wahabism chapter1

- An attempt has been made to improve the highly non-standard use of transliteration of arabic names and terms. .

It must be noted that this is not a complete overhaul of the translation, that being outside the scope and expertise of our team. However, a comparison to the original Persian text has been made.

Users who wish to see the translation as it was published must refer to the printed copies available in bookshops. Those who understand Persian are advised to refer directly to the original book in that language.

In summary, this online text is not exactly as translated by its translator. It has undergone changes which we hope are improvements. However, they are not comprehensive and we realize that they are not the solution to the challenge of having good quality English translations.

We hope that our decision to present this translation online, in its amended form, along with this notice would help achieve three objectives:

One: allow a world audience to benefit from a scholarly and important book by a notable scholar

Two: alert this world audience that this translation is deficient and our efforts at correction are but a humble contribution towards the goal of having access to quality Islamic literature in English.

Three: highlight the fact that unless translations of important books are carried out professionally from the beginning, they have the potential to mislead and belittle the worth of the great original books and their authors that they aim to represent in translation.

Chapter 1

Familiarity with the Life of the Founder of Wahhabism

Wahhabism is ascribed unto Shaykh Muhammad, the son of ’Abd al-Wahhab of Najd. This ascription has been derived from the name of his father ’Abd al-Wahhab. And as some scholars put it, the reason why this creed has not been attributed to Shaykh Muhammad himself and has not been called Muhammadiyyah is for fear lest the followers of this creed would find a kind of association with the name of the Holy Prophet (s) [1] and would misuse this ascription. Shaykh Muhammad was born in 1115 A.H.  in the city of ‘Uyayna which was located in Najd. His father was a judge in this city. Ever since his childhood, Shaykh Muhammad had a great liking for the study of books on tafsir (Qur’anic interpretation), hadith (tradition), and aqa’id (principles of beliefs). He learned the Hanbali jurisprudence from his father who was one of the Hanbali scholars. From the bloom of youth, he regarded as indecent many of the religious doings of the people of Najd. After going on a pilgrimage to the house of Allah and performing its rites, he headed for Medina where he rejected the resorting of the people to the Holy Prophet (s) near his shrine. He then returned to Najd, and from there he went to Basrah with the aim of later leaving Basrah for Damascus.He spent some time in Basrah and embarked on opposing many doings of the people. The people of Basrah, however, cast him out of their city. While on his way from Basrah to the city of al-Zubayr, he was about to perish due to the intensity of the heat, thirst, and toll of walking in the desert. But a man from al-Zubayr, seeing the Shaykh clad like the clergy, endeavoured to save him. He gave the Shaykh a gulp of water, set him on a mount, and took him to the city of al-Zubayr. The Shaykh wanted to travel from al-Zubayr to Damascus, but as he did not have sufficient provisions and could not afford the expenses of the journey, he changed his destination and headed for the city of al-‘Ahsa. From there, he decided to go to Huraymala, one of the cities of Najd.

At this time which was the year 1139 AH, his father ’Abd al-Wahhab had been transferred from ‘Uyayna to Huraymala. Shaykh Muhammad accompanied his father and learned (the material in) some books from his father. He set out on rejecting the beliefs of the people of Najd. For this reason, altercation and debates ensued between him and his father. In like manner, serious and violent disputes erupted between him and the people of Najd. This matter lasted several years until his father Shaykh ‘Abd al-Wahhab passed away in the year 1153. [2]

After the demise of his father, Shaykh Muhammad embarked on expressing his own beliefs and rejecting part of the religious acts of the people. A group of the people of Huraymala followed him and his work won fame. He departed from Huraymala for the city of ‘Uyayna. At that time, ‘Uthman ibn Hamd was the head of ‘Uyayna. ‘Uthman received the Shaykh, honoured him and made the decision to assist him. In return, Shaykh Muhammad also expressed hope that all the people of Najd would obey ‘Uthman ibn Hamd. The news of Shaykh Muhammad's call and doings reached the ruler of al-‘Ahsa. He wrote a letter to ‘Uthman. The consequence of this letter was that ‘Uthman summoned the Shaykh and dismissed him. Shaykh Muhammad replied that if you help me, you will become the leader of the entire Najd. ‘Uthman, however, avoided him and cast him out of the city of ‘Uyayna.

In the year 1160, after being expelled from ‘Uyayna, Shaykh Muhammad headed for al-Dar’iyya, one of the renowned cities of Najd. At that time, Muhammad ibn Sa’ud  (the ancestor of Aal Sa’ud) was the emir of al-Dar’iyya, He went to see the Shaykh and gave him tidings of glory and goodness. The Shaykh too gave him tidings of power and domination over all the cities of Najd. And in this way, the relationship between Shaykh Muhammad and Al Sa’ud commenced. [3]

At the time when Shaykh Muhammad went to al-Dar’iyya and made an agreement with Muhammad ibn Sa’ud, the people of al-Dar’iyya lived in utmost destitution and need.

Relating from (‘Uthman) Ibn Bishr al-Najdi, al-Alusi notes that:

I (Ibn Bishr) initially witnessed the poverty of the people of al-Dar’iyya. I had seen that city at the time of Sa’ud, when its people had enjoyed enormous wealth, their weapons were decorated with gold and silver and they mounted thoroughbred horses. They wore sumptuous clothes and were well provided with all the means of prosperity, so much so that it is beyond the scope of expression.

One day in a bazaar in al-Dar’iyya, I saw men on one side and women on the other. In the bazaar, there was a huge amount of gold, silver, and weapons and a large number of camels, sheep, horses, expensive clothes, and much meat, wheat, and other edibles, so much so that they could not be recounted. The bazaar extended as far as the eye could see. And I could hear the call of the sellers and buyers, a sound which hummed like the buzz of the bee. One (of them) would say, “I sold (my goods)”, and the other (one) would say, “I bought (something)”. [4]

Of course, Ibn Bishr had not given an account as to how and from where such an enormous wealth had been amassed. But the trend of history indicates that it had been accumulated by attacking the Muslims of other tribes and cities (on the charge of not accepting his beliefs) and by plundering and taking as booty their properties. With regard to the war booties which Shaykh Muhammad took (from the Muslims of that region), his policy was to spend it in any way he desired. At times, he granted unto only two or three people all the war booties which amounted to a very large amount. No matter what the booties were, they were in the possession of the Shaykh, and the Emir of Najd could have a share of the booties on permission of the Shaykh.

One of the biggest flaws during the Shaykh's life was the fact that he treated Muslims who did not follow his notorious beliefs as infidels deserving to be fought against. He maintained no esteem for their life or property.

In short, Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab called (the people) to tawhid (monotheism) but an erroneous tawhid which he created himself, not the real tawhid promulgated by the Qur’an. Whoever adhered to it would have immunity as far as his life and property were concerned, else (the dissolution of) his life and property would, like that of the infidels, be religiously lawful and permissible.

The wars which the Wahhabis waged in Najd and outside Najd such as in Yemen, Hijaz, the vicinity of Syria and Iraq were on this basis. Any city which they conquered by war and domination was religiously lawful for them. If they could, they would establish it as their own possession, otherwise they would be content with the booty they had taken. [5]

Those who adhered to his beliefs and hearkened to his call had to pledge allegiance to him. If anyone rose up in rebellion, he was killed and his property divided. On the basis of this policy, for instance, they killed three hundred men from a village called al-Fusul, located in the city of al-‘Ahsa and pillaged their property. [6]

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab died in the year 1206. [7] After the demise of Shaykh Muhammad, his followers also pursued this policy and kept alive his innovation and misguidance. For instance, in the year 1216, the Wahhabi emir Sa’ud mobilized an army of twenty thousand warriors and made an inroad on the city of Karbala. At this time, Karbala enjoyed utmost fame and grandeur. Iranian, Turkish, Arab, and other pilgrims turned to it. After laying siege to the city, Sa’ud finally entered it and brutally massacred the defenders and inhabitants of the city.

The Wahhabi army created such a public disgrace in the city of Karbala that it cannot be put to words. They killed over five thousand people. After emir Sa’ud found leisure from the affairs of the war, he turned to the treasures in the shrine of Imam Husayn (‘a). These treasures consisted of various properties and precious objects. He took away and plundered whatever he found there. After this episode, Karbala was transformed into a situation that the poets composed elegies for it. [8] For over twelve years, the Wahhabis, every now and then, invaded and looted the city of  Karbala and its suburbs, as well as the city of Najaf .The first of these invasions took place in the year 1216 as already mentioned. According to the writings of all Shi’i writers, this invasion took place on Eid al-Ghadir (a festival celebrating the designation by Prophet Muhammad (s) of Imam Ali's (‘a) as his successors of the same year.

The late ’Allama Sayyid Muhammad Jawwad al-‘Amili says:

“this part of the book Miftah al-Kirama was completed by the writer after midnight of the ninth of the holy month of Ramadan 1225 AH while in anxiety and apprehension, for the ‘Unayza Arabs who are Wahhabi had laid siege on the Najaf al-‘Ashraf and on the place where Imam Husayn (‘a) had been martyred. They blocked the roads, plundered the pilgrims to the shrine of Imam Husayn (‘a) who were returning to their own lands after pilgrimage in the middle of Sha’ban, and massacred a large number of them (mostly from among Iranian pilgrims). It is said that the number of those killed (this time) probably amounted to one hundred and fifty, some say less..” [9]

The tawhid to which Shaykh Muhammad and his followers invited the people in which they made permissible the seizure of the life and property of whoever did not accept it, consisted of proving a location for Allah the Almighty and regarding Him as having limbs and organs, going by the apparent meaning of some of the Qur’anic verses and traditions.

In this regard, Alusi has noted that the Wahhabis, adhering to Ibn Taymiyya, confirm the traditions which express Allah's descent into the heavens. They say that Allah descends into the heavens from the empyrean and says:

“Is there a person who seeks forgiveness for his sins?”

In like manner, they also acknowledge that on the Judgment Day, Allah comes to the place where mankind is gathered because He Himself has said:

“And your Lord comes and (also) all the angles in ranks (Fajr:22).”

And Allah can draw near to any of His creations in any way He wants:

“…and We are nearer to him than his life vein” (Qaf:16)” [10]

As indicated in his book entitled al-Radd ‘ala al-‘Akhna’i, Ibn Taymiyya regarded the traditions related to going on pilgrimage to the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) as forged. He has pointed out that it is a grave mistake if a person thinks that the Holy Prophet's being is the same as that of his lifetime even after his demise.

Shaykh Muhammad and his followers have expressed similar statements in a more vehement manner.

The false beliefs and statements of the Wahhabis has prompted some people, who have studied Islam from their viewpoint, to say that Islam is a strict and rigid religion and that it is not suitable for all ages (of human history).

An American scholar, Lothrop Stoddard, says:

“The Wahhabis have gone to extremes as far as prejudice is concerned. In the meantime, a group of fault-finders have risen and, voicing out the Wahhabi course of action, have said that the essence and nature of Islam does not fit in with the demands of different times. Therefore it does not have conformity with progress and evolution of the society and does not follow changes brought about by time.” [11]

From the time that Shaykh Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab expressed his views and called on the people to accept them, a large group of eminent scholars voiced opposition to his beliefs. The first person to oppose him severely was his father ‘Abd al-Wahhab and then his brother Sulayman ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab, both of whom are deemed as Hanbali scholars.

Shaykh Sulayman compiled a book entitled al-Sawa’iq al-ilahiyya fi al-radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya in which he refuted the views of his brother.

[Ahmad] Zayni Dihlan says:

“The father of Shaykh Muhammad was a righteous man of learning. His brother Shaykh Sulayman was also regarded as a scholar. Shaykh ’Abd al-Wahhab and Shaykh Sulayman both reproached Shaykh Muhammad and warned the people against him from the very beginning. That is to say, from the time when Shaykh Muhammad was studying in Medina. It was through Shaykh Muhammad's words and deeds that they had realized he cherished such a claim.” [12]

The Egyptian scholar ‘Abbas Mahmud al-‘Aqqad said:

“The greatest opponent of Shaykh Muhammad was his brother Shaykh Sulayman, the writer of al-Sawa’iq al-ilahiyya, who did not acknowledge for his brother a position of ijtihad and correct understanding of the Qur’an and sunnah.”

Al-‘Aqqad has also noted that Shaykh Sulayman said the following while severely refuting his brother's statements:

“Matters in which the Wahhabis have regarded as polytheism and unbelief, and used as pretexts to make permissible the taking of life and property of the Muslims existed at the time of the A’imma (leaders) of Islam. But no one has heard or narrated from the Imams of Islam that those who commit these acts are infidels or apostates. Neither have the Imams issued order of Holy war (jihad) against them. Nor have they called the cities of Muslims as the cities of polytheism and unbelief, as you have.” [13]

In conclusion, it must be noted that Shaykh Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab was not the originater and innovator of the beliefs of the Wahhabis. But centuries before him, his ideas had been expressed in different forms by people such as Ibn Taymiyya al-Harrani and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim. However it had not been turned into a new creed and had not found many followers.

Refutations of the true leader of the Wahhabis

Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Halim, known as Ibn Taymiyya, was a Hanbali scholar who died in 728 A.H. As he expressed views and beliefs contrary to the views held by all Islamic sects, he was constantly opposed by other scholars. Investigators are of the view that the beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya later formed the principles of beliefs of the Wahhabis.

When lbn Taymiyya made his views public and wrote books in this regard, the scholars of Islam, headed by the Sunni scholars’ulama, did two things to preclude the prevalence of corruption:

A) They criticized his views and beliefs. In this regard, we will refer to some books which have been written as a criticism to his beliefs:

1)  Shifa’ al-saqam fi ziyarat qabr khayr al-anam,: by Taqi al-Din al-Subki.

2)  Al-Durrat al-mudi’a fi al-radd ‘ala Ibn Taymiyya, by Taqi al-Din al-Subki.

3) Al-Maqalat al-mardiyya, compiled by the supreme judge (qadi al-qudat) of the Maliki’s by the name of Taqi al-Din Abi ‘Abdillah al-‘Akhna’i.

4)  Najm al-muhtadi wa rajm al-muqtadi, by Fakhr bin Muhammad al-Qurashi.

5)  Daf’ al-shubha, by Taqi al-Din al-Hisni.

6)  Al-Tuhfat al-mukhtara fi al-radd ‘ala munkir al-ziyara, by Taj al-Din.

These are some of the refutations written on the beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya. In this way, the baselessness of his views has become evident.

B) The Sunni scholars and fuqaha of his time have accused him of immorality and have even at times excommunicated him and have revealed his heresy.

When his views about going on pilgrimage to the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) were expressed in written form for the Supreme Judge of Egypt, al-Badr ibn Jama’a, he wrote the following at the bottom of the page:

“Going on pilgrimage to the (shrine of the) Holy Prophet (s) is a virtue, the Sunnah and all scholarsscholars unanimously accept it. He who regards going on pilgrimage to the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) as being religiously unlawful, must be rebuked by the scholarsscholars and must be barred from making such statements. If these measures are not effective, he must be imprisoned and exposed to the people, so that the latter would not follow him”.

Not only did the supreme Judge of the Shafi’i school of thought express such a view about him, but also the Supreme Judges of the Maliki and Hanbali schools of thought in Egypt also confirmed his views in one way or the other. For more details in this regard, you can refer to Daf’ a -Shubha written by Taqi al-Din al-Hisni.

Apart from this, his contemporary al-Dhahabi, who was a great writer of the eighth century A.H. and who has written valuable works on history and biography, has, in a letter to him, called him an equal match to al-Hajjaj al-Thaqafi as far as spreading corruption and deviation are concerned. (This letter has been disseminated by the writer of Takmila al-sayf al-saqil on page 190 of his book, as recorded by the late ’Allama al-‘Amini in the fifth volume of Al-Ghadir on pages 87-89. Those interested may refer to these books.)

When Ibn Taymiyya died in 728 AH in a prison in Damascus, his movement underwent a decline. Though his renowned student Ibn al-Qayyim embarked on propagating the views of his master but did not succeed. No trace of such beliefs and ideas was left in later periods.

But when the son of ’Abd al-Wahhab came under the influence of the beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya, and when Al -Sa’ud supported him to strengthen the foundations of their own rule over Najd, once again the hereditary beliefs of Ibn Taymiyya spread in the minds of some of the people of Najd like cancer in the body. In the wake of rigid bias, and unfortunately in the name of tawhid (monotheism), a blood bath was evoked under the title of jihad against the unbelievers and polytheists. Tens of thousands of men, women, and children were victimized by it. Once again, a new sect sprang up in the Muslim community and regret arose from that day the haramayn sharifayn (the two holy sanctuaries of Mecca and Medina) were put under the possession of this group as a result of compromise with Britain and the other superpowers of that time. Also due to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and division of the Arab countries among the superpowers, the Wahhabis of Najd gained control over Mecca and Medina, as well as other vestiges of Islam. They exerted utmost effort in annihilating the graves of the awliya Allah and in transgressing in disrespect against the progeny of the Prophet (s) by destroying their shrines and other historical remains attributed to them.

In this regard, the Shi’a scholars, alongside the Sunni scholars as we have mentioned above, made tremendous efforts to criticize the views of ’Abd al-Wahhab. Both groups commenced logical and scholarly jihad in the best possible manner.

The first refutation which the Sunni scholars wrote on the views of Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab was the book entitled Al-Sawa’iq al-Ilahiyyah fi al-radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya written by Shaykh Sulayman ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab, the brother of  Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab.

The first book written by the Shi’a scholars to refute the views of Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab was Manhaj al-Rashad, penned by the honourable late Shaykh Ja’far Kashif al-Ghita (died 1228 AH). He wrote this book as a reply to a treatise which one of the Emirs from among House of Sa’ud by the name of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Sa’ud had sent to him. In that treatise, ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Sa’ud had gathered all views of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and tried to prove them from the Qur’an and Sunnah. This book was published in 1343 A.H  in Najaf. After the work of this dignitary, numerous refutations and criticisms were written against the movement Wahhabism in the region. Most of these books have been published.

But now, the Wahhabi movements have increased as a result of the massive wealth that the Sa’udis have amassed by way of selling oil. Every day and month, the modern Abu Jahls and Abu Lahabs who have taken control of Ka’ba, attack the Islamic sanctities in one way or the other. Each day, the vestiges of Islam are ruined. That which has given impetus to their movement is the secret signs and go-aheads given by their Western masters who are appalled by the unity of the Muslims. They fear this unity more than they fear international communism. Therefore they have no choice, but to expedite the creation of religions and faiths, so as to spoil a part of the money they pay to the Wahhabi government for oil and ultimately to severely harm the unity of the Muslims and engage them in branding one another as immoral and in excommunicating one another.

In this book, we will try to reveal their beliefs and remove the obscurities regarding Wahhabism. We will remove the dark viels of doubts and hope to clarify the facts that the beliefs of all Muslims of the world, originate from the Qur’an and the blessed Sunnah and that the movements of Wahhabism and its deeds are against the teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (s).

Footnotes: 

[1] Farid Wajdi, Da’irat al-ma’arif al-qarn al-‘ishrin, vol. 10, p. 871, quoting from the magazine Al-Muqtataf, vol. 27, p. 893.

[2] Summarised from the Ta’rikh Najd of al-‘Alusi, pp. 111-113.

[3] An Ottoman writer in his book Ta’rikh Baghdad, p. 152, has noted that the relationship between Shaykh Muhammad and Aal Sa’ud began in another manner. But what has been stated here seems to be more correct

[4] al-‘Alusi, Ta’rikh Najd, pp. 117-118.

[5] Jazirat al-‘Arab fi al-qarn al-‘ishrin, p. 341.

[6] Ta’rikh al-mamlakat al-‘arabiyya al-Sa’udiyya, vol. 1, p. 51.

[7] There are other views concerning the date of birth of Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Wahhab and that of his death.

[8] Dr. ‘Abd al-Jawwad al-Kalidar, Ta’rikh Karbala, pp. 172-174.

[9] Sayyid Muhammad Jawwad al-‘Amili, Miftah al-kiramah, vol. 7, p. 653.

[10] al-‘Alusi, Ta’rikh Najd, pp. 90-91; Ibn Taymiyya, al-Risala al-`aqida al–hamawiyya al-kubra, risalah no. 11 from his Majmu’ al-rasa’il al-kubra, pp. 429-432.

[11] Lothrop Stoddard, The New World of Islam, (London, 1922), vol. 1, p. 264.

[12] Ahmad Zayni Dihlan, al-Futuhat al-Islamiyya, vol. 2, p. 357.

[13] Al-‘Islam fi al-qarn al-‘ishrin, (Egypt), pp. 72-73.

Chapter 2

Wahhabis and the Renovation of Graves of Awliya Allah

Amongst the matters about which the Wahhabis are most sensitive is the matter of renovation of graves and construction over the graves of Prophets, Imams and the pious ones.

This matter was at first initiated by Ibn Taymiyya and his famous student Ibn al-Qayyim and they gave their verdicts (fatawa) in prohibiting the construction of a structure and the necessity of its destruction.

Ibn al-Qayyim in his book Zad al-ma’ad fi huda khayr al-‘ibad [1] says as such:

It is obligatory to destroy the structure constructed over the grave and after gaining power for their destruction it is not permissible to reinstate them even for one day.

