Those Muslims, especially molvis and muftis who have committed the zulm of negating the Laa Adwaa (There is no contagion) declaration of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) – the zulm of advocating closure of the Musaajid – the zulm of suspending Jumua Salaat – the zulm of banning Jamaat Salaat – the zulm of believing in the efficacy and goodness of the Niqaab of Iblees (the shaitaani mask) – the zulm of observing shaitaani distancing, and the zulm of supporting the theories and protocols of the atheists – all such Muslims MUST resort to Taubah.

Allah’s Athaab is severe. When his Whip strikes, then it will be too late for Taubah, and too late to regret. The very Athaab (the covid satanism) which these molvis and muftis believe can be combated and thwarted by observing the protocols of the atheists will hem them in. Maut which these molvis and muftis believe can be foiled with the implements of Iblees – the protocols of the atheists – will apprehend them at the appointed time. Flight from Maut and Allah’s Taqdeer is not possible.

Understand well that it is KUFR to reject the declaration of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). No amount and no kind of interpretation can justify the rejection by the miscreant muftis of this era. These muftis, molvis and sheikhs have become agents of Iblees and agents of the government. Thus, instead of being the Defenders of the Shariah, they find themselves in the camp of the atheists and defending and propagating the haraam theories and protocols of the enemies of Allah Ta’ala.

One by one Allah Ta’ala will apprehend them with the very Athaab (the covid satanism) which they seek to escape by way of rejecting the Shariah and adopting the excreta of the atheists. Nothing will save them. Hasten to Taubah. Renew your Imaan and make Dua.

24 Zul-Qa’dh 1442 – 5 July 2021



The response to our rebuttal of the zigzag fatwa of Ebrahim Desai, is nothing but a regurgitation of drivel and clutching at straws by the ZigZagger. Here we shall content ourselves to rebut his stupid straw-clutch pertaining to the notice which he has reproduced. Other issues shall, Insha-Allah, be tackled and demolished in future articles.

The purpose of the notice which was written on the board by a brother, not by The Majlis, was not to advocate wearing the mask out of Salaat. Some musallis do come to the Musjid with masks, perhaps three or four among a couple hundred musallis.

Rather than expelling such musallis from the Musjid, the notice advises them to keep their masks in their pockets. Another reason for keeping the masks in pockets at all times, is to be saved from the oppression of the kuffaar authorities when they accost one in the street.

Most certainly, it is a sign of Imaan and Yaqeen to abstain from wearing the mask. The notice does not encourage wearing masks outside Salaat. The notice contends with a practical problem with the people of Imaan are beset with in consequence of the oppressive draconian laws of an oppressive regime, which is supported by munaafiq, maajin, zig zag ‘muftis’ who misinterpret the fatwas of the Aakaabireen.

18 Zul Qa’dh 1442 – 29 June 2021




In his latest moronic, kufr, bootlicking fatwa, the maajin mufti Ebrahim Desai, promoting the theme of the atheists, and peddling their satanic wares, says:

“If a person is tested Covid positive, he should take full precaution and avoid going to the Musjid until Covid 19 symptoms are clear.”

He abortively attempts to justify this SAREEH (Explicit) kufr with a Hadith which he stupidly misinterprets and which has absolutelyno relevance to the issue which he seeks to promote on behalf of the kuffaar proponents of the contagion baatil and fussaaq, munaafiq, murtad ‘muslim’ doctors who are promoting the kufr covid protocols more zealously than even their atheist handlers who have fitted their brains into kufr straitjackets.

Prohibiting a Muslim from participating in Jamaat Salaat is sareeh kufr notwithstanding the Muslim being afflicted with any type of sickness. When Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was overwhelmed with severe fever, he would lean on the shoulders of two Sahaabah who would literally drag our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to the Musjid. And, this was the Sunnah adopted by ailing Sahaabah. But here we find moron maajin muftis peddling and promoting the theories and protocols of the atheists banning Muslims from the Musjid.


In 2014, this selfsame mufti who has now slipped into the dregs of dhalaal and kufr, propounded the exact opposite of what he is disgorging today. The following is his fatwa issue in September 2014 when there was no covid agenda to promote.

