hadith can’t be used to justify oppression



Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Islam began in a forlorn state and will
soon return to a forlorn state. Glad tidings to the forlorn.”
We are witnessing such times where the depravity of this Ummah is being made
manifest for all to see. The era prophesied by Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)
where Muslims will be huge in numbers but they will be (useless and
insignificant) as the trash and muck of floodwaters, is certainly before us. Love
for the world and fear of death is the common trait amongst Muslims and nonMuslims alike. Compounding this pitiful state, the current terror that a simple
virus has unleashed upon the masses, has seen the Ummah being further
filtered into those with Imaan and those with merely a façade of it. Right before
our eyes, Islam is being returned to its initial forlorn state! May Allah Ta`ala
include us amongst those fortunate forlorn ones.
Social media has been ablaze with messages and texts (one such corrupt
message originates from the Jamiat so-called ‘ulama’ South Africa) which
purportedly ‘justify’ (from the Mubarak Ahaadith) people skulking in their
homes. The disbelieving governments may believe they are doing good, but as
Muslims we recognise the injustice in preventing Muslims from openly
practicing on their Deen. Islam teaches that we should abide to the laws of a
country. However, the act of ‘justifying’ un-Islamic practices and ‘justifying’ the
Musaajid being left desolate, is pure satanism! Being forced not to go to the
Musjid by non-Muslims is one thing, but for ‘Muslims’ to justify this heinous
decree is totally something else. Those who justify such acts, using Qur`aan and
Sunnah, have proven that they have no Imaan left. The Hadith of Nabi (sallallahu
alaihi wasallam) clearly states that the weakest form of Imaan is to recognise an
injustice to the Deen and to detest it in the heart. Hence, those who feel nothing
about the Musaajid being shut down, are devoid of Imaan. As for those who
condone this oppression and even go one step further of ‘justifying’ it using our
Qur`aan and Ahaadith, have stooped to a level that even puts shaitaan to shame.

