And they learn from them that by which they cause separation between a man and his wife. But they do not harm anyone through it except by permission of Allah. And the people learn what harms them and does not benefit them. But the Children of Israel certainly knew that whoever purchased the magic would not have in the Hereafter any share. And wretched is that for which they sold themselves if they only knew.” (Quran 2:102-103)
﷽
Is it not curious that, out of all the things that people learned concerning magic that an emphasis is put on causing separation between a man and his wife? That there are extremely dark forces at play working against the foundations of a family should be something that we really think about.
In Islam, marriage completes half of one’s faith. 60% of Shari’ah law is focused on the family.
There is a significant gap between the holistic guidance of the Qur’an and Sunnah and the often-mechanistic application of certain legal rulings, particularly concerning marriage and divorce.
The Reality of Supra-Natural Forces and Their Target.
The Qur’an explicitly confirms the existence of magic and the efforts of Shaitan to sow discord, especially within the most sacred of institutions: the family.
“The Shaitan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer.” (Qur’an 5:91)
“If an evil impulse from Shaitan provokes you, seek refuge with Allah; He is All-hearing and all-knowing.” (Qur’an 7:200)
“And march forth in the way of forgiveness from your Lord, and for Paradise as wide as the heavens and the earth, prepared for the pious. Those who spend in prosperity and in adversity, who repress anger, and who pardon the people; verily, Allah loves the good-doers.”(Qur’an 3:133-134)
“So whatever you have been given is but enjoyment for this worldly life, but that which is with Allah is better and more lasting for those who believe and put their trust in their Lord. And those who avoid the greater sins, and illegal sexual intercourse, and when they are angry, they forgive.” (Qur’an 42:36)
It can be seen from the aforementioned verses that enmity, anger, hate are things that Shaitan provokes us with. We also see that tempering our anger and forgiveness are more wholesome.
“Say: ‘I seek refuge with the Lord of Daybreak, from the evil of duality, and from the evil of the darkness as it gathers and from the evil of those who blow on knots (l-‘uqadi) and from the evil of an envier when he envies.'” (Qur’an 113:1-5)
From those who ‘blow on knots‘. The term ‘l-uqadi’ .
This term is used in the following instances of the Qur’an:
“There is no blame upon you for that to which you indirectly allude concerning a proposal to women or for what you conceal within yourselves. Allah knows that you will have them in mind. But do not promise them secretly except for saying a proper saying. And do not determine to undertake a (uq’data l-nikahi)marriage contract until the decreed period reaches its end. And know that Allah knows what is within yourselves, so beware of Him. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing.” (Qur’an 2:235)
“And in case you divorce them even before you have touched them, and you have already ordained for them a marriage-portion, then give her one half of what you have ordained except in case the women remit, or he in whose hand is the (uq’datu l-nikahi) knot of marriage remits; that you remit is nearer to piety. And do not forget the virtue of grace among yourselves; surely Allah is Ever-Beholding of whatever you do.” (Qur’an 2;237)
When you look at those instances of the word, it becomes apparent that ‘blow on knots‘ means ‘blow on marriages’. “Devise plots against marriages.”
The phrase “those who blow on knots” (an-naffathati fil ‘uqad) has a primary meaning referring to sorceresses who literally tie knots and blow spells upon them. However, the linguistic drawn to the “knot of marriage” (‘uqdat an-nikah) in verses 2:235 and 2:237 is a powerful and valid tafsir (interpretation). It highlights that one of the primary objectives of these dark forces is to unravel the sacred bond (‘aqd) between spouses. This is not a minor issue; it is a direct assault on half of a Muslim’s faith.
Aqad literally means to ‘tie’ or to ‘bind’. In English, we have the interesting idiom of ‘tying the knot‘ as a reference to getting married.
The Arabic word Khul means to ‘untie or to disrobe’.
Whereas the word Talaq means to abandon or rid oneself of something.
“Definition of “divorce” (talaq) Literally, the word “divorce” (talaq) means to abandon a thing or get rid of a thing. When an animal tied with a string is untied it is called talaq. If the tied with a string she-camel is untied, the Arabs mention this state as: “talaqa al-naqata talaqan” 23 (The she-camel has been released).”
Source: (Pg 15. Islamic Law of Marriage and Divorce by Shehza Sham)
So, if the term Talaq means to untie, to abandon or to get rid of something, it makes no sense to say to someone “I abandon you” thrice, because in order to be abandoned the second time or the third time just like saying ‘I untie you thrice’. In order to be ‘untied’ a second or third time, you would need to be tied or in a state of ‘aqad’ for a second or third time.
If we take into account that supra-natural forces are at work in bringing about discord in Muslim marriages, why is it not taken into the calculation by certain Muslim jurists and especially those influenced by ‘tassawuf’ when deciding the fate of Muslim marriages?
Here is something that those of our brothers of the Ahl Sunnah need to take on board. If you believe the following haidth, we have a question for you.
Narrated Aisha:
Magic was worked on Allah’s Messenger (saw) so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives while he actually had not (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an effect)…….the hadith is longer.
If you believe the best of creation, the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw), could be affected by magic to the extent that it created a false reality in his personal life, then it is a form of arrogance for any scholar or jurist to dismiss the possibility that ordinary Muslim couples could be acting under similar influences of anger, hatred, miscommunication, and irrational behavior provoked by Shaitan.
Until today, there has been no meaningful engagement in regard to this question.
We also need to keep the following verses in mind:
“O Prophet! When any of you divorce women, divorce them during their period of purity and calculate their ‘idda carefully. And have fear of Allah, your Lord. Do not evict them from their homes, nor should they leave, unless they commit an outright indecency. Those are Allah´s limits, and anyone who oversteps Allah´s limits has wronged himself. You never know, it may well be that after that Allah will cause a new situation to develop.” (Qur’an 65:1)
Even though this is what the Qur’an clearly states, the jurist will allow couples’ marriages to be dissolved without asking questions like:
“Did you intend to divorce your wife while she was in menses?”
If the answer is yes, then you cannot intend to divorce your wife while she is in her menses.
If the answer is “I don’t know”, then again, you cannot intend to divorce your wife on an “I don’t know.”
Yet, we, unfortunately, know of many Muslims who have gone through the divorce process, and they have informed us that the judge, the counselor, didn’t even bother to ask this question. Most unfortunate.
Another aspect of the revelation that unfortunately gets ignored is the following:
“Then, when they have reached their term (3 months), take them back in kindness or part from them in kindness, and call to witness two just men among you, and keep your testimony upright for Allah. Whoso believes in Allah and the Last Day is exhorted to act thus. And whosoever keeps his duty to Allah, Allah will appoint a way out for him…” (Qur’an 65:2)
People do not realize it, but it is very possible for people to part amicably. Sometimes a woman cannot produce children, and she has the option to be a co-wife. Whereas, if a man cannot produce children, he does not have the option to be the co-husband.
People can decide to amicably part if having biological children is an absolute deal-breaker in a relationship. They may find, for various other reasons, that they are not suitable as partners.
Yet, unfortunately, once again, the judges or the counselors do not ask about the emotional state of the man/wife when words are uttered? The answer is no.
“If any men among you divorce their wives by Zihar (calling them mothers), they cannot be their mothers: None can be their mothers except those who gave them birth. And in fact, they use words (both) iniquitous and false: but truly Allah is one that blots out (sins), and forgives (again and again).” (Qur’an)
This verse clearly repudiates those men who would use an idiom or simply a verbal expression to divorce women. This verse is also clear when coupled with other verses about having just two witnesses present, and consultation that it repudiates instant divorce simply through pronunciation.
“They are invited to the book of Allah to settle their dispute”. (Qur’an 3:23)
“And this is a Book which We have revealed as a blessing, so follow it and be righteous, that you may receive mercy”. (Qur’an 6:155).
“Lo! this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright”. (Qur’an 17:9)
The Juristic (Fiqh) Response vs. The Holistic (Tazkiyah) Approach
The Problem: In many contemporary contexts, these two streams have become separated. A judge in a civil or family court, or even an imam acting in an advisory capacity, often wears only the hat of the jurist. They apply the law as a set of rules without the accompanying spiritual and pastoral context that is essential for dealing with something as sensitive as divorce.
