I ask about the ruling on a person saying: "Such-and-such happened by the grace of so-and-so."

If a person has a real impact on the occurrence of something, then attributing that thing to its known cause is permissible. However, if one believes that the cause is effective by itself, without Allah's decree and will, or if one is heedless of Allah Almighty being the true Bestower, then this is forbidden and may constitute shirk. But if one believes that a certain person is merely a cause, and that Allah Almighty is the One Who graciously brings about the desired outcome, then this is permissible.

The ruling on saying "were it not for so-and-so" is divided into cases:

1. Major Shirk: If the cause is hidden and has absolutely no effect, such as believing that a deceased saint has control over the universe. 2. Permissible: If the cause is genuinely valid, whether Islamically or empirically, provided there is no belief that the cause is effective by itself, and without forgetting the true Bestower (Allah). 3. Minor Shirk: If the matter is attributed to an apparent cause that has not been proven to be a cause, whether Islamically or empirically, such as wearing amulets that have no basis.

The evidence for permissibility is the prophetic hadith from Al-Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib concerning Abu Talib: "Were it not for me, he would have been in the lowest depths of Hellfire," where the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, attributed the matter to its real cause.