Over the December holiday period I had visited Port Elizabeth. I noticed a strange phenomenon in the Fajr Salaah at a Masjid where I visited relatives. There is only one Masjid in the area.

What I found very strange was that in the second rakaat after the imaam came up from ruku he stood disproportionately long compared to the first rakaat and when he went into the sajda the same thing happened. That is the first sajda was almost double the duration of the second sajda.

Upon enquiring, my relative explained that the reason for this strange method of performing the Fajr salaah is to accommodate the Shaafi musalies. It is to give the Shaafi musalies a chance to raise their hands and make their dua as they normally do if the imaam was a Shafi, and the extra long first sajda is to give them a chance to catch the imaam in sajda.

I have never seen this type of namaaz anywhere else in the world where there are different durations in the rukns of the salaah to such an extent that I strongly felt that the imaam delayed going into ruku in the second rakaat, making Sajda Sahu necessary because of the long delay.

Is salaah valid in this manner. Do I have to repeat my fajr salaah. I would appreciate clarity in this regard.


The imaam of this Musjid is a jaahil. Among the Signs of Qiyaamah is the appointment of juhala, fussaaq and fujjaar to positions of Amaanat. Imaamate is a position of Amaanat (Trust) of exceptional loftiness. But today, most imaams of the Musaajid are Juhala and mercenaries, hence they trade and betray the Deen for the miserable jeefah(carrion) crumbs of the dunya. For them the boodle the trustees pay them is worth more than the Deen of Allah Ta’ala.

The clownish antics of the imaam at the Musjid you have described, invalidate the Salaat. Sajdah Sahw does not rectify a Salaat which is marred with intentional acts which are alien to Salaat. Sajdah Sahw is valid when the musalli unintentionally errs. But what this jaahil imaam does is nafsaaniyat and shaitaaniyat.

The simple way for the Shaafi’ muqtadis behind a Hanafi imaam is to recite the shortest Qunoot. Which is valid in the Shaafi’ Math-hab. This will enable the Shaafi’ to easily link up with the Imaam in Sajdah. Thus, there is absolutely no need for the imaam to despoil and corrupt the Salaat with his mockery of monkey stunts. Salaat is not up for foolery. Salaat is the Central Pillar upholding the entire Edifice of the Deen.

Furthermore, the jaahil with his silly tricks is unwittingly committing shirk. Instead of his focus being Allah Ta’ala, he misuses Salaat to conform to the baseless desires of people.

19 Rajab 1444 – 10 February 2023

The Importance of Punctuality on Salaah

Hazrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (rahmatullahi ‘alaih) once mentioned the following:

When a person is punctual upon performing his five daily salaah, then he acquires a special noor (light) in his heart, and the effect of this noor then becomes visible on his face.On the contrary, when a person neglects performing his five daily salaah, then his heart is filled with darkness, and the effect of this darkness is then visible on his face.In actual fact, when one neglects performing salaah, then it is as if there is a fire that is burning within him. The smoke of this burning fire affects his inner and outer condition (i.e. his heart and face) as it causes darkness to cover both.The result of the heart being blackened is that it no longer is able to perceive any feeling of disgust or detest for sins such as bribery, speaking lies, slandering people, stealing people’s land and property, taking loans and thereafter denying the loan to avoid repayment, casting lustful glances at women and young lads, adopting the culture and ways of the Christians (Jews and other kuffaar) and many other such evils.

(Malfoozaat Hakeemul Ummat 23/121)




The Deen Team has started again a competition called ‘Round 3, Fajr First’. It also captioned this competition as ‘Incentive campaign encouraging youth to perform Salaah with Jamaat in the Masjid’. Approximately, eleven Musaajid are participating in this competition. The following caption is displayed on the poster, ‘A serious effort towards 100% attendance for Fajr Salaah with Jamaat will earn you: The pleasure of Allah, massive Thawaab, a lasting habit, R750 shopping voucher.’ The voucher can be used at sports shops, fishing shops, fashion shops, as shown on the poster. The poster also has the following Hadith mentioned, ‘If they knew the rewards of Fajr and Esha (in Jamaat) they would have come even if they had to crawl.’ Among the sponsors of this competition is Al-Baraka bank. Kindly comment on this competition of the Deen Team.


The “rewards” for Salaat mentioned in the Hadith cited by the scoundrel Munaafiqeen of Devil’s Team to promote its satanism under ‘deeni’ guise, is never a lousy R750 which the rubbish participants could utilize to procure some airtime to enable them to view pornography on their satanic devices, for this immoral shaitaani viewing is the primary objective of almost all youngsters and most adults. Their lives revolve around obscenity, immorality and sexual perversion, the prostitute aapas and devilish ‘shaikhas’, more appropriately Shaitaanahs, included.

Since we are in the era in close proximity to Qiyaamah, the rubbish, haraam mockery of the loftiest and most important Act of Ibaadat, viz. Salaat, must be expected by virtue of the predictions announced by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Mas’ood (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrating from Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said to a gathering:

“How will you be when (the time dawns) when you will be enveloped by such a fitnah which will make the old senile and the young old; when the people will regard this fitnah to be Sunnah. If anything from this fitnah is omitted, they will say: ‘A Sunnah has been omitted.’ The people asked: “When will such (a shocking fitnah) develop?” He said: “When your Ulama (i.e. Ulama-e-Haqq) have disappeared (i.e. they will be under the ground in their graves); when your (fussaaq) qaaris are in abundance; when your Fuqaha are few; when government officials are abundant; when your trustworthy are few; when the dunya will be pursued with the amal of the Aakhirat (such as a lousy R750 in lieu of the Greatest Pillar of Islam), and when knowledge of the Deen will be acquired for purposes other than the Deen (for nafsaaniyat, for money and for name and fame such as the satanic ‘madrasah’ of the NNB jamiat at whose mock Bukhaari jalsah even the so-called ‘shaikhul hadith’ of Azaadville will be officiating)”

We are today in the likes of the times described in the aforementioned Hadith. Never in the history of Islam has Salaat been taken for a toy and for such a satanic mockery as these scoundrel munaafiqeen of Devil’s Team are currently perpetrating. It is NOT possible for these rubbish rascals of this Team of Iblees to be Muslims.

