Post by Abu Idris on Jul 21, 2015 18:07:35 GMT
To read/download the article in PDF format, click here; and to read in flowing text, continue reading below (some Arabic benedictions have been removed in this version for the readers' ease):
Introduction
In an age when the tarāwīḥ prayers of the blessed month of Ramaḍān are seen and treated by many as an unwelcome hindrance and burden, an erroneous practice that needs to be highlighted is that of remuneration for the khatm (complete recital) of the Holy Qurʾān. It has become normal in many masājid to make a payment to the reciter of the Holy Qurʾān and for the reciter to accept such a payment. In fact, such a payment is seen as veneration and promotion of the Holy Qurʾān. Hence, the sum paid to the reciter is usually very generous. The management committees of many masājid effectively compel those who live within the locality of the masjid or who had attended the tarāwīḥ prayers to make a fixed contribution toward this payment – effectively, a ‘tarāwīḥ tax’. Many make this payment reluctantly, out of embarrassment or for fear of being named and shamed. Others make the payment wholeheartedly, believing it to be a service to the Holy Qurʾān.
Many people confuse this unlawful payment with that of imāmah (leading the five daily prayers) and teaching of the Holy Qurʾān. They fail to understand the difference between the two types of services and their respective remuneration.
Remuneration for imāmah and teaching the Holy Qurʾān and other similar services were originally deemed by the fuqahāʾ (jurists) unlawful. This was during the early centuries of Islām when Islamic governments, or governments that were to some degree based on Islamic principles and values, took adequate care of these essential functions and services. Those in Dῑnῑ professions (imāms, muʾadhdhins , teachers and instructors of the Dῑn and others like them) were duly looked after by the state. They received respectful stipends from the state and were respected by the Ummah for their pivotal roles in their communities. However, when the condition of the Ummah deteriorated and law and order was replaced by lawlessness and anarchy, obedience was replaced by rebellion, unity was replaced by disunity, and honesty and just governance were replaced by dishonesty and corruption, those in Dῑnῑ professions were often no longer being respected and cherished by the state or the Muslim masses. Consequently, they now needed to turn to other means of livelihood just like everyone else in society. The inevitable consequence of such a move from their essential Dῑnῑ professions to other means of livelihood would have been the neglect of the essential services to the Dῑn, upon which depended the protection and preservation of the Dῑn. It was in this context that the later generation of fuqahāʾ issued the consensual fatwā of permissibility of remuneration for the above and similar services to Islām and the Muslims. Reciting a khatm of the Holy Qurʾān in tarāwīḥ prayers does not, in any way, equate to any of the above essential services, nor does the protection and preservation of the Dῑn depend on it in any way at all.
Amongst those who have written about the impermissibility of remuneration for the recitation of the Holy Qurʾān and drawn the clear distinction between this and other essential Dῑnῑ services is the great Ḥanafῑ jurist of Damascus, Imām Muḥammad Amῑn ‘ibn ʿĀbidῑn’ (d. 1252/1836) in his magnum opus, the authoritative Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā ’l-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwῑr al-Abṣār (also known as Ḥāshiyat Ibn ʿĀbidῑn). He also wrote a detailed treatise on the subject, which he entitled Shifāʾ al-ʿAlῑl wa Ball al-Ghalῑl fi Ḥukm al-Waṣiyyat bi ’l-Khatamāt wa ’l-Tahālῑl .
The tarāwīḥ prayers, which are a special blessing to this Ummah, granted by Allāh Most Gracious through His most beloved Messenger ﷺ, are being shown lack of appreciation in many communities throughout the world. This special prayer, gifted by Allāh Most Gracious, is being shown so much indifference that it has now become tantamount to abuse in some masājid. A large and growing portion of the Muslim Ummah has defied the consensus of the four established legal schools (madhāhib or madhhabs) – namely, the Ḥanafῑ, Shāfiʿῑ, Mālikῑ and Ḥanbalῑ schools – on the tarāwīḥ prayers being a total of twenty rakaʿāt sunnah and no less . The twenty rakaʿāt have now been reduced to a mere eight rakaʿāt, in spite of the ʿulamāʾ of the four schools and the great imāms of the early centuries stating unequivocally in their respective works that a total of twenty rakaʿāt must be prayed in order for the full sunnah to be discharged, and the countless ḥadῑth and athar evidences, more and more of which are now coming to light.
There are those who pray the full twenty rakaʿāt, but do so in such a way that it is obvious that they see it as a burden and not the subḥah (praise and glorification of Allāh) and a powerful means of gaining closeness to Allāh Most High that it actually is. In order to reduce the time it takes to pray the full twenty rakaʿāt, the opening thanāʾ (praise and glorification of Allāh) is omitted, those behind the imām can barely say the tasbῑḥ of the rukūʿ and sujūd three times, and - even worse – say the ṣalāt ʿala ’l-Nabiyy (durūd sharῑf) and the duʿā that follows it properly or at all, in some cases. The tarwῑḥah (pl. tarāwīḥ - resting between every four rakaʿāt the same duration that it took to pray the four rakaʿāt), from which this special prayer takes its name is so short that one can barely notice it. In some masājid it has been completely omitted.
As for the speed of the Qurʾān recitation, Allāh be our protector! In his haste to reduce the time taken to complete the full recital of the Holy Qurʾān, the imām gives little or no regard to the fine science of correct Qurʾān recitation (ʿilm al-tajwῑd), renders the words of Allāh Most High unclear and, in his frenzy, regularly chops off the ends of words in his pronunciation. Many masjid committees and attendees are impressed by this abuse of the Holy Qurʾān, which, in reality, is no less than desecration of the Book of Allāh. Such imāms are praised and invited the following year. This needs urgent rectification by those of power and influence, in whatever capacity that may be. The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said:
“Whoever from amongst you sees a vice should change it with his hand. If he is unable to do so, he should change it with his tongue. If he is unable to do so, he should [detest it] with his heart. That is the lowest degree of faith.” (Muslim, 49)
The great ḥadῑth master and Shāfiʿῑ authority, Imām al-Nawawῑ (d. 676/1277), writes in his Kitāb al-Adhkār:
“Know that the tarāwīḥ prayer is a sunnah by consensus of the ʿulamāʾ. It is a total of twenty rakaʿāt in units of two. The description of the prayer is the same as that of every other prayer, as mentioned previously. All the adhkār that have been described will be said in this prayer – for example, the duʿāʾ of opening (i.e. the thanāʾ at the beginning of the prayer), the completion of all the other adhkār of ṣalāh, the completion of the tashahhud and the duʿāʾ thereafter, and all the other things that have been mentioned previously. Although, this is all obvious, I have nevertheless mentioned this here due to the carelessness of most people in this regard and their omission of most of the adhkār. The correct way is what has been described.
As for the recitation of the Qurʾān, the preferred opinion of the majority of ʿulamāʾ, upon which is the practice of the people, is that a complete khatm of the Qurʾān should be recited during the month. Approximately a juzʾ (one thirtieth portion) should be recited each night. It is desirable (yustaḥabbu) to recite the Qurʾān at a steady pace and clearly with tartῑl. The imām should avoid prolonging the prayer and making it difficult upon the people by reciting more than a juzʾ a night.”
