Category Archives: The Salafi Sect

Who Are the Madkhalis??

[By Moulana Huzaifah Ibraaheem]

Many people may not be familiar with this term, hence they may be wondering: “Who exactly are the Madkhalis?”

Madkhalis are a branch of the Salafis.

Some people have the misconception that Salafiyyah and the Salafis are one, unified body, but this is very far from the truth. Rather, the Salafis are divided up into many small sects, each with different leaders, different beliefs, different agendas, different ideologies, different methodologies, etc. Perhaps the only thing the various sects truly have in common is that they all hate each other. Other than that, everything else is up for debate, with the very concept of “What is Tawheed?” being a “controversial” issue among the various Salafi subsects, with a variety of conceptions of what exactly Tawheed is and what it entails, e.g. “Is Haakimiyyah part of Tawheed?”, and so on.

Thus, the very first point the readers must realise is that the Salafis are perhaps more divided than any other group, and they certainly fight among one another and kill one another more than any other group has done in recent times.

The Madkhalis, then, are simply one sect from the many sects of Salafiyyah, and the Abu Iyaad Amjad Rafiq character belongs to this subsect of Salafism. From the various Salafi sects, the Madaakhilah (Madkhalis) are the most hated and the most hateful: the rest of the Salafi sub sects unanimously hate them with a passion, and they hate the rest of the Salafis. Their hatred for other Salafis far exceeds their hatred for the Kuffaar; in fact, they (the Madaakhilah) love the Kuffaar and will happily see the Muslims suffer if it means safety for the Kuffaar.

When this is their hatred for even other Salafis, it goes without saying that their hatred for the rest of the Ummah (those who are not Salafis) is worse.

The Madaakhilah are the followers of a man from Saudi Arabia by the name of Rabee` ibn Haadi al-Madkhali, a Salafi Shaykh born in 1931. His Asaatidhah (teachers) include bin Baaz, ibn al`Uthaymeen, al-Albaani, `Abdul Muhsin al-`Abbaad and others. He taught at the Faculty of Hadeeth in Madeenah University for many years until he retired in the mid-1990s. He was made head of the Department of Sunnah in the Department of Higher Studies.

Earlier in his life he had expressed views criticising the Saudi government, but later on became their biggest supporter from all of the scholars within Saudi Arabia, and Saudi began using him to justify all their satanism such as allowing U.S. troops to enter the Jazeeratul `Arab, and preaching an ideology of absolute submission to the Zaalim, Kaafir Saudi government which in turn is the stooge of America. Those who follow him are known as Madaakhilah (Madkhalis), and they resemble a cult more than any other Salafi sect does. To them, there is no Islaam outside of what is preached by Rabee` alMadkhali. Though they hate Taqleed of the Four Madhaahib of Haqq (Hanafi, Maaliki, Shaafi`ee and Hanbali), they themselves are the absolute blindest Muqallideen, rabid cult-worshippers of Rabee` al Madkhali.

The various Arab Zaalim states have always favoured the Madkhalis on account of their blind support for these Kufr, tyrannical regimes which kill, imprison and torture Muslims. Yet, Allaah Ta`aalaa has made it such that even after all of their grovelling at the feet of the Zaalim rulers, with the rise of MBS (Murtadd bin Shaytaan), even these “Dog Scholars”, “Palace Scholars”, worshippers at the feet of the Taaghoot rulers, they themselves now undergo persecution as well, because MBS does not even want their version of Islaam. He wants no Islaam whatsoever, because he is a Shaytaan in human form who hates Allaah Ta`aalaa, hates Rasoolullaah  صلی اللہ علیه وسلم and hates the Deen of Islaam.

In summary: the Madkhalis are the “dogs of the rulers” who are forever barking at anyone who in any way criticises the Kufr, Zaalim regimes or proclaims the Haqq.

The Madkhalis in reality are the Khawaarij of today; because, the salient feature of the Khawaarij described by Rasoolullaah صلی اللہ علیه وسلم is that they kill the people of Islaam and leave the people of idol-worship alone.

The Madkhalis fit this description perfectly. All of their hatred has always been focused only on Muslims. They only argue with Muslims and only fight with Muslims. They have never in their lives stood up for the Haqq. Rather, they have attempted to make the worship of Taaghoot part of Islaam.

