Many advocates of saint veneration who support beseeching the dead argue that this practice does not constitute major Shirk because it is not a literal appeal to the deceased for assistance.
One issue I don’t understand is: is Istighatha only Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah or both Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah and Shirk Al-Rububiyyah? If you say it’s both, then what’s the point of proving that the pagan Arabs had Tawhid Al-Rububiyyah? And how is Istighatha also Shirk Al-Rububiyyah when Asharis who do this act don’t believe their saints are independent of Allah? Is Shirk Al-Rububiyyah restricted to just believing other than Allah acts independently or are there certain things when attributed to other than Allah are considered Shirk whether or not it’s accompanied with the belief that the saint acts independently of Allah? Thank you.
So if an Ashari calls upon the Prophet ﷺ while believing he can hear him and manage the universe with the permission of Allah, that is also Shirk Al-Rububiyyah? But aren’t there some angels that also manage the universe with the permission of Allah? How is this not Shirk then? And what are other examples of Shirk Al-Rububiyyah without ascribing independence other than creation? Thank you.
First, I encourage you to read the links I provide you if you're serious about learning. Shortcuts don't always work.
Secondly, which angel manages the universe?
Thirdly, flip the question back to yourself:
If someone calls upon a saint believing he can do every single thing Allah does (create, forgive sins, grant salvation, control every living thing and atom, know all things, destine everything (literally everything small and big) that will happen in the future, heal all illnesses at will, etc. etc. all by Allah's permission, and this is still not major shirk, then what unique attributes have you left for Allah except Self-Sufficiency? Which scholars believed this?
Do not respond to me unless you read the first link I shared with you earlier fully properly. (not skimming and partially). If you respond, you need to state that you fulfilled my request. (This will spare a long exchange because your questions will be answered there).
I have actually read the articles before which is why I didn’t read them again. I started a discussion here because I was confused concerning when exactly is Istighatha only Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah and when is it both types of Shirk, and what other forms of Shirk Al-Rububiyyah other than creation is Shirk without ascribing independence. Also by the way I do believe Istighatha is Shirk and I totally oppose the other side, but I was only confused concerning the finer details of it.
I think he's referring to Angels that regulate the natural orders, albeit in separate roles, like windblow, rain, plants, growth, death etc.. Mika'il and his subordinate angels are depicted as providing nourishment and bringing rain and thunder to Earth (Q. 51:1-4, 13:10-13, 79:1-2, 82:11)
I think you should list all of the verses and ahadith that demonstrate that the Prophet ﷺ was not Alim al Ghayb. Barelwis and extreme sufis have this belief about the Prophet ﷺ and saints that is eerily similar to how Unitarians believe about Jesus and their saints.
.....Sh. Muhammad Abd al-Wahid al-Azhari mentioned that scholars have traditionally used istighatha-like formulations/phrases in the majazi sense. So they’d for e.g. say “ya fulan, provide for me” but actually mean “O Allah provide for me due to the dhat/jah of fulan”. This is istighatha in the majazi sense but tawassul in the haqiqi sense. Are such formulations valid even if the niyya is sound?
Salam ustadh those who advocate for istighatha would argue back that they can request things because they believed the prophet and/or saint can take some action through kashf and karamah.
Deobandis, even though they don't believe in the aforementioned form of istighatha and consider it haram, come to the grave of the Prophet ﷺ to ask for his prayers and intercession because it is established that Prophets are alive and praying in their graves. They argue why can't we ask for his prayers then?
Be very clear what you're speaking about. Are you speaking about someone calling afar or only near the Prophet's grave? Are you also speaking about someone only asking the Prophet to make dua, or also believing that the Prophet has the power to do other things, such as making the rain fall, easing hardship, etc. by Allah's permission?
This is more than just a matter of supposed life and praying in the grave. To claim that they can hear from afar is to ascribe certain abilities to them, so it's not related to whether they are alive and pray in their graves.
Also, the issue of how these ignorant people beseech the dead through their sujud and sacrifices is also irrelevant to the point.