“The plague of Amwaas

In the Name of Allah. The Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

The plague of Amwaas took piece in the 18th year alter Hijrah (about 639AD),during the caliphate of Umar {Radhiallahu Anhu] The plague occurred in the town of Amwaas, Palestine, somewhere close to Bait al Muqaddas.

A large number of people, estimated 30.000 died in this plague. Amongst them were many Sahahah. Some of the Sahabah that died in the plague of Amwaas are: Abu Ubaidah, Mu’aadh ibn Jabal, Yazeed bin Abi Sufyaan, Suhail bin ‘Amr (Radhiallahu Anhum).

The following Hadith mentions the plague of Anwaas and the lmaan and Yaqeen in which the Sahabah met it with.


It was narrated from Shahr bin Hawshab al-Ash’ari, from Rabbih, a man from among his people who married Shahr’s mother after his father died, that he witnessed the plague of Amwas. He said: When the epidemic grew severe, Abu ‘Ubaidah bin al-Jarrah [Radhiallahu Anhu) stood up to address the people and said: O people, this epidemic is a mercy from your Lord and the answer to the prayer of your Prophet and this is how the righteous before you died. Abu ‘Ubaidah is asking Allah to give him his share of it. Then he got the plague and died, may Allah have mercy on him. Mu’adh bin Jabal [Radhiallahu Anhu] succeeded him as the people’s leader and stood up to address them after he died. He said. ‘O people, this epidemic is a mercy from your Lord and the answer to the prayer of your Prophet an , this is how the righteous before you died. Mu’adh is asking Allah to grant a share of it to the family of Mu’adh.

Then his son ‘Abdur Rahman bin Muadh got the plague and died. Then he asked his Lord for his own share of it, and [symptoms of the plague] appeared on his hand. l saw him looking at it then he turned hand over, then he said o his hand: l would not like to have anything in this world in return for what you have got. When he died, ‘Amr bin al-‘As succeeded him as the people’s leader. (Ahmad 1697)

And Allah Ta’aala Knows Best

Arshed Ali

Student Darul lftaa, Trinidad

Checked and Approved by Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

(End of the fatwa issued in 2014)

In 2014 he maintained that the stance of the Sahaabah who supplicated to become victims of the plague and who had glowingly spoken of the Plague Rahmat had displayed “Imaan and Yaqeen”. Thus he said:

“The Hadith mentions the plague of Amwaas and the Imaan and Yaqeen in which the Sahabah met it with.”

In 2014, he held that the manner in which the Sahaabah had met the plague was of the demands of “Imaan and Yaqeen”.But today this most unfortunate miscreant who has slipped gravely from Siraatul Mustaqeem, and who is promoting pure kufr which he has acquired from the atheists via the munaafiq murtad doctors, deems it haraam to adopt the Sunnah of the Sahaabah and to meet the plague with the Imaan and Yaqeen demonstrated by the Sahaabah.

Notwithstanding all his stupidity and bootlicking, he cannot be ignorant of the fact, that Hadhrat Abu Ubaidah (Radhiyallahu anhu) and Hadhrat Muaaz Bin Jabal (Radhiyallahu) anhu, had delivered their final khutbahs inside the Musjid to the crowds of Muslims among who were numerous Sahaabah. No one was prevented from the Musjid on account of the plague.

Both these senior Sahaabah described the plague glowingly, saying: “O People! This epidemic is a mercy from your Rabb, and the answer to the prayer of your Nabi, and the Maut of the Saaliheen before you.”

Then Hadhrat Muaaz (Radhiyallahu anhu) supplicated to Allah Ta’ala: “Muaaz is supplicating for a share (of the plague) for the family of Muaaz.”

Soon thereafter, his son Abdur Rahmaan contracted the plague, and died. Then Hadhrat Muaaz stood up and supplicated for a share of the plague for himself. Then he was afflicted with the plague. Seeing the symptoms of the plague on his hand, he said, looking at his hand: “Nothing is more beloved to me than that (i.e. the plague) which you have.” He too attained Shahaadat in the Plague.

Discarding this wonderful Sunnah, the mufti maajin is advocating the protocols of the atheists, which require the closure of the Musaajid, abrogation of Jamaat Salaat and prohibiting Muslims from attending the Musaajid, and more kufr.

