How Sahaba Tied their Camels

The Battle of Uhud was about to take place.
Sahaba Radhiyallahu anhum began preparation for this battle.

In the home of Hadhrat Amr bin Jamuh Radhiyallahu anh, preparation of for battle by his three sons were being undertaken.
Amr was an elderly person. He was physically weak. In some accounts, it has been mentioned that he was lame and his back bent.

He too, began preparing for battle. His family became extremely concerned, trying to dissuade him. They pointed out his physical vulnerabilities. They reminded him of his age. They even explained that there is a valid excuse for him to physically take part in the battle.

Amr, extremely agitated, and despondent presents himself to The Beloved Rasool of Allah Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam. He complains about the restrictions being placed upon him by his sons and family.

Rasoolullah Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam, despite full knowledge of Amr’s condition, advises the sons to leave Amr be. Perhaps his martyrdom is written for him on this battle.

He goes into battle and with a son at his side he fights valiantly, giving his everything. He cried, “I want Paradise, I want Paradise!” And fought till Allah Ta’ala blessed him with Shahadat!

Today, we have many of our elderly and physically challenged men. Medically challenged. They want to return to the Masjid. They want to spend the last moments of their lives in the Pleasure of Allah Ta’ala.
Their hearts yearn for shahadat or even a death that is under the condition that Allah Ta’ala is pleased with them.

Oh Trustee, Imam, Family Members, honestly ask your self, if our Beloved Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam had to make a decision in this matter, where you are taking a mere recommendation of the Government and making it a law in your Masjid, what do you think Our Beloved Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam will decide?

In the case of Amr, death was a certainty. For his family, losing their father was a certainty. It was a physical battle. Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam was well aware of the physical condition of Amr. Neither did Amr hide his disability nor did he conceal his age. Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam was well aware of Allah Ta’ala’s Laws and Concessions. He was that glorious Compassionate Being who is the Mercy unto Mankind and Creation. He was that Being who showed sympathy and kindness to even animals and birds.
Yet, Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam overrides the valid concerns of the family and granted the elderly, physically challenged Amr Radhiyallahu anh the permission to seek his Jannah!

Today, it is not the battlefield that your elderly are asking for. They want to be with you in the Masjid, side by side, so that they too can worship Allah Ta’ala in accordance to the Teachings of our Beloved Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam.

You can never be Amr or his sons Radhiyallahu Radhiyallahu anhum. But his spirit can be emulated and expressed.
Just as Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi wasallam spoke on behalf of Amr to his sons, we make this plea to you as well.

Please, stop enforcing these restrictions upon our elderly and infirm. Just as how the son of Amr Radhiyallahu anh fought at his father’s side, supporting him, stand and support your elderly and infirm in their quest for Allah Ta’ala’s Pleasure. Encourage them, support them, help them and open the House of Allah Ta’ala for them. If their comfort, joy and satisfaction cannot be found in the House of Allah, where else is it going to be found?

If this virus does reach them, or anyone for that matter, wouldn’t it be far superior for all to be afflicted whilst being in worship of Allah Ta’ala?

Stop throwing those numbers and data around! Stop the fear mongering. Stop making Believers fearful of death!!! Especially death in the worship of Allah Ta’ala! If you are truly a Believer, you should be the last person to be doing this kind of fear mongering! If you are a Believer, you KNOW the reality of this.

May Allah Ta’ala grant us all such Adherence to Shariah that He is pleased with us.
May Allah Ta’ala accept us all for Service to His Deen.
May Allah Ta’ala protect us from doing a disservice to Deen.
May Allah Ta’ala keep us with Imaan, take us with Imaan and Ressurect us with Imaan amongst the Ambiya, Siddeeqeen, Shuhadaa and Saliheen. Aameen


By Jamiatul Ulama Gauteng

Maulana Rumi (رحمه الله) states: “It is a well-known fact that the fox is noted for its cowardice.” However, the fox that has a lion as a support behind its back saying to him: “Fear not, my hand is upon your back”, in spite of lacking courage, becomes very brave indeed. His newfound bravery is of such a nature that he will not hesitate to attack a leopard. He now has the support of a lion at his side, he will show no fear for a leopard. Similarly, is the case of the chosen servants of Allah Ta’ala. In spite of their apparent weakness and distressed position, they show no fear in the face of a multitude of evil forces. These saintly ones do experience some natural fear of physical hurt or injury, but at heart, they have no fear of anyone besides Allah Ta’ala.

A Sufi says:

“O people! Look not upon my weakly countenance for I have legs of iron. Do you know that within my heart I am connected to the King of Kings.”

In this regard, Maulana Rumi (رحمه الله) tells the story of Hazrat Jaafar (رضي الله عنه)

Once Hazrat Jaafar (رضي الله عنه) attacked a fortress all by himself. His attack was so fierce that it seemed that the fortress would soon become a prey to the hoofs of his horse. The inmates of the fortress were so struck by awe that they closed the gates of the fortress and no one dared to come out to engage in battle with him. The king discussed with his Wazir as to what line of action to adopt. The Wazir advised him thus: “The best line of action is to cancel all plans of making war against the man. It is best to take your shroud and your sword, go to him and lay down your weapons”. The king replied: “But this man is all alone. How is it that you give me such advice?”

The Wazir informed him: “Do not underestimate his being one man only. Open your eyes and look at the fortress and see how it trembles like quicksilver. Look at the inmates of the fortress, and see how their heads are bent downwards like sheep. Even though the man is alone, the heart that he has in his bosom is not like the hearts of ordinary men. Look at his courage. In the face of a vast multitude of opponents, he challenges them into battle with a naked sword in his hand and in a confident and victorious manner, calls them to fight. It seems that all the battle forces of the East and West are with him. One man alone, but he appears like hundreds of thousands. Do you not see that whichever soldiers are sent out to fight him are soon seen lying under the hoofs of his horse? After seeing the valour of this solitary man, O King, I have realized that the multitude of soldiers, which are with you, will not be able to do anything against him. Do not rely upon numbers. The main thing is the unity of the heart and this is actually what is so striking about the heart of this man. In this respect, he has been endowed endlessly with it. This is a gift from Allah Ta’ala, which is attained through the acquisition of contact with Him and through rigorous spiritual exercises. This connection you will not be able to attain while you are in this state of Kufr. Hence, it is best for you to throw down your weapons in defeat before the courageous believer and to open the gates of the fortress, because your numerous soldiers are of no use.”

Then Maulana Rumi (رحمه الله) gives examples in which the majority becomes useless in front of minority:


Millions of stars are shining and produce light, but at the rising of the sun, their light becomes non-existent.


