plus minus gleich

Search our website


E-mail Print PDF


The MJC’s ‘press release’ dated 8/10/2020, purporting to be a criticism of the kufr of Abraham Rasol, is in reality a veiled condonation of the latter’s kufr.  There is no surprise in the comments of kufr made by A.Rasol. Such kufr is only to be expected of Non-Muslims. Therefore commenting on the copro-kufr of the chap will be indulgence in futility. The need is to comment on the veiled kufr of the MJC.

The kufr of the MJC is most deceptive and the ignorant and unwary are likely to be misled. In its press release, the MJC states:

“It is regrettable that, instead of restricting himself to customary felicitations, Mr. Rasool saw fit to launch yet another gratuitous completely uncalled for attack against the Ulama.”

The MJC has no real concern for the Beliefs and Injunctions of Islam. It is concerned with its own carrion image, hence it took exception at the criticism of the Ulama by the non-Muslim. There is much to criticize in the Ulama from the Shariah’s perspective, but non-Muslims such as Abraham Rasol, have other sinister objectives. The target of their criticism is Islam itself. The MJC has taken umbrage not because of the kufr disgorged by the fellow, but because his comments are perceived to be in condemnation of the Ulama, and the MJC believes that they are ‘ulama’, hence the ‘press release’ statement in mild reproach of Rasol. The actual kufr of the chap is not targeted by the MJC. On the contrary, these carrion halaalizers, in their statement, have condoned kufr.

In its entire statement, not once does the MJC mention Allah Ta’ala, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Qur’aan and Hadith. The MJC feels that in criticizing the non-Muslim, it is walking on a tightrope. The MJC dithers in bewilderment. It seeks a balance which will please and placate both Muslims and non-Muslims, hence the need for dispensing with Islamic flavour, termed Sibghatullaah (The Colour of Allah) in the Qur’aan Majeed. According to the Hadith any talk, discourse, etc. bereft of the Name of Allah Ta’ala is accursed. 

The MJC’s advice regarding ‘customary felicitations’ is also haraam. It is not permissible to express feelings of felicity for the kuffaar. Furthermore, birthday celebrations are haraam practice of the kuffaar. It does not behove Muslims to emulate the customary practices of non-Muslims. Such Tashabbuh is haraam. In expressions of felicity, the kuffaar will be praised and honoured. Prohibiting this, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “When a faasiq is praised, the Arsh of Allah shudders.”

The MJC sates: “However, no amount of sacrifice and service confers entitlement to undermine religious truth or remodel categorical tenets of faith.”

Just as the Rasol character is guilty of this crime, so too is the MJC. The MJC’s pro-Shiah stance, its condonation of the Hindu shirki wedding ritual fire circumambulation along with incantations offered to Hindu deities, its performance of janaazah salaat for an atheist, its participation in interfaith kufr, its suspension of Jumuah and Fardh Salaat, its closure of the Musaajid, its vigorous opposition to the opening of the Musaajid, etc., are all acts of kufr designed to ‘remodel’ the Shariah and to undermine the Haqq of the Deen.

The MJC’s presence at the St.George’s Cathedral to dole out some stupid, shaitaani award to a judge; the MJC’s appeal to priests of other religions to ‘dedicate special prayers…..’; MJC joining kuffaar religious leaders in marches; MJC’s participation in the prayer session; MJC sheikh taliep praying in the St.George’s Cathedral where a haraam memorial was held for the communist, Ahmed Kathrada; etc. are all acts of KUFR.

Whilst itself wallowing in fisq, fujoor and KUFR, thereby undermining the Deen and seeking to ‘remodel’ Islam, it deems appropriate to chastise a character who is a bedfellow in KUFR with the MJC. If the fellow had not attacked the ‘ulama’, the MJC would have expressed satisfaction with the Kufr comments of Abraham Rasol. The MJC‘s dalliance with priests of other religions and its participation in even the kufr prayers of the baatil religions  relegate these MJC sheikhs and hybrid molvi-sheikhs  to the realm of KUFR, such kufr which expels  from the fold of Islam. The MJC is no better than the Rasol chap in kufr.

In another dubious and deceptive statement calculated for appeasement of the personnel of baatil religions, the MJC states in its press release:

“An exclusive claim to truth lies categorically and undeniably at the very heart of Islam, as well as, for that matter, the Anglican faith. The denial or adulteration of this exclusive claim stands condemned, by the consensus of the Ulama, as an unmitigated act of Kufr. By persisting upon such a position, a person leaves the fold of Islam.”