His flaccid and flapdoodle arguments

Stupidly arguing in support of preventing sick Muslims or even healthy Muslims from the Musjid on the ridiculous basis of ‘covid symptoms’ which the atheists say are a light cough or sneezing, the ZigZag mufti cites the garlic hadith. Presenting his stupid interpretation, he says:

“If a person is tested Covid19 positive, he should take full precaution and avoid going to the Musjid until the Covid 19 symptoms are clear i. Hereunder are a few relevant points cited in the references:

• Rasulullah صلىاللهعليهوسلم has clearly prohibited the one who has eaten anything which has a foul smell from entering the Masjid and joining the Jamaat Salaah. The reason for this prohibition mentioned in the Hadith is the inconvenience caused to the Malaikah and fellow Musallis.”

This is a rubbish, flaccid, flapdoodle satanically designed ‘daleel’ to promote the kufr protocols of the atheists. There is absolutely no grounds in the ‘foul smelling’ factor to justify prohibition on the basis of illness or a cough or a sneeze. It is necessary to present a solid daleel, not a stupid inference for preventing Muslims from the Musjid.

Why did Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah not prevent Musallis from the Musjid during plagues? Despite Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) speaking negatively about the stench of garlic, neither he nor the Sahaabah prevented sick persons from attending the Musjid. They did not use the stupid garlic inference excreted by the Zigzag mufti. The Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) during a plague is daleel, not the stench of garlic. The fact that no one was prevented from the Musjid on account of the plague is a vehement rejection of the rubbish which the zigzag maajin mufti has disgorged to appease his atheist handlers.

If the stench of garlic had been valid premise for inference, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah would have been the very first to have prohibited the plague-affected Muslims from attending the Musjid. But the factual reality is that during plagues the Sahaabah and the Muslims in general flocked in greater numbers to the Musaajid and remained in I’tikaaf for longer periods imploring the mercy of Allah Azza Wa Jal, while those of the loftiest degree of Imaan and yaqeen supplicated for Maut with the plague in order to gain the status of shahaadat.

It is indeed explicit kufr to prevent people from the Musjid because of a cough/sneeze and to promote the kufr protocols of the atheists and to utilize this satanism as valid grounds for preventing Muslims from the Musjid.

These zigzag muftis are maintaining an ominous and a deafening silence regarding the Sunnah observed by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah during plagues, and about the categorical Qur’aanic prohibition pertaining to satanic quarantine and fleeing from the plague in fear of Maut.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who flees from the plague is like one who flees from the battlefield, and he who remains steadfast (with Sabr) during the plague, for him is the reward of a Shaeed.”

On this very basis, we can say that he who prevents Muslims from the Musjid because of a cough or a sneeze or because the kuffaar diagnosed someone to be ‘covid positive’, is indeed a kaafir. In this context all the doctors of these munaafiq so-called ‘islamic’ associations come fully within the purview of ‘kuffaar’. They are worst kuffaar than asli (born) kuffaar.

The ‘inconvenience’ of a coughing or sneezing Musalli is the effect of brainwashing by the atheists. Why did Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah not consider the sickness acquired from the plague to be a sufficient factor of inconvenience for preventing musallis from the Musjid? There is no need for extending the garlic-stench prohibition to sickness and the plague when Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah had not done so. The qiyaas of the zigzag mufti – his inference based on stench – is stupid and utterly baseless, and the best daleel for this stupidity is the Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

There is no need for inferences and extension of rulings when there exists explicit Sunnah practice on an issue. The Sunnah may not be scuttled and cancelled because of inferences based on the theories of the atheists.

The ‘leprosy’ argument is also stupid and utterly baseless. Despite the presence of lepers, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah did not prohibit the saick Sahaabah from the Musjid during plagues. It is pure satanism to attempt to abrogate the Sunnah on the basis of the leprosy narration because Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah did not ban people suffering from the plague from attending the Musjid.

There is not a single narration which reports that any Muslim was debarred from the Musjid on account of the plague. On the contrary, the majority of the Sahaabah in the Musjid were affected by the plague in Madinah during the time of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), but they all attended the Musjid.

The examples proffered by the zigzag mufti in support of preventing ‘covid affected’ musallis from the Musjid all pertain to garlic-stench. On the basis of this narration whoever emits a foul stench for whatever reason may be prevented from the Musjid. But it is not proper and not valid to extend the garlic narration to plague-affected persons for the simple reason that Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah had not prevented such persons from the Musjid.