                                                       THE MINI-DAJJAALS

Prophetic guidance during epidemic Disease: Social Distancing, Quarantine,

An article with this title is currently doing its rounds on social media. This article
is not only misleading, it is extremely deceptive.
The Hadith reproduced in this article is as follows:
ً ليس من رجل يقع الطاعون فيمكث يف بيته ، يعلم أنه ال يصيبه إال ماكتب هللا له، إالكان له مثل أجر شهيد
ً حمتسبا
FIRSTLY: The Hadith is incorrectly and deviously translated. The translation they
deceptively put is: “….if a person in the time of an epidemic plague stays in their
home, patiently hoping for God’s reward and believing that nothing will afflict
them except what God has written for them, they will get the reward of a
The actual translation should be: “There is no man afflicted with the plague,
who remains in his home patiently, hoping for reward from Allah, knowing
that nothing will afflict him except what Allah has destined for him, except that
he will receive the reward similar to a martyr.”
SECONDLY: The reference given at the bottom of this Hadith cites Musnad
Ahmed AND Saheeh Bukhaari, trying to give the impression that the same Hadith
appears in both these Kitaabs, whereas the wording of this same Hadith in
Saheeh Bukhaari does not have the words رجل من or بيته يف rather it has the words,
.يف بدله and من احد
So, if they wish to restrict the import of the words “in his house” to be literal –
that one should remain indoors only, as is being done at these lockdowns – then
they should also extend that literality to the word “man” (which appears in this
narration in Musnad Ahmed), and infer that women are not included here. This,
we all know, is not the case. The word “man” is used in the Hadith to refer to
both men and women, and the word, “home” infers
locality/hometown/country, and not literally one’s “house”.
Other Kitaabs have the words عبد من meaning “slave”. The words vary but the
import is exactly the same.
The Hadith can never be taken to refer to the “house” only because it is neither
possible nor practical for every person to remain indoors as long as a plague is
present. Society and life would terminate if this were the case.
Also, when there are such cases in Ahaadith where there appears to be a
contradiction, then we interpret it by finding a rational explanation. The
Ahaadith are NEVER contradictory. The Mufassireen and Fuqaha have clarified
any ambiguity that we may perceive. Since the Hadith in Bukhaari mentions “his
locality” this is the obvious meaning that is also extended to the Hadith in
Musnad Ahmed. The word, “home” in Arabic, and also in English (and possibly
most, if not all, languages) is a general term that refers to one’s locality. The
word “home” could refer to one’s hometown, locality, province and even
country. To deceptively translate and infer that Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)
meant remaining indoors is treasonous because it implies the abandoning of
Jamaat Salaat and other beneficial Deeni congregations.
THIRDLY: The Hadith uses the word يقع which refers to a person already afflicted
with the plague. In that case, the person who is already afflicted, can be advised
to remain indoors for various reasons, mostly relating to his recovery. However,
even if a person is afflicted, the Shariah still does NOT advocate the dajjaali
concept of ‘social distancing’. Islam does not teach us to avoid afflicted people,
unless it adversely affects one’s tawakkul. The Hadith teaches us that there is
NO contagion, except with the permission of Allah Rabbul Izzat.
FOURTHLY: The bogus article gives a small excerpt from Fat-hul Baari (which is
a commentary of Saheeh Bukhaari), thereby perpetuating its deception. The
only sentence they deemed appropriate to add from Fat-hul Baari is: “the
wording (of the hadith) indicates that whoever fulfils the descriptions mentioned
has the reward of a martyr (shahid), even if they didn’t die.” They give the false
impression that whoever sits and skulks in their home during a plague, whether
afflicted or not, will also be rewarded by Allah Ta`ala. They fail to expand on this
Let us study what exactly appears in Fat-hul Baari, with regard to these specific
“Nabi’s (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)statement, ‘There is no slave’, that is Muslim,
‘who is afflicted with plague’, that is, in the place where he is, ‘and he remains in
his hometown,’ in the narration of Ahmed (the words are), ‘in his home,’ and this
(whether the word is ‘locality’ or ‘home’) refers to whichever place he is in but he
remains therein, and he does not go away from there, that is, he does not leave
the place wherein the plague occurred. [Note here is also explained that the
words ‘بيته and بلده ‘both mean the place where the plague occurs, hence it does
NOT mean a literal home or house].
The word ‘patiently’, means that he is not irritated, troubled or vexed and neither
is he anxious, apprehensive nor restless, rather he is at ease and accepts the
Decree of Allah Ta`ala and pleased with his fate. This is the condition for
acquiring the reward of a martyr for that person who dies of the plague. That he
remains in the place where the plague occurs and he does not flee from there as
the prohibition clearly appeared earlier (in another Hadith).”
[Let us look at this in our present context – the government has ordered a
lockdown. People are anxious. Many are frustrated because their daily
movements have been curtailed. All businesspeople, besides those in the
“essential services” industry, are suffering huge losses during this time. Nobody
is really sitting at home happily or content. Also, the majority are terrified of
moving outside and mixing with others for fear of contracting this virus. How far
– very, very far – is this condition (prevalent today) to that described in the Hadith
of being patient and hoping for Divine Pleasure. Based on the comments of the
Muhadditheen, we can safely declare that this virus is not a mercy to our
Muslims but also a calamity and punishment just like it is for the disbelievers.
Far from displaying patience, Muslims are anxious, apprehensive, restless,
irritated, troubled and vexed. And this is the condition of those not even afflicted
by the virus!!!
The Muhadditheen have explained that the prevalence of plagues is a
punishment for both – the disbelievers and transgressing Muslims. After all,
does Allah Ta`ala not warn us in His Kalaam, “Do those who commit sins think
that We will treat them like those who have Imaan and who do good deeds,
making their lives and deaths equal? (They are wrong!) Evil indeed is the
decision they take.” The fact that we have been barred from our own Musaajid
can never be deemed a favourable circumstance. How sad that even ‘muslims’
feel Musaajid should be closed. As long as there is life, the time for reformation
exists. May Allah Ta`ala have mercy on us all.]
“The statement, “Knowing that most certainly nothing will overcome him except
what Allah Ta`ala has decreed for him,” is the other condition. This is a
conditional sentence which relates to his remaining (in his hometown/country).
However, if he remains whilst he is anxious, apprehensive, restless and regretful
of not having went out (of his locality), thinking that had he went away then he
would not have been afflicted in the first place and also that he was afflicted
because he stayed behind. This (attitude and state of mind) will deprive him of
the reward of a martyr, even if he dies of plague.” [Fat-hul Baari, vol. 10, page
This excerpt from Fat-hul Baari, proves that the little excerpt which appeared in
the deceptive article, is not only misleading but gives a totally incorrect
interpretation of the Hadith.
The above commentary also proves, inter alia, that this Hadith refers more
specifically to the person who is afflicted with the plague and not necessarily to
those who are healthy and fit. The reward of martyrdom is applicable only to
those who are afflicted with the plague and either die or survive. Those who are
not afflicted by the plague/virus, need to continue their lives normally, whilst
also remaining in their hometown/country. There is another Hadith that states
everyone who resides in a place which is overcome with a plague should remain
Salaat in congregation is not and never was excused for those who are not
afflicted by the disease/virus. ‘Social distancing’ is not and never was an Islamic
teaching. ‘Muslims’ who wish to practice this should never ever believe that
Islam or the Hadith teaches this. ‘Muslim’ men who wish to perform their Salaat
at home, should never ever think this to be permitted by the Shariah due to the
existence of a plague or virus.
This advice of ours should not be misinterpreted as an advocation of civil
disobedience. We merely wish to highlight the point that Muslims should never
trivialise the Deen and they should never misinterpret the Ahaadith of Nabi
(sallallahu alaihi wasallam) to give sanction to any disobedience to Divine
Injunctions. True Muslims should never believe that the Ahaadith of Nabi
(sallallahu alaihi wasallam) ever condoned such a state upon Muslim men where
they are not allowed to attend the Musaajid for the Fardh Salaat. The Ahaadith
never condoned the concept of ‘social distancing’ merely out of fear of
contracting a virus. The Ahaadith never encouraged Muslim men to remain
skulking in their homes, thereby abandoning congregational Salaat. If the
government imposes this on its citizens, that is one thing. The Shariah should
not be misinterpreted to give an impression of approval. If Muslims are forced
to remain indoors and threatened with legal repercussions for ignoring this law,
they should exercise caution and not challenge the authorities, however at the
same time, they should not and cannot condone this injustice from an Islamic
May Allah Ta`ala have mercy on this Ummah!
5th Shabaan 1441 [30th March 2020]

“Clear propagation is our ONLY responsibility”

Issued by:
JAMIATUL ULAMA (Johannesburg)
P. O. Box 961195, Brixton, 2019, Johannesburg, SOUTH AFRICA


  2. HARAAM: Haraam foods are such foods in which the prohibition is clear. There is no doubt in its prohibitions, e.g. haraam meat and food in which haraam ingredients are used.
  3. SPIRITUALLY HARAAM: Halaal food, whether meat or any other kind acquired with unlawful money or by unlawful means. While such food remains halaal, its consumption is haraam for the one who has acquired it by foul or haraam means.
  • MUSTABAH: Such food, the permissibility of which is in doubt. Some factors indicate permissibility while other factors indicate prohibition. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commanded abstention from such doubtful foods.
  1. PHYSICALLY IMPURE: Generally, the foods prepared in public places such as cafes, restaurants and hotels fall in this classification. Although halaal, such food is not tayyib (wholesome). Some physical dirt and unclean hands, etc. go into its production, hence its contamination.
  2. SPIRITUALLY IMPURE: Such food which is halaal and ordinarily tayyib, but for people of high taqwa (i.e. for the Auliya) even such halaal tayib food constitutes contamination, and impedes their spiritual progress, e.g. halaal tayyib food served by a faasiq or zaalim, halaal tayyib food served with a contaminated worldly motive.


