Ijma'a and Abu Bakr's superiority in the Ummah

X. Zujājatu’l Maşābīĥ of Sayyid Ábdullāh Shāh Şāĥib, the Deccan Muhaddith.

Chapter: The excellence of the Companions

Some scholars in our school [ĥanafī] have expressly said that a person who insults the Shaykhayn should be executed; in Kitāb as-Siyar from Al-Ashbāh wa’n Nažāyir of Zayn Ibn Nujaym: ‘concerning any kafir who repents: his repentance is accepted in this world and the hereafter*, except that group of kafirs who curse and insult the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam or the Shaykhayn, or either one of them; or a sorcerer; or a militant atheist – even if it is a woman – if they are arrested prior to their repentance.'

And he said: to insult the Shaykhayn is kufr; but if one elevates Álī over them both [Abū Bakr and Úmar] is an innovator, a heretic [bidátī] as mentioned in Khulāşah. And in Manāqib of Kardari: ‘if one denies, rejects the succession of either of the first two Khalifahs, such a person will be ruled kafir. This is on account of the Prophet’s love şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam for both of them. However, if one simply loves Álī more than both of them, he is not held accountable.’

I [Ábdullāh Shah Sahib] say: ‘because there no control or choice in loving someone more than others; and accountability is in those matters where one can exercise choice.’


* Indeed, acceptance of repentance [tawbah] is with Allāh; but in fiqh, this simply means that consequential punishment is withheld. For example, his repentance is accepted means, it is acknowledged and hence pardoned. And, ‘it is not accepted’ means that though he might repent, he shall be executed nevertheless – like the case of a person who turns an apostate a number of times and claims to have repented each time.

 

IX. selections from Radd al-Muĥtār and Tanbīh al-Wulāti wa’l Ĥukkām, Sayyid Amīn Ibn Áābidīn Shāmī

Radd al-Muĥtār, Vol.4, pg.422; Kitāb al-Jihād, Ruling concerning slanderers of Shaykhayn:

I say: Yes, Bazzāziyyah copies from Khulāşah that if a Rafiđī insults the Shaykhayn [Abū Bakr and Úmar] and curses them, he is an apostate [kāfir]; and if he elevates Álī above these two, he is a heretic, innovator [mubtadiý].

[aH: He then disagrees with Khulasah’s ruling of Takfir in a very interesting piece on withholding from takfir.]

*****
and in Tanbīh al-Wulāti wa’l Ĥukkām álā Shātimi Khayri’l Anām aw Aĥada Aş-ĥābihi’l Kirām álayhi wa álayhimu’s şalātu wa’s salām he says:

[on those who will be ruled kāfir] like that person who rejects the succession [khilāfah] of the two Shaykhs [Abū Bakr and Úmar] and he who swears at them; because doing so is a rejection of the absolutely agreed upon ruling [ĥukm al-ijmāá al-qaţýī] except that they [the rafiđīs] do not accept the validity of ijmāá by making false allegations against the companions.

[...more inshaAllah]

 

VIII. selections from Al-Musayarah of Kamāl ibn Humām and its commentary Al-Musāmarah of his student, Abi’sh Sharīf al-Maqdisi.
[the text in flower brackets is by Imām Kamāl Ibn Humām; outside it is the commentary by Ibn Abi’sh Sharīf; hadith is marked in blue]

****
In the last paragraph summarizing the faith of Ahl as-Sunnah:

{And the rightful successor, khalīfah after} our prophet {Muhammad şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam is Abū Bakr, then Úmar, then Úthmān, then Álī and superiority} amongst them {is also according to this order} as it has been discussed earlier in detail.


*****
The Eighth Principle: On the superiority of the four companions

And the khalifahs {are according to the order of their succession} Abū Bakr, then Úmar, then Úthmān and then Álī rađiyallāhu ánhum. {Superiority in reality is that which is superiority near Allāh táālā; and no one knows this except RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam} by the informing of Allāh táālā.

{It has been reported from him şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam that he has praised all of them and it cannot be known with certainty on whom he considered the most superior} blessings {and peace be upon him, even if a narration} as evidence {and a report from him, has not reached us; that whose proof is absolute in its evidence} and can be relied upon {except those who witnessed that age} that is, those who witnessed the age in which there came revelation and Qur’ānic verses descended and the manner in which the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam dealt with them and they dealt with him {and the presence of conditions} which prove the superiority {about them}; contrary to those who did not witness this {and} however, {it has been} reported to us among narrations {proving this} order of superiority. [1]

{And for us, there is explicit [proof]} among others {and evidence} derived and extrapolated as well {as narrated in Şaĥiĥ Al-Bukhārī} rather, in both Şaĥiĥ collections [2]{the ĥadīth of Ámr ibn al-Áāş} may Allāh be well pleased with him {when he asked} that is, when Ámr asked the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: {who is the dearest person to you among men, he replied: ‘her father’, that is Áāyishah’s father rađiyallāhu ánhā}; this is summarization of the ĥadīth and the wording of the şaĥiĥ narration is:[3]

I asked RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: who amongst the people is most beloved to you?
and he answered: ‘Áāyishah.’
I said: among men?
and he said: ‘her father [4].’
I asked: and who after him?
he replied: ‘Úmar ibn al Khaţţāb’
​

and he mentioned other men. In another narration: ‘I don’t ask you about your household, I ask about your companions.’

