Archive for the ‘Tawassul’ category

The Special Life of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. in BARZAKH

June 23, 2007

The Prophet in Barzakh

The Special Life of Our Prophet by Sayyid Muhammad ibn `Alawi al-Maliki

Translation and notes by GF Haddad ©

It is established that our Prophet possesses an isthmus-life that is greater and more perfect than that of any other, of which he himself told us. It is equally established that he is intimately connected with the Community, fully cognizant of their states, seeing their actions, hearing their speech, replying to their greetings, and the hadiths to that effect are numerous.

Among these hadiths is the narration of the Prophet from `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud – Allah be well-pleased with him:

“Verily, Allah has angels that roam the earth and convey to me the greeting of my Community.”

(Inna lillâhi malâ’ikatan sayyâhîna fi al-ardi yuballighûnî min ummatî al-salâm.)1
Al-Mundhiri said: “Al-Nasa’i and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih narrated it.” Isma`il al-Qadi2 and others have narrated it through various paths with chains that leave no doubt as to their soundness. All of these chains are to Sufyan al-Thawri: From `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa’ib: From Zadhan: From `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud. Al-Thawri explicitly declared having heard it from `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa’ib, as reported in al-Qadi Isma`il’s book. As for `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa’ib and Zadhan, Muslim used them as sub-narrators [in his Sahih], and Ibn Ma`in declared them trustworthy (thiqa), so the chain is sound.3

Also among these hadiths is Ibn Mas`ud’s narration that the Prophet said:

“My life is a great good for you, you will relate about me and it will be related to you, and my death is a great good for you, your actions will be exhibited to me, and if I see goodness I will praise Allah, and if I see evil I will ask forgiveness of Him for you.”

(Hayâtî khayrun lakum tuhaddithûna wa yuhaddathu lakum wa wafâtî khayrun lakum tu`radu a`malukum `alayya famâ ra’aytu min khayrin hamidtu Allâha wa mâ ra’aytu min sharrin istaghfartu Allâha lakum.)4
The hadith master al-`Iraqi said in the book of Jana’iz of his work Tarh al-Tathrib fi Sharh al-Taqrib: “Its chain is good” (isnâduhu jayyid).5 The hadith master al-Haythami said: “Al-Bazzar narrated it and its sub-narrators are the men of the Sahih.”6 The hadith master al-Suyuti declared it sound (sahîh) in al-Mu`jizat and al-Khasa’is. So did al-Qastallani the commentator of al-Bukhari. Al-Munawi also declared, in Fayd al-Qadir, that it is sahîh.7 So did al-Zurqani in his commentary on al-Qastallani’s al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya. So did Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji in his commentary on [al-Qadi `Iyad’s] al-Shifa’.8 So did al-Mulla `Ali al-Qari in his, adding: “Al-Harith ibn Usama narrated it in his Musnad with a sound chain.”9 Ibn Hajar also mentioned it in al-Matalib al-`Alya.10 This hadith also came to us through another, mursal way from [the Tabi`î] Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani. The hadith master Isma`il al-Qadi narrated it in his monograph on the invocation of blessings on the Prophet , and Shaykh al-Albani said about it: “Mursal sahîh.”11 The hadith master Ibn `Abd al-Hadi declared it sound (sahîh) despite his excessive rigor and harshness in his book al-Sarim al-Munki. After all this evidence, does any meddler have anything left to say? The hadith is undoubtedly sound, and no-one questions its authenticity.

This hadith indicates that the Prophet knows about our actions because they are being shown to him, and he asks Allah forgiveness on our behalf for whatever wrong we may do. If this is the case, then it is permissible for us to use him as a means to Allah and ask for his intercession with Him. For he knows our case, and so he can intercede for us and supplicate for us, as he is the intercesor whose intercession is granted – may Allah send blessings and peace upon him and his Family, and increase him in honor and bounty.

