Fatwa: Situations in which gheebah (backbiting) is permitted

We’ve been receiving continuous comments telling us to stop doing all this propaganda and doing backbiting as it is not allowed in Shari’ah. Thus, I think it is necessary to clear them that what are the situations in which gheebah(backbiting) is permitted, and Yousuf Kazzab and cult very well fulfills most of it that we’ll mention below. We hope that this will clear the things as an advice from our side. Insha’Allah. It is unfortunate now that most of the Ziad Hamid fan-club, though claim to work on mission of Khilafah, but are very weak when it really comes to Shari’ah and it’s rulings.

Q: What are the situations in which gheebah (backbiting or talking about others in their absence) is permitted?

Praise be to Allaah.
The scholars have stated that gheebah is permitted in certain situations:


Complaining. It is permissible for the one who has been wronged to complain to the ruler or judge and others who have the authority or ability to settle the score with the one who wronged him.


Seeking help to change evil and bring the sinner back to the right path, so he may say to the one who he hopes is able to do something: “So and so is doing such and such; tell him not to do it.”


Seeking advice or a fatwa, by saying to the mufti, “So and so/my father/my brother has wronged me by doing such and such, does he have the right to do that? How can I solve this problem and ward off his harm from me?”


Warning the Muslims of someone’s evil, such as highlighting the weakness of some reporters or witnesses or authors. That also includes seeing someone buying faulty goods, or someone keeping company with one who is a thief or adulterer, or giving a female relative of his to such a man in marriage, and the like. You should tell them about that by way of sincere advice, not with the aim of causing harm and spreading mischief.


If a person openly commits evil or follows bid’ah, such as drinking alcohol and seizing people’s wealth unlawfully, it is permissible to speak of what he is doing openly, but it is not permissible to speak against him any other way, unless it is for another reason.


For identification, if someone is known by a nickname such as the dim-sighted one, or the blind man or the one-eyed or the lame one, it is permissible to identify him as such, but it is haraam to mention that by way of belittling him, and if it is possible to identify him in some other way, that is better.

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah li’l-Ifta (26/20): Speaking about a person in his absence is permissible in certain situations as indicated by shar’i evidence, if there is a need for that, such as if someone consults you about arranging a marriage to him, or entering into a business partnership with him, or if someone complains to the authorities to put a stop to his wrongdoing. In that case there is nothing wrong with saying things about him that he may not like to be said, because there is an interest to be served by that. One of the scholars summed up in two lines of poetry the situations in which it is permissible to talk about a person in his absence, and said:

Criticizing is not gheebah in six (cases) – complaining, identifying, warning, When the person is committing evil openly, when advice is sought, and when one is asking for help in removing an evil.

End quote.

And Allaah knows best.


Jasarat: Yusuf Kazab Aur Us Kay Khalifa Ki Haqeeqat – Muhammad Ismail Quraishi, 21 Nov 2008

This article was published in Daily Jasarat on 21st of November 2008. The article is written by Muhammad Ismail Quraishi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court. Muhammad Ismail Quraishi fought the case against Yusuf Kazab on behalf of Aalami Majlise Tahafuze Khatam e Nabuwat.

Jasarat: Yusuf Kazab Aur Us Kay Khalifa Ki Haqeeqat - Muhammad Ismail Quraishi, 21 Nov 2008

Jasarat: Yusuf Kazab Aur Us Kay Khalifa Ki Haqeeqat - Muhammad Ismail Quraishi, 21 Nov 2008

Image (Urdu): yusuf-kazzab-aur-us-kay-khalifa-ke-haqeeqat-muhammad-ismail-qureshi-senior-advocate
Source: Daily Jasarat

Maulana AbdulRahman Ashrafi denies Yusuf kazzab was his best friend and calls zaid hamid a lier

Maulana Abdul Rahman Ashrafi denies Yousuf Kazzab - Daily Islam 15 March 2010

Document (Urdu): maulana-abdulrahman-ashrafi-denies-yousuf-kazzab-was-his-best-friend
Source: Daily Islam

p.s. May Allah reward brother Abdullah who referred this to us.

Tanzeem-i-Islami Releases Their Official Position On Yusuf Kazab and Zaid Hamid

We have received press release from Tanzeem-i-Islami. The reason we are saying that we have received it directly from Tanzeem-i-Islami is because our sources have deep and penetrable contacts with the Top Brass of Tanzeem-i-Islami.