{and when he was given precedence to lead the prayer [5] and everybody agrees that} {the sunnah is to forward such a person to lead prayer who is the most superior amongst them with regards to knowledge, recitation, character and piety. Therefore, this proves} and all that was mentioned {that he [6] was the most superior amongst the companions} may Allāh táālā be well pleased with them.

{And in an authenticated narration from the ĥadīth of Ibn Úmar in Şaĥiĥ al-Bukhārī, that he said: ‘We, in the times of the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam did not equate anybody with Abū Bakr, and then Úmar and then Úthmān; and then we did not speak of superiority among other companions after them}[7]

In another narration of Bukhari: {We would speak of choosing [the order] of companions in the time of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam; we chose Abū Bakr, then Úmar and then Úthmān}

and in the narration of Abū Dāwūd [8]: {We used to say in the lifetime of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘the best of followers of the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam after him are Abū Bakr, then Úmar and then Úthmān.} Ţabarānī adds: {this reached RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and he did not deny it}.[9]

{And in another authenticated narration} that is, in Bukhari {the ĥadīth of Muhammad ibn al-Ĥanafiyyah [10], I asked my father:} that is, Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu {Who is the best man after RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and he replied: Abū Bakr. I asked: ‘and who after him?’ He replied: ‘then Úmar.’ I was afraid that he would say Úthmān [if I asked him again], so I said: ‘and then you?’ He said: ‘I am not but a man among Muslims.’ This is Álī affirming himself} rađiyallāhu ánhu {explicitly asserting that Abū Bakr is the best among men} that is, after prophets.



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:

1. aH: i have tried to be as literal as possible to avoid the accusation of tampering the quote. however, the passage above can be reworded thus:

The only way to know that a companion is superior with certainty, would be a narrated report [samýī] coming from RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. Because nobody can say who is superior except Allāh táālā and Allāh táālā would inform him. Thereafter, the best possible evidence would be the opinion of those who beheld the times of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and his companions and the manner in which he dealt with them (how he gave preference to one or the other).

Even though we have no explicit report describing the order of precedence, yet, there are signs and indications in narrations and reports which prove this order.
​

2. The two şaĥiĥ collections, Bukhari and Muslim.

3. Ĥadīth mentioned in Bukhari in the chapter “Excellence of the Companions” no.3662

4. Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu.

5. in the absence of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam

6. Abū Bakr, as he lead the prayer

7. Bukhari, no.36xx

8. Abū Dāwūd, no.

9. Ţabarānī, no.

10. Muĥammad ibn al-Ĥanafiyyah is Mawlā Álī’s son but not the son of Faţimah rađiyallāhu ánhum.

 

VII. Jawharah at-Tawĥīd, Ibrāhim al-Laqānī and its commentary Tuĥfatu’l Murīd, Ibrāhim al-Bājūrī.

76. wa khayruhum man wulliya’l khilāfah
wa amruhum fi’l fađli ka’l khilāfah
and the best of them [companions] are the successors to khilāfah
and the order of their superiority is like [the order of] the khilāfah.
​

His saying {and the order of their superiority is like the order of their tenure of khilafah}: that is, the four rightful khalifahs and the order of their superiority is according to the order of the tenure according to Ahl as-Sunnah. Superiority means ‘greatness in receiving reward’.

So, the best of them is Abū Bakr, and then Úmar, and then Úthmān and then Álī rađiyallāhu ánhum. The ĥadīth of Ibn Úmar corroborates this order:

We used to say in the times of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam that the best of this ummah after its prophet is Abū Bakr; and then Úmar and then Úthmān and then Álī. And he (şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam) did not forbid us from saying so.

Saád [ad-Dīn Taftāzānī] said:

We have found the elders and the later followers attesting to this order [salaf wa’l khalaf]. It is obvious that if they did not have evidence, they would not have ruled likewise.
​

And in attesting this order is the refutation of the Khaţţābiyyah sect, followers of Ibn Khaţţāb al-Asdi who claim that Úmar rađiyallāhu ánhu is superior to all; and in it is the refutation of the Rāwandiyyah – who were originally called as Al-Ábbāsiyyah, who claim Ábbās ibn Ábd al-Muţţalib is superior; their name was changed so that people would mistake them to be the progeny of Sayyiduna Ábbās.

In it is also the refutation of the Shīáh, which is a sect that is fanatical in its love of sayyiduna Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu and therefore claim that he has precedence over all other companions.

As for Kūfans and some scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah, the majority of the Mútazilah and Imām Mālīk according to his first opinion ONLY give precedence to Álī over Úthmān. This is the difference between the Shīáh (claim of superiority) and the latter group, even though Taftāzāni’s commentary [in Sharĥ al-Áqāyid] is unclear and gives the impression of the opposite.

