Did the Shafi'i jurists say that it is permissible to pray for an infidel after his death?

In 4 previous articles, I dealt with the issue of mercy for the non-Muslim from multiple approaches: verbal, jurisprudential and ethical;

In order to diversify the arguments and to familiarize the readers with the types of arguments and the different methodological methods in discussing one issue that seemed to many to be self-evident;

Especially since I consider the issue of mercy as an example that captures many of our methodological and interpretive problems in dealing with heritage in general, and with reading the jurisprudential heritage and how to draw inspiration from it in the present time in particular, and in how to manage our interpretive differences.

In the first article of this series, I explained that supplications for the infidel or polytheist (according to the terminology of the jurists) after his death are of two types:

• A supplication for forgiveness of the sin of polytheism (or the sin of unbelief).

• And supplication for the forgiveness of sins other than polytheism.

It indicated that the first type is prohibited by consensus of the jurists;

Because of the definite prohibition contained in the verse (God does not forgive association with Him) [An-Nisa’: 48], and I told the later Shafi’is that they permitted the second type only because it is included in the second part of the verse, and it is (and he forgives anything less than that for whomever he wills).

But - in light of what I called “the Battle of Mercy” - this transmission was met with denial, until one of them rioted that I did not come up with a text stating that, even though I provided an extensive summary of my reading of the texts of the jurists in this sense and the implications that it bears, because reading and understanding them actually constitutes something else. The one who is experienced in them, and their meanings do not appear until after investigating them in their various places and comparing each other in the various sources, and for all of this I had attributed the content of the sayings to their owners in brief, without telling their words, and among the names mentioned by Ahmed Salama Al-Qalyubi (1069 AH), and Nur al-Din Al-Shabramelisi (1087 AH) and others.

In this article, I find myself compelled to elaborate on the statements of the Shafi’i jurists on this issue, and the reader here excuses me for quoting a number of texts, because there has been a sharp controversy over the Shafi’is words, and it is sufficient for me to stand here on 3 comments that prove - indeed - that this issue Not edited in the texts of the Shafi'i, and for this differed interpretations.

As for the comments that you prefer for those working in jurisprudence, they are:

The first comment:

The author went to the assertion that (1) “Neither a Shafi’i jurist nor a non-Shafi’i scholar has said that it is permissible to pray for mercy for one who dies of his infidelity”;

So “the narration of this on the authority of one of the Shafi’is is a mistake and a misunderstanding of the transmitted text,” because “the circulating text of the scholar al-Qalyubi has its place in the living infidel and worldly mercy without astonishment.”

(2) And that Imam al-Nawawi - may God have mercy on him - recounted “the consensus on the prohibition of supplication for the one who dies of unbelief with forgiveness. The notables of the Shafi’is and their imams stipulated this prohibition without any specification or exception with interpretation.”

As for the discussion of the two Sheikhs Al-Qalyubi and Al-Shabramlsi from the Shafi’is in the permissibility of praying for forgiveness other than polytheism for one who died on his disbelief, it is contrary to the consensus and what was reported from the Shafi’i imams.

Shafi’i texts establish the criteria of life or death for an infidel, so it is permissible to pray for him during his life, and it is not permissible to pray for him during his death.

It is clear that the author of this commentary first supposes that there is a distinction between mercy (which includes forgiveness of polytheism) and forgiveness, although this difference is not proven from the words of the Shafi’is themselves;

The text that he summoned from al-Qalyubi’s footnote included both forgiveness and mercy, even though the man denies the existence of anyone who said that it is permissible to pray for mercy!

Then, secondly, he builds on Al-Nawawi’s claim of unanimity to forbid supplication for absolute forgiveness (whether for polytheism or otherwise), and he goes to the view that the saying of the later who distinguished between the forgiveness of polytheism and the forgiveness of what is below it is contrary to this consensus.

The second comment:

The author made it clear that “the companions of the footnotes [from the Shafi’is] differed: Does God forgive a non-Muslim except for polytheism?” Then he decided that the apparent meaning of Sheikh Umair’s words is that it is not forgiven, and that al-Qalyubi went to the permissibility of that.