I have mentioned the above in passing only, as the remit of this paper is the issue of remuneration for the recitation of the Holy Qurʾān. The above issues are, nevertheless, not completely unrelated to the issue at hand. They are, in my view, of grave concern, requiring urgent action and ought to be addressed separately.
The following is a brief collection of fatāwā that I had the tawfῑq of translating during my time as a student of the Dῑn in Bangladesh. They were translated in 1999 and have been amongst my old papers ever since. I am grateful to Ml. Shahin-ur-Rahman, who recently completed the Dars-e-Niẓāmῑ course and graduated from the madrasah of the Islamic Daʿwah Academy in Leicester, England for taking this and several other papers that were written or translated during that period and typing them on computer. InshāʾAllāh, I hope to make these available one by one in the not too distant future.
Abu Asim Badrul Islam
Northampton, ENGLAND
22nd Ramaḍān 1436/9th July 2015
Fatāwā of some eminent ʿulamāʾ of the last century regarding remuneration for the Qurʾān khatm
The legendary master, Imām Rashῑd Aḥmad Gangohῑ (d. 1323/1905), states in his Fatāwā:
QUERY 1:
How is it to give the sāmiʿ (the ḥāfiẓ who stands behind the reciter and corrects him when he errs in his recitation) and the qārī (the ḥāfiẓ who recites) a sum of payment, which may or may not be agreed by both parties for the khatm in the tarāwīḥ prayers?
FATWĀ 1:
It is not correct to accept payment for the recital of the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers, as recitation of the Holy Qur’ān is an act of ʿibādah and to accept payment for an act of ʿibādah is ḥarām.
QUERY 2:
How is it to recite the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers in return for payment and how is it for the ḥāfiẓ to accept payment, be it with prior agreement of both parties or not? Zayd says that the acceptance of payment is prohibited while ʿAmr claims that just as payment is allowed for the services of adhān, iqāmah and imāmah, it is allowed for recitation of the Holy Qur’ān. Who is right?
FATWĀ 2:
For the ḥāfiẓ to recite the Holy Qur’ān in return for payment is ḥarām and to offer him payment is also impermissible. The later fuqahā’ (muta’akhkhirūn) have excluded (from the prohibition) the acceptance of payment for the services of adhān, imāmah, teaching Islām and waʿẓ (sermons and lectures) due to necessity. To recite the whole Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers is not a necessity. He who has rationalised this with the adhān [and other similarly essential religious services] has erred.
QUERY 3:
Is it better to perform the tarāwīḥ daily by reciting from ‘Alam tara’ (Sūrat al-Fīl) than listen to the full khatm and give the [qārῑ and] sāmiʿ something as payment?
FATWĀ 3:
Payment for the recitation of the Holy Qur’ān or for listening to it is ḥarām. When the payment is ḥarām the tarāwīḥ should be performed by reciting from ‘Alam tara’ (Sūrat al-Fīl).
Imām Rashῑd Aḥmad Gangohῑ
Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah, p. 391
(Deoband, INDIA: Maktabah Thānwī, 1987).
Imām Muḥammad Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī (d. 1362/1943) states in his Iṣlāḥ al-Rusūm, in the chapter discussing prevalent erroneous customs and practices of Ramaḍān:
Some ḥuffāẓ are in the habit of reciting the Holy Qur’ān for remuneration. To accept remuneration for acts of ʿibādāt, and to remunerate, is ḥarām. Some argue, “We did not agree the sum (of payment) in advance – therefore, it will not be deemed remuneration.” We say in response: you did not agree the sum in advance, but the intention of both parties was this. This intention was not of the degree of mere probability; rather, it was of certainty. If by the slightest hint such a ḥāfiẓ were to find out that he would not receive payment at a certain place, he would never agree to recite there. It is stated in the principles of fiqh that that which is [popularly and obviously] known (or understood) is treated as an express condition [even though, the condition may not be clearly expressed]. When this method has become customary and the intention of the giver and acceptor is this, then without doubt it is remuneration. As for the possible counter-argument with analogy from the doubt surrounding remuneration for teaching the Holy Qur’ān, we have discussed it in detail in a previous chapter.
There are some who say, “We cannot find a ḥāfiẓ who is willing to recite the Holy Qur’ān without remuneration. If to listen to the Holy Qur’ān with payment is unlawful, how can we hear its recital?” The simple answer is that to listen to a complete recital of the Holy Qur’ān [during the tarāwῑḥ prayers] is not farḍ; it is mustaḥabb (desirable). To commit a ḥarām act in order to carry out a mustaḥabb deed can never be lawful. Perform the tarāwīḥ prayers by reciting from Sūrat al-Fīl [to Sūrat al-Nās]. In the abovementioned circumstance it does not remain important to complete a full recital of the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwῑḥ prayers.
Imām Muḥammad Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī
Islāḥ al-Rusūm (Rectification of Prevalent Erroneous Customs and Practices), p. 148
(Deoband, INDIA: Maktabah Dῑn wa Adab, no date).
Shaykh ʿAzīz al-Raḥmān ʿUthmānī (d. 1347/1928), the grand mufti of the great Islamic seminary in Deoband, UP, INDIA, Dār al-ʿUlūm states in the ten-volume Fatāwā of the Dār al-ʿUlūm:
QUERY:
How is it to give the ḥāfiẓ qārī [money etc.] for the recital of the Holy Qur’ān during the qiyām of Ramaḍān and for him to accept it? Both parties intend this transaction from the beginning and without it none shall recite the Qur’ān nor listen to it (as a sāmiʿ ḥāfiẓ). If the khatm of the Holy Qur’ān is not completed in a masjid and the tarāwīḥ prayers are offered [without the khatm], will the people be deprived of the virtues of the qiyām of Ramaḍān?
FATWĀ:
It is not correct to recite the Holy Qur’ān in return for payment and there is no virtue in doing so. In accordance to the principle of المعروف كالمشروط (that which is well-known is like a stipulated condition), the mere intention to give and accept is considered payment and, therefore, not permissible.
In such a circumstance, it will be best to perform the tarāwīḥ [with the shorter sūrats] and not listen to the recital of the Holy Qur’ān where payment is involved. By simply performing the tarāwīḥ prayers, the virtues of the qiyām of Ramaḍān shall be attained.
Shaykh ʿAzīz al-Raḥmān ʿUthmānī
Fatāwā Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband, 4:246
(Deoband, INDIA: Zakariyyā Book Depot, no date).
One of the most eminent muftis of his time, Shaykh Rashῑd Aḥmad Ludhyānwῑ (d. 1422/2002), states in his nine-volume Fatāwā:
QUERY:
If in Ramaḍān the qārī (the ḥāfiẓ who recites) and the sāmiʿ (the ḥāfiẓ who stands behind the reciter and corrects him when he errs in his recitation) do not fix any remuneration for their khatm of the Holy Qur’ān and the people of the masjid serve (khidmah) them financially or give them clothing, will this be lawful?
FATWĀ:
To offer cash or clothing in the name of service (khidmah) is in itself remuneration. This is worse than fixing any remuneration, since in it there are two sins being committed: (1) the sin of accepting remuneration for reciting the Holy Qur’ān and (2) the ignorance in not knowing that it is remuneration.
