Edit OmarKN
-
- Concerning MUHARRAM
- Qiyamah on Friday 10th of Muharram
- (Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Shia) Imam Khomeini
- On Khomayni's Kashf al-Asrar
- cf/verse of purification
- Shia/Sunni
- Ref. fr. Ahlu - Sunnah sources
- Ahlul Bayt (pbut) acc. to Ahlu Sunnah
- Are Arabs superior?
- Umm Kulthum al-Hashimiyya
- term: 'Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jamaʿa'
- Ithnaa Asharis? [upd.]
- Mourning And Wailing
As-Salamu ʿalaykum:
Expressing sorrow on ʿAshura' is HARAM in the Hanafi madhhab unless one mourns for all the Companions that were martyred at all times. (Hadiyya ʿAla'iyya).
The Sunna on ʿAshura' is to show generosity to one's spouse and children.
And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
Allahu aʿlam. But consider the following Companion-report from one of those promised Paradise:
Bishr ibn Shaghaf al-Dabbi said: "We were sitting with ʿAbd Allah ibn Salam (ra) on the day of Jumuʿa when he said: 'The greatest of the days of this world is the day of Jumuʿa. On that day was Adam created and on that day shall the Last Hour rise. And in truth, the noblest and most honorable of all the creatures of Allah in the sight of Allah is Abu al-Qasim - blessings and peaceupon him.' I said: 'Allah have mercy on you! Then what about the angels?' He looked at me and laughed, saying: 'Son of my brother! Do you know what the angels are? The angels are only one creation among many others, just as the creation of the earth, the creation of the heaven, the creation of the clouds, the creation of the mountains, the creation of the winds, and the reast of creatures. AND IN TRUTH, THE NOBLEST AND MOST HONORABLE OF ALL THE CREATURES OF ALLAH IN THE SIGHT OF ALLAH IS ABU AL-QASIM ﷺ .'"
Narrated by al-Bayhaqi in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (5:485).
Hajj Gibril
Al-Bukhari and Muslim are not crammed with forgeries. There is a difference between the position that a book is not infallible, which is the Sunni belief about the Sahihayn, and the position that a liar is not infallible.
A Shiʿi protesting the "critical examination" of hadith and the correct "interpretation" of Qur'an is really like a vegetarian proposing to extol the merits of pot roast.
This is what I mean. In Shiʿi English, since "abrogation" is called "deletions", then the rejection of false interpretation can easily be called "tahreef." After Agamemnon killed his own daughter, the rest was easy.
... that they do not dare to make takfir of one who denies it.
Whereas there is absolute consensus among the Sunnis and some of the *early* Shiʿis, that to deny it is kufr - not just lying, or evil-doing, or sophistry, or "being badly mistaken" !
Hajj Gibril
Ansari narrates in Dhamm al-Kalam (3:192-193 #636) from Abu al-Jullas:
"I heard ʿAli ibn Abi Talib say to ʿAbd Allah al-Saba'i [the founder of Shiʿism]: 'I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say that before the Last Hour there would be thirty big liars. Truly you are one of them.'"
Ibn ʿArabi said in al-Futuhat al-Makkiyya, chapter 93: "Know once and for all that there is not in the entire Umma of Muhammad ﷺ anyone who is better than Abu Bakr except ʿIsa (as)."
The above is actually mutawatir fromʿAli in Kufa, in the wording: "The best of this Umma after its Prophet are Abu Bakr and ʿUmar."
Hajj Gibril
Even after that time, ʿAli (as) never ceased to call ʿA'isha (as) "the Beloved of the Prophet" ﷺ .
She forgave him when her anger abated, as authentically reported by al-Shaʿbi.
A lie. She requested Abu Bakr's wife - Asm'a - to wash and shroud her; is this the act of someone who wished Abu Bakr not to know of her burial? She requested night burial only out of scrupulous modesty, because she wished no foreign men to see her even in death. She used a casket to that effect, on Asma's suggestion, for the first time in Islam.
