IMAM AHMAD:GUILTY OF SHIRK??

[asharee_salafi]

ASSALAAMULEKUM,

I READ A BOOK BY SHEIKH AL ALBANI ABOUT TAWASSUL.

IT WAS A FANTASTIC BOOK

BUT WHAT TROUBLED ME WAS WHEN HE SAID THAT HE USED MUHAMMED PEACE AND BLESSINGS BE UPON HIM AS A MEANS OF TAWASSUL

I.E ASKING BY HIS STATUS

I KNOW IMAMS CAN BE MISTAKEN

BUT HOW CAN THE IMAM OF AHL SUNNAH BE MISTAKEN

CERTAIN GROUPS WILL SAY

''YOU ARE JUST A MUQALID, WHO ARE YOU TO SAY THAT HE WAS WRONG OR GUILTY OF DOING BIDAH OR SHIRK''

IT SEEMS MOST UNUSUAL THAT IMAM AHMED WOULD BLUNDER ON SUCH A THING LIKE THIS

ESPECIALLY WHEN 'SALAFIS' ALWAYS TALK ABOUT TAWHEED AND EMPHASISING IT

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS DILEMMA AND SUCCESS IS WITH ALLAH

JAZAK ALLAH KHAIRUN

[ali]

na'am
yaanee....................

you have confused me and maybe other because the name of the post states Imaam Ahmad and also you said this
IT SEEMS MOST UNUSUAL THAT IMAM AHMED WOULD BLUNDER ON SUCH A THING LIKE THIS

But you stated this in the beginning of the post

READ A BOOK BY SHEIKH AL ALBANI ABOUT TAWASSUL

So who was it Imaam Albanee or Imaam Ahmad.

As for the question itself then 1. could be a mistake. 2. could be a writing error by him 3. could be a printing mistake 4. Mistake in the translation (if its a english book)

If you are true in what you say that the book says this then I hope no one sinerily uses this as a proof to justify whatever shirk that they are upon. even Imaams cans be worng since no one is infaalible except the messenger salallahu alaihi wa salam.

asalamu alaaikum

[asharee_salafi]

Assalaamulekum,

I meant al albani said that about Imam Ahmed (and imam shawkani)

yes the book is in english, but i think the maning is still there, besides the ashari's also use this as evidence to show that the salaf did engage in tawassul via Muhammed peace and blessings be upon Him.

It may well be a mistake, but the point remains as to how the imam of Ahl sunnah can blunder on this UNLESS the view is correct.

also he quotes imam bootee from syria to say that ibn qudamah also holds that view aswell.

the reason why i say this is because some deviant groups use this as an evidence for its permissblity

they say
'are you saying that you know the situation better then imam ahmed'

and in one way, how is it possible for clowns like us to say the imaam is wrong when we cant even say an alif properly. UNLESS the imaam is right .

and it is a permisssble form of iktilaf.

WS

[ali]

First of all akh

that is why we do not blindly follow any one except the messenger. So if any one says anything our of the norm then we verify. It is also known many times that scholars would quote other scholars and say "Ibn Rajab says this in Jaami al-Uloom wal-Hikaam" (just an example) but when you find it it isnt there. That is why we verify and we perform takhreej ourselves, not on an ilmi level, but for looking into the evidences.

as for the issue then no one can use that as a proof since the sunnah is suppose to be beloved to us more than any statement of a scholar or few. So if indeed there is this error then it should be brougth to the imaams of our times. I really dont think that is possible (highly unlikely) since if this were true to the "t" then we would have found statements by Bin Baaz,Uthaymeen and others pointing this out to the ummah.
Again this can't be used for proof because if it were true then there ruling would be like those of the fuqaahatu murjiah like Abu Haneefah rahimahullah and Allah knows best. So there (Albanee and whoever he quoted) would not be accepted in this issue if it were true and again Allah knows best and im no alim so this is just a rough estimate so to say on this issue.

asalamu alaikum

[Samira]

BUT WHAT TROUBLED ME WAS WHEN HE SAID THAT HE USED MUHAMMED PEACE AND BLESSINGS BE UPON HIM AS A MEANS OF TAWASSUL

I.E ASKING BY HIS STATUS

Its allowed, I'll get you the refs soon insha Allah. But they'll prolly get censored, will I PM them to you?

