Question: According to Shaikh Ibn Taimiyyah, Shaikh Uthaymeen and even Imaam Ahmad Hambal it is permissible to have special forms of greeting on the Day of Eid, e.g. ‘Eid Mubaarak’. According to them, the Sahaabah, when meeting one other on Eid would Taqabbalallaahu minna wa minka. So why does The Majlis say that it is bid’ah? And what is the status of musaafahah on the Day of Eid?

Answer: We say that it is bid’ah because in reality it is bid’ah notwithstanding what is said in the article you have sent.

Firstly, the argument does not pertain to the dua, Taqabbalallaahu……. The argument concerns the ingrained greeting of ‘Eid Mubaarak’ which has become a grounded custom which has perhaps greater importance on Eid Day than even the Masnoon Salaam.

There is no basis for the ‘Eid Mubaarak’ greeting. Why do they present as daleel the Taqabbalallaahu narration? Why don’t they rather say Taqabbalallaah…..’ ? Why abandon what they say is Masnoon for a greeting which is not Masnoon?

If the Taqabbalallaahu dua was of importance, the Fuqaha would have enumerated it in the Mustahabbaat of the Day of Eid. But whilst they list the Mustahab acts for the Day of Eid, absolutely no reference is made to the dua or greeting. None of our Akaabireen had practised any greeting/dua act on the Day of Eid.

Why did Imaam Ahmad (Rahmatullah alayh) not initiate the Dua although he would respond? He did not initiate it because it was not Sunnah to do so. We are under no obligation to follow Imaam Ahmad (Rahmatullah alayh) in responding to a greeting which we consider to be bid’ah.

“‘The views of Uthaymeen and Ibn Taimiyyah are of no significance. They are deviant Salafis who have abandoned the Math-habs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. When even a well-established Sunnat is accorded a status close to Wujoob (compulsion), then it becomes bid’ah. This principle will have greater application for an act which is not even Mustahab such as the Taqabbalallaahu…. dua. Ibn Taimiyyah’s argument is exceptionally weak, in fact baseless. It is sufficient for abstention that a practice is not Masnoon.

Our Akaabireen have always ruled that musaafahah on the day of Eid is bid’ah despite hand-shaking being Mustahab. This is because of the Wujoob factor.

30 Ramadhaan 1443 – 2 May 2022





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. In 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. It is absolutely preposterous to understand 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.

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 janaabatnajaasat and kufr becomes a murtadd.

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. Disobedience of such laws enacted by even the Imaam of the Islamic state is not sinful. It is not punishable in the Aakhirat.

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”.

At least the modernist 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. No one has any issue with such rules and regulations which are not in violation of the Shariah. However, despite the beneficial objectives of such rules and regulations, 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 an explicit agreement between Muslim citizens and the state? Which document of obedience, which sacrament of allegiance do Muslim citizens pledge obedience, the violation of which will render them fussaaq? The moron should explain the basis for claiming that there exists an explicit agreement.


Download book


Every now and again there arise in the community persons with modernistic leanings endeavouring to introduce their opinions and fancies into the Shariah. They are bent on creating problems and controversies among Muslims. They have deviated from the Sunnah, hence they attempt to introduce their un-Islaamic practices under Shar’i guise. One such example was the recent delivery of the Jumu’ah Khutbah in English by a certain misguided sheikh in one of the Masjids in the Transvaal.
He was asked to deliver the Khutbah. Little did the musallis suspect him to introduce his bid’ah. After he recited the Khutbah in English, the local Imaam repeated the Khutbah in Arabic. A controversy was the logical consequence.
To avoid such controversies, the Imaam or the mutawallis of Masaajid should not request just any tom, dick or harry to lead the Salaat or the Khutbah. It is essential to first ascertain the credentials of a visiting sheikh/maulana. His leanings and views have to be ascertained before the Masjid platform is granted to him. If this is done, unnecessary controversies will be obviated. Further, a platform for baatil and bid’ah is provided by offering the Musallaa to every roving non-entity.
People who are out to scuttle the Sunnah or bring about changes in the fourteen hundred year practices of the Ummah should never be permitted to mount a platform in the Muslim community. These people who wish to diverge from the Sunnah are out to destroy the Deen. They gnaw at the foundations of the Deen by subtle tampering with the Ahkaam of the Shariah. The ultimate result of the misinterpretations of the modernists is kufr. The Ummah cannot tolerate the slightest deviation from the practices established by the Ijma’ (Consensus) of the Ummah. It is indeed sad and ludicrous that non-entities in this belated age in such close proximity to Qiyaamah have deemed it appropriate to alter the practices of Islaam. Unwary Muslims, either because of their gullibility or ignorance, fall prey to the snares laid by these deviates. Deeni matter cannot be trifled with. Muslims should be more careful and beware of shayaateen masquerading as learned men of the Deen.
If there was a need for the Jumu’ah Khutbah to be delivered in the language understood by the people, the Sahaabah who were the first and greatest Muballigheen of Islaam would have adopted this measure unhesitatingly. There was a greater need for Tableegh of Islaam in the early days when Islaam had not yet reached the masses in the various lands. However, despite this need, the Sahaabah did not consider it Islaamic to introduce a non-Arabic Khutbah. The Khutbah was always retained in the Arabic language although there were non-Arab Sahaabah. It is abundantly clear from the evidence of the Shariah that it is not permissible to recite the Khutbah in any language other than Arabic.


