Is calling upon Nad-e-Ali Shirk (polytheism)?
Written by: Abdul Jabbar Salhari, Joya Sharif
In the field of practices (Amliyat), polytheistic acts have become so prevalent that ordinary people, let alone those who call themselves scholars and claim knowledge and understanding, seem to be caught in this vortex. Recently, a writing came to my attention in which some claims were presented with great confidence without understanding the basic realities of beliefs. This situation demanded a serious reckoning of these scholarly irregularities and intellectual deviations, otherwise there is a fear that this game with the faith of simple-minded people will continue.
The issue under discussion is related to "Nad-e-Ali", seeking help from saints, and the permissibility of blowing (Dum) and amulets. Some gentlemen, especially Noor Zaman Shazli Sahib, consider it a tried and tested prayer, a spiritual practice, and a custom that has been going on for centuries, and are in favor of its permissibility, even its desirability; while other scholars, whether Sunni or Shia, consider it unproven and even contrary to the doctrine of Tawhid (Oneness of God) in some cases.
The person concerned presented some points in support of his position, which can be summarized as follows: Nad-e-Ali is called Shirk without investigation; it has been prevalent for centuries; there is no explicit polytheistic aspect in it; it is transmitted through Kashf (revelation) from Imam Jafar Sadiq (RA); it is permissible to call upon saints; and Bid'ah (innovation) and Shirk are being confused.
These claims may seem attractive at first glance, but their value in the scholarly balance can only be determined when they meet the principles of the Quran, Sunnah, and the way of the Salaf (early generations of Muslims).
Here, it is necessary to clarify some basic terms so that the issue can be fully understood:
Shirk:
Associating anyone with Allah Almighty in His essence, attributes, or actions.
(Al-Mufradat lil Raghib, p: 259)
Dua (Supplication):
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) said:
"Ad-Duaa Huwal Ibadah" (Supplication is worship)
(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2969)
Istighatha (Invocation):
Calling someone for help. If this is from someone other than Allah and is of a supernatural nature, then there is a strong possibility of Shirk.
The Holy Quran provides very clear guidance in this regard:
"And that the Masajid are for Allah, so do not invoke anyone along with Allah." (Surah Al-Jinn: 18)
That is, do not call anyone with Allah.
Similarly, it is stated:
"Iyyaka Na'budu Wa Iyyaka Nastaeen"
(Surah Al-Fatiha: 5)
You alone we worship, and You alone we ask for help.
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) said:
"Iza Sa'alta Fas'al Allah"
(Sunan Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2516)
When you ask, ask only Allah.
The sayings of the Imams of Salaf also support this fact. Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) says:
"No one other than Allah should be called upon"
(Al-Fiqh Al-Akbar)
Imam Nawawi (RA) writes:
"Supplication should only be made to Allah"
(Sharh Sahih Muslim, 17/28)
Ibn Taymiyyah (RA) says:
"Whoever calls upon someone other than Allah is a Mushrik (polytheist)"
(Majmu' Al-Fatawa, 1/124)
Now, a review of the presented claims is presented:
First claim: Nad-e-Ali is called Shirk without investigation.
This is actually an attempt to divert attention from the real issue. The basic question is whether this practice is proven from the Quran and Sunnah or not. If there is no proof, then mere claim has no weight.
Second claim: It has been prevalent for centuries.
Mere prevalence is not a proof of the truth of any practice. The Quran makes it clear that the majority can also be misguided.
(Surah Al-An'am: 116)
Third claim: Where is Shirk in it?
If help is being sought from Hazrat Ali (RA) in Nad-e-Ali, then this is Istighatha, and when Istighatha is from someone other than Allah, then it becomes contrary to Tawhid.
Fourth claim: It is free from polytheistic words.
This is a partial defense, because the real consideration is the belief and meaning more than the words; and even the words themselves contain a polytheistic aspect.
Fifth claim: It was obtained through Kashf from Imam Jafar Sadiq (RA).
Kashf is not a proof of Sharia, and there is no authentic source for this attribution to Imam Jafar Sadiq (RA).
Sixth claim: Saints are alive, so it is permissible to call upon them.
The life of Barzakh (intermediate realm) is accepted in its place, but the Quran says:
"Innaka La Tusmi'ul Mawta" (Surah An-Naml: 80)
Moreover, the Companions (RA) never called upon the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in the manner that is done in Nad-e-Ali after his death.
Seventh claim: Bid'ah and Shirk are separate.
This is correct in principle, but when help is sought from someone other than Allah, the matter is not limited to Bid'ah but enters the realm of Shirk.
The issue of blowing (Dum) and amulets:
It is proven from the Holy Prophet (PBUH) to blow (Dum) and use saliva.
(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 5745; Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 2194)
But this was a direct action, in which no one other than Allah was called upon; therefore, its analogy to Nad-e-Ali is not correct.
There is no correct Sharia proof of Nad-e-Ali.
Its basis is on Kashf and unauthentic narrations.
If help is sought from someone other than Allah in it, then it is Shirk.
The belief in the life of saints is in its place, but it is not permissible to call upon them.
Applying the proofs of Dum to it is a Qiyas Ma'al Farq (analogy with a difference).
Reading Nad-e-Ali as Istighatha is not proven in Sharia, and if help is sought from someone other than Allah in it, then it is contrary to Tawhid.
Moreover, it is also clear from historical and Hadith research that the poems or Hadith known as "Nad-e-Ali" are baseless and fabricated according to the Ahl-e-Sunnat. Allama Mulla Ali Qari (RA) and Allama Ajluni (RA) write:
"Wa Kaza Min Muftariyat Al-Shia Al-Shani'a Hadith: Nad Aliya..."
(Al-Asrar Al-Marfu'a, p: 385; Kashf Al-Khafa, 2/447)
Even in Shia sources, these poems or Hadith are not found before the ninth century Hijri. Sheikh Ibrahim Kafami mentioned them as a practice in his book "Al-Misbah" (p: 182-183), but he did not call them Hadith nor did he attribute them to any authentic source.
Later scholars, although attributed them to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) or the Imams of Ahl-e-Bayt, but they also did not have any ancient and reliable source. Therefore, this attribution cannot be said to be correct on a scholarly standard.
There is also disturbance in the internal style of the text, which has been pointed out by the annotator of "Bihar Al-Anwar" himself that the last sentence is not in harmony with the previous statement and is probably a later addition.
(Hashiya Bihar Al-Anwar, 20/73)
"Nad-e-Ali" is neither a reliable Hadith, nor is its proof found in the initial sources, nor are its contents in harmony with the doctrine of Tawhid. Therefore, attributing it to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) or the Imams of Ahl-e-Bayt is against scholarly honesty.
However, the fact remains that permissible Tawassul (seeking a means) through the Prophets and Saints, especially through the sacred being of Sayyid-e-Alam (PBUH), is a source of blessing and happiness for the Ahl-e-Sunnat. May Allah Almighty grant us the goodness and blessings of this world and the hereafter through His beloved (PBUH).
You have carefully read this article of mine. Now, while leaving, also read Nad-e-Ali. Its translation is also being written along with it. Read it and decide for yourself whether it will be permissible for the people of faith to read it even if it is accepted? Here, read:
Nad-e-Aliyan Mazhar Al-Ajaib Tajiduhu Aunan Laka Fi Al-Nawaib
Kullu Hummin Wa Ghammin Sayanjali Bi Nubuwatika Ya Muhammad Wa Bi Wilayatika Ya Ali
Its translation is something like this:
Call upon Ali, who manifests wonders, you will find him as your helper in difficulties, all sorrows and worries will be removed by your prophethood, O Muhammad, and by your Wilayat (authority), O Ali.
Now tell me, what does "Call upon Ali" mean? Whereas in every difficulty, only the Lord of the Worlds should be called upon, not Ali.
Secondly... look at these words: "You will find him as your helper in difficulties." Is the help of Allah, the Lord of the Universe, the Creator of the Universe, included in every difficulty, or that of Sayyidna Ali Karam Allah Wajhu? Why did the Holy Prophet (PBUH) not call upon Sayyidna Ali in the thorny bushes of Taif? Why not in Badr and Uhud, Ahzab and Hunayn? Only Khaybar remained for calling? He should have called in a difficult matter like the incident of Ifk (false accusation). But it did not happen. The point is that calling anyone other than Allah Almighty is clearly Shirk.
Now also observe the last part of the poem: "By your Wilayat (authority), O Ali."
Do you know how many principles of religion the Ahl-e-Sunnah have and how many the Rawafiz (Shia) have? This sentence is shaking the Ahl-e-Sunnah about their beliefs. Remember that according to the Ahl-e-Sunnah, the principles of religion, that is, on which the foundation of religion is based, are only three:
Tawhid (Oneness of God)
Risalat (Prophethood)
Akhirat (Hereafter)
If faith in any of these is shaken, then a Muslim becomes a Kafir (disbeliever). There is nothing fourth besides these three that makes a Muslim a Kafir. If the jurists mention some things, they revolve around these things. While the Rawafiz include Wilayat and Imamate with these three. Apparently, Wilayat and Imamate are good words, but in reality, they have a big meaning in themselves. Therefore, a famous Shia scholar writes in his book Hayat Al-Qulub, Volume 3, page 3, while explaining it that "Wa Haq In Ast Ke Dar Kamalat Wa Sharait Wa Sifat Farq Miyan Paighambar Wa Imam Neest" which means that the truth is that there is no difference between the Prophet and the Imam in perfections, conditions and attributes. Similarly, on page 81, volume 3 of the same book, it is written: "Neez Imamat Fi Al-Haqiqat Nabuwat Ast" There is no need to translate this Persian text into Urdu.
Imam Inqilab Iran Ayatollah Khomeini Sahib has written: "Az Zaruriyat Mazhab Ma Ast Ke Kase Ba Maqamat Manavi Aimma Nemirasad Hatta Malik Muqarrab Wa Al-Nabi Mursal. Ein Juz Asul Mazhab Ma Ast." (Wilayat Faqiha page 81) which means: "It is included in the necessities of our religion that no one can reach the spiritual positions of the Imams, not even the close angel and the sent prophet. This is a part of the principles of our religion."
That is, according to the Rawafiz, the belief in Imamate is one of the basic necessities of religion, which is mentioned in Nad-e-Ali that "By your Wilayat (Imamate), O Ali."
Now tell me, what will Shazli Sahib say about this? Will he still give a fatwa that reading this mantra does not affect beliefs and ideologies? Then it is not a belief, it has become a nose of wax, which can be turned in any direction, there is no difference in its nature. Al-Iyaaz Billah (We seek refuge in Allah).
***