Intention for the journey to Madinah tayyibah

[Bint e Aisha]

Question:

 

As-Salam-Alakium,

 

I want to ask that is it permissible to travel ONLY with the intention of visiting the grave of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) or when we go to medina, our primary intention should be to visit the mosque of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and in addition we can visit the grave.

 

Answer:

 

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

 

As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

 

Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam was sent to this Dunyā as a Mercy to mankind. Through his presence and efforts, Allāh Ta’ālā eradicated and illuminated the darkness that existed in the world.

 

The reverence and love for Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam is a deeply rooted part of a Muslim’s Imān. Because of the uncountable favors of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam upon the Ummah, the Ummah is highly indebted to him.

 

The demand of love is that the lover remains restless in anticipation of visiting his beloved. True lovers experience such an ecstasy and joy in visiting the blessed grave of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam that is beyond the scope of description.

 

Unfortunately, many have the misconception that to visit Medīnah with the Niyyah of only visiting the blessed grave of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam is impermissible. Besides the many juridical texts that prove its permissibility, one can logically comprehend its permissibility. When the blessed city of Medīnah and the blessed Masjid of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam gained their sanctity because of the presence of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam, it would be illogical to conclude that the intention of visiting Medīnah Munawwarah and Masjid al-Nabawī is permissible but intending the blessed grave of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam is impermissible.

 

In conclusion, to visit Medīna Munawwarah with the intention of visiting the blessed grave of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam is undoubtedly permissible. In fact, the experts and Jurists have stated that it is more appropriate to visit Medīnah Munawwarah only with the Niyyah of visiting the blessed grave of Nabī Sallallāhu Alaihi Wa Sallam as this is to display a higher degree of honor and reverence. [1]

 

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

 

Abdul Azīm bin Abdur Rahman,

Student Darul Iftaa

U.S.A.

 

Checked and Approved by,

Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

 

 

 

[1] الأولى في الزيارة تجريد النية لزيارة قبره صلى الله عليه وسلم (حاشية الطحطاوي علي مراقي الفلاح)

 

فتاوي دار العلوم زكريا, ج 3، ص 478، زمزم

 

 

Askimam

[Bint e Aisha]

 

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami on ibn Taymiyya's view of impermissibility on travelling to visit the grave of the Prophet (Sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam):

 

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-Haytami (D. 974AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s view of impermissibility on travelling to visit the grave of the prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

 

“If you say: How can you relate that there is a consensus on the permissible and commendable status of visiting and travelling to it (the Prophet’s grave [sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam]) when ibn Taymiyya among the later Hanbalis deems all of this inappropriate?

 

I say: Who is ibn Taymiyya so that one takes his words into consideration or relies on them in any religious matter? Is he anything but – in the words of the leading scholars who have followed his rotten statements and unsalable arguments… – a servant whom Allah has forsaken and led astray and clothed in the garments of ignominy… The Shaykh al-Islam, the scholar of the world, concerning whose status, ijtihad, rectitude and prominence there is a consensus, Taqi al-Din al-Subki – may Allah sanctify his soul and cast light on his grave – has dedicated himself to answering him in a separate work (shifa al-saqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam) in which he has done a great service and shown with dazzling arguments the correct path.”

 

[ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam fi Ziyarat al-Qabr al-Sharif al-Nabawi al-Mukarram, M. Zaynhum ed. (Cairo: Maktabat Madbuli, 2000), 29-30.]

 

Source

[Bint e Aisha]

Ibn Hajr al-'Asqalani on ibn Taymiyyah's prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet's grave (Sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam):

 

Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (D. 852AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

 

“Al-Kirmani (D. 786AH) has said: On this issue there has been much discussion in our Syrian lands, and many treatises have been written by both parties. I say: He is referring to Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others’ responses to Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya… and the crux of the matter is that they have pointed out that his position implies that it is prohibited to travel to visit the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)… This is one of the ugliest positions that has been reported of ibn Taymiyya. One of the things he has adduced to deny the claim that there is a consensus on the matter is the report that (Imam) Malik disliked people saying: I have visited the tomb of the Prophet. The discerning scholars of the (Maliki) school have replied that he disliked the phrase out of politeness, and not the visiting itself, for it is one of the best actions and the noblest of pious deeds with which one draws near to Allah the Majestic, and it’s legitimacy is a matter of consensus without any doubt, and Allah is the One who leads to truth.”

