THE SUNNIYY ARTICLES
Ibnu Taymiyyah’s prohibiting the tawassul by the 'Anbiya’ and 'Awliya’ and the tabarruk by them and their traces - Among the proofs for the permissibility of tawassul
والصَّلَاةُ والسَّلاَمُ عَلَى سَيّدِنَا مُحَمَّدٍ أَشْرَفِ اْلمُرْسَلِيْنَ وَعَلَى آلِهِ وَصَحْبِهِ الطَّيّبِيْنَ الطَّاهِرِيْن
Among the proofs of the people of truth for the permissibility of tawassul by the Messenger of Allah in his life and after his death are:
In his two mu^jams (Al-mu^jaman), Al-mu^jamu l-kabir and Al-mu^jamu l-saghir [ Al-mu^jam is a book of hadith in which the hadiths are mentioned according to the alphabetical order of the sheikhs. Al-mu^jaman is the dual form of al-mu^jam.] At-Tabaraniyy extracted about ^Uthman ‘Ibnu Hunayf that a man used to go to ^Uthman ‘Ibnu ^Affan who did not pay attention to him and did not look into his case. He met ^Uthman ‘Ibnu Hunayf and complained to him about it. He said: Go to the wash place, perform wudu’ and two rak^as, then say (what means): O Allah, I ask You and direct my request to You by our Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I direct my request to Allah by you to be fulfilled. Then let us go together. The man went and did what he was told. Then he came to the gate of ^Uthman. The gateman came, took him by hand, admitted him to ^Uthman‘Ibnu ^Affan, and seated him on his rug. ^Uthman ‘Ibnu ^Affan asked him: What is your wish? He mentioned his wish to him. ^Uthman fulfilled his wish and said: I did not remember your wish until this time. Then the man left and met ^Uthman ‘Ibnu Hunayf and said: May Allah reward you with good things. He would not have looked into my wish had you not talked to him about me. ^Uthman ‘Ibnu Hunayf said: By Allah, I did not talk to him, but I witnessed a blind person who came to the Messenger of Allah complaining about losing his sight. The Messenger of Allah said (what means): If you would be patient or else I will make a du^a’ for you. He said: O Messenger of Allah, losing my sight is hard for me and I have no guide. He said (what means): Go to the wash place, perform wudu’, pray two rak^as, then say: O Allah, I ask You… to the end of the du^a’. The man did what he was told. By Allah, neither had we departed yet nor had the sitting lasted for long time, the man came to us sightful as if he had never had any problem.
In his two mu^jams, At-Tabaraniyy said that the hadith is sahih. According to the scholars of hadith, the word hadith is reserved to what has been marfu^ [ Al-marfu^ is a hadith which is attributed to the Prophet by a Companion.] to the Prophet and to what is mawquf [ Al-mawquf is a hadith which is attributed to a Companion, but not to the Prophet.] to the Sahabi, as it is established in the books of ‘Istilah (Science of hadith). Imam ‘Ahmad used the word hadith for an athar [Al-‘Athar refers to the marfu^ and mawquf hadith or to the mawquf hadith only.] of ^Umar about cheese brought by the Majus (fire worshippers) whose habit was to use the rennet of the maytah [ Al-maytah is an animal which was not slaughtered as per the rules of Islam. It is a great sin to eat a maytah.].
The hadith of ^Uthman ‘Ibnu Hunayf is evidence for the permissibility of tawassul by the Messenger of Allah in his life and after his death, in his presence and his absence. The matter is not like what ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah says: It is not allowed to perform tawassul except by the alive and present person. Since al-‘Albaniyy follows him, he discredited the portion of the hadith which is mawquf by saying: The mawquf hadith is munkar [ Al-munkar is the opposite ofma^ruf hadith; it is a hadith which is related by one person who has not reached a proper level of memory and trustworthiness.]. The source of the confusion of al-‘Albaniyy is his going beyond his limit. He did not stop at the statements of the scholars of the hadith that whoever did not reach the level of Hafidh has no right to judge whether a hadith is sahih , da^if[ Ad-da^if is a hadith which lacks any of the requisites of the sahih or hasan hadith .], or mawdu^ [ Al-mawdu^ is a hadith which is fabricated upon the Prophet.]. This hadith was related also by Hafidh As-Subkiyy and Hafidh Al-Bayhaqiyy.
Another proof is the hadith: Whoever says when he goes out to the masjid (mosque): O Allah, I ask You by the right of the askers upon You and by the right of this walking of mine, because I did not go out discontentedly, or to be praised or for fame; I went out to avoid Your punishment and seek Your acceptance. I ask You to save me from Hellfire, and to forgive my sins; no one forgives the sins except You, Allah accepts his du^a’ and 70,000 angels ask Allah to forgive him. It is related by‘Ibnu Majah. Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar al-^Asqalaniyy and Hafidh ‘ Ab u l-Hasan al-Maqdisiyy said: it is hasan [ hasan is a hadith, the relators of which are known for their trustworthiness and good memory. Included is the hadith which is related in more than one riwayah (rendition) all of which are devoid of any defect that blemishes its authenticity. It is accepted by the scholars of Islam, and is used for inferring Islamic rulings.]. There is no attention to al-‘Albaniyy’s tad^if of the hadith after these two Hafidh said it is sahih , because al-‘Albaniyy is not at the level of Hafidh ; he is far from it as far as the sky is from Earth. Moreover, he admitted in some of his books that he did not reach the level of Hafidh .
The condition for considering a hadith sahih , da^if, or mawdu^ is that it is not taken except from the words of a Hafidh as stated by As-Suyuti in “Tadribu r-rawi”. Is the daring of al-‘Albaniyy to say about hadith that it is sahih, da^if, or mawdu^ a result of his ignorance of the words of the people of the mustalah (Science of hadith )? Or is it that he knew what they said, but his desires, and the love of showing up and claiming what is not his, thinking that he could fool the people if he said about hadith that it is sahih , hasan, or da^ifare the ones which dragged him?
