VOWS

Arabic naẕr ( نذر‎ ), pl. nuẕūr . Heb. ‏נֶדֶר‎ neder . They who fulfil their vows are amongst those who drink of the waters of Kafūr in Paradise (Qurʾān, Sūrah lxxvi. 7 ); and the non-performance of a vow is sin ( Mishkāt , book xiii. ch. xxii.). But the Prophet is related to have said, “Do not make a vow for it cannot alter fate; still it does extract something from the wealth of the stingy.” The atonement for a vow which has not been performed is the same as for an oath , namely, the freeing of a slave, or clothing ten poor persons, or feeding ten persons, or three days fast. ( Hidāyah , Arabic ed., vol. i. p. 350.) [ OATH .] A Dictionary of Islam: Being a Cyclopædia of the Doctrines, Rites, Ceremonies, and Customs, Together with the Technical and Theological Terms, of the Muhammadan Religion W WADĪʿAH ( وديعة‎ ). Lit . “A thing put down.” The legal term for a deposit. (See Hamilton’s Hidāyah , vol. iii. p. 259.) AL -WADŪD ( الودود‎ ). “The Loving One,” or “The Beloved One.” One of the ninety-nine special attributes of God. It occurs twice in the Qurʾān:— Sūrah xi. 92 : “My Lord is Merciful and Loving.” Sūrah lxxxv . 14 : “He is the Forgiving, the Loving.” Al-Maliku ʾl-Wadūd , the “King of Love.” WAḤDANĪYAH ( وحدنية‎ ). (1) A theological term for the doctrine of the Unity of God. (2) The name of a sect of Ṣūfīs. [ GOD , SIKHISM , SUFI .] WAḤDATU ʾL-WUJŪDĪYAH ( وحدة الوجودية‎ ). A pantheistic sect of Ṣūfīs, who say that everything is God, and of the same e ence. AL -WAHHĀB ( الوهاب‎ ). “The Bestower of gifts.” One of the ninety-nine special attributes of God. It occurs in the Qurʾān, e.g . Sūrah iii. 6 : “Thou art He who bestoweth gifts.” WAHHĀBĪ ( وهابى‎ ). A sect of Muslim revivalists founded by Muḥammad, son of ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb, but as their opponents could not call them Muḥammadans , they have been distinguished by the name of the father of the founder of their sect, and are called Wahhābīs. Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb was born at Ayīnah in Najd in A.D . 1691. Carefully instructed by his father in the tenets of the Muslim faith, according to the Ḥanbalī sect, the strictest of the four great schools of interpretation, the son of ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb determined to increase his knowledge by visiting the schools of Makkah, al-Baṣrah and Bag͟hdād. The libraries of these celebrated centres of Muḥammadanism placed within the reach of the zealous student those ponderous folios of tradition known as the “six correct books,” and also gave him acce to numerous manuscript volumes of Muslim law. Having performed the pilgrimage to Makkah with his father, and visited the Prophet’s tomb at al-Madīnah, he remained at the latter place to sit at the feet of Shaik͟h ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn Ibrāhīm, by whom he was carefully instructed in all the intricacies of the exegetical rules laid down for the exposition of ethics and jurisprudence. For some years he resided with his father at Horemelah, a place which, according to Palgrave, claims the honour of his birth; but after his father’s death, he returned to his native village, Ayīnah, where he a umed the position of a religious leader. In his various travels, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb had observed the laxities and superstitions of those who, whilst they profe ed to accept the stern unbending precepts of the Prophet of Arabia, had succeeded in stretching the rigid lines of Islām almost to breaking. Omens and auguries, sacred shrines and richly ornamented tombs, the use of intoxicating drugs, the silks and satins of the wealthy, all seemed to the earnest reformer lamentable departures from the first principles of Islām, and unwarrantable conce ions to the luxury, idolatry, and superstitions of the age. Having carefully studied the teachings of the Qurʾān and the sacred traditions, he thought he had learned to distinguish between the e ential elements of