Islamic Judgment regarding MASJID AD-DIRAR
 Translation of the text of Yasin Al Hanafi

We will build this article on sura 9:107 - 110 and present and describe all the information our scholars gave about the Masjid ad-Dirar. We must understand exactly what Masjid ad-Dirar is and why we are against praying in such mosques or other underground mosques in the „DITIB“ and „Milligörüs“ today. We will also deal with some judical issues and other related points.

Allah says:
And (there are) those who have built a mosque to cause harm (to Islam) and to promote infidelity and to create dissention among the believers and to provide a station for one who has been at war with Allah and His Messenger even before.They will certainly swear (and say), “We intended to do nothing but good.” Allah testifies that they are liars. (107)
[Sura 9 Verse 107]

Before the Prophet came to Medina, a man named Abu'Amir ar-Rahib had been in authority there. In the Jahiliyya period he converted to the Christian faith and studied the books of the people of Scripture very precisely and in detail. When the Prophet emigrated to Medina and founded a state and then won the battle in Badr, these actions generated a very deep hatred among Abu'Amir, so that he began to take action against Islam. He allied himself with the enemies of Islam and fled to the Mushrikun in Mecca.
When it came to the Battle of Uhud, it had been this Abu'Amir ar-Rahib, who buried some pits on two sides of the field, in which our prophet stumbled in and was injured in the middle of the battle.

Abu'Amir went to his people, the Ansar, just before the war in Uhud, and called them to support him, but they answered his call with curses and beat him up.

Anyway, when Abu'Amir saw the Prophet's power grow stronger time to time, he fled to the Roman Emperor Hyracles and the Emperor offered asylum. From there Abu'Amir contacted some hypocrites among the people in Medina. They have been given the task of building a mosque in which the Muslims are to be observed in order to transmit further information to Abu'Amir.

They built their false mosque near a real mosque called the "Kuba Mosque". The prophet was in Tabuk at the time of this construction and when he left Tabuk the false mosque was completed. The Prophet was asked to pray in it so that it would be blessed.

But Allah saved the Prophet from praying in this false mosque and let him know that this mosque was built only to divide the Muslims in the true "Cuba Mosque" and to incite them against each other. The Prophet called Malik b. ad-Dukhshum and 'Asim b. 'Adi and ordered them:
"Go to the mosque of the tyrants! Put everything in flames and make sure that nobody goes there anymore!"
[Sira Ibn Hisham]

And that was then also done. According to Imam al-Qurtubi in his Tafsīr, the Prophet also sent Wahshi, his uncle Hamza b.'Abd al-Muttalib's killer, to destroy this false mosque.
As Islam gained power, Abu'Amir ar-Rahim fled Emperor Hyracles but was then tricked.
For the emperor could not protect him from our prophet. So ar-Rahib fled to Iraq and there he stayed until he died, may Allah darken his face!

Abdullah b.'Abbas, Mujahid, Qatada and absolutely all Tafsir scholars agree that there were 12 hypocrites who built the Masjid ad-Dirar to harm the Muslims in Cuba. Allah divided the actions of these people into 7 major parts:

Allah says: "And (there are) those who have built a mosque to mischief". Pay attention to the word "dirar". So a mosque is used to harm someone. One causes trouble, for example, when one ascribes oneself to one party and attacks the other party, such a thing is called "division". This is exactly the case between DITIB and MILLI GÖRÜS. Both are democratic parties and both incite their people against the others. That's why they built their democratic mosques.


And if one should say here "One can use one party against the other", then the Prophet's answer to what Ad-Darqutni has reported is valid, namely:
"There must be no mischief! Nor is it true that evil should be fought with evil! So whoever does mischief, Allah will bring him mischief!"
[Tafsir Al-Qurtubi]

So you cannot take a harm and fight the other harm because in both cases, you as well as he from the other side, will get harm from Allah. So, of course, such an argument cannot be put forward. These people who have built these Mosques of Mischief do not understand that they will be punished in hellfire with every component they have built on their Dirar.

