Seeking Sacred Sunni Knowledge

Ibn Taymiyya says Khidr is Alive

greybismillah

 

By Ibn Saad

(Special Thanks to Tilmeedh of Sunniforum)

The Sheikh (Ibn Taymiyyah) – Rahimahullah – was asked:
“Was Khidr (as) a Prophet or a Wali? And is he alive to the present day? And if he is alive, then what do you say about what has been narrated about the Prophet saying “Had he been alive, he would surely have visited me”? Is this hadith sahih or not?”

And the Sheikh answered:

As for his Prophethood: then after the advent of the Messenger of Allah (s), neither he nor anyone else received wahi (revelation). As for before the advent of the Messenger of Allah (s), then people have differed regarding the question of his Prophethood. Those who say that he was a Prophet do not say that he gave up his Prophethood, rather they say he is a Prophet like Ilyas (as), and that he does not get any wahi in this time. And the absence of wahi for a specified period does not invalidate Prophethood, just as the Messenger (s) did not receive any wahi at times during the span of his Messengerhood.
And the majority of the ‘ulema believe that he was not a Prophet… [the Sheikh then goes on to describe the ranks of the Prophets and the Sideeqs]

And as for [the question regarding] his life: then he is alive . And the hadith is question [my note: the hadith in the question posed to the Sheikh] has no basis, and no isnad is known for it either. On the contrary, what has been narrated in Musnad Al-Shafi’i and other books is that [Khidr] did meet the Prophet (s). And as for he who says he did not meet the Prophet (s) then he has stated what he has no knowledge of, for this is from the knowledge that he does not encompass. And he who claims he died relying on the hadith “Have you seen this night of yours? At the end of one hundred years after this none would survive on the surface of the earth” then there is no proof for him in it, for it it is possible that Khidr was not on the surface of the earth at that moment [my note: also, there were Muslims in Abyssinia and Muslim women and children back in Madinah. Hence this was not a general statement] .

Also, regarding Dajjal – and similarly Al-Jasasa – the sahih is that he was alive and present during the era of the Prophet (s), and he is alive till today not having escaped (from his chains), and he is on an island from the islands of the Oceans.

So the responses concerning (Dajjal) is the response for Khidr as well: And that is: the phrase ‘surface of the earth’ does not apply. Or that the Prophet (s) meant the the known human beings. And those who are special cases do not enter the generality, just like the Jinns don’t enter it – unless a word was used that encompassed both Jinns and humans.
And examples of specifications like this are many. Wallahu A’lam.

(Arabic: http://al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=252&CID=76#s2s)

 

 

118 Responses to “Ibn Taymiyya says Khidr is Alive”

  1. Abul Layth says:

    Shaykh Gibril Haddad was asked:

    Is Al-Khidr alive?

    I remember reading a comment of yours where you stated that Shaikh Al Islam Ibn Hajar agreed to the consensus of the people of Tasawwuf that Khidr was still alive. I was reading Sunan Abu Dawud, with its Sharh Awn Al Ma’bud and within it it stated: [Adjust encoding to Arabic windows] …I was wondering if you could clarify the above, since i do not have access to Ibn Hajars Al Isaba, although I do know he goes through a list of narrations regarding Sayyidina Khidrs death and his life [during and after the prophet pbuh]. Also, what is the most soundly established opinion of ibn hajar in this case?

    He Responded:

    Ibn Hajar’s position on the life of al-Khadir is best characterized as a tendency to reject the view that al-Khadir is alive mixed with reluctant acceptance for its possibility. In the Isaba, he cites al-Nawawi and Ibn al-Salah’s assertion that the majority of the scholars consider him alive then states: “One of the later scholars gathered the stories related from the righteous and others after the fourth century, and they hardly reach twenty stories on top of weakness in the chains of some of them.” However, in al-Zahr al-Nadir fi Naba’ al-Khadir – which he said he wrote after the Isaba – he cites more proofs and says he said to his teacher Abu al-Fadl al-`Iraqi: “I have abandoned my belief that al-Khadir died. ” At the conclusion of the monograph he says: “What I tend to hold as my position, on the basis of the strength of the proofs, is contrary to what the `awamm believe in that he continues to live; however, a doubt might be raised from the perspective of the abundance of transmitters for the reports indicating its continuation, and it can be said: granted, their chains are flimsy, since none of them is devoid of a reason for weakness, but what to do with the totality? Accordingly, it might be considered mass-transmitted in meaning in the same way, for example, as Hatim’s generosity. “(*)

    (*) Ibn Hajar, al-Zahr al-Nadir (p. 114). Note: the words “contrary to” were dropped in the Kutub al-`Ilmiyya edition, which rendered the meaning unintelligible.

    gibril
    [SP 2006-10-17]

  2. Abul Layth says:

    Shaykh Gf Haddad, on several occassions, throughout his works has strongly supported the life of al-Khidr (also spelled Al-Khadir).

    In his Islamic Doctrines series, beneath his introduction to Ibn ‘Arabi, he states,

    The hadith master al-Sakhawi stated:

    “It is well-known that al-Nawawi used to meet with al-Khidr and converse with him among many other unveilings (mukashafat).”

    [Al-Sakhawi, Tarjima Shaykh al-Islam Qutb al-Awliya' al-Kiram wa Faqih al-Anam Muhyi al-Sunna wa Mumit al-Bid'a Abi Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi ("Biography of the Shaykh of Islam, the Pole of the Noble Saints and Jurist of Mankind, the Reviver of the Sunna and Slayer of Innovation Abu Zakariyya Muhyiddin al-Nawawi") (Cairo: Jam'iyya al-Nashr wa al-Ta'lif al-Azhariyya, 1354/1935 p. 33).]

    He also quotes Ibn ‘Ata’illah rejecting the view of Ibn Al-Jawzi that he is dead and states that there is consensus of the Sufis that he is alive. [Lata'if Al-Minan 1:84-98]

    Elsewhere, he quotes Imam Al-Barzanji as believing the man to face the Dajjaal will be Khidr. He says,

    “Al-Barzanji in his book al-Isha’a li Ashrat al-Sa’a (1997 ed. p. 279-281; 1995 ed. p. 204-205) lists proofs to the effect that al-Khidr – peace upon him — is alive and shall face and belie the Antichrist (al-Dajjal), as he is the one meant in the hadith whereby a man faces the Antichrist and belies him, whereupon the latter saws him in half then revives him only to be belied again.

    Narrated from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri by Abu Ya’la in his Musnad (2:332) and al-Hakim (1984 ed. 4:581=orig. ed. 4:537), both with a chain containing ‘Atiyya ibn Sa’d who is weak, and with another chain (by Abu Ya’la 2:535) containing Sufyan ibn Waki’ who is weak; also narrated from Abu Umama al-Bahili by Ibn Majah in his Sunan (book of Fitan) with a chain containing Isma’il ibn Rafi’, who is weak in his memorization; also narrated by Nu’aym ibn Hammad (d. 288) in Kitab al-Fitan (2:551) who said: al-Zuhri said: ‘Ubayd Allah ibn ‘Abd Allah [ibn] ‘Utba narrated to us that Abu Sa’id al-Khudri said… The latter is a sound chain but there are several unnamed links between Nu’aym and al-Zuhri. Also narrated by al-Dani (d. 444) in his book al-Sunan fi al-Fitan (6:1178) but with a chain that stops at the Tabi’i Abu Mijlaz.

    None of the weakness mentioned above in the chains raised to the Prophet is grave. If the weak links are at the same levels of the narrators’ biographical layers and are judged to strengthen each other, it would raise the grade of the hadith to “fair due to corroborative/witness chains” (hasan li ghayrih), and Allah knows best. It is confirmed by the hadith related from Abu ‘Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah whereby the Prophet said: “It may be that one of those who saw me and heard my speech shall meet the Dajjal.” Narrated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (15:181) with a weak chain according to Shaykh Shu’ayb Arna’ut, however, Imam al-Tirmidhi in his Sunan said it is also narrated from three other Companions and thus graded the hadith itself “fair and single-chained (hasan gharib) as narrated from Abu ‘Ubayda.” [End Quote]

    Elsewhere he quotes the following,

    “Among the strongest transmitted proofs to this effect are two reports, one narrated by Imam Ahmad in al-Zuhd whereby the Prophet Muhammad said that Ilyas and al-Khidr meet every year and spend the month of Ramadan in al-Quds, and the other narrated by Ya’qub ibn Sufyan from ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-’Aziz whereby a man he was seen walking with was actually al-Khidr. Ibn Hajar declared the chain of the first fair and that of the second sound in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 6:435). He goes on to cite another sound report narrated by Ibn ‘Asakir from Abu Zur’a al-Razi whereby the latter met al-Khidr twice, once in his young age, the other in his old age, but al-Khidr himself had not changed.”

  3. Abul Layth says:

    Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller, Qaddas Allahu sirrh, states in his biographical entries in the back of his translation of Umdatus-Saalik,

    “…Scholars disagree as to whether he is presently alive, though most believe he is and will remain so until the Day of Judgement because of having drunk of the water of life — and also as to whther he is a prophet, angel or friend of Allah (wali), ther majority holding him to be a prophet. (al Futuhaat Al Ilahiyya, Siraj Al Munir)

    [Page 1067 of Reliance]

  4. Mustafa says:

    as-salaamu alaykum,

    Akhi abul layth, when did jibril hadad status change into being a shaykh? With all do respect my brother, it seems as if anybody who studies a bit becomes a shaykh. For an example, the person who is the imam at my masjid is given the title shaykh. He studied a bit in medina yet this man believes that Allaah is EVERYWHERE WITH HIS DHAT. I thought perhaps what he meant was Allah’s ilm. Yet, he clarified that what is meant is Allaah is everywhere with His Dhat.

    The point im trying to make is everyone calls him shaykh goes to him with questions yet hemakes a very grave error like this. May Allaah bless him with guidance and forgive him of all his sins and enlighten his sight.

    I know it is a bit offtopic but I just wanted to know when his status had changed. By the way does jibril hadad still believe you can seek aid from the Ambiya by saying O so and So help me believing that they hear? It seems he has switched his opinion a couple times I am wondering what it is now. Jazakallah khayr

    wasalaam

    -Mustafa ‘Amriki al mexiki’

  5. Ibn Anwar says:

    <p>Assalamu’alaikum,</p>
    <p>Musatafa, you said :</p>
    <p>”Akhi abul layth, when did jibril hadad status change into being a shaykh? With all do respect my brother, it seems as if anybody who studies a bit becomes a shaykh. For an example, the person who is the imam at my masjid is given the title shaykh. He studied a bit in medina yet this man believes that Allaah is EVERYWHERE WITH HIS DHAT. I thought perhaps what he meant was Allah ’s ilm. Yet, he clarified that what is meant is Allaah is everywhere with His Dhat.”</p>
    <p>When did GF Haddad become a Shaykh? It seems to you that anyone who “studies a bit” becomes a sheikh?? Well, I haven’t heard that and Shaykh GF Haddad has not “studied a bit” ..The respected Shaykh has studied in Damascus with Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr, Shaykh Adib Kallas, Shaykh Wahbi al-Ghawji, al-Sayyid Shaykh Muhammad al-Ya`qubi, Dr. Samer al-Nass, Dr. Wahba al-Zuhayli, Shaykh `Abd al-Hadi Kharsa, Shaykh Muhammad Muti` al-Hafiz, Shaykh Bassam al-Hamzawi, Shaykh Munir al-Hayek. In Mecca he studied under the late venerable Muhaddith al-Sayyid al-Shaykh Dr. Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki(the Shaykh has translated some of his works such as “The Prophets in Barzakh” from Manhaj Al-Salaf). In Morrocco he studied under Sidi Mustafa Bassir and in Beirut with the late Shaykh Husayn `Usayran, the last of the close students of Qadi Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabhani. In the secular world he has a PhD from Columbia University and is currently completing a second doctorate from Damascus. He is also an official instructor on the online traditional school sunnipath.com, teaching alongside eminent scholars like Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller and Shaykh Faraz Rabbani. </p>

    The following are some of the published works and translations by Shaykh GF Haddad :

    <p>-Ibn Khafif. Al-’Aqida al-Sahiha (“Correct Islamic Doctrine”).</p>
    <p>-Al-Bayhaqi. Al-Asma’ wal-Safat (“The Divine Names and Attributes”).Excerpts.</p>
    <p>-Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam. Ai-Mulha fi I’tiqad Ahl al-Haqq (“Belief of the Poeple of the Truth”).</p>
    <p>-Ibn ‘Arabi. Aqidat al-’Awamm min Ahl al-Islam (“Common Doctrine of the Muslim”).</p>
    <p>-Sayyid Muhammad ‘Alawi al-Maliki. Al-Anbiya’ fi-Barzakh (“The Prophets in the Isthmus-Life”). Revised bilingual edition.</p>
    <p>- Al-Anwar al-Bahiyya fi Isra’ waMi’raj Khayr al-Bariyya (“The Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Night Journey and Ascention”). Revised English edition.</p>
    <p>-Sayyid Yusuf Hashim al-Rifa’i. Nasiha li-Ikhwaninia Ulama’ Najd (“Advice to our Brethren the Scholars of Najd”). Introduction by M.S.R. al-Buti. With Sayyid ‘Alawi Ahmad al-Haddad’s Misbah al-Anam (“The Light of Mankind”). English.</p>
    <p>-Al-Habib ‘Ali al-Jafri. Jesus Christ the Son of Mary and His Most Blessed Mother.</p>
    <p>-Afdalu al-Khalqi Sayyiduna Muhammad (peace be upon him) On the Prophetic Attribute “Best of Creation”). Bilingual.</p>
    <p>- Al-Arba’un fi Fadli al-Shami wa-Ahlih wal-Hijrati ila Allahi wa-Rasulih (peace be upon him) (“The Excellence of Syro-Palestine and Its People in Emigrating to Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him) 40 Hadith”) Bilingual. Forewords by Shaykh Abid Kallas, Shaykh Mustafa al-Turkmani, and Shaykh Salah Fakhri.</p>
    <p>- Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Saddiq (may Allah be well pleased with him). Bilingual.</p>
    <p>- Qubrus al-Tarab fi Suhbat Rajab (“The Joy of Cyprus in the Association of Rajab [1422]“).</p>
    <p>-Discourses of Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani. Bilingual.</p>
    <p>- Mawlid: Celebrating the Birth of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him)</p>
    <p>- Collective Supplication: Sunna or Bid’a? Bilingual.</p>
    <p>- Albani and His Friends: A Concise Guide to the “Salafi” Movement.</p>
    <p>- The Four Imams and Their Schools. Bilingual.</p>
    <p>- Ahmad ibn Taymiyya.</p>
    <p>some Scholars from sunniforum.com who consider Dr. GF Haddad a Shaykh and scholar :<br />
    -Shaykh eTeacher<br />
    -Shaykh Abul Hasan<br />
    etc.</p>
    <p>You said:</p>
    <p>”The point im trying to make is everyone calls him shaykh goes to him with questions yet hemakes a very grave error like this. May Allaah bless him with guidance and forgive him of all his sins and enlighten his sight.”</p>
    <p>What grave error are you referring to?</p>
    <p>You said,</p>
    <p>”By the way does jibril hadad still believe you can seek aid from the Ambiya by saying O so and So help me believing that they hear? It seems he has switched his opinion a couple times I am wondering what it is now.”</p>
    <p>Could you direct me to where he said that? Perhaps you’re referring to his stance on the concept of hadhir nazir of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.? There is ikhtilaf on this matter.</p>
    <p>This may be of some use:<br />
    Abdullah ibn Mas’ud r.a. relates, that the Messenger of Allah s.a.w. said,“When your animal in runs away from you in the desert, then say: “O servants of Allah! Catch him! O servants of Allah, stop him!” Becaus on Earth there are servants of Allah, which are ready to catch them“.“<br />
    (Abu Ya’la, Musnad, Nr.5269, 9/177, Ibn Hajar, al-mutalib al-ali, Nr.3375, 3/239, Tabarani, al-mukemul Kabir, Nr.10518, 10/217, Daylami, Musnad Firdaus, Nr.1311, 1/330; Ibn Al-Sunni, ‘Amal al-yawm wal laylah S.162, Nr502); Haythamī, Majma’ al-zawa’id 10/132)</p>

    One day a shafi ijtihad scholar Shihab Al-Ramli(Rahimehullah) was asked:
    “Is it correct according to islam, that some people when they get in trouble, shout out with words like: “Ya Rasulallah!, Ya Shaykh so and so!” and so seek for the help of the prophets, awliyas, salihs and scholars? Have theses people the abilitiy to help at all after their death?”