The Qur’anic procedure for divorce is not a mere utterance but a process designed for contemplation and reconciliation.
Divorce during Menses (Tuhr): The ruling in (65:1) to divorce women during their period of purity is precisely to prevent a rash decision made in a state of emotional turmoil (which can sometimes coincide with a wife’s menses). A man who says “I divorce you” in a fit of rage during her menses has transgressed Allah’s law. The juristic consensus is that such a divorce is still legally effective but is considered bid’ah (reprehensible innovation) and a sin.
The practical consequence is that the marriage is often considered dissolved, and the crucial pastoral step of questioning the validity of the intention and context is skipped.
The Role of Witnesses and Kindness: Verse (65:2) emphasize kindness, witnesses, and a measured process. This stands in stark contrast to the instantaneous, often unilateral, and highly emotional divorces that occur. The Qur’anic ideal is a mediated separation, not a sudden outburst.
Before any divorce is finalized, a mandatory mediation process should be instituted that involves:
Questioning the emotional state and intention at the time of the utterance.
Investigating possible external factors (family interference, financial stress, etc.).
Recommending ruqyah (Qur’anic healing) if there is a legitimate suspicion of magic or evil eye.
Exhausting all avenues for reconciliation, as the Qur’an commands.
May Allah (swt) sanctify and bless all of your marriages. May Allah (swt) protect you all from the evil eye. May you and your spouse work out your differences. May Allah (swt) make your wife or wives appear as the most loving and beautiful of women. May Allah (swt) make your husband appear to you as the most kind, generous, understanding and handsome of men.
You might be interested in reading the following articles:
“Surely your Lord is Allah Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days, then established Himself on the Throne, conducting every affair. None can intercede except by His permission. That is Allah—your Lord, so worship Him. Will you not then be mindful?” (Qur’an 10:3)
“He knows what is ahead of them and what is behind them. They do not intercede except for whom He approves, and they tremble in awe of Him.” (Qur’an 21:28)
“Allah! There is no god except Him, the Ever-Living, All-Sustaining. Neither drowsiness nor sleep overtakes Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who could possibly intercede with Him without His permission? He knows what is ahead of them and what is behind them, but no one can grasp any of His knowledge—except what He wills . His Throne encompasses the heavens and the earth, and the preservation of both does not tire Him. For He is the Most High, the Greatest.” (Qur’an 2:255)
“It is You we worship and You we ask for help.” (Qur’an 1:5)
“And he entered the city at a time of inattention by its people and found therein two men fighting: one from his faction and one from among his enemy. And the one from his faction called him for help ( fa-is’taghathahu)against the one from his enemy, so Moses struck him and killed him. said, “This is from the work of Satan. Indeed, he is a manifest, misleading enemy.” (Qur’an 28:15)
﷽
Seems there has been a great deal of heated debate and discussion on this topic as of late. However, this has been the case with the Muslim Ummah for quite some time.
Tawassul is asking Allah for help through an intermediary. This has it’s types and conditions.
Istigatha is asking for urgent help in times of distress. This too has it’s types and conditions.
First point.
Note that all three of the text (Qur’an 10:3) & (Qur’an 21:28) & (Qur’an 2:255) that are quoted above are speaking about third parties that may be in a position to to ask something on behalf of others.
None of the above three text speak about a first person party (a petitioner) seeking something from Allah (swt) via an intermediary, be it an angel, a wali of Allah (swt) or even his Blessed Prophets (upon them all be peace).
Second point.
None can intercede except by what Allah (swt) grants permission or approves.
If a righteous person like the Blessed Prophet (saw) for example prays for his Uncle to enter into heaven and his Uncle did not repent or enter into Islam, then the intercession of the Blessed Prophet (saw) is of no use.
“You surely cannot guide whoever you like, but it is Allah Who guides whoever He wills, and He knows best who are guided.” (Qur’an 28:56)
“Praying or not praying for their forgiveness will make no difference. Even if you (O Prophet) were to pray seventy times for their forgiveness, Allah would not forgive thembecause they reject Allah and His Messenger. Allah does not guide those who are defiantly disobedient people.” (Qur’an 9:80)
Or for example if the Prophet (saw) tried to intercede with Allah (swt) for those Muslims who died without repenting from taking the life without right, shirk, fornication or adultery and they did not seek repentance from Allah (swt). The Prophet’s intercession would be null and void!
“And those who do not invoke with Allah another deity or kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed], except by right, and do not commit unlawful sexual intercourse. And whoever should do that will meet a penalty. Multiplied for him is the punishment on the Day of Resurrection, and he will abide therein humiliated –Except for those who repent, believe and do righteous work. For them Allah will replace their evil deeds with good. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:68-70)
This is the world of asbab (أَسْبَابْ) a world of cause, means and occasions.
The Muslim understands that this is the world of cause, means and occasions. We are 3D carbon based platforms and this is how we understand and perceive things. However, we are also informed:
la hawla wala quwwata illa billah -there is no power or no strength except with Allah.
“If only you had said, upon entering your property, ‘This is what Allah has willed! There is no power except with Allah!’ Even though you see me inferior to you in wealth and offspring.” (Qur’an 18:39)
That is to say that if I believe that I can type this text independent of Allah’s power, I am either making a claim to divinity or asserting a share of divine power.
A Muslim does not believe that a knife in and of itself has the ability to cut but that Allah (swt) grants it that quality.
“It is You we worship and You we ask for help.” (Qur’an 1:5)
So if a Muslim seeks a doctor for a cure, or builds a shelter from the rain are they seeking or depending upon other than Allah (swt) for help? Of course not. The recognition is that we live in the world of causes, means and occasions. That is what is immediately perceptible to us.
Take the example of Mary (as) she was pregnant with Jesus (as) and was hungry.
The Angel directs Mary (as) towards a creation of Allah (swt).
“And shake the trunk of this palm tree towards you, it will drop fresh, ripe dates upon you.” (Qur’an 19:25)
The Angel could have directed Mary (as) to a dead tree, or a dead branch or a log. However, she (as) was directed towards a living tree.
جَزَاكَ ٱللَّٰهُ خَيْرًا or Jazak Allahu Khayran is a common Arabic expression among Muslims. It is said when receiving some good, service or benefit from another person.
It is a way of showing gratitude in a dual manner, by immediately thanking the person (he/she) that brought the good but also realizing that ultimately it is Allah (swt) whom used this person (he/she) to bring the khayer (goodness) to you.
Tawassul in the Qur’an?
First what is Tawassul?
Basically it means to use something to arrive to something else. As a path.
Tawassul is the act of seeking help from Allah (swt) via an intermediary. In relation to this we have the Arabic word Al-Wasila.
You can find derivates of the word twice in the Qur’an. The first text is the one champions of tawassul are quick to quote.
The second text (Qur’an 17:57) they are not so quick to quote. Insh’Allah you will see why.
1st instance of wasila.
“O you who believe! Be careful of (your duty to) Allah and seek means of nearness (l-wasilata) to Him and strive hard in His way that you may be successful.” (Qur’an 5:35)
This is the text that champions of Tawassul would prefer you rather not quote.
Note that the text says to seek a means of nearness and it could have easily mentioned the Blessed Prophet (saw) exclusively but it did not.
Seeking the means of nearness is not exclusive to asking the pious to pray for us.
We know that praying in a group (Jamaat) is more beloved to Allah (swt) then praying alone. We know that praying in a Masjid is more beloved to Allah (swt) then not praying in the Masjid.
We know that praying in Mecca or Medina is more beloved to Allah (swt) then not praying in either of those two cities. Prayer in Mecca is more preferable then prayer in Medina.
Now advocates of tawassul would have to prove that a singular individual praying to Allah (swt) via the station of the Blessed Prophet (saw) would be superior to a whole congregation of people doing dhikr of Allah (swt).
They would have to prove that a singular individual praying to Allah via the station of the Blessed Prophet (saw) would be superior to an individual praying to Allah (swt) in Mecca without mentioning the Blessed Prophet (saw).
