Filthy Language of Ahmad Raza Khan

October 24, 2012

“A woman is capable of committing fornication. Then according to the opinion of your leader and teacher, it is necessary that your God too should be capable of committing fornication – otherwise the prostitutes of the brothers of the Deobandi’s would laugh at Him and say: ‘How do you claim for Godhead? You are not capable of doing which even we can do?’ This naturally implies that your God must possess a female sexual organ – otherwise where will be the sexual intercourse?”
(Ahmad Raza Khan in his Subhan al-Subbuh. P. 142)

Advertisements

Ibn al-Humam in al-Tahrir on the Issue of Lying in Allah’s Power

October 24, 2012

Courtesy of Muzzammil Husayn

In the following translated passage from Ibn al-Humam’s al-Tahrir fi ‘Ilm al-Usul and Ibn Amir al-Hajj’s commentary, they ascribe to the Ash’aris the view that apparently reprehensible acts (qaba’ih) like lying are included in Allah’s power but impossible due to His eternal choice. Regardless of whether this ascription is accurate or not, Ibn al-Humam continues to say that this view is acceptable and does not differ in outcome from the other view, and it is not permissible to repudiate it. The section from al-Tahrir with the commentary can be found here: http://feqh.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=278&TOCID=102&BookID=87&PID=219

In favour of the Hanafis [i.e. Maturidis] and the Mu‘tazilah in the third [issue of contention] i.e. the impossibility for Allah of punishing the obedient and burdening [a soul] more than can be borne, is that it is established with certainty that an action has the quality of goodness (husn) and badness (qubh) in reality [even if this cannot be determined rationally] so it is impossible for it i.e. the action of Allah (Most High) to have this quality i.e. badness, Exalted is Allah from that.

Furthermore, there is agreement [between the Maturidis, Mu‘tazilah and Ash‘aris] on the independence of the intellect to grasp them i.e. goodness and badness, in the sense of an attribute of perfection (kamal) and imperfection (naqs) like knowledge [is an attribute of perfection hence good] and ignorance [is an attribute of imperfection hence bad] according to what has preceded*, so by immediate necessity that in which an imperfection is perceived is impossible for Him i.e. Allah (Most High). And since that in which an imperfection is perceived is impossible for Him, the certainty of the impossibility of giving Him i.e. Allah (Most High) the quality of lying and its like, Exalted is He from that, is manifest.

Furthermore, if it was not impossible for His action to have the quality of badness (qubh), trust in the integrity of His promise and the integrity of His report besides it i.e. promises from Him (Most High) will be lifted, as well as the integrity of prophecy; i.e. there can be no certainty of His integrity at all, neither rationally, because it is supposed there is no judgement in favour of it [i.e. His integrity], nor legally, because it is from that which cannot be affirmed by transmission because transmission being a proof, rather its establishment, is a corollary of His (Most High) integrity; since if lying were possible for Him, His confirmation of the Prophet by producing a miracle by his hands would not be [effective] because He is in effect saying “he is truthful in his claim” indicating his integrity, but when transmission is dependent on His integrity, this will not be established thereby. This also entails that the integrity of the claimant of prophethood cannot in essence be held with certainty due to the possibility of a miracle appearing on the hands of a liar so the door of prophethood will close and trust in his speech will be lifted, and this consequence is unacceptable so the cause is likewise [unacceptable]…

According to the Ash‘aris, there is certainty of not attributing Him (Most High) with anything bad but not rational impossibility, like all knowledge in which it is certain that the reality is one of two opposites despite the possibility of the other if it were supposed that it is the reality; just like the certainty of Makkah and Baghdad, i.e. their existence since their non-existence is not rationally impossible. Therefore, i.e. since the matter is such, trust [in His integrity] being lifted is not necessary because the possibility of something rationally does not entail not having certainty of its absence.

The disagreement occurring in the rational impossibility and possibility of this occurs in every deficiency: Is His (Most High) power absent or is it i.e. the deficiency contained within it i.e. His power, while it is certain that He will not do [it] i.e. while the situation is that it is certain that He will not act on that deficiency? The Hanafis and Mu‘tazila are [agreed] on the first i.e. that His power over it is absent due to the impossibility of His power being associated with impossibilities; and based on this they derive the impossibility of burdening [a soul] what cannot be borne and the impossibility of punishing the obedient.

His [i.e. Ibn al-Humam’s] words in al-Musayarah are: “Know that the Hanafis, since they made it impossible for Him to burden [a soul] that which cannot be borne, they prohibit more strongly that He will punish the good-doer who spent his life in obedience opposing the passions of his soul to please his Master, in the sense that He is exalted beyond that, for it is from the issue of transcendence, since making the good-doer and the sinner equal is unfitting in the dispositions of all intellects, and indeed Allah stated clearly its reprehensibility where He said: ‘What! Do those who seek after evil ways think that We shall hold them equal with those who believe and do righteous deeds,- that equal will be their life and their death? Ill is the judgment that they make.’ (Qur’an 45:21) Hence He considered it evil. This is regarding the possibility and impossibility for Him. As for occurrence (wuqu‘), it is certain of its absence, although according to the Ash‘aris it is because of the promise contrary to it, and according to the Hanafis and others, because of that and because of the reprehensibility of its opposite.”

We mentioned in al-Musayarah that the second [opinion], i.e. that He is able but He will definitely not do [it], is most inclusive [of the two opinions] in transcendence. That which is in al-Musayarah is: “The author of al-‘Umdah from our [Maturidi] scholars said: ‘He (Most High) is not described with power over oppression, foolishness and lying because the impossible is not included in the power and according to the Mu‘tazila, He has the power but will not do [them].’ There is no doubt that excluding power from what was mentioned, it is the position of the Mu‘tazila, and as for its establishment and then the impossibility from associating with them, it is more suitable to the position of the Ash‘aris. There is no doubt abstention from them is from the issue of transcendence, so the mind understands which of the two opinions is further in transcendence from ugliness: Is it power over them and then abstention from them by choice or abstention due to the absence of power, and the view of the most inclusive of the two opinions in transcendence is incumbent.”

This [being said], had Allah willed, a speaker would have said: It i.e. the dispute between the three groups is semantic; for the opinion of the Ash‘aris is that the intellect does not find it impossible for one who has the quality of divinity and sovereignty over everything to be described with oppression (jawr) and all that is not fitting since its outcome would be that he is an oppressive king and the intellect does not find it impossible for a king to be so i.e. oppressive; and it is not permissible for the Hanafis and Mu‘tazila to repudiate this [view].

This passage is sufficient to dismiss the claim that the view that lying is included in the divine power but contingently impossible is heretical or even disbelief. According to Ibn al-Humam it only differs semantically from the other view as its outcome is the same, and he states clearly that it is not permissible to repudiate it.

*Ibn al-Humam is referring to his following statement:

There is no disagreement [between the Ash’aris, Maturidis and Mu’tazila] on its i.e. the intellect’s perception of the quality of an action in the sense of [it being] a quality of perfection (kamal) as is sometimes meant by “goodness” (husn) and a quality of imperfection (naqs) as is sometimes meant by “badness” (qabih) like knowledge and ignorance, as is said: “Knowledge is good [and perfect]” and: “Ignorance is bad [and imperfect].”

And there is no [disagreement] on them [i.e. on describing an action with goodness and badness] in the sense of praise and dispraise i.e. there is also no disagreement on the intellect grasping goodness in that which is unconditionally termed good of that which is associated with praise in the practices of norms and customs and [the intellect grasping] badness in that which is unconditionally termed bad of that which is associated with dispraise in the practices of norms and customs.

Rather, the disagreement is on the intellect grasping goodness and badness regarding them i.e. good and bad, i.e. on that which they are unconditionally used in the sense of deserving His (Most High) praise and His reward for the doer of that action as is sometimes meant by “good” and their opposite i.e. in the sense of deserving His (Most High) dispraise and His punishment for the doer of that action as is sometimes meant by “bad.”

