson.”

(6.2.3) “Members must ensure that a particular offence exists in law before arresting a person for the commission of an offence. Where certain conduct has not been criminalized (such as the wearing of masks or social distancing)

members must sensitize “transgressors” that their conduct is endangering their health and that of others.”

(6.2.7) “A member who uses force for any other purpose (such as to punish or teach the suspect a lesson), may himself or herself be guilty of an offence, such as assault, assault GBH, attempted murder, etc.”

(6.2.14) “Members may not use private equipment or equipment not issued by SAPS such as a “sjambok”, etc.”

In Guidelines regarding social distancing, the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, and also the Minister of Police state:

“Social distancing is currently not an offence, therefore, it cannot be enforced. However, Enforcement Officers may encourage and sensitize members of the public to adhere to social distancing.”

The Deputy Provincial Commissioner: South African Police Service Limpopo Province, in a directive to the entire South African Police Service, states:

“1.1. It has come to the attention of this office that members of the public are arrested for not wearing a cloth or other mask. It has further come to the attention that drivers of public transport vehicles are arrested for allowing passengers more than 70% of the maximum loading capacity of the vehicle.

1.1 There are a number of regulations of which the contravention thereof are not criminal offences. ………….. The following are examples of regulations of which the failure to comply, is not a criminal offence.

3.1.1.1. Although the regulations specifically provide that every person must wear a mask, the failure to do so is not an offence and no person may be arrested for the contravention thereof.

Regarding sanitizers, the Deputy Provincial Commissioner states:

“3.1.3.2 The failure to comply with these sub regulations is not an offence and no person may be arrested for such failure.

3.1.4.2 The failure to comply with any of the above-mentioned directives is not an offence and no person may be arrested for such failure.

5.2 The arrest of persons for the contravention of the regulations and directives mentioned above is not allowed and will be taken in a serious light. In case of a civil claim against the SA Police Service, members may be held liable for any loss incurred by the state.”

Among the regulations for which arrests may not be made for non-compliance is the use of sanitizers which the Munaafiq committees of some Musaajid are enforcing. These committees surpass the government and the police in the shaitaaniyat of enforcement of kufr demands.

“3.1.2.1 The regulations provides that the person in control of retail stores or institutions must:

a) Provide hand sanitizers for use by the public at the entrance of the business ………..The failure of a business owner to comply with the sub regulation is not an offence and no person may be arrested for such failure.”

If a gathering is unlawful in terms of the oppressive and draconian measures of the government, e.g. instead of 50 there are 100 persons present, then the law states:

“An enforcement officer must, where a prohibited gathering takes place —

(a) Order the persons at the gathering to disperse immediately; and

(b) If the persons refuse to disperse, take appropriate action, which may, subject to the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 (Act No.51 of 1977), include the arrest and detention of any person at the gathering.”

(Government Gazette – 28 May 2020)

Thus, the police may not summarily arrest. An arrest without first ordering dispersal is unlawful.

Summary

Non-observance of shaitaani gaps (social distancing) is not a criminal offence.
Not wearing a haraam mask is not a criminal offence.
Not using the haraam sanitizer is not a criminal offence
If the gathering exceeds 50, arrests are unlawful prior to ordering dispersal.

There is no compulsion, no dhuroorah and no majjboori to compel compliance with the host of haraam-kufr conditions which the munaafiqeen have introduced at the Musaajid. All these shaitaani conditions have been accepted and adopted in flagrant rejection of the commands of Allah Ta’ala, hence the KUFR is glaring and flagrant. As such Imaan is invalidated.

The KUFR is of an aggravated nature in view of the fact that the Munaafiq enforcers believe that these conditions advised by the atheists are correct and their observance is imperative whereas the explicit Nusoos of the Shariah debunking the ideology of the atheists is erroneous and practical expression thereof spreads the disease, harms the health and kills.

Those who claim that salaat performed in this evil state is valid are in grievous error. They are either munaafiqs or ignorant or short-sighted or plain stupid.

