Seeking Sacred Sunni Knowledge

The Tawassul Challenge

 

greybismillah

By Ibn Saad

This is an open Challenge to those who are opposed to Tawassul. Please look at the quotes below and answer all of the following questions in the comment section:

1) Are the statements below correctly ascribed to their respective Imam, if not which is a false statement and why?
2) If indeed these Imams did make these claims, should Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Ibn Khuzaima, Imam Ibn Hibban, Imam Nawawi and Imam Shawkani be considered kuffar based on this?
3) If not, are they Muslims, but guilty of Shirk of some degree?
4) If not, are they mubtadi’een?
5) Were they jahils to allow/perform tawassul without (supposedly) any daleels?

If you have said NO so far, can we agree that Tawassul is a Fiqh issue instead of an Aqeedah one?

 

—————————————————————————————–

Imam Ahmad and Tawassul:

:( المرداوي في الإنصاف ( 2:456
“… يجوز التوسل بالرجل الصالح على الصحيح من المذهب، وقيل:
يُستحب. قال الإمام أحمد للمروذي : يتوسل بالنبي صلى اله عليه وسلم في دعائه
وجزم به في المستوعب وغيره..”

Al-Mardawi said: “The correct position of the [Hanbali] madhhab is that it is permissible in one’s du`a to use as one’s means a pious person (saalih), and it is said that it is desirable (mustahabb). Imam Ahmad said to Abu Bakr al-Marwazi: ‘Let him use the Prophet as a means in his supplication to Allah.’” (Al-Insaf 2:456) This is also cited by Ibn Taymiyyah in Majmu’ Al-Fatawa (1:140).

Imam Shawkani and Tawassul:

قال الشوكاني في تحفة الذاكرين:
“وفي الحديث دليل على جواز التوسل برسول الله صلى اله عليه وسلم إلى الله عز وجل
مع اعتقاد أن الفاعل هو الله سبحانه وتعالى، وأنه المعطي والمانع ما شاء

.(10/ كان وما لم يشأ لم يكن” (تحفة الأحوذي 34

Al-Shawkani said, in Tuhfatul Dhakireen:
“And in this hadith is proof for the permissibility of tawassul through the Prophet [s] to Allah, with the conviction that the [actual] doer is Allah, and that He is the Giver and the Withholder. What He wills is, and what He does not will, will never be.”

Al-Albani on Imam Hanbal and Imam Al-Shawkani:

:( الألباني في “التوسل أنواعه وأحكامه” ( 38
“…مع أنه قد قال ببعضه بعض الأئمة، فأجاز الإمام أحمد التوسل
بالرسول وحده فقط، وأجاز غيره كالإمام الشوكاني التوسل به وبغيره من
الأنبياء والصالحي

Al-Albani in ‘Al-Tawassul’: “Even though some of them have been allowed by some of the Imams, so for instance Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal allowed tawassul through the Prophet alone, and others such as Imam Al-Shawkani allowed tawassul through his [pbuh] and through others from the Prophets and the righteous.”

Imam Nawawi on Tawassul:

النووي في المجموع شرح المهذب (كتاب الحج):
ثم يرجع إلى موقفه الأول قبالة وجه رسول الله صلى اله عليه وسلم ويتوسل به في حق
نفسه، ويستشفع به إلى ربه سبحانه وتعالى

[The pilgrim] should then face the shrine of the Messenger of Allah (s) , make him an intermediary [to Allah], and intercede through him to Allah… (Majmu’ Sharh Al-Madhhab – Kitab Al-Hajj)

Imam Ibn Khuzaymah and Tawassul:

:(7/ ابن حجر في تهذيب التهذيب ( 339

قال (الحاكم النيسابوري) وسمعت أبا بكر محمد بن المؤمل بن الحسن
بن عيسى يقول خرجنا مع امام أهل الحديث أبي بكر بن خزيمة وعديله
أبي علي الثقفي مع جماعة من مشائخنا وهم إذ ذاك متوافرون إلى زيارة
قبر علي بن موسى الرضى بطوس قال فرأيت من تعظيمه يعنى ابن خزيمة
لتلك البقعة وتواضعه لها وتضرعه عندها ما تحيرنا.

Ibn Hajar (Tahdhib 7:339) narrates the account of the Imam of Ahlul-Hadith Ibn Khuzaymah, under the entry of the same Ali bin Musa Al-Ridha. He relates that Ibn Khuzaymah also performed tawassul at the grave of Al-Ridha.

Ibn Hibban and Tawassul:

 

:(8/456/ ابن حبان في كتابه الثقات ( 14411
مات على بن موسى الرضا بطوس من شربة سقاه إياها المأمون فمات من
ساعته وذلك في يوم السبت آخر يوم سنة ثلاث ومائتين وقبره بسناباذ
خارج النوقان مشهور يزار بجنب قبر الرشيد، قد زرته مرارا كثيرة وما
حلت بي شدة في وقت مقامى بطوس فزرت قبر على بن موسى الرضا
صلوات الله على جده وعليه ودعوت الله إزالتها عنى إلا أستجيب لي
وزالت عنى تلك الشدة وهذا شيء جربته مرارا فوجدته كذلك أماتنا
الله على محبة المصطفى وأهل بيته صلى الله عليه وعليهم أجمعين.

In his Rijal book Al-Thuqat (8:456:14411), under the entry of Ali bin Musa al-Ridha, Ibn Hibban relates his own account of going to Al-Ridha’s grave, performing tawassul through him and states that whenever “I was afflicted with a problem during my stay in Tus, I would visit the grave of Ali bin Musa (Allah’s blessings be upon his grandfather and him) and ask Allah to relieve me of that problem and it (my dua) would be answered and the problem alleviated. And this is something I did, and found to work, many times …”

 

 

101 Responses to “The Tawassul Challenge”

  1. Abu Zaid says:

    Dear respected br.Ibn Saad, I’m a little confused on this issue b/c I don’t know arabic and my knowledge is very elementary. I have jumped between sites regarding this topic and would like a point of clarifaction. The examples of tawassul you provided of the great Imams in your challenge, are they examples of tawassul through the Prophet’s(s) status or rank? Or are they examples of tawassul asking the Prophet(s)directly i.e. Is Imam Ahamd saying…”O Prophet give me so and so…” In the latter case, is this an example of istigatha?

    So essentially my confusion is I’m not sure if you’re challenging the issue of istighatha or tawassul. Or perphaps I’m using the terms incorrectly.

    Jazak’Allah for your comments to follow.

  2. Taha says:

    Assalamu alaykum,

    The quotes do not specify whether the imams performed tawassul or istighatha – BUT the quote from Imam Shawkani is clearly istighatha.

    How? Well, the hadith he is commenting on contains the phrase ‘O Muhammad…’.
    Moreover, he reminds the reader that the real Giver is Allah, which seems to suggest that operationally it is the Prophet who is being invoked (i.e. ‘O Muhammad…’).

    Also, another proof that the Salafi understanding is off is that our imams is the fact that the scholars who compiled the hadith books (e.g. Imams Ibn Majah, Ibn Khuzaima) put the hadith of tawassul under chapter titles that clearly indicate the *practicality* of the hadith.
    This, of course, is different from the Salafi undertanding, which is: that the hadith merely shows a historical event; and that this portion of the Sunnah is defunct now.

  3. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,

    An example of istigatha from a sahabah:

    From the Sahabi Malik al-Dar r.a.:
    The people suffered a drought in `Umar’s khilafa, whereupon a man[Bilal ibn al- Harith - according to ibn Hajar] came to the grave of the Prophet s.a.w. and said: “Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished.” After this the Prophet(alayhi salaat wa salaam) appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: Be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter wept and said: “My Lord! I spare no effort except in what escapes my power.”

    Related by Ibn Abū Shaybah in al-Musannaf (12:31-2#12051); Bayhaqī, Dalā’il-un-nubuwwah (7:47); Ibn ‘Abd-ul-Barr, al-Istī‘āb fī ma‘rifat-il-ashāb (2:464); Subkī, Shifā’-us-siqām fī ziyārat khayr-il-anām (p.130); ‘Alā’-ud-Dīn ‘Alī, Kanz-ul-‘ummāl (8:431#23535); and Abū Ya‘lā Khalīl bin ‘Abdullāh Khalīlī Qazwīnī in Kitāb-ul-irshād fī ma‘rifat ‘ulamā’-il-hadith (1:313-4), as quoted by Mahmūd Sa‘īd Mamdūh in Raf‘-ul-minārah (p.262).
    (Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah vol.12 pg.31-32; Dalaailun-nubuwwah of Imaam Bayhaqi vol.7 pg.47).

    Some sayings of hanbali scholars:

    Imām Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī (ra), in his encyclopaedic work; al-Mughnī,(3/588), in the section concerning visitation of the Prophet’s (alayhi salaat wa salaam) grave: Then you go to the grave[of the prophet(alayhi salaat wa salaam)] and say: “ Indeed, I have come to you seeking forgiveness for my sins and seeking intercession through you unto my Lord.”This is also mentioned in ash-Sharh al-Kabīr.

    Imām as-Sāmirī (ra) said in al-Mustaw’ab (3/88):
    “There is no harm in Tawassul to Allāh the Exalted in Istisqā’ (prayer for rain) through the Shuyūkh, the ascetics, and the people of knowledge virtue and religion from among the Muslims.”

    Imām Taqiuddīn al-Adamī (ra) said in al-Munawwar (190):
    “And Tawassul through the righteous is allowed (Ar. Yubāh).”

    Imām Ibn Muflih (ra) said in al-Furū’ (3/229):
    “And it is allowed to perform Tawassul through a righteous person, and it is said; it is recommended (Ar. Yustahab).”

    Imām al-Mardāwī (ra) said in al-Insaf (2/456):
    “It is allowed to perform Tawassul through a righteous man according to what is correct in the Madh’hab. And it is said that it is recommended.”

  4. Abu Zaid says:

    Jazak’Allah brother Taha,

    Your response is very informative, could you cite the narration that Shawkani used so that I can get a clearer picture as to what he was referring to.

    As well, could you also elaborate on this concept of using the hadith as a historical event and that that salafis consider that part of sunnah as being defunct. I haven’t come across an explanation on either side with that notion. It would be greatly appreciated.

    Once again, Jazak’Allah khairan for your comments to follow.

  5. Taha says:

    As-Salam alaykum,

    Wa iyyakum khayran.

    Imam Shawkani’s comment was on the report of Uthman bin Hunayf radiallahu anhu.

  6. faqir says:

    as-salamu alaikum

    some material which may be of help in relation to Istighatha:

    Shaykh Yūsuf Khattār Muhammad on al-madad:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=48

    Imam Shams al-Din al-Ramli on istighatha:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=48

    Imam ibn al-Hajj al-Abdari on Tawassul and istighatha:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=48

    Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami on seeking aid with the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=48

    Imam al-Subki on Tawassul, istighatha and tashaffu’:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=45&Itemid=48

    Shaykh Gibril on Tawassul/Istighatha:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=94&Itemid=48

    Imam Zahid al-Kawthari on tawassul, isti’ana and istighatha:
    http://www.marifah.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=114&Itemid=48

    I hope these help.

    was-salam
    al-abd al-faqir

  7. Um Abdullah says:

    Hadith of Malik al Dar is NOT evidence for tawassul by the duaa of the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death, how?

    Read here:

    **Edited**

  8. Abul Layth says:

    Umm Abdullah, you are welcome to post and comment. Do not, however, attempt to use our SI as an advertising grounds for your muqaatili site. Feel free to post your proofs here, without making it too long.

    Thanks

  9. Um Abdullah says:

    bro if I post it here, I am going to post it like it is, as I can’t summerize it more than it already is, I will only remove the arabic text insha Allah

  10. Um Abdullah says:

    Bismillah, wal-hamdulillah was-salatu was-salamu ‘ala Rasulillah.

    I have come across many discussion regarding the narration of Malik al Dar about tawassul, and all of them were concentrating on the “authenticiy” of the narration, discussing its chain.
    But I haven’t come across any discussions on the text of the hadith itself, the story.
    Except for some quotes here and there from some current shaikhs, sited in ahl alhadith forum, and those 2 or 3 points mentioned by those shaikhs led me to search on the text and story of the hadith in classical books of past scholars, and I have found it very interesting and informative.
    The things I discovered and read show a totally different understanding of the hadith, than what is understood by many shaikhs of today, it only needs for one to go deep and see where the scholars of the past quoted the narration, in which chapter and what they said before quoting it to understand the real meaning of the hadith.
    To make the story short, I will go straight to the points that I have regarding the text and story of this narration of Malik al Dar.

    The text of the narration:
    It is related from Malik al-Dar, `Umar’s treasurer, that the people suffered a drought during the time of `Umar (his khilafah), whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter said: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!””

    1. The ones who use this hadith for this type of tawassul say that Umar radiyallahu anhu did not rebuke the man who did istisqa’ at the grave.
    Reply: There is no clear evidence in the hadith that the man told Umar of him going to the grave, but clearly he did tell him of the dream, telling him the message of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
    so to say that he told him about his istisqa’ at the grave is an assumption, and we can’t use assumptions as evidence.

    2. What Imams of Hadith and other Imams understood this hadith to mean:A. Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani -rahimahu Allah- in his books “Fath al Bari” (vol 3 pg. 441):

    He sites it in “book of Jum’ah” the chapter “The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought”, in the chapter heading section, in which he quotes hadiths that have relevance to the chapter heading, and that connect it with hadiths that come under that chapter.
    And amongest those narrations he mentions the narration of Malik al Dar, and he only quotes part of the narration, he stops at “go to Umar”, he used this as evidence that people ask the Imam to do istisqa for them in times of drought.
    He didn’t mention the rest of the hadith because it has nothing to do with the chapter heading, he only quoted what he believed fits the chapters title, for he says at the end of the section, after mentioning this narration:

    “From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“

    so, al Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah understood from this hadith that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was directing the man to go ask the Imam, during that time (Umar radiyallahu anhu), to do istisqa’ for them.

    B. Hafidh Ibn Kathir -rahimahu Allah-:
    He sites it in his book “al Bidayah wan Nihaya” (vol7 pg.104 ), in which he mentions some narrations, right before he mentions Malik ad Dar’s narration, that explain the meaning of the narration.
    The narrations before it are by Sayf Ibn Umar, and in them is the mentioning of Umar radiyallahu anhu, after hearing about the man’s dream (who is said to be Bilal al Harith), asking the people on the minbar if they have seen anything bad from him, and then he tells them about the dream that the Bilal saw, so they told him: “Bilal has spoken the truth, so make istiqatha (seek or ask for help) to Allah, then the Muslims“. So then Umar radiyallahu anhu does istisqa’ through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
    and in the second narration, they said “he found you slow in doing istisqa’, so do istisqa’ for us “, so he did.

    (Note: these 2 narrations could be weak, but the point is that al Hafidh Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah mentioned them right before the narration of Malik, showing what it is about, and means, which shows what he understood it to mean, same as what Ibn Hajar (r A) understood from it).

    C. Shihab adDeen Abdur Rahman bin Askar al Baghdadi al Maliki (d. 732) in his book “Irshad as-Salik ila Ashraf al Masalik fi fiqh al Imam Malik“:

    He sited it in chapter of (istisqa’ – asking for rain), in which he said (before siting the narration of Malik al Dar):
    “and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt“
    Then he quotes the narration that is in sahih, the tawassul of Umar through al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma), and right after it he says “and Ibn Abi Shayba narrated”, and quotes Malik ad Dar’s narration.
    so this clearly shows that he used the narration of Malik as evidence for “doing istishfa’ through ahl al bayt”, for al Abbas ra was the uncle f the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, and the dream the man saw, was guiding him to ask Umar to do istisqa’ for the people, in which he did it through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu

    D. Ala’ ad Deen Ali al Mutaqi al Hindi al Burhan Furi (d. 975) in his book “Kanz al Ummal“:
    He sites it in chapter of (salat al Istisqa’ – prayer for rain), which shows that the narration of Malik is connected to narration about tawassul by al Abbas, in which Umar did salat al istisqa’ (prayer for rain).
    Thus the narration of Malik is understood by Allama Mutaqi Hindi to mean what the other Imams (above) understood it to mean
    so we get from all of this, that the story of Malik al Dar’s narration is connected to the hadith about Umar’s tawassul through al Abbas, all leading to doing istisqa’ through the living, and not through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death.
    3_ There are narrations of the same story, with an addition, if they are authentic (the authenticiy is not known to me so far), they would give very strong support to the understanding of the above scholars.
    and it also shows what the scholars who sited the narrations believed the narration to mean.

    A. Imam Ibn Abd al Bar al Maliki in his book “al Isti’ab fi ma’rifat al As-hab“:

    the people suffered a drought during the time of ‘Umar (his khilafah), whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and said:”O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to ‘Umar then tell him to do istisqa’ (ask Allah for rain) for the people, and that they will be watered. And tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar, and Umar cried and said “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”

    B. Abu Ja’far Ahmad Abdullah at Tabari (d. 694 ) in his book “ar Riyadh an Nadhirah fi Manaqib al Ashara“:
    Anas bin Malik narrated:
    The people suffered drought during Umar’s time, whereupon a man came to teh grave of the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your community, for verily they have but perished,”, he said so the Messenger of Allah came to him in a dream and told him “Go to ‘Umar then tell him to do istisqa’ (ask Allah for rain) for the people, and that they will be watered. And tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar, and Umar cried and said “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”. narrated by al Baghawi in al fada’il and Abu Umar.

    4_ It didn’t rain until after Umar radiyallahu anhu made istisqa’ by al Abbas radiyallahu anhum, in which he made duaa to Allah for rain.
    If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others, then the rain would have come down the same day the man asked him for istisqa’.
    But the sky didn’t rain until after Umar made isitisqa’ by al Abbas radiyallahu anhuma, immediatly after.
    this shows that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, was guiding the man to ask the Imam to do istisqa’ and not him, hinting to Umar by saying to him “be clever!”, and when Umar did istisqa’ by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma) the sky rained.

    5_ If going to the grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to ask him to make duaa to Allah was permissable, Umar radiyallahu anhu would have done that when wanting to do istisqa’ instead of doing it through the uncle of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, who was alive, and Umar’s (r.a) saying “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa, and now we do tawassul through the uncle of your Prophet…”, indicates that they don’t make tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) duaa after his death, and only when he was alive.

  11. faqir says:

    as-salamu alaikum,

    with all due respect noble sister that was a rather pointless exposition.

    if you had proof that the `ulema you quoted considered the ‘unknown man’ [identifed by al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar as the companion Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani (ra)] was guilty of shirk for asking the Nabi [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] to ask for rain for his community then you would have something worth shouting about!

    Rather, the fact is, they did not consider it shirk or they would have said it.

    Whether some also used this narration as proof of tawassul through the living is irrelevant – we don’t object to that and are happy if scholars considered this narration to be an additional proof for this.

    Furthermore, if it is opinions of reliable authorities you are after than the following is a clear quote from al-Hafiz ibn hajar al-Haytami [rh] regarding the athar of Malik al-Dar.

    He says in al-Jawhar al-Munazzam:

    “Tawassul could also mean seeking supplication from him for indeed he is living and knowing the question of the one who asks him. It has been authentically reported from a long Hadith:

    The people suffered a drought during the successorship of `Umar [ra], whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said:“O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him that the rain shall come. And in it also it appears: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

    Meaning, gentleness, because he was severe in the religion of Allah.

    So he came to him and informed him, after which he cried and then said:

    “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”

    In another narration it states that the one who saw the dream was Bilal ibn Harith al-Muzani, the companion [ra].”

    [end of quote]

    For further details refer to the link I gave above.

    was-salam

  12. Um Abdullah says:

    bro faqir

    1. Imam Ibn Hajar al Asqalani rahimahu Allah said that Sayf is the one who identified the unknown man as being Bilal ibn Harith, and Sayf is weak, so his saying can’t be accepted in a matter like this.

    2. That act of asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi was sallam to make duaa for someone (not making duaa directly to him), is considered an innovation that leads to shirk according to some Salafi scholars, so not all of them consider it shirk.
    and some of the past scholars might have had the same opinion, but there wasn’t really any need to show that it was wrong and not part of shari’ah, because the narration speaks for itself, very clear, it tells how the Prophet S.A.W. corrected the man who came to him, and showed him the correct way to act when needing to make duaa and tawassul, by going to the Imam, and many scholars don’t comment on narrations that are clear and speak for themselves, or they make their understanding of it clear in the chapter title.

    3. and what about the sky not raining until after Umar’s tawassul by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma)and not after the man asking the Prophet sallallahu alyhi wa sallam
    to make duaa ?

    and both incidents happened in time of drought during khilafa of Umar r.A.

  13. Abdullah says:

    Yes muslims should should censor falsehood, just like we wouldnt let someone post a link to a pornography site we shouldnt let them promote their man-god wahabi cult both are haram. The scholars of Ahlus sunnah locked and denounced the likes of Ibn taymiyyah and ibn abdul wahhab so they do not spread their filthy aqeedah.

  14. Ibn Saad says:

    Do I have to quote this hadith again….

    Sahih Bukhari

    Volume 1, Book 2, Number 33:

    Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr:

    The Prophet said, “Whoever has the following four (characteristics) will be a pure hypocrite and whoever has one of the following four characteristics will have one characteristic of hypocrisy unless and until he gives it up.