( وَلِلْحَنَفِيَّةِ وَالْمُعْتَزِلَةِ فِي الثَّالِثِ ) أَيْ امْتِنَاعِ تَعْذِيبِ الطَّائِعِ وَتَكْلِيفِ مَا لَا يُطَاقُ أَنَّهُ ( ثَبَتَ بِالْقَاطِعِ اتِّصَافُ الْفِعْلِ بِالْحُسْنِ وَالْقُبْحِ فِي نَفْسِ الْأَمْرِ فَيَمْتَنِعُ اتِّصَافُهُ ) أَيْ فِعْلِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى ( بِهِ ) أَيْ بِالْقُبْحِ ( تَعَالَى ) اللَّهُ عَنْ ذَلِكَ ( وَأَيْضًا فَالِاتِّفَاقُ عَلَى اسْتِقْلَالِ الْعَقْلِ بِدَرْكِهِمَا ) أَيْ الْحُسْنِ وَالْقُبْحِ ( بِمَعْنَى صِفَةِ الْكَمَالِ وَالنَّقْصِ كَالْعِلْمِ وَالْجَهْلِ عَلَى مَا مَرَّ فَبِالضَّرُورَةِ يَسْتَحِيلُ عَلَيْهِ ) أَيْ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى ( مَا أَدْرَكَ فِيهِ نَقْصٌ وَحِينَئِذٍ ) أَيْ وَحِينَ كَانَ مُسْتَحِيلًا عَلَيْهِ مَا أَدْرَكَ فِيهِ نَقْصٌ ( ظَهَرَ الْقَطْعُ بِاسْتِحَالَةِ اتِّصَافِهِ ) أَيْ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى ( بِالْكَذِبِ وَنَحْوِهِ تَعَالَى عَنْ ذَلِكَ وَأَيْضًا ) لَوْ لَمْ يَمْتَنِعْ اتِّصَافُ فِعْلِهِ بِالْقُبْحِ ( يَرْتَفِعُ الْأَمَانُ عَنْ صِدْقِ وَعْدِهِ وَ ) صِدْقِ ( خَبَرِ غَيْرِهِ ) أَيْ الْوَعْدِ مِنْهُ تَعَالَى ( وَ ) صِدْقِ ( النُّبُوَّةِ ) أَيْ لَمْ يَجْزِمْ بِصِدْقِهِ أَصْلًا لَا عَقْلًا لِأَنَّ الْفَرْضَ أَنْ لَا حُكْمَ لَهُ وَلَا شَرْعًا لِأَنَّهُ مِمَّا لَا يُمْكِنُ إثْبَاتُهُ بِالسَّمْعِ لِأَنَّ حُجِّيَّةَ السَّمْعِ بَلْ ثُبُوتُهُ فَرْعُ صِدْقِهِ تَعَالَى إذْ لَوْ جَازَ كَذِبُهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ تَصْدِيقُهُ لِلنَّبِيِّ بِإِظْهَارِ الْمُعْجِزَةِ عَلَى يَدَيْهِ فَإِنَّهُ فِي قُوَّةِ قَوْلِهِ هَذَا صَادِقٌ فِي دَعْوَاهُ دَالًّا عَلَى صِدْقِهِ وَإِذَا كَانَ السَّمْعُ مُتَوَقِّفًا عَلَى صِدْقِهِ لَمْ يَكُنْ إثْبَاتُهُ بِهِ وَيَلْزَمُ مِنْهُ أَنْ لَا يَجْزِمَ أَيْضًا بِصِدْقِ مُدَّعِي الرِّسَالَةِ أَصْلًا لِجَوَازِ إظْهَارِ الْمُعْجِزَةِ عَلَى يَدِ الْكَاذِبِ فَيَنْسَدُّ بَابُ النُّبُوَّةِ وَأَنْ يَرْفَعَ الثِّقَةَ عَنْ كَلَامِهِ وَاللَّازِمُ بَاطِلٌ فَالْمَلْزُومُ مِثْلُهُ وَلَعَلَّ الْمُصَنِّفَ إنَّمَا لَمْ يُفْرِدْ الْوَعِيدَ بِالذِّكْرِ كَمَا أَفْرَدَ الْوَعْدَ إمَّا اكْتِفَاءً بِدُخُولِهِ فِي خَبَرِ غَيْرِهِ وَإِمَّا مُوَافَقَةً لِلْأَشَاعِرَةِ فِي جَوَازِ الْخُلْفِ فِي الْوَعِيدِ كَمَا هُوَ ظَاهِرُ الْمَوَاقِفِ وَالْمَقَاصِدِ لِأَنَّهُ لَا يُعَدُّ نَقْصًا بَلْ هُوَ مِنْ بَابِ الْكَرَمِ وَقَدْ أَشْبَعْنَا الْكَلَامَ فِيهِ فِي حَلْبَةِ الْمُجِلِّي وَعَلَى هَذَا فَيَكُونُ قَوْلُهُ وَخَبَرُ غَيْرِهِ مَخْصُوصًا بِمَا سِوَاهُ ( وَعِنْدَ الْأَشَاعِرَةِ كَسَائِرِ الْخَلْقِ الْقَطْعُ بِعَدَمِ اتِّصَافِهِ ) تَعَالَى بِشَيْءٍ مِنْ الْقَبَائِحِ ( دُونَ الِاسْتِحَالَةِ الْعَقْلِيَّةِ كَسَائِرِ الْعُلُومِ الَّتِي يُقْطَعُ فِيهَا بِأَنَّ الْوَاقِعَ أَحَدُ النَّقِيضَيْنِ مَعَ عَدَمِ اسْتِحَالَةِ الْآخَرِ لَوْ قُدِّرَ ) أَنَّهُ الْوَاقِعُ ( كَالْقَطْعِ بِمَكَّةَ وَبَغْدَادَ ) أَيْ بِوُجُودِهِمَا فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُحِيلُ عَدَمُهُمَا عَقْلًا ( وَحِينَئِذٍ ) أَيْ وَحِينَ كَانَ الْأَمْرُ عَلَى هَذَا ( لَا يَلْزَمُ ارْتِفَاعُ الْأَمَانِ ) لِأَنَّهُ لَا يَلْزَمُ مِنْ جَوَازِ الشَّيْءِ عَقْلًا عَدَمُ الْجَزْمِ بِعَدَمِهِ ( وَالْخِلَافُ ) الْجَارِي فِي الِاسْتِحَالَةِ وَالْإِمْكَانِ الْعَقْلِيِّ لِهَذَا ( جَارٍ فِي كُلِّ نَقِيصَةٍ أَقُدْرَتُهُ ) تَعَالَى ( عَلَيْهَا مَسْلُوبَةٌ أَمْ هِيَ ) أَيْ النَّقِيصَةُ ( بِهَا ) أَيْ بِقُدْرَتِهِ ( مَشْمُولَةٌ وَالْقَطْعُ بِأَنَّهُ لَا يَفْعَلُ ) أَيْ وَالْحَالُ الْقَطْعُ بِعَدَمِ فِعْلِ تِلْكَ النَّقِيصَةِ ( وَالْحَنَفِيَّةُ وَالْمُعْتَزِلَةُ عَلَى الْأَوَّلِ ) أَيْ أَنَّ قُدْرَتَهُ عَلَيْهَا مَسْلُوبَةٌ لِاسْتِحَالَةِ تَعَلُّقِ قُدْرَتِهِ بِالْمُحَالَّاتِ ( وَعَلَيْهِ فَرَّعُوا امْتِنَاعَ تَكْلِيفِ مَا لَا يُطَاقُ وَ ) وَامْتِنَاعَ ( تَعْذِيبِ الطَّائِعِ ) وَلَفْظُهُ فِي الْمُسَايَرَةِ وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ الْحَنَفِيَّةَ لَمَّا اسْتَحَالُوا عَلَيْهِ تَكْلِيفَ مَا لَا يُطَاقُ فَهُمْ لِتَعْذِيبِ الْمُحْسِنِ الَّذِي اسْتَغْرَقَ عُمْرَهُ فِي الطَّاعَةِ مُخَالِفًا لِهَوَى نَفْسِهِ فِي رِضَا مَوْلَاهُ أَمْنَعُ بِمَعْنَى أَنَّهُ يَتَعَالَى عَنْ ذَلِكَ فَهُوَ مِنْ بَابِ التَّنْزِيهَاتِ إذْ التَّسْوِيَةُ بَيْنَ ” – ص 97 -” الْمُسِيءِ وَالْمُحْسِنِ غَيْرُ لَائِقٍ بِالْحِكْمَةِ فِي فِطَرِ سَائِرِ الْعُقُولِ وَقَدْ نَصَّ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى عَلَى قُبْحِهِ حَيْثُ قَالَ ( أَمْ حَسِبَ الَّذِينَ اجْتَرَحُوا السَّيِّئَاتِ أَنْ نَجْعَلَهُمْ كَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ سَوَاءً مَحْيَاهُمْ وَمَمَاتُهُمْ سَاءَ مَا يَحْكُمُونَ ) فَجَعَلَهُ سَيِّئًا هَذَا فِي التَّجْوِيزِ عَلَيْهِ وَعَدَمِهِ أَمَّا الْوُقُوعُ فَمَقْطُوعٌ بِعَدَمِهِ غَيْرَ أَنَّهُ عِنْدَ الْأَشَاعِرَةِ لِلْوَعْدِ بِخِلَافِهِ وَعِنْدَ الْحَنَفِيَّةِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ لِذَلِكَ وَلِقُبْحِ خِلَافِهِ ( وَذَكَرْنَا فِي الْمُسَايَرَةِ ) بِطَرِيقِ الْإِشَارَةِ فِي الْجُمْلَةِ ( أَنَّ الثَّانِي ) أَيْ أَنَّهُ يُقَدَّرُ وَلَا يُفْعَلُ قَطْعًا ( أَدْخَلَ فِي التَّنْزِيهِ ) فَإِنَّ الَّذِي فِي الْمُسَايَرَةِ ثُمَّ قَالَ يَعْنِي صَاحِبَ الْعُمْدَةِ مِنْ مَشَايِخِنَا وَلَا يُوصَفُ تَعَالَى بِالْقُدْرَةِ عَلَى الظُّلْمِ وَالسَّفَهِ وَالْكَذِبِ لِأَنَّ الْمُحَالَ لَا يَدْخُلُ تَحْتَ الْقُدْرَةِ وَعِنْدَ الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ يَقْدِرُ وَلَا يَفْعَلُ ا هـ وَلَا شَكَّ أَنَّ سَلْبَ الْقُدْرَةِ عَمَّا ذَكَرَ هُوَ مَذْهَبُ الْمُعْتَزِلَةِ وَأَمَّا ثُبُوتُهَا ثُمَّ الِامْتِنَاعُ عَنْ مُتَعَلِّقِهَا فَبِمَذْهَبِ الْأَشَاعِرَةِ أَلْيَقُ وَلَا شَكَّ أَنَّ الِامْتِنَاعَ عَنْهَا مِنْ بَابِ التَّنْزِيهَاتِ فَيَسْبُرُ الْعَقْلُ فِي أَنَّ أَيْ الْفَصْلَيْنِ أَبْلَغُ فِي التَّنْزِيهِ عَنْ الْفَحْشَاءِ أَهْوَ الْقُدْرَةُ عَلَيْهِ مَعَ الِامْتِنَاعِ عَنْهُ مُخْتَارًا أَوْ الِامْتِنَاعُ لِعَدَمِ الْقُدْرَةِ فَيَجِبُ الْقَوْلُ بِأَدْخَلِ الْقَوْلَيْنِ فِي التَّنْزِيهِ ا هـ ( هَذَا وَلَوْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ قَالَ قَائِلٌ هُوَ ) أَيْ النِّزَاعُ بَيْنَ الْفِرَقِ الثَّلَاثَةِ ( لَفْظِيٌّ فَقَوْلُ الْأَشَاعِرَةِ هُوَ إنَّهُ لَا يَسْتَحِيلُ الْعَقْلُ كَوْنَ مَنْ اتَّصَفَ بِالْأُلُوهِيَّةِ وَالْمِلْكِ لِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ مُتَّصِفًا بِالْجَوْرِ وَمَا لَا يَنْبَغِي إذْ حَاصِلُهُ أَنَّهُ مَالِكٌ جَائِرٌ وَلَا يُحِيلُ الْعَقْلَ وُجُودُ مَالِكٍ كَذَلِكَ ) أَيْ جَائِرٌ ( وَلَا يَسَعُ الْحَنَفِيَّةُ وَالْمُعْتَزِلَةُ إنْكَارَهُ

