“As for the Hanbalî madhhab, Mansûr ibn Yûnus al-Bahutî [d. in Egypt in 1051 A.H. (1642)], in his annotation to the book Iqnâ’, and [Shams ad-dîn Muhammad] Ibn Muflih [d. in Damascus in 763 A.H. (1361)], in his book Furû’, wrote with references to Ibn Taimiyya: ‘Making a vow so that a certain walî shall relieve the one who vows of a burden or make him meet a person whom he misses much is a vow for someone other than Allah. It is like taking an oath in someone else’s name other than Allah. This kind of nadhr is sahîh but sinful according to others.’ It is understood from this passage that making a vow for awliyâ’ to ask them for help is makrûh tanzîhî according to Ibn Taimiyya. And by ‘sinful according to others,’ that is, other Hanbalî ’ulamâ’, he means that it is not a sin in his opinion. It is also noted in the annotation of Iqnâ’ that Ibn Taimiyya said that a person who vowed oil-lamps or candles for the Prophet (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) should give them to the poor in Medina.
“Making a vow to slaughter an animal for a prophet or walî means to slaughter for Allâhu ta’âlâ’s sake and to offer the thawâb to him. The hadîth ash-sharîf declares, ‘May Allah damn the one who slaughters animal for someone other than Allah!’ Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, in his book Kitâb al-kabâ’ir, Imâm Muhammad az-Zahabî [d. in Egypt in 748 A.H. (1348)], in his work Kabâ’ir, and Ibn Hajar al-Makkî, in his book Zawâjir, expounded upon this hadîth sharîf and said that “the one who slaughters for someone other than Allah’ is the one who would say ‘for my master walî so-and-so’ when slaughtering. Unbelievers, too, slaughter saying the name of their idol. As such is slaughtering by saying another name other than Allah”. Al-Imâm an-Nawawî (rahmat-Allâhi ’alaih) wrote in his book Rawda: ‘It is permissible to slaughter saying “for the Ka’ba” because it is Bait-Allâh (Allah’s Home) or “for the Prophet” because he is Rasûlullâh (Allah’s Prophet). Sending gifts to Mecca or to the Ka’ba is similar to this.’
“We stated above that it is harâm to slaughter animals to curry favour with the sultan or a statesman when he comes. It is permissible to slaughter when one becomes happy for their arrival or for the birth of one’s child or for the purpose of calming the anger of a person. Conciliating someone is different from currying favour with that person. And slaughtering for idols is a completely different deed. As for the animals slaughtered for genies, it is permissible to slaughter for Allah and to expect that Allah will thus protect one against genies. It is harâm to slaughter without this expectation.
“It is seen that the ’ulamâ’ of Islam have dealt with every matter and have left nothing to be added by anybody. In their books, everybody has found answers to his problems. If a stupid and ignorant man comes out to disseminate corrupt ideas with a view to divide Muslims, to bring discord, to blame the ’ulamâ’ of Islam and to disfavour the ones who work on the right path, it will be understood that he is a heretic or zindîq, and a wise person will not believe or be deceived by him. Only those who resemble the Dajjâl’s soldiers will believe such a stupid man and say ‘wrong’ for what is right and ‘ugly’ for what is beautiful.
