I wanted to share some thoughts on my dear brother Abu Sinan's recent blog post regarding the status of the Prophet Muhammad (saw). He took offense to the extreme acts of veneration that some Muslims practice when it comes to our beloved Prophet (saw).
I find it disconcerting that any act of love directed towards our Prophet (saw) can be considered extreme or unwarranted.
I wonder if true love ought to have limits. After all, this is a love which places the beloved (saw) of Allah (swt) above all other loves we may nurture in our hearts:
We were with the Prophet and he was holding the hand of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab. 'Umar said to Him, "O Allah's Apostle! You are dearer to me than everything except my own self." The Prophet said, "No, by Him in Whose Hand my soul is, (you will not have complete faith) till I am dearer to you than your own self." Then 'Umar said to him, "However, now, by Allah, you are dearer to me than my own self." The Prophet said, "Now, O 'Umar, (now you are a believer)." (Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 78, Hadith 628)
This is not some intellectual love that is cultivated by dry calls to 'follow the sunnah'.
This irrepressible infatuation is built on loving a man whom Allah (swt) and His angels are constantly praising and blessing.
This deep-seated obsession is built on my tears born from the pained look on his face when I will be called to account for my sins.
This uncontainable zeal is built on his blood-filled shoes as he was run out of Taif, for attempting to spread the message of Islam so it could eventually arrive to *me*.
This uncontrollable passion is built on his flowing tears that dampened his beard in his nightly vigil, praying for *me* so I could be guided back to Allah (swt).
I would sacrifice my father, my mother, and my self for you, Ya Rasul-Allah!
Abu-Sinan writes: "Mohammed was a Prophet, the last of many before him, but like all of the Prophets he was a man, nothing more. To worship or venerate supposed items of his go over a line that no Muslim should cross."
Really? What then should we make of episodes in our history where his companions crossed over said line?
Urwa returned to his people and said, "O people! By Allah, I have been to the kings and to Caesar, Khosrau and An-Najashi, yet I have never seen any of them respected by his courtiers as much as Muhammad is respected by his companions. By Allah, if he spat, the spittle would fall in the hand of one of them (i.e. the Prophet's companions) who would rub it on his face and skin; if he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect." (Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 50, Number 891)
If such actions were to be carried out in this day and age, accusations of Kufr and Shirk would fly recklessly (note: Abu Sinan, may Allah reward him, explicitly mentioned that he was making no such accusations, but the truth remains that many others would). Yet these blessed companions carried out these very acts in front of the Prophet (saw).
And their love carried over to the relics and belongings of the Prophet, including his hair which he himself distributed, as well as his sweat which he allowed to be collected.
Anas b. Malik (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came to Mina; he went to the Jamra and threw pebbles at it, after which he went to his lodging in Mina, and sacrificed the animal. He then called for a barber and, turning his right side to him, let him shave him; after which he trimmed his left side. He then gave (these hair) to the people. (Muslim, Book 007, Number 2991)
Anas said, "Um Sulaim used to spread a leather sheet for the Prophet and he used to take a midday nap on that leather sheet at her home." Anas added, "When the Prophet had slept, she would take some of his sweat and hair and collect it (the sweat) in a bottle and then mix it with Suk (a kind of perfume) while he was still sleeping." When the death of Anas bin Malik approached, he advised that some of that Suk be mixed with his Hanut (perfume for embalming the dead body), and it was mixed with his Hanut. (Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 74, Number 298)
Truly we do not understand how to love the Prophet (saw). We rationalize it. We intellectualize it. We confine it. We restrict it.
Out of a misplaced fear of deifying him (saw)? A fear that he himself (saw) never vocalized when the companions pushed the limits of love. The Companions would compete for the remnants of his ablution water in order to put it on their faces. They would drink from water he spit out of his blessed mouth. In fact, he encouraged such 'blasphemous' actions, actions that we in our preposterous arrogance would frown upon in this day and age:
Allah's Apostle came to us at noon and water for ablution was brought to him. After he had performed ablution, the remaining water was taken by the people and they started smearing their bodies with it (as a blessed thing). The Prophet offered two Rakat of the Zuhr prayer and then two Rakat of the 'Asr prayer while an 'Anza (spear-headed stick) was there (as a Sutra) in front of him. Abu Musa said: The Prophet asked for a tumbler containing water and washed both his hands and face in it and then threw a mouthful of water in the tumbler and said to both of us (Abu Musa and Bilal), "Drink from the tumbler and pour some of its water on your faces and chests." (Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 4, Number 187)
Is this the love of a sane people? Not by our modern-day standards. Truly they were madly in love with this Mercy to the worlds.
Sadly, we have lost our orientation on how to properly love the Prophet (saw). Our compass is broken, yet we insist we aren't lost. Our hearts are blinded, yet we insist our eyes are sufficient for this journey.