Ghulam Rasul Sa’idi Refuting Barelwi Creed

October 19, 2012

Taken from ayha forums:

These are extracts Prophet saw without Wahee did ijtihad, that can be wrong in some cases, and also Prophet saw said something about Mussa waking up first, then he was told he would be first to raise from grave.

It is taken from bralwi scholar Ghulam Rasool Sa’eedi’s explanation of Saheeh Muslim, where he also quotes from Nawawi, Al Qaree, Abdel Haqq Dehlawi, Ayni and others

All praise is due to Allaah, we praise him, seek his aid and forgiveness. We seek refuge fron our

evils selves and wicked deeds. Who so ever Allaah guides non can misguide him, and whom so

ever Allaah misguides non can guide him.

In the name of Allaah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

Assalamo ‘Alykum Wa Rahmatullah hi Wa Barakatuhoo.

Brother read the works of Shiekh Ghulam Rasool Sa’eedi. He is shaykhul Hadeeth in Darul Ulum Na’eemiyah, Karachi. He has written a sharh of Saheeh Muslim in Urdu.

Here are exact ahadith:

Saheeh Muslim, Kitab Jihad

Chapter 18: THE HELP WITH ANGELS IN BADR AND THE PERMISSIBILITY OF THE SPOILS OF WAR

It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Umar b. al-Khattab who said: When it was the day on which the Battle of Badr was fought, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) cast a glance at the infidels, and they were one thousand while his own Companions were three hundred and nineteen. The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) turned (his face) towards the Qibla Then he stretched his hands and began his supplication to his Lord:” O Allah, accomplish for me what Thou hast promised to me. O Allah, bring about what Thou hast promised to me. O Allah, if this small band of Muslims is destroyed. Thou will not be worshipped on this earth.” He continued his supplication to his Lord, stretching his hands, facing the Qibla, until his mantle slipped down from his shoulders. So Abu Bakr came to him, picked up his mantle and put it on his shoulders. Then he embraced him from behind and said:. Prophet of Allah, this prayer of yours to your Lord will suffice you, and He will fulfil for you what He has promised you. So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed (the Qur’anic verse):” When ye appealed to your Lord for help, He responded to your call (saying): I will help you with one thousand angels coming in succession.” So Allah helped him with angels.

Abu Zumail said that the badith was narrated to him by Ibn ‘Abbas who said: While on that day a Muslim was chasing a disbeliever who was going ahead of him, he heard over him’ the swishing of the whip and the voice of the rider saying: Go ahead, Haizi’m! He glanced at the polytheist who had (now) fallen down on his back. When he looked at him (carefully he found that) there was a scar on his nose and his face was torn as if it had been lashed with a whip, and had turned green with its poison. An Ansari came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and related this (event) to him. He said: You have told the truth. This was the help from the third heaven. The Muslims that day (i. e. the day of the Battle of Badr) killed seventy persons and captured seventy. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (Allah be pleased with them): What is your opinion about these captives? Abu Bakr said: They are our kith and kin. I think you should release them after getting from them a ransom. This will be a source of strength to us against the infidels. It is quite possible that Allah may guide them to Islam. Then the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: What is your opinion. Ibn Khattab? He said: Messenger of Allah. I do not hold the same opinion as Abu Bakr. I am of the opinion that you should hand them over to us so that we may cut off their heads. Hand over ‘Aqil to ‘Ali that he may cut off his head, and hand over such and such relative to me that I may but off his head. They are leaders of the disbelievers and veterans among them. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) approved the opinion of Abu Bakr and did not approve what I said The next day when I came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), I found that both he and Abu Bakr were sitting shedding tears. I said: Messenger of Allah, why are you and your Companion shedding tears? Tell me the reason. For I will weep ate, if not, I will at least pretend to weep in sympathy with you. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I weep for what has happened to your companions for taking ransom (from the prisoners). I was shown the torture to which they were subjected. It was brought to me as close as this tree. (He pointed to a tree close to him.) Then God revealed the verse:” It is not befitting for a Prophet that he should take prisoners until the force of the disbelievers has been crushed…” ( surah Anfal, Ayat 67-70) to the end of the verse:” so eat ye the spoils of war, (it is) lawful and pure. So Allah made booty lawful for them.” Hadeeth about prisoners of Badr Vol 5 p 343.

