Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 120

‫ﺍﻼک ﺍﻟﻮﻫﺎﺑﻴ ﻋٰ ﺗﻮﻫ ﻗﺒﻮر ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬

Castigation of the Wahabis

For Disrespecting the
Graves of Muslims
By Mujad’did e Azam, Sayyidi Aala Hazrat,
Ash Shah, Imam Ahmed Raza Khan
Qaadiri Barakaati ؓ◌

Translated into English

Through the Blessings of Ghaus-ul-Waqt
Huzoor Sayyidi Mufti-e-Azam Hind ؓ◌

By a humble servant of Allah

Muhammad Afthab Cassim
al-Qaadiri Razvi Noori

Published FOR

Free Distribution



All Rights Reserved
No part of this publication may be produced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying or otherwise without the
prior permission of the Copyright Owner.

Islamic Date : Safar 1439

English Date : November 2017

Author: Aala Hazrat Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Qaadiri Barakaati

Translator: Muhammad Afthab Cassim al-Qaadiri Razvi Noori

The Publishers
Imam Mustafa Raza Research Centre
P.O. Box 70140, Overport, 4067 Durban, South Africa

28 Clayton Road, Overport, Durban
Tel/Fax: 031 2081045
Email: noori@noori.org
Website: www.noori.org

Contribute towards a noble course: For those brothers and sisters who wish to contribute
towards our humble efforts, our Banking Details are as follows:

Name : Imam Mustafa Raza Research Centre

Bank : Nedbank
Acc No : 2034044606
Branch : Sydenham
Code : 103409

Sponsor the Printing of a Book for Esaal-e-Sawaab

Contact us, if you wish to sponsor the printing of a book for the Esaal e Sawaab of the
marhooms in your family. Sponsor the printing of a book and send the Sawaab to your
marhoom family members. This is Sawaab e Jaariyah and a means of educating the Ummat.
Knowledge is Power!

This Translation is Dedicated to
The Imam of the Ahle Sunnat, the Mujad’did of the
14th Century, the Great Imam of His Era,
The Abu Hanifa of his Time, Hasaan ul Hind, Sayyidi
Aala Hazrat Ash Shah

Imam Ahmed Raza Khan

Qaadiri Barakaati
Radi Allahu Anhu

Whose Steadfastness in Imaan, Love for the Beloved Nabi , Knowledge,

Spiritualism, Intellect, Piety, Humility, Wisdom, Efforts, Distinguished
Works, and True Spiritual Successors, Serve as Lamps of Guidance to the
True Believers.

For The Esaal e Thawaab of My Beloved Mother

Sayyidah Khadija
Goolam Rasool
Allah Exalt Her and all Marhooms of The Ahle
Sunnat with an Exalted Place in Holy Paradise.

Translator’s Note

All Praise is due the Almighty Allah Who is the Creator, Sustainer and
Nourisher, and Who granted the believers respect and honour in life, and
after death. Countless and the best of salutations upon the Beloved Rasool
 who is the soul of believers. Salutations upon his Noble Family and

Companions, and upon the Righteous Ulama who have always raised the
Flag of Truth.

Alhamdu-Lillah, before you is the English translation of ‘Ihlaak ul

Wahabiy’yeen Ala Tawheeni Qubooril Muslimeen,’ which was written by
the great Mujaddid, Sayyidi Aala Hazrat Ash Shah Imam Ahmed Raza Khan
ؓ◌. The English translation of this book is ‘Castigation of the Wahabis for

Disrespecting the Graves of Muslims.’

I, initially translated some excerpts from this book many years ago, in the
form of a booklet, but due to the ruthless onslaught of the wahabis and the
modern day extremists, who are destroying the sacred graves of the
Awliyah Allah, in the name of ‘Shirk’ and ‘Bid’ah,’ I put my trust in the
Mercy of Allah and His Beloved Rasool , and through the blessings of
Sarkaar e Ghauth e Azam ؓ◌ and all my Masha’ikh, especially Huzoor
Sayyidi Taajush Shariah and Huzoor Sayyidi Muhad’dith e Kabeer, I have
attempted with my humble knowledge, to translate this entire manuscript.

All this would not be possible without the Duas of my parents. May Allah
grant my dear father good health and long life with strong Imaan, and
virtuous deeds, and may Allah exalt my beloved mother in Holy Paradise,
and allow me to always receive her Duas and blessings. Aameen.

My special appreciation to my wife and children for their continuous
support and patience, while I am engrossed in my Deeni work. I must thank
all those who have assisted in proofreading, editing and making valuable
suggestions to this book, especially Hazrat Maulana Shakeel Qadri Razvi
(London, UK), and Brother Rukhsar Husain Qaadiri Razvi Amjadi, and
Brother Ahmed Sabir Suliman Qaadiri Razvi. Also, special thanks to my
beloved daughter for reading through this books and making valuable
suggestions. May Allah grant them all good health and long life with strong
Imaan, and virtuous deeds. Aameen.

I pray through the Wasila of the Beloved Rasool  that Almighty Allah
accepts my humble effort, and allows this translation to be a means of
benefit for the believers. Aameen.

Kaam wo Le Lijiye Tum Ko Jo Raazi Karen

Theek Ho Naame Raza Tum Pe Karoro Durood

Sag e Mufti e Azam

Muhammad Afthab Cassim Qaadiri Razvi Noori
Imam Mustafa Raza Research Centre

Words of Inspiration
By Hazrat Maulana Mohammed Shakeel Qaadiri Ridawi
(London, U.K.)

All praise is due to Allah Almighty, Durood and Salaam upon the Most
Beloved, the Most exalted in Allah’s creation, Sayyiduna Rasool Allah Sall
Allahu Alaihi wasallam.

I am extremely honoured that Hadrat Al-Sheikh Mufti Afthab Cassim Sahib

Qiblah has given me the opportunity to add a small comment on his
beautiful work.

Alhamdu li Allah I had the honour of reading through the whole

book ‘Ihlaak ul Wahabiy’yeen Ala Tawheeni Qubooril Muslimeen and in my
opinion it is a need of the times. A time when terrorists posing as Muslims
such as isis etc demolish the graves of the pious. A time when bulldozers
are being used on whole graveyards to make roads and buildings.

Imam Ahmad Rida Khan Radi Allahu Anhu has left no stone unturned in
clarifying the correct position. All the objections made by the objectors
have been systematically dissected, and all the misgivings of the opposition
have been wiped out. The following verification sums up the whole book.

“The writing and the bright stamp of the Faadil, Kaamil, Aalim, Aamil,
Muhaqqiq e Uloom e Aqaliya, Mudaqqaq e Funoon Naqaliya, Qaali Usool e
Mubtadi’een, Qaami’ e Awhaam e Najdiyeen, Haami e Sunan, Maahi e Fitan,
Mujadd’did e Miat e Haadira, Hujjat e Qaahira, Maulana Al Haj Ahmed Raza
Khan Saaheb was like a bolt of lightning which struck the opposition. He
disintegrated the premeditated script of Rashid Gangohi, and left no stone
unturned in this issue, and there will be no need to write on it again by
anyone else.” [Sayyid Haydar Shah Al Qaadiri Hanafi]

The beauty of the writing style of the Great Faqih is such, and such is his
love for The Most Beloved Sall Allahu Alaihi Wasallam that even when
responding to a question which apparently does not call for praise of the
Beloved Prophet Sall Allahu Alaihi Wasallam, Alahadrat Azeemulbarakat
Radi Allahu Anhu spontaneously launches into an ode to his greatness.

“In fact, the Naa’lain Shareef (Sacred Footwear) of the Beloved Rasool is so
exalted that if the Sacred Dust from it has to touch the grave of a Muslim,
his entire grave will be fragranced with Heavenly musk and amber, if the
Beloved Rasool Sall Allahu Alaihi Wasallam was to place His Sacred Foot on
the chest, head and eyes of a Muslim, then that fortunate person will be
absorbed forever in its delight, its abundant benevolence, and in its
peacefulness and blessings.” (pg.113)

The original book in Urdu is difficult to understand and as the case with all
his other translations Hadrat Mufti Afthab Cassim Sahib Qibla has
explained this beautifully and made this extremely easy to understand.

May Allah shower his unbound bounties and blessings on Hadrat Mufti
Afthab Cassim Sahib, may Allah Almighty preserve him. May Allah
Almighty give us all the ability to benefit and learn from him.

I pray that Almighty Allah through the blessings of The Most Beloved Sall
Allahu Alaihi Wasallam accepts this effort in His Divine Court, and blesses
the accomplished translator and all those who have assisted him in this
project, with a befitting reward. Aameen

Faqeer Mohammed Shakeel Qadiri Ridawi Ghufira Lahu

A Brief Insight into this Book

This book commences with a Fatwa which was sent to Sayyidi Aala Hazrat
ؓ◌ by a very learned Aalim. Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌ quoted this Fatwa at the
beginning of this book, and then presented evidence to support the
correctness of the Fatwa on the said issue.

Further in this book, Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌ also refutes the incorrect
decrees of deviants such as Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi and his notorious
accomplices. Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌ explains in detail the importance of
respecting and honouring the graves of Muslims, and in doing so, he
refutes the destructive ideology relating to this. You will find that this book
consists of many arguments on the principles of Jurisprudence, and
responses by Sayyidi Aala Hazrat which proves that quotations presented
by the deviants on this topic are futile and either taken out of context, or
misconstrued, in order to fulfil their evil conspiracy of misleading the
unsuspecting Muslims.

May Almighty Allah bless us with the Taufeeq to respect our deceased and
to honour them as commanded by the Shariat. May Allah keep us always in
the company of His true and pious servants, and may He keep us away from
the deviants, and keep them away from us, so that our Imaan is not tainted
by their corrupt beliefs and ideology. Aameen.

Sag e Mufti e Azam

Muhammad Afthab Cassim Qaadiri Razvi Noori
Imam Mustafa Raza Research Centre


The query

What is the ruling of the Ulama e Deen and Muftis of the pristine Shariah
in this issue:

• Is it permissible or not according to the Hanafi Madhab, to

deliberately dig up the graves in an ancient cemetery (of the Ahle
Sunnat) in order to build houses on it?

• Will doing so cause any disrespect and insult to the deceased or

not? ‫( ﺑ ﻨﻮﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﺮوﺍ‬Please clarify and be rewarded)

The Verdict

‫وﻣﻨ ﺍﻟﻬﺪﺍﻳﺔ ﺍ
ﺍﻟﺤﻖ وﺍﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ‬

It should be known that the heartfelt enmity which the Nadjis and Wahabis
possess for the Ambia, Awliyah ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم‬and the believers (Ahle Sunnat)
is not possessed by any other deviant sect.

It is for this reason that the baseless books of the narrow minded leaders of
this accursed sect are full of disrespect for the beloved servants of Allah.

Those who wish to confirm this should pick up the baseless books of the
Najdi Mulla Ismail Delhvi, Hassan Bhopali, Khuram Ali and Rashid Gangohi
etc., and take a look at them, as they contain all kinds of slanderous words.

One of the (evil) malicious signs of this deviant sect is that they damage
and destroy the graves of the Ambia, Shuhada and Awliyah ‫ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﻼم‬.

Shaykh Najdi Intended To Destroy The Blessed

Rauda e Aqdas

In the Book ‘Faslul Khitaab Fi Rad-di Dalalati Ibn Abdil Wahab’ Allama
Ahmed bin Ali Basri states

‫ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻧ ﺻﺢ ﺍﻧ ﻘﻮل ﻟﻮﺍﻗﺪر ﻋ‬

‫ﺣﺠﺮة ﺍﻟﺮﺳﻮل ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ ﻟﻬﺪ ﻣﺘﻬﺎ‬

“From amongst the things he (Abdul Wahab Najdi) mentioned one thing
which he actually said is that, ‘If I get the opportunity, I will break down
the Rauda of Rasoolullah .’” [Faslul Khitaab Fi Rad-di Dalalati Ibn Abdil

Shaykh Najdi Destroyed the Mazaars of Sahaba e


The same Allama Basri also states that,

“Breaking down the blessed graves of the Shuhada amongst the Sahaba e
Kiraam ‫ ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨﻢ‬simply because of the domes, is a harsh evil, and deviancy
of this Najdi (Abdul Wahab Najdi).” [Faslul Khitaab Fi Rad-di Dalalati Ibn
Abdil Wahab]

The same Allama Basri states,

‫" ﻋﻠﻴ‬#‫" ﻋﻠﻴ ﻣﺸﻬﻮرﺍ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻠﻢ وﺍﻟﺼﻼح ﺍو'ﺎن ﺻﺤﺎ ﺑﻴﺎ و'ﺎن ﺍﻟﻤﺒ‬#‫ﻌﻀﻬﻢ وﻟﻮ'ﺎن ﺍﻟﻤﺒ‬0 ‫ﻗﺎل‬
‫ﻣﺔ ﻧﺒﺸ وﺍن ﺍﻧﺪرس ﺍذﺍ ﻋﻠﻤﺖ‬8‫@ہ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻳﻨﺒ< ﺍن ﻻ ﻳﻬﺪم ﻟ‬A‫ﻨﺎء ﻋٰ ﻗﺪر ﻗ‬2‫ﻗﺒﺔ و'ﺎن ﺍﻟ‬
‫ﻢ ﻻ ﻳﺨﻠﻮ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍن‬H‫" ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ‬B‫ﻨﺎء ﻋٰ ﻗﺒﻮر ٰﻫﺆﻻء ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺪﺍء ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺎﺑﺔ ر‬2‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﻓﻬﺬ ﺍﻟ‬
‫ﺘﺪع ﺿﺎل‬2‫رﺟﻞ ﻣ‬4 ‫ﺔ وﻋٰ 'ﻞ ﻓﻼ ﻘﺪم ﻋ ﺍﻟﻬﺪم ﺍﻻ‬L‫ﺍ‬M @N‫ﻐ‬0 ‫ﺰ ًﺍ‬Ò‫ﻳﻜﻮن وﺍﺟﺒ ًﺎ ﺍوﺟﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺔ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺏ رﺳﻮل ﺍﷲ ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺟﺐ ﻋٰ 'ﻞ‬W ‫ﻻﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻣ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎک‬
"Z‫@ ﻫﻢ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺪم ﻗﺒﻮر ﻫﻢ ﺣ‬N‫@ﻫﻢ وﺍی ﺗﻮﻗ‬N‫ﺘﻬﻢ وﺟﻮﺏ ﺗﻮﻗ‬2‫ﺘﻬﻢ وﻣﻦ ﻣﺤ‬2‫ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﻣﺤ‬
‫ﻲ ﻣﺨﺘ_ﺍ‬H‫ ﺳﻮﺍل ﺍرﺳﻠ ﺍ ﺍﻧﺘ‬a ‫ﻌﺾ ﻋﻠﻤﺎء ﻧﺠﺪ‬0 M‫ﻛﻔﺎﻧﻬﻢ ﻛﻤﺎ ذ‬e‫ﺑﺪﺕ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻧﻬﻢ و‬

‘Some of the Ulama have stated that if the deceased is a well-known Aalim,
a pious person or a Sahabi, and the Quba (Dome) is only equal to the size of
the grave, then it should not be destroyed, because even if its sign perishes,
to open it (the grave) is disallowed. Therefore, to erect buildings over the
graves (i.e. around the graves) of those martyred Sahaba ‫ ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨﻢ‬will
either be Waajib or permissible without disapproval, and in any situation,
to destroy it is disallowed. Only such a person will try to destroy such
places; who is a Bid’ati and a misled person (i.e. a deviant), because this is
to show disrespect to the companions of the Beloved Rasool , whereas it
is Waajib (compulsory) upon every Muslim to respect and revere them.
Now, how can those who have dug up the Mazaars (sacred graves) of the
Shuhada e Kiraam, be categorised amongst those who respect them,
whereas even some of their shrouds (Kafan) and blessed bodies became
apparent, just as some of the Ulama of Najd have written in response to this
answer [Faslul Khitaab fi Radd Dalalati Ibn Abdil Wahab]

According To the Depraved Wahabis, The Ambia
and Awliyah ‫ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم‬
 ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ‬Are Dead and Mixed In the
Sand (Allah Forbid)

According to these evil ones, after passing away, they (the Ambia and
Awliyah) become totally senseless and unaware of anything and
everything, and are mixed with the sand (i.e. decayed), (May Allah protect

On page 60 of his book Taqwiyatul Imaan Mulla Ismail Delhvi, makes a

blasphemous statement in the exalted Court of the Beloved Rasool . He
writes, ‘I too will die one day and be mixed with the sand.’ [Taqwiyatul

It has already been mentioned earlier in the statement of Allama Basri  ‫رﲪﺔ اﷲ‬
‫ ﺗﻌﺎﱃ  ﻠﻴﻪ‬that when the Najdis destroyed the sacred graves of the Shuhada e
Sahaba e Kiraam ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﻮﺍن‬even their sacred bodies and Kafan (shroud)
remained preserved, and this was almost 1200 years after the Sahaba e
Kiraam had been laid to rest.

A thousand curses upon Mulla Ismail and upon his followers, the depraved
wahabis, that they hold such a tainted and deviant belief about Sayyiduna
Rasoolullah , which is against the dignity of every Muslim. (May) Allah
keep the Ahle Sunnat away from their evil company. Aameen.

If this is the evil views of these cursed ones about Sayyidul Mursaleen ,
and if they have the blatant plan of destroying the Rauda e Aqdas and the
sacred graves of the Shuhada and Sahaba e Kiraam ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﻮﺍن‬then what can
be said about their (notorious) propagandas concerning the graves of the
ordinary Muslims!

The demolishing of the graves of the believers especially the Awliyah is the
manner and sign of the Najdis.

Thus, in this case, for any person to demolish or dig the graves of the
Mo’mineen Ahle Sunnat is not allowed.

It is also disallowed for anyone to destroy the graves of deceased members

of the Ahle Sunnat and it is disallowed to build houses on these places for
their personal pleasure and comfort.

Living in these houses that will be built after demolishing the graves, will
definitely and undoubtedly cause discomfort to the deceased, and by doing
so is to disrespect and insult them, and this is not permissible under any

The Aqida (Belief) Of the Ahle Sunnat Is That the
Ambia, Shuhada and Awliyah Are Physically Alive
In Their Graves with Their Shrouds

It is the Aqida (belief) of the Ahle Sunnat that the Ambia and the Shuhada
‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻴﺔ وﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎء‬are alive in their graves, with their physical bodies. In fact the
sacred bodies of the Ambia e Kiraam ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم‬have been made Haraam
upon the earth, (i.e. it is forbidden upon the earth) to devour these blessed
bodies. Similarly, the sacred bodies and shrouds of the Shuhada and the
Awliyah ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ وﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎ‬also remain preserved in their graves. These beloved
personalities are (even) given sustenance (in their graves).

Allama Subki states in Shifa us Siqaam

،‫ﺘﻬﻢ‬2‫ رﺗ‬a ‫ﻛﻤﻞ وﺍﻋٰ ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﻮع ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎة وﺍﻟﺮزق ﻻﻳﺤﺼﻞ ﻟﻤﻦ ﻟﻴﺲ‬e ‫وﺣﻴﺎة ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺪﺍء‬
‫وح وﺍﻟﺠﺴﺪ ﻋ ﺍﻟﺪوﺍم ﻋ‬k‫ﻛﻤﻞ وﺍﺗﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻴﻊ ﻻﻧﻬﺎ ﻟ‬e‫ﻴﺎء ﺍﻋٰ و‬2‫وﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﺣﻴﺎة ﺍﻻﻧ‬
‫ ﺍﻟﺪﻧﻴﺎ‬a ‫ﻣﺎ'ﺎن‬

“And the lives of the martyrs are perfectly blessed and exalted ones; and
this particular type of life and sustenance is not awarded to those who are
not of their status; and the lives of the Ambia are the most perfect and
exalted, because their lives are with both, the body and the soul, just as it
was on this earth, and it will remain like this forever.” [Shifa us Siqaam Fi
Ziyaarati Khayr Al Anaam Pg.206]

Qadi Thana’ullah Panipati states as follows in Tazkiratul Mauta:


6789:"#$%& '()*+,-./'  012  312 45
;<=>? /  @A+BC F G 0H  


;Y I I 9:Z/ [\]^/_@A+BCDE\]
d A`a 0b .a 6 #d ef

‘The Awliyah Allah have stated, ‘Our souls are our bodies’. In other words,
their souls serve as their bodies and due to great excellence sometimes
their bodies manifest (the splendours of) the soul. It has been stated that
the Sacred Body of the Beloved Rasool  had no shadow. Their exalted
soul goes and comes to and from the earth, Jannat, the skies and where ever
and whenever they please. It is for this reason that the sand of the grave
does not devour their bodies; and even their shrouds remain preserved. Ibn
Abi Al Duniya narrated from Malik that the souls of the believers travel
wherever they please. Believers (Mo’mineen) here refer to those who have
attained spiritual excellence (i.e. the Kaamileen). Almighty Allah blesses
their bodies with the power and might of the soul, so they perform Salaah
in their graves, and perform Zikr, and recite the Qur’an Kareem.” [Shifa us
Siqaam Pg.206; Tazkiratul Mauta Wal Quboor Pg.75]

Shaykh ul Hind Muhad’dith Delhvi ‫ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ‬%‫ ﻋﻠﻴ‬states in the annotation of
Mishkaat Shareef,

 /A j 1   k  lm no> pka q 9: r '( 

st  u^/ )vA 

‘The Awliyah Allah have only journeyed from this mundane world towards
the eternal world in the hereafter, and they are alive by their Creator, and
they are given sustenance. They are completely comfortable, and people
have no understanding of this.’ [Ashi’atul Lam’aat Vol.3 Pg.402]

Allama Ali Qaari states in the annotation of Mishkaat Shareef,

‫ﻜﻦ ﻳﻨﺘﻘﻠﻮن ﻣﻦ دﺍ ٍر ﺍٰ دﺍر‬p‫ وﻟﺬﺍ ﻗﻴﻞ ﺍوﻟﻴﺎء ﺍﷲ ﻻﻳﻤﻮﺗﻮن و‬nN‫ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟ‬a ‫ق ﻟﻬﻢ‬m‫ﻻ‬

‘There is really no difference in both conditions of the great Awliyah Allah

(i.e. in their life and passing). This is why it has been mentioned that, they
do not die, but they have moved from one home to another home.”
[Mirkaat Sharah Mishkaat Vol.3, Pg.241]

Allama Jalaalud-deen Suyuti ‫ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ‬%‫ ﻋﻠﻴ‬presented few authentic narrations

about the life of the Awliyah Allah after their passing from this world,
which we are quoting here;

Imam Aarif Bil’laah Ustadh Abul Qasim Qushairi with his own merit,
narrates from the famous saint Hazrat Abu Sa’eed Kharraz that, ‘I was in
Makkah Mu’azzamah and I found a young man dead at the entrance of Baab
Bani Shaiba. When I looked at him, he looked towards me and began to
smile and he then said,

‫ﺍﻻﺣﺒﺎ ﺍﺣﻴﺎء وﺍن ﻣﺎﺗﻮ ﺍ وﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﻳﻨﻘﻠﻮن ﻣﻦ دﺍ ٍر ﺍٰ دﺍر‬

4 ‫ﻳﺎﺍﺑﺎ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺍﻣﺎﻋﻠﻤﺖ ﺍن‬

‘O Abu Sa’eed! Do you not know that the beloveds of Allah are alive, even
after they pass away. They simply move from one place to another’.’
[Sharhus Sudoor]

The same reliable and exalted personality narrates from Sayyidi Abu Ali ‫ﻗﺪس‬
‫*ہ‬ that, “I lowered a Faqeer into a grave. When I opened his Kafan and
placed his head on the dust so that Allah may have mercy on his poverty.
The Faqeer opened his eyes and said to me,

"#‫ ﻳﺪی ﻣﻦ ﻳﺪﻟﻠ‬nN‫" ﺑ‬#‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﺑﺎ ﻋ ﺍﺗﺬﻟﻠ‬

“O Aba Ali! Are you disgracing me in front of Him, Who bears with me?’ I
said, O my Leader! Is there life after death?