“Who is a greater zaalim (oppressor) than the one who prevents the Thikr of Allah in the Musaajid (and added to this villainy) he strives in the destruction of the Musaajid?” (Al-Baqarah, Aayat 114)

15 Shawwaal 1441 – 8 June 2020

Why is the Majlis so harsh?

answer given by a student of deen and approved by hazrat

Why is the Majlis so harsh towards the Salafis, Barelwis and other deviant sects? So-and-so Akaabir had praised so-and-so person from a deviant sect, and so-and-so Deobandi website contains ample praise of people from deviant sects. This kind of attitude is creating disunity and drives a wedge between Muslims which is exactly what the CIA and the Kuffaar want???

ANSWER

The issue of dissociating (Baraa’) from people from deviant sects is yet another tenet of the Shariah which was upheld by the Ijma’ (consensus) of Salaf-us-Saaliheen, and which is flagrantly and recklessly neglected by the Ummah as a whole today. Innumerable quotes and incidents of the Salaf-us-Saliheen vividly portray their ‘extreme’ attitude towards people associated with deviant sects, which throws into stark contrast the nafsaani (desire-ridden) attitude of today’s so-called ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’.

The Shariah is crystal-clear and explicit on how we should regard people from deviant sects. This is a ‘wedge’ made Waajib by the Ijma’ (consensus) of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, not the CIA or other Kuffaar. What so-and-so shaykh or so-and-so website says is powerless and impotent to alter this Shariah position – a Shariah position which has become Ghareeb (strange, lone, forlorn) and unpalatable now, just like most other parts of the Shariah.

Even a perfunctory reading of the lives and anecdotes of the Salaf-us-Saliheen, whom many falsely claim to follow, will bring to the fore their ‘extreme’ ghairah for the purity of the Deen, and their ‘harsh’ and ‘extreme’ attitude towards deviants. In fact, if a complete Jaahil were to observe the massive contrast between the satanic pin-drop silence of the Ulama today, and the deafening noise of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen with their innumerable Fatwas of Kufr, Tabdee’, Baraa’, the Jaahil might mistakenly assume these worst of times today to be a Golden Age, free from deviances, and the blessed era of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen to be the age of Jahiliyyah.

The Salaf-us-Saaliheen never recognised any such stupid concept of ‘unity’ as trumpeted by deviants of all breeds today. The slightest deviation from the Haqq was abominable to the Salaf-us-Saliheen. In their eyes there was no such creature as a ‘good’ deviant or a ‘moderate’ deviant. Deviation has no moderation. One person’s stupid idea of ‘moderate’ is another stupid person’s idea of ‘extremism’ – and vice versa.

Furthermore, those who pipe the stupid ‘unity’ slogan are extremely selective in the type of deviants they are willing to flirt with. Thus, for example, while the salafi-inclined ‘deobandis’ have no hesitation in proclaiming the Barelwi-like sects as deviants, they will suddenly bury their heads deep deep in the sand regarding the clear-cut beliefs of Kufr held by the leading Imams of the Salafi sect, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, which have only recently been thoroughly exposed in manner that does not leave the slightest shred of doubt regarding their Kufr anthropomorphic nature, thanks mainly to the mass-publishing and mass-propagation of Ibn Taymiyyah’s books carried out by the Salafis of this age.

Just look at the destruction wrought to the Deobandi Maslak and efforts of Deen because of our flagrant and reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah. It is now not uncommon to come across ‘deobandi’ muftis who believe that Allah (azza wa jal) is in the physical direction upwards, sat (juloos) on the throne. A local ‘deobandi’ Maulana now propounds the Kufr belief of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim, that hell-fire will eventually shut down even for disbelievers. The most senior and prominent Deobandi Shaykh and Buzurgh in the UK recently instructed the use of Shirki Istigaathah “zikr”. Not co-incidentally the said Buzurgh has amicable relations with the Barelwis. Public Bid’ah Zikr sessions, in the manner of the fraudulent ‘sufis’, orchestrated by our Mashaikhs and Buzurghs are now commonplace. More and more ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ are today regurgitating the same fatwas first issued by salafi ‘jihadis’ many years ago, that suicide bombing in public places for a ‘need’, targetting women and children, Haraam ‘jihadi’ promotional videos, and the like are amongst the means through which Jihaad must be fought. Not co-incidentally these ‘muftis’ and ‘maulana’ squander all their time indulging in and propagating Haraam ‘jihadi’ videos excreted by salafi ‘jihadis’.

