By Mujlisul Ulama

When the government decides to somewhat ‘ease’ its  oppression by granting permission for the Musaajid to open, it will obviously attach a host of haraam conditions. One such condition is the shaitaani ‘social distancing’
which the Munaafiqeen had introduced in Musjids under their illegitimate control.

Ignorant musallis were cast into bewilderment when they had to perform Salaat in a satanic haraam manner by
standing a kilometer apart. Even a small gap between two musallis in the Saff is occupied by shaitaan. Regarding this haraam method of standing which the maajin fong
kong muftis and munaafiq trustees had introduced, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

* “Straighten the sufoof, line up the shoulders and close the gaps..”

* “Straighten the sufoof……and do not leave gaps for the shaitaan. He who joins the saff, Allah will join him. He who cuts the saff (leaves gaps), Allah will cut (destroy)

* “He who closes the gap in the saff, is forgiven (his sins).”

It was the practice of Hadhrat Uthmaan (Radhiyallahu anhu) before commencing the Salaat to proclaim: “Straighten the
sufoof, and line up the shoulders. Verily, correct formation of the sufoof is of the completion of Salaat.” Then he would not
recite the Takbeer to begin the Salaat. He would wait for some men whom he had appointed to attend to the sufoof. When
they would inform him that the sufoof were correctly formed, then only would he commence the Salaat.

Hadhrat Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) also would wait until the sufoof had been correctly formed as commanded by
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Only then would he commence the Salaat. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commanded: “Taraas-soo” – Stand shoulder to shoulder without the slightest gap.” There are numerous Ahaadith emphasizing the imperative need to stand shoulder
to shoulder, and not to leave any gap for the shaitaan to occupy.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned that the effect of gaps in the saff is enmity in the hearts. Allah Ta’ala afflicts disunity among the musallis who are careless in this regard.

Sealing the gaps with shoulders is Waajib. It is haraam to leave gaps in the saff. For this very reason the ruling of the Shariah is that if a musalli arriving in the Musjid sees a gap in the first saff, then he has to pierce through the sufoof to reach the first saff in order to fill the gap thus preventing shaitaan from entering it.

Walking in front of a musalli who is engaged in Salaat is a kabeerah (major) sin. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that if one is aware of the severity of the sin and punishment for crossing the path of a musalli, one will wait forty years until the musalli had completed his Salaat.

Despite the great importance and significance of the musalli in Salaat, it is necessary to pierce the sufoof to fill the gap in front regardless of this act necessitating walking in front of the musallis. The reason mentioned by the Fuqaha is that those who did not step to fill the gap are deprived of sanctity.

Now when the Shariah attaches such tremendous importance to standing shoulder to shoulder, and when it is haraam to leave gaps, then the satansim of the one or two metre gaps ordered by the Munaafiqeen and the rubbish trustees of some Musaajid in compliance with the kufr theories of the atheists should not be hidden from true Mu’mineen.

Standing in the stupid, fong kong manner, leaving gaps for droves of devils to stand in the sufoof is absolutely haraam. There is no scope for permission. With emphasis we claim that the Salaat is not valid. If one enters the Musjid and finds musallis standing in such a stupid, clownish haraam manner, one should not join in. Perform Salaat alone. Never join rows of devils.

The maajin bootlicking muftis will concoct stupid arguments for the validity of the Salaat conducted in this haraam manner. They will dig out ibaaraat (texts) from the Kutub of Fiqh to extravasate permissibility and validity to soothe the palates of the atheists. Do not heed their silly, zigzag fatwas of jahl. Perform Salaat alone if no valid Jamaat can be found. But do not join in the haraam formation resembling stupid football
characters on the field.

The bootlickers will not be able to find any argument from the Kutub of Fiqh or from the Ahaadith any permissibility for justifying gaps in the saff. The ‘best’ shaitaaniyat with which they can manage to bamboozle the ignorant masses is the rule pertaining to large spaces between the saffs, not between
musallis in the saff. The issue of Ittihaade Makaan (unity of place) is misused to justify the haraam fong kong style of spacing which licences admission for the shayaateen to stand in the sufoof. In a Musjid, if there is a large space between the saffs, then despite the Karaahat (detestability) and
impermissibility of leaving such spaces between the saffs for no valid reason, the Salaat will be valid. But there is no scope
for permissibility of leaving large or even small gaps between the musallis in the saff.

Furthermore, the planned gaps arranged by the munaafiqeen are not the acts of careless musallis – acts which could be overlooked and which will not invalidate the Salaat. These gaps organized by the Munaafiqeen are the effects of the theories of the atheist scientists. Their theories are kufr which
deny the explicit command of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the belief that disease is not contagious. As such it is haraam to adopt the method devised by the atheists and adopted by the bootlicking munaafiqeen and the maajin muftis.


In a weird zigzagging style, one Mufti Sahib abortively justifying these kuffaar-created haraam gaps in the saff, says in his fatwa:

“In principle, joining the rows and not leaving gaps in between the rows is strongly emphasized in Shariah. It is disliked to leave a gap or space in between the rows. However,
in the present circumstances we are in due to covid-19, it will be permissible to do so. Hence you should join them in the Masjid.”

What is the meaning of “in principle” in the context of saff-formation? The command for arranging the sufoof is explicit and precise just as is the command for Salaat and the number of raka’ts. There is no ‘in principle’ here which could be waived or subjected to whim and fancy to comply with commands of the atheists.

The conclusion by the Mufti is absolutely baseless. There is absolutely no substantiation in the Shariah for this baatil
‘permissibility’ which is a pure figment of the mufti’s imagination in submission to the current irrational fear and in obedience to the atheist authorities of the land.

The mufti should have searched for an answer in the example of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), of the Sahaabah and of the Salafus Saaliheen. How did they conduct themselves in plagues which were a million times more devastating than the Bill Gates ‘pandemic’? The example of the Salafus Saaliheen is our standard and our guide, not that which the atheist scientists claim.

While there is massive conflict among the scientists regarding this ‘pandemic’, there is a shaitaani, bizarre ittifaaq (unanimity) among the bootlicking muftis who fall over
themselves in their eagerness to appease the rulers and governments. They simply lap up the najaasat disgorged by the governments all over the world, and find stupid arguments
by perpetrating gross distortion of the Nusoos to appease their masters and leaders. It is ludicrous in the extreme to utilize
Ahaadith for substantiating the wildly baatil claims of the atheists, fussaaq and fujjaar.

It is also kufr to so callously set aside Rasulullah’s proclamation of “Laa adwaa”, and to accord precedence to the view of the atheists which totally rejects what our Nabi
(Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said on the issue.

The ‘circumstances due to covid-19’ cited by the mufti as the basis for his baatil fatwa are the creations of the unbelievers and the atheists. But neither fear nor shame inhibited the mufti sahib from disgorging a fatwa which totally ignores Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah. He acquits himself as if there is no response in the Qur’aan and Sunnah for the likes of this little plague which has sent the world into a pandemic of fear by the Bill Gates cartel.

That Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah have been excised from the equation is absolutely deplorable to say the least.

The mufti has not presented a single vestige of Shar’i evidence for his baatil view. It is haraam to accept his view. While we have used the term zigzag with derision in describing the mufti’s fatwa, it has a literal meaning as well. Everyone understands the literal meaning of zigzag. In the context of the
mufti’s fatwa, the mufti literally zigzags from one extreme to the other.

He commences his fatwa by emphasizing the importance and necessity of observing the Shariah’s saff rules. In the Arabic texts accompanying his fatwa, he presents many Ahaadith and texts of the Fuqaha which emphasize the imperative importance of the correct saff formation and of the evil of the
shaitaani gaps between musallis standing in the saff.

Then from this correct position, he veers widely into baatil without presenting even a single valid Shar’i daleel for his egregiously erroneous fatwa of ‘permissibility’ for allowing shayaateen to occupy the wide gaps which the atheists have ordered. It is with zigzag fatwas that the maajin muftis all over
the world are concocting a new ‘shariat’, in the same way as the Yahood and Nasaara clergy had transmogrified and destroyed Islam which their Ambiya had delivered to them from Allah Ta’ala.

“Social distancing”

Justifying this shaitaani concept and act, another mufti sahib says:

“Social distancing in Shariah can be extracted from the hadeeth shareef that says: ‘if you hear of a place where the plague has occurred, then do not go there.’

On the basis of this Hadith, the mufti concludes: “This can be interpreted to mean ‘do not associate with all the people living
in that area, healthy or sick.’

This is no basis for this wild interpretation which is devoid of Shar’i substance.

This argument is absolutely weird and in total conflict with the Sunnah. The Hadith in question prohibits outsiders – those who are not in the plague-ravaged region – from entering into the epidemic zone. Regardless of the Shariah’s rationale for this prohibition, it cannot and may not be cited to override
Rasulullah’s explicit Hadith: “Laa adwaa” (Disease is not contagious). The Fuqaha have provided suitable interpretations to reconcile the apparently contradictory narrations, but never did any Authority override or abrogate
the primary Hadith, viz. Laa adwaa, which is the basis for our aqeedah.

Our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had forcefully refuted the contagion idea of the mushrikeen by logically presenting an argument for the understanding of those who contended that disease is contagious just as today these filthy copro-munaafiqs are doing.

When the Bedouin sought an explanation regarding his herd of camels which became infected when a scurvy camel mingled with them, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam),
forcefully dispelling the corrupt belief asked: “Who had infected the first camel?”

Our obligation is to only follow the commands of the Shariah. This obedience is not based on understanding the rationale
underlying the commands. On the issue of plagues, the commands issued by our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are simple and unambiguous:

• Disease is not contagious
• Do not enter a plague-ravaged place
• Do not flee from a plague-ravaged area.

The aforementioned Hadith cited by the mufti bears not the slightest relationship with the ‘social distancing’ concept of
the atheists. Either the Musjid is filled with diseased people or not, or some may be affected while others are healthy.

Those coming to the Musjid to perform Salaat belong to the area where all the musallis belong and reside. They are not outsiders who are entering a plague-ravaged area.

Assuming that it is known that many of the musallis are affected by the disease, then too the unaffected ones, if they flee from the Musjid or from the area, will be guilty of sins
akin to kufr for acting in violation of the abovementioned two Ahaadith regarding negation of contagion and the prohibition
to flee.

When the term ‘social distancing’ is mentioned, what is understood? The meaning of the atheists is that people should
maintain a distance from one another; they should not dare make musaafaha and muaanaqah; they should remain far, very
far from even their parents if they happen to be affected; if healthy persons unaffected with the disease venture to greet one another, they should transform themselves into clowns with their elbows jutting out to venture touching. On the basis of this kufr concept of ‘social distancing’ have the fong kong, juhhaal, munaafiq molvis introduced the haraam spacing practice in the saff in the Musjid. There is absolutely no daleel in this narration nor in any other narration for this practice of the atheists. To equate the prohibition of entering a plague-ravaged area with the satanic spacing in the saff is weird in the extreme.

Furthermore, what was the example of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah in the Musjid during plagues? Did they adopt the shaitaani spacing method of the atheists? How did they stand in the sufoof? It is indeed mind boggling that despite being aware of the example of
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah, muftis find it plausible to negate the Sunnah practice with the
haraam shaitaani method of the atheists. If such spacing was a valid requisite, our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the
Sahaabah would have been the very first people who would have introduced it. The Ummah had been ravaged by many plagues from the very era of our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), but never did any one of the Salafus Saaliheen nor Muslims of later eras ever insult their Imaan and intelligence
with these silly, stupid, shaitaan-inpsired methods of the atheists.

“Not entering a plague area” and satanic spacing in the saff in a Musjid are two widely different issues. The one has no relationship with the other. For both issues there are clear
directives and examples in the Ahaadith and lives of the Salafus Saaliheen. Not by the remotest stretch of logical and Shar’i reasoning will any Hadith have any  relationshipwith the shaitaani spacing in the saff. The Hadith has only one meaning, and that is: Do not enter a plague-ravaged area. This is applicable to those who are not the residents of such an area. To understand saff-formation during a plague there is no need
for remote, baseless interpretation. The example of the Salafus Saaliheen is more than adequate. The people attending the
Musjid are all local residents who are not subjected to the Hadith prohibiting entry to a plague area.

