Man’s honour is in his îmân and ma’rifat, not in his property or position. Try to make your îmân firmer! Make efforts to promote your grade in ma’rifat! It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “If a person works for the Hereafter, Allâhu ta’âlâ will make him attain all his wishes. As for those who always run after worldly concerns; He will perish them.” If a person has difficulty in making a living, it is permissible for him to work. It will be good if he earns. If he cannot, then he should not be persistent about it. Persistence will be futile. In fact, it will be harmful.
THE EARLIEST FITNA IN ISLAM
INTRODUCTION
Allâhu ta’âlâ has mercy on all people in the world. He sends useful things to everybody. As a kindness to those Believers who deserve Hell (on account of the sins they have committed in the world), He will forgive them and bless them with Paradise. He, alone, creates every living being, keeps them always in existence, and protects all against fears and horrors. Trusting ourselves to the honourable Name of such an almighty being as Allah, we begin to write this book.
Praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ! Prayers and salutations be to His most beloved Prophet, Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’! Benedictions be to the pure Ahl-i-Bayt of that exalted Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’, and to each and every one of his faithful Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’!
It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf which is written in the abridged version of Tadhkira Qurtubî: “Fitna will break out among my Sahâba. For the sake of the sohbats they have had with me, Allâhu ta’âlâ will forgive those who will partake in the fitna. People after them, however, will rekindle the fitna by repeatedly blathering on the events; they will go to Hell on account of their undue concern.” The great Islamic scholar Imâm Rabbânî Ahmad Fârûqî Serhendî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’, who passed away in India in 1034 [1624 A.D.], sent letters to every country in order to teach the creed of Ahl as-Sunnat and the true way of Islam, as well as the fact that Tasawwuf was not something distinct from the Islamic faith. His letters, more than five hundred, were compiled and printed in three volumes. The thirty-sixth letter of the second volume enlarges on the fitna among the Sahâba.
It was during the time of the third Khalîfa Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ when a Jew of Yemen named Abdullah bin Saba’ fomented the earliest fitna of separatism in Islam. People who had fallen victim to his misguidance mingled with the Sahâba. Throughout history they have been supported by masons and Jews. From time to time they have had recourse to violence, thus undermining Islam from within and causing considerable bloodshed among Muslims. The tragedy runs counter to Islam’s instructions on unity and brotherly affection.
In the course of time, enemies of the Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ broke into twelve sectarian groups, maintaining their unison only in their systematic and cleverly planned activities to deceive and divide Muslims. They allege that the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ were inimical towards one another, and cast all sorts of ignominious aspersions on those great Islamic celebrities on the chimerical ground that they refused to pay homage to Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’. These instigators of fitna and fesâd, who represent themselves as enlightened men of religion or up-to-date writers, stigmatize the benevolent Sunnî religious teachers as uneducated fuddy-duddies, trying thereby to derogate and blemish those blessed teachers, who have been endeavouring to awaken the Muslims by divulging and refuting their abominable lies and slanders. As the aspersions cast by these abhorrent instigators will not detract from the high honour of the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’, likewise, their attacks will recoil on them, adding to the value and honour of those virtuous teachers.
In order to protect our Muslim brothers from believing the sequinned lies of these subversive people, whose purpose is to separate brothers from one another, we have translated the thirty-sixth letter from the Fârisî into Turkish, (and thence into English,) and entitled it The Earliest Fitna in Islam. We are certain that when the valuable younger generation read this letter with objectivity, their pure souls and unsoiled consciences will help them see that the Ahl as-Sunnat scholars are right.
May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect Muslims against divisions! May He unite us in the correct Sunnî path, which we all like and approve of! May He protect us from believing the lies of the enemies of Islam, and from falling into their traps! Âmîn.
THE EARLIEST FITNA IN ISLAM
The thirty-sixth letter of the second volume of the book Maktûbât by Imâm Rabbânî Mujaddîd-i-alf-i-thânî Shaikh Ahmad Fârûqî Serhendî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ proves the greatness of the Ashâb-i-kirâm and quotes the remarks made about the Ashâb-i-kirâm both by the scholars of the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat and by other people in heretical groups. It explains that the Shiite sect was the produce of the earliest fitna in Islam, that the Sunnî group are not eccentric like the Shiites, and that they do not follow a benighted and short-sighted course like the Khwârij (Khârijîs), either, and lauds and praises the Ahl-i-Bayt of our Master, the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’.