Some people say, “The qārī and the sāmiʿ do what they do for the pleasure of Allāh and we also serve them for the pleasure of Allah; we do not intend remuneration.” In order to expose such people’s intentions the fuqahā’ (jurists) have mentioned the following test:
If the qārī and sāmiʿ are not given anything, will they be willing to come and serve this masjid again? The test for the people of the masjid is that if this qārī and sāmiʿ do not come the following year, will they be willing to ‘serve’ them again? Now test the people of today with this touchstone. If the qārī and the sāmiʿ are not given anything, they will not even turn their faces in the direction of this masjid in the future .
The state of the people of the masjid is that they will never feel pity for the qārī and the sāmiʿ who have not completed a khatm of the Holy Qurʾān in their masjid, no matter how needy or destitute they may be. This proves that both parties intend remuneration – not the pleasure of Allāh – and they are lying in their claims. Therefore, those who recite the Holy Qur’ān and those who listen to it in this manner are grave sinners and fussāq . The imāmah of such a qārī is makrūh taḥrīman (prohibitively disliked).
The ruling regarding the imāmah of a fāsiq in the farḍ (obligatory) prayers is that if a ṣāliḥ (righteous) imām is not found or it is not within one’s power to remove the fāsiq imam, prayers may be performed behind him, but the jamāʿah must in no circumstance be missed.
However, the ruling regarding the tarāwīḥ prayers is that they must in no circumstance be offered behind an imām who is a fāsiq. If a ṣāliḥ imām is not found, the prayers should be performed with short sūrats. If such a ḥāfiẓ leads the tarāwīḥ prayers in the local masjid, one should perform the farḍ prayers there with the jamāʿah and leave the masjid to perform the tarāwīḥ in his home.
Even if we imagine that the aim of a ḥāfiẓ is not remuneration, he will, nevertheless, hope and look forward to being given something due to the common practice nowadays. On not receiving anything, he will be regretful and unhappy. This is known as ishrāf al-nafs (greed of the ego), which is ḥarām.
Even if a qārī is imagined to be pure from such ishrāf al-nafs, this transaction should be avoided, as it resembles and supports a general ḥarām practice and it is against religious modesty. Therefore, it is wājib (compulsory) to fully avoid this at all costs.
23rd Shawwāl 1386 AH.
Shaykh Rashīd Aḥmad Ludhyānwī مد ظله
Aḥsan al-Fatāwā, 3:514
(Deoband, INDIA: Zakariyyā Book Depot).
Compiled and translated by:
Badrul Islam
Student at the Dār al-ʿUlūm Muʿῑn al-Islām, Hat’hazari, Chittagong
15th Ramaḍān 1420 AH/24th December 1999 CE.
Appendix
Reproduced below is the full discussion on remuneration for acts of worship (ʿibādāt/ṭāʿāt) from the authoritative Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā ’l-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwῑr al-Abṣār (also known as Ḥāshiyat Ibn ʿĀbidῑn) of the great Ḥanafῑ jurist of Damascus, Imām Muḥammad Amῑn ‘ibn ʿĀbidῑn’ (d. 1252/1836). It is being reproduced for the benefit of scholars. Those scholars who wish to gain a deeper juristic insight into the issue may refer to his separate work, Shifāʾ al-ʿAlῑl wa Ball al-Ghalῑl fi Ḥukm al-Waṣiyyat bi ’l-Khatamāt wa ’l-Tahālῑl, which, in his own words, is a “wonder of wonders”. He says he presented this work to his contemporary, another great Ḥanafῑ jurist, Imām Sayyid Aḥmad Ṭaḥṭāwῑ (d. 1231/1816), the grand mufti of Egypt, who praised the work and wrote a preface to it.
REMUNERATION FOR LEADING TARĀWĪḤ DURING RAMAḌĀN
(Mawlana Abu Asim Badrul Islam)
Introduction
In an age when the tarāwīḥ prayers of the blessed month of Ramaḍān are seen and treated by many as an unwelcome hindrance and burden, an erroneous practice that needs to be highlighted is that of remuneration for the khatm (complete recital) of the Holy Qurʾān. It has become normal in many masājid to make a payment to the reciter of the Holy Qurʾān and for the reciter to accept such a payment. In fact, such a payment is seen as veneration and promotion of the Holy Qurʾān. Hence, the sum paid to the reciter is usually very generous. The management committees of many masājid effectively compel those who live within the locality of the masjid or who had attended the tarāwīḥ prayers to make a fixed contribution toward this payment – effectively, a ‘tarāwīḥ tax’. Many make this payment reluctantly, out of embarrassment or for fear of being named and shamed. Others make the payment wholeheartedly, believing it to be a service to the Holy Qurʾān.
Many people confuse this unlawful payment with that of imāmah (leading the five daily prayers) and teaching of the Holy Qurʾān. They fail to understand the difference between the two types of services and their respective remuneration.
Remuneration for imāmah and teaching the Holy Qurʾān and other similar services were originally deemed by the fuqahāʾ (jurists) unlawful. This was during the early centuries of Islām when Islamic governments, or governments that were to some degree based on Islamic principles and values, took adequate care of these essential functions and services. Those in Dῑnῑ professions (imāms, muʾadhdhins , teachers and instructors of the Dῑn and others like them) were duly looked after by the state. They received respectful stipends from the state and were respected by the Ummah for their pivotal roles in their communities. However, when the condition of the Ummah deteriorated and law and order was replaced by lawlessness and anarchy, obedience was replaced by rebellion, unity was replaced by disunity, and honesty and just governance were replaced by dishonesty and corruption, those in Dῑnῑ professions were often no longer being respected and cherished by the state or the Muslim masses. Consequently, they now needed to turn to other means of livelihood just like everyone else in society. The inevitable consequence of such a move from their essential Dῑnῑ professions to other means of livelihood would have been the neglect of the essential services to the Dῑn, upon which depended the protection and preservation of the Dῑn. It was in this context that the later generation of fuqahāʾ issued the consensual fatwā of permissibility of remuneration for the above and similar services to Islām and the Muslims. Reciting a khatm of the Holy Qurʾān in tarāwīḥ prayers does not, in any way, equate to any of the above essential services, nor does the protection and preservation of the Dῑn depend on it in any way at all.
Amongst those who have written about the impermissibility of remuneration for the recitation of the Holy Qurʾān and drawn the clear distinction between this and other essential Dῑnῑ services is the great Ḥanafῑ jurist of Damascus, Imām Muḥammad Amῑn ‘ibn ʿĀbidῑn’ (d. 1252/1836) in his magnum opus, the authoritative Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā ’l-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwῑr al-Abṣār (also known as Ḥāshiyat Ibn ʿĀbidῑn). He also wrote a detailed treatise on the subject, which he entitled Shifāʾ al-ʿAlῑl wa Ball al-Ghalῑl fi Ḥukm al-Waṣiyyat bi ’l-Khatamāt wa ’l-Tahālῑl .
The tarāwīḥ prayers, which are a special blessing to this Ummah, granted by Allāh Most Gracious through His most beloved Messenger ﷺ, are being shown lack of appreciation in many communities throughout the world. This special prayer, gifted by Allāh Most Gracious, is being shown so much indifference that it has now become tantamount to abuse in some masājid. A large and growing portion of the Muslim Ummah has defied the consensus of the four established legal schools (madhāhib or madhhabs) – namely, the Ḥanafῑ, Shāfiʿῑ, Mālikῑ and Ḥanbalῑ schools – on the tarāwīḥ prayers being a total of twenty rakaʿāt sunnah and no less . The twenty rakaʿāt have now been reduced to a mere eight rakaʿāt, in spite of the ʿulamāʾ of the four schools and the great imāms of the early centuries stating unequivocally in their respective works that a total of twenty rakaʿāt must be prayed in order for the full sunnah to be discharged, and the countless ḥadῑth and athar evidences, more and more of which are now coming to light.