 

VI. Álī al-Ūshī in Bad-yi’l Amālī and Álī al-Qārī in its commentary: Đaw al-Máālī

wa li’ş şiddiqi rujĥānun jaliyyun
ála’l aş-ĥābi min ghayri’ĥtimāli
And [Abū Bakr] Şiddīq has a prominence and superiority
Upon all companions without any doubt

wa li’l fārūqi rujĥānun wa fađlun
álā úthmāni dhi’n nūrayni áālī
And [Úmar] Faruq has prominence and superiority
Upon Úthmān – he of the two lights, the lofty

wa dhu’n nūrayni ĥaqqan kāna khayran
mina’l karrāri fī şaffi’l qitālī
And Dhu’n Nurayn [Úthmān] has the right, that he is superior to
[Álī] al-Karrār, the brave and unflinching in the face of battle

wa li’l karrāri fađlan báda hādha
ála’l aghyāri ţurran lā tubālī
And superiority is due to Álī the brave, after this
Upon everybody else without any hesitation
​

--
Concerning the order [of superiority] of companions, First is Abū Bakr As-Şiddīq.

Ibn Jamāáh said: ‘The right thing, correct opinion is that Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu is the most superior among all companions of the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and his rightful heir, his successor.’

Abū Bakr earned the title as-Şiddīq on account of his accepting as truth, the word of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam without any second thought and in the event of Ascension (miýrāj) without any hesitation. Muĥibb At-Ţabarī says in Ar-Riyāđ that the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam himself gave him the title of As-Şiddīq.

rujĥān means to give precedence in rank, to give prominence in order.
al-jaliyy means: ‘as is obvious’, ‘that which is apparent’.
al-iĥtimāl means: probability, possibility and an uncertainty in affirming something.

The meaning of the above verse is: It is obvious that Abū Bakr has superiority and prominence among all the companions without any hesitation or any uncertainty in affirming his succession. There is no doubt nor any ambivalence in the validity of his being the rightful successor [khalīfah].

In this issue, the shiáh and a majority of the Mútazilah have a different opinion: they say that Álī is the most superior to all companions.

Second is Úmar ibn Al-Khaţţāb:
He earned the title Al-Fārūq [The Discerner] for his astute discerning between truth and falsehood. Imām Nawawī in At-Tahdhīb and Muĥibb At-Ţabarī in Ar-Riyāđ say that RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam gave this title himself.

Third is Úthmān ibn Áffān:
Dhu’n Nūrayn – He of the two lights – is a title bestowed upon him because he married two of the Prophet’s daughters şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. First Ruqayyah and after she passed away, Umm Kulthūm.

áālī : meaning high is used to denote that he is highly esteemed and has a high position with respect to all other companions [other than the two preceding ones] and this is the opinion of the majority of the Ahl as-Sunnah. However, some amongst us held that Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu is superior to Úthmān rađiyallāhu ánhu.

ĥaqqan: having the right; probably, this is used as emphasis. That is: It has been proven that Úthmān is superior to Álī who is known by the title ‘Brave Lion unflinching in the face of battle’ [ĥaydar=lion; karrār=unflinching]

Fourth is Álī ibn Abū Ţālib:
That is Álī is superior to all other companion, including prominent ones who have not been mentioned [above]. There is no hestitation is saying this at all. Abu Ţufayl was asked whether Álī was superior or Muáāwiyah, he replied: ‘Is not Muáāwiyah content that he considers equality with Álī, that he seeks superiority over him?’

baáda hādha: after this. It means, after the three companions mentioned above; or after the mention of Úthmān. This is probably to either to describe the order or as a refutation to those who say that Álī was superior to the previous three; or a refutation of those who say that Álī was superior to Úthmān; or a clarification for those who chose to remain silent on the issue of superiority between Álī and Úthmān

 

updated: 29-05-2009


V. Sáad ad-Dīn Taftāzānī in his Sharĥ al-Maqāşid :
[These are selections and not one contiguous quote; asterisk mark the end of one snippet.]

*****
In the Fifth Discussion:

The Imām (leader of Muslims) after RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam is Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu. The Shiáh say: Álī.

And we say: There is a unanimous agreement (ijmāá) of every person of importance [the ahl al-ĥill wa’l áqd – from the council, prominent ones, nobles etc.] on this matter. Even though some of them tarried.

It is proven that Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu followed [and enforced] his commands and prohibitions; and participated in Jumuáh and Eýd along with Abū Bakr and named him, called him a ‘Khalīfah’; and praised him while he was alive and after he passed away and he presented his excuse for the delay in swearing allegiance.


*****
In the Sixth Discussion, he says:

Superiority, according to us [ahl as-sunnah] is according to the order of succession [of Khalifahs] along with some difference of opinion [in the superiority] between Úthmān and Álī rađiyallāhu ánhumā.

The Shīáh and majority of the Mútazilah say that Álī is the superior [to all of them].

We say, in general, that the majority of [our] scholars are in agreement [ijmāá that Abū Bakr is superior] indicates that there is evidence for their position.

