You aren’t as bad of a person if you impregnate and kill your mother compared to someone who asks the prophet to pray for them

[Angelina]

Scholars who were explicitly against Istighaatha before Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Allah.
1. Ibn Aqeel
2. Imam al Shaafici
3. Imam Ibn Khuzaymah
4. Imam Bayhaqi
5. Imam Abu Suleman Khatibi
6. Ibn Rajab al Hambali
7. Al Hajjaawi al Hambali
8. Al Bahuti al Hambali
9. Imam Fakhruddin Al Razi Al Ashari.....

This is what Imam Al Tabari said in his takfeer of Ayah:

وَإِذَا مَسَّكُمُ ٱلضُّرُّ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ ضَلَّ مَن تَدْعُونَ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ ۖ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْبَرِّ أَعْرَضْتُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلْإِنسَٰنُ كَفُورًا

"And when harm touches you at sea, lost are those you call upon except for Him. But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away..."

Iman Tabari (رحمه الله) says:

"You've lost those who you call upon besides Allah from the rivals (unto Him) and deities...-ولم تجدوا غير الله مغيثا يغيثكم دعوتموه -and you will not find besides Allah any helper who can help you when you call upon Him..."

Did they say it was Shirk though? Bid’ah yes, especially in the case of Ibn Taymiyyah. I keep on reading reports that Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbali thought it was acceptable.

Imam Shafici didn’t believe it was acceptable? My Allah forgive me, it thought I read somewhere that traditionally the Shaficis thought it was okay. There are Shafi scholars that clearly did.

By the way, I don’t believe you can make Tawassuf through the dead. Goes against common sense, the way I see it. I merely don’t understand how we can label it as shirk and call people deviants when a lot of classical scholars didn’t see it that. If you remember from one of the threads and we were having big debate, I was one of the posters saying it was a big shirk.

 

[Haragwafi]

do you seriously think i’m going to ignore all major classical scholars and listen to a qabilist isaaq who praised colonial foot soldiers for the british?

You don't even believe in classical scholars to begin with weirdo

 

[Angelina]

Shirk is

Can you give a reference to what Muslim scholar believed it was acceptable to make dua to the Prophet peace be upon him after the Prophet was passed away?

To my knowledge the practice of making dua to the Prophet didn’t take place by the Sahaba and two generations after them, when he was dead.

Scholars hold different opinions on making Tawassul through the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Most scholars who have addressed this issue, including Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal believed it to be permissible. However, the Hanafi scholars, Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and others say it is prohibited.

Advocates for the first opinion refer to evidence from the Quran and Sunnah (Prophetic tradition). Some of them like As-Subki the Shaafi’i scholar even claim that this kind of Tawassul has been declared permissible by all scholars. Their evidence from the Quran includes the verse (which means): {O you who have believed, fear Allaah and seek the means [of nearness] to Him and strive in His cause that you may succeed.} [Quran 5: 35

Tawassul seeking intercession is prohibited in principle unless proven otherwise

Explore the debate surrounding Tawassul (seeking intercession) in Islam, where scholars have differing views, particularly regarding its permissibility through the Prophet Muhammad, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. While most scholars, including Imam Ahmad, support Tawassul as permissible, notable...

www.google.com

This was clearly an acceptable practice by early Islamic scholars. Even Taymiyya who was against it says it is bid'ah and not Shirk. That is why i've changed by stance on the matter. I don't agree with it, but when something was blantantly seen as acceptable by many and those that opposed it say it is bid'ah, who am I to scream that is shirk when I am an unknowledgeable laymen?

 

[Angelina]

You don't even believe in classical scholars to begin with weirdo

Where did he say that or are you just insulting him?

 

[hamar_oo_iidil]

How can you even imagine the thought of impregnating your own mother let alone killing her? Sometimes I wonder where sheikhs, ustaads, etc minds are at for them to even be conjuring up these sorts of comparisons...

I get that shirk is bad, the worst sin in Islam even. But pls don't tell me about how impregnating and murdering my own mother is less of a sin that it.

 

[Hamzza]

Did they say it was Shirk though? Bid’ah yes, especially in the case of Ibn Taymiyyah. I keep on reading reports that Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbali thought it was acceptable.

