Seeking intercession with the Prophet (s): Its ruling according to classical scholars

[AbuNajm]

So you're not aware of anyone coming with this reasoning from any of the classical scholars, yet you came up with this ruling by yourself using the translations, and at the same time alluding to the Sahabi (RA) who witnessed it and taught it, being in error?

وأما قصة عثمان بن حنيف في شأن الرجل الذي كان يريد حاجة من عثمان بن عفان فقد ضعفها الألباني في التوسل، وأطال الكلام فيها، وذكر أن الطبراني لم يصحح القصة، وإنما صحح الحديث فقط، ثم قال الألباني: وخلاصة القول: إن هذه القصة ضعيفة منكرة، لأمور ثلاثة: ضعف حفظ المتفرد بها، والاختلاف عليه فيها، ومخالفته للثقات الذين لم يذكروها في الحديث، وأمر واحد من هذه الأمور كاف لإسقاط هذه القصة، فكيف بها مجتمعة؟ اهـ

"As for the story of Uthman bin Hanif ... then al-Albani has weakened it in his book at-Tawassul and he discussed it at length; he also mentioned that at-Tabarani did not authenticate the story and only authenticated the Hadith..."

It's not that the Sahabi was mistaken, but rather the addition to the Hadith about the Sahabi is weak.

Also, I think you and others are confused by this charlatan and his antics- I already proved how Ibn Qudamah and others did not approve of the Du'a in this Hadith except at the grave of the Prophet SAWS and in the formula mentioned in the Hadith.

Do you see how the charlatan has already changed it to saying "Yaa Muhammad..." and he no longer restricts it to the visit of the grave of the Prophet SAWS as many of the scholars he mentioned have done?

[AbuNajm]

I'm not asking you to do anything but do you follow the interpretation of some scholars or the companion himself? I think it's the former.

IslamWeb is one place where you will find reference to the story of Uthman bin Hanif declared as weak and the declaration of al-Albani based on that of at-Tabarani.

Source Islam Web

The biggest distortion in this thread is how AS has changed the formula of the Hadith containing the Du'a of the Blind Man to "Yaa Muhammad..." and abandoning the restriction that Ibn Qudamah and others placed on that Du'a of being at the grave of the Prophet SAWS; as well as the restriction to doing that only with the Prophet SAWS and not using Qiyaas to allow it with all dead, righteous people.

All these Ash'ari grave worshipers do is bring evidence proving one thing and use it to establish their Shirk in other actions and beliefs falsely derived from those proofs.

The Hadith of the Blind Man is merely a flood gate for them. Too bad that gate has long since closed and their accusations against the Companions RA, Tabi'een, Salaf and "classical scholars" is a distortion and sham.

[AbuNajm]

وقال المرتضى الزبيدي في شرح إحياء علوم الدين " وقد كره أبو حنيفة وصاحباه أن يقول الرجل : أسألك بحق فلان ، أو بحق أنبيائك ورسلك ، إذ ليس لأحد على الله حق

al-Murtada az-Zubaydi said in his explanation of Ihya Ulum ad-Deen: "Abu Hanifah and his companions disliked that a man say: "I ask You by the right of so-and-so" or "by the right of Your Prophets and Your Messengers"; since no one has a right over Allah..."

Ibn Abideen mentioned this as well as the major scholars of the Hanafi school.

This "Karaahah" includes the wording as mentioned in the Hadith of the Blind Man.

Why would al-Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah oppose this if it was so ubiquitous as AS claims? How could al-Imam al-Azam be ignorant of such a thing if it was so wide-spread and accepted?

[Abu Sulayman]

AN, I seriously don't know how to label your behavior above. Is it compound ignorance or deception or lying or altogether?!

- As for al-Albani not authenicating the incident with the man in need: So what? Al-Albani lived in our time and he had basically no teachers in Hadith and was self-taught and therefore lacked a systematic approach. It's no secret that he would try to weaken narrations when he didn't like its content.
Why even mention him, when it was already mentioned that major classical Hadith experts like Imam al-Mundhiri (d. 656 AH) and Imam al-Haythami (d. 807 AH) authenticated it?

Even Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728) - who tried to weaken it a little bit - ended up admitting that's it's the position of the companion 'Uthman bin Hunayf (radhiallahu 'anhu)! He even admitted that it's the position of Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) and others from the Salaf al-salih!

