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

[AbuMubarak]

So you people made the thread this long and then you're complaining?!

I cant believe you typed that, read it, then pressed "post reply"

On that note, we will put this thread to bed, have a good night all

[Abu Sulayman]

Interesting. So I guess similiar comparisons could be made with regards to the Atharis/Hanabilah who gradually became more and more sympathetic towards Ash'arism as they maintained their political and theological dominance throughout the centuries. Politics and the status quo matters on some level even when it comes to theology and the formalization of Madhhabs.

Politics and the status quo do have an effect on the dominant theology. I agree with that, but the Hanabila did not change their creed and even their later creedal works are very clearly based upon earlier ones.
If you look into their more detailed works you will see them extensively quoting their earlier scholars.

The only thing that changed was that there were less tensions with the Asha'ira and this with the knowledge that there has been always times where the Hanabila and the Asha'ira were on good terms and this even very early on. Just see how the Hanabila respected and loved someone like Imam al-Baqillani (d. 403 AH) - one of the absolute top scholars of the Asha'ira! - in his very lifetime and my point should become clear.
It's only that the Najdis don't like to mention all these times and only highlight those times were tensions occurred. They basically love to see the Muslims in constant tensions, problems and disunity.

And the sympathy that the later Hanabila showed towards the Asha'ira was a genuine one. The reason for their sympathy was that the Asha'ira were literally the masters of almost all Islamic sciences and the chains of knowledge of these sciences go primarily through them.
So it's only logical to respect them, even if one may disagree with some of their Ijtihadat in finer issues of creed.

I guess it's because we've recently completed the month of Ramadhan and I didn't want to make people uncomfortable by bumping a thread with the term "Wahhabi" in it. At least this book is not derailing the topic though!

I get what you're saying. But according to these people anything criticising them is provocative, even if you call them Najdi or "Salafi".
But yes, here it's much more on-topic.

[AmantuBillahi]

I hope you don't believe that any of the above is really intended. They would have thrown the Shaykh (rahimahullah) into prison and not accepted the book to printed, if he would have called out the Al Sa'ud, IAW (d. 1206 AH) and the so called Al al-Shaykh, may Allah ta'ala give them all what they deserve.
Anyways, the rest of the book is different.

Interesting. So I guess similiar comparisons could be made with regards to the Atharis/Hanabilah who gradually became more and more sympathetic towards Ash'arism as they maintained their political and theological dominance throughout the centuries. Politics and the status quo matters on some level even when it comes to theology and the formalization of Madhhabs.

Regarding the title of the other thread (i.e. "Wahhabi claim: Belief in Rububiyya (lordship) of Allah: Muslims = Pagans"), then the only thing provocative is the claim of these Najdis.

I guess it's because we've recently completed the month of Ramadhan and I didn't want to make people uncomfortable by bumping a thread with the term "Wahhabi" in it. At least this book is not derailing the topic though!

[Abu Sulayman]

I didn't want to be the first one to bump the other thread because the title is somewhat provocative but I finally received this book in the mail just yesterday. I'm really surprised to see that the author opened his introduction by praising the Saudi rulers and calling it the "land of Tawhid". He also defended Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab in the first few pages and seems to take the approach of him being slandered by his opponents. I haven't got much farther than the very beginning but it suspringly resmebles the angle of a revisionist Najdi so far. Interested to see what the rest contains when time permits inshaAllah.

I hope you don't believe that any of the above is really intended. They would have thrown the Shaykh (rahimahullah) into prison and not accepted the book to printed, if he would have called out the Al Sa'ud, IAW (d. 1206 AH) and the so called Al al-Shaykh, may Allah ta'ala give them all what they deserve.
Anyways, the rest of the book is different.

Regarding the title of the other thread (i.e. "Wahhabi claim: Belief in Rububiyya (lordship) of Allah: Muslims = Pagans"), then the only thing provocative is the claim of these Najdis.

