Indexed OCR Text

Answer
Many exegetes of the Qur'an and Masha'ikh accepted it on the basis of
its popularity and believe it to be a historical incident not
withstanding that its chain of transmission is not sound. The names of
some of the scholars who accept it are listed below.
'Abd al-Hādī Muhammad ibn Khursah ad-Dimishqī writes in the
marginal notes of al-Is'ād:
ذكر قصة العتبي بذه جماعة من الحفاظ والمحدثين منهم الإمام النووي في
كتابه المجموع، والأذكار، ومنهم الحافظ ابن كثير في تفسيره، والحافظ
السخاوي في القول البديع. قال المحدث الغماري في رده على من حكم على
القصة بالوضع الحكاية ضعيفة إذ لم يذكر في روايتها كذاب أو متهم بالكذب
لا سيما وقد أخرجها الإمام البيهقي في الشعب، وذكربا الحافظ ابن كثير ولم
يتعقبها، والإمام ابن الجوزي، والإمام ابن العساكر في التاريخ على أننا لم
نذكريا استدلالاً واحتجاجاً لأننا لا نستدل بالحكاية ولا نحتج بها، وإنما
ذكرنابا استيناساً وإيضاحاً لما قدمناه من أن الآية تفيد العموم. (حاشية
الاسعاد: ص ٥٦)
The names of some of the scholars who quote this incident without
any objection are as follows:
حافظ ابن كثير القرشي الدمشقي، تفسير ابن كثير: (١٥٧٠)، ومختصر تفسير ابن
كثير: (٢٣٠٢)، التفسير الوسيط لمحمد بن سيد الطنطاوي: (١٩٨٥)، الحاوي
الكبير للعلامة أبوالحسن الماوردي: (٥٢٩٠، فصل فاما زيارة قبر ... الخ كتاب
الحج)، وسبل الهدى والرشاد في سيرة خير العباد لمحمد بن يوسف الصالحي
الشامي: (١٢٣٩٠)، والمغني في فقه الإمام أحمد بن حنبل لابن قدامة المقدسي:
(٣٥٨٨)، وحاشية الجمل على المنهج للعلامة الشيخ سليمان الجمل: (٢٢٨٥)،
ومعجم ابن عساكر: (١٦٣)، وخلاصة الوفا بأخبار دار المصطفى: (١٥٧)،
ومختصر تاريخ دمشق ابن منظور عن محمد بن حرب: (٢٤٠٨)، والدر المنثور
561

للسيوطي: (١٥٧٠)، عن أبي الحرب الهلالي. والمجموع شرح المهذب: (٨٢١٧)،
والأذكار للنووي: (٤٤٠، كتاب أذكار الحج)، والإيضاح: (٤٩٤)، ومقالات
الكوثري: (٣٨٧)
وفي معجم ابن العساكر: (١٣٦٣/ ٧٣٨) حدثنا عبد الغالب بن ثابت بن مابان
أبو نصر الرافقي قاضيها بها وكان شيخاً مسناً وذكر لي أنه سمع من أبي الحسين
بن المقتدي ببغداد ومن ابن طوق بالموصل واحترقت كتبه، قال: أنبأ ابن طوق
الموصلي بالموصل سنة تسع وخمسين وأربع مائة بإسناد لا أذكره الآن عن العتبي
أنه قال: كنت جالساً عند قبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وإذا بأعرابي قد
أقبل على ناقة لم فنزل وعقلها ودنا إلى حجرة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وأنشأ
يقول من البسيط:
يا خير من دفنت بالقاع أعظم - فطاب من طيبهن القاع والأكم
نفسي الفداء لقبر أنت ساكنه - فيه العفاف وفيه الجود والكرم
ثم قال الأعرابي وجدت الله تعالى يقول: "ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك
فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله تواباً رحيماً" وقد جئتک یا
رسول الله مستغفراً من ذنبي مستشفعاً بك إلى ربي، وانصرف. قال العتبي:
فنمت فرأيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في النوم، فقال لي يا عتبي الحق
الأعرابي فقل له إن الله عز وجل قد غفرله. وبذا إسناد منقطع.
A similar incident is narrated by other narrators. These have several
chains of transmission.
The Ghayr Muqallids make a number of objections against this
incident:
1.
'Utba passed away in 228 A.H. How did he present himself
three days after the demise of Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa
sallam?
562

