THE PRIDE OF THE UNIVERSE

Greetings to Muhammad Mustafa, mercy to the worlds of humans and jinn!

Greetings to Muhammad Mustafa, messenger to the worlds of humans and jinn!

Greetings to Muhammad Mustafa, Imam of the two holy sanctuaries in Mecca and Medina!

Greetings to Muhammad Mustafa, grandfather of Hasan and Husayn!

Allah, the Most Glorified, has embraced the world with His endless mercy. He granted the highest place in the universe to humans, who are the perfect outcome of His mercy and compassion. Allah also endowed humanity with the attributes that make it qualified to hold such a position.

Even this distinguished position has not been enough for humans to reach truth to the extent that Allah willed. So they were endowed with such divine blessings as reason and intuition. Furthermore, another gift was added to these, in the form of guidance by the messengers of Allah. Thus, the divine support extended to humans has paved the path to Allah in the most perfect way. The absolute height of this divine help was the light of Muhammad (peace be upon him), who was the last prophet to fulfill this mission to the world, and whose physical presence in our world as the Messenger was a gift to all of humanity.

How He Honored the World

The Prophet (peace be upon him), who is the zenith of the chain of creation, came into this world on Monday, the 12th of Rabi al-Awwal, which corresponds to the 20th April of 571. He was born just before sunrise.

With his birth, divine mercy flooded into this world. The colors of morning and night changed. Feelings became deeper. Words, friendships and pleasures were opened up to infinity. Everything gained a new meaning and acquired a new joy. Idols were shaken and shattered. In Madayin, the land of the glorious kings of Iran, palaces and towers were destroyed. The water of lake Sava receded, and the whole lake dried up, as the muddy waters of oppression began to vanish.

Hearts were flooded with this showering of divine mercy and blessings.

The prophet’s father had gone to Damascus for reasons of trade and on his way home he passed away in Medina, only two months before the birth of his child.

Following Arab custom, the blessed child remained in the care of his milk mother, Halima, for four years.

At the age of six, in order to visit the grave of her late husband, his mother Aminah took Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Umm Ayman, the maid of the family, to Medina. A terminal illness was awaiting Aminah on this journey. She passed away in a place called Abwa. A poet described it as follows:

O the deceased, sleeping in Abwa!
Blossomed in your garden
The most beautiful rose in the world…

Muhammad (peace be upon him) thus became an orphan and returned to Mecca with Umm Ayman.

At the age of eight, he lost his grandfather, Abd al-Muttalib. Not long after, he also lost his uncle Abu Talib, who had defended him selflessly. Thus, all of his visible supporters had departed. After that, the sole protector and teacher he had was his Lord. In fact, these visible caretakers during the weakest period of his life had been given to him based on the Divine Wisdom that he would eventually become a perfect example for the whole of humanity to follow.

His childhood and youth as an orphan were passed in chastity and the highest morality, which indicated his prospects for a bright future.

When he reached the age of 25, Muhammad (peace be upon him) married Khadijah, may Allah be pleased with her. She was a noble woman from the Quraysh, the ruling tribe of Arabia. The noble Khadijah became a source of support for him as she put her life and wealth at his service. Khadijah, fifteen years older than Muhammad (peace be upon him), was a widow with children. The Prophet had a beautiful relationship with her, which became an example for the whole world.

When he was alone in his struggle, she was the first to support him. For instance, when the first revelation came to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in a cave on Mount Hira, he was shaken by the enormous responsibility he had been given by Allah. Immediately, he returned home, frightened.

“O Khadijah! Who will believe me?”

This blessed wife answered Muhammad (peace be upon him) by saying:

“By Allah! Allah will never forsake you; you care for your relatives, you shoulder the burden of those who cannot carry it themselves, you are charitable to the poor and you help them attain what others cannot. You are generous to guests. You help people in the challenges they face on the right path… O, Messenger of Allah! I will accept you and believe in you. Invite me first to the path of Allah!”[1]

So she was the first to believe and she was his first supporter.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) never forgot her deep love, refined manners and kindness. Even after she died, whenever a sacrifice was made, he always sent some of the meat to her relatives.[2] He treasured blessed memories of her.

The first twenty-four years of the Prophet’s marriage, the duration of which corresponds to his youth and the period of highest energy, were spent only with Khadijah, may Allah be pleased with her. Most of his later wives were older than he and were widowed. The only virgin and young woman among these later wives was Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her. Aishah grasped the religious issues of women with intelligence and foresight. After the demise of the Prophet (peace be upon him), she continued to live for an extended period of time, during which she enlightened both men and women with her broad knowledge. This body of knowledge later constituted one of the solidest foundations of Islamic thought.

The following account bears witness to how this goal was achieved: Abu Musa al-Ashari, one of the leading companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: “We, as the companions of the Prophet, asked Aishah whenever we faced a question about any hadith and we always found satisfactory knowledge in her answers.”[3]

Another reason behind this marriage was to confirm the intimacy between the Prophet (peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), who was “the second of the two” in the cave of Thawr, as reported in the Qur’an.[4]

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was elevated to the level of prophethood at the age of forty after leading a pure life during his youth and a sublime family life. Six months prior to the age of forty, Almighty Allah opened the cave of Hira to him, near Mecca, as a divine school.

In this spiritual classroom, where his sacred education continued in secrecy, he was given lessons about what is transient and eternal. Eventually, at the age of forty, he was endowed with the power to guide people and with the certificate of prophethood came the order: “Read: In the name of thy Lord Who created!” (Qur’an, Alaq, 96/1-2)

The first six months after this blessing, a blessing that can only be perceived by those whose minds are able to comprehend it, were noteworthy for their “trustworthy dreams.” In truth, Hira resembled the adventure of a seed beneath the soil, a place of spiritual formation that will remain veiled to humanity forever. Externally speaking, the factors that led Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to the cave were his all-encompassing compassion and sorrow for the people of his time because of their misery and their heresy. In reality, this was the preparatory phase for the transfer of the Qur’an from the Divine presence to human understanding through the pure heart of Muhammad (peace be upon him). It was the time for the development of his latent power to shoulder the heavy burden of revelation, a burden that would be impossible for an ordinary person to carry. This is like the transformation of raw iron into steel; it’s inner potential is released through a process. It is impossible to imagine a mind that could come close to the essence of this secret or a discourse capable of penetrating it that would not shatter into pieces when touched.

Those who could not look at this world through the window of the heart constituted the miserable mob that gathered under the black flag of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab, the two leading enemies of Islam in Mecca.

The life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is full of divine manifestations of honor, an honor that had not been bestowed on any of the previous prophets. Allah, the Most High, called him alone “my beloved” (Habibi). Likewise, he was the only one who was blessed with the Miraj (i.e., the ascension to the throne of Allah). [5]

His superiority became evident when he led all the previous prophets in prayer in Jerusalem before theMiraj. The secret of “len terani” [6] in the life of Moses (peace be upon  him) showed itself as “qaba qawsayni aw adna”[7] in the life of Prophet Muhammad. In his religion, Islam, salat (prayer), the point of union with Allah, was offered to his Ummah (community) as a blessing.

 

After thirteen years of striving to guide people, Muhammad was led to another cave. It was the Thawr cave on the Hijrah path. Muhammad was not led to this cave for reasons of education, but to allow him to drown in the secrets of Allah and to perfect his heart. Muhammad stayed in this cave for three days and nights. This time he was not alone. His companion was Abu Bakr, who was the highest and richest spiritually after the Prophet (peace be upon him). Abu Bakr had the honor of being with the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the cave. He thus became the “second of the two.” Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said to his noble friend:

“Have no fear, for Allah is with us.” (Qur’an, Tawba, 9/40) In this way, he taught him how to be with Allah (mai’yyah). This was the first lesson in secret dhikr and in seeking the satisfaction of the hearts by opening them to Allah.

In other words, the Thawr cave served as the first place in the primary education of the heart; it is the heart that carries a servant to Allah in the boundless sky of secrets. The sojourn in this cave was also the first station on this sacred journey. It was at this time that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) first began to disclose to Abu Bakr the secrets in his heart, a heart that was a spring of light. This formed the first link in the Golden Chain, which will last until eternity. Faith takes its power from love. The fundamental motive behind all sublime journeys is love for the Prophet (peace be upon him). The only path by which one can gain the blessing of Allah is by following his example. This is because the law of love commands to love not only the beloved, but also what the beloved loves. It is not possible to comprehend such a divine love through our weak and inadequate understanding.

We believe that the following story will have an impact on every heart; the impact will change from person to person, depending on the horizons and capabilities of that heart. Abu Bakr Siddiq (the faithful) found a new and different joy and pleasure from all his conversations and from his friendship with the Prophet (peace be upon him) throughout his life. Familiar with the most intimate secrets of prophethood and blessed with many manifestations of it, he used to long for the Prophet (peace be upon him), even while they were together.

When he heard Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) say: “I have not benefited from the property of anyone more than I have benefited from the property of Abu Bakr,” Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) responded in tears: “Aren’t I and my property yours, O Prophet!”[8] In this way, he demonstrated that he had surrendered himself, along with all of his belongings to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and became “lost” (fani) in him. (This state is called fana fi al-Rasul [being lost in the Prophet] in tasawwuf – Sufism). Abu Bakr spent all his wealth on the Prophet’s path. For instance, once Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said to him:

“Help the soldiers!”

Abu Bakr brought all his valuables to him. When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) asked him:

“What did you leave for your family and children?” He responded with great ecstasy of faith:

“Allah and His Prophet…!”[9]Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan said about Abu Bakr: “The world did not want Abu Bakr; nor did he want the world…”[10]

It should be noted that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) cared about Abu Bakr’s family and did not want them to live in misery. The donation by Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) of all his wealth constituted an exceptional circumstance among the companions. This may be due to the fact that Abu Bakr and his family had enduring patience and a strong reliance on Allah.

Allah was the helper, supporter, shelter and host of these two travelers. The unbelievers who were searching for them saw nothing but a spider’s web when they came to the entrance of the cave where they were hiding on Mount Thawr. After the Prophet and Abu Bakr entered the cave, a spider wove a web at the entrance of the cave; this misled the unbelievers into thinking that there was no one inside. As the poet Arif Nihat Asya put it:

The spider’s web was not in the air,
Neither was it in the water, nor was it on the ground;
It was before the eyes
Of those who were blind to the truth.[11]

These two precious travelers, under divine protection, reached Quba near Medina. The honorable travelers had been long expected with great anticipation; now they had finally arrived, so an atmosphere of joy and happiness prevailed over the entire city.

The fiery chanting of “Tala’al-badru ‘alayna” (the full moon has risen upon us) from the hills echoed through the sky, bringing joy to the hearts of the people. The date was the 12th of Rabi al-Awwal, and a new calendar was instituted for all posterity. All events from then on were going to be dated from that day.

From that day forward, Medina became the center and the mirror for the development spread of Islam. With the Hijrah, the dark face of disbelief (kufr) paled. The Prophet’s Mosque in Medina and the Mosque of Quba acquired a sublime meaning and remained sacred places and reminders of this blessed Hijrah.

The Ansar (the Helpers) declared their wealth to the Muhajirun (the Immigrants): “This is my wealth; half of it is my wealth; half of it is Yours…” The groundwork of Islamic brotherhood, which we establish with difficulty through our limited forms of charitable acts, was thus established. In this way, Medina attained an immortal place in Islamic history. It was in Medina that the Adhan, Ramadan, Eid, and Zakat became part of the Islamic life of the community and it was also in Medina that great historical battles took place. All these practices and events constituted ideal examples for the future of the entireUmmah.

The battle of Badr was a test of resistance of the true faith over disbelief (kufr), resulting in the triumph of the former over the latter. Religious solidarity replaced traditional tribal solidarity. For instance, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) encountered his son in battle, a disbeliever. Abu Ubayda ibn Jarrah (may Allah be pleased with him) similarly encountered his father, who was also a disbeliever. Finally, Hamzah (may Allah be pleased with him) came face to face in battle with his disbelieving brother. They met each other with swords in their hands to fight. Such a fight over faith between people bound by blood ties was unimaginable before Islam; prior battles had been mostly caused by tribal disputes. Also the Highest Truth (Haqq Taala) sent an army of angels. These angels, who joined in the flow of sublime feelings, gained greater honor than other angels. After this great event, Allah the Highest revealed the following verse to protect the believers from over confidence and arrogance: “It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah: When thou threwest (a handful of dust), it was not thy act, but Allah’s: In order that He might confer on the Believers a gracious benefit from Himself: for Allah is He who heareth and knoweth (all things).” (Qur’an, Anfal, 8/17)

In the Battle of Uhud, which followed the Battle of Badr, it was witnessed how the blood of Hamzah was shedThe number of martyrs, including Hamzah, reached seventy. Funeral prayers (salat al-janazah) were held for ten martyrs at a time. Each time nine were buried, Hamzah made up the tenth individual; thus he was included in all the funeral services. Prayers were made repeatedly for Hamzah, who in his final state epitomized martyrdom. Let us not forget the Prophet (peace him) loved his uncle with such a depth that he referred to Hamzah as a part of his heart.

The battle of Uhud was filled with frightening and sorrowful scenes such as those just cited. Through these tests, the maturity of the community evolved in terms of the believers’ service to Allah and their submission to Him. The consequences of this growth resulted in the characteristic of contentment with Allah’s chosen destiny that is a mark of Islamic faith at its highest degree.

In addition, during this battle an event that shook the Heavens and the Earth occurred; two rings from the shield of the Prophet (peace be upon him) pierced his cheek and broke one of his teeth. At that moment, all the companions were drowned in deep sorrow.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) wiped away the blood from his face with his hand and did not let it fall on the ground, fearing that it might bring the wrath of Allah down on the Earth. It was also for this reason that he sought refuge in Allah, praying thus:“O Allah! My community is ignorant about you. They know not. Please give them guidance!”[12]

A hadith informs us:

“The wrath of Allah increased against those who had made the face of the Prophet bleed.” [13]

The Battle of Uhud was one that provided such striking scenes.

The Companions of the Prophet (Ashab) followed him unconditionally. They said to him:

“O, Messenger of Allah! We believe in you. We have accepted with utmost sincerity the Qu’ran that you have brought to us from Allah. And we have made a covenant with you that we will obey and follow you. Act as you like, give us orders! We are always with you! By Allah who sent you to us, if you enter the sea we will also enter with you. None of us will refrain from doing so…”[14]When these words were uttered by the Ashab they were at the zenith of their joy in their faith.

Yet, at the Battle of Uhud, a moment of disobedience to an order given by the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and a slight inclination toward worldly gains altered the outcome of the war. The divine warning manifested itself and consequently the final triumph was delayed.

The mountain Uhud is a place distinguished in the heart of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). He continued all his life to visit Mount Uhud and the martyrs of Uhud. He used to say repeatedly: “We love Uhud and Uhud loves us!”[15] These words have honored this place, which is known for its martyrs’ graves and for the special place it occupied in the heart of the Prophet, reflected in his practice of periodically visiting it. This site will always remain special to all Muslims.

 

In the battle of Khandaq (the trenches) the Prophet was able to break a huge rock that the companions had been unable to remove. With the first blow he said he saw the Palace of Caesar. With the second blow, he said he saw the Palace of Kisra, the Persian king. With the third blow, he said he saw the collapse of the palaces in San’ah, Yemen. In this way he gave the glad tidings for the coming spread of Islam to these lands, thus  injecting the hope of a prospective triumph into the hearts of the believers. He was giving the glad tidings that truth would prevail over falsehood and was drawing a map of the universe in which that which had been impossible would now become possible, one after another.

The battle of Khandaq was one of great pain, fatigue, hunger, cold, and darkness. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) prayed:

O my Lord! The real life is the life of the Hereafter, please help the Helpers (Ansar) and the Immigrants(Muhajirun).”[16]

In these prayers he was explaining that the all pain and fatigue of this world are insignificant compared to the infinity of the Hereafter, and was thus orienting his Companions to adopt the Hereafter as their goal.

 

As was foretold by the Prophet (peace be upon him) at the time of the Hudaybiya Treaty, Muslims would triumph in subsequent battles and the people of Mecca would open their arms to its real owners. Mecca had been conquered spiritually by those who loved it with forgiveness, peace, security and guidance. The desire for Mecca, which was full of pain, oppression and hardship, came to an end. The many years of sorrow turned into joy. Next, as a thanksgiving to Allah, the greatest scene of forgiveness in history was demonstrated. Through this act of forgiveness, many people who had previously murdered Muslims and many people who had committed crimes were able to gain the honor of Islam.

Eventually, the final verse was revealed during the Farewell Pilgrimage (Hajjat’ul-Wada’). It was announced that the religion had been perfected. This, at the same was an implicit notice that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who had been sent as a mercy to the universe, had completed his task and that the time was approaching for him to return to his Lord. As evidence that he had taught the religion, he asked his companions to witness three times:

“O my companions! Did I convey the religion to you? Did I convey the religion to you? Did I convey the religion to you?”

Upon receiving an answer in the affirmative, again three times, he raised his hands, open towards the Heavens and asked Allah to witness this event. He said:

“Be the Witness, O Allah! Be the Witness, O Allah! Be the Witness, O Allah!”[17]

It was on this occasion that the sacred trust, which had been invested in the Prophet (peace be upon him) by Allah during his twenty-three years of Prophethood in Mecca and Medina, was transferred to the responsibility of the Ummah until the Day of Judgment.

Some of the helpers were concerned that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had finally conquered his homeland and birthplace; some of the Helpers (Ansar) began to voice their concern:

“Allah the Most High opened Mecca to his Prophet, from now on, he will stay in Mecca and will not return to Medina.”

Although this was an intimate conversation among themselves, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) later discussed this concern with them. They became embarrassed and confessed that they had thus spoken. Rasulullah (peace be upon m) said to the Ansar:

“I seek refuge in Allah from doing that! My life and death will be with you…”[18]

He displayed an example of unparalleled loyalty and returned to Medina.

 

Muhammad was the final prophet, but there were many who preceded him. Below is a list of some of the most important prophets that were sent to humanity by Allah in order to guide and advise.

Adam (peace be upon him), to whom the angels were ordered to prostrate;

Elijah (peace be upon him), who beheld the secrets of the Heavens;

Noah (peace be upon him), who cleansed the Earth with the flood;

Heber (Hud) (peace be upon him), who turned the lands of disbelief upside down with storms;

Shelah (Salih) (peace be upon him), who shook the foundations the houses of disobedience and rebellion;

Abraham (peace be upon him), who turned the fire of Nimrod into a rose garden by his submission and reliance on Allah;

Ishmael (peace be upon him), who is the  symbol of sincerity, loyalty, reliance and submission to Allah; the stories about Ishmael will be remembered by believers during the Pilgrimage until the Day of Judgment;

Isaac (peace be upon him), from whose progeny came from the prophets of Israel;

Lot (peace be upon him), the burdened prophet of the people of Sodom and Gomorra, a people that took its place in history’s wasteland, being erased from the face of the Earth due to their excessive immorality and rebellion.

Zulkarnayn (peace be upon him), who carried the torch of Tawhid (faith in the unity of God) from the East to the West;

Jacob (peace be upon him), who was a statue of patience, love, and longing;

Joseph (peace be upon him), whose beauty made the beauty of the moon pale and who became the sultan of Egypt after living through a period of slavery and loneliness in prison, who lived as a stranger in this land, who underwent trial, pain, hardship, and struggle against the passions;

Jethro (Shuayb) (peace be upon him), who is called the orator of the prophets and who filled hearts with ecstasy by virtue of his sermons;

Khidir (peace be upon him), who taught the divine secrets to Moses;

Moses (peace be upon him), who destroyed the hegemony of the Pharaoh and who opened a path in the Red Sea a with his staff;

Aaron (peace be upon him), who helped his brother Moses (peace be upon him) at all times and in all places;

David (peace be upon him), who with his prayers (dhikr), sent the mountains, stones and wild animals into ecstasy;

Solomon (peace be upon him), whose heart refused to assign any value to his glorious kingdom;

Uzayr (peace be upon him), who became symbolic of resurrection on the Day of Judgment, being resurrected after lying dead for a hundred years;

Job (Ayyub) (peace be upon him), who became the grindstone of patience;

Jonah (Yunus) (peace be upon him), who overcame darkness by going deeper into dhikr, supplication and penitence while in a state of great ecstasy;

Elias  (Ilyas) (peace be upon him), who attained the divine blessings when he was greeted by Allah: “Peace and salutation to such as Elias.” (Qur’an, Saffat, 37/130);

Elijah (peace be upon him), who was elevated over the worlds;

The pure hearted prophet Ezekiel (Zulkifl) (peace be upon him), who was showered by divine blessings;

Lukman (peace be upon him), the leader of doctors,  both of the internal and external body, who became a legendary figure with his insightful advice;

The oppressed prophet Zechariah (peace be upon him), who maintained his submission to and reliance on Allah -even when his body was divided into two pieces- without uttering a complaint;

John (peace be upon him), who, like his father, faced death as a martyr;

And the heavenly exalted Jesus (peace be upon him), whose distinct qualities included purity of soul, healing the ill and giving life to the dead all by seeking the help of Allah through sincere supplication. These are all examples of the approximately one hundred and twenty thousand prophets who were sent to humanity with an abundance of divine manifestations and occurrences that descended on the spiritual soil of humanity like rain from saturated clouds. Those prophets who had acted as blessed sparks of Divine Guidance, who by examples and messages functioned as a chain of prophecy, served as glad tidings that foretold the emergence of Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was to be sent as a mercy to the worlds.

 

Our sources tell us that the lucky woman Suwayba was one of the milk mothers of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). She was the slave girl of Abu Lahab.

The lady Suwayba was also the first to give the glad tidings of the birth of his nephew to Abu Lahab. As a consequence of delivering this good news, he set her free out of his tribal spirit and happiness. This event took place on a Monday. The happiness of Abu Lahab for the birth of Muhammad (peace be upon him), even though it was mixed in a mundane way with feelings of tribal solidarity, will cause the punishment of this disbeliever in the Hellfire to decrease on Mondays.

After his death, some saw Abu Lahab in a dream where they were able to ask him about his life in the Hereafter:

“Abu Lahab! How are you?”

“I am being punished in the Hellfire! Yet my punishment lessens on Monday nights. I suck water between my fingers on that night. I feel cooler by drinking it. This is because on that day I set Suwayba free as she ran to me and gave me the glad tidings about the birth of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). In return, Allah rewarded me by decreasing my punishment on Monday nights.”

Ibn al-Jazari said:

“A disbeliever like Abu Lahab benefited from his display of happiness on the occasion of the birth of the Prophet (peace be upon him) even though it was mixed with tribal feelings. Comparatively, imagine the kind of divine gifts and blessings a true believer acquires if they, out of respect for that night, open their heart to the Eternal Pride of the World (peace be upon him) and their table to guests…”

The appropriate way of celebrating the birth of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is to organize conferences and talks that rekindle the light of his heart during the month in which he was born. The purpose of these acts is so that we can benefit from the spirituality of this blessed month while giving feasts to the Ummah, so that we can make content the depressed hearts of the poor, the stranger, the orphan, and the helpless by aiding them in various ways and by providing them with charity, and to organize recitations of the Qur’an in public.[19]

 

This orphan was unlettered because he had never taken lessons, yet he came as the savior of all humanity, the interpreter of the unseen world and the teacher of the school of Truth.

Moses (peace be upon him) brought rules and regulations. David (peace be upon him) was distinguished by his ability to chant supplications and invocations. The sublime Jesus was sent to teach humanity the most beautiful manners, and to exemplify the practice of asceticism in the material world. The Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, (peace be upon him), nevertheless, brought all of these: he instituted the rules and taught how to purify the soul and to worship Allah with a clean heart. He instructed humanity in the best morality and represented it in every aspect of his life. He identified the ways in which one should not be misled by the false attractions of this world. In brief, he gathered in his personality and efforts the capacity and obligations of all the prophets. In his personality were found both the dignity that arose from his family genealogy and high morality, blissfulness that arose from his perfect character and physical beauty.

When he reached the age of forty, this was undoubtedly the turning point for humanity.

He had lived for forty years among his people. Most of the splendid things he was to bring were as yet unknown to them. He was not known as a statesman, or as a preacher, not even as a public speaker. Apart from not only not having the reputation at this time of being a triumphant commander, he was not even known as a regular soldier.

He had never given a speech about the history of past nations, the prophets, the Day of Judgment, or Paradise or the Hellfire. He was alone, living an exclusively sublime life in a lofty moral state. Yet, he changed completely after he came down from the cave on the Mountain of Hira, having been entrusted with a divine commandment.

All of Arabia was shocked and frightened as he began his mission. His extraordinary speech and discourse enchanted all. Public poetry competitions, literature, rhetoric and discourse suddenly came to an end. Poets no longer dared to post their poems on the wall of the Holy Ka’bah. This tradition, centuries long, thus ended, to theextent that even the daughter of the most famous Arab poet, Imru’ul-Qays, was so thrilled  after listening to a passage from the Qur’an, that she said in great surprise:

“This cannot be the word of a human being! If there is such a word in the world, my father’s poems must be taken from the walls of the Ka’bah. Go and pull them down; and in their place post these verses…!”

 

The Prophet, and the Qur’an itself, challenged the entire world to produce chapters similar to the chapters of the Qur’an. This challenge, however, to produce an equivalent chapter to those found in the Qur’an, has found no response, even today.

Allah says:

“And if you are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to our servant, then produce a chapter like thereunto; And call your witnesses or helpers (if there is any) besides Allah, if you are truthful.” (Qur’an, Baqara, 2/23)

 

This unlettered man, who came out of an uncivilized society, left the people of his time feeling powerless as a result of the mass of knowledge and wisdom that was revealed through him, as a result of the sea of miracles that will not be surpassed until the Last Day. This fact is proven in different ways. The Holy Qur’an touches upon many academic and scientific issues, as well as predictions about future events; none of what was revealed has been contradicted by any new scientific discoveries. In contrast, respected encyclopedias feel obliged to publish a new volume to rectify their mistakes every year, updating the information of their previous edition.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) told all of humanity that he was the vicegerent of the Truth (al-Haqq) on the Earth.

He laid down the basic principles of social, cultural, and economic organization, the basic principles of government and international relations, and did this in ways that can only be understood through life-long research on the material and immaterial worlds by the most distinguished scholars of our time. Indeed, humanity will better comprehend the reality of Muhammad (peace be upon him) as it develops in the areas of theoretical knowledge and practical experience.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) – even though he had never carried a sword, had never undergone military training, and had never participated in a campaign, except once as a witness – proved to be a great soldier, who never gave up, even in the bloodiest battles during the struggle to spread faith in the oneness of God. The Prophet had to fight in these battles, despite his dislike of violence, to ensure peace in society; this was part of his endless mercy that encompassed the whole of humanity. In nine years, he conquered all of Arabia with a comparatively weak military force. He achieved miraculous success in providing spiritual power and military training to the undisciplined and unorganized people of his time. His achievements were of such greatness that his followers were able to defeat the two most powerful empires of that time, namely the Byzantine and the Persian Empires. Thus was realized the good tidings which he had given years ago in Mecca:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) had said to the people of Mecca;

“Accept the religion and follow me!” Abu Jahl had objected:

“Even if we follow you, the tribes of Mudar and Rabi’a will not obey you!”

The Prophet (peace be upon him) had responded to him:

“Willingly or unwillingly, not only they, but also the Persians and the Byzantine people will follow me!”[20]This promise was soon realized.

Despite all the negative conditions, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) brought about the greatest world revolution in human history, silenced the oppressors, and put an end to the tears of the oppressed. He would comb the hair of orphans with his fingers. With the comfort he offered, hearts were relieved of anxiety.

Mehmed Akif, the famous Turkish poet, illustrated this scene in an excellent way:

Suddenly the orphan grew up and reached forty.
The bloody feet stepping on the heads reached the water!
With one breath, this innocent saved humanity,
With one movement, he defeated the Caesars and Kisras,
The weak, who used to deserve only oppression, stood up,
The oppressors, who never expected defeat, vanished,
A mercy to the worlds was indeed his enlightening religion,
With his wings, he covered the country of those who asked for justice,
What the world owns are only gifts from him,
Society is indebted to him; individuals are indebted to him,
Indebted to this innocent one is the whole of humanity,
O Lord! With this confession, resurrect us on the Last Day,

If Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who gathered in his personality all virtues, had not come to the world, humanity would have remained under oppression and in the wilderness, and the weak would have been enslaved by the powerful until the end of time. The balance of the world would have changed in favor of evil. In the event of such a circumstance, the world would have been dominated by oppressors, and it would have belonged only to the powerful few. How nicely the poet describes this situation:

O the Messenger of Allah! If you had not come to the world,
Roses would not have bloomed, the nightingale would not have chanted,
The names of God would have remained unknown to humanity,
Existence would have lost its meaning and would have been drawn into grief!

 

Prophet Muhammad conducted twenty-seven battles and approximately fifty raids, known as sariyya. Islam was firmly established with the conquest of Mecca. Allah declared in the following verse of the Qur’an that Islam is the highest level of human perfection:

“This day, have I perfected your religion for you, completed my favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.” (Qur’an, Maida, 5/3)

It was time for the greatest separation and the greatest union.

The day before the start of his fatal illness, the Prophet went to the graveyard in Medina, calledJannat’ul-Baqi’, where he prayed for the deceased as follows:

O Allah, the Greatest! Please do not refrain from pardoning the people who lie here.”[21]

With this act, it was as if he was bidding farewell to them.

After returning from the graveyard, it was time to bid farewell to his companions. He gave them the following advice:

“Allah, the Most High, gave a choice to one of his servants between this world and its attractions and the blessings in Paradise. The servant chose what is in Paradise…”

Hearing these words, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), who had a sensitive heart, realized that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was saying good-bye to them. A great grief overcame him, his heart saddened, and tears gushed from his heart and eyes. He sobbed:

“May my father and mother be sacrificed for your sake, O Messenger of Allah! Let us sacrifice for you our souls, the souls of our fathers, mothers and children, and our property…”

No one else in the congregation had been able to understand the deeply hidden message of the Prophet nor did they sense the feelings of Prophet Muhammad, peace and greetings be upon him. Abu Bakr was “the second of the two” in the cave of Thawr, a position that made him more aware than the others.[22]

The Messenger of Allah said about him that:

“I put in the heart of Abu Bakr all what I have in my heart…”

The Companions, as they saw the valuable friend of Rasulullah (peace be upon him) crying, asked each other:

– “Are not you surprised by this old man who cried when the Prophet (peace be upon him)  mentioned  a person who chose to meet his Lord?!…”

The sensitive and refined heart of Abu Bakr, however, intuitively understood the holy and great farewell and began to cry like a reed flute that laments separation.

The daughter of the Prophet, our blessed Mother Fatimah, the leader of the women in Paradise, became so sad from the temporary separation from her father, the Prophet of Mercy to the worlds (peace be upon him), that she said:

“As Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) went to the Hereafter, a great grief fell upon me. It was so great that if it had fallen on daylight it would have turned it into night.”[23]

He left two great guides to us, the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah.

The Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah are two eternal souvenirs of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him); they are also prescriptions for happiness in this world and in the Hereafter.

He returned to Medina and thereon followed a bitter illness that lasted for thirteen days; then the horizons of beauty were opened to his soul. The date was the 8th of June, 632, or the 12th of Rabi’ul-awwal in the llth year of the Hijra calendar.

Between the two shoulder blades of the Prophet there had been a divine mark that indicated that he was the final Prophet. Most of the companions desired to kiss it. Imam Bayhaqi stated that:

“The Blessed companions doubted whether the Prophet (peace be upon him) had really traveled to the Hereafter as they saw no changes in his face after he emigrated to the eternal world. Asma (may Allah be pleased with her) searched for the sign of prophethood on his body. When they saw that it had disappeared, it was determined with certainty that he had passed onto the next world.”[24]

The religion had been perfected; the approval of the companions of the transfer of the divine message to humanity was demonstrated and was presented as witness to the Most High Truth (al-Haqq). Following this, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was invited to the world of eternity.