Imam Shafici didn’t believe it was acceptable? My Allah forgive me, it thought I read somewhere that traditionally the Shaficis thought it was okay. There are Shafi scholars that clearly did.

By the way, I don’t believe you can make Tawassuf through the dead. Goes against common sense, the way I see it. I merely don’t understand how we can label it as shirk and call people deviants when a lot of classical scholars didn’t see it that. If you remember from one of the threads and we were having big debate, I was one of the posters saying it was a big shirk.

Istighaatha through the prophet wasn't a thing back then when this scholars lived, it's later innovation by Ahlul Bid'ah. This scholars were against the concept of Istighaatha altogether and labeled it Kufr.

Al-Buhuti a Hanbali(d.1051) wrote in this work Kashf al-Qinaa' (14/227): said: Or who set up between himself and Allaah intermediaries, relying upon them, invoking them and asking them meaning, he disbelieved beacause this is like the action of the worshippers of idols,

According to Ahlul Bid'ah and shia the prophet spent 23 years of his life calling the mushrikeen away from dua to their idols and statues, only to tell them to call upon himself and his Ahlul Bayt instead. This doesn't make any sense.

 

[World]

Scholars who were explicitly against Istighaatha before Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Allah.
1. Ibn Aqeel
2. Imam al Shaafici
3. Imam Ibn Khuzaymah
4. Imam Bayhaqi
5. Imam Abu Suleman Khatibi
6. Ibn Rajab al Hambali
7. Al Hajjaawi al Hambali
8. Al Bahuti al Hambali
9. Imam Fakhruddin Al Razi Al Ashari.....

This is what Imam Al Tabari said in his takfeer of Ayah:

وَإِذَا مَسَّكُمُ ٱلضُّرُّ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ ضَلَّ مَن تَدْعُونَ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ ۖ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْبَرِّ أَعْرَضْتُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلْإِنسَٰنُ كَفُورًا

"And when harm touches you at sea, lost are those you call upon except for Him. But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away..."

Iman Tabari (رحمه الله) says:

"You've lost those who you call upon besides Allah from the rivals (unto Him) and deities...-ولم تجدوا غير الله مغيثا يغيثكم دعوتموه -and you will not find besides Allah any helper who can help you when you call upon Him..."

It is well known that none before Ibn Taymiyyah wrote against tawassul and istigatha through the Prophet (SAW) as stated by Imam Ibn Hajar and Imam al-Subki.


Imam Ibn Hajr al Haithami, in the chapter on Intermediation “BESEECHING FOR HELP” or Intercession through the Prophet (Peace be upon him)”: Amongst the evil deeds of Ibn Taymiyyah, something which nobody before him in this world proclaimed is his rejection of Istighatha (Beseeching for help) and Tawassul through Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam). This Tawassul through Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) is Hassan (fair) in all conditions whether before his creation (i.e. him being sent to the world), after it (i.e. his death), also in this world and on Day of Judgment.

[Al-Jawhar al Munazzam fi Ziyaratil Qabril Muqarram, Page No. 171, Published by Dar ul Hawi, Beirut, Lebanon]


Sheikh ul Islam Imam al- Subki said: It should be known that Tawassul, “ASKING FOR HELP” and intercession through the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in the court of Allah is not only allowed but is “RECOMMENDED” It being Legal and recommended is a known fact for everyone who has understanding of deen, this is a deed of Prophets/Messengers, the salaf-as-Saliheen, the Ulama and general public of Muslims, none of them denied it nor in any time these deeds were called as bad except for when Ibn Taymiyyah (came in picture) and he started to reject them, his sayings made the weak get into confusion/dilemma, he did such a Bidah which nobody before him had done…

[Imam Taqi ud din as-Subki – Rahimuhulllah in his magnificent work called Shifa us Siqaam fi Ziyaratal Khayr al Anaam, Page No. 357].

 

[Angelina]

Istighaatha through the prophet wasn't a thing back then when this scholars lived, it's later innovation by Ahlul Bid'ah. This scholars were against the concept of Istighaatha altogether and labeled it Kufr.