When 'Umar b. al-Khattab asked someone who helped ar-Rahibs people to build their Masjid ad-Dirar, why he did it, the man replied:“My help in building this mosque was really just a stick!“ Umar replies:
"That's exactly what I want to tell you! This one stick will be put around your neck for you in hell, as fire!"

I.e., only one stick when building a DITIB and MILLI GÖRÜS mosque is enough to punish you with hellfire.



QUESTION: What if two mosques are reached next to each other?


ANSWER: According to the opinion of the scholars, it can also be evaluated as "Masjid ad-Dirar" if a second mosque is built next to a first existing mosque. This second mosque, according to the Islamic fiqh, must not be present. The Friday prayer in this second mosque becomes invalid, as  Imam Al-Qurtubi describes in his Tafsir.

However, if the quarter is large and its population is large, so that you cannot get it into a mosque, then a second mosque is permitted, but this must prove a certain distance - this varies depending on the school of law (Madhab).

Imam At-Tabari tells the following about Shaqiq: He performed the prayer in the mosque of the sons Ghadira. When he finished the prayer they said to him: "At the mosque of Fulan and Fulan (so and so) was not prayed yet. He said: "I would not pray in their mosque! For this is a Masjid ad-Dirar, a mosque built for evil!"

Imam Al-Qurtubi said:
 "Our scholars say: „Every mosque built to do mischief and foolishness or to gain prestige is subject to the "Masjid ad-Dirar" verdict and it is strictly forbidden to pray there!"

Imam Al-Qurtubi quotes from an-Naqqash who said:
 "According to the current definition, Muslims would not be allowed to pray in a church or synagogue, because they were built to do mischief!"

Imam Al-Qurtubi responds to this statement as follows:
"Such a judgment is not necessary! For churches and synagogues are not built in principle to cause mischief. No matter whether their principle or their doctrine itself contains evil, they build their houses of prayer - as we Muslims do with our houses of prayer - in order to have a place for their own worship! Moreover, our scholars have established the consensus that a Muslim's prayer is recognized when he does it both in the church and in the synagogue!"

For example, says Imam Al-Bukhari:
"Ibn'Abbas used to pray in a monastery, but without an idol or stature!"
[Sahih al Bukhari]

One has to ask the question: How strict were our scholars against the Masjid ad-Dirar that churches and synagogues were not included? Imam Al-Qurtubi also described exactly this point of view. He said:
"Our scholars - may Allah have mercy on them - have said: "Even those mosques built for worship and built according to Sharia law and the prophet said"[....] He who is to build a mosque for Allah will get a house in paradise...must be fixed if it is to bring mischief. Then what about the other mosques?"
[Tafsir Al-Qurtubi]

Allah says:"And (there are) those who built a mosque to cause unbelief/infidelity"
Abdullah b. 'Abbas tells us exactly what is meant by "kufran"[unbelief]. He says:
"This means harming the Muslims and rejecting the Prophet and what he brought!"

The DITIB teaches in its mosques that people should remain loyal to the Turkish government.They say that Tayyib Erdogan is not a Kafir and that you can vote democratically. They did everything they could to stop the Tawhid. Moreover, in a 1989 newspaper excerpt, the DITIB stated quite clearly: "We are in Europe only for the reason of hindering Sharia law!"“


The "MILLI GÖRÜS" is no different. Also this is a democratic organization, tied to the Turkish laicist system. Today the "MILLI GÖRÜS" is a member of the democratic party "Saadet Partisi". Necmettin Erbakan plays a very important role in this party. Erbakan said about his own Refah party that they want to realize this party according to the regulations of the Turkish constitution.  But what do the Turkish laws or the party law say?

In Chapter 4 we read: "The political parties belong to the democratic elements. They work according to Atatürk principles!" Necmeddin Erbakan acted according to this scheme.

According to the Koran, Sunnah and consensus he could not have been a Muslim!

