13 - FIRST VOLUME, 312th LETTER

This letter, written to answer the questions asked by Mīr Muhammad Nu’mān ‘quddisa sirruh’, informs that it is not good to raise one’s finger when sitting in namāz:

Thanks be to Allāhu ta’ālā, Who creates all classes of beings, all creatures, Who keeps them in existence, and Who sends them what they need! Salāt, salām and benedictions be over the highest of Prophets, Muhammad Mustafa ‘alaihissalātu wassalām’, to his brother Prophets, to angels and to those who are honoured with following him! The valuable letter which you sent through Molla Mahmūd has arrived and made us happy. You ask:

Question 1 - Savants say that the place called Rawda-i mubāraka is more valuable than Mekka city. However, Hadrat Muhammad’s figure and essence prostrate themselves before the shape and essence of Ka’ba-i mu’azzama. How could the Rawda-i mubāraka ever be higher?

[In the mosque of Medina, the twenty-six-metre-long place between Rasūlullah’s ‘sallallāhu alaihi wa sallam’ blessed grave and the minbar, which the mosque at that time had is called Rawda-i mutahhara. Rawda means garden. The blessed minbar at that time had three steps and was one metre high. It was burned

-59-

completely in the fire of 654. Various minbars were made at various times, and today’s twelve-staired minbar was sent by (the Ottoman) Sultan Murād Khan III from Istanbul in 998 Hijri.]

Answer 1 - My Dear Sir! According to this faqīr (Hadrat Imām-i Rabbānī means himself), the most valuable place on the earth is Ka’ba-i Mu’azzama [together with the mosque around it which is called Masjid-i harām]. Next comes the Rawda-i muqaddasa, which is in Medina. Thirdly comes the blessed city of Mekka. This means to say that it will be correct to say that the Rawda-i Mutahhara is higher than Mekka.

Question 2 - Does a Muslim in the Hanafī Madhhab raise his index finger while sitting in namāz? Mawlānā ’Alīmullah wrote a booklet on this subject. I send it to you. What do you say on this matter?

Answer 2 - My Dear Sir! There are many hadīths saying that it is permissible to make a sign with one’s index finger. Some of the savants of the Hanafī Madhhab have said so, too. Mawlānā ’Alīmullah states so, too. If the books in the Hanafī Madhhab are read with attention, it wil be seen that the pieces of knowledge communicating that it is permissible to raise one’s finger are not from the knowledge of usūl. They are not the madhhab’s zāhir khabars. Imām-i Muhammad Shaybānī said, “Our Prophet ‘sallallāhu alaihi wa sallam’ used to make a sign with his blessed finger. Like him, we, too, raise and lower our finger. Imām-i a’zam Abū Hanīfa said so, too.” But it has been communicated through nawādir information, not through usūl information, that Imām-i Muhammad said so.

[Ibni Âbidin writes on the forty-seventh page of his first volume, “Information of the Hanafī Madhhab reached the later savants through three different ways:

1 - Those pieces of information which are usūl are also called zāhir khabars. These are the pieces of information coming from Imām-i a’zam Abū Hanīfa and his disciples. These pieces of information are communicated in Imām-i Muhammad’s six books. These six books are Al-Mabsūt, Az-Ziyādāt, Al-Jāmi’ussaghīr, As-Siyarus saghīr, Al-Jāmi’ulkabīr and As-Siyarulkabīr. Because these books were brought from Imām-i Muhammad by trustworthy people, they are called zāhir khabars. Who gathered the pieces of usūl information together first is Hākim Shahīd [Muhammad]. His book Kāfī is well-known. There are many books explaining Kāfī.

-60-

2 - Those pieces of information that are nawādir, also come from these same savants. But these pieces of information do not exist in those six books, but they exist in Imām-i Muhammad’s other books titled Al-Qisāniyyāt, Al-Hārūniyyāt, Al-Jurjāniyyāt and Ar-Ruqiyyāt. Because these four books were not brought clearly and dependably as the former six books were, these pieces of information are called ‘information which is not zāhir.’ Or they are reported in others’ books. For example, they are reported in the book Muharrar by Hasan bin Ziyād, one of Imām-i a’zam’s disciples, or in Imām-i Abū Yūsuf’s Amālī.

