Khala,
First and foremost Jazakallahu Khayran for giving us a chance to discuss matters amicably.
Nobody considers you dumb or old or stupid however I do believe that you are not aware of the full facts about this issue on the ground in South Africa and neither are most of the posters who back Majlis.
Their support (and yours) for the most part is based on due deference and reverence towards a Senior Alim (and rightly so) although most people are unable to pick apart the Fatwa (Academically) and genuinely delve into the issues at hand.
I was involved with Hazrat (HA) long before most of the abusers got on the gravy train and also offered to assist him with the old site (which is incorrectly listed on your forum) and the new site and also digitising some of the Bayans and also listened to him in the 1990’s long before anyone had heard of him. Over the years I have had numerous conversations with Hazrat (HA) both public and private.
His Taqwa, Seniority, Service, compassion and passion for serving the Deen of Allah (SWT) has NEVER been in question! In fact, he puts most Ulama to shame when it comes to Service to the Deen of Allah (SWT) and providing Service to it.
Issue 1:
The issue here is abuse towards (everyone including Ulama) this isn’t harshness its pure unaltered, untampered abuse! Our Akabir dealt directly with Shaykh (Maulana) Raza Khan Barlewee (RA) and DID NOT label him as a Reverend, Pundit, or whatever but refuted him strongly and adequately every step of the way.
Shaykh (Maulana) Ebrahim Bham (HA) is not a teenager, not a new 21 year old new Darul-uloom graduate but someone Senior, well known and a person of authority within South Africa and a 110% bonafide Deobandi, he visits UK on (almost) a yearly basis; he DOES NOT deserve this abuse!
Shaykh (Mufti) Taha Karaan (HA) is not a teenager, not a new 21 year old new Darul-uloom graduate but the most Senior Shaf’ae Mufti in South Africa and well known internationally, him (and womenfolk of his family) don’t deserve abuse!
Shaykh (Maulana) Yunus Patel (RA) was the Khaleefa of Hakeem Akhtar Saheb (RA) and didn’t deserve to be plotted against and overthrown as the head of Ulamas in South Africa. Shaykh (Mufti) Zubair Bayat (HA) is not a teenager, not a new 21 year old new Darul-uloom graduate but someone Senior, well known and a person of authority within South Africa he didn’t have to go off a tangent and start a new organisation at the behest of Shaykh (Maulana) Yunus Patel (RA)!
I keep asking you to give me examples of where Deobandi Ulama have treated other Deobandi Ulama (whom they disagree) with in such a manner? Give me examples from our Akabir.
We absolutely respect Hazrat A. S. Desai (HA) but we will NOT standby when other Akabir are being abused in such manner.
I don’t know why you can’t see that calling a Senior Alim a “Reverend” and deliberately changing his name from “Ebrahim” to “Abraham” is not a matter of disagreement between Ulama at all; it is downright ABUSE!
Starting up an entire FAKE ORGANISATION called UUCSA to deliberately mislead Muslims of South Africa who trust the union of various Ulama bodies (real UUCSA) is NOT an Ulama disagreement!
Issue 2:
Then we discuss the Fatwaas themselves. The Fatwaas on Qiblah, vaccination, Blood transfusion, Pepsi, Alcohol are based on “conspiracy theories” and Daily Mirror sensationalism (science) and to declare things Haram based on hocus-pocus (science) IS NOT a matter of Fiqh it is a matter of not having the prerequisite scientific knowledge and background.
MJC is the representative organisation of most South African Shaf’aes and to then issue statements about Shaf’ae Madhab based on 2 lines when there is an entire discussion by Shaf’ae Ulama (in both Arabic and English) explaining and outlining the issue is just confusing the masses. Which Deobandi (Hanafi) Ulama do you know you issue Fatwaas on Shaf’ae Madhab in direct contradiction to the Shaf’ae Ulama and Muftees of the land? Name me EXAMPLES and references, please!
Come clean?
