Clarifying the Stances of Taqi ad-Din as-Subki and Ibn Hajar al-Haytami on Istighatha

The below is a translation of a section from Ustadh Alaa Hasan’s article: Mawqif ash-Shaf’iyyah al-Muta’akhireen min Bida’ al-Qubur wa min al-Istighatha..wa Tahreer Mawqif al-Shaykhayn as-Subki wal-Haytami

Determining the Madhab of Taqi as-Subki and Ibn Hajar al-Haytami:

It must be emphasized that Muslims should not assume that Islamic scholars sanction explicit polytheism involving Allah, such as attributing the ability to provide sustenance or healing to figures like al-Badawi and al-Jilani. This is something that ordinary Muslims distance themselves from, let alone scholars of the caliber of al-Haytami, who authored works such as az-Zawajir and al-I’lam.

Before assessing their madhabs, it is necessary to clarify certain matters:

Firstly, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami holds the view that we make takfir of the one who invokes beings other than Allah for things beyond their control. He cites Ibn Muflih’s statement in al-Furu’ in his book, al-I’lam bi Qawath’ al-Islam, and affirms it.

Al-Haytami states:

وحاصل عبارة الفروع أن مما يكون كفرًا جحد صفة له تعالى اتفق على إثباتها… ومن ذلك أن يجعل بينه وبين الله تعالى وسائط يتوكّل عليهم ويدعوهم ويسألهم قالوا: إجماعا

“The summary of the matter concerning the statement in al-Furu’ is that among the things that constitute kufr is denying an agreed upon attribute of Allah, the Exalted… This includes making intermediaries between oneself and Allah, relying on them, supplicating to them, and asking them for help. They said: this is unanimously agreed upon.”[1]

It is known that Ibn Muflih transmitted this view from Ibn Taymiyyah, and the Hanbalis continued to mention it in their compilations, accepting it, with al-Haytami concurring with this consensus.

Secondly, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami asserts in az-Zawajir that masjids built over tombs must be demolished, considering them more harmful than the Masjid adh-Dhirar.

He states among the major sin are:

اتخاذ القبور مساجد، وإيقاد السرج عليها، واتخاذها أوثانًا، والطواف بها، واستلامها، والصلاة إليها

"Taking graves as masjids, lighting lamps over them, treating them as idols, circumambulating them, touching them, and praying towards them."[2]

And he further explains:

وأسباب الشرك الصلاة عندها واتخاذها مساجد أو بناؤها عليها. والقول بالكراهة محمول على غير ذلك؛ إذ لا يُظن بالعلماء تجويز فعل تواتر عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لعنُ فاعله، وتجب المبادرة لهدمها وهدم القباب التي على القبور، إذ هي أضر من مسجد الضرار

“The causes of polytheism include praying near them and building masjids over them. The ruling of karaha applies to other actions. Let no one think that scholars endorse an act for which the Prophet (peace be upon him), via tawatur (narrations), cursed the doer. It is mandatory to be proactive in their demolition, including the domes over the graves, as they are more harmful than the Masjid adh-Dhirar.”[3]

Thus, he categorically denies any validity to practices occurring around the graves of saints. As for his permissibility of istighatha – whose meaning we will clarify – it is only in a specific sense related to the Prophet during visitation, as evidenced by the title of his book, al-Jawhar al-Munazzam fi Ziyarat al-Qabr al-Mu’azzam. This specifically concerns the visitation of the Prophet’s grave (peace be upon him).

Thirdly, al-Haytami contends in al-Jawhar al-Munazzam in the context of discussing the prohibition of tabarruk that exaggerating in venerating the Prophet’s grave beyond what is permitted by Islamic law can lead to disbelief.

He states:

قال الحليمي وغيره من أئمتنا: يُكره إلصاق الظهر والبطن بجدار القبر المُكرم. انتهى. ... من ثم تعيّن على كل أحد ألا يُعظمه إلا بما أذن الله لأمته من جنسه مما يليق بالبشر، فإن مجاوزة ذلك تُفضي إلى الكفر والعياذ بالله

“Al-Halimi and other scholars among our leaders said: It is makruh to press one’s back and stomach against the wall of the revered grave… Therefore, it is incumbent upon everyone to venerate the Prophet (peace be upon him) only in ways Allah has permitted for his ummah, befitting a human being. Transgressing this can lead to kufr, and we seek refuge in God from that.”[4]

The understanding of istighatha according to as-Subki and al-Haytami:

We will suffice with what as-Subkisaid because al-Haytami transmits al-Subki’s words verbatim.

The meaning of istighatha and its types, as explained by al-Subki, is as follows:

The first type: Seeking assistance through supplication, meaning seeking help from Allah Almighty by invoking the status of the Prophet Muhammad  (peace be upon him), which is known as tawassul. This is why it is termed istighatha, and as-Subki refers to it as istighatha through the Prophet, meaning seeking aid from Allah through the Prophet. The letter “baa” here indicates seeking assistance, omitting the object.

Tawassul is permissible according to the madhab of many scholars, but it should be called tawassul and not istighatha. The error here lies in the terminology.

As-Subki says:

وقد تكون الاستغاثة بالنبي على وجه آخر، وهو أن يقول: استغثت اللهَ بالنبي، كما يقول: سألت الله بالنبي، فيرجع إلى النوع الأول من أنواع التوسل، ويصحّ قبل وجوده وبعد وجوده، وقد يحذف المفعول به ويقال: استغثتُ بالنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، بهذا المعنى

“Istighatha through the Prophet can also mean saying, ‘I seek aid from Allah through the Prophet,’ just as one says, ‘I ask Allah through the Prophet,’ which refers back to the first type of tawassul. It is correct to use it before and after the object, and the object may be omitted, as in saying, ‘I seek aid from the Prophet (peace be upon him),’ in this sense.”[5]

The second type: Seeking assistance from the occupant of the grave himself, which comprises two categories:

A. Seeking intercession and supplication from the Prophet himself during visitation. This practice has become widespread among later generations and is considered a blameworthy innovation (bid’ah), although it does not constitute major shirk according to the correct opinion. They based this on the fact that the Prophet is alive in his grave and hears those who send salawat upon him and the hadith of Malik al-Dar. This argument, despite its weakness, has led to such doubts.. Based on this, it is falsely argued that the Prophet (peace be upon him) may intercede for the supplicant.

As-Subki states:

فيصح أن يقال: استغثت النبيَّ وأستغيث بالنبي بمعنى واحد، وهو طلب الغوث منه بالدعاء ونحوه، على النوعين السابقين في التوسل من غير فرق، وذلك في حياته وبعد موته. وقد تكون الاستغاثة بالنبي على وجه آخر، وهو أن يقول: استغثت الله بالنبي… ولا مانع من ذلك، فإن دعاء النبي لربه تعالى في هذه الحالة غير ممتنع، وقد وردت الأخبار على ما ذكرنا، ونذكر طرفا منه

“It is valid to say, ‘I seek aid from the Prophet,’ and ‘I seek help through the Prophet’ with the same meaning, which is seeking assistance through requesting supplication and similar means, akin to the two previous types of tawassul, without distinction, whether during his lifetime or after his death. Istighatha through the Prophet can also mean saying, ‘I seek aid from Allah through the Prophet...’ and there is no objection to that. This is because the Prophet’s supplication to his Lord in this manner is not impossible. Narrations support this, as mentioned earlier, and we cite some of them.”[6]

B. Seeking from the Prophet what is desired by invoking him with the condition that it falls within the permissible realms of Arabic language and logical inference. As-Subki uses the example of the hadith where the companion asks for the Prophet’s company in Paradise, assuming that the Prophet (peace be upon him) will supplicate for the supplicant.

According to the madhabs of Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and as-Subki, the request must be acceptable linguistically and according to Al-Majaz al-Aqli,[7] as in the previous example. It is impermissible, according to them, to say, “Cure me and heal me, O Messenger of Allah,” or similar requests that only Allah can fulfill. As-Subki explicitly states in Shifa’ as-Siqam that:

ولا شك أن من أدب السؤال أن يكون المسئول مُمكنا.كذلك لا نسأل رسول الله ما لا يُمكن أن يجيب إليه

“Undoubtedly, it is part of good manners to ask that the requested matter be possible. Likewise, we do not ask the Messenger of Allah for something he cannot respond to.”[8]

This concludes the exposition of the madhab of the two Shaykhs, as-Subki and al-Haytami.

The essence of their opinion on this matter, and the crux of it, is that seeking aid through the Prophet is not a direct request from the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, but instead, it means seeking intercession or asking for supplication from him.

This latter issue - requesting supplication - appears linguistically to be Shirk and can lead to Shirk. Because the general public does not differentiate between expressions and their metaphorical meanings, the correct stance, upheld by the majority, is to deem it impermissible. As-Subki and al-Haytami (may Allah forgive them) made an error in this regard despite their ta’weel.

Thus, Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab says:

ونحن كذلك لا نقول بكفر من صحَّت ديانته، وشهر صلاحه، وعلم ورعه وزهده، وحسنت سيرته، وبلغ من نصحه الأمّة ببذل نفسه لتدريس العلوم النافعة والتآليف فيها، وإن كان مخطئًا في هذه المسألة -أي: الاستغاثة بالرسول- أو غيرها؛ كابن حجر الهيتمي، فإنا نعرف كلامه في الدرّ المنظم، ولا ننكر سعة علمه؛ ولهذا نعتني بكتبه، كشرح الأربعين، والزواجر، وغيرها، ونعتمد على نقله إذا نقل؛ لأنه من جملة علماء المسلمين

“Likewise, we do not make takfir of those whose religion is sound, whose righteousness is apparent, whose knowledge, piety, and asceticism are renowned, and whose conduct has reached the Ummah through their dedicated efforts in teaching beneficial knowledge and writing beneficial works. Even if they are mistaken on this issue - namely, istighatha of the Prophet or others like Ibn Hajar al-Haytami. We know his sayings in ­ad-Dur al-Munazzam and do not deny his extensive knowledge. We take care of his books, such as ‘Explanation of the Forty Hadiths,’ az-Zawajir, and others. We rely on his transmission when he transmits, for he is among the prominent scholars of the Muslims.”[9]

From what has preceded, it is understood that they did not permit seeking aid from saints, but rather they permitted a specific form of tawassul and intercession, specifically with regard to the Prophet (peace be upon him), due to his granted right of intercession bestowed by Allah. Through this nuanced approach, the truth became obscured to later and contemporary Sufis based on ambiguous statements by some scholars. They built upon these statements pure polytheism, believing that diverting worship to other than Allah is a debatable matter! They then expanded this concept to include seeking aid from saints and righteous individuals, approving the construction of masjids over graves, and similar practices. It is well-known that innovation starts small but ends in disbelief, and we seek refuge in Allah Almighty from such a fate.

Certainly, it is not permissible to say, “I seek aid from the Prophet,” even if the intention is to seek his supplication. Islamic law, based on pure monotheism, considers the precautionary measures regarding ambiguous expressions. Allah Almighty says, “And do not say ‘Ra’ina’ but say ‘Unzurna’” [Quran 2:104].

To clarify this matter distinctly, observe how the Prophet  (peace be upon him) dealt with the incident of the girl who said, “Among us is a Prophet who knows what will happen tomorrow.” The Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade her from saying so and instructed her, “Do not say this, but return to what you used to say” [Saheeh al-Bukhari].

While her statement might carry some truth in that the Prophet (peace be upon him) may know some unseen matters through Allah’s granting him knowledge of them, it could potentially lead to misunderstanding and conflating the Prophet’s status with what is uniquely Allah’s domain. Thus, he prohibited it to prevent such misinterpretations, safeguarding the concept of tawhid and decisively rejecting any form of polytheism.

---

[1] Al-‘Ilam bi Qawati’ al-Islam, p. 213

[2] Az-Zawajir, vol. 1, p. 120

[3] Ibid., vol. 1, p. 149

[4] Al-Jawhar al-Munazzam, pp. 114 & 133

[5] Shifaa’ as-Siqam, p. 385

[6] Ibid., p. 380

[7] Note from translator: See: Istighatha of the Dead, and the Al-Majaz al-Aqli Defense

[8] Ibid., p. 385

[9] Ad-Dorar as-Saniyyah fi al-Ajwiba an-Najdiyyah, vol. 1, p. 222