Istigātha at a distance

that is quite low from you brother. firstly, you did not read the full debate. secondly, ibn hajr does not consider any difference between istighatha and tawassul while he presented the very same hadith of the blind. thirdly, when it is proven from sahih hadith that rasulAllah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem hears from afar then why would we care if there is such a statement in his book? this is when we assume the ibarah is as you assumed, while the later debate in the chapter negates it. I will present ahadith for it inshaAllah.

a question to you if you would answer honestly. are you a deobandi, a wahabi, a brailvi, or a 50/50, that is neither this side nor that side.

 

Note when the Imam says "“From the greatest of benefits of Ziyārah is that his ﷺ visitor, when sending ṣalāt and salām on him near his grave, he hears it literally and replies to him without an intermediary. This is sufficient for you. This is different from someone that sends ṣalāt and salām on him from afar, because that does not reach him, nor does he hear it, except via an intermediary.". This doesn't negate hearing completely, firstly. Secondly, as we said it doesn't negate hearing via a continuous mu'jiza. That would be a better ta'wil than just Allah ta'ala's qudrah.

Furthermore, here is the exact reference:

https://archive.org/details/elsoufia50/page/n41/mode/2up

 

Deobandis write:

“Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī explicitly rejects Barelwī belief that the Prophet ﷺ can hear from afar.

He writes in al-Jawhar al-Munaẓẓam (p41):


“From the greatest of benefits of Ziyārah is that his ﷺ visitor, when sending ṣalāt and salām on him near his grave, he hears it literally and replies to him without an intermediary. This is sufficient for you. This is different from someone that sends ṣalāt and salām on him from afar, because that does not reach him, nor does he hear it, except via an intermediary. The evidence for this is many ḥadīths that I cited in my aforementioned book.”

He says further in the same work (p45):


“When you realise that replying to the salām of the visitor to him ﷺ by his noble self is something that occurs without doubt, and there is only disagreement over his reply to someone who sends salām on him from those not visiting, then this is another massive virtue that visitors to his grave acquire. Allāh thus combines for them both that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ hears their voices directly and him replying to their salāh himself. So how can someone who hears of these two virtues, in fact even one of them, lag behind from visiting him?!”

Response:

1. One issue with the first passage is that it is not mutlaq whereas the qawl of the Deobandiyya is mutlaq. it says ila bi wasita – except by a means. Allah’s Qudrah could a means. But this is a tawil. Another note is that Shaykh Ibn Hajar رحمة الله تعلى عليه states the amal of the ummah are presented to the Prophet ﷺ
2. The issue with the second – he never says the Prophet ﷺ does not hear, wa iyadhubillah, with explicitness

 

you copy pasted this from zameel

 

Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasalam hearing salaam in front of his grave without an intermediary. From afar, its sent via an intermediary. From Ibn Hajar Haytami Jawhar al-Munazzam

 

can you please present evidence for this?

 

Istigātha meaning specifically asking the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasalam) to help (or to ask him to ask Allāh to help), which is not found in the hadith that mentions uthman hunayf (radiallahu anhu).

Classical scholars made a distinction between far and near. Instead of near or far, I guess the better description is in front of his grave or not in front of his grave.

Sure there are there plenty of hadīth of those who have passed away hearing people, but not specific requests for assistance, as far as I know. I have only found the hadith of malik dar to be explicit in doing istigatha in front of the grave of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasalam). Everything else is speculative.

I do not say istigatha is shirk, if done with the correct belief, but at worst, its bid'ah, at best its recommended. I am just trying to find evidence for it being at the very least permissible to do from afar, meaning anything explicit from the Sahābah radiallahu anhum doing that. The most I have heard is well since our salams are conveyed to him from afar, then perhaps our requests for help are conveyed as well, and then its possible he responds, but there is no text on this issue. Its just possibilities. So certain scholars have said its bidah because theres no textual precedent, even though its possible, because it has no basis. Allāhu alam. On a personal level, I would not mind to do istigatha from afar, and I want to but refrain due to no athar establishing it clearly, as far as I know and many scholars saying its bidah. But its definitely not shirk.

