We have explained Sima al Mawta i.e. hearing of the dead and Hayat al Anbiya i.e. Life of Prophets Here. Now we would discuss concept of Tawassul (intercession) in detail. There are many verses and hadiths on proof of Tawassul.

The Qur’an states:

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا لِيُطَاعَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ۚ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذ ظَّلَمُوا أَنفُسَهُمْ جَاءُوكَ فَاسْتَغْفَرُوا اللَّهَ وَاسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمُ الرَّسُولُ لَوَجَدُوا اللَّهَ تَوَّابًا رَّحِيمًا

Translation: We sent not the Messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah. If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come to the Messenger and asked Allah's forgiveness, and the Messenger had (also) asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft- returning, Most Merciful. (Al- Qur'an, Surah an- Nisa, 4:64. Yusuf Ali.)

This is a direct Divine order to seek intercession of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) and this verse is Mutlaq (not restricted to any time). None of the classical commentators of Qur'an said that it only applied to the Physical life of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) as falsely asserted by Salafis. To make something Khaas (specific) from Aam (general), the Salafis should show proof from Qur’an or hadith that Prophet (Peace be upon him) restricted this verse only during his presence.

Before citing many other proofs we would like to present a logical and rhetorical question and then provide an answer:

Question: When Allah is most Qarib (close) then why does He not say: Ask me in your homes and I will answer you? Why does He put the condition of going to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in this verse?

Answer: If the deniers of intercession understand this point then, God willing, it shall be a source of guidance to them and their generations to come. This verse proves from the Nass (categorical proof) of the Qur'an that intercession in sight of Allah is an approach that He likes & prescribes. Please remember that we as Ahlus Sunnah consider both the ways to be right i.e.

Imam an- Nawawi (rah) while emphatically proving Tawassul said: 

 ثم يرجع إلى موقفه الاول قبالة وجه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ويتوسل به في حق نفسه ويستشفع به إلى ربه سبحانه وتعالى ومن أحسن ما يقول ما حكاه الماوردي والقاضي أبو الطيب وسائر أصحابنا عن العتبي مستحسنين له قال (كنت جالسا عند قبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فجاء أعرابي فقال السلام عليك يا رسول الله سمعت الله يقول (ولو أنهم إذ ظلموا أنفسهم جاءوك فاستغفروا الله واستغفر لهم الرسول لوجدوا الله توابا رحيما) وقد جئتك مستغفرا من ذنبي مستشفعا بك إلى ربي

Translation: (The Pilgrim) should turn towards the face of the Messenger of Allah (قبالة وجه رسول الله) and make him a means (ويتوسل به) for the sake of himself and also seek his intercession towards reaching God (ويستشفع به إلى ربه). In this regard “THE BEST OF SAYINGS” is the Hikayat of Imam al- Marwadi (rah) and Qadhi Abu at- Tayb (rah) and “ALL MY OTHER COMPANIONS also narrate it by considering it RECOMMENDED/ADMIRED (مستحسنين له)” the narration of Utbi” i.e. A Bedouin who visited the Prophet's grave and sat beside it said: Peace unto you O Messenger of Allah, I have heard Allah say:

Had they, when they had wronged themselves, come to you and asked Allah's forgiveness and the Apostle had asked forgiveness for them, they would certainly have found Allah Most- Propitious, Most- Merciful. (Holy Qur'an 4: 64).

Therefore, I have come to you for forgiveness of my sins and seeking your intercession with Allah [Imam an- Nawawi in Al- Majmu' Volume No. 8, Page No. 274]

The incident of the Bedouin has also been recorded by the following:

Important Note: This report is only shown to reveal the beautiful Aqida (belief) of so many scholars and none of them had declared it to be Shirk or Bidah.  If Salafis reject this report in spite of Imam- Nawawi (rah) calling it admired, then we have overwhelming Sahih hadiths which establish Tawassul.

The Qur’an states:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَابْتَغُوا إِلَيْهِ الْوَسِيلَةَ وَجَاهِدُوا فِي سَبِيلِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ

O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach (Wasila) unto Him, and strive with might and main in his cause: that ye may prosper. [Yusuf Ali: 5:35, Brackets mine]

This verse uses the word Waseela. Waseela is defined as Qurbah (i.e. to seek closeness to Allah) too, however in the Sahih Hadith of Bukhari the word Tawassul is proven to mean intercession. Read hadith of Umar (ra)’s intercession through al-Abbas (ra) which shall be shown later in this chapter.

Ibn Muflih al- Hanbli said in regards to 5:35:

ويجوزُ التَّوسُّلِ بصالحٍ، وقيلَ: يستحبُّ ، قالَ أحمدُ في منسكِهِ الَّذِي كتبَهُ للمروذيِّ: إنَّهُ يُتوسَّلُ بالنَّبيِّ صلَّى اللهُ عليْهِ وسلَّمَ في دعائِهِ، وجزمَ بِهِ في «المستوعبِ» وغيرِهِ، وجعلَهَا شيخُنَا كمسألةِ اليمينِ بِهِ، قالَ: والتَّوسُّلُ بالإيمانِ بِهِ، وطاعتِهِ، ومحبَّتِهِ، والصَّلاةِ، والسَّلام عليْهِ، صلَّى اللَّهُ عليْهِ وسلَّمَ، وبدعائِهِ وشفاعتِهِ، ونحوِهِ ممَّا هُوَ مِنْ فعلِهِ وأفعالِ العبادِ المأمورِ بِهَا فِي حقِّهِ مشروعٌ (ع)، وهُو مِنَ الوسيلةِ المأمورِ بهَا في قولِهِ تعالى؛ {ٱتَّقُوا ٱللَّهَ وَٱبْتَغُوۤا إِلَيْهِ ٱلْوَسِيلَةَ

Translation: And intercession through the righteous is "PERMITTED" and It is said: It is "RECOMMENDED" Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (rah) said in his Mansak which is written by al- Marwadhi: He sought intercession "THROUGH THE PROPHET PEACE BE UPON HIM" in his supplications, which is also "AFFIRMED" in <> and others. Our Shaykh agreed with this matter and said: The intercession is with belief in him [i.e. The Messenger of Allah], his obedience, and his love and "BY HIS SUPPLICATION AND INTERCESSION" and (his nahw) from what he can do and the actions of the appointed servants by which its reality is legislated [Having evidences in the sacred law] and it is from the intercession which Allah has ordained in His saying {Do your duty to Allah, "SEEK THE MEANS OF APPROACH UNTO HIM – 5:35} [Al- Furuh by Ibn Muflih al- Hanbli (2/159)]

Hadith Section:

Book 024, Number 5149: (Sahih Muslim)

…Narrated by Sayyidah Asma bint Abi Bakr (RA). Whereupon she said: Here is the cloak of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). and she brought out to me that cloak made of Persian cloth with a hem of brocade, and its sleeves bordered with brocade and said: This was Allah's Messenger's cloak with 'A'isha until she died, and when she died. I got possession of it. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to wear that, and "WE WASHED IT FOR THE SICK AND SOUGHT CURE THEREBY"

May our parents be taken a ransom for great Sahaba who even took the blessed cloak of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) as a means of cure, and we can only have pity upon those people who deny intercession through the blessed Dhaat (personality) of the Prophet (Peace be upon him).

