Archive for December, 2010

Salafism and modernism are quickly gaining momentum in and around the Islamic world. Whilst many may agree that the views held by either group would be in direct contrast with each other, I beg to differ. A new brand of Salafism has emerged, showing us that the generic off-shoot combining salafi core principles with a modern ‘Islamic’ mix may well be a force to be reckoned with.

This generic mutant force has slowly crept into the world of the orthodox Muslim and is threatening the existence of the soon-to-be-extinct traditionalist follower. How, or why you ask? Well, my thinking is that this mutant force knows that the goal is ultimately what matters. It is no easy task to break down 1400 years worth of solid Islamic grounding and so the mutant force is keen on increasing its numbers rather than a total traditionalist-madhab-following mutiny.

Salafis have always maintained that their way is that of the ‘salaf’ (i.e. the pious predecessors) but I have noticed a re-branding of sorts, a change in direction if you must, of a salafi-modernist group intent on breaking down every little piece of Islam in the name of Islam and unity. The concept is catchy, I’ll give them that. It’s something like this:

Firstly, we break down the traditionalist core. The focus is no longer on smaller, meaningless issues. Whatever is in your control is a ‘small issue’. This would include: Islamic dressing, apparel, the hijab, the beard, music etc. Whatever is not in your direct control is an issue. For example: saving the people of Palestine, Islamic unity, peace and prosperity, gender equality etc.

Secondly, we unite and conquer. It does not matter whether our belief structure differs, if you give me a platform to spread my beliefs, I will align myself with you.

Thirdly, destroy all structured forms of belief. If you can read it and understand it yourself, you do not need to follow anybody. Moulanas/Muftis/Molvis/Mullahs who force you to follow a Madhab are evil. Madressahs finding their roots via a Deobandi framework are evil. Scholars from India who cannot speak English are uneducated, dumb or silly; in fact, anything remotely Indian is backward and oppressive, misogynistic and cruel.

Some would say overactive imaginations, arrogance perhaps or maybe a severe inferiority complex resulting from the chance that perhaps someone out there knows a whole lot more than you do and of course since you know how to Google, read a couple of translated works on an Islamic Science, this naturally would qualify you to become a scholar in your own right.

In this lies the danger of a true blindness. The traditionalists have fallen asleep only to wake up in a world where Muslims enjoy the integration of halaal and haraam, where everything is subject to debate and opinion and where anything goes. Naturally, all Muslims should be worried, right? The answer is no. There are very few Muslims who find this to be a problem. In any event, why would they?

The modern salafis are serving them guilt-free Islam on silver platters; and it’s working. The effect of labeling and judging has worked in reverse and those who call for the preservation of a true Islam MUST be labeled extremists or fundamentalists, crazy and oppressive. This is the modernist-salafi core. So where does modernism fit in? This aspect is a bit tricky to explain but I do hope you’ll bear with me.

A modernist thrives on a ‘non-judgmental’ and unified approach. Confrontation is a total no-no and moderation is key. Salafis have been able to implement these aspects quite effectively into their strategies. Basically, a Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim so as far as the Salafis are concerned, there is no place for sectarianism or the following of Madhaahib in Islam. We are all Muslim and a Muslim does not judge.

Now that’s all well and good up until you come to a point where the stark reality smacks you in the face: There can be no Islam without judgment. Muslims are in a constant state of judgment. That is the purpose of our test in this world. We have to constantly re-evaluate our actions, perfect what is required of us as living and practising Muslims in the hope that we will pass the most important test we spend our whole lives preparing for. In order to pass the test, how can there not exist judgment? The Qur’aan judges, Allah Ta’ala judges, Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam passed judgment, the Shari’ah passes judgment, the Sahaabah radhiAllahu anhum passed judgment and the most noble and illustrious Scholars, Qaadhis and Jurists passed judgments.

But the notion of not being able to judge is a perfect shield for those who do not want to be judged.

The modern salafis also combine the non-judgmental approach in other areas of modern issues affecting Muslim. An apt example which comes to mind is the issue of Islamic apparel. Most modern Salafis belief that items such as a thaub are purely cultural and some even contest the validity of hijab. Other examples include religious entertainment such as the permissibility of musical instruments or the hosting of concerts/events attended by both males and females. Again, the main objective is to spread their word. These aspects tie in to modern salafi principles such as practicing moderation, keeping the ultimate goal in sight and increasing alliances.

Are we on a path to a new modern Islam? The answer is yes. The mutant salafi force emerging to break down the pillars of Islamic belief are creeping in from all angles and are picking away at the very foundations of Islam. They are emerging in their numbers and by branding the true followers of Islam as extremist fundamentalists, they serve as nothing more than a crusade against the vestiges of traditional Islamic beliefs.

May Allah guide us and protect us all

The Say What? column featured on Muslimality is meant to inspire, teach, engage debate or simply make you laugh. This column revolves around a variety of issues relating to Muslims in South Africa and Muslims around the world.

Muslimality is pleased to announce that we will now be taking article submissions from anyone who has a passion for writing about true Islam. If you or anybody you know would like to submit an article for publication, kindly email or submit your piece via our Contact Form

Muslimality reserves the right to edit your submission. Should you not receive a response from us within 7 days of submission, please consider the submission rejected.

Part Three of a detailed analysis of the errors of Quraysha Ismail Sooliman (5 years studies at Darul Uloom Pretoria, Freelance Journalist and Political Science Honour’s Student, University of Pretoria)

The writer states the following hadith:

“The Prophet Muhammad SAW said:

‘Do not prevent your women from attending the mosque if they seek your permission to do so’ [Sahih Muslim]”

Our response:

This hadith is stated without authentic commentary provided by authoritative Muhadditheen who spent their entire lives,day and night in the pursuit and preservation of true knowledge.

We provide hereunder some of the statements of the true scholars regarding this Hadith and other Ahaadith which are related:

This hadith appears in Saheeh Muslim Page 183 [Qadeemi].

The chapter is called, “The chapter on women going out to the Masjid when there is no fitnah and she must go out without perfume”.

The commentary of Imaam An Nawawi rahimahullah on this hadith entails the following:

The Ulama have stipulated conditions which are taken from hadith. Amongst other conditions, the following conditions are necessary before a woman is allowed to attend the Masjid:

1.      A woman must not be perfumed.

2.      A woman must not be adorned with jewellery etc.

3.      A woman’s voice must not be heard.

4.      A woman must not wear showy or gaudy clothing.

5.      There should not be any mixing with men.

6.      The woman should not be young.

7.      There should be no fear on the road to and from the Masjid. There should be no fear of any harm, corruption or wrong being committed/ taking place.

[Footnotes of Saheeh Muslim Pg 183, Qadeemi]

The following ahadeeth are recorded in authentic books of hadith and pertain to the issue of women attending the Masjid.

Hadith no. 1: Ibn ‘Umar radhiAllahu anhu reported that Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said: “Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from the mosques of Allah.” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

Hadith no. 2: Abu Hurairah radhiAllahu anhu reported that Nabi SallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said: “Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from visiting the mosques of Allah, however they ought to go out tafilaat*.” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

*We will explain “Tafilaat” shortly.

Imaam an Nawawi has mentioned that total safety and surety against fitnah is a precondition for the permissibility of women attending the masjid. (Saheeh Muslim Juz 1 Pg 183; Bazlul Majhood Juz 4 Pg 160)

In Laamiud Duraari, it is mentioned that the words “female servants of Allah” is indicative of the fact that permission is based upon the woman being a true slave of Allah (inwardly and outwardly) and not a slave to the world and to her desires. (Bazlul Majhood Vol 4 Pg 161)

Tafilaat is translated as “without perfume” or “without displaying any sort of adornment”. In Qamoos it is mentioned: “For example, a shoulder (of meat or of an animal) which has gone off and whose smell has changed is described as ‘tafil’. (Bazlul Majhood Vol 4 Pg 161)

Ibn Raslaan has mentioned the incident of Zubayr radhiAllahu anhu and his wife Aatika bint Zayd. He did not clearly prevent his wife from attending the masjid because of the hadith. So one day he sat on the road and when she passed him, he pulled her clothes. Thereupon, she stopped going to the masjid. Upon being questioned why, she replied, “We used to go out when people were people.” (Bazlul Majhood Juz 4 Pg 160)

Ibn Hajar has mentioned: “The essence of the speech of Imaam Nawawi and that of Zarkashi is that, if in their going out, there occurs mixing with men in the masjid or on the way or the fear of fitnah is great due to them adorning themselves and going out, IT IS HARAAM FOR THEM TO GO OUT and the right of permission rests with the husband; and it is waajib upon the Imaam or his deputy to stop them (from going to the Masjid). (Bazlul Majhood Vol 4 Pg 161)

Allaamah Baaji mentions: “In it (the hadith) is proof that the husband has the option of preventing his wife and that there is no going out except with his permission.” (Awjazul Masaalik Juz 4 Pg 207)

Hadith no. 3: Ibn ‘Umar radhiAllahu anhu reported that Nabi SallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said: “Do not prevent your women from visiting the mosques; but their houses are better for them (for praying).” (Sunan Abi Dawud)

This hadith is emphasizing the fact that salaah in their (women’s) homes is better for them than salaah in the masjid with Jama’ah because it is more concealing. The second part of this hadith encourages women to read their salaah at home because it is more virtuous, more rewarding and more pleasing to Allah Ta’ala.

We should now ask ourselves as to why would any sane, rational person want to leave something which is more virtuous, more rewarding and more pleasing to Allah Ta’ala for something which is less? If the true aim is the pleasure of Allah, why would anybody prefer to practise upon that act which is less pleasing to Allah? It is mentioned in Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah Juz 2 Pg 277: “A woman is to be concealed and the closest a woman is to Allah is when she is in the depths of her home…” Therefore what is the aim when a woman chooses to make salaah anywhere else besides her home?

Abu ‘Amr ash Shaibaani mentioned, ‘I saw ibn Mas’ood radhiAllahu anhu throwing stones at the women, chasing them from the Masjid on the day of Jumu’ah.’ (Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah Juz Pg 277)

Allaamah Aini has narrated from Imaam Maalik that this hadith (Hadith no. 3) is understood to refer to very very old women. (Awjazul Masaalik Juz 4 Pg 207)

Hadith no. 4: ‘Abdullah ibn Umar radhiAllahu anhu reported that Nabi SallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said: “Allow women to visit the mosque at night.” A son of his (Bilal) said: “I swear by Allah, we shall certainly not allow them because they will take it as “*daghl”. I swear by Allah, we shall not allow them. He (ibn Umar) spoke to him harshly and became angry at him and said: “I tell you that Nabi SallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said: “Allow them;” yet you say: We shall not allow them.”*Daghl will be explained shortly.

The first part of the hadith places emphasis on permission being granted for women to visit the masjid at night. The commentary of this hadith which is found in Bazlul Majhood states: “Because it is a time when the roads are empty and the time of darkness was the time when the causes of fitnah would decrease.”

Imaam an Nawawi has mentioned “Daghl” refers to corruption, deception and other forms of evil, meaning the women would use this permission to go out as a stepping stone towards great corruption and evil. (Bazlul Majhood Juz 4 Pg. 163).

In Al Kanzul Mutawari, the following explanation appears:

“Imaam Bukhari has named the chapter “Chapter No 556: Women going to the Masjid at night and in galas”

Note: The Muhadditheen went to great lengths explaining the wisdom behind Imaam Bukhaari’s choice of names for the chapters of Saheeh Al-Bukhaari. We reproduce hereunder the following explanation as mentioned in Al Kanzul Mutawaari Juz 5 Pg 448.

“In it (the name of the chapter) is an indication that the permission for women going out is linked to the absence of fitnah in any form at all. When the night and galas were times in which fitnah was non-existent, it was permissible for them to go out in these two times. But when they both become reasons for fitnah as we witness in our error, then even in these two times it is not permissible for women to be present in the Masjid.

Imaam Bukhaari, in restricting the naming of this chapter with the night and the galas in indicative of the fact that he is pointing to the permissibility of women leaving for the Masjid only under the existence of this condition (at night and galas). The vast majority of commentators have mentioned, ‘Imaam Bukhaari is indicating via his choice of naming this chapter that the Ahaadeeth narrated in the chapter are tied to the condition which he has mentioned in the name.’