In the year 1344 AH when the Sa’uds had gained control over Mecca, Medina and its surroundings, they planned a pretext for destroying the graves of Baqi’ and the traces of household and companions of the Holy Prophet (s). By getting verdict (fatwa) from the scholars of Medina they wanted to pave the way for demolition and preparing the minds of the people of Hijaz who were never in favour of such action. For this reason they sent the Chief Judge of Najd, Sulayman bin Bulayhid towards Medina for the purpose of deriving benefit from the scholars of that place regarding this matter. Thus he planned the questions in such a manner that its answers (as per the viewpoint of the Wahhabis) were hidden in the questions itself. And in this way he declared to the muftis that their replies should match the answers which had come in the questions; otherwise they would be called as polytheists and be killed if they would not repent.

The questions and answers were published in the newspaper Umm al-Qura in Mecca in the month of Shawwal 1344 AH. [2] As a result of this publication, a severe reaction took place among the Muslims mainly Sunnis and Shi’as because they were aware that after taking the verdict (fatwa) even if it was by way of force, the destruction of graves of the leaders of Islam would commence.

Incidentally, after taking the verdict from fifteen scholars of Medina and publishing it in Hijaz, the destruction of the traces of the household of the Prophet (s) began on the 8th of Shawwal of the same year. The entire traces of Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) and the companions of the Holy Prophet (s) disappeared and the valuable properties of the shrine of the Holy Imams (‘a) at Baqi’ were plundered and the graveyard of Baqi’ was turned into a heap of dung which would fill one with horror while looking at it.

Now we will mention some of the questions so that it becomes clear as to how the answers had been placed in the question itself. That is to say, the aim was not to ask any questions but gain a pretext for destroying the traces of Messengership. If the aim was truly conception and realism it was meaningless for the inquirer to place the answers in the questions itself. Instead we can deduce from it that the questions and answers were written on a piece of paper which they took to the scholars (ulama) of Medina only for getting their signature since it is un-imaginable that the famous scholars of Medina who for years were propagators and protecters of the traces of the Holy Prophet (s) and the visitors to his grave would, all of a sudden, accept the views of others and give their verdict for the prohibition of construction and the necessity of its destruction.

Sulayman bin Bulayhid says in his questions:

What are the views of the scholars of Medina who, may God increase their knowledge and insight, about construction over the graves and setting them as mosques? Is it permissible or not? And if it is not permissible and is strictly prohibited in Islam, then is it necessary and compulsory to destroy them and prevent the people from reciting prayers near it or not?

If in one endowed (waqf) land like Baqi’ construction over the grave becomes an obstacle from making use of those sections which are over that, then is this act not usurption of a portion of the waqf?

The scholars of Medina under threat and compulsion gave replies to the questions of Shaykh as follows:

Construction over the graves is forbidden. Based on some traditions proving its prohibition, a group have given verdict (fatwa) for the destruction of the same. In this matter they have made use of the tradition which Abu al-Hayyaj has narrated from ‘Ali (r). The latter told him - I am entrusting you with a work which the Messenger of God (s) had entrusted me with the same. Don't see any picture but that you erase it and don't see any grave but that you level it.

Shaykh Najdi in an article, which was published in the newspaper Umm al-Qura No. Jamadi al-thani 1345 AH, says: 

Construction of dome and structure was in vogue from 5th century AH.

These are a few examples of the sayings of Wahhabis about renovation of graves and mostly they put forth two reasons in support of their sayings:

1. Consensus of the scholars of Islam about its being prohibited.

2. Tradition of Abu al-Hayyaj from Ali (‘a) and some other similar ones.

It should be known that our discussion at present is about renovation of graves and construction of bower or ceiling over them. However the matter of ziyara - visitation to graves - will be discussed separately.

For making the matter clear, we will discuss this issue from three perspectives:

1. What is the view of the Qur’an regarding this matter? Can we derive the judgement from the Qur’an?

2. Does the Islamic ummah in reality have consensus in its being prohibited or is it that in all the Islamic ages the matter was something else and renovation of graves and construction of house was in vogue during the period of the Holy Prophet (s) himself and his companions?

3. What is the derivation of the tradition of Abu al-Hayyaj, Jabir, Umm Salama and Na’im which the Wahhabis utilise?

A. Qur’anic View-Point Regarding Renovation of Grave

The Qur’an has not directly passed a judgement about this matter but it is possible to derive its ruling from some of the relevant verses. The details follow.

1- Renovating and protecting the graves of the Prophets is nothing but paying respect to the Divine Rites.

The Holy Qur’an reckons the respect of Divine rites to be a sign of piety and purity of heart. It says:

“And whoever respects the signs of Allah, this surely is (the outcome) of the piety of hearts”. (Hajj: 32)

What is meant by respect of Divine rites?   is the plural of   and gives the meaning of sign and symbol. This verse does not show the sign of existence of God since the whole Universe is the sign of His existence. And nobody has said that respecting whatever things that exist in this Universe is the sign of piety. Instead, it shows the signs of His religion and thus the exegetes interpret this verse as “the Signs of religion of Allah”. [3]

If in the Qur’an, Safa and Marwa [4] and the camel which is to be sacrificed in Mina [5] are reckoned to be the rites of God it is for the reason that these are the signs of straight religion (Din-e-Hanif) and beliefs of Ibrahim. If Muzdalifa is considered to be al-mash’ar, it is because it is the sign of religion of God and stopping at this sign (during Haj) is practically acting on the religion and obedience to God.

If the entire Hajj rites are named as al-sha’air it is because these actions are the signs of divine and true religion.

In short, whatever are the signs and symbols of divine religion, respecting them is the source of nearness towards God. Indisputably, the Prophets and Awliya Allah who were the channel for propagating religion among the people are the greatest and the most evident signs of the divine religion. No just person can deny this fact that the existence of the Holy Prophet (s) and Imams (‘a) are from the proofs of Islam and are the signs of this holy religion and one of the ways of respecting them is protecting their graves and their remains and safeguarding them from any kind of destruction.

Anyhow, the matter of respect for the graves of awliya Allah (friends of God) becomes clear when we consider two things:

(a) The Prophets and awliya Allah, in particular those who have sacrificed their lives in the path of religion are from the divine sha’air (rites) and signs of religion.

(b) One of the ways of respecting this group after their demise is to safeguard and renovate their graves as well as protecting their school of thought. For this reason throughout the world, great religious and political leaders whose graves are a symbol of their school of thought are buried in such selected places which remain permanently safe. Safeguarding their grave from destruction is the sign of protection of their existence and eventually the sign of protection of their school of thought.

For understanding this fact it is necessary to examine and analyse accurately verse number 36 of Sura Hajj. Some of the pilgrims to the House of God take a camel along with themselves right from their houses to be sacrificed near the House of God. They earmark on this camel for sacrifice in the way of God and distinguish it from the other camels by putting a collar round its neck. As this camel is somehow related to God then according to the same verse it is considered to be the sha’air (rites) of God and according to the contents of verse 32 of Sura Hajj   should be respected. For example, no one should ride on that camel and water and grass should be given to her at the appropriate time till the time she is slaughtered.

When one camel which is earmarked for being sacrificed near the House of God is considered to be a part of sha’air (rites) and its honour and respect is found to be necessary, then why the Prophets, Imams, Scholars, Martyrs and those who right from the beginning of their life have put the collar of obedience and submission to God around their neck and have become a channel between God and His creatures are not to be considered a part of sha’air (rites) of God and their respect and honour not necessary? If really Ka’ba, Safa, Marwa, Mina and Arafat, which are all inanimate objects and no more than stone and mud, are part of the sha’air (rites) because of being related to the divine religion and each one requires obligatory honour and respect, then why the Divine Leaders, who are the preachers and protectors of the divine religion, and those things which are related to them not part of the sha’air (rites)!? [6]

We put the conscience of Wahhabis to justice in this matter. Do they doubt the Prophets and Messengers to be amongst the sha’air (rites) of Allah and do not they consider the protection of their traces and things related to them as honourable!? Does respect and honour mean renovating their graves and keeping them clean or rather destroying and turning them into a heap of ruins?

2- The Holy Qur’an very clearly instructs us to love the near ones of the Holy Prophet.

The Qur’an says:

“Say; I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives.” (Shura: 23)

From the view point of the general people who are referred to by this verse, is not the matter of the grave and its renovation as one of the ways of expressing love towards the household of the Holy Prophet (s)? We see that this custom was and is still prevailing amongst all the nations and they think this to be one way of expressing their love to the people in grave. Thus great political and religious personalities have been buried in the church or in famous shrines surrounded by flowers and trees.

3. Renovation of grave and the past generation

From the Qur’anic verses we come to know that respect towards the grave of a believer was one kind of practise which was in vogue amongst the nations prior to Islam.

About the companions of Kahf, Qur’an narrates that when their condition became known to the people of that time and they came near the entrance of the cave, they expressed two views about their graves

“…..Erect an edifice over them….,” (Kahf: 21)

“….Those who prevailed in their affair said: We will certainly raise a mosque over them”….. (Kahf: 21)

The Qur’an narrates these two views without any criticism. Of course it can be said that if either of these two views were wrong then surely Qur’an would have criticised them or would have narrated their action with condemnation. Anyhow these two views show that one of the ways of respect of the awliya Allah and virtuous people has been the protection of their shrines.

By paying attention to these three verses we can never declare the matter of renovation of graves of the awliya Allah, Prophets and the virtuous ones as prohibited and or an abominable affair. Instead we can interpret it to be one kind of respect to the sha’air (rites) of God and manifestation of mawadda fi al-qurba (love towards kinsfolk).

4. Elevation of Special Houses

The Qur’an sets forth one novel parable wherein the Light (nur) of Allah is compared to a lamp which is having a light within it, and this elegant and profound parable begins with the sentence    and ends with the sentence. 

After setting forth this parable which itself is having a lengthy discussion, Qur’an says:

“In houses which Allah has permitted to be exalted and that His name may be remembered in them; there, glorify Him therein in the mornings and the evenings, Men whom neither trade nor selling diverts from the remembrance of Allah”. (Nur: 36 & 37)

Argumentation of this verse requires, before anything else, two points to be clarified:

(a) What is meant by  (houses)?

(b) What is meant by    which has come in the meaning of raising and elevation?

Regarding the first word, we have to remind you that its objective is not limited to mosques. Instead it refers to mosques and houses such as the houses of Prophets and awliya Allah which possesses the aforesaid specialities mentioned in the verse and there is no reason to confine the meaning of the word to mosque. The whole of this  most common being the mosques and houses of the Prophets and the pious ones who have never been forgetful of the Hereafer, is the centre of Light (nur) of Allah and the flames of tawhid, purification and glorification. Instead it can be said that   here excludes the mosques because a house consists of four walls and surely a ceiling and if Ka’ba is called as   (house of Allah) it is because it possesses a ceiling. But we see that it is recommended (mustahab) that a mosque should be devoid of a ceiling and at present even Masjid al-Haram is without a ceiling. The verses of the Qur’an too show that by house is meant a place possessing a ceiling. It says:

“And were it not that all people had been a single nation, We would certainly have assigned to those who disbelieve in the Beneficient God (to make) of silver the roofs of their houses.” (Zukhruf: 33)

Anyhow   either refers to a place other than mosque or it consists of both mosque and house.

Now it is time to explain the meaning of the second word i.e. 

The word    in the Arabic language means 'to raise' or 'to elevate' and the verse explicitly says that God has permitted these houses to be elevated. This elevation either refers to physical elevation i.e. raising the base and the walls and protecting them from tumbling down as Qur’an has used the same meaning in the following verse, 

“And when Ibrahim and Ismail raised the foundations of the House” (Baqarah: 127)

or it refers to spiritual elevation i.e. God has given a special privilege to such houses and has raised their rank and position.

If we take the meaning of physical elevation, then it clearly shows that the houses of the Prophets and awliya Allah who are the true proofs of these houses, are worthy of renovation - whether during their lifetime or after their demise, whether they are buried there itself (like the house of the Holy Prophet (s), Imam al-Hadi and Imam al-‘Askari where their houses are their graves because they were buried in their own houses) or in some other place. Under any condition such houses are to be renovated and protected from ruin and destruction.

And if we take the meaning of spiritual elevation, then we conclude that God has permitted such houses to be honoured and respected and one of the ways of manifesting our respect to such houses is safeguarding them from destruction and renovating them and keeping them clean.

All these physical and spiritual elevation is because these houses belong to the divine men who were God's obedient servants and were submissive to His commands.

Despite these and such other verses it is a matter of shock as to how the Wahhabis have destroyed the traces of Messengership and ruined their houses and have turned into a heap of rubble, these lustrous places where men and women used to glorify and praise God, day and night, and gather in these places and recite supplications because of the spiritnal connection the owners of these houses had with God! This shows as to how they have openly and apparently disclosed their old enmity with the Holy Prophet (s) and his household (‘a) and his sincere companions!

In this connection we draw the attention of our readers to one tradition.

Anas bin Malik says: The Holy Prophet (s) recited this verse. At that time a person stood up and said:

refers to which house?

The Holy Prophet (s) said – “The house of the Prophets”.

Abu Bakr stood and said –“Is this house (refering to the house of ‘Ali and Fatima) included amongst them?

The Holy Prophet (s) replied   [7]

“Yes, it is the most important of all of them.”

B -THE ISLAMIC UMMAH AND RENOVATION OF GRAVES

The day when Islam spread out in the Arabian penninsula and its light gradually spread to the vital parts of the Middle East, the graves of the Prophets whose place of burial were known to the people were not only having ceiling and bower at that time but also a dome and place of gathering. Now too a part of their graves stand intact in the same form.

In Mecca itself, the graves of Isma’il (‘a) and his mother Hajar lie on a rock. The grave of Danial (‘a) is at Shush and of Hud (‘a), Salih (‘a), Yunus (‘a) and Dhu’l Kifl (‘a) at Iraq. The graves of the Prophets like Ibrahim (‘a) and his sons Ishaq (‘a), Ya’qub (‘a) and Yusuf (‘a) who were brought from Egypt to Bayt al-Maqdas by Musa (‘a) are in the occupied Quds and all of them possess structure, signs and symbols.

The grave of Hawwa is in Jeddah where the traces of it were destroyed after the conquest of tribe of Sa’uds and the reason this land is called as Jeddah is because of her grave in that place although this relationship may not be correct.

When the Muslims gained control over this place they never got disturbed and never issued any orders for its demolition.

If truly the renovation of graves and burial of the dead in a covered shrine is forbidden in Islam, then the first and foremost task of the Muslims of that time was to destroy all the graves existing in Jordan and Iraq and secondly prevent the restoration of any structure at all times. Not only have they not destroyed these shrines but also during the entire 14 centuries they have strived in protecting and renovating any traces left from the previous Prophets.

By their God-gifted wisdom they took the protection of the remains of the Prophets to be one way of expressing their respect towards them and by this action reckoned themselves to be pious and virtuous.

Ibn Taymiyya in his book al-Sirat al-mustaqim says:

“At the time of victory of al-Quds the graves of Prophets consisted of a constructed structure but its doors were closed till the fourth centry hijri” [8]

If truly construction over the graves was a prohibited affair, then its demolition was naturally necessary and its continuity not justified. In short, the existence of these structures duing this period and before the very sight of Islamic scholars is itself an evident sign of its being permissible in the religion of Islam.

Islamic Remnants are the Sign of Originality of Religion [9]

Fundamentally, protecting the remnants of Prophethood especially the traces of Holy Prophet (s) such as his shrine, the graves of his wives, children and companions, the houses in which he lived and the mosques wherein he recited prayers, all have great significance which we shall now discuss.

Today, after the lapse of twenty centuries following the birth of (‘Isa) Jesus Christ (‘a) and his mother (Maryam) Mary (‘a), his book Bible and his companions and disciples, all have been looked upon as a fairy tale in the West. A group of Orientalists have doubted the existence of this heavenly man by the name of Christ whose mother was Mary and his book Bible and described them as a fairy tale like the fairy tale of Layla and Majnun. Why!? Because not even one genuine trace of Jesus Christ is at hand. For example, his true place of birth, his house where he lived in and the place of his burial according to Christian belief are not known. His heavenly book fell victim to distortion and these four gospels where in the last chapter of each of them there is the description of death and burial of Jesus Christ is certainly not related to him and it clearly shows that they have been compiled after his demise. Thus most of the researchers recognise them to be the literary works of the second century A.D. However, if all the specifications related to him had been protected, then there would have been a clear proof and confirmation to his originality and there would have been no excuse for these fictional and skeptical persons.

Muslims openly announce to the world that: “O people! 1400 years ago a man was appointed in the land of Hijaz for the guidance of the human society and he was fully successful in his mission. All the specifications of his life have been protected as seen in his life without the slightest ambiguity and even the house where he was born is known to us. The mount of Hira is a place where revelation (wahy) used to descend upon him and it is in this mosque where he used to pray and this is the house where he was buried in and these are the houses of his wives, children and relatives and these are the graves of his children, wives, Caliphs and….

Now, if we remove all these traces or signs, then obviously we have erased all the traces of his existence and the signs of his originality and prepared the ground for the enemies of Islam. Therefore destroying the traces of Messengership and household of the Prophet is not only one kind of disrespect but also a war against the original manifestations of Islam and authenticity of Messengership of the Prophet (s) .

The constitution of religion of Islam is a permanent and everlasting programme and till the day of Judgement it will remain as the religion of mankind. The generations that will follow after thousands of years have to believe in its authenticity. Therefore, for ensuring this objective, we have to always protect all the traces and signs of the Holy Prophet (s) and in this way take a step in safeguarding the religion for the coming years. We should not do anything that will make the fate of Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s) meet the same end as that of Prophet (‘Isa) Jesus (‘a).

The Muslims have strived for the protection of the traces of the Holy Prophet (s) to such extent that they have accurately recorded all the specifications of his life during Prophethood, such as the details of his ring, shoes, brush and the signs of his sword, spear, shield, horse, camel and slave. Even the wells from where he used to draw water and drink and the territory which he has bequeathed and still more the style of his walking and eating and the kinds of food which he liked and the appearance of his beard and his way of applying dye, etc, have been recorded and to a certain extent these signs have still remained till today.

By referring to the history of Muslims and touring the expansive Islamic countries, it becomes clear that renovation of graves and their protection and preservation was one of the customs of the Muslims. At present, throughout the Islamic countries, the graves of Divine Prophets, awliya Allah and the pious people exist in the form of shrines and for their protection endowments are available where their revenues are used for their preservation, etc.

Before the birth of faction of Wahhabism at Najd and before their domination over the two holy shrines and the outskirts of Hijaz, the graves of awliya Allah had been erected, thriving and worthy of attention of everyone. None of the Islamic scholars had any objection towards them.

It is not only in Iran where the graves of awliya and virtuous people have been sanctified in the form of shrines but throughout the Islamic countries, especially Egypt, Syria, Iraq, the western countries and Tunisia the shrines of scholars and great personalities of Islam are flourishing and muslims depart in groups towards these shrines to visit their graves and recite fatiha and Holy Quran for the souls of these great personalities. All these holy places are having servants and protectors responsible for maintenance and keeping them clean.

With such propagation and dissemination throughout the Islamic countries, is it possible to regard the rennovation of graves as a forbidden act when this long-drawn custom was existing and still exists from the beginning of Islam till today and this custom is known in the language of the scholars as 'the ways or conduct of Muslims'? The existence of such behaviour without any objection from any corner shows that it is permissible, desirable and popular.

This matter is so fundamental that one of the Wahhabi writers too confesses to it as such:

“This matter has reached the common places, East and the West to such an extent that there is no Islamic country where there is no holy grave or shrine. Even the mosques of the Muslims are not devoid of it and reason does not accept that such an affair remains forbidden and the scholars of Islam have kept silent towards this matter.” [10]

However, inspite of such confession they have not left their obstinacy and say that the prevalence of such matter and the silence of scholars are no reason for it to be permissible. And if a group remains silent due to some reason or the other, another group under different situation will reveal the fact.

But the answer to such talks is obvious since for seven centuries, the scholars of Islam had remained silent and did not utter a word regarding this matter. Were all of them conversative during this period!? Why at the time of the victory over Baitul-Muqqadas the second Caliph did not destroy the traces of graves of the Prophets? Did he too compromise with the polytheists of his time!?

Surprising is the reply of scholars of Medina who say;

“Construction over the graves is forbidden according to the consensus of scholars because of the correct traditions which have come in this regard. Thus a great many of scholars have given their verdict (fatwa) for their destruction.”

How can the claim of consensus be made over prohibition of construction over graves when we see that the Muslims buried the Holy Prophet (s) in the house where his wife - Ayesha - was living. Later Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were buried near the Holy Prophet (s) in the same chamber. Thereafter, the chamber of Ayesha was divided from the middle and a wall was put up there. A portion of it was earmarked for Ayesha and the other portion was related to the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and the two Caliphs. During the time of Abdulla bin Zubayr, the wall was raised to a higher level due to its low height.

From then on, in every period, the house in which the Holy Prophet (s) was buried was either renovated or reconstructed based on the special architecture of that time. Even during the period of the caliphate of the Umayyads and Abbasids the matter of construction of grave was in vogue and graves were constructed in every period with the special architecture of that time.