Allah has informed us in the Qur’an that the Prophet is a witness over his entire Community. This assuredly requires that the actions of his Community be shown to him so that he may witness to whatever he saw and knew:

Ibn al-Mubarak said: One of the Ansâr narrated to us from al-Minhal ibn `Amr that the latter hears Sa`id ibn al-Musayyib say: “Not one day passes except the Prophet’s Community is shown to him morning and evening. He knows them by their marks [or names] and their actions, thereby giving witness concerning them. Allah said: {But how (will it be with them) when we bring of every people a witness, and We bring you (O Muhammad) a witness against these?} (4:41). (Laysa min yawmin illâ wa yu`radu fîhi `alâ al-nabiyyi ummatuhu ghuduwwatan wa `ashiyyan fa ya`rifuhum bi sîmâhum wa a`mâlihim fa lidhâlika yashhadu `alayhim. Yaqûlu Allâhu ta`âlâ…)12

Also among these hadiths is the narration from `Ammar ibn Yassir – Allah be well-pleased with him – that the Prophet said:

“Verily, Allah has put an angel in charge of my grave and given him the names of all creatures. No-one invokes blessings upon me until the Day of Resurrection except he informs me of his name and the name of his father thus: So-and-so son of So-and-so has just invoked blessings upon you.”

(Inna Allâha wakkala bi qabrî malakan a`tâhu Allâhu asmâ’a al-khalâ’iqi falâ yusallî `alayya ahadun ilâ yawmi al-qiyâmati illâ ablaghanî bi ismihi wa ismi abîhi hâdhâ fulânu ibnu fulânin qad sallâ `alayk.)
It is narrated by al-Bazzar, while Abu al-Shaykh – Ibn Hayyan – narrates it thus:

The Prophet said: “Allah Most High has an angel to whom he has given the names of all creatures, and he shall stand at my grave, after I die, so that none shall invoke blessings upon me except he shall say: `O Muhammad, So-and-so son of So-and-so has just invoked blessings upon you.’ Thereupon the Almighty Lord shall send a blessing upon that person, tenfold for each blessing he invoked upon me.”

(Inna lillâhi malakan a`tâhu asmâ’a al-khalâ’iqi fatr huwa qâ’imun `alâ qabrî idhâ mittu falaysa ahadun yusallî `alayya salâtan illâ qâla yâ Muhammadu sallâ `alayka fulânu ibnu fulânin. Qâla fa yusallî al-Rabbu `alâ dhâlika al-rajuli bi kulli wâhidatin `ashrâ.)13
Also among these hadiths is the narration of Abu al-Darda’:

“Make abundant invocations of blessings upon me the day of Jum’a, for that day is witnessed by the angels. Verily, no-one invokes blessings upon me except his invocation is shown to me until he finishes it.” Abu al-Darda’ said: “Even after death?” The Prophet replied: “Even after death! Truly Allah Most High forbade the earth to consume the bodies of Prophets. Therefore the Prophet of Allah is alive and sustained!”

(Akthirû al-salâta ‘alayya yawma al-jumu’a fa innahu mashhûdun tashhaduhu al-malâ’ikatu wa inna ahadan lan yusalliya ‘alayya illâ ‘uridat ‘alayya salâtuhu hattâ yafrughû minhâ. Qâla qultu wa ba’da al-mawt? Qâla wa ba’da al-mawti inna Allâha harrama ‘alâ al-ardi an ta’kula ajsâda al-anbiyâ’i fa nabiyyullâhi hayyun yurzaq.)14
Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya said: “This hadith is authentic by the criterion of Muslim.”

Also, the hadith of Abu Hurayra: Abu Dawud narrated with a sound (sahîh) chain – as stated by al-Subki – from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah said:

“No-one greets me except that Allah has returned my soul to me so that I may greet him back.”

(Mâ min ahadin yusallimu ‘alayya illâ radd Allâhu ‘alayya rûhî hattâ arudda ‘alayhi al-salâm.)15
Also, the hadith of Abu Hurayra from the Prophet :

“Whoever invokes blessings upon me at my grave I hear him, and whoever invokes blessings on me from afar, I am informed about it.”

(Man sallâ `alayya `inda qabrî sami`tuhu wa man sallâ nâ’iyan bullightuhu.)16
The narrations to that effect are very numerous indeed.


NOTES

1Narrated from Ibn Mas`ud with a sound chain by Muslim’s criterion as stated by Shaykh Shu`ayb al-Arna’ut in Ibn Hibban (3:195 #914), al-`Azim Abadi in `Awn al-Ma`bud (6:21), Ibn al-Qayyim who declared its chain sound in Jala’ al-Afham (p. 24), and al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak, confirmed by al-Dhahabi (2:241=1990 ed. 2:456). Also narrated by al-Nasa’i with six chains in his Sunan, al-Sunan al-Kubra (3:43), and `Amal al-Yawm wa al-Layla (2:167), Isma`il al-Qadi in Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi – Allah bless and greet him – (p. 34), al-Bayhaqi in Shu`ab al-Iman (2:217) and al-Sunan al-Kubra (1:380), Abu Ya`la in his Musnad (9:137 #5213), Ahmad in his, al-Darimi in his, Ibn Abi Shayba (2:253=2:517, 6:316), `Abd al-Razzaq in his (2:215 #3116), al-Tabarani in al-Kabir (#10528-10530), Ibn al-Mubarak in al-Zuhd (p. 364 #1028) and his Musnad (p. 30 #51), and al-Khatib in Talkhis al-Mutashabih (p. 766).

