The Moon Issue – A Fitnah Of Modernists

The Moon Issue – A Fitnah Of Modernists

---

Article source: The Majlisul Ulama

Link to original article’s source: https://themajlis.co.za/articles/the-stupid-moon-issue-a-fitnah-of-modernist-cranks/

---

Question

A gentleman, Mr.Sabir Abdullah, in what he calls an ‘Urgent Appeal’ has discussed the issue of regional moonsighting. According to him such moonsighting and the acceptance of regional verdicts are incumbent. Please read his article on unity with neighbouring countries. Is his argument valid in the Shariah? Please comment in detail.

 

ANSWER AND COMMENTS OF THE SHARIAH

 

Our (The Majlis’s) comments are in bold.

 

The gentleman says in his essay:

It is my humble opinion that the politically constructed scholar councils in the Southern African region really enjoy the differences they see every Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr and Eid-ul-Adha.

 

Year in and year out, this has been the tradition as long as I can remember.

 

Our comment

Your opinion is baseless. In terms of the Shariah, your ‘humble’ opinion is bunkum. The ‘differences’ are the consequences of two factors: Ignorance and shaitaaniyat/nafsaaniyat.

 

Ignorance: Self-appointed ‘scholars’ and ‘reformers’ bereft of true Ilm of the Deen have fabricated their private concepts of ‘unity’ and seek to impose such drivel ideas on the community in conflict with the Shariah.

 

Shaitaaniyat/Nafsaaniyat

Evil molvis and sheikhs (ulama-e-soo’) such as Revrend Abraham Bham and his zindeeq cohorts, refusing to submit to the Shariah and vying with the modernist Juhala mentioned above, also promote false concepts of unity hoping for the leadership of the community. These molvis/sheikhs seek to install themselves as the leaders and representatives of the community. However, due to their shenanigans, the Ulama-e-Haqq oppose them. This then culminates in differences – valid differences as demanded by the Shariah. Since compromise with baatil is haraam, the differences are logical effects of the conflict for which Allah Ta’ala has created this dunya.

 

Such differences are the logical conclusion of the conflict between Haqq and baatil. It was a conflict initiated by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the Command of Allah Ta’ala. Thus, conflict and its consequence of difference will remain until the Last Day. The desire for an end to differences is pure hallucination. The ‘tradition of differences’ is here to remain.

 

The gentleman says:

(2) I have written to a few of those I believed could have an influential voice within these scholar councils, both here in South Africa and around the SADC regions, imploring them to seek out a collective forum which could lead to a regional forum where this issue can be regionally discussed.

 

The aim is for such a forum to come out with a verdict as close as possible to Shariah but, to this day, it appears to have fallen on deaf ears, for reasons best known to Allah Ta’ala.

 

Our comment

What is the Shar’i need for this ‘regional forum’ you are proposing? What is the need for a regional discussion of the moon issue? There never existed such forums during the age of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) nor during the era of the Sahaabah nor during the time of Khairul Quroon. So what are the factors which compel the establishment of a regional forum today? The deaf-ear response is the effect of the proposal being nonsensical and lacking in Islamic credibility. In addition to the Awareness of Allah Ta’ala, we too are aware. We are aware that your proposal is devoid of Shar’i merit – that it is nonsense, hence the ‘deaf ears’.

 

The gentleman says:

It is an unfortunate reality that whenever a question is raised regarding the issue of moon sighting, the word ‘fitna’ is always thrown around, as if to say it’s an abomination to question the elite scholars on the issue.

 

Our comment

The fitnah is created by those who conjecture and proffer the ‘unity’ proposal. Their unity is a hallucinated one devoid of Shar’i substance. The ‘elite scholars’ do not enjoy a Shariah mandate to submit and accept suggestions and advice which lack Shar’i substance and substantiation. Those who proffer the ‘unity’ advice are bigoted. They are narrow-minded and suffer from the malady of self-conceit. They believe that their proposal has divine sanction and has to be complied with. From whence did they gain this false idea?

 

If they are so concerned about unity, they should simply refrain from getting too big for their boots and accept the ruling of the Ulama in their locality. Acceptance of a ‘regional forum’ is not a Sunnah. Hence, they should not be offended on account of their proposal being unacceptable to the Ulama-e-Haqq. The main culprits responsible for the differences are the very ones who clamour for ‘unity’.

 

The gentleman says:

What difference there is between South Africa and Mozambique in as far as the Islamic opinions of these two are concerned as well as the regional geographic placements of the two, only the elite scholars would know!