In more detail, is the saying of Allāh: ‘And the most pious will be kept away from it; he who gives his wealth in charity’ [sūrah Al-Layl, v.17] that this verse was revealed referring to Abū Bakr. And one who is ‘pious’ is the most honorable and the most superior [wa’l atqā, akram wa afđal].

And the saying of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘Follow those after me, Abū Bakr and Úmar.’ commanding us to follow them both. [hadith tirmidhī]

And he said: ‘[Abū Bakr and Úmar] are the leaders of all middle-aged [people] in paradise except Prophets and Messengers.’ [kahl, kuhūl]

And he said: ‘The best among my nation are Abū Bakr and then, Úmar.’

And he said: ‘The sun has not risen nor set on anyone after prophets and messengers better than Abū Bakr.’ and such reports are numerous.

And he said: ‘If there would be a prophet after me, Úmar would be [one].’

And he said: ‘Úthmān is my brother and my companion in paradise.’

And he said: ‘Shall I not be modest with him, from whom the angels in the heavens are bashful.’ It is proven that this has been narrated from Álī, Ibn úmar and Ibn al-Ĥanafiyyah.

There is an overwhelming evidence [tawātur] in these reports describing their [the first three khulafa] efforts in aiding and furthering Islam. [and it is among these leaders who] influenced muslims to embrace Islam [ta’alluf al-qulūb] and prepared for expansion [al-futūĥ] of Islamic empire; who subdued the apostates and won victories for Islam against Persia, Rome and in the east; and defeated the armies of the non-arabs (non-muslims); those who set a structure for administration and the judicial system [tartīb al-umūr]; and strengthened the weak [against powerful in societies]; those who won lands for Islam and elevated the Word of Allāh and worked towards an agreement for a common muş-ĥaf [copy of the written Qur’ān]; and who equipped the impoverished army of early Islam and those who spent their wealth freely for the victory of Islam.

A majority of Ahl as-Sunnah and also many among other sects are of the opinion that leadership [of the people] is due to the most superior person of the age [áşr] except when electing [the superior] causes a state of confusion and disturbance or incites rebellion or turmoil. It is therefore, they discussed the issue of superiority [of the imām].

Those from Ahl as-Sunnah said: The most superior to al all is Abū Bakr and then Úmar and then Úthmān and then Álī. Some amongst them were inclined towards the opinion that Álī was superior to Úthmān. Yet some others preferred silence in the latter issue (of superiority between Álī and Úthmān).

Imām al-Ĥaramayn said:

The issue of invalidity of the leadership of a lesser person is not absolute. Even so, there is no absolute evidence that one imām [the khulafa mainly as above] is superior to another – because there are varying and contradictory reports concerning their superiority. However, that which is the most likely to be accurate estimation [ghālib álā až-žann] is that Abū Bakr is superior, and then Úmar.

And then, there is a contradiction in such extrapolations concerning Úthmān and Álī.

The Shiáh and majority of the Mútazilah are of the opinion that Álī is superior to Abū Bakr after RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam.

And we [from the Ahl as-Sunnah] say: In general, the majority of prominent personalities and eminent scholars have held that the order of superiority is as above [Abū Bakr, Úmar, Úthmān and Álī]. And we have a favorable opinion about them [distinguished scholars] that if they did not know this by evidence, they would not have mentioned the ranks or the described the order.

The details of which are found in the Book, the Sunnah, the reports about them and signs, indications [for the order].
​

As for the Book is the verse: ‘And the most pious will be kept away from it; he who gives his wealth in charity; and [he does] this is not as a repayment for a favor, for none has a favor upon him that needs be repaid’ [al-layl, v.17,18,19]

The majority [jam’hūr] say that these verses were revealed referring to Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu; and the most pious [atqā] is the most honorable [akram] because Allāh táālā has said [elsewhere]: ‘The most honorable amongst you are the most pious’ [al-ĥujurāt, v.13]

When we say ‘superior’ we mean nothing except ‘honorable.’ However, this does not refer to Álī because, the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam has a favor on Álī that deserves recompense and that is the favor of training him and being his guardian [tarbiyah].

As for the tradition [sunnah] is his saying şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘Follow those after me, Abū Bakr and Úmar.’ This injunction is general and Álī is included and thus incumbent upon him to follow them; and one who is superior or even an equal will not be ordered to follow the other particularly according to the shiáh.

And his saying şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam to Abū Bakr and Úmar: ‘They are the two cheiftains of the middle-aged men in paradise except prophets and messengers.’

And he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘The best in amongst my followers are Abū Bakr and then, Úmar.’

And he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘It is not appropriate for anyone in a community in which Abū Bakr is present that they take precedence over him.’

And he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘If I were to choose a khalīl (close friend) other than my Lord Almighty, I would have taken Abū Bakr as my close friend. However, he is together with me in my religion and my companion in the cave and my successor for my ummah.’ [ibn mājah]

And he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘Where is anybody like Abū Bakr? When people belied me, he attested to my being truthful. He bore faith in me and married his daughter to me; he gave his wealth for my sake and comforted me and struggled by my side in the hour of fear.’

