PDA

View Full Version : Ibn Kathir and Other Scholars on Tawassul through The Prophet! (saws)



Sunni Student
11-13-2006, 08:23 PM
I request the Mods to please allow the discussion to take place, both sides should be allowed to express their views especially when a question regarding the Issue was asked.

Brother Ahmad provided a Quote from Al-Maghrib forum which is supposed to be a Neutral forum.

Quote from Yasir Qadhi:


Also, as I said, some scholars of the past have indeed allowed tawassul thru the status of the Prophet salla Allahu alahyi wa sallam, but the proof for allowing an act is not based on the statements of scholars, but rather on textual evidence. And as we explained in class, there is no authentic, explicit evidence allowing this type of tawassul.

Lastly, it is always amazing how the people of innovation passionately defend their beliefs, at the expense of acts from the Sunnah. As we mentioned in class, there are so many types of tawassul that are permissible to do - why leave these types, which are clearly sanctioned by our beloved Rasool, and concentrate on the more controversial ones?

No one loves the Prophet salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam more than those who follow his Sunnah - that is why we follow it in the first place! Had he told us about this type of tawassul, we would have been the first people to do it.
Quote from Ahmad

3. Taking the occupants of graves as intercessors, or supplicating them directly is an act of major Shirk because supplication is a form of worship and directing it to other than Allah (swt ) is an act of Shirk.
I looked through Tafsir Ibn Kathir and I did not find in what was mentioned by brother SunniStudent.
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا لِيُطَاعَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ جَاءُوكَ فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّهَ وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمُ الرَّسُولُ لَوَجَدُوا اللَّهَ تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا


يَقُول تَعَالَى " وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ رَسُول إِلَّا لِيُطَاعَ " أَيْ فُرِضَتْ طَاعَته عَلَى مَنْ أُرْسِلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَقَوْله " بِإِذْنِ اللَّه " قَالَ مُجَاهِد : أَيْ لَا يُطِيع أَحَد إِلَّا بِإِذْنِي يَعْنِي لَا يُطِيعهُ إِلَّا مَنْ وَفَّقْته لِذَلِكَ قَوْله " وَلَقَدْ صَدَقَكُمْ اللَّه وَعْده إِذْ تَحُسُّونَهُمْ بِإِذْنِهِ " أَيْ عَنْ أَمْره وَقَدَره وَمَشِيئَته وَتَسْلِيطه إِيَّاكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَقَوْله " وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسهمْ " الْآيَة يُرْشِد تَعَالَى الْعُصَاة وَالْمُذْنِبِينَ إِذَا وَقَعَ مِنْهُمْ الْخَطَأ وَالْعِصْيَان أَنْ يَأْتُوا إِلَى الرَّسُول صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَيَسْتَغْفِرُوا اللَّه عِنْده وَيَسْأَلُوهُ أَنْ يَسْتَغْفِر لَهُمْ فَإِنَّهُمْ إِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ تَابَ اللَّه عَلَيْهِمْ وَرَحِمَهُمْ وَغَفَرَ لَهُمْ وَلِهَذَا قَالَ " لَوَجَدُوا اللَّه تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا " وَقَدْ ذَكَرَ جَمَاعَة مِنْهُمْ الشَّيْخ أَبُو مَنْصُور الصَّبَّاغ فِي كِتَابه الشَّامِل الْحِكَايَة الْمَشْهُورَة عَنْ الْعُتْبِيّ قَالَ : كُنْت جَالِسًا عِنْد قَبْر النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَجَاءَ أَعْرَابِيّ فَقَالَ : السَّلَام عَلَيْك يَا رَسُول اللَّه سَمِعْت اللَّه يَقُول " وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسهمْ جَاءُوك فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّه وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمْ الرَّسُول لَوَجَدُوا اللَّه تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا " وَقَدْ جِئْتُك مُسْتَغْفِرًا لِذَنْبِي مُسْتَشْفِعًا بِك إِلَى رَبِّي ثُمَّ أَنْشَأَ يَقُول : يَا خَيْر مَنْ دُفِنَتْ بِالْقَاعِ أَعْظُمه فَطَابَ مِنْ طِيبهنَّ الْقَاع وَالْأَكَم نَفْسِي الْفِدَاء لِقَبْرٍ أَنْتَ سَاكِنه فِيهِ الْعَفَاف وَفِيهِ الْجُود وَالْكَرَم ثُمَّ اِنْصَرَفَ الْأَعْرَابِيّ فَغَلَبَتْنِي عَيْنِي فَرَأَيْت النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَآله وَسَلَّمَ فِي النَّوْم فَقَالَ : يَا عُتْبِيّ الْحَقْ الْأَعْرَابِيّ فَبَشِّرْهُ أَنَّ اللَّه قَدْ غَفَرَ لَهُ " .

The reason Brother Ahmad cannot find this Incident in Ibn Kathirs Tafsir, and I presume he looked at the translation, is because the the incident was omitted from the translation, now why would they do such a thing, well because they must have believed this is promoting shirk, now the Question arises did not Ibn Kathir think that by including this Incident in his Tafsir commentating on an Ayah which tells us to go to the prophet, that he would be promoting Shirk?

Do not try and deny this exists in Ibn Kathirs Tafsir, it is in any Arabic version [or any un edit Arabic version] and i have given the full Arabic text above.
Sidi Yasir said that Scholars of the Past said Tawassul through the status of the Prophet was permissible, what he should have accepted was Scholars of the past believed it was permissible for Tawassul through the Prophet, meaning Tawassul by requesting the Prophet [Peace be upon him] at his grave to supplicate to Allah on our behalf.

As is evident from the Incident of Utbi i posted above and those that narrated it which I will mention below.

Now those that do this practice get condemned of Committing Shirk, But those that endorsed this practice by narrating this Incident and thus making it well known without stating that this incident is an example of Shirk do not get condemned.

The following Scholars have cited this Incident; I have given the full references of where each Scholar has mentioned this Incident in my previous post 28 of the thread linked below.

http://www.islamicboard.com/basics-i...-haraam-2.html

Imam Nawawi,

Ibn Jama`a,

Ibn `Aqil,

Ibn Qudama,

al-Qurtubi,

Samhudi

Dahlan

Ibn Kathir,

Abu al-Faraj ibn Qudama,

al-Bahuti al-Hanbali,

Taqi al-Din al-Subki

Ibn al-Jawzi

al-Bayhaqi

Ibn `Asakir

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami,

Ibn al-Najjar,

The least that those that practice this practice can expect is that those that condemn them also have the courage to speak up and condemn these Scholars.

Brother Ahmad gave this Quote saying it was related to the Issue, yet it was not as Tawassul by the status of the Prophet and Tawassul through the Prophet are completely different Issues.

Now the Question arises is there anything in the Quran or Sunnah that proves this is Shirk?

According to Brother Ahmad it is Shirk, I await to see how this is Shirk.
It is true that our Aqeedah is not based on what the Scholars views where, but at least condemn these Scholars as promoting Shirk if you feel that way, and also provide you evidences to how you can make such a claim.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
chacha_jalebi
11-13-2006, 09:10 PM
salaam

elo stooodent :D:D:D

well well, lol theirs so much other thins to discuss in islam, but us muslims debate amongst ourselfs whether this is right or this is not wrong!

basically i would personally say tawassul through RasoolAllah (saw) is wrong, because right now RasoolAllah (saw) is not with us, if he was with us, and alive then it would be okie dokie,

as their have been many instances in a hadiths in tirmidhi, of the blind man, where RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aley hi wasalam) says to the blind man, pray 2 rakahs and then ask intercession fru d Prophet (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) for his eyesight back. also in sahih bukhari theres a instance of Hadhrat Umar (ra) asking for rain and sayin " o Allah for the sake of your Prophet (pbuh) make it rain" BUT all these incidents happened durin the life of RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam)

and in the quran there is evidence that it shouldnt be done, because why ask through someone, when you can directly ask Allah (swt)? even though RasoolAllah (saw) is mashallah the butifullest, greatest of all people! i would say doin tawasul fru him is wrong

in the Quran in surah al anaam v 51 it says

"give this warnin to those in whose (hearts) is the fear that they will be brought (to judgement) before their lord, they will have no protector no intercessor"

also surah al isra v 56-57

"say: call on those who you desire, beside him. they have neither the power to remove your troubles from you nor to change them. those whom they call upon do desire (themselfs) the waseela to their lord, even those who are nearest"

in this surah its sayin that, the people who you call upon, call upon Allah (swt) themselfs, and they dont have the power to help you!!!

also RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) is told in the quran in surah al araf v188 to say

"i have no control to benefit or harm for myself"

also in a hadiths in sahih bukhari n muslim

RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) says to Hadhrat Fatima

"o faatimah, seek comfort from my waelth as much as you wish, but i cannot avail you from Allah(swt)

so when RasoolAllah (sal allah hu aleyhi wasalam) is himself sayin i cant help you regardin matters with Allah (swt), bro that means he cant, inshallah he will do shifa for us on the day of judgement, but how do you know Allah (swt) will aceept it??

so, isnt it jus easier to ask directly from Allah (swt) :D:D:D:D

manz is gona finish off wit a verse we read everyday but fail to realise its power ....

iyyaka na budu wa iyyaka nas ta eeen

"YOU ALONE we worship, YOU ALONE we ask for help"

:D:D:D:D:D: brap brap :D:D:D:D:D point proven :p
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-14-2006, 05:45 AM
Originally Posted by Sunni Student
وَقَدْ ذَكَرَ جَمَاعَة مِنْهُمْ الشَّيْخ أَبُو مَنْصُور الصَّبَّاغ فِي كِتَابه الشَّامِل الْحِكَايَة الْمَشْهُورَة عَنْ الْعُتْبِيّ قَالَ : كُنْت جَالِسًا عِنْد قَبْر النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَجَاءَ أَعْرَابِيّ فَقَالَ : السَّلَام عَلَيْك يَا رَسُول اللَّه سَمِعْت اللَّه يَقُول " وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسهمْ جَاءُوك فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّه وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمْ الرَّسُول لَوَجَدُوا اللَّه تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا " وَقَدْ جِئْتُك مُسْتَغْفِرًا لِذَنْبِي مُسْتَشْفِعًا بِك إِلَى رَبِّي ثُمَّ أَنْشَأَ يَقُول : يَا خَيْر مَنْ دُفِنَتْ بِالْقَاعِ أَعْظُمه فَطَابَ مِنْ طِيبهنَّ الْقَاع وَالْأَكَم نَفْسِي الْفِدَاء لِقَبْرٍ أَنْتَ سَاكِنه فِيهِ الْعَفَاف وَفِيهِ الْجُود وَالْكَرَم ثُمَّ اِنْصَرَفَ الْأَعْرَابِيّ فَغَلَبَتْنِي عَيْنِي فَرَأَيْت النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَآله وَسَلَّمَ فِي النَّوْم فَقَالَ : يَا عُتْبِيّ الْحَقْ الْأَعْرَابِيّ فَبَشِّرْهُ أَنَّ اللَّه قَدْ غَفَرَ لَهُ " .
:sl: brother,
If you are sincerely interested in learning the response on this, then you will find a very in-depth discussion by several prominent scholars - both classical and contemporary - on this narration here (arabic only).
Take a look especially at the other Ahâdîth cited by Shayk Rabî' Ibn Hâdî Al-Madkhalî. And to asses the issues pertaining to the other classical scholars you mentioned, one must examine what they said on the subject, it is not sufficient to infer their opinion from this. If your mind is already made up on this and you just intend to advance the opinion you are inclined to, then there is little we can do in the way of dialogue. As such, I have no intention to debate this issue. I've provided a source for people to understand the response to this - whoever benefits from it has benefited and whoever has not, will not. There's no need to inflame sectarian issues.
:w:
Reply

Ibn Abi Ahmed
11-15-2006, 12:43 AM
:sl:

Again, not to argue or debate, because it is simply no use to argue with those that are unwilling to listen, but to simply put some things forward, lest I be held accountable by Allah for not putting it forward:

2: 186. And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad ) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near (to them by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor). So let them obey Me and believe in Me, so that they may be led aright.

Allah hears the Servant's Supplication

Imam Ahmad reported that Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari said, "We were in the company of Allah's Messenger during a battle. Whenever we climbed a high place, went up a hill or went down a valley, we used to say, `Allah is the Most Great,' raising our voices. The Prophet came by us and said:


«يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ، ارْبَعُوا عَلى أَنْفُسِكُمْ، فَإِنَّكُمْ لَا تَدْعُونَ أَصَمَّ ولَا غَائِبًا، إنَّمَا تَدْعُونَ سَمِيعًا بَصِيرًا، إنَّ الَّذي تَدْعُونَ أَقْربُ إِلَى أَحَدِكُمْ مِنْ عُنُقِ رَاحِلَتِهِ، يا عَبْدَاللهِ بْنَ قَيْسٍ، أَلَا أُعَلِّمُكَ كَلِمَةً مِنْ كُنُوزِ الْجَنَّةِ؟ لَا حَوْلَ وَلَا قُوَّةَ إِلَّا بِالله»


(O people! Be merciful to yourselves (i.e., don't raise your voices), for you are not calling a deaf or an absent one, but One Who is All-Hearer, All-Seer. The One Whom you call is closer to one of you than the neck of his animal. O `Abdullah bin Qais (Abu Musa's name) should I teach you a statement that is a treasure of Paradise: `La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah (there is no power or strength except from Allah).')


This Hadith was also recorded in the Two Sahihs, and Abu Dawud, An-Nasa'i, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah recorded similar wordings. Furthermore, Imam Ahmad recorded that Anas said that the Prophet said:


«يَقُولُ اللهُ تَعَالى أَنَا عِنْدَ ظَنِّ عَبْدِي بِي وَأَنَا مَعَهُ إِذَا دَعَانِي»


("Allah the Exalted said, `I am as My servant thinks of Me, and I am with him whenever he invokes Me.') Allah accepts the Invocation


Imam Ahmad also recorded Abu Sa`id saying that the Prophet said:


«مَا مِنْ مُسْلِمٍ يَدْعُو اللهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ بِدَعْوَةٍ لَيْسَ فِيها إِثْمٌ ولَا قَطِيعَةُ رَحِمٍ، إلَّا أَعْطَاهُ اللهُ بِهَا إِحْدَى ثَلَاثِ خِصَالٍ: إِمَّا أَنْ يُعَجِّل لَهُ دَعْوَتَهُ، وَإِمَّا أَنْ يَدَّخِرَهَا لَهُ فِي الأُخْرَى، وَإِمَّا أَنْ يَصْرِفَ عَنْهُ مِنَ السُّوءِ مِثْلَهَا»


قَالُوا: إذًا نُكْثِرُ؟ قَالَ:


«اللهُ أَكْثَر»


(No Muslim supplicates to Allah with a Du`a that does not involve sin or cutting the relations of the womb, but Allah will grant him one of the three things. He will either hasten the response to his supplication, save it for him until the Hereafter, or would turn an equivalent amount of evil away from him.'') They said, "What if we were to recite more (Du`a).'' He said, (There is more with Allah.)


`Abdullah the son of Imam Ahmad recorded `Ubadah bin As-Samit saying that the Prophet said:


«مَا عَلى ظَهْرِ الأَرْضِ مِنْ رَجُلٍ مُسْلِمٍ يَدْعُو اللهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ بَدَعْوَةٍ إِلَّا آتَاهُ اللهُ إيَّاهَا، أَوْ كَفَّ عَنْهُ مِنَ السُّوءِ مِثْلَهَا مَا لَمْ يَدْعُ بِإِثْمٍ أَوْ قَطِيعَةِ رَحِم»


(There is no Muslim man on the face of the earth who supplicates to Allah but Allah would either grant it to him, or avert a harm from him of equal proportions, as long as his supplication does not involve sin or cutting the relations of the womb.) At-Tirmidhi recorded this Hadith.


Imam Malik recorded that Abu Hurayrah narrated that Allah's Messenger said:


«يُسْتَجَابُ لأَحَدِكُمْ مَالَمْ يَعْجَلْ، يَقُولُ: دَعَوْتُ فَلَمْ يُسْتَجَبْ لِي»


(One's supplication will be accepted as long as he does become get hasty and say, `I have supplicated but it has not been accepted from me.'')

This Hadith is recorded in the Two Sahihs from Malik, and this is the wording of Al-Bukhari.


Muslim recorded that the Prophet said:


«لا يَزَالُ يُسْتَجابُ لِلْعَبْدِ مَا لَمْ يَدْعُ بِإِثْم أَوْ قَطِيعَةِ رَحِمٍ مَا لَمْ يَسْتَعْجِل»


قِيَل: يَا رَسُولَ اللهِ، وَمَا الاسْتِعْجَالُ؟ قَالَ:


«يَقُولُ: قَدْ دَعَوْتُ وقَدْ دَعَوْتُ، فَلَمْ أَرَ يُسْتَجَابُ لِي، فَيَسْتَحْسِرُ عِنْدَ ذلِكَ وَيَدَعُ الدُّعَاء»


(The supplication of the servant will be accepted as long as he does not supplicate for what includes sin, or cutting the relations of the womb, and as long as he does not become hasty.) He was asked, "O Messenger of Allah! How does one become hasty'' He said, (He says, `I supplicated and supplicated, but I do not see that my supplication is being accepted from me.' He thus looses interest and abandons supplicating (to Allah).)
40: 60. And your Lord said: "Invoke Me, (and ask Me for anything) I will respond to your (invocation). Verily! Those who scorn My worship [i.e. do not invoke Me,] they will surely enter Hell in humiliation!"

The Command to call upon Allah By His grace and kindness,

Allah encourages His servants to call upon Him, and He guarantees to respond. Sufyan Ath-Thawri used to say: "O You Who love most those who ask of You, and O You Who hate most those who do not ask of You, and there is no one like that apart from You, O Lord.'' This was recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim. Similarly; the poet said: "Allah hates not to be asked, and the son of Adam hates to be asked.'' Qatadah said that Ka`b Al-Ahbar said, "This Ummah has been given three things which were not given to any nation before, only to Prophets. When Allah sent a Prophet, He said to him, `You are a witness over your nation.' But you have been made witnesses over mankind; it was said to the Prophets individually, `Allah has not laid upon you any hardship in religion,' but He said to this entire Ummah:


﴿وَمَا جَعَلَ عَلَيْكمْ فِى الدِّينِ مِنْ حَرَجٍ﴾


(and ﴿Allah﴾ has not laid upon you in religion any hardship) (22:78) and it was said to the Prophets individually; `Call upon Me, I will answer you,' but it was said to this Ummah,


﴿ادْعُونِى أَسْتَجِبْ لَكُمْ﴾


(Call upon Me, I will answer you).'' This was recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim. Imam Ahmad recorded that Al-Nu`man bin Bashir, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "The Messenger of Allah said:


«إِنَّ الدُّعَاءَ هُوَ الْعِبَادَة»


l(Indeed the supplication is the worship. )'' Then he recited,


﴿ادْعُونِى أَسْتَجِبْ لَكُمْ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِى سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَخِرِينَ﴾


(And your Lord said: "Call upon Me, I will answer you. Verily, those who scorn My worship they will surely enter Hell in humiliation!''). This was also recorded by the Sunan compilers; At-Tirmdhi, An-Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, and Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Jarir. At-Tirmidhi said, "Hasan Sahih.'' It was also recorded by Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa'i, and Ibn Jarir with a different chain of narration. Allah's saying:


﴿إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِى﴾


(Verily, those who scorn My worship) means, `those who are too proud to call on Me and single Me out,'


﴿سَيَدْخُلُونَ جَهَنَّمَ دَخِرِينَ﴾


(they will surely enter Hell in humiliation!) means, in disgrace and insignificance. Imam Ahmad recorded from `Amr bin Shu`ayb from his father, from his grandfather that the Prophet said:


«يُحْشَرُ الْمُتَكَبِّرُونَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ أَمْثَالَ الذَّرِّ فِي صُوَرِ النَّاسِ، يَعْلُوهُمْ كُلُّ شَيْءٍ مِنَ الصَّغَارِ، حَتْى يَدْخُلُوا سِجْنًا فِي جَهَنَّمَ يُقَالُ لَهُ: بُولَسُ، تَعْلُوهُمْ نَارُ الْأنْيَارِ، يُسْقَوْنَ مِنْ طِينَةِ الْخَبَالِ، عُصَارَةِ أَهْلِ النَّار»


(The proud will be gathered on the Day of Resurrection like ants in the image of people, and everything will be stepping on them, humiliating them, until they enter a prison in Hell called Bulas. They will be fed flames of fire, and given for drink a paste of insanity dripping from the people the Fire.)''


﴿اللَّهُ الَّذِى جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الَّيْلَ لِتَسْكُنُواْ فِيهِ وَالنَّهَـارَ مُبْصِـراً إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَذُو فَضْلٍ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَلَـكِنَّ أَكْـثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَشْكُرُونَ - ذَلِكُـمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّـكُمْ خَـلِقُ كُـلِّ شَىْءٍ لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ فَأَنَّى تُؤْفَكُونَ - كَذَلِكَ يُؤْفَكُ الَّذِينَ كَانُواْ بِـَايَـتِ اللَّهِ يَجْحَدُونَ - اللَّهُ الَّذِى جَعَـلَ لَكُـمُ الاٌّرْضَ قَـرَاراً وَالسَّمَآءَ بِنَـآءً وَصَوَّرَكُـمْ فَأَحْسَنَ صُوَرَكُـمْ وَرَزَقَكُـمْ مِّنَ الطَّيِّبَـتِ ذَلِكُمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّكُـمْ فَتَـبَـرَكَ اللَّهُ رَبُّ الْعَـلَمِينَ - هُوَ الْحَىُّ لاَ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ فَـادْعُوهُ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ الْحَـمْدُ للَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَـلَمِينَ ﴾


(61. Allah, it is He Who has made the night for you that you may rest therein and the day for you to see. Truly, Allah is full of bounty to mankind; yet, most of mankind give no thanks.) (62. That is Allah, your Lord, the Creator of all things, La ilaha ila Huwa. How then are you turning away) (63. Thus were turned away those who used to deny the Ayat of Allah.) (64. Allah, it is He Who has made for you the earth as a dwelling place and the sky as a canopy, and has given you shape and made your shapes good and pure (looking) and has provided you with good things. That is Allah, your Lord, so Blessed be Allah, the Lord of all that exists.) (65. He is the Ever Living, La ilaha illa Huwa; so invoke Him making the religion for Him Alone. All the praises and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of all that exits.)
Both are from Tafsir Ibn Kathir. And you have avoided Br.Ansar's post again.

Shaykh Yasir again:

Lastly, it is always amazing how the people of innovation passionately defend their beliefs, at the expense of acts from the Sunnah. As we mentioned in class, there are so many types of tawassul that are permissible to do - why leave these types, which are clearly sanctioned by our beloved Rasool, and concentrate on the more controversial ones?

No one loves the Prophet salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam more than those who follow his Sunnah - that is why we follow it in the first place! Had he told us about this type of tawassul, we would have been the first people to do it.
:w:
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Ansar Al-'Adl
11-15-2006, 07:06 PM
:sl:
Originally Posted by Sunni Student
No one has even given a thought to the Narration from the Salaf that I quoted with the Full sanad in an earlier posts.
That's clearly not the case. I not only 'gave thought to it' but I posted a detailed link concerning this narration and what the scholars have said about it which refutes your claims. If you chose to ignore it, that's your own problem but then don't complain about no one answering it if you ignored the answers! Here's the link again:
http://www.sahab.net/sahab/showthrea...hreadid=301940

Here the response from Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah:


قال شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية رحمه الله في اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم مخالفة أصحاب الجحيم ج1/ص393-397 ط. مطبعة السنة المحمدية:

(ولم يكن أحد من السلف يأتي قبر نبي أو غير نبي لأجل الدعاء عنده, ولا كان الصحابة يقصدون الدعاء عند قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم, ولا عند قبر غيره من الأنبياء, وإنما كانوا يصلون ويسلمون على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وعلى صاحبيه, واتفق الأئمة على أنه إذا دعا بمسجد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يستقبل قبره, وتنازعوا عند السلام عليه, فقال مالك وأحمد وغيرهما يستقبل قبره ويسلم عليه, وهو الذي ذكره أصحاب الشافعي, وأظنه منصوصا عنه, وقال أبو حنيفة بل يستقبل القبلة ويسلم عليه, وهكذا في كتاب أصحابه, وقال مالك فيما ذكره إسماعيل بن إسحاق في المبسوط والقاضي عياض وغيرهما لا أرى أن يقف عند قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ويدعو ولكن يسلم ويمضي, وقال أيضا في المبسوط لا بأس لمن قدم من سفر أو خرج أن يقف عند قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فيصلي عليه ويدعو لأبي بكر وعمر, فقيل له: فإن ناسا من أهل المدينة لا يقدمون من سفر ولا يريدونه إلا يفعلون ذلك في اليوم مرة وأكثر عند القبر فيسلمون ويدعون ساعة, فقال: لم يبلغني هذا عن أحد من أهل الفقه ببلدنا ولا يصلح آخر هذه الأمة إلا ما أصلح أولها, ولم يبلغني عن أول هذه الأمة وصدرها أنهم كانوا يفعلون ذلك, ويكره إلا لمن جاء من سفر أو أراده. وقد تقدم في ذلك من الآثار عن السلف والأئمة ما يوافق هذا ويؤيده من أنهم كانوا إنما يستحبون عند قبره ما هو من جنس الدعاء والتحية كالصلاة والسلام, ويكرهون قصده للدعاء والوقوف عنده للدعاء, ومن يرخص منهم في شيء من ذلك فإنه يرخص فيما إذا سلم عليه ثم أراد الدعاء أن يدعو مستقبل القبلة إما مستدبر القبر أو منحرفا عنه وهو أن يستقبل القبلة ويدعو ولا يدعو مستقبل القبر, وهكذا المنقول عن سائر الأئمة ليس في ائمة المسلمين من استحب للمار أن يستقبل قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ويدعو عنده, وهذا الذي ذكرناه عن مالك والسلف يبين حقيقة الحكاية المأثورة عنه وهي الحكاية التي ذكرها القاضي عياض عن محمد بن حميد قال: ناظر أبو جعفر أمير المؤمنين مالكاً في مسجد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال له مالك: يا أمير المؤمنين لا ترفع صوتك في هذا المسجد فإن الله تعالى أدب قوما فقال (لا ترفعوا أصواتكم فوق صوت النبي) الآية ومدح قوما فقال (إن الذين يغضون أصواتهم عند رسول الله) وذم قوما فقال (إن الذن ينادونك من وراء الحجرات أكثرهم لا يعقلون) الآية وإن حرمته ميتا كحرمته حيا فاستكان لها أبو جعفر وقال: يا أبا عبد الله أستقبل القبلة وأدعو أم أستقبل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ فقال: ولِمَ تصرف وجهك عنه وهو وسيلتك ووسيلة أبيك آدم إلى يوم القيامة, بل استقبله واستشفع به فيشفعه الله فيك, قال الله تعالى (ولو أنهم ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا الله) الآية فهذه الحكاية على هذا الوجه إما أن تكون ضعيفة أو مغيرة, وإما أن تفسَّر بما يوافق مذهبه, إذ قد يُفهم منها ما هو خلاف مذهبه المعروف, بنقل الثقات من أصحابه, فانه لا يختلف مذهبه أنه لا يستقبل القبر عند الدعاء, وقد نص على أنه لا يقف عند الدعاء مطلقا, وذكر طائفة من أصحابه أنه يدنو من القبر ويسلم على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ثم يدعو مستقبل القبلة ويوليه ظهره, وقيل لا يوليه ظهره فاتفقوا في استقبال القبلة, وتنازعوا في تولية القبر ظهره وقت الدعاء, ويشبه والله أعلم أن يكون مالك رحمه الله سئل عن استقبال القبر عند السلام, وهو يسمي ذلك دعاء, فإنه قد كان من فقهاء العراق من يرى أنه عند السلام عليه يستقبل القبلة أيضا, ومالك يرى استقبال القبر في هذه الحال, كما تقدم وكما قال في رواية ابن وهب عنه, إذا سلم على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقف ووجهه إلى القبر لا إلى القبلة, ويدنو ويسلم ويدعو, ولا يمس القبر بيده, وقد تقدم قوله إنه يصلي عليه ويدعو له, ومعلوم أن الصلاة عليه والدعاء له يوجب شفاعته للعبد يوم القيامة, كما قال صلى الله عليه وسلم في الحديث الصحيح (إذا سمعتم المؤذن فقولوا مثل ما يقول ثم صلوا علي فإنه من صلى علي مرة صلى الله عليه عشرا ثم سلوا الله لي الوسيلة فإنها درجة في الجنة لا تنبغي إلا لعبد من عباد الله وأرجو أن أكون أنا ذلك العبد فمن سأل الله لي الوسيلة حلت عليه شفاعتي يوم القيامة) فقول مالك في هذه الحكاية ان كان ثابتا عنه معناه أنك إذا استقبلته وصليت عليه وسلمت عليه وسألت الله له الوسيلة يشفع فيك يوم القيامة, فإن الأمم يوم القيامة يتوسلون إلى الله بشفاعته, واستشفاع العبد به في الدنيا هو بطاعته وفعل ما يشفع له به يوم القيامة, كسؤال الله له الوسيلة ونحو ذلك, وكذلك ما نقل عنه من رواية ابن وهب إذا سلم على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ودعا يقف ووجهه إلى القبر لا إلى القبلة ويدعو ويسلم يعني دعاءه للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وصاحبيه, فهذا الدعاء المشروع هناك كالدعاء عند زيارة قبور سائر المؤمنين وهو الدعاء لهم فإنه أحق الناس أن يصلي عليه ويسلم ويدعي له بأبي هو وأمي صلى الله عليه وسلم, وبهذا تتفق أقوال مالك ويفرق بين الدعاء الذي أحبه والدعاء الذي كرهه, وذكر أنه بدعة.

وأما الحكاية في تلاوة مالك هذه الآية (ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم..) الآية فهي والله أعلم باطلة, فإن هذا لم يذكره أحد من الأئمة فيما أعلمه ولم يذكر أحد منهم أنه استحب أن يُسأل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد الموت, لا استغفارا ولا غيره, وكلام مالك المنصوص عنه وعن أمثاله ينافي هذا, وإنما يُعرف مثل هذا في حكاية ذكرها طائفة من متأخري الفقهاء عن أعرابي أنه أتى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وتلا هذه الآية وأنشد بيتين:


يا خير من دفنت بالقاع أعظمه ** فطاب من طيبهن القاع والأكم
نفسي الفداء لقبر أنت ساكنه ** فيه العفاف وفيه الجود والكرم


ولهذا استحب طائفة من متأخري الفقهاء من أصحاب الشافعي وأحمد مثل ذلك, واحتجوا بهذه الحكاية التي لا يثبت بها حكم شرعي, لا سيما في مثل هذا الأمر الذي لو كان مشروعا مندوبا لكان الصحابة والتابعون أعلم به وأعمل به من غيرهم, بل قضاء حاجة مثل هذا الأعرابي وأمثاله لها أسباب قد بسطت في غير هذا الموضع, وليس كل من قضيت حاجته لسبب يقتضي أن يكون السبب مشروعا مأمورا به, فقد كان صلى الله عليه وسلم يُسأل في حياته المسألة فيعطيها لا يرد سائلا, وتكون المسألة محرمة في حق السائل, حتى قال (إني لأعطي أحدهم العطية فيخرج بها يتأبطها نارا) قالوا يا رسول الله: فلم تعطيهم؟ قال (يأبون إلا أن يسألوني, ويأبى الله لي البخل) وقد يعمل الرجل العمل الذي يعتقده صالحا ولا يكون عالما أنه منهي عنه فيثاب على حسن قصده ويعفى عنه لعدم علمه, وهذا باب واسع, وعاما العبادات المبتدعة المنهي عنها قد يفعلها بعض الناس ويحصل له بها نوع من الفائدة, وذلك لا يدل على أنها مشروعة, بل لو لم تكن مفسدتها أغلب من مصلحتها لما نهى عنها...).

وقال رحمه الله في كتابه قاعدة جليلة في التوسل والوسيلة ط. مكتبة الفرقان, ص160-162:

(وأيضاً فإن طلب شفاعته ودعائه واستغفاره بعد موته وعند قبره ليس مشروعاً عند أحد من أئمة المسلمين، ولا ذكر هذا أحد من الأئمة الأربعة وأصحابهم القدماء، وإنما ذكر هذا بعض المتأخرين: ذكروا حكاية عن العتبي أنه رأى أعرابيا أتى قبره وقرأ هذه الآية، وأنه رأى في المنام أن الله غفر له.
وهذا لم يذكره أحد من المجتهدين من أهل المذاهب المتبوعين، الذين يفتي الناس بأقوالهم، ومن ذكرها لم يذكر عليها دليلاً شرعياً....) الخ كلامه رحمه الل
And further comments by Shaykh Rabî' Ibn Hâdî Al-Madkhalî:
قال فضيلة الشيخ العلامة: ربيع بن هادي المدخلي حفظه الله في تعليقاته على كتاب: قاعدة جليلة في التوسل والوسيلة لشيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية رحمه الله ط. مكتبة الفرقان, ص160-162:

(هذه الحكاية ذكرها ابن عساكر في تأريخه. وابن الجوزي في "مثير الغرام" وغيرهما، بأسانيدهم إلى محمد بن حرب الهلالي، قال: "دخلت المدينة، فأتيت قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، فزرته وجلست بحذائه، فجاء أعرابي فزاره، ثم قال: ياخير الرسل إن الله أنزل عليك كتاباً صادقاً، قال فيه: {ولن أنهم إذْ ظلموا أنفسهم} إلى قوله: {رحيماً}. وإني جئتك مستغفراً ربك من ذنوبي مستشفعاً بك.
وفي رواية؛ وقد جئتك مستغفراً من ذنبي، مستشفعاً بك إلى ربي، ثم بكى، وأنشأ يقول:


ياخير من دفنت بالقاع أعظمه ** فطاب من طيبهن القاع والأكم
نفسي الفداء لقبر أنت ساكنه ** فيه العفاف وفيه الجود والكرم


ثم استغفر وانصرف، قال: فرقدت، فرأيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في نومي وهو يقول: الحق بالرجل، وبشره بأن الله غفر له بشفاعتي. فاستيقظت، فخرجت أطلبه، فلم أجده". وفاء الوفاء للسمهودي (4/1361).
وقد بحثت كثيراً في مظان كثيرة من تأريخ ابن عساكر عن القصة فلم أجدها. وبحثت عن ترجمة محمد بن حرب الهلالي، فلم أقف له على ترجمة.
قال ابن عبد الهادي في "الصارم المنكي" (ص 212): "وهذه الحكاية التي ذكرها - يعني السبكي - بعضهم يرويها عن العتبي بلا إسناد، وبعضهم يرويها عن محمد بن حرب الهلالي، وبعضهم يرويها عن محمد بن حرب بلا إسناد، عن أبي الحسن الزعفراني عن الأعرابي.
وقد ذكرها البيهقي في كتاب "شعب الإيمان" بإسناد مظلم عن محمد بن روح بن يزيد البصري حدثني أبوحرب الهلالي، قال: حج أعرابي، فلما جاء إلى باب مسجد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أناخ راحلته فعقلها، ثم دخل المسجد حتى أتى القبر، ثم ذكر نحو ما تقدم. وقد وضع لها بعض الكذابين إسناداً إلى علي بن أبي طالب - رضي الله عنه -.
وفي الجملة؛ ليست الحكاية المذكورة عن الأعرابي مما تقوم به الحجة، وإسنادها مظلم، ولفظها مختلف "أيضاً"، ولو كانت ثابتة لم يكن فيها حجة على مطلوب المعترض، ولا يصلح الاحتجاج بمثل هذه الحكاية، ولا الاعتماد على مثلها عند أهل العلم، وبالله التوفيق.
أقول: ومحمد بن روح بن يزيد البصري، لم أقف له على ترجمته.
والعجب من قوم لا يحتجون بالأحاديث الصحيحة في باب الاعتقاد، كيف يتعلقون فيما يوافق أهواءهم بروايات المجهولين، الذين لا يعرفهم علماء الجرح والتعديل، الذين دونوا أسماء الثقات والضعفاء والمجهولين، وفاتهم هؤلاء المجهولون الذين يتعلق برواياتهم أصحاب الأهواء.
ثم العجب - ثانياً - أنهم يتعلقون بالمنامات، ويحتجون بها في الاعتقادات.
ثم العجب - ثالثاً - أنهم يتعلقون بما ينسب إلى الأعراب الأجلاف، ويعرضون عما ثبت عن أئمة الأسلاف من مثل ما روى عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن عبيد الله بن عمر، أنه لا يعلم عن أحد من الصحابة أنه كان يزور قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وهي رواية ثابتة صحيحة لا غبار عليها.
وهل هذا الأعرابي أفقه من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وأعلم بالقرآن منهم، وأحرص على تطبيقه منهم؟ كيف لم يأت أصحاب محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى قبره، مستغفرين من ذنوبهم، مستشهدين بهذه الآية؟.
إذن فعلى هؤلاء أن يتأدبوا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بأدب الأعراب؛ فقد روى الإمام أحمد (2/288) ثنا زيد بن الحباب أخبرني محمد بن الهلال القرشي عن أبيه أنه سمع أبا هريرة - رضي الله عنه - يقول - كنا مع رسول الله في المسجد، فلما قام قمنا معه، فجاءه أعرابي، فقال: أعطني يامحمد، قال "لا، واستغفر الله" فجذبه فخدشه، قالوا: فهموا به، قال: "دعوه"، ثم أعطاه. قال: وكانت يمينه أن يقول: "لا، واستغفر الله".
وقال أيضاً - (5/65): "ثنا روح بن عبادة ثنا بسطام بن مسلم قال: سمعت خليفة بن عبدالله الغبري يقول: سمعت عائذ بن عمرو المزني قال: بينما نحن مع نبينا صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا أعرابي قد ألح عليه في المسألة، يقول: يارسول الله! أطعمني، يارسول الله ! أعطني، قال: فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فدخل المنزل، وأخذ بعضادتي الحجرة، وأقبل علينا بوجهه، وقال: "والذي نفس محمد بيده لو تعلمون ما أعلم في المسألة، ما سأل رجل رجلاً وهو يجد ليلة تبيته" فأمر له بطعام.
وروى البخاري في 72 - كتاب اللباس، حديث (5809). ومسلم في 12 - كتاب الزكاة، حديث (128). وأحمد (3/153، 210) كلهم من حديث أنس - رضي الله عنه - قال كنت أمشي مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وعليه برد نجراني غليظ الحاشية، فأدركه أعرابي، فجبذه بردائه جبذة شديدة، حتى نظر إلى صفحة عاتق رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وقد أثرت بها حاشية البرد من شدة جبذته، ثم قال: يا محمد! مر لي من مال الله الذي عندك، فالتفت إليه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، ثم ضحك، ثم أمر له بعطاء.
وفي لفظ عند أحمد؛ حتى انشق البرد، وحتى تغيبت حاشيته في عنق رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم.
وروى البخاري في 4 - كتاب الوضوء، حديث (220)، عن أبي هريرة - رضي الله عنه - قال: قام أعرابي فبال في المسجد، فتناوله الناس، فقال لهم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: "دعوه وهريقوا على بوله سجلاً من ماء؛ فإنما بعثتم ميسرين، ولم تبعثوا معسرين". ورواه غيره.
فهل يحتج بتصرفات هؤلاء الأعراب، ويقتدى بهم فيها، فإذا كانت تصرفاتهم هذه خطأ فتصرف ذلك الأعرابي - على افتراض ثبوتها ودونه خرط القتاد - خطأ؛ لأنه فهم الآية على غير وجهها وطلب من الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد موته مالا يجوز أن يطلب منه، ولو كان جائزاً لفعله الصحابة الكرام، واشتهر عنهم، بل وتواتر عنهم).

There is a lot more information in the link as well, so I hope you check it out.

As for the distinction you made and your claim about shirk occurring only when one believes in a deity that is independent from Allah swt, then this is clearly false as the Mushrikeen in the time of the Prophet saws believed in Allah swt, they believed that He controlled everything and they believed that those other beings could only intercede on their behalf before Allah swt. And yet this was denounced as shirk. The Qur'an records that they said:

وَيَقُولُونَ هَـؤُلاء شُفَعَاؤُنَا عِندَ اللّهِ
10:18 "These are only our intercessory with Allah."
عن ‏ ‏ابن عباس ‏ ‏رضي الله عنهما ‏ ‏قال ‏كان المشركون يقولون لبيك لا شريك لك قال فيقول رسول الله ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏ويلكم ‏ ‏قد قد ‏ ‏فيقولون إلا شريكا هو لك تملكه وما ملك يقولون هذا وهم يطوفون ‏ ‏بالبيت
Ibn Abbas reported that the mushrikeen would say (during Hajj): "I respond to your call, O Allah, I respond to your call. There is no partner that you have..." at this, the Prophet saws would interject and say, "Woe to you! Stop (here), stop (here)," but they would proceed, "...except a partner that belongs to you. You control him, and all that he controls." They would say this while performing tawaf around the Ka'bah. (Sahîh Muslim 2/842)


Clearly, the musrikeen still believed that Allah had complete control over such deities, and they had no power in and of themselves. This refutes your claim that they believed these were powerful deities at a level comparable to Allah swt. This proves that they ascribed total rububiyyah (control/lordship) to Allah swt.

What they did that wrong was that they made Dua'aa to other than Allah swt. If you supplicate to ANY created being as an intercessor this is shirk because supplication (Du'a) is worship as the Prophet saws said
ان الدعا هو العباده
"verily Du'aa is worship" (Sunan At-Tirmidhî, Sunan Ibn Mâjah, Musnad Ahmad).

Those who the Mushrikun called upon, including Al-Lat, Al-Uzza and Manat were just human beings. Wadd, Suwa', Yaghuth, Ya'ooq, and Nasr were pious people who died and the mushrikun used to call upon them. Please see what I posted here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/57660-post14.html

No doubt the Prophet Muhammad pbuh is living, but his life in the life of al-barzakh and he has passed from the life of this world. Allah swt told His messenger:
إِنَّكَ مَيِّتٌ وَإِنَّهُم مَّيِّتُونَ
39:30 Verily, you (O Muhammad SAW) will die and verily, they (too) will die.

The Qur'an and the Sunnah are filled with exhortations to call upon Allah swt alone, and never to supplicate to anyone other than Him (eg. 72:18 So do not make Du'aa to anyone alongside Him). This has always been the message of Islam and this is why the Jahiliyyah arabs were considered Mushrikun. They used to take pious people as intercessors with Allah swt EXACTLY as the Modern mushrikeen do.

As for your saying that these scholars would be irresponsible for narrating ahadith that contained dubious material, then I strongly suggest you familiarize yourself with the ahadith in the classical works. I will quote Ibn Jareer At-Tabari to show the attitude of some of the early scholars:
Let him who examines this book of mine know that I have relied, as regards everything I mention therein which I stipulate to be described by me, solely upon what has been transmitted to me by way of reports which I cite therein and traditions which I ascribe to their narrators, to the exclusion of what may be apprehended by rational argument or deduced by the human mind, except in very few cases. This is because knowledge of the reports of men of the past and of contemporaneous views of men of the present do not reach the one who has not witnessed them nor lived in their times except through the accounts of reporters and the transmission of transmitters, to the exclusion of rational deduction and mental inference. Hence, if I mention in this book a report about some men of the past, which the reader of listener finds objectionable or worthy of censure because he can see no aspect of truth nor any factual substance therein, let him know that this is not to be attributed to us but to those who transmitted it to us and we have merely passed this on as it has been passed on to us. (Ibin Jarîr al-Tabarî, Târîkh al-Tabarî: Târîkh al-Umam wal-Mulûk, 1997, Volume I, Dâr al-Kutub al-cIlmiyyah, Beirut (Lebanon), pp. 13.)
So the scholars have warned people not to think that just because they narrate something it is necessarily what they believe. There are many works of hadith by prominent scholars that have hundreds or even thousands of weak narrations, like the Sunan of Ad-Daraqutni, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Musnad of Imam Ahmad and many others. Again, we have to see what the scholars themselves said about it. Why are you hiding the words of these scholars? Why don't you show us what they said about making Du'aa to the Prophet or to pious people?

For those interested in more info on tawassul please see:
http://www.islamtoday.com/show_quest...&sub_cat_id=71
:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-15-2006, 07:17 PM
:sl: From Shaykh Abdullah Al-Dumayjî:
It is permissible to ask a living person to help you. Allah says: “Help ye one another in righteousness and piety.” [Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 2] and says: “Now the man of his own people appealed to him against his foe, and Moses struck him with his fist and killed him.” [Sûrah al-Qasas: 15]

However, it is not allowed to ask a deceased person for help of any kind. This is a pure polytheism. This is what Allah severely warned us against and sent prophets and messages so that people would avoid it.

It does not make a difference who the deceased was, not even the Prophet (peace be upon him). The Companions, who are our example to follow, used to ask the Prophet (peace be upon him) to pray for them during his life time. However, after his death, none of them would come to his grave and ask him for help regardless how severe their conditions might have been and regardless of whether the problem was general or personal.

When a famine occurred during the reign of `Umar B. al-Khattâb, he told the Prophet’s uncle: “O, `Abbas, ask Allah for us” and said: “O, Lord, we were soliciting you by our Prophet and you would answer us and let us have rain, now we are soliciting you by the uncle of our Prophet so we ask you to answer us.” Neither `Umar nor another Companion went to the Prophet’s grave and asked him for rain. No one used to go the Prophet’s grave to seek forgiveness. The Companions clearly made a distinction between the living and the dead in this matter. Since it is not permitted to be done with the Prophet (peace be upon him), it is clearly equally prohibited to be done with someone else.

The essence of polytheism is to seek from other than Allah.

Wadd, Suwâ`, Yagûth, Ya`ûq and Nasrâ - the idols of pagan Arabia - were originally names of pious people, the same as Sheikh `Abd al-Qâdir al-Jîlânî. People made statues at their graves to remind each other of their pious conduct. However, after some time, they requested things from these people, though they were dead, and sought their help in fulfilling their needs.

This is an act of polytheism. The same applies to al-Lât. He was a good man. Sheikh `Abd al-Qadr al-Jîlânî, al-Husayn and Zaynab were doubtless pious people, but unfortunately, people began visiting their graves and asking them to fulfill their needs.

Allah says: “Is it not to Allah that sincere devotion is due? But those who take for protectors others than Allah (say): ‘We only serve them in order that they may bring us nearer to Allah'." [Sûrah al-Zumar: 3]

Those who worshipped statues thought that they represented pious people and their intention in worshipping those statues was only to be granted intercession through them to Allah. This is always the reason used by those who try to justify calling on the deceased for help.

Some who join Gods besides Allah in the Islamic era have gone further than the polytheists of pre-Islamic times by describing their Gods of being able to maniputate the universe. Some of them have gone so far as to say: “O `Abd al-Qâdir al- Jîlânî O you who have dispensation of the universe.”

Then what is there left for Allah? If such a statement is not deemed pure polytheism, what then would be pure polytheism?

The person who told you that you were doing the right thing by asking `Abd al-Qâdir in his grave, and considered that as being from the Qur’ân and Sunnah is indeed a liar. You will never see in Allah’s book and the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) anything that condones such conduct.

In fact, the Qur’ân, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and all other books and Prophets were sent to spread monotheism and the loneliness of Allah in worship. Allah says: “Not a messenger did We send before thee without this inspiration sent by Us to him that there is no god but I: therefore worship and serve Me” [Sûrah al-Anbiyâ’: 25].

Allah warns us in many verses not to call upon the deceased. He says: “Verily those whom ye call upon besides Allah are servants like unto you: call upon them, and let them listen to your prayer, if ye are (indeed) truthful” [Sûrah al-A`râf: 194] and says: “If ye invoke them, they will not listen to your call, and if they were to listen, the cannot answer your (prayer) On the Day of Judgment they will reject your ‘partnership’, and none (O men) can inform you like Him who is All-Aware” [Sûrah Fâtir: 14]. (SOURCE)
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-15-2006, 09:38 PM
Originally Posted by Sunni Student
Why are you Ignoring وَيَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ when this is the main issue Involved in the Ayah?

and just focussing on
وَيَقُولُونَ هَـؤُلاء شُفَعَاؤُنَا عِندَ اللّه

I'm not ignoring it, this is exactly the point I have been giving you all along with other texts - WHAT was their worship?? It was their Du'aa which they directed to other than Allah. It was their taking others as intercessors with Allah swt. Iltijâ' to these beings IS worship.

they regarded the Idols as Intercessors with Allah
Just as they regarded pious people like Wadd, Suwa', Yaghut, Ya'ooq and Nasr as intercessory with Allah swt, you do exactly the same.
Mushrikeen worshipped others besides Allah
HOW did they worship others besides Him? Your method of argument here is ridiculous - has anyone here claimed that the Mushrikun did not worship other than Allah??? NO! The issue is that they did worship other than Allah, and that those who call upon others alongside Allah as they did ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING.

Let me ask you one Question, is asking someone who can hear you to regarding as Dua of worship, for example I come to you and say Ya Ansar supplicate to Allah for me that I be guided to the straight path is that request a Dua directed to you?

Please answer that and we will move on!
If you call upon a person from another place, then you are committing shirk because you are attributing divine attributes to them, regardless of what you are requesting. And if you call out for someone to do something beyond their control then you are committing shirk regardless of where you are (eg. "O Person! Bless my children, forgive their sins and give them long lives!"). However, if you are with me and you request me to make Du'aa for you, that is regarded by most scholars as perfectly acceptable. So how does that differ from what you are proposing? If someone calls out to a (dead of alive) saint from some distant land to intercede for them, this is shirk because they are attributing divine powers of omniscience to that individual. Now if someone goes and stands at the grave of such a person and asks them to intercede for them, this is not shirk if the person believes they can hear them, but it is bida'ah which could lead to shirk. However, if you go to their grave and say, "O person please forgive my sins" THEN that is shirk because no one can forgive your sins except Allah swt.

I have not once stated that I believe it is permissible to call on the Prophets or any dead from afar with the belief that they can hear us and accept our requests!
That's good. So I'm glad we agree that would be shirk. Now with regard to going to their grave - do you agree that if you asked them to forgive your sins, or grant you jannah, etc. that would also be shirk?

And you said that just because the Scholars have quoted the Incident of Utbi does not mean that they are not against it then can you explain why many have included it in their Tafsirs of Surah 4 Ayah 64.
Can you explain why many of the mufassireen included stories from the Irsâ'îliyyât in their tafsîr even though many of them are blatantly false and contain baseless concepts the scholars denounce. Example? Story of Harût and Marût. And I also quoted for you the comment of Imam Ibn Jarîr At-Tabarî which shows that he, being one of the most prominent mufasireen, acknowledged the presence of dubious narrations within his tafsîr and said they are not to be attributed to him. I repeat my request to quote what these scholars have actually said about seeking forgiveness from those other than Allah swt.
we ask the Prophet at his grave with the knowledge that he can hear us, it clearly shows that it is not Shirk and not in any way similer to those Meccan Idol worshipors.
This is not shirk, and no one ever claimed it to be shirk. It is a bida'ah whcih could lead to shirk. As Yasir Qadhi said:
if the being is dead, and one thinks that the dead can hear, and stands by the grave of this person, believing that his du'aa has a greater chance to be responded to, then this is a reprehensible bid'ah that has no basis in the Quran or authentic sunnah or confirmed actions of the first three generations of Islam. This is a bid'ah, and NOT shirk, although no doubt it is a stepping stone which will lead to the first two categories.
What is shirk is for people to call out and say "Ya Rasulullah, forgive my sins!". Or if they say "O so-and-so help me!" when they are in a different land. I'm glad to see you denounce such things. If you go to their grave and request them to supplicate to Allah swt on your behalf, this cannot be shirk but it will be considered bida'ah which could lead to shirk.

How did the mushrikeen worship Wadd, Suwâ, and the others? I've already posted:
Wadd, Suwâ`, Yagûth, Ya`ûq and Nasrâ - the idols of pagan Arabia - were originally names of pious people, the same as Sheikh `Abd al-Qâdir al-Jîlânî. People made statues at their graves to remind each other of their pious conduct. However, after some time, they requested things from these people, though they were dead, and sought their help in fulfilling their needs.

This is an act of polytheism. The same applies to al-Lât. He was a good man. Sheikh `Abd al-Qadr al-Jîlânî, al-Husayn and Zaynab were doubtless pious people, but unfortunately, people began visiting their graves and asking them to fulfill their needs.


:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-16-2006, 02:15 AM
:sl:
Originally Posted by Sunni Student
So all that time I have been saying that going to the Prophets grave and asking him to Intercede for us is not shirk and you and other Brothers have been comparing this act to those who Asscociate with Allah!

and Now you say it is not Shirk!

I suggest you re-read my posts. I never said that asking at the grave for them to supplicate for you is shirk, I was speaking about calling out to others than Allah swt in general. It seems the reality is that there has been some miscommunication between us and you assumed something about what I was saying as I did about what you were saying.

So as it stands - am I right in assuming there is no difference between us as to what we consider shirk?

Regarding your views of the Ayah that them using a median to Allah was the actual cause of them worshipping Allah then I do not agree with that.

The Tafseers are pretty clear that it was worship and that they made these Medians as God's.
This reminded me of something I intended to comment on earlier. Take a look at what you wrote here:

Originally Posted by Sunni Student
They were Condemed for Worshipping them!

71:23 "And they have said (to each other), 'Abandon not your gods: Abandon neither Wadd nor Suwa', neither Yaguth nor Ya'uq, nor Nasr';-

وَقَالُوا لَا تَذَرُنَّ آلِهَتَكُمْ وَلَا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّا وَلَا سُوَاعًا وَلَا يَغُوثَ وَيَعُوقَ وَنَسْرًا (71:23

(And they have said) i.e. the chieftains said to the communality of the people: (Forsake not your gods) forsake not the worship of your Lord. (Forsake not Wadd) forsake not the worship of Wadd, (nor Suwa') nor the worship of Suwa', (nor Yaghuth and Ya'uq and Nasr) nor the worship of Yaghuth and Ya'uq and Nasr. These were idols which Noah's folk worshipped.
Look at how you translated this verse. You criticised brother Ahmad for the words inserted into his translation in brackets, but what you have done here is far worse! You have placed words into the translation that do not appear in the original arabic text, and you have not identified them with brackets! Please show me where in this verse it says 'worship' ('Ibâdah) - it doesn't! It says "do not abandon your Ilâhs and do not abandon Wadd, nor Suwa', nor Yaghooth, Ya'ooq or Nasr." And it was careless for you to place your own comment (highlighted purple) right next to the translation without any indication that it was not part of the verse.

And I am amazed at your reference to the mufasireen in spite of what your wrote. Do you know what the mufasireen and the authentic Ahâdîth say about this verse? They do not say that Wadd, Suwa' Yaghooth, Ya'ooq and Nasr were taken as creator deities, No! They say that these were pious people who died and shirk was initiated when the people began to take these pious people as intercessors and they called upon them. And the verse does not say 'your gods' it says Âlihatakum, and Ilâh is ANYTHING to which one directs their devotion, acts of worship, subservience, supplications, etc. Proof? Ayat 45:23.

The manner in which they called their idols or false gods is with beliefs such as they are the partners of Allah and they claimed them to be Gods so this is complete contrast to Saying "Ya Muhammad Help me" as such a comment is not to be taken litraly meaning Litraly the belief is not that The Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] will be the cause of the help rather the belief is that the Prophet will enable that help to come from Allah by Supplicating to him, so I do not consider such a statement to be Shirk with such an Intention.
So you hold it permissable as well for one to say "Ya Wadd, Help me!", "O Jesus, forgive me!", "Ya Uzzah, guide me!", or maybe even "Ya Abdul-Qadir Jilani, save me!" Is this permissable?
Usually there intention is not as stated, but if it is why would anyone call out someone else to help them when they can call upon Allah swt as we are instructed to in the Qur'an?

But I think the most important point here is that today there are many people who invoke saints around the world to help them and intercede for them, or even to forgive them or grant them Jannah. You and I both agree that this is shirk. The point I am making is that they fall into the same group as those people who worshipped these five pious men from the people of Nûh and after them.
However if someone is to believe that the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] can Independantly or without the will of Allah help or cause benefit to us then this would be Shirk and that is without doubt, and it stands that no one has such a belief.
Actually there are many people who invoke not just the Prophet but saints to forgive them, grant them paradise, accept their repentance, and all sorts of things that are blatant shirk. I'm glad you denounce such people.
Brother I have already given you the Quranic Ayah that they regarded them As Gods, and according to the Tafseer of the Ayah these were their Idols!
As mentioned above, it was not the fact they were 'idols', consult the major works of tafseer and you will learn that they were pious people who were called upon after their death, just as many ignorant muslims do today.
As for the Opinions of the Scholars Inshallah Tomorrow I will present a detailed post on what the Scholars have said on this Issue, I would also be greatful and I am sure others would also be if you could also present the sayings of the Scholars regarding this Issue.
Before we do this we need to understand exactly what the point of contention is. Am I right in saying that we are not in disagreement about shirk but rather Bida'ah?

:w:
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-16-2006, 02:20 AM
:sl:
Regarding what you posted from Ibn Hajr Al-Haythami: it is not relevant here since he is talking about tawassul by the status of the Prophet Muhammad saws which is not the topic being discussed. You will find many scholars who say that tawassul by his status is bida'ah, but you will also be able to find many who hold it permissable like Al-Haythami. As such, it is not an issue I am interested in debating. I am more concerned with debating the issues of shirk rather than bida'ah, but it seems that you accept all my points on what is and what is not shirk. So if that is the case then there is no disagreement between us on shirk, only bida'ah in which case I don't see it necessary to debate the issue further.

:w:

ps. the hadith quoted in the fatwa on adam's du'aa is da'îf:
http://islamqa.com/index.php?ln=eng&QR=34715
Reply

abdur_Rahmaan
11-16-2006, 08:21 PM
For further information about Tawassul (seeking nearness), Shaykh al-Albaanee has a good book titled "Tawassul". I do not know if anyone has read or referrred it here, but it's a good read, with authentic proofs from Qur'aan, Sunnah, upon the understanding of the Companions.

walhamdulillaahi rabbil 'aalameen.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
11-17-2006, 03:42 AM
:sl:

Regarding the 5 mentioned in Surah Nûh.
Remember what I wrote:Do you know what the mufasireen and the authentic Ahâdîth say about this verse? They do not say that Wadd, Suwa' Yaghooth, Ya'ooq and Nasr were taken as creator deities, No! They say that these were pious people who died and shirk was initiated when the people began to take these pious people as intercessors and they called upon them. And the verse does not say 'your gods' it says Âlihatakum, and Ilâh is ANYTHING to which one directs their devotion, acts of worship, subservience, supplications, etc. Proof? Ayat 45:23.

As for what is mentioned about these being pious people:

Ibn 'Abbas relates: "Indeed these five names of righteous men from the people of Nooh. When they died Shataan whispered to their people to make statues of them and to place these statues in their places of gathering as a reminder of them, so they did this. However, none from amongst them worshipped these statues, until when they died and the purpose of the statues was forgotten. Then (the next generation) began to worship them."[7]
The likes of this has also been related by Ibn Jareer at-Tabaree and others, from a number of the salaf (Pious Predecessors) - radiallaahu 'anhum. In ad-Durral-Manthoor (6/269): 'Abdullaah ibn Humaid relates from Abu Muttahar, who said: Yazeed ibn al-Muhallab was mentioned to Abu Ja'far al-Baaqir (d.11H), so he said: He was killed at the place where another besides Allaah was first worshipped. Then he mentioned Wadd and said: "Wadd was a Muslim man who was loved by his people. When he died, the people began to gather around his grave in the land of Baabil (Babel), lamenting and mourning. So when Iblees (Satan) saw them mourning and lamenting over him, he took the form of a man and came to them, saying : I see that you are mourning and lamenting over him. So why don't you make a picture of him (i.e. a statue) and place it in your places of gatherings so that you maybe reminded of him. So they said: Yes, and they made a picture of him and put in their place of gathering; which reminded them of him. When Iblees saw how they were (excessively) remembering him, he said : "Why doesn't every man amongst you make a similar picture to keep in your own houses, so that you can be (constantly) reminded of him." So they all said "yes". So each household made a picture of him, which they adored and venerated and which constantly reminded them of him. Abu Ja'far said: "Those from the later generation saw what the (pevious generation) had done and considered that........to the extent that they took him as an ilah (diety) to be worshipped besides Allaah. He then said :" This was the first idol worshipped other than Allaah, and they called this idol Wadd"[8]

They followed the exact same logic of these people being closer to God then them, so therefore they took them as intercessors. Many people do the same thing today towards other dead saints. And don't say it doesn't exist, this is actually WIDESPREAD in many places and I have witnessed examples myself of people invoking saints for things that are in divine control or just invoking them in general away from their grave. These are things you and I both agree to be shirk.

Anyway as you agree that it is not Shirk to request one at his grave to supplicate on our behalf it is needless to discuss such Ayah’s further.
Agreed.

I request you speak for yourself brother Ansar as without a doubt there are many that regard it as Shirk so it means they do not even know the positions of their own Scholars on this Issue, I have come across so many that claim it is Shirk.
What you are quoting is just people speaking about the issue of calling on others besides Allah swt in general, just as I was speaking on this issue in general as well in my earlier posts in this thread. But the specific issue of going to someone's grave and requesting that person to supplicate for you believing they can hear your request, I have not come across anyone saying this specifically is shirk rather what most have said is that this is bida'ah.

Will you have read what I have said is that Shirk according to you or Bidah?
If I understand you correctly and you mean calling out "Ya Muhammad!" in the same manner as "Oh Jesus!" and "By Jove!" without actually intending this, then I would call it minor shirk. I'm not sure if that is what you meant.

If you agree it is not Shirk then I am done for that is the only point I wanted to establish in the first place!

As can be seen from All of my posts!

It is pointless Us debating this Issue in terms of Bidah because we will differ on the meaning of Bidah and I am not up for another long debate on the Issue of Innovations at the moment,
Me neither. I think our efforts can be much better spent debating against those who reject Ahadith or who deny fundamentals of Islam, rather than going into a discussion on bida'ah when I am sure we probably will agree on everything except the common points of contention there too.

:w:
Reply

boriqee
11-18-2006, 09:56 AM
The reason Brother Ahmad cannot find this Incident in Ibn Kathirs Tafsir, and I presume he looked at the translation, is because the the incident was omitted from the translation, now why would they do such a thing, well because they must have believed this is promoting shirk, now the Question arises did not Ibn Kathir think that by including this Incident in his Tafsir commentating on an Ayah which tells us to go to the prophet, that he would be promoting Shirk?
I had recently talked to the translator and student who was in charge of the translation of the entire tafseer Ibn katheer. I dont swish to post the entire thing but there are certain unaareful realities that you failed to allude and only were lead to the conclusion you gave. the project of its translation was also to have all the dhuafa raiwayaat from the tafseer of Ibn katheer, so quite naturally this athar was removed do to its fallacious nature according to the rules of the muhaditheen. there are other mattrs involved as well that is to lengthy, but this pretty much dismantles your notion that you had alluded to us here.

secondly as your your challange ABout any salafi labelling shirk the ulema you stated is unrealistic sicne it is known the the salafi position concerning seeking baraka from Allah's messenger while alive is permissible and this act was done while he was alive. That is why the actual methodology that the sahaba perfomred after his death was one that was in toal UN accordance with the ayaah since the ayaah hasn othing to do with the matter that is used in the promotion of the awliyyah in their quboor.

AS FOR THE INCORRECT AND RATHER BLATENTLY IGNORANT REPPLY USED BY sHAYKH Yusif ar-Rifa'e, in where it was said

Supplicating Allah by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, a good deed, or a name or Attribute of Allah Most High. The scholar, YUSUF RIFA'I, says: I here want to convey the position, attested to by compelling legal evidence, of the orthodox majority of Sunni Muslims on the subject of supplicating Allah through an intermediary (tawassul), and so I say (and Allah alone gives success) that since there is no disagreement among scholars that supplicating Allah through an intermediary is in principle legally valid, the discussion of its details merely concerns derived rulings that involve interschool differences, unrelated to questions of belief or unbelief, monotheism or associating partners with Allah (shirk); the sphere of the question being limited to permissibility or impermissibility, and its ruling being that it is either lawful or unlawful. There is no difference among groups of Muslims in their consensus on the permissibility of three types of supplicating Allah through an intermediary (tawassul):
The problems that arise that
1. claiming complete agreement about its allowance the the historical reality of islam necessitates the fact that such an idea was unavailable to any of hte muslim imaams until the idea of dua til-quboor came into the matter under the umbrella of tawassul.
2. the claim that the issue is not related to aqeedah, when it actually is, when even hanafee imaams completely made takfeer, DUE TO THE AQAID of the ones who made this permissible


So In conclusion you failed to bring one Ayah of the Quran or One Hadith which prohibits asking the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] to Intercede for us at his grave
that is because there is no khusoos. there is no texts allowing it nor denying it. So according to the usool of ahlu-sunnah, of hwom ahlul-hadeeth laid down and whom ahlul-rai also accepted was the fact that if the two remain silent, then the next issue of proof is the ijmaa of the sahaba, and while there is no khusoos concerning seeking his shafa'a, even though tere are hadeeth regarding his warning from us of thoe things which would lad to his shirk, then the actions of the sahaba is now hujjah in the mater, and their hujjah was that they did not do so whcih leads me to answer this

You seem to be contradicting yourself here Brother, You yourself admitted that asking help from those that are alive is permissible and allowed, and If you don’t believe in that then you are clearly Ignorant, I asked you to explain why asking help from alive does not come under that Ayah and asking those that have passed away does?
There is no contradictin because in one instance, the act is accepted, and the other instance it is not. The asking of only Allah Himself is mutlaqa EXCEPT where there is a sunnah that it is allowed, and asking or refering to those who are alive is acceptable, where as there is no mention about its acceptbale practibility when the person is in a state of helplessness, and if the sahaba did not do it, then we dont do it.

That is realy an Ignorant Comment and Infact a Offensive comment towards the Prophets of Allah.

By Allahs will The Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] has bought us immense benefit, Allah calls him a Mercy to the Worlds, A Bearer of Glad Tidings, A Warner, A witness, As a Lamp spreading Light, As Merciful and Compasionate towards the Believers, A exalted Charater, A Noble Prophet, The Seal of The Prophets.

and you say he bought us no benefit!
i didnt know that there was any benefit from the Person of the prophet. The benefit that we extract from him is his sunnah. This is the waseela we seek, whcih is why the deniers of tawheed failed to realized that making tawassul in the riwayaat was specifically refering merely to the prophet's invocation to Allah in dua.

Those most worthy of receiving the shafa'a of the prophet salallahu alaihi wa salam are those who abide restrictedly to his sunnah alone and abandon all tha is introduced, even if it comes from someone well respected, for obedience to Muhammada rasulullah necessitates overiding anything against him from no matter who. Such people are extremly more worthy of his shifaa than those who oppose the sunnah in this regard in seeking his shifaa and tabbarruk.

and here is yet another among the lies mentioned by the likes of haddad and his likes that they would ignorantly blurt out their necks

More so when one realizes that this remained the practise of the Ummah for centuries. Allamah Taqee-ud-Deen Al-Subki(RA) and other Muhadditheen have stated that Haafiz Ibn-Taimiyyah(RA) - who passed away in the year 728 Hijri - was the first to refute the permissibility of this form of Tawassul (Shifaa-us-Siqaam pg.293) In fact, Abu-Abdillah Al-Tilmisani Al-Maaliki(RA) (a renown scholar of the 7th century) has written a book concerning how this remained the practise of the entire Ummah since its existence. (Refer Maqaalatul Kawthari pg.397)
I will not even quote the earlier ulema, however here is osmehting quite explicit from Imaam Ibn kathir

Haafidh in Katheer said in his tafseer "al-Wasilah (root word of tawassul) is the means that one uses to obtain a need. al-Wasilah is also the best grade grade in paradise, the grade of the Messenger of Allah that is his residence in paradise"
further stated by Ibn Katheer
"Oh ye who beleive, do your duty to Allah and fear Him. Seek al-Wasilah to Him" Ibn Katheer reported that Ibn abbass had stated that al-Wasilah here means good deeds. This is also the tafseer of the mujtahid Imaams Mujaahid, Abu Wa-il, Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, as-Suddi, ibn Zayd and others who are all noted Imaams and mufassireen.
Ibn Katheer added that Qatadah said that the ayaah means "draw closer to Allah by obeying Him and by performing the deeds that please Him", then, Ibn katheer commented on this that this tafseer by these scholars is unopposed.


I have given you the Scholars that have mentioned this Incident, and if the above is Shirk which according to those who reject asking the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] to intercede for us at his grave and doing Tawassul through him, Then the countless Scholars that have cited the it will have inevitably have been inciting Shirk, So my challenge was to accept that those Scholars accepted this to be permissible and according to those who reject it they are inciting shirk
no, you are the one insinuating that there is an inciting of shirk where there is none which results from an unstablized fahm concerning your creed.

Where in the Ayah does it make an exception to worldly matters?
becuase it is caste upon other ayaah and ahadeeth whcih contrict it to specific issues, which means it is mutlaq as I have said unless there exists texts which clarify the muqayyida of this ayaah.

How is asking Allah’s creation to ask Allah for us Setting up rivals with Allah?
because it falls back to an issue of itiqaad, if the person beleives that the object being adressed has any say or power in the allowance or inacceptance of that which is asked, then upon that it becomes the reality of what it is, shirk.

You understand right. let me make it simpler

Amm or mutlaqa= there can be no going to any of hte creation at all in anything with what one wishes for

muqayyid= except where there exists a texts that doing so does not infringe upon the above rule.

end conclusion= while we do have texts whcih points to the relaity that we can consult living beings for benefit (beleiving that the source and baraka is from Allah) at the same time there is no texts validifying the idea or notion that seeking the dead i the quboor fall into the same line practice, thus the prophetic manhaj is witnessed proving this fact upon the actions of the sahaba and the early salaf who never heard of such absurd ideas that Taj-udeen as-Subki attributes to them.

I will have to get back later, Im tired

asalamu alaikum ya ikhwaani
Reply

Abu Ibraheem
11-18-2006, 11:27 AM
I am happy to see al-Izaaree has showed up. This thread will now be a very interesting read. I remember conversations with him and another brother Abu Bakr and they explained to me these things very well. Mashaallah.
Reply

Abu Ibraheem
11-21-2006, 08:52 PM
My argument was against an ideology that has been innovated into Islaam. The terminology saint depicts sinlessness and human divinity. For the pure prestine message of Islaam to prosper amongst us as an ummah, we have to drop the taboos and dogmatic beliefs that have arisen amongst us. In order to do this I suggest that we only follow what classical scholars have agreed upon and anything that they argue upon we leave alone. Once we do this then Islaam becomes simple for every Muslim everywhere.

Brother I have never took the angle of criticizing the Awliyah and I cant help it if my approach flew over your head, if you misunderstood then you should read more carefully. Also a brief course in logic would help you greatly then you would be able to recognize a valid and a invalid argument once presented and you wouldn’t commit so many logical fallacies yourself. I apologize if I haven’t got time to teach you.

Next you draw a false analogy with the word saint to the words ilah and God. Saint actually comes from the latin word “sanctus.” Meaning to be sanctified; totally purified from any sins. If we were to apply the term by its very definition then every common believer is a saint when they do tawbah. However, the way its applied within Islaam carries the very same implication as the ideology of sainthood in Christianity, where the saints came to be worshipped to get closer to God. Therefore I am saying that the word saint should not be used and moreover if you are translating the Qur’aan in such ways from waalee to saint then you are doing injustice, because the word wallee carries a different meaning altogether!

Next you argue that Allah is the protector (walee) of a common believer, but a common believer may not have waliyaat. I abhor those who argue over matters of the unseen. If you preach a God that is unknowable and does not enter into a personal relationship with each and every servant who sincerely testifies to His oneness and His truths then you might as well call God unjust. Which Allah is not. Allah is the friend of all believers but you argue we are not His friends? That’s erroneous!
Secondly lets refer back to the Hadith you stated about the waleeullah:

"Allah the Almighty has said: 'Whosoever acts with enmity towards a closer servant of Mine (wali), I will indeed declare war against him. Nothing endears My servant to Me than doing of what I have made obligatory upon him to do. And My servant continues to draw nearer to Me with supererogatory (nawafil) prayers so that I shall love him. When I love him, I shall be his hearing with which he shall hear, his sight with which he shall see, his hands with which he shall hold, and his feet with which he shall walk. And if he asks (something) of Me, I shall surely give it to him, and if he takes refuge in Me, I shall certainly grant him it.'"

Notice the last line very carefully “And if he asks (something) of Me, I shall surely give it to him, and if he takes refuge in Me, I shall certainly grant him it.” Was there any need of quoting from the tafaaseer to prove that Allah protects his servants? His awliyah? Every common believer is a waleeullah and their waliyaat deepens on their levl of taqwa.

Let us look at another Hadith you quoted

Ibn Jarir recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that Allah's Messenger said:

(Among the servants of Allah there will be those whom the Prophets and the martyrs will consider fortunate). It was said: "Who are these, O Messenger of Allah, so we may love them'' He said:

(These are people who loved one another for the sake of Allah without any other interest like money or kinship. Their faces will be light, upon platforms of light. They shall have no fear (on that Day) when fear shall come upon people. Nor shall they grieve when others grieve.) Then he recited:

(Behold!! Verily, the Awliya' (friends and allies) of Allah, no fear shall come upon them nor shall they grieve.)

How many common believers love people for the sake of Allah? And do not take interest or anything of the like. Bottom line by claiming that Muslims are not in a friendship with Allah you are then excluding them from a personal relationship with their Lord and attempting to debar them from the path of Allah. Waliyaat is a hidden matter which you can not see! So why are you even arguing about it. There could be Awliyah on this forum, but I guess due to stubbornness and self righteousness you may want to disbelieve that.

Allah comes to a servant faster than the servant comes to Him, whoever wants the friendship of Allah immediately has it. Allah is not a cruel and unjust God that mardies with His creation childishly saying “I don’t want to be your friend.” The level of friendship with Allah does, however, depend on how sincere you are. No matter how much of a sinner we are, I will let nobody convince me that we Muslims are not friends of Allah. When we see that common believers are the friends of Allah then we will refrain in every way from acting with enmity against them. Readers please note that my use of common believers has deeper implications, my words are not just directed at Sunni Student but anybody who carries a takfeeri attitude. Love the ummah!
Reply

Ibn Abi Ahmed
11-21-2006, 11:33 PM
:sl:

Here is the best book on the subject of Awliya by Ibn Taymiyyah;

The Criterion between the Awliya of Ar-Rahman and the Awliya of Shaitan:

http://download.yousendit.com/1C190EF73F98BF38

Also, a claim used by the ones that say that the Awliya are alive and can respond is the verse in Surah Ale-Imran, #169

وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ أَمْوَاتًا بَلْ أَحْيَاء عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ

Notice that the verse says, Yurzaqun, which means 'they are provided with provision'. The verse does not state, Yarzaqun, which would mean, "they are providing provision". Therefore, if they cannot even provide themselves with provision, how can they provide provision to those that ask them of it?

Strangely though, this verse and the verse in Surah AlBaqarah #154, are used as a proof that the Awliya of Allah, the 'saints' are alive. But in fact these verses are reffering to the martyrs. The verse in Ale-Imran was revealed after the martyrs in the battle of Uhud.


In his Sahih, Muslim recorded that Masruq said, "We asked `Abdullah about this Ayah,


﴿وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَتاً بَلْ أَحْيَاءٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ ﴾


(Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision.)


He said, `We asked the Messenger of Allah the same question and he said,


«أَرْوَاحُهُمْ فِي جَوْفِ طَيْرٍ خُضْرٍ، لَهَا قَنَادِيلُ مُعَلَّقَةٌ بِالْعَرْشِ، تَسْرَحُ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ حَيْثُ شَاءَتْ، ثُمَّ تَأْوِي إِلَى تِلْكَ الْقَنَادِيلِ، فَاطَّلَعَ إِلَيْهِمْ رَبُّهُمُ اطِّلَاعَةً فَقَالَ: هَلْ تَشْتَهُونَ شَيْئًا؟ فَقَالُوا: أَيَّ شَيْءٍ نَشْتَهِي وَنَحْنُ نَسْرَحُ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ حَيْثُ شِئْنَا؟ فَفَعَلَ ذَلِكَ بِهِمْ ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ، فَلَمَّا رَأَوْا أَنَّهُمْ لَنْ يُتْرَكُوا مِنْ أَنْ يُسْأَلُوا، قَالُوا: يَا رَبِّ نُرِيدُ أَنْ تَرُدَّ أَرْوَاحَنَا فِي أَجْسَادِنَا حَتَّى نُقْتَلَ فِي سَبِيلِكَ مَرَّةً أُخْرَى، فَلَمَّا رَأَى أَنْ لَيْسَ لَهُمْ حَاجَةٌ، تُرِكُوا»


(Their souls are inside green birds that have lamps, which are hanging below the Throne (of Allah), and they wander about in Paradise wherever they wish. Then they return to those lamps. Allah looks at them and says, `Do you wish for anything' They say, `What more could we wish for, while we go wherever we wish in Paradise' Allah asked them this question thrice, and when they realize that He will keep asking them until they give an answer, they say, `O Lord! We wish that our souls be returned to our bodies so that we are killed in Your cause again.' Allah knew that they did not have any other wish, so they were left.)''' There are several other similar narrations from Anas and Abu Sa`id.
(When your brothers were killed in Uhud, Allah placed their souls inside green birds that tend to the rivers of Paradise and eat from its fruits. They then return to golden lamps hanging in the shade of the Throne. When they tasted the delight of their food, drink and dwelling, they said, `We wish that our brothers knew what Allah gave us so that they will not abandon Jihad or warfare.' Allah said, `I will convey the news for you.') Allah revealed these and the following Ayat,


﴿وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَتاً بَلْ أَحْيَاءٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ ﴾


(Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision.)

Qatadah, Ar-Rabi` and Ad-Dahhak said that these Ayat were revealed about the martyrs of Uhud.
That was the relevent parts, but heres the rest before I am accused of with holding all the info:

Abu Bakr Ibn Marduwyah recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said, "The Messenger of Allah looked at me one day and said, `O Jabir! Why do I see you sad' I said, `O Messenger of Allah! My father was martyred and left behind debts and children.' He said,


«أَلَا أُخْبِرُكَ؟ مَا كَلَّمَ اللهُ أَحَدًا قَطُّ إِلَّا مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ، وَإِنَّه كَلَّمَ أَبَاكَ كِفَاحًا»


، قال علي: الكفاح: المواجهة


«قَالَ: سَلْنِي أُعْطِكَ. قَالَ: أَسْأَلُكَ أَنْ أُرَدَّ إِلَى الدُّنْيَا فَأُقْتَلَ فِيكَ ثَانِيَةً، فَقَالَ الرَّبُّ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: إِنَّهُ قَدْ سَبَقَ مِنِّي الْقَوْلُ: إِنَّهُمْ إِلَيْهَا لَا يَرْجِعُونَ. قَالَ: أَيْ رَبِّ فَأَبْلِغْ مَنْ وَرَائِي»


(Should I tell you that Allah never spoke to anyone except from behind a veil However, He spoke to your father directly. He said, `Ask Me and I will give you.' He said, `I ask that I am returned to life so that I am killed in Your cause again.' The Lord, Exalted He be, said, `I have spoken the word that they shall not be returned back to it (this life). ' He said, `O Lord! Then convey the news to those I left behind.') Allah revealed,


﴿وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِى سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَتاً﴾


(Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah...)''


Imam Ahmad recorded that Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said,


«الشُّهَدَاءُ عَلى بَارِقِ نَهْرٍ بِبَابِ الْجَنَّـةِ، فِي قُبَّةٍ خَضْرَاءَ، يَخْرُجُ عَلَيْهِمْ رِزْقُهُمْ مِنَ الْجَنَّـةِ بُكْرَةً وَعَشِيًّا»


(The martyrs convene at the shore of a river close to the door of Paradise, in a green tent, where their provisions are brought to them from Paradise day and night.)


Ahmad and Ibn Jarir collected this Hadith, which has a good chain of narration. It appears that the martyrs are of different types, some of them wander in Paradise, and some remain close to this river by the door of Paradise. It is also possible that the river is where all the souls of the martyrs convene and where they are provided with their provision day and night, and Allah knows best. UImam Ahmad narrated a Hadith that contains good news for every believer that his soul will be wandering in Paradise, as well, eating from its fruits, enjoying its delights and happiness and tasting the honor that Allah has prepared in it for him. This Hadith has a unique, authentic chain of narration that includes three of the Four Imams. Imam Ahmad narrated this Hadith from Muhammad bin Idris Ash-Shafi`i who narrated it from Malik bin Anas Al-Asbuhi, from Az-Zuhri, from `Abdur-Rahman bin Ka`b bin Malik that his father said that the Messenger of Allah said,


«نَسَمَةُ الْمُؤْمِنِ طَائِرٌ يَعْلُقُ فِي شَجَرِ الْجَنَّـةِ حَتَّى يَرْجِعَهُ اللهُ إِلى جَسَدِهِ يَوْمَ يَبْعَثُه»


(The soul of the believer becomes a bird that feeds on the trees of Paradise, until Allah sends him back to his body when He resurrects him.)


This Hadith states that the souls of the believers are in the shape of a bird in Paradise. As for the souls of martyrs, they are inside green birds, like the stars to the rest of the believing souls. We ask Allah the Most Generous that He makes us firm on the faith.


Allah's statement,


﴿فَرِحِينَ بِمَآ ءَاتَـهُمُ اللَّهُ﴾


(They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them) indicates that the martyrs who were killed in Allah's cause are alive with Allah, delighted because of the bounty and happiness they are enjoying. They are also awaiting their brethren, who will die in Allah's cause after them, for they will be meeting them soon. These martyrs do not have fear about the future or sorrow for what they left behind. We ask Allah to grant us Paradise. The Two Sahihs record from Anas, the story of the seventy Ansar Companions who were murdered at Bir Ma`unah in one night. In this Hadith, Anas reported that the Prophet used to supplicate to Allah in Qunut in prayer against those who killed them. Anas said, "A part of the Qur'an was revealed about them, but was later abrogated, `Convey to our people that we met Allah and He was pleased with us and made us pleased.'''


Allah said next,


﴿يَسْتَبْشِرُونَ بِنِعْمَةٍ مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَفَضْلٍ وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يُضِيعُ أَجْرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ﴾


(They rejoice in a grace and a bounty from Allah, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers) ﴿3:171﴾.


Muhammad bin Ishaq commented, "They were delighted and pleased because of Allah's promise that was fulfilled for them, and for the tremendous rewards they earned.'' `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam said, "This Ayah encompasses all the believers, martyrs and otherwise. Rarely does Allah mention a bounty and a reward that He granted to the Prophets, without following that with what He has granted the believers after them.''
Taken from Tafsir Ibn Kathir.


Now for the verse in Al Baqarah:

This is what is in Tafsir ibn Kathir:

Allah's statement:


﴿وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ لِمَن يُقْتَلُ فِى سَبيلِ اللَّهِ أَمْوَاتٌ بَلْ أَحْيَاءٌ﴾


(And say not of those who are killed in the way of Allah, "They are dead.'' Nay, they are living,) indicates that the martyrs are alive and receiving their sustenance.


Muslim reported in his Sahih:


«أَنَّ أَرْوَاحَ الشُّهَدَاءِ فِي حَوَاصِلَ طَيْرٍ خُضْرٍ، تَسْرَحُ فِي الْجَنَّة حَيْثُ شَاءَتْ، ثُمَّ تَأْوِي إلَى قَنَادِيلَ مُعَلَّقَةٍ تَحْتَ الْعَرْشِ، فَاطَّلَعَ عَلَيْهِمْ رَبُّكَ اطِّلَاعَةً، فقَالَ: مَاذَا تَبْغُونَ؟ فَقَالُوا: يَا رَبَّنَا وَأَيَّ شَيْءٍ نَبْغِي، وَقَدْ أَعْطَيْتنَا مَا لَمْ تُعْطِ أَحَدًا مِنْ خَلْقِكَ؟ ثُمَّ عَادَ إِلَيْهِمْ بِمِثْلِ هذَا، فَلَمَّا رَأَوْا أَنَّهُم لَا يُتْرَكُون مِنْ أَنْ يُسْأَلُوا، قَالُوا: نُرِيدُ أَنْ تَرُدَّنَا إِلَى الدَّارِ الدُّنْيَا فَنُقَاتِلَ فِي سَبِيلِكَ حَتَّى نُقْتَلَ فِيكَ مَرَّةً أُخْرَى لِمَا يَرَوْنَ مِنْ ثَوابِ الشَّهادَةِ فَيَقُولُ الرَّبُّ جَلَّ جَلَالُهُ: إِنِّي كَتَبْتُ أَنَّهُمْ إلَيْهَا لَا يَرْجِعُون»


(The souls of the martyrs are inside green birds and move about in Paradise wherever they wish. Then, they take refuge in lamps that are hanging under the Throne (of Allah). Your Lord looked at them and asked them, `What do you wish for' They said, `What more could we wish for while You have favored us with what You have not favored any other of your creation' He repeated the question again. When they realize that they will be asked (until they answer), they said, `We wish that You send us back to the earthly life, so that we fight in Your cause until we are killed in Your cause again,' (because of what they enjoy of the rewards of martyrdom). The Lord then said, `I have written that they will not be returned to it (earthly life) again.)


Imam Ahmad reported that `Abdur-Rahman bin Ka`b bin Malik narrated from his father that Allah's Messenger said:


«نَسَمَةُ الْمُؤْمِنِ طَائِرٌ تَعْلَقُ فِي شَجَرِ الْجَنَّةِ حَتَّى يَرْجِعَهُ اللهُ إِلَى جَسَدهِ يَوْمَ يَبْعَثُه»


(The believer's soul is a bird that feeds on the trees of Paradise until Allah sends it back to its body when the person is resurrected.)


This Hadith includes all the believers in its general meaning. Thus, the fact that the Qur'an mentions the martyrs in particular in the above Ayah serves to honor, glorify and favor them (although the other believers share the rewards they enjoy).


﴿وَلَنَبْلُوَنَّكُم بِشَيْءٍ مِّنَ الْخَوفْ وَالْجُوعِ وَنَقْصٍ مِّنَ الاٌّمَوَالِ وَالاٌّنفُسِ وَالثَّمَرَتِ وَبَشِّرِ الصَّـبِرِينَ - الَّذِينَ إِذَآ أَصَـبَتْهُم مُّصِيبَةٌ قَالُواْ إِنَّا لِلَّهِ وَإِنَّـآ إِلَيْهِ رَجِعونَ - أُولَـئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ صَلَوَتٌ مِّن رَّبْهِمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ وَأُولَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُهْتَدُونَ ﴾


(155. And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to As-Sabirin (the patient).) (156. Who, when afflicted with calamity, say: "Truly, to Allah we belong and truly, to Him we shall return.'') (157. They are those on whom are the Salawat (i.e., who are blessed and will be forgiven) from their Lord, and (they are those who) receive His mercy, and it is they who are the guided ones.)

Therefore, there is nothing that supports that the Awliya can answer us etc. Also, as underlined, it shows that the general meaning is meant for all the believers. No doubt that the Awliya of Allah are great people, great in their Zuhd.

There are two groups of the believers as mentioned in Surah Waqiyah, the Sabiqun (the foremost, like Abu Bakr r.a.), and the Ashab Al Yamin (People of the Right Hand). Ibn Taymiyyah says in the book I mentioned above in chapter 4, pg. 24:

So whoever performs all that Allah has ordered him to perform, and does of the allowed (halal) whatever he wishes, is of the second group, and whoever does everything according to what Allah loves and is pleased with, and seeks the allowed only to aid him in the performing of the obligatory, is of the first group.

The proofs for these are found on the preceding pages. Therefore, we learn that there is no special knowledge needed, and no training with a Shaykh is needed nor any of those kinds of things to gain the status of AsSabiqun or the Ashab Al-Yamin, both which are levels of the Awliya - both levels which are comprised by all the Believers. Ibn Taymiyah says in the same book, chapter 4, page 18:

The allies of Allah are of two levels: forerunners, those brought near, and those of the right hand who acted in moderation. Allah has mentioned them in a number of places in His sacred Book such as the begining of surah number 56, and again at the end of the same sura, and in suras 76, 83 and 35.

2: 257. Allâh is the Walî (Protector or Guardian) of those who believe. He brings them out from darkness into light. But as for those who disbelieve, their Auliyâ (supporters and helpers) are Tâghût [false deities and false leaders, etc.], they bring them out from light into darkness. Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.

Ibn Kathir also has this in his Tafsir:

﴿اللَّهُ وَلِيُّ الَّذِينَ ءامَنُواْ يُخْرِجُهُم مِّنَ الظُّلُمَـتِ إِلَى النُّورِ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ أَوْلِيَآؤُهُمُ الطَّـغُوتُ يُخْرِجُونَهُم مِّنَ النُّورِ إِلَى الظُّلُمَـتِ أُوْلَـئِكَ أَصْحَـبُ النَّارِ هُمْ فِيهَا خَـلِدُونَ ﴾


(257. Allah is the Wali (Protector or Guardian) of those who believe. He brings them out from darknesses into light. But as for those who disbelieve, their Awliya' (supporters and helpers) are Taghut (false deities and false leaders), they bring them out from light into darknesses. Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.)


Allah stated that whoever follows what pleases Him, He will guide him to the paths of peace, that is Islam, or Paradise. Verily, Allah delivers His believing servants from the darkness of disbelief, doubt and hesitation, to the light of the plain, clear, explained, easy and unequivocal truth. He also stated that Shaytan is the supporter of the disbelievers who beautifies the paths of ignorance and misguidance that they follow, thus causing them to deviate from the true path into disbelief and wickedness.


﴿أُ;ولَـئِكَ أَصْحَـبُ النَّارِ هُمْ فِيهَا خَـلِدُونَ﴾


(Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.)


This is why Allah mentioned the light in the singular while mentioned the darkness in the plural, because truth is one, while disbelief comes as several types, all of which are false.

Alhamdullilah, I think the matter is very clear.

:w:
Reply

boriqee
11-27-2006, 02:27 PM
Im sorry ya ikhwaan for not coming sooner, Im trying to limit my interneting

Firstly Brother before replying specificly to your post, I would just like to clarify weather or not you regard it as Shirk to:

1) Supplicate to Allah by the Status of the Prophet
I regard what Abu haneefa, maalik, Thawri, Awzaa'e, Basri, Qataadah, Ibn Khuzaimah, Ahmad, Bukharee, Abu Bakr al-Aujuree, and the countless Imaams of ahlu-sunnah have declared to be shirk before the invention of the innovation of mentioning anyone other than Allah even with the intention of tawassal came into existance withing the islamic ummah, of which one of he first ones to do so was none other than Ibn Arabi.

Here is the reality of the matter you just posted.
The problem with the innovated wasala, that the people of this form of tawwassul try to bring shubha about is through the route that "It is not shirk because the person beleives Allah to be one AND OnLY, THEY ARE MERELY USING THEM TO GET CLOSER TO Allah".

Such an analogy is like the analogy of the asharis trying to undermine their jahmic aspcts of beleifs. "we are not jahmiyyah because jahmiyyah outright negated Allah's sifaat. We only do so for some of His sifaat and our negation is only through the "tawil" of the sifaat" whcih in actuality their t'awil is the tahreef and ultimately the t'ateel of the sifaat.

in both cases, both groups make the kufr of the actuality of the issue to be "hidden". This "hiddenness" only beguiles those who befool themselves.

Ask the Prophet to supplicate for us at his grave
had this been done at any time within the salafu-saalih, I would not have minded. However I follow strictly the athari manhaj of Ahmad "If the salaf didnt do it, we dont do it, if it was not deen then, it is not deen now"

Say Phrases such as "Ya Muhammada" in a state of need and out of love but not with the intention that the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] can hear, [An example which I gave earlier which was that of Ibn Umar and the pain he had in his feet]
all of it is either shirk or the lead to it, and most of what you mention is the "leading" to it. this example is one of them and it only becomes shirk when the heart "itiqaadu" it beleives that the prophet has the "ability" to bail him out of some form of desctruction or to save him from nar by his shafa'a.

so in all three avenues you had mentioned, if it is not shirk (and there is a strong emphasis that i isnt), most certainly, the methods used in approch to these forms of worship is, and anything that leads to shirk in the deen is haraam by consensus, and we have the sufis to thank for tat, because now, if i wish to gain baraka form any relic form the prophet, I would no be harbpressed to contemplate on doing a seeking of baraka, due to the "shirk" the sufis had coupled with this blessed established act from the sahaba.

Brother I personally feel no one other than the Author himself has the right to retract Narrations that were Included in the Non Translated version, It is Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir and Translating it should Include everything he stated in it.
that is stupid. That means nobody can make any "abridged" versions in any place or time, which this publication was, was somehwat abridged. So the brother decided "If we are going to have to abridge it, we might as well keep everything that is best and supported and leave off the dhu'afa and errornous parts of it.

If they wanted an English Tafsir without these Narrations then they should have wrote there own and not attribute it to Imam Ibn Kathir
That again is stupid, because then the abridged version of Saheeh Bukhari now becomoes "not bukharee' and then what is it they are going to label it.

I agree with you at some point, ad it been me, I would have included the wole thing and then mde tahqee of the baatil and way out narrations from OTHER scholars and Imaams clarifyig the baatil i the issue thus whatever said in the actual text still remains baseless and ineffective as proofs. f course that is me and nobody is me.

Brother according to you the Sahaba never practiced it but according to us they did, you site the Muhaddiths that have regarded those Hadith as weak and we site the Muhaddiths that have regarded those Hadith as Hasan or Sahih.
the issue is not about my muhaditheen and your muaditheen, the issue is whether the ahkaam fo themuhaditheen on this specific realm fo riwayaat had the best arguements for their ahkaam in this realm.

The only reason why I accept al-Albanee over this issue is due ot he fact that the best guidance in the affairs of determining the ilal, etc, of any hadeeth is through the area of jarh wa t'adeel, of whcih if I say so myself, no one in any era, including shawkaani, has reached his accurateness in the judging of the ahadeeth from the route of its narrators. in fact Im willing to say there has been none like him in this regard since Dhahabee.

You are not explaining the types of help and why some fall under this Ayah, you are wrongly using the principles to interpret the Quran brother it is accepted by the people of Ilm that the Quran is looked at first and Hadiths are based around Quranic Ayah’s not what you are doing looking at the Practice of the Sahaba first and basing your Interpretation of the Ayah based on that.
Islam (quran and sunnah) is understood from the light of the salaf.

The reason why we look through the sahaab for the quran because any other route is in fact not the quraan therefore not Islam, because the only isam is their islam. The only islam is whom Allah attested to their islam, he did not attest to other Islam's accept their, thus their way is the only way. So really any harf of the quraan that lads to an understanding contrary to their is i fact not the quraan.


Just to expand on that further you are not defining the term ‘Help’ that is being mentioned in this Ayah, As soon as you define this term you will have to make the conclusion that this help refers to Independent help which is beyond the capabilities of Creation, It is the sort of help that is sought with the belief that the One being asked for can Independently help and such is not the belief among the Muslims with any creation not the Prophets nor the Saints, and if there was to be such a belief I have said before and I say It again it would be Shirk.
tht is the point. you are limiting the route of shirk through "help". Ths is "unshirkisizing shirk". becuase there are other factors. One being that the reality of how the aimah looked at "dua' is that it is worship.

Froom the concept of uboodiyyh form wat the hufaadh of the rleigion gave description of is that that one making du'a, is surrending their existance 9basically relaying their existance) on who the du'a is being made to. This is the concept of du.a that the one performing it is in total need of the one bein adressed.

before islam, from the jahiliyyah of the people was to convert this total relyment of the person making dua, on an intermediary due to a false pretense that this intermediary could merely help them in getting closer to Allah.

When Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa salam abolished it, this abolishment was uplifted by the time of the later 4th generation (after Ahmad's time) began the legitimization of this ritual.

Does Ibn Kathir say here that it is not permissible to seek the Prophets Shaifa? Or that these are the only means, He is specifically explaining that Ayah and to what he thinks it is referring to and if it is referring to good deeds then so be it, but it is not a statement which nullifies all other types of Means to Allah
tha is an incorrect attribution to hi regarding this affair ,when he clearly beleived hat "tawassul" in the Islamic sense was by obeying Him and performing the deeds that please Him.

For even his Teacher Ibn Taymiyyah was in favour of seeking means to Allah through the status of the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] and there is no reason for us to believe that Ibn Kathir believed otherwise.
yo hav fallen victim just as another did when using Ibn taymyyah when he tried to demonstrate his poit. When i had presented his specific hukm on the matter he turned to the revilement of Ibn taymyyah, thus I had to repel those revilements upon the detaild praise of him and the revilement of those who become of the reviled.

If you wish I could present to you this detailed fatwa from ibn taymiyyah thus repeeling this accusation that you attributed to him.

So I take it from that comment that you do not regard it as Shirk for someone to go to the Prophet Muhammad’s [Peace be upon him] grave and ask forgiveness from him and seek his Intercession?
thought your texts was "mking dua to him, not asking to him. We are ordered to mke du'a for him. This is another aspect of du'a, that the one making it is doig so due to the fact that he is deficient and in need. If we were ordered to make du'a for him, that is because he himself is in a state of need just as the one making the dua. du'a in the concept of uboodiyyah, is to turn to the one who has no need and in seeking something from this source. So even from a logica aspect of the religion it makes no logical snese to any muwahid that they shoul direct the act of woship or any of their du'a to other than Allah whether openly like the mushrikeen of old times of Nuh and Ibraheem, or in hiddenly like the mushrikeen of the prophet's tyime and those who revied that way of worship among the msulims 3 centuries after hi time within his ummah.


Abu Ibraheem

Thank you, i dont have to debate my point any further. The truth manifested at your own fingertips. Its human nature to criticize a thing, it may not be out of enmity. We have to remember that Imam Shafee was asked why he had such a good character and he informed that person that he listened closely to his critics. All because somebody criticizes it does not necessarily mean they are wrong. However what is in question here is the whole saint issue. What exactly is a saint and who is a saint according to the Qur'aan and Ahadith? Do saints sin? Why is the word saint even used? Where does the word saint come from and why is it applied to the auwliyah of Allah? and finally what is the difference between saints in Islam and saints in Judaism and Christianity which came to be worshipped by the Jews and the Christians? If we study the Qur'aan in its purity we will find that every believer is a friend of Allah. Which causes the next question to arrise "If only a saint can believe and a believer is a saint then does that mean that a non saint is a kaafir?" Now am i criticizing the saint or an ideaology? - if you can understand what straw i am tugging at then the discourse may be fruitful.
ahee you should read "Byaan al-Awliyatu-Rahmaan wal Awliyyatu-shaytaan (Friends of Allah and the friends of Shaytaan) by Imaam Ibn aymiyyah were he clearly locks into place the actuality of what constitues as awliyyah and a wali, and what constitues as shayateen khubatha acting as a wali to the people.

aLso you said
certainly know about your shaykh’s difficulties. Especially his runnings with the brelviyah where people refused to pray behind him accusing him of being a Deobandi. I have heard the shaykh being backbitten and even slandered. However i know better as i have had the privilege to learn from him. Salafi's would love his teachings only if they gave him the light of day. The whole misunderstanding of tasawuf which is known to the Salafiyah as Tazkiyah. Even Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah wrote much discourse about this neglected science which is Sunnah. In reality tassawuf and tazkiyah an nafs are the same thing, which ever name you choose to paint it with, the Salafiyah and the Brelviyah both accept this, but argue over matters such as loud dhickr , etc. Whats causing a lot of the friction and misunderstanding is the actions and beliefs of pseudo sufees doing acts of bidah and then seeking to justify them. And there is a great lack of people who are willing to understand both sides of the argument as well which then causes further friction. Its safe for me to say that i try to practice the tawheed of a “Salafi” whilst attempting to practice the spirituality of a “Sufi.” And I tend to take only from what is agreed upon by the scholars and leave well alone the disputed issues such as asking “saints” for help and so forth. In regards to your T and members:
here is what I have brought to clarify the matter to all

Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah,Haafidh Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya and the people of hadith in general are certainly not indiscriminate towards sufism; at times, they are bitter and stated that the right attitude towards sufism, or any other thing, is to accept what is in agreement with the Quran and the Sunnah, and reject what does not agree'" [Majmu Fatawa Shaykh al-Islam, vol. 10, p. 82].

Ibn Taymiyah applies this principle of judicious criticism to sufi ideas, practices and personalities.
He divides the sufis into three categories:

In the first category of sufis whom he calls mashaikh al-Islam, mashaikh al-Kitab wa al-Sunnah and a'immat al-huda, [Majmu'at al-Rasa'il wa al-Masa'il, vol. 1, p. 179, and Majmu Fatawa Shaykh al-Islam, vol. 10, pp. 516-7 and vol. 11, p. 233] he mentions Fudayl b. Iyad, Ibrahim b. Adham, Shaqiq al-Balkhi, Abu Sulayman al-Darani, Maruf al-Karkhi, Bishr ëa-Hafi, Sari al-Saqati, al-Junayd b. Muhammad, Sahl b. Abd Allah al-Tustari and Amr b. Uthman al-Makki.
Later sufis whom he places in this category are: Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Shaykh Hammad al-Dabbas, and Shaykh Abu al-Bayan. These sufis, Ibn Taymiyah says, were never intoxicated, did not lose their sense of discrimination, or said or did anything against the Quran and the Sunnah. Their lives and experiences conformed with the Shariah (mustaqim al-ahwal) [Majmu Fatawa Shaykh al-Islam, vol. 10, pp. 516-7].

The second category consists of those sufis whose experience of fana and intoxication (sukr) weakened their sense of discrimination, and made them utter words that they later realized to be erroneous when they became sober [Majmu Fatawa Shaykh ël-Islam, vol. 10, pp. 220-1]. Some of them also did things [Majmu Fatawa Shaykh ël-Islam, vol. 10, pp. 382, 557] under intoxication of which the Shariah does not approve, but sooner or later they became sober and lived well. In this category Ibn Taymiyah mentions the names of Abu Yazid al-Bostami, Abu al-Husayn al-Nuri and Abu Bakr al-Shibli. But he condemns what they said or did in that state and offers apology for them on the ground that they were intoxicated (sukran), and had lost control over reason. [Majmu'at ël-Rasa'il wa ël-Masa'il, vol. 1, p. 168; Majmu Fatawa Shaykh ël-Islam, vol. 10, pp. 382, 557].
His criticism is directed to the third category of sufis who have believed in ideas and expounded doctrines which contradict Islamic principles [ wihdatul woojood and Al-hulool {incarnation}, or who have indulged in practices which are condemned by the Shariah.

The first sufi in this group is al-Hallaj [ the aquidah of God incarnate similar to all mushriks] [Majmu'at ël-Rasa'il wa ël-Masa'il, vol. 1, pp. 81, 83; Majmu Fatawa Shaykh ël-Islam, vol. 11, p. 18]. . . . Next to al-Hallaj the apostate, the sufis who draw strong criticism from Ibn Taymiyah are the ones who expound the doctrine of One Being or unity with God (wahdat al-wujud), such as Ibn ël-Arabi, Sadr ël-Din ël-Qunawi, Ibn Sab'in and Tilimsani. . . . . The apostate Ibn ël-Arabi, who is the central figure in this context (of wahdat ël-wujud ), Ibn Taymiyah subjects him to detailed criticism.
Ibn Taymiyah does not object to intensification of some approved forms of dhikr, or reliance on some methods for purifying the soul, with the neglect of others, provided it is within the limits of the Shariah [Majmu'at ël-Rasa'il wa ël-Masa'il, vol. 4, pp. 86-87].

It is worthwhile to note that Al-Hallaj was executed in Baghdad in 922 for saying "Ana al-Haqq" ("I am the Truth," i.e., God), and his former teacher, al-Junayd, was among those who gave the verdict that he should die. [See Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami, in Tabakat al-Sufiyya, Edited by Nur al-Din Shariba, Maktaba al-Khanji, Cairo, 1986, pp. 307-8, for details.]

The third category of Sufis which includes two sub-categories, regardless of their tareeqah, worship others than Allaah, such as Prophets and “awliya’” [“saints”], living or dead. They say, “Yaa Jeelaani”, “Yaa Rifaa’i” [calling on their awliya’], or “O Messenger of Allaah, help and save” or “O Messenger of Allaah, our dependence is on you”, etc.
Also, they believe in wahdat al-wujood (unity of existence). They do not have the idea of a Creator and His creation, instead they say that everything is creation and everything is God [ Hinduism, pantheism, etc].

They unscrupulously claim that they take knowledge directly from Allaah, without the mediation of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). They say, “Haddathani qalbi ‘an Rabbi (My heart told me from my Lord).”

so the term mutassawuf or commonly known to the english world as "sufi" has quite a broad meaning. And due to ahlu-sunnah who are real or actual salafees, understanding and knowing this reality, then when ahlu-sunnah partakes in refutation of sufis, it is directed at times to the second category of sufis and most of these rududd fall in the thrid category, and not the first, However to expound on this issue and little more, the problem in our times, and for quite a while, is that most of the world that ascribe to tassawuf usually find no fault or partake in the practices either in part or in full with the tenents that are inherent in the third category of tassawuf that Haafidh Ibn Taymiyyah described.

SO if you are to apply the first category of sufis to be on the haq, then Bin Baz, Ibn Taymiyyah, and I are sufis and as Abu Haneefa said, one must follow at-tariqa asalaf. So I myself am in the tariqa of salafiyyah and since this tariqa has precedent by virtually a multiplicity of ulema throughout the eras, this tariqa is by far the best, correct and only tariqa, not to mention that there was no other tariqa outside of this tariqa in the first generations. our dhikr is the sunnah asaheeha and our waseela is the waseela that the Imaams of ahlu-sunnah expounded upon to be correct and the established way of making waseela to the greatest of all creation Abul-Qaasim Mustapha Muhammad ibn Abdillah salawatu llahi wa salamu alai. And our group sittings is the sittings of ilm, just as the sitting of Ibnu-Mubarak and Thawri, and Humaydee and Ahmad. This is the tariqa asalafi

Clarifying a Deception of Muhammad Hischam Kabbani

When discussing this subject, we often hear the labels of tampering by the saudis or salafees in matters such as this, only failing to look at the very usool of the people who promote these statements. I mean by this they claim this about those who they oppose yet they do not look at the fact that their very proponents of what they beleive in from its people are the very founders and pillars of altering.

here is one of their clear examples of altering (tahreef)
this was brought forth by the sufi, Kabbani


Quote:
Imam Ibn Taymiyya Mentions some Great Shaikhs of Sufism
>
> In the volume entitled cIlm as-Sulak, ("The Science of Travelling the
> Way to God"), which consists of the entire 775 pages of volume 10 of
> Majmaca al-Fatawa, he says (p. 516): "The great Sufi shaikhs are well
> known and accepted, such as: Bayazid al-Bistami, Shaikh Abdul Qadir
> Jilani, Junaid ibn Muhammad, Hasan al-Basri, al Fudayl ibn al-Ayyad,
> Ibrahim bin al-Adham, Abi Sulayman ad-Daarani, Ma'ruf al-Karkhi, Siri
> as-Saqati, Shaikh Hammad, Shaikh Abul Bayan.
>
> "Those great Sufis were the leaders of humanity, and they were calling
> to what is right and forbidding what is wrong."



Here are ibn Taymiyyahs words,
"
Quote:
as for those who were firmly upon the Straight Path from amongst those who traversed the path (al-mustaqeemeen min as-saalikeen) such as the majority of the shaykhs of the Salaf such as Fudayl bin Ayaadh, Ibraheem bin Adham, Abu Sulaymaan ad-Daaraanee, Ma`roof al-Kharkee, as-Siri as-Saqatee, al-Junaid bin Muhammad, and others. Also such as Abdul Qaadir, Shaykh Hammaad, Shaikh Abu al-Bayaan and others from the later scholars then all of these did not allow the one traversing the path to depart from the commands and prohibitions of the Sharee`ah even if he were to walk on water or fly in the air! Rather they impressed upon him the importance of leaving off all the prohibited matters until the time of his death. This is the truth which is proven by the Book, the Sunnah and the consensus of the Salaf."


So the questions arise: where did the Kabbani get the names Bayazid al-Bistami and Hasan al-Basri from? Where did he get the first sentence from? Where did he get the last two sentences from?

so it is true that Ibn taymiyyah distinguishes different classes of tassawuf, which is inccorect for all of us salafis to lump all of them in one single group, because if you get down to the technical usgage of what the term 'tassawuf" implies, if its meaning is the way to gain taqwa or the path to attain ihsaan, then salafis are the have more right to be sufi IN THIS SENSE of the usage of the term than do those who professly propagate tassawuf.

This is why there is a world of difference between the Imaam Alamaah Abdul-Qadir Jilaanee the true salafi,andthose who made shirk wiht him calling him gauth and other such terms and between him and the ultra hulooli itihaadi Ibn Arabi who they call "Shaykhul-Akbaar" wa iyaadhubillah

secondyl, it is appearent that we understand the following that im going to provide

In a unique manuscript of the H anbali Yusuf ibn cAbd
al-Hadi (d. 909 H./1503 CE), entitled Bad' al-culqa bi
labs al-khirqa, uncovered in the Princeton University
Library, Ibn Taymiyya is listed in a Sufi spiritual
genealogy with other well-known Hanbali scholars. The
links in this genealogy are, in descending order from
cAbdul Qadir Jilani:

Shaikh cAbdul Qadir Jilani (d. 561 H./1165 CE)

Abu cUmar b. Qudama (d. 607 H./1210 CE)

Muwaffaq ad-Din b. Qudama (d. 620 H./1223 CE)

Ibn cAli b. Qudama (d. 682 H./1283 CE)

Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 H./1328 CE)

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751 H./1350 CE)

Ibn Rajab (d. 795 H./1393 CE)



the only thing, the only remote quote that implies affirmation of this caim is what was found in the Princeton Library, of the work of Ibn
Taymiyya himself, in a book named, Targhib
al-Mutahabbin fi labs Khirqat al-Mutammayyazan by
Jamal ad-Dan al-Talyani. Here are Ibn Taymiyya's own
words, as quoted from a work of his, al-Mas'ala
at-Tabraziyya:
"I wore the blessed Sufi cloak of
Shaikh cAbdul Qadir Jilani, there being between him
and me two Sufi shaikhs."

However, like all matters, just like the sunnah, things are weighed by way of it being mashoor. Basically if this issue suffered the critique of hadeeth acceptance, the grade it would be stamped on would be after it being khabru-waheed (such narrations are still accepted, it still goes through more stages. The claim also attains the rank of being ghareeb, not only ghareeb but it is also mursal, meaning the ending narrators are majhool.

in any case, whatever was brought forth above now must be looked at form the viewpoint of ibn taymiyyah

Ibn Taymiyyah viewed "tassawuf" in his famous fatawa regarding it that is on this site and you can read it here Salafees on Sufis where in it Ibn taymiyyah clarifies the nature of tassawuf and its types.

basically whatever sufiship that could ever be attributed to Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah must be by the route of what he himself viewed tassawuf to be, and such a state was classified by him in the first category, which would be salafiyyah on zuhd or the salafi path of the purification of the soul. This is because his view of his shaykh (al-jilanee), as well as my shaykh, is in the first category of sufis, by which in essence were from ahlu-sunnah, the salafiyeen of the 4th and 5th centuries and into the 6th.

One last matter to clarify is the fact that the ijaaza granted from Shaykh Abdul-Qadr to Ibn taymiyyah has nothing to do with "making waseela to graves" and "making tawaf" at the graves and accompanying them and from the other ill practiced innovations done by most sufis nowadays which further adds more khilaaf between the original "sufis" were upon versus modern day sufis.

The ijaazah granted to him stretching from Bani Qudamah to Ibn Taymiyyah was from the field of hanbaliyyah from which Ibn taymiyyah has his formal ijaazah of the hanbali school. That completely demolishes the idea of him being being what a modern day qadiri is since his ijaazah is mostly known through his hanbali affiliation, not exactly his "sufi" attribution. Even so, if it was from the world of tassawuf, again we would have to convert tassawuf to be what Ibn taymiyyah viewed as tassawuf, and what he viewed was the correct manner and what was the innovated manner, and not how the innovated mubtadiah view it wallahu alim


In fact you are right it is not an Article of Faith then how is it that for most of those that are against Tawassul they seem to make it the difference of Tawhid and Shirk, the difference of Iman and Kufr, The difference of a Muslim and a Mushrik?
here is what I have gathered

About the Ayah “ Seek Waseelah to Him”, Hanafi scholars said in tafseer “ Seek Qurbah of Allah with actions of obedience and leaving sins”

Abu Layth Samarqandi, one of the big Hanafi scholar said about this Ayah : “ Meaning seek Qurbah and Fadeelah with good deeds”

Imam Abu Su’ood Al ‘Imadi al Hanafi said in tafseer : “ It is Fa’eelatun with meaning what we do Tawassul with to Allah from actions of obedience and leaving sins”

Also Nassafi mentioned in Madariku Tanzeel that Tawassul as been used to “ What we do Tawassul with to Allah with actions of good and leaving sins”

Imam Mahmood Aloosi and his son Nu’man followed him : “ This is Fa’eelatun with meaning of what one does tawassul with from actions of obedience and leaving sins” and some people took daleel from this ayah to justify istighathah from Saliheen, making them Waeelah between Allah and slaves, and Qasam on Allah for them is to say : “O Allah we do Qasam on you with Fulan that you give us that” and some of them say to the absent or dead from pious slaves of Allah : “ Ya Fulan, invoke Allah that He gives us Rizq this and that”, and they think that it is from chapter of seeking Waseelah, and they tell from the Prophet saw : “ When things are difficult for you, then go to Ahle Quboor or seek help from Ahle Quboor” ( a fabricated narration), and all of this is far from the truth”

( Rooh Al Ma’ani v 6 p 124-125, Jala ul Aynayn p 494)

Imam Haskafi said in Durul Mukhtar, Fasl fil Bay’ : “ And in Tatar Khaniyah Ma’ziyan lil Muntaqa, from Abu Yussuf from Abu Haneefah : “ One should not invoke Allah except with Himself, and the Du’ah permitted in it and prescribed is what is taken from His Saying : “ And for Allah are beautiful Names, invoke with them” ( A’raf, 180), and this saying is makrooh : : Bi Haqq of Your Prophets or Nabi or Awliyah…”

Ibn Abideen As Shamee said in explanation of “except with Himself” : “ Meaning with his Dhat, His Sifat and His Names”

Allamah Rustami Al Hanafi said : “ Know that in this saying ( of Abu Haneefah) there is restriction to Tawassul of Tawassul Ismi in du’a in Names of Allah and His Sifat. And the condition of these muqalideen is that they leave the saying of their Imam, and follow their desire without knowledge…and our shaykh ( Ar Ribati) Al fadil Al Allamah Al Adeeb, Jami’ Al Ma’qool and Manqool, one of the Afadil Hanafiyah fair refuting Quburiyah, has some Kalam important in istidlal from this saying of Imam Abu Haneefah, and he quoted sayings of Hanafi scholars cutting backs of Quburiyah…” ( Tibyan p 182 of Rustami, see also “Kowakib Ad Duriyah fi tahqeeq Waseelah Shar’iyah” p 125 of Ribati Al Hanafi”

Mahmoof Aloosi Sahib Roohul Ma’ani said about Tawassul of Sahabah :

“ That one seek Du’a, Shafa’ah, so the Tawassul and Tawajuh is in truth with his du’ah and his Shafa’ah, and this is from what is not forbidden, as for what is in language of a lot of people, that meaning is to ask Allah with his dhaat, and do Qasam on him with it, this is subject of dispute, and you have known words on it, and it has been put in Iqsam not legislated the saying of someone : “ O Allah, I ask you with status ( Jahun) of Fulan” because this is not proven from any of the salaf that he invoked like that…And Tahqiq of kalam in this topic is that istighathah from creation, and making him a waseelah in meaning of asking for his du’a, there is no doubt for its permissibility, if the one asked is alive, and if the asked is dead or absent, then it is not hidden for the scholar that it is not permissible, and it is from the innovations that none of the Salaf did, and none of the Salaf came with this, while they were most desiring people from creation to do good deeds…and Taj Subki insulted Al Majd ( Ibn Taymiyah), as it is his ‘adat and said : “ And tawassul is Hassan, and Istighathah with Nabi saw to the Lord, and none from the Salaf or khalaf denied this until Ibn Taymiyah came, and he denied this, and deviated from Sirat Mustaqeem, and innovated…. (Al Aloosi answered ) : “And you know that Du’a Mathoorah from pure Ahle Bayt and others from Aimah, there is not in them Tawassul with his Respected Dhat…the one who claims a text, then he should present it”

( Rooh Al Ma’ani v 6 p 126-127 and Jala Ul Aynayn of his son Nu’man Al Aloosi p 497-498)

And Shukri Aloosi, great son of Mahmood Aloosi said in Ghayatul Amani in refutation of Nabbahani about Tawassul with du’a : “ And this is done with alive, and not dead, and this is tawassul with their du’a and their Shafa’ah, because the alive is sought for that, and for the dead, nothing is sought from him, not du’a nor anything else” ( Ghayatul Amani v 2 p 335)

For more on Tawassul and other innovations of graves, see the book of Nu’man Al Aloosi Al Hanafi “ Jala ul Aynayn fi Muhakamati baynal Ahmadayn” in which he refutes Ibn Hajar Al Haytami’s attack against ibn Taymiyah, on Tawassul, ibn Arabi, taqleed, Asma wa Sifat, Ismah of Anbiyah and many other attacks of AL Haytami, that Al Aloosi called unjust and leaving ways of scholars by attributing things to ibn Taymiyah he never said.

Also Zyaratul Qubur of Al Barkawi Al Hanafi, Majalis ul Abrar of Roomi Al Hanafi, Khazeenatul Asraar translation of Majalis ul Abrar of Subhan Baksh Al Hindi Al Hanafi for refutation of innovated Tawassul that are done on graves of Saliheen, the many books of Shukri Al Aloosi against Yussuf Nabbahani Ash Shazili.

Note : Among kibar Ahnaf who also defended Ibn Taymiyah, there is Badrudeen Al Ayni, as mentioned by Shukri al Aloosi in Ghayatul Amani v 2 p 128-132, Ibn Nasirudeen’s quoted Al Ayni in his book “ Rad Al Wafir” : “ The Madhab of Salaf is Ithbat with Tashbeeh, Tanzih without Ta’teel, Imam Malik was asked about His saying “ Ar Rahman ‘ala Arshi stawa” and he said “ Istiwa is known, the Kayf is Majhool, and Iman in it is Wajib and question about that is an innovation” and this Imam, Ay Shaykhul Islam, as I saw his creed and discovered his thinking, the one who is on this creed, how can we attribute him Hulool and Ittihad, Tajseem, or to what went people of Ilhad”

So it shows that many Kibar from Ahnaaf did not see any wrong in Ibn Taymiyah’s creed as Ayni, the Aloosi family, rather they defended him from unjust attacks of people of kalam and Tasawwuf.

Now to finish, let us quote from Muhadithul asr of Deobandiyah

In Faydul Bari, Kitab Jihad, v 3 p 434, Anwar Shah Kashmiri said

Chapter : “ One who seeks help with weak and Salihin” : Know that the tawassul for Salaf was not as it is practiced between us, because when they wanted to do Tawassul with someone, they went to the one they wanted to do tawassul with, also with him, so he makes du’a for them, and they sought help from Allah, making du’a to Him, hoping His answer…

As for the Tawassul with names of Salihin, as it is known in our time, in which the one who is done tawassul with is not aware of our tawassul, rather his being alive is not a condition, and tawassul is only done with mention of their names, thinking they have status in front of Allah, and acceptation, so Allah will not make ( du’a) vain with mention of their names.

This matter, I do not like to enter it, nor do I claim any prove from Salaf, nor do I make Inkar. Look ar Shami for that.

As for His Saying : “ Seek Waseelah to Him”, this, even if it necessitates seeking f Wasitah, there is no prove for Tawassul with only names, and Ibn Taymiyah went to its forbiddance, and Sahibu Durul Mukhtar enabled it, but he did not give any text from Salaf.: end of Kashmiri’s words

Anwar Shah Kashmiri said in Faydul bari, Abwabul Witr v 2 p 379 :

“ Allah we used to do tawassul with our Prophet saw” : There is not in this ( shar’I tawassul mentioned in hadeeth) the Tawassul known, that is done secretly, until he has no perception from basis ( meaning the one who is done tawassul with has no knowledge of that), rather there is in this the Tawassul of Salaf, and it is to come to a man of Satus in front of Allah, and he asks him to invoke Allah…as was done with Abbas, uncle of the Prophet saw, it it was Tawassul of mutaakhireen, then why did they need to go to Abbas with them, Tawassul with their Prophet saw after his death was sufficient for them, or with Abbas without his presence, and this kind of things is permissible for mutakhireen, and Hafiz ibn Taymiyah forbade this, and I am doubtful ( mutraddidun) in this, because a text from Imam came in quoting of Qadoori that Iqsam to Allah without His Names is not permissible, and he took from negation of Iqasam negation of Tawassul, and if tawassul is Iqasam, then the case is as said by Ibn Taymiyah, and if it is not Iqsam, it remains permissible.

As for taking ( daleel) from his saying saw “ You are given Rizq with your weak” then this is not supporting this, because it is not Tawassul, but the meaning is that Allah gives you your rizq with Ri’ayat ( taking care) of weak and Ri’ayah of their being with them, not the Tawassul with toungue : “ Allah give us Rizq with Waseelah of Fulan”…

End of Kashmiri’s words

So one can see Shah Sahib denies any text from Salaf doing Tawassul with status, and he made a clear affirmation that tawassul of Khalaf is different that Tawassul of Salaf.

He also refuted claims of people doing Istidlal with the Ayah “ Seek Waseelah to Him” and the hadeeth of Umar doing tawassul with Abbas, which is a refutation of Al Kawtharee and many others who took daleel from them.

Such a great Muhadith like Kashmiri, who knew Kanzul A’mal and Hidayah by heart, who had a big nathar on books of Salaf and khalaf, could not find any text from Salaf doing Tawassul with names.

Also there is no text from Imam Abu Haneefah, nor his students permitting Tawassul with status, and it is well known that Muqalid should not act on any hadeeth nor saying of anybody except their Imam, as they do not know whether the hadeeth is abrogated, and they do not have faculty of istinbat, traking rulings from hadeeth.

But the shock is that we see Muaqlidoon of Abu Haneefah doing things without any text of their Imam, how is it possible that if this was done by Mutawatir from Sahabah, Tabiin, and Imams and we have no text from Abu Haneefah that he was doing tawassul with Status, nor any text from his students ?

If this practice was agreed upon by Salaf, where is mutawatir report of it, so none can deny it ? Where are many quotes from them ?

secondly, many of you attributed Abdul-Qaadir Jilaanee, my shaykh, to be on the methodology you all hold. I aks you were is there proof frtom my shaykh that he held these stances.

He refuted two peoples when he was asked "Was anybody on the correct path on an aqeedah other than Imaam Ahmad, he replied that has never happened and it will never happen"

again for a more ehnanced discusson about awluyah and the karamaat of awliyyah and he karamaat of the shayateen,all of this is clarified in the book of Ibn taymyyah "The Friends of Allah and the friends of shaytaan", and it is quite strnge that sufis have said that this work was a sufi work. To someone as contraversial as Ibn taymiyyah to the sufis, the most logical thig for a sufi to do would be to translate thios work to prove the "sufihood" of Ibn Taymiyyah. However, this line of thinking was not with the sufis particularly since it was the "salafis" who translated rthis work by Abu Rumaysah and you can find it online to order.

very very very very very very good read if i say so myself

asalamu alaikym
Reply

Abu Ibraheem
11-27-2006, 02:55 PM
If i had to try to refute that, it would probaly take me six months research.

Thanks for making those clarifications Jazakulah Khair
Reply

Abu Ibraheem
12-04-2006, 11:52 PM
Salam

This is an issue that needs to be studied very carefully without any personal hatred towards any of the groups involved in this dispute. I am simply a reporter. My opinions on this matter do not count, unless I advice what seems to me as a good solution to the problems at hand. I realize the importance of this issue due to the following quote tooken from Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab’s Religious Fundamentals in which he states that there are ten things that nullify faith, and therefore whosoever does so commits disbelieve. I want to draw your attention to point number two and three which state:

He who sets up intermediaries between him and Allah, supplicating them and asking them to intercede on his behalf with Allah and putting trust in them, is an infidel according to the consensus of the scholars. He who does not hold the polytheists to be disbelievers or doubts there infidelity or holds their belief to be valid is also an infidel.

A few questions naturally arise in regards to this masaa'il.

1. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab mentions that the people who believe in what he mentions are disbelievers according to the consensus (ijmaa) of the scholars. It is only fair to ask, which scholars and what is the evidence?
2. Where do the scholars derive their evidence for what Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab mentions?
3. somebody, like me for example, who is questioning where exactly they stand, and trying to stay mutual without considering people disbelievers. Am I an infidel for trying to stay mutual?

Mas’alah # 54 in the text Aqeedat ut-Tahaawiyah teaches me to consider anybody that faces the Qiblah as a Muslim. Mas’alah # 70 speaks about not judging Muslims to be disbelievers unless they have openly manifested that, and that we should leave their secrets to Allah.

I will leave this post here, I am simply gathering information. I have not come to any conclusion. Participants please be fair in your discussion. No argumentation as it is forbidden. (mas’alah # 15 Aqeedat ut Tahaawiyah).
wasalams
Reply

boriqee
12-09-2006, 03:06 PM
they believed thier idols as forms or representatuves of God. We dont.
What we do is follow the command of Allah. take a means towards him
“O you who believe! Be careful of (your duty to) Allah and seek means of nearness to Him” (Maida: 35).
akhee Muhammad mahdi. That right there is one o hte problems pertaining to the aqeedah of waseela, is their complete misinterpretation of this ayaah. had they resorted to the authentic mufasirreen and i mean free from those who fell into these ideas like Rumi and Suyootee, if thewy would have reverted back to Ibn Kathir, Tabarani, Tabari, and others, the fahm of this ayah was through the seeking nearness to Allah through Muhammad by what he came with, not by his personal being. None of the established mufasireen understood this ayaah to make shirk with Allah through the jah of muahmmad salallahu alaihi wa salam.

if you dont beleive me, then here is a burhaan
al-Haafidh in Katheer said in his tafseer "al-Wasilah (root word of tawassul) is the means that one uses to obtain a need. al-Wasilah is also the best grade grade in paradise, the grade of the Messenger of Allah that is his residence in paradise"
further stated by Ibn Katheer
"Oh ye who beleive, do your duty to Allah and fear Him. Seek al-Wasilah to Him" Ibn Katheer reported that Ibn abbass had stated that al-Wasilah here means good deeds. This is also the tafseer of the mujtahid Imaams Mujaahid, Abu Wa-il, Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, as-Suddi, ibn Zayd and others who are all noted Imaams and mufassireen.
Ibn Katheer added that Qatadah said that the ayaah means "draw closer to Allah by obeying Him and by performing the deeds that please Him", then, Ibn katheer commented on this that this tafseer by these scholars is unopposed.


Regarding 10:18, if you read tafsir, it refers to idol worshippers and polythiests. We dont worship the prophet, but respect him. Should I differentiate between the two?
that right there is another problem. You differentiate the two when our Lord mended them together and called people khubathaa who tricked themselves into thinking it was different.

People used to ask Isa (as) to cure them. He did
Was Isa committing a msitake? because the same goes with asking Muhammad (saw).
that was when isa was alive alaihi salam. It was only those inclined to shirk and who did not get firmly established on the authentic creed of isa alaihi salam that those who were inclined to shirk made their deen the way it is now.

akhee abu Ibraheem

A few questions naturally arise in regards to this masaa'il.

1. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab mentions that the people who believe in what he mentions are disbelievers according to the consensus (ijmaa) of the scholars. It is only fair to ask, which scholars and what is the evidence?
2. Where do the scholars derive their evidence for what Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab mentions?
3. somebody, like me for example, who is questioning where exactly they stand, and trying to stay mutual without considering people disbelievers. Am I an infidel for trying to stay mutual?

Mas’alah # 54 in the text Aqeedat ut-Tahaawiyah teaches me to consider anybody that faces the Qiblah as a Muslim. Mas’alah # 70 speaks about not judging Muslims to be disbelievers unless they have openly manifested that, and that we should leave their secrets to Allah
for one the masaa'il that Ibn Abdul-Wahhab was speaking of were those masaa'il that Abu jafar at-tahawi and others considered as Kufr al-Bawah, clear and evident kufr that clearly take a person out of Islam. And what I highlighted in bold is a generalizationof those matters where Ibn abdul-Wahhab clarified and brought the specifics thereof.

Hence no sholar anywhere on earth would not affirm islam for one who clearly made shirk with allah and then after being shown proofs, rejects them and continues his association with Allah.

In fact each one of those ten points, upon assesment, and refering tothe past books, shows the actuality of the matter.

that is why Ibn Abdul-Wahhab also said elsewhere "We do not make takfeer of he muslims except upon what all the scholars of ahlu-sunnah affirmed and that is the two testimonies", and all of these ten points being made is a complete fracture, no, infact an annialation of the two testimonies, because each one of them entailes a negation soemwhere in any part of the two testimonies or they undermine the actuality of what the testimonies mean.

Lets take a clear example. No one in their right mind is going to consider that one who sayd the kalima perfectly, and then beleives that "master" fard muhammad was that Messenger could possibly beleive such a one to be a musliim as it clearly neghates the implication of how the messenger taught all the muslims to beleive in the two testimonies. That is one problem rght here, that people, mostly mulims, give no weight to the weightiets staytement on the universe. They give no weight whatsoever, they simply let the statement to justify ocrruption of aqeedah and tawheed under the banner "well he beleives in islam dont bother him". f course we are not to doubt the kalima of any one who submits, however actions are weighedby all people including ulema, and the actions imply the strength or weakness of he beleif in the two testimonies.

Br Ahmed, you accept that asking the prophet when he was alive is not shirk, then what makes it shirk now?
Allah did when he said "and they ask those who can neither prfit them nor harm them" equating it with shirk.

secondly, islam is to be understoopd based upon how the companions understood and implemented Islam. basically whatever action they didnt do with regards to the ibadaat cannot be called islam or even allowable in the sight of Islam. Upon the death of he prophet there is not one athaar, not one isnaad, not even among the early farbicated reports where the companions used to call and go to the barzaakh of Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa salam, as the later day people opposed to the early islam have performed.

Yes it would, because the rock can not see, hear, and is not close to Allah, and has not been given the ability to intercede for others.
so this is your justification of shirk, that by having these attributes, then the shirk of whatever the object is becomes shirk no more, based on having these attributes.
And that here is another problem regardin this entire matter is the misconstruence of how the companions viewed the shafa'ah of Muhamamd to be, and had they understood the matters and implemented as you have allue for us here, then there would have been abundant proof thereof of the issue, however there is one problem. there is nothin reported of this sort, that the companions would practice islam as the later 4th century sufis and grave worshippers did iin gaining the shafa'ah of Muhammad salallahi alaihi wa salam.

firsly, form the different shafa'ah, is that he is going to make shafa'ah for all the muslims, and he will also make shafa for specific ones from among them, and he will also make shafa'ah to pull some out of hell, al of whom were saved by his shafa'ah without their asking of him.

However, another group will come and they will be prevented from the hawd and will be prevented form drinking thereof and it will be said to Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa salam, "You have had no knowledge with what they brought new to what you brought of the message"

Firstly this authentic hadeeth shows a very important aspect. That he salalalhu alaihi wa slaam is shown to have ignorance of everythin that has happened the moment he went to the barzaakh, signifying that all the asking and making the innovated forms of waseela to him were all null and vain and for nothing. And what adds more nullification of their precious innovatory works to be lost is when their going to be prevented from the hawd. And the fatc of he matter is these people will not be able to receive the blessing of the shafa'ah of Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa salam thus the actuality is those who sought the shafa'ah of Muhammad in this life through these means ends up of those most underserving of the shafa'ah of Muhammad and those who did not seek the shafa'ah of muhammad from these forms and routes end up gaining the shafa'ah of Muhammad salallahu alaihi wa salam.


ya aba Ibraheem
However I need to make sure I am taking the right step. In order to know this I must ask some questions
from what you stated you wished to hear some other scholastic sources

Imaam Abu Ja'afar at-Tahaawee said in Mushkilul Aathaar (4/228)
"No man can be a disbeliever when he is a Muslim and submits to and confesses Islaam. So likewise, his apostasy does not come about except by denial of Islaam."


Imaam ash-Shawkaanee,
“Judging that a Muslim has left Islaam and entered into disbelief is something that it is not fitting for a Muslim who believes in Allaah and the Last Day to do, except with a proof (burhaan) which is clearer that the day-time sun. Since it is established in the authentic hadeeth, reported by a group of the Companions that he who says to his brother, ‘O Kaafir!’ Then it returns back to one of them. And in another wording, ‘Whoever addresses a man with kufr, or says ‘Enemy of Allaah!’ and he is not that it returns back upon him. And so there is in these ahaadeeth and their like the severest reprimand and the greatest warning against hurrying to perform takfeer; and Allaah - the Mighty and Majestic says, “But such as open their breast to disbelief.” [Sooratun-Nahl 16:106] So it has to be the case that the heart embraces disbelief and the heart is at peace with it and the soul is satisfied with it - so the appearance of wicked beliefs is not to be taken into account here - especially if one is ignorant of the fact that they are contrary to Islaam. And likewise, account will not be taken of the appearance of an action of disbelief whose doer did not intend by it to leave Islaam and enter into disbelief - and likewise account will not be taken of a word spoken by a Muslim which is a saying of disbelief - but he does not believe what it means.” Refer to Saylul-Jarraar (4/578).

Al-Qurafi said:
"A matter is not determined to be kufr by reason, rather it is a legislated matter of the shari'ah. So if the shari'ah says about a matter, 'It is kufr' then it is kufr, and it is the same whether it is a thing written or stated." Tahtheeb al-Furuuq 4:158

Al Imaam al-Ghazali said:
"Kufr is a shari'ah ruling like enslavement and freedom etc. It makes blood lawful and warrants eternity in the Fire. It is determined by the shari'ah so its realization is either by a text, or by qiyaas concluding from what occurred in the texts." Faysal at-Tafriqah bayn

Ibn al-Wazir said:

"Takfeer is based purely upon what has been revealed, there is no room for the use of reason in determining it, and the evidences for kufr can be established only by revelation alone, and there is no dispute over this” A1-Awasim wal-Qawasim 4:178.

Shaykh al-Alamaah Muhammad ibnu-Saalih Ibn 'Uthaymin was asked the following
Question:Are the people of ta'weel (misleading interpretation) considered disbelievers or just fasiqs6 ?

Answer:"To apply the judgement of disbelief and fusuq is not for us, rather it is for Allah (T) and His Messenger (S). It is a judgement of the shari'ah based upon the Book and the Sunnah. So it is necessary that its application is affirmed. None is considered a disbeliever or a fasiq without proof from the Book and the Sunnah for his disbelief or fisq.
The rule for one who appears to be a true Muslim is that his Islam and its fidelity remains until it has been determined by proof from the shari'ah that this has ceased. It is not allowed to indulge in declaring him a disbeliever or a fasiq because this may result in one of the two following grave dangers:
1. Forging a lie against Allah (T) by judging and sentencing another with the description (kaafir) that he labelled him with.
2. What he accused his brother with may return to him if his brother was in fact innocent of it. In Sahih Muslim it is reported that 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar (R) said that the Prophet (S) said: "When a man calls his brother a kafir it surely comes back to one of them"
So accordingly, before judging a Muslim to be a kafir or a fasiq, it is necessary to be sure of two matters:
1. The Book and the Sunnah prove that these statements or actions necessitate a declaration of kufr or fisq.
2. The judgement is applied to the individual who said or did the act, only when the conditions of takfeer and declaring one a faasiq truly apply to him, and all obstacles are removed.
One of the most important conditions is that the offender is aware of the violation which made him a kafir or fasiq, as Allah (T) said: "Whoever contends with the Messenger (S) after the guidance has been made clear to him and he follows other than the way of the believers, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen and land him in Hell. What an evil refuge" [An-Nisa' 4:115]
And: "And Allah does not allow a people to stray, after He has guided them, until He makes what they should avoid clear to them" [At-Tawbah 9:115] Al- Qawaa'id al-Muthlaa fee Sifa at Allaah wa Asmaa'hil-Husna 88-89.

When it was asked to Imaam Muqbil this is what happened.
Question: Is the person who abandons the prayer (As-Salaah) considered a disbeliever?

Answer: The person who abandons the prayer is considered a disbeliever (Kaafir) due to what Al-Imaam Ahmad reported in his Musnad and also Muslim in his Saheeh, from Jaabir (Radhiyallaahu 'anhu) who related from the Prophet (Sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) that he said, "There is nothing between the servant (of Allaah) and disbelief (Al-Kufr) or polytheism (Ash-Shirk) except the prayer (As-Salaah)." It is also due to what Aboo Dawood reported in his Sunan from Buraydah (Radhiyallaahu 'anhu) that he said that the Messenger of Allaah (Sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said, "The covenant that stands between us (the Muslims) and them (the disbelievers) is the prayer (As-Salaah), so whoever abandons it then indeed he has disbelieved." And the Lord of Might says in His Noble Book, "So there succeeded them successors who lost (i.e. neglected) the prayer (As-Salaah) and followed the lusts, so they will meet with misguidance (i.e they will be astray)."

Therefore, the correct view among the statements of the people of knowledge is that the person who abandons the prayer is considered a disbeliever (Kaafir), regardless of whether he abandoned it due to rejecting its obligation or if he abandoned it without rejecting its obligation. This is the opinion of Al-Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal and it is also the opinion of a group among the companions. Rather, Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm mentioned a group among them (who held this view) and then he said, "I do not know anyone who disagreed with these companions."

Notice, oh reader, how the Shaykh specifically stated that a group among the companion had believed this, not all of them. I will show you this light of belief and understanding between the people of truth and the people of falsehood.

And the following is a list of those who hold the opposite of this idea.

when Hudhaifah ibn al-Yamaan - one of the foremost of those Companions - replied to Silah ibn Zafr who was about to understand the matter in the same way as Ahmad, so he said : "`Laa ilaaha illallaah’ will not benefit them if they do not know what is Prayer," so Hudhaifah replied after turning away from him : "O Silah it will save them from the Fire" three times. So this is a clear statement from Hudhaifah (radiallaahu anhu) that the one who abandons Prayer - and likewise the other pillars of Islaam - is not a Kaafir, rather he is a Muslim who will be saved from remaining eternally in the Fire."

It is also quoted from Imaam as-Sakhawee rahimahullah
who after mentioning the ahaadeeth about the Kufr of one who abandons Prayer, who says : "But all of this is taken at face value with regard to one who abandons it whilst denying its obligation after having grown up amongst the Muslims - since in that case he will be a Kaafir and an apostate by ijmaa’ of the Muslims - so he either returns to Islaam or is killed - but as for the one who abandons it without valid excuse but out of laziness whilst still believing in its obligation then what is correct and clearly stated by the majority failing to pray a Prayer in its essential time - such as leaving Zuhr until the sun sets, or Maghrib until the sun rises - then his repentance is sought just as the repentance of the apostate is sought - then if he does not repent heis executed, then he is washed, prayed over and buried in a Muslim graveyard - and the rest of the rulings applicable to Muslims apply to him and application of the term `kufr’ to him is explained to be due to the fact that he shares with the Kaaafir in some rulings with regard to action, this explanation is in order to harmonize between these texts and the texts such as what is authentic from him (sallallaahu ‘alaihi wasallam) that he said : There are five Prayers which Allaah prescribed... if He wishes He punishes him and if He wishes He forgives him and he also said : He who dies knowing that none has the right to be worshipped but Allaah enters Paradise Therefore the Muslims have not ceased to give inheritance to and to inherit from those who abandon Prayer. And if he were a Kaafir then he would not be forgiven and would not inherit or be inherited from." Al-Fataawaa al-Hadeethiyyah (2/84)

Yet it is imperative to know, oh brothers, those of you who have disdain or just mere opposement of Imaam al-Albanee for his views, by which it may have been distorted throughout the kalaam of the mutakalimeen (takfeeris in this case) that he rahimahullah said the following.

"And there is a fine point here which I have rarely seen pointed out or noticed so it is essential to point it out and explain it, so I say : That the one who abandons Prayer out of laziness is judged a Muslim as long as there is nothing to reveal the secrets of his heart or indicate that and he dies before repentance is sought from him - as is the case these days - but if he is given the choice between death and between repentance and returning to regular Prayer, but he chooses death then in this case he dies a Kaafir. Shaikhul-Islaam said : And when a man refuses to pray even if he is to be killed then he will not be inwardly agreeing to the obligation of Prayer nor one who establishes it - and he is a Kaafir by agreement of the Muslims as is shown by the many reports from the Companions that such a one is a Kaafir - and as is shown by the authentic texts." Abbreviated from `as-Saheehah’ (1/117) and the saying of the Shaikul-Islaam is quoted from `Majmoo’ul-Fataawaa’ (2/48)


and these are the various statements regarding the klufr of theo ne who was a muslims by nam,e and then becoms a kaafir by agreement of one single matter that was negated. There are more staement in this regard in dirrerent fields of knowledge from matters of istihlaal, judgements and other matters.

sunni student

I am not going to get into this whole discussion again as I have said what I have to say in earlier posts, but as the brothers have agreed that seeking Intercession from the Prophet [Peace be upon him] at his grave with the intention that he can here you is not Shirk thus is not an act which constitutes worship to the Prophet
seeking baraka from him while beleiving the ultimate source is from Allah through this means is shirk

If we accept the above then all the Ayah's that are being presented as evidences against seeking Intercession to Allah by the above means are not valid, as in those Ayah it is clearly stated that they worshiped those who they took as Intercessors and as the brothers agree that this type of Intercession is not worship thus there is no basis for such ayahs!
this quote is unclear to me so i will reply with what i understood from it

intercession is not worship. Seeking the means of it that include du'a is. WHy?
it was reported from Abu Dawud and from other routes that 'Dua is worship" thus a du'a to other than Allah is a worship of other than Allah.

Abu Ibraheem
lets kill this argument once and for all by agreeing on the hadith that this ummah will never unite upon error. So what i would like to know is the consensus of the scholars that Muhamad Ibn Abdul Wahaab refers to in point 2-3 of his ten things that nullify Islam. Its important somebody feeds me this information to make the point that seeking help from the dead is in error. Which classical scholars forbade the seeking of help from the graves? which scholars have made ijmaa upon this?

here may be a squasher right here

here is Ibn taymiyya's arguement

Shaykhul-islam Ibnu-Taymiyyah was asked
"what is the verdict regarding whoever visits graves for the purpose of seeking help from the dead concerning an illness that has befallen him, his horse, camel, or another living creation. Such a person seeks to be cured from his illness, for example, by invoking the dead and saying 'oh my master! I am a refuge of yours' or 'I seek your sufficient aid', or 'So and So intends to harm me' and similar statements, claiming that he calles upon the dead as intermediaries between him and Allah, the exalted.
Furthermore, what is the verdict about those who Vow to masajid, Zawaya, or dead or living shaykhs and pledge to pay dirhams, sacrifice camels or sheep, or light candles or oil, or example, for the sake of their dead shaykhs, so that the shaykhs help them in cases such as their saying, 'If my son sustains his welfare, I vow to do this or that in the sake of the shaykh' and similar statements

Also what is the verdict regarding thoe who invoke the dead or absent shaykhs so that they strengthen their hearts during various hardships. Or those who visit the shaykhs grave and touch the grave with their hands and wipe their faces

Seek fulfillment of their needs from the dead and then claim that 'My need has been fulfilled because of baraka of Allah and the baraka of the shaykh.
Visit graves and uncover their heads, or bow down on the ground before their shaykhs and similar acts.
Finally what about those who claim that there exists a person who is described as a qutb, ghauth, jami and fard

Give us a fatwa regardin these matters and explain your response in detail may Allah reawrd you"

Before I mention his fatwaa I say that it is clar that the concepts described above by the questioner either absolute refers to or partially refers to the mutassawifa specifically, those who establish their form of tawassul. what is also clear is that the propagators of this waseela, more or less fall into one, a few, or all of the aspects contained in the above question in which will recieve a verdict inshallah.

Ibn Taymiyya's reply was

All thanks and praises to Allah the Lord of all that exists.
The true religion that Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala sent his Messenger with, and for which sake He revealed revealed His Books, ordains worshipping Allah alone without partners, invoking Him alone for help, having tawakkul in Him and calling Him by supplicationto bring all types of benefits and to fend off all types of harm. This fact is reiterated in what Allah said

and then he quotes (39;1-3), then (72;18), then (7;29), then (17;56-57)

So after he quoted these he said

"Scholars of the salaf stated that some people used to invoke the Messiah, Uzair, and the angels in supplication, and Allah, the exalted, said to them, "Those whom you invoke for help are My slaves, just as you are My slaves. They seekMy Mercy just as you seek My Mercy. They fearMy Wrath just as you fear My Wrath. They seek the means of approach to Me (which means adhering to Allah comands which is why Ron gave you the context of Ibn Taymiyyah's words) just as you seek them. If this is the case with regards to invoking the prophets and the angels, then what about invoking whomever is lesser in grade than they are?
Then he quotes Allah in (18;102), then (34;22-23), then he says

"Hence, Allah, all praise be to Him, stated that those who are being invoked besides Him such as the angels, the humans beings, or any other creation, do not own the weight of an atom in His Kingdom. He also stated that He has no partner with Him in His Kingdom. Rather, He alone owns the Kingship, and He alone deserves all thanks and praises, and He is able to do everything. Allah the exalted does not have an aid who aids Him, as created kings have aids and helpers. Further, the righteous creations that are qualified to perform shafa'ah with Allah can only do so on behalf of whom Allah wills. Thus, Allah negated all types and aspects of shirk.
Why is it that some objects (meaning angels or prophets) are being invoked instead of Allah? Is it because they own a share in the kingship, or because they are partners or aids to Allah? Or are they (those being made du'a for) merely solicitors who intercede on behalf of others?

As for the first three aspects (of shirk) wnership, partnership and being aids, they certainly are all negated with regards to Allah, the Ever High. As or the fourth type, it can only occur by Allah's leav, just as He stated

And then he quotes (2:255), then (53;26), then (39;44-45), then (32;4), then (6;51), then (3;79-80), then he explains that

"If Allah considers those who take angels and the prophets as gods to be kuffar, what about those who take as gods whomever is less than they are, such as their shaykhs or other people?

To further explain this subject, we should state that if what the slave seeks is a matetr only or Allah is able to deliver, it can only be asked of Allah, the Exalted. These aspects include seeking a cure from an ilness for people or animals, repayment of a debt from no particular source, sustenance of the family's welfare and relief concerning the trials of this life and the last life. This list also includes seeking aid against the enemy, invoking to grant one's heart the correct Islamic guidance, seeking forgiveness for sins, being entered into paradise and saves from the fire, learning the religious knowledge and the quran, having the heart directed to righteousness, and seeking help in improving conduct and purifying the soul.

Surely one is not allowed to call upon a king, a prophet or a shaykh, whether dead or alive saying 'Forgive my sins for me', or 'Grant me victory over my enemy', or 'Cure my ill relative', or 'Sustain my welfare, and the welfare of my family, my animal, etc'. As for whoever asks this of a created being, whomever that may be, they are mushriks in Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala. They are among the mushriks who worship the angels, the prophets and the idols, manufactured by disbeleivers in the image of angels, or prophets. Further such practice are similar to the du'aa of the christians to the Messiah and his mother alaihi salatu salam. Allah the Exalted said
then he quotes (5;116), then (9;31)
This is Ibn Taymiyyahs fatwa on the one who belives in performing the matters that the callers to waseelah are promoting whcih clearly incidicate that there is a clear khilaaf between the legislated shafa'aa and the innvoated acts performed to receive that shafa'a when the sunnah of the reality of the shafa'a is that the individuals deserving the most of the shafa'a of the prophet are those who restrict themselves with his very practice (which includes not doing what he didnt do) not those who go to his grave and pleade for his shafa'a

here are some other scholatic sources you look for

There occurs in ad-Durrul -Mukhtaar (2/630), and it is one of the most famous of the books of the Hanafees; “From Aboo Haneefah: It is not fitting at all that anyone should sup - plicate to Allaah except by Him, and using such supplications as have been per - mitted and ordered in the like of the Saying of Allaah, the Most High:

“And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allaah, so call upon Him by them.”69

Its like is also found in al-Fataawal-Hindiyyah (5/280), and al –Qudooree said in his large book of Fiqh called Sharhul -Kharkbee in the chapter of detested matters: “Bishr ibn al -Valeed said: Aboo Yoosuf narrated to us, that Aboo Haneefah said: “It is not right that anyone should supplicate to Allaah except by Him, and I hate that anyone should say: ‘By the glory of Your Throne’ or ‘By the right of Your creation’.”” This is also the saying of Aboo Yoosuf. Aboo Yoosuf said: “The One who gives glory to the Throne is Allaah, so I do not hate that, but I hate that anyone should say: ‘By the right of so and so’ or ‘By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of the Sacred House, and the Sacred Area (dMuzdalifah).’”

Az-Zubaydee says in Sharhul-Ibyaa (2/285): “Aboo Haneefah and his two companions hated that a person should say: I ask You by the right of so and so’ or ‘ By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of the Sacred House and Sacred Area (of Muzdalifah)’ and the like, since no one has any right upon Allaah. Likewise Aboo Haneefah and Muhammad [ibn Hasan ash-Shaybaanee] hated that a person making supplication should say:
‘0 Allaah I ask You by the glory of Your Throne’ and it was allowed by Aboo Yoosuf due to a report which reached him.”

Ash-Shaikh Abut-Tayyib Shamsul-Haqq al-‘Azeemabaadee said inAl-Ta’leeq al- Mughnee ‘alaa Sunanid-Daaraqutnee (pp.520-521): “From the vilest of evil acts and the greatest of innovations and the most severe inventions is the practice of the people of innovation that they mention Shaikh ‘Abdul-Qaadir al-Jeelaanee, rahimahullaah, by saying: ‘0 Shaikh ‘Abdul-Qaad ir al-Jeelaanee grant us something for the sake of Allaah,’ and they misdirect their prayers to Baghdad, and many other practices.
These people are worshippers of others besides Allaah and they make a totally deficient and unjust estimate of Allaah. These ignorant people do not know that the Shaikh, rahimabullah, is not able to bring them an atoms weight of good, nor to remove an atoms weight of evil from them. Why do they call upon him for help and why do they seek their needs from him? Is Allaah not sufficient for His servants?! 0 Allaah we seek Your refuge from associating anything with You,or honouring any of Your creation with the honour due to You.” They also state in al-Bazzaaziyyah and other books of religious rulings: “Whoever claims that the souls of the Shaikhs are present, and that they know what occurs, has become an Unbeliever.”

Also ash-Shaikh Fakhruddeen Aboo Sa’d ‘Uthmaan al-Jiyaanee ibn Sulaymaan al-Hanafee said in a treatise of his: “Whoever thinks that any dead person has any control over the affairs besides Allaah, and he believes that, then he is an Unbeliever.” This is what is mentioned in Al-Bahrur-Raaiq.

al-Qaadee Hameeduddeen Naakoree al-Hindee said in at-Tawsheeh: “From them are those who supplicate to the prophets and the pious when they have a need or are in distress, believing that their spirits are present and hear their call and know of their needs. This is vile shirk and clear ignorance, Allaah, the Most High, says:
“And who is more astray than one who calls (invokes) besides Allaah, such as will not answer him till the Dayof Resurrection, and who are (even) unaware of their calls (invocations) to them?”

In al-Bahr (3/94) there occurs: “If such a person marries, attesting his belief in Allaah and His Messenger, then the marriage is not correct. Rather he is an Unbeliever due to his belief that the prophet salallahu alaihi wa salam knows the Hidden and Unseen."
Thus that hadeeth i quoted regarding the hawd is the source and proof for this haq as relayed in the famous book al-Bahr.

Its like occurs in the Fataawaa of Qaadee Khaan, al-‘Aynee, ad- Durrul-Mukhtaar, al-‘Aalamgeeriyyah and other books by the Hanafee scholars, Then as for the Noble Aayaat and sayings in the pure Sunnah in refutation of the foundations of shirk, and in pure rebuke of those guilty of it, then they are too many to be counted. Our Shaikh, the scholar, as-Sayyid Muhammad Nadheer Husayn ad-Dehlawee has a clear and beneficial treatise in reply to these evil innovations.

Imaam al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abdis -Salaam (Sultan of the ulema) said in his treatise: Al-Waasitab (p.5):
“Whoever makes the prophets, and the scholars of the religion, intermediaries between Allaah and His creation, like the door keepers employed by earthly kings who come between them and their subjects, and thinks that they are the ones who raise up the needs of the creation to Allaah, the Most High, and that Allaah, the Most High, guides, gives provision and aid to His creation through them, meaning that the creation make request of them and then they in turn make request of Allaah, just as the intermediaries with earthly kings pass on the request of subjects to them, and the people ask them since it is not deemed correct for them to ask the king directly, and it is more beneficial for them to make their request to the intermediaries than to ask the king directly, since they are closer to the king.
So whoever deems them to be intermediaries in this way, then he is a Kaafir and a mushrik. His repentance is to be sought, and he either repents or he is killed. Such people make similarity with Allaah; they take Him to be like His creation, and attribute rivals to Allaah...”

Alaamah al-Imaam Muhamamd al-Ameen ash-Shanqeetee said "The saying of the Exalted, ‘You Alone we ask for help’: meaning that we do not seek aid from anyone but You because the command/affair in it’s totality is under Your control Alone, no one else has even an atoms weight of control over it. And in this statement’s following His saying, ‘You Alone we worship’ lies an indication that it is not permissible to put our trust in anyone except the One that deserves worship because no one else has control over the command/affair. This meaning which is indicated here is clearly explained in other verses, like His sayings,
‘So worship Him and put your trust in Him’ (12:123
‘But if they turn away, say: Allaah is sufficient for me, none has the right to be worshipped but Him, in Him I put my trust’ (9:129
‘The Lord of the East and the West, none deserves to be worshipped but Him, so take Him as the Disposer of your affairs’ (73:9)
‘Say: He is the Most Beneficent, we have believed in Him and put our trust in Him’ (67:29) (Al-Adwaa u-Bayaan)

Alamaah al-Imaamu-Zaahid Muhammad Ibnu-Saalih al-Uthaymeen said "major shirk, is, every type of shirk which the Lawgiver described as such and which puts a person beyond the pale of his religion – such as devoting any kind of act of worship which should be for Allaah to someone other than Allaah, such as praying to anyone other than Allaah, fasting for anyone other than Allaah or offering a sacrifice to anyone other than Allaah. It is also a form of major shirk to offer supplication (du’aa) to anyone other than Allaah, such as calling upon the occupant of a grave or calling upon one who is absent to help one in some way in which no one is able to help except Allaah. " (Majmoo al-Fatwaa wa rasa'il Ibn Uthaymeen)

Ash-Shaykh Naasir al-Aql says "To direct any form of worship, such as, du'aa, istigaaathah (seeking help), isti'aana (seeking aid or assistance), Nadhr (vowing), dhabh (slaughtering), tawakkul (reliance), khawf (reverential fear), rajaa (hope), mahabah 9love, or other similar acts, to other than Allah the Most High, consitutes ascribing partners to Allah (shirk) irrespective of who the worship was directed to; whether it be an wangel, a prophet, a righteous person (awliyaa) or someone other than this" (General precepts of ahlu-sunnah wal jama'ah)

Al-Imaam, al-Mujadid, al-Alamaah al-Faqeeh and the Subdoer of Innovations Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal ash-Shaibaanee was recorded by Khatabee (narration saheeh)
"Khattabi said: Ahmed used to adduce by the hadith { I seek refuge in the perfect Words of Allah } that the Prophet did not seek help from creation" Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Fath al-Bari 410/6 and al-Mardawi al-Hanbali confirmed that in al-Insaaf. "

I have to end here, i will have to come back, Im busy right now

asalamu alaikum
Reply

boriqee
12-09-2006, 05:49 PM
so that we muslims do not get skabuzeled by the shubuhaat of the last thread here is a clarification of the matter

Lawful and Prescribed Tawassul and its types
From what has preceded we know that there are two separate matters, the first of which is that the use of a means (tawassul) must be prescribed, and that this can only be known through an authentic proof from the Book and the Sunnah. The second matter is that the tawassul should be by means of a correct natural means by which one does indeed reach what is desired.
We know that Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, ordered us to supplicate to Him and to call upon Him for aid. He says:
“And your Lord said: “Invoke Me (and ask Me for anything) I will respond to your (invocation). Verily! Those who scorn My worship they will surely enter Hell inhumiliation!”32
He, the Most High, says:
“And when My slaves ask you (0 Muhammad ( )) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near to them (by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor). So let them obey Me and believe in Me, so that they may be led aright.”33
He, the Mighty, has prescribed for us a number of types of prescribed means (tawassut) which are beneficial and reach the desired goal. Allaah has granted that He will certainly respond to those who call upon Him by these means, as long as the other conditions for acceptability of the supplication are fulfilled.
So now let us look, without clingin g blindly to one opinion or prejudice, at what is apparent after careful research, of what is reported in the Noble Book and the pure Sunnah, and that is that there are three types of Tawassul whichAllaah, the Most High, has prescribed and encouraged. Some of them are reported in the Qur’aan and were used by the Messenger ( ) and he encouraged their use. Amongst them there is not to be found any tawassul by Tuhfah) and others.
means of any person, nor their status, nor their rights, nor their station. So this shows that this is not prescribed and does not enter into the general ‘waseelaV which is mentioned in the two Aayaat. As for the types of prescribed tawassul which are indicated then they are:
I. TAWASSUL (SEEKING A MEANS OF NEARNESS) TO ALLAAH, THE MOST HIGH, BY MEANS OF HIS PERFECT AND MOST BEAUTIFUL NAMES OR HIS EXALTED ATTRIBUTES.
Such as the Muslim saying in his supplication: “0 Allaah I ask You by Your being the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy, the Most Gracious Knower of all that is hidden, the Fully-acquainted: that You grant me safety and wellbeing.”
(Allaahumma innee Asaluka biannaka Anta ar -Rahmanur-
Raheem...}, Or such as: “0 Allaah I ask you, by Your Mercy which compre - hends everything, that You have mercy upon me and forgive me... .” Like it is the saying of a person: “0 Allaah I ask You by Your love for Muhammad... ,” since love is one of His Attributes. The proof for the prescription of this form of tawassul is the Saying of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic:
“And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allaah, so call on Him by them.”3 4
The meaning of this is: Call upon Allaah, the Most High, by means of (per - forming tawassul with) His perfect Names, and there is no doubt that His exalted Attributes fit into this since His Names are Attributes of His. From this is what Allaah, the Most High, mentions about the supplication of Sulaymaan, ‘alaihis-salaam, when he said:
“He said: “My Lord! Inspire and bestow upon me the power and ability that I may be grateful for Your Favours which You have bestowed on me and on my parents, and that I may do righteous good deeds that will please You, and admit me by Your Mercy among Your righteous slaves.” 35
Also from the proofs of this is the saying of the Prophet( ) in an established supplication which he would say before giving the Salaam in his Prayer: 0 Allaah by Your Knowledge of the Hidden and Unseen, and Your Power over the creation, grant me life for as long as You know that life is good for me, and grant me death when death is good for me..^. From them is that he ( ) heard a man saying in his tashahhud; “0 Allaah, I ask You, 0 Allaah, the One, the Single, the Self Sufficient Master Who needs none, but all have need of (Him), Who does not beget, nor was He begotten, nor is there any like Him..., that You forgive me my sins, indeed You are the Most forgiving, the Most Merciful.” So he ( ) said: He has been forgiven, he has been forgiven?1
The Prophet ( ) also heard another man saying in his tashahhud: “0 Allaah I ask You by virtue of the fact that all praise belongs to You, none has the right to be worshipped but You, alone, having no partner. The Great Bestower of all blessings, 0 Originator of the heavens and the earth, 0 Possessor of Majesty and Honour, 0 Ever-Living, 0 Sustainer and Protector of all that exists. Indeed I ask You for Paradise and I seek Your refuge from the Fire.” So the Prophet( ) said to his Companions: Do you know what he has supplicated with? They said: ‘Allaah and His Messenger know best.’ He said: By Him in Whose Hand is my soul he has supplicated to Allaah by His Great name (and in a narration: by His greatest name) if He is called upon by it then He responds and if He is asked by it He gives.38
From this is his ( ) saying: Whoever is greatly troubled and says: “0 Allaah I am Your slave, son of Your male slave and female slave. My forelock is in Your Hand. Your judgement is continually operative upon me. Your sentence concerning me is just. I ask You by every name which is Yours, with which You named Yourself, taught to anyone from Your creation, or sent down in Your Book, or which You kept to Yourself in the knowledge of the Hidden with You, that You make the Qur’aan the spring of my heart, the light of my chest, the removal of my sadness and of my anxiety” then Allaah will remove his anxiety and sorrow and replace it with
joy?39
Also from this is what is reported from his ( ) seeking Allaah’s refuge with the words: OAllaah, I seek refuge in Your Might, none has the right to be worshipped but You, ...40
Also from them is what Anas, radiyallaahu ‘anhu reports about the Prophet ( ), that when a matter grieved the Prophet, he would say: 0 Ever-Living, 0
Sustainer and Protector of all that exists, by Your Mercy I beg for Your aid.^1
So these ahaadeeth and their like show the prescription ottawassul to Allaah, the Most High, with one of His Names or His Attributes, and that this is something which Allaah loves and is pleased with. Therefore it was done by Allaah’s Messenger ( ) and Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, says:
“And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad ( )) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).”42
So it is prescribed for us to call upon Allaah, the one free of all imperfections, in the manner which His Messenger ( ) called upon Him. That is a thousand times better than calling upon Him with supplications which we originate and in forms which we ourselves invent.
II. TAWASSUL TO ALLAAH, THE MOST HIGH, BY MEANS OF A RIGHTEOUS DEED WHICH THE PERSON SUPPLICATING HAS DONE.
Such as the Muslim’s saying: “0 Allaah by my Eemaan in You, and my love for You, and my following of Your Messenger, forgive me...” or his saying: “0 Allaah I ask You by my love for Muhammad ( ) and my Eemaan in him, that you rescue me...” From it is that the person supplicated and mentions an important pious act which he has done, and in which he feared Allaah, the One free of all imperfections, and did in obedience to Him, hoping for His reward and fearing His punishment, and giving precedence to pleasing Him and obeying Him over everything else, and then using that as a means ottawassul in his supplication, so that it is more liable to be accepted and responded to. This form oftawassul is good and beautiful and has been prescribed by Allaah, the Most High, and it is pleasing to Him. Its prescription is shown by the Saying of Allaah, the Most High:
“Those who say: “Our Lord! We have indeed believed, so forgive us our sins and save us from the punishment of the Fire.”43 His Saying:
“Our Lord! We believe in what You have sent down, and we follow the Messenger (Jesus); so write us down among those who bear witness (to the truth i.e. none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah).”44
“Our Lord! Verily, we have heard the call of one (Muhammad ( )) calling to Faith: ‘Believe in your Lord,’ and we have believed. Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and remit from us our evil deeds, and make us die in the state of righteousness along with Al-Abraar (those who are obedient to Allaah and strictly follow His Orders).”4?
and His Saying:
“Verily! There was a party of My Slaves, who used to say: “Our Lord! We believe, so forgive us, and have mercy on us, for You are the Bes t of all who show mercy!” ^ This form of tawassul is also proven by what Buraidah ibn al-Husayb, radiyallaahu ‘anhu reports, saying: “The Prophet ( ) heard a man saying: ‘0 Allaah I ask You by virtue of the fact that I testify that You are Allaah, none but You has the right to be worshipped. The One, The Self-Sufficient Master whom all creatures have need of. He who does not beget, nor was He begotten, Who has no equal or anything comparable to Him.’ So he ( ) said: He has asked Allaah by His greatest name, which if He is asked by it He gives and if He is supplicated to with it, He responds.” 47
Also from this is what occurs in the story of the companions of the cave, as is reported by ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Umar, radiyallaabu ‘anhumaa, who said: I heard Allaah’s Messenger ( ) say: Three men, amongst those who came before you set out until night came and they reached a cave, so they entered it. But a boulder rolled down from the mountain and blocked the entrance of the cave. So they said: Nothing can rescue you from this rock except that you supplicate to Allaah by mentioning righteous deeds you have done, (and in the narration of Muslim: So one of them said to the others-. Think of righteous deeds which you have done purely for Allaah by, making mention of them, that He might release you). So one of them said: ‘0 Allaah I had two elderly parents and I had not used to give precedence over them to my family and slaves in giving them milk to drink. But one day I was delayed in seeking after something (in the narration of Muslim: for fodder) and I did not return with the flock until they (my parents) had slept. So I milked the animals for them but found that they were both asleep. However I hated to give milk to my family and slaves before them, so I waited with the bowl in my band for them to awake. Then with the break of dawn they awoke and drank their milk. 0 Allaah if I did that seeking Your Face, then relieve us from this situation caused by the rock.’ So it moved slightly, but they were unable to escape. The Prophet ( ) said: The next said: ‘0 Allaah my uncle bad a daughter and she was the most beloved of the people to me and I tried to persuade her to have sexual relations with me, but she refused me until she suffered from 47. Reported by Ahmad (5/349/350), Aboo Daawood (translation l/389/no.l488) and others and its isnaad is saheeh. 31
a year of famine. Then she came to me and I gave her a hundred and twenty deenars on the condition that she would comply with my desire for her, so she agreed. But when I was about to fulfil my desire she said: ‘It is unlawful for you to break (in a narration of Muslim: 0 servant of Allaah, fear Allaah and do not break) the seal except by lawful means. So I felt ashamed to commit the crime against her so I left her alone, and.she was the most dear of all the people to me, and I (also) left the gold which I had given her. 0 Allaah if 1 did that seeking Your Face then release us from the situation we are in.’ So the rock opened further but they were still unable to escape. The Prophet ( ) said: And the third said: ‘0 Allaah I employed some labourers and paid them their wages except a single man who did not take his wages and went away. I invested his wages and it grew into a great deal of property. Then after some time he came to me and said: ‘0 servant of Allaah, give me my wages.’ So I said to him: ‘All the camels, cows, sheep and slaves that you see are your wages.’ So he said: ‘0 servant of Allaah, do not mock me.’
So I said: ‘I am not mocking you.’ So he took all of that and led them away and did not leave any of it. 0 Allaah if I did that seeking Your Face, then release us from our situation.’ So the rock moved and they walked out of the cave.48
So it is clear from thi s hadeeth that when these three Believers were in distress and in such difficulty, and when they despaired of any means of escape except that Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, alone should save them, then they turned to Him and supplicated purely and sinc erely to Him. They also mentioned righteous actions which they had done being aware of Allaah in times of ease, hoping that their Lord would in return now rescue them in their time of hardship. Just as is reported in the hadeeth o f t h e P r o p h e t ( ) in which there occurs:... Remember Allaah in times of ease and He will remember you in times of difficulty. 49
So they sought a means of nearness (tawassul) to Him, the One free of all imperfections, through those actions. So the first used his kindness to his parents as tawassul and his merciful and compassionate treatment of them to the point that it lead him to that singular and beautiful action, and I do not think any other person, except for the Prophets, would reach this level of kindness and goodness to their parents.
Then the second used as tawassul his abstention from fornicating with his uncle’s daughter, and he had the strongest desire for her and she was at his disposal and had submitted to Him unwillingly due to hunger and need. But she reminded him of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, and his heart accepted the admonition and his limbs trembled and he left her and the money which he had given to her.
Then the third used as tawassul his preserving the right of his employee, who left his wages which amounted to a measure of rice, as occurs in an authentic narration of the hadeeth, and went off. So the employer invested this until it grew to amount to sheep, cows, camels and slaves. Then when the employee was later in need of his wages, he requested his meagre earnings from the man who employed him. He in turn handed over all the wealth which astonished the worker and caused him to think that he was being mocked. However when it was clear that the man was serious and that this was all the product of his wages he led them off with joy and wonder, not leaving anything behind.
Indeed, by Allaah, the action of the employer here reached an astonishing level of beneficent treatment of the worker and was an exemplary example of fine and honourable treatment of those whom one is in charge of. It was of such a level that the position of all those who claim to support the workers and the common man does not even reach a hundredth of it, those who make a profitable business out of their claims to protect the rights of the poor and needy, and to treat them fairly and give them their rights. So the supplication of thesethree to their Lord, the One free of all imperfections, using as a means of nearnessto Him these extremely righteous and noble actions, declaring that they had done them purely and solely to seek the pleasure of Allaah, the Most High, not intending by them any worldly or personal benefit or any wealth.
So they hoped that Allaah, the Majestic would release them from their difficulty and free them from their trial, so He, the One free of all imperfections responded to their supplication, relieved their distress and did as they had hoped of Him by granting them a clear miracle, causing the rock to move away in three stages each time one of them supplicated so that it opened totally when the third man finished his supplication, after their having been in a state where death was imminent.
Then our noble Messenger ( ) narrated this fine story to us after it was something unknown and hidden, known only to Allaah, the One free of all imperfections and the Most High. He informed us of this to remind us of excellent and exemplary actions performed by excellent and exemplary followers of the previous prophets in order that we should follow their example, act as they acted, and draw valuable lessons and admonition from their story. It cannot be said: ‘These actions were done before the sending of our Prophet Muhammad ( ) and so do not apply to us,’ based upon what is the correct view in the Principles of Fiqh that prescribed laws for those who came before us are not prescribed laws for us. This is not said here because the Prophet ( ) quoted this event in terms of praise and esteem, and this was a tacit approval of it from the P rophet ( ). Indeed it is even more than a tacit approval of their righteous actions: it is not except an explanation of and a practical example of how the previous Aayaat are to be put into practice. The revealed laws agree in their teaching’s and guidance and this is not surprising since they come from a single source and emanate from a single light, particu larly with regard the condition of people and their relation to their Lord, the One free of all imperfections, so they only differ very slightly and very rarely as required by the wisdom of Allaah, the One free of all imperfections.
III. SEEKING A MEANS OF NEARNESS TO ALLAAH, THE MOST HIGH, BY THE SUPPLICATION OF A RIGHTEOUS MAN.
If a Muslim falls into great difficulty or a great misfortune befalls him, and he knows that he has been very negligent with regard to Allaah, the Blessed and Most High’s, rights upon him, so he wishes to use a strong means of drawing nearer to Allaah. So he goes to man whom he believes to be righteous and to be one who fears Allaah, or a person possessing excellence and knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah, and he asks him to supplicate to his Lord for him that He (i.e. Allaah) should relieve his distress and remove what had befallen him. This is a further type of prescribed tawassul which is proven and guided to in the pure Shares’ah. Examples of it are found in the noble Sunnah and examples of it are found in the practice of the noble Companions, may Allaahthe Most High be pleased with them all.
Anas ibn Maalik, radiyallaahu ‘anhu reports, saying: “The people were afflicted with drought in the time of the Prophet ( ), so whilst the Prophet ( ) was giving the khutbah [upon the minbar], standing, on the day of jumu’ah a bedouin stood [and in a narration: entered] [from the people of the desert] [through a door which faced the minbar] [near to the house sold for the repayment of a debt50, and Allaah’s Messenger ( ) was standing. So he stood facing Allaah’s Messenger ( )] and said: “0 Messenger of Allaah, the livestock are dying and the children are hungry [and in a narration: destroyed] [and in another narration: the horses are dying and the sheep are dying] [and in another wording: the cattle are dying and the roads are cut off] so supplicate to Allaah for us [that he should give us rain] [and in another: that he should give us a downpour].”
So he raised up his hands and supplicated [until I saw the whiteness of his armpits]: [0 Allaah bless us with rain, 0 Allaah bless us with rain] [and the people raised up their hands along with him supplicating] [and he did not mention that he turned his cloak inside out, nor that he faced the Qiblah], and [By Allaah] we could not see [any cloudsnor] any trace of clouds [nor anything, 50. Daarul-Qadaa - a house which belonged to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and which was sold in order to repay a debt and there was no building or house between us and sal’51] [and in a narration:
Anas said: And the sky was clear as glass] [He said: So I then saw a large cloud like a shield and when it came to the middle of the sky it spread and it rained]. By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, as soon as he had lowered his hands clouds like mountains had gathered, and he did not descend from the minbar until I saw the rain dripping from his beard, [and in a narration: suddenly the wind blew gathering clouds which came together and then rain poured down from the sky] [and he came down from the minbar and prayed the Prayer] [so we went out and waded through the water until we reached our homes] [and in a narration: and it was such that a person could hardly reach his home]. So it continued to rain that day, and the next, and the next, and that which followed, until the following Jumu ‘ah and it had not ceased [so the waterways of al-Madeenaah were filled] [and in a narration: so, by Allaah we did not see the sun for a week]. Then that bedouin or someone else stood up [and in a narration:
Then a man entered from that door in the next jumu’ah and Allaah’s Messenger ( ) was standing giving khutbah, so he stood facing him] and he said: 0 Messenger of Allaah, buildings are being destroyed, [and in a narration: houses are collapsing, roads are cut off and the cattle are dying] [and in a narration: the traveller cannot proceed and the roads are blocked]
and livestock are being drowned. So supplicate to Allaah [to withhold it] for us [so the Prophet ( ) smiled] and he raised his hands and said: 0 Allaah, around us and not upon us, [0 Allaah upon the tops of mountains, hillocks [and hills] and river beds and places where trees grow}. So he did not point with his hand in any direction except that the clouds cleared away producing a clear circular hole [and in a narration: so I looked and saw the clouds separating around al-Madeenah [to the right and the left] forming [a sort of crown] [and in another: so the clouds cleared away from al-Madeenah just as clothes are removed] and it was now raining all around us, but not raining upon us at all [in a narration: not a drop] [and we went out walking in the sunshine]. So Allaah showed them a miracle for His Prophet ( ) and His response to his
51. A small mountain in al-Madeenah.
36 supplication. The valley of Qanaat was flooded for a month, and no one came from outside except that he told of abundant rain.”52 Anas ibn Maalik, radiyallaahu ‘anhu^ narrates from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, radiyallaahu ‘anbu, that when the people suffered from drought he used to ask al-‘Abbaas ibn al-Muttalib to pray for rain for them. He used to say: “0 Allaah we used to request our Prophet ( ) to supplicate to You for rain (natawassalu ilaika) and You would bless us with rain. Now we ask the uncle of our Prophet to supplicate to You (natawassalu ilaika), so grant us rain.” What the saying of ‘Umar (Inaa kunnaa natawassalu ilaika binabiyyinaa wa inaa natawassalu ilaika bi’ammi nabiyyinad) means is: We used to go to our Prophet ( ) and ask him to supplicate for us, and draw nearer to Allaah by means of his supplicating for us, and now that he ( ) has passed on to the company of the highest Angels and it is not now possible for him to supplicate for us, then now we go to the uncle of our Prophet ( ), al-‘Abbaas, and ask him to supplicate for us. It certainly does not mean that they used to supplicate saying: ‘0 Allaah, by the status of Your Prophet grant us rain’ and then after his ( ) death say: ‘0 Allaah by the status of al-‘Abbaas grant us rain’, since this supplication is an innovation having no proof or basis in the Book or the Sunnah, and it was not done by a single one of the Pious Predecessors, may Allaah the Most High be pleased with them all, as will be discussed in more detail shortly, if Allaah wills.
Also from this is what al-Haafidh Ibn ‘Asaakir, rahimahullaah ta’aalaa reports in his Tareekh (18/151/1) with an authentic chain of narration54 from the noble tabi’ee Sulaym ibn ‘Aamir al-Khabaairee: “That the sky withheld any rain, so Mu’aawiyah ibn Abee Sufyaan and the people of Damascus went out to pray for rain. So when Mu’aawiyah sat upon the minbar he said: ‘Where is Yazeed ibn al-Aswad al-Jurashee?’ So the people called him and he came stepping between the people. Then Mu’aawiyah commanded him and he ascended the minbar and sat at his feet. Then Mu’aawiyah said: “0 Allaah we are today asking the best and most noble amongst us to supplicate to You for us, 0 Allaah today we put Yazeed ibn al-Aswad al-Jurashee forward to supplicate to You for us,” “0 Yazeed raise up your hands to Allaah.” So he raised up his hands and the people raised up their hands. Then very quickly rain -clouds like a large shield came quickly from the west, and the wind blew and it rain ed so profusely that people could hardly reach their houses.”
Ibn ‘Asaakir also reports with an authentic chain of narration that ad-Dahhaak ibn Qays went with the people to pray for rain, and he also said to Yazeed ibn al-Aswad: ‘Stand up 0 he who weeps much!’ and in a narration: “So he only supplicated three times before it rained so heavily that it almost drowned them.”
So again we have Mu’aawiyah, radiyallaahu ‘anbu, not doing tawassul by means of the Prophet ( ) for the reason that has preceded, rather he used the supplication of that righteous man, Yazeed ibn al-Aswad, rahimahullaah, as a means of tawassul. So he asked him to supplicate to Allaah, the Most High, that He should bless them with rain. Then Allaah, the Blessed and the Most High, responded to his request, and the same thing occurred during the gov-ernership of al-Dahhaak ibn Qays.
54. Al-Haafidh al-‘Asqalaanee also attributes it in al-Isaabah (3/634) to Aboo Zur’ah ad-
Dimashqee and Ya’qoob ibn Sufyaan in his Tareekh with an authentic chain of narration from Sulaym ibn ‘Aamir.
so in fact 80 percent of what was mentioned by SirZubair has nothing to do with the matter of dispute because most of the dispute regarding this, revolves around making waseela through the jah of individuals deemed as awliyyah and through the anbiyyah.

and frrom what was mentioned in my quote above, any waseela outside of these thre permissible types is bida, dhalaah, and is or leads to shirk billah. yet this is the realm of the wolrd of the people of tawassul that they insist that waseela should revolves around these innovated and way out unfounded practices and no reference is made or emphasis ios made to implement and practice the established prophetic manhaj of how he companions and the salafu-saalih performed waseela. This has also been mentioned in similar form by other ulema, among them Haafidh Ibnul-Qayyim.

here is some more clarification

THE INCORRECTNESS AND FUTILITY OF SEEKING TO DO TAWASSUL IN ANY WAY OTHER THAN THE THREE PRECEDING WAYS

So from what has preceded you know that prescribed tawassul, that which is proven by the texts of the Book and the Sunnab, and which is proven by the practice of the Pious Predecessors, and upon which there is consensus (ijmaar) of the Muslims is:
1. Tawassul by means of the Names of Allaah, the Blessed and
the Most High, and His Attributes.
2. Tawassul by means of a righteous action which the person
who is supplicating has done.
3. Tawassul by means of the supplication made by a righteous
man.
As for anything besides these types of tawassul, then there is disagreement about it, and what we believe firmly and hold as our religion before Allaah, the Most High, is that other ways are not permissible, and not prescribed. This is because there is no acceptable proof for them, and these things have been spoken against by the verifying scholars in successive centuries of Islamic history.
Even though some of them have been allowed by some of the scholars, so [for instance] Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger ( ) alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowed tawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious. However we, as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men. We do not align ourselves except with the truth. So with regard to the question of tawassul, which we are presently discussing, then we see that the truth is with those who warn against tawassul by means of any created being, and we warn against tawassul by means of any created being. Indeed they cannot find anything to support what they hold except doubts which they raise and possibilities which we will reply to shortly.
So we find many supplications in the Noble Qur’aan, and we do not find any of them containing any tawassul by means of the status, honour, right or position of any created being. Here are some of the noble supplications as examples.
Our Lord, the Most Majestic, says, teaching us and guiding us how to supplicate:
“Allaah burdens not a person beyond his scope. He gets reward for that (good) which he has earned, and he punished for that (evil) which he has earned. “Our Lord! Punish us not if we forget or fall into error, our Lord!
Lay not on us a burden like that which You did lay on those before us (Jews and Christians); our Lord! Put not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Pardon us and grant us Forgiveness. Have mercy on us. You are our Maulaa (Patron, supporter and protector, etc.) and give us victory over the disbelieving people.”^5
He says:
“And of them is he who says: ‘Our Lord! Give us in this world that which is good and in the Hereafter that which is good, and save us from the torment of the Fire!’”56
He says:
“They said: ‘In Allaah we put our trust. Our Lord! Make us not a trial for the folk who are dhaalimeen (polytheists and wrong-doers). And save us by Your Mercy from the disbelieving folk.’” 57

“And (remember) when Ibraaheem said: ‘0 my Lord! Make this city (Makkah) one of peace and security, and keep me and my sons away from worshipping idols.’ ‘0 my Lord! Make me one who offers prayers perfectly, and (also) from my offspring, our Lord! And accept my invocation.’ ‘Our Lord! Forgive me and my parents, and (all) the believers on the Day when the reckoning will be established.” 58
He says, upon the tongue of Moosaa, ‘alaihis-salaam:
He says:
“(Moses) said: ‘O my Lord! Open for me my chest (grant me self-confidence, contentment, and boldness). And ease my task for me; And make loose the knot (the defect) from my tongue, (i.e. remove the incorrectness from my speech).”’59
He, the One free of all imperfections, says:
“And those who say: “Our Lord! Avert from us the torment of Hell. Verily! Its torment is ever an inseparable, permanent punishment.”60
There are many other noble Qur’anic supplications, some of them are supplications which Allaah, the Most High, has taught us to call upon Him with, others are supplications which He relates to us from some of His prophets and messengers, or some of His worshippers and pious men whom He loves, and it is very clear that none of them contain any of that innovated tawassul which the blind-followers cling to and which the adversaries seek to argue for. Then if we look to the noble Sunnah to find the supplications which the Prophet ( ) used to make and which Allaah was pleased with and taught him, and he in turn guided us to their excellence and beauty, then we find that they are in full conformity with the previous Qur’anic supplications, in that they are also free from any of the aforementioned innovated tawassul. So here are some of those Prophetic supplications: From them is the Du’aaul-Istikhaarah (Supplication requesting Allaah’s help and guidance about a matter) which is well-known and which the Prophet ( ) used to teach his Companions,
when one of them intended to carry something out, just as he would teach them the Qur’aan, and it is: 0 Allaah I ask Your guidance through Your Knowledge, and I seek Your help through Your Power, and I ask You for Your great blessings. Indeed You are fully capable and lam not; You know and I do not, and You know whatever is Hidden and Unseen. 0 Allaah if You know that this matter is good for me in my religion, my worldly life and my Hereafter, and my present and future, then ordain it for me and make it easy for me, and-bless me in it. If however You know that this matter is bad for me in my religion, my worldly life and my Hereafter, and my present and future, then keep it away from me, and turn me away from it, and ordain whatever is good for me wherever it is, then make me pleased with z’f.61
Also from them is his supplication: 0 Allaah set right for me my religion which is the safeguard of my affairs, and set right for me my worldly affairs wherein is my living, and set right for me my Hereafter which is the place of my after-life, and make life a source of increase in all good for me, and make death a rest for me from every evil.^ 0 Allaah through Your knowledge of the Hidden and Unseen, and Your Power to create, grant me life for as long as You know that life is better for me, and take my soul when You know that death is better for me...63 0 Allaah I ask You for right guidance, piety (taqwaa), chastity and contentment.
0 Allaah grant us such a share of fear of You as will prevent us from disobedience to You, and such obedience to You as will enable us to reach Your Paradise...65
0 Allaah, Lord of jibreel and Meekaaeel and Israafeel and Muhammad, we seek Your refuge from the Fire.66
There are very many supplications like this in the Sunnah, whereas we do not find a single authentic example of the innovated tawassul which is used by the adversaries.
What is certainly very strange is that you see these people turning away from the previous correct and prescribed types of tawassul. They hardly use anything from them in their supplications or when they are teaching the people, despite the fact that they are established in the Book, the Sunnah and the consensus of the Ummab. But instead of this you see them turning to supplications which they have invented and using forms of tawassul which they have innovated and which were not prescribed by Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, nor were they used by His chosen Messenger (IH), nor are they reported by the Pious Predecessors amongst this Ummah, the people of the three praiseworthy generations, and the best that can be said about their forms of tawassul is that they are things about which there is disagreement. So how deserving these people are of the Saying of Allaah, the Blessed and the Most High:
5“Would you exchange that which is better for that which is lower?”67
So perhaps this is one of the witnesses to the truth of what the noble Tabi’ee Hassaan ibn ‘Atiyyah al -Muhaaribee, rahimahullaab, said: “No people intro - duce an innovation into their religion except that Allaah will take away a cor - responding amount of their Sunnah, and will not restore it to them until the Day if Resurrection.” 68 We are not alone in criticising these innovated forms of tawassul, rather great imaams and scholars of the past preceded us in this criticism, and this is also confirmed in at least one of the schools of thought which people follow, and that is the madhhab of Aboo Haneefah, rahimahullaab. There occurs in ad-Durrul -Mukhtaar (2/630), and it is one of the most famous of the books of the Hanafees; “From Aboo Haneefa h: It is not fitting at all that anyone should sup - plicate to Allaah except by Him, and using such supplications as have been per - mitted and ordered in the like of the Saying of Allaah, the Most High:
“And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allaah, so call upon Him by them.”69
Its like is also found in al-Fataawal-Hindiyyah (5/280), and al -Qudooree70 said in his large book otFiqb called Sbarhul -Kharkbee in the chapter of detest - ed matters: “Bishr ibn al -Valeed said: Aboo Yoosuf narrated to us, that AbooHaneefah said: “It is not right that anyone should supplicate to Allaah except by Him, and I hate that anyone should say: ‘By the glory of Your Throne’ or ‘By the right of Your creation’.”” This is also the saying of Aboo Yoosuf. Aboo Yoosuf said: “The One who gives glory to the Throne is Allaah, so I do not hate that, but I hate that anyone should say: ‘By the right of so and so’ or ‘By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of the Sacred House, and the Sacred Area (dMuzdalifah).’”
AJ-Qudooree said: “Asking Him by His creation is not allowed since the creation has no right over the Creator, therefore it cannot be allowed.” Shaikhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah reports this in al-Qaa’idatul-Jaliyyab.
Az-Zubaydee says in Sharhul-Ibyaa (2/285): “Aboo Haneefah and his two companions hated that a person should say: I ask You by the right of so and so’ or ‘ By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of the Sacred House and Sacred Area (of Muzdalifah)’ and the like, since no one has any right upon Allaah. Likewise Aboo Haneefah and Muhammad [ibn Hasan ash-Shaybaanee] hated that a person making supplication should say:
‘0 Allaah I ask You by the glory of Your Throne’ and it was allowed by Aboo Yoosuf due to a report which reached him.”71
I have quoted a number of these reports since many of the blind-following Hanafees and others deny the correctness of this as a saying of Aboo Haneefah, rahimabullaah. So if the like of this report is not established from him, then there is nothing at all that can be established from him in the books ofFiqb, as will not be hidden from any scholar who is aware of the way in which the sayings of the Hanafee scholars are reported in the books of their madhhab. Then it is extremely strange how some of them, when confronted with this saying of Aboo Haneefah they openly say that they are not bound to accept this saying of his since there are authentic ahaadeetb which show, as they claim, that one may call upon Allaah by means of other than Allaah, as occurs in the hadeeth of the people of the cave and the hadeeth of Buraydah. These two ahaadeeth have preceded and we have given the correct explanation of them. Then they=

However the report which is mentioned is baseless, and is not authentic. Ibnul- Jawzee quotes it in al-Mawdoo’aat and says: “This hadeeth is fabricated with out a doubt.” Then al-Haafidh az-Zayla’ee agreed with him in Nasbur-Raayah (4/273) so it cannot be used as a proof. Then if the saying of a person: I ask You by the glory of Your Throne’ is in origin tawassul through one of Allaah’s attributes, then it is a prescribed form of tawassul as is shown by many other proofs, as has preceded. Therefore there is no need for this fabricated hadeeth. Ibnul-Atheer, rahimahullaah, said: “I ask You by the (source of the) glory of Your Throne. That is by those characteristics which give the Throne its glory, or the places where glory is attached to it. Its meaning in reality is: ‘By the glory of Your Throne’, and the companions of Aboo Haneefah hate wordings such as this in supplication.” So upon the first explanation, that it refers to the characteristics which give the Throne its glory, then that would be tawassul by means of the attributes of Allaah, the Most High, and would be permissible. But upon the second explanation, that it refers to the places of the Throne whereby glory is attached, then that would be tawassul by means of something created and is not permissible. Whatever the case this hadeeth is not deserving of further discussion and explanation since it is not authentic, so we suffice with what has preceded.
=say this despite the fact that their methodology and well-known way is that they are drowned in taqleed (blind-following) up to their ears, and they turn away from any hadeeth which conflicts with their madhhab, even if the hadeeth has an authentic chain of narration and its meaningis clear. So how is it that they turn to our methodology here when the ways of replying to us by means of their madhhab is closed? Is this self contradiction from them, or is it carelessness, or is it that “They say with their tongues what is not in their hearts.”[Al-Fath (48): 11] in order to reject the truth which was stated by the imaam of their madhhab, just because he is in agreement with what we call them with regard to abandoning tawassul by means of people and seeking tawassul by Allaah, the Most High, and His attributes?
So is it the case that they are prepared to take acting upon authentic ahaadeeth as their methodology in all their Fiqh, so that we will then require them to follow tens of, or rather hundreds of authentic ahaadeeth which they oppose in favour of their madhhab’1. In that case their view and our view would be the same. Or is it the case that they will only follow the hadeeth and differ with the madhhab when that goes along with their desires and interests, and that they will stick to the madhhab and oppose the hadeeth, if the hadeeth does not happen to satisfy their desires and interests! As for their seeking to use the hadeeth of Buraydah and the hadeeth
and

Tawassul in the Arabic Language and in the Qur’an
THE MEANING OF TAWASSUL IN THE ARABIC LANGUAGE
Before going into this topic in detail I would like to draw attention to an important reason why many people have an incorrect understanding of the meaning of Tawassul, and why they go beyond bounds with regard to it and enter into it things which are not from it. The reason is their lack of understanding of its meaning in the language and their lack of knowledge of it from its original root meaning.
This is that the word Tawassul is an original Arabic word occurring in the Qur’aan and Sunnah and in ancient Arabic poetry and prose, and its meaning is: To draw near to what one seeks after and to approach that which one desires, Ibnul-Atheer said in an-Nihaayah: “Al-Waasil is one who desires or longs for something, and al-Waseelah is nearness and a means, and that by which one is able to approach and draw near to something. Its plural is Wasaail.” Al-Fayroozabaadee said in al-Qaamoos: ‘”He performed waseelah towards Allaah, the Most High,’ means: He did an action in order to draw near - er to Him, as a means of approaching Him.” Ibn Faaris said in Mu’jamul
Maqaayees-. “Waseelah is to desire and to seek after. One says Waslas for one who wishes and aspires for something, and the Waasil is the one who wishes to draw nearer to Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, and it occurs in the saying of Labeed: ‘I see that the people do not know the value of their affair, whereas every religious person seeks to draw nearer to Allaah.’”
Ar-Raaghib al-Asfahaanee said in al-Mufradaat; “Al-Waseelah (written with the letter ^) is to approach that which one desires, and it is more particular than al-Waseelab (written with the letter ^ since it includes the concept of being desirous of it. Allaah, the Most High, says:
“Seek the means of approach (al-waseelah) to Him”6
The reality of seeking a waseelah to Allaah, the Most High, is: To take care to follow His way with (good) actions and worship, by adhering to the noble qualities required in the Sharee’ah. It is like nearness, and the waasil is one who aspires nearness to Allaah, the Most High.”
The famous scholar Ibn Jareer also reports this meaning and then brings as evidence the saying of the poet: “If the informers miss us then we will arrive, and the relations and the means of approach (waseelah) between us will be restored.”
Then there is another meaning for waseelah and it is rank and standing with a king and closeness to him. Just as in the hadeeth, it is the name given to the highest station in Paradise, in his ( ) saying: When you hear the caller to Prayer then say the like of what he says, then send blessings (salaat) upon me, since whoever sends a single blessing upon me then Allaah will send ten upon him because of it. Then ask Ailaah to grant me al-waseelah because it is a station in Paradise which is appropriate only for a single servant from the servants of Ailaah, and I hope that it will be me. So whoever asks for al-waseelah to be granted to me then my intercession is due for himJ
As is clear, the last two meanings for waseelah are closely connected to its orig - inal meaning, however they are not what is meant in this treatise of ours. T H E M E A N I N G O F W A S E E L A H I N T H E Q U R ‘ A A N What we have presented so far is the meaning that is well -known in the lan guage, and nobody disagrees about that. It is also the meaning give n by the Pious Predecessors (as -Salafus-Saalih) and the imaams of tafseer in explana tion of the two Aayaat in which the word al- waseelah occurs. They are the Saying of Ailaah, the Most High:
“0 you who believe! Do your duty to Allaah and fear Him. Seek the means of approach (al-waseelah) to Him, and strive hard in His Cause as much as you can. So that you may be successful.”8
“Those whom they call upon (like Jesus son of Mary, Ezra etc.) desire (for themselves) means of access (alwaseelah) to their Lord (Allaah), as to which of them should be nearest and they (Jesus, Ezra, angels, etc.) hope for His Mer cy and fear His Torment. Verily, the Torment of your Lord is somethng to be afraid of!”9
As for the first Aayah then the imaam of the scholars oitafseer al-Haafidh Ibn Jareer [at-Tabaree], rahimahullaah, said in explanation of it: “0 you who affirm whatever Allaah and His Messenger inform you of, and affirm whateverreward He promised and whatever punishment He threatened, “Fear Allaah.” He says: Respond to Allaah by obeying Him regarding whatever He has ordered or forbidden. “and Seek a Means of approach to Him.” He says: And seek to draw near to Him by doing actions which are pleasing to Him.” Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer reports from Ibn ‘Abbaas, radiyallaahu ‘anhumaa, that the meaning of waseelah is to draw closer. He also reports the like of that from Mujaahid, Aboo Waail, al-Hasan, ‘Abdullaah ibn Katheer, as-Suddee, Ibn Zayd and others. He also reports from Qataadah that he said about it: “That is-, that you draw near to Him by obedience to Him and through action that is pleasing to Him.” Then Ibn Katheer sai d: “And with regard to what those imaams said there is no disagreement between the scholars of tafseer about it... and al-waseelah is that by means of which one reaches that which he 9. SoorahAl-Israa(17): 57 5 desires.”10
As for the second Aayah, then the distinguished Companion ‘Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood, radiyallaahu ‘anhu, explained the circumstances in which it was sent down, which clarifies its meaning. He said: “It was sent down concerning a group of Arabs who used to worship a group of Jinn, then the jinns accepted Islaam unknown to the people who worshipped them.”11 Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr, rabimabullaab,^2sa.id: “That is the people who used to
worship the Jinn continued to worship the Jinn, and the Jinn were not pleased with that since they had accepted Islaam, and they were the ones who sought a means of nearness to their Lord, this is what is reliable with regard to tafseer of the Aayah.”
This is very clear that what is meant by the waseelah is those actions by which one draws nearer to Allaah, the Most High, therefore He said: “they seek” i.e. they seek to do such righteous actions as will bring them closer to Allaah, the Most High. It also clearly shows the very strange case - contrary to sound and unblemished thinking - that some people direct their worship and their supplication to some of the servants of Allaah, fearing them and placing hope in them, despite the fact that those servants whom they are worshipping have themselves openly declared their Islaam and their servitude to and their worship of Allaah, and they have hastened to perform deeds to bring them nearer to Him, the One free of all imperfections, performing righteous deeds which He loves and is pleased with, hoping for His mercy and fearing His punishment.
So Allaah, the Most Perfect, declares the foolishness of the empty hopes of those ignorant people who worshipped the Jinn and continued to worship them despite the fact that they were themselves created beings and worshippers of Allaah and weak and powerless befo re Him, just like the humans themselves. They did not possess any benefit or harm for themselves, and Allaah rebukes those people for not directing their worship to Him alone, the Blessed and Most High, since He alone is the One who controls harm and benefit, and in His Hand is the control and protection of everything.
RIGHTEOUS ACTIONS ALONE ARE THE WASEELAH WHICH DRAW ONE CLOSER TO ALLAAH
It is also very strange that some of those who claim to have knowledge have become accustomed to using these two Aayaat as an evidence for what many of them are fervently attached to with regard to seeking tawassul through the persons of the prophets, or their honour, or their status, and this is erroneous and the two Aayaat cannot be used to support it, since it is not established in the Sharee’ah that this tawassul is prescribed and desirable. What they understand from these Aayaat is that Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, orders us to draw nearer to Him fervently and to seek a means of nearness to Him by doing deeds of righteousness, and to seek closeness to Him by any means. However Allaah, the One free of all imperfections, teaches us in many other texts that if we seek to draw closer to Him them we must do so by performing righteous deeds which are pleasing to Him. He did not leave those actions up to us, nor did He leave it up to our intellect and our tastes and feelings to decide which actions they should be, since in that case we would disagree and differ, conflict and argue. Rather He, the One free of all imperfections, ordered us to refer to Him for that and to follow His guidance and teaching about that.
This is because no one knows what pleases Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic, except Him alone. Therefore in order for us to know the means to draw nearer to Allaah, it is obligatory upon us to refer back, in every matter, to that which Allaah, the Most Perfect, prescribed in the Sharee’ah, and which Allaah’s Messenger ( ) explained. The meaning of this is that we refer back to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger ( ). Indeed this is what our Messenger Muhammad ( ) commanded us to do in his saying: /have left amongst you two things; you will not go astray as long as you cling to them: The Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger)-13
WHEN IS AN ACTION A RIGHTEOUS ACTION
It is made clear in the Book and the Sunnah that for an action to be a ‘righteous action’ and for it to be acceptable to Allaah, the One free of all imperfections, and one which draws a person closer to Him, then it must fulfil two important conditions:
The first is that the intention of the person doing it must be sincerely for the sake of Allaah.
The secondis that it must be in accordance with what Allaah, the Blessed and Most High, prescribed in His Book and what His Messenger explained in his Sunnah.
If one of these two conditions is absent then the action is neither a righteous action nor is it acceptable. This is indicated by the Saying of Allaah, the Blessed and the Most High:
“So whoever hopes for the meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord.”14
And these are from the statements of imaam al-albanee, which is total agreement of all the lema I have mentioned above before this post regarding the people of waseela and their misguidance.

asaamu alaikum
Reply

boriqee
12-11-2006, 03:07 PM
I am sure we have been through this before, what exactly constitutes 'Dua'?

If I ask you "brother do dua for me", is that request a Dua in itself? The Obvious answers is NO, why not?, so If I go to the grave of the Prophet Muhammad [Peace be upon him] with the intention that he can hear me and ask him to do dua for me, how does it constitute a Dua?

I think the only way we are going to get anywhere is if we focus on such small issues, so I would like you to give a response to this.

I await your response!
we have already proven the big issue so I guess this is the only thing left.

well. So if we say "oh brother make du'a for me" we are seeking worship and nearness to Allah through the righteousness of the brother who is asked whcih is one of the permissible types of waseela.

So asking for a du'a does not constitue du'a UNLESS the form of asking is in the matter that the one asking beleives (itiqaadu bil kalbi) that the mere asking of that individual will bring about the success and aid that the one asking is looking for by the mere action of asking such individual, then such a one has transformed their non du'a into du'a.

One of them is an attempt. meaning any way or form, to seek a blessing or salvation, seeking anything with regards to deen, if it is asked or requested, constitues dua.

That is why the Lord of the universe told, no, commanded those who say they beleive that "if you ask, then ask Him"

secondly, what constitues as anothr transformation o the non du'a into dua is the very clear state of affairs between asking the righteous during the state of being alive as was authenticated and practiced by the shaba and proved through the orthodoxy of Muslims scholars throughout the eras, verys the exact opposite of this of the person being in the barzaakh, where there is no islami textual proof nor implementation of the sahaba nor other than them with regard to asking, since what is connected to this type of asking is the issue of "intermediation" which is no connected to in the first type of the permissible waseela.

So while they being alive in the barsakh is not the issue, as no one who has a firm authentic aqeedah could ever beleive that the muslimeen, I mean the real muslimeen who followed the aqeedah of the salaf, and the mujaahideen and the awliyyah, all of them, are not dead, however from conclusive proofs we understand throughout the majority of the ulema of ahlu-sunnah that they
1. Dont hear (there is som khilaaf, however the stronger proofs and arguments of ahlu-sunnah wal jama'ah surrounds the fact that they do not hear with the slightest exception of he prophet hearing our salams to him)
2. they dont see
3. are either living their enjoyment in the barzaakh by the angels or through the torcher of the two angels, whom these two affairs have them enveloped from even remotely having anything from this dunya to reach them
4. are ignorant of the affairs that are going on after they left the earth
i do not have my references with me as Im acting on memory, but there are pillars of d'ua.

so there is no conceivable logic in any shape or form where one would compare asking someone who is alive to make du'a for him and asking someone who is in the barzaakh to make du'a for him.

asalamu alaikum warahmatullah
Reply

Ibn Abi Ahmed
01-29-2007, 07:10 PM
:sl:

If anyone has fallen into any doubts reading some posts in this thread, Insha'Allah this will clear your doubts:

http://www.islamicboard.com/islamic-...ng-doubts.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/islamic-...gin-shirk.html
Reply

Abu Ibraheem
08-28-2007, 07:38 PM
I can see that there are alot of posts missing from this thread. It was sooo many pages long. What happened and why?
Reply

MinAhlilHadeeth
08-28-2007, 07:46 PM
:salamext:

The thread was cleaned up. For further clarrification, please PM Muhammad.
Reply

Skillganon
10-06-2007, 02:35 AM
Assalamu alaikum wr wb

here is another good link:

All about Istighatha, Istishfa', and Tawassul, etc...
Reply

Sunni Student
05-19-2011, 06:43 PM
Originally Posted by Abu Ibraheem
I can see that there are alot of posts missing from this thread. It was sooo many pages long. What happened and why?
Was intresting reading the edited version of this thread five years on.

Reply

boriqee
05-23-2011, 02:27 AM
Originally Posted by Sunni Student
Was intresting reading the edited version of this thread five years on.
could be because of the reform of the site allahul-alim

one more thing I forgot to add long long time ago in the beginning is that what we have now in todays world which is the english translation of Ibn katheer is NOT the direct translation from Ibn katheer

One of my teachers, who was the chief editor of the project, the project was a translation of the work of the Imaam of Hadeeth Safi-ur-Rahmaan al-Mubarakfuri in which he authored called "al-Misbaah al-Muneer Fi Tahdheeb Tafseer ibn Katheer". My teacher, being a student of the shaykh, sought to translate this work, and that is exactly what he did. However, because Darussalam is a "business" organization and not exactly in the business of the distribution of knowledge but rather for the accruence of wealth, then in order to generate more money, they marketed the translation AS the translation of Tafsir ibn Kathir. They wouldn't have made as much money if they sold it as "Misbha al-Muneer" because nobody except for students of knowledge know of this book. From a business standpoint, I can understand the strategy, but as a small slave of the servant of our Lord and in the pursuit of the knowledge He has allowed to remain here, i am as well opposed to it.

THUS, what many people who have problems with traditionalist Islam and the traditionalist of ahlu-sunnah, they find fault with the translation simply because they do not understand that it is not a translation of Ibn katheer's work in reality, but that of the abridgment of a hadeeth scholar ON the tafseer that Ibn Katheer produced. Not factoring this has caused a major ruckus in the circles of heterodox groups against the ahlu-sunnah.

asalamu alaikum
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!