2. There is idtirab in it because one narration mentions that he
cast himself onto the grave while another narration does not
make mention of this. One narration mentions the emanating
of a voice from the grave while the other narration makes
mention of Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam coming in his
dream and giving the glad tiding:
3. It mentions a direct conversation with Rasūlullah sallallahu
'alayhi wa sallam while it is not possible to do this after his
demise, "although this can happen in extra-ordinary
situations".
4. The chain of transmission of 'Utba's story is bleak.
5.
Another idtirab in it is whether this incident is related from
'Utbā or from Muhammad ibn Harb Hilalī 'an al-A'rābī, or
Muhammad ibn Harb al-Hilalī 'an Abī Muhammad al-Hasan az-
Za'farānī 'an al-A'rabī, whereas az-Za'faranī is a student of
Imam Shafi'ī rahimahullah, and he passed away in 249 A.H.
How, then, can he relate from the Bedouin who passed away
long before that?
6. Sometimes it is narrated from 'Utba who reached the Bedouin
through Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam and is then given
the order to convey the glad tiding. Hafiz Ibn 'Abd al-Hādī
writes in as-Sārim al-Maknī that some scholars quote this
incident from 'Utba without a chain of transmission, while
others narrate it from Muhammad ibn Harb 'an al-A'rabī, and
others from Muhammad ibn Harb 'an Abī al-Hasan az-Za'faranī
'an al-A'rabī. Furthermore, Imam Bayhaqī quotes this incident
in Shu'ab al-Iman through a bleak chain of transmission.
7. The student of Ghamārīyyīn, Mahmud Sa'īd Mamduh writes in
Raf al-Manārah:
وبي حكاية غير صحيحة الإسناد لكن الشابد من ذكريا بو بيان أن العلماء
ذكروبا استيناساً لبيان أن الآية تفيد العموم. وحديث عرض الأعمال يؤيد
الاستدلال بهذه الآية وہو قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم: حياتي خير لكم،
ومماتي خير لكم تحدثون ويحدث لكم وتعرض علي أعمالكم فما وجدت
خیراً حمدت الله وما وجدت غیر ذلک استغفرت لكم. وہو حديث صحيح.
(رفع المنارة: ٧٧، لمحمود سعيد ممدوح)
563

Our seniors accept this incident on the basis of its popularity and
many chains of transmission. Shaykh 'Atīyyah Salim relates the well-
known incident which occurred in the time of Nur ad-Din Zangī when
two Christians had wanted to desecrate the blessed body of Rasūlullah
sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam. They were digging an underground canal
from their house to the grave of Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.
The king saw a dream in this regard, arrested these two and had them
punished. This incident is accepted for several reasons; some of which
are:
1.
Its popularity.
2.
The king had invited the people of Madinah so that he could
identify these two persons who had intended to commit this
vile act. The place where he hosted the people of Madinah was
known as Dar ad-Diyafah and was existing until not very long
ago.
3.
Subsequently, a wall of lead was constructed around the
blessed grave. The place where the lead was melted was
known as Dar ar-Rasasah, and it too was in existence until not
very long ago.
Based on this, our seniors accepted this incident even though there is
no continuous and unbroken chain of transmission for it.1
In the same way, the incident under discussion is well-known and
related in the books of tafsir and jurisprudence. The couplets of 'Utba
are also written on the blessed grave. Incidents of this nature are
acceptable on the basis of their popularity. Some of our people refer to
themselves as Yusuf Za'y, 'Umar Khayl and Aba Khayl. Can they
produce authentic lineages for this? Certainly not. Nonetheless,
popularity is sufficient for the acceptance of such incidents. Hadrat
Maulānā Sarfaraz Safdar rahimahullah is also of the view that
popularity is sufficient for incidents of this nature. Refer to his book
Taskīn as-Sudūr, pp. 363-364 for details.
Some people claim that 'Utba is an unknown person. The following
texts are quoted to show his identity:
في كتاب: تبصير المنتبه بتحرير المشتبه لابن حجر العسقلانى: (١٣٢):
العتبى: محمد بن عبيد الله البصري الأخباري، مشهور
1 Shaykh 'Atīyyah Salim: as-Suwal wa al-Jawab fī Āyāt al-Kitab, pp. 277-278.
564

وفي كتاب: الإكمال لابن ماكولا: (١٤٨١):
باب العتبي والقيني والقتبي: أما العتبي بعين مهملة وتاء ساكنة معجمة
باثنتين من فوقها وباء معجمة بواحدة فهو محمد بن عبيد الله العتبي
الأخباري، بصري.
وفي كتاب العبر في خبر من غبر للذببي (١٨٦):
وفيها العتبي الأخباري وبو أبو عبد الرحمن محمد بن عبيد الله بن عمرو
الأموي أحد الفصحاء الأدباء من ذرية عتبة بن أبي سفيان بن حرب، كان من
أعيان الشعراء بالبصرة، سمع أباه وسمع أيضاً من سفيان بن عيينة عدة
أحاديث، والأخبار أغلب عليه.
وفي كتاب معجم الشعراء للمرزباني (١/١٠):
أبو عبد الرحمن العتبي محمد بن عبيد الله بن عمرو بن معاوية بن عمرو بن
عتبة بن أبي سفيان صخر بن حرب بن أمية بن عبد شمس، بصري علامة
راوية للأخبار والآداب وكان حسن الصورة جميل الأخلاق وبلغ سناً عالية
وكان حسن الخضاب ويلبس الطيالس الزرق ولقب الشقراق للون خضاب
وشدة حمرة وجهه وتلون طيالسته، وكان عمرو بن عتبة يغمز في نسبه،
وتتابعت على العتبي مصائب بالذكور من ولده في الطاعون الكائن بالبصرة سنة
تسع وعشرين ومائتين وقبل ذلك فمات منهم ستة فراثابم بمراث كثيرة
منهاقوله:
كل لساني عن وصف ما أجد - وذقت ثكلاً ما ذاقه أحد
ما عالج الحزن والحرارة في - الاحشاء من لم يمت له ولد
وفي كتاب والوافي بالوفيات للصفدي (١٤٥١):
565

