Ibn 'Asakir reports from Ibn Thawr Al-Fahmi who said, “I went to Sayyiduna 'Uthman when he had been blockaded. He said to me, ‘I have ten qualities of myself preserved with Allah:

1. I was the fourth person to accept Islam.

2. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ gave two of his daughters in my marriage, one after the other.

3. I have never participated in music.

4. I have never concerned myself with amusement.

5. I have never desired anything bad or evil.

6. I have never touched my private parts with my right hand, after giving it to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in Bay'ah.

7. I have freed a slave every Jumu'ah since I accepted Islam. If it was not possible at the time, then I freed a slave later.

8. I have never committed adultery, neither before accepting Islam nor after accepting Islam.

9. I never stole anything, before accepting Islam or after it.

10. I compiled the Qur’an according to how it was in the time of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

From Ta’reekh Al-Khulafa’ by Imam Jalal Al-Din Al-Suyuti

By Neesarahmed Amjadi

Sayyidunā 'Uthman [may Allāh Almighty be pleased with him] was a very strict follower of the Sunnah of the Beloved Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, and was drowned in his love. He always feared Allāh Almighty and did nothing that would displease Allāh Almighty or his Beloved Prophet, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace. He would often cry due to the fear of Allāh Almighty, death, and the concern of the hereafter.

Bay'ah with the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace 
He loved the beloved Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, and all his blessed actions, to the extent that he did not let any impurity get on the hand with which he gave oath [bay'ah] to the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace.

Smiling after ablution 
He loved the Prophet, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, so much so that he would observe all the actions and followed them. Once 'Uthman [may Allāh Almighty be pleased with him] smiled after Wudhū and was asked as to why he smiled. He replied, I saw the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace do the same. [History of the Khulafas, pg 30-31]

Follow me or leave me 
Sayyiduna Uthman [may Allah Almighty be pleased with him] spent his life practising even the smallest Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah Almighty bless him and grant him peace, and gave invitation to others to practise the Sunnah. When he became caliph, he stood in front of the people and said, Follow me until I follow the Sunnah and leave me as soon as I leave the Sunnah. If I leave or move away from the Sunnah then show me the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace. [History of the Khulafa, pg 32]

A passing funeral 
Once a funeral was passing Sayyidunā 'Uthman [may Allāh Almighty be pleased with him] when he suddenly stood up and said, The Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, would do this. [Adab of Sunnah, pg 31]
The mother of the believers, Sayyidā Ayesha Siddīqah [may Allāh Almighty be pleased with her] related that the beloved Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, gathered his garments around him when 'Uthman entered, and said to 'Uthman, Should I not feel shy of a man of whom the angels are shy? [History of the Khulafa, pg 162]
Glory be to Allāh Almighty! This is the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace, saying this, however, we do not feel shy at all when we go against the teaching of the Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh Almighty bless him and grant him peace. Oh Allāh Almighty! Give us the ability to follow in the footsteps of Sayyidunā 'Uthman [may Allāh Almighty be pleased with him.] 

It is narrated from Zuhrī, that Sayyidunā Abu Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhu name is Abdullah bin Uthmân bin Aamir bin Amr bin Ka’ab bin Sa’ad bin Taeem bin Marah bin Ka’ab bin Laueey bin Galib bin Fahr.[1]
Ummul Mu’minīn Sayyidāh Ayesha rađiyAllāhu ánha has narrated that Sayyidunā Abu Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhu was given the name Abdullah bin Aamir bin Amr by family members, but was known as Attīq.[2]

Sayyidunā Layth bin Sa’ad narrated that Sayyidunā Abu Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhu was given the name Attīq, by the kindness [and mercy] of the Beloved Prophet śallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. Your real name was Abdullah bin Uthmân.[3]

Abu Hafs Amr bin Ali rađiyAllāhu ánhu narrates that Sayyidunā Abu Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhu blessed face was [of a] light [complexion] and your blessed name was Abdullah bin Uthmân.[4]