[AmantuBillahi]

Another good book, would be is Notions that Should be Corrected by Shaykh Muhammad b. ʿAlawi al-Maliki al-Hasani. He was the Shaykh of the Malikis in Mecca and a Muhaditheen, who died at the beginning of this century.

https://sunnipubs.com/products/notio...t-be-corrected

I didn't want to be the first one to bump the other thread because the title is somewhat provocative but I finally received this book in the mail just yesterday. I'm really surprised to see that the author opened his introduction by praising the Saudi rulers and calling it the "land of Tawhid". He also defended Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab in the first few pages and seems to take the approach of him being slandered by his opponents. I haven't got much farther than the very beginning but it suspringly resmebles the angle of a revisionist Najdi so far. Interested to see what the rest contains when time permits inshaAllah.

[Abu Sulayman]

And another point and that is regarding the classic Ash'ari scholars:

To even act as if this issue is about being Ash'ari or Hanbali just shows how ignorant one is and that one has been fooled by Najdi propaganda and lies!

I will just mention the name of the Hanbali scholar Imam al-Sarsari (d. 656 AH) and this should be enough for those who know of him and his poetries in praise of the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and how much the Hanabila praised him and his poetries and this with the knowledge that they are not just filled with Tawassul and Tashaffu', but also Istighatha!
(Again: I don't have a problem with disallowing Istighatha for laymen as already mentioned.)

The Ash'aris and Hanbalis were not in dispute about the issue of Tawassul and Tashaffu' in the very first place and anyone claiming otherwise is absolutely ignorant! They differed regarding the issue of the permissimibilty of giving a possible Ta`wil for those texts which are considered from those of the Sifat and regarding the issue of the divine speech and our wording of it.
And the issues that they differed about were detailed issues, where there is place for Ijtihad. They were not the great issues of belief and they should not be brought up in front of laymen, because of them not being able to understand these discussions in the very first place!
The Ash'aris and Hanbalis were at times opposed to each other - similar to the Ash'aris and Maturidis - and at other times united. Their scholars would benefit from each other and take from each other and their opposition ended with both side accepting each other, while believing that the other side is mistaken on some detailed Ijtihadi issues of creed.

Then the Najdis appeared and claimed that both of them had got it wrong for centuries upon centuries and that they are now all obligated to believe in the Najdi call or get killed.


Note that the Asha'ira and their likes are the leading people through whom Allah ta'ala preserved Islamic knowledge and its sciences!
An example to see that this is true: On the Arabic "Salafi" "ahlalhdeeth" forum they tried to find a single narration that has reached us until our day without it containing an Ash'ari or a Hanbali, who supports Tafwidh, or a Sufi. Guess how many they found? ZERO! Just imagine!

So imagine the amount of shamelessness that anyone today has to have, when he attacks and undermines the classic Asha'ira and lies against them while being aware that they were the primary preservers of all Islamic sciences!

And imagine the amount of evilness of a people who do not want the Asha'ira, Maturdiyya and Hanabila to be united - with the knowledge that they are in agreement on all major issue of creed and only differ in very detailed issues! - and want instead all of them become mindless Najdis, who differ with all of them in major issues!

[Abu Sulayman]

There is another point:
The issue does nowhere stop at Tawassul.
The Najdis systematically fought against having true love and respect for the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and they were even successful in diminishing the love and respect for the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in the heart of some people who claim Islam.

This is why you will see them having a problem with visiting the grave of our noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) or remembering his birth and rejoicing in this great mercy of Allah ta'ala. They will also have a problem with any of the great poems written by the classical scholars in the praise of our noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and accuse them of containing "polytheism"!
Let it be known to them that a "Tawhid", which is not accompanied by love and respect for those whom Allah ta'ala has chosen as Prophets and Messengers (peace and blessings be upon them all) is not accepted! In fact this so called "Tawhid" is that of the accursed satan, who did NOT show due respect to Adam (peace be upon him) and rejected the command of His Lord jalla jalaluhu regarding him.

The issue goes even that far that a lot of these Najdis will not send Salawat upon our noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in a correct manner, but rather say "sal'alslm" while being able to pronounce everything else correctly! So look how Allah ta'ala has deprived them of the blessing of sending Salawat upon the Chosen One - SALLALLAHU 'ALAYHI WA SALLAM - and if this is an indication for anything, then that of them being deficient in their love and respect for him, peace and blessings be upon him!

But how is this surprising when one knows that IAW (d. 1206 AH) - their leader! - killed an old Muslim man, because he would send Salawat upon the Chosen One (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) after the Adhan!



