Abstract
According to Islamic belief, when Ramadan begins, the gates of Paradise are opened, the gates of Hell are closed, and the devils are chained. This statement by Muhammad is preserved in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and several other hadith collections. Within Islam’s supernatural worldview, Satan is a being who whispers evil suggestions into people’s minds, tempts them toward sin, and seeks to lead them astray from Allah’s path. The declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan is therefore not merely an expression of the religious importance of a festival. It also involves claims about the existence of invisible beings, their powers, their influence on human conduct, and the restriction of those powers during a particular lunar month. Yet no independently observable evidence of this supernatural event exists. Where devils live, how they influence human minds, what kind of chains bind them, which of their powers cease to operate during captivity, and how they are released when Ramadan ends—none of these questions has been answered through verifiable evidence independent of religious narratives.
One of the most serious problems with this belief arises within the Islamic hadith literature itself. On the one hand, Muhammad declared that devils are chained during Ramadan. On the other, Sahih al-Bukhari narrates that Satan appeared before Abu Hurayrah and stole food while he was guarding the Ramadan charity supplies. More significantly, while observing i’tikaf during the last ten days of Ramadan, Muhammad himself expressed concern that Satan might implant evil thoughts in the minds of two men. Other hadiths specifically mention the chaining of particularly rebellious devils rather than referring to devils without qualification. Considered together, these narratives reveal fundamental inconsistencies and ambiguities concerning the nature, scope, and effectiveness of the alleged captivity. If being chained means that the devils can no longer influence human beings, the reports of their activity during Ramadan conflict with that interpretation. If captivity instead means that only some devils are restrained, or that their influence is merely reduced, the nature and actual effects of those restrictions require independent evidence.
The geographical realities of Earth create another significant problem for this supernatural claim. Ramadan follows the lunar calendar, but the visibility of the new crescent and the religious decisions marking the start of the month differ across regions. At the same moment, Ramadan may already have begun in Saudi Arabia while Sha’ban continues elsewhere. Islamic hadith literature itself records differences in moon sightings between regions. This raises a direct question: does the chaining of devils begin when Ramadan starts in one particular region, or does it take effect separately according to the local beginning of Ramadan in every region? Linking a supposedly universal supernatural event to different regional religious calendars calls for a definite account of its timing and reach. Earth’s rotation, differences in local time, variations in crescent visibility, and the extraordinary patterns of daylight and darkness near the poles intensify the problem. No testable explanation establishes when and where the captivity begins, how the devils’ activities are restricted, or how their location is determined across distinct geographical regions.
Crimes and other unethical acts committed during Ramadan also raise questions about the alleged effects of chaining the devils. Murders, thefts, robberies, fraud, extortion, food adulteration, hoarding, violence, and religious extremism continue throughout the month. In Bangladesh, people have been attacked, threatened, and forced to close food establishments for not fasting or for keeping restaurants open during the day. The Quran also identifies human desires as a source of wrongdoing. Yet the continued occurrence of crime and misconduct during Ramadan leaves the alleged effects of Satan’s captivity unidentified. If Satan plays a significant role in generating evil thoughts and conduct, what specific changes result from his confinement? How can those changes be measured and distinguished from ordinary social and psychological causes? No established method answers these questions.
The declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan conflicts with accounts of their activity during the same month. Islamic commentators have adopted different interpretations of captivity in response to these inconsistencies. Some understand it as literal chaining; some restrict it to especially rebellious devils; others suggest that Satan’s influence is weakened; still others discuss metaphorical interpretations. The range of explanations demonstrates the absence of a single clear, consistent account of what the declaration actually entails. Establishing that devils really are chained during Ramadan requires more than showing that the statement appears in hadith literature: it requires independent evidence that the alleged event occurs and has real effects. This is the fundamental problem with the belief that Satan is chained during Ramadan: the captivity of an unproven supernatural being is accepted as fact on religious authority, while the existence, operation, and consequences of the alleged event remain independently unestablished.
Introduction
Why human beings commit crimes, act unjustly, practice cruelty or deception, nurture hatred, and depart from moral standards is among the oldest questions in human civilization. Why does one person kill another, deceive someone, seize another’s property, abuse power, or harm others for personal gain? In seeking explanations, different civilizations developed various religious and supernatural accounts. Islamic theology establishes a particular relationship between human wrongdoing and Satan’s temptation. The Quran describes Satan as humanity’s declared enemy: a being who seeks to lead people astray, makes wrongdoing seem attractive, and whispers evil suggestions into their minds. In this conception, Satan is not merely a symbol of evil. He is a supernatural being with his own will, intentions, and powers, whose existence is accepted as a religious truth despite being imperceptible to ordinary human senses.
Ramadan occupies a special place within this religious worldview. According to Muhammad, when Ramadan begins, the gates of Paradise are opened, the gates of Hell are shut, and the devils are chained. The significance of this declaration extends beyond the religious status of Ramadan. It announces a supernatural event connected to a specific period of the year, whose effects are understood to bear upon human moral and religious life. Satan is ordinarily believed to be able to whisper evil suggestions into human minds, whereas during Ramadan his powers supposedly become restricted by some special process. If such a restriction actually occurs, unavoidable questions arise: what changes in Satan’s activity before and after captivity, how much his influence upon people diminishes, and how those changes can be identified. A claim that a particular measure is imposed upon an invisible being is not exempt from scrutiny of its nature and effects.
There is no independently verified information establishing Satan’s existence. The connections between brain activity and human thoughts, emotions, fear, anger, desires, decisions, and behavior can be observed. Research can likewise investigate relationships between behavior and social surroundings, childhood experience, family upbringing, economic conditions, personality, psychological stress, social relationships, and legal circumstances. But no recognized scientific method identifies an invisible being called Satan as the cause of any particular thought entering someone’s mind. Declaring an evil thought to be Satan’s work does not establish a supernatural cause for that thought. Nor does a person’s avoidance of crime or increased religious observance during Ramadan provide grounds to conclude that Satan’s chains caused it. Religious discipline, social expectations, personal decisions, fear of punishment, self-restraint, and changes in habit are all observable alternative causes of the same behavior.
The problem deepens when the declaration of Satan’s captivity is compared with other Islamic narratives. Authentic hadiths describe Satan coming to take Ramadan charity provisions. While observing i’tikaf during the last ten days of Ramadan, Muhammad himself voiced concern that Satan could implant an evil suspicion in people’s minds. Other narrations mention the captivity of a particular category of devils rather than speaking of them all without qualification. The questions therefore arise: which devils are actually chained, and which of their powers remain active or cease? If a chained devil can still approach people, speak to them, or potentially whisper into their minds, what does its captivity accomplish? If captivity means only a partial reduction of power, how are its extent, limits, and real effects determined? These questions arise from inconsistencies among the hadith narratives themselves.
The timing of the alleged captivity presents further problems. Day does not begin at the same moment everywhere on Earth; sunset does not occur simultaneously worldwide, and the Ramadan crescent is not sighted on the same date in every region. Islamic tradition itself records regional differences in moon sightings and the commencement of fasting. Ramadan may therefore begin in one region while Sha’ban continues in another. How does the captivity of devils operate under those circumstances? If Satan is a supernatural being whose powers extend to people across the world, how do different religious dates in different regions affect his captivity at the same moment? If all devils are chained across the entire Earth at once, on what basis is that moment determined? The beginning, end, and geographical extent of the captivity remain undefined amid these differences in religious calendars.
Events in ordinary life are also relevant to assessing the alleged effects of this belief. Ramadan places particular emphasis on fasting, prayer, charity, religious discipline, and self-restraint. Yet crime, violence, fraud, and exploitation continue in countries around the world throughout the month. In Bangladesh, Ramadan also witnesses food adulteration, profiteering, extortion, snatching, and other forms of violence. More troublingly, the supposed sanctity of Ramadan sometimes becomes a pretext for attacks on personal freedom. People have been harassed, forced to close restaurants, and assaulted for keeping food establishments open during the day, eating publicly, or not fasting. These events show that the idea of Ramadan’s sanctity does not itself guarantee moral behavior. Nor has any alleged effect of Satan’s captivity been identified in the observed patterns of crime and violence.
The distinction between belief and evidence is crucial to assessing religious narratives. A claim recorded in a sacred book, attributed to a prophet, or accepted by a religious commentator tells us something about that religion’s beliefs and doctrines. It does not independently establish that the supernatural event described actually occurred. No one has independently verified Satan being bound in chains; there is no testable information about the chains, the place of detention, the period of captivity, or its effectiveness. Ultimately, the assertion rests on accepting Muhammad’s report as true. But the argument that his report must be true because he was Allah’s messenger first requires independent evidence for his claimed divine authority. Treating that authority as already established and then using it to validate his supernatural reports is circular reasoning.