 

Our comment

What is the imperative requisite for the desire to forge Eid with Mozambique? What is the Shar’i basis for this desire which is bereft of Shar’i substance? The ‘regional geographic placements of the two’ is not a principle of the Shariah. It is not a constituent of the Sunnah. And, why does this gentleman not proffer the same advice to the ‘elite scholars’ of Mozambique? What Shar’i incumbency is there for the Ulama of South Africa to become annexed with Mozambique or any other country on the moon issue? From whence did the gentleman extract this idea?

 

The gentleman says:

I must put it on record that it has become clear to me, as a mere student of knowledge, after reading through as many verdicts from different councils of scholars around the world, that the opinion close to the Shariah is that of regional sighting, as opposed to the opinion of one common global sighting, worldwide. But to even differ inter-regionally is another level of scholarship!

 

Our comment

Regional sighting, common global sighting and inter-regional sighting are not Shar’i imperatives. The gentleman’s flaccid opinion has no Shar’i validity. His scholarship is devoid of Shar’i validity. There is no basis in the Sunnah for these hallucinated concepts. The so-called ‘other level of scholarship’ is firmly grounded in the Shariah and the Sunnah while the ‘scholarship’ of self-appointed reformers of the Ummah is the effluvium of shaitaani inspiration or better, shaitaani urination. The gentleman calls himself a ‘student of knowledge’. But his essay indicates that his ideas are the effects of jahaalat. He seeks to impose on the Ulama an idea which has no basis in the Sunnah. It is an idea which is devoid of even mundane merit. There is no benefit, religious or mundane in forging unity of Ramadhan and Eid with neighbouring countries. It is an idea for squandering brains, effort and wealth in redundancy.

 

The gentleman says:

If I, a mere non-elite student of knowledge, could read through as many verdicts on the issue as possible to look at the views offered by these scholars, what is it that a collective of such ‘elite brains’ from the many councils of ulama in the region are failing to see within the abundant proofs?

 

Our comment

The gentleman should present the ‘abundant proofs’ he hallucinates of to enable us to dissect, vivisect and demolish the flapdoodle narrative on which he labours to structure his personal idea of ‘unity’ discarnated from the Shariah. Islam does not advocate blind unity. The Qur’aan is the Criterion which splits issues into Haqq and baatil. The gentleman should not be so self-conceited to gain the idea that the ‘elite brains’ should submit to the concept he is promoting.

 

The gentleman says:

In my opinion, all that is needed in this issue is for this elitist group of scholars to get off their high horses, fear Allah (in the true sense of taqwa), and place the interest of their communities above all their interests.

 

Our comment

In reality, it is for the gentleman suffering from the maladies of kibr, ujub and hubb-e-jah to dismount from the satanic pedestal to which he has promoted himself. His dispute with the Ulama comes within the purview of the Qur’aanic Aayat:

“In their breasts (hearts) is nothing but a kibr (false pride)

which they are unable to attain.”

 

Before the gentleman can ever understand the Islamic concept of Taqwa, he should gain the correct expertise in the Sunnah art of Istinja. Liberals and modernists are generally inept in this essential requisite of the Sunnah. Their cognitive dissonance generally explode their Imaan, casting them into the cauldron of kufr. They seek to submit the Shariah to their personal opinion. The primary cause is their kibr coupled with ignorance. But they set themselves up as scholars and reformers.

 

The gentleman says:

They can come out with a ‘once-and-for-all’ decision that is based on sincere Islamic academic debates that are in touch with the meteorological and astronomical realities, and publicise such a decision in an equally consultative manner, such that the views of the whole community are unified.

 

Our comment

“The meteorological and astronomical realities” about which he broods are drivel in relation to the precepts of the Shariah. Such imaginary ‘realities’ have no bearing whatsoever in the determinations and decrees of the Shariah. Confirming this fact, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

 

“We are an Ummi Ummah. We neither count nor calculate….”

 

Only morons seek to shove these drivel ‘realities’ into the Shariah thereby creating fitnah. The fitnah pertaining to the moon issue is the flotsam of the brains of liberals and modernists who excel in jahaalat.

 

The gentleman says:

As an example, the Darul Uloom Deoband, in India, and Jamia Darul Uloom Karachi, in Pakistan, have long ago issued a collective verdict on the matter where they cited regional sighting as the opinion closest to the Shariah, in their view.

 

Likewise, The Majma Al-Fuqahaa, based in Saudi Arabia, which consists of qualified Fuqahaa from different parts of the world issued the same verdicts, citing regional sighting as opposed to global sighting, and they all make it unequivocally clear in their verdicts that where a hilaal body in a certain country fails to cite the moon themselves, they should consult those countries near it, regionally, for a sighting.

 

These bodies and many others hold a similar view, which I consider to be the closest to the Shariah from proofs cited by all.

