 |
| سورة المائدة 5:53 |
The website www.marifah.net is down and I have no idea whether it will return, so I am republishing this article here:
Al-Waṭan publishes the opinion of the Muftī of Egypt
regarding wasīla and circumambulating graves in response to some
Kuwaitis
Dr ʿAlī Jumuʿah: There is an enormous and vast
difference between wasīla and shirk, as wasīla is
commanded to in the Revealed Law
The Muftī of the Republic of Egypt, Dr ʿAlī Jumuʿah,
has made his contribution to the debate between the general secretary of the
General Secretariat of Awqāf, Dr Muḥammad ʿAbdul Ghaffār Ash-Sharīf and Sheikh Ṣāliḥ Bin
Fawzān Al-Fawzān, a member of the supreme council of scholars in the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia, as well as Fayṣal Qazāz Al-Jāsim, whose comments have
also been published as part of this debate that is taking place in the pages of
Al-Waṭan regarding a number of Islamic issues. The Muftī of Egypt’s
contributions have come as an answer to a question that was previously
submitted to the Egyptian Fatwa Office via fax by Muḥammad Al-Fahd, Bassām
Al-Hārūn, Aḥmad An-Niṣf, Aḥmad Al-ʿAbīd and ʿAbdur Raḥmān Al-Kandarī and registered
under no.1113 for the year 2006.
What follows contains the text of the response that Dr
Jumuʿah gave to the question and which was published by Al-Waṭan because of its
connection to this Islamic discussion over an issue that causes a lot of
division:
‘Praise be to Allah alone, and prayers and peace be
upon the one after whom there is no other prophet, our Master, Muḥammad, the
Messenger of Allah, as well as his family, his Companions, and those who follow
him in excellence until the Day of Judgment. We have been informed of the
request that has reached us via fax from the Profs. Muḥammad Al-Fahd, Bassām
Al-Hārūn, Aḥmad An-Niṣf, Aḥmad Al-ʿAbīd and ʿAbdur Raḥman Al-Kandarī and
registered under no.1113 for the year 2006. It contains the following:
‘An interview with one of our respected Shuyūkh was
published in Kuwait in Al-Raʿī newspaper on the 20th of
March, 2006/20th Ṣafar 1427, and this Sheikh was, for a certain
period of time, the dean of the Faculty of Sharīʿah at the University of Kuwait.
The interview included this response to a question that was given to him
regarding shirk: ‘As for circumambulating graves, this is not rightful
according to all the scholars of the Muslims, including the Sufis, and they
have differed over whether it is ḥarām or makrūh, and none of
them said it was shirk apart from a few that could be counted on one’s
fingers from the people of knowledge.’ This led to a great uproar in several
articles, some of which were written by professors of Sharīʿah, which attacked
the Sheikh’s words and denounced him, and they even went as far as accusing him
of propagating shirk. Due to the fact that your rank and your words have
a special place in our hearts, we wanted you to say the word of truth with
regards to clarifying Allah’s ruling in this matter and thus put an end to this
controversy that is having blameworthy consequences.
The answer:
It is befitting to put forward three principles that
should be kept in mind when discussing this issue and others like it:
1)
The principle with regards to the
actions that are committed by a Muslim is that they are to be interpreted in a
way that does not oppose the principle of tawḥīd. It is not permissible
to hastily accuse him of kufr or shirk, because his Islam is a
strong affiliation that requires us not to interpret his actions in a way that
would necessitate kufr. This is a general maxim that all Muslims should
adhere to. Imam Mālik, the Imam of Dār Al-Hijra, may Allah the Exalted
have mercy on him, expressed this by saying: ‘If someone commits an action that
could be interpreted as kufr from ninety-nine angles and as īmān
from only one angle then we interpret it as an action of īmān. Let us
give one example of a statement and another of a physical action.