العتبي الأخباري محمد بن عبيد الله بن عمرو بن معاوية بن عمرو بن عتبة
بن أبي سفيان الأموي المشهور بالعتبي البصري الأخبارى أحد الأدباء
الفصحاء، مات له بنون فکان یرئیہم وقصيدته في ولده مشهورة منها:
الصبر حمد في المواطن كلها - إلا علیک فإنه مذموم
روى عن أبيه وعن سفيان بن عتبة ولوط ابن مخنف، وروى عنه أبو حاتم
السجستانى وأبو الفضل الرياشي وإسحاق بن محمد النخعي، وقدم بغداد
وحدث بها، وكان مشتهراً بالشراب، وكان ہو وأبوه سیدین أدیبین فصیحین،
ومن تصانيف: كتاب الخيل، كتاب أشعار الأعاريب، وأشعار النساء اللاتى
أحببن ثم أبغضن، وكتاب الذبيح، وكتاب الأخلاق وغير ذلك.
وفي كتاب وفيات الأعيان وأبناء أبناء الزمان أحمد بن محمد المشهور بابن
خلکان:
٦٦٣ - العتبي أبو عبد الرحمن محمد بن عبيد الله بن عمرو بن معاوية بن
عمرو بن عتبة بن أبي سفيان صخر بن حرب بن أمية بن عبد شمس القرشي
الأموي المعروف بالعتبي، الشاعر البصري المشهور.
وفي كتاب: سير أعلام النبلاء:
٢٩ - العتبي العلامة الأخباري الشاعر المجود، أبو عبد الرحمن محمد بن عبيد
الله بن عمرو بن معاوية بن عمرو بن عتبة بن أبي سفيان بن حرب الأموي ثم
العتبي البصري، روى عن: ابن عيينة، وأبي مخنف، ووالده، وعنه: أبو حاتم
السجستاني، وإسحاق بن محمد النخعي، وكان يشرب، ولم تصانيف أدبيات
وشهرة، مات سنة ثمان وعشرين وماتین.
566

وانظر للمزيد: تاريخ بغداد لأحمد بن على أبو بكر الخطيب البغدادى (
٢٣٢٦٨١٥)، وتوضيح المشتبه في ضبط أسماء الرواة وأنسابهم وألقابهم وكنابم
لابن ناصر الدين الدمشقي: (٦٨٩)، والمنتظم لابن الجوزي: (٣٣٤٧)، والنجوم
الزابرة في ملوك مصر والقابرة لابن تغري بردي: (١٢٣١)، وكتاب الأنساب
المتفقة لابن القيسراني: (١٣٣)، وكتاب الأنساب للسمعاني: (٤٩(٤)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The incident related by Hadrat 'Ali is different from that of 'Utba
Question
'Utbā relates an incident about a Bedouin coming to the blessed grave
of Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam. Hadrat 'Alī radiyallāhu 'anhu
also relates a similar incident. Are both narrations referring to the
same incident? The Ghayr Muqallids say that they are both the same,
and label it mudtarib in this way. What are the details related to these
two incidents?
Answer
The two incidents are different. This has been clarified by Imam
Qurtubī, the author of Kanz al-'Ummal, the author of al-Muntakhab, the
author of al-Mughnī and other scholars. Therefore, it is unjust to
consider both as one and establish idtirab in this way. The reason for
saying this is that not a single one of the proofs which they furnish to
establish idtirāb is convincing.
The incident of 'Utbā is related by Ibn Kathīr rahimahullah:
وقد ذكر جماعة منهم الشيخ أبو منصور الصباغ في كتاب "الشامل" الحكاية
المشهورة عن العتبي قال: كنت جالساً عند قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم
فجاء أعرابي فقال: السلام عليك يا رسول الله، سمعت الله يقول: "ولو أنهم إذا
ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجودوا الله تواباً
رحيماً". وقد جئتك مستغفراً لذنبي مستشفعاً بك إلى ربي، ثم أنشأ يقول:
يا خير من دفنت بالقاع أعظم - فطاب من طيبهن القاع والأكم
567

