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

[Abu Yunus]

As-salamu alaikum, Faqir.

In your opinion, who is your earliest Mujtahid scholar to allow such Istighathah?

The scholars you quote seem rather late in Islamic history.

[SASLAMS]

I am unaware of the specifics you are talking about, but it is possible that you'll find traditional scholars opposing it, but I doubt they will label you a mushirk or a kafir for doing it.... Unless you are doing istighatha in away that opposes what the traditional scholars have considered permissible....

You'll find traditional Shafi scholars who oppose the hadra by the Sufis but it is still permissible in the Shafi madhab... You find traditional Shafi scholars who oppose the dominant opinion that shaving the beard is makrooh and prefer the opinion that is haraam... but the dominant opinion in the late Shafi madhab concerning shaving the beard is still makrooh... So it is not strange to find scholars opposing the dominant opinion of a madhab but their disagreement with it isn't usually like the disagreement that Wahabis have of it that are accompanied with shirk and kufr etc etc...

You'll will always find disagreements among human beings, it is a natural aspect of the human being... a person would be lying if they told me that they personally agreed with everything their shuyukh have taught them... There will always be something that you will disagree with your shaykh... always.... Most people just bite their lip... There will always be something that your shaykh does, that goes against the dominant opinion of the madhab.... always... I haven't studied a single text in Islam except a shaykh saying, it would have been better if the Imam would have said this or that... or while the dominant of opinion of the madhab is this, in modern times it is not possible to fulfill so do this or that.... even in Arabic grammar... the ajromiyyah I remember a shaykh telling me it is not the most accurate text... but Allah placed his baraka in this text so we teach from it...

So it is possible to find traditional scholars disagreeing with some positions within traditional Islam...


The fallacy of this argument is in the question... Simply because you have this group or that group agreeing with Ahlus Sunnah on a point doesn't make them Ahlus Sunnah... There are Wahabis who believe that Bukhari is Sahih, it doesn't make them Ahlus Sunnah.... however seeing Bukhari as sahih can be a sign that one is Ahlus Sunnah because the Shia don't regard Bukhari as Sahih... So what doesn't your question really mean????



The Habashis are considered Ahlul Bidah by most of our Ulama.... and in regards to the second question, I have no idea what you are talking about... I don't know the context in which they were congratulating the nasara... I don't why they did it... what does that even mean???

And Allah knows best.

he could be talking about the letter to the pope a few years back by habib Ali aljifri & was signed by most of the worlds major ulama. in my opinion it was more of a call to Islam.

[Muzzammil Husayn]

Imam Khayr al-Din al-Ramli on Istighatha

Khayr al-Din al-Ramli also said in his Fatawa

http://ia600404.us.archive.org/2/ite...TAWIKAIR01.pdf

وأما النذر الذي ينذرونه أكثر العوام كأن يقول يا سيدي فلان يعني به وليا من الأولياء أو نبيا من الأنبياء إن رد غائبي أو عوفي مريضي أو قضيت حاجتي فلك من الذهب أو الفضة أو الطعام أو الشراب أو الزيت كذا فهذا باطل بالإجماع لأنه نذر لمخلوق وهو لا يجوز لأنه أي النذر عبادة فلا تكون لمخلوق والمنذور له ميت والميت لا يملك وإنه إن ظن أن الميت يتصرف فى الأمور كفر إلا أن قال يا الله إني نذرت لك إن فعلت معي...ا

“As for the vow which most of the commoners undertake, like saying ‘O my master so-and-so,’ intending thereby a saint from the saints or a prophet from the prophets, ‘if my lost property is returned to me or my patient is cured or my need is fulfilled, you will have of gold or silver or food or drink or oil such-and-such [amount],’ this is baseless by consensus, because he made a vow to creation which is impermissible because it, i.e. the vow, is worship, so is not [permissible] for creation, and the one to whom the vow is made is dead having no ownership, and if [the person making the vow] thinks that the deceased freely disposes in the matters, he has disbelieved...” (Fatawa Khayriyyah, vol 1 p 20)

Clearly, the commoners who perform istighathah of the dead are far more likely than those who perform nadhr to them to believe the dead freely dispose in the matters in which they are asked for help. Based on the same reasoning therefore, that such istighathah leads to the belief that the dead freely dispose in these matters, it should be ruled impermissible.

