Dalael-us-Suluk

CHAPTER 21

SOME OBJECTIONS

AND

THEIR ANSWERS

First Objection: Tasawwuf is a heresy.

Answer: The human being is a strange combination of paradoxes. He has instituted separate air tight compartments for different walks of life and spelled out principles to solve the problems of each. Not only that, these principles vary in each case but are also diametrically op­posed to each other. Take the example of health: in the case of sickness, he consults the best physician because a quack is considered dangerous, nor is self treatment resorted to because it involves risk of one’s dear life. An­other example is his legal affairs, here the opinion of a veteran jurist is taken as the final word- these certainly are fineprinciples. But in the mat­ter of religion and faith, he poses as an expert and passes verdicts at will; the irony is that every absurdity is considered an authority and the final word. Such an attitude has created strange complications in religious mat­ters. Consequently, Tasawwuf has been dubbed as a heresy by such self-styled experts.

A whole chapter has been devoted in this book forproofs of Tasawwuf, which is adequate for a detailed study and analysis. Those who wish to ac­quire further knowledge, and are learned enough, should consult the rele­vant chapters of Fatah al-Bari, lqtadha-e Sirat-e Mustaqim, al-I‘atesamand Fatah al-Mulhim. Indeed, defining Tasawwufas a heresy stems fromthe lack of understanding of the Faith as awhole. Thosewho give such ir­responsible verdicts are likely to err in a greater way if they are on the wrong track themselves. It is an established tact that the text of a constitu­tion does not explain all its detail, only broad principles and the formulae are outlined. The Qur-an,being the fountainhead of theIslamic constitu­tion, contains only the broad principles of the Faith, interpreted in minutest detail by the practice of the Prophet. Again, the method of deducing details from these fundamental principles has also been indicated by him. The true erudite among his followers, who are his rightful heirs, continue to deduce and issue ordinances to meet the demands of the time, in accor­dance with the method laid down by him.

T he principles and the formulae being the objectives, the exploration and adoption of means and methods to achieve these objectives cannot be termed an affront to the Faith. Such means will, of course, become heresy when accepted as part of, or the Faith itself, because in that case they shall fall in the category of objectives. Means (after all) are means, used as such to achieve an end.

 

T o illustrate this point, let us examine the Divine Command, “O Mes­senger! Make known that which has been revealed to you. ” and the Hadith, “Preach what you learn from me, may it be only a verse,” each ordains preaching which is the objective, but the method to achieve it, is not indi­cated. It may be conducted by a word of mouth, using the pulpit or the chair, in a Masjid, out in the open, while travelling in a train or a bus or even by means of a loud speaker. All these are means and since these are adopted for the propagation of the Faith, they become its preface.

A n example may be quoted of yet another commandment,

O you who believe, remember ALLAH with much remembrance. (33:41)

N ow, to remember ALLAH individually, or collectively, in a seance, by word of mouth or within the heart spiritually, moving, sitting, reclining, keeping count on fingers or on a rosary, etc, are all means, the objective being the remembrance. To term all these as heresy obviously amounts to impeding the attainment of the objective.

I personally pursue the Deobandi line (teachings of the most eminent Muslim institution at Deoband, now in India). I neither live on gifts and charity, nor hold periodical festivals on tombs, nor do I covet others’ riches - all this is against my creed. My way is simple and crystal clear, I hold the Qur-an in my right hand, Sunnah inthe left and follow the foot­steps of our righteous forefathers and that is all.I trust kashf only when it is in conformity with Qur-anand Hadith, otherwise I reject it as a whisper of the Devil. The Sufi Order that I pursue is the Naqshbandiah Owaisiah which allows beneficence to be drawn from the spirit, though not of the type implied by the ignoramus. The method used by me for this purpose has been described in an earlier chapter, though incomprehensible for the beginner.

I do not favour the concept of Tasawwur-e Shaikh (a meditation in which the personality of the Shaikh is contemplated). There is no room for this concept in our Order. For the oral invocations I hold recitation of the Qur-an foremost, followed by Istighfar (supplication for His Forgiveness) and Darud Sharif.

I n the Halqah-e Zikr, the invocation used is “ALLAH Hu” (ALLAH exists). At each stage, verses from the Qur-an are recited. In the spiritual stroll of the K‘abah and the audience of the Prophet, Labbaik (O Rabbi I am present) and Darud Sharif are recited respectively. In all other stages of the Path, nothing but the name of ALLAH is commemorated.

T he assembly of seekers for spiritual attention, zikr by breathing method, etc, is not the objective but only the means for its achievement. Neither forming Halqah, nor Tawajjuh nor breathing through the nose is religion, but only a preface to it. In the Order I pursue, there is no room whatsoever for hymns or invocations not permitted by the Sunnah. I chal­lenge the critic to point out one iota of heresy in our Order. We follow the explicit teachings of the Book and the Sunnah, which provide a beacon, a fountainhead, and the only yardstick for guidance, and that is all!

Second Objection: Disclosing kashf and ilham to others is not per­missible.

Answer: It has been wrongly presumed that matters relating to kashf should not be disclosed. Muslim masses apart, some of the ‘Ulama consider such expression unlawful and criticise it. The fact is that the manifestation of the knowledge of the Path is essential for three dis­tinct reasons:

Proclaiming ALLAH’s Bounties and Expounding the Faith

D isclosure and proclamation of His bounties and blessings is essential being clearly enjoined by the Qur-an: Therefore the bounties of your Rabb be your discourse. The author of Tafsir-e Mazhari writes in the explanation of this verse, “No fuss should be created by anyone on the discourse of His bounties by the sufis.” According to Irshad at-Talibin, “Whoever denies the discourses of the sufis in fact denies the Qur-anic injunction.” ‘Umar bin Sho‘aib in al-Mishkat vol: II, ‘Chapter on Raiments’ quotes the Prophet:

ALLAH likes His bounties to be proclaimed by His bondsmen.

A ccording to Asha‘t al-Lam‘at (an explanation of al-Mishkat vol: III, p-548),

The concealment of a Divine bounty is not permissible because it amounts to ingratitude. Likewise any blessing on His bondsmen such as knowledge and allied matters relating to its perfection (inward or outward) must be manifested. This will keep the people posted and enable them to benefit from it. Such a disclosure will, of course, be in accord with the Qur-anic pronouncement,

Spend of that We have bestowed upon them. (2:3)

Note: The expression of spiritual achievements is permissible for the benefit of mankind while concealment is unlawful. One who conceals will be punished, intention being the key note.

Tafsir-e Jamal (vol: II, p: 445) further explains the point:

That is why it is incumbent on a person living in seclusion to de­clare himself so that he could be recognised and benefited from. An expression of his attainments for this purpose shall not amount to pride or self-conceit.

W rites Ibn-e Kathir in his commentary Tafsir Ibn-e Kathir (vol: II, p: 482) while explaining the verse:

He (Yusuf) said, “Set me over the store houses of the land. Surely! I am a skilled custodian.” ( 12: 55 )

This apparently is a self-praise on the part of Prophet Yusuf but it not at all so, because a disclosure likely to benefit mankind is permissible and meritorious.