Aala Hazerat (1)

Above is a scanned copy of the books of fatawa of Ahmad Raza Barelvi which the Barelvis study and supposedly follow.

In His book of fatawa he states that the Birthday of Prophet Muhammad , sallaalaahu alayhi wa sallam, was th 8. of Raabiul Awwal and h did on th 12. of the same month.

So can the barelvis and friends of the shiah perhaps explain why they celebrate and hold big functions on the day Nabi. sallalaahu alayhi wa sallam certainly died ?!

On the murtad from trinidad and tobago

For the love of the Mujaddid, Imam Rabbani

As-Salamu ‘Alaikum

A video is doing the rounds on the internet about a jahil murtad, imran hosein, denying the most prominent reading of a verse of the Quran (43:61). 

This filthy, rotten, infidel is casting aspersion on revelation – all for trying to fit it in with his insane theories based on pure hallucinations and conjecture. La’anahullah. This braying donkey hasn’t even read a book on recitations of the Quran or else he wouldn’t make such an astounding fool of himself!

He talks as if the entire ummah has been misguided (which is apostasy in itself) and he has just suddenly discovered guidance. 

He is not wrong to promote the variant, lesser known, reading of Ibn ‘Abbas radzi Allahu ‘anhu, but rather a murtad to say that the reading adopted by the entire Ummah, and transmitted by the tawatur of the  sahabah and imams of the ummah is incorrect.


View original post 538 more words


Q. King Salman of Saudi Arabia has ordered that Taraaweeh will henceforth consist of only 10 raka’ts, no longer 20 raka’ts. What is the Shar’i status of this king who has tampered with the Taraaweeh Ibaadat?
A. The status of this jaahil, Najdi agent of Iblees is not a mystery. Every Muslim can understand the kufr of this miserable Najdi who has transformed Arabia into Darul Kufr. Reducing Taraaweeh to 10 raka’ts is not at all surprising. The entire Shariah has been abolished by the current Kufr regime. The people who support the kufr regime with their presence are also guilty of aiding kufr. People should perform the full 20 raka’ts at home. It is not permissible to participate in the fong kong style of worship which these kuffaar Najdis have introduced in the Musaajid in Arabia.



Q. If a person says the following, is he still a Muslim?

  1. Stoning is not part of Shariah. He goes on to give explanation that some commentators of the Quran included the Hadith about stoning. And they need to interpret one in light of another. He also says they said there was a verse in Quran whose recitation was abrogated but the ruling remained. He says that some people said that you can’t have Hadith abrogating the Quran.
  2. Shariah laws like cutting of the hands are not applicable today. He goes on to say that we read that when Isa (AS) comes back then he will abolish the jizya. So he explains that it depends on the time and place.
  3. There is no apostasy law ( I think he means no death penalty). He explains that there is no compulsion in religion and so the Hadith may not be authentic or it would mean that the Hadith applied to a certain circumstance in the time of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).
  4. He feels that the ‘Muslim countries’ should be ruled by majority (democracy).
  5. He believes that transgenders can marry.
  6. He says because we believe that Isa (AS) is a prophet and so during Christmas we should have lectures etc to honour the birth of Isa (AS).
  7. You can believe in evolution theory.
  8. You can give interest in the case of a mortgage as it is difficult nowadays.
  9. He believes there is something like black magic but he says that if people had the power today then they would use
    it to change governments etc.
  10. He says Non Muslims can go to Jannah if they do good actions within their range.
  11. He says if you follow the Prophet (SAW) in the minor things then often times we lose the bigger picture. The minor things are taken from Hadith. I think he meant that the bigger picture is to submit to Allah.
  12. He explains crucify as a method of killing but he says that in the case of Isa (AS), Isa (AS) was crucified but not to the point that he was killed. Then he quoted some Tafsir book.
  13. He is friends with pro LGBGTQ priest.
    A. A man holding these clear-cut beliefs of kufr is termed Akfarul Kaafireen, i.e. he is among greatest of the kuffaar, perhaps worse than Fir’oun and Iblees.
    In this era the Ummah abounds with kuffaar of this category. They masquerade as Muslims whilst every capillary in their body pulsates with kufr. One does not have to be an Aalim to understand the kufr of people of this kind. Their kufr is a conspicuous exhibition which pours out from every aperture of their bodies and from every pore on their skins.


Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) narrates in Husnul Azeez:
“Haafiz Ahmad Saahib, the Principal, narrated that Haaji Imdaadullah Saahib (Quddisa sirruhu) said: ‘Molvi Muhammad Qaasim Sahib (i.e. Hadhrat Maulana Qaasim Nanotwi) had always accepted wholeheartedly whatever I had said to him verbally or in writing. However, once he gave me such a curt reply which left me stunned. It was the occasion after the dismissal of Nawaab
Muhammad Ali Saahib, the Raees of Tonk when he desired to organize Khatm-e-Bukhaari in the Haram of Makkah Muazzamah. (He requested Hadhrat Haaji Sahib to intercede on his behalf for Hadhrat Nanotwi to participate in the Khatme Bukhaari jalsah. Hadhrat Haaji Sahib said to Maulana Nanotwi): ‘I have already promised Nawaab Muhammad Ali Saahib. You should now participate in the Khatam.
However, Maulana Nanotwi responded: ‘Hadhrat! I did not study Bukhaari Shareef for this.”
(Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi commented): “This had a very profound impact on Hadhrat Haaji Sahib.”
In this episode there is much food for thought and soul searching for those who enact Maulana Nanotwi Jalsahs and Khatm-e-Bukhaari Jalsahs. Even seniors fail to apply their minds when organizing these jalsahs which are functions of takabbur, riya and israaf. From the refusal of Hadhrat Maulana Nanotwi (Rahmatullah alayh) to participate in the Bukhaari jalsah held even in the Haram Shareef of Makkah Muazzamah and despite his Shaikh requesting him, others who organize such jalsahs using his name should reflect deeply and try to fathom their hearts and nafs: Would Hadhrat Nanotwi be happy with these jalsahs?


RAMADHAN 1438 /JUNE 2017


The comments of Mufti Taqi Uthmani were made on the 12 March 2021 at the Annual ceremony of Khatm Bukhari Jamia Darul Uloom Education of Quran Raja Bazar Rawalpindi

Transcription follows:

Now since there is very little time, I shall therefore, Insha Allah, according to the directive, recite the last Baab of Bukhari Shareef Insha Allah, and my dear students have submitted that I give them ijaazat of Hadith. Insha Allah I shall do that as well.

However, before that I wish to submit (guzaarish) something. The guzaarish is that for some time now the ceremonies of Bukhari Shareef that have started in every street, every neighbourhood, every Madrasah; in such a way that I fear that these are going in the direction of Bid’at. This is also becoming an Urs. And I am the culprit behind it. For perhaps I was the first; upon Hazrat Maulana Nazeer Ahmed Saheb telling me in Faisalabad’s Jaamia Imdaadiyah Khatme-e-Bukhari. I attended and for several years I would attend.

At that time this thing was not so widespread. But now for Khatm-e-Bukhari elaborate invitations are printed and handed out; notices are put up and then people are invited; and then someone is called from out of town; an extravagant gathering (ijtima) is enacted. My heartfelt appeal is that this should be reviewed.

This is a place [the Madrasah] where Bid’aat are uprooted. They are uprooted or not? So, if from here, if the end of this Bid’at is announced then it will be much appreciated. Or I don’t say that it is a Bid’at, but it will become (a Bida’t), if such importance is attached to it. Is it not so, O Maulana Abdul Ghaffaar Saheb? (Jee, Jee)

For this reason, it is my appeal that you reconsider. There were Khatm-e-e-Bukharis in Darul Uloom Deoband as well. There were also by Hazrat Shaikhul Hind (Rahmatullahi alaih); also by Hazrat Shah Anwar Shah Saheb Kashmiri (Rahmatullahi alaih) also by Hazrat Maulana Madani (Rahmatullahi alaih). Did you ever here that those illustrious personalities organized a Huge Jalsah for Khatm-e-Bukhari?!

Since some things initially seem appealing, however, later when it is incumbently carried out, and if any Madrasah does not have it then it is looked upon as strange. “They did not even have a Bukhari Khatm!”. So, this Iltizaam Maa Laa Yalzam (making incumbent that which is not incumbent) is in fact the beginning of Bid’aat.

So my request to all my brothers and friends; Maulana Abdul Ghaffaar is sitting; Maulana Zahoor Ali’s son is sitting; my request to all of them is, and I shall, Insha Allah also send this message out, that in future do not allow this to become a Bid’at. If there is dastaarbandi then let it be. However, the Saheeh Bukhari Khatm with the title Saheeh Bukhari Jalsah which are now taking place, I understand that we should desist from it. (Emphasis added)

End of Transcript