Clearing Misconceptions about Waseelah

The popular idea is as below.

The Ahlul-Bayt are a conduit to God.
We do not call upon them, rather, we call upon God "through" them. This is Waseelah.
DETAIL
Calling other than God as a divine entity is shirk. What we do when we perform Tawassul, is to call upon
God through the Ahlul-Bayt. God has in fact commanded us to seek waseelah (Al-Quran 5:35) "wabtaghu
ilayhi waseela". The Ahlul-Bayt are a waseela to God. So invoking them should not be considered "calling
upon them", rather, calling upon God through a waseela - since He has commanded us to seek Him
through a waseela. There are innumerable references that mention the Ahlul-Bayt as a waseelah, hence
there is no problem in calling God "through" them i.e. via calling them.

This paper on Clearing Misconceptions about Waseelah, will detail out

10 reasons why the above is a misconception. We invite you to read it
with sincerity and an open-mind. After that, what you decide is up to you.

Thank you very much for your time!

May Allah (swt) bless You.

Responses to the Misconception

(1)

We must distinguish between Waseelah of Hidaayah and

Waseelah of Intermediary

(a) There is an unfortunate tendency to assume that Waseelah means "Intermediary".

It in fact means "a means".
Waseelah is "a means" i.e. something that aids one to move from one station closer to
another. Fuel might help one to move in a car from one city to another, but this does not
mean that fuel is an "Intermediary" between you and the destination. Rather it is an aid
that provided a benefit i.e. a means. Likewise, the Quran has mentioned in innumerable
places that the Prophets are messengers who transmit / provide guidance to us (whether
by theory or by role-modeling). It did not say that they are intermediaries between us and
God. Rather, they provide the guidance required for us to become close servants of Allah.
See: Al-Quran 2:119, 3:144, 7:188, 11:2, 13:7, 27:92, etc.
Besides the Quran, all valid narrations which speak of any human as a waseelah to God,
are in conformance with the same Quranic context i.e. Hidaayah (Guidance).
(b) There is no evidence in the Quran for saying that Prophets and Ahlul-Bayt are
intermediaries.
There is ample evidence showing that there is no intermediary between Man and God (as
far as supplication or worship is concerned). God is closer to us than our Jugular Vein,
God directly listens to us, and asks us to directly call upon Him, in humility, secrecy,
with fear, hope, etc.
See: Al-Quran 50:16, 2:186, 40:60, 4:32, 7:55-56, etc.
Nowhere in the above and similar verses does God refer to the Prophets or Ahlul-Bayt as
"Intermediaries". Nonetheless, as mentioned before, if anyone provides guidance
(whether theoretical or by practical demonstrations), then they are a waseelah (means of
seeking closeness to Allah) in the sense of being a guide who shows the right path to
tread.

(c) Waseelah in form of Intermediary, is reflected by the word Wakil, and it is

completely rejected by the Quran.
Wakil is the kind of waseelah that refers to Intermediary, or any of its derivatives such as
"Agent", "Representative", "Attorney", "Custodian", etc. Allah (swt) did not ask us to
seek a Wakil (intermediary) for the sake of supplicating Him. Infact he distinctively
forbade it. In at least three places Allah (swt) clarifies that the Prophet is not a Wakil for
us (nor is anyone else).
See: Al-Quran 10:108, 11:12, 39:41.
And finally, in 39:36, Allah (swt) makes it clear that He is sufficient for His servants.
They need no one to be supplicated to as an intermediary.

(2)

The main Waseelahs (Wasail) mentioned in Quran and Hadith

tend to be ignored as Waseelah

(a) Main Wasail in the Quran.

The Quran and Ahadith mention key-items of Waseelah, that should be the first elements
that come to mind when the word Waseelah is mentioned. Unfortunately popular culture
has ignored these main wasail, in place of a morphed waseelah concept unsupported by
the Quran. So what are these main wasail that Quran and hadith talk about?
Firstly, Belief and Good Deeds are Wasilah, as in the verse 34:37:

]:[

And not your wealth nor your children, are the things which bring you near Us in
station, but whoever believes and does good, these it is for whom is a double reward for
what they do, and they shall be secure in the highest places.

Secondly, the Names of God (such as Al-Rahmaan - Most Beneficent) are a Wasilah, as

in 7:180 and 17:110:

]::[

Allah has the most excellent names. So call on Him by His names and shun those who
distort them. They shall soon be requited for their deeds.