Presently, he is waiting for his Ummah by the Mahshar, that is the square of resurrection, on the Siratand the river of Kawthar.

Grant us your intercession, O Rasulullah!
Help us, O Rasulullah!
Welcome us, O Rasulullah!

The world was blessed by his birth on Monday the 12th of Rabi al-awwal.

It was on Monday the 12th of Rabi al-awwal that Allah gave the Prophet the task of serving as a prophet. Abu Qatada narrated as follows:

“Prophet Muhammad was asked about fasting on Mondays. In response he said:

“This is the day on which I was born and the day on which I was sent as a Prophet.”[25]

Likewise, it was on Monday the 12th of Rabi al-awwal, that he entered Medina and laid the ground stone for the new Islamic State, which will last forever.

And finally, again on Monday the 12th of Rabi al-awwal, he immigrated to the Hereafter.

As an exemplification of a divine manifestation, his birth, his Hijra from Mecca to Medina, and his transit from this world to the Next World, through the majesty of Allah, all took place on Monday the 12th of Rabi al-Awwal. This is a confirmation of the holiness of this month. The manifestations of Divine Beauty (Jamal) and Divine Glory (Jalal) are richly experienced at this time. In the inner worlds, the joys of a festival along with the pains of a separation are intertwined in the union of these two opposites. He is, yet again with mercy and compassion, waiting for his Ummah in the Hereafter.

With the journey of the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) to the World of Happiness, this world became deprived of his physical presence. Indeed, this is a disloyal world, as expressed in the poetry of the Ottoman Sufi Poet, Aziz Mahmud Hudayi:

Who expects loyalty from you?
Are not you the false world?
Are not you the same Earth,
That took away Muhammad Mustafa?[26]

 

[1]        Bukhârî, Zakât 1; Muslim, Îmân 12; Nasâî, Salât 10; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad,V, 417, 418.

[2]        Muslim, Fadâil al-Sahâbah75; Ibn Hibbân, al-Sahîh, XV, 467.

[3]        Tirmidhî, Manâqib 62.

[4]        See Holy Qur’an, Tawba, 9/ 40.

[5]        Bukhârî, Salât I; Muslim, Îmân 259; Abû Dâwûd, Sunnah 23; Tirmidhî, Tıb 12; Ahmad ibn Hanbal,al-Musnad, III, 224.

[6]        The secret of “len terani” (You will never see me!) was as follows; Moses (peace be upon him) was put through a stage of preparation with the purpose of becoming ready to talk to Allah. He was ordered to fast first for thirty days, a period that was later extended to forty. This period was a phase of preparation for talking to Allah, allowing Moses to be cleansed of carnal desires. Moses (peace be upon him) talked to Allah not through material means, such as language, but through the eternal divine attribute of Kalam, speech. No one heard or felt this dialogue, not even the angel Gabriel or the seventy witnesses who came with Moses (peace be upon him). Yet, Moses (peace be upon him) fainted under the influence of this divine manifestation. He became unaware as to whether he was in this world or in the Hereafter, and felt out of both space and time. Drowned in love and ecstasy, a strong passion was aroused in him to see the Ultimate Truth, al-Haqq. In response, the Divine Answer came: “len terani” (you will never see me!). Yet, as Moses (peace be upon him), in this semi-conscious state, continued to insist, Allah told him to look at the mountain. He told Moses that if the mountain could endure the divine manifestation, then so too could Moses. The narrative continues that a small Divine Light from behind endless veils was allowed to shine on the mountain. The mountain shattered into pieces. Moses (peace be upon him) fainted as a result of this terrifying event. When he awoke, he praised Allah and repented for trying to cross the limits.

[7]        “Qaba qawsayni aw adna” [Then he approached and came closer, and was at a distance of but two bow-lengths or (even) closer. Najm 8-9]: The Prophet (peace be upon him) was taken behind the Sidra al-Muntaha. Even Gabriel is not allowed to approach this close to Allah. The verse describes this distance as “two bow-lengths or (even) closer”. A private and sacred union between the Prophet and Allah took place at this distance, a distance that it is impossible for the human mind to comprehend. This serves as a comparison between Moses and Muhammad (peace be upon them) presented to our humble and powerless minds.

[8]        Ibn Mâjah, Fadâil Ashâb al-Nabî  11; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, II, 253; Ibn Hibbân, al-Sahîh,XV, 273; Ibn Abî ‘Âsim, al-Sunnah, II, 577.

[9]        Tirmidhî, Manâqib16; Abû Dâwûd, Zakat 40; Dârimî, Zakât 26; al-Hâkim, al-Mustadrak, I, 574; al-Bayhaqî, al-Sunan, TV, 180; al-Bazzâr, al-Musnad, I, 263, 394.

[10]      Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Kitâb al-Zuhd, p. 18.

[11]      Asya, Arif Nihat, Dualar ve Aminler, (Istanbul, 1973), p.122.

[12]      Bukhârî, Anbiyâ 54; Muslim, Jihâd 104; Ibn Mâjah, Fitan 23; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, I, 380.

[13]      Ibn Ishâq, Sîrahp. 311; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, II, 317; Ibn Abî 
Shaybah, al-Mosesnnaf, VII, 373.

[14]      Bukhârî, Magâzi, 4Muslim, Jihâd 83; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, I, 389, 428, 457; Ibn Abî Shaybah, al-Mosesnnaf, VII6

[15]      Bukhârî, I’tisâm 16; Muslim Fadâil 10; Ibn Mâjah, Manâsik 104; Muwatta, Madînah 10; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, III,140.

[16]      Bukhârî, Jihâd 34; Abû Dâwûd, Salât 12; Nasâî, Masâjid 12; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, VI, 289.

[17]      Bukhârî, Fitan 8; Muslim, Îmân 378; Abû Dâwûd, Manâsık 56 Nasâî, Ihdâs 4; Ibn Mâjah, Fitan 2; Dârimî, Manâsik 34; Ahmad ibn  Hanbal, al-Musnad, I, 447.

[18]      Muslim, Jihâd 86; Ahmad ibn Habal,, al-Musnad, II,538; Ibn Hibbân, alSahîh, XI, 75; Nasâî, al-Sunan al-Kubrâ, VI, 382,al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al Kubrâ, IX, 117.

[19]      Joseph ibn Ismâil al-Nabhânî, al-Anwâr al-Muhammadiyyah min al-mawâhib al-ladunniyah, p. 28-29. (Some part of this riwayah was narrated by al-San’ân, al-Mosesnnaf, VII, 478; al-Bayhaqî, Shu’ab al-Îmân, I, 261; al-Marwazî, al-Sunnah, I, 82; İbn Hagar al-’Asqalânî, Fath al-Bârî, IX, 145).

[20]      Ibn Ishâq, Sirah, p.190 (Similar narratives are found in, Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, IV, 128; al-Hâkim, al-Mustadrak, III, 728; al-Bayhaqî, al-Sunan al-Kubrâ, IX, 31; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Mosesnnaf, VI, 311; Ma’mar ibn Rashid, al-Jâmi’, XI, 48).

[21]      Muslim, Janâiz 102; Nasâî, Janâiz 103; Ibn Hibbân, al-Sahîh, VII, 444.

[22]      Bukhârî, Salât 80; Muslim, Fadâil al-Sahâbah 2; Tirmidhî, Manâqıb 15; Dârimâ, Muqaddimah 14; Nasâî, Janâiz 69; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, III, 18.

[23]      al-Nabhânî, al-Anwâr al-Muhammadiyyah min al-mawâhib al-ladunniyah,p. 593.

[24]      Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabakât, II, 271; al-Bayhaqi, Dalâil al-nubuwwah, VII, 219.

[25]      Muslim, Siyâm 196; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, V, 299; Ibn Hibbân, al-Sahîh, VIII, 403; al-Bayhaqî,al-Sunan al-Kubrâ, IV, 286.

[26]      Hudâî Mahmud, Kulliyyât-ı Hudâî, (Istanbul, 1338), p. 109

Osman Nuri Topbas

WASTING TIME TOPIC: 1 & 2

All the blessings a human being receives, with or without making an effort, are blessings from Allah Almighty. He is the One who creates the blessings from nothing and through His benefaction He gives us the ability and strength which is needed to attain these blessings. For this reason, human beings should not forget that ones blessings are a benefaction from Allah Almighty alone.

A person should live with the understanding that these are an amanah (a trust, a person or a thing entrusted to another’s safekeeping) and one day he will be held responsible for them. In a verse of the Qur’an it is said that:

“Did ye then think that We had created you in jest, and that ye would not be brought back to Us (for account)?” (Qur’an:23/115)

Therefore, while we are making use of these material and spiritual blessings, we should realize that we are not totally free and that we have to use these blessings in accordance with the will of the Lord Almighty.

In another verse, Allah Almighty reminds us of the great reckoning and stresses of our personal responsibility.

“Then, shall ye be questioned that Day about the joy (ye indulged in!).” (Qur’an:102/8)

This indicates that the Lord Almighty has set measures in using these blessings, like the measures He set in acquiring them. He declared that these are “halal and haraam” (lawful and unlawful).

Wastefulness is one of the haraam acts that cause the loss of Allah Almighty’s love and mercy andattracts His wrath. In a verse, it is said:

“…and be not prodigal. Lo! Allah loveth not the prodigals.” (Qur’an:6/141)

Wasting Time:

Due to heedlessness and forgetfulness, one of the sins human beings most often fall into is that of wasting time.

Life is a most precious blessing that Allah Almighty has bestowed upon every living creature only once and only for a limited amount of time. It is essential that we use our time most efficiently with the deeds that are most deserving. In our lives, there is always more than one thing that can be done at each moment. Putting the most important in front and arranging the other things according to their significance, is essential in using our time well.

For example, a mother nursing her child is a beautiful thing, which is a condition of her mercy and compassion. But continuing to nurse when there is a fire in the house is a great folly and a liability. At that moment she should try to put out the fire, even if she only has one bucket of water. This task is more vital than the other. If she neglects this task, she will soon perish with her baby in that fire.

Likewise, today, due to the importance of time, giving priority to the religion of Allah Almighty over other things is a requirement of being responsible for time.

For the sahaba (Companions of the Prophet) who used their time in the best way, the most meaningful and enjoyable times were those when they were giving the message of tawhid (Oneness of Allah Almighty) to other people. Just before his execution, one of the sahaba thanked the person who gave him three minutes grace and said:

“This means I have three minutes to make tabligh to you about the Truth. Hopefully you will find hidaya (the right way, the way to Islam)”

Today, it is a duty of iman (belief) and conscience for a believer to reflect the beauty, grace and kindness of Islam in a pleasant manner to those people who are lost in an erosion of unbelief and immorality.

Wasting time, which is an extremely valuable asset, on empty and useless things, and this means risking the afterlife. For this reason, for those who have been able to open the curtains of heedlessness, time is a blessing which cannot be compared with any other thing. In Qur’an the Lord Almighty says:

“By the declining day, Verily man is in a state of loss, except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy.”(Qur’an:103/ 1-3)

The surah starts with an oath about time, declaring that time that is not used in the way of Iman, such as good deeds, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, advising patience and truth, is time that has been wasted and will be a means to great disappointment. Sadly, those who use time correctly are mentioned as a minority, pointing out that the majority of mankind is deceived about this matter.

The Lord Almighty advises His servants about the usage of time, and shows the way to avoid disappointments and how to reach divine blessings.

“So when thou art relieved, still toil, and strive to please thy Lord.” (Qur’an:94/7-8)

This means when a form of worship or a good deed is finished, one should immediately turn to the next. There should not be any time void of worship or good deeds, because life is a blessing given to us with which to earn the next world.

Death is like the due date on a loan. A merchant gives a document to the creditor, promising to pay his debt. The deferment time is for preparing the money that will be paid in the set period of time. Life on this earth is a term given to us to attain the next world and to receive divine consent. When a merchant does not take the date on his document seriously and does not make preparations during the time that is given to him, he will suffer great distress on the due date.

Likewise, if humans do not use the blessing of time that is given to them by their Lord, in the best way possible, they cannot escape facing great disappointment. From the moment of birth, every human is sentenced to a death, the time of which is unknown. The time of the execution of this sentence will be the moment when one faces Azrail, the Angel of Death.

Although the due date on the voucher is set, the absolute end of a human being’s life is unknown to him or her. This awesome reality requires readiness for the Reckoning at any given moment.

In Vukûf-i Zamânî (deep knowledge and understanding of one’s own time), which is one of the most important training methods of Sufism, it is stated that using the blessing of time with extreme sensitivity is an absolute necessity.

So, a Muslim who wants to clean his nafs (lowerself) and purify his heart, has to utilize time with righteous deeds in an awareness of the selfquestioning one has to continuously perform, due to the uncertainty of the time of one’s death. One should abandon useless things and refrain from meaningless conversation. As Hadhrat Rumi puts it, one should protect the tongue from becoming a “buffoon of language”. The Lord Almighty states in the Qur’anic style, the characteristics of those “who reach salvation”, as follows:

“…(those)…Who avoid vain talk.” (Qur’an:23/3)

“…(those who)…if they pass by futility, they pass by it with hounorable (avoidance)” (Qur’an:25/72)

Pious believers should always be aware of the state of their inner world and contemplate the level of their istighfar (repentance), hamd (giving praise and glory to Allah only), shukr (gratitude) and ridha (desiring Allah’s approval and consent).

Contemplating the countless blessings in each and every limb, and the shukr for these blessings, one needs to repent for the times wasted with heedlessness. Refraining from unnecessary worries about the future, Muslims should busy themselves reviving their current state at this moment. In other words, a sound believer should be “ibnu’l waqt”, that is, one who values life, especially the actual time one is living in, and prepares with it in the best possible way for the hereafter.

Wasting time is a reason for great remorse. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh), reminding us to utilize time with good deeds that will be the wealth of eternal life, said:

“The people of Jannah (heaven) will regret and grieve nothing but only those times they have not spent in dhikr (remembrance of Allah Almighty).” (Haythami, X, 73-74).

Remorse has no use when the blessings have gone. For this reason, we should fill our lives with good deeds while we still have the opportunity.

We should try to be grateful with each limb. For example, we should constantly try to utilize the blessing of the tongue with dhikr, which is a cure for our hearts.

The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) advised our beloved mother Hafsa as follows:

“O Hafsa! Shun talking too much! All talk except dhikr will destroy the heart. But make

dhikr abundantly, because this will revive the heart.” (Ali al-Muttaki, I, 439/1896)

Lord Almighty warns us to be watchful about two matters:

“And spend something (in charity) out of the substance which We have bestowed on you, before Death should come to any of you and he should say, “O my Lord! why didst Thou not give me respite for a little while? I should then have given (largely) in charity, and I should have been one of the doers of good.” (Qur’an:63/10)

The following ayah, portraying the laments of those who wasted their lives and the refusal of their pleas, is a stern admonition:

“Therein will they cry aloud (for assistance): “Our Lord! Bring us out: we shall work righteousness, not the (deeds) we used to do!”

– “Did We not give you long enough life so that he that would should receive admonition? and (moreover) the warner came to you. So taste ye (the fruits of your deeds): for the wrong-doers there is no helper.” (Qur’an:35/37)

As with all the blessings of life, the main reason for wasting time is because we are not able to grasp the meaning of death correctly, or because we are heedless of death, seeing it as distant from ourselves. However, in a hadith it is said:

“Frequently remember death, which extinguishes all pleasures by its roots (Tirmidhi, Kiyamah, 26).

Without a doubt, continuing indifference, despite all the prophetic admonitions, will end in a chapter of bitter torment.

One day the Messenger of Allah said:

“There is no person who will not feel repentance after they die”

The Companions asked: “What is his repentance O Messenger of Allah?”

He said: “If it is a beneficent person, he will repent not increasing his condition; if it is a person of evil doing, he will repent not forsaking bad deeds.” (Tirmidhi, Zuhd, 59)

WASTING TIME II

Human beings will feel obliged to think about how they should live this life on earth when they start contemplating with their souls the exhibition of divine power upon themselves and about the composition of the universe. The greatest truth that should concern a human being is the matter of “death”.

That magnificent moment of farewell is a great lesson for humans. The one who knows death does not dawdle with mortal pleasures and the one who knows that he is a traveler to the hereafter, is not deceived by the toys in this guesthouse and does not waste time playing with them. In a verse Allah Almighty says:

“We created not the heavens, the earth, and all between them, merely in (idle) sport: We created them not except for just ends: but most of them do not understand.” (Qur’an:59/38-39)

What good would it do for all mortal blessings to be given to one person who lived a peaceful and a happy life for a thousand years? In the end, is not the final place which that person goes to the dirt upon which we tread? Why do we, humans, not take heed of the fact that the freshness and health of every mortal being is continuously being ground in this mill called time? What a dreadful deception for eternal destiny, unaware of the hereafter, assuming that the compliments of this world which feed a selfish life are permanent, and that the toys of this world are real. As Imam Shafi puts it:

“Is it wise for caravans to build homes on a journey?”

A life lived in heedlessness with games in childhood, passion in youth, heedlessness in adulthood and yearning for the lost things in old age, is a sum of thousands of tremors and remorse.

But, death is waiting in ambush at every moment. What a sad waste of life and a bitter demise it is to wear out one’s life in worldly indulgencies, working for mortal pleasures in a state that is deprived of the thought of the hereafter. Those who destroy their time as if they will never die, will long for and repent the time wasted.

Those who surrender to the pleasures of their nafs constantly avoid contemplating the grave and what comes after it. They do this to be able to continue their lives in the context of the nafs.

For this reason, the death that will embrace them turns into a futuristic worry and a horrifying nightmare; every person wants to live in the world they dream about and cherish. Would a person, who ruins his/her afterlife by constructing this world, want to leave the mansion and go to the ruins? On the contrary, would a believer, who has constructed his afterlife, agonize in terror, seeing death as a nightmare?

Hadhrat Rumi shows the way of escaping captivity in this world and reaching eternal happiness:

“Do not embrace possessions so that when the time comes you can leave them easily. You can easily give them away and leave as well as gain sawab (blessings). Embrace the One who holds you tightly, He is the Awwal (The First, The One whose Existence is without a beginning), He is the Akhir (The Last, The One whose Existence is without an end).”

“Most people fear the death of their bodies. What they actually should fear, is the death of their hearts”

For each living being, the last breath one will take is predestined. It is not possible to set it aside or to lengthen life on this earth for a certain period of time. Time continues to flow in the manner that it was established, as it is adatullah (preordained – the rules and practices of Divine origin that govern the universe).

In this world, it is more or less possible to buy or get back almost anything. But this is impossible for passing time. While we find it hard to be indifferent to a piece of gold thrown into the trash, strangely, people are indifferent to wasting time (something that cannot be bought for tons of gold) in useless pursuits.

Fariduddin Attar counsels us and says:

“Four things cannot be brought back after they are out of one’s hands: words that have come out of the mouth suddenly, an arrow that has left the bow, an accident that has taken place and a life that has been wasted.”

A saintly person gave advice on how to value time without falling into heedlessness and how to spend our days properly:

“From time to time go to hospitals and visit patients. Contemplate and make shukr for the blessing of health you have and for not being ill like those who are suffering. From time to time go to prisons, contemplate the lives of the inmates that are full of misery. Think that murders are committed on the spur of the moment with recklessness and frenzy. On the other hand, think about those innocent people in prison who go through those difficulties and think that you could have been in their shoes. Make shukr to Allah Almighty that by His Grace you have not found yourself in these situations. Pray for their safety and freedom. And then go to the graveyards. Listen to the silent cries and laments that arise from the gravestones…Value your time before you lose it and realize that there is no use in regretting a lost life after death. Recite Fatiha (the opening chapter of the Qur’an) for those in the graves and then try to spend the rest of your days in hamd, shukr and dhikr.”

So a believer should try to live a pious life, never forgetting Lord Almighty. Allah says:

“And be ye not like those who forgot Allah. And He made them forget their own souls! Such are the rebellious transgressors.” (Qur’an:59/19)

Abu Abdurrahman as-Sulami, stated that the most shameful acts of the nafs are wasting time and constantly being with people who only worry about this world and he explained its cure as follows:

“Value time as the most precious thing in life and spend this valuable time with equally valuable things, like making dhikr of Allah Almighty, constantly being in a state of worship and working on nestling sincerity in the nafs. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: “For a person to forsake those things that does not concern him, is from the beauty of his Islam”. (Tirmidhi, Zuhd, 11)

In many hadith, the necessity of appreciating time and utilizing it with a heartfelt vigilance, are stated.

“Esteem five things before another five come upon you: Youth before old age, health before sickness, wealth before poverty, free time before busy time and life before death.” (Hâkim, al-Mustadrak, IV, 341; Bukhârî, Rikak, 3; Tirmidhî, Zuhd, 25)

“On the Day of Judgment, no man’s feet will move before he is asked about four things.

1. About life: with what did you destroy it?

2. About youth: where did you destroy it?

3. About possessions: Where did you earn it and where did they spend it?

4. About knowledge: What did you do with it?” (Tirmidhî, Kiyamah, 1)

“There are two blessings that most people are deceived in the use of: health and spare time.” (Bukhari, Rikak, 1)

In many verses the Lord Almighty states that there will be a reckoning in the hereafter for all the spiritual and material blessings He bestowed upon us. Scholars of Islam have different interpretations about the most important matters that will be the subject of the divine reckoning.

Ibn al-Mas’ud said, these are “security, health and spare time”, Muawiya bin Kurra said, “The most severe reckoning in the hereafter will be about free time”. (Bursavi, X, 504)

Imam Gazali’s warning about wasting time is an important admonition:

“Son! Assume you died today. You will be so sorry for the times you spent in heedlessness. You will say “if only…” but, alas!”

Junaid al-Baghdadi says:

“One day of this world is better than a thousand years of the hereafter, because the matters of gain and loss belong to this world. There is no gain or loss in the hereafter.”

Wasted time is a bitter loss, that cannot be compensated for. All the files belonging to the past have been closed. We can only seek refuge in Allah with prayer, repentance and asking forgiveness with remorse for those wasted times and trying to compensate, at least spiritually, for these losses.

The river of life flows very fast. Our mortal lives, which have been limited by divine will, are like drops that fill a glass. We should not forget that with each passing day, we move towards the end of this limited life; we are one more day away from this world and closer to our graves. We should bear in mind that, because the time of death is not known to us, we could meet Azrail at any time.

Devoutness is not just unique to the days of Ramadan or other special days; it is a lifetime of piety. We should try to spend our life, which has been limited, like we do in the month Ramadan, by Divine Will with the excitement and manners of being a servant of Allah Almighty, so that the hereafter will become a celebration for us.

On the other hand, the future is just as full of dangers as it is of glad tidings. We do not know if we will be alive for the next Ramadan, or how many leaves of the calendar are left in our lives.

May our Lord bless all of us with the state of servant hood until yaqeen (death) comes upon us and may He bless us to die as Muslims.

May He enable us to live a life void of squander and extravagance, to establish balance and moderation in our inner and outer lives and to beautify His blessings with charity and good deeds when He bestows them upon us.

Amen!

Osman Nuri Topbas

Narration of Malik al-Dar – Response to Objections

Narration of Malik al-Dar

Imam al-Bayhaqi relates with a sound (sahih) chain:

It is related from Malik al-Dar, `Umar’s treasurer, that the people suffered a drought during the successorship of `Umar, whereupon a *man came to the grave of the Prophetand said:

“O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” 

The man went and told `Umar. The latter said: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!””

Ibn Kathir cites it thus from Bayhaqi in al-Bidaya wa al-nihaya and says: isnaduhu sahih;[25] Ibn Abi Shayba cites it in his Musannaf with a sound (sahih) chain as confirmed by Ibn Hajar who says: rawa Ibn Abi Shayba bi isnadin sahih and cites the hadith in Fath al-bari.[26] He identifies Malik al-Dar as `Umar’s treasurer (khazin `umar) and says that the man who visited and saw the Prophet in his dream is identified as the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harith, and he counts this hadith among the reasons for Bukhari’s naming of the chapter “The people’s request to their leader for rain if they suffer drought.” He also mentions it in al-Isaba, where he says that Ibn Abi Khaythama cited it. [27]”

What follows is the original Arabic wording of this hadith of tawassul in Umar ibn al Khattab’s time as cited by various major scholars of Hadith:

From the Musannaf (12/31-32) of ibn Abi Shayba (d. 235 AH)

مُصَنَّفُ ابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ >> كِتَابُ الْفَضَائِلِ >> مَا ذُكِرَ فِي فَضْلِ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ >>
يَا رَبِّ لَا آلُو إِلَّا مَا عَجَزْتُ عَنْهُ *

31380 حدثنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن أبي صالح ، عن مالك الدار ، قال : وكان خازن عمر على الطعام ، قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر ، فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا رسول الله ، استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا ، فأتى الرجل في المنام فقيل له : ” ائت عمر فأقرئه السلام ، وأخبره أنكم مستقيمون وقل له : عليك الكيس ، عليك الكيس ” ، فأتى عمر فأخبره فبكى عمر ثم قال : يا رب لا آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه *

From Imam al-Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (7/47)
دَلَائِلُ النُّبُوَّةِ لِلْبَيْهَقِيِّ >> جُمَّاعُ أَبْوَابِ غَزْوَةِ تَبُوكَ >> جُمَّاعُ أَبْوَابِ مَنْ رَأَى فِي مَنَامِهِ شَيْئًا مِنْ آثَارِ نُبُوَّةِ مُحَمَّدٍ >> بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي رُؤْيَةِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي >>
مَا آلُو إِلَّا مَا عَجَزْتُ عَنْهُ *

2974 أخبرنا أبو نصر بن قتادة ، وأبو بكر الفارسي قالا : أخبرنا أبو عمرو بن مطر ، أخبرنا أبو بكر بن علي الذهلي ، أخبرنا يحيى ، أخبرنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن أبي صالح ، عن مالك قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمان عمر بن الخطاب ؛ فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا رسول الله , استسق الله لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا ؛ فأتاه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام ؛ فقال ائت عمر فأقرئه السلام ، وأخبره أنكم مسقون . وقل له : عليك الكيس الكيس . فأتى الرجل عمر ، فأخبره ، فبكى عمر ثم قال : يا رب ما آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه *

From al-Irshad fi Ma’rifa Ulama al-Hadith of Hafiz al-Khalili (1/313-314) 
الْإِرْشَادُ فِي مَعْرِفَةِ عُلَمَاءِ الْحَدِيثِ لِلْخَلِيلِيِّ >>
مَالِكُ الدَّارِ

مالك الدار مولى عمر بن الخطاب الرعاء عنه : تابعي , قديم , متفق عليه , أثنى عليه التابعون , وليس بكثير الرواية , روى عن أبي بكر الصديق , وعمر , وقد انتسب ولده إلى جبلان ناحية . حدثني محمد بن أحمد بن عبدوس المزكي أبو بكر النيسابوري , حدثنا عبد الله بن محمد بن الحسن الشرقي , حدثنا محمد بن عبد الوهاب قال : قلت لعلي بن عثام العامري الكوفي : لم سمي مالك الدار ؟ فقال : الداري المتطيب . حدثنا محمد بن الحسن بن الفتح , حدثنا عبد الله بن محمد البغوي , حدثنا أبو خيثمة , حدثنا محمد بن خازم الضرير , حدثنا الأعمش , عن أبي صالح , عن مالك الدار ، قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمان عمر بن الخطاب , فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا نبي الله , استسق الله لأمتك فرأى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال : ” ائت عمر , فأقرئه السلام , وقل له : إنكم مسقون , فعليك بالكيس الكيس ” . قال : فبكى عمر , وقال : يا رب , ما آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه يقال : إن أبا صالح سمع مالك الدار هذا الحديث , والباقون أرسلوه

Imam Ibn Kathir in al Bidaya wal Nihaya (7/106)
وقال الحافظ أبو بكر البيهقي: أخبرنا أبو نصر بن قتادة، وأبو بكر الفارسي قالا: حدثنا أبو عمر بن مطر، حدثنا إبراهيم بن علي الذهلي، حدثنا يحيى بن يحيى، حدثنا أبو معاوية، عن الأعمش، عن أبي صالح، عن مالك قال: أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر بن الخطاب، فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم.
فقال: يا رسول الله استسق الله لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا.
فأتاه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال: إيت عمر، فأقرئه مني السلام، وأخبرهم أنه مسقون، وقل له عليك بالكيس الكيس.
فأتى الرجل فأخبر عمر، فقال: يا رب ما آلوا إلا ما عجزت عنه.وهذا إسناد صحيح.

Shaykh al-Islam al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in al-Isaba fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba (3/484) :
الإصابة – لابن حجر

8362[ص:274] مالك بن عياض مولى عمر هو الذي يقال له مالك الدار له إدراك وسمع من أبي بكر الصديق وروى عن الشيخين ومعاذ وأبي عبيدة روى عنه أبو صالح السمان وابناه عون وعبدالله ابنا مالك وأخرج البخاري في التاريخ من طريق أبي صالح ذكوان عن مالك الدار أن عمر قال في قحوط المطر يا رب لا آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه وأخرجه بن أبي خيثمة من هذا الوجه مطولا قال أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا رسول الله استسق الله لأمتك فأتاه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال له ائت عمر فقل له إنكم مستسقون فعليك الكفين قال فبكى عمر وقال يا رب ما آلوا إلا ما عجزت عنه وروينا في فوائد داود بن عمرو الضبي جمع البغوي من طريق عبدالرحمن بن سعيد بن يربوع المخزومي عن مالك الدار قال دعاني عمر بن الخطاب يوما فإذا عنده صرة من ذهب فيها أربعمائة دينار فقال اذهب بهذه إلى أبي عبيدة فذكر قصته وذكر بن سعد في الطبقة الأولى من التابعين في أهل المدينة قال روى عن أبي بكر وعمر وكان معروفا وقال أبو عبيدة ولاه عمر كيلة عيال عمر فلما قدم عثمان ولاه القسم فسمى مالك الدار وقال إسماعيل القاضي عن علي بن المديني كان مالك الدار خازنا لعمر.

Hafiz ibn Hajar in Fath al Bari (2/495)
وروى ابن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الداري – وكان خازن عمر – قال ” أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: يا رسول الله استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا، فأتى الرجل في المنام فقيل له: ائت عمر ” الحديث.
وقد روى سيف في الفتوح أن الذي رأى المنام المذكور هو بلال بن الحارث المزني أحد الصحابة، وظهر بهذا كله مناسبة الترجمة لأصل هذه القصة أيضا والله الموفق.

Imam ibn Abdal Barr in al-Isti’ab (2/464) under the biography of Umar ibn al Khattab (ra) said:

وروى أبو معاوية عن الأعمش عن أبي صالح عن مالك الدار قال‏:‏ أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال‏:‏ يا رسول الله استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا‏.‏

Note: All of these Imams narrated it and not one of themweakened it let alone said it leads to Shirk as some of theinnovators of this age claimed!
In fact Imam ibn Hajar and Imam ibn Kathir explicitly declared its Isnad to be Sahih. Ibn Kathir in his recently published: Jami al-Masanid (1/223) – Musnad Umar – declared it as: “Isnaduhu Jayyid Qawi: ITS CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION IS GOOD AND STRONG!”

Let the pseudo-Salafiyya take note – that this is the ruling ofibn Kathir in 2 places, and he was associated with Ibn Taymiyya.

