Archive

Archive for the ‘Ahmed bin Hanbal (Rahimahullah)’ Category

Family Man- Life of Ahmed bin Hanbal [rahimahullah]


 

Ahmad bin Hanbal [rahimahullah] did not marry or occupy himself with making money until he was past the age of forty and had got the knowledge he wanted. We are told that he was precisely forty at the time of his first marriage, which means he married in 204/819–20. His wife was an ‘Abbasah bint al-Fadl, of Arab lineage. She gave birth to a son, Salih, who grew up to be Ahmad’s biographer, a collector of his opinions, and a qadi. Then she died

(IAY, 2:49; Manaqib, 298 402).

 

 

Ahmad next married his paternal cousin, Rayhanah, who was one-eyed. She gave birth to a son, ‘Abd Allah, who grew up to be the main collector of Ahmad’s opinions and hadith (IAY, 2:49; Manaqib, 299 403), before she in her turn died. Rayhanah may have been a concubine, whom Ahmad bought, with his wife’s permission, for the sake of offspring (Manaqib, 177 243). However, Ahmad is also reported to have told a disciple,

‘Salih’s mother lived with me for thirty years without our disagreeing over a single word” (Manaqib, 298–9 402–3).

 If she was with him for thirty years, she must have died about 234/848–9, whereas ‘Abd Allah is said to have been born in 213/828–9 (TB 9:376). Therefore, it seems likely that Ahmad’s household at some point included either two wives or a wife and a concubine.

 

 

Then Ahmad bought Husn, who gave birth to several children: Umm ‘Ali Zaynab, a daughter (perhaps also called Fatimah – girls might bear two names), twins al-Hasan and al-Husayn, who died shortly after birth, al-Hasan and Muhammad, who lived to be around 40 years old, and finally Sa‘id, who grew up to become a deputy qadi in Kufa (IAY, 2:49; Manaqib, 307 414).

 

For years, I have collected references to the sources of income of Muslim men of religion. The one that comes up most often is trade; for example, Ahmad’s shaykh, Abu ‘Asim al-Nabil (died Basra, 212/828?), was a silk trader (TI 15:192). The second most common is income from rents.

Ahmad’s principal source of income seems to have been renting out the property he inherited from his father: one shop brought in three dirhams a month (Hilyah 9:179).

 

A collection of shops is said to have yielded seventeen dirhams a month in the 220s/ mid-830s–40s (Ibn Kathir, 10:337).

 

 

He occasionally sold items made by his womenfolk, mainly spun yarn and woven cloth (Sirah, 42) and sometimes accepted a government stipend (‘ata’) as an Arab and a soldier’s son (Siyar 11:320). He also went out to glean (Siyar 11:320).

 

Ahmad seems to have been continually short of cash. A bookseller relates getting four or five dirhams from a person who said it was half of everything he owned. The bookseller went on to Ahmad, who gave him four dirhams, with the comment that it was all he owned. There are several other stories in which he gives away all he owns, in the form of four or five dirhams (Manaqib, 240 324–5). He is reported to have been overjoyed when one of his tenants came to him with one and a half dirhams: “I supposed that he had assigned it to some pressing need” (Manaqib, 225 307).

 

Ahmad’s house was probably divided into sections around a central courtyard. Ahmad’s sons lived there even after they married. It had a well, as is shown by the tale of Abu al-Fawaris, who rented a property from Ahmad.

One day, Ahmad told him that the boy had thrown a set of shears down the well. (Parents know how these things happen.) Abu al-Fawaris went down to retrieve them, so Ahmad instructed his grocer to give him half a dirham. Ahmad had an account with this grocer and evidently used him as banker. Abu al-Fawaris refused to take half a dirham for so small a job, so Ahmad excused him of three months’ rent

(Siyar 11:219).

 

Advertisements

Ijmaa and the 4 Madhaahib on the Tahreem (prohibition) of Musical Instrument

February 6, 2013 2 comments

 

Few Muslims try to confuse the masses that there is no Ijmaa on the prohibition of Music and then they use weak hadith to support their claim. I will not be going into the Hadith part at this time. In sha Allah sometime else.

I will be Quoting the Sayings of few Scholars who have said that there is Ijmaa on the prohibition of Musical instrument and likewise will quote from the scholars of the 4 Madhaahib that they too consider Music to be Haram.

