THIRD VOLUME, HUNDRED and
TWENTY-FOURTH LETTER

This letter, written to Molla Murâd-i-Keshmî, explains the greatness of the As-hâb-i-kirâm and the fact that they lovedone another:

Allâhu ta’âlâ declares at the end of Fat-h sûra, “Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’ is the Prophet whom Allâhu ta’âlâ has sent tomankind. Those who are in his company are very harshtowards disbelievers and extremely compassionate towards one another.” This âyat-i-kerîma is fairly long and ends as “Lest disbelievers should resent them... .” Allâhu ta’âlâ praises the As-hâb-i-kirâm by stating that they loved one another very much. The word ‘Rahîm’ used in the âyat-i-kerîma signifies exceeding mutual love. Such words are called Sifât-i-mushabbiha in the Arabic grammar. They signify both muchness and continuance. It shows that the As-hâb-i-kirâm loved one another permanently, and that they always loved one another after the Messenger of Allah honoured the Hereafter with his presence as well as when he was alive. It is inferred from this âyat-i-kerîma that anything incompatible with mutual love never existed or happened among the As-hâb-i-kirâm. Allâhu ta’âlâ states plainly in this âyat-i-kerîma that such unlovely feelings as grudge, hatred and jealousy toward one another did not even occur to them. Each and every one of the As-hâb-i-kirâm possessed this common attribute. The expression “Wallazîna’ in the âyat-i-kerîma indicates this fact. When this is the case with all of them, how can anything be said against the highest ones? Certainly, these great people had the most and the highest of virtues. It is for this reason that the Sarwar ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “Abû Bekr ‘radiy-Allâhu anh’ is the most merciful of my Ummat!” He stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf, “No Prophet shall succeed me. Ifthere were a Prophet to come after me, ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu anh’ would certainly be the Prophet.” This hadîth-i-sherîf is recorded in Daylamî and Kunûz-ud-deqâiq. This hadîth-i-sherîf shows that hadrat ’Umar possessed all kinds of superiority peculiar to Prophets. The only virtue he was not given was the rank of prophethood, and this was because Rasûlullah was the final Prophet. One of the virtues possessed by Prophets is to love Muslims very much and to have mercy on them. Such bad habits as envy, grudge, enmity, resentment are quite incompatible with love and mercy. Could these bad habits be thought to have existed in those people who

-329-

were spiritually educated by the best and the highest of mankind, Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’, and who were the highest members of the best of all Ummats? The As-hâb-i-kirâm ‘alaihim-ur-ridwân’ are ahead of all these people (Muslims), who, in their turn, have replaced all (past) peoples. The century in which they lived is the best of all times. Their educator is the highest of Prophets ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ alaihi wa sallam’. The lowest individual in this Islamic Ummat would be disgusted with these bad habits. If the As-hâb-i-kirâm had had these bad habits, could they have been the best of this Ummat, and then could this Ummat be said to be the best of Ummats? Could such merits as having been the earliest Believers, the earliest alms-givers, having made Jihâd and sacrificing their own lives for the sake of Allah be said to be honours and superiorities? How could their time have been the best of times? And what would be the significance, the value of having been educated by the Messenger of Allah? While a person educated by a Walî or by a scholar of this Ummat gets rid of bad habits and becomes extremely clean, could it ever be possible for these bad habits to have remained on those people who spent all their lives in Rasûlullah’s company, serving him, sacrificing their property and lives for helping and supporting him and his religion, and who were always ready to dive into death upon a signal he would give? To believe it would mean to deny the greatness of the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’. [May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from such denial]. It would mean to hold his educating inferior to the educating of a Walî or any other educator. On the other hand, it is stated unanimously by scholars that no Walî in an Ummat can be as high as any of the Sahâbîs of that Ummat. Then, how could they ever be as high as the Prophet of that Ummat? Abû Bekr-i-Shiblî states that a person who does not respect a Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ As-hâb has not become a Believer of that Prophet.

