Saturday, October 23, 2010

What he worships is not Allaah, even if he called it Allah

---



Those who believe Aļļaah to be a body i.e. occupy a location are not Muslims, as mentioned in “The difference between the Wahabi creed and Islam”, here are some quotes by well known scholars testifying to that:

Al-ˆAsqalaaniyy said they are not Muslims:
قال حذاق المتكلمين ما عرف الله من شبهه بخلقه أو أضاف إليه اليد أو أضاف إليه الولد فمعبودهم الذي عبدوه ليس هو الله وإن سموه به (فتح الباري, ابن حجر العسقلاني, دار المعرفة – بيروت ، 1379, 3 / 359)
The brilliant kalaam scholars said: “The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or ascribed a hand to Him (i.e. in the sense of a part or limb) or a child; what he worships is not Aļļaah, even if he called it Aļļaah.”[Fath al-Bari,Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani,Dar al-Marifah-Beirut,(3/359,1379)]

An-Nawawiyy and Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ said they are not Muslims:
قوله صلى الله عليه و سلم ( فليكن أول ما تدعوهم إليه عبادة الله فإذا عرفوا الله فأخبرهم إلى آخره ) قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله هذا يدل على أنهم ليسوا بعارفين الله تعالى وهو مذهب حذاق المتكلمين في اليهود والنصارى أنهم غير عارفين الله تعالى وان كانوا يعبدونه ويظهرون معرفته لد لالة السمع عندهم على هذا وان كان العقل لا يمنع أن يعرف الله تعالى من كذب رسولا قال القاضي عياض رحمه الله ما عرف الله تعالى من شبهه وجسمه من اليهود أو اجاز عليه البداء أو أضاف إليه الولد منهم أو أضاف إليه الصاحبة والولد وأجاز الحلول عليه والانتقال والامتزاج من النصارى أو وصفه مما لا يليق به أو أضاف إليه الشريك والمعاند في خلقه من المجوس والثنوية فمعبودهم الذى عبدوه ليس هو الله وان سموه به اذ ليس موصوفا بصفات الاله الواجبة له فاذن ما عرفوا الله سبحانه فتحقق هذه النكتة واعتمد عليها وقد رأيت معناها لمتقدمى أشياخنا وبها قطع الكلام ابوعمران الفارسى بين عامة اهل القيروان عند تنازعهم في هذه المسألة هذا آخر كلام القاضي رحمه الله تعالى. (المنهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج , النووي , دار إحياء التراث العربي , 1392, 1 / 199-200)

The saying of the Prophet (
صلى الله عليه وسلم) “let the first you call them to be the worship of Aļļaah, then when they know Aļļaah tell them…” etc.

Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (
رحمه الله) said: “This (i.e. the foregoing statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم))indicates that they (the Christians) do not know Aļļaah, and this is the saying of the brilliant kalaam scholars regarding the jews and the Christians; that they do not know Aļļaah (تعالى) even if they worship Him (i.e. call what they worship by His name) and making it appear as if they know Him, based on what they narrate amongst themselves, even though it is not impossible in the mind’s eye that someone who disbelieves in a messenger does know Aļļaah.”

Al-Qaađii ˆIiaađ (
رحمه الله) said: The one that likened Aļļaah to His creation, or believed Him to be bodily among the jews and Christians, or believed that He gains knowledge over time, or claimed He has a child, or a female companion and a child, or said he could exist in created things, or move from one place to another, or be mixed with creation, among the Christians or attributed to Him what is not befitting, or associated with Him a partner or opponent in creating among the Magians an dualists; what they worship is not Aļļaah, even if they called it that. This is because it is not attributed with the attributes that are necessarily His. Accordingly, they do not know Aļļaah (سبحانه), so realize this point well, and depend on it, and I have seen this point made by our predecessor shaykhs.”

