Tag Archives: Misconceptions



(kindly click to download pamphlet: SHAITAANI LEGACY)

Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Expose the faajir regarding the evil in which he indulges so that people remain safe from him.”


“When you observe a Deeni danger in a person of worldly pomp and rank, then proclaim it (to the masses), and do not be deterred by his pomp and rank. Verily, Allah is your Supporter and your Helper, and the Helper of the Deen. When you act in this way (i.e. fearlessly proclaiming the Haqq), they will hold you in awe and not become audacious in flagrant commission of bid’ah in front of you.

In matters of the Deen if you see someone flagrantly committing evil, then expose him to the people so that they do not follow him, and so that they remain aloof of him. Verily, Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Expose the faajir regarding the evil in which he indulges so that people remain safe from him.”

The advice of Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) based on the Hadith he cited is to name and expose miscreant Ulama and leaders who flagrantly practice fisq, fujoor and bid’ah. The purpose of naming and criticizing them is to save the masses from becoming ensnared in their evil. The Ulama who conceal the Haqq for nafsaani motives should reflect on this advice, and do some soul searching, for then they will understand the despicable sin of Kitmaanul Haqq which they are committing.


Everyone knows that the ‘Public Relations Officer’ of Sanha is E.B.I Lockhat. He is a faasiq. He takes photos. He shaves his beard. Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: “the Arsh of Allah shudders when a faasiq is honoured.” Despite Sanha praising their Ulama e Soo’ team, sanha’s ‘public relations officer’ is a faasiq. Why is it that the entire Sanha ‘ulama’ team and their entire ‘ulama’ council does not object to the appointment of a faasiq as your ‘public relations officer’??? The answer is obvious. The ‘ulama’ who are part of Sanha are the Ulama e Soo – Mudhilleen.


Why is it that the Jamiatul Ulama Gauteng found out that Sanha was feeding the Ummah haraam Earlybird Chickens? They undertook an unannounced inspection? Where was Sanhas Ulama council and Ulama team to make sure that the Ummah is not fed Haraam meat?

In this suffocating age of Kitmaanul Haqq (concealment of the Haqq), trampling on the Haqq and satanic interpretation of the Deen by the evil shayaateen, the Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar of The Ulama e Haqq would come as a fresh breeze.

Regarding the clique of mudhilleen, Rasulullah (sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said:

        “Verily, I fear for my Ummah the Aimmah mudhilleen. (The Imaams and ‘ulama’ that mislead)”

The mudhilleen are such agents of Shaytaan who prowl on the surface of the earth in the guise of Ulama.  While these “shayaateen fi jusmaanil ins” (devils in  human bodies – Hadith) are here to stay since this dunya has been created to be the abode of conflict between Haqq and baatil – vice and virtue – it does not behove the many Ulama-e-Haqq to seek refuge in silence for fear of controversy. Controversy and disunity for Allah’s Sake are natural consequences of Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar.  This earth is meant for controversy, and controversy is the logical effect of the propagation of the Tauheed of Islam. It is essential for the Ulama to heed Allah’s praise for those who remain steadfast and unflinching on the Haqq. He says in the Qur’aan about them:  “They do not fear the insults of those who insult.”