If a thousand mice were to attack a weak and sickly cat, it would appear that they would be victorious in their endeavour. A few of them can grab him by the neck. One or two of them can then take his eyes out. One or two of them can tear off his ears with their teeth. One or two of them can make an opening at his side, enter and begin chewing the internal organs. It would appear to be a reasonable plan. However, experience proves otherwise. As soon as the weak and sickly cat utters one “meow” the whole multitude of mice become awestruck and one by one, they flee to safety. The moment they hear the “meow” they become convinced of being vanquished and visualizing the actions of the cat’s teeth and paws makes them flee. The main reason for this is the difference between the hearts in the breast of the mice and the heart in the breast of the cat. The unity of the heart in the cat and the courage lying in it, is not found in the mice. Hence, the mice becoming confounded and defeated in the presence of the cat, is proof thereof that the cat possesses unity of heart and courage. Otherwise, it would appear that if a large number of mice should attack the cat, it will be impossible for the cat to escape. Hence, we conclude that even if the number of mice were a hundred thousand, still, seeing a weak and sickly cat will cause all of them to run away. This proves that numbers mean nothing. The main thing is unity of the heart and courage.


Sheep and goats may be numerous in number but in the face of the knife of the butcher, that number is of no consequence.


Sleep comes along and causes many thoughts and imaginations to vanish.


The lion in the forest courageously attacks a multitude of animals with horns and he alone gets the upper hand over them. Furthermore, whichever animal he chooses from among them, he eats.

Lesson: Allah Ta’ala, the King of kings, is the One who grants this unity of heart and such courage. This unity of the heart is of two kinds. One is natural, or common possessed by the Non Believers, polytheists, and even animals. The other form is that which is granted by Allah Ta’ala and comes about through the blessings of close contact with Allah Ta’ala. This is what the Sufis term as “Nisbat”, for which one has to strive.

It is a great favor from Allah Ta’ala to have contact with Him. And there is only one way of attaining this contact and that is by following the Shari’at.



Jihad is the most just, humane and noble form of warfare.

Even non-Muslims who have managed to maintain some degree of honesty and objectivity while studying the Laws of Jihad have been compelled to conclude that the 1400 year old, ancient, medieval, “backwards” Laws of Jihad are superior to modern, “enlightened”, international rules related to war.

A few such examples are cited below:

Roger C. Algase, in his thesis comparing the laws of Jihad with modern international law, states that the laws of Jihad:

“strikes a balance between military necessity and respect for human life in a manner which gives a higher priority to saving the lives of non-combatants than does modern international law…the Islamic law dealing with the conduct of war is in a better position than modern theory to develop an effective approach to the problems involved in the law of war crimes…”

“The growth of the legal literature in the early centuries of Islam which attempted to anticipate every possible situation which could arise in any area of human conduct leaves perhaps less room for uncertainty as to what the law is than the modern case method…The contrast between the ability of Islamic law and the ability of modern International law to develop an effective system for governing conduct in battle is nowhere more evident than in the case of air warfare [1400 years before air warfare was invented!!! – note added]…”

Troy S. Thomas concludes in his thesis on the Laws of Jihad with regards to prisoners of war that:

“Finally, it [i.e. the thesis] argues that the laws governing the treatment of POWs are at least as equally benevolent as the Geneva Convention and are in some specific cases broader in scope. Ultimately, they carry a more convincing sanction. A declaration of jihad carries with it a robust body of law that should guide policy and behavior lest all credibility for jihad be lost…”

Hans Kruse states in his seminal thesis on Islamic International Law that:

“the positive international law of Europe had more than eight centuries later not yet reached the high degree of humanitarianization with which the Islamic law of war was imbued.”

Unlike the the Geneva convention, the Hague convention, International Humanitarian Law, and other man-made laws which invariably fluctuate at the behest of the world’s powerful nations and which are often paid merely lip service to, the Laws of Jihad are immutable, unchangeable and can never be up for review or “improvement”. Moreover, such Divine Laws completely dictated, controlled and regulated the conduct of Muslim Warriors for over a thousand years. Regarding the rapid conquests of the medieval, “backwards” Muslims, the famous French political scientist, historian and thinker, Gustave Le Bon, states in his detailed study of the conquests of the early Arabs:

“history has never known a merciful and a just conqueror as the Arabs….The conduct of the Commander of the Believers, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattâb, in Jerusalem (Bayt al-Maqdis) proves how kindly the Arab conquerors dealt with the conquered peoples, the opposite of what was done by the Crusaders in Jerusalem many centuries later…* [see Footnote 1 below]”

“The forbearance and toleration that characterized the Arab conquerors, of which historians were ignorant, seemed to explain to what extent they were able to expand their conquests… They used to show mercy to the weak, be kind towards the conquered and abide by the conditions they imposed upon themselves, to the end of those good traits… whichever region they invaded, if Syria or Spain, they treated the people with utmost gentlesness by leaving them their laws, their institutions and their religion…. Never before had the world known conquerors with such tolerance or with such gentle a religion.”

Similarly, the English historian, Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, mentions in his detailed study of the early conquests of the very first generations of Muslims:

“Of forced conversion or anything like persecution in the early days of the Arab conquest, we hear nothing. Indeed, it was probably in a great measure their tolerant attitude towards the Christian religion that facilitated their rapid acquisition of the country…. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action [i.e. extermination or forced conversions], they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestanism penal in France or as the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years … the very survival of these churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of the Mohammedan governments towards them…” [The Spread of Islam in the World]

Those who study objectively the conquests of the early Muslims, sincerely and honestly seeking the truth, will come to the very same conclusion as the following one reached by the former British Diplomat, Charles Eaton, one of innumerable westerners to have eventually embraced Islam after having realised the superiority and beauty of its evidently Divine Laws:

“The rapidity with which Islam spread across the known world of the seventh centuries was strange enough, but stranger still is the fact that no rivers flowed with blood, no fields were enriched with the corpses of the vanquished. As warriors the Arabs might have been no better than other of their kind who had ravaged and slaughtered across the peopled lands but, unlike these others, they were on a leash. There were no massacres, no rapes, no cities burned. These men feared God to a degree scarcely imaginable in our time and were in awe of His all-seeking presence, aware of it in the wind and the trees, behind every rock and in every valley. Even in these strange lands there was no place in which they could hide from this presence, and while vast distances beckoned them ever onwards they trod softly on the earth, as they had been commanded to do. There had never been a conquest like this.”