And the last of the construction over the grave which still exists was the construction of Sultan Abdul Hamid which started in the year 1270 and lasted for four years. You can read the detailed history of rennovation and reconstruction of the house of the Holy Prophet (s) throughout the Islamic history till the time of Samhudi in the book Wafa -ul- Wafa of Samhudi [11] and some other related books about the history of Medina.

C - HADITH OF ABU AL-HAYYAJ

Now it is the time to closely examine the hadith which the Wahhabi scholars narrate. Here we produce a tradition from Sahih Muslim:

Narrated to us Yahya bin Yahya, Abu Bakr bin Abi Shayba and Zuhayr bin Harb (on the authority of) Waki’ who narrates from Sufyan who narrates from Habib bin Abi Thabit who narrates from Abu Wa’il who narrates from Abu al-Hayyaj that ‘Ali told him: “I assign you for a task which the Holy Prophet (s) assigned me for the same. Do not leave any picture but that which you erase nor any high grave but that you level it.” [12]

The Wahhabis have utilised this tradition as a pretext without paying attention to the authenticity and logic of the tradition.

Our Views about this Tradition

Whenever we wish to derive an Islamic ruling from a hadith, it should possess two conditions:

1. The authenticity of tradition should be correct; that is to say, the narrators of tradition should be such people that one could rely on their sayings.

2. The instruction of tradition should be clear upon the purpose.

That is to say the words and the sentences of the tradition should clearly prove our purpose such that if we give the same tradition to a person well versed in language and aware of its specifications, he would be able to derive the same meaning as we derive.

Unfortunately, this tradition is worthy of criticism from both these points especially the second, where one can find no relation with its purpose.

From the viewpoint of authenticity (isnad), the traditionalists (those expert in the science of hadith) do not accept the reliability of the persons narrating this tradition because we see that its narrators are people like (1) Waki’ (2) Sufyan al-Thawri (3) Habib bin Abi Thabit and (4) Abu Wa’il al-‘Asadi. 

A traditionalist such as Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani has criticised them in his book Tahdhib al-tahdhib to such an extent that it throws doubt and uncertainty on the authenticity of the aforementioned tradition and other traditions narrated by them.

1. For example he narrates from Ahmad bin Hanbal about Waki’ that:

“He has committed mistakes in 500 traditions.” [13]         

He also narrates from Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi about Waki’ that:

 “He used to narrate the tradition according to its meaning (rather than narrating the precise text) while his mother-tongue was not Arabic”. [14]

2. About Sufyan al-Thawri, he narrates from Ibn al-Mubarak that:

“Sufyan was narrating a tradition when I suddenly arrived and noticed that he was deceiving in tradition. When he saw me, he felt ashamed.” [15]

Deception in any tradition in whatever meaning it may be interpreted shows that there had been no equity, truthfulness and realism in such a man that he has presented the untrue things to be true.

In the translation of Yahya al-Qattan, he narrates from him that Sufyan tried to present to me an unreliable person to be reliable but eventually he was unsuccessful. [16]

3. About Habib ibn Abi Thabit, he narrates from Ibn Hibban that:

“He was deceiving in tradition.”

He also narrates from al-Qattan that:

“His traditions cannot be followed because they are not firm.”[17]

4. About Abi Wa’il he says:

“He is from the nawasib and from the deviators from (the path) of ‘Ali (‘a) [18]

It is worthy of attention that in the entire sihah sitta only one tradition is narrated from Abu al-Hayyaj and that is the same which we have discussed already. It shows that a person, whose share from the Prophetic knowledge was only one tradition, was not a man of tradition at all. Therefore, it becomes difficult to rely on him. When the reference of tradition possesses such shortcomings, then no jurisprudent (faqih) can pass a verdict (fatwa) based on such a weak reference.

The ‘instruction’ of tradition is no less important than its reference as the following words in this tradition testify:

Now we will discuss the meaning of these two words i.e.

(a).  and

(b). 

(a). The word in dictionary means high and elevated and it has been said that

is a high place overlooking the other place.” [19]

The author of al-Qamus who is having greater validity in the arrangement of meaning of words says:

  with vowel of ( ) is named as something ‘high’ and ‘the hump of a camel’.

Therefore the word () in absolute term is called as ‘height’ and in particular that height which is in the shape of a hump of a camel. By referring to the past, we have to see the objective pertains to which kind of height.

(b).The word   in dictionary means ‘to restore equilibrium’, ‘to make equal’ and ‘to set right the crooked’.

. He made it straight; Arab says - I wanted to set right the crooked which was not smoothened. It also comes in the meaning of ‘a faultless product’.

The Holy Qur’an says:

“Who creates, then makes complete”. (A’la: 2)

After knowing the meanings of phrases and words, we have to see what this tradition means!

Two possibilities exist in this tradition. We have to select one of the two by paying attention to the individual meanings and other logical possibilities, the first one of it is:

1. One possibility is that Prophet (s) ordered Abul-Haiyyaj to destroy the elevated graves and level them to the ground.

This possibility which the Wahhabis rely upon is rejected due to the following reasons:

Firstly, the word  does not mean ‘to destroy’ or ‘to demolish’ and if it meant so then they should have said:

Level them to the ground while we do not find such words in the tradition.

Secondly, if it is meant what they say then why the scholars of Islam have not given such a verdict (fatwa)? It is because levelling of grave to the ground is against the Islamic Sunnah which says that a grave should be slightly higher than the ground level and all the jurisprudents (fuqaha) of Islam have given verdict (fatwa) over this matter that a grave should be higher than the level of ground by one span.

In the book al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-‘arba’a, as per the verdicts (fatawa) of the four well-known Imams (Hanifa, Malek, Shafe’i and Hanbal), we read as such:

“It is recommended (mustahab) that the soil of grave be higher than the ground by one span.” [20]

By paying attention to this matter we are bound to interpret the tradition in some other way to which we shall now refer.

2. Second possibility is that he was ordered to make the top of the grave uniform, even or flat and not like the graves which are made in the shape of the hind of a fish or the hump of a camel.

Therefore, the tradition is a witness to this fact that the top of a grave should be even and flat and not in the shape of the hind of a fish or a hump which is common among some of the Ahl al-Sunnah. All the four well-known Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah, except al-Shafi’i, have given fatwa that the grave is recommended to be so. Thus this tradition conforms to the Shi’a scholars who say that a grave apart from being above the ground should be even and flat. [21]

Incidentally, Muslim, the author of Sahih has himself brought this tradition and another tradition which we shall soon discuss under the title     

and similarly al-Tirmidhi and al-Nasa’i have brought this tradition in their Sunan under the aforementioned title. This title gives the meaning that the surface of grave should be even and flat and if it meant that the graves should be made level to the ground then it was necessary to change the title and name it as  

Incidentally, in Arabic language if   is ascribed to any thing (like grave) it means that the thing itself should be flat and even and not that it should be made equal with any thing (like ground).

Here we produce another tradition which Muslim has narrated in his Sahih and this tradition too contains the same contents which we have approved.

The narrator says: We were with Fudala bin ‘Ubayd in Rome when one of our companions died. Fudala ordered that his grave be made uniform and said that he had heard the Holy Prophet (s) giving instructions for the levelling of graves. [22]

The key to understanding this tradition lies in acquiring the meaning of the word   which posseses three possible meanings. By paying attention to the legal presumptions one of them should be selected. Here are the three possibilities:

1. One meaning is ‘to destroy the structure over the graves!’ This possibility is false because the graves which were in Medina were not possessing structure or dome.

2. Another meaning is ‘to level the surface of the grave to the ground’. This is against the Sunnah (practice) of the Prophet (s) which is conclusive that the grave should be above the ground by one span.

3. Lastly it could mean ‘to surface the grave and make even the uneven portions and hence bring it out from the shape of hind of a fish or hump of a camel’. This meaning is exact and precise and needs no reason for proving this interpretation.

Now let us see how the famous commentator of Sahih Muslim, al-Nawawi, interprets the tradition. He says:

“It is Sunnah (tradition) that the grave should not possess excessive height above the ground and should hot have a shape of a hump of a camel. However it should be one span above the ground and should be even.” [23]

This sentence shows that the commentator of Sahih Muslim has derived the same meaning as we have derived from the word  . That is to say, Imam al-Nawawi recommended and advised that the surface of the graves should not possess the shape of the hind of a fish and they should be made uniform, flat and even, not that they should be levelled with the ground or that the grave and the structure on it should be destroyed.

It is not only we who have interpreted the tradition as such but al-Hafiz al-Qastallani too in his book Irshad al-sari fi sharh Sahih al-Bukhari has interpreted the tradition as we have. He says:

“It is the sunnah that a grave should be surfaced and we should never abandon this Sunnah just because surfacing of the grave is the motto of the rawafid. When we say that the Sunnah is surfacing of grave (having no difference with the tradition of Abu al-Hayyaj) it is because

The objective is not to make the grave on par with the ground but the objective is to make the surface of the grave flat and even although being above the ground level. [24]

Moreover, if the objective of recommendation was to destroy the structures and domes over the graves then why didn't ‘Ali (‘a) himself destroy the domes over the graves of the Prophets existing during his own time!? Besides, he was the ruler over the Islamic lands and places like Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran and Yemen, which were full of such structures over the graves of the Prophets and were within his sight.

Forgoing all that we have said even if we assume that Imam (‘a) ordered Abu al-Hayyaj to level all the elevated graves on par with the ground, still the tradition never bears testimony over the necessity of destroying the structures over the graves since Imam (‘a) has said:

i.e. ‘destroy the graves’, but has not said:

‘There is no building and no dome (dome of grave) unless I made them separate’.

Moreover our discussion is not about grave itself but about construction and structures over the graves where people occupy themselves under the shade of these structures and recite the Qur’an, invocation and prayers. Which part of this sentence bears testimony for the destruction of the structures surrounding the graves which in fact facilitates the visitors to worship and recite Qur’an and protects them from extreme heat or cold!

Two more possibilities in tradition

In the end we are bound to present two more possibilities in the tradition:

(1) It is possible that this and some other similar traditions are pointing to a series of graves of the past people where people took the graves of the pious and virtuous people as their qibla instead of performing prayers towards the true qibla. They used to perform prayers over the grave and the picture which was near the grave and were refraining from facing the true qibla which God has selected.

Thus the tradition has no connection to the graves which have never been prostrated upon by the Muslims but have recited prayers near them facing the divine qibla (Ka’ba).

And if they expedite in visiting the graves of the pious people and worship God near their pure bodies and the holy graves, it is because of the high esteem these dignified places have acquired due to the burial of their bodies. We shall discuss about them later on.

(2) By    is meant the portrait of idols and by    is meant the graves of polytheists which were still respected by their near and far ones.

Over here we shall narrate the verdicts of the four scholars of Sunni school of thought:

It is makruh (abominable) to build a house, dome, school or mosque over the grave.” [25]

With such consensus existing amongst the four Imams how can the judge of Najd insist that construction over the grave is haram (prohibited)!?

Moreover, its being makruh is itself not having a decisive and correct reference especially when construction over the grave provides a means of worship for the visitor to the grave of Prophets and pious people.

D. ANALYSIS OF HADITH OF JABIR:

The tradition of Jabir is one of the references which the Wahhabis rely on to prove the matter of prohibition of construction of the grave. This tradition has been narrated in different ways in the books of Sihah and Sunan of the Ahl al-Sunnah and in all the references we see the names of Ibn Jurayh and Abu al-Zubayr.

We shall investigate them by narrating all the phases of tradition with their references and then mention our own views regarding the scale of its competency based on logical reasoning.

Muslim narrates in his Sihah in the chapter<

‘Prohibition to plaster-mould or make construction on a grave’

The tradition of Jabir is reported with three chains of narration, and with two texts. The first one is:

1.

“It is narrated from Abu Bakr bin Shaybah, (who said) Hafs bin Ghiyath narrated to us, from Ibn Jurayh, from Abu al Zubayr from Jabir who said that The Prophet of God (s) prohibited the plastering of graves and prohibited anyone from sitting or constructing over them”

 2.

Here the text of the tradition is indicated to be the same but its chain of narration differs slightly from the first.

3.

“The Holy Prophet (s) prohibited the plastering of graves.” [26]

Sahih al-Tirmidhi narrates one tradition with one chain of narration.

in chapter entitled

‘Abominability of plaster moulding and writing on graves’

4.

 “The Holy Prophet (s) prohibited us from plastering the graves and writing on them, and from making and constructing over them.”

Thereafter al-Tirmidhi narrates from al-Hasan al-Basri and al-Shafi’i that they have permitted growing of flowers over the grave. [27]

Ibn Maja narrates a tradition with two texts and two chains of narration in his Sahih in the chapter entitled:

‘What it is been said, is about prohibition of building, plaster-moulding and writing on graves (engraving)’

5. & 6.

It is narrated from Azhar ibn Marwan, Muhammad-ibn-Ziad said Abdul Wareth has narrated to us from Ayub from Abi-Zubairfrom Jaber that Prophet (s) of God has prohibited from plaster-moulding on graves.

Abdullah-ibn-Saeed narrated us, Hafs from Ibn Jarih from Sulaiman Ibn Musa from Jaber that Prophet (s) of God has prohibited to engrave anything on graves. [28]

After narrating this tradition, the commentator al-Sindi, quotes al-Hakim al-Naysaburi and says:

“The tradition is Sahih but not practical because the Islamic leaders from East to West have been writing over the graves. This is a practice which the people have adopted from the past generations.”

al-Nasa’i narrates in his Sahih in the chapter of   with two chains of narration and two texts:

7. & 8.

      

Yousuf bin Saeed reported to us that Hajjaj narrated from ibn ibn Jarih who said I heard from Abu Zubair who heard Jabir he said that Prophet (s) of God prohibited to plaster-mould or build on a grave or someone sitting on it.

Imran ibn Musa reported to us who said, narrated to us Abdul Warith, who said narrated to us Ayub, from Abi Zubair, from Jabir who said that Prophet (s) of God prohibited to plaster mould graves. [29]

In the Sunan of Abu Dawud (vol. 3, p. 216) chapter of  tradition of Jabir is narrated with two chains of narrations and two texts:

9. & 10.

“…..Abu Dawud says: “The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited us from writing over the grave or from raising it.”

Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal in his al-Musnad has narrated the tradition of Jabir as follows:

11.

From Abd al-Razzaq from Ibn Joraih who reported from Abu Zubair that Jabir Ibn Abdullah said that I heard from Prophet (s), he prohibited people from sitting on grave or plaster- moulding or building on it. [30]

These were the various forms of the tradition that have been narrated with different chains of narration and texts. Now let us see whether the tradition can be rationalized or not.

Points of Weakness in this Tradition

The tradition of Jabir is faced with a series of problems that no logical reasoning can be based on it.

Firstly: In all the chains of transmission of this tradition, Ibn Jurayh [31] and Abu al-Zubayr [32] have either both come together or at least one of them has been mentioned. Now if the position of these two persons is clarified, then it would be needless to discuss about other people who have come in the chains of transmission of this tradition. Although a section of the narrators are from the unknown and weak still by clarifying the position of these two people it is not required to discuss and talk about the others.

Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani narrates in Tahdhib al-tahdhib about Ibn Jurayh quoting from the distinguished scholars as follows:

Yahya bin Sa’id was asked about the hadith of Ibn Jurayh to which he said: ‘If Ibn Jurayh does narrate a tradition from the book, he cannot be relied upon’. It was said to him that he uses akhbarani (technical term used in isnad followed by identification of the transmitter from whom the report was obtained), to which he said, ‘It’s nothing… all of it is weak.’

He narrates from Ahmad bin Hanbal that if Ibn Jurayh says:

 

“..that so and so said such and such then he has narrated a false tradition.”

Malik bin Anas says: In the matter of traditions Ibn Jurayh is like one who collects twigs in the darkness of night. (where his hand will be bitten by snake and scorpion).

From al-Darqutni, who says:

Keep away from the craftiness (presenting the false to be true) of Ibn Jurayh for he plays a dirty hypocrisy. Whenever he hears a tradition from a weak person, he presents it in such a manner that as if it was from a reliable person.

From Ibn Hibban who says that: Ibn Jurayh plays trickery in tradition. [33]

With such judgements from the scholars of ‘ilm al-rijal can one rely on the tradition of such a person and in contrast to the decisive path of the Muslims who were always renovating the graves of awliya Allah and respecting them, is it possible to have confidence in such a narrator?

About Abu al-Zubayr’s position, Ibn Hajar narrates the following sentences from the scholars of rijal:

The son of Ahmad bin Hanbal narrates from his father who narrates from Ayyub that he (i.e. Abu al-Zubayr) was weak in hadith.

Ibn Hajar narrates from Shu’ba that Abu al-Zubayr did not know how to recite his prayers properly. Again he narrates from him as such: “I was in Mecca when a person came to Abu al-Zubayr and asked him some questions to which the latter started to defame him. I told him that he was accusing a Muslim. He replied: He has made me angry. I informed him that since he was defaming everyone who made him angry I would no longer narrate any tradition from him.”

Again Ibn Hajar asked Shu’ba as to why he stopped narrating tradition from Abu al-Zubayr. He replied: “I saw him openly performing bad deeds.”

Ibn Hajar narrates from Ibn Abi Hatim that he asked his father about the character of Abu al-Zubayr to which he replied: “His traditions are written but they cannot be relied upon.”

Ibn Hajar further narrates from him that the latter informed Abu Zur’a that people were narrating traditions from Abu al-Zubayr and asked him whether he could be relied or not.

He replied: ‘The tradition of only a trustworthy person can be used as an argument (a sarcastic remark to indicate that he was not a trustworthy person)’.

This is the position of these two persons who have come in all the chains of narration of the tradition. Is it possible to rely on a hadith that is reported by these two persons?

Even if we assume that others mentioned in the references are reliable (while in fact some of them like ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Aswad were accused of being liars), can such a tradition be used as argument when its narrators are these two people.

Is it really fair that with such a tradition that is having such a weak authencity, one can destroy the traces of household of the prophet and his companions and find fault with the actions of the Muslims in these fourteen centuries?

Secondly: The tradition is a matter of concern from the viewpoint of text. This is because of the fact that the narrators have not heeded sufficient attention to memorising its text. And this concern is such that a person loses confidence in them. Now we shall describe the kind of concern:

The tradition of Jabir has been narrated in seven forms whereas the Holy Prophet (s) has mentioned that in one form. Here are the descriptions of the seven forms:

1. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited plastering of the graves and resting or constructing a structure over them. (Tradition no 1, 2 and 9).

2. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited plastering of graves.

(Tradition no.5 and 8).

3. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited plastering, writing, constructing and walking over the graves.  (Tradition no.4).

4. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited writing over the graves.

(Tradition no.6).

5. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited sitting over the grave or plastering and constructing and sitting over it. (Tradition no.10)

6. The Holy Prophet (s) has prevented from sitting, plastering or constructing over the grave.

(Tradition no.11) This one differs from the first where in the first form resting is prohibited while here sitting is prohibited).

7. The Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited from sitting, plastering, constructing and writing over the grave or raising the grave. Here, the prohibition of writing over the grave and raising the grave is added.

Apart from this, there are some differences and contradictions among the interpretations. In the first case, resting is mentioned; in the third case walking is mentioned and in the fifth and sixth case we find sitting.

With such problems, no jurisprudent (faqih) can rely upon this tradition.

Thirdly: Assuming that the chains of narration of this tradition are reliable, it does not indicate more than that the Holy Prophet (s) prevented construction over graves. However, preventing one thing is no proof of its being prohibited because prohibition sometimes is of haram type and sometimes of makruh type and prohibition has been mostly used in the makruh sense in the discourse of the Holy Prophet (s) and other religious leaders.

It is true that the first meaning of prohibition that is to say in real term is ‘nahi’ which is same as haram and till a proper terminology for another meaning is not found, we can never take it to be makruh, yet the scholars and the fuqaha have not taken this tradition to be anything but in the makruh sense. For example, al-Tirmidhi in his Sahih narrates the tradition under the chapter

A clear proof that it is makruh is the same which al-Sindi, commentator of Sahih Ibn Maja narrates from al-Hakim al-Naysaburi who says that none of the Muslims have acted upon this prohibition. That is to say he has not presented it to be a prohibition in the haram sense calling to witness the fact that all Muslims have been writing on the graves.

Another proof that this prohibition is in the makruh sense is the consensus of the Islamic scholars upon the permissibility of construction over the grave except that if the land is endowed.

The commentator of Sahih Muslim in his commentary of this tradition writes:

 

“Construction over the grave in the land belonging to the owner of the grave is makruh and in the endowed land is haram. Al-Shafi’i has emphasised upon this matter and even brought the tradition under the title of chapter.” [34]

However, it is obvious that a thing being makruh does not become an obstacle. The fact being that sometimes due to a series of affairs that makruh gets eliminated. Whenever renovation of grave becomes the source of protection of the originality of Islam or the source of manifestation of love for the owner of grave which God has made their love obligatory or the source of protection of Islamic signs or becomes the cause for the visitors to recite Qur’an and invocation under the shade of the structure over the grave than surely not only such benefits (which arise from the construction over the grave) eliminate the makruh element but make them mustahab (recommended).