There are those who pray the full twenty rakaʿāt, but do so in such a way that it is obvious that they see it as a burden and not the subḥah (praise and glorification of Allāh) and a powerful means of gaining closeness to Allāh Most High that it actually is. In order to reduce the time it takes to pray the full twenty rakaʿāt, the opening thanāʾ (praise and glorification of Allāh) is omitted, those behind the imām can barely say the tasbῑḥ of the rukūʿ and sujūd three times, and - even worse – say the ṣalāt ʿala ’l-Nabiyy (durūd sharῑf) and the duʿā that follows it properly or at all, in some cases. The tarwῑḥah (pl. tarāwīḥ - resting between every four rakaʿāt the same duration that it took to pray the four rakaʿāt), from which this special prayer takes its name is so short that one can barely notice it. In some masājid it has been completely omitted.
As for the speed of the Qurʾān recitation, Allāh be our protector! In his haste to reduce the time taken to complete the full recital of the Holy Qurʾān, the imām gives little or no regard to the fine science of correct Qurʾān recitation (ʿilm al-tajwῑd), renders the words of Allāh Most High unclear and, in his frenzy, regularly chops off the ends of words in his pronunciation. Many masjid committees and attendees are impressed by this abuse of the Holy Qurʾān, which, in reality, is no less than desecration of the Book of Allāh. Such imāms are praised and invited the following year. This needs urgent rectification by those of power and influence, in whatever capacity that may be. The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said:
من رأى منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده، فإن لم يستطع فبلسانه، فإن لم يستطع فبقلبه، وذلك أضعف الإيمان.
(مسلم 49)
“Whoever from amongst you sees a vice should change it with his hand. If he is unable to do so, he should change it with his tongue. If he is unable to do so, he should [detest it] with his heart. That is the lowest degree of faith.” (Muslim, 49)
The great ḥadῑth master and Shāfiʿῑ authority, Imām al-Nawawῑ (d. 676/1277), writes in his Kitāb al-Adhkār:
“Know that the tarāwīḥ prayer is a sunnah by consensus of the ʿulamāʾ. It is a total of twenty rakaʿāt in units of two. The description of the prayer is the same as that of every other prayer, as mentioned previously. All the adhkār that have been described will be said in this prayer – for example, the duʿāʾ of opening (i.e. the thanāʾ at the beginning of the prayer), the completion of all the other adhkār of ṣalāh, the completion of the tashahhud and the duʿāʾ thereafter, and all the other things that have been mentioned previously. Although, this is all obvious, I have nevertheless mentioned this here due to the carelessness of most people in this regard and their omission of most of the adhkār. The correct way is what has been described.
As for the recitation of the Qurʾān, the preferred opinion of the majority of ʿulamāʾ, upon which is the practice of the people, is that a complete khatm of the Qurʾān should be recited during the month. Approximately a juzʾ (one thirtieth portion) should be recited each night. It is desirable (yustaḥabbu) to recite the Qurʾān at a steady pace and clearly with tartῑl. The imām should avoid prolonging the prayer and making it difficult upon the people by reciting more than a juzʾ a night.”
I have mentioned the above in passing only, as the remit of this paper is the issue of remuneration for the recitation of the Holy Qurʾān. The above issues are, nevertheless, not completely unrelated to the issue at hand. They are, in my view, of grave concern, requiring urgent action and ought to be addressed separately.
The following is a brief collection of fatāwā that I had the tawfῑq of translating during my time as a student of the Dῑn in Bangladesh. They were translated in 1999 and have been amongst my old papers ever since. I am grateful to Ml. Shahin-ur-Rahman, who recently completed the Dars-e-Niẓāmῑ course and graduated from the madrasah of the Islamic Daʿwah Academy in Leicester, England for taking this and several other papers that were written or translated during that period and typing them on computer. InshāʾAllāh, I hope to make these available one by one in the not too distant future.
Abu Asim Badrul Islam
Northampton, ENGLAND
22nd Ramaḍān 1436/9th July 2015
Fatāwā of some eminent ʿulamāʾ of the last century regarding remuneration for the Qurʾān khatm
The legendary master, Imām Rashῑd Aḥmad Gangohῑ (d. 1323/1905), states in his Fatāwā:
QUERY 1:
How is it to give the sāmiʿ (the ḥāfiẓ who stands behind the reciter and corrects him when he errs in his recitation) and the qārī (the ḥāfiẓ who recites) a sum of payment, which may or may not be agreed by both parties for the khatm in the tarāwīḥ prayers?
FATWĀ 1:
It is not correct to accept payment for the recital of the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers, as recitation of the Holy Qur’ān is an act of ʿibādah and to accept payment for an act of ʿibādah is ḥarām.
قال في رد المحتار: الآخذ والمعطي آثمان.
QUERY 2:
How is it to recite the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers in return for payment and how is it for the ḥāfiẓ to accept payment, be it with prior agreement of both parties or not? Zayd says that the acceptance of payment is prohibited while ʿAmr claims that just as payment is allowed for the services of adhān, iqāmah and imāmah, it is allowed for recitation of the Holy Qur’ān. Who is right?
FATWĀ 2:
For the ḥāfiẓ to recite the Holy Qur’ān in return for payment is ḥarām and to offer him payment is also impermissible. The later fuqahā’ (muta’akhkhirūn) have excluded (from the prohibition) the acceptance of payment for the services of adhān, imāmah, teaching Islām and waʿẓ (sermons and lectures) due to necessity. To recite the whole Qur’ān in the tarāwīḥ prayers is not a necessity. He who has rationalised this with the adhān [and other similarly essential religious services] has erred.
QUERY 3:
Is it better to perform the tarāwīḥ daily by reciting from ‘Alam tara’ (Sūrat al-Fīl) than listen to the full khatm and give the [qārῑ and] sāmiʿ something as payment?
FATWĀ 3:
Payment for the recitation of the Holy Qur’ān or for listening to it is ḥarām. When the payment is ḥarām the tarāwīḥ should be performed by reciting from ‘Alam tara’ (Sūrat al-Fīl).
Imām Rashῑd Aḥmad Gangohῑ
Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah, p. 391
(Deoband, INDIA: Maktabah Thānwī, 1987).
Imām Muḥammad Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī (d. 1362/1943) states in his Iṣlāḥ al-Rusūm, in the chapter discussing prevalent erroneous customs and practices of Ramaḍān:
Some ḥuffāẓ are in the habit of reciting the Holy Qur’ān for remuneration. To accept remuneration for acts of ʿibādāt, and to remunerate, is ḥarām. Some argue, “We did not agree the sum (of payment) in advance – therefore, it will not be deemed remuneration.” We say in response: you did not agree the sum in advance, but the intention of both parties was this. This intention was not of the degree of mere probability; rather, it was of certainty. If by the slightest hint such a ḥāfiẓ were to find out that he would not receive payment at a certain place, he would never agree to recite there. It is stated in the principles of fiqh that that which is [popularly and obviously] known (or understood) is treated as an express condition [even though, the condition may not be clearly expressed]. When this method has become customary and the intention of the giver and acceptor is this, then without doubt it is remuneration. As for the possible counter-argument with analogy from the doubt surrounding remuneration for teaching the Holy Qur’ān, we have discussed it in detail in a previous chapter.
