Friday, 1 October 2010

REFUTING THE CHARGE OF GRAVE WORSHIP





REFUTING THE CHARGE OF GRAVE WORSHIP

Wahhbi creed is clear cut about those who seek tawassul through the “dead” by calling upon them. (nullify a person’s Islam - is an infidel )
Mu-hammed Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s
"Nawaaqid ul-Islaam"
[the factors in which Wahhabis claim nullify a person’s Islam],
p. 308
where Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Najdi said:
He who sets up intermediaries between him and Allah, calling unto them and asking them to intercede on his behalf with Allah, and putting trust in them is an infidel [i.e. a Kaafir, a disbeliever] according to the consensus of the scholars”.

This is exactly what Muslims do when we make tawassul through the Messenger of Allah
صلى الله عليه وسلم

We “call unto them” addressing him with the vocative particle [harf an-nidaa]
Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم”).

Wahhabis need an ‘Arabic lesson in al-Munaada .

The Wahhabi cult teaches that calling unto [du’a] to other than Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) is worship, and they misuse the hadeeth which says “du’a is worship”, so when any Sunni Muslim is caught saying “Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم”) at his grave, he is then automatically accused of worshipping the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) by calling unto him, thus deemed a mushrik [a pagan] for doing so –

He is then accused of calling unto other than Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) and deemed a Kaafir.

To demonstrate this point further then let us return to the statement of Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Najd's book:

Nawaaqid ul-Islam

Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Najdi said in point number two:

“Man ja’ala baynahu wa bayna Allah wa saa’itaa yad’uwhum wa yas’aluhum wa yatawakkaulu alyhim. Kafara ijmaa’a”

Now take special note that Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Najdi used the imperfect verb “yad’u-hum” meaning “they are calling or will call upon them” this verb derives from the same root as du’a which simply means to call upon see p. 282 of the Hans Wehr ‘Arabic dictionary.

The Sahaabah addressed the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) respectfully by saying “Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم”, “Yaa RasulAllah (صلى الله عليه وسلم” and why?

Take note of the following Qur’anic passage from Surah an-Nur [24] ayah 63:

“la taj’alu du’a ar-Rasul baynakum ka- du’a ba’dikum ba’da”

Which translates as:
“Do not make the calling [du’a] of the Messenger between you like the calling [du’a] of each other”

Meaning address the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) respectfully! This is why they used “Yaa RasulAllah” in his very lifetime out of respect. But more importantly also notice that the Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) used the word du’a!

Wahhabis make a distinction here. They argue that when the Messenger was alive, then its permissible to call upon him [du’a] using the vocative noun “Yaa” but now he is “dead”, calling unto him [du’a] is now considered as worship, thus calling unto the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) is shirk [i.e. idolatry].

So according to Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab Najdi, to yad’u-hum [to call upon them] by saying “Ya RasulAllah” is indeed an act that is considered by the Wahhabi’s to take one out of the fold of Islam whether you are doing tawssaul, asking for Shifaa’a or istighathah. This can be further seen by the fact Wahhabi scholar Bilal Phillips wrote in his book:

Fundamentals of Tawheed p. 27-28:

“The Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said in no uncertain terms “prayer (du’a) is worship…If somebody prays to the Prophet, to so called saints [remember Bilal Phillips means by this calling upon them]…asking for help or asking them to request help from Allah, they have also committed shirk [i.e. they have became a Kaafir Mushrik]”

It is then clear that Wahhabis deem such tawaasul as calling upon the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) by directly addressing him “Yaa RasulAllah” as major shirk, regardless if we are asking for help, or for them to supplicate to Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) for us.

However the big burning question here is this the stance of Muslim orthodoxy?
Is this the position that the scholars of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’a hold?
Do the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah believe that it is an act of idolatry to address the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in his grave?

According to Tafseer Ibn Katheer Surah an-Nisa [4] ayah 64 it is not shirk to call upon [du’a] the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) whilst he is in his grave.

Before we go to Tafseer Ibn Katheer and look at the evidence [scans available] I would like to mention that this cannot be found in the ‘Arabic versions, nor is it translated in the Dar us-Salaam versions that are published by any Wahhabi publisher.

It is purposefully whitewashed for the very reason that it defies the Wahhabi creed and they cannot have that as prove against them.

So what they have done is they have put outSaheeh Tafseer Ibn Katheer, but when they say Saheeh they do not mean authentic, they mean that they have corrected Ibn Katheer’s (رحمه الله) tafseer as they deemed that what he(رحمه الله) mentioned was dalaalah [misguidance].

This is one of the many reasons many new converts remain blind to the tricks of the Wahhabi organization.