There is not a single Fiqhi narration adduced by the zigzag mufti which relates to the plague and to persons afflicted by the plague. His only inference to bolster his corrupt fatwa is the ‘garlic’ factor. However, not a single Faqih has utilized this narration as a basis for prohibiting people from the Musjid during a plague. The fatwa of the zigzag mufti is corrupt and baatil.

17 Zul-Qa’dh 1442 – 28 June 2021



Mufti Ebrahim Desai, in a fatwa, says that it is permissible to wear a covid mask. He says that the prohibition in the Hadith falls away when the mask is worn because of a need. The need is the danger of being infected with the covid disease. He quoted from several kitaabs of the Hanafi Fuqaha. One such quotation is:

“Covering one’s mouth in Salah is prohibited due to the Hadith of Abu Dawud and others. It will only be permissible to cover at the time of need.” (Emphasis not mine)

The mufti basis the permissibility on the need “to save oneself from being infected”. Is this fatwa valid?


This is one more of the zigzag fatwas for which the wayward mufti has a penchant. There is no valid Shar’i substance in his zigzag fatwa which is designed for bootlicking the atheists and the government. This miserable mufti is a sell-out. He has become a traitor to the Deen. He mis-manipulates the texts of the Shariah for sinister agendas. The current shaitaani objective is to accord Shar’i acceptability to the baatil covid shaitaaniyat dinned into his ears by anti-Islam forces.

The Hadith and the texts of the Fuqaha are abundantly clear. With clarity the prohibition is stated. The exception is an exigency of Dhuroorat (real need), not a hallucinated need, and not a need according to the kufr theories of the atheists.

No one denies the principle of Dhuroorat. But every imaginary ‘need’ does not come within the Shariah’s concept of Dhuroorat. If there is genuine Dhuroorat, Salaat may be performed wearing only a female’s panties or even stark naked. When there is legitimate Dhuroorat in the meaning of the Shariah’s concept, then liquor and pork may also be consumed, and for such consumption there is no need for the rubbish ‘halaal’ certificates of the Carrion & Pork cartel.

The conjectured or imagined ‘need’ on which the zigzagger basis his corrupt fatwa is underlined by the kufr contagion belief which is in blatant denial of the explicit La Adwaa proclamation of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). This miserable miscreant mufti shamelessly peddles the idea of the atheist in stark denial of the Law stated by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

In view of the Shariah’s explicit negation of the kufr idea of contagion, there is absolutely no need to don the niqaab of Iblees in Salaat. Thus, the original Mas’alah remains in its place. The exception proffered by the miscreant has no basis. It is spurious and baatil, hence donning the niqaab of Iblees in Salaat is Haraam. The fear of infection is unfounded and kufr.

Furthermore, wearing the niqaab of Iblees in the current context of the circumstances is not only Makrooh, it is kufr, and it invalidates Salaat. Donning the Ibleesi niqaab is accompanied by the kufr belief of contagion. It is the kufr idea of the atheists which this miserable mufti is promoting.

The function of a true Mufti is to strengthen the bond with Allah Ta’ala, not to widen the existing chasm between the bandah and Allah Ta’ala. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Seek a fatwa from your heart.” The sincere searcher of the Truth should, with an unbiased mind, scrutinize the fatwa of this wayward mufti.

Who and what is this mufti promoting with his zigzag fatwa? The fatwa of the heart will adequately reply this question. Everyone can understand that the fatwa of permissibility for donning the niqaab of Iblees is designed to promote the theory of the atheists and to curry favour with the government. There is no Deeni objective for this confounded baatil fatwa.

He completely side steps the original purport of Rasulullah’s prohibition, and clings on to the straw of the exception on the fallacious basis of imaginary dhuroorat to peddle the wares of Bill Gates and his ilk.

The fatwa of Deoband is just as putrid as the fatwa of mufti Ebrahim Desai. Deoband is no longer a reliable institution. We scrutinize the fatwas emanating from today’s Darul Ifta if Deoband. The Janaazah of Ilm has long ago departed from Darul Uloom Deoband. Now there remains only a skeleton. Their fatwa also emphasizes on the exception instead of the prohibition stated with clarity by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Both fatwas are bunkum. It is haraam to don the niqaab of Iblees. Salaat with the evil niqaab on, due to the kufr belief underlying it, is not valid.