There are some who say, “We cannot find a ḥāfiẓ who is willing to recite the Holy Qur’ān without remuneration. If to listen to the Holy Qur’ān with payment is unlawful, how can we hear its recital?” The simple answer is that to listen to a complete recital of the Holy Qur’ān [during the tarāwῑḥ prayers] is not farḍ; it is mustaḥabb (desirable). To commit a ḥarām act in order to carry out a mustaḥabb deed can never be lawful. Perform the tarāwīḥ prayers by reciting from Sūrat al-Fīl [to Sūrat al-Nās]. In the abovementioned circumstance it does not remain important to complete a full recital of the Holy Qur’ān in the tarāwῑḥ prayers.
Imām Muḥammad Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī
Islāḥ al-Rusūm (Rectification of Prevalent Erroneous Customs and Practices), p. 148
(Deoband, INDIA: Maktabah Dῑn wa Adab, no date).
Shaykh ʿAzīz al-Raḥmān ʿUthmānī (d. 1347/1928), the grand mufti of the great Islamic seminary in Deoband, UP, INDIA, Dār al-ʿUlūm states in the ten-volume Fatāwā of the Dār al-ʿUlūm:
QUERY:
How is it to give the ḥāfiẓ qārī [money etc.] for the recital of the Holy Qur’ān during the qiyām of Ramaḍān and for him to accept it? Both parties intend this transaction from the beginning and without it none shall recite the Qur’ān nor listen to it (as a sāmiʿ ḥāfiẓ). If the khatm of the Holy Qur’ān is not completed in a masjid and the tarāwīḥ prayers are offered [without the khatm], will the people be deprived of the virtues of the qiyām of Ramaḍān?
FATWĀ:
It is not correct to recite the Holy Qur’ān in return for payment and there is no virtue in doing so. In accordance to the principle of المعروف كالمشروط (that which is well-known is like a stipulated condition), the mere intention to give and accept is considered payment and, therefore, not permissible.
وإن القراءة بشيء من الدنيا لا تجوز، والآخذ والمعطي آثمان لأن ذلك يشبه الاستئجار ونفس الاستئجار عليها لا يجوز.
(رد المحتار - باب قضاء الفوائت - مطلب في بطلان الوصية 1\687)
In such a circumstance, it will be best to perform the tarāwīḥ [with the shorter sūrats] and not listen to the recital of the Holy Qur’ān where payment is involved. By simply performing the tarāwīḥ prayers, the virtues of the qiyām of Ramaḍān shall be attained.
Shaykh ʿAzīz al-Raḥmān ʿUthmānī
Fatāwā Dār al-ʿUlūm Deoband, 4:246
(Deoband, INDIA: Zakariyyā Book Depot, no date).
One of the most eminent muftis of his time, Shaykh Rashῑd Aḥmad Ludhyānwῑ (d. 1422/2002), states in his nine-volume Fatāwā:
QUERY:
If in Ramaḍān the qārī (the ḥāfiẓ who recites) and the sāmiʿ (the ḥāfiẓ who stands behind the reciter and corrects him when he errs in his recitation) do not fix any remuneration for their khatm of the Holy Qur’ān and the people of the masjid serve (khidmah) them financially or give them clothing, will this be lawful?
FATWĀ:
To offer cash or clothing in the name of service (khidmah) is in itself remuneration. This is worse than fixing any remuneration, since in it there are two sins being committed: (1) the sin of accepting remuneration for reciting the Holy Qur’ān and (2) the ignorance in not knowing that it is remuneration.
Some people say, “The qārī and the sāmiʿ do what they do for the pleasure of Allāh and we also serve them for the pleasure of Allah; we do not intend remuneration.” In order to expose such people’s intentions the fuqahā’ (jurists) have mentioned the following test:
If the qārī and sāmiʿ are not given anything, will they be willing to come and serve this masjid again? The test for the people of the masjid is that if this qārī and sāmiʿ do not come the following year, will they be willing to ‘serve’ them again? Now test the people of today with this touchstone. If the qārī and the sāmiʿ are not given anything, they will not even turn their faces in the direction of this masjid in the future .
The state of the people of the masjid is that they will never feel pity for the qārī and the sāmiʿ who have not completed a khatm of the Holy Qurʾān in their masjid, no matter how needy or destitute they may be. This proves that both parties intend remuneration – not the pleasure of Allāh – and they are lying in their claims. Therefore, those who recite the Holy Qur’ān and those who listen to it in this manner are grave sinners and fussāq . The imāmah of such a qārī is makrūh taḥrīman (prohibitively disliked).
The ruling regarding the imāmah of a fāsiq in the farḍ (obligatory) prayers is that if a ṣāliḥ (righteous) imām is not found or it is not within one’s power to remove the fāsiq imam, prayers may be performed behind him, but the jamāʿah must in no circumstance be missed.
However, the ruling regarding the tarāwīḥ prayers is that they must in no circumstance be offered behind an imām who is a fāsiq. If a ṣāliḥ imām is not found, the prayers should be performed with short sūrats. If such a ḥāfiẓ leads the tarāwīḥ prayers in the local masjid, one should perform the farḍ prayers there with the jamāʿah and leave the masjid to perform the tarāwīḥ in his home.
Even if we imagine that the aim of a ḥāfiẓ is not remuneration, he will, nevertheless, hope and look forward to being given something due to the common practice nowadays. On not receiving anything, he will be regretful and unhappy. This is known as ishrāf al-nafs (greed of the ego), which is ḥarām.
Even if a qārī is imagined to be pure from such ishrāf al-nafs, this transaction should be avoided, as it resembles and supports a general ḥarām practice and it is against religious modesty. Therefore, it is wājib (compulsory) to fully avoid this at all costs.
23rd Shawwāl 1386 AH.
Shaykh Rashīd Aḥmad Ludhyānwī مد ظله
Aḥsan al-Fatāwā, 3:514
(Deoband, INDIA: Zakariyyā Book Depot).
Compiled and translated by:
Badrul Islam
Student at the Dār al-ʿUlūm Muʿῑn al-Islām, Hat’hazari, Chittagong
15th Ramaḍān 1420 AH/24th December 1999 CE.
Appendix
Reproduced below is the full discussion on remuneration for acts of worship (ʿibādāt/ṭāʿāt) from the authoritative Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā ’l-Durr al-Mukhtār Sharḥ Tanwῑr al-Abṣār (also known as Ḥāshiyat Ibn ʿĀbidῑn) of the great Ḥanafῑ jurist of Damascus, Imām Muḥammad Amῑn ‘ibn ʿĀbidῑn’ (d. 1252/1836). It is being reproduced for the benefit of scholars. Those scholars who wish to gain a deeper juristic insight into the issue may refer to his separate work, Shifāʾ al-ʿAlῑl wa Ball al-Ghalῑl fi Ḥukm al-Waṣiyyat bi ’l-Khatamāt wa ’l-Tahālῑl, which, in his own words, is a “wonder of wonders”. He says he presented this work to his contemporary, another great Ḥanafῑ jurist, Imām Sayyid Aḥmad Ṭaḥṭāwῑ (d. 1231/1816), the grand mufti of Egypt, who praised the work and wrote a preface to it.