No, al-Bukhari does not. He only reports the words of ʿUrwa, from Fatima, to the meaning that ʿAli did not wait for her father Abu Bakr to let him pray over Fatima. This had nothing to do with any supposed will on the part of Fatima other than the intense need for privacy.
Sunni references: - Sahih al-Bukhari, Chapter of "The battle of Khaibar", Arabic-English, v5, tradition #546, pp 381-383, also v4, Tradition #325
Brothers and sisters, I did not have to look far to find faults with the people who your claim to be great.
"He who attacks My Friends, let him know that I have declared war upon him." - Hadith Qudsi.
Amin.
This narration comes to us only through "ʿAbd Allah ibn Bukayr, from Hakim ibn Jubayr": two Rafidis known for munkar ("rejected") narrations. Al-Tabarani, al-Muʿjam al-Kabir (3:66 #2681, 5:166 #4971).
The Salaf used to say that no-one lies more than the Rafidis and this continues to hold true today.
Hajj Gibril
There is a much simpler reason: the Prophet ﷺ is included in that verse and thus the entire group (of his wives) becomes masculine.
The basic meaning of the verse is the Prophet ﷺ and his wives. Then comes the additional meaning of the ʿItra (Fatima, ʿAli, al-Hasan and al-Husayn), not from the Qur'an, but from the hadiths.
And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
The twelve caliphs are:
1-4. The Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs
5. Muʿawiya after al-Hasan's pledge to him
6. His son Yazid
7. ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwan
8-11. The latter's four sons al-Walid, Sulayman, Yazid, and Hisham
12. Al-Walid ibn Yazid ibn ʿAbd al-Malik.
See al-Suyuti's _Tarikh al-Khulafa'_ and Shah Wali Allah al-Dihlawi's _Izalat al-Khafa' ʿan Khilafat al-Khulafa'_.
Hajj Gibril
Before you enlighten others, bring yourself up to date. Your second hadith has just been discussed to saturation. As for the first, it was brought up by one of your friends two years ago on soc.religion.islam and I've appended below the reply I posted at the time. As for your painful ignorance of the Sira of the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs and why we were commanded to follow them, I believe I already advised you in private correspondence to see their biographies at http://sunnah.org/history/Default.htm.
and also: Re: Muawiyah and Abusing Imam Ali (AS)
NN wrote:
It is also a well-known fact also that ʿAli's son, al-Husayn -- Allah be well-pleased with both of them -- accepted reconciliation with Muʿawiya and gave him his pledge (bayʿa) as narrated by al-Bukhari in his Sahih.
The rightly-guided caliph, ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAziz said: "Those from whose blood Allah has kept our hands exempt, we shall not soil with it our tongues."
The Prophet said ﷺ : "None of you should come to me with anything (negative) about any of my Companions for I do not want to go out to you except with a clear heart."
Narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, and Ahmad. This is one of the hadiths that those who mumble about the Fitna hate to hear. I heard from my shaykh the following rule: When lions fight, street dogs keep quiet.
Narrated Sa'd Ibn Abi Waqqas:
Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan, give order to Sa'd, and told him: "What prevents you that you are refraining from cursing Abu Turab (nickname of Ali)?" Sa'd replied: "Don't you remember that the Prophet said three things about (the virtue of) Ali? So I will never curse Ali."
Your "Sunni references" are always half-true because you never mention the Sunni understanding for them.
Imam al-Nawawi said: "The ulamas said: Any hadith that appear to refer to intra-Sahaba enmity is interpreted figuratively. In this hadith there is nothing that states that Muʿawiya actually ordered Saʿd to curse ʿAli, but he only asked him for the reason why he refrained from cursing him: was it Godwariness? in which case, well done; or fear? etc. It may be that Saʿd was observed among a group that cursed ʿAli, but he himself abstained from it although unable to reprimand them, then they were subsequently reprimanded, and Muʿawiya asked him this question. Another possible interpretation is: What prevented you from proving ʿAli wrong in his opinion and ijtihad, and tell people the rightness and correctness of our position and ijtihad?"