Senior muftis who are known to associate and socialize with deviants and fussaaq of all breeds, were amongst the first Deobandis to issue the grievously ruinous Haraam fatwas legalizing pictures of animate objects, interest (riba), and the like, against the Ijma’ (consensus) of ALL the Akabir of Deoband and the Fuqaha of all ages, and which have now suddenly become the Mash-hoor (preponderant) majority opinion of the ‘deobandis’ today. Relying on the Faasiq-Faajir Saudi government for moon-sighting, permitting women to go to the Masjid, holding Meelad-un-Nabi conferences, and innumerable other practices and rulings first adopted by deviant sects, have already become, or are rapidly on the way to becoming the ‘majority’ opinion amongst the ‘Deobandis’ today.

Our reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah just so that we can squeeze enough room to justify an inclination to a pet deviant of ours, has practically opened the floodgates for every other type of deviant and deviance to enter our ranks and be conferred Deeni respectability. Kuffar domination, which is only a manifestation of Allah’s Wrath and Azaab upon this Ummah is only set to increase. No Divine Nusrat appears to be forthcoming any time soon.

Yes, senior Akabir of Deoband had praised and approved of people from extremely deviated sects such as salafis, fraudulent ‘sufis’, maududis, qutbis, etc. We do not say that such Akabir had Nifaaq in their hearts. Since we know them to be 100% stern upholders of the Haqq, even when Haqq would become extremely bitter, we adopt Husn-e-Zann and say that they were genuinely unaware of the deviation of the person or sect in question. We are convinced that had they become aware of the deviation, they would have adopted dissociation (Baraa’, Bughd fillah, etc.) immediately, unlike the nafs-following ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ of today and recent times.

Many of the Akabir had initially admired and praised Maududi and Sayyid Qutb both of whom were guilty of the most blood-curdling statements regarding the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum). A few of the Akabir had passed away while holding Maududi in great esteem. But after Shaykh Zakariyyah, Allamah Binnori, and others had thoroughly exposed the deviation of Maududi and his sect, virtually all our Akaabir, without the slightest hesitation, dissociated (Baraa’) themselves from the Maududis. Undoubtedly, today’s ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ would have desperately clutched at straws to maintain their Nifaaqi admiration and connection to such a person and group.

Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani once mentioned that only after residing in Madinah did he come across books of Ibn Taymiyyah which were not available in India and which made it clear to him that Ibn Taymiyyah had veered blatantly out of Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah. From that time onwards, he was unable to tolerate any respect shown to Ibn Taymiyyah. Now that the Salafis of this age have mass-propagated the books of Ibn Taymiyyah which expound such anthropomorphic beliefs as Allah having a size, a body (jism), limits (hudood), spatial direction (jiha), Allah having the actual ability to sit upon the back of a mosquito, the non-eternity of Hell-fire, and innumerable other abominable beliefs which go against the Ijma’ of the whole Ummah, it is only Nafsaaniyat and Nifaaq which prevent the Salafi-lovers today from recognising the Salafi sect as amongst the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah.

Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and other senior Mashaykh did praise Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. We do not say that they had Nifaaq in their hearts. Without any doubt, they were genuinely unaware of his deviation and the deviation of the Arab Salafis in general. However, now that it is open knowledge that he was of the deviant Salafi aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah, and that he had made Halaal (Mubaah-ud-Dam and Waajib-ul-Qatl) the blood of thousands of Muslims just like the Salafi-influenced ‘jihadis’ are doing today, then to proclaim him as a ‘Mujahid’ or a ‘Reviver’ is undoubtedly, according to the Shariah, aiding in the destruction of the Deen, and a result of pure Nafsaani Nifaaq lurking in the heart like a filthy thief.

