In my previous article, I’ve presented you a plethora of evidence proving that the Rafidi-Sufi ‘proof’ for the claim that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (may Allah have mercy upon him) permitted touching and kissing of the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave for the sake of seeking tabarruk (blessings) is nothing but a spoof that opposes the entire Hanbali school and the more authentic reports by Imam Ahmad regarding this issue.

In this article, I shall provide you with statements of major fuqahah of all four Sunni schools of thought, including non-Atharis, and even enemies of the likes of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy upon him), regarding the issue of tabarruk (seeking blessings) from the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave.

All scholars cited in this article are upon the straight and correct view that kissing and touching graves (which includes the Prophet’s ﷺ grave )  is a hideous and impermissible act in Islam; an act that shows poor manners, opposes the ijma’ (consensus) of the Sahabah and is from the tradition of the Jews and Christians.

Note: The practice of tabarruk (seeking blessings) from the Prophets and Messengers has never been declared as shirk by Athari authorities, including the Najdis. Whoever states otherwise is an ignoramus who peddles Rafidi-Sufi propaganda in order to scare people from the Da'wah of Tawhid. Such false claims and slander are similar to the claim that 'Wahhabis' regard the mere visitation of graves as shirk (polytheism), whereas in truth, heretical and polytheistic rituals at the graves are what are condemned by Sunni scholars, not the visitation itself (where it is Sunnah to pray for and not to the deceased, prophets, saints and ordinary Muslims alike).

Needless to mention that not a single Sahabi ever, sought tabarruk by wiping over or kissing the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ). Whatever has been reported regarding this issue has been debunked, yet the Qubooris from amongst the Rawafid, extremists Sufis and those who rehash their khurafat keep spreading these inauthentic reports.

بيننا وبينكم فهم الصحابة

“Between us and you is the understanding of the Sahabah.”

Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy upon him) said:

قال شيخُ الإسلامِ ابنُ تَيميَّة (ت: 728هـ): (لا يُسَنُّ باتِّفاقِ الأئمَّة: أن يُقَبِّلَ الرَّجُلُ أو يستَلِمَ رُكنَيِ البيت -اللَّذين يَليانِ الحِجْرَ- ولا جُدرانَ البيتِ، ولا مَقامَ إبراهيم، ولا صخرةَ بيت المَقدِس، ولا قَبْرَ أحدٍ مِن الأنبياء والصالحين) -((مجموع الفتاوى)) (27/79).

“And it is not legislated according to the agreement of Imams that one should kiss or do al-Istilam (either Kissing, touching, or pointing towards an object, just like done for the black stone) the two corners of the House (i.e. the Ka’bah) that are next to the Hijr, or the walls of the house (i.e. the Ka’bah), or Maqam Ibrahim, nor the rock at Bayt al-Maqdis nor the grave of any Prophet or saint.” [Majmoo’ al-Fatawa by Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah]

Ibn Taymiyyah is not from the Salaf, this is correct, but his understanding (فهم) is that of the Sahabah:

This is how strict the Sahabah were when it came to matters of worship i.e. religious rituals.

However, Abu al-‘Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy upon him) is viewed by some as ‘the incarnation of evil’, ‘the spiritual forefather of the Wahhabis’ and ‘Daesh’. Others like to point out that he held many odd views. Others go as far as to accuse him of kufr.

So let’s ignore Ibn Taymiyyah and refer to the scholars of the four schools and let’s see if Ibn Taymiyyah and the likes of Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab (may Allah have mercy upon him) and the Najdi da’wah are alone in their stance against grave kissing/licking/rubbing, etc.

The Shawafi’ (الشوافع) and the prohibition of touching and kissing graves

 لا يجوز أن يطاف بقبره صلى الله عليه وسلم، ويكره إلصاق الظهر والبطن بجدار القبر، قاله أبوعبيد الله الحليمي وغيره، قالوا: ويكره مسحه باليد وتقبيله، بل الأدب أن يبعد منه كما يبعد منه لو حضره في حياته صلى الله عليه وسلم. هذا هو الصواب الذي قاله العلماء وأطبقوا عليه، ولا يغتر بمخالفة كثيرين من العوام وفعلهم ذلك، فإن الاقتداء والعمل إنما يكون بالأحاديث الصحيحة وأقوال العلماء، ولا يلتفت إلى محدثات العوام وغيرهم وجهالاتهم. وقد ثبت في الصحيحين عن عائشة رضي الله عنها أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: { من أحدث في ديننا ما ليس منه فهو رد } وفي رواية لمسلم { من عمل عملا ليس عليه أمرنا فهو رد } وعن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم { لا تجعلوا قبري عيدا وصلوا علي، فإن صلاتكم تبلغني حيثما كنتم } رواه أبو داود بإسناد صحيح. وقال الفضيل بن عياض رحمه الله ما معناه: اتبع طرق الهدى ولا يضرك قلة السالكين، وإياك وطرق الضلالة، ولا تغتر بكثرة الهالكين. ومن خطر بباله أن المسح باليد ونحوه أبلغ في البركة، فهو من جهالته وغفلته، لأن البركة إنما هي فيما وافق الشرع، وكيف يبتغى الفضل في مخالفة الصواب؟!

 المجموع شرح المهذب 8/257

“It is not permissible to do tawaf around his (ﷺ) grave and it is hated (makrooh) to attach one’s back and front to the walls of the grave. This was said by Abu ‘Ubaydullah al-Halimi and others who said: “it is disliked to touch it (i.e. the grave) with the hand and to kiss it, rather, the etiquette is to keep (some) distance from it (i.e. the grave) just like one would do when visiting him (ﷺ) during his lifetime, and this is what is correct. This has been said by the scholars and they acted upon it and one should not be misled by many of the laymen and their actions, as emulation (al-Iqtida) and action must be based upon authentic ahadith and statements of the scholars. One should not pay attention to the innovations of laymen and others and their ignorance. It is proven in the two Sahihs (i.e. Bukhari and Muslim) on the authority of ‘Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “If anyone introduces in our matter something which does not belong to it, will be rejected.” And in the version narrated by Imam Muslim: “If anybody introduces a practice which is not authenticated by me, it is to be rejected.”

And it has been reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “… do not make my grave a place of festivity. But invoke blessings on me, for your blessings reach me wherever you may be.” (Abu Dawud with a sahih chain)

And Fudayl Ibn ‘Iyad (may Allah have mercy upon him) said: “Follow the path of guidance and do not worry about how few are the people who follow it. Beware of the paths of misguidance, and do not be deceived by the large numbers of those who doomed.” (al-I’tisam by Imam al-Shatibi)

And the one whose mind tells him that touching it (i.e. the grave) with the hand and its likes is a more effective way of receiving blessings (al-barakah/tabarruk), then this is from his ignorance and heedlessness as blessings are only found in the practices that are in agreement with the religious law (al-Shar’).” [Al-Majmoo’ Sharh Muhadhdhab]

Note: Imam al-Nawawi's views on tawassul are known, he did not allow Istighathah, he only allowed tawassul where one prays to Allah alone through the Prophet (ﷺ) based on the hadith of the blind man (a disputed hadith and disputed type of tawassul, however, not a shirk type of tawassul).