Unfortunately, the likes of these Allah-fearing, selfless, honourable men of integrity, whose nature was imbued with genuinely Islamic mercy and concern for all of Allah’s Makhlooq (creation), and who conquered and ruled most of the known world for many centuries, are scarcely to be found anywhere in the world today. The Prophet of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) foretold that true Islam will eventually become Ghareeb (lone, forlorn, strange) as it clearly has today.

A true representation of the only religion to have brought justice and enlightenment to the entire world on an unprecedented and rapid scale, the only religion under whose benign rule oppressed populations the world over found genuine sanctuary, and the only religion to have provided and to continue to offer a solution to the chaos, anarchy, mass-exploitation, epidemics of murder, suicides, depression, drugs, rapes, bestiality etc. currently plaguing every society today – the natural consequence of Kufr (disbelief and rejection of the Final, Divinely Revealed Law) – is more easily found in the ancient books of Islam than in any muslim community today.

Furthermore, testifying to its Divine origin and its applicability for all times and places, Islam is the only religion whose immutable 1400 year old source-texts, laws, spirit, ethos and every other facet, have been preserved in the most minute detail with unparalleled accuracy, thus enabling any person today or in future to embrace a Way of Life that will forever remain the only panacea to all the problems afflicting this ephemeral (extremely short-lived) world, and will forever remain the only religion that secures eternal salvation for the impending life to come tomorrow.

An exposition of one aspect of Jihad, the laws of Aman (the means by which a sacred contract of safety and security is enacted between the Muslims and the enemy (harbi)) will be forthcoming here insha-Allah, which will further demonstrate that the 1400 year-old, ancient, medieval, “backwards” Laws of Jihad – all of which are unchangeable and immutable just like every other 1400 year-old ruling of Islam – are far far superior to all man-made constructs including the innumerable modernist and Salafi versions of “Islam” which have mushroomed in recent times, and which all are perversions of true Islam.

Footnote 1:

The blood-soaked pillage of the sacred city of Jerusalem by the Christian crusaders, whose brutality and barbarism were not much less than their modern, secular counterparts today, is accurately depicted by the  English Historian, Thomas Hart Milman, as follows:

“No barbarian, no infidel, no Saracen, ever perpetrated such wanton and cold-blooded atrocities of cruelty as the wearers of the cross of Christ on the capture of that city. Murder was Mercy. Rape tenderness, simple plunder the mere assertion of the conqueror’s right. Children were seized by their legs, some of them were plucked from their mother’s breasts and dashed against the walls or whirled from the battlements. Others were obliged to leap from the walls; some tortured, roasted by slow fires. They ripped up prisoners to see if they had swallowed gold. Of 70,000 Saracens there were not left enough to bury the dead; poor Christians were hired to perform the office. Everyone surprised in the temple was slaughtered, till the reek from the dead bodies drove away the slayers. The Jews were buried alive in their synagogues.”

Christian historian Michaud writes:

“The Saracens were massacred in the streets and in the houses. Jerusalem had no refuge for the vanquished. Some fled from death by precipitating themselves from the ramparts; others crowded for shelter into the palaces, the towers, and above all into their mosques, where they could not conceal themselves from the pursuit of the Christians. The Crusaders, masters of the Mosque of Omar, where the Saracens defended themselves for some time, renewed there the deplorable scenes which disgraced the conquest of Titus. The infantry and cavalry rushed pell-mell among the fugitives. Amid the most horrid tumult, nothing was heard but the groans and cries of death; the victors trod over heaps of corpses in pursuing those who vainly attempted to escape. Raymond d’Agiles, who was an eye- witness, says. ‘that under the portico of the mosque, the blood was knee-deep, and reached the horses’ bridles.”

Fulcher of Chartres, a Christian chronicler of that time, said:

“In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared”

Only a generation after the fall of Jerusalem into Christian hands, Sultan Salahuddin Ayyubi (rahmatullah alayh) (famously known in the west as “Saladin”) conquered this prized city. How did this Orthodox, medieval, Muslim ruler repay the butchery and massacre of 70,000 Muslims at the hands of the savage Crusaders almost a century ago? Describing the conquest of Jerusalem by Sultan Salahuddin, Steven Runcimman, a Christian, writes: 

“Saladin had the city at his mercy. He could storm it when he wished.…On Friday 2nd October, Saladin entered Jerusalem. It was the 27th day of Rajab….The victors (i.e. the Muslims) were correct and humane.

Where the Franks, eighty-eight years before, had waded through the blood of their (Muslim) victims, not a building now was looted, not a person injured. By Saladin’s orders guards patrolled the streets and the gates, preventing any outrage on the Christians…

Then Saladin announced that he would liberate every aged man and woman. When the Frankish ladies who had ransomed themselves came in tears to ask him where they should go, for their husbands or fathers were slain or captive, he answered by promising to release every captive husband, and to the widows and orphans he gave gifts from his own treasury. His mercy and kindness were in strange contrast to the deeds of the Christian conquerors of the First Crusade.

The Orthodox Christians and the Jacobites remained in Jerusalem. Each had to pay a capitation tax in addition to his ransom, though many poorer classes were excused the payment. The rich amongst them bought up much of the property left vacant by the Franks’ departure. The rest was bought by Moslems and Jews whom Saladin encouraged to settle in the city. When the news of Saladin’s victory reached Constantinople the Emperor Isaac Angelus sent an embassy to Saladin to congratulate him and to ask that the Christian Holy Places should revert to the Orthodox Church. After a little delay his request was granted.”

Worth noting is the fact that Salahuddin was of the Shaafi’i Madh-hab in Fiqh, a staunch upholder and propagator of the Ash’ari Madh-hab in Aqeedah, and one who established numerous Sufi Khanqahs including one in his own house in Damascus, as documented by reliable Islamic historians such as al-Maqrizi.

Considering the fact that the numerous offspring (salafi sub-sects) today of Ibn Abdul Wahhab –  the inspiration of ALL Salafi sects today, including ISIS – are doing Tabdee’ (declaring as deviant) or Takfeer of even their own siblings (other Salafi subsects who share the exact same Taymiyyun Aqeedah), it’s a no-brainer that the hard-core Sufi Ash’ari, Salahuddin Ayyubi, would have been declared a Kaaafir, or at least a deviant, if he were around today to establish Ash’arism and Sufism as he did in the 6th century.

Only political correctness and expediencies prevent the various Salafi sub-sects, who are second only to the Shiah sect in the chameleon-like art of Taqiyyah, from baring their true colours and being consistent with their Tabdee’ and Takfeer.

True Islam as upheld by the likes of Salahuddin, stands poles apart to all versions of Salafi and modernist “islam”.