Dear reader, he (saw) was no mere man and his blessed companions acknowledged this, time and again:
`Uthman bin `Abd Allah ibn Mawhab said, "My people sent me with a bowl of water to Umm Salama." Isra'il approximated three fingers indicating the small size of the container in which there was some hair of the Prophet. `Uthman added, "If any person suffered from evil eye or some other disease, he would send a vessel (containing water) to Umm Salama (and she would dip the Prophet's hair into it and it would be drunk). I looked into the container (that held the hair of the Prophet) and saw a few reddish hairs in it." (Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 72, Number 784)
Narrated Ibn Sirrn: I said to 'Ablda, "I have some of the hair of the Prophet which I got from Anas or from his family." 'Abida replied. "No doubt if I had a single hair of that it would have been dearer to me than the whole world and whatever is in it." (Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 4, Number 171)
Again, I humbly ask those who claim that certain lines mustn't be crossed in our reverence for our dear Prophet (saw), did the companions cross those lines?
WAW
1 week ago
27 comments:
Assalamu Alaikom Naeem,
you ask what are the lines? it's quite simple... they are the lines that the prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) and his companions drew.
To equate a mixed group ceremony of worship to what "may" be a hair of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) to a COMPANION rubbing his face with the Prophet's (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) spit directly from him seems quite 'out of line'.
We can't stress just how important it is to stick to that which our rightly guided predecessors did. To arrange a mass ceremony of worship around a hair of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) does not represent an 'added' love as opposed to those who do not.
The "sticking" to what the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) did is not something to be undermined; extremely necessary in order to maintain the purity of this religion. Through time, with what is considered 'added love', we may all witness deviation in terms of methodology and even creed at times.
The hadeeth of the Messenger which is reported by Bukhari: "The best of generations is my generation, then those that follow them, then those that follow them". Imaam Abu Haneefah (rahimahullaah) d. 769 (150 H.) said: "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" [Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32]
By clinging to their way, holding on to their beliefs and understanding them as they did, worshiping Allaah in His Oneness, upon the Authentic Sunnah of the Messenger in the manner of the Companions is guaranteed success in this life and security from the Fire in the next life. When questioned by his companions about those who will be saved from the Fire, the Messenger replied: "They are those who are upon what I and my companions are upon" [Reported by Tirmidhee from Amr ibn al-Aas - Hadeeth Hasan]
If the companions gathered around a hair and prayed together... by all means let us do it... otherwise let's stick to that which is BEST; the way of the companions.
No doubt barakah can be had from the personal relics of our beloved prophet (pbuh).
Also, calling him a 'mere' man is also in error.
The love for the prophet needs to be balanced with one's tawheed. Being deeply in love with the person of the prophet is something very few can really claim. We with our sinful lives will not come close.
Indeed Allah says in the qur'an that if you claim to love him (Allah) then follow the prophet (pbuh).
Allah is telling us that actions are but the true evidence of love. The one who created us AND our beloved prophet, commands us to follow the prophet.
I can imagine how it is easy for people to lose themselves in their displays of love for the prophet.
For instance, here in the subcontinent people have gatherings where they proclaim their love for the prophet, nothing wrong with that except that they are actually waiting for the prophet HIMSELF to show up. Then one amongst them proclaims that the prophet (pbuh) has arrived and is in their midst. The there is dancing and signing and Allah knows what else.
Now I'd like to ask, is this crossing the line?
Asalaamu alaikum.
100% with you on this Naeem. :) The Prophet salalahi alahi wa salaam was no mere man. He was a prophet and messenger, and the last of them. He was sinless, and a perfect guide.
I am amazed that people think nothing of expressing romantic love toward someone; of talking of not being able to imagine life without them, of the light of their eyes, the beauty of them, the blessing of such companionship, etc. But that we will become embarrassed to express love for the Prophet salalahi alahi wa salaam... When we are in love, we allow free rein to our emotions. But when love of the Prophet salalahi alahi wa salaam is mentioned, we suddenly become very rational and feel compelled to turn it into an intellectual matter. Love is not rational and intellectual, it is a feeling.
What you express, how you mention the feelings that well up inside you when you think of what the Prophet salalahi alahi wa salaam went through to bring the message of Islam, so that eventually we would personally benefit from it; and how you will feel on Judgment Day when your sins are revealed before him, or your good deeds gladden him, this is such a beautiful expression.
I also think that some people like to talk about other people "crossing lines" without having any personal experience to know for certain what they are talking about. Alot of assumptions are made about what is going on in such gatherings as are mentioned. If you've never personally attended, maybe you shouldn't be trying to say anything about what is or is not happening there or whether it is or is not "in line". You do not know that it is "worship" of a hair; perhaps you do not understand what is actually taking place in such a gathering. You do not know that it is a "mixed group ceremony" (I personally know that many are not mixed group). You do not know what the intentions of each individual participant are, or what the guidance of the shaykh or leader was to the participants.
I'm inclined to say that we need to stop spending so much time telling each other how to be. We could best use that effort to improve our own state, as we are all in need of.
Assalamu Alaikum.
Brother Ali, you said : "To equate a mixed group ceremony of worship to what "may" be a hair of the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) to a COMPANION rubbing his face with the Prophet's (sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) spit directly from him seems quite 'out of line'."
