Wednesday, November 10 2021 Written by Administrator  



The following is the comment of some Students of Deen:

“At the recent programmed organised by Wifaaqul Ulama at Hilaal Musjid in Durban, Mufti Saeed Motara of Azaadville in his bayaan made a veiled criticism of The Majlis and Mufti A.K.Hoosen. Attached is a transcript of what he had said. Some or many of the audience believe that with these comments he undid the good of the programme. Everyone understands who he was criticizing, but we fail to understand the benefit of his ‘advice’. If he has an issue with The Majlis or with Mufti A.K.Hoosen, he was supposed to speak directly with them,  not lament to the laymen. He conveyed the impression of coming out in defence of the ulama-e-soo’. Please comment.


Transcript of Mufti Saeed Motara’s bayaan


“This is truly unbecoming of Ulama, that where another party differs with us, to resort to mud-slinging, to resort to hate-mongering, to resort to attaching abusive labels, this was not the way taught to us by Nabi-e-Kareem Sallallahu Alayhi WaSallam. Yes, we will make Dua, that the opposite party has erred, Allah Ta'ala must show them the Haq and the truth.


If we have erred, Allah Ta'ala must show us the truth and the Haq. Every human being can make mistakes. So, the way shown to us by our Akaabir, that if we have to confront someone with a different opinion, we should do it with respect, with decorum, with dignity, with honour, to show the true way of Islam and the true Sunnah of Nabi-e-Kareem Sallallahu Alayhi WaSallam.


Unfortunately, the fear today is, that we resort to extremism, that perhaps we resort to extremism, we resort to attaching abusive labels, we resort to mud-slinging, that is totally unbecoming. One example in particular, many Ulama may have seen this, definitely it is not from The Wifaq, but whichever organisation it may be, it was doing the rounds on social media, that a soccer club by the Shaytaani soccer team has been formed, and prominent Ulama's names feature in this soccer club.


This type of mud-slinging, this was not the way of our Akaabir, our pious predecessors. We need to use tact and wisdom, bring them closer, if you feel that they may have erred. Not to cause further friction. Not to cause them to distance themselves away from us.”

(End of Motara’s comments)





The Mufti Saheb perhaps believes that as long as a faasiq, faajir or even a murtad was perhaps a ‘moulana’, then he has to be honoured regardless of his public fisq, fujoor and kufr.


The Mufti Saheb has perhaps forgotten, intentionally or unintentionally, that the punishment in the world for a murtad is execution. He has conveniently   adopted blindness and feigns that Ahaadith  such as the following  do not exist:


“When  faasiq is honoured, the Arsh of Allah shudders.”

“He who honours a bid’ati, aids in the destruction of Islam.”

The Mufti Sahib appears to have more value for the mufsideen, mudhilleen molvis than the Deen. He  finds a niche of support in his heart for such human shayaateen as the ‘Devil’s Soccer Team’ and others of similar ilk regardless of the irreparable harm they are causing to Islam and the ignorant Muslim community already drowning in  its own vice, fisq and fujoor.


It is undoubtedly the nafs of the Mufti Sahib which has deceived him into the highly erroneous opinion of support he entertains for agents of Shaitaan. The Mufti Sahib has either intentionally failed to employ his Aql on this issue or his Aql has become overshadowed with his nafsaani instincts, hence the utter ludicrousness of his advice pertaining to the method of the Akaabir. If a method of a senior causes harm to the Deen or if it has outlived its utility or it no longer has applicability to the scenario we are currently facing, it must be incumbently set aside. It will be haraam to make taqleed of personal methods of the Akaabireen at the cost of detriment to the Deen. Most of today’s molvis who come within the purview of the Hadith branding molvis as ‘dumb devils’, have abandoned Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar which is a Waajib obligation  which attracts considerable flak from the people of baatil whom this Mufti Sahib is supporting and defending instead of defending the Shariah.