]:[



Say: Call upon Allah or call upon, the Rahmaan (Most Beneficent); (by) whichever
you call upon (Him), He has the best names; and do not utter your prayer with a very
raised voice nor be silent with regard to it, and seek a way between these.
A good example of this is in the Dua-e Kumayl of Imam Ali (a) wherein he says: O
Allah! I ask You by Your mercy (Rehmah)by Your strength (Quwaah).by Your
invincibility (jabaroot)..by Your honour (Izzat).by Your tremendousness
Your authority (sultaan)and so on.
Even more forceful are these lines of the dua: O my Master, So I ask You by (the
waseela of) Your Izzat (Honour)., and .So by (the waseela of) Your Izzat, comply
with my supplication... and further more, ..wa yatawassalu ilaika bi rububiyyatika..
(..and who invokes the waseela of Your Lordship..) .I ask You by (the waseela) of
Your Truth, Your Holiness and the Greatest of your Attributes and Names.
There are likewise many other wasail mentioned in the Quran, such as Taqwa,
Ikhlaas, Sabr, Salah, Tawakkul-ala-Allah, etc.

Let us now take a look at Wasilah in Ahadith:

(b) Main Wasail in the Khutbah-of-Waseelah Hadith from Imam Ali.

Imam Ali (as) has addressed the question of Waseelah in what is arguably the best
possible elucidation of the "seek wasilah" verse 5:35 that we can find, which is Khutba
no. 110 of Nahjul Balagha; here Imam Ali (as) talks about the best Waseelahs that can
bring us close to Allah (swt), and interestingly enough, there is no mention of the Ahlul
Bayt (as) in the Khutbah, showing us that when Allah (swt) commands us to seek means
of nearness to Him, He is asking us to focus on those actions which bring us close to Him
which the Imam then goes on to list. Allah (swt) is not asking us to seek intercessors as
is implied by the contention. The functions of Imams is guidance i.e. mentioning wasail
to us.. not as intermediaries (that is: waseelah of hidaayah, not waseelah of mediation).
This is perhaps why Imam Ali (a) did not mention them in his khutbah.
Heres the text of the Khutba (of Waseelah) outlining the main items of Waseelah:
Verily, the best means by which the seekers of nearness to Allah, the Glorified, the
Exalted, seek nearness, is the belief (Al-Imaan) in Him and His Prophet, struggling in
His cause, for it is the high pinnacle of Islam, and (to believe in) the Kalimatul Ikhlaas
(the expression of Divine Purification) for it represents the Fitra (Sound innate
disposition/nature with which human beings are created), and the establishment of
prayer for it is (the basis of) community, the payment of Zakat for it is a compulsory
obligation, fasting for the month of Ramadhan for it is a shield against the punishment
of God, the performance of Hajj of the House of Allah and its Umra for these two acts
repel poverty and wash away sins; regard for kinship (Silatu Rahim) for it increases
wealth and length of life, giving alms secretly for it protects against bad deaths, and
extending benefits (to people) for it saves one from disgrace
Source: Nahjul Balagha, Sermon no. 110 (or 109 in some versions)

(3)

Taking of Awliyaa, or any person, as an Intermediary to God is

forbidden in the Quran and Hadith

(a) The "Waseelah of Intermediary" is a rejected kind of worship, per the Quran.
The Quran and Ahadith specifically reject the notion of individuals - such as awliyaa being intermediaries to God. As discussed earlier, Wasilah means "a means" and not "an
intermediary". Below are more evidences from the Quran and Ahadith against the
interpretation of Wasilah as "Intermediaries".

Verse 39:3

]::[

Unquestionably, for Allah is the pure religion. And those who take protectors (Awliya)
besides Him [say], "We only worship them that they may bring us nearer to Allah in
position." Indeed, Allah will judge between them concerning that over which they differ.
Indeed, Allah does not guide he who is a liar and [confirmed] disbeliever.
They worshiped these entities but justified it by saying it brings them closer to God.
Although this verse is talking about Ibada (worship), we know that Dua is a component
of worship. You are essentially submitting your requests to someone that cannot hear
you, cannot answer you, cannot benefit you nor harm you in any way. You choose to
stop using your intellect and humble yourself unconditionally in front of another human
being. Does this not equate to outright worship?
If Allah (swt) had allowed it, then it would be accepted worship to supplicate "entities as
intermediaries". But in the above, Allah has rejected the claim of such a notion as a lie.
Verse 10:18

]::[



And they worship beside Allah what can neither harm them nor profit them, and they say:
These are our intercessors with Allah. Say: Do you (presume to) inform Allah of what He
knows not in the heavens and the earth? Glory be to Him, and supremely exalted is He
above what they set up (with Him).
This verse shows that the excuse of making dua to one "in the capacity of an intercessor",
is rejected. All worship, including dua, is to be directed to Allah (swt) alone and directly
(not via dua to an intercessor).