The greater the degree of one’s abstention from contaminated food, the more will on incline towards piety and ibaadat and the converse is also true. Abstention from the first two categories (mentioned above) is Fardh. Eationg such food is a major sin for which Jahannuum is the punishment. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said about those who consume the contaminated food mentioned in these two categories:

“The Fire of Jahannum is more befitting for a human body nourished by haraam.”

The Auliya say that the high stages of piety a man attains are dependent on his halaal and tayyib consumption of food. A man can spend an entire lifetime in abundance of thikr, nafl ibaadat and fasting etc, but as long as the food he consumes is not physically and spiritually pure, he will be deprived of the high stages of taqwa and Divine proximity.

The Aligarh Speech of Shaykh al-Hind Maulana Mahmud Hasan

This is an excerpt from the historic speech given by the Shaykh al-Hind Maulana Mahmud Hasan at Aligarh on the 29th of October, 1920. Born in 1851, he was the first student of the then newly-established Darul Uloom Deoband. Later, he would join the school as an instructor, emerging over time as its most influential teacher, mentoring an entire generation of formidable scholars. Towards the end of his life, he would plunge himself into national politics, in particular on the demand for restoring the Ottoman Caliphate. A movement to do so was waged in the name of the Khilafat Movement in India, engineered and energised in no small part by the Shaykh al-Hind’s famous fatwa on non-co-operation with the British colonizers. At Aligarh, on the occasion of the foundation of Jamia Millia Islamia, the Shaykh delivered the presidential address. The following excerpts, taken from the Shaykhs’ speech, touch upon the themes of a free and pure education, the effects of colonial education, and the way forward to mend the gap between the two camps, of the modernizers (Aligarh) and the traditionalists (Deoband).

Translated from the Urdu by Saad Razi Shaikh

I’m present here, at your invitation, in this old age, in this infirmity and weakness (as you all can well see), for I’m hopeful that I can retrieve here a lost belonging of mine. There are many people whose faces shine with the light of prayers and the remembrance of Allah, yet when they are asked that they, for the love of Allah, rise and save this ummah from the traps of the disbelievers, fear descends upon their hearts, not of Allah but of a few ignoble characters, their war, and their instruments of violence. They, of all people, should know that if there is anything that must be feared it is the wrath of Allah Most High, for its retribution is severe. [They should know] that the possessions of the world are but ephemeral, and that they are nothing when compared to the mercies and kindnesses of Allah Most High.

O youth of this country! When I saw that those sympathetic to my pain (which is chipping away at my bones) are less in the madrasahs and khanqahs and more in the schools and colleges, then I, along with a few sincere friends, decided to make our way to Aligarh. In this way, we bridged the gap between the two historical institutions of India: Deoband and Aligarh.

It isn’t improbable that more than a few of our well-intentioned elders would object to my trip here and feel that I’m deviating from the path of the elders of our tradition. But the people of discernment know that for the few steps I’ve taken here, Aligarh has taken far more steps towards me.

Those of you who have researched well and are well-informed know that at no point did the predecessors of our tradition pass a ruling against the learning of foreign languages or acquiring the knowledge and arts of other people. That being said, they certainly said that the last stage of acquiring British education, which has often been observed, is that the people get meshed in the shape and mould of Christianity, or that they commit insolence in the manner of atheists and make fun of religion and the people of religion, or they begin devotion of the government. When compared to getting an education like this, it is better for a Muslim to stay uneducated.

Now you must decide, in all fairness, was this the prevention of the education or the prevention of its harmful effects? Is it not the same thing that Mr. Gandhi explains these days in this manner:

“The education of these colleges is like good quality milk, clean and clear, to which just a small pint of poison has been added.”

We’re grateful to Allah, who has blessed this community with the youth who can discern that which is beneficial, and harmful to them, and who, using a furnace, can separate the poison from the milk. Today, we have gathered here to establish that very furnace. You must have understood by now that that furnace is the “Muslim National University” (Jamia Millia Islamia).

The virtues of having a pure education need not be presented to my community, for the times themselves have shown that it is through education alone that the seeds of great thinking, foresight, and wisdom come to fruition. It is in their light that a man is able to walk the path of success.

It is necessary that education be in the hands of the Muslims, and it must be free from the influence of adversaries. Are we, by way of beliefs and thought, by way of character and deeds, manners and habits, free of the influence of our adversaries?

The way forward for our community isn’t that our colleges should continue to produce slaves in great numbers; rather, our colleges should be exemplars of the great madrasahs of Baghdad and Cordoba, the ones which made Europe their disciple; even before we could make them our guides. You must have heard that when the foundations of the Madrasah Islamiyyah in Baghdad were laid by the Islamic government, the scholars of the city gathered and mourned the death of knowledge (‘ilm), regretting that from now onwards, knowledge will be acquired to curry favours with the Sultan. Do you then expect a successful community (qawm) to emerge from the colleges which are run and supported largely by a non-Islamic government?

Without a doubt, in the places of learning where Muslims acquire a high quality of education in the modern subjects, if students are unaware of the foundations and branches of their religion, if they forget their religious consciousness and the Islamic obligations, if they have scant regard for their nation and co-religionists, then it should be known that such places of learning are a means to weaken the power of the Muslims. Consequently, it has been announced that such independent colleges must be opened which are completely free of government support and influence and whose entire system of governance must be in accordance with the Islamic disposition and religious consciousness.


November 29, 2021
A Digital Archive of Islamic Knowledge

Vaping Is Risky. Why Is the F.D.A. Authorizing E-Cigarettes?