“Muslims touch their closed eyes with the nails of their thumbs and say, “You are the light of my eyes, oh Rasûl-Allâh! when they hear the muadhdhin (müezzin) call outRasûlullâh’s (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) name. This is written by some ’ulamâ’, for example ad-Dairabî in his book Mujarrabât. We have not seen any hadîth sharîf about this before, but the hadîth ash-sharîf, ‘Rahmat (Allah’s Mercy) descends where the pious persons are mentioned,’ indicates that this deed is permissible. Imâm Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn al-Jawzî and Ibn Hajar confirmed the authenticity of this hadîth sharîf, which is also quoted by al-Imâm as-Suyûtî in his Jâmi’ as-saghîr. Our Prophet (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) is certainly the highest of all prophets and the pious. And Allâhu ta’âlâ shows Mercy and Grace when His name is mentioned. Prayers said when Allâhu ta’âlâ shows Mercy will be accepted. It is a prayer for one’s happiness in this world and the hereafter to say, ‘My eyes gain light and my heart is joyful with you, oh Rasûl-Allâh!’ when the adhân is heard. Such a prayer is compatible with Islam. Hanafî scholar at-Tahtâwî, writes on the authority of al-Quhistânî in his annotation of Marâq al-falâh: It is mustahab to put the thumbs on one’s eyes and say, ‘Qurrat ’aynayya bika yâ Rasûl-Allâh! Allâhumma matti’nî bi ’s-sam’i wa ’l-basari,’ when the muezzin recites Rasûlullâh’s (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) name for the second time in the adhân, because Rasûlullâh will take the one who does so to Paradise. In his annotation of the tafsîr by al-Baidâwî, Shaikh-zâda [Muhammad al-Hanafî, who passed away in Istanbul in 951 A.H. (1544),] narrates from Abu ’l-Wafâ [who passed away in Istanbul in 896 A.H. (1490)] that he saw some fatwâs stating that Abu Bakr as-Siddîq (radî-Allâhu ’anh) kissed the nails of his two thumbs and then touched his eyes with them when he heard Rasûlullâh’s (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) name in the adhân, and when the prophet asked why he did so, he said, ‘To attain blessings through your blessed name.’ Rasûlullah then declared, ‘You did well. He who does so never suffers from eye-disease.’ One should say, ‘Allâhu ’m-mahfuz ’aynayya wa nawwirhumâ,’ when the nails touch the eyelids. Ad-Dailamî quotes the hadîth ash-sharîf narrated by Abu Bakr as-Siddîq: ‘If one, when the muezzin says, “Muhammad Rasûlullâh,” kisses his two thumbs and then rubs his eyes with them and says, “Ashhadu anna Muhammadan ’abduhû wa Rasûluh, radiytu bi’llâhi Rabban wa bi’l-Islâmî dînan wa bi Muhammadin sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallama nabiyyan,” my intercession becomes halâl for him.’Here ends the passage from at-Tahtâwî. A hadîth sharîf declares, ‘I will look for and find and take to Paradise on the Day of Judgement the ones who put their two thumbs on their eyes upon hearing my name in the adhân.’ Al-Quhistânî [Muhammad al-Hanafî, who passed away in Buhara in 962 A.H. (1508),] reports from the book Kanz al-’ibâd that it is mustahab to say, ‘Sall-Allâhu wa sallama ’alaika yâ Rasûl-Allâh!’ when one hears the first ‘Muhammad’ in the adhân and to say, ‘Qurrat ’aynayya bika yâ Rasûl-Allâh!’ upon hearing that blessed name being repeated and then to put the two thumbs on one’s eyes and to say, ‘Allâhumma matti’nî bi ’s-sam’i wa ’l-basari!’ before removing one’s thumbs; our master Rasûlullâh(sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) will take this person to Paradise.”