'Allamah 'Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi (d. 1304) was asked about the same issue referred to in the above link, of saying: "Ya Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir shay’an lillah," and he replied:

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

"Secondly, such recitation consists of calling on the dead from a distance and it is not established from the Shari’ah that saints have the power to listen to a call from far distance. However, it is established [from Shari'ah] that the people of the grave hear the salam of the visitors to their graves. But to consider that anyone beside Allah is hadhir nadhir at all times and is aware of the evident and hidden, is shirk… And our ‘ulama have said that anyone who believes that the souls of the saints are hadhir and ‘alim (knowing), is a kafir. Although, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani (may Allah have mercy on him) is one of the great luminaries of the Ummah al-Muhammadiyah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and his virtues and excellent qualities are innumerable, but it is not established that he hears the distressed caller from a distance. And to hold a belief that he is aware of his disciple’s affairs all the time and hear their calls, is shirk." (Mujmu’ah al-Fatawa, 2:189-190) http://www.deoband.org/2010/09/aqida...er-than-allah/

And 'Allamah Qadi Thana Allah Panipati (d. 1225 H/1810 CE) said:

"And the statements of the ignorant ones: ‘Ya Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani shay’an lillah‘ and ‘Ya Khawaja Shams al-Din al-Panipati shay’an lillah‘ (‘Oh Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani give something for the sake of Allah’, and ‘Oh Khawaja Shams al-Din Panipati give something for the sake of Allah’) are not permissible. In fact, they are shirk (polytheism) and kufr. But if someone says: ‘Oh my lord, through the mediation of Khawaja Shams al-Din Panipati fulfil the following need of mine…’ then this will be correct." (Irshad al-Talibin, p.18.) http://www.deoband.org/2009/02/aqida...efs/istigatha/

[warea]

Khayr al-Din al-Ramli also said in his Fatawa

http://ia600404.us.archive.org/2/ite...TAWIKAIR01.pdf

وأما النذر الذي ينذرونه أكثر العوام كأن يقول يا سيدي فلان يعني به وليا من الأولياء أو نبيا من الأنبياء إن رد غائبي أو عوفي مريضي أو قضيت حاجتي فلك من الذهب أو الفضة أو الطعام أو الشراب أو الزيت كذا فهذا باطل بالإجماع لأنه نذر لمخلوق وهو لا يجوز لأنه أي النذر عبادة فلا تكون لمخلوق والمنذور له ميت والميت لا يملك وإنه إن ظن أن الميت يتصرف فى الأمور كفر إلا أن قال يا الله إني نذرت لك إن فعلت معي...ا

“As for the vow which most of the commoners undertake, like saying ‘O my master so-and-so,’ intending thereby a saint from the saints or a prophet from the prophets, ‘if my lost property is returned to me or my patient is cured or my need is fulfilled, you will have of gold or silver or food or drink or oil such-and-such [amount],’ this is baseless by consensus, because he made a vow to creation which is impermissible because it, i.e. the vow, is worship, so is not [permissible] for creation, and the one to whom the vow is made is dead having no ownership, and if [the person making the vow] thinks that the deceased freely disposes in the matters, he has disbelieved...” (Fatawa Khayriyyah, vol 1 p 20)

Clearly, the commoners who perform istighathah of the dead are far more likely than those who perform nadhr to them to believe the dead freely dispose in the matters in which they are asked for help. Based on the same reasoning therefore, that such istighathah leads to the belief that the dead freely dispose in these matters, it should be ruled impermissible.