Tafsir-e Jamal elucidates,

If anyone declares his excellence for the benefit of the people, it is neither repugnant nor unlawful, rather incumbent. For example, a person possessing knowledge of public utilityunknown to the people must disclose it as a matter of moral obligation.

Disclosure Conditional

A nyone who takes undue pride inthe expression of his attainments orintends to draw benefit forbidden by Shari ‘ah willstand guilty of perfidy, self-conceit and pride.

Hafiz Ibn-e Kathir spells out a principle in his Exegesis (vol: III, p: 548),

A Divine favour is to be concealed up to a point, i.e., till it fully manifests itself. According to Hadith, “Help your needs by con­cealing them until their fulfilment, for every recipient of Hisblessings is generally begrudged.”

Notes:

However, the fact is that an excellence, of whatever nature and quality, ul­timately manifests itself.

H ad there been no manifestation and expression of true sufi knowledge, there would have been no distinction between right and wrong, the right­eous and the depraved, and mankind would have remained ignorant of trueIslamic mysticism. Without this knowledge the common man misguided by his ignorance would take any lunatic for a wali and a pseudo sufi for a Qutb!

Third Objection: When the hearing by the dead is not possible, how can a communication be established with them'?

Answer: To begin with, let us be clear about a basic principle.

At the time of death, the Ruh is not divested of its achievements and knowledge acquired during its association with the body. These rather stand amplified resulting in wider cognition. However, it is unable to act through physical instrumentation. In the earthly existence, it relies on physical ears, eyes and tongue because it has to deal with corporeal things. When it finally departs from the body, its physical senses are divested but it retains the inherent attributes of speech, hearing and sight. Therefore, the Ruh lives, speaks, sees, hears and answers when spoken to.

T here is a consensus on this issue. Imam Ghazali, in his Ahya ul-‘Ulum (p: 15) sums it up in these words,

Note: This does not imply that kashf is something final and conclusive. Indeed, it is a definite authority for the endowed one but only to the extent of conformity with the categorical laws of Shari‘ah.

Ruh Retains its Memory and Knowledge after Death

It was said (to him), “Enter Paradise.” He said, “Would that my people knew, with what (munificence) My Rabb has pardoned me and made me of the honoured ones.” (36:26-27)

Note: This shows that the treatment meted out to the believer (referred in the above verse) by his community was retained in his memory (even after he was done to death). His words express his grief.

The Ruh Hears

And when Ibrahim said (to his Rabb), “My Rabb! Show me how You give life to the dead.” He said, "Don’tyou believe?”" Ibrahim said, “Yes, but (I ask) in order that my heart may be at ease.” (His Rabb) said, “Take four of the birds and cause them to incline to you, then place a part of them on each hill, then call them, they will come to you in haste...” (2:260)

R ebutting the belief of the non-conformists, Imam Razi explains,

This verse bears ample testimony to the fact that every part of the birds heard the call of Prophet Ibrahim , understood it and hav­ing been restored to formal existence by ALLAH ,flew back to him, notwithstanding the fact that their parts were scattered away on different hills. It provides incontrovertible evidence that the body need not be intact before animation.

T his verse is explicit in its meaning. There is no difference of opinion about hearing by the Ruh. The point at issue is whether the physical body hears or not. The return of the Ruh to the body at the time of questioning by the Angels (Munkir and Nakir) is proved from Twatir. The disagree­ment is confined only to whether or not the body continues to hear after this interview.

The Return of the Ruh on the Eve of the Interview

Shaikh al-Islam said that the return of the Ruh to the body at the time of questioning is supported by authentic Hadith to the extent of Twatir. But a certain group opposes this Twatir who, in turn, are opposed by a consensus of the ‘Ulama.

Kitab ar-Ruh p: 62

‘Allama Sayuti quotes Imam Ibn-e Taimiyah,

The Hadith pertaining to the return of the Ruh to the body at the time of questioning are authentic and continuous. A section of critics like Ibn al-Zaghuni, lbn-e Jorair (and Karamiah) oppose this but the consensus of the ‘Ulama is against them.

Sharah as-Sudur fi Ahwal al-Mauta wal-Qubur (p:60)

‘Allama Salfi said,

The return of the Ruh to the body in the grave is a proven fact. This covers all the dead without exception and is the true belief. The difference of opinion is confined only to the Ruh’s perma­nent presence with the body in the grave.

Shaikh al-Islam, ‘Allama lbn-e Hajr was asked whether the ques­tioning of the dead takes place (after the Ruh returns to the body) lying or sitting, he confirmed the latter. He was again asked whether the Ruh re-establishes its link with the entire body as be­fore. He nodded in affirmation and added that according to a number of Hadith only the upper part of the body is restored to full life... and that this re-established connection of the Ruh stays on forever, even if the body is shredded into bits and pieces.

Sharah as-Sudur fi Ahwal al-Mauta wal-Qubur (pp:60,97)

Note: The connection of the Ruh is re-established with the body at the time of questioning in the grave, though confined to the upper half because of the location of the Qalb, the faculty of perception.

The Connection of the Ruh with the Bodies of Prophets is Permanent in their Graves

Then Abu Bakr came, uncovered the Prophet’s countenance, kissed it and said, “I totally devote myself to you. You remained pure during your life and thereafter. I swear by the Rabb who controls my very life that you willnot die again.”

Fatah al-Bari (vol: VII, p:20)

The author further asserts that the HolyProphet lives eternally in his shrine and that all the Prophets are similarly alive.

Note: The re-established connection of the Ruh for the purpose of ques­tioning in the grave stays permanently in case of the Prophets it is never severed, because of this they live and pray in their tombs. This is the belief of all Sunnis.

Both the Body and the Ruh are Subjected to Punishment

Tafsir-e Mazhari vol: VIII, p: 77

Tafsir-e Mazhari vol: X, p: 77

Hashiah-e Khyali p: 118

Sharah Mowaqif p: 715

Note: Life is a pre-requisite for recompense and is inconceivable with­out the Ruh. This necessitates its return, a fact proved from Twatir. Then there is the consensus of the Ummah on reward and punishment being meted out to both the body and the Ruh together and this is the belief of all Sunnis.

 

Consensus of the Ummah on Hearing by the Dead

T he Prophet enjoined his followers to invoke peace whenever they happen to pass by a cemetery in these words, “Peace be on you! O dwell­ers of the believers’ abode.” This (the invoking of peace) is for one who hears and understands. Otherwise, it would mean addressing the non­existent and the stones, which is obviously absurd. All of the righteous from bygone days agree on the hearing by the dead. It is proved from Twatir that the entombed recognises the visitor and rejoices at the homage being paid. Ibn-e Kathir adds, “This address naturally is for one who hears, understands, and reciprocates, whether or not the visitor discerns it.”