Many people think that Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ As-hâb parted into two groups. They say that one group were against hadrat Alî while the others sided with him. According to these people, “These two groups were nursing a grudge against each other. Most of them withheld their inimical feelings for worldly interests. They were doing Taqiyya, which means hypocrisy. These atrocities continued for a hundred years.” Because of this bad opinion, they vilify those Sahâbîs who they think were against hadrat Alî, and accuse them of atrocities quite incompatible with their high honour. It would take only a little

-330-

reasoning, a little consideration to realize that people who think or say so are reviling both groups of Sahâbîs and accusing them of being bad-tempered by doing so. People who make such allegations are striving to represent all the best people of this Ummat as the worst of this Ummat, even as the worst of all people. They are trying to change an era which was praised as “the best era” in a hadîth-i-sherîf into the worst era. What sort of wisdom or reason should one have to let hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ‘Umar, the two archstones of Islam who are loved and respected so much by Muslims, to be censured and stained? Our’ân al-kerîm informs that hadrat Abû Bekr is the most valuable, the most virtuous member of this Ummat. It is stated unanimously by Abdullah Ibni Abbâs and other Sahâbîs and all scholars of Tafsîr that the âyat-i-kerîma that purports, “He who fears Hell’s fire very much will give his property for the sake of Allah for attaining the blessings Allah promises,” in Wa’l-layl sûra, denotes hadrat Abû Bekr. It needs no stretch of the imagination to discern the fact that it would be an utterly despicable attitude to impute disbelief, wickedness or aberration to a person who it is declared by Allâhu ta’âlâ is the most pious and the most valuable member of this Ummat, the best of Ummats. Hadrat Imâm-i-Fakhr-ad-dîn Râdî, one of the greatest scholars of Tafsîr, states that “This âyat-i-kerîma shows that hadrat Abû Bekr is the highest member of this Ummat (Muslims).” For the thirteenth âyat of Hujurât sûra purports, “The highest one among you is the one who fears Allah most.” Since it is declared in the former âyat-i-kerîma that in this Ummat hadrat Abû Bekr is the one who fears Allâhu ta’âlâ most, this second âyat-i-kerîma denotes that he is the highest of this Ummat. It is stated unanimously by the As-hâb-i-kirâm and by the Tâbi’în that hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ‘Umar are the highest ones among this Ummat. This unanimity is reported to us by the greatest ones of our religious imâms. One of the reporters is hadrat Imâm-i-Shâfi’î. Another person who acknowledges that hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ‘Umar are the highest ones in this Ummat is hadrat Alî. Imâm Zehebî, a great scholar of Hadîth, states in his book that “This statement of hadrat Alî’s has been reported to us by more than eighty people.” Therefore, that hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ’Umar are the highest ones of this Ummat has been acknowledged even by some Shiite scholars, e.g. by Abd-ur-Razzâq, who is one of the most prominent. He made this statement: “I say so because hadrat Alî stated that hadrat

-331-

Abû Bekr and hadrat ’Umar were superior to him. Otherwise, I would not say so. It would be very sinful if I did not agree with hadrat Alî as a person who loved him.” That these two people (hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ’Umar) are the highest ones of this Ummat, the best of Ummats, is denoted by the Book, i.e. Qur’ân al-kerîm, explained by the Sunna(t), i.e. hadîth-i-sherîfs, confirmed by the Ijmâ’, i.e. unanimity of the As-hâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum ajma’în’, and acknowledged by hadrat Alî. So, it is not something a Muslim or any reasonable person would do to blemish or revile these people. If these people are reviled, what goodness will be left in this Ummat for us to praise? If it were a good deed, a worship to curse or vituperate a person, it would be a commandment to curse Abû Jahl and Abû Leheb, who are declared to be evil, accursed people in Qur’ân al-kerîm. Cursing these people would deserve much thawâb. It is something unpleasant to curse a person. It means repugnance towards him. What good could there be in such behaviour? And if it is done unjustly, if the person who is cursed is a good one, it would mean to put something in the wrong place, which is cruelty. No two things, no two places are the same as each other. And each kind of cruelty is different from another.

Hadrat ’Uthmân Zinnûreyn also was elected Khalîfa by the unanimous vote of the As-hâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum ajma’în’. All of them, men and women alike, agreed to his caliphate. It is for this reason that Islamic scholars said, “The degree of unanimity in the voting for hadrat ’Uthmân’s caliphate was not reached in the election of any of the other three Khalîfas.” For at that time there were various rumours and therefore the election was important for everybody. All the As-hâb-i-kirâm joined the election. [If the writer named Sayyed Qutb had realized this truth, he could not have said, “’Uthmân’s becoming Khalîfa was an unfortunate event for Muslims.”]

