09. January 2014 Refutation 0

It was said

Among their strongest fallacies and wickedest of heresies is their corrupted talk about tawassul. Perhaps they misguide more people with this fallacy than with their talk about likening Allah to the creations. They say to the unsuspecting person, “Do you worship the graves? Do you worship the Prophets? Do you call upon the dead?” And of course, that unsuspecting Muslim would say, “Never!” They would say to him, “Beware of those who do shirk throughout the Muslim lands, calling upon the Prophets and Muslim Saints (Waliyys), rubbing themselves on their graves and asking for their intersession.” They say more than this, and this is a very dangerous poison. It is like the bite of the so-called vampire, quickly turning its victims into practically incurable deviants. The one who learns before encountering this talk of theirs can protect himself, but the one who has leant them a listening ear in this issue may never return to the truth, even if he heard all of the evidence. In fact, he would just ignore all of the evidence and believe that it is all weak, even if their own authorities authenticate the references. Some prefer to avoid tawassul after hearing the talk of the Wahhabiyys in this issue, even if they do not take the Wahhabiyy creed. Let us not make this introduction longer than it needs to be, and bring the remedy for their sick poison. However, one must know that the key to refuting Wahhabiyys in this issue is textual evidence; Qur’anic verses, hadiths and traditions from the Companions (athar). You must understand and memorize the proof. An essential mistake of the Wahhabiyy in this topic is his rejection of religious proof for his opinion. To successfully refute them, it is imperitive that you know the references that disprove them, and enforce those references on them.

The first thing one must do to protect himself and others, and to refute the Wahhabiyys in this menacing deviance, is understand the meaning of “ˆibadah (worship)”, because they accuse the Muslims of worshipping other than Allah when they never did so. To understand the meaning of worship, one must understand that worship (ˆibadah) is a concept; a description of one’s actions.

Therefore, one may walk, and depending on his intention, his walking may be worship or may not be. In the hadith that we will revisit, the Prophet taught us to say when walking to the Masjid:
وَأَسْأَلُكَ بِحَقِّ مَمْشَايَ هَذَا، فَإِنِّي لَمْ أَخْرُجْ أَشَرًا، وَلَا بَطَرًا، وَلَا رِيَاءً، وَلَا سُمْعَةً، وَخَرَجْتُ اتِّقَاءَ، سُخْطِكَ، وَابْتِغَاءَ مَرْضَاتِكَ
“…O Allah, I ask You by the right of this walking of mine, for I have not gone out boasting, or to impress, nor insincerely, nor seeking a reputation. I have gone out fearing Your punishment and seeking Your acceptance…”
His eating might be worship or might not be. The Prophet taught the one who forgot to eat in the name of Allah to say:
بِسْمِ اللَّهِ أَوَّلَهُ وَآخِرَهُ
“In the name of Allah at its beginning and at its end.”
His fighting might be worship or it might not be. A man said the Prophet, “One may fight out of anger, or to protect himself, so what is fighting for the sake of Allah?” The Prophet said:
مَنْ قَاتَلَ لِتَكُونَ كَلِمَةُ اللَّهِ هِيَ العُلْيَا، فَهُوَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ
“Whoever fights so that the Word of Allah will be dominant has fought for the sake of Allah.”
Even one’s prostrating might be worship to someone or it might not be. For this reason, when we prostrate to Allah we are worshipping Him, and when the Angels prostrated to Adam, they were not worshipping him, and when Muˆadh Ibn Jabal prostrated to the Prophet, he was not worshipping the Prophet. The references for these prostrations are as follows:
It was confirmed that when Muˆadh Ibn Jabal came from the lands of Ash-Sham, he prostrated to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ . The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
مَا هَذَا
“What is this?” He said, “O Messenger of Allah, I saw the people of Ash-Sham prostrating to their generals and priests, and you are more deserving of that. The Prophet said:
لا تَفْعَل, لَوْ كُنْتُ آمِر أَحَدًا أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لأَحَدٍ لأَمَرْتُ الْمَرْأَةَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِزَوْجِهَا
“Do not do that. Had I ordered anyone to prostrate to anyone, I would have ordered the woman to prostrate to her husband.” This is narrated by Ibn Hibban, Ibn Majah and others. Yes, it may be forbidden in the Laws of Muhammad to prostrate to a human, but that is beside the point. Always beware of a Wahhabiyy reaching for something beside the point. The point is that the great Companion prostrated to the Prophet, and the Prophet did not accuse him of shirk. Prostration is a greater indication of humility and servitude than calling, so how is calling the Prophet worshipping him while prostrating to him is not? Also, Allah commanded the Angels to prostrate to Adam:
<(وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا)>[1

So what makes one prostration worship and the other not? Even the brothers of Prophet Yusuf prostrated to him:
وَخَرُّوا لَهُ سُجَّدًا