    He answered: “The Rasuls, the nabis and the walis, have the abilitiy to help after their passing away. Because the miracles of the prophets and the keramets of the walis don’t stop after their death. Anyway, many secure Ahadith tell us, that prophets live in their graves, make there salah, go to hajj and their help is one of their miracles. Alive are also the shehids, often it was seen with bare eyes on broght daylight, that they openly fought against the kafirs. But the help of the walis is with their keramets.” .”(Fatawa Ramli, fi Hamishil Fatawal Kubra, ibni Hajar Al-Haytami, 4/382, al Fatawa” Hayriyye, fi Hamishil Ukudid Durriyye fi Tenhikil Hamidiyye, 2/279280. Tahanawi, Ahkamul Qur’an, 3/67, Nabhani, Shawahidul Haq, pg. 141)

    <p>-Ibn Anwar</p>
    <p>P.S. Shaykh literally means “old man” or “elder”. The word is not exclusive to Islam. One should not feel affronted that someone is called “shaykh” even if he is disagreeable. Anyone in a respectable position(in the eyes of whoever)linguistically may be called a “Shaykh” by his supporters. There are more important issues to tackle. By the way, I think the comparison you provided was a bit unwarranted.</p>

  6. al-faqir says:

    brother Ibn Anwar, [as-salamu alaikum]

    the two quotes you mentioned can be found on our website:

    Imam al-Ramli’s fatwa:

    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=48

    O Slaves of Allah: Help me

    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=55

    By the way sidi, I wanted to get in contact with you – can you ask Abul Layth for my msn email?

    was-salam

  7. Mustafa says:

    That is a rediculous fatwa. Basically ‘You can call upon the Nabi salalahu alayhi wa salam to rescue you, cure your illness, give your children as long as you believe Allah has the only effect in the world’ Such kufr may Allah guide you

  8. Ibn Saad says:

    Interesting, so I guess Scholars who did do Tawassul must be Kafr according to your reasoning. So lets see who is Kafr:

    1) Ibrahim Al-Harbi (Tarikh Baghdad 1:122)
    2) Abul-Rabi’ bin Salim (Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala 21:251)
    3) Abul-Shaikh Al-Asbahani (Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala 16:400)
    4) Abu ‘Ali al-Khallal (Tarikh Baghdad 1:120)
    5) Abu Zar’ah Al-Razi (Al-Muntadhim 9:74)
    6) Ibn Abil-Dunya (Qurra al-Dayf 5:225)
    7) Ibn Al-Jazari (Iddatul-Hisn Al-Husain)
    8) Ibn Al-Jawzi (Zad Al-Maseer 4:253)
    9) Ibn ‘Asakir (Tarikh Dimishq 6:43) and in his Arba’iniyat
    10) Ibn Kathir (Bidayah 13:192)
    11) Al-Bayhaqi (Al-Muntadhim 11:211)
    12) Al-Darimi (Sunan Al-Darimi: Chapter on what Allah blessed His Prophet with)
    13) Al-Sakhawi (Fath Al-Mughith 2:261)
    14) Al-Suyuti (Al-Itqan 2:502)
    15) Al-Tabarani (Siyar A’lam Al-Nubala 16:400)
    16) Al-’Ijluni (Kashf Al-Khafa 2:55)
    17) Al-Mundhiri, in his Risalah
    18) Al-Qurtubi (Tafsir Al-Qurtubi 8:240)
    19) Al-Haythami (Majma’ Al-Zawaid 9:420)
    20) Al-Ghazali (Ihya ‘Ulum Al-Din 1:260)

    The Messenger (s) said: “Allah does not allow the Ummah of Muhammad to agree on an error.”
    Sahih.
    Tirmidhi (Sunan, #2167), Hakim (Mustadrak #397)

  9. Mustafa says:

    There is is a difference between asking using the status of someone and asking the ambiya and awliya to heal you, grant you health, children, wealth etc …

    Kashf ush shubuhat destroys this kufr

  10. Ibn Saad says:

    Ibn Qudamah Hanbali, defining the manner of pilgrimage to the shrine of the Prophet (s), writes in the book al-Mughni Stand beside the tomb of the Prophet (s), and say: I have come to you for forgiveness of my sins and to seek your intercession with Allah (taken from Al-Mughni ma’ al-Sharh, vol. 3, p 588; al-Sharh al-Kabir ma’ al-Mughni, vol. 3,
    p. 494).

    (Interestingly I got this from a shia site: http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/tawassul/tawassul.pdf)

  11. Abul Layth says:

    All deeds are based upon intent. Before you begin vomiting your atrocious takfeer and wahhabi bida’ah, know that those who do such an act are not asking the prophet for those things. They are asking him to ask Allah ta’alaa for them. That is the reality of the matter. The wahhabis, because of their own ignorance, can not understand this simple point! It is a type of intercession that this Ummah is unanimously agreed upon, save Ibn Taymiyyah. As As-Subki said no one before Ibn Taymiyyah made such a claim, and he innovated!

    Stop your innovating into the deen of Allah atrocious and unfounded Bida’aat!

  12. Taha says:

    I thought the discussion was about Khidr [a].

    Anyway, there is ijma’ of the Sufis that he is alive. And this is from directly meeting him.
    Anyone who’s spent even a day with a real sufi knows that the last thing they do is lie.

    It’s authentically narrated that Umar bin Abd Al-Aziz met him. Likewise, Ibn Hajar mentioned in the Isaba that either Ali bin Hasan or Abul-Hasan met him as well. Or heard him, or something along those lines – memory fails me.

  13. Taha says:

    *It should say Ali bin HUSSAIN ^ (i.e. Zayn Al-Abidin) or Abul-Husain (i.e. bin Abi Talib)

  14. Ibn Saad says:

    From H-Adam:

    “Among the strongest transmitted proofs to this effect are two reports, one narrated by Imam Ahmad in al-Zuhd whereby the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) said that Ilyas and al-Khidr meet every year and spend the month of Ramadan in al-Quds, and the other narrated by Ya’qub ibn Sufyan from ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-’Aziz whereby a man he was seen walking with was actually al-Khidr. Ibn Hajar declared the chain of the first fair and that of the second sound in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 6:435). He goes on to cite another sound report narrated by Ibn ‘Asakir from Abu Zur’a al-Razi whereby the latter met al-Khidr twice, once in his young age, the other in his old age, but al-Khidr himself had not changed.”

  15. Sunnih says:

    It would be interesting if you did publish what Ibn Taymiah said in his Majmoo 4/337 from Imam Ahmad and Bukhari which of course you will not do. As for Imam Ahmad: Ibraheem al harbi asked Imam Ahmad about the idea of Khidr and Ilyas still being alive and whether they could still be seen and whether stories could be narrated from them. He replied: “I think all of these stories are comming from Shaytan”.

    Also from the same fatwah 4/337 sheikh ul-Islam mentions that Bukhari was asked about Khidr and Ilyaas if they were still alive and he replied: “How could they be still alive when the prophet said: in 100 years time there will be no one left on this earth alive from those alive now”.

  16. tilmeedh says:

    …or I could mention that Ibn Taymiyya also quotes Imam Ahmad as encouraging tawassul, without challenging it.
    But he tried to counter it by his own reasoning using the contradictory reports of Imam Ahmad allowing and disallowing swearing by the Prophet [s].

    ..

    Ya akhi, the contradictory fatwas regarding Khidr are in fact one right after the other.
    So:
    1) Either the Sheikh is a madman who says one thing one day, and another thing the other
    2) or, he held one view once, but changed it later on.

    I hope it was the latter. And in fact there are authentic reports (from the salaf AND khalaf) that show that people have met with Al-Khidr.

    Anyway, the answer to Imam Bukhari’s reasoning has been provided by none other than Sheikh Ibn Taymiyya himself in the fatwa that follows the one you quoted.

    In any case, thank you for sharing.

    ws

  17. sunnih says:

    So at least you should mention that there are two oppinions transmited from him on this matter. This would be more honest.

  18. mustafa says:

    as salaamu alaykum,

    This isnt an issue that people should debate over. Relax sunnih even if your heroe ibn taymiyah rahimahullah did believe khidr alayhi salam is alive doesnt mean it affects your belief in Allah literally having limbs and of you calling yourself Salafi or ‘hanbali’. So really its not that big of deal.

    wasalaam

  19. sunnih says:

    Wa alaikum salam. I am not debating at all but reading the name of the site, it would be nice to present the information as it is and if there are two fatwas that contradict themselves at least it should be mentioned that there is another say also. That is all. Ibn Taymiyah does not need me or you to defend him and nor does my or your words against him carry any weight whatsoever.

  20. tilmeedh says:

    w’salam,

    It’s just that the point of quoting the particular fatwa had a [very obvious] purpose.
    For many, it doesn’t matter whether the Shaykh believed in his being alive or not. But for some, it does matter quite a big deal.

    How many a time, one quotes scholars from the Salaf, Khalaf, left, right and center. And it has no effect on a person.
    But when the Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya is quoted, it is really as if he is AL-Shaykh.

    Given the implied premise this entails when discussing with people, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out why that particular fatwa was quoted.

    And you are right: he does not need me or you or anyone else to defend him.
    I pray Allah allows us to benefit us from the good he left, and forgive him for his slips.

    Wallahu a’lam.

    ws

  21. mustafa says:

    as salamu alaykum,

    The brother perhaps was unaware of the other fatawa. Let us make excuses for eachother.

  22. what I read you said the khidr is alive! and Ibn Taymiyya said that?
    and this link:
    “http://al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=252&CID=76#s2s”
    shows this?

  23. Ibn Saad says:

    For those who clicked the link and unfortunately can not read:

    هل كان الخضر ـ عليه السلام ـ نبيًا أو وليًا ‏؟‏ وهل هو حي إلى الآن‏؟‏ وإن كان حيًا فما تقولون فيما روى عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال‏:‏ ‏(‏لو كان حيًا لزارني‏)‏ هل هذا الحديث صحيح أم لا‏؟‏

    فأجَـاب‏:‏

    أما نبوته‏:‏ فمن بعد مبعث رسول اللّه صلى الله عليه وسلم لم يوح إليه ولا إلى غيره من الناس، وأما قبل مبعث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقد اختلف في نبوته، ومن قال‏:‏ إنه نبي، لم يقل‏:‏ إنه سلب النبوة، بل يقول‏:‏ هو كإلياس نبي، لكنه لم يوح إليه في هذه الأوقات، وترك الوحي إليه في مدة معينة ليس نفيًا لحقيقة النبوة، كما لو فتر الوحي عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في أثناء مدة رسالته‏.‏

    وأكثر العلماء على أنه لم يكن نبيًا، مع أن نبوة من قبلنا يقرب كثير منها من الكرامة والكمال في الأمة، وإن كان كل واحد من النبيين أفضل من كل /واحد من الصديقين كما رتبه القرآن، وكما روى عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال‏:‏ ‏(‏ما طلعت الشمس ولا غربت على أحد بعد النبيين والمرسلين أفضل من أبي بكر الصديق‏)‏، وروى عنه صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال‏:‏ ‏(‏إن كان الرجل ليسمع الصوت فيكون نبيًا‏)‏‏.‏

    وفي هذه الأمة من يسمعه ويرى الضوء وليس بنبي؛ لأن ما يراه ويسمعه يجب أن يعرضه على ما جاء به محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم، فإن وافقه فهو حق، وإن خالفه تيقن أن الذي جاء من عند اللّه يقين لا يخالطه ريب، ولا يحوجه أن يشهد عليه بموافقة غيره‏.‏

    وأما حياته‏:‏ فهو حي‏.‏ والحديث المذكور لا أصل له، ولا يعرف له إسناد، بل المروي في مسند الشافعي وغيره‏:‏ أنه اجتمع بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، ومن قال‏:‏ إنه لم يجتمع بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقد قال ما لا علم له به، فإنه من العلم الذي لا يحاط به‏.‏

    ومن احتج على وفاته بقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم‏:‏ ‏(‏أرأيتكم ليلتكم هذه، فإنه على رأس مائة سنة لا يبقى على وجه الأرض ممن هو عليها اليوم أحد‏)‏ فلا حجة فيه، فإنه يمكن أن يكون الخضر إذ ذاك على وجه الأرض‏.‏

    ولأن الدجال ـ وكذلك الجساسة ـ الصحيح أنه كان حيا موجودا /على عهد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وهو باق إلى اليوم لم يخرج، وكان في جزيرة من جزائر البحر‏.‏

    فما كان من الجواب عنه كان هو الجواب عن الخضر، وهو أن يكون لفظ الأرض لم يدخل في هذا الخبر، أو يكون أراد صلى الله عليه وسلم الآدميين المعروفين، وأما من خرج عن العادة فلم يدخل في العموم، كما لم تدخل الجن، وإن كان لفظًا ينتظم الجن والإنس‏.‏ وتخصيص مثل هذا من مثل هذا العموم كثير معتاد‏.‏ واللّه أعلم‏.

  24. ninja says:

    some topics are best left alone.Especially by muslims whom cannot even agree on a date for eid or ramadan in the same town ,city, or country.How can such people reach a point of agreement on a status of My lords Khizer and Ilyas

  25. Abul Layth says:

    Such topics are awesome and should be known by Muslims. I have no doubt that Khidr is alive and well, and insha’allah I’ll get to meet the guy (alayhis salaam) some day.

  26. mustafa says:

    as salaamu alaykum but how do we know that he STILL is alive today?

  27. Abul Layth says:

    Noble men have attested to meeting him. Shaykh M.H Adam recently informed us that his grandfather personally encountered him.

  28. ninja says:

    what diffrence does it make if he is alive or not to you or i because we can never meet him nor can it serve purpose if we do meet him.What will you ask for the lottery numbers or who is right the suuni, the al hadith or the shites.

  29. mustafa says:

    I would ask him alayhi salam if we affirm Yad and wajh and istiwa upon the dhahir and ask him if Allah is over the throne distinct from creation etc..

  30. Abul Layth says:

    It may not matter you, and obviously it doesn’t. If it doesn’t, then the articles related to Khidr being alive are not pertinent. If it does matter, then they have worth.

    So what would I ask him? I would ask him, if I ever meet him as others have: “What is your favorite food? Where do you stay so I can come visit you more often – or are you a hermit? Who do you believe was the greatest scholar of the Muhammedan Ummah? Besides ‘arabi, what other language(s) are you fond of? Did you ever marry or do you think women are a waste of energy? How tall was Musaa? What is your favorite literary works? of Everything you learned in your entire existence, which dunya-related knowledge do you find most useful?