Amir narrates from his father Sayyidunā Abdullah bin Zubayr rađiyAllāhu ánhu that Sayyidunā Abu Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhu’s name was Abdullah bin Uthmân.[5]
________________________________
[1] Hâkim, al-Mustadrak, vol. 3, pp. 64, Hadīth 4403
Imâm Bayhaqī, Sunan al-Kubra, vol. 6, pp. 369, Hadīth 12870
[2] Shaybāni, Al-Âhād wa al-Mathānī, vol. 1, pp. 70
[3] At-Tabarânī, Mu’jam al-Kabīr, vol. 1, pp. 52, Hadīth 4
Haytamī has stated in Majma’ al-Zawâ’id [vol. 9, pp. 41] that this has been narrated to us by at-Tabarânī and all the narrators are trustworthy [thiqqa].
Shaybāni, Al-Âhād wa al-Mathānī, vol. 1, pp. 69
Ibn Hajar Asqalânī, al-Isaba, vol. 4, pp. 170
[4] Haytamī, Majma’ al-Zawâ’id, vol. 9, pp. 41
[5] Ibn Hibbān, Sahīh, vol. 15, pp. 279, Hadīth 6864 

The Beloved Rasūl of Allâh Almighty şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam stated,

It is wajib (obligatory) upon my Ummah to love Abū Bakr [rađiyAllāhu ánhu]

In another blessed Ĥadīth, the Beloved Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam said,

It is wājib upon my Ummah to love Abū Bakr [rađiyAllāhu ánhu] and to be thankful to him

Reference:

Both Ĥadīths compiled in as-Sawaiq al-Muharriqa of Imām Ibn Ĥajar al-Haytamī rađiyAllāhu ánhu (d. 974h). 

The ruling for the denier of the Khilafa of Abu Bakr and 'Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala ánhuma
Sidi Muhammad Aqdas

It is evident that those Rafidis [tabarra’i] who insult Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta’ala ‘anhuma – even if they deny them being Imams and Khulafa – are definitely Kafirs according to relied upon books of the Hanafi school and the explicit writings of the jurists. It is in Durr al-Mukhtar that:

If he is a denier of any necessity of faith, then he is a Kafir. Such as saying that Allah has a body or denies that Abu Bakr Siddiq radiyAllahu ta’ala ‘anhu is a companion [Durr al-Mukhtar, 1:83].

Tahtawi, commentary of Durr adds:

And denying his Khilafah is also Kufr [Tahtawi, 1:244].

Fatawa Khulasa and Khazanat al-Muftin mention that:

If Rafidis consider Mawla ‘Ali radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu to be greater than all the companions; then they are innovators and astray. If they deny the Khilafah of Siddiq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu; then they are Kafir [Khazanat al-Muftin, 1:28].

It is in Fath al-Qadir and Hashiya Tabyeen that:

If any Rafidi considers Mawla ‘Ali radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu to be Afdal [greater] than the first three Khulafa; then he is astray and if he denies the Khilafah of Siddiq or Faruq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma, then he is a Kafir [Hashiya Shalbi ‘ala Tabyeen al-Haqayiq, 1:135].

It is in Wajiz of Imam Kardari that:

The denier of the Khilafah of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a Kafir, this is authentic. The denier of the Khilafah of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is also a Kafir. This is most authentic [Fatawa Bazzaziya, 6:318].

It is in Tabyeen al-Haqayiq Sharh Kanz al-Daqayiq that:

Imam Mirghinani said that salah behind an innovator will be valid but not valid behind a Rafidi, Jahmi, Qadari, Tashbahi. It is gathered from this that if someone’s innovation is not to the extent that he is a Kafir, then salah behind him will be valid but Makrooh and if it does reach Kufr, then it is not valid at all [Tabyeen al-Haqayiq, 1:134].

It is in Fatawa Hindiya that:

The same is in Tabyeen al-Haqayiq and Khulasa and it is authentic. The same is in Badayi’ [Fatawa Hindiya, 1:84].