2The Imam and hadith master, Shaykh al-Islam Abu Ishaq Isma`il ibn Ishaq ibn Isma`il ibn Hammad ibn Zayd al-Azdi al-Jahdami al-Qadi al-Maliki (199-282), author of several works, including a Musnad. See al-Dhahabi, Siyar (Arna’ut ed. 13:341).

3Zadhan in this narration is Abu `Umar al-Kindi al-Bazzaz as named explicitly in Abu Sa`id al-Shashi’s (d. 335) narration of this hadith in his Musnad (2:252). Muslim narrated from him, from Ibn `Umar, two narrations of the Prophet in three places: “Whoever strikes his slave in the face or beats him unjustly, his expiation is to manumit him,” and the Prophet’s prohibition of the use of wine fermentation-vessels. See also Abu Bakr al-Asbahani’s Rijal Muslim (1:230) and Ibn Hajar’s Taqrib. He was declared thiqa by Ibn Ma`in, Ibn Sa`d, al-`Ijli, Ibn Shahin, al-Khatib, and al-Dhahabi as reported by al-Arna’ut and Ma`ruf in al-Tahrir (1:409 #1976). From `Abd Allah ibn al-Sa’ib al-Kindi or al-Shaybani al-Kufi, Muslim narrated through two chains the hadith of Thabit ibn al-Dahhak whereby the Prophet forbade sharecropping. He is trustworthy (thiqa) as stated in Ibn Hajar’s Taqrib (1:304 #3339). The rest of the sub-narrators of this hadith are all the men of al-Bukhari and Muslim.

4Narrated from Ibn Mas`ud by al-Bazzar in his Musnad (1:397) with a sound chain as stated by al-Suyuti in Manahil al-Safa (p. 31 #8) and al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (2:281), al-Haythami (9:24 #91), and al-`Iraqi in Tarh al-Tathrib (3:297) – his last book, as opposed to al-Mughni`an Haml al-Asfar (4:148) where he questions the trustworthy rank of one of the narrators in al-Bazzar’s chain. Shaykh `Abd Allah al-Talidi said in his Tahdhib al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (p. 458-459 #694) that this chain is sound according to Muslim’s criterion, and Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf`al-Minara (p. 156-169) discusses it at length and declares it sound. Their shaykh, al-Sayyid `Abd Allah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari (d. 1413/1993) declared it sound in his monograph Nihaya al-Amal fi Sharh wa Tashih Hadith `Ard al-A`mal. Opposing these six judgments al-Albani declares it weak in his notes on al-Qadi Isma`il’s Fadl al-Salat (p. 37 n. 1). It is also narrated with weak chains from Anas and – with two sound mursal chains missing the Companion-link – from the Successor Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani by Isma`il al-Qadi (d. 282) in his Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi (p. 36-39 #25-26). The latter chain was declared sound by al-Qari in Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102), Shaykh al-Islam al-Taqi al-Subki in Shifa’ al-Siqam, his critic Ibn `Abd al-Hadi in al-Sarim al-Munki (p. 217), and al-Albani in his Silsila Da`ifa (2:405). A third, weak chain is related from Bakr al-Muzani by al-Harith ibn Abi Usama (d. 282) in his Musnad (2:884) as per Ibn Hajar in al-Matalib al-`Aliya (4:23). Al-Albani declared the hadith weak on the grounds that some authorities questioned the memorization of the Murji’ hadith master `Abd al-Majid ibn `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Abi Rawwad. However, he was retained by Muslim in his Sahih and declared thiqa by Yahya ibn Ma`in, Ahmad, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Shahin, al-Khalili, and al-Daraqutni, while al-Dhahabi listed him in Man Tukullima Fihi Wa Huwa Muwaththaq (p. 124) as stated by Mamduh in Raf` al- Minara (p. 163, 167). Al-Arna’ut and Ma`ruf declare him thiqa in Tahrir al-Taqrib (2:379 #4160) as well as Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr in his edition of al-Dhahabi’s Mughni (1:571 #3793) and Dr. Khaldun al-Ahdab in Zawa’id Tarikh Baghdad (10:464). Even if al-Albani’s grading were hypothetically accepted, then the weak musnad narration in conjunction with the sound mursal one – graded sahîh by al-Albani – would yield a final grading of hasan or sahîh, not da`îf. In addition to this, Mamduh quoted al-Albani’s own words in the latter’s attempted refutation of Shaykh Isma`il al-Ansari entitled Kitab al-Shaybani (1:134-135) whereby “The sound mursal hadith is a proof in all Four Schools and other than them among the Imams of the principles of hadith and fiqh, therefore it is apparent to every fair-minded person that the position whereby such a hadith does not form a proof only because it is mursal, is untenable.” This is one of many examples in which al-Albani not only contradicts, but soundly refutes himself.

Shaykh Hasanayn Muhammad Makhluf wrote in his Fatawa Shar`iyya (1:91-92): “The hadith means that the Prophet is a great good for his Community during his life, because Allah the Exalted has preserved the Community, through the secret of the Prophet’s – Allah bless and greet him – presence, from misguidance, confusion, and disagreement, and He has guided the people through the Prophet – Allah bless and greet him – to the manifest truth; and that after Allah took back the Prophet , our connection to the latter’s goodness continues uncut and the extension of his goodness endures, overshadowing us. The deeds of the Community are shown to him every day, and he glorifies Allah for the goodness that he finds, while he asks for His forgiveness for the small sins, and the alleviation of His punishment for the grave ones: and this is a tremendous good for us. There is therefore `goodness for the Community in his life, and in his death, goodness for the Community.’ Moreover, as has been established in the hadith, the Prophet is alive in his grave with a special `isthmus-life’ stronger than the lives of the martyrs which the Qur’an spoke of in more than one verse. The nature of these two kinds of life cannot be known except by their Bestower, the Glorious, the Exalted. He is able to do all things. His showing the Community’s deeds to the Prophet as an honorific gift for him and his Community is entirely possible rationally and documented in the reports. There is no leeway for its denial; and Allah guides to His light whomever He pleases; and Allah knows best.”

5Al-`Iraqi, Tarh al-Tathrib (3:297).

6Al-Haythami, Majma` al-Zawa’id (9:24 #91).

7Al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir (3:401) only reported al-`Iraqi’s words “Its narrators are the men of the Sahih except for `Abd al-Majid ibn Abi Rawwad who, despite being retained by Muslim as a narrator and being declared trustworthy (thiqa) by Ibn Ma`in and al-Nasa’i, was declared weak by some.” Al-Munawi then went on to criticize al-Suyuti’s unmitigated authentication of the narration in Manahil al-Safa although al-Suyuti is correct.

8Al-Khafaji, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102).

9Al-Qari, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102), referring to the mursal hadith of Bakr al-Muzani.

10Ibn Hajar, al-Matalib al-`Alya (4:22).

11In his edition of Isma`il al-Qadi’s Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi – Allah bless and greet him – (p. 37), after which he goes on to say that the hadith is weak, as in his Silsila Da`ifa (#979).

12Narrated by Ibn al-Mubarak in al-Zuhd (p. 42), Ibn Kathir (asmâ’ihim instead of sîmâhum) in his Tafsir (1:500), al-Qurtubi in al-Tadhkira (1:335), Ibn Hajar (asmâ’ihim instead of sîmâhum) in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 9:99), and al-Mubarakfuri (asmâ’ihim instead of sîmâhum) in Tuhfa al-Ahwadhi (8:300).

13Narrated from `Ammar ibn Yâsir by Abu al-Shaykh in al-`Azama (1988 ed. 2:763) and al-Bazzar in his Musnad (Ibn Hajar, Mukhtasar 2:436 #2164), and from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq by al-Daylami in al-Suyuti’s al-La’ali’ al-Masnu`a (1996 ed. 1:260 =1981 ed. 1:284) and al-Haba’ik fi Akhbar al-Mala’ik (p. 99).