The claim that devils are chained during Ramadan thus faces three fundamental questions: what evidence establishes the actual existence of beings called devils, what establishes that they are imprisoned during Ramadan, and where can the real effects of their captivity be identified? Religious declarations, supernatural interpretations, and obedience to belief do not answer these questions. Considered together, the hadith narratives, the conflicting interpretations of classical commentators, the geographical and temporal realities of Earth, and observable evidence about human behavior expose the epistemic weakness of the claim. The standard for deciding whether an event occurred is not religious authority, but the availability of independent, consistent, and verifiable evidence. That evidence is absent in the case of the alleged chaining of devils.
Islamic Doctrine Concerning Hadith
Within Islamic theology, Muhammad’s statements are not treated simply as the personal opinions of an ordinary human being. On the belief that he was Allah’s messenger, his religious commands, prohibitions, reports about the unseen world, and statements concerning the afterlife are invested with special authority. Alongside the Quran, hadith and Sunnah are accepted as major sources of Islamic religious law and belief. Consequently, when a narration attributed to Muhammad is classified as authentic and acceptable, believers are expected to accept its contents as religious truth. Whether it concerns everyday human experience or the actions of angels, jinn, devils, Paradise, Hell, and other unseen beings, prophetic authority forms a fundamental basis for its acceptance in religious belief. The central problem with this arrangement is the logical gap between believing that someone is Allah’s messenger and establishing that every supernatural report made by that person is factually true. The former is a religious belief; the latter is a specific claim about reality. Assuming a belief to be established does not independently prove every supernatural declaration based upon it.
One Quranic basis for granting Muhammad’s words special authority is Surah An-Najm, verses 3–4. They declare that he does not speak from personal desire and that what is conveyed to him is revelation. This declaration is taken as a foundation for the truthfulness of his religious reports. Yet the verses themselves are claims made by the Quran. The Quran states that Muhammad’s message comes from a divine source; this is the Quran’s own assertion. It does not independently demonstrate that a supernatural being actually delivered revelation to Muhammad. Using the Quran’s own declaration to prove that Muhammad received revelation is circular reasoning. Independent evidence is required to establish the claimed divine origin. [1]
وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ ﴿٣﴾ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ ﴿٤﴾
English translation: Nor does he speak from his own desire. It is nothing but revelation sent down to him.
Islam does not present obedience to Muhammad’s statements merely as a matter of religious respect; it connects that obedience to the conditions of faith. Surah An-Nisa, verse 65, says that people will not be believers until they accept Muhammad as judge in their disputes, feel no discomfort in their hearts concerning his judgments, and submit completely. Two conditions are particularly important: harboring no inward objection to his decision and submitting without reservation. Outward compliance is not enough; inward acceptance of the judgment is also connected to faith. Questioning the correctness of a decision or feeling uneasy about it thus becomes a religious problem. Unquestioning submission to the Prophet’s decisions in judicial disputes is made a condition of belief. [2]
فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا
English translation: But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you the judge in the disputes that arise between them, then feel no discomfort within themselves concerning what you have decided, and submit completely.
Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 36, states the same authority-based relationship even more explicitly. It declares that once Allah and His messenger have decided a matter, believing men and women have no separate choice in that matter. Disobedience is described as manifest error. This creates a distinct structure of religious authority: first, a decision is recognized as the decision of Allah and His messenger; then the individual’s right to make an independent choice about that decision is denied. Once prophetic authority has been accepted as the source of a statement, the scope for independently evaluating its contents narrows. The believer is left to choose whether to obey, while unlimited freedom to reconsider whether the instruction really came from a divine source conflicts with the demand for religious submission. [3]
وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلَا مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَن يَكُونَ لَهُمُ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ وَمَن يَعْصِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَالًا مُّبِينًا
English translation: It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His messenger have decided a matter, to have any choice in their affair. Whoever disobeys Allah and His messenger has certainly gone manifestly astray.
A hadith in Sunan Abi Dawud is especially relevant to Muhammad’s claims about the truthfulness of his own spoken words. Abdullah ibn Amr reported that he wrote down everything he heard from Muhammad in order to preserve it. Some members of Quraysh, however, discouraged him from recording every word. Their objection was that Muhammad was a human being who spoke both when angry and when pleased. In other words, they questioned the relationship between a person’s emotional state and the things he says. When Abdullah ibn Amr brought this matter to Muhammad, Muhammad pointed to his own mouth and swore that nothing but the truth came from it. In this hadith Muhammad made a comprehensive declaration about the truthfulness of his statements. The discussion did not concern merely permission to record Quranic verses; it concerned preserving what Abdullah heard Muhammad say. The Arabic phrase مَا يَخْرُجُ مِنْهُ إِلَّا حَقٌّ directly asserts that nothing but truth comes from his mouth. [4]
عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، قَالَ كُنْتُ أَكْتُبُ كُلَّ شَىْءٍ أَسْمَعُهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أُرِيدُ حِفْظَهُ فَنَهَتْنِي قُرَيْشٌ وَقَالُوا أَتَكْتُبُ كُلَّ شَىْءٍ تَسْمَعُهُ وَرَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بَشَرٌ يَتَكَلَّمُ فِي الْغَضَبِ وَالرِّضَا فَأَمْسَكْتُ عَنِ الْكِتَابِ فَذَكَرْتُ ذَلِكَ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَأَوْمَأَ بِأُصْبُعِهِ إِلَى فِيهِ فَقَالَ اكْتُبْ فَوَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ مَا يَخْرُجُ مِنْهُ إِلَّا حَقٌّ
English translation: Abdullah ibn Amr reported: I used to write down everything I heard from the Messenger of Allah, intending to preserve it. But Quraysh forbade me, saying, “Do you write down everything you hear, when the Messenger of Allah is a human being who speaks in anger as well as in pleasure?” So I stopped writing and mentioned this to the Messenger of Allah. He pointed with his finger to his mouth and said, “Write, for by the One in whose hand is my soul, nothing comes out of this mouth except the truth.”
In the hadith from Abi Dawud, Muhammad declares that nothing except truth comes from his mouth. But a person’s declaration of his own truthfulness is not evidence of his infallibility. If followers treat this declaration itself as proof that all his statements are true, the reasoning is circular. An intention to speak truthfully is also different from accurate knowledge of reality: a person can sincerely believe something and still be mistaken. Muhammad’s supernatural reports likewise require evidence independent of his own assertions.
The claim that devils are chained during Ramadan is a specific example of this problem. Muhammad stated that devils are chained when Ramadan begins, and his words are preserved in Islamic hadith collections. To accept the statement as fact, however, several distinct claims must be assumed: supernatural beings called devils exist; they ordinarily act freely; a special confinement is imposed on them when Ramadan begins; Muhammad received accurate information about that confinement; and subsequent hadith transmission faithfully preserved his statement. There is no independent evidence for the existence of these devils, their captivity, or Muhammad’s receipt of supernatural information. All these claims rest upon Muhammad’s religious authority, which is in turn established through the Quran and Muhammad’s own declarations. The reasoning is circular.
The classification of a hadith as sahih does not resolve this logical problem. Such a classification results from an assessment according to the internal standards of transmission and acceptability within hadith scholarship. It establishes the status a report holds within recognized Islamic hadith collections. But the acceptability of a chain of transmission and the actual occurrence of a supernatural event described in the report are different matters. Even if it were historically established that Muhammad spoke particular words, that would not automatically establish the existence of the invisible event he described. Conflating evidence that an ancient individual’s statement was preserved with evidence that the individual’s supernatural or cosmological knowledge was infallible confuses two separate questions about history and reality.
Islamic doctrine therefore plays a crucial role in claims such as the chaining of devils during Ramadan. Believers are asked to accept an invisible event as fact on the report of a person whose authority and truthfulness are themselves established within the religious belief system. Yet believing a person to be infallible does not prove that the supernatural events he describes actually occurred. The claim of infallibility itself is subject to evidence, not exempt from scrutiny. This is the fundamental difference between accepting a statement on religious authority and accepting it on independent evidence. The alleged chaining of devils during Ramadan is a religious belief, not an established fact.
The Hadith Accounts
The declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan is preserved in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan an-Nasa’i, Jami’ at-Tirmidhi, and other hadith collections. The central claim is that three extraordinary events occur in the unseen realm when Ramadan begins: the gates of Paradise or heaven are opened, the gates of Hell are shut, and the devils are chained. These narrations are not merely statements about religious feelings, self-restraint, or moral behavior. Their wording describes specific actions performed upon Paradise, Hell, and the devils. The Arabic texts expressly refer to chaining devils. Variations occur among narrations regarding the category of devils involved and whether the gates belong to Paradise, heaven, or mercy.