Also in Hindiya [3:264], Bazzaziya [3:319], al-Ashbah [Kitab al-Siyar], Ithaf al-Absar wa’l Basayir [p.187], Fatawa Anqarwiya [1:25] and Waqiyat al-Muftin [p.13] that:

Rafidis that speak ill of Shaykhayn radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma [al ‘ayadhu billah] are Kafir. If they consider Mawla ‘Ali radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu to be greater than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma, then he is an innovator and not a Kafir.

It is on the same page of Bazzaziya and in Barjandi Sharh Nuqaya [4:21] from Fatawa Zahiriya that:

The denier of the Imamah of Abu Bakr Siddiq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a kafir. Some said he is an innovator and not a Kafir; but the authentic position is that he is a Kafir. Similarly, the denier of the Khilafah of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is also a Kafir according to the authentic narrations.

Bazzaziya also has that:

It is Wajib [necessary] to call Rafidis, Nasibis and Kharijis as Kafir because they say Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Uthman, Mawla ‘Ali, Talha, Zubair and Sayyida ‘Aisha were all Kafirs [Bazzaziya, 6:318].

It is in Bahr al-Rayiq that:

The most authentic position is that the denier of the Khilafah and Imamah of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma is a Kafir [Bahr al-Rayiq, 5:121].

It is in Majma’ al-Anhur Sharh Multaqa al-Abhur that:

If Rafidis are only Tafdilis, then they are innovators and if they deny the Khilafah of Siddiq, they are Kafir [Majma’ al-Anhar, 1:108].

From the same book:

Whoever denies the companionship of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a Kafir. Likewise, whoever denies that he is the rightful Imam, he is a Kafir according to the most authentic position. Similarly, whoever denies the companionship of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a Kafir in the most authentic reports [Majma’ al-Anhar, 1:631].

It is in Ghunya Sharh Munya that:

An innovator is someone who holds any belief that contradicts the Ahlu’s Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah. Praying behind him valid whilst being Makruh until his belief does not reach Kufr according to the Ahlu’s Sunnah. If it does, then praying behind him is invalid. Such as the Rafidis who say Mawla’ Ali is God or that prophethood was for ‘Ali and Jibra’eel made a mistake. Such beliefs are Kufr and so is accusing Sayyida ‘Aisha or to deny the companionship and Khilafah of Siddiq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu or to speak ill of Shaykhayn radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma [Ghunyat al-Musalli, p.515].

It is in Kifaya Sharh Hidaya [1:305] and Mustakhlas al-Haqayiq Sharh Kanz al-Daqayiq that:

If a Kafir innovates, such as a Jahmi or Qadari who say the Qur’an is created or a Rafidi who denies the Khilafah of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu, then praying behind him is not allowed [Mustakhlas al-Haqayiq, 1:202].

It is in Sharh Kanz ‘ala Fath al-Muyin that:

It is in Khulasa that salah is valid behind innovators apart from the Jahmiya, Jabriya, QaDurriya, Rafidi Ghali, those who believe the Qur’an is created and the Mushabbiha. Salah is valid, but Makruh, behind the Ahl Qibla as long as their innovation does not reach Kufr such that they are not Ghali. And a Rafidi Ghali is someone who denies the Khilafah of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu [Sharh Kanz ‘ala Fath al-Muyin, 1:208].

It is n Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah that:

The denier of the Khilafah of Siddiq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a Kafir. And Fath al- Qadir says the same for the denier of the Khilafah of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu. Burhan Sharh Mawahib al-Rahman says the same for the denier of the Khilafah of ‘Uthman and salah behind someone who denies the wiping of the socks or the companionship of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu or speaks ill of Shaykhayn or accuses ‘Aisha Siddiqq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anha and is also invalid behind anyone who denies any necessity of faith as he is Kafir. His explanation will not be heard nor will his excuse that he said so due to a mistaken opinion [Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah, p.168].