The fact that a capitalist institution of Riba – an institution against whom Allah Azza Wa Jal has “declared war”, namely Al-Baraka bank, is a sponsor of this rubbish, haraam shaitaani completion speaks volumes for the villainy and kufr of this vile competition which is worse than gambling.

With satanic cunning, using Salaat as a cover, are these scoundrels of the progeny of Iblees, who have dubbed themselves ‘deen team’, promoting obscenity, immorality and sport which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi has branded ‘HARAAM’. Using Salaat as a camouflage, the munaafiq scoundrels exhort the stupid youngsters in need of a few rand to watch porn on their phones to spend and waste the lousy, haraam R750 at haraam sports shops and fashion shops which cater for the fashions and devices of Iblees. These are shops of haraam.

This satanic competition is haraam from beginning to end. The Salaat which the moron youngsters may perform will NOT BE VALID. Their Salaat borders on SHIRK. The Maqsood (Objective and intention) of the silly, stupid youngsters will not be Allah Ta’ala. Their Salaat will be devoid of the slightest vestige of Ikhlaas (sincerity). Their objective will be the lousy satanic prize – the R750 and a couple of pats on their backs by the munaafiq scoundrels of Devil’s Team who may be NNB jamiat munaafiq molvis.

May Allah Ta’ala destroy this Devil’s Team which is so brutally excoriating the Deen in pursuit of its filthy, satanic objectives under ‘deeni’ cover.

22 Rabiuth Thaani 1444 – 17 November 2022

Salaat behind modern day Zanaadiqah

Assalamualaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh,

Muhtaram Hazrat Saheb,

I refer to Hazrat’s refutation of the group dubbed Difaa ul-Ulama-e-Soo. Hazrat stated, “According to the Ahlus Sunnah, Salaat behind every Birr and Faajir is valid notwithstanding his fisq and fujoor.”

A question came to mind in light of recent events.

Since the introduction of the covid protocols in the Masjids throughout the UK, I had stopped attending any Masjid which imposed the implementation of these satanic protocols.

As Hazrat has mentioned, Salaat in any of these Masjids which had been temporarily converted into temples, is not valid. The displacing of the Ahkaam of Allah with the Ahkaam of the very worst enemies of Allah is Sareeh Kufr which expels the willing perpetrator from the fold of Islam. Most of the Imams and “Ulama” leading the Jamaats in the Masjids in the UK actually believed that the satanic Ahkaam of the atheists are superior to Islamic Ahkaam and that such displacement was Waajib. There can thus be absolutely no doubt that such Imams and Molvis became Murtaddeen.

Virtually all the modernists such as the Maududis, and also other deviate groups such as the Barelwis and the Salafis began to implement these Kufr protocols even before the government began imposing them. In fact, many Masjids continued to impose these protocols even after the government decided they were no longer Fard.

Regarding those who regard themselves to be Deobandi, there appeared to be some difference of opinion amongst them. Some, like the modernists, implemented these protocols of their own accord, independent of the government imposition, whilst others did so only after and due to the government imposition.

I managed to locate a Masjid in another town which had not adopted any of these Kufr protocols throughout the lockdowns, and Allah Ta’ala enabled me to do Hijrah and move to a flat not too far away from that particular Masjid. This was one of only two Masjids which I was aware of in the entire country which had not adopted the protocols of Kufr.

Around 6 months ago, the government decided that these protocols are no longer necessary. Gradually, all the Masjids began to stop implementing these protocols.

However, since none of the Murtad Imams of these Masjids which had been converted temporarily into temples, had made Tawbah and renewed their Imaan publically, as far as I could determine, they remain Murtaddeen. It is clear, in most cases, that these Imams actually believe that the terrible crime they had perpetrated was something truly commendable.

Most times I have no need to go to any of these Masjids where the Jamaat is led by a Zindeeq. However, once in while, there is no Masjid near enough for me to reach the Jamaat other than these Masjids where a Zindeeq is conducting “Salaat”. Even though these Masjids have stopped implementing the satanic protocols, I have been unable to bring myself to pray behind such Imams whom I believe to be Murtaddeen. I feel it would be a mockery of the Deen. Hence, on such occasions, I feel compelled to pray alone.

However, the statement cited above by Hazrat has brought a question to my mind.

Am I correct in assuming that the Faajir referred to applies exclusively to a Faajir with correct Aqeedah, or a man of Bid’ah whose Bid’ah has not reached the level of Kufr?

While there seems to be some ikhtilaaf on whether or not Salaat should be prayed behind the man of Bid’ah whose Bid’ah is not Kufr (most opining on its validity), there appears to be complete unanimity that Salaat is invalid behind one whose Bid’ah is Kufr. The Fuqaha give the example of Jahmiyyah, Mushabbihah, Raafidhis, and those who believe in Khalq-e-Qur’aan. The recent crimes of Sareeh Kufr perpetrated by the modern day Zanaadiqah appear to be at least as vile as those of the aforementioned ancient sects, if not far worse.

I request Hazrat’s Duas,

7 Rabiul Awwal 1444 – 4 October 2022

Respected Brother,

Your e-mail refers.