Note that I don't have a problem with disallowing Istighatha for the laymen due to the risk of misunderstandings and wrong practices and if the Najdis would have stopped at this level, then there would be no problem at all!
But this never justifies accusing the Muslims of the past - and their scholars! - of greater polytheism and allowing Muslim blood based upon these type of secondary issues and trying to diminish one's love for the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam)!

[Abu Sulayman]

Salamun 'alaykum,

'Id mubarak to all.

Regarding the last comments:

As for AA's statememt that the thread should have ended when he said that this thread should be about the ruling of asking the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) according to the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and AM and AN both liking his post:

The classical scholars are the heirs of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in knowledge and they're the ones through whom Allah ta'ala preserved authentic knowledge of His religion, so acting as if their position is in opposition to the teachings of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is something very dangerous and clearly indicates deviation from the correct way!



As for what has been shown in this thread:
It has been proven that the classic scholars regarded it as correct and allowed to ask Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala by the virtue of His Messenger, the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam).
It has also been proven that the classical scholars regarded is as good to ask intercession from the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) unto His Lord jalla jalaluhu during the visitation of his blessed grave regarding the forgiveness of one's sins.

These two points being the position of the classical scholars is established and no one is able to doubt this.


So what's the importance of this thread?:
It's meant as an eye-opener and to show that all these modern attacks against Tawassul and Tashaffu' with the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and claims of this being "disallowed and polytheism according to the scholars" is nothing but a great lie and an ugly innovation in itself.
The group that has made up these lies is trying to turn secondary issues into the very foundation of the religion, while at the same time turning some major issues of Islamic creed into secondary ones or even rejecting them!



Now as for the length of this thread, then it's clearly not my fault:
I started the thread by posting some of the statements of the classical scholars regarding the issue in question and also mentioned some of their proofs. I wanted to keep on in this manner and expected the same from those participating in this thread.
You people however then flooded the thread with your personal opinions and this with the knowledge that no consideration is given to any of them in the religion of Allah. And you even added to this all kinds of off-topic posts.

So you people made the thread this long and then you're complaining?!

Then: When the people that you people have been influenced by were spending money to print their misleading "free books on Tawassul" (which were filled with misinformation and outright lies!) and were distributing it to the Muslims on Hajj, we did not see anyone of you whining about this? And when these people were financing groups and people in other Muslim countries (and even in non-Muslim ones) with huge amounts of money in order for the Muslims to leave the Sunna and become Najdis (just like they successfully influenced some of your thoughts), you people did not whine about this? And when these people have filled the internet with their websites and videos such that one can not search for any Islamic issue except that the first websites appearing are theirs and their dark faces, you people did not say anything?
But just because someone opens several threads that show how these Najdis are lying and betraying regarding the religion of Allah ta'ala, suddenly you people start whining and complaining regarding its length!?!

When many people started to falsely think that Shirk is all about Tawassul and issues connected to it and when they started thinking that the more body parts one affirms for one's Creator (High Exalted is Allah ta'ala above this!) the greater one's monotheism becomes - and this all thanks to the huge amounts of money spent by the Najdis! -, then you did not find a single word against them?
And when these people made the people doubt the importance of the 4 Madhahib in the preservation of the religion and opened thereby the door for every type of heresy, where did your tongues go then!?
And when they distorted the meaning of the Ahadith and claimed that our Lord - Exalted is He above what the oppressors claim! - is described with boredom and jogging and getting hurt and other imperfections, then where did your voices go?
And when they stooped lower and lower in knowledge and understanding to the degree that that which their leaders teach to their "advanced" students in Usul al-Fiqh is what other people teach to beginners or at most to those of intermediate level, where did you go then?
When a group among them acted as if the solution for our problems is to kill each other like crazy and to cause civil wars and to blow ourselves up in big crowd of Muslims (by accusing them of "apoatasy") and another group went to another extreme and acted as if the rulers of today are legitimate ones - despite them throwing the book of Allah ta'ala behind their backs! - and as if obedience to them is obligatory, why did you side with one of these groups instead of rejecting both of them?