It is in Nazm al-Farayid of ‘Allama ibn Wahban that:

Whoever curses or speaks ill of Shaykhayn is a Kafir. An even greater Kafir is someone who says that Yadullah means ‘hand’. The most accurate opinion for someone who denies the Khilafah of Abu Bakr radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is Takfir and this is the same for the Khilafah of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu.

It is in Tayseer al-Maqasid that:

If a Rafidi speaks ill of Shaykhayn radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma and curses them will become a Kafir. If he believes that Mawla ‘Ali radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is greater than them, then he is not a Kafir but astray and an innovator.

It continues:

According to the most authentic way, the denier of the Khilafah of Siddiq radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu is a Kafir. And the same is for the Khilafah of ‘Umar radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhu.

It is in Fatwa ‘Allama Nuh Afandi, Majmu’a Shaykh al-Islam ‘Ubaid Allah Afandi, Mughni al-Mustafti ‘an Su’al al-Mufti and ‘Uqud al-Durriya that:

Rafidis are Kafirs. They hold many beliefs of Kufr. They deny the Khilafah of Shaykhayn and speak ill of them. May Allah blacken their faces in both worlds. Whoever has any of their characteristics is a Kafir [‘Uqud al-Durriya, 1:103].

It continues:

To speak ill of Shaykhayn radiyAllahu ta'ala 'anhuma is the same as disrespecting RasulAllah sallAllahu 'alaihi wasallam. Imam Sadr Shaheed said: Whoever speaks ill or curses Shaykhayn is a Kafir [‘Uqud al-Durriya, 1:104].

It also has that:

The scholars of the ‘Uthmani era always had divine help with them. Whoever among them was the Akabir Shaykh al-Islam wrote fatawa against the Shi’a. Many of them wrote extensively and compiled monographs. It was the Muhaqqiq and Mufassir, Abu Mas’ud Afandi ‘Imadi [leading Mufti, ‘Uthmani era], who gave the fatwa of the Rafidis’ Kufr and apostacy. His fatwa has been recorded by ‘Allama Kawakibi Halabi in his commentary of Farayid Sunniya [‘Uqud al-Durriya, 1:105].

Ashbah, Ithaf [p.187], Anqarwi [p.25] and Waqiyat al-Muftin [p.13] all have it from Manaqib Karwari that:

Whoever denies the Khilafah of Shaykhayn or has hatred for them is a Kafir because Shaykhayn are beloved to RasulAllah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam [Waqiyat al-Muftin, p.13].

Moreover, many of the Akabir have explained that the Kufr of the Rafidis is such that even their repentance is not accepted. Tanweer al-Absar has it that:

The repentance of any apostate is accepted except for him who insults a Prophet or any or both of the Shaykhayn [Durr al-Mukhtar, 1:356].

It is in Ashbah wa’l Nadhayir, Fatawa Khayriya [1:94] and Ithaf al-Absar wa’l Basayir
[p.186] that:

The repentance of a Kafir is accepted in both worlds but there are some Kafirs whose repentance is not accepted. One of these is someone becomes a Kafir due to insulting our Prophet or any Prophet. Another is he who becomes Kafir after speaking ill of one or both of Shaykhayn radiyallahu ta'ala 'anhuma.

It is in Durr al-Mukhtar that:

It is in Bahr al-Rayiq from Jawhara Nayyara Sharh Mukhtasar Quduri that Imam Sadr Shaheed said that whoever speaks ill of Shaykhayn radiyallahu ta'ala 'anhuma or curses them is a Kafir. His repentance is not accepted and the fatwa of Imam Dabbusi and Faqih Abu’l Laith Samarqandi is on this. And fatwa should be on this opinion. This is what is decided in Ashbah and ‘Allama Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah Ghazi Tamartashi maintained this [Durr al-Mukhtar, 1:357]. 

From al-Malfūdh Sharīf, Pg 95:

Question
Were the thirty chapters of the Glorious Qur’ān already established in the sacred era of the Sahaba?