The shaykh explains that it was a mistake of Ijtihad ( Ijtihadi khata) and that the Prophet saw would have thawab for this ijtihad.

Saheeh Muslim Kitab Fadahil Nabi saw

Chapter 35: IT IS OBLIGATORY TO FOLLOW THE PROPHET (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM) IN ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO RELIGION, BUT ONE IS FREE TO ACT ON ONE’S OWN OPINION IN MATTERS WHICH PERTAIN TO TECHNICAL SKILL

Musa b. Talha reported: I and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) happened to pass by people near the date-palm trees. He (the Holy Prophet) said: What are these people doing? They said: They are grafting, i. e. they combine the male with the female (tree) and thus they yield more fruit. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I do not find it to be of any use. The people were informed about it and they abandoned this practice. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) (was later) on informed (that the yield had dwindled), whereupon he said: If there is any use of it, then they should do it, for it was just a personal opinion of mine, and do not go after my personal opinion; but when I say to you anything on behalf of Allah, then do accept it, for I do not attribute lie to Allah, the Exalted and Glorious.

Rafi’ b. Khadij reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to Medina and the people had been grafting the trees. He said: What are you doing? They said: We are grafting them, whereupon he said: It may perhaps be good for you if you do not do that, so they abandoned this practice (and the date-palms) began to yield less fruit. They made a mention of it (to the Holy Prophet), whereupon he said: I am a human being, so when I command you about a thing pertaining to religion, do accept it, and when I command you about a thing out of my personal opinion, keep it in mind that I am a human being. ‘Ikrima reported that he said something like this.

Anas reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) happened to pass by the people who had been busy in grafting the trees. Thereupon he said: If you were not to do it, it might be good for you. (So they abandoned this practice) and there was a decline in the yield. He (the Holy Prophet) happened to pass by them (and said): What has gone wrong with your trees? They said: You said so and so. Thereupon he said: You have better knowledge (of a technical skill) in the affairs of the world. (Hadeeth about Dates : vol 6 p 827)

Shaykh Sa’eedi quotes saying of Nawawi, Mulla Ali Qari and Abdel Haqq Dehlawi that this decision was the Prophet’s Ijtihad, and without Wahee, the Prophet saw makes Ijtihad that can be right or wrong.

Saheeh Muslim, Chapter fadhail of Musa Aley Salam

Abu Fluraira reported that two persons, one from amongst the Jews and the other from amongst the Muslims, fell into dispute and began to abuse one another. The Muslim said: By Him Who chose Muhammad (may peace be upon him) in the worlds. And the Jew said: By Him Who chose Moses in the worlds. Thereupon the Muslim lifted his hand and slapped at the face of the Jew. The Jew went to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and told him about his affair and the affair of the Muslim. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) laid: Don’t make me superior to Moses for mankind will swoon and I would be the ‘first to recover from it and Moses would be at that time seizing the side of the Throne and I do not know (whether) he would swoon and would recover before me or Allah would make an exception for him. (Hadeeth about Prophet saw raising first from grave : Vol 6 p 705)

The shaykh explains why the Prophet the contradiction between a hadeeth of Muslim saying the Prophet saw would be first to be raised from grave and the Hadeeth that Mussa aley salam would be first to wake up. He quotes shaykh BadruDeen Ayni Hanafi saying that the Prophet saw did not know first that he would be first, and then he was told.


Green Turbans are an Innovation – Mufti Ghulam Sarwar Qadri al-Barelwi

October 7, 2012

It has become a symbol of the Barelwis, especially Barelwis associated with Dawate Islami, to wear green turbans. Whenever you visit them, they wear green turbans and even have green flags all over the place. Their founder, Ilyas Qadri, also does the same.

The fact remains that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) never wore a green turban. It is not proven in a single authentic hadith that the Prophet wore one. On the contrary, we have come to know that the army of Dajjal will wear green turbans!

Now we have a Barelwi scholar from their midst, stating that wearing the green turban is an innovation, especially how Barelwis from Dawate Islami have made this colour their mark.

The book of Mufti Ghulam Sarwar Qadri can be downloaded here: http://www.4shared.com/zip/uPEo88vn/sabz_imama__-_fatwa_from_a_bar.html

The book was also linked here, on a youtube video made by a Barelwi highlighting the difference of opinion on this issue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CO&feature=related&hl=es-419&v=HFRDzPqDeiw U kunt het oorspronkelijk boek hier downloaden:


Istighathah: Seeking aid from other than Allah

October 1, 2012

Du’a (supplication and invoking aid) is worship (‘ibadah). Allah Most High says in the Qur’an,

“And your Lord says, ‘Call upon Me; I will respond to you’. Indeed, those who disdain My worship will enter Hell [rendered] contemptible.” (Al-Ghafir, 60)

In this verse Allah has equated du’a to worship.

The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) is reported to have said, “Du’a is worship, and then he recited the following verse of the Qur’an, ‘And your Lord says, Call upon Me; I will respond to you. Indeed, those who disdain My worship will enter Hell [rendered] contemptible’.” (Sunan Al-Tirmidhi, 2:173; Sunan Abi Dawud, 1:208; Sunan Ibn Majah, p.208; Musnad Tayalisi, p.108; Al-Mustadrak, p.491; Al-Adab al-Mufrad, p.105; Tafsir Ibn Kathir; under 40:60)

It also comes in another hadith, “Nothing is dearer to Allah than du’a.” (Al-Mustadrak, p.490; Al-Adab al-Mufrad, p.105) It is mentioned in another narration, “The noblest act of worship (‘ibadah) is du’a.” (Al-Adab al-Mufrad, p.105) The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, “One who doesn’t call (yad’u) Allah, He gets angry with him.” (Al-Mustadrak, p.491) And it comes in another version, “Allah is angry with someone who does not ask (yus’al) of Him.” (Al-Mustadrak, p.491)

Yet in another narration it says, “Du’a is the weapon of the believer and the pillar of the religion.” (Al-Mustadrak, p.492 – Al-Hakim and Al-Dhahabi have classified this narration as authentic)

Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “The most excellent worship is du’a.” (Al-Mustadrak, p.491 – classified as authentic by Al-Hakim and Al-Dhahabi)

It is apparent from the clear verse of the Qur’an and authentic narrations mentioned above that to make du’a to the creation (i.e. istighathah) is not permissible, since to make du’a is worship and indeed worship is only the right of Allah. It is therefore clear that that Allah is the sole Being deserving of du’a and indeed all worship.

Thus the practice of istighathah – which is to call for such help from the creation, which is beyond their natural means – would be impermissible and a possible cause of shirk. And this is because asking such help from the creation, which is not in the ambit of natural means or proven through authentic texts, implicitly attributes such qualities to the creation that in reality solely belong to Allah.

‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar (d. 1430H / may Allah have mercy on him) mentions that seeking help is of two types: (a) Within the means (ma taht al-asbab) and (b) beyond the means (ma fawq al-asbab).

Regarding the difference between help which is within the normal means and beyond normal means, he explains that while the first type is established through the Qur’an, hadith, the Companions (Sahabah) and the Pious Predecessors (Salaf), the second type has no basis in Islam and has been declared haram and shirk in Shari’ah by jurists.[1] The seeking of the latter type of help is only restricted to Allah. (Guldastah Tawhid, p.135. Also see his Tafsir lecture of Surah Fatihah)

Similarly, Shaykh Abu Bakr bin Muhammad ‘Ali Khawqir (d. 1349H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes, “Shirk is the belief that those besides Allah have an effect [ability] on things above the normal capabilities granted to them by Allah and also that something possesses a power which is beyond the capabilities of the normal creation.” (Ma la Budda Minhu fi Umur al-Din, p .11, from Tanqid-i-Matin, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar)

Shaykh Khawqir has thus shown that shirk is the belief that something other than Allah has an effect beyond that which Allah has granted him from the apparent means, and that something possesses a power outside the realm of the abilities of created beings.