As for Makrooh: It means opposite of liked or loved. It can be translated as 'hated/detested/disliked'. 

In the terminology of Shari’ah it means that which the Lawgiver asks us not to do, but not in a definitive manner. It may be said that it means that for which the person who does not do it out of obedience will be rewarded, but the one who does it will not be punished. 

When a Shafi`i faqih describes something as being disliked, he means that it is non-prohibitively disliked (makrooh tanzihan) and that performing the action does not entail any sin. However, some Shafi`is have described certain actions as being prohibitively disliked (makrooh tahriman).

In the Hanafi school, when the word makrooh or karahah (مكروة / كراهة) is mentioned unrestrictedly (mutlaqan), it usually refers to makrooh tahrimi/kiraha tahrimiyyah (prohibitively disliked). This is a general principle for which there are exceptions.

This is based on the Qur'an itself where Allah describes all forms of evil and muharramat (including shirk!)as makrooh:

 كُلُّ ذَلِكَ كَانَ سَيِّئُهُ عِنْدَ رَبِّكَ مَكْرُوهًا {الإسراء: 38 }

{The wickedness of each of that is hateful to your Lord} - al-Isra`, verse 38

Imam Abu Yusuf said: "I said to Iaam Abu Hanifah: When you say about something: ‘It is makrooh to me’, then what do you mean thereby?’ He (Imam Abu Hanifah) said: “Tahreem” (i.e. It is haram). (Ibn 'Abidin al-Shami, Vol.1, Page 225)

Many people treat the word makrooh lightly. They show scant regard for acts which are described as 'makrooh' in the Shariah. They have a very dangerous attitude of trivialising the abhorrent, evil and sinful status of makrooh acts. They belittle ‘makrooh’ acts. This attitude according to the Shariah is termed ‘Istikhfaf’. Moreover, a mind-set of ‘Istikhfaf’ is an attitude of Kufr. It is dangerous for one’s Iman.

Let it be clear that since makrooh acts are practically haram (or at the very least hated/disliked), they will be condemned just as how technical haram acts are condemned. Technicalities are not meant to create confusion. One needs to understand the technical terms of Fiqh.

Notice the shiddah (harshness and sternness) that Imam al-Nawawi relays (may Allah make his grave spacious and full of light and forgive all his sins) and his zeal and love for the Sunnah, and his antipathy for bid’ah and the many ahadith he quotes in condemnation of practices such as seeking tabarruk by touching or kissing the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ). Also, notice how excessive grave veneration practices at the grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) were not uncommon during his lifetime. The likes of Imam Nawawi condemned those who touch (let alone kiss) the grave of the Messenger of Allah as juhhal (ignoramuses) yet we have many pseudo-Sunnis, some even masquerading as Atharis, who wish to wipe over and kiss the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ), stepping in the footsteps of the Jews and Christians who do exactly that with their saints!

The Persian Sunni beacon of knowledge, Abu Hamid al-Toosi al-Ghazali, certainly not an Athari, however, the Ummah has been benefitting from his works to this very day:

Islamqa.info states:

“No fair-minded person would deny the rare level of intelligence, ingenuity and cleverness that Abu Haamid al-Ghazzaali attained. Al-Dhahabi said of him: “Al-Ghazzaali, the imaam and shaykh, the prominent scholar, Hujjat al-Islam, the wonder of his time, Zayn al-Deem Abu Haamid Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Toosi al-Shaafa’i al-Ghazzaali, the author of many books and one possessed of utter intelligence. He studied fiqh in his own town, then he moved to Nisapur in the company of a group of students. He stayed with the Imaam al-Haramayn and gained a deep knowledge of fiqh within a short period. He became well-versed in ‘ilm al-kalaam and debate, until he became the best of debaters…” (Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’, part 9, p. 323)

وقال الإمام الغزاليُّ الشافعيُّ (ت: 505هـ): (ليس مِن السُّنةِ أنْ يَمسَّ الجدارَ، ولا أن يُقَبِّله، بل الوقوفُ مِن بُعد أقربُ للاحترامِ) ((إحياء علوم الدين)) (1/259).

“It is not from the Sunnah to touch the wall nor to kiss it (i.e. the Prophet’s grave), rather, it is more appropriate and more respectful to keep some distance (i.e. from the grave).” [Ihya ‘Uloom al-Din by Imam Ghazali]

“But Ghazali didn’t say it is haram.” Wait for it, he said something more severe than haram.

Al-Ghazali also said:

قال الغزاليُّ الشافعيُّ (ت: 505هـ): (فإنَّ المسَّ والتقبيلَ للمَشاهِدِ: عادةُ اليهود والنَّصارى) – ((إحياء علوم الدين)) (1/271)

“Indeed, kissing and touching shrines is from the habits of the Jews and Christians.” [Ihya ‘Uloom al-Din by Imam Ghazali]

He also said:

وقال الغزالي: « ولا يمس قبراً ولا حجراً فإن ذلك من عادة النصارى »

“One must not touch any grave or stone (i.e. stone markers), for indeed, this is from the habits of the Jews and Christians.” [Ihya ‘Uloom al-Din by Imam Ghazali]

Abu Shamah al-Maqdisi al-Shafi’i, (665H) elaborates on the bid’ah that the laypeople do at the Prophet’s (ﷺ) mosque. He says that al-Halimi said:

ونَقل الفقيه أبو شامة المقدسيُّ الشافعيُّ (ت: 665هـ) عن بدع العامَّة في المسجد النبوي عن الحليمي: (عَن بعض أهل الْعلم أَنه نهى عَن الصاق الْبَطن وَالظّهْر بجدار الْقَبْر ومسحه بِالْيَدِ وَذكر أَن ذَلِك من الْبدع) – (الباعث على إنكار البدع والحوادث)) (95)

“It is reported from a group of people of knowledge that they prohibited the practice of attaching oneself unto the walls of the grave with one’s stomach and back and also wiping over it (i.e. the grave) with the hands. He mentioned that all of this is from the heretical innovations (bid’ah).” [al-Bahith ‘ala inkar al-Bida’ wa al-Hawadith]

Taqiyyu al-Din al-Subki al-Shafi’i (756H), a Sufi Ash’ari and a fierce enemy of Shaykh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah, said:

وقال تقيُّ الدِّين السبكيُّ الشافعيُّ (ت: 756هـ): (… وإنَّما التمسُّحُ بالقبر وتقبيله، والسجودُ عليه، ونحو ذلك: فإنَّما يَفْعَلُه بَعضُ الجهال، ومَن فعَل ذلك يُنكَر عليه فِعلُه ذلك، ويُعَلَّم آدابَ الزِّيارة…) -(شفاء السقام في زيارة خير الأنام)) (ص: 312)

“Wiping over the grave (i.e. of the Prophet ﷺ), kissing it, prostrating on it and similar actions, are indeed only done by some of the ignoramuses (juhhal). Whoever does something like that should be rebuked and proper etiquettes of grave visitations should be taught to him.” [Shifa al-Saqam fi Ziyarah khayr al-Anam by al-Subki]

There you go, a Sufi authority describing those who indulge in such practices as ignoramuses. So even if one wants to argue that it is not literally haram, it goes against adab (mannerism), so why would a Muslim (let alone an ‘Athari’) indulge in such practices?

Imam Suyooti (911H):

وقال السيوطيُّ الشافعيُّ (ت: 911هـ): (ومِن البِدع أيضًا: … طوافُهم بالقبرِ الشريف، ولا يحلُّ ذلك، وكذلك إلصاقُهم بُطونَهم وظُهورَهم بجدارِ القَبر، وتقبيلُهم إيَّاه بالصُّندوق الذي عند رأسِ النبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ، ومسْحُه باليد؛ وكل ذلك مَنهيٌّ عنه) -(الأمر بالاتباع والنهي عن الابتداع)) (ص185)

“And amongst the heretical innovations (bid’ah) are also: their tawaf around the noble grave, which is not permissible. And likewise, how they attach their chests and their backs unto the walls of the grave and how they kiss it at the box that is at the level of the head of the Prophet (ﷺ). And how they touch it (i.e. the grave) with their hands. All of this has been prohibited.” [al-Amr bi al-Ittiba’ wa al-Nahi ‘an al-Ibtida’]

The Malikiyyah (المالكية)and the prohibition of touching and kissing of graves

Imam Malik ibn Anas (may Allah have mercy upon them)

قال الشيخ خليل المالكيُّ (ت: 776هـ): (روى ابنُ وهبٍ في المختصَرِ قال: سُئِلَ مالكٌ: من أين يقِفُ من أراد التَّسليمَ؟ فقال: مِن عندِ الزاويةِ التي تلي القِبلةَ مِمَّا يلي المِنبرَ، ويَستقبِلُ القبلةَ، ولا أحِبُّ أن يمسَّ القبرَ بيَدِه)(التوضيح في شرح مختصر ابن الحاجب)) (2/ 101).

Shaykh Khalil al-Maliki said: “Ibn Wahb narrates in al-Mukhtasar: Malik was asked: Where should the one who intends greeting the Prophet (ﷺ) (at his grave) stand? Imam Malik replied: “From the corner close to the Qiblah and to the pulpit, and he faces the Qiblah, and I do not like it if the grave is touched with the hands.” [al-Tawdih fi Sharh Mukhtasar Ibn al-Hajib]

Note: Makrooh/karahiyyah/I do not like this, etc., majority of time in the speech of the Salaf refers to tahreem (something being haram) as statede by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah in his Majmoo' al-Fatawa (32/241)

From the same source:

Khalil ibn Ishaq al-Jundi al-Misri, also known as Sidi Khalil al-Maliki said:

وقال الشيخ خليل المالكيُّ (ت: 776هـ): (ولْيَحذرْ ممَّا يفعلُه بعضُهم من طوافِه بقبره -عليه الصَّلاة والسَّلام- وكذلك أيضًا: تمسُّحهم بالبِناء، ويُلقون عليه مناديلَهم وثيابهم، وذلك كلُّه من البِدَع؛ لأنَّ التبركَ إنما يكون بالاتِّباع له -عليه الصلاة والسلام- وما كانتْ عِبادةُ الجاهلية الأصنامَ إلا مِن هذا الباب) (التوضيح في شرح مختصر ابن الحاجب)) (2/ 101))

“Beware of what some of them do like tawaf around his (ﷺ) grave, and likewise how they wipe (i.e. their hands) over the construction [of the grave], and throw their cloths and garments on it; all of this is from the evil heresies (bid’ah) and this is because tabarruk is only sought by what is established in the Sunnah (al-Ittiba’). And idol worship in the Jahiliyyah did not occur except via this gateway (i.e. the veneration of graves).” [al-Tawdih fi Sharh Mukhtasar Ibn al-Hajib]

Comment: Here you have a Maliki faqih comparing the veneration of the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave with the evil actions of the pagan polytheists of the Jahiliyyah! He basically said that it is a gateway to shirk (and Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab made similar statements).

No doubt, if you remove the name of the scholars above and present the above statements, you will most certainly be accused of peddling ‘Vahabi-Najdiyaa’ propaganda, yet those are classical scholars who were born centuries before the rise of the Najdi Daw’ah.

Abu Bakr al-Turtooshi al-Andalusi al-Maliki (520H):

قال الأصوليُّ أبو بكر الطُّرْطُوشيُّ المالكيُّ (ت: 520هـ): (ولا يَتمسَّح بقبرِ النبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ، ولا يَمْسَح كذلك المِنبرَ) (الحوادث والبدع)) (ص: 156)

“One must not wipe wipe over the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) and likewise one must not wipe over the pulpit (of the Prophet).” [al-Hawadith wa al-Bida’]

Note: Although some Sahabah touched the actual pulpit of the Prophet (ﷺ) for the sake of tabarruk, yet as Ibn Taymiyyah explained, the pulpit burned down and this is why the scholars deem it impermissible to seek tabarruk with replacements that were never touched by the Prophet (ﷺ). This is true fiqahah, understanding of the Din.

Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad al-‘Abdari al-Fassi (737H), known as Ibn al-Hajj al-Maliki, the Sufi, said:

وقال الفقيه ابنُ الحاج المالكيُّ ت: 737هـ): فترَى مَن لا عِلمَ عنده يطوفُ بالقبرِ الشريفِ كما يطوفُ بالكعبةِ الحرامِ، ويتمسَّحُ به، ويُقَبِّله، ويُلقون عليه مَناديلَهم وثيابَهم؛ يَقصِدون به التبَرُّك، وذلك كلُّه من البِدعِ؛ لأنَّ التبركَ إنما يكون بالاتِّباعِ له عليه الصَّلاةُ والسَّلام، وما كان سَببُ عبادة الجاهلية للأصنام إلَّا مِن هذا الباب (المدخل)) (1/ 263).

“You will see those deprived of knowledge doing tawaf around the noble grave (i.e. of the Prophet) as they would do tawaf around the Ka’bah, and they would wipe over it and kiss it (i.e. the grave), and they would throw their cloths and garments on it, intending thereby tabarruk; all of this is from the heretical innovations (bid’ah) and this is because tabarruk is only sought by what is established in the Sunnah (al-Ittiba’), and the reason for the worship of idols in the Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance) was not but from this door.” [al-Madkhal]

The Hanabilah (الحنابلة) and the prohibition of touching and kissing of graves

The Arab-Persian scholar Abdul-Qadir al-Hanbali al-Jilani (561H):

قال عبد القادر الجيلانيُّ (ت: 561هـ): (وإذا زار قبرًا لا يَضَع يدَه عليه، ولا يُقَبِّله؛ فإنَّها عادةُ اليهود)- ((الغنية)) (1/ 91)

“When one visits a grave, one must not put his hand on it nor kiss it, as this is the habit of the Jews.” [al-Ghunyah by ‘Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani]

Imam ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali al-Maqdisi (may Allah have mercy upon him) said in ‘al-Mughni’:

قال ابنُ قدامةَ: ولا يُستحَبُّ التمسحُ بحائطِ قبرِ النبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ ولا تَقبيلُه، قال أحمد: ما أعرفُ هذا؛ قال الأثرمُ: رأيتُ أهلَ العِلمِ مِن أهل المدينةِ لا يَمسُّون قبرَ النبي صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلم يقومون من ناحية فيسلّمون » [المغني 3/559 الفروع 2/573 وفاء الوفا 4/1403].

“And it is not recommended to wipe over the wall of the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) or kiss it. Ahmad said: “I do not know of this (practice)”. Al-Athram (student of Imam Ahmad) said: “I have seen the people of knowledge (Ahl al-‘Ilm) of Madinah, none of them touched the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ). They depart and send salam upon the Prophet (ﷺ).” [al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali]

The Imam of the Hanabilah Shaykh ‘Ala al-Din al-Mardawi al-Sa’di al-Dimashqi (may Allah have mercy upon him) who passed way 885H said:

قال المَرداويُّ: (لا يُستحَبُّ تمسحُه بقبرِه -عليه أفضلُ الصَّلاةِ والسَّلام- على الصَّحيحِ من المذهبِ. قال في المستوعب: بل يُكرَهُ. قال الإمامُ أحمد: أهلُ العِلم كانوا لا يَمسُّونه) الإنصاف في معرفة الراجح من الخلاف)) (4/53)

“And it is not recommended to wipe over the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) according to the sahih (correct) position of the [Hanbali] school. He said in al-Mustaw’ib: Rather it is makrooh (disliked, hated). Imam Ahmad said: The people of knowledge would not touch it.” [al-Insaf fi ma’rifah al-Rajih min al-Khilaf]

Shaykh al-Buhooti al-Misri al-Hanbali (d. 1051H), also known as al-Khalwati said:

قال البُهوتيُّ الحنبليُّ (ت: 1051هـ): (لا يَمسَح قَبرَ النبي صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ، ولا حائطَه، ولا يُلصق به صَدْرَه، ولا يُقَبِّله)
بغية الناسك في أحكام المناسك, ص: 127

“One must not wipe over the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) nor over the walls, nor should one attach one’s chest unto it nor kiss it.” [Bughyah al-Nasik fi Ahkam al-Manasik by al-Buhooti al-Hanbali known as al-Khalwati]

Here an even harsher statements of al-Buhooti al-Khalwati al-Hanbali after he narrated the narration by al-Athram:

« واتفقوا على أنه لا يقبله ولا يتمسح به فإنه من الشرك» (كشاف القناع للبهوتي2/600).

“And it is agreed upon that one must not kiss it (i.e. the grave of the Prophet ﷺ) nor wipe over it, as this is from polytheism.” [Kashaf al-Qina’ by al-Buhooti al-Khalwati]

Comment: Would the woke anti-Najids dear to call al-Buhooti a ‘Vahabi-Najdi’?! Remember, the ‘anti-Najdis’ present straw man arguments, claiming that the Najdis/Muhammad ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhab declare those who perform tabarruk with the Prophet (ﷺ) or saints as mushriks.

Here is the statement of the ‘Wahabi’ leader himself:

قال شيخ الإسلام محمد بن عبد الوهاب رحمه الله: (ويُكرَهُ التمسُّح به، والصلاة عنده، وقصده لأجل الدُّعاءِ، فهذه من المنكراتِ، بل من شُعَبِ الشركِ) كتاب آداب المشي إلى الصلاة للإمام محمد بن عبد الوهاب رحمه الله ص242

“It is disliked to wipe over it (i.e. the grave), and to perform ritual prayers next to it, and to take it (as a central point) for supplications. These are from the evil matters (munkarat), rather they are from the branches of shirk.” [Kitab Adab al-Mashi ila al-Salah by Imam Muhammad b. Abdul-Wahhab, p. 242]

So what’s the crime of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab the Hanbali here when he merely repeated the stance of other Hanbali authorities such as Shaykh al-Buhooti al-Khalwati who died decades before Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was even born.

Note: the religiously bankrupt are known for their logical fallacies and therefore you will often encounter them objecting to the prohibition of touching and kissing graves with a shallow and superficial response and argument where they like to point out that even 'Wahhabis' see no issues in kissing the forehead, hand, etc. of a person out of respect. Why not graves then? Isn't that hypocrisy? The answer: No, it isn't. This objection is based on a false analogy i.e. qiyas ma’a al-Fariq (قياس مع الفارق) which is invalid. It is a logical fallacy to conflate the tradition of the Jews and Christians i.e. excessive grave veneration (which includes touching and kissing graves to seek blessings) which is the cause of polytheism with the everyday interactions between human beings.

The Ahnaf (الأحناف) and the prohibition of touching and kissing graves

Hanafi authorities have been as strict (if not more) as the scholars from other schools when it comes to the prohibition of touching and kissing graves. Of course, this prohibition includes the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave, or rather this applies especially to the grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) who even in the last moments of his life severely warned against the veneration of graves in any shape or form.

Ahmad al-Tahtawi al-Hanafi (1231H):

قال أحمد الطحطاويُّ الحنفيُّ (ت: 1231هـ): (ولا يَمسَّ القبرَ، ولا يُقَبِّله؛ فإنَّه مِن عادةِ أهل الكتاب، ولم يُعهَدِ الاستلامُ إلَّا للحَجَرِ الأسود، والركْنِ اليَماني خاصةً) -(حاشية الطحطاوي على مراقي الفلاح شرح نور الإيضاح)) (ص 620)

“One must not touch the grave (i.e. of the Prophet) nor kiss it, as this is indeed from the habits of the Ahl al-Kitab (i.e. Jews and Christians), and it is not legislated to do al-Istilam (either Kissing, touching, or pointing towards an object, just like done for the black stone) except for the black stone and the Yemeni corner particularly.” [Hashiyah al-Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah Sharh Noor al-Idah by al-Tahtawi]

Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Diya al-Makki al-Hanafi (854H) says:

قال أبو البقاء محمَّد الضياء المكيُّ الحنفيُّ (ت: 854هـ): (ليس مِن السُّنة أن يَمَسَّ الجدارَ أو يُقبِّلَه، بل الوقوفُ من البُعدِ أقرَبُ إلى الاحترامِ. ومن الآدابِ: ألَّا يَرفعَ صوتَه بالتسليم، ولا يَمسَّ القبرَ بيدِه، ولا يَقِفَ عندَ القبرِ طويلًا) – (البحر العميق في مناسك المعتمر والحاج إلى بيت الله العتيق)) (5/2900)

“It is not from the Sunnah to touch the walls or to kiss them, rather, it is more appropriate and more respectful to keep some distance (i.e. from the grave).” And from good manners is: Not raising one’s voice when sending salutations; not to touch the grave with the hand and not to stand for a long time next to the grave.” [al-Bahr al-‘Ameeq by Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Diya al-Makki ]

Qutb al-Din al-Nahrawali al-Hindi (Indian) al-Makki (from Makkah) al-Hanafi (990H), an Ottoman scholar and historian said:

وقال قطبُ الدِّين النهروالي الحنفيُّ (ت: 990هـ): (ليس مِن السُّنَّةِ أن يمسَّ الجدار أو يقبِّلَه) – (تاريخ المدينة)) (ص: 192).