He said,

‫ ﻏﺪﺍ‬s‫ ﺑﺠﺎ‬t‫_ﻧ‬u‫ ﻻ‬r ‫ و'ﻞ ﻣﺤﺐ ﺍﷲ‬qr ‫ﺑﻞ ﺍﻧﺎ‬

‘I am alive and all the beloveds of Allah are alive. Verily on the day of
Qiyaamat I will use the respect and honour blessed to me to be of assistance
to you.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

The same reliable and exalted personality quotes a narration from Hazrat
Ibrahim bin Shaybaan ؓ◌ as follows:

Ibrahim bin Shaybaan ‫ ﻗﺪس *ہ‬mentioned, ‘A very good young man who was
my companion (disciple), passed away. This caused me much sadness, so I
intended to perform the Ghusl for him personally. In a state of anxiety, I
started to bathe him from the wrong side (i.e. from the left), so he held my
hand and moved me to the right side, so I said, ‘O Beloved Son! You are
right and I was in error’.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

The very same Imam narrates from Abu Ya’qub Susi Nahr-Jawri ؓ◌ who
reports, ‘I was giving Ghusl to a deceased (who was my mureed) on the
bathing board, when he suddenly held my thumb, so I said to him, ‘O my
son! Let go of my thumb, as I know that you are not dead (forever), but it
is only moving from one place to another’.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

It is reported from the same great personality that, ‘One of my mureeds
(disciples) arrived from Makkah Mu’azzamah and said to me, ‘O Ustadh! I
will pass away tomorrow at the time of Zuhr, so take this Dinar (or Ashrafi,
i.e. money). Use half to arrange my burial, and the other half for my Kafan.’

He performed Tawaaf of the Kaaba on the following day, at the time of

Zuhr. He then rested at a distance at a slight distance from the Kaaba, and
his soul left his body. When I placed him in his grave, he opened his eyes,
so I said to him, ‘Is there also life (like this) after death?’ He said,

و  ﻞ ﻣﺤ ﺐ ﺍﷲ‬

‘I am alive (i.e. as I am a beloved of Allah) and every beloved of Allah is

alive.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

Inappropriate Actions Cause Discomfort to the


Even though some of the bodies of the general Muslims and other deceased
are not intact, to sit on their graves, lean against their graves and walk with
shoes harshly in the graveyard, causes discomfort to them. This is proven
from the authentic Hadith Shareef without any doubt.

Haakim and Tabrani report from Hazrat Am’mara Ibn Hazm ؓ◌ that,
‘Rasoolullah  saw me sitting on a grave, so He  said,

/‫ ﺍﻧﺰل ﻣﻦ ﻋ)
ﺍﻟﻘ! ﻻﺗﺆذی ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ! وﻻ ﺗﺆذ ﻳ‬، !‫ﻳﺎﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ‬

‘O you on the grave! Come down from the grave. If you do not cause distress
to the deceased, the deceased will not cause distress to you.’’ [Sharhus

Sa’eed bin Mansoor quotes in his Sunan that Hazrat Ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌ was
asked, ‘What do you say about tramping over the graves?’ He said,

‫ﻌﺪ ﻣﻮﺗ‬0 ‫ہ ﺍذﺍہ‬M‫ ﺍ‬v‫ ﺣﻴﺎﺗ ﻓﺎ‬a ‫ہ ﺍذی ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻦ‬M‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺍ‬

‘Just as I feel it is wrong to cause harm (distress) to a living person, I also

feel it is wrong to cause harm (distress) to one who is deceased.’’ [Sharhus

Imam Ahmed +‫ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤ‬+‫ ﻋﻠﻴ‬with the merit of Hasan narrates from Amar bin Hazm
ؓ◌ that, ‘The Beloved Rasool  saw me leaning against a grave. He 

either said,

@A‫ﻻ ﺗﺆذی ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻫﺬﺍﺍﻟﻘ‬

“(O you!) Do not cause discomfort to those in the grave”

Or He  said,

‫ﻻ ﺗﺆذہ‬

“Do not harm him”’ (i.e. the one in the grave).

[Mishkaat ul Masabih, pg.149]

The issue of causing discomfort to the deceased was one that the Tabi’een
and other Ulama, who were people of foresight, experienced first-hand. Ibn
Abid Daniya narrates from Abu Qulabah Basri as follows;

Ibn Abi Al Duniya reported from Abu Qulabah, ‘I was on my way to Basra
from Syria, and stopped over at Khandaq. I performed two Raka’at Namaaz
and then fell asleep while placing my head on a grave. In my dream, I saw
the deceased saying to me,

‫" ﻣﻨﺬ ﺍﻟﻠﻴﻠﺔ‬#‫ﻟﻘﺪ ﺍذﻳﺘ‬

‘You have caused me distress all night.’’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

Imam Baihaqi reports in Dala’il un Nubuw’wah and Ibn Abi Al Duniya

reports from Hazrat Abu Uthman Nahdi ؓ◌, who narrates from Ibn Meena
Tabi’ee that, ‘I went into a cemetery. I performed two Raka’ats Namaaz and
fell asleep. I was in a deep sleep, when, by Allah! I heard someone from the
grave saying,

"#‫ذﻳﺘ‬w ‫ﻗﻢ ﻓﻘﺪ‬

‘Wake up! You are causing me discomfort’’

[Dala’il un Nubuw’wah, Vol.7, pg.40]

Hafiz Ibn Munda narrates from Imam Qasim bin Makhmera ٰ‫رﺣﻤﺔ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬that, ‘If
I keep my feet on a heated spear and the spear passes through my foot,
then I prefer this more than keeping my foot on the grave (of a Muslim).’
He then said, ‘A person once kept his foot on a grave and in an awakened
state he heard a voice saying,

"#‫" ﻳﺎ رﺟﻞ ﻻ ﺗﺆذﻳ‬4 #‫ ﻋ‬t‫ﺍﻟﻴ‬

‘(O You!) Move away, do not cause me discomfort.’’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

Allama Shurunbulali writes in Maraqi ul Falah states,

ٰ‫ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎ‬x‫ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻮی ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬y‫ ﺷﻴ‬v@A‫ﺍﺧ‬

‫ﺑﺎﻧﻬﻢ ﻳﺘ ٔﺎذون ﺑﺨﻔﻖ ﺍﻟﻨﻌﺎل‬

‘My Ustadh (Shaykh) Allama Muhammad bin Ahmed Al Hamawi Hanafi %‫رﺣﻤ‬
ٰ‫ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬ informed me that the deceased feels discomfort by the stamping
sound of shoes.’ [Maraqi ul Falaah, pg. 342]

It is for this reason that our Hanafi Fuqaha e Kiraam (Jurists) ‫ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ‬have
stated, ‘To construct a house, for living purposes on a grave, to sit or sleep
on a grave, or to answer the call of nature near a grave, are all actions that
are strongly Makruh (disapproved), and close to Haraam.’

It is in Fatawa Alamgiri,

‫@ ﺍو ﻘﻌﺪ ﺍوﻳﻨﺎم ﻋﻠﻴ ﺍوﻳﻄﺎء ﻋﻠﻴ‬A‫" ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬#‫وﻳہ ﺍن ﻳﺒ‬

‫ﻂ‬Ò‫ﺴﺎن ﻣﻦ ﺑﻮل ﺍوﻏﺎ‬u‫ﺍو ﻘ€" ﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﺍﻻ‬

‘It is Makruh to construct a building on a grave, to sit or sleep on it, to

trample on it, or answer the call of nature near it is Makruh.’ [Fatawa
Hindiya, Vol.1, pg.122]

In providing evidence for this, Allama Shaami states in the footnotes of

Durr e Mukhtar,

4 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﺘ ٔﺎذی ﺑﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﺎذی ﺑ‬

‚‫ﺍﻟ‬ 4 ‫ﻻن‬

‘(In other words) that which causes the living discomfort also causes the
deceased discomfort.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.229]

Dailami narrated from Ummul Mo’mineen Hazrat Siddiqa ‫ ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ ﻋﻨﺎ‬to

explain further this well-known principle, that the Beloved Rasool  said,

‫ ﺑƒﺘ‬a ‫@ہ ﻣﺎﻳﺆذﻳ‬A‫ ﻗ‬a ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﺆذﻳ‬


‘Whatever caused the deceased discomfort in his home; causes him

discomfort in the grave.’ [Al Firdaus, Vol.1, pg.199]

Ibn Abi Shayba narrates in his Musan’naf (i.e. composition) from Sayyiduna
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌ that,

‫ ﺣﻴﺎﺗ‬a ‫ ﻣﻮﺗ 'ﺎ ذﺍہ‬a ‫ﺍذی ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻣﻦ‬

‘To cause harm (discomfort) to the deceased after his demise is like causing
harm to him in his lifetime.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

It is now as clear as day, that to dig up (i.e. demolish) graves and build
houses on the said land will definitely include either one, or all of the above
mentioned inappropriate actions, and this will certainly cause discomfort
to the deceased Muslims, and to do so is totally disallowed in the Hanafi

However, if someone decides to raise an objection by quoting that Allama
Zayla’i wrote as follows in Sharah Kanz,

‫@ہ وز„ﻋ وﺍﻟﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻴ‬A‫ ﻗ‬a ‫@ہ‬N‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ وﺻﺎرﺗﺮﺍﺑﺎﺟﺎز دﻓﻦ ﻏ‬

4 ‫وﻟﻮﺑ‬

‘If the deceased has decomposed and has been mixed in the sand, then to
re-bury in that grave, to plant vegetables etc. on it and to erect buildings
on it is permissible.’ [Tabyin ul Haqaa’iq, Vol.1, pg.246]

The first answer to this is that the statement of Allama Zayla’i is not in
accordance with the above Ahadith and other cited narrations, and is thus
not acceptable (in this issue). Secondly, Imam Shurunbulali in Imdad ul
Fatah disproved this statement of Allama Zayla’i with another differing
narration, thus making it inapplicable to act upon.

a ‫@ہ‬N‫@ ﻳہ دﻓﻦ ﻏ‬A‫ ﺍﻟﻘ‬a‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﺗﺮﺍﺑﺎ‬

4 ‫ ﺍﻟ…ﺘﺎر ﺧﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍذﺍﺻﺎر‬a‫ ﺍﻻﻣﺪﺍد وﻳﺨﺎﻟﻔ ﻣﺎ‬a ‫ﻗﺎل‬
.‫ ﺍﻟﺦ‬-‫ﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﻗﻴﺔ‬8‫@ہ ﻻن ﺍﻟ‬A‫ﻗ‬

‘It is in Imdad ul Fatah and it is contrary to this in Tatar Khania. In other

words, even if the deceased is decomposed and mixed in the sand, then too,
it is Makruh to bury someone else in the same grave, since it is contrary to
the respect and honour of the deceased, for that deceased must still be
revered.’ [Raddul Muhtar with reference to Al Imdad ul Fatah, Vol.1,

Also, reinforcing and supporting this statement, is what Allama Nablusi
wrote in Al Hadiqatun Nadiya Sharah Tareeqatul Muhammadiyah, ‘That
which has been stated, that by leaning on the grave, it causes discomfort
to the deceased, means that the souls come to know that the said person
has been responsible for causing disrespect to them, and thus feel offended
by that.’ [Al Hadiqatun Nadiya Sharah Tareeqatul Muhammadiyah Vo.2,

  ~  ~
w xW1 ay z s|  }AxI  +€ 0 ^+' &
2 {z 2

x ‚ƒ 

Shaykh ul Hind +‫ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤ‬+‫ ﻋﻠﻴ‬states in Sharah Mishkaat, ‘This could perhaps mean
that the soul is displeased with someone resting against the grave, as this
is insult to the deceased.’ [Ashi’atul Lam’aat, Vol.1, pg.699]

It must be noted that resting against a grave, causes the curse of the
deceased to befall the person involved in this action, and it displeases and
causes insult to them. Therefore, there is no doubt that by destroying (i.e.
flattening) the graves, and using it for cultivation, and building houses on
them, will be regarded as being more disrespectful.

Thirdly, we ask the Wahabis/Najdis (i.e. who are the ones responsible for
disrespecting the graves) as to how do they know that the deceased has
completely turned to dust?

In other words, what proof do they have that the deceased is totally
decomposed, and even the bones are still non-existent, because the graves
have not been dug up as yet, and neither is it evident from the Qur’an and
Hadith concerning any time frame which has been stipulated for the
decomposition of the body, wherein it is stated that after such and such a
time, the bones of the deceased also decompose.

However, from experience, we have noticed in numerous instances that

when an old plot of land (i.e. which was used for burial) on the outskirts is
dug up, remains are found in the graves and sometimes even the complete
body is found intact and fresh.

Such graves according to records showed that they were three to four
hundred years old. Now after all this, to use insufficient proof, and without
any dire Shar’ee need, to make an ambiguous narration the basis of
refuting something which is disallowed, is impermissible.

If those objecting to this issue decide to use the example of places like
Bombay (and other places in the world), where the graves of Muslims are
re-dug and people are buried in them, by saying that if this were not
allowed then why is such a practice carried out in such huge cities of the
world; then the answer to this question, is that in these cities, there is a
shortage of vacant space.

There is not enough place in the graveyards to use a grave only once for
one particular individual.

Thus, in such dire conditions, it becomes permissible as per the Shariat to
re-bury based on that principle;

‫ﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻈﻮرﺍﺕ‬2‫ﺍﻟ‰ورﺍﺕ ﺗ‬

‘In time of need, necessity takes precedence over prohibition’

This principle is one which is unanimously accepted. It has been stated in

Kabiri Sharah Muniya,

‫ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻟ‰ورة‬4 ‫@ﻟﺪﻓﻦ ﺍŠﻣﺎ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺒﻞ ﺍﻻول ﻓﻠﻢ ﻳﺒﻖ ﻟ ﻋﻈﻢ ﺍﻻ‬A‫وﻻ ﻳﺤ‹ ﻗ‬
‫ﺑﺎن ﻟﻢ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﻣŒﺎن ﺳﻮﺍہ‬

‘And do not dig a grave to bury another person unless the initial body has
decomposed, and even its bones do not remain; but in a time of extreme
need, it is permissible to dig the grave, wherein there is no other place
(available), except this.’ [Ghuniyatul Mustamali Fi Sharah Muniyatul
Musal’li, pg.607]

Translator’s Footnote

This means that in (absolute) necessity that which is impermissible becomes

allowed, but this cannot be used as an excuse to change things in Shariah to go
with the times, and to suite ones whims and fancies, like many do today.

‫@ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻋﻤﺮﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‬N‫ﻔﻤ وﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺮﻗﻤ ﺍﻟﻌﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻔﻘ‬0 ‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﺎﻋﻨﺪی وﺍﻟﻌﻠﻢ ﺍﻻﺗﻢ ﻋﻨﺪ ر ﻗﺎﻟ‬

‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺎدری ﺍﻟﻬﺰﺍروی ﻋﻔﺎﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ‬x‫" ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬#‫ﺍﻟﺴ‬

This is according to me (i.e. my research), and the complete knowledge

belongs to my Creator. He has dictated this verdict with his own mouth,
and authorised it by his writing.

A humble servant
Muhammad Umrud’deen Sunni Hanafi Qaadiri Hazarvi %‫ﻋﻔﺎ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ‬

Verifications of the Verdict

First Verification

Whatever has been written by the judicious writer is correct and accurate.
It is in Khazanat ur Riwaya,

a ‫@ہ‬N‫@ ﻳہ دﻓﻦ ﻏ‬A‫ ﺍﻟﻘ‬a ‫ﺻﺎرﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﺗﺮﺍﺑﺎ‬

4 ‫ﻞ وﺍذﺍ‬Ò‫ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻔﻴﺪ ﻋﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﺗﻴﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎ‬a
‫؎ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﻲ‬۱ ‫ﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﻗﻴﺔ‬8‫@ہ ﻻن ﺍﻟ‬A‫ﻗ‬

‘It is in Mufid ul Mustafid from Mafatihul Masa’il that, even when the
deceased decomposes and turns to dust in his grave, it is Makruh
(disapproved) to bury someone else in his grave, because the honour and
dignity of that deceased is still prevailing.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.599]

It is also mentioned in Khazanat ur Riwaya,

‫@ ﺣﻖ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺒﻮر وﻟﻬﺬﺍ ﻻﻳﺠﻮز‬A‫" ﻓﻮق ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﺑƒﺘ ًﺎ ﺍوﻣﺴﺠﺪﺍ ﻻن ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﻘ‬#‫ﻻﻳﺠﻮز ﻻﺣ ٍﺪ ﺍن ﻳﺒ‬
.‫ﻧﺒﺸ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﻲ ﻣﺨﺘ_ﺍ‬

‘It is not permissible for anyone, to construct a house or a Masjid on a grave,

because the area (place) of the grave, is the right of the one whose grave it
is. It is for this reason impermissible to dig (i.e. open) it (i.e. the grave)’
[Khazanat ur Riwaya]
‫ﻧﻤﻘ ﺍﻟﺮﺍ ﺍ رﺣﻤﺔ رﺑ ﺍﻟﺸﻜﻮر ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻐﻔﻮر ﺻﺎﻧ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻻٰﻓﺎﺕ و ﺍﻟور‬

It has been written by one hopeful of the Mercy of his Most Generous
Creator, Abdul Ghafur. Allah protect him from all calamities and evils.

Second Verification

‫ﷲ درﺍﻟﻤﺠﻴﺐ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺍﺟﺎﺏ ﻓﺎﺟﺎدوﺍﺻﺎﺏ ﻓ‘ ﺍﻓﺎدہ‬

‫ ﻋﻨ‬x‫@ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻋ‬N‫ﺸ‬0 ‫ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ‬nN‫رہ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻜ‬W

May Allah bless the writer abundantly, for he has given an excellent
answer, and has given a detailed explanation.

Written by Muhammad Bashirud’deen ‫ﻋ ﻋﻨ‬

Third Verification

I have seen the said Fatawa. The Fatwa (decree) is accurate and the answer
is correct. Written by Muhammad Abdur Rasheed Delhvi %‫ ﻋﻨ‬-‫ ﻋ‬.

Fourth Verification

‫ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬

The answer is correct. Muhammad Afzal Al Majeed %‫ ﻋﻨ‬-‫ ﻋ‬.

Fifth Verification

‫ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ و ﺻﻮﺍﺏ‬

The answer is true and correct. Muhammad Abdul Muqtadir Qaadiri

Badayuni %‫ ﻋﻨ‬-‫ ﻋ‬.

Sixth Verification

The answer is exceptional * Muhammad Fazl e Ahmed Badayuni

Seventh Verification

The answer is correct * Muhammad Ibrahim Qaadiri

Eighth Verification

He has answered correctly. And Allah knows Best * Muhammad Hafiz

Bakhsh Teacher Madrassah Muhammadiyah - Badayun

Ninth Verification

The answer is correct * Abdur Rasool Muhib Ahmed (Badayun)


Translator’s Footnote: The above completes the Fatwa presented to Aala Hazrat
ؓ◌. Hereafter commences the explanation of this topic by the Mujad’did of the 14th
Century Sayyidi Aala Hazrat Ash Shah Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Qaadiri Barakaati


‫وﺟﻌﻞ ﻣﻮﺗﻬﻢ رﺍﺣ ًﺔ وﺳﺒﺎﺗ ًﺎ‬. ‫ ﺍﺣﻴﺎء وﺍﻣﻮﺍﺗﺎ‬:;‫ و ﺍ=م ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻣﻨ‬. ‫ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺪﷲ ﺍﻟﺬی ﺟﻌﻞ ﺍﻻرض ﻛﻔﺎﺗﺎ‬
‫ وﺍﻋﻄﺎﻧﺎ‬. ‫ﺍﺗﺎ‬G ‫ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﻋ)
ﻣﻦ ﺳﻘﺎﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻓﻀﻠ وﻓﻀﻠﺘ ﻣﺎء‬. ‫ﻳﻤ ًﺎ ﺑﺘﺎﺗ ًﺎ‬D‫م ﺍﻫﺎﻧﺘﻬﻢ ﺗ‬F‫و‬
. ‫ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻻﺑﺪﻳﻦ وﻟﻢ ﻳﻮﻗﺖ ﻟ ﻣﻴﻘﺎﺗ ًﺎ‬:;‫ﻌﻈﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻨ‬X ‫ وﺍﺑﺪ‬. ‫ﻘﻀﺎ وﺍﺛﺒﺎﺗﺎ‬Q ‫ﺣﺠﺔ‬
 ‫ﻣﺤﺠﺔ ﺍﺑﻠﺢ‬
‫وﺻﺤﺎﺑ و ﺍﻫﻞ وﺣﺰﺑ‬ ٖ
ٰ)‫ وﻋ‬. ‫م ﺍﻳﺬﺍء ﻫﻢ وﻟﻮﺎﻧﻮﺍ رﻓﺎﺗ ًﺎ‬F‫و‬
‫[ﻟ‬  . ‫ﻓﺠﻌﻠﻬﻢ ﻋﻈﺎﻣ ًﺎ وﺍن ﺻﺎروﺍ ﻋﻈﺎﻣ ًﺎ‬
.‫ ﺟﺰی ﺍﷲ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻴﺐ ﺧ; ًﺍ وﻳﺜﻴﺐ‬،‫ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﷲ ﺟﻤﻴﻌﺎو ﺍﺷﺘﺎﺗﺎ‬:;‫ﺍﻟﻤ\ﻣ‬

All praise is due to Almighty Allah, Who created the earth as that which
gathers everything. He gave dignity to the living and the dead believers,
and He made their death (a means of) peace and comfort, and He made it
Haraam to insult and be abusive towards them (both the living and the
dead) forever. Durood and Salaams upon that blessed personality who
nourished us with the sweet waters of His favours and His continuous
blessings, and who provided for us strong evidence of righteousness to
counter attack wrong in every field, and by doing so, He blessed honour to
the believers forever, and for this, He did not stipulate any set time; and He
granted excellence to the believers, even though they may become bones,
and He made it Haraam to harm them, even though they may have turned
to dust. And salutations upon his illustrious family and noble companions,
and upon his congregation, who are all exalted in the sight of Allah, (both)
as a congregation, and individually. May Allah bless the writer (of the
above-mentioned verdict) abundantly (for his efforts).

The one with collective virtues, the extinguisher of corruption, the
protector of the Sunnah, the destroyer of dissension, Maulana Maulavi,
Muhammad Umrud’deen (Allah make him just as his name Umrud’deen is,
and for his efforts and for his protection may he be blessed with long life
in Deen). His answer is clear and illuminating, correct and sufficient, but
on his command, in my humble capacity, I would like to add two beneficial
sections to this discussion.

Section one will be in support of the verdict of the learned writer, and in
verification of its correctness; that it is necessary to respect the graves of
the Muslims, and to abstain from harming the deceased. (I will also attempt
to explain) those actions which cause discomfort to the deceased, even
though a few of the proofs presented may be repetitions, but as it is well-
known, the repetition of evidence is excellent in the case of presenting
support on any issue. ‫ﻣﺎ
رﺗ ﻳﺘﻀﺆ‬

Section two will be enforcement of the objective, defeating deception,

admonishment of the erroneous ones, and annihilating the offenders, and
to clearly prove that it is Haraam to build even Waqf houses on the graves
of the general Muslims, leave alone building houses for your own comfort
and residence.

