The Example of Applying the Sunnite Sharia during the Reign of Al-Moayyad Sheikh Is a Punch in the Eye for Those Demanding the Application of This Sharia of Satan
The 'Pious' Mameluke Sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh Who Was among the Big Criminals – 2

آحمد صبحي منصور في الثلاثاء 12 مايو 2020

The 'Pious' Mameluke Sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh Who Was among the Big Criminals – 2 

The Example of Applying the Sunnite Sharia during the Reign of Al-Moayyad Sheikh Is a Punch in the Eye for Those Demanding the Application of This Sharia of Satan




Published in April 24, 2020

Translated by: Ahmed Fathy






1- Applying the Sunnite sharia of Satan by force began during the reign of the very first sinful caliph, Abou Bakr, during his so-called the renegades war launched against those who refused to pay Zakat contributions to him; he demanded to be the collector and distributer of Zakat! This application of this sharia of Satan continued within the Arab conquests also initiated by the sinful caliph Abou Bakr. This means that this devilish caliphate, as well as its sharia of Satan, was established within bloodshed and massacres; such bloodshed goes on within the countries of the Muhammadans where the big criminals apply – even partly –  this sharia of Satan.   

2- Writing down this sharia of Satan began with inventing and fabricating devilish hadiths/narratives of balderdash and nonsense in the books titled (Al-Mowata') by Malik and (Al-Um) by Al-Shafei and other books by other Sunnite authors; such books that we label as the theoretical fiqh increased exponentially; such fiqh has its many theological branches now still taught at Al-Azhar University, in Egypt, and other devilish religious institutions and universities in the planet of the Muhammadans.     

3- The other type of fiqh books we label as preaching fiqh; i.e., when fiqh scholars condemn in their writings events they witnessed; for instance, this has been done by Al-Ghazaly in his book titled (Ehiaa Olom Eddine), Ibn Taymiyya in his some of his booklets, Ibn Al-Qayyim in his book titled (Ighathat Al-Lahfan min Makaed Al-Shaytan), and Ibn Al-Haj in his book titled (Al-Madkhal). In such cases, a historian like our person finds a treasure trove of information and data about social and religious aspects of life within this or that historical era; such fiqh scholars are thus historians unbeknownst to themselves; i.e., they never intended that their preaching and condemning would be also a historical sketch of their respective eras.    

4- The unique feature within the books of Al-Makrizi is his tendency to preach and condemn within historical events he recorded; he does so intermittently in most of his books and booklets, especially in his many-volume history-book (Al-Solok); thus, in several lines he condemns an event or a misdeed he mentions while addressing the readers. In fact, what distinguishes Al-Makrizi as a historian is his honesty and truthfulness in recording events and also in commenting on them as per his mentality which belonged, of course, to his era. Al-Makrizi was a devout Sunnite historian but he was influenced very much by the Fatimid Shiite religion. Al-Makrizi as an eyewitness of the events of his own era writes the events while he was devoted to his own era and its traditions and keen on offering pieces of advices regarding reform from within his Sunnite religion; he never realized that his Sunnite religion, as well as its mortal gods Abou Bakr, Omar, Othman, Ali,...etc., is the basis of corruption.    

5- Hence, hundreds of lines have been written by Al-Makrizi in (Al-Solok) to condemn and deplore many events of his own era and to preach and offer advice regarding reform. We copy from his own historical sketch as an eyewitness to prove the corruption resulting from the application of the Sunnite sharia during the reign of the Mameluke sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh.

6- In 820 A.H., Al-Moayyad Sheikh was absent from Cairo, Egypt, as he journeyed through the Levant; he left Egypt to be managed by his followers as per the dominant sharia at the time which never changed during the presence or absence of any sultan. We copy from (Al-Solok), section 1, vol. 4, the testimony of Al-Makrizi about the reign of Al-Moayyad Sheikh praised by Al-Makrizi himself.  

7- After writing about the temporary, long absence of Al-Moayyad Sheikh from Cairo, Egypt, and his journey within the Levantine cities as he sent an envoy to Greater Cairo announcing the sultan's arrival to Aleppo, Al-Makrizi describes the plight of people because of the grave injustices committed by high-rank employees. Within events of Rabei Akhar, 820 A.H., he writes the following: (...An Envoy of the sultan came with the news of his arrival to Aleppo...This month began while all people all over Egypt suffered from so many untold grave injustices and atrocities which no pen can fully describe...). Such grave injustices and atrocities were committed by the big criminals in Egypt inside and outside Greater Cairo during the absence of the leader of big criminals as he journeyed through the Levant. We copy some lines by Al-Makrizi followed by our comments.     


