Scholars of Ahl al-Sunna Who Did Permit Istighatha from the Deceased

[SeekerOfGuidance]

In my humble opinion, what it was intended is : since neither the prophet (saw) nor the sahabas (r) nor the salafs (rh) did istighatha, and neither did the first generations amonst the khalaf did it, we should abstain from it, since du'ah is an 'ibadah and not a 'adah.

An obvious point expressed very succintly.

[Abu Jahid]

When speaking about this matter it's very very important to make it clear about what exactly one is talking about, because if that is done the Zanadiqah will find no way to justify their evil crimes.

So let's make it clear: If one is speaking about statements like "Ya Shaykh Fulan I ask you for health/rizq/children/protection/help/etc." (i.e. calling upon other than Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala for the fulfillment of one's needs) then this is a matter of tawhid and shirk!

As for the list that was posted on the first site:
The list contains 'Ulama`, who did not regard it permissable to call upon other than Allah ta'ala for the fulfillment of one's needs.

For example al-Hafidh Taqi ad-Din as-Subki (rahimahullah) is on the list because he uses the word "Istighathath" (together with Tawassul and Tashaffu') and says that it's permissable, but he does not mean "calling upon other than Allah ta'ala for one's needs" by that (and therefore he should not be on the list!). And that becomes very clear if one reads his words. The brother "godilali" posted something very beneficial in another thread regarding this matter:

An explanation of what al-Hafiz al-Subki meant when he used the terms istighathah:

يقول السبكي في كتابه شفاء السقام (13) ونص عبارته
" اعلم أنه يجوز ويحسن التوسل والاستعانة والتشفع بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى ربه سبحانه وتعالى ، وجواز ذلك وحسنه من الأمور المعلومة لكل ذي دين المعروفة من فعل الأنبياء والمرسلين وسير السلف الصالحين والعلماء والعوام من المسلمين ، ولم ينكر أحد ذلك من أهل الأديان ولا سمع به في زمن من الأزمان حتى جاء ابن تيمية فتكلم في ذلك بكلام يلبس فيه على الضعفاء الأغمار، وابتدع ما لم يسبق إليه في سائر الأعصار. . . ".اهـ.

أن تعلقهم بالسبكي على أن " التوسل والاستغاثة بمعنى واحد"
مع تجاهل القرآن { فَلَا تَدْعُوا مَعَ اللَّهِ أَحَدًا } والحديث "إذا سألت فاسأل الله " ليس من صفات المسلم.
ولقد كان السبكي يقصد بـ ( الاستغاثة بالنبي ) : الاستغاثة إلى الله بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم
ولذلك قال " اعلم أنه يجوز التوسل والاستغاثة والتشفع بالنبي إلى ربه " .
ثم استدل على ذلك بحديث "يا رب أسألك بحق محمد"
انظر - شفاء السقام في زيارة خير الأنام 160 - 161 دار الآفاق . والحديث موضوع كما في تعقيب الذهبي على مستدرك الحاكم 2 / 615 .

ثم قال السبكي:
" ولسنا في ذلك سائلين غير الله تعالى ولا داعين إلا إياه ، فالمسئول في هذه الدعوات كلها هو الله وحده لا شريك له ، والمسئول به مختلف ، ولم يوجب ذلك إشراكاً ولا سؤال غير الله ، كذلك السؤال بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ليس سؤالاً للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بل سؤال لله به ".

وضرب لذلك مثلا أن تقول
" استغثت الله بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كما يقول : سألت الله بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم" (انظر شفاء السقام 174-176-)

وهذا يفيد : أن سؤال غير الله شرك عند السبكي .
وأن الاستغاثة بالنبي معناها عنده : الاستغاثة بالله بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم
ولكنه عادة يختصر العبارة ويقول : ( الاستغاثة بالنبي ) . ولذلك قال
" وقد يحذف المفعول به ( أي الله المستغاث ) ويقال : استغثت بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم "

يعني مختصر مفيد.
يقول السبكي فيما معناه.. لما الواحد بيقول لك ( انا بستغيث بالنبي ) يعني قصده أنه يستغيث بالله .. بالنبي ...
ولكن ليس معناه أنه يقول ( يارسول الله اشفني وارزقني وانقذني من الغرق ) كما يحاول جهلة المتصوفة أن يقرروه.. بأن هذا هو مقصود السبكي.