Also, being discussed here is the issue concerning the research of Imam
Zayla’i. Only two verdicts of this humble servant will be presented in this
section; and Praise be to Allah, this will be sufficient. ‫وﺑﺎﷲ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻓﻴﻖ‬

Section One

It has been unanimously agreed upon by the Ulama that the respect for the
Muslims, both living and dead is equal. The noble intellectual ‫رﲪﺔ  اﷲ  ﺗﻌﺎﱃ  ﻠﻴﻪ‬

states in Fathul Qadeer,

4 ‫ﻣﺘ‬8‫ƒﺘﺎ ﻛ‬4 ‫ﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻢ ﻣ‬W“ ‫ﺍن‬
4 ٰ‫ﺍﻻ!ﻔﺎق ﻋ‬

‘It has been agreed upon that, the respect and the dignity afforded to a
deceased Muslim is the same as is awarded to one who is alive.’ [Fathul
Qadeer, Vol.2, pg.102]

The Beloved Rasool  said,

4 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ وﺍذﺍہ ﻛﻜ”ہ‬
4 ‫ﻛ” ﻋﻈﻢ‬

‘Breaking the bones of the deceased, and causing pain to the deceased, is
like breaking the bones of a living person.’ [Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol.2,

This has been reported by Imam Ahmed, Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah on the
merit of it being a Hasan (i.e. close to sound) narration, from Sayyidatuna
A’isha Siddiqa ‫ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ ﻋﻨﺎ‬.

This Hadith has been reported in Musnad ul Firdaus with the following
words; The Beloved Rasool  said,

‫ ﺑƒﺘ‬a ‫@ ٖہ ﻣﺎﻳﺆذﻳ‬A‫ ﻗ‬a ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﺆذﻳ‬


‘The deceased (also) feels discomfort in his grave, by that which causes
discomfort to him in his home.’ [Al Firdaus, Vol.1, pg.199]

Allama Manawi states in Sharah,

‫ﻌﺪﻣﻮﺗ ﺑﺎﻗﻴﺔ‬0 ‫ﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻦ‬W ‫ﺍﻓﺎدﺍن‬

‘From this Hadith we ascertain that even after death, the Muslim deceased
must be honoured.’ [Faiz ul Taqdeer Sharah Jaami us Sagheer, Vol.4, pg.551]

Sayyiduna Hazrat Ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌ states,

‫ ﺣﻴﺎﺗ‬a ‫ ﻣﻮﺗ 'ﺎذﺍہ‬a ‫ﺍذی ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻦ‬

‘To cause discomfort to the Muslim deceased, is the same as causing

discomfort to a living person.’ This has been reported by Abu Bakr ibn Abi
Shayba. [Sharhus Sudoor]

The Ulama have stated,

‚‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﺘﺎذی ﺑﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﺎذی ﺑ ﺍﻟ‬

‫@ہ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺘﻤﺪﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﺳﻔﺎر‬N‫ ردﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﺎر وﻏ‬a‫ﻛﺬﺍ‬

‘That which causes pain and discomfort to the deceased, causes pain and
discomfort to the living, just as it has been mentioned in authentic books
like Raddul Muhtar etc.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.229]

Allama Shaykh Muhaqqiq ‫ رﲪﺔ اﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﻠﻴﻪ‬quotes from Imam Allama Abu Umar

Yusuf bin Abd Al Birr in Ashi’atul Lam’aat as follows:

  Œ †2 “ ” Œ 
+ s u‰ ‹
z ’
  Š m  1  Ž  ‘  1 ‹ z   Ž  • + 1‹ zŒ–B > 
 ~ žš   Œ   Œ
œ 
k  m › u1  u˜™1 —z
— z

‘Here it is being acknowledged that all those things which cause harm to
the living, cause harm to the deceased, and it is thus obvious that all that
which causes pleasure (i.e. happiness) to the living, also gives such pleasure
to the deceased.’ [Ashi’atul Lam’aat, Vol.1, pg.292]

This is to the extent that our Ulama have mentioned that, if a new road
(pathway) has been created in the graveyard, it is Haraam to walk on such
a pathway.

‫ ﺳﻜﺔ ﺣﺎدﺛﺔ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬a‫ﺼﻮﺍ ﻋٰ ﺍن ﺍﻟﻤﺮور‬u ‫ ﺍﻟﺸﺎﻣﻴ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻄﺤﻄﺎوﻳﺔ ﺁŠ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻄﻬﺎرة‬a

‘It is in the latter part of the Book of Purification in Shaami, from Tahtawi
that the Ulama have clarified that, to walk on such a pathway that has been
newly made in a graveyard, is Haraam.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.229]

They also state,

‘To cut the grass on the graves is Makruh; because as long as it is fresh, it
recites the Tasbeeh of Allah. This (green) grass gives comfort to the hearts
of the deceased, and the mercy of Allah descends upon them. However, it
is permissible to cut off (i.e. remove) grass which has become dry. One may
trim the grass and take it to feed the animals. It is disallowed to bring the
animals into the graveyard to graze.’

‫@ة دون ﺍﻟﻴﺎﺑﺲ‬A‫ﺰ ردﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﺎر ﻳہ ﺍ ﻀﺎ ﻗﻄﻊ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺮﻃﺐ وﺍﻟﺤﺸﻴﺶ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬Ò‫ ﺟﻨﺎ‬a
‫ وﺍﻟﺪر„ وšح ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻴﺔ‬8‫ ﺍﻟﺒ‬a ‫ﻛﻤﺎ‬

‘It is Raddul Muhtar in the Book of Prayer for the deceased that, it is
Makruh to cut off (i.e. remove) fresh green grass from the graves, and to
remove dry grass is not objectionable, just as it has been mentioned in
Bahr, Durar and Sharah Muniya.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.606]

4 ‫ ﺍﻻﻣﺪﺍد ﺑﺎﻧ ﻣﺎدﺍم رﻃﺒ ًﺎ ﺴﺒﺢ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻓﻴﻮﻧﺲ‬a ‫وﻋﻠﻠ‬
‫ہ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﺔ‬M‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ وﺗﻨﺰل ﺑﺬ‬
‫ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﻲ‬a ‫وﻧﺤﻮہ‬

‘And the reason mentioned for this in Imdad, is that for as long as it remains
fresh (green), it recites Allah’s Tasbeeh, so the deceased feels comfort; and
due to its Zikr, the mercy (of Allah) descends. And the same has been
mentioned in Khania.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.1, pg.606]

‫ﻖ ﻟﻮ'ﺎن ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺣﺸﻴﺶ ﻳﺤﺶ وﻳﺮﺳﻞ ﺍ ﺍﻟﺪوﺍﺏ وﻻﺗﺮﺳﻞ‬Ò‫ﺍﻟﺮﺍ‬8‫@ﻳﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺒ‬N‫ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﮕ‬a‫و‬
‫ﺍﻟﺪوﺍﺏ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬

It is in Alamgiri from Bahrur Raa’iq that if there is grass growing in the

graveyard, then one may trim it, and take it with (for feeding), but one
should not leave ones animals to graze therein. [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2,

Sayyiduna Rasoolullah  once saw a person walking with his shoes on the
graves. He  said, ‘O such shameful person, who is wearing Taai’fi shoes.
Throw away your shoes.’

‫@ ﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﺨﺼﺎﺻﻴﺔ وﺍﻟﻠﻔﻆ ﻟﻼﻣﺎم‬N‫ﺸ‬0 ‫@ﻫﻢ ﻋﻦ‬N‫ﻤﺔ ﺍﺑﻮدﺍﺅد ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎ وﺍﻟﻄﺤﻄﺎوی وﻏ‬Ò‫ﺍŠج ﺍﻻ‬
،nN‫ﻌﻠ‬u a ‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر‬nN‫" ﺑ‬ ‫ی رﺟ ًﻼ ﻳﻤ‬w‫ ﺍن رﺳﻮل ﺍﷲ ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ ر‬x‫ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬
¡ .‫ ﺍھ‬t‫…ƒ…ﻴ‬2‫ ﺍﻟﻖ ﺳ‬nN‫…ƒﺘ‬2‫ ﻳﺎ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﺴ‬t‫ﻓﻘﺎل وﻳﺤ‬
‫…ﺘ ﺑﻜ” ﺍﻟﻤﻬﻤﻠﺔ وﺳﻜﻮن‬2‫ﺍﻟﺴ‬
‫" ﻋﻴﺎض 'ﺎن ﻣﻦ ﻋﺎدة ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺏ ﻟﺒﺲ ﺍﻟﻨﻌﺎل‬B‫ ﻗﺎل ﺍﻟﻘﺎ‬.‫" ﻻﺷﻌﺮﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬Z‫ ﺍﻟ‬s ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺣﺪة‬
‫ ﺍﻟﺦ‬۲؎ ‫@ہ‬N‫ﻒ وﻏ‬Ò‫ﻐﺔ !ﻌﻤﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺎ‬0‫@ﻣﺪﺑﻮﻏﺔ و'ﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻟﻤﺪ‬N‫ﺸﻌﺮﻫﺎ ﻏ‬0

Our A’ima, Abu Dawud, Nasa’i and Tahtawi etc. have narrated from Bashir
bin Khasasiyah, and the words narrated are those of Imam Hanafi that the
Beloved Rasool  once saw a person walking between the graves while
wearing his shoes. Sayyiduna Muhammad Mustafa  said, ‘May bad befall
you, O’ one with the shoes. Remove your shoes!’

The word ‘Sibta’ is with a Kasra at the beginning and with a sukoon on the
letter ‘Ba.’ This refers to the leather on which there is no fur. Qadi Iyaadh
has mentioned, ‘The Arabs used to wear leather shoes which still had fur
on them, and the people of Taa’if etc. wore shoes from skin that was
tanned.’ [Sharah Ma’ani ul Athaar, Vol.1, pg.342; Tareekh Sibta of Qadi

The masterful scholar, Hasan Shurunbulali and his Ustadh, Allama

Muhammad bin Ahmed Hamawi state, ‘That sound which is caused due to
walking by the feet (with shoes) causes sadness (i.e. discomfort) to the

‫ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ‬x‫ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻮی ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬y‫ ﺷﻴ‬v@A‫ ﺍﻟﻔﻼح ﺍﺧ‬¥‫ ﻣﺮﺍ‬a ‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﻗﺎل‬
‫!ﻌﺎٰ ﺑﺎﻧﻬﻢ ﻳﺘ ٔﺎذون ﺑﺨﻔﻖ ﺍﻟﻨﻌﺎل‬

It is for this reason that it has been stated in Maraqi ul Falaah, my Shaykh
Allama Muhammad bin Ahmad Al Hamawi Al Hanafi ‫رﲪﺔ  اﷲ  ﺗﻌﺎﱃ  ﻠﻴﻪ‬ said, that
sound which is caused by walking (with shoes), causes discomfort to the

ٰ‫ﺍﻗﻮل ووﺟﻬ ﻣﺎﺳﻴ ٔﺎ¨ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﺎرف ﺍﻟ¦@ﻣﺬی رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎ‬

‘I say, that soon the evidence to this, will be presented from Arif Tirmizi.’
[Maraqi ul Falah, pg.342]

Nabi Kareem  said,

ٰ‫@ﻟ ﻣﻦ ﺍن ﻳﺠﻠﺲ ﻋ‬N‫" ﺗﺨﻠﺺ ﺍٰ ﺟﻠﺪہ ﺧ‬Z‫ق ﺛﻴﺎﺑ ﺣ‬8‫ﻻن ﻳﺠﻠﺲ ﺍﺣﺪ ﻛﻢ ﻋٰ ﺟﻤﺮة ﻓﺘ‬
‫" ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ‬B‫@ روﺍہ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ وﺍﺑﻮدﺍﺅد وﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎ وﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺎﺟﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺳﻴﺪﻧﺎ ﺍ ﻫﺮﻳﺮة ر‬A‫ﻗ‬

‘Indeed, it is better for a person to sit on burning embers, until it burns

through his clothes and reaches his skin, rather than him sitting on a grave.
This has been reported by Muslim, Abu Dawud, Nasa’i and Ibn Majah on the
authority of Sayyiduna Abu Hurairah ؓ◌.’ [Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol.2, pg.104]

Am’mara bin Hazm ؓ◌ says, ‘Rasoolullah  saw me sitting on a grave, so
he  said, ‘get off from the grave. If you do not cause distress to the
deceased, the deceased will not cause distress to you’.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

‫ﺴﻨﺪ ﺣﺴﻦ وﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ وﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﻨﺪة‬0 @N‫ﻜﺒ‬p‫ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺠﻢ ﺍ‬a v‫@ﺍ‬A‫ ﺍﻻﺛﺎر وﺍﻟﻄ‬v‫ ﻣﻌﺎ‬a ‫ﺍŠج ﺍﻟﻄﺤﺎوی‬
ٰ‫ رﺳﻮل ﺍﷲ ﺻ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ ﺟﺎﻟﺴ ًﺎ ﻋ‬v‫" ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ ﻗﺎل رﺍ‬B‫ﻋﻦ ﻋﻤﺎرة ﺑﻦ ﺣﺰم ر‬
‫ وﻟﻔﻆ ﺍﻻﻣﺎم‬۱؎ t‫@ وﻻﻳﺆذﻳ‬A‫@ ﻻ ﺗﺆذی ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ‬A‫@ ﺍﻧﺰل ﻣﻦ ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬A‫@ ﻓﻘﺎل ﻳﺎ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ‬A‫ﻗ‬
t‫ ﻓﻼﻳﺆذﻳ‬x‫ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬

Tahawi has quoted from Ma’aani ul Athaar; and Tabrani has quoted in
Mu’jam Al Kabeer, with the merit of a Hassan narration; and Haakim and
Ibn Munda narrated from Am’mara ibn Hazm ؓ◌ that, Sayyiduna
Rasoolullah  saw me sitting on a grave and He  said, ‘O, you who are
sitting on the grave. Get off the grave and do not cause discomfort to the
deceased, and he will not cause you any harm.’ The words of Imam Hanafi
are, ‘so that he may not harm you.’ [Sharah Ma’ani ul Asaar, Vol.1, pg.346]

Imam Ahmed ‫ رﲪﺔ اﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﻠﻴﻪ‬has mentioned in his Musnad that Nabi  saw Amr
bin Hazm leaning against a grave and said,

‹‫ﻤ ﺗﺎوﻳﻞ ﺍﻻﻣﺎم ﺍ ﺟﻌ‬Ò‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜٰﻮة ﻗﻠﺖ وﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻻﻳﻼ‬a ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ‬-@A‫ﻻﺗﺆذ « ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ‬
‫ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻋﻢ ﻣﻨ ﻓﺎﻓﻬﻢ‬a ‫وﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺷﻴﺊ ﻻﻳﻨﺎ‬
‘Do not harm the person in the grave,’ just as it has been mentioned in
Mishkaat. I am saying that the interpretation of Imam Abu Ja’far does not
have any connection to this Hadith, and to forbid from something, does not
necessitate it being forbidden generally through that thing, so deliberate
over this. [Mishkaat ul Masabih, Vol.1, pg.149]

Shaykh Muhaqqiq ‫ رﲪﺔ اﷲ ﺗﻌﺎﱃ ﻠﻴﻪ‬states in Sharh Mishkaat,

 ~  ~
wxW1 a Ÿs|    .AxI +€ 0 ^+' &

x ‚ƒ 

‘This could perhaps mean that the soul is displeased with someone resting
against the grave, as this is an insult to the deceased.’ [Ashi’atul Lam’aat,
Vol.1, pg.699]

I say, on the basis of this guideline, Imam Allama Muhad’dith Arif Bil’laah
Hakeem ul Ummat Sayyidi Muhammad bin Ali Tirmizi made a decision. He
explains that, ‘the souls become aware of the disrespect, and feel insulted
by the manner in which they are being treated, and thus feel hurt.’

‫ ﺍﻟﺤﺪ ﻘﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻧﻮﺍدر ﺍﻻﺻﻮل ﻣﻌﻨﺎہ ﺍن ﺍﻻروﺍح !ﻌﻠﻢ ﺑﺎﻟ¦@ک ﺍﻗﺎﻣﺔ‬a "#‫ﻗﺎل ﺳﻴﺪی ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻐ‬
t‫ﻣﺔ وﺑﺎﻻﺳﺘﻬﺎﻧ ﻓ…ﺘ ٔﺎذی ﺑﺬﻟ‬8‫ﺍﻟ‬

Sayyidi Abdul Ghani Nablusi states in Al Hadiqatun Nadiya from Nawadir
ul Usul, ‘It means that the souls sense the disrespect and insult, and are
thus saddened by this.’ [Al Hadiqatun Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.505]

Sayyiduna Rasoolullah  says,

‫ روﺍہ‬. @A‫" ﻋٰ ﻗ‬ ‫ﻌ ﺑﺮﺟ ﺍﺣﺐ ﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍن ﺍﻣ‬u ‫ﺍوﺳﻴﻒ ﺍوﺍﺧﺼﻒ‬ ‫ﻻن ﺍم ­" ﻋ ﺟﻤﺮة‬
‫ﺟﻴﺪ ﻛﻤﺎ ﻓﺎد ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺬری‬
4 ‫" ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨ وﺍﺳﻨﺎدہ‬B‫ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺎﺟﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻋﻘﺒﺔ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﺮ ر‬

‘I feel it is better to walk on burning embers, or on a sword, or to string

together my feet with my shoes rather than walking on the grave of
someone.’ It has been narrated in Ibn Majah from Uqba bin Aamir ؓ◌ and
the merit of this narration is acceptable just as Mundhiri has verified.
[Sunan Ibn Majah, pg.113]

Hazrat Abdullah ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌ states,

‫@ ﺑﺎﺳﻨﺎد‬N‫ﻜﺒ‬p‫ ﺍ‬a v‫@ﺍ‬A‫ روﺍہ ﺍﻟﻄ‬،‫@ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ‬A‫ﻻن ﺍﻃﺎء ﻋ ﺟﻤﺮة ﺍﺣﺐ ﺍ ﻣﻦ ﺍن ﺍﻃﺎء ﻋٰ ﻗ‬
‫ ﻗﺎﻟ ﺍﻣﺎم ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ‬. ‫ﺣﺴﻦ‬

‘I certainly prefer to place my feet on burning embers, rather than walking

on the grave of a Muslim.’ Tabrani has narrated this in Mu’jam Al Kabeer
on the merit of it being a sound narration. It has been mentioned by Imam
Abdul Azeem. [At Targheeb Wat Tarheeb, Vol.4, pg.372]
Someone once asked the same great Sahabi (Abdullah ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌) about
the issue of keeping one’s foot on a grave. He replied,

a ‫ ﺍŠﺟ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻣﻨﺼﻮر‬- ‫ﻌﺪ ﻣﻮﺗ‬0 ‫ہ ﺍذﺍہ‬M‫ ﺍ‬v‫ ﺣﻴﺎﺗ ﻓﺎ‬a ‫ہ ﺍذﺍی ﺍﻟﻤﺆﻣﻦ‬M ‫ﻛﻤﺎ‬
‫ šح ﺍﻟﺼﺪور‬a ‫ﺳﻨﻨ ﻛﻤﺎ‬

‘Just as I feel that it is Makruh (disliked) to cause pain to a Muslim during

his lifetime, likewise, do I dislike him being hurt after he passes away.’

Sa’eed ibn Mansur has reported this narration in his Sunan, just as it is
evident from Sharhus Sudoor.

a ‫ﺪﻣﺎ ﺍﺧ¦@ﻧﺎ وﺗﺆذن ﺍن ﺗﺎوﻳﻞ ﺍ ﺟﻌ‹ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻟﻴﺲ‬4‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻫﺬہ ﺍﻻﺣﺎدﻳﺚ ﺗﻮﻳ‬
‫ وﻻﻧ ﻋﻠﻴ ﺍﻻﻛ¯@ وﻗﺪ‬،‫ﻜﺘﺐ ﻧﺄﺧﺬ ﻻﻋﺘﻀﺎدﻫﺎ ﺑﻨﺼﻮص ﺍﻻﺣﺎدﻳﺚ‬p‫ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺍ‬a ‫ﻣﺤﻠ ﻓﺒﻤﺎ‬
‫ وﺍﻧ ﻻ ﻌﺪل ﻋﻦ روﺍﻳﺔ ﻣﺎوﻓﻘﺘﻬﺎ درﺍﻳﺔ ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﺍذﺍ'ﺎن ﻫﻮﺍ‬،@¯‫ﺼﻮﺍ ﺍن ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻴ ﺍﻻﻛ‬u
._‫ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺪة ﻓ…ﺒ‬a‫ﺍﻻﺷﻬﺮ ﺍﻻﻇﻬﺮ ﺍﻻﻛ¯@ ﺍﻻزﻫﺮ وﺑ ٰﻬﺬﺍ ﻀﻌﻒ ﻣﺎزﻋﻢ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺪر‬

I say, ‘It has become evident from these Ahadith, that the interpretation
which we have taken is the correct one, and the explanation of Abu Ja’far %‫رﺣﻤ‬
ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬is not appropriate in this instance. Hence, we are complying with the

way which is evident in the wide-ranging books, since these receive

strength through the clear indication made in the Ahadith; and also for this

reason, that it is the statement of the majority (of the learned scholars),
since the Ulama have clarified that this Amal (practice) is based on that
which is agreed upon by the majority (of the learned and righteous
scholars), and also this, that one cannot decline such a narration which is
according to expertise (proper reasoning); then what permissibility is
there to decline that which is well-known, clear, well established and
agreed upon? It is through this, that the opinion of the Allama Badr is
recognised as a weak opinion. So deliberate over this!’

It is from these Ahadith that our Ulama ‫ رﺣﻤﺔ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ‬have disallowed us to
step on a grave, or sit on it etc., without an absolute necessity, as they have
regarded these actions as disrespect and insult to the deceased.