مَطْلَبٌ: فِي الِاسْتِئْجَار عَلَى الطَّاعَات
قَوْلُهُ (وَلَا لِأَجْلِ الطَّاعَاتِ) الْأَصْلُ أَنَّ كُلَّ طَاعَةٍ يَخْتَصُّ بِهَا الْمُسْلِمُ لَا يَجُوزُ الِاسْتِئْجَارُ عَلَيْهَا عِنْدَنَا لِقَوْلِهِ ﷺ «اقْرَءُوا الْقُرْآنَ وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا بِهِ» وَفِي آخِرِ مَا عَهِدَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ إلَى عَمْرِو بْنِ الْعَاصِ «وَإِنْ اُتُّخِذْتَ مُؤَذِّنًا فَلَا تَأْخُذْ عَلَى الْأَذَانِ أَجْرًا» وَلِأَنَّ الْقُرْبَةَ مَتَى حَصَلَتْ وَقَعَتْ عَلَى الْعَامِلِ وَلِهَذَا تَتَعَيَّنُ أَهْلِيَّتُهُ، فَلَا يَجُوزُ لَهُ أَخْذُ الْأُجْرَةِ مِنْ غَيْرِهِ كَمَا فِي الصَّوْمِ وَالصَّلَاة.ِ هِدَايَةٌ.
مَطْلَبٌ: تَحْرِيرٌ مُهِمٌّ فِي عَدَمِ جَوَازِ الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى التِّلَاوَةِ وَالتَّهْلِيلِ وَنَحْوِهِ مِمَّا لَا ضَرُورَةَ إلَيْهِ
قَوْلُهُ (وَيُفْتَى الْيَوْمَ بِصِحَّتِهَا لِتَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ إلَخْ) قَالَ فِي الْهِدَايَةِ: وَبَعْضُ مَشَايِخِنَا اسْتَحْسَنُوا الِاسْتِئْجَارَ عَلَى تَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ الْيَوْمَ لِظُهُورِ التَّوَانِي فِي الْأُمُورِ الدِّينِيَّةِ، فَفِي الِامْتِنَاعِ تَضْيِيعُ حِفْظِ الْقُرْآنِ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى اهـ، وَقَدْ اقْتَصَرَ عَلَى اسْتِثْنَاءِ تَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ أَيْضًا فِي مَتْنِ الْكَنْزِ وَمَتْنِ مَوَاهِبِ الرَّحْمَنِ وَكَثِيرٍ مِنْ الْكُتُبِ، وَزَادَ فِي مُخْتَصَرِ الْوُقَايَةِ وَمَتْنِ الْإِصْلَاحِ تَعْلِيمَ الْفِقْهِ، وَزَادَ فِي مَتْنِ الْمَجْمَعِ الْإِمَامَةَ، وَمِثْلُهُ فِي مَتْنِ الْمُلْتَقَى وَدُرَرِ الْبِحَار، وَزَادَ بَعْضُهُمْ الْأَذَانَ وَالْإِقَامَةَ وَالْوَعْظَ، وَذَكَرَ الْمُصَنِّفُ مُعْظَمَهَا، وَلَكِنَّ الَّذِي فِي أَكْثَرِ الْكُتُبِ الِاقْتِصَارُ عَلَى مَا فِي الْهِدَايَةِ، فَهَذَا مَجْمُوعُ مَا أَفْتَى بِهِ الْمُتَأَخِّرُونَ مِنْ مَشَايِخِنَا وَهُمْ الْبَلْخِيُّونَ عَلَى خِلَافٍ فِي بَعْضِهِ مُخَالِفِينَ مَا ذَهَبَ إلَيْهِ الْإِمَامُ وَصَاحِبَاهُ، وَقَدْ اتَّفَقَتْ كَلِمَتُهُمْ جَمِيعًا فِي الشُّرُوحِ وَالْفَتَاوَى عَلَى التَّعْلِيلِ بِالضَّرُورَةِ وَهِيَ خَشْيَةُ ضَيَاعِ الْقُرْآنِ كَمَا فِي الْهِدَايَةِ، وَقَدْ نَقَلْتُ لَكَ مَا فِي مَشَاهِيرِ مُتُونِ الْمَذْهَبِ الْمَوْضُوعَةِ لِلْفَتْوَى فَلَا حَاجَةَ إلَى نَقْلِ مَا فِي الشُّرُوحِ وَالْفَتَاوَى، وَقَدْ اتَّفَقَتْ كَلِمَتُهُمْ جَمِيعًا عَلَى التَّصْرِيحِ بِأَصْلِ الْمَذْهَبِ مِنْ عَدَمِ الْجَوَازِ، ثُمَّ اسْتَثْنَوْا بَعْدَهُ مَا عَلِمْتَهُ، فَهَذَا دَلِيلٌ قَاطِعٌ وَبُرْهَانٌ سَاطِعٌ عَلَى أَنَّ الْمُفْتَى بِهِ لَيْسَ هُوَ جَوَازُ الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى كُلِّ طَاعَةٍ بَلْ عَلَى مَا ذَكَرُوهُ فَقَطْ مِمَّا فِيهِ ضَرُورَةٌ ظَاهِرَةٌ تُبِيحُ الْخُرُوجَ عَنْ أَصْلِ الْمَذْهَبِ من طروّ الْمَنْعِ، فَإِنَّ مَفَاهِيمَ الْكُتُبِ حُجَّةٌ وَلَوْ مَفْهُومَ لَقَبٍ عَلَى مَا صَرَّحَ بِهِ الْأُصُولِيُّونَ بَلْ هُوَ مَنْطُوقٌ، فَإِنَّ الِاسْتِثْنَاءَ مِنْ أَدَوَاتِ الْعُمُومِ كَمَا صَرَّحُوا بِهِ أَيْضًا.
وَأَجْمَعُوا عَلَى أَنَّ الْحَجَّ عَنْ الْغَيْرِ بِطَرِيقِ النِّيَابَةِ لَا الِاسْتِئْجَارِ، وَلِهَذَا لَوْ فَضَلَ مَعَ النَّائِبِ شَيْءٌ مِنْ النَّفَقَةِ يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ رَدُّهُ لِلْأَصِيلِ أَوْ وَرَثَتِهِ، وَلَوْ كَانَ أُجْرَةً لَمَا وَجَبَ رَدُّهُ، فَظَهَرَ لَكَ بِهَذَا عَدَمُ صِحَّةِ مَا فِي الْجَوْهَرَةِ مِنْ قَوْلِهِ وَاخْتَلَفُوا فِي الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى قِرَاءَةِ الْقُرْآنِ مُدَّةً مَعْلُومَةً، قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ: لَا يَجُوزُ: وَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ: يَجُوزُ وَهُوَ الْمُخْتَارُ اهـ وَالصَّوَابُ أَنْ يُقَالَ عَلَى تَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ، فَإِنَّ الْخِلَافَ فِيهِ كَمَا عَلِمْتَ لَا فِي الْقِرَاءَةِ الْمُجَرَّدَةِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا ضَرُورَةَ فِيهَا، فَإِنْ كَانَ مَا فِي الْجَوْهَرَةِ سَبْقَ قَلَمٍ فَلَا كَلَامَ، وَإِنْ كَانَ عَنْ عَمْدٍ فَهُوَ مُخَالِفٌ لِكَلَامِهِمْ قَاطِبَةً فَلَا يُقْبَلُ.