The overwhelming majority of Fuqaaha have taken the stance that women are to be prevented from going out in this era (general prohibition) because of what we witness (all-encompassing fitnah). Ibn Daqeeq Al Eid has mentioned, ‘This hadeeth applies to all women(but it must be borne in mind) that the Fuqaaha have attached conditions to it (the permissibility of women attending the masjid): She must not be perfumed; She must be dressed shabbily. It must also be borne in mind that whatever fulfils the function of perfume will be in the same category of perfume. The reason for perfume being impermissible is because of it inciting passion so good clothes, jewellery and open adornment would fall into this category, likewise mixing with men.’” ( Al Kanzul Mutawari Juz 5 Pg 448)

“Ibn Al Arabi mentions in the commentary of Tirmidhi, after mentioning the narrations of the Chapter, ‘The original law of the Shari’ah is that it is permissible for women to go out for Salaah and there are many ahadeeth which testify to this and when she goes out, she is to go out shabbily dressed in an unattractive manner as mentioned by various narrations. The literal meaning of the word ‘tafil’ which is translated as ‘shabbily’ is used by the Arabs to denote such a woman whom nobody would be attracted to. And Aisha radhiAllahu anha and Ibn Mas’ood radhiAllahu anhu and other sahaabah radhiAllahu anhum have clearly indicated that women are to be prevented from the Masjid and that they should necessarily stick to the innermost recesses of their homes.

Imaam At Thauri has mentioned, “It is Makrooh for a woman to leave her home and Ibn Mas’ood has also made similar statements. This is the view of Imaam Abu Hanifah and Abdullah Ibn Mubaarak.’

Allaamah Aini has mentioned, ‘The author of Hidaayah mentions, ‘It is highly detestable for women to attend congregational salaah. The word ‘congregational’ encompasses Jumu’ah, Eid, Salaatul Khusoof.

In the emergence of women, there is fear of fitnah which is a platform for haraam and what leads to haraam is also haraam.

Therefore it must be understood that the statements of the Fuqaaha wherein the word ‘Yukraahoo’ (detestable) is mentioned, their intention is Haraam.

With regards to the hadith of Ibn Umar, ‘When your women seek permission from you…’ that is when there is no fear of fitnah affecting them or of them becoming sources of fitnah. That (permissibility) was in their era in contrast to our era as surely corruption in our era is widespread and the corrupted ones are many and the hadith of Aishah radhiAllahu anha substantiates this.

Imaam An-Nawawi has mentioned, ‘There is no place for a woman which is better than her house even if she is very, very old. Ibn Mas’ood has mentioned, ‘A woman is aurah (an object of concealment) and the closest that she can be to Allah is when she is in the depths of her home and when she exits her home, Shaitaan lies in wait for her and Ibn Umar RadhiAllahu anhu used to stand and throw pebbles on women on the day of Jumu’ah expelling them from the Masjid.’ ” (Kanzul Mutawari Juz 5 Pg 450)

In al Kanz ul Mutawaari it is noted that Abdullah bin Umar would stand outside the Masjid on Jumuah and throw pebbles at the women in order to chase them from the Masjid. (Juz 5 Pg.450)

In the same book it is mentioned that Hasan al Basri was asked regarding a woman who took an oath that if her husband is released from prison she would read 2 rak’aat of Salaah in every masjid in Basrah in which Salaah is read. The summary of his reply was “If Umar Radi Allahu anhu found out about her, he would have smashed her head” (Juz 5 Pg 451) (This is also recorded in Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah Juz 2 Pg 277)

“Allaamah Aini mentions, ‘If Aisha radhiAllahu anha had to see what the women of this era are doing then she would have voiced even greater objection and her statement was not made very lon after the death of Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam. The reason for this greater objection of hers is that the women of her era did not even do one thousandth of what the women of this era are doing.’

That was in the era of Allaamah Aini who died in the year 855 hijri, what then is the condition in our era which is filled with evil and corruption? ” (Kanzul Mutawari Juz 5 Pg 454)

The following is recorded in al Fiqhul Islami Juz 2 Pg 1172

“Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam Mohammed have mentioned (Al Kitaab Ma’al Lubaab Juz 1 Pg 83; Fathul Qadir Juz 1 Pg 529; Haashiya Ibn Aabideen Juz 1 Pg 429) , ‘It is highly detestable (Haraam) [we have explained the usage of the term ‘highly detestable’ by the Fuqahaa earlier] for young women to attend Jama’ah.’ Imaam Abu Hanifah has mentioned, ‘There is no problem with an Ajooz (shall be explained shortly) going out for Fajr, Maghrib and Esha due to the fact that Fussaaq (flagrant mischief makers) are sleeping at the time of Fajr and Esha salaah…Imaam Abu Yusuf and Imaam Mohammed have permitted an Ajooz to attend all salaat due to the fact that none would desire them.

The fatawa of the Hanafi Madhab is that it is not permissible for women to attend the Jama’ah even if for Jumu’ah, Eid or a lecture. This is a blanket ruling and applies to all, young and old, during the day and the night. The reason for this is due to the corruption that abounds as well as the mischief that is openly practiced.

The Maaliki view is that if there is any fear of fitnah whatsoever then going out for salaah is not permissible at all for any woman.

Ibn Rushd has mentioned, ‘An Ajooz is a woman who is so old that no man would feel any sexual desire towards her, so much so that she is treated like a man i.e. without any sexual desire whatsoever.’” (In South Africa in the year 2010, there have been numerous instances of elderly, sickly, grandmothers and even great-grandmothers being sexually molested, abused and raped. This bears testimony to the fact that society has become corrupt to such an extent that even extremely old women are seen as sources of sexual pleasure by some individuals and thus the ruling of general impermissibility on all types of women going out for salaah will be established.)

“According to the Shafi’i and Hambali scholars, it is Makrooh for young women, those of attractive appearance to attend the Masjid wherein the men will be assembling for Salaat due to the possibility of fitnah. And the woman will read in her home. It is permissible for the elderly women to leave ‘tafilah’ with the permission of her husband whilst bearing in mind that her house is still better for her.”

Umm Salmah has narrated that Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam said, ‘The best place for a woman to read salaah is the depth of her home.’ Narrated by Imaam Ahmad, recorded in Nailul Autaar Juz 3 Pg 131.”

The Shaafi’ authority, Shaikh Sulaiman Bujairmi (rahmatullah alayh) states:

“Women should not attend (the Musjid) whether they are young or old for Jamaat because of the appearance of corruption….. Today the Fatwa is on total prohibition in all Salaats.  This includes Jumuah, Eid, Istisqaa’, and gatherings of lectures, especially the lectures of the juhhaal (ignoramuses) who masquerade as Ulama while their motive is the gratification of lust and worldly acquisition.” – Tuhfatul Habeeb Ala Sharhil Khateeb

Which woman would intentionally shun that which the greatest of all creation (sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam) has mentioned to be the best?

This concludes Part Three of the detailed and academic response to ‘The Conclusion’ by Quraysha Ismail Sooliman

Read Part One, Part Two and Part Four of The True Conclusion:

A concerned individual has collated video and audio recordings regarding slaughter methods used at abattoirs worldwide.

Due to Rainbow and other poultry abattoirs refusing the general public access to their farms, the individual in question obtained confirmation from Rainbow to the effect that the methods used to slaughter chicken at Rainbow are exactly as those of leading abattoirs worldwide.

We reproduce hereunder SANHA’s supposed rebuttal to the expose regarding poultry slaughter methods.

Muslimality comment:

Muslimality is once again issuing an OPEN invitation and clear request to any individual, scholar or otherwise, not affiliated to SANHA or its affiliates to forward us a clear-cut, authoritative, valid fatwa based on solid, authentic and clear Shar’i juristic principles stating that Rainbow chickens and other battery and broiler chickens certified Halaal by SANHA and the MJC are HALAAL.

Please note that we are not interested in the so-called views presented by those working for SANHA and the MJC nor do we consider opinion-based verdicts as valid in the Shari’ah.


SANHA’s comments appear within the quotation marks:

A reader forwarded a YouTube video clip on chicken slaughter from an unknown source styling themselves as the chicken truth.

Without forcing our views on any reader, we list our rebuttal and leave it to the discernments of enlightened minds to draw their own conclusion.

From our point of view we firmly believe that the information is fatally flawed and presented with malicious intent on the following basis:-

1. Of what use is the identity of the source? Does it matter who is ‘The Chicken Truth’? Why can you not simply answer the questions?

2. Enlightened minds are still awaiting your responses to the unanswered questions posed by brother Ahmed Laher. If, for some odd reason, SANHA cannot seem to find the questions, please click here.

3. Your failed attempt at inferring that it is only the enlightened who will blindly swallow the vomit spewed out by SANHA is indeed indicative of your lack of solid proof. Hence like so many who wish to just enforce their opinion on the public, you rush to play the emotion card.

4. Irrespective of whether the reader had acted with malicious intent or not, simply answer these questions and we are almost certain that the numerous smear campaigns SANHA constantly wails about, will come to an end.


This group’s stated stance is that the issuing of Halal certificates is “foreign to Islam and do not hold any weight”. They further expostulate that “From a Shari (Islamic) point of view, there is no such thing as a Halaal organization. Such organizations never existed in the time of Nabi Muhammed Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam nor in the time of the illustrious Sahaba, may Allah be pleased with them. Neither did they exist for 1400 years. These groups probably sprouted up within the last 4 or 5 decades. Based upon Western concepts and frameworks…”

It is impossible for any argument, based on a wrong premise and naked prejudice from the outset, to arrive to the correct conclusion.

Whilst we are not affiliated to, nor are we interested in defending a the points of view of the reader who submitted the videos, we ask you to kindly explain why is it that you, SANHA, are now trying to fuddle the mind of your blind followers by merely stating some concocted principle being quoted out of context. Where, pray tell, are your juristic rebuttals to the FIQH questions posed to you by concerned members of the public?

We have in our possession clear-cut emails from SANHA telling questioners “We do not deem it necessary to offer you an academic response.”

We must also bring to your attention that the individual has not based his entire argument on the point that you mention above. Muslimality has found a solution to SANHA’s woes: SIMPLY RECORD A FULL DAY’S WORTH OF SLAUGHTER ON UNTAMPERED, UNCUT VIDEO AND ALLOW THE MUSLIM PUBLIC TO WITNESS FIRST-HAND WHETHER STUNNING, HOT-DIPPING ETC. IS TAKING PLACE OR NOT. This is what enlightened minds want.

2. Ulama are dimwits

Ulama are the inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophets (Peace be upon them) and have been giving leadership to the Ummah for centuries. They hold the Noble Quraan immutable, the Sunnah (Prophetic Traditions) sacrosanct and accept differences in opinion which are not opposed to or are in conflict with them. Their decisions and edicts are in the best interest of Islam for their respective communities. It is patronizing and ludicrous to the extreme to believe that thousands of Ulama have lost their wits and direction to “have unwittingly legalized these bodies.”

It is frightening to contemplate that hundreds of thousands of people from Halaal bodies to butchers, retailers and communities take direction from Ulama in these matters who according to the faceless Chicken Truth individual/group cannot discern right from wrong, yet they can.

Where and when has the individual stated that Ulama are dimwits? Why again do you wish to play the emotion card?

The usage of the word “unwittingly” does not imply the Ulama are dimwits.Do refrain from such blatant lies.

We also issue an open request to SANHA to please provide us with clear-cut academic proof provided by any authoritative Aalim/Mufti substantiating SANHA’s activities.

3. Anonymity

Whilst this group boldly criticizes and slanders Halaal bodies, the Ulama, producers and the public whilst sprouting Quraanic ayaat, it cowers behind a cloak of anonymity. Surely, if they truly wish to “save the muslims” then they ought to have the courage of their conviction and stand up for their beliefs and engage with all parties?

What can be the vested interest that prevents the writer/s from revealing their identity?

How again does the identity of the individual matter? Does SANHA need someone to sue? Please visit the reader’s website and see the contact us page.

Simply answer the unanswered questions and all these anonymous bodies will leave you alone.

It is strange that you speak of courage yet you run away from simple requests for academic proof!!!

Vested interests? Does the reader want everyone to start getting certified with his halaal certifying body?Must everyone buy chickens from the string of abattoirs he supposedly has waiting to start delivering chickens as soon as the public stop trusting SANHA?


4. Hearsay

The group has failed to attest the information into sworn statements and follow any process that gives the accused the right to call and cross examine witnesses, not to incriminate oneself, the right not to be tried on secret evidence, the right to exclude evidence that is improperly obtained, irrelevant or inherently inadmissible e.g. hearsay, punishment for perjury, the right to exclude judges on the grounds of partiality or conflict of interest, the right of appeal etc.

The absence of this renders the information as hearsay and places their work in the realm of fitnah and rumour mongering.

The aforesaid is but another glaring example of the actions of extremists against mainstream Islam.

Please be assured that the processes used in Halaal certified commercial abattoirs are endorsed by mainstream Ulama and all chickens certified / approved by SANHA is undoubtedly Halaal..

We will not provide the Shar’i response to SANHA’s pathetic excuse of sworn statements etc. due to the fact that after contacting SANHA numerous times we have reached the conclusion that they are in fact quite scared of and possibly allergic to Shar’i proof.