Yes, the faasiq-faajir refers to one with correct Aqeedah. It does not refer to such a faasiq-faajir who subscribes to beliefs of kufr.

The state of the Ummah is absolutely deplorable. If we have to resort to takfeer, then logically almost the entire Ummah of this era will have to be branded kaafir. This is indeed most difficult for us. We therefore confine ourselves to pointing out what is kufr, without generally resorting to takfeer unless there is a real need.

My advice is that when you are in a situation where no other Musjid is available, then without making enquiries about the Imaam and his beliefs, simply join the jamaat. If you then feel agitated, simply repeat your Salaat alone.

May Allah Ta’ala always guide and protect you and the family.





In some regions in proximity to the North Pole, e.g. Norway, the times in relation to the rest of the world are abnormal. Some days after sunset and even before disappearance of shufuq abyadh (the whitish glow in the western horizon after the redish glow), the sun rises. Thus, the time of Isha does not set in. In some regions the sun remains above the horizon for six months, and in some places it is night for six months.

       The classical Fuqaha had discussed and elaborated on this issue. According to one group of Fuqaha, Isha and all other Salaat remain obligatory and have to be performed in view of the command of five Fardh Salaat daily, which is substantiated by the Sunnah.

       The Sunnah has not excluded any land from this obligation. These Fuqaha base their ruling on the Hadith which says that during the era of Dajjal there will be a day the equivalent of one year. It will be a long day. The Sahaabah queried the performance of Salaat on that day. Will only five Salat be performed in that marathon day of a year? Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) explained that the times of Salaat will be calculated. That is: Five Salaat for every 24 hours.

       According to the other Fuqaha, the five Salaat are conditional with their five specific times. If the incidence of a specific Salaat time does not develop in a region, then that particular Salaat is waived. They present the analogy of Wudhu which has Four Fardh acts according to the Hanafi Math-hab. If both feet have been amputated, the fardh of washing the feet falls away. Similarly, the Fardh Salaat will be waived if its time does not develop in many regions.

       Regarding the Hadith pertaining to the era of Dajjaal, these Fuqaha are of the opinion that since it is in conflict with Qiyaas (Analogical Reason), it may not be presented as a basis for a ruling. In terms of the Usool of Fiqh, the Khilaaf-e-Qiyaas narration shall be confined to its original purpose and not be used as a basis for extrapolation for extending the ruling to another issue.

       Shaikh Akbar Muhayyuddeen Ibn Arabi (rahmatullah alayh) has elucidated this issue in his Futuhaat.  According to him, the event of the long day during the era of Dajjaal will in reality not be one year literally. The times of Salaat will be normal. However, due to the deception of Dajjaal people will not observe the movement of the sun, sunrise and sunset. The people will perceive this day to be as long as a year.

Download booklet



Q. Is it permissible to use loud-speakers for Salaat?

A. Due to the ignorance of the masses and the inaad (enmity), jahaalat (ignorance), and nafsaaniyat
(submission to base desire) of even the Ulama, it is best that we present the Fatawa of the Akaabireen whom even the non-entities accept as Seniors.

Hadhrat Mufti Mahmudul Hasan Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) said:
“Loud speakers should not be used in Salaat. The Imaam Sahib should put a stop to it.” (Fataawa Mahmudiyyah, Vol.2, page 128)

In Fataawa Raheemiyyah, Vol. 1, page 209, it is said: “Whether the voice transmitted by the loudspeaker is the original voice or an artificial representation of the original voice (such as an echo), there is difference of opinion among the experts (the technologists). (There is no longer any difference of opinion of the experts on this issue. Besides the consensus of the experts, it is just common sense that the voice which

reaches a kilometre away is not the original or actual voice. The voice is ‘rebuilt’ after its ‘capture’, then transmitted. The sound which reaches the ears of the audience, is the sound of the reproduced voice of the speaker. It is never the original voice—The Majlis)
If it is the reproduced voice, then the Iqtida will not be valid by following the voice……Even if it is not a reproduction (but is the original voice), then too there is no permission for the utilization of a loudspeaker in Salaat because it is in conflict with the simplicity which is the characteristic of Islamic acts of ibaadat. Hadhrat Shah Waliyullah (rahmatullah alayh) said that encumbrances and pretence in ibaadat are among the factors which alter the Deen. This was the malady in which the priests of the Yahood and Nasaara were involved.

In addition, a loudspeaker interferes with the khushoo’ of Salaat.

There is more corruption than benefit in using a loudspeaker for Salaat, hence the Shariah does not permit it. Furthermore, there is no need for a loudspeaker in Salaat because the validity and perfection of the Salaat are not dependent on hearing the recitation of the Imaam. An arrangement could be made for relaying the Takbeeraat-e-Intiqaal by means of appointing (human) Mukhabbireen (proclaimers).

It is also improper to use a loudspeaker for the khutbah…”

In an elaborate Fatwa of a number of pages, Hakimul Ummat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh) stated the impermissibility of using a loudspeaker for Salaat.
(Imdaadul Fataawa, Vol.`1, from page 581 to 600)

Extract from a lengthy fatwa of Hadhrat Husain Ahmad Madani (rahmatullah alayh): “The Salaat of all
those who perform their Salaat on the basis of this instrument is faasid (invalid)….It is therefore necessary to refrain from using it. All the arguments which have been presented for permissibility or preferability of the loudspeaker, from the Fiqhi angle, does not carry the weight of a grain of wheat (in other words, all such arguments are devoid of substance).” Imdaadul Fataawa, Vol.1, page 598

There is consensus of all our senior Ulama on the prohibition of using loudspeakers for Salaat and Khutbah.