Billahi 'alaykum, if the progeny of IAW (d. 1206 AH) (I mean these Al al-Shaykhs!) would have spent all this money that they have speant in order for the people to accept Najdism on helping our brothers in Palestine instead, would this not have been 1000 times better?
If they would have spent this money upon technical advancement of their own country (SA) and strengthing its military and army, would it have not been 1000 times better?
Why is it that they were able to mobilize all these bedouins and fill them with a great amount of zeal in fighting other Muslims, but they did not do the same with preparing an army who will be able to fight the Zionist devils and other than them!?!

Billahi 'alaykukum, if anyone else would have soo much money and would control the Haramayn al-sharifayn, would he not have thought about what I stated above?

Yet, these Najdis did none of this! Why?! Because they don't care for Islam and Muslims! They only care about spreading Najdism! That's it.

Let us stop being fooled by these type of people!


What is important in creed is not to disallow Tawassul and act as if it's decides whether one is a Muslim or not, but rather what is important are the Arkan al-Iman! And when it comes to our belief in Allah ta'ala, then what is important is Surat al-Ikhlas and not what the Najdis have invented into the relgiion!
This is so, because the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) clarified what is important! So we will view what he (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) regarded as important as important and not accept it from anyone to add things from his own pocket to the foundation of the religion!



What this Umma needs is a serious revival of the religion by re-embracing classic Islam and also concentrating on building up a strong army and military that can protect the Muslims and the oppressed ones and not all this Najdi nonsense!

[AbuNajm]

If this were any other topic that did not involve the conviction of creed according to a deviant sect called "Ash'ari" and "Sufi", then it would have been over hundreds of years ago.

I've already demonstrated, along with Abdullah, that the borrowed musings of Abu Sulayman and company are simply a game of credal 3-card monty.

He raises many false claims about what preeminent Atharis said or believed and when those quotes are analyzed it comes back to a false interpretation whereby the formulaic wording of a Du'a based solely on Athar [hence the "Athari" nomenclature] are permitted or recommended in specific topics/chapters of Fiqh are then unrestrictedly expanded to include reformulations of the wordings that intentionally blur the lines between the Atharis and Ash'aris. The removal of the contextual restrictions and formulaic expressions with the clearly designed guard rails in creed found in the entire corpus of statements of those same preeminent Athari scholars is the real deception here.

Any moderate Ash'ari will have statements that potentially contradict his presumed creed if taken out of context or reinterpreted according to Athari standards and nomenclature. Likewise, this trick is being pulled with Athari statements in this thread.

No sense in taking statements from the likes of Ibn Qudamah and referring to explanations by well-known Ash'aris and Sufis like the Subkis or Ash'ari inclined Hanbalis like Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Aqeel, and likewise, no sense in referring the statements of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab to destractors and revisionists among the Najdis.

Everyone thinks they can "follow the card" by engaging with these `Ilmi street urchins in the guise of well-intentioned anonymous internet academics, but the fact is- the game is rigged and no matter which card they turn over, the palmed credal card is always under another option.

These threads are nothing but self-gratification for a person who has yet to disclose his qualifications, experience, or associations with any actual Islamic scholarship.

The majority of the relevant information was directly copied from Ash'ari/Sufi articles and sites and the rest was translated from the Arabic versions of such sites. It's all propaganda and has been dealt with thoroughly in the Arabic language. English-speaking audiences have missed out because there simply are no incentives for translators to dive into such minutia in English. As these threads have shown, without actual Islamic knowledge and direct experience studying Aqidah as a science from the correct principles and methodology [Athari/Salafi], then most common Muslims will be confused and follow their own whims or the charade of an 80-page thread that seems like "good information" instead of the propaganda it is.

This is the 100th time I've engaged a propagandist like Abu Sulayman. The game he plays never changes and the results are almost always the same.

I prove to him that his few, directly relevant quotes are interpreted and expanded beyond their original scope and restriction and he just brings quotes from Ash'aris and Sufis to support those false interpretations and out-of-context explanations.

Nothing he says or I respond with isn't found on the Arabic-language forums and websites dealing with these very same issues. The only difference is the Arabic-language versions tend to involve a more educated audience and thus, the Ash'ari/Sufi sites don't have Atharis/Salafis responding and vice versa. Students of knowledge and scholars don't waste their time trying to convince the entrenched of the other side on their own turf.

Since it's evident that UF is no one's turf- we have an 80-page thread of propaganda.

[AdoonkaAlle]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
I was trying to find the table contents, on which page is the most current one?

As well as: I saw something interesting from Shaykh Muhammad Abdul-Wahid where he was saying that Ibn Abdul-Wahhab didn't make Takfir on those performing Tawassul. I don't remember how this thread went, but if it was said that the Najdi Da'wah did, can I perhaps see any references where this is taken from?

As for Shafa'ah then I have a question. In ad-Durar it's said that they make Takfir on the one saying يا رسول الله أسألك من الشفاعة. I was wondering how this wording is different from the narration of 'Utbi or if it's practically the same?

جزاكم الله خيرا

Just to add on what Abu Sulayman said regarding the miaw's takfir on the issue of tawassul, have a read through Kashf ush Shubuhat that miaw wrote. The cornerstone of miaw's dawah revolves around his categorization & understanding of tawheed, it forms the basis for his takfir of muslims. In the book miaw equates the actions of muslims who seek intercession of Prophets, righteous muslims etc to that of the mushrikeen of quraysh. He says muslims are committing the same shirk as them and affirms that the mushrikeen had tawheed rububiyah. Once you understand miaw's mistake in affirming tawheed rububiyah to the mushrikeen everything else simply false apart tbh,

[Abu 'Abdullaah]

22 pages of this

Thread should have ended here:

Thread should be 'Seeking intercession with rasoolullah according to rasoolullah '

-_-

[AbuMubarak]

Hello again moron,

You said anyone can communicate after death by sending a message in dream like the messenger of Allah and used that narration as proof. Your attempts at deception have flopped.

22 pages of this

[Abu Sulayman]

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

Table of contents (30-04-2021):


- OP: Summary of its ruling by 'Allama 'Abd al-Rahman bin Muhammad al-Mashhur (d. 1320 AH) and 'Allama Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi (d. 1194 AH)

- Some proofs from the Qur`an al-karim and the Sunna regarding the permissibility of seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

- MIAW's son admitting that the main reason why they killed Muslims was the issue of seeking intercession, which the classical scholars allowed!
- Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 1)
- Is the simple asking for intercession condemned in the Qur`an as polytheism? (part 2)

- Imam Malik's (d. 179 AH) response to al-Mansur (d. 158 AH): Rather face him and seek his intercession!

- Imam 'Abdullah bin al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH), Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (d. 241 AH), Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676 AH) and other scholars from the Salaf and Khalaf ACTED UPON the Hadith "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"
- One of the supporting routes of the narration "O slaves of Allah! Help me!"

- Imam Ibn Abi Dunya (d. 281 AH): The Salaf acted upon the Hadith of the blind man and performed Tawassul!

- Imam al-Mawardi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 450 AH) recommends visitation of the blessed grave and seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Ghazali [al-Shafi'i] (d. 505 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Ibn al-Salah [al-Shafi'i] (d. 643 AH) regards the fullfillment of one’s needs when one performs Tawassul with the Prophet ﷺ among the miracles (Mu'jizat) that Allah granted to our Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Nawawi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 676 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ and mentions that this is the position of his Shafi'i colleagues in general!
- Imam Kamal al-Din Ibn al-Zamlakani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 727 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in poetry
- Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki [al-Shafi'i] (d. 756 AH): The permissibility and goodness of performing Tawassul, Istighatha and Tashaffu' with the best of creation ﷺ
- Scholarly support for the work Shifa` al-Siqam of Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH)
- Imam Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 852 AH) asking the Prophet ﷺ for intercession in his poetry (+ his comment on the Tawassul of 'Umar through al-'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them)
- Imam Taqi al-Din al-Hisni [al-Shafi'i] (d. 829 AH) on seeking aid with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Samhudi [al-Shafi'i] (d. 911 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha
- Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 926 AH) recommends seeking intercession through the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam al-Qastallani [al-Shafi'i] (d. 923 AH) on Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha (+ his own experience)
- Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami [al-Shafi'i] (d. 974 AH) regarding Tawassul, Tashaffu' and Istighatha with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Shihab al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 957 AH) and his son Imam Shams al-Din al-Ramli [al-Shafi'i] (d. 1004 AH) regarding the seeking of aid with the Prophet ﷺ by saying "Ya Rasulullah!"