وَقَدْ أَطْنَبَ فِي رَدِّهِ صَاحِبُ تَبْيِينِ الْمَحَارِمِ مُسْتَنِدًا إلَى النُّقُولِ الصَّرِيحَةِ، فَمِنْ جُمْلَةِ كَلَامِهِ قَالَ تَاجُ الشَّرِيعَةِ فِي شَرْحِ الْهِدَايَةِ: إنَّ الْقُرْآنَ بِالْأُجْرَةِ لَا يَسْتَحِقُّ الثَّوَابَ لَا لِلْمَيِّتِ وَلَا لِلْقَارِئِ. وَقَالَ الْعَيْنِيُّ فِي شَرْحِ الْهِدَايَةِ: وَيُمْنَعُ الْقَارِئُ لِلدُّنْيَا، وَالْآخِذُ وَالْمُعْطِي آثِمَانِ. فَالْحَاصِلُ أَنَّ مَا شَاعَ فِي زَمَانِنَا مِنْ قِرَاءَةِ الْأَجْزَاءِ بِالْأُجْرَةِ لَا يَجُوزُ؛ لِأَنَّ فِيهِ الْأَمْرَ بِالْقِرَاءَةِ وَإِعْطَاءَ الثَّوَابِ لِلْآمِرِ وَالْقِرَاءَةَ لِأَجْلِ الْمَالِ؛ فَإِذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ لِلْقَارِئِ ثَوَابٌ لِعَدَمِ النِّيَّةِ الصَّحِيحَةِ فَأَيْنَ يَصِلُ الثَّوَابُ إلَى الْمُسْتَأْجِرِ وَلَوْلَا الْأُجْرَةُ مَا قَرَأَ أَحَدٌ لِأَحَدٍ فِي هَذَا الزَّمَانِ بَلْ جَعَلُوا الْقُرْآنَ الْعَظِيمَ مَكْسَبًا وَوَسِيلَةً إلَى جَمْعِ الدُّنْيَا - إنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّا إلَيْهِ رَاجِعُونَ - اهـ
وَقَدْ اغْتَرَّ بِمَا فِي الْجَوْهَرَةِ صَاحِبُ الْبَحْرِ فِي كِتَابِ الْوَقْفِ وَتَبِعَهُ الشَّارِحُ فِي كِتَابِ الْوَصَايَا حَيْثُ يُشْعِرُ كَلَامُهَا بِجَوَازِ الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى كُلِّ الطَّاعَاتِ وَمِنْهَا الْقِرَاءَةُ. وَقَدْ رَدَّهُ الشَّيْخُ خَيْرُ الدِّينِ الرَّمْلِيُّ فِي حَاشِيَةِ الْبَحْرِ فِي كِتَابِ الْوَقْفِ حَيْثُ قَالَ: أَقُولُ الْمُفْتَى بِهِ جَوَازُ الْأَخْذِ اسْتِحْسَانًا عَلَى تَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ لَا عَلَى الْقِرَاءَةِ الْمُجَرَّدَةِ كَمَا صَرَّحَ بِهِ فِي التتارخانية حَيْثُ قَالَ: لَا مَعْنَى لِهَذِهِ الْوَصِيَّةِ وَلِصِلَةِ الْقَارِئِ بِقِرَاءَتِهِ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا بِمَنْزِلَةِ الْأُجْرَةِ وَالْإِجَارَةُ فِي ذَلِكَ بَاطِلَةٌ وَهِيَ بِدْعَةٌ وَلَمْ يَفْعَلْهَا أَحَدٌ مِنْ الْخُلَفَاءِ، وَقَدْ ذَكَرْنَا مَسْأَلَةَ تَعْلِيمِ الْقُرْآنِ عَلَى اسْتِحْسَانٍ اهـ يَعْنِي الضَّرُورَةَ وَلَا ضَرُورَةَ فِي الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى الْقِرَاءَةِ عَلَى الْقَبْرِ.
وَفِي الزَّيْلَعِيِّ وَكَثِيرٍ مِنْ الْكُتُبِ: لَوْ لَمْ يُفْتَحْ لَهُمْ بَابُ التَّعْلِيمِ بِالْأَجْرِ لَذَهَبَ الْقُرْآنُ فَأَفْتَوْا بِجَوَازِهِ وَرَأَوْهُ حَسَنًا فَتَنَبَّهْ اهـ كَلَامُ الرَّمْلِيِّ.
وَمَا فِي التتارخانية فِيهِ رَدٌّ عَلَى مَنْ قَالَ: لَوْ أَوْصَى لِقَارِئٍ يَقْرَأُ عَلَى قَبْرِهِ بِكَذَا يَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَجُوزَ عَلَى وَجْهِ الصِّلَةِ دُونَ الْأَجْرِ، وَمِمَّنْ صَرَّحَ بِبُطْلَانِ هَذِهِ الْوَصِيَّةِ صَاحِبُ الْوَلْوَالِجيَّةِ وَالْمُحِيطِ وَالْبَزَّازِيَّةِ، وَفِيهِ رَدٌّ أَيْضًا عَلَى صَاحِبِ الْبَحْرِ حَيْثُ عَلَّلَ الْبُطْلَانَ بِأَنَّهُ مَبْنِيٌّ عَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِكَرَاهَةِ الْقُرْآنِ عَلَى الْقَبْرِ وَلَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ، بَلْ لِمَا فِيهِ مِنْ شِبْهِ الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى الْقِرَاءَةِ كَمَا عَلِمْتَ، وَصَرَّحَ بِهِ فِي الِاخْتِيَارِ وَغَيْرِهِ، وَلِذَا قَالَ فِي الْوَلْوَالِجيَّةِ مَا نَصُّهُ: وَلَوْ زَارَ قَبْرَ صَدِيقٍ أَوْ قَرِيبٍ لَهُ وَقَرَأَ عِنْدَهُ شَيْئًا مِنْ الْقُرْآنِ فَهُوَ حَسَنٌ، أَمَّا الْوَصِيَّةُ بِذَلِكَ فَلَا مَعْنَى لَهَا وَلَا مَعْنَى أَيْضًا لِصِلَةِ الْقَارِئِ؛ لِأَنَّ ذَلِكَ يُشْبِهُ اسْتِئْجَارَهُ عَلَى قِرَاءَةِ الْقُرْآنِ وَذَلِكَ بَاطِلٌ وَلَمْ يَفْعَلْ ذَلِكَ أَحَدٌ مِنْ الْخُلَفَاءِ اهـ إذْ لَوْ كَانَتْ الْعِلَّةُ مَا قَالَهُ لَمْ يَصِحَّ قَوْلُهُ هُنَا فَهُوَ حَسَنٌ، وَمِمَّنْ أَفْتَى بِبُطْلَانِ هَذِهِ الْوَصِيَّةِ الْخَيْرُ الرَّمْلِيُّ كَمَا هُوَ مَبْسُوطٌ فِي وَصَايَا فَتَاوَاهُ فَرَاجِعْهَا.