In the early days of the Milli Görüs, Cemaleddin Hocaoglu also took part in this movement. But when "MILLI GÖRÜS" became a democratic party, Cemaleddin Hoca separated from them and stood up against them from that day until his death. They lost 2/3 of their followers, they passed to the organization of Cemaleddin Hoca. Zahit Kotku, the last Shaykh al-Islam of the Ottoman Empire, also knew Erbakan personally. He warned him to take a democratic path. The Turks today say "He should have warned him to take a political path!" There's a big difference. To be more precise, Zahit Kotku told him to leave the democratic party way and act according to the Sharia of Allah, but Erbakan did not listen to him. That's what Cemaleddin Hoca said to him.

There's a man they call Kemaleddin Amca. it is said that he knew Erbakan personally. Some journalists who call themselves "" have asked him the question: "Is it true that Zahit Kotku warned Erbakan for taking a political path?" And this man answers: "Look! This is an issue about Iman! You are now walking a way which Allah has commanded, and you invite men to do the same! I.e. The wisdom for this Dunya is exactly this way! Then how can you say such a "Stop it! Don't do that!"?"

As if Zahit Kotku wasn't against what Erbakan did, he just criticized it. Zahit Kotku has written a book called "Müminlerin vasiflari". On page 77 under the chapter "The parties are not in the right" he says: "There is no Jama'a that the parties would consider and focus on.However, when they saw what these parties benefited, they gathered their people. Later they supported the parties and supported the politicians. With this action they were far in the wrong. After taking this step and infiltrating themselves more and more in the madness of the parties, they did not realize what damage they had done to Islam. It is a fact that it is wrong to turn to one party."

In the book "Ittihad al-Islam" Zahit Kotku says: "The parties are harmful. Beware of the parties, so that they do not mislead you. The parties can do many bad things. They can portray a man who is an angel as a devil because he is not one of their parties. The parties can also portray the man who is a devil as an angel, because he does not belong to their parties either."

He turned his back on Erbakan when Erbakan chose the democratic path and the Milli Görüs belong to him. These two organizations and all other mosques that should act in the same way have declared war on Allah and His Messenger. Their mosques belong without a doubt to Masjid ad-Dirar and to perform the prayers. In the worst case praying  at home is more blessed than to pray there.

Allah says: "and to create division among the faithful".
I.e.: They used their mosques as a tool to divide the Muslims among themselves. The DITIB, for example, cooperates with the „Verfassungsschutz“ (Office for the Protection of the Constitution of germany) and hands Muslims over to them.

They call upon the people in their Temples to stand up against real Muslims. They call them radical Salafists and Islamists. They call them "alleged" Muslims. So indirectly they declare the takfir to them, but Tayyib Erdogan and Angela Merkel are Muslims and not Kuffar for them. All signs of Masjid ad-Dirar are evident in them. And we have recognized the fact that those who call us "takfiris" are in truth themselves the worst takfiris.



 Allah says:"and to provide a station for one who has been at war with Allah and His Messenger even before".

This passage refers to Abu 'Amir ar-Rahib. When the Prophet got the power in Medina, he lost his power. Ever since that day, he sought enmity. He said to the prophet: "As soon as I find an army, I will fight with them against you!" [Tafsir Al-Qurtubi]

Until the Battle of Hunayn, ar-Rahib did not abandon his plan. When he lost the fight he fled to Syria and later he joined forces with the emperor and ordered his people to build the Masjid ad-Dirar. We've dealt with that part before, Alhamdulillah.



Allah says: "They will certainly swear (and say), “We intended to do nothing but good.”".

As Ibn Kathir reports in his Tafsir, the hypocrites, who built a Masjid ad-Dirar by the order of ar-Rahib, justified their intention with the fact that they wanted to care for poor and sick people in it.

Similarly, when the DITIB or Milli Görüs Imams say: "We will teach you Tawhid, how to pray, how to fast, how to perform the pilgrimage". But when you confront them with the real Tawhid, they look for Ta'wil ways to teach you their kufr.

  They can lie to themselves but not to Allah. Because Allāh now says further:

Allah testifies that they are liars.“

I.e., their lies that they built the mosque to help weak people, like the DITIB, who claims to want to teach the Tawẖid, they can hide as they want. But Allah knows what they have in mind, and He declares them liars. They are liars because they wear all these signs. And that is why we will also call them "liars. We got permission from Allah, Alhamdulillah. Verse 108 of sura 9

Allah the Exalted says:

Do not ever stand there (in prayer). In fact, the mosque that was founded on Taqwa (piety) from the very first day has greater right that you stand in it.