1) You may be conflating two issues here. It is possible to condemn the mixed-gender aspect of a religious gathering, where the proper etiquette is not followed (proper hijab, etc) but we can't use that as a reason to say the gathering itself is wrong.
2) It seems that a lot of people are going on the default assumption that the blessed relics of the Prophet (peace be upon him) are "fake." It is not that easy to pass off a relic of the Prophet (peace be upon him). These relics are well-known to the ulama and even the common people, meaning I can't simply produce a sandal today and say "Hey guys, this is the sandal of the Prophet." These relics have been known to generations of Muslims, unbroken, up to the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself. Undermining the legitimacy of mass-transmission, undermines the legitimacy of our religion itself.
3) "to a COMPANION rubbing his face" Why are the rules different for us, than for the Sahaba (radiallahu anhum)? Again, this also undermines the foundation of our religion, to say that what they did isn't applicable to us. We use the salaf's actions as a precedent for our own today.
Love is spontaneous, it is not rehearsed. That which the sahaba did, was spontaneous, and I don't understand why our love needs to be constrained only to actions that they did.
One unfortunate problem (might I say bid'ah?) of today, is people mention his blessed name, peace be upon him, like they mention the name of their driver. Without bothering to add the salutations of blessings and peace. This is terribly poor adab, at the very least!
Saif.
Salam,
Just wanted to clarify since you are a resident of Arabia,would it be love if ppl were prostrating towards the Prophet's Raudah?Making dua and asking Him to forgive their sins?There is a difference between using the Prophet as a waseela(medium)and directly asking him.I mean what are the limits according to you so i can gauge a better understanding of what you are trying to say.Jazakallah.
sorry anon... are you asking me specifically
would it be love if ppl were prostrating towards the Prophet's Raudah?Making dua and asking Him to forgive their sins?
and you said that:
There is a difference between using the Prophet as a waseela(medium)and directly asking him.
There is a difference? I'm curious, how so? Maybe some examples?
salam,
i am asking the blogger,as for using the Prophet as a mediary,it is permitted as long as the Prophet is just that.
Tawassul (Waseela); whether it is done through the medium of the living, the dead, their beings, their actions, a person’s own actions or someone else’s actions; in all these instances the truth of the matter is that Tawassul in reality is done by drawing the Rahmat (Mercy) of Allah Ta’ala, i.e. by using the aforementioned as a medium in drawing and attracting His Rahmat. For example, a person may say: “I am making Tawassul through the blessings that were showered on a certain accepted slave of Allah or through my good actions or someone else’s good actions which were earned solely through your Mercy oh Allah. Due to the fact that Tawassul is done by drawing the Mercy of Allah it is more readily accepted. No one can doubt this fact and this would include all the above-mentioned scenarios. Therefore Tawassul done through the medium of the Ambiyaa, Auliyaa, the living, the dead, their beings or actions will all be permissible.
In the Aayah هنالك دعا زكريا ربه Zakariyyah عليه السلام sought Tawassul through the mercy that was showered upon Maryam رضى الله عنها and his Du’aa was accepted.
A Hadeeth makes mention of three people, who got trapped in a cave, and then were released through the Waseelah of their good actions.
Thus the truth of the matter is thus, that by Waseelah we are basically making Du’aa that “Oh Allah! That Mercy which you bestowed upon us (or upon a certain pious servant of yours) when doing a certain action, through that same Mercy you accept our prayers!”
For purposes of academic interest we record hereunder some Arabic text from various sources to back up our ruling with regards to Tawassul:
١.قوله تعالى "يا ايها الذين امنوا اتقوا الله وابتغوا اليه الوسيلة" و قال العلامة الوسى البغدادى فى تفسير هذه الاية: و يحسن التوسل و الاستغاثة بالنبى صلى الله عليه وسلم الى ربه ولم ينكر ذالك احد من السلف و الخلف حتى جاء ابن تيمية رحمه الله فانكر ذالك و عدل عن الصراط المستقيم وابتدع مالم يقله عالم و صار بين الانام مثلة انتهى.(روح المعانى ص١٢٦ج٦/٥ )
الوسيلة هى القربة :عن ابى وائل و الحسن ومجاهد و قتادة وعطاء والسدى و ابن زيد و عبدالله بن كثير. و هى فعلية من توسلت اليه اى تقربت.
فيقول ابن مفلح الحنبلى فى الفروع (٥٩٥ .١) و يجوز التوسل بصالح و قيل يستحب .قال احمد فى منسكه الذى كتبه للمروزى :انه يتوسل بالنبى صلى الله عليه وسلم فى دعائه و جزم فى المستوعب وغيره.
٢.قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم:هل تنصرون و ترزقون الا بضعفائكم رواه البخارى (و مشكوة ٤٤٧) و عند النسائى انما نصر الله هذه الامة بضعفائها و دعوتهم و اخلاصهم.
٣.قوله صلى الله عليه و سلم:ابغوبى فى ضعفائكم فانما ترزقون و تنصرون بضعفائكم رواه ابو داؤد(و مشكوة ٤٤٧ )
٤. عن انس رضى الله عنه ان عمر بن الخطاب كان اذا قحطوا استسقى بالعباس بن عبد المطلب فقال اللهم انا كنا نتوسل اليك بنبينا فتسقينا وانا نتوسل اليك بعم نبينا فاسقنا فيسقوا رواه البخارى (ومشكوة ص.١٣٦)
وقال المبلغ الاعظم فى ترك التقليد العلامة الشوكانى رحمه الله فى كتابه المشهور المسمى بنيل الاوطارتحت باب الاستسقاء بذوى الصلاح "و يستفاد من قصة العباس استحباب الاستشفاع باهل الخير و الصلاح واهل بيت النبوة" (ص٩ ج٤ ) و هكذا فى عمدة القارى ص.٤٣٧. ج.٤ و ص.٣٩٩ ج.٢)
والشيخ محمد ابن عبد الوهاب لاينكر التوسل انظر مؤلفات الشيخ محمد بن عبدالوهاب (ص.٦٨ ج.٣)
وقال الحافظ فى الفتح "و يستفاد من قصة العباس استحبا ب الاستشفاع باهل الخير والصلاح و اهل بيت النبوة وفيه فضل العباس و فضل عمر لتواضعه للعباس و معرفةه بحقه " ص.٤٧ ج.٢)
٥. قول البخارى فى صحيحه حدثنا عمرو بن على قال حدثنا ابو قتيبة قال حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن عبد الله بن دينار عن ابيه قال سمعت ابن عمر يتمثل بشعر ابى طالب :
وابيض يستسقى الغما م بوجهه- ثمال اليتا مى عصمة للارامل
٦.و ممن فهم ان التوسل بالعباس هو توسل به اى بذاته لا بدعائه حسان ابن ثابت الصحابى رضى الله عنه حيث قال:
سأل الانام و قد تتابع جدبنا - فسقى الغمام بغرة العباس
عم النبى و صنو والده الذى – ورث النبى بذاك دون الناس
احيا الاله به البلاد فاصبحت – مخضرة الاجانب بد اليأس
When we realise the IJMAA of the Sahabah on the Istihbaab of making Tawssul through the living, then the Tawassul through the dead would be permissible to a greater extent. To clear the doubt of why did Umar make Tawassul through Hadhrat Abbas and not through Rasulullah Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam, a few reasons are listed below:
1. Although the name of Abbas , was uttered, in truth, Nabi Sallallahu Alahi Wa Sallam was intended. That is why he used بعم نبيك and not Abbas.
2. In order to illustrate that besides Tawassul through Nabi Sallallhu Alayhi Wa Sallam himself, another permissible type of Tawassul is the one done done through his family members (in this case, his uncle).
3. To show that Tawassul through the Awliya and Sulaha are permissible. Tawassul is not only restricted to Ambiya.
4. It is the nature of humans to incline to a living being which is in front of him. Example: even though the Malaikah convey our Salaam when we send our Salaam to Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam, yet we go on sending Salaam with those who go for Hajj and Umrah, because we can see and interact with these people. This is despite the fact that the Malaikah are much faster, safer and cautious in delivering this Salaam. Some further text in this regard follows hereunder:
٧. عن النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم انه كان يستفتح بصعا ليك المهاجرين رواه فى شرح السنة(و مشكوة .٤٤٧)
٨. عن ابن مسعود رضى الله تعالى عنه قال"من كان مستنا فليستن بمن قد مات فان الحى لا تؤمن عليه الفتنة رواه رزين (مشكوة ٣٢)
٩. و ما رواه انس رضى الله عنه فى التوسل بالمحبة قال ان رجلا سأل النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم عن الساعة فقال متى الساعة ؟قال وما اعددت لها؟ قال لا شيء الا انى احب الله و رسوله فقال انت مع من احببت قال انس فما فرحنا بشىء فرحنا بقول النبى صلى الله عليه و سلم أنت مع من احببت قال انس فا نا احب النبى صلى الله عليه و سلم و ابا بكر و عمر و ارجو ان اكون معهم بحبى اياهم و ان لم اعمل بمثل اعمالهم ,اخرجه البخارى فى مناقب عمر رضى الله عنه ,رقم ٣٦٨٨ و مسلم فى البر و الصلة,باب المرء مع من احب
١٠.و اخرج الترمذى عن عثمان بن حنيف رضى الله عنه ان رجلا ضرير البصر اتى النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال ادع الله ان يعافينى قال ان شئت دعوت و ان شئت صبرت فهو خير لك قال فادعه قال فامره ان يتوضأ فيحسن وضوئه و يدعو بهذا الدعاء : اللهم انى اسألك و اتوجه اليك بنبيك محمد نبى الرحمة انى توجهت بك الى ربى فى حاجتى هذه ,لتقضى لى . اللهم فشفعه فى قال الترمذى هذا حديث حسن صحيح غريب لا نعرفه الا من هذا الوجه من حديث ابى جعفر وهو الخطمى (كتاب الدعوات باب ١١٩ حديث ٣٥٧٨) و (ابن ماجه ٩٩) و (انجاح الحا جة ٩٩).
Conclusion:
From the above mentioned factors, we deduce the permissibility of Tawassul. However if there is a fear of any misconception occurring within the general masses and they begin desiring by means of this Wasilah such things which could lead to shirk, then abstention would be preferable, even though Tawasuul in itself is permissible. Furthermore, the invocations mentioned in the Ahaadeeth etc. are generally devoid of Tawassul. There is no doubt in the Masnoon Duas being more readily accepted by Allah.
It is most befitting that this topic be concluded with a few beneficial words of Hakimul Ummah Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi Rahmatullahi Alayhi which he mentioned in Imdaadul Fataawa (page 372, volume 4):
“Tawassul made through the medium of accepted slaves of Allah whether living or dead is permissible, e.g. Umar Radi Allahu Anhu’s incident in asking for rain or the incident of the blind person as well.” He further mentions that Tawassul is permissible without doubt however if extremism becomes apparent in the general masses then it would be better to refrain from making Tawassul. Having this belief that it is incumbent upon Allah to accept the invocations through Tawassul or to hope for help from those close slaves of Allah who were the medium of Tawassul or to believe that their names hold the weight of the names of Allah, will lead to extremism and transgressing the limits of Shari’ah.
For more please see:
(محمودية ص.١٣٦ج.٥ و تكملة فتح الملهم ص.٦٢٠ج.٥و روح المعانى ص. ١٢٦ ج.٥/٦)
AND ALLAH TA'AALA KNOWS BEST
AA-
Thank you all for your excellent comments and questions...
@Ali, "We can't stress just how important it is to stick to that which our rightly guided predecessors did."
Well, I supplied the various ahadith where the companions DID show reverence to the Prophet's hair (as well as his spit, sweat, and so forth). How is that 'added' love?
And how do you propose we show similar love, as practiced by the companions?
@Islamblog, "I can imagine how it is easy for people to lose themselves in their displays of love for the prophet."
Care to explain the actions of the companions, who seem to me to have 'lost themselves in their displays of love for the prophet'??
"Now I'd like to ask, is this crossing the line?"
Personally, I find that practice a bit odd. But let's not confuse that with the premise of my post. I'm simply asking that we show the proper respect to our dear Prophet (saw), as embodied by his closest companions.
AA-
@Aaminah, "But when love of the Prophet salalahi alahi wa salaam is mentioned, we suddenly become very rational and feel compelled to turn it into an intellectual matter. Love is not rational and intellectual, it is a feeling."
Beautifully stated sis! Thank you for your thoughts.
@Saif, "Love is spontaneous, it is not rehearsed. That which the sahaba did, was spontaneous, and I don't understand why our love needs to be constrained only to actions that they did."
Another beautiful comment. Spontaneity is the difference between love flowing from one's heart versus the love coming from one's rational faculties.
BTW, are you the Saif planning on moving to Riyadh? If so, what's the hold up? :-)
@Anon, "would it be love if ppl were prostrating towards the Prophet's Raudah?Making dua and asking Him to forgive their sins?"
Are you serious? How did you conclude any of this from my post? Who ever mentioned worshiping the Prophet?
Why do those so staunchly opposed to any acts of deep love towards the Prophet (saw) immediately jump to accusations of worshiping him (or his hair)? If anything, that is sui-dhunn (evil assumptions), no?
There is another hadis about the love of Prophet S.A,W when one of his comanion was drunk and brought he punished him RA and once again the same person was drunk and brought before him and when of those present said may Allah curse him he is found drunk again and the Prophet s.A.W dont curse him because I know he loves Allah and His Prophet. This is near about the text of hadith but I dont know the reference. This hoever shows even a drunkerd can love Allah's Mehboob not necessrily those who think themselves to be very pious
Assalaamu alailkum.
Anonymous, jazakAllahukhairan, we know what tawassul is, and that Allah told us to do it in the quraan.
real quick though:
"then the Tawassul through the dead would be permissible to a greater extent"
Akhi/ukhti, hold on there please. Without getting into a huge discussion about tawassul, atleast i dont want to right now, what you quoted from the ayat and hadeeth are fine and undisputable. However, none of them, nowhere prove that tawassul can be done using the dead.
Tawassul is clear akhi/ukhti and it is well known that it can be done through the living. Foremost it should be done using those things Allah commanded and by following his shariah, that is what the ayat means in general.
As a general rule, the deeds of the dead people have come to an end, and according to what is clear is that they cannot hear us. Let alone intercede with Allah on our behalf.
Mashallah beautifully written
May Allah SWT create in my heart genuine love for the Prophet (SAW)
As-salaamu alaikum
I have some questions, Naeem, from some of the comments here.
Was Muhammad (saaws) infallible? What does that mean? Was he sinless? And what does that mean? Did he never make a mistake?
And secondly... were the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) infallible?
Hair, even hair of our beloved Prophet (saaws) has no power to help or harm us. It will not give us extra blessing, increase our reward, spare us punishment, or lighten our afflictions.