‫@ وﺍﻟﻘﻌﻮد ﺍو ﺍﻟﻨﻮم‬A‫ہ وطء ﺍﻟﻘ‬M ‫@ﻫﺎ ﺍن ﺍﺑﺎﺣﻨﻴﻔﺔ‬N‫ﻊ وﺍﻟﻤﺤﻴﻂ وﻏ‬Ò‫ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺍدر وﺍﻟﺘﺤﻔﺔ وﺍﻟﺒﺪﺍ‬x‫ﻓ‬
‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ‬p‫ ﺍﻗﻮل وﺍ‬.‫ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻴﺔ‬a ‫@ ﺍﻟﺤﺎج‬N‫ﻘﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻣ‬u ‫ﺍوﻗﻀﺎء ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺟﺔ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻛﺬﺍ‬
‫ ﺍﻻﺣﺎدﻳﺚ ﻣﻌﻠ ًﻼ‬a‫ﺣﻮﺍ ﺑ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻔﻴﺪہ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﺍﻟﻮﺍرد‬³ ‫ﻳﻢ ﻛﻤﺎ‬8‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﺗ‬M ‫ﺍﻻﻃﻼق‬
.‫ﺍم ﻓﻬﺬﺍ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﺑ وﺍن ﻗﻴﻞ وﻗﻴﻞ‬W ‫ﺑﺎﻻﻳﺬﺍء وﺍﻻﻳﺬﺍء‬

It is in Nawadir, Tohfa, Bada’i and Muheet etc. that (Imam) Abu Hanifa has
said it to be Makruh (disapproved and disliked) to walk on a grave, sleep on
it, and to answer the call of nature on it. Ibn Ameer Al Haaj has quoted in
Hilya. I say, ‘When it being disapproved (Makruh) is mentioned as being
absolute, then it means that this is a disapproval which reaches the level
close to that of prohibition (i.e. it is Makruh e Tahreemi), just as the learned
Fuqaha (learned Jurists) have explanation. There is also supportive
evidence forbidding it, which has been mentioned in the Ahadith about the
issue of discomfort and harm that is caused (to the deceased), and to cause
harm is Haraam, and this is the authentic interpretation according to the
Deen, no matter what anybody else says. [Al Bada’i Was Sana’i, Vol.1,
pg.320; Tohfatul Fuqaha, Vol.2, pg257]

‫ﺍﻟﻤﺸﻜﻮة ﺍﻟﻮطء ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺟﺔ ﻛﺪﻓﻦ‬

ٰ ‫ ﺍﻟﻔﻼح ﻋﻦ šح‬¥‫ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻄﺤﻄﺎوی ﻋ ﻣﺮﺍ‬a
‫" ﻋﻠﻴ ﻟﻠ‰ورة‬ ‫@ ﺟﺎزﻟ ﺍﻟﻤ‬A‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻻﻳہ ﺍھ وﻋﻦ ﺍﻟ”ﺍج ﻓﺎن ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻟ ´ﻳﻖ ﺍﻻﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬

It is in the marginal notes of Allama Tahtawi in Maraqi ul Falaah on Sharah

Mishkaat, that in the case of necessity, if one needs (i.e. is compelled) to
pass over a grave to bury a deceased, then to do so is not Makruh. It is in
Siraaj that, ‘If there is a pathway over a grave, then to walk on it is only
allowed due to necessity.’ [Haashia Tahtawi Ala Maraqi ul Falah, pg.340]

It is in the Haashia of Tahtawi Ala Sharah Noorul Idaah from Siraaj


‫@ ﺟﺎزﻟ دﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻟﻠ‰ورة‬A‫ ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬4 ‫ﺍن ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ ﻟ ´ﻳﻖ ﺍﻻ‬

‘If the pathway is from on top of the grave, then to walk on it out of
necessity, is permissible.’

a @A‫ﻳﻢ ﻓﺎن ﺍﻟﻤﻔﻬﻮم ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﻣﻌﺘ‬8‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﺍﻟﺘ‬M ‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻫﺬﺍ ﺍ ﻀﺎ دﻟﻴﻞ ﻋ ﻣﺎﺍﺧ¦@ﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ورة وﻣﺎﻻﻳﺠﻮز ﻓﺎدﻧﺎہ‬µ‫" ﻻﻳﺠﻮز ﺑﻼ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﺮوﺍﻳﺎﺕ و¶م ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﺎء ﺑﺎﻻ!ﻔﺎق ﻓﺎﻓﺎدﺍن ﺍﻟﻤ‬
.‫ﻳﻢ‬8‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﺍﻟﺘ‬M

I say, ‘This is also evidence that our statement of disapproval on the level
of prohibition (Tahreemi) is correct, because Mafhum e Mukhalif (i.e. to
take a contrasting meaning) in narrations, and in the views of the Ulama is
regarded as permissible, according to consensus. Therefore, it has been
confirmed that, to walk on the grave without a valid necessity is
impermissible, and the most moderate degree of that which is
impermissible, is Makruh e Tahreemi. [Haashia Tahtawi Ala Maraqi ul
Falah, pg.340]

Sayyid Abdul Ghani Nablusi states in Al Hadiqatun Nadiya,


Original Footnote: His statement about without absolute necessity (is being
clarified here). One example of absolute necessity, is when a grave needs to be dug
for a deceased in the cemetery, or there is a need to bury the deceased. However,
the entire area around it is covered by graves, and one needs to get to that point,
but the graves are in the way, then for this reason one is permitted to do the above.
However, to the best of your ability you should try to avoid the graves, and try to
go barefoot and make Dua e Maghfirat for those deceased as you go.

‫@ ﻟﻤﺎروی ﻋﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻣﺴﻌﻮد‬A‫ šح ﻋ ﺍﻟﺪر„ وﻳہ ﺍن ﻳﻮطء ﺍﻟﻘ‬a ٰ‫ﻗﺎل ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻟﺪ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎ‬
‫ ﺍﺛﺮﺍﻟﺬی روﻳﻨﺎہ‬M‫ﺍﻟﺦ و ذ‬

‘My father ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫ رﺣﻤ‬has mentioned in the Sharah of Durar that, to walk on a
grave is Makruh, just as it has been mentioned by Ibn Mas’ud ؓ◌.’ He further
explained the same signs which we have mentioned. [Al Hadiqatun Nadiya,
Vol.2, pg.504]

It has been recorded from Muheet that,

‫@ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻞ و ﻘﻌﺪ ﻋﻠﻴ‬A‫ﻳہ ﺍن ﻳﻄﺎء ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬

‘To walk on the grave with the feet, and to sit on it is Makruh.’

The reason for stipulating trampling with the feet was made clear so that
it is not applied as the same (ruling) as being intimate (by a grave). [Al
Hadiqatun Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.504]

‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻳہ ﺍ ﻀ ًﺎ ﺑﻞ ﺍﺷﺪ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻓﻴ ﻣﻦ زﻳﺎرة ﺍﻻﺳﺘﺨﻔﺎف 'ﺎ ﻟﻮﻃ ٔﺎ ﻋ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ ﻣﻊ‬
a ‫ ﻓŒﺎن ﺍﻟﺤﻤﻞ ﻋ ﺍﻟﻮﻃ ٔﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﻟﻴﻜﻮن ﺍدﺧﻞ‬،‫ ﺗﻨﺎ·" ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺕ‬a ‫ ﺍﻟﻘﻠﺐ‬s‫ﺍﻟﺪﻻﻟﺔ ﻋٰ ﺗﻨﺎ‬
‫ ﺃن ﻔ¸ﻢ‬º<‫@ ﻣوﮦ »ﻜﺬﺍ ﻳﻨﺒ‬N‫" ﺍﻟﺠﻤﺎع ﺑ¾ﻳﻖ دﻻﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﺺ ﻻ ﻻﻧ½ ﻏ‬#‫ﺍﻟﻨﻬﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﻃ ٔﺎ ﺑﻤﻌ‬

I say, ‘Even to be intimate (by a grave) is Makruh, and this is even more
detested, since there is even more disrespect and insolence in this, like
having intercourse on the roof of a Masjid. By doing such a (corrupt) action,
also indicates that one has forgotten death. Hence, to attribute it to
trampling with the feet, is for this reason so that it serves as evidence to
the forbiddance of intimacy (there). This does not mean that intimacy
there is not Makruh. This is how it should be understood.’

It is recorded from Jaami ’ul Fatawa that,

ٔ ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ ﻓﻼ ﻳﺠﻮز ﺍن‬

‫ﻳﻮﻃﺎ‬ 4 ‫ﺍﻧ وﺍﻟ¦@ﺍﺏ ﺍﻟﺬی ﻋﻠﻴ ﺣﻖ‬

‘The sand on the grave is the property of the deceased.

Thus, it is not permissible to walk on it.’
It is in Mujtaba,

‫" ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﻳہ‬ ‫ﺍن ﺍﻟﻤ‬

‘It is Makruh to walk on the graves’

It is Shar’atul Islam and in its annotation as follows,

t‫ﻌﻠﻴ ﻓﺎن ﺍﻟﻨ¿" ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ 'ﺎن ﻳہ ذﻟ‬u a ‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﺍن ﻻﻳﻄﺄ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر‬

‘It is from the Sunnah that one should not walk on a grave in one’s shoes,
as the Beloved Rasool  mentioned it to be Makruh.’ [Al Hadiqatun
Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.504]

Shamsul A’ima Halwani stated,

‫وﺍﻧ ﻗﺎل ﻳہ‬

‘And to do so is Makruh’
[Al Hadiqatun Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.505]

Imam Ali Tarjumani states,

4 ‫@ ﺣﻖ‬A‫ﻳﺄﺛﻢ ﺑﻮﻃﺊ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﻻن ﺳﻘﻒ ﺍﻟﻘ‬
‘Trampling on the graves will make one a sinner, for the roof (top) of a
grave is the property of the deceased.’
[Al Hadiqatun Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.505]

ٰ‫ ﻻن ﻣﺮﺟﻌ ﺍ‬.‫ ﺍﻟﻤوہ ﺗﻨﺰﻳﻬﺎ‬a ‫ﻳﻢ ﺍذﻻ ﺍﺛﻢ‬8‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﺍﻟﺘ‬M ‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻫﺬﺍ ﻧﺺ ﻋ ﻣﺎﺍﺧ¦@ﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ‬
"¿‫ وﻻ ﻧ رﺑﻤﺎ !ﻌﻤﺪہ ﺍﻟﻨ¿" ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ ﺑﻴﺎﻧ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﺠﻮﺍز وﺍﻟﻨ‬، ٰ‫ﺧﻼف ﺍﻻو‬
‫ﺣﻮﺍ ﺍﻧ ﻳﺠﺎﻣﻊ‬³ ‫ﻴﺎن ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍز وﻻﻧﻬﻢ‬2‫" ﻟ‬#‫ﻣﻌﺼﻮم ﻋﻦ !ﻌﻤﺪ ﺍﻻﺛﻢ وﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺛﻢ ﻻﻳﺠﻮز ﻓﻼ ﻣﻌ‬
‫@ون ﻋﻨﻬﺎ‬A‫ وﺍﻟﻤﻌﺼﻴﺔ ﻻﺗﺠﺎﻣﻌﻬﺎ وﻻﻧﻬﻢ ﻌ‬،‫ ﺍ ﺍﻟﺴﻌﻮد‬،‫ ﺍšﺑﺔ ردﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﺎر‬a ‫ﺍﻻﺑﺎﺣﺔ ﻛﻤﺎ‬
‫س ﺍﻋﻈﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﺛﻢ وﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺛﻢ وﺍﺟﺐ ﺍﻟ¦@ک وﻣﺎوﺟﺐ ﺗﺮﻛ 'ﺎن ﻓﻌﻠ‬
ٍ ‫ ﺍﻟﺒﺎس وﺍی ﺑﺎ‬x‫ﺑﻨ‬
‫ﺼﻮﺍ ﺍن ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻟﻤوہ ﺗﻨﺰﻳﻬﺎ ﻻ ﻌﺎﻗﺐ‬u ‫ﻳﻢ وﺍﻻﻧﻬﻢ‬8‫ﺍﻫﺔ ﺍﻟﺘ‬M "#‫ﺍم وﻫﺬﺍ ﻣﻌ‬8‫ﻣﻘﺎر ﺑﺎﻟ‬
‫@ة ﻓﻬﺬہ‬N‫ ﺍﻟﺘﻠﻮﻳﺢ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎﺍﻋﺘﻘﺪﻧﺎ ﺍن ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﺍن ﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﻋٰ 'ﻞ ﺟﺮﻳﺮة وﻟﻮﺻﻐ‬a ‫ﺍﺻﻼ ﻛﻤﺎ‬
‫ رﺳﺎﻟﺔ šﺏ‬a ‫ﻌﺾ ﺍﺑﻨﺎء ﺍﻟﺰﻣﺎن‬0 ‫ﻞ ﻧﺎﻃﻘﺔ ﺑﺎن ﻣﺎوﻗﻊ ﻋﻦ‬Ò‫ﺑﺤﻤﺪ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﺳﺒﻌﺔ دﻻ‬
‫ح ﺻﺎﺣﺐ‬³ ‫ﻌﻢ ﻗﺪ‬u ‫ﺮ ﻏﻠﻂ ﻓﺎﺣﺶ وﺧﻄﺎء ﻋﻈﻴﻢ‬Ò‫ﺍﻟﺪﺧﺎن ﻣﻦ ﺍن ﺍﻟﻤوہ ﺗﻨﺰﻳﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺼﻐﺎ‬
.‫ﻳﻤﺎ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﺘﺜﺒﺖ وﻻﺗﺨﺒﻂ‬8‫ہ ﺍن ﺍﻟﻤوہ ﺗ‬8‫ ﺑ‬a 8‫ﺍﻟﺒ‬

I say, ‘Even this statement adopted by us, clearly indicates that the
‘Karahat’ (disapproval) is Tahreemi, because there is no sin in that which
is Makruh e Tanzeehi. Tanzeehi is only that which is contrary to the
preferred way of doing something. Thus, (to say that) Nabi  did this
intentionally to show permissibility, whereas a Nabi does not intentionally
(or un-intentionally) commit sin as they are Ma’sum from this; and that
which takes one towards sin is totally impermissible, so what then is meant
by trying to prove permissibility? Thus, this would not be combined with
that which is permitted, just as it is in Raddul Muhtar from Abi Mas’ud, and
sin cannot be combined with what is permitted.

They (the Wahabis) then try to establish this from negation of

wretchedness, and which wretched action will be regarded worse than sin.
It is for this reason that it is compulsory (Waajib) to abstain from that
which makes one sinful. Also, any action which is compulsory to abstain

from, is regarded as an action which is close to Haraam, and this is what is
meant by that disapproval which is close to forbiddance (i.e. Makruh e
Tahreemi); and also for this reason as well, the Fuqaha have made it clear
that one who commits an act which is Makruh Tanzeehi, is not responsible
for any sin at all, just as it is mentioned in Talweeh. With this, we still
believe that if Allah wills, He may punish the most minor sins. Alhamdu
Lillah, these are seven substantiations from which we have understood
that some of the scholars of the time, in Risaala Sharbud Dukhaan have
made a shocking error, and an enormous mistake by stating Makruh e
Tanzeehi to be from Sagha’ir (minor sins). However, Saahib e Bahr has
made clear in Bahr that Tahreemi is from Sagha’ir (i.e. and not Tanzeehi).
Thus we should understand this and not be foolish.

It is Noorul Idaah and in its annotation Maraqi ul Falaah,

‫@ ﺍن ﻳﻄﺄ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر‬N‫ زﻳﺎرة ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﻧﺪﺏ زﻳﺎرﺗﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻏ‬a ‫ﻓﺼﻞ‬

‘It is in the section on visiting the graves that, to visit the graves is
Mustahab (a recommended action), but the graves should not be walked
upon.’ [Maraqi ul Falaah, pg.340]

Translator’s Footnote: This is an excellent point brought forth by Imam Ahmed

Raza ؓ◌, whereby he is explaining that the mere fact that it is regarded as a sinful
act is sufficient evidence to say it is Makruh e Tahreemi and not Makruh e
Tanzeehi, as Tanzeehi does not render one sinful and Tahreemi does.

It is also in Maraqi ul Falaah,

‫@ة‬A‫ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬a ‫" ﺧﺎن ﻟﻮ وﺟﺪ ´ ﻘﺎ‬B‫ وﻗﺎل ﻗﺎ‬،‫ہ وﻃﺆﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻻﻗﺪﺍم ﻟﻤﺎ ﻓﻴ ﻣﻦ ﻋﺪم ﺍﻻﺣ¦@ﺍم‬M
‫" ﻓﻴ‬ ‫@ہ ﻻﺑﺄس ﺑﺎن ﻳﻤ‬N‫ ﺿﻤ‬a ‫ وﺍن ﻟﻢ ﻘﻊ‬t‫ ذﻟ‬a " ‫وﻫﻮ ﻳﻈﻦ ﺍﻧ ´ﻳﻖ ﺍﺣﺪ ﺛﻮہ ﻻﻳﻤ‬

‘To walk on the graves with the feet is Makruh, since this is disrespectful.
Qadi Khan has stated that if a person sees a pathway in the graveyard and
he suspects that this pathway was newly made by the people, then he
should not walk on that pathway; and if he does not have such a suspicion,
there is no objection in walking (on the pathway).’ [Maraqi ul Falaah,

@A‫ ﻗﻠﺒ ﺍﻧ ´ﻳﻖ ﻋٰ ﻗ‬a ‫ ﺍﻟﺒﺄس ﺍن ﻻ ﻘﻊ‬x‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻫﺬﺍ ﺍ ﻀﺎدﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﺎﺍﺧ¦@ﻧﺎہ ﻓﺎﻧ ﻋﻠﻖ ﻧ‬
Á‫ﻣﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺎ‬8‫ﻔﺴ وﺍ ﻀﺎﻗﺪ !ﻘﺪم ﺍﻟﺘ_ﻳﺢ ﺑﺎﻟ‬u a t‫ﻓﺎﻓﺎد و ﺟﻮد ﺍﻟﺒﺄس ﻓ‘ ﺍذﺍ وﻗﻊ ذﻟ‬
ٰ‫ﻨﺎ رﺣﻤﻬﻢ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎ‬Ò‫وﺍﻟﻄﺤﻄﺎوی ﻋﻦ ﻋﻠﻤﺎ‬

I say, ‘This is also evidence in support of our statement, because this is only
permissible when one does not have any doubt (i.e. suspicion) in one’s
heart that this pathway was built over graves. The clear meaning of which
is that, if such a thought enters one’s heart, then it becomes objectionable
(to use that pathway). Also, the views explaining it as being disallowed
have already been presented on the authority of our Ulama; Shaami and
Tahtawi ٰ‫رﺣﻤﻢ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬
Allama Ismail Nablusi states in the Sharah of Durar and Ghurar,

‫ﻊ‬Ò‫ ﺍﻟﺒﺪﺍ‬a ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ‬.‫ ﻣﻦ وﻃﺊ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر‬nN‫ﻻﺑﺎس ﺑﺰﻳﺎرة ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر وﺍﻟﺪﻋﺎء ﻟﻼﻣﻮﺍﺕ ﺍن 'ﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﻣﻮﻣﻨ‬

‘There is no objection (i.e. harm) in visiting the graves and making Dua for
the deceased, on condition that the graves are safe from being walked upon
(when visiting them), just as it is in Bada’i and Multaqat.’ [Al Hadiqatun
Nadiya, Vol.2, pg.505]

It is in Tariqa e Muhammadiyah,

‫" ﻋ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻓﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺮﺟﻞ ﺍﻟﻤ‬w ‫ﻣﻦ‬

‘From the catastrophes of the feet, is to walk on the graves’

Imam Allama Muhaqqiq Alal Itlaaq objects to those people who walk over
the graves of others to go to the graves of their parents and family
members. He says that they should rather stand at the edge of the
graveyard and make Dua for them, rather than trampling over graves to
get to the graves of their loved ones. [Tariqa e Muhammadiyah, Vol.2,

It has been mentioned in Fathul Qadeer,

‫@و وﻃﺆہ ﻓﻤﺎ ﺼﻨﻌ ﺍﻟﻨﺎس ﻣﻤﻦ وﻓﻨﺖ ﺍﻗﺎرﺑ ﺛﻢ دﻓﻦ ﺣﻮﺍﻟﻴﻬﻢ ﺧﻠﻖ‬A‫ﻳہ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻮس ﻋ ﺍﻟﻘ‬
ٖ @A‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﺍ ﺍن ﺼﻞ ﺍٰ ﻗ‬t‫ﻣﻦ وﻃﺄﺗ‬
‫ﻳﺒ ﻣوہ‬Â

‘To sit on the graves and to walk on them is Makruh, so those who have
other people buried near their relatives, should not walk on the graves to
reach the graves of their relatives, as this is Makruh.’ [Fathul Qadeer, Vol.2,

Imam Muhad’dith Hafizul Hadith Abu Bakr bin Abid Daniya narrates from
Abu Qulabah ؓ◌,

‫ ﺑﺎﻟﻠﻴﻞ ﺛﻢ وﺿﻌﺖ‬nN‫ﻴﺖ رﻛﻌﺘ‬4‫ﺍﻗﺒﻠﺖ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﺎم ﺍ ﺍﻟﺒ_ة ﻓﻨﺰﻟﺖ ﺍﻟﺨﻨﺪق ﻓﺘﻄﻬﺮﺕ وﺻﻠ‬
‫" ﻣﻨﺬ ﺍﻟﻠﻴﻠﺔ‬#‫ذﻳﺘ‬w ‫ و ﻘﻮل ﻟﻘﺪ‬Ã‫@ ﺸﺘ‬A‫ﺼﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﻘ‬0 ‫ ﺛﻢ ﺍﻧ…ﺒﻬﺖ ﻓﺎذﺍ‬.‫@ ٍﻓﻨﻤﺖ‬A‫رﺍ·" ﻋٰ ﻗ‬

‘I was on my way to Basra from Syria, so I stopped over at Khandaq. I

performed Wudu and then performed two Raka’at Namaaz, then fell asleep
while placing my head on a grave. When I woke, I was astonished to see the
deceased complaining to me, by saying, you have caused me distress the
entire night.’ [Sharhus Sudoor]

Ibn Abid Daniya and Imam Baihaqi narrated in Dalaa’il un Nubuw’wah from
Hazrat Uthman Nahdi who narrated from Meena Taabi’ee that, I went to a
graveyard. I performed two Raka’ats Salaah and fell asleep (in the
graveyard). By Allah! I was wide awake when I heard the deceased saying,

"#‫ذﻳﺘ‬w ‫ﻗﻢ ﻓﻘﺪ‬

‘Get up! For you have caused me distress.’

(Dalaa’il un Nubuw’wah, Vol.7, pg.40)

Imam Haafiz ibn Munda narrates form Qasim bin Makhmera,

‘A certain person placed his foot on a grave, when he heard the following
words from the grave,

v‫" وﻻﺗﺆذ‬#‫ﻋ‬
4 t‫ﺍﻟﻴ‬

‘Move over to your side, (i.e. move away from me) and stop hurting me.’’
[Sharhus Sudoor]

‫ﻨﺎ ﺧﻼﻓ ًﺎ‬Ò‫ﻴﺪ ﻟﻤﺎ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻋﻠﻤﺎ‬Ò‫ šح ﺍﻟﺼﺪور ﺍﻗﻮل وﻓﻴﻬﻤﺎ ﺗﺎ‬a Ä‫ ﻫﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﻮ‬M‫ذ‬
‫ﻌﺾ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺎŠﻳﻦ‬0 ‫ﻌ ﻣﻦ‬0‫ﻟﻼﻣﺎم ﺍ ﺟﻌ‹ وﻣﻦ ﺗﺎ‬

Allama Suyuti has mentioned both these narrations in Sharhus Sudoor. I
say, both these narrations are supportive of the view held by our Ulama in
general, which is different to the opinion of Imam Abu Ja’far and some of
his latter followers.

This Faqeer ‫ﻏﻟ ﻌﺎ ﻟ‬ (Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌) heard the following from
Hazrat Sayyidi Abul Husain Noori ؓ◌, ‘In our town, near Marahrah
Mutaharah, there is a forest in which there are graves of martyrs. There
was a person who was walking with his buffalo, and a portion of the ground
there was very soft, so due to this, the legs of the buffalo started to sink
into the sand. He realised that there was a grave there. Just then a voice
was heard from the grave, saying, ‘O person! You caused me distress. The
foot of your buffalo stamped on my chest.’

ٖ ‫ﺗﺪل ﻋٰ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﻗﺪرة ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ وﻋﺠﻴﺐ‬

‫ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺪﺍء‬a ‫ﺻﻨﻌ‬ 4 ‫ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﻗﺼﺔ ﻟﻄﻴﻔﺔ‬

In it is also a beautiful incident which proves the Divine Power of Almighty,

and also the amazing abilities regarding the Shuhada (martyrs).

Alhamdu Lillah, the ruling in the matter has become as clear and evident
as the light of the sun and the brightness of day. The Beloved Rasool 
prohibited us from sitting, walking and leaning on graves, and the Ulama
have on the basis of this, said that it is Haraam to walk on a pathway created
over graves, so that one does not place his feet on the grave. They have
commanded us not to place our feet on the graves, and they have
commanded us not to sleep by the graves.
It is also Sunnat when visiting the graves, not to sit there (by leaning etc.).
Proper respect is that we should not even go too close (so as to avoid
disrespect). The Ulama have also mentioned (as quoted earlier) that it is
allowed to feed the grass from the graveyard to animals, but the animals
should not be brought to graze inside the graveyard, but rather the grass
must be trimmed and taken to the animals.

The (above narrations of the Ulama) have also clarified that the deceased
are respected in the same way as the living, and the deceased are distressed
by those actions which cause distress to the living, and that to cause the
deceased any distress is Haraam.

It is now very clear how disrespectful and insulting that action is, which
was mentioned in the initial query. It is a cause of sin, and deserving

If one builds houses on the graves (after they have been destroyed), then it
would mean that one is walking, sitting, eating, answering the call of
nature, and being sexually intimate etc. on the graves, and all these will be
regarded as immodest actions, as they are now being done on the grave of
a Muslim, thus causing the deceased much distress and discomfort.