 

Our comment

The Ulama here in South Africa are not subservient to the verdicts of the institutions mentioned by the gentleman. There is no incumbency for the Ulama here to consult nearby countries notwithstanding the permissibility. Invocation of the permissibility in the current scenario is a recipe for future fitnah. Fisq and Fujoor abound. This precludes the consultation to which the gentleman refers. Furthermore, there is no Shar’i imperativeness to resort to the ‘consultation’ promoted by the institutions mentioned above. The Sunnah does not provide a basis for this kind of ‘consultation’. Hitherto, the need – Shar’i need – for the proffered consultation has not been elaborated. The consideration of the gentleman is of nonsensical import, and cannot be imposed on the Ulama here.

 

The gentleman says:

So, it is really mind boggling that Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Mozambique and Malawi are not regarded close to us and therefore their sighting of the moon is not to be trusted, as per the verdicts issued by all these bodies.

 

How strange, till to this day, we can’t find any reliable Ulama in these countries, when many students qualified from our Darul Ulooms are doing great work of Deen in these countries,

 

Our comment

It is ‘mind boggling’ for the gentleman on account of induracy of the brains which is the effect of ignorance and kibr. Since the gentleman is ignorant of the Shariah, he has the ability of blurting out drivel with temerity. There is no Shar’i incumbency on the Ulama of South Africa to submit to the verdicts of the bodies in the aforementioned countries. It is for the Ulama here to decide whom to trust and distrust. That is our prerogative. Those who may be reliable to liberals and modernists may be fussaaq to us. And, assuming that the information and verdicts from the other countries emanate from even Auliya, we here in South Africa, are not coerced by any Shar’i obligation to accept and submit just as Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (Radhiyallahu anhu) did not accept the sighting of Shaam despite the 100% proof – many Sahaabah had sighted the moon in Shaam. Thus, despite confirmation at the highest level, Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (Radhiyallahu anhu) did not accept it to be valid for Madinah Tayyibah.

 

The gentleman says:

But very conveniently, we wait for Cape Town’s moon sighting when we label most of their Ulama/Sheikh’s Kaafir and Munaafiq.

 

Our comment

It is the vile molvis of the Jusa and UUCSA cartel of fussaaq who wait for the decision of the fussaaq/fujjaar carrion halaalizing moron sheikhs of Cape Town. The Ulama-e-Haqq do not accept the information which the fussaaq and munaafiq MJC sheikhs excrete.

 

The gentleman says:

If our so-called ulama councils in SADC were sincerely concerned about the unity of our communities, they could, without much effort, facilitate meetings/ forums to come out with a verdict that will settle this matter once and for all.

 

Our comment

There just is no decree of the Sunnah to forge the type of hallucinated ‘unity’ mentioned by the gentleman. Universal unity of Ramadhaan and Eid is not a requisite of the Shariah. It is wasteful and even stupid to facilitate the type of forums and meetings suggested by the gentleman. This miscreant gentleman should understand that settling the matter once and for all is a stupid pipe dream. It is an unattainable goal.

 

When the limits of the Shariah are transgressed, the consequence is fitnah. The Qur’aan Majeed states:

“These are the limits of Allah. Whoever transgresses

These limits, verily, he has oppressed himself.”

 

The command of the Shariah is crisp and clear. There is no need to introduce elaborate forums and systems for this very simple Shar’i Act of sighting the moon and confirming Ramadhaan and Eid. After almost 15 centuries of Islamic history, the morons are still dwelling in confusion which constrains them to create fitnah with their obfuscation in the name of Islam.

 

For the ventilation of the vermiculated brains of miscreant molvis and modernist cranks, it will be salubrious for the expurgation of all the copro cobwebs of zandaqah blocking their intellectual faculties, to understand that fitnah is never the consequence of firm adherence to the simple acts and practices of the Sunnah. The fitnah of which the miscreant gentleman hallucinates is the product of exceeding the prescribed limits of the Shariah.

 

Having Ramadhaan and Eid on different days in even the same country is never fitnah as these foolish proponents of a false ‘unity’ seek to convey. This so-called ‘fitnah’ is a figmentary epigenesist of misguided fellows seeking to elevate themselves as reformers and leaders of the Muslim community. Thus, their baatil attempts and efforts which are in reality infractions of the Shariah are presented under Deeni guise to assuage the confusion of the masses.

 

It is necessary for Muslims to reflect and to understand who exactly are the louts who create controversy and spread fitnah perennially, every year, regarding the moon issue. It is NEVER the Ulama who issue their decrees in term of the requisites of the Shariah. The Shariah does not compel the Ulama of a locality to seek confirmation of moon-sightings from other countries, cities and towns.