3 - Those pieces of information which are wāqi’āt. These pieces of information were not communicated by the three imāms, but are those matters on which their disciples or the disciples of their disciples performed ijtihād. Abullays-i Semmerqandī who gathered these pieces of information first, wrote the book Nawāzil.”

Ibni Âbidīn, again, writes on the thirty-fifth page of his first volume, “The knowledge of fiqh is as indispensable for everybody as food is. Abdullah ibni Mas’ūd ‘radiyallāhu anh’, who sowed the seeds of this knowledge, was one of the greatest and best learned ones of the Sahāba. Alqama, his disciple, watered these seeds and turned them into crops, and Ibrāhim Nahāī, his disciple, reaped the harvest, that is, gathered the pieces of this knowledge together. Hammād-i Kūfī threshed it, and his disciple, Imām-i a’zam Abū Hanīfa, ground it, that is, he classified the knowledge into sections; Abū Yūsuf made dough from it, and Imām-i Muhammad baked it. Muslims have been eating the morsels prepared in this procedure. In other words, learning this knowledge they have been attaining happiness in this world and the next. Imām-i Muhammad communicated these morsels which he baked in nine hundred and ninety-nine branches of knowledge to his disciples. Of his six books, in the ones which he called saghīr (little), he communicated what he learned through Imām-i Abū Yūsuf, and, in those which he called kabīr, he communicated only what he heard from Imām-i a’zam.” It is for this reason that the book Siyar-i kabīr, which is a work of Imām-i Muhammad’s, does not contain Imām-i Ebū Yūsuf’s name. Today, some ignorant people who do not know of this subtle information impute this to his antipathy against Imām-i Abū Yūsuf. However, these two imāms were in the highest grade of hubb-i fillāh. Even those who follow in their footsteps get rid of the desires of their nafs owing to them.]

-61-

The book Fatāwā-i gharāib informs that it is written in the book Muhīt: “Imām-i Muhammad did not communicate in his books of usūl that one must make a sign with the pointing finger of one’s right hand. Also, those savants who succeeded him said differently on the subject. There were those who said that one should not as well as those who said that one should. Imām-i Muhammad, in his books other than books of usūl, writes that the Prophet ‘sallallāhu alaihi wa sallam’ used to make a sign with his finger and communicates that Imām-i a’zam also informed of this fact. As it is said that it is sunnat to make a sign, there are those who say that it is mustahab.” The book Fatāwā-i gharāib then adds: “In actual fact, it is harām to do so.”

It is written in Fatāwā-i sirājiyya, “It is makrūh to raise the finger when saying ‘ash hadu an lā...’ in namāz. The book Kubrā affirms this. Savants agree about this. The fatwā has been given in agreement with this, too. For, it is necessary to sit calmly, without moving in namāz.”

It is written in the book of fatwā titled Ghiyāsiyya [as well as in the book Bezzāziyya], “One should not make a sign with one’s pointing finger during the sitting posture. This is what the fatwā says. And this is what has been preferred, liked.”

It is written in the book Jāmī’ur-rumūz. “One should not make a sign or bend one’s finger. This is so according to the teachings of usūl of the Madhhab. It is written so in Zāhidī’s book, too. The fatwā also has been given in agreement with this. Also, it is written so in the books Mudmarāt, Walwaljiyya, Khulāsa and others. Some of our superiors, on the other hand, state that it is sunnat to make a sign with the finger.”

[The book Jāmi’ur-rumūz is an explanation of the book Nikāya, which, in its turn, is an abridged edition of the book Wikāya. The book Mudmarāt is an explanation of the book Qudūrī.]

The book Hazīnaturriwāyāt, citing from the book Tātārhāniyya, says, “While sitting for the tashahhud and saying ‘lā ilāha il-lal-lah,’ will the pointing finger of the right hand make a sign? Imām-i Muhammad did not mention this in the information of usūl. Those who came after him said differently on this matter. Some savants said that one should not make a sign. So does the book Kubrā write. The fatwā agrees with this, too. Yet some others said that one should make a sign.”