In Sahih al-Bukhari 1899, Abu Hurayrah reports that Muhammad said that when Ramadan begins, the gates of heaven are opened, the gates of Hell are closed, and the devils are chained. Three Arabic verbs are important: فُتِّحَتْ, meaning “were opened”; غُلِّقَتْ, meaning “were shut”; and سُلْسِلَتْ, meaning “were chained.” All three describe actions performed upon the objects or beings concerned. In particular, سُلْسِلَتِ الشَّيَاطِينُ literally means that the devils were chained. The hadith does not directly say that people are encouraged toward good deeds, experience heightened religious devotion, or become less inclined to sin. Its central statement includes the declaration of a specific confinement imposed upon devils. [5]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم «إِذَا دَخَلَ شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ فُتِّحَتْ أَبْوَابُ السَّمَاءِ، وَغُلِّقَتْ أَبْوَابُ جَهَنَّمَ، وَسُلْسِلَتِ الشَّيَاطِينُ»
English translation: Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad said: “When the month of Ramadan begins, the gates of heaven are opened, the gates of Hell are closed, and the devils are chained.”
A notable feature of this hadith is that the captivity of devils is directly connected to the beginning of Ramadan. The statement is not conditional upon an individual fasting, praying, giving charity, or carrying out any other religious practice. The declaration is not restricted to any particular person, country, or region. These events are associated with the beginning of Ramadan in general. The ordinary reading therefore describes a supernatural arrangement tied to a specific period of time: whatever freedom or power devils possess during the rest of the year becomes subject to special restraints once Ramadan begins. Yet the hadith supplies no details of where the restraint takes effect, how it operates, or precisely which powers the devils lose. It makes a definite assertion that an event occurs while leaving the event’s mechanism unexplained.
Sahih Muslim 1079 also transmits the same essential statement from Abu Hurayrah: when Ramadan arrives, the gates of Paradise are opened, the gates of Hell are closed, and the devils are bound. There is a difference in wording between this narration and al-Bukhari’s. Al-Bukhari uses أَبْوَابُ السَّمَاءِ, “the gates of heaven,” while this narration in Muslim uses أَبْوَابُ الْجَنَّةِ, “the gates of Paradise.” For the captivity of devils, Muslim uses صُفِّدَتْ in place of al-Bukhari’s سُلْسِلَتْ. Both verbs convey binding or chaining. The central declaration of the devils’ confinement is therefore unchanged. There is also a translation problem in the English rendering at Sunnah.com: although the Arabic of Muslim 1079a says “the gates of Paradise,” its English version says “the gates of mercy.” The correct translation of الْجَنَّةِ here is “Paradise,” not “mercy.” [6]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ «إِذَا جَاءَ رَمَضَانُ فُتِّحَتْ أَبْوَابُ الْجَنَّةِ وَغُلِّقَتْ أَبْوَابُ النَّارِ وَصُفِّدَتِ الشَّيَاطِينُ»
English translation: Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad said: “When Ramadan comes, the gates of Paradise are opened, the gates of Hell are shut, and the devils are chained.”
Another version of the same hadith in Sahih Muslim mentions the gates of mercy rather than those of Paradise or heaven. It uses the Arabic phrase أَبْوَابُ الرَّحْمَةِ, literally “the gates of mercy.” This shows that different transmissions of the same basic report speak of the gates of heaven, Paradise, and mercy. These three expressions are not identical in wording or literal reference. The declaration that devils are chained, however, remains in this version. The confinement of devils is therefore a recurring central element of the report. Abu Hurayrah is the primary transmitter in these narrations from Bukhari and Muslim; recording a statement in more than one collection should not be mistaken for testimony from multiple independent eyewitnesses. The historical transmission of these accounts and the factual occurrence of their supernatural claims are separate questions. [7]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم «إِذَا كَانَ رَمَضَانُ فُتِّحَتْ أَبْوَابُ الرَّحْمَةِ وَغُلِّقَتْ أَبْوَابُ جَهَنَّمَ وَسُلْسِلَتِ الشَّيَاطِينُ»
English translation: Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad said: “When Ramadan comes, the gates of mercy are opened, the gates of Hell are shut, and the devils are chained.”
In Sunan an-Nasa’i 2106, Muhammad describes Ramadan as a blessed month and states that the gates of heaven are opened, the gates of Hell are shut, and مَرَدَةُ الشَّيَاطِينِ—the especially fierce or intensely rebellious devils—are chained. The word مَرَدَةُ expresses the intensity of rebellion, but the very meaning of “devil” already includes evil, disobedience, and rebellion. The distinction between “rebellious devils” and “ordinary devils” therefore cannot establish a division between good and evil devils. Sahih al-Bukhari 1899 and Sahih Muslim 1079 declare that devils are chained without adding such a qualifier. The adjective used by an-Nasa’i does not by itself establish that the scope of those unqualified declarations must be restricted. [8]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم «أَتَاكُمْ رَمَضَانُ شَهْرٌ مُبَارَكٌ فَرَضَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ عَلَيْكُمْ صِيَامَهُ تُفْتَحُ فِيهِ أَبْوَابُ السَّمَاءِ وَتُغْلَقُ فِيهِ أَبْوَابُ الْجَحِيمِ وَتُغَلُّ فِيهِ مَرَدَةُ الشَّيَاطِينِ لِلَّهِ فِيهِ لَيْلَةٌ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَلْفِ شَهْرٍ مَنْ حُرِمَ خَيْرَهَا فَقَدْ حُرِمَ»
English translation: Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad said: “The blessed month of Ramadan has come to you. Allah has made fasting in this month obligatory for you. During it, the gates of heaven are opened and the gates of Hell are shut. During it, the fiercely rebellious devils are chained. Allah has placed in it a night better than a thousand months. Whoever is deprived of its goodness is indeed deprived.”
The essential statement in the reports from Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and Sunan an-Nasa’i is the same: devils are chained during Ramadan. Yet this declaration conflicts with accounts in the same Islamic sources describing devils remaining active. The fact that one report mentions especially rebellious devils does not establish that the other devils remain free; that is an interpretation advanced by later commentators, not a statement of the hadith itself. Surah As-Saffat, verse 7, uses كُلِّ شَيْطَانٍ مَارِدٍ, meaning “every rebellious devil.” Surah Al-Hajj, verse 3, likewise refers to كُلَّ شَيْطَانٍ مَرِيدٍ, “every rebellious devil.” There is therefore no basis for detaching rebellion from the fundamental character of a devil to manufacture a convenient categorical distinction. The conflict between the declaration that devils are chained and the accounts of their approaching people and whispering to them during Ramadan remains. [9] [10]
The weakness of this interpretation is acknowledged within Islamic scholarship itself. Ibn Khuzaymah offered an interpretation according to which only the fiercest jinn-devils are chained during Ramadan. But IslamQA’s discussion numbered 256868 examines problems in the wording and chains of transmission of certain reports used to support that limited interpretation and gives priority to the unqualified declarations found in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. It explicitly states that every devil is rebellious and that the adjective مَرِيدٍ need not limit captivity to one category. Thus, the proposition that “rebellious devils are chained while other devils remain free” is not an established conclusion of the hadith. [11]
فهذه العبارة لا يتعيَّن أن يكون مرادا منها التقييد، لأن كل شيطان هو مريد، لتعرِّيه عن كل خير، وجريانه في معصية الله تعالى.
English translation: This wording does not necessarily imply a restriction, because every devil is rebellious, devoid of all goodness and engaged in disobedience to Allah.
The concluding position in IslamQA’s discussion also favors the captivity of devils in general, not merely that of the fiercest among them. Devils may differ in the degree of their rebellion, but that distinction cannot be turned into a declaration that the others remain free. The fundamental inconsistency persists between the unqualified statements in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim about devils being chained and the accounts of devils remaining active during Ramadan.
Another important feature of these hadiths is that the alleged chaining of devils is not presented as an event directly witnessed by ordinary people or as an observable state. Abu Hurayrah did not claim to have seen the devils being chained; he reported Muhammad’s statement. The immediate subject of the transmitted testimony is therefore Muhammad’s declaration, not the event of the devils’ imprisonment. These hadiths offer no observational account of how Muhammad received this information, how he could have known that the chaining occurred, or how its truth could be independently confirmed. Without first establishing that devils exist, the announcement of their captivity cannot establish the event as fact. Using the declaration that they are chained as evidence that they exist is circular: an unproven report about the supernatural beings is being presented as proof of the existence of those very beings.
The three supernatural actions mentioned together in these hadiths are also important. Opening the gates of heaven or Paradise, closing the gates of Hell, and chaining devils are all parts of one religious declaration, but each is a separate factual claim. If the gates of heaven or Paradise are said to have opened, the existence of those gates and the event of their opening must be established. The same applies to the gates of Hell being shut. The claim that devils are chained introduces yet another purported supernatural event. Merely appearing together in one hadith does not make any of these claims independent evidence for the others. Multiple supernatural statements by the same informant do not compensate for the lack of independent observation or testimony. Religious authority is not independent evidence for any of the three events.