A few young men of a Muslim Army, while in pursuit of a Kaafir soldier in the battlefield, called out in Persian, “Don’t be afraid!” The Kaafir soldier, understanding this call to be an assurance of safety, permitted the Muslims to catch up with him, only then to be killed by them.

When Umar (radhiyllahu anhu) heard of this seemingly minor misdemeanour in the battlefield against a Kaafir enemy combatant, he sounded the following severe warning to any Muslim who commits such treachery, which portrays the enormous emphasis placed by Islam on justice, honour and integrity, even during war:

By He in whose hand my soul is, if I hear of anyone who does that, I shall strike off his neck [i.e. execution].”

This narration is related in numerous authentic books such as Imam Malik’s Muwatta. The Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen (Leading Imams of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen), whilst differing on whether the specific punishment stated by Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) is mandatory or not, all agreed that the misdemeanour described above constituted treachery and as such deserved severe punishment.

Numerous other narrations from Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) convey a similar meaning, emphasizing the fact that even in a real battlefield, if a Kaafir combatant understands or misunderstands, from even the slightest indication, that he has been granted safety by a Muslim, then the Muslim is obliged to honour that impression of him, and is obliged not harm the Kaafir combatant at all. For example, the following authentic narration used by the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen as evidence (istidlaal) for the prohibition of treachery even against a Kaafir combatant on the battlefield, quotes Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) as saying:

A Muslim man that gestures to a man from the enemy: “If you come down I will kill you.” And he (the enemy) comes down believing that he has been granted safety, then he (the Muslim) has guaranteed him (the enemy) safety.’”

[Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab-ul-Kharaj of Imam Abu Yusuf, al-Siyar of Imam Muhammad al-Shaybani, and other books of the Salaf]

In the scanario described above, a Muslim expresses his explicit intention to kill the enemy. However, the enemy misunderstood from the gesture that the Muslim does not intend to harm him. As a result a contract of Aman is established automatically and the Muslim is obliged not to harm him.

The obligation of abiding by this contract of Aman is of such a degree that Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) threatened the execution of any true Muslim warrior who violates the contract by murdering in a treacherous manner a Kaafir combatant in a real battlefield – a Kaafir enemy who would most likely have already slaughtered or harmed numerous innocent Muslims.

Now not too much Aql (intellect) is required to understand what Umar’s (radhiyallahu anhu) Fatwa and attitude would have been towards the fraudulent ‘Jihadis’ of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Pakistani Fake Taliban, and other Salafi-influenced ‘Jihadi’ groups, and their Zindeeq “scholars” who, like all modernists today, excel in the art of making Halaal that which is Haraam. They are the Zindeeqs who legalize (make Halaal) such perverted abominations as gunning down or blowing oneself up in amongst protected (Mu’aahid) men, women and children in a completely non-battlefield scenario.

The Laws of Islam pertaining to every single aspect of life, including Jihaad, were derived, recorded, compiled, and set in stone over a thousand years ago, by a galaxy of Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen (the Leading Imams of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen) and Fuqaha who had instituted a incomparably monumental and unmatchable process of codification, compilation, and intense scrutiny which culminated eventually in the compendium of rulings that now constitutes the Four Madh-habs (schools of thought which comprise of all the original rulings of Islam).

These rulings of Islam which include the absolute prohibition of targeting civilians in Jihaad, and the absolute prohibition of treachery and fraud, are ALL immutable, unchangeable, and not up for review or “improvement”, regardless of how rigid, restrictive and “backwards” such Laws of Islam might appear to the fraudulent “Jihaadis”, Salafis, and modernists today, whose satanic pride (Kibr) and desperate craving to concoct a tailor-made religion (Deen) based around their filthy desires lead them to dwell under the self-deception that their kindergarten-level of knowledge enables them to re-enact an improved version of the monumental process instituted by those who were, according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the most superior of generations (Khairul Quroon), whose knowledge and piety will never be matched again, and who witnessed first-hand and carried forward to their direct students the spirit and ethos of the Deen as practised by the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum).

Any version of “Deen” which seeks to differ with or “improve” on the Four Madh-habs even slightly, such as the innumerable new versions of “Deen” of the multitudes of Salafi and modernist groups that have mushroomed recently, is a deviated imposter of a “Deen” that has nothing to do with Islam.



The following quotes from the Classical Fuqaha (jurists), provide just a glimpse into the 1400 year old, ancient, medieval, and “backward” Laws of Jihad:

Allamah Ibn Abd al-Barr said:

وَأَجْمَعَ الْعُلَمَاءُ عَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِجُمْلَةِ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ، وَلَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَهُمْ قَتْلُ نِسَاءِ الْحَرْبِيِّينَ وَلَا أَطْفَالِهِمْ؛ لِأَنَّهُمْ لَيْسُوا مِمَّنْ يُقَاتِلُ فِي الْأَغْلَبِ

“The Ulama (scholars) are unanimous (i.e. Ijma’) on advocating the generality of this hadith, and it is not permissible according to them to kill women and children from the Harbis (people whom the Muslims are at war with), because they are not generally from those who fight.” (Tamheed)

Imam Nawawi said:

أجمع العلماء على تحريم قتل النساء والصبيان إذا لم يقاتلوا

“The Ulama are unanimous (i.e. Ijma’) on the prohibition of killing women and children when they are not fighting.” (Sharh Saheeh Muslim)

Allamah Ibn Battaal states:

ولا يجوز عند جميع العلماء قصد قتل نساء الحربيين ولا أطفالهم ؛ لأنهم ليسوا ممن قاتل فى الغالب

“According to ALL the Ulama it is impermissible to intentionally kill the women of the Harbees (those with whom the Muslims are at war) and their children, because they are generally not from those who fight.” (Sharh Saheeh Bukhari)

Allamah Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani states:

واتفق الجميع كما نقل ابن بطال وغيره على منع القصد إلى قتل النساء والولدان..

“ALL are in agreement (i.e. Ijma’), as Ibn Battaal and others have transmitted, upon the prohibition of intentionally killing women and children.” [Fath ul-Bari]

Allamah Ibn Rushd states:

ولا خلاف بين المسلمين أنه لا يجوز قتل نسائهم ولا صبيانهم، ما لم يقاتل الصبي والمرأة

“There is no difference amongst the Muslims (i.e. Ijma’) that it is impermissible to kill their women and children as long as the child and woman does not fight.” [Bidayat ul-Mujtahid]

Imam Ibn al-Humam states:

وما الظنّ إلا أن حرمة قتل النساء والصبيان إجماع

“I do not know except that the prohibition of killing women and children is [established by] Ijma (consensus of all the scholars)” [Fath ul-Qadeer]

Most of the scholars quoted above are from around a 1000 years ago.