In this article we will address the claim of some of those who practice istighathah that they do not intend to attribute independence or the status of godhead to saints but rather to Allah. We will show that this in reality is not much different than the mentality of the idolaters of Makkah. They too did not attribute independence or status of deity to their idols but rather used them as a means to gain closeness to Allah.

We will secondly demonstrate that such calling on the deceased for help implies several forms of shirk such as assuming that they are present and seeing (hadhir and nadhir), possess knowledge of the unseen (‘ilm al-ghayb), etc. – attributes that are unique to Allah and not established for anyone else. We will thirdly present the verdicts of some leading scholars on the practice of istighathah.

Lastly, we will conclude by exonerating Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani from the claims of some that he permitted the practice of istighathah, and we will show that, to the contrary, he rather promulgated strict tawhid.

[1] Imam Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dahlawi (d. 1174H / may Allah have mercy on him) has extensively refuted the practice of istighathah in his numerous works. He writes while distinguishing between ma taht al-asbab and ma fawq al-asbab, “He [Allah] is Everlasting, All-Hearing, All-Seeing;[2] He has no match and peer. He has no partner in necessary per se (wujub al-wujud) neither in deserving worship nor in creating and managing (tadbir), so none deserves worship, i.e. highest reverence, but He, and none cures an ill, supplies livelihood, removes distress, but He, in a sense that He addresses the thing with kun fayakun (Be! and it becomes). This is different than in the sense of usual causation (tasbib), as it is said that the physician cured the patient, the emir gave livelihood to the soldiers; so this is different though they are similar in wording.” (Tafhimat al-Ilahiyyah, 1:145)

‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar writes in Tanqid-i-Matin bar Tafsir Na’im al-Din, p.25, while explaining the above quote, that it is clear that seeking outward help with means is lawful, as [is shown] when Sayyiduna Dhu ‘l-Qarnayn (may Allah be pleased with him) approached the place of the dam, he heard people complaining about the destruction by Gog and Magog and was requested to build a dam across the pass so that they could be protected against their plundering. They offered him financial help as well. Sayyiduna Dhu ‘l-Qarnayn said he did not need money; Allah had given him plenty. Rather he asked them to provide him with physical help. This is not the [type of] help that those who perform istighathah seek from the prophets, saints and martyrs, who are neither alive in this world nor near. He further says that it is not befitting for scholars to use such examples to prove istimdad since such examples involve asking for help from the living which is within the normal means of the creation.

Many among the proponents of calling the dead for help believe or unintentionally imply that the prophets and saints have the power of kun fayakun (Be! and it becomes) and ask them for help with this belief. Imam Shah Waliullah Dahlawi writes in refutation of these extremists, “Shirk is to affirm the special attributes of Allah (Exalted is He) for [those] beside Him, such as free-disposal (tasarruf) in the affairs of the universe with the intention expressed as kun fayakun… [The polytheists] used to ask those close (mutaqarribin) to Allah for help in important matters under the power (qudrah) of kun fayakun and the polytheists used to carve their images from stone, copper, glass, etc. and make the souls of the dead the focus of their deep attention.” (Al-Fawz al-Kabir fi-Usul al-Tafsir, p.3-4)

[2] Imam Ahmad bin Idris Shihab al-Din Qarafi al-Maliki (d. 684H / may Allah have mercy on him) has also refuted those Sufis who assign the power of kun fayakun to the creation. He writes, “The second type is that a person making du’a (supplication) is extremely stupid and daring, leading him to ask Allah to grant him special powers for running the universe which are exclusively under the power and will of Allah, such as creation, annihilation, and predestination. Common sense and logic indicate that it is impossible for these divine powers to be for anyone besides Allah. This means that such a request is in fact asking for partnership with Allah in his kingdom and this is akin to disbelief (kufr). Many ignorant Sufis have fallen into this trap and they claim that so-and-so was given the word ‘kun‘ (Be!) and they ask to be given this divine command, which Allah mentions in the Qur’an, ‘Our command for a matter when we will it is to say to it ‘be’ and it becomes’. They do not understand the meaning of this phrase in the speech of Allah and they also do not understand the meaning of this divine phrase being ‘given’ to someone, if that could be possible. This is a matter that is impossible to achieve according to the qualified scholars, let alone the concocting Sufis. This causes these Sufis to be destroyed in a way that they do not even realize. They believe that they are among those close to Allah, when in reality they are far from Him. May Allah save us from evil trials and those things that lead up to them. May Allah save us from ignorance and that which leads to it.” (Anwar al-Buruq fi Anwa’ al-Furuq, 4:446)

[3] It may be said that those who perform istighathah do not consider the power and ability of the saints from whom du’a is sought to be equal to Allah, but rather they believe that their ability is given to them by Allah. This claim is not sufficient to justify istighathah since the polytheists of Makkah also never held their deities as equal to Allah. They too believed that the power of their deities was bestowed to them by Allah.

Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes regarding this notion, “Know that there is no one in the whole universe who ascribes a partner with Allah who is at the same level with Allah in existence (wujud), power (qudrah), knowledge (‘ilm), or wisdom (hikmah). Not one person until today has been found [who believes that anyone is on the same level as Allah] except the Zoroastrians…” (Tafsir al-Kabir, 2:112, from Itmam al-Burhan fi Rad Tawdih al-Bayan, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar)

Imam Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dahlawi (d. 1239H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes, “It should be kept in mind that there is not one person in the universe who associates anyone with Allah at the same level in existence (wujud), knowledge (‘ilm), power (qudrah), and wisdom (hikmah).” (Tasfir-i-’Azizi, p.162)

Imam Shah Waliullah Dahlawi writes in his magnum opus Hujjat Allah al-Balighah, chapter 74 titled “The explanation of what had been the condition of the People of Jahiliyyah which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) reformed”, “Among the principles agreed upon among them [the people of the Ignorant Age] was the belief that God, may He be exalted, had no partner in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the substances in them, and that He had no partner in managing the great affairs and that no one could reject His order nor frustrate His decree once it had become settled and decided, and this is [proven by] His saying, may He be exalted, ‘If you asked them who created the heavens and the earth they would answer Allah’, [31:25], and His saying, ‘If God’s chastisement comes upon you, will you call upon any other than God, if you speak truly? No; upon Him you will call, and He will remove that for which you call upon Him if he wills, and you will forget whatever partners you associated with Him,’ [6:41-42], and His saying, ‘All upon whom you call for help lose their way except Allah.’ [That is, these others fail in times of crisis or disaster] but it was due to their deviance in religion that they held that there were personages among the angels and the sprits who could manage [the affairs of] the people of the earth, except for the major matters…”[3]

Shah Waliullah further writes about the beliefs of early polytheists in chapter 37 titled Tawhid, “[The second group] are polytheists… They also said that these beings [righteous servants of God] hear, see, intercede for their worshipers  manage their affairs, and give them help; and they carved stones in their names and made the stones a focus for directing their worship towards these beings.”[4]

Hafiz Ibn Kathir (d. 774H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes, “And yet, they have associated partners with Him in divinity (ilahiyyah), so they worshiped others with Him in spite of their admission that those whom they worshiped will not be able to create a thing, they do not own anything and do not domineer anything, but they believed that these idols take them closer to Him.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 5:488)

‘Allamah Muhyi al-Din Shaykh Zadah (d. 951H / Allah have mercy on him) writes, “I.e. the idols are not equal to Allah, neither in reality which is obvious, nor according to their beliefs; since they believe that these [idols] are intermediaries taking them nearer to Allah as per their belief, not that they are adversary equals [to Allah].” (Hashiyyah ‘ala al-Baydawi, 1:383)

According to Islamic theologians, the polytheists of Makkah didn’t believe that idols were gods but merely referred to them as such. Imam al-Mutakallimin ‘Allamah Sayyid Sharif Jurjani al-Hanafi (d. 816H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes, “Know that there is no opposition regarding this issue except that of the sanawiyyah (Zoroastrian dualists), not the wasniyyah (idol-worshipers). Verily they [the polytheists] do not believe that there are two necessarily-existent deities, nor do they ascribe the attributes of divinity (ilahiyyah) to the idols even though they referred to them with the word ‘aalihah‘ (deities), rather they adopted them as statues of the Prophets or the pious or the angels or the celestial objects, and adopted revering them in a manner of worship, using them as a means of reaching the One who is actually Divine [Allah].” (Sharh al-Mawaqif, p.580)

[4] ‘Allamah ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi[5] (d. 1304H / may Allah have mercy on him) was asked, “What is the ruling regarding that person who thinks that saints know and hear the call from far and near and [he] seeks their help with the wording which are used for those present and make vows for them and says that my vow is for them?”