Anyways, the refutation of al-Albani by a contemporary Hadith scholar (who unlike him has known teachers and had studied properly) had already been mentioned:
"Epistle in Refutation of al-Albānī by Shaykh `Abdullāh ibn Muhammad ibn al-Siddīq al-Ghumārī"


- As for your claim regarding Imam Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH) and you proving something: Did this really happen in this world or was it only in your imagination!?
Rather Imam Ibn Qudama was quoted in context of the visitation and OTHER than it (and his words will be requoted insha`Allah) and you were proven wrong.


- As for you saying that al-Albani declared the incident as weak based upon al-Tabarani doing so: Did this happen in reality? I mean seriously!?
Rather Imam al-Tabarani (d. 360 AH) mentioned the incident completely in his al-Mu'jam al-Saghir and slightly after that stated that the narration is authentic!!!
As for your al-Albani, then he tried to deceive the people and acted as if his authentication only applies to the incident in the time of our Prophet (sallallahu 'alahyi wa sallam) and not the incident in the time of the Khilafa of 'Uthman bin 'Affan (radhiallahu 'anhu). Even your islamweb did not claim that al-Albani weakened it based upon Imam al-Tabarani doing so, but rather only claimed that the authentication of Imam al-Tabarani was regarding the first incident.

(Please don't try to fool us and act as if the second incident can not be called as Hadith and must be called an Athar, because one can refer to both as Hadith.)


- As for your claim regarding Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150 AH) and your mentioning of the 'Allama Ibn 'Abidin (d. 1252 AH):
He disliked the wording of "by the right of so and so" (which other scholars allowed), but did not deny the correctness of Tawassul in itself or seeking intercession and this was clarified by the 'Allama Ibn 'Abidin and he was even quoted in this very thread!
The very same major scholar also mentioned that the ruling regarding your beloved MiAW (d. 1206 AH) and his group is that they are Khawarij!

[Abu Sulayman]

- As for your claim regarding Imam Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH) and you proving something: Did this really happen in this world or was it only in your imagination!?
Rather Imam Ibn Qudama was quoted in context of the visitation and OTHER than it (and his words will be requoted insha`Allah) and you were proven wrong.

These are the quotes that I had already requoted to him and I will repeat it here again (let's hope he will read the second quote and realize how wrong he is):

Imam Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi [al-Hanbali] (d. 620 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

He said in his famous al-Mughni 3/478 - 488 (or see HERE) the following in the context of the visitation (he mentioned in the beginning of the section that the visitation of the Prophetic grave is desirable ("وَيُسْتَحَبُّ زِيَارَةُ قَبْرِ النَّبِيِّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ")):

اللَّهُمَّ إنَّك قُلْت وَقَوْلُك الْحَقُّ: {وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ جَاءُوكَ فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّهَ وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمُ الرَّسُولُ لَوَجَدُوا اللَّهَ تَوَّابًا رَحِيمًا} [النساء: 64] . وَقَدْ أَتَيْتُك مُسْتَغْفِرًا مِنْ ذُنُوبِي، مُسْتَشْفِعًا بِك إلَى رَبِّي، فَأَسْأَلُك يَا رَبِّ أَنْ تُوجِبَ لِي الْمَغْفِرَةَ، كَمَا أَوْجَبْتهَا لِمَنْ أَتَاهُ فِي حَيَاتِهِ، اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ أَوَّلَ الشَّافِعِينَ، وَأَنْجَحَ السَّائِلِينَ، وَأَكْرَمَ الْآخَرِينَ وَالْأَوَّلِينَ، بِرَحْمَتِك يَا أَرْحَمَ الرَّاحِمِينَ

O Allah, You spoke and your saying is the truth: { 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 } [4:64].
So I've come to you, asking [my Lord] for forgiveness for my sin and seeking intercession through you unto my Lord.
So I ask you, o Lord, that you grant me forgiveness just like you granted it to the one who came to him during his life.
O Allah, grant to him that he be the first of the intercessors, the most successful of those who ask, and the most honorable of the first and the last, through Your Mercy - o Most Merciful of the Merciful!.
- end of quote -



Imam Ibn Qudama recommends acting upon the Hadith of the blind man when in need!