When they first appeared in the United States in the mid-2000s, “electronic nicotine delivery systems” — e-cigarettes, vapes, e-liquids and other wares that contain the stimulant found in tobacco — were subject to little federal oversight. Their makers could incorporate countless other ingredients and flavorings. Like cigarettes before them, the devices proved extremely attractive to young people; in 2018, the surgeon general declared youth vaping an “epidemic” and noted that one in five high schoolers and one in 20 middle schoolers used e-cigarettes. Nicotine can harm the developing brain, and e-cigarettes contain potentially harmful toxins like heavy metals; the long-term effects of vaping — the heating of nicotine to create an inhaled aerosol — are uncertain.

Despite these concerns, public-​health officials in the U.S. hope that, given a choice in the open market, people already addicted to nicotine will choose e-cigarettes over cigarettes — a deadly consumer product so successful at attracting and retaining users that it has killed as many as 24 million Americans over the past six decades. Because e-cigarettes generally contain fewer toxic chemicals than tobacco smoke, they are believed to be less damaging than cigarettes. If a sizable number of the one in seven adults in the U.S. who smoke switched to e-cigarettes, the theory goes, significantly fewer people might suffer from cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.

In 2016, in an effort to mitigate the potential harms of e-cigarettes, the Food and Drug Administration began regulating them as “new tobacco products.” It became illegal to sell e-cigarettes to anyone under 18 (a cutoff that rose nationally to 21 in late 2019), and the agency was empowered to require warning labels. The F.D.A. also gained the authority to keep products out of the marketplace, unless it could be demonstrated that their public-health benefit outweighed their risks. (As a result of legislation passed in 2009, this condition applies to new tobacco products in general; cigarettes themselves, and other tobacco products on the market before Feb. 15, 2007, don’t have to meet the same standard.) As of last month, the agency had denied nearly a million applications. But a vaporizer and two tobacco-flavored liquids were authorized, after the F.D.A. declared that data submitted by their manufacturer showed that they were indeed less toxic than cigarettes and could, in the words of the agency’s news release, “benefit addicted adult smokers who switch to these products.” This would “outweigh the risk to youth” and lead to an overall “protection of the public health.”

The decision was controversial. In part, this is because the research into whether e-products can help adult smokers stay off cigarettes shows mixed results at best. For example, in October, the same month as the F.D.A. ruling, JAMA Network Open published a study that “did not find evidence that switching to e-cigarettes prevented relapse to cigarette smoking,” says the lead author John P. Pierce, a emeritus professor at the Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science at the University of California, San Diego. He and his colleagues analyzed data from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, a longitudinal study of tobacco use in the U.S. begun in 2013 by the National Institutes of Health and the F.D.A. Based on responses through 2017, the researchers identified 13,604 participants who were cigarette smokers. When those same participants were surveyed a year later, 9.4 percent of them reported that they had quit.

The PATH study did not try to determine what methods people used to quit; it asked only what tobacco products they consumed after quitting, if any. Then, after 12 more months, it checked whether they had stayed off cigarettes entirely; had relapsed and quit again; or had gone back to smoking. After controlling for potential confounding factors, like level of nicotine dependency, the JAMA group concluded that those who were using any alternative tobacco product after they quit smoking, including e-cigarettes (but also cigars, hookahs and the like), were 8.5 percent more likely to have relapsed than those who were not. The proportion of daily e-cigarette users and tobacco abstainers who were smoking again was about the same: just over a third. In other words, e-cigarettes did not appear to be more successful at preventing a return to smoking than going cold turkey did.

But there are other researchers who believe that, taken together, the existing evidence suggests that e-cigarettes may benefit public health. In September, before the F.D.A. approved any e-cigarette products, a group of those researchers laid out that evidence in The American Journal of Public Health. The studies they cite include a randomized controlled trial conducted in Britain and published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2019, which found that participants who wanted to quit and who switched to e-cigarettes were 80 percent more likely to abstain from cigarettes for at least a year compared with those who used a range of nicotine-​replacement therapies (like patches, gum and lozenges).

Findings like these, which show that e-cigarettes could help smokers under certain conditions — the participants all received behavioral support, which improves the success rate of attempts at quitting — have been undervalued, the A.J.P.H. authors think, while the risks to youths have been amplified. “The message out there is these are harmful devices that shouldn’t be out there at all,” says Nancy A. Rigotti, one of the authors and a professor at Harvard Medical School and the director of the Tobacco Research and Treatment Center at Massachusetts General Hospital. “The truth is more complicated.”

Controlled trials don’t always show what would have happened in a real-world setting — which is what the JAMA study sought to assess. Yet Rigotti and others think its conclusions are misleading. “What’s important here is, Is vaping helping a subset of smokers quit smoking who wouldn’t have otherwise done so?” says Kenneth E. Warner, an emeritus professor and dean of health management and policy at the University of Michigan’s School of Public Health and a co-author of the A.J.P.H. paper. The JAMA study found that those who were the most dependent on nicotine, and thus likely to have the hardest time quitting smoking, were also the most likely to use e-cigarettes. But there was no way to say whether, had e-cigarettes not been available, that group would have continued smoking — in which case e-cigarettes increased the total number of quitters — or whether its members would have tried abstaining from nicotine instead. Without that information, it’s unclear if e-cigarettes could be a valuable cessation tool that entices some inveterate smokers to give up cigarettes.

Adult smokers do want to quit: In 2018, about 55 percent of those surveyed said they tried to quit in the past year; only 7.5 percent succeeded, according to the C.D.C. If anything, the JAMA study, however you parse it, illustrates how difficult it is to remain smoke-free. “What we haven’t seen, in terms of cessation, is something that’s game-changing,” says Jonathan M. Samet, dean and professor at the Colorado School of Public Health. Clearly, smokers need more resources, says Alayna P. Tackett, an assistant professor at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California: “They’re trying to quit, they want to quit, how can we best support them?”

