Question:
Respected Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai, Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,I pray that Allah keeps us all adherent to the Quran and Sunnah and utilizes us in the service of His religion according to our capabilities. Respected Hafiz Sahib, I have a few questions. Please kindly provide detailed answers. It is okay if the answers take some time, but they should be comprehensive. May Allah reward you generously. (Ameen)
Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله), Hafiz Ibn Qayyim (رحمه الله):
Please provide their stance from their books with references. Were they followers (muqallid) or not?
**Additionally, clarify whether their books prove Shirk (polytheism) or not. Barelvi scholars prove their belief in the hearing and seeking help from the dead using 'Kitab al-Ruh' and other such works. Do their other books also state that seeking help from the dead and the unseen is prohibited or Shirk? If so, please provide references. A Barelvi friend claims that their belief aligns with that of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim. Is this true? If not, please explain. If any of these questions are suitable for Al-Hadith, please do publish them. Jazak Allah Khair.
A Barelvi friend says that before Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, no one declared seeking help from graves and the unseen as Shirk.
Is this true? If not, may Allah reward you. Please provide references from at least ten ancient interpreters of the Quran and Hadith who have declared seeking help from the unseen or the dead as Shirk. Note that these should be statements from significant interpreters.
The hadith that when you are in a deserted place and lose your ride, call out (O servants of Allah, help me).
If its chain is weak, prove it and provide details about all its routes. Which scholars have declared it weak? Provide their statements with references. Also, has any major commentator (other than Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Barelvi) proven seeking help from graves or the unseen from this hadith?
Answer:
Walaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) was a renowned scholar and was known as Shaykh al-Islam. It is absolutely not proven that he was a follower (muqallid); rather:
◈ Hafiz Ibn Qayyim (رحمه الله) writes:"
Some followers objected to Shaykh al-Islam teaching at Ibn Hanbali School, which was dedicated to Hanbalis, and the independent scholar is not among them. He replied: 'I only utilize what I do based on my knowledge of Ahmad's (bin Hanbal) school, not by following him.'"[I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, 2/241-242, Dar al-Jil, Beirut, Lebanon, al-Radd ala man Akhlada ila al-Ardh, Suyuti, p. 166]
Second Evidence:◈ Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah's student Hafiz al-Dhahabi (رحمه الله) writes about him:"
Shaykh al-Imam al-Allamah al-Hafiz al-Naqid (the jurist), the independent scholar (mujtahid), the brilliant commentator, Shaykh al-Islam, the ascetic leader, the rare of the era..."
[Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, 4/1496, 1175]
It is known that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was considered a mujtahid by Hafiz al-Dhahabi, and a mujtahid does not follow (taqlid).
◈ Tahawi Hanafi wrote about the ranks of independent scholars:"
They are non-followers."[Hashiyat al-Tahawi ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 1/51]
◈ Master Muhammad Amin Okardawi Deobandi Hayati writes:"
A person who is a mujtahid will himself find the issue from the rules of Shariah and will act upon the book and Sunnah."[Tahqiq Mas'alah Taqlid, p. 5, Majmu'ah Rasail, 1/21, October 1991, Gujranwala]
Third Evidence:
Some people keep saying that it is obligatory for the common people to follow (taqlid) of a specific individual (for example, Imam Abu Hanifa رحمه الله). Refuting these people:
◈ Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah says:"
As for someone saying that it is obligatory for the common people to follow (taqlid) of so-and-so, this is not said by any Muslim."
[Majmu' al-Fatawa, 22/249]
It is clear that according to Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah, no Muslim advocates for obligatory following of so-and-so.
Fourth Evidence:
A person who shows bias towards a particular Imam while following (taqlid), like the method of Deobandis and others, Ibn Taymiyyah calls such a person ignorant, oppressive, and like the Rafidhis.
[Majmu' al-Fatawa, 22/252]
This detailed explanation shows that Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) was not a follower (muqallid) but was an adherent of the Quran and Sunnah. Alhamdulillah.
Hafiz Ibn Qayyim wrote a separate book 'I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in' refuting taqlid, which can be downloaded from here. Jalaluddin Suyuti (died 911 AH) calls this book 'Dham al-Taqlid'.