31 - The following is again a translation from the book Ashadd al-jihâd:
Muhammad ibn Sulaimân al-Madanî ash-Shâfi’î (rahmat-Allâhi ’alaih), [who passed away in Medina in 1194 A.H. (1780),] was questioned about Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb an-Najdî. He said, “This man is leading the ignoramuses of the present age to a heretical path. He is extinguishing Allâhu ta’âlâ’s light. But Allâhu ta’âlâ will not let His light be extinguished in spite of the opposition of polytheists, and He will enlighten everywhere with the light of the ’ulamâ’ of Ahl as-Sunna.” The [collection of the] questions and his answers at the end of Muhammad ibn Sulaimân’s fatwâs are as follows:
“Question: Oh great ’ulamâ’, the stars who lead to the path of the Best of Creatures (the Prophet)! I ask you: Is a person to be permitted to disseminate his ideas if he says that this umma has wholly dissented from the essence of Islam and from the path ofRasûlullâh (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam), just by measuring with his short sight and narrow mind the knowledge he has gathered from various religious books, and if he says that he is mujtahid and, therefore, is able to derive knowledge on Islam from Allâh’s Word andRasûlullâh’s hadîths, although he does not have any of the qualifications stated as necessary by the ’ulamâ’ of Islam for being a mujtahid? Should he not give up this claim of his and follow the ’ulamâ’ of Islam? He says that he is an imâm, that it is necessary for every Muslim to follow him and that his madhhab is necessary. He forces Muslims to accept his madhhab. He says that those who do not obey him are unbelievers, that they should be killed and that their possessions should be confiscated. Does this man tell the truth? Or, is he wrong? Even if a person fulfilled all the requirements necessary for making ijtihâd and founded a madhhab, would it be jâ’iz for him to force everyone to adopt this madhhab? Is it necessary to adopt a certain madhhab? Or, is everyone free to choose any madhhab he like? Does a Muslim go out of Islam if he visits the grave of a Sahâbî or a pious servant of Allâhu ta’âlâ, vows something for him, cuts an animal near a grave, prays making a mediator of a dead person, takes some soil from such a grave to receive blessings or asks help from Rasûlullâh or a Sahâbî to get redeemed from danger? Is it permitted to kill such a Muslim even though he says, ‘I do not worship the dead person and do not believe that he has the power to do anything. I make an intercessor, mediator, of that person with Allâhu ta’âlâ to make me attain my wish, because, I believe that he is a beloved servant of Allâhu ta’âlâ.’ Does a person go out of Islam if he swears by something [or somebody] other than Allah?
“Answer: It should be well understood that knowledge is to be learned from a master. Those who learn knowledge, one’s religion, from books by themselves make many mistakes. Their mistakes are more than their correct conclusions. There is no one who can employ ijtihâd today. Al-Imâm ar-Râfi’î, al-Imâm an-Nawawî and Fakhr ad-dîn ar-Râzî said, ‘The ’ulamâ’ have come to a unanimous conclusion that there is no one left capable of employing ijtihâd today.’ No ’âlim argued with al-Imâm as-Suyûtî, who was like an ocean in every science and a profound ’âlim, when he declared that he was a relative (nisbî) mujtahid, that is, a mujtahid belonging to a formerly established madhhab, though he did not say that he was an absolute (mutlaq) mujtahid or that he had his own madhhab. He wrote more than five hundred books. Every book of his khows that he was at a very high level in the sciences of tafsîr and hadîth and in every branch of Islamic knowledge. Is it apt to believe similar words of those who are very far from the high level of an ’âlim such as al-Imâm as-Suyûtî while he was not accepted as a relative mujtahid? They should not even be listened to. And if one of them goes so far as to say that the books by the ’ulamâ’ of Islam were wrong, we shall doubt his reason and faith. Because, we may ask: From whom has he acquired his knowledge? Since he has seen neither Rasûlullâh (sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam) nor any Sahâbî, he should have learned by reading the books by the ’ulamâ’ of Islam if he knows anything. If he says that the books of those ’ulamâ’ are distorted, then how has he himself found the right path? He should explain this point to us! The imâms of the four madhhabs and the great ’ulamâ’ who came up in these madhhabs derived all their knowledge from âyats and hadîths. From which source has he acquired his knowledge which disagrees with theirs? It is obvious that he has not attained the degree of employing ijtihâd. The thing this man should do when he encounters ahadîth sharîf which he cannot comprehend is to search for the interpretations of thathadîth sharîf by mujtahids. He should adopt the interpretation he likes. Al-Imâm an-Nawawî (rahimah-Allâhu ta’âlâ), a profound ’âlim, wrote in his book Rawda that his was the way to be followed. Only those profound ’ulamâ’ who had attained the degree of ijtihâd could comprehend âyats and hadîths. Non-mujtahids are not permitted to attempt to understand âyats and hadîths. So, Ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb had better return to the right path and give up his heresies.