In particular, Arabic words associated with silsilah and tasfid convey the idea of chains and restraint. Yet the hadiths describe neither the substance, location, nor length of the chains, nor the place of detention or the specific mechanism that restricts the devils. If literal chaining is accepted, the nature of the restraint imposed upon them must be explained. If captivity instead means only a reduction in their influence upon human beings, an explanation is needed of how that influence is measured. Adopting an interpretation with no identifiable practical consequences does not establish the claim’s independent truth. If it cannot be determined whether chained devils can approach people, whisper into their minds, harm them, or retain their former powers, the effective meaning of the alleged captivity remains undefined.
The accounts in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and Sunan an-Nasa’i establish that the belief in devils being chained during Ramadan belongs to Islamic hadith literature. They do not independently establish the actual existence of devils, the occurrence of their captivity, or its effects. These are religious claims preserved as reports from Muhammad. Despite variations in wording, their central statement announces a supernatural action. Whether that action really occurs, how it occurs, and what specific effect it has upon human behavior cannot be determined solely through the hadiths’ accepted status. This issue becomes particularly important because the same Islamic sources also contain accounts of other activities by devils during Ramadan.
Satan Appearing to Abu Hurayrah While He Guarded Ramadan Charity
In Sahih al-Bukhari 2311, Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad assigned him to guard the food collected as Ramadan charity. A person came and began taking the food, but Abu Hurayrah caught him. The man pleaded poverty and the needs of his family, and Abu Hurayrah released him. The next morning, Muhammad said that the man had lied and would return. The same thing happened on the second night, and Muhammad again said that the man would return. On the third night, the person was again caught taking food. This time he advised Abu Hurayrah to recite Ayat al-Kursi before sleeping, saying that if he did so, no devil would be able to approach him until morning. The following day Muhammad said that, although the person was a liar, he had spoken the truth on this occasion, and that the being who had spoken with Abu Hurayrah over the three nights was Satan. Sahih al-Bukhari 3275 also contains a shorter account of the same incident. The two hadith numbers refer to one event, not two independent occurrences. [12] [13]
وَكَّلَنِي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِحِفْظِ زَكَاةِ رَمَضَانَ
English translation (detailed account of the incident): Abu Hurayrah said: Muhammad entrusted me with guarding the Ramadan charity supplies. A person came and began taking food from them. I caught him and said, “By Allah, I will take you to Muhammad.” The man replied, “I am needy, I have a family to support, and I am in great need.” I felt compassion for him and let him go. The following morning Muhammad asked me, “What did your prisoner do last night?” When I told him what had happened, he said, “He lied to you, and he will return.”Abu Hurayrah continued: I waited for him. He came back and began taking food again. I caught him and said I would take him to Muhammad. Once more, the man pleaded poverty and the needs of his family, promising that he would not return. I let him go. The following morning Muhammad again asked what my prisoner had done. When I described the incident, he said the man had lied and would return. On the third night the man came yet again and began taking food. This time I caught him and said, “You keep promising not to return, yet you come back again and again. This time I will certainly take you to Muhammad.”
The man then said, “Let me go. I will teach you some words by which Allah will benefit you.” Abu Hurayrah asked what those words were. The man replied that he should recite Ayat al-Kursi from beginning to end before going to sleep. Then a guardian from Allah would watch over him, and no devil would come near him until morning. Abu Hurayrah released him. The next day, when Muhammad asked about the incident, Abu Hurayrah told him what the man had taught him. Muhammad said that although the man was a habitual liar, he had spoken the truth on this occasion. He then asked whether Abu Hurayrah knew with whom he had been speaking during the past three nights. When Abu Hurayrah said no, Muhammad declared, «ذَاكَ شَيْطَانٌ» — “That was Satan.”
The hadith depicts Satan coming into the presence of a human being, taking food, being caught, speaking, and repeatedly returning. Abu Hurayrah initially apprehended the visitor as an ordinary person; his identity as Satan was established through Muhammad’s subsequent declaration. The account connects the incident to the guarding of Ramadan charity, although it does not give the precise dates of the three nights. It portrays Satan as a being capable of acting and communicating with humans. The declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan, meanwhile, gives no account of how that captivity restricts such abilities. Satan’s identity in this incident and the claim of his captivity both rest upon Muhammad’s words; neither is independently established.
Muhammad Feared Satanic Whispering Even During the Last Ten Days of Ramadan
Sahih al-Bukhari 2035 explicitly identifies the time of the incident: Muhammad was observing i’tikaf in the mosque during the last ten days of Ramadan. His wife Safiyyah bint Huyayy visited him and spoke with him for a while. As she was leaving, Muhammad accompanied her to the mosque entrance. Two men from the Ansar passed them. Muhammad stopped the men and explained that the woman accompanying him was Safiyyah, his wife. When they expressed surprise, Muhammad said that Satan circulates within a human being as blood does and that he had feared Satan might implant an evil thought in their hearts. Sahih Muslim 2175 also reports the incident. During this specifically identified period in the last ten days of Ramadan, Muhammad himself described the possibility of Satanic whispering as a genuine concern. [14] [15]
إِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ يَبْلُغُ مِنَ الإِنْسَانِ مَبْلَغَ الدَّمِ، وَإِنِّي خَشِيتُ أَنْ يَقْذِفَ فِي قُلُوبِكُمَا شَيْئًا
English translation: “Satan reaches a human being as blood does, and I feared that he might cast something into the hearts of you two.”
This creates a direct conflict with the declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan. That declaration describes special restrictions imposed upon devils throughout the month. Yet during the last ten days of that very month, Muhammad regarded Satan’s ability to influence human hearts as an active danger. The hadith does not say that Satan actually whispered to those two men; Muhammad feared that he could. This concern is itself significant: Muhammad considered Satan capable of whispering even while the supposed captivity was in effect. If captivity is interpreted as the cessation of Satan’s influence upon humans, Muhammad’s own statement is inconsistent with that interpretation. If the ability to whisper remains intact, there is no evidence of what the imprisonment actually accomplishes. Nor does the claim that “only rebellious devils are chained” resolve this incident; the hadith does not identify the devil feared by Muhammad as a member of some special category exempt from captivity.
The Relativity of Time and Earth’s Rotation
A significant problem with the claim that devils are chained during Ramadan concerns when this captivity begins and how it operates across different regions of Earth. According to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, Muhammad stated that devils are chained when Ramadan begins. His statement directly connects a supernatural event to a particular time. Yet Ramadan does not begin at the same moment everywhere on Earth. This is not merely due to differences in local time; it also involves the Islamic methods of determining lunar months, the visibility of the new crescent, and the rules for accepting moon-sighting testimony. At the same actual moment, Ramadan may have begun in one region while Sha’ban continues in another. This difference is real and acknowledged in Islamic jurisprudence concerning fasting and other religious observances. Which region’s beginning of Ramadan, then, triggers the captivity of devils? Ramadan may have begun in Saudi Arabia while Sha’ban continues elsewhere. Where is the boundary between their chained and unchained states at that moment? The problem is not how religious calendars count time; it is how a supposedly universal supernatural event can be attached to different regional schedules.
Earth completes one rotation relative to distant stars in approximately 23 hours and 56 minutes. The mean solar day, measured by the Sun’s apparent position, is approximately 24 hours. Because Earth rotates on its axis and revolves around the Sun, sunrise, sunset, noon, and nighttime do not occur simultaneously at different locations. Time zones are related to these differences, but the official time offsets defined relative to UTC are a human-created system. Their boundaries are often set by political and administrative decisions. Thus, a clock striking midnight or an official date changing in a particular country is not a separate cosmic event. The same real moment can be expressed as different local times in different regions. Yet explaining the differing beginnings of Ramadan merely as a difference in time zones is also incorrect. The Islamic lunar calendar depends on crescent-sighting testimony, whether that testimony is accepted, and decisions about local or international moon sightings. Earth’s rotation and these distinct practices of determining lunar months can together produce different starting times for Ramadan in different regions. [16]
Under Islamic rules, observing the new crescent has particular importance in determining the beginning of Ramadan. In Sahih al-Bukhari 1909, Muhammad instructed people to begin fasting upon seeing the crescent and to end fasting when the crescent of the following month is sighted. If clouds prevent the crescent from being seen, he instructed them to complete thirty days of Sha’ban. Thus, Ramadan’s beginning is not linked solely to one predetermined astronomical instant; it also depends on the actual sighting of the crescent and religious acceptance of that sighting. Although the Moon occupies a particular phase at the same instant across Earth, the conditions for observing a young crescent are not identical everywhere. The Moon’s position above the horizon, its relationship to sunset, atmospheric clarity, and the observer’s location affect whether it can be seen. When religious authorities’ decisions about accepting sightings from particular regions are added, the starting dates of Ramadan can differ. [17]
صُومُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ، وَأَفْطِرُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ، فَإِنْ غُبِّيَ عَلَيْكُمْ فَأَكْمِلُوا عِدَّةَ شَعْبَانَ ثَلاَثِينَ
English translation: “Fast upon seeing it, and end your fast upon seeing it. If it is obscured from you, complete the count of Sha’ban as thirty days.”
