Shaykh Asrar on istighathah

It seems you did not listen to Shaykh Asrar hafizahullahu ta'ala's first clip talking about sadd al-dharai and enforcing it on the awam brother. Please go back and listen to the first clip.

As for Sayyidi Shaykh Asrar hafizahullah's second clip, if it means that it is mutlaqan ja'iz then I humbly ask again - sad al dharai means what then? If it is mashrut to just poetry/nashids/qasaid, as br. Ali Bash said , then why did Mawlana hafizahullah mention takwin of the Awliya?

It's a simple question

The answer is NOT "ask yourself. you have a phone"

Furthermore, I do appreciate Shaykh Asrar hafizahullah's publication of Shawahid al-Haq but what does that have to do with what Shaykh Asrar hafizahullah has said in public lectures?

 

Also why misrepresent what sheikh Asrar is saying. He just published Sheikh Nabahanis book about istigatha but apparently he is against istigatha. Represent his argument properly before refuting it.

Also he destroyed the wahabi person in the debate about istigatha.

 

Yes I think you are right. Istigatha is not shirk. This is understood. But what is wrong with teaching people not to overdo it? Imagine walking into a masjid and everyone is chanting ya abdalqadir. Nobody is saying ya Allah. This happens. It’s off putting to say the least.

 

given the state of affairs today, a lot of people would argue it’s a fair line of reasoning

 

Asalam Alaikum Brother Aqdas

Not everyone has access to Shaykh Asrār. I dont even have any social media like facebook or Twitter, i only follow his telegram account. So if any brother can ask on our behalf that would be much appreciated.

 

Okay although note our brother Ali Bash and others insinuated that that was the case.

 

Note: Allamah Ghulam Rasul Saeedi rahmatuLlahi alayh writes:
” خلاصہ یہ ہے کہ اس اعتقاد کے ساتھ انبیاء علیہم السلام و اولیاء کرام سے استمداد و استغاثہ کرنا ہر چند کہ جائز ہے لیکــن افصل , احسن اور اولیٰ یہی ہے کہ ہر حال میں ہر معاملہ میں اللّٰہ تعالیٰ سے سوال کیا جاۓ ___ اور اسی سے مدد چاہیں اور دعــا میں مستحسن طریقہ یہ ہے کہ رسول اللّٰہ کے وسیلہ سے دعا مانگیں , زیادہ محفوظ و زیادہ سلامتی اس میں ہے کہ وہ دعائیں مانگیں جو قرآن و احادیث میں مذکور ہیں تاکہ دعاؤں بھی اللّٰہ تعالیٰ کی رحمت اور رسول اللّٰہﷺ کی سنت سایہ افگن رہے, اگر کسی خــاص حــاجت میں دعا مانگنی ہو تـو رسول ﷺ کے وسیلہ سے دعا منگنی چاییے
[ تبیان القرآن , ص ١٧۸ / ۲۰۸ , ج ١ , فرید بک سٹال ]
There is no disagreement with Allama Saeedi sahib’s statement here
Similarly he mentions Allama Abdul Hakim Sharf Qadri قدس الله سره
Note Hadrat Shaykh al Hadith رحمة الله عليه mentions lessening of wrong judgements on istighatha by removing misconceptions but did not say istighatha was only for awam or using sadd al-dhara'i.. Hadrat Allamah Saeedi رحمة الله تعلى عليه quotes:
بارگاہِ انبیاء و اولیاء سے درخواست کیا جاۓ کہ آپ اللّٰہ تعالیٰ کی بارگاہ میں دعا کریں کہ ہماری مشکلیں آسان فرمادے اور حاجتیں برلاۓ , اس طرح کسی کو غلط فہمی بھی پیدا نہیں ہو گی اور اختلاف کی خلیج بھی ذیادہ وسیع نہیں ہو گی “
[ نداۓ یارسول اللّٰہ , ص ١۲ , مطبوعہ مرکزی مجلس رضا , لاہور , ١٤۰٥ ھ ]

Hadrat Shaykh al-Hadith mentions it is awla to do du'a to Allah ta'ala through wasilah and gives a suggestion to stop misconceptions but does not state to stop the awam from doing istighathah

He mentions only in poems though Aqdas bhai....

