Placing flowers and sheets on the graves of the friends of Allah and the righteous is a vile innovation based on non-Arab culture. This act is a complete opposition to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, the Companions, and the leading early scholars. If there were any religious benefit or wisdom in this practice, the Prophet ﷺ would surely have guided towards it, and the righteous predecessors would surely have adopted it. Innovation-loving people exert every ounce of effort to provide it with a proof of permissibility. Their utmost effort is that the city of silence become a hub of shirk and innovation. They change its silence into music, noise, disorder, wickedness and immorality. These people, going to the extreme limits of exaggeration regarding graves, offer vows and offerings in the names of those buried there, place offerings upon them, hold fairs and urs, and arrange gatherings of sama’ with musical instruments and shirkish poetry, so that people keep coming and going to the graves and our bellies keep getting filled. Do they not know what religion is and how much harm innovation does to religion?
Innovation is advancing ahead of Allah and His Beloved Messenger Muhammad ﷺ. The righteous predecessors were strongly averse to it and vehemently condemned it, as the second Shaykh al-Islam, Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
اشتد نكير السلف والأئمة لها، وصاحوا بأهلها من أقطار الأرض، وحذروا فتنتهم أشد التحذير، وبالغوا في ذلك، ما لم يبالغوا مثله في إنكار الفواحش، والظلم والعدوان، إذ مضرة البدع وهدمها للدين ومنافاتها له أشد.
“The righteous predecessors and the leading scholars of religion have consistently opposed innovation with the utmost severity. They challenged the people of innovation from every corner of the earth and warned people about their trials far more intensely. They opposed it to such an extent that they did not oppose even sins like immorality, oppression and transgression to that degree. The reason is that the harm of innovation and its damage to religion is far greater than that of other sins.”
It is the habit of innovators that when they are unable to establish innovation through clear legal evidence, they set about fabricating its proof from some general texts. This is a great corruption and a distortion of religion. If the meaning and understanding of the texts of the Quran and Sunnah were what today’s innovators take them to be, then this understanding would have been grasped first by our predecessors, namely the Companions and the Successors, as the Allamah al-Shatibi (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
فإن هؤلاء الذين أدركوا هذه المدارك، وعبروا على هذه المسالك، إما أن يكونوا قد أدركوا من فهم الشريعة ما لم يفهمه الأولون، أو حادوا عن فهمها، وهذا الأخير هو الصواب؛ إذ المتقدمون من السلف الصالح كانوا على الصراط المستقيم، ولم يفهموا من الأدلة المذكورة وما أشبهها إلا ما كانوا عليه، وهذه المحدثات لم تكن فيهم، ولا عملوا بها، فدل على أن تلك الأدلة لم تتضمن هذه المعاني المخترعة بحال، وصار عملهم بخلاف ذلك دليلاً إجماعياً على أن هؤلاء في استدلالهم وعملهم مخطئون ومخالفون للسنة… فيقال لمن استدلّ بأمثال ذلك: هل وجد هذا المعنى الذي استنبطت في عمل الأولين أو لم يوجد؟ فإن زعم أنه لم يوجد – ولا بدّ من ذلك – فيقال له: أفكانوا غافلين عما تنبهت له أو جاهلين به أم لا؟ ولا يسعه أن يقول بهذا، لأنه فتح لباب الفضيحة على نفسه، وخرق للإجماع، وإن قال: إنهم كانوا عارفين بمآخذ هذه الأدلة كما كانوا عارفين بمآخذ غيرها، قيل له: فما الذي حال بينهم وبين العمل بمقتضاها على زعمك حتى خالفوها إلى غيرها؟ ما ذاك إلا لأنهم اجتمعوا فيه على الخطأ دونك أيها المتقوّل، والبرهان الشرعي والعادي دال على عكس القضية، فكلّ ما جاء مخالفاً لما عليه السلف الصالح فهو الضلال بعينه .