·  Central Islamic Trust

·  Council of Ulama – Eastern Cape

·  Darul-Ihsan Islamic Services Centre –  KZN

·  Darul Waqaf Islamic Trust

·  Jamiatul Ulama South Africa

·  Majlisud Dawah Wal Islah

·  Northern Cape Halaal Board

·  Mudhil Muhammed Suliman

·  Mudhil Junaid Adam

·  Mudhil Zubair Bayat

·  Mudhil Ebrahim Essop

·  Mudhil Abbas Ali Jeena

·  Mudhil Ismail Allie

·  Mudhil Rafiek Ahmed Hassan


·  Mudhil Abdullah Minty

·  Mudhil Abdur Rahman Pandor

·  Mudhil Abraar Ahmed Varachia

·  Mudhil Adbul Rehman Sirkot

·  Mudhil Alie L Kgaphola

·  Mudhil Anees Moegamed Kara

·  Mudhil Arqam Ahmad

·  Mudhil Bilal Ebrahim Nicholson

·  Mudhil Dawood Vahed

·  Mudhil Farid Ahmed

·  Mudhil Haamid Mulla

·  Mudhil Hashim Wadia

·  Mudhil Imtiaaz Ahmed Baiyant

·  Mudhil Luqmaan Mahomed

·  Mudhil Masihullah Kathrada

·  Mudhil Mehmood Yacoob

·  Mudhil Mohamed Choksi

·  Mudhil Mohammed Ilyas Cassim

·  Mudhil Mohammed Mangera

·  Mudhil Muhammad E Nanabhay

·  Mudhil Muhammad Saeed Navlakhi

·  Mudhil Muhammed Ameen Ravat

·  Mudhil Muhammed Vaid

·  Mudhil Muhammed Wahseem Saib

·  Mudhil Nazir Mahomed

·  Mudhil Rafiek Ahmad Hassan

·  Mudhil Reza Nanabhay

·  Mudhil Ridhwaan Vaid

·  Mudhil Shafiq Ahmed Hajee

·  Mudhil Shah Jehan Naicker

·  Mudhil Siraajoddeen Parker

·  Mudhil Sulaiman Kindi

·  Mudhil Suleiman Karani

·  Mudhil Syed Haroun

·  Mudhil Yaaseen Allie

·  Mudhil Zakariya Jeewa

·  Mudhil Muhammed Yusuf Seedat

·  Mudhil Nomaan Ishhaq

·  Mudhil Kassim Hussein Akili

·  Mudhil Abdul Hakim Kabetcha

·  Mudhil Abdul Karim Phiri

·  Mudhil Abdul Rashid Swaleh

·  Mudhil Emaan Chikwatu

·  Mudhil Hussyn Kamwana

·  Mudhil Muhammad Jumah Chiumbe

·  Mudhil Ndwandwe Nxumalo

·  Mudhil Shaffy Jaffar

·  Mudhil Shuaib Wasiya

·  Mudhil Yahya Wiseman Ibrahim

·  Mudhil Younus Bowman Khalea




You might be aware that Sanha has posters/pamphlets/leaflets which they distribute in order to promote their tarnished reputation. Sanha has recently ‘warned’ the community regarding slaughtering rumours on poultry and meat products as its heading states. Our objective is to inform the community of being aware of such rumours.

Too many rumours in the Muslim community abound due to the corrupt state of the Ummah. The fact that Rainbow and Early Bird chickens are Haraam is a fact. Sanha is not really trusted by the intelligent ones. All intelligent people have already realised that Sanha is making a wild claim that their chickens are Halaal. Let us give you an example of Sanha feeding the Ummah Haraam meat.

In 2008, The NIHT inspected the ANCA chicken plant which was at that time certified as Halaal by Sanha. Although Sanha does not certify ANCA currently, it is necessary for Muslims to know that Sanha did feed the Ummah haraam meat in the past and currently, it is also doing so. So what happened at ANCA?

The NIHT established that 87% of the chickens were Haraam. The Majlis did not say so! Mufti A.K. of CII did not say so! The Jamiat Gauteng did not say so! Mufti Ilyas did not say so! Moulana Olgar did not say so! The Jamiat Northern Cape did not say so! But Sanhas sister-body, NIHT said so! They inspected the plant without Sanha knowing about it. And they discovered that Sanha was feeding the Ummah Haraam.

Sanha boasts to the Ummah of its professionalism. Where was Sanha’s supervisor at ANCA? The slaughterers also gave affidavits that Tasmiyah was not recited on every chicken and that the birds were not properly cut. And all of this at a speed of ‘only’ 16 birds per minute. If you have intelligence, then you can form your own fatwa regarding the status of Rainbow, Earlybird and all the other carrion plants. What is so difficult in understanding that they are Haraam. In fact, Mufti Ebrahim Desai knows very well that the slaughterers don’t read Tasmiyah on all the chickens at Rainbow. We were informed a few days ago that Mufti Motara of Azaadville doubts Rainbow Chickens. So even the silent supporting Ulama of Sanha doubt Sanha. In fact, Mufti Motara does not trust Sanhas beef at all and does NOT eat Sanhas beef. So what do you expect us to say when so many senior Ulama are doubting Sanha?