Once again we plead with SANHA,forget the side-issues and simply answer the questions the public wants answered.



Was Salaam

Yours sincerely
For South African National Halaal Authority

EBI Lockhat
Public Relations Officer

Tel: +27 (31) 207 5768
Fax: +27 (31) 207 5793


Shaikh Yawar Baig Sahib wishes to know why there is a sudden need for a SA Muslim Charter.

The Charter is the first step towards a so-called unified body which will eventually seek to represent South African Muslims. Let’s discard the fluff and focus on hard issues. There are three worrying clauses in the Charter.

We will, Insha-Allah, analyse one of the clauses presently.

There is nothing wrong in having a unified body speaking for all Muslims of the country. The problem is that the body should be more concerned about the welfare of the Ummah than the need for lip-service unity.

The Charter has been drafted by a majority of liberal Molvies. This is a given fact. This statement is born out by the fact that 99 % of the present authors of the Charter are in favour of the MPL Bill. 99 % of the Ulama bodies involved in the drafting of the Charter are heavily involved in the lucrative “Halaal” industry. Not a single one of any of the signatories of the Charter, to the best of our knowledge, has protested publicly against SANHA’S “Halaalizing” of Israeli products. In fact, the Fordsburg Jamiatul-Ulama fully blesses the back-stabbing and treachery of our Palestinian brothers by SANHA. Even the Muslim Lawyers Association has, again to the best of our knowledge, remained strangely silent. Perhaps they do not wish to be seen as opposing the Ulama. Within the Shariah boundaries, any reasonable person will be suspicious of the underlying motives of the authors of the Charter.

What could the motive be? Perhaps the authors mean well. Allah knows best. Perhaps they wish to seek a mandate that they are the representatives of all South African Muslims. This is more plausible. At first there was an attempt to hijack the Ulama fraternity with the deceptive “Jamiatul-Ulama South Africa”. Posters were issues by the Fordsburg Jamiat fraudulently, illegally and criminally depicting them to be a registered entity. Public funds are now being used to go to court for a lie which the Jamiat had peddled. The Jamiat is a chief motivator of the Charter

When the JUSA TRICK failed, UCSAA was promoted PUBLICLY to be the official “all-inclusive” body representing the Muslims. This too has flopped as the vast majority of Muslims in KZN and the previous Transvaal do not want to be associated with grave-peer-worshippers from Natal and some of the MJC standing-and-urinating-non-Istainja-ing clique.

The same gang now has roped in some well-meaning sincere Muslim lawyers in order to give some oomph to their agenda. And so we have the proposed SA Charter, laced with candy floss, bankrupt with issues of Imaan, blind to the genuine welfare of the Muslims and the Ummah.

The South African Government has a problem in that the Muslim community does not have a single unified body with whom the Government can liaise. One can commiserate and sympathise with the Government. It indeed must be laborious to gather a hundred different organizations every time there is a need to sound out Muslim views.

The Government, for instance understands the need to consult with the Muslim community if they wish to send troops to Somalia. Common sense dictates that the Muslim Community will be unhappy with our troops being placed in harms way. The body bags returning will cause us Muslims to be the focus of a certain local backlash with unpredictable consequences. The Charter circumvents the need for effective serious consultation by Governement with us. Thus, it states:

Furthermore there is a need for greater co-operation among South Africa’s Muslims, and a desire for mutual recognition between the South African Muslim community and other South African communities and, in line with African Union’s ideals and values, between the South African Muslim community, the rest of Africa, the Muslim world and international community in general.

What need is there for us South African Muslims to have a desire to fall in line with the African Unions ideals and values? The Union has a short history which has proven that it is nothing but a vessel to impose American and Western values. No, brothers there is something very sinister about this Charter which seeks credibility by deceptively citing a Charter of Rasulullah Salallahu alayhu Wasallam out of context. The African Union has already decided to contribute troops to fight Amercia’s war against the Muslims of Somalia. If the Charter is adopted, there will be no need for Government to even consult with us. Muslims would have, after all, surrendered their rights by adopting the Government as their representative and their Guardian. “In line with Afirican Union’s ideals and values” is indeed where the Devil lies.

Similarly, the International community allows Israel to continue its oppressive policies against the Muslims of Palestine. Already we have the utterly deplorable situation wherein the Fordsburg Jamiatul-Ulama blesses SANHA’S dealings and “Halaalization” of Israeli products. Opposing this dastardly stance will be ultimately in vain as the Charter makes provision for greater co-operation with the international community in general. Even a blind man can see the midwife Shaytaaniyah in the delivery room where this Charter was conceived. In line with international communities ideals and values includes homosexuality, gender equality, lesbianism, powerful nations oppressing the poor, stealing the resources of poor nations, demanding subservience to puppets Governments, the so-called war on terror, wars that have killed millions of Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq without any accountability by the international community, renditions, brutal torture, the wholesale theft of Palestine, the destruction of Al-Aqsa- in short – the Charter wishes to very, very subtly, by accident or design promote the Deen of Dajjaal.

We , the Jamiatul-Ulama Gauteng are, Insha-Allah, not prepared to charter way our sense of humanity nor the soul of Islam nor the Imaan of our offspring.

To be continued, Insha-Allah.

Subject: Fwd: FW: comments: Draft SA Muslim Charter – Comments by Shaikh Yawar Baig Sahib

My dear Maulana

As salaamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

The main issue seems to me to first ask the question: Why do we need this charter?

South African Muslims have been living for generations, perfectly happily with people of other religious and ethnic groups. So why this sudden need of a charter?

Written documents have a life and identity of their own. They can and will be interpreted. They can and will be attacked and will have to be defended, thereby tying you up in even more knots. So one must ask, ‘Why do we need this charter? What is the goal we are aiming to reach by means of this charter? What is the benefit that the Muslims of South Africa (they are your primary constituents) will derive from this charter?’

Once these questions have been satisfactorily answered can we even begin to think about what should be in such a charter. Until then to talk about the charter is premature.

On another note, it may be a good question to ask (and look around to see) if any other community, ethnic or religious group in South Africa is writing charters to live by with respect to dealing with Muslims. If not, then one should ask why the Muslims feel this need?

We live in a world where the perpetrators of apartheid go scot free. Those committing mayhem and murder at will to the tune of numbers which have lost all semblance of meaning go unquestioned. The deaths of people in natural disasters make the headlines. But when ten times that number are murdered in the name of giving them freedom, it does not even merit two minutes silence.

If a charter must be written then let it be written for those who are committing such crimes to show them how to live in this world and to remind them that a day of reckoning will come for them when they will stand before their Creator and the one they murdered will ask for what crime he/she had been killed. Let them prepare to answer that question.

May Allah give us all the Tawfeeq to do what is pleasing to Him.

Was salaam


Re: Comments on the Draft SA Muslim Charter

I have studied the proposed charter and submit herewith my comments. I am sending this to everyone listed on the website to ensure that it is duly received by all.

I do not believe that the objective that motivated it has been stated transparently, and if it has, it indicates extreme confusion in the minds of those who are behind this.

The Charter of Medina was a treaty, for want of a better word. It stated duties and responsibilities between independent communities (Muslim and Jewish primarily) living together. It laid down the code of conduct of different independent groups and implied in this is a termination of the agreement should either group violate its terms. It was done from a position of authority, a position of power which would ensure that the agreement could be enforced, and that violation of it would meet with severe consequences. It bound people.

This proposed charter does not qualify to be mentioned in the same breath as the Medina Charter. We are subjects of a state, and bound by its rulings. Everything we do or say is irrelevant because it must be sanctioned by those we are subject to. A charter, to be truly inspired by the Medina Charter, must reflect the intentions of free people and this we are not. Our first step must be to form a charter to achieve true freedom.

Of great concern is the fact that a charter such as this could be used in the future to misguide Muslims. Actions could be taken with claims that it was “sanctioned by the Charter” or “in keeping with the charter”. The charter could be used as a substitute for our real charter, the Quraan and Hadith, and in time, the Quraan and Hadith may be ignored completely.

The true Muslim already has the best possible charter, we do not need another. Anyone who wants to understand Islam or understand us with a view to interacting with us should look no further than the Quraan and the Hadith.

I shall go through some of my concerns.


This charter aims to outline the essential principles of Islam which will contribute to a better understanding of the Muslim community, as well as lay the foundation for its interaction with the broader South African society.”

So, what new does this Charter add? Is the purpose of this charter to teach others about Islam? This was not the purpose of the Medina Charter.

If the purpose is to propagate Islam, then that should be done and needs no “charter”. This Charter falls grossly short in explaining Islam so cannot be used for that purpose. It therefore misrepresents the essential principles of Islam since our first obligation is to free ourselves from subjugation to man. We cannot pick and choose what constitutes Islam or what constitute its essential principles. There are millions of books on the subject, and one could refer people to IPCI.

However, there are contradictions in this document that should make any descent Muslim extremely wary.

The starting point of every Muslim is the Quraan and Hadith. Should we make our own laws, and get others to follow us, we become no different from the Rabbis and monks that Allah SWT teaches us about in the Quraan. The Jews and Christians worshipped their rabbis and monks by following them, instead of following the true teachings of Allah.

Al Qur’aan Surat-at tauba, 9:31

They (i.e. Jews and Christians) have taken as lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah) their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah, Mary’s Son, when they were bidden to worship only One God (Allah). None has the right to be worshipped except Him. Be He glorified from all they ascribe as partners unto Him.

Should anyone attempt to do the same through a “charter”, the effect is no different and every Muslim should oppose this.

We may not make any ruling or guide that is contrary to Allah’s teaching.


“The Muslim presence in South Africa demands a framework of citizenship based on justice, equality of rights, and recognition of Muslims as a religious community in its own right.”

This is openly stating that Muslims ARE a separate group, and a distinct one at that, and that we plead (from a position of absolute weakness) to be recognized as such, and hence we will be treated differently in certain matters, such as our refusal to accept the Constitution as the supreme law while living within the territory. This is not compatible with a single status of citizenry. In fact, a completely common citizenship negates the possibility of a truly separate Muslim identity. We are only allowed that semblance of an identity which the SA law sanctions, an entity defined by man, not Allah.

If the objective of the Charter is to declare our independence, just as the Medina Charter was a manifestation of their autonomy, then good luck. No one will buy it. But I do not think this is at all its objective. On the contrary, it seems to be declaring out total capitulation and subjugation to the SA constitution. That is not Islam.

“Article 3 – Sanctity of Life

We uphold the sanctity of life irrespective of race, religion or ethnic orientation.”

This seems to parrot the SA Constitution. Allah does not uphold sanctity of life “irrespective”. The death penalty applies. Period. No charter that attempts to change this fact can be condoned by true Muslims.

There is something that needs to be understood. A Parliament that makes its own laws is forbidden in Islam. To obey its laws is shirk. A Muslim may only obey the law of Allah (SWT). If he is forced to live in dar-al harb, he complies with the minimum requirements of the laws under duress, and avoids them as far as possible, such as resolving disputes privately and not using the courts which apply man-made laws.

The constitution insists that it is the supreme law of the land

Chapter 1 part 2 Supremacy of the Constitution.

“This Constitutuion is the supreme law of the Republic”.

There is no exception!

This charter is making it a fard that a Muslim will obey the constitution (making him a proclaimed kafir) by declaring

“Article 13

We recognize the laws of the country in which we live …”

Does “recognize” mean “noting but not implementing”, or does it mean “formally accepting”. I suspect the latter as this parrots Isreal’s demand to be “recognized”.A Muslim cannot do this “…without compromising our religious principles.”

We cannot “recognize” the Constitution and

“Article 2

…worship no-one else except the Almighty Allah and demonstrate this consistently in all our daily actions”

at the same time. We either recognize and adopt the constitution and abandon tauhid or follow tauhid and reject the supremacy of the constitution. We cannot do both at the same time.

“Article 7

The Muslim is bound by the testimony that: “There is no deity but Allah alone and that Muhammad (s) is the final Messenger of Allah” and not by any geographic, national, ethnic or racial considerations.”

This sounds pure nonsense when read together with the title of “Draft SA Muslim Charter”, Inherent in this title is the identification and recognition of the division of the world into tiny Bantustans, with SA being one of them. The Muslim only recognizes Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb, the third, the place of safety, in the modern era is pure fiction to justify our submission to non-Muslim forces. A Muslim is always the target of the anti-Islam forces, (Allah AWT has made this abundantly clear) the same forces that control the economies of the major part of the world and who are the driving forces behind the formation of a single world government. We can never be truly “in safety” unless we abandon Islam. We abandon Islam when we abandon Tauhid, ie recognizing and submitting to man made laws created by a Parliament.

There is no separate entity called the SA Muslim. This is a dangerous fabrication which serves to entrench division within the ummah, not unite us. There is only one Muslim ummah. We cannot have a “Draft SA Muslim Charter” and not be bound by “geographic consideration” at the same time.