Like all other 1400 year old, ancient, and medieval Laws of Islam, these Laws of Jihad are ALL immutable, unchangeable, and can never be open to re-interpretation. The doors of Ijtihaad (interpreting the Qur’an and Sunnah) had been welded firmly shut by the Fuqaha (jurists) over a thousand years ago. There is no scope in Islam for overriding any of the ancient Laws of Islam no matter how much the modernist and ‘progressive’ Zindeeqs (heretics) of today detest it.

Modernists who seek to re-interpret and overturn the ancient Laws of Islam, and Salafis who seek to open the door for each and every scholar to interpret directly the source texts of Islam, the Qur’an and the Sunnah, do so at the peril of their Imaan (faith). Their “ijtihad” – conclusions based on their own understanding of the Qur’an and the Sunnah – have absolutely nothing to do with Islam.


A Kharijite-inclined Aalim evidently distressed by an article exposing the evil and twisted actions and Fatwas of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, Ibn Uthaymin, Hamoud ibn Uqla, Anwar Awlaki, and other Salafi and modernist Imams, which exhort the mass-murder of women, children and babies, made the following comment: “If you claim their fataawaa are wrong and contrary to ijmaaa’ (consensus), then really it shouldn’t be hard to bring the madhaahib’s books to disprove it.”


Despite being a Maulana/Mufti, perhaps even one of those salafized “Mujtahids”, you miserably failed to understand the purpose of producing those Fatwas from prominent Salafi and modernist Imams exhorting the mass-slaughter of women, children, and babies. Perhaps this is because the article was not directed at you and your ilk whose deep Nafsaani attachment to such Zindeeq (heretic) or accursed Bidatee (deviate) Imams – i.e. Gods besides Allah who flagrantly transgress Ijma’ – prevent you and your ilk from intuitively appreciating the fact that perhaps roasting babies alive just might be prohibited in the Shariah, even if the Kuffaar do the same to our babies.

The article was directed at those who already understand readily the prohibition of slaughtering women, children and babies, but who themselves employ the very same principles i.e. Ghair Muqallidism (freeing oneself from rigidly binding oneself to the ancient laws of Islam), which these Salafi and modernist Imams also employ to provide justification for their Fatwas legalizing mass-slaughter of women, children and babies.

The purpose of the article was to demonstrate the chaos and anarchy that stems from opening the door for each scholar to escape Taqleed (rigidly binding oneself) to the ruling of one of the Four Madh-habs (schools of thought which comprise of all the ancient, original rulings of Islam), and instead adopt a “minority” ruling, or come up with his or her own understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah e.g. legalizing imitation of the Kuffaar in their orgy of mass-murder and mass-rapes throughout the world.

An article will be forthcoming insha-Allah which will thoroughly expose the hypocrisy of these Salafis and closet Salafis who, despite being the quickest at labelling others as deviates, adopt an extraordinarily deafening silence regarding their own “Gods besides Allah” even when their beloved Gods transgress Ijma’ (consensus) multiple times.

For yours’ and others’ possible edification, a few explicit transmissions of Ijma’ (consensus) on the prohibition of mass-slaughter of women, children and babies have been cited in the article above.

However, despite the Ijma’ cited above, and in other quotes to come in the article, Salafism and modernism possess a unique ability to overturn Ijma’, as demonstrated in countless other issues.

Also, refer again to the following incident cited in the article above, which was used for Istidlaal (proof) in the authentic books of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen:

“A few young men of a Muslim Army, while in pursuit of an enemy soldier in the battlefield, called out in Persian, “Don’t be afraid!” The enemy soldier, understanding this call to be an assurance of safety, permitted the Muslims to catch up with him, only then to be killed by them. When Umar (radhiyllahu anhu) heard of this seemingly minor misdemeanour in the battlefield against a non-muslim enemy combatant, he sounded the following severe threat to any Muslim who commits such treachery, which portrays the enormous emphasis placed by Islam on justice, honour and integrity, even during war: “By He in whose hand my soul is, if I hear of anyone who does that, I shall execute him!”

When Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) sounded the threat of a death punishment for any Muslim who kills in a treacherous manner an accursed Kaaafir Harbee (a mass-murdering enemy combatant) on the battlefield, how many a brain cell(s) does one require to understand the prohibition of slaughtering women, children and babies, outside of an actual battlefield?

When committing istikhfaaf (treating lightly) of even the Sunnah status of the Miswaak expels one from the fold of Islam, then what is the accursed status of the one who commits Istikhfaaf (treats lightly) of a crime for which Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) declared the death punishment, leave aside the mass-murder of women, children, and babies?

As will be demonstrated in another forthcoming article on the rules of Aman (a sacred contract enacted between the Muslims and an accursed Harbee even on the battlefield), there is Ijma’ on the severity of the crime for which Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) declared the death punishment, although the Imams of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen did differ on whether or not a Muslim should be executed for such a crime.

However, Halaalizing or doing Istikhfaaf of such a crime, or any other major crime (e.g. rape) for that matter, is Zanaadiqa (heresy) for which no Imam would differ that execution is the most appropriate punishment.

Despite the ingrained brutality and barbarism that is inherent in Kufr, which constrained the Kuffaar of every age, without exception, to pillage, ravage, plunder, ransack, defile and utterly destroy everything in their path, even slaughtering babies without compunction, Islam has always upheld the absolute prohibition of imitating the Kuffaar in this and in all other aspects.

Islam, which is represented only by the Four Madh-habs, stands apart from all other religions and ideologies.

Any “Deen” (religion) which opens the door to escape the ruling of the Four Madh-habs, even momentarily, such as the countless versions of Salafi and modernist “Deens” which have mushroomed in recent times, is a deviant imposter of Deen that has nothing to do with Islam.


In regards to Muslims living in Darul Harb – Kuffaar nations which are murdering Muslims around the world – a sacred contract known as Aman is enacted between the Muslim residents and the non-Muslims, which prohibits the Muslims from harming not only priests, monks, farmers, hired workers, old people and other non-combatants – those branded by the ancient Shariah as “those who generally do not fight” – but also all Harbis (military combatants and all potential fighters).

A remarkable conformity exists between all Four Madh-habs (schools of thought which comprise of all the ancient and original laws of Islam) in regards to the severity of the issue of Aman, the consequences of breaking it, the means by which the contract is enacted, and the method of terminating the contract.