If Allah (swt) had allowed it, then it would be accepted worship to supplicate "entities as
intermediaries". But in the above, Allah has rejected the claim as unknown in His
dominion.
(b) The "Waseelah of Intermediary" is a sin, slip, and stumble, according to dua-hadith
from Imam Zayn al-Abideen.
A very direct exposition of the matter can be observed in Dua # 13 (Talab-e Hawaij) of
Imam Zayn al-Abideen's Saheefa-e Kaamilah/Sajjaadiyya:
(Excerpt)
O God, I have a need of Thee: My exertion has fallen short of it and my stratagems have
been cut back before reaching it. My soul induced me to present it (my need) to him who
(himself) presents his needs to Thee and can do nothing without Thee in his requests,
but this is one of the slips of the offenders, one of the stumbles of the sinners! Then
through Thy reminding me, I was aroused from my heedlessness, through Thy giving
success, I stood up from my slip, and through Thy pointing the way, I returned and
withdrew from my stumble. I said: Glory to my Lord! How can the needy ask from the
needy? How can the destitute beseech the destitute? So I went straight to Thee, my God,
in beseeching, and I sent Thee my hope with trust in Thee.
Imam Zayn al-Abideen uses the above example to demonstrate the fault in approaching
an intermediary between Man and God. Since all entities other than Allah (swt), are
dependent and needy entities, then none of them deserves to be approached in prayer. He
guides us to supplicate God directly for our needs, and have our hope firmly in Him
alone.

(4)

The word waseelah ("

") appeared a second time in the
Quran only to repudiate the idea of Intermediary

In 5:35, it says seek means of approach (waseelah) to Allah. And in the verses (17:5657), Allah (swt) brings it one more time, just to let people know that "supplicating to
other than Allah" is NOT a waseelah. So the only other time that Allah brought the word
waseelah was to specifically inform people that supplicating other than Allah (Angels,
Jinn, Prophets, Ahlul-Bayt, etc) is not a correct waseelah. And in fact they
(AwliyaaAllah) themselves are seeking a right kind of waseelah (for example via Salah,
Zakat, Sabr, etc).

Verses 17:56-57

]:[

]:[

Say: Call on those whom you assert besides Him, so they shall not control the removal of
distress from you nor (its) transference. Those whom they call upon, themselves seek the
means of access (al-Waseelah) to their Lord-- whoever of them is nearest-- and they hope
for His mercy and fear His chastisement; surely the chastisement of your Lord is a thing
to be cautious of.
Reconciling the Quranic verses, it is clear that the 'Wasilah' in 5:35 is only a reference to
a means by which one come close to a thing; and in this case the entity is God and any
manner of possible positive ways that brings one closer to Him in worship is alluded to.
A 'Wasilah' (a means of access to a thing) is indeed broad but certainly does not and
cannot encompass the manner which is specifically negated by verses 17:56-7 of the
Quran (i.e. supplicating of intermediaries).

(5)

The idea of Tawassul considered as Supplicating to a person

while not considering them God, is still problematic

(a) Even when not considering them as divine, Supplicating them is Praying to them
and a worship
Simply by calling out for assistance to someone else across the curtain of Ghayb, even
while maintaining that they are not a divine entity, qualifies as seeking help from
someone via prayer (i.e. praying to them). This is both literally (because they were
invoked and sought out as a supplicated intermediary), and conceptually because it
involves considering them as one's guardians or custodians in the sense that they take
care of your affairs between you and God, and so you deposit your haajaat
(needs/desires) at their disposal, considering them entities that are empowered to process
affairs for God's servants and who can be "pleased" or "bribed" into getting you a
favorable response from God. So instead of pleading to God, you plead to them.
Problematic supplications like "Dua-e Tawassul" teach people to plead to (/bribe)
Awliyaa-Allah (in supplication) with embellished praises of them, so that they may plead
on your behalf to God. And therein lies a big problem.