“Those who have understood these meanings (of the texts of the Quran and Sunnah, based on innovation) and adopted these (innovative) paths have either attained an understanding of the Sharia that the early righteous did not attain, or they have erred in understanding them. The second is the correct view, since the earlier righteous predecessors were upon the straight path, and from the evidences mentioned and the like they understood only what they were upon. These innovations did not exist among them, nor did they act upon them. This shows that those texts do not contain these invented meanings in any way, and their practice contrary to this becomes a consensual proof that these people are mistaken in their reasoning and practice and oppose the Sunnah… Then it is said to whoever derives from such evidences: Did this meaning that you have deduced exist in the practice of the earlier ones or not? If he claims that it did not exist – and he must say so – then it is said to him: Were they heedless of what you have become aware of, or ignorant of it, or not? He cannot say this, because it opens the door of disgrace upon himself and breaks the consensus. If he says: They knew the sources of these evidences just as they knew the sources of other evidences, then it is said to him: What then, according to your claim, prevented them from acting upon their implications, so that they opposed them in favour of other things? It was nothing but that they all agreed upon error, apart from you, O fabricator! The legal and rational proof points to the reverse of this claim. So whatever comes contrary to what the righteous predecessors were upon is pure misguidance.”
That is to say, every innovator is opposed to the righteous predecessors, harbours ill opinion about them, and keeps trying to convey the impression that (Allah forbid!) he has understood what the imams of hadith and the righteous predecessors could not understand from the Quran and hadith, that his knowledge and piety have surpassed theirs, or that they were unaware of the evidences of which he has become aware, and so on.
Division of Innovation
If innovators cannot manage anything else, they give their innovation the name “good innovation” (bid’ah hasanah). Yet innovation is nothing but misguidance, and where would goodness come from in misguidance? If it were good, why were the righteous predecessors deprived of this good deed? As for the division of innovation, this division is itself an innovation. The division of innovation into good (hasanah) and evil (sayyi’ah) is not correct.
❀ Allama Shatibi writes:
إن هذا التقسيم أمر مخترع، لا يدل عليه دليل شرعي، بل هو فى نفسه متدافع ؛ فإن من حقيقة البدعة أن لا يدل عليها دليل شرعي، لا من نصوص الشرع، ولا من قواعده، إذ لو كان هناك من الشرع ما يدل على وجوب أو ندب أو إباحة لما كان ثم بدعة، ولكان العمل داخلا في عموم الأعمال المأمور بها، أو المخير فيها، فالجمع بين كون تلك الأشياء بدعا، وبين كون الأدلة تدل على وجوبها أو ندبها أو إباحتها، جمع بين متناقضين .
“This division (of bid’ah) is itself a bid’ah. There is no legal evidence for it. Moreover, it is self-contradictory, because the reality of bid’ah is that no legal evidence supports it, neither from the texts of the Shariah nor from its principles. For if there were any evidence in the Shariah indicating that something is obligatory, recommended or permissible, it would not be a bid’ah at all; rather, that action would fall under the general category of actions that have been commanded or left to one’s choice. Therefore, to call those things bid’ah and at the same time claim that there are evidences indicating their obligation, recommendation or permissibility is to combine two contradictory things.”
From this explanation it becomes clear that declaring as “good innovation” (bid’ah hasanah) something that did not exist in the era of the Companions, the Successors and the Imams of the religion, and granting it a basis of permissibility, is pure misguidance. In the present age, some people have given the status of religion to many matters that had not even been heard of in the era of the Companions, the Successors and the Imams of the religion. Among them is the practice of placing flowers and sheets (chadars) and the like on graves.
❀ The Barelwi imam Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Gujrati (1324-1391 AH) writes:
“Placing flowers on graves, laying sheets over them, and illuminating them with lamps: the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah state that placing flowers on the grave of every believer is permissible, whether he is a friend of Allah or a sinner. Placing sheets on the graves of saints, scholars and righteous people is permissible, but on the graves of common Muslims it is impermissible, because it is useless.”
When Naeemi says “scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah,” if he means the so-called Ahl al-Sunnah, i.e. the innovators and Barelwis, then it is correct; otherwise, none of the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah has held or practised the placing of flowers and sheets on graves. Something that did not exist in the time of the Prophet ﷺ, which the Companions were unaware of, and which the earlier Imams never even knew of, how did it become a good deed, and how did it receive a basis of permissibility?