The decree of mustahab or makruh changes under various pretexts. It is likely that a makruh becomes good due to some pretext or a series of mustahabi (recommended) affairs become abominable due to some other events because makruh and mustahab of one thing is nothing but expedient for being hated or loved respectively. But these expedients are effective under the condition that no obstacle nullifies their expediences and effects and this matter is clear for those people who are acquainted with Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh).

LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF TWO MORE TRADITIONS

Now that our discussion has reached this stage, it is worthy that we examine some more traditions which are referred to by the Wahhabis.

1. Ibn Maja narrates in his Sahih as such:

Mohammad Ibn Yahya, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, Al-Riqashi, Wahab, Abdur Rahman Ibn Yazid Ibn Jaber, have narrated to us from Qasim ibn Mokhaimara from Abi Saeed: “Verily Prophet Muhammad (s) prohibited make construction on graves”.  [35]

Ahmad bin Hanbal in his al-Musnad narrates one tradition with two chains of narration. Here we narrate both of them:

2. Narrated Hassan, Ibn Lahiaah narrated, Baraid Ibn Abi Habib narrated from Naim servant of Umme Salamah. She said: ‘Prophet of God prohibited to build (construction) on grave or plaster-moulding.’ [36]

3. Ali Ibn Ishaq narrated, Abdullah ibn Lahiaah, narrated Boraid ibn Abi Habib from Naeem, servant of Umme Salama: ‘Prophet prohibited to plaster-mould a grave or build (make construction) on it or sit on it.’ [37]

To prove the weakness of the first tradition suffice it is to say that one of the narrators is Wahab who is completely  (unknown) and it is not known which ‘Wahab’ is the narrator of this tradition. In Mizan al-‘i’tidal seventeen Wahabs are mentioned and it is not known that this Wahab is which one of them where most of them are regarded to be fabricators of traditions and known liars. [38]

The major problem of the second and third traditions is the presence of ‘Abdulla ibn Lahi’a.  Al-Dhahabi writes about him as such: 

Ibn Ma’in has said that he is weak and his tradition cannot beargued upon. [39] Al-Humaydi narrated from Yahya bin Sa’id that he does not count him to be of any significance.

We shall now pass from the controversies in the sanad and turn over to the following matter. All the historians and Islamic muhaddithun (traditionists) have narrated that the holy body of the Holy Prophet (s) was buried by the approval of his companions in the house and chamber of his wife Ayesha. In selecting the place of his burial, the companions have relied on the tradition narrated by Abu Bakr from the Holy Prophet (s)  that any Prophet who dies in any place should be buried in that very place. [40]

The question arises here that if the Holy Prophet (s) had really prohibited construction over the grave then how was it that he was buried under the ceiling and his grave became such that it possessed a structure. It is a matter of laughter when some of the dry and rigid Wahhabis say that what is forbidden is making the structure over the grave and not the burial of body under the structure and the Holy Prophet (s) was buried under the structure and not that a structure was made over his grave. [41]

Such an interpretation of the tradition shows no motive other than explaining one external fact (burial of the body of the Holy Prophet (s) under a structure) and if one Wahhabi was not faced with such a fact he would have ordered both these acts to be haram (forbidden).

Basically at this juncture we ask the Wahhabis some questions:

Is it that only the original construction over the grave of the dead person forbidden and if someone has already made such a construction then is its continuity not forbidden although its original construction was forbidden?

Or is it that the original construction and its continuity both are forbidden?

If only the original construction is forbidden and their continuity was not forbidden, then the question arises that why the Government of Sa’ud destroyed by force the traces of Messengership and the houses of the household of the Holy Prophet (s) and the domes of his children and companions who were already buried under the structures.

Moreover, this supposition is against the verdicts (fatawa) of founders of Wahhabism such as Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Taymiyya.

The former says:

“It is obligatory to destroy the structures made over the graves and after gaining power for its destruction it is not permissible to let it remain and to preserve it even for one day.”

With this explanation it is not correct for a Wahhabi to select the first alternative of our question. Thus he is bound to select the second and say that the construction over the grave is haram in both the cases.

At this moment, a question will arise as to why the Muslims buried the holy body of the Prophet (s) under a roofed place. Although it is true that they did not originally construct over his grave yet they acted in such a way that the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) was already having a structure.

Here a Wahhabi has only one route of escape and that is for explaining the physical action of the Muslims he will say: Preservation and continuation of grave is forbidden when original construction takes place over the grave and if at the time of the original construction, there was no grave then its continuation (no matter if it is in the form of construction over grave) is not haram.

Such dissociation has no reason other than justifying one external fact (action of Muslims).

Wahhabism entangled in the contradiction between the school of thought and the practice of Muslims

This point is not the only instance where the Wahhabism has been caught in the scuffle of contradiction between its school of thought and the deeds of Muslims.

It has been aimlessly struggling in other instances too. It strictly prohibits tabarruk of the remains of the Holy Prophet (s) and say: “Stone, soil etc are of no use.” On the other hand we see the Muslims constantly kissing and touching the stone (hajr al-‘aswad) or kissing the curtain of the Ka’ba or seeking tabarruk from its door and walls which according to Wahhabis bears no result.

They have prohibited construction of mosque near the grave of the awliya Allah whereas in the entire Islamic lands, mosques exist near the graves. Even besides the grave of Hamza there was a mosque which the transgressive Sa’udis have destroyed. At present the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) is in the mosque and the Muslims perform prayers around there.

Preparing an argument instead of adopting a realistic approach

In order to destroy the tombs of the graves of Imams (‘a) buried in Baqi’ the Wahhabis embarked on resorting to arguments and so to speak have found an excuse.  They say that the land of Baqi’ is an endowed (waqfi) land and maximum use should be made from this land and every kind of obstruction from reaping the benefits should be removed. Construction of a structure over the graves of the household of the Prophet (s)  is an obstacle from utilising a part of the land of Baqi’, because, although burial is possible in the sanctuary and the shrine, the same cannot be done under the foundations and surrounding walls. Therefore, such constructions should be destroyed till the enitre land of Baqi’ is exploited for useful purposes.

The Response and Refutation:

Undoubtedly such reasoning is nothing but a kind of biased judgment. The Wahhabi judge (qadi) wishes to destroy, by any means, the traces of the household of the Holy Prophet (s) and even if he was unable to find any reason he would still think of destroying them under the cover of force. On account of such a mentality he started to conjure up a pretext and hence brought up the matter of endowment of the land of Baqi’.

Moreover the idea that Baqi’ is an endowed land is nothing more than an imagination since:

Firstly, no book that we could rely on, whether of history or tradition (hadith), mentions that Baqi’ is endowed (waqfi). Instead it is possible to say that Baqi’ was a waste land where the people of Medina used to bury their dead. In this case, such a land will be considered to be amongst the ‘properties belonging to no particular person’ (al-mubahat al-‘awwaliyya) and any kind of appropriation over it is permissible.

In previous times, greed and avarice of the people in possessing the dead and barren land was insignificant and there was no money and power in developing and flourishing them. Moreover, the people living in villages had not yet started to migrate to cities and no issues related to land and no people such as land profiteers existed and no institute by the name of land exchange had come into existence. Thus most of the lands were not having owners and they remained as they were and were counted to be part of wastelands.

During these periods the people of every city, village and hamlet allocated a part of the land for the burial of their dead or if someone would become the first in burying his dead once on a piece of land, others would follow suit. As such, they would convert the land into a graveyard without anyone seeking possession of it and making it a waqf for burying the dead.

The land of Baqi’ was no exception to this rule. The lands in Hijaz and Medina were not of much value and with the presence of waste lands around Medina, no wise person would have created an endowment over cultivable land. In a place where waste land is plentiful and cultivable land very scanty, surely the waste land (which is counted to be the property belonging to no particular person) will be used.

Incidentally, history too confirms this reality. Al-Samhudi in Wafa’ al-wafa’ fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa writes:

“The first person who was buried by the Holy Prophet (s) in Baqi’ was ‘Uthman ibn Maz’un (the companion of the Holy Prophet). When Ibrahim, son of the Holy Prophet, died, the Prophet (s) ordered him to be buried near ‘Uthman. From then on, people were inclined to bury their dead in Baqi’ and they cut off the trees (to make space).  Each tribe appropriated one piece of the land for themselves”.

Thereafter he says:

“The land of Baqi’ was having a tree by the name of gharqad. When the people buried ‘Uthman ibn Maz’un over there the tree was cut off.” [42]

The tree of gharqad is the same wild tree found in the deserts of Medina.

From these words of al-Samhudi we draw a clear conclusion that the land of Baqi’ was a dead land where, after the burial of one companion everyone took a part of it for their respective tribes and the name of waqf has never been seen in history. Instead, history shows that the part or section of Baqi’ where the Imams (‘a) have been buried was the house of ‘Aqil bin Abi Talib and the holy bodies of these four Imams (‘a) were buried in the house which was related to Bani Hashim.

Al-Samhudi writes:

“Abbas bin ‘Abd al-Muttalib was buried near the grave of Fatima bint Asad in the cemetery of Bani Hashim which was in the house of ‘Aqil.” [43]

He also narrates from Sa’id bin Muhammad bin Jubayr that he has seen the grave of Ibrahim, son of the Holy Prophet (s), in the house which was the property of Muhammad bin Zayd bin ‘Ali.

He further narrates that the Holy Prophet (s) buried the body of Sa’d bin Mu’adh in the house of Ibn Aflah which was around Baqi’ and possessed a structure and dome.

All these show that the land of Baqi’ was not endowed (waqfi) and the pure bodies of our Imams (‘a) have been buried in the houses owned by themselves.

Under these cricumstances, is it correct to destroy, under the pretext of waqf, the traces and signs of the household of the Holy Prophet (s)?

Let us suppose, just for argument’s sake, that the land of Baqi’ was a waqf. But is there any hint about the circumstances in which the waqf was made? Perhaps the one making the waqf has given permission for construction over the grave of noble personalities. So, because we do not know, we should interpret a believer's deeds as right, and not accuse him of offence.

Under these situations, destroying these domes and houses will be considered forbidden (haram) and going against the divine laws.

The qadi Ibn Bulayhid and his supporters knew well that the idea of waqf was one kind of preparing a reason and carving an argument. Even if they were not having such reason, they would have still destroyed the signs of the Holy Prophet (s) because this is not the first time they have destroyed the traces of Messengership. In the year 1221 AH when they gained control over Medina for the first time, they destroyed the traces of Messengership. Later, when they were expelled from the land of Hijaz by the ‘Uthmani forces, all the structures were again re-built.

Footnotes: 

[1] Ibn al-Qayyim, Zad al-ma’ad fi huda khayr al-‘ibad, page 661. 

[2] The late Agha Buzurg al-Tihrani in his book al-Dhari’a ila tasanif al-shi’a, vol. 8 p. 261, writes as such: “The Wahhabis gained control over Hijaz on 15th Rabi’ al-‘awwal 1343 AH and on  8th of Shawwal 1343 AH they destroyed the graves of the Imams (‘a) and companions in Baqi’.”

On the other hand, the newspaper Umm al-Qura published the form of questions and answers in publication No.17 Shawwal from the year 1344 AH and fixed the date of reply of the scholars of Medina as 25th Ramadan. It should be said that dominance and destruction of the graves both occurred in the year 1344 AH and Sayyid Muhsin Amin thinks the year 1344 AH to be the date of complete dominance and destruction. Please refer to the book Kashf al-‘irtiyab pages 56 to 60.

[3] al-Tabarsi, Majma’ al-bayan, (Sayda edition), vol. 4 p. 83.

[4] Baqarah: 158

[5] Hajj: 36

[6] Protection of graves is expression of love and affection.

[7] al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, vol. 5 p. 50.

[8] Sayyid Muhsin Amin, Kashf al-‘irtiyab, p. 384.

[9] Refer to the Tabaqat al-sahaba in Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabaqat al-kubra, vol.1 pp. 360 to 503. In these pages we find the specialities and characteristics of the life of the Prophet (s).

[10] Tathir al-‘i’tiqad, (Egyptian edition), p. 17, narrating from Kashf al-‘irtiyab.

[11] al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’ fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa, pp. 383 to 390.

[12] Sahih Muslim, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 3 p. 61; Sunan al-Tirmidhi, bab ma ja’a fi taswiyat al-qabr, vol. 2 p. 256; and Sunan al-Nasa’i, bab taswiyat al-qabr, vol. 4, p. 88.

[13] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 11, p. 125.

[14] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 11 p. 130.

[15] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 4 p. 115.

[16] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 11 p. 218.

[17] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 2  p. 179.

[18] Ibn Abi al-Hadid al-Mu’tazili, Sharh Nahj al-balagha, vol. 9 p. 99.

[19] Al-Munjid.

[20] al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-‘arba’a, vol. 1, p.  420.

[21] al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-‘arba’a, vol. 1, p. 420. Therefore, no groups from the Islamic tradition have acted upon this tradition, except the Shafi’i’s and the Shi’a.

[22] Sahih Muslim, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 3 p. 61.

[23] al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 36.

[24] al-Qastallani, Irshad al-sari, vol. 2 p. 468.

[25] al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-‘arba’a, vol. 1, p. 421.

[26] Sahih Muslim, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 3 p. 62.

[27] Sunan al-Tirmidhi, (ed. by ‘Abd al-Rahman Muhammad ‘Uthman, al-Maktaba al-salafiyya), vol. 2 p. 208.

[28] Sahih Ibn Maja, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 1, p. 473.

[29] Sahih al-Nasa’i (printed with commentary of Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti), vol. 4 pp. 87-88 .

[30] Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 3 p. 295 and p. 332, and he narrates from Jabir in the mursal form on p. 399.

[31] He is ‘Abd al-Malik bin ‘Abd al-‘Aziz bin Jurayh al-‘Umawi.

[32] He is Muhammad bin Muslim al-‘Asadi.

[33] Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, (Dar al-ma’arif al-nizamiyya), vol. 6 p. 402, 404 and p. 506.

[34] Sahih Muslim, (Egypt), vol. 3 p. 62.

[35] Sahih Ibn Maja, vol. 1 p. 474.

[36] Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 6 p. 299.

[37] Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 6 p. 299.

[38] al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-‘i’tidal, vol. 3 pp. 350 to 355.

[39] al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-‘i’tidal, vol. 2 p. 476 under the title ‘Abdulla ibn Lahi’a; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, vol. 1 p.  444.

[40] Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 1 p. 7; Sahih al-Tirmidhi, vol. 2 p. 139; Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabaqat,  vol. 2 p. 71; and others.

[41] Muqbil bin al-Hadi al-Wadi, Riyad al-janna, (Kuwait), p. 269.

[42] al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’ fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa, vol. 2 p. 84.

43] al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’ fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa, vol. 2 p. 96.

Chapter 3

Construction of Mosque Near the Graves of Pious People

Is construction of mosque near or in front of the grave of pious people permissible or not? Supposing it is permitted, then what is the main purpose of the tradition (hadith) of the Holy Prophet (s) regarding the actions of Jews and Christians as it has come in a tradition that the Holy Prophet (s) has cursed these two groups for considering the graves of their Prophets as objects of worship? Moreover, is construction of mosque near the graves of the Awliya inseparable with what has come down in this tradition!?

Answer:

By paying attention to the general principles of Islam, construction of mosque in the vicinity of graves of the awliya and pious doesn’t not have the least problem. This is because the purpose of construction of mosque is nothing more than worshipping Allah near the grave of His beloved who has become the source of receiving gifts. In other words, the aim of establishing mosque in these instances is that the visitors to the Divine leaders either before or after their ziyarat, perform their duty of worship (‘ibadat) over there in as much as neither ziyara to graves is forbidden (even from the viewpoint of Wahhabis) nor performing of salat, after or before ziyarat. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that the construction of mosque near the graves of awliya for the purpose of worshipping Allah and performing divine duties is forbidden.

By paying attention to the story of Ashab al-Kahf it is deduced that this action was a custom prevalent in the previous religions and Qur’an has narrated that without any criticism. When the incident of Companions of Kahf was disclosed to the people of that time after 309 years, they expressed their views about the ways of honouring the Companions of Kahf. One group said that a structure should be made over their grave (so that apart from honouring them their names, signs and memories are kept alive). Qur’an expresses this view as such:

“…..Erect an edifice over them….,” (Kahf: 21)

Another group said that a mosque should be built over their grave (and in this way tabarruk sought). The Islamic commentators are unanimous in their views.[1] that the suggestion of the first group was related to the polytheists and the suggestion of the second gronp was that of the monotheists. The Qur’an, while narrating this saying, says:

       

  Those who prevailed in their affair said: We will certainly raise a masjid over them. (Kahf: 21) [2]

History has it that the period of occurrence of the incidence of Companions of Kahf was the period of victory of monotheism over polytheism. There was no more of the sovereignty of the polytheists, nor their calling the people towards idol-worshipping. Naturally, this victorious group will be the same monotheist group, especially, that the content of their suggestion was the matter of construction of mosque for the sake of worshipping Allah. This itself is a witness that those making the suggestion were monotheists and God-worshippers.

If really the construction of mosque over or near the grave of the holy persons is a sin or polytheism, then why the monotheists made such a suggestion and why Qur’an narrates this without any criticism? Is not the narration of Qur’an together with this silence a testimony upon its permissibility? It is never proper that God narrates the sign of polytheism from a group but without specifically or implicitly criticising them. And this reasoning is the same ‘assertion’ which has been explained in ‘ilm al-‘usul. (Methodology)

This event shows that it has been one kind of lasting conduct amongst all the monotheists and was one way of honouring the one in grave or a means of seeking tabarruk.

It was reasonable and polite of the Wahhabis that before arguing about hadith, they should first have sought the reference from the Holy Qur’an and then attempted the analysis of the tradition.

Now we shall discuss and examine their reasonings.

Reasonings of Wahhabis that Construction of Mosque near Grave is Forbidden

By presenting a series of traditions, the Wahhabis have analysed the matter of construction of mosque near the grave of pious people to be forbidden. We shall examine all such traditions:

Bukhari in his Sahih under the chapter of    narrates two traditions as such:

1. When al-Hasan bin al-Hasan bin ‘Ali passed away his wife made a dome (a tent) over his grave and after one year she removed it. It was heard that one person cried out: “Have they found that which they had lost”, another person replied: “No they have become disappointed and have given up.”

2. May the curse of Allah be upon the Jews and Christians (for) considering the graves of their Prophets as mosques. She (Ayesha) said: “If it was not for this fear that the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) would become a mosque, the Muslims would have kept his grave open (and not put up a barrier around it).

3. Muslim has narrated in Sahih the same tradition with slight variation. As such we confine ourselves to narrating only one text. [3]

Know that people before you took the graves of their Prophets and the pious people as mosques. Never take the graves as mosques, I forbid you from that. [4]

4. Umm Habiba and Umm Salama (Wives of the Holy Prophet) saw a prophet's picture in the country of Ethiopia (when they had travelled to that place along with a group). The Holy Prophet (s) said: They are such people that whenever a pious man dies amongst them they construct a mosque over his grave and draw his picture on it. They are the worst of the people before God on the Day of Judgement. [5]

al-Nasa’i narrates from Ibn ‘Abbas in his Sunan under the chapter:

5. The Holy Prophet (s) has cursed those ladies who visit the grave and those who take them as mosques and light a lamp over it. [6]

Ibn Taymiyya who is the leader of such beliefs and Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab sharing his views interpret the aforesaid traditions in such a manner that building mosque over or near the grave of pious people is not permitted.

Thus Ibn-Taymiyya writes:

 

 “Our scholars have said that it is never allowed to construct a mosque over the grave”. [7]

A Probe into the Context of Traditions

Now we have to pay attention to the contents of the traditions and derive its correct meanings. We should not remain negligent to this principle and it is as such: As one verse (ayah) can remove the ambiguity of another verse and help its correct interpretation, in the same way, one tradition too can remove the ambiguity and interpret another tradition.

The Wahhabis have stuck to the apparent meaning of one tradition and relied on that in such a manner that any kind of building of mosque over or near the graves of awliya is prohibited whereas if they would have collected all the traditions together, they would have understood the objective of the Holy Prophet (s) in sending this curse.

The Wahhabis have closed the door of ijtihad and thus commited too many mistakes in understanding many of the traditions.

Superficially, it is possible that the authenticity of the traditions be reliable and its narrators trustworthy. Since the deliberation on the references of these traditions will lengthen our discussion, we shall limit ourselves to their contents only.

Our Views about This Matter:

Awareness about the objective of the traditions is related to throwing light on the actions of the Jews and Christians near the graves of their respective Prophets because our Holy Prophet (s) has prevented us from the actions which they used to do. If the limits of their actions are clarified, then surely the limits of haram in Islam too would be clarified.

In the previous traditions there exist evidences which testified to the fact that they took the graves of their prophets as their qibla and refused from paying heed to the true qibla. More still, they were worshipping their prophets near their graves instead of worshipping Allah or at least were taking partners with God in their worship.

If the context of the traditions is this that we do not choose their graves to be their qibla and do not consider them as partners with God in worship, then we can never consider the construction of mosque over or near the graves of the pious and virtuous as haram where the visitors neither take their graves to be as their qibla nor do they worship them. Moreover, they worship the one God facing the qibla in their salat and the aim of constructing mosque near the graves of awliya Allah is only to seek tabarruk from their places.