In Contention # 11, we have already established that calling upon anyone across the
curtain of Ghayb is tantamount to deifying them, so it does not matter whether one
believes in the divinity of the entity one is calling upon or not;.. by virtue of making dua
to them one has unwittingly given them the station of divinity, since dua in the sense of
calling out to an entity across the curtain of Ghayb is an act of worship, and hence should
be reserved only for Allah (swt). Therefore, calling upon any entity besides Allah across
the curtain of Ghayb is tantamount to worshiping that entity, and the worship of any
entity besides Allah (swt) amounts to Shirk. Which is also why we see the Christians are
accused of taking Mary as a god (5:116) even though they never considered her as divine.
They only considered Jesus as divine (due to claiming him as part of a trinitarian
Godhood); but with Mary being his mother, they said that since she is the mother of this
divine entity, then why would this divine entity (Jesus) not be influenced by the
intercession brought forth by his mother, and so the Christians, while not considering
Mary herself to be divine, prayed to her as an intercessor, and God condemned this as
Shirk (re: equating it to their taking her to be a god).
(b) There is no difference between supplicating them for prayers vs. supplicating them
for help in other things
Some people say it is wrong to supplicate Ahlul-Bayt for help as in "grant us this and
that", but that it is okay to supplicate them for "seeking their prayers of recommendation
to God". The fact is, this distinction is irrelevant. If I ask you to help me with food, or I
ask you to pray for me to God, either way I have asked you for help. The issue is not
"asking for prayers vs. asking for help in other things".., rather, it is "asking for help
naturally vs. supplicating for help". God forbids supplicating for help to other than Him.
And He considers this to be worship. It is not a matter of whether one asks help in buying
a car or in getting a scholarship. It is help in buying a car or getting a scholarship
naturally Vs. via supplication to non-God entity for anything - whether buying a car,
getting a scholarship, or getting intercession - in all three cases one has sought to
supplicate a non-God entity for help. And this is against "Iyyaka Nastaeen" (1:5). In
Surah Yunus 10:18, it mentions about some Makkans who had argued that they did not
worship their Idols as "gods" rather as Intercessors i.e. only calling upon them for help as
mediators to God. And Allah responded in that verse, that this idea of supplicating
Intercessors for mediation has no place in His domain. It is not the issue of "what" is
being supplicated for, but "supplication for help" in itself!

This article is taken from an encyclopedia containing 30+ articles on the aspects of forbiddance of Dua to
GhayrAllah. As of the date of creation, this article is Contention # 9 in that encyclopedia (still in development).

(c) The Doctor analogy (seeking his help being used as a proof) makes no sense
Many people say, "if we can seek medical help from the doctor, then we can seek help
from the Ahlul-Bayt, and this is not Shirk because we do not consider the Ahlul-Bayt or
the doctor to be a god". This analogy is false. Seeking help from the doctor is not done
by supplication, rather by visiting the clinic and interacting with the doctor. No one goes
on the Musalla and raises the hands and begins supplicating the doctor. And no one
supplicates to seek help from a doctor who has passed away and moved on to the world
of barzakh. So how can such an analogy be used to justify "supplicating" Awliyaa-Allah
who have passed away from this world, and with whom there is no interaction?! It is a
false analogy.
(d) In the lives of the Imams, we see communication with them, not supplication to them
The best example for this is from the story of Karbala, whereby Imam Husain's most
trusted ambassador, his cousin "Muslim", exerted great effort in vain to get a letter
dispatched to the Imam warning him not to come to Kufa. If supplication to Imams was
permissible, Muslim could simply have supplicated to the Imam, rather than exerting his
utmost to send a letter, then regretting his failure to have it dispatched successfully.
Either Muslim was ignorant of the possibility of supplicating to the Imam, or then he
knew very well that the Imam could not be supplicated to. Clearly it is the second option.

(6)

Asking another to pray for you is different from Waseelah in

Supplication (to an Intermediary)

We do not hold that asking others to pray for us is Haraam or not acceptable. It is in fact
perfectly permissible, and in some cases even advisable. For instance if we wrong
someone or do any sort of injustice to them, the most effective way to get absolution for
such a sin is to request the victim to pray for our forgiveness, for if the person we
wronged forgives us to the point that they are willing to ask Allah (swt) to forgive us,
then Allah (swt) will be all the more inclined to forgive. And we certainly have support
and precedents for this in the Quran. For instance, the sons of Prophet Yaqoob requested
their father to pray for their forgiveness (12:97) after they realized that they had grossly
wronged him and done grave injustice to him, and he agreed (12:98). The other example
is in 4:6063 where the Quran talks about a group of hypocrites who rejected the
authority of the Prophet (sawa) and refused to surrender to his judgement. They are
encouraged in 4:64 to come to the Prophet (sawa) in obedience, surrender to his

10

authority, beg for Allahs forgiveness, and then at that point if the Prophet (sawa) does
istighfaar for them, they are promised forgiveness in return. But notice that this is only
prescribed for those hypocrites who had committed offences against the Prophet (sawa)
(in the sense that they refused to bring their disputes to him for resolution and sought
other arbiters); otherwise normal, regular individual offenders are not asked to approach
the Prophet (sawa), rather they are asked to seek forgiveness from Allah (swt) directly as
in 4:110.

In any case, both the above cases (of Yaqoob's sons and the Medina hypocrites) are
Quranically approved. What does this mean?

We see that the discussion centers around sinners approaching entities who are [1]
entities that they have wronged (in the cases of the brothers of Nabi Yusuf (as), its their
father Nabi Yaqoob (as), and in the case of the Munafiqoon of Madinah, it is the Holy
Prophet (sawa), and [2] in both cases, the entities that are being approached are
physically alive in this material abode (as opposed to Barzakh). They are not entities who
have left this worldly phase of existence and gone to a realm that exists beyond the
curtain of ghayb. In other words, the asking is based on "interaction" or
"communication", not on supplication.

(7)

Quranic examples of communication cannot be applied to justify

Supplication

Yaqoob's sons asked him to pray for them; this was communication, not supplication.
Had they asked him for some silver coins, that would still be communication, not
supplication. Communication is okay, as we all know. It is supplicating (calling upon
[Dua] beyond the curtain of ghayb [unseen]) to other than Allah that is forbidden.
Likewise, when Allah (swt) mentions in the Quran about certain hypocrites that if they
came to the Prophet and sought God's forgiveness, and the Prophet as well sought God's
forgiveness for them, it would benefit them - this is also a matter of interaction. It refers
to an incident in the lifetime of the Prophet, and there is no insinuation of supplication
here either.
The question is raised, why did the sons not pray directly to God? Why should the
hypocrites have come to the Prophet?

11

(a) The Sons of Yaqoob seeking their father's prayer to God for forgiveness
Notice firstly that the brothers of Nabi Yusuf (as) did not supplicate Nabi Ibrahim (as) their great-grandfather - to intercede for them, even though it may be argued that Nabi
Ibrahim (as) is closer to Allah (swt) and has a higher station than Nabi Yaqoob (as), and
therefore he would be much better placed to intercede for his repentant greatgrandchildren. So why did they not turn to Ibrahim (as)? Why didn't they approach him
as an intermediary? There is a 2-fold answer to this: [i] the offense they had committed
was against their father; he was the madhloom (victim) in all of this, and so they
reckoned that if the madhloom were to pray for their forgiveness, their chances of being
forgiven by Allah (swt) would be higher, in light of the principle that has already been
established above. [ii] they did not approach Prophet Ibrahim (as) for intercession
because he had already departed from this worldly and material phase of existence, and
there is no evidence that any channels of communication exist for us between this world
and that other realm to which the souls are transferred after they leave the body. And this
is the main problem with the idea of imploring Prophets, Awliyaa, saints, sages or
righteous servants of Allah (swt) for intercession.
Do we have any evidence to prove that they can listen to our voice when we call upon
them? When they (i.e. the Holy Prophet (s) and the Imams of Ahlul Bayt (as) were
physically alive in this material phase of existence, did they have the power to listen to
the voices of supplicants all over the world? If so, why would people living in distant
lands waste ink and paper to send them letters; they should just have called out to them,
and their calls would have been heard. But the fact that people would write letters to
them clearly shows that they were not all-hearing in this life; So is there any valid
basis from the Quran or authentic Hadith to assume that Allah (swt) must have made
them all-hearing after they left this world in order to enable them to hear the petitions that
sinners make for intercession? The reality is that there is not a shred of evidence from
either the Holy Quran or the authentic Hadith to suggest that Allah (swt) has arranged for
a mechanism whereby His righteous servants are given all-hearing powers when they
leave this world, and that they then receive daily petitions for intercession, and that they
take action on the basis of those petitions.
(b) The hypocrites and the matter of the Prophet's prayer
As for the Quranic injunction to the Munafiqeen in 4:64 to approach the Prophet, we see
the same thing, i.e. that they are being asked to approach him [i] because they have
committed an offense against him, and [ii] because he is physically alive and in their
midst. After our beloved Prophet (s) left this material abode, the normal, physical
channels of communication between him and his followers have been severed. If this had
not been the case, and approaching him for intercession was still an option, the Imams

12

from his progeny would certainly have been the first to lead the way in showing us how
to use this option. However, we have the whole Sahifa-e-Sajjadiyyah before us, and it
contains so many different duas which are aimed at teaching us how to approach Allah
(swt) and seek His forgiveness, yet not a single one of these duas is addressed to the
Prophet (sawa)! We dont see the Imam (as) supplicating to the Prophet (sawa) in any
dua of Sahifa-e-Kamilah, nor of requesting him to plead with the Almighty on his behalf.
If calling upon the Prophet (sawa) after his departure from this world and requesting him
to intercede for us was a valid or recommended method, surely a comprehensive book on
Dua like Sahifa-e-Kamilah should have contained at least one Dua on the pattern of Duae Tawassul - actually most or all of them should have been on this pattern. However, the
fact is that the more one reads the authentic duas taught by the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt
(as), the more one realizes that they never followed this approach. So if they didn't follow
this approach, why should we? Arent we safer following the uniform standard approach
that we find in all their authentic Duas, i.e. calling upon Allah (swt) directly without
involving anyone else, the way His Prophets and righteous servants have always done?
(see chapter 21 of the Quran for examples and specimens of Duas made by some of the
great Prophets). By abandoning "their tried and tested method of approaching Allah (swt)
by calling upon Him directly", aren't we introducing a baseless and indefensible bidah
(religious innovation) in our ritual worship? Why should we follow an approach to Dua
that is not consistent with the approach that is prescribed by the Quran, and further
endorsed by the practice of the Holy Prophet (sawa) and the Imams from his blessed
progeny?

(8)

The Authentic and agreed upon Duas from the Ahlul-Bayt enjoin
Supplication to Allah (swt) only

We see Duas of Imam Ali, Imam Husain, Saheefahe-Sajjadiyya of Imam Sajjad, etc. all
teaching Supplication to Allah (swt). There are several dozens of these. And on the other
hand, we do not see any authentic Dua that is supplicating to Imams. The Nade-Ali Dua
that calls upon Imam Ali is declared by the scholars as fabricated. The Dua-e-Ilaahi
Adhumal Balaa that calls Prophet Muhammad, Imam Ali and 12th Imam for help was
claimed from a dream! We don't get our faith from dreams. Especially dreams that go
against the Quran. The Dua-e-Tawassul was only claimed by a single person (KhabarWahid) and that too after all the Dhahir Imams had died (claimed by someone from the
11th Imam after he had died). Why would we leave over 100 Authentic Duas that teach
Supplication to Allah only, and focus on few inauthentic unreliable (three or so) Duas
that contradict the Quran and contradict the Authentic Duas.

13

All the authentic Duas of the Imams from the Ahlul Bayt (such as Dua Kumail, Dua
Mashlool, Dua Abi Hamza Thumaali, the duas of Sahifa-e-Kamilah) are directly
addressed to Allah (swt). It is therefore safe to conclude that the idea of approaching
intercessors, especially those who are beyond the curtain of Ghayb, and requesting them
to make dua for us is not the way of the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt (as). In fact, if we read
their Duas carefully, we find that they actually advocate approaching Allah (swt) directly
without intercession. This can be seen very clearly from Imam Ali bin Husain Zainul
Abideen (as)s statement at the beginning of his famous Dua entitled Dua Abu Hamza
Thumali (named so because it was narrated by his companion Abu Hamza Thumali);
therein he says: All praise is for Allah Whom I call upon whenever I wish for my
need, and I present myself before Him in solitude without any intercessor/mediator,
and He Grants my wishes. From this we see that the standard approach and teaching of
the Imams (as) is to call upon Allah (swt) directly without appealing in Dua to any
intercessor for their mediation. And logically, this makes sense. If Allah (swt) is closer to
us than our jugular veins, and is the most Merciful of those who show mercy, then why
should we turn to anyone else, especially since He hasn't asked us to do so in the first
place!