In the name of Allah I begin to write this letter of mine. Praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ! Prayers and salutations be to His exalted Prophet! Benedictions be to the Ahl-i-Bayt of that exalted Prophet, to all his Sahâba, and to all Muslims!
One of the greatest and most valuable gifts and blessings of Allâhu ta’âlâ is for a person to love the followers of the right path, to yearn to meet and talk with those fortunate people, to hear the words of those great people, and to read their books. The Mukhbir-i-sâdiq, i.e. Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’, who always tells the truth, stated, “Al-mer’u ma’a man ahabba,” which means, “If a person loves someone, he will be with him in both this world and the next.” Hence, if a person loves great religious persons, he will be with them and get a share from their spiritual closeness to Allâhu ta’âlâ. According to the reports given by my valuable son Khwâja Sharaf-ad-dîn Husayn, who is a man of choice wording and a good prospect for spiritual promotions, you possess the utterly beautiful moral qualities required for that great blessing. With all your miscellaneous occupations and complicated cares, you do not forget about those great people. Beleaguered by all sorts of worldly problems as you are, you do not miss that most valuable blessing. Infinite praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ for that greatest favour of His! Indeed, your happiness and blessed attainments will reproduce happiness and attainments for many another person. Your salvation will cause others’ salvation and attainment of peace. As is reported, again, by my son, you have been reading this faqîr’s (Hadrat Imâm Rabbânî’s) writings and cherishing my words. He said it would be very useful if I wrote a few words to you. So I attempt to write a few words at my son’s request.
Recently, most people in India have been discussing subjects such as right of caliphate and making comments on the behaviours and attitudes of the Sahâba. Quite a few people have been frankly saying and writing their personal meagre heretical opinions and narrow views on this esoteric subject, which is one of the most delicate branches of the Islamic sciences. They do not hesitate to attach wrong meanings to âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs, or to try to hush up the true and rightful words of the Islamic scholars, in order to prove that they are right. I have therefore considered it requisite to reveal the truth by writing a couple of facts on the subject, informing the Muslims about the true and rightful words of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat and refuting the heresies of the aberrant groups of bid’at with the help of documentary proofs.
O my pure-souled and noble-natured brother! Scholars of the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat ‘rahimahumullâhu ta’âlâ unanimously state that it is necessary to “hold the Shaikhayn superior and love the two sons-in-law.” In other words, Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar are superior to all the other Sahâbîs, and Hadrat ’Uthmân and Hadrat Alî should be loved. Every Muslim in the right path called Ahl as-Sunnat wa-l-jamâ’at is to hold the former two (Khalîfas) in higher esteem, feeling warm affection for the latter two.
That Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar are the highest (of all the Sahâba) is a fact on which all the Sahâba were unanimous. This unanimity of the Sahâba was reported to us by the Tâbi’în-i-izâm. The greater ones of our religious imâms, such as Imâm Shâfi’î, inform us that the unanimity was the case. Hadrat Abul Hasan Ash’arî, one of our two religious leaders in credal matters, states: “That Abû Bakr and ’Umar are the highest Muslims in the entire Ummat is an absolute fact.” Imâm Zahabî writes that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was Khalîfa and was therefore holding the entire state power and authority in his hands when he said to a large audience of the Sahâba, “Abû Bakr and ’Umar are the highest of this Ummat,” and adds that their superiority is a definite fact which has reached us through (an authentic way of narration called) tawâtur. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ stated: “After our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, Abû Bakr is the (second) highest human being. ’Umar is next after him. And next comes someone else.” His son Muhammad bin Hanafiyya, who was among the audience, said, “You are the highest next after ’Umar!” Imâm Bukhârî reports that Hadrat Alî’s reply was: “I am only one of the Muslims.” So high is the number of the dependable and trustworthy people who acknowledge the superiority of Abû Bakr and ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’, that it has become a tawâtur, i.e. a narration which is wâjib (necessary, compulsory) to believe. He who denies it must either be ignorant or strongly bigoted and obdurate. Abd-ur-Razzaq bin Alî Lâhijî (d. 1051 [1642 A.D.]), an eminent Shiite scholar, saw the incontrovertibly palpable truth and acknowledged that the two Imâms were the highest, stating, “Since Alî acknowledged that Abû Bakr and ’Umar were superior to him, I say so, too. I believe in the fact that both of them were superior to him. If Hadrat Alî had not stated that they were higher, I would not say so, either. I say as he did because I love Hadrat Alî. It would be sinful not to agree with him and to still profess love of him.”