 Part 1

Response to al-Albani’sObjections

al-Albani :

” Firstly: We do not accept that this story is authentic since the reliablity and precision of  Maalik ad-Daar is not known, and these are two principle conditions necessary for the authenticity of any narration, as is affirmed in the science of hadeeth. Ibn Abee Haatim mentions him in al-Jarh wa-Ta’deel (4/1/213) and does not mention anyone who narrates from him except Abu Saalih. So this indicates that he is unknown, and this is further emphasized by the fact that Ibn Abee Haatim himself, who is well known for his memorization and wide knowledge, did not quote anyone who declared him reliable, so he remains unknown. Then this does not contradict the saying of al-Haafidh (Ibn Hajar): ‘…with an authentic chain of narration, from the narration of Abu Saalih as-Samaan…’ since we say: It is not declaration that all of the chain of narration is authentic (saheeh), rather only that it is so up to Abu Saalih. If that were not the case then he would have begun: ‘From Maalik ad-Daar … and its chain of narration is authentic.’ But he said it in the way that he did to draw attention to the fact that there was something requiring investigation in it. The scholars say this for various reasons. From these reasons is that they may not have been able to find a biography for some narrator(s) and therefore they would not permit themselves to pass a ruling of authenticity without certainity and cause others to think it authentic and to use it as a proof. So what they would rather do in such a case is to quote the part requiring further examination, which is what al-Haafidh (rahimahullah) did here. It is also as if he indicates the fact that Abu Saalih as-Samaan is alone in reporting from Maalik ad-Daar, or that he is unknown, and Allah knows best. So this is a very fine point of knowledge which will be realized only by those having experience in this field. What we have said is also aided by the fact that al-Haafidh al-Mundhiree reports another story from the narration of Maalik ad-Daar, from ‘Umar in at-Targheeb (2/41-42) and says after it: ‘at-Tabaraanee reports it in al-Kabeer. Its narrators up to Maalik ad-Daar are famous and reliable, but as for Maalik ad-Daar then I do not know him.’ The same is said by al-Haythamee in Majma’ az-Zawaa’id (3/125).”

THE RESPONSE:

Mālik ad-Dār has related:

The people were gripped by famine during the tenure of ‘Umar (bin al-Khattāb). Then a Companion walked up to the Prophet’s grave and said, “O Messenger of Allah, please ask for rain from Allah for your Community who is in dire straits.” Then the Companion saw the Prophet in a dream. The Prophet said to him, “Go over to ‘Umar, give him my regards and tell him that the rain will come to you. And tell ‘Umar that he should be on his toes, he should be on his toes, (he should remain alert).” Then the Companion went over to see ‘Umar and passed on to him the tidings. On hearing this, ‘Umar broke into a spurt of crying. He said, “O Allah, I exert myself to the full until I am completely exhausted.”[26]

Ibn Kathīr has confirmed the soundness of its transmission in al-Bidāyah wan-nihāyah (5:167).

Ibn Abū Khaythamah narrated it with the same chain of transmission as quoted by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī in al-Isābah fī tamyīz-is-sahābah (3:484), while the latter writes in Fath-ul-bārī (2:495-6): “Ibn Abū Shaybah transmitted it with a sound chain of transmission and Sayf bin ‘Umar Tamīmī has recorded it in al-Futūh-ul-kabīr that the dreamer was a Companion known as Bilāl bin Hārith Muzanī.” Qastallānī has remarked in al-Mawāhib-ul-laduniyyah (4:276) that Ibn Abū Shaybah has narrated it with a sound chain of transmission while Zurqānī has supported Qastallānī in his Commentary (11:150-1).
It is quite surprising that some people have tried to dub even this soundly transmitted tradition as weak and, therefore, lacking the sinews to face a rigorously probing analysis, though this is far from the truth.

They have marshalled in their favour the following

objections:

First objection: 

One of its narrators is A‘mash who is a Mudallis.

Reply:

Though A‘mash is a Mudallis, his tradition is popular for two reasons whether its soundness is proved or not:
1. A‘mash is regarded as a second-grade Mudallis, and this is a class of Mudallis from whom our religious leaders recorded traditions in their authentic books. Therefore, it is proved that this tradition narrated by A‘mash is accepted.
2. If we accept this tradition only on the basis of its transmission by A‘mash, as is the practice in the case of third-grade or even lower-grade Mudallis, even then the tradition by A‘mash is likely to retain its popularity as he has copied it from Abū Sālih Dhakawān Sammān. Imam Dhahabī comments: “When A‘mash begins a tradition with the word ‘an (from) there is a possibility of imposture and deception. But if he relates it from his elders like Ibrāhīm, Ibn Abū Wā’il, Abū Sālih Sammān, etc., then it is presumed to possess sound linkage (ittisāl).[27] In addition, Imam Dhahabī has also described him as trustworthy (thiqah).

*[comment: please see also the clarification from sidi Abul Hasan on the issue of al-A’mash posted below]


Second objection:

Albānī in his book at-Tawassul, ahkāmuhū wa anwa‘uhū observes, I do not acknowledge it authentic because the credibility and memory of Mālik ad-Dār is not known and these are the two basic criteria for any authentic narrator of traditions. Ibn Abū Hātim Rāzī in Kitāb-ul-jarh wat-ta‘dīl [4/1/213(8:213)], while discussing Mālik ad-Dār, has not mentioned any narrator except Abū Sālih who has accepted any tradition from him, which shows that he is unknown. It is also supported by the fact that Ibn Abū Hātim Rāzī, who himself is a leading figure of Islam and a memorizer of traditions, has not mentioned anyone of them who has pronounced him trustworthy (thiqah). Similarly Mundhirī has remarked that he does not know him while Haythamī in his Majma‘-uz-zawā’id, has supported his observation…”

Reply:

This objection is refuted by the biographical details which Ibn Sa‘d (d.230ah) has furnished while discussing him among the second-grade Medinan Successors:

Malik al-Dar: `Umar ibn al-Khattab’s freedman. He narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar. He was known. [28]

In addition, this objection is also cancelled by Khalīlī’s (d.445 ah) comment on Māik ad-Dār:

Malik al-Dar: muttafaq `alayh athna `alayhi al-tabi`un — He is agreed upon (as trustworthy), the Successors have approved highly of him [29]

Besides, the biographical sketch provided by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī also serves to neutralize this objection:

“Malik ibn `Iyad: `Umar’s freedman. He is the one named Malik al-Dar. He has seen the Prophet and has heard narrations from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. He has narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, Mu`adh, and Abu `Ubayda. From him narrated Abu Salih al-Saman and his (Malik’s) two sons `Awn and `Abd Allah…Bukhari in his Tarikh narrated through Abu Salih Dhakwan from Malik al-Dar that `Umar said during the period of drought: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!” Ibn Abi Khaythama also narrated it in those words but in a longer hadith:The people suffered a drought during the time of `Umar, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask Allah for rain for your Community.” The Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go, see `Umar and tell him: You will be watered, and: You must put your nose to the grindstone (`alayk al-kaffayn)!” (The man went and told `Umar.) Then `Umar wept and exclaimed: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”We have also narrated in the Fawa’id of Dawud ibn `Amr and al-Dabbi compiled by al-Baghawi in the narration of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa`id ibn Yarbu` al-Makhzumi from Malik al-Dar: he said: “`Umar ibn al-Khattab summoned me one day. He had with him a purse of gold containing four hundred dinars. He said: “Take this to Abu `Ubayda,” and he mentioned the rest of the story.Ibn Sa`d mentioned him (Malik al-Dar) in the first layer of the Successors among the people of Madina and said: “He narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, and he was known.” Abu `Ubayda said of him: “`Umar put him in charge of the dependents in his household. When `Uthman succeeded him, he put him in charge of financial allotments and he was then named Malik of the House.”Isma`il al-Qadi related from `Ali ibn al-Madini: “Malik al-Dar was `Umar’s treasurer.”” [30]

Ibn Hibbān has attested to the trustworthiness and credibility of Mālik ad-Dār in Kitāb-uth-thiqāt (5:384). [31]

Now if Mundhirī and Haythamī insist that they do not know Mālik ad-Dār, it means that they have not asserted anything about his credibility or lack of credibility. However there are traditionists of great repute like Imam Bukhārī, Ibn Sa‘d, ‘Alī bin Madīnī, Ibn Hibbān and Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī who know him. Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī has even mentioned him in Tahdhīb-ut-tahdhīb (7:226; 8:217).

It is shocking to learn that Albānī gives weight to the opinion of those who do not know Mālik ad-Dār and prefers them to those who know him. Albānī has discarded the traditions of Mālik bin ‘Iyād who is popularly known by the title “ad-Dār” while the great Companions appointed him as their minister because they relied on his trustworthiness. He was even given the portfolio of finance minister, an office that requires honesty, integrity and a huge sense of responsibility. On the contrary, Albānī gives credence to the traditions of those who enjoyed a much lower status than Mālik ad-Dār. The following examples support my contention:

1. He has pronounced Yahyā bin ‘Uryān Harawī as hasan (fair) in Silsīlat-ul-ahādīth-is-sahīhah (1:49). His argument is based on the statement made by Khatīb Baghdādī in Tārīkh Baghdad (14:161) in which he declares Yahyā bin ‘Uryān Harawī as a traditionist ofBaghdad.

This statement is quite transparent. Khatīb Baghdādī has argued neither in favour of nor against Yahyā bin ‘Uryān Harawī. His stance is neutral, as he has not tried to establish the stature of his narrations. He has not labelled them as authentic or inauthentic. In spite of his posture of neutrality, it is quite surprising that Albānī has called him fair (hasan).

2. Abū Sa‘īd Ghifārī has also been pronounced a fair narrator in Silsilat-ul-ahādīth-is-sahīhah (2:298). After stating that he is no longer unknown because two narrators have acknowledged traditions from him, he writes, “So he is a Successor. A group of those who have committed the traditions to memory have verified the authenticity of his traditions. Therefore, ‘Irāqī has declared the traditions attributed to him as authentic (isnāduhū jayyid), and there is no harm in it. This gave me a sense of satisfaction and I felt deeply contented.”

The question is why has he tried to discriminate between Abū Sa‘īd Ghifārī and Mālik ad-Dār?

3. Sālih bin Khawwāt has also been pronounced credible in Silsilat-ul-ahādīth-is-sahīhah (2:436) because a group of people has relied on his traditions, and Ibn Hibbān has mentioned him in Kitāb-uth-thiqāt.

While, according to our research, Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī has described him as an acceptable narrator in Taqrīb-ut-tahdhīb (1:359) and has also stated that he belonged to the eighth category of Successors. If an eighth-grade narrator is being described as credible, what justification is there to pronounce a first-grade Successor as un-credible? The discrimination seems to be rooted more in prejudice than reason.

Therefore, the silence of Ibn Abū Hātim Rāzī is hardly an argument against the unknown stature of Mālik ad-Dār because his silence is based on lack of evidence about the narrator. Thus the absence of evidence and reasoning does not reflect the unknowingness of the narrator, which his silence neither explains nor indicates towards any definite interpretation. On the contrary, it opposes any attempt to establish the unknowingness of the narrator. There are a number of narrators about whom Ibn Abū Hātim Rāzī has remained silent though other scholars have argued about them and the books on tradition and related issues are riddled with similar examples.

Third objection:

There is a suspicion of discontinuance between Abū Sālih Dhakawān Sammān and Mālik ad-Dār.

Reply:

This suspicion is a fallacy, as it has no basis in reality. In its rejection, it is sufficient to say that Abū Sālih like Mālik ad-Dār was a native of Medina and he has reported traditions from the Companions. Therefore, he is not an impostor and a fraud. It may also be noted that only contemporaneity is an adequate guarantee for the connection of transmission as Imam Muslim has mentioned the consensus in the Preamble (muqaddimah) of his as-Sahīh.

Fourth objection:

There is no justification for the soundness of this tradition because it entirely depends upon a person whose name has not been spelled out. Only in the tradition narrated by Sayf bin ‘UmarTamīmī, he has been named Bilāl and Sayf has declared him as a weak narrator.

Reply: 

This objection is also groundless, because justification does not depend on Bilāl but on ‘Umar bin al-Khattāb’s act. He did not prevent Bilāl from performing his act; on the contrary, he acknowledged it. He rather himself cried and said: ‘my Creator, I do not shirk responsibility but I may be made more humble.’ Therefore the person visiting the grave, whether he is a Companion or a Successor, does not affect the soundness of the tradition.

The gist of the discussion is that the tradition related by Mālik ad-Dār is sound, as I have stated in the earlier part of my exposition.

Muhammad bin ‘Alawī al-Mālikī writes:

“All those people who have made reference to this tradition or narrated it or reproduced it in their books have never labelled it disbelief or infidelity. They have not questioned the substance of the tradition and it has been mentioned by a scholarly person of high level like Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī who has confirmed it as a soundly transmitted tradition. Therefore his confirmation needs no apology in view of his highly distinguished stature among the hadith-scholars.” [32]
This tradition establishes the following principles:

1. Visiting graves with the intention of mediation and seeking help.
2. It is valid to visit the grave of a pious dead person during the period of one’s trials and tribulations to seek help from him because if this act were invalid, ‘Umar would surely have forbidden that person to do so.
3. The Prophet’s appearance in the dream of the person who visited his grave and to give him good tidings, argues in favour of the fact that it is quite valid to seek help from non-Allah and the dead because if it were invalid, it would have been impossible for the Prophet not to have forbidden that person to do so.
4. Validation of the mode of address “O Messenger of Allah (yā rasūl Allah)” even after his death.
5. Call for help and the act of intermediation dates back to the early ages.
6. The holy personality of the Prophet is a fountain of guidance even after his death.
7. The head of the state is responsible for administrative matters. The Holy Prophet , in spite of being the chief of prophets, did not break the state channel and, as a visible demonstration of his sense of discipline, he commanded the man visiting his grave to see the head of the state.
8. The man visiting the grave implored his help through the instrumentality of the Ummah. This shows the Prophet’s immeasurable love for the Community of his followers.
9. Justification for making the Ummah as a source for seeking his help.
10. Justification for making non-prophet a means of help in the presence of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم
11. Anyone who strengthens his link with the Holy Prophet is rewarded by his sight and is showered with his blessings.
12. The Holy Prophet , even after his death, is aware of the weakness of his Ummah or anyone of its rulers and he issues different commands for removing these flaws.
13. To seek guidance from Allah’s favourites.
14. The acknowledgement of the Prophet’s commands by the Companions after his death as just and truthful.
15. Imposition of commands received in dreams on others.
16. When intermediation was discussed in the presence of ‘Umar bin al-Khattāb, he did not forbid it; rather he cried and responded to it acknowledging it as valid.
17. 
‘Umar bin al-Khattāb’s love for the Holy Prophet that he incessantly cried as someone mentioned the Holy Prophet(s)

NOTES:

[26]. Related by Ibn Abū Shaybah in al-Musannaf (12:31-2#12051); Bayhaqī, Dalā’il-un-nubuwwah (7:47); Ibn ‘Abd-ul-Barr, al-Istī‘āb fī ma‘rifat-il-ashāb (2:464); Subkī, Shifā’-us-siqām fī ziyārat khayr-il-anām (p.130); ‘Alā’-ud-Dīn ‘Alī, Kanz-ul-‘ummāl (8:431#23535); and Abū Ya‘lā Khalīl bin ‘Abdullāh Khalīlī Qazwīnī in Kitāb-ul-irshād fī ma‘rifat ‘ulamā’-il-hadith (1:313-4), as quoted by Mahmūd Sa‘īd Mamdūh in Raf‘-ul-minārah (p.262).

[27]. Dhahabī, Mīzān-ul-i‘tidāl (2:224).

[28]. Ibn Sā‘d, at-Tabaqāt-ul-kubrā (5:12).

[29]. Abū Yā‘lā Khalīl bin ‘Abdullāh Khalīlī Qazwīnī, Kitāb-ul-irshād fī ma‘rifat ‘ulamā’-il-hadith, as quoted by ‘Abdullāh bin Muhammad bin Siddīq al-Ghumārī in Irghām-ul-mubtadī al-ghabī bi-jawāz-it-tawassul bi an-nabī (p.9).

[30]. Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī, al-Isābah fī tamyīz-is-sahābah (3:484-5).

[31]. Mahmūd Sa‘īd Mamdūh, Raf‘-ul-minārah (p.266). Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī also mentioned in his Tahdhīb-ut-tahdhīb (7:226; 8:217).

[32]. Muhammad bin ‘Alawī al-Mālikī, Mafāhīm yajib an tusahhah (p.151). ]

It has already been mentioned above that Ibn Hajarconsidered Malik al-Dar (RA) to be a sahabah when he stated:

” Malik ibn `Iyad: `Umar’s freedman. He is the one namedMalik al-Dar. He has seen the Prophet and has heard narrations from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. He has narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, Mu`adh, and Abu `Ubayda. From him narrated Abu Salih al-Saman and his (Malik’s) two sons `Awn and `Abd Allah…

Sidi Abul Hasan has also brought to light that the Hafiz of Hadith and famed Historian: Shamsud-Din al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) has listed Malik ibn Iyad as a Sahaba in his Tajrid Asma al-Sahaba, which was printed in Hyderabad, India, in the year 1315 AH – i.e. more than 100 years ago. 

In addition, Malik al-Dar has been listed as being a Sahabi by Imam Ibn Hajar’s student: Imam Taqiud-Din Ibn Fahd al-Makki (d. 871 AH) in his Mukhtasar Asma al-Sahaba. This has been found from the Al-Azhar manuscript.

Malik al-Dar being listed as a Sahabi:

Larger scans can be reviewed HERE 
Malik ibn Iyad in Tajrid Asma al-Sahaba of al-Hafiz Shamsud-Din al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH):

Tajrid Asma al-Sahaba of al-Hafiz Shamsud-Din al-Dhahabi -Malik al-Dar- Sahaba

Sidi Abul Hasan goes on to mention:

The fact that these 3 well known scholars: al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar and Ibn Fahd listed Malik al-Dar in specific works mentioning those they considered to be noble Sahaba is a proof against those contemporaries who deem Malik al-Dar to be unknown!Such Imams must have surely possessed some definitive evidence to list Malik al-Dar as a Sahabi.

It may also be mentioned that since Ibn Kathir (the contemporary of al-Dhahabi) declared the Malik al-Dar narration to be authentic, then he too must have considered Malik to be at least Thiqa (trustworthy), if not a Sahabi.

 

Sidi Abul Hasan also mentioned HERE (slight editing by me) regarding the following statement of al-Albani :

Thirdly: Even if the story were authentic there would still be no proof in it for them since the man (i.e. who came to the grave)in the story is himself not named, and therefore unknown. The fact that he is named as Bilaal ibn al-Haarith in the narration of Sayf is worthless since Sayf is Sayf ibn ‘Umar at-Tameemee, and the scholars of hadeeth are agreed that he is weak. Indeed Ibn Hibbaan says about him: ‘He reports fabricated things from reliable narrators, and they say that he used to fabricate hadeeth.'” 

…..

the narration has a Sahih Isnad as: Ibn Hajar and before him: Ibn Kathir explicitly declared in 2 different books.

Thirdly, the narration with Isnads back to Malik al-Dar are found in Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-Nubuwwa and collected before him by Ibn Abi Khaythama and Ibn Abi Shayba as we know. It was also collected with its Isnad by Abu Ya’la al-Khalili in his Irshad. Not one of these Imams of Hadith questioned the text or isnad for its authenticity or it being a route to shirk as the Wahhabi’s think!

Without Isnad, it was mentioned in shorter forms by: Ibn Abdal Barr in his al-Isti’ab and al-Bukhari in his Ta’rikh al-Kabir (under Malik al-Dar) – these two Imams didn’t attack his narration in any form.

Fourthly, Sayf ibn Umar
 – no doubt he was problematic – 

BUTImam ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his Taqreeb al-Tahdhib (no. 2724) said that he was “Da’eef fil Hadith Umda fil Ta’rikh…”

Meaning: “Weak in Hadith, a PILLAR in HISTORY..” 

Sayf ibn Umar - weak in hadith good in History-1Sayf ibn Umar-History-2

Hence: Since the narration from Malik al-Dar is not aHadith but an Athar (report) from a Tabi’i – this would be regarded as a Historical report from the time of Umar (ra) –This is why Ibn Hajar accepted it, and I have just been looking a little bit deeper into this and have noted that Sayf’snarration – naming explicitly the fact that the Sahabi who went to the blessed Qabr – Bilal ibn Harith al-Muzani, was also mentioned by these famous Historians and well regarded Muhaddithin:
Ibn Kathir in his al-Bidaya
Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari in his al-Kamil fi al Ta’rikh
Abu Ja’far al-Tabari in his Ta’rikh(see under the year 18 AH)

Hence, since Sayf is reporting this as a Historical report – the likes of Imam ibn Hajar accepted his narration that it was Bilal al-Muzani (ra) – so this is just another ploy by the Wahhabiyya to reject his historical report. If it was a Hadith – then Sayf’snarration would be rejected!

[comment: please read also the related answer to the Fourth Objection posted above]

QUESTION: I was wondering what you could tell me about Sayf b. Umar. He is a primary source for Imam al-Tabari’s material in his Tarikh. What is his reliability and all of the other necessary info.

Reply of Dr. GF Haddad:

Sayf ibn `Umar Al-Asadi al-Tamimi al-Dabbi al-Kufi (d. ca. 178) met the Tabi`in and was a “chronicler” (akhbari) as opposed to a muhaddith historian and the author of al-Ridda, Futuh al-Buldaan, al-Fitnatu wal Jamal and other historical works.

In hadith he was declared weak by Yahya ibn Ma`in, Ya`qub ibn Sufyan, al-Nasa’i, and Abu Dawud. Abu Hatim said he was “discarded, of the same type as al-Waqidi.” Al-Daraqutni said he was discarded. Ibn Hibban even said he was accused of hidden heresy (zandaqa) and forgery, charges which Ibn Hajar rejected as outlandish in al-Taqrib where he merely grades him asda`if, while Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr in his notes on al-Dhahabi’s Mughni says: “There is no proof of any zandaqa in him, rather, the narrations from him indicate the contrary.”

Al-Tirmidhi narrates from him the hadith: “When you see those who insult my Companions, say: The curse of Allah be on the evil you do!” which al-Tirmidhi then grades “disclaimed” and he describes Sayf as unknown.

Al-Dhahabi in al-Mughni fil-Du`afa’ said he was “discarded by agreement” and, in Tarikh al-Islam, said “he narrated from Jabir al-Ju`fi, Hisham ibn `Urwa, Isma`il ibn Abi Khalid, `Ubayd Allah ibn `Umar, and many unknowns and chroniclers.”

Yet, he is considered not only reliable but “eminently reliable” in history, as shown by Ibn Hajar’s grading in the Taqrib: “Da`if fil-hadith, `umdatun fil-tarikh,” notwithstanding the acrimonious dissent of Shu`ayb al-Arna’ut and Bashshar `Awwad Ma`ruf in their Tahrir al-Taqrib. 
Indeed, he a primary source for al-Tabari in his Tarikh, Ibn Hajar in his Isaba, and Ibn Kathir in his Bidaya while Ibn `Abd al-Barr cites him in al-Isti`ab as does al-Sakhawi in Fath al-Mughith. Even al-Dhahabi cites him often in his Tarikh al-Islam.

Follow up Questions:

[1] I was wondering, sidi, if you could explain the reasoning behind why and how a specific narrator who is discarded or weak in hadith can be considered “eminently reliable” when it comes to history? 

 

What were the reasons behind Sayf’s weakness in narrating hadith as opposed to historical events?

[2] is the identification of the “unknown man” as hadhrat bilal ra by sayf ibn umar al-tamimi in the malik al-dar narration considered a historical report?

Reply of Dr. GF Haddad:

Those who questioned the `adl of al-Waqidi and Sayf were dismissed.The issue here is dabit vs. non-dabit. You know well we can have honest people who do not have a clue what dabt requires.

Imam Malik mentioned that he met 70 extremely honest shuyukh in Madina but he did not narrate from a single one of them because they were nescient in hadith transmission.

Now, take someone who does have a clue but given the abundance of things he transmits he makes so many mistakes that he becomes similarly discardable.

Now make him so erudite, so researched, so full of gems that it is simply impossible to discard him altogether. This is the case with al-Waqidi and Sayf.

These scholars would go to the actual sites of battles and look for descendents and interview them one by one for stories. Hence the large number of “unknowns” in their chains. Yet, when it comes to purely historical details such as whether a certain Sahabi was a Badri or not, they might even best al-Bukhari and Muslim.

And yes, the identification of the Sahabi in Malik al-Dar’sreport as Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani [NOT Bilal ibn Rabah al-Habashi, in case that is whom the respondent meant by “Hadrat Bilal”] is definitely a historical clue. Allah Most High be well-pleased with them all.

[End of Dr. GF Haddad’s words]

*Sidi Abul Hasan also mentioned:

These people have also come off with claims that the narartor in the Isnad: al-A’mash may have made Tadlees – that is not clarifying how he received his report from: Abu Salih, since A’mash sometimes made Tadlees. He used the term: An (from) – which is not a very clear way to show how the narration was received by him.

The answer to this is the fact that A’mash using “An” – from Abu Salih is not considered as tadlees – because Imam al-Bukhari in his Sahih accepted this type of route, as did: Ibn Hajar and Ibn Kathir.

Some others have claimed that Abu Salih al-Samman may not have heard from Malik al-Dar – another mistake on their part- for al-Khalili and Ibn Sa’d clarified that he did!

Much of what I said has been answered by Shaykh Mamduh – foral-Albani and his colleagues like: Abu Bakr al-Jaza’iri and Hammad al-Ansari – showed fanaticism and weakness in the Science of Hadith – when they took on the correct grading of the likes of Ibn Kathir and Ibn Hajar.

Also, al-Albani deliberately misinterpreted Ibn Hajar’swords – when claiming that Ibn Hajar authenticated it only up to Abu Salih al-Samman!…..
For further details on this narration please consult:

Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh’s

Reply to al-Albani

on his weakening a narration on Tawassul

Here

—–

Also

Reply to “Abu Alqama” and his

Nefarious Attacks on a

Narration from Malik al Dar

PDF BOOK Link

 

Narration of Malik al Dar – Tawassual Through The Prophet(s) and The Pious 

Part 2: Here

(Wahhabi/Salafi Arguments)

original source: link

Narration of Malik al Dar – Tawassual Through The Prophet(s.a.w) & The Pious

Part 2

Quote:
Um Abdullah M

” Narration of Malik al Dar, evidence for Tawassul by the living & not by the Prophet after his death

[…]

The incident mentioned in the narration of Malik al Dar happened during the Khilafah of Umar radiyallahu anhu, during the time of drought, and so did the incident of Umar bin al Khattab’s (radiyallahu anhu) tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) uncle, Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.

I have come across many discussions in regards to this narration, and all of them were concentrating on the “authenticity” of the narration, discussing its chain.


But I have not come across any discussions on the text of the hadith itself, the story,

except for some quotes here and there from some current shaikhs, sited in ahl alhadith forum, and those 2 or 3 points mentioned by those shaikhs led me to research the story of the hadith in classical books of past scholars, and I have found it very interesting and informative.
The things I discovered and read show a totally different understanding of the hadith, than what is understood by many Muslims today including some scholarsit only needs for one to go deep and see where the scholars of the past quoted the narration, in which chapter and what they said before quoting it to understand the real meaning of the hadith.
I will go straight to the points that I have regarding the text andstory of this narration of Malik al DarAfter that I will mention some logical arguments in reply to the ones who use this narration as evidence for tawasul that is “asking the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) to make duaa to Allah for us AFTER HIS DEATH.

The text of the narration:

It is related from Malik al-Dar, `Umar’s treasurer, that the people suffered a drought during the time of `Umar (his khilafah), whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter said: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!””

Scholars’ understanding of this narration

1. Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani -rahimahu Allah- in his books “Fath al Bari” (vol 3 pg. 441):
He sites it in chapter “The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought,” in the chapter heading section, in which he quotes ahadith that have relevance to the chapter heading, and that connect it with hadiths that come under that chapter.
Amongst those narrations he mentions the narration of Malik al Dar, and he only quotes part of the narration, he stops at “go to Umar”. He used this as evidence that people ask the imam to do istisqa (ask for rain) for them in times of drought.
He didn’t mention the rest of the hadith because it has nothing to do with the chapter heading, he only quoted what he believed fits the chapters title, for he says at the end of the section, after mentioning this narration:
“From all of this appears the relevance of the chapter heading to the origin of this story“

so, al Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah understood from this hadith that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was directing the man to go ask the Imam, during that time (Umar radiyallahu anhu), to do istisqa’ for them.

2. Hafidh Ibn Kathir -rahimahu Allah-:

He sites it in his book “al Bidayah wan Nihaya ” (vol7 pg.104 ),in which he mentions some narrations, right before he mentions Malik ad Dar’s narration, which explain the meaning of the narration.
The narrations before it are by Sayf Ibn Umar, and in them is the mentioning of Umar radiyallahu anhu, after hearing about the man’s dream (who is said to be Bilal al Harith), asking the people on the minbar if they have seen anything bad from him, and then he tells them about the dream that Bilal saw, so they told him:
“Bilal has spoken the truth, so make istiqatha (seek or ask for help) to Allah, then the Muslims”. So then Umar radiyallahu anhu does istisqa’ through al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
In the second narration, they said “he found you slow in doing istisqa’, so do istisqa’ for us “, so he did.
(Note: these 2 narrations could be weak, but the point is that al Hafidh Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah mentioned them right before the narration of Malik, showing what it is about, which shows what he understood it to mean, same as what Ibn Hajar (r A) understood from it).

3. Ala’ ad Deen Ali al Mutaqi al Hindi al Burhan Furi (d. 975) in his book “Kanz al Ummal“:He sites it in chapter of (salat al Istisqa’ – prayer for rain), and what the man did at the grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was asking for dua, not istisqa’ prayer, and salat al Istisqa’ was done by Umar radiyallahu anhu, when he made tawassul through Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu, thus both narrations are connected to each other, as shown in the previous points.

Conclusion: That the story of Malik al Dar’s narration is connected to the hadith about Umar’s tawassul through al Abbas, all leading to doing istisqa’ through the living, and not through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death.

Narrations with an addition

There are narrations of the same story, with an addition, if they are authentic (the authenticiy is not known to me so far), they would give very strong support to the understanding of the above scholars.
and it also shows what the scholars who sited the narrations believed the narration to mean.- Imam Ibn Abd al Bar al Maliki in his book “al Isti’ab fi ma’rifat al As-hab”:

The people suffered a drought during the time of ‘Umar (his khilafah), whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and said:”O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to ‘Umar and tell him to do istisqa’ (ask Allah for rain) for the people, and that they will be watered. And tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar, and Umar cried and said “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!” 

 Ahmad Abdullah at Tabari (d. 694 ) in his book “ar Riyadh an Nadhirah fi Manaqib al Ashara”:

Anas bin Malik narrated:

The people suffered drought during Umar’s time, whereupon a man came to teh grave of the Prophet (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your community, for verily they have but perished,”, he said so the Messenger of Allah came to him in a dream and told him “Go to ‘Umar then tell him to do istisqa’ (ask Allah for rain) for the people, and that they will be watered. And tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar, and Umar cried and said “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”. narrated by al Baghawi in al fada’il and Abu Umar.