One of the most important Islamic sources documenting regional differences in the beginning of Ramadan is Sahih Muslim 1087. It narrates an incident involving Kurayb. Umm al-Fadl sent him to Mu’awiyah in Syria. While there, he saw the new crescent of Ramadan on Friday night. Others in Syria also sighted it, and Mu’awiyah and the people there began fasting. When Kurayb later returned to Medina, Abdullah ibn Abbas asked him when the Ramadan crescent had been seen. Kurayb said that they had seen it in Syria on Friday night. Ibn Abbas replied that the people in Medina had seen it on Saturday night. Kurayb asked whether Mu’awiyah’s sighting and the commencement of fasting in Syria were not sufficient for them. Ibn Abbas explicitly answered no, saying that this was how Muhammad had instructed them. Thus, Syria and Medina differed by a day in sighting the crescent and beginning the same month of Ramadan. The incident is recorded in Islamic sources and became a basis for jurisprudential discussions about different regions observing the crescent independently. [18]
فَقَالَ لَكِنَّا رَأَيْنَاهُ لَيْلَةَ السَّبْتِ فَلاَ نَزَالُ نَصُومُ حَتَّى نُكْمِلَ ثَلاَثِينَ أَوْ نَرَاهُ
English translation: Ibn Abbas said, “But we saw it on Saturday night, so we will continue fasting until we complete thirty days or see it.”
Kurayb’s account establishes an important fact: according to Islamic religious timekeeping, different lunar dates can apply in different regions of Earth at the same moment. The sighting of the Ramadan crescent in Syria on Friday night did not make that decision binding in Medina. The difference was not about the time shown on a clock; it concerned which observation and which region’s religious decision would determine the beginning of a month. Thus, the beginning of Ramadan is not inseparably tied to one single moment of a universal astronomical event. Within the same world, Ramadan may have begun for one community while another is still observing the last day of Sha’ban. If the chaining of devils is connected to the start of Ramadan, that difference in religious dates inevitably raises the question of how their captivity operates. A decision to begin fasting governs human religious behavior, whereas imposing actual captivity upon devils is a separate claim about a supernatural event.
Islamic jurisprudence also contains differing positions on regional moon sightings. Some jurists consider a confirmed sighting in one region potentially binding on Muslims elsewhere. Others recognize regional differences in sightings. Islamweb’s fatwa 40176 notes that the variation in crescent rising and visibility across regions is a real, acknowledged phenomenon, although jurists disagree on whether these differences should be considered when determining the beginning and end of Ramadan. A significant implication is that the same astronomical conditions may lead to different jurisprudential decisions. The start of Ramadan is therefore determined not only by the laws of nature but also by human interpretation and decisions made by religious authorities. No rule, however, establishes which region’s moon-sighting decision governs the time at which devils are chained. [19]
فقد اتفق أهل العلم على أن مطالع الأهلة مختلفة، وأن ذلك مما علم بالضرورة حساً وعقلاً، إلا أنهم اختلفوا في اعتبار ذلك في بداية صوم رمضان ونهايته
English translation: Scholars have agreed that the places where crescents rise differ, and that this is necessarily known through observation and reason. They have nevertheless disagreed over whether this difference should be taken into account in determining the beginning and end of the Ramadan fast.
A real and verifiable example of this problem occurred at the beginning of Ramadan in 2026. Saudi Arabia’s Supreme Court accepted testimony of a new crescent sighting on February 17 and declared Wednesday, February 18, to be the first day of Ramadan. In Bangladesh, by contrast, the National Moon Sighting Committee accepted reports of a crescent sighting on February 18 and decided that Ramadan would begin on Thursday, February 19. Turkey’s Presidency of Religious Affairs, the Diyanet, also designated February 19 as the first day of Ramadan on the basis of astronomical calculations and its own religious criteria for crescent visibility. Indonesia’s government likewise declared February 19 to be the first day of Ramadan. Thus, in the same year, Saudi Arabia began the same lunar month one day earlier than several other countries. More importantly, both Saudi Arabia and Turkey use the UTC+3 official time zone, yet their Ramadan starting dates differed. This cannot be explained simply by time-zone differences; it also reflects differing policies for accepting crescent-sighting evidence and determining the religious month. [20] [21] [22] [23]
فإن الدائرة تقرر، أن يوم غدٍ الأربعاء 1/ 9/ 1447هـ -حسب تقويم أم القرى– الموافق 18/ 2/ 2026م، هو غرة شهر رمضان المبارك لهذا العام 1447هـ.
English translation: The relevant chamber has decided that tomorrow, Wednesday, February 18, 2026, corresponding to 1 Ramadan 1447 AH according to the Umm Al-Qura calendar, is the first day of the blessed month of Ramadan for this year.
| Country | First day of Ramadan in 2026 | UTC time zone | Basis of official decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | February 18 | UTC+3 | Crescent-sighting testimony accepted by the Supreme Court |
| Bangladesh | February 19 | UTC+6 | Decision of the National Moon Sighting Committee |
| Turkey | February 19 | UTC+3 | Astronomical and religious criteria adopted by the Diyanet |
| Indonesia | February 19 | UTC+7 to UTC+9 | Government assessment of crescent sightings and astronomical calculations |
This real example exposes a specific problem with the claimed captivity of devils. Ramadan began in Saudi Arabia on February 18, while Sha’ban was still in progress according to the religious calendars of Bangladesh and Turkey. If devils are chained from the moment Ramadan begins, which region’s start of Ramadan triggered their captivity? If the Saudi decision is used, their confinement would have begun on the religious night following sunset on February 17, even though Sha’ban was still being observed in Bangladesh. If the Bangladeshi decision is used, what was the state of their captivity during the initial portion of Ramadan already underway in Saudi Arabia? The hadiths specify neither a single universal moment for captivity nor a procedure for geographically staggered captivity.
Assuming that confinement takes effect separately in different regions makes the problem even more complicated. If Satan is believed to have the power to whisper into human minds, it must be determined whether his activities are regulated by geographical boundaries. For example, what happens to a devil whispering into someone’s mind in Bangladesh after Ramadan begins in Saudi Arabia? Does it remain free because Ramadan has not yet started in Bangladesh? Or is it already chained because Ramadan has begun in Saudi Arabia? There is no evidence establishing geographical boundaries, movement, or territorial limits for the devils’ captivity. The regional difference in the commencement of Ramadan, however, is an established reality.
Saudi Arabia and Turkey both used UTC+3, yet in 2026 they began Ramadan on different dates. This is because the start of Ramadan depends not merely on time zones but also on moon-sighting testimony and religious decisions. No definite basis specifies which decision determines the moment when devils are chained.
Another fundamental distinction is that although Ramadan is a lunar month, the social and religious decision about its first day is not identical to a single event in nature. The astronomical position of the Moon and the likelihood of crescent visibility can be calculated. But the truth of a report that the crescent was seen in a particular region, and the decision to begin a religious month on the basis of that report, are separate matters. For this reason, states and religious institutions can designate different first days of Ramadan in the same year. Religious authorities may decide when people begin fasting. The human decision to begin fasting is observable; no observable relationship between that decision and the captivity of devils has been established.
At the same moment, Ramadan may be underway in one region of Earth while Sha’ban continues in another. This is established both by Islamic sources and by actual religious practice. Yet there is no independently verifiable account of how the captivity of devils relates to these different periods. Even its beginning, end, and geographical scope remain undefined. If the devils truly become captive, there should be definite facts concerning when and where the captivity begins and ends and what effects it produces. Instead, we find separate decisions about when Ramadan begins in different regions and a supernatural declaration whose truth and operation remain unproven.
Satan’s Existence and Physical Presence Remain Unproven
The most fundamental problem with the claim that devils are chained during Ramadan is that the actual existence of the beings supposedly being chained has never been established. Islamic theology presents Satan not as a symbol of human imagination, emotion, or evil impulses, but as a supernatural being with his own existence, will, intentions, and powers. In the Quran, Satan speaks to humans, tempts them, whispers into their minds, deceives them, and plans to lead them away from Allah’s path. He is not alone; the Quran also refers to his followers and accomplices. In Islamic belief, then, human behavior is influenced by invisible beings whose existence humans ordinarily cannot perceive. Another claim is added to this belief: chains are imposed upon these beings during a particular lunar month each year. Before the claim that Satan is imprisoned during Ramadan can be accepted, therefore, his existence, his powers over human beings, and the truth of the supernatural mechanism restricting those powers must be established. Independent scientific evidence is absent in all three areas.