Because there were fitnas and tumults during the caliphates of Hadrat ’Uthman and Hadrat Alî, the two blessed sons-in-law of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, the people’s hearts were rather depressed and cold. A general feeling of hostility and discord was prevalent among them. Therefore, the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat stated that the two Khatanas (In-laws), or Sons-in-law, should be loved. Thereby they anticipated any possible defamatory essay against Rasûlullah’s Sahâba and closed the remotest loophole which might be exploited for fomenting grudge against any one of the Khalîfas, who were the representatives of the Messenger of Allah.
As is seen, love of Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is an essential condition for being a Sunnî Muslim. He who dislikes Hadrat Alî is not in the group of Ahl as-Sunnat. He is called a Khârijî (pl. Khwârij). On the other hand, a person who is inordinate, excessive and eccentric in the affection due to Hadrat Alî; who asserts that loving Hadrat Alî requires swearing at Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba; and who deviates from the path guided by the Ashâb-i-kirâm, the Tâbi’în-i-izâm and the Salaf as-Salihîn by vilifying the Ashâb-i-kirâm, is a heretic. As is seen, this last group are overzealous in their affection for Hadrat Alî, whereas the Khwârij bear grudge against Hadrat Alî, which obscures their insight and prevents them from recognizing that Lion of Allah. It is the group of Ahl as-Sunnat who have followed the moderate course without allowing the slightest digression towards either extremity. Truth is definitely in the medial course, and not in either of the two eccentric directions. Either one of the aberrations is both detestable and perilous. According to a narration reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal ‘rahima hullâhu ta’âlâ’, Hadrat Alî quotes Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ as having said to him: “Yâ Alî! You will be identical with Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’. Jews have pursued an inimical policy against him, calumniating his blessed mother Hadrat Maryam(Mary). Christians, by contrast, have doted on him unduly, attributing preposterous grades to him. That is, they have called him Son of God.” Afterwards, Hadrat Alî explicated the hadîth-i-sherîf as follows: “Two groups of people will perish because of me. One group will overflow the measure of affection due towards me, overstating my faculties and attributing to me merits that I do not really have. The other group, my enemies, will slander me.” Hence, the Khwârij were compared to Jews, whereas the intemperate adherents have symbolized Christians. Both groups are apart from the right path. It is crass ignorance to assert that the Sunnî Muslims dislike Hadrat Alî, or to associate love of Hadrat Alî with being a Shiite. One thing should be known well: The heresy in this matter is based not on love of Hadrat Alî, but on animosity against three Khalîfas of the Messenger of Allah. What is wicked is to cast aspersions on the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Imâm-i-Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ states, as is versified in the following couplet:
If love of Muhammad’s
‘alaihis-salâm’ family involves being
A Shiite, I’m one, be it known, every genie’n human
being!
In other words, Shiites say that to be a Shiite means to love Muhammad’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ Âl (family), i.e. the Ahl-i-Bayt. If being a Shiite really involves love of the Ahl-i-Bayt, then Shiites are people whom we love and respect very much. What is wrong, however, is animosity against people other than the Ahl-i-Bayt.
(Hadrat Alî and Hadrat Fâtima and their children are called the Âl-i-Rasûl, or the Ahl-i-Bayt.)
Certainly, the Sunnî Muslims are the only people who love the Ahl-i-Bayt of the Messenger of Allah properly. And certainly, again, they are the only true followers of the Ahl-i-Bayt. If a person who professes love of the Ahl-i-Bayt and claims to be following them does not nurse a grudge against the Sahâba and believes that the wars among the Sahâba were based on benevolent reasons, he is a Sunnî Muslim. This saves him from being a heretic. For, to hate the Ahl-i-Bayt means to be a Khârijî. A Sunnî Muslim both loves the Ahl-i-Bayt and respects the Sahâba and loves them all. As is seen, being a person without a certain Madhhab is a concomitant of enmity against the Sahâba. For, the Ahl-i-Bayt are Sahâbîs at the same time. And, to be a Sunnî Muslim means to love all the Sahâba. A wise and reasonable person simply does not hold enmity against the Sahâba above love of the Ahl-i-Bayt. Because he loves Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, he loves all his Sahâba.
Some people allege that the group of Ahl as-Sunnat are hostile towards the Ahl-i-Bayt. No degree of dismay felt at their extremely wrong and utterly detestable allegation would be too much. Indeed, love of the Ahl-i-Bayt is held by the Sunnî Muslims as the greatest source of hope for dying with îmân, (i.e. as Believers). The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat say that dying as a Believer requires loving the Ahl-i-Bayt very much. This faqîr’s (Imâm Rabbânî’s) father was a scholar. He was very profound both in the zâhirî sciences and in the bâtinî ones. He would always inculcate love of the Ahl-i-Bayt upon people. He would say that affection for them would be very useful at the time of death, helping one to die as a Believer. Afterwards, when my father was ill on his deathbed, I was by his side. He was spending his final minutes in this life. He was about to drop his last tenuous links with the world. I remembered him saying to love the Ahl-i-Bayt very much. I asked, “How much is your love of them at this moment?” He was almost completely unconscious when he breathed: “I have been bathing in the ocean of love of Ahl-i-Bayt.” I made hamd-u-thenâ (praise and gratitude) to Allâhu ta’âlâ for my father’s answer. Love of the Ahl-i-Bayt is capital for the Muslims of Ahl-i-Sunnat. Some people do not realize this fact. Turning away from the correct and moderate love held by the Sunnî Muslims, they follow an eccentric course. Disdainful of a manner of love which is not excessive or inordinate, they stigmatize the Sunnî Muslims as Khwârij. They do not understand that between excess in one direction and the other is a medial way, a moderate and correct way. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat are the only people who have been blessed with the honour of finding the correct and right way, the medial way between the two wrong ways, one of which is unduly high and the other despicably low. May Allâhu profusely reward the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat for the incessant and relentless drudgery they went through for the sake of the research they carried on to find this right way. That it was only the Sunnî Muslims who fought the Khwârij, i.e. the enemies of Hadrat Alî and his progeny, is a fact which Shiites also know well. There were no Shiites, –or their number was infinitesimally small–, when the Sunnî Muslims ploughed a lonely furrow in giving the enemies of Ahl-i-Bayt their deserts. By the way, do these people call the Sunnî Muslims ‘Shiites’ on account of their love of Ahl-i-Bayt? And do they think, therefore, that those people who dispersed the Khwârij and frightened them away were Shiites? So surprising to say, sometimes they call the Sunnî Muslims ‘Khwârij’. Perhaps they really think so, since the affection which the Sunnî Muslims display towards the Ahl-i-Bayt is not aggressive and excessive. And, conversely, they sometimes consider the Sunnî Muslims as Shiites on account of the moderate love which they show towards the Ahl-i-Bayt and which is the manner of affection proper towards those great people. Consequently, and because they are vulgarly ignorant, when they hear the expression ‘love of the Ahl-i-Bayt’ from the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, they conclude that those scholars side with them. On the other hand, when other scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat warn against excessive affection and admonish that the (other) three Khalîfas must be loved, this time they call those scholars ‘Khwârij’. Shame on them for the unjust and inappropriate labels they hang on the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. Because of their anomalous affection towards Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, they say that love of Hadrat Alî necessitates animosity against the three Khalîfas and against most of the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Why should they be so unreasonable? How could that ever be called love?
Could the name of love ever allow for the folly of animosity against the Khalîfas of the Messenger of Allah or defamation of his Sahâba. The only reason for the hatred they feel against the Sunnî Muslims and for the ugly aspersions they cast on them is the Sunnî Muslims’ complementing love of the Ahl-i-Bayt with love of all the Sahâba, and their not maligning any one of the Sahâba although they know about the wars which took place among them. Because the Sunnî Muslims realize the value and honour of the sohbat of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, they state that each and every one of the Sahâba was a superior, valuable and pure Muslim who had been purged from all sorts of malice, recalcitrance and jealousy. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat do discriminate between the right and the wrong parties in those wars. Yet they state that the mistakes were based not on the wicked desires of the nafs, but on ra’y and ijtihâd. If the Sunnî Muslims also were inimical and abusive towards most of the great Sahâba, these eccentric people would be pleased with them and would no longer speak ill of them. On the other hand, the Khwârij would sympathize with the Sunnî Muslims only if they, too, were enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt. Yâ Rabbî! After showing us the right way, do not make our hearts slip away from it! Bless us also from Thine endless treasures of Compassion! Thou art the only source of goodness.
As the greatest ones of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat explain, the blessed Sahâba of our master the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ parted into three groups concerning the matters that caused the so-called wars:
1– The Sahâbîs in the first group ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ observed the events and reached the ijtihâd that those who were with Hadrat Alî were right.
2– According to the ijtihâd of the second group, the other party were right.
3– The third group were hesitant. Their ijtihâd did not show clearly which party was right.
It was wâjib for the blessed Sahâbîs in the first group to act in accordance with their own ijtihâd and support Hadrat Alî. Likewise, it was necessary for the second group to follow their own ijtihâd and support the opposing party. And the third group was to support neither party. It would have been wrong for them to support either party. Each of the three groups acted in accordance with their own ijtihâd. All three of them did what was wâjib and necessary for them to do. Then, how could we ever blame them for having done so? And which one of them could we blame? Imâm Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ states: “Allâhu ta’âlâ has protected us from imbruing our hands with their blood. So we should protect our tongues from interfering with them.” ’Umar bin Abd-ul’azîz also is reported to have made an identical statement. That statement shows that we should not make comments on the events among them, neither favourable nor unfavourable; we should not pass judgments, for instance, on who was right and who was wrong. We should only speak in praise of them. A hadîth-i-sherîfcommands us to do so. The hadîth-i-sherîf reads as follows: “Keep your tongues when my Sahâba are mentioned,” which means, “When people talk about my Sahâba and the wars among them, protect yourselves. Avoid expressing a predilection for some of them and blaming the others.” We have to obey this commandment. However, according to the understanding of most of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, the Sahâbîs who fought on Hadrat Alî’s side were right. The opposing party were erroneous. Yet they cannot be blamed, since theirs was an error of ijtihâd. An error of ijtihâd is not something open to criticism. Those (mujtahids) with erroneous ijtihâd, like the mujtahids whose ijtihâd was right, cannot be blamed or vilified. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is reported to have made the following explanation amidst the so-called wars: “Our brothers disagree with us. They are neither disbelievers nor sinners. For, their ijtihâd is what they understand, which would not make them disbelievers or sinners.” As is seen, the Sunnîs and the Shiites concur in that the Sahâbîs who fought with Hadrat Alî were wrong, and in that Hadrat Alî was right. They differ, however, inasmuch as the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat state that the erroneous party cannot be blamed because their error originated from their understanding and points of view. They hold that we should avoid criticizing and maligning those great people and that we should be considerate of the right and honour of the Best of Mankind ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’. Indeed, our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated: “FearAllâhu ta’âlâ lest you should fail to be considerate of my Sahâba’s rights. After me, do not speak ill of them!” He repeated the same statement twice in order to emphasize the importance of his commandment. It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “All my Sahâba are like the celestial stars. You will attain hidâyat and happiness if you follow any one of them!” There is many another hadîth-i-sherîf which commands that each and every Sahâbî must be held great and respected. Therefore, we have to hold them valuable and superior. As for the trivial mistakes ascribed to them; we should, at the most, believe that there were benevolent intentions behind those mistakes. This is the Sunnî credo.
Some people exceed the limits in this matter. They call the Sahâbîs who fought with Hadrat Alî ‘disbelievers’ and utter about them such ugly, abominable and vulgar expletives as one could not even imagine oneself articulating. Their abusive language fouls their own tongues. If their attitude is intended to show that Hadrat Alî was right and those who fought with him were wrong, they might as well be moderate like the Sunnî Muslims, which would perfectly serve their cause. This moderacy is at the same time compatible with justice and reason. There cannot be a religion or a madhhab which is based on vituperation or criticism of those great religious celebrities. These eccentric people have adopted that vicious policy as a religion for themselves. They believe that inimical and opprobrious attitude towards our Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba is an act of worship. What kind of a religion and madhhab is it that its principal credal tenet is to curse Rasûlullah’s Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în?