Q. An organization called, The South African National Quraan Council, is organizing a Quran ‘memorization competition’. Are such competitions permissible?
A. The Qur’aan competition is a shaitaani function. It is haraam to participate in this mockery of the Qur’aan Majeed. This type of haraam mockery of the Qur’aan Majeed is among the Signs of Qiyaamah. The Qur’aan Majeed states:
“Verily this nation of mine took the Qur’aan as an object for buffeting.”
This will be the complaint of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the Day of Qiyaamah.
Competitions of this nature make the Qur’aan Majeed into a toy for stupid and haraam entertainment. The Objective of the Qur’aan Majeed is the guidance of mankind. It is a capital crime to use and misuse the Qur’aan Majeed for merrymaking and stupid competitions.
Shaitaan has urinated the idea of Qur’aan competitions into the brains of the organizers of this haraam mockery. Since Muslims all over the world are making a mockery of the Qur’aan Majeed in various shaitaani ways, Allah Ta’ala, in order to punish us, causes defilement of the Qur’aan Majeed at the hands of kuffaar. Since Muslims themselves defile and desanctify the Qur’aan Majeed, in different ways – one way being these satanic competitions – Allah Ta’ala permits the kuffaar to defile the Qur’aan Majeed in various ways, e.g. burning the Qur’aan Majeed.
While defilement of the Qur’aan Majeed and of the Musaajid by kuffaar has no effect for Allah Ta’ala, it is a form of punishment for Muslims who are grieved by such defilement. During its history, Allah Ta’ala had handed Musjidul Aqsa to the kuffaar for defilement and pollution to punish Muslims. The same is happening today. Musjidul Aqsa has been handed to the Yahood for defilement, and the Kuffaar are allowed to burn and defile the Qur’aan.
All of this is merely a reflection of the villainy, treachery, fisq and fujoor of Muslims. The kuffaar are not blameworthy. Muslims are the vile and treacherous criminals who are the cause of such defilement at the hands of the kuffaar. Qur’aan competitions are one form of Qur’aanic defilement.
It is haram to participate in any way whatsoever in the stupid ‘memorization’ competition of this miscreant body called SANQC.


Question: What is the view of the Shariah with regarding monetary incentives to draw people in particular the youth towards the Masjid? A competition was recently held in one town whereby children/youth of up to a certain age were to register with an organisation and thereafter attend a particular salaah with jamaat in a few masaajid that were part of this competition.
The attendance was to be done for a certain number of days after which successful candidates were to get awarded. To maintain “integrity”, roll calls were also done for that particular salaah.
I cannot come to terms with this initiative. I feel it to be in direct contradiction to the ways and methodologies set down by the Shariah. Further, there exists a serious concern as to whether those participating in this competition are performing salaah for the pleasure of Allah Ta’ala (which should be the object of our life) or to gain the insignificant material incentives being given by this organisation.
Please advise what is the stance of the Shariah regarding this type of competition.

Answer: All these competitions and prizes doled out ostensibly to draw people to the Musjid are a mockery of the Deen and inspirations of Iblees. It is a method of riya, takabbur and pure nafsaaniyat. This mockery of Ibaadat is akin to kufr. There is absolutely no Ikhlaas in such ‘ibaadat’. In some places in America to lure people, especially their youth drifting into atheism and barbarism, to the empty churches, they served hot dogs and coke as holy communion. These haraam ‘ibaadat’ competitions are worse than the hotdog-coke scheme of the Christian priests.
It is not permissible to participate in these haraam competitions which make a joke and mockery of Salaat which the Qur’aan describes as the “Greatest Thikr”. The exceptionally low and degraded level of spiritual degeneration in which Muslims are wallowing can be adequately understood from this mockery of Salaat organized by Munaafiq rascals. Whereas ibaadat is a sombre exercise of meditating on Allah Ta’ala, these rascals have transformed it into a merrymaking stunt for winning stupid, haraam prizes. Their hallucinated objective for the shaitaani completion is waswasah urinated into their brains by Iblees.
The slightest contamination in niyyat corrupts the ibaadat which is rejected by Allah Ta’ala. Prizes for ibaadat? It is indeed shocking and unimaginable. But we are in the era which is in close proximity to Qiyaamah, hence the fitnah of the dunya is incremental by the day. The Hadith instructs us to constantly make dua for protection from the ‘fitnah of the dunya and the athaab of the qabr’. Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed:
“The life of this world is but play and amusement while the abode of the Aakhirat is best for those who have Taqwa (who fear Allah Ta’ala). What! Have you no intelligence?”

Today even ibaadat has been transformed into play and amusement based on Riya (show and ostentation). Those rubbishes who have devised this satanic scheme of  ‘ibaadat’ competitions are in reality bereft of Imaan.
In a dream a man saw a Buzrug. On asking of the Buzrug’s condition in Barzakh, he  replied:

“A meticulous reckoning of my a’maal (deeds) was taken. I was rewarded for the death of my cat because I had grieved. But, was not rewarded when my donkey had died because I was annoyed and a curse slipped from my mouth. A silk thread in my topi of which I was not even aware was recorded as an evil deed in my account.
The ibaadat which made me happy when people saw me engaging in it was not recorded among my good deeds.” In other words, such ibaadat was nullified by the feeling of happiness which was tantamount to riya.
On hearing this, a Wali commented: “He is most fortunate for not being punished for such ibaadat.” Now form your own conclusion regarding these shaitaani schemes of ‘ibaadat competitions’.

from the majlis volume 26 number 06





Molvi Irfan Nauyock of Mauritius issued a fatwa that there is no Eid Salaah during lockdown because there is no Izn Aam in private properties. Is his fatwa valid? Must we abandon Eid Salaat? On the basis of this fatwa, we are to abandon even Jumuah Salaat since Ithn Aam is also a condition for the validity of Jumuah Salaat.


