Ibn Hajar Refutation to Ibn Taymmia on Ziaarah

Urdu Translation:

For reading into Unicode or copying:
(Online copying click)
(Download Text File with Scans)

Updated to english by Majzoob: 11:59 PM, Mon Nov 10 / 2014

This is rough translation (SUMMARY with some more narrations added)  (advance sorry for some mistakes)

Travel for Visiting Prophet (sal Allahu alyhi wasalam)

According to all given ahadith, either Ziarat (visiting to the grave of Prophet aly hisalam) is established, and interacting of the Prophet aleyhisalam with those males and females who came to visit you even after your demise are having intention to visit You (alehisalam) and its proven, and this is also proven that visiting towards You (alehisalam) is permissible, even for the women too (i.e, visiting to roza mubarak), As Imam Delmi has deduct it from the sayings of the learned ones, that for every Hajji (the doer of Hajj) has a sunnah to perform (i.e, visiting Prophet alehisalam) its sunnah, and the things which are objectionable about it are un-related with Grave of Prophet alehisalam’s question“.

Visiting the shrines of the Saints and Sages of Almighty Allah and to the shrines of Martyrs are also such kind of sunnah, and because reason of its (visiting) is that going from one place to another (for a visit), means person visits the Muzawir (the person in grave inside shrine). As the word ‘Muj’iyee’ will come along, and Quranic verse is evidence on it.”.

So visiting (Ziarat) in its meaning is departing from one place to another with intention or reaching to the ‘Muzawar’ from another place, in each situation the ‘Safar’ (Travel) would be implemented on it, either he came from near or from far away, it must have the means of (some) travel found in it“.

And when every Ziarat is a Qurbat (Love/ Affection ) then, traveling towards someone is also a Qurbat, And it is established from authentic sanad (narration) (Sahih status of hadith), that You (sal Allahu alehi wasalam/means Prophet) visited his companions in Jannat al baqee’ (the famous graveyard which is now been destroyed by Wahhabi control), and going towards Uhud, is also established (proven) from Prophet alehisalatowasalam. Thus when visiting or traveling towards other’s (graves) is validated then, Prophet alehisalatowasalam’s Roza mubaraka is more entitle then all other graves (i.e, to be visited / or traveled to). And it is established principle that, trying intercede for traveling is also an act of Qurbat (love). That means! this act (which reaches us towards Qurb) it could not be called haram, like going on some wrong way, and those who think that only those can visit there who are living nearby, only those had have such goodness and benefit (blessing) then, its a LIE UPON BLESSED SHARIA, and even does’nt need to think abou that“.


And some deprived ones’s thinkings regarding in-validity of ziarah , that this can lead one to astry is completely bias, because this act shows the proof of his Ibadat al Qalbi (means love towards tawheed from heart)“.

Because if someone think that its polytheism, then it would be only in this case when the grave is been made a Sajdagah (place of prostration), or either when someone do Tawaf of the grave (circumnavigation), or worshipping pictures upon them, as mentioned in Sahih ahadeeth (plural of hadith), instead (of this), going to visit i.e., Ziarat, and doing Salam there and seeking Dua (supplication)“.


[Note: let me phrase this is simple words, Imam is saying that, those who think that visiting to grave is not valid and it leads someone to shirk , then he is wrong because it will be only leads someone to shirk if, he is doing tawaf, and or worshiping it, otherwise its not]. …. and Scholar can easily differentiate among these. And second kind is, (ie. Ziarat, Salam Dua) is when done in accordance with the guidence of Shari’a, then it makes one to stop from the invalid things. Even after this (clear explanation) if someone stopping from this, is then clear negligence and denial of that, which is prescribed by Allah (jalla washanuhu) and told by Prophet alehisalatowasalam“.


Tawhed (Oneness of ALLAH) and Respect of the Prophet alehisalam:
and here are two things and each one is compulsory

“One is that, Acceptence of the Respect of RasulAllah alehisalam, and to the Highest Status from each and everything’. and Second is, the Oneness of Allah (jallawashanuhu), and having this belief stead fasted that, He is One and Alone, none is compare to Him, and whosoever compared Him with creations, he committed Shirk. And if disrespect the honour of Rasoolillah alehisalam in any case or means, and neglecting that which is been proven for him, he commits sin, even became a ‘Kafir’ and out from Islam (for that sin)”. And whosoever (try to) praise Rasulillah alehisalam’s  status with highest possible words, but that words does not reaches to the level of ‘Elohiyat’, (Allah), he reaches to HAQ (the Truth), and he keep covenant of the Oneness of Allah and the limits of the Prophet-hood of Rasoolillah alehisalam. And this is such saying which is free from corruption and wrong“.

