Question: Asalaamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu Maulana Sahib,
Recently, I received a mail by a Ghayr-Muqallid who rejected Waseela or Tawassul even in its permissible concept claiming that Imam Abu Hanifah and his student Imam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayhim) have prohibited even the correct form of Tawassul, I would like to produce the mail here as follows:
“It occurs in Durr ul Mukhtar (the famous book on Fatwa in the Hanafi Madhab) (2/630), ‘From Abu Hanifa: “It is not fitting at all that anyone should supplicate to Allah except by Him (Allah), and using such supplications have been permitted and ordered in the like of the Saying of Allah, the Most High, “And (all) the Most Beautiful Names belong to Allah, so call upon Him by them.”
In al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya (5/280), and al-Quduri (d. 428/1037) said in his large book of Fiqh called Sharh ul Kharkie in the chapter of detested matters: “Bishr Ibn al-Walid said: ‘Abu Yusuf (the students of Imam Abu Hanifa) narrated to us that Abu Hanifa said: ‘It is not right that anyone should supplicate to Allah except by Him, and I hate that anyone should say: ‘By the right of so and so’ or ‘By the right of your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of your sacred house and the sacred area (of Muzdalifah).”
Murtada Az-Zabidi (d. 1205/1790) says in Sharh ul Ihya (2/285): “Abu Hanifah and his two companions hated that a person should say, ‘I ask You by the right of so and so’ or ‘By the right of Your Prophets and Messengers’ or ‘By the right of the sacred house and sacred area (of Muzdalifah)’ and the like, since no one has any right upon Allah. Likewise, Abu Hanifah and Muhammed Ibn Hasan ash-Shaybani hated that a person who made supplication should say: ‘O Allah I ask you by the glory of Your Throne.”
Al-Quduri (d. 428/1037) also said: “Asking Him by His creation is not allowed since the creation had no right over the Creator, therefore it cannot be allowed.”
Similar statements can be found in many Hanafi Fiqh books like;
-Al Ikhtiyaar of Imam Mawsili (d. 683/1284)
-Molla Husraw’s (d. 885/1480) ; Durar al-hukkam fi Sharh Ghurar al-Ahkam
-Multaka-Al Abhur of of Ibrahim al-Halabi (d. 956/1549)
-Al Hidaya of Imam Burhan al-Din al-Marghinani (d. 593/1197)
From these quotes it is clearly that Imam Abu Hanifa and his students hated these kinds of Waseelah. (End of the mail).
Maulana Sahib please comment on this issue,
1. Did Imam Abu Hanifa and his student really prohibit Tawassul? If yes then is it permissible to cite the later Hanafi scholars who justified a specific form of Tawassul?
2. Which principle should be applied if the main Imam of the Math-hab and his student has ruled prohibition on a mas’alah and some later scholars of the same Math-hab had given permissibility for the same mas’alah?
Maulana Sahib, please guide me regarding this issue as I am very confused and feeling guilty regarding this Issue.
Answer: (by Mujlisul Ulama):
The makrooh view is one view of the Hanafi Fuqaha. The other view is of permissibility and this is according to Imaam Abu Yusuf, Faqeeh Abu Layth, and obviously innumerable Fuqaha and Ulama subscribe to this view of permissibility in the same way as numerous subscribe to the karaahat view. Add to the above the consensus of all the Auliya of former times and all our Akaabireen of recent times.
This brief explanation suffices for claiming that there is no absolute certitude for the view of prohibition.
The only reason for karaahat stated on the basis of the narration pertaining to the Waseelah of the Arsh is possibility of the idea of the annihilation of Allah Ta’ala’s Izzat (Greatness and Glory) because the Arsh itself is a creation which can be annihilated. Therefore, there is the possibility of people understanding that Allah’s Glory can also be annihilated. From this perspective the karaahat view is pure figment of human opinion. It is unsubstantiated by Nass.
It appears that the primary difference pertains to the word ‘Haqq’ in view of the possibility of the idea of divinity stemming from the word Haqq which is the attribute of Allah Ta’ala, especially when there is such a great prevalence of shirk by the Ahl-e-Bid’ah. It is advisable and best to refrain from using the term Haqq in supplications involving Waseelah. But to understand that the concept of Waseelah is impermissible on the basis of the ibaarat of Shaami and other kutub is unintelligent and not valid. It is not possible for all the Auliya and innumerable Fuqaha and Ulama of all ages confirming permissibility if there was absolute certitude for karaahat.
Our Akaabireen were all branded kaafir because of their resolute opposition to bid’ah and to the slightest vestige of shirk.
Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi alayh) was faced with the peculiar shirki situation of the Khawaarij and Mu’tazilah. For this reason certain of the views of Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi alayh) ostensibly appear in conflict with the views of the other Fuqaha. Hadhrat Thaanvi (Rahmatullahi alayh) mentions that the Mu’tazilah’s brains are deranged for they consider that makhlooq has a right over Allah Ta’ala. Imaam Abu Hanifah’s proscription of using the words Bihaqqi Fulaan was thus in this context.
As far as the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah are concerned, wherever the words Haqqan Alallah, etc. appear it means that Allah Ta’ala will treat it like a Haqq, not that Allah Ta’ala is now bonded and compelled to fulfil the right. Since the deviant sects treated the word Haqq as an obligation upon Allah Ta’ala Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullahi alayh) thus proscribed its use.
And Allah Ta’ala knows best.
(Mufti) AS Desai
Mujlisul Ulama of SA