*Logical Arguments

  1. The ones who use this hadith for this type of tawassul say that Umar radiyallahu anhu did not rebuke the man who did istisqa’ at the grave.
    Reply: There is no clear evidence in the hadith indicating that the man told Umar of him going to the grave, but clearly he did tell him of the dream, telling him the message of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
    so to say that he told him about his istisqa’ at the grave is an assumption, and we can’t use assumptions as evidence.
  2. It didn’t rain until after Umar radiyallahu anhu made istisqa’ by al Abbas radiyallahu anhum.
    If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others, then it would have rained immediately after the man asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam at his grave, but it didn’t until after Umar’s istisqa’ through the duaa of Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
    This shows that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, was guiding the man to ask the Umar to do istisqa’ and not him, hinting to Umar by saying to him “be clever!“, and when Umar did istisqa’ by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma) it immediately rained..
  3. If going to the grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to ask him to make duaa to Allah was permissable, Umar radiyallahu anhu would have done that when wanting to do istisqa’ instead of doing it through the uncle of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, who was alive, and Umar’s (r.a) saying “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa, and now we do tawassul through the uncle of your Prophet…”, indicates that they don’t make tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) duaa after his death, and only when he was alive, or else why would he say “we used to”?
  4. If what the man did (wether it was Bilal ibn al Harith radiyallahu anhu or someone else) was correct\permissable, then:
    • Why didn’t any of the scholars I quoted mention the narration in a chapter titled (tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) or some title indicating that the narration is EVIDENCE for permissibility of that type of tawassul?
      Instead they title the chapter in which the narration is in (salat al istisqa’- the man didn’t do salat al Istisqa’ at the grave, only did duaa, while Umar rA did salat al istisqa) , (The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought), wouldn’t it be more important to point out the permissibility of tawassul through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death, which is stronger than doing tawassul through the righteous and ahl al bayt?
      Instead they ignored that part , showing no importance to it at all.
      So if they believed that the narration indicates the permissibility of such a tawassul, why didn’t they at least hint to it by the chapter title or a comment like they did to show that it meant to do intercession through saliheen and ahl al bayt, and ask the imam to do istisqa?
    • What was the point of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling Umar r.A “be clever“?
    • If the man told Umar that he went to the grave, and then told him about the dream, why would Umar do salat al istisqa’ when the man already asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa’ and he told him that they will be watered?
      Isn’t the istisqa’ of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sufficient?
    • If the action of the man was correct (to ask the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa), and the Prophet S.A.W answered his request, then why didn’t it rain immediately after the dream, and instead came down immediately after al Abbas’s (radiyallahu anhu) duaa?
      Who is higher in status, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam or his uncle?

Reply to “Logical Arguments”

Quote: 

” Logical Arguments
1. The ones who use this hadith for this type of tawassul say that Umar radiyallahu anhu did not rebuke the man who did istisqa’ at the grave.
Reply: There is no clear evidence in the hadith indicating that the man told Umar of him going to the grave, but clearly he did tell him of the dream, telling him the message of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
so to say that he told him about his istisqa’ at the grave is an assumption, and we can’t use assumptions as evidence. ”

REPLY : The man came with a dream to Umar radiallahu anhu and Umar Radiallahu accepted the dream by saying O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”. Which means the man who saw the dream was truthful in the sight of Umar radiallahu anhu otherwise he would have not accepted the dream ! 

Secondly the narration which you have mentioned says “!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar,” which shows the man told everything.

Thirdly: the man who saw the dream and did visited the grave was same and he was truthful according to Umar Radiallahu anhu.So we can accept this has a genuine reason to visit our Prophet’s grave Alhumdollilahe.

Quote:
2. It didn’t rain until after Umar radiyallahu anhu made istisqa’ by al Abbas radiyallahu anhum.
If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others, then it would have rained immediately after the man asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam at his grave, but it didn’t until after Umar’s istisqa’ through the duaa of Al Abbas radiyallahu anhu.
This shows that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, was guiding the man to ask the Umar to do istisqa’ and not him, hinting to Umar by saying to him “be clever!“, and when Umar did istisqa’ by al Abbas (radiyallahu anhuma) it immediately rained..

REPLY: Your statement “This shows that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, was guiding the man to ask the Umar to do istisqa’ and not him” clearly shows that you have accepted that the Prophet salallhualaihewasallam was guiding some one after his death Alhumdolillahe.

Regarding your argument that “If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others, then it would have rained immediately”

Have you not seen this hadees sharif:

Majmua al zuwaid Ibn hajr haytami 9.24
باب ما يحصل لأمته صلى الله عليه وسلم من استغفاره بعد وفاته
عن عبدالله بن مسعود عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال إن لله ملائكة سياحين يبلغون عن أمتي السلامقال وقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حياتي خير لكم تحدثون وتحدث لكم ووفاتي خير لكم تعرضعلي أعمالكم فما رأيت من خير حمدت الله عليه وما رأيت من شر استغفرت الله لكم
رواه البزار ورجاله رجال الصحيح

“My life is better for you, you narrate Ahadith and Ahadith are narrated for you. When I pass away it will continue to benefit you because your actions will be presented before me. If I see a good deed I shall praise Allah Soobha Nahu Wata’ala, If I see a bad deed of yours I shall ask Allah Soobha Nahu Wata’ala to forgive you.

Narated by Bazzar with men who are sahi [Majma-uz-Zwaa’id, vol.9, pg.24]

Hear it clearly shows that our Nabi sualallhualaihewasallamdoes make dua for us after his death. May Allah show us and keep us on right path.

Quote:
3. If going to the grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to ask him to make duaa to Allah was permissable, Umar radiyallahu anhu would have done that when wanting to do istisqa’ instead of doing it through the uncle of the Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, who was alive, and Umar’s (r.a) saying “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa, and now we do tawassul through the uncle of your Prophet…”, indicates that they don’t make tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) duaa after his death, and only when he was alive, or else why would he say “we used to”?

REPLY: As per the proof given by you which is as follows: “The people suffered a drought during the time of ‘Umar (his khilafah)”
This means that it was the time when Umar radiallahu anhu was the Khalifa and when he said this “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa” this period includes the period of both during the life time of Prophet sualallahualaihewasallam and after his death and also when Abu bakr radiallahuanhu was the khalifa.

So your explanation that “indicates that they don’t make tawassul through the Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) duaa after his death” is wrong.

Secondly you have mistranslated the haddeth as “we used to make tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa”

Muslims do see Arabic text of that hadees as follows and nowhere does it says Prophet’s duaa:

Sahi Bukhari 3.1360
باب ذكر العباس بن عبد المطلب رضي الله عنه
3507 حدثنا الحسن بن محمد حدثنا محمد بن عبد الله الأنصاري حدثني أبي عبد الله بن المثنى عنثمامة بن عبد الله بن أنس عن أنس رضي الله عنه ثم أن عمر بن الخطاب كان إذا قحطوا استسقىبالعباس بن عبد المطلب فقال اللهم إنا كنا نتوسل إليك بنبينا صلى الله عليه وسلم فتسقينا وإنا نتوسل إليكبعم رآه فاسقنا قال فيسقون

How can one change the word tawaasul ilaikaa bi nabiyinaato tawassul through your Prophet’s duaa. Whereas the right translation is “we use to take wasila of our Prophet towards you (Allah) and now we take wasila of his uncle”

Quote:
4. If what the man did (wether it was Bilal ibn al Harith radiyallahu anhu or someone else) was correct\permissable, then:

o Why didn’t any of the scholars I quoted mention the narration in a chapter titled (tawassul by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) or some title indicating that the narration is EVIDENCE for permissibility of that type of tawassul?
Instead they title the chapter in which the narration is in (salat al istisqa’- the man didn’t do salat al Istisqa’ at the grave, only did duaa, while Umar rA did salat al istisqa) , (The people asking the Imam to do istisqa’ in times of drought), wouldn’t it be more important to point out the permissibility of tawassul through the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam after his death, which is stronger than doing tawassul through the righteous and ahl al bayt?
Instead they ignored that part , showing no importance to it at all.
So if they believed that the narration indicates the permissibility of such a tawassul, why didn’t they at least hint to it by the chapter title or a comment like they did to show that it meant to do intercession through saliheen and ahl al bayt, and ask the imam to do istisqa?

REPLY: 

If Aqida is based on the titles given by various scholars then we all should be muqalid of the scholars.

For example :

It is recorded in al-Darimi’s Sunan, in the 15th Chapter of the Introduction (1:43) titled:

Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death,” related from Aws ibn `Abd Allah:

“The people of Madina complained to `A’isha of the severe drought that they were suffering. She said: “Go to the Prophet’s grave and open a window towards the sky so that there will be no roof between him and the sky.” They did so, after which they were watered with such rain that vegetation grew and the camels got fat. That year was named the Year of Plenty.”

Now will you say we should belive on the title given by the scholar?

The scholars like Ibn Hajr Asqalani gave the hadees about visiting the grave in Fatahul bari to explain that even that incidence took place and it was Permissible. ALhumdollilahe.

Quote:
o What was the point of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam telling Umar r.A “be clever“?

REPLY: 

This question goes directly to our Prophet Sualallahualahewasallam and it also shows that you have accepted that Prophet Sualallahualahewasallam did said to Umar radiallahu to be clever.

Quote:
o If the man told Umar that he went to the grave, and then told him about the dream, why would Umar do salat al istisqa’ when the man already asked the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa’ and he told him that they will be watered?
Isn’t the istisqa’ of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sufficient?

REPLY: 

Istisqa was taught by our Prophet sualalualaihewasallam when he was alive. DO you mean to say that there was need for salatul istisqa when Prophet sualalualaihewasallam was alive. If not then why did Prophet sualalualaihewasallam taught it? This is shariyat that we follow.

o If the action of the man was correct (to ask the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to do istisqa), and the Prophet S.A.W answered his request, then why didn’t it rain immediately after the dream, and instead came down immediately after al Abbas’s (radiyallahu anhu) duaa?
Who is higher in status, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam or his uncle?

REPLY: If? I say it is indeed. You need to understand what shariyat is. Prophet sualallahualaihewasallam was informed by Allah but still he used to ask others to produce proof in cases of murder or adultery. Did he needed that? Was not wahi enough to accept everything. This is shariyat.
When Prophet sualallahualaihewasallam said it will rain then we muslims must believe it will. How it will, it is the way of shariyat. The main question is that Umar radiallahu anhu accepted the man’s dream as you mentioned before : ““!” So, the man went and told ‘Umar,”

Finally who was superior Umar radiallahu or Al Abbas radiallahu anhu?

Umar radiallahu was the Khalifa and his dua would have been the best in this period but still he asked Abbas radiallahu for tawassul to proove us that it is indeed through the Prophet’s family that tawassul can be made.

And now some hadees sharif:

Ibn Abi Shayba narrates in the chapter entitled: “Touching the grave of the Prophet” with a sahih chain according to Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani and al-Qadi ‘Iyad in al-Shifa‘ (in the chapter entitled: “Concerning the visit to the Prophet’s grave , the excellence of those who visit it and how he should be greeted”):
Yazid ibn ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Qusayt and al-‘Utbi narrated that it was the practice of the Companions in the mosque of the Prophet to place their hands on the pommel of the hand rail (rummana) of the pulpit (minbar) where the Prophet used to place his hand.
There they would face the Qibla and supplicate to Allah Almighty and Exalted hoping He would answer their supplication because they were placing their hands where the Prophet placed his while making their supplication. Abu Mawduda said: “And I saw Yazid ibn ‘Abd al-Malik do the same.”

Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf (4:121).

Now I ask does the title of this chapter affects us or not and does this incidence helps us in some way regarding tawassul or not?

Qays ibn Abi Hazim narrated that one day, `Umar addressed the people from the pulpit in Madina and said in his address:

“Verily there is in the Gardens of `Adn a palace which has five hundred doors, each posted with five thousand of the ladies of Paradise, and none but a Prophet shall enter it.” At this point he turned to the grave of the Messenger of Allah – upon him blessings and peace – and said: “Congratulations to you, O dweller of this grave!” Then he continued: “And none but a Most-Truthful One (siddiq) shall enter it.” At this point he turned towards Abu Bakr’s grave and said: “Congratulations to you, Abu Bakr!”

Then he said: “And none but a Martyr shall enter it,” and he pointed to himself. He continued, speaking to himself out loud: “And when did you inherit martyrdom, `Umar?” Then he said: “Truly, the One who brought me out from Makka unto the migration to Madina is able to bring me martyrdom!”

Al-Tabarani narrated it in al-Awsat through trustworthy narrators cf. al-Haythami, Majma` al-Zawa’id (9:54-55).

 

1) Ibn Hajr Asqalani Rahimullah says in Fathaul Bari 2.495 as follows:

وروى بن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الداري وكان خازن عمر قالأصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا رسول اللهاستسق لامتك فإنهم قد هلكوا فأتى الرجل في المنام فقيله ائت عمر الحديث وقد روى سيف في الفتوح أنالذي رأى المنام المذكور هو بلال بن الحارث المزني أحد الصحابة وظهر بهذا كله مناسبة الترجمةلأصل هذه القصة أيضا والله الموفق

The person who saw the dream was *Bilal Bin HarithRadiallahu.

*Someone has forgotten to put this in the post ! This is how Ibn Hajr Rahimullah has understood the hadees.

Also Ibn Katheer says clearly in Al Bidayah Wal Nihaya 7, 91-92 that the man was *Bilal Bin Harith Radiallahu.

2) Now the amal done by a Sahaba is right and cannot be ignored as you think may be.

3) Regarding your statement “It was guiding him to something that is sunnah, not some new ruling or act of worship. nothing new added to deen.
That is what is not accepted, to say that the PRophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam taught a person some new ibadah or way of ibadah or some new ruling and such.”

Din and Shariyat is by the saying of our Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and we muslims believe that he is indeed ALIVE. AS I mentioned before understand Shariyat first then you will understand everything. What was the need for hazrat Bilal Radiallahu to visit Prophet’s grave? If anyone has an understanding he will see the difference.

4) Your statement “If the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was capable or had permission to do du’aa to Allah after his death, when asked by others, then it would have rained immediately”

you are contradicting your own statement by giving another statement which is “now in the narration you quoted, no one ASKED the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam to make istighfar for them, it is the angels who deliver the information and he asks for istighfar.”

First statement shows Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam cannot make dua when requested but the second statementshows he can.

Now I ask you if the angels are informing the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam about the actions of his Ummah will the action of Hazrat Billal Radiallahu about visiting his grave would have not been presented to the Prophet?

how can a muslim say that Prophet’s dua was not accepted as it did not rained imediately?

In fact
 Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam himeself said thattell Umar radiallahu that it will RAIN.

5) Sunan Al Darimi 1.56: Chapter Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death
باب ما أكرم الله تعالى نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد موته 92 حدثنا أبو النعمان ثنا سعيد بن زيد ثناعمرو بن مالك النكري حدثنا أبو الجوزاء أوس بن عبد الله قال ثم قحط أهل المدينة قحطا شديدا فشكواإلى عائشة فقالت انظروا قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فاجعلوا منه كووا إلى السماء حتى لا يكون بينهوبين السماء سقف قال ففعلوا فمطرنا مطرا حتى نبت العشب وسمنت الإبل حتى تفتقت من الشحم فسميعام الفتق

“The people of Madina complained to `A’isha of the severe drought that they were suffering. She said: “Go to the Prophet’s grave and open a window towards the sky so that there will be no roof between him and the sky.” They did so, after which they were watered with such rain that vegetation grew and the camels got fat. That year was named the Year of Plenty.”

I ask what was the Aqeeda of Imam Darimi when he headed the chapter as Chapter Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death?

6) The Salafi scholar Nasiruddin Albaani says :

Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowed tawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious. However we, as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men.”
[al-Albani, At-Tawassul p. 38]

This is how people reject the scholars whome they themseleves call as RahimullahFor example Imam Darimi, Ibn Hajr Asqalani, Imaam ash-Shawkaanee and Imam Nawawi.

7) What Ibn Hajr Asqalani says about the Aqeeda of visiting the grave of our beloved Nabi sualallahualihewasallam:

Fatahul Bari: 3.66
والحاصل أنهم ألزموا ابن تيمية بتحريم شد الرحل إلى زيارة قبر سيدنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلموأنكرنا صورة ذلك، وفي شرح ذلك من الطرفين طول، وهي من أبشع المسائل المنقولة عن ابن تيمية،ومن جملة ما استدل به على دفع ما ادعاه غيره من الإجماع على مشروعية زيارة قبر النبي صلى اللهعليه وسلم ما نقل عن مالك أنه كره أن يقول زرت قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وقد أجاب عنهالمحققون من أصحابه بأنه كره اللفظ أدبا لا أصل الزيارة فإنها من أفضل الأعمال وأجل القرباتالموصلة إلى ذي الجلال وإن مشروعيتها محل إجماع بلا نزاع والله الهادي إلى الصواب

Hafidhh Asqalani says that:

The Scholars have said, “How can Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyahsay that it is Haraam to visit our Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] grave”. In this instance the Scholars have really rebuked Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah. And on this saying of Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah it created a lot of disagreement between the Ummah. As all the Scholars agree unanimously that it is permitted to travel to visit our Prophet (Sallallhu’ alaihi wa sallams) grave. The evidence Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah gave was of Imam Maliks saying that he did not like people saying that they have visited our Prophet (Sallallhu’ alaihi wa sallams) grave. As the Maliki Scholars have cleared this by saying that Imam Malik did not like the word Visit (Ziyarah) being used, he was not against the actual visiting of the grave. Imam Malik knew about visiting our Prophet (Sallallhu’alaihi wa sallams) grave is the best sort of aamal you can do to become closer to Allah Ta’ala. And he also knew that the whole of the Ummah is together on this issue.

I ask what is the Aqeedah of Ibn Hajr Asqalani and Imam Malik Rahimullah whome all the muslims call as Rahimullah!

8) I ask if a person who is doing a tafsir and is giving only one hadees in explanation of the Ayat then will that be according to his Aqeeda or not?

Answer will be YES it will be.

Tafsir Al Qurtubi 5.265 – 266

الآية: 64 {وما أرسلنا من رسول إلا ليطاع بإذن الله ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاؤوك فاستغفروا اللهواستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما}.

الآية: 64 {وما أرسلنا من رسول إلا ليطاع بإذن الله ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاؤوك فاستغفروا اللهواستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما}
قوله تعالى: “وما أرسلنا من رسول” “من “زائدة للتوكيد. “إلا ليطاع” فيما أمر به ونهى عنه. “بإذن الله”بعلم الله. وقيل: بتوفيق الله. “ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاؤوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول”روى أبو صادق عن علي قال: قدم علينا أعرابي بعد ما دفنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بثلاثة أيام،فرمى بنفسه على قبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وحثا على رأسه من ترابه؛ فقال: قلت يا رسول اللهفسمعنا قولك، ووعيت عن الله فوعينا عنك، وكان فيما أنزل الله عليك “ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم “الآية،وقد ظلمت نفسي وجئتك تستغفر لي. فنودي من القبر أنه قد غفر لك. “لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما” أي قابلالتوبتهم، وهما مفعولان لا غير.‏

“Abū Sādiq has reported it from ‘Alī. A villager came to see us three days after the burial of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليهوآله وسلم). He placed himself near the Prophet’s grave, sprinkled its earth over his body and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, you said and we have heard it from you. You received commands from Allah and we received commands from you, and one of these divine commands is wa law annahum idh zalamū anfusahum. It is true that I have wronged myself, therefore, you should pray for my forgiveness.’ (In response to the villager’s act of imploring) he was called out from the grave: ‘there is no doubt that you have been forgiven.’”

Ibn Katheer also gives the same hadees in his tafsir of the same Ayat Surah Nisa verse 64:

} أي فرضت طاعته على من أرسله إليهم، وقوله: {بإذن اللّه} قال مجاهد: أي لا يطيع أحد إلى بإذني،يعني لا يطيعه إلا من وفقته لذلك، كقوله: {ولقد صدقكم اللّه وعده إذ تحسونه بإذنه} أي عن أمره وقدرهومشيئته وتسليطه إياكم عليهم، وقوله: {ولو أنهم إذا ظلموا أنفسهم} الآية، يرشد تعالى العصاةوالمذنبين إذا وقع منهم الخطأ والعصيان أن يأتوا إلى الرسول صلى اللّه عليه وسلم فيستغفروا اللّه عندهويسألوه أن يستغفر لهم، فإنهم إذا فعلوا ذلك تاب اللّه عليهم ورحمهم وغفر لهم، ولهذا قال: {لوجدوا اللّهتواباً رحيماً} وقد ذكر جماعة منهم الشيخ أبو منصور الصباغ في كتابه “الشامل” الحكاية المشهورة عنالعتبي قال: كنت جالساً عند قبر النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم فجاء أعرابي فقال: السلام عليك يا رسولاللّه، سمعت اللّه يقول: {ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا اللّه واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا اللّهتواباً رحيما} وقد جئتك مستغفراً لذنبي مستشفعاً بك إلى ربي، ثم أنشأ يقول:
يا خير من دفنت بالقاع أعظمه * فطاب من طيبهن القاع والأكم
نفسي الفداء لقبرٍ أنت ساكنه * فيه العفاف وفيه الجود والكرم
ثم انصرف الأعرابي، فغلبنتي عيني فرأيت النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم في النوم فقال: “يا عتبي إلحقالأعرابي فبشره أن اللّه قد غفر له

(In this Qur’anic verse) Allah is exhorting the sinners and evildoers that when they commit sins and errors they should call on the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and ask forgiveness from Allah. They should also request the Messenger of Allah (صلىالله عليه وآله وسلم) to pray for them. When they do so, Allah will turn to them and forgive them and He will show mercy to them. That is why He used the words la-wajadullāha tawwāban-rahīmā (they (on the basis of this means and intercession) would have surely found Allah the Granter of repentance, extremely Merciful). Many have stated this tradition. One of them is Abū Mansūr Sabbāgh who writes in his book al-Hikāyāt-ul-mashhūrah that, according to ‘Utbī, once he was sitting beside the Prophet’s grave when a bedouin came and he said, “Peace be on you, O Allah’s Messenger. I have heard that Allah says: ‘(O beloved!) And if they had come to you, when they had wronged their souls, and asked forgiveness of Allah, and the Messenger also had asked forgiveness for them, they (on the basis of this means and intercession) would have surely found Allah the Granter of repentance, extremely Merciful.’ I have come to you, asking forgiveness for my sins and I make you as my intermediary before my Lord and I have come to you for this purpose.” Then he recited these verses: “O, the most exalted among the buried people who improved the worth of the plains and the hillocks! May I sacrifice my life for this grave which is made radiant by you, (the Prophet,) the one who is (an embodiment) of mercy and forgiveness.” Then the bedouin went away and I fell asleep. In my dream I saw the Holy Prophet (صلى اللهعليه وآله وسلم). He said to me: O ‘Utbī, the bedouin is right, go and give him the good news that Allah has forgiven his sins

1) I’d love to know who said that we cannot accept a week hadees and have to take only Sahi hadees. And who asked to clasify the hadees into Sahi, Daef and Mauwdoo?
2) Ibn Hajr Haytami who is recognised as a scholar by Ahle haddes and as well as the sunnis he says the narration by Bazzar is SAHI and now we can see the new generation people claim it to be week GOOD JOB. Ibn Hajr Haytami named the chapter as باب مايحصل لأمته صلى الله عليه وسلم من استغفاره بعد وفاته
asking istigfaar for the ummah after death

I ask what was the aqeeda of Ibn Hajr Haytami when he headed this title using a week hadees according to salafi?

3) Imam Darimi has given a title before giving the hadees sharif which is “Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death“.

I asked what will be the Aqeeda of Imam Darimi? 

more over he gave a title to a hadees which you people say is week? So this inturn prooves that Imam Darimi accepted week hadees to proove Fadilat of our beloved Nabi sualalahualaihewasallam ! Alhumdolillahe.

4) Who has asked you to trust the narrations? dont accept it its your will. Ibn Hajr Asqalani said the hadees Ibn Abi Shayba, Musannaf (4:121) is Sahi so we follow it. Alhumdolillahe! you don’t because your scholars says so so and even you are muqallid of your scholar.

I give you two choice 

a) Accept what Ibn Hajr says as the hadees is Sahi and

b) accept your scholar who took trouble to proove the hadees as daeef.

Whom will you follow? 

the one who knows in an out of the hadees to whome we say asrahimullah or the one who is considered as a shaikh by the Salafis only?

5) The tafsir I gave you is Tafsir Qurtubi and my question was not concerning the hadees sharif but rather the Aqeda of Imam Qurtubi rahimullah whom you people also call as Rahimullah.

6) Ibn Katheer also gave the same hadees in his tafsir to proove what that he did not believe that such a thing ever happened? or whether his Aqeeda was the same as ours.
7) You do not accept something which is abondened by the scholar like your statement “Imaam Nasaa’ee and other said, Munkar al-hadeeth, abandoned in hadeeth” but when they give a hadees in refference to their tafsir you say we do not accept. Why double standards.
8) My Aqeeda is based on the beliefs of the majority of the scholars and not just a single sect.
9) I think that the Salafis are thinking that they are better than the scholars that were present before and better than such scholars whose books are read by both the salafis and the sunnis till date.
10) I also would like to know that if a person now goes to the grave of our beloved Prophet sualalaahualaihewasallam and says O Prophet make dua to Allah that he forgives us. Is this act Haraam, Mustahab or Jayaz.

11) The quranic verse : Surah Nisa 4.64

We sent not an Apostle but to be obeyed in accordance with the will of Allah. If they had only when they were unjust to themselves come
unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness and the Apostle had asked forgiveness for them they would have found Allah indeed Oft-Returning
most Merciful.

Allah has not limited this ayat just during the lifetime of our Prophet sualallahualaihewasallam and because of this Ayat all the hadees that are recorded in the different tafsirs are termed to be accepted as long as it is in accordance to this ayat.

12) Remember what Salafi scholar Albani says:

Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowed tawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious. However we, as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men.” [al-Albani, At-Tawassul p. 38]

I ask what was the aqeeda of Imaam Ahmed and Imaam ASh-Shawkaanee?

Marij Wasti

You were not able to answer a simple question of mine in my previous post. Rather you said I think I should’nt even reply to your stupidity here. Good job to escape. If asking questions is stupidity then we all are stupid who are asking questions on this forum.

As you said before I would like to ask you two questions before I can reply, inshallah.
Have you studied Hadeeth science or have background about it?
Which Fiqh Madhab are you following, may allah preserve you? i.e. Hanafi, Shafi’e, Maliki or Hanbali

Are these not questions?

Anyways people here knows who is running from the topic.

We all comit mistakes and can you please tell me who has writen the book Majmua AL Zuwaid? Just for my future refference as I am not a scolar.

Regarding your point “That does’nt mean that whatever the scholar includes is sahih” See how you are running away from the question.

I asked if Imam Darimi is heading a chapter as “Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death” what will be his Aqeeda? I am not discussing whether the hadees is Sahi or Not but rather producing a fact that the scholars like Imam Darimi did not think like the todays salafis.

More over Imam Darimi gave a title to a hadees which you people say is week?
 So this inturn prooves that Imam Darimi accepted week hadees to proove Fadilat of our beloved Nabisualalahualaihewasallam ! Alhumdolillahe. 

Who is questioning whether the hadees included by a scholar has to be only SAHI?

Your statement : “Sanad is in deen. Ibn Hajr only said that it is authentic upto Abu Salih as Saman excluding Malik al dar!”

Which book says Sanad is deen? please produce your proof if you are truthfull.
Please also quote the refference for your statement “Ibn Hajr only said that it is authentic upto Abu Salih as Saman excluding Malik al dar!”

I am here not talking about some tafsirs rather those tafsirs which are read by salafis as well as sunnis. Like the example of Imam Qurtubi where he gives only one hadees in explaning the ayat!!!!!

My statment : “You do not accept something which is abondened by the scholar like your statement “Imaam Nasaa’ee and other said, Munkar al-hadeeth, abandoned in hadeeth” but when they give a hadees in refference to their tafsir you say we do not accept. Why double standards. ”

I wanted to ask is if some one says the hadees is week we accept it trusting the scholar which is indeed following the scholars blindly based on their view then why don’t we accept the things that they say as per their belief? cause they have deduced the same beliefs based on their analysis and grading of hadees!!

And our Aqeedah is upon the majority of the salaf. The three blessed generations Alhamdulillah! Does Imam Abu haneefa is also a part of the generations which you have mentioned or not?
“Salafis don’t blindly follow any scholar.” that is the reason none of the scholar is saved from the salafi slander.

I asked a simple question: ” I also would like to know that if a person now goes to the grave of our beloved Prophet sualalaahualaihewasallam and says O Prophet make dua to Allah that he forgives us. Is this act Haraam, Mustahab or Jayaz.” and your reply is like someone who cannot answer anything GOOD JOB!

Quranic verse : 4.64 “We sent not an Apostle but to be obeyed in accordance with the will of Allah. If they had only when they were unjust to themselves come
unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness and the Apostle had asked forgiveness for them they would have found Allah indeed Oft-Returning
most Merciful. ”

You proove it to me that it was limited only for the time when our Prophet suallalahualaihewasallam was alive.

Wow and now the BOMB :

Seriously I have’nt found any sanad all the way back to Imam Ahmad for this statement attributed to him and if you have found any then please enlighten me. And it was not the tawassul which is being promoted by you!

Brother I gave a refference from Albaani’s own book and you are demanding sanad for the same? good job so now even Albaani is doing what the other scholars do. This is truth. Albaani is also not saved from your slander.

Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowed tawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious. However we, as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men.”
[al-Albani, At-Tawassul p. 38]

Who knows the deen well now? the so called Salafis have also left their own scholar?

I know that after this you people will start ignoring my views or My Id will be blocked so readers please be aware that the salafis always feel that they are right and all the scholars are wrong when indeed the scholars themselves gave us the science of hadees and the way of understanding the hadees!!

starting with “

وروى ابن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الداري
(فتح الباري)”

Marij Wasti

Please show me where in this statement it states “Ibn Hajr only said that it is authentic upto Abu Salih as Saman excluding Malik al dar!
More over Ibn Kathīr has confirmed the soundness of its transmission in al-Bidāyah wan-nihāyah (5:167). Ibn Abū Khaythamah narrated it with the same chain of transmission as quoted by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī in al-Isābah fī tamyīz-is-sahābah (3:484), while the latter writes in Fath-ul-bārī (2:495-6): “Ibn Abū Shaybah transmitted it with a sound chain of transmission and Sayf bin ‘Umar Tamīmī has recorded it in al-Futūh-ul-kabīr that the dreamer was a Companion known as Bilāl bin Hārith Muzanī.” Qastallānī has remarked in al-Mawāhib-ul-laduniyyah (4:276) that Ibn Abū Shaybah has narrated it with a sound chain of transmission while Zurqānī has supported Qastallānī in his Commentary (11:150-1).

Now what does Ibn Hajr ASqalani says about Malik Al Dar:

Malik ibn `Iyad: `Umar’s freedman. He is the one named Malik al-Dar. He has seen the Prophet and has heard narrations from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. He has narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, Mu`adh, and Abu `Ubayda. From him narrated Abu Salih al-Saman and his (Malik’s) two sons `Awn and `Abd Allah…Bukhari in his Tarikh narrated through Abu Salih Dhakwan from Malik al-Dar that `Umar said during the period of drought: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!” Ibn Abi Khaythama also narrated it in those words but in a longer hadith:The people suffered a drought during the time of `Umar, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask Allah for rain for your Community.” The Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go, see `Umar and tell him: You will be watered, and: You must put your nose to the grindstone (`alayk al-kaffayn)!” (The man went and told `Umar.) Then `Umar wept and exclaimed: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”We have also narrated in the Fawa’id of Dawud ibn `Amr and al-Dabbi compiled by al-Baghawi in the narration of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa`id ibn Yarbu` al-Makhzumi from Malik al-Dar: he said: “`Umar ibn al-Khattab summoned me one day. He had with him a purse of gold containing four hundred dinars. He said: “Take this to Abu `Ubayda,” and he mentioned the rest of the story.Ibn Sa`d mentioned him (Malik al-Dar) in the first layer of the Successors among the people of Madina and said: “He narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, and he was known.” Abu `Ubayda said of him: “`Umar put him in charge of the dependents in his household. When `Uthman succeeded him, he put him in charge of financial allotments and he was then named Malik of the House.”Isma`il al-Qadi related from `Ali ibn al-Madini: “Malik al-Dar was `Umar’s treasurer.””
Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalānī, al-Isābah fī tamyīz-is-sahābah (3:484-5)

Hope this will clarify some things….

Now back to Abu Najm Muhammed

Thanks for letting me know the following “Nuur ad-Deen al-Haythaamee wrote the book ‘Majmuu’ az-Zawaa’id’

So now my question is “Nuur ad-Deen al-Haythaamee named the chapter as باب ما يحصل لأمته صلى الله عليه وسلم من استغفاره بعد وفاته
asking istigfaar for the ummah after death

What was the aqeeda of Nuur ad-Deen al-Haythaamee when he headed this title using a week hadees according to salafi? 