Hazīnat-urriwāyāt is a book of fiqh written by the Qādī of

-62-

Gujarāt in India. Kubrā, a book of fatwā, was written by Husāmaddīn ’Umar. It is written in Durr-ul-mukhtār, “One should not make a sign with one’s pointing finger when saying the word of shahādat in namāz. The fatwā says so. It is written so in Walwaljiyya, in Tajnis, in Umdatulmuftī, and in all the books of fatwā. But those who annotated these books, such as Kamāl, Halabī, Bāqānī, say, ‘One will make a sign. As a matter of fact, Imām-i Muhammad informed that Rasūlullah ‘sallallāhu alaihi wa sallam’ used to do so.’ Also, it is written in the book Muhīt that it is sunnat to make a sign.” Ibni Âbidīn says, “It is understood from Muhīt that it is sunnat-i ghayr-i muakkada. As a matter of fact, Aynī and Tuhfa inform that it is mustahab.” In the book Nūr-ul-izāh, Sharnblālī says, “What is sahīh is to make a sign with one’s pointing finger,” and Tahtāwī objects to this.

As it is seen, there are savants who say that it is harām to make the sign. There are fatwās informing that it is makrūh. There are many who say that one does not make the sign; information of usūl states so. Then, it is not right for us, the imitators, to attempt to make the sign by saying that there is a hadīth confirming it, thus doing something which has been said to be harām or makrūh by the fatwās of many mujtahids. If a person in the Hanafī Madhhab makes the sign with his finger despite the fatwās informing that it is prohibited, this denotes one of two opinions: 1 - It may come to mean that he thinks these savants of dīn who reached the grade of ijtihād did not know of the mashhūr hadīths informing that one will make the sign with one’s finger. 2 - Or it means that he thinks that they heard of the hadīths but did not follow the hadīths and acted upon their own thoughts and opinions. Both these opinions are quite eccentric. To suppose so, one should be very mean and quite obstinate. Also, the word, “Early savants used to make a sign with their fingers in namāz. Afterwards, Rāfidīs overflowed the measure in doing this, so the savants of Hanafī prohibited the Ahl as-sunnat from making the sign. Thus, the Sunnīs were distinguished from the Rāfidīs,” in the book Targhibussalāt, is incompatible with the information in valuable books. For, our savants inform through (the branch of religious knowledge termed) zāhir usūl not to make the sign or bend the finger. That is, the early savants said not to make the sign. Then, this matter has nothing to do with the Rāfidīs. Since some of our religious superiors said that one should not make the sign, what devolves on us is to respect them, to mind our manners and say: “If these superiors had not had the documentary

-63-

evidence showing that it would be harām or makrūh to make a sign with the finger, they would not say that it would be harām or makrūh. After communicating the reports informing that it is sunnat or mustahab to make the sign, they would not say, ‘Though they have said so, the truth of the matter is that the sign is harām.’ This means that maybe they inferred that not those pieces of information communicating that the sign was sunnat or mustahab, but those evidences showing that it was prohibited were right.” In short, we ignorant people having heard a few hadīths cannot be a witness or a document. It cannot be a reason for our refuting the words of the superiors of the dīn. One may say, “We now have obtained the information showing that what they inferred was wrong.” Yet the information which we ignorant people have cannot be a witness for something to be halāl or harām. Something can be halāl or harām only after a mujtahid’s determining it to be so. It would be critically daring to consider mujtahids’ words and evidences to be more flimsy than a spider’s web. It would be to inflict a deep wound on Islam to hold one’s own knowledge superior to the knowledge of the superiors of the dīn, to say that the usūl information of the Hanafī Madhhab is corrupt and unsound, to hold of no account the valuable information which the savants depend upon in giving fatwā and to say that this information is wrong. Islam’s great savants, being closer to the brilliant time of Rasūlullah ‘sallallāhu alaihi wa sallam’, their knowledge being very much more than that of those who came after them, and because they avoided sins and feared Allāhu ta’ālā to the greatest extent, would know and understand the hadīths certainly better than we addle-headed and ignorant people do, who know nothing of knowledge of the dīn and who boast of a few words which we heard in the name of knowledge. They would distinguish the right ones from the wrong ones, the changed ones from the unchanged ones better than we can. Certainly, they must have had some reasons for saying that these hadīths should not be followed, and there must have been some sound witnesses which they depended upon. We, who are so inferior to them in knowledge and in sight, understand to the extent that there are various hadīths explaining how to bend the finger, but they do not agree with one another. This incoherence among the (reported) hadīth-i-sherīfs has made it difficult to say something definite on whether or not to make the sign. Some reports say that the sign should be made without bending fingers into the form of a fist, while others say that it should be made by