Allah says:  "Never stand (in prayer) in it (in this mosque)".

In this verse, Allah commands that He strictly forbids the prophets to pray ad-Dirar in the Masjid forever and ever. Here is a clear answer to the Murjia, who say: This matter should not be evaluated in general but specifically. If there are no other mosques, then it is permitted to pray ad Dirar in Masjid. Here we look at the intention!

We answer as follows:
1-) We have said  "Never stand for prayer in this mosque" Here is a time strophe and the word "abadan". And our scholars said after Usul Al-Fiqh that a time strophe consists of two parts. The first part is a fixed time such as a day. The second part is an unlimited time, so forever and ever. And the word "abadan" belongs to this second part.

Consequently, our scholars say: The word "abadan" when it is single cannot address a general and eternal time. But if one addresses the "laa" with this word and wants to aim at a negation, then it addresses a general public. For example, if you say how this occurs in this verse "laa taqum"[never shall you stand], then this appeals to the generality. But since the word "abadan" was still attached to it, this speaks of an eternal time. [Tafsir Ar-Razi]

After this explanation, the Murjia are not even helped by their "specification declaration". Because you can't pray in the Masjid ad-Dirar forever.

2-) As far as intention is concerned, there is a very clear rule here too in Usul Al-Fiqh, and this with the agreement of all scholars. There is great evidence of this. However, we will mention only a fraction:

Proof one: The prophet said:  "I was not commanded to open people's hearts and explore what they put inside." [Sahih Al-Bukhari]
Ibn Hajar says to this tradition: "I.e. I was commanded to judge by the outward meaning of their actions" [Feth Al-Bari]

2nd proof: As Usama b. Zayd killed a man who had been known as an enemy of Islam at a moment when the man said "la ilaha illallah", the prophet asked him why he did it. He said, "He spoke these words out of fear!". Then the prophet asks him:
"Did you then open his heart to know whether he said the right thing or not?"

You were in the same situation once, o Zayd. What will you do if he comes to you on the day of judgment with these words? The Prophet repeated this question so often that Usama said "If only I had converted to Islam today so that the Prophet could not keep telling me that!"“ [Sahih Al-Muslim]

Imam An-Nawawi says to this tradition:"In the prophet's statement, "Have you opened his heart", we see in Fiqh and Usul the well-known rule: "Judgments are given according to their external meaning (i.e. according to what their deeds show)".
[Sharch An-Nawawi]

Ibn Hajar reports:Imam Al-Qurtubi said: "In this Hadith there is proof that judgments are not to be given according to what is hidden (i.e. what is in the heart) but according to what is obvious (i.e. the external meaning of an action).[ Feth Al-Bari]

Proof Three: Allah says in Sura 2:173: "He has only prohibited for you carrion, blood, the flesh of swine and that upon which a name of someone other than ‘Allah’ has been invoked."
Then Allah says: "Then, whoever is compelled by necessity, neither seeking pleasure nor transgressing, there is no sin on him. Verily, Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful."

Fahrreddin Ar-Razi says to this verse: "We were committed to the outer meaning, not the inner meaning." [Tafsir Al-Kabir Mafatih Al-Ghayb]

4th Proof:'Umar b. al-Khattab said: At the time of the Prophet we paid attention to the purpose of man. Because that's when we had revelation. But now the prophet is gone and Revelation has ended. Then said'Umar:"And whoever shows us evil (with his deeds), we will not trust him and will not believe him, even if he should say his purpose is good." [Sahih Al-Bukhari]

5th proof: The Murjia like to misuse the following statement of the Prophet for their "Heart Look Theory":"The deeds are in accordance with the intentions" [In almost all sources]

We undoubtedly believe in this statement and say: The intention is more excellent and higher than the deed. But we do not cross the line by saying: just because the intention is more excellent and higher, it does not allow the forbidden to be allowed and the allowed to be forbidden. Because the intention does not have the right to do so. Otherwise he loses his advantages.

