An argument made by the proponents of invocation or supplication to the Prophet ﷺ or the awliyā’ when answering those who contend that the act is shirk is:
“We do not believe the Prophet ﷺ or other holy personalities are ‘gods’ (ālihah, plural of ilāh) or ‘lords’ (arbāb, plural of rabb) besides Allāh, so our act of invocation does not constitute association with Allāh. We also do not believe that they have been bestowed partnership in any exclusive divine attributes such as ‘All-Hearing’ (al-Samīʿ) or ‘All-Aware’ (al-Khabīr), so us calling upon them does not entail making them partners (shurakā’) with Allāh in His exclusive divine attributes either.”
This argument hinges on the fact that the belief and intention behind their action is not one of association with Allāh or any assumption that the beings they invoke have been conferred with godhood (ulūhiyyah) or lordship (rubūbiyyah).
The inevitable question, then, is: what exactly is the role of intention (niyyah) and belief (iʿtiqād) when it comes to matters of tawḥīd and shirk?
Two strands of those who invoke other than Allāh
Istighāthah,1 which literally means ‘calling for help or aid in times of distress/calamity’, is used to refer to the act of invoking someone with the intention of seeking help (ghawth) from them, believing that they indeed possess such ability which enables them to help us by Allāh’s permission, i.e., these beings are empowered by the Lord such that they can aid and succor a person in need. It is like istiʿānah, albeit more specific. The former is a distress call, and while the latter can refer to any act of seeking help or aid.
Tawassul,2 on the other hand, is commonly used to refer to the act of asking someone to pray to Allāh on one’s behalf. It is also referred to as istishfāʿ or seeking ‘intercession’. Please note that this is not the Qur’ānic definition of the term.
The common ground amongst the two groups (seekers of help and seekers of intercession) is their belief that the awliyā’ of Allāh hear us while not being accessible through physical means, i.e., across the curtain of ghayb, and thus, can be invoked.
The main argument this article aims to address and analyse is that such acts, when done with the firm conviction that the entities being supplicated to are not gods or that they have not a share in God’s attributes, cannot be shirk. Whether invoking and supplicating to those across ghayb constitutes worship or not shall only be touched upon in this article, as it aims to provide supportive evidence or qarā’in for what has already been discussed in numerous other disquisitions.
The case of the People of the Scripture:
Abū Baṣīr said3:
‘I asked Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq about the words of Allāh: They have taken their scholars/rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah . . . (9:31), so he (al-Ṣādiq) said:
‘By Allāh, they (rabbis and monks) did not call the people to worship them. Had they done so, people would not have listened to them. They, however, made ḥalāl for them what was ḥarām and made ḥarām for them what was ḥalāl, so they (the people of the Scripture) worshiped them without being aware of it.’
In another version of the same ḥadīth4, the Imām is reported to have said:
‘By Allāh, the people did not pray or fast for them (rabbis and monks) but they (rabbis and monks) made lawful for the people what was unlawful and unlawful what was lawful, so they (the People of the Scripture) followed them (i.e., their scholars).’
This tafsīr5 can be substantiated by other verses of the Qur’ān, which, although explicitly mention the people of the Scripture claiming godhood for ʿĪsā b. Maryam (ʿa) or sonship of Allāh for ʿUzayr (Ezra), do not mention such a claim of theirs for their scholars. Instead, what we find is:
Fight those who [. . .] do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful . . . (9:29)
Extensive corroboration for this exegesis can be found in Sunnī sources as well, where the same tafsīr has been transmitted from the likes of ʿAbdullāh b. ʿAbbās, Abū al-ʿĀliyah, etc.6
The above account clarifies that the Ahl al-Kitāb did not believe their scholars were conferred with lordship or any divine attributes, and yet, their deed or action of blind obedience or taqlīd of these scholars amounted to what Allāh deemed ‘taking as lords (arbāb, plural of rabb) besides Him’. This is different from the Christians, for example, calling Jesus their ‘Lord and Savior’. The Jews, on the other hand, have not been known to have deified their rabbis either.
It thus follows that this association with Allāh in His rubūbiyyah has to do with what act of theirs has been condemned in connection with the verse, which concerns taḥlīl (legalization, making lawful) of ḥarām and taḥrīm (prohibition, making unlawful) of ḥalāl.
Their shirk in this domain becomes apparent when it is borne in mind that only Allāh has the right to legislate in religion:
Legislation (ḥukm) is only for Allāh. He has commanded that you worship naught but Him. (12:40)
Or have they other shurakā’ (partners) who have legislated (sharaʿū, from tashrīʿ) for them a religion (dīn) not permitted by Allāh? (42:21)
From the above verses, it is clear that the action of following the verdict of creation while disobeying and defying that of the Creator violates what can be termed as Tawḥīd al-Ḥākimiyyah.
