Fiqh al-Sirah of Shaykh Buti

toysoldier: at the end aH has accepted the point - so stop tripping before you land face first.

2ndly the response doesn't strengthen the other side as it answers the point that they was trying to make that Imam Bouti violated the parameters of Sunni Islam.

3rdly what aH is critiquing of Imam Bouti's passage in Fiqh alSira is interpretable. aH has accepted that Imam Bouti is not telling people to turn their back on the Rawza. Now I would want to mention something regarding the 'juhaal and mubtadia' comment. These type of statements are found in works. Like Imam Ghazzali saying 'the Sahabah never debated' yet it is known that some did debate like Ibn Abbas, Hazrat Ali etc radiyAllahu anhum. But Imam Ghazzali means almru alaghlab. Likewise when Sh Bouti says the 'juhaal mubtadia'he means almru alaghlab like what Imam Nawawi says regarding juhaal.

 

Is it true Ala Hazrat said to hold the view of Imaan of Abu Talib is a Shia view?

If that is the case wouldn't that be a mistake as it is also a Sunni view and other Sunni ulama held that view? And wouldn't Ala Hazrat's wording be harsh just as Sh Bouti's?

 

i don't know.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

Thank you. Would it be reasonable to say that Sh. Būṭī based his approach on that of Imām Nawawī but added his own views regarding those that take another position?

 

until 80s, i have heard* that people could enter from the side of the feet (which is the current exit).

so, yes.

when shaykh bouti had written the book, the entrance was most likely the current exit. yet, that does not explain the harshness of his comments, which i have pointed out. we have acknowledged that the jumhur position is to face the rawDah (the blessed grave) and some scholars have differing opinion, and said that one should turn to qiblah.

i think so. Allah ta'ala knows best.



----
* from people who have been there at that time.

 

Salām,

Just to clarify, does that mean Sh. Būṭī visited at a time when the entrance to the Rawdah Sharīf was where people currently exit from and wrote that in his book, and then the Saudis changed where people enter from?

 

a thought occurred to me today and i verified it just now.
the book fiqhu's sirah was written prior to 1968. because the 'preface to the second edition' is dated 1968.


====
shaykh bouti was born in 1929; and that means he was less than 38 when he wrote this book. that explains the incoherence.
but the edition we have read was revised in 1991, and shaykh bouti was 62 at that time. yet, this mistake remained in his book.

-----
nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

 

1. Upon finishing the Prayer, the Holy Prophet (as its Imam) used to turn his back to the Qiblah, face the congregation, and raise his hands for supplication.

2. Upon the pulpit, on every Friday, the Holy Prophet used to supplicate to Allah, (with or without raising his hands), with his back to the Qiblah, facing the congregation.

is it that difficult to understand, that those who oppose facing the Noble Messenger whilst supplication to Allah - are actually:-

1. the real JUHHAL or
2. Those who consider it polytheism?

ask them; when they raise their hands whilst facing the Ka'aba, are they ASKING FROM the Ka'aba?

 

It would also help if Abu Hamza actually used the real name of Shaykh Buti.

His name is Muhammad Sa'eed Ramadan alButi not just Ramadan alButi. For an academy work he could have at learnt the full name of the one he was defending. Shaykh Asrar should have looked through this work better and noticed all of these errors that Abu Hasan has mentioned. Harris doesn't even know Arabic and is telling Abu Hasan what is being meant.

This was not a very strong refutation at all. It unfortunately strengthens the Shazilis and is opening up a new can of worms.

 

which Muslim, however ignorant, will have even a shadow of a thought that 'facing the qibla for dua is bad adab'?!

the very fact that the issue of adab was raised alongside that of facing the qibla indicates that there was an external factor which even the author could not ignore, and which the generality of Muslims will find short of adab. can you please tell us what that could be if not turning one's back toward the rawdah shareef?

To add to that, do you not see that Abu hamzah himself read that passage as concerning facing the Prophet (peace be upon him) while supplicating?

not just that brother - he says that facing the blessed qabr during du'a is not permissible (laa yajuz) since it is tantamount to including someone else (yushrak fihi) in your "khitaab" with Allah ta'ala.

these are, it pains me to say, standard najdi positions. we can't play the ostrich and pretend that they are not.