- Imam Ibn 'Aqil [al-Hanbali] (d. 513 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam 'Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani [al-Hanbali] (d. 561 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ
- Imam Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi [al-Hanbali] (d. 620 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ (+ recommendation to act on the Hadith of bling man when in need)
- Imam Yahya bin Yusuf al-Sarsari [al-Hanbali] (d. 656 AH) seeks intercession with the Prophet ﷺ in his poetry

- Imam 'Abdullah bin Mahmud bin Mawdud al-Mawsili [al-Hanafi] (d. 683 AH) recommends seeking intercession with the Prophet ﷺ

- Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) ADMITTING that the Hadith of the blind man was acted upon by the Salaf al-salih and that Imam Ahmad (d. 241 AH) permitted Tawassul!
- Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) exact position on Tawassul and Tashaffu'
- Who was the [leader of] state and who were the scholars who stood against Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) abnormal Fatawa?
- Imam al-Jazari [al-Shafi'i] (d. 711 AH) and Imam al-Tufi [al-Hanbali] (d. 716 AH): On seeking aid with the Best of Creation ﷺ and responding to Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 728 AH) objections

- Famous incident that proves silent consensus (Ijma' sukuti) among the Sahabat al-kiram - radhiallahu 'anhum ajma'in - on the issue of Tawassul bil Dhat
(+ supporting evidences) (+ correction of mistranslation)

- A good series of short lectures / videos regarding Tawassul and connected issue



- Supplication through the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (al-tawassul) (by Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyya)

- Some short videos by Shaykh Muhammad 'Abd al-Wahid al-Hanbali clarifying the Hanbali position on Tawassul and the position of Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) on Istighatha



(There maybe some other beneficial posts, but the above are the most relevant ones.
In classical works one will find hundreds of statements regarding this issue and all in support of what has already been stated and that is the permissibility of Tawassul and Tashaffu' with the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam).)

[BintFulaan]

Wa 'alaykum al-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,

I'll post an up-to-date table of contents in the next post insha`Allah.

It's correct that Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) stated that he regarded the permissibility of Tawassul as an acceptable difference of opinion, but he intended here only wordings like "O my Lord, forgive me for the sake of your Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam)" or what is similar to it (which is the first type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki (d. 756 AH)).
But there are other wordings like the statement "O Messenger of Allah, pray for me" (which falls under the second type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki) or "O Messenger of Allah, your Umma needs help" (which falls under the third type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki and the intention is the same as the second and that is the asking for supplication) - which also fall under Tawassul according to classical scholars - and MiAW regarded these things as "Shirk" and not subject to difference of opinion.

As for what is mentioned in al-Durar al-Saniyya, then it is the statement of 'Abdullah (d. 1244 AH), the son of MiAW and one of the major heads of these Najdis, where he allows the blood of the one who believes in the correctness of the statement "O Messenger of Allah, I ask you for [your] intercession" to be spilled (!!!) and he makes it very clear that this issue is the most important reason for killing other Muslims and this while acknowledging that this was allowed by the scholars of the past.
So he admits that their major reason for spilling Muslim blood was an issue allowed by major scholars of this Umma! Just imagine the boldness in doing so!

Here some examples of wordings recommended by major scholars:

- Imam al-Mawsili (d. 683 AH) for example mentioned in Ta'lil al-Mukhtar that one should say "Intercession, intercession, o Messenger of Allah" and before that he stated "so intercede for us to your Lord"!
- Imam Ibn al-Humam (d. 861 AH) said in Fath al-Qadir that one should say "O Messenger of Allah, I ask you for intercession"!
- Imam al-Samhudi (d. 911 AH) stated in Khulasat al-Wafa that one should say "So intercede for me, o Messenger of the Lord of the worlds"!
- etc.

According to that 'Abdullah these scholars were "excused" (for recommending what he regards as major polytheism!), because the call of IAW had not reached them unlike the scholars and people of their own time (whose blood he regards as lawful and he's very clear on this!).
What he does not seem to get is that this implies his own disbelief, because he doesn't regard the call of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - which had reached all these scholars without any doubt! - as enough for the establishment of proof, but rather the call of IAW!

As for the wording found in the Athar of al-'Utbi (and the classical scholars regarded the wording as good and correct to use during the visitation), then it's the wording "So I've come to you, asking for forgiveness for my sin and seeking intercession through you unto my Lord" and this is identical in meaning to the above wordings mentioned.



One last point: I'm personally sick of hearing what so and so or so and so claimed after 1000 years of the Hijra to be "Shirk akbar for which one's blood needs to be spilled".
I'm sick of those acting as if anyone has the right to treat the Umma of the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in this manner and to put the faith of the majority of the Muslims before us into question! Subhanallah, did the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) give anyone the authority to treat HIS Umma in this manner or did he rather warn against this!?

Understood, thank you for taking the time answering me. May Allah compensate you.

[Abu Sulayman]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
I was trying to find the table contents, on which page is the most current one?

As well as: I saw something interesting from Shaykh Muhammad Abdul-Wahid where he was saying that Ibn Abdul-Wahhab didn't make Takfir on those performing Tawassul. I don't remember how this thread went, but if it was said that the Najdi Da'wah did, can I perhaps see any references where this is taken from?

As for Shafa'ah then I have a question. In ad-Durar it's said that they make Takfir on the one saying يا رسول الله أسألك من الشفاعة. I was wondering how this wording is different from the narration of 'Utbi or if it's practically the same?

جزاكم الله خيرا

Wa 'alaykum al-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,

I'll post an up-to-date table of contents in the next post insha`Allah.

It's correct that Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) stated that he regarded the permissibility of Tawassul as an acceptable difference of opinion, but he intended here only wordings like "O my Lord, forgive me for the sake of your Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam)" or what is similar to it (which is the first type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki (d. 756 AH)).
But there are other wordings like the statement "O Messenger of Allah, pray for me" (which falls under the second type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki) or "O Messenger of Allah, your Umma needs help" (which falls under the third type of Tawassul according to Imam al-Subki and the intention is the same as the second and that is the asking for supplication) - which also fall under Tawassul according to classical scholars - and MiAW regarded these things as "Shirk" and not subject to difference of opinion.

As for what is mentioned in al-Durar al-Saniyya, then it is the statement of 'Abdullah (d. 1244 AH), the son of MiAW and one of the major heads of these Najdis, where he allows the blood of the one who believes in the correctness of the statement "O Messenger of Allah, I ask you for [your] intercession" to be spilled (!!!) and he makes it very clear that this issue is the most important reason for killing other Muslims and this while acknowledging that this was allowed by the scholars of the past.
So he admits that their major reason for spilling Muslim blood was an issue allowed by major scholars of this Umma! Just imagine the boldness in doing so!

Here some examples of wordings recommended by major scholars:

- Imam al-Mawsili (d. 683 AH) for example mentioned in Ta'lil al-Mukhtar that one should say "Intercession, intercession, o Messenger of Allah" and before that he stated "so intercede for us to your Lord"!
- Imam Ibn al-Humam (d. 861 AH) said in Fath al-Qadir that one should say "O Messenger of Allah, I ask you for intercession"!
- Imam al-Samhudi (d. 911 AH) stated in Khulasat al-Wafa that one should say "So intercede for me, o Messenger of the Lord of the worlds"!
- etc.

According to that 'Abdullah these scholars were "excused" (for recommending what he regards as major polytheism!), because the call of IAW had not reached them unlike the scholars and people of their own time (whose blood he regards as lawful and he's very clear on this!).
What he does not seem to get is that this implies his own disbelief, because he doesn't regard the call of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - which had reached all these scholars without any doubt! - as enough for the establishment of proof, but rather the call of IAW!

As for the wording found in the Athar of al-'Utbi (and the classical scholars regarded the wording as good and correct to use during the visitation), then it's the wording "So I've come to you, asking for forgiveness for my sin and seeking intercession through you unto my Lord" and this is identical in meaning to the above wordings mentioned.



One last point: I'm personally sick of hearing what so and so or so and so claimed after 1000 years of the Hijra to be "Shirk akbar for which one's blood needs to be spilled".
I'm sick of those acting as if anyone has the right to treat the Umma of the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in this manner and to put the faith of the majority of the Muslims before us into question! Subhanallah, did the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) give anyone the authority to treat HIS Umma in this manner or did he rather warn against this!?