Hypocrites Among Sahabah and
Surat al-Tawbah:
Al-Baghawi and others reported from Ibn Abbas as saying: The Messenger of Allah was not aware of the hypocrites till the revelation of Surat Bara’ah (al-Tawbah). Before it he could recognize some of their distinguishing qualities, sayings and deeds, out of what is revealed in their regard in several surahs before Surat al-Tawbah, like al-Munafiqun, al-Ahzab, al Nisa, al-Anfal, al-Qital and al-Hashr.
Surat Bara’ah has in fact disgraced them and divulged all sorts of their outward and inward hypocrisy, the reason for which it was called also al-Fadihah, al-Muba’thirah, al-Musharridah, al-Mukhziyah, al-Muthirah, al-Hafirah, al-Munakkilah, al-Mudamdimah and Surat al-Adhab!
Herewith exposition of some facts about them in the Battle of Tabuk and its limit, with their acts and signs of their hypocrisy, and scandals, and
( 430 )
their punishment, arranged according to the course of the verses of Surat al-Tawbah not according to the letters.682
1. Their asking permission to remain behind, which can never be done by a believer, as none asks permission to abandon jihad but only that who believes neither in Allah nor in the Hereafter (467).
2. Had they intended really to go out they would have made ready for it (174)
3. Allah was averse to their resurgence, so He hindered them (471)
4. Had they risen out among the believes, they would have only increased in their perplexity, with wishing for their disgrace (473).
5. They have adopted the course of sedition before Battle of Tabuk, during Battle of Uhud, when they instigated discord among Muslims, discouraging some of them (474).
6. They reversed the facts for the Prophet in the outset till truth was revealed to make him victorious and manifesting of Allah’s decree, while they being averse to this (475).
7. Some of them took leave from the Prophet to stay behind (in battles), with the excuse of fearing from being infatuated by prettiness of the Roman women but they were afflicted with the fascination of disobeying Allah and His Messenger by practice (477).
8. Every good befalls the Prophet would bother them, and every disaster strikes him would delight them, thinking themselves to be decisive in remaining behind (478).
9.The believers await for the hypocrites to be afflicted with a doom from Allah directly or at their hands (479).
10. Their almsgiving would not be accepted due to their debauchery, impiety, performing prayers while being idlers, and paying their contribution only unwillingly (481).
11. Punishing them with their wealth and children in this world, and passing away of their souls while being disbelievers (485-574).
682. Thid chapter is taken from the tenth volume of Tafsir al-Qur'an al-hakim, of al-Imaman Muhammad Abduh and MUhammad Rashid Rida, and the numbers placed before the words are the numbers of the pages of this volume.
( 431 )
12. Their swearing for the believers that they be in truth of them, with describing their failure and being afraid of them (485).
13. Pointing of some of them at the Messenger in the alms, and if they be given from them they would be pleased, otherwise they would be enraged (487).
14. Their vexing the Prophet (S) by saying: He is only a hearer (516).
15. Their swearing for the believers to please them without pleasing Allah and His Messenger (522).
16. Their fearing from revelation of a surah proclaiming what be in their hearts, and threatening them (by God) for their scoffing with disclosing what they fear (525).
17. Their apologizing for their scoffing by saying that they were only prating and jesting, which being the same as infidelity, with threatening to punish a party of them because of their insistence on their guilt, and possibility of forgiving another party (528-532).
18. Manifesting the conditions of the hypocrites and their general qualities, males and females, and throwing them together with the disbelievers into Hellfire and cursing them (533).
19. Resembling them to the hypocrites of the ancient peoples in having nothing to do but to enjoy what they stated when prating in falsehood and perishing of their works in the world and the Hereafter like them (527), with reminding them with the fate of the hypocrites folks who were before them (539).
20. The hypocrites are verily the transgressors (the verse 67).
21. Connecting them (hypocrites) to the disbelievers in respect of obligation of striving against them, with being harsh in treating them and threatening them (549).