It would make sense to supplicate intercessors to intercede on behalf of us IF [i] Allah

(swt) Had commanded us to do so Himself, which He has not, at least not in the Quran,
or [ii] may be if the Holy Prophet (sawa) had advised us to follow such an approach,
which he never did, at least not in any authentic Hadith, or [iii] if any of the Imams of
Ahlul Bayt (as) had shown us this path, which they never did, at least not in any authentic
Hadith or Dua, or [iv] if Allah (swt) was distant and inaccessible to us, which He most
decidedly is not, (see 2:186 and 50:16) or [v] if for some reason, He Was not willing or
inclined to listen to us, which is again not the case, for it is Allah Himself who has
instructed us to call upon Him (in 40:60 and all those other verses of the Quran that have
been referred to earlier above).

14

(9)

Imams preferred teaching people to pray to Allah, as vs. praying

for them

Imam Husain (as) narrates that he was in the Masjidul Haraam with his father, the
Commander of the faithful, when they came across a youth who appeared to be in great
distress. When they asked him about the cause of his distress, he related to them the story
of how he had been disowned by his diseased father on account of his persistent
disobedience. As a result, the right side of his body had been struck with paralysis. Now,
if the Imams from the Ahlul Bayt believed in the kind of Tawassul that many people
believe in today, Imam Ali (a) would have simply told the youth not to worry; he would
step aside for a moment, and pray for the youth to be forgiven; in other words, he would
mediate and intercede for the sinful youth as many of us would want him to. But no, this
was not the approach of the Imams. They wanted to empower us with the hope and
confidence to approach Allah (SWT) ourselves.
So what did the Imam do? The Riwaayah (narration) says that the Imam (as) turned to the
youth and said: Should I not teach you a Dua which the Messenger of Allah (sawa)
taught me; in it is the Great and Exalted Name of Allah, with which if He is called upon,
He Responds, and with which if He is asked, He Gives Saying this the Imam (as)
ordered his son to bring a pen and paper, and he went on to dictate the Dua that we know
of today as Dua Mashlool. The Imam then reassured him that if he were to sincerely call
upon Allah (swt) with this Dua that his problem would be solved and his affliction would
be removed, and this is exactly what happened. (Source for the Riwaayah: Muhaju
Daawaat wa Manhajul Ibadaat by Ibn Tawoos, pg 191; Bihaarul Anwaar vol. 95, pg
394, Hadith no. 33; Jawaahirul Hikmah li Shabaab by Muhammad Raishahry and Ahmad
Ghulamali pp 176 180.)
This is what the Imams wanted from their followers: to learn from them about the Great
Names and Great Qualities of Allah (swt), so that they should develop the confidence to
approach Him themselves, equipped, of course, with a high level of Ma'rifah
(Understanding). It is in this sense that the Ahlul Bayt (as) are a Waseelah for
acquiring nearness to Allah (swt): They empower us with the knowledge and
Marifah that we need in order to establish a strong and firm connection with Allah
(swt). They didn't come to distract us from Allah or to act as our proxies before Allah
(swt). Rather, their mission was to educate us about Allah (swt), and to inspire us with
the confidence to turn to Him, just as Allah Himself has instructed us to do in numerous
verses of the Holy Quran (such as 7:55-56, 180).

