NNB JAMIAT-MJC AMENDMENTS – THE KUFR MMB REMAINS A KUFR SO-CALLED ‘MUSLIM’

MARRIAGES BILL The NNB Jamiat of Fordsburg with its partner, the MJC operating under the fictitious body called ‘UUCSA’ have submitted a few cosmetic amendments to the Kufr MMB. The amendments suggested by this clique besides being unconstitutional, in no way whatsoever alter the kufr character of the proposed MM Bill. On the contrary, the amendments have aggravated the kufr nature of the Mufr MMB. If old wine is put in a new bottle, some people are liable to be hoodwinked. But the amendments suggested by the NNB-Jamiat-MJC clique cannot be described even as old wine in a new bottle. The bottles are exactly the same. Only a couple of scratches have been effected to the label on the bottle. Let us examine the proposed Kufr Bill together with the clique’s amendments in the light of the Qur’aan and Sunnah – the Immutable Shariah of Allah Ta’ala which tolerates no amendment because the Qur’aan Majeed declares:

“This day have I perfected for you your Deen, and completed for you My Favour, and for you have I chosen Islam as your Deen.”

The Kufr MMB states:

(1) EQUAL STATUS AND CAPACITY OF SPOUSES The draft Kufr so-called “Muslim” Marriages Bill, accepted, endorsed and promoted by the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique contains the following flagrant violation with the Qur’aan and Sunnah: “A wife and a husband in a Muslim Marriage are equal in human dignity and both have, on the basis of equality, capacity and financial independence, including the capacity to own and acquire assets, to dispose of them, to enter into contracts and to litigate.”

Refuting this contention and provision of the Kufr MMB, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “For men there is a rank over them (women).” – (Baqarah, Aayat 228)

“Men are the rulers of women….” -- (Nisaa’, Aayat 34)

“And call as witnesses two from among your men, and if there are not two men, then one man and two women……” -- (Baqarah, Aayat 282)

“If they (the heirs) are brothers and sisters, then for the male is twice the share Of a female. Allah explains to you (this law) so that you do not go astray.” (An-Nisaa’, Aayat 176) Also in refutation of the ‘equal status’ contention, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “O Assembly of women!......... pages 6 and 7 – The Patriarchal Ideology

1

PO Box 3393 Port Elizabeth6056, South Africa

Further refuting the ‘equal status’ contention, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) very explicitly mentioned that if Sajdah (Prostration) was permissible for any being other than Allah Ta’ala, he would have commanded the wife to make Sajdah to her husband. Numerous Ahaadith unequivocally negate the ‘equal status’ claim made by the NNB-Jamiat-MJC Kufr MMB clique.

The following laws of the Shariah effectively refute the kufr claim of ‘equal status’:

(1) Man has a higher rank than women as mentioned explicitly in the Qur’aan. (2) Man is the Ruler of woman as mentioned explicitly in the Qur’aan.(3) The testimony of two females equals to the testimony of one man. Also mentioned explicitly in the Qur’aan.(4) Only the man is the maintainer of his wife. The obligation of maintenance is never on the woman. (5) The wife may not leave the home without the consent of the husband. It is never the other way around.(6) The husband has the right to prevent his wife from engaging in trade even from the home.(7) The wife has to consult her husband even if she wishes to spend her own money.(8) The woman requires a male Wali to contract her Nikah. This is the unanimous ruling of all four Math-habs. While according to the Hanafi Math-hab it is not permissible for a woman to contract her own Nikah without valid reason, according to the other three Math-habs, her Nikah is not valid without the intermediary of a male Wali regardless of reason/need. The Nikah will be baatil without a male Wali.(9) The inheritance of a daughter is half that of a son. (10) A woman is in need of a male mahram for a journey. It is not permissible for her to travel alone.(11) The right of Talaaq is vested in only the husband. The wife has no right of Talaaq.(12) The wife does not become the guardian of her minor children despite having custody for a limited period.(13) Jumuah , Eid and Jama’t Salaat are not incumbent on women.(14) The Qur’aan permits husbands to beat their wives as a last resort while women never have such permission.(15) Women are created with deficient intelligence in comparison to the males. (Anyone who denies this authentic Hadith loses his/her Imaan and becomes a murtad.)(16) A man pays dowry (mehr) to his wife, not vice versa. (17) The Qur’aan imposes the duty of Deeni ta’leem and tarbiyat of the wife on the husband.(18) Women cannever become Imaams to lead males in Salaat.(19) It is not permissible to appoint a female to be a ruler, a qaadhi or in any position of leadership.(20) Women are not allowed to recite the Qur’aan or anything else in Salaat audibly.(21) Women are not permitted to recite the Athaan and Iqaamat.(22) Hajj becomes Fardh on a woman only if she has a male mahram who is willing to accompany her on the journey.(23) There is great disparity between the aurah of men and women.(24) The Diyat of a woman is half the Diyat of the male.(25) In the Farewell Hajj, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) described women as “the prisoners of men”.(26) If the wife performs Salaat in jamaa’t with her husband, she has to stand behind even her male children. If she performs alone with her husband, she may not stand at his side as a single male muqtadi would. She has to stand directly behind him.(27) A man may marry four wives.

