Before I am accused of misquoting Ibn Taymiyyah, as certain individuals have a habit of doing so, I make it clear that Ibn Taymiyyah did not approve of this and condemned it harshly.
However, I will present those passages in which he affirms the reality of it, thus none may accuse me of deception for leaving out the parts of condemnation.
He states that though it is a reality, this does not make it permissible, whereas Najdīs deny the reality completely.
He writes:
“I know of a group from those who asked their needs from those in the graves, from the Prophets and the righteous, and their needs were fulfilled.”
[Iqtidā'a, 2/218]
Further:
“That which is narrated that people heard the return of the salām from the grave of Nabī ﷺ, or from the graves of others from among the righteous, and that Saýīd ibn al-Muşayyab would hear the Adhān from the grave during the nights of Ĥarrah, and similar to that.
All of this is reality, and is not which we are discussing, and the matter is more than that and greater.
Similarly, also that which is narrated, that a man went to the grave of Nabī ﷺ, and complained to him in the year of the drought, thus he saw him [in his dream],
and he commanded him to go to Úmar, thus he commanded him to go out and perform istisqā'a with the people. Indeed, this is not from this matter. The like of this takes place many times with the one who is less than Nabī ﷺ [i.e. a Walī], and I am aware of incidents of this.
Similarly, some of them asking the Nabī ﷺ for their need, or to other than him from his ummah, and it is fulfilled for him. For indeed, this has occurred many times.”
[Iqtidā'a, 2/254]
Here he clarifies that though Nabī ﷺ does fulfil the need, it is not proof of recommendation, according to him:
“It is upon you to know that the responding of Nabī ﷺ or other than him to these seekers is not from that which shows the recommendation of asking.”
Interestingly, he states that if Nabī ﷺ did not respond, this would harm the faith of the seekers:
“Most of these seekers due to their condition, if they were not responded to their faith would be harmed, just as those who asked him in his [worldly] life.”
“Thus, this extent, when it occurs, it is a karāmah of the inhabitant of the grave.”
“Similarly, what is mentioned from the karāmāt, and the breaking of norms, which is found at the graves of the Prophets and the righteous, such as the descending of lights and Angels near them,
and the repelling of Devils and beasts from them, and the driving away of fire from them and those around them, and the intercession of some of those around them from among the deceased [i.e. buried near them], and the preference of being buried near some of them,
and the achievement of serenity near them, and the descent of punishment for the one who desecrated them, then this kind of thing is true, and not from what we are discussing.
That which is in the graves of the Prophets and the righteous, from the karāmah of Allāh and His Mercy,
and what they possess with Allāh in terms of santicity and karāmah, is greater than that which most of the people imagine.”
[Taken from Iqtidā'a, 2/254-256]
Again, to clarify, I have selected relevant passages from these pages, and the rest is his condemnation of the act.
What is being pointed out here is that though he did not consider it permissible, he did not deny the reality of it. He considered all that is mentioned to occur in reality, as opposed to the Najdīs of today who laugh and mock, calling all this fairy tales and superstition.
Most importantly, he affirmed RasūlAllāh ﷺ and the Awliyā'a do help, and do fulfil the needs of those who ask them. He did not say as the blasphemous Wahābīs, who say, “he is dead, he is gone, he cannot help”, we seek Allāh's refuge from such statements.
I know that the Najdīs will try to accuse me of deception by not including the passages of condemnation, despite the fact I have made clear he considered the act forbidden.
It is hoped they too will accept the reality of all this as did Ibn Taymiyyah.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
and if I were given the world in its entirety I would not give the verdict that it is impermissible [ĥarām].”
[Khulāşah al-Fatāwā]
The reason being that at his time the fatwā was given according to the opinion of Imām al-Aáżam, that alcoholic drinks other than khamr [i.e. wine]
with the condition that one does not become are permissible, intoxicated nor do so for merry-making as the sinners do.
However, for centuries the fatwā has been given according to the fatwā of Imām Muĥammad ibn al-Ĥasan al-Shaybānī, that all alcoholic drinks are prohibited.
“When it has been established* that the world is originated, and it is known that anything originated must have an originator, for by necessity it is impossible that there be a preponderance in favour of one of the two alternatives of something
possible [i.e. of it existing and of it not existing] without there being a determiner, it is established that the world has an originator.”
* That is, when it has been established by evidence that the world is originated, preceded by non-existence, and it is known that its existence is not due to its own self, and its existence and non-existence is equal in the intellect,
“Shall I not pray for you the prayer of RasūlAllāh ﷺ?”
Thus, he prayed and did not raise his hands except for the first time.
Abū Ýīsā [al-Tirmidhī] said:
“The ĥadīth of Ibn Masúūd is a ĥasan ĥadīth.
More than one amongst the people of knowledge from the companions of Nabī ﷺ and the tābiýīn held this opinion, and it is the opinion of Sufyān al-Thawrī and the people of Kūfah.”
[Tirmidhī, #257]
Albānī grades this narration şaĥīĥ.
He also graded the same ĥadith şaĥīĥ in Mishkāt al-Maşābīĥ:
“The reality is that it is a şaĥīĥ ĥadith, and its isnād is şaĥīĥ upon the criteria of Muslim.”