The Governor of Medina who was one of the members of the house of Marwan called Sahl Ibn Sa'd, and ordered him to curse Ali. But Sahl refused to do so. The governor said: "If you don't want to curse Ali, just say God curse Abu Turab (the nickname of Ali)." Sahl said: "Ali did not like any name for himself better than Abu Turab, and Ali used to become very happy when somebody would call him Abu Turab."
Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Virtues of Companions, Section
The one who gave that order is not a Companion of the Prophet ﷺ nor what you call "Sunnah cursing Imam Ali" but a member of a fitna group about whom Abu Hurayra said: "By the One in Whose hand is my soul, there will soon come a time upon people when the flock of sheep will be dearer to its owner than all the house of Marwan." Imam Malik narrates it in al-Muwatta'. There are several other statements by Abu Hurayra -- Allah be well-pleased with him -- to that effect....
Hajj Gibril
May 30, 1999
I looked for it before posting but couldn't find it. [it is below 
]
No, he was Qurayshi from both his father's [al-Khattab ibn Bufayl ibn ʿAbd al-ʿUzza ibn Riyah [or ʿAbd Allah] ibn Qurt ibn Razah ibn Uday ibn Kaʿb ibn Lu'ay al-Qurashi al-ʿAdawi] and his mother's side [the sister of Abu Jahl, Hantama al-Makhzumiyya bint Hisham or Dhi al-Ramhayn ibn al-Mughira ibn ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿUmar ibn Makhzum].
The hadith is authentic and narrated from Jabir, Ibn ʿAbbas, Abu Musa, and Abu Dharr by Muslim, Ahmad, al-Darimi, al-Bazzar, Ibn Hibban and others.
ʿIyad mentioned it in al-Shifa' (2000 ed. p. 218 #401) then explained: "It was said that the black are the Arabs because swarthiness is their dominant complexion so they are among the black while the red are the ʿAjam (non-Arabs). And it was said that [it means] the white (al-beed) and the black among the nations. And it was said that the red are human beings while the black are the jinn."
The Arabs did not know racialism (race theories) and to them, probably tribe and clan were the dividing factor in defining ethnicity, which was then abolished by Islam. However, the term for slave (ʿabd) definitely denotes a black man in Arabic, which caused and continues to cause friction althouth it runs counter to the objectives of the Law. There are also some forged narrations attempting to inject racist notions into Islam.
Hajj Gibril +Someone's feedback on SRI allowed me to research this narration a little further but it is probably a "gharib, gharib" report.
"Oh Mankind! The Lord is One Lord. The Father (Adam) is one father.
The religion is one religion. To be an Arab is not based from the
father or mother but it is a language. Whoever speaks Arabic then he is
an Arab.
http://geocities.com/aly2k1/arab.jpg
Ibn ʿAsakir in Tarikh Dimashq (Dar al-Fikr ed. 21:407) said:
Abu al-Faraj Qawwam ibn Zayd ibn ʿIsa and Abu al-Qasim Ismaʿil ibn Ahmad narrated to us: Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Naqur narrated to us: Abu al-Hasan ʿAli ibn ʿUmar al-Harbi narrated to us: Ahmad ibn al-Hasan ibn Harun al-Subahi narrated to us: al-ʿAla' ibn Salim narrated to us: Qurra ibn ʿIsa al-Wasiti narrated to us: Abu Bakr al-Dhuhli narrated to us: From Malik ibn Anas: From al-Zuhri: From Abu Salama ibn ʿAbd al-Rahman who said:
"Qays ibn Mattatiyya came to a circle in which were sitting Salman al-Farisi, Suhayb al-Rumi, and Bilal al-Habashi, whereupon he said: 'Here are Aws and Khazraj rising to help this man [the Prophet ﷺ ], so what is the meaning of this?' Hearing this, Muʿadh ibn Jabal stood, seized him by the collar, and brought him to the Prophet ﷺ and told the latter what he had said. The Prophet ﷺ stood and walked trailing his garment until he entered the Mosque and it was called out that the people have gathered to pray. Then he said: O people! The Lord is One and the Father [Adam] is one. Arabness (al-ʿarabiyya) is not, in any of you, inherited from father or mother but it is only the language that is spoken (innama hiya al-lisan). So, whoever speaks Arabic then he is an Arab.' Then Muʿadh stood - still holding the other's collar - and said: 'What do you order us to do with this Munafiq, O Messenger of Allah?' He replied, 'Leave him to the Fire.' And Qays was among those who committed apostasy during the Ridda, at which time he was killed."