“It is not from the Sunnah to touch the walls (i.e. of the grave of the Prophet ) or to kiss it.” [Tarikh al-Madinah by Qutb al-Din al-Nahrawali]

Comment: Again, if someone argues that it is ‘merely’ not Sunnah, then he has a very corrupt understanding of the Din. This is because touching and kissing the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) shows a lack of respect for him (ﷺ).

Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi (1014H) said:

وقال مُلا علي القاري الحَنفيُّ (ت: 1014هـ) في مناسكه: (قوله: “ولا يَمسّ عند الزِّيارة الجِدارَ”، أي: لأنَّه خِلافُ الأدبِ في مقام الوقار، وكذا لا يُقَبِّله؛ لأنَّ الاستلامَ والقُبلةَ من خَواصِّ بعض أركانِ الكعبةِ) – (مناسك ملا علي القاري)) (ص: 276)

“His statement: ‘One must not touch the walls (i.e. of the grave) during the visitation‘ i.e., this is because it shows bad manners (towards the Prophet ﷺ) and likewise one must not kiss it (i.e. the grave). Al-Istilam (either kissing, touching, or pointing towards an object, just like done for the black stone) and kissing are for specific arkan of the Ka’bah only.” [Manasik by ‘Ali al-Qari]

Imam Birgivi (27 March 1522 – 15 March 1573) was a Hanafi Maturidi scholar during the height of the Ottoman Empire and whose texts are used to this day as manuals of practice. His full name, in Arabic, is Taqi al-Din Muhammad ibn Pir ‘Ali al-Birkawi.

Al-Birgawai wasn’t even Athari, yet he had a better understanding of the dangers of grave veneration than some Athari claimants and actual Athari scholars. He was astonished at the mere thought that a sane Muslim would believe that the Sahabah would flock to the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) to seek blessings by touching it and praying to Allah next to it (imagine what he would say to the polytheists who flock to the graves and literally invoke the saints for their needs):

“As for the bid’ah types of grave visitations: this includes visiting the graves for the sake of praying salah next to them; to do tawaf around them; to kiss them; to perform al-Istilam (either Kissing, touching, or pointing towards an object, just like done for the black stone): to put one’s cheeks on them; to take from its soil; to ask the person in the grave to supplicate to Allah for one’s need; to beseech the saint directly for aid (al-Istighathah)…”[Ziyarah al-Quboor al-Shar’iyyah wa al-Shirkiyyah by Muhyi al-Din Muhammad al-Birkawi]

He also mentions that none of the Sahabah indulged in any form of worship and grave veneration next to the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave. Rather, they worshipped in the masjid and even when they greeted him (facing his grave) they turned to the Qiblah for du’a with their backs to his grave.

Note: Some modern-day studies state that the above work is wrongly attributed to Muhyi al-Din Muhammad al-Birkawi. Nonetheless, it was printed frequently and preserved in Turkey during Ottoman rule and attributed to him. Thus, it is a lie that Salafis have started to attribute it to al-Birkawi. Many such Ottoman manuscripts exist to this very day:


It is also argued that al-Birkawi's treatise was actually written by Ahmad al-R­umi al-Aqhisari (d. 1041/1632), a Hanafi Maturidi jurist, theologian, and Sufi. Their argument is based on the fact that three handwritten manuscripts by al-Aqhisari attributed al-Birkawi's treatise to him.


So whatever the case, the book goes back to Hanafi Maturidi authorities who fought Quboorism in the form of grave-kissing and touching.

Abdullah ibn al-Ghazi al-Hanafi transmitted in his book (Ifadah al-Anam) the fatawa (religious verdicts) of the highest authorities of the four schools in Makkah and Madinah. He says:

وأمَّا التوجُّهُ إلى حُجرة النبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ عند الدُّعاء؛ فالأولى منْعُه، كما هو معروفٌ من مُعتَبرات كتُبِ المذهب، ولأنَّ أفضلَ الجِهات جِهةُ القِبلة، وأمَّا الطوافُ بها والتمسُّحُ بها وتَقبيلُها، فهو ممنوعٌ مُطلقًا). توقيع: (إبراهيم بري مفتي الحنفية، ومحمد صادق العقبى مفتي المالكية، وزكي برزنجي مفتي الشافعية، وحميد بن الطيب مفتي الحنابلة، وأكثر من عشرة من علماء المدينة المنورة) – (إفادة الأنام)) (5/135)

“As for facing the chamber of the Prophet (ﷺ) when supplicating (du’a), then what is correct is to abstain from that as this is the well-known stance mentioned in the books of the school. This is because the best of all directions is the Qiblah. As for performing tawaf around the grave, wiping over it, and kissing it; this is absolutely forbidden (this was signed by Ibrahim Bari, the mufti of the Hanafis, Muhammad Sadiq al-‘Aqabi, the mufti of the Malikis, Zaki Barzanji, the Mufti of the Shafi’is, and Hamid ibn al-Tayyib, the Mufti of the Hanbalis, in addition to ten scholars of Madinah al-Munawwarah.” [Ifadah al-Anam by Abdullah ibn al-Ghazi al-Hanafi ]

The objections and excuses of the Qubooris debunked

Today you will only find Sufis and Rawafid (both their learned and laymen) and those who are in agreement with their extremism i.e. khurafat and ghuluw, indulging in such polytheistic-like practices. They will clutch onto everything to justify grave veneration (including in the form of touching and kissing graves). They will cite tons of scholars (mainly khalaf), weak and even fabricated narrations in support of their grave/tomb/shrine fetish, not understanding that taking graves of their saints as places of worship is the very origin of shirk.

Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali when speaking about the prohibition of taking graves as places of worship (yes, this matter is inherently intertwined with the veneration fo graves such as touching and kissing them) said:

« لأن فيه إفراطاً في تعظيم القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام ولأن الصلاة عند القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام بالسجود ولأن ابتداء عبادة الأصنام كان في تعظيم الأموات باتخاذ صورهم ومسحها والصلاة عندها » المغني 2/507-508 

“This is due to exaggeration that takes place in the veneration of graves that resembles the veneration of the idols. And this is because prayers (salah) next to graves resemble the veneration of idols and the prostration towards them. And this is because idol worship began with the veneration of the dead, the veneration of their images, wiping over them and salah next to them.” [al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi]

Shi’ism:

Sufism:

Objection: So you agree that the Sahabah practiced tabarruk with the Prophet (saws) and even with his relics? But your Wahabi mullas say it’s shirk and paganism, they make takfir, these Najdiyaa!!!

Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Athar have never claimed that tabarruk is shirk per see. However, there is no doubt that many of those who indulge in grave veneration already hold major shirki and major kufri beliefs that are much worse than the bid’ah of kissing and touching graves (for tabarruk purposes), but Ahl al-Sunnah do not make blanket takfir on those who venerate graves. There is also no doubt that tabarruk in the form of grave veneration has lead to much evil and even shirk. However, the tabarruk of the Sahabah is an undeniable fact that only an ignoramus rejects.

Islamqa.info says:

Tabarruk (seeking barakah or blessings) from the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was something that was done at the time of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), with things such as water left over from his wudoo’, his garment, his food and drink, his hair, and anything else from him.

As for seeking barakah from anything that had touched his body, such as wudoo’ water, sweat, hair and so on, this is something that was well-known and regarded as permissible by the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) and those who followed them in truth, because of the goodness and barakah that there is in that, and the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) approved of them doing that.

It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah (10/70):

The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is permissible to seek barakah from the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and the scholars of seerah (Prophet’s biography), shamaa’il (Prophet’s character) and hadith narrated many reports that speak of the noble Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) seeking barakah from various relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). End quote. Sharh Riyaadh as-Saaliheen (4/243)

However, the relics that the Rafidah and Sufi claims are all bogus:

There is no proof that any of the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) exist now. Anyone who claims that any such thing exists has no proof to that effect. Based on that, it is not permissible for anyone to claim to have in his keeping any of the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), unless he has definitive evidence, and how could he have that?

The great scholar and historian Ahmad Pasha Taymoor said:

There is no valid proof for the hairs that were kept by people after that. Something of that which was shared out among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) may have reached them, but it is difficult to know what is genuine and what is not. End quote.

Al-Athaar an-Nabawiyyah by Ahmad Pasha Taymoor (91)

The great scholar and muhaddith Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

However we should point out that we believe that it is permissible to seek barakah from the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and we do not object that, contrary to what our opponents say about us.

… it is stipulated that the one who wants to seek barakah should have in his possession one of the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and use it.

But we know that his relics (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), such as his garment, hair and so on, have been lost, and it is not possible for anyone to prove that any such thing exists on a definitive and certain basis. As that is the case, seeking barakah from these relics has become irrelevant in our times and it has become a purely theoretical matter, so we should not speak at length about it.

End quote from at-Tawassul: Anwaa‘uhu wa Ahkaamuhu (144)

You can find many such statements by classical and modern-day Athari-Salafi scholars; all condoning tabarruk with the Prophet (ﷺ). What many laypeople, including the learned from Ahl al-Bid’ah, seem not to understand is that false and bid’i tabarruk (which is not shirk) in combination with actual shirk (like praying to the saints, which is not tawassul) is what is rebuked and branded as shirk. Tabarruk with graves is a means to shirk and this has been stated by scholars before the dawn of the Najdi da’wah.

Another important point that is often overlooked is that the Prophet (ﷺ) gently advised his companions to seek other ways of tabarruk i.e. not through him. Imagine the Prophet (ﷺ) being amongst us today seeing what the Rafidah and Sufis have attributed to Islam in the name of his Ahl al-Bayt and the Awliya.

Islamqa.info:

Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Although the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) approved of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) seeking barakah from his relics and touching them during the campaign of al-Hudaybiyah and on other occasions, that was for an important purpose, especially on that occasion; that purpose was to scare the kuffaar of Quraysh and to highlight the extent of the Muslims’ devotion to their Prophet and their love for him, and their willingness to strive hard in serving him and showing him respect. But what we cannot overlook or conceal is the fact that after that campaign, the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) discouraged the Muslims, in a wise and gentle manner, from seeking barakah in this way, and he instructed them to do righteous deeds, which would be better for them before Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and more beneficial. This is what is indicated by the following hadith:

It was narrated from ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ibn Abi Qarraad (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did wudoo’ one day, and his Companions began wiping themselves with his wudoo’ water. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said to them: “What made you do that?’ They said: Love for Allah and His Messenger. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever wants to love Allah and His Messenger, or wants Allah and His Messenger to love him, let him be truthful when he speaks, and let him fulfil his trust when he is trusted, and let him be kind to his neighbour.” This is a proven hadith with several chains of narration and corroborating evidence in the Mu‘jams of at-Tabaraani and elsewhere. End quote.

At-Tawassul (p. 145)

Yes, some Sahabah did continue to seek tabarruk with his relics, even after his (ﷺ) demise:

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:

What is the ruling on seeking barakah from the relics of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) after his death, such as his hair and the like?

He replied:

The answer to that is that it is not possible to prove that this is a hair of the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) at all. What is said about it being in Egypt in a place where relics were collected is not sound, and it does not exist.

It is not known that the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) paid attention to this matter, apart from what is reported from Umm Salamah (may Allah be pleased with her), that she had some of the hairs of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in a vessel of silver, and if anyone fell sick he would come to her and she would pour water on it and collect the water, then he would drink it.

Based on that, it is not possible to prove that this is actually the hair of the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). The most important “relics” are the texts and reports Islam (as opposed to physical relics). As for the physical relics, they are mere relics to which the heart may incline and love them, but what really matters is the teachings of Islam that he left behind. End quote.

Duroos li’sh-Shaykh al-‘Uthaymeen (2/64)

However, this is the most one can argue for i.e. that some of the Sahabah saw it permissible to seek tabarruk with his relics. This excludes his grave and tabarruk with other righteous and pious individuals.

Objection: So you agree that the Sahabah practiced tabarruk with the Prophet (ﷺ) and even with his relics? So what’s the problem if we extend it to the saints and their relics? Many scholars allowed that therefore making it a legit difference of opinion, ya Vahabiyaa Najdiyaa!!!

Response:

Tabarruk with other than the Prophet (ﷺ) opposes the consensus of the Sahabah

First of all, it is not a valid difference of opinion, one can find all sorts of opinions from a plethora of scholars, this doesn’t make those views legitimate, especially not if those views oppose the consensus of the Sahabah and have lead to much evil.

Yes, you will find the likes of Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy upon him) and other than him endorsing obscure grave veneration (NOT worship) rituals, including the kissing and touching of graves. However, this does not make the practice right nor does it make it a valid difference of opinion nor does it render the likes of Dhahabi as Quboori mushriks.

Note: Qubooriyyah/Qubooriyyoon or Qubooris (القبورية/القبوريون) is a technical and descriptive term used by many scholars (especially in Yemen, like by the Ex-Shia Imam Shawkani) for those who venerate graves and those who worship the buried saints. It steems from the word grave (قبر) and is the plural of قبوري (a grave venerator). It is sometimes translated as grave worship, but this is incorrect as grave worship is called عبادة القبور in Arabic.

Yes, one can use Quboori for a mushrik, but not every person with Quboori tendencies is a mushrik, just like not every Muslim with traits of Tashayyu' is a full-blown Rafidi, or a Muslim with traits of Irja` is a full-blown Murji`i, etc.

It is a sign of heresy and zandaqah to justify one’s bid’ah by fishing in murky waters only to find either weak and/or fabricated reports in support of tabarruk with saints/pirs, especially if one claims to be a Sunni-Athari (someone who follows the clear-cut Athar, not the far-fetched ta`wilat of the likes of Qurtubi, Dhahabi, etc. in support of tabarruk with saints).

No matter how long the list of the scholars (consisting of mainly khalaf) in support of tabarruk with saints/grave veneration is; citing them as evidence is flawed reasoning, an appeal to popularity (Argumentum ad populum) which is a logical fallacy and in opposition to the very principles of Islam which are based on the following statement:

The emotional blackmailing of the Ahl al-Bid’ah appeals to the emotions of the gullible and less learned. They will cite who held opinions in favour of grave veneration such as wiping over graves, kissing them, etc. They will appeal to the number of scholars as if a high number cancels out a wrong view that opposes the consensus of the Sahabah! Then they will try to corner you to either accept grave Yahoodi-Rafidi-esque kissing/licking/touching as a legitimate difference of opinion or be ‘brave enough’ to declare great scholars of Islam as mushrik Qubooris or innovators.