He replied, “The belief of this person is corrupt (fasid) and there is fear of disbelief (kufr) of that person because the hearing of saints from far is not proven [in Shari’ah]. And knowledge of all of the matters (juziyat) at all times is only specific to Allah Most High. It is stated in Fatawa Bazzaziyyah that whoever says that souls of the pious (mashayikh) are hadhir is a disbeliever (kafir), and it is written in the same book that whoever performed nikah by making Allah and His Messenger to be witnesses become kafir. [This is] because he assumed that the Holy Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) is knower of the unseen…” (Majmu’ah al-Fatawa, 1:46-47)

It was further asked, “It is the practice of the general public of this city that in the time of distress they call upon the prophets and saints for help (madad) from far, and believe that they are hadhir and nadhir, and when we call them they hear us and make du’a concerning our needs. Is this [type of istimdad] permitted or not?”

At this the reply came, “This type [of seeking aid] is not merely haram but also shirk as in this [asking for such help] is considered [i.e. implied] that those besides Allah have knowledge of the unseen (‘ilm al-ghayb) and this belief is manifest shirk. Because in Shari’ah, shirk is to associate anyone with Allah in His essence (dhat) and specific attributes (sifat), and knowledge of the unseen (‘ilm al-ghayb) is the specific attribute of Allah as it is mentioned in the books of ‘Aqa’id…” (Majmu’ah al-Fatawa, 1:45-46)

Another such query stated, “If a person believes that Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani (may Allah have mercy on him) has the power to hear anyone who calls him from anywhere and turns his attention towards his [the caller’s] situation. How is this belief according to the principles of Shari’ah?”

The answer came, “This belief is not only against the ‘aqa‘id of the people of Islam but leads to shirk…” (Majmu’ah al-Fatawa, 1:73)

And he wrote in a reply to a question regarding seeking aid with the wording, “Ya Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir shayy’an lillah“,

“It is binding and necessary (wajib) to abstain from these sort of recitations. Firstly, [because] this recitation consist of the wording ‘shayy’an lillah‘ and certain jurists consider these wording disbelief (kufr)…

Secondly, such recitation consists of calling on the dead from a distance and it is not established from the Shari’ah that saints have the power to listen to a call from far distance. However, it is established [from Shari’ah] that the people of the grave hear the salam of the visitors to their graves. But to consider that anyone beside Allah is hadhir nadhir at all times and is aware of the evident and hidden, is shirk… And our ‘ulama have said that anyone who believes that the souls of the saints are hadhir and ‘alim (knowing), is a kafir. Although, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani (may Allah have mercy on him) is one of the great luminaries of the Ummah al-Muhammadiyah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and his virtues and excellent qualities are innumerable, but it is not established that he hears the distressed caller from a distance. And to hold a belief that he is aware of his disciple’s affairs all the time and hear their calls, is shirk.” (Mujmu’ah al-Fatawa, 2:189-190)

[5] Hakim al-Ummah Mawlana Shah Ashraf ‘Ali Thanawi (d. 1362H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes in Bawadir al-Nawadir, p.706, his last book, “The detail [with regards to this issue] is that tawassul through a creation was explained in three ways: First is to make du’a and seek aid (istighathah) in the way that it is in the religions of the polytheists. This is forbidden by consensus (ijma’). As to whether it is manifest (jali) shirk or not, then its criterion is [that if] the person doing it has the belief that the person being called upon has istiqlal in bringing about an effect, then this is shirk that constitutes kufr…

And second is to request him [the person being called upon to make du’a to Allah], and this is permissible through those from whom it is possible to seek for du’a, but such possibility is not proven through any evidence for those who have passed away. So we shall restrict this type of tawassul to those who are alive.

And the third is to make du’a to Allah through the blessing (barakah) of an accepted (maqbul) creation and this is allowed according to the majority of scholars…”

From the above it is clear that according to Mawlana Thanawi istighathah from the creation is, at minimum, haram by consensus under all circumstances, and disbelief with the belief of istiqlal. It is a clear rebuttal of those circles who try in vain to highjack the verdicts of righteous scholars to suit their fancies.

Explaining istiqlal, ‘Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar writes in Izalat al-Rayb ‘an ‘Aqidah ‘Ilm al-Ghayb from Fatawa Rashidiyyah, “Knowledge of the unseen sometimes is available to the prophets, it is also from the same kind, i.e. it is not derived from any power and ability gifted to these holy men, rather it is an effect of the exclusive attribute of Allah that He manifested there, like the movement of the pen is due to the movement of the writer.” (Fatawa Rashidiyyah, 3:23)

He adds from Fatawa Rashidiyyah, “As far as terms like ‘personal knowledge’ (‘ilm al-dhati) and ‘free choice’ (tasarruf istiqlal), etc. in relation to the disbelievers in the writings of scholars like Shah Waliullah Dahlawi and Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dahlawi are concerned, this usage was to relay that the disbelievers used to establish the same power and choice (for the idols) through Allah which was the causative factor of their polytheism; otherwise the Arab polytheists believed that the idols and their attributes were created by Allah, and they were granted power and choice from Him, as we have elaborated before. As far as using the word ‘free choice’ is concerned it is obvious that the polytheists, due to their belief in the entrusting of power and choice, maintained that these acts of divine characteristic are included in actions and matters coming under one’s power, and that the self-determined actions of servants come under the regulation of freewill and thus they deserve praise and criticism, though all actions of servants are based upon the power gifted by Allah.” (Fatawa Rashidiyyah, 3:24)

‘Allamah Sarfaraz writes while explaining the above quotes, “It is very clear that by ‘personal’ and ‘independent’ it is meant that human beings have independent power on good and bad, belief and disbelief, obedience and disobedience, etc. on which they deserve praise and condemnation as well as reward and punishment. Likewise, the polytheists believed that Allah Most High grants attributes of ghayb (unseen) to some of his servants and they are independent in acting freely therein just like the self-determined actions (af’al ikhtiyariyyah).” (Izalat al-Rayb, p.33)

He further writes distinguishing between istiqlal and ghayr istiqlal, “By given (a’tai) and dependent (ghayr mustaqil), they mean that like mu’jizaat and karamaat, they need the power of Allah in partial matters as well; even in these matters they do not have such a power as they have in the normal actions of the servants (af’al ikhtiyariyyah). For example, a pen writes in the hand of a writer, but it requires the movement of the writer in writing each single word. In other words, it can be said that the writer has manifested his action of writing through the pen, not that the pen has got power of writing like a man; since a pen cannot be a writer unless it carries the human characteristics… Except human actions, since human beings have independent (mustaqil) and inherent power, though this power and choice is gifted by Allah.” (Izalat al-Rayb, p.34)

It is clear that mustaqil (istiqlal) is used in the same sense as normal everyday actions (af’al ikhtiyariyyah) while ghayr mustaqil for mu’jizaat and karamaat in the statements of scholars.

Some circles, in desperation, use poetry as their last resort to prove or disprove ‘aqa‘id. Mawlana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanawi was asked about a qasidah by Mawlana Ilahi Bakhsh Kandhalwi (d. 1245H / may Allah have mercy on him), produced in the book Shiyam al-Habib fi Zikr Khasa’is al-Habib, which innovators use to prove istimdad, etc. Mawlana Thanwi replied about this notion, “[Uttering such statements] with the intention of isti’anat and istighathah or with the belief of hadhir nadhir is impermissible. And without any of these [above mentioned] beliefs if it is solely to display one’s desire and delight it is permissible. This permissibility is granted because the purpose of reading poetry is usually to display one’s desire and delight. However, in places where things are seen contrary to it, this permissibility will cease.” (Imdad al-Fatawa, 5:385)

[6] Mufti Muhammad Shafi’ (d. 1396H / may Allah have mercy on him) has refuted the practice of seeking aid from the creation at numerous places in his marvelous tafsir, Ma’arif al-Qur’an. He has equated istighathah with prostrating (sajdah) to the creation. Under the verse – “And that masajid (mosques) belong to Allah; so, do not invoke anyone along with Allah.” (72:18) – he writes, “And therefore we are not permitted to call on anyone for help beside Allah, like the Jews and Christians [who] commit shirk in their places of worship… The word masajid could also have another sense. It could be the plural of masjad, with the letter jim carrying fath, in which case it would be masdar mimi (a type of infinitive) and means ‘to prostrate or prostration’. The verse in this sense would signify that worship is reserved exclusively for Allah. It is not permitted to prostrate to anyone, and if he calls on anyone else besides Allah for help (i’anat), it is as though he is prostrating to him which must be avoided.”