 

If the followers of Shaykh Asrar hafizahullahu ta'ala wa naf'anAllahu bihi will quote Imam al-Nabhani رضى الله عنه quoting Imam al-Khawas, Imam al-Dahlan, and Shaykh Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'rani radhiyallahu anhum, I will say:

the majority of a’imma of ahl al-sunna allowed istighatha bil awliya and only some disagreed with it (see jaa al-haq quoting lamaaat al-tanqih). although Sayyidi Shaykh asrar hafizahullah quoted imam al-sha’rani and shaykh ahmad zayni dahlan to that effect. (https://www.facebook.com/ShAsrarRas...Z2vJ3HeuFy8h13pn1VUjVhYhHodRwd8Ljk4S3cipEdW5l)

yes, sh abdal hadi kharsah hafizahuLlah said sadd al-dhara’i was used by SOME ulama and shah abdul haq muhaddith dehlwi رحمة الله عليه said in ashi’at and in lama’at al-tanqih that some fuqaha (and some texts say katheerun min al-fuqaha or many) denied this like imam muhammad ibn sulayman al-kurdi who called it qabih (but not makruh) and others

but many eminent imams like shaykh al-ramli and hadrat shah abdul aziz رحمة الله عليه and others have permitted istighatha bil awliya – even the very same shaykh abd al-haq muhaddith dehlwi رحمة الله عليه who mentions this difference writes it is permissible.

Note- Imam Dahlan as quoted by Imam al-Nabhani said : ‘The Ulama said: if any such statement (calling on the name of other than Allah in the name of istighathah) was done by a muwahhid, it is enough to regard it as a metaphorical attribution (isnadan majaziyyan), because the correct i’itiqad (of every muwahhid) is the belief that Allah is the only creator of his human servants and their actions. There is no disposition (ta’thir) by anybody living or dead people except Him.’. (shawahid al-haq pg. 170-171).

See original post: https://www.facebook.com/ShAsrarRas...2D9YxyvJoqnKcVxsXgq1cL6NqyXfnYKF5q7kgqUJ4BNtl

Passages from al-Ibriz of al-Imam al-Dabbagh قدس الله سره and the text of Shawahid al-Haq of Imam al-Nabhani قدس الله سره are attached

These passages from the Ibriz and from Shawahid al-Haq are sometimes mentioned as supporting ghayr mustahsan position but it is not accurate to say they supported the other position like how imam muhammad ibn sulayman al kurdi did ; the majority consider istighatha bil Awliya jaiz and mustahab and that is the jamhur and sawad al-a’dham and that is raajih. See more info on the Shawahid al-Haq passages here from Shaykh Zulfiqar Haidar Pirzada:

 

This is what I was referencing from Lama'at al-Tanqih:



Regarding istighatha, this is one ibarat in Lamaat al Tanqih vol 1 p. 37-38 regarding istighatha bil Awliya and its ikhtilaf. See here also:

قال الشيخ عبد الحق المحدث الدهلوي (١٥٥١ – ١٦٤٢ م) المشهور في شرحه على المشكاة باللغة العربية: ((أما الإستمداد بأهل القبور فقد أنكره بعض الفقهاء، فإن كان الإنكار من جهة أنه لا سماع لهم ولا علم ولا شعور بالزائر وأحواله فقد ثبت بطلانه، وإن كان بسبب أنه لا قدرة لهم ولا تصرف في ذلك الموطن حتى يمدوا، بل هم محبوسون عن ذلك ومشتغلون بما عرض لأنفسهم من المحنة ما شغلهم عمن عداهم فلا يرى ذلك كليا، خصوصا في شأن المتقين الذين هم أولياء الله تعالى، فيمكن أن يحصل لأرواحهم عند الرب تعالى من القرب فى البرزخ والمنزلة والقدرة على الشفاعة والدعاء وطلب الحاجات لزائريهم المتوسلين …وما أدري ما المراد بالإستمداد والإمداد الذي ينفيه المنكر، والذي نفهمه نحن أن الداعي المحتاج الفقير إلى الله يدعو الله ويطلب حاجاته من فضله تعالى ويتوسل بروحانية هذه العبد المقرب المكرم عنده تعالى، ويقول: اللهم ببركة هذا العبد الذي رحمتَه وأكرمتَه وبما لك به من اللطف والكرم اقض حاجتي وأعط سؤلي إنك أنت المعطي الكريم، أو ينادي هذا العبد المقرب عند الله تعالى ويقول: يا عبد الله ويا وليه اشفع لي وادع ربك وسله أن يعطيني سؤلي ويقضي حاجتي، فالمعطي والمسؤول عنه والمأمول به هو الرب تعالى وتقدس، وما العبد فى البين إلا وسيلة، ولا القادر والفاعل والمتصرف إلا هو، وأولياء الله هم الفانون الهالكون في فعله تعالى وقدرته وسطوته…هذا وما ينقل عن المشايخ المكاشفين فى الإستمداد من أرواح الكمل واستفادتهم منهم فخارج عن الحصر مذكور في كتبهم مشهور فيما بينهم لا حاجة أن نذكرها)) (لمعات التنقيح ج٧ ص٣٨ – ٤٠)