That is, he understood from Sheikh Al-Qalyubi’s words exactly the same as what I understood, but he considered him unique in this issue, which is “permissibility of asking for forgiveness other than polytheism only” because the general request for forgiveness that includes polytheism is not permissible by agreement.

The commentator said that al-Qalyubi’s singularity in this matter is unreliable even though it is for the sake of the later Shafi’i scholars, and his footnote is not mentioned among the footnotes on which the fatwa is based in the Shafi’i school.

The third comment:

“The Shafi’i texts establish the criterion of life or death for the infidel, so it is permissible to pray for him when he is alive, and it is not permissible to pray for him during his death.”

As for “the latecomers of the shift of the madhhab, they are different - as is apparent from what we have quoted - and some of them are not more deserving of interpretation than the other,” and he stated that the words of some of the later Shafi’is from the shift of the madhhab such as al-Barmawi, al-Qalyubi and al-Bajirami, it is not correct to make a judge on the words of the general Shafi’i jurists from the people of weighting or the owners of faces Those who continued to release the prohibition without detail, and the author of this saying tended to combine the sayings that the words of the Shafi’ites are in agreement with the words of al-Nawawi, as indicated by their apparent release in the section on funerals from the sanctity of supplication for the infidel.

The previous three comments or understandings prove - then - the distinction between supplication for an infidel during his life and supplication for him after his death, and they also agree that there is a saying in Shafi’i sources that distinguishes between asking for forgiveness of polytheism and asking for forgiveness less than polytheism for one who died as an infidel, but she chooses to give preference to the prevailing saying of prohibition from the absolute. Supplication after death, as stated - in part by Al-Nawawi’s words, and you see that this differentiation between polytheism and non-shirk is either contrary to consensus, or it is not a fatwa in the doctrine, or it must be interpreted to conform to what is common, or it is not correct to make a ruler over the words of the general Shafi’i jurists.

In other words, the three comments used various interpretations to reject this saying, as I was preoccupied with the search for the approved doctrine in particular, while my interest here is the presence of a reliable saying within the doctrine, at least.

Now let's move to the texts of the later Shafi'is, the most prominent of which are the words of Al-Qalyubi and his followers on this one, and Al-Shabramlsi and before them came Ibn Qasim Al-Abadi.

 Imam Al-Nawawi said in the chapter on funerals: “If Muslims mix with infidels, it is obligatory for all to be washed and prayed. If he wishes, he prays on everyone with the intention of Muslims - which is the best and stipulated - or on one, then one intends to pray for him, if he is a Muslim, and says: Oh God, forgive him if he is a Muslim.” .

As for Al-Qalyubi, he discussed this issue in more than one chapter of jurisprudence, such as raindrops and funerals.

In the chapter on dropsy, he said: “It is permissible to answer the supplication of an infidel, and it is permissible to supplicate for him, even with forgiveness and mercy, in contrast to what is in the dhikr except for forgiveness of the sin of unbelief; with his death on disbelief, it is not permissible.” Ibrahim Al-Barmawi (1106 AH) and Suleiman Al-Bajirmi (1221 AH) followed him on this. in their footnotes.

This text was confused for some of them, so they understood that this is in the state of life, but the text talks about insurance for the supplication of an infidel on the one hand, and about supplication for him during his life and after his death on the other hand.

Al-Nawawi’s Book of Remembrances referred to herein contains two texts: a text that talks about seeking forgiveness for a living infidel, and another text that talks about seeking forgiveness for an unbeliever after his death, but the word al-Qalyubi here “with his death upon disbelief” is explicit.

And Imam al-Nawawi had said in the chapter on funerals: “If Muslims mix with infidels, it is obligatory to wash all and pray. If he wishes, he prays on all with the intention of the Muslims - which is the best and stipulated - or on one, then one intends to pray for him, if he is a Muslim, and says: Oh God, forgive him if he is. Muslim."

But al-Qalyubi commented here, saying: “(Forgive him if he is a Muslim) is a matter of consideration, because supplication for an infidel for forgiveness is permissible, unless it is in the manner of the [Nawawi] workbook as mentioned above. Or it is said that the generality includes the sin of blasphemy and it is not permissible.”