Article 16

We shall reinforce the family as the key social unit of society and promote harmonious familial relations and values

How, may I ask, is this possible for Muslims in South Africa? There is no sanctity of the family under SA law. The State President (ie the government) is the upper guardian (read head) of every minor in terms of SA law. The child must obey the SA law above the guidance of the true head of the family (the father). A “family” as the building block of society is based on the values of that family being independent and inviolate. It is not a “physical entity” as much as a “value based entity”.

Making such proclamations suggest ignorance or intent to deceive, neither of which inspires any confidence in the reader.

How do we “reinforce” this? By disobeying the law and insisting on the father being the head of the family? Is this Charter a declaration of war against the law of this country? I do not think so. So this statement is meaningless and irrelevant at the least, but highly misleading as it cannot be put into practice. What is the point of making a big issue about “the family as the key social unit” if the law that applies within it is the man-made SA law, and this body of laws sanctions promiscuity, abortion, and facilitates divorces?

Article 19

We shall honour all covenants.

What covenants are we talking about and who is “we”? We are not competent under SA law to enter into any covenant that is contrary to the law or not sanctioned by the government. Under such restrictions, what is the point of making this claim, unless the objective is to try and bind signatories of this charter to obeying the tenets of SA law, which, if we did, would amount to a formal declaration of abandoning Islam by abandoning tauheed.

We, as a distinct community, are not competent to enter into any relevant international covenant. That is the sole prerogative of the government. The Muslim community is part of the citizenry of this country. We are not independent in any way or form.

All private agreements are private affairs. No one can make a pledge on behalf of the entire ummah. If anyone did, they are obliged to compensate every person who lodges a claim because of being disadvantaged by a Muslim failing to honour his private covenant. Who will bear this cost and responsibility? If this promise is not intended, that what is the point of this pledge?

We return to the relevant questions, who is “we”, what covenants are we talking about, what is meant by these being “honoured”, who will ensure that they are and who will pay compensation in the case of default.

Without clear answers to these questions, this statement is irrelevant. As subjects of the SA government, we are judged by its laws, and enforcement of contracts done on its terms and conditions. What we say is irrelevant. The charter cannot be used by anyone against anyone in a court of law. This claim is meaningless.

It only has merit if it is a claim made by free people, so that this claim may be held against them should the need arise.

Article 22

We acknowledge the necessity to reduce carbon foot print

Any scientist with half a functioning neuron will confirm that the solar system undergoes cycles of heating and cooling, and we are in a normal “warm going into a cool cycle”. It is the sun that dictates the planetary temperature, not the level of carbon in the atmosphere. All the planets in our solar system are experiencing a normal cyclical rise in temperature, not ours alone.

The carbon lie is bogus and the criminally lying “scientists” who falsified data to fabricate a case of global warming due to carbon levels in the atmosphere were exposed when their e-mails were accessed and disclosed publicly.

No informed person accepts carbon as a cause of the current transient rise in the temperature of the Earth. Volcanoes put out more carbon that all man made output many times over with no effect of planetary temperature.

The bogus carbon threat was created to justify new taxes. No, I do not “acknowledge the necessity to reduce carbon foot print” and the Muslim community must not proclaim its sheep-like slavery to western indoctrination by proclaiming itself a champion of this lie.

What purpose can this document really serve? May be the answer lay here


“…and their integration into South African society,”

Muslims can never integrate into a non-Muslim society. Why? Because our Nabbi SAW told us not to … for reasons inspired by the Almighty.

Is this the nuts and bolts of this exercise; to clandestinely promote Muslims abandoning Islam and becoming one with a jahiliyya society, and this done through the “noble” objective of being truthful by keeping ones covenant with this document?

This project raises more questions than I care to think about. It does nothing constructive for Islam. It is misleading and contradictory in its stated objectives and stated principles.

It appears to abuse the Medina Charter by mentioning it together with this document. They are as different as chalk and cheese both in background and objective.

We as Muslims do not need something like this. I will go further and say we should oppose this with all our might and vigor.

Is this charter in response to the “war of terror” being waged against Muslims around the world? Is its objective to show that the Muslims of this geographical area are firmly behind those spearheading these wars and that we must not be seen as a threat in any way?

No Muslim would go down this path. We are at war with these enemies of Islam just as they are at war with us and this statement that I make is in keeping with that made in the Charter of Medina. We do not accept what is being done to our brothers and sisters and we do not abandon them for our temporal benefit.

Some things are best left unsaid until the time is right for them to be proclaimed. That a Muslim cannot accept the Constitution and still remain a Muslim must not be advertised and create unnecessary problems. We need not bring in the open our total support for our mujahideen around the world. Similarly, we must not follow those who deceive Muslims into formally adopting practices of shirk.

I get a strong feeling that those creating this document are what has become known as “modernist” whereby we abandon Allah’s teachings in favor of our own fanciful creations and within these “creations” we justify our “integration” with jahiliyya.

I do not support this document.

I do not believe its initiators are transparent in their objective.

I find it offensive to the true teachings of Islam.

Dr Nassim Kamdar.

Issued by: Jamiatul Ulama Gauteng

SANHA thrives on the representation and support of the mainstream theological bodies and professional organisations across South Africa. Membership on SANHA is restricted to credible and bonafide Muslim organisations.
SANHA´s membership comprises of leading Muslim Theological bodies and reputable, professional Muslim organizations. It is a founder member of the World Halaal Council and has links with certifying bodies across Africa as well as globally.

Membership is categorised into the formal and Associate categories. Formal membership requires active participation and representation on the board whilst Associate membership is of an honorary nature.

The following are formal members of SANHA

SANHA Members

* Association of Lawyers and Accountants for Islamic Law [AMAL]
* Central Islamic Trust
* Council of Ulama, Eastern Cape
* Crescent of Hope SA
* Darul Ihsan Islamic Services Centre
* Darul Waqaf Islamic Trust
* Durban Muslim Traders Association
* Gauteng Halaal Traders Association
* Islamic Medical Association
* Jamiatul Ulama (South Africa)
* Jamiatul Ulama, Western Cape
* Majlisud Da’wah wal Islaah
* Minara Chamber of Commerce
* Northern Cape Halaal Board
* South African Muslim Restaurants Association



Please forward the list of unanswered questions on the Muslimality site to these formal members of SANHA

In yet another attempt by the “gender mujaahidaat brigade”, I managed to come across a somewhat dismal article regarding the trials and tribulations of South African “women of the north”. Prior to reading this article penned furiously by an extremely angry, yet strong-willed muslimah, I felt the need to take a step back and analyse the reasoning behind pursuing a crusade in the name of Islamic gender equality.

These Muslim feminists fighting their desktop gender jihads, our very own mujaahidaat as I like to call them, never fail to surprise an individual like myself. There is always something waiting in the wings; something lurking in the next blog or twitter update; or even worse, a hadith or Aayah which the gender mujaahidah genuinely believes needs immediate reinterpretation so as to free herself from the expletives of ‘frightened and injured male egos’.

Unfortunately for me, I have always had a weakness for searching for the truth and in doing so, I cannot ever truly say that my mind has never been clouded by judgment or anger but rather, I can safely say that most of the time its clouded by the truth and I think I like it that way!

In any event, I had to admit that what these Muslim women were initially saying made a little sense to my ignorant mind. That’s what ignorance does to you by the way. It does not allow your mind to think, to expand or to consume the greatness that is Islam. The result is a claustrophobic mind hanging on so tightly to a preconceived notion that often results in destructive behaviour. The same goes for prejudices we tend to harbour. It does not matter whether its racial, religious or gender-based prejudice. Prejudice is prejudice and prejudice clouds your judgment.

Herein lies my problem. The truth is out there but its the journey towards the truth that really unsettles most people. You have to forsake everything you believe in in order to grasp on to the truth of Islam. And you have to like it (if you’re a Muslim). That is the test for a Muslim. That is the sacrifice of a Muslim.

In all fairness, the Muslim feminists had what they may have genuinely thought to be a solid foolproof argument. And they could have sold it pretty convincingly to the unsuspecting public if they had gone about it in a proper manner. In choosing to state rather than debate, they faulted greatly. It is one thing putting forth an idea for discussion and debate but it is quite another when you go looking for ‘proof’ to fuel your argument and then present this ‘proof’ to the public leaving aside pertinent and detailed explanations and differing rulings and views.

To then profess scholarship under the banner of some university or Darul Uloom degree is a slap in the face for those who truly seek the truth beyond a predisposition or preconceived notion. It is insulting to those who have taken the time to learn, understand and accept the science of Islam, the importance of hierarchy and the danger which lies in allowing anything but the truth to cloud your judgment.

I had forsaken my preconceived ideas, my preconceived notions, my prejudices. I had willed myself to learn and I had made myself understand the science behind a ruling which did not allow a woman to attend the Masjid. I had understood and I had accepted for that is the life of a believing Muslim, that is the life of a true Muslimah. For those women who believe that “Muslim women will not sit back and accept a status quo that usurps their right to participation in religious life,” I urge you to empower yourself with education, true education in line with the teachings and true spirit of Islam. Education which does not promote hostility towards male counterparts but education which helps a true Muslimah submit to the will of Allah Ta’ala.

It is quite saddening when Muslim women wish to promote a feminist ideology through Islam and for Islam. This is not to say that Islam harbours any anti-feminist sentiments but rather, that where women are concerned, Islam has only always been about protecting the modesty of a woman.

It is true that the history of feminism finds its roots in westernism so many of its key aspects and beliefs simply conflict with the essence of women in Islam. The ideas being preached to Muslim women by Muslim feminists is really unnerving, simply because ‘Muslim feminism’ finds itself undefinable and too complex given the nature of the followers of this ideology and its varying degrees.

Many women in South Africa, especially in the north of South Africa, chose to stay away from attending the various Eid Gah venues as this, according to Islam, was what was expected of them. When the Muslim feminist mujaahidaat began their desktop gender jihads in South Africa during the time of Eid-ul-Fitr 2010, it was unfortunate that much of the Islamic rulings and information reaching the public was one-sided. This was expected since the Muslim feminists could not and would not explain the viewpoint of true and authentic scholars of Islam since:

  1. The scholars are men and would therefore only harbour misogynistic views
  2. The scholars kept this information away form the public, especially women, and therefore it was the duty of the Muslim feminists to expose these scholars
  3. The scholars held true to their beliefs since they could explain why and how they reached this conclusion using authentic and traditional scholarly works
  4. The scholars would not change their misogynistic views and this was not acceptable
  5. The Muslim feminists had in their possession clear-cut hadeeth as well as various view points from other Ulama around the world
  6. The Muslim feminists simply did not need to include the view held by any Fuqaaha which was contrary to their message

A number of refutations were published by various organisations and according to my knowledge, those Muslim feminists who were guilty of gross misrepresentation of facts and non-disclosure never made any attempt to retract their statements. This should have been highly unacceptable in any community, let alone a Muslim one. I, for one, was surprised that nobody ever called Quraysha Ismail Sooliman a blatant liar because that certainly was what she was to me. In omitting certain sections of the book she was translating or had translated, she managed to conveniently prove her point but she attributed statements to the writer of the book, Allaamah Zafar Ahmed Thanvi rahimahullah, which he never made. You can sugar-coat that all you like, but her article was written with the express intent to further her own agenda and, of course, after the ‘error’ was pointed out to her, she never retracted her statements!

The ruling regarding women attending the Eid Gah or the Masjid is clear. It is not permissible for a woman to leave her home in order to pray. This ruling has been discussed in detail, therefore I will not go into the intricacies of the ruling. The main reason for this ruling is due to ‘fitnah’ or ‘chaos’ or translated more loosely as ‘wrong or the possibility of wrong occuring’. No person can deny the existence of fitnah and so, due to the danger in ladies leaving their homes, the original permissibility which was granted to ladies going out for any kind of salaah at whatever time has been abrogated.

If only we lived in a perfect world where everybody did as they were told and if they truly committed acts which were better for them, we would be free of this current conflict. Sadly, this is not to be. Due to the fierce and raging battle, the Muslim feminists have proceeded to claim the right awarded to them by Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam whilst not understanding the wisdom of his words to act on that which was better for them. It is only when we live with prejudice and ignorance, do we run about, ranting on like sweet-deprived children, wanting what is due to us without seeing the benefit and wisdom behind the rulings of our knowledgeable A’immah. It is only when we remain steadfast in not wanting to understand that we continue to infect others around us with our half-truths and diseased ignorance.