Al-Buhuti a Hanbali(d.1051) wrote in this work Kashf al-Qinaa' (14/227): said: Or who set up between himself and Allaah intermediaries, relying upon them, invoking them and asking them meaning, he disbelieved beacause this is like the action of the worshippers of idols,View attachment 242434

According to Ahlul Bid'ah and shia the prophet spent 23 years of his life calling the mushrikeen away from dua to their idols and statues, only to tell them to call upon himself and his Ahlul Bayt instead. This doesn't make any sense.

that isn’t what tawassuf is walal. Tawassuf with a person alive is allowed even amongst Salafis as far as I’m aware. The debate is Tawassuf with the dead. This isn’t about calling to others. It is making dua through others.

One question, do you see Ahmed ibn Hanbal may Allah be pleased with him committing or allowing Bid’ah? Also, many more believed it was okay. You can’t deny that he thought it was allowed.

Also, what do you think of Sh. Wahabs opinion that it is shirk? Hardly (as far as I know) before him believed it was shirk.

Can you label someone a deviant for following an opinion that the majority of Muslims did?

 

[Haragwafi]

Tawassul through the Prophet s.a.w doesn’t make sense to me and It isn’t something I’ll do. However, I’m not going to call it shirk, especially if Ibn Taymiyya believed it was bid’ah rather than shirk and you have major classical scholars such as Imam Hanbali believing it is acceptable. In fact, the majority did think it was acceptable. From the Hanbalis to get Malikis, to the Shafis and Hanaf

@Haragwafi how do you reconcile with the fact that the vast majority of major scholars believed it is acceptable and the ones that didn’t such as ibn Taymiyyah regarded it as Bid’ah and not shirk.

Are we going to sit there and say they’re wrong? Are you going to say that they have allowed Shirk?

I was raised with the idea that it is blantant shirk. However, how can I condemn people for that when the majority of Muslim scholars believe it isn’t? I didn’t know this and learning this blew my mind.

The Imams you have mentioned and those before them never said Tawasul to the dead was preassemble

قال أبو حنيفة: «لا ينبغي لأحد أن يدعو الله إلا به وأكره

Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah be pleased with him, said:

No one should call upon Allah except by Him.

 

[World]

that isn’t what tawassuf is walal. Tawassuf with a person alive is allowed even amongst Salafis as far as I’m aware. The debate is Tawassuf with the dead. This isn’t about calling to others. It is making dua through others.

One question, do you see Ahmed ibn Hanbal may Allah be pleased with him committing or allowing Bid’ah? Also, many more believed it was okay.

Also, what do you think of Sh. Wahabs opinion that it is shirk? Hardly (as far as I know) before him believed it was shirk.

can you label someone a deviant for following an opinion that the majority of Muslims did?

How can something that Allah recommends in the Qur’an be shirk?

We sent not an apostle, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah. If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful.(4:64)


Hafidh Ibn Kathir (reh) said:

“Allah guides the sinners and neglectful [`asi], if they do something sinful or corrupt, to come to the Prophet, take him as a means [wasilah], and ask forgiveness from Allah, and to ask the Prophet (s) to also request God’s forgiveness for them. If they do this, God will forgive them, bless them and have mercy on them.”

So when the Prophet (SAW) is alive, it is recommended, but when he passes away it is shirk? This is why Ibn Taymiyyah said it was haram and not shirk, only a laymen with no knowledge of the deen like MIAW could say that it is shirk.

 

[Angelina]

The Imams you have mentioned and those before them never said Tawasul to the dead was preassemble

قال أبو حنيفة: «لا ينبغي لأحد أن يدعو الله إلا به وأكره

Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah be pleased with him, said:

No one should call upon Allah except by Him.

Saxib, they did. They even had chapters on Tawassuf. Tawassuf with a person alive is completely allowed even amongst Salafis. It is making dua through them, not calling them. The debate is about someone that is dead

How come, Islamweb a traditional Hanbali site say
otherwise and along with a host of Hanbali material I have seen with regards to Tawassuf through the prophet?


Scholars hold different opinions on making Tawassul through the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Most scholars who have addressed this issue, including Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal believed it to be permissible. However, the Hanafi scholars, Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and others say it is prohibited.