 

During our student-days in Jalalabad, after Taraaweeh Salaat, a group of reliable persons arrived from Deoband or Saharanpur to deliver the information regarding confirmation of the moon-sighting and that ‘tomorrow’ would be Eid in Deoband/Saharanpur which is a journey of one hour by bus from Jalalabad.

 

While Hadhrat Masihullah Khan (Rahmatullah alayh), our Ustaadh and Shaikh, wished them well and made dua for them, he announced that tomorrow in Jalalabad “we shall fast”. No one was offended. There was no ensuing fitnah. There was no Shar’i incumbency to accept the moon news which had arrived from Darul Uloom Deoband despite that sacred Institution being our Ilmi and Roohaani headquarters.

 

Lest there be a misunderstanding, we must clarify the current status of Darul Uloom Deoband. This once great and illustrious Center of Uloom and Roohaaniyat, is no longer regarded by us as our Headquarters. Darul Uloom Deoband has somewhat deviated from the Path of the Akaabir Ulama and Auliya who had established that Centre of Ilm and Islaah. All great and noble institutions decline with the passage of time. Just look at the fate of the once illustrious Jamiah Azhar. Great Ulama and Auliya had emerged from the portals of that wonderful Institution of the Deen. Today it is an Institution of KUFR. Its function is to eliminate Islam. The fataawa emanating currently from the Darul Ifta of Deoband are not blindly accepted by us. Their fataawa are viewed with circumspection since we are of the opinion that the process of Shar’i circumvallation is no longer a strict requirement of the group of Muftis staffing the Darul Ifta.

 

In fact, Hadhrat Maulana Saeed Ahmed Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh), the then Chief Mufti of Darul Uloom Deoband, told us personally that he has to issue fataawa cautiously since he had to contend with eight Muftis who have their own kind of erratic ideology blended with liberalism.

 

Reverting to our main topic of discussion, it should be understood that the fitnah is always created by the modernist cranks of the gentleman’s ilk. If they refrain from shoving their unwanted and ugly snouts into this Shar’i issue for which they entirely lack in qualification, there will be no confusion which is the effect of the stercoraceous obfuscation churned up by the modernist cranks.

 

Consider the current system of confirming the moon-sighting. If all and sundry submit to the decision of Wifaaqul Ulama, there will be no problem, no fitnah and no nonsense. Although the Mujlisul Ulama of S.A. is not an affiliate of Wifaaqul Ulama, it has opted out of the moon issue and has decided to make taqleed of Wifaaqul Ulama in this regard. The Mujlisul Ulama had foreseen the development of problems – real problems – should there be conflicting announcements on the moon issue by these two bodies.

 

Therefore, since there is ample leeway in the Shariah for resorting to Taqleed on this issue, it was in accord with wisdom to accept the decree of Wifaaqul Ulama on the moon issue. Now if all others, eliminate from their brains worldly and nafsaani motives and accept the announcement of Wifaaqul Ulama, there will be no confusion and no fitnah whatsoever. But the problem is the cranks. They overstep the limits of the Shariah in their stupid attempt to disprove the reliability of Wifaaq by making contact with agencies in other countries, then spreading confusion among the ignorant masses.

 

This endeavour of the modernist cranks demonstrate a disingenuous and desperate attempt to churn much smoke to obfuscate the reality of the decrees of the Shariah on which basis Wifaaq makes its moon announcements.

 

Since we are on this subject, we deem it appropriate to proffer some naseehat to Wifaaqul Ulama as well. If for some reason Wifaaqul Ulama rejects the sighting of any town in South Africa, e.g. Grobblershoop, and the Mufti of that town being bound by the Shariah, declares that it will be Eid ‘tomorrow’ in view of the moon having been sighted by the people of that town, neither Wifaaq nor anyone else should disgorge fitnah noises. The Mufti of that town will be acting fully within the ambit of the Shariah. Thus, the celebration of Eid in that one town while the rest of the country celebrates the following day, should not be understood as fitnah.

 

The Mufti of that town is under no Shar’i obligation to submit to the decree of any other group of Ulama anywhere in the world. Celebrating Eid on a day at variance with the rest of the country is not in violation of the Shariah. It does not usurp anyone’s rights. It is not an imposition of hardship on people of other cities and towns.

 

In conclusion, the example of Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Abbaas (Radhiyallahu anhu) during the age of the Sahaabah, is more than adequate proof for disregarding the moon-sighting of other towns and cities despite the high degree of reliability of the sighters and announcers, be they great Muftis,Ulama, Fuqaha and Auliya.

25 Ramadhaan 1444 – 17 April 2023