(edit: and I have not found any report from the Sahābah radiallahu anhum asking assistance from other righteous individuals who have passed away besides the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasalam, whether near or far from their graves. So I would never say shaykh abdul Qadir, madad.)

 

a batter ver and scan;

 

there is a typo in the second highlight, it should be;
فليبك على نفسه

also, in the 5th line;
فى الإستسقاء

 

al jauhar al munazzam by ibn hajr al haythami



note that ibn hajr presented the hadith of the blind in the preceding discussion, and he does not make any distinction between tawassul and istighatha, as it is clear from the above quote.

 

wahabi can say that it was in the presence of rasulAllah alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem, because after it the hadith says;

فلما صلوا الظھر قاموا فقالوا ذلک
they prayed zuhr, stood up, and said these words

ala hazrat alaihi rahmah wa riDwan has very succinctly refuted the objection preemptively

 

what is the difference b/w tawassul and istighatha?

is there any aplication of haqiqah and majaz in the usage of language or not?

there is a calling upon rasuAllah alahi afDaus salat wat tasleem (nida) in the hadith, why this cannot be deemed as istighatha

as brother Abdullah Ahmed rightly pointed out, what is the exact definition of near and far when seeking help, and from which naS it is proven?

the blessed grave is in a closed room that has no doors, then there is an outer building around it, then there is a barrier to keep visitors away from the rawDah, with what logic it will be considered near the grave, and what reasoning will call it far if someone is outside the masjid or in another city and does tawassul or istighatha? while it is proven from hadith that souls (of muminin), that are in different places and some of them live below the arsh, listen to the salam of visitors on their graves and reply to them.

also why only restrict it to after demise? if istighatha is shirk in the parlance of whabiyyah then what shirk has to do with time and/or distance differences, or being alive or passed away?

do we, alhussunah wal jamah, not bellieve that rasulAllah alaihi afDalus salat wat-talseem is alive after he alaihi afDalus salat wat-tasleem has tasted the death to fulfil the promise of Allah azza wa jalla.

is it not our aqidah, based on sahih ahadith of sihah sittah, that rasulAllah alaihi afDalus salat wat-talseem does listen, see, and can access things far beyond our imaginations, beyond skies, in the heaven, etc? what comparison the distances on earth make with the distance to heavens and beyond?

why? the hadith of the blind is sahih. also, what about assalamu alayka ayyuha an nabi? okay, it is not istighatha, but nida is proven from sahih ahadith

 

1. Where is this principle written that:

If the sahabah didn’t do something that they possibly could have, then that thing is impermissible?

2. just because many actions of the sahabah have been preserved via recorded ahadith/narrations, doesnt mean that we assume those things not mentioned, to be negated. It’s very possible that there were many actions that were done (ie such as istigatha from afar) but just weren’t recorded. Or if they were recorded, then perhaps weren’t preserved long enough to have reached our era due to a number of reasons (ex: libraries being burned down by the mongols etc).

3. the absence of an action does not necessarily imply impermissibility unless explicitly stated

4. if such a thing is impermissible, then what is the hukm on the action and the one performing it?

 

I don't know the sharh of the hadith of the blind man right now, but as far as I know, none of the scholars of the salaf or khalaf have applied any sort of taqayyud on it, and it's an open prescription for the entire ummah.

 

Its definitely logically possible that Allāh can make him hear from far away with a means (angels for example) or without a means.
But as far as I know, the only ahādīth that mention the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasalam) knowing what happens from afar is when angels convey the salāms of the people to him, and the deeds of the ummah are presented to him. But I haven't seen any about a request for a help. Sure its possible, but deen is based on athar/text. It would surprise me that such a gigantic blessing, if permissible or recommended, was not utilized by the Sahābah. We at least have an athar for them doing it right in front of the qabr. I have heard it was Bilal ibn Al-Harith Al-Muzani radiallahu anho that did so. But some may say its not permitted to do it afar because this is doing something the Sahābah never did when they could have.

 

this is tawassul.

 

They say its not sound, and even if it was, they say it does not imply asking for help.