Say (O Muhammad SAW), "I am only a man like you, to whom has been revealed that your god is one God. So whoever would hope for the meeting with his Lord - let him do righteous work and not associate in the worship of his Lord anyone."
The last ayah in Surat al-Kahf.
Assalamu Alaikum.
Brother Naeem, I'm waiting for some paperwork... :/ Make du'ah, Insha-Allah.
Sister Amy : What I've heard from the scholars is that yes, all of the Prophets (peace be upon them) where sinless. However, the Companions (Allah be pleased with them) were not (one lady was even stoned for adultery, let alone lesser sins).
The ayah in Suratul Kahf is often quoted, but without much emphasis or regard for the second part. How many of us can claim that God has inspired or spoken directly to us?
"Muhammad is a human being, but not like humankind;
He is a ruby, while people are as stones."
- Imam Busayri.
"I am the best of the children of Adam, and that is no boast."
As for reconciling verses and hadiths that indicate the Prophet (peace be upon him) made much daily istighfar (a sunnah), a lot of scholars have explained this in many different ways.
Saif.
I personally wouldnt consider the Prophet sinless...as that would indicate he was perfect...and of course he wasnt...so I would assume he didnt engage in major sins..or even the more obvious sins...but if he was indeed sinless...why the constant asking of God for Mercy and Forgiveness...forgiveness for what...if he was sinless?
AA- CoolRed and Amy,
As many things in Islam, the infallibility of the Prophet (saw) is a contested issue.
As I understand it, the majority of the scholars believe him to be ma'sum (infallible). That doesn't necessarily mean he was perfect - rather, he was protected (by Allah (swt)) from sinning. Other Prophets were similarly infallible.
Why did he make so much Istighfar (seek forgiveness)? As Saif mentioned the scholars cite various reasons. He felt his worship and praise for the Most High was lacking and incomplete. He was teaching his Ummah the importance of constant taubah (repentance). He was raising his already lofty status. And so on...
The Prophet did make some "mistakes" such as turning away from a blind man (and causing Surah Abasa to be revealed). But he was protected by Allah from sins.
The companions collected spit and even sweat from the Prophet because it had a strong pleasant smell and could be used as an 'atar' like musk - there are some hadiths of Aisha (ra) using his sweat has perfume - as well as once finding a needle in a dark room illuminated by his smile.
I think what Abu Sinan is objecting to is when Muslims associate powers to relics, especially those attributed to God (like power to forgive or benefit in a meta physical / spiritual way).
As-Salaamu 'alaikum,
In response to sister Amy, the Prophet (sall' Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) was infallible as regards matters of religion and personal character. He did not claim to be an expert in worldly matters, as illustrated by the time he advised the date farmers who were hand-pollinating their crop that they might be better not doing that. When they got less fruit out of their crop and complained to him, he (sall' Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) told them that they knew best about their worldly matters; however, they were unwilling to refuse this advice.
As-salaamu alaikum
Subhanallah, I did not ask my question blindly. Since the issue of Prophets (peace be upon all of them) comes up quite frequently in discussions with non-Muslims, I have an answer I usually give, from what I have learned from scholars.
And the answer is that Prophets are free from major sins, but not necessarily from minor sins, and someone has told me that Jesus (pbuh) was actually sinless while other Prophets (pbut) were not. I don't usually include that because I haven't seen proof of that, while I have seen statements that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the best of all creation, which I understand to mean he was the best at fulfilling the purpose of creation which is to worship and glorify Allah SWT.
However, the question regarding his infallibility is answered precisely as Yusuf Smith actually answered it, and he saved me the trouble of actually giving that explanation. But in fact whenever someone asks my sheikh this question, he always give the same answer which Br Yusuf Smith has given. And that answer of course is that the Prophet (pbuh) was infallible in matters of the deen, but not in worldly matters. Every word or action as a part of the religion we can understand to be divinely inspired or revealed. But on other matters--like the fertilization/pollination (not sure of the appropriate word) of date trees--he was prone to make mistakes.
And Allah knows best. :-)
As-salamu'alaykum,
We should bear in mind that Prophet Muhammad (saw) was not a man of good ideas. In fact he refused to be a man of good ideas. He refused to be an "intelligent man", or a "wise man", or a "calculating man"....like Karl Marx, or Adam's Smith, or Confucious, etc.
Rather he was a man of istikhara (i.e. seeking Guidance), a man of Revelation, a man of Reliance, who Relied solely on Inspiration and Godly Insight - both in so-called "worldly" and other-wordly (spiritual) matters.
So, what mistake is there to make?
The mistake is made perhaps because his "observers" (as opposed to believers) are a now people of "intelligence", "wisdom", "analytics", etc
Because of their Utter Reliance on God, the Prophets became a locus of Divine effulgences and narration/communication..... It couldn't be otherwise. Such a veracious communication could not be entrusted to a man of "unconscious miskake" ( a meaningless terminology!). That would be far too foolish!