The people attending the Musaajid are from the Islamic perspective all healthy regardless of what the atheists say and dignose. It is haraam to flee from your father or brother who is healthy, but who is alleged to be ‘positive’ by the the fraudulent tests of the fraud doctors who have been ordered by
the authorities to be record as ‘positive’ on a wholesale scale to justify their oppression. Massive fraud in this field is being uncovered and reported. A person dying of old age is
summarily recorded as a virus case.

The action of Hadhrat Amar Bin Aas (Radhiyallahu anhu)

The mufti sahib cites Hadhrat Amar’s reaction of taking the people to the mountains as justification for the shaitaani
spacing in the saff. There is no relationship between the two. Saff-spacing cannot be justified by moving from one house to
another in the plague-stricken area.

In the context of the ‘social distancing’ advised by the atheists, the term has a totally different meaning. It means the satanic
spacing in the saff, closure of the Musaajid and prohibiting the daily Fardh Salaat, Jumuah Salaat, Taraaweeh Salaat and Eid
Salaat in the Musaajid. In fact, the prohibition applies even to performing Jamaat Salaat in the homes. A neighbour is not allowed by the law of the atheists to join one in Jamaat Salaat at home.

Hadhrat Amar’s act was in conflict with both the Qur’aan and Sunnah. No matter how his act is interpreted, it cannot be validly reconciled with the prohibition stated in the Qur’aan Majeed and with the Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Two very senior Sahaabah had severely criticized
Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu) for his decision. Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu) was a Sahaabi. We have no right to criticize him for even an error. Nevertheless, the other
senior Sahaabah had this right. In view of the conflict between the Qur’aan and Sunnah on the one hand, and Hadhrat Amar’s act on the other hand, it will be set aside. Any how, the act of Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu) is no justification for the spacing in the saffs. We are discussing ‘social distancing’ in
the meaning of the concept of the atheists.

Spread of disease
The mufti argues that spread of disease is a basis for ‘social distancing’. This is baatil. Even Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu) who had after some time taken to the mountains during the Amwaas plague did not practice the shaitaani spacing which has been introduced in the Musaajid at the behest of the atheists. Prior to taking to the mountains, he was performing Salaat in the Musjid, not at home, not in isolation. And, in the Musjid there was no shaitaani spacing as ordered by the atheists.

Measures of caution mentioned by the mufti sahib excludes shaitaani saff-spacing. A haraam method is not a valid precautionary method in terms of the Shariah. The mufti sahib mentions injections and medication in his arguments. These forms of medication have no relationship with saff-formation
and ‘social distancing’ even in terms of the kuffaar concept. While medication is permissible, saff-spacing is not.

The mufti says: “…the individual will be allowed to distance himself from such areas on the basis of ihtiyaat or precaution.” Even if momentarily assumed to be correct, this
does not justify the satanic mode of spacing in the Salaat saff. The example of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Saahabah during plagues is more than adequate for us.
They never spaced themselves like clowns for fear of the plague virus. They stood shoulder to shoulder despite the ravaging plague. There is no argument and no interpretation
of any hadith which can override this glaringly conspicuous amal of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the
Sahaabah in the Musaajid even at the height of the plague.

A conflicting argument of an Aalim regardless of his stature of seniority, will be interpreted to reconcile it with the Nusoos of the Shariah, and if a reconciliation is not possible, it shall
be set aside and practical expression shall be given to the Qur’aan and Sunnah which cannot be made subservient to the
interpretation of the senior Aalim.

In this discussion the concern is only one aspect, viz., the metre or two metre spacing between musallis in the Musjid. It is this haraam aspect of ‘social distancing’ which is being discussed here although all the other aspects of the social distancing concept of the atheists are also haraam, the concern
here is only the spacing in the saff. As far as the saffs are concerned, we have to only look at the way the saffs were formed during plagues by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi
wasallam) and the Sahaabah. It is indeed a grievous and an egregious error to justify the haraam spacing in the saff with Ahaadith which have no relationship with saff-formation.


The mufti justifies the concept of ‘social distancing’ of the atheists with the Hadith advising the maintenance of a distance
from a leper. Again, this Hadith has no bearing on the saff formation in the Musjid. Even the leper was not debarred from the Musjid. During the plague, the Musjid was full of affected musallis who all stood shoulder to shoulder.

The advice pertaining to lepers was for people of weak Imaan. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ate together with a leper from the same plate. We shall not dwell much on this issue since the concern here is the saff formation, and the Hadith pertaining to the leper has no relevance in this regard.

Whoever has fear of contracting the disease is free to distance himself from the confirmed diseased person if he so wishes. But such distancing cannot be practiced in the Musjid in the

There are also other errors pertaining to distancing in the mufti’s article. However, our discussion here pertains to only saff-formation. The other issues could be discussed in another article, Insha-Allah.

A Pakistani mufti’s fatwa

In his fatwa on this specific issue of spacing in the saff, a Pakistani mufti states:

“…..Saff formation is not related to validity or invalidity of Namaaz.”

In the current context, saff formation is most certainly related to validity and invalidity regardless of the mas’alah in another
scenario. The spacing in the saff in the current context is at the behest of atheists. It entails the displacement of the Waajib form commanded in many Ahaadith. It is giving preference to a kufr mode over and above the method commanded by Allah Ta’ala. If this evil method is accepted, it will ultimately
become the norm in the Musaajid. The imperative importance of standing shoulder to shoulder will be dispelled from the minds of Muslims.

Prolonged practice and acceptance of an evil desensitize the heart. The inherent Imaani inhibition to haraam is desensitized, thus opening the doorway for acceptance of
haraam. This is precisely the state of affairs pertaining to many haraam acts which are today accepted as valid, permissible and even preferable over the commands of the
Shariah. Shaving the beard, riba, kuffaar dress, kuffaar eating styles, abandonment of purdah, etc. are examples of having become acceptable and respectable in the wake of shaitaan’s gradual process of desensitizing Imaani inhibitions to evil.

The mufti is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, in presenting a technicality to justify a kuffaar concept which in turn is the antithesis of the demand of Imaan which negates the contagion belief of the atheists, mushrikeen and kuffaar in general.

With the validity-invalidity argument the Pakistani mufti endeavours to justify the haraam act of spacing in the saff. Irrespective of the validity argument, the mufti is constrained to accept that the official view is the prohibition of spacing in the saff, and that it is Makrooh Tahrimi which in practice is the same as Haraam because the consequence of both Makrooh Tahrimi and Haraam is the Fire of Jahannam. Hence, even if accepted that the Salaat is valid with the satanic spacing at the behest of atheists and fussaaq/fujjaar ‘Muslim’ doctors, then too it (the spacing) is unacceptable since its consequence is the Fire of Hell.

The validity contention does not mitigate the notoriety and hurmat of the satanic spacing. It remains haraam hence unacceptable.

Then the mufti in a further stupid attempt to justify the spacing says:

“However, the Author of Badaaiush Sanaai’, Allaamah Kaasaani wrote: ‘This karaahat (i.e. being Makrooh Tahrimi) is when the space in the saffs is without valid reason.’ (The
mufti concludes): ‘And here is a valid reason.”

His valid reason is the corona virus. In terms of the Shariah the disease or the virus is not a valid reason. A valid reason is, for example, pillars in the saff or some other real tangible
impediment. Fear for a disease is never a valid reason because Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah are
our guides, and they never practised this confounded ‘social distancing’ of the atheists. There is absolutely no valid basis for adopting the haraam shaitaani spacing in the saff.

The oppression of the Pakistani government should not induce the ulama over there to confer respectability and acceptance to
the haraam laws. The population should not be led into haraam with the belief that the unlawful act has become permissible due to the virus bogey. Merely on the basis of a
handful of sick persons, the ulama are buckling and trading the ahkaam of the Shariah for a miserable price. If the
government with its forces of repression and oppression enforces the closure of the Musaajid, it is the better option. That will be acceptable, but not voluntary shaitaaniyat in the Musaajid.

The Pakistani mufti claims that keeping the Musaajid open with the haraam conditions is the lesser of the two evils. We say that it is not. The lesser evil is to accept the oppression of the government – the closure of the Musaajid. The greater evil is the destruction of the ahkaam of the Shariah which should be accepted voluntarily. Step by step the greater part of the Shariah will be devoured by the devil and a new ‘shariat’ will
be substituted. The obligation of the Ulama is to maintain and defend the pristine purity of the Shariah. That is our only duty.

“Upon us is to only deliver the Clear message.” (Qur’aan)



What exactly is social distancing? This is a new phrase which has come into existence in the wake of the bogus coronavirus
plotted by the enemies of humanity. When this term is mentioned, a specific picture looms up in the mind. In this picture which has been designed by the conspirators we see:

1) Flight from your parents, children and humanity for the fear of contracting the disease.

2) Do not shake hands with any one, not even with your parents.

3) Transform yourself into a clown by hideously sticking out your elbow to touch another person’s elbow when greeting.
Elbow-to-elbow displaces the Masnoon Musaafahah and Muaanaqah which are totally prohibited. Such vile Tashabbuh
bil Kuffaar is haraam.

4) Spacing 2.2 metres apart in the Salaat saff, if Musaajid are allowed to be open under extremely stringent conditions. Thus, the Musaajid become haunts for the shayaateen.

5) If Musaajid are permitted to operate, the elderly and the sick must be debarred.

6) Perfectly healthy people may not travel more than two persons in a vehicle. They may not sit on the same seat.

7) Dua should not be made with hands raised. More ‘dangerous’ is to draw the hands over the face at the end of Dua as is the Masnoon method.

8) Visiting close relatives even parents at their homes is prohibited.

9) Visiting a sick relative even if parents, in hospital is prohibited. No contact whatsoever is allowed.

10) Closure of the Musaajid thus prohibiting Fardh Jamaat Salaat, Jumuah Salaat, Taraaweeh and Eid Salaat.

11) The Masnoon Ramadhaan I’tikaaf is banned.

12) Closing shops thus depriving people from their legitimate needs.

13) Lockdowning the entire country thus devastating the economy.

14) Confine people to their homes. Not allowing them access to even their yards.

15) Closure of all Darul Ulooms

16) Banning Hajj and Umrah

17) If one person is tested positive, an entire household or institution must be placed in quarantine.

18) Snitch and spy on Muslims who perform Salaat in Jamaat. Report them to the kuffaar police to be arrested.

19) Kafan and Ghusl for the mayyit are abolished. Even Tayammum on the mayyit is prohibited.

20) In some places. e.g. Sri Lanka, Muslim bodies are by law appropriated by the government’s devilish order and cremated. Cremation is strongly advised by the Satanists who have invented their Satanist concept of social distancing.

21) Violation of the draconian social distancing rules is a crime leading to arrest, fines and imprisonment. Yet, even in
terms of the secular constitution these draconian measures are unconstitutional and unlawful, hence many senior lawyers are
challenging the unconstitutionality of the oppressive laws.

This is the heinous satanic concept of social distancing. No Muslim in his sane Imaani senses will ever accept that this system of Iblees has the slightest support in the Ahaadith.

The primary basis for debunking the entire gamut of terms and conditions of this kuffaar concept of social distancing is the explicit statement of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “Laa adwaa” (Disease is not contagious). Every ingredient in the satanic concept of social distancing is anathema to the Shariah and Imaan.

The Laa adwa command of Allah Ta’ala is fully bolstered by the practical example and conduct of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Sahaabah and the Salafus Saaliheen of Quroon-e-Thalaathah. There is not the slightest shred of support in the Qur’aan and Sunnah for the kuffaar concept of social distancing which errant muftis of this age are abortively struggling to justify by hook or crook with grotesque misinterpretation of some Hadith narrations which have absolutely no relevance to this shaitaaniyat of social distancing introduced by the agents of Bill Gates.

The Leper

The Hadith, “Flee from the leper….” Has specific application. Firstly it is directed to people of weak Imaan. Secondly it applies solely to the disease of leprosy. The body festers with
open wounds and sores. The sight is ‘disgusting’ and causes aversion in most people. It was for only these reasons that this
advice was proffered by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). But, to negate the kufr idea of disease being contagious, our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) practically
refuted it by eating together with a leper from the same bowl.