Why is seeking refuge with Allah worshipping Allah, and seeking refuge with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ not worshipping him? Imam Ahmad narrated in his Musnad, with a hasan chain of narration, as said by Hafidh Ibn Hajar[2], that Al-Harith Ibn Hassan Al-Bakriyy said in the presence of the Prophet ﷺ:
أَعُوذُ بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ أَنْ أَكُونَ كَوَافِدِ عَادٍ
“I seek refuge with Allah and his Messenger from being like the delegate of the tribe of ˆAd.” The Prophet did not object to him. Had what he done been shirk, the Prophet would have clarified that. How we know that the Wahhabiyys are misguided in this issue, is that they would consider the one who seeks refuge with Allah and His Messenger ﷺ a mushrik, even after knowing of the strong hadith in this issue. If you were to tell him the hadith before he ever knew about it, he would assume that it is weak or fabricated, and find such a doing very ugly and despicable. In fact, to him, this is obvious and clear shirk, although Imam Ahmad narrated it and did not comment on it; had it been such obvious shirk, he would have realized that when documenting it.

Worship is the ultimate submission, the extent of humility, and the maximum humbleness and fear for another, not calling and asking. Take some of the quotes of the Sunniyy linguists for the true definition of ˆibadah (worship):
The hafidh, faqih and linguist, Taqiyyu-d-Din ˆAliyy Ibn ˆAbdi-l-Kafi As-Subkiyy defined it as:
غَايةُ الخُضُوعِ الخُشُوع
“the extremity in humbleness and fear”, as mentioned by the imam, hafidh and linguist, Muhammad Murtada Az-Zabidiyy. Others have mentioned the likes of this, such as Abu Mansur Al-Azhariyy in Tahdhib Al-Lughah. He said in conveying the words of Az-Zajjaj, who is among the most famous linguists[3]:
ومعنى العبادة في اللغة: الطاعة مع الخضوع
“Worship in the Arabic language is the (special) obedience with the (ultimate) humility.” This does not mean that any obedience is worship, or any humility, or else anyone who obeyed another, even his parent or employer, would be worshipping that one, and anyone who humbled himself to another, even his parent or commanding officer, would be worshipping that other. Ibn Mandhur said similar to that in Lisanu-l-ˆArab[4], as well as Al-Farra’ and Ar-Raghib Al-Asbhaniyy in his book Mufradatu-l- Qur’an [5]. Ibn Athir said, “ˆIbadah in the language is the obedience with the submission.” Also, Al-Fayyumiyy, one of the famous linguists said in Al-Misbah[6]:
وهي الانقياد والخضوع
“…it is the submission and the humility.”

Hence, to refute the Wahhabiyy, you must understand firmly that worship is not merely calling upon someone- whether alive or dead- nor merely seeking help from someone other than Allah, nor fearing someone, nor being hopeful of something from someone, nor merely glorifying someone, nor merely going to the grave of a waliyy to seek blessings, just as it is not merely prostrating or merely seeking refuge. Nor is it worship to request something from someone in an unusual way, because when the Children of Israel were searching for the body of Prophet Yusuf, a woman requested from Prophet Musa that she would be his companion in Paradise, and she did not request that from Allah. Had she done an act of shirk, Musa, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, would have clarified that.

None of these matters in themselves are applicable to the meaning of ˆibadah according to the linguists, as you have just seen. The Wahhabiyys use all of these matters to wrongfully define worship, and then accuse the Muslims of worshipping someone other than Allah. What we have presented as the definition of ˆibadah is what is linguistically confirmed, what is normal (ˆurf), and in compliance with what came in the Religion. Take, for example, a person who goes to the grave of his dead parent, falls to his knees crying, and says, “O Father!” It is not normally thought that this person has worshipped his dead parent, except by a Wahhabiyy, because to him, calling a dead person is forbidden and is worship of the dead. According to him, whoever says, “O, Prophet Muhammad,” has blasphemed for calling upon someone who has died, although it came in the Tashahhud for the Prayer:
السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ
“Peace be upon you, O Prophet.”
Then, according to the Wahhabiyyah, the Four Imams, Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafi^iyy and Ahmad are all mushriks for confirming this as part of the Prayer after the Prophet’s death, as well as the Companions who passed them on to the people after them, like Ibn Abbas and Ibn Mas^ud. Not only is this calling on the Prophet after his death, but it is part of the Prayer. Despite that, the Companions and the imams did not say it is forbidden, let alone shirk.


Tawassul linguistically means: “to seek a means”. Allah said in His Book:
وَابْتَغُوا إِلَيْهِ الْوَسِيلَةَ
This means seek everything that grants you a higher status to Allah, and by that, Allah will make the results of those means manifest for you, and Allah has the power to make them manifest without those means. This verse is not restricted, and therefore it is not valid for a Wahhabiyy to restrict it to particular conditions that he believes in, as will be made clear. It means to take advantage of the means, and Allah will manifest for you the results you seek. Technically, tawassul is to seek from Allah the occurrence of a benefit or the repulsion of harm by mentioning the name of a Prophet or a waliyy, out of honor of the one by whom the tawassul is made. An example is what Al-Bayhaqiyy narrates in Dala’il An-Nubuwwah:
لَمَّا اقْتَرَفَ آدَمُ الْخَطِيئَةَ، قَالَ: يَا رَبِّ أَسْأَلُكَ بِحَقِّ مُحَمَّدٍ لَمَا غَفَرْتَ لِي
“When Adam committed the sin, he said, ‘O my Lord, I ask you by the status of Muhammad to forgive me’…” As is clear, this is part of the Religion, and far from deviance, blasphemy or shirk.