A future article will elaborate in detail on these ancient and immutable Laws of Jihad which some scholars today are attempting to override or “improve”, by loosening the reins of Rigid Taqleed (tightly binding oneself) to the ancient Fatwas of the Four Madh-habs.

This sacred contract of Aman (guaranteeing safety and security) is enacted automatically by both implicit or explicit means. An Aman contract enacted by mere gesture, even if misunderstood by a mass-murdering Kaafir war-mongerer, has the same weight as a written contract guaranteeing safety and security. This will become clear even from the few snippets below, and will become even more clear from the the upcoming article.

For now, the narrations produced below from the ancient Fuqaha (jurists) should be sufficient in providing a glimpse into the manner in which the sacred contract of Aman is enacted, and the severe consequences of breaking it.

The following narration from Masaa-il al-Imam Ahmad, in regards to a Harbi in an actual battlefield, demonstrates that even the slightest of indications – even if it is misunderstood by a mass-murdering enemy combatant (Harbi) – is sufficient for the contract of Aman to be enacted:

قُلْتُ لِأَحْمَدَ» الرَّجُلُ يَحْمِلُ عَلَى الْعِلْجِ، فَيَصَيحُ بِهِ بِالرُّومِيَّةِ: قِفْ، أَوْ أَلْقِ سِلَاحَكَ؟ قَالَ: هَذَا أَمَانٌ، قُلْتُ: فَإِنَّ الْعِلْجَ عَلِمَ أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ لَهُ مِنْهُ مَنْجَا؟ فَقَالَ: هَذَا أَمَانٌ، قُلْتُ: فَإِنْ قَالَ لَهُ: ذَهَبْتَ أَوْ نَحْوَ ذَلِكَ، يُرِيدُ يُرْعِبُهُ؟ قَالَ: كُلُّ شَيْءٍ يَرَى الْعِلْجُ أَنَّهُ أَمَانٌ فَهُوَ أَمَانٌ «

“I said to Ahmad [ibn Hanbal]: A man attacks a non-Muslim, shouting out to him in the Roman language: “Wait!” Or: “Put down your weapons!” (Ahmad) said: “This is Aman (i.e. a contract guaranteeing safety and security).” I said: The non-Muslim knows that he can’t escape him. (Ahmad) said: “(Even still), it is Aman.” I said: If he said to him: “You have gone” or something like that, intending to frighten him. (Ahmad) said: “Everything the non-Muslim believes to be Aman is Aman.”

Allamah Ibn Qudamah narrates the following narration from Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, in order to demonstrate that what the Harbis (actual and potential war-combatants) understand from the norm (aadah) of the society is sufficient to enact a contract of Aman:

وقد جرت العادة بدخولهم إلينا تجاراً بغير أمان، لم يعرض لهم، وقال أحمد: إذا ركب القوم في البحر، فاستقبلهم فيه تجار مشركون من أرض العدو يريدون بلاد الإسلام، لم يعرضوا لهم ولم يقاتلوهم، وكل من دخل بلاد المسلمين من أهل الحرب بتجارة، بويع ولم يسأل عن شيء ا–هـ.

“[When] it is the norm for them (i.e. the Harbis) to enter upon us as traders without Aman (i.e. an explicit one), they will not be disturbed. Ahmad said: When the people (Muslims) are at sea, and the Mushrikoon (idolators) from the land of the enemy face them intending the lands of Islam, they (the Muslims) will not intercept them or fight them. All who enter the lands of the Muslims from the Ahlul Harb (people with whom the Ummah is at war) for trade, will be traded with, and not asked about anything.”

Imam Shafi’i clarifies in several places in his ‘al-Umm’, that the sacred contract of Aman is enacted even if implicitly understood. For example, he states:

وإذا أسر العدو الرجل من المسلمين فخلوا سبيله وأمنوه وولوه ضياعهم أو لم يولوه فأمانهم إياه أمان لهم منه، وليس له أن يغتالهم ولا يخونهم.

“When the enemy takes a man from amongst the Muslims as a prisoner, and then they let him go and grant him security…then their Aman to him amounts to an Aman from him of them. He may not betray them or be treacherous towards them.”

Imam Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani, in his Siyar, states that if the Muslims attempt to enter into the Darul Harb through deception, by claiming to be messengers of the Caliph, or claiming to be traders, then the sacred contract of Aman is enacted. The mere impression of seeking safety given to the Harbis (actual and potential war-combatants) is sufficient for the enactment of this contract. Imam ash-Shaybani states:

ولو أن رهطاً من المسلمين أتوا أول مسالح أهل الحرب فقالوا: نحن رسل الخليفة، وأخرجوا كتاباً يشبه كتاب الخليفة، أو لم يُخرجوا، وكان ذلك خديعة منهم للمشركين، فقالوا لهم: ادخلوا، فدخلوا دار الحرب. فليس يحل لهم قتل أحد من أهل الحرب، ولا أخذ شيء من أموالهم ما داموا في دارهم .فكذلك إذا أظهروا ذلك من أنفسهم، فيجعل ما أظهروه بمنزلة الاستئمان منهم، ولو استأمنوا فأمنوهم وجب عليهم أن يفوا لهم، فكذلك إذا ظهر ما هو دليل…”

Had a group of the Muslims come to the first military camp of the Harbis (those with whom the Ummah is at war with) and said: “We are messengers of the Caliph,” producing a letter that resembles a caliphal letter, or not producing it, and that was a deception on their part of the non-Muslims, upon which they said to them: “Come in” and they entered Darul Harb, it is not permissible for them to kill any of the Harbis, nor to take any of their wealth for as long as they are in their territory….What they show is treated as equivalent to seeking Aman from them; and when they seek Aman and receive Aman, it is necessary for them to honour it….And likewise were they to say: “We have come seeking trade.”

Allamah as-Sarakhsi, commenting on the above scenario states:

وهذا لما بينا أن أمر الأمان شديد والقليل منه يكفي

This is because of what we explained that the issue of Aman is severe, and little of it is sufficient;” [Sharh Siyar]

Allamah as-Sarakhsi states similarly in his Usul:

لأن أمر الأمان مبني على التوسع وأدنى الشبه يكفي لإثباته

The matter of Aman is built on broadness, and the slightest of doubts is sufficient to enact it”

The Fuqaha (jurists) relate the following Hadith, amongst many others, to emphasize the severe consequences of breaking the contract of Aman. The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

لكل غادر لواء يركز عند باب أسته يوم القيامة يعرف به غدرته

‘[On the Day of Judgement] Every treacherous person will have a flag-standard rooted from the opening of his backside, by which his treachery will be recognised [by everyone].’