[Abu Ilyas]

As Salaamualaikum,

Brother perhaps you can quote what shaykh al Albaani said regarding Imaam Ahmad and Tawsul directly to make things clearer. In absence of the exact words or opinion attributed to Imam Ahmad, I just want to add that seeking Tawassul through the status of the Messenger of Allah, Sallahu alaihi Was Salam has not been classified as shirk by scholars but has been classified as a bidah.This is because different examples of Tawassul have been related in Qur'aan and sunnah but never Tawassul through the status of the Prophet SAWS, so unless someone can find evidence of this type of Tawassul through the status of the Prophet SAWS, then like any act of worship which is not In accordance of the sunnah it should be rejected as a bidah, unless we have some other type of definition for bidah.

Was Salaam

[terrorthreat]

Imaam Abu Haneefah said:

((It is not befitting for anyone to call upon Him, except by Him, and with the supplication that He has permitted and commanded, that which is instructed in His statement:

{And Allaah has Beautiful Names, so call upon Him by them, and leave the company of those who deviate concerning His Names. They will be recompensed for what they used to do})), [Soorah al-A'raaf, Aayah 180], [ad-Durrul-Mukhtaar ma'a Haashiyah Raddul-Mukhtaar (6/396-397)]

Abu Haneefah said:

((It is detested for the supplicator to say: "I ask You by the right of so and so", or, "By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers, and by the right of the Sacred House and the Sacred Sanctuary")), [Sharhul-'Aqeedatut-Tahaawiyyah (p. 234) and Ithaafus-Saadaatul-Mustaqeem (2/285) and Sharhul-Fiqhil-Akbar (p. 198) of al-Qaaree]

And Abu Haneefah said:

((It is not befitting for anyone to call upon Allaah, except by Him, and it is even more detestable for him to say: "By the junctures of Honour from your Throne", or "By the Right of Your Creation")), [al-Fiqhul-Absat (p. 56)]

[ali]

The secong nullifier of Islam isplacing intermediaries between himself and Allah, calling unto them and asking intercession for them, seeking reliance unto them and this is agreed upon by unanimous consensus (ijm'aa).

Let those who say they are Msulims and say that they believe in Allah and the last day take hold and believe in this ayaah firmly which is

"And those who take supporters besides Allah, they say: "We don't worship them except for the purpose of bringing us closer to Allah"

and then because of this Allah declares whoever fall into this as kaafireen and liars in His statement

"Verily Allah will judge between them concerning what they used to differ in. Surely, Allah does not guide he who is a liar, and a hardened disbeleiever" and this is in the same ayaah (Suraah az-Zumar:3)

Allah also says

"And they worship besides Allah that which can neither harm them nor benefit them, and they say: 'These are our intercesors before Allah" (Suraah Yunas:18)

So we now that tawassul means seeking nearness and in the islamic terminology doing that to Allah. Intercessing or the act of is tawassul.

Allah says that they use the excuse of saying that they only supplicate to whoever Imaam bin Bozo or the rigtheous imaams or even the prophet for the purpose of what? to get closer to Allah. So Allah has defined this as shirk. All the imaams of the sunnah and the salaf have agreed that using intercessors is shirk. Along with this then tawassul is only for allah. The only thing we do with our messenger is follow him and his guidnace. Verily tawassul in other than allah is shirk.

Again they say with their lips they do not worship Allah. The action itself whether realized or not or done in ignorance or not is still shirk no matter how anyone slices it or dices it. As for the statements of these Imaams then it there words must be understood the way they intended it and the best ones who know this is none other than there brethren in Ilm. From my understanding (im not one with ilm at all) is that the shaykh merely used his term in its outer form meaning to draw close to the messenger (aka to follow his guidance) but to to practice tawassul to other than allah i beleive was misconstrued by those with some disease in their hearts.