22. Their swearing (by Allah) on denying what they said of the word of disbelief, and God’s proving what they denied, (and He inspired them that which they could not attain), which being the attempt to assassinate the Prophet (551-555).
( 432 )
23. Making some of them a covenant with Allah to give alms when being straitened, but breaching their covenant and lying after attaining richness and affluence, with (Allah’s) making the consequence of this to be hypocrisy accompanying them until the day of meeting God. And their unawareness that Allah knows both their secret and what they announce (558).
24. Their pointing at and carping the believers in giving the alms, and deriding them (563).
25. Depriving them from asking forgiveness by the Messenger due to their disbelief in Allah and His Messenger, with no hope to be guided (by Allah) through abandoning their rudeness. (666).
26. Rejoicing of those who were left behind at sitting still behind the Messenger of Allah, and their recommendation not to go forth in the heat with reminding them with the fire of hell (569).
27. Its being more proper for them to be sad, laugh a little and weep much (572).
28. The Prophet’s forbidding from praying for the dead of them, giving the reason to be their disbelief and dying while being disbelievers.(573).
29. Asking leave by men of wealth among them to stay behind of jihad whenever a surah is revealed commanding to gather between faith and jihad (581).
30. The state of the wandering Arabs and asking permission by some of them to sit and be exempted from jihad, and sitting of the liars without an excuse, with threatening that a painful doom will fall on those who disbelieve (583).
I suffice with citing these qualities of the hypocrites in the Battle of Tabuk, as stated in Surat al-Tawbah, Whoever seeking more information or desiring to recognize all the acts done by the hypocrites, he can refer to the Surahs of al-Munafiqun, al-Ahzab, al-Nisa’, al-Anfal, al-Qital and al-Hashr.
( 433 )
In the two Sahihs, in hadith al-Ifk, it is reported that Asid ibn al-Khudayr said to Sa’d ibn Ubadah: You are a hypocrite, and you dispute on behalf of the hypocrites. Then there was a heated wrangling between them till the Prophet reconciled between them. These were the Badrites among whom someone said to the other: you are a hypocrites, but the Prophet never charged with impiety anyone of them.
There are so many reports in this regard, and anyone desiring to know the names of the hypocrites among the Khazraj and Aws (Tribes), he can refer to the first volume of Ansab al-Ashraf, in which their names filled ten pages from p.274 upto p.283.
Preferring Trade and Pastime to Prayers:
It seems proper to state here what was done by the Sahabah toward the Messenger of Allah, and how they broke away from him toward merchandise and pastime, preferring this to prayers, leaving him standing performing the Jumu’ah (congregation) prayer, alone. That was after the commandment of Allah the Glorified to them to haste unto remembrance of Allah and leave the trading, as that is better for them, if they but knew. Nevertheless, they disobeyed Allah’s order and dispersed toward their merchandise and pastime, leaving the Messenger of Allah!
The following verse can divulge the truth about them:
“And when they see merchandise or pastime, they break away unto it, and leave thee standing. Say thou (O Our Apostle Muhammad!) What is with God is better than pastime and (better) than merchandise, and God is the Best of sustainers” (61:11).
( 434 )
Hypocrisy of Companions during and after Prophet’s
Lifetime:
The following is a hadith reported by al-Bukhari and others683 from Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman, in which he manifests clear the hypocrisy of the Sahabah during the Prophet’s lifetime and after him.
Hudhayfah said: The contemporary hypocrites are worse than those who lived during the Prophet’s lifetime and used to conceal their truth but today they declare publicly! In another narration by al-Bukhari from him (Hudhayfah) too; who said: Verily hypocrisy was found in the time of the Prophet (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny), but today it is no more than disbelief after faith. In another narration (he said): It is in fact disbelief and faith.