 

[ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari (Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1959), 3:308]

 

 

 

 

 

Imam al-Khafaji on ibn Taymiyyah's prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet's grave (Sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam):

 

Imam Ahmad al-Khafaji (D. 1069) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

 

“Know that this is the hadith that led ibn Taymiyya and those who follow him, such as ibn al-Qayyim, to the despicable statement due to which he was declared an unbeliever, and against which al-Subki devoted a separate work, and this is his prohibiting the visit to the tomb of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and travelling to it… He imagined that he protected monotheism (tawhid) on the basis of drivel that should not be mentioned, for they do not come from a rational, let alone an eminent, person, may Allah the Exalted forgive him.”

 

[Ahmad al-Khafaji, Nasim al-Riyad, 5:100-101]

 

 

 

 

Mulla 'Ali al-Qari on ibn Taymiyyah's prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet's grave (Sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam):

 

Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi (D. 1014AH) on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

 

“Amongst the Hanbalis, ibn Taymiyya has gone to an extreme by prohibiting travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), just as others have gone to the opposite extreme in saying: the fact that the visiting is a pious deed is known with certainty and he who denies this is an unbeliever. Perhaps the second position is closer to the truth, for to prohibit something that scholars by consensus deem commendable is unbelief, since it is worse than prohibiting what is (merely) permissible, in regards to which there is agreement (i.e. there is agreement that the prohibition of what is permissible by consensus is unbelief).”

 

[Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi, Sharh al-Shifa (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2001), 2:152]

 

From the above-mentioned words of Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari al-Harawi al-Hanafi, it seems he has retracted his statements in praise of ibn Taymiyya, as Jarh Mufassar (Specified Criticism) takes precedence over General Tawthiq/Ta’dil (Praise).

 

Anyone who wishes to object to the above should know that in his sharh (commentary) on the Shifa of al-Qadhi ‘Iyadh he mentioned his al-Mirqat Sharh al-Mishkat (al-Masabih) in 2 places – 1/24 and 1/547. Also, in the same Sharh al-Shifa, he referred to his sharh (commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi known as Jam’ al-Wasa-il (1/324, 343 and 2/366). This means that his Sharh al-Shifa is later than his sharh (commentary) on Mishkat al-Masabih and his sharh (commentary) on Shama-il al-Tirmidhi, and thus what he mentioned in it, is his last stance on ibn Taymiyya, as it overrides what he thought about him in the earlier two works named, in which he had praiseworthy remarks for ibn Taymiyya.

 

 

 

 

Imam al-Qastallani on ibn Taymiyyah's prohibiting of travelling to visit the Prophet's grave:

 

Imam Ahmad al-Qastallani (D. 923AH) expressing his outrage on ibn Taymiyya’s prohibition of travelling to visit the Prophet’s grave (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):

 

“The Shaykh Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiyya has abominable and odd statements on this issue to the effect that travelling to visit the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is prohibited and is not a pious deed but the contrary. Shaykh Taqi al-Din al-Subki has replied to him in Shifa al-Saqam and has gratified the hearts of the believers.”

 

[Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya (Cairo 1291AH), 8:343]

 

 

 

 

 

Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi calling ibn Taymiyyah a Deviant?

 

The Taymiyyun love to quote Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi (d.846AH) and his book al-Radd al-Wafir in defence of their Imam, ibn Taymiyya. However, the following is a clear cut example of how many of those who defended him weren’t truly aware of all the deviant positions held by him on various issues. Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi falls into this category as is evident from the following, where he declares anyone who rejects the Hadiths in relation to the reward and virtue of visiting the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) a deviant. It is well known that ibn Taymiyya is the foremost proponent of the view that travelling out to visit the blessed grave of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) is a reprehensible innovation – a view which he based on the rejection of the aforementioned narrations. Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi mentions:

 

 

“Visiting the grave of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) is a Sunnah of the Muslims, it is unanimously accepted as an act of reward and it is an act of virtue that is encouraged. The Hadiths on this topic have been accepted and practised upon, even though a few of these Hadiths have weakness. Only a deviant will reject them totally.”

 

(Jami’ al-Athar, vol.8 pg.141)

 

In addition, it is worth noting that Imam ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi has written extensively on this and has approved several Hadiths on this issue in the book of his which has been quoted from above (Jami’ al-Athar) – see vol.8 pgs. 129-141.

 

 

Source: taymiyyun.worpress.com

Edited June 15, 2017 by Bint e Aisha

[Bint e Aisha]

Questions One and Two:

What is your opinion on an extensive journey (shadd al-rihal) to visit the master of all beings – upon him the most excellent of salutations and greetings and upon his progeny and his companions? Which of the two matters is more desirable to you and more virtuous according to your mashayikh for the visitor: does he intend at the time of travelling for visiting to visit him – upon him be peace – or does he intend the mosque also? The Wahhabis have said that the traveller to Madinah must not intend (visiting anything) besides the Prophetic Mosque.