He said in his Wasiyya (p. 46-48) under the chapter of asking for a need (translation taken from here: "The Blazing Star in Defence of a Narration from Malik al-Dar" (p. 391):

وإذا كانت لك حاجة إلى الله تعالى تريد طلبها منه فتوضأ ، فأحسن وضوءك ، واركع ركعتين ، وأثن على الله عز وجل ، وصلَ على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ، ثم قل : لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ الله الحَلِيمُ الكَريمُ، سُبحَانَ رَبِّ العَرشِ العَظيمِ الحَمْدُ للهِ رَبِّ العَالمِينِ، أَسأَلُكَ مُوجِبَاتِ رَحمَتِكَ وَعَزَائمَ مَغفِرَتِكَ وَالغَنيمَةَ مِنْ كُلِّ بِرٍّ، وَالسَّلامَةَ مِنْ كُلِّ إِثْمٍ، لا تَدَعْ لي ذَنباً إِلاَّ غَفَرْتَهْ وَلا هَمَّاً إِلاَّ فَرَّجْتَهْ، وَلا حَاجةً هِيَ لَكَ رِضاً إِلاَّ قَضَيتَهَا يَا أَرحَمَ الرَّاحمين

وإن قلت : اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبيك محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي فيقضي لي حاجتي، وتذكر حاجتك

وروي عن السلف أنهم كانوا يستنجحون حوائجهم بركعتين يصليهما ثم يقول : اللهم بك أستفتح وبك أستنجح ، وإليك بنبيك محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم أتوجه ، اللهم ذلل لي صعوبة أمري ، وسهل من الخير أكثر مما أرجو ، واصرف عني من الشر أكثر مما أخاف

If you need something from Allah, exalted is He, and want to seek it from Him, do wudu and do it well, perform two rak’ahs, and praise Allah, mighty and majestic is He, bless the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and then say: ‘There is no god but Allah, the Ever-Forbearing, the Generous. Glory is to Allah, the Lord of the immense Throne. Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. O Allah, I ask You for what obliges Your mercy and the firm resolution (to obtain) Your forgiveness, the obtainment of every act of piety and safety from every wrongdoing. O Allah, do not leave me any wrong action but that You forgive it nor any care but that You relieve it nor any need that is pleasing to You but that You settle it, O Most Merciful of the merciful.

O Allah, I ask You and turn to You by Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I turn by you to My Lord and your Lord, mighty and majestic is He, for Him to settle my need for me.’ Then he should mention what he needs.

It is related that the early Muslims (Salaf) used to seek to have their needs fulfilled by praying two rak’ahs and then saying: ‘O Allah, I seek opening by You and success by You. I turn to You by Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam). O Allah, make the difficulty in my business easy for me, ease my hardship for me, make smooth for me good than I hope for and avert from me more evil than I fear.’
- end of quote -


Comment: The above is supported by the very words of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ himself as found in the Hadith of the blind man (which is not just authentic by agreement, but also GENERAL in wording such that it applies to ALL times), so attacking the above recommendation - as done by some innovators and heretics in our time - is attacking the divine law in itself. As for declaring a Muslim - who acts upon the above recommendation - a polytheist, then this is disbelief in itself, because it means that one regards Islam as disbelief.

Note that the second quote is NOT in the context of the visitation, but rather a recommendation regarding what to do when one has a need.
So he recommends one to do Wudhu` and pray to two Rak'at and then use a similar wording as found in the Hadith of the blind man!
This can be done EVERYWHERE (except in places where praying is not allowed)!


So your problem is not just with Ash'aris as you claimed (which is bad enough!), but rather also with the Hanabila!
You and your Najdi brothers have a problem with basically all classical Sunni scholars, be they Ash'ari or Hanbali!

And this is why we see that IAW (d. 1206 AH) mentioned the major Hanbali scholars of the region (including the 'Allama Ibn 'Afaliq (d. 1164 AH) and the 'Allama Ibn Fayruz (d. 1216 AH), whom the "Salafis" ironically claim to be in the chain of knowledge of their Ibn 'Uthaymin!) and made OPEN TAKFIR upon them!
For this reason your Ibn 'Uthaymin also accused the 'Allama al-Saffarini (d. 1188 AH) (who was the major scholar of the Hanabila in Sham!) of "polytheism in Lorship and Divinity"!

So don't try to fool us! We know very well that you hate the classical Hanabila too!