    And maybe more…

  31. Abul Layth says:

    And to Mustafa’s question, it seems that Khidr hung out with some cool “asha’ris”:

    The hadith master al-Sakhawi stated:

    “It is well-known that al-Nawawi used to meet with al-Khidr and converse with him among many other unveilings (mukashafat).”

    [Al-Sakhawi, Tarjima Shaykh al-Islam Qutb al-Awliya’ al-Kiram wa Faqih al-Anam Muhyi al-Sunna wa Mumit al-Bid’a Abi Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din al-Nawawi (”Biography of the Shaykh of Islam, the Pole of the Noble Saints and Jurist of Mankind, the Reviver of the Sunna and Slayer of Innovation Abu Zakariyya Muhyiddin al-Nawawi”) (Cairo: Jam’iyya al-Nashr wa al-Ta’lif al-Azhariyya, 1354/1935 p. 33).]

  32. mustafa says:

    imam nawawi akhi? rahimahullah

    Was he that deep into tasawwuf? Man this further confuses me!ALLAH WHERE IS THE HAQ

  33. loveProphet says:

    “And the majority of the ‘ulema believe that he was not a Prophet…”

    Is that true? I thought it was the opposite.

  34. Abul Layth says:

    lol, Firstly Khidr met Abul-Hasan Ash-Shadhili as reported by Ibn As Sabbagh in his work on the issue. I don’t know what is so confusing about the issue. Apparently Khadir meets alot of the Aqtaab of old.

    As for Imam An-Nawawi being sufi, then one only need to read his bustan al-aarifeen or the maqaasid to see that he was indeed a Sufi. I recall Shaykh Nuh being asked if Imam An Nawawi followed a Tariqah and he told us that such is not known from him, however, when he was younger he was constantly seen with a “man” – an implication to khidr – as Mentioned by Hafith Sakhawi.

  35. ninja says:

    my research on sayidna Khizer so far: He was a prophet. But on the arrival of Hazrzt Muhammed Mushstapha {pbuh} he and Hazrat Ilyas were demoted by choice. So that they could be part of the ummah of the holy prophet. Both were and are in the elite catogary of saints in the hierachey known as the Rijal ul gaib.{the people of the unseen} Hazrat Khizer is nt an angel because he has a KUNEEYAT parentage. Hazrat Khizers name is ABUL ABBAS BALYA BIN MALAKAN.

  36. ninja says:

    HE IS NOT IMMORTAL HE HAS LONGEVITY OF LIFE LIKE HAZRAT ILYAS.ALLAH{SWT]HAS SELECTED HIM AS HIS SLAVE AND AGENT ON EARTH TO DO HIS BIDDING.PART OF WHICH GUIDEING PEOPLE WHOM SEEK ALLAH ON THE RIGHTPART SOME OF WHOM YOU HAVE ALL MENTIONED,HE RESIDES ON THE SEA OF WHICH HE HAS AUTHORITY OVER BY THE LEAVE OF ALLAH{SWT}HE HAS BEEN THE TEACHER TO THE PROPHETS EXCLUDING THE HOLY PROPHET AND THE SAINTS.

  37. Abul Layth says:

    Someone have a caps problem? Immortality has nothing to do with the issue, as immortality refers to one who will never taste death! No one is saying that at all! We believe he is mortal and has been given an extended life. Simple!

  38. IbnSaad says:

    wohooo this post reached 1000 views

  39. ninja says:

    has anyone got anything constuctive to say!

  40. loveProphet says:

    This has been posted on another forum:

    “The Fatwa is probably not sound as coming from Shaykh al-Islam. The editor, Shaykh Abd al-Rahman b.Qasim rahimahullah, expressed its doubtful nature by mentioning in the footnote something on its origin what he did not do for many other Fatawa.

    There exist a possibility that it is sound, but there are two explicit Fatwa’s of the Shaykh al-Islam – in the same collection – that oppose it. Therein he explicitly denies it. In fact, in the Minhaj al-Sunnah which is written between 708 and 712 I believe, he argues against it in clear terms. So maybe he expressed an earlier opinion, which he left for what is stated in the Minhaj and elsewhere.

    And even if he did opinion it, there is nothing wrong with that. You dont become a disbeliever in thinking Khidr being alive. It was an opinion, strongly criticized by the Shaykh al-Islam, that was shared by some great scholars.”

    and

    “Sheikh Sulayman al-Ashqar has mentioned in his book on the beliefs on the messengers and angels from Majmoo al fatawah of Ibn Taymiah 4/337 that Ibraheem al harbi asked Imam Ahmad about the idea of Khidr and Ilyas still being alive and whether they could still be seen and whether stories could be narrated from them. He replied: “I think all of these stories are comming from Shaytan”.

    Also from the same fatwah 4/337 sheikh ul-Islam mentions that Bukhari was asked about Khidr and Ilyaas if they were still alive and he replied: “How could they be still alive when the prophet said: in 100 years time there will be no one left on this earth alive from those alive now”.

    He also mentions that a lot of scholars wrote about the falseness of the claims that Khidr is still alive and he mentions amongst them:

    Ibn Kethir in Bidayah wan-Nihayah 1/326

    Sheikh Shanqeeti ne Adwa’ al-bayan 4/184

    Ibn Haxhar Askalani wrote “Az-Zahr an-nadr fi naba’ al Khidr” that is published in Majmoo’ah ar-rasail al-muneeriyah 2/195

    Based upon all these I do not think that what this dajjal quotes from sheikh ul-Islam is true. It might be as usual a quote from him quoting someone else as it has become a vogue of these shayateen to attribute the ideas of others to sheikh ul-Islam.”

  41. Ibn Saad says:

    lol bro,

    this is from IA forums, look at the comment that answers that.

  42. loveProphet says:

    Don’t know, some wahabi posted it on Sunniforum.
    Yeah i just read that comment you’re talking about.
    Yeah Ibn Taymiyya a lot of the times has contradictory fatwas.

  43. “الخضر مات قبل بعثة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم”

    في قريتي رجل يدعي أنه قابل الخضر عليه السلام في المدينة المنورة وأعطاه تمراً، كما يدعي أنه يعالج المرضى، ولهذا فالناس يتوافدون عليه ليل نهار ليعالجهم عن طريق المسح على مكان الألم مقابل بعض النقود، هل هذا صحيح؟ أم أنه نوع من الشعوذة واستغلال السذج والبسطاء؟

    أما الخضر فالصحيح أنه مات من دهر طويل قبل مبعث النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام، وليس لوجوده حقيقة بل هذا كله باطل وليس له وجود، وهذا هو الصحيح الذي عليه المحققون من أهل العلم، فالخضر عليه السلام مات قبل مبعث النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام بل قبل مبعث عيسى عليه السلام، والصحيح أن الخضر نبي كما دل عليه ظاهر القرآن الكريم، وقد قال عليه الصلاة والسلام في الحديث الصحيح: ((أنا أولى الناس بابن مريم والأنبياء أولاد عَلات وليس بيني وبينه نبي))[1]، فدل على أن الخضر قد مات قبل ذلك ولو فرضنا أنه ليس نبياً وأنه رجل صالح لكان اتصل بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم. ثم لو فرضنا أنه لم يتصل لكان مات على رأس مائة سنة كما قال عليه الصلاة والسلام في آخر حياته: ((أرأيتكم ليلتكم هذه فإن على رأس مائة سنة منها لا يبقى ممن هو على ظهر الأرض أحد))[2]، فدل ذلك على أن من كان موجوداً في ذلك الوقت لا يبقى بعد مائة سنة، بنص النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام أنهم يموتون قبل انخرام المائة، فالحاصل أن الخضر قد مات وليس بموجود، والذي يزعم أنه رآه إما أنه كاذب، وإما أن الذي قال إنه الخضر قد كذب عليه، وليس بالخضر وإنما هو شيطان من شياطين الإنس أو الجن.
    أما هذا الذي يعالج الناس بأن يمسح على محل المرض فهذا ينظر في أمره، فإن كان من الناس الطيبين المعروفين بالاستقامة والإيمان وأنه يقرأ عليهم القرآن، ويدعو الله لهم فلا بأس وإن أخذ شيئاً من الأجرة، أما إن كان لا يعرف بالخير بل يتهم بالسوء فإنه يمنع ولا يؤتى، ويمنع بواسطة المسئولين في البلد؛ لأن مثل هذا في الغالب يكون خرافياً أو مشعوذاً، أو يستخدم الجن أو كذاباً يأكل أموال الناس بالباطل. نسأل الله السلامة والعافية.
    ________________________________________
    [1] رواه البخاري في كتاب الأنبياء برقم 3186، ومسلم في الفضائل برقم 4360.
    [2] رواه مسلم في فضائل الصحابة برقم 4605، والترمذي في الفتن برقم 2177.

  44. Ibn Ahmad says:

    في قريتي رجل يدعي أنه قابل الخضر عليه السلام في المدينة المنورة وأعطاه تمراً، كما يدعي أنه يعالج المرضى، ولهذا فالناس يتوافدون عليه ليل نهار ليعالجهم عن طريق المسح على مكان الألم مقابل بعض النقود، هل هذا صحيح؟ أم أنه نوع من الشعوذة واستغلال السذج والبسطاء؟

    What that man does is between him, the people he treats, and Allah. The Muslim leaves that which does not concern him.

    This anectodes pertains very little to the above article.

  45. Ibrahim Abdul-Haqq says:

    I believe that Khidr (alayhis salaam) is alive, but there is a difference between someone actually meeting him and someone CLAIMING to have met him (or someone claiming that someone else has met him). I find that some of the Sufis are extremely gullible in accepting every claim from everyone about everything.

  46. Abul Layth says:

    I think that is a fair concern Ibrahim. The fact is, if someone reliable and a non-liar informs us of his encounter, there is no reason to disbelieve him unless it contradicts the shari’ah.

    Abdullah, your article has no relevance and your arguments have already been answered, you’re just to slow to GET IT, like always.

  47. Ibn Umer says:

    Salam,

    I find that some of the Sufis are extremely gullible in accepting every claim from everyone about everything.

    What is, and what SHOULD BE, accepted is what conforms to the conditions laid down by Imam Tahawi in his creedal manual:
    We believe in what we know of Karamat, the marvels of the awliya’ and in authentic stories about them from trustworthy sources.

    What has reached us regarding Al-Khadir [a] meeting the awliya, there are some stories that are forgeries, but others that have been transmitted by the elite of the Ummah; those who fit the description of ‘trustworthy sources’ that Imam Tahawi mentions.

    ws

  48. Usooli says:

    to the wahabi abdullah ibn mubarak,
    what is your point in showing off yourself with arabic in an english speaking blog? Boastfulness, tafakhour, reyaa, mofreh, ta3hadhom an nafs isnt it? Your boastfulness is one of the many ugly traits that the adherents to the way of the la madhhabi Najdi Saloolite wahabis, the back stabbers of the Ottoman Caliphate, the destroyers of the Islamic unity, the causers of fitaan east and west, the uglifiers of the names of da3wah, deen and jihad, profess. What we see of all the mess today from Palestine to Afghanistan, has its origins in your cult’s appearance in the accursed Najd, who caused the unity of Muslims take a downfall, opening the lands of haramayan, and jerusalem wide open for the crusaders/colonists and zionists to dominate and oppress us till this day. You mujassim khawarij and neo-khariji la madhhabis , we dont want to take our religion from you Najdis, you are a people beefed in ignorance, arrogance and partisianship,who lack the science of ihsan/tazkiyatun nufus leading to take up the matters of deen out of the intentions of shuh/party-self-ego/other than getting closer to Allah, who ignore the ijmaa on many counts, and cant take opinions that do have validity amongst the traditional islamic scholarship and sources, just because it doesnt agree with the opinion of your neo-salafi party, and who are severe, harsh, rude, rough and prideful on fellow muslims, and at the same soft and kind with Christians and Jews.

    my advice to you is before you even decide to post, it is better for you to go over the surah of luqman and ponder over its verses, and go over surah al kahf, and see the lessons therein, it is more better than coming to blogs and showing yourself off.

  49. loveProphet says:

    To this brother “Usooli”,

    I understand your frustration but please calm down on your tone.
    Such a harsh tone towards Muslims is not the way of the Messenger of Allah(Sallalahu Alaihi Wa Sallam).
    I however also don’t agree with you in your arguing that the wahabis are the destroyers of unity amongst the Muslims, the Muslims were already disunited before they appeared anyways. Although it can be argued and strongly too that the wahabis have further disunited the Ummah.
    And its not also right to lay the blame upon them for this Ummah’s weakness in today’s time.
    Do you think it was the wahabis who made the Mughal empire fall to the colonialist British?
    Do you think it was the wahabis who made the Muslim empires in Central asia to fall to the Tsars?
    And it was also the other Arabs(who weren’t wahabi) who joined the kuffar against the Ottomons. The Jordanians and the Egyptians are a good example.
    And my point can continue.
    We have to use reasoning, not emotion.
    Also, it is not valid to assume the intentions of the person who has posted in Arabic, we cannot see the hearts of people and thus we should have husn adh-dhann(a good opinion of others).

    Wa Salaam

  50. Mustafa says:

    as salaamu alaykum,

    The reason why the ummah is in such distress is our lack of acting upon the Quran and Sunnah. This is for every single one of us. That is why we must purify ourselves. Only those succeed who purify themselves.

    The Salafis are indeed a group that you will find are indeed very harsh with muslimin and nice to the kuffar. The hizbiyah of the group has caused the opinions of the reliable ulama to be thrown to the side because a handful of salafis do not agree to it. THough its just not the salafis themselves i believe. IT has to do with you and I who do not invoke ALlaah in dua, who do not recite Quran much, who do not make dhikr much, and who dont strive to purify ourselves of our negetive traits. Then truely once we purify ourselves the ummah as a whole we will succeed.

    I think

  51. Abul Layth says:

    The Wahhabis revolted in the 1700′s. They latered allied with the british after being wooped on by Muhammad Pasha (rahimahullah). When they came back in the 1900′s they betrayed this Ummah, solidified kufr and taghaa in the jazeera, and implemented their trash spiritual stagnation. There is no doubt that they are not the only cause for our downfall, however, they are sure part of it.

  52. Ibn Ahmad says:

    In defense of brother Abdullah, he is an Arab and is still learning English. Masha’Allah he has made attempts to type in English and though I disagree with him on..well..everything, I’m still proud of his effort. He types in Arabic because he knows the average SI surfer will understand him.

  53. Abul Layth says:

    He can type english well. He types in arabic because he hopes I or you will waste time translating his non-sense to get his “message” out. I have quickly learned that such endeavors are futile.

  54. Ahmed Mohamed says:

    Regarding the main point of this mini forum. Al Khidr was a wise man but one can not surely claim he is alive without any prove and evidence. Al Khidr is a man of great Integrity and a man Allah has given knowledge to. But to invoke or a praise him in any way is an act of Shirk. May Allah bless you all my muslim brothers or Sisters

  55. Abul Layth says:

    To say that he is alive right now can not be absolute. However, the possibility of him being alive is certain, as we have shown in the above article.

    Regarding praising him being shirk, then such a statement is baseless. Firstly, praise simply means to “express approval or admiration”. Within your very post you did just that. Apparently you committed shirk by your own standards. May Allah guide us all to his siraat and continue to send his blessings upon Al-Khadir ‘alayhis salam Amin!

