Arba'een, a bid'ah?

Audio recording* of Ayatullah Fadlullah: Transcribed by Ayatullah Muhammad Ali al Hashmi al Mashhadi in his book 'Al Hawzah al Ilmiyah Tudain al Inhiraf', Page 70 (Original Arabic page posted at bottom of post)

*Link to the audio file as well as transcription of the lecture is also available here: Ayatullah Mutada Ja'far al Amuli's site

"It is not necessary that all views present throughout history in the Jewish ideology, be evil. (No) This is not necessary. There have been things which originated from religion. But then as for arba'een, so it does not have any basis in Islam. As per Islamic law, neither do we have a week of mourning nor forty days, we have been ordained only three days of mourning and whoever carries on mourning afterwards is only freshening the sorrow. Three days, then the door of remembering the dead is closed, period. Just remember him with duas (supplications) and sadqah (charity), as for holding of a gathering on the first arba'een and then us repeating that year after year as seen in past years, so this does not have any Islamic basis whatsoever. I am not saying that it is haram, no it is not so, but it is not from the followings of Islam. It may or may not have Jewish origins, Allah knows best. Perhaps some Muslims believe that this occasion is suitable for the gathering of people; especially as it entails preaching, righteous guidance and meeting of people for positive causes.

Now as for ziyarah al arba'een, so it has not been mentioned in our ahadith (1). We do have a hadith saying that the signs of a momin (believer) are: wearing ring in the right hand, commencing with bismillah, praying fifty one rakahs and doing ziyarah al arba'een (doing visitation of forty). Some people have interpreted 'ziyarah al arba'een' as doing ziyarah of Imam al Hussain on the day of arba'een. But that is incorrect, it actually means visiting forty believers (2). However, Imam Hussain (as) is a shaheed (martyr) in our view, there are recommended ziyarahs for him such as ziyarah on day of arafah, in (mid of) sha'ban etc, but as for ziyarah al arba'een, so there is no istihbab (merit) in it."

(1) Translator's note: The mutaqaddamin such as Shaikh Kulaini or Shaikh Ja'far b. Qawluweh al Qmmi (author of Kamil al Ziaraat) never mentioned any hadith about ziyarah al arba'een. The latter only mentioned ziyarahs on days of ashura, arafa, mid sha'ban etc. The earliest hadith about the recommendation of ziyarah al arbaeen comes from Ibn al Qawluweh's student, Shaikh Mufid (in 'Al Mazaar') in mursal form (without chain), followed in turn by his student Shaikh Tusi who narrated 3 ahadith about it in his works (Tahdhib and Misbah). So overall, the 3 ahadith about arba'een, come from the latter Baghdadi scholars in mursal fashion. While ziyarah of Imam Hussain is highly recommended, on any day(including arba'een), but there is no specific hadith from earlier sources at all about doing it on arba'een (unlike how we have ahadith for doing it on ashura, arafa etc).

(2) Translator's note: However, as for interpreting the term 'ziyarah al arbaeen' found in the latter sources as the visitation of forty believers, it does not seem to have any precedent or support. The earlier giant scholars, from Shaikh Mufid to Shaikh Hurr al Amili, understood it to mean ziyarah of Imam al Hussain (as) on 20th Safar. They created chapters in their books called 'Desirability of doing ziyarah of Imam Hussain on arbaeen' and reported this hadith (the giant scholars who interpreted this hadith as ziyarah of Imam Hussain on arba'een, are simply too many to be listed). Neither does this interpretation have linguistic support. Contemporary scholars, from Ayatullah Murtada Ja'far al Amuli to Shaikh Al Dur al amuli, have linguistically refuted this isolated interpretation. Below, is also an excerpt from 'Al-Islam.org' (the most mainstream shia website in this age, run under the supervision of Ayatullah Sistani's office), refuting this interpretation:

"To twist the meaning of ziyarat al-arba’een by saying that it means visiting the grave-sites of forty believers is simply indicative of twisted minds, an attempt at distortion, one which good taste resents. Moreover, it is without any foundation. Had the goal been to visit forty believers, the Imam (ﻉ) would have used the term "ziyarat arba’een [mu’mineen]." The original wording indicates that ziyarat al-arba’een is one of the conditions enumerated in the hadith cited above saying that it is one of the marks of one’s iman and an indication of his loyalty to the Twelve Imams (ﻉ)." (Source: Karbala and Beyond, by Shaikh Yasin T. al Jibouri)

Nonetheless, regardless of the interpretation, this hadith does not form a hujjah (proof) as it is coming from the latter sources.

Conclusion: The desirability of 'ziyarah al arbaeen' specifically is not established, as no hadith has been reported for it from our earlier sources.

*A common misconception: A common belief, regarding origin of arbaeen, is that the ahlulbayt returned from Syria (after being held prisoners by Yazid ma'loon ibn mal'oon) to Karbala (on way to Medina) on the 20th of Safar, where they met Jaber b. Abdullah al Ansari who had also come for ziyarah. This incident is not historically correct. Below is an excerpt from 'al-islam.org':

"Only Sayyid bin Tawus has written in Luhuf, contrary to the historical and geographical evidence, that on return from Damascus the Ahlul Bayt proceeded to Iraq when they reached the parting of the ways to Iraq and the Hijaz (a place which is not identified even by the geographers) and on the 40th day of the Ashura they reached Karbala. Sayyid bin Tawus was, no doubt, a great person. Allama Hilli has acknowledged that he performed unusual feats and there is no denying the fact that he enjoyed high status.
However, it is not possible to attach any value to this statement of his from the historical viewpoint and it is not known whether he himself believed in this narration which is not based on any authority. In any case this matter needs investigation and research.
As a matter of principle it is opposed to common sense that everything should be accepted without any investigation, study and comment. Even if Sayyid bin Tawus had been our contemporary we would not have approached that great scholar in this particular matter, and his remark in a book, which according to the researchers was written in his youth, would not have carried any historical value for us. It is a vulgar and foolish way of thinking that whatever is said by anyone or is written in any book should be accepted as correct and free from errors.
The path of research and criticism is always open to the intelligent persons and research scholars of history .According to the Muslims of the world in general there is only one person whose remarks cannot be erroneous in the least and he is the Holy Prophet. According to the Shi'ah school, however, this distinction is enjoyed by the Holy Prophet as well as by Lady Fatima Zahra and the twelve Imams whose infallibility is proved by reason as well as by narrations." (Source: A probe into the history of Ashura, by Dr. Ibrahim Ayati)

'Al Hawzah al Ilmiyah Tudain al Inhiraf' by Ayatullah Muhammad Ali al Hashmi al Mashhadi, page 70