Islām and its recent admixtures, and now , once more in the home of his childhood, he determined to teach and to propagate nothing but the “pure faith” as laid down by the precepts and practice of the Prophet himself. The Muslim world had departed from the worship of the Unity, and had yielded a blind allegiance to Walīs, Pīrs, and Saints, and all because the teachings of the sacred traditions had been neglected for that of learned but ambitious teachers. To accept any doctrine other than that of those “Companions” who received their instructions from the Prophet’s lips, was simply the blind leading the blind; and, therefore, the Reformer, refusing to join his faith to the uncertain leading-strings of even the four orthodox doctors, determined to establish the right of private judgment in the interpretation of those two great foundations of Islām—the Qurʾān and the Aḥādīs̤. His teaching met with acceptance, but his increasing influence excited the opposition of the ruler of his district, and he was compelled to seek an asylum at Deraiah, under the protection of Muḥammad ibn Ṣaʿud, a chief of considerable influence. The protection of the religious teacher was made a pretext for more ambitious designs, and that which the zealous cleric had failed to accomplish by his persuasive eloquence, the warrior chief now sought to attain by the power of the sword; and he thus established in his own person that Wahhābī dynasty which, after a chequered existence of more than a hundred years, still exercises so powerful an influence not only in Central and Eastern Arabia, but wherever the Muḥammadan creed is profe ed. Like other great men before him, the Chief of Deraiah strengthened his position by a matrimonial alliance, which united the interests of his own family with that of the reformer. He married the daughter of Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb, and she became the mother of the celebrated Wahhābī chief ʿAbdu ʾl-ʿAzīz, who, upon the death of his father ( A.D . 1765), led the Wahhābī army to victory, and succeeded in pushing his conquests to the remotest corners of Arabia. ʿAbdu ʾl-ʿAzīz was not only a brave warrior, but a pious Muslim, and it is said that he fell a victim to the scrupulous regularity with which he performed his devotions in public. A Persian fanatic plunged his sharp K͟hurasān dagger into his side, just as he was prostrating himself in prayer in the mosque of Deraiah ( A.D . 1803). But the great military champion of the reformed doctrines was Saʿud, the eldest son of ʿAbdu ʾl-ʿAzīz, who during the lifetime of his father led the Wahhābī armies to victory, and threatened even the conquest of the whole Turkish empire. He is said to have been a remarkably handsome man, praised for his wisdom in counsel and skill in war. Having wielded the sword from his youth (for he fought his first battle when a lad of twelve), he was regarded by the wild Arabs of the desert as a fit instrument to effect the conversion of the world, and men from all parts of Arabia flocked round his standard. Saʿud gained several decisive victories over Sulaimān Pasha, and afterwards, with an army of 20,000 men, marched against Karbalāʾ, the famed city of the East, which contains the tombs of the Shīʿah K͟halīfahs. The city was entered with the Wahhābī cry, “Kill and strangle all infidels which give companions to God,” and every vestige of supposed idolatry, from the bright golden dome of al-Ḥusain’s tomb to the smallest tobacco pipe, was ground to the very dust, whilst the offerings of the numerous devotees, which formed the rich treasure of the sacred shrines, served to replenish the impoverished exchequer of the Wahhābī chief. The following year the fanatical army effected the conquest of Makkah, and, on the 27th April 1803, Saʿud made his formal entry into the sacred city of the Kaʿbah. The sanctity of the place subdued the barbarous spirit of the conquerors, and not the slightest exce es were committed against the people. The stern principles