And he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam to Abū Dardā’a when he was walking ahead of Abū Bakr: ‘Do you walk ahead of him, who is superior to you? By Allāh, the sun has not risen nor set after prophets and messengers on anyone superior to Abū Bakr.’

There are many such examples. Even though its external meaning negates superiority to anyone other than him, it could be restrictive when read in context. That is, Abū Bakr is superior to Abū Dardā’a.
​

*****

It is reported from Ámr ibn al-Áāş:

I asked RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: who amongst the people is most beloved to you?
and he answered: ‘áāyishah.’
I said: among men?
and he said: ‘her father (Abū Bakr).’
I asked: and who after him?
he replied: ‘Úmar’


*****

[aH: al-taftāzāni presents the argument of those who claim that Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu is superior to everybody else. this discussion is about three pages long and these are equally important and shall be, inshaAllah, translated as a separate post. after giving many verses, hadith and reports about the superlative status of sayyiduna Álī which we all acknowledge, al-taftāzāni says]:

The answer to this [claim that ‘therefore Álī is superior’] is: there is no argument about his superlative status, his prominent rank, his outstanding attributes or miracles attributed to him. [There is no question about it and we accept it.]

Yet, none of this can be used to prove that it means he deserves the most reward or that is more dear [or honorable] near Allāh. [The above qualities of Álī cannot be used to contradict] after it has been agreed and a unanimous agreement [al-ijmāá] is present on the superiority of Abū Bakr and then Úmar. And this was recognized by Álī [himself.]

 

IV. Sáad ad-Dīn Taftāzānī in his Sharĥ al-Áqāyid :

[The original text of Nasafi is in bold/green letters and enclosed in flower brackets; the rest is al- Taftāzānī’s commentary; square brackets are additions by the translator for clarification]

{The best of all after our Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam} It is better to say: ‘after ALL prophets. But the author’s intention in saying ‘after’ was chronological; and there is no prophet after the time of our Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam.

Also, there is a special case of Sayyiduna Ýīsā álayhi’s salām: if we say [better than] any man who lives after the time of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam, it would then denigrate Jesus álayhi’s salām.

However, if this means every human born after RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam, then this ‘superiority’ would not include anyone but the companions, their followers and those who came after them. [As said above,] if this means any human present on earth, then that would necessitate degrading Sayyiduna Ýīsā álayhi’s salām.

{Abū Bakr as-Şiddīq} he, who believed and attested to the truth of the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam without any hesitation or reluctance.

{and then, Úmar al-Fārūq}: he, who scruplously and diligently differentiated between truth and falsehood in judgement and in [settling] disputes.

{and then, Úthmān, Dhu’n Nūrayn}: he, [of the Two Lights] because the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam gave two of his daughters in marriage to him; Ruqayyah, and after she passed away, Umm Kulthūm. And when she passed away, he said şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam: ‘If I had a third daughter, I would have given her in marriage to you.’

{and then, Álī al-Murtađā}: he [the accepted one] among the slaves of Allāh; and among the closest and sincerest of the companions of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam.

this is the order [of precedence] as we have found our elders [narrate, to hold].

It is obvious: that if they [our elders, salaf] did not have evidence, they would not have ruled accordingly [attested to the above order]. And as for us, we find that either side has evidence which contradicts the other. And we don’t consider this issue as one included in deeds and action; or that it causes a defeciency in any obligatory deed if one chooses to abstain.

Some of our elders have withheld in the matter of the superiority between Úthmān and Álī rađiyallāhu ánhumā and have therefore said: ‘The mark of Ahl as-Sunnah is that we consider the two shaykhs [Abū Bakr and Úmar] to be superior; and that we love both the sons-in-law [Úthmān and Álī].

The balanced view would be that if ‘superiority’ means ‘more reward’, there is a reason for abstention; but no hesitation if ‘superiority’ is used as the learned and wise usually mean, ‘the excellence in attributes and character.’

 

III. Imām Abū Jáafar Al-Ţaĥāwī in Al-Áqīdah at-Ţaĥāwiyyah:

93. And we love the companions of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. We do not exaggerate the love of any one of them, nor disown nor renounce any one them. We hate those who hate them. And dislike those who mention them in a disparaging manner. We do not mention [the Companions] except in a commendable and favorable manner.

Loving them is [a part of] religion, faith and superior character; and hating them is [from] disbelief, hypocrisy and rebellion.

94. We affirm the succession [khilāfah] after RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam first for Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu – on account of his superiority upon the entire ummah and being paramount among them.

Then, Úmar ibn al-Khaţţāb rađiyallāhu ánhu
Then, Úthmān ibn Áffān rađiyallāhu ánhu
Then, Álī ibn Abū Ţālib rađiyallāhu ánhu

For they are the Rightly Guided Successors [khulafā ar-rāshidūn] and The Guiding Leaders [ayimmah al-muhtadūn - in another version ayimmah al-mahdiyyūn].

 

II. Álī al-Qārī in Minaĥ ar-Rawđ al-Az’har, Sharĥ Fiqh al-Akbar:
[These are selections and not one contiguous quote; asterisks mark the end of snippets.]