 

Amongst the Ulema who have reported Ijmaa on the prohibition of Music are:

Ibn Rajab in his “Nazhatal Asmaa fee Masaa’ilat as Samaa in page 3” where he quoted al Aajuree saying:

[ And Aboo bakr al Aajuree and other than him ruled a consensus (Ijmaa) of the Ulemaa upon that ]

 

Ibnus Salaah as was reported by Ibnul Qayyim in his Ighaathatul Lahfaan [ 1/228 ]

Al Qurtubee and Ibn Taymiyyah in his fatawaa [ 11/576 ]

Ibn Hajr al Haytamee in his Kaff ar-Ri’aa [page124]

 

The Imaams of 4 Madhaahib have ruled upon the Tahreem of Musical instruments.

 

Madhhab of Imaam Aboo Haneefah (Rahimahullah)-

Abee Tayyib at-Tabaree said:

Aboo Haneefah used to hate music (singing); he placed the one listening to singing among the sinners. And this is the madhhab of the rest of the people of Koofah.

[Talbees Iblees 282]

Imam Aboo Haneefah is also reported as Saying:

Music/singing is Haram according to all religions.

[Roohul Ma’aanee of al-Aloosee (21/67) ]

 

Abu Haneefah’s closest disciple, Abu Yoosuf, stated that if the sound of
musical instruments (ma’aazif) and amusements (malaahi) were heard coming from a house, the house could be entered without permission of its owners. The justification for this is that the command regarding the prohibition of abominable things (munkaaraat) is mandatory, and cannot be established if such entering rests upon the permission of the residents of the premises.

[Quoted from ‘Ownul Ma’bood Sharhu Sunan Abi Dawood, vol. 13, pp. 273-274].

 

This is the madhhab (position) of the rest of the Kufic scholars as well, such as Ibraheem An-Nakha’i, Ash-Sha’bi, Hammaad and Ath-Thowri. They do not differ on this issue. The same can be said of the general body of jurisprudence of Al-Basrah.

[Stated by Abut Teeb Taahir At-Tabari and quoted in Al-Qurtubi’s Al-Jaami’li Ahkaamil Quraan, vol. 14, p. 55.]

 

Ibnul Qayyim Reported,

The Madhhab of Imaam Aboo Haneefah concerning that was the Harshest of the Madhaahib, and his statement concerning it is from the harshest of statements. Indeed his companions clarified that it is Haraam to listen to any musical instruments such as the wood-wind oboe, the hand drum, or striking bars. And they clarified that it is disobedience obligating rebellious sinning and they would reject him as a witness. The most profound evidence of that is their statement that listening to music is rebellious sinning and taking pleasure in it is kufr. These are their words.

[Ighaathatul Lahfaan of Ibnul Qayyim (348)]

 

 

Madhhab of Imam Maalik bin Anas (Rahimahullah)-

Abee Tayyib at-Tabaree also said:

As for Malik bin Anas, then he prohibited Music/singing and listening to it…and this is the madhhab of the rest of the people of Madeenah.

[Talbees Iblees 272]

 

Ishaaq ibn Eesaa at-Tibaa said:

I asked Maalik bin Anas about the position of the people of Madeenah on singing so he said: Indeed those people who do this with us are the (rebellious) sinners.

[al Khallaal recorded it in Amr bil Ma’roof wan-Nahiyy an al-Munkar (142)  and Ibnul Jawzee in Talbees Iblees (282)]

 

The Maaliki jurisprudence and commentator, Al-Qurtubi, reports Ibn Khuwayz Mandaad as saying that Imam Maalik had learned singing and music as a small boy until his mother encouraged him to leave it for a study of the religious sciences. He did, and his view became that such things were prohibited. [Al-Jaami’li Ahkaamil Quraan, vol. 14, p. 55.]

 

Al-Qurtubi confirmed Maalik’s view by saying that the only exception to this
general ruling was the type of innocent songs such as those sung to placate the camels during travel, or during hard labor or boredom or during times of festivity and joy, such as the E’ ed days and weddings – the latter to the accompaniment of a simple daff (hand drum).

Al-Qurtubi then said,

“As for that which is done in our day, by way of the [blameworthy] innovations [bidah] of the Sufi mystics in their addition to hearing songs to the accompaniment of melodious instruments such as flutes, string instruments, etc., such is haraam [forbidden].