A Muslim believes that the Messiah,
peace be upon him, brings the dead back to life but with Allah’s permission,
and he is incapable of doing it by himself. Rather, it is Allah’s power that
does it. A Christian believes that he brings the dead back to life, but he
believes that he does it with his own intrinsic power, and that he is Allah, or
the son of Allah, or one person of the Trinity, as they believe. Therefore, if
we hear a Muslim, who believes in Allah’s Oneness, saying: ‘I believe that the
Messiah brings the dead back to life,’ which is the same statement that the
Christian makes, we should not assume that the Muslim has become a Christian
because of these words. Rather, we interpret them according to the meaning that
befits his affiliation to Islam and the creed of Allah’s Oneness.
A Muslim also believes that it is not
permissible to devote one’s worship to other than Allah, while the idolater[1]
believes that it is permissible to devote one’s worship to other than Allah the
Exalted. Therefore, if we see a Muslim doing an act that could be interpreted
as being done for other than Allah, we must interpret it according to what
befits his creed as a Muslim, because his pledge to Islam has been firmly
established with certainty, and certainty is not removed by doubt or
speculation. This is why, when Muʿādh Bin Jabal, may Allah be pleased with him,
prostrated to the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, as has
been related by Ibn Mājah and declared as authentic by Ibn Ḥibbān, the Prophet,
may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, forbade him from doing so but he did
not describe this action of his as kufr or shirk. Furthermore, it
is undeniable that Muʿādh, may Allah be pleased with him, is the most
knowledgeable of this Ummah with regards to the ḥalāl and the ḥarām,
and he was not ignorant of the fact that prostrating is an act of worship and
it is not permissible to devote acts of worship to other than Allah. However,
since prostrating can be interpreted to be something other than worship of the
one being prostrated to, it is not permissible to interpret it as worship if it
is done by a Muslim, or to declare that Muslim to be a kāfir in any way.
Regarding this, Al-Ḥāfiẓ Adh-Dhahabī says: ‘Have you not seen that the
Companions, due to their boundless love of the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and
peace be upon him, said: ‘Should we not prostrate to you?’ He said: ‘No.’ Thus,
if he had permitted them, they would have prostrated to him out of honour and
respect, not worship, just as Yūsuf’s brothers prostrated to him, peace be upon
him. Likewise, the position regarding a Muslim who prostrates to the grave of
the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, out of exaltation and
reverence, is not accused of disbelief but rather he is disobedient and he is
informed that this action is prohibited. The same goes for praying towards
graves.’[2]
Violating this principle is the
standard practice of the Khawārij. According to Ibn ʿUmar, may Allah be pleased
with both of them, this was the starting point of their misguidance. He said:
‘They took the āyāt that referred to the disbelievers and applied them to the
believers.’ Al-Bukhārī narrated it with a suspended chain[3]
of transmission in his Ṣaḥīḥ and it was completed by Ibn Jarīr At-Ṭabarī
in Tahdhīb Al-Āthār with an authentic chain of transmission.
2)
There is an enormous and vast
difference between wasīla and shirk, as wasīla is
commanded to in the Revealed Law in the Exalted’s Statement: “O you who
believe! Have taqwā of Allah and seek the means [wasīla] of drawing near
to him, and do jihad in His Way, so that hopefully you will be successful.”
[Al-Māʾida 5:35] The Glorified also praised those who do tawassul in
their supplications when He said: “Those they call on are themselves seeking
the means by which they might approach their Lord – which of them are closest
to Him? – and are hoping for His mercy and fearing His punishment. The punishment
of your Lord is truly something to be feared.” [Al-Isrāʾ 17:57]. In the
Arabic language, wasīla means ‘rank, ‘connection’ and ‘nearness’, and
thus the overall meaning is drawing near to Allah the Exalted by way of that
which He the Glorified has legislated and that includes extolling everything
that Allah the Exalted has extolled, whether it is places, times, individuals
or states. Thus, a Muslim strives, for example, to pray in Al-Masjid Al-Ḥarām
and supplicate at the grave of Al-Muṣṭafā, may Allah’s prayers and peace be
upon him, and this is extolling the places that Allah the Exalted has extolled.