نفسي الفداء لقبر أنت ساكنه - فيه العفاف وفيه الجود والكرم
ثم انصرف الأعرابي، فغلبتني عيني، فرأيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في النوم
فقال: يا عتبى! الحق الأعرابي فبشره أن الله قد غفر له. (تفسير ابن كثير: ١/
٥٧٠)
The above-quoted incident is also related by 'Allāmah Nawawī, Ibn
Kathīr, Suyūtī, Bājī, Tha ālabī, Ibn Qudāmah, Bayhaqī, Māwardī, Ibn
'Asākir, Qurtubī, Ibn al-Jauzī, Qastalānī, and Subkī rahimahumullāh.
From among the scholars of the recent past, it has been quoted by
Shaykh Sābūnī, Shaykh Kautharī, Maulānā Thanwī rahimahumullāh and
others without making any objection to it.
The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu is quoted in Kanz al-
'Ummāl:
قال ابن السمعاني في الذيل: أنا أبو بكر ببة الله بن الفرج، أنا أبو القاسم
يوسف بن محمد بن يوسف الخطيب، أنا أبو القاسم عبد الرحمن بن عمرو بن
تميم المؤدب، ثنا على بن إبرابيم بن علان، أنا على بن محمد بن على، ثنا أحمد بن
الهيثم الطائى، ثنا أبى عن أبيه عن سلمة بن كهيل عن أبى صادق عن على بن
أبى طالب رضى الله تعالى عنه قال: قدم علينا أعرابى بعدما دفنا رسول الله
صلى الله عليه وسلم بثلاثة أيام، فرمی بنفسه على قبر النبي صلى الله عليه
وسلم وحثا من ترابه على رأسه، وقال: يا رسول الله! قلت: فسمعنا قولك،
ووعيت عن الله فوعينا عنك، وكان فيما أنزل الله عليك: "ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا
أنفسهم جاء وك فاستغفروا الله ... " وقد ظلمت نفسى وجئتك تستغفر لى،
فنودي فى القبر: "أنه قد غفر لک".
قال فى المغنى: الهيثم بن عدى متروک. (كنز العمال: ٢٣٨٦، سورة النساء،
تفسير القرطبي: ٥/٧٢)
After pondering over the subject matter of these two narrations, we
learn that the two incidents are separate due to several reasons. They
are:
568

1. The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu clearly mentions
three days after the demise of Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa
sallam whereas 'Utba makes mention of an incident which took
place in his time; and he passed away in 228 A.H.
2. The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu contains the
words وحثا من ترابه على رأس while these are not mentioned in the
narration of 'Utbā.
3. The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu does not contain
the couplets of the Bedouin, while they are mentioned in the
narration of 'Utbā.
4. The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu makes mention
of a voice emanating from the blessed grave: فنودي فى القبر while
the narration of 'Utba makes mention of a dream.
5. The narration of Hadrat 'Alī radiyallahu 'anhu contains the
words: ظلمت نفسى وجئتك while they are not in the narration of
‘Utbā.
6. The two narrations are completely different as regards their
chains of transmission.
Based on the above, there is a clear difference between the two.
Therefore, we cannot understand how both can be considered to be
one, and to thereby establish idtirāb.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
569

THE SHA'A'IR OF HAJJ
Meaning of the sha'a'ir of hajj
Question
What is the meaning of the words Muzdalifah, 'Arafat, Minā, Wādī
Muhassir, Masjid Namirah, Masjid Khayf, Safa and Marwah?
Answer
Muzdalifah
Is derived from izdilaf which means near. This is where nearness to
Allāh ta'ālā is acquired.
When you leave 'Arafat, it is nearby.
Hadrat Ādam 'alayhis salam went near to Hadrat Hawwa'.
People reach here during zulf al-layl - one portion of the night.
Arafat
Is derived from 'araf which means fragrance. It is more fragrant than
Mina which is the slaughter-ground. Mina does not have that
fragrance because of the smell given off by slaughtered animals.
This is where Hadrat Ādam 'alayhis salam came to know (ta'āruf) Hadrat
Hawwa' in this world.
When Hadrat Jibra'īl 'alayhis salām taught Hadrat Ibrahim 'alayhis salām
the rites of hajj, the latter said: 'araftu - I have learnt them.
When Hadrat Ibrahim 'alayhis salam again saw the dream of
slaughtering his son on the night of 'Arafah. He learnt that this dream
is to be taken at face value and he has been ordered to slaughter his
son.
Minā
It means to shed blood. Because the blood of qurbanī animals is shed
there, it is known as Wādī Mina (Mina Valley).
It is derived from tamanna, i.e. the place where wishes are fulfilled
through supplication and invocation. A poet says:
بوادی منی نلنا المنى إذ تبسمت - ليال وأيام ملاح المباسم
In the Mina Valley we realized our wishes and hopes when it smiled by day
and night, where its smile manifested itself and glittered.
570