Answer:

According to us and according to our mashayikh visiting the grave of the master of the Messengers – my soul be his sacrifice – is from the greatest of nearing acts and the most important of rewarded acts and the most fruitful in attaining degrees, rather is close to the obligations, even if its acquisition is by extensive journeying and expending health and wealth and one intends at the time of travel to visit him – upon him a million greetings and peace – and he intends along with it visiting his mosque – Allah bless him and grant him peace – and other than it from the plots of land and noble sites, rather the preferred [intention] is what the valiant ‘Allamah Ibn al-Humam said that is to only intend visiting his grave – upon him blessing and peace – and then visit the mosque once he arrives, because in that is greater respect and admiration of him – Allah bless him and grant him peace – and this agrees with his – Allah bless him and grant him peace – saying,

“Whoever comes to me as a visitor, no need driving him but visiting me, it is a duty upon me that I become an intercessor for him on the Day of Resurrection.”

Such was transmitted by the great Gnostic Mulla Jami that he separated the visit from Hajj, and this is closer to the path of the lovers.

As for what the Wahhabis said that the traveller to the illuminated city – on its resident a million greetings – does not intend but the noble mosque, adducing as evidence his – upon him blessing and peace – saying “Do not extensively journey but to three mosques,” it is rejected because the hadith does not indicate prohibition at all, rather, if a possessor of understanding were to consider carefully, he would know that by indication of the text it proves the permissibility [of intending to visit the grave], because the rationale (‘illah) for which the three mosques are excluded from the generality of mosques and plots of land is the excellence specified to them, and such [excellence] is found in more abundance in the noble plot of land [where he is buried], for the noble plot of land and the lofty area which joins his – Allah bless him and grant him peace – limbs is more virtuous absolutely than even the Ka‘bah and the Throne and the Seat as stated by our jurists – Allah be pleased with them, and since the mosques are excluded due to this special excellence, it is more worthy, and then again more worthy, that the blessed plot of land be excluded for that absolute excellence.

The issue as we mentioned, rather in more detail than it, was expressed by our shaykh, the great scholar, the sun of the practicing ‘ulama, Mawlana Rashid Ahmad al-Gangohi – Allah sanctify his mighty secret – in his treatise Zubdat al-Manasik on the virtue of visiting the illuminated city, and it has been printed several times. Also on this noble subject is a treatise by the shaykh of our mashayikh, Mawlana Mufti Sadr al-Din al-Dihlawi – Allah sanctify his mighty secret – in which he erected a terrible calamity against the Wahhabis and those who agree with them, and he produced definite proofs and shinning evidences which he called Ahsan al-Maqal fi Sharh Hadith La Tashuddu al-Rihal, [which is] printed and well-known, so that should be referred to. And Allah – Exalted is He – knows best.

 

Excerpt taken from: Al-Muhannad ala ‘l-Mufannad

[Bint e Aisha]

Ibn Taymiyyah's Innovative Prohibition of Travel to Visit the Holy Prophet 

After spending the years 719-721 in jail, he was jailed again in 726 until his death two years later amid charges of kufr for declaring that one who travels to visit the Prophet  commits a prohibition (h.arâm), a sin (ma`s.iya), and an innovation (bid`a).

The H.anbalî Rejection of His Fatwâ

Al-Mardâwî, Ibn Hubayra, and others stated that the entirety of the early and late authorities in the H.anbalî Madhhab stipulate the desirability (istih.bâb) of visiting the grave of the Prophet  in Madîna, most especially after H.ajj, and/or travelling to do so.  Ibn Muflih., al-Mardâwî, and Mar`î ibn Yûsuf in Ghâyat al-Muntahâ stated the Sunnî character of visiting the graves of the Muslims and the permissibility (ibâh.a) of travelling to do so. Mar`î reiterates this ruling in his unpublished monograph on the ethics of graves and visitation, Shifâ' al-S.udûr fî Ziyârat al-Mashâhid wal-Qubûr. 