Answer
Imam Jalāl al-Dīn Suyutī rađiyAllāhu ánhu [d. 911/1505] in his famous book, al-Itqān fī ‘Ulūm al-Qur’ān, has compiled all the relevant ahadīth and narrations pertaining to the compilation of the Holy Qur’ān. It is not mentioned anywhere in this book of a chapter which tells us that it was done in that sacred era. Yes, the rukū’s existed. 

Question: It must be brought to the notice of the Ulama-e-Ahle Sunnat that today Sunnis sit in the companionship of corrupt sects and have become misled in faith due to a few laws. Even though there are numerous laws explained in your books, this servant has not seen anything relating to this that is why I felt it necessary to query this issue. There issue is that there is a person who refers to Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) as a miserly person. He says that Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) fought with Hazrat Ali and the family of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam (Hazrat Imam Hassan radi Allahu anhu) and stole the khilaafat from them and he martyred thousands of Sahaba-e-Kiraam to achieve this. Bakr says that he is aware of Ameer Mu’wiyah’s (radi Allahu anhu) wrongs and he can not be called and Ameer.

Amar on the other hand says that Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is from amongst the senior Sahaba-e-Kiraam and the slightest disrespect to him is to be misled. There is another person, who calls himself a Sunni and also claims to have some knowledge (The truth is that he is actually completely ignorant) says that all the Sahaba especially Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique (radi Allahu anhu), Hazrat Umar Farouk-e-Azam (radi Allahu anhu) and Hazrat Usman Zul Noorain (radi Allahu anhu) (Allah forbid) were greedy and miserly, as they kept the blessed bier of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam and then were each engrossed in their own schemes of how to become Khalifa. 

Now what is the ruling about these four persons? Can we regard them as being Ahle Sunnat Wa Jamaat or not? What is your (Aala Hazrat’s) view on this issue? Please present a simple yet well supported answer.

The Answer: Almighty Allah described the Sahaba of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in two categories in Surah Hadeed. One group are those who accepted Islam before the Victory at Makkah and who spent their wealth in the way of Allah sincerely and made Jihad. The second group refers to those who accepted Islam after the Victory at Makkah. Almighty Allah mentioned in the Holy Quran about both the groups “Wa Kul’la Wa’d Allahu Husna” wherein Almighty Allah promised both groups good things. In giving this promise of giving them good things, Almighty Allah says in the Holy Quran, “They have been kept a great distance away from Hell. They will not even hear its sound. These are the ones who will live forever in the way they desire. The most difficulty moments of Qiyaaamat will not cause them any sadness, The Angels will welcome them by saying, This is that day of yours which you have been promised.”

Almighty Allah has mentioned the above as the status and excellence of every Sahabi. Now, if anyone says ill about any sahabi, then he wants to belie the word of Allah. To present false and incorrect narrations regarding some of their dealings against that, which Allah has mentioned, is not the manner of the Muslims. In the same verse, Almighty Allah even answered such people by promising good to both the groups of the Sahaba-e-Kiraam (radi Allahu ta’ala anhum). Almighty Allah also says, “Allah knows well, whatever you are to do.” (In other words Allah knows everything and has still promised both groups his Mercy and blessings). Now after this, whoever barks or says such things, will go to jahanum (Hell). Allama Shahabud’deen Khufaji states as follows in Naseemur Riyaz, the commentary of Shifa Shareef by Qaadi Iyaaz as follow: “One who slanders Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is a dog from amongst the dogs of Hell.” 

Amongst the four statements (presented in the question), only Amar’s statement is correct and true. Zaid and Bakr are liars and the fourth person is the worst and most evil of all three as he is a raafdhi (Shia). To Appoint an Imam (Caliph) is the most difficult task of all difficult tasks. All the issues of the world and religion have connection to this and if the blessed Janazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam had to be kept even until Qiyaamat, then there would have been still no possibility of any harm at all. The blessed bodies of the Ambia (alaihimus salaatu was salaam) never become disintegrated. Hazrat Sulaiman (alaihis salaam) remained standing for one entire year after passing away. He was only laid to rest in his blessed grave after one year. 