“As for his calling Muslims ‘unbelievers,’ a hadîth sharîf declares, ‘If a person calls a Muslim an “unbeliever,” one of the two becomes an unbeliever. If the accused is a Muslim, the one who accuses becomes an unbeliever.’ Al-Imâm ar-Râfi’î (rahmat-Allâhi ’alaih), with reference to Tuhfa, wrote in his book Ash-sharh al-kabîr, ‘The one who calls a Muslim a disbeliever but is unable to explain it away becomes a disbeliver himself, for he will have called Islam disbelief.’ Al-Imâm an-Nawawî, too, wrote the same in his book Rawda. Abu Is’haq al-Isfarâînî, al-Hâlimî, an-Nasr Al-Muqaddasî, al-Ghazâlî, Ibn Daqiqi ’l-Îd and many other ’ulamâ’ said that he becomes a disbeliever whether he is able to explain it away or not.
“As to his permitting killing Muslims and confiscating their properties, a hadîth sharîfdeclares, ‘I have been commanded to fight against disbelievers until they say Lâ ilâha illa’llâh.’ This hadîth sharîf shows that it is not permissible to kill Muslims. Thishadîth sharîf was said in the light of the sixth âyat al-karîma of Surât at-Tawba which declares, ‘Free them who make tawba and perform salât and give zakât.’ The twelfth âyat al-karîma of Sûrat at-Tawba declares, ‘They are your brothers in Islam.’ It is declared, ‘We judge according to the appearance we see. Allâhu ta’âlâ knows the secret,’ in a hadîth sharîf.[84] Another hadîth sharîf declares, ‘I am not ordered to dissect the hearts of men and see their secrets.’ Hadrat Usâma killed a man who had been heard to have said, ‘Lâ ilâha illa’llâh’; when Usâma claimed that the man had not had îmân in his heart, Rasûlullâh declared, ‘Did you dissect his heart?’
“It is not permissible for a mujtahid to compel people to accept his madhhab. If he is a qâdî at the court, he may give a ruling according to his ijtihâd and may order that his decree be executed.
“As for making nadhr for awliyâ’, the Shâfi’î ’ulamâ’ explained this subject in detail. It is noted in the book Hiba with reference to the book Tuhfa: ‘If someone makes a vow for a dead walî with the intention that the goods he vowed be for the walî, this nadhr is not sahîh. If he vows without this intention his nadhr is sahîh, and the goods vowed are to be given to the servants of the walî’s tomb, the students and teachers of the madrasa near the tomb and to the poor who live near the tomb. If the people who are used to receiving the vowed goods assemble near the tomb, and if it is a custom of that country that the goods vowed should be given to them, the goods are given to them. If there is no such custom, then the nadhr is invalid. This is reported from as-Samlâwî and ar-Ramlî, too. Everyone knows that no one amongst those who make nadhr for a dead walî would ever think the goods vowed should be given to the dead walî. Because, everyone knows that the dead do not take or use anything and that the goods are to be given to the poor or to the people who serve at the tomb. This is why it is an ’ibâda. In fact, according to the Shâfi’î madhhab it is not permissible to vow to do mubâh, makrûh or harâm things. The ’ibâdas and sunnas which are neither fard nor wâjib can be vowed as nadhr.’
“Some ’ulamâ’ said ‘permissible’ and some said ‘not permissible’ for kissing and rubbing one’s face on graves. Those who said ‘not permissible’ said that it was makrûh. Nobody said it was harâm.