Note: This also proves that the grave is the very pit in which the dead is buried. The punishment is meted out here. The dead body is lying in this pit though it is a part of Barzakh. The similitude is that of a human being living in the world but having his abode at a particular place. Likewise, the dead are in Barzakh, in a particular place, i.e, the grave in which they are buried.

Question: If the grave is taken to mean this pit on the earth and not Barzakh, a number of Hadith shall stand nullified. For example, the dead eaten by carnivorous animals, drowned in water, or burnt away, have no such graves. Therefore, the meaning assigned to the grave should cover all these eventualities. The Prophet during his Ascension found some per­sons undergoing punishment though they were not in their graves.

Answer: Writes ‘Allama Ibn-e Hajr,

The punishment is ascribed to the grave in general terms because it is often meted out there and because, by and large, there the dead are entombed.

Note: This shows that interment is the general method, other forms be­ing exceptions, and as such, not infringing the general principle.

About drowning, the Qur-an relates the episode of Pharaoh’s army (pursuing the Children of Israel):

They were drowned and then thrown into the fire. (71:25)

This means, in no uncertain terms, that no matter where the fragments of the body may be, the connection of the Ruh will be re-established for the purpose of recompense.

A bout burning, an incident has been related in al-Bukhari, the most authentic work on Hadith. A person left a will enjoining his sons to burn his corpse, throw some of the ashes into water and scatter the rest in the wind. ALLAH commanded them together, restored him to life and ques­tioned him. This indicates that the Ruh returns to the body at the time of questioning. Of course the Ruh of said person was living. The animation of the body from ashes indicates the re-establishment of the connection of the Ruh with the body. About the Prophet’s observation of the Ruh in punishment without the body, during his Ascension, it has already been proved that the punishment is executed on both the body and the Ruh to­gether. The connection of the Ruh with the body sustains irrespective of the latter’s location. Observation of the Ruh under torture in Barzakh, during the Ascension, does not in any way negate the chastisement of the body. It must be clearly understood that in case the body was not to be subjected to punishment, the Ruh would not have been restored to it be­cause the Ruh could independently be subjected to punishment irrespec­tive of the body’s location, it follows then that the grave means this very pit. Otherwise the return of the Ruh to the body would be meaningless, i.e., the Ruh being already in Barzakh, the proposition of its reunion with the body would be incorrect.

Question: In the two verses, Surely, you can not make the dead to hear... and... you can not reach those who are in the graves.., the infidels have been compared-with the real dead, who indeed are so. The non-hearing is definitely proved in their case.

Answer:

• Cannot make hear... is not in the literal but allegorical sense. As a rule, the comparison is drawn by expressing the predominant common quality. For example, in an allegory like, “Zaid is a tiger”, Zaid is called a tiger due to their predominant common quality, i.e., courage. Similarly the comparison of the infidels with the dead is not drawn by way of death, because it is not common to both. They were, of course, living and the com­parison was in the quality of hearing, which was common to both. But the hearing again is not meant in the literal sense because the infidels did pos­sess ears and could hear very well. Here, the literal meaning is conditional, i.e., beneficial hearing, the condition is that of benefit. Therefore, the verse under reference enunciates that the dead do not benefit from the preaching of the Prophets just like the infidels because they are dead of hearts (their hearts do not perceive). This proves that, here, beneficial hearing is denied and not the literal. It is this beneficial attribute which is common to both, the infidel and the dead.

S ome argue that here the denial is that of asm‘a (making to hear) and not of sam‘a (hearing). On this basis some so-called modern commentators of the Book (who indeed are its interpolators) have, in their misguided en­thusiasm, surpassed the People of the Scripture and other transposers. Their argument cannot stand the test of searching analysis.

• Human actions fall into two categories; namely, natural and super­natural. The latter even if intentional, are not attributed to human beings but to the Almighty. The verse under reference implies this meaning. Here ALLAH addresses His Prophet, You cannot make them hear (but I can). Other examples:

So you (Muhammad) did not slay them, but it was ALLAH Who slew them... ( 8:17)

Surely ALLAH makes whom He wills to hear... (35:22)

Similarly, the spiritual conversation of the aulia with those in Barzakh is a supernatural act, as distinct from a natural one.

Question: A person vows that he would neither talk to Zaid, nor clothe him, nor beat him. If any of these actions is taken by him after Zaid is dead, it would not amount to the violation of his vow. This is because Zaid, when dead, has no senses, does not hear, and the beating causes himno pain.

Answer: The basis of an oath is on common law. Accordingly, actions like speaking, beating, etc, pertain to this existing life. After Zaid’s death, his legacy is distributed among his heirs and his wife remarries. If he is restored to life by the miracle of a Prophet or the karamah of a wali, he would neither recover his property, nor his wife because these were the possessions of his original life. Likewise, an infidel’s confession of faith, if restored to life, after his death, will not be valid because this matter nec­essarily concerns the former life. Similarly, the vow in question pertains to the life-time of Zaid. To deduce from it that the dead neither hears nor feels pain is a folly, and to attribute such a deduction to the four Imams is an awful calumny:

The noble Imams (Abu Hanifah, d. 150 A.H.; Malik, d. 195 A.H.; Shaf‘ai, d. 204 A.H.; and Ahmad bin Hanbal, d. 264 A.H) stand free from any insinuations on this account. Their verdict is that beating of the dead or speaking to him, etc, is not admissible because the basis of an oath is on common law which is the deciding factor in this case, it pertains to the terrestrial existence and not to the ce­lestial. Speaking to the dead, though a reality because they hear and understand, yet a vow like, “I shall not speak to him,” being a matter of common law, necessarily pertains to this earthly exis­tence. Similar is the case with pain, which even if felt, common law dictates that a vow like, “I shall not beat him,” holds good during his lifetime and not after death.

Sharah Waqayah Glosses by Maulana ‘Abdul Haqq p: 254.

Question: Why did Caliph ‘Umar and Had hrat ‘Aishah deny hearing by the dead?

Answer: First let us analyse the narration onwhich the denial of Caliph ‘Umar is based,

After a victory the Prophetusually stayed in the battle field for three days. On the third day after the Battle ofBadr, he ordered his mount and proceeded to the well wherein the corpses of the en­emy killed in action were collected. He stood by the well and ad­dressed them by their names. Caliph ‘Umar standing by asked, “O! ALLAH’sMessenger, How do you address the bodies with­out souls?” The Prophetanswered, “I swear by the BeingWho controls my life,you cannot hear better than them.”

al-Mishkat p: 345

Note: This clearly indicates that the question asked by Caliph ‘Umar was to seek a verdict and did not amounted to a denial. After Prophet’s categorical assertion quoted above, can it be rationally argued that a Com­panion of ‘Umar’s calibre shall deny hearing by the dead? Denial apart, even amazement cannot be presumed. Caliph ‘Umar’s question seems to stem from the fact that three days had passed on the dead, the interview by the Angels concerned (Munkir and Nakir) was over but the dead still con­tinued to hear. The point is illustrated further by another similar incident.