Again my statements here are only from or in conformity of what our Rabb has told all of us so Im not saying this at all. I simply restrict my kalaam to what was revealed and if I speak then I will use the kalaam of those who precedded me in faith (salaf) and those with ilm.

It is funny how some people can not get the clear picture of a certain ayah or even the essence of His message (do not worship others besides Allah) and all the salaf including our nabi has described those things that are considered worship for other than allah E.G. tawassul.

I hope that whoever reads these ayaah can truely beleive in them.

No I see why many ofthe salaf of this nations would perform takfeer off of these things(Shirk). inalillahi wa ina ilaihi raji'oon

asalamu alaikum

[Samira]

A wise man once said (cant remember who) "if i could think of 99 reasons to call a person a kafir, and one reason to call them a muslim, i would call them a muslim"

anyways, the link: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2308
(more of it there)

[terrorthreat]

Kinds of Tawassul
http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=979&dgn=4

Tawassul: Islamic vs. bid’ah
http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=3297&dgn=4

[ali]

then indeed Allah would have not made takfeer of those whom were deserving of takfeer according to this wise man.

That is or would constitue a statement of irj'aa. that is one of the two extremes regarding imaan and the other is kharijiyyah.

so lets just call any one who says the purity of kalimatu-tawheed and nullify it with intercession with intermediaries (just as blowing wind and najis nullifys the purity of wu'doo) and say that he is muslim after Allah the one whom we claim to beleive has already precedded us in testifying in their disbelief, lawhawla wa la kuwata illah billah.

[Abuz Zubair]

as-Salaamu 'Alaikum,

The Hanbalis are divided over the issue of Tawassul through the Prophet - SallAllahu 'alaihi wa-sallam, primarily because Imam Ahmad said to al-Marrudhi (his closest student), "One should make Tawassul through the Prophet".

Referring to all the books of Fiqh (nearly) by the Hanbalis who came after Ibn Taymiyah, one notices that when they mention this issue, they immediately follow it up with the opinion and understanding of Ibn Taymiyah on this issue.

Ibn Taymiyah says that in light of the fact that Ahmad allowed one to swear an oath by the Prophet, he also allowed one to make Tawassul through him. The other narration from Ahmad forbids one from swearing an oath by the Prophet, and hence, it could be extracted from this narration the prohibition of making Tawassul through the Prophet as well.

The reason why Imam Ahmad allowed one to swear an oath by the Prophet, is because the Prophet SallAllahu 'Alahi wa-sallam is twin-half of the testimony of faith, so the one swearing by the Prophet is as if he is swearing by Allah. Hence, he allowed it, and said that the one breaks such oath must make Kaffarah. This is why Imam Ahmad restricted the permissibility of Tawassul as well as oath by the Prophet SallAllahu 'aliahi wa-sallam only.

According to the other narration, however, such is not the case, and likewise, one may not make Tawassul through the Prophet.

However, one may make Tawassul through his love for the Prophet, etc…

Having said that, one should remember – as Sheikh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab said – that this issue is an issue of khilaf (legitimate difference of opinion) and one may not condemn another for doing, or not doing Tawassul through the Prophets and the righteous people.

This should also highlight to us how misunderstood Sheikh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab amongst those who claim to love him, not to mention his enemies!

And as bro Abu Ilyas said, this issue has nothing to do with Tawheed and Shirk.

wasalam

[ali]

Na'am, I think i mentioned before that the tawassul that one would practice for rasulullah is by way of following the messenger as Allah says in the Quraan "If you indeed love Allah, then follow the Messenger, and surely Allah will love you" so through this then I see where this comes in the feild or ballgame so to speak. We must understand the contexts of these two sayings which nessesitated ikhtilaaf. Unfortunately people who have been infected by that which Allah and His messenger fought with the sword have taken it to mean that which what they were upon.

However I will look into this from those people who have a speacialty in uloomul-rijaal and find out the matter of this regard and the validity of suh khilaaf. The reason being because ALL acts that are done purely for Allah and restricted for Allah Alone then no one from the creation shares in that (tawassul being one of them) but other matters like aqa'ieed and itib'aa then this is not resticted to Allah alone subhanahu wa ta'ala. Nevertheless I will perform tadh habut on the mater to further grow in this knowledeg and in the science of men to see if any one of those who specialized in the field had regarded the one who narrated from Ahmad this stroy to be from those of the thiqaat, dha'eef, majrooh etc.

asalamu alaikum

[Abuz Zubair]

The reason being because ALL acts that are done purely for Allah and restricted for Allah Alone then no one from the creation shares in that (tawassul being one of them)

One may make Tawassul through one's righteous actions, which are Allah's creation by the agreement of Ahl al-Sunnah.

but other matters like aqa'ieed and itib'aa then this is not resticted to Allah alone subhanahu wa ta'ala

In fact, it is restricted to Allah alone, since one may not legislate besides Allah, and likewise, we are required to obey Allah alone in all that He legislates.

The Prophet SallAllahu 'alaihi wa-sallam is not the legislator. Rather, 'it is only revelation' that he speaks.

Similarly, the four Imams and other scholars simply strive to arrive at the legislation of Allah. They do not make their own legislations as they go along.

Nevertheless I will perform tadh habut on the mater to further grow in this knowledeg and in the science of men to see if any one of those who specialized in the field had regarded the one who narrated from Ahmad this stroy to be from those of the thiqaat, dha'eef, majrooh etc.

Marrudhi is the devout student of Imam Ahmad and it is to him that Imam Ahmad wrote in his Manasik: 'One should make Tawassul through the Prophet', and the book is authentically attributed to him. In fact, I know of no scholar to doubt in its authenticity. Sh Bakr Abu Zaid also affirms it in his Madkhal.

If there was any doubt in its authenticity, no doubt Ibn Taymiyah would have pointed it out, for it is not from the character of ibn Taymiyah to quote such a narration and not criticise it at all, espacially in his book on Tawassul where he did a very thorough research on the topic.

wasalam

[ali]

okay but when i was reffering to aqaid and ittib'aa then i was meaning that no one can beleive in other than the correct way of creed and following the messenger BUT if someone does like many of the firqa then that does not nessessitate shirk with Allah. Example, like believing that eman doesnt increase or decrease, NO DOUBT this is from the zandiqah of the murji'aa but that isnt shirk.

Thats what I was talking about. As for the narration of this individual from Ahmad, even if Ibn Taymiyyah quoted it without refuting it does not make it not a mistake rather only highly unlikely, but not unmistakable

Also to claifiy even though its a little late but I have miscontrued the difference between tawassul and tawakkul hehehe but I think the meaning of it I gave above still applies to tawassul and allah knows best, BUT I will try to perform takhreej when I get a chance on it as I would like to KNOW with yaqeen about the correct understanding of the affair so as to refute whatever comes through any direction to use that as proof for shirk.

asalamu alaikum

[asharee_salafi]

Assaalaamulekum warahmutalahi wabarakatu

Jazak Allah khairun to all teh brothers and sisters that have wrote replies, it was extremely beneficial

thanks especially to brother ali and abu zubair.

so, I'm in my right NOT to perform tawassul through Muhammed peace and blessings be upon him.

and by doing that i wont be gulty of not loving Muhammed peace and blessings be upon him, right?
and can someone give me a list of names of those scholars OTHER then ibn taymiyyah who forbidded it, i know abu hanifah did, WHO ELSE?

because the sufis make it out as if it was a MAJORITY opinion.


please answer those two points

1. not doing tawassul through Muhammed peace and blessings be upon him is not showing a lack of love

2. is it a majority opinion to DO tawassul through Muhammed peace and blessings be upon him


can Muhammed peace and blessings be upon him be abbreviated to SAW?

[asharee_salafi]

Oh and another thing!

brother abu zubair you said that tawassul through a righteous action is, as ahl sunnah agree with, that it is a creation.

????????????????????????????????????????????

but how can the creation have benefit in it>? i mean the when the salafees say to teh sufis, oh but Muhammed peace and blessinge be upon him is a creation so dont do tawassul by him, then the sufis reply, well what about doing tawassul through your actions which are creations too.!

[ali]

Akhee I wouldnt really even put any weight to what any sufee says since their whole concept on ibaada is so jacked that they are not reliable in this field. Think about it, what kind of weight or validity in the words of someone whos has pantheistic beleifs which is one of those things which nullify Islam or really the main thng that nullifies it.

I mean these are the type of people where you find the most harshest of speech eminating from the aimah of this nation against these people.

These are the people who fit the description of being warned against, labelled as mubtadiah, expelled, beaten, exectued. In the reral and true Islamic state these zindeeqs would be executed forthere pantheistic aqeeda especially after Allah said that every sin is forgiven except that (shirk) and so the words of our nabi should be sufficient for you when he told us to not make of Muhammad as the christians did with 'Isa. everyone knows which group of muslims fell into that error that our nabi just told us to obstain from

asalamu alaikum

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

as salaamu alaykum

I thought the tawasul that imam ahmad rahimullah approved of was just sayings like 'O Allaah bless me by right of your nabi salalahu alayhi wa salam'

Was he of the opinion like ahmad naqib al misri that you can visit the grave of al mustafa salalahu alayhi wa salam and ask him to make dua for you?


Jazakallaah khayr

wasalaam

[Abuz Zubair]

I thought the tawasul that imam ahmad rahimullah approved of was just sayings like 'O Allaah bless me by right of your nabi salalahu alayhi wa salam'

According to one opinion, yes.

Was he of the opinion like ahmad naqib al misri that you can visit the grave of al mustafa salalahu alayhi wa salam and ask him to make dua for you?

No he wasn't. But did Ahmad Naqib Misri believe that? Could you give us ref?

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

as salaamu alaykum


This is what ifind ya akhi though doesnt say necessarily asking the nabi salalahu alayhi wa salam for dua.



In reliance of the Traveler translated by nuh ha mim keller page 356 (j13.2)

How to visit the Prophet's salalahu alayhi wa salam Tomb

It is recommended to pray two rakas to greet his mosque, and then approach the noble and honored tomb and stand at the head of it with ones back to the direction of prayer (qibla). One bows ones head and summons to mind reverent awe and humility, then greets the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam and blesses him in a normal voice (O: Saying: "Peace be upon you, O messenger of Allaah, peace be upon you, O Chosen one of Allaah. Peace be upon you, O best of Allaah's creation. Peace be upon you, O beloved of Allaah")

after which one supplicates Allaah for whatever one wishes. Then one steps half a meter to the right to greet abu bakr, and again to the right to greet umar (Allaah be well pleased with them). Then it is recommended to return to one's original place and do much supplicating Allaah, turning to Allaah through the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam. (O concerning ones aims and goals since he is the greatest intermediary, in intercession and other things), and invoking blessings upon him (salalahu alayhi wa salam) after which one supplicates beside the pulpit (minbar) and in the Rawda (N: which is the space designated by the white pillars between the chamber containg the noble tomb and pulpit.

End of his words

On page 939 Nuh ha mim keller says The upshot is that the recommendedness of tawassul to Allaah Most High through the living or the dead is the position of the shafii school, which is why both our author ibn naqib at j13.2 and Imam nawawi in his al adkhar 281-282 and al majmu 8.274 explicitly record that tawassul through the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam and asking his intercession are recommended.

[Abuz Zubair]

This is what ifind ya akhi though doesnt say necessarily asking the nabi salalahu alayhi wa salam for dua.

That's what I had thought. Isn't it ironic that an issue which is hardly even mentioned in the works of fiqh or 'aqida is made into a litmus test for being a sunni by these heretics?

Keller's claim that this is a mu'tamad Shafi'i position, well, I would like to know which Shafi'i before Keller ever regarded it to be the Shafi'i position.

[Madarijas-Salikeen]

as salaamu alaykum

naam like abul layths emotional cries against those upon dawah as salafiyyah for not supporting such a controversal stance that really doesnt have basis.

Allaahu alim


wasalaam

[AbuNaim]

as-Salaamu 'Alaikum,

The Hanbalis are divided over the issue of Tawassul through the Prophet - SallAllahu 'alaihi wa-sallam, primarily because Imam Ahmad said to al-Marrudhi (his closest student), "One should make Tawassul through the Prophet".

Referring to all the books of Fiqh (nearly) by the Hanbalis who came after Ibn Taymiyah, one notices that when they mention this issue, they immediately follow it up with the opinion and understanding of Ibn Taymiyah on this issue.

Ibn Taymiyah says that in light of the fact that Ahmad allowed one to swear an oath by the Prophet, he also allowed one to make Tawassul through him. The other narration from Ahmad forbids one from swearing an oath by the Prophet, and hence, it could be extracted from this narration the prohibition of making Tawassul through the Prophet as well.

The reason why Imam Ahmad allowed one to swear an oath by the Prophet, is because the Prophet SallAllahu 'Alahi wa-sallam is twin-half of the testimony of faith, so the one swearing by the Prophet is as if he is swearing by Allah. Hence, he allowed it, and said that the one breaks such oath must make Kaffarah. This is why Imam Ahmad restricted the permissibility of Tawassul as well as oath by the Prophet SallAllahu 'aliahi wa-sallam only.

According to the other narration, however, such is not the case, and likewise, one may not make Tawassul through the Prophet.

However, one may make Tawassul through his love for the Prophet, etc…

Having said that, one should remember – as Sheikh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab said – that this issue is an issue of khilaf (legitimate difference of opinion) and one may not condemn another for doing, or not doing Tawassul through the Prophets and the righteous people.

This should also highlight to us how misunderstood Sheikh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab amongst those who claim to love him, not to mention his enemies!

And as bro Abu Ilyas said, this issue has nothing to do with Tawheed and Shirk.

wasalam

Can you give the sources where Imam Ahmad permitted tawassul through the Prophet (saw)?

[ali]

yes, I want to see these sources too

[Abuz Zubair]

You would find it in various hanbali sources, including IT's work on tawassul and al-Insaf and other hanbali works. It's main source is treatise on Hajj Imam Ahmad wrote for his closest companion al-Marrudhi. Point being that IT never denied its attribution to Imam Ahmad.

[AbuNaim]

You would find it in various hanbali sources, including IT's work on tawassul and al-Insaf and other hanbali works. It's main source is treatise on Hajj Imam Ahmad wrote for his closest companion al-Marrudhi. Point being that IT never denied its attribution to Imam Ahmad.

Can you quote all the sayings on this subject from Imam Ahmad (rah) so that we have all these quotes together?

[Abuz Zubair]

As far as I am aware, there is only one quote available from Imam Ahmad, and that is what he said to al-Marrudhi.

Why are you interested, anyway?

[ali]

As far as I am aware, there is only one quote available from Imam Ahmad, and that is what he said to al-Marrudhi.

Why are you interested, anyway?

to eradicate the dhann.

besides, it is better that we have the exact wording, and as well as the chain if possible.

[Ibn malik]

So does this mean that what the Brailwis do is permissible if they claim they are following the opinion of Imam Ahmad in this issue? Is what the Brailwis do, or even the ones fought by Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab, the same thing as what Imam Ahmad is refering to in this fatwa of his?

['Abd al-Kareem]

Brother ibn Malik, it is my understanding that the opinion of Imam Ahmed referred to in this topic was that one could do tawassul by the status of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم).
i.e. "O Allah, I ask you by the status of Your final Messenger Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم), to grant me..."

It is also my understanding that the brelvis actually direct their du'a to Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). This is a whole different issue.

I may be mistaken, perhaps brother Abuz Zubair or another brother can confirm or deny these two understandings of mine (smile).

[abdul muntaqim]

Brother Abu Zubair do you believe it to be shirk for one to ask the prophet SAW to make dua for them, when visiting his grave?

[Skillganon]

Brother Abu Zubair do you believe it to be shirk for one to ask the prophet SAW to make dua for them, when visiting his grave?

Salaam

You should find the answer on this thread: http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=3306