Not a single moment will pass in which there is no immodesty, and in which
the deceased Muslims are not being caused distress. ‫وﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎذ ﺑﺎﷲ رﺏ ﺍﻟ ٰﻌﻠﻤ‬

The Ulama have stated, ‘There is always one Wali Allah present, wherever
there are forty Muslims gathered together,’ just as Allama Manawi ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫رﺣﻤ‬
has mentioned in Tayseer Sharah Jaami us Sagheer.

Thus, it is very clear and evident that there are scores of graves in a Muslim
graveyard and only Allah knows which personalities are buried in which
one of these graves.

Also, as it is essential, there will also definitely be pious servants of Allah

buried in this graveyard, and there is an even greater hope of this amongst
the deceased, since there are numerous people who may have not been
very pure (i.e. pious) in their lives, but are purified and exalted after their
The Beloved Rasool  said,

ٍ ‫ «ﻞ‬4 Œ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮﺕ ﻛﻔﺎرة ﻟ‬


‘Death is compensation for the sins of every (Sunni) Muslim.’

A Significantly Valuable Note

In the manner of the Qur’an and the Hadith, the Momin Muslim specifically
refers to the Ahle Sunnat, because in the era of the revelation of the Holy
Qur’an, and during the blessed sayings of the Hadith e Kareema, only the
Ahle Sunnat wa Jama’at existed.

It was completely impossible in that blessed era for there to be any deviant
or innovator (from amongst the companions), because bud-mazhabi is
created by doubt and interpretations, and Nabi , who was the changer
of this, by way of convicition, was present (amongst the companions), and
the Beloved Nabi  would clarify it.

If one who had any doubt accepted (this clarification) he was a Sunni, and
the one who did not accept it would become an unbeliever. This middle
path doubt was not possible there at all. Hence, when the Ulama took
reasoning for opinions on consensus from this verse of the Holy Qur’an,

nq ْ N«‫ « ْﻴ «ﻞ ﺍﻟ “ْﻤ ْﺆ «ﻣﻨ‬2‫ﺳ‬q @q ْ Nq‫ﺒ « ْﻊ ﻏ‬ƅ‫ﻳ‬q ‫و‬q

‘And who walk on a path separate from the path of the Muslims’
[Surah An-Nisa (4), Verse 115]

They clarified that, the consensus of the innovators will not be given any
credibility in the Ijma (consensus)’, because Mo’mineen refers to the
Ummat e Ijabat (those who accepted the true message of Deen).

The innovators (i.e. deviants) are not from the Ummat e Ijabat, but they are
Ummat e Da’wat (those who received the true message, but reject it). Look
at the explanations and cautions in the discussions on Ijma’ etc.

This beautiful and beneficial point is one which should be remembered. It
has been mentioned that in the verse,

‫ﻮ ٌة‬q ‫ن ﺍ « ْﺧ‬q ‫ﻤﺎ ﺍﻟ “ْﻤ ْﺆ «ﻣﻨ“ ْﻮ‬q Æ ‫ﺍ«ﻧ‬

‘Muslims are indeed brothers unto one another’

[Surah Al Hujurat (49), Verse 10]

And in other related verses and Ahadith, Mo’mineen refers to the Ahle
Sunnat alone. The ruling is based on their joint agreement, and unity. The
generalisation of Nadwa (Allah cause them to fail), and their (call for) unity
with all the deviants and bud-mazhabs, and their teachings to praise them,
and to present these evidences as evidence to show respect and honour to
those without any Deen, is simply irreligiousness and deviance. ٰ‫وﺍﻟﻌﻴﺎذ ﺑﺎﷲ ﻌﺎ‬

Abu Nu’aim and Baihaqi have stated in Sha’b ul Imaan from Anas ؓ◌, and
Allama Suyuti ؓ◌ stated that Ibn Arabi ؓ◌ has accepted this to be correct
and completely sound. [Sha’bul Imaan, Vol.7, pg.171]

On the same token, the Beloved Rasool  said that the sins and evil actions
of a blatant sinner should be publicised, so that the people may stay away
from him.

a ‫@ﺍزی‬N‫ وﺍﻟﺸ‬،"#‫ﻜ‬p‫ ﺍ‬a ‫ ﺍﻟﻨﻮﺍدر وﺍﻟﺤﺎﻛﻢ‬a ‫ ذم ﺍﻟﻐƒﺒﺔ وﺍﻟ¦@ﻣﺬی‬a ‫ﺍŠج ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍ ﺍﻟﺪﻧﻴﺎ‬
، ‫ ﺍﻟﺘﺎرﻳﺦ‬a ‫ وﺍﻟﺨﻄﻴﺐ‬nÈ‫ ﺍﻟﺴ‬a É‫ﻴﻬ‬2‫@ وﺍﻟ‬N‫ﻜﺒ‬p‫ ﺍ‬a v‫@ﺍ‬A‫ ﺍﻟŒﺎﻣﻞ وﺍﻟﻄ‬a ‫ﺍﻻﻟﻘﺎﺏ وﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺪی‬
‫'ﻠﻬﻢ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺠﺎرود ﻋﻦ ﺑﻬﺰﺑﻦ ﺣﻜﻴﻢ ﻋﻦ ﺍﺑﻴ ﻋﻦ ﺟﺪہ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻨ¿" ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ‬
‫وﺍ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺟﺮ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻓﻴ ﻳﺤﺬرہ ﺍﻟﻨﺎس‬M‫" ﻌﺮﻓ ﺍﻟﻨﺎس ﺍذ‬Z‫ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﺟﺮ ﻣ‬M‫ﺍﺗﺮﻋﻮن ﻋﻦ ذ‬

Imam Ahmed Ibn Abid Daniya has reported in Dham Al Ghaybah; Tirmizi in
Nawadir; Haakim in Al-Kuni; Shiraazi in Al Alqab; Ibn Adi in Kaamil; Tabrani
in Kabeer; Baihaqi in Sunan and Khateeb in his Taarikh, from Jaarud, (i.e.
all of them have reported from Jaarud) who reported from Bahaz bin
Hakeem, who in turn reported from his father, and his (paternal)
grandfather narrated from Nabi , ‘Are you afraid of speaking (out) about
an open sinner. When will the people then recognise him? Speak about the
evils of a Faajir (open sinner) so that people may be saved from him.’
[Nawadir ul Usool, pg.213]

After a person passes away (with Imaan) no matter how sinful he may have
been, he should not be slandered, and his faults should not be exposed, as
he has reached the end of his actions.

Imam Ahmed, Bukhari and Nasa’i have narrated from Sayyidatuna A’isha
Siddiqa ‫ ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ ﻋﻨﺎ‬who in turn reported that the Beloved Rasool  said,

‫ﻻ!ﺴﺒﻮﺍ ﺍﻻﻣﻮﺍﺕ ﻓﺎﻧﻬﻢ ﻗﺪﺍ ﻓﻀﻮﺍ ﺍ ﻣﺎﻗﺪﻣﻮﺍ‬

‘Do not speak ill of your dead, for they have reached the point of their
recompense.’ [Sahih Bukhari]

Abu Dawud, Tirmizi, Haakim and Baihaqi have reported from Ibn Umar
who reported the Beloved Rasool  that,

‫ﻮﺍ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺴﺎوﻳﻬﻢ‬4‫ ﻣﺤﺎﺳﻦ ﻣﻮﺗﺎﻛﻢ وﻛﻔ‬M‫ﺍذ‬

‘Mention the praiseworthy actions of your dead, and abstain from

discussing their bad.’ [Sunan Abi Dawud, Vol.2, pg.315]

‫" ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻨ¿" ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎ ٰ ﻋﻠﻴ‬B‫ﺸ ر‬Ò‫ﺴﻨﺪ ﺟﻴﺪ ﻋﻦ ﻋﺎ‬0 ‫وﺍŠج ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎ‬
@N‫وﺍ ﻫﻠŒﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﻻﺑﺨ‬M‫وﺳﻠﻢ ﻻﺗﺬ‬

Nasa’i narrated with a strong merit from Sayyidah A’isha Siddiqa ‫ر ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ ﻋﻨﺎ‬
that the Beloved Rasool  said,

@N‫وﺍ ﻫﻠŒﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﻻﺑﺨ‬M‫ﻻﺗﺬ‬

‘Remember not your deceased, but with goodness’ (i.e. kindly)

[Sunan Nasa’i, Vol.2, pg.963]

Now, even after being informed about this, if such persons who are doing
this (wanting to build houses on the gravesite) do not refrain from this evil
action, then not only are they disrespecting the graves of ordinary
Muslims, but it means that they are causing calamity to befall them. And
those who disrespect the Awliyah will face severe calamities, and regarding
those who insult the Awliyah, Nabi Kareem  says that Almighty Allah

‫ﺏ‬8‫ذﻧﺘ ﺑﺎﻟ‬w ‫ﻣﻦ ﻋﺎدی  وﻟﻴﺎ ﻓﻘﺪ‬

‘One who makes enmity with any of my Walis; I have waged a war against
him.’ [Sahih Bukhari] Imam Bukhari ؓ◌ has narrated this on the authority
of Sayyiduna Abu Hurairah ؓ◌.

‫ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺍﻟﺬﻫ¿" ﻣﺎ'ﺎن‬a ‫ ﺑﺎﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﺣﺠ ًﺔ وﺍن 'ﺎن‬x‫ﺍﻗﻮل وﻛ‬

I say, ‘As evidence, the narrations from Sahih are sufficient even though
the persons in question may have doubts in their heart.’

However, it is crucial for those (who wish to do this) to have pity on their
diseased selves. They should fear the wrath of Almighty Allah. They must
refrain from causing distress and discomfort to the Muslim deceased, for
one day, they too will have to enter the same ground (after death). And
they will have to lay there totally powerless and alone. Just as they are
treating others today, others will treat them in the same manner
tomorrow. The Beloved Rasool  said,

‫ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺪﺍن‬

‘You will reap whatever you sew’

a ‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻨﺪ ﻋﻦ ﺍ ﺍﻟﺪردﺍء وﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺮزﺍق‬a ‫ ﺍﻟŒﺎﻣﻞ ﻋﻦ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﻤﺮوﺍﺣﻤﺪ‬a ‫ﺍŠﺟ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺪی‬
‫ وﻫﻮ ﻣﻦ‬،‫ ﻗﻠﺖ وﻟ ﺷﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺟﻤﺔ‬،‫ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﻋﻦ ﺍ ﻗﻼﺑﺔ ﻣﺮﺳ ًﻼ وﻫﻮ ﻋﻨﺪﺍﻻٰŠﻳﻦ ﻗﻄﻌﺔ ﺣﺪﻳﺚ‬
‫ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ 'ﻠﻤ ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ‬

It has been narrated by ibn Adi in Kaamil from ibn Umar, and Ahmed
narrated it in Musnad from Abi Dardah, and Abdur Raz’zaq narrated in
Jaami’ from Abu Qulabah on the merit of a mursal narration, and the latter
two say that this is a portion of a Hadith. I am saying, ‘There are numerous
testimonies to this Hadith and this Hadith is from Nabi ; the
comprehensive words of Nabi Kareem .’

They are protesting in the Court of Allah! These extremely ignorant ones
have spread this evil amongst the ignorant. These are the ones who regard
the dead to be powerless like stones, (saying) that they have died and have
turned to dust. They feel that the dead do not hear or understand anything
anymore, and nor do they attain any comfort or discomfort. Whenever
(these deviants) get the chance to do so, they try to remove from the hearts
of the believers the respect for the graves of the deceased. ‫ﻓﺎﻧﺎﷲ وﺍﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﻴ رﺍﺟﻌﻮن‬

Section Two

In order to show our position, and terminate the deceit of the vile Najdis,
the Fatwas of this humble servant are (being presented).

The First Fatwa

‫ﺴﻢ ﺍﷲ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ‬0

The question was sent from Amar Tala, Lane no. 8, Calcutta, initially by Haji
La’l Khan Saaheb, and for the second time from Kanpur Bazaar, Naya Ganj
Company, Daduji Dada Bhai Surti, by Abdur Rahim Saaheb on the 20th of
Rabi ul Aakhir Shareef 1321 Hijri.

The Query

What do the Ulama e Deen ٰ‫ رﺣﻤﻢ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬decree concerning this issue;

There are some old graves, and the remainder one third of land is vacant
and after asking the elders of the community who are between 80 and 100
years old about this place, they say that for as long as they can remember,
no person was ever buried in that said portion of vacant land. Few spirited
Muslims have decided to build a Madrassah and library on this vacant
(piece of) land and they have asked the authorities to permit them to do so.

After making enquiries, the authorities confirmed that no one had been
buried there before and granted permission for the necessary construction
to go ahead. These people have now made all the necessary materials
available which are needed for this construction. Is it allowed to build a
Madrassah and Library on this place or not? And while digging the new
foundation of the Madrassah if somehow any bones etc. of deceased are
found, then what should be done? ‫ﺑ ﻨﻮﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﺮوﺍ‬

The Verdict

It is impermissible to change a Waqf (i.e. that which is donated for a specific

religious reason). It is not acceptable to change something for another
purpose, if it was made Waqf for a specific purpose. Just as one cannot
change a Masjid or Madrassah to a graveyard, one can also not change a
graveyard into a Masjid, Madrassah or Library. This is not Halaal (allowed).

It is in Siraaj Wah’haaj and then in Fatawa Hindiya,

‫ﺴﺘﺎﻧ ًﺎ وﻻ ﺍﻟﺨﺎن ﺣﻤﺎﻣ ًﺎ وﻻ ﺍﻟﺮ ﺑﺎط د'ﺎﻧ ًﺎ ﺍﻻًﺍذﺍ ﺟﻌﻞ‬0 ‫@ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﻋﻦ ﻫﻴﺄﺗ ﻓﻼ ﻳﺠﻌﻞ‬N‫ﻻﻳﺠﻮز !ﻐ‬
‫ ﻣﺎﻳﺮی ﻓﻴ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ‬Ê‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﺎ‬

‘It is not permissible to change a Waqf from its original condition. Thus, a
house cannot be turned into a garden, a place for lodging of visitors cannot
be turned into a bath, and a hospice cannot be changed into a shop, as to
do so is impermissible (if it was made Waqf). However, if the person making
the Waqf, leaves the discretion of the affairs of the Waqf property to the
nominated trustee, that he may run the affairs as he deems fit for the
benefit of the Waqf, then only is it permissible (to make any change).’
[Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.490]

‫@ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺼﻮد‬N‫ﻗﻠﺖ ﻓﺎذﺍﻟﻢ ﻳﺠﺰ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺄة ﻓﻜﻴﻒ ﺑﺘﻐﻴ‬

I am saying, ‘When the changing of a condition is not allowed, then how

can it be permissible to change it, by changing the actual objective.’

The fact that no one has been buried in that portion of the graveyard for
more than one hundred years, does not cause it to cease being a graveyard.

According to the relied upon view of Imam Abu Yusuf ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫ رﺣﻤ‬on which the
Fatwa is given, all the Waaqif (one giving the property etc.) needs to say is,
‘I have made this Waqf for the burial of Muslims or I have given this land
as a cemetery for Muslims, and the entire land becomes a graveyard, even
though a single person may not have been buried there. According to the
statement of Imam Muhammad ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫رﺣﻤ‬, the burial of even a single person
in that land makes the entire area a graveyard.

It is in As’aaf and then in Raddul Muhtar,

‫ ﺍﻟﺨﺎن ﺑﻨﺰوﻟ‬a‫ﺑ و‬0 ‫ ﺍﻟﺴﻘﺎﻳﺔ‬a‫@ة ﺑﺪﻓﻦ وﺍﺣﺪ و‬A‫ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬x‫ﺑﺤﺴﺒ ﻓ‬ ‫!ﺴﻠﻴﻢ 'ﻞ ﺷﻴﺊ‬

‘To give everything (in trust etc.) is according to its merit and need, and in
a graveyard, it is about burying one person, and in the case of a water
distribution trough, it is drinking a sip of water, and for an inn (guest
house), it is to stay there.’ [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.3, pg. 405]

It is in Hidaya and Hindiya, and according to Imam Abu Yusuf ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫رﺣﻤ‬, that
by saying it to be his property, (the Waqf) will end (i.e. it will not be legal),
just as it is the actual (condition) for it to be a Waqf; and according to Imam
Muhammad ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫ رﺣﻤ‬when the people drink from the water trough and they
live in the inn or guesthouse, and they bury in a graveyard, it ceases to be
(someone’s) property, and (for all this) to happen just once, will suffice (for
it to be regarded a Waqf, if it was given for this purpose), because to fully
achieve the entire objective is impossible. The same ruling applies to the
ruling for a well, or a big pond. [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.465]

It is mentioned in Muntaqa and Shaami that, in Tanweer, Durar, and

Wiqaaya, precedence has been given to the statement (view) of Imam Abu
Yusuf, and you have realised its authority in (the issues of) Waqf and Qada.


Translator’s footnote: In other words, you cannot fill the entire graveyard at once,
people will be buried as they pass away, hence just one being buried there makes
the Waqf active.
Therefore, in the said case, it is not permissible to build a Madrassah or a
library on the said land, even though no bones of dead people are found
there. If bones are unearthed, it is an even more serious issue, and is
disallowed to a greater degree, as this would be showing disrespect to the
graves of Muslims, just as I have explained in the book ‘Al Aamir bi
Ehtiraamil Maqaabir.’

And Allah Knows Best

Translator’s Footnote: The remainder of the second section of this book deals with
issues pertaining to other questions sent to Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌ on the issue of
Waqf of the graveyard. This was sent by a Sunni Aalim Maulavi Ahmed Hassan
wherein he also sent verdicts of non-Sunnis like Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi etc.
where they believed that a Waqf could be changed. These incorrect decrees are
refuted by Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌. It must be noted that some of the discussion
which follow are somewhat intricate and more suitable for the Ulama, but I have
attempted to translate it as simple as possible. It must also be noted that the
translation of this entire book is an explanatory translation, rather than a word
for word translation. This was done in order to keep the essence of the book,
without losing the real gist of it.

The Second Fatwa

The question was sent from Kanpur Masjid Rangiya, by Maulavi Shah
Ahmed Hasan Saaheb (Marhoom), via Janaab Maulana Maulavi Wasi
Ahmed Saaheb on the 21st of Jamadil Aakhir 1321 Hijri.

Presented to his eminence, Maulana Maulavi Mujad’did of the present

century, the one who is clear proof, The Imam of the Ahle Sunnat wa
Jama’at internationally, Maulana Wa Sayyiduna Al Maulavi Muhammad
Ahmed Raza Khan Saaheb ‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎرق وﺍﻟﻤﻐﺎرﺏ‬%‫وﻋﻤﺖ ﺳﻜﻨﺘ‬
 ‫ﺗﻤﺖ ﻓﻴﻮﺿﺎ ﺗﻢ‬

As Salaamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuhu

I met Maulavi Ahmed Hasan Saaheb of Kanpur. He said that he requires an

urgent issue to be attended to. These people from Jaami ul Uloom have
written a Fatwa, and the one who asked the question brought it (that
Fatwa) to me. I wrote an answer against theirs.

The people from Jaami ul Uloom sent it to Deoband, and they verified the
answer of their colleagues, who are of their own (corrupt) Madhab. The
person who asked the questions then brought that (answer) to me as well,
asking about whose view he should act upon.

I said that you have to act on the decision which is made by the true
authority. Who is a greater authority (now) than Hazrat Maulana (i.e.
Sayyidi Aala Hazrat ؓ◌), so take this query and have Maulana write the
answer, return it to me immediately.
Since, I had intended to present myself before you, I took the Istifta (i.e. the
query) but unfortunately, I could not come. This issue is very important, so
I am sending this request with Sayed Abdush Shakur Saaheb to your blessed
self. Please write the decision immediately and have it returned with Sayed
Saaheb, so that I may send it to Maulavi Ahmed Hasan who is anticipating
this (response).

Copy of the Istifta (Query)

What is the ruling of the Ulama e Deen (in this issue) that, a vacant land is
famously known as a cemetery (graveyard). On one side there are very old
dilapidated graves (The rest of the question is the same as the initial
question which came from Amar Tala Lane in Kanpur Bazaar Ganj, which
has already been mentioned in the earlier Fatwa).

Answer by those from Jaami ul Uloom

To construct a library and Madrassah at such a place is permissible; as the

non-permissibility is absent, and if co-incidentally old bones come out,
then they should be buried somewhere.

ٖ ‫@ہ و‬A‫ ﻗ‬a ‫@ہ‬N‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ وﺻﺎر ﺗﺮﺍﺑ ًﺎ ﺟﺎز دﻓﻦ ﻏ‬

‫ﻨﺎ “ء ﻋﻠﻴ‬2‫ز„ﻋ وﺍﻟ‬ 4 ‫ وﻟﻮ ﺑ‬Ë‫وﻗﺎل ﺍﻟﺰﻳﻠ‬
Imam Zayla’i has mentioned that, if the deceased becomes decayed and
becomes mixed in the sand, then to bury someone else in his grave, or to
plant on it, and to build on it, is permissible. [Shaamia, pg.599]

And Allah Knows Best

The humble servant, Muhammad Rasheed

Deputy Principal Madrassah Jaami ul Uloom, Kanpur

‫ﻣﻦ ﺍﺟﺎﺏ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺍﺻﺎﺏ‬

The answer which has been given is correct. Muhammad Abdullah.

‫@ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﻻﻧ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﻟﻌﺒﺎرة ﺍﻟﻔﻘﻬﺎء‬N‫ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﻏ‬

This answer (i.e. that of the Sunni Aalim) is incorrect, because it is

contrary to the words of the Fuqaha.

Muhammad Abdur Raz’zaq

Teacher Madrassah Imdad Darul Uloom Kanpur

Summary of the Answer Presented By
Maulavi Ahmed Hasan Saaheb

In the said case, to build a Library and Madrassah there, is impermissible.

As this place is famously known as a cemetery, and it has been made Waqf
(given away for this purpose) so it is regarded as a cemetery, and the land
has already been made Waqf for this cemetery, and this being so well-
known is sufficient as proof of this.

It is in Durr-e-Mukhtar,

‫؎ﺍﻟﺦ ﻣﻠﺨﺼ ًﺎ‬۱ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﺸﻬﺮة‬

Ì ‫!ﻘﺒﻞ ﻓﻴ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎدة‬

‘In it, Shahaadat (testimony) is accepted on the basis of it

being well-known.’ [Durr-e-Mukhtar, Vol.1, pg.388]

Similarly, it is in Raddul Muhtar and Alamgiri,

‫ﺍﻟﺸﻬﺎدة ﻋ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﻬﺮة ﺗﺠﻮز‬

‘Shahaadat over a Waqf is permissible, based on it being well-known’

[Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.438]

It is not proper to take any other benefit from it (i.e. to use it for any other
reason) even if it has become ruined. Qadi Khan has stated in volume 3,
page 314, published in Egypt that,

‫@ة ﻫﻞ ﻳﺒﺎح ﻻﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻧﺘﻔﺎع ﺑﻬﺎ ﻗﺎل ﺍﺑﻮ‬A‫ﺛﺎر ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬w ‫ﺎ‬H‫@ة ﻗﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﺑﻤﺤﻠﺔ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺒﻖ ﻓﻴ‬A‫ﻣﻘ‬
‫_ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻻﻳﺒﺎح‬u

‘There is an old cemetery in a district, and the signs of it (being a cemetery)

do not remain; so can the people of that district use it (for something else)?
Abu Nasr ٰ‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬%‫ رﺣﻤ‬says that, it is not lawful (to do so).’ [Fatawa Qadi Khan]

It is on pages 470/471, Volume 2, Fatawa Alamgiri, published Egypt,

‫@ة ﺍذﺍ ﺍﻧﺪرﺳﺖ و ﻟﻢ ﻳﺒﻖ‬A‫ﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺍﻻوزﺟﻨﺪی ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬Ò‫" ﺍﻻﻣﺎم ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻻ‬B‫ﺳﺌﻞ ﺍﻟﻘﺎ‬
a‫ ﻛﺬﺍ‬.‫@ة‬A‫ﺎ ﻗﺎل ﻻوﻟﻬﺎ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬H‫@ہ ﻫﻞ ﻳﺠﻮز ز„ﻋﻬﺎ وﺍﺳﺘﻐﻼﻟ‬N‫ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻮ¨ٰ ﻻﺍﻟﻌﻈﻢ وﻻﻏ‬

Qadi Shamsul A’ima Mahmud Awzjandi (i.e. Imam Qadi Khan) was asked
about a cemetery at such a place, the signs of which are not existent
anymore, and there are also no bones left. Therefore, is it permissible to
farm on (such a land) or give it out on rent? He said, no! It is within the
ruling of a cemetery, just as it is mentioned in Muheet. [Fatawa Hindiya,
Vol.2, pg. 470/471]

The non-impermissibility of utilisation of the cemetery is not contrary to
this actual statement of Imam Zayla’i, because he decreed permissibility
based on the decomposition of the deceased, and it turning to dust. And
here the impermissibility is not on this basis, but it is on the basis of the
cemetery having been made Waqf (for this purpose), just as the Editor has
written in Alamgiri (published Egypt).

He wrote the following on the actual text of Fatawa Alamgiri,

‫ ﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻧﻊ ﻫﻨﺎ ﻛﻮن ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻞ ﻣﻮﻗﻮﻓﺎ ﻋ ﺍﻟﺪﻓﻦ ﻓﻼ‬،Ë‫ ﻣﺎﻗﺎﻟ ﺍﻟﺰﻳﻠ‬a ‫ﻗﻮﻟ ﻗﺎل ﻻﻫﺬﺍ ﻻﻳﻨﺎ‬
‫ر ﺍھ ﻣﺼﺤﺤ‬8‫@ ٖہ ﻓﻠƒﺘﺎﻣﻞ وﻟﻴ‬N‫ ﻏ‬a ‫ﻳﺠﻮز ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻤﺎﻟ‬

His statement, ‘He said No’ this is not inconsistent with the statement of
Zayla’i, because here it being disallowed is on the basis of it being donated
for the purpose of burial (i.e. on basis of it being a Waqf), so its use for
something else is not permissible. Therefore, this should be carefully
considered, and it should be preserved. [Haashia Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2,

And from the rulings, it is also proven, that to make it Waqf towards a non-
entity (i.e. something else) is not permissible.

‫ ﻋﻦ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﺍوﺣﻮضٍ Šﺏ ﻻﻳﺤﺘﺎج ﺍﻟﻴ ﻟﺘ‹ق ﺍﻟﻨﺎس ﻫﻞ‬v‫ﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻠﻮﺍ‬Ò‫ﺳﺌﻞ ﺷﻤﺲ ﺍﻻ‬
‫ وﻟﻮ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘ‹ق ﺍﻟﻨﺎس‬،‫ﻌﻢ‬u ‫ ﻗﺎل‬.Šw ‫Š ﺍوﺣﻮض ﺍو‬w ‫" ﺍن _ف ﺍوﻗﺎﻓ ﺍٰ ﻣﺴﺠ ٍﺪ‬B‫ﻟﻠﻘﺎ‬
‫" ﺍﻟﺤﻮض ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎرة وﻫﻨﺎک ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ﻣﺤﺘﺎج ﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎرة ﺍوﻋ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺲ ﻫﻞ‬#‫ﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻐ‬p‫و‬
‫" ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎرة ﺍٰ ﻋﻤﺎرة ٍ ﻣﺎﻫﻮ ﻣﺤﺘﺎج ﺍ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎرة ﻓﻘﺎل‬#‫ف وﻗﻒ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻐ‬³ "B‫ﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻠﻘﺎ‬
‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻴﻂ‬a‫ ﻛﺬﺍ‬،‫ﻻ‬

‘Shams ul A’ima Halwani was asked about a Masjid or a Haudh (pond),

which is uninhabited (unused), and for which there is no need (any longer),
because there are no residents there anymore. Can the Qadi utilise Awqaaf
(Religious Endowments) from it, for another Masjid or another pond? He
said, Yes! And if the people live there, but there is no need for that Haudh,
and there the Masjid depends on a building, or the opposite, then can the
Qadi spend the income of that Waqf, which is not needed (by it any longer),
to assist another Waqf to build, which is in need? He said, No! The same has
been mentioned in Muheet.’ [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.478]

Hence, it will not be permissible to utilise this land to build a Madrassah

etc. whereas it has been made Waqf for the purpose of burial, even if it is

Secondly, to merely regard it as being vacant simply on this testimony, that

in our lifetime no deceased has been buried there, does not prove anything.

In fact, it will be regarded as the old cemetery being fully used, because
when two-thirds of the cemetery has graves which are so old, that they are
from before those who are a hundred years of age, and they can even

remember, then in the remaining one-third, there could be graves which
are even older than that, and these graves must have become totally
perished, which makes the land look as if it is vacant, and (it is possible
that) it was left because of the land becoming fully utilised.

However, if some person confirms that ever since this land was made Waqf
for a cemetery, no deceased has been buried in that one-third of land, then
this will (only) prove that it is vacant, but it still cannot be utilised to build
a Madrassah etc. To use it for any other purpose except for burial is not
permissible. ‫وﺍﷲ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ‬

Written (Decreed) by Fazl e Ilaahi ‫ﻋ ﻋﻨ‬

This Answer is correct Abdur Raz’zaq ‫ﻋ ﻋﻨ‬
The second answer is correct Ahmed Hassan ‫ﻋ ﻋﻨ‬

Responses by (Molvi) Rashid Ahmed
Gangohi & Other Deobandis

The Answer

This answer is incorrect and the narration which the writer has quoted,
does not prove the claim. In brief, if that cemetery is not Waqf, then there
is no issue. (As for) the common manner of making the cemetery Waqf, this
is not prevalent everywhere. It has been seen in most places that the
cemeteries are not made Waqf, and after acknowledging that it is Waqf, and
in the case where for a long time the deceased are not buried there, then
to erect another Waqf building there is proper. Hence, to construct a Waqfi
Madrassah in that graveyard is permissible. Now, from that narration it is
clear, in others words, from the narration of Ayni Sharah Bukhari, Volume
2, pg.359,

‫@ة‬A‫ ﻗﻠﺖ ﻗﺎل ﺍﺑﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺳﻢ ﻟﻮ ﺍن ﻣﻘ‬nN‫" ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺎﺟﺪ ﻋ ﻗﺒﻮر ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬#‫ﻓﺎن ﻗﻠﺖ ﻫﻞ ﻳﺠﻮز ﺍن ﺗﺒ‬
‫ ﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑﺮ‬t‫وذﺍﻟ‬،‫ ﺑﺎﺳﺎ‬t‫ﺎ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ ًﺍ ﻟﻢ ﺍرﺑﺬﺍﻟ‬H‫" ﻗﻮم ﻋﻠﻴ‬#‫ ﻋﻔﺖ ﻓﺒ‬nN‫ﻣﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬
"#‫ ﻟﺪﻓﻦ ﻣﻮﺗﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻻﻳﺠﻮز ﻻﺣ ٍﺪ ﺍن ﻳﻤﻠﻜﻬﺎ ﻓﺎذﺍ درﺳﺖ وﺍﺳﺘﻐ‬nN‫وﻗﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺍوﻗﺎف ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬
‫ ﻻ‬،nN‫ﻓﻬﺎ ﻻی ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ ﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ ﺍ ﻀ ًﺎ وﻗﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺍوﻗﺎف ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬³ ‫ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺪﻓﻦ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺟﺎز‬
ٌ ‫ﻳﺠﻮز ﺗﻤﻠﻴŒﺎ ﻻﺣﺪ ﻓﻤﻌﻨﺎ ﻫﻤﺎ ﻋ ﻫﺬﺍ‬

If you say, is it permissible to build Masjids on the graves of Muslims? I will
say, Ibn Al Qasim has stated, that if the Muslim cemetery has perished (i.e.
is non-existent), and some people build a Masjid there, then I do not see
any problem in this, because a cemetery is also a Waqf of the Muslims, for
the burial of their deceased. For anyone to become its owner is not
permissible. Now, that it has been obliterated, and there is no need to bury
there any longer, then to use it as a Masjid is permissible, because a Masjid
is also a Waqf from the Awqaaf of the Muslims. It is not permissible to make
anyone its owner. Hence, the purpose of both is one (i.e. the same).
[Umdatul Qari Sharah Sahih Bukhari, Vol.4, pg.179]

There are narrations of permissibility in other books of Fiqh as well, but

this servant does not have time. ‫وﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ
ٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ‬

Rashid Ahmed Gangohi

‫ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬

The Answer is correct

A Servant – Mahmud

‫ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬

The Answer is correct

A humble servant - Muhammad Yaseen

‫ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍﺏ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‬

The Answer is correct

Ghulam Rasool

When that cemetery has become very old, and burial there has been
abandoned currently, then to build a Madrassah there, especially on the
vacant area is proper (legal). However, if that cemetery is still used for the
burial of deceased, then to build any other building there is not

‫ﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻴ ﻛﺬﺍ‬0‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ وﺻﺎر ﺗﺮﺍﺑﺎ ﺟﺎز دﻓﻦ ﻏہ  ﻗہ وز ﻋ وﺍﻟ‬
" $‫ وﻟﻮﺑ‬،‫ﻗﺎل  ٰﻋﻠﻤﮕﻳﺔ‬
1‫ﻴ‬02‫ ﺍﻟ‬

‘It is in Alamgiri that, if the deceased has decomposed and turns to dust,
then to bury someone else in it is permissible, and to use it for farming and
to erect a building on it is permissible, just as it has been mentioned in
Tabyin.’ [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.1, pg.167] ‫وﺍﷲ
ﻌﺎٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ‬

Written by Aziz ur Rahmaan (1307 Hijri)

Sayyidi Aala Hazrat’s Response
& Refutation

The Verdict

‫ﺍﻟﻠﻬﻢ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ وﺍﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ‬

The first answer is completely incorrect, and the second ruling is true and
correct, and their third writing is extreme ignorance.

Gangohi’s Baseless Argument

The First Point: It was clearly mentioned in the query that ‘a vacant Waqf
Land,’ so the futile argument of the third respondent, ‘If it is not a
cemetery’ …. till the end, is merely a baseless argument.

For a Waqf to be well-known is sufficient & the

ignorance of Gangohi Saaheb

The Second Point: (as for the statement) ‘the common manner of making
the cemetery Waqf, this is not prevalent everywhere.’ Is the thing being
referred to by the word ‘This’ the fact that it is well-known or that it is a
Waqf? The first is correct but meaningless and a baseless call. The question
here is based on a specific case, in which it being well-known is evident. To
rule on this, is it necessary that this should be well-known everywhere?

In the same manner, if the second is meant, and the purpose is the negation
of what is known about the Waqf, on the basis of it being well-known, then
in both these cases, this statement, ‘It has been seen in most places that the
cemeteries are not made Waqf,’ remains in place, even though, not to differ
between the words ‘many’ and ‘most,’ is to confine the extent of the
clarification. And if the negation of it being a well-known Waqf is meant,
then this is simply futile and baseless; and now to give testimony to the
observation that ‘in most places,’ an explicit one, is clearly hearsay,
without any criterion for it. In the actual texts, and in the annotations, and
the Fatawa of the Madhab, it is clearly and explicitly mentioned that for it
to be well-known is sufficient for it to be a Waqf, and this is counted as
admissible testimony. In the discussion presented by the second
respondent (May he be well), some of the quotations have been mentioned.
Therefore, on the grounds of acknowledging the proofs of Shariah, to
present negative evidence is absolute ignorance. In this case, to reject the
testimony of it being well-known, or of it being a cemetery, is in fact to
terminate an ancient Awqaaf. Where can there be testimonies of
observation after such a long period of time, and just a letter is not

It is in Fatawa Khairiyah,

‫ح ﺑ ﻋﻠﻤﺎ “ء ﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻋﺪم ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎد ﻋ ﺍﻟﺨﻂ‬³ ‫ﻻ ﻌﻤﻞ ﺑﻤﺠﺮد ﺍﻟﺪﻓ¦@ وﻻﻣﺠﺮد ﺍﻟﺤﺠﺔ ﻟﻤﺎ‬
t‫ ذﻟ‬a ‫ وﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‬nN‫وﻋﺪم ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ ﺑ ﻛﻤﻜﺘﻮﺏ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﺍﻟﺬی ﻋﻠﻴ ﺧﻄﻮط ﺍﻟﻘﻀﺎة ﺍﻟﻤﺎﺿ‬
‫ƒﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻋﻴﺔ‬2‫ﺑﺎﻟ‬
It will not be actioned simply on the basis of writing, and not merely on
evidence, because our Ulama have clarified, that there is no credibility to a
letter, and acting on it is not valid, like that Document of Endowment (Waqf
Naama) on which is the writings of the previous Qadis. In this case, one will
only act on the basis of witnesses, who are Shar’ee witnesses. [Fatawa
Khairiyah Vol.1, Pg.118]

It is mentioned in the same narration,

‫@ ﻣﻦ‬N‫ح ﺑ ﻛﺜ‬³
4 ‫ ﻛﻤﺎ‬،‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ 'ﺎﻏﺬ ﺑ ﺧﻂ وﻫﻮﻻ ﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﻴ وﻻ ﻌﻤﻞ ﺑ‬
‫ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﺴﻮغ ﻟﻠﺸﺎﻫﺪﺍن ﺸﻬﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﺴﻤﺎع‬a‫ƒﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻋﻴﺔ و‬4 2‫ ﻟﻠ‬t‫ ذﺍﻟ‬a ‫@ة‬A‫ وﺍﻟﻌ‬، ‫ﻨﺎ‬Ò‫ﻋﻠﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻜﻦ ﺍﺷﺘﻬﺮ ﻋﻨﺪی ﺍو‬p‫ﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ و‬Ò‫ﺎدﺗ ﻟﻢ ﺍﻋﺎ‬H‫ﻌﺪ ﺷ‬0 ‫ ﺷﻬﺎدﺗ ﻗﻮﻟ‬a ‰ ‫وﻻ‬
4 ،‫وﻳﻄﻠﻖ‬
‫ ﺑ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺛﻖ ﺑ‬v@A‫ﺍﺧ‬

‘The writing (i.e. Deed) of a Waqf is simply a paper, which cannot be relied
upon, and neither can we act upon it, just as many of our Ulama have
mentioned. In this situation reliance is upon Shar’ee witnesses, and in the
issue of a Waqf it is permitted for a witness to give testimony by hearing
(about it), and it should be applicable. (In this case) there is no harm in the
Shahaadat, if after he gives testimony, he says, I have not inspected (seen)
the Waqf, but according to me, this is what is well-known, or if he says, I
have been informed of this by a reliable person.’ [Fatawa Khairiyah, Vol.1,

Now even if it being well-known is not accepted, and even if there were a
thousand Waqfs besides this, because then they would simply be regarded
without evidence and be regarded as futile. And what other result will
there be!

To Change A Waqf Is Haraam! & Gangohi Saahebs


The Third Point: to acknowledge the Waqf of the cemetery and then to
regard it correct to build another Waqfi building on it, is outright injustice
and disgraceful ignorance, because this is to explicitly change (alter) the
Waqf, which is Haraam (forbidden), (and this is) even though the trustee
may have guardianship over the Waqf, and not some stranger. In fact, the
Ulama have neither permitted the changing of the state (of the Waqf),
without the permission of the Waaqif (the Endower), nor the changing of
the actual Waqf. It is written in Al Uqud Al Dur-riyah,

‫@ﻫﻤﺎ‬N‫@ ﺍﻟﺮﻣ وﺍﻟﺤﺎﻧﻮ¨ وﻏ‬N‫" ﺑ ﺍﻟﺨ‬Z‫@ ﺻﻴﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﻛﻤﺎ ﺍﻓ‬N‫ !ﻐ‬Ê‫ﻻ ﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻠﻨﺎ‬

It is not permissible for the guardian of the Waqf to change the principles
of the Waqf, just as it is mentioned in the Fatawa of Khayr Al Ramali and
Haanuti. [Al Uqud Al Durriyah, Vol.1, pg.115]

It is in Siraaj Wah’haaj and Hindiya,

4 ‫ﺎﻧ ًﺎ ﺍﻻ‬4'‫ﺣﻤﺎﻣﺎ وﻻ ﺍﻟﺮﺑﺎط د‬

4 ‫ﺴﺘﺎﻧﺎ وﻻ ﺍﻟﺨﺎن‬0‫@ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﻋﻦ ﻫﻴﺄﺗ ﻓﻼ ﻳﺠﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﺪﺍر‬N‫ﻻﻳﺠﻮز !ﻐﻴ‬
‫ ﻣﺎٰﻳﺮی ﻓﻴ ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺔ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ‬Ê‫ﺍذﺍﺟﻌﻞ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﺍ ﺍﻟﻨﺎ‬

‘It is not permissible to change the Waqf, from its state. Hence, to change a
house to a garden, and an inn to a public bath, and a guesthouse to a shop,
are (all) disallowed, except if the endower gave the custodian (guardian) of
the Waqf the permission, that he may do as he deems best for it, in which
there is benefit to the Waqf, (then it is fine).’ [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.490]

It is in Fathul Qadeer, Raddul Muhtar and Sharah Al Ashbah of Allama Al


‫ﻘﺎء ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﻋٰ ﻣﺎ'ﺎن ﻋﻠﻴ دون زﻳﺎدة ﺍŠی‬0‫ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺟﺐ ﺍ‬

It is Waajib to maintain the Waqf in its original condition (i.e. for its original
purpose), without some other making any additions (changes) to it. [Fathul
Qadeer, Vol.5, pg.440]

To Be the Owner Is Conditional, In order to
make a Waqf. Once Something Is Made Waqf, It
Cannot Be Made Waqf for a Second Time (&
Gangohi Saahebs Obliviousness)

The Fourth Point: Does a Madrassah, library or some building simply refer
to the walls? Every intelligent person, even the one with the slightest
intelligence knows that the land is surely included in this. Neither are only
the walls regarded as the building and the establishment, nor is just a house
or residence, or just the Madrassah regarded as a place of study. Is the place
of education, the land on which the (students) sit, or will the students sit
on the walls and learn? Even if this were the case, then in order for stability,
they would have no option but to come down to the ground.

This land has been made Waqf once, for one purpose, so why will it being
made Waqf for a second time, be regarded as sensible, because it is a
condition for the one making it Waqf to be the owner of the thing which
he is making Waqf, at the time of the Waqf. In our Madhab (i.e. Hanafi
Mazhab), it is unanimously agreed upon that, the condition of the Waqf is
dependent on the endower, and after completion of the Waqf
(endowment), none is the owner of it, and even after this if the actual
endower (Waaqif) wishes to make it Waqf for the second time, it will be
regarded as futile. This is not simply for Zaid or Amr (i.e. for specified
people), but this ruling is generalised, be this if the Waqf is being done
again for another purpose, or for the same initial purpose. In the first
instance, the custody is invalid, and in the second instance, the acquisition
is (already) existing and everything (new) is futile.
It is in Bahrur Raa’iq and Alamgiri etc.,

‫ وﻗﺖ ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ وﻳﺘ‹ع‬t‫ﺑﺔ وﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻠ‬ ‫ﻄ ﻓﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻘﻞ وﺍﻟﺒﻠﻮغ وﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺍن ﻳﻜﻮن‬Ò‫ﺍﻣﺎšﺍ‬
‫ ﺍﻧ ﻻﻳﺠﻮز وﻗﻒ ﺍﻻﻗﻄﺎﻋﺎﺕ وﻻ وﻗﻒ ﺍرض ﺍﻟﺤﻮز ﻟﻼﻣﺎم‬t‫ﻋٰ ﺍﺷ¦@ﺍط ﺍﻟﻤﻠ‬

As for the conditions, then from (amongst) them is to be sane, and to have
reached the age of puberty, and from it (the conditions) is for it to be for
the purpose of Ibaadat, and for it to be in one’s ownership at the time of
making the Waqf. Also, from the conditions of ownership, one subdivision
is that, it is impermissible to make a Waqf an estate, and that land which
has been enclosed by the Imam (Ruler). [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.352/354]

It is in As’aaf,

a ‫ﻌﻀﻬﺎ‬0 ‫ﺍ!ﻔﻖ ﺍﺑﻮﻳﻮﺳﻒ وﻣﺤﻤﺪ رﺣﻤﻬﻤﺎ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﺍن ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﻳﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﺟﻮﺍزہ ﻋ šوط‬
‫ﻔﺲ‬u s‫ ﺍو‬t‫ ﻓﺎن ﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺔ ﻋ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻞ šط ﺍﻟﺠﻮﺍز وﺍﻟﻮﻻﻳﺔ !ﺴﺘﻔﺎد ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻠ‬t‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘ_ف 'ﺎﻟﻤﻠ‬

Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad have agreed ٰ‫ رﺣﻤﻬﻤﺎ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬that that the
permissibility of a Waqf depends on certain conditions. Some of them are
administrative (ones), such as ownership, because guardianship is the basis
of the condition of permissibility, and the guardianship is either from the
benefit of the entity, or it is actually the entity. [Al As’aaf]
It is mentioned in the same narration that,

‫ﺼﺢ‬d‫ﺎﻟ ﺍو ﻣﻮﺍﺗﺎ ﺻﺢ وﺍن ﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﺖ ﺍﻟﻤﺎل ﻻ‬a‫ﻟﻮ وﻗﻒ ﺍرﺿﺎﺍﻗﻄﻌ ﺍﻳﺎﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎن ﻓﺎن ﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻠ‬

If someone made Waqf of an estate which was given (to him) by the King,
then if it is in his ownership (i.e. his property), or if it is a dead land, then
it is legal, and if it is from the Bayt ul Maal (Islamic Treasury), then it is not
legal. [Al As’aaf]

No Building can be made Waqf on a Waqf Land, for

Another Purpose & Gangohi Saahebs Ignorance

The Fifth Point: Either the building will be made Waqf by itself, or just the
land, or both; in the second case it is plainly void because it is
impermissible to make a Waqf, Waqf again. Similarly, in the third case (it is
void), because it is dependent on the Waqf. In the first case, there is
permissibility in the case where the land is non-controlled, in the situation
when, the building is made Waqf for the exact same purpose for which the
initial land was made Waqf (this is correct, and in fact this is the research
by Allah’s Divine Guidance). Therefore, the (issue) of the land of the
cemetery and the walls of the Madrassah, is simply (devilish) insinuation.