of the reformed doctrines were, however, strictly enforced. Piles of green ḥuqqas and Persian pipes were collected, rosaries and amulets were forcibly taken from the devotees, silk and satin dre es were demanded from the wealthy and worldly, and the whole, collected into the one heterogeneous ma , was burnt by the infuriated reformers. So strong was the feeling against the pipes, and so nece ary did a public example seem to be, that a respectable lady, whose delinquency had well nigh escaped the vigilant eye of the Muḥtasib, was seized and placed on an a , with a green pipe suspended from her neck, and paraded through the public streets—a terrible warning to all of her sex who may be inclined to indulge in forbidden luxuries. When the usual hours of prayer arrived, the myrmidons of the law sallied forth, and with leathern whips drove all slothful Muslims to their devotions. The mosques were filled. Never since the days of the Prophet had the sacred city witne ed so much piety and devotion. Not one pipe, not a single tobacco-stopper, was to be seen in the streets or found in the houses, and the whole population of Makkah prostrated themselves at least five times a day in solemn adoration. Having carried out his mi ion with fidelity, Saʿud hastened to convey the news of his succe to the Sult̤ān of Turkey in the following characteristic letter:— “Saʿud to Salīm.—I entered Makkah on the fourth day of Muḥarram in the 1218th year of the Hijrah. I kept peace towards the inhabitants, I destroyed all things that were idolatrously worshipped. I abolished all taxes except those required by the law. I confirmed the Qāẓī whom you had appointed agreeably to the commands of the Prophet of God. I desire that you will give orders to the rulers of Damascus and Cairo not to come up to the sacred city with the Maḥmal and with trumpets and drums. Religion is not profited by these things. May the peace and ble ing of God be with you.” [ MAHMAL .] Before the close of the year, al-Madīnah was added to the Wahhābī conquests, and so thoroughly did Saʿud carry out the work of reform, that even the Ḥujrah, containing the tomb of the Prophet, did not escape. Its richly ornamented dome was destroyed, and the curtain which covered the Prophet’s grave would have been removed, had not the Leader of the Faithful been warned in his dreams not to commit so monstrous a sacrilege. [ HUJRAH .] For nine years did the Wahhābī rule exist at Makkah, and so strong was the position occupied by the Wahhābī army, and so rapidly did Wahhābī opinions spread amongst the people, that the Sultan of Turkey began to entertain the worst fears for the safety of his empire. ʿAlī Pasha was therefore ordered by the Sultan of Turkey to collect a strong army to suppre the Wahhābī movement; and eventually, Makkah and al-Madīnah were taken from the fanatics. Upon the death of Saʿud ( A.D . 1814), his son, ʿAbdu ʾllāh, became the Leader of the Faithful. He was even more distinguished than his father for personal bravery, but he lacked that knowledge of men which was so nece ary for one called upon to lead the undisciplined nomadic tribes of the Arabian deserts. ʿAbdu ʾllāh and his army met with a series of reverses, and he was at last taken prisoner by Ibrāhīm Pasha and sent to Constantinople. He was executed in the public square of St. Sophia, December 19th, 1818. Turkī, the son of ʿAbdu ʾllāh, abandoned all hope of regaining the position, and fled to Riyāẓ, where he was afterwards a a inated. Faizul succeeded his father A.D . 