it is the latter, then he has supplicated with such earnestness that, had he done so somewhere other than that spot, or even beside a cross, his need would have been fulfilled. The cause, therefore, is his earnestness in supplication, not anything particular to the grave.

The fourth consideration:

Even supposing that graves have some influence in this regard—whether through the graves themselves, as the would-be philosophers and those who follow their approach maintain, claiming that the departed soul connects with the supplicant’s soul, thereby strengthening him, as Ibn Sīnā, Abū Hāmid, and others like them allege concerning visits to graves, or through some other cause—the response is:

Not every means by which a person obtains what he needs is prescribed by Islamic law, or even permissible. A means is prescribed only when its benefit outweighs its harm. If its harm predominates, however, it is not prescribed; rather, it is forbidden, even if it yields some benefit.

This includes the prohibition of sorcery, despite its effects and its fulfillment of certain needs, and the practices it encompasses, such as worshipping the heavenly bodies, invoking them, and summoning the jinn. The same applies to soothsaying, divination by arrows, and the various practices forbidden by Islamic law, even though they sometimes involve some disclosure of hidden matters or produce certain effects. This provides a general indication of the means by which their needs are fulfilled. As for