2

(28) The divorced woman has to spend time in Iddat and may not marry during this period while there is no Iddat for the man.(29) In the Sunnah practice of Aqeeqah, two sheep are recommended for a male child, and one for a female child.(30) In cases where Hudood ( prescribed punishment such as flogging and amputation of the hand, stoning, etc.) apply, the testimony of women is inadmissible. Only males may testify. (31) The Kafan (burial shrouds) of men consists of three sheets while that of woman comprises six sheets.(32) Allah Ta’ala had never appointed a woman to be a Nabi/Rasool.(33) The female postures in Salaat differ vastly from the male postures.(34) According to the Shaafi’ Math-hab, a woman has no contractual capacity to contract her own Nikah or the Nikah of anyone else. Only a man has contractual capacity.(35) And, even in Jannat the man’s status will be higher. In addition to his earthly wives, a man will have numerous Damsels of Paradise for wives while women will have only one husband. This is the natures of men and women created by Allah Ta’ala. Interfering with Allah’s natural systems leads to corruption and ruin. The aforementioned stark differences more than adequately portray the fallacy of the ‘equal status’ contention. Furthermore, the ‘equal fallacy’ contention is not only a fallacy. It is kufr which negates Imaan, for it is in diametric conflict and rejection of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. What has happened to the brains of this miscreant Kufr MMB clique? Despite all these glaring differences in the status of men and women, they present and promote the kufr ‘equal status’ fallacy. Islam is decidedly a patriarchal ideology. In Islamic society, the man is the ruler and the dominant figure. Denial of this Qur’aanic fact is kufr.

(2) Requirements for Validity of Muslim Marriages In this provision, the Shaafi’ community has been discarded as if Shaafi’ Muslims are not part of the Ummah. A Nikah performed without the Fardh requisite of the presence of a male Wali is not valid in terms of the Shaafi’ Math-hab, and according to the Hanafi Math-hab it is sinful. According to the Shaafi’ Math-hab a woman regardless of her age, status, intelligence, academic qualifications, etc., has no contractual capacity, hence she may not contract her own marriage or the marriage of any other person. Thus, in terms of the Kufr MMB, if some ignorant Shaafi’ female contents herself with the conditions stipulated in the Kufr bill, her marriage will not be valid. She will be passing her life in an adulterous state, and her children will be illegitimate. (3) Only 18 years Old and Older May Marry While according to the Shariah, it is the right of all adult (baaligh) persons, male and female, to enter into Nikah, the Kufr MMB promoted by the NNB Jamiat-MJC nexus, prohibits under 18 year old adults from marrying. While this Kufr bill spawned by kufr brains prohibits under 18 year olds from Nikah, it does not prohibit them from fornication. While they are free to indulge in every type of immorality and sexual aberration, they are prohibited from the holy institution of Nikah. This provision is an adequate commentary for the kufr of the miscreants who have spawned this haraam suggestion and who are actively promoting it.

(4) Definitions

(a) “court” means High Court of South Africa, or a court for a regional division as provided for in section 29 ( 1B) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act, 1944 (Act No.32 of 1944).”

Firstly, this definition is defective in that it does not make any reference to the Supreme Court of Appeal and to the Constitutional Court. This defective definition is by deliberate design in a bid to

3

conceal that these two higher courts will be dealing with appeals without the ‘Muslim’ or ‘shariah’ pretence which has been suggested as a misleading outer-façade for the High Court. The High Court of South Africa, despite the misleading ‘Islamic’ terminology and the Muslim assessors, will also not be subservient to the Shariah. The very definition (stated above) of ‘court’ clarifies and confirms that the ‘court’ is a court in terms of South African law. As such the court cannot divert from the Constitution and the laws of the country. Regardless of the futile insertion in the Kufr MMB Bill of the phrase ‘Islamic Law’, the High Court cannot be made subservient to the Shariah, for this would be grossly unconstitutional. It is essential to understand that in the present system with the Constitution being the ‘supreme law’ in the land, it is downright stupid and unintelligent to believe or to expect that the High Court or the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court could be fettered with Islamic Law and made subservient to the Shariah. The court – all courts – will most certainly mutilate ( what they call ‘develop’) the Shariah to conform to the Constitution. It is not only extreme naivety, but gross ignorance to believe otherwise. Thus, the very first step in the process of resolving a marital dispute in terms of the Kufr MMB is submission to the kufr court. With regard to such submission, the Qur’aan Majeed sates with much emphasis: “Those who do not judge/decide according to that (Shariah) revealed by Allah, verily they are the kaafiroon. ……..verily, they are the faasiqoon ……verily they are the Zaalimoon.” (Surah Maaidah, Verses 44, 45, 47)

Common sense constrains that it be understood as an obvious fact that a ‘court’ constituted in terms of the secular law Act No.32 of 1944, cannot be the Shariah, and that such a court in this secular country cannot be made subservient to the Shariah, and that any conflict between the Shariah and the law of the land will most assuredly be resolved by the court by interpreting the Shariah to conform to the Constitution. The Constitution explicitly dictates the subservience of all forms of law to its letter and spirit. The NNB Jamiat-MJC clique is thus guilty of either chicanery or gross ignorance in the attempt to convince Muslims that in the current dispensation despite the Constitution being the supreme law, the Shariah will surface over the Constitution . But this is false. It is the Constitution which will prevail over the Shariah if the kuffaar courts are allowed to dabble with Islamic Law.

(b) “Divorce Act” means the Divorce Act, 1979 (Act No.70 of 1979”

While the clique dishonestly tells Muslims that the Kufr MMB is 100% Shariah-compliant, it is ominously silent regarding the Divorce Act and the several other secular law Acts which overshadow the Bill. All facets of the Kufr MMB which are portrayed as ‘Islamic’ will be interpreted in the light of the secular Divorce Act, and the several other Acts which litter the Kufr MMB. What brand of ‘Muslim’ marriages bill is the MMB which has to operate under the shadow of a secular Divorce Act and other secular law Acts? By what stretch of Muslim imagination can such a bill be 100% Shariah-compliant

(c) “Family Advocate” means any Family Advocate appointed under section 2(1) of the Mediation in Certain Divorces Matters Act, 1987 (Act No.24 of 1987).”