[Al-Radd ala man Akhlada ila al-Ardh, p. 166]
Fifth Evidence:◈ Hafiz Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya says about taqlid:"
This innovation (bid'ah) originated in the fourth century, condemned by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)."[I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, 2/208]
It is clear that the prevalent taqlid is considered a condemned innovation (bid'ah) by Imam Ibn Qayyim, proving that he was not a Hanbali follower but a mujtahid and adherent of the Quran and Sunnah. Alhamdulillah.
Benefit:
Deobandi and Barelvi elders, Mulla Ali Qari Hanafi (died 1014 AH) writes:"Whoever studies 'Sharh Manazil al-Sairin' will find that they (Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim) were among the great scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah and the saints of this Ummah."
[Jami' al-Wasail fi Sharh al-Shamail, 1/207]
To my knowledge, there is no evidence of Shirk of elders in the books of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim (رحمهما الله). However, in the verified 'Kitab al-Ruh' of Ibn Qayyim and other books, weak and rejected narrations are certainly present. These two did not believe in seeking help from the dead; as for the issue of hearing the dead (Samaa Mawta), it is a matter of difference among the righteous predecessors (Salaf), and considering it disbelief and Shirk is incorrect. The correct and predominant view is that, except for some specific occasions proven by authentic Ahadith, the dead do not hear anything.
Your Barelvi friend's claim that "our belief aligns with that of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim" requires evidence. If so, let him provide detailed and referenced proof from Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim for their known beliefs, such as obligatory following of Abu Hanifa, Hadhir Nazir, Noor min Noor Allah, and knowledge of the unseen.
Ask your Barelvi friend to prove from any one trustworthy and credible Imam who lived before Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (رحمه الله) that seeking help from graves is valid or not Shirk.
Centuries before Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (رحمه الله) was born, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728 AH) wrote a book 'Al-Jawab al-Bahir fi Zuwar al-Maqabir', in which he strongly refuted grave worshipers.
Those who raise loud voices of greeting (Salam) towards the Prophet's grave:
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah wrote:"
This is an innovation that no scholar has considered recommended."[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 9, Riyadh, Jazirat al-Arab/Saudi Arabia]
Those who go to graves and call upon them (ويدعونه ويحبونه مثل ما يحبون الخالق):
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah called them 'Ahl al-Shirk'.
[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 21]
This entire book is worth reading. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) considered grave worship the first cause of Shirk (هو أول أسباب الشرك فى قوم نوح).
[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 12]
Centuries before Shaykh al-Islam, Abdullah bin Umar (رضي الله عنهما) considered touching the Prophet's grave as disliked (makruh)."Ibn Umar used to dislike touching the Prophet's grave."
[Juz Muhammad bin Asim al-Thaqafi al-Asbahani, p. 27, its chain is authentic, Abu Usamah is free from Tadlis]
Benefit:
Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali (died 620 AH) wrote about lighting lamps at graves:"And it is excessive reverence for the graves similar to the reverence of idols..."
[Al-Mughni, 2/193, issue 1594]
Explaining an Ayah in Surah Yunus (10:101), Mufassir Ibn Jarir Tabari (died 310 AH) says:"
Allah says: Do not call upon anything besides your Lord and Creator, neither in this world nor in the Hereafter..."
[Tafsir Tabari, 11/122]
This reference from an ancient trustworthy Mufassir is sufficient. Those who consider grave worship permissible should prove it from a single trustworthy ancient Mufassir.
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah called those who call upon the inhabitants of graves for help as 'Mushriks' (polytheists).
[Kitab al-Radd ala al-Akhna'i, p. 52] and [Majmu' al-Fatawa, 27/256]
The narration you mentioned with its various chains is present in Musnad Abu Ya'la, Al-Mu'jam al-Kabir by Al-Tabarani, and Musnad Al-Bazzar, etc. All its chains are weak.
[Silsilat al-Da'ifah, Al-Albani, 2/108-112, no. 655, 656]
The chain in Musnad Al-Bazzar is rejected by Shaykh Al-Albani due to being anomalous (Shadh). The narrator himself is criticized.