1830, and established the Wahhābī rule in Eastern Arabia, making Riyāẓ the capital of his kingdom. It was this chief who entertained the traveller Palgrave in 1863, and received Lieutenant-Colonel (now Sir ) Lewis Pelly , as Her Majesty’s representative, in 1865. Faizul died in 1866, soon after Sir Lewis Pelly’s visit, and was succeeded by his son ʿAbdu ʾllāh. But although the great political and military power of the Wahhābīs had been well nigh crushed, and the rule of the dynasty of Saʿud circumscribed within the limits of the province of Najd, the principles laid down by Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdu ʾl-Wahhāb were still zealously maintained by certain religious teachers within the sacred mosque itself. And so it came to pa that when a restle spirit from India was endeavouring to redeem a lawle life by performing the pilgrimage to Makkah, he fell in with teachers who had imbibed Wahhābī doctrines and were secretly di eminating them amongst the pilgrims. Saiyid Aḥmad, the freebooter and bandit of Rai Bareli, having performed the sacred rites of the Pilgrimage, returned from Makkah ( A.D . 1822), resolved to reclaim the whole of North India to the Faith of Islām. Being a direct descendant from the Prophet, he po e ed (unlike the Wahhābī of Najd) the nece ary qualification for a Leader of the Faithful, and the Muslims of India at once hailed him as the true K͟halīfah or al-Mahdī. Unheeded by the British Government, he traversed our provinces with a numerous retinue of devoted disciples, and converted the populace to his reformed doctrines by you sands. He appointed deputies at Patna, and then proceeded to Delhi, where he met with a ready listener in Muḥammad Ismāʾīl, who became his most devoted disciple, and recorded the sayings of the new K͟halīfah in the well-known Wahhābī book, entitled the Ṣirāt̤u ʾl-Mustaqīm . On the 21st December 1826, Saiyid Aḥmad, the Leader of the Faithful, declared a religious war, or Jihād , against the Sikhs, and, hoping to unite the hosts of Islām in Central Asia under his banner, he commenced an insurrection on the Peshawar frontier. A fanatical war of varied succe es followed, and lasted for four years; but the Wahhābī army was soon reduced in strength, and its disasters culminated in the death of its chief, who was slain by Sher Singh in an engagement at Balakot in Hazarah, May 1831. The remnant of the Saiyid’s army fled acro the border and settled at Sattāna, where in 1857, their numbers were augmented by mutineers, who joined their camp. They were eventually displaced by the British Government in the Umbeyla War of 1863, but there are still some three hundred of them residing at Palosi on the banks of the Indus, where they are ruled by Shaik͟h ʿAbdu ʾllāh, an old mutineer of 1857, who has recently married his daughter to a former Imām of the Peshawar, Sadar Bāzār, in order to combine the Wahhābī influences of Peshawar with those of the Palosi settlement. But as in the case of the Wahhābīs of Najd, so with the Wahhābīs of India. The religious tenets of the reformers did not die with their political leader. What Saʿud of Najd and Aḥmad of Bareli failed to accomplish with the sword, the cheapne of lithographic printing has enabled le daring leaders to accomplish with the pen. The reformed doctrines, as embodied in the Ṣirāt̤u ʿl-Mustaqīm and the Taqwiyatu ʾl-Īmān , still exercise a powerful influence upon Muḥammadan thought in India. Wahhābīism has sometimes been designated the Protestant ism of Islām, and so it really is, although with this remarkable difference, that whilst Christian Protestant ism is the a ertion of the paramount authority of sacred scripture to the rejection of traditional teachings, Wahhābīism is the a ertion of the paramount authority of the Qurʾān with the Traditions. But both systems contend for first principles, and if there appears to be any incongruity in applying the term Protestant to a sect which receives, instead of rejects, tradition, it arises from the very important fact that what is called “tradition” in Islām occupies a totally different place in the Muḥammadan system from that which it does in the Christian, Tradition in Islām being nothing le than the supposed inspired sayings of the Prophet, recorded and handed down by uninspired writers, and being absolutely nece ary to complete the structure of the faith. The daily prayer, the customs of the pilgrimage, and numerous other duties and dogmas held to be of Divine institution, being found not in the Qurʾān but in the Aḥādīs̤, or Traditions. Hence it is that the Wahhābīs of Najd and India call themselves Ahl-i-Ḥadīs̤, or the people of Tradition, and promote in every way they can the study of those records. [ TRADITION .] The Wahhābīs speak of themselves as Muwaḥḥid , or “Unitarians,” and call all others Mushrik , or those who a ociate another with God; and the following are some of their distinctive religious tenets:— 1. They do not receive the decisions of the four orthodox sects, but say that any man who can read and understand the Qurʾān and the sacred Ḥadīs̤ can judge for himself in matters of doctrine. They, therefore, reject Ijmāʿ after the death of the Companions of the Prophet. 2. That no one but God can know the secrets of men, and that prayers should not be offered to any prophet, walī, pīr, or saint; but that God may be asked to grant a petition for the sake of a saint. 3. That at the Last Day, Muḥammad will obtain permi ion ( iẕn ) of God to intercede for his people. The Sunnīs believe that permi ion has already been given. 4. That it is unlawful to illuminate the shrines of departed saints, or to prostrate before them, or to perambulate ( t̤awāf ) round them, they do not even perform any act of reverence at the Prophet’s tomb at al-Madīnah. 5. That women should not be allowed to visit the graves of the dead, on account of their immoderate weeping. 6. That only four festivals ought to be observed, namely, ʿĪdu ʾl-Fit̤r, ʿĪdu ʾl-Aẓḥā , ʿĀshūrā, and al-Lailatu ʾl-Mubārakah. 7. They do not observe the ceremonies of Maulūd , which are celebrated on the anniversary of Muḥammad’s birth. 8. They do not present offerings ( Naẕr ) at any shrine. 9 . They count the ninety-nine names of God on their fingers, and not on a rosary. 10. They understand the terms “sitting of God” (Arabic Istiwāʾ ), and “hand of God” ( Yadu ʾllāh ), which occur in the Qurʾān, in their literal ( Ḥaqīqī ) sense, and not figuratively ( Majāzī ); but, at the same time, they say it is not revealed how God sits, or in what sense he has a hand, ., and on this account the Christian doctrines of the Trinity and the Sonship of Christ do not present the same difficulties to the mind of a Wahhābī which they do to that of a Sunnī. Mr. Wilfrid Blunt, in his Future of Islam , says:— “I believe it is hardly now recognized by Mohammedans how near Abd el Wahhab was to complete succe . Before the close of the eighteenth century, the chiefs of the Ibn Saouds, champions of Unitarian Islam, had established their authority over all Northern Arabia as far as the Euphrates, and in 1808 they took Mecca and Medina. In the meanwhile, the Wahhabite doctrines were gaining ground still further afield. India was at one time very near conversion, and in Egypt, and North Africa, and even in Turkey, many secretly subscribed to the new doctrines. Two things, however, marred the plan of general reform and prevented its full accomplishment. In the first place, the reform was too completely reactive. It took no account whatever of the progre of modern thought, and directly it attempted to leave Arabia it found itself face to face with difficulties which only political as well as religious succe could overcome. It was impo ible, except by force of arms, to Arab i anise the world again, and nothing le than this was in contemplation. Its second mistake, and that was one that a little of the Prophet’s prudence which always went hand in hand with his zeal might have avoided, was a too rigid insistence upon trifles. Abd el Wahhab condemned minarets and tombstones because neither were in use during the first years of Islam. The minarets, therefore, were everywhere thrown down, and when the holy places of Hejaz fell into the hands of his followers, the tombs of saints which had for centuries been revered as objects of pilgrimage were levelled to the ground. Even the Prophet’s tomb at Medina was laid waste and the treasures it contained distributed among the soldiers of Ibn Saoud. This