وهذا – كما ترى – صريح في أن المراد بالإستغاثة عنده المعنى الأول والثالث والرابع المذكور أعلاه، ثم قال: ((نعم، إن كان الزائرون يعتقدون أهل القبور متصرفين مستبدين قادرين من غير توجه إلى حضرة الحق والإلتجاء إليها كما يعتقده العوام الجاهلون الغافلون، وكما يفعلون غير ذلك من تقبيل القبر والسجود له والصلاة إليه مما وقع منه النهي والتحذير، وذلك مما يمنع ويحذر منه وفعل العوام لا يعتبر قط…وحاشا من العالم بالشريعة والعارف بأحكام الدين أن يعتقد ذلك ويفعل)) (لمعات التنقيح، ج٧ ص٣٩)



As for istimdād from the inhabitants of graves, some jurists have denounced it. If the denunciation is because they have no hearing, knowledge or feeling of the one visiting and his conditions, then this has been proven to be false, and if it is because they have no power or control in that location to help them but are held back from them and occupied in the trials that occur to their souls which distract them from all else, then this is not regarded as always [being the case], especially for the pious who are the friends of Allāh, and thus it is possible for their souls to acquire closeness to the Lord Most Exalted in the Barzakh, and position and power to intercede and make du‘ā and ask for needs to those visiting and making Tawassul through them.

…

I don’t understand the istimdād and imdād that the denouncer is negating. What we understand is that a needy supplicant, in need of Allāh, makes du‘ā to Allāh and asks his need from His Most Exalted grace, and takes the spirituality of this slave brought close and ennobled by Him Most Exalted as an intermediary, saying: “O Allāh, by the blessing of this slave that You have shown mercy to and have ennobled, and the gentleness and honour You have over him, fulfil my need and grant my request, verily You are the Generous Giver.” Or he calls out to this slave brought close and ennobled by Him Most Exalted, saying: “O slave of Allāh, O friend of His, intercede for me and make du‘ā to your Lord and ask Him to give me my request and fulfil my need.” The giver and the one asked and the one hoped in is the Lord Most High and Most Exalted, and the slave in between is nothing but an intermediary. The one with power, agency and control is none but Him, and the friends of Allāh are annihilated in His Most Exalted agency, power and control.

…

That which is transmitted from the saints who experience kashf upon istimdād (i.e. deriving spiritual benefit) from the souls of the accomplished and taking benefit from them, it is more than can be counted, described in their works, well-known amongst them, so there is no need to cite them. (Lama‘āt al-Tanqīḥ, Dār al-Nawādir, 7:38-40)

A similar ibarat with the words katheer min al fuqaha is here:



From the English version of Jaa al-Haq:


https://archive.org/details/SaeedUl...e-Takhreej-Ja-Al-Haq-Vol-1/page/n471/mode/2up

And here:


Shaykh Abd al Hadi al-Kharsah hafizahullah says the same





see here also:





Thank you to a brother for the scans

Also see the same ibarat in Ashi`at al Lamaat 5/231-234 (cf: Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddis Dehlvi aur Aqaid o Mamulat e Ahle Sunnat p. 88)

Note Sayyidi Hadrat Shaykh al-Muhaqqiq رحمة الله عليه mentions Imam al-Ghazali قدس الله سره as allowing istighatha bil Awliya (Ashiat 2/923) and mentions many athar to prove istighatha bil Anbiya wa Awliya (see Jadhb al-qulub Urdu p. 294) and mentions the ziyarah of Sayyidina Imam al-Shafi’i رضى الله عنه to the qabr of Sayyidina Imam Musa Kazim رضى الله عنه (see Jadhb al-Qulub Urdu p. 286)-cf: Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddis Dehlvi aur Aqaid o Mamulat e Ahle Sunnat p. 88.