'Allamah 'Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi (d. 1304) was asked about the same issue referred to in the above link, of saying: "Ya Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir shay’an lillah," and he replied:

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

"Secondly, such recitation consists of calling on the dead from a distance and it is not established from the Shari’ah that saints have the power to listen to a call from far distance. However, it is established [from Shari'ah] that the people of the grave hear the salam of the visitors to their graves. But to consider that anyone beside Allah is hadhir nadhir at all times and is aware of the evident and hidden, is shirk… And our ‘ulama have said that anyone who believes that the souls of the saints are hadhir and ‘alim (knowing), is a kafir. Although, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir Jaylani (may Allah have mercy on him) is one of the great luminaries of the Ummah al-Muhammadiyah (Allah bless him and give him peace) and his virtues and excellent qualities are innumerable, but it is not established that he hears the distressed caller from a distance. And to hold a belief that he is aware of his disciple’s affairs all the time and hear their calls, is shirk." (Mujmu’ah al-Fatawa, 2:189-190) http://www.deoband.org/2010/09/aqida...er-than-allah/

And 'Allamah Qadi Thana Allah Panipati (d. 1225 H/1810 CE) said:

"And the statements of the ignorant ones: ‘Ya Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani shay’an lillah‘ and ‘Ya Khawaja Shams al-Din al-Panipati shay’an lillah‘ (‘Oh Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani give something for the sake of Allah’, and ‘Oh Khawaja Shams al-Din Panipati give something for the sake of Allah’) are not permissible. In fact, they are shirk (polytheism) and kufr. But if someone says: ‘Oh my lord, through the mediation of Khawaja Shams al-Din Panipati fulfil the following need of mine…’ then this will be correct." (Irshad al-Talibin, p.18.) http://www.deoband.org/2009/02/aqida...efs/istigatha/

Your stretching the quote of Imam Ramli. From what you quoted he seems to refering to those who donate material stuff to the person in the grave which is agreed upon as imperssible and foolish.

[Ansari]

Your stretching the quote of Imam Ramli. From what you quoted he seems to refering to those who donate material stuff to the person in the grave which is agreed upon as imperssible and foolish.

Since when is donating material stuff kufr? He talks about tasarruf fil umur which is the aqida of many people who claim they perform istigatha.

[warea]

Since when is donating material stuff kufr? He talks about tasarruf fil umur which is the aqida of many people who claim they perform istigatha.

Would you translate Imam Ramli's whole discussion on vows ? So we get what he considers as permissible and impermissible. Rather than just one angle.

This quote cannot be brought here to prove a point because the statement which Imam Ramli discusses is not somethin anyone permits. The only last underlined line which is now being used to equate with the understanding of ttassaruf is a then a discussion of tassaruf. Why club it and make isthighasa itself shirk when its a seperate issue? And the quote with one line on it barely does any justice to understanding what he meant.

Moroevr I'm not aware of anyone attributting tasarruf in the way you imply it. Its just in the way Isa alaihi brought dead to life or in the way you believe your own ability to move your hands as you will. Moreover, the isthighasa most do is by the meaning of tawassul. They expect the person in the grave to help him within their ability which means through their prayers to God. This is why isthighasa, tawassul and shafaat that muslims everywhere do is essentialy one. While some isthighasa done are in situations where they expect some help from their karamat that Allah has gifted them with, and has basis in the hadith "o servants of Allah! Help me!".

[SeekerOfGuidance]

There are numerous threads on this forum with quotes from scholars who do not permit Istighatha (seeking aid) from the deceased. Clearly this falls into the normal differences we encounter amongst the scholars of Islamic Law. But, I think it only fair that the opinions of other scholars ( non-Barelwi ) from the past and present who did permit it (with conditions, of course) are also considered. Please see below:


Imam Khayr al-Din al-Ramli on Istighatha

Imam al-Kawthari on Istighatha, Isti'ana and Tawassul
[Full article of Imam al-Kawthari available HERE]

Imam Shihab al-Din al-Ramli's Fatwa on Istighatha

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami on Seeking Aid With the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam)

Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki on Tawassul, Istighatha and Tashaffu'