Let us mention here the statement of Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar in summary, since this will remove any ambiguity that some people imagined for not differentiating between the two hadiths: the practical hadith and the verbal hadith . The practical hadith is the one which is da^if , but the verbal hadith is thabit (confirmed). ‘Ibnu Hajar said: The saying of an-Nawawiyy : We related in the book of‘Ibnu s-Sunniyy from Bilal and by the previous sanad [ Sanad or ‘isnad refers to the chain of people relating a hadith.] to ‘Abu Bakr ‘Ibnu s-Sunniyy many times; ^Abdu l-Lah ‘Ibnu Muhammad al-Baghawiyy told us Al-Hasan ‘Ibnu ^Arafah told us ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu Thabit al-Jazariyy from al-Wazi^ ‘Ibnu Nafi^ from ‘Abu Salamah ‘Ibnu ^Abdi r-Rahman from Jabir ‘Ibnu ^Abdi l-Lah, radiya l-Lahu ^anhuma, from Bilal, radiya l-Lahu ^anhu, [ radiya l-Lahu ^anhu means: May Allah accept his deeds.] the mu’addhin of the Prophet, ﷺ, [ﷺ means: May Allah raise the rank of the Messenger of Allah, Muhammadand his ‘Ahlu-l-Bayt.] who said what means: When the Prophet ﷺ went for the prayer, he used to say: I start with the Name of Allah . I believe in Allah. I rely on Allah. No one avoids disobeying Allah except with the protection of Allah and no one has the strength to obey Allah except with the help of Allah. O Allah, I ask You by the right of the askers upon You and by the right of this going out of mine, because I did not go out discontentedly, or to be praised or for fame; I went out seeking Your acceptance and to avoid Your punishment. I ask You to protect me from Hellfire, and to admit me to Paradise. This is a very da^if hadith. Ad-Daraqutniyy extracted it in “al-‘Ifrad” from this way and said what means: Al-Wazi^ is the only relator of this hadith . The author reported that it is agreed that he is da^ifand his hadith is munkar. I (‘Ibnu H ajar) said: There is a tougher saying about him. Yahya ‘Ibnu Mu^in and an-Nasa’iyy said: He is not a thiqah (trustworthy). ‘Abu Hatim and others said: His hadith is matruk [ Al-matruk is a hadith related by a da^ifperson, because, e.g., he is known to lie. His hadith is abandoned.]. Al-Hakim said: He related mawdu’ (fabricated) Ahadith. ‘Ibnu ^Adiyy said: All of his hadiths are not mahfudh [ Al- mahfudh is a hadith in which the addition of the relator of a sahih or hasan hadith to its wording disagrees with what a more trustworthy person related. The relating of the latter outweighs that of the former and is known as a mahfudh hadith . The outweighed hadith is known as a shadh-dh hadith.]. I said: He committed ‘idtirab [ Al-‘idtirab refers to the case when a person relates a hadith in more than one version, such as adding more words in one version or changing the wording or meaning of the hadith. Additionally, the two versions are equally authentic, but neither one version outweighs the other nor it is possible to bring the two versions together. The hadith is called mudtarib.] in this hadith. In “Al-yawmu wa l-laylah”, ‘Abu Nu^aym extracted it in another version from him. He said: From Salim ‘Ibnu ^Abdi l-Lah ‘Ibnu ^Umar from his father from Bilal. There is no other evidence to strengthen the hadith.
His saying: And we related in the book of ‘Ibnu s-Sunniyy means from the riwayah (rendition) of ^Atiyyah al-^Awfiyy from ‘Abu Sa^id al-Khidri from the Messenger of Allahﷺ. ^Atiyyah is d a^ifalso. I said: His da^f is due to his tashayyu^ (following the Shi^ah) and tadlis [ At-tadlis is relating a hadith in a delusive manner so that people would accept the hadith from one. The tadlis is done by the relator, because, e.g., his shaykh is young or da^if , by dropping the name of his shaykh from the chain or mentioning him in such a way that people think that he is talking about another person.]. He himself is saduq (truthful). al-Bukhariyyextracted for him in “al-‘Adabu l-mufrad” and ‘Abu Dawud extracted for him many hadiths about which he kept silent. At-Tirmithiyy said that many of his hadiths were hasan , some of which are of his ‘ifrad [ Al-‘ifrad refers to the case when the relating of a hadith is confined to one person or to one person from another person, or to a group of people from a certain area, for example.]. So do not think that he is like al-Wazi^.
I read, in Damascus, under Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad ‘Ibnu ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Muhammad ‘Ibnu ^Uthman , the Dimashqiyyah (from Damascus) from ‘ Ab u l-Fadl ‘Ibnu ‘Abu Tahir. He said: ‘Isma^il ‘Ibnu Dhufr told us; Muhammad ‘Ibnu ‘Abu Zayd told us; Mahmud ‘Ibnu ‘Isma^il told us; ‘ Ab u l-Husayn ‘Ibnu Fathshah told us; At-Tabaraniyy in the chapter on “Du^a'” told us; Bishr‘Ibnu Mus a told us; ^Abdu l-Lah ‘Ibnu Salih, who is al-^Ajaliyy, told us; Fudayl ‘Ibnu Marzuq told us from ^Atiyyah from ‘Abu Sa^id al-Khidriyy, radiya l-Lahu ^anhu, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ , said what means: If a man went out of his house for Salah and said: O Allah, I ask You by the right of the askers upon You and by the right of this walking of mine, because I did not go out discontentedly, or to be praised or for fame; I went out to avoid Your punishment and seeking Your acceptance. I ask You to save me from Hellfire, and to forgive my sins; no one forgives the sins except You, Allah assigns 70,000 angels to ask Allah to forgive him and He accepts his du^a’ until he finishes his prayer. This is a hasan hadith which ‘Ahmad extracted from Zayd ‘Ibnu Harun from Fudayl‘Ibnu Marzuq. ‘Ibnu Majah extracted it also from Muhammad ‘Ibnu Yazid ‘Ibnu ‘Ibrahim at-Tustariyy from al-Fadl‘Ibnu Muwaffaq. ‘Ibnu Khuzaymah extracted it also in the book “at-Tawhid” from the riwayah of Muhammad ‘Ibnu Fudayl ‘Ibnu Ghazwan and from the riwayah of ‘Abu Khalid al-‘Ahmar. ‘Abu Nu^aym al-‘Asbahaniyy extracted it also. All of them extracted it from the riwayah of ‘Abu Nu^aym al-Kufiyy from Fudayl‘Ibnu Marzuq. We related it in the chapter on As-salah by ‘Abu Nu^aym. He said in his riwayah from Fudaylfrom ^Atiyyah: He said: ‘Abu Sa^id told me and he mentioned it but did not attribute it to a Sahabiyy. Consequently, he was safe from the tadlis of ^Atiyyah.