Al-Haythami (10:162) said: “Its chains contain Nu`aym ibn Damdam whom some scholars declared weak and `Imran ibn al-Himyari [al-Ju`fi], whom al-Bukhari indicated was unconfirmable (lâ yutâba`) [i.e. very weak], while the author of Mizan al-I`tidal [al-Dhahabi] declared him unknown. The rest of its sub-narrators are the men of the Sahih.” There are some inaccuracies in this report. Al-Bukhari actually stated in al-Tarikh al-Kabir (6:416 #2831): “He is unconfirmable in his narration of that hadith” as cited by Ibn `Adi in al-Kamil (5:93 #1273). Al-Dhahabi in the Mizan (3:236 #6278) did not declare Ibn al-Himyari unknown, but said: “His narration of the hadith `Allah has given me an angel’ is not known, and al-Bukhari said: he is unconfirmable in narrating it.'” Ibn Hajar names him `Imran ibn Himyar and similarly states in Lisan al-Mizan (4:345 #996): “His narration of `Allah has given me an angel’ is not known.” However, Ibn Hibban includes him in the Thiqat (5:223 #4608) and Ibn Abi Hatim mentions him without discrediting him in al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dil (6:296 #1644). As for Nu`aym ibn Damdam, Ibn Hajar in Lisan al-Mizan (6:169 #595) stated: “From him narrated Sufyan ibn `Uyayna, Abu Ahmad al-Zubayri, Qubaysa ibn `Uqba, `Abd al-Rahman ibn Salih al-Kufi, and others… and I was so far unable to discover who had declared him weak.” Accordingly, the chain of the hadith is fair because Nu`aym’s unknown state is eliminated and his credibility is established by the fact that two or more trutworthy authorities narrated from him, according to the rules of hadith science. Lastly, al-Daylami’s chain contains neither Nu`aym nor `Imran.

Al-`Uqayli cited the narration in his Du`afa’ (3:248 #1246) and said: “`Ali ibn al-Qasim al-Kindi from Nu`aym ibn Damdam is a Shi`i chain of transmission that needs investigation.” Al-Suyuti cited it in La’ali’ al-Masnu`a (1996 ed. 1:259-260 =1981 ed. 1:284) and went on to narrate corroborative proofs for the authenticity of the hadith, among them Ibn Abi Shayba’s (2:253, 6:326) two mursal narrations from the weak Tâbi`î Yazid ibn Aban al-Raqashi: “An angel is in charge of all that invoke blessings upon the Prophet to inform him of it saying: `So-and-so from your Community has invoked blessings on you.'” Isma`il al-Qadi also narrates it from Yazid in Fadl al-Salat (p. 37-38 #27) but with the addition: “on the day of Jum`a, and with the wording: “So-and-so from your Community is invoking blessings on you.”

Al-Suyuti cites `Ammar’s narration in his commentary on al-Nasa’i’s Sunan (4:110). Al-Mundhiri cites the narration in al-Targhib (1994 ed. 2:388) after al-Bazzar, Abu al-Shaykh, and al-Tirmidhi in [al-`Ilal?] “al-Kabir.” The hadith is further confirmed by the sound narrations already mentioned and those that follow, as well as the Tâbi`î Ayyub al-Sikhtyani’s sound mursal narration in Isma`il al-Qadi’s Fadl al-Salat (p. 36): “It has reached me – and Allah knows best – that there is an angel in charge of each person that invokes blessings on the Prophet so that he will convey it to him.” Al-Tabari in the commentary on the verse {For him are angels ranged before him and behind him who guard him by Allah’s command} (13:11) in his Tafsir (13:115) narrates from `Uthman ibn `Affan that the Prophet identified the angels that attend every believer as twenty, ten in the day and ten in the night, among them two angels whose unique responsibility is to record one’s invocations of blessings upon the Prophet . See also al-Albani, Silsila Sahiha (#1530).

14Narrated from Abu al-Darda’ by Ibn Majah with a munqati’ chain missing a sub-narrator in two places. However, its parts are confirmed verbatim by other sound narrations, among them Aws’s narration cited below. Consequently the hadith master al-Busiri declared it sound in his Zawa’id (2:58-59). The first part (concerning the order to invoke more blessings on Jum’a and the disclosure of this invocation to the Prophet) is related by al-Bayhaqi in Shu’ab al-Iman through Abi Umama, Anas, and Abu Mas’ud al-Ansari, and by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak from the latter. Al-Shafi’i in his Musnad relates the first part only (“Invoke blessings upon me abundantly on Friday”) mursal from Safwan ibn Salim.