When we refuse to bend our minds, perceptions and ideologies to a purer truth, we remain ensconced by a darkness no light will ever erase. It is with this understanding of the truth that a large majority of women in South Africa have remain steadfast in their belief of true Islam that the place for Ibaadat, the best place to worship Allah is in the innermost recesses of their homes. What kind of a Muslimah forsakes the words of her beloved Nabi sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam and forsakes what is better for something of a lesser value?

Of course there is not much of a fuss in staying at home and reading salaah. Surely salaah that is to be read in the innermost recess of one’s home requires no preparation for going out to the Masjid, no fanfare, no frills; it is just you and your Lord. Therefore for the woman who claims to be wanting to attend the Masjid in order to gain a higher spirituality with, a greater nearness and connection to Allah Ta’ala must surely be sorely mistaken because in remembering Allah Ta’ala and connecting with Him in the innermost recess of your home simply through salaah is an attribute afforded only to women. Therefore, I ask you, dear Muslim feminist sister, dear gender mujaahidaah, why exactly are you dragging your sisters out of their homes, out of the innermost recesses of their Ibaadat, out of their closeness, privacy and nearness to Allah Ta’ala, endangering their modesty in a world rampant with fitnah, luring them from the best place for their salaah?

Another issue I would like to point out is the climbing of the ‘gender-equality’ ladder. Where does it all stop? Sure, today it’s ladies at the Eid Gah but tomorrow? Ladies at the Masaajid? Then what? Ladies reading side by side with men? And then? Ladies leading mixed-congregations in prayer? Ladies giving adhaan? Lecturing the Jumu’ah bayaan? Will the Muslim feminists ever be truly content? Or is the idea of an Islam where a man is an Imaam, a lecturer, a masjid-goer too unbearable for the gender desktop mujaahidaat?

In the field of gender jihad, the goal posts do not ever remain fixed, they are always changing. If it’s this today, rest assured that there will always be something else tomorrow. When asked whether I thought there was a place for a kind of feminism in Islam a very long time ago, I battled an inner turmoil whilst seeking the most appropriate and correct answer. I understand it now. Islam has always been all for women’s rights, Islam has always been protective of the believing women, Islam has always had the best solutions for the female servants of Allah Ta’ala. Within itself, Islam has its own brand of feminist ideology. It is an ideology which is difficult to grasp, accept and understand by the current brand of feminists, Muslim or otherwise simply because the current feminist ideologies rely too heavily on western influence.

It is safe to say that until our feminist mujaahidaat can see it fit to become totally accepting of Islamic principles, values and ideologies and forsake western influence in matters of religion, their cause is nothing more than a means for Muslim women to regress back to the very state for which Islam was meant to save them.

Islam does not require change, Islam changes us.

The Say What? column featured on Muslimality is meant to inspire, teach, engage debate or simply make you laugh. This column revolves around a variety of issues relating to Muslims in South Africa and Muslims around the world.

Today’s Say What? column is written in response to the article, ‘They Don’t Have Prayer: The Media and Eid for Muslim Women in South Africa’

Find it here:


On Thursday, the 25th November 2010, a Muslim sister interviewed a non-Muslim man on the so-called Radio “islam”. We feel embarrassed to quote in verbatim parts of the shameless discussion on Aids which was forwarded by many outraged Muslims to us. We do so with the greatest of reluctance. Nothing is quoted out of context. The entire recording could be obtained from the Radio station. Hereby follows some snippets of the conversation:

Non-Muslim: “And anal sex, anal sex, you also get it, and oral sex you can also get it. So under sexual intercourse, there are three types: It’s vaginal, it’s anal and it’s oral.”

Radio Shaytaan Muslim sister: “O.K.”

Non-Muslim: “But in actual fact we should be issuing condoms after we have demonstrated but sometimes we just  assume that people they now know how to use condoms. We have got some equipment that look like the man male organ and we demonstrate how to use condoms. You need to expel the air completely. If there is air the condom will make a bubble in front in the tip of the penis, and eventually the condom will burst so I am not saying the condoms are not safe. The condoms are 100% safe but depending on how you use them…”

Radio Shaytaan Muslim sister: “What do you do if in case this happens if you if you realize that the condom must have torn or something, what is immediate what must the person do immediately?”

Non-Muslim man: “You need to, both of you, woman and the man, need to go to the clinic or the hospital and explain to the doctor that the condom burst.”


Nabi Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam said that shame is half of Imaan. Every Muslim will be shocked and disgusted at the above shameless discussion which a Muslim sister conducted on air under the guise of educating the Muslims about AIDS.

Radio “islam” claims that they are the only truly Islamic Radio in the World. Ask yourself: “Is the above shameless conversation consistent with the Haya and modesty which true Islam teaches?”

There was a time where the Ulama of the same Radio station promised that they would never allow women to broadcast their voices. Today, they encourage our sisters to discuss shameless topics with non-Muslim men. They could not find a single male to conduct this shameless interview. No wonder the Ulama are losing all respect. Shaytaan has truly misled them. “And Shaytaan instructs you to be shameless.” (Surah Baqarah. V.268). It is only at the time of Maut that they will realize how Shaytaan duped them and how they displeased Allah Ta’ala.

Radio “islam” wins prizes from the Americans and non-Muslim companies. They are congratulated by Jews such as Rothschild. Why? Because the Non-Muslims know that the harm of the shameless Radio is much more than any true Islamic benefits.

The Jamiat-ul-Ulama based in Fordsburg fully blesses the operations of the Radio Station. They must take full responsibility for this evil and revolting interview which is not an isolated case.

We call upon all the sincere Ulama, especially those who conduct programs on Radio Shaytaan to open their eyes and to publicly distance themselves from this evil Station. Their presence is misleading the Ummah who feel that since Moulana so and so comes on air, everything must be fine. What answer will these Ulama give if Nabi Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam asks them on the Day of Qiyamah why they remained silent when such shameless programs were aired?



“Do not follow in the footsteps of Shaitaan. Verily, he is your

open enemy. Verily, he instructs you with evil and (filthy acts of)

immorality, and that you fabricate about Allah what you know not.”


‘As-Soo’ (evil) andAl-Fahsha’ (filthy acts of immorality), are salient attributes of kufr and Satanism. When ‘Muslims’ have stooped to the sub-baboon level to put on  public exhibit a ‘Muslim’ woman to  discuss filthy acts of sex with a non-Muslim male, to be broadcast to all and sundry, then we know that the time is not distant for the materialization of Rasulullah’s prediction that  men and women will indulge in adultery and fornication like dogs and asses in public streets in full view of passing pedestrians, and no one will have the courage to even say: Do your deed around the corner out of public view.

When a ‘Muslim’ woman can in public have  the degree of shamelessness to interview a non-Muslim man on a topic which perhaps a modest, shameful wife of Taqwa will not venture to broach with her husband in the privacy of the bedroom, then the prevalence of kufr – real kufr – on a large-scale in the Muslim community is confirmed.

It is sickening and most disgusting to contemplate that this vile, kaafir Radio Porno-Shaitaan is the voice of the NNB Jamiat (NO NAME BRAND JAMIAT OF FORDSBURG), and these vile, miserable vermin masquerading as ‘ulama’ have allowed, in fact commanded, a ‘Muslim’ woman to participate in a porno-programme which puts Iblees Laeen to shame. The filth and immorality in which the ‘Muslim’ woman had indulged in her public exhibition is the immoral vomit of the NNB Jamiat which she spewed out on air, contaminating the pure air waves which Allah Ta’ala has created for the benefit of mankind.

These devil molvis of the NNB Jamiat, undoubtedly, are aware of the Islamic methodology when teaching sex masaa-il (haidh, nifaas, etc.) to girls. Despite it being Waajib for the girls to learn these issues, Hadhdrat Maulana Ashraf Ali (rahmatullah alayh) states in Beheshti Zewer:

“If the teacher happens to be a male, then he should not teach these masaa-ol (to the girls). He should either acquire the services of his wife to explain these issues, or (failing this), instruct the (female) pupils to study these masaa-il afterwards by themselves. If the pupils are young boys, then too, he (the teacher) should not teach them these masaa-il. He should only advise them to study these masaa-il at some time in the future.”

But, today we find the NNB Jamiat’s Radio Porno-Shaitaan putting ‘Muslim’ females on public exhibition to discuss filthy, zina acts with non-Muslim males. Every vestige of Imaani Haya has been jettisoned. A ‘Muslim’ woman who was able to muster up the audacity to publicly discuss explicit zina acts of the filthiest kind with a non-Muslim male, cannever be a Muslim. This woman had long ago destroyed her Imaan.  Her act of immoral shamelessness excreted out on the NNB’s Porno-Shaitaan Radio, was her act of self-exposure of her hidden kufr. She had by her abominable, unnatural, immoral zina talk so flagrantly spewed out over the holy airwaves of Allah Azza Wa Jal, simply advertised her hidden kufr in which the NNB Jamiatush Shayaateen had tutored her.


There was a time, some years, ago when these followers of Shaitaan were still a shadow of the  Old Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal, that Molvi Dhorat  emphatically asserted  their  Shar’i stance as follows:  “In order for Radio Islam to adhere to your (i.e. Yield’s) proposal, as outlined, namely presenting female hosts on Radio Islam, Radio Islam would of necessity be required to act in contravention of the Code of Conduct … This is so because Radio Islam would broadcast material in a manner which is offensive to the religious convictions and feelings of the overwhelming majority of Muslims who follow the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet (Peace be upon him.  …  Any suggestion to act contrary to the fundamental tenets of Islam will not be acceptable to Radio Islam. Radio Islam is not apologetic about its Islamic principles and will do everything in its power to uphold and further the interests of the overwhelming majority of the Muslim community.

In a pamphlet stating its intention of NOT allowing females to broadcast, the Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal, stated: “Moreover, modesty is the essence relating to the prohibition of intermingling of sexes and hijaab. The Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal has no authority to effect any variation to these decrees.”

But today, in the philosophy of the NNB Jamiat or Jamiatush Shayaateen, the concept of ‘modesty’ permits ‘Muslim women to publicly, over the air discuss lewd, immoral filthy, zina issues of satanic abomination with non-Muslim males. The elimination of Imaan follows in the wake of the elimination of Haya, for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Haya is a Branch of Imaan.”

The Qur’aan Majeed commands even the noble Wives of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to adopt harsh and abrupt tones when the need developed to explain Shar’i masaa-il to even the Sahaabah:  “Do not make alluring (your) speech, (for if you do so), then he in whose heart there is the disease (of carnal lust) will desire.” (Surah Ahzaab)

But today we find followers of Shaitaan masquerading as ‘molvis’ and proclaiming themselves to be Ulama, instructing  ‘Muslim’ women to excrete immoral filth from their mouths over the bounty of airwaves by discussing immoral rot with non-Muslim men.  Indeed, this entire progeny of Shaitaan will hang upside in Jahannum. They will be dragged naked on their faces and cast into the blazing pits of Hell to roast for having advertised immoral filth in the name of Islam. These shaitaani molvis who promote and condone the immoral filth, will have to circumambulate their entrails in Jahannum.

In the early stages when this Devil’s Porno-Radio had deceived the Muslim community by donning an Islamic façade, the NNB Jamiat’s, Molvi Dhorat stated:

“It is true that there are no female presenters that host any particular programme on Radio Islam. The reason for this is two-fold:

i) This is in accordance with Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the prophet (peace be upon him), as will be fully shown.

ii) It is in accordance with the role of woman from an Islamic perspective against intermingling of sexes in preserving the modesty of both men and women. ….. About the voice of a  woman the following is stated in the Quran:  “…and do not speak in soft alluring tones, for then, he in whose heart there is a disease, will lust.” (Surah Ahzaab, aayat 33).

Based on the above Quranic aayat as well as other clear indications of the Sunnah and the jurists of Islam, it is unanimous that the female voice is also subject to the laws of intermingling of sexes and to be concealed. The Jurists book Shaami which is one of the authoritative books of Islamic law states: ‘And, her voice is also satr (to be concealed) according to the most authentic view.”

What has happened to all these holy pronouncements of the NNB Jamiat? Now the voice of woman has become lawful for prostitution. The ‘ulama’-e-soo (vile, abominable molvis of the NNB Jamiat) have surpassed the ulama-e-soo’ of Bani Israeel. The Ulama-e-Soo of Bani Israeel did not stoop the level of the NNB Jamiat molvis who are scraping the very bottom of the barrel of  soo’ and fahsha’.  The Mujlisul Ulama’s book, Betrayal of IslamThe Debacle of Radio Shaitaan explains the haraam somersault of the NNB Jamiat’s molvis. This booklet is available. Write for a copy.

By instructing the ‘Muslim’ woman to perpetrate flagrant zina with the non-Muslim man with her voice, mind and heart, the NNB Jamiat molvis should understand that in the history of Islam they are the very first Shayaateenul Ins (Human Devils) who have opened the door wide for  the commission of actual zina in public. They will yet rue the day they were born on earth.  We register our complaint in the Divine Court.