The honourable Molvi Irfan did not apply his mind correctly hence his erroneous fatwa. Firstly, private property does not negate Izn Aam (general permission to the male Muslim public to attend). The condition of Izn Aam does not hinge on Waqf property. As long as musallis have free access to the venue during the Salaat time, the condition of Ithn Aam is satisfied.

The ‘fatwa’ of Molvi Nauyock is a jumble of confusion in which he sought to acquit himself like a mujtahid, hence he made a mess of the numerous narrations from the different Math-habs. He has no entitlement to resort to the variety of Hadith narrations on which the different Math-habs base their respective views. Furthermore, the vast majority of narrations does not even support the Izn Aam condition of the Hanafi Math-hab.

As a muqallid, he is required to remain within the confines of the Math-hab. Since he is a professed Hanafi muqallid, he had no right to indulge in a twaddle of excrescent citations which clearly displays cognitive dissonance.

According to the Hanafi Math-hab, even if the venue is not a Musjid, Eid and Jumuah Salaat will be valid with a minimum of four males (one to act as Imaam, and three Muqtadis). We fail to understand the ambiguity of ‘imaam’ in the current context of Muslim life. If by ‘imaam’, the Molvi means ‘Sultan’, then he dwells in confusion. The Ummah today has no political Imaam, i.e. Sultan/King/Ameerul Mu’mineen. Jumuah and Eid Salaat have been performed by the Ummah since time immemorial all over the world in places where there was no Sultan. Thus, introducing the ‘imaam/sultan’ factor is a flapdoodle indulgence, and so is the issue of ‘private property’. Eid and Jumuah Salaat are valid even in private property to which the Muslim male community is given access during the Salaat time.

It is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, to issue a fatwa for the abandonment of Jumuah and Eid Salaat solely on the basis of the rubbish lockdown satanism of the atheists. Assuming that Eid Salaat is not valid in private homes in terms of the Hanafi Math-hab (although it is valid), then too, the imperative demand will be to incorporate into our Math-hab the method and view of the other Math-habs in order to safeguard this significant, important and vital Act of Ibaadat. We shall opt for the fatwa of the other Math-habs in order to guard the Eid Salaat and to prevent Muslims from forgetting this important Practice of the Deen. It is not permissible to allow an Act of Ibaadat to become antique and discarded.

It is absolutely ludicrous to set aside the Haqq of the other Math-habs for compliance with the satanism of the atheists who have ordered the devilish lockdown. When there is scope in the Hanafi Math-hab for borrowing from the other Math-habs during occasions of dire need, then it will be imperative to do so, and not to abandon the Shar’i Hukm. However, as far as Eid and Jumuah Salaat are concerned during the satanic lockdown, there is no need for Hanafis to look askance to the other Math-habs in view of the fact that the condition of Izn Aaam is satisfied even in private homes.



29 Shawwaal 1443 – 31 May 2022



Is the following narration authentic and is the contents about the origin of menstruation correct?

It is narrated from Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) that he said: “The men and women of the Banu Israil used to pray together. If a woman had a [male friend in the congregation], she would wear wooden shoes [that were elevated like stilts] in order to raise herself for her friend. Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation.” Ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) used to say: “Expel them [from the masjids] just as Allah has expelled them.”


Imams ‘Abdur Razzaq, Tabarani (rahimahumallah) and others have recorded this statement of Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu).

(Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq: 5115, Al Mu’jamul Kabir: 9484-9485. Also see: Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah: 1700)

‘Allamah Haythami (rahimahullah) has declared the narrators of Tabarani reliable (rijalus sahih) and Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) has declared the chain of Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq authentic (sahih).

(Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 2 pg. 35, Fathul Bari, before Hadith: 294, vol. 1 pg. 400)

A similar narration has also been reported as the statement of Sayyidah ‘Aaishah (radiyallahu ‘anha).

(Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq: 5114)


1) The last part of the Hadith should be translated as “Keep them back just as Allah has kept them back” instead of “Expel them just as Allah has expelled them.” See here for clarity regarding this.

The correct translation will therefore be as follows:

Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) that he said: “The men and women of the Banu Israil used to pray together. If a woman had a [male friend in the congregation], she would wear wooden shoes [that were elevated like stilts] in order to raise herself for her friend. Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation.” Ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) used to say: “Keep them back just as Allah has kept them back.”

2) Other general narrations suggest that menstruation was for all women and from the time of Sayyidah Hawwa. (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 294, Mustadrak Hakim, vol. 2 pg. 381)

In light of this, Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) has stated that it could be that due to the actions of the women of Banu Israil, the period of menstruation was increased. The narrations of Sayyiduna Ibn Mas’ud (in question) and Sayyidah ‘Aaishah (radiyallahu ‘anha) should be understood in this light.

Hence the words: ‘Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation’ would mean: Allah Ta’ala inflicted the women with extended periods of menstruation.

And Allah Ta’ala Knows best.