Also, the life of Barzakh and what it entails in terms of abilities to impact life on this dunya requires an actual scriptural argument. This is a matter of the unseen and cannot be analogized with the life of the dunya, absent backing from nusus.
What we know from nusus are very specific things such as the dead being able to hear certain things at certain times, or some of the dead being able to do certain things. To deduce from these nusus that the Prophets and saints can hear everybody and everywhere through an ability that Allah has given them, lacks scriptural evidence. Moreover, it runs the risk of falling into Shirk in Rububiyyah and Sifaat by elevating the status of these saints to Al-Mujeeb and As-Samee' (the ones who can answer and hear all calls from Muslims around the world). This is extremely dangerous.
It cannot be argued that the Prophet's (peace be upon him) link to the dunya is like when he was alive, but is rather a special link for such a specific act. Otherwise, if it’s a general link, then that means that the Prophets are also eating, drinking, etc. And if the link is general, then the Sahabah would have referred back to the Prophet during their disputes, as the Qur’an commands. The realm of barzakh is different, and for any exceptional links to the dunya, you need a nass. So far, none have been presented for asking the prophet for help during times of hardship with the presumption that he has the supernatural ability to help us.
As far as being able to impact life of the dunya is concerned one might resort to certain ahadith wherein our deeds are presented to the Prophet ﷺ on certain days and at certain times in which he will ask for blessings for any good deed and forgiveness for anything bad.
Some of those ahadith correlate with the authentic hadith about our salawat being presented to him every Friday
السلام عليكم
One issue I don’t understand is: is Istighatha only Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah or both Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah and Shirk Al-Rububiyyah? If you say it’s both, then what’s the point of proving that the pagan Arabs had Tawhid Al-Rububiyyah? And how is Istighatha also Shirk Al-Rububiyyah when Asharis who do this act don’t believe their saints are independent of Allah? Is Shirk Al-Rububiyyah restricted to just believing other than Allah acts independently or are there certain things when attributed to other than Allah are considered Shirk whether or not it’s accompanied with the belief that the saint acts independently of Allah? Thank you.
wa alaykum assalam,
Yes, I'd say most forms of istighatha today are both.
And yes, Shirk in Rububiyyah is broader than ascribing independence. I flesh out that point here https://islamicdiscourse.substack.com/p/clarifying-doubts-regarding-shirk
Also, read this https://islamicdiscourse.substack.com/p/can-istiqlalis-define-ibadah-easily as it's related.
So if an Ashari calls upon the Prophet ﷺ while believing he can hear him and manage the universe with the permission of Allah, that is also Shirk Al-Rububiyyah? But aren’t there some angels that also manage the universe with the permission of Allah? How is this not Shirk then? And what are other examples of Shirk Al-Rububiyyah without ascribing independence other than creation? Thank you.
First, I encourage you to read the links I provide you if you're serious about learning. Shortcuts don't always work.
Secondly, which angel manages the universe?
Thirdly, flip the question back to yourself:
If someone calls upon a saint believing he can do every single thing Allah does (create, forgive sins, grant salvation, control every living thing and atom, know all things, destine everything (literally everything small and big) that will happen in the future, heal all illnesses at will, etc. etc. all by Allah's permission, and this is still not major shirk, then what unique attributes have you left for Allah except Self-Sufficiency? Which scholars believed this?
Do not respond to me unless you read the first link I shared with you earlier fully properly. (not skimming and partially). If you respond, you need to state that you fulfilled my request. (This will spare a long exchange because your questions will be answered there).
Jzak.
I have actually read the articles before which is why I didn’t read them again. I started a discussion here because I was confused concerning when exactly is Istighatha only Shirk Al-Uluhiyyah and when is it both types of Shirk, and what other forms of Shirk Al-Rububiyyah other than creation is Shirk without ascribing independence. Also by the way I do believe Istighatha is Shirk and I totally oppose the other side, but I was only confused concerning the finer details of it.
The article mentions more examples than creation ex-nihilo. Revisit it. Jzak.
I think he's referring to Angels that regulate the natural orders, albeit in separate roles, like windblow, rain, plants, growth, death etc.. Mika'il and his subordinate angels are depicted as providing nourishment and bringing rain and thunder to Earth (Q. 51:1-4, 13:10-13, 79:1-2, 82:11)
I think you should list all of the verses and ahadith that demonstrate that the Prophet ﷺ was not Alim al Ghayb. Barelwis and extreme sufis have this belief about the Prophet ﷺ and saints that is eerily similar to how Unitarians believe about Jesus and their saints.
Also according to the following quora post.....
https://ibrahimspost.quora.com/Im%C4%81m-Ibn-Taym%C4%AByyah-on-Takf%C4%ABr-and-Istigh%C4%81tha
.....Sh. Muhammad Abd al-Wahid al-Azhari mentioned that scholars have traditionally used istighatha-like formulations/phrases in the majazi sense. So they’d for e.g. say “ya fulan, provide for me” but actually mean “O Allah provide for me due to the dhat/jah of fulan”. This is istighatha in the majazi sense but tawassul in the haqiqi sense. Are such formulations valid even if the niyya is sound?
Deobandis already took care of the Barelwis on that issue. See https://barelwism.wordpress.com/ and other sites.
These ta'weeli statements are rejected, but important when it comes to the hukm of the person and whether we forgive him due to ignorance.
Salam ustadh those who advocate for istighatha would argue back that they can request things because they believed the prophet and/or saint can take some action through kashf and karamah.
Deobandis, even though they don't believe in the aforementioned form of istighatha and consider it haram, come to the grave of the Prophet ﷺ to ask for his prayers and intercession because it is established that Prophets are alive and praying in their graves. They argue why can't we ask for his prayers then?
Be very clear what you're speaking about. Are you speaking about someone calling afar or only near the Prophet's grave? Are you also speaking about someone only asking the Prophet to make dua, or also believing that the Prophet has the power to do other things, such as making the rain fall, easing hardship, etc. by Allah's permission?
My point is that would be the counter-argument
Both actually
This is more than just a matter of supposed life and praying in the grave. To claim that they can hear from afar is to ascribe certain abilities to them, so it's not related to whether they are alive and pray in their graves.
Also, the issue of how these ignorant people beseech the dead through their sujud and sacrifices is also irrelevant to the point.
Also, the life of Barzakh and what it entails in terms of abilities to impact life on this dunya requires an actual scriptural argument. This is a matter of the unseen and cannot be analogized with the life of the dunya, absent backing from nusus.
What we know from nusus are very specific things such as the dead being able to hear certain things at certain times, or some of the dead being able to do certain things. To deduce from these nusus that the Prophets and saints can hear everybody and everywhere through an ability that Allah has given them, lacks scriptural evidence. Moreover, it runs the risk of falling into Shirk in Rububiyyah and Sifaat by elevating the status of these saints to Al-Mujeeb and As-Samee' (the ones who can answer and hear all calls from Muslims around the world). This is extremely dangerous.
It cannot be argued that the Prophet's (peace be upon him) link to the dunya is like when he was alive, but is rather a special link for such a specific act. Otherwise, if it’s a general link, then that means that the Prophets are also eating, drinking, etc. And if the link is general, then the Sahabah would have referred back to the Prophet during their disputes, as the Qur’an commands. The realm of barzakh is different, and for any exceptional links to the dunya, you need a nass. So far, none have been presented for asking the prophet for help during times of hardship with the presumption that he has the supernatural ability to help us.
Do these narrations in anyway legitimizes seeking his intercession after death?
As far as being able to impact life of the dunya is concerned one might resort to certain ahadith wherein our deeds are presented to the Prophet ﷺ on certain days and at certain times in which he will ask for blessings for any good deed and forgiveness for anything bad.
Some of those ahadith correlate with the authentic hadith about our salawat being presented to him every Friday