The problem here is that we confuse our own reality with the reality of others. But we need to be modest about our iconoclastic realities: For example, the Prophet (saw) participated in actions which were mubah (i.e permissible as opposed to obligatory), but these actions were obligatory for him to show to the ummah that there were not makruh or haram. Similarly, with any so-called mistakes, Allah is teaching you a lesson through these events. As for the Prophet (saw), he was firmly fixed in the Divine Presence. He was not thinking of what way the sword will swing, or whether the Quraysh will invade tomorrow or whether the camel milk will go bad by the morning... No, no, no. He was busy with Allah, hence Allah sorted him out in a way that he was not oblivious to what was happening. He was not a crazy or possessed man, and Allah had to remind us of that in the Koran many times:
By the stars... And your companion is not crazy.
His faculties were intact and well-preserved. But they were not engaged in chimeras!
"You have nothing to do with this affair".
This is the sunnah which unfortunable has not been passed down to generations, as tradition has now been replaced with confusion.
And confusion is all about looking at the elusive details. If you are going to take this approach to Religion, then know that there will be no end to your search. Doubts can only produce doubt. You have now began at the wrong place, with the wrong person.
Okay, got to go...salams.
Assalamu Alaikum.
Sister Amy, can you ask your Sheikh if he believes the Prophet (peace be upon him) was free from major sins, but not minor sins? I suspect if you word the question exactly like that ("sins"), he will probably answer no, he was free from all sins.
As brother Mezba pointed out, the word is ma'soom, which doesn't actually mean infallible, but rather Allah protected him from sin. This doesn't preclude him from doing sub-optimal things, but sub-optimal is not a sin.
Often, when discussing attributes of the Prophet (peace be upon him), people get hung up over his lofty station, and tawheed. But we can reconcile the two, by bearing in mind that Allah alone granted the Prophet (peace be upon him) everything, including divine protection from sin. This is not "worship of the Prophet."
The hadith about the date-plants doesn't seem to indicate (to me, anyway), that the Prophet (peace be upon him) committed minor sins. Not pollinating plants properly is not a sin. A sin is direct and willful disobedience of God. Even if we grant fallibility in worldly affairs, and infallibility in religious affairs, our discussion here (seeking blessings from relics) relates to a religious affair, and it is impossible for the Prophet (peace be upon him) to countenance a sin in his presence (ie the Companions rushing for his relics, sweat, hair, etc) without a condemnation. His silent-approval is a daleel in itself.
Saif.
Wa alaikum as-salaam Saif
I'll ask him when I get the chance inshaaAllah, but what you said made a lot of sense. I haven't heard anyone ever say that the Prophet Muhammad (saaws) actually ever sinned, nor would I espouse that view. Rather what I learned was that according to Ibn Taymiyyah, the majority of scholars agreed that the Prophets (in general, pbut) were protected from major sins, but they were not protected from minor sins.
And upon further reading I see people tending to say "mistakes" instead of sins.
I just wanted to point out that the Prophet (saaws) was certainly infallible in matters of deen while the Companions were not.
And I don't like to see people fighting to prove they love the Prophet (saaws) more by acting one way or another way. It kind of bothers me.
What man in this day and age would sacrifice his whole entire family for the prophet(pbuh), thats the real question we should ask ourselves.
As-salamu'alaykum Amy/Saif,
There are no mistakes for Prophets (peace be upon them). Prophets are beneficiaries of Special Graces from Allah 24/7. They are not "calculating" men, although they enjoyed and experienced Allah's Calculation, i.e they were above that...at the same time they were not possessed/majnoons as the fatalist would accuse them; they were conscious beings at a level we probably will never appreciate, especially if we are still posing as observers (as opposed to shameless believers) in the Prophetic Way.
People make mistakes when they try to work things out... and they look back only to realise that they could have done it better, or someone looks at their action and points out what better ways they could have done it. Such analysis does not apply to Prophets because they did'nt have any duniya consideration for which they would have to calculate about, they only had akhira.
But unfortunately we (i.e. us) have duniya and akhira. Basically the Prophet (saw) tried to take us as we are, and he was actually instructed/inspired to do that, so we can rise in stages.
...if you had been stern and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from round about you.
i.e. we would had find the deen too difficult, hence we have our mubahs, makruhs, mundubs, munthis, munthats etc. The Prophet (saw) didn't have any of these. He had Fards i.e. obligations - Period! The obligation to persist in submission to Allah both in the particulars and the universals.
And some of those Fards include showing us that it is okay to pollinate dates artificial if that will make us happy in the short term! You could leave it to self-pollinate if you wish. You could plant a seed, or you could graft a stem. It's up to you. Even you could eat pesticide/fertilizer ridden dates, or you could wait for it to grow naturally. You could employ mechanised farming techniques which will bring about a large quantity of foods but will restructure the complex arrangement of the micro-organism in the soil which will in turn affect how nutrients are absorbed to the fruits...so that in 50 years time they will be lacking essential nutrients and you will have to live on multi-vitamins for the rest of your life.