[Ibid., vol. 14, p. 54.]

 

 

Madhhab of Imam Ash-Shafi’ee (Rahimahullah)-

In the book, Aadaabul Qadaa, Ash-Shaafi’ee is reported as saying,

“Verily, song is loathsome [makrooh]; it resembles the false and vain thing [al-baatil]. The one who partakes of it frequently is an incompetent fool whose testimony is to be rejected.”

[See Al-Qurtubi’s tafseer, vol. 14, p. 55 and Ibnul-Jowzi’s Talbees Iblees, p. 231. Also refer to footnote no. 111.]

 

His closest and most knowledgeable disciples clearly stipulate that his position on this issue is that of prohibition (tahreem) and they rebuke those who attribute its legality to him.

[See ‘Ownul Ma’bood, vol. 13, p. 274.]

 

This is confirmed by the later Shafi’ite scholar, Ibn Hajar Al-Haythami. He related that one of Ash-Shaafi’ee’s disciples, Al-Haarith Al-Muhaasibi (d.243 H) said,

Song is haraam, just as the carcass [maytah]* is.”

Furthermore, the statement that singing is haraam is found in the treatise, Ash-Sharh Al-Kabeer, by the authoritative Shafi’ite scholar, Ar-Raafi’ee (d.623 H.). This is further corroborated by the accomplished Shafiiite jurisprudent, Imam An-Nawawi (d.676 H.) in his Rowdah. [Kaffur Ra’aa, p. 61.]

 

Such is the correct view of the dependable scholars of the Shafi’ite madhhab. However, due to limited knowledge and personal fancy and desire, a few of their latter-day scholars disagree with this view.

[Talbees Iblees, pp. 230-231.]

 

Abee Tayyib at-Tabaree also said:

Music/singing is not permissible, nor listening to it nor is the hitting the bars, and whoever ascribes that to ash-Shaafi’ee has lied upon him.

[Talbees Iblees 283]

 

 

Madhhab of Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (Rahimahullah)-

 

Imaam Ahmad’s position regarding this issue has been narrated in detail by the Hanbalite jurisprudent and Quranic commentator, Abul-Faraj Ibnul-Jowzi (d.597 H.) in his treatise, Tablees Iblees (Satan’s deception). He tells us that ghinaa during Ahmad’s era consisted primarily of a rhymed, rythmical chanting (inshaad) of poems whose purpose was to lead people to a pious, abstentious way of life. However, when such chanters began to vary their simple style to one of a throbbing, affected melody, the narrations regarding Ahmad began to differ.

 

His own son and student, Abdullah, relates that his father said,

“Singing sprouts hypocrisy in the heart#; it doesn’t please me.”

 

The scholar, Ismaa’eel bin Ishaaq Ath-Thaqafi, reports that Ahmad was questioned regarding one’s listening to those poems (qasaaid) to which he replied,

“I despise it, for it is a bid’ah [innovation]. Don’t sit down to listen to its reciters.”

Abul-Haarith relates that Ahmad said,

“At-taghyeer^ is an innovation,” whereupon it was said, “But it sensitizes and softens the heart.” Ahmad rejoined, “It is a bid’ah [blameworthy innovation].” Yaqoob Al-Haashimi narrates that Ahmad said, “At-taghyeer is a recent innovation,” and Yaqoob bin Gayyaath reports him as saying that he despised at-taghyeer and prohibited one’s listening to it.

[Talbees Iblees, p. 228.]

 

Ibnul-Jowzi concluded that it is obvious from what has preceded that the variant narrations relating to Ahmads dislike of (karaahah) or permission for singing depended upon the type of singing that was meant. As for the type of singing which is popular today,[This statement was made during the 6th century of the Islamic era. Therefore, what could be said of what we hear and see of music and singing today!]  it would be forbidden according to Ahmad’s view. If only he could see what the people have added to it by way of innovation. [Talbees Iblees, pp. 228-229.]

 

______________________________________________________________

Footnotes:

* Designates the carcass of the animal which has not been slaughetered in a manner acceptable to the shari’ah, but has died in a manner rendering it unlawful for food, such as dying from a disease, accident, naturally or by being hit by a blow, etc. However, the skin of such an animal may be used after proper curing.