    As to invoking him being shirk, then it is according to the intent of the one invoking and what they are invoking him with.

    Jazaakum Allahu khairan

  56. ninja says:

    The question at hand was if Al Khizer is alive.?

  57. Abul Layth says:

    There was no question. It was a statement!

  58. tilmeedh says:

    Here’s another fatwa from Shaykh Ibn Taymiyay’s Majmu’ which clearly indicates belief in Al-Khadir’s being alive:

    وأما أبو بكر والخضر، فهذا يبني على نبوة الخضر‏.
    ‏‏ وأكثر العلماء على أنه ليس بنبي، وهو اختيار أبي علي بن أبي موسى وغيره من العلماء‏.‏ فعلى هذا أبو بكر وعمر أفضل منه‏.‏
    والقول الثاني‏:‏ أنه نبي، واختاره أبو الفرج ابن الجوزي وغيره‏.‏ فعلى هذا هو أفضل من أبي بكر، لكن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وعيسى ابن مريم هما أفضل منه بالاتفاق، ومحمد في أول هذه الأمة وعيسى في آخرها‏.‏

  59. Ibn Saad says:

    Salam br. Tilmeedh,

    Can u give the reference?

  60. Usooli says:

    Just to add, the sufi tariqahs attributed to the Muhammadiyyan(saws) ways have their chains from Khidr. From amongst those teachers who took from khidr directly, they had such karamaat as rising the dead, something no magician or a person in contact with demons can immitate. Even the Dajjal wont be able to perform this and will use illusions, as only a Prophet or someone who follows him can issue by the power of Allah such a thing.
    Abdul Aziz ad dabbagh, the maghribi, took his path from khidr, and from him at tazi took, and who was followed by Ahmad ibn Idris of Fez.
    Ibn Idris also had personal visitations from khidr, and it is famous from him that he ressurected once a dead woman.From ibn idris and his approval, the path was taken by Muhammad ibn Ali as Sanusi, the founder of the saunsi order, who had an effective role in guarding North, central and western africa from european colonist expanions, and whose successors and mureeds fought off the French, British, and the Italians. The famous Omar al Mukhtar was one of them.

  61. Usooli says:

    May Allah bless and protect the west of this Islamic nation, who have kept remaining on traditional islam from the beginning, who perserved the true spirit of the deen and risalah, who did not indulge in afflictions at the scale seen in the east, who continuously throughout generations brought forth so many awliya and friends of God, from whose fruits the east and west of this nation are benefitting.
    May Allah protect the maghrib from the plague of wahhabism, and eradicate it wholely ,protect the entire ummah from this menance, the menance that brought retreat of Allah’s blessings, disunity/anomosity amongst muslims, and have made the tasks of kuffars easier upon us, and may Allah protect the whole ummah from the modern evils of secularism and capitalism.

    The Prophet(saws) is reported to have said, that his followers in the west will remain on the truth till the day of ressurection, (sahih muslim),

    They say the East is the land of the Ambiyaa, and the West is the land of Awliyya. Whoever said this has spoken the truth.

  62. Nasir says:

    Masha Allah brothers,
    I learnt a lot about AL-Khidr today. Jazaak Allah.

  63. yasir says:

    well salafis came to purify islam as you people destroyed islam by preaching prophets and saints we says Allah is the one to be preached is any thing wrong in it i ask you what is the difference between you or jews and christian they also pray there prophets….

  64. yasir says:

    The description “Salafi” applies to one who truly attaches himself to the Salaf. This attachment is not to an arbitrary single person or group of people. It is an attachment to that which will never err – to the guidance of Muhammad (S), his Sahabai, and their true followers. Likewise, Salafiyyah (the Salafi Da’wah) is not blind following of any particular Shaikh or Imam. It is adherence to the Qur’an and Sunnah as understood and practiced collectively by as-Salaf as-Salih. A true Salafi values Tawhid, singling out Allah in all acts of worship: in supplication, in seeking aid, in seeking refuge in times of ease and hardship, in sacrifice, in making vows, in fearing and hoping and total reliance, and so on

  65. Usooli says:

    so the modern day ‘salafi da3wah’ is following the prophet (saws) and the salaf..according to whose understanding…let me guess…muhammad ibn abdelwahhab and his ilk, right? whatever they say is quran and sunnah, and whatever they oppose is not in the quran and sunnah.. right?
    Let me tell you one thing straight.. the modern day salafiyyah has nothing to do with the Prophet 3alihesalat wasalam and the real salaf… and the proof of this is the very wrong understanding of the concept of worship that pseudo salafis have….

    In order to show how far this modern day group is from the Prophet(saws) let us discuss the definition of worship.. my question to all of you salafis out there… define in your own words and from the words of your masters what 3ebada or worship is..and what constitutes it?

    inshallah you answer this and we will go step by step…

  66. SufyanThawri says:

    Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah

    Alhamdu lillah, wa salatu wa salaam ala sayyidi rasulillah…

    According to the Salafi scholars:
    “Ibada is all actions that Allah loves and is pleased with, of sayings and actions (of the heart and limbs), whether outward or inward”

    this is the definition of worship (ibada) according to the salafi scholars, may Allah ta’ala preserve them.
    Salaam.

  67. SufyanThawri says:

    translation of previous post:

    “al-Ibada hiya: kull ma yuhibuhu Allah wa yardaahu, min al-Aqwaal wal-Af’aal, al-Dhahirati wal Khafiyyah”.

  68. Usooli says:

    ok very good so we agree with the principle that

    worship constitutes of two things: Love of Allah from the heart or inwards and actions which Allah wants from the outside,

    worship = love of Allah from the heart + actions from the limbs

    agreed?

    in other words…do you agree that in the above equation of worship if one one of the elements is absent, then this worship has not been performed?
    like let us say if love is there and action is absent, then there is no worship, and similiarly if action is there but there is no love in the heart then there is again no trace of worship?

    …Do we agre with this?

    -now about the portion {love of Allah}, ok you salafiyya what is definition of love in the heart context,&
    what are two wings of love of Allah that makes it up in the heart…?

    Answer both questions and you will see how erroneous was ibn abdelwahhab…and how the whole nature and logice of your pseudo salafi cult is based on falsehood..where there would be no doubt afterwards that modern salafiyyah with all its variants ( saudi, ikhwani, suroori, jihadi, madkhali, albani etc. ) are khawarij of this age…

  69. yasir says:

    as you agreed brother that worship is love from inside and actions from outside if any thing is absent from that the equation is incomplete hence all the muslims believe al-ehsan(which means to do any thing in a best possible way).

    actually your questions makes no sense.

    why dont you bring out some of the allegations against salafis and also tell me which group you belongs to……

  70. Irfan says:

    isnt this hadith a proof for khidr being alive?

    Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) one day gave a detailed account of the Dajjal and in that it was also included: He would come but would not be allowed to ether the mountain passes to Medina. So he will alight at some of the barren tracts near Medina, and a person who would be the best of men or one from amongst the best of men would say to him: I bear testimony to the fact that you are Dajjal about whom Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) had informed us. The Dajjal would say: What is your opinion if I kill this (person), then I bring him back to life; even then will you harbour doubt in this matter? They would say: No. He would then kill (the man) and then bring him back to life. When he would bring tha@ person to life, he would say: By Allah, I had no better proof of the fact (that you are a Dajjal) than at the present time (that you are actually so). The Dajjal would then make an attempt to kill him (again) but he would not be able to do that. Abu Ishaq reported that it was said: That person would be Khadir (Allah be pleased with him).

    Sahih Muslim

    The Book Pertaining to the Turmoil and Portents of the Last Hour (Kitab Al-Fitan wa Ashrat As-Sa`ah)
    Chapter 19: THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE DAJJAL AND A BAN ON HIS ENTRY TO MEDINA AND HIS KILLING OF A BELIEVER AND THEN RESTORING HIM TO LIFE

  71. yasir says:

    A true Salafi actively seeks to remove shirk (polytheism) with all his capacity. He knows that victory is not possible without true Tawhid, and that shirk cannot be fought with the likes of it (i.e., with another form of shirk). A true Salafi adheres to the Sunnah of the Prophet (S) and of his companions after him.

  72. yasir says:

    A true .Salafi worships Allah out of a combination of Fear, Hope and Love. Allah says (what means): Call upon Him, with Fear and Hope. [Al-Araf 7:56]. And He says (what means): There are people who take [for worship] alleged rivals to Allah, loving them as only Allah should be loved. But the Believers love Allah more than all else. [Al-Baqarah 2:165].

    A true Salafi is not of the Khawarij who consider most Muslims to be kafirs (disbelievers) because of committing sins. He is not of the Shiah who revile the Sahabah, who claim that the Qur’an has been altered, who reject the authentic Sunnah, and who worship the Prophet’s Family. He is not of the Qadariyyah who deny qadar (the Divine Decree). He is not of the murjiah who claim that iman is only words without deeds. He is not of the Mu’attilah who deny Allah’s Attributes. He is not of the Sufis who worship graves and claim Divine incarnation. He is not of the Muqallidun who insist that every Muslim should adhere to the Madth’hab (understanding) of a particular imam or shaikh, even when that madth’hab conflicts with the clear texts of the Qur’an or authentic Sunnah.

    Thus the true Salafs are Ahl us-Sunnati wal-Jamaah. They are at-Ta’ifat ul-Mansurah (the Aided, Victorious Group)

  73. Usooli says:

    Good this is what i wanted to hear…

    worship = love from inwards + actions from outwards

    and love from inward is futher formed from the combination of hope and fear, or khushoo in other words…

    love from inwards = hope + fear
    and which builds tawakal

    so,

    worship = hope + fear + actions…

    We both agree upon this..

    My question now to you wahhabis, followers of ibn abdelwahhab, and the scholars of najd, why do you declare others mushriks and make takfeer of people whose inwards’ state you are not aware of…

    FOR EXAMPLE:

    A person going to the grave of some Prophet or saint, and asking him something, but if in his inwards his hope, fear and tawakal is on Allah to fulfill, then how he is a mushrik according to the definition of worship upon which we have agreed?

    A person stuck in a desert and asks the angels help, but his inward hope, fear, tawakaal is all upon Allah and sees Him as the sole Nafi3 and Dhar’, how is he a mushrik or worshipping someone esle beside Allah, as we agreed that the definition of worship is a combination of (Fear+hope)+ actions, such that one element absent of this will render worship nill and absent?

    If a person standing, prostrating or bowing to someone, but their inward they are not doing it out of khushoo’ ( hope / fear) then how is he a mushrik?

    Remember

    worship = hope & fear + actions… and together they are meant to Allah only.

  74. Usooli says:

    >>>He is not of the Sufis who worship graves and claim Divine incarnation. He is not of the Muqallidun who insist that every Muslim should adhere to the Madth’hab (understanding) of a particular imam or shaikh, even when that madth’hab conflicts with the clear texts of the Qur’an or authentic Sunnah.

    Thus the true Salafs are Ahl us-Sunnati wal-Jamaah. They are at-Ta’ifat ul-Mansurah (the Aided, Victorious Group)
    <<<<

    spare yourself from being a laughing stock. The 4 imams knew far better the Quran and Sunnah than either you or any of your wahhabi pseudo shaykhs. The Prophet(saws) required the Muslim to attach to the siwad al a3dhaam of his followers, who are all either followers of a Madhahb, confirm tasawuff/organized science of tazkiyaten nafs through transmission, and who are either Ashari, Maturidi, or Mufawwid. You claim ahlat tasawuff as grave worshippers whereas you have forgotten, that they are the ones who have conveyed the deen to you, as most of this ummah’s scholars including the likes of the mufassir Ibn Katheer and Imam as-Suyuti were of them, and what you declare falsely as grave worship, were respects and communication to the deceased, approved by the Prophet(saws), his companions after him, and the tabieen…

    You claim yourself a follower of the Quran and Sunnah, and the Salaf, what do you say of the hadith of blind man and Uthman ibn hanif, authentically reported, which according to the understanding of ibn abdel wahab’s followers it s shirk? and the many otehr authentically reported narrations which is against your beliefs?

    Taaifatul Mansura lol, rather you are the khawarij al 3asr, from the accursed land of Najd, from the people of boastfulness, riyaa and 3ajab, whose manners and actions are like qaroon… and who burn themselves with their extremism, AND about whom the Prophet(saws) warned.. you are mujasima and your salaf are the likes of Muqatil ibn Sulaiman and Dhul Khuwaisira..

    MY CHALLENGE TO ALL YOU WAHHABIS OUT THERE:

    if you truely claim that you are upon haqq, give me one chain of teachers for any of your scholars that go back to the Prophet(saws)? Remember for the true Ahlas sunnah, the people of tasawuff, the siwad al a3dham of this ummah, there are many many chains which they can bring and which would have no doubts, can you do the same for your own scholars oh wahhabiyya? So who is the mutasil and who is the maqto3?

  75. yasir says:

    worship = love from inwards + actions from outwards

    and love from inward is futher formed from the combination of hope and fear, or khushoo in other words…

    yes there is no doubt but all the intensions is only for Allah not for any one else the primary goal is tauheed all the other things are secondary…

    I dont know who told you that we follow ibn wahab we only follow Quran and sunnah any thing matches with it we say ahlun wa sahlan any thing which is against it we throw it on the wall…

    asking from any one either it is prophet or saint or an angel is shirk here is what Quran says :

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 16 Surah Nahl verse 20-21:All the other beings, whom the people invoke with Allah, create nothing! Nay, they are themselves created. They are DEAD, not living, and they do not at all know themselves when they shall again be raised to life!

    yes worship means hope+fear=actions

    but remember hope that Allah is there to hear him fear is only from Allah alone and actions which shows intension. So every thing is for Allah alone……

  76. yasir says:

    well all the grave worshippers have this one old daif hadith of a blind man but when we check the narrater of this hadith it is abu jafar raazi. Ibn Hajar after summarizing writes that Abu Jafar Raazi is a truthful person but has a bad/weak memory. [Ref: Taqreeb ut Tahzeeb].so it is unacceptable according to many scholars.

    well lets debate rather than accuse each other as you see i never bring any allegations against you accept with clear proves you said tawassul is allowed i challenge you bring out the verses from the Quran and authentic hadith and then wait for my reply INSHAALLAH by the grace of Allah i will show you haq.

    Abu Hurairah narrated that The Prophet (saws) said: ‘May Allah curse Jews and Christians for they turned the graves of their Prophets into places of worship’.” (Muslim Bukhari and Muslim)

    “When My servants ask you concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them). I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calls on Me’ let them also, with a will, listen to My call, and believe in Me, that they may walk in the right way ” [Al-Baqarah:186]

  77. zaahid says:

    How can I contact you, Usooli

  78. Usooli says:

    >>>I dont know who told you that we follow ibn wahab we only follow Quran and sunnah any thing matches with it we say ahlun wa sahlan any thing which is against it we throw it on the wall…<<>asking from any one either it is prophet or saint or an angel is shirk here is what Quran says :

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 16 Surah Nahl verse 20-21:All the other beings, whom the people invoke with Allah , create nothing! Nay, they are themselves created. They are DEAD, not living, and they do not at all know themselves when they shall again be raised to life!

    <<<

    there is where you make the mistake, what you are implying now from your arguement is that mere action, (without taking the heartly/inward state into consideration), can render one mushrik, or out of islam… how can you distinguish and determine if this action might have been from a heartly state were tawakal/khushoo might have been directed to Allah..? Aren’t we supposed to have a good dhan for a brother or sister and give them 70 excuses?