The MMB is being advertised by the clique as a 100% Shariah-compliant proposal, yet the ‘family advocate’ in terms of the secular may be a woman, a lesbian, a gay, a faasiq/faajir, a jaahil, etc. How compatible is this kufr ‘family advocate’ concept with a supposedly ‘shariah-compliant’

4

bill? The ‘family advocate’ will be an appointment in terms of Act No.24 of 1987. As such he/she is obliged to operate under the umbrella of the Constitution.

(d) “Iddah” means the mandatory waiting period from the dissolution of the marriage…….. The iddah of a divorced woman who menstruates, is three menstrual cycles.”

In terms of the Kufr MMB proposed by the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique, the Shaafi’ community appears to have been placed beyond thre pale of Islam. This clique should hang their heads in eternal shame for having expelled the Shaafi’ community from the fold of Islam. The implication of this definition of iddah is that the Shaafi’ community may be ignored. Let this miscreant clique spell out with clarity if by this provision they imply that Shaafi’ Muslims should ignore Iddah in terms of the Shaafi’ Math-hab. What prohibited or inhibited the MJC who is supposedly the ‘representative’ of a substantial size of the Shaafi’ community, from having included the Shaafi’ definition of Iddah in the proffered amendments? Why did the MJC in particular, and its other bedfellow, the NNB Jamiat, refrain from insisting that the Shaafi community also be taken into account? According to the Shaafi’ Math-hab, the Iddah is NOT three haidhs (menstrual cycles). On the contrary it is three At-haar (periods of purity). After each haidh comes a tuhr. Thus, in terms of the Shaafi’ Math-hab, the Iddah will be substantially longer than the Hanafi Iddah. Therefore, if a stupid Shaafi’ woman becomes entrapped in MMB (assuming it becomes law), and she acts in accordance with MMB’s definition of Iddah, it will follow that her subsequent marriage after ‘expiry’ of the MMB ‘iddah’, will not be valid in terms of the Shariah. Thus, she will be living in an adulterous state, and her offspring will be illegitimate. This is the Kufr MMB espoused by the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique operating under the ‘UUCSA’ pseudonym. There is also another fundamental issue on which the Shaafi’ Muslim community has been ignored despite them forming the majority of the Muslim population. Insha’Allah, this fundamental issue will be explained further on.

(4) “Custody of and Access to Minor Children“In making an order for the custody of, or access to a minor child, or making a decision of guardianship, the court must, with due regard to Islamic law and the report and recommendation of the Family Advocate, which must take into account Islamic norms and values, consider the welfare and best interests of the child.” With forked tongues, the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique has attempted to bamboozle unwary and ignorant Muslims with the terms ‘Islamic law’. With this extremely transparent veneer, the clique has endeavoured to pull wool over the eyes of the Muslim public. It is an abortive ploy to beguile people into believing that the Kufr bill is ‘shariah-compliant’. If it was shariah-compliant what is the need for the recommendations of a lesbian/gay/non-Muslim/jaahil ‘family advocate’? Why did the miscreant clique not spell out with clarity the Shariah’s laws of custody? They refrained from the Shar’i presentation because on this issue the Shariah comes into violent clash with the Constitution and the law. The recommendation of the non-Muslim family advocate who is appointed in terms of the secular Act, and who may be a lesbian female or a gay, kaafir male, must incumbently be in line with the letter and spirit of the Constitution. It is unthinkable and downright stupid to believe that the non-Muslim family advocate will ignore the law/Constitution and submit to the Shariah. In a conflict of the two systems, the family advocate is constitutionally bound to set aside any law/tradition, and to act in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Constitution. The inclusion of the phrases, Islamic law, Islamic norms and values’, is pure hogwash designed to bamboozle. Every intelligent person who has even a slight understanding of the Constitution and the laws of the land knows that it is inconceivable for the courts to render the Constitution or the law Acts subservient to the Shariah. On the contrary, they are under constitutional obligation to mutilate (‘develop’) and interpret the Shariah to force it into subservience of the Constitution.

5

In brief, the so-called ‘amendments’ of the miscreant clique have totally ignored the Shariah’s laws pertaining to custody of minors. They did so because of the sharp conflict between the two systems.

(5) “In the absence of both parents, for any reason, but subject to subsection (1), the court must, in accordance with Islamic law, in awarding or granting custody or guardianship of minor children, award or grant custody or guardianship to any person as the court deems appropriate, in all the circumstances.”(Our emphasis) The determining factor in this provision is “as the court deems appropriate, in all circumstances.” It is not as the Shariah deems appropriate. The final decree is that of the court which will decree according to the Constitution. Islamic law will or may be taken into consideration only if it does not conflict with the Constitution nor is in violation of the law. Even the miscreant clique is not so stupid as to believe that the Shariah will trump the Constitution. They do understand that the final say will be the decree of the court which will and must necessarily conform with the Constitution. The courts will incumbently interpret and mutilate the Shariah to bring it in line with the letter and spirit of the Constitution. It is precisely for this reason that the MMB clique has refrained from stating clearly the Shariah’s law in this case. They content themselves with highly ambiguous statements since such ambiguity and forked tongued presentations serve the objective of befooling and misleading the unwary and the ignorant. The court will not and cannot award custody and grant guardianship in terms of Islamic law if such law conflicts with the Act or with the Constitution. In any such conflict, the courts will incumbently interpret the Shariah to render it subservient to the Constitution. Such mutilation of the Shariah is kufr – kufr invited by the miscreant clique in the name of Islam.