Answered by: Moulana Suhail Motala

Approved by: Moulana Muhammad Abasoomar

Ikhtilāṭ: A Critical But Neglected Islamic Prohibition

What is Ikhtilāṭ?
As the “human being has been created weak” (Qur’ān, 4:28) and “no temptation (fitnah) is greater for men than women” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 5096), the Sharī‘ah has placed strict safeguards against men and women interacting.
One of these safeguards is the prohibition of unnecessary mixing (mukhālaṭahikhtilāṭimtizājijtimā‘) between non-elderly men and women, something upheld by the vast majority of the classical jurists. Mixing refers to there being no segregation between men and women; that is, men and women are together in the same place, and don’t have their own areas or seating places. Unfortunately, due mainly to influences of non-Islāmic systems of morality, many Muslims have become very relaxed with regards to this ruling. Some even oppose and ridicule it.
RELATED: The Basis for Gender Separation in Islam
Ḥijāb primarily means to screen women from men but also has the secondary meaning of being fully covered when a woman’s person is exposed to onlookers due to some need, e.g. on the streets, in the markets or during Ḥajj. The obligation of Ḥijāb began towards the end of the 5th year of Hijrah with the revelation of verses in Sūrat al-Aḥzāb. From this time onward, care was taken to ensure non-elderly men and women do not unnecessarily intermingle or mix.
RELATED: Yes, Islam Forces Muslim Women to Wear Hijab
The Example of ‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) During the Incident of Slander