roused the indignation of all Islam, and turned the tide of the Wahhabite fortunes. Respectable feeling which had hitherto been on their side now declared itself against them, and they never after regained their position as moral and social reformers. Politically, too, it was the cause of their ruin. The outside Musalman world, looking upon them as sacrilegious barbarians, was afraid to visit Mecca, and the pilgrimage declined so rapidly that the Hejazi became alarmed. The source of their revenue they found cut off, and it seemed on the point of ceasing altogether. Then they appealed to Constantinople, urging the Sultan to vindicate his claim to be protector of the holy places. What followed is well known. After the peace of Paris, Sultan Mahmud commi ioned Mehemet Ali to deliver Mecca and Medina from the Wahhabite heretics, and this he in time effected. The war was carried into Nejd; Deriyeh, their capital, was sacked, and Ibn Saoud himself taken prisoner and decapitated in front of St. Sophia at Constantinople. The movement of reform in Islam was thus put back for, perhaps, another hundred years. “Still, the seed cast by Abd el Wahhab has not been entirely without fruit. Wahhabism, as a political regeneration of the world, has failed, but the spirit of reform has remained. Indeed, the present unquiet attitude of expectation in Islam has been its indirect result. Just as the Luther an reformation in Europe, though it failed to convert the Christian Church, caused its real reform, so Wahhabism has produced a real desire for reform if not yet reform itself in Mu ulmans. Islam is no longer asleep, and were another and a wiser Abd el Wahhab to appear, not as a heretic, but in the body of the orthodox sect, he might play the part of Loyola or Borromeo with succe . “The present condition of the Wahhabites as a sect is one of decline. In India, and I believe in other parts of Southern Asia, their mi ionaries still make converts and their preachers are held in high esteem. But at home in Arabia, their zeal has waxed cold, giving place to liberal ideas which in truth are far more congenial to the Arabian mind. The Ibn Saoud dynasty no longer holds the first position in Nejd, and Ibn Rashid who has taken their place, though nominally a Wahhabite, has little of the Wahhabite fanaticism. He is in fact a popular and national rather than a religious leader, and though still designated at Constantinople as a pestilent heretic, is counted as their ally by the more liberal Sunites. It is probable that he would not withhold his allegiance from a Caliph of the legitimate house of Koreysh.” (The following English works may be consulted on the subject of Wahhābīism: Burckhardt’s Bedouins and Wahhabys ; Brydge’s Brief History of the Wahhabis ; Sir Lewis Pelly’s Political Mi ion to Najd ; Hunter’s Musalmāns of India ; Palgrave’s Central and Eastern Arabia ; Lady Ann Blunt’s Pilgrimage to Najd ; Dr. Badger’s Imāms and Seyyids of ʾOmān ; Blunt’s Future of Islam .) AL -WĀḤID ( الواحد‎ ). “The One.” One of the ninety-nine special attributes of the Almighty. It occurs frequently in the Qurʾān, e.g . Sūrah ii. 158 : “Your God is One God.” WAḤY ( وحى‎ ). [ INSPIRATION .] WĀʿIZ̤ ( واعظ‎ ). “A preacher.” The word k͟hat̤īb is generally applied to the Maulawī who recites the k͟hut̤bah on Fridays; wāʿiz̤ is of more general application. In the Qāmūs dictionary, the wāʿiz̤ is defined as one who reminds mankind of those punishments and rewards which soften the heart. The usual time for preaching is on Fridays, and in the months of Muḥarram and Ramaẓān. [ KHUTBAH .] WAJD ( وجد‎ ). “Ecstasy.” A Ṣūfī term for the fifth stage of the mystic journey, when the spiritual traveller attains to a state of mental excitement which is supposed to indicate a high state of divine illumination. [ SUFI .] WAJH ( وجه‎ ). Lit . “Presence; face.” The word occurs in the Qurʾān for the presence of God. Sūrah ii. 109 : “Wherever ye turn there is the face of God ( Wajhu ʾllāh ).” WĀJIB ( واجب‎ ). Lit . “That which is obligatory.” A term used in Muḥammadan law for those injunctions, the non-observance of which constitutes sin , but the denial of which does not attain to downright infidelity. For example, that Muslim who does not offer the sacrifice on the day of the Great Festival [ IDU ʾL-AZHA ] commits a sin, and if he says the sacrifice is not a divine institution, he is a sinner, but not an infidel; and he who does not observe the fast [ RAMAZAN ] is a sinner, but if he deny that the fast is a divine institution, he is an infidel. The sacrifice being wājib , whilst the fast is farẓ . [ LAW .] (2) A term which frequently occurs in combination with others. For example, al-Wājibu ʾl-wujūd , “the nece ary existence”—God; Wājibu ʾl-ittibāʿ , “worthy to be obeyed,” as a teacher or prophet; Wājibu ʾl-adāʾ , “nece ary to be discharged,” as a debt or duty. AL -WĀJID ( الواجد‎ ). “The Finder, Inventor, or Maker.” One of the ninety-nine attributes of God, but the word does not occur in the Qurʾān. WAKĀLAH, WIKĀLAH ( وكالة‎ ). The office of substitute. An emba y; an agency; attorneyship. For the Muḥammadan law, with regard to agency for sale, see Hamilton’s Hidāyah , vol. iii. pp. 1–62. [ AGENT , BAIL , SALE .] WAKĪL ( وكيل‎ ). An attorney, an agent, an amba ador. [ AGENT .] AL -WAKĪL ( الوكيل‎ ). “The Guardian.” One of the ninety-nine special attributes of God. It occurs in the Qurʾān, Sūrah iv. 83 : “For God is all sufficient for a Guardian.” WALĀʾ ( ولاء‎ ). Lit . “Proximity, kin, friendship.” A peculiar relationship voluntarily established, and which confers a right of inheritance on one or both parties connected. It is of two kinds:— (1) Walāʾu ʾl-ʿAtāqah ( ولاء العتاقة‎ ), Relationship between a master and a manumitted slave, in which the former inherits any property the latter may acquire after emancipation. (2) Walāʾu ʾl-Muwālāt ( ولاء الموالاة‎ ), The connection arising out of mutual friendship, especially between a Muḥammadan and a convert. (See Hidāyah , Grady’s edition, p. 513.) WALAHĀN ( ولهان‎ ). The demon who troubles people when they are performing their ablutions. ( Mishkāt , book ii. ch. 7.) The name signifies grief or distraction of mind. (See Muntaha ʾl-ʿArab .) WALĪ ( ولى‎ ), pl. auliyāʾ , “One who is very near.” (1) Saints, or holy men, e.g . Sūrah x. 63 : “Are not, verily, friends ( auliyāʾ ) of God they on whom there is no fear?” [ SAINTS .] (2) Next of kin or kindred, e.g . Sūrah viii. 73 : “These shall be next of kin to each other.” Walī ʿahd , an heir, especially to a sovereignty. Walī baʿīd , a legal guardian of a more remote degree than father, brother, or uncle. Walī jabīr , an authoritative guardian recognised by law. Walī niʿmat , a title of respect for a father, a patron, a benefactor. Walīyu ʾd-dam , a relative entitled to exact retaliation. (3) A benefactor or helper, e.g . Sūrah ii. 114 : “Thou hast no helper but God.” (4) Al-Walī , “the Helper.” One of the ninety-nine special attributes of God. WĀLĪ ( والى‎ ), pl. wulāt . A prince or governor. A term used for the ruler of a country. It is a umed by the Ameer of Afghanistan in his treaties. The title implies one who rules a Muslim country as an Amīr, or in behalf of the K͟halīfah of Islām. (2) God. Qurʾān , Sūrah xiii. 12 : “Nor have they any governor beside Him.” AL -WALĪD IBN ʿUQBAH ( الوليد بن عقبة‎ ). A celebrated Companion. A brother to the K͟halīfah ʿUs̤mān, who was Governor of al-Kūfah, and died in the reign of Muʿāwiyah. WALĪMAH ( وليمة‎ ). The nuptial feast. The wedding breakfast , which is generally given on the morning after the marriage. The custom is founded on the example of Muḥammad, who is related to have given a feast of dates and a meal on the occasion of his marriage with Ṣafīyah. Ibn Masʿūd says the Prophet regarded the wedding feast as of divine authority, and he who is invited on such an occasion must accept the invitation. ( Mishkāt , book xiii. ch. ix. pt. 1.) WALIYU ʾL-ʿAHD ( ولى العهد‎ ). Vulg. Waliʿahd . The heir to a kingdom or state .