لذلك يقول السبكي (فتاوىيه 1/13) تعليقا على هذه الآية ( أدعوني أستجب لكم)
بأن هذه الآية تفيد أنه لا يستعان غير الله.
وأكد أن تقديم المعمول يفيد الاختصاص
وتجد هذا أيضا في طبقات السبكي.

وهذا السبكي الابن ينقل عن القماح شعراً يقول فيه
فاضرع إلى الله الكريم ولا تسل بشراً فليس سواه كاشـف الضر
انظر (طبقات السبكي 9 / 92 محققة)

So can anyone claim that Taqi ad-Din as-Subki (rahimahullah) supported statements like "Ya Fulan I ask you for rizq" after reading the above?? No!

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) says the following (after mentioning that if someone goes to a grave of a Salih (righteous person) or Nabi (Prophet) or to a grave which is regarded to be the grave of a Salih or Nabi - but it's not - and he ask the person in the grave and resorts to him, then the matter has three levels):

إحداها : أن يسأله حاجته مثل أن يسأله أن يزيل مرضه أو مرض دوابه أو يقضي دينه أو ينتقم له من عدوه أو يعافي نفسه وأهله ودوابه ونحو ذلك مما لا يقدر عليه إلا الله عز وجل : فهذا شرك صريح يجب أن يستتاب صاحبه فإن تاب وإلا قتل .

The first: If he asks [for the fulfillment of] his need, like asking [the Wali/Nabi/Salih] to eliminate his ailment, or that of his beast, or to take care of his debt, or revenge some enemy, or to heal him, his people, or his beast; and anything like that whereof no one is capable of it except Allah 'azza wa jal, then this is clear shirk (polytheism), which requires that he is asked to repent. Either he repents, otherwise he is killed.

Source: Majmu' al-Fatawa 27/72: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d...d=22&Hashiya=3

So accoring to Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) the one who calls upon other than Allah ta'ala for the fulfillment of his need is an apostate (because he committed clear cut shirk) and he has to be asked to repent (otherwise the hadd of riddah is applied to him [in an islamic state]).

Imam Ibn Muflih (d. 763 H, rahimahullah) said in his "al-Furu'" in the "Bab: Hukm al-Murtad" ("Chapter: Ruling of Apostate"):

قال : أو جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يتوكل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم

He (he mentiones before that "our Shaykh" and he means Imam Ibn Taymiyyah) said: Or he made between him and Allah intermediaries on whom he places his trust, to whom he supplicates (yad'uhum) and whom he asks (yas`aluhum) [for his needs].

Source: Al-Furu' 6/165: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d...k_no=28&ID=953

Imam al-Mardawi (d. 885 H, rahimahullah) said in his "al-Insaf" also in the "Bab: Hukm al-Murtad" (Chapter: Ruling of Apostate):

قال الشيخ تقي الدين رحمه الله : وكذا الحكم لو جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يتوكل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم إجماعا

The Shaykh Taqi ad-Din [ibn Taymiyyah] - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: And such is the ruling if he made between him and Allah intermediaries on whom he places his trust, to whom he supplicates (yad'uhum) and whom he asks (yas`aluhum) [for his needs]. This is agreed upon (Ijma'an).

Source: Al-Insaf 10/327: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d..._no=26&ID=5317

Imam al-Hajjawi (d. 968 H, rahimahullah) said:

قال الشيخ: أو كان مبغضا لرسوله أو لما جاء به اتفاقا. وقال: أو جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يتوكل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم إجماعا. انتهى. أو سجد لصنم أو شمس أو قمر

The Shaykh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said: Or he is resentful towards his messenger or towards that which he came with. This is agreed upon. And he said: Or he made intermediaries betwenn him and Allah on whom he places his trust and to whom he supplicates (yad'uhum) and whom he asks (yas`aluhum) [for his needs]. This is agreed upon - End. Or he prostrates before an idol or the sun or the moon.