Summary of the Press Release is presented below:

  • Tanzeem-i-Islami calls Yusuf Ali to be Kazab in unequivocal terms. They have not minced words and have been absolutely clear and precise that Yusuf Ali was a Kazab.
  • Tanzeem said that in the beginning we didn’t knew about Zaid Hamid’s association with Yusuf Kazab and Zaid Hamid himself used to deny that, however, suddenly one day he came out defending Yusuf Kazab.
  • Tanzeem-i-Islami sent a delegation (as we reported earlier) to meet Zaid Hamid to know his views on Yusuf Kazab, after the release of videos in which Zaid Hamid admits his links with Yusuf Kazab. Zaid Hamid accepted this in front of the Tanzeem delegation in clear words that:
  1. He is a firm believer in Khatam e Nabuwat SAW.
  2. He sends Lanat on Ghustakhan e Rasool SAW.
  3. Although he was associated with Yusuf Ali in the past, but he announces his baarat from the Aqaid and Believes of Yusuf Ali during his last days.
  • Tanzeem demanded Zaid Hamid to announce all three points mentioned above in public and publish it on his own website and on his facebook page. It is worth mentioning here, that Tanzeem has asked him to announce this on his own and in his own words and not in the words of Tanzeem-i-Islami.
  • Lastly Tanzeem has announced that they dont agree with Zaid Hamid’s stand on Lal Masjid, The Afghan Policy of Government after 9/11, Operation in Malakand and Swat, and the intermingling of sexes in Zaid Hamid’s programs.

Editor’s Note:
This first press release by Tanzeem-i-Islami was twisted by the Zaid Hamid claiming that Dr. Israr has cleared him of all allegations and is with him. This was followed by a second press release by Tanzeem-i-Islami making their stance very clear that Yousuf Ali was Kazzab and Zaid Hamid hasn’t fulfilled Shari’ah requirements till now after their own press release of BrassTacks which deceitfully tried to say that the Shari’ah requirements are fulfilled now.

The press release could also be seen here. The press release is attached below:

Tanzeem-i-Islami Press Release on Yusuf Kazab Case

Tanzeem-i-Islami Press Release on Yusuf Kazab Case

Document (Urdu): tanzeem-e-islami-first-press-release-regarding-yousuf-kazzb-and-zaid-hamid
Document (Urdu): tanzeem-e-islami-second-press-release-regarding-yousuf-kazzb-and-zaid-hamid

Refutations: 10 Refutations in respond to Zaid Hamid defense of Yousuf Kazzab

All the refutations that have been made available in the following document has been posted on the blog. We ask Allah to make this beneficial for others and guide them and we ask Allah to reward those who prepared this for the Muslim Ummah in a manner that He loves.

Refutation: Only “Khabrain” reported Yusuf Kazzab Case?
Refutation: Yusuf Kazzab case was a problem of Deobandi Brelvi maslak?
Refutation: Zaid Hamid claims that the accusers Molvis did not have any proof except Khabrain news
Refutation: Zaid Zaman Hamid says that Molana Abdul Sattar supported yusuf kazzab
Refutation: Yusuf Kazzab was the member of Zai ul Haq’s Majlis e Shoora?
Refutation: Ulema threatened Zaid Hamid not to follow the case of yusuf Kazzab?
Refutation: Zaid Hamid says Yusuf was accused of ZANA (adultery) but Molvis could not prove it
Refutation: Zaid Hamid said,”Molvis should come to me to clear it”
Refutation:Zaid Hamid says repeatedly to satisfy the students that Dr. Israr is with me
Refutation: Zaid Hamid says he never met Yusuf Kazzab after 1992 till Yusuf was captured in 1997

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab


Refutation: Yusuf Kazzab was the member of Zai ul Haq’s Majlis e Shoora?

Yusuf Kazzab was the member of Zai ul Haq’s Majlis e Shoora? While praising his “Murshid yusuf Kazzab”, zaid hamid says that Yusuf was so “big scholar” of his time that General Zia appointed him member of his Majlis-e-Shoora.


We read one column of those days written by Major Retired Saeed Tawana exposing the reason of his membership of Zia ul Haq Shoora.

Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wassallam) said:

“A believer is not stung twice from the same hole”. [Bukhari, Muslim]

Document (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab
Scribd (English): reply-to-zaid-hamid-defense-of-yousuf-kazzab


Fatwa Fobia – Zaid Hamid's Historic Article In Defense Of His False Prophet

Although some of the younger generation might have got confused by the sudden U-turn in Zaid Hamid’s stand – who previously was claiming that he had no relationship with Yusuf Kazab, and have now suddenly came out defending the False Prophet.