(6) “Maintenance “Subject to subsection (2), the provisions of the Maintenance Act, 1988 (Act No.99 of 1998), apply with the changes required by the context, in respect of the duty of any person to maintain any other person.”

Regardless of the Islamic terminology injected into the bill, the secular Maintenance Act and the Constitution will be the deciding factors. It is precisely for this reason that a variety of secular Acts fetter the Kufr MMB. There is an unbridgeable chasm between Nafqah (maintenance) fixed by the Shariah, and maintenance in terms of the secular law. The greater portion of maintenance ordered by a secular court will be haraam. What may be essential in secular law could be haraam in terms of the Shariah.

(7) “Arbitration (Tahkeem) “Subject to subsection (4), the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1965, shall apply to an arbitration conducted in terms of this section.”

Islam has its own form of Tahkeem (Arbitration). Yet, the miscreant clique places it under the shadow of the secular Arbitration Act. It is haraam to fetter the Shariah’s Law, making it subservient to the secular Act. The mere adoption of the term, tahkim, does not confer Shar’i legitimacy to the hybrid, haraam arbitration process proposed by the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique.

(8) “No arbitration award affecting the welfare of minor children or the status of any person shall come into effect unless it is confirmed by the court upon application to such court and upon notice to all parties who have an interest in the outcome of the arbitration.”

6

This is a perfect specimen of transmogrification of the Shariah. The arbitrator in terms of the Kufr MMB is a toothless dog whereas in terms of the Shariah, the hukm (decree) of the Hakam (Arbitrator) is final and binding. The award made by the Hakam may not be made subservient to the secular court. While the Kufr amendment of the miscreant clique states in the above provision that the Hakam’s decree for minor children will have no effect, the Shariah declares it to be binding. While the MMB’s kufr provision requires the Hakam’s award to be confirmed by the kuffaar court, the Shariah decrees that his award is Waajib and binding. The amendment implies the invalidity of the award of the Hakam unless ratified and confirmed by the secular court, and that too on application. Besides the threat of transmogrification (mutilation and destruction) of the Shariah by the interpretation of the courts, the Kufr MMB itself transmogrifies the Shariah with its kufr provisions even without the intrusion of the courts.

(9) “In considering an application for the confirmation of an arbitration award, the court must be satisfied that the award is in the best interests of all minor children…”

This is utterly baatil in terms of the Shariah which does not require any confirmation of any court for the validity of the Hakam’s decree. Secondly, the concept of ‘best interests of minor children’ is widely at variance with the Shar’i concept. What is ‘best interests’ in terms of secular law may be evil and haraam according to the Shariah, and what is ‘best interests’ in terms of the Shariah may be unlawful according to secular law. Yet, the miscreant clique who proposed the MMB kufr amendments feels comfortable with its kufr provisions as well as with the transmogrification of the Shariah, which will be the logical consequence of the intrusion into the domain of the Shariah by the secular courts.

(10) “….and to this end the court may: (a) confirm the award; (b) declare the whole or any part of the ward to be void; (c) substitute the award for another award which the court deems fit; (d) vary the award on appropriate terms: or (e) remit the matter to the arbitrator with appropriate directions.” In terms of the Shariah, all five provisions (a, b, c, d, and e) are baatil. According to the Shariah the secular court has no power to effect any of these provisions. This haraam action is a further distortion and mutilation of the Shariah.

(11) “Nothing in subsection (5) shall be construed as limiting the court’s jurisdiction under any law to review an arbitration award insofar as it relates to a property dispute which does not affect the rights or interests of minor children.” It is quite obvious from this provision that nothing and nothing whatsoever can limit the jurisdiction of the secular court which operates in the full glare of the Constitution. The Shariah has absolutely NO pedestal in this secular judiciary system. Despite this brazen assertion of the Kufr MMB amendment, the miscreants stupidly pipe the theme of 100% shariah-compliant, when in fact the bill is 100% KUFR.

(12) While the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique has suggested the amendment of a ‘Muslim presiding officer’ and Muslim assessors for a court hearing a Muslim marital dispute, this provision is nothing more than window dressing to befool the ignorant and the unwary. Irrespective of the assessors and even the judge of a secular court being Muslims, they are not independent of the Acts of Law and the Constitution. They operate under the umbrella of kuffaar law about which the Qur’aan unequivocally proclaims the fatwa of kufr:

7

“Those who do no decree/decide/judge according to that (Shariah) revealed by Allah, verily they are the kaafiroon.” No one should allow himself to be befuddled and deceived by a secular court where a Muslim judge presides. The judge is fitted with constitutional blinkers and fettered with the chains of the law Acts from which he may not diverge. He operates in a straitjacket of kufr law. On the contrary, he is under constitutional obligation to eliminate any Shariah conflicts with interpretation that transmogrifies, mutilates and distorts the Shariah. The ‘Muslim’ judge has long ago lost his Imaan when he swore allegiance to the ‘supreme constitution’. His oath and office compel him to uphold the atheist Constitution, not the Shariah. If the miscreant MMB clique is stupid, others are not. In a non-Muslim country, a Qaadhi will have Shar’i validity only if he is completely freed from the secular courts, the constitution and the law. His decrees will not be the subject of appeal. Neither the supreme court not the constitutional court should have the right to review the decrees of the Qaadhi. The duty of the state will be restricted to only enforcement (Nifaaz). The state will have to enforce the decrees of the Qaadhi. Only in such a scenario is the decree of a Muslim judge (the Qaadhi) valid according to the Shariah. Anything short of this system has no validity in the Shariah. Furthermore, the assessors act in an advisory capacity. The judge is not obliged to decree according to the opinion of the assessors. And, even if by hook or crook the judge becomes fettered to the decree of the assessors, such decree will not be valid in the Shariah due to the lack of Wilaayat (jurisdiction) of a secular court.