Furthermore, there is no record of any leper being quarantined or expelled from society or ostracized in any way. Despite the Hadith in this regard, the leper was not ordered to self-isolate himself. He remained amidst the people and attended the Musjid. There was no one to debar him from the Musjid. Not
a single one of the satanic stipulations enumerated above applied to the leper.

Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu)

It is indeed lamentable for a mufti to cite Hadhrat Amar’s action of taking to the mountains, in the indefensible bid to
justify the kufr concept of social distancing with its numerous conditions of kufr and injustices. The mufti sahib has argued
in an unprofessional and an unprincipled manner by introducing Hadhrat Amar’s act to justify the kuffaar social distancing model which is the invention of scoundrel atheists
such as Bill gates who is steering a grotesquely Satanist conspiracy to ensure that every human being on this planet is
vaccinated with a ‘nano chip’.

Extravasating daleel on the basis of an error of a Senior is dangerous for Imaan. Hadhrat Allaamah Abdul Wahhaab Sha’raani (Rahmatullah alayh) as well as other authorities have said: “He who grabs hold of the obscurities of the Ulama, verily he has made an exit from Islam.” This type of
extrapolation becomes more grievous when the Hadith or the error of a Senior is used and manipulated to justify a baatil and haraam concept of atheists.

In fact, it is not permissible – it is tantamount to kufr to manipulate Ahaadith to cancel and debunk explicit commands of the Shariah substantiated by Qur’aanic Nusoos and such
Ahaadith which are of the Mutawaatur category. A mufti is supposed to be well versed with the Usool of Fiqh. He should
correctly employ the Usool to arrive at a proper and valid conclusion.

The mufti is supposed to know that when a Khabr Waahid or Qiyaas conflicts with Kitaabullaah (The Qur’aan Majeed), and if reconciliation is not possible, then the Hadith shall be set aside, and practical expression shall be accorded to Kitaabullaah. It will never be the other way round. The Qur’aan and Ahaadith Mutawaatur will not be set aside to accommodate Khabr Waahid.

In addition to the amal of Hadhrat Amar (Radhiyallahu anhu) being in glaring conflict with the amal of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the vast Body of the Sahaabah, it (taking to the mountains) was in open conflict with Kitaabullaah. The Qur’aan Majeed outlaws quarantine, severely condemning it. Those who had resorted to quarantine and self-isolation during a plague were punished with death by Allah Ta’ala.

Referring to the haraam kuffaar act of quarantine, the Qur’aan Majeed states:

“What! Have you not seen those people who came out (fleeing) from their homes while they were thousands, in fear of Maut (death)? Then Allah said to them: “Perish!” Then
(after their death) He resurrected them.”
(Al-Baqarah, Aayat 242)

In bygone times, during the era of Bani Israaeel, a severe plague spread in a city/town. The inhabitants consisting of
approximately 10,000 persons, for fear of contracting the disease and death, fled from the town and went into quarantine in a valley in between two mountains. Their cowardly flight and attempt to flee from Maut invited the Wrath of Allah Ta’ala. Allah Ta’ala killed the entire community. Not a single soul escaped death. They had fled the plague, went into self-imposed quarantine with the notion of saving themselves from death. They miserably failed.

Senior Sahaabah had also criticized Hadhrat Amar’s act. Without criticizing Hadhrat Amar Bin Al’As (Radhiyallahu anhu), on the basis of the Dalaail of the Shariah, his amal may not be presented in view of the conflict with the Qur’aan and the standing Sunnah of the Sahaabah. And, it is preposterous to cite his amal to substantiate and justify the satanic concept of the atheist, Bill Gates – a concept replete with kufr and haraam.


Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem


What is the view of the scholars of Din on the following matters?

1. An announcement has been made by some ‘Ulamā’ that people can come to the Masājid in limited numbers for the five daily Ṣalāh, i.e. for every Ṣ alāh, three to five people will
perform in Jamā’ah, whilst the rest of the people will perform the Ṣ alāh at home. Similarly, for Jumu’ah Ṣalāh, a maximum of
ten people can come and the rest of the people should perform Ẓuhr Ṣalāh at home. To what extent is this necessary in the light of the Noble Qur’ān, Sunnah and Islāmic Fiqh?
Until today, we have been taught that there is no permission for those living nearby a Masjid to perform Ṣ alāh at home without a valid reason. If a person performs Ṣ alāh at home without a valid reason, then his Ṣalāh will not be valid and he will get the sin of abandoning the Jamā’ah. We ask you for the
Shar’ı̄ response in this regard.

2. Some people say that those who come to the Masjid for Ṣalāh, they should stand a metre distance apart from the others so that the effect of the illness does not spread to the
others. In the light of the Noble Qur’ān and Sunnah, will the Ṣalāh performed in this way be correct? Will our Ṣalāh be done or not? We hope that you will respond with references from the Noble Qur’ān and Hadı̄th.

A few concerned Musallı̄s
Rājah Khāli, Chat gam, Bangladesh



(a) With regards to the matter at hand, Allā h Ta’ala says in the Noble Qur’ān,

«Maintain with care the [obligatory] prayers and [in particular] the middle prayer and stand before Allāh, devoutly obedient» Surah Al-Baqarah: 238

Rasūlullāh (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said in explaining this verse, “I had intended to instruct some youngsters to gather firewood, then I give the command for Ṣalāh to commence and for the Jamā’ah to begin. Then, I would go to the homes of those who do not come for Ṣalāh in Jamā’ah and burn their homes.” Tirmidhi

The same Hadı̄th is narrated from lbn Mas’ud (Radhiyallahu anhu), Abu Ad-Darda’ (Radhiyallahu anhu), Ibn ‘Abbas (Radhiyallahu anhu) and others. Imam Tirmidhı̄ (rahmatullahi alayh) said that this Ḥ adı̄th is Ḥ asan and Sahih. Imam Tirmidhı̄ (rahmatullahi alayh) says that this narration is proven from many Ṣaḥābah. All of them said that those who do not attend the Jamā’ah after the Adhan has been called out, without any excuse, their Ṣalāh is not done.

(b) Shaykh-ut-Tafsı̄r Maulānā Muhammad Idrı̄s Kandehlawı̄ (rahmatullahi alayh) writes in his Tafsı̄r, Ma’ārif-ul-Qur’ān under verse 114 of Surah Al-Baqarah,

«And who are more unjust than those who prevent the name of Allāh from being mentioned in His Masājid and strive toward
their destruction. It is not for them to enter them except in fear. For them in this world is disgrace, and they will have in the Hereafter a great punishment»

‘This refers to stopping the name of Allāh Ta’ala being taken, whether in the heart, or by the tongue, or by the limbs. Not only this, but the person strives to render them empty and
barren. Showing dishonour and destroying the Masājid is outwardly destroying them, whilst preventing worship, the remembrance of Allāh, this is the inner form and the
proverbial form of destroying the Masājid .’ Ma’arif-ul-Qur’an vol.1 p.203

Muft̄i Muhammad Shafi’ writes in his Tafsı̄r under the same verse quoted above, ‘The third aspect we learn is that whatever action is adopted to render the Masjid empty and
barren is forbidden (ḥ arām). Just as destroying the Masjid is addressed clearly in this verse, in the same way, it refers to
creating all those means that will cause the Masjid to be rendered empty and barren. The meaning of rendering the Masjid barren is that people do not come there for Ṣalāh, or
they come in decreased numbers. This is because, the objective of building the Masjid is not to decorate it, but it is to enliven Dhikr, Tilāwat and Ṣalāh. This is why the Noble Qur’ān states,

«The Masājid of Allāh are only to be maintained by those who believe in Allāh and the Last Day and establish prayer and give
zakah and do not fear except Allāh, for it is expected that those will be of the [rightly] guided» Surah At-Taubah: 18

In a Hadı̄th, Rasūlullāh (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that closer to Qiyamah, the Masājid of the Muslims will outwardly
be beautiful and full of activity, but in reality, they will be barren. The number of those who come for Ṣalāh will decrease, or means for this decrease will be created. Sayyidunā ‘Ali (Radhiyallahu anhu) said, “Honour of man lies
in six things.” Three of them are listed here:
i. Recitation of the Noble Qur’ān
ii. Enlivening the Masājid
iii. Building unity amongst friends that will help in the work of Dı̄n. Ma’arif-ul-Qur’an vol.1 p.272

The summary of the two Tafsı̄rs is presented hereunder:

1. The Masājid are the houses of Allāh Ta’ala. The objective is that Allāh Ta’ala, should be remembered therein, with the heart, tongue and limbs, like in Ṣalāh and Tilāwat.

2. The demand of honour as a human being is to enliventhe Masājid and develop one’s ı̄mān.

3. The actions of Muslims involve the maximum number of Muṣallis coming for Ṣalāh, remembering Allāh Ta’ala, in the
Masājid and reciting the Noble Qur’ān.

4. Contrary to this, stopping people from coming to the Masjid, preventing them from worship and Ṣalāh, this is destroying the Masājid. This is censured in the verse.

5. Stopping the people from the Masjid is like the general destruction of the Masjid. Similarly, limiting the numbers of people or specifying the people to attend also falls under the purview of destroying the Masjid. This is great oppression.

6. The reasons and causes mentioned by those who stop and prevent the people from coming to the Masjid are not explained by the Sharı̄’ah, nor do we find any indication of
them in the Nuṣūṣ (clear texts).

Allāh Ta’ala says,

«And [mention] when We made the House a place of return for the people and [a place of] security. And take, [O believers], from the standing place of Ibrāhīm a place of prayer. And We charged Ibrāhīm and lsmā’īl, [saying], “Purify My House for those who perform Tawiāf and those who are staying [there] for
worship and those who bow and prostrate [in prayer}.”» Surah Al-Baqarah: 125, Mūdiḥ-ul-Qur’ān, Shāh ‘Abdul Qādir Dehlawi
(Rahmatullah alayh) p.24

Tafsı̄r ‘Uthmānı̄ states:

‘When we stipulated the Ka’bah as a place of gathering for people and as a place of security because people get together
there annually for Ḥ ajj and ‘Umrah, they perform Tawāf there, perform Ṣalāh and there are huge crowds. Those who perform
Ḥajj and ‘Umrah, they will then be safe from punishment and the oppression of people. Perform Ṣalāh at Maqām Ibrāhı̄m during Ḥajj and ‘Umrah. We commanded Ibrāhı̄m and lsmā’ı̄l  to keep Baytullāh pure for those performing Tawāf, Rukū ‘ and Sajdah.’

From this verse of the Noble Qur’ān we learn that the Ka’bah Musharrafah and all the Masājid of the world are places of
gathering. At the Ka’bah Musharrafah, Ṭawāf is done and Ṣalāh is performed. People remember Allāh Ta’ala there too. In other Masājid, Ṣ alā h with Jamā’ah is held and Jumu’ah is performed. People remember Allāh and recite from the Noble Qur’ān.

Who is the oppressor that stops the gathering of people at those places that Allāh Ta’ala has made places of gathering?! Who is the oppressor that closes them, prevents the people from Ṭawāf and Ṣalāh? This can only be the greatest oppressors of the world and they are the greatest criminals too. May Allāh Ta’ala bless the Muslims with the ability to use their intelligence and intellect. One should not come under the sway of the Jews and Christians and close the Masājid,
stopping the different forms of worship. One should open it for all the Muslims. However, those from whom harm can come, they should be stopped.

lbn ‘Abbās (Radhiyallahu anhu) was asked about a person that fasts during the day, stands in worship at night, but he does
not attend the Jumu’ah and Jamā’ah. He said, “He is in the fire.” Tirmidhi

Mujāhid says, “Those who turn away from attending the five times Ṣalāh and Jumu’ah, treating it lightly, their Ṣ alāh will not
be done.”

A narration from Rasūlullāh (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) says, “He who leaves three Jumu’ah due to negligence and laziness,
Allāh Ta’ala will place a seal on his heart.”