[Abu Sulayman]

All these Ash'ari grave worshipers do is bring evidence proving one thing and use it to establish their Shirk in other actions and beliefs falsely derived from those proofs.

Your accusations of "grave worship" and "Shirk" will fall back on you, because our noble Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - stated (as authentically reported in Sahih Ibn Hibban on the authority of Hudhayfa, radhiallahu 'anhu (translation taken from HERE and edited a little bit)) :

إِنَّ مَا أَتَخَوَّفُ عَلَيْكُمْ رَجُلٌ قَرَأَ الْقُرْآنَ حَتَّى إِذَا رُئِيَتْ بَهْجَتُهُ عَلَيْهِ ، وَكَانَ رِدْئًا لِلْإِسْلَامِ ، غَيَّرَهُ إِلَى مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ ، فَانْسَلَخَ مِنْهُ وَنَبَذَهُ وَرَاءَ ظَهْرِهِ ، وَسَعَى عَلَى جَارِهِ بِالسَّيْفِ ، وَرَمَاهُ بِالشِّرْكِ ، قَالَ : قُلْتُ : يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ ، أَيُّهُمَا أَوْلَى بِالشِّرْكِ ، الْمَرْمِيُّ أَمِ الرَّامِي ؟ قَالَ : بَلِ الرَّامِي

Verily, I fear for you that a man will recite the Quran [abundantly], so much so that the splendour of the Quran is visible upon him and he takes Islam as a cloak [i.e. He lives his life in accordance to the teachings of Islam diligently]. Then, he changes to whatever Allah wills for him, such that it is stripped from him and he throws [Islam] behind his back, assaulting his neighbour with the sword and accusing him of shirk (polytheism).’ I said, “O Prophet of Allah, which one is closer to shirk? The accused or the accuser?” [The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam)] said, ‘Rather it is the accuser.'
- end of quote -

And you don't need to mention the Asha'ira in this context alone, because the Asha'ira and Hanabila were united in their rejection of the new religion of IAW (d. 1206 AH)!
IAW mentioned the major Hanbali scholars of the region and made Takfir upon them as already stated! This should be enough to know what an evil person your IAW was!

[Fais]

All these Ash'ari grave worshipers do is bring evidence proving one thing and use it to establish their Shirk in other actions and beliefs falsely derived from those proofs.

Hey, whatever happen to Saint Abu Najm? The one who wanted to hold hands and sing we are the world? The one whom standing on top of a mountain and looking down upon his people exclaimed this!

How about let's make every place where we participate a better place than how we found it?

We all should be learning and growing as a result of exposure to other views and opinions online and in person. If we're not, then we should reconsider whether our participation is healthy for us or not.

This forum, like all others, thrives on participating and activity. When that turns negative, which is inevitable, is the answer to ban everyone guilty of some offense? No.

But to complain and use pressure to force members to tone down their rhetoric is warranted and good for the forum and its members. A threat of a ban can serve that purpose.

Designating as "satanic" any Muslim scholar, whose scholarship is acknowledged by a vast majority of Muslims, both opponents and followers, should be discouraged in any Muslim environment.

I am truly disappointed. I will leave you with the words of ... Saint Abu Najm.

What is more hypocritical than that?

No irony at all. I promise!

[Fais]

وأما قصة عثمان بن حنيف في شأن الرجل الذي كان يريد حاجة من عثمان بن عفان فقد ضعفها الألباني في التوسل، وأطال الكلام فيها، وذكر أن الطبراني لم يصحح القصة، وإنما صحح الحديث فقط، ثم قال الألباني: وخلاصة القول: إن هذه القصة ضعيفة منكرة، لأمور ثلاثة: ضعف حفظ المتفرد بها، والاختلاف عليه فيها، ومخالفته للثقات الذين لم يذكروها في الحديث، وأمر واحد من هذه الأمور كاف لإسقاط هذه القصة، فكيف بها مجتمعة؟ اهـ

"As for the story of Uthman bin Hanif ... then al-Albani has weakened it in his book at-Tawassul and he discussed it at length; he also mentioned that at-Tabarani did not authenticate the story and only authenticated the Hadith..."

It's not that the Sahabi was mistaken, but rather the addition to the Hadith about the Sahabi is weak.