“As declared in the hadîths quoted at the beginning of our book, to have recourse toprophets and pious Muslims, that is, to put them as intermediaries, or to entreat Allâhu ta’âlâ through them is permissible. There are many hadîths which show that it is permissible to have tawassul (recommendation of oneself to Allâhu ta’âlâ) through pious deeds. It is certainly permissible to have recourse to the mediation of pious men while it is permissible to make so of good deeds.
“As to swearing by some being other than Allâhu ta’âlâ, it is disbelief only if that being is highly esteemed and attributed as a partner to Allâhu ta’âlâ. The hadîth ash-sharîf, ‘He who swears by someone other than Allah become a disbeliever,’ which was related by Hâkim and Imâm Ahmad and quoted in al-Munâwî’s book, explains this fact. But al-Imâm an-Nawâwî, depending on the majority of the ’ulamâ’, wrote that it was makrûh and added that the ijmâ’ of Muslims was a document.
“The 114th âyat al-karîma of Sûrat an-Nisâ’ declares, ‘We put into Hell in the hereafter together with unbelievers the person who, after tawhîd and guidance have been taught ot him, dissents from the right path of Rasûlullâh and departs from the Believers in belief and deeds.’ It is understood from this âyat karîma also that it is necessary for every Believer to follow the path of Ahl as-Sunnat wa ’l-Jamâ’a. It should not be forgotten that the wolf will devour the lamb out of the flock. Likewise, he who remains outside Ahl as-Sunnat wa ’l-Jamâ’a will go to Hell.”
After the above passage, Hadrat Dâwûd ibn Sulaimân goes on:
“This is the end of our short quotation from the profound scholar Muhammad ibn Sulaimân al-Madanî’s long fatwa on this subject. This will be sufficient for those whom Allâhu ta’âlâ has decreed guidance. Muhammad ibn Sulaimân died in 1195 A.H. (1780). The heretic Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb was born in the Najd desert in 1111 A.H. (1699) and died in 1206 (1792). Muhammad ibn Sulaimân unmasked the ignorance of this man and refuted his opinions and claim that he employed ijtihâd. He proved and disseminated in Muslim countries the fact that Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-Wahhâb had not learned anything or received faid from any scholar of Islam and that he had fallen into heresy on account of calling Muslims polytheists.
“Hanafî scholar Muhammad ibn ’Abd al-’Azîm al-Makkî [(rahmat-Allâhi ’alaih) d. 1052 A.H. (1643)] listed and confuted the heretical statements of Ibn Hazm Muhammad ’Alî [az-Zâhirî, d. 456 A.H. (1064)] in his book Al-qâwl as-Sadîd. Ibn Hazm ordered everybody to employ ijtihâd and said that it was harâm to follow other people. He presents the 58th âyat al-karîma of Sûrat an-Nisâ’, ‘If you cannot agree on a matter, do it the way Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Prophet said,’ as a support for these words of his. ’Abd al-’Azîm said in answer: ‘Thanks to Allâhu ta’âlâ, we are not outside the state of following the great Islamic scholar al-Imâm al-a’zam Abu Hanîfa. We are honoured by following that exalted imâm and his great students and the profound ’ulamâ’ who poured light into the world such as Shams al-a’imma and other real ’ulamâ’ who came throughout a millennium (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ).’
“Ibn Hazm was an Andalusian. He was in the Zâhiriyya madhhab, which was founded by Dâwûd al-Isfhânî [az-Zâhirî, d. Baghdad, 270 A.H. (883)], whose madhhab was forgotten in a short time. Ibn al-Ahad, az-Zahabî and Ibn Ahmad ibn Khallikân [d. Damascus, 681 A.H. (1281)] said, ‘Even those who greeted Ibn Hazm hated him. They disliked his ideas. They all agreed that he was a heretic. They could not speak good of him. They warned the sultans to beware of him. They told Muslims to keep away from him.’ Ibn al-’Ârif said, ‘Ibn Hazm’s tongue and al-Hajjâj’s sword did the same thing.’ Ibn Hazm had many wicked, heretical ideas incompatible with the Hadîth. Al-Hajjâj[85] killed one hundred and twenty thousand innocent people without any reason. And Ibn Hazm’s tongue led astray hundreds of thousands of Muslims who came after the ‘good time’ defined in the Hadîth ash-sharîf. He died in 456 A.H. (1064).