*****
In summary: The best of humans after prophets [peace and blessings upon them] is Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu. His name was Ábd al-Kábah in pagan times and RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam renamed him as Abdullāh.

*****
There is a unanimous agreement, a consensus [ijmāá] upon this and the objection or opposition of the rafīđīs are not of any significance nor worth consideration.

RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam made Abū Bakr a deputy, to lead prayer in his own lifetime; therefore his being the successor [after him] is true, valid and accepted.

*****
Ibn Baţţah narrates with his chain that Úmar ibn Ábd al-Ázīz sent Muĥammad ibn Az-Zubayr al-Hanžalī to Ĥasan al-Başrī to ask: ‘Did the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam make Abū Bakr the successor?’ He replied: ‘Does your master doubt in this? Yes, verily by Him who is the Only God and no god but He: [the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam] made him the successor and he is the purest [and that he is not stained with error].’

*****
The superiority of Abū Bakr and Úmar is an unanimous agreement in the Ahl as-Sunnah. And the majority holds that Úthmān is superior to Álī except that some scholars from Kūfā and Başrah hold the reverse.

Know that all the Rafiđīs and most of the Mútazilah say that Álī is superior to Abū Bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu. There is a report that Abū Ĥanīfah held Álī superior to Úthmān, but the correct position is what he has said here, and mentioned them in order and in agreement with the majority of the Ahl as-Sunnah [that Úthmān is superior to Álī].

In Sharĥ al-Áqāyid:

‘We find our elders [salaf] speaking of and accepting this order of precedence. It is obvious that if they did not have evidence, they would not have ruled it likewise. It also indicates that there is some hesitation among our elders in the precedence of Úthmān and Álī over each other because they said: ‘The mark of Ahl as-Sunnah is to give superiority to the two Shaykhs [Abū Bakr and Úmar] and to love the two sons-in-law [Úthmān and Álī]. The balanced view would be that if ‘superiority’ means ‘more reward’, there is a reason for abstention; but no hesitation if ‘superiority’ is used as the learned and wise usually mean, ‘the excellence in attributes and character.’
​

*****
It is not concealed therefore [there is no confusion whatsoever at all that] giving superiority to Álī rađiyallāhu ánhu over the two Shaykhs [Abū Bakr and Úmar] is an opposition to the creed of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l Jamāáh; however, some later scholars differed in the superiority of Álī over Úthmān rađiyallāhu ánhum.

 

I. Imām al-Aážam Abū Ĥanifah in Fiqh Al-Akbar:

The most superior and the best of all men after prophets – blessings and peace upon them – is Abū Bakr as-Şiddīq. And then, Úmar ibn al-Khaţţāb al-Fārūq. And then Úthmān ibn Áffān Dhu’n Nūrayn. And then Álī ibn Abū Ţālib al-Murtađā. May Allāh be well pleased with them all; they were worshippers and steadfast on Truth and sided with Truth. We love all of them.

 

[please do not reproduce these translations until this notice is removed. corrections pending. please do not accuse me of dishonesty right away if you find an error. let me know of any mistakes here.]
​

Bismillāhi’r Raĥmāni’r Raĥīm
​

here below i translate opinions of scholars here below. there are sayyids among them, to illustrate a point, but there is no need to restrict ourselves though.

1. Fiqh al-Akbar, Imām al-Aážam
2. selections from Sharĥ Fiqh al-Akbar by Mullā Álī al-Qārī
3. Áqīdah at-Ţaĥāwiyyah, Imām Abū Jaáfar at-Ţaĥāwī
4. Sáad ad-Dīn Taftāzānī in his Sharĥ al-Áqāyid
5. selections from Sharĥ al-Maqāşid, Al-Taftāzānī
6. Badyi’l Amāli, Álī al-Ūshī and Đaw al-Máālī, Álī al-Qārī
MORE.inshaAllah..[WATCH THIS LIST]
​

*********************
highlights:

1. there is ijmāá (unanimity and consensus) on the veracity and validity of the khilafah of abū bakr, úmar, úthmān and áli in that order. the ijmāá is conveyed by almost all sunni scholars.

2. anybody who disputes the above is not a sunni and surely a person of bidáh; and there are various subcategories among those who talk ill of the companions:

a. some curse the shaykhayn and label them as unbelievers. denying their companionship and denying their khilafah.

b. some deny their khilāfah and claim that the khilāfah of the early three khulafā is null and void; but still admit that abū bakr and úmar are companions.

c. some do not invalidate the khilafah of the early three khalifahs, but only elevate álī over abū bakr and úmar.

d. some do not curse the shaykhayn but let their impious and transgressing tongues loose and talk ill of other şaĥābah ignoring the prophet’s dire warnings şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam.
​