Ar-Raaziyy said they are not Muslims:

الدليل دل على أن من قال إن الإله جسم فهو منكر للإله تعالى وذلك لأن إله العالم موجود ليس بجسم ولا حال في الجسم فإذا أنكر المجسم هذا الموجود فقد أنكر ذات الإله تعالى فالخلاف بين المجسم والموحد ليس في الصفة بل في الذات فصح في المجسم أنه لا يؤمن بالله أما المسائل التي حكيتموها فهي اختلافات في الصفة فظهر الفرق وأما إلزام مذهب الحلولية والحروفية فنحن نكفرهم قطعاً فإنه تعالى كفر النصارى بسبب أنهم اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ في عيسى وهؤلاء اعتقدوا حلول كلمة اللَّهِ في ألسنة جميع من قرأ القرآن وفي جميع الأجسام التي كتب فيها القرآن فإذا كان القول بالحلول في حق الذات الواحدة يوجب التكفير فلأن يكون القول بالحلول في حق جميع الأشخاص والأجسام موجباً للقول بالتكفير كان أولى (مفاتيح الغيب – دار الكتب العلمية, 16 /24)

“Proofs tell us that the who says that God is a body is a disbeliever in God (who is greatly above and clear of flaws). The reason is that the God of the World exists, and He is not a body, or stationed in a body. So if the one who believes that God is a body denies this non-bodily existence, then he has disbelieved in God Himself.
This means that the disagreement between the one that believes that God is a body, and the monotheist (i.e. in the Islamic sense, namely that God does not have a partner, part or a like in His self of attributes), is not based on a disagreement regarding attributes, but regarding the self (i.e. the identity of the one attributed with godhood.)
It is sound to say then, that the one who believes that God is a body does not believe in Aļļaah….
As for the ĥuluuliyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah settles in created things, such as the sky or a human body) and ĥuruufiyyah (those who believe that Aļļaah’s attribute of kalam/speech consists of letters and sounds) sects, we say that they are unequivocally disbelievers. This is because Aļļaah declared the christians blasphemers for believing that Aļļaah’s speech entered into Jesus, whereas the ĥuruufiyyah believe that it settles in the tongue of all those who recite Qur’aan, and in all physical things that the Qur’aan was written on. Accordingly, if the belief in its settlement in one single body (Jesus) is blasphemy, then it is even more blasphemous to believe that it settles in all shapes and bodies.”

As-Subkiyy calls them idol worshipers:

As-Subkiyy in his Tabaqaatu-sħ-Sħaafiˆiyyatu-l-Kubraa says regarding scripture texts that appear to be referring to bodily attributes:
طبقات الشافعية الكبرى : إنما المصيبة الكبرى والداهية الدهياء الإمرار على الظاهر والاعتقاد أنه المراد وأنه لا يستحيل على الباري فذلك قول المجسمة عباد الوثن الذين في قلوبهم زيغ يحملهم الزيغ على اتباع المتشابه ابتغاء الفتنة عليهم لعائن الله تترى واحدة بعد أخرى ما أجرأهم على الكذب وأقل فهمهم للحقائق طبقات الشافعية الكبرى ج 5 ص 192
“the saying of the mujassimah(anthropomorphists), worshipers of the idol, makes them always focus on ambiguous aayahs.”

Al-Qurţubiyy
and Ibn Al-ˆArabiyy
الصحيح القول بتكفيرهم ، إذ لا فرق بينهم وبين عباد الأصنام والصور.
Similarly, Al-Qurtubīy in his commentary in the Qur’ān narrates from his Shaykh Ibn Al-’Arabīy regarding the, those who say Allāh has a body:
“The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and pictures.”
(Tafsiir Al-Qurţubiyy, 4/14).

---

IBN HAJAR AL-HAYTAMI IN HIS BOOK: AL-MINHAJ AL-QAWIM SAID:

“KNOW THAT AL-QARAFI & OTHERS HAVE NARRATED FROM ASH-SHAAFI’I, MALIK, AHMAD & ABU HANIFAH(RA) THAT THOSE WHO SAY [ABOUT ALLAH] THAT HE IS IN A DIRECTION OR THAT HE HAS A BODY, HAVE COMMITTED BLASPHEMY (AL-QAA’ILEEN BI J-JIHAT WA T-TAJSIM), AND THEY [I.E. THESE SCHOLARS] WERE RIGHT IN SAYING SO.”

IMAM IBN HAJAR AL-HAYTAMI (d.974AH) HE WAS A WELL-KNOWN SHAFI’I SCHOLAR & USED TO BE THE STUDENT OF THE FAMOUS SCHOLAR ZAKARIYYA AL-ANSARI. HERE HE NARRATES : THE CONSENSUS OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE FOUR SCHOOLS ON THE FACT THAT ATTRIBUTING A DIRECTION OR A BODY TO ALLAH IS BLASPHEMY (KUFR).
------------------------------------------------------------



They are not Muslims”

Allah is not body


Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said: "Whoever says that Allah is abody unlike the bodies have blasphemed (committed kufur)". This is because Allah is not a body, and is not like the creations in anyway.