A Muslim seeks to pray on Laylat Al-Qadr and supplicate within the time of
response[4]
on Friday as well as in the last third of the night, and this is extolling the
times that Allah has extolled. A Muslim draws near to Allah by loving the
Prophets and the righteous, and this is extolling the individuals that Allah
has extolled. A Muslim seeks to supplicate while travelling and when rain
falls, and other instances, and this is extolling the states that Allah has
extolled, and so on, and all this falls under the Exalted’s statement: “That
is it. Whoever extolls Allah’s sacred rites, then that comes from the taqwā in
their hearts.” [Al-Ḥajj 22:32]
As for shirk, it means to
devote an act of worship to other than Allah in a way that should only be done
for Allah the Exalted, even if it is done with the objective of drawing nearer
to Allah. Allah the Exalted has said: “If people take protectors besides Him
– ‘We only worship them so that they may bring us nearer to Allah.’” [Az-Zumar
39:3] We have only said ‘in a way that should only be done for Allah the
Exalted’ in order to exclude everything that goes against worship in terms of
what it describes even if its outward description doesn’t. For example, the
word duʿāʾ can mean a supplication, and thus it is worship of the one
being supplicated to: “What they call on [yadʿūna] apart from Him are
female idols.” [An-Nisāʾ 4:117] However, it can also mean simply to call
someone, and thus not be a supplication: “Do not make the Messenger’s
summoning [duʿāʾ] of you the same as your summoning of one another.”
[An-Nūr 24:63] Also, the context may tell us that supplication is being
made for someone and not to: “for beggars and the destitute.”
[Al-Maʿārij 70:25] There is also the word istiʿāna,[5]
which may be worship of the One Whose help is being sought: “You alone we
worship and from You alone we seek help.” [Al-Fātiḥa 1:5], “Mūsā said to
his people: ‘Seek help from Allah and be patient.” [Al-ʿArāf 7:128], but it
might also not be worship: “Seek help through patience and prayer.”
[Al-Baqara 2:45] Love, likewise, can be worship of the object of one’s love
and at the same time it might not be, as the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace
be upon him, indicated when he said: “Love Allah for the blessings that He
provides you with, love me because of Allah’s love and love the people of my
household due to my love.” [Narrated by At-Tirmidhī and declared authentic
by Al-Ḥākim] and so forth, which means that shirk only refers to
extolling other than Allah in a way that is only befitting of Allah the
Exalted. For example, the Exalted has said: “Do not, then, knowingly make
others equal to Allah.” [Al-Baqara 2:22] The Glorified has also said: “Some
people set up equals to Allah, loving them as they should love Allah. But those
who believe have greater love for Allah.” [Al-Baqara 2:165] Thus, the
difference between wasīla and shirk has been made clear, because wasīla
means to extoll that which Allah has extolled, which is ultimately extolling
Allah, as Allah, Mighty and Majestic has said: ““That is it. Whoever extolls
Allah’s sacred rites, then that comes from the taqwā in their hearts.” [Al-Ḥajj
22:32] As for shirk, it means to extoll something else in addition
to Allah, or merely something else. This is why the angels’ prostration to
Adam, peace be upon him, was īmān and tawḥīd and the prostration
of polytheists to their idols is kufr and shirk, even though both
prostrations were, or are, made to created beings. However, the angels’
prostration to Adam, peace be upon him, was extolling that which Allah had
extolled, and as Allah had commanded. It was a legislated wasīla and
those who did it deserved reward. Polytheists’ prostration to their idols is
extolling something in a way that only Allah should be extolled, and thus it is
shirk and blameworthy, and those who do it deserve to be punished.
