Some have questioned why the scholars quoted in the article have declared a person who denies the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) to be a disbeliever, but they do not explicitly say the same regarding a person who denies his being a Muslim.
Firstly, there are texts quoted within the article which categorically state it to be disbelief to deem Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) a disbeliever:
Text 20 from Radd al-Rawafidh of Mujaddid Alf-i-Thani
Text 35 from Al-Musawwa of Shah Waliyullah al-Dihlawi
Text 38 from Baaqiyaat Fatawa Rasheediyya of Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Gangohi
Text 43 from Khayr al-Fatawa
Text 47 from Fatawa al-Subki
Text 48 from As-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa of Ibn Hajar al-Haythami
Text 50 from Al-Shifa of Qadi ‘Iyaad
Text 51 from Al-Mufhim of al-Qurtubi
Text 52 from Sharh al-Kharshi
Text 53 from Hashiyat al-Adawi
Text 55 from Al-Fawakih al-Dawani of Nafrawi
Thus, it is an oversight to suggest the article does not contain any such texts.
Secondly, as already elucidated in the article, being a Muslim is innately and inseparably part of the definition of a Companion. Hence, those who stated that denial of the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) is disbelief did not feel the need to state the obvious, and sufficed upon what every Muslim knows to be the meaning of a Companion. All of their texts and the whole context of their statements prove beyond a doubt that Companionship in its Shar’i meaning (see Ibn Hajar’s definition of a Companion on Page 5) is being referred to, not merely a travel companion as believed by extreme Rawafidh.
Moreover, as a question to those who have raised this absurd and unnecessary objection, will Abu Lahab be considered among the Companions if faith (iman) is not a condition for Companionship? His name has been categorically stated in the Qur’an and everyone knows him to have seen the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), whereas Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) has not been mentioned by name. Hence, in light of this warped line of reasoning, the scholars should have stated a person who denies the Companionship of Abu Lahab to be a disbeliever with greater reason! May Allah protect us from such clear misguidance.
It is also interesting to note that Sunnis and Shias are unanimous that the Companion in the verse of Surah Tawba is none other than Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) – see pages 4-5 of article. Hence, if companion is referring to a travel companion only – as claimed by the Rawafidh – we would be compelled to say that the scores of scholars who discussed the issue of denying the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) had expended their efforts in a fruitless discussion, because everyone is agreed on his being a travel companion! Thus, it is very clear that the meaning of denial of his Companionship is to say he was – may Allah forbid – a non-Muslim during the lifetime of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and/or died upon disbelief.
May Allah Most High grant us all the correct understanding. Aameen.
ghouse mohiuddin
November 25, 2020 at 11:34 pm - Reply
It is unfortunate to have such kind of opinion about hazrat abu bkr RA.We can,t imagine a believer can dare to express things that destroy his own aakhirat
Assalamu alaykum,
A further clarification on the article above:
Some have questioned why the scholars quoted in the article have declared a person who denies the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) to be a disbeliever, but they do not explicitly say the same regarding a person who denies his being a Muslim.
Firstly, there are texts quoted within the article which categorically state it to be disbelief to deem Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) a disbeliever:
Thus, it is an oversight to suggest the article does not contain any such texts.
Secondly, as already elucidated in the article, being a Muslim is innately and inseparably part of the definition of a Companion. Hence, those who stated that denial of the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) is disbelief did not feel the need to state the obvious, and sufficed upon what every Muslim knows to be the meaning of a Companion. All of their texts and the whole context of their statements prove beyond a doubt that Companionship in its Shar’i meaning (see Ibn Hajar’s definition of a Companion on Page 5) is being referred to, not merely a travel companion as believed by extreme Rawafidh.
Moreover, as a question to those who have raised this absurd and unnecessary objection, will Abu Lahab be considered among the Companions if faith (iman) is not a condition for Companionship? His name has been categorically stated in the Qur’an and everyone knows him to have seen the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), whereas Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) has not been mentioned by name. Hence, in light of this warped line of reasoning, the scholars should have stated a person who denies the Companionship of Abu Lahab to be a disbeliever with greater reason! May Allah protect us from such clear misguidance.
It is also interesting to note that Sunnis and Shias are unanimous that the Companion in the verse of Surah Tawba is none other than Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) – see pages 4-5 of article. Hence, if companion is referring to a travel companion only – as claimed by the Rawafidh – we would be compelled to say that the scores of scholars who discussed the issue of denying the Companionship of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiallahu anhu) had expended their efforts in a fruitless discussion, because everyone is agreed on his being a travel companion! Thus, it is very clear that the meaning of denial of his Companionship is to say he was – may Allah forbid – a non-Muslim during the lifetime of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and/or died upon disbelief.
May Allah Most High grant us all the correct understanding. Aameen.
It is unfortunate to have such kind of opinion about hazrat abu bkr RA.We can,t imagine a believer can dare to express things that destroy his own aakhirat