Ibn al-Jawziy al-Hanbali said in his book "Daf^ Shubah at-Tashbih" page 58"The obligation upon us is to believe that the self of Allah ta^ala is not contained in a place, and He is not attributed with change nor movement".

Ibn al-Jawziy also said: "Some people lied when they heard about the Sifat (attributes of Allah) and interpreted them according to the physical meanings, such as those who claimed that Allah literally descends from the sky and moves from one place to another. This is an ill understanding, because the one who moves would be from a place to a place, and that necessitates that the place is bigger than him and that requires movement, and all of that is impossible to be attributed to Allah the Exalted".

Imam Ibn al-Jawziy is the great interpreter of al-Qur'an, and one of the great heads of the Hanbalis. In his book "Daf^ Shubah at-Tashbih" he refuted the Mushabbiha and Mujassimah that attributed themselves falsely to the Hanbali School. He also cleared Imam Ahmad and the Salaf from the beliefs of Tajsim (attributing a body to Allah) and Tashbih (likening Allah to his creations), and cleared Allah from the place, space, size, shape, limit, body, sitting, standing, settling, and other attributes of the creations.

Ibn Hajar al-Haitamiy also confirmed in his book "al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyah" page 144 that Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal clears Allah from being a body, or having a limit, size, shape, place or direction. He said: "The creed of the Imam of Alsunna Ahmad Bin Hanbal (Radiallahu ^Anhu) complies with the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama^ah in exceptionally clearing Allah completely from what the ungrateful wrongdoers did by attributing to Allah non befitting attributes such the direction and body and other attributes of imperfection, in fact any attribute that does not have complete perfection. And what became popular between the ignorant people who falsely claim to follow this great Imam(Ahmad bin Hanbal) al-Mujtahid, that he attributed the direction to Allah or such, this is a lie and a false accusation to him".

وقال الشيخ شهاب الدين أحمد بن محمد المعروف بابن حجر الهيتمي الأشعري (974 )ها ما نصه (الفتاوى الحديثية (ص/ 144): "عقيدة إمام السُّنة أحمد بن حنبل رضي الله عنه موافقة لعقيدة أهل السنة والجماعة من المبالغة التامّة في تنزيه الله تعالى عما يقول الظالمون والجاحدون علوّا كبيرا من الجهة والجسمية وغيرهما من سائر سمات النقص، بل وعن كل وصف ليس فيه كمال مطلق، وما اشتهر بين جهلة المنسوبين إلى هذا الإمام الأعظم المجتهد من أنه قائل بشىء من الجهة أو نحوها فكذب وبهتان وافتراء عليه"ا.هـ

Imam al-Baqillaniy (one of the great Asharis) said in his book al-'Insaf page 65:

"And we do not say that the ^arsh (throne) is a place of settlement or rest for Allah, because Allah existed and there was no place, and when He created the place, He did not change". Healso said: "Allah is clear from being in directions, or resembling the creations, and also He is not attributed with transformation or movement, nor with standing or sitting, because such attributes are of the creations, and Allah (the creator) is clear from that".

قال القاضي أبو بكر محمد الباقلاني المالكي الأشعري (403) ما نصه: "ولا نقول إن العرش له- أي الله- قرار ولا مكان، لأن الله تعالى كان ولا مكان، فلما خلق المكان لم يتغير عما كان" اهـوقال أيضا ما نصه: "ويجب أن يعلم أن كل ما يدل على الحدوث أو على سمة النقص فالرب تعالى يتقدس عنه، فمن ذلك: أنه تعالى متقدس عن الاختصاص بالجهات، والاتصاف بصفات المحدثات، وكذلك لا يوصف بالتحول والانتقال، ولا القيام ولا القعود، ولأن هذه الصفات تدل على الحدوث، والله تعالى يتقدس عن ذلك" اهـ.

When Imam al-Baqillaniy died, Abul Fadl at-Tamimi came to his funeral with bare feet, along with his brothers and friends and ordered to call out during his Janazah:

"This is the Imam of Alsunna and the Religion, He is the Imam of the Muslims, He is the one that used to defend the Shari^a and refute those who oppose, He is the one who compiled seventy thousand letters refuting the atheists". And he remained in his mourning ^azza' for three days, and he used to visit his grave every Saturday".

Al-Hafidh Ibn ^Asakr reported from ad-Damghaniy that Imam Abul Hassan at-Tamimi al-Hanbaliy said to his companions "Stick with this man (al-Baqillaniy), for he is indispensable".