Issued by: The Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa


Muslimality comment:

Muslimality has contacted Radio Islam and audio copies of this show are available at a cost of R40.00. Please note that Muslimality is not affiliated to any organisation, Mujlisul Ulama or otherwise. Should the supporters, board members or management of Radio Islam feel that this article is an unfair representation of the goings-on at Radio Islam, we cordially extend an open invitation to substantiate the radio’s conduct with valid, authentic Shar’i proof. We have also been informed on numerous occasions that ‘many senior muftis’ have given the fatwa that it is fine for women to be on Radio Islam, recording adverts and voice-overs, presenting shows, calling in and talking unnecessarily with Ulama etc. This article serves as an open request and invitation to the management of Radio Islam to kindly forward us the official fatawa of the aforementioned muftis substantiated with valid, authentic academic proof.

We also request all those who feel Radio Islam has been treated unfairly in this regard to kindly desist from vile and abusive comments and emails and simply provide us with simple, academic proof.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

1.      Allah Ta’ala mentions in the Noble Quran:

قل لا يعلم من في السماوات والأرض الغيب إلا الله وما يشعرون أيان يبعثون (النمل65)

Say no one in the heavens and earth knows the unseen except Allah. (Naml 65)


إن الله عنده علم الساعة وينزل الغيث ويعلم ما في الأرحام وما تدري نفس ماذا تكسب غدا وما تدري نفس بأي أرض تموت إن الله عليم خبير (لقمن34)

Surely, it is only Allah who has knowledge of the Hour; and He sends down the rain, and He knows what is in the wombs. No one knows what he will earn tomorrow, and no one knows in which land he will die. Surely, Allah is All Knowing, All Aware. (Luqman 34)



يقولون لئن رجعنا إلى المدينة ليخرجن الأعز منها الأذل ولله العزة ولرسوله وللمؤمنين ولكن المنافقين لا يعلمون (المنفقون8)

They say if we return to Madina the more honourable will remove the lower class.

تفسير ابن كثير – (ج 4 / ص 334)دار المفيد

طريق أخرى عن زيد: قال الإمام أحمد، رحمه الله، حدثنا يحيى بن آدم، ويحيى بن أبي بُكَير (7) قال: حدثنا إسرائيل، عن أبي إسحاق قال: سمعت زيد بن أرقم -وقال ابن أبي بُكَير (8) عن زيد بن أرقم-قال: خرجت مع عمي في غزاة، فسمعت عبد الله بن أبي بن سلول يقول لأصحابه: لا تنفقوا على من عند رسول الله، ولئن رجعنا إلى المدينة ليخرجن الأعز منها الأذل. فذكرت ذلك لعمي فذكره عمي لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأرسل إلي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فحدثته فأرسل إلى عبد الله بن أبي بن سلول وأصحابه فحلفوا ما قالوا: فكَذبني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وصَدَّقه، فأصابني هَمٌ لم يصبني مثله قط، وجلست في البيت، فقال عمي: ما أردت إلا أن كذبك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ومقتك. قال: حتى أنزل الله: { إِذَا جَاءَكَ الْمُنَافِقُونَ} قال: فبعث إليَّ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقرأها رسول الله على، ثم قال: “إن الله قد صدقك” (9)

Sayyiduna Zaid ibn Arqam رضي الله تعالى عنهrelates that he went out on battle with Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم. During the journey he heard Ibn Ubayy say to his companions “do not spend on the companions of the messenger and if we return to Madina the more honourable will remove the lower class from Madina”. Sayyiduna Zaidرضي الله تعالى عنه related this to Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمsent for Ibn Ubayy and his friends and asked them regarding this. They took an oath that they did not say such a thing. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم accepted what they said and did not accept what I said. I became very disheartened and I just sat in my home until this verse was revealed. After this verse was revealed Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent for me and recited this verse to me. Thereafter Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم commented that Allah Ta’ala has confirmed what you have said. (Ibn Khathir 4/334)

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم knew the unseen and if Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم was omnipresent why did Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم not accept Sayyiduna Zaid رضي الله تعالى عنه’s statement the first time?

4.      Allah Ta’ala mentions:

يا أيها الذين آمنوا إن جاءكم فاسق بنبأ فتبينوا أن تصيبوا قوما بجهالة فتصبحوا على ما فعلتم نادمين (الحجرات6)

O you who believe, if a sinful person brings you a report, verify its correctness, lest you should harm a people out of ignorance, and then become remorseful on what you did. (Hujurat 6)


تفسير ابن كثير – (ج 4 / ص 187) دار المفيد

وقد ذكر كثير من المفسرين أن هذه الآية نزلت في الوليد بن عقبة بن أبي معيط، حين بعثه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم على صدقات بني المصطلق. وقد روي ذلك من طرق، ومن أحسنها ما رواه الإمام أحمد في مسنده من رواية ملك بني المصطلق، وهو الحارث بن ضِرَار، والد جُويرية (3) بنت الحارث أم المؤمنين، رضي الله تعالى عنها، قال الإمام أحمد:

حدثنا محمد بن سابق، حدثنا عيسى بن دينار، حدثني أبي أنه سمع الحارث بن ضرار الخزاعي يقول: قدمت على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فدعاني إلى الإسلام، فدخلت فيه وأقررت به، ودعاني إلى الزكاة فأقررت بها، وقلت: يا رسول الله، أرجع إليهم فأدعوهم إلى الإسلام وأداء الزكاة، فمن استجاب لي جمعت زكاته، ويُرسل إليَّ رسول الله رسولا لإبَّان كذا وكذا ليأتيك بما جمَعتُ من الزكاة. فلما جمع الحارث الزكاة ممن استجاب له، وبلغ الإبان الذي أراد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يبعث إليه، احتبس عليه الرسول فلم يأته، فظن الحارث أنه قد حدث فيه سُخْطة من الله ورسوله، فدعا بسَرَوات قومه، فقال لهم: إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كان وَقَّت لي وقتا يرسل إلي رسوله ليقبض ما كان عندي من الزكاة، وليس من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم الخُلْف، ولا أرى حبس رسوله إلا من سخطة كانت، فانطلقوا فنأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وبعث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم الوليد بن عقبة إلى الحارث ليقبض ما كان عنده مما جمع من الزكاة، فلما أن سار الوليد حتى بلغ بعض الطريق فَرَق -أي: خاف-فرجع فأتى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فقال: يا رسول الله، إن الحارث منعني الزكاة وأراد قتلي. فضرب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم البعث إلى الحارث. وأقبل الحارث بأصحابه حتى إذا استقبل البعث وفَصَل عن المدينة لقيهم الحارث، فقالوا: هذا الحارث، فلما غشيهم قال لهم: إلى من بُعثتم؟ قالوا: إليك. قال: ولم؟ قالوا: إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كان بعث إليك الوليد بن عقبة، فزعم أنك منعته الزكاة وأردت قتله. قال: لا والذي بعث محمدا بالحق ما رأيته بَتَّةً ولا أتاني. فلما دخل الحارث على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: “منعت الزكاة وأردت قتل رسولي؟” . قال: لا والذي بعثك بالحق ما رأيته ولا أتاني، وما أقبلت إلا حين احتبس علي رسول رسول الله (1) صلى الله عليه وسلم، خشيت أن يكون كانت سخطة من الله ورسوله. قال: فنزلت الحجرات: { يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنْ جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ } إلى قوله: { حكيم }


Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم had an appointment with the leader of the Banu Mustaliq tribe that he will send someone on a certain date to collect the zakah. On the appointed date no one arrived at the Banu Mustaliq tribe to receive the zakah from them, so they became worried that it should not be that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم is upset with them as Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمwill never go against his word. The leader of the Banu Mustaliq, Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنه, gathered his chiefs and noble people and decided that they will go and meet Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم. At the same time Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent Sayyiduna Walid رضي الله تعالى عنه to collect the zakah. On the way Sayyiduna Walid رضي الله تعالى عنه became scared so he returned and told Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم that the Banu Mustaliq refused to pay zakah and they intended to kill him. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent an army to go and meet with Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنه. On the way the met with Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنهand his people who were on their way to meet with Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم. Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنهenquired form them where they were going to. The army replied that they were on their way to combat with him. He asked the reason for this to which they replied that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent Sayyiduna Walid رضي الله تعالى عنه to collect the zakah from them to which they refused and intended to kill him. Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنهtook an oath that no one approached him and he did not even see Sayyiduna Walid رضي الله تعالى عنه. When Sayyiduna Harith رضي الله تعالى عنهcame to Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم, Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم told him “you refused to pay zakah and you intended to kill my messenger!” He replied that by that being who sent you with the truth he did not come to me nor did I even see him. It was only when we saw no messenger has come that we came to meet with you as we feared that it should not be that Allah and His messenger  is upset with us. It was then that these verses were revealed. (Ibn Khathir 4/187)

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم knew the unseen and if Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم was omnipresent what was the reason for sending an army against the Banu Mustaliq?


قل لا أملك لنفسي نفعا ولا ضرا إلا ما شاء الله ولو كنت أعلم الغيب لاستكثرت من الخير وما مسني السوء إن أنا إلا نذير وبشير لقوم يؤمنون (الاعراف188)

Say I have no power to benefit or harm myself except what Allah Ta’ala wishes. Had I known the unseen, I would have accumulated a lot of good, and no evil would have touched me. I am only a warner, and give glad tidings to those who believe. (A’raf 188)


مشكاة المصابيح – (ج 1 / ص 25 اثبات عذاب القبر)

عن زيد بن ثابت قال بينما النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في حائط لبني النجار على بغلة له ونحن معه إذ حادت به فكادت تلقيه وإذا أقبر ستة أو خمسة أو أربعة قال كذا كان يقول الجريري فقال : ” من يعرف أصحاب هذه الأقبر فقال رجل أنا قال فمتى مات هؤلاء قال ماتوا في الإشراك فقال إن هذه الأمة تبتلى في قبورها فلولا أن لا تدافنوا لدعوت الله أن يسمعكم من عذاب القبر الذي أسمع منه ثم أقبل علينا بوجهه فقال تعوذوا بالله من عذاب النار قالوا نعوذ بالله من عذاب النار فقال تعوذوا بالله من عذاب القبر قالوا نعوذ بالله من عذاب القبر قال تعوذوا بالله من الفتن ما ظهر منها وما بطن قالوا نعوذ بالله من الفتن ما ظهر منها وما بطن قال تعوذوا بالله من فتنة الدجال قالوا نعوذ بالله من فتنة الدجال ” . رواه مسلم


Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم passed by some grave and asked does anyone know who the inmates of these graves are? Someone from the gathering replied I know. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم asked when did they pass away? This person replied that it was during the time of ascribing partners to Allah Ta’ala that they passed away. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said verily this nation will be tested in their graves. Had it not been that you will not burry your deceased, I would have asked Allah Ta’ala to make you hear the punishment of the grave that which I hear. (Mishkat 25 with ref to Muslim)

Why did Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم have to ask if anybody knew the inmates of these graves and when did they pass away?


مشكاة المصابيح – (ج 1 / ص 40كتاب الطهارة)

وعن أبي هريرة أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أتى المقبرة فقال : ” السلام عليكم دار قوم مؤمنين وإنا إن شاء الله بكم لاحقون وددت أنا قد رأينا إخواننا قالوا أولسنا إخوانك يا رسول الله قال أنتم أصحابي وإخواننا الذين لم يأتوا بعد فقالوا كيف تعرف من لم يأت بعد من أمتك يا رسول الله فقال أرأيت لو أن رجلا له خيل غر محجلة بين ظهري خيل دهم بهم ألا يعرف خيله قالوا بلى يا رسول الله قال فإنهم يأتون غرا محجلين من الوضوء وأنا فرطهم على الحوض ” . رواه مسلم


Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said I would have loved to see my brothers. The honourable Sahaba رضوان الله تعالى عليهم replied are we not your brothers? Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم replied you are my companions. My brothers are those who have not yet come. Sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهم asked Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمhow will he recognize those who still have to come in his ummah. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم replied if a person has shining horses between dark horses will he not recognize his horses? The sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمreplied yes he will. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said my ummah will come shining due to the effects of wudhu and I will be their fore comer at the pond. (Mishkat 40 with ref to Muslim)

This narration shows that sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمdid not believe that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمknew the unseen. Also if Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم knew the unseen he should have replied that the life of barzakh has no limitations, I know them. Rather, Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said I will see them and recognize them by effects of wudhu.