A ccording to Abu Hurairah, a swarthy woman used to sweep the Prophet’s mosque. Not finding her there one day, the Prophet enquired about her and was told that she had died.

‘Abdullah Ibn-e Marzuq narrates the subsequent part.

The Prophet passed by a grave and was told that it was of Umm-e Mahjan, the said woman. We all lined up and offered the funeral prayer. The Prophet addressing her enquired, “Which one of your deeds stood you best?” The Companions enquired whether she was listening and were told that they were not hearing any better. The woman answered, ‘Sweeping of the mosque was by far my best deed.’

at-Targhib vol: I, pp: 196-197

Note: These two Hadith prove continuous hearing by the dead, if ALLAH wills. The Prophet conversed with Umm-e Mahjan some days after her death. This shows that those who confine the hearing only to the time of questioning by the Angels, soon after burial, are wrong.

T he versions of al-Mishkat and at-Targhib prove from the Prophet hearing by the dead after three days in one case and after a number of days in the other. This is the true story of the denial remorselessly attributed to Caliph ‘Umar.

A s for the denial ascribed to Hadhrat ‘Aishah, let us examine one of her own statements. She quotes the Prophet ,

Anyone who visits the grave of a fellow Muslim and sits by it, the dead cultivates affection with him and answers his salutation.

Tafsir Ibn-e Kathir vol: III, p: 347 and Kitab ar-Ruh p: 5

T his Hadith is clear on hearing by the dead. Yet the adamant categorise it as feeble despite the presence of other corroborating Hadith, a fact which provides strength of authenticity even to a feeble one, for example:

I n books of Fiqh, the non-hearing by the dead, based on the conclusions of some elders, is listed in the Bab-e Yaqm. Nothing emanates from Imam Abu Hanifah, Yusuf and Muhammad (the authors of six basic books on Fiqh). Maulana ‘Abdul Hayee Lacknavi, an eminent interpreter of Hanafi Law, writes in Sharah Waqayah’s Glosses (p: 254),

I n fine, no valid argument on the non-hearing, non-perception, non-comprehension or immunity to pain in respect of the dead is available, either from the Book or Hadith. On the other hand, authentic Hadith proves hearing by the dead. The fact is that all references of non-hearing traced to some of the elders comprise their personal explanations and cold polemic. These are of no con­sequence in the presence of authentic Hadith and sayings of the Companions to the contrary.

Notes:

T he Hadith and the statements of the Companions show that they be­lieved in the hearing by the dead. This was also the belief of the ma­jority of the ‘Ulama as discussed above with reference to Fatah al-Bari

The Imams who compiled the Fiqh held the same belief and the opinion of Maulana ‘Abdul Hayee Lacknavi, quoted above, is the final word on the issue.

Caution: It should be clearly understood that the hearing by the dead does not mean that they (particularly the aulia) are vested with powers to fulfil people’s needs and alleviate their sufferings. None of the Hadith grants such powers to the dead. To solicit help from anyone, in absentia, save ALLAH amounts to polytheism. Prostration before tombs is strictly forbidden. It is only ALLAH Who has absolute powers, all Prophets and aulia being totally subservient to Him.

Fourth Objection: It is not possible to derive beneficence from the spirit of the dead.

Answer: It has been stated earlier that human attainments in the fields of knowledge and cognition are not divested from the spirit after it departs from the body but on the other hand are amplified in Barzakh. The point to examine now is whether a living human being can meet the spirits in Barzakh and derive beneficence from them or not.

The Prophet’s Meeting with the Spirits

W rites Hafiz Ibn-e Kathir in connection with the Night of Ascension,

Then the Prophet met the spirits of other Prophets, who began to praise ALLAH. Ibn-e Mas‘ud a renowned Companion quotes the Prophet , “During my Ascension I met Prophet Ibrahim, Musa and ‘Isa. We talked about the Day of Resurrection. Each pointed to the other for answer but everyone denied knowledge about the Hour of its occurrence."

Tafsir Ibn-e Kathir vol: III, p: 16-18

Deriving Beneficence (Faidh) from the Spirit

T he Prophet said,

On my way back from the Ascension I passed by Musa and he enquired about the commandments I had received. I told him that Salah had been enjoined fifty times a day. He observed, ‘Your Ummah will not be able to comply with it. I have the experience of my people. I left no stone unturned in the reformation of the Children of Israel but they did not comply with far easier com­mandments. Do go back to your Rabb and request for a reduction.

al-Mishkat Bab al-M‘eraj p: 528

Note: Accordingly, the Prophet approached ALLAH time and again till Salah was reduced to five times a day.

The Prophet continues: I met Ibrahim. He conveyed his good wishes to my Ummah with this message, “ Paradise has clean and pure clay. Its water is sweet and its ground as plain as the palm of the hand. Gardens grow therein with these sanctifications: Subhan ALLAH(Glory be to ALLAH); wal -Hamd-o li-ALLAH (Praise to ALLAH); and ALLAH -oAkbar (ALLAH is the Greatest).”

al-Mishkat p: 202

Note: These quotations prove that the Prophet met the spirits of other Prophets, heard their messages and, acting on the advice of one of them, obtained concessions for his Ummah.

I t must be remembered that whatever the Prophet did or said, or did not prohibit, or approved of when done in his presence, or intended to do, or thought about aloud, or resolved to do, are Hadith of various denomina­tions. The Ummah is bound to follow every kind of Hadith unless specifically proved to the contrary. One of the Prophet’s actions has been highlighted above. Let us now examine a few examples within his ‘Ummah.

Sa‘eed bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz states:

During the days of Harrah, neither the Azan was called in the Prophet’s mosque nor congregational prayers were held for three days. Sa‘eed bin al-Musayyib (who was blind) remained in the mosque throughout and discerned the Salah timings from the Azan heard from inside the Prophet’s tomb.”

al-Mishkat p: 545

W rites Imam Ibn-e Taimiyah,

Narration like the ones that some people heard the reply to saluta­tions from the Prophet’s tomb or from the tombs of aulia, and that Sa‘eed bin al-Musayyib heard the Azan from the Prophet’s tomb for three days during the days of Harrah, neither amount to heresy nor polytheism. All such incidents are true and I need not expatiate because there have been incidents of far greater signifi­cance. For example, a person visited the Prophet’s tomb and complained of famine. He saw the Prophet who directed himto approach Caliph ‘Umar and tell him to hold special prayers for the rain. Such incidents have nothing to do with innovations and polytheism. Many such incidents, in authentic form, are not only proved from the Holy Prophet but also from the righteous of his Ummah.

Iqtadha-e Sirat-e Mustaqim

T he incident of the famine is given in Fatah al- Bari (vol: II, p: 238) as narrated by Ibn-e Abi Sheba with due authority.