 

Abdullah ibn Masood (radiAllahu anhu) said: Singing sprouts hypocrisy in the heart. [ Sunan al Bayhaqee no. 20795]

 

^ Indicates a change in the state of mind or disposition of a person who appears “overcome” by the mention (dhikr) of God in supplication (du’aa) performed in a humble, humiliating stance. Those who partake in this experience of being “overcome” are moved to extreme delight or grief by the manner in which such poetry is delivered. It is usually delivered in an affected, throbbing style which moves them to dance and gyrate to the beat and melody of such rythmic poems. Because of this “change” (taghyeer) which overcomes them, they were called al-mughayyarah. Refer to Talbees Iblees, p. 330.

 

Related Link:

      A Practically Dead Sunnah- When You Hear Music…

Ruling on offering congratulations at the beginning of the Hijri year


♣Bismillah Ar Rahmaan Ar Raheem♣

 

Praise be to Allaah.

 

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: What is the ruling on congratulating people on the occasion of the Hijri new year, and how should one reply to a person who offers congratulations?

 

He replied:

If someone offers you congratulations, then respond to him, but do not initiate such greetings. This is the correct view concerning this matter. So if a person says to you, for example, “Happy New Year”, then you can say, “May Allaah make it a good and blessed year for you.” But you should not initiate such a greeting, because I do not know of any report that the salaf [early generations of Islam] congratulated one another on the occasion of the new year, rather the salaf did not regard the first of Muharram as the first day of the new year until the caliphate of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him).

 

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Kareem al-Khudayr said concerning offering congratulations on the occasion of the hijri new year:

Praying for another Muslim in general terms, in phrases that are not meant as a kind of ritual  on special occasions such as Eid, is acceptable, especially if what is meant by this greeting is friendship and to show a friendly face to one’s fellow Muslim. Imaam Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “I do not initiate the greeting but if someone greets me I return the greeting, because responding to the greeting is obligatory. But being the first to offer congratulations is neither Sunnah nor forbidden.

 

Related Links-

• Muslims adopting the Anno Domini (A.D.) calendar

Imam Ahmad Hanbali Madhab and Kissing Grave of Prophet

September 14, 2011 Leave a comment

 

Some of the sufis try to prove their shirk i.e Asking help from Prophet peace be upon him from a narration attributed to Imam Ahmad on kissing graves, they quote from Imam Ad-Dahabee that he mentioned

عن ابن عمر: أنه كان يكره مس قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم. قلت : كره ذلك لأنه رآه إساءة أدب . وقد سئل أحمد بن حنبل عن
مس القبر النبوي وتقبيله فلم ير بذلك بأسا ، ورواه عنه ولده عبد الله بن أحمد

Ibn Umar used to dislike touching the grave of Prophet (Peace be upon him). I (ad-Dahabee) say: He disliked it “BECAUSE HE FOUND IT AGAINST ADAB” Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (rahimahullah) was asked about “TOUCHING AND KISSING THE GRAVE OF PROPHET” he said “I DO NOT SEE ANY HARM IN IT” This is narrated by his son Abdullah bin Ahmed

[Al-Dhahabi, Mu’jam al-Shuyukh (1:73 #58).]

 

 

Response:
First of all It has nothing to do with asking help from Prophet Peace be upon him, Kissing grave is not shirk but it is against Islamic Law, If some one is kissing the grave plus asking his needs then it becomes shirk, Before dealing with the narration of Imam Ahmad allowing Kissing grave, let me deal with Asking direclty from Prophet peace be upon him.

Imam ad-Dahabee himself said regarding Sayyeda Nafeesa ra and deviant creed of people regarding her

ولجهلة المصريين فيها اعتقاد يتجاوز الوصف، ولايجوز مما فيه من الشرك، ويسجدون لها، ويلتمسون منها المغفرة

Due to ignorance of Egyptians the Creed found in them is not correct to talk about it, When shirk found in them, they prostate to others (except Allah), and they seek forgiveness from them

[Seyar Ailam Nubala 10/106]

 

Ibn e Rajab Hanbli said

وَكَانَ الْإِمَامُ أَحْمَدُ يَدْعُو وَيَقُولُ: اللَّهُمَّ كَمَا صُنْتَ وَجْهِي عَنِ السُّجُودِ لِغَيْرِكَ فَصُنْهُ عَنِ الْمَسْأَلَةِ لِغَيْرِكَ، وَلَا يَقْدِرُ عَلَى كَشْفِ الضُّرِّ وَجَلْبِ النَّفْعِ سِوَاهُ

Imam ahmad was making a du’a ” Ya Allah! Just as you have prevented my face from falling down from prostrating to somebody other than You, prevent me from asking from others than You.”