I was surprised by the Shaykh how he mentioned the riwayah of Bilal without ‘Abu Sa^id and how he attributed the riwayah of ‘Abu Sa^id to ‘Ibnu s-Sunniyy without ‘Ibnu Majah or others. Allah is the One who gives success [This is the end of ‘Ibnu Hajar’s statement.].
In this hadith, there is evidence about the permissibility of performing the tawassul by the live and dead people, because the word ‘askers’ includes both of them, and the permissibility of tawassul by the good deed, which is the walking of the man to the masjid for the sake of Allah. The Shar^ did not differentiate between the tawassul by the good selves and the good deeds. One may say: How would the tawassul by the self of the Messenger of Allah, who is the most honourable creation of Allah, not be permissible and it would be permissible to do that by the salah, siyam , and sadaqah of the slave? Both are creations of Allah: the good selves are creations of Allah and the good deeds, which the slaves perform, are creations of Allah . For what reason is the differentiation?
Most of the confusion which they adduce to prohibit the tawassul and visiting the grave of the Messenger are matters which are irrelevant to the tawassul, like the marfu^ hadith of ‘Ibnu ^Abbas and in it: If you ask, ask Allah and if you ask for help, ask Allah for help. The answer is: This hadith does not contain: Do not ask other than Allah or Do not ask other than Allah for help. The Prophet meant: Allah is more worthy to be asked and His help is more worthy to be sought. How do these people fabricate upon the Messenger of Allah and ‘Ibnu ^Abbas to prove their claim of accusing of kufr the one who performs the tawassul and asks help from the Messenger? This hadith is like the saying of the Messenger of Allah in the hadith related by‘Ibnu Hibban: Do not accompany except a believer and let no one except a pious eat your food. Does this hadith contain that accompanying the non-Muslim is prohibited? Would one understand from it that feeding the non-pious is prohibited? In His Book (al-Qur’an), Allah permitted the Muslims to feed their kafir (non-Muslim) prisoner and praised it in al-‘Insan, 8: They feed the food out of their love for Allah to the needy who cannot earn, orphan, and the (non-Muslim) prisoner.
Among their suspicious actions is their adducing the hadith of ^Umar that he asked Allah for rain by al-^Abbas . They claimed that ^Umar performed the tawassul by al-^Abbas, because the Messenger had died. The answer is: Did ^Umar or al-^Abbas tell you that this tawassul was because the Messenger had died? No! Neither ^Umar nor al-^Abbas said that or indicated it. It is only out of your fabrications upon them to support your desire to accuse of kufr the one who performs the tawassul by the Prophet.
As one of their suspicious things, they may mention a hadith , which is agreed that it is da^if: ‘Abu Bakr said (what means): Let us perform istighathah by (ask for the help of) the Messenger of Allah against this hypocrite. The Messenger of Allah said what means: I am not someone by whom help is asked. Allah is the only One Who is asked for help. The answer to this suspicious matter is: Firstly, this hadith has‘IbnuLahay’ah among its relators, who is da^if. Secondly, this hadith is contradictory to the hadith thatal-Bukhariyyextracted in his Sahih from the marfu^ hadith of ^Abdu l-Lah‘Ibnu ^Umar, and in it the sun approaches the heads of the people on the Day of Judgement. While they are like that, they ask Adam for help. How do they cling to an unconfirmed hadith when it is opposed by the sahih hadith.
In the book “Kashshafu l-Qina^”, Volume 2, page 68 is mentioned: As-Samiriyy and the author of at-Talkhis said (what means): There is no objection to performing the tawassul by the shuyukh (plural of shaykh) and the pious scholars. In “al-Mudhahhab” he said: It is permissible to ask Allah by performing the intercession by a righteous man, and it is said: it is mustahabb (liked) to do so.
In his Mansak which he wrote to al-Marwaziyy, ‘Ahmad said: It is Sunnah for the one who is asking Allah for rain to perform the tawassul (ask Him) by the Prophet. He determined it in “al-Mustaw^ab” and others. Then he said: ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy said (what means): The du^a’ at the grave of Ma^ruf al-Karkhiyy is the tested antidote. ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy [ Adh-Dhahabiyy said what means: He was born in the year 198 A.H. He acquired the Fiqh under ‘Ahmad and was one of his most respectable companions. In “Tadhkiratu l-Huffadh”, Adh-Dhahabiyy said what means: As-Salamiyy said (what means): I asked Ad-Daraqutniyy about ‘Ibrahim Al-Harbiyy. He said (what means): He used to be compared with ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Hanbal in his zuhd, knowledge, and piety.] is one of the contemporaries of ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Hanbal. He died forty years after ‘Ahmad. He was one of the most respected and trustworthy scholars of hadith. The saying of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah that it is an ugly innovation is refuted by the agreement of the a’immah . The statement of Imam ‘Ahmad and of‘Ibrahim Al-Harbiyy, who was one of the respected scholars of Salaf , testify to the refutation. Where is the agreement that ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah claims?
The meaning of what is mentioned about ‘Abu Hanifah that he hated to say: I ask You by the right of Your ‘anbiya’, is not prohibiting the tawassul in general in all of its forms and wordings. ‘Abu Hanifahhated this expression: by the right of Your ‘anbiya’, as the people of his madh-hab said, because it may seem to mean that the slaves have a right which is obligatory upon Allah (to fulfil). The people of his madh-hab are more aware of his words. The followers of ‘Abu Hanifahhave been and are still performing tawassul by the ‘ anbiya’ of Allah and consider it something by which they seek a better status from Allah.
