Salam alaykum dear Shaykh,
Insha’Allah you are being cared for in the Lutf of Allah ta’ala.
What’s the status of the act of saying “rahimahullah” after mentioning
the name of Mu’awiya, in lieu of taraddi, because of not feeling happy
with some of his acts (e.g. Instituting the cursing of Imam Ali from the
manabir), while at the same time wanting to avoid falling under the
warnings against cursing and disparaging any Sahabi…in other words,
taking a “middle ground” so to speak in saying “rahimahullah“?? How does
one answer the objection, “well yes it’s haram to disparage a Sahabi, so
why did Mu’awiya do that with Ali??”
Are the following true:
that Mu’awiya convinced one of the wives of al-Hasan to poison him, or
that he was pleased at the news of his death?
that he dealt in Riba, which is why (as the story goes) some Sahabis
(such as Ubada ibn Samit) refused to live anymore in Syria?
And why in general would some Sahaba go so far as to make talaa’un
against each other, when cursing a Sahabi is zandaqa??
Also, if one states that Ali was more spiritually advanced than Uthman,
(but not more than Abu Bakr and Umar), is that still Sunnism or is it
heretical? Or if the question is asked, what are the proofs and
indications that Uthman was more spiritually advanced than Ali
(radiyallahu ‘anhum jami’an)??
Hopefully you can help shed some light on these questions with convincing
answers. It disturbs me to be honest what I read about some actions of
some Sahabi kiram, such as cursing each other and fighting against
each other and so on.
May Allah’s pleasure be on them all…wa salla Allahu ala sayyidina
Muhammad wa sallam
`Alaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah,
May this find you well.
We do not say “rahimahullah” after mentioning Prophets or Sahaba but rather “sallallahu…” and “radya Allahu…” respectively. If one deliberately avoids such an invocation then it is to their own detriment. Faint praise here is not a ‘middle ground’ but rather a camouflaged disparagement which shows weak religion.
There is no permission for anyone to “not feeling happy with some of his acts” when it comes to a Sahabi. Rather, each should focus on one’s own acts which do not measure up to a single moment in the life of a Sahabi.
To the objection that “it’s haram to disparage a Sahabi, so why did Mu’awiya do that with Ali??” we reply with our teacher Mawlana Shaykh Nazim’s reply (Allah sanctify his soul) which we quoted over a decade ago: “When lions fight, street dogs keep quiet.” Furthermore, al-Hasan was more aware of Mu`awiya’s words against his father than a million of those objectors, yet he made peace and gave bayaa and respect, which the
Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) himself foretold and commended. Whoever objects to that is a person of fitna camouflaging himself as a person of respect.
As for whatever transgression is attributed to Mu`awiya, Allah be well-pleased with him, the Prophet himself (upon him blessings and peace) declared that it is does not matter at all, since he said that those who fought at Badr and Hunayn are in Paradise, and Mu`awiya fought at Hunayn.
As for the Sahaba’s language with one another, people have no way of understanding the context and even if they did, they are not qualified to put themselves in the shoes of the Sahaba or on a par with them, so any judgment they may wish to cast is from their own waswasa.
Allah Most High chose the Sahaba as Companions for his Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) and they are the first Awliya of this Umma, each and every one of them; disparaging any of them is in fact disparagement of the Prophet and of Allah Most High. That is why the advice of Ahl al-Sunna ulema in this respect is invaluable, and they all said: Protect your own religion by steering clear of that subject.
Hajj Gibril Haddad