Note: These Hadith prove the visibility of the spirit, its conversation, its knowledge, its memory of past events, its response to the salutations of the living and its capability to deliver beneficence. Prophet Muhammad himself benefited from the spirits of other Prophets. The complainant of the famine actually saw the Prophet , heard his direction, and conveyed it to Caliph ‘Umar. Sa‘eed bin al-Musayyib heard the Azan from the Prophet’s tomb while awake. These are acoustic proofs of deriving be­neficence from the spirit and this is the Prophet ’s Sunnah, forgotten by the Muslims. Whosoever revives this Sunnah today will be bestowed with the promised reward equal to that of a hundred martyrs. Pitiable indeed is the state of those vicious ‘Ulama who dub Tasawwuf and the Path as her­esy. As a matter of fact, this Sunnah cannot be rejuvenated without follow­ing the Path and receiving spiritual beneficence.

A s for intuitive proof, all sufis and scholars agree that the devout of the Ummah do derive beneficence from the spirit. How this happens is a mat­ter which cannot be comprehended without close association with them. It is not a matter of ordinary knowledge and cannot be acquired by reading books. The ignorant and the learned externalists are at par in this. Angels are highly sacred beings but are unable to comprehend marital bliss or the taste of honey, because of the maxim: He who tastes, discovers the taste and only the striving one finds his goal. Therefore, to derive beneficence from the spirit, discipleship of an accomplished Shaikh is compulsory as well as devotion to zikr, with ALLAH’s Pleasure as the only motive, it will ultimately lead to the unfolding of this truth.

I t has been stated earlier that any earnest seeker, desiring nothing but His Pleasure is extended an open invitation to join our Halqah. ALLAH will­ing, within a period of six months, he will also see for himself how the spirit in Illiyyin (the station for spirits of righteous in Paradise) has connection with the body whether intact or in shreds. He will further see the nature of relationship of the Holy Prophet ’s spirit with his sacred body and the state of life in his tomb. Indeed he will also be able to observe how the lights irradiating from the Prophet ’s bosom reach the believers’ hearts, stabilising their faith.

I know that these lines will cause anguish to some people but it is not uncommon. Contemporaries seldom acknowledge each others attainments, it is quite possible that professional Muftis will hurry to criticise; such has been the reaction in every age. My only aim is to expound the truth and to present Islamic mysticism in its pristine form, which has been mutilated beyond recognition by mundane hypocrites. The coming generations will, ALLAH willing, certainly benefit from it.

Fifth Objection: If accomplished sufis have the honour of seeing the Prophet , they become his additional Companions; in their conver­sation, whatever they hear from him is additional Hadith. Where then do we draw a line between the original and the additional?

Answer:

Conditions for Companionship

T here are two conditions for Companionship: The first is the physical ex­istence and its requirements, e.g., discharging obligations like Salah, Fast­ing, Hajj, Zakat, etc, besides adherence to other duties imposed by Shari‘ah. The second is the privilege of the Prophet ’s company in his earthly existence:

This does not mean that those who see the Prophet spiritually become his Companions. The Prophet’s Companions are those believers who saw him during his life in this world, and not in the celestial one.

Fatawa al-Hadithiah p: 206

I n the case of sufis, these two conditions are not fulfilled. They are blessed with a spiritual association in Barzakh where the spirit does have a connection with the body but quite different to that of its erstwhile earthly existence. Therefore, the question of becoming a Companion does not arise.

 

The Reality of Hadith

W hatever the Prophet perceived through spiritual inspiration and re­counted it in this earthly existence is Hadith. So the spiritual conversation of the Prophet with the sufis cannot be termed as such. However, the confirmation of an existing Hadith may be obtained from him. Here is an example, as listed in al-Mishkat. Abi ‘Ayyash, a Companion, once de­scribed the reward of reciting La Ilaha ill-ALLAH, wa ALLAH-o Akbar (There is no God except ALLAH and He is the Greatest). A Companion from the audience saw the Prophet in his dream and got it confirmed as genuine.

Note: The Ahadith so confirmed have been included in the relevant books. However, it must be remembered that this confirmation pertained to what had already been stated by the Prophet in his terrestrial exis­tence. No new commands are issued as a result of the Prophet’s spiri­tual conversation in Barzakh. This is the way of the sufis, who get such confirmation, not in a dream, but in full consciousness. Sufis, bestowed with kashf, obtain confirmation of a Hadith through another method. When a genuine Hadith is recited, it radiates a certain light, while gloom follows a fabricated one. They can discern both the light as well as the darkness. By this method the learned sufis can distinguish between a genuine and a concocted Hadith.

Sixth Objection: During the time of Khulafa-e Rashidin, there had been a difference of opinion among the Companions regarding the selec­tion of the Caliphs. These differences led to the Battles of Jamal and Safin. Why did the Companions not seek solutions to these problems by spiritual consultation with the Prophet ? No such consultations are attributed to the Companions. How can the sufis achieve what even the Companions failed to do?

Answer: There are two parts of this objection. First, we will explain why the Companions did not seek solutions of their problems through spiritual consultation with the Prophet .

T he Qur-an deals with the issue of caliphate and enumerates the attrib­utes of caliphs, but without naming anyone. The Prophet also made a number of predictions, further elaborated their attributes, but did not men­tion any names. Similarly, the Prophet gave indications of impending tribulations and of the appearance of the Dajjal (the Antichrist) and impos­tors of Prophethood, again without naming them. This shows that the Prophetin his earthly existence, did not name his successor, nor did he indicate the steps to be taken to allay the impending tribulations. The Companions too, on their part did not solicit the solution of such important problems during his lifetime. Why then, should they consult him after his passing away?

T he real reason why the Prophet did not indicate the solutions of these problems during his lifetime is that problems cannot be solved be­fore they actually occur. To choose a caliph or to meet a crisis, as and when it arises, is the responsibility of the Ummah. However, the way has been shown by ALLAH and His Messenger by enunciating broad princi­ples. It has been left to the Muslims to channelise their prowess and their abilities in the light of these guide lines.

T he second part of this objection is that no such incidents of kashf of the Companions are available. This is not true. To recount only a few:

• Imam Razi describes the interment of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq. The Compan­ions, after the obsequies, brought the bier to the door of the apartment in which the Prophetis buried. Then an announcer called, “O Messenger of ALLAH, peace be upon you! Here is Abu Bakr at your door.” The door opened instantly and a voice was heard from inside the tomb, ‘Bring the friend to his friend.’

Tafsir-e Kabir vol: V,p: 465

Note: The criticism by the Shi‘ites on the subject of Jawar ar-Rasul (Neighbourhood of the Prophet ) has been fully answered in a Treatise titled al-Faruq. It has been proved in scores of books that Abu Bakr As-Siddiq was buried in the Prophet ’s apartment by his side with his explicit permis­sion. There were thousands of Companions present who heard this voice from the Prophet’s tomb.

Tafsir Ibn-e Kathir vol: 11, p: 279.

al-Mishkat p: 127.