“May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect all my Muslim brothers against heretical and corrupt paths! May He bestow upon us the belief and deeds compatible with the correct ijtihâds of the ’ulamâ’ of the four madhhabs! May He assemble us as the followers of their madhhabs beside the prophets, siddîqs, martyrs and the pious on the Day of Judgement! Âmîn.”[86]
32 - We came across a book titled Mesâil-i mühimmiyye jewab-i Nu’mân[87](Nu’mân’s Answer to Important Problems) which was written in Turkish by a Wahhâbî named Osmân Zekî, the son of Osmân Effendi ibn Mustafâ, the late mudarris of Şîrân (suburb of Gümüşhane, Turkey). It is understood that this young man had gone to the Hijaz and fell into the traps of the Wahhâbîs and, being deceived by their lies, deviated from the right path. This corrupt and harmful book has been distributed free of charge to Turkish pilgrims in the Hijaz. Those who have little knowledge of Islam regard the wrong statements and lies in this book as true and thus drift into disasters. The hajj and other ’ibâdas of those deceived by the people of bid’a are not acceptable by Allâhu ta’âlâ, and they will deviate from the right path into the calamity of bid’a and heresy while they are trying to perform hajj.
This small book writes:
“The Qur’ân al-karîm and the Prophet of Rabb al-’âlamîn declared that he who did not perform salât was a polytheist and a disbeliever. It is sufficient to perform the salât al-witr in one rak’a without reciting the Qunût. Even Rasûlullah did not know the new moon of the month shawwâl. Therefore, those who say, ‘So-and-so knows the ghaib and helps against danger,’ should fear Allah and be ashamed of themselves before human beings. Because, the Qur’ân and the Prophetforbid such beliefs. These impudent men say that they talk with our master the Prophetand do as he orders. They display the fact that they are meaner than asses. If this belief of theirs had been true, there would have been no conflict between as-Sahâbat al-kirâm who would have talked with Rasûlullâh and got disembarrassed of the distress. The âyat about ‘wasîla’ means that we should do what is ordered, abstain from the prohibitions and try to perform the nâfila. It does not suggest asking the dead for help or blessings, which is a polytheistic and ass-like behaviour. There is no such thing in Islam. Islam calls such people ‘polytheists and disbelievers.’
“Allah and His Prophet say that he who omits deliberately a fard salât is a kâfir. Their performing qadâ’ for it will not be accepted.
“The words of this or that person will not save one on the Day of Judgement. Those who do not trust in the Book and the Sunna but perform ’ibâda according to the words of this or that person will go to Hell. In the grave, one will not be questioned about those who are said to be great but about Allah and His Prophet, Allâhu ta’âlâ has ordered, ‘Ask what you do not know from the competent.’ Some people, to avoid responsibility, say, ‘There are apparent and hidden meanings of âyats and hadîths. We cannot understand the hidden.’ Allah has not ordered the believers what they are not able to understand or do. Refer to Ömer Rızâ’s book on this subject and view the subject through this brilliant telescope!
“It is ordered in the 238th âyat of Sûrat al-Baqara to perform salât while walking during time of danger. Reciting the Qunût is not ordered in the Hadîth. It is valid to perform salât al-witr without the Qunût. The one who performs only the fard and one rak’a of salât al-witr cannot be blamed. There is thawâb for those who perform [those salâts which are] sunnas, but there is no sin for thim who does not perform them.
“Oh my brothers! I am telling what âyats and hadîths convey, not out of my head. The polytheists who bark and growl are like those who charge Rasûlullâh with mendacity and sorcery. And those who keep away from those who convey [the orders of] the Book and the Sunna are like the cowards who run away from Reality.