15Narrated from Abu Hurayra by Abu Dawud with a chain declared sound by al-Nawawi in Riyad al-Salihin and al-Adhkar, Ibn al-Qayyim in Jala’ al-Afham (1996 ed. p. 48 #23 cf. ‘Awn al-Ma’bud 6:22), Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1959 ed. 6:488), al-Wadyashi in Tuhfa al-Muhtaj (2:190), al-‘Ajluni in Kashf al-Khafa’ (2:253), and al-Shawkani in Nayl al-Awtar. Also narrated from Abu Hurayra by Ahmad with a sound chain according to al-Zayn in the Musnad (9:575 #10759) and al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra (5:245 #1040) and Shu’ab al-Iman (2:217, 3:490-491); and al-Tabarani in al-Awsat (3:262) with a weak chain as indicated by al-Haythami (10:162). There is little weight to al-Albani’s claim in his notes on al-Alusi’s al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 80) and his Silsila Sahiha (#2266) that “this hadith is only fair, not sound.”

16A fair hadith narrated from Abu Hurayra, not by Ibn Abi Shayba (as mistakenly stated by al-Qadi `Iyad in al-Shifa’) but:

* By Abu al-Shaykh with a good chain in Thawab al-Salat `ala al-Nabi as stated by Ibn al-Qayyim in Jala’ al-Afham (p. 48-49=p. 16-22), Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (1989 ed. 6:379=1959 ed. 6:488), al-Suyuti in al-La’ali’ (1996 ed. 1:259=1:282-283), and others. Ibn al-Qayyim states: “This narration is extremely singular” while Ibn Hajar states: “Abu al-Shaykh cites it in al-Thawab with a good chain (sanad jayyid).” Al-Sakhawi reiterates the latter verdict in al-Qawl al-Badi` (p. 154) as reported by Shaykh `Abd Allah Siraj al-Din in al-Salat `ala al-Nabi (p. 214) and Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf` al-Minara (p. 351). Al-Munawi questions this grading in Fayd al-Qadir and Ibn `Abd al-Hadi in al-Sarim al-Munki (p. 206) claims without proof that Abu al-Shaykh’s chain, although strong, is “a gross mistake” because – in his view – “the hadith did not come to us except through al-Suddi, who is discarded” (cf. below). However, Ibn `Arraq in Tanzih al-Shari`a (1:335) confirms Ibn Hajar’s verdict and al-Suyuti in al-La’ali’ authenticates Abu al-Shaykh’s chain – among other narrations, citing it in his commentary on al-Nasa’i’s Sunan (4:110) and rejecting Ibn al-Jawzi’s verdict of forgery in al-Mawdu`at (1:303). Shaykh Ahmad al-Ghumari in his al-Mudawi li `Ilal al-Munawi (6:277) graded Abu al-Shaykh’s chain “spotless.”

* By al-Bayhaqi with two chains – with ublightuhu in the end – in Shu`ab al-Iman (2:218 #1583), al-`Uqayli in al-Du`afa’ (4:137) and others, through Muhammad ibn Marwan al-Suddi who is accused of lying and is discarded as a narrator as stated by Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir (6:466), or through al-`Ala’ ibn `Amr al-Kufi who is weak, but al-Bayhaqi in Hayat al-Anbiya’ (p. 15) cites corroborating chains and narrations which strengthen the hadith.

* By al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad (3:292) with the very weak chain of Muhammad ibn Marwan al-Suddi with the wording: “Whoever invokes blessings upon me at my grave I hear him, and whoever invokes blessings on me from afar, an angel was put in charge of it who informs me of it. He will have sufficiency of his worldly needs for it as well as his needs in the hereafter, and I shall witness on his behalf – or: I shall be his intercessor.” Al-Ahdab in his Zawa’id Tarikh Baghdad (3:69) considers the second sentence of this narration undoubtedly forged.

As for al-Albani’s grading of mawdû` for this hadith in his notes on al-Alusi’s al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 80) and his Silsila Da`ifa (#203) in imitation of Ibn Taymiyya’s identical verdict in the latter’s al-Radd `ala al-Akhna’i in Majmu`a al-Fatawa (27:241-242), it stems from studied ignorance of Abu al-Shaykh’s chain as pointed out by Mamduh in Raf` al-Minara (p. 354). Note that Ibn Taymiyya contradicts himself by (1) declaring al-Suddi’s chain not forged but “containing some weakness (fîhâ lîn) and corroborated by firmly established reports” elsewhere in his Fatawa (27:116) and (2) considering the meaning of the hadith correct, all of which al-Albani rejects (“I do not know from where Ibn Taymiyya took his claim (27:384) that he hears the salaam from someone near!”). That man goes so far as to state: “I have found no evidence for the Prophet’s hearing of the salaam of those who greet him at his grave”! This is one of his greater enormities and the essence of innovation and deviation. On the hearing of the Prophet in the grave see also al-Nabahani, Shawahid al-Haqq (p. 283-285).