◈ Hafiz Al-Daraqutni (رحمه الله) said about him:"
He is trustworthy but makes many mistakes and relies on his memory."
[Su'alat Hamzah bin Yusuf al-Hamidi for Al-Daraqutni, p. 116]
◈ And he said:"
He makes mistakes in the chain and the text. He narrated Al-Musnad in Egypt from memory, looks into people's books and narrates from his memory, and made many mistakes. People criticized him."
[Su'alat Al-Hakim for Al-Daraqutni, p. 23]
◈ Abu Ahmad Al-Hakim said:"
He makes mistakes in the chain and the text."
[Lisan al-Mizan, 1/237]
Al-Bazzar was considered trustworthy and truthful by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi, Abu Awana, the author of Musnad, and others.
Against Al-Bazzar's defective narration, Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Abdullah bin Abbas (رضي الله عنهما) that he said:"Indeed, Allah has angels on the earth besides the guardian angels who write down what falls from the leaves. If any of you experiences a mishap in the land and cannot find helpers, he should call out: 'O servants of Allah, help us or assist us, may Allah have mercy on you.' He will indeed be assisted."
[Shu'ab al-Iman, Al-Bayhaqi, 6/128, no. 7697, its chain is hasan (good), 1/183, no. 167]
In this statement of a Sahabi, calling upon living angels is permissible, so this calling is within the means (Mataht al-Asbab). There is no evidence of calling upon dead souls in this statement. Therefore, using it as evidence for calling beyond the means (Mafawq al-Asbab) is incorrect.
Joke:
One of the narrators in Musnad Al-Bazzar and Al-Bayhaqi is Usama bin Zaid Al-Laythi, who is considered Hasan al-Hadith according to the preferred opinion. If this narrator appears in a hadith against the Hanafis, they immediately criticize him, for example:[Athar al-Sunan, Al-Nimawi, regarding the issue of offering prayer during the early dawn, hadith no. 213 from Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari (رضي الله عنه), footnote]
Is this what justice means? Only this. والسلام
(25th Dhu al-Qa'dah, 1426 AH)
Respected Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai, Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,I pray that Allah keeps us all adherent to the Quran and Sunnah and utilizes us in the service of His religion according to our capabilities. Respected Hafiz Sahib, I have a few questions. Please kindly provide detailed answers. It is okay if the answers take some time, but they should be comprehensive. May Allah reward you generously. (Ameen)
Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله), Hafiz Ibn Qayyim (رحمه الله):
Please provide their stance from their books with references. Were they followers (muqallid) or not?
**Additionally, clarify whether their books prove Shirk (polytheism) or not. Barelvi scholars prove their belief in the hearing and seeking help from the dead using 'Kitab al-Ruh' and other such works. Do their other books also state that seeking help from the dead and the unseen is prohibited or Shirk? If so, please provide references. A Barelvi friend claims that their belief aligns with that of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim. Is this true? If not, please explain. If any of these questions are suitable for Al-Hadith, please do publish them. Jazak Allah Khair.
A Barelvi friend says that before Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, no one declared seeking help from graves and the unseen as Shirk.
Is this true? If not, may Allah reward you. Please provide references from at least ten ancient interpreters of the Quran and Hadith who have declared seeking help from the unseen or the dead as Shirk. Note that these should be statements from significant interpreters.
The hadith that when you are in a deserted place and lose your ride, call out (O servants of Allah, help me).
If its chain is weak, prove it and provide details about all its routes. Which scholars have declared it weak? Provide their statements with references. Also, has any major commentator (other than Ghulam Rasool Saeedi Barelvi) proven seeking help from graves or the unseen from this hadith?
Answer:
Walaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) was a renowned scholar and was known as Shaykh al-Islam. It is absolutely not proven that he was a follower (muqallid); rather:
◈ Hafiz Ibn Qayyim (رحمه الله) writes:"
Some followers objected to Shaykh al-Islam teaching at Ibn Hanbali School, which was dedicated to Hanbalis, and the independent scholar is not among them. He replied: 'I only utilize what I do based on my knowledge of Ahmad's (bin Hanbal) school, not by following him.'"[I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, 2/241-242, Dar al-Jil, Beirut, Lebanon, al-Radd ala man Akhlada ila al-Ardh, Suyuti, p. 166]
Second Evidence:◈ Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah's student Hafiz al-Dhahabi (رحمه الله) writes about him:"
Shaykh al-Imam al-Allamah al-Hafiz al-Naqid (the jurist), the independent scholar (mujtahid), the brilliant commentator, Shaykh al-Islam, the ascetic leader, the rare of the era..."
[Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, 4/1496, 1175]
It is known that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was considered a mujtahid by Hafiz al-Dhahabi, and a mujtahid does not follow (taqlid).
◈ Tahawi Hanafi wrote about the ranks of independent scholars:"
They are non-followers."[Hashiyat al-Tahawi ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 1/51]
◈ Master Muhammad Amin Okardawi Deobandi Hayati writes:"
A person who is a mujtahid will himself find the issue from the rules of Shariah and will act upon the book and Sunnah."[Tahqiq Mas'alah Taqlid, p. 5, Majmu'ah Rasail, 1/21, October 1991, Gujranwala]
Third Evidence:
Some people keep saying that it is obligatory for the common people to follow (taqlid) of a specific individual (for example, Imam Abu Hanifa رحمه الله). Refuting these people:
◈ Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah says:"
As for someone saying that it is obligatory for the common people to follow (taqlid) of so-and-so, this is not said by any Muslim."
[Majmu' al-Fatawa, 22/249]
It is clear that according to Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah, no Muslim advocates for obligatory following of so-and-so.
Fourth Evidence:
A person who shows bias towards a particular Imam while following (taqlid), like the method of Deobandis and others, Ibn Taymiyyah calls such a person ignorant, oppressive, and like the Rafidhis.
[Majmu' al-Fatawa, 22/252]
This detailed explanation shows that Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) was not a follower (muqallid) but was an adherent of the Quran and Sunnah. Alhamdulillah.
Hafiz Ibn Qayyim wrote a separate book 'I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in' refuting taqlid, which can be downloaded from here. Jalaluddin Suyuti (died 911 AH) calls this book 'Dham al-Taqlid'.
[Al-Radd ala man Akhlada ila al-Ardh, p. 166]
Fifth Evidence:◈ Hafiz Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya says about taqlid:"
This innovation (bid'ah) originated in the fourth century, condemned by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)."[I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, 2/208]
It is clear that the prevalent taqlid is considered a condemned innovation (bid'ah) by Imam Ibn Qayyim, proving that he was not a Hanbali follower but a mujtahid and adherent of the Quran and Sunnah. Alhamdulillah.
Benefit:
Deobandi and Barelvi elders, Mulla Ali Qari Hanafi (died 1014 AH) writes:"Whoever studies 'Sharh Manazil al-Sairin' will find that they (Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim) were among the great scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah and the saints of this Ummah."
[Jami' al-Wasail fi Sharh al-Shamail, 1/207]
To my knowledge, there is no evidence of Shirk of elders in the books of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim (رحمهما الله). However, in the verified 'Kitab al-Ruh' of Ibn Qayyim and other books, weak and rejected narrations are certainly present. These two did not believe in seeking help from the dead; as for the issue of hearing the dead (Samaa Mawta), it is a matter of difference among the righteous predecessors (Salaf), and considering it disbelief and Shirk is incorrect. The correct and predominant view is that, except for some specific occasions proven by authentic Ahadith, the dead do not hear anything.
Your Barelvi friend's claim that "our belief aligns with that of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim" requires evidence. If so, let him provide detailed and referenced proof from Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim for their known beliefs, such as obligatory following of Abu Hanifa, Hadhir Nazir, Noor min Noor Allah, and knowledge of the unseen.
Ask your Barelvi friend to prove from any one trustworthy and credible Imam who lived before Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (رحمه الله) that seeking help from graves is valid or not Shirk.
Centuries before Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab (رحمه الله) was born, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728 AH) wrote a book 'Al-Jawab al-Bahir fi Zuwar al-Maqabir', in which he strongly refuted grave worshipers.