Our answer to the Wahhabiyy who asks, “Why make tawassul? Cannot Allah grant you what you seek without that?” is, “Yes, but He made tawassul an optional resort. There is nothing wrong with it, and in fact it is beneficial and helpful.” Allah made the matters of life based on reasons and consequences, although He has the power to grant us reward without us doing any deeds.
An-Nasafiyy said in his Tafsir:
تقديم الوسيلة قبل طلب الحاجة أقرب إلى الإجابة
“Advancing the good deeds and offerings before seeking the need makes it more likely for one to be answered.” Allah made the tawassul by the Prophets and waliyys during their lives and after their deaths a means for the manifestation of what we seek. We ask Allah by them, hoping that we would get what we asked for. We say, “O Allah, we certainly ask You by the status or honor of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ to fulfill our need or to relieve us of our calamity.” We also say, “O Allah, we ask you by the status of ˆAbdi-l-Qadir Al-Jaylaniyy…” and the like. It is not a condition to say, “by the status of”. One can say, “I ask you by Muhammad,” as will be seen. This is permissible and has only been made forbidden by the Wahhabiyyah, thus they have deviated from Ahlu-s-Sunnah.

There is no real evidence that tawassul by the Prophets and the Waliyys is forbidden, whether that was done in their absence or after their deaths. The Wahhabiyyah have claimed that this is shirk, unless some conditions are fulfilled: that it is done in their presence during their lives, but the Prophet said:
كُلُّ شَرْطٍ لَيْسَ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَهُوَ بَاطِلٌ، وَإِنْ كَانَ مِائَةَ شَرْطٍ
“Every condition that is not in the Book of Allah is invalid, even if it were 100 conditions.” The condition of being alive and present is a fabrication, as we will prove by first referring to “The Hadith of the Blind Man (Hadithu-l-Aˆma)”. This hadith perfectly discredits the claims of the Wahhabiyyah on every level; that making tawassul or calling upon someone is only permissible if that one were alive and present, or else it is shirk:
Within it is evidence that calling on someone is not worship, because the blind man was personally ordered by the Prophet ﷺ to call upon the Prophet ﷺ, who would never order someone to worship him. The Prophet ﷺ said to him:
ائت الميضأة فتوضأ وصل ركعتين ثم قل اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبينا محمد نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي في حاجتي لتقضي لي
“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray two rakˆahs, then say, ‘O Allah, I surely ask you, and direct myself to You by our Prophet, Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself by you to my Lord in my time of need so that my need would be fulfilled’.”

2. There is also proof that calling upon someone in his absence is permissible, because the blindman, obeying the Prophet, went away from the Prophet ﷺ when he called upon him, as proven by the saying of Ibn Hunayf, the Companion who narrated the hadith:
قال فوالله ما تفرقنا ولا طال بنا المجلس حتى دخل علينا الرجل كأنه لم يكن به ضر قط
“I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the session been long, when the man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.” This means that he went away from the Prophet ﷺ, as the Prophet ﷺ ordered him, said the supplication that contains calling on the Prophet, and then came back.

3. There is also proof that calling upon someone after his death is not worship, because the Companions continued to teach this supplication after the Prophet’s death ﷺ, as ˆUthman Ibn Hunayf did. Also, the hadith scholars continued to narrate this supplication without forbidding the people from applying it after the death of the Prophet ﷺ.