These errant molvis and muftis have the satanic penchant of citing the ‘Akaabir’ to defend their own indirect support for the people of baatil. They are the staunchest ‘muqallideen’ of the Akaabir when it comes to the issue of justifying their own weaknesses and their own abandonment of Amr bil Ma’roof, but on issues of real Taqleed, they are ambivalent, lax, and even inimical. Just what business does an Aalim of Haqq have with defending characters who blatantly and brazenly slander, misinterpret and mutilate the Ahkaam of the Shariah?  What is the relationship of this Mufti Sahib with such molvis and sheikhs who flagrantly espouse causes of baatil, who suspend the Shariah, who close the Musaajid and who in general propagate fisq and fujoor and even kufr? There is something hidden in the heart of this Mufti Sahib! He need to make muraaqabah of his heart and understand that Maut is always stalking.


Never is it the job of a Mufti of the Haq to come out in brazen support of the mudhilleen whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) feared more than even Dajjjaal. These mudhilleen whom the Ulama-e-Haqq condemn are all agents of Dajjaal. By supporting or defending them, this Mufti Sahib (i.e. Mufti Motara of Azaadville) is defending Dajjaal. This Mufti’s satanic silence regarding the blatant and flagrant acts of fisq, fujoor, bid’ah and kufr of the  shaitaani members of the Devil’s Football Team, is in stark contrast to his  haraam, stupid criticism of the Defenders of the Haqq about whom our Beloved Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:


“There will for all time remain a Taaifah (a small group) in my Ummah who will be firm on the Haqq until the Day of Qiyaamah. Those who oppose them (such as Mufti Motara) and those who abandon them (such as those of similar ilk) will not be able to harm them.”


Regardless of a myriad of such ‘dumb devil’ muftis, molvis and sheikhs, the Saut (Voice) of Haqq will always, until the Day of Qiyaamah, reverberate from the hilltops of the world to proclaim that Haqq whose defence Allah Azza Wa Jal has placed squarely on the shoulders of the Ulama-e-Haqq whom Mufti Motara and his ilk despise and for whom he harbours a deep-seated enmity merely because they resolutely proclaim the Haqq without fear or favour. About them, the Qur’aan Majeed proclaims: “They do not fear the insults of the insulters.”


It appears that this Mufti Sahib is a subtle supporter of the kufr interfaith movement which characters such as Reverend Abraham Bham espouses and promotes to the hilt. It appears that this Mufti Sahib has tolerance for the devil who worships under twelve crosses in a church then has the temerity of   claiming to be a Muslim. With stupid questions to deflect from the explicit kufr perpetrated by the Reverend Abraham Bham, the Mufti of Azaadville engages in mental shenanigans.  While this mufti has no inclination to defend the Haqq, he is quick in coming to the defence of those who mislead and deceive Muslims into the snare of kufr by condoning and defending the satanic perpetrators. Just imagine a Mufti seeking  stupidly to not only minimize the evil of Muslims or professed Muslims attending  a Hindu temple, standing in reverence in front of the Hindu priest who mutters some shirki rituals, but  scraping the bottom of the  barrel to exonerate them from their act of kufr and shirk. Has this mufti become a Pandit as the other fellow had become a Reverend?


The very first Wrung of our Akaabir are the Sahaabah. The Mufti Sahib needs to engage in better research of the lives of the Sahaabah to understand and know their attitudes towards kufr, bid’ah and zanaadaqah. For the edification of the Mufti Sahib, he should know that the Sahaabah had a better and more effective way of dealing with the Football type of mudilleen molvis. They would answer with the Sword. We in this zamaanah lack this ability, hence we resort to the Tongue to defend the Deen of Allah Azza Wa Jal.

Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahyi Anil Munkar has been totally abrogated by these reverend and pandit molvis and muftis. This Mufti (i.e. the Pandit Motara) has reduced their Wifaaqul Ulama assembly at Hilaal Musjid in Durban to a charade and a farce with his uncalled for silly comments made in defence of the mudhilleen whom he and perhaps other molvis of Wifaaq are now wooing. It appears that the Wifaaq Ulama are in a quandary regarding their stance. They appear not to know whether they are moving forward, reversing or halting, hence Pandit Motara deemed it imperative to proffer conciliatory gestures to the mudhil molvis such as Reverend Bham and his clique of mudhilleen. Was this the objective for Wifaaq having convened its merrymaking assembly. It appears to us that their assembly at the Hilaal Musjid was merely a publicity stunt to gain acclaim and support. It also appears that Wifaaq will fall by the wayside because of its inertia and abstention from Amr Bil Ma’roof and now its veiled support for those human shayaateen whose mission it is to destroy the Deen.