    What Allah says in His book are regarding those people who when asked someone, they put the tawakal and khushoo’ on that person instead of Allah, and saw in them independent power upon which they can rely beside Allah…and the proof of the heartly state as being the determining factor is the permissibility to call out “Allah’s servants” when trapped in some land, as hadeeth of the prophet (sallahu 3layeh wasalam) states, where the action of calling is allowed when one doesnt put his tawakul on that person but Allah, and by mere action one is not a kaffir, if he affirms by his tongue the oneness of Allah, and you are not aware of the state/intention of his heart….

  79. Usooli says:

    the above situation is a good example of taqleed of ibn abdel wahhab, whose understanding of uboodiyya differs from those who were more qualified and authentic than him..

  80. yasir says:

    well according to me you belongs to a sufi sect who worship graves and asks from dead but this completely contradicts from the teachings of Quran and sunnah.I never said that the grave worshipper is a non muslim or out of islam and no one can judge accept Allah He is the one who can judge and his justice will be the last but the point is only accepting Allah is one is not enough you have to believe it as well and after believing it you have to ask Allah alone this will complete your faith no one can do any thing accept Allah alone not even the Prophets i said before and iam saying it again tauheed is the primary objective of islam all the other things comes after it and also i want to add Allah will never forgive shirk to beware…..

  81. yasir says:

    usooli my simple usool is i accepts the teaching of those scholars whose teaching matches with Quran and sunnah blind following like you is a waste as Allah says in the Quran produce your prove so i ask you produce your prove that worshipping graves and asking from dead is allowed then wait i will show you dozens of ayats and hadiths which will prove my point are you going to accept my challenge or just want to talk out of usool….

  82. Ebrahim says:

    yasir said-

    “I never said that the grave worshipper is a non muslim or out of islam and no one can judge accept Allah “.

    LOL, that was hillarious! Something like saying; “I did’nt say the blind man could not see!”, LOL! What a joke. Seriously yasir i have been following you and usooli for a few days as i found the conversation interesting but after seeing this post I won’t waste time with this discussion with you as truly you got no idea what you’re speaking.

    You also wrote-
    “i will show you dozens of ayats and hadiths which will prove my point are you going to accept my challenge or just want to talk out of usool….”

    It seems you dont want to talk of usool, why? Your methodology of wahabism has no usool??? I thought usool was important in deen,or in wahabism there are no usools?

  83. Usooli says:

    mere action to some one springs out from three heartly states:

    A) when the khushoo’/tawakal/reliance or seeking closeness/acheiving acceptance is concentrated on Allah

    B) when the khushoo’/tawakal/reliance or seeking closeness/acheiving acceptance is concentrated on the other person..

    C) or these is no khushoo/tawakal involved where the person doesnt seeks closeness to the one to whom the action is directed in return for something like appreciation or acheiving acceptance from the one to whom the action is done..

    Shirk, as we have agreed upon its definition ( worship = (fear + hope) + actions), is only valid when the mere actions to someone falls into the category B) mentioned above, and this understanding is established from the sunnah of the Prophet sallahu 3layeh wasalam and the actions of the companions.

    From the Sunnah of Allah’s Apostle(saws) is that he once stood up for the funeral of a jew passing by, out of respect, as reported authentically by Abu Dawud in his sunan, and we all know standing out is done for Allah in regular prayers, but what makes the latter different from the former is that first one doesnt have khushoo involved to anyone, whereas the latter one has all the khushoo directed to the Creator..

    Secondly we have the hadith from tabarani, authentically reported that When one loses his means of transport in a (deserted) land, he should call: “O slaves of Allah! Help me recover (my transport)” for there are many of Allah’s attendants on this earth. They will help you recover it … now what makes this different from shirk is that the khushoo’ to the creation is absent even if by action one is calling them, and rather the tawakal is directed to Allah from heart.

    And last we have from bukhari who reports in his sahih, in the book of ghazawat, that in one of the journey’s some of the sahaba had to jump into fire which was kindled and as they were doing they called “We seek protection in Allah’s Prophet(saws)”, and the fire didn’t touch them.. now what makes their call different from the shirk ones, is that when they said this they expected that Allah would convey their situation to the Prophet(saws)either through revelation or through the angels who were present with those companions, and in turn once the Prophet(saws) knowing of their situation would make duaa for them… and so mere action without khushoo to anyone or when the khushoo being to Allah, doesnt make the mere practice of that action to be classified as shirk

    Remember again

    Worship = khushoo + actions

    and where the wahhabis erred is their bad opinion of those who recite the kalimah, by accusing them of worshipping beside Allah, by judging their actions to be coming from only the situation of B) criterion discussed above, without taking into consideration situations A) and C) as well. They have forgotten that a muslim is given 70 excuses and no muslim in his right mind would ever ascribe independent power to someone else besides Allah, or would focus their hope and fear which comes from this belief on that power, to some other person.

    if mere actions were shirk, then how can you wahhabis answer the 3 situations mentioned above from the example of the Prophet(sallahu 3layeh wasalam) and the companions?

    Without doubt your sects are the khawarij, and the founder ibn Abdel Wahhab was a big deviant who was ignorant of the deen, and his father and brother rightly warned of him and his fitna, and his teachers disowned him..

  84. yasir says:

    Shirk, as we have agreed upon its definition ( worship = (fear + hope) + actions.

    this is not the definition of shirk its a definition of worship.

    shirk is ascribing partners to Allah or ascribing divine attributes to others besides Allah and believing that the source of power harm and blessings come from another besides Allah.

    give me the references of the hadith you quoted.

    the word wahabi is a myth you can use muslim or salafi.

    lets see what Quran says about the topic of shirk and remember iam also giving reference numbers:

    Allah says in Quran :

    “Surely the Religion ( i.e worship and the obedience) is for Allah alone and those who choose protectors other then Allah (say):We only worship them in order that they may bring us nearer to Allah”. Surah Az Zumar(39:3).

    “What do they take for intercessors other besides Allah ? Say :even though they own nothing whatever and
    have no intelligence?” Surah Az Zumar(39:43).

    “Say: Unto Allah belongs all intercessions.His is the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth.And afterwards unto Him you will be bought back”.Surah Az Zumar(39:44).

    Further Allah addresses His beloved Apostle Muhammad(pbuh) in:

    “Say (O Muhammad!):It is not in my power to cause you harm or to bring you to the right path.
    (Surah-Al-Jinn 72:21).

    this indicates that the Prophet(pbuh) has no power of harming or benefitting anyone,for all that is in the Hands of Allah,The Elevated.

    i can Quote tons of ayaat just on the topic of shirk to prove my point.

    how wrong you are in calling me khawarij.

    salafiism is not a sect we are ahle sunnah wal jammah but the only difference is we came back to the real teachings of Quran and sunnah and kicked off all the bidaah and innovations prevailed in the society and ibn wahab was just a reformer nothing else and you have to read the biography of ibn al wahab yes his father and brother innitially oppose him but he convinced them with the help of Quran and Sunnah and i want to add one thing more my father also use to go and ask from graves and in my childhood i also visit graves with him but when i realised that how can this dead person help me I started to research Quran and came to know that i was doing shirk i convinced my father also and now he also dont visit graves MASHA’ALLAH …..

  85. yasir says:

    to ebrahim,
    brother you can check i never said that grave worshipper is out of Islam.

    second,
    you said iam talking out of usool well if quoting Quran is out of usool then i dont know which usool you are talking about i only know one usool and it is following Quan and sunnah isnt it enough….

  86. Ebrahim says:

    “to ebrahim,
    brother you can check i never said that grave worshipper is out of Islam.”

    I know you didn’t say that. But the reason i said it’s hilarious is because in islam worship is for Allah alone so if a person worships a grave then he is certainly out of islam and for you to refrain from saying that is wrong. Worshipping someone or something other than Allah is shirk and a person involved in is a mushrik and not a muslim. The arguements put forward by us is that istegaatha and tawassul are not shirk while you say it is. I don’t want to get into the discussion about shirk with you as bro usooli is discussing it.

    “second,
    you said iam talking out of usool well if quoting Quran is out of usool then i dont know which usool you are talking about i only know one usool and it is following Quan and sunnah isnt it enough”

    Quoting al quran is not out of usool but quoting al quran without knowledge can be dangerous. So there has to be a principle we have agreed upon to discuss issues of the deen. You must be aware of the hadith that the khawarij during the time of the sahaba used to bring verses of al quran to prove their point but those ayahs were not meants for muslims, so from this incident we know that just quoting al quran without proper knowledge is the practise of khawarij.

  87. Ebrahim says:

    Oh btw,you also said the word wahabi is a myth. Yes, many wahabis say that. But it actually means one who follows ibn abdul wahab’s interpretations in matters of creed and i am pretty sure you do and since you have no problems with ibn abdul wahab’s creed so there should be no problem in using the term wahabi either, infact you should be proud of it as much you are proud of ibn abdul wahab najdi himself. For eg, I call myself a hanafi as i am proud of imam abu hanifa and i follow his maddhab and i am not ashamed of it.

  88. yasir says:

    ebrahim said:

    I know you didn’t say that. But the reason i said it’s hilarious is because in islam worship is for Allah alone so if a person worships a grave then he is certainly out of islam and for you to refrain from saying that is wrong. Worshipping someone or something other than Allah is shirk and a person involved in is a mushrik and not a muslim. The arguements put forward by us is that istegaatha and tawassul are not shirk while you say it is.

    so you mean to say that tawassul is allowed can you prove your point with the help of Quran because my research on Quran says that tawassul is a form of shirk yes Allah allowed some special people special permission at a special period of time but saying this that every prophet,saint or pious man has this form of degree is nothing but a contradiction from the teachings of islam.

    here is my prove with the help of Quran.
    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 46 Surah Ahqaf verses 4-6: Prophet, say to them, “Have you ever seen them with open eyes those whom you invoke instead of Allah? Show me what they have created in the earth? Or have they any share in the creation and control of the heavens? Bring me a Book revealed before this, or produce some remnant of knowledge in support of your beliefs if you are truthful.” And who could be further astray than the one who invokes, instead of Allah, those who cannot answer him till the Day of Resurrection. Nay, they are even UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED. And when all mankind shall be gathered together (on the Day of Qiyamah), they (the so called leaders and intercessors) will become enemies of those who invoked them and they will DISOWN THEIR WORSHIP!!!

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 39 Surah Zumur verse 2-3: So worship Allah Alone, making your religion His exclusively. Beware! Religion is the exclusive Right of Allah. As for those who have taken other ‘auliyas’ with Allah (and justify their this conduct by saying): “We serve them only that they may bring us closer to Allah.” Allah will surely judge between them concerning all that in which they differ. Allah does not show guidance to any liar and denier of the Truth.

    read them carefully i can quote many more ayaats on the topic.

    ebrahim said:
    Quoting al quran is not out of usool but quoting al quran without knowledge can be dangerous. So there has to be a principle we have agreed upon to discuss issues of the deen. You must be aware of the hadith that the khawarij during the time of the sahaba used to bring verses of al quran to prove their point but those ayahs were not meants for muslims, so from this incident we know that just quoting al quran without proper knowledge is the practise of khawarij

    your statement suggests me that i dont have the knowledge of Quran well lets see what your great knowledge says about the subject of intercession but remember i need the verses of Quran or authentic hadith not what your so called scholars say or believe.
    And about khawarijis do you know they consider every person out of Islam who did any grave sin we are not extremist as they are…..

  89. yasir says:

    you also said the word wahabi is a myth. Yes, many wahabis say that. But it actually means one who follows ibn abdul wahab’s interpretations in matters of creed and i am pretty sure you do and since you have no problems with ibn abdul wahab’s creed so there should be no problem in using the term wahabi either, infact you should be proud of it as much you are proud of ibn abdul wahab najdi himself. For eg, I call myself a hanafi as i am proud of imam abu hanifa and i follow his maddhab and i am not ashamed of it.

    brother in islam i seem no problem if you call yourself hanafi but iam a muslim and i love to be called a muslim and we dont follow ibn al wahab we only follow what Quran and sunnah teaches any thing matches with it we takes it if ibn al wahab said any thing which matches with Quran and sunnah we surely accepts it and the best example is the book written by ibn al wahab “kitab al tauheed” i think its a best book ever written on the subject of tauheed.

  90. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    “”so you mean to say that tawassul is allowed can you prove your point with the help of Quran”"

    check sura al nisa verse 64. also check surah al munafiq to find out who dosnt like tawassul. check tafir ibn kathir and tafsir qurtubi and see the hadiths they quoted under it.

    “”Quran says that tawassul is a form of shirk yes Allah allowed some special people special permission at a special period of time but saying this that every prophet,saint or pious man has this form of degree is nothing but a contradiction from the teachings of islam”"

    worng. every believer can intercede.

    quran 43:86
    And those whom they, the disbelievers, call on, [those whom] they worship, besides Him, that is, besides God, have no power of intercession, for anyone, EXCEPT those who bear witness to the truth, that is, those who say ‘there is no god except God’, with [full] knowledge, in their hearts of what they have testified to with their tongues — such are Jesus, Ezra, and the angels, who will intercede for believers. (tafsir jalalyn)

    Surah Ahqaf verses 4-6 is revealed for those who worshipped others beside Allah. because intercession is only for those who believe in the oneness of Allah and not those who made partners beside Allah.
    they used to believe in the intercession of Gods. they worship the jesus the son of God and there is no such son of God. they worship the angels the daughters of God and there are no such daughters for Allahu taala.

    as for Surah Zumur verse 2-3:

    read the verse carefully and try to understand why Allah called them liars.
    and ur translation is ““We serve them”. while the actual translation is “we worship them”.

    anyway heres tafsir jalalyn:
    “”Surely to God belongs pure religion, none other than Him being deserving of it. And those who take besides Him, the idols [as], patrons: and they are the disbelievers of Mecca — they say: ‘We only worship them so that they may bring us near to God’ (zulfā, a verbal noun, with the sense of taqrīban, ‘for the sake of nearness’). God will indeed judge between them, and the Muslims, concerning that about which they differ, of religion, and so admit the believers into Paradise, and the disbelievers into the Fire. Truly God does not guide one who is a liar, attributing a child to Him, a disbeliever, worshipping other than God.”"

  91. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    check tafir ibn kathir and tafsir qurtubi and see the hadiths they quoted under sura nisa verse 64.

  92. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    Also see surah zumar verse 4 to 6 to see the real beliefs of the mushriks.

    az-zumar verse 4(tafsir jalalyn)
    Had God wanted to take a son — as they allege [that He has], ‘The Compassionate One has taken [to Himself] a son’ [Q. 19:88], He could have chosen from what He has created whatever He willed, and taken it as a child, instead of the angels whom they claim to be God’s daughters, or [their claim] that ‘Ezra is the son of God’, or that ‘Jesus is the son of God’ [cf. Q. 9:30]. Glory be to Him, in exaltation of Him as being above that He should take a child. He is God, the One, the All-Compelling, over all His creatures.

    verse 6 (tafsir jalalyn)

    He created you from a single soul, namely, Adam, then made from it its mate, Eve; and He sent down for you of the cattle, [of] camels, cows, small cattle, sheep and goats, eight kinds, of each kind a male and a female — as He makes clear in sūrat al-An‘ām [Q. 6:143f.]. He creates you in your mothers’ wombs, creation after creation, that is to say, as a sperm-drop, then a blood clot, then a foetus, in a threefold darkness, that is, the darkness of the belly, that of the womb and that of the placenta. That is God, your Lord. To Him belongs [all] sovereignty. There is no god except Him. Why then are you being turned away?, from worshipping Him to worshipping [things] other than Him?

    also see the explaination of the verses by ibn kathir rahimahullah:

    http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=39&tid=44967

  93. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    ibn kathir rahimahullah says as in the link above:

    “And Allah tells us that the angels in the heavens, those who are close to Him and others, are all servants who submit humbly to Allah. They do not intercede with Him except by His leave for the one with whom He is pleased. They are not like the princes and ministers of their (the idolators’) kings who intercede with them without their permission for both those whom the kings like and those whom they hate.”

    and it is the same mushriks who say:

    Allah also told us what the disbelievers from Quraysh said:

    [أَجَعَلَ الاٌّلِهَةَ إِلَـهاً وَحِداً إِنَّ هَـذَا لَشَىْءٌ عُجَابٌ ]

    (Has he made the gods into one God Verily, this is a curious thing!) (38:5)

    http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=10&tid=22328

  94. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    chapter 35 verse 5 asbab al nuzul

    (Maketh he the gods One God? Lo! that is an astounding thing…) [38:5-11].