Here is the hadith in its entirety as narrated by At-Tabaraniyy in his two books Al-Muˆjam Al-Kabir and Al-Muˆjam As-Saghir:
عن عثمان بن حنيف : أن رجلا كان يختلف إلى عثمان بن عفان رضي الله عنه في حاجة له فكان عثمان لا يلتفت إليه ولا ينظر في حاجته فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فشكا إليه ذلك فقال ائت الميضأة فتوضأ ثم صل ركعتين ثم قل اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبينا محمد نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربي في حاجتي لتقضي لي ثم رح حتى أروح معك فانطلق الرجل ففعل ما قال ثم أتى باب عثمان فجاء البواب فأخذ بيده فأدخله على عثمان بن عفان فأجلسه على طنفسته فقال ما حاجتك؟ فذكر له حاجته فقضا له حاجته و قال ما ذكرت حاجتك حتى كانت هذه الساعة ثم خرج من عنده فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فقال جزاك الله خيرا ما كان ينظر في حاجتي ولا يلتفت إلي حتى كلمته في فقال عثمان بن حنيف والله ما كلمته ولكن شهدت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم وقد أتاه ضرير فشكا عليه ذهاب بصره فقال: إن شئت صبرت و إن شئت دعوت لك فقال يا رسول الله إنه شق علي ذهاب بصري و إنه ليس لي قائد فقال: ائت الميضأة فتوضأ وصل ركعتين ثم قل هؤلاء الكلمات ففعل الرجل ما قال فوالله ما تفرقنا ولا طال بنا المجلس حتى دخل علينا الرجل كأنه لم يكن به ضر قط
A man used to go back and forth to ˆUthman Ibn ˆAffan, may Allah accept his deeds, because of an issue that he needed fulfilled. ˆUthman did not look into his issue. This man met ˆUthman Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about that. So ˆUthman Ibn Hunayf said to him, “Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, pray two rakˆahs, and then say, ‘O Allah, I surely ask You, and direct myself to You by our Prophet, Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad, I direct myself to my Lord by you in my time of need so that my need would be fulfilled,’ then come to me so that I would go with you.” The man left and did as he said, but then went directly to the door of ˆUthman. The doorman came, took him by the hand and took him in to see ˆUthman Ibn ˆAffan. He sat him on his carpet and said, “What is it that you need?” So he told him about his need, and ˆUthman fulfilled his need for him and said, “I did not remember your need until this moment.” Then the man left ˆUthman, met with ˆUthman Ibn Hunayf and said, “May Allah compensate you. He would not look into my need until you spoke to him about me.” ˆUthman said, “I swear by Allah, I did not speak to him, however, I witnessed the Messenger of Allah ﷺ when a blind man came to him and complained about the loss of his sight. He said to the blind man:
“If you want, you will be patient, and if you want, I will make supplication for you.”
The man said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, The loss of my sight has surely been a hardship on me, and I certainly have no one to guide me.’ So he said to the blind man:
“Go to the place of wudu’, make wudu’, then say these words…”
The man did as he said, and I swear by Allah, we had not dispersed, nor had the session been long, when the man came to us sightful as if he had never been blind.

Ibn Taymiyah was the first to prohibit making tawassul by the Prophet, as mentioned by Taqiyyu-d-Din As-Subkiyy, in his book Shifa’u-s-Saqam. He said:
Know that it is permissible and good to make tawassul, to seek help (istiˆanah), and to seek intercession (tashaffuˆ) by the Prophet ﷺ to one’s Lord, the glorified and exalted. The permissibility and goodness of that is known by every religious person. It is known by the doings of the Prophets and Messengers, and the biographies of the righteous Salaf, and no one has denied that from any religion, and the denial of it was never heard of at any time in history until Ibn Taymiyah came and spoke about it with speech by which he fooled those who are weak and inexperienced. He innovated what was not preceded before him at any time in history.”

It is permissible to make tawassul by what is attributed with life and what is not attributed with life. Allah said:
{(وَاسْتَعِينُوا بِالصَّبْرِ وَالصَّلَاة)}[7
Seek help through patience and prayer>.
A Wahhabiyy’s blindness will make him unable to see the evidence in this verse that commands us to seek help from other than Allah. The validity of tawassul by the Prophets and the pious, and by what is alive and what is not alive, is in the well-known, aforementioned hadith narrated from the route of Abu Saˆid Al-Khudriyy:
إذا خرج الرجل من بيته إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فقال اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْأَلُكَ بِحَقِّ السَّائِلِينَ عَلَيْكَ وَبِحَقِّ مَمْشَايَ هذا
“If someone left his house to go to the prayer and he said, ‘O Allah, surely I ask You by the right of those who ask You, and by the right of this walking of mine…’.”
The Prophets and the pious are among those who ask Allah, so it is lawful to make tawassul by them; this hadith promotes the meaning: “I ask You by the right of the Prophets”, or “by the right of the waliyys”. “By the right of” means, “I ask you by the status that those have with You”.
Furthermore, those people have a higher status to Allah than the status of the walking, so if it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the walking to the prayer- which is not something living-, it is permissible to make tawassul by the status of the Prophets and the pious people, whether living or not living. We have already presented the tawassul of Adam by the Prophet as an example:
لَمَّا اقْتَرَفَ آدَمُ الْخَطِيئَةَ، قَالَ: يَا رَبِّ أَسْأَلُكَ بِحَقِّ مُحَمَّدٍ لَمَا غَفَرْتَ لِي
“When Adam committed the sin, he said, ‘O my Lord, I ask you by the status of Muhammad to forgive me’…” If making tawassul by someone who is not alive is shirk, then according to the Wahhabiyys, Adam, the father of men, along with the Four Imams, is a mushrik, because he made tawassul by the Prophet before the Prophet was created. Let us see what other names will join this list of people that the Wahhabiyyah consider mushriks.
EXTRA DETAIL: “The Tawassul of ^Umar by Al-^Abbas”
If they say, “ˆUmar Ibn Al-Khattab made tawassul by Al-ˆAbbas after the Prophet’s death; does that not prove that it is forbidden to make tawassul by him after his death, since ˆUmar would not leave out doing what is best had it been permissible?” The answer is that ˆUmar did not leave out tawassul by the Prophet ﷺ because he died. Rather, had the Wahhabiyy understood the text at all, he would have never asked the question, because the answer for his question is contained in the story; Al-ˆAbbas gave the reason for why they made tawassul by him when he said:
اللهم إن القوم توجهوا بي إليك لمكاني من نبيك
“O Allah, certainly the people have directed themselves by me to You because of my status to your Prophet.[8]” He did not say, “They directed themselves by me to You because Your Prophet has died.” Thus, ˆUmar did so out of observing the status of the relatives (Al) of the Prophet. This incident is narrated by Az-Zubayr Ibn Bakkar. Furthermore, leaving out something is not evidence that it is forbidden, as confirmed in the books of the Foundations of Fiqh. The Prophet left out many permissible things, and that is not evidence that they are forbidden. ˆUmar wanted to clarify the permissibility of making tawassul by other than the Prophet, and that is why Ibn Hajar said after narrating this story, “Among the benefits taken from the story of Al-ˆAbbas is the recommendation of seeking intercession by the people of goodness, piety, and the family of the Prophet (Ahlu-l-Bayt).” No one said that this story proves that tawassul by the Prophet after his death is forbidden.
To refute a Wahhabiyy in this issue, you must memorize the proof and not be intimidated by his spooky talk of grave worshippers. One proof that calling is not worship, whether the called one were alive or dead, present or absent, is the aforementioned hadith of the blind man. Take a few more references:
Among what proves that calling the dead is not blasphemy is the story of Prophet Ibrahim and the revival of the dead birds[9]:

To this the Wahhabiyy will laugh and say that we are being silly, but for us, he is being silly, because calling on the dead is calling on the dead- human or not. And why would calling on someone who originally has a mind and speech be worse than calling on a dead thing that when living has no mind or speech? He is the one who made an inconsistent rule, not us.

Among what proves the validity of calling upon other than Allah without worshipping that one, even if he were absent, is what was narrated by Al-Bazzar from the route of Ibn ˆAbbas:
إن لله ملائكة فى الأرض سوى الحفظة يكتبون ما يسقط من ورق الشجر فإذا أصاب أحدكم عرجة بأرض فلاة فليناد أعينوا عباد الله
“Surely, Allah has angels who roam the earth, other than the angels who record the deeds. They document the leaves that fall to the ground. So if one of you were in an open land and was inflicted with a difficulty, let him call out, “Help, O slaves of Allah.” So along with Prophet Adam and the Four Imams, Ibn Abbas is a mushrik according to them, for encouraging seeking help from those who are not present (how would one know those angels are present?). Hafidh Al-Haythamiyy said that At-Tabaraniyy narrated this hadith and its narrators are trustworthy. Ibn Hajar also narrated this hadith in his sessions of dictation (amali) as a hadith of the Prophet ﷺ (marfuˆ), and he judged it as hasan. The different narrations of this hadith support each other, and strengthen whatever weakness exists in some of the narrations.
It is also documented by the scholars of hadith, like Al-Bayhaqiyy in Al-Madkhal, that weak narrations can be used for doing good acts, supplications, and interpretation of the Qur’an, and this was already addressed in this book previously, when we produced Ibn Taymiyah’s approval of what he and his followers consider shirk (because Ibn Taymiyah contradicting himself is nothing strange). In his book Al-Kalimu-t-Tayyib, his quote is:
عن الهيثم بن حنش قال: كنا عند عبد الله بن عمر رضي الله عنهما، فخدرت رجله فقال له رجل: اذكر أحب الناس إليك، فقال: يا محمد، فكأنما نشط من عقال
“From Al-Haytham Ibn Hanash that he said, ‘We were with ˆAbdullah Ibn ˆUmar, may Allah accept his and his father’s deeds, when his leg was inflicted with the ‘khadar’. A man said to him, ‘Mention the most beloved of people to you’, and so he said, ‘Ya Muhammad’, and it was as if he was untied from a knot’.”
So is Ibn Taymiyah a mushrik or not, O Wahhabiyy? Rather, the Wahhabiyy will make every excuse for Ibn Taymiyah for what he has done here, and accuse anyone else who does the exact same thing of shirk.
If the Wahhabiyy says that the hadith is weak, we tell him that is beside the point; Ibn Taymiyah considered it a good practice, weak or not, and even if it were weak, weak narrations can still be used for doing good deeds.
If he says that what is meant in the hadith is that Ibn ˆUmar wanted to conjure up the remembrance of the Prophet in his heart, not to call on the Prophet, we tell him that it says “Ya Muhammad,” which is calling. What grammarian said that saying “Ya So and So” is not calling if one wanted to conjure up the remembrance of another in one’s heart? Are you actually a sane person who accepts this excuse? And how come it was only Ibn ˆUmar who meant to conjure up the Prophet in his heart, and anyone else who says the exact same words after the Prophet’s death is a mushrik according to you (except Ibn Taymiyah)?
If he says, “He was told to MENTION the most beloved person to him, so when he said, ‘Ya Muhammad’, he was only MENTIONING the Prophet, not calling on him.” The answer is that he said, “Ya Muhammad (O Muhammad). The fact that a person told him to MENTION the most beloved to him is beside the point. He called the Prophet after his death.” They play all of these word games because they believe in Ibn Taymiyah more than they believe in the Prophet. They did not play these word games for the sake of Ibn ˆUmar, it was for the sake if Ibn Taymiyah.
EXTRA DETAIL: “the munada (the vocative case in Arabic)”