You said “The sanad or chain of the narration may have weakness in it, but the ‘ittibar or expression it contains is not weak as I mentioned above, the belief indicated by the text of the narration and its chapter title are affirmed by other than it from the authentic narrations.

Brother, everyone accepts weak narrations for indicating the merits and raising the status of the Prophets, Messengers and the Righteous. However we are all agreed upon the necessity of mentioning the weakness and having this accompany the narrations. The scholars of narrations also require that the weak narrations not be used to indicate rulings (‘ahkaam) or beliefs (‘aqaa’id) contrary to what is established by stronger than it.

Thank you very much for clarifying that: “Brother, everyone accepts weak narrations for indicating the merits and raising the status of the Prophets, Messengers and the Righteous.”

So now its crystal clear that we can accept the weakhadees as discussed in this thread as it is raising the merits and status of our beloved Nabi kareemsualalahualaihewasallam Alhumdolillahe.

then why are we still busy posting a reply about the hadees being daeef when it is raising the status of our beloved Nabi sualalahualaihewasallam.

Your statment “The statement ‘sanad is deen’ is from the statements of the ‘Abd Allah bin al-Mubaarak, may Allah have mercy on him, and can be found as among the meanings contained in statements from the Salaf as-Saalih in general.”
Good job i wanted to ask you, is Abd Allah bin al-Mubaarak our Nabi Maz Allah? then how can we follow what he says? is this not innovation in religion. Do i take it that salafis also follow a scholar’s innovation? Think please….

Easy way to run by saying “Can you show me more than one occassion where ‘Imaam al-Qurtubee used only one narration to explain an ‘Ayah of the Qur’aan? Brother this one occasion is produced because it is related to the topic in discussion!!!! and why cant you say a simple thing that indeed a scholar when he writes a tafsir giving only one hadees for the explanation of quranic verse it is his aqeeda if not then he would have given a different one.

You think that discussing such issues in controversial where as the entire thread which you are replying to is controversial?

Is this thread to discuss the weakness of the hadees? 

IF you check from the begening Um Abdullah is using her logical arguments to make us understand the hadees and I have replied logically for which I am waiting for an answer. I can see that she is busy but I shall wait.

( Forum discussion on ahlahdeeth: Here )

al-boriqee-Ahlehadeeth-salafi

^al-boriqee Here

Reply to al-boriqee:

See how you cannot defend your own scholar (al-Albani) who said clearly the Aqeeda of Imam Ahmed. 


Is Albaani weak so therefore you are rejecting his saying?

http://salafiaqeedah.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/narration-of-malik-al-dar-tawassual.htmlcmmon you are not of your own people how can you be of the people of the Prophet sualallahualaihewasallam?

Here


al-Albani, At-Tawassul p. 38
Here
=======================================

al-Albani said:
Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowedtawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious.
However we, as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men.”
[al-Albani, At-Tawassul p. 38] 
=======================================

Narration of Malik al Dar, evidence for Tawassul by the living & not by the Prophet after his death

Also Posted by Saheefah.org on Apr 14, 2008
Compiled by Um Abdullah M.

Quote: “I wrote this couple months ago, and posted it in my blog.
Logical Arguments
Quote: ” (Note: The article has been replaced with the update version)”

1313

She is Still very… very busy:

Um Abdullah M.Saheefah.org -ahlalhdeeth.com

Here

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal & Tawassul –

Yasir Qadhi’s Arrogance!

The following is evidence of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s approval of tawassul through our beloved Prophet (peace & blessings upon him):

“Imam Ahmad made tawassul through the Prophet a part of every du`a according to the following report:

`Ala’ al-Din al-Mardawi said in his book al-Insaf fi ma`rifat al-rajih min al-khilaf `ala madhhab al-Imam al-mubajjal Ahmad ibn Hanbal (3:456):

“The correct position of the [Hanbali] madhhab is that it is permissible in one’s supplication (du`a) to use as one’s means a pious person, and it is said that it is desirable (mustahabb). Imam Ahmad said to Abu Bakr al-Marwazi:

“yatawassalu bi al-nabi fi du`a’ih”

(“Let him use the Prophet as a means in his supplication to Allah.”)

The same report is found in Imam Ahmad’s Manasik as narrated by his student Abu Bakr al-Marwazi.  Similarly the lengthy wording of the tawassul according to the Hanbali madhhab as established by the hafiz Ibn `Aqil in his Tadhkira was cited fully by Imam Kawthari in his appendix to Shaykh al-Islam Taqi al-Din al-Subki’s al-Sayf al-saqil included in Kawthari’s edition of the latter.”

Read more: Here

IMAM MALIK RECOMMENDS TAWASSUL WITH THEINHABITANTS OF JANNATUL BAQI

The Maliki scholar, Ibn Farhun (d. 799) , in his book “Irshad alSalik” (Pg 592) writes:

وذکر عن مالک أن فی البقیع من الصحابة-رضی الله عنهم- عشرة الافصحابی و أما کبار التابعین وتابع تابعین فما یحصیهم الا الله تعالی ، فینبغیالسلام علیهم والدعاء لهم  والتوسل بهم الی الله تعالی

Rough translation: It is narrated from Imam Malik that in Baqi are thousands of Sahabah, Tabi’in and Taba’ at-Tabi’in. One should greet them, pray for them and take them as a recourse/intercessor/means (tawassul) to Allah Ta’ala.

Source


Imam Dhahabi narrates:

Once there was a drought in Samarqand, People tried their best, some said Salat al Istisqa but still it did not rain, A renowned righteous man known as Salih came to the Qadhi and said: In my opinion you along with your public should visit the grave of Imam Bukhari (rah), His grave is located in Khartank, We should (go near the Qabr) and ask for rain, Allah might give us rain then, The Qadhi said Yes to his opinion and then he along with the people went towards (the Qabr) and then He made a dua along with the people and people started to cry near the grave and started to make him a Waseela (i.e. Imam Bukhari). Allah Ta’ala (immediately) sent rain clouds.

[Siyar al A’lam wa al Nubalah, Volume 012, Page No. 469]

 

Imam Bulqini also declares this tradition “sound” in his Fatawa.

Imam Subki confirms Hakim’s authentication in [Shifa-us-siqam fi ziyarat khayr-il-anam Page No. 120-1]

Grave of Imam Bukhari(RA)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grave of Imam Bukhari (rah)

————————-

” YA MUHAMMAD “

DID THE HANBALI IMAMS PROHIBIT TAWASSUL ?

IMAM SHAFI’S TAWASUL THROUGH GRAVE OF

IMAM ABU HANIFAH

WHY DID NOBLE MUHADDITHEEN SEEK HELP FROM THEBLESSED PROPHET(S) ?

IBN KATHIR ON TAWASSUL

Analysis on Visiting the Grave of ProphetHere

Tawassul – Intercession through Prophets and Righteous :Here

original souce: link

 

ADAM [alayhi salaam] SEEKS INTERCESSION WITH THE PROPHET [salallahu alayhi wa sallam]

1)ADAM [alayhisalaam] SEEKS INTERCESSIONWITH THE PROPHET [salallahu alayhi wa sallam]

The Prophet(s) said on the authority of `Umar (RA):

“When Adam committed his mistake he said: O my Lord, I am asking you to forgive me for the sake of Muhammad.Allah said: O Adam, and how do you know about Muhammad whom I have not yet created? Adam replied, O my Lord, after You created me with your hand and breathed into me of Your Spirit, I raised my head and saw written on the heights of the Throne:

LA ILAHA ILLALLAH MUHAMMADUN RASULULLAH

I understood that You would not place next to Your Name but the Most Beloved One of Your creation. Allah said: O Adam, I have forgiven you, and were it not for Muhammad I would not have created you.”

First the above Hadith was declared sound by many of the scholars of Hadith despite their knowledge of the presence of aproblematic narrator in its chain by the name of Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam.

Now, even if we accept the grading given to this Hadith by the”salafis” [something which many of the reliable scholars of the past have disagreed with them upon as demonstrated below] then still, as explained by Sh. GF Haddad the narration through Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd is not actually the most authentic chain for this report!

Rather, the Hadith narrated by Maysarat al-Fajr RA [Hadith below] is the most authentic chain for this report [declared by Sh. Abdullah al-Ghumari as “good and strong“].
A discussion regarding this Hadith was found HERE 

It was transmitted through many chains and was cited byBayhaqi (in Dala’il al-nubuwwa), Abu Nu`aym (in Dala’il al-nubuwwa), al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (2:615), al-Tabarani in his Saghir (2:82, 207) with another chain containing sub-narrators unknown to Haythami as he stated in Majma` al-zawa’id (8:253), and Ibn `Asakir on the authority of `Umar ibn al-Khattab, and most of these narrations were copied inQastallani’s al-Mawahib al-laduniyya (and al-Zarqani’sCommentary 2:62).

1. This hadith is declared sound (sahih) by al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (2:651), although he acknowledges Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam, one of its sub-narrators, as weak. However, when he mentions this hadith he says: “Its chain is sound, and it is the first hadith of Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam which I mention in this book”; al-Hakim also declares sound another version through Ibn `Abbas.

2al-Bulqini declares this hadith sound in his Fatawa.

3. al-Subki confirms al-Hakim’s authentication (in Shifa’ al-siqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam p. 134-135) although Ibn Taymiyya’srejection and criticism of this hadith was known to him and he rejects it, as well as saying that Ibn Taymiyya’s extreme weakening of Ibn Zayd is exaggerated.

4. The hadith is also included by Qadi `Iyad among the “sound and famous narrations” in al-Shifa, and he says that Abu Muhammad al-Makki and Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi mention it; Qadi `Iyad says: “It is said that this hadith explains the verse: ‘And Adam received words from his Lord and He relented towards him‘ (2:37)”; he continues to cite another very similar version through al-Ajurri (d. 360), about whom al-Qari said: “al-Halabi said: This seems to be the imam and guide Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Husayn ibn `Abd Allah al-Baghdadi, the compiler of the books al-Shari`a devoted to the Sunna, al-Arba`un, and others.'” This is confirmed by Ibn Taymiyya in his Qa`ida fi al-tawassul: “It is related by Shaykh Abu Bakr al-Ajurri, in his book al-Shari`a.”

5. Ibn al-Jawzi also considers it sound (sahih) as he cites it in the first chapter of al-Wafa bi ahwal al-mustafa, in the introduction of which he says: “(In this book) I do not mix the sound hadith with the false,” although he knew of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd’sweakness as a narrator; he also mentions the version of Maysarat al-Fajr whereby the Prophet says: “When satan deceived Adam and Eve, they repented and sought intercession to Allah with my name”; Ibn al-Jawzi also says in the chapter concerning the Prophet’s superiority over the other Prophets in the same book: “Part of the exposition of his superiority to other Prophets is the fact that Adam asked his Lord through the sanctity (hurmat) of Muhammad that He relent towards him, as we have already mentioned.”

6.
 Suyuti cites it in his Qur’anic commentary al-Durr al-manthur (2:37) and in al-Khasa’is al-kubra (1:12) and in al-Riyad al-aniqa fi sharh asma’ khayr al-khaliqa (p. 49), where he says that Bayhaqi considers it sound; this is due to the fact that Bayhaqi said in the introduction to the Dala’il that he only included sound narrations in his book, although he also knew and explicitly mentions `Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd’s weakness;

7. Ibn Kathir mentions it after Bayhaqi in al-Bidayat wa al-Nihaya (1:75, 1:180).

8. al-Haythami in Majma` al-zawa’id (8:253 #28870), al-Bayhaqi himself, and al-Qari in Sharh al- shifa’ show that its chains have weakness in them. However, the weakness of Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd was known by Ibn al-Jawzi, Subki, Bayhaqi, Hakim, and Abu Nu`aym, yet all these scholars retained this hadith for consideration in their books.

9. Three scholars reject it, such as Ibn Taymiyya (Qa`ida jalila fi al-tawassul p. 89, 168-170) and his two students Ibn `Abd al-Hadi (al-Sarim al-munki p. 61-63) and al-Dhahabi (Mizan al-i`tidal 2:504 and Talkhis al-mustadrak), while `Asqalani reports Ibn Hibban’s saying that `Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd was a forger (Lisan al-mizan 3:360, 3:442).

10.
 At the same time, Ibn Taymiyya elsewhere quotes it and the version through Maysara [ see below] and says:

“These two are like the elucidation (tafsir) of the authentic ahadith (concerning the same topic)” (Fatawa 2:150). The contemporary Meccan hadith scholar Ibn `Alawi al-Maliki said: “This indicates that Ibn Taymiyya found the hadith sound enough to be considered a witness for other narrations (salih li al-istishhad wa al-i`tibar), because the forged (al-mawdu`) and the false (al-batil) are not taken as witness by the people of hadith”; al-Maliki also quotes (without reference) Dhahabi’s unrestrained endorsement of the ahadith in Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-nubuwwa with his words: “You must take what is in it (the Dala’il), for it consists entirely of guidance and light.” (Mafahim yajib an tusahhah p. 47).

11. It is furthermore evident that Ibn Taymiyya considersthe meaning of the creation of everything for the sake of the Prophet as true and correct, as he declares in his Majmu`at al-fatawa in the volume on tasawwuf (11:95-97):

Muhammad is the Chief of the Children of Adam, the Best of Creation, the noblest of them in the sight of Allah.This is why some have said that “Allah created the Universe due to him,” or that “Were it not for him, He would have neither created a Throne, nor a Footstool, nor a heaven, earth, sun or moon.”

However, this is not a hadith on the authority of the Prophet… but it may be explained from a correct aspect…

Since the best of the righteous of the children of Adam is Muhammad, creating him was a desirable end of deep-seated purposeful wisdom, more than for anyone else, and hence the completion of creation and the fulfilment of perfection was attained with Muhammad, may Allah Exalted bless him and grant him peace… The Chief of the Children of Adam is Muhammad, may Allah Exalted bless him and grant him peace, Adam and his children being under his banner. He, may Allah Exalted bless him and grant him peace, said: “Truly, I was written as the Seal of the Prophets with Allah, when Adam was going to-and-fro in his clay,” i.e. that my prophethood was decreed and manifested when Adam was created but before the breathing of the Spirit into him, just as Allah decrees the livelihood, lifespan, deeds and misery or happiness of the slave when He creates the embryo but before the breathing of the Spirit into it.

Since man is the seal and last of all creation, and its microcosm, and since the best of man is thus the best of all creation absolutely, then Muhammad, being the Pupil of the Eye, the Axis of the Mill, and the Distributor to the Collective, is as it were the Ultimate Purpose from amongst all the purposes of creation. Thus it cannot be denied to say that “Due to him all of this was created“, or that “Were it not for him, all this would not have been created,” so if statements like this are thus explained according to what the Book and the Sunna indicate, it is acceptable.
12. Its latter part is mentioned as a separate hadith in the wording: “Were it not for Muhammad, I would not have created the spheres (al-aflak).” al-`Ajluni said in Kashf al-khafa’ (#2123): “al-Saghani (d.650) said it is forged. I say: but its meaning is correct.”

Similarly `Ali al-Qari said in al-Asrar al-marfu`a (#754-755): “al-Saghani (in al-Ahadith al-mawdu`a p. 7) said: “It is forged,”however, its meaning is sound (mi`nahu sahih), as Daylami has narrated on the authority of Ibn `Abbas that the Prophetsaid: “Gabriel came to me and said: O Muhammad! Were it not for you, Paradise would not have been created, and were it not for you, the Fire would not have been created.” And Ibn `Asakir’s narration has: And were it not for you, the world would not have been created.”



As for Albani’s rejection of Qari’s use of Daylami in support of the hadith with the words: “I do not hesitate to declare it weak on the basis that Daylami is alone in citing it” (Silsila da`ifa #282), it shows exaggeration and deviation from the practice of the scholars concerning Daylami and his book. Ibn Taymiyya said in Minhaj al-sunna (4:38): “The fact that Daylami alone narrates a hadith does not indicate that the hadith is sound.”

Note that he never said: “The fact that Daylami alone narrates a hadith indicates that it is forged,” yet this is what Albaniconcludes! The reader may compare Albani’s method of apriori rejection in lieu of a discussion of the hadith itself, to Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani’s reliance on a hadith narrated by Daylami, as is shown by hadith #33 of his Arba`un fi rad` al-mujrim `an sabb al-muslim, although Daylami is alone in citing it. Further in Minhaj al-sunna (4:78) Ibn Taymiyya declared of him and his book: “al-Daylami in his book al-Firdaws mentioned many sound (sahih) hadiths, and also fair (hasan) narrations and forged ones…. He was one of the people of knowledge and religion and he was not a liar.”
13. Ibn al-Qayyim in his Bada’i` al-fawa’id went so far as to represent Allah saying to humankind that everything was created for the sake of human beings:

hal `arifat qimata nafsik? innama khalaqtu al-akwana kullaha laka… kullu al-ashiya’i shajaratun wa anta al-thamara

Have you realized your value? I only created all the universes for your sake… All things are trees whose fruit you are. [18]

If Allah created all the universes for the sake of human beings, then how could all humanity be given what the Prophet is grudged, who is better than mankind and jinn put together?

What follows now is the discussion of another related Hadith narrated through Maysarat al-Fajr [RA] cited below in Arabic with its chain of narrators.

2) ADAM [alayhi salaam] SEEKS INTERCESSION WITH THE PROPHET’S [salallahu alayhi wa sallam] NAME
I asked: “O Messenger of Allah, when were you [first] a Prophet?”He replied: “When Allah created the earth ‘Then turned He to the heaven, and fashioned it as seven heavens’(2:29), and created the Throne, He wrote on the leg of the Throne: “Muhammad theMessenger of Allah is the Seal of Prophets” (Muhammadun Rasûlullâhi Khâtamu al-Anbiyâ’). Then Allah created the Garden in which He made Adam and Hawwa’ dwell, and He wrote my name on the gates, its tree-leaves, its domes and tents, at a time when Adam was still between the spirit and the body. When Allah Most High instilled life into him he looked at the Throne and saw my name, whereupon Allah informed him that ‘He [Muhammad SAWS] is the liege-lord of all your descendants.’ When Satandeceived them both, they repented and soughtintercession to Allah with my name.”

قد أخرج الحافظ أبو الحسن بن بشران قال : حدثنا أو جعفر محمد ابن عمرو، حدثنا أحمد بن سحاق بنصالح، ثنا محمد بن صالح، ثنا محمد ابن سنان العوقي، ثنا إبراهيم بن طهمان، عن بديل بن ميسرة، عنعبد الله بن شقيق، عن ميسرة قال: قلت: يا رسول الله، متى كنت نبياً ؟ قال: (( لما خلق الله الأرضواستوى إلى السماء فسواهن سبع سماوات ، وخلق العرش،كتب على ساق العرش: محمد رسول اللهخاتم الأنبياء، وخلق الله الجنة التي أسكنها آدم وحواء، فكتب اسمي على الأبواب، والأوراق والقباب،والخيام،وآدم بين الروح والجسد،فلما أحياه الله تعالى: نظر إلى العرش فرأى اسمي فأخبره الله أنه سيدولدك، فلما غرهما الشيطان ، تابا واستشفعا باسمي إليه ) .
وأخرجه ابن الجوزي في الوفا بفضائل المصطفى من طريق ابن بشران

In the chapter concerning the Prophet’s superiority over all other Prophets in his great book titled al-Wafa bi Ahwal al-Mustafa’,Ibn al-Jawzi states: “Part of the demonstration of his superiority to other Prophets is the fact that Adam (AS) asked his Lord through the sanctity (hurma) of Muhammad (S) that He relent towards him.”

The most authentic chain for this report is not that of al-Hakim’s narration from `Umar through `Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam who is weak (da`îf), but that of the CompanionMaysarat al-Fajr who narrates it as [above]

Shaykh `Abd Allah al-Ghumari cited it in Murshid al-Ha’ir li Bayan Wad` Hadith Jabir and said, “its chain is good and strong” while in al-Radd al-Muhkam al-Matin (p. 138-139) he adds: “It is the strongest Companion-corroboration (shâhid) I saw for the hadith of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd” as quoted also by Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf` al-Minara (p. 248).

Elsewhere Maulana Muhammad ibn Moulana Haroon Abasoomar states:

The chain of narrators for this Hadith is totally different from the previous one. And in fact, Hafiz ibn Hajar [ra] has stated concerning a completely different narration which has the very same chain of narrators, that this chain of narrators is strong. (al-Raddul Muhkamul Mateen pgs.138-139; al-Ahaadeethul Muntaqaa pg.14, both of Shaykh Abdullah Siddique al-Ghumarie)” 

Sidi Abul Hasan mentioned:

The student of Imam al-Suyuti: Imam Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Salihi of Damascus, who died in the year 942 AH, has mentioned in his multi-volume Sira work known as: Subul al-Hadi wal Rashhad, this very narration from Maysara (ra) as follows (vol. 1/p. 86, Darul Kutub Ilmiyya edn, Beirut) fromImam ibn al Jawzi:

وروى ابن الجوزي بسند جيد لا بأس به ، عن ميسرة رضي الله تعالى عنه قال : قلت يا رسول الله ،متى كنت نبيا ؟ قال : لما خلق الله الأرض واستوى إلى السماء فسواهن سبع سماوات وخلق العرشكتب على ساق العرش : محمد رسول الله خاتم الأنبياء . وخلق الله تعالى الجنة التي أسكنها آدم وحواء ،فكتب اسمي على الأوراق والأبواب والقباب والخيام ، وآدم بين الروح والجسد ، فلما أحياه الله تعالىنظر إلى العرش فرأى اسمي ، فأخبره الله تعالى أنه سيد ولدك . فلما غرهما الشيطان تابا واستشفعاباسمي إليه

The crucial point is highlighted in blue above, where Imam al-Salihi declared the chain of transmission to be: “Jayyid La Ba’sa bihi”,

Meaning: “Good and there is no harm in it.”

This earlier ruling gives credibility to Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghumari and his student: Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh’s declarations on its authenticity. Note also, that Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghumari has also declared in his Al-Ahadith al-Muntaqa fi-Fada’il Rasul Allah (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) that the narration from Maysara (ra) is “Qawi” – “Strong”

Sidi Abul Hasan regard to the narration from Maysara al-Fajr (ra):

فقد أخرج الحافظ أبو الحسن بن بشران قال : حدثنا أو جعفر محمد ابن عمرو، حدثنا أحمد بن سحاق بنصالح، ثنا محمد بن صالح، ثنا محمد ابن سنان العوقي، ثنا إبراهيم بن طهمان، عن بديل بن ميسرة، عنعبد الله بن شقيق(1)، عن ميسرة قال: قلت: يا رسول الله، متى كنت نبياً ؟ قال: (( لما خلق الله الأرضواستوى إلى السماء فسواهن سبع سماوات ، وخلق العرش،كتب على ساق العرش: محمد رسول اللهخاتم الأنبياء، وخلق الله الجنة التي أسكنها آدم وحواء، فكتب اسمي على الأبواب، والأوراق والقباب،والخيام،وآدم بين الروح والجسد،فلما أحياه الله تعالى: نظر إلى العرش فرأى اسمي فأخبره الله أنه سيدولدك، فلما غرهما الشيطان ، تابا واستشفعا باسمي إليه ) .وأخرجه ابن الجوزي في الوفا بفضائلالمصطفى من طريق ابن بشران، نقله عن ابن تيمية في الفتاوي (2/159) مستشهداً به

Some contemporaries have objected of late that in the sanad to the narration from Ibn Bushran there is a narrator by the name of Muhammad ibn Salih – and it is not precisely knownwhich of the numerous Muhammad ibn Salih’s is this exact one in the Isnad given above.

Shaykh Mamduh
 has named two that could possibly be the exact narrator in the above sanad.

He said:
ومحمد بن صالح هو أبو بكر الأنماطي المعروف بكيلجة ، ثقة حافظ من رجال التهذيب ، ويمكن أنيكون هو محمد بن صالح الواسطي كعب الذراع، ثقة أيضاً، ومترجم في تاريخ الخطيب (5/360)،والاختلاف في تعيين الثقة لا يضر .

Basically it may be the Muhammad ibn Salih known as Abu Bakr al-Anmati who he said was a trustworthy Hafiz (Thiqa Hafiz, as In Taqreeb al-Tahdhib of Ibn Hajar, no. 5962) or it may be Muhammad ibn Salih al-Wasiti Ka’b al-Zaari who was declared Thiqa by Khatib al-Baghdadi in his Ta’rikh (5/360).

The objection stems from not having direct evidence if any of these narrators commonly known as Muhammad ibn Salih didactually meet and narrate from the next narrator in the Isnad known as: Muhammad ibn Sinan.

The answer Insha’allah: Most of our contemporaries, like the late Shaykh Abdullah al-Ghumari and his students like Shaykh Mamduh seem to have missed or not known of anotheralternative route which was also related by Imam Ibn Bushran, with the crucial point of Muhammad ibn Salih not being in an alternative route containing the same text!

The Imam: Shamsud-Din Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Nu’man al-Marakashi, who
 died in the year 683 AH, hence before Ibn Taymiyya has related in his book known as:

مصباح الظلام في المستغيثين بخير الأنام

The following Isnad on p. 23, without the narrator Muhammad ibn Salih in the sanad:

أخبرنا أبو الحسين محمد بن عبد الله السلامي قال أخبرنا محمد بن ناصر السلامي عن أبيطاهر محمد بنأحمد بن قيداس عن أبي الحسين بن بشران قال حدثنا أبو جعفر محمد بن عمرو قال ثنا أحمد بن إسحاقبن صالح قال حدثنا محمد بن سنان العوقي إلإلى آخر السند والمتن

The chain from Ibn Bushran is thus from his Shaykh Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Amr from

Ahmad ibn Ishaq ibn Salih from

Muhammad ibn Sinan al-Awqi from

Ibrahim ibn Tahman from

Budayl ibn Maysara from

Abdullah ibn Shaqiq from

Maysara al-Fajr with the same text as Ibn Taymiyyamentioned from Hafiz ibn al-Jawzi.

A similar chain to this was recorded by Imam al-Bayhaqi in his Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (no. 18) as follows with a different text:
وأخبرنا أبو الحسين بن بشران ببغداد قال : حدثنا أبو جعفر محمد بن عمرو الرزاز قال : حدثنا أحمد بنإسحاق بن صالح قال : حدثنا محمد بن سنان العوقي قال : حدثنا إبراهيم بن طهمان عن بديل بن ميسرةعن عبد الله بن شقيق عن ميسرة الفجر قال : قلت : يا رسول الله متى كتبت نبيا ؟ قال : ” وآدم بين الروحوالجسد ”

Insha’allah, this should give strength to the route containingMuhammad ibn Salih in the initial part of the discussion above. If anyone has an objection to the sanad given by Imam al-Marakashi then they need to show why using Ilm al-Jarh wa Ta’dil of the narrators.

THE PROPHETIC TITLE

BEST OF CREATION

(KHAYRU-L-KHALQ)

THE WHOLE UNIVERSE WAS CREATED FOR ?

THE MOST BLESSED PLACE IN CREATION

ADHM

original source: link

The Hadith of The Blind Man & The Man in Need – “Confused” ?

“Confused” ?

Part 2

Quote:

Whilst I was reading Saheeh al-Jaami‘ as-Sagheer, I came across a hadeeth (1279) that says:

“O Allah, I ask You and I turn to You by virtue of Your Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy; O Muhammad, I turn by virtue of you to my Lord concerning this need of mine, that it might be met for me. O Allah, or accept his intercession for me.”

I was confused about this hadeeth.

* Is there any evidence in it for those who seek to draw close to Allah (tawassul) by virtue of the dead, as is done by worshippers of graves and their ilk?

* How can we interpret this hadeeth?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Imam Ahmad and others narrated with a saheeh isnaad from ‘Uthmaan ibn Haneef that a blind man came to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said:

 Pray to Allah to heal me. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If you wish, I shall pray for you; and if you wish, I shall delay that for you and that will be better for you.” [According to another report, he said: “… Or if you wish, you can be patient and that will be better for you.”] He said: Pray for me (now).

So he instructed him to do wudoo’ and do it well, then to pray two rak‘ahs and say this du‘aa’ (supplication):

*  “O Allah, I ask You and I turn to You by virtue of Your Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I turn by virtue of you to my Lord concerning this need of mine, that it might be met for me. O Allah, accept his intercession concerning me and accept my intercession concerning him.”

* So the man did that and he was healed.

Some people are confused by this hadeeth and think that it constitutes evidence for some innovated types of tawassul (seeking to draw close to Allah), but that is not the case. 

This misinterpretation of this hadeeth has been answered bymany of the scholars, who explained that it does not constitute evidence for any of those who believe in innovated kinds of tawassul, whether that is by virtue of the Prophet’s person or by virtue of his status, let alone tawassul by virtue of the dead and calling upon them instead of Allah.

One of the best precise and academic responses concerning this issue is that which was written by the great scholar Shaykh Muhammad Naasir ad-Deen al-Albaani in his book at-Tawassul Anwaa‘uhu wa Ahkaamuhu (available in English under the titleTawassul: Its Types and Its Rulings).

Among the comments that he made on this hadeeth is the following: 

As for uswe believe that this hadeeth does not constitute evidence for them to support seeking to draw closer to Allah (tawassul) by virtue of the Prophet’s person; rather it constitutes further evidence for the third type of lawful tawassul – which is tawassul through the du‘aa’ (supplication) of a righteous man – because the tawassul of the blind man was only by means of the du‘aa’ of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) (and not by virtue of his person). The evidence for what we say is to be found in the hadeeth itself, in abundance. The most important points are as follows: 

The blind man only came to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to ask him to pray for him; that was when he said: Pray to Allah to heal me. This is seeking to draw closer to Allah (tawassul) by virtue of his du‘aa’, because he knew that the du‘aa’ of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was more likely to be accepted by Allah, unlike the du‘aa’ of anyone else. If the blind man’s intention was to draw close to Allah by virtue of the Prophet’s person or his status, there would have been no need for him to come to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and ask him to offer du‘aa’ for him; rather he could have stayed at home and called upon his Lord by saying, for example: O Allah, I ask You by virtue of Your Prophet and His status before You to heal me and give me my sight. But he did not do that. 

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) promised to offer supplication (du‘aa’) for him whilst advising him of that which would be better for him, which is when he said: “If you wish, I shall pray for you; and if you wish, you can be patient and that will be better for you.”

The blind man insisted that he offer supplication for him, as he said: Pray for me (now). This implies that the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did offer supplication for him, because he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was the best one in fulfilling promises, and he had promised him that he would offer supplication for him if he wanted, as stated above. So there is no doubt that he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) offered supplication for him. Thus what the blind man wanted was done. After that, the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) turned towards the blind man out of compassion towards him and out of keenness that Allah answer his supplications for this man. So he turned to him and advised him of the second type of lawful tawassul, which is tawassul by virtue of righteous deeds, so as to combine all kinds of good and righteous deeds (to ensure that his need would be met). So he instructed him to do wudoo’ and to pray two rak‘ahs, then to offer supplication for himself. These are all acts of obedience towards Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, that came before the supplication of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) for him, and these are included in the words of the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Seek the means of approach to Him” [al-Maa’idah 5:35], as stated above.

Based on this, the entire incident revolves around the supplication (du‘aa’) – as is clear – and there is no mention at all of what they claim.

In the supplication that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) taught him it says: “O Allah, accept his intercession concerning me.” It is impossible to interpret this as referring to tawassul by virtue of the person or status of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), because what is meant is: O Allah, accept his (the Prophet’s) intercession for me; in other words, Accept his supplication for my vision to be restored to me. The Arabic word shafaa‘ah (translated here as intercession) means supplication. It says in Lisaan al-‘Arab (8/184): Shafaa‘ah (intercession) is the words of the shafee‘ (intercessor) to the king asking him to meet the need of someone else, or the one who asks for something for someone else and intercedes for him to get what he is seeking… End quote.

Thus it is proven that the tawassul of the blind man was only by virtue of the du‘aa’ of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), not by virtue of his person.