Also, I think you and others are confused by this charlatan and his antics- I already proved how Ibn Qudamah and others did not approve of the Du'a in this Hadith except at the grave of the Prophet SAWS and in the formula mentioned in the Hadith.

Do you see how the charlatan has already changed it to saying "Yaa Muhammad..." and he no longer restricts it to the visit of the grave of the Prophet SAWS as many of the scholars he mentioned have done?

I'm not confused by anyone or the issues raised in this topic. These are all narrations and opinions I'm familiar with and have been for many years.

You know what does confuse me though, is the totally mixed bag of answers you get when trying to get some clarification from some people who hold similar positions to yours (I don't want to be accused of calling someone a Salafi).

For example, right here you say Ibn Qudamah (Ra) said the dua can only be made at the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and in the same manner as in the hadith.

So I'm trying to clarify this with you, if someone goes to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and makes dua, calling out to the Prophet (SAW) in the same manner, it is not shirk?

[Abu Sulayman]

For example, right here you say Ibn Qudamah (Ra) said the dua can only be made at the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and in the same manner as in the hadith.

So I'm trying to clarify this with you, if someone goes to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and makes dua, calling out to the Prophet (SAW) in the same manner, it is not shirk?

And he's not even correct in his claim and this had been proven to him, but he doesn't read properly. It seems he somehow thought that the second quote is a continuation of the first one (which was in the context of the visitation), but this is not the case and the quotes are not even from the same book.

Imam Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH) recommends using the mentioned wording (meaning: "O Allah, I ask You and turn to You by Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I turn by you to My Lord and your Lord, mighty and majestic is He, for Him to settle my need for me.") when having a need from EVERYWHERE after doing Wudhu` and praying to Rak'at.

Let him first admit this before anything!

[AbuNajm]

So I'm trying to clarify this with you, if someone goes to the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and makes dua, calling out to the Prophet (SAW) in the same manner, it is not shirk?

I've already answered this question before- if someone goes to the grave of the Prophet SAWS and reads the Du'a mentioned in the Hadith, it is most definitely not Shirk and no one ever said that it was- not MIAW, not Ibn Taymiyyah, NO ONE. Some scholars said this act is forbidden or an innovation, however, there were other factors involved in that determination and not simply a rejection of the application of the Hadith of the Blind Man after the death of the Prophet SAWS.

Case in point, if a person goes to the grave of the Prophet SAWS and "calls out to the Prophet SAWS" or reads the Du'a in the Hadith intending to call out to the Prophet SAWS believing that it is the Prophet SAWS who will hear and respond to the Du'a, relieving the need or fulfilling a request of some sort- then that is most definitely Shirk.

When you Fais understand the Du'a as "calling out to the Prophet", you've already made a mistake in understanding the Hadith and the Du'a it contains. That is why many scholars have simply warned from this practice altogether. It is a principle in Usul called Sadd adh-Dhari'ah, or blocking the means for corruption/evil.

Since the majority of people will not understand the Hadith or its application properly and instead they will harbor incorrect and false beliefs due to it, then the practice itself- since it is NOT a Sunnah, nor an action recommended and practiced by the majority of the Companions RA or Tabi'een- the practice itself should be avoided.

There is another principle in Usul whereby it is recommended to refrain from a legitimate Sunnah if there is a Maslahah in doing so- so what about an act that is not even a Sunnah?

Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about the Hadith of the Blind Man and whether it was Kufr to implement it and also about the Fatwa of Izz ad-Deen bin Abd as-Salam and his Fatwa allowing it only with the Prophet SAWS and no one else. Would you like to read Ibn Taymiyyah's reply?

For example, right here you say Ibn Qudamah (Ra) said the dua can only be made at the grave of the Prophet (SAW) and in the same manner as in the hadith.

That's not just what I say. The context for the entire discussion is within the Fasl of visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS. If it was intended as a general Du'a that could be made anywhere and everywhere, then why not also included it in a Fasl dealing with Du'a in general?

This is how the books of Fiqh work- a Hadith can be mentioned in more than one chapter or Kitab whenever applicable.

And to be clear, since it seems you haven't read my previous posts- this Du'a is not "calling out to the Prophet SAWS".