Concerning that he said (what means): Allah is not asked by other than Him, is far from being true. How could it be true when it is confirmed in the Sahih that due to rain, three men took shelter in a cave. A rock fell and blocked the entrance of the cave and they could not exit. Every one of them asked Allah by his good deed to relieve them of their calamity [; the rock moved away]. al-Bukhariyyand others extracted this hadith . How would one pay attention to this report about ‘Abu Hanifahwhich contradicts the sahih ? Al-‘Albaniyy mentioned in some of his circles: ‘Abu Hanifahsaved us the trouble concerning the tawassul , meaning that ‘Abu Hanifahprohibits the tawassul in general as they do. Let those prove, if they can, that ‘Abu Hanifahsaid: it is prohibited to perform the tawassul by the Prophet after his death, or while alive in his absence as the followers of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah claim in his saying: It is not permitted to perform the tawassul except by the alive and present person.
The tawassul, tawajjuh (directing oneself), and the istighathah (asking for help) lead to the same thing as Hafidh Taqiyyu d-Din As-Subkiyy said. He is one of the linguists, as As-Suyutiyy said. This is evident. In the Ramadah Year, a companion went to the grave of the Messenger of Allah and said: O Messenger of Allah, ask Allah to give rain to your Ummah; they are close to perish. It is correct to call what he did tawassul and istighathah, because he went to the grave of the Messenger asking him to save them from the calamity that hit them by him (the Messenger) asking Allah to give them rain. Al-Bayhaqi and ‘Ibnu Kathir in his “Tarikh” said that this hadith is sahih. This occurring from ‘Ibnu Kathir is evidence that he did not follow ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah in the issue of tawassul, because he did not find the evidence with him.
The negators of tawassul, the followers of‘Ibnu Taymiyyah, say: Why do you make a wasitah (an intermediary) by your saying: O Allah, I ask you by your slave fulan ? [ Fulan is equivalent to John Doe in the USA.] Allah does not need a wasitah! It is said to them: The wasitah may come with the meaning of helper which is impossible for Allah to have. However, the wasitah with the meaning of a means is not negated by the Shar^ or intellect. Allah is the Creator of the means and their causes. Allah is the Creator of medicines and the Creator of healing by them. Also, Allah, ta^ala , made the tawassul by the ‘ anbiya’ and ‘awliya’ a means to benefit those who are performing it. Had the tawassul not been a means of benefit, the Messenger of Allah would not have taught the blind man the tawassul by him. Additionally, Allah is the Creator of the tawassul and of the benefit that happens by it, by the will of Allah . Performing the tawassul by the ‘ anbiya’ and ‘awliya’ is of seeking the means, because the means are either necessary (essential) like eating and drinking, or unnecessary (non-essential) like the tawassul. Each is among the means. The believer who performs tawassul by the ‘ anbiya’ and ‘awliya’ does not believe that their being wusata’ (intermediaries) between him and Allah means that Allah uses their help to get the benefit to the performer of tawassul or that He cannot do it by Himself. They consider them as means made by Allah to achieve the benefit, by the will of Allah.
The goal of the performer of tawassul may or may not happen, as much as the one who takes medicine; he may or may not recover by it. Also, Allah made the visit to the graves of the ‘ anbiya’ and ‘awliya’ seeking blessing, with the hope of having one’s du^a’ fulfilled there, a means to achieve benefit. This is known among Muslims, the lay ones and the scholars. No one before ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah renounced it. An example is the aforementioned story of the companion who visited the grave of the Prophet in the Ramadah Year. Its authenticity was confirmed by al-Bayhaqi and‘Ibnu Kathir.
The saying of the negators of tawassul: Why do you make wusata’ between you and Allah and why do you not ask Allah for your needs has no sense, because the Shar^ permitted the believer to ask for his need with or without the tawassul. Whoever says: O Allah I ask You by Your Prophet or by the status of Your Prophet or the like, he has asked Allah. Whoever says: O Allah I ask You for this and that, he has asked Allah. Both matters comprise the slave asking his Lord. Both are included in the hadith: If you ask, ask Allah.
Taymiyyun (followers of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah), the matter is not like what you claim. You and your imam, ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah, will meet the consequences of what occurs from you, since he spread this invalid belief of considering the tawassul and visiting the graves for tabarruk as straying and kufr, because it goes under the hadith: Whoever initiates in Islam a bad deed, he will carry its burden and the burden of everyone who acts in that way after him.
In another position, ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah declared that going to the grave to make du^a’ there is an ugly innovation. Al-Buhutiyy, the author of “Kashshafu l-Qina^”, said reporting about the author of “al-Furu^”: Our shaykh- meaning ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah- said: one’s going to the grave for du^a’ hoping for its fulfillment there is an innovation and not something by which one seeks a better status from Allah by the agreement of the a’immah. The author of “al-Furu^” is Shams-ud-Din‘IbnuMuflih, al-Hanbali and one of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s students. In another place in “Kashshafu l-Qina^”, he said: The shaykh- meaning ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah- said: By the agreement of the imams, it is prohibited to perform Tawaf around other than al-Baytu l-^Atiq (al-Ka^bah), then he said: They agreed that he does not kiss it or rub his body with it; it is of the shirk. He said: Allah does not forgive the shirk even if it was the smaller shirk. This is the statement which Al-Buhutiyy reported about him. In the folds of these words is accusing ‘Ab u Ayyub al-‘Ansariyy, about whom it was confirmed that he placed his forehead on the grave of the Prophet, of kufr. Marwan‘Ibnu al-Hakam saw him and held his neck. ‘Ab u Ayyub turned his face towards him. Marwan went away. ‘Ab u Ayyub said: I did not come to the stone. I came to the Messenger of Allah . I heard the Messenger of Allah say: Do not weep for Islam if the qualified people were in charge, but weep for it if it was under the charge of the unqualified. Al-Hakim related it in “al-Mustadrak” and said it is sahih. Adh-Dhahabiyy agreed to his authentication. If putting the face on the grave was not objected to by any of the Companions, what would ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah say? Would he accuse ‘Ab u Ayyub of kufr or what would he do? Then what would he do with the statement of Imam ‘Ahmad reported by his son ^Abdu l-Lah, which was mentioned previously in other than this article, that he said about kissing and touching the minbar and grave of the Prophet seeking the blessing and a better status from Allah: No objection to that.