15

(10) Waseelah as "supplication to an entity" is a logical insinuation of

their divinity / godhood / divine nature / being a deity
When the Greeks (past) / Romans (past) / Hindus (present) etc. worship(ed) at their
temples, they generally call out loudly and in the particular language of their deities. This
is because the deities were presumed with superpowers to hear at those "hotspots"
(temples) but only if the caller can speak audibly, and in a language that they understand;
But when a deity is more powerful (a senior god) then he could even be expected to hear
the whispers or silent calls (i.e. that which is in the heart). The Catholics - although
claiming to be monotheists and sourced in a monotheistic religion - inadvertently
adopted this extreme stance by appealing to Mary from any spot (not just a templespot) and in any language.. hence it is no wonder that Allah (swt) accused them of
making her a god (5:116). Alas! Amongst Muslims many seem to have gone down a
similar path by claiming the Prophet, or Imams or Awliyaa-Allah can listen to all
believers or suppliants from any spot irrespective of the degree of audible-ness, and in
any language!
A test of how close some sectors in Muslims have got to polytheistic notions can be
effected by taking many of the prayers manuals of Christians, Hindus and others, and
replacing Jesus, Mary, Vishnu and other supplicated-names with names such as
Muhammad, Fatima, Ali, etc. and notice the similarity and flow. If it flows in similitude,
then there is correspondence. It is therefore not surprising when we hear of some Shia
scholars in intra-faith dialogues telling their Catholic counterparts the like of - we are
very similar to you, such that you submit your prayers in the hands of Jesus and Mary and
Saints, while we do the same for Husain and Abbas and Ali. As if any of these entities, or
their like, or any set of them, is capable of hearing supplications of all believers or
suppliants from all places simultaneous, in all languages, and understanding all, and
being capable of responding to them all with beneficial actions in their favor.
In fact the Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt, themselves unambiguously repudiated such belief of
supplicating to intermediaries.
For example,

Imam Zayn al-Abideen in Dua # 99 of jawashan-e Kabeer, declares about Allah (swt):

16

O Helistening to one individual does not prevent Him from listening to others
simultaneously,
O Hedoing one thing does not prevent Him from doing other things
simultaneously,
O Hethe speech of one person does not divert Him from simultaneous speech of
others,
O Heone request does not make Him forgetful of other requests,
O Hethe sight of one thing does not prevent him from seeing other things
simultaneously,
O Hethe plaintive cries of those who weep and lament do not bother Him,
O He
Who is the ultimate Aim of the efforts of saints,
O He
Who is the Goal of Gnostics, O He Who is the Goal of seekers,
O He
from Whom not a single particle in the worlds is hidden.
In other words, the one, and only One, worthy of Supplication is He who can hear all
simultaneously. All believers and suppliants can approach Him from everywhere, at any
time, all the time, simultaneously, and He can see, hear and address all their supplications
simultaneously. And who is that? About whom is that known? That is not known of any
entity (the Prophet, His Ahlul-Bayt, Saints or anyone else) but Allah (swt). Polytheist
religions deemed any entity a "god" who could see, hear and address multiple suppliants
in more than one temple, or even within a single temple, simultaneously.. for this is truly
a Divine feat; We Muslims only know of Allah, the One God, for whom this is His
Attribute alone. So only He is worthy of being supplicated to.
And since there are plenty of quranic and ahadith narrations informing that Allah (swt) is
the Qaazi-al Hajaat (Determiner/Apportioner of Needs) and Mujibu Dawaat (Responder
to Supplications), it is sensible that only such kind of entity, as long as easily
approachable and accessible, be supplicated to. And we know that not only can Allah
(swt) listen, see, respond and address all suppliants and supplications from everywhere
simultaneously, but He is also the most approachable and Most Merciful!

17

A Final Note
When we will be alone in the grave, and there will be no helper for us except Allah, and
we will dread the darkness and hope for light, and dread the constriction and hope for
mercy.. we do not want to be in a condition of "regret". What we decide now (i.e. when
we are alive) will dictate our condition then. We owe it to our nafs not to do anything
troublesome for our Aakhirah. Further, we owe it to our brethren to help them come out
of troublesome aqaid that they have gotten into. It would help both them and us.

Even if we are not yet convinced, after all the evidence above, to not engage in
supplication to the Imams... and if doubt still haunts us.... then we must at least think this
way: Why take the risk? Is it worth risking our Aakhirah, to recite Dua-e-Tawassul or
Nade-Ali or Ilaahi-Adhumal-Balaa???
The Christians love and celebrate Jesus much more than we do. But will that love help
them? They exceeded bounds in his love and so Allah condemned them severely. Jesus
will dis-associate with the Christians, saying I have no idea/blame what they did after
me, so do with them as You - Allah - see fit (5:117-118). Do we want the Ahlul-Bayt to
also dis-associate from us like that?
On the judgment day when we will hope and desire from Allah for their intercession, how
would their rejection of us feel? That would indeed be most unfortunate. Yet the
Christians are already inflicted with it, despite their grave love for Jesus, and we too can
be similar victims, if we do not reform before our life-chapter is closed upon us.

Thank you very much for your time!

May Allah (swt) bless You.

18