[Consensus of Ummah upon Visiting the Gumbad e Khadhra i.e., Rawda Mubaraka ]

And if you say that you had written in previous pages about the Ijma (consensus) of the Ummah upon this (visiting), but in the mutakhireen (that generations which came a long after blessed 3 generations) among Hanabila (Hanbali school of though) from them, Ibne taymmiyah rejected this, and even said that intention to do this i.e. to visiting grave of Prophet alehisalam, is been neglected by him, as Imam Subki’s writing shows it‘.

And Ibnu Taymmiya has collected materials about his theory, to which ears does not want to listen, and the natures felt bad from it, but even Ibne taymmiyah’s deviant and disturbed view is that, visiting towards qabar is haram according to concensus, for that reason we (according to ibn taymmiya) does not perform namaz-e-qasar for that traveling. And all those a’hadeets which are came in its favour are ‘Modu’ (invalid), and some muta’khireen (the next coming scholars of that time) followed him in this, who were followers of his religion“.

Note: [Ibne Taymmiyah in the Eyes of Ulema of Ummah]

I [imam ibn hajr] say, seeking [for knowledge] towards Ibnu Taymmiyah in Ummur ad-Deen [matters of religion i.e, fiqh etc] or making him authority for rule, is not valid, because a huge number of scholars of ummah refuted him, and his wrong deviated views, even till the extent that exposed his blatant ignorance of his thoughts very effectively“.

Like Imam Al izz bin Jam’aa’ said that:”Ibne taymmia was lost & destroyed by Allah, and gives him the shawl of stigma and dishonour, and he dissolved by himself in his lies and deviancy, and Zillat (dishonor) chased him, and the misfortune became must on him“.

and Hazrat Sheikh ul Islam (upon whose scholarly status all of the ummah is agreed upon) i.e, Taqi-ud-deen al-Subuki (rta) (may Allah bless his grave with noor), has written a treatise on this person (ibn taymmia) and refuted him very well. and from that book, he shows him righteous way from evidences, thanks Allah for this great work of his, may Allah bless us from his Fuyuz and Baraka“. (Amin)

“…and committed such henious crime, that they tried to darken the face of that beauty [authentic islam] , they bring up with such things which shows the ignorance towards Allah, and it is an attempt to decrease the Mercy and Shan of Allah, they need to shamed of themselves for such thing from Allah, and needs to repent, their mouths goes astry and whatever they wished to, they said [about Him]”.

When someone is been prevailed by suffering, and disturbness haunt him, such kind of superstitions committed by him, O Allah ! we seek refuge from these all misleadings, O Allah, we seek towards your Mercy with piety, humility and knowledge, that You had shown us the knowledge of the right way. And keep us save from all those wrongdoings done by Ibnu taymmiyah. He drown into this sin forever, and this problem is forever forced upon him, this misfortune is been ever for his fate, and these things are not unusual from him, because his innerself, his wishes, and his satan makes these things beautiful for him. Until, he faces the arrows of truth from Mujtahideens (Scholars), and he blind from thoughts does not come to know that in which condition he was, and was doing against the consensus of the Ummah in many matters“.

“….he used to started out wrong flaws with weak evidences from Khulfa e Rashideen, and he even bring such stupidness that our ears does not want to listen, and natures are disturbed by his views, until, that Dhaat (Allah) who is far more Higher than any bad thing, and entitle of every Goodness, he (ibe taymmiya) decreased from his limits in His Lordship, and he assign such ugly attributes towards HIM, he breaks the limit of His Highness, and Almighty-ness, and on the culpurts, for ordinary people, he used anthropomorphist ideas for HIM, for such none among those people attracted towards him. Even, until Ulema of that era stand against him and asked to the Sultan of that time to either kill him or, captivate him in jail. So he was captivated, up til he died in that cell, and this “bidat’ dies there, his wrong-ness and deviancy was dissolved with time, and then his followers became lesser, may Allah never made them arise again, and may never gave them any honor, instead Allah opprobriousness was enforced upon them, and they diverted in the Anger of Allah, thus because of their aberran, because they were going out of limits“.