In other words there are a plethora of acts and actions in Islam that are more meritorious then praying to Allah (swt) and beseeching Allah (swt) via the station of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
2nd instance of wasila.
“Say, “Invoke those you claim besides Him—they do not have the power to undo harm from you or transfer it.” “˹Even˺ the closest ˹to Allah˺ of those invoked would be seeking a way (l-wasilata) to their Lord, hoping for His mercy, and fearing His punishment. Indeed, your Lord’s torment is fearsome.” (Qur’an 17: 56-57)
Shaykh Dr. Kahlan Al Kharousi (h) speaks on three types of Tawassul.
First type: Asking Assad to make du’a and thinking that it will be accepted because Assad has got the power to do so. This is clearly shirk. We are very clear about this.
The evidence from this is from the Qur’an:
“If only you had said, upon entering your property, ‘This is what Allah has willed! There is no power except with Allah!’ Even though you see me inferior to you in wealth and offspring.” (Qur’an 18:39)
“How powerless are those who invoke and those invoked!“ (Qur’an 22:73)
For example if I as a Muslim believe that I am typing this text independent of the power of Allah (swt) this would be a claim to divinity and shirk.
Second type: (which all madhabs classify as Mubaah Halaal-meaning neutral or permissible.) -This includes the Ibadis.
This is the request of means and reason. Not a request of response and refuge.
That is to let someone who’s considered righteous amongst of people make du’a.
For example: Ridael and Assad and Hakki just had some food, Assad asked Ridael to make du’a; however, Ridael believes that Assad (at least what it apparent) is a better Muslim than him, so he says to Assad to make the du’a instead.
Examples of this in the Qur’an:
“They begged, “O our father! Pray for the forgiveness of our sins. We have certainly been sinful.” (Qur’an 12:97)
“And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah. And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammed], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:64)
“Take from their wealth ˹O Prophet˺ charity to purify and bless them,and pray for them—surely your prayer is a source of comfort for them. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.” (Qur’an 9:103)
Or when we as believers pray on behalf of all believers no less than 17 times a day:
“Guide us to the straight path.” (Qur’an 1:6)
The third type: Is that when you mention someone’s name (in this case Assad) thinking by doing so your du’a gets accepted.
For example: We are in a battle and I say: “Oh Allah Assad is with us grant us victory.” Some say this is shirk and some say it is not. This has lead to allot of fighting among the Muslims. Our school’s position is to leave these doubtful matters. Stick with what is firm from the Qur’an & Sunnah.
In the case of the person above a simple gentle reminder from the Qur’an and the history of the Blessed Prophet (saw) may suffice to set their thinking on the right course.
For example, having the Blessed Prophet (saw) with the Muslims was not a guarantee of victory. In fact, they lost conflicts when he (saw) was among them; and this was a test for the believers.
“Do you think you will be admitted into Paradise without being tested like those before you? They were afflicted with suffering and adversity and were so ˹violently˺ shaken that ˹even˺ the Messenger and the believers with him cried out, “When will Allah’s help come?” Indeed, Allah’s help is ˹always˺ near.” (Qur’an 2:214)
“Your Lord has proclaimed, “Call upon Me, I will respond to you. Surely those who are too proud to worship Me will enter Hell, fully humbled.” (Qur’an 40:60)
“When My servants ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about Me: I am truly near. I respond to one’s prayer when they call upon Me. So let them respond ˹with obedience˺ to Me and believe in Me, perhaps they will be guided ˹to the Right Way˺.” (Qur’an 2:186)
As Allah (swt) is the Sovereign Lord of all creation.
Surely a Muslim can’t go wrong by calling upon Allah (swt) alone and trusting in Allah (swt) to answer us in the time and manner that Allah (swt) deems fit.
It was narrated that Abu Al-Hawra’ As-Sa’di said:
“I said to Al-Hasan bin ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him: ‘What did you memorize from the Messenger of Allah (saw) ?’ He said: I memorized from him: ‘Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt.'”
Because there is dispute it is best to leave that which is doubtful. The Muslim is one who practices wara’ and it is best to leave the doubtful. That is also because this act is not wajib. The side that is very vocal for their practices have labeled it as mustahab, which is merely recommended.
So there is no harm in sticking with the clear formula of the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Our way is the moderate way and the safe passage. Let us turn to the Qur’an.
All duas in the Qur’an are just Allahumma, Rabbi or Rabbana. So what is wrong if the believer sticks with that sort of formulation and puts their trust solely in Allah (swt)?
One can make du’a for others and when requested also have friends and family make du’a for them. This is very clearly sanctioned in the Qur’an because we see examples of Prophets praying for others as has already been mentioned.
So if we stick with the du’a formulations in the Qur’an and preserved Sunnah we are safe.
Who better than Allah (swt) and his Messenger (saw) to teach us?
So yes why not direct all supplication , du’a , petition and request to Allah (swt) knowing full well that Allah (swt) can respond to that du’a, petition and request by using this world of asbab to send to you a person(s), angel(s), Muslim Jinn(s), or any of His (swt) creation to aid you.
In the Qur’an we find the following formulations when addressing Allah (swt).
Rabbi Rabbanaa A’udhu billahi Rabbanaghfir Rabbihkum Rabbighfir Rabbanaa Bismillahi (Qur’an 11:41) Ma’adhallahi (Qur’an 12:23) Inni a’udhu bir-Rahmani (Qur’an 19:18) Inni maghloobun fantasir (Qur’an 54:10) In all these passages: (Qur’an 7:155- 7:156), (Qur’an 7:189), (Qur’an 10:22) it is clear that the one being addressed is Allah (swt). Qul a‘ūdhu birabbil-falaq (Qur’an 113:1) Qul a‘ūdhu birabbin-nās (Qur’an 114:1)
So in conclusion on the issue of Tawassul is that for the Ibadi school asking the pious to make du’a for us is permissible.
We should ask each other to make du’a for one another all the time.
“Guide usto the straight path.” (Qur’an 1:6)
Allah (swt) for example, encourages us to make du’a for our parents.
“And be humble with them out of mercy, and pray, “My Lord! Be merciful to them as they raised me when I was young.” (Qur’an 17:24)
The woman who pleaded her path went direct to Allah (swt) for help even bypassing the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“Indeed,Allah has heard the argument of the woman who pleaded with you ˹O Prophet˺ concerning her husband, and appealed to Allah. Allah has heard your exchange. Surely Allah is All-Hearing, All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 58:1)
In the above case in was Allah (swt) who was the refuge and succor of this woman and not Prophet Muhammed (saw). In fact, the above verse is one of those that let us know the Qur’an is not from the Blessed Prophet (saw), His, Sunnah is a form of guidance,-when not overruled by Allah (swt) and that the Prophet (saw) is genuine and authentic.
If it was good enough for the woman to appeal directly to Allah (swt) in her life time (by passing the Prophet -saw) while he (saw) was alive, it is good enough for us to go directly to Allah (swt) after the death of the Blessed Prophet (saw).
“Tawassul is not an obligation or a necessary matter, neither is the response to the supplication conditional upon it, Rather, the basis for the supplication is to call upon Allah, the Exalted, as Allah said: And if my servants ask you concerning me, then say that I am close (al-Baqara: 186) and: Say, “Call upon Allah or call upon al-Rahman: Whatever you call him by -to Him belong the best names.”
Source: (pgs. 74-75 Notions that must be corrected by Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani)
ISTIGATHA
Istigatha is asking for urgent help in times of distress.
Those who are in favour of Istigatha themselves put it in the category of mustahab (مُسْتَحَبّ) meaning something that is recommended. However, it is not something that is fard or wajib.
An example of this from the Qur’an.
“And he entered the city at a time of inattention by its people and found therein two men fighting: one from his faction and one from among his enemy. And the one from his faction called him for help (fa-is’taghathahu)against the one from his enemy, so Moses struck him and killed him. said, “This is from the work of Satan. Indeed, he is a manifest, misleading enemy.” (Qur’an 28:15)
The example in the Qur’an of istigatha is of someone who is physically alive calling out to other people who are physically alive.