And this is exactly the meaning Fahreddin Ar-Razi addressed under this Hadith by saying:

"The sinfulness of sins is not abolished because of intent. Thus, with regard to the prophet's statement, "Actions are in accordance with intentions," the ignorant should not think that sin is now being turned into obedience because of intention. An example of this would be when someone takes or steals something from someone else's property and then gives it to the poor or when a mosque is built from a forbidden source."

[Tafsir Al-Kabir Mafatih Al-Ghayb]


If Allah has declared something for Kufr and Shirk, then it remains Kufr and Shirk. The intention can do absolutely nothing to change that. That is why we rightly say: The intention can neither allow what is forbidden, nor prohibit what is allowed. And therefore, if Allah says that you are NEVER allowed to pray in the Masjid ad-Dirar, then you have the task to obey.



Allah says:  "There is a mosque whose foundation was laid from the first day on piety."

This answers the question of where else to pray? Namely in a mosque that was built from the ground up with Taqwa and with the Sharia of Allah. Here the word "ussisa" occurs. And  means "foundation". It is also said in Arabic "I built the plain on the foundation". The foundation of the mosque has to be right for us to be allowed to pray there. Is the foundation of the DITIB, MILLI GÖRÜS and all other mosques that share the same views as this one on which Tawhid and Sharia Allahs were built? No. So you're looking for a mosque you know the foundation of this mosque was built on Taqwa. Then you can pray there. Proof of this kind of meaning is the statement of Allah in the 109 verse of Sura 9:

"Which then is best?― he that layeth his foundation on piety to Allah and His Good pleasure?― or he that layeth his foundation on an undermined sand-cliff ready to crumble to pieces? And it doth crumble to pieces with him, into the fire of Hell."

Imam Al-Qurtubi says to this verse:

"In this verse we see a parable of what was given to them (those who built the Masjid ad-Dirar), namely: Is it better to have built a plane from the foundation of Islam or to have built a plane on hypocrisy and the shirk?"

This also answers the question: "What about the mosques in Turkey that were built by the Muslims at the time of the Ottomans, but were conquered at the time of the Kemalists and are still under occupation today"?

The answer would be clear: Pray behind this mosque, because its foundations are built on Taqwa, but not behind the Imam, if you know that he stands for the DITIB or MILLI GÖRÜS or for their ideologies. But the mosques that they have built in Turkey, you must not pray FOREVER AND FOREVER.

Allah says:"The foundation of those who so build is never free from suspicion and shakiness in their hearts until their hearts, are cut to pieces. And Allah is All-Knowing Wise."

Abdullah b.'Abbas says to this verse: "I.e.: The Masjdir ad-Dirar they have built will always place doubts and hypocrisy in their hearts!"

So why this building is described as doubt and hypocrisy has the following reasons:

          1-) The hypocrites were very happy when they built these buildings. But when the Prophet took away their joy by having it destroyed, they felt very disappointed. Thus their doubts about the prophethood of our prophet became even stronger.

          2-) They believed that they had a good intention to build this mosque. But when the Prophet had their buildings destroyed, they wondered why he did so. So their doubts became even stronger. This explanation brings Ar-Razi and here we also recognize that the Prophet did not ask for their intention but acted according to what was obvious.


We have mentioned with Allah's help most facts that prove that according to the Usul Al-Fiqh, it is definitely not allowed to pray in the Masjid ad-Dirar. All praise is due to Allah.


A famous question could now be: Allah commanded us to pray on Fridays. But how can this be done if there is only Masjid ad-Dirar instead of a mosque built on Tawhid?

We answer as follows: First, the issue of whether or not Friday prayer is compulsory must be addressed. Allah says:

"O ye who believe! when the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday, hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah,"

[Sura 62 verse 9]

All scholars of Islam agree that Friday prayer is an absolute duty. And the evidence is this:

          1-) Allah says  "Hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah!"

Ibn Hajar quotes the Shaykh Muwaffaquddin who said that this address clarifies the commitment of Friday prayer.