What is important is that it should be proved that the aim of the tradition (that we should not take their graves as mosques) is the same as what we have just said. Here are the evidences:

1. The tradition of Sahih Muslim (4th tradition) elucidates the other traditions because when the two wives of the Holy Prophet (s) explained to him that they had seen a portrait of a Prophet in a Ethiopian church, the Holy Prophet (s) said:

“They are such people that whenever a pious person passes away they would construct a mosque over his grave and put up his portrait in that mosque.”[8]

The purpose of putting portraits near the graves of pious people was that people would worship them such that they considered the portrait and grave to be their qibla or still more, consider them as idols for worship and prostration. Worshipping of idols is nothing but placing the idol in front and respecting and falling into humiliation before them.

The probability which we are having in this tradition, keeping in mind the actions of the Christians who were and are always inclined towards human worship and are always worshipping portraits and statues, is very worthy of attention. With such strong probability we can never rationalize with the help of this tradition, the prohibition of construction of mosque over or near the grave of awliya Allah which is devoid of such embellishments.

2. Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his al-Musnad and Imam Malik in his al-Muwatta’ narrate the tradition that the Holy Prophet (s) after prohibiting the matter of construction of mosque said:

“Allah, do not make my grave as an idol which is subject to worship” [9]

This sentence shows that they were behaving with the grave and the portrait which was next to it like one idol and taking them as their qibla and still more is worshipping them in the form of idol.

3. Pondering over the tradition of Ayesha (2nd tradition) will elucidate this fact to a greater extent. After narrating the tradition from the Holy Prophet (s) she says:

“If it was not for the fear that the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) would be taken as mosque the Muslims would have kept his grave open”.  (They would have not constructed a barrier around the grave)

Now it should be seen that from what aspects the barrier and wall around the grave can become an obstacle? Undoubtedly the barrier will prevent the people from reciting salat over the grave, from worshipping the grave as one idol or at least from taking it as a qibla. However, performing salat near the grave without worshipping the grave or considering it as a qibla is absolutely possible, whether there exists a barrier or not and whether the grave is open or hidden. This is because for fourteen centuries the Muslims have been performing salat near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) facing the qibla and have been worshipping Allah without the barrier preventing them from doing this action.

To sum up, the appendix of the hadith which is the text of the sayings of Ayesha clarifies the contents of the tradition because Umm al-mu’minin says: ‘In order that the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) would not be taken as mosque, they kept his grave hidden from the eyes of the people and constructed a barrier around it.’ Now it should be seen as to what extent this barrier can serve as an obstacle.

A barrier can prevent from two things:

1. The grave from taking the shape of idol and the people from standing in front of it and worshipping it since with the presence of a barrier, people are unable to see his grave to be able to treat it as an idol.

2. The grave from becoming a qibla since fixing it as a qibla is the outcome of seeing and we can never compare it with the ka’ba which is a qibla in all the situations whether it is seen or not. This is because ka’ba is a universal conventional qibla in all the conditions, making no difference if it is seen or not. However taking the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) as a qibla for the attendants in the mosque will be related to those who offer salat in his mosque and such a deviation is more achievable in case the grave is uncovered and seen; but when the grave is concealed the thought of prostrating over his grave even in the form of qibla is much less. Due to this, Umm al-mu’minin says that if no possibility existed for considering the grave as mosque (ie. prostrating over the grave) it would have been kept uncoveed. Moreover, such a deviation takes place more when the grave is seen and much less when the grave is hidden.

3. Most of the commentators of the tradition offer the same interpretation as we have done.

Al-Qastallani in Irshad al-sari says: For keeping alive the memories of their past ones, the Jews and Christians were fixing the portraits of their virtous ones near their graves and worshipping their graves. However, their sons and successors, under the influence of whisperings of shaytan, started to worship the portraits near the graves. Thereafter he narrates from Tafsir al-Baydawi as follows:

In view of the fact that the Jews and Christians were taking the graves of their Prophets as their qibla for the purpose of respect, and were paying attention towards them at the time of their prayers, their graves took the position of idols. For this reason the Muslims have been forbidden from this action. However, if someone constructs a mosque near the grave of a pious person for the prupose of seeking tabarruk and not for worshipping or paying attention towards them, he will never be included in this prohibition.” [10]

It is not only al-Qastallani who in his commentary on Sahih Bukhari interprets this tradition as such but also al-Sindi, the commentator of Sunan al-Nasa’i speaks with the same effect. We mention some of them here.

The outcome of his dispensation is this that construction over the grave is haram and occasionally makruh. If the grave is considered as qibla it is haram, since it may lead to the worship of the one buried, otherwise it is makruh. [11]

Again he says:

 “He (i.e. the Holy Prophet) prohibits his ummah from treating his grave in the same manner as what the Jews and the Christians have done to the graves of their Prophets. This is because, in the name of honour and respect, they were prostrating over the grave or considering it as their qibla”. [12]

Regarding this matter, the commentator of Sahih Muslim says:

“If the Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited us from considering his grave and other graves as a mosque, it is due to this reason that the Muslims should stop from exaggerating his honour which might lead to infidelity. Thus, when the Muslims were compelled to develop the mosque of the Holy Prophet (s) and place the chamber of the prophet’s wives and the chamber of Ayesha in the middle of the mosque, they fixed a round wall around the grave so that it could not be seen and the Muslims would not prostrate over it. The speech of Umm al-mu’minin too is a witness to the same:

If it was not for this fear that his grave (i.e. the grave of Holy Prophet) would become a mosque, the Muslims would have kept his grave open (and not put up a barrier around it).

Another commentator says: The words of Ayesha are related to that period when the mosque was not developed nor extended. After extention and the admittance of her chamber inside the mosque, the chamber was made in the shape of a triangle so that nobody could perform salat over the grave. Thereafter he says that the Jews and Christians were worshipping their Prophets near their graves and were taking them as partners in their worship. With such evidence and perception of the tradition, one cannot understand any meaning other than this.

We shall now overlook all these evidences and will approach this issue by another  reasoning:

Firstly, the tradition is applicable to a situation where a mosque is constructed over the grave and this matter does not bear any relation to an adjacent place of the buried. In all the buried places, the mosque is placed near the grave of Imams (a’imma) and awliya in such a manner that the mosque is separated from the shrine. In other words, we are having one shrine and one mosque. The shrine is set aside for ziyarah and tawwasul and the mosque near that, for the worship of Allah. Therefore these adjacent places (shrines) are outside the scope and contents of the tradition assuming that the contents of the traditions are the same as what the Wahhabis say.

Basically speaking how can it be said that the construction of mosque over the grave is haram or makruh whereas Masjid al-Nabi (mosque of the Holy Prophet) is placed near his grave?

If the companions of the Holy Prophet (s) are like the stars which should be followed then why, in this case, we should not follow them. They extended the mosque in such a manner that the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and the shaykhayn have been placed in the middle of the mosque.

If really, construction of mosque near the grave of Holy Imams was unlawful, then why the muslims expanded the mosque of the Holy Prophet (s) from every angle; while the mosque during the time of the Holy Prophet (s) was placed on the eastern side of the grave, after the expansion, the western side of the grave too became the part of the mosque.

Is it that following the  i.e. predecessors and being   which the Wahhabis are always proud of, means that we should follow them in one instance and disobey them in another?

From this description, it becomes clear that to what extent the sayings of Ibn al-Qayyim that in Islam, grave and mosque do not exist together are baseless and against the path of Muslims. Secondly, we do not derive any meaning from these traditions other than the Holy Prophet (s) prohibiting construction of mosque over or near the graves of the awliya. However, there does not exist any decisive argument to prove that this prohibition is a haram prohibition. Instead, it is possible that this prohibition is a makruh prohibition just as Bukhari has interpreted the traditions and discussed them under the title;

 Chapter: It is aversion to build mosques on graves. [13]

Another testimony is that this matter has come along with the curse upon female visitors to the grave. [14]  Surely visiting the graves is makruh and not haram for the ladies.

If the Holy Prophet (s) has cursed this group, this curse is no testimony of it being haram because in many of the traditions those committing makruh acts have been cursed too. In tradition, it is mentioned that those who travel alone or eat alone or sleep alone are cursed.

In the end we remind that the construction of mosque over the grave of pious people was an act which was in vogue in the beginning of Islam.

Al-Samhudi says: “When the mother of Ali (‘a), Fatima bint Asad, passed away, the Holy Prophet (s) ordered that she be buried in a place where today stands a mosque named as ‘Grave of Fatima’. He meant that the place of grave of Fatima appear as a mosque in later time. Again he says: “Mus’ab bin ‘Umayr and ‘Abdulla bin Jahsh were buried under the mosque which was built over the grave of Hamza.” [15]

He further says that in the 2nd century there existed a mosque over the grave of Hamza.[16]

This mosque existed till the domination of the Wahhabis. They demolished this mosque on these unfounded reasons.

Footnotes: 

[1] Refer to Tafsir al-Kashshaf of al-Zamakhshari, Ghara’ib al-Qur’an of al-Naysaburi, and others.

[2] Sahih al-Bukhari, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 2, page 111.

[3] Sahih al-Bukhari, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 2, page 111; Sunan al-Nasa’i, kitab al-jana’iz, vol. 2 p. 871

[4] Sahih Muslim, vol. 2 p. 68.

[5] Sahih Muslim, kitab al-masajid, vol. 2, p. 66.

[6] Sunan al-Nasa’i, (ed. Mustafa Halabi), vol. 4, p. 77

[7] Ibn Taymiyya, Ziyarat al-qubur, p. 106.

[8] 

[9] Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 3, p. 248

[10] al-Qastallani, Irshad al-sari; and Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-bari, vol. 3, p. 208 approve this view. Prohibition is applicable under circumstances where the grave appears in the manner which was in vogue amongst the Jews and Christians. Otherwise there is no problem and objection. 

[11] Sunan al-Nasa’i, (al-Azhar edition), vol. 2, p. 21.

[12] Sunan al-Nasa’i, (al-Azhar edition), vol. 2, p. 21.

[13] Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2, p. 111

[14] Sunan al-Nasa’i, (Egyptian edition), vol. 3, p. 77.

[15] Al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’ fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa, (ed. Muhammad Muhyiuddin), vol. 3, p. 897.

[16] Al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’, (ed. Muhammad Muhyiuddin), vol. 3, p. 922 and 936

Chapter 4

Visitation (Ziyarat) of Graves of Believers from the Viewpoint of the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah

The scholars of Islam with the support of verses of Qur’an and traditions have recommended ziyarat of grave especially the ziyarat of the Holy Prophet's grave and those of the pious people and consider this to be a virtue and honour. However, Wahhabis do not consider the principle of ziyarat to be haram (in apparent terms) but declare that the journey for ziyara towards the grave of the awliya Allah as unlawful and haram. After completion of the principle of ziyarat, we shall discuss the matter of journey for ziyarat of the graves of the awliya Allah

Ziyarat of graves has many ethical influences and is important for moral education and training that we shall mention here very briefly.

Looking at this silent valley (i.e. graveyard) which has blown off the light of life of everyone from the poor to the rich and the weak to the powerful and all of them being buried with only three pieces of cloth, purifies the mind and the heart and reduces greed and avarice of a person to a great extent. If a person possesses an eye which can see warnings he can there by learn a lesson and think within himself as such: A transient life of 60 or 70 years ending in getting concealed under the soil and then decaying and getting destroyed is not so much valuable that a person strives hard to achieve wealth and position and does injustice upon himself and the others.

Witnessing this silent valley which softens the most adament heart and makes the most heavy ear to hear and gives brightness to the most poor eye-sight, causes a person to review his plans in life and ponder over the great responsibilites which he has before Allah and the people and controls his desires.

The Holy Prophet (s) refering to this point in a tradition says:

/p>

 “Visit the graves; for visiting them becomes the cause of remembering the next world”. [1]

While the authenticity and firmness of ziyarat of graves is so obvious that it is needless to produce proofs and reasonings to a great extent yet, we reflect here some of the proofs for those who are doubtful.

Qur’an and ziyarat of Graves:

Qur’an clearly instructs that the Holy Prophet (s) should not perform prayer over the dead body of the hypocrites and should not stand near their graves. It says:

“And never offer prayer for anyone of them who dies and do not stand by his grave, surely they disbelieve in Allah and His Apostle and they shall die in transgression”. (Tauba: 84)  

In this verse, for destroying the character of the hypocrites and rebuking the members of this group, the God commands the Holy Prophet (s):

1. Not to perform salat over the dead body of anyone of them.

2. Not to stand over their graves; and this reality is presented with the sentence;

 

When the Holy Qur’an commands that one should avoid these two actions with regards to the hypocrites it means that for others who are not hypocrites these actions are good and worthy to be performed.

Now let us see what    means? Does it refer only to the standing at the time of burial which in the case of hypocrites is not permissible and in the case of the believers good and necessary? Or it also refers to standing at the time of burial and at other instances?

Some of the commentators think that the verse refers to the matter of standing at the time of burial but some others like al-Baydawi see the verse from a far angle and interpret it as such:

Don’t stand on grave for burial or pilgrimage. [2]

Paying attention to the contents of verse will show that it is having a wider meaning i.e. it concerns standing at the time of burial as well as stopping after the burial.

This is because two sentences form the gist of the subject matter of this verse and these two sentences comprises of:

1.

“And never offer prayer for anyone of them who dies……” (Tauba: 84)

The word of  which has been placed in the course of prohibition is good for all individuals.

The word of   is good for all times and the meaning of the sentence will be as such: “Do not perform salat for any one of the hypocrites at any time”.

By paying attention to these two words we can easily understand that the meaning of this particular sentence is not refering to recitation of salat over the dead body because reciting salat over the dead body takes place only once and that is before the burial and it cannot be repeated. If it specifically meant recitation of salat over the dead, then it was needless to bring the word. And to imagine that this word serves the purpose of expressing all individuals is completely irrelevant because the sentence   is sufficient for such inclusion and purpose and there is no need to mention it once again.

Moreover, the word   in Arabic refers to time and not individuals such as:

“Nor that you should marry his wives after him ever;…” (Ahzab: 53)

 

Therefore the essence of the first sentence is: Never seek forgiveness and mercy for anyone of the hypocrites whether at the time of reciting salat or otherwise.

2. And now we will discuss the second sentence:

The meaning of this sentence in connection with the previous sentence is as such:

because the adverbs which are present in  are also applicable for  .

Therefore it cannot be said that qiyam (standing) refers to the qiyam at the time of burial because it is presumed that qiyam at the time of burial for each one is not subject to repetition and the word   too is commendable in this sentence which shows that this action is worthy of repetition.

The reply to the supposition that this word is applicable for all individuals was given in the previous sentence since with the presence of   it is needless to express that once again.

By paying attention to these two points in the words  and   one can say:

God has prohibited the Holy Prophet (s) from seeking any kind of mercy for the hypocrites whether by means of reciting salat upon the dead body or merely by means of du'a and from any kind of standing over their graves whether at the time of burial or after the burial. This means that these two actions i.e. ‘seeking forgiveness’ and ‘standing’ is permissible and worthy for the grave of a believer in all the instances and one of such instances is standing for ziyarat and recitation of Qur’an for a believer who has been buried there for years.

Now we shall discuss the virtue and excellence of ziyarat of graves from the viewpoint of traditions.

Traditions and ziyarat of Graves:

From the Islamic traditions which the authors of Sihah and Sunan have narrated, we derive the conclusion that the Holy Prophet (s) had prohibited, due to a temporary reason, the ziyarat of graves and later on allowed the people to make haste for ziyarat.

Perhaps the reason for prohibition was that their dead ones were predominantly polytheists and idol-worshippers and Islam had cut off their relation and affection with the world of polytheism. It is also possible that the reason for prohibition was something else and that is the newly converted Muslims were writing elegies and saying un-Islamic things over the graves of the dead polytheists. But after the expansion of Islam and the ‘faith’ entering into the hearts of people, this prohibition was lifted and the Holy Prophet (s) permitted the people to go for the ziyarat of graves because of the educative benefits, so that people should hasten to visit graves

The writers of Sunan and Sihah narrate as such:

 

“I had prohibited you from ziyara of graves. From now on, go for ziyara because it will make you feel unattached towards this world and make you remember the hereafter.” [3]

It is on the same basis that the Holy Prophet (s) was visiting the grave of his mother and informing the people to visit the graves since ziyara is the source of remembering the hereafter. Here is the text of the tradition:

“The Holy Prophet (s) visited the grave of his mother and cried near her grave and also made others around him to cry. Thereafter he said: I have taken permission from my Lord to visit the grave of my mother. You too should visit the graves because such a visit will remind you of death.” [4]

4. Ayesha says that the Holy Prophet (s) freely allowed the ziyarat of graves,

[5]

“The Prophet of God permitted the visit of graves”.

5. Ayesha says: The Holy Prophet (s) taught me the manner of visiting the graves. Here is the text of the tradition:

                   

“My lord commanded me to come to Baqi’ and seek forgiveness for them. (Ayesha) says: I asked him how one should seek forgiveness to which the Holy Prophet (s) replied: Say Peace (Salaam) be upon the people of this place from the believers and muslims, May God have mercy on those who have left and those who are to follow. We shall join you all very soon.” [6]

6. In another tradition, there are some sentences which the Holy Prophet (s) used when performing ziyarat of graves. It is as follows:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and we will be return to you and rely on you and certainly if God wishes, we will join you. O God, have mercy on all those (buried) in Baqi’ al-Garqad* [7]

*Garqad was a tree in Baqi’ graveyard. And because of this tree, it was commonly called as the land of Garqad.

7. In another tradition, the text of ziyarat is narrated in a different way:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and muslims, and certainy we will join you. You will exhilarate us and we will follow you. We ask welfare from you for ourselves and for yourself. [8]

8. In the third tradition, the text is narrated still differently:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and if God wishes, we will join you. [9]

From the tradition of Ayesha, we got knowledge that whenever the last part of night was approaching, the Holy Prophet (s) would go towards Baqi’ and say:

Peace be with you! The groups of believers and what has been promised to you will be given to you, soon in future your destiny will reach you. And certainly, we will be the joiners to you soon. And if God wishes, will be with you. O God! Have mercy on all those (buried) in Baqi’ al-Garqad. [10]

From another tradition we come to know that the Holy Prophet (s) used to hasten, along with a group of people for ziyarat of graves and teach them the manner of doing ziyarat:

The Prophet (s) used to teach them that when they go out to graves they should say: Peace be with those who live in houses (graves). Peace be with you the groups of believers and muslims. Certainly if God wishes, we will be joiners to you. We ask safety for ourselves and yourselves. [11]

Women and ziyarat of Graves

The only matter which is remaining is the matter of ziyara by women which in some of the traditions, the Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited them from doing so.

 

“The Prophet of God has cursed the women who go excessively for ziyarat.” [12]

But it should be known that utilizing this tradition for proving prohibition of ziyarat is not correct due to a number of reasons: firstly, most of the scholars think this prohibition to be in the makruh sense and the reason for it being makruh was because of the special conditions prevailing at that time. One of the commentators of tradition i.e., the writer of Miftah al-haja fi sharh Sahih Ibn Maja refers to that and says:

“The scholars are having two opinions about the prohibition. That whether it is prohibited in the makruh sense or prohibited in the haram sense! But most of the scholars believe that women can go for ziyara if they are certain of remaining safe from any trouble.” [13]

Secondly, we have read in the previous traditions (kindly refer to tradition number 4) that Ayesha narrates from the Holy Prophet (s) that the latter declared free the ziyara of graves. If the women were excluded from this declaration then it is necessary to remind that this declaration is exclusively for men especially when the narrator is a lady and amongst the people to whom he (i.e. Prophet) was addressing was a lady and every addressee will naturally think that the order and declaration is directed to him or her.

Thirdly, some of the traditions mention the manner in which the Holy Prophet (s) taught Ayesha to perform ziyara of graves [14] and Ayesha herself used to personally visit the graves after the Holy Prophet (s).

Fourthly, al-Tirmidhi narrates that when Ayesha's brother i.e. ‘Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Bakr died in Ethiopia, his body was taken to Mecca and buried there. When his sister Ayesha came to Mecca from Medina, she visited grave of her brother and by the side of his grave, recited two couplets in his sorrow and made speech (about him).[15]

The commentator of Sahih al-Tirmidhi Imam Hafiz Ibn al-‘Arabi [al-Maliki] (born in 435 AH and died in 543 AH) writes in his additional notes on Sahih.

“The fact is that the Holy Prophet (s) has permitted the men and the women to go for ziyara. If some of the traditions mention it to be makruh it is because of restlessness and impatience near the grave or because of not observing proper hijab.”

Fifthly, Bukhari narrates from Anas that the Holy Prophet (s) saw a woman crying over her beloved one and comforted her to have faith and be patient. The woman not recognising the Holy Prophet (s), said: “you release me from the calamity which has befallen upon me and not befallen upon you”. When it was said to her that he was the Holy Prophet (s) she left the grave and went to the house of the Holy Prophet (s) pleading pardon for not recognising him. The Holy Prophet (s) replied: “Patience is advised at the time of misfortunes”. [16]

If ziyara was forbidden, the Holy Prophet (s) would have prohibited her from this action while he only asked her to adopt patience. Moreover, after the women visited the house of the Holy Prophet (s) he talked of patience and steadfastness at the time of misfortunes and did not say anything about ziyara of grave; otherwise he would have ordered her not to visit the grave of her beloved one any more.