Cited in two places in Kanz al-ʿUmmal (#33936 and #37132) which also states that the above is mursal and adds the words, "the Religion is one religion" as well as repeating the substantives (The Lord is One Lord, the father is one father).
And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad wrote:
then ʿUmar could not have married Umm Kulthum the daughter of ʿAli and Fatima -
Umar did all his best to force this marriage that in fact did not take place. He asked the hand of Um Kolthoom many times, and insisted. No marriage took place.
The marriage of ʿUmar with Umm Kulthum al-Hashimiyya (b. 6) the daughter of ʿAli and Fatima most certainly took place. ʿAli gave her away to ʿUmar upon her request although he was afraid at first that ʿUmar might not accept her due to her youth. The dowry was 40,000 dirhams. She bore him Zayd al-Akbar, known as Ibn al-Khalifatayn (= "Son of the Two Caliphs i.e. ʿUmar and ʿAli) who became renowned for his great beauty, and a daughter, Ruqayya. After ʿUmar died she remarried, upon ʿAli's order, with ʿAwn ibn Jaʿfar ibn Abi Talib. When ʿAwn died ʿAli remarried her with Muhammad ibn Jaʿfar then, when the latter also died, with ʿAbd Allah ibn Jaʿfar who survived her. Zayd died a young man, childless, from a stone throw in the time of Muʿawiya. Umm Kulthum died at the same time and either ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿUmar or Saʿid ibn al-ʿAs ibn Saʿid [who had asked for Umm Kulthum's hand after ʿUmar died] prayed over the both of them, Allah have mercy on them!
Sources: Ibn Saʿd, Tabaqat (8:337-340=8:463-464); al-Siyar wal-Maghazi (p. 248); Tarikh al-Yaʿqubi (2:260); Nasab Quraysh (p. 352); al-Tabari, Tarikh (4:199 and 5:335); Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, al-Istiʿab (4:490-491); al-Nawawi, Tahdhib al-Asma' wa al-Lughat (2:267 #1219); al-Dhahabi, Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubala' (Dar al-Fikr ed. 5:22-24) and Tarikh al-Islam (4:58-59, 4:137-139, 4:227); Ibn Hajar, al-Isaba (4:492 #1481); Ibn al-Athir, Usd al-Ghaba (7:387-388) and al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh (3:54, 4:12); etc.
Hajj Gibril
More detailed account here:
- The Marriage of `Umar ibn al-Khattab with Umm Kulthum bint `Ali
The expression "Ahl al-Sunna" is reported from Ibn ʿAbbas and Ibn ʿUmar by al-Lalika'i in Sharh Usul Iʿtiqad Ahl al-Sunna; Muslim narrates it from Muhammad ibn Sirin in the Muqaddima to his Sahih; and al-Darimi in his Musnad from al-Hasan al-Basri. This is not to mention the Mujtahid Imams and those of the generation-layer immediately preceding them.
I could look up al-Suyuti's compilation _Miftah al-Janna fi al-Ihtijaj bis- Sunna_ and the late Dr. ʿAbd al-Khaliq Abd al-Ghani's _Hujjiyyat al-Sunna_ for more reports, but this is probably enough to put to rest the false assumption that the expression was unknown in the early days of Islam.
Hajj Gibril
and also:
Literal translation: The people of the traditional way and of the congregation.
Meaning: The people who follow the Prophetic Sunna and adhere to the largest mass of the Muslims beginning with the congregation of the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ .
Antonym: "Ahl al-Bidʿa wa al-Dalala" = the people of innovation and misguidance, i.e. all non-Sunni Muslims.