وَنَقَلَ الْعَلَّامَةُ الْخَلْوَتِيُّ فِي حَاشِيَةِ الْمُنْتَهَى الْحَنْبَلِيُّ عَنْ شَيْخِ الْإِسْلَامِ تَقِيِّ الدِّينِ مَا نَصُّهُ: وَلَا يَصِحُّ الِاسْتِئْجَارُ عَلَى الْقِرَاءَةِ وَإِهْدَائِهَا إلَى الْمَيِّتِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يُنْقَلْ عَنْ أَحَدٍ مِنْ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْإِذْنُ فِي ذَلِكَ. وَقَدْ قَالَ الْعُلَمَاءُ: إنَّ الْقَارِئَ إذَا قَرَأَ لِأَجْلِ الْمَالِ فَلَا ثَوَابَ لَهُ فَأَيُّ شَيْءٍ يُهْدِيهِ إلَى الْمَيِّتِ، وَإِنَّمَا يَصِلُ إلَى الْمَيِّتِ الْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحِ، وَالِاسْتِئْجَارُ عَلَى مُجَرَّدِ التِّلَاوَةِ لَمْ يَقُلْ بِهِ أَحَدٌ مِنْ الْأَئِمَّةِ، وَإِنَّمَا تَنَازَعُوا فِي الِاسْتِئْجَارِ عَلَى التَّعْلِيمِ اهـ بِحُرُوفِهِ، وَمِمَّنْ صَرَّحَ بِذَلِكَ أَيْضًا الْإِمَامُ الْبِرْكَوِيُّ قَدَّسَ سِرَّهُ فِي آخِرِ الطَّرِيقَةِ الْمُحَمَّدِيَّةِ فَقَالَ: الْفَصْلُ الثَّالِثُ فِي أُمُورٍ مُبْتَدَعَةٍ بَاطِلَةٍ أَكَبَّ النَّاسُ عَلَيْهَا عَلَى ظَنِّ أَنَّهَا قُرَبٌ مَقْصُودَةٌ إلَى أَنْ قَالَ: وَمِنْهَا الْوَصِيَّةُ مِنْ الْمَيِّتِ بِاِتِّخَاذِ الطَّعَامِ وَالضِّيَافَةِ يَوْمَ مَوْتِهِ أَوْ بَعْدَهُ وَبِإِعْطَاءِ دَرَاهِمَ لِمَنْ يَتْلُو الْقُرْآنَ لِرُوحِهِ أَوْ يُسَبِّحُ أَوْ يُهَلِّلُ لَهُ وَكُلُّهَا بِدَعٌ مُنْكَرَاتٌ بَاطِلَةٌ، وَالْمَأْخُوذُ مِنْهَا حَرَامٌ لِلْآخِذِ، وَهُوَ عَاصٍ بِالتِّلَاوَةِ وَالذِّكْرِ لِأَجْلِ الدُّنْيَا اهـ مُلَخَّصًا. وَذَكَرَ أَنَّ لَهُ فِيهَا أَرْبَعَ رَسَائِلَ.
فَإِذَا عَلِمْتَ ذَلِكَ ظَهَرَ لَكَ حَقِيقَةُ مَا قُلْنَاهُ وَأَنَّ خِلَافَهُ خَارِجٌ عَنْ الْمَذْهَبِ وَعَمَّا أَفْتَى بِهِ الْبَلْخِيُّونَ وَمَا أَطْبَقَ عَلَيْهِ أَئِمَّتُنَا مُتُونًا وَشُرُوحًا وَفَتَاوَى، وَلَا يُنْكِرُ ذَلِكَ إلَّا غَمْرٌ مُكَابِرٌ أَوْ جَاهِلٌ لَا يَفْهَمُ كَلَامَ الْأَكَابِرِ، وَمَا اسْتَدَلَّ بِهِ بَعْضُ الْمُحَشِّينَ عَلَى الْجَوَازِ بِحَدِيثِ الْبُخَارِيِّ فِي اللَّدِيغِ فَهُوَ خَطَأٌ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمُتَقَدِّمِينَ الْمَانِعِينَ الِاسْتِئْجَارَ مُطْلَقًا جَوَّزُوا الرُّقْيَةَ بِالْأُجْرَةِ وَلَوْ بِالْقُرْآنِ كَمَا ذَكَرَهُ الطَّحَاوِيُّ؛ لِأَنَّهَا لَيْسَتْ عِبَادَةً مَحْضَةً بَلْ مِنْ التَّدَاوِي. وَمَا نُقِلَ عَنْ بَعْضِ الْهَوَامِشِ وَعَزَى إلَى الْحَاوِي الزَّاهِدِي مِنْ أَنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ الِاسْتِئْجَارُ عَلَى الْخَتْمِ بِأَقَلَّ مِنْ خَمْسَةٍ وَأَرْبَعِينَ دِرْهَمًا فَخَارِجٌ عَمَّا اتَّفَقَ عَلَيْهِ أَهْلُ الْمَذْهَبِ قَاطِبَةً. وَحِينَئِذٍ فَقَدْ ظَهَرَ لَكَ بُطْلَانُ مَا أَكَبَّ عَلَيْهِ أَهْلُ الْعَصْرِ مِنْ الْوَصِيَّةِ بِالْخَتَمَاتِ وَالتَّهَالِيلِ مَعَ قَطْعِ النَّظَرِ عَمَّا يَحْصُلُ فِيهَا مِنْ الْمُنْكَرَاتِ الَّتِي لَا يُنْكِرُهَا إلَّا مَنْ طُمِسَتْ بَصِيرَتُهُ، وَقَدْ جَمَعْتُ فِيهَا رِسَالَةً سَمَّيْتُهَا شِفَاءُ الْعَلِيلِ وَبَلُّ الْغَلِيلِ فِي حُكْمِ الْوَصِيَّةِ بِالْخَتْمَاتِ وَالتَّهَالِيلِ وَأَتَيْتُ فِيهَا بِالْعَجَبِ الْعُجَابِ لِذَوِي الْأَلْبَابِ، وَمَا ذَكَرْتُهُ هُنَا بِالنِّسْبَةِ إلَيْهَا كَقَطْرَةٍ مِنْ بَحْرٍ أَوْ شَذْرَةٍ مِنْ عقد نَحْرٍ، وَأَطْلَعْتُ عَلَيْهَا مُحَشِّيَ هَذَا الْكِتَابِ فَقِيهَ عَصْرِهِ وَوَحِيدَ دَهْرِهِ السَّيِّدَ أَحْمَدَ الطَّحطاوِيَّ مُفْتِيَ مِصْر سَابِقًا فَكَتَبَ عَلَيْهَا وَأَثْنَى الثَّنَاءَ الْجَمِيلَ، فَالله يَجْزِيهِ الْخَيْرَ الْجَزِيلَ، وَكَتَبَ عَلَيْهَا غَيْرُهُ مِنْ فُقَهَاءِ الْعَصْرِ.
«رد المحتار على الدر المختار شرح تنوير الأبصار»
للإمام العلامة محمد أمين الشهير بابن عابدين – 5\534 من طبعة بولاق بمصر و6\55 من طبعة الحلبي بمصر وطبعة الحاج محمد سعيد بباكستان و9\76 من طبعة دار الكتب العلمية ببيروت وطبعة دار عالم الكتب بالرياض.