Al-Buhutiyy said in “Kash-shafu l-Qina^”: ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy said: It is mustahabb (liked) to kiss the chamber of the Prophet ﷺ. Then Al-Buhutiyy said: No objection to one’s touching it (the grave) with one’s hand.
Then he reported the words of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah: Rubbing one’s body with, performing prayer at, and going to the grave (of the Prophet) believing that performing du^a’ there is better than elsewhere, or committing a nadhr (oath) for it or the like, the shaykh -meaning ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah- said: This is not of the Religion of the Muslims, but is of what has been initiated of the ugly innovations which are of the branches of shirk. In “Al-ikhtiyarat”, ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah said: The Salaf and a’immah agreed that whoever says salam to the Prophet or other prophets and righteous people does not rub his body with the grave or kiss it. They agreed that he does not hold or kiss except the Black Stone. The Yamani Rukn is held, but correctly is not kissed. Then in response to ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah, Al-Buhutiyy said: I said: But ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy said: It is mustahabb (liked) to kiss the chamber of the Prophet. Al-Buhutiyy is a Hanbali (follower of Imam ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Hanbal ), but when he knew of the incorrectness of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s words, he repelled his words, thereby refuting ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s claim about the agreement of the Salaf to prohibit the kissing of the grave. He did not catch ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah; he died after the year 1000 A.H.
In “Musannaf‘Ibnu Ab i Shaybah”: ‘Abu Bakr- meaning ‘Ibnu Ab i Shaybah - told us; he said: Zayd ‘Ibnu Habbab told us; he said: ‘Abu Mawdudah told me; he said: Yazid ‘Ibnu ^Abdi l-Malik ‘Ibnu Qasit told me; he said: I saw a group of the Companions of the Prophet if the masjid was free for them, they stood up and went to the free rummanah (knob) of the minbar, rubbed it, and made du^a’. He said: and I saw Yaziddo that.
Some followers of‘Ibnu Hanbal, like ‘ Abu l-Faraj ‘Ibnu al-Jawziyy and his Shaykh ‘Ibnu ^Aqil declared that it is makruh (disliked) to go to the grave for du^a’. However, they did not prohibit it. No one of the Salaf and Khalaf prohibited it. What was cited about some scholars is the karahah (disliking) and not the tahrim (prohibiting). However, ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s pen trespassed the limits; he deviated from the truth to accusing the Muslims of kufr for that. Whoever tracked the biographies of the Muhaddithun and ^ulama’ finds in a lot of them that a fulan of the scholars of hadith or the righteous was buried in a certain town; he is visited and the du^a’ is fulfilled there. Among that is what Hafidh ‘Ibnu ^Asakir mentioned in the biography of Hafidh ^Abdu l-Ghafir ‘Ibnu ‘Isma^il al-Farisiyy . He said: He was buried in Naysabur and his grave is visited and the du^a’ is fulfilled there. It was mentioned previously that ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy said: The grave ofma^rufis the tested antidote. This was mentioned in “Tarikh Baghdad” by Hafidh al-Baghdadiyy. In his book “al-Hisnu l-Hasin” and its summary “^Uddatul-Hisnil-Hasin”, Hafidh, Muhaddith, the Shaykh of the Qurra’ (Reciters of al-Qur’an) Shamsu d-Din ‘Ibnu l-Jazariyy mentioned that the graves of the righteous are among the places of having the du^a’ fulfilled. He came after ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah and was a studymate of Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar al-^Asqalaniyy.
How does ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah rule that this matter, which is mutawatir [A mutawatir hadith is one related by a large number of Muslims in a way which was impossible for them to have agreed to lie about it, from the beginning of the chain of relators to the end. They have seen or heard what they related and it was true, i.e., not misconstrued. (The number of mutawatir hadith s is around fifty.)] among the Muslims, is shirk. Praise to You Allah; this is a foul fabrication.
By this, it is clear that ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah attributed the opinion of his which he desires to the a’immah and claimed their agreement upon it without any proof. Let this be known to those who took ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s saying and ruled with kufr upon those who visited the grave of the Messenger and others for performing du^a’ there, that visiting the grave with this intention is shirk. Let them be warned against it and let them quit the blind imitation. The truth of the matter is what As-Subkiyy said: It is preferred to perform the tawassul by the Prophet and no one of the Salaf or Khalaf objected to it, except ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah; he said what no scholar before him had said.
Their citation of ^Umar’s cutting the tree of Bay^atu r-Ridwan to support their prohibiting the tabarruk by the graves of the ‘ anbiya’ and salihin is of no value. It is interpreted as that ^Umar was worried that there would come a time when people would worship the tree. He did not mean to prohibit the tabarruk with the traces of the Messenger. Had it been like what they thought, his son ^Abdu l-Lah would not have come to the samur tree, under which the Messenger used to sit, seeking the tabarruk. He used to water it so that it does not dry out. ‘Ibnu Hibban related it and said it is sahih. There is no doubt that ^Abdu l-Lah understood his father’s biography more than ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah and his followers did.
We challenge whoever is fanatic about ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah to bring forth a sahih report from the Salaf or Khalaf prohibiting visiting the grave of the Prophet for tabarruk or the tawassul by him in his life or after his death. They will not find it. That is why ‘Ibnu Kathir disagreed with his shaykh ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah in the issue of tawassul. However, he followed him in the issue of divorce and was tortured for that. ‘Ibnu Kathir declared in his tafsir with the liking of tawassul by the Prophet after his death and asking help by him. He mentioned it in his history book “al-Bidayatu wa n-nihayah” in the biography of ^Umar ‘Ibnu l-Khattab .
As for their prohibiting the travel to visit the grave of the Prophet, inferrring from the hadith [related by al-Bukhariyy ]: There is no extra merit in packing luggage except to three masajid (mosques): al-masjidu l-Haram, al-masjidu l-‘Aqsa , and my Masjid (masjidu r-Rasul), the answer is the following: No one of the Salaf understood what ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah understood. Visiting the grave of the Messenger is Sunnah whether with or without traveling as for the residents of Medina. The Hanabilah stated, as others did, that the visit to the grave of the Prophet is Sunnah , whether or not one meant to do it with traveling.