Firstly: the Muhtasib and his followers were among the big criminals:

1- This is about the Muhtasib who was an inspector of markets, shops, and merchants: (...The Muhtasib of Greater Cairo at the time was the judge Shams-Eddine M. Ibn Yacoub...He and his followers unjustly imposed heavy taxes on merchants instead of punishing them after accusing them justly of cheating within the quality of goods and within their weighing any goods in their business transactions; he and his followers spent such ill-gotten money on sinful pleasures and also to settle their debts as they borrowed money from others to pay bribes to receive their posts; some of such ill-gotten money was spent by them by offering precious gifts to the followers and statesmen of the sultan to help them maintain their posts...).

2- So, instead of penalizing merchants who cheat and commit injustice when selling goods to common people, the Muhtasib imposed bribes/taxes if they desire to avoid being punished; this means that he and his followers were partners in crime and in consuming ill-gotten money; such ill-gotten wealth was spent by the Muhtasib and his followers within three aspects: committing sins like fornication and wine-drinking, settling their debts as they borrowed from many men to be able to pay the sums of demanded bribes to purchase their high-rank positions, and offering more bribes/gifts to the courtiers, statesmen, viziers, and retinue members of the sultan so that they help them keep their posts and avoid being dismissed as per whims of the sultan.      


Secondly: the judges of sharia were among the big criminals:

1- As we have mentioned before, the Mameluke sultanate had four supreme judges representing each of the Sunnite doctrines: each supreme judge had his deputies or local judges under him, about two hundred, distributed among each region in Egypt and each Cairene district.

2- Al-Makrizi writes the following about judges and supreme judges: (...Each of the four supreme judges had about 200 judges under him as their deputies and all of them never felt ashamed and never refrained to take bribes to issue certain rulings in favor of anyone – most of such judges and their scribes and followers spent their ill-gotten money in sinful pleasures as per their whims and desires; they rarely spent some money by giving any sums to the sultan; they amassed wealth and were never pious regarding how to spend it; they never sought to gratify Allah with such money though they considered themselves as 'pious' judges who were nearer to Allah since they apply sharia; they announced such a lie a lot in public; thus, they shamelessly ascribed lies to Allah...).

3- Thus, this is the testimony of Al-Makrizi about those corrupt scholars who were appointed as judges; their bosses at the time in 820 A.H. were as follows: the supreme judge of Al-Shafei doctrine Sheikh Al-Eslam Jalal-Eddine Ibn Al-Balkini, the supreme judge of Al-Hanafiyya doctrine Nasser-Eddine Ibn M. Ibn Omar Al-Adeem, the supreme judge of the Malik doctrine Jamal-Eddine Abdullah Ibn Ismail, and the supreme judge of the Hanbali doctrine Alaa-Eddine Ibn Abou Bakr Al-Hamry. These four names were of renown men at such era; Al-Makrizi asserts that they and other judges sans exception took bribes to issue court rulings in favor of the payer of bribes; this means they were unjust and unfair judges. They felt the urge to accumulate more money to make up for sums paid as bribes to assume and keep their posts; the rest of such ill-gotten money was spent by them in sins like fornication and wine-drinking; yet, these hypocrites assumed themselves to be the beloved allies of the Lord God!     

4- So, the judges of sharia during the Mameluke Era were corrupt, but what about the Mameluke policemen?


Thirdly: the Mameluke policemen were among the big thieves:

1- At that time, the governor of Greater Cairo was the head of the police force in Cairo and its districts and suburbs; there was also governors who were heads of the police force in other regions in Egypt outside Greater Cairo. Al-Makrizi writes the following: (...Thegovernor of Greater Cairo and the governors in other regions of Egypt typically confiscated to themselves from arrested thieves what they have robbed and stolen; even when they arrested thieves who have not stolen any goods or money, they imposed on them a heavy fine to be paid by them later before they release such thieves; hence, thieves robbed and stole as often as they liked since they avoided penalties by paying bribes to the policemen and their heads and governors...). Thus, instead of fighting the crime of theft, the police stole the goods/money stolen by petty thieves in return for their release! This means that the regime men were the big thieves who robbed small thieves; as if the small thieves/criminals were employed by the big thieves/criminals to increase their own ill-gotten wealth!    

2- Al-Makrizi writes the following about the penalty of thievery by cutting off one hand of each thief: (...The hand of any thief was cut off only in either of the two cases: the high stature, influence, and power of the wronged parties who were robbed or when a thief fails to pay money to the governors and their policemen to ransom himself...). This means that this Quranic penalty was not applied in most cases unless when thieves stole things from the mansions/palaces of big criminals in authority or when they fail to pay bribes, to get released unharmed, to the big criminals of the police force! This means that any hungry thief had his had cut off!   