22 Jamaadil Awwal 1442 – 6 January 2021

Mufti Ebrahim Desai is gradually becoming a deviate.

Q. Mufti Ebrahim Desai’s fatwas are very accommodating for the covid-19 protocols. He sees permissibility in all the measures introduced for musallis at a Musjid. He cites even the fatwa of Darul Uloom Deoband. Please comment.

A. Mufti Ebrahim Desai is gradually becoming a deviate.
We have answered the stupid fatwa from Deoband and others
in several articles available on our website. This mufti is a liberal plodding the path of deviation. He has left the fold of the Ulama-e-Haq. He has no perception of the closeness of Maut and the Accountability to Allah Ta’ala, hence his ‘fatwas’ are zig zag stupidities.






This molvi’s leanings towards liberalism have been disturbing for some time. We had regarded him to be from among the Ulama-e-Haqq, hence in response to many queries, we had always advised that he was a man of the Haqq. However, his true colours have been coming to light incrementally in his baatil and kongfu fatwas. We now retract our recommendation.

In the current shaitaani crisis, he has exposed himself to be a supporter of the baatil of the cartel of munaafiqeen comprising of ghutha and hufaalah

such as Bogus uucsa, MJC, Bhum, Yusuf Patel, Menk, Suliman Moolla, Amal, the silly chamber of ‘muslim’ commerce, and others of similar ilk.

These munaafiqeen and pro-munaafiqeen such as the maajin mufti Ebrahim Desai, are traitors to Islam. They are back-stabbing the Muslim community. But they have no word of condemnation for those who are suppressing the Deen and oppressing Muslims. They are pure unadulterated shayaateen in human form.

Place no reliance on the fatwas churned out by his darul iftah.



3 Ramadhaan 1441 – 27 April 2020




Please comment on mufti Ebrahim Desai quoting Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) in support of the lockdown measures. In this regard, he cites the following advice of Hadhrat Thanvi:

“Maulana Thaanvi RA advised, avoid disrespect to 3 people:

1) People in Authority, 2) Landlord, 3) Son-in-Law.”

We see the wisdom in this advice during the lockdown. Don’t put yourself in an embarrassing situation. Avoid
embarrassment to Islam and Muslims.”   (End of Ebrahim Desai’s statement).

Does his statement hold Islamic validity?


His statement is bunkum advice, the effect of bootlicking.


Maajin Mufti Ebrahim Desai has become a bootlicker. By degrees he has drifted from Siraatul Mustaqeem.
He is incrementally following in the footsteps of the munaafiqeen. Currently he is decidedly a fence sitter.
If he continues along the path of dhalaal, he will end up in the camp of the munaafiqeen.


Hadhrat Thanvi’s quote has no relationship with the current bogus corona saga.


Besides the three persons mentioned by Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh), all people, Muslims and non-Muslims, to the exclusion of the munaafiqeen and zanaadaqah, are to be respected within the confines of the Shariah. Respect precludes bootlicking, stupid flattery and concealment of the Haqq.


No intelligent Muslim advocates disrespect for the government, for the landlord, for the son-in-law or for anyone else. What is advocated, condoned and propagated is to abstain from respecting and honouring the people of bid’ah and the munaafiqeen, and such maajin muftis who open the pathway to Jahannam for the masses.  Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Whoever honours a man of bid’ah, verily he has aided in the demolition of Islam.” When a faasiq is honoured, the Arsh of Allah shudders.


There are many similar Nusoos which proscribe respecting and honouring such juhala, fussaaq, fujjaar and zanaadaqah who constitute a danger to the Imaan of the masses. In our time, there is a glut of molvis, muftis and sheikhs whose bootlicking constitutes a danger for the Imaan of the masses.


The policy of shaitaani silence propagated by the likes of these maajin muftis comes within the purview of the Qur’aanic Aayat:

“Why do their ahbaar and ruhbaan not prevent the people from sinful statements and consumption of haraam?”


These bootlickers are among the worst of scoundrels who dig the foundations of the Deen. The moron mufti has abortively attempted to extravasate haraam capital from Hadhrat Thanvi’s statement which does not have the remotest relationship with the current shaitaani conspiracy.