It is helpful to digress into the Arabic language in this issue. The ‘munada’, literally: ‘the called one’, and grammatically: ‘the vocative case’, is in essence a direct object (mafˆul bih). This is because had one said, “يا عبد الله (O ˆAbdallah)”, it is as if he said “أدعو عبد الله (I call ˆAbdallah).” The verb (أدعو ‘I call’) is omitted, and the particle (يا ‘O’) took its place.
There are a number of particles used for it: Its most famous is (يا ‘Ya’), like ‘Ya Zayd (O, Zayd)’. With it, you can call the close and the far, the one who is present and the one who is not present. Among them is (أ ‘A’), like: ‘AZayd!’; ‘O Zayd!’, if he is close, and there are others. Al-Haririyy said[10]:
ونادِ مَن تدعُو بيَا أَو بِأيَا
أَو همزةٍ أَو أيْ وإنْ شئتَ هَيَا
Call whomever you want to call by (using) ‘ya (يَا)’, ‘aya (أيَا)’, by using a Hamzah (أَ), ‘ay (أيْ)’, and if you want, then by using ‘haya’ (هَيَا).”
It has many cases and branches. One of those branches is the special munada named “al-mustaghathu bih (one whose help is sought).” In his grammar book, the explanation of Qatru-n-Nada, Ibn Hisham, may Allah have mercy upon him, defined this specific munada as:
وَهُوَ كل اسْم نُودي ليخلص من شدَّة أَو يعين على دفع مشقة
‘Every name that is called (out) for being relieved of something harsh, or for assistance in repelling difficulty.” The only particle used for this type is (يا “ya”), which means, ‘O’, and it has details that are not directly related to this discussion. Therefore, for the Wahhabiyys to say that Ibn Taymiyah did not approve of “calling on the dead” as they would call it, or “seeking help (isthighathah) from the dead” is a lie.
Among the evidence of tawassul by the Prophet and others, using them as a means for the supplication to be answered, whether during their lives or after their deaths, is what was narrated by Hafidh Abu Bakr Al-Bayhaqiyy with his chain of narration mentioned in the Arabic text:
قَالَ الْحَافِظُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ الْبَيْهَقِيُّ: أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو نَصْرِ بْنُ قَتَادَةَ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ الْفَارِسِيُّ قَالَا: حدثنا أبو عمرو بْنُ مَطَرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ الذُّهلِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ يَحْيَى، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو مُعَاوِيَةَ، عَنِ الْأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ أَبِي صَالِحٍ عَنْ مَالِكٍ الدار قال: أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ فَجَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى قَبْرِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ اسْتَسْقِ اللَّهَ لِأُمَّتِكَ فَإِنَّهُمْ قَدْ هَلَكُوا
فَأَتَاهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ في المنام فقال: ائت عمر فأقره مني السلام واخبره أنهم مسقون، وقل له عليك بالكيس الْكَيْس.
فَأَتَى الرَّجُلُ فَأَخْبَرَ عُمَرَ فَقَالَ: يَا رب ما آلوا إِلَّا مَا عَجَزْتُ عَنْهُ
From the route of Malik Ad-Dar, that the people were inflicted with a drought[11] at the time of ˆUmar Ibnu-l-Khattab, and so a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, seek the rain for your nation, for certainly they are perishing!’ Then, the Messenger of Allah came to him in the dream and said, ‘Go to ˆUmar and pass the salam to him from me and inform him that they will be irrigated, and say to him, ‘Endeavor, endeavor’. And so the man went and informed ˆUmar, and so ˆUmar said, ‘O my Lord, I do not fall short except in what I am unable to do.’
Hafidh Ibn Kathir, who is trustworthy to them, narrated this and said immediately afterwards:
وَهَذَا إِسْنَادٌ صَحِيحٌ
“This is an authentic chain of narration.” The confirmation of that person who went to the grave being the Companion, Bilal Ibn Al-Harith is found in another version of the story, also narrated by Ibn Kathir:
فَأَخْبَرَهُمْ بِقَوْلِ الْمُزَنِيِّ – وَهُوَ بِلَالُ بْنُ الْحَارِثِ – فَفَطِنُوا وَلَمْ يَفْطَنْ
فَقَالُوا: إِنَّمَا اسْتَبْطَأَكَ فِي الِاسْتِسْقَاءِ فَاسْتَسْقِ بِنَا
“…And so ˆUmar informed them about what Al-Muzaniyy said-and he is Bilal Ibn Al-Harith-and they understood and he did not understand. They said, ‘He is only considering that you have been slow in performing the prayer for seeking rain (al-istisqa’), so lead us in the prayer of seeking the rain.’…”