Sixthly, Fatima (‘a), daughter of the Holy Prophet (s), used to visit every Friday the grave of her uncle Hamza and recite prayer (salat) and cry sadly at his grave. [17]

Seventhly, al-Qurtubi says that the Holy Prophet (s) did not prohibit any lady going for ziyara. Instead he cursed those ladies who were going for ziyara very often as he uses the words   and  which is used for exaggeration [18]

Perhaps the reason of cursing such a habit is that excessive ziyarat is the source of spoiling the rights of husband. If such factors are absent in the ziyara of one lady then there is no problem as such since remembering death is a matter which is necessary for both men and women.

Eighthly, if ziyara of grave is the source of getting unattached towards this world and a reduction of the greed of the person in helping him to remember the Hereafter, it also brings some benefit for the dead one i.e. for the one who is buried under the soil and is helpless from doing anything. This is because the Islamic ziyara is usually accompanied by recitation of al-Fatiha and giving its reward to the deceased. In fact this is the best gift which an alive person can give to his or her beloved dead one.

Ibn Maja narrates in his Sahih that the Holy Prophet (s) said:

“Recite Sura Yasin upon your dead ones” [19]

Therefore, there is no difference between man and woman that one should be permitted and the other should be forbidden, except that if the women are faced with some special situations that we previously discussed. Now, that the matter of ziyara of the graves of believers is clear for us and it is now necessary to refer to the valuable effects of ziyarat of the graves of the awliya Allah and the beloved ones of Allah.

Footnotes: 

[1] Sunan Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 113 chapter of  

[2] Tafsir al-Baydawi, vol. 3, p. 77.

[3] Sunan Ibn Maja, chapter of   vol.1, p.114, (Indian edition); Sahih al-Tirmidhi chapter of  vol. 3 p. 274 along with commentary of Ibn al-‘Arabi Maliki, (Lebanon edition); After narrating the tradition from Burayda, al-Tirmidhi says:

‘The tradition of Burayda is correct and the people of knowledge act upon it. They do not put forward any obstacle for performing ziyara of graves and they are people such as Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Shafi’i, Ahmad and Ishaq.’ Meanwhile, you may refer to the following documents:

Sahih Muslim, vol. 3. page 65 chapter of                                  

Sahih Abu Dawud, vol.2. p. 195, book of   chapter of    

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4 p. 73, book of chapter of   

[4] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p. 65, chapter of 

Sahih Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 114.

According to the narrators of this tradition, the reason the Holy Prophet (s) took permission from Allah for visiting the grave of his mother was that his mother was a polytheist. Undoubtedly the mother of Holy Prophet (s) was a monotheist and a believer like her father, grandfather and ancestors. For this reason all the portion of this tradition is incompatible with the religious standards.

Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2 p. 195. Book of   Egyptian print along with the additional notes of Shaykh Ahmad Sa’d from the scholars of Azhar.

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4 p. 74, book of   chapter of  

[5] Sahih Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 114.

[6] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 3 p. 76; and Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p. 64 chapter of   

[7] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 40,  pp. 76- 77.

[8] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 40, pp. 76- 77.

[9] Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 2,  p. 196.

[10] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3,  p. 63 chapter of   

[11] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3,  p. 110 chapter of 

[12] Sahih Ibn Maja, (1st Edition, Egypt), vol. 1, p. 478, book of  chapter of

 

[13] Hawashi of Sunan Ibn Maja, (Indian edition), vol. 1, p. 114.

[14] Refer to tradition no. 5.

[15] Sunan al-Tirmidhi, vol. 4, p. 275 book of   chapter of 

Wahhabism

Ayatullah Ja'far Subhani

Translated by: Jalil Dorrani

Chapter 4

Visitation (Ziyarat) of Graves of Believers from the Viewpoint of the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah

The scholars of Islam with the support of verses of Qur’an and traditions have recommended ziyarat of grave especially the ziyarat of the Holy Prophet's grave and those of the pious people and consider this to be a virtue and honour. However, Wahhabis do not consider the principle of ziyarat to be haram (in apparent terms) but declare that the journey for ziyara towards the grave of the awliya Allah as unlawful and haram. After completion of the principle of ziyarat, we shall discuss the matter of journey for ziyarat of the graves of the awliya Allah

Ziyarat of graves has many ethical influences and is important for moral education and training that we shall mention here very briefly.

Looking at this silent valley (i.e. graveyard) which has blown off the light of life of everyone from the poor to the rich and the weak to the powerful and all of them being buried with only three pieces of cloth, purifies the mind and the heart and reduces greed and avarice of a person to a great extent. If a person possesses an eye which can see warnings he can there by learn a lesson and think within himself as such: A transient life of 60 or 70 years ending in getting concealed under the soil and then decaying and getting destroyed is not so much valuable that a person strives hard to achieve wealth and position and does injustice upon himself and the others.

Witnessing this silent valley which softens the most adament heart and makes the most heavy ear to hear and gives brightness to the most poor eye-sight, causes a person to review his plans in life and ponder over the great responsibilites which he has before Allah and the people and controls his desires.

The Holy Prophet (s) refering to this point in a tradition says:

/p>

 “Visit the graves; for visiting them becomes the cause of remembering the next world”. [1]

While the authenticity and firmness of ziyarat of graves is so obvious that it is needless to produce proofs and reasonings to a great extent yet, we reflect here some of the proofs for those who are doubtful.

Qur’an and ziyarat of Graves:

Qur’an clearly instructs that the Holy Prophet (s) should not perform prayer over the dead body of the hypocrites and should not stand near their graves. It says:

“And never offer prayer for anyone of them who dies and do not stand by his grave, surely they disbelieve in Allah and His Apostle and they shall die in transgression”. (Tauba: 84)  

In this verse, for destroying the character of the hypocrites and rebuking the members of this group, the God commands the Holy Prophet (s):

1. Not to perform salat over the dead body of anyone of them.

2. Not to stand over their graves; and this reality is presented with the sentence;

 

When the Holy Qur’an commands that one should avoid these two actions with regards to the hypocrites it means that for others who are not hypocrites these actions are good and worthy to be performed.

Now let us see what    means? Does it refer only to the standing at the time of burial which in the case of hypocrites is not permissible and in the case of the believers good and necessary? Or it also refers to standing at the time of burial and at other instances?

Some of the commentators think that the verse refers to the matter of standing at the time of burial but some others like al-Baydawi see the verse from a far angle and interpret it as such:

Don’t stand on grave for burial or pilgrimage. [2]

Paying attention to the contents of verse will show that it is having a wider meaning i.e. it concerns standing at the time of burial as well as stopping after the burial.

This is because two sentences form the gist of the subject matter of this verse and these two sentences comprises of:

1.

“And never offer prayer for anyone of them who dies……” (Tauba: 84)

The word of  which has been placed in the course of prohibition is good for all individuals.

The word of   is good for all times and the meaning of the sentence will be as such: “Do not perform salat for any one of the hypocrites at any time”.

By paying attention to these two words we can easily understand that the meaning of this particular sentence is not refering to recitation of salat over the dead body because reciting salat over the dead body takes place only once and that is before the burial and it cannot be repeated. If it specifically meant recitation of salat over the dead, then it was needless to bring the word. And to imagine that this word serves the purpose of expressing all individuals is completely irrelevant because the sentence   is sufficient for such inclusion and purpose and there is no need to mention it once again.

Moreover, the word   in Arabic refers to time and not individuals such as:

“Nor that you should marry his wives after him ever;…” (Ahzab: 53)

 

Therefore the essence of the first sentence is: Never seek forgiveness and mercy for anyone of the hypocrites whether at the time of reciting salat or otherwise.

2. And now we will discuss the second sentence:

The meaning of this sentence in connection with the previous sentence is as such:

because the adverbs which are present in  are also applicable for  .

Therefore it cannot be said that qiyam (standing) refers to the qiyam at the time of burial because it is presumed that qiyam at the time of burial for each one is not subject to repetition and the word   too is commendable in this sentence which shows that this action is worthy of repetition.

The reply to the supposition that this word is applicable for all individuals was given in the previous sentence since with the presence of   it is needless to express that once again.

By paying attention to these two points in the words  and   one can say:

God has prohibited the Holy Prophet (s) from seeking any kind of mercy for the hypocrites whether by means of reciting salat upon the dead body or merely by means of du'a and from any kind of standing over their graves whether at the time of burial or after the burial. This means that these two actions i.e. ‘seeking forgiveness’ and ‘standing’ is permissible and worthy for the grave of a believer in all the instances and one of such instances is standing for ziyarat and recitation of Qur’an for a believer who has been buried there for years.

Now we shall discuss the virtue and excellence of ziyarat of graves from the viewpoint of traditions.

Traditions and ziyarat of Graves:

From the Islamic traditions which the authors of Sihah and Sunan have narrated, we derive the conclusion that the Holy Prophet (s) had prohibited, due to a temporary reason, the ziyarat of graves and later on allowed the people to make haste for ziyarat.

Perhaps the reason for prohibition was that their dead ones were predominantly polytheists and idol-worshippers and Islam had cut off their relation and affection with the world of polytheism. It is also possible that the reason for prohibition was something else and that is the newly converted Muslims were writing elegies and saying un-Islamic things over the graves of the dead polytheists. But after the expansion of Islam and the ‘faith’ entering into the hearts of people, this prohibition was lifted and the Holy Prophet (s) permitted the people to go for the ziyarat of graves because of the educative benefits, so that people should hasten to visit graves

The writers of Sunan and Sihah narrate as such:

 

“I had prohibited you from ziyara of graves. From now on, go for ziyara because it will make you feel unattached towards this world and make you remember the hereafter.” [3]

It is on the same basis that the Holy Prophet (s) was visiting the grave of his mother and informing the people to visit the graves since ziyara is the source of remembering the hereafter. Here is the text of the tradition:

“The Holy Prophet (s) visited the grave of his mother and cried near her grave and also made others around him to cry. Thereafter he said: I have taken permission from my Lord to visit the grave of my mother. You too should visit the graves because such a visit will remind you of death.” [4]

4. Ayesha says that the Holy Prophet (s) freely allowed the ziyarat of graves,

[5]

“The Prophet of God permitted the visit of graves”.

5. Ayesha says: The Holy Prophet (s) taught me the manner of visiting the graves. Here is the text of the tradition:

                   

“My lord commanded me to come to Baqi’ and seek forgiveness for them. (Ayesha) says: I asked him how one should seek forgiveness to which the Holy Prophet (s) replied: Say Peace (Salaam) be upon the people of this place from the believers and muslims, May God have mercy on those who have left and those who are to follow. We shall join you all very soon.” [6]

6. In another tradition, there are some sentences which the Holy Prophet (s) used when performing ziyarat of graves. It is as follows:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and we will be return to you and rely on you and certainly if God wishes, we will join you. O God, have mercy on all those (buried) in Baqi’ al-Garqad* [7]

*Garqad was a tree in Baqi’ graveyard. And because of this tree, it was commonly called as the land of Garqad.

7. In another tradition, the text of ziyarat is narrated in a different way:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and muslims, and certainy we will join you. You will exhilarate us and we will follow you. We ask welfare from you for ourselves and for yourself. [8]

8. In the third tradition, the text is narrated still differently:

Peace be with you the groups of believers and if God wishes, we will join you. [9]

From the tradition of Ayesha, we got knowledge that whenever the last part of night was approaching, the Holy Prophet (s) would go towards Baqi’ and say:

Peace be with you! The groups of believers and what has been promised to you will be given to you, soon in future your destiny will reach you. And certainly, we will be the joiners to you soon. And if God wishes, will be with you. O God! Have mercy on all those (buried) in Baqi’ al-Garqad. [10]

From another tradition we come to know that the Holy Prophet (s) used to hasten, along with a group of people for ziyarat of graves and teach them the manner of doing ziyarat:

The Prophet (s) used to teach them that when they go out to graves they should say: Peace be with those who live in houses (graves). Peace be with you the groups of believers and muslims. Certainly if God wishes, we will be joiners to you. We ask safety for ourselves and yourselves. [11]

Women and ziyarat of Graves

The only matter which is remaining is the matter of ziyara by women which in some of the traditions, the Holy Prophet (s) has prohibited them from doing so.

 

“The Prophet of God has cursed the women who go excessively for ziyarat.” [12]

But it should be known that utilizing this tradition for proving prohibition of ziyarat is not correct due to a number of reasons: firstly, most of the scholars think this prohibition to be in the makruh sense and the reason for it being makruh was because of the special conditions prevailing at that time. One of the commentators of tradition i.e., the writer of Miftah al-haja fi sharh Sahih Ibn Maja refers to that and says:

“The scholars are having two opinions about the prohibition. That whether it is prohibited in the makruh sense or prohibited in the haram sense! But most of the scholars believe that women can go for ziyara if they are certain of remaining safe from any trouble.” [13]

Secondly, we have read in the previous traditions (kindly refer to tradition number 4) that Ayesha narrates from the Holy Prophet (s) that the latter declared free the ziyara of graves. If the women were excluded from this declaration then it is necessary to remind that this declaration is exclusively for men especially when the narrator is a lady and amongst the people to whom he (i.e. Prophet) was addressing was a lady and every addressee will naturally think that the order and declaration is directed to him or her.

Thirdly, some of the traditions mention the manner in which the Holy Prophet (s) taught Ayesha to perform ziyara of graves [14] and Ayesha herself used to personally visit the graves after the Holy Prophet (s).

Fourthly, al-Tirmidhi narrates that when Ayesha's brother i.e. ‘Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Bakr died in Ethiopia, his body was taken to Mecca and buried there. When his sister Ayesha came to Mecca from Medina, she visited grave of her brother and by the side of his grave, recited two couplets in his sorrow and made speech (about him).[15]

The commentator of Sahih al-Tirmidhi Imam Hafiz Ibn al-‘Arabi [al-Maliki] (born in 435 AH and died in 543 AH) writes in his additional notes on Sahih.

“The fact is that the Holy Prophet (s) has permitted the men and the women to go for ziyara. If some of the traditions mention it to be makruh it is because of restlessness and impatience near the grave or because of not observing proper hijab.”

Fifthly, Bukhari narrates from Anas that the Holy Prophet (s) saw a woman crying over her beloved one and comforted her to have faith and be patient. The woman not recognising the Holy Prophet (s), said: “you release me from the calamity which has befallen upon me and not befallen upon you”. When it was said to her that he was the Holy Prophet (s) she left the grave and went to the house of the Holy Prophet (s) pleading pardon for not recognising him. The Holy Prophet (s) replied: “Patience is advised at the time of misfortunes”. [16]

If ziyara was forbidden, the Holy Prophet (s) would have prohibited her from this action while he only asked her to adopt patience. Moreover, after the women visited the house of the Holy Prophet (s) he talked of patience and steadfastness at the time of misfortunes and did not say anything about ziyara of grave; otherwise he would have ordered her not to visit the grave of her beloved one any more.

Sixthly, Fatima (‘a), daughter of the Holy Prophet (s), used to visit every Friday the grave of her uncle Hamza and recite prayer (salat) and cry sadly at his grave. [17]

Seventhly, al-Qurtubi says that the Holy Prophet (s) did not prohibit any lady going for ziyara. Instead he cursed those ladies who were going for ziyara very often as he uses the words   and  which is used for exaggeration [18]

Perhaps the reason of cursing such a habit is that excessive ziyarat is the source of spoiling the rights of husband. If such factors are absent in the ziyara of one lady then there is no problem as such since remembering death is a matter which is necessary for both men and women.

Eighthly, if ziyara of grave is the source of getting unattached towards this world and a reduction of the greed of the person in helping him to remember the Hereafter, it also brings some benefit for the dead one i.e. for the one who is buried under the soil and is helpless from doing anything. This is because the Islamic ziyara is usually accompanied by recitation of al-Fatiha and giving its reward to the deceased. In fact this is the best gift which an alive person can give to his or her beloved dead one.

Ibn Maja narrates in his Sahih that the Holy Prophet (s) said:

“Recite Sura Yasin upon your dead ones” [19]

Therefore, there is no difference between man and woman that one should be permitted and the other should be forbidden, except that if the women are faced with some special situations that we previously discussed. Now, that the matter of ziyara of the graves of believers is clear for us and it is now necessary to refer to the valuable effects of ziyarat of the graves of the awliya Allah and the beloved ones of Allah.

Footnotes: 

[1] Sunan Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 113 chapter of  

[2] Tafsir al-Baydawi, vol. 3, p. 77.

[3] Sunan Ibn Maja, chapter of   vol.1, p.114, (Indian edition); Sahih al-Tirmidhi chapter of  vol. 3 p. 274 along with commentary of Ibn al-‘Arabi Maliki, (Lebanon edition); After narrating the tradition from Burayda, al-Tirmidhi says:

‘The tradition of Burayda is correct and the people of knowledge act upon it. They do not put forward any obstacle for performing ziyara of graves and they are people such as Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Shafi’i, Ahmad and Ishaq.’ Meanwhile, you may refer to the following documents:

Sahih Muslim, vol. 3. page 65 chapter of                                  

Sahih Abu Dawud, vol.2. p. 195, book of   chapter of    

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4 p. 73, book of chapter of   

[4] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p. 65, chapter of 

Sahih Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 114.

According to the narrators of this tradition, the reason the Holy Prophet (s) took permission from Allah for visiting the grave of his mother was that his mother was a polytheist. Undoubtedly the mother of Holy Prophet (s) was a monotheist and a believer like her father, grandfather and ancestors. For this reason all the portion of this tradition is incompatible with the religious standards.

Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2 p. 195. Book of   Egyptian print along with the additional notes of Shaykh Ahmad Sa’d from the scholars of Azhar.

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4 p. 74, book of   chapter of  

[5] Sahih Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 114.

[6] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 3 p. 76; and Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p. 64 chapter of   

[7] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 40,  pp. 76- 77.

[8] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 40, pp. 76- 77.

[9] Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 2,  p. 196.

[10] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3,  p. 63 chapter of   

[11] Sahih Muslim, vol. 3,  p. 110 chapter of 

[12] Sahih Ibn Maja, (1st Edition, Egypt), vol. 1, p. 478, book of  chapter of

 

[13] Hawashi of Sunan Ibn Maja, (Indian edition), vol. 1, p. 114.

[14] Refer to tradition no. 5.

[15] Sunan al-Tirmidhi, vol. 4, p. 275 book of   chapter of 

[16] Sahih Bukhari, p. 100, book of   chapter of  ;  Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2 p. 171.

[17] al-Hakim, Mustadrak al-sahihayn,  vol. 1, p. 377; al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’, vo1. 2 p. 112.

[18] Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 2, p. 196 has narrated 

[19] Sahih Bukhari, p. 100, book of   chater of  ; Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2 p. 171.

Chapter 5

Valuable Effects of Ziyarat of the Graves of Religious Personalities

The graves which attract the worshippers of God from all over the world and in particular the Muslims, are the graves of those who were possessing a divine mission in the society and had fulfilled their mission befittingly. These people consist of:

1. Prophets and religious leaders who carried the divine message upon their shoulders and guided the people by giving their lives, property and blood of their dear ones and bore the hardships and difficulties in this path.

2. Great scholars who, like a bright candle, have spread light to their surroundings and have laboured in research and left behind a great treasure by the name of knowledge and wisdom in the service of mankind. They have acquainted men with the Divine Book, the Book of Nature and the language of creation and have laid the foundation of religious, human and natural sciences.

3. The group of people whose cup of patience had been overflowing from the social oppression, ever-increasing injustices and unfair discrimination. They are those who have put their life at stake against the oppressive rulers and washed with their blood the cruelties prevalent in the society. (the martyrs in the path of Islam). No revolution and reform in society will remain worthless and the significance of a holy revolution which wishes to bring down the palaces of the oppressors and suffocate them, is the holy blood of those combatants who wish to bring Justice, Equity, Liberty and freedom back to the society. It is they to whom the people go for their ziyarat and shed tears near their graves or shrines and remember their valuable services and their holy sacrifices. By reciting some Suras from the Qur’an they soothe their souls and by reciting poems about their sacrifices, lofty human merits and exalted morals, they enliven their memories and their school of thought and invite the people to follow their path.

Ziyarat of graves of such group of people is one kind of thanksgiving and appreciation of their heroism and self-sacrifices. It is a warning to the contemporary generation that the reward of the person who selects the true path and gives his or her life while defending true beliefs and propagating freedom and liberty is that he or she will never be forgotten. The passage of time which turns everything old and extinct not only does not make their memories to fade or disappear but causes the flames of love to glow more in the pure and sincere hearts. Thus how good it is that the contemporary generation and the future generation too follow their path since they have seen with their own eyes the rewards of the sacrifices of the men of truth. What was said till now has acquainted us with the importance of honouring the great religious personalities and the combatants in the path of truth and reality.

Therefore, based on this, we should always honour and respect these people in their death time just as it was done during their life time and should protect and safeguard their signs and memories. We should celebrate their birth-days and declare the day of their deaths to be the day of grief and sorrow. By holding big gatherings and delivering good and effective speeches, we should invite the people to become acquainted with their school of thought and protect and safeguard them in the future. We should respect the soil and place of their burial and prevent any kind of insult and segregation. This is because respecting their graves means respecting their school of thought just as insulting and degrading their grave is insulting their path and their conduct.