Imam Subki (rta) and some other scholars has explain such a good hikaya, that “Visiting is Qurbat and this is essential necessity of Deen, whosoever is against it, has a fear of polytheism on him“.

Thus think deep in it, so that you come aware of this fact that, Ibne Taymmiya and his followers bring along with them such bad thing”. When it is proven and established that visiting is a goodness (act of goodness) then, intention towards doing it is also a goodness. and these both are compulsory, its not hidden thing, unless those who are deviants, who refuses this act or keep silence on it, thus, you may know now that, rejecting totally this thing [visiting] is Kufar, thus you must have to keep yourself save from this act, beacuse it is a very big negligence‘.

[Note: because of the length of this, i am presenting some other narrations a part from this translation, because mostly all things are cleared now and important points are already been given]

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami (D. 974AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s view of impermissibility on travelling to visit the grave of the prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

If you say: How can you relate that there is a consensus on the permissible and commendable status of visiting and travelling to it (the Prophet’s grave [sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam]) when ibn Taymiyya among the later Hanbalis deems all of this inappropriate?

I say: Who is ibn Taymiyya so that one takes his words into consideration or relies on them in any religious matter? Is he anything but – in the words of the leading scholars who have followed his rotten statements and unsalable arguments… – a servant whom Allah has forsaken and led astray and clothed in the garments of ignominy The Shaykh al-Islam, the scholar of the world, concerning whose status, ijtihad, rectitude and prominence there is a consensus, Taqi al-Din al-Subki – may Allah sanctify his soul and cast light on his grave – has dedicated himself to answering him in a separate work (shifa al-saqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam) in which he has done a great service and shown with dazzling arguments the correct path.”

Imam Ahmad al-Qastallani (D. 923AH) expressing his outrage on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

The Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya has abominable and odd statements on this issue to the effect that travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is prohibited and is not a pious deed but the contrary. Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki has replied to him in Shifa al-Saqam and has gratified the hearts of the believers.

[Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya (Cairo 1291AH), 8:343]


Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi (D. 1014AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

Amongst the Hanbalis, ibn Taymiyya has gone to an extreme by prohibiting travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), just as others have gone to the opposite extreme in saying: the fact that the visiting is a pious deed is known with certainty and he who denies this is an unbeliever. Perhaps the second position is closer to the truth, for to prohibit something that scholars by consensus deem commendable is unbelief, since is it worse than prohibiting what is (merely) permissible, in regards to which there is agreement (i.e. there is agreement that the prohibition of what is permissible by consensus is unbelief).

[Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi, Sharh al-Shifa (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2001), 2:152]

From the above-mentioned words of Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi, it seems he has retracted his statements in praise of ibn Taymiyya, as Jarh Mufassar (Specified Criticism) takes precedence over General Tawthiq / Ta’dil (Praise).

Anyone who wishes to object to the above should know that in his sharh (commentary) on the Shifa of al-Qadhi ‘Iyadh he mentioned his al-Mirqat Sharh al-Mishkat (al-Masabih) in 2 places – 1/24 and 1/547.


Also, in the same Sharh al-Shifa, he referred tohis sharh (commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi known as Jam’ al-Wasa-il(1/324, 343 and 2/366). This means that his Sharh al-Shifa is later than his sharh (commentary) on Mishkat al-Masabih and his sharh(commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi, and thus what he mentioned in it, is his last stance on ibn Taymiyya, as it overrides what he thought about him in the earlier two works named, in which he had praiseworthy remarks for ibn Taymiyya.


ده امام ملا علي قاري الحنفي رحمته الله عليه ، ده ابن تيميه په دې عقيده باندې ترديد چه دنبي عليه السلام قبر لره روتلل بدعت يا شرک وي:

ليکې چه

 ( په حنبليانون کښ ابن تيميه هغه واحد سړے وه چه ده حد نه اي تجاوز وکړ.دې نبي عليه السلام قبر مبارک لره ورتللو په بارئ کښ اې بنديش ولګول. (يعني ممانعت فتوي ائ ورکړه).هم هغه خلق په شان لکه چه کم په دې طريقه زيادتئ وکړو چه وائي چه دغه زبرګانو لره زيارت له ورتګ باعث ثواب دئ او چه کم يو به نه ځي هغه اسلام نه باهر دے…..خو بيا هم دغه دوئيمه ويئنا معتبره دا، او ده حقيقت نه زيات نږدئ ده. زکه چه په کم خبره باندے د امت علمائو اجماع وشي نو دې هغي انکار کول هم اسلام نه باهر کول شول.نو هغه خو بيا نور هم ظالمه خبره ده چه که څوک په ده ممانعت فتوي ورکړي.په هغه شې باندے چه کم (مستځسن ) (اجازت شوئ) عمل دئ او په هغه باندے ټول متحد دې.