Now what is the “position” adopted by Abraham Rasol? It is clear even by MJC dubious standards that his position is “an unmitigated act of Kufr”. Such an act disgorged or committed just once excommunicates the person from the fold of Islam. However, in order to appease shadows and the kuffaar, the MJC disgorges the baatil rubbish of persistence as a requisite for expulsion from Islam. Thus they say: “By persisting upon such a position, a person leaves the fold of Islam.”

From whence did the MJC acquire this claptrap? What is the basis for the predication of persistence as a condition for expulsion from the fold of Islam? When a person utters or commits an act of ‘unmitigated kufr’, Islam immediately on his utterance or commission expurgates itself from the calumny of kufr by expelling the shaitaan from the precincts of Islam. Persistence on kufr is not a condition for Takfeer. If a person just once says that Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was not the Final Nabi, or Jannat and Jahannam do not physically exist, or that kuffaar will enter Jannat on the basis of their ‘good’ deeds, or that the five daily Salaat are not Fardh, or any one of the innumerable Fardh beliefs and acts of Islam, he forthwith, without any extenuation, will be booted out of the fold of Islam.

The MJC’s statement is designed to mitigate in favour of the Abraham Rasol character who is a confirmed non-Muslim in terms of the Shariah. Furthermore, the MJC’s exercise in fabricating extenuation is dictated by its own floundering in its cesspool of iniquity of fisq, fujoor and kufr. The Shar’i infractions of the MJC and of all other miserable miscreants such as Reverend Bham and his ilk, remain inexpiable as long as they are not forthcoming with public Taubah. Only Taubah can efface kufr.

By introducing the Anglican faith, the MJC has presented veiled condonation for Anglican kufr, thereby assigning itself into the same rot in which Rasol has sunk. Let it be known to all  those who entertain the slightest doubt regarding the exclusiveness of Islam’s claim that Islam is the one and only  repository of Absolute Truth that such doubt is kufr. Allah Ta’ala declares in the Qur’aan Majeed: “Verily, the Deen by Allah is only Islam.” Any person professing to be a Muslim, who claims that there is scope for kuffaar entry into Jannat is a murtadd “a person who leaves the fold of Islam”, as the MJC reluctantly avers in its press release.

In view of Islam being the only repository of Absolute Truth, participation in the interfaith kufr movement, messages of felicity for kuffaar, especially if they are priests, and participation in their acts of prayers and worship in any way whatsoever, are all acts of kufr which expel from the fold of Islam.

In a futile and haraam attempt to present cover for the Rasol character, the MJC says: “The MJC as a rule adopts an approach of extreme caution on takfir. As such, we desist from takfir in this instance.”

This stance itself is kufr. Despite acknowledging that Abraham Rasol’s comments are kufr, the MJC desists from takfir as if this injunction is haraam. While the comments of the chap are haraam and kufr, takfir in the instance is Waajib. On what basis has the MJC adopted ‘extreme caution’ in this case? When the kufr of Rasol is unmitigated, brazen and blatant, what then entitles the MJC who claims to be a body of Ulama, from issuing the Fatwa of Excommunication. In this case, abstention from Takfir casts the ignorant public into a quandary. The dividing line between Imaan and Kufr is clear and bright, but the ulama-e-soo’ such as the MJC blur that line in their pursuit of worldly and nafsaani objectives.

The idea of ‘multireligious coexistence’ is another kufr hallucination of the MJC. There is no such coexistence in Islam. The thread of the theme of castigation of kufr and the kuffaar runs through the Qur’aan from beginning to end. The concept which the MJC and other interfaith munaafiqeen are propagating perceives unification of religions – a concept which elevates every religion and ideology to the same pedestal of truth as claimed for Islam by the Qur’aan Majeed.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah had no messages of felicity for the kuffaar. Their only Message was the Message of Tauheed.

The MJC’s press release demonstrates a disingenuous attempt to hoodwink and deceive Muslims – to trick them into  believing that  its personnel – the hybrid clerics- are orthodox Muslims when in reality this idea is the furthest from the truth. While the kufr utterances of a non-Muslim such as Abraham Rasol have no effect on Muslims, those ignorant Muslims who still believe that the MJC is a body of bonafide Ulama, are cast into kufr by the kufr-accommodating stance of the MJC.

“They (seek to) deceive Allah and the Mu’mineen. But they deceive only themselves whilst they do not understand. In their hearts is a disease (of kufr and nifaaq). Thus, Allah increases for them their disease, and for them there is a painful punishment for the falsehood they use to fabricate.”

(Al-Baqarah, Aayat 10)

24 Safar 1442 – 12 October 2020


Hijri Date