Direct and explicit order of Prophet

حدثنا ‏ ‏أحمد بن منصور بن سيار ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏عثمان بن عمر ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏شعبة ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبي جعفر المدني ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عمارة بن خزيمة بن ثابت ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عثمان بن حنيف

أن رجلا ضرير البصر أتى النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏فقال ادع الله لي أن يعافيني فقال إن شئت أخرت لك وهو خير وإن شئت دعوت فقال ‏ ‏ادعه ‏ ‏فأمره أن يتوضأ فيحسن وضوءه ويصلي ركعتين ويدعو بهذا الدعاء اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك ‏ ‏بمحمد ‏ ‏نبي الرحمة يا ‏ ‏محمد ‏ ‏إني قد توجهت بك إلى ربي في حاجتي هذه ‏ ‏لتقضى اللهم شفعه في

The Hadith states: It was narrated from 'Uthman bin Hunaif that a blind man came to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and said: "Pray to Allah to heal me." He said: "If you wish to store your reward for the Hereafter, that is better, or if you wish, I will supplicate for you." He said: "Supplicate." So he told him to perform ablution and do it well, to pray two Rak'ah, and to say this supplication: O Allah, I ask of You and I turn my face towards You by the intercession of Muhammad the Prophet of mercy. O Muhammad, I have turned to my Lord by your intercession concerning this need of mine so that it may be met. O Allah, accept his intercession concerning me.

References:

►Ibn Majah transmitted it in his Sunan, book of Iqamat al- salat wa al- sunnat (establishing prayer and its sunnahs) [Hadith No#1385. Declared Sahih by Salafi Dar us Salam publication] 

In Sunnan Ibn Majah then it says:

قال ‏ ‏أبو إسحق ‏ ‏هذا ‏ ‏حديث صحيح

Translation: Imam Abu Ishaaq (rah) said: This hadith is "SAHIH" [ibid]

►Tirmidhi in al- Jami’ Book of da‘awat (supplication) Vol. 6, Book 46, Hadith 3578, where Imam at- Tirmidhi declared it "HASAN SAHIH GHARIB" and also declared Sahih by Dar us Salam publication.

And many others narrate it.

Look at the wording: 

. فَأَمَرَهُ أَنْ يَتَوَضَّأَ فَيُحْسِنَ وُضُوءَهُ. وَيُصَلِّيَ رَكْعَتَيْنِ. وَيَدْعُو بِهذَا الدُّعَاءِ

Translation: (The Prophet) ordered: Perform ablution and the ablution should be good, then pray 2 Rakaat and supplicate with “THIS DUA”

Explanation: This wording proves that Prophet (Peace be upon him) ordered to do ablution and pray 2 cycles of prayer. There is no condition of Prophet asking him to do this in his presence only.

Plus Albani a Salafi big authority tried to misuse the wording “وَيَدْعُو بِهذَا الدُّعَاءِ” and he said that the Tawassul was actually “DUA OF PROPHET HIMSELF NOT HIS PERSONALITY WHICH COMPANION TOOK”

This is proven as wrong by the next wording of hadith which states:

:اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْأَلُكَ، وَأَتَوَجَّهُ إِلَيْكَ بِمُحَمَّدٍ نَبِيِّ الرَّحْمَةِ. يَا مُحَمَّدُ إِنِّي قَدْ تَوَجَّهْتُ بِكَ إِلَى رَبِّي فِي حَاجَتِي هذِهِ لِتُقْضَى. اللَّهُمَّ فَشَفِّعْهُ فِيَّ

Translation: O Allah I ask of you and I turn my face towards you “BY VIRTUE OF THE INTERCESSION OF MUHAMMAD ”THE PROPHET OF MERCY” O MUHAMMAD I HAVE TURNED TO MY LORD BY VIRTUE OF YOUR INTERCESSION CONSERNING THIS NEED OF MINE, so it may be met, O Allah accept his intercession concerning me [Translation of Salafi published Sunnan Ibn Majah by Dar us- Salam. Hard copy, Volume # 2, Page # 329, 330]

Read the highlighted parts carefully, now this directly proves Albani to be wrong because the Prophet (Peace be upon him) “DID NOT MAKE THE DUA HIMSELF” rather he told the Blind Sahabi to make it, the wording of the hadith and dua are clear, i.e. the Blind Sahabi is “ORDERED” to ask through intercession of the Prophet not that the Prophet asked through his own intercession by calling himself a “PROPHET OF MERCY” (which would be illogical)

The Salafis are asked to prove that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) is making dua himself by saying “YA MUHAMMAD I TURN TO LORD THROUGH YOUR INTERCESSION.” How on earth could this be possible? How could Prophet turn into a second person himself and ask the Lord by saying “YA MUHAMMAD I TURN TO LORD THROUGH YOU (يَا مُحَمَّدُ إِنِّي قَدْ تَوَجَّهْتُ بِكَ إِلَى رَبِّي)”

The wording “نَبِيِّ الرَّحْمَةِ” i.e. Prophet of Mercy, proves intercession through the personality of the Prophet (Peace be upon him). The attribute of Prophet is that he is Rauf ur Raheem (kind and merciful) and Rehmat al Lil Aalameen (Mercy to the worlds) as mentioned in the Qur’an is being used. Had this not been through his personality, then hadith would have categorically said “BI DUA AN- NABI (WITH THE DUA OF PROPHET) RATHER THAN NABI AR- RAHMAH”

Now let us turn towards hadith scholars and their chapter titles in regards to this hadith. Imam Ibn Majah (rah) allocated the chapter as:

Translation: What was narrated concerning “PRAYER AT TIMES OF NEED” [Sunnan Ibn Majah, English translation by Dar us Salaam. Hard copy, Volume # 2, Page # 328]

This chapter title is Mutlaq (i.e. for all times), the Salafis are asked to prove from hadith masters that when they narrated the hadith of Uthman bin Hunayf (ra) in regards to prayer in need then they only restricted it during physical life of the Prophet.

If Salafis say yes, this chapter is right, then do they believe that hadith scholars asked us for Bidah in their chapter titles? Did they not know which hadiths to bring under chapter titles?

If Salafis say that hadith scholars can err in chapter titles, then remember many of them like al-Mundhiri (rah) in his Targheeb wa Tarheeb, Imam an- Nawawi (rah) in his Kitaab ul Adhkaar also narrated it with same chapter title.  Imam an- Nawawi (rah)’s Adhkaar not only proves intercession by author's direct testimony, but is rather a book of Adhkaar (remembrance of Allah) which is written for Muslims in all times, hence later hadith scholars repeating same chapter title proves that they did not err in naming this chapter title.