So how do the Wahhabiyys play with this narration?
If the Wahhabiyy lies and claims that the hadith is weak, we have produced Ibn Kathir’s authentication of the hadith, and he is reliable to them.
If they say that there is no evidence in dreams, we tell them that that is beside the point. The evidence is not in the dream, it is in the doing of the Companion while no one objected to him.
If they say their silence to his deed was the proof that they objected to it, we tell them, “You claim to follow the Salaf, so stop talking; do like them and be silent.” We also tell them that objecting to the deed is by speaking up, not being silent. The Messenger of Allah said:
من رأى منكم منكرا فليغيره بيده فإن لم يستطع فبلسانه فإن لم يستطع فبقلبه
“Any one of you who saw something forbidden, then let him change it by his hand. If unable, then by his tongue. If unable, then with his heart (he must hate it)…[12]”


The Wahhabiyys said that it is not permissible to call someone who is not alive or is absent, because they do not hear, so this is why the person commits shirk in their claim; he must have believed in the godhood of the dead or absent one to think that he (the dead or absent) can hear him (the living) and then help him. We say that this is a claim that has no evidence, and in fact is against the evidence. Ibn ˆAbbas narrated:
قَامَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ عَلَى الْحَجَرِ فَقَالَ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْحَجُّ فَأَسْمَعَ مَنْ فِي أَصْلَابِ الرِّجَالِ وَأَرْحَامِ النِّسَاءِ فَأَجَابَهُ مَنْ آمَنَ وَمَنْ كَانَ سَبَقَ فِي عِلْمِ اللَّهِ أَنَّهُ يَحُجُّ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ لَبَّيْكَ اللَّهُمَّ لَبَّيْكَ
“Ibrahim stood upon the stone and said, ‘O people, Hajj has been made obligatory upon you!’ He made those who were in the spines of the men (as seminal fluid) and the wombs of the women hear, and whoever was to believe and whoever was eternally known by Allah that he would perform the Hajj until Judgment Day responded, ‘labbayka-llahumma, labbayk!’.” In some narrations, it is mentioned that he made everyone in the heavens and earth hear him. So according to the Wahhabiyyah, along with Adam and Ibn ^Abbas and the Four Imams, Prophet Ibrahim is a mushrik. If the Wahhabiyy says, “He was a Prophet,” we say, “Then you are going back on your invalid rule, that those who are not alive or who are far cannot hear. You did not say, ‘Unless the one who calls them is a Prophet’, nor do you believe that, because you misinterpret the verse that we will clarify:
إِنَّكَ لَا تُسْمِعُ الْمَوْتَى)>[13
O Muhammad, you cannot make the dead hear.”
So we pose the question wanting only a “yes-or-no” answer: is it a condition that the one who hears be alive and present? He must say no. If he says, “Not if the caller is a Prophet,” we object because statements without evidence are not accepted in our Religion: It is confirmed that ˆUmar, who is not a Prophet, was in Al-Madinah giving a speech, then interrupted himself to call out to Sariyah, the commander of the army in Persia, “Sariyah, take the mountain, take the mountain!” Later, the messenger of the army told of how the enemy had prepared an ambush, and then they heard ˆUmar’s voice saying to take the mountain, so they took the mountain as cover and avoided the ambush. This is narrated by Al-Bayhaqiyy in Al-Iˆtiqad, and by others, and is very famous. The Imams use it as evidence for the karamahs of the Waliyys. Most likely, the Wahhabiyy will deny this story- without evidence, of course- because he would rather adhere to his empty, false beliefs than submit to religious evidence. So if calling someone depends on him being alive and present, or else it is shirk, then to the Wahhabiyys, along with Adam, Ibn Abbas, the Four Imams and Ibrahim the Messenger of Allah, ˆUmar is a mushrik.

As for the dead hearing, we confirm this because we believe in the life of the Barzakh; the life in the grave. When the person is buried, his soul returns to him, and he returns to consciousness, but in a different state than the people who did not lose their souls yet. He remains like that until his body decays, if his body is among those that decay. For example, there is the hadith of Ibn ˆAbbas from the Prophet:
مَا مِن أحَدٍ يَمُرُّ بقَبْرِ أخِيهِ المؤمنِ كَانَ يَعْرفهُ في الدُّنيا فَيُسَلّمُ علَيه إلاعَرَفَهُ وَردَّ عليهِ السَّلامَ
“There is not one of you that passes by the grave of his fellow believer that he knew in the dunya and gives him the salam, except that he [i.e., the dead one] would know him and return his salam.” This hadith was narrated by Ibn ˆAbdul-Barr and ˆAbdul-Haqq Al-Ishbiliyy, and he deemed it as authentic. Also, Al-Bukhariyy and Muslim narrated from the route of Anas from the Prophet that he said:
إنَّ العَبْدَ إذَا وُضِعَ في قَبْرِه وتَوَلَّى عَنْهُ أصْحابهُ وإنَّه لَيَسْمَعُ قَرْعَ نِعَالِهم إذَا انْصَرَفُوا
“Certainly, the slave, if he is put in his grave, and his companions turn away from him, he will surely hear the steps of their sandals as they leave…”
As for the saying of Allah that the Wahhabiyys always use:
إِنَّكَ لَا تُسْمِعُ الْمَوْتَى)>[14
it likens the blasphemers to the dead, as proven by the fact that the Prophet was calling living people to Islam, not dead people. It does not mean that the dead cannot hear. One reason is that the verse itself does not say that the dead do not hear. It says that Muhammad does not make them hear; Allah is the One Who creates the hearing and understanding in whomever He willed. Another reason is because there are several pieces of evidence proving that the dead do hear, like what was just mentioned, as well as the belief in the questioning of the Angels Munkar and Nakir. They ask the dead people, and the dead people answer them. There is also the the incident when the Prophet said to the casualties of the Battle of Badr:
وَجَدْتُمْ مَا وَعَدَ رَبُّكُمْ حَقًّا؟
“Have you found what your Lord promised you to be true?” It was then said to the Prophet, “O Messenger of Allah, do you call the dead?” He responded:
مَا أَنْتُمْ بِأَسْمَعَ مِنْهُمْ، وَلَكِنْ لاَ يُجِيبُونَ
“You do not hear better than they do, however, they do not answer.”[15]
You should know that the Prophets are alive in their graves and their bodies do not decay. It was narrated in the hadith of Anas from the Prophet,
الأَنْبياءُ أحْياءٌ في قبورهم يُصَلُّونَ
“The Prophets are alive in their graves praying.” Al-Bayhaqiyy deemed it authentic and the Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaniyy agreed with him. You should also know that the Wahhabiyy conviction about the Prophet is that he loses his status after death, and for that reason many of them bad-mouth the Prophet and call him a corpse, or say that a stick is more useful than he is because he has died. They would never dare to say something like that about Ibn Taymiyah.

[1] Al-Baqarah, 34

[2] Fathu-l-Bari
وَقَدْ أَخْرَجَ قِصَّةَ عَادٍ الثَّانِيَةِ أَحْمَدُ بِإِسْنَادٍ حَسَنٍ عَن الْحَارِثِ بْنِ حَسَّانَ الْبَكْرِيِّ قَالَ خَرَجْتُ أَنَا وَالْعَلَاءُ بْنُ الْحَضْرَمِيِّ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْحَدِيثَ وَفِيهِ فَقُلْتُ أَعُوذُ بِاللَّهِ وَبِرَسُولِهِ أَنْ أَكُونَ كَوَافِدِ عَادٍ

[3] Tahdhib Al-Lughah

[4] لسان العرب (3 / 271):
وَيُقَالُ: فُلَانٌ عَبْدٌ بَيِّن العُبُودَة والعُبودِيَّة والعَبْدِيَّةِ؛ وأَصل العُبودِيَّة الخُضوع والتذلُّل

[5] المفردات في غريب القرآن (1 / 542):
العُبُودِيَّةُ: إظهار التّذلّل، والعِبَادَةُ أبلغُ منها، لأنها غاية التّذلّل، ولا يستحقّها إلا من له غاية الإفضال، وهو الله تعالى، ولهذا قال: أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاهُ

[6] المصباح المنير في غريب الشرح الكبير – (ج 2 / ص 389)

[7] Al-Baqarah, 45

[8] عمدة القاري شرح صحيح البخاري – (ج 10 / ص 424), فتح الباري – ابن حجر – (ج 2 / ص 497), تاريخ دمشق – (ج 26 / ص 358)

[9] Al-Baqarah, 260

[10] Mulhatu-l-Iˆrab

[11] The drought lasted six months.

[12] Narrated by Muslim

[13] An-Naml, 80

[14] An-Naml, 80

[15] Al-Bukhariyy

 الا يرى من يُنكر التوسل برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم انه مكتوب على حاط مسجد رسول الله مقابل للمواجه الشريفه ((((صاحب الوسيله ))) !!!!!! قال الله تعالى((( وابتغوا إليه الوسيلة. سورة المائدة، الآية ٣٥))))

الا يرى من يُنكر التوسل برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم انه مكتوب على حاط مسجد رسول الله مقابل للمواجه الشريفه ((((صاحب الوسيله ))) !!!!!! قال الله تعالى((( وابتغوا إليه الوسيلة. سورة المائدة، الآية ٣٥))))