Imam al-Hafidh al-^Iraqiy, and Imam al-Qurafiy, and Ibn Hajar al-Haitamiy, and Mulla ^Ali al-Qari, and Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthariy and others reported that the Imams of the Four Schools whom are the guide of the Ummah (Imam ash-Shafi^iy, Malik, Ahmad and Abu Hanfiah Radiallahu ^anhum) all declared those who attribute to Allah the direction or the body with kufur".

نقل الإمام الحافظ العراقي والإمام القرافي والشيخ ابن حجر الهيتمي وملا علي القاري ومحمد زاهد الكوثري وغيرهم عن الأئمة الأربعة هداة الأمة الشافعي ومالك وأحمد وأبي حنيفة رضي الله عنهم القول بتكفير القائلين بالجهة والتجسيم ".

Imam Ahmad Ibn Salamah, Abu Ja^far at Tahawiyy, who was born in the year 237 after Hijrah, and was one of the Heads of Great Salaf wrote a book called Al-Aqidah at­ Tahawiyyah.

He mentioned that the content of his book is an elucidation of the creed of Ahlus -Sunnah wal Jama^ah, which is the creed of Imam Abu Hanifah, who died in the year 150 after al Hijrah, and his two companions, Imam Abu Yusuf al-Qadi and Imam Muhammad Ibn al Hasan ash-Shaybaniyy and others.

At-Tahawiy said in his book at-Tahawiyah: "Allah is supremely clear of all boundaries, extremes, sides, organs and instruments. The six directions do NOT contain Him--these are attributed to all created things.

Such is the saying of Imam Abu Ja^far who is among the heads of as-Salaf.

He explicitly stated that Allah is clear of being contained by the six directions, that is he is confirming that Allah exists without a place. The six directions are above, below, in front of, behind, right, and left. So this is clear evidence that the Salaf cleared Allah from organs, bodily parts, place, direction, limits and al-Kayf (manners of beings).

Imam at-Tahawiy also said: "And whoever attributes to Allah any of the manners of beings is considered a blasphemer".

In his book, Ihya'u ^Ulum ad-Din, Imam al-Ghazaliyy said:

"... places do not contain Allah, nor do the directions, earth, or heavens.He is attributed with an "istiwa'" over al-^arsh as He said in the Qur'an--with the meaning that He willed--and not as what people may delude. It is an istiwa' which is clear of touching, resting, holding, moving and containment. Al-^arsh does not carry Him, but rather al-^arsh and those that carry al-^arsh are all carried by Allah with His Power and are subjugated to Him. He is above al-^arsh and above the heavens and above everything--in status-- an aboveness that does not give Him proximity to al-^arsh or the heavens as it does not give Him farness from earth. He is higher in status than everything: higher in status than al-^arsh and the heavens, as He is higher in status than earth and the rest of the creation."

Imam al-Ghazaliyy said:" Allah, the Exalted, existed eternally and there was no place. He is not a body, jawhar (atom), or property, and He is not on a place or in a place."

Shaykh Abdul-Ghaniyy an-Nabulsiyy said: "He who believes that Allah filled the heavens and earth or that He is a body sitting above al-^arsh, is a kafir."

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaniy  said in his explanation of Sahih al-Bukhary (Fath al-Bari): "Attributing aboveness (Fawqiyah) to Allah is a matter of status, and the impossibility lies in it being physical." This means Allah exists without a place and is clear from being in a direction or place. And the "Fawqiyah" or aboveness when attributed to Allah it refers to abovness of status and greatness of Allah, the exalted. He is the creator Subhanahu Wa Ta^ala that does not need any of the creations in any way.

---

Mullah Ali Qari (ra) said:
Indeed a whole group of them [the early Muslims], as well as later scholars, said that whoever believes Allah to be in a particular physical direction is an unbeliever, as al-Iraqi has explicitly stated, saying that this was the position of Abu Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi'i, al-Ashari, and al- Baqillani (Mirqat al-mafatih: sharh Mishkat al-masabih. 5 vols. Cairo 1309/1892. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d., 2.137).


---
The Nobel Quran:

“O Noble Messenger (Prophet Mohammed - peace and blessings be upon him)! Do not let yourself be aggrieved by the people who rush towards disbelief - those who say with their mouths, “We believe” but whose hearts are not Muslims;...”

[Maidah 5:41]
---------------------------------


(Edited by ADHM)
22-Oct-2010

Friday, October 1, 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

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


-
-
-
-
---