سرور بعيد واجتماع أحبة - وقرب وقربان وخير مواسم
The joy of 'id and the meeting place of friends. The nearness of Allah ta'ālā,
sacrifices, and the best of seasons.
Muhassir
To get tired. The elephants of the army of Abrahah became tired and
could not move forward. This valley is therefore given this description.
Masjid Namirah
Namirah refers to a sheet or shawl which has black and white stripes.
The mountains here are probably black and white.
Masjid Khayf
Khayf refers to the rear portion of a mountain which is higher than
the place from which water flows.
Safa and Marwah
Safā refers to sāf (clear and clean) rocks. Marwah refers to shining
rocks. Alternatively, Adam Safīyyullah 'alayhis salām was sitting on Mt.
Safa, while his mar'ah (wife) was sitting on Mt. Marwah.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Minā and Muzdalifah being attached to Makkah
The 'ulama' of the past considered Mina to be separate from Makkah. A
pilgrim who spends 14 days from the day of arrival in Makkah to the
Yaum at-Tarwiyah is classified as a musafir - traveller. However,
because the inhabitancy of Makkah has extended, many muftīs have
now issued the fatwa that Mina is a part of Makkah. In fact, some
muftīs even include Muzdalifah within the boundaries of Makkah.
It is my view that Mina and Muzdalifah are both separate places from
Makkah, and both have to be considered to be separate places. Proofs
in this regard are presented briefly:
(1)
Although Shaykh Subayyil has said that Minā is included in Makkah,
the Saudi imams do not perform jumu'ah salah in the Jami' Masjid of
Minā - neither during the days of hajj, before the days of hajj nor after
them. Many people are occupied in preparing and cleaning the tents at
Minā before and after the days of Minā. Despite this, the jumu'ah salah
is not performed there. Had it been a part of Makkah, jumu'ah salah
would have certainly been performed there. 'Azīziyah is considered to
571

be a part of Makkah. This is why jumu'ah salah is always performed in
the masajid of 'Azīziyah. We learn from this that Mina is classified as a
part of Makkah only for administrative and regulatory reasons.
(2)
The jurists and Hadith experts explain five types of places in Kitab al-
Jumu'ah:
(الف) مصر، وتجب فيه الجمعة وهو ما يعد في الأمصار عند ذكر الأمصار أو
ما لا يسع أكبر مساجده أبله أو ما يوجد فيه مرافق الحياة العامة أو ما فيه
أسواق وسكك ولها رساتيق أو مالم أمير وقاض ينفذ الأحكام والحدود
والقصاص بالفعل أو بالقوة وغيره من التعريفات. (شامى وطحطاوى)
(ب) القرية الكبيرة التي فيها الأسواق تجب فيها الجمعة. (طحطاوى)
(ج) القرية الصغيرة في فناء المصر، تجب فيها الجمعة. (طحطاوى)
(د) القرية الصغيرة خارج فناء المصر. (مجمع الانهر)
(٥) الصحارى والبراري. (بدائع الصنائع ومجمع الانهر)
Minā is obviously not a misr (city) nor a qaryah kabīrah (large village). It
is also not a qaryah saghīrah fī fina' al-misr (a small village within a city)
because Minā is not a finā' al-misr - i.e. a necessity of the city; it is a
necessity of the pilgrims. It is also not a small village but a field. It
therefore does not make sense to attach it to a city.
Al-Fatāwā al-Hindīyyah:
الصحيح ما ذكر أنه يعتبر مجاوزة عمران المصر لا غير إلا إذا كان ثم قرية أو
قرى متصلة بربض المصر فحينئذٍ تعتبر مجاوزة القرى. (الفتاوى الهندية:
١١٣٩، فى صلاة المسافر)
572

Fatāwā ash-Shāmī:
وأشار إلى أنه يشترط مفارقة ما كان من توابع موضع الإقامة كربض المصر وہو
ما حول المدينة من بيوت ومساكين فإنه في حكم المصر وكذا القرى المتصلة
بالربض في الصحيح. (فتاوى الشامى: ٢١(٢، سعيد)
For a person to be classified as a musafir, it is a prerequisite for him to
move beyond the buildings which are on the edge of a city because
they fall under the city. Small inhabitancies which are attached to the
city and also a part of the city. The houses which are on the outskirts
of a city are probably referred to as rabad because the shepherds make
enclosures there for their flocks and herds.
Bear in mind that Mina neither falls under Makkah nor does it have
inhabitancies whereby it could be referred to as a small residential
area and then include it under Makkah. Instead, it is an empty field.
Yes, one statement in al-Fatawā al-Hindīyyah gives the impression that
it probably falls under Makkah:
وإن اتخذ المسلمون مصراً في أرض موات لا يملكها أحد فإن كان بقرب ذلک
قرى لأبل الذمة فعظم المصر حتى بلغ تلك القرى وجاوزبا فقد صارت من
جملة المصر. (الفتاوى الهندية: ١٢٥١، الباب الثامن فى الجزية، فصل فى احداث
البيع والكنائس)
However, this means that if a small inhabitancy is surrounded by a
city, it will fall under the city. In this case, Mina is not a small
inhabitancy which is surrounded by a city. Instead, it is a field and a
desert. It is not even there to fulfil the needs of the city. Also, the city
has not surrounded it. Some portions of it have long and broad
mountains. Yes, if a small inhabitancy comes onto the shoulder or side
of a city, it will become a part of the city.
Tahtāwī:
ويشترط أن يكون قد جاوز أيضاً ما اتصل به أي بمقامه من فناءه كما
يشترط مجاوزة ربضة وبو ما حول المدينة من بيوت ومساكين، فإنه في حكم
المصر وكذا القرى المتصلة بربض المصر يشترط مجاوزتها في الصحيح. (حاشية
الطحطاوى على مراقى الفلاح: ٤٢٣، باب صلاة المسافر)
573

