Part Eight THE KNB (KUFR NIKAH BILL)
HENDRICKS DWELLING IN CONFUSION – UNABLE TO BOLSTER HIS FALLACIES
Once again we need to remind the Muslim community that our current argument with Ganief Hendricks developed as consequence of two absolutely fallacious claims he had made. In a reckless moment of gloating over nothing, he screamed arrogantly:
- THAT SHARIAH LAW IS RECOGNIZED IN SOUTH AFRICA
- THAT THE SHARIAH CONSEQUENCES OF NIKAH ARE RECOGNIZED.
This is our eighth installment in response and refutation of the fallacious claims made by the fellow. In his six-page so-called ‘response’ in which he has miserably failed to provide evidence for his fallacy, he says:
“The panel, which consisted of Moulana Vanker, Mufti Advocate Vawda (the son-in-law of Mufti A. S. Desai), and the Mufti of the Dar ‘Ulum in Port Shepstone, met with the Party under my leadership.
Mufti A. K. Hoosain, a notable public personality, pulled out because he arrogantly insinuated and considered me being a Shi’ah (that is, a school that diifers theologically and jurisprudentially from the Sunni school)! He perpetuated this unfounded fitnah-mongering even though he knows well that I have been and remains a steadfast Sunni. When I met the panel, I was questioned by one of its members too regarding this; and I gave ample evidence that I am a staunch Muslim tied to the Sunni school. By the time the Party’s consultation with the panel concluded, a firm undertaking was given that its members will study it closely; in addition, it will make changes where necessary to ensure that it complies fully with Shari’ah.”
Firstly, whatever he has disgorged in this statement has no nexus with our demand. We had nailed him on two fallacious claims and we are still busy crucifying him for the canard. And, the Shariah requires that in the process of demolishing his baatil, his every argument must be thoroughly excoriated to ensure that ignorant an unwary Muslims do not become entrapped in a Kufr device (KNB).
Secondly, Hendricks cites Mufti Emraan Vawda in a manner to convey the idea that he is supportive of Al Jahannam’s KNB whereas this impression is utterly baseless. Mufti Vawda has made it abundantly clear in his public statement that he does not support the baatil bill of Hendricks.
On the contrary, Mufti Emraan Vawda objurgatorily, warned of even discussing with Hendricks. Thus He (Mufti Vawda) said:
“Having had this experience with the Al Jama-ah Party, I then took the trouble to enquire more about its members. It appears that this is a recurring modus operandi that they employ, where they engage with some member of society or an Aalim, and no sooner the meeting is concluded, they use the engagement as a promotional tool to give the impression that this person or Aalim is supportive of their party. Hence I would caution members of the public to be extremely weary if ever they interact with the members of this party, and that they do not take their claims of endorsement on face value. Their averments should always be verified.”
Thirdly, as far as the Vanker character is concerned, he is a non-entity in terms of the Shariah. Whatever supportive stance he may have – we are not aware of his stance on the KNB – is simply dismissed with mirth, not even contempt. Again we reiterate, that whatever Hendricks had discussed with the ‘panel’ bears no relevance to the Core Issue of the current argument.
Fourthly, Mufti A.K.Hoosen is quite capable of substantiating his claim. In our current discourse we shall not tackle the Al Jahannam character on the Shiah issue. We are asking him to only provide his evidence for his two claims mentioned above. It will suffice here to debunk the stupid baatil claim that “Shi’ah (that is, a school that differs theologically and jurisprudentially from the Sunni school)! This is another fallacy and a despicable canard being promoted by the pro-Shiah munaafiqeen in our community. Shiahs are kuffaar. For the time-being this will suffice on the Shiah issue.
Fifthly, the averment: “a firm undertaking was given that its members will study it closely; in addition, it will make changes where necessary to ensure that it complies fully with Shari’ah.”, is a laughable hallucinatory expectation. This averment too has no bearing on the argument pivoting on the Core Issue. It has been presented by Hendricks as a red herring.
Since he has proffered this piece of flotsam in vindication of his Kufr nikah Bill (KNB), it will only be proper for him to explain to the Muslim community the following issues:
- Has this ‘panel’ hitherto presented any ‘changes’ “to ensure that it complies fully with Shari’ah.”?
- What has come of the “firm undertaking” of the ‘panel’?
Let us assure the Muslim community and let us edify Hendricks that even until doomsday neither this ‘panel’ nor all the Ulama of the world will succeed in the trick of making Al Jahannam’s KNB “fully compliant with the Shariah”. Only those who have no idea of the Shariah are able to utter such twaddle.
TO BE CONTINUED IN PART NINE, INSHA-ALLAH
IT IS HARAAM TO SUPPORT THE KUFR NIKAH BILL (KNB) OF Al JAHANNAM PARTY. IT IS HARAAM TO VOTE FOR HENDRICKS. IT IS HARAAM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE POLITICS OF TAAGHOOT.
27 Jamaadith Thaani 1444 – 20 January 2023