The meaning of the hadith which the Salaf and Khalaf understood is: There is no extra merit in traveling to pray in a masjid except traveling to those three masajid, because the reward of Salah in them is multiplied up to 100,000 times in al-masjidu l-Haram, to 1000 times in masjidu r-Rasul, and to 500 times in al-masjidu l-‘Aqsa. What is meant by the hadith is: The traveling to perform salah. This is shown by what Imam ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Hanbal related in his “Musnad” from the route of Shahr‘Ibnu Hawshab, from the marfu^ hadith of ‘Abu Sa^id: Animals should not be ridden to a masjid in which Salah is sought, except to al-masjidu l-Haram, al-masjidu l-‘Aqsa , and my Masjid (al-masjidu n-Nabawiyy). Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar said that this hadith is a hasan hadith, and it shows the meaning of the previous hadith. Explaining the hadith with another hadith is better than the perversion of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah. In his Alfiyyah (Poem of about one-thousand lines) of the mustalah of hadith, al-’Iraqi said: The best way to explain a text (ayah or hadith) is by another text (ayah or hadith).
What felled ‘ Ibnu Taymiyyah in this perversion is his ill-understanding. He is as Hafidh Waliyyu d-Din al-^Iraqiyy said about him: His knowledge is greater than his mind. He mentioned that in his book “Al-‘ajwibatu l-mardiyyah ^ala l-‘as’ilati l-Makkiyyah”, which was mentioned previously.
Important Note
From what was said, it is known that the calamity of those who accuse the performers of tawassul and istighathah by the ‘ anbiya’ and ‘awliya’ after their death and in their absence while alive is their ill-understanding of the‘ayatand hadiths which they use to support their view. They thought that the meaning of ^ibadah is the nida’ (calling someone), isti^anah (seeking help), khawf (fear), raja’(hope), and istighathah (seeking help). This, in their thinking, is the ^ibadah that whoever directs it to other than Allah would become mushrik (person who commits shirk). They also thought that whoever asks other than Allah for things which are not habitually asked becomes mushrik.
How was it justifiable to them to do that when it was confirmed that al- Harth‘IbnuHassan al-Bakri, radiya l-Lahu ^anhu, said: I ask refuge with Allah and His Messenger from being like the envoy of ^Ad. This is the mash-hur hadith [ mash-hur is a hadith related by more than two persons. It can be sahih or otherwise.] that Imam ‘Ahmad related in his “Musnad”, and Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar said that it is a hasan hadith. The evidence in it is that the Messenger did not say to al-Harth : You committed shirk for having said: and His Messenger, since you asked refuge with me!
It was also confirmed that ‘Ibnu ^Abbas related that the Prophet ﷺ, said: Allah has angels, other than the Hafadhah (angels who record man’s deeds) who roam (on Earth) writing what fall of tree leaves. If any of you fell in a calamity in a desert let him call: O slaves of Allah help. Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar related it in “al-‘Amali” and said that it is a hasan hadith.
When their understanding was ill, they made those things ^ibadah to other than Allah for their mere wordings. They charged Muslims with kufr for a matter upon the permissibility of which, the Salaf and Khalaf agreed. This is evidence that they did not understand the meaning of the ^ibadah mentioned in the Qur’an, according to the Arabic language rules. The linguists stated the meaning very clearly and without any ambiguity. Their definition of ^ibadah as the ultimate humbleness was mentioned before. How did the negators of tawassul rule that asking for what it is not the habit to ask is shirk and made it a rule, when the Companion Rabi^ah ‘Ibnu Ka^b al-‘Aslamiyy asked the Messenger of Allah to be his companion in the Jannah. The Messenger did not object to him and out of humbleness said to him: Do you want anything else? The Companion said: This is it. He said to him: perform a lot of sujud (Muslim).
What would be shirk is when one asks a creation to do what Allah is the only One Who does, such as asking someone to create a thing, i.e., bring it from non-existence into existence, and to ask him for forgiveness of sins. Fatir, 3 means: Is there any Creator other than Allah (i.e., no one is the Creator except Allah ). Ayah 135 of Al ^Imran means: Who forgives the sins except Allah (i.e., no one forgives the sins except Allah). In Maryam, 19 it is mentioned that Jibril said to Maryam: (I was sent by Allah) to give you a pure boy. Actually, the giver of the boy, who is ^Isa, to Maryam is Allah , but Allah made Jibril a means and Jibril attributed the giving to himself. Jibril’s case shows the excessive deviation of those who accuse of kufr the performers of tawassul and istighathah, just because they said: O Messenger of Allah I have no way out, O Messenger of Allah help me, and the like of these statements, which they say and do not mean by them that the Messenger of Allah creates, or deserves the ^ibadah, which is the ultimate humbleness. They mean that he is a wasitah, i.e., a means to obtain the intended matter and blessing from Allah. They do not understand from the wasitah except the meaning of having a means even if they call it wasitah. Allah made it the norm to relate the effects with the means. Allah had the power to give Maryam that pure boy without having Jibril as a means for that.
How did they justify charging Muslims with kufr for the mere saying of: The nabiyy or the waliyy is a wasitah , meaning a means. The shirk is to confirm the wasitah , i.e., say that there is something which helps Allah or that Allah cannot do that thing independently except through the nabiyy or the waliyy. This is the shirk, if they [the Taymiyyun] would just understand.
Benefit
This is an emphasis to what was mentioned before that the Muslim scholars used to deem the tawassul and istighathah by the Prophet after his death permissible and unobjectionable.