لګ تفصيل :

دلته د امام ملا علي قاري رحمته الله عليه مطلب دا دئ چه د الله معتبر او ګرانو خلقو لره ورتلل زيارت له پاره قبر ته ورتګ ، دغه کو يو جائز عمل دے چه په ده ټولو اسلافو اجماع شوې ده. نو بيا چه کم شئ باندے دغه ټول علماے کرامو رضامندي شوا خو دا دې امت رضامندي شوه. او دې اجماع امت منکر کافر وي. ورڅره يئ دا هم بيان کړل چه که څوک دا وائ چه که يو سړے چری نه ورځي نو هغه هم کافر شول، نو دا خبره هم صحيح نه دا بلکه زيادتئ دے. خو بيا ائ وليکل چه دا دويئمه خبره د حق سره زياته نړي ده. او زياته منيدونکې ده. يعني نن چه کم خلق دا زيارتوڼ لره ورتګ ته کفر شرک او بدعت وائي او په امت کښ نفاق اچوي هغه نام نهاد تبليغيان هم امام ملا علي قاري الحنفي  صاحب مقلدان دي. او زمونګه امام صاحب خو دې شې ته جائز او مستحسن عمل ګنړې نو نن دا تبليغيان که حنفيان دې نو بيا دوئي انکاري کيګي ويلے؟

په دې ټولو ثبوتون او ګواهيانون نه پس دغه ثابته شوه چه ابن تيميه عقيده غلط او ګمراه وه.او اسلاف ټول تر انکاري وو.که څوک په دې باندے اعتراض کوې نو هغه خپله وکاندې چه په خپل شرح کښ يعني شفا شريف قاضي عياض مالکي رحمته الله تعالي عليه هم داغه خبره تصديق کړئ دے او په خپل المرقات شرح المشکات کښ هم (المصابيح) کښ ۲ ځائ ذکر کړے دے.

حواله جلد ۱، پانړه ۲۴ او جلد ۱ پانړه ۵۴۷او هم په دغه شرح الشفا شريف کښ هغي دې خپل حاشيه هم تذکره کړئ دئ په شمائل ترمذي کښ، چه څه ته جامع الوسائل هم ويلي کيګي،

(حواله ؛ جلد ۱ پانړه ۳۲۴ او ۳۴۳ او جلد ۲، پانړه ۳۶۶). بيروت ايډيشن 


Update Scans by Admin 2 to this post @7:13 PM Wed/Nov/2014

Imam Ahmad al-Khafaji (D. 1069) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

Know that this is the hadith that led ibn Taymiyya and those who follow him, such as ibn al-Qayyim, to the despicable statement due to which he was declared an unbeliever, and against which al-Subki devoted a separate work, and this is his prohibiting the visit to the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and travelling to it… He imagined that he protected monotheism (tawhid) on the basis of drivel that should not be mentioned, for they do not come from a rational, let alone an eminent, person, may Allah the Exalted forgive him.”

[Ahmad al-Khafaji, Nasim al-Riyad, 5:100-101]

 Scans by (ZH)


Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (D. 852AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

Al-Kirmani (D. 786AH) has said: On this issue there has been much discussion in our Syrian lands, and many treatises have been written by both parties. I say: He is referring to Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others’ responses to Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya… and the crux of the matter is that they have pointed out that his position implies that it is prohibited to travel to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)… This is one of the ugliest positions that has been reported of ibn Taymiyya. One of the things he has adduced to deny the claim that there is a consensus on the matter is the report that (Imam) Malik disliked people saying: I have visited the tomb of the Prophet. The discerning scholars of the (Maliki) school have replied that he disliked the phrase out of politeness, and not the visiting itself, for it is one of the best actions and the noblest of pious deeds with which one draws near to Allah the Majestic, and it’s legitimacy is a matter of consensus without any doubt, and Allah is the One who leads to truth.”

[ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1959), 3:308]


In short, these all views clearly shows that Salaf and Khalaf were against these new bidati views of ibnu taymmiya i.e., not visiting the graves etc. They refuted him, but today his so called followers followed his polytheist views under the flag of Salafi Islam.

Further, Imam Hajr also express his views regarding ibne taymmiya’s taking of those narrations from ahadeets which were saying that visiting to the 3 masjids are allowed not to anyone else, So Imam Hajr refutes him by giving him true meaning of that hadith, that this hadith was in praise to just to show that, Only these three places had a Most High status for Ibadat, that does not means that one can think or imagine that its the prohibition of totally visiting to the Grave of the Prophet alehisalatowasalam.


I had tried my best to translate it in short, time, but because of length i was able to translate only first 3 to 4 parts, the rest 4th and 5th can be clarified by the above given verdicts of other Imams and the conclusion. Imam ibn Hajar or anyone else, all of the Ummah was against and IS AGAINST these wrong views of Ibnu Taymmiyah and his followers. May Allah guide us all to the right path. 

[update ended]

Updated on Friday April 10. 2015 



Urdu Translation:

امام تاج الدین السبکی رحمتہ اللہ تعالیٰ علیہ کار ردِ تیمیت-ازم
امام ابن حجر مکی رحمتہ اللہ علیہ اپنی کتاب جوھر المنظم میں امام سبکی کے حوالے سےلکھ رہے ہیں کہ ۔ “امام سبکی نے ذکر فرمایا کہ ان کے سامنے چند فتوے پیش کیئے گئے جو کہ بعض مالکی اور شافعی وغیرہما علماء کی طرف منسوب تھے۔ کہ زیارتِ قبور منع ہے تو آپ نے بیان فرمایا کہ یہ سب کے سب محض جھوٹ کذب اور مضحکہ خیز ہیں اور یہ کسی ابن تیمیہ کے جاہل ماننے والے نے گھڑے ہوئے ہیں وہ یہ نہیں جانتا کہ اللہ تعالیٰ اپنے دین کا خود حامی ومددگار ہے۔ اور ان مفتریوں اور جاہلوں اور مغروروں کےشر سے اپنے دین کو بچانے والا ہے۔
اور اگر تم کہو کہ رسول اللہ علیہ السلام کے اس فرمان سے وہ استدلال کرتے ہیں کہ آپ علیہ السلام نے ارشاد فرمایا۔
لا تجعلوا قبری عیدًا ۔ میری قبر کو عید نہ بناؤ۔
اور اس کا گمان ہے کہ زیارت کی ممانعت میں یہ ظاہر ہے جیسا کہ پہلی حدیث لاتشدا لرحال ظاہر تھی اور اسی حدیث کے ساتھ اہل بیت میں سے کسی حضرات نے تمسک کیا ہے کہ یہ زیارت کی ممانعت پر دلیل ہے۔ تو میں کہتا ہوں کہ اس حدیث کے ثبوت میں ہی اختلاف ہے اور اگر اس کو ثابت مانا جائے تو اس کے بارے میں صحیح ترین کلام دو مقامات پر ہے۔
پہلا تو یہ کہ مسند عبدالرزاق میں اہل بیت کی ایک جماعت سے نقل کیا گیا ہے کہ یہ حدیث اہل زیارت کی ممانعت میں منع نہیں کرتی بلکہ صرف اس شخص کے بارے میں ہے جو کہ غیر مشروع طریقے سے قبر منورہ پر حاضر ہو۔ اس میں امام حسن بن حسن بن علی رضی اللہ عنہم کا فرمان دلیل ہے کہ آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم نے منع کرنے کے بعد فرمایا جب تُو مسجد میں داخل ہو تو آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم پر سلام پڑھ۔ پھر حدیث مذکورہ روایت کی۔