Now, the Blessed Janaazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam was in the room of Ummul Mo’mineen Siddiqa (radi Allahu anha), and it is the same place where the blessed Rauza-e-Anwar is today. The Janaazah Mubaarak was not going to be taken out of that Hujrah. It was a small Hujrah and all the Sahaba wished to be part of the Janaazah Salaah, so small groups of Sahaba-e-Kiraam came in one after the other. They partook in the Janaazah Salaah and went out (and the next group came in). This chain of actions ended on the third day. 

Now, if this practice of the Sahaba had to take three years, then the blessed janaaza would have been kept their for three years and this, would have been the reason for the (so-called) delay in placing the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam to rest in his blessed Rauza Mubaarak. If according to this Iblees (cursed person) this was being greedy (power hungry), then the strongest objection would be on Ummul Mo’mineen Siddiqa and Hazrat Ali (Radi Allahu anhum). They were not greedy. The issue of burial and kaffan is the right of the family members. Why did Hazrat Ali and Ummul Mo’mineen then just wait and do nothing for three days? They are the ones who did this for the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam. They should have done the last rites as well. (All this is being just given as example to allow the ignorant to understand that these could be the objections that they would have to make on great people like Hazrat Ali and Ummul Mo’mineen). Now, it can be established that the objections by these people are baseless and cursed and the issue of not resting the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in his blessed grave quickly had religious benefits in it and Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu) and all the Sahaba-e-Kiraam were pleased with this.

These evil cursed people (May Allah destroy them) are not just hurting the Sahaba, but they are causing discomfort to the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam. It has been mentioned in the Hadith Shareef as follows: “Anyone who has hurt my sahaba has hurt me and one who has hurt me has caused Allah displeasure and one who displeases Allah, it is soon that Allah will seize him.”

والله تعالٰی اعلم

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

Question:

In a gathering, a certain Peer openly called Yazeed a Kaafir and branded Hazrat Ameer Mu’aawiya as a Kaafir also. A virtuous Aalim-e-Deen was also present in this gathering and he said, “Regarding Yazeed, the ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifa is to adopt silence (sukoot) but Ameer Mu’aawiya is a Sahaabi (companion) of the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam)”. The Peer then said, “He who doesn’t regard Ameer Mu’aawiya and Yazeed as Kaafirs, is himself a Kaafir”. The supporters of the Peer repeated this statement a few times also i.e. “…such a person is a Kaafir”.

What is the ruling of the Shari’ah on the Peer with such beliefs and his supporters also? Reply in light of the Qur’an and Hadeeth.

Maulana Muhammad Zameerudeen Naeemi
India

Answer:

To respect all the Sahaaba (companions) of Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) is Fardh and all of them are Adool (honoured). Regarding the Mushaajaraat (disputes) between them (whether it be battles or anything else), the belief of the Ahle-Sunnat wal Jamaat is that to speak about it is Haraam because in mentioning it, there is a fear of negative sentiment being developed towards a Sahaabi and this is ruin in this world and the Hereafter also.

A Hadeeth states, “When remembering my Sahaaba, be careful (meaning don’t mention their Mushaajaraat).”
There are various Ayats of the Holy Qur’an and Ahadeeth testimony to the glory of the Sahaaba. The Holy Qur’an has classified the Sahaaba in two leagues:-

(a) Mu’mins before Fath - Sahaaba who spent and made Jihad in the path of Allah prior to the conquering of Makkah.
(b) Mu’mins after Fath - Sahaaba who did so afterwards.