The Book and the Sunna(t), i.e. Qur’ân al-kerîm and hadîth-i-sherîfs, were taught to us by the As-hâb-i-kirâm. Ijmâ’i ummat, which is one of the four sources of Islamic knowledge, means the unanimity of the As-hâb-i-kirâm. Censuring all or some of these people, or saying that they turned bad afterwards, means mistrusting all or some of the Islamic knowledge. And this, in its turn, means denying the ultimate divine cause in Allâhu ta’âlâ’s sending the final Prophet and the highest Messenger. Qur’ân al-kerîm was arranged by hadrat ’Uthmân. Or, rather, it was arranged by hadrat Abû Bekr Siddîq and hadrat ’Umar Fârûq

-332-

‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum’. Now, if these people are vituperated and accused with injustice, will Qur’ân al-kerîm have any authenticity left? And will there be any Islam left? We have to realize how unsightly this attitude is. All the As-hâb-i-kirâm are just people. And all the teachings of Qur’ân al-kerîm and hadîth-i-sherîfs they reported to us are true.

The disagreements and disputes that took place among the As-hâb-i-kirâm in the time of hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anh’ were not intended to satisfy the desires of nafs, for pleasure or for obtaining posts and positions. They originated from disagreements in ijtihâd. They were based on differences of reasoning. The ijtihâd reached by one of the parties was wrong. These people could not reach a correct decision. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat wa’l jamâ’at state that hadrat Alî was right and those who fought against him were wrong. However, since their mistake was based on ijtihâd, none of them can be criticized. None of them can be castigated. We say that hadrat Alî was right and those who were opposed to him were wrong. For scholars of Ahl as-sunna say so. Yet it would be an outrageous behaviour to curse or criticize those who were against him. It would serve no useful purpose, in addition to the most likely harm it would cause. For these people, too, are Rasûlullah’s Sahâbîs. Among them were people who had been blessed with the good news of going to Paradise directly after death, as well as those who had partaken in the Holy War of Bedr. Those who had joined this Holy War were forgiven their sins. It is informed that these people will not be tormented (in the Hereafter). It is stated in a hadîth-i,sherîf that “Allâhu ta’âlâ said to those who joined the Holy War of Bedr: Do whatever you like! I have forgiven you all your deeds.” Among these people were also those who had been present in the solemn covenant termed Bî’at-i-ridwân. Our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ stated that none of the people who had joined this covenant would go to Hell. According to Islamic scholars, it is inferred from Qur’ân al-kerîm that all the As-hâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum ajma’în’ will go to Paradise. The tenth âyat of Hadîd sûra purports, “Those who gave their property and performedJihâd for the sake of Allah before the conquest of Mekkaare unlike those who did so after the conquest. These people (the former ones) occupy higher grades. Allâhu ta’âlâ has promised the Husnâ to those who did so, before or after the conquest.” Husnâ means Paradise. As is seen, those who gave their property and made Jihâd before or after the conquest of the

-333-

blessed city of Mekka are blessed with the good news that their destination is Paradise. The expressions ‘giving property’ and ‘performing Jihâd’ in this âyat-i-kerîma are not put as stipulations for entering Paradise. They are laudatory additions intended to praise these blessed people. For these qualifications were shared by all the As-hâb-i-kirâm. All of them gave their property and made Jihâd for the sake of Allah. Consequently, all the As-hâb-i-kirâm are blessed with Allah’s promise of Paradise. It must be realized now that it would be quite far from common sense and from Islam to vituperate or execrate these great religious guides.

Question: Some people say and write that after Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu alaihi wa sallam’ death a few Sahâbîs abandoned the right way, degenerated, had recourse to atrocities for becoming Khalîfa or for seizing posts and positions, and deprived hadrat Alî ‘kerrem-Allâhu ta’âlâ wejheh’ of his right to caliphate. They say that some of those people turned disbelievers. According to such oral and written statements, many Sahâbîs will be deprived of Paradise. Attaining the honour of being a Sahâbî requires being a Muslim. Can a person who is said to have turned a non-Muslim or deviated from the right way still have the honour of being a Sahâbî?