Ha fi dh ^Abdu r-Rahman ‘Ibnu l-Jawziyy mentioned in the book “Al-waf a bi ‘ahwali l-Mustafa” and Hafi dh ad-Diya’ al-Maqdisiyy mentioned also: From ‘Abu Bakr al-Minqariyy ; he said: At-Tabaraniyy, ‘Abu sh-Shaykh , and I were in the Haram of the Messenger of Allah in a bad situation. Hunger had affected us and we continued fasting that day. When the time of ^Isha’ came, I came to the grave of the Messenger of Allah and said: O Messenger of Allah , hunger, hunger; and I left. ‘Abu sh-Shaykh told me: Sit down, either there will be provision or death. ‘Abu Bakr said: ‘Abu sh-Shaykh and I slept, while At-Tabaraniyy was sitting looking into something. An ^Alawiyy [a descendent of Prophet Muhammadﷺ] came and knocked the door. He had two servants, each had a big straw bag full of things. We sat, ate, and thought that the rest will be taken by the servant. However, he departed and left the rest for us. When we finished eating, the ^Alawiyy said: O people, did you complain to the Messenger of Allah? I saw the Messenger of Allah in the dream; he ordered me to carry something to you.
In this story, there is that those great people deemed the istighathah by the Messenger a good, permissible matter. Then the scholars conveyed it in their writings, some of which were the Hanabilah and others. In the eyes of the Muslims, those are muwahhidun (believers in Allah), not just that, but among the greatest muwahhidun. However, in the eyes of the negators of the tawassul who followed ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah they have committed shirk, because whoever likes shirk commits kufr. What is the answer of those people about the likes of this incident which if traced would come in a large volume. Let those prepare an answer when they are asked on the Display-of-Deeds Day.
Among such incidents is what Hafidh ‘Abu Bakr al-Khatib al-Baghdadiyy, about whom it was said: The writers of the books of hadith dirayah [ Dirayah means knowing about the related hadith and its relator in the context of accepting or rejecting it.] are in need of him, said: Qadi ‘Ab u MuhammadAl- Hasan ‘Ibnu l-Husayn ‘Ibnu Muhammad ‘Ibnu Ramin al-‘Istrabadhiyy told us; he said: ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Ja^far ‘Ibnu Hamdan al-Qati^iyy told us; he said: I heard al-Hasan ‘Ibnu ‘Ibrahim , ‘Abu ^Aliyy al-Khallal say: Any time I had a problem, I went to the grave of Mus a ‘Ibnu Ja^far and performed the tawassul by him; Allah made what I liked easy for me.
‘Isma^il ‘Ibnu ‘Ahmad al-Hiriyy told us; he said: Muhammad ‘Ibnu al-Husayn As-Salamiyy told us; he said: I heard ‘ Ab u l-Hasan ‘Ibnu Maqsam say: I heard ‘Abu ^Aliyy As-Saffar say: I heard ‘Ibrahim al-Harbiyy say: The grave ofMa^rufis the tested antidote.
‘Ab u ‘Ishaq ‘Ibrahim ‘Ibnu ^Umar al-Barmakiyy told me; he said: ‘Ab u l-Fadl ^Ubaydu l-Lah ‘Ibnu ^Abdi r-Rahman ‘Ibnu Muhammad az-Zuhriyy told us; he said: I heard my father say: The grave ofMa^rufis tested for the fulfilment of needs. Whoever said there: “Qul huwa l-Lahu ‘Ahad” one hundred times and asked Allah, ta^ala , what he wanted, Allah would fulfil his need.
‘Ab u ^Abdi l-Lah Muhammad ‘Ibnu ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu ^Abdi l-Lah As-Suwariyy told us; he said: I heard ‘ Ab u l-Husayn Muhammad ‘Ibnu ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Jami^ say: I heard ‘Ab u ^Abdi l-Lah ‘Ibnu al-Mahamiliyy say: I have known the grave of Ma^ruf al-Karkhiyy for seventy years. Allah will relieve the distress of any person who comes to it.
Qadi ‘Ab u ^Abdi l-Lah al-Husayn ‘Ibnu ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu Muhammad As- Saymari told us; he said: ^Umar ‘Ibnu ‘Ibrahim al-Muqri’ told us; he said: ^Umar ‘Ibnu ‘Ishaq ‘Ibnu ‘Ibrahim told us; he said: ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu Maymun told us; he said: I heard ash-Shafi^iyy say: I perform tabarruk by ‘Abu Hanifahand come to his grave every day, i.e., visiting. If I needed something, I would pray two rak^a s, come to his grave and ask Allah there. It would not be too long before my need was fulfilled.
The Graveyard of Babu l-Burdan has a group of meritorious people. At the musalla prescribed for the prayer of ^Id, there was a grave known as the Grave of Nudhur (pl. of nadhr) [An- nadhr is an oath to Allah by which one commits oneself to do any good deed which is not obligatory, such as fasting a certain number of days or paying charity. It is obligatory to fulfil one’s nadhr.]. It is said that in it was buried a man who was a descendent of ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu ‘Abi Talib. People perform tabarruk by visiting him, and whoever had a need would come to him to have his need fulfilled.
Qadi ‘ Ab u l-Qasim ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu l-Muhsin at-Tanukhiyy told me; he said: My father told me; he said: I was sitting in the presence of ^Adudu d-dawlah while we were camping near the ‘ A^yad Musalla in the eastern part of the city of As-Salam aiming to go with him to Hamadhan. In the first day he attended the camp, his eye fell on the construction made on the Grave of Nudhur. He said to me: What is this construction? I said to him: This is the Mashhad (Grave) of Nudhur. I did not say grave, because I knew his superstition of this. He liked the wording and said: I knew this is the Grave of Nudhur, but I wanted its matter to be explained. I said: This is a grave, it is said, of ^Ubaydu l-Lah ‘Ibnu Muhammad ‘Ibnu ^Umar ‘Ibnu ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu al-Husayn ‘Ibnu ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu ‘Abi Talib. It is also said: It is the grave of ^Ubaydu l-Lah ‘Ibnu Muhammad ‘Ibnu ^Umar ‘Ibnu ^Aliyy ‘Ibnu ‘Abi Talib. It is said that one ruler wanted to have him killed secretly. A ditch was made for him. He was taken on it without him knowing and fell into it. Then the sand was thrown over him while alive. The grave was famous as the Grave of Nudhur, because every single nadhr made for him was valid, the nadhir (one who performs the nadhr) achieved what he wanted and is obligated to fulfil his nadhr. I am one of those who made nadhr for it many times that I cannot count for hard matters. I achieved them; fulfilling the nadhr became obligatory upon me and I did fulfil it. He did not accept this saying and said what implicated that this occurred accidentally. Then lay people marketed it magnified and spread false news about it. I stopped talking.