This Baatil, Satanic sect known as “Madkhalis” has been refuted not only by other groups outside of Salafism, but they have even been refuted time and again by other sub sects of Salafiyyah themselves and their evil has been made manifest. Their agenda of trying to make Muslims subservient to Taaghoot has been exposed.

In their personal lives, these people are absolutely devoid of true Deen. Many of them in recent years have popped up in the UK: the likes of Abu Khadeejah, etc.

In the UK, they are known for their vile treatment of Muslim women, of the wives they marry, treating them as cheap prostitutes. They have ruined the lives of many Muslim families, and many of those who had been Madkhalis but later abandoned this sect especially the womenfolk have testified to this and to what they experienced living under the Madkhalis.

Before concluding this point, there is one last issue that must be addressed, and that is the Madkhali Salafi style of dressing which has lately been adopted by not only Salafis but other Muslims as well: the long, silky dress and the red and white scarf.

The Saudis and those who follow them drag themselves around in these long, silky dresses which hang not just on the ankle but far below it. They have moved very far away from the Sunnah of Rasoolullaah صلى الله علیه وسلم and Sahaabah رضي الله عنهم.

Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضي الله عنهم were people of Jihaad. The fitness level of the Sahaabah رضي الله عنهم was such that they were able to run and jump onto a moving horse and ride it without even the need for a saddle. Compare this to the Saudi Salafis with their “thawbs” that sweep the streets. They cannot even run while wearing it, let alone fight in Jihaad. Their obesity is appalling. Their style of dressing, with the silky dress dragging around on the floor, is that of homosexuals and has absolutely nothing to do with the Sunnah of Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم and his Sahaabah رضي الله عنهم, and this is something which people must understand very clearly. There are people who think that they are following the Sunnah if they purchase these long silky dresses and that red and white scarf. We must clarify this: By dressing in this manner, you are following Aal Sa`ood (the Saudis), not Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم.

Those who know a little bit about the history of these Saudis and how they were the stooges of Britain will know about a man by the name of Thomas Edward Lawrence, more famously known as “Lawrence of Arabia”, a British archaeologist, army officer, diplomat and writer. During the time of the Ottomans, he bribed and instigated many of the various Bedouin tribes into rising up against them. The red andwhite scarf (known as a ghutrah or shimaagh) was worn exclusively by those Bedouin tribes who had given their allegiance to Britain. Thus, the red-and-white scarf historically signifies loyalty and allegiance (Walaa) to the Kuffaar. It is most hypocritical and ironic, then, to wear that long dress and that red-and-white scarf designed by Britain while speaking about “al-Walaa wal-Baraa”.

It used to be that only the Salafis dressed in this way, but unfortunately today even many of the “Ulamaa” around the world dress like this as well. The original Sunnah of  Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم and his Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضي الله عنهم  has been shunned and replaced with a long, tight, silky dress that inhibits a person from being able to fight in Jihaad, and a red-and-white scarf that symbolises subservience to Britain.

فإ الله المشتكى وهو مستعان

The Salafis dress like this despite knowing and admitting that it is not how Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم and Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضي الله عنهم used to dress. The excuse tendered by and Sahaabah the Salafis is that, “we must dress according to custom.”

It is narrated that once, Hadhrat Huzaifah ibn al-Yamaan رضي الله عنه was invited to partake of a meal. Present at the meal were some of the leaders of the Persians. During the meal, a morsel of food he was eating fell down, so he picked it up, cleaned it and ate it. One of the Muslims present tried to stop him from doing so, saying that the Persians will think badly of him if he does this. Hadhrat Huzaifah رضي الله عنه became angry at this man and said:

أأترك سنه حبيبي لهؤ لاء الحمقى؟

“What! Should I abandon the Sunnah of my beloved for the sake of these fools?”

That is the difference between the mindset of Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضي الله عنهم and the mindset of these “Salafi Shuyookh”.

Imaam al-Ghazaali رحمة الله عليه used to say that amongst the secrets to Sa`aadah (happiness and contentment) is following the Sunnah of Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم  in entirety; in how he ate, drank, slept, dressed, walked, spoke, smiled, laughed, fought, dealt with people, etc. That was the understanding of the Ummah all the years until the Salafis decided to pick and choose from the Sunnah what they felt should be followed, and what the felt was not necessary, they discarded.