In short, there are severe warnings for the person that abandons the Jamā’ah Ṣalāh and Jumu’ah. However, those who are ill, or they have fear of illness, if they cannot attend the
Jamā’ah, or Jumu’ah, there will be no sin on them. On the other hand, the person that does not have a valid Shar’ı̄ reason, and
he stays away from the five times Jamā’ah due to faulty or defective belief, he will be a severe sinner.

Firstly, due to his defective belief.
Secondly, due to leaving the Jamā’ah.

It must remain clear that the meaning of faulty or defective belief is that it is stated in the ḥ adith that according to Islāmic
belief, there is no contagiousness, i.e. it is not correct to believe that an illness can move from one to another. This is because every illness is the creation of Allā h Ta’ala.The illness is subject to the command of Allāh Ta’ala, whether it affects man or animals. It is the system of Allāh Ta’ala that when He
wills an illness to afflict someone, it will afflict him, not anyone else. If these illnesses are free to go wherever they want, they can go to everyone, but this is not the case.

Therefore, the area or locality in which the Corona Virus has spread, if it affects
everyone, then everyone will die. However, it affects certain people, not others. When the illness is subject to the command of Allāh Ta’ala, it does not afflict every single person. Whoever is subject to the command of Allāh Ta’ala to be affected, it goes to him. Therefore, it is not a valid excuse to fear such an illness and not attend the Masjid for Jamā’ah and Jumu’ah, especially when all the Masājid are the houses of Allā h Ta’ala. They are places of mercy, blessing, safety, security and reward. When a person will perform Ṣalāh in the Masjid, Allāh Ta’ala becomes
pleased, He becomes displeased when a person does not go to the Masjid and abandons the Jamā’ah. If the illness comes into the Masjid, it will be under the command of Allāh Ta’ala.

Allāh Ta’ala, instructs His servants to come for Jamā’ah in order for them to acquire mercies, blessings and great reward. He will not punish them because these illnesses come as punishment for the disobedient and polytheists and as a mercy for the believers. In addition, if this illness goes wherever it wants, on its own accord, then it will not be the creation of Allāh Ta’ala – there is no proof for this. The proof establishes the contrary because the clear texts of the Noble Qur’ān and ḥadith show that all illnesses are the creation of Allāh Ta’ala and they follow His command. If it affects someone, it will be due to the command of Allāh Ta’ala . There
is no proof in the Noble Qur’ān and ḥadith that shows illnesses coming into the Masājid . If anyone has doubt, then there is no consideration given to doubt in Shari’ah in the case of definite and convincing circumstances.

Conviction is not removed by doubt. With regards to this, the research of medical professionals will be considered when it
does not contradict the Sharı̄’ah. If it conflicts with the Sharı̄’ah, it will be rejected.


Due to fear for the Corona Virus, if a space of a metre is kept between people in the rows of Ṣalāh, then this contradicts the clear Shar’ı̄ texts. Therefore, no consideration will be given to this. The principle regarding the rows in the Masjid is that it should be like the rows of the angels in their worship and
Tasbiḥ . Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) explained that when the angels worship and glorify Allāh Ta’ala, they join
one another in a row or rank and there is no space in between. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) taught the Ummah
that when standing in Ṣalāh, one should stand in a row, shoulder to shoulder format and there should be no space in between at all. This is because Shaytān comes into the empty place. Allāh , does not like that Shaytān has a share in one’s worship. The proof is the following narration,

‘Samurah Ibn Jundub (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah(sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Make your rows in Ṣalāh like the angels do by their deity.” We asked, “How do the angels make their rows when worshipping their deity?” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Complete the first row, then the next. Complete each row, without leaving a space in between because when it is left empty, Shaytān jumps in between and causes harm in your prayer.”

Anas (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Join one another in the rows in sequence, do not leave a space in between, join shoulder to
shoulder.” Then he said, “By the Being in Whose control is my life, I see that when you leave a space in the row, then Shaytān
comes in between like the kid of a goat.” Tirmidhi

Rasūlullāh (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Form your rows for Ṣalāh by joining each other, he who fills a space in order to
complete a row, Allāh Ta’ala, will join him to Him. He who leaves a gap in
between, Allāh Ta’ala will keep him away from Him. Do not leave an empty space for Shaytān.” Ibid

The belief system of our government is that by joining the rows, the illness will spread, whereas the Masājid are not places of illness, but they are places of the mercy, blessings,
safety and reward from Allāh Ta’ala. Therefore, it will not be permitted to practice upon such principles. They are in conflict with the Sharı̄’ah and the Sunnah. If according to the medical practitioners, the illness can spread by gathering in this way, then it will be medical and human research. No consideration is given to this research when it conflicts the Noble Qur’ān and ḥadith. Their research is limited to their intellect, which is of the level of doubt. However, the
information given in the Noble Qur’ān and ḥ adith is based on divine revelation. There is no possibility of error in it. Hence,
the definite information should not be abandoned for that which is doubtful. We have to look at Din from the sources of
Dı̄n. It is not possible to understand Din from the intellect of animals.

29 March 2020
Mufti Muhammad Abdus-Salam Chatgami



The Tragic event of Syria – Desecration of the Grave of Hadhrat ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-Aziz (Rahmatullahi Alayh)

By Dr. Atif Sohail Siddiqui

The most heart-breaking and painful news is coming from Syria that the worst enemies of Islam, the Shiites, desecrated the holy shrines of the fifth caliph, Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Umar bin ‘Abd al-Aziz (Rahmatullahi Alayh) and his wife, Fatima (Rahmatullahi Alayha). By removing their blessed bodies or remains from their graves and desecrating them. There are also unconfirmed reports that their remains have been burnt. (To Allah we belong and to Him is our return).

This sad news is very painful for the Muslims who see the reflection of the great caliph, Sayyidina ‘Umar bin Khattab (radhiyallahu anhu) in the just government of the Rightly Guided Caliph ‘Umar bin Abd al-Aziz. On the contrary, due to his rule of growth and guidance, he is remembered with great titles like ‘Umar the second.

The Shiites, who are the product of Abdullah bin Saba the Jew, have been carrying out anti-Islamic acts since the first day of their existence. Therefore, this heinous act is a reflection of their enmity towards Islam.

Those sections of ‘Muslims’ who talk of ‘religious unity’ between Muslims and Shiites are wasting both their time and energy promoting this kufr agenda. If the Muslims had already recognized the Shia as a separate religion from Islam like the Qadianis, they might have avoided such a loss at the hands of the Shiites.

The older a Muslim Becomes, The More he is Honoured by Allah

An elderly Muslim has a high status before Allah. The older a Muslim grows, the more he or she is honoured by Allah and the more Allah increases His favour on him or her.

When a person grows older, his hair changes colour from black to grey or white. These grey hair will be a source of light on the day of Qiyamah.

Ka’b ibn Murrah (radiyallahu ‘anhu) reported that he heard the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) saying, “If a person’s hair turns grey or white in Islam, it will be light for him on the Day of Resurrection.” [At-Tirmidhi 1634]

In another narration, he mentioned “It is the Muslim’s light.” [At-Tirmidhi 2821]

For each grey or white hair, a person is rewarded.

Abu Hurayra (radiyallahu ‘anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “Do not pluck grey or white hairs, for they will be light on the Day of Resurrection. Whoever has one hair that turns grey or white in Islam will have one Hasanah (good deeds) for each grey or white hair and he will be raised one degree.” [Ibn Hibbaan, Al-Ihsaan 4199]

In another narration, he mentioned, “One sin is wiped out.” [Abu Dawud 4199]

Grey or white hair is a sign of honour in the sight of Allah.

Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyib (rahimahullah) said that Ibraheem (‘alayhis salaam) was the first person to see grey hair. He said, “O Lord! What is this?” Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said, “It is dignity, O Ibraheem.” He said, “Lord, increase me in dignity!” [Maalik, Al-Muwatta 1673]

The best person is the one to whom Allah has given a long life which he spends in ‘Ibaada (worship).

Abdullah ibn Busr (radiyallahu ‘anhu) reported that a bedouin said, “O Messenger of Allah, who are the best people?” He (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) replied, “One with a long life of good deeds.” [At-Tirmidhi 2329]

The following Hadith details the favours of Allah at different ages starting from forty.

Anas (radyallahu ‘anhu) reported that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said, “No servant reaches the age of forty, except that Allah removes from him three types of illnesses: madness, vitiligo and leprosy. When he reaches fifty, Allah makes his reckoning easy on him. When he reaches sixty, Allah grants him to turn to Him with what He likes. When he reaches seventy, Allah loves him and the inhabitants of the sky love him. When he reaches eighty, Allah accepts his good deeds and forgives his sins, and when he reaches ninety, Allah forgives his past and future sins and he is named, ‘Allah’s prisoner on His earth’ and his intercession is accepted for his family members.” [Ahmad 5626]

Ifran Nauyock

Al-Kawthari Academy


From the presidency the Muslim community has been thrown a few crumbs or a slice of stale bread in the form of permission to conduct Salaat in the Musaajid. Furthermore, the slice of stale bread is from the same whole loaf of fresh bread which was snatched from us. Our religious and constitutional right was violated and denied to us. Thus, there is no thanks from us – the vast majority of the Muslim Community – for this unpalatable slice of stale, mouldy bread despite the fact that hunger compels acceptance for the sake of survival.

Minus Salaat in the Musaajid in exactly the manner ordained by Allah Azza Wa Jal, Muslims head for spiritual destruction. Nevertheless, our heartfelt and sincere Shukr is offered unto Allah Ta’ala for at least the permission to leave the doors of the Musaajid open and to perform Salaat by manoeuvring in the labirynthal minefiled strewn with the morass of physical and metaphysical impurities in the form of the haraam, shaitaani conditions encumbering the permission.

Understand well the following Shar’i guidance:

(1) It is essential for Muslims to understand that Salaat performed in the fong kong baboonic style of this shaitaani ‘social distancing’ is NOT VALID. Should you, out of ignorance become trapped in a haraam congregation, then do repeat your Salaat. The haraam aspect of ‘social distancing’ is explained in detail in our latest book: “TARAAS-SOO!” – HARAAM SATANIC SAFF-FORMATION. This treatise is available on our website. Hard copies are also available.

(2) It is Haraam to debar any Muslim entry to the Musjid. It is not the job of the Imaam nor of the Musjid trustees and committees to act as policemen, and it is absolutely vile kufr to act as spies, mpimpies and snitches to report if more than 50 Muslims are in a Musjid. Such snitching is the work of only the Munaafiqeen among whom the leaders are reverend abraham bham, tony karaan, menk, bhayat and similar types of molvis/sheikhs who had closed the Musaajid, abolished the Fardh Jamaat Salaat and Jumuah Salaat many days prior to the government ordering the closure of the Musaajid.

(3) If the government regards more than 50 Muslims in the Musjid to be a criminal offence, then it devolves upon it to post a policeman outside every Musjid. His job will be to count the Musallis and to prevent the 51st one from entering. Since debarring a Muslim from entering the Musjid is in violent conflict with the Qur’aan and the Sunnah which constitute the Divine Shariah, our conscience will not permit us to indulge in such horrid oppression. Severely castigating the oppression of debarring Muslims from the Musaajid, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “Who is a greater zaalim (oppressor) than the one who prevents the Name of Allah from the Musaajid, and he strives in the ruin of the Musaajid?” (Al-Baqarah, 114)

Commission of oppression is the salient feature of all governments. We should not be expected to act as agents and employees of the government to enforce a regulation which deracinate our Imaan. It is constitutionally unlawful for the government to impose on us the abhorrent task of preventing Muslims from entering the Musjid. In terms of the constitution it will not be a crime for any Imaam or any Musjid committee not debarring any Muslim from the Musjid.

(4) There will be munaafiq ‘imaams’ and munaafiq committees who will attempt to throw their satanic weight around. They may engage in silly attempts to shunt musallis in the Musjid. Musallis should resist such vile attenmpts. Do not submit to instructions issued by these munaafiqeen.