-You’re right about Hanafis scholars being against it. But Hanbalis clearly aren’t, hence you’re lying to suggest that non of them thought it was okay.

Are you going to claim that everyone, including Salafis who admit that Imam Hanbali had this opinion are liars?

 

[Angelina]

@Haragwafi

don’t lie please. Even Islamqa a Salafi website admits that many scholars used to allow it. Why say that non allowed it?!

But if it is asking by mere virtue of the person of the Prophets or the righteous, this is not prescribed, and it was prohibited by more than one of the scholars, who said: it is not permissible. However some of them granted a concession allowing it, although the former view is more correct, as stated above, because it is asking through a means that does not lead to the desired outcome.

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/114142

Just say you don’t agree and that is fine. But let’s not act like many scholars did allow it. I don’t agree because it doesn’t make sense and goes against common sense in my very humble opinion, but I’m going to refrain from calling it Shirk.

 

[Angelina]

How can something that Allah recommends in the Qur’an be shirk?

We sent not an apostle, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah. If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful.(4:64)


Hafidh Ibn Kathir (reh) said:

“Allah guides the sinners and neglectful [`asi], if they do something sinful or corrupt, to come to the Prophet, take him as a means [wasilah], and ask forgiveness from Allah, and to ask the Prophet (s) to also request God’s forgiveness for them. If they do this, God will forgive them, bless them and have mercy on them.”

So when the Prophet (SAW) is alive, it is recommended, but when he passes away it is shirk? This is why Ibn Taymiyyah said it was haram and not shirk, only a laymen with no knowledge of the deen like MIAW could say that it is shirk.

The reason why there are different opinions is that clearly the Ayah is being interpreted in different ways. I as a humble laymen with 0 knowledge will refrain from calling it shirk. Especially, in the light of the fact even those against it say it is Bid’ah. Also, I’ll also refrain from calling those who do this Ahlul Bid’ah because you are indirectly insulting the scholars who allowed it like ibn Hanbali who is ten times more knowledgeable than all of us put together.

Also, who am I going to take knowledge from. A scholar that emerged from the desert of Nejd less than 300 yrs ago, or classical scholars who believe it was Bid’ah or even halal?

 

[Haragwafi]

It is well known that none before Ibn Taymiyyah wrote against tawassul and istigatha through the Prophet (SAW) as stated by Imam Ibn Hajar and Imam al-Subki.


Imam Ibn Hajr al Haithami, in the chapter on Intermediation “BESEECHING FOR HELP” or Intercession through the Prophet (Peace be upon him)”: Amongst the evil deeds of Ibn Taymiyyah, something which nobody before him in this world proclaimed is his rejection of Istighatha (Beseeching for help) and Tawassul through Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam). This Tawassul through Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) is Hassan (fair) in all conditions whether before his creation (i.e. him being sent to the world), after it (i.e. his death), also in this world and on Day of Judgment.

[Al-Jawhar al Munazzam fi Ziyaratil Qabril Muqarram, Page No. 171, Published by Dar ul Hawi, Beirut, Lebanon]


Sheikh ul Islam Imam al- Subki said: It should be known that Tawassul, “ASKING FOR HELP” and intercession through the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in the court of Allah is not only allowed but is “RECOMMENDED” It being Legal and recommended is a known fact for everyone who has understanding of deen, this is a deed of Prophets/Messengers, the salaf-as-Saliheen, the Ulama and general public of Muslims, none of them denied it nor in any time these deeds were called as bad except for when Ibn Taymiyyah (came in picture) and he started to reject them, his sayings made the weak get into confusion/dilemma, he did such a Bidah which nobody before him had done…

[Imam Taqi ud din as-Subki – Rahimuhulllah in his magnificent work called Shifa us Siqaam fi Ziyaratal Khayr al Anaam, Page No. 357].

Subki is a Asha'ari later scholar bring a scholar from the salaf saying Tawasul and Istigatha is permitted in Islam with strong evidence in the Sunnah and the Quran

Surat al-Ahqaf 46:5:

وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّن يَدْعُو مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ مَن لَّا يَسْتَجِيبُ لَهُ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ وَهُمْ عَن دُعَائِهِمْ غَافِلُونَ

Who is more astray than one who calls upon other than Allah, those who cannot answer him until the Day of Resurrection and are unaware of their supplications?