Hadrat Mufti Zahid Hussain دامت بركاتهم quotes Shaykh Abd al-Haqq رحمة الله عليه and writes:

The Awliya of Allah are alive in their graves and they do provide help and assistance to those who seek it. Calling us Mushrik for doing this is an old tactic of their actual small numbered forefathers.Imam Muhaqqiq Ala Al-Itlaaq writes in his commentary on Mishkaat Al-Masaabeeh after a long discussion on proving that seeking help and assistance from the Awliya who passed on from this world is the way of the Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaa’ah,ثم اعلم أن الخلاف إنما هو في غير الأنبياء فإنهم أحياء حقيقة بالحياة الدنياوية بالاتفاق صلوات اللَّه تعالى على نبينا وعليهم أجمعين، وإنما أطنبنا الكلام في هذا المقام رغمًا لأنف المنكرين، فإنه قد حدث في زماننا شرذمة ينكرون الاستمداد والاستعانة من الأولياء الذين نقلوا من هذه الدار الفانية إلى دار البقاء الذين هم أحياء عند ربهم، ولكنهم لا يشعرون، ويسمون المتوجهين إليهم مشركين باللَّه كعبدة الأصنام، ويقولون ما يقولون، وما لهم على ذلك من علم إن هم إلا يخرصون[لمعات التنقيح في شرح مشكاة المصابيح ,7/40]’

Thereafter, you should know that the dispute is only regarding those who are not Prophets because it is agreed upon that they (Prophets) are truly alive like the worldly life, blessings be upon our Prophet and upon them all. The only reason why I lengthened the discussion on this matter is in defiance of the deniers because a small group has emerged in our time who deny ‘Istimdaad’ (seeking help) and ‘Isti’aanah’ (seeking aid) from the Awliya who have moved from this temporary abode to the everlasting abode and they are alive with their ‘Rabb’ but they (deniers) have no idea and they label those who attend to them, ‘Mushrik Bi-Allah’ (partnering others with Allah) like the worshippers of idols and they say what they say and they have no knowledge regarding this, they do not but guesstimate’.

Note: This yaqin is about istighatha bil Mustafa salAllahu alayhi wa alihi wa salim and not bil Awliya quddisa sirruhum al-aziz. Note a small minority have disagreed with isstighatha bil awliya such as Allama Sunullah al-Halabi and perhaps Imam Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi. Note the latter still admits its permissibility. There is a slight ikhtilaf on istighatha bil awliya and the vast majority such as Shah Abdul Haq Imam Wazzani Imam al Ghazali rahimahumullah jamian etc allow it . Shaykh Abd alHadi Kharsa hafizahullah and Hadrat Shah Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlwi rahimahullah and Hadrat Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naimi rahimahullah mention this difference.

However, what is incorrect is to stop those who hold the view of permissibility from doing istighatha bil Awliya as some shuyukh (may Allah preserve them) have done. Shaykh Abd al Hadi (Allah preserve him)’s words do not give those shuyukh's mistake in this matter credence as that sad al dharai is only for those who follow that opinion. To stop those who do istighatha bil Awliya and who consider it permissible within the quyudat of the Shari'at is against the jamhur view of Ahl al-Sunna.

 

Check what 'Allama al-Wazzani رحمة الله عليه says:

 

One is "i don't want to say ya Ghawth or ya Fulan", but Shaykh Asrar hafizahullah insists that istighatha bil Awliya is to be stopped for the laymen, period except in anashid. Which is not the majority position

 

Any valid criticism of shaikh Asrar’s position? If a person does not want to say Ya Ghaws, what is the problem?

 

Please don't get me wrong. I disagree with the Shaykh hafizahuLLahu ta'ala's take and lean more towards Mufti Zahid Husain Hafizahullahu taala on this matter but I respect both

 

Wa alaykum asalam brother Ali Bash, may Allah bless you.


As for your point, the noble Shaykh has made unnecessary restrictions and applied them widespread i.e. nashids vs du'a. May Allah preserve him.

Furthermore, many Ulama and Awliya have accepted istighatha at qubur al-Salihin and from afar in the du'a eg Shah Waliyullah in alIntibah fi Salasil al-Awliya, Imam alWazzani in his book alNawazil alJadidat alKubra quoting imam alQastalani, etc. (although Shaykh e Muhaqiq قدس الله سره in Ash'iat and in Lama'at al Tanqih says some fuqaha follow the other position) If you want to hold to the opinion of sadd al-dhara'i, its up to you but my point and Mufti Zahid Sahib (Allah preserve him)'s point is this should not be made widespread and made to seem like a qati' yaqini hukm when it is against the jamhur of Sunni scholars.

 

Asalam Alaikum brother

His Sad al-Dharāiʿ did not go anywhere.

In the second link he is saying it is ok if said in a nasheed or some sort of Poem. Whereas in the first clip he explicitly said the people are surrounding a grave of the Wali and saying Ya Ghous, Ya Ghous. He is differentiating between Dua and nasheeds

 

And again not to attack Imam Zahid Hussain but when did Shaykh Asrar speak out against Tawassul? Or deny the wilayah of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani? Those 2 points don't make sense at all and completely irrelevant.