(13) “Any decision of the court on matters of fact and matters of Islamic Law shall be final and binding upon the parties.” The puerility of this provision evokes mirth. That the decision of the court being binding on the parties is a self-evident fact. The miscreant Kufr MMB clique has conspicuously displayed its ludicrousness in this silly provision.

(14) “The courts shall be empowered to make such order or grant such relief as its deems just and equitable.” This is another stupid and superfluous provision. All courts are automatically empowered to grant orders as they deem fit. Of course, the fitness will be within the framework of the Constitution. However, from this stupid provision emerges the fact that the secular court is not under any obligation to render its decrees subservient to the Shariah. It will act as it deems fit, and the only constraint the court recognizes is the limits and framework of the Constitution. The Shariah features nowhere in this scenario.

(15) “On matters of law other than Islamic Law the parties shall have the right to take the matter on appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal and /or Constitutional Court.”

This is pure bunkum. The law does not recognize a division in the right of the parties relative to an appeal to the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court. The parties enjoy the constitutional right to proceed to the Supreme or Constitutional Court on any matter, not only on matters of secular law. The minds of the miscreant clique appear to be befogged with a density befitting only morons. Any provision of any bill which infringes on the constitutional rights of citizens will be unconstitutional and not valid. And, besides all these arguments, the simple straightforward issue is that the secular court just lacks the Wilaayat to adjudicate and issue decrees pertaining to the matrimonial matters of Muslims.

8

(16) “A decree of dissolution of a Muslim Marriage to which this Act applies shall not be granted or confirmed under this Act unless the presiding Judge/Magistrate is satisfied that the best interests of any minor children born from such marriage have been taken into account.”

This provision violently conflicts with the Shariah. Once the husband has uttered Talaaq Baa-in/Mughallazah, the Nikah is irrevocably and finally dissolved. The dissolution of a marriage in terms of the Shariah is not reliant on extraneous issues for confirmation. The validity and confirmation of Talaaq cannot be denied if the husband does not abide by any provision of the Kufr MMB or if he is recalcitrant regarding the interests of his minor children. The effect of this haraam provision is that despite a husband having administered Talaaq Mughallazah/Baa-in, the Nikah will still be regarded as subsisting, hence the secular court will not grant a decree of dissolution. We are sure that even Muslims who have no understanding of the rubbish in the Kufr MMB will at least understand that once Talaaq has been given, it is valid in the Shariah, and it requires nothing further for ‘granting a decree of dissolution or confirmation’. The Nikah is summarily dissolved by the word of the husband, and so is it confirmed by the word of the husband. No court, not even a purely Islamic court in Darul Islam has the power to undo what the husband has executed by way of Talaaq Baa-in/Mughallazah. All consequences of a dissolved Nikah automatically come into effect upon the administration of Talaaq by the husband. The consequences of Talaaq may not be encumbered with the interests or best interests of the minor children. Even if the husband is flagrantly recalcitrant and acts in total conflict of the best Islamic (not secular) interests of his minor children, his action/attitude has absolutely no bearing on the validity of his Talaaq and the dissolution of the marriage which requires no court decree for confirmation or for granting of dissolution.

(17) “A husband whose marriage is registered under this Act, who concludes a further Muslim marriage without an approved proprietary regime shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding R5000. The court imposing such a fine shall be empowered to make such order with regard to the proprietary regime which in its opinion is fair and equitable in the light of all circumstances.”

This provision presented by the NNB Jamiat-MJC clique is a satanic specimen of unadulterated kufr. It is an evil suggestion proffered in total rejection of the Qur’aan which grants man the inalienable right to marry four wives without any legal interference and constraints. This kufr provision is satanically designed to effectively abrogate the Qur’aanic permission, yet the villains responsible for this kufr shamelessly dub the kufr MMB as a 100% ‘shariah-compliant’ device. These NNB Jamiat and MJC characters cannever be called Ulama. They are denizens of Jahannum, for they are implicitly blaspheming against the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) in general, against Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in particular, against the Sahaabah, the Taabieen and the entire Ummah of fourteen centuries, who all have taken full liberty of the Qur’aanic permission to marry more than one wife. Without the slightest vestige of shame or thought for their ‘imaan’, these zindeeqs, to placate westernized and kufr palates, have come out condemning and abrogating a divinely ordained practice of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Ambiya and the Sahaabah. Is there any doubt in their kufr? Let them examine their Imaan. If Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had to be present today and marry in conflict of the NNB Jamiat-MJC proposal, then these munaafiqeen would ask for the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to be arraigned before a kuffaar court, convicted and fined the R5000 which these villains masquerading as Muslims have proposed. The only difference between this proposal and the provision in the draft MMB is of a quantitive nature. Besides the amount, it is the same. While the first provision imposes a fine of R25,000, the current kufr provision of the NNB Jamiat-MJC wants the fine to be R5,000. The initial provision is like a full bucket of pig’s faeces while this latest NNB Jamiat-MJC proposal is the same bucket of