Placing flowers on graves is the practice of the Christians. Placing sheets on graves is exaggeration in honouring the righteous, and the Shariah has condemned and prohibited it. If placing sheets on the graves of common Muslims is impermissible because it is “useless,” then what is the benefit of placing sheets on the graves of the righteous? If there were any legal permissibility or benefit in it, Allah and His Messenger would certainly have taught it, and the earlier Imams would certainly have adopted it. This is merely a habit of grave-worshippers, because their entire life is tied to the dead and to graves.
Sheets on Graves and the Scholars of Truth
Let us look at the statements of the scholars of truth condemning these innovations:
❀ Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
ومن المحرمات: العكوف عند القبر، والمجاورة عنده، وسدانته، وتعليق الستور عليه، كأنه بيت الله الكعبة
“Some forbidden matters are: making i’tikaf at a grave, sitting as a custodian beside it, serving it, and hanging curtains on it as though it were the House of Allah, the Ka’bah.”
❀ He also says:
ومنهم من يعلق على القبر المكذوب أو غير المكذوب، من الستور والثياب، ويضع عنده من مصوغ الذهب والفضة، ما قد أجمع المسلمون على أنه ليس من دين الإسلام .
“Some people hang curtains and cloths over a grave, whether fabricated or genuine, and place gold and silver ornaments beside it. The Muslims have reached unanimous consensus that these things are not part of the religion of Islam.”
❀ Shaykh al-Islam further says:
وقد اتفق ائمة الدين علي انه لا يشرع بناء المساجد علي القبور، ولا ان تعلق عليها الستور .
“The Imams of the religion are agreed that it is not permissible to build mosques over graves or to hang curtains over them.”
❀ Shaykh al-Islam the second, the divine scholar Allama Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
ومنها : مشابهة عبادة الأصنام بما يفعل عندها من العكوف عليها والمجاورة عندها وتعليق الستور عليها وسدانتها وعبادها يرجحون المجاورة عندها على المجاورة عند المسجد الحرام، ويرون سدنتها أفضل من خدمة المساجد .
“Among the superstitions practised at graves is performing at them actions that resemble idol-worship, such as making i’tikaf at them, sitting as custodians beside them, hanging curtains over them, and dedicating oneself to their service. Grave-worshippers even prefer custodianship of the graves over custodianship of the House of Allah, and they hold the view that serving the graves is more virtuous than serving the Sacred House of Allah.”
Al-Barkawi (may Allah have mercy on him) has written the same point in his treatise “Ziyarat al-Qubur”.
❀ Allama al-Shawkani (may Allah have mercy on him, 1172-1250 AH), writing about grave-worship, says:
فلا شك ولا ريب أن السبب الأعظم الذي نشأ منه هذا الاعتقاد في الأموات هو ما زينه الشيطان للناس من رفع القبور، ووضع الستور عليها، وتجصيصها وتزيينها بأبلغ زينة، وتحسينها بأكمل تحسين. فإن الجاهل إذا وقعت عينه على قبر من القبور قد بنيت عليه قبة فدخلها، ونظر على القبورِ السُّتورَ الرائعة، والسرج المتلألئة، وقد سطعت حوله مجامر الطيب، فلا شك ولا ريب أنه يمتلئ قلبه تعظيما لذلك القبر، ويضيق ذهنه عن تصور ما لهذا الميت من المنزلة، ويدخله من الروعة والمهابة ما يزرع في قلبه من العقائد الشيطانية التي هي من أعظم مكائد الشيطان للمسلمين، وأشد وسائله إلى ضلال العباد ما يزلزله عن الإسلام قليلا قليلا، حتى يطلب من صاحب ذلك القبر ما لا يقدر عليه إلا الله سبحانه، فيصير في عداد المشركين.