(5) If you enter a Musjid and find a congregation of clowns in a mock ‘salaat’, do not join them. Stand aside – far from the polluted devils, and perform your Salaat alone. It will be a crime for any of the clowns to interfere with you. If they do, lay a criminal charge against them at the police station. You will not be in violation of the government’s ‘social distancing’ regulation if you perform Salaat alone in a setting where clowns and munaafiqeen pretend to perform jamaat salaat. On the contrary, standing aloof will be in full accord with the kufr regulation. Therefore, maniupulate this regulation to ensure correct performance of Salaat. In this scenario, defy the fong kong characters and perform Salaat alone if Jamaat Salaat is not being performed in conformity with the Waajib command of the Shariah.

(6) It is the duty of the Musallis of a Musjid to unite, form their own committee and expel the munaafiq committee. Musallis should avail themselves of their Shar’i right and submit to the Shariah by disbanding any Musjid committee consisting of munaafiqeen. Understand that the Musallis have a greater right in the Musjid and over the Musjid than these illegitimate munaafiq trustees whose only qualification is ‘boodle’. They are total fussaaq juahala who should not be allowed to administrate the Musaajid.

The Musaajid are not their personal properties. They did not inherit the Musaajid from their fathers. Any committee which seeks to conduct the affairs of the Musjid in contravention of the Shariah is automatically disqualified. It must be booted out by the Musallis.

(7) Multiple jamaats in a Musjid will be permissible only if the government posts a policeman outside the Musjid to prevent Musallis from entry. If such an unconstitutional act of oppression is perpetrated by the government, then multiple Jamaats will be permissible. But never will the kilometer spaces in the sufoof be permissible. Such spaces according to Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are occupied by devils. Only Munaafiqeen enjoy standing alongside shayaateen.

(8) It is of great importance to understand that contributing any funds to a Munaafiq committee is aiding in haraam. It is an act undermining the Shariah. Devils should not be aided in their haraam activities. Refrain from contributing funds to such committees and plan to have them booted out. The Qur’aan is very clear on this issue. Only men of Taqwa are permitted to administrate the affairs of a Musjid.

(9) Resort to Inaabat ilallaah, that is: Taubah (repentance), abstain from sin and futility, renew your pledge of obedience to the Shariah, and be concerned with Islaah of the Nafs (moral reformation). In this way should Muslims rectify their ruptured bond with Allah Ta’ala. Only then will Allah’s Nusrat be forthcoming.

Muslims should understand well that besides Allah Ta’ala there is no refuge for us. All over the world the nations are poised to swallow and destroy the Ummah.

“There is no help (for Muslims) except from Allah, The Mighty, The Wise.”(Qur’aan)

A Hanafi scholar behind the compilation of Sahih al-Bukhari

Imam Is-haaq ibn Ibraheem al-Handhali al-Marwazi al-Hanafi, most commonly known as Ibn Rahuyah (rahimahullah) [d. 238 H] was the student of Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Mubaarak (rahimahullah) who was a student of Imam al-‘Adham, Abu Hanifa (rahimahullah). He was known as Ameer al-Mu-mineen (the leader of the believers) in Hadith. [See: Abu Ghuddah, Umaraa al-Mu-mineen fi al-Hadith 113]

He was one of the greatest Hadith scholars of his time. He dictated 11 000 Hadiths from his memory. He passed away during the night of mid-Sha’ban. Imam Al-Bukhari was among his students. [See for example: Al-Kalaabadhi, Rijaal Sahih al-Bukhari 1/72, Adh-Dhahabi, Siyar ‘Alaam an-Nubala 11/118 and Al-Mizzi, Tahdheeb al-Kamaal 2/10]

Imam Al-Kardari and Imam As-Salihi ad-Dimashqi mentioned him among the narrators who reported from Imam Abu Hanifa and his companions. [See respectively: Al-Kardari, Al-Manaaqib 2/241, As-Salihi, ‘Uqud al-Jumaan 99]

Hafidh Ibn Hajar said about Imam Al-Bukhari, “His determination became stronger on this [that is on the compilation of his Sahih] when he heard his teacher, the leader of the believers in Hadith and Fiqh Is-haq ibn Ibraheem al-Handhali, known as Ibn Rahuyah. […] Abu ‘Abdillah Muhammad ibn Ismaail al-Bukhari said, “We were at Is-haaq ibn Rahuyah when he expressed his desire saying, “If only you could assemble a concise book of the sound Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam).” He said, “His words proved an inspiration for me and I almost immediately embarked on the compilation of Al-Jaami’ as-Sahih.” [Hadyu as-Saari Muqaddima Sahih al-Bukhari 1/4]

Shaykh Mufid ar-Rahman said, “So, we know from this that Is-haaq ibn Rahuyah was the reason behind the compilation of Al-Jaami’ as-Sahih of Imam Al-Bukhari. The latter compiled Al-Jaami’ as-Sahih from his words and he was a Hanafi. Therefore the Hanafi is the reason behind the compilation of Al-Jaami’ as-Sahih of Imam Al-Bukhari.” [Al-Warda al-Haadira 46]

Ifran Nauyock
Al-Kawthari Academy


By Mujlisul Ulama

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“The Saalihoon will depart (from this dunya) one after the other (in quick succession). Then will remain only the hufaalah (rubbish / scum / flotsam) such as the chaff of dates or barley. Allah will have no care whatsoever for them.”

Shaikhul Hadith of Darul Uloom Deoband, Hadhrat Maulana Saeed Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh) passed away on the 25th night of Ramadhaan, 1441 (19 May 2020) at about 3 a.m. After having dedicated his life to teaching Hadith, Allah Ta’ala granted him the most auspicious occasion of one of the last ten Nights of Ramadhaan.

Hadhrat Shaikhul Hadith is among the very last of the Ulama-e-Haq remaining in this world flooded with ulama-e-soo. Darul Uloom Deoband has indeed lost a Great Soul. The Darul Ulooms all over the world, including Deoband, are mere skeletons of their former grandeur. These institutions are no longer the Madaaris which were established by the noble Akaabireen for the attainment of the objectives of the Aakhirat.

We narrate here some episodes which may be interesting to such Muslims who still have an affinity with the Ulama-e-Haq and who had some relationship with Shaikhul Hadith.

* Hadhrat Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh) was the Ustaadh of Mr. Taha Karan of the Carrion body, MJC. Some years ago Karan had written a fong kong article to show that it is permissible for women to cut their hair. In refutation the Ulama-e-Haq published a book, Tresses of Jannat which is available on our website. Hard copies are also available.

We had written to Shaikhul Hadith drawing his attention to the extreme deviation of his student, Karan. The following is the response of Hadhrat Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh):

“Maulana Taha Karaan Sahib is a graduate of Daarul Uloom Deoband. He had studied under me. He had a good ability. In Dorah (the Final Year) he attained first position. His father, Maulana Yusuf Karaan is also a graduate of Daarul Uloom Deoband. His isti’daad (ability) too was very good, and he (i.e. Maulana Yusuf Karaan) is my colleague.

As you have written, Maulana Taha Karaan Saahib after having studied here (at Daarul Uloom) went to Egypt and there too he pursued studies. As you have written, having gone to Egypt he set aside the Maslak and Mashrab of his Ulama of Deoband. Now what is there to lament about?”

(Our comment: By this, Hadhrat Saeed Ahmad Sahib implies that what his student has said on the issue of hair-cutting should not be attributed to the Ulama of Deoband. He acquired his views from elsewhere, not from the Ulama of Deoband.)

Hadhrat Maulana Saeed Ahmad Sahib continues:

“He has imported liberalism from Egypt. Furthermore, he is not a Mufti. Neither did he learn to be a Mufti here (at Daarul Uloom) nor in Egypt. He has begun to interfere with Masaa-il (of the Shariah) merely on the strength of his own knowledge. Thus, his writings could be called articles. It cannot be described as Fatwa.”

There are many Usool (Principles) for (competency in) Fatwa. It is obligatory on a Mufti to take into consideration such principles (of Ifta). Awareness of such principles is the first obligation of a Mufti. For example in his writings he differentiates between Haraam and Makrooh whereas these terms are technical terminology. If the prohibition of things is substantiated on the basis of the Qur’aan, the Ulama describe it with the term, Haraam, and if the prohibition is substantiated on the basis of Ahaadith, the term Karaahat (being Makrooh) is used. But in Urf this differentiation is not made. The word Haraam is used for Makrooh Tahrimi as well. This reality is not in front of Maulana Taha.

Similarly, he has understood the act of the Azwaaj-e-Muttahharaat (the Holy Wives of Rasulullah – sallallahu alayhi wasallam), which was restricted to aged widows, to be the general hukm of the Shariat (i.e. applicable to all women). However, he (i.e. Taha) did not reflect on this fact that the other Ladies of Islam of that age did not adopt that act (the assumed hair-cutting) as their practice. (As a warning Hadhrat wrote the following Qur’aanic aayat after his comment):

“Verily, in this is a lesson for the People of Intelligence.”

In addition, he (Taha) has not correctly understood the riwaayat (Hadith narration) pertaining to tashabbuh (emulation) of males. In this age the women who have the desire for hair-cutting, entertain this fancy on account of fashion. This, in fact, is tashabbuh with aliens.

I have sent your letter to Daarul Ifta and the answer is annexed hereto. Muslims should repose reliance on only this Fatwa (of Daarul Uloom). They should not accord any reliance to the research of Shaikh Taha Karaan.


Saeed Ahmad Palanpuri, Khaadim (Servant) of Daarul Uloom

3rd Rabiul Awwal 1424(5th May 2003)

(End of Hadhrat Maulana Saeed Ahmad’s letter.)

There is much ibrat (lesson for reflection) for Mr. Taha Karan in the unambiguous Naseehat of his Ustaadh. There is no need for further comment. Shaikhul Hadith Sahib has spoken with profound clarity.

* About 2 or 3 years ago Hadhrat Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh) visited South Africa. On that occasion, the NNB jaahil / munaafiq clique was his host. Shaikhul Hadith had expressed the desire to meet the molvi of The Majlis. These miserable characters ensured by crook that the meeting does not take place, hence Shaikhul hadith did not meet us.

* Shaikhul hadith again visited South Africa. This time his host was Mufti E. M. H. Salejee of Estcourt. Shaikhul Hadith expressed the same desire. Shaikhul Hadith accompanied by Mufti Salejee Sahib came to meet us in Port Elizabeth.

Hadhrat Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh) said personally to this writer: “I had two wishes: (1) To meet Hadhrat Maulana Yusuf Binnuri (Rahmatullah alayh), and (2) To meet you (i.e. the molvi of The Majlis). My first wish was not fulfilled. Due to circumstances I was unable to meet Hadhrat Binnuri. My wish to meet you has been fulfilled.”

After emerging from our Musjid in Malabar (Musjidul Fuqara), Shaikhul Hadith saw a prominent notice on the outside door of the Musjid. In a nutshell, the notice stated that Salaat with jeans and t-shirt is not valid, and that whoever performs Salaat with such lewd clothes, should repeat the Salaat. Commenting, Hadhrat Palanpuri said:

“I too propagate against such lewd dress, especially for Salaat. However, I would have phrased the notice (as follows): “A person who wears jeans and t-shirt is like a naked person, and the Salaat of a naked person is not valid.”

* At our home, he said to the molvi of The Majlis. “You are free. You can say and write as you please while I in Darul Ifta have to contend with eight Muftis.”

Shaikhul Hadith implied that he was not totally free and had to take into consideration the attitudes of the other Muftis. Alhamdulillah, by Allah’s fadhl, we at The Majlis are not encumbered with such considerations and restraints. Allah Ta’ala has left us unfettered to proclaim the Haqq in the manner Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) advocated: “Proclaim the Truth even if it is bitter.”

May Allah Ta’ala bestow lofty mansions to Hadhrat Shaikhul Hadith Maulana Saeed Palanpuri (Rahmatullah alayh).


by Shaykh Muhammad Shareef bin Farid

It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of A`isha, who said that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

(( ﺇِﻥَّ ﻟِﻜُﻞِّ ﻗَﻮْﻡٍ ﻋِﻴﺪًﺍ ﻭَﻫَﺬَﺍ ﻋِﻴﺪُﻧَﺎ ))

“Every people have an `Eid, and this day is our `Eid.”