Among the things that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) taught the blind man to say was: “and accept my intercession concerning him”. What is meant is: accept my intercession, that is my supplication, that his intercession, that is his supplication that my sight be restored, be accepted. This is the only way in which this sentence can be interpreted; there is no other way of interpreting it.

Hence you see those among later generations who hold different views ignoring this last phrase and not referring to it at all, because it utterly demolishes their interpretation of the hadeeth.

This hadeeth is cited by the scholars as being one of the miracles of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and one of his supplications that were answered, and an example of what Allah manifested through the blessing of his supplication of extraordinary events and healing from sickness. By virtue of the Prophet’s supplication for this blind man, Allah restored his sight. Hence the scholars of hadeeth, such as al-Bayhaqi and others, narrated it among the signs of Prophethood (dalaa’il an-nubuwwah). This indicates that the reason for the healing of the blind man was the supplication of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).

If the reason for the healing of the blind man was that he sought tawassul by virtue of the Prophet’s status, as it was understood by many later scholars, that would imply that this healing should also have happened for other blind people who sought tawassul by virtue of his status and sometimes added to it the status of all the Prophets and Messengers, and all the close friends of Allah, the martyrs and the righteous, and the status of anyone who has status with Allah among the angels, mankind and the jinn! But we do not know, and we do not think that anyone knows, of any such incident that was fulfilled throughout the many centuries from the death of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) until the present day.

From this explanation it becomes clear that what is meant by the words of the blind man in his du‘aa’, “O Allah, I ask You and I seek to draw close to You by virtue of Your Prophet Muhammad”, is: I seek to draw close to You by virtue of the supplication of Your Prophet. The text of the hadeeth does not mention the supplication, but it is implied. This is something that occurs commonly in Arabic, as in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And ask (the people of) the town where we have been, and the caravan in which we returned, and indeed we are telling the truth” [Yoosuf 12:82]; in the original text the word “people” is not mentioned but it is implied.

However, I would say: Even if we assume that the blind man did seek to draw close to Allah by virtue of the Prophet’s person, that would be a ruling that applied only to him (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and not to any other Prophet or righteous person, and applying it to them too is something that would not be acceptable to sound reasoning, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is their leader and the best of them all.

It is possible that this is something that Allah bestowed exclusively upon him and not them, like many other qualities that were given only to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), according to saheeh reports. When it comes to that which was given exclusively to him, there is no room for applying it to others by analogy. If anyone thinks that the tawassul of the blind man was by virtue of the Prophet’s person, then he has to apply it to him only and not to anyone else. 
This view was narrated from Imam Ahmad and Shaykh al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd as-Salaam (may Allah have mercy on them) and it is the only conclusion that can be reached by fair-minded academic research. 

And Allah is the One Who guides to what is correct.

End quote from at-Tawassul, p. 75ff 

http://islamqa.info/en/97600

—-

ALBANI’S REWORDING OF THE PROPHET’S

DU`A OF TAWASSUL

Here

Following is a concise refutation of a recent dissertation by the “Salafi” shaykh Albani entitled Tawassul: Its Types and Its Rulings currently distributed in translation among English-speaking Muslims by his supporters in order to replace with “Salafi” ideology the understanding of Ahl al-Sunna regarding tawassul.[1][64] 
M. Nasir al-Din al-Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Its Rulings, trans. Dawud Burbank (Birmingham: al-Hidaayah, 1995).

It will be seen with Allah’s permission that the commentary ofAlbani is a proof against “Salafis” and all those who follow new teachings instead of clinging to the sawad al-a`zam or massive majority of scholars. Their pretext that “there is disagreement about tawassul” and that “we follow proof not scholars” is a sham. There is no disagreement about tawassul among Ahl al-Sunna except the dissent of some lone voices in the matter, such as Ibn Taymiyya who declared travel undertaken to visit the Prophet an act of disobedience: this is not disagreement but shudhudh or dissent, as classified by Imam Ahmad in speaking of the disagreement of the lone scholar with the consensus.

There seems to be little doubt that Albani has achieved the same dubious distinction of dissenting with one and all, as heproudly admits in the following lines of his book, especially the second sentence which we have emphasized:

Imaam Ahmad allowed tawassul by means of the Messenger alone, and others such as Imaam ash-Shawkaanee allowed tawassul by means of him and other Prophets and the Pious. 
[Note that he omits to mention Imam Malik and Imam Shafi`i as permitting tawassul also.]

However we [i.e. Albani and his party], as is the case in all matters where there is disagreement, follow whatever is supported by the proof whatever that is, without blindly sticking to the opinions of men.[2][65] [Albani, Tawassul p. 38.]

The proofs that Albani alone purports to see — against what the majority understand — are characteristic of the “Salafi” method. As the scholars who debate them well know, the “Salafi” method consists in a lack of method in and a non-recognition of any of the established principles of the derivation of rulings from the primary sources other than what fits the purpose of their position at the time. Scholars of Ahl al-Sunna may traditionally familiarize themselves with the fiqh and the usul of other than their own school, but this is impossible to do with the “Salafis,” because they completely lack any type of method and shift constantly from one position to another depending on the purpose at hand. Albani has achieved particular notoriety for his contamination of the field of hadith scholarship with this systematic unaccountability and free-lance style.

As we will see in the section on salat in the present work,Albani had previously suggested altering the prayer bychanging the words as-salamu `alayka ayyuha al-nabi to as-salamu `ala al-nabi in the tashahhud whereas the Prophet explicitly said, as related in Bukhari and Muslim: “Pray as you see me pray,” and: “Who innovates something in this matter of ours (meaning religion), it is radd (rejected).” And here is Albani now trying to alter the tawassul through the Prophet which is valid for all and for all times, and reduce it to a one-time du`a of the Prophet valid only for a single man in the Prophet’s time. But, as the Prophet said: “There is no preventing what Allah has given, and there is no avoidance of what He has decreed.”[3][66]

1. ALBANI’S TAMPERING WITH THE HADITH ITSELF

It is reported by Ahmad and others with an authentic chain of narration from Uthmaan bin Haneef [sic] “that a blind man came to the Prophet (SAW) and said, ‘supplicate to Allaah that He should cure me.’ So he (SAW) said, ‘if you wish I will supplicate for you and if you wish I will delay that for that is better (and in a narration: and if you wish have patience and that is better for you).’ So he said, ‘supplicate to Him.’ So he (SAW) ordered him to make wudoo, and to make wudoo well, and to pray two rak’ahs and to supplicate with this du’aa, ‘O Allaah I ask you and turn to you by means of your Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of mercy, O Muhammad I have turned by means of you (i.e. your du`aa) [sic] to my Lord in this need of mine, so that it may be fulfilled for me, O Allaah accept him as supplicant on my behalf, and accept my supplication for him (to be accepted for me) [sic].’ He said, ‘So the man did it and he was cured.'”

[Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 68]

1. Albani or his translator err on the narrator’s name. This is the Companion `Uthman ibn Hunayf, not Haneef, and his full name isAbu `Amr `Uthman ibn Hunayf ibn Wahb of Aws, may Allah be well pleased with him.[4][67]

2. The wording of the hadith is: “O Muhammad I have turned with you (bika) to my Lord.” It is not “O Muhammad I have turned by means of your du`a (bi du`a’ika) to my Lord.” We shall see that this blatant interpolation of another term in lieu of the explicit wording of the hadith is central to Albani’s attempt to reword this hadith of the Prophet (we have already transcribed the complete and correct translation of this hadith above, in the section entitled SEEKING MEANS THROUGH THE PROPHET). 

3. The blind man’s final words are not “and accept my supplication for him” nor could they be, since he is not praying for the Prophet but for himself. He is imploring Allah to help him by means of the Prophet’s intercession, not by means of his own, and he is practicing Islam, not egalitarianism!

The original Arabic is (in one of two versions in Ahmad):wa tashaffa`ni fihi which must be translated: “and join me to him in supplicating You (i.e. join my supplication to his),” as he is well aware that the likelihood of his being heard increases exponentially if it is linked to the Prophet’s audience.

One may excuse the false suggestion that the man not only prays for the Prophet’s intercession for him but also for his own interceding for the Prophet as stemming from a bad translation. However, the poor translation is just as deliberate as the misrendering of “O Muhammad I have turned by means of your du`a to my Lord,” since Albani, as we shall see, tries to adduce the supposed du`a of the blind man on behalf of the Prophet as additional evidence to support his idea that the tawassul in the hadith is by means of du`a and not by means of the person of the Prophet.

Furthermore the words of the blind man’s final request”and join me to him in supplicating You” are not in all versions. They are not found in Ahmad’s first version out of two, nor inTirmidhi’s version, nor in Ibn Majah’s version, nor in Nasa’i’sversion, nor in the version retained by Imam Nawawi in his Adhkar![5][68] Why then does Albani cite it as the primary text instead of assigning it parenthetical mention, as he does with the phrase: “(and in a narration: and if you wish have patience and that is better for you)”? Because, as we have said, he wants to make the entire hadith revolve around tawassul through the du`a of the Prophet as opposed to his person, and he wants to adduce the blind man’s own supposed tawassul through his own du`a as additional evidence of his claim, as we see below.

2. ALBANI’S DISSENT AND CONTEMPT FOR THE SCHOLARS

The opponents hold that this hadeeth shows that it is permissible to make tawassul in du’aa by the status of the Prophet (SAW) or other pious people, since the Prophet (SAW) taught the blind man to use him as a means of nearness in his du’aa, and the blind man did that and his sight was restored.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 69

Observe how he says “the opponents,” although it is he who has brought opposition to something established in Islam, and he invented that it is not through the Prophet’s sacred status (hurmat) or person (dhaat) but through his du`a that tawassul is permissible, in open contradiction to the understanding of the Salaf such as Mujahid, Imam Malik,[6][69] Imam al-Shafi`i,[7][70] Imam Ahmad,[8][71] Ibrahim al-Harbi, and al-Shawkani as we have already seen, and that of Ibn al-Jawzi, Nawawi, Ibn al-Humam, and Ibn al-Qayyim as we see below.

As for us, than [sic] we hold that the hadeeth has no proof for them concerning this form of tawassul about which there is disagreement,  which is seeking nearness by means of his person. Rather it is a further proof for the third type of lawful and prescribed tawassul which we have spoken of previously [i.e. through the du’aa of another person], since the tawassul of the blind man was through means of his (SAW) du’aa, and the proofs for what we say are many being contained in the hadeeth itself, most importantly:

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 69

Rather, Muslims believe as Ibn al-Jawzi said that it is through the Prophet’s person and status and not only through his du`a that one makes tawassul, as is clear from this excerpt from his chapter concerning the Prophet’s superiority over the other Prophets in his book al-Wafa:

Part of the exposition of his superiority to other Prophets is the fact that Adam asked his Lord through the sacred status (hurma) of Muhammad that He relent towards him, as we have already mentioned.[9][72]

The importance of this remark does not lie in the veracity of the hadith, which is a separate discussion — and Ibn al-Jawzi clearly considers it authentic — but in the wording of Ibn al-Jawzi whereby tawassul is correct as made through the status of the Prophet. This is enough of an indication that Ibn al-Jawzi’s `aqida or doctrine concerning tawassul fully contradicts that of Albani and his followers. It comes down to deciding who is closer to following the Sunna: the Imams, huffaz and historians on the one hand — or the polemicist and scholar of books? al-hamdu lillah, this is no dilemma at all.

Indeed the position of Albani is not founded upon the explicit words of the hadith, but upon their figurative interpretation.  The hadith clearly says: bi nabiyyika i.e. with/by means of/through Your Prophet. Even a child of seven years old can see that this does not mean “through the du`a of your Prophet.” Nor does he provide any justification for his recourse to figurative interpretation in a matter where the literal meaning is clear and true.

1)      The reason the blind man came to the Prophet (SAW) was for him to make supplication (du’aa) for him, as he said, ‘Supplicate Allaah that He should  cure me.’ So he sought to use his (SAW) du’aa as a means of nearness to Allaah, the Most High, since he knew that his (SAW) supplication was more likely to be accepted by Allaah than the du’aa of others, and if the intention of the blind man was to seek nearness to Allaah by means of the Prophet’s (SAW) person or status or his right, then he would have had no need to go to the Prophet (SAW), or to ask him to make du’aa for him, rather he would have sat in his house, and supplicated to his Lord saying, for example, ‘O Allaah I ask You by the status of your Prophet and his station with You, that You cure me and enable me to see.’

But that is not what he did. Why? because he was an Arab and knew very well the meaning of ‘tawassul’ in the Arabic Language, and knew that it was not a word said by a person with a need, mentioning the name of a person as an intermediary, rather it had to include coming to one whom he believed to be pious and have knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah and ask him to make du’aa for him.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 69

This argument is entirely speculative and theShari`a is not derived from speculation. The facts are clear. The ruling is not derived only from the fact that the blind man came to the Prophet but from the entirety of the hadith. The blind man came asking for the Prophet’s du`a, and the Prophet subsequently taught him a form of du`a that he should make after performing wudu’ and praying two rak`at. In the latter du`a the Prophet further taught him to make tawassul with certain clear and explicit words. These same words were used by the man in need in the time of sayyidina `Uthman ibn `Affan, after the time of the Prophet. Was the man in need not also an Arab who knew very well the meaning of ‘tawassul’ in the Arabic Language?

About the hadith of the man in need which we have already cited in full earlier, Shaykh Yusuf al-Rifa`i wrote in his rebuttal to a “Salafi” critic entitled “The Evidence of the Sunni Community” (Adilla Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a): “This is an explicit, unequivocal text from a prophetic Companion proving the validity of tawassul through the dead”; and Shaykh Muhammad al-Hamid (1910-1969) has written in his “Rebuttals of Falsehoods” (Rudud `ala abatil): “As for calling upon the righteous (when they are physically absent, as in the words Ya Muhammad in the hadiths of `Uthman Ibn Hunayf), tawassul to Allah Most High through them is permissible, the supplication (du`a) being to Allah Most Glorious, and there is much evidence for its permissibility.  Those who call on them intending tawassul cannot be blamed.”[10][73] Are Shaykh al-Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifa`i, Shaykh Muhammad al-Hamid, and Shaykh `Abd Allah al-Ghumari not also Arabs who know very well the meaning of ‘tawassul’ in the Arabic Language?

Were Imam Ahmad, Shawkani, and Ibn al-Jawzi not also Arabs who knew very well the meaning of ‘tawassul’ in the Arabic Language? What about Imam Nawawiand Ibn al-Humam, who are cited below as instructing every visitor to the Prophet in Madina to seek him as a means in tawassul– are they not Arabs who knew very well the meaning of ‘tawassul’ in the Arabic Language? All these major scholars did not seem to experience the same problem as Albani with the language of tawassul, nor with the fact that tawassul is said by a person in need mentioning the name of another person as intermediary!

2)      The Prophet (SAW) promised that he would make du’aa for him, after advising him of what would be better for him, and this was his (SAW) saying, ‘If you wish I will supplicate for you, and if you have patience that is better for you.’ And this second matter is what he (SAW) indicated in the hadeeth which he narrated from His Lord, the blessed and Most High, that He said, ‘when I afflict My servant  in his two beloved ones, that is his eyes, and he has patience, then I give him Paradise in place of them.’ [Reported by al-Bukhaaree (transl. 7/377/no.557) from Anas, quoted in as-Saheehah (2010)]

3)      The blind man’s insistence that he (SAW) should supplicate for him, as he said, ‘Supplicate to Him.’ Which means that the Messenger (SAW) definitely did make du’aa for him, since he (SAW) was the best at fulfilling a promise and he had already promised to make du’aa for him if he wished as has preceded, and he wanted du’aa from him, and so the point is established. Also the Prophet (SAW), out of his mercy and desire that Allaah, the Most High, should answer his du’aa for him, guided the blind man to using the second type of lawful and prescribed tawassul, which is tawassul by means of righteous actions, in order to combine the different types of good.

So he ordered him to make wudoo, and to pray two rak’ahs, and then to make du’aa for himself…

[Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 70]

… in the words taught to him by the Prophet, which consist verbatim in asking Allah through the Prophet himself and his status. That is the essence of the du`a taught by the Prophet, and of the entire hadith.

… and these are acts of obedience to Allaah, the One free of all blemish or defect, and the Most High, which he offered along with the du’aa of the Prophet (SAW) on his behalf, and this falls under Allaah, the Most High’s Saying: ‘Seek means of approach (waseelah) to Him’ (5:35) as has preceded.

The Messenger (SAW) did not suffice with making du’aa for the blind man, as he had promised, he also gave him an action to perform which involved obedience to Allaah, the One free of all blemish and defect, the Most High, and drawing near to Him, so that the affair would be complete from all angles, and nearer to acceptance and being pleasing to Allaah, the One free of all blemish and imperfections, and the Most High, therefore the whole event revolved around du’aa, as is clear and contains nothing of what they mention.

Shaikh al-Ghumaaree[11][74] is ignorant of this or pretends to be, since he says in ‘al-Misbaah’ ([p.] 24), ‘”… If you wish I will make du’aa for you”, means, “if you wish I will teach you a du’aa which you can make and will repeat it to you,” this explanation is binding so that the start of the hadeeth agrees with its end.’

I say: this explanation is futile due to many reasons, from them that the blind man asked him (SAW) to make du’aa for him, not to teach him a du’aa, and since his (SAW) saying to him, ‘And if you wish I will make du’aa’ was an answer to his request, it was then definitely a request for du’aa, and this has to be, and this is the meaning which agrees with the end of the hadeeth, which is why we find that al-Ghumaaree does not try to explain his saying at the end, ‘O Allaah accept him as a supplicant for me, and accept my supplication for him (to be accepted for me),’ since this clearly shows that his tawassul was through the du’aa of the Prophet (SAW) as we have shown in what has preceded.

[Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 70-71]

Rather, the end does confirm that the essence of this du`a revolves around the Prophet’s intercession, and that is what making tawassul through him means. Shaykh al-Ghumari is right when he says that the Prophet taught the du`a of tawassul as an answer to the blind man’s request for du`a, since the du`a of tawassul is the main lesson of this hadith and the means through which Allah fulfills the Prophet’s own du`a and returned the blind man’s sight to him. Nor does the fact that the blind man asked the Prophet to make du`a for him preclude the Prophet in any way or form from teaching him that du`a — and through him all Muslims — in addition to responding to his specific request, for the Prophet is by essence the Teacher and Purifier of the Community:

Truly Allah was gracious to the believers when He raised up among them a Messenger from themselves, to recite to them His signs and to purify them, and to teach them the Book and the Wisdom, though before they were in manifest error. (3:164)

To insist that the Prophet could not have been acting didactically in a general way but only making the du`a for the blind man alone simply because that is all that the blind man wanted, is to act like the man who kept repeating to the Prophet: “Teach me something (about Islam)!” not realizing that the Prophet’s answer: “Do not get angry”[12][75] constituted a universal Islamic teaching of the highest order. Yet this is what Albani insists, in order to reduce the hadith to a one-time occurrence that bears no significance to the Umma at large, and in order to annihilate its availability to all Muslims as a universal and enduring du`a of tawassul.

The great characteristic of Islam is that the overwhelming part if not all of the Prophet’s guidance, his teachings, and his miracles are enduring for all time, the greatest being the Glorious Qur’an, and not limited to the time of the Companions or to some individuals among them! To believe otherwise is to rob Islam of its primacy as the Religion that pleases Allah and to place it on a par with Christianity and Judaism as an abrogated religion, and we seek refuge in Allah from such aberrant suggestions.

Then he [Ghumari] says, ‘Even if we admit that the Prophet (SAW) made du’aa for the blind man, then that does not prevent those hadeeth from being generalised to include others.’

I say: This is clear error, since no one prevents the hadeeth from applying to other then [sic] the blind man, from those whom the Prophet (SAW) made du’aa for. However since du’aa from him (SAW) after he left to join the highest company is something that those seeking tawassul for all various needs and desires do not know about, and also they themselves do not seek tawassul by his (SAW) du’aa after his death, therefore the ruling is different, and this admission of al-Ghumaaree is a proof against him.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 71-72

Observe the aberration of Albani’s declaration that “du’aa from him (SAW) after he left to join the highest company is something that those seeking tawassul for all various needs and desires do not know about,” when it is established in the authentic hadith that the Prophet continually makes du`a and asks forgiveness for his Umma and makes tahmid (al-hamdu lillah) even in the grave:

My life is a great good for you, you will relate about me and it will be related to you, and my death is a great good for you, your actions will be presented to me (in my grave) and if I see goodness I will praise Allah, and if see other than that I will ask forgiveness of Him for you. [13][76]

Observe also how Albani boldly claims: “they themselves do not seek tawassul by his (SAW) du’aa after his death” — this is clear and manifest error, and may Allah save us from such. As we have shown in many places already, the Companions sought tawassul, tabarruk, istisqa, and istishfa` both through his person and through his du`a after his death, in which he stands the same as he stands in his life in the world in relation to Allah, i.e. praying and making du`a for his Community.

This is another clear proof against misguidance, and it is confirmed by Malik al-Dar’s narration of the Companion *Bilal Ibn al-Harith’s request to the Prophet that he make istisqa’ (prayer and du`a for rain) on behalf of his Community. We have already cited this hadith which Ibn Hajar said “Ibn Abi Shayba related with a sound chain from the narration of Abu Salih al-Saman from Malik al-Dar who was `Umar’s treasurer”:

The people suffered from drought during the successorship of `Umar, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished”…

We will note here that in his obstinacy in asserting that the Companions did not seek tawassul by the Prophet’s du`a after his death Albani went far afield trying to disprove the authenticity of this hadith:

We do not accept that this story is authentic since the reliability and precision of Maalik al-Daar is not known, and these are the two principle [sic] conditions necessary for the authenticity of any narration, as is affirmed in the science of hadeeth. Ibn Abee Haatim mentions him in al-Jarh wat-ta’deel (4/1/213) and does not mention anyone who narrates from him except Aboo Saalih. So this indicates that he is unknown, and this is further emphasized by the fact that Ibn Abee Haatim himself, who is well known for his memorisation and wide knowledge, did not quote anyone who declared him reliable, so he remains unknown. Then this does not contradict the saying of al-Haafidh: “… with an authentic chain of narration, from the narration of Aboo Saalih as-Saman…” since we say: It is not declaration that all of the chain of narration is authentic (saheeh), rather only that it is so up to Aboo Saalih. If that were not the case then he would not have started mentioning the chain of narration from Aboo Saalih. Rather he would have begun: “From Malik ad-Daar… and its chain of narration is authentic.” But he said it in the way that he did to draw attention to the fact that there was something requiring investigation in it. The scholars say this for various reasons. From these reasons is that they may not have been able to find a biography for some narrator(s) and therefore they would not permit themselves to pass a ruling on the whole chain of narration…

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings p. 120

1. The above is disproved by Ibn Sa`d’s (d. 230) biographical notice on Malik al-Dar in his Tabaqat:

Malik al-Dar: `Umar ibn al-Khattab’s freedman. He narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar. He was known.[14][77]

2. It is further disproved by the hafiz al-Khalili’s (d. 445) notice on Malik al-Dar in his Kitab al-irshad fi ma`rifat `ulama’ al-hadith:

Malik al-Dar: muttafaq `alayh athna `alayhi al-tabi`un — He is agreed upon (as trustworthy), the Successors have approved highly of him.[15][78]

3. It is further disproved by Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani’s biographical notice on Malik al-Dar in his al-Isaba fi tamyiz al-sahaba:

Malik ibn `Iyad: `Umar’s freedman. He is the one named Malik al-Dar. He has seen the Prophet and has heard narrations from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. He has narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, Mu`adh, and Abu `Ubayda. From him narrated Abu Salih al-Saman and his (Malik’s) two sons `Awn and `Abd Allah…

Bukhari in his Tarikh narrated through Abu Salih Dhakwan from Malik al-Dar that `Umar said during the period of drought: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!” Ibn Abi Khaythama also narrated it in those words but in a longer hadith:

The people suffered a drought during the time of `Umar, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said: “O Messenger of Allah, ask Allah for rain for your Community.” The Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go, see `Umar and tell him: You will be watered, and: You must put your nose to the grindstone (`alayk al-kaffayn)!” (The man went and told `Umar.) Then `Umar wept and exclaimed: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!”

We have also narrated in the Fawa’id of Dawud ibn `Amr and al-Dabbi compiled by al-Baghawi in the narration of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa`id ibn Yarbu` al-Makhzumi from Malik al-Dar: he said: “`Umar ibn al-Khattab summoned me one day. He had with him a purse of gold containing four hundred dinars. He said: “Take this to Abu `Ubayda,” and he mentioned the rest of the story.

Ibn Sa`d mentioned him (Malik al-Dar) in the first layer of the Successors among the people of Madina and said: “He narrated from Abu Bakr and `Umar, and he was known.” Abu `Ubayda said of him: “`Umar put him in charge of the dependents in his household. When `Uthman succeeded him, he put him in charge of financial allotments and he was then named Malik of the House.”

Isma`il al-Qadi related from `Ali ibn al-Madini: “Malik al-Dar was `Umar’s treasurer.”[16][79]

4. It is further disproved by Hasan al-Saqqaf’s rebuttal of Albani’s discourse and entire method on this hadith in Saqqaf’s preface to `Abd Allah al-Ghumari’s refutation of Albani entitled Irgham al-mubtadi` al-ghabi bi jawaz al-tawassul bi al-nabi (The compulsion of the ignorant innovator with the permissibility of seeking means with the Prophet):

Albani has declared this sound hadith weak upon pretexts frailer than a cobweb in his Tawassul. He has claimed that Malik al-Dar is unknown (majhul) and has reproduced only his biographical notice from Ibn Abi Hatim’s Kitab al-jarh wa al-ta`dil in order to give his readers the impression that only one man has narrated from Malik al-Dar, and that is Abu Salih al-Saman. And it has been decided by Albani on the basis of what he reproduces from one of the scholars that a man remains “unknown” until two or more narrate from him. In order to help his cause he mentioned that al-Mundhiri and al-Haythami did not know Malik al-Dar, that he is therefore unknown, and that a chain of transmission containing an unknown is unsound. Then he began to brag saying: “This is a critical piece of information which none will know but those who have practiced this science.” As for us we say to him: Rather this is deliberate concealment (tadlis) and deceit and treachery which none commits except one whose heart is filled with spite and enmity against the Sunna and Tawhid and its people…

Now, if al-Mundhiri and al-Haythami declared that they did not know him, we say to the searcher for truth: This means that they did not declare him either trustworthy or unreliable, because they do not know him. However, there are those who do know him, such as Ibn Sa`d, and Bukhari, and `Ali ibn al-Madini, and Ibn Hibban, and al-hafiz Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani, and others! Which of the two assessments, O Albani, is retained: that of those who know him, or that of those who don’t?!

It is a wonder that Albani approves the statement of those who don’t know Malik al-Dar’s case, selects it, and prefers it to the statements of those who do know it, which he conceals and with which he dislikes that anyone be acquainted.

What I will cite from the sayings of the Imams among the masters of hadith who have recognized Malik al-Dar as reliable is enough to confirm what al-Sayyid `Abd Allah al-Ghumari and other hadith scholars as well as some of those who work with hadith have said: namely, that Albani knows the correct facts in many matters but … is not to be relied upon for (assessing) a single hadith. This is the explicit position of many of the scholars such as the three muhaddiths al-Sayyid Ahmad al-Ghumari, al-Sayyid `Abd Allah al-Ghumari, and al-Sayyid `Abd al-`Aziz; the shaykh `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda; the muhaddith of India and Pakistan Habib al-Rahman al-A`zami; Shaykh Isma`il al-Ansari; Shaykh Muhammad `Awwama; Shaykh Mahmud Sa`id; Shaykh Shu`ayb Arna’ut; and tens of others among the experts in this field and those that deal with it. The People of Hadith therefore witness that that man’s word is not relied upon in the authentication and weakening of hadith because he authenticates and weakens according to whim and mood, not scientific rules, and whoever examines his sayings and writings can verify this.[17][80]


A REFUTATION OF ALBANI FROM IMAM NAWAWI AND

IMAM IBN AL-HUMAM AL-HANAFI

A further proof that tawassul through the Prophet after his time is universally recognized and encouraged in the Shari`a is Imam Nawawi’s description of the etiquette of visiting the grave of the Prophet after the fulfillment of the Pilgrimage in the Book of Hajj in the Adhkar, where he says:

[After giving salam to the Prophet, Abu Bakr, and `Umar] Then he [the visitor] returns to his initial station opposite the Prophet’s face, and he uses the Prophet as his means in his innermost (fa yatawassalu bihi fi haqqi nafsihi), and seeks his intercession before his exalted and mighty Lord (wa yatashaffa`u bihi ila rabbihi subhanahu wa ta`ala)… and he avails himself of this noble spot, and glorifies and praises and magnifies Allah and invokes blessings on His Messenger. Let him do all that abundantly.[1][81]

Nawawi similarly says in the part devoted to visiting the Prophet in his book on Pilgrimage entitled al-Idah fi manasik al-hajj:

[The visitor stands and greets the Prophet, then he moves to greet Abu Bakr and `Umar] Then he returns to his original position, directly in front of Allah’s Messenger, and he uses the Prophet as his means in his innermost self (fa yatawassalu bihi fi haqqi nafsihi), and seeks his intercession before his exalted and mighty Lord (wa yatashaffa`u bihi ila rabbihi subhanahu wa ta`ala) and one of the best things that he can say is what has been narrated by our colleagues on al-`Utbi’s authority, and they admired what he said:

As I was sitting by the grave of the Prophet, a Bedouin Arab came and said: “Peace be upon you, O Messenger of Allah!  I have heard Allah saying: “If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgive-ness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful” (4:64), so I have come to you asking forgiveness for my sin, seeking your intercession with my Lord…”[2][82]

Similarly the Hanafi faqih Kamal al-Din ibn al-Humam said in Fath al-qadir (2:337), book of hajj, chapter on visiting the Prophet:

wa yas’alu allaha hajatahu mutawassilan ilallah bi hadrati nabiyyihi thumma qala yas’alu al-nabiyya sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam al-shafa`ata fa yaqulu ya rasulallah as’aluka al-shafa`ata ya rasulallah atawassalu bika ilallah

Then let him ask Allah for his need, using Allah’s Prophet as his means to Allah; (then he said): Let him ask the Prophet for his intercession and say: O Messenger of Allah, I am asking you for your intercession; O Messenger of Allah, I am using you as my means to Allah.

It cannot be clearer that Albani is therefore innovating in:

a) claiming that tawassul is no longer made by asking for the Prophet’s du`a after he left dunya;

b) claiming that tawassul is not made through the Prophet’s person or status.

That in the du’aa which Allaahs Messenger (SAW) taught him to say occurs, ‘O Allaah accept him as a supplicant [intercessor] for me’, and it is impossible to take this to mean tawassul by his (SAW) person, or his status, or his right, since the meaning is, ‘O Allaah accept his (SAW) supplication for You to restore my sight.’

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The complete words of the du`a are as follows: “O Allah I ask you and turn to you by means of your Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad I turn by means of you to my Lord in this need of mine, so that it may be fulfilled for me, O Allah make him my intercessor (shaffi`hu fiyya).”

There fore the du`a contains the following steps:

– Call and request to Allah stating that one uses the Prophet as means;

– Call to the Prophet stating that one uses him as means to Allah;

– Call and request to Allah to make the Prophet one’s intercessor.

This proves:

– that one may ask for the Prophet’s intercession in this life;

– that one takes for granted that the Prophet’s intercession is accepted;

– that one does not take for granted that his intercession is granted;

– and that such intercession is “by means of him,” period.

And shafaa’ah [the arabic word used in the hadeeth] in the language means: du’aa [supplication], and this is what is meant for the Shafaa’ah which is established for him (SAW) and for the other Prophets and the pious on the Day of Ressurrection.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

Neither is the hadith taking place on the Day of Resurrection, nor is this hadith primarily about the Prophet’s blessed shafa`a, which is explained in countless other ayats and ahadith, but about tawassul through the Prophet, which is the modality and language of asking for his shafa`a here and now. Albani is trying to make one and the same thing of tawassul and shafa`a, and furthermore he is trying to make the language say other than what it states explicitly.