Sacrifices for the Deen do not exonerate a person from a deviant sect. The original Khawarij were unmatched in their passion for the Deen, their willingness for Jihaad, their concern for the Ummah, their Ikhlaas, their night-vigils, their Ibaadah, and even their honesty. Yet that did not alter in the slightest their status of being the Dogs of Hell-fire – the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah with whom dissociation is Waajib.

Shaykh Zakariyyah himself and other senior mashaikh had great admiration for and close ties with Muhammad al-Alawi al-Maliki who was from one of those deviated Arab fake ‘Sufi’ sects. There is no doubt, Shaykh Zakariyyah was unaware of al-Alawi’s barelwi-like aqeedah, otherwise he would have been the very first to do Baraa’ of him. Shaykh Zakariyyah passed away without becoming aware. Once it is clear that a person is from a deviant group, the Shariah is crystal-clear that it becomes Haraam to honour and praise him, and to do so aids in the destruction of the Deen. Yet, stupid ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ and ‘deobandi’ websites today use Shaykh Zakariyyah to justify their admiration for this Bidati and other similar deviant Arab ‘Sufis’.

Lastly, even assuming that any of the Akaabir were aware of the deviance of a deviant whom they had praised, this would not alter in the slightest the truth behind Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) statements that to honour a deviant aids in the destruction of the Deen and causes the Arsh of Allah (azza wa jal) to shudder.

May Allah (azza wa jal) grant us the Tawfeeq to adopt and have full Yaqeen in the efficacy of every single tenet of Allah’s glorious Shariah even if the ‘wisdom’ behind that tenet escapes are puny, miniscule and chaotically varying intellects.

Was-salaam

Ilm al-Ghayb and the Kufr of Barelwis

The extreme deviance of the Barelwis and the crooked lie of their deceptive claim of being authentic adherents to the Hanafi Madh-hab and the generality (Jumhoor) of the Fuqaha, are exposed thoroughly by their attribution of detailed (tafseeli) knowledge of “everything that was and everything that will be” to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

This belief is summed up, in very clear terms, as follows by their arch-idol, Ahmad Raza Khan:

“It is without a doubt that the Almighty has given His Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace) the complete knowledge of everything from the first till the last. From the east to the west, from the Throne till the earth, everything was shown to him. He was made witness to the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth. From the very first day till the last day all of the knowledge of what was and what shall be (ma kana wa ma yakun) has been shown to him. From all of the above, not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet. Great knowledge has been encompassed by the Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace). It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail. Much praise to Allah. In fact, that which has been discussed is not, never, the complete knowledge of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace and send peace on his family and companions, all of them); but this is a small part of the Prophet’s knowledge.” (Inba al-Mustafa, p.486)

To illustrate better what is meant by the detailed knowledge of “every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness”, let us consider the example of a Nikah (wedding). According to this perverted Barelwi creed, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) possesses the knowledge of every single one of the billions of Nikah that had ever taken place in the past, is currently taking place, and the billions more that are due to take place in the future.

Furthermore, according to this twisted creed, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) possesses not only the knowledge of the general arrangements of each and every Nikah, but also every single paraphernalia attached to each Nikah, from the food items, the guests, the clothes worn by the guests, to every other minute detail connected to the Nikah, even the detailed knowledge of each and every leaf that falls in the vicinity of the Nikah and the detailed knowledge of each and every grain that is consumed during the Nikah.

The leafy and grainy detail of the knowledge attributed to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is made clear in unambiguous terms:

“From all of the above (i.e. all that has occurred and all that will occur – including obviously every single Nikah) not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet….It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail.”