Finally, let us come towards a “SAHIH HADITH” which proves directly from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that he told the companions and through them all Muslims to do it whenever in need.

Here is the hadith first:

حدثنا مسلم بن إبراهيم، حدثنا حماد بن سلمة، نا أبوجعفر الخطمي، عن عمارة بن خزيمة، عن عثمان بن حنيف، أن رجلاً أعمى أتى النبي فقال: إني أصبت في بصري، فادع الله لي. قال: "اذهب فتوضأ، وصل ركعتين ثم قل: اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبيي محمد نبي الرحمة، يا محمد إني أستشفع بك على ربي في رد بصري، اللهم فشفعني في نفسي، وشفع نبيي في رد بصري، وإن كانت حاجة فافعل مثل ذلك". .

Translation: it is narrated from Muslim bin Ibrahim, who said it is narrated from Hammad bin Salama from Abi Jafar al- Khatami from Amara bin Khuzayma from Uthman bin Hunaif (ra): A blind man came to the Prophet (Allah bless him & give him peace) and said: I am afflicted in my eyesight, “Kindly pray to Allah for me". The Prophet (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Go perform ablution (Wudu), perform two rak'at Salat and then say: “O Allah! I ask you and turn to you through the intercession of my Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad! I seek intercession (أستشفع) through you to my lord for the return of my eyesight, that it may be fulfilled. O Allah, accept my intercession for myself and accept the intercession of my Prophet for the restoration of my sight. (The Prophet said): “WHENEVER YOU HAVE ANY NEED DO THE SAME” [Tarikh Ibn Abi Khaythma, Volume No.3]

All the men of this hadith are “THIQAAT” now again Albani and Ibn Taymiyyah wrongly said that Hammad bin Salama’s addition is rejected. Such a statement is proof of Ibn Taymiyyah and Albani’s ignorance in principles of hadith. The “ZIYADAH (ADDITION)” of “THIQA MA’MOON (UTTERLY RELIABLE)” narrator is accepted.

Imam Hammad bin Salamah (rah) is not only Thiqa but is rather “THIQA MA’MOON” also “IMAM UL HADITH (LEADER IN HADITH NARRATION)” and has many more praises to the extent that some hadith scholars considered him greater than Sufyan ath-Thawri in knowledge [Refer to Tahdhib ul Kamaal and Tahdhib ut Tahdheeb under the biography of Hammad bin Salamah bin Dinaar al Basri, also refer to Kitab ul Thiqaat of Ibn Hibban]

Imam Ibn Hibban (rah) said about Hammad bin Salamah “IN REGARDS TO HIS ADDITIONS IN HADITH”

تفرد بها حماد ابن سلمة وهو ثقة مأمون وزيادة الألفاظ عندنا مقبولة عن الثقات إذ جائز أن يحضر جماعة شيخا في سماع شيء ثم يخفى على أحدهم بعض الشيء ويحفظه من هو مثله أو دونه

Translation: Hammad bin Salamah is “ALONE” in narrating this and he is “THIQA MA’MOON (HIGHEST GRADE OF AUTHENTICITY)” and according to us (hadith scholars) “ADDITION IN WORDS” of (such narrators) is “ACCEPTED” because it is “JAIZ (PERMISSIBLE/POSSBILE)” that one group is present with the teacher and then “SOMETHING REMAINS HIDDEN FROM HIM AND THEN ANOTHER NARRATOR OF THEIR STANDARD OR “EVEN LOWER STANDARD” HAS MEMORIZED IT”  [Kitab ul Thiqaat, Volume # 8, Page # 1]

What a beautiful explanation by Imam Ibn Hibban (rah), now remember additions of even reliable narrator is accepted let alone “UTTERLY RELIABLE ONE”

If Salafis say that his hadith becomes Shadh (odd), then they have to prove from the sayings of "MUTUALLY AGREED UPON" scholars directly who called this addition as Shadh. Now the only way we could be refuted is by quoting "MUTUALLY AGREED UPON" scholars who passed ruling on “THIS” specific hadith to be “SHADH”

Things do not just stop here, Albani contradicted himself and that too regarding same Hammad bin Salamah (rah). Albani without realizing his contradictions said about same Hammad bin Salamah in his Silsilaat al Ahadith as Sahiha:

و خالف الجماعة حماد بن سلمة فقال :

" عن هشام بن عروة عن أبي سلمة عنها مختصرا بلفظ :

" قالت : سابقت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فسبقته " .

أخرجه أحمد ( 6 / 261 ) و حماد ثقة حافظ فيحتمل أن يكون قد حفظ ما لم يحفظ

Translation: Hammad bin Salamah (rah) “WENT AGAINST” a group and said: Hishaam bin Urwa narrated from Abi Salamah with abridged wording that (Aisha RA) said: I got ahead of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in the race.

This is narrated by Ahmed (6/261) and “HAMMAD IS RELIED UPON MEMORIZER” and I reckon “THAT HE REMEMBERED WHAT THEY (GROUP) DID NOT REMEMBER” [Silsilat al Ahadith as- Sahiha (1/204)]

Allah is the best of planners and he made Albani prove the addition of Hammad bin Salamah to be authentic.

Imam al Bayhaqi said:

الزيادةُ من الثِّقَةِ

مقبولةٌ

Translation: The Ziyadah (addition) of relied upon narrator is accepted [Sunnan Bayhaqi al Kubra (10/297)]

Imam al- Hakim (rah) said:

الزيادة من الثقة مقبولة

Translation: The Ziyadah (addition) of relied upon narrator is “ACCEPTED” [Mustadrak al Hakim, Hadith # 2111]

Imam al- Hakim (rah) also beautifully said in his Muqadma of Mustadrak:

عند كافة فقهاء أهل الإسلام أن الزيادة في الأسانيد والمتون من الثقات مقبولة

Translation: "Near all the fuqaha (jurisprudents) of Islam the additions in chains and texts from relied upon narrators are accepted [Muqadma al Mustadrak, (1/42)]

Imam an- Nawawi (rah) said:

واحتج الجمهور بأن الزيادة من الثقة مقبولة 

Translation: The Majority takes proof of Ziyada (addition) from Thiqa to be “ACCEPTED” [Sharh Sahih Muslim (4/68)]

Imam al- Bukhari (rah) says in his booklet of Raf ul Yaddain (dubious book due to Mujhool narrator in it, whereas it is Hujjah upon Salafis):

لأن هذه زيادة في الفعل والزيادة مقبولة إذا ثبت

Translation: This is the “ADDITION” in practice and addition of “THABAT IS ACCEPTED” [Juzz Raful Yaddain under Hadith # 80]

Imam Bukhari (rah) regarding the addition of doing Raful Yaddain in prostrations says:

أنه لاختلاف في ذلك إنما زاد بعضهم على بعض والزيادة مقبولة من أهل العلم

Translation: 'There is no difference in that some narration increase upon others and the Ziyadah (additional wording) are accepted from the people of knowledge'. [Juzz Raful Yaddain, under Hadith # 98]

Imam al- Zarqani (rah) said:

زيادة من ثقة حافظ غير منافية فيجب قبولها

Translation: The Ziyadah (addition) from relied upon memorizer which does not have an “OPPOSING (STATEMENT)” then it is “NECESSARY TO ACCEPT IT” [Sharh of Muwatta Imam Malik (1/160)]

This statement is very important to understand and we have used this for a strong reason, i.e. nobody has “OPPOSED” Hammad bin Salamah in this regard, remember opposition means that some other Muhadith should narrate contrary wording to the hadith like for example the Prophet (Peace be upon him) instead of saying: “WHENEVER YOU HAVE ANY NEED DO THE SAME” would have said: “DO NOT DO THIS IN NEED BUT DO IT ONLY IN MY PRESENCE”

Salafis are asked to show a single hadith from Uthman bin Hunayf which says opposite to Ziyadah of Hammad bin Salamah, hence the Ziyada of Hammad is accepted without doubt and cannot be called “SHADH” according to Usool ul Hadith.

