In the year 2005, Pope John Paul II died, and Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, may God Almighty preserve him, prayed for him, saying: “We pray to God Almighty to have mercy on him and reward him, according to the amount of good he provided for humanity and the good work he left behind.”

However, this supplication provoked angry responses from some Salafist sheikhs and many of the common people against Sheikh Al-Qaradawi, which still raises debate in similar incidents when some people pray for the deceased if he was not from the people of Islam.

The case for consensus referred to in the words of Al-Albani goes back to the Maliki judge, Iyad al-Yahsibi (544 AH), who was quoted by al-Nawawi as saying: “The unanimity has been established that the unbelievers do not benefit from their deeds and are not rewarded for them with blessings or a mitigation of punishment, but some of them are more severely tormented than others, according to their crimes.” That is, supplication for the infidels is not only prohibited, but it is of no use when they die in disbelief

Sheikh Nasir al-Din al-Albani, may God have mercy on him, had previously reported on the authority of Imam Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi (676 AH) that the consensus is that supplications for forgiveness for the infidel are forbidden, and then he added: “And from this, you learn the mistake of some Muslims today of being merciful and pleasing to some infidels, and that is a lot.” From some owners of newspapers and magazines... It is not surprising that such a ruling may be hidden, but it is surprising that some Islamic preachers fall into such a position.

It seems that the audience of communication sites today adopts the position of Sheikh Al-Albani, for every time the denouncement is harsh on those who seek mercy for those who died in a religion other than Islam.

For this reason, the issue of praying for the infidel for forgiveness and mercy needs a serious and critical discussion, in which we revisit the authentic jurisprudential discussions that preceded the tendencies of credit and advocacy discourses that tend to be separated with poverty in the jurisprudential provision, which is what I will try in this article.

Praying for the infidel is related to another very important issue, which is the attitude towards the righteous deeds that the infidel did in his life, and are they considered or were they wasted?

for his infidelity?

Will she be rewarded in the hereafter, or does it only relieve him of the torment?

They are rhetorical issues that deserve discussion to understand the perceptions of Muslim speakers, away from the prevailing popular perceptions today, which spread an intolerant general mood, and sometimes do not take into account the slightest degree of tact in dealing with the dead of non-Muslims.

The case for unanimity referred to in the words of al-Albani goes back to the Maliki judge, Iyad al-Yahsibi (544 AH), who was quoted by al-Nawawi as saying: “The unanimity has been established that the unbelievers do not benefit from their deeds and are not rewarded for them with blessings or a mitigation of punishment, but some of them are more severely tormented than others, according to their crimes.” That is, supplication for the infidels is not only forbidden, but it is of no use when they die in disbelief.

Al-Nawawi Al-Shafi’i discussed this issue in two of his books. In his jurisprudence book he said: “As for praying for an infidel and praying for him for forgiveness, it is forbidden according to the text of the Qur’an and consensus.” Muslims are unanimous on it.”

He also said: “Know that it is not permissible to be called upon for forgiveness and the like that are not said to the infidels, but it is permissible to be called upon for guidance, health of the body, wellness and the like.”

The question that the auditor should discuss here is: Where did this consensus come from?

Is the issue really unanimous, as was claimed by Al-Qadi Iyad, followed by Al-Nawawi, who has been repeatedly quoted in his explanation of Sahih Muslim?

In fact, Al-Nawawi himself indistinctly contradicts this consensus when he reports directly after the words of Judge Iyad on the authority of Imam al-Bayhaqi al-Shafi’i (458 AH) that the statement that the righteous deeds of a disbeliever do not benefit him in the Hereafter is rather the saying of “some people of knowledge and insight,” meaning that it is no more than mere It is a statement and not a consensus. Rather, al-Nawawi also transmits from al-Bayhaqi that the verses and hadiths mentioned regarding the invalidity of the good deed of an unbeliever if he dies in disbelief, can be interpreted with the meaning of his expulsion from Hellfire and his admission to Paradise, and this means that these righteous deeds of a disbeliever can help him to relieve For him the torment that required him for felonies committed other than infidelity.

And this opinion is not the opinion of Al-Bayhaqi alone, but it is the opinion of many scholars from different schools of jurisprudence, and it is a strong opinion and I found it common in multiple sources after research and tracking. Two sayings in the matter was not likely between them.

We find the story of these two sayings or disagreements in the books of explanations of hadith, jurisprudence and interpretation, and at different times;

It is a strong disagreement, even if the saying that the righteous deed of the unbeliever benefits him is the strongest saying, to the extent that the Hanafi jurist Ahmad Al-Kurani (893 AH) contented himself with stating it alone and asserting it. Al-Qadi Iyadh has such releases that require careful consideration, and al-Nawawi is often quoted from him.