Al-Bazzar reported from Abu Wa’il as saying: I said to Hudhayfah: Which is worse, the hypocrisy of today or that which was found during the time of the Messenger of Allah? He — banging his forehead by hand — said: Oh! It is today manifest, while in the time of the Messenger of Allah they used to hide it.
I support this chapter with a statement written by Dr. Taha Husayn in his book Uthman, in which he referred to the issue of fitnah (disorder) that happened during the time of Uthman, and some comments of the historians about it.
The stances of people toward the events during the days of Uthman and his role in them differed much. Some of them relieved themselves of the job saying: Most of these events were falsified and innovated, and their occurrence was not established. But they were claimed to exist by claimants, some of whom intended to hatch plots against Islam, with some others being compelled to do so, because of the severe animosity that was found among the parties. Therefore they would reject and deny most of the events, viewing those ones accepted by them to be not so perilous, but were subjected to exertion of opinion (ijtihad) by the madhhab leader (imam) that if he would be correct, two rewards will be his share but if mistaken one reward.
683. Fath al-Bari, vol.XIII, pp.62,63.
( 435 )
However, his intention of that was only good, as he could not intend but good, the opinion that was held by them (the latters) in regard of the narrations approved by them, which were exposing the antagonism that was going on between Uthman and the Prophet’s Companions. So most of these events were viewed by them to be composed and very few of them could be accepted according to the above-mentioned interpretation, i.e. they were produced as a result of ijtihad.
Most of those holding this notion, are in fact compelled to it, due to their consecration to that era of Islam, and being averse to accuse the Prophet’s Companions with charges that were usually ascribed to those caring only for the worldly lusts, out of what they harbour of readiness to rivalry and struggling on transient wishes that never suit people accompanied the Messenger of Allah, striving hard in the way of Allah and founding the State, through what they expended of money , wealth and efforts. Despite the possibility of being wrong or correct but they used to strive all the time, rushing to do good, so it was not possible for them to be involved in major sins, nor to perpetrate such minor sins that Allah forgive for His benevolent bondmen! Few of those holding this belief are impelled to hold it due to the mental inactivity that curbs them from researching, investigation and inquiry.
There being others who make it easy for themselves by denying the possibility of occurrence of such events and seditions at the hands of the Prophet’s Companions, viewing them to be conspiracies hatched by enemies of Islam, like Abd Allah ibn Saba’ and his likes from among People of the Book and other than them. It is quite obvious that we can never believe in this or that notion, as we neither like laziness nor incline towards comfort, nor exaggerate in consecrating people to that far extent, nor ascribing to the Prophet’s Companions traits which they don’t attribute to themselves. They used to consider themselves to be human beings, liable to what others are subject to, of sins and guilts, exchanging serious charges, with some of them accusing each other with infidelity and liberatinism. As an example, it is reported that Ammar ibn Yasir used to charge Uthman with impiety, deeming
( 436 )
it lawful to kill him, calling him with the name of Na’thal. It is reported too that Ibn Mas’ud used to deem shedding the blood of Uthman to be lawful when he was in Kufah, where he used to address the people saying: The worst of things are verily their invented ones, and every invented thing is a heresy (bid’ah), and every bid’ah is dalalah (deviation), and every deviation is in fire, meaning with this Uthman and his deputy al-Walid. Further it is reported that Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf said to some of his companions, when he was in deathbed: Precipitate him (i.e. Ali), before his sovereignty exceeds the bounds.