-64-

bending them likewise. Some of those who say that fingers should be bent inform that it should be done by representing the figure as fifty-three. And others say that they will be bent in such a manner as to represent the figure twenty-three. [While explaning these, Halabī decribes at full length how to show figures with the fingers.] Some other reports say that one should close one’s two little fingers on the right, form a circle with one’s thumb and middle finger and make the sign with one’s pointing finger. Another report says that the sign will be made by putting one’s thumb on one’s middle finger. Some narration says that the sign should be made by putting one’s right hand on one’s left thigh and one’s left hand on one’s right foot. Another report says that the sign will be made by putting the right hand, together with the wrist and the arm, on the left hand, wrist and arm. To some reports, the sign will be made by closing all the fingers, while others inform that it will be made without moving the pointing finger. In addition to these, it is said that the sign will be made during the tahiyyāt, but not a certain place is given, and, in some other information, it is said that the sign will be made when saying the word shahādat. And some other reports inform that when sitting to pray one should say, “O My Allah, Thou canst change the hearts as Thou wilt! Keep my heart steady in Thine dīn!” and make the sign while saying so.

The savants of the Hanafī Madhhab, seeing that the hadīths uttered on the sign were numerous and various, said not to do any action incompatible with the clear and definite commandments about namāz. For, it is essential in namāz to avoid any extra movements and to perform it in a solemn attitude. Furthermore, as it is declared by all the savants unanimously, it is sunnat to do one’s best to keep one’s fingers pointing towards the qibla all the time. It is ordered openly by the hadīth: “During namāz do your best to keep all your limbs pointing towards the Qibla!”

Should it be suggested, “Those hadīths having been uttered differently will make the matter difficult only when they cannot be reconciled with one another. But a common rule can be deduced from these hadīths. For, various hadīths may have been heard and reported at different times,” we would say in response that many of these reports contain the word ‘kāna’ (was), which comes to mean ‘all,’ in the branches of knowledge other than logic. For this reason, these various reports cannot be reconciled.

Imām-i a’zam Abū Hanīfa said, “If you learn a hadīth which disagrees with my word, give up my word and follow the hadīth;”

-65-

yet this statement of his was about those hadīths which he had not heard. He meant to say, ‘Give up any of my words which disagrees with a hadīth that I have not heard.’ However, the hadīths about making the sign are not so; they are well-known, they are widespread. It cannot be said that Imām-i a’zam might have not heard them. [Imām-i a’zam said so to his own disciples, that is, to mujtahids, not to us ignorant people.]

In case of a question such as, “Among the savants of the Hanafī, there are also those who said that the sign should be made and who gave a fatwā in agreement with this. Do we not have the choice to follow any one of the fatwās disagreeing with one another?”

We would answer that when the disagreement between fatwās is in the manner of ‘permissible, not permissible, or halāl, harām,’ it is essential to follow those fatwās which say ‘not permissible or harām.’

Ibni Humām says, “Seeing the variety of hadīths disagreeing with one another on whether or not to raise the finger, we have to follow the hadīths saying that the finger should not be moved, since it is necessary to sit motionless in namāz!” Any amount of surprise would be less than Ibnī Humām causes. In his book he says, “The majority of savants said that the sign must not be made; this word of theirs is incompatible with hadīths and with mind!” thus accusing the great Islamic savants of ignorance, who were in the grade of ijtihād and qiyās. As a matter of fact, qiyās is the zāhir and usūl information in the Hanafī Madhhab and is the fourth of the adilla-i shar’iyya. How can one ever speak ill of ijtihād? Seeing the maniness of the reports disagreeing with one another, the same person says that the hadīth about qullatayn in the chapter on kinds of clean water also is da’īf.