Imam Ibn al-Hajj al-Abdari on Tawassul and Istighatha

Imam Mustafa ibn Ahmad ash-Shatti al-Hanbali on Shirk and Istighatha

Imam Busiri's Istighatha & Imam al-Haytami's commentary upon it

Najm al-Din al-Tufi Quotes a Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya on Istighatha

Shaykh Yusuf al-Nabahani, Shaykh abd al-Ghani al-Nablusi, al-Allamah Imam Abdul Hayy al-Shurunbali and Shaykh al-Khalili on Istighatha

'Allamah Yusuf b. Ahmad al-Dijwi al-Azhari on Tawassul and Istighatha
[Read his treatise posted on aslein.net HERE]

Istighatha of Shaykh `Uthman Dan Fodio

Habib Zayn b. Sumayt on Istighatha and other 'Issues of Controversy

Habib Umar bin Hafiz on Istighatha

The Hadith: 'O Slaves of Allah! Help Me!' and the opinion of various `Ulema regarding it and their acting upon it

Shaykh Yusuf Khattar Muhammad on al-Madad

Istighatha in Ibn `Abdidin's Radd al-Muhtar




(p.s. I hope the moderators will allow these links to remain! I see no point in wasting bandwidth and copy / pasting here instead)

You managed to only gather a handful of names from the khalaf, not more than what you would find for other disastrous anomalous opinions that are being propagated today by pseudo-traditionalists and pseudo-salafis.

Since istagathah can have many forms, varying from those that are permissible to those that are shirk, it's important to define the exact words of istagathah that is being justified.

Which of the above names have unambiguously permitted words similar to: "Oh Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani, guide me along the straight path" ?

And from the names you have left, how many are accepted as Mujtahids, or even as a scholar from the first seven centuries AH?

[Saad]

Assalam o 'alaykum,

Istighathah/istimdad is a mushtarik (common) word. The istighathah in the statement of 'Allamah Ibn Hajar Makki (etc.) is a reference to the correct form of tawassul. Also, his student 'Allamah Tahir Patni Shahid has claimed consensus of the Muslim scholars on its prohibition. And there were scholars before Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah who refuted seeking aid from the dead.

'Allamah Ibn Jawzi (d.597 AH) has brought forward a fatwa from 'Allamah Abul-Wafa ‘Ali ibn ‘Aqil al-Hanbali (d. 488 AH) on the prohibition of asking the dead for help in his Tablis al-Iblis.

G.F Haddad writes in reply to a question, “Are Hanbali and Athari aqida the same?”

“…This is the strain that a few Hanbalis embraced in their own positively Ash'ari creeds such as Ibn `Aqil, Ibn al-Jawzi, and al-Saffarini…”

Ibn Jawzi writes on page 136:

قال ابن عقيل: لما صعبت التكاليف على الجهال والطغام عدلوا عن أوضاع الشرع إلى تعظيم أوضاع وضعوها لأنفسهم فسهلت عليهم إذ لم يدخلوا بها تحت أمر غيرهم قال وهم كفار عندي بهذه الأوضاع مثل تعظيم القبور وإكرامها بما نهى الشرع عنه من إيقاد النيران وتقبيلها وتحليقها وخطاب الموتى بالألواح [بالحوائج] وكتب الرقاع فيها يا مولاي أفعل بي كذا وكذا وأخذ التراب تبركا وإفاضة الطيب على القبور وشد الرحال اليها وإلقاء الخرق على الشجر أقتداء بمن عبد اللات والعزى ولا تجد في هؤلاء من يحقق مسألة في زكاة فيسأل عن حكم يلزمه والويل عندهم لمن لم يقبل مشهد الكهف ولم يتمسح بآجرة مسجد المأمونية يوم الأربعاء ولم يعقد على قبر أبيه أزجا بالجص والآجر ولم يشق ثوبه إلى ذيله ولم يرق ماء الورد على القبر ويدفن معه ثيابه