It is of no benefit for Sanha to simply say that the people of Truth are spreading rumours when there is so much proof against Sanha. Have you read Sanhas 223 page document. If you read it, you wont trust Sanha because this document today goes against Sanha although Sanha tried to smash the MJC with this document. In this document, you will find that everything what we are saying against Sanha, Sanha said against the MJC. When the MJC did the wrongs, then Sanha was right. Now, when Sanha is doing the very same wrongs which the MJC did, then all of a sudden Sanha remains right and we are accused of spreading rumours. Is this called justice? Do not hesitate to write to us and we will Insha Allah email you a copy of the 223 page document which will shock you and make you realise that Sanha knew that the Ummah was eating Haraam, yet they did NOT inform the Ummah!

All the Ulama know that commercial chickens are doubtful. Yet, Sanha certifies them as Halaal. An Aalim who says that Sanha is trustworthy is not being honest in his opinion. He knows that a lot of things which Sanha has certified as Halaal, are not Halaal according to him. Shellac and ethanol are conspicuous examples of this.

Sanha says that the slaughterers are speaking lies. On the issue of ANCA, even the NIHTs’ inspection of Sanhas plant confirmed that the Sanha chickens were Haraam. It is very easy to accuse the people of Haqq of bribing the slaughterers, whereas the slaughterers were not bribed. If you are interested in evidence, then write to us.

Mufti A.K. Hoosen of CII does not trust Sanha. Now just look at that. Now when Ramadaan time comes and a fatwa is given that one should be careful what meat one uses for one’s pastries, then we are declared as rumour-mongerers. We said that even Mufti Motara does not trust Sanhas beef. Great Ulama such as Mufti A.K. and Mufti Ilyas have written that Rainbow is Haraam. They inspected Sanhas plants themselves and have retracted their views of Halaal! Was Mufti A.K. and Mufti Ilyas also bribed to say that Rainbow is Haraam?

We have Fikr (concern) for our mothers, sisters, daughters and wives. We don’t want them to use haraam meat in the preparation of savouries for Ramadaan. Eating Haraam and doubtful foods in Ramadaan is much more worse. Now let us analyze the reality. When Sanhas Ulama go for pre-planned inspections, then everything is Halaal. But, when Ulama who are not associated with Sanha undertake an unannounced unfettered inspection, then a lot of Haraam is discovered. Kindly view confessions below of unannounced inspections.

Ulama Confessions:

“It was also clearly observed that the slaughterers only passed the knife very superficially over the necks of the chickens. On closer inspection it was found that many, if not most of the birds were just nicked with the knife. In many cases the knife of the slaughterers barely cut the skin on the necks of the poor chickens.”

“The birds came relentlessly (moving swiftly on the conveyor belt). The slaughterers held the birds’ necks with their left hands and slit the necks. The slaughtering was done very lightly. In fact, so lightly, that I and my other colleagues saw plenty of chicks with only nips in the necks. We examined a few thoroughly and they did not have even a single vein cut. Only the skin was cut.”

Are these Ulama liars? Does anyone in the world have any proof to come forward and say that the above two confessions of the Ulama are false when these two Ulama had seen it with their own eyes -the reality at a Sanha plant??? The inspections of the Ulama who are not associated to Sanha are more reliable and more credible. The views of the Ulama who support Sanha are not valid as they are merely spreading Sanha rumours. Dozens of slaughterers have testified against Sanha. Were they all bribed? To advertise on Sanhas front page of its so-called halaal gazette, one needs to pay R40 000-00. So, why was Sanha unable to bribe the slaughterers when they earning so much ‘bucks’?

There is so much evidence from even Sanha supervisors to prove what we are saying. Thus according to the Shariah, commercial chickens are Haraam. Abandoning tasmiyah and not cutting the necessary neck vessels is confirmed. Now when such a deluge of evidence is in front of us, do you expect us to say that Rainbow is Halaal? Do you expect us to say that Sanha is Islamically credible?




“Imaam Abu Yusuf said: ‘I said to Imaam Abu Hanifah: When you say about something: ‘It is Makrooh to me’, then what do you mean thereby?’ He (Imaam Abu Hanifah) said: “Tahreem” (i.e. It is haraam). (Shaami, Vol.1, Page 225)

There seems to be much confusion on the meaning of Makrooh amongst the masses. Many people treat the word Makrooh lightly. They show scant regard for acts which are described as “Makrooh” in the Shariah by certain authorities. Many people also do not understand that Makrooh acts are Haraam which means impermissible. They regard ‘Makrooh’ acts to be Halaal and permissible whereas Makrooh acts are sinful acts. They also have a very dangerous attitude of minimising the abhorrent, evil and sinful status of Makrooh acts. They belittle ‘Makrooh’ acts. This attitude according to the Shariah is termed ‘Istikhfaaf’. Moreover, a mind-set of ‘Istikhfaaf’ is an attitude of Kufr. It is dangerous for one’s Imaan.