The narrative behind this prophetic tradition is that A`isha said: “Once the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace entered upon me, and with me were two servant girls singing the poems of the battles between the `Aws and the Khazaraj. He then came and laid down on the bed and turned his face away from them. Then Abu Bakr entered and rebuked me and them saying: ‘Are the wind instruments of Satan in the presence of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace?!’ Then the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace turned to him and said: ‘Leave them!’ However, when they took a brief rest, I ushered them out. This was the day of the `Eid in which the Sudanese usually played with their shields and lances.”

The meaning of his words: “Every people have”; refers to every ethnic group or community. In this statement is an important principle because it gives authoritative recognition of the linguistic, racial, religious and cultural legal existence of all people and by which is established the fundamental right to exist.

The meaning of his words: “…an `Eid”; like New Years Day and other holidays. An-Nisaai’ and Ibn Hibban cited in sound chains of authority on the authority of Anas: “When the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace first came to Medina, they had two days in which they celebrated and made amusement in them, and he said: ‘Allah ta`ala has substituted for these two with two more days better than them: the day of al-Fitr and al-Ad’haa’.”

What can be extracted from this prophetic tradition is the reprehensibility of being jubilant during the holidays of the idolaters as well as resembling them. Shaykh Abu’l-Hafs al-Kabeer an-Nasafi from among the followers of Abu Hanifa went as far as to say: “Whoever gives as much as an egg to an idolater out of esteem for their holiday has disbelieved in Allah ta`ala.” The meaning of his words: “…and this day is our `Eid”; is that this is the `Eid of the people of Islam.

The complete narration of the cited prophetic tradition as it is narrated in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of A`isha, may Allah be pleased with her: “Abu Bakr once entered upon me, and there were two servant girls from the Ansaar singing the customary poetry of the Ansaar which they sang about the wars between the `Aws and the Khazraj. She said: ‘They were not actually singing, (but reciting poetry)’. Then Abu Bakr said: ‘Is the wind instruments of Satan in the house of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace?!’ This occurred on the day of the `Eid. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, then said: ‘O Abu Bakr! Every people have an `Eid, and this is our `Eid’.”

A contingent from some of the Sufis uses this prophetic tradition as evidence for the lawfulness of singing, listening to it with musical instruments and without instruments. However, what suffices as a refutation of that is the explicit statement of A`isha in the prophetic tradition by her words: “They were not actually singing”; because she negated singing from them by way of meaning although it had been established for them by verbal expression. The reason for this is because singing is the irrefutable raising of the voice and the modulating hymns which the Arabs call singing. Otherwise a person is not described as singing. It is called singing when the singing of poetic verse is accompanied with the syncopations, lowering of the voice, its arousing, and stimulation which insinuates indecency or explicitly refers to it.

Al-Qurtubi said: “Her statement: ‘They were not actually singing’; means that they were not doing what is normally understood to be singing which singers customarily do. Thus, her statement constitutes a strong safeguard against the kind of conventional singing which is well known; which is designed to motivate and stir the person tranquil and to arouse hidden desires. This type of singing when it is poetic and it describes the beauties of women, wine and other than that from forbidden matters, then there is no disagreement regarding its prohibition…

…As for what the Sufis have invented in that from one perspective there is no disagreement regarding its prohibition. However, the passions of the soul has gotten the better of many people who are associated with spiritual excellence, until there even appears on many of them the actions and behavior of insane people and children; to the point where some of them dance in uniform movements and incessant intermittent routines and even ends with some insolent people among them claiming that that this dancing is form of drawing near to Allah and righteous behavior; and that it is the fruits of sublime spiritual states. However, in reality this is nothing by the fruits of heresy and words of the people of misinterpretation, may Allah assist us!”

Imam al-`Asqalaani said: “In this prophetic tradition is that the lawfulness of manifesting happiness during holidays is from the rites of the religion. In it also is the permissibility of a man entering upon his daughter while she is with her husband, since this is customary. It also establishes the permissibility of a parent disciplining the daughter or son in the presence of their spouses, even when the spouse neglects to do so, since disciplining is the duty of parents. It establishes that lawful compassion between spouses is that shown towards women. In it also is showing kindness towards a woman and seeking to attract their affections. In it also is that the places of the people of spiritual excellence should be free of diversions and nonsense, even when there is no sin involved, except with their permission.
This prophetic tradition also establishes that if the spiritual disciple sees something which is objectionable in the presence of his spiritual guide (shaykh), that he should immediately object to it; and in doing so it does not constitute a breach of the relationship with the spiritual guide. On the contrary, it is correct courtesy with him and fulfilling the responsibility of maintaining his sanctity and showing respect for his rank. In it also is the permissability of a spiritual disciple passing legal decision in the presence of his spiritual guide by what is known to be correct in his spiritual path.

The prophetic tradition also gives evidence of the lawfulness of listening to the voice of a servant girl singing, even when she is not in the direct service of the person listening. This is because, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace did not object to Abu Bakr listening to them. Rather, he objected to his objection of them. Further, the indication that A`isha made for them to leave implies that it is the locus of permissability of servant girls singing in the presence of others is conditioned by it being safe from temptations.”

The two `Eids are the days of al-Fitr and al-Ad’haa, whose legality is established by the words of Allah ta`ala: “Then pray to your Lord and make sacrifice”; and His words: “He has succeeded who purifies himself by giving alms, then mentions the Name of his Lord and then prays.”

The Shehu, may Allah be merciful to him said in his Mirat’t-Tullab: “As-Shibrakhiti said in his commentary upon the al-Mukhtasar: ‘The majority of the scholars of Qur’anic exegesis agree that what is mean by His words: ‘Then pray to your Lord and make sacrifice’ are the two `Eid prayers and the animal sacrifice made for the Day of Sacrifice. It states in the al-Ahkaam of Ibn al-`Arabi: ‘`Ikrama said: ‘A man used to present his alms before performing the prayer’. The Sufyan said about that: ‘Allah ta`ala says: ‘He has succeeded who purifies himself by giving alms, then mentions the Name of his Lord and then prays’.

In the Miftaah as-Sadaad, the commentary upon the Irshaad’s-Saalik it states: ‘The prominent opinion is the prayer of the `Eid is a confirmed Sunna for the person for whom the jumu`a prayer is incumbent, and no one else.’ He then said after a bit: ‘Ibn Zarquun related that it is collective obligation.’

As-Shibrakhiti said in his commentary upon the al-Mukhtasar regarding the words of the author (Khalil ibn Is’haq): ‘The Sunna of the `Eid is two rak`ats based upon the more prominent opinion’; ‘What can be extracted from his words is what will be cited, or it missed him that it is a collective Sunna. However, the view of the madh’hab of Malik is that it is an individual Sunna for the one upon whom jumu`a is obligatory, and not upon every responsible person. It is also said that regarding the obligation both `Eid prayers that they are individual and collective.

It has related by Abu Mansuur ad-Daylami on the authority of Talha ibn `Ubaydallah, may Allah be pleased with him that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace said:

ﻟَﻴْﻠَﺔُ ﺍﻟْﻔِﻄْﺮِ ﻟَﻴْﻠَﺔُ ﺭَﺣْﻤَﺔِ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪِ ﻳُﻌْﺘِﻖُ ﻓِﻴﻬَﺎ ﺍﻟﺮِّﻗَﺎﺏَ، ﻓَﻤَﻦْ ﺳَﺠَﺪَ ﺳَﺠْﺪَﺗَﻴْﻦِ ﻛَﺘَﺐَ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪُ ﻟَﻪُ ﻣِﻦَ ﺍﻟﺜَّﻮَﺍﺏِ ﻛَﻤَﻦ ﺻَﺎﻡَ ﺭَﻣَﻀَﺎﻥَ ﻣِﻦ ﺻَﻐِﻴﺮٍ ﺇِﻟَﻰ ﻛَﺒِﻴﺮٍ ﻭَﺫَﻛَﺮٍ ﻭَﺃُﻧْﺜَﻰ ﻭَﻳُﻌْﻄِﻴﻪِ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪُ ﺗَﻌَﺎﻟَﻰ ﺛَﻮَﺍﺏَ ﻣَﻦ ﺻَﻠَّﻰ ﻓِﻲ ﺍﻟْﺠُﺒَﺎﻧَﺔِ ﺍﻟﺼَّﺤَﺮَﺍﺀِ ﻣِﻦَ ﺍﻟْﻤَﺸْﺮَﻕِ ﻭَﺍﻟْﻤَﻐْﺮِﺏِ

“The night of the breaking of the fast (laylat ‘l-fitr) is the night of the mercy of Allah, in which Allah frees slaves. Whoever makes two prostrations during this night, Allah will write for him the reward of all those who fast Ramadan, whether young, old, male or female. And Allah ta`ala will give him the reward of one who prays in places of worship in the desserts from the east to the west.”

It has been related by Abu Nu`aym al-Haafidh, Abu `Ali al-Hadaad and Abu Mansuur ad-Daylami on the authority of Daws ibn Umar and Abu Hani, may Allah be pleased with both of them that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace said:

ﻣَﻦ ﺍَﺣْﻴَﺎ ﻟَﻴْﻠَﺘَﻲْ ﺍﻟْﻌِﻴﺪِ ﻭَﻟَﻴْﻠَﺔَ ﺍﻟﻨِّﺼْﻒِ ﻣِﻦ ﺷَﻌْﺒَﺎﻥِ ﻟَﻢْ ﻳَﻤُﺖْ ﻗَﻠْﺒُﻪُ ﻳَﻮْﻡَ ﻳَﻤُﻮﺕُ ﺍﻟْﻘُﻠُﻮﺏُ

“Whoever gives life to the two nights of `Eid and the night of the fifteenth of Sha`baan, his heart will never die on the day when hearts will die.”
It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of Anas who said:

” ﻛَﺎﻥَ ﺭَﺳُﻮﻝُ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪِ ﺻَﻠَّﻰ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪُ ﻋَﻠَﻴْﻪِ ﻭَﺳَﻠَّﻢَ ﻻَ ﻳَﻐْﺪُﻭ ﻳَﻮْﻡَ ﺍﻟْﻔِﻄْﺮِ ﺣَﺘَّﻰ ﻳَﺄْﻛُﻞَ ﺗَﻤَﺮَﺍﺕٍ”

“The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not go out on the day of `Eid’l-Fitr until he had eaten some dates.”
The meaning of his words: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not go out”; where the expression ‘go out’ means to walk or circulate during the first part of the day.

The meaning of his words: “…on the day of `Eid’l-Fitr”; is that he mentioned the al-Fitr in particular because this is absent in the day of al-Ad’haa, which is in contrast since it is highly recommended to eat breakfast consuming something from his sacrificed animal; as it was stated explicitly in the prophetic tradition: “He should not eat on the day of al-Ad’haa until he has prayed.”

In the narration of Ibn Maja: “…until he has returned.” Ahmad added: “…he should then eat from his sacrificed animal.” In the narration of Abu Bakr al-Athram: “…until the time of forenoon.” This is the same as in the narrations of the al-Muntaqa and the an-Nayl.

In the narration of al-Bayhaqi: “He should then consume something from the liver of his sacrificed animal.” This is the same as in the narration of the `Umdat’l-Qaari. In the narration of ad-Daraqutni in his as-Sunnan he added: “…until he returns and he should then consume something from his sacrificed animal.” The meaning of his words: “…until he had eaten some dates”; that is to say, three, five, or seven or less than that, or more.

Ibn Qudama said: “We do not know of any disagreement regarding expediting consuming food on the day of al-Fitr.” The wisdom in the recommendation of dates is what it in them of sweetness, and the strengthening of the sight which becomes weak due to fasting. Other reasons are that the consuming of something sweet conforms to the sweetness of faith; it removes the desire to sleep; and is easier to consume than anything else.

Further, some of the Taabi`uun considered it highly recommended to break the fast with anything sweet such as honey. This was transmitted by Ibn Abi Shayba on the authority of Mu`awiyya ibn Qirra, Ibn Sireen and others. All of this is applicable regarding those who are able to do so; if not, then it is merely necessary that he break the fast, even with water in order to achieve the resemblance of adherence to the Sunna.