The incident of slander (ifk) referred to in verses of Sūrat al-Nūr occurred in the 6th year of Hijrah, after the revelation of Ḥijāb. Thus, while explaining its background,
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said:
“I had come out with the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) after Ḥijāb was revealed and thus I was carried in a hawdaj and put down in it.”[1]
‘Ᾱ’ishah’s (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) person was completely concealed in the hawdaj.
Ibn Ḥajar explains:
That is, after the command of Ḥijāb was revealed, meaning the concealment of women from men looking at them, while before that they were not forbidden [from this]. She said this as an explanation for why she was concealed in the hawdaj, to the point that this led to them [later on in the journey] carrying it when she was not inside it while they believed she was inside it; as distinguished from before the Ḥijāb, as it may have been that women then rode on the backs of the saddles without a hawdaj.[2]
When later in the journey ‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) returned from searching for her misplaced necklace to find the caravan had left, she explains:
I headed towards my position where I was, and I assumed that they would find me missing and come back for me. While I was sitting at my place, my eyes overcame me and I slept. Safwān ibn al-Mu‘aṭṭal al-Sulamī al-Dhakwānī was behind the army, and he proceeded in the morning to where I was resting, and saw the shape of a person sleeping. He came to me and recognised me when he saw me, as he had seen me before Ḥijāb. I woke up when he said innā lillāhi wa innā ilayhi rāji‘ūn upon recognising me, so I covered my face with my Jilbāb, and by Allāh he did not say to me a word and nor did I hear from him anything besides innā lillāhi wa innā ilayhi rāji‘ūn” [3]
This demonstrates that after the revelation of Ḥijāb, extreme care was taken to ensure men did not see women in general circumstances, while in cases of necessity she was covered fully.
Non-Observance of Ḥijāb before its Obligation Cannot be Advanced as Evidence
There are narrations of Ṣaḥābah drinking wine in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) or engaging in mut‘ah marriage. These narrations obviously cannot be advanced as evidence as they occurred before the prohibition of these acts. Similarly, it will be mistaken to use incidents before the revelation of Ḥijāb as proof for the permissibility of unnecessary mixing. Likewise, incidents in which elderly women are in reference are not evidence that this would be allowed for non-elderly women. For example, Sahl ibn Sa‘d (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhumā) explained that the young Ṣaḥābah came to eat at a woman’s house after Jumu‘ah, and in one version, it is clarified that she was an elderly woman (‘ajūz). [4]
Related: Western Hatred for Hijab: Have Muslims Contributed to the Problem?
Women’s Attendance of Congregational Ṣalāh in the Time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam)
The congregational Ṣalāh that would take place in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) would not entail mixing. Some narrations indicate that women were only permitted to emerge for Ṣalāh in the night (i.e. for Fajr and ‘Ishā’). [5]
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said:
“The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) would pray Fajr, and women from the believers would attend with him wrapped up in their cloaks, and then they would return to their houses while no-one recognised them.” [6]
Note, that these women would return immediately after the Ṣalāh and were not recognized by anyone.
Measures were taken for men and women to not mix.
Umm Salamah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said: “[The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam)] would make salām, and the women would turn away and enter their houses before the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) [and the male companions] turned away.” [7]
Al-Zuhrī, a narrator of this ḥadīth, explains: “This was so that the women turn back before the men catch up with them.” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 875) Ibn Ḥajar comments that this ḥadīth shows “the reprehensibility of men mixing with women on the roads, let alone in homes.” [8]
The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “The best rows of men are the first and the worst of them are the last, and the best rows of women are the last and worst of them the first.” (Saḥīḥ Muslim)
Again, this is to show that men and women are to be separate from one another. One narration even indicates that there was a separate entrance for women in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam). [9] Women’s emergence for ṣalāh was premised on such principles being adhered to. Once these principles were not maintained, and decadence became the norm amongst people, the ruling changed[10].
Separate Sessions for Men and Women
Female companions complained to the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) that “the men have overpowered us with you, so arrange a day for us…” (Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 101) This shows men and women would not gather together in the same place – otherwise, there would be no reason the women could not attend with the men.
Segregation During Ṭawāf
A governor of Makkah from the early part of the second century of Hijrah, Muḥammad ibn Hishām, stopped women completely from making Ṭawāf when men were making Ṭawāf, i.e. they had completely separate times for making ṭawāf. (Fatḥ al-Bārī, 4:548-9) ‘Aṭā’ ibn Abī Rabāḥ (26 – 114), the great scholar of Makkah, questioned this, stating that the wives of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) made Ṭawāf when there were men present. His well-known student, Ibn Jurayj (80 – 150 H), at this, asked: “How was it that [women] were mixing with the men [in Ṭawāf]?” He said: “They would not mix, ‘Ᾱ’ishah would perform Ṭawāf screened from the men, not mixing with them.” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 1618)
In other words, even in Ṭawāf, in the blessed era of the Salaf, men and women would keep separate from one another. Al-Fākihī (ca. 210 – 275 H) reports with his chain to Ibrāhīm al-Nakha‘ī: “‘Umar forbade men from making ṭawāf with women. He once saw a man making ṭawāf with the women and he struck him with a whip.” [11]
The later intermingling that became commonplace in the Ḥaram was censured by the scholars. Mullā ‘Alī al-Qārī (ca. 930 – 1014 H) describes what “the women of Makkah do today, in terms of mixing with men in that area” as “a great abomination”. (al-Maslak al-Mutaqassiṭ, p79) Another great Makkan Ḥanafī scholar before him, Ibn al-Ḍiyā’ (789 – 853 H), writes in his detailed work on Ḥajj: “From the vilest of abominations is what the ignorant women amongst the commoners do during Ṭawāf, mixing with men together with their husbands while their faces remain uncovered.” [12]
Ibn al-Ḍiyā’ has another work listing the ills that occurred in the Ḥaram, called Tanzīh al-Masjid al-Ḥarām ‘an Bida‘ al-Jahalat al-‘Awāmm. Amongst these ills, he mentions women coming into the Maṭāf and the Masjid on auspicious nights and mixing with men. (ibid. p34) A similar complaint was made even before by the Shāfi‘ī imām, al-‘Izz ibn Jamā‘ah (694 – 767 H), who added: “We ask Allāh to inspire the ruler to eradicate these abominations.”[13]
Avoiding Intermingling on the Roads
Ibn Ḥibbān narrates in his Ṣaḥīḥ that the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said:
Women do not have the middle of the path.”
Ibn Ḥibbān explains that when a woman comes out for a need, she should not walk in the middle of the path. This is because men walk in the middle, and doing so may result in men and women coming in very close proximity to one another.[14] This is the teaching of Islām in the case of the road, so it would be even more emphasized in the case of closed environments.
Women Taught Behind Screens
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā), perhaps the greatest female teacher amongst the ṣaḥābah, would teach from behind a screen (ḥijāb/sitr) as mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Aḥmad ibn Hanbal narrated that a group of students of ḥadīth came to the great muḥaddith, Abu l-Ashhab (70 – 165 H), and did not know which ḥadīth to ask of him until his daughter informed them from behind a screen of a ḥadith to learn from him. (Musnad Aḥmad, 33:401) From the blessed time of the Salaf, immense care would be taken to avoid intermingling – and this was despite the fact that their hearts were infinitely purer than ours.
The Qur’ān says that if men (i.e. the male ṣaḥābah) are to ask something of the wives of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam), they are to do so “from behind a screen” because “that is purer for your hearts and their hearts”. (Qur’ān, 33:53)
If the purest of hearts, that of the male companions and the wives of the Prophet, are affected by such interactions, people after them are in far greater need of such measures.
Not Intermingling at the Funeral Procession