For the edification of Mr. Ebrahim Desai, we say: Avoid embarrassment to Islam and Muslims by refraining from bootlicking, from having two tongues, from fence-sitting, from leaning towards the munaafiqeen.”

And, in the words of the Qur’aan Majeed, we say to him and his miserable ilk:


“Scram! (and perish) therein (in Jahannam), and do not speak to ME (Allah).”

(Al-Mu’minoon, Aayat 108)

In emulation and in adoption of this Qur’aanic tone stemming from the address of Allah Ta’ala to the Jahannamis, we say to this wayward maajin mufti:

Scram! Voetsek! Get Lost! Drown in the cesspool of inequity which you and your like are preparing for the community. Beware of Allah’s Athaab. You will suffer and not escape Allah’s Apprehension.

3 Ramadhaan 1441 – 27 April 2020




“When the Prohibition of khamr was revealed, it (khamr) was from five sources: grapes, dates, wheat, barley and honey. Khamr is whatever convolutes the brain.

Restricting it (the prohibition) to grape (liquor) is meaningless. The element in prohibition (tahreem) is the convolution of the brain. Its little leads to much, hence the view of prohibition is Waajib.

It is not permissible today for anyone to opine the permissibility of the (liquor) acquired from sources other than grapes and to use less than the intoxicating limit.

Yes, there were some among the Sahaabah and Taabieen to whom the Hadith did not initially reach, hence they are excused. However, when the Hadith became well known and the matter clear, and the Hadith: “People from my Ummah will certainly consume liquor giving it some other name”, was authenticated, then there remained no excuse (for claiming liquor to be permissible). May Allah Ta’ala protect us and the Muslimeen from it (liquor).”
(Hujjatullaahil Baalighah – Shah Waliyullah Dehlawi)



Please comment on the following fatwa issued by Mufti Ebrahim Desai. The following question was posed to him:



On your website, you state that vanilla extract (minimum of 35% alcohol) is permissible for use in flavoring in ice cream or cakes since it’s alcohol is not Khamr (derived from grapes or dates). Vanilla extract can cause intoxication if someone drinks it directly.

My question is, if an ice cream or cake lists rum as ingredient for flavoring would be permissible? Rum is usually 40% alcohol and derived from sugar cane. The amount of rum in such an ice cream or cake is not large enough to cause intoxication.

If this is not permissible, could you please explain how rum as an alcoholic flavoring agent would be different from vanilla extract?

Jazak Allah khair, wasslam

The Mufti gave the following absolutely corrupt fatwa:


In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

You refer to our position on vanilla extract. You then enquire about rum as an ingredient in ice cream and cakes based on the analogy of our ruling on vanilla extract. Your analogy is correct.

In principle, alcohol derived from dates and grapes is prohibited. Therefore, any product containing alcohol derived from any source besides dates and grapes is permissible on condition: (Absolutely baatil – baseless, false and stupid. Rasulullah – sallallahu alayhi wasallam – said that anything which intoxicates in big quantity, its small quantity too is haraam. – Mujlisul Ulama.)
1. It does not intoxicate.

2. It is not generally used by people who drink intoxicants. (In fact, 90% of all liquor is made from non-grape alcohol. It is this type of alcohol that is mostly used. The Mufti’s claim is baatil. –Mujlisul Ulama)
Rum, in drink form, is generally used by people who drink intoxicants, hence not permissible. (He is in contradiction of his condition No.2 – Mujlisul Ulama)

However, ice cream, cakes, chocolates and similar off the shelf products which contain very low amounts of rum are not consumed only by such people. They are used by one and all and are also not regarded as a main feature of the gatherings of sinful people (Faasiqs) as is the case with intoxicants. Such products are similar to soft drinks which are permissible. (Our refutation of this ghutha/rubbish claim will appear later in the ensuing pages, Insha-Allah. – Mujlisul Ulama).

The above answer is based on principle. If one abstains from such products, that is Taqwa. (End of the Mufti’s fatwa) – The answer is not based on any sound Shar’i principle. It is an answer sucked out from the nafs to appease the masses who indulge in devouring haraam. – Mujlisul Ulama)

A ‘Halaal’ License For Rum And Brandy_booklet