    1. Whenever he is entrusted, he betrays.

    2. Whenever he speaks, he tells a lie.

    3. Whenever he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous.

    4. Whenever he quarrels, he behaves in a very imprudent, evil and insulting manner.”

  15. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum Umm Abdullah,
    In regards to you discrediting Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami’s fatwa on the issue with reference to the narration in question due to Sayf’s “dhaifness” in hadith literature..the following explanation is provided on Sidi Faqir’s site :

    “Fourthly, Sayf ibn Umar – no doubt he was problematic – BUT, Imam ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his Taqreeb al-Tahdhib (no. 2724) said that he was “Da’eef fil Hadith Umda fil Ta’rikh…” Meaning: “Weak in Hadith, a PILLAR in HISTORY..”

    QUESTION: I was wondering what you could tell me about Sayf b. Umar. He is a primary source for Imam al-Tabari’s material in his Tarikh. What is his reliability and all of the other necessary info.

    Reply of Dr. GF Haddad:

    Sayf ibn `Umar Al-Asadi al-Tamimi al-Dabbi al-Kufi (d. ca. 178) met the Tabi`in and was a “chronicler” (akhbari) as opposed to a muhaddith historian and the author of al-Ridda, Futuh al-Buldaan, al-Fitnatu wal Jamal and other historical works.

    In hadith he was declared weak by Yahya ibn Ma`in, Ya`qub ibn Sufyan, al-Nasa’i, and Abu Dawud. Abu Hatim said he was “discarded, of the same type as al-Waqidi.” Al-Daraqutni said he was discarded. Ibn Hibban even said he was accused of hidden heresy (zandaqa) and forgery, charges which Ibn Hajar rejected as outlandish in al-Taqrib where he merely grades him as da`if, while Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr in his notes on al-Dhahabi’s Mughni says: “There is no proof of any zandaqa in him, rather, the narrations from him indicate the contrary.”

    Al-Tirmidhi narrates from him the hadith: “When you see those who insult my Companions, say: The curse of Allah be on the evil you do!” which al-Tirmidhi then grades “disclaimed” and he describes Sayf as unknown. Al-Dhahabi in al-Mughni fil-Du`afa’ said he was “discarded by agreement” and, in Tarikh al-Islam, said “he narrated from Jabir al-Ju`fi, Hisham ibn `Urwa, Isma`il ibn Abi Khalid, `Ubayd Allah ibn `Umar, and many unknowns and chroniclers.”

    Yet, he is considered not only reliable but “eminently reliable” in history, as shown by Ibn Hajar’s grading in the Taqrib: “Da`if fil-hadith, `umdatun fil-tarikh,” notwithstanding the acrimonious dissent of Shu`ayb al-Arna’ut and Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf in their Tahrir al-Taqrib. Indeed, he a primary source for al-Tabari in his Tarikh, Ibn Hajar in his Isaba, and Ibn Kathir in his Bidaya while Ibn `Abd al-Barr cites him in al-Isti`ab as does al-Sakhawi in Fath al-Mughith. Even al-Dhahabi cites him often in his Tarikh al-Islam.

    Follow up Questions:

    [1] I was wondering, sidi, if you could explain the reasoning behind why and how a specific narrator who is discarded or weak in hadith can be considered “eminently reliable” when it comes to history? What were the reasons behind Sayf’s weakness in narrating hadith as opposed to historical events?

    [2] is the identification of the “unknown man” as hadhrat bilal ra by sayf ibn umar al-tamimi in the malik al-dar narration considered a historical report?

    Reply of Dr. GF Haddad:

    Those who questioned the `adl of al-Waqidi and Sayf were dismissed.The issue here is dabit vs. non-dabit. You know well we can have honest people who do not have a clue what dabt requires. Imam Malik mentioned that he met 70 extremely honest shuyukh in Madina but he did not narrate from a single one of them because they were nescient in hadith transmission. Now, take someone who does have a clue but given the abundance of things he transmits he makes so many mistakes that he becomes similarly discardable. Now make him so erudite, so researched, so full of gems that it is simply impossible to discard him altogether. This is the case with al-Waqidi and Sayf. These scholars would go to the actual sites of battles and look for descendents and interview them one by one for stories. Hence the large number of “unknowns” in their chains. Yet, when it comes to purely historical details such as whether a certain Sahabi was a Badri or not, they might even best al-Bukhari and Muslim.

    And yes, the identification of the Sahabi in Malik al-Dar’s report as Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani [NOT Bilal ibn Rabah al-Habashi, in case that is whom the respondent meant by "Hadrat Bilal"] is definitely a historical clue. Allah Most High be well-pleased with them all.

    Just by the way, what do you make of Ibn Mas’ud’s report of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. doing istighfar for the Muslims?

  16. Ibn Anwar says:

    It is also interesting that you informed that “an innovation that leads to shirk according to some Salafi scholars, so not all of them consider it shirk.” Is it safe to infer from this that most salafi scholars as opposed to some do not consider it shirk?

  17. Abul Layth says:

    Sister Umm Abdullah,

    An obvious example of the salaf partaking in tawassul is what Sidi Taha had posted regarding the story of Abdul Maalik ibn Abjar:

    حدثنا أبو هشام محمد بن يزيد بن محمد بن كثير ابن رفاعة قال: جاء رجل إلى عبد الملك بن أبجر، فجس بطنه فقال: بل داء لا يبرأ قال: ما هو ؟ قال: الدبيلة، قال: فتحول الرجل فقال: الله الله الله ربي لا أشرك به شيئاً، اللهم أني أتوجه إليك بنبيك محمد نبي الرحمة، يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربك وربي يرحمني بما بي، قال فجس بطنه فقال: قد برئت مما بك من علة.

    وقد كان ابن أبجر حافظاً ثقةً، وكان مع ذلك طبيباً ماهراً يداوي الناس مجاناً، وهو من رجال مسلم وأبي داود والترمذي والنسائي

    Ibn Taymiyyah has related a story in the perspective of this tradition that Ibn Abī Dunyā has narrated a tradition in his book Mujābī ad-du‘ā’ that a person came over to see ‘Abd-ul-Malik bin Sa‘īd bin Abjar. ‘Abd-ul-Malik pressed his belly and told him that he was suffering from an incurable disease. The man asked him: ‘what is it?’ ‘Abd-ul-Malik replied that it was a kind of ulcer that grows inside the belly and ultimately kills the man. It is said that the patient turned round and then he said:

    Allāh! Allāh! Allāh is my Lord. I regard no one as His rival or partner. O Allāh! I beseech You and submit myself to You through the mediation of Your Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), the merciful Prophet. O Muhammad! Through your means I submit myself to your and my Lord that He should take mercy on me in my state of illness.

    It is said that ‘Abd-ul-Malik pressed his belly again and said: ‘you are cured, you are no longer suffering from any disease.’

    See this thread for a critical analysis of the chain as well as the statement of ibn taymiyyah regarding it: http://seekingilm.com/archives/153

    If this is such an atrocious bida’ah, as the wahhabi/Muqaatili order claim, why was it an established act amongst the foremost, earliest scholars of the past? Need we remind you AGAIN of the story narrated by the erudite Jurist and Muhaddith At-Tabarani? He was of the earlier generations, also performing acts of tawassul by the du’aa of the Nabi (‘alayhis salaam). What right do you have to make such claims without substantial evidence? Where is the tabdee’ of the salaf upon this act? Where is their castigation of the masses, like that of the wahhabis?

    Fact: the Salaf did perform tawassul with the Nabi (‘alayhis salaam) after his death.

    Fact: None of the salaf ever rejected this action.

    Fact: Those who do so are upon heretical innovation, as stated by Imam As-Subki.

    3. and what about the sky not raining until after Umar’s tawassul by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma)and not after the man asking the Prophet sallallahu alyhi wa sallam
    to make duaa ?

    and both incidents happened in time of drought during khilafa of Umar r.A.

    The usage of this incident by the wahhabi/muqaatili movement has been exposed by the Sunni ‘Ulamaa’. We shall soon be posting their 5 point refutation of this shameless, null, and conjectural attempt of using the permissible in an attempt to force prohibition upon an established act of Islam. Upon posting the article I will link to it in the comments section here.

    Allah have mercy upon us! Amin!

  18. Abul Layth says:

    Also Umm Abdullah, you criticize br. Faqir for making claims without substance, yet what greater misdeed than to do the act you criticized him for. You stated:

    and some of the past scholars might have had the same opinion, but there wasn’t really any need to show that it was wrong and not part of shari’ah, because the narration speaks for itself, very clear, it tells how the Prophet S.A.W. corrected the man who came to him, and showed him the correct way to act when needing to make duaa and tawassul, by going to the Imam, and many scholars don’t comment on narrations that are clear and speak for themselves, or they make their understanding of it clear in the chapter title.

    Conjecture of the highest order Madam! “Might” is not proof for you, and never will be. As we have shown above and throughout this site, there are many authentic narrations of the salaf performing tawassul with the Nabi (‘alayhis salaam) and others (such as ibn khuzayma). It is obligatory for the scholars to speak out. Where did they speak out in the earlier generations, while this act was being done in their presence?

    Or is it as As-Subki stated? Indeed!

  19. Ibn Saad says:

    Salam

    By the way, moreso than the hadith of Malik Al-Dar, I am more interested in seeing why people object to the narration of the man in need, and what people have to say about the hadith which states the Prophet makes istighfar for us in his grave.
    Before objecting to the narration of the man in need in Tabarani’s Mu’jam, please check out the version in Bayhaqi’s Dalail Al-Nubuwwah p. 166-168:
    22

  20. Um Abdullah says:

    First of all
    I am not here to speak about tawassul that is by the status or jah of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, which has to do with the hadith of the blind man.

    my concern is the tawassul that is asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us after his death.

    secondly, to Abu Layth, you said:

    [Also Umm Abdullah, you criticize br. Faqir for making claims without substance, yet what greater misdeed than to do the act you criticized him for.]

    yes, it is an assumption that they might have not considered it shirk but just an innovation, or maybe they did consider it shirk ! Allahu a’lam, I am not using that as evidence, either way, the narration is clear and doesn’t need any comment on it, especially when their arabic and knowledge was much stronger than us today, and I havent’ come across any quotes by earlier scholars explaining the narration of Malik al Dar to be evidence for the tawassul that you do(tawassul by asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam for duaa).

    The point of my article is to show that they didn’t understand the narration the way you understand it to mean today.

    3. To brother Ibn Anwar, regarding Sayf, yes he is accepted in history, but here you are using the narration as evidence for an act of worship not just narrating an incident in history, so until u prove it to be true (that a sahabi did it) then u can’t use it as evidence for ibadah.

    4. I do not like to discuss in this manner, labeling others with label’s which they do not accept or call themselves by, like saying [wahhabi/Muqaatili], you don’t see me calling you jahmi mu’atilis .

  21. Abu Zaid says:

    assalaam alaikum br.Saad

    I remember Yasir Qadhi and tilmeedh discussing this very narration at maghrib forums. Do a search on tawassul and you will find it. They discussed the isnad back and forth.

  22. Ibn Umer says:

    Indeed. May Allah reward the Shaykh immensely for taking out the time from his busy schedule to discuss with me. I had been quite unaware at that time that the forum was only for students.

    In any case, the arguments he presented were those that were used by Shaykh Al-Albani, and already refuted by Shaykh Mamduh and others.
    It was those arguments that I was presenting.

    I think those who cannot comprehend tawassul as being a fiqh issue should avoid it because they would be committing shirk. But they shouldn’t condemn others just because they fail to comprehend the understanding of those who are fine with tawassul (including many great imams).

    Likewise, those who DO accept tawassul should not condemn those who are anti-tawassul. We should understand that they are simply rejecting a notion that they sincerely believe, as per their understanding of it, to constitute shirk.

    What is condemnable, however, is their trigger-freedom in handing out Takfir tickets.

  23. Abul Layth says:

    secondly, to Abu Layth, you said:
    [Also Umm Abdullah, you criticize br. Faqir for making claims without substance, yet what greater misdeed than to do the act you criticized him for.]
    yes, it is an assumption that they might have not considered it shirk but just an innovation, or maybe they did consider it shirk ! Allahu a’lam, I am not using that as evidence, either way, the narration is clear and doesn’t need any comment on it, especially when their arabic and knowledge was much stronger than us today, and I havent’ come across any quotes by earlier scholars explaining the narration of Malik al Dar to be evidence for the tawassul that you do(tawassul by asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam for duaa).
    The point of my article is to show that they didn’t understand the narration the way you understand it to mean today.

    You did not prove that at all. In fact, as you just admitted, what you have forwarded is pure speculation and not proof.

    Let us turn the tables on you with your own argument, even though what you have said is far-fetched. Let us forward the same speculative argument as yourself, and state, hypothetically, that the ‘Ulama’ did not need to explain the hadith of Malik Ad-Daar because it is “clear and doesn’t need any comment on it, especially when their arabic and knowledge was much stronger than us today”. The hadith is clear, and that is why the wahhabi ilk have struggled for years attacking the narration. The obvious result of the hadith is proof that seeking tawassul with the Nabi, post-mortum, is an established act amongst the salaf us saalih.

    3. To brother Ibn Anwar, regarding Sayf, yes he is accepted in history, but here you are using the narration as evidence for an act of worship not just narrating an incident in history, so until u prove it to be true (that a sahabi did it) then u can’t use it as evidence for ibadah.

    The scholars of the past accepted that it was Bilal ibn Al Harith Al-Muzani by accepting the historical reports of Sayf. Can you produce dissent from the scholars of old on this specific point of rejection? Or have you innovated dissent some 1000 years later? Furthermore, it matters not considering the scholars also testify that Maalik Ad-Daar was a companion himself; ex: Ibn Hajr. The chain is Sahih as declared by the scholars of old. The issue of it being Bilal ibn Al Harith is a historical issue, and hence the statement of Sayf can be used according to the standards of the scholars of Islam. Or have you invented new standards?

    Furthermore, justification does not depend on Bilāl but on ‘Umar bin al-Khattāb’s act. He did not prevent Bilāl from performing his act; on the contrary, he acknowledged it. He rather himself cried and said: ‘my Creator, I do not shirk responsibility but I may be made more humble.’ Therefore the person visiting the grave, whether he is a Companion or a Successor, does not affect the soundness of the tradition.

    4. I do not like to discuss in this manner, labeling others with label’s which they do not accept or call themselves by, like saying [wahhabi/Muqaatili], you don’t see me calling you jahmi mu’atilis .

    No one called you a Muqaatili. Get over it.

  24. Abul Layth says:

    Also, the quotes mentioned above from the scholars of old, by brother Ibn Sa’ad, support our claims of seeking tawassul through the nabi. “Bin-Nabi” can be through his jaah or by asking him to make du’aa. It is clear. Thanks.

  25. faqir says:

    as-salamu alaikum

    More encouragement of ‘shirk’ – this time from al-Qurtubi in al-Jami li ahkam al qur’an [5:265/6] regarding surah an-Nisa, ayah 64:

    “….If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful.”

    الجامع لأحكام القرآن، – للإمام القرطبي
    الجزء 5 من الطبعة >> سورة النساء >> الآية: 64 {وما أرسلنا من رسول إلا ليطاع بإذن الله ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاؤوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما}.

    قوله تعالى: “وما أرسلنا من رسول” “من” زائدة للتوكيد. “إلا ليطاع” فيما أمر به ونهى عنه. “بإذن الله” بعلم الله. وقيل: بتوفيق الله. “ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاؤوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول” روى أبو صادق عن علي قال: قدم علينا أعرابي بعد ما دفنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بثلاثة أيام، فرمى بنفسه على قبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وحثا على رأسه من ترابه فقال: قلت يا رسول الله فسمعنا قولك، ووعيت عن الله فوعينا عنك، وكان فيما أنزل الله عليك “ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم” الآية، وقد ظلمت نفسي وجئتك تستغفر لي. فنودي من القبر أنه قد غفر لك. “لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما” أي قابلا لتوبتهم، وهما مفعولان لا غير.

    ..Abu Sadiq has reported it from `Ali. A villager came to see us three days after the burial of the Holy Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]. He placed himself near the Prophet’s grave, sprinkled its earth over his body and said:

    `O Messenger of Allah, you said and we have heard from you. You received commands from Allah and we received commands from you, and of these divine commands is wa law annahum idh zalamu anfusahum. It is true that I have wronged myself, therefore, you should pray for my forgiveness.’

    (In response to the villager’s act of imploring) he was called out from the grave: ‘there is no doubt that you have been forgiven.’

    was-salam

  26. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,

    Masha’Allah..what an excellent discussion….here’s further encouragement of “shirk” from the great scholars:

    The beduin at the blessed grave of our prophet (alayhi salaat wa salaam):
    Al-`Utbi said: “As I was sitting by the grave of the Prophet, a Beduin Arab came and said: “Peace be upon you, O Messenger of Allah! I have heard Allah saying: “If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful” (Quran 4:64), so I have come to you asking forgiveness for my sin, seeking your intercession with my Lord.” [Then he began to recite poetry]
    Then he left, and I dozed and saw the Prophet in my sleep. He said to me: “O `Utbi, run after the Beduin and give him glad tidings that Allah has forgiven him.”"

    The classification of the hadith:

    A report graded mashhur (established and well-known) and related by Nawawi, Adhkar, Mecca ed. p. 253-254, al-Majmu` 8:217, and al-Idah fi manasik al-hajj, chapters on visiting the grave of the Prophet; Ibn Jama`a, Hidayat al-salik 3:1384; Ibn `Aqil, al-Tadhkira; Ibn Qudama, al-Mughni 3:556-557; al-Qurtubi, Tafsir of 4:64 in Ahkam al-Qur’an 5:265; Samhudi, Khulasat al-Wafa p. 121 (from Nawawi); Dahlan, Khulasat al-Kalam 2:247; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir 2:306, and al-Bidayat wa al-nihayat 1:180; Abu al-Faraj ibn Qudama, al-Sharh al-kabir 3:495; al-Bahuti al-Hanbali, Kashshaf al-qina` 5:30; Taqi al-Din al-Subki, Shifa’ al-siqam p. 52; Ibn al-Jawzi, Muthir al-gharam al-sakin ila ashraf al-amakin p. 490; al-Bayhaqi, Shu`ab al-iman #4178; Ibn `Asakir, Mukhtasar tarikh Dimashq 2:408; Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Jawhar al-munazzam [commentary on Nawawi's Idah]; Ibn al-Najjar, Akhbar al-Madina p. 147. A similar report is cited through Sufyan ibn `Uyayna (Shafi`i’s shaykh), and through Abu Sa`id al-Sam`ani on the authority of `Ali.

  27. siddiqui4ever says:

    An incident of “Istighatha”
    Using Intermediaries And Intercessors
    by GFH

    See:
    http://www.livingislam.org/k/tght_e.html

  28. Um Abdullah says:

    Abul Layth said:
    [You did not prove that at all. In fact, as you just admitted, what you have forwarded is pure speculation and not proof.]

    Oh yes I did, I showed in which chapter they quoted that narration in, which clearly shows how they understood it, plus comments by some, like the one by Shihab ad Deen al Baghdadi al Maliki who said before quoting the narration:
    ((and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt)) then he quoted that narration + tawassul of umar by al Abbas.
    go back to my article and you will see it there.

    Quoting Abul Layth:
    [Let us turn the tables on you with your own argument, even though what you have said is far-fetched. Let us forward the same speculative argument as yourself, and state, hypothetically, that the ‘Ulama’ did not need to explain the hadith of Malik Ad-Daar because it is “clear and doesn’t need any comment on it, especially when their arabic and knowledge was much stronger than us today”. The hadith is clear, and that is why the wahhabi ilk have struggled for years attacking the narration. The obvious result of the hadith is proof that seeking tawassul with the Nabi , post-mortum, is an established act amongst the salaf us saalih.]

    What their opinion regarding the tawassul that is asking the PRophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us is an assumption on my part and yours, we don’t know exactly what their opinion regarding it is, so I can’t say 100% that they considered it forbidden, nor can you say that they considered it permissable, and an act of worship is forbidden until proven permissable (while in matters of dunya it is halal until proven forbiden), so for you to say it is permissable you have to have clear authentic evidence.

    My article was only to speak about the >>meaning of the narration and how it CANNOT be used as evidence for this type of tawassul

  29. Abul Layth says:

    Oh yes I did, I showed in which chapter they quoted that narration in, which clearly shows how they understood it, plus comments by some, like the one by Shihab ad Deen al Baghdadi al Maliki who said before quoting the narration:
    ((and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt)) then he quoted that narration + tawassul of umar by al Abbas.
    go back to my article and you will see it there.

    I just read the article posted by Umm Abdullah. Everything she quoted, if she even quoted it correctly as I have not the time to go reference, is proof for the promoters of tawassul.

    1) The scholars quoted above are affirming the narration of Maalik Ad-Daar. It was this dream of Bilaal ibn Haarith that lead Imam Umar to seek tawassul through Al-’Abbas (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu), as shown in her quotes above. 2) So the scholars named by her, deemed this act of tawassul through the Nabi by Bilaal ibn Haarith non-objectionable, as they are citing it to affirm the story of Umar. She is trying to imply that they are affirming the tawassul of Umar, which I do not object too. What she is overlooking, however, is that they are actually affirming the tawassul of Bilaal ibn Haarith through the Nabi as well by establishing the narration.

