The Consequences of Denying the Companionship of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq By Deoband.org| 2018-03-09T08:19:38+00:00 March 27th, 2015| View Larger Image By Mufti Javed Iqbal The Consequences of Denying the Companions of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq – Deoband.org Share FacebookTwitterRedditGoogle+ Related Posts Important Discourses on Tasawwuf February 20th, 2017 Gifting The Reward Of Virtuous Deeds To Others April 24th, 2015 The Truth about the Number of Rak‘ahs in Tarawih August 31st, 2010 Clearest Rational Argument for the Existence of a Creator March 11th, 2010 Joining Shoulders and Feet in Prayer Rows July 7th, 2009 One Comment Javed Iqbal April 13, 2015 at 6:42 am 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: 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. Comments are closed.