Salafis generally lack true love and respect for Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم and Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضوان الله عليهم hence they will refer to Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم simply as “Muhammad”, and to Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضوان الله عليهم “Abu Bakr,” “`Umar”, “`Uthmaan”, “`Ali”, etc.

Not only do they refer to Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضوان الله عليهم and the illustrious A’immah of Islaam in a manner devoid of respect, they even go as far as to insult and criticise them. Their hatred for Imaam Abu Haneefah رحمة الله عليه is well known. Once again, the biggest culprits in this regard among the Salafis are the Madkhalis. Out of all the various Salafi sub-sects, the Madaakhilah are the most vitriolic haters of Imaam Abu Haneefah  رحمة الله عليه, of the Hanafi Madh-hab, and of the Ash`ari and Maatureedi Madh-habs of `Aqeedah.

If any Madkhali reads this he will claim this to be false, but their actions have proven that they have a disregard for the A’immah of Islaam whom they despise, hence they attack the greatest of `Ulamaa as they see fit.

There are Madkhalis who have gone as far as to question whether Abu Haneefah رحمة الله عليه was in fact a Muslim or not, and who have made Takfeer of Imaam ibn Hajar al`Asqalaani رحمة الله عليه Fakhr-ud-Deen Raazi رحمة الله   عليه, Imaam al-Ghazaali رحمة الله عليه etc. on account of the fact that they were Ash`aris.

No goodness has ever come from the Madkhalis, and many – if not most of those who become Madkhalis do not stay Madkhalis for long. The Salafis themselves have coined a phrase: “Salafi Burnout”, as a reference to those who become rabid, cult-worshipper Madkhalis, making Takfeer and Tabdee` of the rest of the Ummah, only to abandon Madkhalism and even Salafism entirely later on and become a pseudo “Sufi” who only believes in “love” , singing and dancing, saying they left the cult because they found it to be “cold and empty” from the one baatil extreme to the other. This is another testimony to the fact that Madkhalism is a Baatil cult and has nothing to do with the true Islaam of the Rasoolullaah صلی الله علیه وسلم and Sahaabah-e-Kiraam رضي الله عنهم, Islaam which was followed by the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.

Salafi Double Standards

By Umar Rumi

Salafis’ on Moonsighting:

“With today’s modern technology, fax, internet, radio, we should have a unified beginning of Islamic months and `Ids all over the world. Local sighting was a pre-modern condition due to lack of the necessary technology”.

Salafis’ on Madhahib:

“Four madhahib split the Ummah, we should have a unified robotic fifth-madhhab (as the common ikhwani-salafi-modernist common utopia) whereby any ikhtilaf is deleted in favor of the supposed” stronger/more authentic/easier opinion that somehow us “moderns” are painlessly able to individuate without any doubt.

But then:

Salafis’ on Political system:

“An unified Islamic polity is an utopia lol, look at our history, Muslim polities were split most of the time [and somehow all the arguments about pre-modern lack of infrastructure/
technology/means of communications is suddenly forgotten, and history becomes proof]”.

Just look at how the decisive fiqhi discussions and sidelined in favor of ever-changing flipping incoherent recourses to history or the “changed times” being used at will.




Is it permissible in our time for females to give lectures to men if the woman lecturer is screened from the males by a barrier?

In response to this question, Salafis in the U.K. have based their fatwa of permissibility on a fatwa of Mufti Kifaayatullah (Rahmatullah alayh). In his Fatwa, Mufti Kifaayatullah states:

“The holy Shariah of Islam does not prohibit women from any Islamic service of which they are capable. Along with guarding Purdah, a woman may give a lecture to a gathering of men.”

Please comment on this Fatwa which the Salafis are using to create confusion.

Answer by Mujlisul Ulama:

Salafis are COPROCREEPS. In addition they exhibit Shiah tendencies, especially taqiyah (holy hypocrisy). The juhala Salafis, while portraying themselves as ‘mujtahids’ higher in calibre than even the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Salafus Saaliheen era, are academically bankrupt and spiritually barren.

They descend into the dregs of ludicrousness by vacillating between extremes. While they claim to deduct the ahkaam of the Shariah directly from the Qur’aan and Ahaadith since Taqleed of the Aimmah Mujtahideen is a capital sin according to these coprocreeps, their academic bankruptcy compels them to resort to Muqallid Muftis of this era which is far, very far from the age of even their Imaam Ibn Taimiyyaah, and even further from the noble era of the Salafus Saaliheen.