[7] ‘Allamah Ahmad bin ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Rumi (d. 1041H / may Allah have mercy on him), an erudite scholar from the people of Akhisar in present-day Turkey, also addressed this issue in Majalis al-Abrar wa Masalik al-Akhyar.[6] He writes in chapter three concerning how Satan tricks those who ask the creation for help, “…And there are those people who perform istighathah from the creation, regardless of whether they are alive or dead, Muslim or non-Muslim. And Satan takes the form of the person whose help has been sought and fulfills the need of the person who has sought help. So, these Muslims think that Satan is the same person who they called for help. However, it is not as they believe. In reality, it is Satan who misguides them when they assign a partner to Allah. For, Satan leads astray the children of Adam (may the peace of Allah be upon him) according to his ability. So, when Satan helps them according to their needs, he is harming them much more than he can benefit them. Hence, that person who is a Muslim, when he seeks aid from those mashayikh who he believes in, Satan comes to him in the shape of that shaykh because Satan often takes the forms of the pious but he does not have the power to take the form of the Prophet of the Cherisher of the Worlds (Allah bless him and give him peace). Then, indeed that shaykh whose help has been sought, if he is from among those of knowledge then the Satan will not inform him of the saying of his companions who sought his help. And if he is from those who have no knowledge he informs him [the shaykh] of what they said and he [Satan] relays to them the shaykh’s speech. So those ignorant people think that indeed the shaykh has heard their voices and answered them in spite of the long distance, whereas it is not the case. This is only done through the medium of Satan. And it has been narrated from some mashayikh who have experienced such [events] through unveiling (kashf) and mukhatabah, they say that: ‘I see something shiny like water or glass, and in it that news which I seek appears and so I inform people of it. And through it the speech of those who seek my aid from my companions reaches me and so I answer them and my response reaches them’.

And these types of things of the extraordinary (khawariq) happen to many of the mashayikh who do not know the Qur’an and Sunnah, and do not act upon them. For indeed, Satan plays with people a lot and shows them things that are false in the appearance of the truth. So, he who has the insight (basirah) of the realities of faith (iman) and knows the Shari’ah of Islam, he knows that it is the deception of the Satan and he seeks aid with Allah Most High from him.” (Majalis al-Abrar wa Masalik al-Akhyar, p.24)

[8] ‘Allamah Muhammad ibn Muflih al-Maqdisi (d. 762H) in Al-Furu’, 6:165, and ‘Allamah ‘Ala al-Din al-Mardawi (d. 885H / may Allah have mercy on them) write in Al-Insaf, in the chapter “Ruling of the Apostate”, “He said: Or he made between him and Allah intermediaries on whom he places his trust, to whom he supplicates (yad’u) and asks for help. While some said: Or he prostrated before the sun or the moon.”

[9] ‘Allamah Sharf al-Din al-Hijawi (d. 960H / may Allah have mercy on him) stated in his book Al-Iqna‘, 4:285, in the chapter ‘Ruling of the Apostate’, “The shaykh said: [The ruling of apostasy is given towards one who] has an aversion towards the Messenger or what he came with, according to consensus. He added: or he took intermediaries between himself and Allah, relying on them and supplicating to them, according to consensus. Or, he prostrated before idols or the sun or the moon.”

[10] ‘Allamah Khayr al-Din Sayyid Nu’man Alusi (d. 1317H) ibn Sayyid Shihab al-Din Mahmud Alusi al-Hanafi (d. 1270H / may Allah have mercy on them) has quoted Shaykh Muhammad Amin al-Suwaydi al-Shafi’i (d. 1246H) on the prohibition of istighathah. Shaykh Amin’s father, Mulla ‘Ali al-Suwaydi (d. 1237H / may Allah have mercy on them), was the teacher of the author of Ruh al-Ma’ani. He states in Jala’ al-’Aynayn fi Muhakamat al-Ahmadayn,[7] “Shaykh Muhammad Amin al-Suwaydi al-Shafi’i stated: None can regard it lawful except one who is ignorant of the traditions of the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace). This was the reason that seeking help from the dead spread among the people during times of trouble and discord. They beseech the dead and supplicate to them, as if what they do with them is greater than their worship of Allah and their belief in the Lord of the Heavens.”

[11] Dr. Wahbah Mustafa al-Zuhayli, a contemporary Syrian Shafi’i Ash’ari scholar, was asked, “What is the ruling regarding istighathah (calling for assistance) that [some] Naqshbandis engage in after completing al-rabitah with the wording, ‘Oh my teachers extend your aid towards us’ and ‘Oh my shaykhs, help us’ and ‘Oh my masters, help us’ and ‘Oh my guides, help us’?”

He replied, “These types of istighathah, in their apparent meanings, are haram, because they amount to seeking help from other than Allah, and help (madad) is granted by Allah alone, although the intercession (tawassul) of other than Allah from amongst the prophets and righteous people is correct according to Ahl al-Sunnah…”[8]

He further answered in a reply to an objection on visiting the graves, “Visiting graves is licit according to the wording of the hadith ‘alaa fazuruhaa’, and there is no connection to evil in that, because we visit graves as an admonishment and a lesson, we do not seek anything except from Allah, and we do not draw near to shirk, even by a hair-length.”[9]

[12] Shaykh Wahbi ibn Sulayman al-Ghawji Albani, another contemporary Ash’ari scholar, writes, “After this introduction I want to mention some of the bid’ahs upon which the ‘ulama and propagators of the religion need to agree as being prohibited since these are blameworthy innovations concerning which there cannot be silence: … (8) “Of the bid’ah is that which some of the ignorant people do when visiting the grave: They ask the dead to cure them of their illnesses and to fulfill their needs. They tie strings of material to the material of the graves of saints and pious people, with the intention of making barren women fall pregnant or that an estranged husband should return to his wife and love her again, and other examples like this. But if these ignorant people were to be asked in a mild tone: ‘Do they really believe that a pious man has power over anything after he has returned to the Mercy of Allah?!’ The answer to them is: ‘No, we believe that nobody else besides Allah Most High causes any real benefit or harm – none being able to cause such in their life or after their death. But this pious man is blessed, in that he has an honorable position in the sight of Allah and we are asking him because of that’. The truth is with those who teach and say to them: ‘Ask Allah the One. And it is acceptable if you ask Allah through the piety of that Friend of Allah (wali), or through the religious uprightness of the devout pious man that Allah fulfills your needs. By the Will of Allah they will return to the lawful commands. They are thus being returned to something permissible, and they will be so returned, InshAllah.”[10]

[13] Sayyid al-Ta’ifah Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani (d. 561H / may Allah have mercy on him) said, “Follow [the Qur’an and Sunnah] and do not indulge in innovation (bid’ah). Remain in conformity and do not disagree. Remain obedient and not be disobedient. Be sincere and do not commit shirk. Declare Allah Most High to be One, and do not leave His door. Ask Him and do not ask anyone apart from Him. Seek aid from Him and do not seek aid from anyone apart from Him. Rely on Him and do not rely on anyone apart from Him.” (Al-Fath al-Rabbani, p.313)

And he further writes, “You must carry out His commandments, observe His prohibition, comply with His decree, and keep your outer and inner calmly speechless in His presence, then you will experience what is good in this world and the hereafter. Do not ask creatures for anything for they are weak and poor, incapable of bringing harm or benefit to themselves or anyone else.” (Al-Fath al-Rabbani, p.325)

When Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani was in the throes of the illness in which he died, he gave the following advice to his son ‘Abd al-Wahhab, “… Do not rely on anyone but Him, address all your requests to Him (Exalted is He), and put your trust in no one other than Allah (Glory be to Him). Affirm His Oneness. All is contained within the affirmation of His Oneness.” (Futuh al-Ghayb, p.185)

Some circles have brought forward a statement attributed to Shaykh al-Jaylani from a book titled Bahjat al-Asrar in support of istighathah. However, this particular quote attributed to Shaykh al-Jaylani is contrary to what we find in his books. Shaykh al-Jaylani never endorsed istighathah as is evident from his books from which the above mentioned quotes have been produced. Furthermore, Bahjat al-Asrar has been declared unreliable by senior scholars.