And this shows that shafaa’ah is more particular then du’aa since it will only occur if there are two people seeking a matter, so that one of them is a supplicant for the other, as opposed to a single person seeking something who does not have anyone else to supplicate for him. In Lisaan ul-Arab it says, ‘shafaa’ah [intercession] is the intercessor’s speaking to a king about a need which he is requesting for someone else, and the intercessor is the one seeking something for someone else, through whom he intercedes to attain what is desired…’  So it is established by this means also that the tawassul

of the blind man wa through his (SAW) du’aa and not his person.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

Again: The hadith is about the asking for the intercession, not the intercession itself. Clearly, the one hoping intercession needs to ask, and the reason he is asking is because of the intercessor’s status. Is this not obvious?

That from what the Prophet (SAW) taught the blind man was, ‘And accept my supplication [shafaa’ah] for him’… This sentence is an authentic part of the hadeeth, it is reported by Ahmad and al-Haakim who authenticated it with adh-Dhahabee agreeing. And it alone is a decisive proof that taking the hadeeth to refer to tawassul by his person is futile, that being the position of some recent writers – and it seems that they realise this point and therefore do not mention this sentence at all – which shows how far they can be trusted in reporting narrations. And close to this is their quoting the

previous sentence, ‘O Allaah accept his shafaa’ah for me’, as a proof for tawassul by his person – but as for explaining how it shows that then they do not explain that to the readers, since one not having something cannot give it to others.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The proof for tawassul through the Prophet’s  person does not lie in the particular part of the du`a which says “O Allah accept his shafa`a for me” but in the du`a as a whole, as has been shown above.

Albani’s contempt and mistrust of the scholars whose view invalidates his typifies his tendency to disrespect persons on the basis of his disagreement and that is the general tendency of his admirers also. What can be meant by his phrase “some recent writers”? Are Nawawi and Ibn al-Jawzi, who respectively state that tawassul is through the Prophet’s person and status, “recent writers”? The only “recent writer” here is Albani himself.

‘i.e. accept my shafaa’ah for him, i.e. accept my du’aa that you accept his ‘shafaa’ah’, i.e. his du’aa that You restore my sight.’ And it is not possible to understand  anything but this from this sentence.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The above impossibility seems axiomatic to Albani perhaps, but to others it is clear that the statement quoted also refers to the phrase: “I ask you and turn to you by means of your Prophet” and so the full meaning is: “Accept my du`a and accept the request that I may make this du`a to you by means of him.” As much as Albani tries to conceal this basic meaning he cannot.

This is why you find the opponents feigning ignorance of it and not making mention of it since it demolishes their building from the foundations and tears down it’s walls, and when they hear it you will see them looking at you like one in a swoon. This is because they (think that they) understand the shafaa’ah of the Messenger (SAW) for the blind man, but what can the blind man’s shafaa’ah for the Messenger (SAW) mean? They have no answer for that at all. And the fact that they percieve this nullifies their misinterpretation is that you will not find a single one of them using it in practice, i.e. supplicating, ‘O Allaah accept Your Prophets’ shafaa’ah for me and my shafaa’ah for him.’

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The blind man was merely blind in the eyes, but Allah spoke of those who are blind-hearted and this is a graver illness.

The shafa`a of the Messenger for the blind man benefits the blind man. The shafa`a of the blind man for the Messenger benefits the blind man also! The former is the Prophet’s request on behalf of the blind man. The latter is the blind’s man request that he be given permission to have the Prophet request for him. It is very clear, but it seems Albani ekes out his argument only in order to confuse the issue, just as he shuffled the lexical meanings of tawassul and shafa`a.

the saying of the blind man in his du’aa, ‘O Allaah I ask You and turn to You by means of your Prophet Muhammad (SAW)’ means, ‘I seek a means of nearness to You by means of the du’aa of your Prophet’, with the governing word [i.e. du’aa] omitted – and this is something well known in the language – as occurs in the saying of Allaah, ‘the town and caravan…’ (12:82), i.e. ‘the PEOPLE of the town, and the COMPANIONS of the caravan..’ [with the governing

words PEOPLE and CARAVAN omitted]. And we and the opponents agree upon that, i.e. that we have to come up with the governing word which has been omitted.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The above is a good illustration of Albani’s method of narrowing down the outward sense of the du`a, which is: “I am turning to You by means of your Prophet” to a specific sense: “I am turning to You by means of your Prophet’s du`a.” In order to achieve this he comes up with terms that are not in the hadith — “by means of the du`a” — and he dictates that they are the governing terms around which the sole meaning of the hadith revolves — that is: Albani’s meaning.

And in our view it is the same case as with the du’aa of Umar and his tawassul by means of al-Abbaas – either it is taken to be, ‘I turn to You by means of the (status) of Your Prophet’, and ‘O Muhammad I turn by your (person) or your (position) to my Lord’ – as they claim – or to be, ‘I turn to you by means of the (du’aa) of Your Prophet’, and, ‘O Muhammad I Turn to you by your (du’aa) to my Lord’ – which is our saying. And one of these must be preferred due to a proof which shows it. So as for their saying that the missing governing word is (status/position) then they have no proof for it, neither in this or any other hadeeth, since there is nothing mentioned along with it which suggests or states any mention of (status) or indicates it at all.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

This is perhaps the greatest fallacy in his entire argument, since in making it he completely ignores the countless verses and hadiths which show the Prophet’s tremendous status, including his own explicit statements that he is the Master of the children of Adam and the noblest of them in Allah’s sight, and the ijma` of Muslims concerning his praiseworthy station.

Just as they have nothing from the Qur’an and Sunnah, or from the practice of the Companions where there is tawassul by anyone’s status. So this preferred view of theirs has nothing to support it and so is rendered baseless and not taken into any further consideration. As for our view then it is supported by many proofs which have preceded.

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

The lexical “proof” has been rejected as shafa`a is not the same as tawassul. And the “proof” that the wasila is purely the Prophet’s du`a has been rejected, as it was shown that the wasila is the Prophet himself in addition to the du`a which he taught the blind man, and the du`a which he himself made on his behalf.

And I also say: Even if it were correct that the blind man sought to make tawassul by his (SAW) person, then it would be something particular to him, not something shared by the rest of the Prophets and the pious. And joining them in it along with him is something not acceptable, since he (SAW) was the leader and the most noble of them all, so it could have been something which Allaah particularised him like many others reported in authentic narrations, and matters of particularised qualities are not within the scope of analogy. So he who thinks that the blind man’s tawassul to Allaah was by means of his (SAW) person – then he should halt at that and not add others to it, as is reported from Imaam Ahmad and Shaikh al-Izz bin abdis-Salaam (RH).

Albani, Tawassul: Its Types and Rulings

One goes to one’s nearest means among the salihin or saintly people, as is established by `Umar’s tawassul through al-`Abbas the Prophet’s uncle. This is not only permissible but recommended by all Four Schools. As for Imam Ahmad, he made tawassul through the Prophet a part of every du`a as has been reported, nor did he try, unlike Albani, to alter the modality of the tawassul or its meaning.

Note that Albani moved from denying that the tawassul can be made through the Prophet’s person to accepting it, then denying that it be made by other than the blind man, then accepting it, and finally denying that it be made through other than the Prophet!

If it were forbidden to seek the Prophet’s person as a means for obtaining cure and blessings in this life, then why did the Companions and the Followers seek such blessings through the hair of the Prophet, his minbar, his sweat, his saliva, his grave, and other items which we shall not mention? If one cannot deny the benefit derived by a mere particle of the Prophet’s body long after his time, they surely one cannot deny the benefit derived by his noble person — except one whom Allah has deprived of true understanding, such as those who insist on denying even when the proofs are brought right under their nose.


The Hadith of the Man in Need

Abdullah al-Ghumari’s Reply to al-Albani and hisFollower’s

The following is a short excerpt from the document that was attached in full HERE

The article is a very useful scholarly response to the objections raised by “Salafi sheikh al-Albani  and hisfollowers!

Abdullah al-Ghumari mentioned in his response to al-Albani.

[…]

To get to the point, I declare that Shaikh Al-Albani,may Allah forgive him, is a man who is motivated by ulterior purposes and desire. If he sees a hadith 6 or a report ( athar7 ) that does not accord with his persuasion8 he straightway proceeds to foist it off as weak (da‘if) . By using guile and deception he prevails upon his readers that he is right; whereas, he is wrong.

Rather, he is a sinner and a hoodwinker. By such duplicity he has succeeded in misguiding his followers who trust him and think that he is right.

One of those who has been deceived by him is Hamdi al-Salafi who edited al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir . He had the impudence to declare a rigorously authentic hadith weak (da‘if / 11) because it did not go along with his sectarian dogmas just as it did not concur with the persuasion of his teacher (Shaikh) .

The proof of that is that what he says about the hadiths beingweak is just what his Shaikh says.12
This being the case, I wished to present the real truth of the matter and to expose the falsity of the claims of both thedeceiver [Al-Albani] and the deceived [Hamdi al-Salafi] .

Al-Tabarani  reported 

From Ibn Wahb from Shabib from Rauh ibn al-Qàsimfrom Abu Ja‘far al-Khatami al-Madani from Abu Umamah ibn Sahl ibn Hunaif: ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif

A man was going to ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn  trying to get something done for himself.However, ‘Uthman didn’t pay any attention to him, nor did he look after his need. That man went to ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif and complained about that to him. ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif said to him, “Go and perform ablution (wudu), then go to the mosque and pray two cycles (rak‘ah) of prayer, then say: ‘O Allah, I ask You and I approach You through your Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I approach my Lord through you that my need be fulfilled,’ then mention your need. Thereafter come to me that I might go with you.”

Then the man went away and did what he was told. After that he went to the door of ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn; whereupon the doorkeeper took him by the hand and ushered him into ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn who sat him down beside him on his mat and said to him, “What can I do for you?” He told him what he needed and ‘Uthmàn had that done for him and then he said to him, “I didn’t remember your problem until now. Whenever you need anything come to me.” Thereupon the man left him and went to ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif and said, “May Allah bless you, ‘Uthmàn wouldn’t look after me, nor even pay attention to me until you spoke to him about me.” ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif replied, “I swear by Allah that I didn’t speak to him.

Actually, I saw a blind man come to the Messenger of Allah [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] and complain to him about losing his sight. The Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] said to him, “Wouldn’t you rather show patience?” He replied, “O Messenger of Allah, I don’t have a guide and the matter has become an ordeal for me.” The Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] said to him, “Go and make ablution (wudu), then pray two cycles (rak‘ah) of prayer, then make this supplication (du‘a’) . I swear by Allah, we hadn’t gone away, nor had we remained long time talk when the man returned as if he had never suffered any affliction.

Al-Tabarani declared this report to be rigorously authentic (sahih / 16 ) ;

whereas,

Hamdi al-Salafi contradicted him saying:

There is no doubt about the authenticity of that part of the hadith [concerning the story of the blind man]17; the doubt concerns the [first part of] the story [concerning ‘Uthman ibn Hunaif’s instructions to the man who sought the help of ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affan] which heretics (mubtadi‘ah) adduce attempting to prove the legitimacy of their heretical practice of calling the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]for his intercession. [That part of the story is in doubt for the reasons which we will explain.]
Firstly, as al-Tabarani mentioned, Shabib [who is one of the narrators mentioned in the report’s chain of narration (sanad) is alone in reporting this hadith.

Then, Shabib’s narrations are not bad (la ba’sa bihi) on two conditions: first, that his son Ahmad be the one who narrates from him; second, that Shabib’s narration be from Yunus ibn Yazid. However, in the present case, Shabib’s narration is reported by [three persons]: Ibn Wahb, and Shabib’s two sons Ismà‘il and Ahmad.

As for Ibn Wahb, extremely reliable narrators (al-thiqah) criticized Ibn Wahb’s narrations from Shabib, as they criticized Shabib himself. And as for Shabib’s son, Isma‘il, he is unknown.

Although Ahmad also reports this hadith from Shabib, it is not Shabib’s report from Yunus ibn Yazid [which (as Hamdu pretends) is what the experts in narration stipulated as the condition for the correctness of Shabib’s narrations].

Furthermore, the experts in narration (al-muhaddithun) are at variance concerning the text of this hadith which they narrate from Ahmad [ibn Shabib].

Ibn al-Sunni reported the hadith in his ‘Amal al-Yaumwa ’l-Lailah and al-Hakim reported it with three different chains of narration (sanad) neither of them mentioning the story [of ‘Uthman ibn Hunaif and the man who wanted to see ‘Uthmàn].

Al-Hakim reported the hadith by way ‘Aun ibn ‘Amàrah al- Basri from Rauh ibn al-Qasim.

My teacher (Shaikh) Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani:“

Even though ‘Aun is weak (da‘if), still his version of the hadith (riwàyah) [without the story of ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is preferable to Shabib’s since Rauh’s narration agreeswith the narrations of Shu‘bah and Hamàd ibn Salamah through Abu Ja‘f`ar al-Khatmi[without the story of ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif].”

The foregoing discussion is misleading and distorted in several ways.

First Point
The story [of ‘Uthman ibn Hunaif and the man who wanted to see ‘Uthman] was reported by al-Bayhaqi in Dalà ’ilu’l-Nubuwah19 by way of:

Ya‘qub ibn Sufyan who said that Ahmad ibn Shabib ibn Sa‘id reported to me that his father reported to him from Rauh ibn al-Qàsim from Abu Ja‘far al-Khatami from Abu Usamah ibn Sahl ibn Hunaif that a man was going to ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn and he mentioned the story in its entirety.

Ya‘qub ibn Sufyàn is [Abu Yusuf] al-Fasawi (d. 177 h)20, the Hàfiz,21 the Imàm,22 the utterly reliable transmitter (al-thiqah) 23rather, he is better than utterly reliable (thiqah) .

The chain of narration (sanad) of this hadith is utterly reliable (sahih /24) Thus the story [about ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is quite authentic. Other [specialists in the science of hadith and its narrators] also proclaimed the hadith to be rigorously authentic (sahih) . Hàfiz al- Mundhiri25 mentioned in his al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib: p. 606, vol. 2;26 and Hafiz al-Haithami27 mentioned it in his Majma‘ al-Zawà’id: p. 179, vol. 2.28

Second Point
Ahmad ibn Shabib is one of the narrators that al-Bukhari29 depended on; al-Bukhàri reported hadith from Ahmad ibn Shabib both in his Sahih and in his al-Adab al-Mufrad. Abu Hàtim al-Ràzi30 also declared him to be utterly reliable (thiqah) , and both he and Abu Zur‘ah wrote down his hadith.31 Ibn ‘Adi32 mentioned that the people of Basrah [that is, the experts in the science of hadith and criticism] considered him to be utterly reliable (thiqah) and ‘Ali al-Madini33 wrote down his hadith.

Ahmad’s father, Shabib ibn Sa‘id al-Tamimi al-Habati al-Basri34 is also one of the narrators whom al-Bukhari depended on in both his Sahih and his al-Adab al-Mufrad.Those who considered Shabib to be thiqah include: Abu Zur‘ah, Abu Hatim, al-Nisà’i, al-Dhuhali, al-Dàraqutni , and al-Tabarani35.

Abu Hatim related that Shabib had in his keeping the books of Yunus ibnYazid, and he said that Shabib was reliable (salih) in hadith and that there was nothing wrong with him (là ba’sa bihi / 36 ) .

Ibn ‘Adi said: “Shabib had a copy of the book37 of al-Zuhri. He had in his keeping sound hadith which Yunus related from al-Zuhri. ” 38

[‘Ali] ibn al-Madini said about Shabib: “He was utterly reliable (thiqah). He used to go to Egypt for trade. His book was authentic (sahih). ” 39

The foregoing relates to the authentication (ta‘dil) of Shabib.40

As you notice there is no stipulation that his narration be from Yunus ibn Yazid in order to be authentic (sahih) .

Rather, Ibn al-Madini affirms that his book was authentic,41 while Ibn ‘Adi confined himself to commenting about Shabib’s copy of al-Zuhri’s book not intending to intimate anything about the rest of Shabib’s narrations. So what Al-Albàni claims [namely, that Shabib’s narrations are authentic on the condition that he narrate from Yunus ibn Yazid] is deception and a breach of academic and religious trust.

What I have said [about Shabib’s unconditional reliability] is further corroborated by the fact that [another hadith which Shabib related; namely] the hadith about the blind man [who came to the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]to plead him to pray for him] was declared to be authentic by the hadith experts (huffaz /42) although Shabib did not narrate this hadith from Yunus by way of al-Zuhri. Rather, he related it from Rauh ibn al-Qàsim.

Furthermore, al-Albani claims that since some narrators whose hadith are mentioned by Ibn al-Sunni and al-Hakim did not mention the story [about ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif], the story is doubtful (da‘if ) . This is another example of Al-Albàni’s trickery. People who have some knowledge about the principles of the science of hadith know that some narrators report a given hadith in its entirety, while others may choose to abridge it according to their purpose at hand.

Al-Bukhari, for example, does that routinely in his Sahih where he often mentions a hadith in abridged form while it is given by someone else in complete form.

Moreover, the person who has related the story [about ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] in al-Bayhaqi’s report is an extraordinary Imàm: Ya‘qub ibn Sufyàn. Abu Zur‘ah al-Dimashqi says about him: “Two men from the noblest of mankind came to us; one of them, Ya‘qub ibn Sufyàn the most widely-traveled of the two, defies the people of Iraq to produce a single man who can narrate [as well] as he does. ”

Al-Albàni ’s declaring the narration of ‘Aun, which in fact is weak, to be better than the narration of those who narrated the story [of ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is a third aspect of Al-Albani’s duplicity and fraud because when al-Hakim related the hadith of the blind man in an abridged form by way of ‘Aun, he remarked :

Shabib ibn Sa‘id al-Habati 
has given the same hadith by way of Rauh ibn al-Qàsim with some additions to the text (matn ) and the chain of narrators (isnàd) . The decision in the matter is Shabib’s since he is utterly reliable (thiqah) and trustworthy (ma’mun) .

What al-Hakim says emphasizes a precept which is universally recognized by the experts in the science of hadith (al-muhaddithun) and the principles of the holy law (usul al-fiqh) ; namely, that additional wording related by a narrator who is utterly reliable (thiqah) is acceptable (maqbulah ) , and, furthermore, someone who remembered something is a proof against someone who didn’t remember it.

Third Point
Al-Albani saw al-Hakim’s statement but he didn’t like it, so he ignored it, and obstinately and dishonestly insisted on the superiority of ‘Aun’s weak narration.

It has been made clear that the story [about ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is rigorously authentic (sahih) in spite of Al-Albàni’s [and Ibn Taimiyah’s] deceitful attempts to discredit it. The story shows that seeking the Prophet’s [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]intercession after his passing away is permissible since the Companion43 who reported the hadith understood that it was permissible and the understanding of the narrator is significant in the view of the holy law (shari‘ah) , for it has its weight in the field of deducing (istinbat ) the detailed rules of the holy law (shari‘ah) .

We say according to the understanding of the narrator for the sake of argument; otherwise, in actuality, ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif’s instructing the man to seek the intercession of the Prophet was according to what he had heard from the Prophet as the hadith of the blind man [which ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif himself related] establishes.

Ibn Abi Khaithamah stated in his Tàrikh [which is a genre of writing which deals with the history and reputation of narrators of hadith] :

Muslim ibn Ibràhim related to me that Hammàd ibn Salamah said: Abu Ja‘far al-Khatami related to me from ‘Amarah ibn Khuzaimah from ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif :

A blind man came to the Prophetand said: “I have lost my sight. Pray to Allah for me.”

He answered: “Go and make ablution and then pray two cycles (rak‘ah) of prayer, and then say: ‘O Allah, I ask You and I approach you through my Prophet Muĥammad, The Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I seek your intercession with Allah that my sight should be restored. O Allah, accept my intercession for myself and accept the intercession of my Prophet for the restoration of my sight.’ If ever you have any need do like that.”

The chain of narration (isnàd) of this hadith is rigorously authentic (sahih). The last clause of the hadith constitutes the express permission of the Prophet to seek his intercession whenever there occurred any need.Not withstanding, Ibn Taimiyah objected on feeble grounds that this last clause comprehended some covert technical defect (‘illah) [which prejudices the authenticity of the hadith or at least its last clause]. I have demonstrated the invalidity of those grounds elsewhere.44

Indeed, Ibn Taimiyah is characteristically audacious in rejecting hadith which do not conform with his purpose at hand even if those hadith are rigorously authentic (sahih) .

A good example of that is the following case: Al-Bukhari reported in his sahih:

“Allah existed and there was nothing other than Him.”

This hadith is in agreement with the [clear-cut] evidence of the Qur`an, the sunnah, reason, and certain consensus (al-ijmà‘ al-mutayaqqan). However, since it conflicts with his belief in the eternity of the world,45 he turned to another version of this hadith which al-Bukhàri also reported: “Allah existed and their was nothing before Him.” And he rejected the first version in favor of the second on the grounds that the second conforms with another hadith: “You are the first; there is nothing before You.” [He held that the implication was that created things always existed along with Allah]

Hafiz Ibn Hajr remarked concerning the correct manner of reconciling the apparent contradiction in the above-mentioned hadiths:

“In fact the way to reconcile the two versions of the hadith is to understand the second in light of the first, and not the other way around. Moreover, there is consensus on the principle that reconciliation of two apparently contradictory versions of a text (nass) takes precedence over endorsing one version at the expense of revoking the other. ” 46

Actually, Ibn Taimáyah’s prejudice blinded him from understanding the two versions of the hadith which, in fact, are not mutually contradictory. That is because the version“Allah existed and there was nothing before Him.” has the meaning which is contained in His name the First; whereas, the version “Allah existed and there was nothing other than Him.” has the meaning contained in His name the One. The proof of this is still another version of the hadith with the wording “Allah existed before everything. ” 47

Another example of Ibn Taimiyah’s audacity in rejecting hadith is the case of the hadith:

“The Messenger of Allah [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] ordered the doors which opened on the mosque from the street to be sealed, but he left ‘Ali’s door [open].”

This hadith is rigorously authentic (sahih). Ibn al-Jauzi 48 was mistaken by mentioning it in his collection of forged hadiths, al-Maudu‘àt. Hafiz [Ibn Hajr] corrected him in his al-Qaul al-Musaddad: “Ibn Taimiyah because of his well-known bias against ‘Ali was not content with Ibn al-Jauzi’s declaration that the hadith was forged, but took the initiative to add from his own bag [of fraud] thepretence that the hadith experts (al-muhaddithun) are agreed that the hadith is forged. Ibn Taimiyah has rejected so many hadith simply because they are irreconcilable with his opinions that it is hard to keep track of the instances.49

Fourth Point
In order to conciliate al-Albàni, let us suppose that the story [about ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is weak, and that the Ibn Abi Khaithamah’s version of the hadith [with the addition: Wheneveryou have any need do like that.] is defective (mu‘allal) as Ibn Taimiyah would have it; still the hadith of the blind man is quite enough to prove the permissibility of seeking the intercession of the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]since the fact that the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]taught the blind man to seek his intercession on that occasion shows the propriety of seeking it in all circumstances.

Moreover, it is not allowable to refer to such intercession as a heretical departure (bid‘ah ), nor is it allowable to arbitrarily restrict such intercession to the lifetime of the Prophet .

Indeed, whoever restricts it to his lifetime is really a heretic50 because he has disqualified a rigorously authentic hadith and precluded its implementation, and that is unlawful (haram).

Al-Albàni, may Allah forgive him, is bold to claim conditionality an abrogation simply because a text prejudices his preconceived opinions and persuasion. If the hadith of the blind man was a special dispensation for him, the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] would have made that clear as he made it clear to Abu Burdah that the sacrifice of a two year old goat would fulfill his duty; whereas, it would not suffice for others. Furthermore, it is not admissible to suppose that the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] might have delayed explaining a matter in detail when his followers needed that knowledge at that time.

A Subterfuge and its Preclusion
Suppose somebody says that the reason we have to restrict the application of this hadith to the lifetime of the Prophet is that it involves calling (nidà’) the Prophet[whereas, it is not possible to call him after his death.] We reply that this objection is to be rejected because there are numerous reports (mutawatir) from the Prophet concerning his instruction about what one should recite during the tashahhud 51of prayer, and that contains the greeting of peace (salàm) for him with mention of him in the vocative form: Peace be upon you, OProphet! 52 That is the very formula which Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, Ibn Zubair, and Mu‘àwiyah taught the people from the mimbar53. Thereafter, it became an issue on which there was consensus (ijmà‘) as Ibn Hazm 54 and Ibn Taimiyah affirmed.

Al-Albàni, because he is prone to schism (ibtidà‘ ), violated the consensus and insisted on following an opinion reported of Ibn Mas‘ud: “Then when he died we said: Peace be on the Prophet (al-salàmu ‘alà al-nabiyu).” Indeed, violating the hadith and consensus is the essence of heresy (ibtidà‘ )

Furthermore, there are authentic reports from the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]which inform us that our deeds are presented to the Prophet [in his blessed grave] as are our supplications for his peace (al-salàm ) and honor (al-salah / 55 ) . There are also authentic reports about angels which travel about the earth in order to convey to the Prophet any greetings of peace and honor that anyone of his people might happen to make for him. Also definitive texts (tawàtur / 56 and consensus ( ‘ijmà’ ) establish that the Prophet is alive in his grave, and that his blessed body does not decay. After all that, how can anybody dare to claim that it is not allowable to call the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]in seeking his intercession? After all, is that in any different than calling him in tashahhud?

Unfortunately, Al-Albàni is perversely obstinate and opinionated, as are the Albani’ites, [that is, his blind, fanatic followers].So much for my rebuttal of Al-Albàni.

As for the person called Hamdi al-Salafi, there’s no need to refute him separately because he merely echoes Al-Albàni.

Another thing which I should establish here is that Al-Albàniis not to be depended on in his judgments about hadith authenticity, nor their weakness because he routinely employs a variety of tactics to mislead, and he does not disdain to betray his trust in transmitting the opinions of the ‘ulamà’ (religious scholars) distorting their words and meanings. Moreover, he has had the impudence to oppose the consensus and to claim the abrogation (naskh) of texts without proof. He commits such excesses because of his ignorance of the principles [of the science of fiqh] and the rules of inference and deduction (al-istinbat )

He claims he is struggling against heretical innovation(bid‘ah ) by forbidding the practice of intercession, and by forbidding people to use the epithet sayyidinà when mentioning the name of the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam], and by forbidding them to recite the Qur‘àn for the sake [of the souls] of the deceased.

However, the fact of the matter is that by doing that he commits a real heresy (bid‘ah) by forbidding what Allah has permitted, and by verbally abusing the Asharites 57 and the Sufis 58.

[…]

Al-Albàni’s outlandish and heterodox opinions, which are the result of his impious resort to free thought, his deceit, his dishonesty in pronouncing hadith to be authentic or weak according to what suits his persuasion [rather, than according to the dictates of the facts], his excoriations of the ‘ulamà’ and the illustrious personages of Islàm; all that is an affliction from Allah, yet he doesn’t realize it.

Indeed, he is one of those [to whom the Qur‘àn referred by its words:] who thinks they are doing good; however, how wrong is what they think.61

We ask Allah to preserve us from what He has afflicted Al-Albani with, and we seek refuge in Him from all evil.

All praise is for Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. May Allah bless Our Master Muhammad and all his noble people. [ …]


Shabib and the Hadith of the Man in Need 

What follows is a summary from all that has already been mentioned [with some other additional useful points] by our shaykh GF Haddad, and brother [in his summary of Shaykh Mamduh] which was posted on SF regarding the reliability of Shabib [Abu Sa`id Shabib ibn Sa`id al-Basri al-Habti al-Tamimi] which is critical to the issue of the authenticity of the Hadith of the Man in Need. [I have not taken it upon myself on this occasion to discuss the other issues brought up by those who have falsely labeled the hadith weak]

We will deal with the sanad of two versions primarily:

1) The narrators of Tabarani’s version are as follows:
From Ibn Wahb from Shabib from Rauh ibn al-Qàsim from Abu Ja‘far al-Khatami al-Madani from Abu Umamah ibn Sahl ibn Hunaif: ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif

2) 
Imam al-Bayhaqi in Dalà ’ilu’l-Nubuwah reports the hadith with the following sanad:
Ya‘qub ibn Sufyan who said that Ahmad ibn Shabib ibn Sa‘idreported to me that his father [Shabib] reported to him fromRauh ibn al-Qàsim from Abu Ja‘far al-Khatami from Abu Usamah ibn Sahl ibn Hunaif that a man was going to ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn and he mentioned the story in its entirety.

[Take note: Imam Bayhaqi’s chain does not contain the narrator Ibn Wahb]

Here is the exact wording from al-Bayhaqi’s Dala’il (no. 2417) with highlighting of what was mentioned above in point no. 2:

 

أخبرنا أبو سعيد عبد الملك بن أبي عثمان الزاهد ، رحمه الله ، أنبأنا الإمام أبو بكر محمد بن علي بن إسماعيل الشاشي القفال ، قال : أنبأنا أبو عروبة ، حدثنا العباس بن الفرج ، حدثنا إسماعيل بن شبيب ، حدثنا أبي ، عن روح بن القاسم ، عن أبي جعفر المديني ، عن أبي أمامة بن سهل بن حنيف أن رجلا كان يختلف إلى عثمان بن عفان رضي الله عنه في حاجته ، وكان عثمان لا يلتفت إليه ولا ينظر في حاجته ، فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فشكى إليه ذلك ، فقال له عثمان بن حنيف : ائت الميضأة فتوضأ ، ثم ائت المسجد فصل ركعتين ، ثم قل : اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبيك محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي الرحمة ، يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي فتقضي لي حاجتي ، واذكر حاجتك ، ثم رح حتى أرفع ، فانطلق الرجل وصنع ذلك ، ثم أتى باب عثمان بن عفان رضي الله عنه ، فجاء البواب ، فأخذ بيده فأدخله على عثمان ، فأجلسه معه على الطنفسة ، فقال : انظر ما كانت لك من حاجة ، ثم إن الرجل خرج من عنده فلقي عثمان بن حنيف ، فقال له : جزاك الله خيرا ما كان ينظر في حاجتي ولا يلتفت إلي حتى كلمته ، فقال عثمان بن حنيف : ما كلمته ولكني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وجاءه ضرير فشكى إليه ذهاب بصره فقال له النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : ” أوتصبر ؟ ” ، فقال : يا رسول الله ، ليس لي قائد ، وقد شق علي ” ، فقال : ” ائت الميضأة فتوضأ ، وصل ركعتين ثم قل : اللهم ، إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبيك نبي الرحمة ، يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي فيجلي لي عن بصري ، اللهم شفعه في وشفعني في نفسي ” قال عثمان : فوالله ما تفرقنا طال بنا الحديث حتى دخل الرجل كأن لم يكن به ضرر ، وقد رواه أحمد بن شبيب ، عن سعيد ، عن أبيه أيضا بطوله . أخبرنا أبو علي الحسن بن أحمد بن إبراهيم بن شاذان ، أنبأنا عبد الله بن جعفر بن درستويه ، حدثنا يعقوب بن سفيان ، حدثنا أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد ، فذكره بطوله . وهذه زيادة ألحقتها به في شهر رمضان سنة أربع وأربعين ، ورواه أيضا هشام الدستوائي ، عن أبي جعفر ، عن أبي أمامة بن سهل ، عن عمه وهو عثمان بن حنيف

The salafis have attempted to weaken these chains due to the presence in it of Shabib [ibn Sa‘id al-Tamimi al-Habati al-Basri] so it is important that we clarify his status amongst the scholars of Hadith.

The problem the Salafis have with this narrator as I can ascertain from reading shaykh al-Albani’s book on Tawassulis as follows:

They believe him to be a weak narrator from memory and his hadith are rejected unless, they claim, his narrations are from his book which he narrated from Yunus and his son in turn narrated from him. So, according to the Salafis, unless the chain containing Shabib is: [ Ahmad -> Shabib -> Yunus ] the hadith containing Shabib are all weak.