The discussion about the benefit of the infidel by his righteous deeds in the Hereafter is lengthy, and perhaps I will dedicate a separate article to it;

Because my purpose in this article is to clarify the permissibility of supplicating for the infidel for forgiveness and mercy or for something else, not just this worldly thing, whether during his life or after his death;

But on the condition that it does not include the sin of unbelief or major polytheism, and this is a valid doctrine, rather it is the Shafi’i school, contrary to what was delusional in the words of the previous Imam al-Nawawi, and in contrast to the consensus of Iyad, whom I do not know of anyone who preceded him.

If we are going to talk about the Shafi’is in order to clarify the place of the words of Al-Nawawi Al-Shafi’i, then we find that his words were confused with the later Shafi’i imams, and I can distinguish here between two positions:

The first position:

It is understood from Al-Nawawi’s words of the absolute, and that it is absolutely forbidden to pray for forgiveness and mercy for the infidel, whether it is the sin of polytheism or something else.

Contrary to al-Nawawi's words.

This approach was directed by several sheikhs in the sect, as it will become clear later.

The second position:

An-Nawawi’s words were interpreted as meaning that he wanted the prohibition of supplication for the infidel for forgiveness of his polytheism or his infidelity, that is, his admission to Paradise. This position is represented by the scholar Ibn Allan al-Shafi’i;

Al-Nawawi’s words were interpreted to mean “mercy, entry into Paradise, or the pleasure of God Almighty,” i.e., seeking forgiveness that brings one out of Hell and one that leads to Paradise.

Far from the claim of consensus by Iyadh, if we return to the words of Al-Nawawi in his two books, we find that its apparent meaning indicates that he only wanted major polytheism, not what is below it, and this is indicated by 3 presumptions:

The first presumption:

that Al-Nawawi combined prayer for the infidel and supplication for him, then after he decided that supplication for him for forgiveness was prohibited, he also decided that the doctrine is permissible for a Muslim to follow the funeral of his infidel relative, and that visiting the grave of an infidel is permissible.

The second premise:

An-Nawawi himself contradicted the consensus of Judge Iyad when he reported on the authority of Imam al-Bayhaqi al-Shafi’i that the work of a righteous infidel benefits him in the Hereafter, even if he does not enter him into Paradise.

The third presumption:

Al-Nawawi’s inference in this context with the verse “It is not for the Prophet and those who believed to ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even if they were the closest of relatives to Hell after repentance, and it indicates that they are repentant.” [113] Here, Ibn Allan al-Shafi’i explained that in the verse there is evidence that it is permissible to seek forgiveness for the living polytheists;

Because he "sought to reconcile them to the faith."

In addition to the foregoing evidence, it must be said: If forgiveness is released, it will turn to major polytheism.

The supplication for forgiveness is directed to the fact that the fire does not touch the one who is called upon, which is the reality of supplication for the monotheists, especially when the supplication for the deceased is combined with the prayer for him;

Because what is meant by praying for him is to pray for him for forgiveness that will enter Paradise.

The problem with Al-Nawawi’s words stems from the lack of liberation of the subject of the dispute.

His words have two meanings:

The first possibility:

that he wants to supplicate for the forgiveness of major polytheism, and the prohibition of this supplication is a matter of consensus among the jurists;

Because it is contrary to the explicit Qur’anic text, and it is apparent from the words of Al-Nawawi when he said: “With the text of the Qur’an and consensus.” What is proven by the explicit text is “God does not forgive association with Him, and He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills,” which is the unanimous meaning.

The second possibility:

that al-Nawawi wants to forbid the absolute supplication for forgiveness;

Including major polytheism and other sins, if he intended this meaning, then the most correct opinion in his Shafi’i school is the opposite of this, and a number of sheikhs of the school came to explain this most correct one.

And if we return to the books of the doctrine, we find some of the Shafi’i imams stating that it is permissible to pray for an unbeliever with an afterlife, with forgiveness and mercy;

Contrary to what Al-Nawawi’s words deceived him from saying that it is forbidden, as we find, for example, in Al-Khatib Al-Sherbini (977 AH), Ahmed Salama Al-Qalyubi (1069 AH), Ibrahim Al-Barmawi (1106 AH), and Suleiman Al-Bajirmi (1221 AH).

Perhaps this explicit text has been confused with other texts in some Shafi’i books in which it is mentioned that it is forbidden to pray for the infidel for forgiveness, as we find with Al-Khatib Al-Sharbini and Shihab Al-Din Al-Ramli, for example;

He justified the sanctity of prayer on the infidel that it is not permissible to pray for him for forgiveness, because the Almighty said: “God does not forgive association with Him” [An-Nisa: 48].

But the release of the prohibition in these texts is only combined with the prohibition of the funeral prayer for the unbeliever.

In some texts, the expression is given that “the issue of their speech at funerals is the prohibition of supplicating for the infidel for forgiveness,” in addition to the text on the permissibility of supplicating for the infidel for forgiveness, which indicates that their intention in forbidding prayer for him with supplication for him is the forgiveness of the sin of major polytheism that is felt by this pairing of prayer And supplication for him, especially since the footnotes of the books of the Shafi’i school of madhhab tell that there is a difference of opinion among the jurists regarding “the desirability of supplication for the infidel,” although the most correct is the permissibility of supplication.