The truth is, they have nothing against Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Athar. The scholars who held such deviant views have passed away and we remember them in good and we have no doubt that their good deeds and beneficial knowledge outweigh all their mistakes. Many of them relied on weak and other inauthentic reports, this has happened to the greatest scholars.

Furthermore, as already explained, we have even Salaf who fell into creedal mistakes (yes, that includes bid’ah), yet they were transmitters of the Sunnah (we have Shi’i, Murji`i, Khariji, etc. narrators in the Sahihayn and Sunan). So we have no problem with the fact that a group of scholars, particularly the khalaf, fell into mistakes in some matters, including matters of creed and those related to grave and saint veneration (in the form of tabarruk, deviant types of tawassul, istighathah, etc.).

Objection: But you agree that the Sahabah practiced tabarruk with the Prophet (ﷺ) and even with his relics? Ibn ‘Umar used to seek tabarruk by touching the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)!!! There is no difference between a man-made pulpit and a man-made grave. We believe both are blessed and we only intend to get closer to Allah by seeking blessings through them as they are related to the Prophet (ﷺ)!

Response:

There is wisdom (حكمة) why the Sahabah restricted tabarruk to the Prophet (ﷺ) and his relics only but never indulged in the Judeo-Christian-Rafidi tradition of kissing and touching any grave for tabarruk. You only need to look to what evils tabarruk with saints/pirs has lead in the Ummah. If someone argues that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence then we say that in Islam this only applies to worldly matter.

As for religious matters: Islam is tawqeefi; It is not permissible to worship Allah, may He be exalted, through any act of worship unless this act of worship is proven in the Shar’i texts (Qur’an and Sunnah) and the consensus of the Sahabah.

Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercuy upon him) and other scholars of hadith used to say: The basic principle with regard to acts of worship is tawqeef; no acts of worship are prescribed except that which has been prescribed by Allah, may He be exalted; if we do not adhere to this principle, we will be included among those referred to in the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “Or have they partners with Allah (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allah has not allowed?” [ash-Shoora 42:21]. The basic principle with regard to customs (i.e. wordly matter and wordly)is that they are permissible and none of them are forbidden except that which Allah has forbidden. If we do not adhere to this principle, we will be included among those referred to in the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “Tell me, what provision Allah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful” [Yoonus 10:59].

Tabarruk with other than the Prophet (ﷺ) opposes the ijma’ (consensus) of the Sahabah and is impermissible and has factually lead to excessive shaykh/pir veneration and other evil and many of those who are involved in tabarruk with saints already hold beliefs that are much worse than their false tabarruk rituals. here, absence of evidence (عدم الدليل) is the evidence (الدليل) for restricting (التخصيص) tabarruk to the Prophet (ﷺ), and this is exactly what the Sahabah did.

And if someone argues (like some of the khalaf), even if he’s an Athari scholar, that the Sahabah were in no need to practice tabarruk with others as they had seen the Prophet (ﷺ), drank his wudhu water, etc. then we say that this is a poor istidlal (juristic deduction and reasoning). Most Sahabah did not meet the Prophet (ﷺ) except a few times in their lives. Some of them (the likes of Ibn Abbas, al-Hasan, al-Husayn, etc.) were still young when the Prophet (ﷺ) passed away, yet none of them extended tabarruk to the likes of the rightly guided caliphs (الخلفاء الراشدون) i.e. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with them all, despite them being the greatest Awliya after the prophets of Allah.

The great Hanbali jurist Ibn Rajab al-Baghdadi (736 هـ – 795 هـ) saysin his al-Hikam al-Jaridah:

كذلك التبرك بالآثار، فإنما كان يفعله الصحابة مع النبي-صلى الله عليه وسلم- ولم يكونوا يفعلونه مع بعضهم.. ولا يفعله التابعون مع الصحابة، مع علو قدرهم فدل على أن هذا لا يُفعل إلا مع النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم– مثل التبرك بوضوئه، وفضلاته، وشعره، وشرب فضل شرابه وطعامه. وفي الجملة فهذه الأشياء فتنة للمعظّم وللمعظّم لما يخشى عليه من الغلو المدخل في البدعة ، وربما يترقى إلى نوع من الشرك . كل هذا إنما جاء من التشبه بأهل الكتاب والمشركين الذي نهيت عنه هذه الأمة . وفي الحديث الذي في السنن : ” ان من إجلال الله إكرام ذي الشيبة المسلم ، والسلطان المقسط ، وحامل القرآن غير الغالي فيه والجافي عنه ” . فالغلو من صفات النصارى ، والجفاء من صفات اليهود ، والقصد هو المأمور به . وقد كان السلف الصالح ينهون عن تعظيمهم غاية النهي كأنس الثوري وأحمد . وكان أحمد يقول : من أنا حتى تجيئون إلى ؟ اذهبوا اكتبوا الحديث ، وكان إذا سئل عن شيء ، يقول : سلوا العلماء . وإذا سئل عن شيء من الورع يقول : أنا لا يحل لي أن أتكلم في الورع ، لو كان بشر حياً تكلم في هذا . وسئل مرة عن الإخلاص فقال : اذهب إلى الزهاد ، إي شيء نحن تجيء إلينا ؟ وجاء إليه رجل فمسح يده ثيابه ومسح بهما وجهه ، فغضب الإمام أحمد وأنكر ذلك أشد الإنكار وقال : عمن أخذتم هذا الأمر؟ -(الحكم الجديرة بالإذاعة لإبن رجب النحبلي (ص55)

“And likewise regarding tabarruk with the Prophet (ﷺ), although the Companions sought tabarruk with him, however, they never did so with each other, nor did the Tabi’oon do so with the Companions, despite their lofty positions. So this is evidence that it (i.e. tabarruk) is only valid in relation to the Prophet (ﷺ)… (Ibn Rajab then continues explaining that tabarruk with other than the Prophet (ﷺ) leads to bid’ah and ghuluw and might even evolve into types of shirk/polytheism and resembles the practice the polytheistic Ahl al-Kitab. He also mentions how the Salaf detested ghuluw with their personality and how Imam Ahmad rebuked a man who sought blessings by touching him) [al-Hikam al-Jaridah by Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali. p. 55]

Why did the Sahabah seek tabarruk from the Prophet (ﷺ) in the first place? Was it because he was a righteous man (رجل صالح)? No, if that would be the case they would have sought tabarruk from others as well. They sought blessings from him (ﷺ) because he was a Messenger of Allah and they restricted it to him and if someone cites 1000 scholars from the khalaf, heck even some from the Salaf, it won’t change the fact that the safest path is that of the Sahabah:

‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, “I enjoin you to follow my companions, then those after them and those after them. Thereafter, falsehood will spread… [Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Al-Albani]

Hudhayfah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Every act of worship which was not practiced by the Companions of Muhammad (ﷺ) then do not do it―for indeed the early ones did not leave out any speech (or matter) for the later ones. So fear Allah, O people of recitation (and knowledge)! And take the path of those who have preceded you.” (See Al-Lālikā’i 1/95, no. 119)

Ibn Masood (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Follow the Āthār and do not innovate for indeed you have been sufficed.” [al-Zuhd of Waki’]

and he also said:

“Follow and do not innovate, for everything has been taken care of, and you must follow the ancient way (i.e., of the Salaf).” [Darimi in his Sunan]

Abu Burda (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

“…The stars are a source of security for the sky and when the stars disappear there come to the sky, i. e. (it meets the same fate) as it has been promised (it would plunge into darkness). And I am a source of safety and security to my Companions and when I would go away there would fall to the lot (of my Companions) as they have been promised with and my Companions are a source of security for the Ummah and as they would go there would fall to the lot of my Ummah as (its people) have been promised. [Sahih Muslim]

Conflating between the tabarruk of the Sahabah with the Prophet and his relics i.e. whatever he (ﷺ) touched directly, with the matter of his grave about which the Prophet (ﷺ) himself warned against in so many authentic narrations, is flawed reasoning, no matter if it is argued by 1000 scholars.

Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: “O Allah! Do not make my grave into an idol that is worshipped. Allah’s anger is severe upon a people who turned the graves of their Prophets into places of worship (mosques).” [Al-Muwatta]

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent la’nah on those who took the graves of their prophets as places of worship and referred to them as the worst of all creation in the sight of Allah. He (ﷺ) severely warned against and prohibited any form of grave veneration, not just the actual worship of his (ﷺ) or anybody else’s grave, as the ghuluw and khurafat apologists want us to believe. This is why you can even find reports where he prohibited the decoration of graves (let alone their veneration!).

The emotional outburst excuse

Another trick of the Qubooris is the ’emotional outburst’ excuse; this one they usually use after being refuted after citing unreliable reports that are attributed to the Sahabah in support of grave-kissing. One quboori apologist literally said to me:

“An emotional breakdown at Prophet’s grave due to love may be not ideal for people to see but Allah may love this affection of the person towards his beloved.”

In support of such claims, they misquote Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (who suddenly becomes relevant to them when it comes to their heresies) in his Iqtidaa’ al-Sirat al-Mustaqeem li Mukhaalafat ashaab al-Jaheem (Following the Straight Path in Differentiating from the Companions of the Hell-Fire) by citing this one bit:

Whilst omitting the following crucial part:

وكذلك ما يحدثه بعض الناس ، إما مضاهاة للنصارى في ميلاد عيسى عليه السلام ، وإما محبة للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وتعظيمًا . والله قد يثيبهم على هذه المحبة والاجتهاد ، لا على البدع– من اتخاذ مولد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عيدًا . مع اختلاف الناس في مولده . فإن هذا لم يفعله السلف ، مع قيام المقتضي له وعدم المانع منه لو كان خيرًا . ولو كان هذا خيرًا محضا ، أو راجحًا لكان السلف رضي الله عنهم أحق به منا ، فإنهم كانوا أشد محبة لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتعظيمًا له منا ، وهم على الخير أحرص

“And so is the case with what some people have innovated, either in imitation of the Christians who celebrate the birthday of Jesus (as) or out of love for the Prophet (ﷺ) and in order to exalt him. And it may be that Allah may reward them for this love and for the ijtihaad they made, but not for the innovation of taking the birthday of the Prophet (ﷺ) as a festival; despite the differences regarding his actual birthday. For indeed, this was an act never performed by the earlier generations … had it been good in essence or correct Islamically, then those earlier generations (may Allah be pleased with them) would have more right to such a deed than us, for they had greater love for the Messenger (saas) and exalted him more than we do, and they were more concerned and ardent with performing good deeds than us.”

So it is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah called it a bid’ah, and saw no reward for the deed. The most that can be argued is that Ibn Taimiyyah humbly hoped that Allah may reward those who used to be involved in bid’ah actions due to their sincere beliefs that they are doing something right. Nowhere did Ibn Taymiyyah say that Allah loves bid’ah practice.

The Qubooris use such arguments in order to excuse –  or in the worst case normalise and justify –  the many heresies that have become an everyday business at the idolatrous shrines in the name of Islam and the Awliya.

Summary:

• Major authorities from all four schools of Ahl al-Sunnah, including non-Atharis, strongly warned against the veneration of graves in the form of touching and kissing them. This, of course, includes the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave, or rather, this includes specifically the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave, as he (ﷺ) had severely warned against any form of veneration of his own grave.
• Those who indulge in the practice of touching and kissing graves, including that of the Prophet (ﷺ), have been branded as juhhal (ignoramuses) by the scholars.
• Touching or/and kissing graves shows bad manners. So whoever longs for touching and/or kissing the grave of the Prophet (ﷺ) has no manners and should be advised, and in the worst-case punished.
• The practice of touching and kissing graves is not just disliked, it is absolutely forbidden and even if it was ‘only’ makrooh (disliked/detested), a Muslim should stay away from makrooh, not wishing to indulge in it.
• The consensus amongst the Sahabah was that touching or kissing graves, including that of the Prophet (ﷺ), is not legislated, this is why they abstained from it. A Sunni-Athari prefers them over everybody after them.
• Later scholars who have allowed tabarruk at the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave are excused. They often relied on weak reports (something that happens to the greatest scholars) and/or exercised ijtihad where they tried to explain away why the Sahabah did not practice tabarruk at the Prophet’s (ﷺ) grave.
• Later scholars who have extended tabarruk to the saints/Awliya have ultimately opposed the consensus of the Sahabah. They are also excused as they also relied on weak reports (something that happens to the greatest scholars) and/or exercised ijtihad where they tried to explain away why the Sahabah did not seek tabarruk from their leaders and superiors other than the Prophet (ﷺ).
  
• Neither the scholars nor the laymen are mushrik qubooris for indulging in certain forms of grave veneration like wiping over/touching and kissing graves. The grave venerators lie about Shaykh ibn Abdul-Wahhab and the Najdi da’wah (‘Wahabis’) as none of them claimed that false tabarruk per se is shirk.
• Grave veneration is a means to shirk, blocking the means to shirk is a paramount principle in Islam, so there is no doubt that an Athari-Sunni should warn against such practices and not diluting them and presenting them as differences of opinion.

Finally, next time you see a Hanbali or Maliki or Shafi’i or Hanafi (especially ‘Hanafi-Athari’) claiming to be an ‘Athari’ whilst justifying the Judeo-Christian-Rafidi tradition and practice of kissing and touching graves, know that he or she opposes the greatest scholars of his/her own school and instead clutches unto either weak or fabricated reports or the statements of fallible men.

The Prophet (ﷺ) and his companions used to visit graves (yes, it is Sunnah if done correctly), yet none of them indulged in heresies such as seeking blessings by touching or kissing graves, they didn’t even do that out of respect as this is the practice of the polytheists.

May Allah guide us all, and Allah knows best, and may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad al-Mustafa (ﷺ).

Related articles:

The Worst of All Creation – Grave Worship Amongst Jews, Rawafid, and Sufis

Islam Is Inherently Iconoclastic

Shia Saint Statues – Paganism In The Name Of the Ahlul-Bayt