The wisdom in eating before the `Eid prayer is in order that a person not assume that it is necessary to fast until he actually prays the `Eid prayer. It is as if by doing so he seeks to preempt this pretext.It is said that the wisdom in eating before going out to the prayer is because Satan who was incarcerated during the month of Ramadan is not released until after the the prayer of the `Eid.

Thus, it is highly recommended to expedite the breaking of the fast early in order to be protected from his whispering. Some of the people of knowledge consider it highly recommended for a person not to leace his home on the day of al-Fitr until he has eaten something. It is also highly recommended for him to break his fast with dates, and that he should not eat on the day of al-Ad’haa until after he has returned from the prayer.

It has also been related regarding eating on the Day of Fitr before going ut to the `Eid Prayer in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari using the same narration from Marjan ibn Raja on the authority of Anas ibn Malik who said:

ﻭَﻳَﺄْﻛُﻠُﻬُﻦَّ ﻭِﺗْﺮﺍً

“The dates should be eaten in odd numbers.”

Ibn Abi Jamra made clear intimation to meaning of this by his words: “As for making them an odd number, al-Muhallab said: ‘This is clear indications of the oneness of Allah ta`ala. It is for this reason that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace used to utilize an odd number in al of his affairs, in order to take baraka from that’.”

In a narration of Abu Dawud on the authority of Ibn Mas`ud: “Utilize an odd number O people of the Qur’an. Indeed Allah is Uniquely Odd and He loves the odd.” In the narration of al-Bukhari and Muslim on the authority of Abu Hurayra: “Verily Allah has ninety-nine Names, short of one. No one memorizes them except that he will be entered into Paradise. He is the Uniquely Odd and He loves the odd.”

In the narration of Abd’r-Razaaq on the authority of al-Hassan mursalaan: “Indeed Allah is Uniquely Odd and He loves the odd. Whoever does not perform the witr is not from among us.” Thus, the meaning of his words, upon him be blessings and peace: “…He loves the odd”; is that the expression odd in terms of enumeration is superior to numbers which are even especially regarding His Divine Names because it is a clear proof of the Oneness of His Divine Attributes.

For Allah ta`ala loves that which is odd in everything, even in things which are enumerated as odd. He also loves the servant behaving in accordance with His Divine character and actions, glory be to Him, the Exalted. For this reason the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace loved behaving and acting in accordance with what Allah azza wa jalla loved. This prophetic tradition is proof that all the actions of the Sunna are a manifestation of gnosis of Allah ta`ala and are indications of His Divine Oneness.

O Allah accept our fasting, our abstinence, our vigils, our prayers, supplications and Qur’anic recitations. Give us good in this life and the Next and redeem us from the punishment of the Fire.

The `Eids are a time of glorification of Allah and performing much remembrance of him by Angels, humanity, djinn and the whole of creation. It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of Abdallah ibn Yusr, who said:

” ﺇِﻥْ ﻛُﻨَّﺎ ﻓَﺮَﻏْﻨَﺎ ﻓِﻰ ﻫَﺬِﻩِ ﺍﻟﺴَّﺎﻋَﺔِ، ﻭَﺫَﻟِﻚَ ﺣِﻴﻦَ ﺍﻟﺘَّﺴْﺒِﻴﺢِ ”

“When we had finished with the `Eid prayer at that hour was the time for the glorification of Allah.”

The meaning of his words: “When we had finished with the `Eid prayer at that hour”; is reference to the fact that the completion of the prayer of the `Eid occured at that particular hour similar to the time it was done during the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The accusative particle ‘inna’ (indeed) is an indication of extenuating phrase after a significant one; thus, making it a contingent conditional phrase.

The origin of this interpolation is from Ahmad where he explicitly expressed it in the nominative case and with its connecting phrase. Ahmad then related a prophetic tradition by way of Yazid ibn Khumayr who said: “Abdallah ibn Yusr, the Companion of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace once came out to the people on the day of the `Eid’l-Fitr or al-Ad’haa, and he objected to the Imam tarrying with the prayer. He then said: “We were with the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace and we had completed the prayer at this particular time.” This is the same in the narrations of Abu Dawud on the authority of Ahmad and al-Hakim by way of Ahmad also, who verified its soundness.

The meaning of his words: “…was the time for the glorification of Allah”; is that it took place at the time of forenoon, which is the time of the glorification of superogatory prayers. Thus when the time passes it is considered a reprehensible time to perform the `Eid prayers. In the a sound narration of at-Tabarani: “…and that was at the time of the glorification of forenoon.” His saying: ‘the time of glorification’ means that this time is the moment in which the `Eid prayer should commence.

This is proof that the prayer of `Eid actually takes the place of the glorification of duhaa for that day and is an indication of the superiority of the prayer of the forenoon. It also provides evidence of the lawfulness of expediting the performance of the prayer of the `Eid, and the reprehensibility of postponing it very late. Some of the scholars said that it should be performed after the expansion of the sun towards its zenith, and no disagreement is known to exist regarding this opinion.

It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, who said:

” ﻛَﺎﻥَ ﺭَﺳُﻮﻝُ ﺍﻟﻠَّﻪِ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﻳَﺨْﺮُﺝُ ﻳَﻮْﻡَ ﺍﻟْﻔِﻄْﺮِ ﻭَﺍﻷَﺿْﺤَﻰ ﺇِﻟَﻰ ﺍﻟْﻤُﺼَﻠَّﻰ ”

“The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to go outside of the town to the place of prayer on the days of fitr and ad’haa.”

The meaning of his words: “…to the place of prayer…”, is that it was a well known locale in Medina which was one thousand cubits from the door of the masjid, as Umar ibn Shibba said in his Akbar’l-Medina on the authority of Abu Ghasaan al-Kinaani, the companion of Malik.

This prophetic tradition establishes that it is more appropriate for the khutba to be delivered by the Imam while he is standing on the earth than it would be on the minbar. The difference between this place of prayer and the masjid is that it should be an empty space, in which the Imam can see everyone present, in contrast to the masjid which has places some restricted areas where some people can not be seen. It is to this empty place that the people should go to pray the `Eid prayers.

Thus, the `Eid prayer should only be prayed in the masjid when there is a necessity to do so. It is for this reason that this prophetic tradition establishes the right of the scholars to object to the Amirs when they fabricate something contrary to the Sunna. It also establishes the lawfulness of a scholar swearing to the truthfulness of what he informs others about. It also establishes the proof for it being highly recommended to go out into the deserts for the `Eid prayers, and that it is superior to praying in the masjid. This is due to the persistence of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace doing that although the value of his masjid was well known.

As-Shafi said in his al-Umm: “It has reached us that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace used to go out during the two `Eids to the place of prayer in Medina. This was the same with those who came after him, except when there was an excuse of heavy rain or the like. This is the same judgment for populations of the general lands of Islam, except for the people of Mecca.”

It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of Jaabir ibn Abdallah, who said:

” ﻛَﺎﻥَ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺒِﻰُّ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﺇِﺫَﺍ ﻛَﺎﻥَ ﻳَﻮْﻡُ ﻋِﻴﺪٍ ﺧَﺎﻟَﻒَ ﺍﻟﻄَّﺮِﻳﻖَ ”

“The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to redirect himself on the way returning on the day of the `Eid.”

In the narration of al-Isma`ili: “When he went out to the `Eid, he would return another way from the way he went.” At-Tirmidhi said: “Some of the people of knowledge extract from this that this action is highly recommended for the Imam.” This is the opinion of as-Shafi`, however in his al-Umm he considers it highly recommended for the Imam and those who follow him. This is the opinion held b the majority of the followers of as-Shafi`. Ar-Raafi` said: “In short, no one required to do this except the Imam.”

Qadi Abd’l-Wahaab al-Maliki said: “The Imam should do this so that the people of both directions can witness him. It is said that this includes those who reside in the two ways from among men and jinn. It is said that this should be done so that equity can be established between them in the advantage of the bounty of his passage. Or so that equity can be established between them in their receiving baraka from him. Or so that they can all smell the fragrance of the musk in the road in which he passes, because the Imams were known for that. It is said that this was originally done because the road to the place of prayer was in the south of the city, so when he return he would take the direction of the north of the city. Thus, he would return in another direction from which he went originally.

It is said that this should be done in order to make manifest the rites of Islam in both directions. It is said that this is in order to manifest the remembrance of Allah. It is said that this is in order to irritate the hypocrites and the Jews, and it is said that this is in order to incite fear in them by the large numbers of people with him. It is said that this is done in order to be on guard against the intrigues of the hypocrites and Jews or against one of them. It is said that this is done in order cause joy to become general among them by means of his passing, or in order that they can take baraka from him as a result of his passage and their seeing him, and that they can attain advantage from him in fulfilling their needs regarding legal decisions, instructions, adherence, guidance, the giving of alms, his giving of the greetings of peace to them and other than these. It is said that this should be done in order that visitations can be made to the relatives among the living and the dead, as well as to connect the bonds of kinship.
It is said that it should be done in order to bring about cheerfulness among them by the alteration of their circumstances to that of forgiveness and contentment. It is said that during his passage to the place of prayer the Imam should give alms, and when he returns there usually does not remain any wealth with him, thus he returns in another direction so that he does not have to turn away those who ask. However, this last point is extremely implausible because it requires proof to corroborate it. Finally, it is said that this is done simply in order to to decrease the number of the crowd walking with him.”

It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari on the authority of al-Bara’, who said that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said in a sermon on the day of sacrifice:

(( ﺇِﻥَّ ﺃَﻭَّﻝَ ﻣَﺎ ﻧَﺒْﺪَﺃُ ﺑِﻪِ ﻓِﻰ ﻳَﻮْﻣِﻨَﺎ ﻫَﺬَﺍ ﺃَﻥْ ﻧُﺼَﻠِّﻰَ ﺛُﻢَّ ﻧَﺮْﺟِﻊَ ﻓَﻨَﻨْﺤَﺮَ، ﻓَﻤَﻦْ ﻓَﻌَﻞَ ﺫَﻟِﻚَ ﻓَﻘَﺪْ ﺃَﺻَﺎﺏَ ﺳُﻨَّﺘَﻨَﺎ ))

“The first thing that we begin with on this day of ours is we pray then return and make our sacrifices. Whoever has done so, has accomplished our Sunna.”

The meaning of his words: “the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said in a sermon on the day of sacrifice”; is that it was the day of the `Eid’l-Ad’haa as Mansuur stated it explicitly in his narration on the authority of as-Sha`bi regarding the same prophetic tradition because the cited speech occurred during the khutba. The wording of Mansuur on the authority of al-Bara’ ibn al-`Aazib who said: “The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace gave a khutba to us on the day of al-Ad’haa and said…” and he went on to cite the following tradition.

The meaning of his words, upon him be blessings and peace: “The first thing that we begin with on this day of ours is we pray”; and then the Imam gives the khutba after the prayer.

The meaning of his words, upon him be blessings and peace: “…then return and make our sacrifices”; is that the meaning of the prophetic traditions of al-Bara’ establishes the invalidation of the sacrifice made before the prayer, by the apparent statement of his words from another path of transmission: “Whoever offers sacrifice before the prayer has no sacrifice.” That is to say, that whoever sacrifices his animal before the prayer, then he has not performed the sacrifice, which means that he has not fulfilled the sacrifice of slaughtering his animal properly.

The meaning of his words, upon him be blessings and peace: “Whoever has done so, has accomplished our Sunna”; is evidence that the proper time of the animal sacrifice should begin after the performance of the prayer.

As for the prophetic tradition of al-Bara’ its apparent wording seems to contradict its proper interpolation because his words: “The first that we began with on the day of ours is that we pray then return and make our sacrifices”; gives the perception that these words occurred before the occurrence of the prayer, which then necessitates the sermon preceding the actual prayer, based on the assumption that these words were actually apart of the sermon of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and since the prayer is followed by the sacrifice. However, the correct explanation is that what was intended is that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace prayed the `Eid, and then made the khutba in which he said the following statement.