The attempt to seek daleel for their coprocreep view from the Muqallid Mufti Kifaayatullah (Rahmatullah alayh) for an issue which has no resemblance to the original mas’alah, is a vivid commentary of their jahaalat. It is indeed ludicrous and laughable when a Salafi seeks daleel from a Muqallid Mufti whose fatwa is out-dated by half a century, and which no longer holds Shar’i substance due to the satanism with which the issue under discussion is bedevilled today.

There is no contention regarding the validity of the Deeni service of a capable female. There is similarly no contention regarding the validity of the Deeni service of a male. Impermissibility has not been predicated to such services whether executed by males or females. However, only a moron Salafi coprocreep and the modernist zindeeqs will cling to the original unadulterated mas’alah even when satanism has become attached to the mubah (permissible) act.

Women performing Salaat in the Musjid was permitted by even Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). However, when satanasim became associated with this original permissible act, the Sahaabah unanimously banned women from the Musaajid. Similarly, on account of the accretion of satanism,  all the Fuqaha of Islam of all Math-habs have declared that it is no longer permissible for women to attend even Walimahs or bayaans to listen to lectures delivered by Ulama.  Attending any kind of function is no longer permissible for women.

Mufti Kifaayatullah’s view is not a Shar’i daleel. For daleel, we have to resort to the Fuqaha, especially the Fuqaha of the Salafus Saaliheen era. All of those illustrious Souls have issued the Fatwa of Prohibition. Thus, it is imperative to set aside Mufti Kifaayatullah’s view.

Furthermore, the situation during Mufti Kifaayatullah’s time was not as rotten and stinking as it is today. In our time, faasiqaat andfaajiraat are generally the ones who deliver copro-lectures to males who attend to cast lustful stares at the faasiqaat/faajiraat, and to derive nafsaanigratification from their voices. There is an incremental preponderance of faasiqaat/faajiraatin the public domain. This vile and rotten phenomenon has also been given great impetus by the wayward Tabligh Jamaat with its women’s wing.

It is HARAAM in this age for women to give lectures in gatherings of males. The dalaa-il for this prohibition in a nutshell are:

  • The Ijmaa-ee ban on women attending the Musjid issued by the Sahaabah.
  • The Fatwa of the Fuqaha of Islam.
  • The evil shenanigans of women and men in our present era.

Refuting the Deviant Assim al-Hakeem about the Hanafi View of Delaying Salaat al-Fajr

The timing of the morning prayer (fajr) according to the Hanafi school. A certain Jahil “Shaykh” named Assim al-Hakeem said during his program on Huda tv and his disgraced Q&A Site:

“In the Hanafi Madh-hab, they tend to delay the fajr until it is a little bit light before sunrise of course… This is against the majority of the scholars and this is against the sunna of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam).”

This “Shaykh” declared the Hanafi practice, in no uncertain terms, as contrary to the Sunnah. But, what evidence do the Hanafis use for this practice?

I checked out the most basic of the Hanafi books such as al-Ikthiar (volume 1 page 44) and I found that the Hanafi scholars based their view on ahadith narrated by al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Al-Tabarani and Imam Ahmad.

If you look at Jami’ al-Tirmidhi, you will see chapter 117 called “Narrations about delaying the fajr until it starts to get lighter ( ﺑﺎﻟﻔﺠﺮ ﺍﺍﻟﺴﻔﺎﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺟﺎﺀ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﺏ .“(al-Tirmidhi narrates a hadith (number 154) on the authority of Rabi’ bin Khadeej who said:

“I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: “Delay the fajr towards the end of its time [when it starts to get lighter] for there is more reward”.

Al-Tirmidhi goes on to say that this hadith was also narrated by Shu’ba and [Sufyaan] al-Thawri from Muhammed bin Ishaaq. It is also narrated by Muhammed bin Ajlaan on the authority of Aasim bin ‘Umar bin Qatada. There are also other ahadith regarding this subject from Abu Barza Al-Aslami, Jaabir and Bilal. al-Tirmidhi said this is a fair and authentic hadith (haadha hadithun hasanun saheeh). 

Imaam Anwar Shah Kashmiri has more to say on this subject in his commentary on Jami’ al-Tirmidhy called “Al-Urf al-Shadhy” on page 177 of volume 1. It can be found here.