Those who supported Uthman from among the Prophet’s Companions, were of the opinion that their opponents had renegaded religion and violated his commandment, the reason for which they deemed fighting each other as lawful. And actually so they did, as in the Battles of al-Jamal and Siffin, except in the case of Sa’d and his few companions. While the Prophet’s companions have obliged themselves toward such disagreement, reciprocating charges with major sins and fighting each other to please God! So how can our opinion of them be better than the way they viewed themselves, and we can’t hold the belief held by those denying most of the akhbar (reports) that conveyed to us the sedition and conflict occurred among them. Doing so, we would only negate the Islamic history as a whole since the mission of the Prophet, since those who narrated the reports of these seditions were the same narrators relating the news of conquest and reports of maghazi, beside conduct (sirah) of the Prophet and caliphs. Hence it is not for us to believe them when narrating that which pleases us, and belie them when reporting that which we dislike. And we should not approve of a part of history and negate its other part, for the only cause that some of it pleases us while some other part of it bothers or harms us. Also it is improper to believe whatever is narrated or belie it as a whole, as the narrators being ordinary people liable to err and be correct, and may tell the truth or falsehood. The earlier traditionists themselves realized this fact, and made ready for it, laying down certain rules and regulations for ta’dil and tajrih, and believing and refuting, beside ways of preponderation and disapproval, and suspecting that
( 437 )
which is doubtful. So we are not to blame when adopting the same method they followed, and to add to the rules known for them the new rules recognized by recent traditionists, which they employed to verify, investigate and analyze the texts so as to comprehend their denotations.
The point that has no room for any doubt being that, the Muslims have differed in opinions regarding Uthman, and this disagreement resulted in a disorder and insurrection that created disunion and discord after which they haven’t attained unity or agreement till the present time.684
Taha Husayn concluded this chapter with some elaboration about the rules that everyone studying the Islamic history should follow and base his research on their principles, so as to employ them to verify, investigate and analyze the texts and comprehend their denotations.
He also obligated upon anyone intending to study these reports properly, to adopt a stand toward narrators of reports as that of a psychologist, viewing them as ‘ordinary people liable to err and be right, and may tell the truth or falsehood.” Further, he should seek truth and equity when investigating their narrations, believing nothing out of malignance, or denying nothing out of self desire.
If these healthy rules cited by Dr. Taha Husayn enrage some people, they undoubtedly deserve approval and confidence of ilm (knowledge), truth and religion altogether.
I conclude this chapter with a word recorded by Dr. Ahmad Amin (may God’s mercy be upon him) in his book Duha al-Islam,685 through a letter by some Zaydis, saying.
“We noticed how the Sahabah used to criticize each other, or rather curse each other, and if the Companions were at a position where no criticism or cursing be permitted, we would be able to recognize this fact through them themselves, as they are better aware of their status than common people of our present time.686 For example Talhah, al-Zubayr and A’ishah and their supporters have forsaken Ali, with Mu’awiyah and Amr ibn al-As having not fallen short of smiting him and his followers with the sword. It is also
684. 684. Al-Fitnah al-kubra, p.17 and following pages.
685. Duha al-Islam, vol.III, pp.75,76.
686. Similar to them are the commoners of our time, though disguising among people under cloak of ulama'.
( 438 )
reported that Umar used to vilify and refute the narrations of Abu Hurayrah,687 standering Khalid ibn al-Walid and charging him with debauchery, accusing Amr ibn al-’As and Mu’awiyah with dishonesty and looting the spoils of war and deducting them. In fact we can rarely find among the Sahabah anyone whose tongue and hand be free from fault, beside many similar instances found in history books.
The Tabi’un used to follow this way in regard of the Sahabah, holding such belief about the rebels among them, while common people considered them as masters after that. It can be said that the Companions were only ordinary people, and should be judged and viewed in the same way of other people. Whoever of them doing any offence is to be censured, and that who does good should be extolled, having no merit over others but in sighting and accompanying the Messenger. Rather, the sins they perpetrated might be more obscene than those of others, since they have witnessed all the landmarks and miracles, therefore our guilts should be considered lighter as we are far from that time and more excused.”
After finishing talk on reliability of the Sahabah, I am going to manifest how the Ummah ulama’ were viewing the akhbar al-ahad.
Attitude of Ulama’ toward Akhbar al-Ahad
In a comment on utterance of Ibn al-Salah,688 “The Ummah received al-Bukhari and Muslim with approval” al-Jaza’iri said: “He didn’t manifest what he meant by Ummah! Or what he intended by receiving them both with approval! And he had to elucidate that clearly so as not to let doubts and questions raised in the minds of people. If he meant by Ummah all the Ummah throughout all ages, he would prove his dishonesty, as these two books were only approved in the 3rd century after the time of al-Bukhari and leaders of known schools of Islamic Law (mudhahib). And if he meant some of it — who came on the scene after the two Sahihs and they truly constituted part of the Ummah — his proof cannot be established. But if he meant by it
687. Refer to my book Shaykh al-mudirah.
688. Tawjih al-nazar, p.125.
( 439 )
its ulama’ — which is apparently sensed — the ulama’ here are on three divisions: Mutakallimun, Fuqaha’ and Grammarians.
But the ulama’ to whom this description can be applied, being in fact those who emerged after coming out of these two books in the 3rd Hijrah century. Whereas those who came before them from among people of ancient centuries, in regard of whom a hadith ascribed to the Prophet was cited, that ‘they were the best of peoples of all centuries’! had never seen these two books so as to seek their opinion regarding them, nor the way they received them!
Let’s go back to the ulama’ who came after the appearance of these two books, to inquire about the way they viewed them and how they received them.
The Mutakallimun:
Out of what is known about them, they used to refute and reject every hadith contradicting their beliefs, even if it was among the conjectural issues. When any such hadith was cited before them, they would interpret it if finding its interpretation accessible. Or they would reject it contenting with saying: This is of akhbar al-ahad indicating only conjecture, and it is impermissible to take decision based on conjecture in the case of kalami issues, since the basic principle in ilm al-kalam being always: The naqli evidences can never indicate certainty”689 As an example for this, we can refer to the hadith: A dispute was heated between the Paradise and Fire. The Fire said: I have been distinguished with the supercilious and despots. While the Paradise said: What is the matter with me that no one enters me but only the weak and mean among people! Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, said to the Paradise: You are My mercy, with you I bestow My mercy upon whoever I choose from among My bondmen. And to the Fire He said: You are only a torment, with you I punish whoever I wish from among My bondmen. For every one of them is her filling! As the Fire is never filled till He (We seek
689. Al-Mawaqif by al-Ibji and al-Jurjani, p.79, Istanbul deition.
( 440 )
God’s forgiveness) puts His leg, when it would say: Never, never, never. Only then it would be filled and would seclude itself altogether, and Allah the Glorious and Exalted never oppresses anyone. Concerning the Paradise, Allah will verily prepare for it certain creatures. This hadith is unanimously concurred, and was reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim from Abu Hurayrah, from the Prophet (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his progeny). In another narration by al-Bukhari, from Abu Hurayrah, it reads thus: the Paradise and Fire quarrelled before their Lord — the hadith — saying in it: Allah will originate creatures for the Fire. In another narration by Muslim: “Till Allah puts His leg.” The researchers believed that the narrator intended to mention the Paradise, but he was distracted and his tongue slipped and said the Fire.
No mutakallim can believe in veracity of this hadith and its likes – which being so many – and rather he can never be determined in their regard! And if he be obliged to believe in their veracity he would spare no effort to interpret them, even if when the words cannot conduce it, in a way the hearer gets to know that the speaker never holds it permissible inwardly. This fact has created strong antagonism between the mutakallimun and muhaddithun, that is known for anyone looking into history books, to the extent that the mutakallimun called the muhaddithun with the name al-mushabbihah (anthropomorphists), while the muhaddithun used to give them the title al-mu‘attilah (prorogators).690
The Fuqaha’:
In relation to the fuqaha’, it is commonly known about them that they used to interpret every hadith contradicting the notions held by the ulama’ of their madhhab, even if being among the latters. Or they used to refute the hadith by another hadith, though being unfamiliar among leaders of hadith, and that one they refuted being recorded in the two Sahihs or reported in al-Sihah al-Sittah. Whoever looking into the expositions of the two Sahihs,
690. Also al-mutakallimun used to call the muhaddithun with the term al-Hashwiyyah, describing them as the most ignorant of what they have of knowledge, and the meserest among people in what they seek. They contented of knowledge with its outward only, and were pleased to say: So and so is expert in ways and narration of hadith, but was indifferent to be said: He is aware of what is written and applying what he has knowledge of!!