Some proof-texts:
"My Community shall divide into seventy-three sects, all of them in the Fire except one: [Those that follow] that which I and my Companions follow." A sound narration from ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿAmr by al-Tirmidhi (h.asan gharib).
Another version states: "My Community shall divide into seventy-three sects, all of them in the Fire except one: the Congregation (jamaʿa)." Narrated from Abu Hurayra by Ibn Majah and, as part of a longer h.adith, from Muʿawiya by Abu Dawud and Ah.mad all with good chains as stated by al-ʿIraqi in al-Mughni while al-H.akim (1:128=1990 ed. 1:218) said "a sound chain" and al-Dhahabi concurred, and from Anas by Abu Yaʿla in his Musnad as stated in Kashf al-Khafa.
In the same sense the Prophet said ﷺ Allah bless and greet him and his family: "My Companions are trustkeepers for my Community" [Narrated from Abu Musa al-Ashʿari by Muslim and Ah.mad as part of a longer h.adith] and "Mankind makes up one portion (h.ayyiz) and I and my Companions make up one portion [counter-balancing it]." Narrated from Abu Saʿid al-Khudri, Rafiʿ ibn Khadij, and Zayd ibn Thabit by Ah.mad and al-T.abarani in al-Kabir (3:341 #4444), the former with a chain of sound narrators according to al-Haythami (5:250, 10:17), "a sound chain" according to al-Zayn in the Musnad (10:72 #11110, 16:43 #21521) and al-H.akim (2:258 - al-Dhahabi concurred) while al-Arna'ut declares Ah.mad's chain "cut off" (munqatiʿ) but the h.adith itself s.ah.ih. li ghayrih in his edition of the Musnad (17:258 #11167); also by Ibn Abi Shayba (14:498-499), al-T.ayalisi in his Musnad (#2205), al-Qud.aʿi in Musnad al-Shihab (#845), and al-Bayhaqi in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (5:109-110). The complete narration states: "When the verse { When comes the Help of Allah, and Victory} (110:1) was revealed, the Messenger of Allah - Allah bless and greet him and his family - recited it until he finished it and said: ʿMankind makes up one portion and I and my Companions make up one portion.' And he said: ʿThere is no longer emigration (hijra) after victory but there remains jihad and intention (niyya) [for emigration].'"
Further readings at
Probativeness Of The Sunna
After I posted the above on another forum I received the interesting answer below, to which I append my answer:
In this case, we could understand /jamaaʿah/ to mean those who join or meet with, or who agree upon the truth. Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaaʿah : those who follow the sunnah of the Prophet, upon whom be peace, and who agree upon the truth, do combine or meet together in their own agreement of what this is, they affirm the truth and bear witness to it... and so on.
There are many opportunities for dispute here. Etymology is said to be a science in which the consants count for very little and the vowels for nothing at all.
Naturally, the expression "Ahl al-Sunnah" was unknown in the early days of Islam. This emerged in response to the "shia of Ali", who were the first to distinguish themselves from the community in a way that had already been forseen. Ahl al-Sunnah only has meaning when it is placed in apposition to something else and that first something was the shia, who indeed call themselves "ahl al-bayt" - grandly expropriating for themselves the moniiker of the "Household of the Prophet".
Today "Ahl" this and that is used by the rigidly righteous of all color and hue to refer to themselves : extremist Sufis who assume the authority to declare takfir on whoever disagrees with them will call themselves "Ahl al-Sunnah", despite the fact that takfir was the first bid'a to appear among the Muslims. Extremist Salafis do the same thing, tit for tat.
As sectarianism spreads, the terminology to destinguish the true path from all others proliferates, ahl this and ahl that multiply like rabbits. We have ahl al-hadith and its nemisis ahl al-fiqh. Ahl al-rai was a common perjorative for the proto-Hanafis of Kufa who had a penchant for speculative law and theology. G Haddad has already mentioned Ahl al-Dalala, the Misguided, and Ahl al-Bida, the innovators.
Early Wahhabi polemics mention Ahl al-Qibab wa Qihab, "the whoremongering people of tombs", that is to say, the Sufis, whose "whoreing" was with shirk. The opposite of this was, of course, "ahl al-tawhid".