It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Muslims will part into seventy-three groups. Seventy-two of them will go to Hell on account of their heretical beliefs. Only one group will attain salvation.” Each of the seventy-two groups deviated from the Sunnî path by inventing various bid’ats. The basest and the worst of the seventy-two heretical groups are those who have been waging an animosity campaign against the Ashâb-i-kirâm. They are the most aberrant and the farthest away from the Ahl as-Sunnat, (i.e. the Sunnî Muslims,) who are the seventy-third group, the only group whose direction leads to salvation. What foreign matter could be found in the pure name of right to associate with these miscreants, who believe that the basis of their religion and madhhab is to vituperate and curse the religious authorities? With time, this group broke into twelve sub-groups. Contentious as they are among themselves, all twelve sub-groups concur in insistently calling the Sahâba disbelievers. They say that it is an act of worship to swear at the Khulafâ ar-râshidîn. However, they avoid being called Râfidîs. They say that Râfidîs are other people. For they, too, know about the hadîth-i-sherîfs foretelling that Râfidîs will be tormented in the world to come. It would be great if they avoided the tenor as well as the vehicle of the word ‘Râfidî’ and desisted from their inimical stance towards the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Hindus in India call themselves Hindus, not disbelievers. They do not consider themselves to be disbelievers. They say that disbelievers are those who live in the Dâr-ul-harb. They are quite wrong. They are disbelievers, regardless of the country they live in. The way they follow is kufr (disbelief).
Or, do these people identify themselves with Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Ahl-i-Bayt? Do they think, in other words, that the Ahl-i-Bayt also are hostile to Abû Bakr and ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’? To think so would mean to consider the greatest ones of the Ahl-i-Bayt as hypocrites. They assert that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ dissembled his real feelings and intentions throughout his thirty-year-long friendship with the other three Khalîfas, that he suppressed his grudge against them for the sake of getting along well with them, holding them superior and showing deference to them although they did not deserve it. Their assertion is extremely appalling. If they loved the Ahl-i-Bayt because they loved Rasûlullah, they would be inimical towards Rasûlullah’s enemies and curseRasûlullah’s enemies more bitterly than they do the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt. However, they have never been seen or heard to curse or even criticise Abû Jahl, who wasRasûlullah’s arch enemy and who hurt and persecuted him so cruelly. On the other hand, they cling to the heretical belief that Hadrat Abû Bakr, who was the most beloved companion of the Messenger of Allah, was an enemy of the Ahl-i-Bayt. In an unbridled fury, they hurl the most vulgar invectives at him. They cast on him such aspersions as would run quite counter to his great honour. What kind of a religion or madhhab is theirs? May Allah forfend! How could it ever be imagined that Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar and all the Ashâb-i-kirâm were enemies of Rasûlullah’s Ahl-i-Bayt ‘ridwânullâhi ’alaihim ajma’în’? It would be all right if these unreasonable and blasphemous people swore at the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt without mentioning the names of the greatest Sahâbîs and thereby putting themselves into the awkward position of maligning the greatest religious celebrities. If they did so, they would be no different from the Sunnî Muslims (in belief). Indeed, the Sunnî Muslims also know the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt as their own enemies, blame them and curse them. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat provide the following very elegant and subtle explanation on the matter: “We should not say that a certain person is to go to Hell, even if he has gone into various kinds of kufr (disbelief). He may make tawba and become a Muslim again (before death). Such people should not be cursed in name. And we should not curse a certain disbeliever by mentioning his name. Disbelievers must be cursed en masse. A dead person can be cursed only if it is known for certain that he died without îmân, (i.e. as a disbeliever).” Some of these wretched miscreants shamelessly curse Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar and malign and pronounce maledictions on the greater ones of the blessed Sahâba. May Allâhu ta’âlâ bless these wretched people with guidance to the right path and deliverance from that wrong and heretical path! Âmîn.
There are two main differences bet