Based on this principle regarding the
difference between wasīla and shirk, a group of scholars have said
that it is permissible to swear by that which is extolled in the Sharīʿah: the
Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him and his family, Islam, the
Kaʿba, and this group includes Imam Aḥmad, may Allah the Exalted have mercy on
him, in one of his statements, in which he deemed it permissible to swear by
the Prophet, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him and his family, and he
justified this because of the fact that he, may Allah’s prayers and peace be
upon him, is one of the two pillars of the shahāda, without which it is
incomplete. This is because such an act does not bear any resemblance to Allah
the Exalted in any way. Rather it is extolling Allah by extolling what He has
extolled. These scholars have also interpreted the aḥādīth that prohibit
swearing by other than Allah to mean swearing in a way that contains
resemblance to Allah, while the majority of scholars have forbidden it based on
the outward, general meaning of the prohibition of swearing by other than
Allah.
In order to clarify the first opinion
and give it more weight, Ibn Mundhir, may Allah have mercy on him, says: ‘The
people of knowledge have differed over the meaning of the prohibition of
swearing by other than Allah. One group holds the position that it is specific
to the oaths that were made by the people of jāhiliyya to other than
Allah, such as Lāt, ʿUzzā and their own ancestors. The one who makes such an
oath has sinned and there is no expiation mentioned for it. As for what can be
interpreted as extolling Allah, such as saying: ‘By the right of the Prophet’,
or Islam, or the Ḥajj, or the ʿUmrah, or guidance, or charity or the
emancipation of slaves, and other things whose intent is extolling Allah and
drawing near to Him, these do not fall under the prohibition. Those who hold
this position include Abu ʿUbayd and a group whom we have
encountered, and their proof is what has been related regarding the Companions
consenting to a person swearing by emancipation, guidance and charity, and they
consented to this person even though they were aware of the abovementioned
prohibition. This indicates that according to them the prohibition was not
general. If it were general, they would have forbidden it and not consented to
it at all.[6]
Should any difference of opinion
arise after that regarding certain forms of wasīla, such as making tawassul
through the righteous and supplicating at their graves, for example, or if an
error is committed therein by some Muslims, i.e. something that hasn’t been
legislated, such as prostrating to graves or circumambulating them, it is not
then permissible to move this error or this difference of opinion from the
scope of wasīla to that of shirk or kufr,
because by doing so we would be mixing between matters and making the extolling
of that which Allah has extolled to be the same as extolling something besides
Allah, and Allah the Exalted has said: “Would We make the Muslims the same
as the evildoers? What is the matter with you? On what basis do you judge?”
[Al-Qalam 68:35-36]
3)
There is also a difference between
something being a means and believing that it is a creator and that it is able
to affect things intrinsically, and this is just like the example we gave in
the first principle of the Muslim believing that the Messiah, peace be upon
him, is a means in the creation according to Allah’s permission, as opposed to
the Christian, who believes that he acts according to himself. If we see a
Muslim requesting, asking, seeking help or hoping for some benefit or harm from
other than Allah, then we must decisively interpret his action as one of
seeking means and not due to believing that what is besides Allah is a creator
or is able to affect things intrinsically. This is because we know that the creed
of every Muslim is that intrinsic benefit and harm only come from Allah and
that created beings only benefit and harm according to Allah’s permission. All
that remains after that is discussing whether this or that created being was
the means or not.
Once these three principles have been established then
we must bear them in mind when discussing the ruling regarding circumambulating
graves, for if we know that we are talking about actions committed by Muslims,
and that these Muslims are visiting these tombs and graves because of the
righteousness of the people in them and in order to draw nearer to Allah the
Exalted, and that visiting graves is a righteous action and it is a means [tawassul]
of seeking nearness to Allah the Exalted, and that the discussion is only
regarding the permissibility of certain actions committed by these Muslims, and
that some of their actions are differed over by scholars and some are
indisputably wrong; if we know all of this then it should be absolutely clear
to us there is no place whatsoever for shirk or kufr when judging
the actions of these Muslims. Rather, there is a difference of opinion over
some wasāʾil while some others are indisputably
wrong, without there being any need to accuse someone whose Islam is
established with certainty of committing kufr.
In examining the opinions of the people of knowledge
regarding the ruling for circumambulating graves, we see that it falls within
the scope of whether it is makrūh or ḥarām, i.e. there are those who
hold the position that circumambulating is an unlawful wasīla and that the one doing it
is sinning and there are those who hold the position that it is better for a
Muslim to leave it off but if he does do it he does not merit any punishment.
The position that it is makrūh is the muʿtamad[7]of the chief scholars of
the Ḥanbalī school, as is mentioned in the book Kashf
Al-Qināʾ by the seal of their investigative
scholars,[8]
Al-ʿAlāma Al-Bahūtī, and the position that it
is ḥarām is the position of the majority of
scholars, and that is the fatwa.
As for involving shirk and kufr in this
matter, there is no need, unless it is assumed that the one circumambulating is
actually worshipping whoever is in the grave, or he believes that the person in
the grave can intrinsically harm him or benefit him, or he believes that
circumambulating the grave is an act of worship that Allah the Exalted has
legislated, just as He has legislated circumambulating the Kaʿba. These are all
possibilities which the people of knowledge stay away from when interpreting
the actions of a Muslim, as we’ve mentioned before, because the premise of the
matter is regarding the Muslim who is circumambulating, and nothing else.
It is not permissible for Muslims to preoccupy
themselves with matters like these and make them issues over which to attack
one another. It is a pointless fuss and a means of breaking ranks, squandering
efforts and distracting us from building our communities and uniting our Ummah.
We ask Allah the Exalted to unite the hearts of the Muslims upon the Book and
the Sunnah and to grant them a good understanding of the religion and the
knowledge of what Allah the Exalted wants from His slaves. Amīn.
[1] (tn): Ar. mushrik
[2] Muʿjam Ash-Shuyūkh p.56
[3] (tn): Ar. muʿallaq.
This refers to when a narrator quotes a ḥadīth but omits either a) the entire
chain of transmission or b) the entire chain of transmission except for the
Companion or the Companion and the Follower from that chain.
[4] (tn): Ar. sāʿat
ul-ijāba. Imam Yaḥyā An-Nawawī says:
‘We have related in the two Ṣaḥīḥ collections of Al-Bukhārī and Muslim,
on the authority of Abū Hurayra, may Allah be pleased with him, that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, mentioned Friday
and said: “On that day there is a time in which no Muslim slave who
coincides with it while he is standing and praying and asking Allah the Exalted
for something except that He gives it to him.” He then indicated with his
hand that it was a short time. I say: The scholars from the salaf and
the khalaf have differed over when this time is, giving many dispersed opinions,
and I have gathered all the opinions on the matter in Sharḥ Al-Muhadhdhib
[i.e. Al-Majmūʿ, the Imam’s 27-volume fiqh book and ultimate reference
work for the Shāfiʿī school] and explained who has held what position, and
indeed many of the Companions held the position that it was after ʿAsr.
What is meant by “standing and praying” is the own who is waiting for the
prayer, because it is as if he is in prayer. The most authentic position that
has reached us in this matter is what we have related in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim on
the authority of Abū Mūsā Al-Ashʿarī, may Allah be pleased with him, who said:
‘I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him,
saying: “It is what is between the imam sitting until the prayer is
finished.” i.e. sitting on the minbar. [Translated
from Al-Adkhār min Kalām Sayyid Al-Abrār by Al-Imām, Al-Ḥāfiẓ, Sheikh
ul-Islām Muḥyī Ad-Dīn Abī Zakariyā Yaḥyā bin Sharaf An-Nawawī Ad-Dimashqī
Ash-Shāfiʿī (Damascus: Al-Maktaba Al-ʿAṣriya, 2000/1421) p.141] For further details, one can refer to Al-Futūhāt
Ar-Rabbāniyyah ʿala Al-Adhkār An-Nawawiyyah by Imam Muḥammad Bin ʿAlān, (Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ At-Turāth Al-ʿArabī) v.4,
p.227-9.
[5] (tn): i.e. seeking
help
[6] Quoted by Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar in Fatḥ Al-Bārī 11/535
[7] (tn): i.e. the most
relied-upon position in the school
[8] (tn): Ar. muḥaqqiqīn