According to a group of the imāms, it is recommended to stand behind the bier as it is being carried to its burial place. However, al-Ṭaḥāwī recorded from ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) and his student, al-Aswad ibn Yazīd, that they would at times walk in front of the bier because women were following it from behind. This was done in order to avoid mixing with them.[15]
Al-Ṭaḥāwī says: “[The students of Ibn Mas‘ūd] would discourage [walking in front of the bier] and then would do it for an excuse, as that is better than mixing with women when they are close to the bier.” (ibid.) Badr al-Dīn al-‘Aynī al-Ḥanafī adds in his commentary: “because mixing (mukhālaṭah) with non-related women is ḥarām, while going ahead of the bier is permissible.” [16]
Shāfi‘ī Imāms Forbidding Intermingling
Abū ‘Abdillāh al-Ḥalīmī (338 – 403 H), one of the major early Shāfi‘ī mujtahids, said: “Allāh says: ‘O you who believe, protect yourselves and your families from the Fire.’ Included in the totality of this is that a man protects his wife and daughter from mixing with men and conversing with them and being alone with them.” [17]
Al-Māwardī (364 – 450 H), another major early Shāfi‘ī authority, said: “A woman is forbidden from mixing with men and is ordered to stay in the house [when there is no need to come out].” [18]
Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (393 – 476 H), another major Shāfi‘ī authority, states: “[Jumu‘ah] is not obligatory on a woman because of what Jābir (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) narrated…and because she may mix with men and that is ḥarām.” [19]
Imām al-Ghazālī (450 – 505 H) said: “When the speaker is a non-elderly man (shābb), attractive to women in dress and appearance, with plenty of poems, gestures and movements, and women attend his gathering, this is an abomination (munkar) which must be prevented, since the corruption in this is greater than the benefit…It is obligatory to erect a screen/barrier between men and women that prevents seeing [one another], as that is also an anticipated cause of corruption. Norms bear testimony to these abominations.” [20] Note, al-Ghazālī wrote this more than nine-hundred years ago.
Imām Mālik on a Woman Eating with her Husband’s Friends
Some refer to the statement of Imām Mālik in his Muwaṭṭa’ on a woman eating with her husband or brother along with their male companions who are unrelated to her. However, an early Mālikī authority from ‘Irāq, Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Jahm (d. 329 H), explains that Imām Mālik is here referring to an elderly woman (‘ajūz/mutajāllah). [21]
This is consistent with Imām Mālik’s other remarks, as he clearly opposes intermingling and makes distinctions between elderly and non-elderly women. It is narrated in the ‘Utbiyyah that Imām Mālik said: “I believe the ruler is to head towards workers on account of women sitting with them, and I believe he is not to leave a non-elderly woman sitting by these workers; as for an elderly woman and a lowly slave, who would not be suspect for sitting, and nor would the one sitting next to her be suspect, I see no problem with that.” [22]
Ibn Rushd al-Mālikī (450 – 520 H) comments on this passage from al-‘Utbiyyah: “Indeed the Messenger of Allāh (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) said: ‘I did not leave a temptation more harmful for men than women,’ and he said: ‘Create distance between the persons of men and women.’” [23]
Furthermore, Imām Mālik states, as reported in the Muwaṭṭa’, that a man may give salām to an elderly woman, but not to a non-elderly woman.
RELATED: Yes, How Women Dress Is Everyone’s Business
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah Forbids Women from Attending the Masjids
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and his students did not allow non-elderly women emerging for Ṣalāh (al-Aṣl, 1:365), let alone another activity not sanctioned in Sharī‘ah and not based on genuine need. The reason for this is to prevent men and women interacting or being tempted by one another to engage in the impermissible (e.g. looking with desire, speaking unnecessarily, touching etc.).
Ikhtilāṭ Vs Khalwah
Some people argue that since mixing is not khalwah (being in solitude with a woman), it is not a sin. But khalwah is a separate, graver, sin, while mixing and intermingling is also a sin, though of a lesser category. The fact that intermingling does not necessarily entail khalwah does not mean it is not sinful.
RELATED: Is Islamic Gender Separation a Sign of Backwardness?
Conclusion: Statement of Ibn al-Ḥājj
In short, it is not permissible for non-elderly men and women to remain unnecessarily in a place where each gender is not designated their own separate area/space. Difficulties encountered in adhering to this principle does not negate its importance. Those engaged in this sin should try to eliminate it from their lives, or at minimum reduce it as far as possible, and constantly turn to Allāh in tawbah and ask Him to make for them a means to leave it completely. The corruption in the present time and the prevalence of such immoral practices and attitudes does not justify becoming lax or complacent about these matters. Rather, because of this prevalence, it would be a greater necessity to draw attention to its prohibition.
In this respect, I end with this fitting quote from the great Mālikī imām, Ibn al-Ḥājj (ca. 657 – 737 H), who lived more than seven-hundred years ago:
[The learned man] should teach [his womenfolk] the Islāmic teaching (sunnah) of coming out when she is compelled to do so. It has been transmitted that a woman comes out in the lowliest and roughest of her clothing, dragging her cloak behind her [to the length] of one hand span or an arm’s length…The Islāmic teaching (sunnah) has stipulated that her walking should be along the walls…Look, Allāh have mercy on us and you, at these teachings (sunan), how they have been erased in our time, to the point that they have come to be like something unknown, because of what [women] do of the opposite of these Shar‘ī states. Thus, a woman sits at home as is known of her normal manner, with lowly garments and avoiding adornment…and then when she wishes to come out, she becomes clean and adorned, looks to the finest clothing and jewellery she possesses and wears it, and then comes out on the road as if a bride that has appeared; and she walks in the middle of the road, mixing with men, and they have a way of walking – to the point that the men, I mean the righteous amongst them, retreat to the walls to make space for them on the road; while others mix with them…All of this is caused by not looking to the sunnah and its principles, and what the Salaf of this ummah (Allāh be pleased with them) have passed upon. When a learned person draws attention to this and its likes, these holes are closed, and the blessing of that would be hoped for everyone. Those who turn back from what ought not be, this is an excellent destination, and those who do not turn back will know that he/she is engaging in sin and so will remain broken hearted due to that. The goodness in being broken is known, and it is hoped the one who is broken will repent and turn back. [24]
Note: Circumstances and situations which arise in the land of non-Muslims, or in lands that have adopted non-Muslim norms, that are beyond our control, and which might temporarily constrain us to enter into environments of free-mixing to fulfil a genuine personal need (ḥājah), cannot justify introducing such an abomination in places under our control (like private residences or masjids) or entering such places without need. “Need” here refers to something that to avoid would cause unbearable distress and hardship to individuals (Asbāb al-‘Udūl, p261). For example, to not go into the market to purchase basic necessities would undoubtedly cause unbearable distress. There is no ḥājah for introducing free-mixing within homes/masjids/madrasahs, or to enter places where it is taking place without any need.
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 4750; Fatḥ al-Bārī, Dār Ṭaybah, 10:386 
ibid. 10:395 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 4750; Fatḥ al-Bārī, Dār Ṭaybah, 10:387 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 6248 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 865; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 3:109-10 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 372; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 2:89 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 850; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 3:89 
ibid. 3:92-3 
Sunan Abī Dāwūd, 460; Badhl al-Majhūd, Dār al-Bashā’ir al-Islāmiyyah, 3:186 
Akhbār Makkah, Dār Khaḍir, 1:252 
Akhbār Makkah, Dār Khaḍir, 1:252 
Hidāyat al-Sālik, p1022-3; al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā al-Fiqhiyyah, 1:201-2 
Ṣaḥīh Ibn Ḥibbān, 5601 
Sharḥ Ma‘ānī al-Ᾱthār, 1:485 
Nukhab al-Afkār, 7:268 
al-Minhāj fī Shu‘ab al-Imān, 3:398 
al-Ḥāwi al-Kabīr, 2:51 
al-Muhadhdhab, Dār al-Qalam, 1:358 
Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn, Dār al-Minhāj, 4:639 
al-Jāmi‘ fi l-Sunan wa l-Ᾱdāb wa l-Maghāzī wa l-Tārīkh, 214 
al-Nawādir wa l-Ziyādāt, 8:243; al-Bayān wa l-Taḥṣīl, 9:335 
ibid. 9:336 
al-Madkhal, 1:244-5 

The Muslim Skeptic