I have tried to tell them they are being deceived and they need to learn ‘Arabic so they can analyze these things for themselves, but I find that many Wahhabi converts are too huffed up with pride and are too far gone to even sincerely speak too. The once sincere conversation soon turns sour.

However, it is my challenge to them to study the following in ‘Arabic and then turn to the Dar us-Salaam and ask themselves why do Wahhabis keep white washing Sunni texts which clearly display evidences against their own creed?

Let us now quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer:

Ataabi raltes that he was sitting at the grave of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم when an Arab came and said “As-Salaamu Alayka YAA RASULALLAH” then he quoted the related ayah about seeking forgiveness.”
See Tafseer Ibn Katheer, vol. 1, p. 328

Before my readership starts calling me a misleading Barelwi prentending to be a Hanbali, let us look to the Hanbali scholars and see what they have to offer.

There is no doubt to the authenticity of this narration used by Ibn Kathher as Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi (رحمه الله) included this is his al-Mughni, vol. 3, pp. 599-601 [scan available].

The Shaafi Master, Imaam Nawawi (رحمه الله) also included this narration in his book al-Adhkaar pp. 218-221 [evidence here]
The Maaliki Master Qadi Iyaad also documented this is his classical text Ash-Shifaa’a and other countless Imaams from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah have used this as an evidence as seeking a need.

For example, the great relied upon Hanbali scholar Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi wrote in his al-Wasiyyah:

“When seeking for a need to be fulfilled from Allah ta’ala then perform the ablution and two units of nawafil prayer, relying on Allah ta’alaa and sending salutations on the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam and say the following ….“O Allah, I ask you and turn to you by Your Prophet Muhammad [sal Allahu alayhi wasallam], the Prophet of Mercy. YAA MUHAMMAD!!! I turn by you to my Lord and your Lord aza wajjal for Him to settle my need for me”

Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen (رحمه الله) then says after quoting this du’a “The early Muslims [i.e. the Salaf] had their needs fulfilled by saying this”

Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah’s (رحمه الله) work al-Wassiyah has been translated by Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali and is available for people to read here:
http://thinkhanbali.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/word-of-advice.pdf and it has also been translated by Aisha Bewly.

You will also be able to find this hadeeth in Sunan at-tirmidhi and Ibn Maajah, Imaam Suyuti (رحمه الله) classified this hadeeth as saheeh in his al-Jami us-Saghir hadeeth no. 1279; and again Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) testifies to this hadeeth in his Mansik: Kash-Shaaf ul-Qinaa, vol. 2, pp. 70-73.

Now this is the interesting part, we can see from the above reference that Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) allowed tawassul through the Prophet by addressing the Prophet in his grave with the vocative noun “Yaa” as in “Yaa Muhammad” or “Yaa RasulAllah”.

However, look what the Wahhabi scholar Albani had to say about this in the book Tawassul: Seeking a means of nearness to Allah By Nasir ud-Deen Albani, Al-Hidaayah publising. -p. 38:

“Imam Ahmad allowed tawwasul by means of the Messenger saaws alone,…However, WE (he means we as in WE i.e. the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, the Ahle Hadeeth) follow what is supported by proof and not the blind opinions of men.”

Notice carefully how Albani used the pronoun “We” distinctly to differ from Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal. Imaam Tahaawi and other great scholars of Islamic creed only used the pronoun “we” in reference to the Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaa’ah and their methodlogy.
Therefore not only does Albani demonstrate to us that Wahhabis are on a different path than Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) but it also demonstrates to us that the deeper implications reflect the Khawwaarij theology at work by differing from the Imaams of theAhl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.

Albani’s statement therefore reflects nothing but bad opinion towards the Imaam.
Especially given the fact that he describes Imaam Ahmad’s ijtihaad regarding this issue as a “blind opinion”.
Wahhabi’s should take special attention to what Imaam Tahaawi has to say in his
al-Aqeedah ut-Tahaawiyah:
“The learned men of the first community and those that followed in their footsteps – the people of virtue, the narrators of hadeeth, the jurists and analysts – must only be spoken about in the best way. Anyone who speaks ill of them, then he is on other than the path (of guidance)”. point no. 97"
---

The whole Wahhabi madh-hab is flawed as it teaches that every (Sunni) scholar, common Muslim,... is a Kaafir, and the whole world is on the path of idolatry all except for them.
---
The Late King Faisal Ibn Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia visited to the Dargah Shareef of Hazrath Mehboob-e- Sayyid Nizamuddin Auliya(Rahmatullah Alaih) in New Delhi, India.
Was it not Shirk-Bida'ah!  
did he not become a Grave Worshiper according to 
 Wahhabis, if you visit any Mazar Shareef

---

originally written by
Abu Muhammad Ibraheem al-Hanbali
comment
(EDITED BY ADHM)
30-09-2010

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-
-
-
-
---