CAN AN ACT OR ACTION GO FROM NOT BEING SHIRK TO BEING SHIRK?
There have been those who claim that something is in a category of shirk or non shirk and these categories do not change.
This is absolutely not true.
If one has animals that they use and even call out to while alive. They call out to these animals after they have died. This is clearly shirk.
Another example is the following:
Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah “; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah .” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who were kafara (ungrateful disbelievers [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate (yush’rikuna) with Him. They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses except to perfect His light, although the (ungrateful disbelievers) dislike it. It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although they who associate others (l-mush’rikuna) with Allah dislike it. (Qur’an 9:29-33)
Narrated ‘Adi bin Hatim:
“I came to the Prophet (saw) while I had a cross of gold around my neck. He said: ‘O ‘Adi! Remove this idol from yourself!’ And I heard him reciting from Surah Bara’ah: They took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah (9:31). He said: ‘As for them, they did not worship them, but when they made something lawful for them, they considered it lawful, and when they made something unlawful for them, they considered it unlawful.'”
So if you previously followed a command of Allah (swt) and then abandoned it in favour of what the monks and rabbis said that would be an act of worship and thus shirk.
Likewise, if you previously abstained from a prohibition of Allah (swt) and then indulged in that prohibition in favour of what the monks and rabbis have said that would be an act of worship, and thus shirk.
CAN THE DEAD (THAT WHICH WAS BIOLOGICALLY ALIVE) BENEFIT OTHERS AFTER IT’S DEATH?
We know this from direct empirical data. We benefit from the meat of an animal after it has been slaughtered, the hide or wool from animals after they have died. The Inuit Eskimos have shown us how to essentially use virtually all parts of a whale after it has died.
We as human beings are living testimony that we continue to benefit by the knowledge of those who have died. From every facet of knowledge, to mathematics, to architecture to cherished recipes. We continue to benefit from from those who have long since passed.
Just as we benefit from them, what ever benefit we receive from them is accredited to them as well. So for example, when you teach someone to read the Qur’an you benefit from every time that person reads the Qur’an, even after you have long since died.
ISTIGATHA OF THE DEAD AND SCANT EVIDENCE.
Calling out to those who have died for aid and assistance.
There are some cold hard facts that stare in the face of those who advocate for Istigatha.
There are 25 Prophets mentioned by name in the Qur’an. We don’t have a single example of any of those Prophets doing Istigatha to a prophet that proceeded him that has died.
Considering that the Blessed Prophet Muhammed (saw) is the best example for us and considering that he is the last of the Prophets we do not have a single example of the Blessed Prophet (saw) making Istigatha of any of those prophets that proceeded him that has died!
Point 2 is extremely important considering there are 124,000 prophets and he did not consider to call upon any of them!
If the reply to point 2 is that the Blessed Prophet (saw) is the supreme prophet and the seal he is not in need of them to ask it still does not take away from point 1.
Narrated Anas:
Whenever drought threatened them, `Umar bin Al-Khattab, used to ask Al-Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib to invoke Allah for rain. He used to say, “O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle to invoke You for rain. O Allah ! Bless us with rain.” And so it would rain
قوله : ( أن عمر بن الخطاب كان إذا قحطوا ) بضم القاف وكسر المهملة أي أصابهم القحط ، وقد بين الزبير بن بكار في الأنساب صفة ما دعا به العباس في هذه الواقعة والوقت الذي وقع فيه ذلك ، فأخرج بإسناد له أن العباس لما استسقى به عمر قال : اللهم إنه لم ينزل بلاء إلا بذنب ، ولم يكشف إلا بتوبة ، وقد توجه القوم بي إليك لمكاني من نبيك ، وهذه أيدينا إليك بالذنوب ونواصينا إليك بالتوبة فاسقنا الغيث . فأرخت السماء مثل الجبال حتى أخصبت الأر
Translation:
His statement: (That ‘Umar bin al-Khattab used to say that when they were parched) with the addition of the qāf and the kasra of the neglected one, that is, they were afflicted with drought. Al-Zubair ibn Bakkar explained in the genealogies the description of what Al-Abbas called for in this incident and the time in which it occurred, so he narrated with his chain of transmission that when Al-Abbas asked for rain with it, ‘Umar said: “Oh Allah, no affliction has descended except due to sin, and it has not been removed except with repentance, and the people have turned to me in place of your Prophet, and these are our hands to you for sins.” And We enjoined upon you repentance, and We poured rain. Then the sky fell like the mountains until the trees became fertile
Source: (Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani Fath al-Bari Sharhu Sahih Al Bukhari)
“And O my people! Seek your Lord’s forgiveness and turn to Him in repentance. He will shower you with rain in abundance, and add strength to your strength. So do not turn away, persisting in wickedness.” (Qur’an 11:52)
The above example, often brought up by proponents of tawassul and istigatha realize just how deadly the above example is to their doctrines. In particular the doctrine of calling out to those who are in their graves or seeking a means by those who are now in their graves.
O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle
This is crystal clear. We used to (past tense) this of course is when the Blessed Prophet (saw) was alive.
However, NOW (in this time) we are asking his uncle.
To add insult to injury to proponents of tawassul and istigatha the formula of the du’a used by Ibn Abbas (ra) looks like this:
“Oh Allah, no affliction has descended except due to sin, and it has not been removed except with repentance, and the people have turned to me in place of your Prophet, and these are our hands to you for sins.”
Notice there is no ‘Oh Allah by the status of the Prophet’.
Notice there is no ‘Oh Allah by your love of the Prophet’.
These formulas are not used by Ibn Abbas (ra) !!
Now there have been some weak sauce replies by those who are clearly overwhelmed in the face of such evidence. It is clear that copium is the only reply in the face of such powerful evidence.
They will offer meekly. Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra) has choice. So he choose Ibn Abbas (ra). Yes, but why not choose the best of Creation? Especially if that was an option?
The Prophet Muhammed (saw) is he (currently) dead or alive in his grave?
The central point of the controversy surrounding the issue is rather or not one can do istigatha to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he died.
Narrated `Aisha:
All sides of the debate have agreed that the Blessed Prophet (saw) has died.
Abu Bakr came riding his horse from his dwelling place in As-Sunh. He got down from it, entered the Mosque and did not speak with anybody till he came to me and went direct to the Prophet, who was covered with a marked blanket. Abu Bakr uncovered his face. He knelt down and kissed him and then started weeping and said, “My father and my mother be sacrificed for you, O Allah’s Prophet! Allah will not combine two deaths on you. You have died the death which was written for you.” Narrated Abu Salama from Ibn `Abbas : Abu Bakr came out and `Umar , was addressing the people, and Abu Bakr told him to sit down but `Umar refused. Abu Bakr again told him to sit down but `Umar again refused. Then Abu Bakr recited the Tashah-hud (i.e. none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammed is Allah’s Messenger (saw)) and the people attended to Abu Bakr and left `Umar. Abu Bakr said, “Amma ba’du, whoever amongst you worshipped Muhammed, then Muhammed is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, Allah is alive and will never die. Allah said: ‘Muhammed is no more than an Apostle and indeed (many) Apostles have passed away before him ..(up to the) grateful.‘ “ (Qur’an 3.144) (The narrator added, “By Allah, it was as if the people never knew that Allah had revealed this verse before till Abu Bakr recited it and then whoever heard it, started reciting it.”)
The interesting point about the above hadith is why would such shock over come the believers and why would Allah (swt) need to remind them that the Prophet (saw) will die as other humans have died if it was firmly planted in their (the companions) hearts that they would have a direct line of communication with the Prophet (saw) after his earthly life?
This verse would constitute an unnecessary redundancy.
The other point to be noted is that often proponents of those who say we can do istigatha to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he died is to compare the situation of the Blessed Prophet (saw) to that of martyrs.
But this begs the question: How did the Prophet (saw) die?
Are we prepared to believe that The Prophet (saw) was indeed poisoned by a Jewish woman -thus making the Prophet (saw) a martyr?