The silly talk of Pandit Motara was NEVER sincere naseehat for anyone. It was a shaitaani and a nafsaani exercise of flattery to make him dear to the Reverend Bham clique of mudhilleen. Let this Pandit Motara answer:


For whom was your stupid advice intended? You decried labelling and what you hallucinate to be ‘extremism’. You demonstrated the imbecility of your Aql by addressing your silly comments to a non-existing audience. Everyone knows that you were taking a dig at The Majlis and perhaps Mufti A.K.Hoosen with your unfounded, childish and stupid ‘naseehat’. But was the venue conducive for such ‘advice’? Will The Majlis’ accept your load of trash disgorged in Musjid Hilaal? You were fully aware that The Majlis was not present at your merrymaking assembly.


The audience present is not involved in the ‘labelling and criticizing’ which you stupidly decried. You should have informed the audience about the haraam carrion they devour and about the deluge of immorality they are drowning in. But you stand there engaging in gheebat under a deeni façade – indulging in pure gheebat about those who were not present. You were more than 100% certain whom you were targeting with your stupidity, and so does the audience.  It is an issue which does not concern them. Our labelling you and your ilk of mudhilleen is based on solid Shar’i grounds.


Whilst you have the temerity and the expertise to find scope for the permissibility of kufr – permissibility of attending a Hindu temple and a Christian church for worship and for honouring the priests of kufr and shirk, in your heart you could not find a niche to defend those Ulama-e-Haqq whose labelling is for the Sake of the Deen, for the Sake of Allah Azza wa Jal.


While mufti Motara (now Pandit) finds space and inclination in his heart to mitigate the explicit kufr of those attending kuffaar temples, he cannot find any argument to defend those who stand up for the Deen. He finds no mitigating circumstances for our labelling which is to defend and safeguard Islam. He looks at our labelling while casting a satanically blind eye at the kufr and shirk which are being committed and for which they are being labelled. Why does our labelling exercises irk this Pandit mufti so much while he fails to display even the slightest concern when professed Muslims attend Hindu and Christian temples? There is something drastically amiss in either his heart or in his Aql.


This wayward mufti of Azaadville said in his silly talk:


“One example in particular, many Ulama may have seen this, definitely it is not from The Wifaq, but whichever organisation it may be, it was doing the rounds on social media, that a soccer club by the Shaytaani soccer team has been formed, and prominent Ulama’s names feature in this soccer club. This type of mud-slinging, this was not the way of our Akaabir, our pious predecessors.”

The ‘prominent ulama’ are ALL mudhilleen in our opinion even if they are ‘prominent buzrugs’ in the opinion of the Pandit mufti. The issue here is: What benefit did this mufti discern in his acquittal? Who benefitted from this piece of stupidity? Those who are responsible for criticizing the ‘soccer team’ of mudhilleen do not accept this nonsensical advice nor were they present in the audience, and nor is that audience capable of transforming the thinking and methodology of  those  who  the Pandit accused  of ‘mud-slinging’. A person with functional brains should not indulge in cognitive dissonance which makes a mockery of his intelligence.


If this mufti was sincere in proffering naseehat to those whom he believe were wrongly labelling others, then he had the obligation of directing his naseehat to the source. Why does he lack the courage for telling The Majlis that it errs in its labelling? If he responds that The Majlis will not accept his naseehat, then we ask: Did you ever speak to The Majlis in this regard? Furthermore, The Majlis is under no obligation to accept anyone’s advice which we believe is incorrect and in conflict with the Shariah regardless of the Ikhlaas of the person. It is important for this mufti to reflect and ask himself: What was the benefit of his veiled cowardly advice? Just who benefited from his side cracks?


What really motivates a Mufti to deem it appropriate to mitigate fisq, fujoor, bid’ah and kufr and feel disinclined towards those who criticize and condemns these evils? The Majlis as well as other Ulama-e-Haqq criticize, temple and church-going, interfaith kufr assemblies, closing the Musaajid, suspending Jumuah Salaat, banning Muslims from performing Jamaat Salaat in the Musaajid, intermingling of sexes, women coming to the Musaajid, picture-making, carrion, and a host of other haraam and kufr activities. Why does this mufti of Azaadville entertain an aversion for these Ulama while he indirectly condones the perpetrators of all these acts of fisq, fujoor and kufr? Is it an aversion for Imaan?