T he five incidents of spiritual conversation should be studied in detail. Thousands of the Companions heard the Holy Prophet ’s spirit calling, “Bring the friend to his friend.” on the eve of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq’s burial.A group of people were accompanying Caliph ‘Umar when the deceased, address­ing the Caliph by name, answered his question. This should be enough to prove spiritual conversation by the Companions.

The Prophet’s Resolve and Kashf-e Qubur

Hadhrat ‘Aishah once asked the Prophet about the children of the infidels. He replied, “If you like, I can make you hear their cries from Hell.”

Besides there is a Hadith in al-Mishkat narrated by Zaid bin Thabit, The Prophet said,

Had I not feared that you would stop burying the dead, I would have supplicated to my Rabb to let you see the chastisement to infidels in their graves.

T hese two Hadith prove that through the Prophet’s supplication Hadhrat ‘Aishah and the Companions would have attained kashf without en­deavour, had they so desired. It has been stated earlier that Prophet ’s resolve is also a Hadith and these two incidents express his resolve. There­fore, to revive this Sunnah is precisely an act of adherence to him. 

The Prophet ’s Madrissah

The Prophet was the most learned and the most perfect human being. To derive beneficence from him, people of different dispositions and mental and physical capabilities gathered around him. Information and in­structions covering all aspects of life in this and the next world were avail­able in his company. But no individual had the capacity or capability to acquire the entire knowledge and excellence of the Prophet . Moreover, it was not the Divine Will to bestow all his abilities and virtues on any other single individual. Therefore, each Companion benefited according to his inherent capability and ALLAH’s Will. This sacred school produced preachers, teachers, commentators, traditionalists, jurists, judges, funda­mentalists, scholars (Motakallim), analysts, men of kashf and ilham, sufis, adepts, soldiers, generals, ministers and caliphs equipped with different grades of knowledge. It is strange that the critics do not question as to why all the Companions were not commentators, traditionalists and jurists but clamour without hesitation why all of them did not acquire kashf, ilham and mysticism

The mind is seized with horror at this bizarre absurdity!

T he second basic principle which should be borne in mind is that the knowledge imparted by the Prophet was about basic rules and funda­mentals. It was left for erudite and learned interpreters of his Ummah to deduce corollaries and subsidiary regulations. It has been the way of ALLAH that His Messengers lay down fundamental principles leaving it to competent and capable intellectuals to frame, in the light of said princi­ples, rules and regulations for the solution of theoretical and practical problems which might arise from time to time.

T he third consideration which must be kept in view is, that during the time of the Prophet and his Companions, the basic and fundamental principles of various sciences pertaining to the Faith were laid down in concise and elementary forms without detail. There were no separate compilations, for example, of Tafsir, Hadith, Fiqh, fundamentals, gram­mar, or etymology etc. But, as time passed and new exigencies arose, co­pious works on the aforesaid subjects were gradually compiled containing minute details and subsidiary regulations; similarly the science of Tasawwuf gradually developed. But while the absence of standard works of Taf­sir, Hadith, Fiqh, etc, during the time of the Holy Prophet and his Compan­ions causes no uneasiness to the bigoted critic, he is perturbed at the emergence of the permanent science of Tasawwuf because it did not exist dur­ing the time of the Prophetand his Companions. As a matter of fact, learned sufis, like experts of other sciences, found the essentials of their branch of knowledge scattered, and so they collated them and subse­quently deduced subsidiary rules and regulations. They discovered the means to attain the goal of Ihsan,and codified them, but kept the means distinct from the goal. However, it must be remembered that men of gen­ius are always rare. During the time of the Prophet , each Companion got his share of knowledge according to his capacity and propensity. For example:

Hadhrat Huzaifah was the bearer of such secrets which none else knew, he even knew the hypocrites. He was also bestowed with the knowledge of future events, other Companions were not so blessed.

Fatah al-Bari vol: XIII, p: 29.

This shows that Hadhrat Huzaifah was blessed with unique knowledge of kashf and ilham and Divine secrets, which no other Companion possessed. To ask as to why all the Companions were not so blessed would mean questioning Divine Wisdom and Will.

T he fourth basic principle is that Tasawwuf or ihsan is an important branch of the Faith and it is an established rule that when a fundamental is proved, its elements stand proved too.

K ashf and ilham are essential elements of Tasawwuf or Ihsan which, ac­cording to Hadith-e Jibril, is an essential part of the Faith. Hence the ac­ceptance of the Faith means acceptance of Tasawwuf, which in turn im­plies acceptance of kashf and ilham. However, it is essential that the Shaikh be accomplished and the seeker earnest. The attributes of excel­lence of the Prophets are directly bestowed by ALLAH ,that is why these attributes saturate their companions by virtue of their company and without any endeavour on the companions’ part. However, sincerity of in­tention is the key note, otherwise one remains deprived like ‘Abdullah ibn-e Ubayy (the leader of the hypocrites in Madinah). The attributes of excel­lence of the aulia are duly acquired, hence their disciples attain these through their company and with due diligence and endeavour.

I n brief, the learned sufis follow the Sunnah of the Prophet and his Companions, with regard to spiritual conversations with the dead. The means and methods used by them for this purpose may be new but that is immaterial, since the goal is legitimate and laudable, the means and meth­ods adopted to achieve it fall in the same category. The real investment of the aulia is their love of ALLAH and His Prophet . To see the Holy Prophet is, in fact, the reward of this love and none deserves it better than the lovers of the Holy Prophet . Their true state is summed up in the following words in Fatah al-Bari p: 45:

There are many among them, who, when mention is made of the Prophet , are seized with a longing to see him. They set out for his abode, forgetting and forsaking parents, kith and kin and their property. They are ready to face grave dangers to attain their goal. It has been observed that such men give preference to visiting the abode of the Holy Prophet , his tomb, the places he walked and the paths he trod, over their lives, property and kith and kin, because their hearts are saturated with his love. However, this state disap­pears in case of heedlessness.

Note: The desire to visit the Prophet tomb and the places where he walked is an index of his love. This being so, how fortunate are those who see him physically and spiritually! But this can be achieved only when the ardour to follow his Sunnah reaches its climax. This is the only criterion of his love, as highlighted by the saying of the Prophet ,

“Whosoever loves my Sunnah, indeed loves me.”

N evertheless, this love fades out when the heart sinks into forgetfulness. The sufis have shown the way to guard against it and they have prescribed some exercises. Their adoption results in the rekindling of the flame of love, which ultimately leads to a spiritual audience with the Prophet , his observation, and the privilege of spiritual conversation with him; ALLAH willing, this relationship-in-love grows into a permanent bond with the passage of time. This is the way followed in our Order. If anyone considers observation of the Prophet , his audience and conversation with him, as sinful acts then, of course, the means adopted for their at­tainment will also be so. One the other hand, if these are not sins but con­stitute the very Faith in its sublimity, the means adopted to achieve them will also fall in the same category.