In the U.S., it’s uniquely hard to say if vaping could play a more supportive role. The available products are ever-changing, and e-cigarettes are not classified as “a cessation device,” a label that would require their manufacturers to go through the F.D.A.’s drug evaluation and research process — which they have little incentive to do. As a result, e-cigarettes can’t be promoted to smokers as a means of quitting by companies or as a proven therapeutic by health officials. The bizarre consequence is that for e-cigarettes to have a widespread positive impact on public health — the F.D.A.’s stated hope in approving the ones they did — smokers will have to decide largely on their own to switch to them. “The regulatory muddle is working against us,” says Terry F. Pechacek, a research professor in the department of health policy and behavioral sciences at Georgia State University’s School of Public Health, who wrote a commentary accompanying the JAMA study. “That’s the heart of the problem.”

Kim Tingley is a contributing writer for the magazine.

Correction: Nov. 25, 2021
An earlier version of this article misstated which products were approved by the Food and Drug Administration. It approved two tobacco-flavored products. No menthol flavor was approved.

Limitations of Intellect

By Shaykhul-Hadīth, Hadrat Mawlānā Muhammad Saleem Dhorat hafizahullāh

Every capability and strength in the human body has limitations. For example, the human capability of seeing is limited; one may be able to see someone walking at a distance of 100 metres, but as the person walks further away, it will become increasingly difficult to see him. After travelling a certain distance, the person will completely disappear from sight. The human capability of hearing is also limited; one is able to hear a person speaking from a close distance, but is unable to hear a person speaking from a far distance. Similarly, every strength and capability granted to us by Allāh ta‘ālā has limitations.

The intellect is also one of these limited capabilities granted to us by Allāh ta‘ālā. There are many things which the human intellect cannot perceive as it has boundaries beyond which it cannot function. Therefore, just as we do not expect to be able to see everything with our eyes or hear every sound with our ears, we should not expect to be able to understand everything with our intellects.

The Three Sources of Knowledge

There are three sources of knowledge:

  1. The first source of knowledge is the five senses. We use our five senses (i.e. eyesight, hearing, taste, smell and touch) to perceive different things. For example, when we touch a surface, we learn that it is smooth or rough. When we taste a fruit, we gain knowledge of whether it is sweet or sour etc.
  2. The second source of knowledge is the intellect. If used within its limits, the intellect is a great blessing of Allāh ta‘ālā. By using the intellect to ponder upon the creation, one can attain the recognition of the Creator. This alone shows how great of a blessing the intellect is.

Allāh ta‘ālā states in the Glorious Qur’ān,

Allāh brought you forth from the wombs of your mothers when you had no knowledge whatsoever. Allāh ta‘ālā made for you the sense of hearing, the sense of seeing and hearts so that you may be grateful. (16:78)

From the five senses, we most often use the senses of seeing and hearing, thus Allāh ta‘ālā sufficed on mentioning only these two when referring to the five senses. Thereafter, He mentioned the heart with which we think and understand. Thus, in this verse, Allāh ta‘ālā states that He granted us senses and intellect, through which we can acquire knowledge.

  1. The third source of knowledge is wahy (Divine Revelation). Allāh ta‘ālā revealed wahy upon the Prophets ‘alayhimus salām and they conveyed the knowledge of wahy to their nations.

Limitations of the Intellect

From the three sources of knowledge, the five senses and intellect have limitations:

  1. The five senses cannot perceive what the intellect is able to perceive.

For example, the intellect can perceive that there is oxygen in a room but the five senses cannot. Intellect tells us that a human cannot survive without oxygen; therefore, the fact that people in that room are alive certainly means that oxygen is present in the room.

Now, if a person refuses to believe that oxygen exists in the room because of not being able to perceive oxygen with his five senses, then we would all deem him to be irrational. We would explain that he will only be able to come to the correct understanding by applying his intellect, as the five senses have their limitations and cannot perceive what the intellect is able to perceive.

  1. Similarly, the intellect cannot perceive what wahy is able to perceive.

Just as the five senses fail to grasp what the intellect can grasp, the intellect fails to grasp what wahy can grasp. Therefore, just as we accept the limitations of the five senses, we also need to accept the limitations of the intellect. Hakīmul-Ummah, Mawlānā Ashraf ‘Alī Thānwī rahimahullāh very beautifully explains the limitations of intellect. He says, ‘…Like other senses the perceptions of intellect have limits. Beyond these limits, wahy is needed. The example of this is that if a person (mounted on a horse) desires to climb a mountain, the horse will only be able to go till the bottom of the mountain. To climb the mountain, one will have to go himself. Similarly, the feeble intellect is incapable of climbing the mountain (which can only be climbed by wahy)…’

Do Not be Self-Opinionated

After recognising the limited nature of the intellect, we can understand how a person will be prone to making mistakes if he was to apply his intellect beyond its boundaries. We can also better understand the dangers of the norm today, where each person has taken his own intellect as the sole authority in deciding what is right and wrong. This attitude is a sign that one has too much reliance on his own opinions, a quality regarding which Nabī sallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam warned the Ummah. Rasūlullāh sallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam said,

When you see (that it has become rife in society, that people) obey (the demands of their) greed, follow (their unlawful) desires, give preference to the world (over Dīn), and that every person is fond of his own opinion (thinking of it to be always correct), then worry about yourself and leave aside the affairs of the general public. (Abū Dāwūd, At-Tirmidhī)

Sayyidunā ‘Umar radhiyallāhu ‘anhu said,

Indeed, what I fear upon you most, is that greed which is obeyed, that desire which is followed and a person’s fondness of his own opinion. And this (last one) is the worst of them. (Musannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah)

There are many Islamic beliefs and teachings which we cannot comprehend with our intellects, yet we still have conviction in their truthfulness solely because Allāh ta‘ālā has revealed them in the Glorious Qur’ān or through His Messenger. For example, we believe in the existence of Jannah and Jahannam and in the life Hereafter despite not being able to comprehend them. We wholeheartedly accept these because they have been sourced from wahy which is beyond the perception of our intellects. In fact, attempting to understand such beliefs with the intellect will lead one astray. It was due to applying the intellect beyond its limits that many individuals and sects rejected the truth and deviated from the straight path.