The humiliating treatment described above of a “Jihadi” Ghaadir – one who breaks a contract of Aman – will be only the beginning of his punishment. In other Hadiths, it is stated that the treacherous person will not even smell the fragrance of Jannah.

The severity of breaking the contract of Aman can be understood further from the following narration used for Istidlaal (proof) by the Salaf, in which Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) declares the death punishment for any Muslim who kills a Harbi, in a treacherous manner:

عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ قَالَ قَالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ وَاللَّهِ لَوْ أَنَّ أَحَدَكُمْ أَشَارَ بِأُصْبُعِهِ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ إِلَى مُشْرِكٍ فَنَزَلَ إِلَيْهِ عَلَى ذَلِكَ فَقَتَلَهُ لَقَتَلْتُهُ بِهِ

By Allah, if one of you were to give a gesture with his fingure towards the sky, and a Mushrik (idolator) came down to you due to that, and you killed him, then I would execute you for it.”

Other narrations similar to the above used as Istidlaal (proof) and quoted in the books of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, such as al-Muwatta, confirm that Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was referring to a Harbi (Kaafir war combatant) in an actual battlefield scenario. One wonders what Umar’s (radhiyallahu anhu) Fatwa would be regarding the growing number of Zindeeq (heretic) “Muslims” today, who exhort the mass-murder of women, children and babies in a completely non-battlefield scenario, by adopting their own understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah in preference to Rigid Taqleed to the ancient rulings of the Four Madh-habs.

The Fuqaha state, as an example, that doing istikhfaaf (treat lightly) of even a Sunnah act expels one from the fold of Islam. Those who have committed Istikhfaaf of a crime for which Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) sounded the threat of death punishment, should immediately renew their Iman, in case they find themselves to be amongst the inmates of Hell-fire – or the poodles of those Zindeeq Dogs of Hell-fire whom they have foolishly adopted as their idols in this life.

Allamah as-Sarakhsi, commenting on another scenario in which the contract of Aman is automatically enacted between the Muslims and the Harbis, states:

فهو أمان جائز بمنزلة قوله: قد أمنتكم؛ لأن أمر الأمان مبني على التوسع، والتحرز عما يشبه الغدر واجب، فإذا كان معروفاً بينهم فالثابت بالعرف كالثابت بالنص

It is a valid Aman, equivalent to saying: “I have granted you protection”, because the matter of Aman is based on broadness, and avoiding anything that resembles treachery is necessary, so once it is recognised amongst them, then what is established by the norm (Urf) is like what is established by explicit text.”

Imam ash-Shaybani uses the following narration from Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) for istidlaal (proof) to demonstrate that even an explicit declaration of intent to kill in an actual battlefield, if misconstrued and misunderstood by the enemy, is sufficient for the sacred contract of Aman to be enacted:

أيماً رجل من المسلمين أشار إلى رجل من العدو أن تعال، فإنك إن جئت قتلتك، فأتاه فهو آمن

Any man amongst the Muslims gestures to a man from the enemy, ‘Come here – for if you come I will kill you,’ and then he (the enemy) comes, he is secure (i.e. under a contract of Aman).”

Treachery and betrayal has disastrous consequences not only for the criminals involved but also for the Ummah as a whole. Imam Malik, while commenting on the issue of Aman, relates the following narration from Ibn Abbas (radhiyallahu anhu), which sums up the current humiliated state of the Ummah:

وإنه بلغني أن عبد الله بن عباس قال: ما ختَرَ قوم بالعهد إلا سلَّط الله عليهم العدو.

It has reached me that Abdullah ibn Abbas said: No people betray a covenant but Allah will put the enemy in power over them.” [al-Muwatta]



Satanism is practiced and imparted by saahireen and saahiraat under Deeni guise. The names of Ulama of the past are cited to give the classes of Satanism ‘islamic’ credibility. Many ignorant Muslims are tricked and misled by these confounded haraam, kufr therapy snares.

They use their hands like sorcerers and witches in abracadabra displays to hypnotize and satanize stupid people. They satanize the brains of gullible and stupid Muslims just as the alcoholic sanatizers sanitize the hands.

All forms of abracadabra therapy are haraam and tantamount to kufr even if Qur’aanic verses are utilized. The utilization of Islamic terminology by these Satanists is for hoodwinking and trapping the gullible and the ignorant. Their objective is only monetary gain.

The ‘professional’ ruqyah gangs of tricksters are also of this Satanist ilk. Beware of them. They have become millionaires by means of their ruqyah / therapy shaitaani stunts adorned deceptively with Islamic terminology. The haraam boodle pours into their coffers from idiots who submit to this satanic baatil.

Practise your own valid Qur’aanic ‘therapy’. Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Shareef:

“Say (O Muhammad): ‘Verily, Allah misleads whomever He wills, and He guides unto Himself those who turn towards Him (with repentance and obedience). They are those who have Imaan, whose hearts derive peace by Thikrullaah. Behold! With the Thikr of Allah do hearts find rest,”

(Ar-Ra’d, 27, 28)
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Your tongue should remain ever fresh with the Thikr of Allah.” At all times, in all walks of life, keep the Name of Allah Ta’ala on your tongue. Permanent Thikrullah with the tongue will embed the remembrance of Allah Ta’ala in the heart. This will bring about peace of mind and peace of the heart.

All the depression and mental unsettlement which people complain of are the effects of gross and flagrant sin. One of the consequence of the deluge of sin, transgression, cellphone, fisq, fujoor, porn and filth is depression which leads people unto drug addiction by taking drug-medication, and into the snares of the Satanist therapists – the saahireen and saahiraat (sorcerers and witches).

6 Sha’baan 1441 – 1 April 2020



Many Muslims have complained about the saahirah ‘aapa’ operating her sihr shaitaaniyat under guise of some confounded ‘therapy’ which itself is a hotch potch of kufr concepts and methods. One of the complainants wrote:

“There is an aalimah in Azaadville who has posted an advertisement about her so-caled ‘jihaadun nafs’ therapy. She is ensnaring a lot of women. She has copied many cults. She has advertised her cult and charges a fee of R6,500 for participation. What is the view of the Shariah regarding this type of therapy and what is the status of this woman who conducts this very expensive course?” (End of letter)
It is shockingly surprising that the girls madrasah has retained the teaching services of this marauding witch who poses as an ‘aalimah’, when in reality she is not even a Muslim. Her ‘therapy’ shaiyaaniyat being spawned by shaitaan is a snare to entrap gullible ignorant women. The saahirah’s motive is the haraam boodle which has driven her into the arms of Iblees. The sihr expels her from the fold of Islam, and all those who submit to her shaitanaiyat, also lose their Imaan.