The Holy Qur’an has given excellence to the first group over the second, “Those who sacrificed and made Jihad before the Fath are higher in rank to those who did so after the Fath.” (Surah Hadeed, Verse 10)
It has also said, “Allah has promised Jannat to all of them.” (Surah Hadeed, Verse 10)

Allah has guaranteed goodness for both leagues and has sealed the door of ignorantly criticizing their actions.
Also, “Allah knows well your actions .” (ibid)

Meaning, He knows all what you will do. In short, He has assured goodness to all whether they are the Saabiqeen (first group) or Lahiqeen (second group). Let us also ask the Qur’an itself, what it has in store for those whom it has promised goodness,

“Verily, those who We have promised goodness, they have been kept far from Jahannum, they won’t hear even it’s faint noise and they shall remain forever with what their hearts desired and the major anxiety will not put them in sorrow. Angels will come to receive them saying, ‘This is the day which you were promised’”. (Surah Ambiya, Verses 101-103)

A true Muslims heart, after hearing this Qur’anic proof can never think negatively about any companion or impugn their actions.

From the above extracts, it is clear that all the Sahaaba are Jannatis. Anyone who calls a Sahaabi a Kaafir, is calling someone who is a Jannati a Kaafir. Anyone who has such a belief is bereft of Imaan and by regarding the Sahaaba to be Kaafirs, becomes a Jahannami himself. Hazrat Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) is an esteemed companion of Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) and the promise of Allah to a Sahaabi has been quoted above. Hence, by calling Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) a Kaafir, the Peer became a Kaafir, and Jahannami himself. Hazrat ibn Masood (Radi Allahu Anhu) reports Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) to have said, “The people of my time (the Sahaaba) are the most excellent.” (Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmed, Tirmizi)

Another Hadeeth states, “The fire (of Jahannam) will not touch the Muslim who saw me or saw anyone who saw me (the Sahaaba).” (Tirmizi)

Also, the curse of Allah, Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam), the Angels and all people falls on those who swear, abuse and blaspheme the Sahaaba. A Hadeeth states,

The Noble Messenger (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) is reported to have said, “Undoubtedly, Allah has selected me and my Sahaaba and has made Wazeers (ministers), helpers and relatives through marriage for me. So, he who swears them incurs the curse of Allah, Angels and all people. Neither does Allah accept his Nafil nor Fardh.” (Tibraani, Haakim)

When this is the censoring for impugning the Sahaaba, what will the ruin be for believing them to be Kaafir? Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) states, “Whoever calls his Muslim brother a Kaafir, then one of them definitely returns as a Kaafir.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

Meaning, if the person called a Kaafir is truly a Kaafir, nothing is wrong. If he isn’t, then the person who called him a Kaafir becomes one himself. When this ruling is about general Mumins, definitely he who calls any Sahaabi a Kaafir, immediately becomes one himself. Hazrat Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) entered Islam before his parents could accept it and together with Imaan he attained the honour of sharing genealogy, companionship and was even related to Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) through marriage. Through these reasons, having the companionship of the Noble Messenger (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) in Jannat also becomes necessary for him. Allama Ibn Hajar writes,

Tatheerul-Jinaan, pg. 6)

Imaam Tirmizi has dedicated an entire chapter in Jaame-Tirmizi to the excellence of Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) specifically. A Hadeeth states: It is reported that Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) made this Du’a for Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu), “O Allah make him a guide and righteous leader and grant people salvation through him.” Another Hadeeth states that when Hazrat Umar bin Khattab (Radi Allahu Anhu) retired Hazrat Umair bin Sa’ad (Radi Allahu Anhu) from Hims (a city in Syria) and appointed Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) as it’s Governor, people said, “Umair has been retired and Mu’aawiyah has been made Governor.” Hazrat Umair (Radi Allahu Anhu) replied to this, “Speak only good about Mu’aawiya because I have heard Rasoolullah saying, “O Allah! Grant people guidance through him.’”

If Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) was a Kaafir, Ahadeeth regarding his excellence wouldn’t have been narrated. Also, look at the reverence of the Sahaaba and how they had complete certainty and trust in Rasoolullah’s (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) sayings. Even though he was being released from power, but Hazrat Umair (Radi Allahu Anhu) still said, “Speak only good about Mu’aawiya….”

If Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) had any defect, the Sahaaba wouldn’t have been so cautious about his personality. The excellence of Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) is extremely grand and how can it not be whereas Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) loved him so much and the Sahaaba venerated him. Speaking about every Sahaabi, the Messenger (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam) has said, “My Sahaaba are like stars, follow them and you will attain salvation.”

This Peer seems to be a complete wretch of a Raafzi (Shia) and an instrument of Shaitaan. People will become Gumrah (astray) through him, lose their Imaan and not be correctly guided. Becoming the Mureed (disciple) of this Peer is impermissible and Haraam and becoming his Mureed while knowing of his Kufri beliefs is itself Kufr. What more disrespect can be made of the Sahaaba than calling them Kaafir!

Regarding those who slander and curse Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu), Allama Khifaaji states,
“He who slanders Ameer Mu’aawiya, is a dog from the dogs of Jahannam.” (Naseemur-Riyadh)
Regarding Yazeed being a Kaafir and slandering him, there is a difference of opinion. The ruling of our Imaam-e-Aazam on this matter is that Sukoot (silence) must be made as prudence. Fisq (transgression of the Shari’ah) by Yaazid is Mutawaatir (successive) but his Kufr is not. However, Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal rules him to be a Kaafir.

Nevertheless, we are Hanafi Muqalids and in the Taqleed (following) of our Imaam, we shall adopt Sukoot on the Takfir (deeming as a Kaafir) of Yazeed.

With regards to cursing Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) due to him making Yazeed the Khalifa, doing so is explicitly Haraam. Firstly, Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) did not fully know the conduct of Yazeed. Secondly, Ameer Mu’aawiya (Radi Allahu Anhu) was a Mujtahid himself. When a Mujtahid makes a correct Ijtihaad, he attains two rewards and if he makes an incorrect Ijtihaad he attains only one reward. A Hadeeth states,

This Peer has absolutely no knowledge and the statement of his, “Whoever doesn’t regard Yazeed and Mu’aawwiya to be Kaafir is a Kaafir himself”, is a crime against the Shari’ah and a means of making thousands of people, rather the Ummah of Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alayhi Wasallam), Kaafirs. His supporters who aid his statement are also strange and retarded.

This Peer is a Kaafir and apostate and it is necessary on him to sincerely make Tauba and renew his Imaan. If he has a wife, he must renew his Nikah also. Those supporters who were happy and content on these statements of his must also act on the above ruling of the Shari’ah. Regarding such people, A Hadeeth states:
“Allah has chosen me, my Sahaaba and my relatives through marriage. Soon a group of people will come who slander them and diminish their esteem. Do not keep their company, do not eat with them and do not marry with them.” (Uqaili)

For more insight into this subject, refer to the books “Sawaaiqe Muhriqa”, “Tatheerul-Jinaan”, “An-Naahiyah”, “Fatawa Hadeethiah”, “Fatawa Razvia, Vol. 11”, and various other treatises.

Written by
Moulana Muhammed Yunus Raza
4 Shabaan 1422 A.H.

Certified by
Huzoor Tajush Shari’ah, Allama Mohammed Akhtar Raza Khan Azhari
Qaadhi Abdur-Raheem Bastawi
Moulana Muzaffar Husain
Moulana Naazim Ali
Source (Fataawa Bareilly Shareef - Markazi Darul Ifta Bareilly) 

From al-Malfūdh Sharīf, Pg 95:

Question
Were the thirty chapters of the Glorious Qur’ān already established in the sacred era of the Sahaba?

Answer
Imam Jalāl al-Dīn Suyutī rađiyAllāhu ánhu [d. 911/1505] in his famous book, al-Itqān fī ‘Ulūm al-Qur’ān, has compiled all the relevant ahadīth and narrations pertaining to the compilation of the Holy Qur’ān. It is not mentioned anywhere in this book of a chapter which tells us that it was done in that sacred era. Yes, the rukū’s existed.