[Jamiul Ulum wal Hikam, 1/280,281]

 

Ibne Rajab said

A man came to him(Imam Ahmad) and he wiped his hands on his clothes, And wiped his face, Imam Ahmad became angry and denied that of the most denial and said: from whom you have learnt this?

[ الحكم الجديرة بالإذاعة. Page 46 and 47]

Comment: After reading these statements no one can even think that Imam Ahmad and ad-Dahabee allowed asking from the pious people in graves. Let us deal with the narration mentioned by Imam ad-Dahabee

 

 

First of all Companions of Prophet Peace be upon him used to hate the practise of touching grave of Prophet Peace be upon him

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو أُسَامَةَ ، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ ، ” أَنَّ ابْنَ عُمَرَ كَانَ يَكْرَهُ مَسَّ قَبْرِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ” . Ibn Umar used to dislike/hate the touching of the grave of the Prophet peace be upon him.

[Juzz Muhammad bin Asim al Thaqafi as-Subhani no: 28, Abul Hassan Ali ibn Umar al Qazweeni in his Amaleeh and Al Hafiz Al Dhahabi. Sheikh Shu’ayb Al Arna’ut said “its men are trustworthy” (Sayr A’laam Al Nublaa’,12/373]

 

Source: http://espanol.islamweb.net/hadith/display_hbook.php?indexstartno=0&hflag=&pid=42140&bk_no=160&startno=29

Comment: So it was the practise of Companions not to touch the grave of Prophet, let us see what is the opinion of Imam Ahmad and the Hanbli Madhab on this issue.

 

 

Qadhi Abu Yala quoted
أن أحمد قال لما سأله أبو بكر الأثرم عن التمسح بالقبر: ما أعرف هذا ، قلت: فالمنبر؟ قال:نعم.

وقال الأثرم أيضاً: وقلت لأبي عبدالله: إنهم يلصقون بطونهم بجدار القبر وقلتُ له: ورأيت أهل العلم من المدينة لا يمسونه ويقومون من ناحيته فيسلمون. فقال أبو عبدالله: نعم هكذا كان ابن عمر يفعل.

“Abu Bakr al-Athram relates: I said to Ahmad can the Prophet’s grave, peace be upon him, be touched?He replied: ‘I do not know this.’ I then asked him: What about the pulpit? He replied: ‘As for the pulpit, then yes.’Al-Athram said: I said to Abu Abdullah (Ahmad bin humble)… I have seen people of knowledge from Madeena, they would not touch the grave. They would simply stand to the side and send Salam.Abu Abdullah (Ahmad bin Humble) said Yes This is also the practise of Ibn ‘Umar”

[Al Masail al Faqeeh min Kitab Riwayatain wal wajhayn page 215, Ibne Abdul Hadi in Sarim al Manki page 133, Al Mughni, 559/3, Al Furoo’, 573/2 and Wafa Al Wafaa’, 1403/4.]

 

 

After quoting this Qadhi Abu Yala (380 h to 458 h) said
وهذه الرواية تدل على أنه ليس بسنة وضع اليد على القبر

And this narration shows that it is not sunnah to place the hands on the grave

[ Al Masail al Faqeeh min Kitab Riwayatain wal wajhayn page 215]

 

 

It is mentioned in al-Mughni
” ولا يستحب التمسح بحائط قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا تقبيله قال أحمد : ما أعرف هذا . قال ابن الأثرم : رأيت أهل العلم من أهل المدينة لا يمسون قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم, يقومون من ناحية فيسلمون ”

It is not recomended to touch the wall of the grave of Prophet peace be upon him nor kiss it. Ahmad said ‘I do not know this. ibn Al-Athram said: I have seen The people of knowledge from Madeena, they would not touch the grave. They would simply stand to the side and send Salam

[See also Kashaf al Qina 2/139]

 

It is also mentioned in Kashaf al Qina
ويكره تقبيله والطوافبه لأن ذلك كله من البدع

And it is disliked to kiss it and doing tawaf of it, Because all this is innovation

[2/140,141]

 

 

The book ‘Al Mughni’ of Hanbalis mentioned the reasons
لأن فيه إفراطاً في تعظيم القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام ولأن الصلاة عند القبور أشبه بتعظيم الأصنام بالسجود ولأن ابتداء عبادة الأصنام كان في تعظيم الأموات باتخاذ صورهم ومسحها والصلاة عندها

for this was because this act venerates the greatness of these graves just as it would for idols and that prayer at the graveyards is similar to venerating or glorifying idols with prostration and that idol worship began initially by praising the dead by taking their pictures and wiping them and praying over them.