Abd al-Rahman al-Sherbini (1326 AH) followed him and said: “(His saying: and he says: O God, forgive him if he is a Muslim) seems obligatory, and in (Q’l) on the majesty that the most correct is the permissibility of supplication for the infidel for the hereafter and forgiveness, contrary to what is in the supplications.

In another place, Al-Qalyubi commented on the words of Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami, saying: “In the words of Ibn Hajar, it is forbidden to pray for the infidel for another, and there is a consideration in it.

The most correct opinion is the opposite, as it is established in its place, and it is permissible to pray for him for forgiveness.

Contrary to what is mentioned in the supplications as presented.

It is clear that Al-Qalyubi does not distinguish here between forgiveness and mercy, nor between death and life first, and he directs the discussion on the duality of polytheism and what is less than polytheism, secondly.

Because it is not forgiven.

Al-Qalyubi understood that al-Nawawi’s statement that the prohibition of supplication could be related to two things:

• He wanted absolute supplication in life and death, and forgiveness of polytheism and others.

• And supplication absolute, i.e. asking for forgiveness of major polytheism, and this is not permissible by agreement.

For the first possibility: the nuclear launch is not intended in my opinion;

Therefore, Al-Qalyubi insisted on restricting him to polytheism only, and he did this in more than one place.

And on the second possibility, the matter is subject to agreement, because it includes something that is prohibited and agreed upon that it is prohibited.

As for Al-Shabramlsi, I have confused his words with some of those who followed me. I want to stand here on 4 places where the issue was mentioned. I will refer here to 3 of them, and the fourth will come later.

In the introduction to his footnote: He decided that “(His saying: Among His faithful servants) requires that the infidel will not be forgiven for any transgression beyond disbelief.” He said: “And it is apparent [the words of Shihab al-Din] Umairah (957 AH), and their statement [i.e. the Shafi’is] in [The Shafi’is] agrees with him. Chapter] Funerals that it is not permissible to supplicate for forgiveness for the infidel, and it does not respond to him saying that it is permissible to forgive him, Glory be to Him, except for polytheism, because the permissibility does not necessitate the occurrence of which he is talking about.

And when Shams al-Din al-Ramli (1004 AH) said in the chapter on funerals: “(And it is forbidden) to pray (for an infidel), even a dhimmi, because of the Almighty’s saying: (And do not pray for one of them who dies) [Al-Tawbah: 84]; The Almighty (God does not forgive association with Him).” Al-Shabramlsi commented on him by saying: “His saying: Because God Almighty says (God does not forgive association with Him) in which the evidence is more specific than the one who pretends because the verse only indicates the meaning of forgiveness of polytheism, and it may indicate forgiveness. Other than the general saying of the Almighty:

(And he forgives anything less than that for whomever he wills) [An-Nisa: 48], and this indicates the permissibility of praying for him for forgiveness other than polytheism.” In the chapter on security, Al-Shabramlsi mentioned that “If [a Muslim] backbites a dhimmi, is it justified to pray for him for forgiveness so that he will rid himself of the sin of backbiting or not? suffices with remorse;

Why is supplication for forgiveness for the infidel refrained?” He mentioned the two possibilities, saying: “Everyone is possible, and the most likely one is to pray for forgiveness for him other than polytheism, or a large amount of money and the like;

With remorse.” He was followed by the footnotes’ owners Suleiman al-Jamal, al-Sharwani and al-Bajirmi.

In the first place, Al-Shabramlsi was concerned with explaining the phrase Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami that came in the introduction to the book, which he writes a footnote to, and therefore he tried to push back any objection that might come to it.

As for the second place, he was deciding his own opinion, and that is why he said: The inference from the general prohibition of supplication to the infidel with the verse (God does not forgive polytheism...) is not correct;

Because the first part of the verse is specific to the sin of polytheism, while its second part indicates to the general public that it deals with forgiveness other than polytheism, and then indicates the permissibility of praying for the infidel for forgiveness other than polytheism, that is, after his death on him.

As for the third position, there is no point in asking for forgiveness other than polytheism for the infidel except that he died on his disbelief, and his saying: “or the abundance of money and the like” is a matter of diversification, meaning that the Muslim prays for the infidel in the state of his life by a worldly matter;

As an atonement for his backbiting, and in the event of the death of the infidel who slandered him, he prays for him with a permissible otherworldly order (i.e. by mitigating him);

As attached right Bzmth to a man of the people of Dhimma.