It is in the Fatawa of Allama Khairud’deen Ramali,

‫ﺮ‬Ò‫ƒﻨﺎ وﺳﺎ‬4 2‫ وﺍرﺿ وﻗﻒ ﺳﻴﺪﻧﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻴ وﻋٰ ﻧ‬nN‫م ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﻋٰ ﻋﻨﺐ وﺗ‬M a ‫ﺳﺌﻞ‬
‫ وﻗﻒ ﺟﺪہ ﻫﻞ‬4‫ٰ رﺟﻞ ﺑﺎﻧ‬Ï‫د‬4 ‫ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻴﻞ ﺍ‬t‫ﻴﺎء ﺍﻓﻀﻞ ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻠ‬2‫ﺍﻻﻧ‬
‫م ﺍﺳﻢ ﻟﻼرض وﺍﻟﺸﺠﺮ وﺍن ﺍرﻳﺪ ﺑ ﺍﻟﺸﺠﺮ‬p‫ ﺍذﺍﺍ‬،‫ ﺍﺟﺎﺏ ﻻ!ﺴﻤﻊ وﻻ!ﺼﺢ‬،‫!ﺴﻤﻊ دﻋﻮﺍہ‬
‫@ة وﻗﻒ‬N‫ﺔ ﺍﻻرض ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻓﻴ وﻗﺪﻗﺎل ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻟﺬﺧ‬H‫@ ﺟ‬N‫ﺘ ﻏ‬H‫ﻓﻮﻗﻒ ﺍﻟﺸﺠﺮ ﻋٰ ﺟ‬
‫@ وﻗﻒ ﺍﻻرض ﻟﻢ ﻳﺠﺰﻫﻮﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ وﺍن ﺍرﻳﺪ 'ﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻرض وﺍﻟﺸﺠﺮ ﻓﺒﻄﻼﻧ‬N‫ﻨﺎء ﻣﻦ ﻏ‬2‫ﺍﻟ‬
ٰ‫ﺑﺪﻳﻬﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻮر وﺍن ﺍرﻳﺪ ﺍﻻرض ﻓﺒﺪﻳﻬﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻄﻼن ﺍو‬

It is being queried about an orchard, in which there are grapes and figs, and
regarding its land, which Hazrat Ibrahim Ala Nabiy-yina and the other
Ambia ‫ ﺍﻟﺠﻠﻴﻞ‬:‫ﺍﻟﺼﻠﻮة وﺍﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻠ‬
ٰ ‫ ﺍﻓﻀﻞ‬made Waqf. A person has made a claim to such
an orchard, that his paternal grandfather has made Waqf. Will his claim be
heard? The answer given is, No! Because an orchard refers to combination
of the land and the trees, and if he means the trees by this, then to make
the trees Waqf without the portion of the land, is (an issue) which is
disputed. The author of Zakhira has said that, it is not permissible to make
a building Waqf without the land and this is correct (i.e. the proper view).
If (in his claim) he means the land and trees, i.e. all of it, then it being
invalid is obvious. And if he is only referring to the land, then it being
invalid is even more obvious. [Fatawa Khairiyah, Vol.1, pg.176]

It is mentioned in the same, parallel to it that,

‫ وﻗﻒ ﺍﻟﺨﻠﻴﻞ ﻋﻠﻴ ﺍﻟﺼﻠٰﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﺍھ وﻫﺬﺍ‬s ‫ﻔﺴ و‬u ٰ‫ﺎ ﻋ‬H‫ﻛﻴﻒ ﺼﺢ ﻟﻠﻮﺍﻗﻒ وﻗﻔ‬
‫" ﻗﻮﻟ ﻓﺒﻄﻼﻧ ﺑﺪﻳﻬﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻮر‬#‫ﻣﻌ‬

How can a Waaqif make it Waqf upon himself, whereas this Waqf is of
Hazrat Ibrahim . This is what is meant by his statement, ‘it being invalid
is obvious.’ [Fatawa Khairiyah, Vol.1, pg.177]

It is in Raddul Muhtar,

‫" 'ﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻟﺒﻘﻌﺔ‬Z‫ﻣﺎ ﺍذﺍ وﻗﻔ ﻋ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟ‬4 ‫@ﻳﺔ وﺍ‬N‫ ﺍﺧﺬﺍ ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮﻟ ﺍﻟﻈﻬ‬8‫ ﺍﻟﺒ‬a ‫رہ‬W
4 ‫ﺍﻟﺬی‬
ٰ‫@ة ﻟﻢ ﻳﺠﺰﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻣﻘﺼﻮر ﻋ‬N‫وﻗﻔ ًﺎ ﻋﻠﻴ ﺟﺎز ﺍ!ﻔﺎﻗ ًﺎ ﺗﺒﻌ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﺒﻘﻌﺔ وﺍن ﻗﻮل ﺍﻟﺬﺧ‬
‫ﺔ ﺍŠی ﺍھ وﻋ ﻫﺬﺍ‬H‫ﻣﺎﻋﺪﺍﺻﻮرة ﺍﻻ!ﻔﺎق وﻫﻮﻣﺎﺍذﺍ 'ﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻻرض ﻣﻠŒ ًﺎ ﺍووﻗﻔ ًﺎ ﻋٰ ﺟ‬
‫ ٰ" ﻣﻦ ﺍرض ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﺎﺍذﺍ'ﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻌﺪة ﻟﻼﺣﺘŒﺎر وﺑ ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﺍﻟﺤﺎل‬#‫ﻓƒﻨﺒ< ﺍن ﺴﺘﺜ‬
.‫ﻘﻨﺎ ﻋﻠﻴ‬4‫ وﻗﺪ ﺍوﺿﺤﻨﺎہ ﻓ‘ ﻋﻠ‬، ‫ ﺍھ ﻣﻠﺨﺼﺎ‬۲؎ ‫ ﺍﻻﻗﻮﺍل‬nN‫وﻳﺤﺼﻞ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﻓﻴﻖ ﺑ‬

That which is written in Bahr is taken from the statement of Zahiriyah, and
if it is made Waqf for the same purpose on which that (portion of) land was
made Waqf, then the Waqf in adhering to this, is unanimously permissible;
and the statement of Zakhira that ‘It is impermissible,’ is correct. This

refers to the situation which is contrary to that with is unanimous, and this
is when the land is under ownership, or the Waqf is intended for some
other purpose. On this basis, this type of exclusion from the Waqf land is
necessary, whereas this land has been arranged for hoarding (i.e.
amassing). From this, the current situation is clear, and guidance is
achieved in all the statements. (And we have explained this clearly in the
comments on Raddul Muhtar). [Raddul Muhtar, Vol.3, pg.428]

Gangohi Saahebs extreme ignorance in

mentioning relevant narrations to be Non-

The Sixth Point: The Madrassah or library which intends being built,
whereas according to the Shariah it cannot be made Waqf, will
undoubtedly be upon those who build it (founders). This will be clearly
regarded as doing what you feel like with the Waqf and constructing
buildings for your own benefit. Therefore, it is as clear as the sun, the texts
of Qadi Khan and Zahiriyah which the second respondent %‫ ﺳﻠﻤ‬has quoted,
(in which it is mentioned) that even if a cemetery becomes obliterated, and
leave alone any signs of graves not being there; even if there are no signs
of the bones of the deceased, still to take benefit from it is not permissible,
and it will always fall under the ruling of a cemetery. Similar to this, is the
text of Fatawa Zahiriyah, Khazanat ul Muftiyeen and As’aaf,

‫@ة ﻻﻳﺒﺎح ﻻﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻻﻧﺘﻔﺎع ﺑﻬﺎ وﺍن 'ﺎن ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬A‫@ة ﻗﺪﻳﻤﺔ ﺑﻤﺤﻠﺔ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺒﻖ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺁﺛﺎر ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬A‫ﻣﻘ‬
‫ وﻻﺗﺮﺳﻞ ﺍﻟﺪوﺍﺏ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬،‫ﺪوﺍﺏ‬4 ‫ج ﺍﻟﺤﺸﻴﺶ ﺍ ﺍﻟ‬Ð‫ﺣﺸﻴﺶ ﻳﺤﺶ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ وﻳ‬
‘That cemetery which has become old and there are no signs of a cemetery
(there), then for the people of the locality to take any benefit from it is not
lawful. If there is grass (growing) in it, then that can be cut. It should be cut
and taken outside for the animals, and the animals should not be left (to
graze) in the cemetery.’ [Fatawa Zahiriyah]

As for the conjecture of the third respondent that the narrations quoted by
the writer do not prove the claim; is simply his lack of understanding, and
sheer ignorance.

(This is Gangohi Saahebs extreme lack of knowledge, that he ignored the

texts of the (Hanafi) Madhab, and relied on a Maliki scholar).

Gangohi Saaheb Caught Out

The Seventh Point: When the third respondent did not find any path in the
(Books of) Jurisprudence, he inevitably left aside all the texts, annotations
and decrees, and he ignored the (reliable) texts from the principles and
branches of the Hanafi Fiqh. And he became content with just one
narration from the annotation of Sahih Bukhari, which was not in
accordance with the (Hanafi) Madhab, that Ibn Al Qasim said, in my opinion
if the signs (i.e. the trace) of the cemetery have perished (i.e. are non-
existent), and there is no need for it (any longer), then to build a Masjid
there is permissible.

The translation of the Arabic words has been seen. Now who knows who
this Ibn Al Qasim is? (or) of which Madhab is he a scholar? Upto what extent
will his view (statement) be acceptable in the Hanafi Madhab? And that too,
his mere opinion, which is completely contrary to the principles and
branches of the (Hanafi) Madhab.

The respondent should know that Allama Ayni ‫ رﺣﻤﺔ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ‬does not simply
restrict (his discussions) in Sharah Jaame Sahih only on the basis of the
views of the Madhab. However, he records the views of all the four Imams
of the Madhabs, and he even surpasses this and presents the views of some
of the former and latters as well. And he even quotes at times the views of
some of the deviants, such as Dawood Zaahiri and Ibn Hazm, and on many
occasions, he is content with the views of just almost anyone, and he does
not bring into the discussion the Madhab of the Imams of the Madhab.

The ignorant ones who are not aware of the translations of the Ulama fall
into the trap like you (i.e. the third respondent), and this servant of sacred
knowledge (i.e. Sayyidi Aal Hazrat ؓ◌), with praise to Almighty Allah, is
versed with the differences in grades, and the differences of the Madhabs.

Here Imam Ayni is not really presenting anything which is from any Books
of Fiqh. These are simply points which are non-related to the discussion,
the aim of which is to be made aware of the views of the people. As for the
Madhab, then this is already established in the (authentic books) of the
Madhab, in principle and through its branches.

Most of the substance of these quotations of his are from the writings of
Ibn Al Mundhir and Ibn Batal and the other Shafi’i (scholars) etc. It is his
manner to quote many lines, and even in some places, pages of the (actual)
text, without references and unchanged, upon which his Imam of the era,
Imam Ibn Hajr Asqalani ٰ‫ رﺣﻤ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬also cautioned him in Ad Durar Al Kaamina.
Here also, in the foremost part of the discussion from ‫ﺎم‬%‫ﻨﺒﻂ ﻣﻨ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻻﺣ‬,‫ﺴ‬. ‫ ﻣﺎ‬#‫ذ‬
up to the narrative he presented, consists of the same kind of text. An Aalim
will realise due to many reasons, that this is not the words of the Hanafis.

He should have at least seen this, that in this text it is said,

‫ وﺍﺷﻬﺐ ﺑﻬﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ‬Ë‫ﻜﻮﻓﻴﻮن وﺍﻟﺸﺎﻓ‬p‫ﺍٰ ﺟﻮﺍز ﻧﺒﺶ ﻗﺒﻮرﻫﻢ ﻟﻠﻤﺎل ذﻫﺐ ﺍ‬

‘The people of Kufa, Shafi’i and Ash-hab, deducing from this Hadith, have
gone with this view that, in order to retrieve valuables, it is permissible to
dig up a grave’

It is not the style of the Hanafis to explain the Madhab of the Imams by
saying, the people of Kufa have gone with this view. If the speaker were a
Hanafi, he would have written,

t‫ﻤ…ﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﺎﺅﻧﺎ وﺍﻣﺜﺎل ذﻟ‬Ò‫ذﻫﺐ ﺍ‬

‘Our Imam or our fellow (Hanafi Scholars), or our Ulama have gone
(with this view), and so on…’
Both Ibn Al Qasim and Ash-hab are personalities who are Ulama of the
Maliki Madhab, and personally the students of Imam Ibn Humaam, and in
their Madhab, they are counted amongst the Ahl Al Riwayah wa Al Diraya,
like we (the Hanafis) have, (Imam) Zufr and Hasan bin Ziyad ‫رﺣﻤﺔ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ‬.

Such is your (the third respondents) piety that you give a Fatwa completely
contrary to the Hanafi Madhab based on the opinion of one Maliki Scholar,
and in your arrogance, you are regarding it as a narration of the Hanafi
Madhab, whereas leave alone our Imams, the Imam of that Madhab as well,
The great Mujtahid Imam Sayyiduna Imam Malik ؓ◌ mentions, Ibn Al Qasim
is not from our Ulama. However, when lack of understanding overwhelms,
then what do you think, as you have taken (the statement) ‘Our Ashaab
have said’ and entered it under ‘Ibn Al Qasim said,’ and you have accepted
it to be part of his views.

Three Tricks of Gangohi Saaheb & How the

Tables were turned

The Eighth Point: The respondent was wrongfully content with the
narrative which is contrary to the Madhab, so that they may get some
latitude to destroy the graves of the unfortunate deceased Muslims, by the
hands of the cleaners. Why did he not take (the statement) ‫ ذ ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑﻨﺎ‬and
use as leeway to scream in Masjids, and to tie horses and donkey there in?


Original Footnote: The luminous Mazaars of both these personalities, Ibn Al Qasim
and Ash-hab, are at one location in Qarafa. The Ulama have said, that Dua which is
made between both these Mazaars is accepted.
‫ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑﻨﺎ ﺍن‬M‫ﺑﻞ ﻫﻮ ﺍﺷﻨﻊ وﺍﺧﻨﻊ وﻫﻮ ﺍﺗﺨﺎذ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ ﺣﺸﺎ و ﻛﻨﻴﻌﺎ ﻟﻘﻮﻟ وذ‬
‫@ة ﺍذﺍ ﻋﻔﺖ ودﺛﺮﺕ !ﻌﻮد ﻣﻠŒﺎ‬A‫ وﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬،‫ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ ﺍذﺍŠﺏ ودﺛﺮ وﻟﻢ ﻳﺒﻖ ﺣﻮﻟ ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺔ‬
‫@ ﻣﺴﺠﺪ‬A‫" ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺠﺪ دﺍر ًﺍ وﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬#‫ ﻗﺎل ﻓﺎذﺍ ﻋﺎدﺕ ﻣﻠŒﺎ ﻳﺠﻮز ﺍن ﻳﺒ‬،‫ﻻرﺑﺎﺑﻬﺎ‬
‫ ﺍﻻﺷﻴﺎء‬t‫ﺪﻟﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠ‬4 ‫ﺍﻟﺪﺍرﻻﺑ‬
4 ‫؎ ﻻن‬۱t‫@ ذﻟ‬N‫ﺍوﻏ‬

However, worse than this, is to make the Masjid a stable or a barn, because
he said; our colleagues (i.e. our Scholars) have said that, when a Masjid
becomes deserted, and there are is no Jama’at (i.e. people) around it (i.e. in
its vicinity), and when a cemetery perishes, then the ownership of the past
owner is reinstated over it. He said, that when these things are now in his
ownership, then for the place of a Masjid to be made a house, and to use
the place of the cemetery etc. to make a cemetery is valid, because these
things are essential for it to be regarded as a house.

But you were surely devious!

The first reason, is because you knew that in the authentic books of the
distinguished Madhab, this has been openly refuted, but you still forcefully
without any care gave a Fatwa.

It is in Tanweerul Absaar and Durr e Mukhtar,

‫ ﺍﺑﺪ ًﺍ ﺍ ﻗﻴﺎم ﺍﻟﺴﺎﻋﺔ وﺑ‬v‫ ﻣﺴﺠﺪﺍ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﻻﻣﺎم وﺍﻟﺜﺎ‬É‫ ٰ" ﻋﻨ ﻳﺒ‬#‫وﻟﻮŠﺏ ﻣﺎﺣﻮﻟ ﺍﺳﺘﻐ‬
"Z‫ ﻔ‬
‘If the area (vicinity) around it is deserted, and there is no need for it, then
the Masjid will (still) remain (a Masjid). Imam Saaheb (i.e. Imam Abu
Hanifa) and the Deputy Imam (i.e. Imam Abu Yusuf) have said that, this will
remain such until Qiyaamat, and the Fatawa is given based on this.’ [Durr e
Mukhtar, Vol.1, page 379]

It is in Haawi Al Qudsi, Bahrur Raa’iq and Raddul Muhtar

‫ﺦ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻣﺠﺘ¿" وﻫﻮ ﺍﻻوﺟ ﻓﺘﺢ‬Ò‫ﻛ¯@ﺍﻟﻤﺸﺎ‬e‫و‬

‘And most of the Masha’ikh are of this (view). [Mujtaba]

And it is that which is most reliable.’ [Fath]
[Raddul Muhtar, Vol.3, page 406]

The second reason is because, the statement of Imam Muhammad ٰ‫رﺣﻤﺔﺍﷲ ﻌﺎ‬

‫ﻋﻠﻴ‬ which was attributed towards ‫( ﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑﻨﺎ‬our learned colleagues), is

specifically in the situation (or in the case) when that thing which was
made Waqf, is completely removed from capacity to fulfil that purpose for
which the person who made it Waqf, gave it as a Waqf. (In other words), it
primarily is not of any use (to fulfil this) any longer.

It is in Raddul Muhtar,

‫ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺢ ﻣﺎﻣﻌﻨﺎہ ﺍﻧ ﻳﺘ‹ع ﻋ ﺍﻟﺨﻼف ﺍﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮر ﻣﺎﺍذﺍ ﺍﻧﻬﺪم ﺍﻟﻮﻗﻒ وﻟﻴﺲ ﻟ ﻣﻦ‬a M‫ذ‬
‫ﻜﻦ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ‬p ‫ ﺍوورﺛﺘ ﻋﻨﺪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺧﻼ ﻓﺎ ﻻ ﻳﻮﺳﻒ‬v‫@ﺟﻊ ﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺎ‬N‫ﺍﻟﻐﻠﺔ ﻣﺎ ﻌﻤﺮﺑ ﻓ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻤﺎ ﻌﻮد ﺍٰ ﻣﻠﻜ ﻣﺎŠج ﻋﻦ ﺍﻻﻧﺘﻔﺎع ﺍﻟﻤﻘﺼﻮد ﻟﻠﻮﺍﻗﻒ ﺑﺎﻟŒﻠﻴﺔ‬
‘It is mentioned in Fath (and) the gist of it is this, that it branches out
contrary to what is mentioned, whereby if a building which was made Waqf
is ruined (completely), and there is no source of income for it, through
which it may be built (i.e. rebuilt), then it will revert to the one who built
it. Or to his heirs according to Imam Muhammad, and this is contrary to
Imam Abu Yusuf, but according to (Imam) Muhammad, only that portion
will revert, from which any benefit whatsoever is not possible.’ [Raddul
Muhtar, Vol.3, page 406]

Therefore, why will this be even considered in the case of this cemetery,
because as per the one who asked the question; ‘one third of land is
(completely) vacant.’

The third reason is because, probably there was this concern as well, that
with this cemetery even the Masjid will have no chance. What if the general
public becomes enraged? This is why instead of mentioning ‘Ashabuna’
(our fellow colleagues), you took hold of this point of ‘Ibn Al Qasim said.’
However, you remained negligent, because the three concerns (fears)
which you attempted to remedy, the same three have become unavoidable
upon you, but with everything, it (i.e. your position) has become worse.

The first thing we have seen in the seventh point that leave alone it being
contrary to the accepted and relied upon view. It is not even the weak view
of any other Madhab.

The second thing was in the sense, that virtue in the words of Ibn Al Qasim
is valid, that the virtue attributed to it, should be completely ruined, and
inexistent, without there being any sign of it. How can this be really
attributed in the case of this cemetery, whereas the one asking the question
says that old graves which are in poor condition can be found there. So
now, it still cannot be regarded as being completely ruined and non-
existent. That narration which was invalid (in our Madhab) has also not
been of any use to you.

The third thing is in this sense, when in his opinion, its isolated position of
being Waqf, is cause of it being combined in this context, and the reasons
for legality of residing there are not just one, but many, then just as a
cemetery can be converted to a Masjid is acceptable (in their view).
Similarly, to make a Masjid a cemetery (will be regarded permissible). The
same will apply to a Masjid being converted to a guest house, and a guest
house being converted to toilets.

‫ﻓﺎن ﺍﻟ ﻞ وﻗﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺍوﻗﺎف ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ ﻻ ﻳﺠﻮز ﺗﻤﻠﻴﻜ ﻻﺣﺪ ﻓﻤﻌ ﺍﻟ ﻞ ﻋ  ﻫﺬﺍ وﺍﺣﺪ‬

Because, all of these are forms of Waqf, from the Awqaaf of the Muslims, to
make anyone the owner of it, is impermissible. In this sense the
connotation of all are same.

So now, where is there any refuge!

The Ninth Point: Please come to your senses for a little while and state, that
where did Ibn Al Qasim say that it was legal (allowed) to convert a cemetery
to a Masjid after no signs of it are found? (And keep in mind) that Abul
Qasim Muhammadur Rasoolullah  said that it is forbidden (Haraam) to
erect a Masjid over graves. (So) according to you both these rulings are in
the same category! Then, it means that it is your Imaan that, Ibn Abul Al
Qasim’s word should be regarded as correct, and the blessed command of
Abul Qasim  should not be adhered to. And if the conditions are

different, then first stipulate the difference, on the basis of which, both
these rulings will be divided.
Is the difference,

• merely on the basis of it (i.e. the graves) being new or ancient,

whereby to build a Masjid on new (fresh) graves is Haraam, and
when they become even slightly old, then to perform Namaaz on
them is permissibe,

• or is it simply when the apparent signs perish, or surely by this,

that all the limbs of the bodies, and all the bones etc. should be
completey decomposed (i.e. become dust),

• (or) when the deceased with all the limbs, should completely turn
to dust, and only then will it be acceptable!

The first instance is completely out, and probably due to the reasoning of
your wahabism, it will be regarded as shirk (polytheism). The second
instance is also similar, because the apparent sign on the grave is neither
the grave and nor is any column a condition for a grave, so it (i.e. the sign)
being present or not, is alike. That is why in the case of this cemetery, even
this condition is still not proven, that the sign of the grave is non-existent,
and your ruling without specification of any of the three (conditions), is
plainly absolute, ‘to make a Waqfi Madrassah in that graveyard is
permissible.’ And your follower has explicitly explained this validity (by
saying), ‘To construct a Madrassah in that place, especially in the vacant
portion, is allowed.’

This specification has clarified the generalised, so undoubtedly you will
take the third option! It was thus, necessary upon you, that you should
stipulate the time period with evidence from the Shariah, in which there is
primarily no sign at all of the bones (etc.) of the deceased remaining. (You
should have stated) the amount of time which has elapsed since the last
deceased was buried there. Without clarifying these two stages, it was
simply ignorance for you to give the ruling of permissibility.

You should bear in mind that the point of doubt here will be of no use,

t‫ ﻻ ﻳﺰول ﺑﺎﻟﺸ‬nN‫ﺍﻟﻴﻘ‬

‘Certainty is not terminated due to doubt’

It is the agreed upon principle of the sense of intellect that, existence

impedes. In other words, there will not be certainty simply because of some
remains of the deceased. The ruling will still be that, of it being forbidden
and disallowed, and your evasion will not be of any use.

Thus, it has been clarified that to take refuge in the narration which was
not in accordance with the (Hanafi) Madhab was simply (your) confusion,
and adherence to (your) uncertainty. ‫وﺑﺎﷲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﻤﺔ‬

The Tenth Point: What is interesting, is that in the external narration, the
condition of hindrance from burial has been stipulated. Now, it must be
seen, that if it means that with the exception of (burial) there, burial can
take place elsewhere. Then (in this case), this condition is simply baseless
and futile.
Which cemetery is there, regarding which the necessity to bury, in the
sense that, if it is not there, then it is disallowed. Neither is it ever on the
basis of suspension (of burial) or of it being empty.