    (Please remember that Ibn Hajr and Ibn Kathir both deem this narration Sahih.)

    So by their affirmation of this narration, without criticism of its chain and without commenting on the action of Bilaal ibn Al Haarith being as being rejected, they are in fact affirming this action and establishing its credibility.

    Again, by the scholars of Islam mentioning this narration – in particular Ibn Kathir who deemed it Sahih – in relationship to the Narration of Umar seeking tawassul through Al-’Abbas, it affirms the act of Bilal ibn Al Haarith as valid – especially since no one of the past ever criticized it or mentioned criticism for the action of Bilal ibn Al Haarith.

    So, it becomes obvious that Umm Abdullah’s attempt to nullify the implications of this narration, have in fact nullified her own claim. Yes, we agree with her that this narration is an explanation for the tawassul of Umar through Al Abbas, but she is ignoring the fact that the ‘Ulamaa are mentioning this incident that includes tawassul through the person of the Nabi (‘alayhis salaam).

    What their opinion regarding the tawassul that is asking the PRophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us is an assumption on my part and yours

    Wrong! We know their opinions by the fact that they have quoted this narration without reservation. What does Bilaal ibn Al Haarith do?

    As quoted by Ibn Hajr Al-Haytami in his Jawhar:

    The people suffered a drought during the successorship of `Umar [ra], whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said:“O Messenger of Allah , ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him that the rain shall come. And in it also it appears: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

    He went to the grave of the Nabi and asked him to make du’aa for rain for his Ummah! Where is the condemnation from the scholars when they quoted this authentic narrative? None! Their affirmation of this narration, without condemnation of the act, only shows their approval!

    Thanks,

    Abul Layth

  30. Um Abdullah says:

    1) The scholars quoted above are affirming the narration of Maalik Ad-Daar. It was this dream of Bilaal ibn Haarith that lead Imam Umar to seek tawassul through Al-’Abbas (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu), as shown in her quotes above.

    I already replied to the part about the man being identified as “Bilal al Harith”.

    2) So the scholars named by her, deemed this act of tawassul through the Nabi by Bilaal ibn Haarith non-objectionable, as they are citing it to affirm the story of Umar. She is trying to imply that they are affirming the tawassul of Umar, which I do not object too. What she is overlooking, however, is that they are actually affirming the tawassul of Bilaal ibn Haarith through the Nabi as well by establishing the narration.

    plz read my article very good before replying to it, the reply to ur claim is in the article:
    ((-Ibn Hajar Asqalani-.. he only quotes part of the narration, and he stops at “go to Umar”, he used this as evidence that people ask the Imam to do istisqa for them in times of drought.
    He didn’t mention the rest of the hadith because it has nothing to do with the chapter heading, he only quoted what he believed fits the chapters title, for he says at the end of the section, after mentioning this narration:
    ظَهَرَ بِهَذَا كُلّه مُنَاسَبَة التَّرْجَمَة لِأَصْلِ هَذِهِ الْقِصَّة أَيْضًا وَاَللَّه الْمُوَفِّق .
    “From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“
    so, al Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah understood from this hadith that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was directing the man to go ask the Imam, during that time (Umar radiyallahu anhu), to do istisqa’ for them. –))

    also, part of narrations that I quoted taken from Ibn Kathir’s (al Bidyah wan Nihaya), right before the narration of Malik, clearly show the meaning of it, and what Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah understood it to mean, here is what is in the article:
    ((–The narrations before it are by Sayf Ibn Umar, and in them is the mentioning of Umar radiyallahu anhu, after hearing about the man’s dream (who is said to be Bilal al Harith), asking the people on the minbar if they have seen anything bad from him, and then he tells them about the dream that the Bilal saw, so they told him: “Bilal has spoken the truth, so make istiqatha (seek or ask for help) to Allah, then the Muslims“. So then Umar radiyallahu anhu does istisqa’ through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
    and in the second narration, they said “he found you slow in doing istisqa’, so do istisqa’ for us “, so he did.–))
    also check point #3 in the article (post #11 in this page).

    He went to the grave of the Nabi and asked him to make du’aa for rain for his Ummah! Where is the condemnation from the scholars when they quoted this authentic narrative? None! Their affirmation of this narration, without condemnation of the act, only shows their approval! .

    There was no need for them to comment on it or condemn it, because the narration speaks for itself , the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling the man to go to Umar radiyallahu anhu to make istisqa’. If what he did was correct the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam would have just made duaa for rain, and not tell the man to go to Umar instead, and the sky would have rained by the duaa of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

  31. faqir says:

    as-salamu alaikum

    Here is a translation of the relevant part of the narration from which you are drawing all your baseless conclusions:

    “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

    From this you are trying to claim that the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] considered it shirk for the companion to say:

    “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,”

    The fallacy of your entire argument should be clear to all.

    You can’t even prove that he considered it makruh to ask that – let alone shirk – based on the statement of our beloved Prophet and if you can prove it then show that this was clearly the opinion of the ‘ulema you quoted.

    was-salam

  32. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    In short, Umm Abdullah believes herself to be more knowledgeable than the likes of Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami who specifically used the narration in his approval of istigatha…in one of her comments she has indirectly implied that Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami didn’t know what the hell he was talking about and I quote ,”To brother Ibn Anwar, regarding Sayf, yes he is accepted in history, but here you are using the narration as evidence for an act of worship not just narrating an incident in history, so until u prove it to be true (that a sahabi did it) then u can’t use it as evidence for ibadah.” Is the act of worship not covered in Fiqh? was Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami and other great fuqaha’ who have concluded the same as him on the issue with regards to the narration not aware of what kind of narration to be used in approving ‘aml in ‘ibadah or otherwise?

    In comment 29, Umm Abdullah said ,”and an act of worship is forbidden until proven permissable (while in matters of dunya it is halal until proven forbiden), so for you to say it is permissable you have to have clear authentic evidence.” So again…you are implying Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami one of the pillars of fiqh, did not know what the hell he was doing when he permitted and encouraged istigatha by citing the narration in question and others? Just for your information..the scholars are divided on the issue of whether the ‘asl of matters(ibadah included) is haram or ja’iz..but according to the majority the qa’idah is “Everything is permitted unless proven otherwise” and the basis for this is a hadith relating to ibadah…
    Sheikh GF Haddad explains:
    “The correct phrasing in the Shafi’e madhab is “al-aslu fil-ashya’i al-ibahatu hatta yadulla al-dalilu `ala al-tahrimi”
    cf. al-Suyuti, Ashbah (Cairo 1998 ed. 1:166). This is the Shafi`i
    view. It is also the majority Hanafi view according to Ibn `Abidin
    quoting Sharh Usul al-Pazdawi in his Hashiya (1386H ed. 4:161)”
    This qa’idah is based on the following hadith whose context is clearly ibadah:
    Should we perform pilgrimage every year? When the questioner kept asking, the
    Prophet, upon him blessings and peace, replied: “Whatever Allah Most
    High made halal it is halal, and whatever He made haram is haram, and
    whatever He was silent about, it is a boon (`afwun), so accept from Allah the boon He is giving you, for Allah certainly is not going to
    forget anything.”

    Umm Abdullah..you are no faqih…you are virtually a nobody beside Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami..wake up..

    Sheikh GF Haddad on an incident of Istigatha :
    One night, the Prophet of Allah may Allah bless him and grant him peace – was in his house and was heard to proclaim `I am here!’ three times and `You have been granted help’ also three times. Umm al- Mu’minin, Maymunah – may Allah be well pleased with her – asked the Prophet – may Allah bless him and grant him peace – whom he had been talking to since there was no one present. He may Allah bless him and grant him peace – replied, `I was talking to a person called Rajiz from the tribe of Bani Ka’ab. He asked for help from me against the Quraysh.’ Umm al- Mu’minin, Maymunah – may Allah be well pleased with her – said that when she finished fajr prayer the next morning, she heard Rajiz calling out in the streets of Madina: “Ya Rasul Allah! Help us and call the servants of Allah to help us.”
    Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabhani, Allah have mercy on him, cites two hadiths in this respect with their full wording in the chapter of the Prophet’s `ilm al-ghayb in his encyclopedia of the Prophetic miracles, Hujjat Allah `ala al-Alamin bi-Mu`jizat Sayyid al-Mursalin (p. 493):

    >

    NOTES

    (1) Ibn H.ajar in al-Is.âba (4:631) mentions another wording, “invoking my mercy (yastarh.imunî).”

    (2) Narrated from Maymûna by al-T.abarânî in the Kabîr (23:433-434 §1052) and S.aghîr (2:167-169 §968) and al-Taymî in his Dalâ’il (p. 73-74 §59), both with a slightly weak chain because of Yah.yâ ibn Sulaymân ibn Nad.la al-Madînî cf. al-Haythamî (6:163-164) although Ibn `Adî in al-Kâmil (7:255 §2156) said “he narrated reports from Mâlik and the Madinans, most of which are valid.” Ibn H.ibbân included him in his Thiqât (9:269). Cf. Is.âba (4:631), Fath. (7:520), Sîra H. alabiyya (3:5), and Dah.lân’s Sîra (2:76-77).

    (3) Cf. Ibn `Umar’s narration in Ibn H.ibbân (13:140 §5996) and Ibn H. ajar, Talkhîs. al-H.abîr (4:131 §1929).

    (4) Allâhumma innî nâshidu Muh.ammadâ / h.ilfa abînâ wa’abîhi al- atladâ.

    (5) I.e. the Banû Hâshim and Banû `Abd al-Mut.t.alib with a rhetorical trope of apostrope (iltifât).

    (6) Wa-ja`alû lî fî kadâ’in ras.adâ, misspelt in al-Nabhânî as wa- ja`alû lî fîka dâ’in ras.adâ.

    (7) Ibn `Asâkir (43:519) narrated from Ibn al-Musayyab: “There is not one homebound woman of Banû Khuzâ`a except she memorized the verses of `Amr ibn Sâlim al-Khuzâ`î to the Messenger of Allâh, upon him blessings and peace.”

    (8) Narrated
    (i) through al-Zuhrî from `Urwa ibn al-Zubayr from the Companion al-Miswar ibn Makhrama and the Tâbi`î Marwân ibn al-H.akam by Ibn Ish.âq in the Maghâzî (cf. Ibn Hishâm 5:48, al-T.ah.âwî, Sharh. Ma`ânî al-Athâr 3:315-316, Is.âba 4:630-631, and Bidâya 4:278), al-T. abarî in his Târîkh (2:152-153), Ibn `Asâkir in his Târîkh (43:519- 520), and al-Bayhaqî in the Sunan al-Kubrâ (9:233) and Dalâ’il;
    (ii) from Ibn `Abbâs by Ibn Mandah and Abû Nu`aym in Ma`rifat al-S.ah.âba as well as Ibn al-Athîr in Usd al-Ghâba (4:225-226 cf. Is.âba 5:285);
    (iii) from Abû Hurayra by al-Bazzâr and al-Bayhaqî (cf. Bidâya 4:281) with a fair chain according to Ibn H.ajar in the Fath. (7:520) and al- Haythamî (6:162);
    (iv) from the Tâbi`în Abû Salama and Yah.yâ ibn `Abd al-Rah.mân ibn H.ât.ib by Ibn Abî Shayba (7:398 §36900) and
    (v) also mursal from `Ikrima by Ibn Abî Shayba (7:400-401 §36902) and al-T.ah. âwî in Sharh. Ma`ânî al-Athâr (3:291, 3 :312-313). The bracketed segment is narrated only through al-Zuhrî. Cf. Iktifâ’ (2:215); al- Fâkihî, Akhbâr Makka (5:103); Istî`âb (3:1175-1176); Ibn al-Qayyim, Zâd (3:348-349); Sîra H.alabiyya (3:5-6); Ibn Taymiyya, al-S.ârim al- Maslûl (2:214); Is.âba (1:122), Fath. (7:519-520), Talkhîs. al-H.abîr (4:131-132 §1929), Ibn al-Athîr, Kâmil (2:162), al-Suhaylî, Rawd. (2: 265), and Kanz (§14422, §30166, §30195, §30204). Al-Watîr or Watîn is a Khuzâ`a watering-point in the lowest area of Makka cf. Yâqût and al- Nihâya. Ibn Ish.âq and al-Wâqidî said that `Amr was accompanied by forty riders of the Banû Khuzâ`a when he arrived in Madîna. Another report by al-Bârûdî with a weak munqat.i` chain attributes those verses to Budayl ibn Kulthûm ibn Sâlim al-Khuzâ`î cf. Is.âba (1:274).

    Blessings and peace on the Prophet his Family, and all his Companions.

    Was-Salam,
    gibril
    [SP 2006-03-02]

  33. Hussain20 says:

    Ibn Abi Shayba cites the narrtion of Malik al-Dar with a Sahih chain as confirmed by Ibn Hajar who says; rawa Ibn Abi Shayba bi isnadin sahih and cites the hadith in Fath al-Bari. He also mentions it in al-Isaba where he says that Ibn Abi Khaythama cited it.

    Another very interesting narration I found is related by the Hanbali Ibn al-Jawzi (d.597 AH) who states in Kitab al-Wafa (p 818 #1536)

    Al Hafiz Abu Bakr al-Minqari said: “I was with (al-Hafiz) al-Tabarani and (al-Hafiz) Abu al-Shaykh in the Mosque of the Prophet and were in a predicament. We became very hungery that day and and the next we didn’t eat. When it was time for Isha, I came to the Prophet’s grave and I said: “O Messanger of Allah, we are hungry, we are hungry!” (ya rasullallah al`ju`al-ju) Then I left. Abu al-Shaykh said to me: “Sit, Either there will be food for us, or death.” I slept and Abu al-Shaykh slept. Al-Tabarani stayed awake, researching something. Then al Alawi came knocking at the dorr with two boys, each one carrying a palm-leaf basket filled with food. We sat up and ate. We thought that the children would take back the remainder but they left everything behind. When we finished the Alawi said: “O people, did you complain to the Prophet? I saw him in my sleep and he ordered me to bring something to you”

    Similiar narration can be found in Imam Dhahabi’s Siyar a`lam al-Nubala (16/400-401).

  34. Ibn Muhammad says:

    Um Abdullah says:
    “There was no need for them to comment on it or condemn it, because the narration speaks for itself , the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling the man to go to Umar radiyallahu anhu to make istisqa’.”

    This is an outright lie, show me where the prophet(sw) told the man to “go ask Umar(ra) to make istisqa” rather he told the man that they will recieve the water from the rain and send my greetings to Umar.

    This actually proves that the ummah recieved rain due to the man asking the prophet to ask allah for rain.

  35. Abul Layth says:

    I already replied to the part about the man being identified as “Bilal al Harith”.

    And we responded back. Fact: The scholars of the past accepted the historical statement that the man was Bilal ibn Al Haarith.

    plz read my article very good before replying to it, the reply to ur claim is in the article:
    ((-Ibn Hajar Asqalani-.. he only quotes part of the narration, and he stops at “go to Umar”, he used this as evidence that people ask the Imam to do istisqa for them in times of drought.
    He didn’t mention the rest of the hadith because it has nothing to do with the chapter heading, he only quoted what he believed fits the chapters title, for he says at the end of the section, after mentioning this narration:
    ظَهَرَ بِهَذَا كُلّه مُنَاسَبَة التَّرْجَمَة لِأَصْلِ هَذِهِ الْقِصَّة أَيْضًا وَاَللَّه الْمُوَفِّق .
    “From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“
    so, al Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah understood from this hadith that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was directing the man to go ask the Imam, during that time (Umar radiyallahu anhu), to do istisqa’ for them. –))

    Faqir just responded above to your claim.

    also, part of narrations that I quoted taken from Ibn Kathir’s (al Bidyah wan Nihaya), right before the narration of Malik, clearly show the meaning of it, and what Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah understood it to mean, here is what is in the article:
    ((–The narrations before it are by Sayf Ibn Umar, and in them is the mentioning of Umar radiyallahu anhu, after hearing about the man’s dream (who is said to be Bilal al Harith), asking the people on the minbar if they have seen anything bad from him, and then he tells them about the dream that the Bilal saw, so they told him: “Bilal has spoken the truth, so make istiqatha (seek or ask for help) to Allah , then the Muslims“. So then Umar radiyallahu anhu does istisqa’ through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
    and in the second narration, they said “he found you slow in doing istisqa’, so do istisqa’ for us “, so he did.–))
    also check point #3 in the article (post #11 in this page).

    Again you have dodged everything that I stated. I have no qualms with stating that it was Bilal’s dream that encouraged the action of tawassul through Al-Abbas by Umar. What you are overlooking, as I stated in my previous post, is the fact that the scholars are affirming this narration and establishing the act of Bilāl ibn al Hārith of going to the grave and asking the Nabi t o make du’aa for the Ummah. The Nabi, in the dream, did not reject such an action. Furthermore, Bilāl ibn Al-Hārith, the Sahābī – as well as Mālik Ad-Dār the Sahābī – had absolutely no problems with Bilāl going to the grave of t he Nabi and asking him to make du’aa for the Ummah in this time of need.

    The entire point is that you are overlooking the most manifested point of the entire narrative; that a Sahabi, Bilāl ibn Al-Hārith, went to the grave of the Nabi and asked him to make du’aa for the Ummah. The scholars of Islām did not reject this act. You, on the other hand, do, and thus contradict their manhaj.
    So by the scholars quoting this narrative and considering it rigorously authentic, without condemning the action therein, they had absolutely no problem with the action of this man seeking tawassul with the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam).

    As for your claim that the athar of Umar shows prohibition of going to the grave of the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam), no one before ibn taymiyyah ever stated such. He innovated, in the words of Imām As-Subki, this new-fangled idea. The only thing you can prove by using this narration is that it is mustahabb for the Imam to seek tawassul through Ahlul Bayt. It does not prove that you can not go to the grave of the Nabi, as Bilāl ibn Al-Hārith did, and ask him to make du’aa for this ummah.

    Another point of benefit taken from this narrative: The Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) can hear and respond via dreams to those who go to his grave and seek his aid when they are in need. A point that the pseudo-salafi movement denies.

  36. Ibn Muhammad says:

    The prophet(sw) tells the man to tell Umar that they will be watered, why would he tell the man to tell Umar they would recieve rain before telling him to ask Umar to make istisqa. The propher(sw) gives the man no conditions. He only says:

    “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered.”

  37. Um Abdullah says:

    faqir said:

    Here is a translation of the relevant part of the narration from which you are drawing all your baseless conclusions:

    “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

    I am basing it on other narrations (related to the incident), comments and chapter titles of the scholars mentioned in my article.

    From this you are trying to claim that the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] considered it shirk for the companion to say:

    “O Messenger of Allah , ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,”

    where did I say it is “shirk” ?

    Ibn Anwar said:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    In short, Umm Abdullah believes herself to be more knowledgeable than the likes of Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami

    wa alaykum assalam
    I believe that Ibn Hajar al Asqalani and Ibn Kathir rahimahuma Allah are more knowledgable, and I have brought 2 other scholars, in addition to them, who had the same understanding of it, while you only brought one whom all of the ones mentioned, except one, came before him.

    Umm Abdullah..you are no faqih…you are virtually a nobody beside Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami..wake up..

    No where did I claim to be a faqih.

    Ibn Muhammad said:

    The prophet(sw) tells the man to tell Umar that they will be watered, why would he tell the man to tell Umar they would recieve rain before telling him to ask Umar to make istisqa. The propher(sw) gives the man no conditions. He only says:

    “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered.”

    If you read my article you would have seen how I came to that conclusion, based on the chapter titles, Imam Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah’s saying (-From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story-) and the other narrations related to the incident.

    And everyone knows that it didn’t rain until immediatly after Umar radiyallahu anhu made istisqa’ through Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu, which happened later.

    Abul Layth said:

    And we responded back. Fact: The scholars of the past accepted the historical statement that the man was Bilal ibn Al Haarith.

    and you haven’t answered my question: Are you just narrating it as a historical incident or are you using it as evidence for an act of worship (ibadah)?

    Faqir just responded above to your claim.

    I don’t see any response from him regarding this specific point.

    What you are overlooking, as I stated in my previous post, is the fact that the scholars are affirming this narration and establishing the act of Bilāl ibn al Hārith of going to the grave and asking the Nabi t o make du’aa for the Ummah.

    I already responded to this in my previous post, the narration speaks for itself, you already showed in my article what those scholars understood the incident to mean.

    Furthermore, Bilāl ibn Al-Hārith, the Sahābī – as well as Mālik Ad-Dār the Sahābī – had absolutely no problems with Bilāl going to the grave of t he Nabi and asking him to make du’aa for the Ummah in this time of need
    ….
    The entire point is that you are overlooking the most manifested point of the entire narrative; that a Sahabi, Bilāl ibn Al-Hārith, went to the grave of the Nabi and asked him to make du’aa for the Ummah.

    In Malik al Dar’s narration, he says “a man”, and does not say “Bilal ibn al Harith”.
    The one who claimed it was Bilal ibn Al Harith is Sayf not Malik al Dar, and until you prove that it was him, you can’t use it as evidence for an act of worship.