In addition, Al-Hafidh al-Suyuti al-Shafi’i included the above hadith of al-Tirmidhi among the mutawatir hadith (unanimously authentic) in his booklet called “Al-Azhaar al-Mutanathira fi al-ahadith al-mutawatira” as was recorded by the author of I’ila al-Sunan volume 2 page 24. His brilliant research can be found here.

In summary, the Hanafi scholars’ point of view is based on multiple narrations (see Nasb al-Raya of Hafidh al-Zaylai volume 1 pages 304-313 for more details.):

1. Hadith of Rabi’ bin Khadeej narrated by al-Tirmidhy. He declared it a fair and authentic hadith (haadha hadithun hasanun saheeh). Al-Hafidh al-Zaylai, Al-Muhaqqiq al-Kamal bin Al-Humaam agreed with al-Tirmidhy. Al-Hafidz Al-Suyuti declared this hadith mutawatir (unanimously authentic).

2. Al-Nasa’i narrated a hadith similar in meaning and he did not comment on its authenticity. Al-Hafidh Al-Zaylai declared the chain authentic (I’ila al-Sunnan volume 2 page 24-25)

Now, how can someone declare a practice based on a mutawatir (unanimously authentic) and a saheeh (authentic) hadith (not to mention the rest of the evidence) to be against the sunnah? Even if the “Shaykh” believes that hadith is not mutawatir but only authentic (saheeh), I still cannot fathom how a “Shaykh” would dismiss all of the above evidence and label the Hanafi practice as “contrary to sunnah.” Just like his teacher, this Shaykh never even bothered to glance over the Hanafi books before he gave his fatwa. One wonders if these people really believe it themselves wholeheartedly when they say they are following the daleel (evidence). How can someone claim they are following the daleel when time and time again we see that they do not collect all the evidence in a given subject before they make up their minds? They are either delusional or dishonest. I cannot think of a third possibility, can you?

(The from a book of Dr. Sadi Kose).


Question: The Salafis claim that the followers of Mathhabs are not of the Ahlus Sunnah. Only Salafis are the Ahlus Sunnah because they follow the Salaf of the first three noble eras of Islam. Is this claim valid?

Answer (by Mujlisul Ulama):

Their claim is satanic bunkum. Salafis are deceitful in claiming that they follow the Salaf of the first three ages of Islam. Their Imaam is Ibn Taimiyyah who came about 6 centuries after Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Whatever he had interpreted, they follow. Thus, they are liars.

Furthermore, they practice taqiyah similar to the Shiahs. The doctrine of speaking holy lies (taqiyah) of the Shiahs religiously orders them to con-ceal their true beliefs of kufr to beguile Muslims. In like manner, Salafis con-ceal their deviant identity by labelling themselves ‘salafi’, and worse, by prof-fering the blatant LIE of them being Hambalis. Although they generally follow the Fiqh of the Hambali Math-hab, they are not Hambalis just as the Mu’tazilis are not Hanafis merely because they follow Hanafi Fiqh in the rituals of the Shariah.

The gap between Salafis and the Sala-fus Saaliheen is about 4 centuries. Their first Imaam is Ibn Taimiyyah. Between Ibn Taimiyyah and Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) there is a gap of almost 6 centuries while the gap between Imaam Abu Hanifah and Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is 80 years. Thus, he flourished during the Khairul Quroon. Only the followers of the Four Math-habs are the true followers of the Salafus Saali-heen.


By: Mufti Muhammad Nadeem uddin Qasmi

Ramadan is the month of blessings. It is time to start fixing and adjusting our schedule accordingly. During the month, special evening prayers in Ramadan are known as taraweeh.

What are benefits of it?

There are many benefits of it.

• The Prophet (may Allah peace and blessings be upon him) said whoever stood in Ramadan (in worship) with Iman and to seek reward, all his past sins are forgiven (Muslim, vol,1, p 259)

• Abu Dhar (May Allah be well pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said “whoever stands with the Imam until he finishes, it is equivalent to spend the whole night in prayer” (Tirmidhi 809)

What is place of Taraweeh in shari’ah?

Taraweeh is a emphasized Sunnah not fardh for all in Ramadan according to hadiths.

• Sayyida Aisha (May Allah be well pleased with her) related: After these nights (23, 25, and 27) the congregation grew to a very large number on the 29th night. The Masjid of prophet had filled to capacity, but the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) didn’t came out because of the fear that taraweeh would become compulsory upon you (Bukhari, vol,1 pg 269)

• Allama Shaami writes: Taraweeh is Sunnah Mua’kkadah on both men and women (Al Durrul Mukhtar, vol 1 pg 520)

How many Rak’ats?