Obedience to creation in defiance of the Creator
Disobedience of Allāh and His Messenger is definitely tantamount to fisq and ẓulm in Islām; however, there is an avenue where such an act falls under the category of shirk, lest it be debated that ‘taking an entity as a lord or god besides Allāh’ isn’t shirk!
And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allāh has not been mentioned, for indeed, it is grave disobedience (fisq). And indeed do the devils inspire their allies (awliyā’) to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be mushrikūn. (6:121)
‘Taking as Lords/Gods’ versus ‘naming and calling them literal Gods/Lords’
Their intention
The report from Abī Baṣīr informs us that Imām al-Ṣādiq (as) held that the Jews and Christians worshipped their scholars without being aware of it.
But how can they be blamed for something they had no awareness of? The answer is that while their intention was not to literally devote certain acts of worship to their scholars, what their actions entailed was a kind of association (shirk) with Allāh, and thus, it became an act of ʿibādah li ghayrillāh (worship of other than Allah). The blame upon them is that of disregarding the ḥukm of Allāh and substituting in its place the legislation and verdict of their scholars.
Their deed
The verse under discussion (9:31) also mentions ʿĪsā (ʿa) alongside the aḥbār and ruhbān amongst the arbāb (lords) they, i.e., the people of the scripture, took besides Allāh. However, their claim of godhood for Nabī ʿĪsā, peace be upon him, was literal and intentional:
They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allāh is Christ, the son of Mary. (5:17)
Their ascription of godhood to Jesus falls under not only ittikhādh (taking, adopting) but also tasmiyah (naming), i.e., literally calling someone ‘god’. There is a difference between the two. From the above verses and narrations, it is clear that the former subsumes and includes the latter, while the latter is specific, and not every kind of ittikhādh requires that the entity attributed with some characteristic specific to lordship or godhood be literally called a ‘god’ or ‘lord’.
A narration attributed to7 Imām al-Bāqir sums up the aforementioned arguments in a concise manner:
‘As for the Messiah, they disobeyed him when they exonerated him in their perception to the extent that they claimed he was a god (5:17) and the son of God (9:30); and a group from among them said: He is the third of three. (5:73). As for their rabbis and monks, they obeyed them, took their words, followed what they commanded, and adhered to the religion they called them to. Thus, they took them as lords by their obedience to them and their abandonment of what Allah, His Books, and His Messengers commanded. They cast Allah’s commandments behind their backs (3:187), and instead, they followed and obeyed what their rabbis and monks commanded them.
This was mentioned in our Book so that we may take lessons and learn from them (i.e., their example).8 Thus, Allah reproached the Children of Israel for what they had done. Allah says: And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above what they associate [with Him] (9:31).’
To understand the above concept, the following verses should be kept in mind:
Have you seen the one who takes his desires (hawāhu) as his god (ilāhahu)? (25:43)
Have you seen him who has taken his desire to be his god and whom Allāh has led astray knowingly, set a seal upon his hearing and heart, and put a blindfold on his sight? (45:23)
How exactly does one take their hawā (desires, whims) as a god? In what manner do we worship our desires? Does this expression denote an act of prostration before a sculpture hewn from stone or rock, representing the abstract realities that our desires embody? Certainly not. Rather, to worship one’s desires is to become subservient to one’s own whims, following and obeying them while disregarding the injunctions of the Creator. This, in effect, entails elevating one’s hawā above or alongside God in the realm of religious obedience, which is itself an essential aspect of worship.
It is thus clear that actions, by their very nature, can amount to associating partners with God, even without a wilful intention to associate with Him. If that wasn’t the case, one could easily prostrate to an idol and claim it wasn’t an act of worship because they didn’t intend by it any expression of subservience or didn’t do so while believing in the divinity of the said idol!
How do we ‘worship’ someone without ‘worshiping’ them?
Allāh, in the Qur’ān, rebukes the doctrine of the Trinity, as we have seen in Sūrah al-Mā’idah (verse 73), as it is irreconcilable with monotheism. He, exalted is He, also rebukes and excommunicates those who claim sonship of God for Jesus or literal godhood for him. However, nowhere do we find, whether we look in the Islāmic or the Christian tradition, any large or significant body of the Naṣārā holding the mother of ʿĪsā, Sayyidah Maryam, peace be upon them both, as either part of the Trinity or a deity/god separate from the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
However, on the day of judgment, Allāh shall ask al-Masīḥ:
‘O Jesus son of Mary! Was it you who said to the people, ‘‘Take me (ittakhiḏūnī) and my mother for two gods (ilāhayn) besides Allah’’? (5:116)
Some may argue that the deification of Maryam (ʿa) is a concomitant of claiming godhood for her son ʿĪsā (ʿa), as it results in deeming her ‘the mother of God’. However, while the shirkī nature of such a saying and belief is apparent, it does not necessarily amount to worshiping Mary or conferring her with ulūhiyyah (godhood), especially when prophet ʿĪsā’s response is borne in mind: I did not say to them except what You had commanded me: ‘‘Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’’ (5:117) Thus, the context is that of worship – ʿibādah.
Here is where what the Twelver exegete, ʿAllāmah Sayyid Muḥammad Ḥusayn al-Ṭabāṭabā’ī, has written9 comes in handy:
The worship of Mary, the mother of Christ, by Christians, takes various forms. One form is a type of prayer that includes praise, pleas for assistance (istighāthah), and intercession (istishfāʿ). Additionally, there are fasts dedicated to her, known by name. The reverence is often accompanied by humility and devotion towards her memory, as well as towards her images and icons. It is intertwined with the belief in her authority, which, according to Christian doctrine, stems from the unseen world.
What the late ʿAllāmah has written can indeed be corroborated by what we find in the Catholic Christian tradition itself. Have a look at the following duʿā10 devoted to lady Maryam, peace be upon her:
O Mother of Perpetual Help! Thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made Thee so powerful, so rich and so bountiful in order that Thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to Thee; come to my aid, dearest Mother, for I recommend myself to Thee. In Thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to Thee I entrust my soul. Count me among Thy most devoted servants; take me under Thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if Thou protect me, dear Mother, I fear nothing; not from my sins because Thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because Thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my Judge, because by one prayer from Thee, He will be appeased. But one thing I fear, that in the hour of temptation, I may through negligence fail to have recourse to Thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace to have recourse to Thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. Amen.
Even a glance at this invocation of Mary tells us that when Allāh accuses Christians of taking Maryam (ʿa) as a god, what is meant by it is them invoking her, seeking recourse to her, pleading to her for succor and aid, and requesting her intercession11.
Good intentions, foul outcomes:
I want to share this narration12 as some food for thought for our readers:
Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq said: Indeed, shirk is more concealed than the creeping of ants. He also said: From it is to turn a ring for one to remember a need, and the like of this.
Ponder over the following verse, keeping the above saying of the Imām in mind: And remember your Lord when you forget [a thing] and say, “Perhaps my Lord will guide me to what is nearer than this to right conduct.” (18:24)
What can constitute shirk?
Shaykh al-Ṣadūq narrates13 with his chain from ʿAbbās b. Yazīd that he said:
I said to Abī ʿAbdillāh al-Ṣādiq, ‘The common people think that shirk is harder to see than the footstep of an ant on a black cloak at night.’
The Imām replied, ‘One would not become a mushrik unless he prays (i.e., offers ṣalāh) to other than Allāh; makes an offering for other than Allāh; or does duʿā to anyone other than the Honorable the Exalted Allāh.’14
The same has been narrated15 from ʿAbdullāh b. Masʿūd in Sunnī sources, albeit with a weak chain16:
al-Ṣalt b. Dīnār, from Abī ʿUthmān al-Nahdī who said: I heard ʿAbdullāh b. Masʿūd say: A servant does not reach disbelief and polytheism until he slaughters for other than Allāh, or prays (i.e., offers ṣalāh) to other than Allāh, or supplicates (does duʿā) to other than Allāh.
Footnotes:
- The word comes from the root gh-w-th (غوث). Istighāthah to both Allāh and humans has been mentioned in the Qur’ān: ‘When you asked help of your Lord, and He answered you . . .’ (8:9) and ‘The one who was from his followers sought his (Mūsā’s) help against him who was from his enemies.’ (28:15) Some cite this verse to substantiate seeking recourse to prophets after they depart from this realm of life; however, such a conclusion is incompatible with the context and content of the verse.
↩︎ - Tawassul is mentioned twice in the Qur’ān (5:35, 17:57) and both times in the meaning of seeking nearness to Allāh through good deeds, which is also the kind of tawassul promoted by Imām ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (ʿa) as can be seen in sermon 110 in Nahj al-Balāghah, chains for which can be found in other Twelver sources.
↩︎ - al-Kāfī by Shaykh al-Kulaynī (الكافي – الشيخ الكليني – ج ١ – الصفحة ٥٣) (https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/2/18/1) (الكافي – الشيخ الكليني – ج ٢ – الصفحة ٣٩٨) (https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/2/1/169/7). al-Maḥāsin by al-Barqī: (المحاسن – أحمد بن محمد بن خالد البرقي – ج ١ – الصفحة ٢٤٦) Grading by ʿAllāmah al-Majlisī: (https://lib.eshia.ir/71429/1/183)
↩︎ - ibid. (الكافي – الشيخ الكليني – ج ١ – الصفحة ٥٣) (https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/2/18/3) This version is authenticated by Āyatullāh Shaykh Bāqir al-Bahbūdī in his Ṣaḥīḥ al-Kāfī and has been graded majhūl ka al-ṣaḥīḥ by al-Majlisī in his Mir’āt al-ʿUqūl (https://ar.lib.eshia.ir/71429/11/179).
↩︎ - A similar tafsīr has been attributed to the Prophet ﷺ in Jāmiʿ al-Tirmidhī albeit with a weak sanad. (https://shamela.ws/book/1363/2826) (https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3095)
↩︎ - See Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī, volume 14, page 208-213. (https://shamela.ws/book/43/7774)(https://tafsir.app/tabari/9/31)
↩︎ - The narration is found in the work of Tafsīr attributed to ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm al-Qummī. (تفسير القمي – علي بن إبراهيم القمي – ج ١ – الصفحة ٢٨٩) He was one of the major shuyūkh (teachers) of Shaykh al-Kulaynī, the author of al-Kāfī. Scholars say that the version of his tafsīr that has reached us has been altered and mixed with other exegeses. Scholars of rijāl note that many narrations in it come from chains with notorious ghulāt and kaḏḏābīn in them. Thus, when we quote from this book, it is only because we have verified and authenticated its contents from either the clear and self-explanatory verses of the Qur’ān and/or other authentic narrations from reliable sources. Even if the quoted narration can’t be authenticated based on its chain, since it is disconnected and Abū al-Jārūd, the primary narrator, is unreliable, the matan (text) is corroborated by what we find in other reliable ḥadīths we have adduced above. This particular citation is to demonstrate that this understanding of the nuṣūṣ existed amongst the scholars and was not invented or innovated by us.
↩︎ - There is certainly in their stories/narratives a lesson for those of understanding. (12:111) Another element that testifies to the veracity of attributing the contents of this report to al-Bāqir is how it mirrors the worldview of the Qur’ān.
↩︎ - Al-Mīzān fī Tafsīr al-Qur’ān, volume 6, page 243: (تفسير الميزان – السيد الطباطبائي – ج ٦ – الصفحة ٢٤٣) quoting from Tafsīr al-Manār. English translation: (https://almizan.org/vol/12/70-231).
↩︎ - See https://www.catholicdoors.com/prayers/english3/p02293.htm
↩︎ - This is not to be confused with the kind of intercession (شفاعة or استشفاع) which is talked about in the Qur’ān pertaining to the day of judgment. (Refer to 2:255 and 21:28.) Rather, the Christian seeking of intercession from Sayyidah Maryam is to be compared with Allāh’s saying: And they worship other than Allah that which neither harms them nor benefits them, and they say, “These are our intercessors with Allah.” (10:18)
↩︎ - Maʿānī al-Akhbār by Shaykh al-Ṣadūq (معاني الأخبار – الشيخ الصدوق – الصفحة ٣٧٩) (https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/28/1/429/1). Authentication by Āyatullāh Āṣif Muḥsinī: (https://ar.lib.eshia.ir/11775/3/143)
↩︎ - al-Khiṣāl by Shaykh al-Ṣadūq (الخصال – الشيخ الصدوق – الصفحة ١٣٦) (https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/10/4/115/1) (https://ar.lib.eshia.ir/15339/1/136) The chain of this narration contains majhūl narrator(s). However, its content is acceptable because it is in line with the Quran.
↩︎ - For discussions on how and when supplication to other than God becomes an act of shirk, please refer to the articles on this topic on the Al Islaah website and The Tawheedi Encyclopaedia.
↩︎ - Tafsīr Yaḥyā b. Salām, volume 1, page 334. (https://shamela.ws/book/12851/286#p6)
↩︎ - al-Ṣalt b. Dīnār is matrūk: (https://shamela.ws/book/2171/496#p10) (https://shamela.ws/book/1269/64#p1) (https://shamela.ws/book/2170/2021)
↩︎