Imam al- Hakim (rah) also said:

والتفرد من الثقات مقبول 

Translation: The Tafarud (being alone in narrating) of a “RELIED UPON NARRATOR IS ACCEPTED” [Mustadrak ala Sahihayn (1/91)]

So even Hammad being lone in narration has to be accepted as he is “THIQA MA’MOON, HAFIDH, THIQA, THABAT, and many other praises he has.

Such a great memorizer of hadith could not have attributed a lie to the Prophet (Peace be upon him); had addition of such a big authority been his personal insertion, he would be counted as a Liar upon the Prophet and anyone who intentionally lies upon Prophet shall be in hell fire (this cannot be even assumed for Hammad)

Imam al Bukhari (rah) himself narrates about Hamad bin Salamah:

سمعت عبد الرحمن بن مهدي يقول: لم أر أحداً مثل حماد بن سلمة ومالك بن أنس

Translation: Abdur Rahman bin Mahdi was heard saying: “I HAVE NOT SEEN ANYONE” like Hammad bin Salamah (rah) and Malik bin Anas (rah) [Tarikh ul Kabeer (3/22)]

The Hadith specialists had put Hammad bin Salamah on par with Imam Malik (rah).

Assuming that the addition of Hammad is not accepted, still it will stand as a valid viewpoint of Hammad and he cannot be accused of treachery or attributing lies to Prophet (Peace be upon him). This proves that classical hadith scholars accepted Tawassul and considered the hadith to be “MUTLAQ” and not time bound.

As Salafis always claim that they follow the Fahm (understanding) of Salaf in regards to hadith, then let us understand that Dua of Waseela was practiced by Salaf as Saliheen (righteous predecessors) and even Ibn Taymiyyah proved it. He said:

ورُوي في ذلك أثر عن بعض السلف، مثل ما رواه ابن أبي الدنيا في كتاب مجابي الدعاء، قال: حدثنا أبوهاشم، سمعت كثير ابن محمد ابن كثير بن رفاعة يقول: جاء رجل إلى عبد الملك بن سعيد ابن أبجر، فجس بطنه فقال: بك داء لا يبرأ. قال: ماهو؟ قال: الدُّبَيْلة. قال: فتحول الرجل فقال: الله الله، الله ربي، لا أشرك به شيئاً، اللهم إني أتوجه إليك بنبيك محمد نبي الرحمة  تسليماً، يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربك وربي يرحمني مما بي. قال فجس بطنه فقال: قد برئت ما بك علة.

قلت: فهذا الدعاء ونحوه قد روي أنه دعا به السلف، ونقل عن أحمد بن حنبل في منسك المروذي التوسل بالنبي في الدعاء، ونهى 

Translation: This is narrated in Athar of some Salaf (early Muslims), Ibn Abi Duniya narrated it in his Kitaab Majabi’i ad- Dua from Abu Hashim who heard from Kathir ibn Muhammad ibn Kathir bin Rafa’ who said: A person came to Abdul Mulk bin Sa’eed, he (Abdul Mulk) pressed his tummy and said, you have an incurable disease called “Dabila” which occurs in the stomach and it kills many patients, that man turned around and exclaimed: Allah, Allah, Allah, My Lord you have no partners, I ask you and turn to you through the Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad! I turn through you to my lord. O Lord cure me, after this (Abdul Mulk) pressed his tummy and said, you are cured.

(Ibn Taymiyyah) said: This dua and similar to it have been narrated by Salaf. It is known from Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (rah) as mentioned in Manasik of Al- Marwadi that one should ask Allah through the intermediary of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) [Qaida al Jaleela, Fit Tawassul wal- Wasila, Page No. 91 #524] 

Also another big authority of Salafis i.e. Qadhi Shawkani’s Istadlal over ongoing Tawassul through Prophet shall be mentioned towards end of this chapter.

Hadith # 3

Salafis ask for proof whether Sahaba asked Allah through Waseela of Prophet after his Zahiri passing away. Ahlus Sunnah use this following authentic Mawquf hadith in this regard which Salafis try to call weak with hook and crook methods. It states:

حدثنا طاهر بن عيسى بن قيرس المصري التميمي حدثنا أصبغ بن الفرج حدثنا عبد الله بن وهب عن شبيب بن سعيد المكي عن روح بن القاسم عن أبي جعفر الخطمي المدني عن أبي أمامة بن سهل بن حنيف عن عمه عثمان بن حنيف أن رجلا كان يختلف إلى عثمان بن عفان رضى الله تعالى عنه في حاجة له فكان عثمان لا يلتفت إليه ولا ينظر في حاجته فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فشكا ذلك إليه فقال له عثمان بن حنيف ائت الميضأة فتوضأ ثم ائت المسجد فصلي فيه ركعتين ثم قل اللهم إني أسألك وأتوجه إليك بنبينا محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم نبي الرحمة يا محمد إني أتوجه بك إلى ربك ربي جل وعز فيقضي لي حاجتي وتذكر حاجتك ورح إلي حتى أروح معك فانطلق الرجل فصنع ما قال له عثمان ثم أتى باب عثمان فجاء البواب حتى أخذ بيده فأدخله عثمان بن عفان فأجلسه معه على الطنفسة وقال حاجتك فذكر حاجته فقضاها له ثم قال له ما ذكرت حاجتك حتى كانت هذه الساعة وقال ما كانت لك من حاجة فأتنا ثم ان الرجل خرج من عنده فلقي عثمان بن حنيف فقال له جزاك الله خيرا ما كان ينظر في حاجتي ولا يلتفت إلي حتى كلمته في فقال عثمان بن حنيف والله ما كلمته ولكن شهدت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وأتاه ضرير فشكا عليه ذهاب بصره فقال له النبي صلى الله عيه وآله وسلم أفتصبر فقال يا رسول الله إنه ليس لي قائد وقد شق علي فقال له النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إيت الميضأة فتوضأ ثم صل ركعتين ثم ادع بهذه الدعوات قال عثمان فوالله ما تفرقنا وطال بنا الحديث حتى دخل علينا الرجل كأنه لم يكن به ضرر قط لم يروه عن روح بن القاسم إلا شبيب بن سعيد أبو سعيد المكي وهو ثقة

It is narrated by same Uthman bin Hunaif (ra) that a person repeatedly visited Uthman bin Affan (ra) concerning something he needed but Uthman paid no attention to him. The man went to Uthman bin Hunaif (ra) and complained to him about the matter- [Note: this was after the death of the Prophet and after the caliphates of Abu Bakr and Umar] so Uthman bin Hunaif said : “Go to the place of Wudu, then come to the Masjid, perform two Rak'ats and then say : “O Allah!, I ask you and turn to you through our Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy. O Muhammad! I turn through you to my lord, that He fulfil my need” and mention your need. Then come so that I can go with you [to the caliph Uthman] So the man left and did as he had been told, then went to the door of Uthman ibn Affan (Allah be pleased with him), and the doorman came, took him by the hand, brought him to Uthman ibn Affan, and seated him next to him on a cushion. 'Uthman asked, "What do you need?" and the man mentioned what he wanted, and Uthman accomplished it for him ...(till the end of hadith)

Imam at- Tabrani after narrating it said:

Translation: This is not narrated from Ruh bin Qasim except from Shabeeb bin Sa’eed Abu Sa’eed al- Makki and “HE IS THIQA” [Mu’jam as- Sagheer (1/306, 307, Hadith # 508]

Remember when a Muhadith calls a specific narrator out of all narrators  as “THIQA” then he is authenticating the whole hadith. Salafis give pseudo Juroohat on this hadith such as: Only son of Shabeeb bin Sa’eed should narrate from him, narrations from Ibn Wahb are Munkar, or that it should only come via route of Yunus. All these Juroohat are Mubham, but still we will prove the chain authentic without Ibn Wahb and also his son Ahmad bin Shabeeb narrating from his father.

Imam al- Bayhaqi (rah) narrates it with another authentic chain without Ibn Wahb. The chain is:

أخبرنا أبو علي الحسن بن أحمد بن إبراهيم بن شاذان، أنبأنا عبد الله بن جعفر بن درستويه، حدثنا يعقوب بن سفيان، حدثنا أحمد بن شبيب بن سعيد، فذكره بطوله

[Dalayl un Nubuwah (6/168), Published by Dar ul Kutb al ILmiyyah]

This chain does not include Ibn Wahb and is absolutely authentic. Imam al- Faswi (rah) has narrated the complete chain with above mentioned Mawquf hadith in his Makhtuta Mashaykha Abi Yusif bin Sufyan al- Faswi, Hadith # 113. The chain is: Abdullah bin Jafar narrates from Ya’qub, he narrates from Ahmad bin Shabeeb bin Sa’eed, he narrates from his Father (Shabeeb bin Sa’eed), he narrates from Ruh bin Qasim, he narrates from Abi Jafar al Madni, he narrates from Abi Amama bin Sahl bin Hunaif, and he narrates from Uthman bin Hunaif … till the end of Hadith.

This chain is absolutely authentic and all Rijaal are “THIQAAT.” Hence Salafis cannot find the defects that hadith has to be from son of Shabeeb from his father without Ibn Wahb.

Let us look at detailed authentication of Shabeeb bin Sa’eed whom Salafis accuse.

شَبِـيْبُ بنُ سَعِيْد التّمِيْمِي الحَبَطِي ، أبُو سَعِيْدٍ البَصْرِي ، وَالِدُ أحْمَد بن شَبِـيْب بن سَعِيد .

روى عنأبان بن تَغْلِب، وأبان بن أبـي عَيّاش، ورَوْح بن القاسم، وشُعبة بن الحَجّاج، ومحمد بن عَمْرو بن عَلَقَمة بن وَقّاص، ويحيـى بن أبـي أُنَيْسة، ويونُس بن يزيد الأيْليّ 

روى عنه ابنُه أحمد بن شَبـيب بن سعيد (خ خد س)، وزَيْد بن بهشر الحَضْرميّ، وعبد الله بن وَهْب، ويحيـى بن أيوب المِصْريّ .

قال عَليّ بن المديني : ثقة ، كانَ من أصحاب يونُس بن يزيد، كان يختلفُ في تجارة إلى مِصرَ، وكتابُهُ كتابٌ صحيحٌ وقد كَتَبْتُها عن ابنه أحمد.

وقال أبو زُرْعَة : لابأسَ به .

وقال أبو حاتم : كان عنده كُتُب يونُس بن يزيد، وهو صالح الحديث لا بأس به .

وقال النّسائي : ليسَ به بأس .

وقال أبو أحمد بن عَدِي : ولشبـيب نسخة الزّهريّ عنده عن يونُس، عن الزّهريّ أحاديث مُستقيمة، وحَدّث عنه ابنُ وَهْب بأحاديث مناكير.

وذكره ابنُ حِبّان في كتاب «الثّقات».

روى له البخاريّ، وأبو داود في «الناسخ والمنسوخ»، و النّسائي .

Translation: Shabeeb bin Sa’eed at- Tameemi al- Habati Abu Sa’eed al- Basri the father of Ahmed bin Shabeeb:

He narrated from: Abaan bin Taghlab, Abaan bin Abi Ayaash, “RUH BIN QASIM” Shu’ba bin Hajjaj, Muhammad bin Umar bin Alqama bin Waqas, Yahya bin Abi Anbasa and Yunus bin Yazid. From him narrated: His son Ahmed bin Shabeeb bin Sa’eed, Zayd bin Bashr al- Hadhrami, “ABDULLAH BIN WAHB” Yahya bin Ayoob al- Misri

Ali bin Mudayni said: “HE IS THIQA” and he is from the companions of Yunus bin Yazid, he went on trip for trade to Egypt and his book is sahih, and from him wrote his son Ahmed. [Unconditional Ta'deel]

[Note: Albani misused rather forged this quote by deleting the word “THIQA” plus Albani made an assumption that Shabeeb's hadith should only be from the book of Yunus, although there is no such stipulation here]

Abu Zura’ said: There is “NO HARM IN HIM” [Unconditional Ta'deel]

Abu Hatim said: He had book of Yunus bin Yazid and he (Shabeeb) is “UPRIGHT IN HADITH AND THERE IS NO HARM IN HIM” [Note: This is again an uncondtional Ta'deel and there is no Stipulation even here that it is a must for him to narrate from the book of Yunus. Albani and Salafis make mistake]

Imam Nasai’i said: There is “NO HARM IN HIM” [Unconditional- Ta'deel]

Imam Abu Ahmed bin Adi said: Shabeeb had the Nuskha of Zuhri which had (narrations) from Yunus, the ahadith from him through Zuhri are fine and Ibn Wahb narrated (some) Manakeer reports from him. 

[Note: This is the best Jarh which Salafis quote, we have already proven different turaq of the hadith without Ibn Wahb, plus Ibn Adi is not talking about all the hadiths from Ibn Wahb but only few out of which he himself presents 2, although after research even those 2 hadiths are proven Sahih, so Ibn Adi’s Jarh is Jarh Mubham (vague)]

Ibn Hibban mentioned him in “THIQAAT” [Unconditional Ta'deel]

Bukhari, Abu Dawud in "Nasikh wal Mansookh" and Nasai narrated from him [Tahdheeb ul Kamaal (8/270, 271)]

In front of these detailed authentications the Mubham Jarh will not count. This is why a great Muhadith Imam Ibn Yusuf al- Salhi (rah) said:

الباب الخامس في ذكر من توسل به - صلى الله عليه وسلم - بعد موته

روى الطبراني والبيهقي - بإسناد متصل ورجاله ثقات - عن عثمان بن حنيف أن رجلا كان يختلف إلى عثمان بن عفان في حاجة

Translation: Chapter 5: Regarding Tawassul through the Prophet (Peace be upon him) "AFTER HIS DEATH". It is narrated by At- Tabrani and al- Bayhaqi "WITH CONTINEOUS CHAIN (بإسناد متصل) HAVING THIQA NARRATORS" the hadith of Uthman bin Hunaif (ra) that a man came to Uthman bin Affan (ra) regarding his Hajah .. until the end of same hadith [Muhammad bin Yusuf al- Salihi in Subl ul Huda War Rashaad, Volume No.12, Page No. 407]

Plus this hadith is Sahih even according to criteria of Imam al- Bayhaqi as he mentioned in the Muqadma of Dalail al- Nubuwah:

ويعلم أن كل حديث أوردته فيه قد أردفته بما يشير إلى صحته أو تركته مبهماً وهو مقبول في مثل ما أخرجته وما عسى أوردته بإسناد فيه ضعف أشرت إلى ضعفه وجعلت الاعتماد على غيره

Translation: You should know that “EVERY HADITH” which I have narrated in (Dalail an Nabuwah) then before It I have mentioned a hadith which points towards it’s “AUTHENTICITY”, and when I have left any hadith as “MUBHAM (VAGUE) THEN IT IS MAQBOOL (ACCEPTED) TOO JUST LIKE THE ONE WHICH I HAVE NARRATED” and I have not narrated a report with chain which has waekness (but) I have also pointed its weakness and trusted some report other than that. [Dalail an Nabuwah (1/46)]

Then Imam al- Bayhaqi (rah) said: 

وعادتي في كتبي المصنفة في الأصول والفروع الاقتصار من الأخبار على ما يصح منها دون ما لا يصح أو التمييز بين ما يصح منها ومالا يصح 

...

Translation: My procedure is that I rely only on “SAHIH REPORTS” from all the books on Usool and Furoh, and I have “REJECTED THOSE WHICH ARE NOT SAHIH” and my way is to “Distinguish sahih from non-Sahih” [Dalail al Nabuwah (1/47)]

Even Imam al- Dhahabi (rah) said about Dalayl un Nubuwah:

قال فيه الحافظ الذ هبي: عليك به فإنه كله هدى ونور

Translation: In this regard (i.e. Regarding Dalail an Nabuwah of Imam al- Bayhaqi) Hafidh al- Dhahabi (rah) said: Whatever is in it is "TOTAL GUIDANCE AND NUR" [Sharh ala Muwahib (1/120)]

Please note that Imam al- Bayhaqi (rah) has shown no Jarh on the hadith of Man in need, hence he considered it authentic.

Imam al- Hakim (rah) also gave hukm on both Marfu and Mawquf hadiths in his Mustadrak when he said:

شبيب بن سعيد الحبطي عن روح بن القاسم زيادات في المتن والإسناد والقول فيه قول شبيب فإنه ثقة مأمون

Translation: Shabib ibn Sa‘id al- Habati narrated by way of Ruh ibn al- Qasim with some additions to the text (matn) and the chain (isnad). The decision in this matter is that of Shabib, he is utterly reliable (thiqah Ma’mun).[Mustadrak: Hadith #1929]

We have shown authentication from Muhaditheen that hadith is Sahih and also shown authentic chains from son of Shabeeb narrating from him and also without Ibn Wahb Hence there is no way this Mawquf hadith could be weak. Salafis on the other hand have to show from three mutually agreed upon classical scholars who declared this hadith as weak. People like Albani will not be considered as proof.

Hadith # 4

Fourth hadith is a Sahih report of Malik al- Dar (RA) which states:

حدّثنا أبو معٰوية عن الأعمش عن أبي صالح عن مٰلك 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، فأُتِيَ 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 إلاّ ما عجزت عنه

قال حافظ ابن كثير : وهذا اسناد صحيح

Malik ad- Dar i.e. treasurer of Umar (RA) relates: The people were gripped by famine during the tenure of Umar (Ibn -ul- Khattab RA). Then a man walked up to the grave of the Prophet and said: O Messenger of Allah! Ask for rain from Allah for your Ummah who is in dire straits. Then he saw the Prophet (SAW) in a dream. The Prophet (SAW) said to him, Go over to Umar, give him my regards and tell him that the rain will come to you. And tell Umar that he should be on his toes, he should be on his toes (he should remain alert). He went over to see Umar and passed on to him the tidings. On hearing this, Umar broke into a spurt of crying. He said, O Allah, I exert myself to the fullest until I am completely exhausted.

References:

Al- Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah Volume 011, Page No. 118, Hadith Number 32538

Its chain is declared Sahih by:

Imam Ibn Kathir in Al Bidayah Wan Nihayah Volume No. 5, Page No. 167

Imam Ibn Hajr al- Asqalani (rah) in Fath ul Bari : Volume No.2, Page No. 495

Imam Qastallani in al- Mawahib -ul- laduniyyah (4:276)

And others.

Nasir ud din Albani the leading scholar according to Salafis has in haste declared Malik al-Dar (RA) to be unknown. We will come to other points later whether this hadith is weak due to Tadlees issue or not.

Nasir al- Albani said:

الأول: عدم التسليم بصحة هذه القصة، لأن مالك الدار غير معروف العدالة والضبط، وهذان شرطان أساسيان في كل سند صحيح كما تقرر في علم المصطلح، وقد أورده

ابن أبي حاتم في "الجرح والتعديل" (4/213) ولم يذكر راوياً عنه غير أبي صالح هذا، ففيه إشعار بأنه مجهول

Translation: "Firstly: We do not accept that this story is authentic since the reliability and precision of Malik ad- Dar is not known, and these are two principle conditions necessary for the authenticity of any narration, as is affirmed in the science of hadith. Ibn Abi Hatim mentions him in al- Jarh wa- Ta'deel (4/1/213) and does not mention anyone who narrates from him except Abu Salih. So this indicates that he is unknown [At- Tawassul, Arabic Page # 69. Published by Maktab al Islami]

Our Answer: This is ignorance shown by Albani, and the quote of Ibn Abi Hatim (rah) is misused by him too.