It’s time for you and all defenders to come clean and say “Yes we do not know the science of the Fiqh behind these Fatwaas (and neither do we have the capability to investigate and understand) but out of respect and trust of Hazrat (HA) we trust and propagate them”
You admitted that you don’t believe laymen can’t disagree with Ulama (Alhumdolillah) but 99.9% of those who are disagreeing simply disagree on the premise that he is a Senior Alim of Taqwa (who are you?).
Nothing solid, nothing substantial pure rhetoric.
Why discuss this?
If this was a purely South African issue then we would consign it to the South African Ulama but this is beginning to affect Pakistanees (already stated by a Brother from Karachi about SANHA). SANHA has an alliance with Darul-uloom Binori Town (Karachi) and other Ulama, the most Senior and reputable Ulama in Pakistan back SANHA and here is a teenager from Karachi saying I don’t trust it because Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) has talks against it.
The question he hasn’t answered are:
WHAT DOES a teenager from Karachi know which Ulama of Darul-uloom Binori Town (Karachi) don’t know?
Sister Maria is another flipper-flopper she sends questions then gets a response and then gets confused, based on what?
Deobandi History?
You have your views and nobody is asking you to change or agree with what is being said but you are being asked to at least consider maybe Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) is looking at something which you are unable to grasp (not out of stupidity but out of not having the full picture).
The most stringent and heated disagreement in the history of Deobandees was between Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) and Shaykhul-Isam (Maulana) Hussain Ahmed Madani (RA) how did they address each other?
I mean who out of these Ulama are Kuffar, Fussaq, Fujjar who need to be abused and plotted against?
- Shaykh (Maulana) Ebrahim Bham (HA)
- Shaykh (Mufti) Taha Karaan (HA)
- Shaykh (Maulana) Yunus Patel (HA)
- Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA)
- etc etc etc
These Ulama are NOT Shias, they are NOT Barelwee, they are NOT Qadiyanees they are Deobandees.
Polite Request:
You have your views and nobody is asking you to change or agree with what is being said but you are being asked to at least consider maybe Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) is looking at something which you are unable to grasp (not out of stupidity but out of not having the full picture).
I fully take your view on board that you are unable to dissect a Fatwa and break it down into its constitutes and analyse it (thoroughly) but surely you CANNOT in your heart of heart agree with the abuse of Ulama right before your eyes!
UUCSA name shenanigans: It’s not just a petty squabble over the trivial
Press Release – UUCSA | 30 September 2014/05 Dhul Hijjah 1435
“And those who defame believing men and believing women undeservedly bear the guilt of slander and manifest sin.” (33:58)
The United Ulama Council of South Africa (UUCSA) was formally constituted in 1994 under the guidance of Moulana Yunus Patel, Moulana Abdur Razzaq, Sheik Naziem Mohammed, Ml Yusuf Karan and Moulana Abbas Jeena. The vision of these founding fathers was to provide a forum for Ulama of different persuasions to jointly engage and interact with Government on behalf of the Muslim Community of South Africa. The founding members of UUCSA were:
- Jamiatul Ulama South Africa (formerly known as Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal – 1923)
- Jamiatul Ulama KZN (1955)
- Muslim Judicial Council (1945)
- Sunni Jamiatul Ulama (1978)
- Sunni Ulama Council (1992)
The following two organisations subsequently joined UUCSA bringing the total number of members to seven:
- Council of Ulama Eastern Cape (1999)
- Eastern Cape Islamic Congress (1996)
UUCSA had since inception made substantial contributions in its engagement with Government; it was invited to Parliament on the eve of the adoption of the Constitution to discuss issues relating to freedom of religion, it played a critical role in re-drafting Anti – Terror legislation in South Africa, it has also played a major role in drafting legislation aimed at the legal recognition of Muslim Marriages. It has in its twenty years of existence become a cohesive voice for mainstream Ulama formations in our country. At no time did it however claim to be the absolute voice of all the Ulama formations in our country.