Why Kashf and Ilham Increased after the Companion’ Era

I t is generally conceded that there has been a spectacular increase in the kashf and karamah of the aulia who came after the Companions. This is so because the frequency of kashf and karamah at any period, is mainly regulated by the standard of faith simultaneously possessed by the masses. When their faith is strong there is hardly any need for kashf and karamah, which strengthen it further. During the Companions’ era, the Faith was extremely strong because of the blessing of the Prophet’s company and required no support through kashf etc. Subsequently, the strength of the Faith waned and people demanded some faith-reinvigorating tokens from the aulia. It must, however, be remembered that extraordinary or super­natural acts do not constitute conditions or essentials of wilayah, these are bestowed only as tokens for its identification and veracity.

I t has already been stated that kashf and ilham are deputies which follow revelation. The Companions’ period was that of revelation and Divine lights were transmitted through the person of the Holy Prophet . Hence there was no need for a deputy, just as the presence of the sun eliminates the necessity for the moon, the stars, lamps and candles. It is a matter of daily observation that light is needed only after the sunset. And yet again the sunset is not followed by sudden darkness. The light remains for a time and decreases gradually until darkness overtakes it and prevails. Similarly, after the passing away of the Holy Prophet , the light of faith diminished gradually through the periods of the Companions, the Tabi‘in (those who immediately followed them), the Tab‘a-Tabi‘in (those who came after the Tabi‘in) and subsequent generations. The learned sufis continued to en­lighten every age, their beneficence lighted a lamp here and a candle there, at one place appeared a star, at another, a moon (signifying the degree of Divine light transmitted by the aulia). In short, it is through the instrumen­tality of the aulia that the light of faith in varying degree is sustained to this day. The sole object of this study is to prove that the variations in the degree of kashf and ilham correspond directly to the strength or weakness of the faith of existing Muslims. Consequently, the manifestations and ex­traordinary display of kashf and ilham were naturally more frequent after the Companions’ period.

Anyone seeking further details may study Maulana Jami’s Shawahid-e Nabuwwah (p: 147) and Fatawa al-Hadithiah (p: 261).

Seventh Objection: Recounting the names of personalities in the Chain of Transmission is not valid. It amounts to polytheism.

Answer: Let us draw on the Book and Hadith for the answer:

“Say, (O Muhammad, to mankind); If you love ALLAH, follow me; ALLAH will love you...” ( 3:31)

The Prophet once prayed, “O Rabb! I implore You for Your Love and the love of those who love You. ” And the Prophet’s Sunnah identifies the means to attain ALLAH ’s Love including his prayer for the love of those whom He Loves. It is obvious that only ALLAH ’sdevoted slaves are loved by Him. Consequently their love leads to His obedience as well as His Nearness and it is natural to remember the beloved frequently and regularly.

Tuhfa tuz-Zakirin p:331.

Notes: Three points are highlighted from the above:

S tudents of the science of Hadith recount the chain of narrators of every Hadith before reading its text. This is meritorious and fruitful, since it is the only way to trace a Hadith right up to the Holy Prophet and establish its authenticity. Recounting the Chain of Transmission follows the same analogy, Ihsan (as defined in Hadith-e Jibril) being the essence of the Faith and the end result of all worship, is another name for Tasawwuf, which can be identified only through the Chain of Transmission. If the chain connects the Shaikh with the Prophet , he is a genuine wali, just as the learned Hadith scholars critically examine the chain of narrators before adjudging the veracity of a Hadith.

Here is a well known incident in the history of Hadith. When Imam ‘Ali Radha arrived in Neshapur, he was requested by Imam Abu Zarah and Imam Muslim Tusi (both Hadith scholars) to narrate a Hadith traceable through his ancestors to the Prophet , he obliged, recited a Hadith and ecounted its narrators. About twenty thousand persons in the audience re­corded it. Comments Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, “If this chain be recounted before a lunatic, he will be cured.”

Sawa‘iq Moharraqa by ‘Allama Ibn-e Hajr

Caution: With a view towards attaining ALLAH’s Nearness, it is commendable to recount the names of the aulia in a Chain of Transmission because they help cultivate His Love and follow the Prophet’s Sunnah. But any presumption that they wield independent authority, influence and are omnipresent, etc, would amount to renouncing one’s faith, which would naturally lead to a tragic end.

Eighth Objection: It is said that Tasawwuf is proved from Twatir whereas Imam Hassan Basri’s meeting with Hadhrat ‘Ali is not proved.

Answer: All veteran sufis are unanimous that the meeting did take place. Sa‘eed Ahmad Qashashi, in his al-‘Aqd al-Farld fi Silasil Ahl-e Tauhid has proved this meeting after an elaborate discourse. Shah Wali Ullah Dehlawi claims a consensus of sufis on this issue:

According to the veterans of the Path, Imam Basri’s meeting with Hadhrat ‘Ali is fully established, but is not admitted by the scholars of Hadith.

al-Intibah fi Silsilah-e Aulia ALLAH p: 31

Note: The difference between the verdict of the two is that the former agree on the meeting as conclusive, and without exception, while the latter declare that there is some evidence, but it is not conclusive. They do unanimously concede a meeting but deny a prolonged association. Even if a prolonged association is taken as a condition for beneficence, the pos­sibility of indirect beneficence cannot be ruled out. Therefore, a direct be­neficence could be denied but not indirect beneficence.

L ikewise, the Imam’s hearing of Hadith from Hadhrat ‘Ali and its sub­sequent narration is also a point of debate, but the fact generally conceded is that is did take place.

N ow if the principle of indirect beneficence is accepted, an intermediary has to be identified. Here, thousands of Companions who had been the as­sociates of Hadhrat ‘Ali had met Imam Hassan. He might have attained beneficence from anyone of them. Spiritual beneficence and its transmis­sion cannot be discerned by a third person. As a matter of principle, lack of knowledge or intuition does not negate the existence of knowledge.

W hen scholars of Hadith agree on a meeting as well as the hearing of Hadith, there is no reason to reject the possibility that the initiation of be­neficence began with Hadhrat ‘Ali but subsequent progress was made through some of his associates.

Testimony From the Cyclopedia of Hadith Narrators

(1) The Meeting and the Hearing:

Ibn-e Sa‘ad said, “Imam Hassan Basri was born two years before the end of Hadhrat ‘Umar’s caliphate. He was brought up in the Vale of Qura, was highly eloquent and had met Hadhrat ‘Ali.”

(2) Narration of Hadith:

Imam Hassan Basri narrated Hadith from Ubayy bin K‘ab, Sa‘ad bin ‘Abadah and ‘Umar bin Khattab, but never met these Compan­ions. He also narrated Hadith of Thoban, ‘Amar bin Yasir, and Makal bin Yasar but did not hear the same from them. He also narrated Hadith from Hadhrat Uthman and Hadhrat ‘Ali.