Allah bless and greet the Prophet, his Family, and all his Companions. Wal-hamdu lillahi Rabb al-`alamin.

Hajj Gibril

GF Haddad ©
[2000-06-11]

The issue of Tawassul

June 17, 2007

From sunniforum.com, posted by Sidi Faqir

Asalamu alaykum

Please read the enclosed Word document – a translation into English of one of the late Shaikh’s works.

A short excerpt from the attached document follows [for notes and a very useful introduction please click on attachment below] – the views expressed in the article are of the author and I do not necessarily agree with all that he has mentioned therein :


By [the grace of] the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate, [I begin].5

All praise is Allah’s , the Lord of the Worlds. The last word will be for those who fear Allah. Enmity is only for those who transgress. I seek blessings and peace on our master, Muhammad [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] , and on his noble house. May Allah be pleased with his Companions and their Followers.

To get to the point, I declare that Shaikh Al-Albani, may Allah forgive him, is a man who is motivated by ulterior purposes and desire. If he sees a hadith 6 or a report ( athar7 ) that does not accord with his persuasion8 he straightway proceeds to foist it off as weak (da‘if) . By using guile and deception he prevails upon his readers that he is right; whereas, he is wrong. Rather, he is a sinner and a hoodwinker. By such duplicity he has succeeded in misguiding his followers who trust him and think that he is right. One of those who has been deceived by him is Hamdi al-Salafi9who edited al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir 10. He had the impudence to declare a rigorously authentic hadith weak (da‘if / 11) because it did not go along with his sectarian dogmas just as it did not concur with the persuasion of his teacher (Shaikh) . The proof of that is that what he says about the hadiths being weak is just what his Shaikh says.12

This being the case, I wished to present the real truth of the matter and to expose the falsity of the claims of both the deceiver [Al-Albani] and the deceived [Hamdi al-Salafi] .

I declare that I depend on none but Allah; He is my support and to Him do I consign myself.

Al-Tabarani 13 reported in his al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir 14

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

A man was going to ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affàn 15 trying to get something done for himself.

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

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

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

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

Hamdi al-Salafi contradicted him saying:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hamdi al-Salafi

There is no doubt about the authenticity of that part of the hadith [concerning the story of the blind man]17; the doubt concerns the [first part of] the story [concerning ‘Uthman ibn Hunaif’s instructions to the man who sought the help of ‘Uthmàn ibn ‘Affan] which heretics (mubtadi‘ah) adduce attempting to prove the legitimacy of their heretical practice of calling the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam] for his intercession. [That part of the story is in doubt for the reasons which we will explain.]

Firstly, as al-Tabarani mentioned, Shabib [who is one of the narrators mentioned in the report’s chain of narration (sanad) is alone in reporting this hadith.

Then, Shabib’s narrations are not bad (la ba’sa bihi) on two conditions: first, that

his son Ahmad be the one who narrates from him; second, that Shabib’s narration be from Yunus ibn Yazid. However, in the present case, Shabib’s narration is reported by [three persons]: Ibn Wahb, and Shabib’s two sons Ismà‘il and Ahmad.

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Even though ‘Aun is weak (da‘if), still his version of the hadith (riwàyah) [without the story of ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif] is preferable to Shabib’s since Rauh’s narration agrees

with the narrations of Shu‘bah and Hamàd ibn Salamah through Abu Ja‘f`ar al-Khatmi

[without the story of ‘Uthmàn ibn Hunaif].

The foregoing discussion18 is misleading and distorted in several ways.

First Point

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

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

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


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


Second Point

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

Ahmad’s father, Shabib ibn Sa‘id al-Tamimi al-Habati al-Basri34 is also one of

the narrators whom al-Bukhari depended on in both his Sahih and his al-Adab al-Mufrad.

Those who considered Shabib to be thiqah include: Abu Zur‘ah, Abu Hatim, al-Nisà’i, al-Dhuhali, al-Dàraqutni , and al-Tabarani35.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Third Point

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The chain of narration (isnàd) of this hadith is rigorously authentic (sahih). The last clause of the hadith constitutes the express permission of the Prophet to seek his intercession whenever there occurred any need.