Source: al-Iqna' 4/285; also in "Bab: Hukm al-Murtad"

Imam Mar'i bin Yusuf al-Karmi (d. 1033 H, rahimahullah) said:

أو جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يتوكل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم كفر إجماعا قاله الشيخ

Or he made intermediaries betwenn him and Allah on whom he places his trust and to whom he supplicates (yad'uhum) and whom he asks (yas`aluhum) [for his needs]. This is kufr (disbelief) by consensus. This is what the Shaykh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said.

Source: Ghayat al-Muntaha 3/355

Imam al-Buhuti (d. 1051 H, rahimahullah) said:

قال الشيخ أو كان مبغضا لرسوله أو لما جاء به ) الرسول ( اتفاقا ، وقال أو جعل بينه وبين الله وسائط يتوكل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم إجماعا انتهى ) أي كفر لأن ذلك كفعل عابدي الأصنام قائلين : { ما نعبدهم إلا ليقربونا إلى الله زلفى

(The Shaykh (i.e. Ibn Taymiyyah) said: Or he is resentful towards his messenger or towards that which he came with), [meaning towards that which] the messenger [came with], (This is agreed upon. And he said: Or he made intermediaries betwenn him and Allah on whom he places his trust and to whom he supplicates (yad'uhum) and whom he asks (yas`aluhum) [for his needs]. This agreed upon. - End), i.e. this is kufr (disbelief), since it resembles the acts of the idolaters who say: {We worship them for no other reason but because they would bring us near to Allah closely.} [39:3].

Source: Kashaf al-Qina' 6/168-169: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/d..._no=16&ID=8568

So as you see all major Hanabilah after Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) agreed with him and regarded it as an act of apostasy. (By the way: Isn't it nice to see how they all call him "The Shaykh" or "Our Shaykh"? )

And to make it even clearer, so that no Zindiq can play around with their words:

The quote of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah), which I posted at first is also quoted by Imam Mar'i bin Yusuf al-Karmi (rahimahullah) in his book "Shifa` as-Sudur fi Ziyarat al-Mashahid wal Qubur" on page 379 (if one takes the pages of the book it's on 212/٢١٢) and of course he agrees with him!!

Here is a link to download the book (pdf): http://www.mediafire.com/?0ydmkzyqky2

Conclusion: According to major Hanbali scholars calling upon other than Allah ta'ala is shirk and apostasy! The one who does it has to be asked to repent, otherwise the hadd of riddah is applied upon him!

I would like to mention three important points, so that these three things are not mixed with eachother:

- Saying "Oh Allah ta'ala help me for the sake of the Prophet" and similar sayings: There are two cases:
If the intention is to use ones love for Rasulallah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in the Tawassul, then this is allowed.
But if the intention is to use the Dhat of Rasulallah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) in the Tawassul, then this is not allowed according to Shaykh al-Islam and others. But other scholars have regarded it as permissable and no one among the scholars have ever called this as shirk.

- Going to the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and asking him (sallalahu 'alayhi wa sallam) to make Du'a` to Allah ta'ala (and not going further than that).
Shaykh al-Islam said that going to the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) and asking him (sallalallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) to make Du'a` to Allah ta'ala was allowed during his lifetime without any doubt, but after he (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) left the Dunya, it's not legislated anymore. He also mentioned that it's a Bid'ah and a "dhari'ah ila ash-shirk" (a mean to shirk, i.e. something that can lead to shirk). Some scholars have even allowed that (but no one among the early scholars near the Salaf as-salih!), but their opinion is to be rejected, because it can lead to shirk (but it's not shirk by itself).

- Calling upon other than Allah ta'ala for the fulfillment of one's needs like saying "Ya Shaykh 'Abd al-Qadir I ask you for rizq/children/protection during my journey/help/etc.".
This is clear shirk (polytheism) and whoever regards it as allowed is an apostate. One should ask such a person to repent and if he refuses then in an islamic state the hadd of riddah is to be applied upon such a person.
As for those "scholars" in our time who endorse calling upon other than Allah ta'ala: They're Zanadiqah and one shouldn't take one's Din from them.