مشكاة المصابيح – ( ص 487 حوض والشفاعة)

وعن سهل بن سعد قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” إني فرطكم على الحوض من مر علي شرب ومن شرب لم يظمأ أبدا ليردن علي أقوام أعرفهم ويعرفونني ثم يحال بيني وبينهم فأقول : إنهم مني . فيقال : إنك لا تدري ما أحدثوا بعدك ؟ فأقول : سحقا سحقا لمن غير بعدي ” . متفق عليه


On the Day of Judgment some people will come to Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم to drink from the pond. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم will recognize them and they will recognize Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم. They will be prevented from getting got drink. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم will say they are from me. The reply will be given the you do not know what they invented after you. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمwill then say go go far away with those you changed after me. (Mishkat 487 with ref to Bukhari and Muslim)

It is clear from this narration that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم does not know the unseen neither the barzakh life which has no limitations allow him to know what the people are doing after him.



مشكاة المصابيح – (ص 529 باب في المعراج)

وعن أبي هريرة قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” لقد رأيتني في الحجر وقريش تسألني عن مسراي فسألتني عن أشياء من بيت المقدس لم أثبتها فكربت كربا ما كربت مثله فرفعه الله لي أنظر إليه ما يسألوني عن شيء إلا أنبأتهم وقد رأيتني في جماعة من الأنبياء فإذا موسى قائم يصلي . فإذا رجل ضرب جعد كأنه أزد شنوءة وإذا عيسى قائم يصلي أقرب الناس به شبها عروة بن مسعود الثقفي فإذا إبراهيم قائم يصلي أشبه الناس به صاحبكم – يعني نفسه – فحانت الصلاة فأممتهم فلما فرغت من الصلاة قال لي قائل : يا محمد هذا مالك خازن النار فسلم عليه فالتفت إليه فبدأني بالسلام ” . رواه مسلم


When Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم returned from mi’raj the disbelievers became asking Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم about Bait al-Maqdis. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم mentions I become extremely worried, so Allah Ta’ala raised Bait al-Maqdis so that I could see it. The disbelievers did not ask anything except that I answered.  (Mishkat 529 with ref to Muslim)

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم had knowledge of the unseen and was omnipresent why did Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم become extremely worried? What was the need to raise Bait al-Maqdis.



صحيح البخاري – (ج 2 / ص 663)

4241 – حدثنا إسماعيل قال حدثني مالك عن عبد الرحمن بن القاسم عن أبيه عن عائشة رضي الله عنها زوج النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قالت

خرجنا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في بعض أسفاره حتى إذا كنا بالبيداء أو بذات الجيش انقطع عقد لي فأقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم على التماسه وأقام الناس معه وليسوا على ماء وليس معهم ماء فأتى الناس إلى أبي بكر الصديق فقالوا ألا ترى ما صنعت عائشة أقامت برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وبالناس وليسوا على ماء وليس معهم ماء فجاء أبو بكر ورسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم واضع رأسه على فخذي قد نام فقال حبست رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم والناس وليسوا على ماء وليس معهم ماء قالت عائشة فعاتبني أبو بكر وقال ما شاء الله أن يقول وجعل يطعنني بيده في خاصرتي ولا يمنعني من التحرك إلا مكان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم على فخذي فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى أصبح على غير ماء فأنزل الله آية التيمم فتيمموا فقال أسيد بن حضير ما هي بأول بركتكم يا آل أبي بكر قالت فبعثنا البعير الذي كنت عليه فإذا العقد تحته


During one journey Sayyidatuna Aisha رضي الله تعالى عنها lost her necklace. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم and the sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهم began to look for it. There was no water. All the sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهم were very perturbed. Later on the necklace was found under the camel.(Bukhari 2/663)

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم was omnipresent and had knowledge of the unseen what was the need of going out to look for it and all the sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمgetting so perturbed?



صحيح البخاري – (ج 2 / ص 706(

حدثني عبد الله بن محمد حدثنا يعقوب بن إبراهيم قال حدثني أبي عن صالح عن ابن شهاب أن أنسا قال

أنا أعلم الناس بالحجاب كان أبي بن كعب يسألني عنه أصبح رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عروسا بزينب بنت جحش وكان تزوجها بالمدينة فدعا الناس للطعام بعد ارتفاع النهار فجلس رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وجلس معه رجال بعد ما قام القوم حتى قام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فمشى ومشيت معه حتى بلغ باب حجرة عائشة ثم ظن أنهم خرجوا فرجعت معه فإذا هم جلوس مكانهم فرجع ورجعت معه الثانية حتى بلغ باب حجرة عائشة فرجع ورجعت معه فإذا هم قد قاموا فضرب بيني وبينه سترا وأنزل الحجاب


When Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم married Sayyidatuna Zainab رضي الله تعالى عنهاHe invited the sahabaرضي الله تعالى عنهم for meals. After eating, the sahabaرضي الله تعالى عنهم sat and were talking. They sat for a very long time. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمleft the gathering. After some time when Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم thought they had left he returned but the sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمhad still not returned. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم returned until he reached the room of Sayyidatuna Aisha رضي الله تعالى عنها and he thought that they left, Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم returned.

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمwas omnipresent and had knowledge of the unseen why did Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمthink that they left only to find that they had not left?


صحيح البخاري – (ج 2/ ص 568)

3690 – حدثنا موسى بن إسماعيل حدثنا إبراهيم أخبرنا ابن شهاب قال أخبرني عمر بن أسيد بن جارية الثقفي حليف بني زهرة وكان من أصحاب أبي هريرة عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه قال

بعث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عشرة عينا وأمر عليهم عاصم بن ثابت الأنصاري جد عاصم بن عمر بن الخطاب حتى إذا كانوا بالهدة بين عسفان ومكة ذكروا لحي من هذيل يقال لهم بنو لحيان فنفروا لهم بقريب من مائة رجل رام فاقتصوا آثارهم حتى وجدوا مأكلهم التمر في منزل نزلوه فقالوا تمر يثرب فاتبعوا آثارهم فلما حس بهم عاصم وأصحابه لجئوا إلى موضع فأحاط بهم القوم فقالوا لهم انزلوا فأعطوا بأيديكم ولكم العهد والميثاق أن لا نقتل منكم أحدا فقال عاصم بن ثابت أيها القوم أما أنا فلا أنزل في ذمة كافر ثم قال اللهم أخبر عنا نبيك صلى الله عليه وسلم فرموهم بالنبل فقتلوا عاصما ونزل إليهم ثلاثة نفر على العهد والميثاق منهم خبيب وزيد بن الدثنة ورجل آخر فلما استمكنوا منهم أطلقوا أوتار قسيهم فربطوهم بها قال الرجل الثالث هذا أول الغدر والله لا أصحبكم إن لي بهؤلاء أسوة يريد القتلى فجرروه وعالجوه فأبى أن يصحبهم فانطلق بخبيب وزيد بن الدثنة حتى باعوهما بعد وقعة بدر فابتاع بنو الحارث بن عامر بن نوفل خبيبا وكان خبيب هو قتل الحارث بن عامر يوم بدر فلبث خبيب عندهم أسيرا حتى أجمعوا قتله فاستعار من بعض بنات الحارث موسى يستحد بها فأعارته فدرج بني لها وهي غافلة حتى أتاه فوجدته مجلسه على فخذه والموسى بيده قالت ففزعت فزعة عرفها خبيب فقال أتخشين أن أقتله ما كنت لأفعل ذلك قالت والله ما رأيت أسيرا قط خيرا من خبيب والله لقد وجدته يوما يأكل قطفا من عنب في يده وإنه لموثق بالحديد وما بمكة من ثمرة وكانت تقول إنه لرزق رزقه الله خبيبا فلما خرجوا به من الحرم ليقتلوه في الحل قال لهم خبيب دعوني أصلي ركعتين فتركوه فركع ركعتين فقال والله لولا أن تحسبوا أن ما بي جزع لزدت ثم قال اللهم أحصهم عددا واقتلهم بددا ولا تبق منهم أحدا ثم أنشأ يقول فلست أبالي حين أقتل مسلما

على أي جنب كان لله مصرعي

وذلك في ذات الإله وإن يشأ

يبارك على أوصال شلو ممزع

ثم قام إليه أبو سروعة عقبة بن الحارث فقتله وكان خبيب هو سن لكل مسلم قتل صبرا الصلاة وأخبر أصحابه يوم أصيبوا خبرهم وبعث ناس من قريش إلى عاصم بن ثابت حين حدثوا أنه قتل أن يؤتوا بشيء منه يعرف وكان قتل رجلا عظيما من عظمائهم فبعث الله لعاصم مثل الظلة من الدبر فحمته من رسلهم فلم يقدروا أن يقطعوا منه شيئا

وقال كعب بن مالك ذكروا مرارة بن الربيع العمري وهلال بن أمية الواقفي رجلين صالحين قد شهدا بدرا


Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم once sent out a small army consisting of ten sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهم. Two hundred people from the enemy surrounded them. The leader of the sahaba, Sayyiduna Asim رضي الله تعالى عنه,made dua O Allah inform you Nabi regarding us.  (Bukhari 2/568)

This shows that the Sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمdid not believe that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمhad knowledge of the unseen and was not omnipresent.



صحيح مسلم – (ج 2 / ص 139)

3522 – حدثنا محمد بن حاتم حدثنا عفان حدثنا حماد أخبرنا ثابت عن أنس بن مالك قال

جاء ناس إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقالوا أن ابعث معنا رجالا يعلمونا القرآن والسنة فبعث إليهم سبعين رجلا من الأنصار يقال لهم القراء فيهم خالي حرام يقرءون القرآن ويتدارسون بالليل يتعلمون وكانوا بالنهار يجيئون بالماء فيضعونه في المسجد ويحتطبون فيبيعونه ويشترون به الطعام لأهل الصفة وللفقراء فبعثهم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إليهم فعرضوا لهم فقتلوهم قبل أن يبلغوا المكان فقالوا اللهم بلغ عنا نبينا أنا قد لقيناك فرضينا عنك ورضيت عنا قال وأتى رجل حراما خال أنس من خلفه فطعنه برمح حتى أنفذه فقال حرام فزت ورب الكعبة فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لأصحابه إن إخوانكم قد قتلوا وإنهم قالوا اللهم بلغ عنا نبينا أنا قد لقيناك فرضينا عنك ورضيت عنا


Some people came to Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم and requested that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent someone who could teach them Quran and Sunnah. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent seventy Sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهم who were known as the Qura. On the way these people attacked these Qura and killed them. These Sahaba رضي الله تعالى عنهمmade dua: O Allah inform our Nabi on our behalf that we have met You. You are happy with us and we are happy with You.

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمhad knowledge of the unseen why did Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم sent these Sahaba and why did these Sahaba made dua that Allah Ta’ala inform Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم on their behalf?



صحيح البخاري – (ج 2 / ص 1062)

6634 – حدثنا عبد الله بن مسلمة عن مالك عن هشام عن أبيه عن زينب بنت أبي سلمة عن أم سلمة رضي الله عنها

أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال إنما أنا بشر وإنكم تختصمون إلي ولعل بعضكم أن يكون ألحن بحجته من بعض فأقضي على نحو ما أسمع فمن قضيت له من حق أخيه شيئا فلا يأخذه فإنما أقطع له قطعة من النار


Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمsaid: Verily you bring your disputes to me. It could be that some are more eloquent in presenting the arguments resulting in that I rule in his favour. If I rule for someone that which he is not liable to receive, then I am giving him a portion of fire, so he should not accept it.

If Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم knew the unseen he would have ruled for the person whose right it is.






صحيح البخاري – (400)

2645 – حدثنا محمد بن بشار حدثنا غندر حدثنا شعبة سمعت قتادة عن أنس بن مالك رضي الله عنه قال

كان فزع بالمدينة فاستعار النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فرسا لنا يقال له مندوب فقال ما رأينا من فزع وإن وجدناه لبحرا


One night there was some noises outside Madina. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمborrowed the horse of Abu Talha and went to see what it is. When Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمreturned he said I did not find anything.

What was the need for Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمto go out and see if he knew the unseen.



صحيح مسلم – (ج 2 / ص 107)

3343 – حدثنا زهير بن حرب وإسحق بن إبراهيم جميعا عن جرير قال زهير حدثنا جرير عن الأعمش عن إبراهيم التيمي عن أبيه قال

كنا عند حذيفة فقال رجل لو أدركت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قاتلت معه وأبليت فقال حذيفة أنت كنت تفعل ذلك لقد رأيتنا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ليلة الأحزاب وأخذتنا ريح شديدة وقر فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ألا رجل يأتيني بخبر القوم جعله الله معي يوم القيامة فسكتنا فلم يجبه منا أحد ثم قال ألا رجل يأتينا بخبر القوم جعله الله معي يوم القيامة فسكتنا فلم يجبه منا أحد ثم قال ألا رجل يأتينا بخبر القوم جعله الله معي يوم القيامة فسكتنا فلم يجبه منا أحد فقال قم يا حذيفة فأتنا بخبر القوم فلم أجد بدا إذ دعاني باسمي أن أقوم قال اذهب فأتني بخبر القوم ولا تذعرهم علي فلما وليت من عنده جعلت كأنما أمشي في حمام حتى أتيتهم فرأيت أبا سفيان يصلي ظهره بالنار فوضعت سهما في كبد القوس فأردت أن أرميه فذكرت قول رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا تذعرهم علي ولو رميته لأصبته فرجعت وأنا أمشي في مثل الحمام فلما أتيته فأخبرته بخبر القوم وفرغت قررت فألبسني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من فضل عباءة كانت عليه يصلي فيها فلم أزل نائما حتى أصبحت فلما أصبحت قال قم يا نومان


During one battle Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمasked who will go and get some information of the enemy? Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمsaid this thrice.