“There is no doubt that the greatest cause from which this belief about the dead arose is what Satan has made attractive to people: raising graves, placing curtains over them, plastering and decorating them with the utmost ornamentation, and beautifying them in the most perfect manner. When an ignorant person’s eye falls upon a grave over which a dome has been built, he enters it, sees the striking curtains and the glittering lamps, and fragrant incense rises around him. Without doubt his heart becomes filled with reverence for that grave, his mind becomes too narrow to grasp the station this dead person holds, and such awe and dread enter him that they plant in his heart satanic beliefs, which are among the greatest of Satan’s schemes against the Muslims and the most severe of his means for leading the servants astray. Bit by bit, they shake him loose from Islam, until he asks of the occupant of that grave what none can grant except Allah the Exalted, and thus he becomes counted among the polytheists.”
In this passage, Allama al-Shawkani (may Allah have mercy on him) has drawn an accurate picture of the beliefs of the grave-worshippers.
Representing these same beliefs, Ahmad Yar Khan Naimi Barelvi writes:
“The saints of Allah and their shrines are symbols of Allah (shaʿa’ir Allah), and the Quran commands the glorification of the symbols of Allah, i.e., the signs of Allah’s religion:
وَمَن يُعَظِّمْ شَعَائِرَ اللَّهِ فَإِنَّهَا مِن تَقْوَى الْقُلُوبِ
This glorification has no restriction. Every country has its own custom: whatever permissible form of glorification is prevalent in whatever country and whatever time, it is permissible to perform it. Placing flowers on their graves, offering sheets (chadars), and illuminating with lamps — all of these are glorification, and therefore permissible. Since there is life in fresh flowers, they glorify Allah and recite tasbih and tahlil, which benefits the deceased with reward, or reduces his punishment. Visitors also obtain fragrance, therefore it is permissible to place these on the grave of every Muslim. If the deceased is being punished, it will be reduced through the blessing of its tasbih.”
Declaring the graves of the righteous to be symbols of Allah appears to be the way of the Rafidis, which has fallen into the hands of the “Mufti” sahib. What proof is there for this from the Quran and Hadith, from the consensus of the Ummah and the understanding of the early generations? Where has Allah commanded the glorification of the graves of the righteous? The people of innovation, in the exaggerated glorification of the graves of the righteous, call this exaggerated glorification “permissible glorification.” On what basis is it declared permissible? If there were any proof, the Companions, the great muhaddithun and the leading scholars of the early generations would certainly have acted upon it. Not a single scholar of Ahl al-Sunnah, of the people of truth, holds or practises the view that placing sheets and flowers on the graves of the righteous is permissible. This is an invention from the house of the people of innovation, in which they are fierce opponents of Ahl al-Sunnah and supporters of the Christians. They say that there is life in flowers and they recite tasbih and tahlil, but we ask: what is special about flowers in this? Everything, whether living or lifeless, glorifies Allah. Bricks, soil, mortar and all other things also glorify Allah, but what benefit does the deceased gain from that glorification? What proof do the people of innovation have for this? Did Allah and His Messenger teach this? If the tasbih of flowers near a grave benefited the deceased, then there would have to be a grave in every garden so that the flowers might glorify abundantly and the deceased might benefit greatly, yet there is no such thing. If the person in the grave was righteous, his righteousness will benefit him, and if the person in the grave was wretched, outside flowers and gardens will be of no use to him. These are merely satanic whisperings that have settled in the hearts of the people of innovation. The command of Allah says:
وَإِنْ مِنْ شَيْءٍ إِلَّا يُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِهِ وَلَـكِنْ لَا تَفْقَهُونَ تَسْبِيحَهُمْ
“And there is not a thing but that it exalts His praise, but you do not understand their glorification.”
❀ At another place Allah the Exalted says:
كُلٌّ قَدْ عَلِمَ صَلَاتَهُ وَتَسْبِيحَهُ
“Indeed, every creature knows its prayer and its glorification.”
❀ Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates:
ولقد كنا نسمع تسبيح الطعام وهو يؤكل
“We used to hear the glorification of food while it was being eaten.”