I will end my post with the following Ayah:

{ وَإِذَا سَأَلَكَ عِبَادِي عَنِّي فَإِنِّي قَرِيبٌ أُجِيبُ دَعْوَةَ ٱلدَّاعِ إِذَا دَعَانِ فَلْيَسْتَجِيبُواْ لِي وَلْيُؤْمِنُواْ بِي لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْشُدُونَ }

{ When My servants ask you about Me, then (tell them that) I am near. I respond to the call of one when he prays to Me; so they should respond to Me, and have faith in Me, so that they may be on the right path. }

[2:186]

Subhanallah! How can anyone call upon other than Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala after knowing this beautiful Ayah?!?

[faqir]

al-salam 'alaikum

This is just flawed reasoning. The shaykh says we only ask Allah and none other than Allah can benefit or harm. This, of course, doesn't contradict the permissibility of istighatha unless you think he considers it forbidden to ask anything of a living person as well. This was all explained in the articles above (see, for example 'Allamah al-Dijwi's explanation). Those who permit istighatha say that istighatha is eventually asking Allah, because He is in reality the creator of all things. Again this is also explained in numerous articles linked in post 1 such as this fatwa of Imam al-Haytami. All your quotes of Ibn Taymiyya, etc are irrelevant and his rush to declare others polytheists and apostates and calling for their blood is certainly not accepted by the major scholars that were quoted above. This eagerness to call for killing of muslims was refuted decisively by the Hanbali Mustafa b. Ahmad al-Shatti in response to the Wahhabis which I urge you to read carefully here. You can also see the correct approach to interpreting the statements of Muslims with the meaning that befits his affiliation to Islam and the creed of Allah’s Oneness in this article. Anyhow the articles linked in post 1 are sufficient for those who wish to understand the position of those who permitted istighatha and I don't really need to add anything further.

was-salam

[abul_hussain]

al-salam 'alaikum

This is just flawed reasoning. ........... Those who permit istighatha say that istighatha is eventually asking Allah, because He is in reality the creator of all things.

I think your reasoning is flawed as well. Then why should anyone ask Allah at all. They should seek everything from the creation since you say that in reality Allah is creator of all things. Using your logic and analogy, Prophets are alive just like any other living human being, so asking them for Jannah Paradise / Job / Car etc.. shouldn't make any difference because you are in reality asking Allah. in short what you are saying is that Ya Ali madad or Ya Abdul Qadir Jilani Madad or Ya Ahmed_raza_Khan_barelwi madad is something recommended and every muslim should do it.

[Jadeed]

@Faqir

Don't you support taqleed? Do you really want Hanbalis to leave the luminaries of the school like al-Mardawi, al-Buhuti, al-Hajjawi, al-Karmi, and Ibn Muflih for some obscure twelfth-century nobody?

[AimeSi]

I think your reasoning is flawed as well. Then why should anyone ask Allah at all. They should seek everything from the creation since you say that in reality Allah is creator of all things. Using your logic and analogy, Prophets are alive just like any other living human being, so asking them for Jannah Paradise / Job / Car etc.. shouldn't make any difference because you are in reality asking Allah. in short what you are saying is that Ya Ali madad or Ya Abdul Qadir Jilani Madad or Ya Ahmed_raza_Khan_barelwi madad is something recommended and every muslim should do it.

I was thinking the same after reading his reply.


Before goind further, faqir, you said : "Those who permit istighatha say that istighatha is eventually asking Allah, because He is in reality the creator of all things."
So, if a Christian ask to 'Isa (as) or Maryam (as) to help him or guide him can we say that in fact he is asking to Allah since 'Isa(as) and Maryam (as) was created by Allah ?

Furthermore, let's do some "reverse thinking"; for you faqir, which form of du'a is NOT permissible according to you (or the scholars you may quote) ?

If someone say "Ya Ghauth A'tham" and then ask him something, as far as I've understand you, it is permissible if he thinks that only Allah can help him in fine and that Shaykh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani (ra) was created by Allah. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
So if only Allah has the ability to answer to his needs, why don't ask Him directly ?
What make those du'a preferable over du'a (by their forms or their words)... on which the 'ulamas have never differed and which come from hadith ?