9

pig’s faeces but filled one fifth. In this shaitaani concept, consuming a bucket of pig’s faeces is not looked on with favour. But eating one fifth bucket-full of pig’s faeces is acceptable. The brains of these coprocreeps are contaminated with stercoracious substances, hence they are able to disgorge only copro-provisions for their kufr MMB. There is absolutely no grounds in the Shariah for the imposition of a proprietary regime for the permissibility of Nikah. Islam does not stipulate any kind of property regime for marriage. Marriage is an independent institution unfettered with the baatil restrictions and conditions imposed by the laws of kufr cults. Furthermore, this kufr proposal empowers the secular court which imposes the haraam fine, to order the Nikah to be encumbered with a haraam matrimonial property regime as “deemed fit by the court”. The right to deny the Qur’aanic permission and to proscribe the Qur’aanic right of a man who intends to enter into the holy bond of Nikah is given to the kaafir/secular court. Then this kufr move is proclaimed to be shariah-compliant. According to the kufr provision suggested by this miscreant clique the secular court’s decree is “fair and equitable”. This presupposes that the divine dispensation enshrined in the Qur’aan and Sunnah is unjust, unfair and inequitable. They should commit suicide to purify the community from their satanic presence. With regard to these types of miscreants who advocate kufr – who despise the practices of Islam – who imply contempt for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Hadhrat Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) and another two dozen senior Muftis issued the Fatwa that they (these coprocreeps of kufr) will hang upside down in Jahannum. They are the enemies of Allah, the enemies of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the enemies of the Sahaabah and the enemies of the Ummah. They masquerade as Muslims whilst in reality they are the munaafiq agents of the western enemies of Islam and the Ummah. In Islam there is no institution of monetary fines. Monetary fines are explicit acts of zulm (injustice/oppression/extortion) for which there is no room in the Shariah. This miscreant clique while parading as Ulama are blissfully stupid and ignorant of this fact. Quite shamelessly they sanctify and legalize a haraam measure of zulm. We fail to find words strong enough for condemning this evil kufr proposal and its vile sponsors.

(18) “Any marriage officer who contravenes this Act in addition to being liable for the payment of a fine may also have his license as a marriage officer revoked.”

The Muslim marriage officer who performs a Nikah in strict accordance with the Qur’aan and Sunnah stands to pay a heavy haraam/zulm monetary fine. Furthermore, he will be debarred from exercising his Shar’i right of conducting Nikahs. This is kufr MMB in operation.

(19) “The court shall be empowered to authorise the issue of a warrant addressed to the sheriff of the court authorising him/her to levy the amount of the fine by attachment and execution.”

Zulm compounded with zulm! The normal practice is for the court’s sheriff to attach property valued far in excess of R10,000 in lieu of the R5,000 supposedly owing to the state for having performed a Nikah in strict accord with the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Attached goods are sold on auction for a song. There is no justification whatsoever in Islam for the commission of such vile acts of zulm as proposed by the NNB Jamiat-MJC shaitaani nexus.

(20) “The court shall be empowered to make such order or grant such relief as it deems fit.”

This proposal conspicuously portrays brains contaminated with kufr ideas. The MMB is advertised by the miscreants as a measure which complies with the Shariah. But in reality it is cluttered with kufr. In this provision the secular court has the power to impose fines, grant awards, etc. in terms of western and atheist ideologies. Whatever the grant or relief ordered by the secular

10

court may be will most assuredly not be Islamic. The Shariah will have no share in the effects of brains impregnated by kufr.

(21) “The court in the exercise and enjoyment of any rights flowing from this Act shall be limited to such an extent that Islamic law permits.” Perhaps insane persons or the baboons in the mountains may swallow this bunkum proposal. It is difficult to believe that this miscreant MMB clique is afflicted with such a sense of bizarre naivety which constrains its juhala members to honestly believe that this silly Kufr MMB could ever circumscribe the powers of the High, Supreme and Constitutional Courts to conform to ‘Islamic law’. The stark reality is the direct opposite. The courts will incumbently subject the Shariah to the letter and spirit of the Constitution. The only reasonable conclusion for the suggestion of this amendment is to bamboozle ignorant and unwary Muslims -- to trick them into believing that the Kufr MMB is a shariah-compliant bill.

(22) “Any regulation made under subsection (1) may provide that any person who contravenes a provision thereof or fails to comply therewith is guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine.”

The obsession with kufr is apparent from this provision as well. This inordinate inclination towards zulm reveals what goes on in the brains and hearts of these miscreant plastic molvis and cheap tin-topped sheikhs. Even if they lacked in piety, but possessed sound Deeni Ilm, never would they have scraped the bottom of the gutter in their process of fabricating kufr clause upon kufr clause. Their amendments are impregnated with haraam, zulm and kufr. What daleel of the Shariah are they relying on for the imposition of the zulm of monetary fines? Even in valid cases of contravention of the Shariah, the Qaadhi has no power to impose monetary fines. But in terms of the miscreant MMB clique’s amendments, a zulm fine has to be imposed for an act which is perfectly lawful in Allah’s Law, but unlawful in kufr law.

(23) “The parties to a marriage governed by MMA shall have the right to have their marriage de-registered from the applicable provisions of this Act, should any provision of this Bill be amended, changed, altered, or inserted, through legislation, or case law, and such amendment, change alteration or insertion is contrary to Islamic law and impacts in such a way that it affects the core and fundamental belief system of the parties.”