One evidence brought forward to try and claim that the Prophet (saw) is alive in his grave is the following:
“And ˹remember˺ when they prayed, “O Allah! If this is indeed the truth from You, then rain down stones upon us from the sky or overcome us with a painful punishment.” But Allah would never punish them while you ˹O Prophet˺ were in their midst. Nor would He ever punish them if they prayed for forgiveness.” (Qur’an 8:32-33)
Some have used this as a proof text to try and say that the Blessed Prophet (saw) is still alive and the context shows that this misunderstanding of theirs is certainly in error.
The context is the disbelievers and not the believers.
However, when one looks into this matter it can be seen that the Muslim Ummah can be seen to have reached a sort of stalemate on the matter.
Rather or not the Blessed Prophet (saw) is dead or alive in his grave (currently) seems to be a secondary matter to the issue of rather or not we can call out to him, that is to say, making Istigatha to him, after he has died.
ISTIGATHA OF THE DEAD SIFTING FOR GOLD AND TRYING TO FIND ANYTHING!
The above video is apt when we are talking about proofs and evidences for calling out to the dead after they are deceased.
One should not be surprised to see when looking into this matter that there is a dearth of evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah that advocates of calling out to an individual after they have deceased can produce.
The book to your left: Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri. The book to your right: Notions that must be corrected by Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani.
Both books are in my personal library and both books in my estimation failed to deliver.
In the book: Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri. You would think that a book that is 389 pages excluding the glossary, bibliography and general index would be teaming with evidences.
This is simply not the case at all.
On page 197 of the book we have: Intermediation through the Blessed Holy Prophet (saw) after his death. This section runs until page 253.
So one of the arguments advanced on page 208 is the following verse of the Qur’an.
“And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah. And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammed], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:64)
There is no indication that this verse is a reference to people calling upon the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he has died. In fact, the Qur’an has not given a single example of any of the former people calling upon any of the earlier prophets that have died. If the Qur’an recorded such incidents then these proponents would be quick to quote it. However, the Qur’an does not indicate any one doing this.
The other text often quoted: (Qur’an 8:32-33) has already been addressed above.
Taking a look at the evidence from the traditions to call out to the Prophet (saw) after he has died
Now, keep in mind dear reader you are reading from the perspective of an Ibadi.
We take a different approach to these matters as we are different kettle of fish.
The sanad-the chains are important to us. Equally important to us is the matn -the actual text. Are the text consistent with one another, do they present to us any anomalies or inconsistencies.
We ask you dear reader to ask Allah (swt) for guidance and to use the brain he has given you to reflect on what you are about to read.
The anonymous Bedouin and the dream of ‘Utbi.
“In this Qur’anic verse Allah is exhorting the sinners and evildoers that when they commit sins and errors they should call on the Messenger of Allah (saw) and ask forgiveness from Allah. They should also request the Messenger of Allah (saw) to pray for them. When they do so, Allah will turn to them and forgive them and He will show mercy to them. That is why He used the words la-wajadullaha tawwaban-rahima (they (on the basis of this means and intercession) would have surely found Allah the Granter of repentance, extremely Merciful). Many have stated this tradition. One of them is Abu Mansur Sabbagh who writes in his book al-Hikayat-ul-mashhurah that, according to ‘Utbi, once he was sitting beside the Prophet’s grave when a Bedouin came and he said, “Peace be on you, O Allah’s Messenger. I have heard that Allah says: ‘(O beloved!) And if they had come to you, when they had wronged their souls, and asked forgiveness of Allah, and the Messenger also had asked forgiveness for them, they (on the basis of this means and intercession) would have surely found Allah the Granter of repentance, extremely Merciful.’ I have come to you, asking forgiveness for my sins and I make you my intermediary before my Lord and I have come to you for this purpose.” The he recited these verses: “O, the most exalted among the buried people who improved the worth of the plains and hillocks! May I sacrifice my life for this grave which is made radiant by you, (the Prophet,) the one who is (an embodiment) of mercy and forgiveness.” Then the Bedouin went away and I fell asleep. In my dream I saw the Holy Prophet (saw). He said to me: O ‘Utbi the Bedouin is right, go and give him the good news that Allah has forgiven his sins.”
Source: (pg. 209-211. Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul)by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri)
You will not fail to note in these narrations that the individual is an unnamed or undisclosed person.
Why the redundancy on behalf of the Prophet (saw)?
Why not just show up in that unnamed man’s dream and tell him directly?
Next, why can’t the Prophet (saw) name the individual?
In other words why say: “O ‘Utbi the Bedouin is right.” Why not say O ‘Utbi, Abdullah bin Marwan ibn Khalid etc…”
On page 212 we are given another tradition by Imam Qurtubi in his famous exegesis al-Jami li-ahkam-il-Qur’an (5:265-6) similar to the ‘Utbi tradition. It states:
The anonymous villager and ‘Ali.
“Abu Sadiq has reported it from ‘Ali, A villager came to see us three days after the burial of the Holy Prophet (saw). He placed himself near the Prophet’s grave, sprinkled its earth over his body and said : ‘O Messenger of Allah, you said and we have heard it from you. You received commands from Allah and we received commands from you, and one of these divine commands is wa law annahum idh zalamu anfusahum. It is true that I have wronged myself, therefore, you should pray for my forgiveness.” (In response o the villager’s act of imploring) he was called out from the grave: ‘there is no doubt that you have been forgiven.’”
Source: (page 212 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul)by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri)
What is quite eye opening is that these traditions, one can imagine if being circulated on their own may have passed in many circles as credible.
Yet, when we have them juxtaposed together the questions start to arise.
This time we have an anonymous villager. This anonymous villager unlike the anonymous Bedouin gets an immediate response from the grave.
Why in this case does the anonymous villager get an immediate response where as the anonymous Bedouin has be told via an intermediary via a dream at that?
Now in regard to the second report Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri is displeased that Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani does not find it reliable.
Dr. Qadri states:
“Muhammed bin ‘Alawi al-Maliki expresses in his review an ambivalent attitude towards the tradition as he cannot positively, certify its authenticity,but in spite of its lack of certainty, most of the traditionalist have relied on its credibility.” Source: (pg. 213 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri)
Actually what Shaykh Muhammed bin ‘Alawi al-Maliki says in his book is as follows:
“So, this is the story of al-‘Utbi, and these are the (scholars) who quoted it. It is irrelevant if this report is authentic or weak. We inquire: Did these (scholars) quote something that is idolatry and misguidance? Did they quote from something that invites to idol worship and grave worship? If that is indeed the case, then what reliability is there to be found in tehm or their books? Glorified are You my Lord this is manifest slander!”
Source: (pg. 119 Notions that must be corrected by Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani)
In reality. Dr. Qadri basically re words Shaykh ‘Alawi al-Malki’s words as his own so it is not wholesale plagiarism.
But these are eye opening statements.
“It is irrelevant if this report is authentic or weak.”
“but in spite of its lack of certainty, most of the traditionalist have relied on its credibility.”
As Allah (swt) states:“They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah”
Apparently this only applies to Jewish and Christian scholars and never to Muslim scholars!
The tradition concerning rain through the means of the Prophet (saw) after his death.
“The people of Medina were in the grip of a severe famine. They complained to ‘Aisha (about their terrible condition). She told them to go towards the Prophet’s grave and open a window in the direction of the sky so that there is no curtain between the sky and the grave. The narrator says they do so. Then it started raining heavily; even the lush green grass sprang up (everywhere) and the camel’s had grown so fat (it seemed) they would burst out due to their over piling of blubber. So the year was named as the year of greenery and plenty.”
Source: (pg. 215-216 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri.)
The chain of transmission for this hadith is: Abu an-Nu’man heard it from Sa’id bin Zayd, he from ‘Amr bin Malik an-Nukri and he from Abu al-Jawza Aws bin Abdullah who has reported it.
Abu an-Nu’man ‘Arim was Muhammed bin al-Fadl Sadusi. He was Imam Bukhari’s teacher, and memorizer of traditions and they (Ahl Sunnah)claim he was a very truthful person.