The Wahhabis themselves, in the days of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab and again in the 1930s under Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, then Sultan of Nejd, called themselves simply "Muslimuun". Who needs ahl when there is only belief and disbelief?
The important thing to remember when you see "ahl" is that someone somewhere is hoping to convince you that they alone possess truth.
Any doubt that the majority is meant is dispelled by the narrations elucidating jamaʿa to mean the largest mass or sawad al-aʿzam. "Popularly" is misleading since the basic sense of congregation or rather massive majority is that forwarded by the Ulema first and last.
These distinctions are important to understand the rest of this answer, namely, that the Wahhabis - since you bring them up - were declared heretics by the Sunni Ulema two centuries ago regardless of what they called themselves or those they sought to demonize.
I would recommend that you take a look at Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani's "200 Years of New Kharijism and the Ongoing Revision of Islam", his introduction to the former Kuwaiti minister, Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifaʿi's _Advice to Our Brothers the Scholars of Najd_ (Nasiha li Ikhwanina ʿUlama' Najd) translated in full together with the introductory chapter of Sayyid ʿAlawi ibn Ahmad al-Haddad's 1801 book _Refutation of the Innovator from Najd_ (Misbah al-Anam fi Radd Shubah al-Najdi al-Bidʿi al-Lati Adalla biha al-ʿAwamm)
lxxxvi p. + 393 p. Translation, notes, and appendices. Al-Sunna Foundation of America. www.sunnah.org - "publications").
The table of contents is archived in full at Dejanews (date: 2000-10-01) under the title "Rifaʿi & Haddad on Wahhabiyya" at: - expired link (before 2023-02-10) groups.google.com/groups
Was-Salam
Hajj Gibril
"Muhammad is the noblest of the Arabs and ʿAjam.
Muhammad is the best of those who trod the earth."
(Al-Busiri)
Calling out their names is not proof that they worship them together with Allah so it cannot be called shirk; nor do we have to reciprocate their takfir of us; nor does slander of the Sahaba entail kufr but only fisq, except qazf of ʿA'isha, which is kufr. However, some of the Shiʿas are kafir according to the conditions detailed below.
The Ithna ʿAshari (literally, "Twelvers") are the largest group of the Shiʿa and are also called Imamis after their doctrine that their twelve Imams are immune from sin (maʿsum). The Shiʿa are also known as Rawafid, or Rafidis, or Rafida, although strictly speaking the Rawafid are only one extreme group among them. However, if we should take Ruhullah Khomayni as an accurate representative of the Ithna ʿAsharis, it would seem that most of them today are actually Rafidis although they do not show it at all times, but Allah knows best.
Below is an answer from Imam Muhammad Ahmad Rida Khan Barelwi, given in his Fatawa al-Haramayn (Waqf Ikhlas offset reprint p. 10):
Answer: The Rafidi, if he prefers Amir al-Mu'minin ʿAli to the Two Shaykhs [Abu Bakr and ʿUmar] - Allah be well-pleased with all of them - is an innovator (mubtadiʿ) as stated in al-Khulasa, [al-Fatawa] al-Hindiyya and other books; but if he denies the validity of the Imamates of Abu Bakr and ʿUmar or the validity of the Imamate of one of the two, then the jurists (fuqaha') declared him kafir while the theologians (mutakallimun) declared him an innovator - and the latter ruling is the more precautionary one. If he claims (1) to correct Allah Most High [i.e. in sending the Revelation to the Prophet ﷺ rather than ʿAli] or (2) that the existing Qur'an is defective or (3) that the Companions or anyone else altered it, or (4) that Amir al-Mu'minin [ʿAli] or any other of the pure Imams is better than the Prophets in the sight of Allah - upon them all blessings and peace - as openly claimed by the Rafadah of our regions [India] and as stipulated in our time by their Mujtahid - he is definitely a kafir and the ruling that applies to him is that of apostates, as stated in al-Hindiyya quoting the Zahiriyya and in al-Hadiqa al-Nadiyya and others of the Fiqh books. We have enlarged upon this question in our epistle _al-Maqala al-Mufassira ʿan Ahkam al-Bidʿa al-Mukaffira_.