“Recitation of mawlîd and dalâ’il, tarîqas, the isqât and talqîn are recent innovations. These are superstitious and prohibited. Those who started them regarded themselves as Allâhu ta’âlâ, and those who accept and do them are in a position of worshipping them. Everything has been explained in Islam, and nothing has been left hidden. It has been declared, ‘The umma will divide into seventy-three groups, and only those who follow me and my companions’ path will attain salvation.’ All tarîqas are superstitious. The things which did not exist in the time of Rasûlullâh should be rebutted. The Qâdirî, Shâdhilî, Mawlawî, Naqshabandî, Rifâî, Tijânî, Khâlidî, Uwaisî and many other tarîqas are examples of deviation from the true path and disobedience to the Qur’ân. Any title other than ‘Muslim’ should be omitted. And Muslims should be brothers as in the time of Rasûlullâh. People should not become a disbeliever or a polytheist by committing the deeds which are not Islamic, such as asking graves or the souls of the dead for salvation. Our religion did not order us to make beads to use for dhikr, tasbîh and takbîr, or to build tekkes and tombs or domes over graves, but it orders us to demolish tombs. Allâhu ta’âlâ said, ‘Pray to Me! I accept.’ He did not say, ‘Pray to prophets,’ or ‘to awliyâ.’ That is, He did not say, ‘Make mediators of the dead,’ or ‘Ask graves and the souls of the dead for help.’ Allah declared that prophets would not be able to do any harm or good to us. It is a disbelief in Allah to do what the Qur’ân tells us not to do. Those who ask the dead for help are polytheists and disbelievers. The salawât said by Rasûlullâh were out of wahî. Salawât said by others are bida’. Bid’a cannot be superior to wahî. The author of the book Dalâ’il put himself in the position of Allah and made up a new rite. He scheduled the book to be recited on certain days. Instead of confessing repentance to Allah, they repent in front of shaikhs as-Sahâbat al-kirâm did not make up to introduce any tarîqa, mawlîd or salawât. The posterity ordered people such bid’as as salât-i munjiyya and salât-i nâriyya for the protection of a country and the defeat of enemies. Thinking of the isqât, Muslims do not perform any ’ibâda. The dead do not hear the talqîn, and it has no place in Islam.”
Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Rasûl said that those who did not perform salât were disbelievers if they did not believe that salât was an order and if they regarded it as unimportant. He who does not perform salât because of laziness does not become a disbeliever. He becomes a fâsiq, a sinner. In the Hanafî madhhab, it is wâjib to perform salât al-witr as three rak’as. It is written in Marâq al-falâh, Abu Dâwûd’s Sunanand al-Munâwî’s Kunûz ad-daqâ’iq that our Prophet performed three rak’as of salât al-witr. And it is wâjib to recite the Qunût and, according to Imâm Abu Yûsuf, Imâm Muhammad, Imâm Ahmad and al-Imâm ash-Shafi’î (rahimahum-Allâhu ta’âlâ), it is sunna. Al-Munâwî, with reference to Abu Dâwûd, wrote: “Rasûlullâh used to recite the Qunût prayer when he performed the salât al-witr.” Reciting the well-known prayer called the “Qunût” is unanimously reported as sunna. The hadîth ash-sharîf documenting this fact is quoted in ash-Sharnblâlî’s Marâq al-falâh. He who omits a wâjib or a sunna becomes a disbeliever if he does not regard it as important. He who regards it as important but omits a wâjib once or neglects a sunna everytime because of laziness becomes a sinner. This man tries to make the Hanafî Muslims forsake their madhhab and become lâ-madhhabî. One who becomes lâ-madhhabî departs from the Ahl as-Sunna. One who departs from the Ahl as-Sunna, as written in the book Al-basâ’ir[88] , becomes either a heretic or a disbeliever.
Rasûlullâh (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam) knew the ghaib not by h