"Ibn Aqil said: “When these obligations were hard on the ignorant and rabble ones, they diverted themselves from the positions of Shari'ah to revere positions which they laid down for themselves, so it felt easy to them as they will not be regulated by the order of anyone except themselves.” He added: “To me, they are kafir (infidels) due to these positions; like revering the graves and paying respect to them with things which are forbidden by Shari'a like burning fire, kissing the graves, roaming around them, addressing the dead with sheets (of requests) and notes on patches which say like this: O my lord! Do me so and so, and taking the soil for getting blessing, pouring perfume on the graves, undertaking journey to visit them, hanging shreds with trees, as imitation to those who worship Lat and 'Uzza. You will find none among them who enquires a matter about Zakat and asks its ruling which he should fulfill. According to them, woe is to one who did not kiss the Mashhad al-Kahaf and did not touch the wall of the Al-Mamuniyah mosque on Wednesday, who did not erect building on the grave of his father with brick and plaster, who did not tear off his clothe to tail, did not spray rose water on the grave of his father and did not bury his clothes with him."

While some isthighasa done are in situations where they expect some help from their karamat that Allah has gifted them with,.

The Reality of Miracles

[faqir]

Khayr al-Din al-Ramli also said in his Fatawa

http://ia600404.us.archive.org/2/ite...TAWIKAIR01.pdf

وأما النذر الذي ينذرونه أكثر العوام كأن يقول يا سيدي فلان يعني به وليا من الأولياء أو نبيا من الأنبياء إن رد غائبي أو عوفي مريضي أو قضيت حاجتي فلك من الذهب أو الفضة أو الطعام أو الشراب أو الزيت كذا فهذا باطل بالإجماع لأنه نذر لمخلوق وهو لا يجوز لأنه أي النذر عبادة فلا تكون لمخلوق والمنذور له ميت والميت لا يملك وإنه إن ظن أن الميت يتصرف فى الأمور كفر إلا أن قال يا الله إني نذرت لك إن فعلت معي...ا

“As for the vow which most of the commoners undertake, like saying ‘O my master so-and-so,’ intending thereby a saint from the saints or a prophet from the prophets, ‘if my lost property is returned to me or my patient is cured or my need is fulfilled, you will have of gold or silver or food or drink or oil such-and-such [amount],’ this is baseless by consensus, because he made a vow to creation which is impermissible because it, i.e. the vow, is worship, so is not [permissible] for creation, and the one to whom the vow is made is dead having no ownership, and if [the person making the vow] thinks that the deceased freely disposes in the matters, he has disbelieved...” (Fatawa Khayriyyah, vol 1 p 20)

This is aqida 101 for the sunnis. In reality this disposal and power is Allah's - and not from the deceased saint. Who would disagree with this?

Clearly, the commoners who perform istighathah of the dead are far more likely than those who perform nadhr to them to believe the dead freely dispose in the matters in which they are asked for help. Based on the same reasoning therefore, that such istighathah leads to the belief that the dead freely dispose in these matters, it should be ruled impermissible.

Again we do not believe this is the belief of the commoner sunni muslim - and obviously this was not what Imam Khayr al-Din al-Ramli considered to be the case otherwise he would not have given a fatwa of permissibility as opposed to your fatwa that 'it should be ruled impermissible'. It is disingenous of you to quote another statement of the Imam's as support for your position which completely contradicts his own view.

[faqir]

You managed to only gather a handful of names from the khalaf, not more than what you would find for other disastrous anomalous opinions that are being propagated today by pseudo-traditionalists and pseudo-salafis.

Since istagathah can have many forms, varying from those that are permissible to those that are shirk, it's important to define the exact words of istagathah that is being justified.

Which of the above names have unambiguously permitted words similar to: "Oh Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jaylani, guide me along the straight path" ?

And from the names you have left, how many are accepted as Mujtahids, or even as a scholar from the first seven centuries AH?

I do not doubt there are 'many forms' of istighatha but can I suggest you read the articles in question where you will find your answers insha'Allah. As for who these scholars are, whether they are mujtahids or not - ask your shuyukh who they are and failing that try shaykh google. I can assure you that the earlier scholars quoted are all major scholars in their respective madhhabs.