However, Mina is not a village in the first place, nor is Muzdalifah an
inhabitancy. This rule applies to a small inhabitancy. If a large town is
right next to a city, the two will be considered to be separate places
unless one is formally attached to the other.
It is therefore my view that, as per the judgement of the jurists of the
past, Minā and Muzdalifah be counted as two separate places.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
The presence of agricultural lands or an area of 16-137 metres between
two inhabitancies is considered to be a demarcating point between
two places. If people refer to both places as districts of one city, then
despite the demarcating point between them, they will be classified as
one district.1
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah:
Once a person goes beyond the inhabitancy of his hometown or place
of residence, he will be classified as a musafir by the Shari'ah. Even if
the next inhabitancy is immediately next to it, it is a different
inhabitancy, the names of both are different, the government and the
corporation classify them as separate areas by delineating separate
boundaries for them. The two will therefore be counted as two
separate places. The person will be classified as a musafir once he
leaves his area. If the municipality classifies both as one place because
they are next to each other, it will be a district within the city. Once
the person leaves the district, the laws of a musafir will apply to him.2
(3)
Classifying Minā as a separate place also entails concurrence with the
seniors, and it is not good to abandon their views unnecessarily.
Hadrat Maulānā Muhammad Yūsuf Ludhyānwī rahimahullāh writes:
Makkah, Minā, 'Arafat and Muzdalifah are separate places. If a person
makes an intention of residing in these places collectively for a period
of 15 days, he does not become a resident. If a person came to Makkah
15 days before leaving for Mina on the 8th of Dhū al-Hijjah, he will be a
resident in Makkah, and will be the same in Mina, 'Arafat and
Muzdalifah. He will perform the full salah. However, if he hadn't
completed 15 days in Makkah and then left for Mina, he will be a
1 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 74.
2 Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah, vol. 6, p. 364.
574

musafir in Makkah, and will also shorten his salāhs in Minā, 'Arafat
and Muzdalifah.1
Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah:
Question: A person reaches Makkah on the 1st of Dhu al-Hijjah and
makes the intention of remaining there for 20 days. Will he perform
the full salah while residing in Makkah, or will he shorten it? Is he a
musafir or a muqīm (resident)?
Answer: He is not a muqīm; he is a musafir. He must shorten his salāhs
in Makkah, and also in Minā, 'Arafat and Muzdalifah.2
Note: From here we learn that Makkah and Mina are two separate
places. This is why his intention of being a muqim will not be correct.
He will remain a musafir and shorten his salahs.
Khayr al-Fatāwā:
There is no need to go into much discussion about 'Arafat because the
pilgrims do not spend the night there, and to go anywhere during the
day does not affect the intention of residence in any way. However,
spending the night in Muzdalifah is an invalidator of the intention of
residence because Muzdalifah is neither included in Makkah, nor have
we come across any proof for considering it in the outskirts of
Makkah. Furthermore, Muzdalifah is not attached to Mina. Rather, the
Muhassir valley comes as a barrier between the two. The following is
stated in ad-Durr al-Mukhtār:
المزدلفة كلها موقف إلا وادي محسر، هو واد بين منى ومزدلفة
Even if Muzdalifah was attached to Mina, we cannot understand how
Muzdalifah which spreads out over an area of about two miles can be
classified to be under Mina. For example, if there is a ten mile long and
wide field right next to a city, how can it be correct to classify it as
being under the city? If Muzdalifah is not included, 'Arafat will have
more right of not being included as a part of Makkah. There is a
distance of about six miles between 'Arafat and Muzdalifah. From a
military perspective, it is of no significance if military outposts are
situated beyond 'Arafat because outposts of this nature are
constructed throughout the way just as these have been constructed
on the road between Makkah and Madīnah.
1 Āp Ke Masā'il Aur Oen Kā Hull, vol. 4, p. 121.
2 Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol. 3, p. 184.
575