“Contrary to Islamic law”? “Core and fundamental belief system”? The stupidity of this miscreant Kufr MMB clique is mind boggling. This provision implies that the current MMB with the suggested amendments is in compliance with Islamic law, and only if later provisions in conflict with Islamic law are introduced, should people opt out of the devil’s cauldron (the hallucinated MMA). The suggestion of deregistration is stupid and incongruous. The grounds given for ‘deregistration’ are un-Islamic provisions/amendments which may be incorporated into the MMB at a later stage. If future haraam provisions are valid cause for deregistration and dissociating from MMB, how can the present bill with its plethora of kufr provisions be valid for opting in? The problem here is that the miscreant clique is either too dense in the brains to see and understand the kufr of MMB or it is deliberately feigning ignorance of the kufr in order to con Muslims into the kufr snare. If future kufr is a valid ground for opting out, then to a greater degree is current kufr a valid ground for abstention from the kufr MMB.

(24) “The De-registration shall be subject to the following conditions: (a) that both parties to the marriage consent thereto:”

11

The ostensible reason for the figment of ‘deregistration’ expressly stated in the silly proposal is “contravention of Islamic law” and violation of “the core and fundamental belief system”. In terms of the suggested amendment if one party opts to perpetuate his/her subsistence in the cauldron of haraam/kufr, then the other party is obliged to remain boiling in that evil cauldron. If one party selects to continue consuming the faeces of a pig, what logic constrains the other party to emulate the former party and also destroy himself/herself with the consumption of pig’s faeces (which MMB is)? If the incorporation of haraam provisions ‘later on’ is valid cause for withdrawing from MMB (or MMA), what is the logic for refusing deregistration if one party desires to withdraw from the haraam quagmire? The Imaan of these miscreants is seriously in doubt. If their Imaan has not already been obliterated, it is in serious jeopardy of elimination.

“that the same proprietary regime which applied in terms of this Act shall apply:”

“This Act”, i.e. a future MMA (Muslim Marriages Act) which the agents of shaitaan yearn for, makes no provision for property consequences in terms of the Shariah. Any haraam proprietary regime is compatible and at home in the Kufr MMB exercise. Since the miscreant clique does not have the Shariah in mind, it had no qualms whatsoever in presenting this corrupt amendment which envisages the validity of a haraam proprietary regime. Thus, if a haraam system had fettered the couple who had been ensnared into MMB, such haraam property system should continue to encumber them even after they have decided to withdraw from the kufr law. What need did these miscreants see for suggesting a proposal to perpetuate haraam and to ensure that the couple opting out from the haraam law will remain fettered to the haraam system?

“that the marriage and consequences shall thereafter be governed by the Common law and the law as developed by our courts.”

While not surprising, it is indeed shocking and lamentable for people professing to be Muslims and Ulama, spitefully penalizing parties withdrawing from the kufr MMB, with the imposition of kuffaar law of the courts. Was there no other descent or Islamic proposal these morons could suggest for couples who opt to withdraw from the Kufr trap? Muslims who advocate that haraam consequences should govern the marriage of Muslims who withdraw from a law on account of its kufr, come within the scope of the Qur’aanic aayat which brands such perpetrators ‘kaafiroon’, faasiqoon and zaalimoon. The MMB mob’s Imaan is completely desensitized. They are unable to distinguish between Imaan and kufr, halaal and haraam, hence they so brazenly present kufr upon kufr and endeavour to have kufr legislated for imposition on Muslims who may strive for regulation by the Shariah.

(25) “That the court having jurisdiction shall have the power to grant such deregistration on good cause shown and subject to such terms and conditions as it may deem fit.”

Ostensibly, the reason proffered in the provision for deregistration is the incorporation of haraam conditions which “contravene Islamic law” and which “affect the core and fundamental belief system of the parties”. Despite peddling this impression, the miscreant Kufr MMB clique recommends that only the secular court shall have the power to “grant such deregistration”. Thus, the opt-out is not an inalienable right of the parties despite the incorporation of un-Islamic provisions which are violently in conflict with the Shariah even according to the MMB clique. In brief, the deregistration amendment is a huge deception – an attempt to pull wool over the eyes of the unwary and ignorant.

12

The secular court has the power to deny deregistration (i.e. to opt out of the kufr cauldron). The court also has the power in terms of the stupid, haraam amendment, to encumber the withdrawal from the kufr law with “such terms and conditions as it may deem fit.” Sight should not be lost of the fact that the deregistration will raise its head according to the amendment only if haraam (i.e. haraam according to the Kufr MMB clique) provisions are inserted into the Act – such haraam provisions which are, according to the miserable kufr clique, “contrary to Islamic law and impacts in such a way that it affects the core and fundamental belief system of the parties.” It appears that this miscreant clique is blissfully ignorant of even the meaning of “core and fundamental belief”. Let us apprize the Kufr MMB clique of the meaning of these words which they have selected for their ludicrous amendment. This phrase refers to the Dhururiyaat of the Deen, to the foundational pillars of Islam – to matters of kufr and Imaan. Despite this, the amendment assigns the power of granting deregistration to the court, and it enchains the deregistration with conditions and terms which it (the secular court) deems fit. In other words, it is the secular court which will decide whether a Muslim may jump out of the cauldron of kufr or whether he and she should remain in this hideous cauldron continuing to consume swine faeces, i.e. the kufr of the so-called ‘Muslim’ Marriages Act. Let these miscreants get lost or commit suicide in SANHA’s scalding tanks from which emerge all the halaalized carrion.