When food too glorifies Allah, then the people of innovation should be told to place bread on graves like sheets, and plates of roast chicken and biryani should be placed on top of the grave as well. Whether or not this benefits the deceased, whether or not his punishment decreases, the gluttons will certainly be satisfied. That is why their followers even today bring cauldrons, goats and roosters to shrines as offerings and vows, make vows, and dedicate food to the grave after reciting Fatiha over it. This is that “permissible glorification” of graves which the idolaters of Makkah used to perform for their idols. These people are far greater “well-wishers” of the dead than of the living. They mislead living people by involving them in shirk beliefs, they destroy their Hereafter, and by expelling righteous deeds from faith they make people Murji’ah and evildoers, yet they begin the “permissible glorification” of the dead. Whereas if such glorification of graves had any religious or legal benefit, the Companions would have placed flowers on the blessed grave of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, laid so many sheets, lit so many lamps, adorned it in such a manner, applied so much fragrance to it, and kept such custodianship over it, that an example would have been set until the Day of Resurrection. But by Allah! All these acts are innovations, and they have no connection with the religion.
An Argument for Innovation:
Some people present the following argument to prove these innovations:
“The Prophet ﷺ passed by two graves, and their occupants were being punished. One of them did not avoid the splashing of his urine, and the other used to carry tales.
ثم اخذ جريدة رطبة فشقها بنصفين، ثم غرز في كل قبر واحدة، فقالوا يا رسول الله: لم صنعت هذا؟ فقال: لعله ان يخفف عنهما ما لم ييبسا
Then the Prophet ﷺ took a fresh palm branch, split it into two halves, and planted one on each grave. The Companions asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, why have you done this?’ He said, ‘Perhaps their punishment will be lightened for as long as these two have not dried.'”
❀ Hafiz al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
استحب العلماء قراءة القرآن عند القبر لهذا الحديث ؛ لأنه إذا كان يرجى التخفيف بتسبيح الجريد فتلاوة القرآن أولى، والله أعلم
“From this hadith the scholars have considered the recitation of the Quran at the grave to be recommended, because if there is hope of lightening the punishment through the tasbih of a palm branch, then the recitation of the Quran is more deserving of this. And Allah knows best.”
Commentary:
It is not permissible to cite this hadith as evidence for placing flowers on graves and holding Quran recitation there, because no one from the best generations (khayr al-qurun) held this view. Moreover, nowhere in it is it mentioned that the punishment was lightened because of the glorification (tasbih) of those branches, so this is an analogy with a difference (qiyas ma’ al-fariq). Furthermore, this was a special privilege (khasah) of the Prophet ﷺ. The lightening of the punishment came about through the Prophet’s ﷺ supplication and intercession, as is also narrated from Sayyiduna Jabir ibn Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) in another narration, where the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: إني مررت بقبرين يعذبان فاحببت بشفاعتي ان يرفه عنهما ما دام الغصنان رطبين “I passed by two graves whose (occupants) were being punished. I wished, by my intercession, that the punishment be lightened for them, for as long as the two branches remain moist.”
The cause is the same in these two different incidents. Similarly, a third incident is also narrated from Sayyiduna Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him).
See also:
Benefit:
Muwarriq al-Ijli reports:
اوصي بريدة الاسلمي ان توضع في قبره جريدتان، فكان مات بادني خراسان، فلم توجد الا في جوالق حمار .
“Sayyiduna Buraydah al-Aslami (may Allah be pleased with him) had bequeathed that two branches be placed in his grave. He (may Allah be pleased with him) died in the region of Khurasan, and there these branches were found only in a donkey’s saddlebag.”
If it is authentic, this appears to be the personal opinion of Sayyiduna Buraydah (may Allah be pleased with him). He ordered that two branches be placed on the grave; he did not order their insertion for the purpose of lightening punishment, as the Prophet ﷺ did.
The narration from Sayyiduna Abu Barzah al-Aslami (may Allah be pleased with him)
is “da’if” (weak).
The biographies of two of its narrators, al-Shah ibn Ammar and al-Nadr ibn al-Munzir ibn Tha’labah al-Abdi, could not be found.