But we can see that towards the end of the quoted text he instructs that one must recite the 64th verse of surah Nisaa and seek the shafa'a of the Prophet (peace be upon him) - which is the standard sunni position. Although, even here he does not mention addressing the Prophet (peace be upon him) directly, as the Bedouin companion did in the hadith narrated by 'Utbi and quoted approvingly by Imam Nawawi himself (Allah ta'ala be plased with them all).

Nevertheless, given these ending words, it is bewildering that sh. Buti wrote what he wrote.

I have a high regard for him and his learning and the only defenses I can think of are - either a serious miscalculation that this will neutralize at least some najdi-influenced people , or an unfortunate slip of pen.

---

I am surprised that after quoting this passage brother Abu Hamzah claimed that:



It is not verbatim by a long stretch.

And worse:



These claims are egregious. I am sorry they were made.

--------

In Fatwa Ridawiyyah vol#25, Risalah Huqqat-ul-Marjaan, Alahazrat ('alayhirraHmah) writes about a fiqhi stance attributed to no less than Shah Abdu'l Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi ('alayhirraHmah):



The conclusion is that when some obviously incorrect position is attributed to a scholar, otherwise known for his erudition and upholding the truth, we can try to find reasons which may prove the attribution to be weak or spurious or term it as an unintentional mistake on his part - but we certainly can't justify it or take it to mean what it does not, let alone follow it.

[clarification: Alahazrat refutes that Shah Abdul Aziz ever held this view]

Brother Abu Hamzah himself acknowledged that:



But in this issue, sh. buti's position cannot be reconciled with Imam Nawawi's or, for that matter, with any major Sunni Imam - as far as I can see. It will have to be abandoned as a mistake.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

it is obvious unless you don't want to see it. where is the 'right side'?

see, in our time you enter the masjid from this side (as shown in #1).

and when you go there, where is the 'move to the right and face the qiblah near the pillars'? anyone who has visited masjid nabawi sharif knows that in diagram #2, the shape of a person is near that pillar and clearly this is on the right as you enter from this side.

practically, this means you turn your back to the rawdah. when you face the qiblah.

if you don't want to see this, can't help.

 

we came to know of it only now. and we responded.

nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

 

That is reading into his text. The fact remains that he doesn't say turn your back etc I think the passage is too vague and in his life the book Fiqh alSirah was published multiple times. People should have clarified it with him then.

 

as pointed out in image#2 below, the "baynal qabr wal 'ustuwaanati" in Imam Nawawi's time, was beyond the western side of the qabr shareef, towards the blessed head and so it would be to the left hand side of the person if he stood facing the rawdah, with his back towards the qibla. People would enter from the eastern side, face the rawdah and offer salams/supplicate and move toward the western/left hand side, face the qibla, supplicate and leave. Thus the entrance was from the side of the blessed feet.

In our time, it's the other way round. People enter from the western side, from the side of the blessed head. So according to the quote from sh. Buti, they should stand between the qabr shareef and 'ustuwaanah present toward the blessed feet, the right hand side when facing the rawdah shareef.

Peace be upon him and his progeny and companions.

 

He doesn't say don't think turning your back to the qabr is bad adab. He says 'do not think facing the qibla for dua is bad adab'. There is a massive difference between the way you are quoting it and what was said. Where Sh Bouti was wrong is to refer to what the others do as 'juhaal and mubtadia'. But he doesn't exhort for dua with ones back to the Qabr Sharif.

 

no he doesn't. he only says those who turn towards the qabr are juhhal. and don't think turning your back to the qabr is bad adab. and reproaches those who do describing it as 'like shirk' even if he didn't say it so expressly.

nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

 

quick sketch.
1. this is the current entrance; whereas previously it used to be opposite.

2. this is how you stand facing the blessed tomb. the qiblah is behind the shape of the person standing.

3. hypothetically when you move further near the headside, you would stand facing qiblah before the pillar; this would not be turning your back to the blessed tomb of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.


this is how i interpret. Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

please follow the ellipsis and you will know what the objection is to.

 

Where in the passage does Shaykh Buti say turn your back to the qabr?

He wrote 'then face the qibla turning a little to the right SO YOU ARE BETWEEN THE GRAVE AND THE PILLAR THAT IS SITUATED AT THE BEGINING OF THE GRAVE then raise your hands...'

 

i wanted to. but i said, people will scoff at me. let me see.