(26) “The manner and form of the deregistration shall be prescribed by regulation promulgated under this Act.”

This provision states with clarity that the option to opt out of the kufr cauldron is not a right. It is a stupid privilege encumbered by kufr terms and conditions which the kufr authorities will prescribe. The deregistration amendment is an obscene deception.

FOR MUSLIMS THERE IS ONLY THE LAW OF ALLAH TA’ALA

“Then We established you on a Shariah regarding (all your) affairs.Therefore follow it. And, do not follow the vain desires of those who

know not.” (Al-Jaathiyah, Aayat 18)

“What, do you search for the law of Jaahiliyyah (Ignorance)? Whose Law is more beautiful than the Law of Allah for a nation who has

Yaqeen (grounded Imaan in Allah)?”(Aal-e-Imraan, Aayat 154)

For the Believers in Islam, the only Law acceptable is the immutable Shariah of Allah Azza Wa Jal. Any hybrid system which alters any Law of Allah Ta’ala, is a kufr system of jaahiliyyah which is mardood (rejected/accursed) and unacceptable to Muslims. Living in a country governed by a secular Constitution, Muslims are obviously not totally free to regulate their lives according to the Shariah. Nevertheless, in large measure we are able to circumvent many kufr laws by virtue of certain provisions enshrined in the secular Constitution. Muslims are not persecuted and not singled out for discriminatory treatment by the government. By virtue of the equality of all citizens of the country, we are able to practise our religion in almost all spheres of life without state interference. Muslims are free to worship, establish Deeni institutions, marry and bury according to the Shariah, lead a moral life according to the Moral code of Islam, resolve disputes, whether marital or financial, according to the Shariah, and generally practise the teachings of Islam with liberty. There are those who profess to be Muslim but who are averse to the strict teachings of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. They too enjoy freedom to don their cloaks of kufr and take the route to Jahannum. That is their ‘constitutional’ right for which they will be adequately compensated when the time arrives for the souls to be ripped out from the bodies by Malakul Maut. It is this miscreant group of

13

munaafiqs and zindeeqs, who is hell-bent on asserting their kufr ideology on the Muslim community who despite having a lax bond with practical Islam, sincerely affirms the divinity and immutability of the Shariah. The tremendous opposition which the vast majority of Muslims have offered to the Kufr so-called ‘Muslim’ Marriages Bill, is loud testimony for the Imaan of the Muslim masses. If the secular courts issue decrees in conflict with the Shariah, they do so in terms of the laws of the land and the Constitution of the country. Such decrees do not intrude in the domain of the Shariah nor is there a conscious process of transmogrification and undermining of the Shariah by the courts or the authorities. But when professed Muslims, Ulama in particular, with their own hands initiate the process to undermine Islam with a thoroughly kufrized brand of a confounded ‘shariah’, it devolves on the Ulama-e-Haqq as a Waajib obligation to expose the enemies lurking within the community, and to lay bare their plots. The current MMB is one such dastardly plot initiated by the Orientalist enemies of Islam in America. These enemies have enlisted the aid of zindeeqs and munaafiqs who are present in the community in the guise of ‘ulama’, university professors, and professionals in other fields of secularism. The most important aid co-opted by the enemies of Islam is the women’s lib. movement. There are numerous murtaddahs (female renegades) who are among the vilest enemies of Islam, inside and outside, campaigning for the destruction of Islam. They are rotten to the core, morally and intellectually. They masquerade as Muslims, concealing their nifaaq with their Muslim names. These evil murtaddahs are the worst kinds of munaafiqs who have darkened Islamic history. They are worse than the munaafiqeen who lived during the age of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They simply reek of kufr and nifaaq. Satanism exudes from their faces and out of their bodies. The zindeeq males have made these stupid, moron females their mascots. With these murtaddahs in the lead, their male Satanist counterparts provide the support they seek to dig the foundations of Islam. The NNB Jamiat-MJC alliance fits snugly into this overall anti-Islam conspiracy. They are the shayaateen about whom Allah Ta’ala mentions in the Qur’aan Shareef: “Thus have We created for every Nabi enemies from among human and jinn shayaateen (devils). They mutually whisper to one another adorned (evil) and false statements (of kufr).” (Al-Anaam, Aayat 112)

That this clique comprises of the human devils mentioned in this Qur’aanic verse, there is no doubt. Only human shayaateen would so audaciously and deceptively undermine Islam in the very name of Islam. How is it possible that men who profess to be Ulama fail to see and understand the explicit kufr in a device such as the MMB? They have ‘adorned’ their falsehood with deception as is mentioned in the above Qur’aanic verse. The human shayaateen of the NNB Jamiat whisper ‘zukhrufal qaul’ (adorned evil and falsehood) to the human shayaateen of the MJC . Then these two groups of human devils unite and collude to undermine the divine Shariah with their deception of ‘engagement’. They engage to strive behind the scenes to get kufr legislated in the name of the Shariah, and to undermine Islam. But, these vile specimen of conspirators against the Deen should take cognizance of the fact that they will not succeed in their nefarious plot to destroy this immutable Shariah of Islam. In every age Allah Ta’ala fields such Ulama-e-Haqq who lay bare the plots and demolish the villainy of Islam’s enemies. The Qur’aan therefore assures us:

“Verily, We have revealed the Thikr (this Deen of Islam and its Qur’aan), and verily We are its Protectors.”

14