It is an accepted fact among the authentic scholars of Islam that the Taraweeh prayer is 20 Rak’ats. The practice of 20 rak’at of Taraweeh continued throughout the era of the sahaba, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and ‘Ali (may Allah be well pleased with them), and remained unaltered in the entire world untill today, this form of worship has been passed down from generation to generation, and safeguarded to this day. This is still practiced in the holiest masjids of Islam in Makkah, Madinah and Masjid al-Aqsa. Besides this, many evidences are proven that the number of taraweeh is 20 Rak’ats.


1. Ibn Abbas reports that the Prophet Muhammad (May Allah peace and blessings be upon him) used to perform 20 Rak’ats and 3 wire in Ramadan (Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah, vol,2 pg 284, Mujamul kabeer lit Tibrani, vol 5 pg 433, Sunan e Kubra lil Bayhaqi, vol 2 pg 495)

2. It is reported by Hazrat Jabir bin Abdullah that the Prophet Muhammad (May Allah peace and blessings be upon him) came out in a Ramadan night and performed 24 Rakats (including ‘Isha Salah) and 3 witr (Tarikh e Jurhani lishmi, pg 317)

Practices of Khulafa Rashideen

1. Hadhrat ‘Umar (may Allah be well pleased with him) commanded a person to perform 20 Rak’ats for people. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah, vol 1 ,pg 483)

2. It is reported on the authority of Sa’ib ibn Yazid that in the era of Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be well pleased with him), people used to offer 20 Rak’ats taraweeh, and in era of ‘Uthman, they would support themselves with a staff because of the long Rak’ats (Sunan kubra lil Bayhaqi, vol 2, pg 496)

3. Ubayy ibn K’ab (may Allah be well pleased with him) reports that ‘Umar (may Allah be well pleased with him) instructed him saying that if he leads the Salah, it will be better. Thereafter, he said “perform twenty Rakats for the people” (Atharul Sunan pg 255)

4. This is reported by Hasan that ‘Umar gathered the people behind the Ubayy ibn Ka’b (may Allah be well pleased with him) in the month of Ramadan, then they used to perform twenty Rak’ats (Abu Dawood vol 1,pg 203)

5. It is reported by Hasan bin Ali that ‘Ali commanded the Qurra (Huffaz) to perform 20 Rak’ats (Musnad Al Imam Zayd 158,159)

6. Sayyidna ‘Ali would state: May Allah enlighten the grave of ‘Umar (Radhiyallahu Anhu) just as he has enlightened our masjid for us (Due to the fact of establishing the 20 Rak’ats for the Ummah. (Minhajus Sunnah, vol 2,pg 224)

The Prophet Muhammad (May Allah Peace and blessings be upon him) gave advise about khulafa’s action and said: “After me, you will see much differences, in such a condition, it is compulsory upon you that you hold firmly to my Sunnah and the rightly guided path of khulafa rashideen (Mishkatul Masabih pg 30)

• On another place, the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah peace and blessings be upon him) stated: I don’t know how long I will remain amongst you, after me, follow Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allah be well pleased with them). (Mishkat pg 560)

Practices of the Sahaabah

1. Abdullah ibn Mas’úd used to perform twenty Rak’ats (Tuhfatul Ahwazi, vol 2, pg 75)

2. This is reported by Yazid ibn Khusaifah from Sa’ib ibn Yazid that all the people used to perform twenty Rak’ats of taraweeh in the month of Ramadan during the era of Hazrat ‘Umar (may Allah be well pleased with him) (Sunanul Kubra lil Bayhaqi, vol 2, pg 496)

3: Ubayy ibn K’ab (may Allah be well pleased with him) used to perform in Madinah 20 Rak’ats (Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah, vol 2, pg 224, Musnad Ahmad, vol 2, pg 424)

4. Yazid ibn Ruman reports that people used to perform 23 Rakats (Muatta Imam Malik, pg 98)

It was nature of Sahaaba that without order and permission of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) they wouldn’t create innovative practices in Deen. Ahle sunnah wal jama’at are the ones who are satisfied and content with the practices of Sahaba.

