Battalions in Defence of the Takfiris

Between Imam ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam and ‘Amr ibn Hind
April 15, 2021
Mayhem of the Enlightened or Mayhem of the Extremists and Scholars?
April 15, 2021

BACK Return to Table of contents

 

Battalions in Defence of the Takfiris

 

Sheikh Jafar al Subhani says, “We, the Shia, do not do Takfir[1] of any of the Sahabah, neither do we defame them. Rather, we criticize their lives. The expression ‘cursing the Sahabah’ has become a barrier that prevents any honest critique or objective study of the lives of the Sahabah.” He then goes on to say, “Cursing and swearing is the trait of ruffians and the uncivilized commoners.”[2]

Let us embark on a brief journey into some of the authoritative works and then see whether or not Sheikh Jafar Al Subhani still maintains that these traits are of “the ruffians and uncivilized commoners.”

  1. In his book Al Anwar Al No’maniyyah, Ni’mat Allah Al Jaza’iri writes:

‘Umar ibn Al Khattab was afflicted with a sickness in his rectum for which the only relief was the semen of men.[3]

  1. Al Majlisi states:

There is no scope for any sane person to doubt the disbelief of ‘Umar. So, may the curse of Allah and His Messenger be on him, and on whoever considers him a Muslim and desists from cursing him.[4]

  1. He states elsewhere:

The narrations that prove the apostasy of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and their ilk; as well as those that prove the reward of cursing them and dissociating oneself from them and what their misguidance entails, are greater in number than what can be mentioned in this volume or in multiple volumes.[5]

 

Are these the ethics of the followers of Ahlul Bayt, or are they the ethics of the “ruffians and uncivilized commoners,” that the ‘Allamah was talking about?

We want an honest answer from people who possess a modicum of sound reason and objectivity. We want an answer from the people of principles and ethics.

I read a number of books that attempt to deny Takfir of the Sahabah, whereas every Shia on the face of the earth knows that the majority of Shia in fact, do Takfir of the Sahabah, and that what these people are claiming is nothing but Holy Subterfuge, Taqiyyah.

One person said, “We sometimes criticize an individual Sahabi, but its only to the extent of mentioning what’s objectionable, not that judgement is passed on the said individual that he apostatized.”

Were the above citations from our authoritative works merely mention of their shortcomings or was it unabashed Takfir, coupled with cursing and defamation? What a farce, “Only what’s objectionable.”

Why is nothing mentioned about the Sahabah except for fabricated stories which imply nothing but their betrayal of Islam and the most honourable Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam?

Why is there not one virtue mentioned about them? Let us forget, momentarily, what is mentioned in the books.

I heard numerous lectures of Sheikh Hassan Shahhatah wherein he dishes out insults about the Sahabah that are no different from the ones cited earlier. One of the insults that he mentioned was exactly what was mentioned in Al Anwar Al No’maniyyah about ‘Umar. He said, “The mother of Umar was an adulteress and she begot Umar as a result of adultery.” He mentioned a host of insults against the Sahabah and of the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam two wives, Aisha and Hafsah. Do these qualify as being simply “shortcomings”.

I also heard lectures of Sheikh Yasir al Habib which are no less repugnant. The same for Sheikh Hassan al Saffar, Sayed Muhammad Baqir Al Fali, Sheikh ‘Abdul Hamid Al Muhajir, and so many others. The defining theme of their discourse is Takfir and cursing of the Sahabah. I do not know what damage-control they are trying to do when they say we “only mention their shortcomings.”

If it is conceded that Sheikh Hassan al Saffar did Takfir and cursed the Sahabah, it is equally worth acknowledging that both Sheikhs, Shahhatah and Habib have said things which can only be described as squalid, unbecoming on anyone who possesses even a modicum of decency and common courtesy, let alone a Muslim, or a Sheikh![6]

My advice to anyone who intends writing on such polemics is that before writing a single word in defence of the likes of these people, tell those people to respect the way of the Ahlul Bayt. It is expected of anyone who intends writing about Ahlul Bayt that they adopt the civility of Ahlul Bayt before volunteering a defence for the Takfirist who lacks any propriety, and is found wanting in terms of the basic decorum required from those who ascribe to the way of Ahlul Bayt!

If they genuinely do not consider the Sahabah apostates and it not simply Taqiyyah, then they ought to publicly censure Takfirists and disassociate from them, instead of inventing stories about the Sahabah whereby they sow the seeds of hatred and rancour. If they genuinely believe what they say, it would be expected of them to address their congregations candidly and equivocally declare Takfir of the Sahabah prohibited. They should not be simply making politically correct statements on television channels and advancing a completely different narrative in their closed gatherings at the Hussainiyyahs.

Do they not say, “Whoever anathematizes a Muslim through disbelief, then he, himself, is a disbeliever”? If so, then why do they not clarify to the common-folk the danger of Takfir of the Sahabah; or is it that they have selective memories?

The situation of those who invent these fairy tales is just as perplexing; they go out of their way to contrive such explanations for Allah’s Word that cannot be accepted by sound reason nor logic. They insult the Sahabah of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with the most pejorative and callous expressions. Inadvertently they even go as far as accusing Imam ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam of cowardice, lacking chivalry. All to what end? Only to present an argument that over 1400 years ago, Imam ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam was more deserving of the leadership than Abu Bakr. Folks, allow your selves some latitude to think critically!

The story does not end there; people went on to claim that the Qur’an was tampered with. They based their argument on the fact that it does not have any mention of Imam ‘Ali’s ‘alayh al Salam successorship which would subsequently be inherited by the Imams ‘alayhim al Salam. Others have emerged who believe in the doctrine of Raj’ah, meaning that the Imams will return to life in order to rule, as will those who usurped the caliphate so that the Imams can take revenge from them!

All of these ideas were invented to prove that the incumbency of Imam ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam!

 

NEXT⇒ Mayhem of the Enlightened or Mayhem of the Extremists and Scholars?


[1] Takfir is a term used to describe one party anathematizing another, declaring them disbelievers.

[2] Hiwar ma’ al Sheikh Salih Al Durwaysh Hawl al Suhbah wa al Sahabah, pg. 6.

[3] Al Anwar Al No’maniyyah, 1/63.

[4] Jila’ al ‘Uyun, pg. 45.

[5] Bihar al Anwar, 30/399.

[6] The authors intuitions and sarcasm in this chapter are rather augural, and it appears that at the time of writing he had not yet observed their discourse devolve into undisguised Takfir. Translator.

Back to top