Secondly, Qatadah is a “mudallis” (concealer of defects in narration), and his hearing from any Companion other than Sayyiduna Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) is not established.
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ inserted date-palm branches into the graves of two sinners. Evidently the graves were of soft earth, which is why the branches became fixed in them, and this was a special privilege of the Prophet ﷺ. But innovators build graves of masonry and then place flowers upon them. We ask people of intellect and fairness: does any word of this hadith show the permissibility of placing flowers on the graves of the Friends of Allah? If this innovation were being done on the basis of the aforementioned hadith, then flowers should have been placed on the graves of sinners. But the innovation came into existence first, and afterwards a hadith was forced and stretched to serve as its evidence; this is why this contradiction arises.
❀ The commentator of Sahih al-Bukhari, Allamah Badr al-Din al-Ayni al-Hanafi (762-855 AH), also writes:
وكذلك ما يفعله اكثر الناس من وضع ما فيه رطوبة من الرياحين والبقول ونحوها علي القبور، ليس بشيء وانما السنة الغرز .
“Similarly, the practice of most people of placing wet things such as flowers and vegetables on graves is futile and baseless, and the way of the Prophet ﷺ was only to insert (branches).”
It is thus established that placing flowers on graves is a practice without evidence; rather it is a frivolous and purposeless act. There remains no doubt that it is forbidden (haram), impermissible (najaiz), and a bid’ah sayyi’ah (evil innovation).
Allamah Hamd ibn Muhammad al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) (319-388 AH), explaining this hadith, says:
فإنه من ناحية التبرك بأثر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ودعائه بالتخفيف عنهما، وكأنه صلى الله عليه وسلم جعل مدة بقاء النداوة فيهما حَدَّاً لما وقعت به المسألة من تخفيف العذاب عنهما، وليس ذلك من أجل أن في الجريد الرطب معنى ليس في اليابس، والعامة في كثير من البلدان تفرش الخوص في قبور موتاهم وأراهم ذهبوا إلى هذا، وليس لما تعاطوه من ذلك وجه .
“The lightening of the punishment in the grave for these two persons came about through the blessing and effect of the Prophet ﷺ and his supplication. The Prophet ﷺ specified the limit of lightening as the remaining moist of the branches only because his supplication for lightening was for that very period; this limit was not stated because there was some effect in a moist branch that was absent in a dry one. In many regions, common people spread palm fronds, coconut leaves and the like in the graves of their dead; in my view, this is what they have in mind, although there is no justification for their practice.”
❀ Allamah Ahmad Shakir (may Allah have mercy on him) (1309-1377 AH), in support of Allamah Khattabi, says:
وصدق الخطابي، وقد ازداد العامة إصراراً على هذا العمل الذي لا أصل له، وغلوا فيه خصوصاً في بلاد مصر تقليداً للنصارى حتى صاروا يضعون الزهور على القبور، ويتهادونها بينهم فيضعها الناس على قبور أقاربهم ومعارفهم تحيةً لهم ومجاملةً للأحياء، وحتى صارت عادة شبيهة بالرسمية في المجاملات الدولية، فتجد الكبراء من المسلمين إذا نزلوا بلدةً من بلاد أوروبا ذهبوا إلى قبور عظمائها أو إلى قبر من يسمونه الجندي المجهول، وضعوا عليها الزهور، وبعضهم يضع الزهور الصناعية التي لا نداوة فيها تقليداً للإفرنج واتباعاً لسنن من قبلهم ولا ينكر ذلك عليهم العلماء أشباه العامة، بل تراهم أنفسهم يصنعون ذلك في قبور موتاهم، ولقد علمت أن أكثر الأوقاف التي تسمى أوقافاً خيريةً موقوفٌ ريعها على الخوص والريحان الذي يوضع في القبور، وكل هذه بدع ومنكرات لا أصل لها في الدين، ولا مستند لها من الكتاب والسنة، ويجب على أهل العلم أن ينكروها، وأن يبطلوا هذه العادات ما استطاعوا .