It has been related in the Saheeh of al-Bukhari: “Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, used to glorify Allah during the days at Mina after every prayer, on his bed, in his tent, while sitting and while walking, and during the whole of these days of Mina. Maymuna used to glorify Allah on the day of sacrifice. And the women used to glorify Allah when praying behind Aban ibn Uthman and Umar ibn Abd’l-Azeez on the nights of tashreeq (11th, 12th, and 13th of Dhu’l-Hijja) along with the men in the mosque.”

The meaning of his words: “Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, used to glorify Allah”; is that as for the wording of the glorification the soundest which has been transmited is what was related b Abd’r-Razaaq with a sound chain on the authority of Salman who said: “Glorify Allah b saying: ‘Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar, kabeera’.”

It has been transmitted by Sa`id ibn Jubayr, Mujaahid, Abd’r-Rahman ibn Abi Layla, which Ja`far al-Fariaabi related in the Kitaab’l-`Eidayn b way of Yazid ibn Abi Ziyaad on the authority of the above mentioned transmitters, which also the opinion of as-Shafi` who added that one should say: “…wa lillahi’l-hamd.”

It is also said that one should glorify Allah ta`ala three times with Allahu akbar and then add: “Laa ilaha illa Allah wahadahu laa shareeka lahu” to the end. It is said that one should glorify Allah two times b saying: ‘Allahu akbar’ and then say after that: ‘laa ilaha illa Allah, wa Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar wa lillahi’l-hamd’; which comes to us b way of Umar; and something similar was transmitted on the authority of Ibn Mas`ud, and is the expressed opinions of Ahmad and Is’haq. However, in these times people have added some additional words which have no foundation to them.
The meaning of his words: “…during the days at Mina after every prayer on his bed, in his tent, while sitting and while walking, and during the whole of these days”; is that the custom inclusive in this prophetic tradition is that the existence of the glorification should be performed during these days at the end of every prescribed prayer, as well as in all other circumstances.

The meaning of his words: “…Maymuna used to glorify Allah on the day of sacrifice”; refers to the Maymuna the daughter of al-Haarith, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The meaning of his words: “…. And the women used to glorify Allah”; are the women of al-Medina. This is evidence for the permissibility of women being present for the prayers in the mosques.

The meaning of his words: “…when praying behind Aban ibn Uthman”; is that he was above mentioned Abaan ibn Amir’l-Mu’mineen Uthman ibn`Afan, who was the Amir of al-Medina at that time.

The meaning of his words: “…and Umar ibn Abd’l-Azeez”: is that he was the Amir’l-Mu’mineen and the mujaddid of the first century of Islam Abu Hafs Umar ibn Abd’l-Aziz ibn Marwaan ibn al-Hakam ibn Abi’l-`Aas ibn Umayya ibn Abdushams ibn Abdumanaaf ibn Qusay ibn Kilaab al-Qurayshi al-Umawi al-Medini. He was the Imam, traditionist, learned mujtahid, ascetic, worshipping and spiritual master. He was from among the Imams of independent judgment and Rightly Guided Khalifs. His mother was Umm `Aasim bint `Aasim ibn Umar ibn al-Khataab. He was appointed Amir of al-Medina in the year 86 A.H. until 93 A.H. It was then that the people prayed the `Eid prayers behind him.

The meaning of his words: “…on the nights of tashreeq (11th, 12th, and 13th of Dhu’l-Hijja) along with the men in the mosque”; is that the phrase tashreeq refers to the days of tashreeq, which are the three das after the day of sacrifice, which is the 10th of Dhu’l-Hijjah. These days are called tashreeq because they are the days in which the meat of the sacrificed animals is laid out in strips in the sun to dry.

Regarding the glorifications performed on these days there is disagreement among the scholars in several areas. Among them are those who restrict the glorifications to be done after all prayers. Among them are those who specify the glorifications to be done after the prescribed prayers and not superogatory.

Among them are those who specify the glorifications to be performed by men and not women; however, this contradicts the apparent expression of the prophetic tradition: “…along with the men in the mosque.” Some say it should be done while in congregation and not individually; while performing current prayers and not missed prayers; by those resident and not those traveling and those who reside in the metropolis and not those living in small villages. It is apparent that al-Bukhari chose this prophetic tradition because it is inclusive of all the above opinions and corroborates them.

Also, among the scholars there is disagreement regarding when the glorifications should begin and when they should end. It is said it should begin on the subh of the day of `Arafa. It also said that it should begin after the dhuhr of that same day. It is also said after its `asr. Others say that it should begin after the subh of the day of sacrifice, while others say after the dhuhr of the same day. It is said that it should end after the dhuhr of the day of sacrifice, while others say after its `asr.

Some say that it should end after the dhuhr on the second day of sacrifice, while some say that it should end after the subh on the last of the days of tashreeq. Others say after the dhuhr of the same day, while others say after its `asr. The soundest opinion, however, is what was narrated on the authority of the Companions: Ali and Ibn Mas`ud that it commences on the subh of the day of `Arafa until the last of the days of Mina, as ibn al-Mundhir related.

Among the best of the adhkaar is saying: “Subhaana Allah; al-Hamdulillahi; Laa ilaha illa Allah; Allahu Akbar; and Laa hawla wa laa quwwata illa billahi.” O Allah accept our fasting, our abstinence, our vigils, our prayers, supplications and Qur’anic recitations. Give us good in this life and the Next and redeem us from the punishment of the Fire.

The Flawed Moon-Sighting “Chart”

By Sharif Abu Laith

One of the biggest diseases when it comes to splits over sighting the new moon is these sighting charts.
They are fundamentally scientifically flawed.

1. They use an outdated and scientifically discredited idea of the danjon limit. It’s now believed no such limit exists

2. It’s a probabilistic chart meaning it’s dhanni (indefinite) and not certain. To use this chart to discount the actual testimony of a person has no basis whatsoever.

3. These charts are built on assumptions that are not scientifically proven but subjective. E.g. They do not account for testimonies of sighting before sunset, or they only refer to non Muslim amateur scientists for “verified sightings” thus ignoring many testimonies from Muslims themselves.

This is what moonsighting.com claim note they use a criteria that is based on cities, with light pollution, and after sunset…

“Please note that our visibility maps are calculated for visibility at local sunset time at every point on the globe for a specific date. All those calculations are based on the collected observation data after sunset (from 1860 AD to the present) from different locations on the globe. The data of observations we have were all from cities which have city lights, city pollution and after sunset. We do not have any data for sighting before sunset. New evidence show that Saudi claims of sighting comes from desert areas and many times the sightings were before sunset. We, at moonsighting.com started calculating the possibility of sighting before sunset, and our finding for sighting possibility before sunset (under consideraion of Saudi desert areas) was a big surprise. The moon being few degrees above the horizon before sunset may have been seen, which would set in a short time and would not be visible if people try to see it after sunset. It should also be noted that the new crescent moon in desert areas with dry climate and no city lights and no city pollution would have very different refraction effects.”

Therefore to use a probabilistic indefinite sighting chart to discount a valid testimony is wrong and needs a fundamental reconsideration from those that use it.

Most if not all Muslims who attempt to use it do not even understand the “science” nor its probabilistic nature behind these charts, yet take it as though it’s certain (qati).

Finally there’s no possible calculations to determine sighting. Yes NO possible way to calculated it with certainty that’s because a number of variables cannot be predicted for instance

1. Light pollution
2. Luminosity at twilight
3. Wind direction
4. Humidity
5 atmospheric pressure
6. The level of eyesight of the individual(s) viewing the moon.
That’s in addition to the elliptical orbit of the moon (gets closer towards the earth at certain periods), variable speed of the moon which changes.

All this makes it IMPOSSIBLE to use calculations to determine when it is possible to sight the moon.

Therefore how can we use a dhanni calculations to disregard what the text has commanded which is to follow a valid testimony (even if there’s still a possibility of error we are still commanded explicitly to follow this).

Thus these charts are a fitnah that should be thrown away
In fact if these charts were thrown away we’d probably have a lot more unity over the issue.


Istighfaar is the act of seeking forgiveness from Allah. We are in the last ten days of the month of Ramadan. During these nights and specially the night of Laylat al-Qadr, it is recommended to make much Istighfaar. We are hereby sharing this anecdote of Imam Al-Hasan al-Basri (rahimahullah).

Ibn Sabeeh narrated: A man once came to Al-Hasan al-Basri and complained to him about his troubles. He said to him: “Seek Allah’s forgiveness [say Astaghfirullah].”

Then another person came to him complaining of poverty. He said to him: “Seek Allah’s forgiveness.”
Then another person came to him and asked him to make Du’a to Allah to grant him a child. He replied: “Seek Allah’s forgiveness.”

After that another person came complaining to him about the dryness of the plants of his garden. He said to him:“Seek Allah’s forgiveness.”

The people present were very surprised thinking, “Why is it that Al-Hasan al-Basri is giving the same solution of Istighfaar to whoever comes to him?” So Ibn Sabeeh eventually asked “Why are you giving one response for all the problems? ”
Al-Hasan al-Basri said, “Have you not read the statement of Allah in Surah Nuh? “And said, ‘Ask forgiveness of your Lord. Indeed, He is ever a Perpetual Forgiver. He will send [rain from] the sky upon you in [continuing] showers. And give you increase in wealth and children and provide for you gardens and provide for you rivers.”” [Surah Nuh, verses 10-12]

This anecdote was cited by Imam al-Qurtubi in his Tafseer, Al-Jaami’ li Ahkaam al-Quran 9/222.

Therefore in any circumstance or problem, first return to Allah through making continuously Istighfaar. It is through it that solutions and relief will come.

Ifran Nauyock
Al-Kawthari Academy


In a fatwa issued by Mufti Abdun Nabi Hamidi of whom we are not aware nor of the institution he represents, he has categorically stated that even in the present satanic scenario Eid Salaat at home will not be valid in terms of the Hanafi Math-hab. In this regard he states:

“The performance of Eid Salah at home cannot be validated as per Hanafi Mazhab as understood clearly from the above-mentioned quotation………Therefore, in the current lockdown situation, Eid Salah cannot be performed at home according to the Hanafi Fiqh.”

The invalidity is based on the incumbent condition of Ithnul Aam (general and open permission for all Muslims to attend) lacking if the Salaat is performed in a private home to which all Muslims have no access.

On this issue, we have advised that Eid Salaat may be performed at home, and that the following conditions should be observed:

(1) The minimum musallis present must be four adult males.

(2) The door should not be locked.

(3) Any Muslim who desires to join the Salaat may not be debarred.

In some measure this will fulfil the Ithnul Aam requisite. Due to the devilish state of affairs prevailing and the oppressive closure of the Musaajid by the oppressive government, and the numerous munaafiqeen prowling about to snitch to the police about Muslims performing Salaat in the Musaajid clandestinely, we are of the opinion that Eid Salaat on the basis of the aforementioned three conditions will be valid, Insha-Allah. This is our opinion. Allah Ta’ala knows best.

Jumuah Salaat had become Fardh only after the Hijrat from Makkah to Madinah. During the first phase of Nubuwwat in Makkah, due to fear for the Mushrik authorities, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the small band of Sahaabah performed Zuhr And Asr Salaat secretly in a house, hence the Qiraa’t was recited silently. We still observe this practice to commemorate that era of fear. There was no Jumuah in that initial phase in Makkah.

Jumuah and Eid Salaat are among the Shi-aar (salient/outstanding features) of Islam. These are Ibaadat activities to be publicized and advertised. Thus, performing Jumuah and Eid Salaat at home does divest these Salaats from their salient characteristic.

Therefore, despite our opinion, we do not take issue with the Mufti Sahib who holds the opinion of invalidity. This is such a difference on which we are not dogmatic.

We have dogmatically propagated that Jumuah is not valid in any prison. We trust that this Mufti has the same fatwa of invalidity for Jumuah in prison.

Since according to the Shaafi’ Math-hab Eid Salaat is valid even at home, the rigidity of the Hanafi prohibition due to the current shaitaaniyat is somewhat diluted, hence we are of the opinion that Eid Salaat at home in the present circumstances will be valid. If it was not for the current Satanism, it would not be permissible at all for Hanafis to depart from the Fatwa of their Math-hab.