Shaykh al-Islâm al-Subkî's Rejection of His Fatwa

This most notorious of all fatwas was refuted by his contemporary the h.adîth Master and Shaykh al-Islâm Taqî al-Dîn al-Subkî in his landmark book Shifâ' al-Siqâm fî Ziyârati Khayri al-Anam ("The Healing of Sickness Concerning the Visitation to the Best of Creatures") , also titled Shann al-Ghâra `alâ man Ankara al-Safar li al-Ziyâra ("The Raid Against Him Who Denied the Lawfulness of Travel for the Purpose of Visitation"). Shaykh al-Islâm adduced the h.adîth "Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be guaranteed for him" as proof against Ibn Taymiyya's claim that "all the h.adîths that concern the merit of visitation are weak or rather forged"  and denounced Ibn Taymiyya's unprecedented fatwâ as a flagrant innovation.

Shaykh al-Islâm al-Zayn al-`Irâqî's Rejection of His Fatwa

Imâm Abû al-Fad.l Zayn al-Dîn `Abd al-Rahim ibn al-H.usayn al-`Irâqî al-Mis.rî (725-806), Shaykh al-Islâm, the Imâm, Qâd.î of Cairo, h.adîth Master of his time, and principal teacher to the h.adîth Master Ibn H.ajar al-`Asqalânî, said in al-Ajwiba al-Makkiyya, a refutation of Ibn Taymiyya's fatwâ claiming the prohibition of travel to visit the Prophet  : "There is no tah.rîm (prohibition) of an act of travel in the h.adîth ["Mounts are not to be saddled except to travel to three mosques"]; rather, it is an emphasis on the importance of traveling to these three mosques in particular, and the emphasis becomes an obligation in case of vow (nadhr), which is not the case for a vow to pray in any mosque other than these three." 

Al-`Irâqî further reacted to Ibn Taymiyya's claim that it was an innovation in the Religion to several battles generosity to relatives on the day of `Âshûrâ'  with the words: "I find it strange that such words should come from this Imâm, whose followers say that he has encompassed the Sunna in knowledge and practice.... One who has not heard of something should not deny that it exists!" Al-`Irâqî then proceeded to several battles that, on the contrary, it was a Sunna based on sound narrations from the Prophet  as well as the Companions and the Imâms of the Successors and the succeeding generations. 

Shaykh al-Islâm Ibn H.ajar's Rejection of His Fatwa

Imâm Ibn H.ajar al-`Asqalânî in Fath. al-Bârî said of Ibn Taymiyya's fatwa prohibition to travel in order to visit the Prophet  : "This is one of the ugliest matters ever reported from him." In his marginalia on that work the "Salafî" scholar Bin Baz comments: "This was not an ugly thing but a correct thing for Ibn Taymiyya to say"! 

H.âfiz. al-S.afadî's Rejection of His Fatwa

Al-S.afadî said:

Ibn Taymiyya gilded his statement
Concerning the visit to the Best of Creation,
Whereupon souls came in droves to complain
To the best of scholars and purest of Imâms
Who compiled this book, providing them with a cure
And so it was indeed The Healing of Sickness.

H.âfiz. al-Qârî's Rejection of His Fatwa

Al-Qârî said in his commentary on `Iyâd.'s al-Shifâ':

 

Ibn Taymiyya - one of the H.anbalîs - committed excess when he declared it prohibited to travel to visit the Prophet  just as other than him also committed excess saying that it is obligatory in the Religion to know that the Visitation is an act that draws near to Allâh (qurba) and whoever denies it is judged to be a disbeliever (kâfir). Yet the latter view is probably closer to being correct than the first, because to declare prohibited something the Ulema by Consensus declared desirable (mustah.abb), is disbelief. For it is graver than to declare prohibited something agreed to be merely permitted (mubâh.) on this chapter. 

Imâm al-Khafâjî's Rejection of His Fatwa

Another H.anafî Imâm who wrote a major commentary on `Iyâd.'s Shifâ', al-Khafâjî, said of Ibn Taymiyya in relation to his heretical fatwa: "He imagined that he was defending monotheism with all kinds of nonsense which do not deserve mention for they do not originate from the mind of a rational person let alone an eminent one - Allâh forgive him!" 