Practices of Tabí’een

1. ‘Ata (Rahimahullah) says “I found the people that they used to perform 23 Rakats consisting of witr (Musannaf ibn e abi Shaiba, vol 5, pg 224)

2 Ibraheem Nakha’i (Rahimahullah) says “that people perform five tarwiha (5 breaks) in Ramazan” (Kitabul Athaar Abi Yusuf, pg 41)

3. It is reported on the authority of Shutayr ibn Shakal (Rahimahullah) that he used to perform in Ramadan 20+3 witr (Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah, vol 5 , pg 222)

4. Abu’l Khusaib (Rahimahullah) said that Suwa’id ibn Ghaflah used to perform 5 tarwiha in 20 Rak’ats (Al Sunanul Kubra lil Bayhaqi, vol 2 ,496)

Sayings of Ulama

1. Imam Ghazali writes: Taraweeh is twenty Rak’ats, its method is well known, and it is Sunnah Mua’kkadah (Ihya ul uloom, vol. 1 pg 139)

2. Sayyid ‘Abdul Qadir Jilani writes: Taraweeh is a Sunnah of Nabi (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) and it comprises of twenty Rakats (Ghunyatut Talibeen pg 464)

3. Imam Ibn Qudama Hambali states: “according to Imam Ahmad Rahimahullah, the most acceptable view is of twenty Rak’ats.” (Al-Mughni ,vol. 1,pg 802)

4. Ibn Taymiyah writes: “it has been accepted that Ubayy ibn Ka’b used to lead the Salah for the people by performing twenty Rak’ats in Ramadan and three Rakats witr. Accordingly, most of the ‘Ulama regarded twenty Rak’ats as Sunnah because Ubayy ibn Ka’b used to lead the congregation of Muhajirin and Ansar and none of them rejected his act (Fatawa ibn Taymiyah, vol. 23, pg 112)

Consensus (ijma) of the Sahaaba

1. Mulla Ali Qari states that the Sahaaba have made consensus on the practice of twenty Rak’ats of taraweeh.(Mirqat, vol.3 pg 194)

2: Ibn Qudama has stated the same in Al-Mughni  (Al-Mughni, vol.1, pg 803)

3. Majority of ‘Ulama are in agreement of that narration reported by Ali and ‘Umar (Radhiyallahu Anhum) (Tirmidhi, vol 1, pg 166)

4. Allama Kasaani also reports the consensus of Sahaba on performing 20 Rak’ats (Badaius’ Sanai vol 1, pg 644)

5. Asad bin ‘Amr related from Qadi Imam Abu Yusuf: I asked Imam Abu Hanifa about the matter of taraweeh and what ‘Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) had done in this respect. Imam Abu Hanifa (Rahimahullah) replied: “20 Rak’ats taraweeh is Sunnah Mua’kkadah, ‘Umar didn’t establish this form from his own nor was he one to create innovation in this Deen. (Maraqiul Falaah, pg 334)

6. In the time of Ibn Taymiyah when the Rawafidh (Shia’) put the blame upon Hadhrat ‘Umar (Radhiyallahu Anhu) for creating the innovated practice of 20 Rak’ats. Ibn Taymiyah responded to this allegation by writing in defense of Hadhrat ‘Umar (Radhiyallahu Anhu) by establishing 20 Rak’ats of taraweeh, had it been deemed to adopt a bad practice, then Hadhrat Ali (Radhiyallahu Anhu) would have put an end to this in his khilafat, however, in his khilafat, he too would offer 20 Rak’ats taraweeh prayer in Kufah (Fatawa ibn Taymiyah)

In Short, there are many evidences to prove that 20 Rak’ats trawih are Sunnah Mu’akkadah.

The Sect of Ghayr Muqallideen

They say that the taraweeh prayer is eight Rak’ats. Usually, the narration of Hazrat Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha) is used to support the view of 8 Rak’ats as sufficient by them:

Abu Salma related that he asked Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha): “How was the prayer of the Prophet in Ramadan? She replied: “The Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) would not pray more than 11 Rak’ats in Ramadan or outside of it.”(Sahih Bukhari, vol 1, pg 154).

Answering this narration:

In this narration, the words clearly state that the prayer of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) throughout the whole year in or out side of Ramadan would be no more than 11 Rak’ats. Therefore, this Hadith is in respect of Tahajjud and taraweeh is not prayed out of Ramadan.

Opinions of Ulama about this Narration

The scholars of the ummah answered the supporting proof the narration of Hadhrat Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anhu), it is in respect of Tahajjud prayer.

1. Allama Abu Bakr ibn Arabi writes: The 11 Rak’ats narration related by Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha) refers to the Qiyamul Layl (Tahajjud) of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam. (Arizatul Ahwadhi Sharh Tirmidhi, vol 4, pg 19)

2. Ibn Hajar Asqalani also refers to this narration as referring to Tahajjud with witr (Fathul Bari sharh Bukhari, vol. 3 pg 328)

3. Qadhi ‘Iyadh Maliki has taken all of the narrations of Hadhrat Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha) as referring to the Tahajjud prayer of the Prophet (Sharh Muslim Nawawi, vol 1, pg 253)

4. Qadhi Muhammad Shawkani (who himself was a Ghayr Muqallid) writes: The narration of Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha) referring to the 11 Rak’ats in and outside of Ramadan is in respect of Tahajjud. (Naylul Awtar, vol 3, pg 39)

5. Shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi states: The narration of Aisha (Radhiyallahu Anha) is in regards to Tahajjud. (Fatawa Aziziyah pg 125)

If we assume that eight Rak’ats of taraweeh are correct, then it means that the entire ummah and big scholars of Islam were deviated for all these centuries by performing twenty Rak’ats without any sharí proof. It is impossible to happen.

It has been proven that the 20 Rak’ats taraweeh is Sunnah Mua’kkadah of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam)

In the end, we pray for Allah to accept this, May Allah Grant them Tawfeeq. AAMEEN.



A salafi claims that it is shirk to address anyone with the title, maulana. He claims that this word has become a title for scholars in only India and Pakistan. Since ‘Maulana’ means ‘Our Protector’, its usage is permissible for only Allah Ta’ala. Please comment.

ANSWER (By Mujlisul Ulama):

Salafis are stupid and arrogant, hence they speak drivel. The word maula has several meanings in Arabic. It means friend, protector, master, freed slave. The term maulanaa consists of two words: maula and naa which is a pronoun meaing our. Thus, maulana means ‘our friend’. The term is used as a title of respect for a learned person who is regarded as a ‘friend’ because he safeguards one’s Deen. He is also the protector of our Deen and Imaan by virtue of the Deeni Ta’leem he imparts.

Maulana Rumi (rahmatullah alayh) was not an Indian. This title existed centuries before it was adopted in India. There is no Shar’i prohibition to calling someone ‘our friend’ or ‘our protector’. Whilst Allah Ta’ala is the Sole source of our livelihood, it is not prohibited to say that we earn our livelihood from Zaid who has employed us. If the police protects a person against a robber, it is not prohibited to say that the police was our protector. Translated into Arabic, our friend will be maulana.

Besides personal opinion, Salafis have no Islamic evidence for his contention. No matter how logical and how nice a view may seem, it is essentially personal opinion if unsubstantiated by Shar’i proof. The use of maulana for Allah Ta’ala in the Qur’aan is not proof or a basis for saying that the term may not be used for a person. This is neither mentioned in the Qur’aan nor anywhere in the Hadith.

The word Rabb is used for Allah Ta’ala. However, it is permissible to use it for others as well, such as Rabb-ul-Maal (one who invests money); rabbika (your rabb meaning your master, i.e. a human master or king).

The kitaabs are replete with the word maula used for a slave-master. If slaves say that their master is maulana (our master), it will be perfectly permissible. All the books of Fiqh from the earliest age of Islam, including the Hadith, use maulaa for the master of slaves. There is no Shar’i prohibition to refer to a person as my maulaa or our maulaa.

To clinch this argument and to demolish the baseless claim of the article, is the following Hadith:

“Anas Bin Maalik (radhiyallahu anhu) was asked about a mas’alah. He responded: ‘Refer incumbently (for answers) to Maulana (Our Maulana) Al-Hasan. They asked him: ‘We ask you, O Abaa Humzah!, and you say: ‘Ask Maulana Al-Hasan.’ Then he said: ‘We have heard and he (Al-Hasan) has heard. We forgot, and he remembered.” (Musannaf Ibn Abu Shaybah).

Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) was a very senior Sahaabi. He was not an inhabitant of India and Pakistan. When even he used the term Maulana for a learned person, then there is no need to pursue this argument further.