3. the objection of a modern mutafaqqih is of little consequence; their ‘examination’ of proofs is not viable as there is a huge discrepancy in their learning and ideas and even their communication is garbled. moreover, they are not in a position to object. regardless,

those will speak who are neither worthy nor qualified to speak
[hadith about end times]

a time will come when a wise man will not see anything that pleases him [literally, ‘not see anything that is coolness of his eyes]. [al-khaţţābī, al-uzlah, pg.67]

among the signs of the hour [tribulations] is that knowledge will be lifted and ignorance widespread [ĥadīth about end times] al-khaţţābī says: ‘Allāh knows best, and it probably means: the appearance of ignoramuses [juhhāl] pretending to be scholars; those who seek to grab leadership and become guides, prior to acquiring knowledge of the religion or gaining a firm foothold in knowledge.’
​

4. yes, in juristic rulings, later ulama differ or revise opinions of early scholars due to necessity and need of the age. for example, issues like organ transplants or life insurance and so forth are juristic issues that require examination.

kam taraka’l awwalu li’l ākhiri
how many are things the earlier ones left, for the later ones to complete
​

however, these are not issues of historical importance and/or concerning the belief system and fundamentals of religion – nor the manners of obligatory worship. for example, the issue of raising hands in prayer (not accepted by ĥanafīs, sunnah for shafiýīs, point of needless argument for the salafis) is already settled – there is no need to ‘re-examine’ the issue.

5. there is no difference of opinion on the superiority of abū bakr and úmar (shaykhayn – the two shaykhs) over the rest of the ummah including álī. rađiyallāhu ánhum. there is an ijmāá on this matter.

6. the majority of ahl as-sunnah hold that úthmān is superior to áli (rađiyallāhu ánhumā), and this is the verified and preferred position; but there have been some sunni scholars who said álī was superior to úthmān. it is said imām mālik held this view, but later māliki scholars also claim that he reversed his opinion later (see tafsir al-qurţubi, 9:40)

7. if a person elevates álī over abū bakr and úmar without cursing them, he is a tafzili/tafđīlī and a man with bidáh in his belief.

8. if he curses the shaykhayn, there are two opinions:

a. some hanafi scholars ruled that he is a kāfir and should be executed as an apostate.

b. other hanafi scholars disagreed and said, it is not kufr but only bidáh.
​

9. rulings concerning mubtadiý or the bidáti:

a. if his bidáh reaches kufr, he is ruled a kāfir and all rulings apply to him like that of apostates; (he cannot marry sunnis, cannot inherit, cannot lead prayer and so forth).

b. if his bidáh does not cause kufr, certain things are not invalid; though, they are extremely disliked and prohibitively disliked in some cases. for example, marriage with a tafđīlī as described in 2c and rafidi in 2d above is not invalid but disliked; in case of praying behind such a person, it is allowed in certain conditions like jumuáh (when a sunni imām cannot be found) and if one prays behind a man of such bidáh, it is necessary to repeat the prayer.
​

10. it is the salafi who exhorts everyone to look into the hadith or qur’an and derive judgements on their own and faulting our elders. there is a new blend of mubtadiýs in our age – you can find some of this kind on yanafi forums. these are the salafidi, a dangerous cocktail of salafi and rafiđi.

they try to justify the beliefs of the rafidi with the methodology of the salafi.

sunnis should not listen to them and throw back their ‘opinions’ back in their faces and return to the sage advice of our predecessors and trust the judgement of our elders.

we seek guidance from Allāh táālā; and guidance is only from Him.

 

Bismillāhi’r Raĥmāni’r Raĥīm
ihdina’s sirāt al-mustaqīm​

preliminaries:

1. a brother informed me of some new controversy in the uk between pirs [shaykhs] and the sabre-rattling among their followers. i am not affiliated with any of them, and i am not in a position to speak about them and neither intend to; please keep this in mind before you proceed further. i have not seen any of the videos (except one which shall be discussed below) and not keen on viewing them either.

2. i am led to believe that the point of contention is about the superiority of sayyiduna álī rađiyallāhu ánhu over abū bakr rađiyallāhu ánhu and whether it is a tafđīlī belief or not:

a. is there a difference of opinion on this matter among sunnis?

b. what did our elders say about those who elevate álī above abū bakr rađiyallāhu ánhumā?

​

3. concerning yanafi fomites: led by tahir, they wear ignorance proudly on their sleeve, stoking the plumes of arrogance; and they fearlessly parade the scant respect they have for anybody or anything: be it muhaddithin, fuqaha or something as insignificant as spelling or grammar. the forumites’ wrath is severe and retribution swift, if anybody appears to get in their way.

in their rule-book, dropping names is passed as evidence and reasoning is replaced with rhetoric. if you insist, they can reason by comparing apples with molten lava and proving inter alia that the moon is manly gabbing – whether full or gibbous.

this is not a ‘debate’ with them – and if they can generously ignore me, it can only be good for their own humor. after all, they are a charming lot, politeness be sacrificed at their feet. [or else they will make sure, it will die a painful death otherwise. just as tahir’s grammar writhes helplessly along with his spelling; though i was surprised at his newfound respect for history.]

http://www.yanabi.com/forum/Topic319270-136-6.aspx#bm319466

​

4. on this particular yanafi thread, tahir posted a video of pir nasir sahib – may Allāh táālā forgive the late pir sahib. i knew little about him other than the links posted here on our forums and so i said good things when he passed away. this disclaimer is to preempt some people who love to ignore contexts and who may gleefully traduce me as a turncoat. the video seen on youtube here, is merely rhetorical and little more than emotional blackmail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVccp-8ylMk&e

​

5. the bane of generalization: if one finds a wee bit of mistake in tāj al-árūs, the generalizer will confidently generalize that tāj al-árus is full of mistakes. they may even claim that al-zabīdī was not well-versed in arabic. you must keep an eye out for such things.