Among the important texts in this context is what Ibn Qasim al-Abadi (994 AH) narrated in his fundamentalist book by saying: “The investigation is the permissibility of forgiveness for other than infidels from the sins of the infidels.” Then he said: “And the issue of the permissibility of pardoning for what was mentioned: the permissibility of praying for them with his forgiveness,” that is, with forgiveness. without disbelief.

Ibn Qasim built here on the permissibility of the occurrence of pardon from God, the permissibility of praying to God for the realization of this pardon.

But Ibn Qasim himself said in his jurisprudence book, when he talks about the rulings of supplication and that he presents symptoms to him: “[praying] may be unbelief, like praying for forgiveness for one who dies as an infidel.”

For this reason, Ibn Qasim's words were confused with the commentators, and both Al-Shbramelsi and Al-Sharwani followed him.

Al-Shabramlsi said: “It should be contemplated that it is unbelief, rather it is merely forbidden, for he said…: It is permissible to forgive except for polytheism for the infidel. Yes, the issue of their words in [the chapter] at funerals is the prohibition of praying for the infidel for forgiveness,” meaning: if we say that the infidel is forgiven without polytheism. It is not permissible to pray for him absolute forgiveness, which includes forgiveness of the sin of polytheism.

Al-Sharwani said: “And his saying: (and it may be blasphemy) may be understood as asking for forgiveness of polytheism, which is forbidden by the text of the Almighty’s saying (God does not forgive association with Him) [An-Nisa’: 48] However, in the fact that that is blasphemy is something,” that is, it is the subject of consideration and hesitation.

It is clear that the confusion only arose from the statement of Imam al-Nawawi in which the speech was released, while what appears to be his meaning was that he meant the prohibition of seeking forgiveness for the sin of polytheism or disbelief in the evidence that I mentioned in my first article, and this is the issue on which there was consensus and was proven by a definitive and explicit text.

As for Ibn Qasim, al-Qalyubi, and the rest, they speak in another form, which is supplication, asking for forgiveness other than polytheism.

This is how the issue is edited and we combine the texts so that they are consistent, especially since the previous imams make many divorces, then school owners come from the owners of books and restrict these releases and clarify what is meant by them.

Here we can distinguish in the Shafi’i texts between 3 forms:

The first:

Who made the statement like al-Nawawi, and the debate remains as to whether he really wants this release or not.

So did he want to forbid the generality of supplication for the infidel, living and dead, and did he want the generality of forgiveness: forgiveness of polytheism and others?

The second:

Whoever distinguished between supplication during life and supplication during death, and this statement may be justified by the fact that supplication for him in the state of life is contained in the meaning of the hope of his conversion to Islam, but the original is to search for what is prohibited from supplication;

Especially since the text is explicit that God forgives what is less than polytheism and that there are many evidences (I mentioned in a previous article) that testify to this meaning, and this statement that the permissibility of supplication for a non-believer is specific to the state of his life is undermined by some texts, such as the supplication of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, to Abu Talib after his death and his benefit Thus, and if it is said: This is specific to him, we say: This is not a matter of agreement, so it is not suitable for inference in the place of disagreement.

The third:

Whoever distinguished between the forgiveness of polytheism specifically, and the forgiveness of others, polytheism is not forgiven, and everything else may be forgiven, and this is clearly established by the Qur’anic text and other evidence, and many scholars who I referred to in a previous article and from different sects went to it, and the texts on this are many, so I do not lengthen them And running on the third saying solves the problems contained in the texts and combines them without any problem. Indeed, there is no text that prevents that, neither from the Legislator nor in the Shafi’i school, and the whole discussion revolves around the search for a legal impediment and it does not exist in anything less than major polytheism, and our case is based on What is proven is that the fire is a pitfall and that good deeds benefit its owner in the Hereafter by reducing the torment that is not the exit from the fire and other than the sin of unbelief, because the punishment is only for two types of torment: the sin of unbelief and all other sins.

God knows.