This man who would say about Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib – “The son of the prostitute.” – This Abu an-Nu’man /Muhammed ibn Al-Fadl Sadusi he is the reliable and truthful one with these people?!
Nonetheless objections have been made against virtually the entire chain of transmitters. Against Abu an-Nu’man.
Against Sa’id bin Zayd. He has been classified as weak.
Against ‘Amr bin Malik and Abu al-Jawza.
At the end of the day let us say that this tradition had no one who disputed it. What does it say? It shows that Allah (swt) honoured the grave of the Blessed Prophet (saw) as he does till today.
There is nothing in the above narration about people either making tawassul or istigatha to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after his death.
In fact, we have the right to ask what would be the advise of the advocates of those who say we can do istigatha to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he has died, if for example a similar situation happened any where else in the world that doesn’t have the grave of the Blessed Prophet (saw) near by?
A) If they can get similar results by doing istigatha to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he died without needing to do any action at the grave; then why do people need to perform some action with the grave in order to receive the blessing?
I know the response is that it is not because of the grave but the person in the grave.
However, if my question in A) above is not answered the impression is that it is not the Prophet (saw) alone but a combo of Grave + Prophet that the people did istigatha to receive rain.
Thus, if people in remote parts of the world can do istigatha of the Blessed Prophet (saw) to receive rain and they do not have to do any action to his grave why did the people of Medina need to do so?
In other words, these people instead of trying to sell the Muslim masses a combo meal, inclusive of fries and a drink, they want to give us a Combo Istigatha Grave + Prophet.
B) If the teaching of istigatha by calling out to the Blessed Prophet (saw) after he died or making means of his burial site was a known thing among the people why did Aisha (ra) have to inform them what to do to begin with?
After all the text does say: “The people of Medinawere in the grip of a severe famine.” Among the people of Medina are heavy weights of knowledge concerning the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Intermediation through the Prophet’s grave during ‘Umar’s tenure?
Malik ad-Dar has related:
“The people were gripped by famine during the tenure of ‘Umar (bin al-Khattab), Then a Companion walked up to the Prophet’s grave and said, “O Messenger of Allah, please ask for rain from Allah for your Community who is in dire straights.” Then the Companion saw the Prophet (saw) in a dream. The Prophet (saw) said to him, “Go over to ‘Umar, give him my regards and tell him that the rain will come to you. And tell ‘Umar that he should be on his toes, he should be on his toes. (he should remain alert).” Then the Companion went over to see ‘Umar and passed on to him the tidings. On hearing this, ‘Umar broke into a spurt of crying. He said, “O Allah, I exert myself to fall until I am completely exhausted.”
Source: (pg. 229 to 230 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri.)
What can be said about this. There are some people that the truth comes out of their own mouths and they do not stop to think about it! Allah is our refuge.
In this chain of narration is A’mash.
“A’mash is regarded a second-grade impostor, and this is a class of impostors from whom our religious leaders recorded traditions in their authentic books. Therefore, it is proved that this tradition narrated by A’mash is accepted.”
Source: (pg. 231 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri)
What can we say people? Admitted imposters inform of us our faith! Do people have no hayya?
Also, this whole narration is flatly contradicted by the narration above!
O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle
This is crystal clear. We used to (past tense) this of course is when the Blessed Prophet (saw) was alive.
Take a close look at the above report and then go back and compare/contrast it with the two above ( The anonymous villager and ‘Ali & The anonymous Bedouin and the dream of ‘Utbi)
The anonymous Bedouin who ask himself has yet ‘Utbi (the one who did not even ask) is the one who has the dream.
“Then the Bedouin went away and I fell asleep. In my dream I saw the Holy Prophet (saw). He said to me: O ‘Utbi the Bedouin is right, go and give him the good news that Allah has forgiven his sins.”
The anonymous Villager who ask himself gets called out to directly from the grave.
(In response o the villager’s act of imploring) he was called out from the grave: ‘there is no doubt that you have been forgiven’
The anonymous companion who ask himself has a dream to go inform Umar (who did not even ask)
“Then the Companion saw the Prophet (saw) in a dream. The Prophet (saw) said to him, “Go over to ‘Umar, give him my regards and tell him that the rain will come to you.”
What on Earth is going on?!
The hadith of ‘Uthman bin Hunayf.
When it comes to this hadith I found it very curious as to why the Arabic was rendered into English the way that it was by Dr. Tahir-Ul-Qadri.
“By God! I did not say this, but once I was in the company of the Messenger of Allah (saw) that a blind man came over to see him and complained t him about the loss of his eyesight. The Prophet (saw) asked him to be patient, but he said: “O Messenger of Allah! I don’t have any servant and I am in great trouble. The Prophet (saw) said: fetch an earthen pot and perform the ablution, then offer two cycles of prayer and implore Allah with these praying words.‘ Then ‘Uthman bin Hunayf said: ‘By God! We had neither gone out far away from the meeting nor had the conversation among us stretched out that the man came running to us as if he had never been blind.”
Source: (pg. 242 Islamic Concept of Intermediation (Tawassul) by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri)
Two things to take note.
The first point to take note of.
The Prophet (saw) asked him to be patient. This is quite sly and I will tell you why this is.
`Uthman bin Hunaif narrated that a blind man came to the Prophet (saw) and said:
“Supplicate to Allah to heal me.” He (saw) said: “If you wish I will supplicate for you, and if you wish, you can be patient, for that is better for you.” He said: “Then supplicate to Him.” He said: “So he ordered him to perform Wudu’ and to make his Wudu’ complete, and to supplicate with this supplication: ‘O Allah, I ask You and turn towards You by Your Prophet Muhammed (saw), the Prophet of Mercy. Indeed, I have turned to my Lord, by means of You, concerning this need of mine, so that it can be resolved, so O Allah so accept his intercession for me (Allāhumma innī as’aluka wa atawajjahu ilaika binabiyyka Muḥammedin nabi-ir-raḥmati, innī tawajjahtu bika ila rabbī fī ḥājatī hādhihī lituqḍā lī, Allāhumma fashaffi`hu fīyya).’”
Why leave out the fact that the Blessed Prophet (saw) himself told the man that being patient with what Allah (swt) decreed would be better than the Prophet (saw) supplicating or interceding on his behalf?!!
In fact, the Qur’an mentions the action in which Allah (swt) rewards us without measure and it is not tawassul or istigatha.
“Say ˹O Prophet, that Allah says˺, “O My servants who believe! Be mindful of your Lord. Those who do good in this world will have a good reward. And Allah’s earth is spacious.Only those who endure patiently will be given their reward without limit.” (Qur’an 39:10)
The second point to take note of.
The text quoted does not give you the formula of the prayer. “with these praying words.” Well, what are those praying words?
Shaykh Muhammed Alawi al-Maliki does the same thing!
We read:
“From ‘Uthman b. Hunayf (ra) who said: “When a blind man came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) complaining from his loss of sight, he said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! I have no one to lead me and things are difficult for me. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: ‘Go perform wudu’, pray two units of ritual Prayer, then supplicate: ‘O Allah, I ask you and turn to you through Your Prophet, the Prophet of Mercy, O Muhammed, I turn to your Lord through you so that He returns to me my sight. O Allah, grant him intercession for me, and grant me intercession for myself.” ‘Uthman said: “By Allah, we did not part company or speak for a very long, before the man came to us as if there was nothing wrong with him.”
Source: (pg. 87 Notions that must be corrected by Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani)
Where is the statement: “be patient, for that is better for you” ?!!
Why leave out this key text?
For the record we (as Ibadis would have no issue) with the narration in Tirmidhi. This happened while the Blessed Prophet (saw) was still alive. No problem.
Yet,
The above hadith of ‘Uthman bin Hunayf comes under a section that is titled:Tawassul through the Prophet (saw) in his life and after his death. In Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki’s book.
It is also is quoted by Dr. Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri is under a section titled:
“Intermediation through the holy Prophet (saw) after his death.”
So why would they include a hadith that is talking about an action of the Blessed Prophet (saw) while he was still alive in a section about intermediation after his (saw) death?
