Question for Bro Abu az-Zubayr: Saying "Ya Rasool-Allah Madad" with a different intention?

[Salahadeen]

As-Salam Alaykum.

What is the ruling on the one who says "Ya Rasool-Allah Madad" but with the intention of asking the Prophet [s] to make du'a to Allah [swt]?

In other words, the person intends to say "Ya Rasool-Allah, help me by making du`a to Allah" but he only says "Ya Rasool-Allah, help me".

Is such a person a kaafir?

In another thread, you said that saying "Ya Rasool-Allah, make du`a for me" is shirk, and I agree with you on that. However, you said that some scholars disagreed (and said it is only bidah/haram), and basically we could abstain from making takfeer on such a person because there is some doubt.

But what if the person doesn't even say those words, and instead only says "Ya Rasool-Allah madad" but with the intention of saying "Ya Rasool-Allah, help me by making du`a."

I know these are word games of the innovators, but I just wanted to know what is the ruling on such a person? Kaafir or there is some room for doubt about takfeer on him?

Jazakh-Allah Khair.

[Abuz Zubair]

'alaikum as-salaam wrt wbk

We take the apparent meaning of what one says... if one says, 'Christ Help!' or 'Muhammad help!' or 'Uzza help!' he is a Mushrik, regardless of what he intends.

The scholars have also discussed the issue of the one who bows to the Prophet SAW while believing in his heart that what he is doing is unlawful, or that he is intending in his heart that he is prostrating to Allah alone, that he is a kafir merely by doing this willingly, irrespective of his intentions.

[Salahadeen]

'alaikum as-salaam wrt wbk

We take the apparent meaning of what one says... if one says, 'Christ Help!' or 'Muhammad help!' or 'Uzza help!' he is a Mushrik, regardless of what he intends.

The scholars have also discussed the issue of the one who bows to the Prophet SAW while believing in his heart that what he is doing is unlawful, or that he is intending in his heart that he is prostrating to Allah alone, that he is a kafir merely by doing this willingly, irrespective of his intentions.

Jazakh-Allah Khair.

Some follow-up questions just for extra clarity:

1. Is there ijma on this?

2. Is this called shirk al-lisan (i.e. shirk of the tongue)? In other words, intention is irrelevant, since there is shirk of the heart and shirk of the tongue, and this is shirk/kufr of the tongue? Would it be a correct statement to say that only the Murjia that said statements of the tongue (which are like an action) cannot constitute kufr without what is in the heart? (I hope that makes sense.) In other words, Ahl as-Sunnah--unlike the Murjia--believe that actions and movements of the tongue can constitute kufr in and of themselves, without any need to look at the intention?

3. Just to summarize your view: so you say that there is doubt on doing takfeer for the one who says "Ya Rasool-Allah, make du'a to Allah [swt] for me", but there is no doubt on doing takfeer for the one who says "Ya Rasool_Allah madad" with the intention of saying "Ya Rasool-Allah, make du`a to Allah". Is this a correct understanding? I know that both are shirk, but I am asking about waiving the takfeer.

Jazakh-Allah khair.

[Abul Hasan]

But this is the one case of shirk where we don't make takfeer right? Unlike if he actually asks the Rasool (saw) for help (rather than asking him to make dua'a) or asks him to intercede with Allah. Is this a correct understanding?

Edit: my question refers to Salahadeen's original question. I didn't read his second post when I posted mine.

[Salahadeen]

But this is the one case of shirk where we don't make takfeer right? Unlike if he actually asks the Rasool (saw) for help (rather than asking him to make dua'a) or asks him to intercede with Allah. Is this a correct understanding?

Well, this leads to my fourth question, for which I want a very clear answer for:

4. Do we proclaim takfeer on whoever says "ya Rasool-Allah madad", no matter what their intention is? And what if they are next to the Prophet's grave when they say it? In other words, is "ya Rasool-Allah Madad" a statement of unequivocal kufr like saying "I am a disbeliever" or "I am a Christian", etc.

[Abdullah11]

Bro Abu Zubari I have a question. In the famous story narrated in the time of Mu'tassim bilAllah. When the woman was slapped and she screamed out waa Mu'tassim. Would this be considered istagtha?

[Yasir]

Bro Abu Zubari I have a question. In the famous story narrated in the time of Mu'tassim bilAllah. When the woman was slapped and she screamed out waa Mu'tassim. Would this be considered istagtha?

AZ has answered this before:

Phrases such as wa mu'tasimah! wa muhammadah! Were never understood in the Arabic language as call for help. This call simply indicates one's sorrow.

Hence, when the woman cried out wa mu'tasimah! She was declaring her sorrow over herself during al-Mu'tasim's reign.

When the companions cried out wa muhammadah! They were declaring their sorrow over the Prophet in their fight against Musaylima, and it was also their battle cry.

Similarly, when al-Mudhaffar Qutuz fought the Tatar at 'Ayn Jalut, the battle cry was wa Islamah! They were declaring their sorrow over Islam and not calling upon Islam for help.

The Arabs, similarly often utter wa huznah! wa asafah! Meaning: O my grief! O my sorrow!

Extracted from here.

[Salahadeen]

Bro Abu Zubari I have a question. In the famous story narrated in the time of Mu'tassim bilAllah. When the woman was slapped and she screamed out waa Mu'tassim. Would this be considered istagtha?

Basically, we are not allowed to ask for help from anyone other than Allah [swt].

When someone is hurt and in pain, then it was the custom of the Arabs to call out the name of the one they loved the most. This is true even in Pakistani culture. When I stub my toe, I yell "ya mama!" It has nothing to do with asking for help.

BUT if I called out to my mom for help, i.e. asking her to remove the pain and hurt, then this would be shirk.

[Abuz Zubair]

1. Is there ijma on this?

There is ijma of the salaf on the fact that kufr/shirk occurs in beliefs and/or in actions

2. Is this called shirk al-lisan (i.e. shirk of the tongue)? In other words, intention is irrelevant, since there is shirk of the heart and shirk of the tongue, and this is shirk/kufr of the tongue? Would it be a correct statement to say that only the Murjia that said statements of the tongue (which are like an action) cannot constitute kufr without what is in the heart? (I hope that makes sense.) In other words, Ahl as-Sunnah--unlike the Murjia--believe that actions and movements of the tongue can constitute kufr in and of themselves, without any need to look at the intention?

Yes, intention is irrelevant. Yes, the Murjia did say what you ascribe to them. However, they still considered those who commit kufr in actions/statements to be kuffar in this world and therefore apostates. They only argued that they are believers in the hereafter for having belief in the heart.

3. Just to summarize your view: so you say that there is doubt on doing takfeer for the one who says "Ya Rasool-Allah, make du'a to Allah [swt] for me", but there is no doubt on doing takfeer for the one who says "Ya Rasool_Allah madad" with the intention of saying "Ya Rasool-Allah, make du`a to Allah". Is this a correct understanding? I know that both are shirk, but I am asking about waiving the takfeer.

This is right. If one makes a statement like this: 'Muhammad, Help!' and there is absolutely no other indication that he meant by that the dua of the Prophet SAW, then his words are taken upon the dhahir. I hope this also answers question 4.

In each case qara'in have to be taken into account, and if there is a strong qarina that the person meant something else then that has to be taken into account. Otherwise, the dhahir is enough for takfir.

[abu hafs]

Ask any laymen, who seeks madad with the dead. They surely and clearly believe that the dead will help . It is just their scholars trying to justify their kufr and shirk with false explanations