Yes he is, insha Allah. I have asked him to take back or explain his fatwa that Barelwis are outside the fold of Ahl al-Sunna and await his answer. The Barelwis are part of Ahl al-Sunna generally speaking, just as the Deobandis are part of Ahl al-Sunna generally speaking. As for individuals, then each case is examined on its own merits.
"We love the Companions of the Messenger of Allah but we do not go to excess in our love for any one individual among them nor do we disown any one of them. We hate anyone who hates them or does not speak well of them and we only speak well of them. Love of them is a part of Islam, part of belief and part of excellent behaviour, while hatred of them is unbelief, hypocrisy and rebelliousness. "
The words "hatred of them" means "hatred of all of them" because Allah Most High praised their generality. To hate some of them is nifaq because the Prophet ﷺ said so precisely in relation to ʿAli, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, Ahl al-Bayt in general, Abu Hurayra, and the Ansar. And Allah knows best.
When it meets the criteria of kufr in specific cases then it amounts to kufr, otherwise not.
Yes, you notice this extremism and blatant apostasy in their Ulema, and to Allah Most High is our return.
To my knowledge it does not differ from what was stated already except that the last words of the Ibana attributed to al-Ashʿari are that whoever disparages a single Sahabi, we cut off our ties with him. I.e. we consider him at the very least an innovator in the Religion.
I'm wondering what is the daleel for the view that believing this takes one outside the fold of Islam. I'm puzzled as to why should that be so, if the person in question sincerely believes in all the articles of faith, and fulfills the five pillars?
The problem is this is an article of faith as stated verbatim in the ʿAqida Tahawiyya Par. 98: "We do not prefer any of the saintly men among the Community over any of the Prophets but rather we say that any one of the Prophets is better than all the awliya' put together." The proof is that Allah Most High { never sent a Messenger except to be obeyed} (4:64) while there is no obligation to obey ʿAli nor sin in not obeying him (ra). Further, there is Consensus in the Umma that Nubuwwa is more special than Wilaya and that Risala is more special than Nubuwwa. See also Jawharat al-Tawhid and its commentaries as excerpted in my post on msa-ec "Best of Creation" ﷺ . And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
In al-Bukhari and Muslim: "The dead are tortured by the wailing of the living over them." Mutawatir by al-Suyuti's criterion, as it is narrated from the Prophet ﷺ by ʿUmar, Ibn ʿUmar, Hafsa, Anas, ʿImran ibn Husayn, Abu Musa, Abu Bakr, Abu Hurayra, Samura, al-Mughira ibn Shuʿba, and Suhayb as in al-Kattani's Nazm al-Mutanathir (#106).
In the Sahihayn and the Sunan also, wailing (al-niyaha) is counted among the characteristics of Jahiliyya.
Khomeini, in his book Al-Hukoomatul-lslamiwah (the Islamic government), claims that the Twelve Imams are infallible, and he raises them to a level above the heavenly angels and the commissioned pro- phets of Allah; he stresses:
The Twelve Imams, the ʿItra, and the Companions - Allah be well-pleased with them all - put together are below the level of a single Prophet - upon our Prophet and upon them blessings and peace. This tenet is in al-ʿAqida al-Tahawiyya:
98. We do not prefer any of the saintly men among the Community over any of the Prophets but rather we say that any one of the Prophets is better than all the awliya' put together.
Also, Ahl al-Sunna concur that the generality of the Prophets are above the generality of the angels in level. See on this point my post "Best of Creation ﷺ .[1]
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
"Muhammad is the noblest of the Arabs and ʿAjam.
Muhammad is the best of those who trod the earth."
(Al-Busiri)
see also:
[1] The Prophetic Title: "Best Of Creation",
by Dr. G. F. Haddad
Related
FIQH - Islamic jurisprudence, Questions & Answers
More answers by Sh Gibril F. Haddad on eshaykh
eshaykh.com Entry page