“Allamah Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) has spoken entirely truly. Common people have become very insistent upon this baseless practice in imitation of the Christians, and have gone to extremes in it, especially in the region of Egypt, to the point that they began placing flowers on graves and gifting them to one another, then people would place them on the graves of their relatives and acquaintances as a greeting to them and as courtesy to the living. Until it became a custom resembling an official protocol in international courtesies: you find the great men of the Muslims, when they arrive in a town of Europe, going to the graves of its dignitaries or the grave of the so-called Unknown Soldier and placing flowers upon them; some of them even place artificial flowers that have no moisture, in imitation of the Europeans and following the ways of those before them. The scholars, like the common people, do not forbid them from this; rather you will see the scholars themselves doing this at the graves of their dead. I also know that most endowments called charitable endowments have their income dedicated to flowers and fragrant herbs placed on graves. All these are innovations and abominations for which there is no basis in religion, and no evidence for them from the Book and the Sunnah. It is obligatory upon people of knowledge to refute them and to abolish these customs to the best of their ability.”
The “Mufti” sahib, citing Fatawa Shami, has written that this hadith establishes the desirability (istihbab) of placing grass and the like over graves. To them we say: Allamah Ibn Abidin Shami was himself a formidable innovator. His statement carries no more weight than a straw against the people of truth. Even if five hundred more innovators and ignorant people were to join him in this view, it would make no difference.
❀ Janab Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Hanafi Deobandi Hayati writes:
“As for the statement of Shami and others that cloths (and the like) placed on graves are permissible because they show honour to the occupant of the grave, etc., it deserves no consideration, since it is the statement of a non-mujtahid and is also without evidence.”
❀ Janab Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Barelvi (1324–1391 AH) writes:
“Placing cloths on the graves of the friends of Allah is permissible, because through it the honour of the occupant of the grave becomes apparent in the eyes of ordinary visitors.”
What an argument! As long as these people do not distinguish the graves of the common Muslims from the graves of those they consider “friends of Allah” in their own opinion, the problem of their stomachs is not solved. By fabricating a “permissible veneration”, they are introducing an innovation into the religion. If this veneration of the graves of the friends of Allah were truly necessary, why did the Shari’ah not guide towards it? Why did the scholars of truth refrain from it?
Now, let the proof offered by the “Mufti” sahib also be considered: “The basis for the cloth is that during the blessed time of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, the Ka’bah was covered with a covering, and he did not forbid it.”
This is what is called “asking about wheat and answering with gram.” The matter under discussion is placing cloths on graves, yet the “Mufti” sahib has offered as evidence the covering of the Ka’bah of Allah. If the covering of the Ka’bah is to be made evidence, then a cloth should be placed on every grave. And if any such permission could be derived from it, the Companions, the Successors, the followers of the Successors and the Imams of the religion would certainly have derived it and been the ones to place cloths on graves. The covering of the Ka’bah is established, as is found in Sahih al-Bukhari.
Now it is necessary that proof be provided for placing cloths on graves. Perhaps these people regard the graves of the friends of Allah as the Ka’bah itself, which is why they face them while praying, circumambulate them, and place coverings and the like upon them.
The “Mufti” sahib further writes: “For centuries a green silk covering has been placed over the blessed tomb of the Messenger ﷺ, which is extremely valuable. To this day no one has forbidden it. Over the Maqam Ibrahim, that stone on which Sayyidina Khalil stood while building the blessed Ka’bah, a covering has also been placed and a structure has been built. By the grace of Allah, even the Najdi Wahhabis kept them in the same state. Why were covers placed on them? For the sake of their greatness, for the honour of the friends of Allah; placing coverings and the like on their graves too is recommended.”
Observe the helplessness of the “Mufti” sahib in the world of proofs, for he has now resorted to plain falsehood. There is no covering on the grave of the Messenger ﷺ, nor on the Maqam Ibrahim. The basis on which the permissibility of placing cloths on the graves of the friends of Allah was presented does not even exist.
It is thus established that placing cloths, flowers and the like on graves is the work of the people of innovation. Had there been evidence for it, the righteous predecessors and the Imams of the religion would also have done so. May Allah grant us the tawfiq to understand the truth and to act upon it.