In an Awqaaf, only credence is given to this, because here two points

remain in sight; one is the inexistence of those depending on it. In other
words, there are no people there at all (i.e. it has become completely
uninhabited), because the people have gone away, so who now has the need
(to bury there); just as it has been mentioned in the second answer, with
reference to Alamgiri and Muheet, regarding the Masjid and the Haudh

‫Šﺏ وﻻﻳﺤﺘﺎج ﺍﻟﻴ ﻟﺘ‹ق ﺍﻟﻨﺎس‬

‘(That) which has become deserted due to the people leaving,

and (since) there is no need for it (any longer)’

The second point is the non-existence of need, due to non-existence of

benefit. In other words, due to some prohibition, omission or fault, that
thing is now not of any use; for example, if water has prevailed over the
land (i.e. the land is now covered by water) whereby there is no chance of

It is in Fatawa Kubra and Jaami Al Mudammirat, in Hindiya and in As’aaf

‫ ﺍﻟﻘﻄﻌﺔ‬t‫@ة وﺍŠﺟﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺪﻫﺎ ودﻓﻨﺖ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺍﺑﻨﻬﺎ وﺗﻠ‬A‫ﺍﻣﺮﺃة ﺟﻌﻠﺖ ﻗﻄﻌﺔ ﺍرض ﻟﻬﺎ ﻣﻘ‬
‫ ﺍن 'ﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻻرض ﺑﺤﺎل‬،‫@ة ﻟﻐﻠﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺎء ﻋﻨﺪﻫﺎ ﻓﻴﺼƒﺒﻬﺎ ﻓﺴﺎد ﻓﺎرﺍدﺕ ﺑﻴﻌﻬﺎ‬A‫ﻻ!ﺼﻠﺢ ﺍﻟﻤﻘ‬
‫ﻴﻊ وﺍن 'ﺎﻧﺖ ﻳﺮﻏﺐ ﺍﻟﻨﺎس ﻋﻦ دﻓﻦ‬2‫ﻻﻳﺮﻏﺐ ﺍﻟﻨﺎس ﻋﻦ دﻓﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﻮ¨ٰ ﻟﻘﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎد ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﻬﺎ ﺍﻟ‬
‫ﻴﻊ‬2‫ﻜ¯@ة ﺍﻟﻔﺴﺎد ﻓﻠﻬﺎ ﺍﻟ‬p ٰ¨‫ﺍﻟﻤﻮ‬

‘A lady converted a piece of her land into a cemetery, and she took it out
(i.e. separated it) with her own hands; and in it she buried her son, but due
to the piece of land being overwhelmed by water, it was not appropriate
for a cemetery, so she decided to sell it. If the land is such, that the people
do not abstain from burying their deceased in it, because the hindrance
was not severe, then (in this case) the woman lady cannot sell that piece
(of land). And if the people do not bury their deceased in it, due to it being
severely defective, then the lady may sell it.’ [Fatawa Hindiya, Vol.2, pg.

Based on this, it is evident that in the case which has been queried, the
issue of the non-existence of need, or the non-existence of benefit is not
present, so when (i.e. how) will the condition of hindrance be proven? And
from which quarters did you get the permission to change (alter) a Waqf?

It has been clearly shown that the third respondent taking the external
narration was (the case of);

‫!ﺸﺒﺚ ﺍﻟﻐﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﺸﻴﺶ‬

‘A drowning person taking the support of a blade of grass’

@‫ ﻫﻜﺬﺍ ﻳﻨﺒ> ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ وﺍﷲ و ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻮ‬.‫ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ‬:‫وﻻﺣﻮل وﻻ ﻗﻮة ﺍﻻ ﺑﺎﷲ ﺍﻟﻌ‬

Note of Caution: This ends the ten points pertaining to the third
respondent, and is adequate in regards to all the followers and accomplices
of that group.

‫ ﺟﻮف ﺍﻟ‹ﺍء‬a ‫و'ﻞ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﺪ‬

‘And every hunted is in the cavity of the Fur’

This is a phrase amongst the Arabs which is used as a paradigm. It is

mentioned at a time, when from amongst many needs, the main need (i.e.
the most important) is fulfilled.

And what else do these offenders have, except the (statement) of Imam
Zayla’i! The narration of Imam Zayla’i, which even Gangohi Saaheb himself
did not take, after deliberating, but rather he used the excuse of lack of
time, due to which he could not note the narrations of Fiqh. The first
respondent wrote it and the second respondent (Allah keep him well)
responded (to them). Some accomplices of the third respondent responded
without contention, and then repeated the same.
However, Janaab Gangohi Saaheb, got startled here, as the discussion is on
a cemetery which has been made Waqf. (He thought) for me (i.e. Gangohi)
to find (evidence) of permission for even a second Waqf (house) is so
difficult, and from which quarters (i.e. from where) will I find a way of
making it permissible to plough and farm, as it is proving to be legal from
that narration of Imam Zayla’i! Hence, he (Gangohi) cunningly did not
comply with it, and this was not understood by the accomplices.

Probably by now, the readers (of this document) would have understood
the position and objective of that narration.

Saahebs! The objective of that narration, is land which is owned (by

someone). In other words, if the deceased is buried in the personally owned
property of someone, then when it completely turns to dust, it is legal for
the owner, to plant there (i.e. To farm there), or build a house, or do as he

‫ ﺍﻟﻐﺼﺐ ﻟ ﺍŠﺍج‬x‫ ﺑﺎذﻧ وﺍﻻﻓ‬t‫ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ وﺍﻟﻤﺎﻧﻊ زﺍل وﻫﺬﺍ ﺍ ﻀﺎ ﺍذﺍ'ﺎن ذٰﻟ‬t‫ﻻن ﺍﻟﻤﻠ‬
‫ ﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﻌﺮق ﻇﺎﻟﻢ ﺣﻖ‬s ‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺖ و!ﺴﻮﻳﺔ ﺍﻻرض ﻛﻤﺎ‬

Since, a personal property is absolute, and the prohibition has fallen away,
and this too, in the case when it is permitted, otherwise in the case of land
which was usurped, he (the actual owner) has the right to exhume the
deceased, and to level the ground, to what it was, because it has been
mentioned in the Hadith that, a tyrant has no right over property, (i.e. land
which he usurped). [Al Mu’jam Al Kabeer]

The great research scholar Allama Ulaa’i ‫ ﻗﺪس ہ‬attached it to such an
exquisite category, which caused its intended meaning to become evident.
The third respondent took this narration from the same place, but where
it is possible for just every person to comprehend the indications of the
great Imam!

He states in Durr e Mukhtar,

،‫ﺸﻔﻌﺔ‬0 ‫ 'ﺎن ﺗﻜﻮن ﺍﻻرض ﻣﻐﺼﻮﺑﺔ ﺍوﺍﺧﺬﺕ‬Á‫د‬w ‫ﻌﺪ ﺍﻫﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟ¦@ﺍﺏ ﺍﻻﻟﺤﻖ‬0 ‫ج ﻣﻨ‬Ð‫ﻻﻳ‬
‫ﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻴ ﺍذﺍ ﺑٰ وﺻﺎر‬2‫ ﺍŠﺍﺟ و ﻣﺴﺎوﺍﺗ ﺑﺎﻻرض ﻛﻤﺎ ﺟﺎز ز„ﻋ وﺍﻟ‬nN‫ ﺑ‬t‫@ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻟ‬N‫وﻳﺨ‬
Ë‫ﺗﺮﺍﺑ ًﺎ زﻳﻠ‬

After covering the deceased with sand (i.e. after burial), the deceased will
only be exhumed due to ‘Rights of the servants,’ in the case of the land
being usurped, or if it was taken away by way of Shuf’a (Pre-emption), and
the owner will have the right, to either take him out or flatten the land,
just as it is allowed to construct a building on it, or to plant, or farm on it,
after the deceased has completely decayed, and has become dust. Zayla’i.
[Durr e Mukhtar, Vol.1, page 126] (Otherwise, to farm and cultivate on a
Waqfi cemetery is not permissible according to any one).

It is in Hidaya,

‫@ ﻓﻴ ﺍﻟﻤﻮ¨ٰ ﺳﻨﺔ و ﻳﺰرع ﺳﻨﺔ‬A‫ ﻏﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺒﺢ ﺍن ﻘ‬a

‘It is extremely abhorrent to bury the deceased in it for a year, and to

farm on it for one year.’ [Al Hidaya, Vol.2, page 618]
The issue here is that, the wahabis feel that the graves of ordinary Muslims,
and more so the Mazaars of the Awliyah e Kiraam ‫ ﻋﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﻮﺍن‬have no real
significance. They actually prefer that these graves are disrespected, and
they look for the slightest excuse to bulldoze and flatten the Mazaars of the
pious servants.

According to them, humans are like stones. They believe that they have no
real worth once they are dead. They say it just as they are in their own
lifetime (i.e. the wahabis), ‫ ﺷﻴﺌًﺎ‬D‫ ﻋﻨ‬EF‫ﻐ‬.‫ وﻻ‬H‫ﺴﻤﻊ وﻻﻳﺒ‬. ‫‘ ﻣﺎﻻ‬those who cannot hear,
or cannot see or cannot be of any benefit to you in anything,’ whereas the
pure Shariat not only explains the excellence of the graves of the Awliyah
Allah, but also of the graves of the ordinary Muslims.

The Ulama have stated that the graves should be respected and not
disrespected. The Ulama have even stated,

‘To keep the foot on the grave is a sin, since the roof (i.e. top) of the grave
is the right (property) of the deceased.’

It is also Fatawa Quniyah from Imam Tarjumani that,

4 ‫@ ﺣﻖ‬A‫ﻳﺎﺛﻢ ﺑﻮطء ﺍﻟﻘﺒﻮر ﻻن ﺳﻘﻒ ﺍﻟﻘ‬

‘To keep the foot on the grave is a sin, as the top of the grave is the property
of the deceased.’ [Fatawa Quniyah, pg.167]

In fact, the Naa’lain Shareef (Sacred Footwear) of the Beloved Rasool  is
so exalted that if the Sacred Dust from it has to touch the grave of a Muslim,
his entire grave will be fragranced with Heavenly musk and amber. And if
the Beloved Rasool  has to place His Sacred Foot on the chest, head and
eyes of a Muslim, then that fortunate person will be absorbed forever in its
delight, its abundant benevolence, and in its peacefulness and blessings.
The Beloved Rasool  says, ‘Indeed, I would prefer to walk on embers (of
fire) or on a naked sword, rather than stepping on the grave of a Muslim.’
Ibn Majah narrated this Hadith from Uqba Aamir ؓ◌.

The wahabis (after all this) are only thinking about how they can build
houses on gravesites, where people will walk, sit and answer the call of

  2¡¢£¤¥> ™

‘If this is what you prefer then let this be destined for you’

‫ﻴﺎن وﻟﻨﻜﻒ ﻋﻨﺎن‬2‫ وﺍذﺍ ﺍﺧﺬﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺣﻘﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟ‬- ‫ ﺑﺎﷲ ﺍﻟﻌ ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ‬4 ‫وﻻﺣﻮل وﻻﻗﻮة ﺍﻻ‬
‫ ﺣﺎﻣﺪﻳﻦ ﷲ ﺳﺒﺤﻨ و!ﻌﺎٰ ﻋ ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﻢ وﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻧﺎ وﻣﻮﻟٰﻨﺎ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ‬- ‫ﺍﻟﻘﻠﻢ‬
.‫ﻟ وﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑ وﺳﻠﻢ وﺍﷲ ﺳﺒ ٰﺤﻨ و!ﻌﺎٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ وﻋﻠﻤ ﺟﻞ ﻣﺠﺪہ ﺍﺗﻢ وﺍﺣﻜﻢ ﻋﺰ ﺷﺎﻧ ﺍﺣﻜﻢ‬w‫و‬

And All the Might and Power is with Allah. When I have explained the laws
clearly and as they should be, then I should now stop my writing by
praising Allah, for it is He, Who has given us knowledge. And Durood and
Salaams upon our Master and Leader Hazrat Muhammad  and upon his
Noble Family, and Distinguished Companions.

‫وﺍﷲ ﺳﺒ ٰﺤﻨ وﻌﺎٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ وﻋﻠﻤ ﺟﻞ ﻣﺠﺪہ ﺍﺗﻢ وﺍﺣﻜﻢ ﻋﺰ ﺷﺎﻧ ﺍﺣﻜﻢ‬

Signed and stamped by Aala Hazrat ؓ◌

Other Verifications

First Verification

‫ﺍن »ﺬﺍﺍﻟ¸ﻮﺍ ﺍﻟﺤﻖ وﺍﻟﺤﻖ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺒﺎ ع ﺍﺣﻖ‬

‘Indeed, it is this which is the truth, and it is the truth, which is more
worthy of being adhered to.’

Muhammad Sultan

Second Verification

All that which has been mentioned herein is in accordance with the rulings
of the Shariah, and in accordance with the pious predecessors. The
Muslims should firmly hold on to all of them. May Almighty Allah reward
the author with the best of rewards, and grant him general and special
acceptance, and may I not be deprived of the reward as well.

ٖ ‫ ﺍﻻﻧﺎم‬45‫وﺍﻟﺼﻠﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﻋ)ٰ ﺧ‬

‫ﺍم‬/0‫وﺁﻟ وﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑ ﺍ‬ ٰ

The sinful servant namely

Muhammad Abdullah
(May he be forgiven)
Third Verification

The above mentioned rulings which have been written and expounded on
by the Ulama of the established Deen, and by the experts of the Ummat of
the Most Accepted Rasool , are all completely correct and proper. Those
who doubt these (rulings) are cursed and transgressors. - The weak
servant, the one turning towards The Mercy of The Most Kind.

Muhammad Na’eem Peshawari

May Allah forgive him, his parents, and all the Believing men and Believing
women! Aameen Thumma Aameen

Fourth Verification

ٖ ‫ﺴﻢ ﺍﷲ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ ﺣﺎﻣﺪ ًﺍ وﻣﺼﻠﻴ ًﺎ وﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ ﻋٰ رﺳﻮﻟ ﺳﻴﺪﻧﺎ ﻣﺤﻤ ٍﺪ‬0
‫وﺍﻟ وﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑ‬
nN‫وﺍوﻟﻴﺎء ﺍﻣﺘ وﻣ…ﺒﻌﻴﻬﻢ ﺍﺟﻤﻌ‬

Whatever has been written by the said Maulana, Jaame Al Ma’qul wal
Manqul, Muhimaat e Furoo’ wa Usool, Maulvi Muhammad Umrud’deen
Saaheb Al Hanafi Al Qaadiri (May Allah bless him with the best of rewards)
in response to the said issue, is correct and righteous. The answer is one
that leaves (the opposition) speechless, and it is very much adored by the
men of understanding (i.e. the Ulama). According to the established
Madhab, to dig up the graves and clear the land, to build houses etc. on it,

is not allowed at all. The responding scholar has presented an excellent
research on this. No stone has been left unturned (in this regard). The
objections made by the objectors have been systematically dissected, and
all the misgivings of the opposition have been wiped out.

After that, the writing and the bright stamp of the Faadil, Kaamil, Aalim,
Aamil, Muhaqqiq e Uloom e Aqaliya, Mudaqqaq e Funoon Naqaliya, Qaali
Usool e Mubtadi’een, Qaami’ e Awhaam e Najdiyeen, Haami e Sunan, Maahi
e Fitan, Mujadd’did e Miat e Haadira, Hujjat e Qaahira, Maulana Al Haj
Ahmed Raza Khan Saaheb ‫ ﺍدﺍم ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻓﻴﻮﺿﺎﺗﻢ‬was like a bolt of lightning which
struck the opposition. He disintegrated the premeditated script of Rashid
Gangohi, and left no stone unturned in this issue, and there will be no need
to write on it again by anyone else.

This humble servant did not feel it appropriate to write a very lengthy
article; hence I have been very brief. With the exception of the Nadiya,
wahabiya, isma’eeliya, hindiya, ishaqiya, rasheediya, gangohiya shaitaniya
sects (May Allah seize them in this world and in the hereafter) no one else
will reject these decrees. It is essential upon the Ahle Sunnat wa Jama’at to
shun the company of these fraudulent deviants, and to break all ties of
Salaam and conversation with them is compulsory.

‫وﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ وﺍﻟﻴ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺟﻊ وﺍﻟﻤﺎ ٰﺏ‬

‫ وﺣﻔﻆ‬، ‫ وﺍﻟﺨ‬:‫ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺪ ﺣﻴﺪر ﺷﺎہ ﺍﻟﻘﺎدری ﺍﻟﺤﻨ ﺗﺠﺎوز ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻦ ذﻧﺒ ﺍﻟﺠ‬L‫ ﺍﻻ‬EM‫ ﺍٰ ﻟﻄﻒ رﺑ ﺍﻟﻘﻮی ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻨ‬Q‫رہ ﺍﻟﺮﺍ‬J
.‫ٰ `ﻟ وﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑ وﺳﻠﻢ‬:‫ ﺍﷲ ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﻋ‬:‫ ﺻ‬L‫ ﺍﻻ‬Z‫ ﺍﻟ[ﺎﺷ‬EM‫ﻋﻦ ﻣﻮﺟﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟ] وﺍﻟ> ﺑ\ﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻨ‬

‫‪Sayyid Haydar Shah Al Qaadiri Hanafi‬‬
‫‪Resident of Kach Bhuj (famously known as) Peer Bhawala‬‬
‫‪Currently in Bombay‬‬

‫‪Fifth Verification‬‬

‫‪0‬ﺴﻢ ﺍﷲ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ‬

‫ﺍﻟﺤﻤﺪ ﷲ ﺍﻟﺬی ر‪Ñ‬ق ﺍﻻ‪u‬ﺴﺎن ﻋﻠﻤ ًﺎ وﺳﻤﻌ ًﺎ و‪_0‬ﺍ‪ a‬ﺍﻟﺤﻴﺎﺕ و‪0‬ﻌﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻮ¨ٰ‬
‫ ﻌﺮﻓﻮن ﺍﻟﺰ‪4‬وﺍر و ﺴﻤﻌﻮن ﺍﻻﺻﻮﺍﺕ وﺍﻟﺼﻠﻮة وﺍﻟﺴﻼم ﺍﻻﺗﻤﺎم ﺍﻻﻛﻤﻼن ﻋٰ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺪﺍ‪ v‬ﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟ_ﺍط ﺍﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ وﻗﺎﻧﺎ ﺑ‪H‬ﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻧﺎرﺍﻟﺠﺤﻴﻢ ﺍﻟ‪ "Z‬ﺍﻋﺪﺕ ﻟﻠﻜٰ‹ﻳﻦ وﺍﻟﻤﺎردﻳﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﻴﺎ‬
‫šةوﺍﻟﻤﻜﺬﺑ‪ nN‬ﻟﺮﺏ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤ‪ ،nN‬وﺍﻟﻤﻔﻀﻠ‪ nN‬ﻟﻠﺸﻴﻄﺎن ﺍﻟﻠﻌ‪ nN‬ﻋٰ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻻوﻟ‪ nN‬وﺍﻻٰŠﻳﻦ‬

‫ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﻋ ﺍﻟ وﺍﺻﺤﺎﺑ وﺍﺑﻨ وﺣﺰﺑ ﺍﺟﻤﻌ‪ ،nN‬وﻋﻠƒﻨﺎ ﺑﻬﻢ ﻳﺎ ﺍرﺣﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺮﺍﺣﻤ‪ ،nN‬و‪0‬ﻌﺪ ﻓﻠﻤﺎ رﺃﻳﺖ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻧﺎ‪ ³‬ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺘ‪ nN‬وﻣﻮﻟٰﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻟﻮی ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ‬

‫وﺟﺪﺗ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻠﺴﻨﺔ دﺍﻓﻌﺎ ﻟﻠﻔ…ﻨﺔ‪ ،‬وﻧﻈﺮﺕ ﺗ‪8‬ﻳﺮ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻟﻮی رﺷﻴﺪ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ ﮔﻨﮕﻮ‪ s‬ﻓﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ‬

nN‫ ﻋﻤﺪة ﺍﻟﻤﺪﻗﻘ‬nN‫ وﻣﺎردﺑ ﻋﻠﻴ ﺧﺎﺗﻢ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻘﻘ‬، nN‫ﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻣﻨ‬8‫ ﻟ‬t‫ وﻫﺘ‬nN‫ﺍﻻﺿﻼل ﻣﺒ‬
‫ وﻏﺪی‬Á‫ہ ﺳﻴﺪی وﻣﺮﺷﺪی و ﻛﻨﺰی وذŠی ﻟﻴﻮ‬µ‫ﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎ‬Ò‫ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ ﻣﺠﺪد ﺍﻟﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻟٰﻨﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻮﻟﻮی ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺍﺣﻤﺪ رﺿﺎﺧﺎن ﺍﺑﺪہ ﺍﷲ ﻟﻮﺍﻫﺐ ﺍﻟﻔﻴﺾ وﺍﻟﻤﻮﺍﻫﺐ ﻓﻼ ﺍﺟﺪ ﻟﺴﺎﻧﺎ ﺛﻨﺎء‬
‫@ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍء ﻋﻦ‬N‫ﺍح ﻓﺠﺰﺍﻫﻢ ﺍﷲ ﺧ‬Ó‫ ﺍﻧ ﺍﻟﺼﺪق ﺍﻟ_ﺍح وﺍﻟﺤﻖ ﺍﻟ‬t‫@ ﺍن ﺍﻗﻮل ﻻ ﺷ‬N‫ﻋﻠﻴ ﻏ‬
‫ وﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﺍﻋﻠﻢ‬،‫ ﺻ ﺍﷲ !ﻌﺎٰ ﻋﻠﻴ وﺳﻠﻢ‬nN‫ﻣﺔ ﺳﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺮﺳﻠ‬8‫ ﺑ‬nN‫ﺍﻻﺳﻼم وﺍﻟﻤﺴﻠﻤ‬
‫ﻘﻠﻤ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﻤﺪﻋﻮ ﺑﻈ‹ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻤﺪی‬0 ‫ﻔﻤ و رﻗﻤ‬0 ‫ﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻗﺎﻟ‬p‫ﺑﺎﻟﺼﻮﺍﺏ وﻋﻨﺪہ ﺍم ﺍ‬
.‫ﺑﺎدی‬w ‫ﺎروی ﺍﻟﻌﻈﻴﻢ‬H‫@'ﺎ¨ ﺍﻟﺮﺿﻮی ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺪدی ﺍﻟﺒ‬A‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺎدری ﺍﻟ‬x‫" ﺍﻟﺤﻨ‬#‫ﺍﻟﺴ‬

All praise is due to Almighty Allah, who granted man life, and (even) after
death, granted him the ability to know, hear and see. May there be perfect
and complete Durood and Salaams upon the personality, who showed us
the straight path, and save us from the fire of hell, which has been created
for the unbelievers, the obstinate ones, and for those who reject the
Creator of the worlds, and who give prominence to the knowledge of the
accursed shaitaan over all from the beginning until the end. Durood and
Salaam upon Him and upon His noble family, His companions and His
descendants, and upon all His followers, and through His Wasila (means
and blessing) upon us as well, O Most Merciful of those who show mercy.

After this, when I carefully studied the response of the supporter of the
pure Deen, Maulana Maulavi Muhammad Umrud’deen, I found it to be in
accordance with the Sunnat, and a repellent against strife, and when I
looked at the response of Molvi Rasheed Ahmed Gangohi, I found it to be
misleading, and filled with disrespect to the believers.

As for the refutation which has been written by the seal of the researchers,
by the master amongst the assessors, the reviver of the present century,
my leader, my spiritual master, my everything, the one who is a treasure,
and chest of treasures for this era, Maulana Maulvi Ahmed Raza Khan
(Allah keep his grants and blessings always). I do not have the tongue (i.e.
words) worthy enough to applaud it. However, this much I will say, it is
indeed the pure truth, and purely righteous. Through the blessings of
Sayyidul Mursaleen  may Allah bless him with a blessed reward on
behalf of Islam and the Muslims. Allah knows best, and the True Book is
with Him.

Muhammad Zafrud-deen Muhammadi Sunni Hanafi Qaadiri Barakaati

Razvi Mujaddidi Biharwi Azimabadi has said this personally with this
tongue, and written it with his pen.

‫ ﻗﺎدرے‬x‫" ﺣﻨ‬#‫@'ﺎ¨ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﻇ‹ ﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﻤﺪی ﺳ‬A‫ﺍﺑﻮﺍﻟ‬

Abul Barkaat Muhammad Zafrud-deen Muhammadi Sunni Hanafi Qaadiri