Not withstanding, Ibn Taimiyah objected on feeble grounds that this last clause comprehended some covert technical defect (‘illah) [which prejudices the authenticity of the hadith or at least its last clause]. I have demonstrated the invalidity of those grounds elsewhere.44 Indeed, Ibn Taimiyah is characteristically audacious in rejecting hadith which do not conform with his purpose at hand even if those hadith are rigorously authentic (sahih) .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“The Messenger of Allah [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam]ordered the doors which opened on the mosque from the street to be sealed, but he left ‘Ali’s door [open].” This hadith is rigorously authentic (sahih). Ibn al-Jauzi 48 was mistaken by mentioning it in his collection of forged hadiths, al-Maudu‘àt. Hafiz [Ibn Hajr] corrected him in his al-Qaul al-Musaddad: “Ibn Taimiyah because of his well-known bias against ‘Ali was not content with Ibn al-Jauzi’s declaration that the hadith was forged, but took the initiative to add from his own bag [of fraud] thepretence that the hadith experts (al-muhaddithun) are agreed that the hadith is forged. Ibn Taimiyah has rejected so many hadith simply because they are irreconcilable with his opinions that it is hard to keep track of the instances.49

Fourth Point

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

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

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

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

A Subterfuge and its Preclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

He claims he is struggling against heretical innovation (bid‘ah ) by forbidding the practice of intercession, and by forbidding people to use the epithet sayyidinà when mentioning the name of the Prophet [sallallahu alayhi wa sallam], and by forbidding them to recite the Qur‘àn for the sake [of the souls] of the deceased. However, the fact of the matter is that by doing that he commits a real heresy (bid‘ah) by forbidding what Allah has permitted, and by verbally abusing the Asharites57 and the Sufis58.

In all this he is just like Ibn Taimiyah who denounced all kinds of people; some of them he declared to be unbelievers and others to be heretics; then, he went and committed two of the biggest heresies that one can commit. In the first instance, he maintained the eternity of the world [which means, in other words, that he maintained that the world has no beginning, but always existed along with Allah], and that is a heresy which constitutes categorical unbelief; we seek refuge in Allah from that. Then in the second instance he was prejudiced against ‘Ali [radiyallahu anhu]for which the ‘ulamà’ of his time accused him of hypocrisy. That is because the Prophet told ‘Ali:

“No one loves you but a believer, and no one hates you but a hypocrite.” 59

No doubt, Ibn Taimiyah’s dislike of ‘Ali is a punishment which Allah has given Ibn Taimiyah. Yet Al-Albàni insists on calling Ibn Taimiyah Shaikh al-Islam [which is traditionally a title reserved for the greatest scholar of the time]. It amazes me that he should give Ibn Taimiyah such a title when Ibn Taimiyah has un-Islamic beliefs.

I think; rather, I am sure that if Hafiz Ibn Nasir [al-Din al-Dimashqi] had some idea of Ibn Taimiyah’s execrable beliefs, he would never have defended him in his book al-Radd al-Wafir [from the scathing attack of ‘Alâ al-Din al-Bukhari60 who wrote a book called Man Qala Ibn Taimiyah Shaikh al-Islam fa huwa Kafir(Whoever says Ibn Taimiyah is Shaikh al-Islàm he is an unbeliever) ] .

No doubt, when Ibn Nàsir wrote his book, he was deceived by the praises he heard some people making of Ibn Taimiyah. Likewise, al-Alusi, the son of the celebrated commentator [Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi] wrote the voluminous commentary of the Qur’àn [Ruh al-Ma‘ani] would not have written his book Jalalal Ainain if he knew the reality of Ibn Taimáyah’s beliefs.

Al-Albàni’s outlandish and heterodox opinions, which are the result of his impious resort to free thought, his deceit, his dishonesty in pronouncing hadith to be authentic or weak according to what suits his persuasion [rather, than according to the dictates of the facts], his excoriations of the ‘ulamà’ and the illustrious personages of Islàm; all that is an affliction from Allah, yet he doesn’t realize it.

Indeed, he is one of those [to whom the Qur‘àn referred by its words:] who thinks they are doing good; however, how wrong is what they think.61

We ask Allah to preserve us from what He has afflicted Al-Albani with, and we seek refuge in Him from all evil. All praise is for Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. May Allah bless Our Master Muhammad and all his noble people.

Epilogue


Intercession is allowed according to our law.

It is a matter by none disputed in all of Muslimdom,

Except those who folly wedded and paid their dowry with insolence.

Their hearts are stone, by Muslims scorned goons of the Wahhàbi mob,

They prohibited it and denounced it

Without any reason why.

The case of one Uthmàn ibn Hunaif is a valid precedent;

It’s our proof; its quite conclusive, and it brooks no controversy.

May Allah guide them to concede the verdict of documentation.