This is the case for Istiáānah [seeking help] and seeking aid; That the reality of it is specifically from Allāh, and from others it is with the meaning of Wasīlah, Tawassul and intercession,
is established and definitively permissible. Rather, this meaning is specific to other than Allāh; Allāh is pure from [being used for] Wasīlah, Tawassul and intercession. Who is there above Allāh, that He could be a Wasīlah towards?
Who is the real fulfiller of needs besides Allāh, that He could be an intercessor between? It is for this reason that it is in the Ĥadīth, that when the bedouin said to RasūlAllāh ﷺ, “Yā RasūlAllāh! We make you an intercessor to Allāh, and we make Allāh an intercessor to you”,
it was very grievous upon him, and he kept reciting SubĥānAllāh for a period of time. Then he proclaimed, “Woe to you! Allāh is not made an intercessor to anyone, Allāh’s status is greater than that.” Narrated by Abū Dāwūd from Jubayr ibn Muţím رضي الله عنه.
The Muslims perform this Istiáānah with the Anbiyā’a and Awliyā’a عليهم السلام, that if it were done with Allāh, it would invite the Wrath of Allāh and the Rasūl ﷺ, and it would be considered disrespectful to the status of Allāh. The reality is,
if one holds the belief of this meaning of Istiáānah and performs it with Allāh, then he will become a Kāfir, but what can we say to the irrationality of the Wahhābīyyah? No Adab for Allāh, nor fear of the Rasūl ﷺ, nor regard for Īmān. Willingly or unwillingly,
by including Istiáānah under, “You alone we seek help”, they make what is clearly impossible for Allāh to be specific for Him. One foolish Wahhābī said, “What is it, that you do not get from Allāh, that you ask from the Awliyā’a?” This Faqīr, may Allāh forgive him, has said,
“We cannot do Tawassul with Allāh, it is that which we ask from the Awliyā’a.” Meaning, this cannot be that by doing Tawassul with Allāh we can make Him a Wasīlah and a means to someone. We ask the Awliyā’a Kirām to be that Wasīlah, that they be our Wasīlah, our means,
our intercessors in the Court of Allāh for our needs to be fulfilled. Allāh has given the answer to this foolish question in this verse:
“And if they, when they have wronged their own souls, come humbly to you and seek forgiveness from Allāh
and the Noble Messenger intercedes for them, they will certainly find Allāh as the Most Acceptor Of Repentance, the Most Merciful.”
What, could Allāh táālā not forgive by Himself? Why then did Allāh declare, “O Nabī! They present themselves to you,
and you seek forgiveness for them from Allāh, then they will receive this prosperity and blessing”?
It is this which is our objective, which this verse of the Qur'ān is clearly stating, however the Wahhābīyyah do not possess understanding.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many Muslims incorrectly assume slavery is not a "good" thing. It is, and if it was not, then Allāh would not have permitted it, and His Beloved Rasūl ﷺ would not have engaged in it.
They erroneously assume that because freeing one's own slaves can be rewarded, that this somehow means slavery as a whole is evil and ought to be abolished.
Firstly, not all instances of freeing slaves are rewarded, it is only rewarded if done sincerely for the Pleasure of Allāh, otherwise if a person frees a thousand of his slaves without this sincere intention, then though it is valid, there is no reward.
Moreover, if a kāfir does so, there is no reward for him, regardless of his intention.
Secondly, a person is rewarded for giving charity if he does so purely for the sake of Allāh, but does this now mean private property is evil and must be abolished? Must governments take all wealth of individuals by force? Of course not.
In reality, this is modern-day apologetics designed to suit 21st century sentiment regarding slavery and has no basis in traditional Islam.
Today marks the day that one of the greatest Sunni scholars of India left this world: Alahazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Hanafi Qadiri Baraylawi [1272-1340 AH / 1856-1921]
Here is a thread of some of my threads regarding him ad translations of his writings
His detailed definition and discourse regarding worship:
So yes, "Anti-slavery fight is a modern idea, Islam unanimously agreed with this this practice, this is the consensus", this is correct.
I don't know why people struggle with the historical fact that wholesale demonisation of slavery and opposition to slavery in the Muslim world is a recent occurrence thst began in 19thC and that for centuries nobody of any group or sect had any issue with slavery in of itself.
The first who conceptualised an identity was German lawyer, jurist, journalist Karl Heinrich Ulrichs [1825-1895].
Prior to this, the focus was on the act of the individual, whereas activists such as Ulrichs shifted the focus towards the nature of the individual.
In 1867 he attended the Congress of German Jurists in Munich and argued for the repealing of laws which prohibited sodomy, mentioning that nature had implanted this inn them, and thus such laws are discriminatory against them.
The one deserving of Khilāfat is he who possesses the seven conditions of Khilāfat, that is:
1. Man,
2. Sane,
3. Pubescent,
4. Muslim,
5. Free,
6. Capable,
7. Qurashī
These seven conditions are necessary such that if even one condition is missing then the Khilāfat shall not be sound. The elucidation of this is in all books of creed.
Imām Taftāzānī says in Sharh al-Aqā’id:
“{He ought to be from Quraysh, and it is not permissible from other than them} meaning, it is stipulated that the Imām be a Qurashī due to his saying, upon him be blessings and salutations, ‘The Imāms are from Quraysh.’
Muslims ought to remember that Allāh has created cattle for the benefit of mankind, and they are a great blessing and favour from our Lord.
There are numerous explicit verses in the Qur'ān which clarify this, and to oppose this is detrimental to one's faith.
It is necessary not to fall prey to modern ideas of veganism, environmentalism, etc, which claim that benefitting from animals is immoral, harmful, unjust, and is destructive for the environment.