Before citing overwhelming hadith scholars such as Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) and many others in regards to Malik al- Dar (RA), we would like to refute Albani from his own wording where he accepted that Malik al Dar was known. He, while quoting the hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, tacitly accepts:

وروى ابن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الدار – وكان خازن عمر

Translation: It is narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah “WITH SAHIH CHAIN” from the narrations of Abi Salih as- Samaan from Malik al- Dar “WHO IS TREASURER OF UMAR” [ibid]

Khazin means treasurer; now such a great person who was deputed as treasurer by Sayyiduna Umar (RA) is being called as Mujhool (unknown) by Albani. Plus Ibn Abi Shaybah (rah) himself proved Malik al Dar (rah) to be well known by calling him “خازن عمر” so this is proof # 1 and Albani stands refuted from the saying he himself quoted.

Here is the second proof that Albani himself declared a hadith as Hasan, having Malik al Dar (ra) in it.

As Allah is indeed the best of Planners, in “SAHIH TARGHEEB WA TARHEEB” by Albani, he says, about narration from Malik al- Dar (Ra)

926(13) (حسن موقوف) وعن مالك الدار

أن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه...

Albani himself declared a hadith via the route of “MALIK AL DAR AS HASAN MAWQOOF (GOOD BUT STOPPED AT COMPANION)” [Sahih Targheeb wa Tarheeb by Albani # 926, Published by Maktaba al Ma’rif, Riyaadh, Saudi Arabia]

Zubayr Ali Zai al- Bakistani said:

When Tawtheeq (reliability) is proven, then sayings regarding someone being Mujhool (unknown), Mastoor etc… become “MURDOOD (NULL AND VOID)” How many narrators are there who are called Mujhool by Abi Hatim and others, whereas other Hadith specialists have proven them Thiqa. Therefore we will follow the Tawtheeq of those scholars, look at Quwaid fi Uloom al- Hadith, Page # 267 [Nur al Aynain by Zubair Ali Zai, Page No.197]

Albani quoted Imam al- Mundhri (rah) saying:

رواه الطبراني في الكبير، ورواته إلى مالك الدار ثقات مشهورون، ومالك الدار لا أعرفه

Translation: (This hadith) is narrated by at- Tabrani in his al-Kabeer and the narrators up to Malik al- Dar are all “RELIABLE AND FAMOUS” whereas I do not know (لا أعرفه) of Malik al- Dar [at- Tawassul of Albani, Page # 69]

Again, this is ignorance on the part of Albani. Please note that the wording used by Imam al- Mundhiri (rah) is “لا أعرفه” i.e. I do not know him. This wording does not mean he is unknown to others. If some hadith scholar does not know any narrator then the narrator does not become unknown automatically, even a beginner studying science of hadith knows that hadith scholars did not have “COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF ALL NARRATORS” so either Albani and Salafis want to call Imam al- Mundhiri (rah) as one who has complete and comprehensive knowledge or they have to accept that Albani was absolutely wrong.

Now here are proofs from great hadith specialists and scholars that Malik al- Dar (RA) was indeed well known.

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

Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said: "Malik bin Iyaadh the freedman of Umar, he is the one called Malik al Dar, He has found the era of Nubuwah (له إدراك) and heard narrations from Abu Bakr, he narrated from both the Shaykhain (i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar) also from Muadh, Abu Ubaida, and from him have narrated Abu Salih as Saman, and his own 2 sons who were Awn and Abdullah. His (narrations) are mentioned in Tarikh of Bukhari with the route of Abi Salih al Dakwan from Malik al Dar.  [Al- Asqalani in Al- Isabah fi Tamyiz as- Sahaba Volume No. 6, Page No. 273, #8362]

Now, whether he is “SAHABI OR GREAT SUCCESSOR” is disputed and we shall shed more light upon this. According to author’s viewpoint he found the era of Nubuwah but accepted Islam later and thus became such a great Tabi'i that Sayyiduna Umar (RA) appointed him as his treasurer.  This is by itself great Ta'deel on the narrator.

Even if he was not Sahabi, although Masbat (something being established) supersedes Nafi (something being negated) then at least his meeting with Abu Bakr (RA), Umar (RA) and other Sahaba is proven.

Imam Ibn Sa’d (of the Salaf as Saliheen) said:

مالك الدار مولى عمر بن الخطاب وقد انتموا إلى جبلان من حمير، وروى مالك الدار عن أبي بكر الصديق وعمر،رحمهما اللـه روى عنه أبو صالح السمان ، وكان معروفا 

Translation: Malik al Dar (ra) was the freed slave of Umar bin Khattab (ra)…he reported traditions from Abu Bakr as- Siddiq and ‘Umar, and from him narrated Abu Salih as- Samaan. He was “WELL KNOWN (معروفا) [Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, Volume No. 5, Page No. 12 # 1423]

al- Dhahabi mentions him in names of Sahaba:

مالك بن عياض مولى عمر روى عن أبي بكر الصديق و عنه أبو صالح السمان

Translation: Malik bin Iyaadh, the Freedman of Umar, he narrated from Abu Bakr (ra) and from him, narrated Abu Salih as Samaan (rah) [al- Dhahabi in Tajrid Asma al Sahaba, Volume No. 2, Page No. 51]

Imam Taqi -ud- din Ibn Fahd al Makki [Student of Imam Ibn Hajr] also mentions him among Sahaba and said:

مالك بن عياض مولى عمر روى عن أبي بكر الصديق و عنه أبو صالح السمان

Translation: Malik bin Iyaadh, the Freedman of Umar, he narrated from Abu Bakr (ra) and from him narrated Abu Salih as Samaan (rah) [Mukhtasar Asma al Sahaba, Page No. 85, Al Azhar University Manuscript]

 Proof # 5

Imam Ibn Hibban also mentioned him in his Kitab ul Thiqaat without making any criticism on him which means he considered him reliable.

He said: Malik bin ‘Iyad ad- Dar He has taken traditions from Umar al- Farooq, and Abu Salih al- Saman, and He was a freed slave of Umar bin al- Khattab. [Kitab uth- Thiqat Volume 5, Page No. 384]

Hafidh al- Khalili (rah) said:

مالك الدار مولى عمر بن الخطاب الرعاء عنه : تابعي , قديم , متفق عليه , أثنى عليه التابعون , وليس بكثير الرواية , روى عن أبي بكر الصديق , وعمر

Translation: Malik al- Dar the Freedman of Umar Bin Khattab (RA):  He is a Qadeem Tab’i muttafaq `alayh athna `alayhi al- tabi`un (meaning, He is agreed upon as trustworthy and the Successors have approved highly of him). He did not narrate many hadiths, he narrated from Abu Bakr (RA) and Umar (RA)…(Then al-Khalili (rah) narrates the hadith of Malik Dar’s tawassul too) [From al- Irshad fi Ma'rifa Ulama al- Hadith of Hafiz al- Khalili (1/313, 314)]

Now when Malik al- Dar (RA) is proven to be “Ma’roof (well known), Agreed upon, Praised by successors, is a treasure of Umar (RA) then let us come towards scholars who authenticated this chain and thus also Matn (as no hukm from classical scholars can be shown by Salafis where Hadith specialists called the Athar itself as weak)

Hafidh Ibn Kathir (rah) after narrating the report of Malik al Dar’s Tawassul said:

وهذا إسناد صحيح

Translation: This is a “SAHIH CHAIN” [Al Bidayah wan Nihayah (7/106)]

Note: This is an authentication of the whole chain so the claim of Salafis that chain is not Mutaassil (connected) or some narrator was unknown is proven Batil (false).

