Explanation of the author's statement: Al-Baghawi said: The 'iraf is the one who claims to know matters through premises by which he infers the location of stolen goods, the place of a lost item, and the like. It was also said

The Shaykh : Al-Baghawi said: "The 'iraf is the one who claims to know matters through premises by which he infers the location of stolen goods, the place of a lost item, and the like". The 'iraf: we all know that this is a form of exaggeration. So either the form itself is intended, or the attribution is intended, meaning the one who claims to know things. Not everyone who claims to know is an 'iraf, but the one who claims to know matters related to the knowledge of the unseen claims to know matters through premises by which he infers the location of a lost item, the location of stolen goods, and the like. The apparent meaning of Al-Baghawi's words (may Allah have mercy on him) is that it includes, the apparent meaning of Al-Baghawi's words includes the one who claims to know the future and the past, because the location of stolen goods is past, not future? It is past, it was stolen, and likewise the location of a lost item, the loss has already occurred. So the apparent meaning of his words includes both. However, the issue is not agreed upon among the scholars. For this reason, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "It was also said: He is the kاهn, and the kاهn is the one who informs about hidden matters in the future. It was also said: He is the one who informs about what is in the heart". This means that some scholars interpreted the 'iraf as the kاهn, interpreting him as the kاهn. The kاهn is the one who informs about hidden matters in the future, and this is undoubtedly knowledge of the unseen. "It was also said: He is the one who informs about what is in the heart". And what does "what is in the heart" mean? It means you keep something in your heart and you ask him, "What did you keep in your heart?" and he says, "You kept such and such." This is a kاهn. Or regarding hidden matters in the future, you say, "What will happen in such and such month, on such and such day?" and he says such and such. "When will my wife give birth?" or "When will my son arrive?" and he does not know. This is from divination. So now the scholars differ in defining the 'iraf. It was said: He is the one who claims to know matters through what? Through premises by which he infers the location of stolen goods and lost items and the like, so it includes the one who informs about matters that have occurred. It was said: He is the one who informs about what is in the heart. Yes. And it was said: He is the kاهn. Yes, before. And it was said: He is the kاهn, and the kاهn is the one who informs about hidden matters in the future, or the one who informs about what is in the heart. The author (may Allah have mercy on him) transmitted from the Shaykh al-Islam: "And Abu al-Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah said". Abu al-Abbas is Ahmad ibn 'Abd al-Halim ibn 'Abd al-Salam Ibn Taymiyyah. He is known as Abu al-Abbas, and he had no children. He did not marry; he did not get married. And his leaving marriage was not from the perspective of monasticism, but rather, and Allah knows best, he was occupied with the struggle of knowledge with little desire, and Allah knows best. Otherwise, if he had a strong desire, he would have married. And as the forgers claim, he has a son buried next to him, because one of the brothers visited Damascus and they said to him, "Do you wish to visit Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah?" He said, "Yes." Then they took him and said, "This is Shaykh al-Islam, and this is his son." He said, "The man did not marry to have a son." But the forger in his name usually does not say anything but lies. Yes, or perhaps he heard that Abu al-Abbas had a son named al-Abbas. Allah knows best.
"Abu al-Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah said: The 'iraf is a name for the kاهn, the astrologer, the sand-reader, and the like of those who speak about knowing matters through these methods". The apparent meaning of the Shaykh's words (may Allah have mercy on him) is that Shaykh al-Islam affirmed this. However, Shaykh al-Islam said: "It was also said: The 'iraf," mentioning it with "it was said." Yes, and it is known that what is mentioned with "it was said" is not something that the author affirms is correct. However, if he transmitted it and did not refute it, it is evidence that he—may Allah reward you with good—approved of it. In any case, Shaykh al-Islam presented this opinion and approved of it.
Then he said: "And if it were said that it is a specific name for some of these", meaning the sand-readers and astrologers and the like, they are included in it by general semantic meaning, because for us, general semantic meaning is what is established through analogical reasoning, and general linguistic meaning is what the word indicates such that the word includes it. This is called general linguistic meaning, and its indication of the similar is called general semantic meaning due to their agreement in the comprehensive cause for this and that. And Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that the use of jinn by humans has three states: Sometimes they use them in obedience to Allah. Sometimes they use the jinn in obedience to Allah the Exalted and Majestic, such as being a deputy for him in conveying the Shari'ah. This person has a companion from the jinn who is a believer, who takes knowledge from him and receives it from him. This is something established that the jinn can learn from humans, so he uses him to convey the Shari'ah to his counterparts from the jinn. Yes, or in assisting with matters required by the Shari'ah. He says: So there is no harm in this, rather it may be a praiseworthy and required matter, and it is from calling to Allah the Exalted and Majestic.
Second: That the jinn are used in permissible matters, such as asking them for help with something. He said: So this is permissible on the condition that the means is not forbidden. The means is this service; if it is forbidden, it becomes forbidden. If the jinn do not help him in his matters unless he slaughters for him or prostrates to him or the like of that, then that is forbidden or shirk (associating partners with Allah), depending on what that sin is. And sometimes the jinn are used in oppression and aggression, using them in oppression and aggression, such as looting people's wealth and terrifying them and the like of that. So its ruling is forbidden. Then, if its means is shirk, it becomes shirk. And if its means is not shirk, it becomes a sin, as if this sinful jinni befriends this sinful human and cooperates with him in sin and aggression. This becomes a sin and aggression and does not reach the level of shirk. He categorized them into three categories. Then he said: "Whoever asks the jinn or asks the one who asks the jinn and believes them in everything they say, this is a sin and disbelief". He believes them in everything they say, so this is a sin and disbelief. Then he mentioned what was mentioned about 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that he was delayed once on a journey, so Abu Musa (may Allah be pleased with him) was preoccupied with the delay of the Commander of the Faithful. They said to him: A woman from the people of Madinah has a companion from the jinn, so if you ordered her to send her companion to search for 'Umar, he did so. The jinni went and then returned and said: The Commander of the Faithful is fine, for he was marking the zakat camels in such and such place. Then 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) arrived after that. So this is use in what? In a permissible matter. Use in a permissible matter.