    So by the scholars quoting this narrative and considering it rigorously authentic, without condemning the action therein, they had absolutely no problem with the action of this man seeking tawassul with the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam).

    you keep repeating the same thing, I already said that the narrations peaks for itself, and the scholars made it clear what they understood from the narration, which is against what you claim the narration to mean.

    Another point of benefit taken from this narrative: The Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) can hear and respond via dreams to those who go to his grave and seek his aid when they are in need. A point that the pseudo-salafi movement denies.

    The narration says that he -sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- responded guiding the man to what he should do, and not answering his request by making duaa to Allah for rain.
    from what I know, Salafis reject that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam would come to someone in a dream with some new ruling in shari’ah, and basing one’s acts of worship and aqeedah on a dream only with no evidence from Quran or Sunnah, and in this dream it was pointing to something already established in deen which is to ask the Imam to make istisqa’ for the people.

    As I can see from many reponses, many have not read my article or they have skimmed through it quickly, and not reading it good before replying, and making me repeat what is in the article over and over again, and that is wasting a lot of my time.
    Unless I see something new and different than what you have been repeating above – regarding this narration specifically-, then I am quiting this discussion insha Allah, as it will only waste more of my time.

    And if I have any responses to any other posts in this site, I will post it in my blog or in IA or Multaqa forum insha Allah, so others can join in discussion too, ones who don’t post in blogs.
    You are welcome to join there, or you can post ur reply to it in this blog.

  38. faqir says:

    as-salamu alaikum

    “I am basing it on other narrations (related to the incident), comments and chapter titles of the scholars mentioned in my article.”

    Fine, then first prove that the other narrations with the alternative wording are more authentic in wording and sanad than the narrration myself and others are utilising.

    Next, prove that those who transmitted the wording of the narration we are using and declared it sahih considered the asking of the man to be an innovation leading to shirk or shirk itself as the Wahabis claim.

    Here is what the man said again:

    “O Messenger of Allah , ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,”

    Those who transmitted the wording as such – is there any evidence that they considered this man’s action to be shirk or innovation or anything of the like?

    And finally, prove to us from the authentically reported statement of our own Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] which we are utilising (as transmitted by various scholars and declared sahih by them) that a) the Prophet did not approve or disliked or considered shirk the man’s action and b) those scholars who transmitted this specific wording considered that the Prophet did not approve of the man’s action or considered it shirk. Once again, here is the authentically transmitted wording of the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]:

    “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

    Thank you.

    was-salam

    p.s. the narration transmitted by Sayf ibn Umar al-Tamimi – the name of the unknown man in the hadith of malik al-dar is a historical report and Sayf is emminently reliable in this regard – and hence Ibn Hajar had no problems in declaring the unknown man in Malik al-Dar’s narration to be the companion Bilal ibn Harith (ra}. So yes, this is additional bonus evidence for us for an act of worship that the action of the unkown man in the malik al-dar narration is not shirk or bid’ah.

  39. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    I believe Sidi Abul Layth’s elaboration on Umm Abdullah’s conjectures are sufficient…the latter is creating her own innovated notions never thought of by those whom she has quoted for support…the simple point is…not one of the scholars she quoted condemned the action of the man who went to the grave of the Prophet s.a.w. and asked him to pray for rain for the ummah..in any case many people besides myself have provided more than enough authentic narrations besides that of Malik Al-Dar’s in regards to istigatha..

    Umm Abdullah said :
    “I believe that Ibn Hajar al Asqalani and Ibn Kathir rahimahuma Allah are more knowledgable, and I have brought 2 other scholars, in addition to them, who had the same understanding of it, while you only brought one whom all of the ones mentioned, except one, came before him.” And what understanding is that? Where did they say anything which can be construed contradictory to Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami’s fatwa? Once again..all they(the scholars you mentioned) did was to explain that the man who went to the Prophet’s grave were later informed by the Prophet s.a.w. to go to Umar r.a. amd do istisqa’ with Al-Abbas r.a.(according to your thesis)…not once did they question or condemned the man’s action..whoever he was in going to the Prophet’s grave and asked him to pray for the ummah…You said, in your article, the conclusion was not that it is shirk…but according to many salafis whom i’ve met…it does constitute shirk..but never mind…if you think that it does not constitute shirk..then what is it? Do you ever use the 5 ahkam to judge the status of a thing? In any case…as mentioned..several individuals have on this post provided more than enough narrations in support of istigatha besides that of Malik Al-Dar r.a. You have not responded to even one of them…..and I have also shown to you that your qa’idah that the asl for ibadah is prohibition is no proof for you…personally, what I would like to see is where Ibn Hara Al-Asqalani or Ibn Kathir ever deemed tawassul with the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. or istigatha as haram or shirk or foreign to the shari’ah…. Just by the way..the shari’ah is not as rigid as some uninformed salafis as you may percieve…new rulings may enter the shari’ah..but those rulings are BASED on the principles of the shari’ah drawn by the Imams of the religion with Qur’an and Sunnah proofs…The Shaitan as has been explained in an authentic narration CANNOT imitate the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. in a dream…thus if he does appear in one’s dream and informs someone of something..that something should be within the premise of the Shari’ah..since he is the Prophet s.a.w. and you are not Umm Abdullah…and by the way..I state again that you are no faqih and I’m glad you realise that…no..i didn’t mention this because you claimed to be one..I simply stated it as a matter of fact..and once again you are virtually a NOBODY in the shadow of Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami..

    Umm Abdullah:
    “As I can see from many reponses, many have not read my article or they have skimmed through it quickly, and not reading it good before replying, and making me repeat what is in the article over and over again, and that is wasting a lot of my time.
    Unless I see something new and different than what you have been repeating above – regarding this narration specifically-, then I am quiting this discussion insha Allah , as it will only waste more of my time.

    And if I have any responses to any other posts in this site, I will post it in my blog or in IA or Multaqa forum insha Allah , so others can join in discussion too, ones who don’t post in blogs.
    You are welcome to join there, or you can post ur reply to it in this blog.”

    RUNN!!!!RETREATTT!!!!..CALL IN THE CAVALRY….THE REINFORCEMENTS!!!!

    Wassalam

  40. Ibn Muhammad says:

    Um Abullah:
    “If you read my article you would have seen how I came to that conclusion, based on the chapter titles, Imam Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah ’s saying (-From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story-) and the other narrations related to the incident.

    And everyone knows that it didn’t rain until immediatly after Umar radiyallahu anhu made istisqa’ through Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu, which happened later.”

    Show me where the prophet(sw) told the man to “go ask Umar(ra) to make istisqa” rather he told the man that they will recieve the water from the rain and send my greetings to Umar.

  41. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,

    Ibn Kathir, the scholar whom Umm Salamah quoted explains the following in regards to Surah Al-Nisa’, verse 64:
    “Allah leads the sinners to the right way. The way he shows them is: If they do a sin, then they should go to the Messenger of Allah and ask by him by Allah for forgivness, and the Messenger will ask for it. If they do so, Allah will accept their Tawba and will be merciful with them. Because of this he says too: “they would surely find Allah merciful and forgiving.”

    This reminds us of the hadith from Ibn Mas’ud r.a. :
    ” 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, and if I see goodness I will praise Allah , and if I see evil I will ask forgiveness of Him for you.”

  42. Ibn Anwar says:

    The following is Sheikh GF Haddad’s explanation on
    Umar’s r.a. tawassul through Al-Abbas r.a. :

    As-Salamu `alaykum:

    How do the contemporary Hanafi scholars explain the hadeeth recorded in Sahih Al-Bukhari according to which Khalifah Umar (Allah be pleased with him) asked Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) to ask Allah for rain on behalf of the Muslim community and not the Prophet Muhammad at his grave. The Khalifah said that they USED to ask the Prophet Muhammad to ask Allah and now they asked his uncle instead.
    Before turning to the question and its questionable premises some preliminary remarks are in order.

    First of all, `Umar asked al-`Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib, not his son `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas. What was posted recently on the Hanbali forum is a mistake which I pointed out to the author.

    Second, the terminology of the Khalifa’s request, Allah be well-pleased with him, is as follows:

    “O Allah! We would use our Prophet as a means to You and You then sent us rain; now we use our Prophet’s uncle as a means to You, therefore send us rain!”
    Narrated from Anas by al-Bukhari in his Sahih.

    “Whoever understands from this that `Umar only used al-`Abbas as his means and not the Messenger of Allah, upon him peace, because al-`Abbas is alive and the Messenger of Allah is dead – that person’s understanding is dead.” (Al-Maliki)

    Al-Suyuti mentions the context of this event in his Tarikh al-Khulafa’ (Beirut, 1992 Ahmad Fares ed. p. 140):

    “In the year 17 `Umar enlarged the Prophetic mosque. That year there was a drought in the Hijaz. It was named the Year of Cinders (`am al-ramada). `Umar prayed for rain for the people by means of al-`Abbas. Ibn Sa`d narrated from [the Sahabi] Niyar al-Aslami that when `Umar came came out to pray for rain, he came out wearing the cloaks (burd) of the Messenger of Allah, upon him blessings and peace. Ibn `Awn narrated that `Umar took al-`Abbas’s hand and raised it up, saying, ‘O Allah, we seek a means to You with the uncle of Your Prophet to ask that You drive away from us the drought and water us with rain’….”
    Now, the event of the tawassul of Sayyiduna `Umar through al-`Abbas shows the following:

    [1] Nowhere in the hadith is there any indication that there was no tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, in the time of `Umar. Such a view is an inference or an extrapolation that is not based on explicit evidence.

    [2] On the contrary, `Umar implicitly made tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, at that very time, by wearing his blessed cloaks as he came out for the prayer for rain as mentioned in the report by Ibn Sa`d. In Sahih Muslim Asma’ says that she inherited the mantle of the Prophet from her sister `A’isha and that they used it to seek a cure for people.

    [3] The use of the Prophet’s uncle illustrates that tawassul is essentially through the Prophet upon him peace, as the importance of al-`Abbas in this respect is only in his relationship to the Prophet as `Umar himself states with the words “the uncle of Your Prophet” in al-Bukhari’s version already mentioned; “the status of al-`Abbas in relation to your Prophet” in al-Lalika’i's version; and as al-`Abbas states:

    “O Allah, truly no tribulation descends except because of sins, nor is lifted except upon repentence. The people have turned to you by means of me BECAUSE OF MY POSITION IN RELATION TO YOUR PROPHET, and here are our hands [raised up] towards you – despite our sins – and our forelocks in repentence, so send down water for us and PRESERVE YOUR PROPHET IN THE PERSON OF HIS UNCLE.” Whereupon the sky let down water as thick as ropes and the people came over to al-`Abbas passing their hands over him and saying to him: “Congratulations to you, irrigator of the two Sanctuaries!” Whereupon `Umar said, “He/This is, by Allah, the means to Allah and the place of nearness to Him!”
    Cited from al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar’s narration in al-Ansab by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (2:497).

    So the tawassul continues to be solely through the Prophet despite appearances to the contrary, for he is the ultimate recourse of human beings seeking nearness to Allah as he himself taught the blind man (“Say, ‘O Muhammad, I turn with you to Allah…’”) and as several Sahaba explicitly said, such as in the following reports:

    (a) Report of the Bedouin who said to the Holy Prophet :

    We have come to you when even our virgins’ milk is dry, and the mother worries for her own life over her child’s, The child lets down his arms sitting still For hunger, a hunger unstilled and uninterrupted. We have nothing left from what our people eat Except bitter colocynth and camel-wool mixed with blood. And we have none but you to flee to, for where can people flee except to the Messengers?
    Then the Prophet – upon him peace – stood up and he was dragging his garment. He climbed up the pulpit and said: “O Allah, send us water….” whereupon rain fell abundantly. Then the Prophet upon him peace said: “If Abu Talib were alive he would have liked to see this. Who will recite for us what he said?” Hearing this, `Ali stood up and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I think you mean his saying:

    A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows. With him the clan of Hashim seek refuge from calamities, For they possess in him immense favor and grace….”
    Narrated by al-Bayhaqi in Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (6:141) cf. Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya (6:90-91) and Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (1989 ed. 2:629).

    (b) Report of Sawad ibn Qarib al-Sadusi who declaimed:

    Truly, you are the nearest of all Messengers as a means to Allah, son of the noblest and purest ones!

    Therefore, be an intercessor for me the Day none but you among intercessors shall be of the least benefit for Sawad ibn Qarib!

    Whereupon the Prophet smiled, upon him peace, and said: “You have obtained success, Sawad!”

    Narrated by Abu Ya`la in his Mu`jam (p. 265), al-Tabarani in al-Kabir (7:94 §6475), Abu Nu`aym in Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (p. 114 §63), al-Taymi in the Dala’il (p. 132), al-Hakim in the Mustadrak, (3:705), al-Bayhaqi in the Dala’il (2:251) cf. Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Isti`ab (2:675), Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (4:169) and Bidaya, Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (7:180) and Isaba (3:219).

    (c) Report of Hassan ibn Thabit who declaimed:

    O Pillar of those who rely upon you, O Immunity of those who seek refuge in you, and Resort of those who seek herbiage and rain, and Neighboring Protector of those in need of shelter! O you whom the One God has chosen for His creatures by planting in him perfection and purity of character!
    Narrated by Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Isti`ab (1:276) and Ibn Sayyid al-Nas in Minah al-Mad-h (p. 73).

    [4] The background to `Umar’s prayer for rain shows that there was also an explicit tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, performed by the Sahabi Bilal ibn al-Harith as narrated in two versions:

    (a) Version 1

    From the Sahabi Malik al-Dar:

    The people suffered a drought in `Umar’s khilafa, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wa- Alihi wa-Sallam and said: “Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished.” After this the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: Be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter wept and said: “My Lord! I spare no effort except in what escapes my power.”

    Ibn Kathir cites it thus from al-Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (7:47) in al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya (Ma`arif ed. 7:91-92=Dar Ihya’ al-Turath ed. 7:105) saying: “isnaduhu sahih” and he also declares its chain sound (isnaduhu jayyidun qawi) in his Jami` al-Masanid (1:223) in Musnad `Umar. Ibn Abi Shayba cites it (6:352=12:31-32) with a sound (sahih) chain as confirmed by Ibn Hajar who says: “rawa Ibn Abi Shayba bi’isnadin sahih” and cites the hadith in Fath al-Bari, Book of Istisqa ch. 3 (1989 ed. 2:629-630=1959 ed. 2:495) as well as in al-Isaba (6:164 §8350=3:484) where he says that Ibn Abi Khaythama cited it. It is also thus narrated by al-Khalili in al-Irshad (1:313- 314) and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Isti`ab (2:464=3:1149).

    Al-Albani attempted to weaken this report in his Tawassul (p. 120) but was refuted in the lengthy analysis given by Mamduh in Raf` al-Minara (p. 262-278), which refutes other similar attempts cf. Ibn Baz’s marginalia on Fath al-Bari, Abu Bakr al-Jaza’iri’s tract Wa-Ja’u Yarkudun, Hammad al-Ansari’s articles “al-Mafhum al-Sahih lil-Tawassul” also titled “Tuhfat al-Qari fil-Radd `ala al-Ghumari,” and other such literature.

    Ibn Hajar identifies the man who visited and saw the Prophet upon him peace, in his dream as the Companion Bilal ibn al- Harith, counting this hadith among the reasons for al- Bukhari’s naming of the chapter “The people’s request to their leader for rain if they suffer drought” in his Sahih, book of Istisqa’.

    (b) Version 2 from al-Tabari’s Tarikh (2:509):

    In the year of the drought called al-Ramada during the successorship of `Umar the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harith, while slaughtering a sheep for his kin, noticed that the sheep’s bones had turned red because the drying flesh was clinging to them. He cried out “Ya Muhammadah!” Then he saw the Prophet – upon him peace – in a dream ordering him to go to `Umar with the tidings of coming rain on condition that `Umar show wisdom. Hearing this, `Umar assembled the people and came out to pray for rain with al-`Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet upon him blessings and peace.
    [5] `Umar had made tawassul through the Prophet in the past, upon him peace, since he said: “WE WOULD USE OUR PROPHET AS A MEANS TO YOU…” i.e. in his and Abu Bakr’s rule (and not only during the life of the Prophet upon him peace), as it is improbable that they never once experienced drought in the previous 8.5 years. “But to restrict this sententence to the Prophet’s lifetime is a deficiency stemming from idle lust, a manipulation of the text of the report, and figurative interpretation without proof.” (Al-Kawthari)

    [6] At any rate the major Sahaba did make tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, after his time as established by the report from our Mother `A’isha – Allah be well- pleased with her – in al-Darimi’s Sunan, in the 15th Chapter of the Introduction (1:43) titled: “Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death,” related from Aws ibn `Abd Allah with a good chain:

    “The people of Madina complained to `A’isha of the severe drought that they were suffering. She said: “Go to the Prophet’s grave and open a window towards the sky so that there will be no roof between him and the sky.” They did so, after which they were watered with such rain that vegetation grew and the camels got fat. That year was named the Year of Plenty.”
    The reader will find extensive documentation on this report in the Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine (4:47-52) and it was declared authentic by all the Sunni experts of hadith, last in date Shaykh Nabil ibn Hashim al-Ghamri in his 1999 10-volume edition of and commentary on al-Darimi titled Fath al-Mannan (1:564-566) where he rejects the objections of al-Albani and his likes to this hadith.

    [7] `Umar had made tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, in the campaign of Tabuk and had therefore directly experienced the Divine munificence and Prophetic generosity.

    “When the travel provision of the people decreased they thought of slaughtering their camels but `Umar came to the Prophet upon him peace, and said, ‘How will they survive without their camels?’ The Prophet said, ‘Call to them to bring every remainder of their travel provisions.’ A piece of leather was spread and they brought whatever they had. Then the Messenger of Allah stood and supplicated, then he blessed over the food and summoned them to being their bags. The people supplied themselves to the last one. Then the Messenger of Allah said, ‘I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah!’”
    Narrated from Salama ibn al-Akwa` by al-Bukhari and Muslim and from Abu Hurayra by Muslim and Ahmad.

    [8] `Umar used al-`Abbas to show people the status of the Prophet’s family in the society and teach them to respect and venerate them, as Ibn Hajar said in explanation of the report of Anas cited above:

    “It is desirable to seek the intercession of saintly people and the relatives of the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wa-Alihi wa-Sallam, and it shows al-`Abbas’s great merit and that of `Umar due to the latter’s humbleness before al-`Abbas and his recognition of his due right.”
    This is confirmed by al-Ajurri’s narration in al-Shari`a and Ahmad in Fada’il al-Sahaba (2:937 #1802) that Ka`b al- Ahbar took al-`Abbas’s hand and said, “I shall hide it away [this handshake] for your intercession on my behalf.” Al- `Abbas replied: “Why, will I have the power of intercession?” Ka`b said: “Yes, there is none from the Household of the Prophet upon him and them peace, except they have the power of intercession!” Ka`b al-Ahbar also said to Sayyidina `Umar: “Whenever the Israelites had a drought they sought intercession through their Prophet’s household” as narrated by Ibn `Abd al- Barr in al-Isti`ab (2:814).

    [9] It is known that `Umar had a particular veneration for the Prophetic Household (Ahl al-Bayt) as illustrated by the following reports:

    (a) Ibn Sa`d narrated from al-Sha`bi and al-Hasan that al- `Abbas had some need of `Umar one day and said to him: “Commander of the Believers, suppose the uncle of Musa, upon him peace, came to you as a Muslim, how would you treat him?” He replied, “I swear by Allah that I would treat him well!” Al-`Abbas said, “Well, I am the uncle of Muhammad the Prophet – upon him and his House blessings and peace!” `Umar said, “Abu al-Fadl, and what do you suppose? By Allah, your father [`Abd al-Muttalib] is certainly dearer to me than my own father!” He said, “By Allah?” `Umar said, “By Allah, yes! Because I know that he [`Abd al-Muttalib] is dearer to the Messenger of Allah than my own father, therefore I prefer the love of the Messenger of Allah to my love.”

    (b) A man disparaged `Ali ibn Abi Talib in the presence of `Umar whereupon the latter said: “Do you know the dweller of this grave? He is Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. And `Ali is the son of Abu Talib ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. Therefore, do not mention `Ali except in a good way for if you dislike him you will harm this one in his grave.” Narrated by Ahmad with a good chain in Fada’il al-Sahaba (2:641 #1089).

    (c) After `Umar saw al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib waiting at his door he said to him: “You are more deserving of permission to enter than [my son] `Abd Allah ibn `Umar! You see the goodness that was placed on our head; [therefore] first Allah; then you [the Prophetic Household]!” and he placed his hand on his head as he spoke. Narrated by Ibn Sa`d, Ibn Rahuyah, and al-Khatib.

    (d) Jabir said he heard `Umar ibn al-Khattab say on the pulpit after he married Umm Kulthum, the daughter of `Ali and Fatima – Allah be well-pleased with them:

    “Do not disparage me [for marrying a young girl], for I heard the Prophet say, upon him blessings and peace: ‘On the Judgment Day every means will be cut off and every lineage severed except my lineage.’”
    Narrated by al-Tabarani. Al-Haythami said its narrators are those of al-Bukhari and Muslim.