Similar statements affirming detailed (tafseeli) knowledge of everything to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), as opposed to a summary overview (ijmaali) of all significant events relevant to the creation, can be found in other books of Ahmad Raza Khan such as ad-Dawlat ul-Makkiyyah, Khaalis ul-I’tiqaad, al-Malfooz al-Shareef, and also in the books of other arch-idols of the Barelwis such Jaa al-Haq and Shane Habeebur Rahman of “Hakeem ul-Ummat” (The quack doctor of the Ummah), Ahmad Yaar Khan.

Now compare and contrast this belief, O Barelwi worshippers of Ahmad Raza Khan, against THE Fatwa of the Hanafi Madh-hab regarding a person who attributes to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the knowledge of a single and solitary Nikah for which there is no apparent means for him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to gain the knowledge of.

The Hanafi Mujtahid from the 5th Century, As-Sadr ush-Shaheed Husam ud-Deen, who was the senior teacher of numerous other pillars of the Hanafi Madh-hab, including the famous authors of al-Hidaaya and Badaai us-Sanaai, narrates the following ruling from his pious predecessors:

من تزوج امرأة بشهادة الله و رسوله لا يجوز لأنه نكاح لم يحضره الشهود، وحكى عن أبو القاسم الصفار أن هذا كفر محض لأنه اعتقد أن رسول الله يعلم الغيب وهذا كفر

“Whoever marries a woman, taking Allah and his messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as witnesses – it is not permissible because witnesses are not present for the Nikah. It is related from Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar that this is Kufr Mahd (pure, unadulterated disbelief that expels a person from Islam) because he believed that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows the unseen (ghayb) and this is Kufr.” [Al-Waaqi’aat, page 70 of the manuscript]

Imam Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar as-Soofee (d. 326H) was a Hanafi Mujtahid with only three links between himself and Imam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullahi alayh). This fatwa has been accepted and transmitted in every age by the Hanafi Fuqaha. The very same Fatwa or similar versions to it were accepted and quoted approvingly by the early Fatwa manuals which constituted the Hanafi Madh-hab such as al-Fataawa ul-Walwaalijiyyah (Vol. 5, pg. 422), Khulaasat ul-Fataawa (Vol. 4, pg. 385), al-Muheet ul-Burhaani (Vol. 7, pg. 407), al-Fataawa al-Bazzaaziyyah (Vol. 6, pg. 325), al-Fusool ul-Imaadiyyah, al-Multaqat (pg. 244), Fataawa Qaadhi Khaan (Vol. 2, pg. 517), and other authoritative texts.

Again, compare and contrast the statement, “this is pure Kufr because he believed that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows the unseen (ghayb)”, with the Barelwi Aqeedah as exemplified by another one of their arch-idols, Muhammad Umar Icharwi, who commits the greatest act of Kufr and Gustakhi (demeaning Allah and his Rasool sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by making Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prophethood wholly dependent on an attribute exclusive only to Allah Ta’aala:

“For the Prophethood to be valid it is necessary that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows ALL OF THE UNSEEN.” (Miqyase Hanafiyyat, p. 385)

Let us now relate a few of the different versions of the same Fatwa related by all the authoritative Hanafi texts, in order to aid in acquiring a better understanding of the import of the Fatwa and the severity of the issue at hand.

The following version is found in the authoritative compendium of the Hanafi Madh-hab, Fataawa ul-Hindiyyah, which was the product of a collaborative effort involving hundreds of Ulama from around the Ummah who were commissioned by Hadhrat Alamghir Aurangzeb (rahmatullah alayh) to record those rulings upon which there is consensus or a general agreement amongst the Hanafi Fuqaha:

“A man marries a woman while witnesses are not present. He says: “I make Allah and His Rasul witness”, or he says, “I make Allah and His Angels witness”, he becomes Kaafir; but if he says: “I make the angel on the left shoulder and angel on the right shoulder witness”, he does not become a Kaafir.” [Vol. 2 pg. 288]

As in most of the other authoritative Fatwa manuals, no ikhtilaaf on this particular issue is cited, while in the very same chapters, multiple other beliefs or statements are often listed regarding whose Kufr there exists an Ikhtilaaf. For example, regarding the anthropomorphic statement, “Allah is looking from the throne“, Fataawa al-Hindiyyah states that this is Kufr (with no attention paid to the intention of the utterer) “according to the majority” i.e. a minority refrained from doing Takfeer for this crime.