And my finals questions are :
For you does the risk of committing shirk exist with those kinds of du'a (itighâtha) ?
Does all the layman who are attached to this practice really think that in fact they are asking to Allah and by himself the pious people they call can't help them ?

[Ansari]

Those who permit istighatha say that istighatha is eventually asking Allah

So if one asks; grant me money, cure my eyesight, help me I am drowning, help me building this wall (the reasoning of GF Haddad; what is asked during life, can be asked after death) you are "asking" Allah.

Christianity has come back to life amongst the so-called Muslims.

This is just too ackward. As in your words:

This is just flawed reasoning.

[warea]

@Faqir

Don't you support taqleed? Do you really want Hanbalis to leave the luminaries of the school like al-Mardawi, al-Buhuti, al-Hajjawi, al-Karmi, and Ibn Muflih for some obscure twelfth-century nobody?

Yea that one liner quote floated around as big proof which first of all speaks about intermediary and not isthighasa. And there are plenty of references to hanbali scholars recognizing intercession by those iin graves. Secondly if interpreted the way you say would make even the intercession that is agreed upon by ahlus usunnah and rejected by muatazili heretics, I.e. the intercession on day of judgment, as shirk. So hold that one liner quote to yourself. Suffice to say that the whole hanabli scholarship in Arabia, Iraq and Syria opposed wahhabism when they emerged and house of saud alliance had to finish them off just like the shias next door silenced Sunnis in Persia.

[warea]

So if one asks; grant me money, cure my eyesight, help me I am drowning, help me building this wall (the reasoning of GF Haddad; what is asked during life, can be asked after death) you are "asking" Allah.

Yep. since we acknowledge the servitude of them and their power to Allah and not indepedence. So we are in effect asking Allah through the means he has kept in creation. Humans by nature interact with the creations around them. To attribute that as shirk is never heard before. Even tabaruk of a lifeless object is taken for curing sickness, so how could someone question the dua of a Muslim or karamat through them?

Christianity has come back to life amongst the so-called Muslims.

Yea. Protestant Christianity.

[Jadeed]

Yea that one liner quote floated around as big proof which first of all speaks about intermediary and not isthighasa. And there are plenty of references to hanbali scholars recognizing intercession by those iin graves. Secondly if interpreted the way you say would make even the intercession that is agreed upon by ahlus usunnah and rejected by muatazili heretics, I.e. the intercession on day of judgment, as shirk. So hold that one liner quote to yourself. Suffice to say that the whole hanabli scholarship in Arabia, Iraq and Syria opposed wahhabism when they emerged and house of saud alliance had to finish them off just like the shias next door silenced Sunnis in Persia.

This is so idiotic. You realize they're quoting Ibn Taymiyyah as an approved authority, right? And you know what his doctrine is in regards to istighatha and intercession, so why are you trying to draw absurd conclusions from it? And al-Mardawi, al-Buhuti, al-Hajjawi - these are the pillars of the late Hanbali mad'hab. al-Iqna' and Ghayat al-Muntaha are two of the mu'tamad books that are consulted to find out 'what the mad'hab position is,' similar to Ibn Abidin's works for the Hanafis, and al-Insaf traces all the opinions in the mad'hab back to their sources. So we're not talking obscurantist characters, we're talking the pillars of the late Hanbali mad'hab taking Ibn Taymiyyah's opinions about Istighatha. You should know what they consist of by now as opposed to drawing absurd comparisons that don't make any sense and trying to do argumento ad absurdum without a solid foundation.

But by all means, continue propagating the absurd myth that Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was opposed by the 'whole of Hanbali scholarship when he emerged.' Would you like to populate the list of names? You should take his brother off, because his brother saw the error of his ways and joined the da'wah before he died, as is recorded, so as for now all I see on the list is Mustafa ibn Ahmed ash-Shatti, who doesn't stand at all next to al-Buhuti, al-Mardawi, al-Hajjawi...