Those who raise loud voices of greeting (Salam) towards the Prophet's grave:
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah wrote:"
This is an innovation that no scholar has considered recommended."[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 9, Riyadh, Jazirat al-Arab/Saudi Arabia]
Those who go to graves and call upon them (ويدعونه ويحبونه مثل ما يحبون الخالق):
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah called them 'Ahl al-Shirk'.
[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 21]
This entire book is worth reading. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (رحمه الله) considered grave worship the first cause of Shirk (هو أول أسباب الشرك فى قوم نوح).
[Al-Jawab al-Bahir, p. 12]
Centuries before Shaykh al-Islam, Abdullah bin Umar (رضي الله عنهما) considered touching the Prophet's grave as disliked (makruh)."Ibn Umar used to dislike touching the Prophet's grave."
[Juz Muhammad bin Asim al-Thaqafi al-Asbahani, p. 27, its chain is authentic, Abu Usamah is free from Tadlis]
Benefit:
Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali (died 620 AH) wrote about lighting lamps at graves:"And it is excessive reverence for the graves similar to the reverence of idols..."
[Al-Mughni, 2/193, issue 1594]
Explaining an Ayah in Surah Yunus (10:101), Mufassir Ibn Jarir Tabari (died 310 AH) says:"
Allah says: Do not call upon anything besides your Lord and Creator, neither in this world nor in the Hereafter..."
[Tafsir Tabari, 11/122]
This reference from an ancient trustworthy Mufassir is sufficient. Those who consider grave worship permissible should prove it from a single trustworthy ancient Mufassir.
◈ Ibn Taymiyyah called those who call upon the inhabitants of graves for help as 'Mushriks' (polytheists).
[Kitab al-Radd ala al-Akhna'i, p. 52] and [Majmu' al-Fatawa, 27/256]
The narration you mentioned with its various chains is present in Musnad Abu Ya'la, Al-Mu'jam al-Kabir by Al-Tabarani, and Musnad Al-Bazzar, etc. All its chains are weak.
[Silsilat al-Da'ifah, Al-Albani, 2/108-112, no. 655, 656]
The chain in Musnad Al-Bazzar is rejected by Shaykh Al-Albani due to being anomalous (Shadh). The narrator himself is criticized.
◈ Hafiz Al-Daraqutni (رحمه الله) said about him:"
He is trustworthy but makes many mistakes and relies on his memory."
[Su'alat Hamzah bin Yusuf al-Hamidi for Al-Daraqutni, p. 116]
◈ And he said:"
He makes mistakes in the chain and the text. He narrated Al-Musnad in Egypt from memory, looks into people's books and narrates from his memory, and made many mistakes. People criticized him."
[Su'alat Al-Hakim for Al-Daraqutni, p. 23]
◈ Abu Ahmad Al-Hakim said:"
He makes mistakes in the chain and the text."
[Lisan al-Mizan, 1/237]
Al-Bazzar was considered trustworthy and truthful by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi, Abu Awana, the author of Musnad, and others.
Against Al-Bazzar's defective narration, Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Abdullah bin Abbas (رضي الله عنهما) that he said:"Indeed, Allah has angels on the earth besides the guardian angels who write down what falls from the leaves. If any of you experiences a mishap in the land and cannot find helpers, he should call out: 'O servants of Allah, help us or assist us, may Allah have mercy on you.' He will indeed be assisted."
[Shu'ab al-Iman, Al-Bayhaqi, 6/128, no. 7697, its chain is hasan (good), 1/183, no. 167]
In this statement of a Sahabi, calling upon living angels is permissible, so this calling is within the means (Mataht al-Asbab). There is no evidence of calling upon dead souls in this statement. Therefore, using it as evidence for calling beyond the means (Mafawq al-Asbab) is incorrect.
Joke:
One of the narrators in Musnad Al-Bazzar and Al-Bayhaqi is Usama bin Zaid Al-Laythi, who is considered Hasan al-Hadith according to the preferred opinion. If this narrator appears in a hadith against the Hanafis, they immediately criticize him, for example:[Athar al-Sunan, Al-Nimawi, regarding the issue of offering prayer during the early dawn, hadith no. 213 from Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari (رضي الله عنه), footnote]
Is this what justice means? Only this. والسلام
(25th Dhu al-Qa'dah, 1426 AH)
Last edited by a moderator: