ORIGINS of al-Maghrib Institute: Dar-us-Salam / Al-Huda School.


What are the origins of the al-Maghrib Institute? One can guess it had nothing to do with moderate Sunni Islam. Rather its origins emanate from an older Wahhabi institute called Dar-us-Salam (or al-Huda) in Maryland, USA.  

The following are excerpts from an announcement made by Muhammad AlShareef,  the founder of al-Maghrib Institute. These statements shed light on the origins of al-Maghrib Institute. Of particular interest is Al-Maghrib Institute’s affiliation with Dar-us-Salam:

“On April 25-26th, 2005, the AlMaghrib Institute Shuyookh, AlMaghrib Institute’s USA management, and this author gathered together in Memphis, TN in an effort to determine the future academic course of action for AlMaghrib Institute.

Firstly: Where did we come from? Since AlMaghrib’s inception in 2001.

  • AlMaghrib Institute was founded in 2001 by Muhammad Alshareef in cooperation with Dar-us-Salaam as the financial/community backbone and the American Open University as the academic backbone.
  • An agreement was made between AlMaghrib Institute and Dar-us-Salaam with the American Open University. The agreement was to acknowledge course credit to students for the courses they took with AlMaghrib Institute.

Secondly: Where are we now? And where are we headed? In the last 6-12 months to present and beyond, in sha Allah.

  • AlMaghrib Institutes founder/director moved back to Canada in October, 2004.
  • Management and Administration of AlMaghrib Institute was moved from College Park, Maryland to Houston, Texas.
  • AlMaghrib Institute became it’s own registered company, legally, under no other registered company/organization.”




As stated above, Dar-us-Salam was the “financial/community backbone” of the al-Maghrib Institute where its “Management and Administration” originated. Therefore, to know more about the al-Maghrib Institute, it is important to know more about Dar-us-Salam.

The Washington Post states that Dar-us-Salam practices Salafi/Wahhabi Islam:

“The kind of Islam practiced at Dar-us-Salaam, known as Salafism, once had a significant foothold among area Muslims, in large part because of an aggressive missionary effort by the government of Saudi Arabia. Salafism and its strict Saudi version, known as Wahhabism, struck a chord with many Muslim immigrants who took a dim view of the United States’ sexually saturated pop culture and who were ambivalent about participating in a secular political system. It was also attractive to young Muslims searching for a more “authentic” Islam than what their Westernized immigrant parents offered.”



Dar-us-Salam (al-Huda School), located in College Park, Maryland (USA), was founded by and currently headed by a Wahhabi named Safi Khan. Safi Khan was educated by Wahhabi scholars in Saudi Arabia. He also attended the Imam Muhammad ibn Saud University in Riyadh and, as is no surprise, teaches Wahhabism. As al-Maghrib Institute is a modern extension of Dar-us-Salam, it no surprise that  the al-Maghrib Institute propagates Wahhabism.


Just as the al-Maghrib Institute has links to dubious individuals, including known extremists and even an Osama bin Laden supporter, Dar-us-Salam/al-Huda School has had its share of extremist problems as well.  The point is not to implicate the entire school of wrongdoing but simply to show the connections it has to scary individuals. Ali Asad Chandia who taught at the al-Huda School for four years was guilty of terrorism. Maryland’s Gazette states:

“Ali Asad Chandia, 29, a resident of College Park who taught at Al-Huda for four years, was sentenced Friday for aiding Lashkar-e-Taiba, an anti-Indian government organization.

Chandia was charged with assisting Lashkar-e-Taiba member Mohammed Ajmal Khan, who is serving a 9-year prison sentence in Britain for serving as a military procurement official for the group. Prosecutors sought a sentence of 30 years to life for Chandia, but U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton gave the Pakistani-born teacher 15 years.”



The al-Maghrib Institute is a repackaged, flashy, state-of-the-art version of Wahhabi Dar-us-Salam (also known as the al-Huda School in College Park, Maryland) that was created to escape the fallout against Dar-us-Salam from the September 11, 2001 attacks. Since Dar-us-Salam was Wahhabi-Salafi, cameras focused in its direction to publicize the unorthodox version of Islam it was preaching. The typical conservative Wahhabi image was a magnet for criticism by many, including the media. Therefore, it had to be ‘redone’ — rebranded — in a modern, “open-minded”, and alluring way. To deflect criticism by Americans and others, the new al-Maghrib Institute discussed issues that were normally taboo, including sex, gay people, and other ‘cool’ topics. Beneath the paraphernalia, colorful purple image, and high-tech make-over, however, is the same ugly Wahhabism. While Dar-us-Salam is more closed, al-Maghrib Institute attempts to accept all who wish to join in an attempt to make their unorthodox Salafism “adapt” to ‘Western’ environments like the United States, Canada, and UK.

The same Washington Post article states:

“Yasir Qadhi, a lecturer with AlMaghrib Institute, an Islamic educational organization founded by a former prayer leader at Dar-us-Salaam, cited his own experience as an example of how Salafism has adapted in the United States.”


Brothers and sisters, don’t be fooled. Stick with the majority of Muslims and not the dubious al-Maghrib Institute (and Dar-us-Salam) that represents a pseudo-Sunni splinter sect that appeared in the 1700s.  

Allah Guide us on the path of the Muslim majority and Protect us from the scholars of deviation. Aameen!



Yasir Qadhi and ‘Istighatha’ (Asking for help).

Though the matter of istighatha (calling for help) has already been discussed elsewhere in this blog, it is important to document as many instances as possible where Yasir Qadhi (and his Wahhabi cronies) mislead the masses on the matter.

In response to a question, Yasir Qadhi said:

“If a person goes to a grave and makes du’a to that grave and says ‘Ya Fulan’, ‘Ya Abdal-Qadir Jeelani’…this is blatant shirk about which there is no difference of opinion amongst the classical scholars of Islam. You cannot make du’a to other than Allah.”  

Fastforward to 5:42)


Yasir Qadhi didn’t explain the fine difference between an act of shirk and the legitimate Sunni act of istighatha in which Muslims say the same statement, “Ya Fulan-bin-Fulan, etc.” What Yasir Qadhi conceals regarding the valid act of istighatha is, in fact, manipulative and deceitful. The reason is that the audience doesn’t have a chance to know that istighatha is a legitimate and valid act in agreement with the Qur’an and Sunnah as explained and accepted by the `ulema of the Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbali madhahib. Yasir selectively packages his answer Wahhabi-style and forces it down the throat of his questioner and audience as if the Wahhabi understanding is the only correct understanding.

Contrary to Yasir Qadhi’s (mis)understanding, as is common to all Wahhabis, a statement such as “Oh Abdal-Qadir Jeelani” is insufficient to conclude that the asker is a mushrik. Rather, the intention of the person counts and must be understood before making such a heavy accusation.

If the person saying those words intended worship, then he indeed committed shirk. But if the person did not intend worship by such calling, but simply intended to ask, then this is not polytheism at all. This is the understanding  that the vast majority of Sunni `ulema had. Yasir failed to explain this.



Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri, the same Sunni Shaykh who gave a great fatwa against terrorism and who was ridiculed by Muslimmatters, explains the lawful practice of istighathah in his excellent book, “Beseeching for Help (Istighathah)”:

Contrary to what Wahhabis say, all du’a is NOT worship.  Shaykh Qadri says that:

“…the word du’a sometimes carries the meaning of address [al-Khitab] or speech. At the occasion of the battle of Uhud, when the Companions seemed to lose heart and were fighting in scattered groups, and only a few of them were concentrated around him, the holy Prophet (pbuh) called those who had scattered away from him. The Qur’an has described his words in these terms:

“When you were running away (in a state of disarray), and never cast a backward glance, and the Messenger (pbuh), who (stood steadfast) among the group behind you, was addressing you.”{Qur’an 3:153}

The word yad’ukum of the verse, that is, he was addressing you, cannot be interpreted in the sense of worship. This interpretation borders on sheer disbelief, which is simply inconceivable for the true believer.”


Saying that du’a can only mean worship will, from a Qur’anic perspective, be extremely problematic and unsensible. Shaykh Qadri further explains:

“If we interpret du’a as simply an act of worship, and the act of begging for help is also merged into the act of worship, then the entire society will be pushed down into the quagmire of disbelief and (God forbid) even the prophets will not be immune to this downward slide.

Therefore, it should be clearly recognized that du’a (calling) is not synonymous with worship in all contexts. If we do not acknowledge this difference between their contextual meanings it will amount to opening Pandora’s box of disbelief, as no one will remain untainted by its rampant proliferation.

The Qur’anic verse itself is a witness to the fact that the holy Prophet (pbuh) himself also called non-God for help, and the Qur’an itself is according permission to call one another for help.

Shaykh Qadri then gives a list of verses that illustrate the problems with understanding all du’a as being worship:

If, as a supposition, we interpret da’a, yad’u, nad’u as worship or as an act of beseeching help in every context of situation indiscriminately, which is regarded by some people as an auxiliary form of worship, then it will be quite problematic to offer a sound explanation of the following Qur’anic verses:

– And, O my people, what is this that I call you to the (path of) salvation and you call me to hell?
 {Qur’an 40:41}

– He said: O my Lord! I call my people night and day (to the right religion) but my call only increased their flight (from the religion).
{Qur’an 71:5-6)

– And Allah calls (people) to the home of peace (Paradise).

– Call (the adopted sons) by the names of their fathers: that is just in the sight of God.
{Qur’an 33:5}

– Then, let him call (for help) his comrades. We shall also, call (our) soldiers soon.
{Qur’an 96:17-8}

– Then they will call on them, and they will not listen to them.
{Qur’an 18:52}

– When we shall call together all factions of human beings with their leaders.
{Qur’an 17:71}

– And if you call them to guidance.
{Qur’an 18:57}


In another post on this blog, Yasir Qadhi repeated the same misunderstanding of the matter. Yasir said:

“The permissibility to make du`a to the dead is of course an import of (late) Sufism and not pure Ash`ari thought…”

Shaykh Abu Adam responded:

The issue here is what does he mean by du`a? If he means prayer, then no Muslim will disagree that it is kufr to make du`a to the dead. If, however, the meaning of du`a here is simply calling, without any sense of worship to the person called, then this is another matter.

Should someone claim that every du’a is worship then how would they understand the following verse in the Holy Qur’an:

لاَّ تَجْعَلُواْ دُعَآءَ الرَّسُولِ بَيْنَكُمْ كَدُعَآءِ بَعْضِكُمْ بَعْضاً

“Make not the addressing (du’a’) of the Prophet among you like your addressing one another…”

So basically we cannot interpret du`a to mean worship in every context. A call without worshipping the called upon is just a call, and it is not shirk. Moreover, calling a person who has died is done every day in every single one of the 5 daily prayers, where a Muslim says, “Ya Ayyuhan-Nabi,” i.e. “O Prophet!” Clearly then, calling a person who has died is not an import of late Sufism.


A hadith states:

“Du’a is worship.” (Sunan Abu Dawood vol.1 p387 no.1474)

A Sunni brother comments:

This hadith does not refer to everydu’a“.

Rather the du’a being referred to is the du’a which is imploring Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala to achieve a better status with Him.

The word du’a which comes from the root word da’a can have different meanings in different contexts.

If someone were to say that every du’a is ibadah then how would they understand the following verse in the Holy Qur’an:

“Make not the addressing (du’a’) of the Prophet among you like your addressing one another…”

لاَّ تَجْعَلُواْ دُعَآءَ الرَّسُولِ بَيْنَكُمْ كَدُعَآءِ بَعْضِكُمْ بَعْضاً

Here the literal word “du’a” is being used! Is this the du’a of worship?

So basically we cannot interpret du’a to mean worship in every context.

There are many other verses from the Qur’an where du’a or its derivatives and words related to it have been used to mean to call or to address.

وَإِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّ أَرِنِي كَيْفَ تُحْيِـي الْمَوْتَى قَالَ أَوَلَمْ تُؤْمِن قَالَ بَلَى وَلَـكِن لِّيَطْمَئِنَّ قَلْبِي قَالَ فَخُذْ أَرْبَعَةً مِّنَ الطَّيْرِ فَصُرْهُنَّ إِلَيْكَ ثُمَّ اجْعَلْ عَلَى كُلِّ جَبَلٍ مِّنْهُنَّ جُزْءًا ثُمَّ ادْعُهُنَّ يَأْتِينَكَ سَعْيًا وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

And (remember) when Ibrâhim (Abraham) said, “My Lord! Show me how You give life to the dead.” He (Allâh) said: “Do you not believe?” He [Ibrâhim (Abraham)] said: “Yes (I believe), but to be stronger in Faith.” He said: “Take four birds, then cause them to incline towards you (then slaughter them, cut them into pieces), and then put a portion of them on every hill, and call them, they will come to you in haste. And know that Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.” (Al-Baqarah 2:260)

Here the word “idu’unna” means call them which has the same linguistic meaning as du’a. Ibraheem has made du’a to these birds.


فَمَنْ حَآجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْاْ نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءنَا وَأَبْنَاءكُمْ وَنِسَاءنَا وَنِسَاءكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَةُ اللّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

Then whoever disputes with you concerning him [‘Iesa (Jesus)] after (all this) knowledge that has come to you, [i.e. ‘Iesa (Jesus)] being a slave of Allâh, and having no share in Divinity) say: (O Muhammad SAW) “Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves – then we pray and invoke (sincerely) the Curse of Allâh upon those who lie.” (Aali Imran 3:61)

Here “nad’au” is being used to mean call.

إِذْ تُصْعِدُونَ وَلاَ تَلْوُونَ عَلَى أحَدٍ وَالرَّسُولُ يَدْعُوكُمْ فِي أُخْرَاكُمْ فَأَثَابَكُمْ غُمَّاً بِغَمٍّ لِّكَيْلاَ تَحْزَنُواْ عَلَى مَا فَاتَكُمْ وَلاَ مَا أَصَابَكُمْ وَاللّهُ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

(And remember) when you ran away (dreadfully) without even casting a side glance at anyone, and the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) was in your rear calling you back. There did Allâh give you one distress after another by way of requital to teach you not to grieve for that which had escaped you, nor for that which had befallen you. And Allâh is Well*Aware of all that you do. (Aali Imran 3:153)

Here the word “yadu’ukum” is being used to mean to call upon someone.

So, it is clear that not every du’a is ibadah.

The du’a only becomes ibadah if one is imploring Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala humbling himself in subjugation and obedience to achieve a better status with Him.

And Allah knows best.

(Thanks to brother faqir:

Surely Yasir Qadhi, in his high praise of the Four Mujtahid Imams and followers, must have known about the position of istighatha according to their madhahib. But he clearly chose to conceal this important information from the man asking the question and the audience that was listening. This shows that Yasir Qadhi’s praise of the Four Mujtahid Imams was phony. If his praise was genuine, he wouldn’t have concealed their madhahibs’ positions on the permissibility of istighatha. Below is a brief discussion on the validity of istighatha.


The following are two specific is evidences of the permissibility of istighatha in Islam. It is not “shirk” as the Wahhabis proclaim. I thank “Faqir” for detailed evidence regarding the narration of Malik al-Dar (#1 below). 


Imam al-Bayhaqi relates with a sound (sahih) chain:

It is related from Malik al-Dar, `Umar’s treasurer, that the people suffered a drought during the successorship of `Umar, whereupon a man came to the grave of the Prophet and said:

“O Messenger of Allah, ask for rain for your Community, for verily they have but perished,” after which the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and told him: “Go to `Umar and give him my greeting, then tell him that they will be watered. Tell him: You must be clever, you must be clever!”

The man went and told `Umar. The latter said: “O my Lord, I spare no effort except in what escapes my power!””

Ibn Kathir cites it thus from Bayhaqi in al-Bidaya wa al-nihaya and says: isnaduhu sahih;[25] Ibn Abi Shayba cites it in his Musannaf with a sound (sahih) chain as confirmed by Ibn Hajar who says: rawa Ibn Abi Shayba bi isnadin sahih and cites the hadith in Fath al-bari.[26] He identifies Malik al-Dar as `Umar’s treasurer (khazin `umar) and says that the man who visited and saw the Prophet in his dream is identified as the Companion Bilal ibn al-Harith, and he counts this hadith among the reasons for Bukhari’s naming of the chapter “The people’s request to their leader for rain if they suffer drought.” He also mentions it in al-Isaba, where he says that Ibn Abi Khaythama cited it.[27]”

What follows is the original Arabic wording of this hadith of tawassul in Umar ibn al Khattab’s time as cited by various major scholars of Hadith:

[kindly provided by Sidi Abul Hasan]

From the Musannaf (12/31-32) of ibn Abi Shayba (d. 235 AH):

مُصَنَّفُ ابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ >> كِتَابُ الْفَضَائِلِ >> مَا ذُكِرَ فِي فَضْلِ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ >>
يَا رَبِّ لَا آلُو إِلَّا مَا عَجَزْتُ عَنْهُ *

31380 حدثنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن أبي صالح ، عن مالك الدار ، قال : وكان خازن عمر على الطعام ، قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر ، فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا رسول الله ، استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا ، فأتى الرجل في المنام فقيل له : ” ائت عمر فأقرئه السلام ، وأخبره أنكم مستقيمون وقل له : عليك الكيس ، عليك الكيس ” ، فأتى عمر فأخبره فبكى عمر ثم قال : يا رب لا آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه *

From Imam al-Bayhaqi’s Dala’il al-Nubuwwa (7/47):

دَلَائِلُ النُّبُوَّةِ لِلْبَيْهَقِيِّ >> جُمَّاعُ أَبْوَابِ غَزْوَةِ تَبُوكَ >> جُمَّاعُ أَبْوَابِ مَنْ رَأَى فِي مَنَامِهِ شَيْئًا مِنْ آثَارِ نُبُوَّةِ مُحَمَّدٍ >> بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي رُؤْيَةِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي >>
مَا آلُو إِلَّا مَا عَجَزْتُ عَنْهُ *

2974 أخبرنا أبو نصر بن قتادة ، وأبو بكر الفارسي قالا : أخبرنا أبو عمرو بن مطر ، أخبرنا أبو بكر بن علي الذهلي ، أخبرنا يحيى ، أخبرنا أبو معاوية ، عن الأعمش ، عن أبي صالح ، عن مالك قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمان عمر بن الخطاب ؛ فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا رسول الله , استسق الله لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا ؛ فأتاه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام ؛ فقال ائت عمر فأقرئه السلام ، وأخبره أنكم مسقون . وقل له : عليك الكيس الكيس . فأتى الرجل عمر ، فأخبره ، فبكى عمر ثم قال : يا رب ما آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه *

From al-Irshad fi Ma’rifa Ulama al-Hadith of Hafiz al-Khalili (1/313-314):

الْإِرْشَادُ فِي مَعْرِفَةِ عُلَمَاءِ الْحَدِيثِ لِلْخَلِيلِيِّ >>
مَالِكُ الدَّارِ

مالك الدار مولى عمر بن الخطاب الرعاء عنه : تابعي , قديم , متفق عليه , أثنى عليه التابعون , وليس بكثير الرواية , روى عن أبي بكر الصديق , وعمر , وقد انتسب ولده إلى جبلان ناحية . حدثني محمد بن أحمد بن عبدوس المزكي أبو بكر النيسابوري , حدثنا عبد الله بن محمد بن الحسن الشرقي , حدثنا محمد بن عبد الوهاب قال : قلت لعلي بن عثام العامري الكوفي : لم سمي مالك الدار ؟ فقال : الداري المتطيب . حدثنا محمد بن الحسن بن الفتح , حدثنا عبد الله بن محمد البغوي , حدثنا أبو خيثمة , حدثنا محمد بن خازم الضرير , حدثنا الأعمش , عن أبي صالح , عن مالك الدار ، قال : أصاب الناس قحط في زمان عمر بن الخطاب , فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : يا نبي الله , استسق الله لأمتك فرأى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال : ” ائت عمر , فأقرئه السلام , وقل له : إنكم مسقون , فعليك بالكيس الكيس ” . قال : فبكى عمر , وقال : يا رب , ما آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه يقال : إن أبا صالح سمع مالك الدار هذا الحديث , والباقون أرسلوه

Imam Ibn Kathir in al Bidaya wal Nihaya (7/106):

وقال الحافظ أبو بكر البيهقي: أخبرنا أبو نصر بن قتادة، وأبو بكر الفارسي قالا: حدثنا أبو عمر بن مطر، حدثنا إبراهيم بن علي الذهلي، حدثنا يحيى بن يحيى، حدثنا أبو معاوية، عن الأعمش، عن أبي صالح، عن مالك قال: أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر بن الخطاب، فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم.
فقال: يا رسول الله استسق الله لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا.
فأتاه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال: إيت عمر، فأقرئه مني السلام، وأخبرهم أنه مسقون، وقل له عليك بالكيس الكيس.
فأتى الرجل فأخبر عمر، فقال: يا رب ما آلوا إلا ما عجزت عنه.وهذا إسناد صحيح.

Shaykh al-Islam al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in al-Isaba fi Tamyiz al-Sahaba (3/484) :

الإصابة – لابن حجر

8362[ص:274] مالك بن عياض مولى عمر هو الذي يقال له مالك الدار له إدراك وسمع من أبي بكر الصديق وروى عن الشيخين ومعاذ وأبي عبيدة روى عنه أبو صالح السمان وابناه عون وعبدالله ابنا مالك وأخرج البخاري في التاريخ من طريق أبي صالح ذكوان عن مالك الدار أن عمر قال في قحوط المطر يا رب لا آلو إلا ما عجزت عنه وأخرجه بن أبي خيثمة من هذا الوجه مطولا قال أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا رسول الله استسق الله لأمتك فأتاه النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في المنام فقال له ائت عمر فقل له إنكم مستسقون فعليك الكفين قال فبكى عمر وقال يا رب ما آلوا إلا ما عجزت عنه وروينا في فوائد داود بن عمرو الضبي جمع البغوي من طريق عبدالرحمن بن سعيد بن يربوع المخزومي عن مالك الدار قال دعاني عمر بن الخطاب يوما فإذا عنده صرة من ذهب فيها أربعمائة دينار فقال اذهب بهذه إلى أبي عبيدة فذكر قصته وذكر بن سعد في الطبقة الأولى من التابعين في أهل المدينة قال روى عن أبي بكر وعمر وكان معروفا وقال أبو عبيدة ولاه عمر كيلة عيال عمر فلما قدم عثمان ولاه القسم فسمى مالك الدار وقال إسماعيل القاضي عن علي بن المديني كان مالك الدار خازنا لعمر.