Tafsir-e Mazhari

(3) Imam Abu Zarah was asked if Imam Hassan had heard any Hadith from a Companion of the Battle of Badr. He said that the Imam had seen a number of them but did not hear any Hadith from them. He had also seen Caliphs ‘Uthman and ‘Ali but again did not hear Hadith from them. He had seen Caliph ‘Ali in Madinah, before the departure of the Caliph to Kufah and Basrah but did not meet him thereafter. Imam Hassan Basri said that he had personally seen Zubair taking Bai‘at at Caliph ‘Ali’s hands. ‘Ali Almadini said that Imam Hassan Basri had seen Caliph ‘Ali in Madinah.

Tehzib at-Tehzib

Notes:

H ere is a side note from Tehzib al-Kamal: Yunus bin ‘Obaid says that he once put a question to Imam Hassan, “How do you quote the Prophet in your narrations when you have not seen him?” The Imam replied, “O my nephew, you have asked me something never asked by anyone before. Had I not trusted you, I would not have answered you. Now listen, unfor­tunately I have been placed under such circumstances that I cannot openly quote Hadhrat ‘Ali (for fear of reprisals at the hands of the greatest tyrant of the Muslim Ummah, Hajjaj bin Yusuf). However, take it for granted that the Hadith you hear from me being directly ascribed to the Prophet, has reached me from Caliph ‘Ali, son of Abi Talib.”

Notes:

W rites ‘Allama Sayuti

One group of scholars, who remember Hadith by heart have de­nied the hearing of Hadith by Imam Hassan from Hadhrat ‘Ali. But another group have confirmed the hearing and I am inclined to agree with them. Hafiz Haya ud-Din Muqadassi also accepts this view in his book Mukhtarah for the following reasons:

  • The learned fundamentalists agree that a positive argument has an edge over the negative because it denotes the existence of some knowledge on which it is based.
  • Imam Hassan Basri was born two years before Hadhrat ‘Umar’s caliphate ended. His mother was the maid-servant of Umm-e Salmah, one of the Prophet ’s wives, who used to send Imam Hassan Basri to the Companions for blessing. Once she sent him to Hadhrat ‘Umar who blessed him with these words, “ O ALLAH! Bestow on him special understand­ing of the Faith and endear him to the people.” Writes Hafiz Jamil ud-Din Mazzi in his Tehzib that at the time of Caliph Hadhrat ‘Uthman’s siege by the rebels, Imam Hassan Basri was fourteen years old. It is admitted that at the age of seven he was commanded to offer Salah and attended congrega­tional prayers. He offered his prayers behind Hadhrat ‘Uthman, till the latter was martyred. He continued to pray under the leadership of Caliph Hadhrat ‘Ali till the latter’s de­parture from Madinah. Hadhrat ‘Ali left for Kufah after the martyrdom of Caliph ‘Uthman. How can it be denied that Imam Hassan Basri heard Hadhrat ‘Ali, when he used to pray behind him five times a day. This was at the discerning age of fourteen. Moreover, Hadhrat ‘Ali used to call on the Prophet’s wives, including Umm-e Salmah and Imam Has­san Basri had been living with her along with his mother.

 

Proof on Record.

‘Allama Sayuti has listed ten Ahadith, narrated by Imam Hassan on the authority of Hadhrat ‘Ali, which prove the meeting.

al-Hawi lil Fatawa vol: II, p: 191.

Imam Abu Zarah said that when Hadhrat ‘Ali took the oath as Caliph, Imam Hassan Basri was fourteen years old; he saw the Caliph in Madinah. ‘Allama Sayuti says that the said ten Hadith confirm the meeting of Imam Hassan Basri with Hadhrat ‘Ali and also his hearing of Hadith from him. The arguments advanced against it relate to the period following his depar­ture to Kufah.

al-Hawi lil Fatawa vol: II, p: 193.

Ninth Objection: Some people hold that to stand or sit facing the graves of saints or other Muslims and then to raise the hands in supplica­tion is prohibited.

Answer: There are two parts of this objection, namely;

F irst, we should bear in mind that the Sunnah prescribes some etiquettes of supplication, which must be observed:

Fatah al-Bari vol: II, p: 352

 

Note: These quotations establish that it is in accordance with Sunnah to raise the hands in supplication with palms upwards but when seeking relief from any distress palms should be downwards.

W hy the hands are raised at all in supplication, is answered by the learned scholars,

It may be asked as to why the hands are raised towards the heaven at the time of supplication. This action signifies that ALLAH is there in the heavens, while He is Omnipresent. The answer lies in the counter question: Why do we turn our face towards the K‘abah during Salah, does ALLAH reside in the K‘abah? As a matter of fact the heaven is our direction for supplication just as the K‘abah is for Salah.

Musamarah p: 30

Imam Ghazali says, “Just as heaven is the direction for supplica­tions, the holy K‘abah is the direction for Salah. The One worshipped in Salah is the same as the One addressed in supplication. He is Omnipresent.”

al-lqtesad fil Eteqad p: 23

 Notes:

In fine , the raising of the hands in supplication is strictly in accordance with the Sunnah,whether such supplication is made at a grave or else­where.

H ere is an example of the Prophet himself. States Hadhrat ‘Aishah,

The Prophet one night went to Jannat al-Baqi‘a (The cemetery at Madinah). I followed him. He stood there for a long time, then raised his hands in supplication and prayed three times before re­turning.

I mam Nawawi states that the above action of the Prophetis an authority for a long and repeated supplication and for raising the hands for the purpose. It also proves that it is preferable to keep standing during supplication at the graves.

T he diversionists argue in favour of a new practice for supplication at the grave. They hold that one should turn ones back towards it. To give weight to their view they misquote Imam Abu Hanifah. In fact, this view has been advanced by ‘Allama Kirmani and ‘Allama Abu Laith Samarkandi and it is against all canon of justice to attribute it to the Hanafi School of Thought. Imam Abu Hanifah states on the authority of Ibn-e ‘ Umar ,

The proper method according to Sunnah is that you approach the Prophet’s shrine from the direction of the K‘abah and facing towards the tomb invoke peace and ALLAH’s blessing on him.

Musnad-e Imam A‘azam p: 27.

According to some of the Companions, whenever Anas bin Malik went to the Prophet’s shrine he raised both his hands and stood facing the tomb. Imam Malik states that whenever Ibn-e Wahhab offered his salutations to the Prophet, he turned his face to­wards the sacred shrine with his back towards the K‘abah.

Shifa fi Haqq al-Mustafa p:235

Note: The above facts prove that the method advocated by Imam Abu Hanifah and the practice of some of the illustrious Companions was to supplicate facing towards a grave with their back towards the K‘abah.

Finally, here is ‘Allama Shokani’sverdict.

Experience shows that supplications at the graves of the aulia are granted promptly, provided they are made in accordance with the Sunnah.

Tuhfa tuz-Zakirin p: 55

T o sum up, it is the Prophet’s Sunnah to supplicate for the dead, sit­ting or standing, with the hands raised and face towards the grave. This is the creed of Imam Abu Hanifah and, according to; Allama Shokani,sup­plications at the graves of the righteous are promptly granted. But it must be emphasised that supplication is made to ALLAH , and not to the en­tombed.