For example, Imam Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi (d. 748H / may Allah have mercy on him), the great master in the science of analyzing the reliability of narrators (rijal), writes regarding the author of Bahjat al-Asrar, “He had great love for Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani. He compiled events of his life and his virtues in about three volumes and wrote in it all narrations from various people, both worthy and unworthy. Thereby, he spread many false stories about him.” (Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-Kibar, p.721)

Hafiz Shams al-Din Muhammad Jaz’ari al-Shafi’i (d. 833H / may Allah have mercy on him) has also brought forward this quote of Imam al-Dhahabi in his Tabaqat al-Qurra’, 1:261.

Hafiz Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d. 795H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes, “It [the book Bahjat al-Asrar] deals with the life-events and merits (manaqib) of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani in three volumes. He has filled it with everything, big and small. It is sufficient for one to be called a liar when he narrates everything he hears. I have seen a portion of this book and my heart does not feel secure in accepting or relying on anything in it, or relating anything from it, except that which is famous and well-known from other books, because of an excess of narrating from unknown individuals, deviations, major errors, [unfounded] claims, and false speech, such that it cannot be considered, nor is it appropriate to attribute such things to Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani.” (Tabaqat al-Hanabilah, 2:194)

The historian Khayr al-Din Zirikli (d. 1396H) quotes a verdict of Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-’Asqalani (d. 852H / may Allah have mercy on them) regarding this book, “Ibn Hajr said that many strange and odd stories are mentioned in it by him [the author] and many people have objected [criticized] to many chains of narration and stories narrated in it.” (Al-A’lam, 5:34) This quote is mentioned in Al-Durar al-Kaminah fi A’yan al-Mi‘a al-Thaminah, 3:142, of Hafiz Ibn Hajr.

‘Allamah Zayn al-Din ibn al-Wardi al-Shafi’i (d. 749H / may Allah have mercy on him) said, “Verily, there are many incorrect things and great exaggerations in this book [Bahjat al-Asrar] concerning the status of ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani that is only appropriate for divinity (rububiyyah).” (Kashf al-Zunun, 1:25)

Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad Abu ‘l-Huda ibn Wadi al-Sayadi al-Rifa’i[11] (d. 1328H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes regarding Bahjat al-Asrar, “There are many things written in the above mentioned book, Al-Bahjat, attributing which to Shaykh [‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani] al-Gawth [al-A’zam], may he enjoy the pleasure of Allah, is incorrect. Many stories and untrue things were spread on his behalf. And numerous astonishing sayings were transmitted from a group of elders. Some defiant and bold people – and Allah’s refuge is sought – even fabricated many false traditions and attributed them to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace).” (Tariqah Rifa’iyyah, p.16)

He further writes, “As for the stories, words, and fabricated traditions written in the book named Bahjat al-Asrar by [Abu ‘l-Hasan ‘Ali] Al-Shattanawfi (d. 713H) regarding the merits of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir, may Allah sanctify his pure secret, the elders have raised objections to these [stories], some of whom have accused Al-Shattanawfi  of lying and opportunism. Amongst them is Hafiz Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali, may Allah bless his soul, as is mentioned in Tabaqat al-Hanabilah under the biography of Qutb al-Jili, may Allah benefit us with his assistance and knowledge, while some others said that he spread many stories, and they seem to have attributed to him stupidity and accepting [both] that which is accurate and that which is not.” (Tariqah Rifa’iyyah, p.59)

____________________________

[1] This has also been elucidated by many scholars, such as Shaykh Sun’allah al-Halabi Hanafi (d. 1120H), Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah (d. 1417H), Shaykh al-Qur’an Mawlana Husayn ‘Ali Wanbacharan al-Punjabi (d. 1363H), ‘Allamah Zafar Ahmad ‘Uthmani (d. 1394H), Mawlana Sayyid Murtada Hasan Chandpuri (d. 1370H), Hafiz al-Hadith Mawlana ‘Abdullah Darkhawasti (d. 1994AD), Shaykh Sayyid Abu ‘l-Hasan ‘Ali Nadwi (d. 1420H), Mufti Sa’id Ahmad Palanpuri, and Mufti Zar Wali Khan (may Allah have mercy on them), just to name a few. [↩]

[2] The Grand Mufti of Hind Mufti Muhammad Kifayatullah al-Dahlawi (d. 1372H / may Allah have mercy on him) writes regarding Shirk fi ‘l-’Ilm and Shirk fi ‘l-Sam‘ wa ‘l-Basr, “To attribute Allah’s power of knowledge to others. For example, to say that a prophet or a pious man has the knowledge of the unseen, knows everything, is aware of all of our affairs, or can tell what is happening far and near; all this is Shirk fi ‘l-’Ilm. Shirk fi ‘l-Sam‘ wa ‘l-Basr is to attribute Allah’s powers of seeing and hearing to others. For example, to believe that a certain prophet or a pious person could hear things far and near, or could see all of our acts.” (Ta’lim al-Islam, 4:15) [↩]

[3] Quote taken with permission from the English translation of Hujjat Allah al-Balighah by Marica K.Hermansen. [↩]

[4] Ibid [↩]

[5] Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah writes, “Imam Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari would always recommend and advocate the works of Imam Lakhnawi.” And Shaykh Kawthari himself said, “Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Lakhnawi was the most erudite of his era in traditions pretaining to judicial rulings.” (Bid’ah and the Salaf’s Worship, p.xvi) [↩]

[6] Imam Shah ‘Abd al-’Aziz Dahlawi praised Majalis al-Abrar in these words, “The book, Majalis al-Abrar, includes much beneficial discourses regarding the secrets of Islamic law, fiqh, suluk, refutation of bid’ah and reprehensible customs. We have no knowledge of the author in terms of his piety, godliness, depth in the sciences of Shari’ah, except that which this book reveals regarding him.” (Mu’jam al-Matbu’at al-’Arabiyyah, 1:388) And ‘Allamah ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi writes regarding Majalis al-Abrar, “And it is an excellent and reliable book.” (Iqamah al-Hujjah, p.19) [↩]

[7] Imam Sayyid Anwar Shah Kashmiri (d. 1352H / may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that one of his hadith teachers was Shaykh Muhaddith Muhammad Ishaq Kashmiri (d. 1322H / may Allah have mercy on him) who is a student of Khayr al-Din Sayyid Nu’man Alusi, and he in turn of his father the author of Ruh al-Ma‘ani. Imam Kashmiri mentioned that Shaykh Nu’man Alusi is the author of many valuable books like Jala’ al-’Aynayn fi Muhakamat al-Ahmadayn and Al-Jawab al-Fasih li ma lafaqqah ‘Abd al-Masih. (Malfuzat Muhaddith Kashmiri, p.334) [↩]

[8] See fatwa of Dr. Zuhayli [↩]

[9] See fatwa of Dr. Zuhayli [↩]

[10] A guiding, knowledgeable word regarding bid`ah and its rulings by Shaykh Wahbi Sulayman al-Ghawiji, translated by IPSA students under the guidance of Shaykh Mahdi Hendricks. [↩]

[11] It says in Al-A’lam, 6:94, regarding Shaykh al-Sayadi al-Husayni, “He is the most famous of all scholars in his age, born in Khan Shaykhun (in the district of al-Ma’arrah) and educated at Aleppo and there he was with entrusted the responsibility of the Association of Ashraf. Later, he stayed at Astanah (Istanbul) and came in contact with the Ottoman Sultan ‘Abd al-Hamid II, who gave him the post of Mashayikhat al-Mashayikh. He won his confidence and became one of his most trusted men and continued serving this post for around thirty years…” [↩]

Source: http://www.deoband.org/2010/09/aqida/deviant-beliefs/istighatha-seeking-help-from-other-than-allah/