Answer: That these three Khalîfas ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ anhum’ will go to Paradise is informed through the most authentic hadîth-i-sherîfs termed ‘Sahîh’. No one can contradict these hadîth-i-sherîfs. Nor can anyone think of the possibility of these people’s having turned disbelievers or deviated from the right way. Furthermore, hadrat Abû Bekr and hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu anhumâ’ were blessed with the honour of having joined the Holy War of Bedr. It is informed through hadîth-i-sherîfs that people who fought in the Holy War of Bedr would be forgiven all their past and future sins. On the other hand, these two Khalîfas were also among those fortunate people who took the so-called solemn oath called Bî’at-i-ridwân. And that those people who were present at the place of this covenant will go to Paradise is informed through ‘Sahîh’ hadîth-i-sherîfs. Hadrat ’Uthmân did not join the Holy War of Bedr, because he had been ordered by the Messenger of Allah to stay in Medîna and look after his ailing wife Ruqayya, [Rasûlullah’s daughter]. The Messenger had told him that (by staying in Medîna to help with his wife’s medical treatment) he would attain the same blessings as if he had joined the Holy War. Also, his failing to join the solemn oath called Bî’at-i-ridwân was because he had been sent on a mission to

-334-

Mekka by the Messenger of Allah, who deputized him in the covenant and took the oath on his behalf. This is a generally known fact. Greatness of these three Khalîfas is informed in Qur’ân al-kerîm. Their high grades are apprized in âyat-i-kerîmas. Sheer stubbornness of those people who are unaware of Qur’ân al-kerîm and hadîth-i-sherîfs is of no value. A couplet:

If a person is unconscious of the Qur’ân and Hadîth,
He deserves no answer; no other answer could be better!

Shame on those people who speak ill of hadrat Abû Bekr! If that great Sahâbî had had doubts of disbelief or aberration, thousands of Rasûlullah’s Sahâbîs, with all their knowledge and justice, would not have elected him as Rasûlullah’s representative by unaminous vote. To deny hadrat Abû Bekr’s caliphate would mean to deny the thirty-three thousand people living in that time which has been declared in a hadîth-i-sherîf to be the best of all times. A person with the smallest thinking capacity could not make such a false accusation. A time in which thirty-three thousand Muslims agreed on an erroneous decision and elected an aberrant and sinful person for Rasûlullah’s place could not be a good time, let alone being the best of times. Such an accusation would mean to say that the hadîth-i-sherîf which declared it as the best of times is nonsencial. [May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from saying so!] May Allâhu ta’âlâ give those people who say or write so enough sense and reason to give up traducing these great Islamic persons! May He give them the understanding to realize the value of having attained Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ alaihi wa sallam’ sohbat and teaching! It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf,

“Fear Allah as you talk about my As-hâb! Fear Allah lest you should show any disrespect in a conversation aboutmy As-hâb! After me, never have a bad opinion of them. Hewho loves them does so because he loves me. And he who bears hostility towards them is my enemy.” What more should I write? What else should I say to explain something so manifest? Qur’ân al-kerîm is full of laudatory statements praising hadrat Abû Bekr. Wa’l-layl sûra was revealed as a whole to inform about his superior virtues. ‘Sahîh’ hadîths reporting his high merits are innumerable. His beautiful moral character, his valuable demeanour, and the distinguishing goodnesses possessed by all the As-hâb-i-kirâm had also been mentioned in the heavenly books revealed to past Prophets. Allâhu ta’âlâ informs about this fact at the end of Fat-h sûra, which purports, “Goodnesses of thine As-hâb were stated also in the Torah and in the Injîl.” Hadrat Abû Bekr ‘radiy-

-335-

Allâhu anh’ is the best and the foremost member of this Ummat, who are the best of all people and who have been blessed with the compassion of Allâhu ta’âlâ. If he is called a ‘disbeliever’ or a ‘miscreant’, what are the bad names that cannot be attached to others? What level of language can be used to talk about them? O my Allah, who created earths and heavens from nothing and who knows all, secret and open alike! You know the right one in the disagreements among Your born slaves! May our salutations be to those people who are in the right way.

Do not take pride in your property!
Don’t ever say, “No one is like me!”
A disastrous wind will winnow all,
Making only a defenceless chaff of thee!

-336-