Do Not Follow Mere Speculations

One incorrect use of the intellect is to jump to conclusions by following whatever comes to mind, especially when it comes to the matter of religion. By doing so, one is basing his religion on mere speculation. Allāh ta‘ālā states regarding those who disbelieve in the Hereafter,

They do not have any knowledge. They follow only speculation, and speculation is of no avail in the (matter of) truth. (53:28)

Some people are such that they debate about Allāh with no knowledge, no guidance and no enlightening book. (22:8)


We must understand that our duty as Muslims is to submit wholeheartedly to the beliefs and teachings of Islām, whether our intellects are able to comprehend or not. This can only be done when one acknowledges the limitations of the intellect, thus accepting the knowledge received through wahy. We should be confident in this regard and should avoid attempting to justify all the injunctions of Dīn through the intellect. May Allāh ta‘ālā grant us the ability to totally submit our intellects to wahy and grant us steadfastness on Dīn. Āmīn.

Extracted from Riyādul Jannah, Vol. 29 No. 9, 2020

The Shi’as & LGBTQ Crowd – ImportantAqeedah Notice!

Weekly, from the Manaabir (pulpits) throughout the world, the Imaams echo the words of our
beloved Rasoolullah (Sallallahu alaihi wasallam) which are as follows:
“Fear Allah! Fear Allah, regarding my Sahaabah (Radhiyallahu anhum)!”
“He who loves them (my Sahaabah), loves them because he loves me.”
“He who hates them, hates them because he hates me.”
The Shi’as who swear and abuse the Sahaabah (Radhiyallahu anhum) cannot be and should not be
included as part of the Muslim Ummah. The supporters and sympathizers of the Shi’as should take
a good warning of the jeopardy of their Imaan in the above Ahaadith echoed from the Manaabir
on Fridays. Can any sane human befriend and ‘act good’ to anyone who swears his mother? The
Shi’as swear and abuse Ummul-Mu’mineen (the mother of the believers), Hazrat Aisha
(Radhiyallahu anha) and other Sahaabah! How can we sympathize with them?
Therefore, it is Haraam to support the Shi’as. Stay far, very far from the Shi’as. The Shi’as are
Kuffaar. Be wary of those scholars who opt to remain silent in exposing the Kufr of the Shi’as!
All the weird, alien-to-humans and inhumane activities, beliefs, doings and concept the LGBTQ
group believes in, are all rejected Islamically and are declared as major sins in Islaam. Supporting
this group, participating in their activities, wearing their coloured clothing, banners and flags are
all Haraam in terms of Deen. Anyone who believes and practices what the LGBTQ believes and
practices in, is out of the fold of Islaam.
Extreme caution should be taken regarding innocent (Muslim) school-going kids who are taught
such subjects whereby their innocent brains and hearts are brainwashed. They are taught to respect
anyone who is a gay or lesbian – Astaghfirullah! Even the animals don’t believe in this garbage!
Parents should really deeply rethink over sending their children to school where today these
subjects are taught. If parents know of a particular school having bullies that hassle students, then
no parent will readily send their kids to that school. The teaching and studying LGBTQ and all
other nonsensical Haraam subjects are subjects which are hassling, harassing, robbing and
murdering the Imaan and Hayaa’ of our kids. What future Ummah do we expect to have?
How can parents still comfortably send their sons – and even worse, their daughters – to schools?
It is sad to note how modern/secular-scholars of Deen encourage godless secular education which
promotes such filthy education. This is ridiculous and a sign of them being part of the Ulama-eBaatil!



Please comment on the following statement made by a modernist:

“It is a settled Shariah principle that a Muslim citizen residing in a modern non-muslim constitutional state, based on the rule of law, enters into an explicit or tacit agreement with the state, in terms of which he or she is obliged to obey all neutral laws and regulations, enacted in the public interest, which fall within the very wide category of mubah or what is described as merely permitted or neutral matters, examples are traffic and town planning laws.”

The modernist backs up his claim with a reference from Ad-durul Mukhtaar which says: “…Because obedience to the Imaam in things which are not sinful is Fardh. The action of the Imaam centres on expediency.” The objective of the modernist is to convince Muslims that it is a requirement of the Shariah for them to obey the government’s corona protocols, and if they disobey, they will be sinful.

Is this correct in terms of the Shariah? Will a Muslim who disobeys the laws of the kuffaar country of which he is a citizen be deemed sinful in terms of the Shariah?


The brains of the modernist is convoluted with kufr, hence he is not blessed with the bounty of brain-application. What he has disgorged in his statement is rubbish. It is clear that this chap is a bootlicker of the kuffaar. With his bootlicking, he seeks to appease his kuffaar masters with his egregious misinterpretation of the texts of the Shariah.

The statement which the moron has ripped out of Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar has no relationship with a kuffaar state. It applies to an Islamic state, and none of the present Muslim lands governed by kuffaar regimes is an Islamic state, not even Afghanistan where currently the “Taliban” have treacherously betrayed the Ummah by violating their Covenant with Allah Azza Wa Jal.

The “Imaam” mentioned in the quote by the moron modernist refers to the Khalifah or the Sultan or the Haakim of an Islamic state. It does not refer to the president or regime of a non-Muslim country or to any of these tyrannical plastic regimes in Muslim countries. It is absolutely preposterous to even hallucinate that it is Fardh for a Muslim to obey man-made laws, and disobeying such laws being sinful, thereby making him liable for Jahannam in the Aakhirah. The consequence of disobeying Fardh is Jahannam, and its denial is kufr. Therefore, in terms of the stupid theory of the jaahil modernists Muslims who disobey the ‘neutral’ laws of those who wallow in kufr and janaabat are destined for Jahaanam, while the kufr entity of the country only views such infraction with relative insignificance, which could be rectified by payment of a monetary fine.