شاید آپ رضی اللہ عنہ ان میں سے کہ جو قبرمنور کے قریب زیادہ وقت کھڑا رہنا پسند نہ کرتے ہوں بلکہ مختصر درودوسلام عرض کرکے آگے گزر جانے والے ہیں۔ جیسا کہ اگلے صفحات میں ذکر ہوگا۔
اس پر علماء کی ایک جماعت کاربند ہے اور امام زین العابدین کا قول دلیل ہے کہ انہوں نے بھی نہی کے بعد اس شخص کے لیئے جو کہ حد سے بڑھ رہا تھا فرمایا کہ میں تجھے اپنے باپ سے حدیث نہ سناؤں تو انہوں نے یہی مذکورہ روایت بیان فرمائی۔ اور ان کے پوتے امام جعفر صادق رضی اللہ عنہ سے روایت ہے کہ وہ جب قبرمنورہ پر حاضر ہوتے تو آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم پر سلام عرض کرنے کے بعد اس ستوں کے پاس کھڑے ہوجاتے جو کہ روضہ شریف کے بالکل پاس ہے۔ پھر سلام عرض کرتے پھر فرماتے کہ یہاں رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کا سرِ اقدس ہے۔ اس سے ظاہر ہوا کہ وہ جو کہ بعض اہل بیت سے گزرا کہ وہ روضہ شریف پر آنے سے منع کرتے تھے اس میں ممانعت کے لیئے کوئی حجت ودلیل نہیں ہے۔ اور یہ کیسے ہوسکتا ہے جبکہ سلف وکلف تمام اپنے آئمہ کی طرف رجوع کرتے ہیں اور انہی کی اقتداء کرتے ہیں اگر وہ آئمہ روضہ شریف کی زیارت سے منع فرماتے تو علماء بھی اس کی اقتداء کرتے ہوئے اس سے ممانعت کا فتویٰ دیتے حالانکہ حال اسکے خلاف ہے کیونکہ تمام علماء سلف و خلف اس زیارتِ قبور کے مندوب ہونے پر اجماع کئے ہوئے ہیں چہ جائیکہ آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے روضہ اقدس کی زیارت ہو۔
امام ابن حجر آگے تحریر فرماتے ہیں کہ:۔
اور وہ جو کہ حضرت عبدالرحمٰن بن عوف رضی اللہ عنہ سے روایت کیا گیا ہے کہ وہ آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی قبرمنورہ پر آنے کو مکروہ سمجھتے تھے تو وہ وقاروجلال وتکبر کےساتھ آنے کے بارے میں ہے یا پھر بہت زیادہ آنے کے خوف سے آپ نے فرمایا۔ جیسا کہ حضرت امام مالک رضی اللہ عنہ سے مروی ہے۔
اور یہ صحیح سند سے ثابت ہے کہ آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ایک جگہ پر تشریف فرما ہوئے تو ایک درخت زمین کو پھاڑتے ہوئے آپ کی بارگاہِ اقدس میں حاضر ہوا اور غلامانہ طور پر حاضری دی اور پھر اپنی جگہ پر واپس چلا گیا۔ تو رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم سے اس درخت کے بارے میں پوچھا گیا تو آپ علیہ السلام نے فرمایا اس درخت نے اللہ تعالیٰ سے اجازت طلب کی کہ وہ رسول اللہ (علیہ الصلوٰۃ والسلام) کی خدمت اقدس میں حاضر ہوکر سلام عرض کرے تو اللہ تبارک وتعالیٰ نے اسکو اجازت عطا فرمائی۔
جب جمادات کا یہ حال ہے تو اس کا کیا حال ہوگا کہ جس کو اللہ تعالیٰ نے عقل وفہم عطا فرمایا ہے اور جو رسول اللہ علیہ السلام کی تعظیم وعزت کو پہچانتا ہے وہ تو زیادہ حقدار ہے کہ اس بارگاہ بے کس پناہ میں حاضر ہوکر سلام عرض کرے۔
آگے مزید لکھتے ہیں:
دوسری بات یہ کہ اس حدیث کے ظاہر سے تمسک و استدلال نہیں کیا جائے گا۔ اور اگر ابن تیمیہ کی بات سچی فرض کی جائے کہ جس نے اسکے ظاہر سے استدلال کیا ہے تووہ عربی زبان سے جاہل اور قوانین ادلہ سے بے خبر ہے۔ اولاً یہ کہ ہم اسکے زعم ِ باطل کی اس دلیل کا انکار کرتے ہیں کیونکہ اگر آپ علیہ السلام کے فرمان کی اگر یہی مراد ہوتی جو کہ ابن تیمیہ نے سمجھی ہے تو آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کا کلام اسطرح ہوتا ہے۔