Let us prove Salafis wrong from yet another authentication given by Ibn Kathir (rah):

Ibn Kathir in his Jami al- Masanid (1/223) - Musnad al- Farooq - declared the: "Chain as Jayyid Qawi: ITS CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION IS GOOD AND STRONG"

Now please note here that he is calling chain as good and strong, hence there was no doubt in mind of Ibn Kathir that the hadith was absolutely Sahih nor was there any defect in the chain as Salafis wrongly claim today.

The Salafis use a trick that calling chain as correct is not proof of Matn (content) to be correct. Remember, O Salafis, this Usool is not “MUTLAQQAN (COMPLETELY)” correct, if you claim it be absolutely correct, then reject all hadiths which just have a grading of “Isnaduhu Sahih” upon them, indeed you would not do that, remember you have to show direct criticism from hadith specialists that the content of this hadith is not Sahih.

We ask the Salafis to prove which classical and unanimously accepted Muhadith has called the content of this hadith to be weak.

Hafidh Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rah) said:

وروى ابن أبي شيبة بإسناد صحيح من رواية أبي صالح السمان عن مالك الداري - وكان خازن عم

Translation: Ibn Abi Shaybah (rah) narrated it with “SAHIH CHAIN” from Abi Salih as- Samaan from Malik al- Dar the treasurer of Umar [Fath ul Bari, Sharh Sahih ul Bukhari (2/495)]

Ibn Hajr (rah) has shown this hadith also in his Isaba fi Tamiyz as Sahaba a book which he wrote on “SAHABA” he mentioned it under same narrator Malik bin Iyaadh who is Malik al- Dar. Nowhere has he criticized this hadith, had this been an innovation or polytheism, then such big hadith scholars would not have abstained to mention it along.

Let’s come towards Albani’s claim about authentication of Ibn Hajr (rah), he said:

إنه ليس نصاً في تصحيح جميع السند بل إلى أبي صالح فقط

Translation:  Since we say: It is not declared that all of the chain of narration is authentic (Saheeh), rather only that it is so up to Abu Saalih. [At- Tawassul, Page # 69]

Here Albani made a huge assumption that Ibn Hajr did not declare the whole chain as Sahih. Ibn Hajr (rah) himself knew about Malik al Dar to be known and being treasurer of Umar (ra) to the extent that he proved “IDRAAK” for Malik al Dar (RA), hence he authenticated the whole chain.

Now let us come to the biggest accusation on this report by Salafis

The Salafis claim: Amash is Mudallis (cheater). Ibn Hajr mentioned him in 2nd category [Tabqaat al Mudalliseen (2/55)] but he also mentioned him in 3rd category of Mudalliseen in Al Nukt ala Ibn al Salah (2/640).

Answer: This is the so- called biggest criticism from Salafis.

Salafis first accept that Ibn Hajr (rah) mentioned him in 2nd category of Mudaliseen. Now Ibn Hajr (rah) has divided Mudaliseen into 5 categories, the Mudaliseen of first 2 categories are accepted if they narrate from reliable narrators like for example Imam Malik (rah), Imam Hasan al Basri (rah), Imam Sufyan ath- Thawri (rah), Imam Sufyan bin Uyayna (rah), A’mash (rah) and others.

Ibn Hajr (rah) has mentioned A'mash at Number 55 in the 2nd category, so the blame of Salafis is absurd.

However, the problem starts only from third category, so why Ibn Hajr mentioned him in the 3rd category in Nukt? Assuming this is a contradiction (although it is not because in Nukt Ibn Hajr is just mentioning the third category of those who did more Tadlees whereas in Tabaqat he has allocated an overall classification of 2nd category to A’mash), still let’s analyze further.

Here is a revealing answer from al- Dhahabi in regards to A'mash and this answer from al- Dhahabi proves this specific chain to be absolutely authentic because A’mash is narrating from his “KNOWN TEACHER CALLED ABI SALIH AS- SAMAAN”

Hafidh al- Dhahabi said:

قال " عن " تطرق إلى احتمال التدليس إلا في شيوخ له أكثر عنهم : كإبراهيم ، وابن أبى وائل ، وأبى صالح السمان ، فإن روايته عن هذا الصنف محمولة على الاتصال 

Translation: When A‘mash begins a tradition with the word ‘an (from), then there is a possibility (احتمال) of Tadlees (cheating). EXCEPT when he relates it from his elders from whom he narrates in great deal, like Ibrahim, Ibn Abu Wa’il, Abu Salih as- Samaan then it is attributed to possess sound linkage (محمولة على الاتصال) [Meezan ul A’itidal, Volume # 2, Narrator # 3517]

This report is from same Abu Salih as- Samaan who is confirmed teacher of A’mash and is also relied upon (whereas blame on A'mash could only be given credit if he narrates from his unknown teachers or weak narrators) hence to accuse him of cheating while narrating from his teachers like al- Dhahabi said, then it is a wrong blame.

Al Dhahabi mentions A’mash as:

سليمان بن مهران، الامام شيخ الاسلام، شيخ المقرئين والمحدثين،

Translation: Suliman bin Mehraan “The Imam, SHAYKH UL ISLAM” the teacher of Reciters and Hadith specialists. [Siyr A’lam an Nubala (6/419)]

We checked the books of hadith and there are roughly 2000+ hadiths via the route of A’mash  -an-  Abu Salih, this is why a great hadith specialist called Imam al- Busayri (rah) said while authenticating a hadith from “A'mash"

ـ حدّثنا أحمد بن عبد الرحمن بن بكار بن عبد الملك بن الوليد بن بسر بن أبي أرطأة . ثنا الوليد . حدثني شيبان ، عن الأعمش ، عن أبي صالح ، عن ابن عباس ، عن النبي قال: «إذا استنفرتم فانفروا». (289) هذا إسناد صحيح رجاله ثقات وشيبان هو ابن عبد الرحمن والوليد هو ابن مسلم صرح بالتحديث فزالت تهمة تدليسه.

Translation: This hadith is Sahih and the men are relied upon. Shibaan is Ibn Abdur Rahman and Walid is Ibn Muslim “HE HAS NARRATED WITH SAREEH TAHDEETH AND IT REMOVES THE BLAME OF TADLEES UPON HIM” [Imam al Busayri in Masabah al Zajajah # 986]

The Salafis without knowing principles are trying to drag the great Abu Mua’wiya Muhammad bin Khazim (rah) into the category of unaccepted Mudaliseen too.