    Abu’l-Qasim ibn Abi Nasr al-Khuza‘i informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdawayh> Abu Bakr ibn Abi Darim al-Hafiz> Muhammad ibn ‘Uthman in Abi Shaybah> his father> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Asdi> Sufyan> al-A‘mash> Yahya ibn ‘Umarah> Sa‘id ibn Jubayr> Ibn ‘Abbas who said:

    “When Abu Talib fell ill, the Quraysh and the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, went to visit him. There was, close to the head of Abu Talib, enough room for one man to sit, so Abu Jahl rushed to it to prevent the Prophet from sitting there.
    They complained to Abu Talib about the Prophet.
    Abu Talib said to the Prophet: ‘Son of my brother, what is it that you want from your own people?’ He said: ‘O uncle, I want from them one word by means of which all the Arabs will surrender to them and all the non-Arabs will pay exemption tax to them’. ‘What is this word?’ he asked. He said: ‘There is no deity except Allah’. They all exclaimed: ‘Does he make the gods One God?’ The Qur’an was then revealed about them (Sad. By the renowned Qur’an, nay, but those who disbelieve are in false pride and schism…) up to Allah’s words (This is naught but an invention) [38:1-7]”.

    The commentators of the Qur’an said: “When ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab embraced Islam, the Muslims were overjoyed while the Quraysh was devastated. Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah said to the nobles and chiefs of Quraysh: ‘Go to Abu Talib and say to him: you are our elder and chief and you know well what these fools have done. We have come to you so that you judge between us and your nephew’. Abu Talib sent for the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, and when he answered his call, he said to him: ‘Son of my brother, these are your own people and they are asking you for fairness, so do not swerve completely from them’. The Prophet asked: ‘What do they want from me?’ They said: ‘Cease mentioning our deities and we will leave you alone with your God’. The Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said to them: ‘Will you grant me one word by means of which you will rule over the Arabs and subjugate the non-Arabs?’ Abu Jahl said: ‘We will surely grant it and grant you ten like it!’ The Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said: ‘Say: there is no deity except Allah!’ The Quraysh were repelled and left, saying: ‘Does he make the gods One God? How can One God be sufficient for the whole creation?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed about them these verses, up to His words (The folk of Noah before them denied (their messenger)…) [38:12]”.

    http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=38&tAyahNo=5&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0

    check the other two tafsir’s also.

  95. Ebrahim says:

    yasir i think irfanibnismail and usooli are more than capable of showing you using al quran and sahih hadith that istegaatha and tawassul are permitted in islam. However, i want to point out something to you. You wrote;
    “Nay, they are even UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED. And when all mankind shall be gathered together (on the Day of Qiyamah), they (the so called leaders and intercessors) will become enemies of those who invoked them and they will DISOWN THEIR WORSHIP!!!”

    This verse is talking about idols and since you highlited “UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED”, so i need to tell you this doesnt fit with the prophet peace unto him as he is aware of our deeds and he prays for our forgiveness or in other words the prophet peace unto him IS AWARE of what we do including our requests for dua to him. Here is the hadith-

    “My life is a great good for you, you will relate about me and it will be related to you, and my death is a great good for you, your actions will be presented to me (in my grave) and if I see goodness I will praise Allah, and if see other than that I will ask forgiveness of him (for you).” ( This hadith is sahih as per the scholars of ahlus sunnah)

    About tawassul just read this link, you will see quite a few hadiths to prove the validity of tawassul; http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/hadith-proofs-for-tawassul.html

    Seekingilm has a tawassul section so you can check that up as well and if you can point out a problem in any of it then do so in the comments section there.

  96. yasir says:

    irfanbnismail said:
    you asked me to check surah al nisa verse 64 but i think you havent read the verse yourself neither you read my previous comments let me clear it again i said tawassul(intercession) is allowed but there are conditions we salafis believe that in the life of the prophet or any pious man a person can ask to supplicate for him but after the death of the prophet or a pious man no one can do that and this we can see in our daily life we ask each other to make supplications for each other this is allowed amd mustahib…..i think i conveyed the message now.

    And those whom they invoke besides Allah have no power of intercession;- only he who bears witness to the Truth, and they know (him). (al quran 48:86)

    again this verse is about the special degree awarded to some special persons for example Prophet(pbuh) will intercede for us in the hereafter.

    where jesus and ezra mensioned keep reading tafsir ibn jurair and keep twisting the verses.
    have you read the verses after that i think no here are them.

    If thou ask them, who created them, they will certainly say, Allah. How then are they deluded away (from the Truth)?

    88. ((Allah) has knowledge) of the (Prophet’s) cry, “O my Lord! Truly these are people who will not believe!”

    89. But turn away from them, and say “Peace!” But soon shall they know!

    again the verses clearly suggests the prophet(pbuh) crying for the ummah and asking for the forgiveness dont twist the verses and try to read them in the context.

    you said surah al zumar verse 2-3 is about worshiping them not to bring nearer to Allah i dont know which translation you refers i have the translations of brother muhsin khan and yusuf ali and the translation is

    Is it not to Allah that sincere devotion is due? But those who take for protectors other than Allah (say): “We only serve them in order that they may bring us nearer to Allah.” Truly Allah will judge between them in that wherein they differ. But Allah guides not such as are false and ungrateful.

    brother read them carefully rather just asking from scholars who twists the meanings for there own sake.

  97. yasir says:

    Allah Alone is the One Who can hear everything! Allah Alone is the One Who sees everything! Allah Alone is the One Who can listen to our supplications! And Allah Alone is the One Who has the Power to answer our prayers! He Alone is the All Mighty, All Powerful.

    Whenever you invoke the name of a ‘holy or pious person’ and call on Allah to give you something, it is natural that you will affiliate yourself with this holy person, or his grave or his shrine. Then you will do all kinds of ‘niyaaz’, ‘offerings’, ‘urs’, ‘milaads’, ‘matams’, and ‘minnats’ of these holy men, so that whenever you want something from Allah, you can invoke this person’s name! It is Allah who gives us everything that we ask for, but human beings do all these offerings and devote themselves to these holy men, and the graves of their pious ancestors…. Thinking erroneously that it was because of their ‘shufa’a’ that Allah granted them their prayers! THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE QURAN TERMS AS THE ABOMINABLE SIN OF ‘SHIRK’

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 39 Surah Zumur verse 2-3: So worship Allah Alone, making your religion His exclusively. Beware! Religion is the exclusive Right of Allah. As for those who have taken other ‘auliyas’ with Allah (and justify their this conduct by saying): “We serve them only that they may bring us closer to Allah.” Allah will surely judge between them concerning all that in which they differ. Allah does not show guidance to any liar and denier of the Truth.

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 10 Surah Yunus verse 18: These people serve beside Allah those which can neither harm nor benefit them, and say, “These are our ‘shofa’a’ (intercessors) with Allah!” (O Mohammed), tell them, “Do you wish to inform Allah of that thing which He knows not in the heavens, or in the earth?” He is absolutely free from, and exalted above the shirk that they commit.

    Allah says in the Holy Quran Chapter 6 Surah Anam verse 94: (And Allah will say), “So, you have come before Us all alone, as We created you at first. Now, you have left behind all that We gave you in the world. Now We do not see with you those ‘shufa’a’(intercessors), who, you believed, had a share in moulding your destinies! All the relations between you and them have been cut off, and all those, in whom you trusted, have left you in the lurch.”

    The Glorious Quran is literally full of these kinds of aayahs which explain the concept, and each and every manifestation of ‘shirk’ in detail. One only has to read the Quran to understand how heinous and horrendous this sin of Shirk is in the eyes of Allah Subhanah. Allah has made Paradise ‘haraam’ for those who die in the state of ‘shirk’! It is an unforgivable sin in the eyes of Allah.

    brother i can only tell you the truth iam not the one resposible for you every one is answerable for his own deeds i urge you to read yourself and research rather then following your so called ulemas blindly….

  98. yasir says:

    irfanbnismael:

    in Quran we have:

    “And your Lord says: Call on Me, I will answer your (prayer). But Those who are too arrogant to serve Me will surely find themselves in hell, in humiliation ” [Al Mu'min:60]
    “When My servants ask you concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them). I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calls on Me’ let them also, with a will, listen to My call, and believe in Me, that they may walk in the right way ” [Al-Baqarah:186]

    A hadith in Sahih Muslim also throws light upon the faith of the polytheists of Makkah. Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) reported that the polytheists recited the talbiyah[uttering loudly (at the time of pilgrimage) to Allah that one is obedient to Him] as:

    “Labaik Allahumma, Labaik! Labaika laa shareeka lakal labaik.” (Here I am at your service, there is no associate with You). But they added this, “Only one associate with You, You possess mastery over him, but he does not possess mastery (over You). They used to say this and go around the Kaaba (House of Allah in Makkah). Because of their adding this statement to the talbiyah, the prophet, peace be upon him, sayyid “Woe to them, because they have said, ‘But one associate with You, You possess mastery over him, but he does not possess mastery (over You). [recorded in Sahih Muslim]

    So when Allah never made anyone His partner then how can people associate partners or intercessors with Him

    you said the verses are about idol worshipping i think your research is very less here is the answer.

    just open the most authentic book of ahadith The Sahih Bukhari, and you will find in the chapter of Tafsir that the idols worshipped in Prophet Noah’s time were actually reminders of Pious people before them. Second evidence is provided by the conquest of Makkah. When the Prophet took charge of The Kaaba he threw away all the idols and amongst them found idols of the Prophet Ibrahim and Ismael (Bukhari Kitab Al-Maghazi). So all these idols were reminders of human beings and the following Quranic verse makes it clear to understand this fact:

    “Those whom you call on besides Allah are slaves like yourselves, so call on them, then let them answer you, if you are truthful.” [Al Araf:194]

    “Those whom they call upon desire, (for themselves) means of access to their Lord (Allah), as to which of them should be the nearest. And they hope for His Mercy and fear His Torment. Verily the Torment of your Lord is (something) to be afraid of!” [Al Isra:57]

  99. yasir says:

    ebrahim,

    i proved my point that the verses i quoted were not about idols so read my previous posts carefully.

    you said,

    “My life is a great good for you, you will relate about me and it will be related to you, and my death is a great good for you, your actions will be presented to me (in my grave) and if I see goodness I will praise Allah , and if see other than that I will ask forgiveness of him (for you).” ( This hadith is sahih as per the scholars of ahlus sunnah)

    i never come across a single hadith like this can you tell me the reference number please because without it I will be consider this a concoction.

  100. yasir says:

    ebrahim,

    The story of the Prophet Noah and His son is a very good example to explain the point. When Noah (peace be upon him) saw his son drowning, he cried to his Lord and said: My Lord, surely my son is of my family, and Your promise is true and You are the Most Just of the Judges. Allah replied:

    O Noah, he is not of your family; he is (an embodiment of ) unrighteous conduct. So ask not of Me that of which you have no knowledge. I admonish you lest you be of the ignorant. [Hud:45-46]
    Now an honest look at the above mentioned Quranic verse clearly explains that even the Prophet of Allah could not save his own son, although he had been preaching Allah’s religion for 950 years. In Quran Allah told His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):

    “Surely you cannot guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He pleases, and He knows best those who walk aright ” [Al Qasas:56]
    Moreover in ahadith of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim we find Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) advising his relatives to do good deeds. He clearly told them that it was not possible for him to save them from Allah’s anger. He specifically made it very clear to his own daughter Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her), that he would be unable do anything for her, once in front of Allah on the day of judgment. He advised her to do good deeds in order to save her self from Allah’s wrath. Now these examples from Sahih Ahadith clearly explain the true concept of Wasila.
    O yes! The supplication of the Prophet was definitely a wasila for his companions. They used to come to him for their problems and asked him to pray for them. The prophet used to pray for them and Allah solved their problems. But this was when he was alive. After he died, his companions never went to his grave to use him as an intercessor between Allah and themselves. They were very clear that once someone dies, he breaks his links with this world and is not aware of what happens behind him. This was the reason that during the need for rain (after Prophet’s death) they (Prophet’s companions) never went to his grave, they used to go to his uncle Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), to invoke Allah for the rain. Anas (radiallahu anhu) narrated:

    ” Whenever drought threatened them, Umar bin Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) used to ask Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib to invoke Allah for rain. He used to say, ‘O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet (peace be upon him) to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle to invoke You for rain. O Allah! Bless us with rain’. And so it would rain.” [Bukhari - Chapter Al-Istisqa (Invoking Allah for rain)]

    It is of great importance to notice that it is permissible for one to request a living religious person to invoke Allah on his behalf but if you ask Allah through a dead or an absent (person etc) then it is not allowed. Moreover we find in this hadith the Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) also prayed to Allah himself. Thus praying to Allah by oneself is also essential, apart from requesting someone else to pray on behalf of someone.

    So it is very obvious now that the companions of the Prophet never went to his grave to solve their problems. This was because they were trained that way. The following hadith taken from Sahih Muslim would explain the teachings of the Prophet about graves:

    “Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her) reported: As the messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) was about to breathe his last, he drew his sheet upon his face and when he felt uneasy, he uncovered his face and said in this very state: Let there be curse upon the Jews and the Christians that they have taken the graves of their Apostles as places of worship. He in fact warned (his followers) against what they (the Jews and the Christians) did.” [Sahih Muslim]

  101. Ebrahim says:

    Yasir, before you type so much you should have asked for the hadith reference because its pertinent to the discussion we are having. Seekingilm has this hadith but it seems you missed that article so here it is-
    http://seekingilm.com/archives/204. The hadith with reference is quoted in the article and if you got anything against it then write a comment there.

    I don’t want to respond to all that you wrote as you seem to think that the prophet peace unto him is unaware of what we do and that makes you believe that he can’t make dua for us to Allah, so go read the hadith first. It would be better if you respond under that article as this article is about Al Khidr alayhissalam and not whether tawassul is allowed or not.