لاتزاوروا قبری ۔ میری قبر کی زیارت مت کرو۔
ایسے الفاظ نہ فرماتے کہ جن سے دونوں کا احتمال پایا جاتا ہے۔ حق یہ تھا کہ یہاں وہ (ابن تیمیہ) اپنے دعوے کے مطابق دلیل لاتا اور اس عظیم خطرہ سے بچتے ہوئے صرف التزام تضمن کے ساتھ کلام نہ کرتا اور بالفرض محال اس سے ممانعت ہی مراد لی جائے تو آپ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم نے اسکو (لاتجعلوا قبری عیدًا) کی طرف لوٹایا ہے جو کہ ظاہردلیل ہے کہ اس سے مراد کچھ اور ہے۔
اگر اس کے معنی ظاہراً وہی ثابت ہوتے ہیں جو کہ ابن تیمیہ کا گمان ہے بلکہ اگر الفاظ بھی وارد ہوتے (لاتزوروا قبری) میری قبر کی زیارت مت کرو۔ تب بھی مسلمانوں کے زیارت پر اجماع کے ہوتے ہوئے اس میں تاویل کی جاتی کیونکہ اجماع دلائل قطعیہ میں سے ہے اور ظنیات اسکے مقابلے میں نہیں پیش کیئے جاسکتے۔ تو اس حدیث کی تاویل واجب تھی کیونکہ یہ ظنی ہے حتیٰ کہ یہ قطعی کے ساتھ موافق ہوجاتی۔
تو جب اس صریح کی تاویل کا وجوب ظاہر ہوگیا تو وہ جو کہ محتمل ہے اس میں تاویل کیوں نہیں کی جائے گی کیونکہ اس میں عیدًا کا لفظ اس پر بھی دلالت کرتا ہے کہ زیارت کثرت کے ساتھ کی جائے نہ کہ عید کی طرح سال میں صرف ایک دو مرتبہ، اور اگر اس کو اس معنی پر لیا جائے جس کا احتمال ہے تو پھر کہا جائے گا کہ اس سے مراد یہ ہے کہ میری قبر کو ایسے نہ چھوڑدو کہ اس کی زیارت ہی نہ کرو مگر بعض اوقات۔ جیسا کہ عید سال میں ایک دو مرتبہ آتی ہے ۔ بلکہ تمام اوقات میں میری قبر کی زیارت کیا کرو اور اسکے لیئے وقت مخصوص نہ ٹھہراؤ کہ زیارت ہی نہ کرو مگر اسی مخصوص وقت میں۔
اور دوسرا احتمال مدنظر رکھا جائے کہ اس سے مراد ممانعت ہے تو اس سے مخصوص حالت مراد ہوگی کہ میری قبر کو عید کی طرح اس کے قریب اظہارِ زینت کرنا کہ جس طرح عیدوں میں کیا جاتا ہے بلکہ وہاں صرف زیارت اور سلام عرض کرنے اور دعا مانگنے کے لیئے حاضر ہوپھر وہاں سے پلٹ آؤ۔
پس یہ جو ہم نے تحریر اور بیان کیا اور ہم نے جس کی تحقیق کی وہ یہ کہ ابن تیمیہ کا اس حدیث سے تمسک کرنا درست نہیں ہے اور ابن تیمیہ کے لیئےاس میں کوئی دلیل نہیں ہے بلکہ ۔ یہ تو ابن تیمیہ پر الٹی دلیل قائم ہوتی ہے کیونکہ اس سے کثرت کے ساتھ زیارت پر ابھارنا مراد ہے اور کسی وقت کے ساتھ خاص نہیں ہے اور اس حدیث سے یہی ظاہر ہے۔
اور جو (نہی) ہے تو وہ مخصوص حالت کے ساتھ مقید ہے اور اس حالت کے سوا زیارت ممنوع نہیں ہے۔ اور جب یہاں نہی کی نفی ہوگی تو اب طلب اثبات پایا گیا۔ جب کہ وہ اس کے مباح ہونے کا قائل نہیں ہے۔ اللہ تعالیٰ ہمیں اپنے راستے طے کرنے کی توفیق عطافرمائے اور اپنے پیارے محبوب صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی بہترین جماعت بنائے۔ (آمین ثم آمین) ۔ (اختتام)۔


Update Ended:


2 thoughts on “Ibn Hajar Refutation to Ibn Taymmia on Ziaarah”

    1. Jazak Allah bhai i had tried to do that, but translating arabic to english is a difficult task, i had translated few points of your request, kindly check it, and sorry for mistakes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s