ABUSING THE SAHAABAH
IBN TAIMIYYAH’S DEVIATION
According to Ibn Taimiyyah, abusing Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Umar and the Sahaabah in general, as the Shiahs do, is not kufr. He argues that since it is not part of Imaan to believe in the Sahaabah, abusing/cursing them is not kufr. In his book, As-Sarimul Maslool, he states:
“And merely abusing someone other than the Prophets does not necessarily make the abuser a kaafir because some of those who were in the time of the Prophet (i.e. companions) used to abuse one another and none of them was declared kaafir because of this, and also because it is not Wajib to have faith particularly in any of the companions. Therefore, abusing any of them does not detract from the faith in Allah and His books and His messengers, and the Last Day.”
Answer: Ibn Taimiyyah was a deviate. What he said in this regard is bunkum. His deviation precluded him from understanding that in fact it is Waajib to believe in the righteousness of the Sahaabah. The claim that abusing Rasulullah’s Sahaabah “does not detract from Imaan”, speaks volumes for his deviance from Siraatul Musraqeem. Reviling/abusing the Sahaabah, especially the Khulafa-e-Raashideen is kufr – kufr which expels the vile abuser from the fold of Islam. The brains of Ibn Taimiyyah became convoluted as a consequence of him having abandoned the Taqleed of the Math-habs, hence he failed to understand the simple, self-evident fact that abusing, for example, Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) is tantamount to abusing Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and such abuse is explicit kufr.
Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Honour my Sahaah, for verily, they are your noblest....” The Qur’aan speaks glowingly of the Sahaabah. Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Make incumbent on you my Sunnah and the Sunnah of my Khulafa-e-Raashideen.” He also said that “Love for the Sahaabah is because of my love, and hatred for them is because of my hatred.” There are many similar commands of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Rejection of any such command is kufr.
The analogy with belief in Allah, the Rasool, the Kitaabs, the Malaaikah and Qiyaamah, is moronic and a display of Ibn Taimiyyah’sjahl-e-murakkab(compound ignorance). Rejection of the fact that five Salaat are Fardh is kufr. Rejecting the Sunniyat of Miswaak is kufr. Preferring a kufr practice over an Islamic practice is kufr. These acts are kufr because they are the details stemming from belief in the Rasool. Similarly, belief in the Sahaabiyyat and Adl (righteousness) of Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu), for example, is Fardh since such a belief stems from belief in Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
To reject, ridicule or mock any tenet, practice or teaching of the Deen substantiated in the basis of Ijma’, is kufr which expels the villain from Islam. If someone cannot understand that branding Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan and the vast majority of Sahaabah as ‘kaafir’ is not kufr, as it appears from the abovementioned flotsam of Ibn Taimiyyah, then either the person’s mind is deranged with some sort of dementia or he, himself is a Shiah or a kaafir of some sort.
The Imaan and Islam of the Khulafa-e-Raashideen and of the Sahaabah are confirmed truths declared by the Qur’aan, Sunnah and Ijma’. If these illustrious and senior Sahaabah are ‘kuffaar’ as they are vilified by the Shiah, then who on earth can be a Muslim? The Shiah? Anyone who reviles the Sahaabah is a kaafir. Do not be fooled into taking the road to Jahannam by falling in Ibn Taimiyyah’s trap of jahaalat. He is a fellow who ‘discovered’ 600 years after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that the Islam taught and practised by the Ummah for more than six centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was ‘corrupt and convoluted’, hence he deemed it appropriate to set aside the Islam of the Ummah – of the Four Math-habs – and to propagate the ‘math-hab’ of his nafs. Thus, only morons adopt his ‘math-hab’ of deviation.
Ibn Taimiyyah presenting the argument of a Sahaabi abusing a Sahaabi and thereby not becoming kaafir, as his basis for negating the kufr of abusing the Sahaabah, is insipid and stupid. The Sahaabah were human. There mutual disputes and fights are restricted to themselves, and may not be presented asdaleel for permissibility or validity for any haraam act committed by others. A Sahaabi abusing another Sahaabi is not kufr. A Nabi assaulting another Nabi, as Nabi Musa (alayhis salaam) had done to Nabi Haroon (alayhis salaam), is not kufr. But a follower assaulting a Nabi becomes a kaafir. Ibn Taimiyyah had lost his intellectual equilibrium when he abandoned the Taleed of the Math-habs, and began dabbling with the kufr of the philosophers. It is for this reason that despite his vast textual knowledge, he spoke much drivel
His view regarding this issue is in effect condonation of Shiah kufr. Of all the baatil sects which branched out from Islam, the Shiahs are the only satanists who revile the Sahaabah and who have declared the Sahaabah to be kaafir. His stupid view is designed to support the Shiahs.
If the Sahaabah are dropped from the lofty pedestal Islam has accorded them, then the entire edifice of Islam collapses. The Sahaabah are the pivots of the Qur’aan. The very authenticity of the Qur’aan Majeed rests on the integrity of the Sahaabah. They were the first compilers and preservers of the Qur’aan. Reviling them is to detract from the authenticity of the Qur’aan, and that in fact is precisely what the Shiahs do and believe. They reject the authenticity of the Qur’aan because it is their belief that the Compilers of the Qur’aan were kaafir. This is the consequence of Ibn Taimiyyah’s corrupt belief that abusing the Sahaabah is not kufr.
|< Prev||Next >|