Al-Nu’man ibn Bashir reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

الدُّعَاءُ هُوَ الْعِبَادَةُ

Supplication is the essence of worship.

 

[Hamzza]

that isn’t what tawassuf is walal. Tawassuf with a person alive is allowed even amongst Salafis as far as I’m aware. The debate is Tawassuf with the dead. This isn’t about calling to others. It is making dua through others.

One question, do you see Ahmed ibn Hanbal may Allah be pleased with him committing or allowing Bid’ah? Also, many more believed it was okay. You can’t deny that he thought it was allowed.

Also, what do you think of Sh. Wahabs opinion that it is shirk? Hardly (as far as I know) before him believed it was shirk.

Can you label someone a deviant for following an opinion that the majority of Muslims did?

I don't agree with ustaad Abu Taymiyyah, and Dua linguistically means to merely call upon, and when you make a request to someone for anything like a cup of tea you are making a form of dua to them.

Yeah, many scholars thought that Istighaatha is ok, we say they scholars Ijtahaduu and wronged. This is Aqeedah issue walaal and you don't follow the majority because they are the majority. Unbelievers are the majority in this world, do we have to leave Islam and become Gaalo because they are the majority?

The scholars I listed were of the same opinion as Imam MIAW. Shiikh Uweysoow ii gargaar Jannada I Gali! Waa Shirk.

 

[Haragwafi]

@Haragwafi

don’t lie please. Even Islamqa a Salafi website admits that many scholars used to allow it. Why say that non allowed it?!

But if it is asking by mere virtue of the person of the Prophets or the righteous, this is not prescribed, and it was prohibited by more than one of the scholars, who said: it is not permissible. However some of them granted a concession allowing it, although the former view is more correct, as stated above, because it is asking through a means that does not lead to the desired outcome.

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/114142

Just say you don’t agree and that is fine. But let’s not act like many scholars did allow it. I don’t agree because it doesn’t make sense and goes against common sense in my very humble opinion, but I’m going to refrain from calling it Shirk.

some of them granted a concession allowing it, although the former view is more correct, as stated above, because it is asking through a means that does not lead to the desired outcome.

It says Some not "many" as you put there

 

[OffTheDome]

How is this acceptable? I won’t say that it’s shirk bc that’s not my job but the Prophet ﷺ has passed away. Why would you not ask Allah ﷻ directly who is the All Hearing the All Seeing? He is the one who will give permission to the Prophet ﷺ to intercede for others. So only ask Allah ﷻ for the Prophets intercession bc he is the one who responds. He is Al Mujeeb!

I’m surprised people actually do this smh

 

[Haragwafi]

 

[Keep it a boqol]

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[citrus_samurai]

Scholars who were explicitly against Istighaatha before Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Allah.
1. Ibn Aqeel
2. Imam al Shaafici
3. Imam Ibn Khuzaymah
4. Imam Bayhaqi
5. Imam Abu Suleman Khatibi
6. Ibn Rajab al Hambali
7. Al Hajjaawi al Hambali
8. Al Bahuti al Hambali
9. Imam Fakhruddin Al Razi Al Ashari.....

This is what Imam Al Tabari said in his takfeer of Ayah:

وَإِذَا مَسَّكُمُ ٱلضُّرُّ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ ضَلَّ مَن تَدْعُونَ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ ۖ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْبَرِّ أَعْرَضْتُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلْإِنسَٰنُ كَفُورًا

"And when harm touches you at sea, lost are those you call upon except for Him. But when He delivers you to the land, you turn away..."

Iman Tabari (رحمه الله) says:

"You've lost those who you call upon besides Allah from the rivals (unto Him) and deities...-ولم تجدوا غير الله مغيثا يغيثكم دعوتموه -and you will not find besides Allah any helper who can help you when you call upon Him..."

Imam Al Bayhaqi, Al Shaafici and Ar Razi weren’t against intercession/istighaatha as far as I know. Not sure about the other scholars though. Furthermore there is a huge difference between calling it haram and calling it straight up shirk