Hafiz ibn Hajar in Fath al Bari (2/495):

وروى ابن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الداري – وكان خازن عمر – قال ” أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: يا رسول الله استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا، فأتى الرجل في المنام فقيل له: ائت عمر ” الحديث.
وقد روى سيف في الفتوح أن الذي رأى المنام المذكور هو بلال بن الحارث المزني أحد الصحابة، وظهر بهذا كله مناسبة الترجمة لأصل هذه القصة أيضا والله الموفق.

Imam ibn Abdal Barr in al-Isti’ab (2/464) under the biography of Umar ibn al Khattab (ra) said:

وروى أبو معاوية عن الأعمش عن أبي صالح عن مالك الدار قال‏:‏ أصاب الناس قحط في زمن عمر فجاء رجل إلى قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال‏:‏ يا رسول الله استسق لأمتك فإنهم قد هلكوا‏.‏

Sidi Abul Hasan goes on to comment:

“Note: All of these Imams narrated it and not one of them weakened it let alone said it leads to Shirk as some of the innovators of this age claimed!

In fact Imam ibn Hajar and Imam ibn Kathir explicitly declared its Isnad to be Sahih. Ibn Kathir in his recently published: Jami al-Masanid (1/223) – Musnad Umar – declared it as: “Isnaduhu Jayyid Qawi: ITS CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION IS GOOD AND STRONG!”

Let the pseudo-Salafiyya take note – that this is the ruling of ibn Kathir in 2 places, and he was associated with Ibn Taymiyya.”

[Al-Albani attempted to weaken the above authentic narration, but this has been addressed adequately in the following link:]

EVIDENCE #2: “YA MUHAMMAD!” (peace & blessings upon him)

In Imam Bukhari’s “al-Adab-ul-Mufrad” related the following about Ibn Umar that his leg was numbed and he was told: Mention the name of the most beloved person to you. He then said: “O Muhammad.” The result was as if his leg was untied from a knot. This is specific evidence as related by Imam Bukhari in which “Ya Muhammad” is specifically mentioned. And this proves Yasir Qadhi absolutely wrong when he said: “If a person goes to a grave and makes du’a to that grave and says ‘Ya Fulan’, ‘Ya Abdal-Qadir Jeelani’…this is blatant shirk about which there is no difference of opinion amongst the classical scholars of Islam.”


To top it off, Shaykh Faraz Rabbani — orthodox Sunni scholar and founder of Seeker’s Guidance — explained the validity of istighatha as follows:

In the Name of Allah, Most Merciful & Compassionate

There are a few issues:

a) It is a fundamental belief of Muslims that only Allah benefits or harms; that only Allah gives and takes;

b) It is also a fundamental belief of Muslims that Allah has created means for humans to take;

c) However, the relationship between these created means and their effects is only normative: it is Allah who creates the means, and Allah who creates the results.

This is why Shaykh Abd al-Rahman al-Shaghouri (Allah have mercy on him), the great spiritual guide and master of the sciences of faith (aqida) from Damascus, explained,

“Taking means is necessary, and denying that they are effective is necessary. Whoever negates means is denying the Wisdom of Allah, and whoever relies upon means is associating others with Allah.”

This is the understanding upon which Muslims “call upon other than Allah.” It is no different from taking medicine when sick, or going to a mechanic when your car is giving trouble: if you think that the medicine itself creates the healing, or that the mechanic is the one himself creates the fixing, then you have serious innovation in belief. The sound understanding is that Allah creates the healing when you use the medicine, and He creates the fixing when the mechanic does their job: we affirm these means, but also affirm that it is Allah who created both the means and the resultant effect.

This is pure affirmation of Divine Oneness. How can it “smack of shirk.” […]


Faraz Rabbani

(Source: )

Allah protect us from pseudo-scholars who are many today and Guide us on Sirat-ul-MustaQeem! Aameen!