Thus, in terms of the convoluted logic of the moron modernist, a Muslim who denies and rejects the hallucinated fardhiyat of traffic and town planning laws enacted by those who wallow in janaabat, najaasat and kufr becomes a murtadd.

This is the tacit conclusion based on his moronic ‘fardh’ ascription to manmade laws of the kuffaar.

Also, the term fardh in the context of the statement cited from Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar does not have the technical Fiqhi meaning. It merely conveys the importance and essentiality of obeying the MUSLIM IMAAM in all rules/laws which are permissible in Islam and formulated in the interests of the Ummah. Disobedience of such laws enacted by even the Imaam of the Islamic state is not sinful if not oppressive. Disobeying zulm of even the Khalifah is never punishable nor castigatory. But, disobeying even the beneficial ‘neutral’ laws of a kuffaar entity is not punishable in the Aakhirat. The appellation of ‘fardh’ assigned to obedience in this context is the effect of substance abuse.

While Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar is concerned with the Imaam of an Islamic State, the moron rips out a Shar’i issue from its context to apply it to a “modern non-Muslim constitutional state”. The descriptive term, ‘modern’ in the context used by the jaahil is laughable. Just how does western ‘modernity’ fit into the puzzle created by the chap? A kaafir state, whether ‘modern’ or non-modern, whatever this may mean, is Darul Kufr/Harb. Today all kuffaar states and all Muslim lands governed by the murtaddeen and kuffaar are ‘modern’ since the era of the Middle Ages has become antique eons ago.

At least this modernist jaahil who has set himself up as a ‘mujtahid’, has saved his skin from the fatwa of kufr by predicating the obedience to “neutral laws and regulations” which are presumed to be such enactments which are not in conflict with the Shariah. At least he grudgingly and tacitly acknowledges that it is Islamically permissible to disobey such laws of the kufr state which are in conflict with the Shariah.

No one has any issue with compliance with ‘neutral’ rules and regulations which are not in violation of the Shariah, and which are designed for the benefit of the people. However, despite the beneficial objectives of such rules and regulations, whimsical and wilful disobedience is not sinful in terms of the Shariah. Thus, his claim that the Muslim “is obliged to obey” such laws should not be understood to mean that it is technically Waajib, and that disobedience of such manmade laws is sinful.

The modernist moron, dwelling in confusion states that the Muslim citizen living in a non-Muslim state “enters into an explicit or tacit agreement with the state” to obey all the trash enacted by the state. Here the fellow mentions two opposites: explicit and tacit. What are his grounds for claiming the existence of an explicit agreement between Muslim citizens and the state? On the basis of which document of obedience, which sacrament of allegiance do Muslim citizens pledge obedience, the violation of which will render them fussaaq and denial kuffaar? The moron should explain the basis for claiming that there exists an explicit agreement.

In a bid to cover his moronity, he paradoxically says “or tacit”. What is the basis for even this hallucinated tacit or implied agreement? The reality is that there is no agreement whatsoever with the state, neither explicit nor tacit. Just as all non-Muslims in the non-Muslim state are citizens, Muslim of a “modern non-Muslim constitutional state” are also citizens. Citizens are not outsiders. They are not in the country on the basis of temporary visas. There are not in the category of the Musta’min (one who enters Darul Kufr with a visa).

Muslims born in the country, just like all other non-Muslims, are citizens by virtue of their birth in the land. They are not citizens by virtue of some agreement and acceptance by the government installed by the population. The government is supposed to be the servant of the citizens although practically these institutions have become oppressors and brutal tyrants. Muslim citizens are not the recipients of a favour bestowed to them by the government. Citizenship is their natural attribute and status which cannot be extinguished by even gross rebellion, leave alone infractions pertaining to the ‘neutral’ rules and regulations.

If the outsider Muslim who is not a citizen of darul kufr, knows that he will be required/compelled to act in conflict with the Shariah in the non-Muslim state, then it will be haraam for him to enter with a visa. The principle of Laa ghadra fi daaril harb (There is no treachery in darul harb), applies to a Muslim who acquires permission (a visa) from the kuffaar state to visit daarul kufr. This Muslim is obliged to obey all the laws which the moron describes as “neutral”, that is, such laws which are not in conflict with the Shariah. If he is requires to submit to haraam, then it will be haraam for him to visit daarul kufr/harb.

But germane to Muslim citizens in the non-Muslim state, the issue of ghadr does not apply. It is perfectly permissible to adopt measures to save oneself from the zulm (oppression and injustice) of the state. Such action which the government regards as unlawful will not constitute ghadr in terms of the Shariah. Some of our greatest Fuqaha and Aimmah Mujtahideen living in Darul Islam under the rule of a valid Ameerul Mu’mineen had also sided with the rebels to displace the existing Khilaafat, e.g. the Khilaafate of Bani Umayya with the Khilaafate of Banu Abbaas. And this they did despite the Shariah having been fully implemented by the Ameerul Mu’mineen of the time, despite the State being a properly constituted Darul Islam.

These Fuqaha who were also Auliya of high rank understood the Laws of the Qur’aan and Sunnah which a million moron modernists will never be able to comprehend even if they are reborn. The moron should tell the baboons in the mountain regarding the ‘fardhiyat’ of obeying kuffaar regimes on the basis of some hallucinated ‘explicit’ or ‘tacit’ covenant. He will find even baboons ridiculing his jahaalat.

The moron modernist has fabricated his stupidity on the basis of hallucination due to perhaps substance abuse. He is clearly a bootlicker, and the objective of life of all bootlickers is the haraam boodle which is the focus of the existence.

Insha-Allah, as time permits, the other stupidities of the moron shall be rebutted.