6. on the depravity prevalent in our age: those interested in truth should ask:

a. whether we trust scholars of today more than past scholars?

b. are scholars of our times more knowledgeable than our elders?

c. are people more pious and have more taqwa today, than those in the past?

d. are sayyids of this age more reliable than sayyids of past ages?

e. can we trust the novel ‘inferences’ and ‘interpretations’ of anonymous posters who formicate on various forums?

​

7. knowledge of religion is not the exclusive precinct of sayyids; imām abū ĥanifah was not a sayyid, nor were the imāms al-shafiyi, mālik, aĥmed, the two sufyāns, al-awzāýī, al-bukhārī, muslim and others. yes, the scholar who is a sayyid has a special place, as úlamā have noted: ‘nūrun álā nūr’, light upon light. but a sayyid’s opinion does not overrule a scholar’s opinion, nor the ijmāá, just on the merit of the former being a sayyid.

8. sayyid-scholars are not a recent occurrence. and sayyid-scholars of this age should not forget that they are sons of greater fathers and except perhaps, wAllāhu aálam, for the mahdī, those who come after are almost always lesser than their ancestors. illā mā shā Allāh; wa lā uzakkī álā Allāhi aĥada.

9. when the late pir naşīr sahib in that video ostentatiously challenges: ‘bring any great scholar, i am also the son of álī…’ it is mere rhetoric and little in way of evidence. is he the only son of álī? is he better than ghawth al-aážam? or is he more knowledgeable than murtađā zabīdī or ibn áābidīn shāmī? and why should we listen to him instead of ibn áābidīn al-shāmī or murtađā al-zabīdī? what is his qualification in terms of hadith or fiqh or his contribution to islamic scholarship compared to these two masters raĥimahuma-Allāh?

the ‘proofs’ he then gives of imām ĥasan and úmar al-fārūq and the latter’s love and respect of ahl al-bayt are a slight sleight of hand. (i don’t understand punjabi that much, but i can still make out that he was talking about a couple of incidents).

he has passed away, and indeed, we should not speak ill of the dead; but people hide behind such excuses to further their own heretical beliefs. therefore, it is necessary to refute these ideas.

regardless, ĥasan and ĥusayn are not superior to úmar al-farūq except by some extreme tafđīlīs; the average tafđīlī merely elevates álī over abū bakr and úmar. rađiyallāhu ánhum.

10. outstanding sayyid-scholars who considered elevating mawlā álī over sayyidunā siddīq as bidáh of a tafđīlī are:

11. lies and ridiculous derivations at yanafi forum: one debases their own self if they attempt to refute lies/misrepresentations of some pernicious yanafi posters.

awa kullamā žanna’dh dhubābu zajartuhu
inna’dh dhubāba idhan, álayya karīmu
if i reproach the fly and comment on every one of its doubts,
verily, it would then mean that i hold the fly in high esteem

​

for example, they claim that imām aĥmed ibn ĥanbal favored the tafđīlī position; and as proof give a statement that he was angry on his son’s query and said: ‘do not imagine anyone to be like álī’. the inference drawn is: ‘imām aĥmed by this statement elevated álī over everybody else.’ sub’ĥānAllāh.

i repeat: would you trust today’s scholar and his interpretation, explanation of a hadith more than the interpretation of earlier scholars?

arabic is an ocean – it may sound like a cliché, but one will be forced to admit that if they pore through arabic lexicons. only those who cannot fathom its depth will demur. arabic idioms, the finer points of ‘kalām al-árab’ are best understood with help from our elders and standing upon shoulders of giants or mountain boulders. i would not trust a modern arab scholar contradicting a qāđī íyāđ or al-subkī or ibn ĥajar or murtađā zabīdī in arabic idioms, let alone ájamī scholars! so, wayward posters on internet forums and their fanciful interpretations can be chucked into the bin without any regret or second thoughts.

12. about ijmā’á: it may sound circular, but there is ijmā’á (consensus,unanimity) about the ijmā’á. if any pipsqueak questions the status of ijmāá, ask if any of our elders questioned the ijmāá. and were all these ulamā unaware when they kept saying ‘the ummah is unanimous that abū bakr is the most superior..’ or were they not as learned as the yanafi fomites? sub’ĥānAllāh.

13. i risk drawing the ire of ignoramuses on the internet, but,

idhā rađiyat ánnī kirāmu áshīratī
fa lā zāla ghađbānan álayya li-āmuhā
when the honorable ones in my community were pleased with me,
it was inevitable that scoundrels (in this community) would be angered

​

Wa billahi't Tawfiq.