InshaAllah we shall expose the error in this claim and prove that it is not supported by any of the Ulema.

SECTION 1:

First, let us look at the authentication [ta’dil] of Shabib amongst the Ulema:

Ibn Hajar in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (vol. 4, no. 534) mentioned Shabib as follows:
[ 534 ] خ خد س البخاري وأبي داود في الناسخ والمنسوخ والنسائي شبيب بن سعيدالتميمي الحبطي أبو سعيد البصري روى عن أبان بن أبي عياش وروح بن القاسمويونس بن يزيد الأيلي وغيره وعنه بن وهب ويحيى بن أيوب وزيد بن بشر الحضرميوابنه أحمد بن شبيب قال بن المديني ثقة كان يختلف في تجارة إلى مصر وكتابه كتابصحيح وقال أبو زرعة لا بأس به وقال أبو حاتم كان عنده كتب يونس بن زيد وهوصالح الحديث لا بأس به وقال النسائي ليس به بأس وقال بن عدي ولشبيب نسخةالزهري عنده عن يونس عن الزهري أحاديث مستقيمة وحدث عنه بن وهب بأحاديثمناكير وذكره بن حبان في الثقات قلت وقال بن يونس في تاريخ الغرباء مات بالبصرةسنة ست وثمانين ومائة فيما ذكره البخاري وقال الدارقطني ثقةونقل بن خلفون توثيقهعن الذهلي ولما ذكره بن عدي وقال الكلام المتقدم قال بعده ولعل شبيبا لما قدم مصر فيتجارته كتب عنه بن وهب من حفظه فغلط ووهم وأرجو أن لا يتعمد الكذب وإذا حدثعنه ابنه أحمد فكأنه شبيب آخر يعني يجود وقال الطبراني في الأوسط ثقة

Shabib in Ta’rikh al-Kabir of Imam al-Bukhari (vol. 4)
[ 2628 ] شبيب بن سعيد نا يونس بن يزيد وعن محمد بن عمر روى عنه عبد الله بنوهب وابنه أحمد البصري

Shabib ibn Sa’eed in Thiqat of Ibn Hibban
[ 13614 ] شبيب بن سعيد الحبطي أبو سعيد من أهل مصر يروى عن محمد بنعمرو ويونس بن يزيد الأيلي روى عنه بن وهب وابنه أحمد بن شبيب وهو الذي يروىعن شعبة وروح بن القاسم

Shabib in al Jarh wa Ta’dil (4/359, no. 1572) of Ibn Abi Hatim al Razi
[ 1572 ]
شبيب بن سعيد أبو سعيد التميمي والد أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد البصري
روى عن روح بن القاسم ويونس بن يزيد ومحمد بن عمرو
روى عنه عبد الله بن وهب وابنه أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد سمعت أبى يقول ذلك وسألتهعنه فقال كان عنده كتب يونس بن يزيد وهو صالح الحديث لا بأس به نا عبد الرحمنقال سمعت أبا زرعة يقول شبيب بن سعيد لا باس به بصرى كتب عنه بن وهب بمصر

From the above it can be collated that the following madeTawthiq on Shabib :

Ibn al-Madini said: Thiqa – Trustworthy
Abu Zur’a: La Ba’sa bi-hi – There is no harm in him
Abu Hatim: Wa huwa sâlih al-Hadith la ba’sa bihi: He is passable in Hadith, there is no harm in him
Nasa’i: Laysa bihi ba’s – There is no harm (in his reports)
Ibn Hibban listed him in his book on Thiqat (trustworthy narrators)
Daraqutni: Thiqa – Trustworthy (This tawthiq from al-Daraqutni was reported by his pupil, Abu Abdullah al-Hakim in his Sawalat (no. 353) )
Al-Dhuhli made Tawthiq (declared him Thiqa)
Tabarani declared him Thiqa in al-Awsat (and in his al-Saghir, no. 509)
Bukhari listed him in his Ta’rikh al-Kabir and made no disparagement on him at all, even though he mentioned that Ibn Wahb narrated from Shabib. We also know that Al-Bukhari narrated via him in his Sahih.

We also know that: Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak (1/526) declared Shabib to be Thiqa Ma’mun – Trustworthy and reliable – which is a high form of making tawthiq on a narrator

So, from what was mentioned by Sh. Mamduh and provided by Sh. Abul Hasan above we conclude the following:

A. The following ulema have declared Shabib to be utterly reliable / THIQA:
Ali Ibn al-Madini,
al-Dhuhli,
al-Daraqutni,
al-Tabarani,
Ibn Hibban,
and Imam al-Hakim (1:526=1:707) who actually said THIQA MA’MUN, which is even stronger.

B. The following Ulema said about Shabib: “la ba’sa bihi”.

[Imam al-Lacknawi in al-Raf` wal-Takmil said this is identical with thiqa in its usage and is “all that is required in order to authenticate a narrator and render what he narrates authentic (sahih) and warrant its mention in the two Sahih’s” according to Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh.]

Abu Zur`ah,
Nasa’i,
Abu Hatim.
The foregoing relates to the authentication (ta‘dil) of Shabib.

SECTION 2:

Next, let us look at the made up false claim of theSalafis that only Shabib’s narrations from his books which contained the hadith he narrated from Yunus are reliable.

We shall bring the actual statements of the Ulema they use to back up their illogical deductions.

‘Ali ibn al-Madini said about Shabib:

“He was utterly reliable (thiqah). He used to go to Egypt for trade. His book was authentic (sahih).”

 

Mahmud Sa‘id Mamduh points out in Raf‘ al-Minarah fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Tawassul wa al-Ziyàrah , pp. 99-100, that the accuracy ( ضبط ) of a narrator [which along with integrity (‘adàlah / عدالة ) establishes reliability] is of two kinds: accuracy in respect of his memory ( الحفظضبط), and accuracy in respect of what he has written down (dabt al-kitàbah).

‘Ali al-Madini first declares that Shabib is utterly reliable (thiqah) without stating any condition. Thereafter, he reinforces that by stating that his book is also authentic without making his reliability conditional on being from that book.

Thus it blatantly clear that the ta’weel made by the Salafis from Ali al-Madini’s statement that only his narrations from his books are reliable is a lame illogical and unfounded inference clearly influenced by their desire to make the hadith weak at all costs!

Similarly this conclusion cannot be drawn from what Ibn Abi Hatim says about Shabib in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil:

شبيب بن سعيد أبو سعيد التميمي والد أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد البصري
روى عن روح بن القاسم ويونس بن يزيد ومحمد بن عمرو
روى عنه عبد الله بن وهب وابنه أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد سمعت أبى يقول ذلك وسألتهعنه فقال كان عنده كتب يونس بن يزيد وهو صالح الحديث لا بأس به نا عبد الرحمنقال سمعت أبا زرعة يقول شبيب بن سعيد لا باس به بصرى كتب عنه بن وهب بمصر

Ibn Abi Hatim says [rough translation] regarding Shabib ibn Sa’id Abu Sa’id al Tamimi, father of Ahmad ibn Shabib bin sa’id al Basri. He narrated from Rauh ibn Qaasim and Younus ibn Yazid and Muhammad ibn ‘amr. From him narrated Ibn Wahb and his son Ahmad ibn Shabib ibn Sai’d who said that i heard my father saying that and i asked him concerning it and he said he had with him the book of Yunus. He is righteous in hadith and there is no harm in him. Abdal rahman said Abu Zurah said shabib bin saeed – la ba’s bihi – there is no harm in him. Ibn wahb wrote from him in Egypt.

As you notice there is no stipulation that Shabib’s narration must be from Yunus ibn Yazid in order to be authentic (sahih).

So yes, we accept that the Ulema have praised the book Shabib wrote from Yunus an Zuhri but to manipulate the statements of praise for this route mentioned by Ibn Abi Hatim and Ali al-Madini in order to disparage all of his other narrations from other narrators by way of memory or otherwise is a fallacy and not supported in their statements whatsoever.

All this goes to show how unreliable the Salafis are in terms of manipulating the texts of the Ulema of old.

Now,
 some mention of two scholars who did place a condition on Shabib’s reliability – namely that it not be Ibn Wahb who narrate from him:

Ibn Adi said in Al-Kamil Fil-Du’afa:

 

^[rough translation of relevant excerpts]
“He has a written copy of Hadith from Younus ibn Yazeed which is fine”
“When his son Ahmad narrates from him with the ahadeeth of Yunus then it is as if they were two different Shabibs, not the shabeeb who ibn wahb narrated disclaimed narrations from when Shabib was on a business trip in Egypt. Ibn Wahb narrated from Shabib disclaimed narrations. Shabib may have transmitted mistakes from memory. I hope that he did not do this intentionally.”
Before we discuss this statement, let us remember in the background that large numbers of Ulema have clearly declared Shabib to be THIQA [utterly reliable].
Let us investigate what has been mentioned by Ibn Adi and what can truly be understood from it.

The claim that “Shabib may have transmitted mistakes from memory” is a speculation brought up by Ibn `Adi (4:31)
Ibn `Adi states that “Ibn Wahb narrated from Shabib disclaimed narrations.”
However, according to Shaykh GF Haddad, the few examples he gives are good hadiths, not one of them is actually weak!
Nevertheless, let us accept Ibn Adi’s statement at face value.
The situation is clarified by the fact that Shabib went to Egypton a business trip [as Ibn Adi mentioned] and not to actually report ahadith. Hence on this one occasion (of un-preparedness) there was the possibility of erroneously reporting some things (as he was after all fallible).

Bottom line: what is criticized is the transmission: Ibn Wahb –> Shabib
Ibn `Adi praises Ahmad’s narration of Shabib’s ahadeeth from Yunus.

But, as you may have noticed in the above notice from Ibn Adi there is no stipulation from him that Shabib’s narration must be from Yunus ibn Yazid in order to be authentic (sahih).

He merely praises it – as does Ibn Abi Hatim’s in Al-Jarh Wa Al-Ta’dil and Ali al-Madani as shown above.
This, of course, does not mean that if Shabib were to narrate from anyone else it would not be accepted.
Anyone who claims as such is making an unfounded ta’wil based on his hawwa!

If Ibn Adi’s statement is taken literally, then this is all that we can gain from it:

1- The narration of Ahmad -> Shabib -> Yunus is excellent
2- What Ibn Wahb reported from Shabib in Egypt is not accepted, and in it are mistakes
3- There is nothing preventing the narrations that don’t fall under the conditions referred to in #1 and #2 from being sahih.

Another scholar whose statements are misinterpreted and manipulated by the 
Salafis is Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.

Salafis 
often mention that Ibn Hajar writes about Shabib, in his Muqaddimah: “al-Bukhari narrated some ahadith from him via his son, which he narrated from Yunus. And he never narrated from him anything from anyone other than Yunus…” (1/429)

This point is somehow meant to support a claim that Shabib’s narrations are only acceptable to Ibn Hajar if it fulfills the chain Ahmad – Shabib – Yunus.

This is, of course, nonsense!

We have already mentioned that yes, this chain is impeccable – but no, there is no evidence in this statement that Shabib’s narrations from other than Yunus are not acceptable. We accept that Imam Bukhari only made use of this chain but there are thousands of sahih Hadith with chains that the Imam did not use – does it make them weak?

Ibn Hajar’s final word on Shabib, is found in al-Taqrib where he [like Ibn Adi] questions the narrations of Ibn Wahb but clearly does not mention any condition that his narrations be from Yunus alone. He says:

“There is no harm [la ba’s] in the narration of his son [Ahmad ibn Shabib] from him, unlike that of Ibn Wahb.”
شبيب ابن سعيد التميمي الحبطي بفتح المهملة والموحدة البصري أبو سعيد لا بأس بحديثه من رواية ابنه أحمد عنه لا من رواية ابن وهب من صغار الثامنة مات سنة ست وثمانين خ خد س
 
So again, this further strengthens the chain of Imam Bayhaqi in which Ahmad ibn Shabib is narrating from his father!

Conclusion:

1) Many of the Ulema gave Shabeeb general tawtheeq.
So, for example, Imam al-Tabarani considered him Thiqa and did not lay any conditions on his reliablity – hence he considered even his own chain containing Ibn Wahb narrating from Shabib to be Sahih!
2)
 The Ulema have not laid any condition that Shabib’s narration only be acceptable if they are from Yunus.
Moreover, Shabib was from Basra, as was Rawh bin Al-Qasim (who he reports this hadith from). This was an advantage for Shabib, as there is an added strength to the chain of a local narrating from a local.
This was the case with Malik too who made an effort to report almost solely from Madinian people, which is one of the reasons why his narrations were so acceptable.
3) Some Ulema did question the narrations of Ibn Wahb from Shabib. So, according to these Ulema the chain of Imam al-Tabarani is problematic.

BUT, the chain from al-Dalail an-Nabuwah does not contain Ibn Wahb! So, Alhamdulillah, no problem there!

4) A further condition was mentioned by some such as Ibn Hajar that Ahmad ibn Shabib narrate from his father [Shabib]. Again, this condition is met in the version from Dalail al-Nubuwwa!

Thus it is all crystal clear – the isnad of the Hadith of the man in Need as cited by Bayhaqi in Dalail al-Nubuwwa isAUTHENTIC.

The deception employed by the Salafiyya is ClearlyEvident.

more info/NOTES: Here

—-

(EDITED BY ADHM)

Next
Narration of Malik al-Dar

Part 1:  Here

original source: link

TAWASSUL OF UMAR (RA) THROUGH AL- ABBAS (RA)

TAWASSUL OF ‘UMAR THROUGH

AL-‘ABBAS [may Allah be pleased with them]

كما في صحيح البخاري (954) عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ رضي الله عنه: أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ كَانَ إِذَا قَحَطُوا اسْتَسْقَى بِالْعَبَّاسِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْمُطَّلِبِ فَقَالَ: اللَّهُمَّ إِنَّا كُنَّا نَتَوَسَّلُ إِلَيْكَ بِنَبِيِّنَا فَتَسْقِينَا وَإِنَّا نَتَوَسَّلُ إِلَيْكَ بِعَمِّ نَبِيِّنَا فَاسْقِنَا قَالَ فَيُسْقَوْنَ

It is narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree (954) from Anas ibn Maalik that if a drought came, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radiyallahu ‘anhu) would ask al-‘Abbaas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib to pray for rain. He would say: “O Allah, we used to beseech You by means of (the du’a of) Your Prophet for rain and You would give us rain; now we beseech You by means of (the du’a of) the paternal uncle of Your Prophet, so grant us rain.” [Salafi translation]

This hadith is often manipulated by the salafis to try and prove that Tawassul is only through the living and not through the deceased.

Question:

How do the contemporary Hanafi scholars explain the hadeeth recorded in Sahih Al-Bukhari according to which Khalifah Umar (Allah be pleased with him) asked Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) to ask Allah for rain on behalf of the Muslim community and not the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) at his grave. The Khalifah said that they USED to ask the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to ask Allah and now they ask his uncle instead.

The Correct Understanding of the Tawassul of’Umar through al-‘Abbas 

Before turning to the question and its questionable premises some preliminary remarks are in order.

First of all, `Umar asked al-`Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib,not his son `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas…

Second
, the terminology of the Khalifa’s request, Allah be well-pleased with him, is as follows:

“O Allah! We would use our Prophet as a means to You and You then sent us rain; now we use our Prophet’s uncle as a means to You, therefore send us rain!”

Narrated from Anas by al-Bukhari in his Sahih.

“Whoever understands from this that `Umar only used al-`Abbas as his means and not the Messenger of Allah, upon him peace, because al-`Abbas is alive and the Messenger of Allah is dead –that person’s understanding is dead.”  (Al-Maliki)

Al-Suyuti mentions the context of this event in his Tarikh al-Khulafa’ (Beirut, 1992 Ahmad Fares ed. p. 140):

“In the year 17 `Umar enlarged the Prophetic mosque. That year there was a drought in the Hijaz. It was named the Year of Cinders (`am al-ramada). `Umar prayed for rain for the people by means of al-`Abbas. Ibn Sa`d narrated from [the Sahabi] Niyar al-Aslami that when `Umar came came out to pray for rain, he came out wearing the cloaks (burd) of the Messenger of Allah, upon him blessings and peace. Ibn `Awn narrated that `Umar took al-`Abbas’s hand and raised it up, saying, ‘O Allah, we seek a means to You with the uncle of Your Prophet to ask that You drive away from us the drought and water us with rain’….”

Now, the event of the tawassul of Sayyiduna `Umar through al-`Abbas shows the following:

[1] Nowhere in the hadith is there any indication that there was no tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, in the time of `Umar. Such a view is an inference or an extrapolation that is not based on explicit evidence.

[2] On the contrary, `Umar implicitly made tawassulthrough the Prophet upon him peace, at that very time, by wearing his blessed cloaks as he came out for the prayer for rain as mentioned in the report by Ibn Sa`d. In Sahih Muslim Asma’ says that she inherited the mantle of the Prophet from her sister `A’isha and that they used it to seek a cure for people.

[3] The use of the Prophet’s uncle illustrates thattawassul is essentially through the Prophet upon him peace, as the importance of al-`Abbas in this respect is only in his relationship to the Prophet as `Umar himself states with the words “the uncle of Your Prophet” in al-Bukhari’s version already mentioned; “the status of al-`Abbas in relation to your Prophet” in al-Lalika’i’s version; and as al-`Abbas states:

“O Allah, truly no tribulation descends except because of sins, nor is lifted except upon repentence. The people have turned to you by means of me BECAUSE OF MY POSITION IN RELATION TO YOUR PROPHET, and here are our hands [raised up] towards you – despite our sins – and our forelocks in repentence, so send down water for us and PRESERVE YOUR PROPHET IN THE PERSON OF HIS UNCLE.” Whereupon the sky let down water as thick as ropes and the people came over to al-`Abbas passing their hands over him and saying to him: “Congratulations to you, irrigator of the two Sanctuaries!” Whereupon `Umar said, “He/This is, by Allah, the means to Allah and the place of nearness to Him!”

Cited from al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar’s narration in al-Ansab by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (2:497).

So the tawassul continues to be solely through the Prophet despite appearances to the contrary, for he is the ultimate recourse of human beings seeking nearness to Allah as he himself taught the blind man (“Say, ‘O Muhammad, I turn with you to Allah…’”) and as several Sahaba explicitly said, such as in the following reports:

(a) Report of the Bedouin who said to the Holy Prophet :

We have come to you when even our virgins’ milk is dry, and the mother worries for her own life over her child’s, The child lets down his arms sitting still For hunger, a hunger unstilled and uninterrupted. We have nothing left from what our people eat Except bitter colocynth and camel-wool mixed with blood. And we have none but you to flee to, for where can people flee except to the Messengers? 

Then the Prophet – upon him peace – stood up and he was dragging his garment. He climbed up the pulpit and said: “O Allah, send us water….” whereupon rain fell abundantly. Then the Prophet upon him peace said: “If Abu Talib were alive he would have liked to see this. Who will recite for us what he said?” Hearing this, `Ali stood up and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I think you mean his saying:

A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows. With him the clan of Hashim seek refuge from calamities, For they possess in him immense favor and grace….”

Narrated by al-Bayhaqi in Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (6:141) cf. Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya (6:90-91) and Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (1989 ed. 2:629).

(b)
 Report of Sawad ibn Qarib al-Sadusi who declaimed:

Truly, you are the nearest of all Messengers as a means to Allah, son of the noblest and purest ones!

Therefore, be an intercessor for me the Day none but you among intercessors shall be of the least benefit for Sawad ibn Qarib!

Whereupon the Prophet smiled, upon him peace, and said: “You have obtained success, Sawad!”

Narrated by Abu Ya`la in his Mu`jam (p. 265), al-Tabarani in al-Kabir (7:94 §6475), Abu Nu`aym in Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (p. 114 §63), al-Taymi in the Dala’il (p. 132), al-Hakim in the Mustadrak, (3:705), al-Bayhaqi in the Dala’il (2:251) cf. Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Isti`ab (2:675), Ibn Kathir, Tafsir (4:169) and Bidaya, Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari (7:180) and Isaba (3:219).

(c) Report of Hassan ibn Thabit who declaimed:

O Pillar of those who rely upon you, O Immunity of those who seek refuge in you, and Resort of those who seek herbiage and rain, and Neighboring Protector of those in need of shelter! O you whom the One God has chosen for His creatures by planting in him perfection and purity of character!

Narrated by Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Isti`ab (1:276) and Ibn Sayyid al-Nas in Minah al-Mad-h (p. 73).

[4] The background to `Umar’s prayer for rain shows that there was also an explicit tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, performed by the Sahabi Bilal ibn al-Harith as narrated in two versions:

(a) Version 1

From the Sahabi Malik al-Dar:

The people suffered a drought in `Umar’s khilafa, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wa- Alihi wa-Sallam and said: “Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished.” After this the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: Be clever!” The man went and told `Umar. The latter wept and said: “My Lord! I spare no effort except in what escapes my power.”

Ibn Kathir cites it thus from al-Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (7:47) in al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya (Ma`arif ed. 7:91-92=Dar Ihya’ al-Turath ed. 7:105) saying: “isnaduhu sahih” and he also declares its chain sound (isnaduhu jayyidun qawi) in his Jami` al-Masanid (1:223) in Musnad `Umar. Ibn Abi Shayba cites it (6:352=12:31-32) with a sound (sahih) chain as confirmed by Ibn Hajar who says: “rawa Ibn Abi Shayba bi’isnadin sahih” and cites the hadith in Fath al-Bari, Book of Istisqa ch. 3 (1989 ed. 2:629-630=1959 ed. 2:495) as well as in al-Isaba (6:164 §8350=3:484) where he says that Ibn Abi Khaythama cited it. It is also thus narrated by al-Khalili in al-Irshad (1:313- 314) and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Isti`ab (2:464=3:1149).

Al-Albani attempted to weaken this report in his Tawassul (p. 120)but was refuted in the lengthy analysis given by Mamduh in Raf` al-Minara (p. 262-278), which refutes other similar attempts cf.Ibn Baz’s marginalia on Fath al-Bari, Abu Bakr al-Jaza’iri’s tract Wa-Ja’u Yarkudun, Hammad al-Ansari’s articles “al-Mafhum al-Sahih lil-Tawassul” also titled “Tuhfat al-Qari fil-Radd `ala al-Ghumari,” and other such literature.

Ibn Hajar identifies the man who visited and saw the Prophet upon him peace, in his dream as the Companion Bilal ibn al- Harith, counting this hadith among the reasons for al- Bukhari’s naming of the chapter “The people’s request to their leader for rain if they suffer drought” in his Sahih, book of Istisqa’.


(b) Version 2 from al-Tabari’s Tarikh (2:509):

In the year of the drought called al-Ramada during the successorship of `Umar the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harith, while slaughtering a sheep for his kin, noticed that the sheep’s bones had turned red because the drying flesh was clinging to them. He cried out “Ya Muhammadah!” Then he saw the Prophet – upon him peace – in a dream ordering him to go to `Umar with the tidings of coming rain on condition that `Umar show wisdom. Hearing this, `Umar assembled the people and came out to pray for rain with al-`Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet upon him blessings and peace.


[5] `Umar had made tawassul through the Prophet in the past, upon him peace, since he said: “WE WOULD USE OUR PROPHET AS A MEANS TO YOU…” i.e. in his and Abu Bakr’s rule (and not only during the life of the Prophet upon him peace), as it is improbable that they never once experienced drought in the previous 8.5 years. “But to restrict this sententence to the Prophet’s lifetime is a deficiency stemming from idle lust, a manipulation of the text of the report, and figurative interpretation without proof.” (Al-Kawthari)

[6] At any rate the major Sahaba did make tawassulthrough the Prophet upon him peace, after his time as established by the report from our Mother `A’isha – Allah be well- pleased with her – in al-Darimi’s Sunan, in the 15th Chapter of the Introduction (1:43) titled: “Allah’s generosity to His Prophet after his death,” related from Aws ibn `Abd Allah with a good chain:

“The people of Madina complained to `A’isha of the severe drought that they were suffering. She said: “Go to the Prophet’s grave and open a window towards the sky so that there will be no roof between him and the sky.” They did so, after which they were watered with such rain that vegetation grew and the camels got fat. That year was named the Year of Plenty.”

The reader will find extensive documentation on this report in the Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine (4:47-52) and it was declared authentic by all the Sunni experts of hadith, last in date Shaykh Nabil ibn Hashim al-Ghamri in his 1999 10-volume edition of and commentary on al-Darimi titled Fath al-Mannan (1:564-566) where he rejects the objections of al-Albani and his likes to this hadith.

[7] `Umar had made tawassul through the Prophet upon him peace, in the campaign of Tabuk and had therefore directly experienced the Divine munificence and Prophetic generosity.

“When the travel provision of the people decreased they thought of slaughtering their camels but `Umar came to the Prophet upon him peace, and said, ‘How will they survive without their camels?’ The Prophet said, ‘Call to them to bring every remainder of their travel provisions.’ A piece of leather was spread and they brought whatever they had. Then the Messenger of Allah stood and supplicated, then he blessed over the food and summoned them to being their bags. The people supplied themselves to the last one. Then the Messenger of Allah said, ‘I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah!'”

Narrated from Salama ibn al-Akwa` by al-Bukhari and Muslim and from Abu Hurayra by Muslim and Ahmad.

[8] `Umar used al-`Abbas to show people the status of the Prophet’s family in the society and teach them to respect and venerate them, as Ibn Hajar said in explanation of the report of Anas cited above:

It is desirable to seek the intercession of saintly people and the relatives of the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wa-Alihi wa-Sallam, and it shows al-`Abbas’s great merit and that of `Umar due to the latter’s humbleness before al-`Abbas and his recognition of his due right.”

This is confirmed by al-Ajurri’s narration in al-Shari`a and Ahmad in Fada’il al-Sahaba (2:937 #1802) that Ka`b al- Ahbar took al-`Abbas’s hand and said, “I shall hide it away [this handshake] for your intercession on my behalf.” Al- `Abbas replied: “Why, will I have the power of intercession?” Ka`b said: “Yes, there is none from the Household of the Prophet upon him and them peace, except they have the power of intercession!” Ka`b al-Ahbar also said to Sayyidina `Umar: “Whenever the Israelites had a drought they sought intercession through their Prophet’s household” as narrated by Ibn `Abd al- Barr in al-Isti`ab (2:814).

[9] It is known that `Umar had a particular veneration for the Prophetic Household (Ahl al-Bayt) as illustrated by the following reports:

(a) Ibn Sa`d narrated from al-Sha`bi and al-Hasan that al- `Abbas had some need of `Umar one day and said to him: “Commander of the Believers, suppose the uncle of Musa, upon him peace, came to you as a Muslim, how would you treat him?” He replied, “I swear by Allah that I would treat him well!” Al-`Abbas said, “Well, I am the uncle of Muhammad the Prophet – upon him and his House blessings and peace!” `Umas said, “Abu al-Fadl, and what do you suppose? By Allah, your father [`Abd al-Muttalib] is certainly dearer to me than my own father!” He said, “By Allah?” `Umar said, “By Allah, yes! Because I know that he [`Abd al-Muttalib] is dearer to the Messenger of Allah than my own father, therefore I prefer the love of the Messenger of Allah to my love.”

(b) A man disparaged `Ali ibn Abi Talib in the presence of `Umar whereupon the latter said: “Do you know the dweller of this grave? He is Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. And `Ali is the son of Abu Talib ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. Therefore, do not mention `Ali except in a good way for if you dislike him you will harm this one in his grave.” Narrated by Ahmad with a good chain in Fada’il al-Sahaba (2:641 #1089).

(c) After `Umar saw al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib waiting at his door he said to him: “You are more deserving of permission to enter than [my son] `Abd Allah ibn `Umar! You see the goodness that was placed on our head; [therefore] first Allah; then you [the Prophetic Household]!” and he placed his hand on his head as he spoke. Narrated by Ibn Sa`d, Ibn Rahuyah, and al-Khatib.

(d) Jabir said he heard `Umar ibn al-Khattab say on the pulpit after he married Umm Kulthum, the daughter of `Ali and Fatima – Allah be well-pleased with them:

“Do not disparage me [for marrying a young girl], for I heard the Prophet say, upon him blessings and peace: ‘On the Judgment Day every means will be cut off and every lineage severed except my lineage.'” 

Narrated by al-Tabarani. Al-Haythami said its narrators are those of al-Bukhari and Muslim.

`Umar desired to place himself in the Prophet’s lineage through this marriage due to the precedence of Ahl al-Bayt in the Prophet’s intercession, upon him and them peace.

[10] Nor is this intercession solely by way of the Prophet’s mere supplication (du`a) and by means of al-`Abbas’s mere supplication as claimed by the innovators and by the terminology of the question cited above. Rather, it was by means of theirperson (dhat) AND du`a as literally stated in the following reports among many others:

(a) Intercession through the Prophet’s person according to Ibn `Umar:

In Sahih al-Bukhari: `Abdullah ibn Dinar said:

“I heard Ibn `Umar reciting the poetic verses of Abu Talib:

A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows.
“`Umar ibn Hamza said: Salim narrated from his father (Ibn `Umar) that the latter said: “The poet’s saying came to my mind as I was looking at the face of the Prophet – upon him blessings and peace – while he was praying for rain – and he did not come down until the rain water flowed profusely from every roof-gutter:

A fair-skinned one by whose face rainclouds are sought, A caretaker for the orphans and protector of widows.”
One sub-narrator added: “These were the words of Abu Talib.” 

Note that in his translation of Bukhari (2:65), Muhammad Muhsin Khan alters the wording of the hadith to read: “A white person WHO IS REQUESTED TO PRAY FOR RAIN” in place of “by whose face rain is sought.” This is tahrif i.e. textual and semantic manipulation of the most important source in Islam after the Qur’an.

(b) 
Intercession through al-`Abbas’s person according to`Umar:

“People! The Messenger of Allah sallAllahu `alayhi wa-Alihi wa-Sallam considered al-`Abbas like his father, venerating him and greatly respecting him and his rights. Therefore, O people! take the lead of the Messenger of Allah in the person of his uncle al-`Abbas and take the latter as yourmeans to Allah Most High in the context of your tribulation.” 

Narrated from `Umar with a sound chain by al-Baladhiri and with weak chains from Ibn `Umar by al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar in al-Ansab and Ibn `Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (8:932) as cited by Ibn Hajar in the Fath (1959 ed. 2:497). Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf` al- Minara (p. 120) rejected al-Albani’s claim in his book al-Tawassul (p. 67-68) that the chain of this hadith is “mixed up” (mudtarib) as inapplicable here.

[11] `Umar showed the possibility of tawassul through X. even though Y. – also present – may be better than X. He showed that tawassul through the inferior in the presence of the superior is permissible as there is Consensus that the best of all living human beings after Prophets then, namely `Umar, `Uthman, and `Ali are all three superior to al-`Abbas, Allah be well-pleased with all of them. This was also a mark of humbleness on `Umar’s part as already cited from Fath al-Bari.

 

Another example of this is the tawassul of Mu`awiya forrain through the Sahabi Yazid ibn al-Aswad al-`Amiri as narrated by Abu Zur`a al-Dimashqi in his Tarikh and his tawassul also through the Tabi`i Abu Muslim al-Khawlani as narrated by Ahmad in al-Zuhd cf. al-Tahanawi, I`la’ al-Sunan (8:193).

[12] `Umar used al-`Abbas also as a precaution lest people’s faith in the Prophet upon him peace, be shaken in case the prayer were not answered.

[13] Finally, the Sunna prayer for rain formally has to be performed by the outward, political Imam of the Muslims or his deputy. It is in that function that the office of the Messenger of Allah – upon him blessings and peace – had ceased and was taken over, first by Abu Bakr, then by `Umar. Al-`Abbas’s position in this event is that of the deputy of the latter as the Commander of the Believers…

[…]

original souce: link

Up ↑