Going into a Hindu temple and exposing oneself to shirk is not an error as the mufti suggests in mitigation of the perpetrators. It is an explicit act of shirk. No amount of texts cited from the Kutub support such haraam mitigation. These muftis are too ignorant to understand the texts correctly. They simply are too dim in their brains to understand the applicability of the texts.


Saving a man from the fatwa of kufr refers to the individual who has ignorantly uttered or done kufr. As far as the individual is concerned, his act is confined to himself. He is ignorant, hence we find some excuse to exonerate him from kufr. On the other hand, is the molvi who has become an Agent of Iblees. His misdeed is not done in privacy. It is not restricted to himself. He publically executes an act of kufr, propagates its ‘veracity’ and invites Muslims to join him in his kufr villainy. He is the Mudhil whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) feared more than Dajjaal. It is haraam to extravasate mitigation for the mudhilleen and zanaadaah. That this mufti believes that it is necessary to defend the mudhilleen against the Ulama-e-Haqq, speaks volumes for what he conceals in his heart. The issue is: What truck does he have with those who practice and propagate what is haraam, fisq, fujoor and kufr? Don’t seek to hide behind the skirts of the Akaabir. There is not the slightest resemblance between the lifestyle of this Pandit mufti and our Akaabir.

“The way shown to us by our Akaabir” is not to defend the mudhilleen; is not to find excuses for flagrant acts of haraam and kufr; is not to side with the mudhilleen against the Ulama-e-Haqq. Again we clarify that if it was the age of the Salafus Saaliheen, these mudhilleen would have been put to the Sword, not to the Tongue.


It will be salubrious for the brains of Pandit Motara to ruminate on the following episodes which  may convince him of his error, and edify him to understand the gravity of the zanaadaqah, and the haste with which the Akaabir acted regarding the Sword.


The Sentence of Qatl (execution) of a Zindeeq in the Court of Haroon Rashid

It is recorded that once a Zindeeq was brought to the court of the Khalifah Haroon Rashid. (A Zindeeq is a person who whilst claiming to be a Muslim, he/she openly subscribes to a tenet in conflict with the established Teachings of Islam).

Haroon Rashid called for Imam Abu Yusuf (Rahmatullahi alaih). When Imam Abu Yusuf (Rahmatullahi alaih) entered the court of the Khalifah, Haroon Rashid told him, “Speak to this Zindeeq!” (In other words, discuss with him so that he realizes his error and makes Taubah-Translator.)

Imam Abu Yusuf (Rahmatullahi alaih) replied, “O Ameerul-Mu’mineen! Call the executioner. Order that the leather mat be spread. Then invite him to Islaam. If he accepts Islaam, then well and good, otherwise behead him. There is no use in debating with him because he already accepted (Imaan) but turned away from it.”


Once the Khalifah Haroun Rashid slipped incognito in the Hadith dars of the Muhaddith Yahyah Bin Ma-een. The Muhaddith recited the  Hadith: “Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) loved dubbaa’ (marrow).” Someone from the gathering commented: “I don’t love dubbaa.” The Khalifah was  unable to restrain his rage at what he understood as the denigration of the Sunnah. He revealed himself and vociferously and repeatedly said: “The leather and the sword! The leather and the sword! The zindeeq  is denigrating the Hadith of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).” It was only the pleading of the Muhaddith which saved the life of the commentator. This upstart paper ‘mujtahid’ should understand that denigrating the Sunnah is not an insignificant issue, and  that defending the one who insults the Sunnah makes him complicit with the  insulter in the act of denigrating the Sunnah.


The answer for the Gang of Mudhilleen whom mufti motara of Azaadville defends, is An-Nat’u was Saif. May Allah Ta’ala guide us all and keep our Imaan intact until the very last moment of life. Imaan is suspended between fear and hope.

5 Rabiuth Thaani 1443 – 10 November 2021