Surah Al-A’raf, verse 27, explicitly states that Satan and his followers can see human beings from places where humans cannot see them. This is an important claim. Satan is not described here merely as an abstract concept representing evil. He is presented as a being who can observe people’s whereabouts and attempt to influence them without their knowledge. When a person wishes to identify the source of a danger, that source can generally be investigated through observation, experience, and inquiry. Yet in this Quranic description, Satan is assigned a special position from which he can see humans while remaining invisible to them. Invisibility is thus made a defining characteristic of Satan within the religious narrative. But declaring that a being is invisible is not evidence that it exists. Imagining an invisible being and demonstrating its actual existence are entirely different things. [24]
يَٰبَنِيٓ ءَادَمَ لَا يَفْتِنَنَّكُمُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ كَمَآ أَخْرَجَ أَبَوَيْكُم مِّنَ ٱلْجَنَّةِ يَنزِعُ عَنْهُمَا لِبَاسَهُمَا لِيُرِيَهُمَا سَوْءَٰتِهِمَآ ۗ إِنَّهُۥ يَرَىٰكُمْ هُوَ وَقَبِيلُهُۥ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا تَرَوْنَهُمْ ۗ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَا ٱلشَّيَٰطِينَ أَوْلِيَآءَ لِلَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ
English translation: O children of Adam, do not let Satan tempt you as he caused your parents to leave Paradise, stripping them of their garments to expose their nakedness. He and his followers see you from where you cannot see them. Indeed, We have made devils allies of those who do not believe.
Surah An-Nas makes a more specific claim about Satan’s powers. It describes a whisperer who plants evil suggestions in people’s hearts and may be among the jinn or human beings. Here, human thoughts and mental experiences are directly linked to the activity of invisible supernatural beings. That thoughts arise in human minds is a real experience. People experience fear, anger, envy, greed, plans to commit crimes, and desires that may even conflict with their own ethical standards. Yet the reality of such an experience does not establish the presence of an invisible being behind it. The Quran attributes the planting of evil suggestions to Satan but supplies no testable method for determining which thoughts result from a person’s own mental processes and which are Satan’s whispers. Without a method for making that distinction, the alleged influence of Satan cannot be identified. [25]
قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ مَلِكِ النَّاسِ إِلَٰهِ النَّاسِ مِن شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ
English translation: Say: I seek refuge in the Lord of humankind, the Sovereign of humankind, the God of humankind, from the evil of the retreating whisperer, who whispers into the hearts of human beings, from among jinn and humankind.
Sahih Muslim 2814 makes an even broader claim about Satan’s relationship with human mental life. In a hadith narrated by Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, Muhammad states that a companion from among the jinn has been assigned to every person. His companions ask whether Muhammad himself also has such a companion. He replies that he does, but Allah has helped him against that companion, who now commands him to do nothing but good. According to this narration, Satanic influence is not confined to particular persons, places, or situations; the belief that an invisible companion accompanies every human being is part of Islamic theology. Although the companion is said to remain with each person, the hadith does not explain how its presence can be identified. More importantly, a claim that such an invisible being constantly accompanies a person calls for independent investigation into its existence and abilities. Here, the sole basis for believing in that companion is Muhammad’s declaration. [26]
عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم «مَا مِنْكُمْ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلَّا وَقَدْ وُكِّلَ بِهِ قَرِينُهُ مِنَ الْجِنِّ» قَالُوا وَإِيَّاكَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ «وَإِيَّايَ إِلَّا أَنَّ اللَّهَ أَعَانَنِي عَلَيْهِ فَأَسْلَمَ فَلَا يَأْمُرُنِي إِلَّا بِخَيْرٍ»
English translation: Abdullah ibn Mas’ud reported that Muhammad said, “There is not one of you but a companion from among the jinn has been assigned to him.” They asked, “Even you, Messenger of Allah?” He replied, “Even me, except that Allah helped me against him, so he submitted, and he commands me only to do good.”
When this hadith is considered alongside the declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan, another significant problem arises. If a jinn companion is assigned to every human being, what happens to that companion during Ramadan? Does it separate from the person when Ramadan begins, or does it remain with the person while chained? Does captivity eliminate its ability to whisper or merely limit that ability? If a special confinement is imposed upon an invisible being permanently attached to a person, how is the change expressed in that person’s thoughts and behavior? Both the claim that devils are chained during Ramadan and the claim that every person has a jinn companion belong to the same Islamic theology. Establishing their relationship requires definite information about the companion’s location, captivity, and powers. Yet none of these matters is supported by independently verifiable evidence beyond religious declarations.
The idea of chaining Satan uses the language of the physical world to describe a supernatural event. In ordinary human experience, binding someone or something in chains means restricting movement or abilities through a physical restraint or some means of control. But Islamic accounts do not specify Satan’s bodily composition, location, or how chains act upon him. What are the chains made of? How do they bind him? Where is he confined, and which powers cease to operate? No testable information answers these questions. Declaring that a special confinement has been imposed upon a being whose existence has not even been identified does not establish that the captivity took place. A description of chains within a religious narrative does not prove that those chains exist in reality, just as an ancient tale describing the wings, weapons, or movements of invisible creatures does not establish the actual existence of the creatures.
Modern science has established the existence of many entities and processes invisible to the naked eye. Bacteria, viruses, atoms, electromagnetic radiation, and countless microscopic phenomena cannot ordinarily be seen without instruments. Their existence has nevertheless been demonstrated through observation, experimentation, measurement, and reliable evidence of their effects. The fact that something is invisible to the naked eye does not mean that it must forever lie beyond investigation. Scientific acceptance of an unseen entity rests on identifiable characteristics and evidence. No comparable established method exists for identifying Satan. Changes in human behavior, the commission of crimes, fear, psychological distress, or unusual experiences may be attributed to Satan, but no causal relationship between those phenomena and an independent being called Satan has been established. It is therefore false to treat the alleged existence of Satan as equivalent to the scientifically established existence of microorganisms, atoms, or other invisible entities.
Satan whispers evil suggestions into human minds and influences their behavior—this is a claim about causation. Yet no scientific method identifies Satan’s presence as the cause of any particular change in thought or behavior. There is no independent evidence establishing Satan’s powers, his influence upon people, or the alleged suspension of those powers during Ramadan. Presenting Satan as a real cause of human conduct is therefore unsupported by evidence.
Neuroscience has already established many important facts about the human brain and behavior. Fear, emotion, memory, decision-making, self-control, and behavior are associated with activity in different neural systems. The amygdala participates in processing the emotional significance of events and signals of danger; the prefrontal cortex plays important roles in planning, decision-making, and behavioral control. These are not functions of isolated brain regions operating alone but result from interactions among neural networks. Changes in thought and behavior are associated with brain states, physical health, sleep, psychological stress, experience, social surroundings, and learning. No intervention by an invisible being such as Satan has been scientifically identified within these complex causal processes. Introducing an unproven supernatural cause to explain the workings of a person’s own mind does not increase our understanding; it introduces an entity whose existence and operation lack reliable evidence.
Testing the claim that devils are chained during Ramadan requires a definite account of their alleged powers. The Quran describes Satan as whispering into human minds, deceiving people, and enticing them toward wrongdoing. If captivity has a real effect, it should be connected to these alleged activities. Yet there is no method for establishing whether a thought arose in someone’s mind because Satan created it. Likewise, if someone’s evil thoughts diminish during Ramadan, no established procedure distinguishes Satan’s captivity from fasting, religious observance, social surroundings, or personal choices as the cause. Satan’s existence remains unproven, and so do his captivity during Ramadan and the claim that this captivity produces supernatural changes in human behavior. The belief rests entirely on religious authority. Authority’s declaration is not a substitute for independent evidence about events in the real world.
Psychological and Sociological Evidence
Assessing the alleged effects of chaining devils during Ramadan requires an examination of the supposed relationship between Satan and human thought, behavior, and criminal tendencies. Islamic theology presents Satan as a major instigator of evil thoughts and conduct. The Quran describes him as a being who whispers evil suggestions into human minds, deceives people, and calls them toward wrongdoing. Authentic hadiths, meanwhile, declare that the devils are chained when Ramadan begins. Taken together, these statements assert a causal relationship: an extraordinary restraint is imposed during Ramadan upon the beings believed to exert supernatural influence at other times. The central question is what change this restraint produces in human behavior. If Satan is a real cause of evil conduct, a change in his ability to operate should have real consequences. Yet no reliable method has been established for identifying the portion of crime, violence, fraud, or human mental experience caused by Satan. The effects of religious discipline, social pressure, self-restraint, and economic circumstances can be investigated; the supposed effects of Satan’s captivity cannot be identified by comparable means.
Islamic sources themselves do not assign all evil tendencies solely to Satan. Surah Yusuf, verse 53, describes the human self or soul as one that urges wrongdoing. Thus, Islamic theology also acknowledges human desires and impulses as causes of evil. Recognizing the human self as a source of wrongdoing does not establish either the captivity of devils during Ramadan or its effects on human conduct. Rather, if one’s own impulses and Satan are both accepted as distinct causes of wrongdoing, the problem becomes how to distinguish their respective effects. The influence of human desires can be investigated through behavior, psychological research, and neural activity. No comparable evidence exists for Satan’s alleged influence. [27]
وَمَا أُبَرِّئُ نَفْسِي ۚ إِنَّ النَّفْسَ لَأَمَّارَةٌ بِالسُّوءِ إِلَّا مَا رَحِمَ رَبِّي ۚ إِنَّ رَبِّي غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ
English translation: I do not declare myself innocent. Indeed, the human soul is constantly inclined to command evil, except for those upon whom my Lord has mercy. Indeed, my Lord is Forgiving and Merciful.
Muhammad’s own statement in Sahih al-Bukhari addresses the possibility that a fasting person may continue to lie and commit wrongful acts. In Bukhari 1903, he said that Allah has no need for someone to abstain from food and drink if that person does not abandon false speech and wrongdoing. The statement connects fasting to moral conduct and explicitly recognizes that a fasting person may continue lying and doing wrong. Ramadan’s religious atmosphere and the act of fasting do not, by themselves, guarantee ethical behavior. The significance of this hadith becomes clearer when it is considered alongside the declaration that devils are chained during Ramadan. Within the same religious framework, devils are said to be confined, yet fasting people are sternly warned against continuing to lie and commit wrongs. This underscores the role of personal decisions and conduct but provides no measurable information about any effective consequences of the alleged captivity of Satan. [28]
عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم «مَنْ لَمْ يَدَعْ قَوْلَ الزُّورِ وَالْعَمَلَ بِهِ فَلَيْسَ لِلَّهِ حَاجَةٌ فِي أَنْ يَدَعَ طَعَامَهُ وَشَرَابَهُ»
English translation: Abu Hurayrah reported that Muhammad said, “Whoever does not give up false speech and acting upon it, Allah has no need for him to give up his food and drink.”
Modern psychology and neuroscience analyze human conduct through numerous interacting causes. Human beings experience fear, anger, greed, sexual desire, competition, empathy, self-restraint, and the impulse toward social cooperation. These tendencies are associated with different neural processes, physical conditions, previous experiences, learning, and social environments. Human behavior is not directed by one isolated brain region. For example, the amygdala participates in assessing emotional significance and potential danger, the prefrontal cortex plays an important role in planning and behavioral regulation, and neural systems involved in memory and reward processing influence decisions. These systems interact with one another. Sleep deprivation, psychological stress, substance dependence, childhood experiences, social expectations, and learned behavior can all affect decision-making. There is no scientific basis for accepting an invisible being called Satan as a cause of evil thoughts or criminal tendencies. Adding Satan to an explanation introduces an additional entity for which no causal relationship has been established.
Sociology likewise does not explain violence and crime as the product of one supernatural cause. Research on violence prevention by the World Health Organization examines risk factors at four levels: individual, interpersonal and family relationships, community environments, and wider social and institutional structures. At the individual level, experiences of violence, substance abuse, behavioral difficulties, and weak self-control may play significant roles. At the relationship level, domestic violence, conflict, abuse, and the influence of peers engaged in crime can matter. Community-level conditions include unemployment, poverty, high-crime neighborhoods, and weak social oversight. At the broader societal level, economic inequality, social norms condoning violence, weak law enforcement, and failures of public institutions can increase the risk of crime. Such analyses connect criminal behavior to people’s actual circumstances and social institutions. Identifying these concrete causes is essential to determining how crime can be prevented. [29]
Religious observance can influence human behavior because religious rituals involve social expectations, personal commitments, regular practices, and attempts to exercise self-control. During Ramadan, many people change their diets, fast at designated times, spend more time in prayer and other religious activities, and pay particular attention to their own conduct. These changes are real, and their social and psychological effects can be investigated. But a fasting person’s change in behavior does not establish that the change was caused by Satan’s captivity. Attempting to control one’s behavior through religious observance is observable. The simultaneous chaining of invisible devils is an entirely separate claim. Using human self-restraint as proof of Satan’s confinement conflates two different causal relationships.
The actual pattern of crime during Ramadan is important for examining the purported effects of this supernatural claim. In Bangladesh, Ramadan began on March 2 and ended on March 30 in 2025. According to crime statistics published by Bangladesh Police, a total of 16,240 cases were registered nationwide during March of that year. These included 316 murder cases, 60 cases of armed robbery, 171 cases of robbery or snatching, 866 theft cases, 83 abduction cases, and 2,054 cases involving violence against women and children. In February of the same year, the total number of registered cases was 13,002, including 300 murder cases, 74 armed robberies, 153 robberies or snatchings, and 673 thefts. Thus, the numbers of registered murder cases, robberies or snatchings, thefts, and total cases were higher in March than in February. These March 2025 statistics show that a large number of crime-related cases were recorded during a calendar month that almost entirely overlapped Ramadan. They do not, however, provide a separate record of crimes committed on the specific days of Ramadan. [30] [31] [32]
| Type of crime | February 2025 | March 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Murder cases | 300 | 316 |
| Armed robbery | 74 | 60 |
| Robbery / snatching | 153 | 171 |
| Theft | 673 | 866 |
| Abduction | 78 | 83 |
| Violence against women and children | 1,430 | 2,054 |
| Total registered cases | 13,002 | 16,240 |
An important distinction must be made when interpreting these statistics. Not all cases registered in March concern crimes committed in March; incidents from earlier periods can also be reported and recorded later. February had 28 days while March had 31, so total monthly numbers alone do not determine daily crime rates. The February and March case totals cannot establish the distinct effect of Ramadan upon criminal activity. The registered cases nevertheless include allegations of murder, theft, robbery, abduction, and violence against women and children. If the chaining of Satan is an actual supernatural means of preventing crime, identifying its effects would require crime data classified by the days of Ramadan, comparable periods before and afterward, and analysis of other social factors affecting crime. A religious declaration alone establishes no such effect.
Social and economic changes during Ramadan also affect human conduct. Patterns of demand for food products, transport, trade, shopping, and charitable activity change during the month. As Eid approaches, the movement of large numbers of people, cash transactions, and the buying and selling of goods increase. These changes can create new commercial opportunities as well as opportunities for crime. Theft, fraud, food adulteration, hoarding, and extortion often involve attempts to obtain economic advantage. Domestic violence, personal conflicts, and organized crime likewise involve interpersonal relationships, imbalances of power, and social conditions. No assumption about Satan’s presence or absence is required to identify these real causes of crime. Social and economic data can help explain criminal behavior during Ramadan, but those crimes do not establish the existence or activity of a supernatural devil.
These statistics do not provide any specific, testable indicator of Satan’s alleged influence. If crime decreases in a region during Ramadan, that does not establish that Satan’s captivity caused the reduction. Policing, social conditions, patterns of movement, economic changes, and other real factors may be involved. If crime increases, the increase can instead be attributed to human impulses or other causes of criminal behavior. In this way, the claim that Satan is captive can be maintained regardless of whether crime rises or falls. But adjusting an unproven claim to fit any outcome does not establish its factual truth. To accept the chaining of Satan as an actual event, the first requirement is independent evidence that Satan exists and that his powers change during Ramadan—not merely figures describing crime.
The effects of religious observance upon human behavior can be observed; Satan’s captivity cannot. During Ramadan, one person may give more charity, control eating habits, participate in community cooperation, or decide to avoid crime. These are real and observable behaviors. During the same month, someone else may engage in lying, fraud, theft, or violence. Those behaviors are equally real and open to investigation. Their relationships with belief, family, education, social surroundings, and personal circumstances can be studied. But no established scientific basis distinguishes a decision supposedly caused by Satan’s whispering from a decision supposedly changed by Satan’s captivity. The idea of Satan therefore remains an additional, unproven cause inserted into explanations of human behavior.
According to Islamic sources, human beings possess evil impulses, Satan whispers into their hearts, and devils are chained during Ramadan. Accepting these three propositions together raises the question of how to identify the separate contributions of human desires and supernatural temptation. Yet the causes of human conduct established by scientific research involve observable biological, psychological, and social processes. No comparable evidence exists for Satan’s alleged presence or imprisonment. Real-world data, including Bangladesh’s crime statistics, provide material for studying criminal tendencies and social conditions; they do not serve as evidence that Satan exists or is imprisoned. The central weakness in the belief that devils are chained during Ramadan is that no causal connection has been established between their alleged captivity and any change in human conduct, whatever that change may be. Yet the captivity itself is presented as a real supernatural event. Scientific and social explanations of wrongdoing can be investigated; the chaining of Satan remains an unproven belief dependent upon religious declarations.