[Feth Al-Bari]

          2-) Imam Al-Qurtubi reports  a Hadith from the Sunnan by Ibn Maja about which he says that this is authentic. In this hadith the prophet said:

"Whoever misses the Friday prayers three times in which he was not eager to go, then Allah will seal his heart!"

          3-) Ibn Maja and al-Bayhaqi report a Hadith from Jabir. He heard the prophet say: "Ye shall know that Allah the Exalted made Friday prayer obligatory to you!"
Imam An-Nawawi says that this tradition is weak.[Al-Majmu'a Sharh al-Muhadhdhab]

In another Hadith that was reported by Tariq b. Shihab, the Prophet said:
"Friday prayer is a truth that has been made obligatory to every Muslim in the congregation, except for four people....(and so on)"

An-Nawawi says that Abu Dawud has reported this Hadith as authentic, according to the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim. However, Abu Dawud says that Tariq b. Shihab, the narrator, has seen the Prophet but heard nothing from him. Imam An-Nawawi also said that this classification of Abu Dawud in no way negates the authenticity of this tradition. For if it should be assumed that Tariq b. Shihab has heard nothing of the prophets, such traditions are evaluated as "mursala sahabiyyyin". And such traditions are undoubtedly recognized as evidence according to the consensus of scholars. Except Imam Al-Isfarayin. He won't take it as evidence. Why are they taken as evidence? Because a hadith was reported authentically, but interrupted by a Sahabi, the reference person may have heard the hadith from another Sahabi, who reported about the prophets. In another hadith, which Abu Bakr b. al-'Arabi also reported, the Prophet said:

"Going to Friday prayers is a DUTY imposed on every Muslim!"

An-Nawawi says that Ibn Maja reported this Hadith and that also this Hadith is authentic according to the criteria of Imam Al-Muslim.

4-) Imam Al-Bukhari quoted this verse in his Sahih under "Kitab al-Jum'a" and called the chapter "bab fard al-jum'a"[Chapter: The Obligation of Friday Prayer]. Ibn Hajar says about this chapter:

"Imam Al-Bukhari bases himself on this verse and therefore said that giving on Fridays is a duty!"
[Fath Al-Bari]

Then Ibn Hajar quotes the great scholar ash-Shafi'i who said in "Al-Umm":

"Both the Qur'an and the Sunnah prove that Friday prayer is a duty!"

5-) The Prophet said:
"We are the last to appear, but we will be the first to be called on the Day of Judgment, though the Scriptures have been given to them (to the People of the Book) before us. The Friday we are in, Allah has made it their duty, but they had differences of opinion about it. Allah has set this holy day for us. The other nations must bind us. For Jews, holy day is Saturday, for Christians, Sunday."

Note the following:

The Prophet says: "Friday was imposed as duty" Later the Prophet says:  "Allah has set this holy day (Friday) for us". So just as it was duty for the Jews, so it is duty for us. The difference is, we are not divided in this matter, but the Jews are. One realizes from these Hadith that Friday prayer is an obligation for us. Otherwise there would be no difference between us and the people of Book.

Claim: One does not recognize by sura 62:9 that Friday prayer is a duty but much more that one should not sell on Friday prayer.

Answer: This person is asked: Allah says:

"Verily! I am Allâh! Lâ ilâha illa Ana (none has the right to be worshipped but I), so worship Me, and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât) for My Remembrance.“
[Sura 20 Verse 14]

Is the call from Allah understood here as a duty or as something voluntary? As a duty, of course. Are there differences of opinion in the performance of the prayers? No, there isn't.

So then: Allah says:
"O ye who believe! when the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday, hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah"[28]

The call in this verse is even clearer. For here is especially referred to the Friday prayer which Allah called by name. So why shouldn't this be a duty and why should there be differences of opinion about it?

Claim: When this verse was revealed, the Prophet was in Mecca at the time when the Muslims were oppressed. He ordered the Muslims in Medina to perform the Friday prayer. But he did not do it himself. Why, if it's a duty?

Answer: Just as prayer has conditions for it to be done, Friday prayer also has its conditions. If the conditions are not given, Friday prayer cannot be performed.