Refer to Ibn Abd al-Barr's Jami' bayan al-ilm wa fadlih, vol.II. And I will give more elaboration on this in the chapter: "Seeking Hadith without Fiqh."
( 441 )
everything will be explicitly manifested. Some have avoided courtesy to the muhaddithun, expressing that preponderating two Sahihs over other books being a preponderation without a preponderated, and those who showed courtesy were content with the apparent indications. To this fact a reference was made by al-Izz ibn Abd al-Salam in Kitab al-qawa’id by saying:
What raises wonder here is the fact that even when any of the imitating fuqaha’ be acquainted with the weakness of doubt aroused by his imam, he would keep on following him in it, though failing to find an escape for him. Moreover he would leave alone those who witnessed and attended the revelation of the Book and the (Prophetic) Sunnah, and the correct criteria for his madhhab, clinging strictly to imitating his imam, and rather he may follow some trickery so as to divert and repel the phenomena of the Book and Sunnah, interpreting them with false illogical interpretations for defending his imitated imam. They used to meet and gather in one place, and when anyone of them hearing some hadith contradicting what he used to have in mind, he would be so astonished, not bothering himself to seek the evidence, rather being stiffly adherent to what he was familiar to, that is imitating his imam. But had he pondered over it, his amazement of the madhhab of his imam would have been much more and prior to that of any other madhhab! Hence, debating with such people is verily futile and useless, leading only to antagonism and discord of which no benefit is hoped. I have never known of anyone converted from madhhab of his imam after coming to know that truth and right be in the side of another madhhab! Rather such person would insist on it despite his awareness of its weakness and remoteness from truth. It is better then to refrain from debating such people who when one of them failing to keep pace with madhhab of his imam, he would say: There may be an Imami who comprehended a proof that I couldn’t understand, or be guided to it. This poor man is unaware of the fact that this is encountered by its equal, and he is distinguishing his rival with the manifest evidence and clear proof mentioned by him. Glorified is Allah, many are those whose sight was covered by imitation, till impelling him to hold the belief I referred to. May
( 442 )
Allah help us to follow the truth wherever it be and no matter by whom it is disclosed. (End of statement of al-Izz).
Al-Jaza’iri (may God’s mercy be upon him) concluded this discussion with an important notice, in a commentary on their criticism for the hadith of disputation between Paradise and Fire), that the Fire is never filled till Allah originates another creation, saying:
What is strange in this respect being the attempt of some unknown man, who has no experience in this profession, whether in respect of riwayah or dirayah to ascribe error to it, believing that criticism has closed its door for all, or thinking that criticizing the text is unjustifiable since he fearing that pleasure-seekers may enter from it, unknowing that when criticism being practised according to the normal course it would not be deplored. Many of leaders of hadith have experienced this case, like al-Isma’ili, who after citing the hadith “Abraham will meet his father Azar on the Day of Resurrection with darkness covering Azar’s face”, said: This is a report in whose veracity there being doubt, with respect to the fact that since Abraham is well aware that Allah never fails to keep is well aware that Allah never fails to keep the tryst, so he may consider what befell his father as a disgrace for him, with telling him that Allah promised not to disgrace him on the Doomsday, though being aware that He never breaks His covenant. We can see here how he found defect in the text he stated.
Some of the usulis said that the traditions contained things that can’t be ascribed to the Prophet (S), as they can’t be held in accordance with their apparent aspect due to their being contradictory to the proof, and other than their appearance being far from his(S) eloquence.691
691. Tawjih al-nazar, pp.130, 131, 136, 137 and following pages.