3- The governors outside Greater Cairo especially in rural regions were worse; they were nothing short of being highwayman even if they wore the formal garb/uniform of the Mameluke State and steal and rob in its name! Al-Makrizi writes the following about them: (...The governors in other regions in both Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt were worse than the governor of Greater Cairo: they confiscated unjustly any money, cattle, camels, and male and female slaves from all peasants, landlords, Bedouins, and any other people after arresting them and killing them off!...). So, not only did governors in the regions outside Cairo stole and rob but they also murdered their victims as per the 'goodness' prescribed to them in their sharia of Satan! 

4- The followers and henchmen of the governors were more criminal and corrupt than the governors themselves; even when any wronged parties filed a complaint or notified them of their being robbed, they pay heavy fines to them! Al-Makrizi writes the following about them: (...As for the followers and henchmen of these governors, we never heard more appalling stories than the ones about their imposing fines and bribes on people in the most unjust, cruel, and harshest ways; when wine-drinkers got arrested, they were released in return for a very heavy fine...Even those who came to file a complaint against someone or some people who robbed or wronged them, or committed any sort of aggression against them, heavy fines were imposed on both the complainer and those who against which the complaint is about; both parties paid thousands of dinars as fines regardless of the crime itself...). 

5- Such ill-gotten wealth was spent by such big criminals on paying bribes to bigger criminals and on excessive wine-drinking and leading a promiscuous lifestyle; of course, the big thieves in high-rank posts thus confiscated the ill-gotten money of the small thieves who occupied lower ranks: all of them were big criminals among the Mameluke State employees. Al-Makrizi writes the following about them: (...The money hoarded by such governors and their followers and henchmen were spent only within two manners: to bribe the statesmen of the sultanate to help them maintain their posts and to never get dismissed by the sultan and to commit grave sins by satisfying carnal lusts and appetites and excessive drinking...Thus, the followers and henchmen imitated their masters in spreading corruption and committing grave sins and this was how they spent their ill-gotten money; besides, many governors from time to time confiscated all money possessed by their own followers and henchmen...).    


Fourthly: the corruption within the political judicial authority:

1- Apart from the ordinary judicial authority which settled disputes among common people, there was the political judicial authority which is about the sultan's 'right' (and hence the 'right' of those representing them as his deputies) in the sharia of Satan to put anyone to death without a trial or within a fake one! This was usually committed for political reasons. This heinous crime began in the first century A.H.; most Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs typically committed this crime. This atrocity continued to be practiced in the name of sharia; this resulted later on in the devilish Sunnite fatwa about the 'right' of the imam/ruler/caliph to put to death up to one-third of the 'subjects' in order to reform the remaining two-thirds!    

2- During the Mameluke Era, murders and massacres never ceased within the struggle for the sake of the crown; i.e., to reach power and to ascend the throne or to maintain the throne/crown by securing the sultans and the big criminals who preferred to get rid of any rivals and enemies. It is a shame and a disgrace that some of the big criminals or rulers loved to manipulate judges by forcing them to issue court rulings to allow the sultans to put to death anyone they liked under the motto of (by the sword of the sharia)! 

3- Within the sharia of the Mameluke Era, the sultans had a special administrative body in the government serving them to confiscate and rob; such a body was headed by Mameluke princes who were the heads of the Hajibs. Hajibs were chamberlains; they were high-rank officials enjoying dictatorial powers; hence, it was a fearful calamity to be summoned by them or to enter into their governmental sectors. Al-Makrizi writes the following about Hajibs/chamberlains during the reign of Al-Moayyad Sheikh: (...As for the Hajibs and their followers, they were keen on imposing heavy fines on any people coming them; the employees who collected such money were supervisors who had to reach a certain sum of money daily to offer it to the Hajibs...). So, the Hijabs in their offices had employees under them to collect ill-gotten money in the form of imposed heavy fines on the victims/preys who came them; those who refused to pay were put to death whether they were wronged party or the aggressive, unjust party. Of course, the head of Hajibs (the Mameluke prince Soodin at the time) had the lion's share of such ill-gotten money and so was the deputy of the sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh during his absence from Egypt during his journey in the Levant.   


Fifthly: the private treasurer of the Mameluke sultan was among the big criminals:

1- The private treasurer of the sultan was a big criminal among the civil wing; i.e., he was typically a judge, clergyman, and a fiqh scholar at the same time; his mission was to keep and manage the financial affairs of the palaces, estates, assets, mosques, Waqfs, and possessions/treasures of sultans; he calculated and maintained reports of revenues and expenditure and bought food items and other needs of the sultans and their palaces; his job included to distribute salaries/wages to those who worked inside the palaces and other employees and soldiers under him who help rob the common people and merchants to spend on the palaces of sultans. In 820 A.H., the private treasurer, judge, and Mameluke prince Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag led his soldiers in rural areas in Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt to rob, steal, and confiscate as per his whims.  