One condition is that you must have a certain number of community for Friday prayer to take place. If the Muslims emigrated to Ethiopia, then later to Medina, and the Prophet stayed in Mecca at the end with Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, how can prayer be performed with only these conditions? Perhaps the verse was revealed during this time and therefore the Prophet could not perform the Friday prayer?


Furthermore, the Friday prayer was also performed in Medina before there was a verse, which may also be the reason why the Prophet instructed them to do so. In the Hadith the Prophet said:
"Allah has imposed this day upon us!"
Ibn Hajar says: "Allah made it possible for this Ummah to establish the Friday prayer through Ijtihad."
[Feth Al-Bari]

And he brings a narration of Abdurrazzaq which he classifies as authentic, which confirms this assumption. In this tradition, Ibn Sirin says that Muslims gathered together on Fridays before the hijra and before the verse was sent down. The Ansar said: "All Jews and Christians have chosen a day where they meet. Let us also choose a day, perform prayer and remember Allah. Thus the Muslims from Medina have always started to meet on Fridays. They chose As'ad b. Zurara as the prayer leader (Imam) and performed the Friday prayer. Later the verse was revealed.

Ibn Hajar says, even if after close study this tradition is interrupted, he has an intesifier which was classified as authentic by several Hadith scholars such as Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal.

 Ka'b b. Malik reports the following:
"Before the Prophet made his hijra to Medina, it had been As'ad b. Zurara who gave us Friday prayers!"

So there are several reasons why the Muslims in Medina did perform the Friday prayer but hte Prophet in Mecca he did not. Friday prayer is an absolute duty. However, if the conditions for its implementation are not fulfilled, this obligation cannot be implemented.

With the Hanafis, for example, the condition was laid down that a caliph and his general permission must be given so that the Friday prayer can be carried out. Because Friday prayer is a government issue. If this condition is not given, prayer cannot be performed. That's what Imam Al-Jazairi says in his book.

In Fatawa Al-Hindiyya it is said that if the Caliph or his representative whom he gave the authority should not have given permission, the Friday prayer wont perfomed. Sarahsi says the same thing in his "Muhit". This is also said in "Tartahaniyya", as well as in Sharh to Al-Hidaya. In "Radd al-Mukhtar" by Ibn Abidin we read, as he mentions in many passages, that without a caliph, Friday prayer cannot take place. These are important scholars and sources for the Hanafitic school of law (Madhab).

After we have explained that Friday prayer is a duty, we come to the question of whether this prayer can be performed in Masjid ad-Dirar.


Answer: No, it is not allowed to perform Friday prayer in a Masjid ad-Dirar. Either you go to a mosque that was built on Tawhid or you can perform the prayer in another room as long as the conditions for its execution are given.

Should still be said: "One cannot generalize this! There are also specific points of view," we reply: Ibn Kathir reports in his "Al-Bidayah wa an-Nihaya" that in the 12th century, the Rawafid met in a mosque and began to curse the Sahaba. In addition, they swore loyalty to a Rafidi named Muhammad b. Ismail and wanted to rebel against the Muslims.

The Caliph asked the scholar for a fatwa and they said that the Rawafid mosques must be counted among the Masjid ad-Dirar and they must be destroyed. The Caliph followed and sent out a troop that first disciplined the Rawafid- and consequently destroyed their mosques. Now our question: If your specification is like a revelation to you, why don't you perfom your prayers in the Rawafid mosques? It's Masjid ad-Dirar. But here one will see how suddenly these people are uncompromising and totalitarian, rejecting the performance of prayers in them.

Why don't these people want to pray with the Rawafid by using their "specification principle" on them as well, but they do with the Democrats, although the Democrats are far worse than the Rawafid?

Why don't these people want to pray with the Rawafid by using their "specification principle" on them as well, but they do with the Democrats, although the Democrats are far worse than the Rawafid?

That's how we recognized the dishonest and distinguished them from the honest. And we ask Allah to count us among the honest ones. Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds.


Yasin Al-Hanafi, 04.04.2018


Hilafet-i İslamiyye
Hilafet-i İslamiyye


Heute 515
Insgesamt 1163511
Am meisten 5598
Durchschnitt 1183