Had Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمknown the unseen what was the need of sending out a spy?



مشكاة المصابيح – (ج 1 / ص 86(

وعن ابن مسعود قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” إن لله ملائكة سياحين في الأرض يبلغوني من أمتي السلام ” . رواه النسائي والدارمي


Verily Allah Ta’ala appointed some angels who travel through the earth and convey the salam of my ummah to me. (Mishkat with ref to Nasa’I and Darmi)

If the life of barzakh had no limitations and Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمcould directly hear the salam what is the need for Allah Ta’ala appointing separate angels for this task?

When writing a letter, e-mail or even whilst talking on the phone, everybody speaks in second person. Does this mean that the other person is hazir nazir??? Similarly, using the second person in tashahhud does not demand that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمbe hazir nazir.


There are many other proofs that Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم did not have knowledge of the unseen and was not omnipresent. Some proofs are:

  1. The incident of accusing Sayyidatuna Aisha رضي الله تعالى عنها.
  2. Sayyiduna Jabir رضي الله تعالى عنه knocked on Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم door. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمasked who is there.
  3. Incident of the dog under Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم bed.
  4. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمeating the poisoned meat in Khaibar.
  5. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم being prevented from Umrah.
  6. During the period in Hudaibiyyah the news spreading of Sayyiduna Uthman رضي الله تعالى عنهmartyrdom.
  7. Before consuming anything Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمwould ask if its sadaqah or hadiyyah.
  8. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمgiving bay’ah to a person not knowing that he was a slave.
  9. Incident of Sayyiduna Hatib ibn Abi Balta’a رضي الله عنه before conquest of Makkah.
  10. The incident of doing black magic against Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم.
  11. Sayyiduna Abu Hurayrah رضي الله تعالى عنهwas lying sown in the masjid. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمentered and enquired does anybody know where is Abu Hurayrah?
  12. Are all the dates of Khaibar like this?
  13. Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمasked Manil Qawn Manil Wafd?
  14. The incident where in Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمcalled Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله تعالى عنهAbu Turab.
  15. The incident wherein in Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلمpassed by some dates and remarked had I not feared it being sadaqah I would have partaken from it.

Etc etc. etc…..

We make dua that Allah Ta’ala keep us all on the straight path. Ameen.

And Allah knows best

Wassalamu Alaikum

Ml. Ishaq E. Moosa,
Student Darul Iftaa

Checked and Approved by:

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In’aamiyyah


The concept of Waseelah which the misguided Salafi sect condemns as Shirk o­n the basis of the opinion of Ibn Taimiyyah was never correctly understood even by him, less by his blind followers. This brief explanation cannot discuss all the baseless arguments which Ibn Taimyyah and his errant followers have presented for their condemnation of Waseelah. A book shall have to be prepared in refutation of their arguments. Should Allah Ta’ala bestow the taufeeq and opportunity, we shall, Insha’Allah, embark o­n such a refutation.


Waseelah is to supplicate (make dua) to Allah Ta’ala by presenting the auspicious proximity to Allah Ta’ala enjoyed by either A’maal-e-Saalihah (Righteous Deeds) or Pious beings such as the Ambiyaa and Auliya. In simple terms, Waseelah is to make dua as follows: “O Allah! Accept my dua for the sake of Your Nabi…..(or a certain Wali)…..or (a certain good deed).”

Ibn Taimiyyah and his muqallideen (blind followers) brand this form of Waseelah haraam and shirk. His opinion in this regard is baseless. The Sahaabah and all the great Personalities of Islam from the earliest times resorted to such Waseelah and believed it to be perfectly permissible.

In his books, Ibn Taimiyyah has made sweeping, albeit baseless, claims that all the Salf-e-Saaliheen (the Pious Predecessors) of the Khairul Quroon era declared such Waseelah to be shirk. His claims are utterly baseless.

Once when there was a severe drought, Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu), the then Khalifah, supplicated to Allah Ta’ala by the Waseelah of Hadhrat Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu), the paternal uncle of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Narrating this fact, Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) said:

“When it used o be drought, then Umar Bin Khattaab (radhiyallahu anhu) would supplicate for rain through the medium of Abbaas Bin Abdul Muttalib (radhiyallahuanhu). He would say (i.e.make dua): “O Allah! Verily, we used to invoke the waseelah of our Nabi to You and You bestowed rain to us. (Now) we invoke you by virtue of the uncle of our Nabi. Therefore, bestow rain to us.” He (Anas) said: Then rainwas bestowed to them.” (Bukhaari)

This Hadith recorded by Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh) state with clarity that Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) would supplicate to Allah Ta’ala through the medium (waseelah) of Hadhrat Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu). Besides this Hadith, there are many other narrations which confirm the validity of waseelah.

However, the misguided Salafis have attempted to circumvent this authentic Hadith by presenting an erroneous translation. Mr.Mohsin Khan the Salafi who translated Bukhaari Shareef into English, committed errors in both the translation of the Hadih and its commentary. Translating the Hadith, he states:

“(Narrated Anas—radhiyallahu anhu): Whenever drought threatened them, Umar bin Al-Khattab (radhiyallaahu anhu) used to ask Al-Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib (radhi yallahu anhu) to invoke Allah for rain. He used to say: “O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle to invoke You for rain. O Allah! Bless us with rain. And so it would rain.” (Page 285, Vol. 1 Dr.M.Muhsin Khan’s translation of Bukhaari Shareef)

This translation is incorrect. Nowhere in this Hadith is it mentioned “used to ask”. In this particular Hadith Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) did not ‘ask’ Hadhrat Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) to ‘invoke Allah for rain’. He (Umar), himself, made the dua for rain, hence he clearly supplicated: “O Allah! Through the (waseelah) of the uncle of our Nabi, bestow rain to us.”

Also, Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) did not say: “We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain.” This translation is completely wrong. The Hadith states with great clarity that Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “We would through the medium of our Nabi supplicate to You…”

The Salafis have conveniently mis-translated this Hadith in their attempt to refute the validity of the concept of Waseelah. This is a blatantly baseless and deceptive way to squeeze out evidence for the baseless claim that Waseelah is shirk.


Stating the Salafi belief acquired from their Imaam, Ibn Taimiyyah, Dr.Muhsin Khan says in his commentary o­n the aforementioned Hadith:

“It is of great importance to notice that it is permissible for o­ne to request a living religious person to invoke Allah o­n his behalf but if you ask Allah through a dead or an absent (person, etc.) then it is not allowed. But it is absolutely forbidden to ask or request the dead for anything, it is regarded as Shirk.” (Page 285, Vol. 1, Translation of Bukhaari Shareef)

Firstly, the Salafis differentiate between (1) asking Allah through a dead person, etc., and (2) asking the dead for something. Regarding No.1, they say that “it is not allowed”. Regarding No.2, they say that “it is absolutely forbidden and it constitutes shirk”.

For this differentiation, the Salafis have neither logical nor Shar’i proof. In fact, the Shariah has not made this differentiation which is based o­n pure conjecture of the followers of personal opinion. What makes the former “not allowed” and the latter, “absolutely forbidden and shirk”? What is the Shar’i proof for claiming that the invocation through a dead or an inanimate intermediary (Waseelah) is not allowed or haraam? Other than conjecture and personal inference unsubstantiated by Shar’i daleel, the Salafis have absolutely no viable evidence from the Qur’aan and Ahaadith to substantiate their claim.


The Salafis concede the validity and permissibility of Waseelah in relation to the living, but deny it with regard to the dead and inanimate and intangible things. This is apparent from Muhsin Khan’s comment, viz. “dead or absent persons, etc.” For this baseless differentiation there is no Shar’i daleel. If they have any evidence, other than their personal corrupt opinion, they should proclaim it. But inspite of the copious works of Ibn Taimiyyah and others of his kind, there has not been forthcoming from the deviant Salafi sect any Qur’aanic or Sunnah dalail for their baseless claim.

Asking a person to make dua is o­ne thing. Making dua by citing that person as an intermediary is another thing. The concept of Waseelah under discussion excludes the former. o­nly the latter is the subject of the concept of Waseelah. In so far as the Shariah is concerned this concept of Waseelah applies equally to the living, the dead, inanimate and intangible things. There is ample evidence in the Ahaadith to substantiate this claim. Insha’Allah, this will be done in a detailed treatise o­n the subject if and when Allah Ta’ala grants us this taufeeq and opportunity.

In brief, the Ahaadith mention with clarity that dua used to be made with the Waseelah of A’maal (righteous deeds) —this is of the intangible kind, and with the Waseelah of living persons as well as with the Waseelah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) after his demise. The practise of the Sahaabah is ample evidence for this.


It is essential to correctly understand the meaning of Waseelah to avoid confusion and the charge of Shirk which the Salafis hurl against every kind of Waseelah. In the Shar’i concept of Waseelah the belief is correct, i.e. Dua is made to Allah Ta’ala, not to the living or the dead or to the inanimate and intangible things.

It is understood in this concept that the being which is stated as the Waseelah is not the bestower of the need. Allah Ta’ala has not delegated power of bestowal to the being of Waseelah. He is the Sole Bestower.

By ‘intermediary’ in his concept is meant that the supplicator asks Allah Ta’ala to accept his invocation (dua) by virtue of the close proximity (Qurb) which the being or deed has with Him. In this meaning of Waseelah there is no difference between the living and the dead. The Qurb which the Ambiya and the Auliya had with Allah Ta’ala during their lifetime is the same or even more after their death. This fundamental factor of Qurb-e-Ilaahi is not eliminated nor adversely affected by the incidence of death. The Qurb is not extinguished with Maut, hence the Waseelah of a living person, the validity of which even Ibn Taimiyyah concedes, is equally valid and permissible after his demise.

Undoubtedly, the type of waseelah practised by ignoramuses who subscribe to corrupt beliefs of shirk such as the idea that the power of bestowal is enjoyed by the dead Wali, for example, is Shirk. But this type of waseelah is not the subject of our discussion.


Ibn Taimiyyah and his muqallideen the Salafis do concede that it is permissible to invoke the Waseelah of good deeds which are intangible items. This is called Waseelah bil A’maal. The very same rationale which renders this Waseelah lawful, applies to Waseelah bil A’yaan (i.e. invoking the Waseelah of beings). The common factor is Qurb-e-Ilhaahi (Divine Proximity) which is found in both kinds of Waseelah. Thus, the meaning of Waseelah in the Shariah is nothing other than asking Allah Ta’ala to accept o­ne’s dua by virtue of the rank and proximity which the being has with Allah Ta’ala.


Source :

Shaitaan has left us an exemplary lesson! He has not done anything for himself. Whatever transgression he committed is a different issue. However, he has left us a very huge lesson, in that he has proclaimed:

“O ye group of Scholars(Ulema)! O ye group of worshippers (Aabids)! Just look at me! Was I in any way deficient in knowledge (Ilm)? Why do Scholars become overawed with my knowledge? Why are they terrified? Did I lack in knowledge in any way? I had abundant Ilm! Did I lack in any way as far as Ibaadat is concerned? My Ibaadat is unlimited! You cannot possibly make as much Ibaadat! Thousands of years I prostrated with my head in Sajdah!”

Yes he had even performed Ibaadat for thousands of years. So, what was lacking? The answer is: There was no tarbiyet! And the factor that was an obstacle to tarbiyet was takabbur! That is why I am saying that he has left us a lesson, and has shown us that it is impossible that merely through teaching and learning (ta’leem and ta’allum) kibr will go away. This just cannot happen. “Just look at me!” is what Shaitaan is telling us.

As more and more zaahiri means arise for performing good, so, too does takabbur increase; as there is no progress in Ilm, so too does takabbur increase; as Ibaadat increases, so too does takabbur increase; as the means of worldly progress increae, so too does takabbur increase. As long as special and specific measures are not adopted to remove the intoxicating effects of the sins of the baatin this intoxication will not disappear.

This nisbat is weak. This nisbat is a feeble connection. Allah Ta’ala states:

“O ye believers! Do not be deficient in fulfilling the rights of Allah and His Rasul.”


Dr Ismail Mangera

Publisher: “For Friends” No. 10 Pages 29-30