Muslim women are expected to reflect and understand that the shaitaani wares of this Azaadville Witch are nugatory of Imaan. Participation in her satanism is the elimination of Imaan. It is indeed surprising that Muslim women will pay R6,500 for dabbling and dalliancing with satanism. There is no room in Islam for the haraam cult practices which the Azaadville Saahirah sells, and most deceptively covers the shaitaaniyat with Islamic terminology. Her advert conspicuously testifies to the shaitaaniyat of her haraam therapy methods and concepts.
In all forms of this type of cult-therapies, shaitaan is the originator. He appoints men and women as his agents to promote his shaitaniyat.

This Azaadville saahirah comes within the scope of the evil naffaathaat (witches who blow on knots) mentioned in Surah Falaq. Allah Ta’ala instructs us to seek His protection against the evil of the naffaathaat. Even if the Azaadville witch does not literally ‘blow on knots’, she is in the category of the naffaathaat. “Blowing on knots” mentioned in the Qur’aan Majeed is just one form of the satanic methodology of the saahiraat (witches) and saahireen (sorcerers).
Stay far from all human devils who practice weird therapies, and stay far from also the Ruqyah cartel of the Tunisian character who also utilizes the name of the Deen to promote his baatil khuraafaat. The bottom line and the primary, in fact only objective of these weird characters with their bizarre satanic methods and therapies is nothing but money which they fleece from stupid Muslims whose Imaani deficiency exposes them to the trickery of Iblees and his agents.

12 Rajab 1441 – 7 March 2020


Slavery existed on earth since time immemorial. Long before the advent of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), slavery existed and the conditions of slaves were horrible and appalling. Islam came and introduced copious reforms which gradually led to the emancipation of the slaves and the abolition of slavery.
Although Islam did not issue a decree to abolish slavery, its reforms led to the virtual abolition of slavery in the ranks of Muslims. It is not permissible to capture free people and reduce them into slavery as was the European practice for many centuries. The brutal treatment which Europeans meted out to slaves was never part of Islamic culture. The history and the books of Islam are replete with the treatment which Muslims meted out to slaves. Emancipation of slaves is a great ibaadat in Islam. For forgiveness of certain sins, the manumission of slaves is considered necessary.

Islam permits the taking of slaves in a war situation. When the Islamic army conquers a kaafir land, the Islamic government is allowed to take the captives of war and assign them as slaves to the Muslim public. Instead of sending the captives of war to prisons and concentration camps, they are distributed among the Muslim populace. Muslims are under Shar’i obligation to treat the slaves kindly as if they were members of their own family. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commanded that they be fed the same food and be clothed in the same garments as the master. This is a broad principle which is the basis for treatment of slaves.

While slavery exists in theory in the books of Islam, in practice it had died out very long ago. The slaves under Muslim control were so highly trained, educated and looked after that they even became the rulers of the Islamic empire. The Mamluke dynasty is the reign of slaves who ruled the Islamic world at one time.

The stories of cruelty which the Europeans and other kuffaar are spreading about Arab maltreatment of slaves are part of the conspiracy of the west to discredit Islam. If some cruel and selfish Arabs had exploited the slaves, this cannot be blamed on Islam nor on the entire nation of Arabs. Such claims are false and malicious. The Europeans have a history of brutality which they perpetrated on the slaves. They are undoubtedly involved in conspiracies to eliminate Islam. The events in Bosnia and elsewhere are ample testimony for their plots.

Unscrupulous exists in all societies and in all nations. But the callous misdeeds of a few men cannot be regarded as the practice of the whole nation. Slavery does not exist today anywhere among Muslims to the best of our knowledge. Islam does not permit the capture of free persons and reducing them into slavery as was the case with the Europeans who set out from their countries especially to capture Africans from Africa and sell them in America and Europe as slaves. While some Arabs may have been involved in this illicit trade, the Arab race cannot be held for such misconduct just as the Arabs or any other nation cannot be held responsible for the drug-trafficking which today members of their respected races are carrying on throughout the world. Such evil men will be found in every community and in every age. But, the attempt to label the whole Arab nation as cruel and brutal because a handful of unscrupulous arabs may have imitated the Europeans in the slave-trade, is a clear plot to discredit Islam because the Arabs are Muslims, hence, the propaganda goes to put out that Islam teaches Arabs to be cruel to slaves. But, this is false.

27th Safar 1416

26th july 1995






From the frontline of the misguided Syrian ‘jihad’, comes the following desperate call portraying the heartrending conditions of both the tens of thousands of refugees and mujaahideen who are all currently fleeing with their lives and whatever they can carry with them. The massive exodus from Idhlib, the last so-called ‘stronghold’ of the mujahideen and other evil rebel fighters who are no better than the brutal Assad butcher, vociferously and vigourously testifies to the huge error of those who had dubbed the brutal animality of the Syrian conflagration a ‘jihad’. The panic and pandemonium accompanying the flight further testify that Allah Azza Wa jal is magnifying His Athaab for the masses and the ‘mujahideen’ who had displayed staggering ignorance from the very inception of their U.S. conspired and directed ‘jihad.

From …………A Brother currently present in the arena of conflict. Message received today, Friday 7th February
Asalamualaykum. Things are going from bad to worse here in Syria. Sararkib which is about 8km from Idlib city fell last night. They bombing the city itself which is the last stronghold of the Ahlus Sunnah and the Mujahideen. People are fleeing in their tens of thousands. They putting whatever belongings they can carry down on any piece of ground that they can find. It is raining here at the moment and a cold front is approaching. Allah make easy!
All Mujahideen are busy evacuating their families to the Turkish border. They and their families are now themselves Refugees. They also dumping their families on whatever piece of ground they can find.
They also appealing for tents etc. They don’t know where to go or what to do with their families. Lots and lots of aid of every kind is needed.

They are clueless as to what to do next. I really don’t know what is going to happen
Turkey sealed the border. Turkey sent in troops and tanks, but they also fled Sararkib. Whole of Sararkib was surrounded. They managed to break through last night and flee. May Allah Ta’ala have mercy.

(End of the Brother’s message)


“They managed to break through last night and flee.”: This statement may refer to either the surrounded mujahideen or to the Turkish troops.
What is currently transpiring was always a forgone conclusion which never posed any enigma to any person of sound intelligence. We can only supplicate and say: May Allah Ta’ala have mercy!