The cause of the confusion and the corrupt attitude of the public regarding the word Makrooh is the lack of proper and adequate Ta’leem on this important issue. Most of the public knows a lot about Haraam cricket and Haraam Soccer, but they don’t know much about Halaal and Haraam and are also not interested in learning the Haq (truth) with specific reference to Halaal and Haraam. And when the Haq is placed before them, then they behave like ignoramuses and they display their true colours of being so Islamically uneducated. They don’t want to accept the truth because of their addiction to Makrooh acts which are practically Haraam.

Another important cause for the misunderstanding of the meaning and purport of Makrooh, is the jahaalat(ignorance) of some Ulama, especially the Ulama-e-Soo’. These Ulama-e-Soo’ mislead the public with their misinterpretation of the actual meaning of Makrooh along with their excessive usage of the word Makrooh. They also play a devilish role in diminishing the importance of abstaining from Makrooh acts as well as in the desensitization of the perpetration of Haraam acts which are described by some Ulama as Makrooh.


Makrooh acts are impermissible – whether Tanzihi or Tahrimi. Hazrat Mufti Kifaayatullah Rahimahullah has mentioned that the perpetration of Makrooh Tanzihi is also sinful. Thus, it should be clear that Makrooh Tanzihi acts are also impermissible. A sinful act is impermissible. Many ‘Ulama’ confuse people with the idea that Makrooh Tanzihi means permissible. This is fallacious. Makrooh Tanzihi culminates into Makrooh Tahrimi which is practically Haraam.


Makrooh Tahrimi and Haraam are basically the same. A Makrooh Tahrimi act is practically Haraam. The word Makrooh Tahrimi is merely a technical term. Whilst it is technically declared as Makrooh Tahrimi, it is practically a Haraam act. The word Tahrimi means Haraam. When the Fuqaha use the word ‘Makrooh’, they mean ‘Makrooh Tahrimi’ which is practically Haraam. Thus, every act which is described by our Fuqaha as Makrooh, is an act which is Haraam upon the Ummat.


Makrooh Tahrimi acts are Haraam. Any Makrooh Tahrimi act could be declared and in fact should be with the term Haraam.  Some people are of the misconception that it is wrong to describe Makrooh Tahrimi acts as Haraam. The following texts of the Fuqaha will clear the issue Insha Allah:

  • And it is correct to apply the designation of haraam on it (i.e. Makrooh Tahrimi). – Bahrur Raaiq.
  • Every Makrooh in the Book of Karaahiyyat is Haraam according to Imaam Muhammed. And it is the closest to Haraam according to Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Abu Yusuf Rahimahumullah. And that is why we describe most Makrooh actions as Haraam! – Tuhfatul Mulook.
  • Moreover, it is mentioned in Bahr that it is saheeh (100% correct) to use the word hurmat (haraam) for Makrooh Tahrimi as it (the mas’alah) appears in Hidaayah. – Durarul Hukkaam.

Even Allamah Shaami states that the word Haraam could be used for Makrooh Tahrimi acts. In Minhajus Sulook, Allamah Aini clearly explains that since according to Imaam Muhammed every Makrooh is Haraam, we declare Makrooh acts as Haraam. The Fuqaha use the word Haraam copiously for Makrooh acts. A few examples follow:

  1. As far as selling monkeys is concerned, Allamah Kaasaani and Allamah Zaila-ee’ use the word Haraam.
  2. On the issue of which parts of an animal, one may not eat, Allamah Kaasaani, Allamah Shaami and Fataawaa Hindiyyah use the word Haraam.
  3. With regards to trade and business at the time of Jumuah, Allamah Margheenaani – Saahibe Hidaayah and Allamah Abu Bakr Raazi state that business at this time is Haraam.

These were a few examples which show that our Fuqaha use the word Haraam to describe Makrooh Tahrimi acts. There are thousands of examples to support this argument. The severity and reprehensibility of ‘Makrooh Tahreemi’ has constrained our Fuqaha to refer to such acts as being Haraam.  When our Fuqaha themselves use the word Haraam for Makrooh acts, then why should it be difficult to understand that all Makrooh acts are impermissible and practically Haraam. It is also clear that only an ignorant person has the potential and capability of making the following stupid statement: “In this instance, one must be careful not to make haram something which is makrooh.” Makrooh is Haraam!!!


It is necessary to state that Makrooh Tahrimi acts are not acceptable acts. The consequence of the perpetration of Makrooh Tahrimi is the Fire of Hell. In Shaami, Vol. 5, page 213, it is stated as follows:

“Every Makrooh, i.e. Karaahat-e-Tahreem is Haraam, i.e. it is like Haraam in punishment with the Fire according to Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayh).”

In other words, the effect of perpetration of Makrooh Tahreemi is identical with the effect of perpetration of Haraam. The consequence of both is Uqoobat bin Naar (punishment with the fire).  Can any intelligent person now claim that Makrooh Tahreemi is acceptable?  Can anyone find Uqoobat bin Naar acceptable?

Shaami states in Vol. 1, page 79:

“Makrooh Tahreemi is that which is closest to Haraam (i.e. the technical meaning of Haraam). Imaam Muhammad has named it Haraam Zanni. ………In Sharhul Muniyah it is said that when they (the Fuqaha) use Makrooh alal itlaaq (i.e. without specifying whether Tahreemi or Tanzeehi) then it means Tahreem (Makrooh Tahreemi).”

The kutub of Fiqah are replete with masaa-il which technically are Makrooh Tahreemi, but which are described with the term Haraam.  Thus, the averment or assumption that Makrooh Tahreemi is acceptable is totally baseless. It is haraam to perpetrate an act which is Makrooh Tahreemi. The punishment for such perpetration is the Fire of Jahannum. This is the Ijma’ of our Fuqaha.


Let it be clear that since Makrooh acts are practically Haraam, they will be condemned just as how technical Haraam acts are condemned. Technicalities are not meant to create confusion. One needs to understand the technical terms of Fiqh. The fact that a technical Makrooh act is Haraam in practical terms and that a Makrooh act leads one to the fire is enough to constrain us to criticize all Makrooh acts. Why should we not prohibit and criticize Makrooh acts when we know that Makrooh acts will take us, our brothers and our sisters to Jahannam? Is this the type of concern (fikr) Muslims have today for others? We don’t care about Makrooh acts which are in fact Haraam! and we don’t care about our Muslim brother/sister who is committing a Makrooh act which will take him/her to Hell-Fire? Have we become so insensitive?

The term Makrooh is a technical term. Despite its literal meaning of reprehensibility, it is a Haraam act. Technical terms portray and convey a technical meaning. It is highly unacademic and unintelligent to translate technical words in a literal way which is meant to confuse the ignorant and unwary public. “The consequence of both Makrooh and Haraam is Naar (Hell Fire).”

There is simply no need to juxtapose the term Makrooh with Haraam in a manner to neutralize the effect of the prohibition.For practical implementation, Makrooh and Haraam are on par. Both lead to the Fire of Jahannum. Ulama who speak on the meaning of Makrooh need to be properly versed in the field of Fatwa.What is Makrooh is Haraam as far as implementation is concerned.


When the technical term Makrooh is used, it implies the same meaning as practical haraam. The difference in academic terms does not concern the masses. There is no need to labour a futile exercise by venturing in the technicalities of Fiqh. The message which Muslims should understand is that it is not permissible to perpetrate Makrooh acts. Whether such impermissibility is dubbed makrooh or haraam is superfluous. However, it has become necessary to abstain from using the term makrooh to describe an impermissibility because the ulama-e-soo’ have corrupted the minds of the masses. In the understanding of the masses, makrooh means permissible, albeit a permissibility which brings a slight frown. This understanding is absolutely baatil and destructive for the Imaan of the masses. Makrooh may not be spinned to bamboozle the Muslim community by diverting the minds of Muslims from the prohibition of consuming what is Makrooh – reprehensible in their own interpretation. The brains which seek to make acceptable for Muslims what is even literally reprehensible are indeed reprehensible and deranged.


  • Makrooh acts are practically Haraam.
  • Makrooh may be described as Haraam. In fact, all impermissible acts should be declared Haraam.
  • Makrooh acts may be criticized and condemned.
  • Committing a Makrooh act leads one to the fire of Jahannam.

Please click to download pamphlet: Makrooh And Its Meaning