The same version of the aforementioned Fatwa narrated by Fataawa al-Hindiyyah is found in earlier compilations such as Khulaasat ul-Fataawa, al-Fusool ul-Imdaadiyyah, Fataawa al-Bazzaaziyah and al-Muheet ul-Burhaani.

Explaining why the one who invokes the two writing angels (Kiraaman Kaatibeen) as witnesses does not become a Kaafir, as opposed to the one who attributes the knowledge of the very same Nikah to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the author of al-Muheet narrates from an earlier Fataawa compilation:

“He does not become Kaafir because those two (i.e. the writing angels in the right and left shoulders) do know that (i.e. the Nikah), since they are not absent from him (i.e. the man making the statement).” [Vol. 7, pg. 407]

This succinctly answers the moronic question posed by Bidatis and Mushriks today, “If it’s not Kufr to ascribe such knowledge to the two writing angels, how could it be Kufr to ascribe it to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)???”

The Hanafi authority of the 6th century, Qaadhi Khaan, while narrating this Fatwa, added:

“He (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) didn’t have knowledge of the unseen while alive, so how would he after his death?” [Vol. 2, pg. 517]

The terrible crime of the apostate which caused his instantaneous exit from Islam, is mentioned in absolutely unambiguous terms by Imam Abul Qaasim as-Saffaar, in one of numerous transmissions of his Fatwa:

“…since he believes that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knows this Nikah…”

O Barelwi, if the authentic belief of Ahlus Sunnah is that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has detailed knowledge, leaf and grain, of EVERYTHING that was and that shall be (maa kaana wa maa yakoon), then on what grounds did all these Fuqaha attribute Kufr to the man who believes that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has knowledge of just the one Nikah?

Isn’t this one Nikah automatically and by default included in the “detailed knowledge of everything that was and everything that will be” which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) supposedly has according to your religion?

Were the Fuqaha all guilty of Haraam Ghuloo’ (extremism) and Gustakhi – demeaning Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) – by denying for him (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the knowledge of billions and billions of Nikah ceremonies?

Or is it not you, O Barelwis, who are guilty of the most abominable degree of Ghuloo’ and Gustakhi – of the degree of Kufr – by fabricating upon Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the multitude of categories of knowledge which can be termed “Ilmun Laa Yanfa’” (knowledge which serves no beneficial purpose) from which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would repeatedly and earnestly seek refuge?

Is it not you, O Barelwis, who are guilty of the most abominable level of Gustakhi by mutilating beyond recognition many of the supreme and sublime attributes of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), such as the noble quality of “Ummi” – defined as “unlettered” by the consensus of the Fuqaha whom you fraudulently claim to follow – which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) proudly proclaimed for himself and his (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) noble Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum)?

Is it not you who commit the dastardly Gustakhi crime of implying deficiency in Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) by propounding the perverted idea that the consensus of the Fuqaha on the definition of Ummi (unlettered), and the consensus of the Fuqaha on negating for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) the multitude of categories of knowledge that is Ilmun Laa Yanfa’ (such as billions of Nikah ceremonies) from which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) himself repeatedly sought refuge, results in a diminishing of the perfections of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Na’oozubillah!?

Did the Salafi arch-idol, Ibn Abdul Wahhab, perform a spectacular and unprecedented miracle (istidraaj) by time-travelling back to the third century and injecting “wahhabism” into the books of all the Hanafi Fuqaha whose books are replete with Fatwas such as the above – Fatwas which condemn unequivocally numerous beliefs and acts that have become the Sha-aair (salient identifying features) of the Barelwis today, such as attributing knowledge of the Hour to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and a chronic addiction to building and plastering over graves – which when cited faithfully by the Ulama-e-Haqq tend to elicit violently allergic reactions and irrational allegations of “wahhabi influence”?