Ibn Taymiyyah and others have explained in detail what is intended by the part of the Du'a containing the vocative- it refers to conjuring up the presence of that person in the heart and addressing that sentiment- nothing more. This is where most laypeople confuse Istighaathah with Tawassul. This is where Sufis and extremist in dealing with the righteous, whether dead or alive, promote this confusion in order to propagate their false beliefs and practices or at least use that confusion to justify their innovated practices and beliefs.

Just like the vocative in the Tashahhud- "Peace be upon you, Oh Prophet!" Why don't promoters of Istighaathah and Tawassul claim the same thing about the Tashahhud as they do the Hadith of the Blind Man? They both contain vocatives. They both appear to be directly addressing the Prophet SAWS.

[Abu Sulayman]

Hey, whatever happen to Saint Abu Najm? The one who wanted to hold hands and sing we are the world? The one whom standing on top of a mountain and looking down upon his people exclaimed this!



I am truly disappointed. I will leave you with the words of ... Saint Abu Najm.



No irony at all. I promise!

An epic fail by AN!

He at one point also implies that the so called "scholarship" of this creature named MiAW (d. 1206 AH) is acknowledged by "the vast majority of Muslims both opponents and followers".

As for the followers, then there is no 'Ibra in their opinion at all!

As for the normal Muslims, who remained upon classical Islam:
If that is the case, let him name the major scholars from the 4 Madhahib (preferably Hanabila!) from his time who acknowledged him to be a scholar of great understanding and someone who is proficient in the Islamic sciences.
(A reminder: IAW literally HATED the major Hanabila of the whole region and excommunicated them!)

Rather what we find is that the major scholars - especially Hanabila! - of his time wrote whole books showing that he was not proficient in the Islamic sciences.

[Abu Sulayman]

AN has basically no idea what he's talking about and that's why he's committing one mistake after the other.

He tries hardly to make things specific, when they are general and doesn't even read when it's proven to him that he's wrong. The issue with Imam Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH) recommending the mentioned supplication from EVERYWHERE is a prime example (which he denied out of nowhere!). Did AN even care to read the second quote?!
The second quote was in a GENERAL context!

Let's get back to the seeking of intercession during the visitation: If a Muslim says "O Messenger of Allah, [I ask for your] intercession" or what is similar to this (and this is CORRECT to do according to the Jumhur of the scholars and the Ahnaf famously use this type of wording!) has he committed "Shirk" according to that creature named MiAW (d. 1206 AH)? Yes, he has!
In fact even according to that Ibn 'Uthaymin this would be "Shirk"!
So let AN not try to fool us! We know very well that his sect regards the classical scholars upon "Shirk"!

According to that IAW this falls under those things that throw one out of the religion and his son explicitly affirmed that the major reason for fighting the people (meaning: Muslims!) was this issue!

And if we were to ask them how this could be polytheism, they would not be able to give any good reasoning!

Note that their whole mindset is based upon having the worst of opinions of other Muslims and they are hellbent on distorting their statements to mean something completely else.

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

So I guess this is it.

We've finally reached a conclusion. It's been a while AA, and to be honest, at one point. I lost hope. But this moment, me and you coming together and figuring things out, really warms my heart.

It's been emotional. But, we made it.

Glad everyone agree that the hadeeth of the blind man is specific to him and not proof for tawassul for anyone else.

What's the next hadeeth we can discuss?

[AbuNajm]

And he's not even correct in his claim and this had been proven to him, but he doesn't read properly. It seems he somehow thought that the second quote is a continuation of the first one (which was in the context of the visitation), but this is not the case and the quotes are not even from the same book.

Yes, I forgot- the one who refuses to mention his training, experience, or studies, publications, Mashayikh, or groups he supports while criticizing me for doing all of that and disagreeing.

Have you read a Ta'leeq for the Wasiyyah of Ibn Qudamah? Well, I have and it clearly states that the author is combining Salat al-Hajah with Hadith bi-Dharir, or the Hadith of the Blind Man. [see p. 100 of at-Ta'leeq al-Jalli]

You're right, the quotes are not from the same book, however, Ibn Qudamah is clearly joining the two issues since in the Fasl on Salat al-Haajah in al-Mughni, he does not mention this combined wording which includes the Du'a of the Blind Man Hadith. However, he does here in the book Wasiyyah.