Also rejecting Ibn Taymiyya's fatwa as invalid are Shaykh al-Islâm Ah.mad Zaynî Dah.lân in his books, Abû `Abd Allâh ibn al-Nu`mân al-Maghribî al-Tilimsânî al-Mâlikî in his Mis.bâh. al-Anâm fî al-Mustaghîthîn bi Khayr al-Anâm, Nûr al-Dîn `Alî al-H.alabî al-Shâfi`î - the author of the S.îra H.alabiyya - in his Bughyat al-Ah.lâm, both of them included in al-Nabahânî's H.ujjat Allâh `alâ al-`âlamîn among many other works on the topic of seeking means and asking the Prophet  (al-tawassul wa al-istighâtha), al-Nabahânî with his Shawâhid al-H.aqq, Shaykh Muh.ammad ibn `Alawî al-Mâlikî in Shifâ' al-Fu'âd fî Ziyârati Khayr al-`Ibâd, al-Lacknawî's Ibrâz al-Ghay fî Shifâ' al-`Ay ("The Exposure of Deviation for the Healing of the Sick"), Shaykh `Îsâ al-H.ymiarî of Dubai, al-Sayyid Yûsuf al-Rifâ`î of Kuwait, and others.

Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî Fanatic Defense of His Teacher

A S.ûfî but anti-Ash`arî student of Ibn Taymiyya and al-Dhahabî, Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî, violently attacked Shaykh al-Islâm al-Subkî in a refutation titled al-S.ârim al-Munkî fî Nah.r al-Subkî ("The Hurtful Blade in the Throat of al-Subkî") in which he "adopted the manner of fanatics and departed from the norms of the scholars of h.adîth" according to Shaykh `Abd al-`Azîz ibn al-S.iddîq al-Ghumârî.  Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî filled his book with unfounded accusations "in order to defend the innovations of his teacher.... It would have better been titled al-Shâtim al-Ifkî ('The Mendacious Abuser')."  Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî falsely accuses al-Subkî of encouraging pilgrimage to the Prophet's  grave, prostration to it, circumambulating around it, and the belief that the Prophet  removes difficulty, grants ease, and causes whoever he wishes to enter into Paradise, all independently of Allâh (swt)!

Nu`mân al-Alûsî also wrote an attack on both al-Haytamî and al-Subkî in his Jalâ' al-`Aynayn which he dedicated to the Indian Wahhâbî S.ûfî, S.iddîq H.asan Khân, and in which, according to al-Nabahânî, he went even further than Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî. Among the counter-refutations of these two works: al-Samannûdî's Nus.rat al-Imâm al-Subkî, a monograph by al-Akhnâ'î, and al-Nabahânî's Shawâhid al-H.aqq.  The latter cites the poems of two other critics of al-Subkî - the H.anbalî Abû al-Muzaffar Yûsuf ibn Muh.ammad ibn Mas`ûd al-`Ubadî al-`Uqaylî al-Saramrî and Muh.ammad ibn Yûsuf al-Yumni al-Yâfi`î, "who claimed to follow the Shâfi`î school" - then proceeds to refute them together with Ibn `Abd al-Hâdî's book.

The h.adîth "Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be guaranteed for him"

The h.adîth "Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be guaranteed for him" (Man zâra qabrî wajabat lahu shafâ`atî)  is a fair (h.asan) narration as concluded by Imâm Abû al-H.asanât al-Lacknawî  and his editor `Abd al-Fattâh. Abû Ghudda in the latter's notes on Mâlik's Muwat.t.a' as per Muh.ammad ibn al-H.asan's narration (chapter 49: On the Prophet's  grave) as well as Shaykh Mah.mûd Mamdûh.,  although some early scholars had declared it sound (s.ah.îh.) such as Ibn al-Sakan in al-Sunan al-S.ih.âh. and `Abd al-H.aqq al-Ishbîlî in al-Ah.kâm, followed by Shaykh al-Islâm al-Taqî al-Subkî in Shifâ' al-Siqâm in view of the totality of the chains.  Other h.adîth scholars who considered it authentic are Ibn H.ajar's student the h.adîth Master al-Sakhâwî,  the h.adîth Master of Madîna Imâm al-Samhudi  and Shaykh al-Islâm al-Haytamî in al-Jawhar al-Munaz.z.am. Al-Ghassâni (d. 682) did not include it in his compendium of al-Dâraqut.nî's weak narrations entitled Takhrîj al-Ahâdîth al-D.i`âf min Sunan al-Dâraqut.nî. Some late scholars, beginning with Ibn Taymiyya, remained undecided whether to grade this h.adîth weak or forged.

Imâm al-Lacknawî said about this h.adîth:

There are some who declared it weak [e.g. al-Bayhaqî, Ibn Khuzayma, and al-Suyût.î], and others who asserted that all the h.adîths on visitation of the Prophet  are forged, such as Ibn Taymiyya and his followers, but both positions are false for those who were given right understanding, for verification of the case dictates that the h.adîth is h.asan, as Taqî al-Dîn al-Subkî has expounded in his book Shifâ' al-Siqâm." 

Source