At present, anyone who steps into the cemetry of Baqi’ will see that the graves of the leaders of Islam and the dear companions of the Holy Prophet (s) who were self-sacrificing and striving in the propagation of religion in such a insulted state that it will give him a severe shock and grief and he will be astonished by attitude of the stone-hearted Wahhabis who reckon themselves to be the propagators of religion. This is because on the one hand they respect the names of religious leaders and companions of the Holy Prophet (s) on the pulpits and on the other hand whenever it comes to the matter of their graves, they do not pay the least respect. They do not even care about the animals contaminating the surroundings of their graves. By using the words of shirk (polytheism) and mushrik (polytheist) as an excuse, they strike down the respect and honour of the awliya and in this manner, restrain the people from honouring them in any possible manner (tongue, thoughts, expressions, actions etc) and to the extent that they consider all these actions (in consideration of the services of the awliya Allah) to be polytheism and label them as polytheists. They have such a severe enmity with the awliya Allah that any kind of respect manifested towards them will very much annoy them.

Now it is time to talk and discuss about ziyara of grave of the Holy Prophet (s) from Islamic proofs and reasonings.

Ziyarat of the Grave of the Holy Prophet (s)

We shall here bring forth the logical proofs from the Holy Qur’an and traditions and request the respected readers for more concentration in this section.

Evidence from Qur’an

The Holy Qur’an commands the sinners to approach the Holy Prophet (s) and request him to seek forgiveness for them from Allah since his request and plead is accepted by Allah. The Holy verse says:

 “And had they, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Apostle had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Oft-returning, Merciful” (Nisa: 64)

If in case we were having only one such verse, we could say that the verse is related to the day when the Holy Prophet (s) was living amongst the people. However, due to a number of reasons, we can derive from this verse, one general conclusion that it is not specific to this worldly life.

They are, firstly the verses of Qur’an that consider a barzakhi life for the Prophet (s), awliya and some particular group of people and introduces them as the ones who can see and hear in that world. This segment of verses will be discussed under the topic of Tawassul (recourse) to the Holy souls.

Secondly, the Islamic traditions (hadiths) clearly bear testimony to the fact that the angels transmit the messages of the people to the Holy Prophet (s). This tradition has come in Sihah as such:

The Holy Prophet (s) said: “There is no one who sends greetings upon me but that Allah makes his greetings reach me and I answer his greetings”. [1]

And

“And said the Prophet of God (s) …… ‘Send greetings upon me for your greetings reaches me”’. [2]

Thirdly, right from the beginning, the Islamic society has grasped a general and wider meaning from this verse (mentioned above) and acted accordingly without the demise of the Holy Prophet (s) becoming any obstacle in this regard. After the passing of the Holy Prophet (s), a group from the Arabs would come for ziyara of Holy Prophet (s) with clear and pure minds and recite this verse and request him to seek forgiveness on their behalf.

Taqi al-Din al-Subki and al-Samhudi have reported examples regarding it in their books Shifa' al-saqam and Wafa' al-wafa' respectively. We shall mention here some of them:

Sufyan bin 'Anbar, who is one of the learned scholars of the Shafi'i school, narrates from al-'Utabi - that latter was standing near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) when an Arab came and said:

‘Peace be upon you Oh Prophet of God, I have heard Allah saying (in Quran) “And had they, when they were unjust to themselves, come to you and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Apostle had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Oft-returning, Merciful” and indeed as I have come near you, I seek forgiveness for my sins and make you intercesseor towards my Lord..’

Thereafter he cried and sought forgiveness and left the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) after reciting this poem 

Regarding this matter al-Samhudi narrates from Ali (‘a) that: “Three days had passed from the burial of the Holy Prophet (s). One Arab came and threw himself over the Prophet's grave and sprinkling the soil of the grave over his head said: O Prophet, you spoke to us and we listened. You received from Allah what we received from you. One sentence which has been revealed from God is the verse:

‘And I have done injustice to myself and I have come to you to seek forgiveness for me.’

This action shows that the level and position which has been given to the Holy Prophet (s) by order of this verse is not limited to his life in this world but also applicable to his barzakhi life.

Basically, the Muslims do not consider the verses which are talking about the matter of respect of the Holy Prophet (s) to be restricted to his life-time. At the time of burial of Hasan ibn 'Ali (‘a), when a section of the people had made an uproar, Husayn ibn 'Ali (‘a), immediately recited the following verse in order to silence them.

 “O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet, and do not speak loud to him”. Hujurat: 2)

Nobody, not even the Umayyads have said that this verse and this respect is only related to the life-time of the Holy Prophet (s). At present, the Wahhabis themselves have written this verse facing the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and put it over the wall and by this, they wish to say that we should lower our voice and not speak loudly.

Therefore, we can grasp a wider meaning from the verse and it is this that at present, the Muslims can approach the Holy Prophet (s) and request him to seek forgiveness from Allah for their sins. Ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s) of Islam has no purpose other than mentioned in this ayah and has no parable in this regard.

This verse proves two matters:

1. After the demise of the Holy Prophet (s), it is possible to approach him and request him to seek forgiveness from Allah on one's behalf. This matter will be discussed later under the topic of “Tawassul (recourse) with the Awliya Allah”.

2. This verse is a testimony to the fact that ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s) is lawful since the reality of ziyara is nothing but the presence of the visitor near the visited one. If one is allowed to visit the grave of Holy Prophet (s) and request him to seek forgiveness from Allah then in fact we have performed two actions:

(i). We have requested him to seek forgiveness from Allah.

(ii). We have, by approaching him, conversed with him and ziyarat possesses no reality other than this and the subject matter of ziyara is mainly shaped with the same theme.

Therefore, this verse is a testimony to both these matters.

Another Evidence:

The unanimity and consensus of the Muslims in various periods in a decree related to the commandments of Islam is the most obvious testimony upon its correctness.

Consensus over the ziyara of grave of the Holy Prophet (s) is one of the better evidences of this decree. By referring to the books of tradition, fiqh, morals and history - especially those related to Hajj rites - the reality of this matter will be clarified.

Allama al-'Amini has narrated from fourty-two Islamic sources, the recommendation of ziyara of the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s). He has accurately narrated the texts and wordings of them in Al-Ghadir, volume 5, pages 106 to 129.

The books which we have referred to are the following:

A. Shifa' al-saqam fi ziyara khayr al-'anam written by Taqi al-Din al-Subki al-Shafi'i (died in 756). He has narrated in this book a part of the texts and wordings of the scholars.

B. Wafa' al-Wafa' written by al-Samhudi (died in 911). He has narrated in this book the texts and wordings of the scholars which all indicate emphatic recommendation.

C. Al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-arba'a which has been written by four men from the four schools of thought and exposes the thoughts of the four Imams of Ahl-al Sunnah whom they follow. They have written as such:

The ziyarat of the grave of the Prophet (s) is the principal recommendion as repeatedly found in traditions.

Now it's time to reflect upon a section of the traditions which have been narrated by Islamic muhaddithun  (traditionists).

Traditions Regarding Paying Homage to the Holy Prophet (s)

The Islamic traditions (hadiths) about ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s) are so many from the Sunni muhaddithun  that we don’t feel need to pay attention to their references. The great Sunni scholars from each of the sects have narrated these in their books and it shows that ziyara of the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) has been one of their indisputable matters. Now we shall narrate only a few of them as mentioning all of the traditions will lengthen our discussion.

First Tradition:

“Anyone who visits my grave, will never be deprived of my intercession”.

This tradition has come down in the book of Al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-arba'a in volume l page 590 and the Sunni scholars of the four schools of thought have given fatwa

 (verdict) based on them. For reference consult the book of Wafa' al-wafa' vol. 4 page 1336.

Certainly, such a tradition which the scholars have recorded right from the middle of the 2nd century till now, cannot be said to be unfounded. For completion of the matter, Taqi al-Din Ali bin Abdl al-Kafi al-Subki (d. 756 AH) has discussed and investigated this matter and isnad of the traditions in his valuable book Shifa' al-saqam on pages 3 to 11 and has proved the verity and accuracy of the methods of this tradition.

Second Tradition:

“Anyone who comes to me with the intention of paying homage to me will be having a right upon me to intercede for him on the Day of Judgement”.

Sixteen memorizers (of Qur’an) and muhaddithun have brought this tradition in their books and Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH) has discussed the narrators and isnad of the traditions in his book Shifa' al-saqam page no.13. Also refer to the book Wafa' al-wafa'  vo1. 4, page 1340.

Third Tradition:

“Anyone who visits the House of Allah and then visits my grave is like one who has visited me during my life-time.”

This tradition has been recorded by twenty-five of the renowned muhaddithun and huffaz in their books and Taqi al-Din al-Subki has spoken extensively about the references of this tradition in his book Shifa' al-saqam pages 12 to 16. Also refer to Wafa' al-wafa'  volume 4 page 1340.

Fourth Tradition:

“Anyone who visits the House of Allah and does not visit me has done injustice upon me”.

This tradition has been narrated by nine men from the shuyukh and memorizers of tradition. Also refer to Wafa' al-wafa' volume 4 page 1342.

Fifth Tradition:

“I will become an intercessor for anyone who pays homage to me by coming to my shrine.”

This tradition has been narrated by thirteen muhaddithun  and  huffaz . Refer to Wafa' al-wafa'  volume 4 page 1347.

Sixth Tradition:

“Anyone who visits me after my demise is like one who has visited me during my lifetime”.

These are the examples from various traditions in which the Holy Prophet (s) has invited the people for his ziyara and the number of such traditions according to research of al-Ghadir amounts to twenty-two.

Al-Samhudi has collected seventeen traditions in his book Wafa' al-wafa' volume 4 pages 1336-1348 and has discussed their references in detail.

If the Holy Prophet (s) has invited the people for his ziyara, it is because of a series of material and spiritual benefits which are hidden in the ziyarat of great Islamic personalities.

By paying homage to the grave of the Holy Prophet (s), people become acquainted with the propagation of religion of Islam and receive the correct traditions and knowledge and spread them around the world.

Reasonings of Wahhabis about Prohibition of Journey towards Ziyarat of Graves

Apparently, the Wahhabis permit the ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s) but do not consider the journey for ziyara of graves (of others) to be permissible.

Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab writes in the second treatise in al-Rasa'il al-hadiyya al-saniyya [5] as follows:

“Ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s) is mustahab (recommended) but journey specifically undertaken for ziyara of mosques and reciting prayer there in is not allowed”.

Their main reasoning for ziyara being forbidden is the following tradition which has been narrated in the Sihah. The narrator of this tradition is Abu Hurayra who says that the Holy Prophet (s) said:

“The load of journey cannot be fastened except for (journey towards) three mosques - my own Mosque, Masjid al-Haram and Masjid al-'Aqsa”

The text of this tradition is narrated in some other way too and that is:

Still this text has been narrated in a third way:

 [6]

That the tradition has come in the books of Sihah is undoubtful and we never dispute that its narrator is Abu Hurayra. However what is important is to understand the context of the tradition.

Let us suppose the text of the tradition is as such:

Indisputably the word of  is an exception and requires   (that from which the exception is made) and before refering to the evidences we can presume the   in two ways:

 

Understanding the context of the tradition depends on selecting one of the two assumptions.

If we assume the context of the tradition to be the first one, then in such a case it would mean that no luggage for journey will be fastened towards any mosque except these three mosques and it does not mean that ( ) is not permissible for any place even if it is not a mosque.

Anyone who fastens the luggage of journey for ziyara of the Holy Prophet (s), Imams and virtuous men will never be included in the prohibition of this tradition since the topic of discussion is journey (only) towards mosque and amongst all the mosques these three mosques have been excluded. But going to journey for ziyara of shrines which is out of our topic of discussion is not included in this prohibition.

If we assume the context of the tradition to be the second case, it would mean that except for the journey towards these three places, all spiritual journeys are prohibited, whether the journey is for ziyara of mosque or for ziyarat of other places.

However by paying attention to the decisive evidences it will become clear that the context of the tradition is the same as the first one.

Firstly the    (the thing excepted) is of the three mosques; in as much as the exception is a linked exception certainly   will be related to the mosque and not place. [7]

Secondly, if the aim is prohibition of all the spiritual journeys, it will not be a correct restriction because, in the Hajj ceremonies people do ( ) and fasten their luggage for Arafat, Mash'ar and Mina. If religious journey (other than to these three places) is not allowed, then why it has been permitted for these three places?

Thirdly, journeys undertaken for jihad in the path of Allah, seeking knowledge, establishing bonds of relationship or visiting parents are such journeys which have been emphasised in Qur’an and traditions. Qur’an says:

“Why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may apply themselves obtain understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they come back to them that they may be cautious?” (Tawba: 122)

Therefore great research scholars have interpreted the tradition in the way which we have mentioned.

Al-Gazzali in his book Ihya' 'ulum al-din says:

“The second type of journey is to go on journey for worship like journey for jihad, hajj, ziyara of the grave of Holy Prophet (s), his companions and the awliya.

Anyone whose ziyara is the source of tabarruk during life-time will also be the same during his death-time and   for these motives is no problem and is not contradictory to the tradition which prohibits   (other than the three mosques).

This is because the matter under discussion is about the mosques and since other mosques are all equal as far as superiority is concerned it is said that journey towards these mosques are not permitted. However, if we overlook the matter of mosques, the ziyarat of Prophets and awliya are having a great virtue although they possess ranks and grades. [9]

Therefore what is prohibited is     towards the mosques (other than the three mosques) and not “ ” for ziyarat and or other spiritual works.

Here we dont have an alternative but to mention that when the Holy Prophet (s) says that no luggage can be fastened for other than the three mosques, it does not mean    is forbidden (haram). Instead it means that it is not having any merit that a person fastens his luggage towards them and takes the trouble of visiting them as all the mosques (other than the three mosques) are not having any difference as far as their superiority is concerned.  The general mosque, the district mosque and the community mosque are all having equal rewards; it is needless that with the presence of the general mosque in a near locality a person fastens his luggage for the general mosque situated in another far-away locality. But it does not mean that if he does so, his action will be haram and his journey will be a sinful one.

The proof of this matter is what the writers of Sihah and Sunans narrate that the Holy Prophet (s) and his companions would visit Masjid Quba on Saturdays and recite prayer at that place. Here is the text of Sahih Bukhari:

 

Footnotes: 

“The Holy Prophet (s) used to go for ziyara of Masjid Quba on every Saturday either on foot or on a mount. The son of ‘Umar too would do the same.” [9]

Fundamentally, how can travelling distances for performing salat for Allah in one of the divine mosques without the least taint of sham be considered as haram and unlawful? While establishing prayers in mosque is mustahab (recommended) its preliminary steps too, as a rule, will take the same colour.

[1] Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 1 pages 470-471, book of Hajj chapter:     

[2] Shaykh Mansur Ali Nasif, Al-Taj al-jami' li al-'usul  fi ahadith al-Rasul, vol. 2, p. 189

[3] Wafa' al-wafa'  volume 4 page 1361

[4] Al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-arba'a, volume 1 page 590.

[5] It is the best book which has been written by any of the Sunni writers against the fatwa (verdict) of Ibn Taymiyya regarding the prohibition of journey for ziyara of the Holy Prophet's grave.

[6] These three texts have been narrated by Muslim in his Sahih vol. 4 page 126 book of Hajj, chapter of . It can also be found in Sunan Abu Dawud, vol. 1 page 469, book of Hajj and Sunan al-Nasa'i with Sharh of al-Suyuti vol. 2 pages 37-38.

[7] If someone says: “” , then we have to say that   is the word for human-beings and its like for example tribe etc. and it is not referring to a more comprehensive meaning by the name of “things” and “existence” which is either human-beings or other things.

[8] al-Ghazzali, Ihya' 'ulum al-din, book of manners of journey, vol. 2 page 247 printed by Dar al-Ma'arifa (Beirut). Also refer to al-Fatawa al-kubra, vol. 2 page 24.

[9] Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 2 page 76. Sahih Muslim (with Sharh of al-Nawawi) vol. 9 pages 169-171; Sunan al-Nasa'i (with Sharh of al-Suyuti) vol. 2 page 37.

Chapter 6

Performance of Prayer and Supplication Near Graves of the Holy Personalities

Among the matters which has been discussed and debated in the books of Wahhabis is the issue of performing prayer and recitation of du'a near the graves of the holy personalities and the matter of lighting candles over their graves.

The founder of this school of thought says in the treatise of Ziyarat al-qubur as such:

“No one from the past leaders has said that salat near the graves is mustahab (recommended) or that salat and du'a at these places are more superior to other places. Instead all of them are of the same view that salat in mosques and houses are more useful than reciting them near the graves of the awliya and virtous people”. [1]

Moreover, in a reply attributed to the scholars of Medina we read as such:

 “At the time of supplication, it is better to stop from concentrating over the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and what is well-known in the reliable books is its prohibition. Moreover the best direction is the direction of qibla”.

This matter, over the passage of time has reached the level of shirk (polytheism) from the level of prohibition and at present they consider such an action to be shirk and its performer a mushrik (polytheist).

We remind you that anyone who perfoms salat for and worships the one in the grave or takes his grave as a qibla will undoubtedly be called a mushrik.

But no Muslim from anywhere in the world performs such an action near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and the awliya. They neither worship them nor take their graves as qibla.

Therefore the idea of shirk is no more than an imagination. The motive of Muslims in performing salat and du'a near the graves of the awliya is the very intention of tabarruk to the place where the beloved one of Allah has been buried.

They imagine that since such a place beholds a special dignity due to the burial of the beloved one of Allah, their actions will consequently be having a great reward.

Now it is necessary to discuss whether a place enjoys sanctification due to the burial of some virtuous and pious person or not?

If such a judgment is proved through the Qur’an and sunnah, then naturally performing salat and du'a near the graves of the divine leaders will be considered as commendable acts. And, even in other case, we cannot declare it to be prohibited and haram. Instead, like all the other places, performing salat and reciting du'a in those places too will be permitted and lawful even though it may not be considered admirable.

In this section we shall now focus our discussion on whether the burial places and graves of the Prophets and awliya are possessing special superiority and dignity or not and whether any proof exists in the Qur’an and sunnah about this matter or not?

This reality can be known by paying attention to the following verses:

1. About the grave of ‘Ashaab-e-Ka'ahf’ the group of monotheist gave their views as such: 

“……For we will certainly raise a masjid over them.” (Kahf: 21)

Their aim in considering the graves as mosques was nothing but to perform their religious obligations or, so to speak, their prayer and du'a over there. [2] They imagined that this place possessed a special dignity keeping in mind the fact that it contained the dead bodies of the beloved servants of Allah. They thought of seeking tabarruk from the superiority of that place and hence a greater reward.

Qur’an narrates this matter from the group of monotheists and does not say anything more. If this action was unlawful, vain and useless, then Qur’an would have never remaind silent. It would have certainly found fault with it and not kept silent which is naturally the sign of approval.

2. The Holy Qur’an commands the people visiting the House of Allah to recite salat at Maqam Ibrahim i. e. the place where Ibrahim (‘a) was standing.

Thus it says:

 “And appoint for yourselves a place of prayer on the standing-place of Ibrahim”. (Baqarah: 125)

If you place this verse before anyone they will not understand anything from it except that this place has achieved superiority and dignity due to the standing of Ibrahim (‘a) over this spot and perhaps his worshipping of Allah in that place. Due to the auspiciousness and dignity this spot possesses, the Holy Qur’an orders the Muslims to recite salat at that spot and seek ‘tabarruk’.

When the Qiyam (standing) of Ibrahim (‘a) in one place gives holiness and dignity to such a place then, does not the burial of the bodies of martyrs and virtuous people become the source of dignity and excellence and does not prayers in such a place possess a greater value and dua's get better answered?

Is it true that this verse has been revealed only in the case of Ibrahim and we cannot derive a general judgement from it!?

Dawaniqi entered into a debate with Imam Malik (the founder of Maleki School of thought) in the mosque of the Holy Prophet (s) and said: “Should we stand facing the qibla at the time of du'a or should we face the grave of the Holy Prophet (s)?” Malik replied: “Why should you turn away from the Holy Prophet (s) while he is your channel and your father, i.e. Adam's ('a) channel?! Instead turn towards the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and take him as your intercessor and request him to intercede on your behalf. [3]

This conversation and discussion shows that du'a near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) was having no problem and difficulty and the question of Mansur to the leader of Medina was about the preference of one (act) over the other and Imam Malik replied that paying attention to the grave is like paying attention to the qibla.

3. Reference to the incident of mi'raj will make this fact more evident since it has come in the traditions of mi'raj that the Holy Prophet (s) recited salat in places like Taiyyaba, Mount Sinai and Bethlehem.

Jibra'eel came to him and said: ‘O Prophet! do you know the place where you recited salat? You have performed your prayer at the birth place of 'Isa’ (Jesus). [4]

From this tradition we come to know that performing salat in places that have been in contact with the body of a Prophet have great significance and tabarruk to this particular place was because of Hazrat Isa's birth in that place and nothing else.

4. ‘Hajar’ and ‘Ismail’, due to their patience in the path of Allah and their forbearance for being away from home, reached to such position that the places where they used to walk became the places of worship (i.e. the places between Safa and Marwa) [5]

The following is the saying of the student of Ibn Taymiyya.