My wise and mature son, Muhammad Sa’īd, is now writing a booklet about making the sign with the finger. When it is completed I will, inshāallah, send you a copy. I send my salām and prayers to those being with you.

[It is written on the hundred and twenty-sixth page of the explanation of Shir’āt-ul-Islām that the book Hidāya says that one must make the sign with one’s finger. Imām-i Hulwānī ‘rahimahullah’ says so, too. It is also said that one must not make the sign. The fatwā also agrees with this. For, it is necessary to keep motionless (during the standing positions and sitting postures as well as during and between the sajdas and the rukū’) in namāz. Reports called wāqi’āt state so, too.

-66-

In the fatwā of Abussu’ūd, which is in the library of Murād Mulla:

Question - Which is better, to raise one’s finger or not to do so during namāz?

Answer - They have said that both are good. Yet, obviously, it is better not to raise the finger.]

The book Al-fiqhu alal-madhāhib-il-arba’a says, “In the Mālikī Madhhab, during a safar, under heavy rain, in dark and muddy places, on Arafa and Muzdalifa, early afternoon and late afternoon prayers of namāz, as well as evening and night prayers of namāz, are conjoined, that is, those pairs of salāts are performed at the same time, respectively. It is permissible for the safar to be of less than three days [80 km.]. Jam’, that is, conjoining these pairs of namāz, (that is, performing the early and late afternoon prayers or the evening and night prayers one immediately after the other within the time prescribed for either one of them), is not permissible during journeys made by sea. On days with heavy rain and mud, it is permissible to perform the night salāt in the mosque in jama’at (congregation) immediately after the evening salāt. But the salāt of witr is performed in its original time. In the Shāfi’ī Madhhab the destination should be at least 80 km. away so that you can conjoin these pairs of salāts.

In the Hanbalī Madhhab, jam’ is permissible in cases such as having set out on a journey and having the excuses written in the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss. Also, it is permissible to conjoin the night salāt with the evening salāt at home in winter when the weather is cold, rainy, stormy, and muddy. When performing the two salāts jointly, that is, when making jam’, the sunnat salāts are not performed. The intention for jam’ is done at the beginning of the first salāt. Those Muslims who are not able to perform their early and late afternoon salāts and evening salāts in their prescibed times because of the unsuitable working hours or office hours should not quit their jobs, but they should make jam’ of the late afternoon salāt with the early afternoon salāt, and the evening salāt with the night salāt by imitating the Hanbalī Madhhab. Resigning from your position would mean to abet the persecutions and infidelities that might be perpetrated by the person who would take your place. The fards for an ablution in the Hanbalī Madhhab are six: washing the face together with the interior of the mouth and the interior of the nose, intention, washing the arms, rubbing the whole head, rubbing the ears including the exterior skin of the ears. (The hair hanging down is

-67-

not rubbed. In the Mālikī Madhhab, the hair hanging down is rubbed, too.) Washing the feet including the bones on the sides, washing the limbs in sequence (tartīb), washing them in haste are all fards. Touching a woman lustfully or touching one’s own penis breaks one’s ablution. If a woman touches a man, the man’s ablution will not be broken even if he feels lust. Anything coming out of the skin, if it is in a considerable amount, breaks the ablution. Eating camel meat breaks an ablution. Reasons for excusability (’udhr) are the same as those in the Hanafī Madhhab. In a ghusl, it is fard to wash inside the mouth, inside the nose, the hair, and for men to undo their tressed hair. As for women, it is sunnat to undo their plaited hair for a ghusl which is made for purification from junub (canonical impurity), and it is fard if the ghusl is made for purification when the menstruation is over. Two other practices that are fard are to sit as long as the time of tashahhud in namāz (during the sitting posture) and to make salām to both sides (when the final sitting posture in namāz is over).”