21 Rabiuth Thaani 1443
26 November 2021

Only fully vaccinated citizens allowed to pray at mosques: Sindh govt

Only fully vaccinated citizens allowed to pray at mosques: Sindh govt
The Sindh government has issued updated Covid-19 protocols for mosques in the province in line with the directions issued by the National Command and Operation Centre.

According to a notification issued by the Sindh Home Department, a copy of which is available with, only fully vaccinated individuals are allowed to pray at mosques to “avoid risk to others”.

The notification also said that face masks would continue to be mandatory during indoor prayer gatherings. The provincial government also directed officials to ensure that carpets are removed and that there is adequate ventilation for indoor prayer gatherings.



FDA adds heart inflammation warning to Moderna, Pfizer vaccines
Warning update follows an extensive review of information and discussion by CDC’s Advisory Committee.

26 Jun 2021

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has added a warning about the risk of heart inflammation to fact sheets for Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines.

The warning on Friday noted that reports of adverse events following vaccination – particularly after the second dose – suggest increased risks of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, or inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart.

The warning update follows an extensive review of information and discussion by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC’s) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices meeting on Wednesday, the FDA said.

At end of the second week of June, more than 1,200 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis have been reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

The cases reportedly appear to be notably higher in males and in the week after the second vaccine dose.

There has been no comment from Pfizer and Moderna yet.

Source: News Agencies

20 Rabiuth Thaani 1443 – 25 November 2021

Why Isn’t Everyone In Bangladesh Dead?

Why Isn’t Everyone In Bangladesh Dead?

by Charles “Sam” Faddis November 22, 2021

Bangladesh just reported zero COVID deaths in the entire country in a 24-hour period. Charitably, one-quarter of the population is vaccinated. This poor, incredibly densely populated nation appears poised on the verge of achieving herd immunity – despite violating every principle the high priests of the pandemic assure us are necessary to beat COVID.

Why? How is this possible?

Bangladesh has a population of roughly 167 million people. These people are jammed together in an area the size of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has a population of roughly 13 million.

Bangladesh has a population density of over 3000 people per square mile. The population density of the United States is 94 people per square mile.

Keep in mind that the

Germany’s always angry Chancellor Angela Merkel is making noises about the same kinds of measures in her stalag. Germany and Austria and most of Europe have already embraced every tenet of the gospel of lockdowns, masking, and vaccination, and yet COVID in Europe is nowhere near defeated.

Some 79% of Germans are “fully” vaccinated. COVID numbers are soaring. And, so, of course, the prescription must be more of the same.

Meanwhile, all across Europe average people are rising up and demanding an end to the madness. They are marching. They are refusing to comply. They can see with their own eyes what the so-called experts either cannot or will not. All of the lockdowns and social distancing measures and vaccinations have failed.

The “pandemic” will end when sufficient numbers of the people in each nation have had the disease and acquired natural immunity. We cannot vaccinate our way out of this situation. We cannot end the disease by decree.

Bangladesh is perhaps the ultimate proof of the complete bankruptcy of every idea that has been trotted out by the bureaucrats and autocrats of the planet since this entire crisis began. It exposes the complete lack of any factual basis for the belief that we must continue to force vaccinations on the population and punish those who fail to comply.

Perhaps more than anything it highlights the real agendas at work here. People must get vaccinated, because they must be made to comply and because Big Pharma must have its profits. A solution to this manufactured crisis, which preserves personal freedom and rests on natural immunity achieves neither of those goals.

If anything we are being told by the “experts” were true, Dhaka would be a ghost town. It is not. It is moving ahead and out of the pandemic. We are not so lucky.

The True Believer Vol -1 No 6

Vaxx : A Deliberate Deception
Of all the vaccines I have taken in my life like Tetanus shots, measles, mumps, polio, meningitis,
TB shots, etc…
Never have I heard so many lies and deceptions over a vaccine that says I have to wear a mask and
socially distance even when fully vaccinated, and that I could still contract or spread the virus even
after being fully vaccinated.
Never had to get tested when I was perfectly healthy without any symptoms whatsoever.
Never been bribed by the establishments to take the vaccine in order to win a holiday and/or cash prizes or earn frequent flyer points.
I never had to worry about cardiac issues, disorders, blood clots and sadly more! Didn’t even have to worry about death.
Never was I ever THREATENED by the use of FORCE by the Government, Employers, Police force, and Military for a vaccine as seen overseas.
I was never judged by my friends or relatives if I didn’t take it. I was never discriminated against for travel or other regular services to a point where I could not buy or sell without it.
The vaccines I have listed above never told me I was a bad person for not taking them or for even taking them for that matter.
I have never seen a vaccine that threatened the relationship between my family members and/or close friends to a point of destroying my relationships with them ever.
Never have I seen it used for political gain.
Never seen a vaccine needing 24/7 mass media advertising and promotion on every media outlet known to man.
Then there’s mixing and matching different vaccine brands and being told it’s okay to do it one day and then told the next day to not do it (overseas).
I have never seen a vaccine threaten someone’s livelihood, as well as wipe out their jobs.
I have never seen a vaccine that allows a 12-year-old child’s consent to supersede their parent’s consent (that one alone blows me away).
Finally, after all the vaccines (jab, shots) I listed above, I have never seen a vaccine like this one that discriminates, divides, and judges a society. So much information is censored, deleted, and removed from the internet and mainstream media!
So many doctors, health care professionals, police and scientists are censored and forbidden to speak out or ask legitimate questions when what is being allowed or not allowed does not make sense! Particularly when it comes from mainstream media. I have never known a vaccine that has made all the Pharmaceutical companies that manufacture it exempt from liability if it kills everyone to a point where no life insurance will cover it!
This is one powerful vaccine guys! It does all these things above that I have mentioned and yet? It does NOT do the one thing it is supposed to do which is…FIGHT OFF THIS PANDEMIC so why on earth would I get it !?

”When the people of truth are silent about falsehood, the people of falsehood fancy that they are upon the truth.” Ali ibn Abi Talib (radhiyallahu anhu)