Basically, you could do whatever you want within the guidance of the Prophet (saw). But you can't make things difficult for other people who are not willing to do as you. This is a lesson Allah is teaching us through the Prophets without them in anyway being ignorant of this fact. It doesn't mean they know it all. But there were certainly not making mistakes, rather they were learning and witnessing Allah's Show.
Whatever may appear as mistakes to you was intended to be part of the revelation process, intended to impart a lesson to the "believers" and future generation of "believers". Now, it seems we are trying to turn this mercy around to mean something else..?
Please enlighten me if you have any references from earlier scholars or generations. Let's avoid quoting scholarly references from 400 years old or so, or from (traditionally) marginalised ulamas.
As for references to the contrary, well volumes have been written about his (saw) perfection... but they didn't suspect that some people will come later on to ask for what that means in the particularities.
If we are worried about saying that the Prophet (saw) is perfect because Allah is also Perfect - so as not to fall into shirk, Then this is a problem of a confused aqida. Allah's Perfection is not comparable to human perfection, His Mercy, His Forgiveness, His Love, His Vengeance, etc. These attributes of Allah are not comparable to any created being's attribute of "similar" description. The two are so different that it is somewhat a fallacy to even emphasise that.
I do recall the incident in which the Prophet was angered by his wives over the honey issue...which resulted in him forbidding(making haram) honey for himself forever after that. God reprimands him in the Quran...how can you make something haram(forbid it) that which I did not?(paraphrasing)...which would indicate the Prophet wasnt infallible...he was prone to making mistakes of course...but forbidding something God did not forbid...or allowing what God did not allow sounds like a sin to me....a sin is something results in harm in some way...either against yourself or others...forbidding or allowing something and disregarding Gods directive (no matter how small or large the issue) results in harm to someone. If God had not taken the Prophet to task concerning his forbidding something...then all Muslims for all time would consider the Prophet having the right to either allow or forbid things whether or not God gave the order first....which I might point out happened anyway even though God did try and put a stop to it.
Anyhow my point being(yes there is one) that the Prophet made a mistake...if anyone this day and age forbid something God allowed...or allowed something God forbid...we would all consider that a sin...so why not consider it a sin when the Prophet did it? God reprimands the sinner and warns them time and again the consequences of sinning....the Prophet was reprimanded...so does that mean God considered his action a sin? Just wondering.
AA- Coolred38,
I thank you for bringing forth challenging questions.
IMHO, I think you've oversimplified the Prophetic episode of the honey. Without going into great details, I would simply say that he (saw) did not make an absolute declaration of something halal becoming haram (ie. for all Muslims). He did so *only* for himself.
On an individual level, anyone can take such a step. Because soda gives me extreme gas, I can make it haram on myself. Or because my nafs overly desires ice cream and I wish to break my nafs, I may declare ice cream haram for myself.
WRT to the 'correction' by Allah that you reference in Sura 66, it can be interpreted in such a manner as to maintain the Prophet's infallibility. The verse was a gentle way for Allah to redirect him (saw) away from his oath (of leaving honey) based on the plot of the Prophet's wives (Aisha and Hafsah (RA)).
As the Prophet (saw) was misguided by his wives (concerning his breath), Allah (swt) corrected that misstep on the part of the Prophet (saw).
I don't see it as a sin at all. :-)
Wonderful post and points brother Naeem. It reminded me of the love that the Sahabi Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari (radiya Allahu 'anhu) had for Sayyiduna Muhammad ('alayhis salaam). Imam Ahmad narrated:
حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا عبد الملك بن عمرو ثنا كثير بن زيد عن داود بن أبي صالح قال : أَقْبَلَ مَرْوَانُ يَوْمًا فَوَجَدَ رَجُلًا وَاضِعًا وَجْهَهُ عَلَى الْقَبْرِ فَقَالَ أَتَدْرِي مَا تَصْنَعُ فَأَقْبَلَ عَلَيْهِ فَإِذَا هُوَ أَبُو أَيُّوبَ فَقَالَ نَعَمْ جِئْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَلَمْ آتِ الْحَجَرَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ لَا تَبْكُوا عَلَى الدِّينِ إِذَا وَلِيَهُ أَهْلُهُ وَلَكِنْ ابْكُوا عَلَيْهِ إِذَا وَلِيَهُ غَيْرُ أَهْلِهِ
Abdul-Maalik ibn ‘Amru>>Kathir ibn Zayd>>from Daawud ibn Abi Saalih who said:
“Marwan [ibn al-Hakam] one day saw a man placing his face on top of the grave of the Prophet . He said: “Do you know what you are doing?” When he came near him, he realized it was Abu Ayyub al-Ansari. The latter said: “Yes; I came to the Prophet , not to a stone. I heard the Prophet say: “Do not weep on religion if its people assume its leadership (walyahu), but weep on it if other than its people assume it.”
[for proof of its authenticity see: http://seekingilm.com/archives/192]
This athar, I certainly believe, manifests the love that they had for him. Just as a mother longs for her lost child, a son for their lost father, so do the believers for their beloved master Muhammad (saaws) - the one still living in his grave!
Jazakum Allahu Khairan,
Your Brother
Abul Layth
Post a Comment