  102. Ebrahim says:

    also this article has the hadith reference-
    http://www.livingislam.org/n/lpg_e.html

  103. not sure says:

    yasir as in yasir qadhi

  104. yasir says:

    ebrahim,
    you missed a point or two first of all we believe that prophet(pbuh) is alive in his grave but his life is different then the life in this world and the hadith you quoted (if i consider it sahih) in that hadith Prophet(pbuh) said your deeds presented to me it doesnt mean we have to ask Prohphet(pbuh) to intercede its very simple but might be hard for you to take….
    second:
    you have only one hadith but i have tons of Ayaats and hadiths which are against tawassul.
    i never started this debate on tawasul it was usooli but he ran when i showed him the truth as Quran says:
    “When truth comes falsehood perishes and falsehood by its nature bound to be perished”

  105. yasir says:

    thankyou but Yasir Qadhi is a great scholar……

  106. Ebrahim says:

    Yasir, you seem to read less and type more. Now you are trying to change the topic and talking about the lives of prophets in graves being different. You wrote in a post earlier this; ““Nay, they are even “UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED” and to that i brought the hadith which is posted above and you have been refuted by the it and still you dont admit it, its fine, i really don’t engage in these types of discussions hoping to bring deviants to truth as most deviants are deaf, blind and dumb people who don’t understand but it’s for all the people to see who is right and who is wrong.

    You wrote; “you have only one hadith but i have tons of Ayaats and hadiths which are against tawassul.” I was actually shocked when I read line from you! KIndly take your MY HADITH VS YOUR HADITH or MY VERSES VS YOUR VERSES fitnah out. I don’t believe this deen has any contraditcion but you are clearly suggesting otherwise.The anti islamic haters who run websites against us would definitely love to see a muslim ( i.e you) trying to point contraditcion( that actually doesnt exist)in islam.

    If you had cared to read the link i posted about tawassul, you would have seen that tawassul was used by sahaba and even by prophet Adam alayhissalam, but then you don’t read! May I remind you, the first revelation is READ, so please read when i bring you hadiths, and secondly dont try to act as a anti islam hater by trying to create contraditcions in islam.

    I am posting the link again. All your arguements against tawassul are answered pretty well there- http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/hadith-proofs-for-tawassul.html .

    you wrote; “hadith you quoted (if i consider it sahih) in that hadith Prophet(pbuh) said your deeds presented to me it doesnt mean we have to ask Prohphet(pbuh) to intercede its very simple but might be hard for you to take….” No one is claiming you MUST use tawassul or ask for intercession,i don’t know who told you that. The point is wahabis point at certain ‘reasons’ for disallowing tawassul like the point you made by equating idols to the prophet peace unto him ( astaghfirullah) by saying “UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED”. When I show you thats not the case you just create a totally different reason for making tawassul haram( Oh but life in grave is different…). I wonder who gave you the permission to make halal things haram. For your information, the scholars of the past have always considered tawassul as permissible including imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal and even your albani admits that but yet he decided to go against all the hadiths and fatawas of the great scholars of the past and sadly enough people like you choose people like albani over great imams like Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal. What a shame!

    Anyways, if you still don’t want to read what i gave you then please don’t respond again.

    About what some scholars said about tawassul this link is good; http://seekingilm.com/archives/201

  107. yasir says:

    ebrahim said,
    You wrote in a post earlier this; ““Nay, they are even “UNAWARE THAT THEY ARE BEING INVOKED.

    yes they cannot help you because Allah is the one who hears and He is the one who can give no one is capable to give accept Allah alone i cant believe such a simple thing cannot enter in your mind.

    you said iam trying to find contradictions but the reality is people like you innovated in deen and trying to make it hard thats why your dawah is not working and all the new muslims specially in christian world are coming to pure Islam (safafiism).

    now regarding your hadiths you posted two examples to prove your point one is,

    My life is better for you. You do new deeds and you are instructed to do so. And my death is also better for you. Your deeds will be presented before me. I will praise Allah about those deeds that I see righteous and I will seek forgiveness for you regarding those that I see evil.

    [Ref: Musnad Al-Bazzar - Kashf ul Astar]

    Observation of the Chain of Narrators:

    The first part is correct but the second one is weak. The weak narrator is Abdul Majeed bin Abdul Aziz bin Abi Rawwad who has been criticized by the Muhadditheen. According to Ibn Hibban he is Matrook (Discarded). Imam Bukhari mentioned him in Book Al-Duafa. [Ref: Al-Majrooheen, Al-Duafa As-Sagheer, Al-Kamil fid Duafa]

    Imam Bazzar after narrating has hinted towards the weakness of this narration. See Kashf ul Astar.

    so your first hadith is weak and hence not accepted sorry.

    regarding the hadith about Adam(pbuh).

    iam not quoting the hadith here iam just quoting what great scholars says about this hadith.

    This narration is weak because of two narrators. They are Abdul Rahman bin Zaid bin Aslam who is weak as is evident in the books of rijaal and Abdullah bin Muslim Fihri who is Majhool i.e. not enough data is available to know who he is. See Lisan ul Meezan and Meezan ul Aitidal for details.

    The narrator before Fihri is Abdullah bin Muslim bin Rushaid. Ibn Hibban mentioned that he was accused of fabricating ahadith. He used to fabricate ahadith upon Lais, Malik and Ibn Lhiya. His ahadith should not be written. Ibn Hajar in Lisan ul Meezan (Page 360 Vol.3) hinted that Abdullah bin Muslim bin Rushaid and Abdullah bin Muslim Al-Fihri, might be the same person.

    Regarding Abdul Rahman bin Zaid, Ibn Hibban said that he brought about changes in ahadith without having enough knowledge about them. So much so that Mursal ahadith narrated by him have been made Marfoo and Mauqoof ahadith to Musnad. For this reason it was thought that he should be left out.

    Imam Zahbi declared this hadith “Batil” (False). See Talkhees Al-Mustadrak and Meezan ul Aitidal.

    Hafiz Ibn Hajar declared it false in Lisan ul Meezan.

    Imam Bayhaqi mentioned this in Dalail Al-Nabuwwah and he said Abdul Rahman bin Zaid is weak, Ibne-e-Kathir in Tareekh Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya acknowledged it.

    Sheikhul Islam Ibn Taimiyyah says in “Qaidah Al-Jaleelah fi Al-Tawassal Wal-Wasila”: Narrating of this hadith by Imam Hakim is such an act that has been disapproved of. According to Ibn Taimiyyah, Muhadditheen agree upon the weakness of Abdul Rahman bin Zaid. Ibn Jauzi also has the same opinion.

    Imam Hakim says in Al-Madkhal Ila Ma’rifah Al-Saheeh min Al-Saqeem that Abdul Rahman bin Zaid bin Aslam narrated “Maudoo” fabricated ahadith from his father. Abu Naeem said the same thing.

    According to Ali bin Madeeni and Ibn Saad Abdul Rahman bin Zaid is extremely weak.

    According to Imam Tahawi Abdul Rahman’s ahadith are considered weak among the muhadditheen.

    so both of your hadiths has weak chain of narrators and both of them considered daif.

    Tawassul is a shirk and a sin which Allah will never forgive may Allah help you to understand pure Islam.

  108. Ebrahim says:

    “yes they cannot help you because Allah is the one who hears and He is the one who can give no one is capable to give accept Allah alone i cant believe such a simple thing cannot enter in your mind.”

    What a guy! From being unaware to being unable to help! One small step for yasir one big leap for “salafi” mandkind! Keep changing the subject but i am happy to see you quote the hadith and it seems you did some research on the hadith i posted and thats the only thing i liked about you since the time you showed up. I will quote the reference i have with me after i finnish writing. You should know that sometimes a hadith can be transmitted through various chains and so one chain might be defective and another one strong, one good example is the hadith of Adam using tawassul of the nabi. Pseudo salafis always quote the weak version and never discuss the strong version as the strong version of that hadith will destroy your creed,so you people dont bring it. If you had cared to read the link i gave you, you would have seen the difference but it seems you are here for repeating your wahabi ideas and not for a intelligent dialogue so really you need to stop harrasing me by refusing to read what is provided to you as i have to retype the whole stuff again and again and again.

    Here is the “weak” hadith concerning Adam alayhissalam’s tawassul; http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/adam-as-seeks-intercession-with.html . And here is the strong one; http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/adamas-seeks-intercession-with.html . I posted the whole link before but you simply wont read. Wake up wahabis!

    Also tawassul is a matter of fiqh not creed so your claim that tawassul is shirk is baseless. If tawassul is shirk then the prophet peace unto him would not have taught it nor would Adam alayhissalam would have used it . Are you saying the prophet peace unto him was teaching shirk? Astaghfirullah, may Allah show you the right path. I know when a lie is repeated hundred times it seems like the truth and you are a victim of that. Cos if you were a normal guy then you would have definitely read the link i posted to prove tawassul but you are blind to it. Since you are a blind follower of albani and co, and refuse to read hadiths in the link i posted, so inshaAllah i will not waste time typing responses to your wahabi repetitions as its getting really boring here.

    since you dont seem to like reading links i am posting what the scholars said about the hadith i quoted before ;

    The hadith master al-`Iraqi said in the book of Jana’iz of his work Tarh al-Tathrib fi Sharh al-Taqrib: “Its chain is good” (isnâduhu jayyid).5 The hadith master al-Haythami said: “Al-Bazzar narrated it and its sub-narrators are the men of the Sahih.”6 The hadith master al-Suyuti declared it sound (sahîh) in al-Mu`jizat and al-Khasa’is. So did al-Qastallani the commentator of al-Bukhari. Al-Munawi also declared, in Fayd al-Qadir, that it is sahîh.7 So did al-Zurqani in his commentary on al-Qastallani’s al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya. So did Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji in his commentary on [al-Qadi `Iyad's] al-Shifa’.8 So did al-Mulla `Ali al-Qari in his, adding: “Al-Harith ibn Usama narrated it in his Musnad with a sound chain.”9 Ibn Hajar also mentioned it in al-Matalib al-`Alya.10 This hadith also came to us through another, mursal way from [the Tabi`î] Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani. The hadith master Isma`il al-Qadi narrated it in his monograph on the invocation of blessings on the Prophet , and Shaykh al-Albani said about it: “Mursal sahîh.”11 The hadith master Ibn `Abd al-Hadi declared it sound (sahîh) despite his excessive rigor and harshness in his book al-Sarim al-Munki. After all this evidence, does any meddler have anything left to say? The hadith is undoubtedly sound, and no-one questions its authenticity.

    For a better understanding here is the link, go read it( i doubt u will); http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/deeds-presented-to-prophet-after-his.html

  109. yasir says:

    ebrahim,

    i seems you havent read my post carefully and actually you are wasting my precious time by doing that i told you before and telling it again that both the hadiths you posted were extremely daif and thats what all the major scholars believe.

    lets check it again for the one last time.

    the hadith about deeds presented to Prophet(pbuh):

    My life is better for you. You do new deeds and you are instructed to do so. And my death is also better for you. Your deeds will be presented before me. I will praise Allah about those deeds that I see righteous and I will seek forgiveness for you regarding those that I see evil.

    If it is considered that Abdul Majeed is not weak, as is the opinion of some scholars, even then the soundness of his narration will be at the lowest grade. Hafiz Ibn Hajar after summarizing the data says that Abdul Majid was truthful but made many mistakes and was a Murji (Sect that beilieved that faith is enough for salvation of a person. They deferred doing deeds/acts) [Taqreeb & Tahzeeb ut Tahzeeb]. Note how this narration supports and augments his Mazhab. Therefore this grade of a narration cannot be taken for any matter of aqeedah especially when it supports the erroneous mazhab of Abdul Majeed.

    now the second hadith about Adam(pbuh):

    The hadith is narrated on the authority of Umar bin Khattab (radiallahu anhu). Had it been authentic, Umar (radiallahu anhu) would never have turned away from this methodology of supplicating with wasila in relation to rank or status of a dead person. But the correct hadith in Bukhari clearly shows that after the death of the Prophet, Umar bin Khattab went to his Uncle Abbas (radiallahu anhu) in need of invocation for rain. If he actually narrated the above mentioned hadith then why did he not intimate wasila of the Prophet after his death and on the contrary went to his uncle for his prayers and supplication?

    Quran itself describes the method by which Adam (p.b.u.h) repented, Allah said:

    Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and His Lord turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful [Al-Quran 2:37]

    The words are mentioned in Quran in Surah Al-A’raf. They said:

    Our Lord! we have wronged our own souls. If You will not forgive us and bestow upon us Your Mercy, we shall certainly be lost [Al-Quran 7:23]

    it seems your research on hadith is less and neither you refer Quran for the answers this happens when person blindly follows scholars and thats what happening with you.

    sheikh-ul-islam ibn taymiyya wrote a great book (at-Tawassul wal-Waseela)
    on a subject of tawassul i urge you to read it carefully.

    both of the hadiths and other daif hadits are mentioned with a great research in a book written by sheikh al albani (Silsalat al-Hadith ad-Da’ifa (Volumes 1-14).
    read them if you want you will get the answer.

    i never followed any one blindly i was born in a hanafi family and i used to visit graves as well but Allah helped me to realised truth.

    may Allah help you to realised truth.Ameen

  110. Abul Layth says:

    both of the hadiths and other daif hadits are mentioned with a great research in a book written by sheikh al albani (Silsalat al-Hadith ad-Da’ifa (Volumes 1-14).

    It is you who are wasting our time. The book Rafa’ Minara refutes the baatil claims of Al albaani and comrades regarding the attempt at weakening certain ahadith pertaining to the above stated issue.

    To download the book go to the following link:

    http://www.seekingilm.com/books/rafaminara.doc

    The Sunni Scholars have done well in responding to his heretical claims and such suffices the one interested.

    The blog posted by Ebrahim also responds to your empty claims. Go read it and stop wasting our time!

  111. profitprophet says:

    Assalamualekum

    You people may agree to disagree but at least your language for each other should be soft.

    wassalam

  112. zaki says:

    Can I please have the reference for this answer by Shaykh al Islam.

  113. Kamal S. says:

    Alhamdulillah, this is comprehensive and should silence some of those who speak without knowledge on this subject.

    A kind request, does anyone know of a narration attributed to Ibn Taymiyya stating that Khidr was one of the sons of Adam?

    I have heard this in a few places but not able to find an actual citation, my gratitude for anyone able to verify this !

    Jazak Allahu Khair !

  114. Shahbaaz says:

    Kamal S. It was ibn kathir(r) view:

    Hafidhh Ibn Kathir states that Khidr (Alay hissalaam) was the son of Adam (Alay hissalaam), who prayed to Allah: ‘O Allah, give my son Khidr a long life so that he lives until the Day of Judgement’. Adam (Alay hissalaam) also told Khidr (Alay hissalaam) ‘O my son, you shall bury me after my death’. He also gave him news of his long life. Khidr (Alay hissalaam) also sat in the boat of the Prophet Nuh (Alay hissalaam).
    [Tareekh by Ibn Kathir, Volume One, Chapter ‘Musa and Khidr’] There have been many narrations of various types some which have been rejected by the scholars for example Hafidhh Ibn Kathir rejected the statements which claimed that Khidr (Alay hissalaam) was the son of Pharaoh or that he was born during Pharaoh’s time. He strictly says he was alive a long time before Musa (Alay hissalaam).
    [Tareekh by Ibn Kathir, Volume One, Chapter ‘Musa and Khidr’]

  115. ruhan madani says:

    asalaatu wassslaam alyka ya mustafa
    asalamu alykum warahmatullahi wa barakaatuhu to all brothers in islam.
    my dear friend and brother yaasir. why are you so prejudiced?. your term “salafiISM” doesnt exist firstly. and noone is coming to “salafissm”. i would like to point out a very interesting thing. hadrat ibnul umar radiallahu anh as related in sahih al bukhari said “the khawaarij used to use the aayats of the quran that had been revealed for non muslims against pious mulsims and thus used to deem them kuffar” or something to that effect. the problem with you is that you dont understand things with putting the glasses of taasub and prejudice in the dustbin. firstly tawassul is of several types and the “pseudo salafies” dont agree with some types that were established by not only the aaemaa but the sahaabis. the “refutation” of the hadith in musnad al bazzar is that of “shaykh” al albaani. and it has been amply replied by shaykh mahmud syed mamduh as you can find in the link presented to you. let us be a bit clear with you. the hadith in sunan at tirmdhee of uthman ibn hunayf ( to all the brothers:it is not hanif) is “hasan sahih” according to imam abu isa tirmidhee himself and even according to your “shaykh” al albaani on whom even “the great scholar” yaasir al qaadhhi depends for his stances against tawassul. so weakening of it by some “pseudo salafiyya” is not only wrong but felonious. and albaani has tried to “prove” that the hadith has “shaadh” in it.
    the fact is that apart from this there are OTHER ahaadith also that prove our stance. some ahaadith are not completely sahih as is the case with hadith of “al utbi” mentioned by ibnul katheer in his tafseer and al bidaaya wal nihaayaa , nawawi in his “majmu” and idaah fi minaasik al hajj, and “al adhkaar” and mentioned by at least 15 scholars including imam samudhi, al bahuti al hanabali and others in their books without weakening (as far as my knowldge is concerned …if you have better than that present it in this case). and our shaykh “mhammad bin alawi al maaliki al makki” has clearly in his “mafaahim yajibu an tus hah” said that he cannot extablish its authenticity but the fact that the ulema who are not only the ulema of the ahle sunnah wal jamaat but also the “salafies or the pseudo salafies” have mentioned them in their books and have taken them as proofs for particular acts clearly is not negligible. you should guard yourself first. imam nawawi is PRESCRIBING tawassul in his al adhkaar and mnaasik al hajj by this hadith. so he becomes a greater mushriq than me according to you as i dont usually prescribe these things but here imam nawawi is not only showing his aqeedah but even calling people towards “shirq” or “kufr” or bidaah” or haraam” whatever you call it. and he even in one of his chapters in al adhkaar prescribes the salaat al haajat as seen in the case of the hadith of “uthman ibn hunayf” and even mentions the grading of the hadith by imam abu isa tirmidhee without negating it. That means he is prescribing the salaat al haajat to the muslims as was prescribed by the prophet in his lifetime to the blind man. Don’t the words “yaa Muhammad” come in the duaa?. Or is it that we had only heard of the blind man in the hadith but people have put veils on their hearts and have become blind by heart also?
    you said “the most authentic book on hadith ..sahih al bukhaari” verily it is the most authentic and imam bukhaari is the muhaddith a lkabeer. the same imam bukhaari in another established book of his namely “al aadaab al mufraad” makes a chapter “what to say when one has a cramp in the leg” and there he mentions ahaadith related to ibn umar and ibn abbas where either they prescribe or people in front of them on having a cramp proclaim “yaa muhammad”, the same ahaadith are mentioned by imam nawawi in “aladhkaar” and also by allaama imam shawkaani in tuhfat az zaakireen. although albaani has done his best with weakening the ahaadith but the fact is that i am here trying to “teach”(rather inform you about) you the aqeedah of the muhaddith al kabeer that clearly according to you is kufr and shirq and an imam only names a chapter on “particular” thing when his aqeedah lies in it. then why do you read the book of imam bukhaari if his aqeedah is based on shirq and kufr??…and imam nawawi also.
    the ahaadith of “ahbisu yaa ibaad allah’ and “aainu yaa ibaadallah” are mentioned even by allama imam shawkaani in his tuhfat az zaakireen and he clearly mentions the account of imam nawawi when he was travelling and some of the sheep of someone were lost and he too said the same and the sheep were found or something to that effect, he even narrates the account that imam nawawi has narrated about “one of his teachers”. imam ahmad bin hanbal said the same as narrated by his son abdullah when he said “i have performed hajj many times and one time we lost our way so i said these words (the above ones that is aainu yaa ibaadallah)” and we found our way”. this was narrated from abdullah ibn ahmad by imam ibn muflih al hanbali in his “aadaab al shariyya”.
    and the aayaat that you propounded my dear friend are the same ones as were quoted by ibn abdul wahaab in his “kitaab al tawhid” and other books. no less than imam shawkaani , a more established imam and aalim than him answers these aayaat in his book “ad durr al naadeed fi ikhlaas al kalimat at tawhid” and he has made it clear for one type of Tawassul as in the case of “yaa rabb we beseech you by the waseelah of this pious person so please fulfil our needs”…although he even prescribes istisgaathaa in other books where he quotes about the great master imam ibnul atheer al jazri that he had allowed Tawassul and then as a proof imam shawkaani deems the hadith of “uthmaan ibn hunayf”.
    We even have the sahih hadith of “maalik ad daar” whose discussion has been thoroughly performed on this site itself in “the Tawassul challenge”.
    The fact is that when a person says “aainu yaa ibaadallah” or “ahbisu” or “almadad”, imam shawkaani in hhis tuhfat az zaakireen explains that be it good jinn or the angels; they come for help;it is just like when ones water bottle falls from a camel And his friend IS WALKING BY HIS SIDE he will instead of invoking ALLAH to give him the bottle of water ask or request his friend to give him the bottle(any person will do that). Imam shawkaani gives this logical explanation. If you want ; you are open to call him a mushriq or kaafir or a person who was misguided as has been the general course with the “salafi” creed who “pride themselves” to be “purely Islamic”.
    The kufaar of mecca were the likes of the present hindus in india who used to WORSHIP the ghairallah be they the prophets or the awliyaa or anything.
    1)do we WORSHIP?. No . we ask the awliyaa to make duaa for us. Now you will say that the kuffar too used to say “these are our shaafiee”. It simply means that we WORSHIP them to make them happy and then they ask ALLAH to bestow rain etc etc on us. They used to kill and slaughter animal IN THE NAMES OF THE GHAIR ALLAH and that is the nizr that is haraam. When a muslim says that he has to have a NIZR it doesn’t mean it is like the one in the jaahiliyyah. There is a principle called “istilaaah” or the usage of language. Nizr in the sense neither does bring a happening close nor does it take it far but only is a way to show happiness of a good muslim. Even we perform nizrs here on the fulfilment of a need we had asked ALLAH for but thats only to thank him. We usually take some money as sadqaa and give it to the gurabaa or take some well cooked food and give it to the masaakin. It is a bidaah but a bidaah that has the sunnah backup with it, so it is a bidah al hasanah rather a sunnah al hasanah. Whenever a good thing happens with us we celebrate like this. It doesn’t always involve going to an “aastaan” or a walis grave and asking there.NO. rather it depends on the niyyah, only the people whose minds are flying in the space try to call this kufr and shirq.
    You say that it (tawassul) is a thing against which QURAN explicitly states(or you said something to that effect). I ask: imam shaafiee, imam ahmad bin hanbal, imam nawawi, imam ibnul khuzaymaah, imam inbnul hibban, imam inul atheer jazri, imam shawkaani, imam bukhaari, imam ibnul hajar al haythami, imam ibnul jawzi, imam abul shaykh, imam tabaraani, imam asqalaani, imam qurtubi, imam aaloosi imam ibnul humaam hanafi,and the hundreds of imams prescribing it ;do they all don’t know the basic difference between “shirq and tawheed” or kufr and tawheed.?. or do you want to say that “they were all misguided in such matters”?
    The sole explanation to this question is that it is your understanding of the quran and sunnah that is all mingled ; people who call themselves “the representatives of pure islam” are the ones whose interpretation is wrong and twisted and the ulemaa about whom the prophet said “al ulamaa waaris ul anbiyya” (in knowledge) are the ones who have understood it correctly and rightly and by FOLOWING them we are actually following the quran and the sunnah as the majority of the ulemaa cannot be wrong, neither logically nor according to ahaadith. Majority of ulemaa cannot be wrong because ALLAH will never allow that to happen with his PURIFIED DEEN.
    Tawassul in any case is always alongwith tawheed and there is no shirq in it. It only increases the chances of our duaa being accepted by ALLAH as was done by our father aadam in an authentic hadith: قد أخرج الحافظ أبو الحسن بن بشران قال : حدثنا أو جعفر محمد ابن عمرو، حدثنا أحمد بن سحاق بن صالح، ثنا محمد بن صالح، ثنا محمد ابن سنان العوقي، ثنا إبراهيم بن طهمان، عن بديل بن ميسرة، عن عبد الله بن شقيق، عن ميسرة قال: قلت: يا رسول الله، متى كنت نبياً ؟ قال: (( لما خلق الله الأرض واستوى إلى السماء فسواهن سبع سماوات ، وخلق العرش،كتب على ساق العرش: محمد رسول الله خاتم الأنبياء، وخلق الله الجنة التي أسكنها آدم وحواء، فكتب اسمي على الأبواب، والأوراق والقباب، والخيام،وآدم بين الروح والجسد،فلما أحياه الله تعالى: نظر إلى العرش فرأى اسمي فأخبره الله أنه سيد ولدك، فلما غرهما الشيطان ، تابا واستشفعا باسمي إليه
    وأخرجه ابن الجوزي في الوفا بفضائل المصطفى من طريق ابن بشران
    I said: “O Messenger of Allah , when were you [first] a Prophet?” He replied: “When Allah created the earth ‘Then turned to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens’(2:29), and created the Throne, He wrote on the leg of the Throne: “Muhammad the Messenger of Allah is the Seal of Prophets” (Muhammadun Rasūlullāhi Khātamu al-Anbiyā’). Then Allah created Jannah in which He made Adam and Hawwa’ dwell, and He wrote my name on the gates, its tree-leaves, its domes and tents, at a time when Adam was still between the spirit and the body. When Allah ta’alā instilled life into him he looked at the Throne and saw my name, whereupon Allah informed him that ‘He [Muhammad (Sallallahu 'Alayhi wa Sallam)] is the Sayyid (master) of all your descendants.’ When Satan deceived them both, they repented and sought intercession (shafa’a) to Allah with my name.“
    It has been reported by Ibn Al-Jawzī in his Al-Wafā bi Fadhā’il Al Mustafā from the chain of Ibn Bushrān. Ibn Al Jawzī mentions,
    “Part of the demonstration of his superiority to other Prophets is the fact that Adam (Sallallahu ‘Alayhi wa Sallam) asked his Lord through the sanctity (hurma) of Muhammad (Sallallahu ‘Alayhi wa Sallam) that He relent towards him.”
    And the hadith is sahih. And if you know something about the hadith sciences this hadith strengthens the hadith of “yaa rabbi as as alukaa bihaqqi muhammadin” that hakim said was “sahih” but was opposed by dhahabi probably in the takhreej of this hadith in “talkhees al mustadrak lil hafiz dhahabhi”(walahuaalam) and this hadith becomes hasan li ghayri isnaadi.
    The fact is that imam ibnul jawzi mentions another story in one of his books (I am sorry I don’t have the reference yet but I will provide it to you in a couple of days.). he says imam..(I now forgot the name of the imam…let us name him imam X fr the time being if this doesn’t go against adabb. I will mention the complete story and the reference in some time).he says imam X said that once imam abul shaykh and imam tabaraani and I were sitting near the grave of the prophet and we were very hungry. Imam abul shaykh stood and went up to the grave of the prophet and said “yaa rasoolullah we are hungry we are hungry”. Then I stood up to leave but imam abul shaykh said “wait o X we will be provided with food”(or something to that effect).. then I and imam abul shaykh had a nap and imam tabaraani remained awake for some research work. In some time an alawi came and asked us “had you complained to the prophet?” and we said yes and then the alawi gave us the food saying that he had been informed of it in his dream by the prophet sallalahu alyhi wasallam.”
    This is the aqeedah of the aaemaa. You call yourself “salafi” and say that we follow the “salaf”. Where are you following the salaf when you say that Tawassul is shirq or kufr?. Isnt imam shaafiee and malik and ahmad bin hanbal from salaf. Isn’t imam bukhaari one of them ?, aren’t the people who performed tawasul in that salaf time enough for you to judge who is right and who is wrong?
    Walaahu aalam and wasallam

  116. shareena Mohammed says:

    In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

    As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkatuhu,

    In our times Hz. Khidr (as) was seen live during the incident in Egypt this Feb.

    THE GREEN MAN ON THE HORSE SEEN DURING THE INCIDENT IN EGYPT IS HZ. KHIDR (AS)

    ADNAN OKTAR: “Master Adnan, As-salamun Alaykom” Alaykom as-salam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu. “First of all, may all your friends there have a blessed Mawlid an-Nabi.” May we all have a blessed Mawlid an-Nabi. “Master, I am curious about that person on the green horse seen in Egypt.” That person on the green horse is Hazrat Khidr (pbuh), as I have said. I have said before that it is Hazrat Khidr (pbuh) who organizes it. “Master, some people say that it is one of the four horsemen mentioned in the Gospel.” No, that’s not true.. Hazrat Khidr (pbuh) sometimes appears as a silhouette like that, sometimes as an object. Look , he is seen there.

    Look he disappears after a while. Yes..

    You do see him, don’t you?

    ALTUĞ BERKER: Insha’Allah.

    ADNAN OKTAR: Yes.. As far as I have seen, he has mingled with the crowd and then turning into a silhouette all of a sudden, he disappears from there. Almighty Allah lets us see those so that no one could say “I didn’t see”, “I didn’t hear”. Actually there are also other incidents similar to this one, but I do not favor bringing up such matters for the moment. We do have many films regarding such matters; this kind of films. I mean there are films about some wondrous incidents however I don’t think it is time to show them, insha’Allah. This one was okay because it was something already seen by everyone; that is why we are talking about this now. (Harun Yahya- Feb 23, 2011)
    To view the following in video format please click on the following link:http://en.harunyahya.tv/videoDetail/Lang/4/Product/39038

    You could also follow me on facebook:
    http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=212276085479983&set=a.141006349273624.17911.100000927808161&type=1&theater

  117. Illyas says:

    Peace kenas far as possible intoenemy territto all – I njoyed this discussion – read a book claimed to be titled Kashful Mahjub by Syed Ali Hujwiri also known as Data Gange Baksh who relates the story of the Sahaba who when fighting the romans under the command of yazid asked that his bier be taken as far as possible in2 the enemies territory – which was done – the battle ended in a stalemate – The interesting thing is that the author (living about 450AH) relates that for some time thereafter, the romans would come to the grave in times of drought and beg for rain, and to preserve/prove the awliyas stature rain would be sent by the Creator – If the kufaar and mushriks also attain needs via these awliyas, what is wrong with these salafis and wahabis – why do they shut the doors to so much of blessings – muslims may not fully understand the details of the barzakhs of the awliya, but surely when u attend the grave of the awliya u sense the peace, tranquility and the blessings – no muslim worships these graves or its occupants, but different cultures xpress gratitude in different ways and most certainly we r greatful to all the awliya for keeping the flag of islam raised – muslims ask by the ranks of the awliya, the abdaals, the awtaads, the abrars, the nuqubas, the ghauth – by the ranks of the Prophets – is this wrong or r the salafi and wahabi refusing all these ranks – just strange that non muslims experience benefits and respect these deceased personalities graves and yet these salafi types deny the existence of the blessings transmitted through these pious friends of the Creator – salaam

  118. Muazzam Khalil says:

    Only those intoxicated with spirituality can answer the question about Khidr, he rides the oceans, you can meet him on the shores, beaches and wherever there’s fresh water, when you shake hands with him you can feel there are no bones in his hands. He is the secret of God.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>