But the people in the know, are certainly not confused. Zaid Hamid was one of the most aggressive defenders of his False Prophet, throughout the trial of Yusuf Kazab. He was present in all the court hearings, took letters from one place to other asking people to withdraw the case, tried to threaten and blackmail the people involved in the case against Yusuf Kazab. Even after Yusuf was sentenced to death by hanging, Zaid Hamid didnt rested and wrote a splendid piece of defense in favor of his False Prophet in DAILY DAWN. The article was published on 13th Aug 2000. Zaid Hamid himself re-published it on Chowk.  The article is being re-published here:


There are a lot of allegedly moderates pakistanis on the chowk, who believe in human rights, who have woRn out their fingers posting about kashmir, the jinnah speach, the tolerant islam in pakistan, the 2% extremists. In supporting the killing of kashmir in the guise of human rights, selfdetermination etc. they are in tune with the mullahs, who prefer the word jihad.

In the following story, if the alleged moderates criticise the blasphemy laws they will be in conflict with the mullah. No, the moderates cannot afford to do that because of the fatwafobia. The human rights blah blah does not apply to pakistani nationals.

Convicted for blasphemy

A kind, benevolent and honourable Muslim Sufi of a small order has been sentenced to death on blasphemy charges by a court in Lahore. I am an eyewitness to what happened in the court and how the prosecution murdered justice, human dignity, Islamic and contemporary law and all norms of humanity in the name of Islam. Mohammad Yusuf Ali is a staunch Muslim and a scholar of the Holy Quran. He has rendered meritorious services to Islam, Pakistan and humanity in his career. It was only a difference of interpretation which was exploited by extremist mullahs and some Urdu newspapers. Yusuf Ali had already spent two years in jail and now he has been convicted.

I was present in the courtroom to assist the defence lawyers. It was barred to the outside world. I am witness to what happened inside and how he has been convicted. The prosecution had based their case on four items: audio cassette of Juma Khutba, video cassettes of Juma Khutba, Yousuf Ali`s purported diary, and one Pir and his few followers, who claimed that he had claimed to be “Muhammad“ in front of them many years ago!

There was nothing objectionable in the cassettes, and even according to Qanoon-i-Shahadat, they were inadmissible, as the one who had made these was not known. They were highly edited, doctored and manipulated.

The diary was not of Yusuf Ali`s at all, and even the prosecution admitted that they were not sure of its origin. It had no name, no handwriting match, no owner. It was simply alleged on Yusuf Ali and was torn to shreds in its originality and credibility.

The Pir and his followers were again torn to shreds, as none of them was the complainant. They never reported the alleged blasphemy to the police or any other authority, which supposedly happened many years ago. Their credibility did not exist at all in terms of contradictions in cross examinations.

One of them was on bail on fraud charges. The complainant had all the info on hearsay. He had never met the accused in his life. All his info was through Urdu newspapers. He accused Yusuf Ali of adultery, but even in the FIR, the relevant section was not mentioned for lack of evidence, making the complainant liable to “Qazaf“. His testimony was not admissible at all.

Yusuf Ali had categorically, even before the registration of the FIR, made it clear through paid ads that he had not claimed to be a prophet and he was a staunch Muslim. Top religious scholars like Maulana Abdul Sattar Niazi had declared him a true Muslim and asked the charges to be dropped. According to all legal and Shariat requirements he had proved himself to be a true Muslim. Still the prosecution insisted that he called himself a prophet. How can anyone be the judge of someone`s faith? The prosecution lawyers went so overboard that even the judge had to stop them from committing blasphemy in trying to prove Yusuf Ali wrong. Even though Yusuf Ali was on bail, he was arrested one day earlier against all rules, laws and norms. It is extraordinary how the bail given by a High Court was cancelled by the Sessions Court and the accused was arrested.

The whole trial was in camera and the media was not allowed in to hear Yusuf Ali`s explanations, his speeches and comments. The media was also barred from seeing the hopelessness of the prosecution witnesses and their lawyers.

It was on this quality of evidence that a great living sufi has been condemned to death on so many counts that we have lost count.

Now Yusuf Ali is in the line for gallows. Will we wait and let the evil win or raise our voices for our own survival?



This article has been published as part of  our on-going effort to unearth all evidences, past and present against this believer and defender of False Prophet Yusuf Kazab.

Update: The Chowk article has now been removed by Zaid Hamid but the original letter in Daily DAWN can be viewed here Convicted for Blasphemy, Zaid Hamid’s Article In Daily DAWN 13 Aug 2000 [Original Scan]