Few days later while we were camping in our position, he sent after me in the afternoon. He said: Ride with me to the Mash-had of Nudhur. We rode along with some of his retinues until we reached to the place. He entered and visited the Grave. There, he prayed two rak^as after which he made a sujud in which he made a long du^a’ in such a way that no one heard him. Then we rode back to his tent and stayed for days. Then we moved to Hamadhan . We reached it and stayed with him for months. Then he sent after me and said: Do you remember what you told me about the Mash-had of Nudhur in Baghdad? I said: Yes, I do. He said: I addressed you with its meaning without that which was in me to have a good company with you. What was in me is that all of what was said about the Grave was a lie. A short time after that something occurred to me that I was afraid it would happen. I worked hard to avoid its happening even if it amounted to spend all of what I had in my treasuries and employing my soldiers. I could not find a way to that. Then I remembered what you told me about the nadhr for the Graveyard of Nudhur. I said: Why do I not try that? I performed a nadhr that if Allah protected me from that matter, I would carry 10,000 full darahim to the box of this Mash-had. Today I got the news of being protected from that matter. I told ‘ Ab u l-Qasim ^Abdu l-^Aziz ‘Ibnu Yusuf -his writer- to write to ‘Abu r-Rayyan, who was his delegated ruler in Baghdad to carry them to the Graveyard. Then he looked at ^Abdu l-^Aziz who was present and said: Surely, I wrote that and the order in the letter was executed [This is the end of the statement by al-Khatib al-Baghdadiyy .].
In “al-Mi^yar”, Vol. 2 page 82, ‘Abu l-^Abbas ‘Ahmad ‘Ibnu Yahya, al-Wansharisiyy, al-Malikiyy, who died in Fas in the year 914 A.H. said: Some villagers were asked about those who performed a nadhr to visit the grave of a righteous Muslim or an alive righteous Muslim. He answered: He is obligated to fulfil his nadhr even if one rode an animal to get there. ‘Ibnu ^Abdi l-Barr said (what means): One is obligated to fulfil every act of worship, visit, ribat (guard post), or other acts of obedience other than Salah. The hadith which says: The animals are not ridden… [ ‘Ahmad extracted it in his Musnad.] is particular to Salah. However, there is no difference in (the permissibility of) visiting the alive brothers and shuyukh and performing a nadhr to do that and ribat, and the like. The Sunnah leads to this of visiting the brother in the Religion of Allah and ribat in the places of ribat. Some people hesitated about visiting the graves and the traces of the righteous Muslims. There should not be a hesitation about them, because they are of the acts of worship other than ribat, and because it is out of visiting and reminding for the saying of the Prophet: Visit the graves; they remind you of death [ Al-Bayhaqiyy extracted it in his Sunan .]. The Prophet ﷺ, used to go to Hira’ when he was in Mecca, and to Quba’ when in Medina. The goodness is in following him and his traces by word and action, especially those who showed obedience to him.
Let it be known that we do not say of the validity of the Nudhur for the graves of the shuyukh and ‘awliya’, with the belief that those places have peculiarities in bringing benefit or warding off harm without those people seeking a better status from Allah by paying charity on the behalf of the buried so that Allah fulfil their needs. We say as al-^Adhru^iyy, may Allah’s mercy be upon him, said: Many of the Nudhur of the laypeople for the graves are invalid and prohibited because they mean that those places bring benefit and ward off harm by a peculiarity of theirs. Allah, subhanahu wa ta^ala , knows best.
What proves that the scholars of hadith and others did not care about the deviation of ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah in prohibiting the tawassul by the Messenger after his death is that Hafidh ‘Ibnu Hajar al-^Asqalaniyy performed the tawassul by the Prophet in his poems known as “an-Nayyaratu s-sab^”. Also, his shaykh Zaynu d-Din al-^Iraqiyy did that at the end of his poem in “tafsiru mufradati l-Qur’an”. This has been and is still the habit of the scholars of the Salaf and Khalaf. No one avoided that except those who were deceived by‘Ibnu Taymiyyah’s innovation, the great innovation of his prohibiting the tawassul by the Prophet who is dead or not present.
Among the innovations of the Mushabbihah (group of people who liken Allah to His creation) who followed ‘Ibnu Taymiyyah they stipulate three things for the correctness of one’s Islam: Tawhidu l-‘Uluhiyyah, Tawhidu r-Rububiyyah, and Tawhidu l-‘Af^al. The answer for that is: Tawhidu l-‘Uluhiyyah along with understanding the meaning is enough. This is evidenced by what is sahih of the questioning in the grave. The buried is asked: Who is your Lord? What is your Religion? Who is your Prophet? Had the matter been like what this group of people say, the hadith would have said: Who is your Lord? Who is your God? However, since the meaning is included, the Messenger of Allah was satisfied with mentioning: Who is your Lord? What they take a long breath about is a refuted argument. Where are those from the saying of the Prophet: I was ordered to fight people until they profess that no one is God but Allah, and that I am the Messenger of Allah? It is a mash-hur hadith. However, some scholars of hadith said that it is mutawatir.
One of their innovations is the prohibition of reciting the Qur'an for deceased individuals. In a hadith narrated by al-Bukhariyy , the Prophet told ^A’ishah that if he were alive, he would ask for forgiveness for her and make a du^a’ for her. The evidence in the hadith is the Prophet's statement: "I would make a du^a’ for you," which includes all kinds of supplications. This includes the supplication of a person who recites some verses of the Qur'an and asks Allah to reward the deceased with the recitation. Ash-Shafi^iyy's saying that recitation does not reach the dead can be interpreted in two ways. Firstly, it refers to the recitation that is without a du^a’ to deliver it. Secondly, it refers to the recitation which is not performed at the grave. If the recitation is done with a du^a’ or at the grave, Ash-Shafi^iyy approves it.