“If really the places of strides of these two persons who, because of their patience and forbearance in the path of Allah became so much Holy that the Muslims have been ordered to worship God in these places, then why the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) who has exhibited the greatest of patience and steadfastness on the path of rectifying the society cannot be considered as Holy and sacred and why salat and du'a cannot be recited near such a place?

5. If truly performing salat near the grave is unlawful, then how Umm al-Mu'minin (Ayesha) during her remaining life time performed salat and worshipped in her chamber where the Holy Prophet (s) was buried.

The meaning of the Holy Prophet's tradition: (“God has cursed the Jews and the Christians for considering the graves of their Prophets as mosques” [6] ) which the Islamic traditionists narrate and which the Wahhabis utilise for proving the prohibition of salat near the graves of awliya is because they were prostrating over the grave of their Prophets or that they were taking their graves as qibla both of which were unlawful.  If the meaning of the tradition is what they say then why Ayesha, narrator of the tradition, performed salat in her chamber for approximately fifty years.

6. If the burial place of the Holy Prophet (s) is not having any special significance, then why the two Shaykhs insisted that they should be buried in that place?

Why al-Hasan ibn 'Ali (‘a) mentioned in his will that his Holy body should be buried near his great grandfather and if not possible due to his enemies, he should be buried in the cemetry of Baqi!?

And what relation this tradition has with the actions of the Muslims who perform salat for the sake of God, facing the qibla near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s) and their motive is only to derive virtue from that place!

The daughter of the Holy Prophet (s) whose happiness as per the decree of traditions of Sihah is the happiness of her God and Messenger and her anger is the anger of her God and Messenger used to visit every Friday the grave of her Uncle Hamza and perform salat and mourn in that place. Here is the text of history:

[7] These reasons jointly show us the path of the Muslims who were always reciting salat and supplications in places where the beloved ones of Allah and the self-sacrificers on the path of truth had been buried and gives the message that salat and supplication in such places enjoy more honour and superiority and the motive is only to seek tabarruk from that sacred place.

* * *

Let us suppose that there is no proof from Qur’an and traditions that such a place possesses distinction and performing salat and du'a in such a place is honourable. But why prayer in such a place should be considered as prohibited? Why such a place should not be included in the general principles of Islam which considers all the places on earth to be the places of worshipping God [8] so that the Muslims are able to peform prayer near the graves of the beloved ones of Allah!?

Previously, we had mentioned to you about the motive of the traditions which says that the Jews and Christians have taken the graves of their Prophets as mosques and never such a tradition includes those who perform salat and du'a facing the qibla for the sake of God.

The matter of lighting candles and so on over the graves of the beloved ones of God which the Wahhabis strictly prohibit is not an important matter since their references is the same tradition of Sunan al-Nasa'i who narrates from Ibn Abbas that the Holy Prophet (s) has cursed the women visiting the graves and those who turn the graves into mosques and light the candles.[9] This tradition is applicable in the event that lighting candles etc. is having no benefits other than wastage of money or imitating some countries of the world.

However if the aim of lighting candle etc. is to recite Qur’an and du'a or perform salat and other legal things, then certainly it will not create any problem. Instead lighting candles etc in such places and that too for such holy purposes will be the proof to:

 

“…….And help oneanother in goodness and piety,….” (Maida: 2)

Under these circumstances why should it be considered haram and forbidden?

Incidentally a group of commentators of traditions have specified the same fact,

Al-Sindi mentions in the margins of Sunan al-Nasa'i,

        

 

“Prohibition for lighting of candles was only because such an action leads to wastage of wealth”. [10]

Footnotes: 

[1] Ziyarat al-qubur, page 159-160.

[2] In interpreting the afore-said tradition, al-Zamakhshari in al-Kashshaf says:

About this verse Nayshaburi writes in his Tafsir as such:

            

[3] Wafa' al-wafa' fi akhbar dar al-Mustafa, volume 4, page 1376.

[4] al-Suyuti, al-Kasa'is al-kubra, vol. 1, page 154.

[5] Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Jala' al-'afham fi salat wa al-salam 'ala khayr al-'anam,  page 228.

[6] Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 4 page 96 (Beirut edition).

 

[7] Sunan al-Bayhaqi, vol. 4 page 78; al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak, vo1. 1, page 377.

[8] 

Ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, vol. 2 page 222.

[9] 

(Sunan al-Nasa'i, vol. 3 page 77 (Egyptian edition) and vol. 4 page 95 (Beirut edition)

Sharh al-jami' al-saghir, vol. 2 page 198.

[10] Sunan al-Nasa’i, vol. 3 page 77 (Egyptian edition) and vol. 4 page 95 (Beirut edition). Also refer to Sharh al-jami'  al-saghir, vol. 2 page 198.

Chapter 7

Tawassul (Recourse) to the Awliya Allah

Tawassul to the beloved ones of Allah is a matter which is in vogue amongst the Muslims of the world and from the day the Islamic Shariat was conveyed through the Holy Prophet (s) its legality was also declared by the way of Islamic traditions.

It was only in the 8th century A.H. that tawassul was rejected by Ibn Taymiyya and two centuries later Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab intensified this objection. Tawassul was introduced to be unlawful and heresy and occasionally was labelled as worshipping the awliya And it is needless to mention that worshipping other than God amounts to polytheism and is forbidden.

We shall later on have a separate discussion regarding the meaning of worship ('ibada) and we shall remind you that tawassul to the divine leaders on the one hand will be counted as worship and polytheism and on the other hand will be considered as desirable and mustahab having no sign of worship. However, we shall not discuss them here. What is important to know is that tawassul to the awliya Allah is done in two ways:

1. Tawassul to themselves. For example we say:

“O Lord I take recourse to your Messenger Muhammad (s) in order that you fulfil my wish.”

2. Tawassul to their position and reverence before Allah and their rights.

Like we say:

“O Lord I take their position and their respect which they have before Thee as the means for my need to be fulfilled by Thee.”

From the viewpoint of the Wahhabis, both these types are declared to be forbidden whereas the Islamic traditions and the practice of the Muslims bear witness contrary to the views of the Wahhabis and recommend tawassul of both these types.

At first, we shall mention the Islamic traditions one by one and then state the practice of the Muslims. By paying attention to both these reasonings, the matter of heresy and unlawfulness will automatically cease to exist.

But, whether tawassul to divine leaders amounts to their worship or not will be discussed in the section of ‘meaning of worship’ and that section will be the most insightful part of our discussion.

Traditions

There are many traditions mentioned in the traditional and historical books which bear testimony to the correctness and verity of the matter of tawassul to the divine leaders themselves and their position. Here, we mention a part of those traditions:

First Tradition - Tradition of ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf

A blind person aproached the Holy Prophet (s) and said: “Request Allah to cure me.” The Holy Prophet (s) replied: “If you wish so I will pray for you but be patient for that is much better.” The blind man asked the Holy Prophet (s) to pray for him. The Holy Prophet (s) ordered him to take proper Wuzu and then recite two Raka't (units) of salat and this ‘Dua’: O’ Lord! I request from Thee; I pay attention to Thee through (the channel) of your prophet Muhammad, Your blessed prophet.

O Muhammad, I turn to my Lord for the fulfillment of my need through you so that my need is answered.

O Lord, accept his intercession for me….

A Word about the Reference of this Tradition

The authenticity and verity of the reference needs no word from us.  Even the leader of the Wahhabis i.e. Ibn Taymiyya has declared its reference to be correct and has said that by Abu Ja'far whose name has come in the sanad of the tradition is meant Abu Ja'far al-Khutami and he is a reliable man. [1]

Al-Rifa'i, a contemporary Wahhabi writer who strives to cast down the credibility of the traditions on tawassul, says with regard to this tradition as such:

“Undoubtedly this tradition is correct and well-known."[2]

In the book of al-Tawassul, Rafa'ee says: “This tradition has been mentioned by al-Nasa'i, al-Bayhaqi, al-Tabarani, al-Tirmidhi and al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak and two recent writers have inserted the sentence  instead of      [3]

Zayni Dahlan writes in Khulasat al-kalam that: “This tradition has been narrated - with reliable chains of narration - by al-Bukhari, Ibn Maja, al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak and Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his al-Jami'”.

The writer narrates this tradition from the following references:

1. Sunan Ibn Maja, vol 1 page 441 from the publications of Dar Ihya al-kutub al-'arabiyya, (ed. by Muhammad Fu'ad 'Abd al-Baqi), tradition no. 1385.

Ibn Maja narrates from Abu Ishaq

‘This tradition is correct’

Thereafter he adds:

"al-Tirmidhi has narrated this tradition in the book of Abwaab-ul-Adeeya and said

‘This tradition is truly correct and Gharib’

2. Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal vol. 4 page 138. He has narrated this tradition in three ways from the Musnad of ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf printed from al-Maktab al-Islami, Mu'assassa Dar Sadir, Beirut.

3. al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim vol. 1 page 313 printed from Hyderabad. After narrating the tradition he says:

“This tradition is correct according to the criteria set by the shaykhayn and they have not narrated it”.

4. Al-Jami' al-Saghir written by al-Suyuti narrated from al-Tirmidhi and Mustadrak al-Hakim page 59.

5. Talkhis al-Mustadrak written by al-Dhahabi (died in 748) which is printed below al-Mustadrak.

6. Al-Taj al-Jami'  vol. 1 page 286. This book is the collection of the traditions of the five books of Sihah except Ibn Maja.

Therefore it is needless to speak and discuss about the reference of this tradition.

You hand over this tradition to somone who is acquainted with Arabic language and a person whose mind is completely free from the controversies of the Wahhabis in the matter of tawassul and ask him what the Holy Prophet (s) has commanded him in the du'a which he taught the blind man and how he guided him as to how one's ‘Duas’ are easily answered! He will immediately reply: “The Holy Prophet (s) has taught him to consider the blessed Prophet as a channel and to seek tawassul from him and ask God to fulfil his wish. This matter can easily be understood from the following sentences:

. A

O lord, I ask Thee and turn towards Thee through the channel of your Prophet.

The word   is pertaining to the previous two words   and   

In clearer terms, he asks from God through the channel of ‘Nabi’ and also turns to God through him. Moreover by ‘Nabi’ is meant Nabi himself and not the ‘Dua’ of Nabi; to imagine that it means the du'a of Nabi is deficieint of any reason.

Anyone who predetermines the word of du'a has no reason other than pre-judgement since, the one who commends such a word and does not think Tawassul to people to be correct forcibly strives to predetermine the word of ‘Dua’ so that nobody opposes his idea and eventually he may say: “It means tawassul to the ‘Dua’ of the Prophet (s) and not the Prophet himself and tawassul to the ‘Dua’ of someone is proper.

.B

In order to clarify that asking God for the Sake of the Prophet and paying attention to Him through His channel is the right purpose, the word of    is mentioned along with the sentence   which clarifies the fact much better and makes the meaning more apparent.

(C) The sentence    shows that he (i.e. the blind man) is referring to Prophet Muhammad himself and not his du'a.

(D) The sentence    means O God make him as my intercessor and accept his intercession towards me. In all of these sentences what is said and explained is the very personality of the Holy Prophet (s) and his great position and there is no talk of the du'a of the Holy Prophet.

With this explanation all the five objections which the Wahhabi writer al-Rifa'i has mentioned in the book al-Tawassul ila haqiqat al-tawassul is done away with and we have brought the details of the objections and their reply in our book, al-Tawassul. Interested readers can refer to them on pages 147 to 153.

Second Tradition: Tawassul to The (Right) Of Questioner

'Atiyya al-'Awfi narrates from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that the Holy Prophet (s) said: “Anyone who leaves his house for salat and recites in this state the following du'a, he will meet the mercy of Allah and one thousand angels will seek forgiveness for him.” [4]

‘O God I ask Thee by the right of the questioners and by the honour of the steps which I take in Thy direction, I have not left the house for the purpose of disobedience or recreation or hypocrisy. I have left for keeping away from Thy anger and achieving Thy satisfaction. I ask Thee to keep me away from the Fire and forgive my sins for nobody forgives the sins except Thee’.

This tradition clearly bears testimony to the fact that man, while asking God for his need to be fulfilled can take the position and status of a pious person as his channel and the reasoning of this tradition brings to light our objective. [5]

Third Tradition: Tawassul to the Right of Holy Prophet (s)

After disobedience of Allah, Adam (‘a) in the light of the words which were manifested from God, repented as Qur’an says:

Then adam received (some) words from his lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful. (Baqarah: 37)

Regarding the interpretation of   (words) which has come down in this verse, a group of commentators and traditionists, by relying on the following tradition are having a view, which by paying attention to its text will become clear for us.

Al-Tabarani in Al-Mu'jam al-saghir, al-Hakim Naysaburi in al-Mustadrak, Abu Nu'aym al-Isfahani and al-Bayhaqi in the book of Dala'il al-nubuwwa, Ibn 'Asakir al-Shami in his al-Ta'rikh, al-Suyuti in al-Durr al-Manthur and al-Alusi in Ruh al-Ma'ani [6] have narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab that the Holy Prophet (s) has said:

 [7]

When Adam committed the sin he raised his head towards the sky and said (O God) I ask Thee by the right of Muhammad that You forgive me. God revealed to him: “Who is Muhammad?”

Adam replied: When You created me, I raised my head towards the ‘Arsh’ (Throne) and I saw that on it was written “There is no God except Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. I said to myself that Muhammad must be His greatest creature that Allah has kept His name besides his own name. At this moment, it was revealed to him that Muhammad was the last of the Prophets from his Progeny and if it was not for Muhammad, God would have not created him.

Our View about this Tradition:

1. In the Holy Qur’an the word of   (words) is applied to personalites contrary to what is common amongst us. For example:

 “That Allah gives you the good news of Yahya verifying a Word from Allah,” (Aal-Imran:39)

    

 “O Maryam, surely Allah gives you good news with a Word from him (of one) whose name is the Messiah, Isa son of Maryam.” (Aal-Imran:45)

 “The Messiah, Isa son of Maryam is only an Apostle of Allah and His Word,” (Nisa: 171)

 

Say: If the sea were ink for the words of my Lord.(Kahf: 109)

..

"With seven more seas to increase it, the words of Allah would not come to an end.” (Luqman: 27)

Considering that the word of   has come in the verse under our discussion, we can say that by   is meant the same noble personalities to whom tawassul is sought and in the aforesaid tradition, only the name of Muhammad is mentioned from amongst the names of those personalities. Therefore, in Shia traditions, this reality is narrated in two ways. Sometimes   is interpreted as a name of these holy personalities and sometimes it refers to their sparkling light. Here is both the interpretations:

[8]

Adam saw the names which were written in ‘arsh (throne) and did tawassul to them. It was told to him that these names were the most honourable creatures of Allah and they were Muhammad, 'Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn. Adam repented by doing tawassul to them.

Another Shia tradition mentions that Adam saw the sparkling light of these five personalities. For knowing this tradition, please refer to Tafsir al-burhan. [9]

2. By referring to the historical and traditional books it becomes clear that tawassul of Adam ('a) to the Holy Prophet (s) was one famous and well-known matter. As, Imam Malik told Mansur al-Dawanaqi in the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s) as such:

[10]

“He (Holy Prophet) is your clannel and your father, Adam's channel.”

The Islamic poets have put this reality into a form of verse

On account of him, Allah accepted the ‘Dua’ of Adam and saved Noah inside the ship. They are such people through whom Adam's sin was pardoned and they are those who are the channels to Allah and the sparkling stars. [11]

Fourth Tradition: Tawassul of Prophet (s) by the Right of Prophet (s) and by the Rights of Previous Prophets

When Fatima, daughter of Asad passed away and the Holy Prophet (s) was informed about her death he came and sat besides her and said:

‘O my mother after my mother, may God have mercy upon you. Then he asked Usama, Abu Ayyub, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and a black slave to prepare one grave. When the grave was ready the Holy Prophet (s) made a niche in the side of the grave and buried her with his own hands and then recited this ‘Dua’:

'O Allah the One who gives Life and Death: the One who is All-Living and never dies, Have mercy on Fatima daughter of Asad and make her abode vast by the right of your Prophet and the Prophets who came before me.’

The writer of Khulasat al-kalam says:

“This tradition is narrated by al-Tabarani (in his al-Mu'jam), Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim and they have confirmed its authenticity”. [12]

Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni Dihlan writes in the book al-Durar al-saniyya fi al-radd 'ala al-wahhabiyya as such:

The famous traditionist Ibn Abi Shayba has narrated this tradition from Jabir. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr and Abu Nu'aym too have narrated this tradition from Ibn 'Abbas and Anas respectively. Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti has brought all these matters in al-Jami' al-kabir.[13]

The writer narrates this tradition in the afore-mentioned form from two books that some of them contains the supplication related to our discussion while others do not.

1. Hilyat al-'awliya (Abu Nu'aym al-Isfahani, vol. 3 page 121.

2. Wafa' al-wafa' (al-Samhudi} vol. 3 page 899.

Fifth Tradition: Tawassul to Prophet (s) Himself

Some of the Islamic traditionists have narrated that an Arab accompanied with some villagers approached the Holy Prophet (s) and said:

 

[14] [15]

“We have come to you while we are neither having a camel with us to groan nor a child to sleep”.  Thereafter he recited these poems

We have come to you while blood drops from the bossom of the horses; the mother has been restrained from her baby. We are not having anything with ourselves for people to eat except for bitter leaves which they eat in the year of famine and some bad food from wool and blood. We are having no alternative but to seek shelter in you, and in whom can people seek shelter except the Prophets.

Then, 

The Holy Prophet (s) said:

‘Yes, my objective was the same as you have recited.’ Then Ali (‘a) read a portion of his elegy and the Holy Prophet (s) asked blessings for Abu Talib on top of the pulpit.’

After this a man from the tribe of Bani Kanane stood up and recited some lines where the first line meant as follows: “All the praise is for You. O Allah; praise from Your worthy slaves. By resorting to the Holy Prophet (s), we have become satiated by the rainfall.”

Numerous references have been narrated for this portion but the writer has narrated from the following documents:

a. 'Umdat al-qari fi sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 7 page 31 written by Badr al-Din Mahmud bin Ahmad al-'Ayni (died in the year 855) printed by Idara al-taba'a al-muniriyya.

b. Sharh Nahjul-Balagha by Ibn Abi al-Hadid, vol. 14 page 80.

c. al-Sira al-Halabiyya by 'Ali bin Burhan al-Din al-Halabi, vol. 3 page 263.

d. al-Hujja 'ala al-dhahib ila takfir Abi Talib, written by Shams al-Din Abi 'Ali Fakhar bin Ma'ad (died in the year 630), printed in Najaf, 'Alawi press, page 79.

e. Sira Zayni Dihlan in the margin of al-Sira al-Halabiyya, vol. 1 page 81.

Sixth Tradition: Tawassul to the Self of Prophet (s)

                                                          

I bear witness that there is no God except Allah. You (O Prophet) are trustworthy upon every hidden thing from the senses. From amongst the Prophets you are the most nearest channel towards Allah. O the son of the honourable and noble! you command us whatever you receive. O, the most righteous Apostle! Although acting upon your commands causes the hair on the head to turn white, you be my intercessor on the Day when the intercession of the intercessors will be useless for Sawad bin Qaa'reb even to the extent of string of dates. [16]

Till here we were able to mention some of the traditions of tawassul which have come in the historical and traditional books of Ahl al-Sunnah.

However in the traditions of Shi’a leaders, the matter of tawassul to holy personalities is so clear and obvious that it can be wittnessed in most of their ‘Duas’ (supplications).

Should we learn Islamic teachings and instructions from Ibn Taymiyya and Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhab or acquire them from the Household of the Messengership and the progeny of the Holy Prophet (s) who by the order of Hadith al-Thaqalayn, are  (The Lesser Weight) and witness to Qur’an. Amongst the numerous ‘Duas’ that have come in al-Sahifa al-'Alawiyya [17] or in du'a 'Arafa or in al-Sahifa al-Sajjadiyya, we shall content ourself with only one of them which is most suitable in connection with the previous tradition.

Seventh Tradition: The Leader of the martyrs says in du'a 'Arafa 

“O Lord at such a moment that You have made it obligatory and honourable upon me, I turn towards You by Muhammad, Your Prophet, Your Messenger and Your best of those created by You.” [18]

Practise of the Muslims Regarding Tawassul

The practise of the Muslims during the time of the Holy Prophet (s) and also after him was that they were always seeking ‘tabarruk’ to the awliya Allah themselves as well as to their position and status. Now we shall mention some of them here:

(1). Ibn al-'Athir 'Izz al-Din 'Ali bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Karim al-Jazari (died in 630 AH) writes in the book Usd al-ghaba fi ma'rifat al-sahaba as such:

In the year when famine reached its peak, ‘Umar requested for rain through the channel of Abbas. God satiated them through him and every place became green. Thereafter ‘Umar faced the people and said: “I swear by Allah that al-'Abbas is our channel towards Allah and he is having a high station before Allah."

Hassan ibn Thabit recited a poem in his honour and said: “When famine had severely engulfed the entire area, the Leader requested for rain."

Thereafter the clouds in the sky, through the brightness of al-'Abbas satiated the people. Al-'Abbas who is the Uncle of the Prophet (s) and alike the father of the Prophet (s) has inherited such a position and status from him.