We interject here to point out that while we accept the Hanafi ruling that this particular aspect of Barelwi creed is Kufr, we refrain from doing Takfeer on the Barelwis in general, just as we refrain from doing Takfeer of the Salafis despite the very same Hanafi texts cited above declaring as Kaafir the one who attributes a place or direction to Allah Ta’aala as the Salafis do. We shall dilate on this point in the complete article, to be published in future, which will contain, insha-Allah, a demolition of the Ghutha (trash) arguments employed by the Barelwi arch-idols to befool their followers.

For now, we release this much information, which we believe to be sufficient for most sincere seekers of truth, to warn the Barelwi masses of the potentially eternal doom that awaits them – the status of a Kaafir according to the Jumhoor Fuqaha of the Hanafi Madh-hab – should they persist in clinging onto their deviant religion.

HARAAM SATANIC SAFF-FORMATION And the KUFR of ‘SOCIAL DISTANCING’

SOCIAL DISTANCING_EBooklet

“TARAAS-SOO!”
(Shoulder to shoulder – like a Solid steel wall) (Hadith)

‘SOCIAL DISTANCING’
What exactly is social distancing? This is a new phrase which
has come into existence in the wake of the bogus coronavirus
plotted by the enemies of humanity. When this term is
mentioned, a specific picture looms up in the mind. In this
picture which has been designed by the conspirators we see:
1) Flight from your parents, children and humanity for the fear
of contracting the disease.
2) Do not shake hands with any one, not even with your
parents.
3) Transform yourself into a clown by hideously sticking out
your elbow to touch another person’s elbow when greeting.
Elbow-to-elbow displaces the Masnoon Musaafahah and
Muaanaqah which are totally prohibited. Such vile Tashabbuh
bil Kuffaar is haraam.
4) Spacing 2.2 metres apart in the Salaat saff, if Musaajid are
allowed to be open under extremely stringent conditions.
Thus, the Musaajid become haunts for the shayaateen.
5) If Musaajid are permitted to operate, the elderly and the
sick must be debarred.
6) Perfectly healthy people may not travel more than two
persons in a vehicle. They may not sit on the same seat.
7) Dua should not be made with hands raised. More
‘dangerous’ is to draw the hands over the face at the end of
Dua as is the Masnoon method.
8) Visiting close relatives even parents at their homes is
prohibited.
9) Visiting a sick relative even if parents, in hospital is
prohibited. No contact whatsoever is allowed.
10) Closure of the Musaajid thus prohibiting Fardh Jamaat
Salaat, Jumuah Salaat, Taraaweeh and Eid Salaat.
11) The Masnoon Ramadhaan I’tikaaf is banned.
12) Closing shops thus depriving people from their
legitimate needs.
13) Lockdowning the entire country thus devastating the
economy.
14) Confine people to their homes. Not allowing them access
to even their yards.
15) Closure of all Darul Ulooms
16) Banning Hajj and Umrah
17) If one person is tested positive, an entire household or
institution must be placed in quarantine.
18) Snitch and spy on Muslims who perform Salaat in Jamaat.
Report them to the kuffaar police to be arrested.
19) Kafan and Ghusl for the mayyit are abolished. Even
Tayammum on the mayyit is prohibited.
20) In some places. e.g. Sri Lanka, Muslim bodies are by law
appropriated by the government’s devilish order and
cremated. Cremation is strongly advised by the Satanists who
have invented their Satanist concept of social distancing.
21) Violation of the draconian social distancing rules is a
crime leading to arrest, fines and imprisonment. Yet, even in
terms of the secular constitution these draconian measures are
unconstitutional and unlawful, hence many senior lawyers are
challenging the unconstitutionality of the oppressive laws.
This is the heinous satanic concept of social distancing. No
Muslim in his sane Imaani senses will ever accept that this
system of Iblees has the slightest support in the Ahaadith.