UUUCSA perhaps in its naivety did not register its name and logo with the Registrar of Trade Marks. It certainly did not expect anyone to usurp its identity and name. It was however proved wrong when Ml A S Desai of Port Elizabeth fraudulently registered the name with the Trade Marks Office in 2013. Subsequent to the registration he threatened UUCSA with legal action if it continued using the name. UUCSA responded by launching an application out of the JHB High Court to expunge the fake UUCSA trade mark.
Ml Desai justifies usurping the name on the basis that ‘UUCSA’ was formed in 1989 by senior
Ulama of the country at a meeting held in Port Elizabeth at which he was appointed as secretary. Incidentally, the ‘evidence’ he tenders in support of the ‘hijack’ is the same he used when he previously usurped the name of Jamiatul Ulama South Africa. If the belated UUCSA was indeed formed in 1989, why:
- Did no one hear of its existence from 1989 to 2013?
- Did it not publish or circulate a single statement in its name from 1989 to mid-2013?
- Is it unable to produce minutes of a single meeting since its alleged inception?
It is strikingly odd that the very individual who had all along acknowledged the existence of UUCSA albeit through his disparaging and pejorative publications, realized after twenty years that the name really belongs to him.
The public may be forgiven for thinking that this is no more than a petty spat over a name between two Ulama bodies. The reality however is very different. The hijack of our name should be viewed against the backdrop of the advance of the voice of extremism in various hot spots around the globe. Every country has its own brand of parochial extremists. South
Africa is no different….the brand of extremism in South Africa subscribes to passive aggression; it tries to bludgeon people into silence and conformity through its acerbic publications and through brazen deception. This shameless impersonation and piracy is an attempt to expand the voice of extremism by giving it a veneer of respectability through the use of the name ‘UUCSA.’ This is not a fight for an appellation but rather a desperate attempt to spread a brand of Islam which:
- Asserts that it is the only sort committed to defending and reviving a puritanical and pristine version of the Deen
- Claims to be the only custodian of Haqq to the exclusion of everyone else
- Dismisses those who differ with its views as deviates or disbelievers.
- Campaigns by all means, fair or foul, against those who hold views contrary to its interpretation of the Deen
- Almost always focusses its attacks against fellow Muslims, especially the Ulama
Pursuant to the ‘hijack’ of UCCSA, several other UUCSA’s suddenly mushroomed, bearing the hallmarks of similar crudity and primitiveness. Each one of them is now used to tout further division and confusion in the community. Recent instances of brazen deception include the following false public statements meant primarily to mislead the public:
- · “In view of his flagrant rebellion against Authority – the Ulama of UUCSA – the Shuraa Council of UUCSA has relieved Moulana Yusuf Patel of his post, viz., the post of Assistant Secretary of our Middleburg branch. We are therefore compelled to inform the Muslim public that Moulana Patel has been expelled from UUCSA. Any statements which he may issue in our name should be regarded as fraudulent and criminal”
- · “UUCSA (United Ulama Council of S.A.) hereby informs the Muslim Ummah of a revision in its former view on the Muslim Marriages Bill (MMB). Formerly, UUCSA, believing that the MMB proposal was in the interests of Muslims, had supported it. However, after in depth research and consultations with a wide variety of Muslim experts, religious and secular, we recognize the dangers to the Shariah posed by MMB.”
- · “In our view there is no doubt in the fact that all commercially slaughtered chickens are Haraam. It is incumbent on Muslims to abstain from consuming the chickens. It is not permissible for Muslim traders to sell these chickens which are all Haraam.”
An ‘UUCSA’ website listed under the name of one Yusuf Nana was also registered as recently as 11 August 2014. A search as per the physical address that appears on its letterhead leads to a very opaque location in Vanderbijlpark. Even the mobile number of Yusuf Nana which is listed as 076 170 3280 draws a blank. When contacted by a staff member of one of the Radio Stations he denied having any association with the website.
The ‘name steal’ is part of a bigger agenda which is bound to politically and socially compromise the integrity and marginalize the Muslim community of South Africa. It has already legitimised vulgarity and scorn in the name of religion. If we allow the ‘name steal’ to go unchallenged, we may inadvertently allow a chauvinistic brand of Islam to dominate the public space in South Africa!
“The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.”