As per the explicit statements of the jurists, Makkah and Madinah are
undoubtedly two separate places. Each city has its own borders. The
start of which is Mina. Even as regards the rites of hajj, they will
forever be classified as two separate places. The rules which are
connected to Mina will have to be fulfilled there. It will not be
permissible to fulfil them in Makkah. The opposite is also true.
Furthermore, if a person departs from Makkah and enters the border
of Mina, it will be said that he left Makkah. It will also be correct to say
that he is in Mina and not in Makkah. A negation of this type with
respect to different areas of a city is not correct. We cannot say that a
person is in Nāzimābād; he is not in Karachi.
Based on the above reasons, we learn that the places which the
Shari'ah classified as separate places have separate rules of the
Shari'ah which apply to them. There are clearly delineated borders for
them, and so, they will be classified as two separate places in matters
related to a Shar'ī journey. Therefore, as regards the person under
discussion, he will not be a resident (muqīm) before hajj, as clearly
stated by all the jurists.
أن الحاج إذا دخل مكة في أيام العشر ونوى الإقامة نصف شهر لا يصح لأنه
لا بد له من الخروج إلى عرفات فلا يتحقق الشرط. (البحر: ٤٣(٢)١
'Umdah al-Fiqh:
When a person makes an intention to stay over at a place [as a
muqīm], the place must be an inhabitable place such as a town or city.
If he makes such an intention in a forest, in the middle of the ocean, or
an uninhabited island; his intention will not be correct. Muzdalifah is
not such a place.
Also, if a person makes an intention of staying over in two places for
15 days, the two places must be completely separate places, e.g.
Makkah and Minā, or Kūfah and Hiyarah. In such a case he will not be a
muqīm.2
Mu'allim al-Hujjāj:
If a musafir pilgrim comes to Makkah at such a time that up to the 8th
of Dhu al-Hijjah he will be in Makkah for less than 15 days, but makes
an intention of 15 days or more in Makkah, his intention of iqamat
1 Khayr al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 248.
2 'Umdah al-Fiqh, vol. 2, pp. 415-416.
576

(residence) will not be correct. He will remain a musafir because he
will certainly proceed to Mina on the 8th and to 'Arafat on the 9th. This
person will therefore have to shorten his salah.1
(4)
There is ease in classifying Mina as a separate place because thousands
of pilgrims remain in Makkah for 14 days or less until the day of
tarwiyah (8th of Dhu al-Hijjah). If the days of Mina are separated, they
will become musafirs. This will provide them with the ease of
shortening the salah, and qurbanī not being wajib on them by virtue of
being musāfirs.
إن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لمعاذ بن جبل وأبي موسى الأشعري عند ما
أرسلهما إلى اليمن فقال لهما: يسرا ولا تعسرا، وبشرا ولا تنفرا، وكذلك قال
عليه الصلاة والسلام: يسروا ولا تعسروا، وبشروا ولا تنفروا، واعلموا أن
أحداً منكم لن يدخل الجنة بعمله. (بخاری: ٢/٢٢، باب بعث ابى موسى ومعاذ
الى اليمن قبل حجة الوداع، ومسلم).
وقال عليه الصلاة والسلام: لا تشددوا فيشد الله عليكم، فإن قوماً شددوا
على أنفسهم فشدد عليهم فتلك بقايابم في الصوامع. (أخرجه أبو داود برقم
٤٩٠٤).
وقال الله تعالى في رخصة إفطار المريض والمسافر: يريد الله بكم اليسر، ولا
يريد بكم العسر.
ويدل على اعتبار اليسر واقعة تمرة خيبر في الحديث المشهور وفي آخره: لا
تفعل بع الجمع بالدرابم ثم ابتع بالدرابم جنيباً. (رواه البخارى: ١٢٩٣، باب اذا
اراد بيع تمر بتمر).
However, providing this ease should not be misconstrued as making
lawful what is unlawful, or considering to be right what is wrong.
(5)
1 Mu'allim al-Hujjāj, p. 157.
577

If, despite separation or non-separation, there is difference of opinion
between common usage and government demarcation, consideration
ought to be given to common usage.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
The presence of agricultural lands or an area of 16-137 metres between
two inhabitancies is considered to be a demarcating point between
two places. If people refer to both places as districts of one city, then
despite the demarcating point between them, they will be classified as
one district.1
Common usage and common practice ought to be given preference
over government demarcation. As long as common practice is not
against a text, one should act on common practice. Allah ta'ālā says:
وعلى المولود له رزقهن وكسوتهن بالمعروف
The word ma'ruf in this verse refers to common practice.
Hadrat 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ūd radiyallāhu 'anhu says:
ما راه المسلمون حسناً فهو عند الله حسن
The commentator of Majallah writes:
ان العرف والعادة يكون حجة اذا لم يكن مخالفاً للنص. (١٨١-٨٩- وشرح
عقود رسم المفتى: ٤١)
In fact, in some instances if a text is based on common practice, then
common practice will be made the basis. For example, in olden days,
wheat and barley transactions were based on volume. The Ahadith
which make reference to interest transactions classify them as items
which are sold by volume. However, later on they were sold by weight,
so they were classified as items sold by weight. Nowadays, people do
not even know about volume. Therefore, to classify wheat and barley
as items sold by weight does not entail changing of the text but
considering the import and basis of the text.
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah quotes the preferred view of Imām Abū
Yūsuf rahimahullāh from Ibn Humām rahimahullāh:
1 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 74.
578

عن الثاني اعتبار العرف مطلقاً ورجحه الكمال وخرج عليه سغدي آفندي.
(الدر المختار: ٧٦٪٥، باب الربا، سعيد. وشرح مجلة: ١٨١، المادة: ٣٦)
To sum up, if text (nass) is subservient to common practice ('urf), a
change in the common practice does not necessitate discarding the
text because the basis is common practice. Common practice is
therefore taken into consideration.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
The views of certain muftīs
Some of the muftīs and 'ulama' who have issued fatawa in line with the
above answer are:
1. Dār al-Iftā' Jāmi ah al-'Ulūm al-Islamīyyah, 'Allāmah Bannūrī Town,
Karachi.
2. Muftī Muhammad Husayn, Dār al-Iftā' wa al-Irshād, Jāmi'ah ar-
Rashīd, Karachi.
3. Muftī 'Abd al-Wahid, Jāmi'ah Madīnah, Karīm Park, Wādī Road,
Lahore.
4. Muftī 'Ismatullah, Dār al-Iftā', Dār al-'Ulūm, Karachi.
5. Hadrat Muftī Muhammad Tagī 'Uthmanī Sahib sent a question to the
Saudi Dār al-Iftā' - Ri'āsah Idārah al-Buhuth al-'Ilmīyyah wa al-Iftā',
stating:
In olden times, Mina and Makkah were classified as two separate
places, but they are now virtually next to each other. Will these two
places be considered to be one, or two separate places?
To this, al-Lajnah ad-Dā'imah replied:
They are two separate places. There is no consideration to the fact that
they lie next to each other.
This reply is attested to by the following senior muftīs:
1. 'Abd al-'Azīz ibn 'Abdillah ibn Muhammad Al Shaykh.
2. Salih ibn Fauzān al-Fauzān.
3. Ahmad ibn 'Alī Sayr al-Mubarakī.
4. 'Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Mutlaq.
Observe the photocopy of this fatwa:
579

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
المملكة العربية السعودية
رئاسة إدارة البحوث العلمية والإفتاء
الأمانة العامة لهيئة كبار العلماء
الرقم :
التاريخ :
المرفقات :
فتوى رقم (٢٢١٧١) وتاريخ ١٤٢٢/١١/٢١ هـ.
الحمد لله وحده والصلاة والسلام على من لانبي بعده .. وبعد :-
فقد اطلعت اللجنة الدائمة للبحوث العلمية والإفتاء على ماورد إلى سماحة المفتي العام من
المستثني / محمد تقي العثماني والمحال إلى اللجنة من الأمانة العامة لهيئة كبار العلماء برقم ( ٦٧٣٨ )
وتاريخ ١٤٢٢/٧/٢٠ هـ وقد سال المستثنى عما يلى :-
السؤال الثاني: في الأزمنة السالفة كان «مى» يعد موضعا مستقلا و « مكة المكرمة )» بلدة
مستقلة ، ومن هنا يختلف فيهما حكم السفر والإقامة ، وأما في العصر الراهن
فقد نشأ بينهما كمال اتصال واقتراب حسب العمران كما لا يخفى على الزائر ،
فالمسئول منكم أن حكومتكم هل تعامل هذين الموضعين معاملة موضع واحد أو
بلدة واحدة اليوم ، ومنى يعد من مكة المكرمة أم لا؟ فالرجاء منكم ايضاح هذا
الأمر كمال الايضاح لتوقف مسألة نية الإقامة فيه .
الجواب : أهل مكة إذا حجوا أخذوا حكم الحجاج في القصر والجمع لأن الذين حجوا مع
النبي رجل من أهل مكة لم ياموهم بالإتمام ولا اعتبار لقرب بنيان مكة من
المشاعر .. وبالله التوفيق ..
وصلى الله على نبينا محمد وآله وصحبه وسلم ،،،،،
اللجنة الدائمة للبحوث العلمية والإفتاء
عضو
عضو
الرئيس
صالح بن فوزان الفوزان عبدالله بن عبد الرحمن الغديان
عضو
عضو
عبدالعزيز بن عبدالله بن محمد آل الشيخ
عضو
عبدالله بن محمد المطلق
عبدا لله بن علي الركبان
أحمد بن علي سير المبتركي
580