2- Al-Makrizi writes the following about Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag and his followers and soldiers: (...In 820 A.H. ... The private treasurer of the sultan was very unjust, cruel, and harsh who loved to harm others on purpose and spread corruption on earth; he never gathered amounts of money that would satisfy his greed and cupidity at all; he remained thirsty for more money all the time....At one time, he and his soldiers and employees headed to Lower Egypt and imposed heavy taxes on all people in all areas to be paid in gold dinars; whenever he received the sum of 100 dinars, his followers would have confiscate the same amount of money! He and his soldiers gathered information about rich landlords and merchants to impose heavier taxes on them; those who refused or resisted risked their entire wealth and goods and possessions being confiscated; all cattle and horses of the peasants were stolen as well...Other people in other regions were forced to buy such cattle and horses at higher prices; for instance, a cow was sold for 12 thousand dinars! The price at the time of the best cow never exceeded 2000 dirhams! ... Those rich men who refused to be forced to purchase anything risked being killed and having all their wealth and assets confiscated ... The private treasurer the prince Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag manipulated and changed the prices of exchanging coins especially the ones made in the Mint by the command of the sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh who was still in the Levantine region; he forced money changers to abide by his unjust commands and he imposed on them heavy fines and taxes ... All such confiscated ill-gotten money were mostly spent on luxuries, carnal lusts, wine-drinking, gluttony, and other sins ...).

3- Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag then led his troops of raiding soldiers to Upper Egyptian rural areas; at one time, his military campaign raided a certain rich tribe in Upper Egypt; the soldiers stole cattle, cows, camels, and fine horses; the rich men in Lower Egypt were forced to purchase such items at the exorbitant prices decided by Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag; he made huge profits by robbing items (livestock, cattle, camels, horses, food, sugar, soap, grains, crops...etc.) from Upper Egypt and selling them in Lower Egypt; as per Al-Makrizi, he also imposed heavy taxes on people in both Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt. Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag never gained any amount of money unless his followers gained the same amount!

4- Fakhr-Eddine Ibn Abou Al-Farag then led his troops of raiding soldiers to Greater Cairo; he began his project of building a new district in the capital; hence, he made them force merchants to give them building materials without paying any money! His soldiers arrested common people in the streets and forced them to work in the construction project within corvée; i.e., forced labor with insufficient wages or without any wages at all! Those who refused to work got killed on the spot! Of course, not all of the ill-gotten money collected by the private treasurer was spent on palaces of the sultan; the larger part of such ill-gotten money was spent on promiscuity and wine-drinking and leading a luxurious lifestyle plus paying bribes to statesmen and courtiers and retinue members of the sultan to help the private treasurer and his followers maintain their posts and not to get dismissed/sacked as per the whims of the sultan.


Sixthly: Al-Makrizi writes further the following:

 (...The whole of Egypt and its dwellers suffered so many grave injustices and troubles whose influence remained for some later years; lack of security encouraged some Bedouins of the deserts to become highwaymen who threatened the caravans and travelers and who raided unguarded villages and towns; many heinous crimes and atrocities were committed during the absence of the sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh and his private Mameluke guards and troops who journeyed through the Levantine region; Allah says the following in the Quran: "...When kings enter a town, they devastate it, and subjugate its dignified people. Thus they always do." (27:34)...Sadly, the plague spread in Al-Gharbiyya Governorate, Damietta, and Alexandria; rumors spread increasingly in Alexandria about a possible attack prepared by the Europeans and their fleet; the Alexandrians were afraid but got ready for defending their city with all their might despite the plague....To Allah is the return and outcome of all matters...).



1- In all times and climes, or in all eras and regions, most of the ill-gotten wealth ended up into the pockets and treasuries of sultans who were the biggest criminals heading all of the big criminals of the State. Most of the confiscated/stolen ill-gotten money ended up into the palaces of the Mameluke sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh.

2- When Al-Moayyad Sheikh, his corpse was being washed but no one could found any napkins or pieces of cloth to cover his private parts; Al-Makrizi writes the following about this: (... Readers should draw a useful moral lesson from the incident that occurred upon the death of the sultan Al-Moayyad Sheikh; when his body was being washed with water before the burial, no one found any napkins or pieces of cloth to cover the corpse or dry it from water; a kerchief was used so that the corpse would be dried; the corpse remained uncovered for a longer while after that since no one found any pieces of cloth to cover it; the private parts, the body, and the face of the dead sultan remained uncovered to the eyes of onlookers until one of his concubines offered her long woolen shawl to cover the corpse; even when the corpse was being washed, no one found any containers to bring and pour water despite his leaving so much money and possessions which disappeared mysteriously after his death and were never found ...). We assert here the fact that the example of applying the Sunnite sharia during the reign of Al-Moayyad Sheikh is a punch in the eye (or a slap on the face or nape) for those demanding the application of this sharia of Satan

3- Would any of the big criminals of today take heed and draw a lesson?!





اجمالي القراءات 387