    `Umar desired to place himself in the Prophet’s lineage through this marriage due to the precedence of Ahl al-Bayt in the Prophet’s intercession, upon him and them peace.

    [10] Nor is this intercession solely by way of the Prophet’s mere supplication (du`a) and by means of al-`Abbas’s mere supplication as claimed by the innovators and by the terminology of the question cited above. Rather, it was by means of their person (dhat) AND du`a as literally stated in the following reports among many others:

    (a) Intercession through the Prophet’s person according to Ibn `Umar:

    In Sahih al-Bukhari: `Abdullah ibn Dinar said:

    “I heard Ibn `Umar reciting the poetic verses of Abu Talib:

    A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows.
    “`Umar ibn Hamza said: Salim narrated from his father (Ibn `Umar) that the latter said: “The poet’s saying came to my mind as I was looking at the face of the Prophet – upon him blessings and peace – while he was praying for rain – and he did not come down until the rain water flowed profusely from every roof-gutter:

    A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows.”
    One sub-narrator added: “These were the words of Abu Talib.”

    Note that in his translation of Bukhari (2:65), Muhammad Muhsin Khan alters the wording of the hadith to read: “A white person WHO IS REQUESTED TO PRAY FOR RAIN” in place of “by whose face rain is sought.” This is tahrif i.e. textual and semantic manipulation of the most important source in Islam after the Qur’an.

    (b) Intercession through al-`Abbas’s person according to `Umar:

    “People! The Messenger of Allah sallAllahu `alayhi wa-Alihi wa-Sallam considered al-`Abbas like his father, venerating him and greatly respecting him and his rights. Therefore, O people! take the lead of the Messenger of Allah in the person of his uncle al-`Abbas and take the latter as your means to Allah Most High in the context of your tribulation.”
    Narrated from `Umar with a sound chain by al-Baladhiri and with weak chains from Ibn `Umar by al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar in al-Ansab and Ibn `Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (8:932) as cited by Ibn Hajar in the Fath (1959 ed. 2:497). Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf` al- Minara (p. 120) rejected al-Albani’s claim in his book al-Tawassul (p. 67-68) that the chain of this hadith is “mixed up” (mudtarib) as inapplicable here.

    [11] `Umar showed the possibility of tawassul through X. even though Y. – also present – may be better than X. He showed that tawassul through the inferior in the presence of the superior is permissible as there is Consensus that the best of all living human beings after Prophets then, namely `Umar, `Uthman, and `Ali are all three superior to al-`Abbas, Allah be well-pleased with all of them. This was also a mark of humbleness on `Umar’s part as already cited from Fath al-Bari. Another example of this is the tawassul of Mu`awiya for rain through the Sahabi Yazid ibn al-Aswad al-`Amiri as narrated by Abu Zur`a al-Dimashqi in his Tarikh and his tawassul also through the Tabi`i Abu Muslim al-Khawlani as narrated by Ahmad in al-Zuhd cf. al-Tahanawi, I`la’ al-Sunan (8:193).

    [12] `Umar used al-`Abbas also as a precaution lest people’s faith in the Prophet upon him peace, be shaken in case the prayer were not answered.

    [13] Finally, the Sunna prayer for rain formally has to be performed by the outward, political Imam of the Muslims or his deputy. It is in that function that the office of the Messenger of Allah – upon him blessings and peace – had ceased and was taken over, first by Abu Bakr, then by `Umar. Al-`Abbas’s position in this event is that of the deputy of the latter as the Commander of the Believers. And Allah knows best.

    I have compiled the above from the references cited below and the lights imparted by my teachers on this subject – may Allah keep them and thank them for guarding pure and authentic Sunni doctrine from the ignorant and the extremists.

    Contemporary Hanafi References:

    - Al-Kawthari, Muhammad Zahid. “Mahq al-Taqawwul fi Mas’alat al-Tawassul” (“The Eradication of Gossip Concerning the Use of Intermediaries”) in his Maqalat (“Essays”) and recently published as a monograph with introduction and notes by Shaykh Wahbi Sulayman Ghawji (1997).

    - Al-Dajwi, Yusuf Ahmad – al-Kawthari’s Shaykh. Four Articles on tawassul originally published in Majallat al-Azhar and reprinted at the beginning of Ghawji’s edition of al-Kawthari’s “Mahq al-Taqawwul.”

    - Ghawji, Wahbi Sulayman. Introduction to Mahq al-Taqawwul.

    - Al-Nass, Samer. Al-Wasilatu ila Fahmi Haqiqat al-Tawassul (“The Means to Understanding the Truth of Seeking a Means”). Beirut: Dar al-Tawfiq, 2003. The best treatment in our opinion.

    Other references:

    - Muhammad ibn `Alawi al-Maliki, Mafahim Yajib an Tusahhah (“Necessary Correction of Certain Misconceptions”). 10th ed. (p. 153-156.)

    - Abul-Hasanayn `Abd Allah ibn `Abd al-Rahman al-Makki al- Hashimi, al-Salafiyya al-Mu`asira: Munaqashat wa-Rudud (“Contemporary Salafism: Discussions and Rebuttals”) p. 143-145.

    - Al-Ghumari, Irgham al-Mubtadi` al-Ghabi bi-Jawaz al- Tawassul bil-Nabi (“Compelling the Dunderheaded Innovator to Accept the Permissibility of Using the Prophet as a Means”). Ed. Hasan `Ali al-Saqqaf. 2nd ed. Amman: Dar al-Imam al-Nawawi, 1992.

    - Mahmud Mamduh, Raf` al-Minara bi-Ahadith al-Tawassul wal- Ziyara (“Raising the Lighthouse with the Hadiths of Seeking Means and Visitation [of the Prophet]“) p. 118-121.

    In his book (al-balagh-ul-Mubeen) Imam Shah Waliullah infers that the Khalifah did not consider it allowed to ask those who had left this world or the absent for intercession.
    This is contrary to the view reported from Shah Wali Allah in his book Fuyud al-Haramayn (“The Outpourings of the Two Sanctuaries) cf. http://www.al-maqsood.org/islam/shah-1.htm

    The apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that some books of Shah Wali Allah may not be free from Wahhabistic interpolations, see LivingIslam.org

    It is known that the beasts themselves ask for rain as in the Prophetic hadith of the ant narrated from Abu Hurayra by al-Daraqutni, his student al-Hakim, and others:

    cf. Ibn Abi Shayba (6:62, 7:71)
    Abu al-Shaykh, al-`Azama (5:1572)
    Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (3:360)
    Ibn Hajar, Talkhis al-Habir (2:97 #718)
    Ibn al-Mulaqqin, Khulasat al-Badr (1:250)
    Al-San`ani, Subul al-Salam (2:83)
    Al-Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar (4:27)
    Al-Tahanawi, I`la’ al-Sunan (8:193).

    And the Sunna requires us to bring the beasts out during the prayer for rain, and the Prophet said, – upon him peace,

    - “Were it not for the beasts they [who withhold zakat] would never be granted rain.” Narrated by Ibn Majah.

    - “Were it not for the pasturing beasts punishment would be poured on you literally.” Abu Ya`la, al-Bazzar and others.

    So we may hope for their intercession, but not for that of the Prophet Muhammad??

    No, the Khalifah did not consider the Prophet upon him peace, to be absent nor to have left this world. Otherwise, why did he address the Prophet upon him peace, and Abu Bakr in their graves as narrated by al-Tabarani through trustworthy narrators (see below) and why was “nothing more important to him” – as narrated from him by al- Bukhari in his Sahih – than to be buried near them?

    Qays ibn Abi Hazim narrated that one day, `Umar addressed the people from the pulpit in Madina and said in his address:

    “Verily there is in the Gardens of `Adn a palace which has five hundred doors, each posted with five thousand of the ladies of Paradise, and none but a Prophet shall enter it.” At this point he turned to the grave of the Messenger of Allah – upon him blessings and peace – and said: “Congratulations to you, O dweller of this grave!” Then he continued: “And none but a Most-Truthful One (siddiq) shall enter it.” At this point he turned towards Abu Bakr’s grave and said: “Congratulations to you, Abu Bakr!” Then he said: “And none but a Martyr shall enter it,” and he pointed to himself. He continued, speaking to himself outloud: “And when did you inherit martyrdom, `Umar?” Then he said: “Truly, the One who brought me out from Makka unto the migration to Madina is able to bring me martyrdom!”
    Al-Tabarani narrated it in al-Awsat through trustworthy narrators cf. al-Haythami, Majma` al-Zawa’id (9:54-55).

    Do the Ahnaaf consider Khalifah Umar to have performed his ijtihad on this issue but the Ahnaaf disagreed with him? Please explain.
    Even if the act of `Umar were not originally a Sunna – which it is – the ijtihad of the Khulafa’ al-Rashidin nevertheless has the probative force of Sunna in this Religion, with which no School, Hanafi or other, is at liberty to differ. Not that the Ahnaaf disagreed with him in this or in anything else whatsoever that comes to mind! And it is a poorly phrased question indeed that places an entire Sunni School in the immaterial position of disagreeing with one of the Khulafa’ al-Rashidin when this is the exclusive wont of Ahl al-Bid`a.

    Hajj Gibril
    GF Haddad
    [Mon, 20 Oct 2003]

  43. Um Abdullah says:

    This is about the third time I repeat this, I wrote the article for the purpose of showing what the scholars UNDERSTOOD the narration to mean, which is that if a person wants istisqa’ he goes to the Imam and ask him to do it.
    Secondly, my first post was about narration of Malik al Dar, I didn’t come to discuss the whole issue of tawassul by asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us, because that will take a much longer article and needs a lot of time, which I do not have right now, but in near future insha Allah there will be articles answering all of the evidences used for this type of tawassul insha Allah.
    But right now I am ONLY discussing Malik al Dar’s narration, that is why I did not reply to the other evidences regarding the issue (this is an answer to bro Ibn Anwar’s post)
    Thirdly, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling the man to go to Umar and tell him “Be clever”, hinting to Umar radiyallahu anhu to make istisqa’ (as the other narrations show, and the chapter titles of the scholars quoted explain), now if what the man did (wether it was Bilal ibn al Harith radiyallahu anhu or someone else) was correctpermissable, then:
    1. Why didn’t any of the scholars I quoted mention the narration in a chapter titled (tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) or some title indicating that the narration is EVIDENCE for permissibility of that type of tawassul?
    Instead they title the chapter in which the narration is in (salat al istisqa’– the man didn’t do salat al Istisqa’ at the grave, only did duaa, while Umar rA did salat al istisqa) , (The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought), and one of them commented before the narration saying: ““and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt“, he didn’t say “intercession through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, wouldn’t it be more important to point out the permissibility of tawassul through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death, which is stronger than doing tawassul through the righteous and ahl al bayt? Instead they ignored that part , showing no importance to it at all.
    So if they believed that the narration indicates the permissibility of such a tawassul, why didn’t they at least hint to it by the chapter title or a comment like they did to show that it meant to do intercession through saliheen and ahl al bayt, and ask the imam to do istisqa?
    2. what was the point of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling Umar r.A “be clever”?
    3. If the man told Umar that he went to the grave, and then told him about the dream, why would Umar do salat al istisqa’ when the man already asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa’ and he told him that they will be watered? Doesn’t the istisqa’ of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sufficient?
    4. If the action of man was correct (to ask the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa), and the Prophet S.A.W answered his request, then why didn’t the rain come down immediately after the dream, and instead came down immediately after al Abbas radiyallahu anhu’s duaa?
    Who is higher in status, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam or his uncle?
    Fourthly, lets say it was Bilal bin al Harith radiyallahu anhu.
    He made a mistake out of ijtihad and he was corrected by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam in the dream, who directed him to go to Umar for istisqa’, which is proven by the act of Umar radiyallahu anhu of making salat al Istisqa’ and tawassul by the uncle of the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam during that same period, if what Bilal did was correct, then there would have been no point in Umar radiyallahu anhu to make tawassul through al Abbas, because Bilal already did tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
    .

    Faqir said:

    Fine, then first prove that the other narrations with the alternative wording are more authentic in wording and sanad than the narrration myself and others are utilising.

    I wrote in my article which you were supposed to have read:
    (Note: these 2 narrations could be weak, but the point is that al Hafidh Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah mentioned them right before the narration of Malik, showing what it is about, and [what it]means, which shows what he understood it to mean, same as what Ibn Hajar (r A) understood from it).

    But it would be interesting to see their authenticity, maybe in future I will try to check that insha Allah.

  44. Ibn Muhammad says:

    Um Abdullah just answer 2 simple questions instead of going around in circles with your arguments. The questions are:

    Why did the prophet(sw) tell the man to tell Umar(ra) they will be watered, doesnt this show that the mans dua has already been accepted and the prophet wants him to notify Umar?

    Where is the condition the prophet(sw) sets so water can be granted?

    Your response to this is the prophet tells the man to tell Umar “Be clever” and this according to you and some scholars meant and order for Umar to do istisqa, Now you have contradicted yourself here because the same scholar you use as your proof (Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani -rahimahu Allah – in his books “Fath al Bari” (vol 3 pg. 441):) stops at “Go to Umar” and the rest as you said is not relevant, yet now you say it is the latter part of the hadeeth that proves the prophet ordered the Imam to do the istisqa.

  45. Hussain20 says:

    Sidi Abul Layth perhaps this would also be of benefit for your future tawassul articles.

    Taken from Imam Dhahabi’s Siyar a’lam an-Nubala

    المُجَلَّدُ السَّابِعَ عَشَرَ >> الطَّبقةُ الثَّانِيَةُ وَالعِشْرُونَ >> 41-ابْنُ لاَلٍ، أَبُو بَكْرٍ أَحْمَدُ بنُ عَلِيِّ بنِ أَحْمَدَ الهَمَذَانِيُّ

    الشَّيْخُ، الإِمَامُ، الفَقِيْهُ، المُحَدِّثُ، أَبُو بَكْرٍ أَحْمَدُ بنُ عَلِيِّ بنِ أَحْمَدَ بنِ مُحَمَّدِ بنِ الفَرَجِ بنِ لاَلٍ الهَمَذَانِيُّ، الشَّافِعِيُّ.
    حَدَّثَ عَنْ:أَبِيهِ، وَالقَاسِمِ بن أَبِي صَالِحٍ، وَعَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الجَلاَّب، وَعَبْدِ اللهِ بن أَحْمَدَ الزَّعْفَرَانِيّ، وَإِسْمَاعِيْل الصَّفَّار، وَعَلِيِّ بن الفَضْلِ السُّتُوْرِي، وَأَبِي سَعِيْدٍ بنِ الأَعْرَابِيّ، وَأَبِي نَصْرٍ مُحَمَّدِ بن حَمْدُوَيْه المَرْوَزِيّ، وَحَفْصِ بن عُمَرَ الأَرْدَبيلِيّ، وَعَبْدِ اللهِ بن عُمَرَ بنِ شَوْذَب، وَخَلْقٍ كَثِيْر.
    وَلَهُ رحلَةٌ وَحفظٌ وَمَعْرِفَةٌ.
    حَدَّثَ عَنْهُ:جَعْفَرُ بنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الأَبْهَرِيّ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بنُ عِيْسَى الصُّوْفِيّ، وَحُمَيْدُ بنُ المَأْمُوْنِ، وَأَبُو مَسْعُوْد أَحْمَدُ بنُ مُحَمَّدٍ البَجَلِيّ، وَأَحْمَدُ بنُ عِيْسَى بنِ عَبَّاد، وَأَبُو الفَرَجِ عَبْدُ الحَمِيْدِ بنُ الحَسَنِ، وَآخَرُوْنَ.
    وَكَانَ إِمَاماً مُفَنّناً.
    قَالَ شِيْرَوَيْه:كَانَ ثِقَةً، أَوْحَدَ زمَانِهِ، مُفْتِي البَلَد، وَلَهُ مُصَنَّفَاتٌ فِي علومِ الحَدِيْثِ، غَيْر أَنَّهُ كَانَ مَشْهُوْراً بِالفِقْه.
    قَالَ:وَرَأَيْتُ لَهُ كِتَاب(السُّنَن)، وَ(مُعْجَم الصَّحَابَة)، مَا رَأَيْتُ أَحْسَنَ مِنْهُ، وَالدُّعَاءُ عِنْد قَبْرِهِ مُسْتَجَابٌ وُلِدَ سَنَةَ ثَمَانٍ وَثَلاَثِ مائَةٍ، وَمَاتَ فِي رَبِيْعٍ الآخِرِ، سَنَة ثَمَانٍ وَتِسْعِيْنَ وَثَلاَثِ مائَةٍ.(17/77)
    وَقَالَ الحَسَنُ بنُ عَلِيِّ بنِ بُنْدَار الرَّنْجَانِيّ الفَرَضِيّ:مَا رَأَيْتُ قَطُّ مِثْلَ ابْنِ لاَل-رَحِمَهُ اللهُ-.
    قُلْتُ:وَالدُّعَاءُ مُسْتَجَاب عِنْد قُبُوْر الأَنْبِيَاء وَالأَوْلِيَاء، وَفِي سَائِر البِقَاع، لَكِن سَبَبُ الإِجَابَة حُضُورُ الدَّاعِي، وَخُشُوعُهُ وَابتِهَاله، وَبلاَ رَيْبٍ فِي البقعَةِ المُبَارَكَة، وَفِي المَسْجَدِ، وَفِي السَّحَر، وَنَحْوِ ذَلِكَ، يَتَحَصَّلُ ذَلِكَ للدَاعِي كَثِيْراً، وَكُلُّ مُضطر فَدُعَاؤُه مُجَابٌ

    and

    9/343-344

    وقد استجيب دعاء معروف في غير قضية، وأفرد الامام أبو الفرج بن الجوزي مناقب معروف في أربع كراريس قال عبيد بن محمد الوراق: مر معروف، وهو صائم بسقاء يقول: رحم الله من شرب، فشرب رجاء الرحمة. وقد حكى أبو عبد الرحمن السلمي شيئا غير صحيح، وهو أن معروفا الكرخي كان يحجب علي بن موسى الرضى، قال: فكسروا ضلع معروف، فمات، فلعل الرضى، كان له حاجب اسمه معروف، فوافق اسمع اسم زاهد العراق. وعن إبراهيم الحربي قال: قبر معروف الترياق المجرب. يريد
    إجابة دعاء المضطر عنده لان البقاع المباركة يستجاب عندها الدعاء، كما أن الدعاء في السحر مرجو، ودبر المكتوبات، وفي المساجد، بل دعاء المضطر مجاب في أي مكان اتفق، اللهم إني مضطر إلى العفو، فاعف عني.

  46. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    My my..what a sly woman this Umm Abdullah is…then again..isn’t that the basic trait of a pseudo-salafi?

    The reason why people have provided several different narrations on istigatha is because Umm Abdullah DECLARED in comment 21 that:
    “First of all
    I am not here to speak about tawassul that is by the status or jah of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, which has to do with the hadith of the blind man.

    ***my concern is the tawassul that is asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us after his death.***”

    However, now in comment 44 she says :
    “Secondly, my first post was about narration of Malik al Dar, ***I didn’t come to discuss the whole issue of tawassul by asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us***, because that will take a much longer article and needs a lot of time, which I do not have right now, but in near future insha Allah there will be articles answering all of the evidences used for this type of tawassul insha Allah .”

    Note : *** for emphasis

    One may safely assume she has run out of reasonable and strong arguments for her conjectures..analyse her comments carefully..and you will be able to come to the same conclusion as Ibn Muhammad has i.e. she is running around a circle, doing tawaf.

    Thus, in comment 38 Umm Abdullah said:
    “And if I have any responses to any other posts in this site, I will post it in my blog or in IA or Multaqa forum insha Allah , so others can join in discussion too, ones who don’t post in blogs.
    You are welcome to join there, or you can post ur reply to it in this blog.”

    Yes..let me say it again:
    “RUN!!! RETREAT!!! REINFORCEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HELPPPP!!!!”

    Wassalam

  47. Um Abdullah says:

    subhanallah, I said that MY FIRST POST which was #11 was about narration of Malik al Dar, and when I posted that FIRST POST I wasn’t planning on discussing the whole issue of tawassul, and Allah knows my intention.

    As for my comment that you quoted:

    “First of all
    I am not here to speak about tawassul that is by the status or jah of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, which has to do with the hadith of the blind man.

    ***my concern is the tawassul that is asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us after his death.***”

    i said that because Abul Layth or someone else here started to argue with me on the first type of tawassul (by the status of the PRophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), so I told him that I am not here to discuss that type of tawassul, and that the second type is what concerns me, I didn’t say that I was going to dicuss THE WHOLE ISSUE of that type of tawassul right now !

    Don’t worry, in near future I will have a reply to every single evidence you have insha Allah ta’ala.
    but right now I am very busy, overloaded with work, and you are just wasting my time.

    Yes..let me say it again:
    “RUN!!! RETREAT!!! REINFORCEMENTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HELPPPP!!!!”

    yes, I ask for Allah’s help, if I wanted to runaway and get others help, I would have posted this in IA or Multaqa forum and not here, but I didn’t.

    I will reply to brother Ibn Muhammad then leave insha Allah, I don’t discuss with people who insult, mock.

    Um Abdullah just answer 2 simple questions instead of going around in circles with your arguments. The questions are:

    Why did the prophet(sw) tell the man to tell Umar(ra) they will be watered, doesnt this show that the mans dua has already been accepted and the prophet wants him to notify Umar?

    Where is the condition the prophet(sw) sets so water can be granted?

    The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was giving glad tidings to Umar radiyallahu anhu that they will be watered and for him to be clever, hinting to him that he should make istisqa’, which some of the people whom he told about the dream understood and told him to pray istisqa’ (As in the narrations quoted in the article)
    and they were watered ! but when?
    immediatly after the duaa of Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu, not immediatly after the dream.

    Your response to this is the prophet tells the man to tell Umar “Be clever” and this according to you and some scholars meant and order for Umar to do istisqa, Now you have contradicted yourself here because the same scholar you use as your proof (Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani -rahimahu Allah – in his books “Fath al Bari” (vol 3 pg. 441):) stops at “Go to Umar” and the rest as you said is not relevant, yet now you say it is the latter part of the hadeeth that proves the prophet ordered the Imam to do the istisqa.

    It is not contradictory, I am the one who said that “Be clever” is the hint for Umar radiyallahu anhu to do istisqa’ (based on the other narrations related to the incident), and Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah stopped at “go to Umar”, to show its relevance to the title of the chapter which is (The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought).

    I didn’t base my conclusion regarding al Hafidh Ibn Hajar’s understanding of the narration on him ONLY stopping at “Umar”, but on the statement after it, which I alread quoted in my previous posts.

    I hope that cleared the issue for you.

    my discussion ends here insha Allah.

  48. Abu Zaid says:

    assalaam alaikum

    I believe the line of questioning has really deteriorated along with manners, which is very unfortunate. I think when we post we should think twice before using sarcasm.

  49. Ibn Umer says:

    Imam Malik was asked:
    رجل له علم بالسنة أيجادل عنها؟
    “If a man is steeped in the knowledge of the Sunnah, should he ARGUE about it?”
    So he replied:
    لا، ولكن ليخبر بالسنة، فإن قبل منه، وإلا سكت
    “No, rather he should INFORM about the sunnah *IF* it will be accepted from him, otherwise he should remain silent.”

    Ma’ruf al-Karkhi said:
    إذا أراد الله بعبد خيرا فتح عليه باب العمل وأغلق عليه باب الجدل وإذا أراد بعبد شرا أغلق عليه باب العمل وفتح عليه باب الجدل
    “If Allah wills well for a servant, He opens for him the door of WORKS and closes upon him the door of ARGUMENTATION. And if He wills ill for a servant, He closes the door of WORKS and opens to him the door of ARGUMENTATION.”

  50. Ibn Saad says:

    wsalam wr wb
    In retrospect, I do feel that some stuff could have been said in a kinder way. So I apologize on my behalf and of others on Seekingilm. HOWEVER, before you point the finger to others, perhaps you should look at the other side first. Here is an example of some of the beautiful manners we can learn from a certain IA member regarding the members of this site:

    “Their skulls seem to be too thick for even gamma particles penetration”

    So anways, let us ALL inshAllah try to conduct ourselves with ikhlaq and let us all Join the Anti-Takfeeri Movement, and be united in Islam, rather than be divided.

  51. Abu Zaid says:

    Dear brother Ibn Saad,

    I haven’t chosen a side and don’t believe I have to. My comments were regarding where this debate was going as for IA, sunniforum, SP, Troid, Deenport let their cheerleaders express themselves. I don’t see the world as black and white.

  52. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    Well..if I struck a cord I sincerely and humbly apologise….but Umm Abdullah is getting on my nerves by repeating the same thing over and over again and then saying I’m done and I’m going to go to some other forum and post it there so others may contribute, like at IA…of course people there will support her…thus my saying “run..retreat..reinforcements..help etc.”

    Once again..the reason why people started posting other evidences for tawassul was because she said:
    “I am not here to speak about tawassul that is by the status or jah of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, which has to do with the hadith of the blind man.

    ***my concern is the tawassul that is asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us after his death.***”

    I think that is quite clear and people construed that she wanted to discuss about istigatha. In any case, the post is generally about tawassul..not simply the narration of Malik Al-Dar. She says she’s busy, so she can’t respond to any one of the evidences given besides the one from Malik Al-Dar r.a…well fine…we shall wait for answers from her when she has time..

    In any case Sheikh GF Haddad provided the following narration in explanation of Umar’s r.a. tawassul through Al-Abbas :
    The use of the Prophet’s uncle illustrates that tawassul is essentially through the Prophet upon him peace, as the importance of al-`Abbas in this respect is only in his relationship to the Prophet as `Umar himself states with the words “the uncle of Your Prophet” in al-Bukhari’s version already mentioned; “the status of al-`Abbas in relation to your Prophet” in al-Lalika’i’s version; and as al-`Abbas states:

    “O Allah , truly no tribulation descends except because of sins, nor is lifted except upon repentence. The people have turned to you by means of me BECAUSE OF MY POSITION IN RELATION TO YOUR PROPHET, and here are our hands [raised up] towards you – despite our sins – and our forelocks in repentence, so send down water for us and PRESERVE YOUR PROPHET IN THE PERSON OF HIS UNCLE.” Whereupon the sky let down water as thick as ropes and the people came over to al-`Abbas passing their hands over him and saying to him: “Congratulations to you, irrigator of the two Sanctuaries!” Whereupon `Umar said, “He/This is, by Allah , the means to Allah and the place of nearness to Him!”
    Cited from al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar’s narration in al-Ansab by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (2:497).”

    And so what if indeed Umm Abdullah hit the mark by showing that the Prophet s.a.w. led the man who did istigatha to him to go to Umar and asked him to do istisqa’ with Al-Abbas…what she fails to understand is that neither Muhammad s.a.w. , nor Umar r.a. nor any of the scholars explained that what the man did i.e. istigatha was wrong let alone shirk…as to the question, why didn’t the Prophet s.a.w. himself make du’a for the rain if he could, well does he not have the ability to refuse and to show that he is not the only means for tawassul and wanted to educate the man and Umar r.a. that the ahlul bait are also means of tawassul due to their RELATION to the Prophet s.a.w. as explained in the narration mentioned above from Fathul Bari? The narration gives clarity to the issue…though Al-Abbas was used as waseelah, the Prophet s.a.w. was still the means through which it was done.So what if Ibn Kathir and Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani mentioned the athar of Malik Al-Dar under istisqa’ and not istigatha..if Umm Abdullah is right in her findings then yea…obviously if the narrations showed and was about istisqa it would fall under the category of istisqa instead of istigatha…yet again we repeat…this does not negate the fact that not one of the scholars of Islam ever blamed the man for asking the Prophet s.a.w. directly…and why is that? Umm Abdullah said very simply that there was no reason to? Yes, I agree there was no reason to BECAUSE they saw nothing wrong with what the man did…Umm Abdullah is creating her own assumptions and inferences of a thing not thought of by any of the scholars she cited as evidence…Thus my saying she is no faqih..and I shall add that she is no muhaddith either….thus her conjectures are not evidence for hukm..

    Wassalam

  53. musa al-Hanafi says:

    IN RESPONSE TO UMM ABDULLAH:

    i personally do not do tawassul of this kind because i am cautious with regard to this and because i am sure i will not be placed in hell merely on account that i did not do it. however, i would never say the people who do this are mushrik, for if i did then i would be forced to consider imaam aHmad ibn Hanbal and others as mushrikiin, na`uuthu billaah!

    UMM ABDULLAH SAID:
    “it tells how the Prophet S.A.W. CORRECTED THE MAN WHO CAME TO HIM, AND SHOWED HIM THE CORRECT WAY to act when needing to make duaa and tawassul, by going to the Imam, and many scholars don’t comment on narrations that are clear and speak for themselves, or they make their understanding of it clear in the chapter title.”

    okay, above we see an exact copy of part of what you have said sister umm abdullah. now let me explain your weaknesses in this inshaa’llaah, not to humiliate you my dear and beloved muslim sister. rather to point you to where you are definitely contradicting yourself and i do so only for the sake of allaah! take it whichever way you will inshaa’llaah, but i swear by allaah that my intention is only good in this!

    okay, so you see the parts of your speech that i have capitalised, right? it’s clear, i hope!
    okay, so let’s suppose that the prophet, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, did correct him in this instance… then WHERE did the prophet, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, tell the man he had committed shirk? and if the prophet, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, was correcting him then HOW did he, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, KNOW the man had visited his grave in order to “correct” him? doesn’t this explanation also suggest he, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, WAS aware of the visitation? and doesn’t this also suggest that he, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, did not rebuke the man mentioned in the HadiiTH for this act of his but rather advised him on what to do next? and also, if it is okay to ask allaah through a living person then it makes absolutely NO difference whether the person is dead or alive because whichever way that person has NO control over the situation and may not even be present and in the know that the tawassul is being made through his status or whatever?

    UMM ABDULLAH ALSO SAID:
    “3. and what about the sky not raining until after Umar’s tawassul by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma)and not after the man asking the Prophet sallallahu alyhi wa sallam
    to make duaa ?”

    with regards to the quote from umm abdullah above this part of my post:

    did the prophet, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, say to the man to ask through al-`abbaas or through himself, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam? it is clear! so this would mean that NOT only did he, `alayhis-Salaatu was-salaam, avoid rebuking the man mentioned in the HadiiTH (at this point i do not think it important at all who the person in the HadiiTH was, rather the text is what is important) but he told the man what to do and the man did it. he went to `umar and told him to make tawassul through al-`abbaas (according to another narration)! so… was al-`abbaas actually present, regardless of whether he was alive or not, when `umar made tawassul through him? and did al-`abbaas have the power to give rain or is it only allaah that has such power? obviously we ALL accept that ONLY allaah has this power, so what is the major fuss here? the point i am getting to is that this type of tawassul has CLEARLY been accepted by great scholars of the diin and this does not make THEM mushrikiin so then HOW can anybody blame those (who have even less knowledge that these scholars and are merely following these scholars because we ALL MUST rely on the scholars – the inheritors of the prophets, `alayhim us-Salaatu was-salaam – to transmit our diin to us) for being mushrikiin?

    thankyou!

    by the way, it is often futile trying to push someone around who is of the Hanafi math-hab, loool… have you not heard the narration about the debate between maalik and abu Haniifah in which it is narrated that maalik was POURING with sweat afterwards and his students asked him why and he said along the lines of “that was abu Haniifah who was just here. wallaahi, that man could convince you that tree over there is made from gold”, ie. we are usually adept in `ilm ul-kalaam and we do not consider it Haraam but we consider it as something great which if it falls into the WRONG hands could be fatal for that person and others who come into contact with him/her!

    the moral of this last part of the post:

    don’t mess with the aHnaaf! lol!

    (i hope you don’t take the last part of this post wrongly! i just wanted to add a little Halaal humour into the mix)!

  54. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    Jazakumullah for the comment akhi musa al-hanafi…I’d just like to say that several of the points you mentioned have already been pointed out in comments prior to yours. But masha’Allah…may Allah increase you and make you steadfast on your madhab always :).

  55. Um Abdullah says:

    I will answer very short as I am very busy.

    To bro Musa
    Firstly, where did I say that this type of tawassul is shirk?
    secondly, you said:

    so… was al-`abbaas actually present, regardless of whether he was alive or not, when `umar made tawassul through him?

    yes he was present, and he made duaa to Allah to send down rain.

    the point i am getting to is that this type of tawassul has CLEARLY been accepted by great scholars of the diin

    Could you list me the names of the scholars you are speaking about? and in which books of theirs did they say that it was permissable/established in shari’ah ?

    Thanks

  56. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    Hmm..do we ever keep our word? Comment 48:
    “my discussion ends here insha Allah .”

  57. Ibn Anwar says:

    The issue of istigatha and why the Prophet s.a.w. asked the man who came to him to instead go to Umar r.a. and he in turn go to Al-Abbas r.a. is beautifully explained here :

    http://www.marifah.net/articles/seekingaid-haytami.pdf

  58. Um Abdullah says:

    yes, but musa accused me of something (that I said that this type of tawassul is shirk)plus asked me a question.
    you don’t expect me to be quite when I am accused of something I didn’t say.

    Plus I asked for names of scholars for my info, I am not planning on continuing this discussion insha Allah.

    and if it “bothers” u to see me posting, then don’t read or reply to my posts, just ignore it.

  59. Um Abdullah says:

    wa alaykum assalam (forgot to reply to salam)

  60. Ibn Anwar says:

    Assalamu’alaikum,
    You said :
    “yes, but musa accused me of something (that I said that this type of tawassul is shirk)plus asked me a question.
    you don’t expect me to be quite when I am accused of something I didn’t say.”

    That’s understandable…however, instead of making a sort of promise of barring yourself from the discussion in toto you should have specified it into something like,”I will not discuss further here unless someone says about me something I didn’t say” lol

    You said:
    “and if it “bothers” u to see me posting, then don’t read or reply to my posts, just ignore it.”

    No, it doesn’t bother me…if it did bother me i wouldn’t simply refrain from replying or responding…i may just delete them ;) lol…

    Wassalam

  61. musa al-Hanafi says:

    as-salaamu `alaykum yaa muslimiin,

    sorry if i seemed to be making an accusation against you as you so rightfully replied to. i may have come accross in the wrong way. however, i feel it necessary to comment further now. so, if you do not consider it as shirk then what do you consider it as? because EVERY salafi-claimant i have ever met so far always says it is an act of shirk (and before you pound my face into the floor for calling or refering to you as a “salafi-claimant”, lol, it’s just the way you have come accross in this thread – as one of those who says “i am salafi”).

    i have a bit of a below the belt question now… as i feel it might be necessary to bring this up (and there is a definite reason for this which will all make sense once the question has been answered and i respond to it inshaa’llaah):

    WHERE is the evidence to label yourself as “salafi”? give me an EXPLICIT ‘aayah or HadiiTH and i swear by allaah i will refer to myself as salafi from now on! lol…

    (don’t forget, i have a good reason to ask this question which will all make sense once i recieve a reply and then make my response inshaa’llaah. then you will see how it ties in with this topic inshaa’llaah)!

    oh, and as for the references you requested… i do believe that these have been given from the very beginning of the thread and throughout the whole thread by other people!

    and sister, please don’t think i wish to see you gone from here. that is not a good assumption with regards to my feelings about your presence here! did you actually note that in my initial post to you i stated along the lines of “my dear and beloved sister in islaam”??? are these the words of a brother that wants to give you a hard time, make you feel bad, stab at you viciously, hates you or thinks negetively about you as a human being??? sis, please, relax and accept my apologies if i came accross that way at any point!

    was-salaam!

  62. musa al-Hanafi says:

    oh yes, and give your husband and children (if you have them, and i only assume so because you have the kunya “umm abdullah”) a BIG salafi-sufi-Hanafi-muslim hug from me and tell them i love you all for the sake of allaah as my muslim brethren and hope for you what i hope for myself bi ithnillaah (jannat ul-firdaws)!

    i hope you feel better now and realise that i do not mean to come accross in a harsh manner even if it does seem that way at times! please do me a favour and keep this in mind every time you think i am being a bit harsh – it may be the way you have read what i have posted, and it may be that i chose my words carelessly, and it may just be another and more sublime reason. wallaahu ta`aala `aalim!

    sis, at the end of the day i am the type of brother who can sometimes get quite heated in debate but if you ever saw me debating anybody who challenges me face to face then you would also see me make every effort to hug the brother and tell him i love him for the sake of allaah even if we had an intense debate and it may have appeared harsh at times!
    i prefer to keep good relationships amoungst muslims, not create and add further to divides within our ranks even if we have disagreements!

    look, i have done my research in the field of `aqiidah and my conclusion so far is that EVERYONE who is either ash`ari, TaHaawi, maaturiidi, naSafi, fiqh ul-akbari, aaTHaari are all saying the same thing at the end of the day but they merely have differences in semantics mainly and the approach via which they conclude the exact same or similar things! ie. maaturiidi’s don’t make ta’wiil but the whole point in ta’wiil of the ash`ari’s is that they are bringing evidences from the qur’aan and sunnah alone in order to refute anthropomorphism and prevent any possibility of it amoungst people, so the conclusion between the two is the same… that being “allaah is NOT a physical body, does not move around from place to place, is not limited, is not bound by His creation or by the laws of His creation (which is also His creation too), is free of all need, does not resemble His creation, His creation does not resemble Him in any way, etc. etc. etc.

    so do you get my point? i wish the muslims would just unite upon the truth and each school of legitimate `aqiidah and fiqh would accept each other with open arms even if they disagree upon a method by which they reach the same conclusion!
    all the fighting and division benefits NOBODY except the shayTaan and the real deviants and kuffaar (including the shi`ah about whom there are some CLEAR and EXPLICIT aHaadiiTH such as the two following aHaadiiTH from musnad aHmad:
    from ibraahiim ibn Hasan, from Hasan ibn `ali, from `ali ibn al-Hasan from al-Hasan ibn `ali ibn abi Taalib from `ali ibn abi Taalib that the prophet, Sallaa’llaahu `alayhi wa sallam, said “at the end of time there will come a people who are called rawaafidh. they reject islaam, they spit it out!”
    from `abdullaah ibn `abbaas that the prophet, Sallaa’llaahu `alayhi wa sallam, said “at the end of time there will be a people who are called rawaafidh. they will reject islaam. kill them, for they are polytheists!”)

    oh how the shayTaan, the deviants, the kuffaar, etc. laugh at us hard because of our fighting each other over minor differences! please consider this inshaa’llaah!

  63. musa al-Hanafi says:

    note: in the above aHaadiiTH i have quoted about the shi`ah rawaafidh the chains are all entirely ahl-il-bayt. lol…
    quite a punch in the face for them, i dare say!

    so, it should be more than clear to you about the status of the shi`ah rawaafidh. therefore, when i say “legitimate schools” i do NOT include the shi`ah rawaafidh in this, rather i consider them as `aduuwullaah (enemies of allaah) and believe they must be stopped the way the prophet, Sallaa’llaahu `alayhi wa sallam, has ordered! this is because i would NEVER undermine or reject anything authentically attributed to the prophet, Sallaa’llaahu `alayhi wa sallam.
    and before anybody uses the age old and extremely weak argument “then why are you Hanafi” i say:

    EVERY muslim with even a granule of `ilm and common sense KNOWS that the aHnaaf, as the other mathaahib, have got a LONG history of scholars and almost every one of these legitimate Hanafi scholars (not the ones who strayed towards the path of the mu`tazila or the murji`ah, etc.) have made more than CLEAR where they DIFFER with abu Haniifah or his mujtaahid students based on authentic aHaadiiTH that have been collected long after his time. so, where will you (those who accuse people of blindly following abu Haniifah) run to now?
    also, it has been narrated by imaam an-nasaa`i in his kitaab ul-`ilm:

    abu kayTHama narrated to us, saying: ma`iin reported to us, saying : mu’aawiyah ibn SaaliH reported to us from rabii`ah ibn yaziid that abud-dardaa said: “if we narrate HadiiTH to you BASED ON THEIR MEANINGS then that is sufficient for you”

    (for the salafi-claimants: al-albaani did footnotes on this book with some additional commentry, and he has NOT spoken against the above statement of abud-dardaa)

    and it is also reported in the same book:

    abu khayTHama narrated to us, saying: ibn `uyaynah reported to us from ibn abiin-najiih that mujaahid said concerning allaah’s statement (which means) “and make us leaders of the muttaquun” (suurat ul-furqaan, ‘aayah 74):
    this means “we take their example and FOLLOW them (ie. the prophet, Sallaa’llaahu `alayhi wa sallam, and his companions, radhiyallaahu ta`aala `anhum) such that THOSE WHO COME AFTER US WILL FOLLOW OUR EXAMPLE”!

    and (from the same book):

    abu khayTHama narrated to us, saying: muHammad ibn `ubayd reported to us from al-a`mash from muslim (ibn `aqiil) that masruuq said: `abdullaah (ibn mas`uud) said:

    “INDEED, IT IS FROM KNOWLEDGE FOR ONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW TO SAY: ALLAAH KNOWS BEST”

    “ان من العلم ان يقول الذي لا يعلم: الله اعلم”

    *musa*

  64. Ibn Umer says:

    I usually doubt ahadith where the Prophet [s] allegedly spelled out the names of the various sects, as in the case of the narration of the ‘Rafida’.
    The chain for it is weak. It contains Yahya bin Al-Mutawakkil and his shaykh Kathir bin Isma’il who are both weak.

  65. musa al-Hanafi says:

    if we were to go down the path of “this HadiiTH is weak because so and so said that so and so in the chain is weak” and we are not careful then the result will be maybe 5 or 6 aHaadiiTH left in total!
    this is because you may find that there is barely a single HadiiTH about which at least one scholar hasn’t said “so and so is in the chain, therefore it is weak”!
    also, there are aHaadiiTH that may be weak in chain but strong in matn!
    so, now i will ask you some simple questions related to the HadiiTH you have commented on:

    do you say the rawaafidh are not mushrik and that they are muslims?
    do you think we should open our arms and embrace those foul people who have been the result of so much fitnah and who, more importantly, hold the many kufr beliefs they hang on to?

    also, according to who is this HadiiTH weak, and who else has mentioned this?
    and why have they said it is weak? is it merely because of somebody in the chain or is it both the chain and the matn? and what is the status of whoever said it is weak and according to who and who else has mentioned them in praise?

    do you see how many possibilities there are linked to this?
    we could continue on this path with every HadiiTH ever narrated and then, as i said, end up with either not a single HadiiTH remaining or only a handful!
    therefore, we must be very careful when commenting on these things!
    the same can happen if we want to try to prove a HadiiTH to be acceptible!

    it was not said and agreed upon that “HadiiTH is a great source of error for the non-mujtaahid” for nothing!

    wallaahu `aalim!

    i personally go by what is clear to me from the great HadiiTH masters, and when it comes to putting that HadiiTH into practical use (acting upon it) then i leave the explanation to the faqii because otherwise i am LOST just like many other people today!
    i do not wish to be one of the lost ones!
    until i am myself qualified to make judgements on aHaadiiTH then i will remain absolutely silent about which is SaHiiH, which is dha`iif, etc.
    because HadiiTH is a very subjective/objective area amoungst so many scholars!
    i currently take my knowledge from those who are authoised in knowledge and who i trust and look up to based not only on their qualifications as a scholar but also based upon the way they themselves act upon the diin and present themselves, ie. do they really act upon the qur’aan and sunnah to the best of their ability and is it clear in how they conduct themselves, etc.

    oh, and a question for the salafi-claimants:

    do you REALLY follow the qur’aan and sunnah to its CORE???

    if so then how is it that i’ve NEVER seen even a single salafi-claimant carrying a container of water EVERYWHERE he/she goes just in case they break wind or lose their wudhu some other way?

    the SaHaabah used to carry water EVERYWHERE they went just in case they broke their wudhu and they would make their wudhu outside no matter where they were! so another question:
    how come i have NEVER seen even a single salafi-claimant making wudhu outside?

    oh, and why do salafi-claimants command their wives NOT to pray when they are travelling outdoors (i have heard it with my own ears, and plus i have NEVER seen a single salafi-claimant praying with his wife behind him when outdoors. i have seen groups of them praying together with their wives sitting around doing nothing in a large group nearby – ASTAGHFIRULLAAHUL-`ADHIIM)? is it not allaah Who is most deserving of your shame?
    my wife prays behind me even if we are in the middle of a busy city and there is nowehere else to pray! i would NEVER even dream of commanding her not to pray just because men might stare at her! if they stare then they are the ones who will get the wrath of allaah, not my wife or i because we are OBEYING allaah’s command to pray!
    also, i have called adhaan, prayed sunnah, then called iqaamatis-Salaat out in a busy street in the middle of a roundabout with my wife and 3 or 4 of her female friends praying behind me, maashaa’llaah! WHAT IS THE PROBLEM with women praying outside? if the prayer time comes in and there is nowehere private for you to pray then FEAR ALLAAH and PRAY and do NOT even dare to tell your wives “don’t pray because men might stare at you”. this is evil and you have NOT got the authority to command your wife to do something extremely Haraam just because of the evil of others and your own tainted desires! how dare you?

    (obviously, these questions are directed towards any salafi-claimants here)

  66. musa al-Hanafi says:

    quote myself:

    “the same can happen if we want to try to prove a HadiiTH to be acceptible!”

    obviously a typo error!

    i meant to point out exactly that which i am sure you understand already without me needing to mention, but since we may have people here who believe `aql is Haraam (even though allaah commanded us to reflect on things and to use our intellect) then i had better explain what i meant to say here at this point in my post (the point i just quoted myself on)!

    if we wanted to go down the path of trying to prove every HadiiTH ever collected to be at least Hasan, then i am sure we (as people of little knowledge and no qualifications or authority in knowledge) could find thousands of quotes from various people to say such and such a HadiiTH is Hasan and such and such a HadiiTH is SaHiiH.

    for this matter, i would prefer to stick to what the giants of `ilm ul-HadiiTH have said because it makes things easier for me, and since the scholar will be rewarded 1 good deed for his unintentional mistakes/errors then how is the one who he dwarfs going to be held blameworthy for following him in that?

  67. Ibn Umer says:

    I agree with you that people can take a jarh from here and a ta’dil from there and make up their own inaccurate judgements about the authenticity of ahadith.

    ..which is why we have great scholars that we follow.

  68. Abul Layth says:

    The following is regarding Yahya ibn Al Mutawakkil:

    Imam Ahmad ibn Abi Yahya stated that he was weak in reporting from Bahiyah and others. Yahya ibn Ma’in said he was weak. Yazid ibn Al Haytham reported from Ad-Dawri from Ibn Ma’in that he was not worth anything in hadith. Al-Ghlaabi reported from Ibn Ma’in that he was Munkar Al Hadith. However, there is a an irregular report from Ibn Ma’in from Uthmaan Ad-Daarimi that states there was ‘nothing wrong with him’. Uthmaan said, “he is weak”. The son of Ali ibn Al-Madini, Abdullah, stated that he asked his father ‘Ali ibn Al Madini regarding Yahya ibn Al Mutawakkil, he declared him weak. Ibn Abi Shaybah also reports from Ibn Al Madeeni “That he is to us, weak”. Ibn ‘Ammar said, “Abu ‘Aqil and Bahiyah are no support (hujjah).” – [Abu 'Aqil being Yahya ibn Al Mutawakkil]. ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali stated, “In his is severe weakness (فيه ضعف شديد ). Ya’qub Al-Jawzjaani states, that his hadith are munkarah. Abu Zur’ah said of him “he is weakened” (لين ). An Nasaa’i said, “Dha’if”. Ibn Hibban stated, “he singularly reported things that had no foundation at all for them…” Ibn ‘Adi states, “The generality of his narrations are not mahfuthah (preserved – i.e. they are not corraborated etc.). As-Saaji stated, “Munkar Al Hadith.” Abu Ahmad Al-Haakim said, “He is not with strength according to them (i.e. the scholars).” Ibn abdul Barr said, “He is, according to all of them, dha’eef.”

    [All from Tahthib At-Tahthib of Ibn Hajr]

    Brother Musa, you have lectured the brother Ibn Umer for no reason at all. Your entire argument has fallen in wake of what we have shown above. Thus, retract your condemnation and stop writing entire papers on nothing. It is better to use your time in researching matters of benefit then posting continuously on matters that you have absolutely no knowledge in.

    I challenge you, brother Musa, to bring us substantial ikhtilaaf regarding Yahya ibn Mutawaakil. I translated for you all of the statements recorded by Al-Haafith regarding him.

    Maybe you should take your own advice:

    <blockquote>“INDEED, IT IS FROM KNOWLEDGE FOR ONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW TO SAY: ALLAH KNOWS BEST”

    “ان من العلم ان يقول الذي لا يعلم: الله اعلم”

    </blockquote>

    You had no idea, from the get go of your sad apologia, that the scholars have united upon the weakness of Yahya ibn Al Mutawakkil, yet you had the audacity to launch your worthless ridicule, maligning, as well as spewing hypothetical rhetoric that had no foundation or relation to the discussion at hand.

    Stop please.

    Thank you, and may Allah have mercy upon you ameen!

  69. Ibn Saad says:

    Asalamolakium Br. Musa,

    On one hand you spoke of unity, and on the other you called the shia, enemies of Allah. AstagfirAllah. To my layman understanding, I understood the Shias to be muslim. You can even check out what Faraz Rabanni says about them:

    What is the status of the Shia according to Sunni Islam
    http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=9787&CATE=24

    This topic also reminds me of what Shakyh Abdullah bin Bayyah once said in a lecture, I am not sure about the status of this hadith:

    “When Ali(RA) was asked about the Khawaraj, he said that they were our brothers in faith, who have transgressed the bounds”.

    So inshAllah, maybe we should keep the same viewpoint of Ali(RA) regarding the shia.

  70. Abul Layth says:

    The statement of Ibn ‘Ammar is regarding Buhayyah not bahiyah.

    Mistake in transliteration.

  71. Abu Hasan says:

    Assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatu Llah Ta’alla!

    As i know,christians often ask the God using intermediaries(their saints etc.).they look at their images on the icons and say for example “Oh st.Paul please ask the God for giving me health..”
    why don’t they ask their God?!maybe they think that those saints know more about their souls than the God and they can give advices to Him and even change His decision?!astagfiru Llah
    and when they ask me about the way i pray,i say that all my prayers due ONLY Allah,He hears me everywhere,He hears all my words and sees all my thoughts.there’s no need to ask someone to do it for me.there’s nobody between me and Him.

    this is one of the main differences between Islam and other religions:for muslims one God is enough and we ask only Him and we don’t add pals to Him.

    i hope for intercession of Muhammad salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on the last day,but now i ask for it not him peace be upon him,but only Allah Ta’alla,when i say to Him:
    “وارزقنا شفاعته يوم القيامة”

    and i will always ask in my prayers only Allah,i will ask only Him for peace,health,iman etc. not prophets peace be upon them all and imams.

    as i know,when someone dies it’s the end for his acts.only their useful for people affairs,knowledge and righteous children can give them benefit.so,how can they hear one’s dua?

    can muslims ask for help ‘isa bnu Mariam or other prophets ‘alayhim ssalam?

    why should we ask someone,if Allah is enough?

  72. Ibn Umer says:

    this is one of the main differences between Islam and other religions:for muslims one God is enough and we ask only Him and we don’t add pals to Him.

    You are mixing two things. Tawassul doesn’t have to do with ‘pals’ or beings that have the ability to help *on their own*.

    Why not say something like “Christians believe in God, and so we shouldn’t!”

    Yes, God is enough. But we still take medicine, we still ask teachers questions. They are only means.
    Likewise, when tawassul is performed, it is done with a sound aqida; as Imam Shawkani said: with the knowledge that Allah solely is ‘the Preventer and the Giver’.
    The one invoked is exactly that: a wasila = ‘means’, and not the independent Preventer or Giver.

    ws

  73. Abu Hasan says:

    it’s a good compare with medicine,when we ask for health,but sometimes we ask for something private..

    when i’m talking with Allah in du’a mentally,can someone hear my request besides Allah?or they can hear me only when i want them to hear it and to be mediators between me and Allah.

    i’ve never used mediatation before and it’s hard to understand how it works.
    as i see,righteous people can hear our du’a and then they can ask Allah for us,right?and can they know our thoughts and what’s in our hearts?because we ask often mentally

  74. Ibn Umer says:

    If one cant put the two and two of tawassul together, because they simply can’t understand how it can’t be shirk: then what I recommend is to *NOT* do it, and to consider your [incorrect] understanding to be shirk.
    At the same time, believe in your mind that it is you who has not understood the right mechanics of tawassul properly, and that there is a perfectly monotheistic understanding of it that you have not happened to grasp.
    Shirk is too dangerous a risk to be taking just for the sake of trying to be accepting of tawassul. So reject the shirk-y understanding of it until you understand it correctly.

    Imam Abu Hasan Al-Shadhili would not allow the generality of his murids to do tawassul, because he found it proper for their training in tawhid to ask Allah directly without a human wasila. This poor servant of Allah would suggest the same.

    ws

  75. Abu Hasan says:

    Jazak Allahu khairan my brother Ibn Umer,i think that’s the best suggestion.
    insha Allah oneday i’ll be able to understand tawassul correctly and then i’ll manage to use it in the right way

    wassalam

  76. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    what did um abdullah try to prove all this while?
    the muslims are divided on tawasul as to whether it is shirk or not. she agrees it is not shirk. she also agrees that the prophet SAW guided the man after he asked help from the Prophet SAW.
    In other words she agrees that Prophet SAW can guide after his passing away when asked for his help. then why was she shooting in the air for?

  77. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    As for Prophet (may peace be on Him) saying ”go to Umar” and ”You must be clever, you must be clever! ” . it must be because Umar radhiallahu anhu was slow in his istisqa as can be seen in another weak narration ”“he found you slow in doing istisqa’, so do istisqa’ for us “ and the words of Umar rahiallahu anhu “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!””

    And not because Prophet (may peace be on him) cant do istisqa because Prophet (may peace e upon him ) himself says, ” tell him that they will be watered ”.

    Um abdullah says:” If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others,”

    I say:The Prophet (may peace be upon him ) said:
    “The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying to their Lord”.
    In addition to this we know Prophet (may peace be upon him) can hear our salaam and replies to our salaam. And salaam itelf is a prayer for us.
    ur understanding that Prophet (may peace be upon him) can hear us but cannot then do duaa to Allah itself is absurd, baseless and idiotic

    Which sect are you from? I have heard of the takfiri wahabies. But you are instead of doing takfir saying it is forbidden. Is there a sect called haraami wahabi? Are you competing for the sheikha al hadith position of that sect? Lol.

  78. Usooli says:

    >>Imam Abu Hasan Al-Shadhili would not allow the generality of his murids to do tawassul, because he found it proper for their training in tawhid to ask Allah directly without a human wasila. This poor servant of Allah would suggest the same<<

    Dear brother Ibn Umer,
    Jazakumullahu khayra for the quote, if it is not a problem dear brother do you remember from which source one can find this saying from Imam Abul Hasan ash-Shadhili. Barakallaho feikom.

  79. sunnistudent says:

    hmmm.. lengthy comments! After reading all the comments , this is what I could summarise for my wahabi friends.

    1)When the man went to the blessed grave of Prophet(s) and requested him to pray to Allah , then Prophet came in his dream.
    Inference= When we speak near the blessed grave of prophet he hears it. Not only our salwat and salam , but also our request.

    If this action was shirk , then prophet would have surely corrected this action in Dream instead of giving the happy news that they will be waterd.

    This also proves that Prophet was informed by Allah that it will rain soon and hence it is a clear proof that Allah provides Knowledge of the futute events to His prophet.

    This also proves that when muslims visit the blessed grave of prophet they can make a request to prophet to pray to Allah for them . If this was a case of shirk , atleast one Imam must have cautioned while narrating this hadith that this “might’ leade to shirk.

    Some hidden wahabis try to confuse people ( since they cannot convince) by saying it is permissible but better to acoid. There are so many muslims who get a chance only once in life time to go for Hajj and these wahabis try to confuse muslims.

    In Bukhari, we have a hadith, (tr) ” Black seed has cure for everyhting except Death”.

    Prophet did not say’Allah has given ” cure in black seed …

    What does it mean? Simple! Every muslim knows that every action is from the Will of Allah and Nothing has power in itself.

    Hence prophet and all the muslims know this fact.

    Try talking to a wahabi on Tawassul and you will find a comment in which he will say’ don’t ask Prophet, ask Allah”

    So this shows they deliberately try to confuse people.

    Try talking to a wahabi on permissibility of Group Dhikr and he will say’ I have seen people dancing in Morocco and Syria”.

  80. Irfan says:

    Umm Abdullah says regarding ibn Hajr al Asqalani RA:
    for he says at the end of the section, after mentioning this narration:

    “From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“

    so, al Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah understood from this hadith that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was directing the man to go ask the Imam, during that time (Umar radiyallahu anhu), to do istisqa’ for them.

    I say: what he says is that the hadith has relevance to the heading which is “The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought”.

    Ibn Hajr RA did NOT say:
    “From all of this appears ”ONLY” the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“.
    Since the chapter is on asking the Imam to do istisqa ,he cites the relevant hadiths.
    And since our chapter is on isthighasa/tawassul we cite the relevant hadiths among which is malik ad dar’s hadith.

    By the way, Imam means leader. Hence the heading is “The people asking the leader to do istisqa’ in times of drought”.

    ————————————————

    Umm Abdullah says:
    these 2 narrations could be weak, but the point is that al Hafidh Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah mentioned them right before the narration of Malik, showing what it is about, and means, which shows what he understood it to mean, same as what Ibn Hajar (r A) understood from it.
    I say:
    How can Ibn Kathirs( RA) mentioning of two hadiths whether before or after related to the incident in hadith of malik adar show that he understood the same as what which ibn hajr understood ??? Al bidaya is a historical book as far as i know.
    Anyway the hadiths mentioned before show that Ibn kathir RA is showing that the man was Bilal Ibn Harith and there was nothing wrong in him and that he was truthful.

    —————————————————-

    Umm Abdullah says:

    Shihab adDeen Abdur Rahman bin Askar al Baghdadi al Maliki (d. 732) in his book “Irshad as-Salik ila Ashraf al Masalik fi fiqh al Imam Malik“:

    He sited it in chapter of (istisqa’ – asking for rain), in which he said (before siting the narration of Malik al Dar):
    “and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt“
    Then he quotes the narration that is in sahih, the tawassul of Umar through al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma), and right after it he says “and Ibn Abi Shayba narrated”, and quotes Malik ad Dar’s narration.
    so this clearly shows that he used the narration of Malik as evidence for “doing istishfa’ through ahl al bayt”, for al Abbas ra was the uncle f the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, and the dream the man saw, was guiding him to ask Umar to do istisqa’ for the people, in which he did it through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu

    I say: he used the hadith of al abbas as evidence for “and it is recommanded/liked to do istishfa’ (intercession) through righteous/pious people, and ahl al bayt“
    After that he was just continuing to quote hadiths for the heading (istisqa’ – asking for rain).
    If it was as Umm Abdullah said, then the hadith of malik ad dar would have been quoted before the hadith of al abbas.

    The reson why he gave a comment before the hadith of al abbas was to make the reader aware of an important point in it which is that the saliheen and ahle bayt are recommended means of intercession.
    While the hadith of malik ad dar speaks for itself.
    ————————————————
    Umm Abdullah says:
    Ala’ ad Deen Ali al Mutaqi al Hindi al Burhan Furi (d. 975) in his book “Kanz al Ummal“:
    He sites it in chapter of (salat al Istisqa’ – prayer for rain), which shows that the narration of Malik is connected to narration about tawassul by al Abbas, in which Umar did salat al istisqa’ (prayer for rain).
    Thus the narration of Malik is understood by Allama Mutaqi Hindi to mean what the other Imams (above) understood it to mean

    i say: since u have done assumptions,i will do mine. he added the hadith of Malik ad dar to show that
    along with the sunna of establishing the salat al istisqa it also good to do isthighasa of Prophet SAW. since the isthighasa of Bilal ibn Harith was among the reasons for recieving rain.

    ———————————————————

  81. Irfan says:

    Umm Abdullah says: Umar’s (r.a) saying “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa, and now we do tawassul through the uncle of your Prophet…”, indicates that they don’t make tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) duaa after his death, and only when he was alive.

    I say: Quoting Shyk GF Haddad :
    ””” the terminology of the Khalifa’s request, Allah be well-pleased with him, is as follows:

    “O Allah! We would use our Prophet as a means to You and You then sent us rain; now we use our Prophet’s uncle as a means to You, therefore send us rain!”
    Narrated from Anas by al-Bukhari in his Sahih. ”””

    ———————————————————

    Umm Abdullah says:
    What their opinion regarding the tawassul that is asking the PRophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make duaa for us is an assumption on my part and yours, we don’t know exactly what their opinion regarding it is, so I can’t say 100% that they considered it forbidden, nor can you say that they considered it permissable.

    I say: but we know 100% that they did not consider it forbidden otherwise they would have mentioned that it was forbidden after relating the hadith.their silence and grading of the hadith shows they had no problem with it. the hadith clearly shows a sahabi doing isthighasa.
    Also Ibn Hajr al Asqalani RA knew Ibn Taymiyyas innovation of prohibitting isthighasa of Prophet SAW. he(RA) says that scholars have gone to the extend of calling him a denier of religion for Prohibiting tawassul. He also says that scholars have considered his innovation to be a insult on Prophet SAW. Check durrarul kamil vol 1 pg 165.
    Never did Ibn Hajr RA defend Ibn Tayymia’s position in any of his books as far as i know. And if Ibn Hajr al Asqalani RA understood from the hadith of malik ad dar what Umm Abdullah is trying to misinterpret then he (RA) would have used it to defend Ibn Taymiyya.

    And everyone knows ibn kathir RA view on tawasul/isthighasa which can be clearly understood from his (RA) tafsir. moreover he(RA) who had been in prison along with ibn taymiyya and is reported to have drank the water from the body of ibn tayymia after his death, in al bidaya vol 14 pg 47 says that ibn taymia did not prevent asking help of prophets and using them as intercessors. Rather what he prevented was asking them, considering them to be Gods or with similar beliefs.
    ————————————————

    Umm Abdullah says:
    what was the point of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling Umar r.A “be clever”?
    I say:
    Ibn Hajr Al Hathami RA answers: ” Meaning, gentleness, because he was severe in the religion of Allah.”
    ————————————————-

  82. Irfan says:

    Umm Abdullah:
    If the man told Umar that he went to the grave, and then told him about the dream, why would Umar do salat al istisqa’ when the man already asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa’ and he told him that they will be watered? Doesn’t the istisqa’ of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sufficient?

    I say: that was a stupid question. Asking Prophet SAW dosnt mean we have to abandon the salat al istisqa.
    Morover Umar RA said:” “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”.

    All of this is just like ayah of surah an nisa v64. Allahu Taala is telling us what to do. Allah says:
    “….If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful.”

    So first what we have to do is to go to Prophet SAW. Just like how one says to a sick person to go to the doctor which means to go to the doctor,tell him ur problem and ask him for help.similarily we go to the Prophet SAW and do the same.
    Next Allah says to ask Allahs forgiveness.

    ——————————————————-
    Umm Abdullah says:
    If the action of man was correct (to ask the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa), and the Prophet S.A.W answered his request, then why didn’t the rain come down immediately after the dream, and instead came down immediately after al Abbas radiyallahu anhu’s duaa?

    I say: because Allah willed the rain to come down after isthighasa of Prophet SAW and salat al istisqa was performed. no where even in the inauthentic hadith did Prophet SAW say to do istisqa by the status of al Abbas RA.
    As for why Umar RA did tawasul of al abbas RA? Because Umar RA said: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”.

    ——————————————-
    Um Abdullah says: lets say it was Bilal bin al Harith radiyallahu anhu.
    He made a mistake out of ijtihad and he was corrected by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam in the dream, who directed him to go to Umar for istisqa’,

    U contridicted ur former statement:

    ”’from what I know, Salafis reject that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam would come to someone in a dream with some new ruling in shari’ah. ”’

    I say:
    I have not seen a single scholar from 1400yrs of islamic history who is of the view that the action of bilal bin harith was wrong and was a mistake in ijthihad. Why?? Because there is not a single evidence to show anything close to it. And you have not shown a single evidence to show that any scholar even came close to thinking of such a thing i.e the action of bilal ibn harith was wrong and was an error in ijthihad.

  83. Irfan says:

    Umm Abdullah:
    if what Bilal did was correct, then there would have been no point in Umar radiyallahu anhu to make tawassul through al Abbas, because Bilal already did tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

    I say: If Umar RA knew that Bilal RA did isthighasa ,then this shows that Umar RA did not object to what Bilal RA did.
    And if Umar RA did not know then he did because Umar RA weeped and said later”“O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”.

    Moreover, what Bilal ibn Harith asked Prophet SAW was : “Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished.”
    Here he(RA) was asking rasullallah to ask for rain.

    while what Umar RA does is a tawasul by the status of al abbas- “O Allah! We would use our Prophet as a means to You and You then sent us rain; now we use our Prophet’s uncle as a means to You, therefore send us rain!”
    and NOT asking him(RA) to make duaa.

    After performing the salat al istisqa , Umar RA made the dua to Allah and in the dua he made tawassul using the status of al abbas RA who was physically leading the salat al istisqa.

    If i do a tawasul by the status of muhiyudeen abdul qadir al jeelani RA , it no way means tht i consider RA to be of a higher status then that of Prophet SAW.

  84. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    Umm Abdullah:
    if what Bilal did was correct, then there would have been no point in Umar radiyallahu anhu to make tawassul through al Abbas, because Bilal already did tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

    I say: If Umar RA knew that Bilal RA did isthighasa ,then this shows that Umar RA did not object to what Bilal RA did.

    After the Salat al istisqa was performed with al abbas leading the prayer for the first time. Umar RA went forward and said- “O Allah! We would use our Prophet as a means to You and You then sent us rain; now we use our Prophet’s uncle as a means to You, therefore send us rain!”
    When Prophet SAW was alive Prophet SAW used to do the duaa after salat al istisqa and since now al abbas is physical leading the prayer Umar RA wanted al abbas also to the duaa.

    And if Umar RA did not know then he did because Umar RA weeped and said later”“O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”.

    ——————————————–

  85. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    Umm Abdullh said giving salafies opinion on dreams:

    and basing one’s acts of worship and aqeedah on a dream only with no evidence from Quran or Sunnah,

    I say: leving the numerous proofs in th sunnah , it is enough to cite just 1 ayah of the Quran
    Which is surah maida verse 55.
    Check TAfsir razi 12/384, baharul muheet 13/513.

    Allah says:” Verily ,your Protectors/helpers is none other than Allah,His Messenger ,and the believers, — those who perform As-Salat, and give Zakat ,and they are rakiun.”

    sunni) can we ask help of Allah ??

    wahabi)Yes

    sunni) can we ask help of Prophet??

    wahabi) No

    sunni)why no ? Didnt Allahu Taala say that even his Messenger is our helper??

    wahabi) it is only meant when Prophet SAW is alive.

    Sunni) what do you mean?? is the Quran expiry?? Is the quran spreading shirk if used today??

    Wahabi) !!!

    ”And whosever takes Allah ,His Messenger ,and those who have believed ,as Protectors,then the party of Allah and will be the victorious.” Maida V56

    —————————————–
    Umm Abdullah said:
    and in this dream it was pointing to something already established in deen which is to ask the Imam to make istisqa’ for the people.
    I say:
    And so is the dream pointing to the fact which is also established in the deen that Prophet SAW will help us when we ask for help.
    ——————————-

  86. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    Umm Abdullah said:
    and I havent’ come across any quotes by earlier scholars explaining the narration of Malik al Dar to be evidence for the tawassul that you do(tawassul by asking the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam for duaa).
    I say:
    None other than Ibn Taymiyya understood from the hadith that when we ask help of Prophet SAW after Prophet SAW passing away , Prophet SAW will help us the same way Prophet SAW helped us when alive on earth. And not only will Prophet SAW help but also other Prophets and awliyas who are lower in status when compared .and he considered it to be the karamaat of the ones in grave.

    Visit here:

    http://www.marifah.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=264&t=2969&st=0#entry12428
    ——————————-

  87. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    regarding the hadith of malik ad dar and weakness of sayf; Ibn Hajr Haythami in Majmul Zawaahid syas that Sayf is weak.
    but still used the hadith of malik ad dar as evidence for isthighasa and also identifies the man to be Bilal Ibn Harith

  88. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    Umm abdullah at the start of the article said
    “we can’t use assumptions as evidence.”

    What she didnt realise is that her useless discovery is completely filled assumptions .

  89. IrfanIbnIsmail says:

    i have heard that majmau zawaaid is by another Haythami and not Ibn Hajr.

    sorry for my errors

    wallahu alam, wallahu alam,wallahu alam

  90. Mohammed says:

    Brothers please can somebody explain what the term Tawasul is and tell me what Shafii and Hanbali view is on it, am very confused by this whole issue regarding Tawassul, and Hanbali and Shafii view. I understand it is better for laymans to study one madhab, I want to study the Fiqh of Shafii, but then I hear things like Tawasul and sufism, which throw me into more confusion, because Tawasul and Sufism is associated with praying to Tombs and seeking help through them, which in my understanding is shirk. Please brother provide resources or explain in laymans terms.

  91. Ajmal Khan says:

    There are 8 verse in Quran which prove tawassul and more then 250 Ahadith-e-Rasool (SAW).
    Dr Tahir-ul-Qadri collected these Ahadith in a single book named الصفا في التوسل والتبرک بالمصطفیٰ صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم

    For more detail you can read this book online @

    http://www.minhajbooks.com/urdu/control/btext/bid/347/cid/2/read/img/الصفا في التوسل والتبرک بالمصطفیٰ صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم.html

  92. hoosein adam says:

    Assalaamu alaykum
    The true issue of tawassul bir Rasool (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is based on the aqeedah of Hayatun nabi fi maqbarihi.(the isue of the nabi saaws being alive in his grave.) Asking of Rasulullaah saaws at his maqbarah to intercede on our behalf is therefore sanctioned.
    On the other hand we hhave certain of our “sunni” brothers who visit the grave, make sajdah to the grave and ask their needs from the inhabitant of the grave.(directly by asking,”grant me such and such.) this is wrong , forbidden and should be abstained from. Many take istighaathaa to mean such. how can such acts be sanctioned by Islam???

  93. admin says:

    No it isn’t restricted to the issue of the life of our beloved master Muhammad (saaws) in His grave. It is restricted to the Sunnah of our Beloved, who taught the blind to seek tawassul through Him (saaws) as reported by the Imams!

    was-salam

  94. tru_Qur'an says:

    As salamu ‘alaykum,

    @Admin,

    Can you address the second part of what hoosein said when he said:

    (On the other hand we hhave certain of our “sunni” brothers who visit the grave, make sajdah to the grave and ask their needs from the inhabitant of the grave.(directly by asking,”grant me such and such.) this is wrong , forbidden and should be abstained from. Many take istighaathaa to mean such. how can such acts be sanctioned by Islam??? )

    Jazak’Allaahu khairan

  95. musa al-hanafi says:

    As-salaamu `alaykum,

    in fact, admin, i do not believe shaykh adam is restricting it to the issue of the life in the grave, nor to the sunnah during the lifetime of our beloved nabee `alayhis-solaatu was-salaam. I am more than certain the shaykh knows it is not restricted to only one of those two, but extends to them both due to a narration in which it is reported that bilaal radhiyallahu `anhu was requested by the prophet `alayhis-solaatu was-salaam not to stop visiting him even when he is in his grave and also the narration of bilaal visiting the grave during the times of extreme drought and asking the prophet `alayhis-solaatu was-salaam to pray to allah on behalf of the muslims that they may get rain.
    The shaykh is well studied maashaa’allah and this is a basic issue, it’s just that too many people out there are trying to complicate matters deliberately in order to push their own sectarian agendas into the limelight and shove the ahl-us-sunnah into the back seat – they’d probably be more satisfied to see the end of us, as a matter of fact. As the shaykh rightly stated, and without even implying any restrictions, “Asking of Rasulullaah saaws at his maqbarah to intercede on our behalf is therefore sanctioned”. There are two views on this issue which are both accepted, and that is your view and the view of shaykh adam. Anything else is in excess, as the shaykh also rightly pointed out. Subhaanallah. Brother, how did you infer from what he said that he was restricting the issue?

  96. admin says:

    Wa’alaykum Salam,

    Musa, the first sentence implies such, as he does not mention any other reasons in his post. Have a wonderful day!

    @tru_,

    It is disturbing that some individuals make sajdah to graves. It is Haram as mentioned by our Master Muhammad (saaws) – as found in the hadith of Mu’adh ibn Jabal in which he prostrated to the Nabi ‘alayhis salam and he forbade such, as found in the Sunan of Ibn Majah, Hakim’s Mustadarak, Al-Bayhaqi’s Sunan, Ahmad’s Musnad and elsewhere. And the Nabi ‘alayhis salam clearly stated that if He would have commanded anyone to prostrate to another it would have been the wife to the husband. Yet He (saaws) did not do such!

    As for asking the inhabitants of the graves to “directly” give something to the seeker, then it could be that the Muslim doing such believes that the inhabitant will make du’aa for Him for the need which he seeks. Similar to asking a person to make du’aa for another for their need – which is permitted in the law. This matter has been discussed by the Sunni ‘Ulama’ in their treatises such as the Mafahim, which is translated into English. Imam Yusuf Ad-Dijwi, the great Azhari Maliki of the early 1900′s, has a succinct response to the pseudo-salafi insinuations here:

    http://marifah.net/articles/tawassul-dijwi.pdf

    and with Allah is our guidance!
    was-salam

  97. hoosein adam says:

    Assalaamu alaykum
    Jazaakumullaah for the response..
    However i dont understand the “logic” behind your claim, “As for asking the inhabitants of the graves to “directly” give something to the seeker, then it could be that the Muslim doing such believes that the inhabitant will make du’aa for Him for the need which he seeks.”. This is but a possibility and not reality. Fatwa is given on reality not possibility!!! I have heard many a so called “sunni” begging for children by the grave of the pious in the following manner, ” ya fulaan grant me a child by your grace.”. Can such a proclamation be permissible. They further say ” Remove my difficulties and bless me.” Do you deem these acts permissible?

  98. Syid Nawaz says:

    @ hoosein adam

    If I am not mistaken then you belong to the deobandi school of thought. Could you please answer a question based on what you said, as I am really confused about the deobandi view on tawassul.

    You wrote :”However i dont understand the “logic” behind your claim, “As for asking the inhabitants of the graves to “directly” give something to the seeker, then it could be that the Muslim doing such believes that the inhabitant will make du’aa for Him for the need which he seeks.”. This is but a possibility and not reality. Fatwa is given on reality not possibility!!! I have heard many a so called “sunni” begging for children by the grave of the pious in the following manner, ” ya fulaan grant me a child by your grace.”. Can such a proclamation be permissible. They further say ” Remove my difficulties and bless me.” Do you deem these acts permissible?”

    Question: what if it is indeed a reality and not a mere possibilty, i.e, if a person goes to the grave of a waliAllah, and requests the wali in the grave to make dua to Allah for his needs; is that wrong?

  99. admin says:

    Br. Hoosein Adam,

    To claim that the dead cannot act upon the information given by the one standing outside of the grave, is indeed contrary to the understanding of the Sahaba (radiya Allahu ‘Anhum). ‘Amru ibn Al-’As (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) instructed his family [and those present at the time of his death] to stand by his grave after his departure. This was so that he could act upon their presence, being reminded of who he was in this dunya.

    The hadith in its entirety is reported in Sahih Muslim:

    مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى الْعَنَزِيُّ وَأَبُو مَعْنٍ الرَّقَاشِيُّ وَإِسْحَقُ بْنُ مَنْصُورٍ كُلُّهُمْ عَنْ أَبِي عَاصِمٍ وَاللَّفْظُ لِابْنِ الْمُثَنَّى حَدَّثَنَا الضَّحَّاكُ يَعْنِي أَبَا عَاصِمٍ قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا حَيْوَةُ بْنُ شُرَيْحٍ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ أَبِي حَبِيبٍ عَنْ ابْنِ شِمَاسَةَ الْمَهْرِيِّ قَالَ حَضَرْنَا عَمْرَو بْنَ الْعَاصِ وَهُوَ فِي سِيَاقَةِ الْمَوْتِ فَبَكَى طَوِيلًا وَحَوَّلَ وَجْهَهُ إِلَى الْجِدَارِ فَجَعَلَ ابْنُهُ يَقُولُ يَا أَبَتَاهُ أَمَا بَشَّرَكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِكَذَا أَمَا بَشَّرَكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِكَذَا قَالَ فَأَقْبَلَ بِوَجْهِهِ فَقَالَ إِنَّ أَفْضَلَ مَا نُعِدُّ شَهَادَةُ أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ إِنِّي كُنْتُ عَلَى أَطْبَاقٍ ثَلَاثٍ لَقَدْ رَأَيْتُنِي وَمَا أَحَدٌ أَشَدَّ بُغْضًا لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِنِّي وَلَا أَحَبَّ إِلَيَّ أَنْ أَكُونَ قَدْ اسْتَمْكَنْتُ مِنْهُ فَقَتَلْتُهُ فَلَوْ مُتُّ عَلَى تِلْكَ الْحَالِ لَكُنْتُ مِنْ أَهْلِ النَّارِ فَلَمَّا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ الْإِسْلَامَ فِي قَلْبِي أَتَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقُلْتُ ابْسُطْ يَمِينَكَ فَلْأُبَايِعْكَ فَبَسَطَ يَمِينَهُ قَالَ فَقَبَضْتُ يَدِي قَالَ مَا لَكَ يَا عَمْرُو قَالَ قُلْتُ أَرَدْتُ أَنْ أَشْتَرِطَ قَالَ تَشْتَرِطُ بِمَاذَا قُلْتُ أَنْ يُغْفَرَ لِي قَالَ أَمَا عَلِمْتَ أَنَّ الْإِسْلَامَ يَهْدِمُ مَا كَانَ قَبْلَهُ وَأَنَّ الْهِجْرَةَ تَهْدِمُ مَا كَانَ قَبْلِهَا وَأَنَّ الْحَجَّ يَهْدِمُ مَا كَانَ قَبْلَهُ وَمَا كَانَ أَحَدٌ أَحَبَّ إِلَيَّ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَلَا أَجَلَّ فِي عَيْنِي مِنْهُ وَمَا كُنْتُ أُطِيقُ أَنْ أَمْلَأَ عَيْنَيَّ مِنْهُ إِجْلَالًا لَهُ وَلَوْ سُئِلْتُ أَنْ أَصِفَهُ مَا أَطَقْتُ لِأَنِّي لَمْ أَكُنْ أَمْلَأُ عَيْنَيَّ مِنْهُ وَلَوْ مُتُّ عَلَى تِلْكَ الْحَالِ لَرَجَوْتُ أَنْ أَكُونَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ ثُمَّ وَلِينَا أَشْيَاءَ مَا أَدْرِي مَا حَالِي فِيهَا فَإِذَا أَنَا مُتُّ فَلَا تَصْحَبْنِي نَائِحَةٌ وَلَا نَارٌ فَإِذَا دَفَنْتُمُونِي فَشُنُّوا عَلَيَّ التُّرَابَ شَنًّا ثُمَّ أَقِيمُوا حَوْلَ قَبْرِي قَدْرَ مَا تُنْحَرُ جَزُورٌ وَيُقْسَمُ لَحْمُهَا حَتَّى أَسْتَأْنِسَ بِكُمْ وَأَنْظُرَ مَاذَا أُرَاجِعُ بِهِ رُسُلَ رَبِّي

    It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Shamasa Mahri that he said: We went to Amr b. al-As and he was about to die. He wept for a long time and turned his face towards the wall. His son said: Did the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him not give you tidings of this? Did the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) not give you tidings of this? He (the narrator) said: He turned his face (towards the audience) and said: The best thing which we can count upon is the testimony that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah. Verily I have passed through three phases. (The first one) in which I found myself averse to none else more than I was averse to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and there was no other desire stronger in me than the one that I should overpower him and kill him. Had I died in this state, I would have been definitely one of the denizens of Fire. When Allah instilled the love of Islam in my heart, I came to the Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Stretch out your right hand so that may pledge my allegiance to you. He stretched out his right hand, I withdrew my hand, He (the Holy Prophet) said: What has happened to you, O ‘Amr? replied: I intend to lay down some condition . He asked: What condition do you intend to put forward? I said: should be granted pardon. He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Are you not aware of the fact that Islam wipes out all the previous (misdeeds) ? Verily migration wipes out all the previous (misdeeds), and verily the pilgrimage wipes out all the (previous) misdeeds. And then no one as or dear to me than the Messenger of Allah and none was more sublime in my eyes than he, Never could I, pluck courage to catch a full glimpse of his face due to its splendour. So if I am asked to describe his features, I cannot do that for I have not eyed him fully. Had I died in this state had every reason to hope that I would have bee among the dwellers of Paradise. Then we were responsible for certain things (in the light of which)I am unable to know what is in store for me. When I die, let neither female mourner nor fire accompany me. When you bury me, fill my grave well with earth, then stand around it for the time within which a camel is slaughtered and its meat is distributed so that I may enjoy your intimacy and (in your company) ascertain what answer I can give to the messengers (angels) of Allah.

    Imam An-Nawawi states regarding the last part in his Sharh of Sahih Muslim:

    وَفِيهِ أَنَّ الْمَيِّتَ يَسْمَعُ حِينَئِذٍ مَنْ حَوْلَ الْقَبْرِ

    “And and this hadith is proof that the dead can hear whomever may be around the grave.”

    http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&TOCID=63&BookID=34&PID=366

    If he can hear, Amru ibn Al-As then had the understanding that he could act upon what he heard, so that he would be able to answer the angel correctly.

    This is definitive proof that the understanding of the Sahabah was that the dead could hear and that the dead could also act upon – in their capacity – what they heard.

    I have heard a pseudo-salafi response to this, and that is that this is only for a short time. The problem with such a claim is that the Nabi ‘alayhis salam never stated that the dead stop hearing, and there is no proof that it ceases after the said time.

    wa billahit Tawfeeq, and our Lord knows best!

  100. hoosein adam says:

    @ Sayid Nawaz
    Assalaamu alaykum wa rahmatullah
    For your information i wish to clarify the deobandi stance on the difference of Tawassul and Istighaatha.
    Tawassul to us is to request the inhabitant of the grave to make du’aa on our behalf. This is regarded as permissible by most of the deobandi ulema.
    Istighaatha is to ask the inhabitant of the grave to personally do or grant the individual his needs. This is done by many and is regarded as being shirk.
    My questions are about the issue of istighaatha as understood by our ulema.
    Many that claim to be sunni and in reality actually make sajdah to the inhabitaants of the graves, ask of the inhabitaant to grant their needs and order their followers to make sure that they dont turn their backs to the grave and retreat in semi-ruku or as i have seen in Sajdah.(ALLAH save us all from such forms of shirk)
    I pose the question to unveil those who have adopted such belifs and have infiltrated this website. The issue has nothing to do with ima moutaa or the likes as some wish to put forward. Derailing the issue in such manner is trying the evade the issue. It is known to many admins on the forum that i believe in simaa moutaa as well as hayatun Nabi alayhi afdhalus Salaat was Salaam.

  101. Abu Isma'il says:

    Salaams; The statements of Imams Ibn Hibban, al-Shawkani, al-Nawawi which either direct the seeker to take the Prophet Muhammad, Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam, or a Wali of Allah, as an intermediary at his grave, or show how even hadith imams (the real ahl al-hadith) have actually done this themselves. After all the dust has settled from the back and forth debating on this thread, the people should take another look (if they haven’t already) at these undeniable statements from the ‘ulama of this Ummah. But Alas, I have the sense that as soon as the generality of the Muslims see the word tawassul, they become blinded and will not and perhaps cannot see what the pre-Wahabbi Ulama have said about the Tawassul through the Prophet, Salla Allahu Alayhi wa Sallam, and the Awliya, at their graves. May Allah azza wa jal remove the veils.

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>