In fact, Al-Shbramlsi followed the previous absolute statement from Al-Sherbini and Al-Ramli that the verse “God does not forgive association with Him” is more specific than the claim that the absolute prohibition of supplication for the infidel;

Because the verse only indicates a specific meaning, which is the non-forgiveness of major polytheism, and it may indicate forgiveness other than polytheism.

Because of the general meaning of the Almighty’s saying: “And he forgives what is less than that for whomever he wills” [An-Nisa: 48].

This indicates the permissibility of supplicating for the infidel for forgiveness other than polytheism.

Because the sin of polytheism cannot be forgiven, it is not permissible to pray for it, while it is permissible to pray for the infidel for forgiveness except for polytheism, mercy, physical health, abundance of money and children, and guidance. Rather, “it is permissible to insure the supplication of an infidel, and it is permissible to ask for supplication from him as well,” as al-Qalyubi and others explained.

In some Shafi’i books, it is mentioned that the permissibility of supplication for a living infidel is restricted, with the restriction “if he embraces Islam,” or with the intention that the unbeliever will obtain the reason for forgiveness, which is Islam, which is what prompted me previously in a Facebook comment to the illusion of distinguishing in supplication for the infidel between the two states of life and death, but it became clear to me after that. That the whole matter is based on the distinction between major polytheism and others, and in this case the supplication is carried on asking for forgiveness of polytheism in this world if he becomes Muslim;

Based on the “faith of repentance” that many Ash’ari say, and it means that the lesson in happiness and misery is the state in which a person dies regardless of his previous work in this state, a Muslim may apostate before his death and an unbeliever may believe at his death, so supplication for him with the generality of forgiveness is left There is room for this consideration that God grant him guidance before his death, so that he dies in Islam.

But what if a Muslim prays for the infidel for forgiveness of the sin of polytheism in the Hereafter, will he be a disbeliever?

Some of the Shafi’i sheikhs criticized considering this to be blasphemy, as did Al-Shabramlsi, Al-Jamal and Al-Sharwani, and that its owner only committed a forbidden act.

 In summary, supplication for the infidel for forgiveness has two meanings:

The first:

that he wants by his supplication for him forgiveness of major polytheism, and this is prohibited by consensus;

Because major polytheism is not forgiven by the text of the Qur'an.

The second

: that he wants forgiveness less than disbelief, and the basic principle with regard to actions that are below polytheism is that they are left to the divine will according to the text of the Qur’an (and what is less than that is forgiven to whomever he wills), so the Muslim’s supplication for the infidel is only a supplication for the fulfillment of the divine will by forgiveness for the infidel without polytheism, and it is not excluded Al-Alusi has this meaning, while others have proven it explicitly, as we find among a number of scholars.

Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji, al-Alusi and others have made it clear that the torment that is not mitigated is the torment of infidelity according to its ranks, and the torment that the prophetic hadiths indicate is mitigating is something other than infidelity.

And the meaning of thwarting the actions of the infidels in which the Qur’anic text was mentioned is that it does not save them from the eternal torment in the fire, which is the meaning of it being a mirage and for nothing.

The origin of this discussion stems from the main premises:

  • Proving that the infidels differ in the afterlife, and that they are not the same, and that Hellfire is a level of gradualness, and that Anwar Shah Al-Kashmiri has conveyed the consensus that the just infidel is better off than the unjust infidel in the Hereafter.

  • Major Shirk is not forgiven by the Qur’an, and it is a unanimous issue.

  • The debate remained regarding whether it is permissible to pray for the infidel for forgiveness, except for major polytheism?

    And it is what we have edited here and it is permissible, but the infidel whom we are praying for here either has done a good deed or a bad deed.

    So supplication for one who does righteous deeds is that God Almighty will accept it from him, not with forgiveness.

    Because forgiveness is only for the bad deed, just as the justice of God Almighty requires that He reward the infidel for his good deeds either in this world by honoring him, or in the Hereafter by reducing his torment, and this means that my supplication to the infidel regarding his good deed is not effective in reality, and what affects is my supplication to the infidel by transgression About his bad deed without polytheism, and in the hadiths of mitigating the torment on the authority of Abu Talib, Abu Lahab and others, evidence of this, although Abu Talib and Abu Lahab are also not equal in the hereafter.

  • Disbelief does not necessitate that every act committed by an unbeliever is not considered.

    Because of his disbelief, we can distinguish between actions as we will detail in a later article, God willing.

  • These views illustrate the vastness of the classical jurisprudence debates, and that they combine textual interpretative issues and other ethical and human issues. Even those who launched the statement that supplication is forbidden for an infidel spoke about the permissibility of walking at his funeral, but rather visiting his grave if it is near, and shrouding him if he is a dhimmi to take care of his protection, but the popular discussions The current one is absent from the human dimension and tends to take tense positions;

    As well as it does not reflect the idiosyncratic inheritance itself, and God assisted.

    Keywords: