The Reward attached to Ṣalāt al-Fātiḥ

Another tenet criticized in relation to ṣalāt al-fātiḥ is the issue of the merits attached to it. The author of Jawāhir ʿAlī Ḥarāzim claims, inter alia, that the reward for one recitation of it is equal to the reward for all of the prayers of glorification to God (tasbīḥ) that have ever been said in this universe, all prayers in remembrance of God (dhikr), every invocation (duʿāʾ) long or short, and six thousand recitations of Qurʾān.⁶¹¹ From al-Ifrīqī’s point of view, this is nothing less than

609 For details, see: ʿAlī Ḥarāzim, Jawāhir al-maʿānī, vol. I, pp. 135-136.

610 The treatise in question is al-Tijānīyya wa-khuṣūmuhum wa-l-qawl al-ḥaqq, written upon the persistent request of a fellow Tijānī Hamzaʾ ʿAbd al-Munʿim, complaining about ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ʿAbd al-Khāliq’s al-Fikr al-ṣufī fī ḍawʾ al-Kitāb wa-l-Sunna, first published in 1974 CE and reprinted at least three times in 1984, 1986 and 2016 CE.

The book purportedly claims that ṣalāt al-fātih is a Tijānī invention. In response, ʿUmar Masʿūd argues that even the reward attached to the litany was known prior the existence of Tijāniyya brotherhood, let alone the litany itself.

ʿUmar Masʿūd, al-Tijānīyya wa-khuṣūmuhum wa-l-qawl al-ḥaqq, n.p. [Khartoum], n.d, p. 10. An online copy of this book is available at http://www.cheikh-skiredj.com/tijaniya-negateurs.pdf

611 ʿAlī Ḥarāzim, Jawāhir al-maʿānī, vol. I, p. 136. One should note that this was not the only merit of ṣalāt al-fātiḥ mentioned in Tijānī sources which are loaded with the lofty merits and rewards of this small prayer formula. See for

176

disbelief (kufr), apostasy (ridda) and departure from the community of Islam (khurūj ʿan l-milla al-Islāmiyya). “Is there any Muslim who would not announce the holder of this claim to be an infidel?”⁶¹² he asks his Tijānī interlocutors, with great disappointment. He even goes a step further, stating that “He who does not reject this claim and show signs of consent is an infidel himself.

Such a person will be asked to repent and if doesn’t he will be killed”.⁶¹³ The Malian Salafī reproaches his interlocutors for not using their intellects, a precious divine gift, in order to find out the truth for themselves.

For Ifrīqī, this conviction contains several problematic issues that are briefly discussed in al-Anwār. It not only entails believing in the continuation of revelation after the Prophet, a sin the Qurʾān denounces in strong words,⁶¹⁴ but as such also entails the litany’s superiority over the divine eternal speech, the Qurʾān. He seems to be stunned by this exalted claim, asking: “What can be superior to the Qurʾān? Is it possible for something to descend to mankind after the Prophet Muḥammad, let alone for it be superior to the Qurʾān?”⁶¹⁵ One who claims this, according to the Malian, can neither have achieved to know the Prophet in the true sense of the word, nor the blessings he had brought to humankind, nor the reason he was sent as a messenger.⁶¹⁶ For al-Ifrīqī, this is enough of a reason to denounce the Tijāniyya. In the following paragraph, his interlocutors are called upon to relinquish their ties with the order, labelled by the Malian as an order of infidelity (al-ṭarīqa al-kufriyya). Any sort of comparison between the divine eternal speech and that of God’s creation is unacceptable to al-Ifrīqī. He attracts the attention of his interlocutors to a Prophetic tradition in which the superiority of the holy divine speech over all other speech is compared to the superiority of God Himself over His creation.⁶¹⁷ Like all of the brotherhood’s antagonists the author of al-Anwār then argues that such a claim (the alleged supremacy of the litany) must be seen as an attempt to establish the superiority of the Tijānīs over the Prophet and his companions, since the latter could not have had the chance to worship God with this litany that is claimed to be

example ʿAlī Ḥarāzim, Jawāhir al-maʿānī, vol. I, pp. 136-140; Muḥammad Muḥammad al-ʿArabī b. al-Saʾiḥ, Bughyat al-mustafīd, pp. 370-77; Maḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Wāḥid al-Naẓīfī, al-Durra al-kharīda fi sharḥ al-Al-yāqūta al-farīda, vol. 4, Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1392/1972, pp. 200-30.

612 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, p. 21.

613 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, p. 21.

614 See: al-Aḥzāb 33:40.

615 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, pp. 21-22.

616 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, pp. 21-22.

617 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, pp. 22-3.

177

superior to the divine speech. “Do you really worship Allah with something superior to the Qurʾān?” asks he his interlocutors. “In this case, I swear to God (wallāhi) you are superior to the Prophet and his companions, for they did not worship Allah with anything superior to the Qurʾān.

The Prophet and likewise his companions recited parts of the Qurʾān as litanies every night”.⁶¹⁸ The alleged supremacy of ṣalāt al-fātiḥ, in his view, causes the attention of ordinary Muslims to deviate from the divine eternal speech. Irritated in the extreme by the degree of supremacy attached to this tiny litany, he tries to mock his interlocutors for their affiliation to an order which regards the Qurʾān to be inferior to human speech, holding that a proper mind cannot accept the alleged ascendancy of al-al-yāqūta al-farīda over a single one of the prayer formulas reported on the authority of the Prophet, let alone all the prayers that have ever been uttered in this universe. At this point, the Malian Salafī cannot hold back from tarring all Tijānīs with a single brush, referring to them as ignorant (jahūl) and stupid (ghabī) ones who have failed to comprehend the simplest fact of haylala’s having been declared by the Prophet to be the best dhikr formula ever recited by a divine messenger. The extraordinary merits attached to ṣalāt al-fātiḥ may also be interpreted as a laying claim, on the part of the Tijānī master, to an otherwise inaccessible rank, entailing his superiority over all divine messengers, the Prophet Muḥammad included: Thus the Malian Salafī seems to have understood the issue. He therefore puts another question to his interlocutors: “O people! were not Adam, Noah, Moses, Jesus and Muḥammad, peace be upon them all, remembering Allah? Is it possible for the inventor of this order to be superior to them?”⁶¹⁹

The traditional Tijānī strategy for refuting such allegations differentiates between the issue of reward and the issue of superiority.⁶²⁰ Reward is by divine grace, they say, and should not be

618 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, p. 22. Al-Hilālī, writing several decades after the Malian, similarly underlines the same point. Each Tijānī, he argues, has to recite ṣalāt al-fātiḥ at least 150 times each day—with the exclusion of supererogatory recitations—which would purportedly bring a reward of nine hundred thousand recitations of the Qurʾān, whereas one proper recitation of the divine eternal speech requires a time period of three days. This would mean that the Prophet and the companions could not, in the course of their lifetimes, have earned, and thus received, the reward which ordinary Tijānīs get in a single day. Hence, he states, “What kind of deviation could match the deviation of he who claims for himself much more reward than the Prophets… and the righteous servants of God”.

See: al-Hilālī, al-Hadiyya al-hādiya, p. 105.

619 Al-Ifrīqī, al-Anwār al-raḥmāniyya, p. 23.

620 See for instance Muḥammad Fāl Abbā’s refutation of al-Zamzamī, in which he differentiates between

supremacy/superiority (afḍaliyya) and distinction (maziyya). One less superior (mafḍūl) may possess a distinction that is missing in a superior one (afḍal), he argues. The Prophet, for example, bestowed distinctions upon some of his companions: upon Ubay b. Kaʿb, upon whom he bestowed the distinction of the proper recitation of the Qurʾān, and upon Muʿāz b. Jabal, upon whom he bestowed the distinction of the knowledge of halāl and harām, but these

178

mistaken for a sign of the recipient’s superiority. The same pattern of argumentation is followed by al-Ḥāfiẓ:

When someone is told by the Prophet “Allah will reward you, due to your praise of me with a thousand recitations of the Qurʾān (alf khatma)”, the wise (ʿuqalāʾ) would immediately understand that either as sheer divine grace, rather than a reward deserved by the reciter; or, that he is superior to others; or that his formula of ṣalāt ʿalā l-nabiyy is superior to the Qurʾān.⁶²¹

As one may notice, the Egyptian Tijānī is at pains to turn the tables on his opponents and accuse them of being stupid enough to interpret the merit allocated to the litany by the Prophet himself as equating to its supremacy over the divine eternal speech. From this point of view, he claims, the ascendancy of the Qurʾān is obvious for Tijānīs, to the extent that they need not engage themselves with the matter. Thus, he addresses his opponents: “Understand the reward for ṣalāt al-fātiḥ in the way your hatred permits. As far our belief is concerned, the Qurʾān is superior to all other speech”.⁶²² Despite the gigantic reward attached to the recitation of al-al-yāqūta al-farīda, he says, Tijānīs have not ceased their recitation of the Qurʾān. The deceivers (mukhdiʿūn) should know, he continues, that the Tijānī master had determined the daily recitation of one thirtieth of the book (juzʾ) to be the lowest acceptable requirement for his disciples. Tijānīs are portrayed by al-Ḥāfiẓ as among the leading supporters of the Qurʾān and the Sunna, which fact, he says, their adversaries would comprehend if they had the opportunity to live among them.⁶²³ Likewise, he says, neither the supreme master of the brotherhood nor his followers had perceived themselves to be superior to the companions of the Prophet on the basis of the reward attached to their litany. Such a belief, according to the Egyptian, would not only pose a contradiction to the Prophetic traditions but would also go against the statements of the founding figure of the Tijāniyya, who perceived the companions as intermediaries between the Prophet and his umma (the universal Muslim

distinctions did not entail their supremacy over Abū Bakr, who is unanimously considered the best among the Prophet’s companions. For details and other examples, see: Muḥammad Fāl Abbā b. ʿAbd Allah b. Muḥammad Fāl al-ʿAlawī, Rashq al-Sihām fī-ma fī kalām al-munkir ʿalā l-shaykh al-Tijānī min l-aghlāṭ wa-l-awhām, Rabat:

Maṭbaʿa al-Amniyya, 1394/1974, pp. 63-64.

621 Muḥammad al-Ḥāfiẓ, Radd akādhīb al-muftarīn, p 28.

622 Muḥammad al-Ḥāfiẓ, Radd akādhīb al-muftarīn, p 28.

623 Muḥammad al-Ḥāfiẓ, Radd akādhīb al-muftarīn, pp. 24-25.

179

community), who for the same reason would continue to benefit from the pious deeds performed by members of this community.⁶²⁴

The same statement is reiterated by ʿUmar Masʿūd as proof of Tijānī convictions regarding the companions of the Prophet.⁶²⁵ The gigantic reward of al-yāqūta al-farīda is left untouched in his discourse; rather, he restricts himself to another statement of the Tijānī master’s, in which any sort of comparison between divine speech and that of humankind is dismissed: “The superiority of the Qurʾān over all other formulas of prayer (adhkār), and salāt ʿalā l-nabiyy, and others, is a matter brighter than the sun”.⁶²⁶ Unlike his Egyptian master, who explicitly argues against any connection between reward and relative superiority, the Sudanese confines himself to this forceful remark by the founding figure. This is another point which differentiates his reply from that of his master. In a recent lecture given in Hijaz, in a Tijānī zāwiya known as the “Bride of the Lodges” (ʿarūs al-zawāyā),⁶²⁷ however, he adopted a much more radical stance on the reward of the litany.⁶²⁸ The main topic of the lecture was a comparison between ṣalāt ʿalā l-nabiyy and the holy Qurʾān from the point of view of the reciter. In it, ʿUmar Masʿūd argued: “The one who recites the Qurʾān without conforming to its injunctions invites divine retribution. He should better recite formulas in the praise of the Prophet instead”.⁶²⁹ Nevertheless, when he was asked about the reward of ṣalāt al-fātiḥ, the Sudanese rejected its apparent superiority to the Qurʾān, stating: “Six thousand’, this phrase has not been uttered by the master Aḥmad al-Tijānī”.⁶³⁰ The absence of any such phrase in either al-Jāmiʿ or Rawḍ al-muḥibb al-fānī (The Garden of the Evanescent Lover) by al-Mishrī (who, along with ʿAlī Ḥarāzim, was responsible for recording the statements of the supreme master), argued the Sudanese, is clear evidence of the fact that this sentence does not belong among the authentic statements of the supreme master. Therefore, he said, this must have been a printing

624 Muḥammad al-Ḥāfiẓ, Radd akādhīb al-muftarīn, p. 35. The supreme master of the Tijāniyya argued that since a special rank was allocated to his disciples and followers by the Prophet himself, no one else could attain this rank no matter how great and plentiful his pious deeds might be. See the full statement in: ʿAlī Ḥarāzim, Jawāhir al-maʿānī, vol. I, p. 142.

625 ʿUmar Masʿūd, al-Radd ʿalā l-Ifrīqī, p. 51.

626 ʿAlī Ḥarāzim , Jawāhir al-maʿānī, vol. I, p. 176.

627 According to a Tijānī informant residing in Saudi Arabia, the precise location of ʿarūs al-zawāyā in Hijaz is deliberately kept hidden. Online conversation with Ghassān b. Sālim al-Tūnisī on 06.08.2017.

628 This lecture took place during ʿUmar Masʿūd’s recent journey to Hijaz in May-June 2017. Online conversation with Haytham b. ʿUmar al-Tijānī on 05.08.2017.

629 I possess an audio recording of the lecture, obtained on 12.08.2017 from the eldest son of ʿUmar Masʿūd.

630 Audio recording of the lecture obtained from ʿUmar Masʿūd’s eldest son Haytham ʿUmar al-Tijānī.

180

mistake,⁶³¹ and should be treated in the light of the authentic sayings of Aḥmad al-Tijānī. The instruction of the founding figure of the Tijāniyya to evaluate statements reported on his behalf in the light of the sublime sharīʿa, according to the Sudanese, should certainly be applied here. This stance seems to have outraged certain Tijānīs, both within and outside of Sudan. Ghassān b. Sālim al-Tūnisī, a Saudi Tijānī who had missed the lecture,⁶³² referred the matter to ʿUmar Masʿūd’s son Haytham b. ʿUmar Masʿūd, for him to illuminate the issue. Ghassān is a disciple of Muḥammad Mawlūd b. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al- Saʿdī al-Shinqīṭī’s, who took the litanies of the brotherhood also from ʿUmar Masʿūd and has considerable service in the proseleytization of the Tijānī brotherhood in Hijaz to his name.⁶³³ From his perspective, the argument of a printing mistake seemed baseless. Not only the printed version of Jawāhir but also the manuscript versions, as studied by Muḥammad al-Rāḍī Guennoun, approved the reward as such, and needless to say, it was never doubted by any of the earlier Tijānī shaykhs.⁶³⁴ Haytham, however, tried to address the issue in relative terms, arguing that while his father had rejected a comparison between ṣalāt al-fātiḥ and the Qurʾān in their essence, a comparison between their rewards is a different issue, particularly when the spiritual state of the reciter is taken into consideration, and one which he said that his father had never dismissed. No such vague response would satisfy Ghassān, who repeated his question and demanded this interlocutor to preserve discretion in correspondence.⁶³⁵