Ramadan-Related Crime and Religious Coercion
Ramadan is promoted as a special period of self-restraint, moral purification, and abstention from sin. Yet murders, robberies, extortion, fraud, food adulteration, and violence continue throughout this month. Increased demand for food products, Eid shopping, travel, and financial transactions during Ramadan can also create new opportunities for criminals. During Ramadan in 2025, the Director General of Bangladesh’s Rapid Action Battalion, A. K. M. Shahidur Rahman, publicly stated that robberies and extortion had increased at the beginning of Ramadan as market activity and cash transactions rose. Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha published his remarks on March 30. The same month, the Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution announced special nationwide operations to prevent food adulteration and enforce product standards. Such events underscore the significance of economic self-interest, opportunistic behavior, and law enforcement in understanding crime. The religious declaration that Satan is chained does not provide an alternative explanation of these actual causes. [33] [34]
Incidents of religious coercion during Ramadan are even more troubling. In Bangladesh, individuals and groups have threatened people, demanded the closure of restaurants, and carried out attacks over food establishments remaining open or people eating publicly during the day in Ramadan. On March 15, 2024, Rajib Kumar Dey Raju, the owner of the Tinbhai Restaurant near Sylhet’s Osmani Medical College Hospital, was injured in an attack on the establishment. According to statements attributed to him in news reports, he had kept the restaurant open during the day to meet the needs of Hindu patients and their relatives visiting the hospital. He had even put up a curtain out of consideration for people observing the fast. Nevertheless, he received threats, and his restaurant was subsequently attacked and vandalized. This incident illustrates how the purported sanctity of one’s own religious observance can be invoked to attack other people’s freedom to obtain food and conduct business. [35]
Raju said that he kept the restaurant open during the daytime in Ramadan for Hindu patients arriving at the hospital and their relatives.
On March 5, 2025, the human rights organization Ain o Salish Kendra expressed deep concern over the forced closure of food establishments in different parts of Bangladesh during Ramadan. Its statement noted that some groups were demanding that food shops close during daylight hours under the pretext of protecting Ramadan’s sanctity, and that owners were being forced to comply for fear of their safety. The organization also raised concerns about access to food and basic rights for women, children, elderly people, working people, and others. The issue extends beyond whether a particular individual fasts. A religious belief is being imposed upon other people as a compulsory code of conduct. Fasting voluntarily is an exercise of personal religious freedom; threatening others into refraining from selling or consuming food is not an exercise of that freedom, but an assault upon other people’s rights. [36]
According to media reports, certain groups have been imposing unwarranted restrictions on food shops, demanding their closure during daylight hours.
These acts of religious coercion have a significant connection to the belief that Satan is chained during Ramadan. Satan is blamed for tempting people toward evil thoughts and wrongdoing, yet during the same religious month some people commit violence and exercise coercion in the name of religious observance. An examination of their conduct points to ideas of religious authority, social pressure, intolerance, and the desire to control the behavior of others. There is no need to attribute any of this to an invisible entity. Instead, the incidents show how treating religious beliefs as unquestionable authority can lead people to regard attacks upon individual freedom as moral duties. Religious sanctity gives no one the right to control another person’s access to food, livelihood, or personal freedom. A video of an actual incident in Bangladesh is provided below.
Crime and religious coercion during Ramadan establish an important fact about human conduct: Human morality is not guaranteed by the sanctity of a religious month or by the alleged captivity of invisible devils. People’s decisions, education, social surroundings, interests, power, and accountability have real roles in shaping their behavior. The belief that Satan is imprisoned during Ramadan does not explain the operation of these actual causes. Preventing wrongdoing requires effective laws, accountability, social protection, and respect for other people’s rights. Human moral security cannot be founded on an unproven declaration that Satan has been chained.
Conclusion
The belief that devils are chained during Ramadan is a well-established supernatural claim within Islamic hadith literature. In Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, Muhammad declares that devils are chained when Ramadan begins. Yet the same hadith literature preserves an account of Satan approaching to take Ramadan charity provisions and Muhammad’s concern, during the last ten days of Ramadan, that Satan might whisper into people’s minds. Different narrations speak of devils being chained in general and of especially rebellious devils being chained in particular. Taken together, these accounts do not present a clear, unified picture of the nature, scope, or effectiveness of the captivity. Islamic commentators have variously understood it as literal imprisonment, limited imprisonment, a reduction in influence, or a metaphorical expression. None of these interpretations offers independent evidence that Satan actually exists or is held captive.
The geographical realities of Earth also reveal undefined elements of this religious claim. Ramadan does not begin at the same moment in every region. Islamic sources themselves report different dates of crescent sightings and the beginning of fasting across regions. Near the poles, unusually prolonged periods of daylight and darkness also necessitate special methods of calculating fasting times. While such schedules can be determined for human religious observance, there is no independent factual basis establishing when, where, or how the captivity of devils takes effect. Likewise, modern psychology and sociology have identified relationships between human behavior and the brain, education, experience, economic circumstances, and social surroundings. But no supernatural influence of Satan upon particular thoughts or actions, or the cessation of such influence during Ramadan, has been established.
Murders, thefts, robberies, fraud, food adulteration, and religious coercion committed during Ramadan also demonstrate the significance of real personal and social causes of human conduct. The causes of crime can be investigated through human decisions, self-interest, social relationships, and institutional failures. Likewise, when someone practices self-restraint during Ramadan, the influence of religious observance and personal choice can be investigated. No independent evidence establishes that the captivity of Satan causes these changes. Whatever changes occur in human behavior, the claim that Satan is chained does not thereby become an empirically established fact rather than a religious belief.
The fundamental problem with the claim that devils are chained during Ramadan is that Satan’s existence is unproven, his captivity is unproven, and the alleged effects of that captivity are unproven. Yet all three unproven claims are accepted as true on the basis of Muhammad’s religious authority. Believing a person’s words to be a divine report does not establish the truth of the supernatural events described. A religious text’s declaration and evidence that an event occurred are not the same thing. The claim that Satan is chained is therefore not part of evidence-based knowledge; it is a blind belief founded on religious authority. In understanding human morality, criminal tendencies, and social behavior, observable facts, real-world causes, and rational investigation provide an effective foundation—not the imagined activities of an invisible Satan.
References
- Surah An-Najm, verses 3–4 ↩︎
- Surah An-Nisa, verse 65 ↩︎
- Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 36 ↩︎
- Sunan Abi Dawud, Book of Knowledge, chapter on writing down knowledge, hadith 3646; no. 3607 in the Islamic Foundation edition ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Fasting, hadith 1899 ↩︎
- Sahih Muslim, Book of Fasting, virtues of Ramadan, hadith 1079a ↩︎
- Sahih Muslim, Book of Fasting, hadith 1079b ↩︎
- Sunan an-Nasa’i, Book of Fasting, hadith 2106 ↩︎
- Surah As-Saffat, verse 7 ↩︎
- Surah Al-Hajj, verse 3 ↩︎
- IslamQA, question 256868: examination of the interpretation that only rebellious devils are chained during Ramadan ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, hadith 2311: the three nights of guarding Ramadan charity ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, hadith 3275: the person who approached Abu Hurayrah was Satan ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, hadith 2035: Safiyyah’s visit during the last ten days of Ramadan ↩︎
- Sahih Muslim, hadith 2175a: concern that Satan might whisper into people’s hearts ↩︎
- NASA, Facts About Earth: Earth’s rotation, revolution, and axial tilt ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Fasting, hadith 1909: beginning and ending the fast upon sighting the crescent ↩︎
- Sahih Muslim, Book of Fasting, hadith 1087: separate moon sightings in different regions ↩︎
- Islamweb, fatwa 40176: disagreement over whether regional differences in crescent sightings should be recognized ↩︎
- Saudi Arabia’s official Umm Al-Qura Gazette: announcement that Ramadan would begin on February 18, 2026 ↩︎
- The Daily Star: Ramadan beginning in Bangladesh on February 19, 2026 ↩︎
- Turkey’s Diyanet: official announcement of the 2026 beginning of Ramadan ↩︎
- Government of Indonesia: official announcement of February 19, 2026 ↩︎
- The Quran, Surah Al-A’raf, verse 27: the invisible presence of Satan and his followers ↩︎
- The Quran, Surah An-Nas, verses 1–6: the whisperer who insinuates evil into people’s hearts ↩︎
- Sahih Muslim, Book of the Characteristics of the Day of Judgment, Paradise and Hell, hadith 2814a: a jinn companion assigned to every person ↩︎
- The Quran, Surah Yusuf, verse 53: the human self’s inclination toward wrongdoing ↩︎
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of Fasting, hadith 1903: false speech and wrongful conduct while fasting ↩︎
- World Health Organization: individual, interpersonal, social, and structural risk factors for violence against women ↩︎
- Bangladesh Police: official crime statistics for February 2025 ↩︎
- Bangladesh Police: official crime statistics for March 2025 ↩︎
- Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha: official announcement that Ramadan began on March 2, 2025 ↩︎
- Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha, March 30, 2025: statement by the RAB Director General on robbery and extortion during Ramadan ↩︎
- Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha, February 26, 2025: BSTI’s special campaign against food adulteration during Ramadan ↩︎
- Sylhet Today, March 15, 2024: restaurant attacked in Sylhet for opening during daylight hours; one injured ↩︎
- The Daily Star, March 5, 2025: ASK concerned over forced closures of food shops during Ramadan ↩︎