Because they both go on to provide another narration where ‘Uthman bin Hunayf teaches a man to pray the following formula after the Prophet (saw) died:
O Allah, I ask you and turn to you through Your Prophet, the Prophet of Mercy, O Muhammed, I turn to your Lord through you so that He returns to me my sight. O Allah, grant him intercession for me, and grant me intercession for myself.”
Remember this clashes with what we know from Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra) who stated:
O Allah! We used to ask our Prophet to invoke You for rain, and You would bless us with rain, and now we ask his uncle
This is crystal clear. We used to (past tense) this of course is when the Blessed Prophet (saw) was alive.
Umar Ibn Al Khattab (ra) is using the plural form “We” this means a collective understanding and this trumps an individual understanding.
On what consistent basis can it be argued that we can’t ask the Prophet (saw) for rain now that he is dead but we can invoke him for other purposes?
In summary about 5 different traditions are cited by those who propose that we call upon the Prophet (saw) after his death. These traditions are either fraught with challenges to their chains of transmissions or out right contradict other transmissions that are stronger or have no challenges to their chains of transmissions.
I have been in circles and gatherings before that practice istigatha and tawassul to not only the Blessed Prophet (saw), but to scholars, people deemed saints or awilya (friends of Allah) and the frequency to which it occurs among them was really what put this whole thing into perspective.
Given the frequency of this occurrence among them and the fact that you would think that if such a practice was really going on in the early Muslim community then these people would not need to be like pan handlers or gold prospectors trying to sift and find anything, anything at all to support their claims.
So recall that the side that is saying that to call upon the Prophet (saw) even after he has died it is mustahab -recommended, not that it is wajib or fardh.
Also recall the quote from Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki
“Tawassul is not an obligation or a necessary matter, neither is the response to the supplication conditional upon it, Rather, the basis for the supplication is to call upon Allah, the Exalted, as Allah said: And if my servants ask you concerning me, then say that I am close (al-Baqara: 186) and: Say, “Call upon Allah or call upon al-Rahman: Whatever you call him by -to Him belong the best names.”
Source: (pgs. 74-75 Notions that must be corrected by Shaykh Muhammed b. Alawi al-Maliki al-Hasani)
Thus, given the extremely contentious nature of this issue, it is best to keep to that tawassul which the scholars and the Muslims are in agreement upon. Leave that tawassul in which the scholars and the Muslims dispute about. It also would be best to keep to that istigatha which the scholars and the Muslims are in agreement upon. Leave that istigatha which the scholars and the Muslims dispute about.
Narrated Abu Huraira:
When Allah revealed the Verse: “Warn your nearest kinsmen,” Allah’s Messenger (saw) got up and said, “O people of Quraish (or said similar words)! Buy (i.e. save) yourselves (from the Hellfire) as I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment; O Bani `Abd Manaf! I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment, O Safiya, the Aunt of Allah’s Messenger (saw)! I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment; O Fatima bint Muhammed! Ask me anything from my wealth, but I cannot save you from Allah’s Punishment.”
I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, “Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians praised the son of Mary, for I am only a Slave. So, call me the Slave of Allah and His Apostle.”
“Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Universe” Allah (swt) is the Rabil alamin.
Allah (swt) is not once addressed in the entire Qur’an as: “The Lord of Muhammed (saw)”, as if that was some exclusive title.
Allah takes pleasure in not simply being The Rabb of Muhammed but “The Rabb of all mankind”.
“We have sent you ˹O Prophet˺ only as a mercy for the whole world.” (Qur’an 21:107)
And the Blessed Prophet(saw) continues to be a mercy for the whole of mankind by leaving behind his examples, his Sunnah, his beautiful and noble character.
Summary:
Aqidah principles have to be based upon that which is certain.
Tawassul 1st Type: Asking Assad to make du’a thinking it will be accepted because Assad has the power to make it accepted. -This is shirk.
2nd Type: Asking Assad to make du’a thinking it will be accepted because of his closeness and proximity to Allah. -This is acceptable.
3rd Type: Thinking Allah will assit us simply by mentioning the name of someone in your du’a. Exampe: “Oh Allah Assad is with us, so grant us victory!” This seems to occupy a place between the 1st and 2nd type. Some say it is shirk some say it is not. We leave the doubtful so we abstain from this.
Istigatha.
Calling out to someone or something that has the abilty to aid you. Examples: Your friend, your brother, your parents, your children. -This is acceptable
Calling out to those who have died. Some say it is shirk and some say it is not shirk. We leave the doubtful so we abstain from this.
Conclusion: A believer cannot go wrong by leaving the doubtful.
We maintain our connection via the Blessed Prophet (saw) via following his Blessed Sunnah.
“Turn you back in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not among those who join gods with Allah,- Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects,- each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!” (Qur’an 30:31-32)
“O mankind! there hath come to you a direction from your Lord and a healing for the (diseases) in your hearts,- and for those who believe, a guidance and a Mercy.” (Qur’an 10:57)
﷽
When looking at the issue of forgeries of hadith one does not have to look further than the pro-Sufi and anti-Sufi forces within the ‘Ahl Sunnah‘.
Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak said, “The isnad is from the religion; were it not for the isnad anyone could say anything they wanted.”
Source: (Reported by Muslim in the introduction to his Sahih, vol. 1, pg. 9, Dar Taibah.)
The isnad -is the chain of narration.
The word hadith in the title of the article is used in the Arabic sense of a report. Thus, for the purposes of this article it is not necessarily a statement attributed to the Blessed Prophet (saw).
Anyone who has been among people who claim to practice ‘Sufism‘ and/ or have inclinations towards a branch of study in Islam called ‘tassawuf‘ has most likely heard innumerable times the following statement attributed to Imam Malik.
“He who practices tassawuf without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith (tazandaq) , while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Tasawwuf corrupts himself (tafassaqa).”
Now when I studied at Zaytuna I was told time and again the importance of being connected in an ‘unbroken‘ chain of sacred knowledge that goes all the way back to the Blessed Messenger (saw) himself.
Of course, what I’m about to say may seem cynical to you the reader, but it is the atmosphere that was created around Zaytuna when I was there.
The atmosphere seemed to say to me, “Don’t you dare question anything that is presented to you, because after all who are you to question? You don’t have the requisite tools; and you didn’t study under a Shaykh who toes the line that we tell you to tow. Therefore, all of your sincere lines of inquiry are invalid.”
So let us say that someone has reservations about giving their complete allegiance (the custody of their soul) to a Shaykh. However, this person agrees to or understands the necessity of following someone learned in jurisprudence.
Thus, the concept of the following someone learned in jurisprudence is used as a jump-off point for handing over complete sovereignty of your soul to a Spiritual guide or Shaykh. Many who call themselves ‘Sufi’ today use the following modus operandi:
Start by getting the spiritual aspirant the necessity of following someone learned in jurisprudence. Use the idea of following Imams in jurisprudence to advance their position. Thus, if Imams like Shaf’i and Malik are seen to be in favor of Sufism or ‘Tassawuf‘ then whom are we to question it!
So even until today, you have world-renown people like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf attributing such statements to Imam Malik.
You can see the following video where he attributes the above-mentioned statement to Imam Malik. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_5d9c2UdiU @ 1:14 in the video you can hear Shaykh Hamza attribute this statement to Imam Malik
Interestingly the term Sufi was applied to those given the appellation “Mutazalites” long before it was applied to Junayd.
“The term Sufi was applied to Mu’tazili ascetics before it was to Junayd and his circle. Early Mu’tazili ascetics and the later Karramiyya, who more or less absorbed Mu’tazili asceticism, sometimes exalted complete renunciation of normal gain, counting it best to live off alms.”
Origins of the term ‘Ahl al sunnah’
Christopher Melchert also gives some very keen insights into the term ‘Ahl al sunnah’ and the fact that a great many factions were called themselves by this appellation.
He says,
“The 9th-century hadith folk’s own preferred term for themselves was“Ahl al-sunna.” It is not convenient for us to call the hadith folk “Sunnis” because that term now calls to mind the great tripartite division of Sunnis, Shi’is, and Kharijis. At least for the 9th century and earlier, a mere tripartite division is simplistic and practically impossible to document. To begin with, 9th-century definitions of Shi’ism were considerably different from those of later times; for example, traditionalist rijal critics regularly distinguished between ‘tashayyu’, special regard for ‘Ali and his house that the hadith folk was willing to overlook, and rafid, the rejection of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar that they thought put one outside the Muslim community. With equal emphasis, the 9th-century hadith folk distinguished themselves from Qadariyya, Murji’a, Mu’tazila, and other theological parties not accounted for by a simple, anachronistic dichotomy between Sunnis and Shi’is. The polarity of Sunni and Shi’i was not strong until the mid-10th century, and full Sunni mutual recognition and self-awareness appeared only in the mid 10th century. Finally, modern scholars should avoid endorsing the hadith folk’s own estimate that they were the overwhelming majority, as calling them “Sunnis” might do.”
” The significance of their calling themselves ‘Ahl al-sunna’ is not that their views were identical to those of the later, great Sunni community, which they were not, but that the later community deliberately identified them as its forebears. We need to understand their piety. Their adversaries preferred not to call them ‘Ahl al-sunna’ and proposed various other terms.’ Al-Jahiz disparaged the nabita, those who sprouted up like weeds to extol the enemies of ‘Ali and to promulgate such crass ideas as assigning God an imaginable body (tajsim, taswfr). Other writers attributed similar errors to the hash- wiyya (vulgar). The hadith folk complained that the Murji’a called them shukkak (doubters) for saying, “I am a believer, God willing,” while the Qadariyya called them mujbira or jabriyya for upholding divine predestination. To use any of these terms for the hadith folk would mean taking sides as much as it would mean calling them ‘Ahl al-sunna’, which is needless for modern scholars.”
“The hadith folk emerged as a distinct group at about the end of the 8th century. They lost importance in the 10th century. Chroniclers usually refer to their 10th-century successors in Baghdad as the Hanabila or simply al-‘amma (the general), periodically rioting against the Shias. Meanwhile, their own name for themselves, ‘Ahl al-sunna’, was claimed by virtually all parties except the Shi’is.Even Mu’tazila called themselves Ahl al-sunna wa-al-jama’a, on the plea that if they were not actually the great majority, they ought to have been. (I have not compared the piety of the hadith folk with that of 9th-century Shi’is, rewarding though such a comparison would be. At least a wing of the Shi’ movement probably had something very close, which ought to show up in Shi’i hadith.)”
So again we can see there was a lot of conflict and turmoil in the very early history of Islam. Conflict and turmoil that is with us until this very day. So less I digress let me go back to the opening quotation attributed to Imam Malik:
“He who practices tassawuf without learning Sacred Law corrupts his faith (tazandaq) , while he who learns Sacred Law without practicing Tasawwuf corrupts himself (tafassaqa).”
Gibril Fouad Haddad who is a follower of the Sufi group ‘The Naqshabandi Haqqani‘ * has provided some very insightful information to this claim above.
* note: This Sufi group is to be distinguished from their rivals the ‘Naqshabandi Mujaddidi‘ as well as other rival Sufi groups.
He has the following to say about the above quotation attributed to Imam Malik :
“Cited without the chain of transmission by Al-Qari in Sharh ‘Ayn al-Ilm and Mirqat al-Mafatih, Ahmad Zarruq in the Forth of his Qawa’id al-Tassawuf in his commentary on Ibn Abi Zayd’s Risal a (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Kutub al Arabiyyah, Ibn Ajiba in Iaqaz, Al Himan fi Sharh al-Hikam and Al-Tata’i in his commentary on Ibn Rushd’s Muaqaddima.”
Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools page 180)
Ponder that for a moment, respected readers. A statement seemingly in support of ‘Tassawuf‘ put into the mouth of Imam Malik and then repeated by men like Al Qari, Ahmad Zarruq, Ibn Abi Zayd, Ibn Ajiba, and At Tata’i. Yet, no chain of narration!
In my previous conversations with Dr. Abdullah bin Hamid Ali and Ustadh AbdasSamad Clarke, both have confirmed to me that it is not authentically ascribed to Malik.
Anti-Sufi reports attributed to Imam Malik
Incident no. 1 )
“Al -Tinnisi said: We were sitting with Malik with his companions around him. A man from the people of Nasibin said, ‘We have some people who go by the name of Sufis. They eat a lot then they start (chanting) poems (qasa’id), after which they stand and start (chanting) dancing.” Malik asked, “Are they boys (sibyan)?” He said no. Malik asked, “Are they insane?” He said, No, they are old men (mashaykh) and other than that, and they are mature and sane (‘uqala.” Malik said, “I never heard that any of the people of Islam do this.” The man said to him, “Indeed, they do! They eat, then they stand up and start dancing intensively (dawa’ib), and some of them slap their heads, and some of their faces.” Malik started laughing then went into his house. His companions said to the man. “You were, O man, ill luck (mash’um) for our friend [Malik]. We have been sitting with him thirty-odd years and never saws him laugh except today.” “Narrated without a chain by Al-Qadi ‘Iyad in Tartib Al-Madarak.”
Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools by Gibril Fouad Haddad page 180)
Incident no.2 )
“Abd al-Malik ibn Ziyad al-Nasibi said: “We were with Malik when I mentioned to him Sufis in our city. I said to him that they wear fancy Yemenite clothes, and do such and such. He replied, ‘Woe to you! Are they Muslims?’. He then laughed until he lay on his back. Some of his companions said to me, ‘What is this?’ We have not seen more trouble (fitna) caused to the Shaykh than you, for we never saw him laugh!” “Narrated by al-Khallal in al-Hathth ‘ala al-Tijara wal-Sina’a wal-Amal (Abu Ghudda) with a weak chain because of ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Ziyad al-Nasibi who is “disclaimed in his narrations and untrustworthy” (munkar al hadith, gahyr thiqa) according to al-Aazdi as per Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Du’afa wal-Matrukin (1:149) while Ibn Hibban in his Thiaqat (8:390) said he reports oddities from Malik.”
Source: (The Four Imams and their Schools by Gibril Fouad Haddad page 181)
So you can imagine the incongruity of all of this. Notice the similarities between the two seemingly Anti-Sufi reports attributed to Imam Malik.
1) His strong reaction: ‘I never heard that any of the people of Islam do this. &Woe to you! Are they Muslims?’
2) His hearty laugh after hearing of their doings. ‘Malik started laughing then went into his house. &He then laughed until he lay on his back’.
3) The shock of the people present at Maliks’ reaction. ‘You were O man, ill-luck (mash’um) for our friend [Malik]. We have been sitting with him thirty-odd years and never saws him laugh except today. & What is this?’ We have not seen more trouble (fitna) caused to the Shaykh than you, for we never saw him laugh’!
You can scroll down to the section: “Imam Malik and the Sufis” Gibril Fouad Haddad has the following to say about the two incidents, reported above:
Concerning the first incident, he says, “This is narrated without chain by al-Qadi `Iyad. in Tartib al-Madarik (2:53-54).” That is all he has to say. There is no chain of transmitters. Case closed.
Concerning the second incident, he simply gives the reason one of the transmitters is dismissed. Then he concludes by saying:
“Content-wise, neither of the above reports shows unambiguous condemnation of group dhikr but only that some people who passed for Sufis in the Imam’s time reportedly committed certain childish excesses or irrational breaches of decorum. The reports only show that Imam Malik found the story amusing. The delator seems obsessed with the ‘eating and dancing’ which he mentions twice as if afraid Malik didn’t hear it the first time. There is also on the part of Malik’s circle clear disapproval of the delator who is apparently perceived as an interloper. And Allah knows best.”
Actually what the reports show assuming they are true at all is the following:
The reports show that Imam Malik does not even seem to be even vaguely familiar with such groups. The asking ‘if the people are Muslim‘, and making statements such as ‘the people of Islam are not heard of doing this‘ would be very difficult for Muslims having a pro-Sufi bias to fathom. Especially, in the first report since, we don’t have Imam Malik laughing until after hearing about people slapping their faces.
Prima Quran 