Imam Ibn Qudama (d. 620 AH) recommends using the mentioned wording (meaning: "O Allah, I ask You and turn to You by Your Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I turn by you to My Lord and your Lord, mighty and majestic is He, for Him to settle my need for me.") when having a need from EVERYWHERE after doing Wudhu` and praying to Rak'at.

Ibn Qudamah does no such thing. In fact, the writing directly before partially quoting the Du'a of the Blind Man, in the original transcript, according to all publications of the Wasiyyah, is not legible. You're assuming that the missing statement is a "recommendation".

What is clear is that after mentioning the Du'a of the Blind Man partially, Ibn Qudamah points out that by which the Salaf used to seek the facilitation of their needs and he mentions a different Du'a that does not contain Tawassul.

Let him first admit this before anything!

That is what I will admit, NOT what you are falsely claiming with no evidence.

[Fais]

I've already answered this question before- if someone goes to the grave of the Prophet SAWS and reads the Du'a mentioned in the Hadith, it is most definitely not Shirk and no one ever said that it was- not MIAW, not Ibn Taymiyyah, NO ONE. Some scholars said this act is forbidden or an innovation, however, there were other factors involved in that determination and not simply a rejection of the application of the Hadith of the Blind Man after the death of the Prophet SAWS.

Case in point, if a person goes to the grave of the Prophet SAWS and "calls out to the Prophet SAWS" or reads the Du'a in the Hadith intending to call out to the Prophet SAWS believing that it is the Prophet SAWS who will hear and respond to the Du'a, relieving the need or fulfilling a request of some sort- then that is most definitely Shirk.

When you Fais understand the Du'a as "calling out to the Prophet", you've already made a mistake in understanding the Hadith and the Du'a it contains. That is why many scholars have simply warned from this practice altogether. It is a principle in Usul called Sadd adh-Dhari'ah, or blocking the means for corruption/evil.

Since the majority of people will not understand the Hadith or its application properly and instead they will harbor incorrect and false beliefs due to it, then the practice itself- since it is NOT a Sunnah, nor an action recommended and practiced by the majority of the Companions RA or Tabi'een- the practice itself should be avoided.

There is another principle in Usul whereby it is recommended to refrain from a legitimate Sunnah if there is a Maslahah in doing so- so what about an act that is not even a Sunnah?

Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about the Hadith of the Blind Man and whether it was Kufr to implement it and also about the Fatwa of Izz ad-Deen bin Abd as-Salam and his Fatwa allowing it only with the Prophet SAWS and no one else. Would you like to read Ibn Taymiyyah's reply?



That's not just what I say. The context for the entire discussion is within the Fasl of visiting the grave of the Prophet SAWS. If it was intended as a general Du'a that could be made anywhere and everywhere, then why not also included it in a Fasl dealing with Du'a in general?

This is how the books of Fiqh work- a Hadith can be mentioned in more than one chapter or Kitab whenever applicable.

And to be clear, since it seems you haven't read my previous posts- this Du'a is not "calling out to the Prophet SAWS".

Ibn Taymiyyah and others have explained in detail what is intended by the part of the Du'a containing the vocative- it refers to conjuring up the presence of that person in the heart and addressing that sentiment- nothing more. This is where most laypeople confuse Istighaathah with Tawassul. This is where Sufis and extremist in dealing with the righteous, whether dead or alive, promote this confusion in order to propagate their false beliefs and practices or at least use that confusion to justify their innovated practices and beliefs.

Just like the vocative in the Tashahhud- "Peace be upon you, Oh Prophet!" Why don't promoters of Istighaathah and Tawassul claim the same thing about the Tashahhud as they do the Hadith of the Blind Man? They both contain vocatives. They both appear to be directly addressing the Prophet SAWS.

Seems like there is quite a bit to unpack here. I genuinely do and don't want to get into this discussion. I just find it arduous to read, think and respond. It's why I left this platform in the first place, it's also why my replies are short.

I'd ask you to not assume my position or understanding on things. I haven't said I agree or disagree with any of the rulings. I'm actually looking for clarification regarding the Salafi position on this as it's never been clear to me, even after asking many people. Think of it as academic as oppose to seeking a ruling, I just want to know a clear position. I also agree this isn't something the masses should really concern themselves with as people are dumb and things get misunderstood and go wrong all the time.

But in short your response leads to more questions, as you're conflating and superimposing assumptions. If I get time, I'll clarify what I mean and respond.