[Al Mughni, 2/507-508 maktaba Riyadh al-Hadeethiya]

 

 

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani mentioned that the companions of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal used to stay away from this practice. [Fathul Bari 3/475 ]

 

Al Mardaawi hanbali concluded,
“ولا يستحب التمسح بالقبر على الصحيح من المذهب

It is not recommended to wipe the graves and this is the correct opinion of this(Hanbli) madhab

 

[Al Insaaf, 4/53]

 

Few Fatwas of Hanbli Scholars

a) Abdul Qadir Jelani Hanbali said

اذا زار قبرا لا يضع يده عليه و لا يقبله فانه عادة اليهود و لا يقعد عليه و لا يكتى عليه “When you visit the graves then do not put your hands on them or kiss them as this is the habit of the jews, nor sit on the graves or rest against them. ”

(al-Ghuniyyah (1/91).
Scan: http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Y3h6JhqU8O4/TFbFeeG0GvI/AAAAAAAAAMo/-HZvP4VmhIE/s400/untitled.JPG

 

 

b) Ibn Aqil Hanbli said
لا يخلق القبور بالخلوق , والتزويق والتقبيل لها والطواف بها , والتوسل بهم إلى الله

Graves are not made for kissing and decorating and roaming around and begging them for ALLAH

[Ibn e Muflih quoted al furoo 2/272]

 

 

c) Ibn Jozi said that
قال ابن عقيل: لما التكاليف على الجهال والضغام عدلوا عن أوضاع الشرع إلى تعظيم أوضاع وضعوها لأنفسهم فسهلت عليهم إذ لم يدخلوا بها تحت أمر غيرهم قال وهم كفار عندي بهذه الأوضاع مثل تعظيم القبور وإكرامها بما نهى الشرع عنه من إيقاد النيران وتقبيلها وتخليفها وخطاب الموتى بالألواح وكتب الرقاع فيها يا مولاي افعل بي كذا وكذا وأخذ التراب تبركا وإفاضة الطيب على القبور وشد الرحال إليها وإلقاء الخرق على الشجر اقتداء بمن عبد اللات والعزى
“Ibn Aqil said:

“When these obligations were hard on the ignorant and rabble ones, they diverted themselves from the positions of Shari’a to revere positions which they laid down for themselves, so it felt easy to them as they will not be regulated by the order of anyone except themselves.” He added: “To me, they are kafir (infidels) due to these positions; like revering the graves and paying respect to them with things which are forbidden by Shari’a like burning fire, kissing the graves, roaming around them, addressing the dead with sheets (of requests) and notes on patches which say like this: “O My Master do such and such for me”, and taking the soil for getting blessing, pouring perfume on the graves, undertaking journey to visit them, hanging shreds with trees, as imitation to those who worship Lat and Uzza

 

[Talbees Iblees of ibn e jozi تلبيس إبليس/الباب الثاني عشر chapter تلبيس إبليس على جمهور العوام]

 

Conclusion:

1. Directly asking help from the people in graves is shirk by saying O so and so Help me,Aid me

2. Kissing grave of Prophet peace be upon him was hated by Companions of Prophet peace be upon him

3. Kissing grave of Prophet peace be upon him is not allowed according to Hanbli madhab and from the most correct narration from Imam Ahmad as Jurists of Hanbli Madhab said i.e Mardawi,Ibn Qudamah, Qadhi Abu Yala etc.

 

Related Links:

¶ Du’aa’ is to be made to Allaah alone

¶ Saying “Yaa Rasool Allaah”

¶ The Prophet’s grave as an argument and proof to justify graves being allowed to be built inside Masjids?

 Praying at graves and the conditions of intercession

¶  Praying on Graves; Waseelah etc. – Right or Wrong?

¶ O Grave worshippers! We want Answers

%d bloggers like this: