The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm

download
The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm e-book version

read
The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm

Khutbatul Hajjah
The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm
Khawaarij and sincerity in the Deen of Allah
Khawaarij in the sunnah
Some of Their Attributes and Characteristics
The Calamity of the Khawaarij is Fasid ta'weel
The Khawaarij Leaving Deen Quickly
The Hukm of Khawaarij
The difference between the People of Jamal-Siffin and people of Khawaarij
Takfir of Khawaarij
The evidence that in the Hadith: (good) intention is not taken under consideration in irtidad
Evidences regarding the Khawaarij being kafir
The reasons for making takfir of the Khawaarij
Revile towards the sahabah will indicate kufr
Until Dajjal and the last day
Khawaarij and irtidad among ahl-qiblah

Khutbatul Hajjah

"Preface Verily all praise is for Allah, we praise Him and seek His aid and ask for His forgiveness, and we seek refuge with Allah from the evils of ourselves and our evil actions. Whomever Allah guides there is none who can misguide him, and whomever Allah misguides there is none who can guide him, and I bear witness that none has the right to be worshipped except Allah Alone, having no partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger.

O mankind! Reverence your Guardian-Lord, Who created you from a single person, created, of like nature his mate, and from them twain scattered countless men and women; reverence Allah, through Whom you demand your mutual (rights) and (reverence) the wombs (that bore you): for Allah ever watches over you. (an-Nisa 4/1)

O you who believe! Fear Allah as He should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam. (al-i Imran 3/102)

O you who believe! Fear Allah, and (always) say a word did to the right that He may make your conduct whole and sound and forgive you your sins: He that obeys Allah and His Messenger, has already attained the highest achievement. (al-Ahzab 33/70-71)

As for what follows: Verily the most truthful speech is the Word of Allah and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (sallAllahu 'alaihi wa sallam), and the worst of affairs are the novelties and every novelty is an innovation and every innovation is a going astray and every going astray is in the Fire." (Muslim, Jumu’a 13, 867; Nesai: Jumu’a 24, III/188)

The Special Features of the Khawaarij and its Hukm

وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَى مَنِ اتَّبَعَ الْهُدَى

Subhaanaka Allaahuma wa bihamdika ashadu an laa ilaaha illa anta astagfirouka wa atoobu ilaik

Ibn Kathir said: “I say this group of people is from the strangest type of children of Adam (as). So how free from all imperfection is the One who varied His creation as He willed and initiated with His magnificent degree. And what is better than what some of the salaf used to say concerning the Khawaarij, that they are mentioned in the statement of Allah (awj): “Say: ‘Shall we tell you of those who lose most in respect of their deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life, while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works?’ They are those who deny the Signs of their Lord and the fact of their having to meet Him (in the Hereafter): vain will be their works, nor shall We, on the Day of Judgment, give them any weight.” (al-Kahf 18/103-105) So the intended meaning is that these misguided ignoramus and these criminals in terms of statements and actions have united their view that of the Khawaarij whilst they are in the midst of Muslims. And they agreed to travel to the cities in order to overtake the people and fortify the cities and then to send out delegations to their brothers and followers from amongst those who are upon their opinion and madhhab. These are from the people of Basra and other than them, so they agreed upon this and their unity was based on upon this. So Zayd ibn Husayn at-Tai said about them: ‘Indeed the cities can not be overtaken, since they have armies that you can not overpower and they will prevent you from them. However arrange to meet your brothers at the bridge of Jawfaa. And do not come from Kufah in groups but come out of it one by one so that you do not rouse suspicious.’ So they wrote a general letter to whomsoever was upon their madhhab and methodology from the people of Basrah and other than them. So in the letter, they mentioned to them to meet at the river so that they may be one hand against the people. Then they come out, pulling out one by one so that no one would know about them. So he prevented them from khuruj. So they came out in the midst of fathers, mothers, maternal uncles and maternal aunts and they separated the ties of kinship. They believed, due to their ignorance lack of knowledge and intellect that the Lord of the heavens and the earth would be pleased with this affair. So they did not know that this was from the greatest of major sins, disasters and offenses. This was from that which was made to look beautiful to them by Iblis an accursed devil who was banished from the heavens, who raised enmity for our father Adam (as) then to his children for as long as their souls inhabit their bodies. And Allah is the One Who is asked to protect us from him, by His might and power. Indeed He answers the invocations.” (al-Bidaya wa’n-nihaya 7/228)

The ideology of Khawaarij was the first innovation to appear in Islam. The Khawaarij (singular Khariji -seceder) (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/296) are group of innovators. The word “Khawaarij” is from the Arabic root verb: “kharaja” meaning to go out or leave something. This label of theirs may be translated as separatists, insurgents, rebels, nonconformist, etc. They are called as ‘Khawaarij’ that because of their leaving the (fundamentals of the) religion and for their opposing the best Muslims (the Companions of the Prophet saw). (Ibn Hajar, Fathu’l-Bari, 12/296-316; Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 7/170; Shahrastani, al-Milal wan’nihal, 107) And it is also said that they were called Khawaarij due to their khuruj (leaving) the path of the jamaa'ah. They are the first people to go against Imam Ali in the war of Siffin, they distanced themselves from Uthman and Ali. They called people with major sins kuffar and they said that it is legitimate and compulsory to rebel against an Imam if he differs or opposes a sunnah (according to their opinion). (Al-Milal wan-Nahal, 87-99)

And the first opposition and insurgency from them occurred against the leader of the believers, Ali Ibn Abi Talib (ra) when the issue of who has the right to pass rulings was debated. The Khawaarij gathered at a place called Harura near Kufah in Iraq. The people of the land of Iraq have a history of fitnah and groups that cause strife. They are so infamous for it that; it is related from Amr ibn al-As (ra) that he said of them, “People of division and hypocrisy.”

RasulAllah (saw) said following in a hadith which is narrated from Abdullah Ibn Umar (ra): “O Allah, put barakah (blessing) on our Sham! O Allah put barakah on our Yemen.  The people said, And on our Najd as well? I think the third time he (saw) said, There (Najd) is a place of earthquakes and afflictions and from it the horn of shaytan will come out.” (Bukhari) Ibn Hajar quotes a sahabi by the name of al-Khatibi about this hadith, who had this to say, “The Najd is in the direction of the east and is in the city of the highlands of the Iraqi steppe/desert. Its direction is east of the people of Madinah, and the root of the word ‘najd’ means what is risen up (raised/elevated) from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it..” Ad-Dawudi has also said, “Najd is with regard to the land of Iraq (min Naahiya al-Iraq).” (Fathu’l-Bari, 13/ 51).

There are some other ahadith narrated regarding the matter such as: It is narrated from Ibn umar (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: "O Allah bestow your blessings on our Madinah, and bestow your blessings on our Makkah, and bestow your blessings on our Sham, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa). A person said, O RasulAllah and in our Iraq (as well?) and so he (saw) turned away from him and said, there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan." (Abu Nu'aym, al-Hilya, 6/133) This hadith of Ibn Umar (ra) also narrated by Tabarani that RasulAllah (saw) prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said, "O Allah bestow your blessings on our Madinah, O Allah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allah bestow your blessings in our Sham and our Yemen. A person said, And Iraq O RasulAllah? He (saw) said, from there arises the horn of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves." (al-Awsat) There is another hadith which is similar is related by Tabarani from Ibn Abbas (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) supplicated and said, "O Allah bestow your blessings on our Sham and Yemen. A person from amongst the people said, O RasulAllah and Iraq? He (aaw) said, indeed there is the Horn of Satan, and the trials and tribulations will come like mounting waves, and indeed harshness/coarseness is in the east." (al-Kabeer) Abu Sa'ed al-Khudri said that RasulAllah (saw) made a mention of a sect that would be among his ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. RasulAllah (saw) gave an example (to give their description) or he said: A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sae'd then said: People of Iraq! It is you who have killed them.” (Muslim) It is narrated from Yusair bin Amr: “I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, ‘Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawaarij?’ He said, I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq. ‘There will appear in it (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Qur’an but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body’.” (Bukhari)

It can be deduced from the above Hadith that Najd is neither blessed nor a good place but a place of Fitna and Evil. Najd has been deprived of the prayers of RasulAllah (saw) and therefore Najd has the seal of misery and misfortune and hoping for any good from there is going against the Will of Allah. According to the ahadith; it is a place that so many fitnah had occurred and will be occurred.

It is narrated from Abu Said Khudri (ra) that he said: “Once we were in the presence and company of RasulAllah (saw). He was distributing booties (Spoils of War) when a person named Thul-Khuwaysara, who was from the tribe of Bani Tamim addressed RasulAllah (saw) ‘Oh Muhammad Be Just!’. RasulAllah (saw) replied: ‘A Great pity that you have doubts, if I am unjust then who will be just, you are a loser and a failure.’ Thul-Khuwaysara's attitude infuriated Umar (ra) and he pleaded with RasulAllah (saw) to permit him to slay Thul-Khuwaysara. RasulAllah (saw) remarked: ‘Leave him, as his slaying will serve no good purpose, as he is not the only individual but there are a host of others like him and if you compare their prayers and fasting to that of yours, you yourself will feel ashamed. These are the people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go beyond their throats, with all these apparent virtues they will leave the fold of Deen just like the arrow leaves the bow’.” (Bukhari)

It is said that these people of Khawaarij are the offsprings of Thul Khuwaisarah at-Tamimee and he was among the tribe of Tamimee. During the era of Abu Bakr (ra) the people of tribe of Tamimee were behind the false prophets such as Sajah and Musaylimah.

The Khawaarij collectively agreed that both the 3rd and 4th caliphs of Islam; Uthman (ra) and later Ali (ra) were in fact disbelievers as were the other companions... And they think revolting against the leaders and governments is permissible. They also believe that any major sin is an act of disbelief… Many authentic ahadith from RasulAllah (saw) condemning them have come in ten different forms of narration like what Al-Khalaal narrated from Imam Ahmad that he said, “The Khawaarij are wicked people, and I don’t know of any people on earth more evil than they.” And he said, “RasulAllah’s (saw) ahadith about them are authentic in ten different forms.” (Al-Khalaal, as-Sunnah, I, 145, # 110) Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmu al-Fatawa, 3/279), mentioned that Muslim recorded some of them in his authentic collection as did Bukhari (Muslim; Bukhari; Fathu’l-Bari).

Shahrastani said: “Everyone who revolts against the true leader whom the Muslims have agreed upon, then he is to be called a khariji; regardless whether the khuruj occurred in the days of the companions as khuruj against the rightly guided caliphs or as revolt against those who followed them in goodness and the leaders in every age.” (al-Milal wan’nihal, 105)

The Khawaarij are known by other (Arabic) names such as “Al-Haruriyyah,” “Ash-Shurah,” “Al-Maariqah,” and “Al-Muhakkimah”. (Imam Al-Ash’ari, Maqaalaat Al-Islamiyyeen, I, 206-207) They don’t mind these labels except for “Al-Maariqah” which is the name taken from the Hadith when RasulAllah (saw) described them as those who “maraqa (go through or pass in and out)” of the religion. Qadi Iyad said: “They were named Maariqah (renegades) due to the statement of RasulAllah (saw) ‘They shoot through the religion’ (Suyuti, Sharhus sunnah of Nisai, 7/85) and they were pleased with all of the names and titles, except al-Maariqah.” (Mawqif Ahlu sunnah wa jamaa'ah, 1/137-139) And they have been called al-Haruriyyah because they gathered and revolted at a place called Harura. And it is a town close to Kufah. (Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 7/170) And they are called people of Nahrawan, because Ali (ra) fought them there. And they are called al-Muhakkimah due to their objection to tahkim (arbitrary/judgment), and their statement ‘There is no judgment except for Allah.” (al-Ashari, Maqalatu’l-Islamiyya, 207)

Sects of Khawaarij are also classified as sitters and revolutionaries. Khawarijuth-Thawriyyah is the sect who revolt and fight against. Khawariju’l-Qa’diyyah (sitters) is a sect of Khawaarij who are a revolutionary movement; prefer sitting and provoking common-folks against the ruler without actually revolting.

The definition of the Qa’diyyah in the Arabic language comes from al-qu’ood (to sit) with a damma, and al-maq’ad with a fathah is something that is sat upon. Al-Qa’dah is the plural of Qaa’id, who is an instigator. (az-Zubaydi, Taju’l-Urus, 5/194; al-Azhari, Mu’jam Tadheebul-Lughah, 3/3003; al-Khaleel, al-Ayn, 3/1501)

Az-Zubaydi said: “The Qa’dah are a people from amongst the Khawaarij who sat back from helping Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) and they sat back from fighting with him. And whoever holds their opinion is a Qa’di instigator. They hold the judgment to be a right, but they sit back when it comes to revolt against the people… And the Qa’diyyah are those who do not leave for the fighting. So it is the name of the group and the Haruriyyah (a sect among Khawaarij) are named Qa’diyyah. And the Shurat (a sect among Khawaarij) are those who try to gain the rule but do not go into battle; they are also named Qa’diyyah.” (az-Zubaydi, Taju’l-Urus, 5/195) Al-Azhari said: “al-Qa’d: plural of Qaa’id and the Qadee is from amongt those Khawaarij who hold judgment to be a right, but they sit back from the revolt against the people.” (al-Azhari, Mu’jam Tadheebul-Lughah, 3/3006) al-Azhari quoted that ibn Arabi said: al-Qa’d: The Shurat who desire to attain ruler-ship, yet do not wage war.” (al-Azhari, Mu’jam Tadheebul-Lughah, 3/3006)   

“The Qa’diyyah are those who incite the people, stir up hatred within the hearts against the rulers and issue fatawa making lawful what Allah has declared unlawful in the name of changing the evil. And they are the wickedest of the Khawaarij.” (Sharr Qatlaa, 20) Abdullah ibn Muhammad ad-Daif (ra) said: “The Qa'diyyah are the wickedest of the Khawaarij.” (Abu Dawud, Masailu Imam Ahmad, 271)

Ibn Hajar said: “The Khawaarij of al-Qa'diyyah did not hold the view of waging war. Rather, they opposed the rulers in accordance to their strength, they called to their opinion and along with that, they beautified revolt and held it to be good.” (at-Tadheed 8/114) He also said: “The Qa’diyyah: Those who beautify revolt against the rulers yet do not actually do it themselves.” (Hadyu’s-Saree, 459)

“And the Qa'diyyah are, in most cases, more dangerous than the Khawaarij themselves. Since, speech, inciting hatred within the hearts and provoking the common-folks against the rulers has the most profound effect upon the souls; especially when it comes from a man who is an eloquent speaker who dupes the people with his tongue and disguises it with the Sunnah.” (al-Ajwibatu’l-Mufidah, 202)

Umran ibn Hittan was the ancient leader of the Qa’diyyah. Although he believed in the statement of the Khawaarij he did not fight and remained sitting. Ibn Hajar said: “Umran ibn Hittan was accused of holding the opinion of Qa’diyyah from amongst the Khawaarij.” (Hadyu’s-Saree, 460)

Qataree ibn Fuja’ah who is one of the heads of the Khawaarij, revolt and fight, also among the poets of the Khawaarij; said about the Qa’diyyah such as Abu Khaled al-Qanaii:

“Flee –O Abu Khalid, since you are not khalid (immortal)
And ar-Rahman has not made an excuse for the Qaai’d (sitter)
 Do you claim that Khariji is upon guidance?
Whilst you have remained back along with the thief and the deserter,” (Shi’rul-Khawaarij, 128)

Ash-Shabi said: “Indeed, this outbreak of the Qa’diyyah and the Azariqah (a sect amongst the Khawaarij) is the fundamental basis for the division between the Khawaarij another time. So the Qa’diyyah in Basra are amongst the members of the Khawaarij. Abdullah ibn Amaad, Abdullah ibn Safaar and Abu Buhays were a solitary sect (Khariji) after the judgement of the Nafi, against them. Likewise the Najdah (a Khariji) launched a scathing attack against the statement of Nafi and withdrew with an encampment. And since then, discord became the way of Khawaarij. The Khawaarij succumbed to unlawful fighting and beliefs.” (al-Mabaahith, 147)

Ali (ra) fought fiercely with them at a place called Nahrawan but only after advising and debating with them and clearly establishing the evidences against them. In that battle, less than ten of the Khawaarij remained and less than ten Muslims were killed. After the Khawaarij’s defeat, two of them fled to Oman, two to Karmaan (near Khorasan in Iran and Sijistaan), two to Sijistaan (Seistan), two to the Arabian Peninsula, and one fled to Yemen. (Shahrastani, Al-Milal wan-Nihal, 1/115-117; Baghdadi, Al-Farq bayna’l-Firaq, 75) Shahrastani said, “The innovated beliefs and methods of the Khawaarij appeared in these places from them (the nine people who were defeated and fled) and they’ve remained ever since up until today.” (Al-Milal wan-Nihal, 1/117)

Jabir ibn Abdullah (ra) was weeping and he said, “I heard RasulAllah (saw) saying, ‘Truly, people will enter the religion of Allah in great crowds and they will leave from it in great crowds’. ” (Ahmad)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Khawaarij and sincerity in the Deen of Allah

It is a must for the Muslim to combine two characteristics while worshipping Allah without which a deed is not accepted by Allah: The action of the slave must be done sincerely and solely for the sake of Allah and not due to riyaa (showing off) nor for seeking reputation. And also he must be following correctly what RasulAllah (saw) was upon.

It is narrated that RasulAllah (saw) said: “There will appear from this man’s progeny people who one of you would belittle his own prayer when compared with theirs, and his fasting compared to theirs. (But) they will pass through the religion just as an arrow might pass through a target.” (Bukhari; Muslim)

RasulAllah (saw) also said: “Indeed there will be a people amongst you who will feign in worshipping Allah until the people become amazed with them and they become amazed with themselves. They will shoot through the religion just as the arrow shoots through the game.” (Abu Ya’la, musnad with sahih sanad.)

When we look at these ahadith and others that have similar concept it seems RasulAllah (saw) attributed them as being sincere. But we know that if they had anything of sincerity, they’d follow the guidance of RasulAllah (saw), and submit with those who are gathered with goodness. Therefore their ibadaah will not benefit them, even if they increase in their worship.

Ibn Qayyim said: “Allah has made devotion of worship to Him alone and following the Sunnah the means of deeds being accepted; if these conditions are not met, then deeds are unacceptable.” (al-Rooh, 1/135)
“So whoever hopes for the Meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord” [al-Kahf 18:110]
Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “ ‘So whoever hopes for the Meeting with his Lord’ means His reward; ‘let him work righteousness’ means actions that are done for the sake of Allah alone, with no partner or associate. These two factors form the basis for an acceptable deed: it must be done sincerely for the sake of Allah alone, and it must be correct and in accordance with the sharee’ah of RasulAllah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).”

“Whoever does any action that is not in accordance with this matter of ours (i.e., Islam), will have it rejected.” (Narrated by Muslim, al-Aqdiyyah, 3243).
Ibn Rajab (ra) said: “This hadith forms one of the most  important principles of Islam. It is like a scale for weighing up deeds according to their outward appearance, just as the hadith ‘The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions’ is the means of weighing up the inner nature of deeds. Just as every action which is not intended for the sake of Allah brings no reward to the one who does it, so too every deed which is not in accordance with the command of Allah and His Messenger will also be rejected and thrown back at the one who does it. Everyone who innovates in Islam something for which Allah and His Messenger have not granted permission, that thing is nothing to do with Islam.  (Jaami’ al-‘Uloom wa’l-Hukam, part 1, p. 176)

Fudayl ibn Iyad said: “The action must be a) sincere (i.e. done sincerely for Allah) and  b) correct (i.e. conformity in the Sunnah), so if the action is correct but if it is not done with sincerity then it will not be accepted. Likewise if the action is sincere but it is not done correctly then it will not be accepted. So the action must be sincere and correct.” (Ibn Taymiyyah, Fatawa 1/333; Abu Nuaym Hilyatu’l-Awliya, 8/95)

It was narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah that RasulAllah (saw) said: “Allah, may He be blessed and exalted, says: ‘I am so self-sufficient that I am in no need of having an associate. Thus he who does an action for someone else’s sake as well as Mine will have that action renounced by Me to him whom he associated with Me.’” (Narrated by Muslim, al-Zuhd wa’l-Raqaa’iq, 5300)

We can come to a conclusion out of these narrations and say that Muslim must at the same time combine both sincerity and correct actions in accordance to the sunnah while worshipping, these are conditions for an deed to be acceptable to Allah (swt). If he associates anything to Allah then his deeds will not be accepted. In the same manner, if he acts with sincerity and without riyaa or without seeking any type of reputation, however if he is misguided and does not perform according to the Sunnah, his deeds will not be accepted. The deeds of Khawaarij were described as sincere in the ahadith yet they were not practicing in the correct manner even though they increased in worship and strove hard in it. So they shot through the religion due to extremism, ignorance and takfir of the Muslimeen.

According to a narration, once three people came to the blessed wives of RasulAllah (saw) to ask regarding his worship. When they were informed they found it to be less than expected and said ‘how can we compare to RasulAllah (saw), his past and future sins are forgiven.’ Then one of them said, ‘I will pray all night forever.’ The other one said, ‘I will fast forever.’ The third said, ‘I will stay away from women and never get married.’ When RasulAllah (saw) heard this, he (saw) said, ‘By Allah I am more fearful of Allah, yet I fast and don't fast, I pray and sleep and marry women, Nikah is from my Sunnah, whoever turns away (is not satisfied) from my Sunnah is not from me’.” (Bukhari)

There is this hadith which is narrated from Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (ra) and it is regarding the roots of the Khawaarij and their misguidance and extreme in acts of worship: “Amr ibn Salmah said: We used to sit in front of Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud's house before the fajr prayer, so that when he came out we would go with him to the Masjid. (One day) Abu Musa al-Ashari (ra) came and asked us: 'Did Abu Abdur Rahman (i.e. Ibn Mas’ud) leave yet? 'We answered: 'No.' So Abu Musa al-Ashari (ra) sat with us waiting for him. When he came out, we all stood up. Abu Musa told him: ‘Oh, Abu Abdurrahman! I recently saw something in the Masjid which I deemed to be evil, but all praise is for Allah, I did see anything except good’. Ibn Mas’ud (ra) then asked: ‘Then what was it?’ Abu Musa said: ‘You will see it if you stay alive. In the Masjid, I saw a group of people sitting in circles waiting for the salah (prayer). Each circle is led by a person. And every person in these circles carries small stones (pebbles). The leader of a circle would say: ‘Say 'Allahu Akbar' a hundred times’ so they would repeat Allahu Akbar a hundred times; then he says ‘Say 'La-ilaha illallah', a hundred times’ so they would say ‘La-ilaha illallah’ a hundred times; then he would say: ‘Say 'SubhanAllah', a hundred times’, they will say ‘SubhanAllah’ a hundred times. Then Ibn Mas’ud said: ‘What did you tell them?’ He said: 'I didn't say anything; I waited to hear your opinion.’ Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (ra) said: ‘Could you not order them to count their evil deeds, and assured them of getting their rewards.’ Then Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud went ahead and we accompanied him. As he approached one of the circles, he said: ‘What is this that you are doing?’ They said: ‘Oh! Abu Abdurrahman, these are pebbles to count the number of times we say Allahu Akbar, La-ilaha illallah, and SubhanAllah.’ He said: ‘Count your evil deeds and I assure you that you are not going to lose anything of your rewards (Hasanat). Woe unto you, people of Muhammad, how quickly you go to destruction! Those are your Prophet's companions available, these are his clothes not worn out yet, and his pots are not broken yet. I swear by Whom my soul is in His Hands that you are either following a religion that is better than the Prophet's religion or you are opening a door of misguidance.’ They said: ‘We swear by Allah (jj) oh, Abu Abdurrahmaan, that we had no intention other than doing good deeds.’ He said: ‘So what? How many people wanted to do good deeds but never got to do them? RasulAllah (saw) has told us about people who recited the Qur'an with no effect on them other than the Qur'an passing through their throats. I swear by Allah, I am almost sure that most of you are from that type of people.’ Then he left them. Umar Ibn Salamah (the sub narrator) said: ‘We saw most of the people of those circles fighting against us with the Khawaarij in the battle of An-Nahrawan’.” (Darimi; Abu Nu'aym, with an authentic chain of narrations.)

Imam Ajurri said: “It is not permissible for the one who sees the uprising of a khariji who has revolted against the leader, whether he is just or oppressive, so this person has revolted and gathered a group behind him, has pulled out his sword and has made lawful the killing of Muslims, it is not fitting for the one who sees, he becomes deceived by this persons recitation of the Qur’an, the length of his standing in the prayer, nor his constant fasting, nor his good and excellent words in knowledge when it is clear to him that this persons way and methodology is that of the Khawaarij.” (ash-shari'ah 28)

It is because Khawaarij went to extremes in acts of worship and go beyond the limits; they fall into extremism which is bid'ah and misguidance. They have left Sunnah of RasulAllah (saw) which is the only way for ones salvation, and turned away from it while being dissatisfied with it. They separated from the path of the jamaa'ah and haqq, therefore it is not proper to say that these ahadith are in praise of them. As RasulAllah (saw) stated: “Whoever isn’t satisfied with my way then he’s not from me” The reason for this hukm is, every innovation introduced in the ummah began as something small and mostly with good intentions, bearing resemblance to the haqq, which is why those who entered it were mislead and then were unable to leave it. Then it grew and became the religion which they followed and thus deviated from the straight path and eventually left Islam.

In another narration it is related that blessings from the Khawaarij has fallen: Imam Ahmad reported from Abu At-Tufail who said: “A young boy was born to a man during the lifetime of RasulAllah (saw). So he was brought to RasulAllah who took hold of the skin on his face and supplicated for him to be blessed. Afterward a hair sprouted from the boy’s forehead in the shape of a bow. Later on, the boy became a young man. Then when it was the time in which the Khawaarij appeared, he loved them, and so the hair on his forehead fell off. So his father took hold of him and restricted and detained him out of fear that he would join their ranks. (The narrator states): So we entered in his presence and admonished him. And one of the things we said to him was: ‘Don’t you see that the blessing from the supplication of RasulAllah (saw) has fallen from your forehead?’ We continued with him until he turned back from their views. And afterward, Allah returned the hair back to his forehead, and he repented.” (Musnad)

Many amongst the salaf such as Uthman Ibn Abi Shaybah (ra) said: "The disobedient sinners (fussaq) of the ashabul hadith are better than the worshippers from other than them." (Khatib al-Baghdade, Sharaf Ashabul Hadith # 98; al-Harawi, Dhammul Kalaam #96)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Khawaarij in the sunnah

Al-Khallal narrated from Ahmad b Hanbal: “RasulAllah’s (saw) ahadith about them are authentic in ten different forms.” (as-Sunnah, I, 145, # 110)

Ibn Taymiyyah records that Imam Ahmad stated: ““RasulAllah’s (saw) ahadith about them are authentic in ten different forms. Muslim has reported all ten of these in his Sahih by consent to Imam Ahmad. As Bukhari narrated some of these he also narrated the sunnan and musnad sahih in different ways." (Fatawa, 7/479)

It is narrated from Abu Salama and Abdullah bin Amr bin Yasar that they visited Abu Sa'ed al-Khudri and asked him about Al-Haruriyyah (Khawaarij) "Did you hear RasulAllah saying anything about them? Abu Sa'ed said, I do not know what Al-Haruriyyah is, but I heard RasulAllah saying, There will appear in this nation -he did not say ‘from this nation’- a group of people so pious apparently that you will consider your prayers inferior to their prayers, but they will recite the Qur’an, the teachings of which will not go beyond their throats and will go out of their religion as an arrow darts through the game, whereupon the archer may look at his arrow, its Nasl at its Risaf and its Fuqa to see whether it is blood-stained or not (i.e. they will have not even a trace of Islam in them)." (Bukhari; Muslim)

It is narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra) that he said: “When we were in the company of RasulAllah (saw) and he was distributing the spoils of war, there came to him Thul-Khuwaysira, one of Banu Tamim. He said: O RasulAllah, do justice. Upon this RasulAllah (saw) said: Woe be upon thee I Who would do justice, if I do not do justice? You would be unsuccessful and incurring a loss, if I do not do justice. Upon this Umar b. Khattab (ra) said: RasulAllah, permit me to strike off his neck. RasulAllah (saw) said: Leave him, for he has friends (who would outwardly look to be so religious and pious) that everyone among you would consider his prayer insignificant as compared with their prayer, and his fast as compared with their fasts. They would recite the Qur'an but it would not go beyond their collarbones. They would pass through (the teachings of Islam so hurriedly) just as the arrow passes through the prey. He would look at its Iron head, but would not find anything sticking) there. He would then see at the lowest end, but would not find anything sticking there. He would then see at its grip but would not find anything sticking to it. He would then see at its feathers and he would find nothing sticking to them (as the arrow would pass so quickly that nothing would stick to it) neither excrement nor blood. They would be recognized by the presence of a black man among them whose upper arms would be like a woman's breast, or like a piece of meat as it quivers, and they would come forth at the time when there is dissension among the people. Abu Sa’ed said: I testify to the fact that I heard it from RasulAllah (saw), and I testify to the fact that Ali b. Abi Talib fought against them and I was with him. He gave orders about that man who was sought for, and when he was brought in, and when I looked at him, he was exactly as RasulAllah (saw) had described him.” (Bukhari; Muslim; al-Bidaya wa’n-Nihaya)

In another narration it reads: “(they) would swerve through the religion (as blank) just as a (swift) arrow passes through the prey.” It is also narrated that: There would arise from my Ummah a people who would recite the Qur'an, and your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer, arid your fast, as compared with their fast. They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone; they would swerve through Islam just as the arrow passes through the prey.” (Muslim)

In another narration it is said: “they would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey, and they would never come back to it. They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures.” (Muslim)

“They will recite the Qur’an, but it will not go further than their throats.”

According to Nawawi’s narration, “Qadi said there are two ta'weels for this

1- The hearts will not comprehend. When they read they will not benefit from it. They do not have for their share any more than reading by mouth throat and pharynx (hulooq). It is because the mahraj of the words are done with them.

2- Neither their amal nor readings will ascend and they also won't be accepted.” (Nawawi, 7/159; Muslim)

There is a chapter in Bukhari “Chapter: Killing the Khawaarij and Heretics after establishing the proof against them” and the statement of Allah:

 “And Allah will not mislead a people after He hath guided them, in order that He may make clear to them what to fear (and avoid) for Allah hath knowledge of all things.” (at-Tawbah 9/115)

Ibn ‘Umar saw them as the most sharr (evil) among the creation. “They took ayaat that were revealed concerning the disbelievers and applied them to the believers.” (Bukhari)

Ali (ra) said: Whenever I narrate to you anything from RasulAllah (saw) believe it to be absolutely true as falling from the sky is dearer to me than that of attributing anything to him (saw) which he never said. When I talk to you of anything which is between me and you (there might creep some error in it) for battle is an outwitting. I heard RasulAllah (saw) as saying: There would arise at the end of the age a people who would be young in age and immature in thought, but they would talk (in such a manner) as if their words are the best among the creatures. They would recite the Qur'an, but it would not go beyond their throats, and they would pass through the religion as an arrow goes through the prey. So when you meet them, kill them, for in their killing you would get a reward with Allah on the Day of Judgment.” (Muslim; al-Bidaya wa’n-Nihaya; Fathu’l-Bari)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Some of Their Attributes and Characteristics

They are young in age. RasulAllah (saw) said: “young in age” (Bukhari; Muslim) ‘Young in age’ here means youth who have not matured and who have not learned enough to learn the truth. (Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 12/283; Ibn Hajar, Fathu’l-Bari, 12/78) Ibnul Athar stated: “Young in age: an indirect expression referring to youth and those in their early years.” (an-Nihayah 1/351) RasulAllah (saw) said: “the blessing with your elders.” Al-Manawi said in Faydul-Qadeer “the blessing with your elders who have experience in the affairs and who have preserved many rewards. So sit with them so that you may follow their views and be guided by their guidance.” (3/220)

They have foolish minds – i.e. intellects. RasulAllah (saw) said: “imbecilic in understanding” (Bukhari; Muslim) And ‘imbecilic in understanding’ here means foolish, ignorant and not having enough intellect. (Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 12/283; Ibn Hajar, Fathu’l-Bari, 12/78) Ibnul Athar said: “imbecilic in understanding (sufahaul ahlam) The meaning of ahlam is understanding and intellect and as-sufh is (being) thoughtless and reckless.” (an-Nihayah, 1/434; 2/376)

They have a weakness when it comes to understanding the Religion of Allah. This is why it has been reported that “They recite the Qur’an but it does not surpass…” (Muslim) Narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: “…or go past their throats.” (Bukhari) In one narration which is narrated from Abu sa’ed al-Khudri (ra), it states: “…their pharynx's (hulooq).” (Muslim) In another narration, it states: Narrated from Abu Dharr (ra) “…their pharynx's (halaaqeehim).” (Muslim) In another narration from Sahl b Hanif, it states: “…their collar bones (taraaqeehim).” (Bukhari) In another narration from Abu Bakrah, it states: “They will make their tongues eloquent with the Qur’an.” (Ibn Abi Asim, As-Sunnah) In another narration from Sahl bin Hanif, it states: “They will recite the Qur’an with their tongues but it will not go past their collar bones.” (Muslim) In another narration from Ali ibn Talib (ra): “They will hold it (i.e. the recitation) to be for them, when it is against them.” (Ibn Abi Asim, As-Sunnah) In another narration from Ali Ibn Talib (ra), it states: “They will think…” instead of “They will hold…” (Muslim) In one narration from Abu Zaid Al-Ansari, RasulAllah (saw) said: “They will call to the Book of Allah, but they will have nothing to do with Allah.” (Ibn Abi Asim, As-Sunnah) In another narration of the hadith, the Khawaarij and what they undergo when reciting the Qur’an was mentioned to Ibn Abbas (ra), so he said: “They are not as extreme in their striving as the Jews and the Christians were, but yet they went astray.” (Shari’ah, 27-28) And in another narration, Ibn Abbas (ra) said: “They believe in His clear verses, but go astray concerning His unclear verses. No one knows their hidden meanings except Allah. And as for those firmly rooted in knowledge, they say: ‘We believe in it.’” And he said: “They are in a confused and drunken state. They are neither Jews nor Christians nor Magians, so that they may be excused.” (Shari’ah, 28)

RasulAllah (saw) said: “Their sign is a black man; one of his arm is like the breast of a woman, or like a piece of meat tadardar (moving loosely). (Ibn Hajar Fathul Bari, 12/308) And they will come about at a division amongst the Muslims. (Bukhari; Muslim) And there has occurred from Zayd ibn Wahb al-Juhayni that he was in the army which came along with Ali (ra) to the Khawaarij. So Ali (ra) said: O people! I heard RasulAllah (saw) saying: ‘A people will come out of my ummah reciting the Qur’an. Your recitation is nothing when compared to their recitation, your prayer is nothing when compared to their prayers and your fast is nothing when compared to their fast. They will recite the Qur’an thinking that is in their favour, yet it will be against them, it will not pass beyond their throats (the bone which is between the shoulder and the neck). (Fathul Bari, 12/293) The battle between Ali and Khawaarij was fast and fierce, but in the end, as truth ultimately must prevail over the dark oppression of falsehood, the Khawaarij were defeated. As Ali was surveying the bodies of the dead, he was looking for some sign that he had killed the very Khawaarij that RasulAllah (saw) had made mention of in the hadith. Ali (ra) was looking for the man that RasulAllah (saw) had said that his hand would look likes a small breast. When he was found, Ali (ra) exclaimed, “Allahu Akbar -thrice. I have been utilised to fulfill the prophecy and you all know the hadith.”

Their distinguishing attribute is that they shave their heads. It is narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (Muslim) in another narration of the hadith from Anas b Malik, it states: “At-Tasbeet.” (Muslim) The word ‘Tasbeet’ which is mentioned in the hadith is: Removing the short hair. In a sahih hadith which is recorded by Muslim and narrated from Abi Asim that RasulAllah (saw) described them saying they would be called as at-tahalluq. Imam Nawawi in the sharh of Muslim said: “And the intended meaning of at-tahalluq is shaving the heads. And some of the people used this as a proof for dislike (makruh) of shaving the head but there is no proof for that in this. It is only one of their signs and a sign can be something unlawful or it can be something lawful.” (7/167) Narrated Abu Sa'ed al-Khudri and Anas ibn Malik (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: “Soon there will appear disagreement and dissension in my people; there will be people who will be good in speech and bad in work. They recite the Qur'an, but it does not pass their collar-bones. They will swerve from the religion as an arrow goes through the animal shot at. They will not return to it till the arrow comes back to its notch. They are worst of the people and animals. Happy is the one who kills them and they kill him. They call to the book of Allah, but they have nothing to do with it. He who fights against them will be nearer to Allah than them (the rest of the people). The people asked: What is their sign? He replied: They shave the head.” (Abu Dawud with sahih isnad.) In the matn of hadith both the words ‘tahliq’ and ‘tasbeet’ were used. These two words are very close in regards to their meaning. ‘Tasbeet’ is having hair cut and shaving the hair. It is also said that it means not oiling/greasing the hair or not cleaning/washing the hair.

In a hadith which is narrated from Sharik b Shihab by Nasai, it is related that Abu Barza (ra) described the man who accused RasulAllah (saw) as “matmumush sha'r” (the one who has long and thick hair) and Ibnul Athar explained the word ‘matmumush sha'r’ which is mentioned in the hadith as: "The one with a lot of hair, the one with hair that covers the head”. Here the expression “sha'r: hair” could mean the hair on the face, the beard. Meaning with the expression a man with a thick beard and shaved head could have been meant. Another hadith which is narrated from Amir bin Wasila by Tabarani also confirms the same meaning. The mentioned individual is a Khawaarij who had not shaved the hair on his head. What is understood from the narrations is that they shaved the hair on their heads in the later era. This has become a principal for all the Khawaarij. However the only thing that distinguishes the Khawaarij is not only shaving their heads. RasulAllah (saw) had shaved the hair on his head also and some among the sahabah. Some salih among the ummah had continuously shaved their heads also. For this reason the mentioned hadith here does not carry a meaning that it is restricted to shave the heads. Therefore there is a possibility that the word tasbeet mentioned in the nass regarding this matter referred to the Khawaarij who rise after the first generation of Khawaarij whose distinguishing feature is that they shave their beards. There is a possibility that there are Khawaarij who rise in some eras which shave their beards and cut their hair. In the shari'ah there is no restriction in cutting the hair and keeping the beard long so in this sense the hadith in which they are mentioned in would point out that they are a part of a group which performs the evil of shaving their beards. In the shari'ah it is only the shaving of the beard which is restricted. Because we have not come across an expression that it is in this meaning and because there are narrations restriction of shaving the beard we could say that this is a great possibility.  Due to the fact that fear and its like is not an excuse those who carry the Islamic belief should not take the matter of shaving the beard lightly.     

They (the Khawaarij) are the first ones who split away from the unified body of Muslims and declared them to be disbelievers due to (their committing of) sins. This description of Khawaarij is made by Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. (Majmoo-ul-Fatawa 3/349 and 7/279) They are from those in whose hearts is a deviation. It is narrated from Abu Umamah (ra) that the ones who are intended by the following verses were the Khawaarij: “But as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation, they follow what is unclear thereof…” (Ale Imran 3/7) and His saying: “On the Day when some faces will be brightened and some faces will be darkened…” (Ale Imran 3/106). (Ahmad)

They declare a Muslim to be a disbeliever due to every sin. They say: “They leave the fold of iman and enter into disbelief.” (Sharh al-Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah, 298) They hold that the Muslims who commit major sins will reside eternally in the Hellfire. This is also recorded in the Sharh al-Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah (360) they say: “Every sin that a person commits makes him a disbeliever, since he is ignorant of Allah. This is done by the Makramiyyah al-Munshaqqah from the Tha’alabiyyah; one of the sects of the Khawaarij. They are the worst of people in deriving rules based on analogy. This is also in al-Milal wan-Nihal (1/116)

They deem the subjects disbelievers if their leader commits disbelief.  This is done by the Baihasiyyah; one of the sects of the Khawaarij. (al-Milal wan-Nihal (1/126) They declare those who don’t agree with their views to be disbelievers, and they consider their blood lawful for shedding. They also permit the killing of the women and children that oppose them. This is done by the Azariqah; one of the sects of the Khawaarij. (Lawaami’-ul-Anwaar al-Bahiyyah 1/86) They hold that it is obligatory to fight against the ruler alone as well as whoever is pleased with his rule. As for those who reject the ruler, then it is not permissible to fight against them unless they support the ruler, attack the beliefs of the Khawaarij or serve as guides for the ruler. This is done by the Ujaradah; one of the sects of the Khawaarij. They do not hold that an oppressive ruler has the right to leadership. This is recorded by Imam Ashari. (Maqaalat al-Islaamiyeen 1/204) they hold it as an obligatory duty to rebel against the leader if he opposes the Sunnah. This is recorded in al-Milal wan-Nihal (1/115)

They hold that iman is: Knowledge of Allah and of what RasulAllah (saw) came with. So whoever commits something that he is not sure of as to whether it is lawful or unlawful, he is a disbeliever, since he was obligated to have researched into the matter. This is done by the Baihasiyyah – one of the sects of the Khawaarij. (Lawaami’-ul Anwaar al-Bahiyyah 1/87)

They come out from the Religion just as an arrow comes out from the hunted game. Then they do not return back to it. This is narrated from Abu Dharr (ra). (Muslim) And in another narration from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri: “They shoot out from the Religion just as an arrow shoots out from the hunted game.” (Bukhari) In another report narrated from Ali (ra) it states: “They shoot out from Islam…” (Bukhari) They will shoot through (yamruqun) Islam just as an arrow shoots the hunted game. Ibn Athar stated: “That is they will enter it, tear through it and leave it, just an arrow will pierce the thing that is shot at and then come out of it.” (an-Nihaya 4/320) “And when the arrow shoots in to hunted game, it comes out from the other side, opposite the side from where it entered. So the Khawaarij were called Mariqah due to the statement of RasulAllah (saw) ‘They will shoot through (yamruqun) Islam just an arrow shoots through hunted game’.” (az-Zari, Mukhtararus-sihhah, 1/259)

Their iman does not go past their throats.  This is narrated in a hadith from Ali (ra) by Bukhari. Due to deviation and separation from the path of haqq and jamaa'ah, their iman will only be considered just a claim which would not reach to the heart. Their prayer does not go past their throats. This is narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra). (Muslim) They will speak the truth with their tongues, but it will not go past this from them. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) said: “They will speak the truth with their tongues, but it will not go past this from them. And he pointed to his throat. They are from the most despised of Allah’s creation to Him. He said this when they told him: There is no rule except for that of Allah’s.” (Muslim)

They will kill the people of iman and leave alone the worshippers of idols. In one narration from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri, it states: "And they will kill the People of Islam, while leaving alone the people of Awthaan (idols)." (Muslim) Imam Ashari said: “As for the sword, then all of the Khawaarij speak of it and hold it except the Ibadiyyah. They do not hold resisting the people with sword. However they hold removing the tyrannical leaders.” (Maqalatul Islamiyyan 1/204) Ibn Taymiyyah said: “the Khawaarij are the most apparent of the people of innovation and fighting against the rulers.” (Fatawa 7/217) They are always fighting against the Muslims. They killed Uthman (ra) and they killed Ali bin Abi Talib (ra). They killed az-Zubayr Ibn-ul-Awwam (ra) and killed the best of the Companions. They will set out (to fight) against the best group amongst people. RasulAllah (saw) described His companions as the best generation. (Bukhari)

They shed unlawful blood. This is narrated from Ali bin Abi Talib. (Muslim)  They lie in wait on the roads for the purpose of attacking the passers-by and spilling their blood without any justification from Allah. It is mentioned in the speech of 'Aishah (raa). (Hakim, Mustadrak; Majma’-uz-Zawaa’id)

They oppose and even accuse RasulAllah (saw). Allah’s saying: “And among them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of the (distribution of) alms…” (at- Tawbah 9/58) was revealed concerning Abdullah bin Thul-Khuwaysirah At-Tamimee, the founding father of the Khawaarij and this is narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra). (Bukhari) Ibnu’l-Jawzi stated: “I am not surprised at their certainty about their knowledge nor their conviction that they were more knowledgable then Ali (ra) for Thul Khuwasirah had told RasulAllah (saw) ‘Be just for you have been unfair.’ And it was Iblis who led them to perpetrate these infamies; we seek refuge in Allah from abandonment and defeat (at the hands of Iblis).” (Talbisu’l-Iblis) They permit oppression against RasulAllah (saw). This is related from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra). (Bukhari; Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmoo-ul- Fatawa 19/73) They disparage their rulers and claim them to be upon misguidance As Abdullah bin Thul-Khuwaysirah did with RasulAllah and others to Uthman (ra), Ali (ra) and likes.

They do not believe that the people of knowledge and virtue hold a special position. They perceived that they were more knowledgeable than Ali bin Abi Talib, Ibn Abbas and the rest of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with all of them. (al-Khawaarij Awwalul-Firaq fi Tarikh-il-Islam 38) Ibnu’l-Jawzi said: “I am not surprised at their certainty about their knowledge nor their conviction that they were more knowledgable then Ali (ra)” (Ibnu’l-Jawzi, Talbisu’l-Iblis) They do not respect the sanctity of places or times, as occurred with the Qaraamitah and those who came after them.

Not one of the Companions of RasulAllah (saw) could be found amongst them (i.e. to support them). This is also recorded by Hakim. (Mustadrak)

Every time a new generation springs forth from them, it gets cut off (i.e. from the Jamaa’ah). This is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah) The Khawaarij will never come to an end. Rather, they will continue to exist until the establishment of the Final Hour. This is related from Ali (ra). (Bukhari). There will emerge from amidst them the Dajjal. In a narration it states: “…from their treachery…” And in one manuscript: “…from their ranks…” And that refers to a great army and this is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah). There will be from among them those who will be with the Dajjal during the Last Days. It was said to Ali (ra): “All praise be to Allah who rescued the servants from them.” He replied: “Nay. I swear by the One in whose Hand my soul is, there are still some of them that remain in the loins of men and verily, there are those amongst them who will be with the Dajjal. (Lawaami’-ul-Anwaar al-Bahiyyah 1/86)

They speak with the best speech amongst creation. Imam Bukhari narrated this from Ali (ra). However they would not benefit from it. They beautify their speech but produce vile actions. This character of theirs is narrated by Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra). (Abu Dawud). They outwardly manifest the attributes of calling to good and forbidding evil, redirecting the religious texts concerning that towards disputing with the rulers, rebelling against them and fighting against those who oppose them. These are mentioned in ash-Shari’ah (22) and also al-Khawaarij Awwalul-Firaq fee Tarikh-il-Islam (37). They speak using the speech and words of the people of knowledge. Muhammad bin al-Husayn (ra) said: “It is not befitting for one who sees the tireless efforts of a Khariji that has rebelled against a ruler, whether just or tyrannical. thus setting out against him, rallying a group against him, unsheathing swords and deeming it lawful to fight against Muslims – it is not befitting for him to be deceived by such a person’s recitation of the Qur’an nor by the length of his standing in prayer, nor by his perseverance in fasting, nor by his good words concerning knowledge, so long as he holds the views of the Khawaarij.” (ash-Shari’ah 28)

They go astray with regard to Allah’s unclear verses. They do not try to combine between the clear and unclear verses, as those firmly-grounded in knowledge do. Ibn Abbas (ra) said: “They believe in His clear verses, but go astray concerning His unclear verses. No one knows their hidden meanings except Allah. And as for those firmly rooted in knowledge, they say: ‘We believe in it.’” And he said: “They are in a confused and drunken state. They are neither Jews nor Christians nor Magians, so that they may be excused.” (Shari’ah, 28) They will become so deeply absorbed (ta’ammuq meaning relying and using as proof that which the religious texts do not substantiate.) in the Religion to the point that they will leave from it. This is narrated from Abdullah b Amr. (Ibn Abi Asim, As-Sunnah) They call the people to the Book of Allah but have nothing to do with it, meaning err in their manner of deriving the basis of proof from them. Narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri and Anas b Malik (Abu Dawud) They cling onto the apparent meanings of the Qur’anic texts. Even though they don’t intend to oppose it, however, they understand from it that which the texts do not indicate.  They have claimed that the prophets committed major and minor sins based on Allah’s statement: “Verily, We have given you a manifest victory, So that Allah may forgive you of your past and future sins.” (al-Fath 48/1-2) According to them RasulAllah (saw) may commit disbelief then repent. (Al-Khawaarij –Aqidatan wa Fikran wa Filasufatan 54)

They use as evidence verses from the Qur’an that deal with the wa’id (Allah’s threat of punishment) while abandoning the verses concerning the wa’ad (Allah’s promise for forgiveness). (Al-Khawaarij Awwalul-Firaq fi Tarikh-il-Islam 38) They are hasty in applying rulings. (al-Khawaarij Awwalul-Firaq fi Tarikh-il-Islam 146) They make rulings and accusations against the hearts. This includes issuing rulings on one’s decisions and notions. (al-Khawaarij Awwalul-Firaq fi Tarikh-il-Islam 147)

They reject the Sunnah if there is not some explicit text in the Qur’an that supports it. Shaikhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: “They do not take anything from the Sunnah except for that which can be interpreted in its general sense, not including those texts that contradict what is apparently stated in the Qur’an, according to them. So they do not believe in stoning the fornicator nor do they believe that there is a minimum (stolen) amount, which constitutes stealing.” (Majmoo-ul-Fatawa 13/48) And also said: “So at times they revile the isnaad and at times the text. And if they do not understand it, then they do not follow it. They are not to be trusted with the reality of Sunnah which RasulAllah (saw) came with. Rather they are not to be trusted with the reality of the Qur’an.” (Fatawa 19/73)

They are excessive in performing acts of worship. It is narrated from Ali Ibn Abi Talib (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: “Your prayer is nothing as compared to their prayer. Your fasting is nothing as compared to their fasting. And your reciting the Qur’an is nothing as compared to their reciting.” (Muslim) In one narration of this Hadith which is narrated from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra), it states: “You will look down at your prayer as compared to their prayer…” (Muslim) And in another narration: “…(and you will look down) at your deeds as compared to their deeds.” (Sharh Usool i'tiqaad Ahlu’s-Sunnah 8/1231) They go to extremes in worship. So they perform acts of worship to the extent that those who see them become amazed with them and they become amazed with themselves. This is narrated from Anas b Malik (Ibn Abi Asim, as-Sunnah) Ibn Abbas (ra) said: “And I have not seen a people that are stricter in their exertion (of worship) than them. Their hands are like the calluses of camels and their foreheads are marked due to the traces of prostration.” (Majma’-uz-Zawaa’id 6/240)

They are the worst of creation and creatures. It is narrated in a hadith from Abu Dharr (Muslim) and in the same manner Abu Abdullah Ahmad bin Hanbal (ra) said: “The Khawaarij are an evil people. I don’t know of any people on the earth that are worse than them.” (Abu Bakr al-Khallal, As-Sunnah of #110) They are the worst of creation. Ibn Umar (ra) said about them: “They took ayat that were revealed concerning the disbelievers and applied them to the believers.” (Bukhari)  Bukhari reported this narration under the “Chapter: Killing the Khawaarij and Heretics after establishing the proof against them.” Allah says: “And Allah will never lead a people astray after He has guided them until He makes clear to them what they should be avoiding.” (at-Tawbah 9/115) They are the dogs of the inhabitants of Hell. It is recorded in Sharh i'tiqaad Ahlus-Sunnah. (8/1232) On the authority of Abi Awfi (ra) that he said: RasulAllah (saw) said: “The Khawaarij are the dogs of the Hellfire.” (Tirmidhi; Ibn Maajah; Ahmad; Ibn Asim, as-Sunnah; Abdullah ibn Ahmad b Hanbal, as-Sunnah and from Abu Uthman al-Bahili by Tirmidhi, Abdurrazzaq, al-Musannaf; ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; Tabarani, Mujamul Kabeer; Tabarani, al-Awsat; Tabarari, as-Sagher; Hakim, Mustadrak; Bayhaqi, as-Sunanul Kubra) On the authority of Abu Umamah that he said: “The most evil of people to be slayed beneath the sky/on the face of the earth, and those whom they slay are the best of people, the dogs of the hellfire. They used to be Muslims and became kuffar.” I said: “O Abu Umamah! How can you say such a thing?" He said: “Rather I heard it from the RasulAllah (saw).” (Ibn Maajah; Hasan hadith.)

Ibn Kathir said: “I say this group of people is from the strangest type of children of Adam (as). So how free from all imperfection is the One who varied His creation as He willed and initiated with His magnificent degree. And what is better than what some of the salaf used to say concerning the Khawaarij, that they are mentioned in the statement of Allah (awj): “Say: ‘Shall we tell you of those who lose most in respect of their deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life, while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works?’ They are those who deny the Signs of their Lord and the fact of their having to meet Him (in the Hereafter): vain will be their works, nor shall We, on the Day of Judgment, give them any weight.” (al-Kahf 18/103-105) So the intended meaning is that these misguided ignoramus and these criminals in terms of statements and actions have united their view that of the Khawaarij whilst they are in the midst of Muslims. (al-Bidaya wa’n-nihaya 7/228) According to the narration of Ali (ra) when Ibnu’l-Kawwa asked Ali (ra) regarding those who were mentioned in the ayah (al-Kahf 18/103-105) He said: ‘These are the ahl-Harura” (Qurtubi, Tafsir; Razi Tafsir) Those are the ones who deemed some of the sins as ibadaah (taat) and performed for this reason. Even if these deeds were taat; due to their being among the kuffar these (acts) would not be accepted from them.” (Razi, Tafsir)

Tabarani narrated from Abu Umamah (ra) that he said: “The statement of Allah “O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom.” (al-e Imran 3/1118) is referred to the Khawaarij.” (Mujamu’l-Kabeer 8/325; Majmau’z-Zawaid 6/233)

Ibn Kathir narrates that in a hadith chain from Abu Kuraib (ra) in a chain from Wakia bin Rabia bin Sabih and Hammad bin Salamah from Abu Ghaalib, who said that, “Abu Umamah saw severed heads on the steps of the masjid in Dimashq (Damascus) and he was weeping. Abu Umamah then said, ‘The dogs of the hellfire (the Khawaarij) are the worst to be killed under the heaven and the one they killed is the best of people to be killed.’ Then he recited, “On the day when faces will be whitened and faces will be blackened. Then to those whose faces are blackened, did you become kuffar after your Iman? Then taste the punishment of what you disbelieved in. And as far as those whose faces were whitened, then they shall be forever in the mercy of Allah. ” (Al-i Imran 3/106) “Then I said to Abu Umamah, ‘You heard it from RasulAllah (saw)? ’ He said, ‘If I did not hear it except once, twice, three, four or even seven times, I would not have spoken it. (Tafsiru’l-Qur’an al-Azim) Hakim narrated from Shaddad b Abdullah Abu Ammar (ra) said: “I saw Abu Umamah Bahili on the gate of Dimasq while he was standing over the Haruriyyah. He was saying that: ‘O dog of hellfire those who killed you are the best among the killers.’ He had tears in his eyes while he was saying it. A man asked him: ‘O Abu Umamah have you ever heard anything from RasulAllah (saw) regarding what you say o dog of hellfire? Or did you say it due to your own opinion?’ Abu Umamah responded him saying: ‘if I say anything without hearing from RasulAllah, once, twice or thrice then I would be dare about it. RasulAllah repeated it for seven times which I narrated to you.’ When he reminded him of the tears in his eyes, Abu Umamah said: “because they became Muslim and then after their iman they failed into kufr’ and recited the ayah: "Be not like those who are divided amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving Clear Signs: For them is a dreadful penalty, On the Day when some faces will be (lit up with) white, and some faces will be (in the gloom of) black: To those whose faces will be black." (al-e Imran 3/105-106)" Then he said twice that ‘this was regarding them’.” (Hakim, Mustadrak; Dhahabi confirmed its sihha.) Ibn Kathir mentioned the following narration as a tafsir of the ayah “Relate to them the story of the man to whom We sent Our signs, but he passed them by: so Satan followed him up, and he went astray.” (al-A’raf 7/175) while grading it as a sound hadith: “There is a hadith in the Musnad of Abu Ya’la al-Mawsili which is narrated from Hudhayfa b Yaman that RasulAllah said regarding the tafsir of this ayah: “For you I fear from the man who recites Qur’an the most, whose happiness is seen in his face and whom is known as Muslim however who is stripped from Islam and who throws his Qur’an behind him, who draws a sword at his neighbour and blames him for being mushrik.” Upon this when it is said to him “O RasulAllah (saw) in this case will the one who blames or the one who is blamed become mushrik?” he answered “the one who blames”. (Tafsir) This is also narrated by Tabarani in as-sagheer and al-Kabeer from Muadh b Jabal. (Majmauz-Zawaid)

There are many amongst them that differ with one another. This is why they have divided into so many sects, some of which set out to fight against the other and at times, some of which deliver speeches against the other. Allah spoke truthfully when He said: “If it (i.e. the Qur’an) were from other than Allah, you would have found many differences in it.” (an-Nisa 4/82) (al-Khawaarij –Aqidatan wa Fikran wa Filasufatan 54)

The Khawaarij will never come to an end until the appearance of the Dajjal and the Last Day. Every time a new generation springs forth from them, it gets cut off (i.e. from the Jamaa’ah). This is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah) The Khawaarij will never come to an end. Rather, they will continue to exist until the establishment of the Final Hour. This is related from Ali (ra). (Bukhari). There will emerge from amidst them the Dajjal. In a narration it states: “…from their treachery…” And in one manuscript: “…from their ranks…” And that refers to a great army and this is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah) There will be from among them those who will be with the Dajjal during the Last Days. It was said to Ali (ra): “All praise be to Allah who rescued the servants from them.” He replied: “Nay. I swear by the One in whose Hand my soul is, there are still some of them that remain in the loins of men and verily, there are those amongst them who will be with the Dajjal. When Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) overcame the Khawaarij on the day of Nahrawan, he responded to the people who came to congratulate him that Allah (awj) had finished them with his hands saying: ‘The praise is for Allah. O leader of the believers who eradicated them at their roots!’. He said, “No, by Allah, they are still in the backs and spines of men and the wombs of women. And when are alive, they hardly leave anyone alone.” (al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya, 7/295; 10/590) Shaikhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said, “And this sign which RasulAllah (saw) mentioned would be the sign for the first people of the Khawaarij. But they are not the only people that are spoken of in these verses because He (saw) mentioned in other hadith that they would still keep coming until the age of the Dajjal. “It is concluded by the Muslims that the Khawaarij are not the only Khawaarij mentioned in the battles with Ali in the battle of Nahrawan.” (Majmual-Fatawa, 28/495-496) Khawaarij will not only come out during one era form the ages only. Rather they have come out a number of times, until they will come out in rebellion along with Dajjal. So it is related from RasulAllah (saw) that he said: “A people will come out towards the end of time. It is as if this one (Thul-Khuwaysirah) is from amongst them. They will recite the Qur’an, yet it will not pass beyond their throats. They will shoot through Islam just as an arrow shoots through the hunted game. They will be called at-Tahaluq. They will not cease to revolt until the last of them revolts along with Dajjal. So when you encounter them, then kill them. They are the most evil of the creation.” (Ahmad; Nisai; Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; al-Bazzar, Musnad; Hakim, al-Mustadrak; Haythami, Majmauz Zawaid) Narrated from Ali (ra) who said: "I heard RasulAllah (saw) say: ‘Towards the last days, a people will emerge who will be young in age and have foolish ideas. They will speak with the best speech of the creatures. Their iman will not go past their throats. So wherever you encounter them, kill them, for indeed there will be a reward for the one who kills them on the Day of Judgement.’" (Bukhari; Muslim; Ahmad, Musnad; Ibn Abi Asim, as-Sunnah; Abdullah bin Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as-Sunnah)

There is a great reward for he who kills them.  Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) said: “If the army that encounters them knew what was ordained for them upon the tongue of their prophet, they would only rely on that action.” (Abu Dawud) In one narration from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra) and Anas b Malik (ra), it reads: “Whoever fights them has more right to Allah than them.” (Abu Dawud) And in another narration from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra), it states: “Toobaa is for he who kills them and is killed by them.” (Abu Dawud; Ahmad; Ibn Sad; Ibn Abi Asim, Sunnah; Lailaki, Sharh usulul i'tiqaad) and from Abdullah bin Abi Awfa (Ahmad) Abu Umamah (ra) said: “They are the worst of those who are killed under the surface of the sky. And the best of those who are killed is he who is killed at their hands.” And he said: “These individuals were Muslims but became disbelievers.” (Ibn Maajah)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The Calamity of the Khawaarij is Fasid ta'weel

Hafidh said they had been called Kurra because they read and are ambitious in praying salah. However they made ta'weel of the Qur’an beyond its aim. They appointed view according to their hawa and exhibited their skills in zuhd, khushu etc. (Fath'ul-Bari, 12/296)

Dhul-Khuwaysirah directed revilement towards RasulAllah (saw). And he said to him (saw): Be just! And also said: I do not desire the Face of Allah by this distribution. Due to this, Khawaarij publicly manifest commanding the good and prohibiting the evil. However they do so without sincerity to Allah.

Ibn Taymiyyah stated: “And the first innovations such as the innovation of the Khawaarij were only due to poor understanding of Qur’an. They did not intend to oppose the Qur’an but they understand from it that which is not from it.” (Fatawa 13/30) And he said: “And the Khawaarij do not hold onto Sunnah except that they distort its ambiguities.” (Fatawa 13/48) He also said: “They have two well known qualities with which they separate the unity of Muslim and their leaders. One of them is that they leave out the sunnah and declare evil that which is not evil, or they declare good which is not good.” (Fatawa 19/27)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: They considered to be from the deen is not actually from the deen, such as the viewpoint of the Khawaarij and other than them from the people of desires. For they believe in an opinion that is an error and an innovation, and then they fight the people over it. Rather, they declare as disbelievers those who oppose them. Hence, they become errant in their opinion and also in fighting those who oppose them, or making takfir of them and cursing them. (Minhaju’s-Sunnah 4/527-)

Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: “…The innovation of Khawaarij is opposite of this, it is because the essence of their innovation is their misunderstanding of the message of Qur’an. The aim of the Khawaarij at the beginning was adhering to both the dhahir and batin of the Qur’an. They did not have the intention to be zindeeq.” (Tafsir’u Surat-i Ikhlas)

It is because their exertion was not based upon a correct foundation, nor upon authentic knowledge, it became a misguidance, a plague and evil upon them and upon the ummah. And this is all due to their ignorance of the deen of Allah. But in spite of this, they had piety and worship, but since these were not founded upon authentic knowledge, it became a disease on them. This is why Ibn Qayyim (ra) said in his description of them:

"They have textual evidences, which they fall short of in understanding
So they have been given shortness in knowledge." (Nooniyyah, 97)

So they use texts as evidences but yet they do not comprehend them. They use as evidence texts from the Qur’an and the Sunnah concerning the threat for committing sins, but they do not comprehend their meanings. They do not refer them back to the other texts, in which there is found a promise for forgiveness and the acceptance of repentance for those whose sins are less than Shirk. So they accept one part and leave off another part and all of this due to their ignorance.

By submitting to the rest in al-Wasit, Ghazali stated there are two views regarding the hukm of the Khawaarij:

The first view: Their hukm is just like the hukm of the ahl riddah

The second view: Their hukm is just like the baghi. Rafii had chosen the first among these.”

Ibn Umar saw them as the most evil among the creation. (Bukhari) This statement had been narrated in his Musnad regarding Tahzib ul Athar, by Tabari through Bakr ibn Abdullah ibn al Ashaj. This man asked Nafi: what is Ibn Umar’s view of the Haruriyyah? He replied: He’d saw them as the most evil among the creation. They took ayaat that were revealed concerning the disbelievers and applied them to the believers.” (Bukhari)   

In a narration according to Muslim is marfu and sahih Abu Dharr describes the Khawaarij “They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures.” (Muslim)

According to Ahmad with a jayyid (good) sanad, from Anas the similar had reached as marfu. From Bazzar, him from Sha’bi, him from Masruk and him from 'Aishah the following had been narrated: RasulAllah (saw) mentioned the Khawaarij and said “they are the most evil among the ummah. Those best among my ummah will kill them.” The sanad of this is hasan.

In Tabarani it is narrated as follows: “They are the worst of the creations and creatures. The best of the creations and creatures will kill them.  In the Abu Said Hadith mentioned in Ahmad it is narrated: “They are the worst among the society.” And in the narration by Ubaydullah ibn Abi Rafiin mentioned in Muslim: “The most hateful among the creation of Allah.” (Muslim)

In a hadith mentioned in Tabarani narrated from Abdullah ibn Hibban his father, it is stated: “The worst of the dead the sky shadows and the ground filtered.” Also the same is seen in Abu Umamah’s hadith. In the marfu hadith narrated by Abu Baraza mentioned in Ahmad and Ibn Abi Shayba it is stated “The worst of the creatures and creations, he said this thrice”. Likewise Umayr ibn ishaq narrated from Abu Hurayrah and him through the chain of Ibn Abi Shayba it is stated: “They are the most evil of the creations.”

All of these confirm the view of those who state the Khawaarij are kafir.   

In the narrations from Abu Ishaq and him from Suwayd ibn Ghafala mentioned in Nasai and Tabari the expression “they expel from deen” is “They expel from Islam”. Likewise in the same bab ,the same is seen in the narrations by Ibn Umar and Zayd ibn Wahb. In the narrations by Abu Bakra in Tabari and by Tariq ibn Ziyad from Ali in Nasai it is narrated as “they expel from haqq.” Fundamentally there is a criticism to those who make tafsir of deen as obedience (taat). Likewise this has been mentioned in the signs of nubuwwah.

When it comes to the following statement: “There would arise in this nation (and he did not say ‘out of them’) a people” regarding this by sahih narrations from Abu Said there is no ikhtilaaf.

According to this in Muslim the narrations of Abu Nadira from Abu Said is as follows: “RasulAllah (saw) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah.”

In another narration: “There would be two groups in my Ummah, and there would emerge another group (seceding itself from both of them)” The narrations of Dahhaq and al Mashriki from Abu Said is just the same. However in the hadith of Abu Dharr in Muslim the hadith is as follows: “Verily there would arise from my Ummah after me or soon after me, a group (of people)” From another chain Zayd ibn Wahb narrated from Ali (ra): “There would arise from my Ummah a people”

With these and the hadith of Abu Said can be reconciled as the ummah mentioned in the hadith from Abu Said being the ummah of ijabah (meaning those who show compliance/acceptance and those who submit)   

And in the other hadith the ummah of dawah (call) has been meant (meaning those who the prophet had been sent to. This would encompass both the Muslim and the kafir).

Nawawi stated these are evidence of the fiqh of the sahabah and that they researched the statements. Also here there is evidence that Abu Said had made takfir of the Khawaarij and that he did not account them from the ummah.

“you would hold/consider insignificant”

“your prayers as compared with their prayers.” As mentioned in the next bab in the narration of Zuhri from Abu Salama “and his fast as compared with their fasts.” Likewise in the narration of Asin b. Samih from Abu Said: “You would consider your amal insignificant (compared to theirs)” Asim Najda had described the ashab of al Haruriyyah as: They fast during the day and pray (salah) during the night and according to the sunnah will take sadaqa. This was reported by Tabari. In Tabari a similar narration is mentioned by Yahya ibn Abu Kathir by Abu Salama. Likewise the narration from Muhammad ibn Amr by Abu Salama is also mentioned in Tabari: “While performing ibadaah one among you will see his salah and sawm insignificant compared to theirs.”

In the narration from Anas from Abu Said the similar is seen. Also In the narration bu Aswad ibn al Alah from Abu Salama the following is also narrated “your amal compared to their amal”

The narration from Salama ibn Kuhayl him from Zayd Wahb and him from Ali is as follows: “Your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer” (Muslim; Tabarani)

Ibn Abbas (ra) said: “And I have not seen a people that are stricter in their exertion (of worship) than them. Their hands are like the calluses of camels and their foreheads are marked due to the traces of prostration.” (Tabarani)

Ibn Abi Shayba narrated that the Khawaarij and what they undergo when reciting the Qur’an was mentioned to Ibn Abbas (ra), so he said: “They are not as extreme in their striving as the Jews and the Christians were, but yet they went astray.” (Shari’ah, 27-28; Fathu’l-Bari, 12/298)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The Khawarij Leaving Deen Quickly

“From the Pray”

At the end of Kitabu’l Tawhid in the narration from Mabad ibn Shirin and him from Abu Said it is stated that until the arrow returns to its place they will not return. Ar Ramiyya is the thing affected from the action of throwing; the aim is for example a deer. In the muksim riwaya by Abdullah ibn Amr it is stated:  “Surely there will be a group who will go deep in deen and pass clean through it”. Meaning they will exit Islam very quick; just like when the arrow is shot from the bow by an archer with a strong wrist and the arrow goes in, through and out of its aim without anything getting stuck to the arrow.  Likewise there will not be a trace left of that which is thrown. When the hunter looks for his arrow he will find it but he will not be able to find that which the arrow went through. To understand whether the arrow went through or not he will look at his shoot (arrow) and when he sees there aren’t any traces of blood on it he will believe he had not been able to hit the target; whereas he had hit the target. He pointed to this with the following stement: “It pierced and went through its flank and blood” meaning although it (the arrow) passed through both of these it had left no trace. On the contrary the explanation to after it is coming out the hand will turn red had been mentioned in the section regarding the signs of nubuwwah. In the riwaya in Muslim by Abu Nadra and him from Abu Said is as follows: “Upon this RasulAllah gave an example to them: like the individual who throws an arrow at his game.”

The riwaya mentioned in Tabari by Abu’l Mutawakkil an Naji and him from Abu Said is as follows: “They are like the one who throws an arrow at his pray. This man later will search for his arrow. He will find it and look at it but he will not see any traces of fat or blood.” Neither fat/dirt will stick to it or blood. Likewise nothing from Islam will stick to them. Again in Tabari in a riwaya from Asim ibn Shamh after the word the aim thrown we read the following: “he will go to the arrow and than look at its metal however he will not see dirt from its tripe or blood on it.

The following is also included in it: “They will forsake Islam upon their backs” at this time he put his hands behind him. In the riwaya from the mawla of banu Hisham Abu Ishaq, Abu Said narrates: “As nothing stuck to the arrow nothing will stick to them (the khawarij) from deen.” Tabari related this. In the hadith by Anas narrated by Abu Said mentioned in Ahmad, Abu Dawud and Tabari the following is stated: "It is said unless the arrow returns they will not return to Islam”

In the hadith mentioned in Tabari narrated by Ibn abbas: “A tribe from Islam would pass clean through their religion/Islam like the arrow exits its pray. This pray will be presented to the hunter. They will shoot at it. Among them one of their arrows will pierce and exit it. Its owner will come and look at his arrow. He will see no blood has stck to its metal. Than he will look at the quill of the arrow and will see no blood on it. Upon this he will say: If I had hit it there should have been hair on this or blood on the arrow. However he will see there is no hair/feather stuck to it. They will exit Islam like this.”

It is possible to find in Ibn Maajah the same with a much clear beginning. The narration of Bilal ibn Baktara from Abu Bakra is as follows: “The shaytan will get closer to them in the name of their deen.” In a riwayah by Abu Bakr and him from Ali mentioned in the musnad of Humaydi and ibn Abu Umar it is stated: “Surely some among the people will exit deen as the arrow goes through and exits its pray than they will not return forever. (Fath’ul Bari 12/307)

“And among them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of the (distribution of) alms…” (at-Tawbah 9/58) There is a witness to this in the hadith from Ibn Masud. He said: When RasulAllah (saw) was distributing the ghanimah of Hunayn I heard a man say: surely in this ditrubution the consent of Allah had been meant. Upon this this ayah was revealed: “And among them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of the (distribution of) alms…” (at-Tawbah 9/58) Ibn Murdawayh recorded this. Also in the version by Abu Said recorded by Ahmad the following is also included: “Abu Bakr came to RasulAllah (saw) and said: O RasulAllah (saw) surely I was passing such valley I saw a humble man who seemed nice. He was performing salah there. Upon this he (saw) said: Go there and kill him. Abu Bakr went there however when he saw that he was performing salah he did not find it appropriate to kill him and he returned. Upon this Nabi (saw) ordered Umar to go and kill him. He (Umar) went and when he saw him in the same state he returned. This time he orderedAli to go and kill him, Ali went but could not see him. Nabi (saw) said: Surely him and his friends will recite the Qur’an but it will not surpass their throats. As the arrow hits and exits its pray they will exit deen and will not return to it kill them they are the worst among the creatures. In the hadith from Jabir the same is seen. Abu Ya’la recorded this with a sika rijal. (Fath'ul-Bari, 12/312)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The Hukm of Khawaarij

Tabari stated: There is this in it also: Surely it is only permissible to fight and kill them after treating them justly and by providing evidence making dawah to them. Likewise in Bukhari the mentioned ayah points to this. Those who have made takfir of the Khawaarij have done so with this evidence. Likewise this is the natural outcome of what Bukhari had done. It is such that he had held them equivalent to the mulhid and in a separate heading he distinguished the ta'weel doers with this. For this reason Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al Arabi in the sharh of Tirmidhi explains this clearly: What is correct is that they are kafir because RasulAllah had said: “They would pass clean through their religion/Islam”, “I would kill them like 'Ad.” In another narration he had said “Thamud”. Both these tribes have been destroyed with their kufr. Likewise this statement is similar to his: “They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures” Whereas it is known that with this attribute only the kuffar are described also with the following “The most hateful among the creation of Allah”. On the other hand, they deserved this name more for giving the hukm that those who oppose their belief is upon kufr and will remain in fire eternally. While Qadi Abu Bakr Ibnu’l-Arabi counts the reasons for them being kafir he states: “They are more deserving to this name for making takfir and stating they will remain in jahannam eternally to all those who oppose their own aqidah.” (Fathu’l-Bari, Kitabu Istitabati’l-Murtad)

One of the mutaakhiruun (khalaf) imams who is inclined to this view is Taqiyuddeen As Subki. In his fatawa he states: “Those who make takfir of the Khawaarij and the extreme Rafidhi had certified this with their takfir of the distinguished personalities of the sahabah. Likewise according to this, this is a correct belief because this manner of conduct rejects the Nabi. He had given them the good news of jannah. Those who do not make takfir of them rely on the following:  Surely the hukm of making takfir will necessitate there be no certain information regarding their prior shahadah. There is doubt in this view because we know that those whom they have made takfir of are very clean until the death reaches them. This is sufficient cause for us to make takfir of those who make takfir of them (sahabah). This hadith confirms this view: RasulAllah (saw) said: "He who says to his brother 'O kafir', then it returns upon one of them." (Bukhari; Muslim; Malik; Tirmidhi; Abu Dawud)

“According to us, for the reason that they make takfir of those who are Muslim for certain, as a necessity of what Shari had informed us they must be given the hukm of kafir. Just as stating “I am Muslim” does not save one or performing some amal does not save the individual who makes sajda to an idol from being kafir, those who call others kafir “stating we are Muslim” will not save them either. (Fath’ul Bari, Kitabu Istitabat’l Murtad)

When Abdulkahir al Baghdadi clarifies the foundation which the ahl sunnah unite on, he states: “It is said that those who gather at Nahrawan have exited deen because RasulAllah (saw) had named then those who exit deen. As they made takfir of Ali, Uthman, Talha, Zubayr, Ibn Abbas and those who submitted to Ali after the incident of tahkim, they said the Muslim who performs sin is also kafir. Those who make takfir of those distinguished sahabah and the Muslim will be kafir.” (Al Baghdadi, al Farku Bayna’l Firak, 351)

Ibn Hajr says, "And what is correct is that the hadith was said as a warning against a Muslim saying that to his brother. It is said, "What returns upon him is his speaking ill of his brother and the sin of declaring him a kafir", and this is reasonable. It is also said, "It is to be feared that this will lead him into kufr", just as it is said, "sins leads towards kufr". Thus it is feared that if he continues in that and persists in it then he will have a bad end. I prefer from these sayings that it refers to the one who says it to someone from whom nothing is known except Islam and there is no justification or reason for him to claim that he is a kafir. So in such a case he becomes a kafir himself because of that, and this will be explained. So the meaning of the hadith is that his judgement of takfir returns upon himself, so what is meant is takfir not kufr. So it is as if he passed judgement of kufr upon himself since he passed this judgement on one who is like him (I.e. a Muslim)” (Fathul-Bari 10/466)

"Whoever addresses a man with Kufr, or says 'Enemy of Allah' and he is not that, then it returns back upon him" (Muslim)

Nawawi said: "They differ as regards interpretation of this "returning", so it is said, "Kufr returns upon him if he is making that lawful", and this is far from the context of the narration, and it is said, "it is taken to refer to the Khawaarij", since they declare believers to be Kafirun (disbelievers)." (Sharh Sahih Muslim 2/50)

“Killing a believer is greater to Allah than the vanishing of the earth.” (Bukhari; Muslim; Tirmidhi; Ibn Maajah)

Imam Nawawi quoted from Qadi Iyad that Malik b Anas said that this hadith is related with the Khawaarij who were applying takfir upon the Muslim. (Sharh Muslim, 3rd opinion) Ibn Hajar commented this and said: “What Malik had stated should be explained. Some among them make takfir of those among the sahabah which RasulAllah (saw) had attested to their Islam and jannah. This takfir will also mean denying RasulAllah (saw)’s testimony and not making takfir of them through ta'weel.” (Fathu’l Bari Istitabatu’l Murtaddeen)

Shaikhu’l-Islam Muwaffaqu’d-Deen al-Maqdisi (ra) says, “A group from the people of hadith believe that they (the Khawaarij) are kuffar and apostates and that their judgement is the judgement of kuffar and that their blood and their wealth is mubah (permissible to take).“ And if they take themselves away to a place and they have power, then they should be moved against just as the kuffar are moved against. And if they are in rebellious to the imam, they should be made to repent, just as the apostates repent. And if they do, fine. If they do not, their necks are struck (they are killed). Their wealth becomes fai’, and it is not inherited from by the Muslims, nor do they inherit from it.” (al-Mughni, 10 Kitaabu Qitaali Ahli’l-Bughaa)

Ibn ul Wazir in his work Isaru’l Hakki states: “Although the Khawaarij had passionately objected to perform what Allah ta’ala had restricted and by making takfir of those who did sin against Him they exalted Allah ta’ala because they made takfir of the Muslim who sin, they suffered the most harsh punishment and they were severely spoken ill of. The one who makes takfir can not be sure of (not) falling in the same situation as the Khawaarij who made takfir. This is great danger in deen.” (Ibn’ul Wazir, Isaru’l Hakki ani’l Halki, 447)   

“Now it is clear that those individuals had attributed kufr to by us who are valuable individuals whose iman is stable. Building upon this as a necessity of the information from Shari it is necessary to give the hukm of kufr. This is similar to their statements regarding those who make sajda to idols and matters as such. If we are to certify by the takfir ijmaa regarding those who do such things we’ll say; This information which is likely to happen regarding those individuals, will necessitate their kufr. Even if they do not believe certainly in the good character of those whom they make takfir of, this is like this. Therefore having belief in the Islamic i'tiqaad and performing the waajib will not save them from giving kufr hukm any longer. Just as the act of the one who makes sajdah to an idol can not save him.” (Fathu’l-Bari, Kitabu Istitabati’l-Murtad)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The difference between the People of Jamal-Siffin and people of Khawaarij

Abul Bukhtari said: “Ali was asked about the people of Jamal. It was said: Are they mushrik? He said they are fled from shirk. It was said: Are they munafiq? He said indeed munafiq do not remember Allah except a little. It was said: So what are they? He said Our brothers who have transgressed against us.” (Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; Bayhaqi, sunnan; Abu’l-Arab, al-mihan)

Narrated from Hasan, that he said, “When Ali (ra) killed the Haruriyyah, they (i.e. his companions) said, ‘Who are those ones, O Ameer Al-Mu’mineen? Are they kuffar?’ He said, ‘They fled from kufr.’ It was said, ‘Then munafiqun?’ He said, ‘Verily, the munafiqun do not remember Allah except for a little. And those ones mention Allah much.’ It was said, ‘Then what are they?’ He said, ‘A people who were stricken by a fitnah, so they became blind and deaf in it.’” (Abdurrazzaq, Musannaf #18656)

Narrated from Tariq ibn Shihab: “I was with Ali when he was asked about the people of an-Nahr. It was said: Are they mushrik? He said they are fled from shirk. It was said: Are they munafiq? He said indeed munafiq do not remember Allah except a little. It was said: So what are they? He said A group of people who have transgressed against us.” (Ibn Abi Shaybah; Ibn Nasr, Tadheem Qadri salaat and Bayhaqi)

There is a break in the sanad of Abdurrazzaq but the sanad with Ibn Abi Shaybah; Ibn Nasr and Bayhaqi is authenticated and connected. As seen the phrase “brothers” does not appear in the ahadith. Indeed Ibn Kathir narrated a version of hadith which includes the phrase “our brothers” but he mentioned this hadith with a sanad from Kitabul Khawaarij of Haytham Ibn Adiyy, from ismail ibn Abi Khaled. (al-Bidayah wa’n-Bihayah, 10/591) Haytham is munkar (rejected) in the hadith. (Tarihk Baghdad, 14/50) And Ibn Nasr pointed out the objection to Haytham concerning the same narration. However the isnad from Waki from Ismail ibn Abi Khaled with the wording: “A people who have waged war against us” is authentic. So this proves that the wording: “Our brothers who have transgressed against us” with regards to Khawaarij is from munkarat of Haytham.

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “Indeed it has been confirmed from the leader of believer Ali (ra) from a number of angles that when he had fought the people of Jamal, he did not take any of their offspring as slaves, he did not take their wealth as booty he did not finish the wounded man, he did not follow behind them and he did not kill the prisoners. And he prayed over those who had been killed from both groups at Jamal and Siffin. And he said: ‘Our brothers who have transgressed against us.’ And he informed that they were not kafir nor munafiq. And he followed that which has been stated in the book of Allah and the sunnah of His messenger. So Allah mentioned: ‘and if two groups from amongst the believers fight…’ (al-Hujuraat 49/9)” (Risalah ahl bayt wa huquqihim, 29) Also said: “And killing those who are prayed over and have been named ‘our brothers’ is not equal to killing those who are not prayed over. Rather it must be said to him: ‘Who are the ones whose path in the worldly life is misguided, yet they reckon that they are doing good works!’ So he will say: ‘They are the people of Harura.’ So this is the difference between the people of Harura and the others who are named by the leaders of believers during his caliphate with his statement and his action, in conformity to the sunnah of his messenger. This is the correct view which can not be exceeded by the one who is guided.” (Risalah ahl bayt wa huquqihim, 31)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said “And similarly the people of knowledge after them, this fighting (against the Khawaarij) was not like the fighting of the people of the Jamal and Siffin and other than them, from those matters in which no text of ijmaa has come, and neither any praise of the noble ones who entered into it. Rather, they were remorseful about it, and also returned (i.e. recanted) from it.” (Minhaaju’s-Sunnah 4/498; 7/406)

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah, said: ‘The second way of fighting the Khawaarij as well as fighting the people who did not pay the zakah, the Khawaarij and those of their like are not like fighting the people of the Jamal and Siffin. And this is what the majority of the scholars, the previous ones and the imams have stated and this is the aqidah of Ahlu’s-sunnah. And this is the madhhab of Ahlu’l-Madina, like Malik and other people and the Madhhab of the imams of hadith, like Ahmad and others. And they have stated this in more than one place. Even in their money, some of them said that it is allowed to take the wealth and ghanima of the Khawaarij. In one statement, Ahmad said according to Abu Talib in Harawiyyah, they (the Khawaarij) had a piece of land in the village, and they started to go out and kill Muslims and fight Muslims. But the Muslims killed them and their land was given to Muslims. Then the land was divided into fifths (like what you do with the land of the kuffar) and 4/5 of which goes to the fighters than fought them or the amir of the battle can divide it and make it into an endowment for all of the Muslims. ‘And it should not be divided for only the fighters, like what `Umar did when he took the land of Egypt in Sawaa and made it an endowment for the Muslims. And Ahmad said that the land that is taken as booty, it is exactly as the money that has been taken from the kuffar. And in general this is the way that is the correct and decisive way (in fighting the Khawaarij). ‘The verses and the ijmaa have differentiated between this type of fighting (the fighting of the evil doers) and this (the fighting of the Khawaarij as mentioned above).” (Majmu`al Fatawa, 28/ 480-485/518)

It is narrated from Umar b Abdulaziz that he freed himself from the Khawaarij. (Ibn Abi Shaybah) And it is not possible for him to free himself from his ‘brothers’.

The people of knowledge have distinguished between fighting against the Khawaarij and fighting against the people of transgression:

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: “Fighting against the Khawaarij is verified as being something which is commanded and exhorted to. So how can one equalize between what is praised as being something better to abandon and what it praised as doing?! So how can one equalize between fighting the Sahabah who fought against each other at Jamal and Siffin and between fighting Dhu’l-Khuwaysarah at-Tamimi and his likes from the Khawaarij who passed through the deen and the transgressing Haruriyyah? What they said was a type of saying associated with the people of ignorance and clear oppression and the one who has this view becomes like the Rawafid and Mu’tazilah who make takfir and tafsiq of those who fought against each other at Jamal and Siffin as was said by the Khawaarij. RasulAllah (saw) instructed to fight against the Khawaarij before they fight. As for the people of transgression and oppression then Allah said about them, “And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah. And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.” (al-Hujurat 49/9) He did not command to fight against those who began oppression because the in-fighting was not ordered in any case, however if they do fight each other then both sides have to seek rectification. Then if one of the two groups transgress it is fought against, for this reason some of the fuqaha said: the rebels are not to be fought against until they fight, while as for the Khawaarij then RasulAlalh (saw) said about them: wherever you find them kill them because in killing them is a reward on the Day of Judgement.” And he said: “If I were to come across them then I would kill them just as how Aad were killed.” Regarding the distinction between fighting against the Khawaarij and fighting during times of fitnah then Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned several distinctions: (AbdulMajeed al-Mash Abi, Manhaj Ibn Taymiyyah fi Mas’alati Takfir, 316-318)

1. The Sahabah differed over fighting during times of fitnah, but they were all agreed on fighting against the Khawaarij. Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “The Companions of RasulAllah )saw) fought against them along with the leader of the believers, Ali bin Abi Talib and they did not differ over fighting against the Khawaarij as they differed over fighting during the periods of fitnah, Jamal and Siffin, wherein they fell into three groups: those who fought with one side; those who fought with the other side and those who withheld from fighting altogether and sat out. The texts affirmed the accuracy of this (latter) condition.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 3/349)

2. Ali (ra) regretted and grieved for participating in fighting during the Battle of Jamal and Siffin, as for fighting against the Khawaarij then he manifested his pleasure and joy about fighting against them. Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “The text and ijmaa make a distinction between the two, for Ali fought against the Khawaarij based on the text of RasulAllah (saw) and he was joyous over this and none of the Sahabah disputed over this. As for fighting on the day of Siffin then it is apparent that he detested this and regretted participating in it. (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/516)

3. RasulAllah (saw) instructed to fight against the Khawaarij as opposed to fighting during times of fitnah, for RasulAllah (saw) instructed to keep away from this and praised the one who did not get involved. Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “It is found in the Sahih from Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: “A group would break away (from the Ummah) when there would be dissension among the Muslims. Out of the two groups, those closer to the truth will execute them.” (Ahmad, Musnad; Muslim; Abu Dawud; Nasai, al-Kubra) Within this hadith it is affirmed that Ali and his companions were the much closer to the truth than Mu’awiyah and his companions and that the group which broke away do not have the same ruling as the two groups who were fighting each other. For RasulAllah (saw) instructed to fight against that groups which broke away while he (saw) did not instruct to fight against any of the two groups who were fighting each other. Rather it is affirmed from him in the Sahih from the hadith of Abu Bakrah that RasulAllah (saw) said to al-Hasan: “This son of mine is a chief and Allah may make peace between two powerful groups of Muslims through him.” Ahmad, Musnad; Bukhari;Abu Dawud; Tirmidhi; Nasai, al-Mujtaba; Nasai, al-Kubra; Ibn Hibban ) RasulAllah (saw) praised al-Hasan due to Allah making him one who will make peace between two groups of Muslims when he avoided fighting. Al-Hasan chose the more correct position and preserved sanctified blood and stayed out of the matter. So if fighting was something commanded to do then al-Hasan would not have been praised for avoiding what Allah had ordered to abandon and doing what Allah had forbidden.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/513)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Takfir of Khawaarij

There is difference of opinion over making takfir on the Khawaarij, what is well-known is that there are two statements from the ulamaa on this. Imam Nawawi stated: “Qadi Iyad said: al-Marwazi stated: the ulamaa have differed over making takfir of the Khawaarij and said: the issue has almost become the most problematic from all issues.” (Sharh Muslim li’n-Nawawi, 7/160)

Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: “The Ummah is agreed on censuring the Khawaarij and that they have misguidance, they (the Ummah) only dispute regarding making takfir of the Khawaarij and fall into two well-known views within the madhdhab of Malik, Ahmad and also ash-Shafi’i. For this reason there are two aspects within the madhdhab of Ahmad and others: First: there are rebellious transgressors Second: they are kuffar apostates who are allowed to be executed along with any prisoners from them who are caught and the followers of their main leader. Whoever among them is able and repents otherwise they are to be executed, like the apostate.” (Fatawa 28/518)

Ibn Taymiyyah said: “So they are ignorant people who split up the Sunnah and the jamaa'ah due to ignorance.” (Minhaju’s-Sunnah 3/464) He also said: “And the first innovations such as the innovation of the Khawaarij were only due to poor understanding of Qur’an. They did not intend to oppose the Qur’an but they understand from it that which is not from it.” (Fatawa 13/30)

Before fighting against them and making takfir of them, it is a must to establish the hujjah:

Allah (awj) stated: “And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger.” (Isra 17/15). And also said: “Messengers as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that mankind should have no plea against Allah after the (coming of) Messengers” (an-Nisa 4/165).

Indeed Ali ibn Abu Talib (ra) sent Ibn Abbas (ra) to them. So he debated them. As a result many of them repented and returned back with him. It is said that they were 4 thousand in number and Ibnul Kawwa was amongst them. (Ibn Hajar, Fathu’l-Bari, 12/298; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wa’n-Nihayah 10/567) Ali (ra) fought fiercely with them at a place called Nahrawan but only after advising and debating with them and clearly establishing the evidences against them. Ali (ra) debated them as well. So his proof was clearly established upon them. (Mawqif Ahlu sunnah wa jamaa'ah, 1/137) Jaabir Ibn Abdullah (ra) also debate with Khawaarij and establish the hujjah: "Related from Yazid al-Faqir who said, "I used to have an interest in an opinion from amongst the opinions of the Khawaarij. So we went out in a group possessing great number. We wanted to perform the Hajj (pilgrimage), then we went out to the people. He said, 'So we passed by Madinah when Jaabir Ibn Abdullah (ra) was speaking to the people – whilst sitting up against a post – about RasulAllah (saw).' He said, 'So when he mentioned the people of the Hellfire, I said to him, 'O Companion of RasulAllah! What is this that you are speaking about? Allah says: "Indeed, whomsoever You enter into the Fire, indeed, You have disgraced him.", (Aali-'Imran 3/92) And, "Every time they wish to be taken out from there, they will be placed back therein." (as-Sajdah 34/20) So what is this that you are saying?' He said, 'So he said, 'Do you read the Qur'an?' I said, 'Yes!' He said, 'So have you heard about the station (maqaam) of Muhammad (saw), meaning, that in which he will be resurrected?' I said, 'Yes!' He said, 'Indeed, it is the praiseworthy station of Muhammad (saw), with which Allah will take out those whom He will take out.' He said, 'Then he described the placing of the Bridge (as-Siraat) and the passing of the people over it.' He said, 'And I feared that I would memorize that.' He said, 'Not to mention that he alleged that a people will be taken out of there after abiding therein.' He said, 'Meaning, they would be taken out of it as if they were the wood of the ebony tree.' He said, 'So they would enter into a river from amongst the rivers of Paradise. So they would bathe in it. So they would come out as if they were white paper.' So we returned and said, 'Woe to you! Do you hold that the Shaykh would lie upon RasulAllah (saw)?!' So we repented. By Allah, every one of us abandoned the Khawaarij, except one man, or as Abu Nu'aym has stated." (Muslim)

The scholars unanimously agree to the permissibility to fight the Khawaarij whenever they begin challenging and revolting against the leader, opposing the mainstream community of Muslims, and renouncing obedience  but after they’ve been warned. This has been mentioned by Nawawi (Sharh of Sahih Muslim, 7/170) and Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmu’l-Fatawa, 3/282). As for considering the Khawaarij to be disbelievers themselves, some scholars differ about this. There are two different narrations from Ahmad about this, mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmu al-Fatawa, 28/500). And Ibn Hajar went into detail about the issue in “Fathu’l-Bari” by mentioning the various opinions of the scholars and their evidences (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/299-301). al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ali (al-Ibaanah as-Sughraa, 15) took the opinion of the ruling on takfir of them along with a narration from ash-Shafii (Rawdat ut-Talibeen, 10/52) a narration from Imam Malik, (ash-Shifa, 2/1057) a group of Ahl ul-Hadith (al-Mughni, 12/239) and Qurtubi. (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/300)

Those who held the view of takfir is not made of them in some narrations from them were: Imams Ahmad (al-Khallaal, as-Sunnah, 113), Malik (ash-Shifa, 2/1057), a saying from Imam Shaafi’i (al-Umm, 4/3229), Nawawi (Sharh Muslim, 2/50) and the later scholars from the Hanabilah. Also most of the fuqaha and many of the Ahlu’l-Hadith. (al-Mugnee, 12/239) They use as evidence for their view:

Firstly: they say the Shahadah and entered into Islam and this prevents making takfir of them as it would include them with those who do not believe in this. Making tasfiq of them was only due to the fact that they make takfir of the Muslims and make the blood and wealth of the Muslims permissible. This is the view of most of the Ahl ul-Usoul from Ahlu’s-Sunnah.

Hafidh Ibn Hajar stated: “Most of the Ahl ul-Usool from Ahlu’s-Sunnah viewed that the Khawaarij are fussaq and they are ruled has having Islam due to their pronouncing of the Two Statements and practice of the pillars of Islam. Rather tasfiq is made of them due to their making takfir of the Muslims and utilising a corrupt interpretation which leads them to make permissible the blood and wealth of those who oppose them and brand them with kufr and shirk.” (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/314)

Secondly: the Khawaarij do not clearly say kufr even if they say things which lead to kufr due to their false interpretations. However, the ruling of kufr has to have principles and exhaust the preventative factors. Even though the Khawaarij intended to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah they erred in their interpretations. For this reason, when Abdullah ibn Abbas debated them many of them recanted and they rest rebelled.

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah stated: “The Khawaarij opposed the Sunnah which the Qur’an instructs to follow, they also made takfir of the believers who the Qur’an instructs to be loyal to, this is how Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas interpreted this verse, “And He misleads not except the defiantly disobedient, who break the covenant of Allah after contracting it and sever that which Allah has ordered to be joined and cause corruption on earth.” (al-Baqarah 2/ 26-27) They (the Khawaarij) began to follow the unspecific from the Qur’an and thus they interpreted the Qur’an incorrectly without knowledge of the correct meanings from those who are well versed in knowledge; without following the Sunnah and without referring to the Jama’ah of the Muslims who understand the Qur’an.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 13/210)

Thirdly: They practice of the pillars of Islam and maintaining them and the lack of negligence in this regard. The Khawaarij are people of obedience and worship and they held very firmly onto matters of the deen and applying the regulations.

Ibn Abbas described them saying: “I went to a people who I had never seen with such striving (in worship), their hands were like camels and their faces were marked with traces of prostration.”

Fourthly: There is consensus among the Muslim scholars that the Khawaarij are a sect from the Muslim sects and no one has expelled them from this general ascription.

Hafidh Ibn Hajar stated: “al-Khattabi said: The ulamaa have reached consensus that the Khawaarij, with all their misguidance, are a sect from the different Muslim sects and thus it is permissible to marry them and eat the meat they slaughter. Takfir is not to be made of them as long as they adhere to the foundation of Islam. (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/300) Ibn Battal said: “Most of the ulamaa hold that the Khawaarij are not outside of the fold of the Muslims due to RasulAllah’s (saw) saying: “and its Fuqa (the top part of an arrow) to see whether” as this is from doubt and if there is doubt in that then their expulsion from Islam has not occurred. This is because whoever’s Islam is affirmed with certainty is not expelled from Islam except with certainty.” (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/300-301) Imam Nawawi said: “The correct madhdhab to choose is that of the majority and of the Muhaqqiqeen which says: the Khawaarij are not to be made takfir of just like the rest of Ahlu’l-bid'ah.” (Sharh Muslim li’n-Nawawi, 2/50) Imam ash-Shatibi stated: “The Ummah have differed over the takfir of those people of greater innovation, yet what appears to be stronger based upon inspection and taking the narrations into account, is that takfir is not to be made of them. The proof for this is the practice of the Salaf us-Saalih in dealing with them…” (al-’I’tisam, 2/185)

Ibn Qudamah stated: “The Khawaarij are those who make takfir due to sins, they made takfir of Uthman, Ali, Talhah, az-Zubayr and many of the Sahabah. They made their blood and wealth permissible except for those who rebelled along with them. The most apparent statement of the fuqaha from our companions (i.e. madhdhab) is that they are rebels and this is their ruling. This is the view of Abu Hanifah, ash-Shaafi’i, most of the fuqaha and many of the Ahlu’l-Hadith.” (al-Mughni, 8/106)

The view which avoids making takfir of the Khawaarij is the view of Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, he said: “What proves that the Sahabah did not make takfir of the Khawaarij is that the Sahabah used to pray behind them and Abdullah ibn Umar (ra) and other Sahabah used to pray behind Najdah al-Haruri. The Sahabah also used to talk to them and address them as a Muslim would to another Muslim, just as Abdullah ibn Abbas answered Najdah al-Haruri when he asked some questions to him over an issue, the hadith is in Bukhari. Just as Naafi bin al-Azraq answered the well-known issue wherein Naafi discussed with him over some aspects of the Qur’an just as how Muslims would. The biography of the Muslims has demonstrated this and has not shown that the Muslims considered them to be apostates like those who as-Siddiq fought against. This is with the command of RasulAllah (saw) within the authentic ahaadith that they should be fought against and what has been relayed in them being the worst of those executed under the heavens, while the best of those murdered is the one who was murdered by them, as mentioned in the hadith on the authority of Abu Umamah and verified by Tirmidhi and others. This means: there are the worst to the Muslims than others and that there is no one worse against the Muslims, neither the yahud nor the nasara. They strove hard in killing every Muslim who did not agree with them, making their blood and wealth permissible and killing their children, making takfir of them. They held firm to this as a deen due to their sheer and utter ignorance and misguided innovation. Yet with this, the Sahabah, may Allah be pleased with them, and those who succeeded them in goodness, did not make takfir of them or consider them as being apostates. They did not transgress against them in speech or action but rather feared Allah in regards to them and traversed a just way with them.” (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/247)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) made clear that the Sahabah, even though they fought the Khawaarij based on the instruction of RasulAllah (saw) to prevent their evil from the Muslims, did not make takfir of them. Rather, Ali bin Abi Talib held their wealth and honour to be sanctified and did not treat them as the Sahabah treated the other apostates such as Musaylimah and his likes. No one objected to Ali doing this as it was known to be the agreement of the Sahabah that the Khawaarij were not apostates from the deen. (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/241) When they rebelled against Ali (ra) in Harura and rebelled against obedience to the Jama’ah, Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) said to them “Our rights upon you are that we neither prevent you from our masajid nor take you right of the fay’.” (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/241) Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah made clear that Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) did not make takfir of the Khawaarij and mentioned from Tariq bin Shihab that he said: “I was with Ali when the call to fight the people of Nahrawan was given. It was said: Are they Mushrikeen? Ali said: They have fled from Shirk. Then it was said: So are they Munaafiqun? Ali responded: They Munaafiqun do not remember Allah except for a little bit. So then it was asked: So what are they then? Ali answered they are a people who have rebelled against us so we are fighting them.” When Ibn Muljam killed Ali bin Abi Talib, he was not considered to be an apostate to be executed and Ali forbade that he be killed in this way. Ali (ra) said: “Do not kill the man, if I survive and am injured then qisas and if I die then execute him.” (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/245) Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) stated: The statement of Ali (ra) in regards to the Khawaarij indicates that they are not kuffar who have disbelieved in the basis of Islam like apostates, this is well documented with the Imams, such as Ahmad and others. (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/518)

Imam Ahmad mostly used to withhold from making takfir of them, al-Khallal reported in as-Sunnah, with his isnad, saying: “Yusuf bin Musa informed us that Abu Abdullah said to him: do you make takfir of the Khawaarij?  Yusuf said: Maariqah (passers through). He said to him: Are they kuffar? Yusuf said: they pass through (yamriqun) the deen.” (as-Sunnah, 145) al-Khallal also reported with an isnad saying: “Muhammad bin Abi Harun informed us that Ishaq narrated to them that Abu Abdullah asked about the Haruriyyah and the Maariqah (the Khawaarij who broke away) if they are kuffar are not? Ishaq said: relieve me from this and just say what is mentioned in the hadith.” (as-Sunnah, 146)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “As for the Qadariyyah who affirm knowledge, Rawafid who are not extremists, Jahmiyyah and Khawaarij, then two narrations have been reported from Imam Ahmad. Yet his main view is to withhold from making takfir of the Qadariyyah who affirm knowledge and of the Khawaarij, even though he said “I do not know a people more evil than them Khawaarij.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 12/486)

Also from those who withheld from making takfir of them is Abu’l-MaAli AbdulMalik bin Yusuf, Imamu’l-Haramayn, Qadi Iyad said: “Abu’l-MaAli also held this opinion (of withholding) from making takfir of them, may Allah have mercy on them. Within his answers to Abu’l-Muhammad ’AbdulHaq who asked him about and then excused himself from answering it as erring within the matter is difficult. This is because entering a person into the religion and expelling a Muslim from it is serious in the deen.” (ash-Shifa, 2/1058)

al-Baqilani also withheld in the matter, as did al-Ghazali, al-Haafidh said in Fathu’l-Bari, transmitting from al-Qadi Iyad: “al-Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqilani withheld before him and said: the people did not explicitly say kufr, rather they made statements which lead to kufr. Ghazali said in the book at-Tafarruq Bayna’l-Iman wa’z-Zandaqah: What has to be guarded against is being mistaken in takfir and the paths that led to it because it involves making permissible the blood and wealth of those who pray towards to Qiblah and expressly say “La-ilaha illallah, Muhammad ir-RasulAllah”. Being mistaken in leaving a thousand disbelievers in life is lesser than the mistake of shedding Muslim blood.” (Fathu’l-bari, 12/314)
 
And fighting the Khawaarij is in all times, and it is obligatory to repel them, by way of the pen, tongue or sword as they will never cease to emerge until in the midst of the last of them appears the Dajjal. Ibn Rajab said: “So as for the people of innovation and misguidance and whosoever attemps to resemble the scholars whilst he is not from amongst them, then it is permissible to expose their ignorance and to make public their faults in order to warn those who would otherwise take them as examples to be followed.” (al-Farq banyan nasiha wa’t-tayir 33)

It is verified in the Two Sahihs, and within other sources, from RasulAllah (saw) that he obligated fighting against the Khawaarij. Of these ahadith is the one relayed by Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) who said: I heard RasulAllah (saw) say: “A people will emerge at the end of time who will be young in age and foolish minded and will have the speech of the best of creation. Iman will not reach beyond their throats and they will pass through the deen just like an arrow passes through its target, wherever you find them kill them because in killing them is a reward on the Day of Judgement.”

RasulAllah (saw) said about Dhu’l-Khuwaysarah at-Tamimi: “There will arise a people from the progeny of this man, who will recite the Qur’an, but it will not go beyond their throats; they kill the people of Islam and leave the people of idol-worship. They will pass through the deen just like an arrow passes through its target, if I were to come across I would have killed them just as how Aad were killed.”

And in another narration: “I would have killed them just as how Thamud were killed.”

Imam Nawawi (ra) said in regards to the saying of RasulAllah (saw): “If I were to come across them I would have killed them…within their killing is a reward…” This is explicitly clear in regards to the obligation of fighting against the rebellious Khawaarij and this is the ijmaa’ of the Muslims.” (Sharh Muslim li’n-Nawawi, 7/169-170)

These ahadith are clear in fighting against the Khawaarij, Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) stated: “The Khawaarij who broke away are those who RasulAllah (saw) ordered Ali bin Abi Talib, one of the rightly guided Khulafa to fight against. The Imams of the deen from the Sahabah, the Taabi’een and those after them agreed on fighting them.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 3/282)

He also said: “Those who the leader of believers and those with him fought against and who the Salaf and Imams agreed on fighting against, did not dispute on fighting against them as they disputed over the fighting on the Day of the Camel and on Siffeen. During times of fitnah the Sahabah were in three groups: those who fought with Ali (ra); those who were those who he was fighting against and those who sat out of the fighting and did not fight with either of the two camps. As for the Khawaarij then none of the Sahabah were among them and none of the Sahabah forbade fighting against them.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/512-513)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) also said: “The Sahabah and ulamaa have agreed on fighting against them (Khawaarij) because they rebel against all of the Muslims including those who agree with them in their madhdhab. They start war against Muslims by fighting them and their evil is not averted except by fighting against them as their evil is worse than that of the highway robbers. As the highway robbers only want money and if they are given money they do not fight, so they just dishonour some people. As for those Khawaarij, then they fight people who are upon the deen so that the people leave what is affirmed in the Book, Sunnah and the ijmaa of the Sahabah and agree with what they (Khawaarij) have innovated via their false interpretations and corrupted understanding of the Qur’an. So with this, Ali (ra) made clear that the Khawaarij are believers and are neither kuffar nor munaafiqeen.” (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/243-244)

Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) made clear that even though the Sahabah fought against the Khawaarij based on the command of RasulAllah (saw) in order to prevent their evil from the Muslims, they did not make takfir of them, rather Ali bin Abi Talib regarded their wealth  and honours as being sanctified and he did not traverse the way in which the Sahabah dealt with the Murtaddeen (apostates), such as Musaylimah an his likes. No one objected to Ali doing this as it was known to be the agreement of the Sahabah that the Khawaarij were not apostates from the deen. (Minhaaj us-Sunnah, 5/241)

Qadi said: “The ulamaa have concurred that the Khawaarij and their likes from the people of innovation and transgression, that when they rebelled against the Imam and opposed the view of the Jama’ah and broke away – it is obligatory to fight against them after warning them and making excuses for them. Allah says, “…then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah.” (al-Hujurat 49/ 9) However, their prisoners are not to be killed and their wealth is not permissible. As for those of them who do not rebel against obedience (to the leader) and raise up war (against the leader) then they are not to be fought against rather they are to be admonished, likewise those who retract from their innovation and baatil all are not made takfir of. If their innovation was of those who necessitate takfir of them then the regulations for the Murtaddeen are applied to them. As for the rebels who do not make takfir they inherit and can be inherited from. At the time of fighting their blood is permissible…and according to us and the majority (of scholars) it is not permissible to benefit from their riding beats and weapons at the time of war but Abu Hanifah allowed this and Allah knows best.” (Sharh Muslim li’n-Nawawi, 7/170)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said: “The Ummah is agreed on censuring the Khawaarij and that they have misguidance, they (the Ummah) only dispute regarding making takfir of the Khawaarij and fall into two well-known views within the madhdhab of Malik, Ahmad and also ash-Shaafi’i. For this reason there are two aspects within the madhdhab of Ahmad and others: First: there are rebellious transgressors Second: there are kuffar apostates who are allowed to be executed along with any prisoners from them who are caught and the followers of their main leader. Whoever among them is able and repents otherwise they are to be executed, like the apostate.” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/518)

Qurtubi said in al-Mufhim: “The view of making takfir of the Khawaarij as a group who are to be fought against, executed and their wealth taken is a view of a group of Ahl ul-Hadith in regards to taking their wealth. As for the view then it avoids making takfir of the Khawaarij and treats them in the way the people of transgression are treated who have broke off from obedience and began warfare.” (al-Ibaanah as-Sughraa, 152; ash-Shifa, 2/1057)

Some of the people of knowledge use relayed ahadith as evidence for the permissibility of executing the Khawaarij from the outset even if they do not begin war; this is if they manifest their innovation. They likewise use this as evidence for the permissibility of killing those from them who can be killed.

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) stated: “As for killing the one who can be from the Khawaarij, such as the Haruriyyah, Rawafid and the likes then there are two views on this from the fuqaha, which are the two views narrated from Imam Ahmad. It is correct that it is permissible to kill them (during warfare against them).” (Majmua al-Fatawa, 28/499)

Ibn Qudamah (ra) said: “What is correct, inshaa’Allah, is that it is permissible to execute the Khawaarij and dispose of their wounded. This is based on the order of RasulAllah (saw) and the promise of a reward for whoever kills them.” (al-Mughni, 8/107)

The ulamaa of Ahlu’s-sunnah wa’l-jamaa'ah believes that the Khawaarij are the proponents of a corrupt madhhab, and that they have innovated into religion and they have separated from the jamaa'ah of the Muslims. And the scholars have two famous statements concerning takfir of the Khawaarij. (Suyuti, Sharhu sunnah Nisai, 7/85) Some among the ulamaa do not implement takfir upon them. (Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim, 7/170; Ibn Taymiyyah; Minhajus-sunnah, 5/248; al-Manawi, Faydul Qadeer, 3/50; ad-Durarus Saniya, 9/290) However, the companions were agreed upon fighting them. Despite this, they did not declare them to be kafir. (Ibn Taymiyyah; Minhajus-sunnah, 5/248) And they did not fight them until they had spilled blood that was unlawful and raided the wealth of the Muslims. So the Muslims fought them in order to lift off their oppression and injustice. They did not fight with them because they were kafir. So due to this they did not dishonour their female familiy members and they did not take their wealth as booty. (Zayd ibn Fayad, Rawdatun Nadiyya sharhul wasitiyyah, 392)

Imam Abu Bakr al-Ajurri said: “The scholars old and new have not differed about the fact that Khawaarij are an evil people who disobey Allah (swt) and who disobey RasulAllah (saw) even though they may fast, pray and strive hard in worship. So that is of no benefit to them, even though they outwardly display enjoining the good and prohibiting the evil but that does not benefit them because they explain the Qur’an to mean whatever they desire and whatever falsify to the Muslims, Indeed Allah (awj) has warned against them, RasulAllah (saw) has warned against them, the rightly guided caliphs after him have warned against them, the companions and those who followed them in goodness have warned against them.” (ash-shari'ah 31)  

There are many sahih ahadith narrated concerning killing the Khawaarij. RasulAllah (saw) said: “Tuba is for those who kill them (the Khawaarij) or who are killed by them.” (Ahmad; Ibn Sad; Ibn Abi Asim, Sunnah; Lailaki, Sharh usulul i'tiqaad) “They are most evil of creation.” (Muslim) “Whosoever encounters them let him kill them; since there is a reward on the Day of Judgment for the one who kills them.” (Bukhari; Muslim) “The Khawaarij are the dogs of hellfire.” (from Abi Awfa by Tirmidhi; Ibn Maajah; Ahmad; Ibn Asim, as-Sunnah; Abdullah ibn Ahmad b Hanbal, as-Sunnah and from Abu Uthman al-Bahili by Tirmidhi, Abdurrazzaq, al-Musannaf; ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; Tabarani, Mujamul Kabeer; Tabarani, al-Awsat; Tabarari, as-Sagher; Hakim, Mustadrak; Bayhaqi, as-Sunanul Kubra)

After narrating a hadith about the Khawaarij and their signs, Abu Sa’ed Al-Khudri (ra) said: "Twenty or more than twenty of the Companions of RasulAllah narrated to me that Ali was in charge of killing them." (Ahmad, Musnad; Abdullah Ibn Ahmad b Hanbal, as-Sunnah) Ibn Hubairah said concerning the hadith of Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri, “In this hadith is proof that fighting the Khawaarij comes before fighting the pagans, mushrikeen. And the wisdom in that is that in fighting against them is a preservation of the capital of Islam, whereas in fighting the people of Shirk there is the seeking of increase (in capital). So preserving the capital comes first.” (Fathu’l-Bari 12/301)

Asim bin Shumaikh said, “So I saw him (meaning Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri who reported the hadith about the killing of the Khawaarij) after he had grown old and when his hands began to tremble, saying, ‘Fighting them (meaning the Khawaarij) is greater to me than fighting an equal number of the Turks.” (Ibn Abi Shaybah 15/305; Ahmad, Musnad 3/33)

RasulAllah (saw) said, “A group will appear reciting the Qur’an, it will not pass beyond their throats, every time a group appears, it is to be cut off, until the Dajjal appears within them”. (Ibn Maajah and it is Hasan)

Az-Zarqani said: “Ismail Qadhi said, Malik was of the opinion of killing the Khawaarij, but he was of the opinion that they are given the chance to repent in hopes that they will return to the Truth, then if they transgress, they are killed due to their making corruption, not due to their kufr. And this is the saying of all of the Fuqaha who are of the opinion of them being killed and given a chance to repent.” (Sharh of Muwatta Malik, 2/26)

Shaikhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, with regard to a helpless or weak individual of the Khawaarij and the Rawafidah (Twelver Shia), said: “It is narrated on the authority of Ali and Umar as well as the consensus of the scholars of Islam that these two individuals should also be killed. Some scholars argue about the individual that is not fighting. However, they all agree that to kill them in a group as a group protecting themselves with the sword is allowed. This is because fighting is more general than killing.” (Majmua Fatawa, 28/476-479)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The evidence that in the Hadith: (good) intention is not taken under consideration in irtidad

Hafidh Ibn Hajar continues to say: “One of those who is inclined towards these mentioned issues is Tabari with his attitude in the book Tahzib. After he narrates the ahadith regarding the matter he states: There is a refutation to those who state after deserving to be of ahl Qiblah as long as no one intends it, they will not exit Islam. Surely this claim invalidates the expressions mentioned in the hadith: “They will utter haqq and recite the Qur’an however they will exit Islam and nothing from it will stick to them. As known other than their mistaken ta'weel of the ayah in the Qur’an in unintended meanings, they did not intend to acquire offense of seeing halaal the blood and property of the Muslim. With a sahih sanad, Ibn Abbas narrated the following: Beside him (Ibn Abbas) the Khawaarij and what they said while they read the Qur’an had been mentioned and he (Ibn Abbas) said: “They believe in the muhkam however they are destroyed with mutashabih.” Besides the mentioned ahadith the command they need to be killed is confirmed with this hadith narrated by Ibn Abbas: "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims (jamaa'ah)." (Bukhari) In al-Mufhim, Qurtubi states: The view of making takfir of them is strengthened with the hadith narrated by Abu Said. –the hadith which is mentioned in the next bab- surely the dhahir meaning of the hadith is that they had left the fold of Islam without anything left from it. Just like the arrow hits and goes through the pray due to its speed and the strength of the shooter. Likewise on the arrow there will be no trace left from the pray. He had pointed this out with this statement: “He would then see at its feathers and he would find nothing sticking to them (as the arrow would pass so quickly that nothing would stick to it) neither excrement nor blood.” The Author of “Shifa” stated: “There is also this “We will for certain make takfir of everyone who compares the ummah to dalalah or who makes a statement which leads to making takfir of the sahabah.” Likewise the author of “ar-Rawda” had quoted and affirmed this statement from him in the riddah section. Most of the ahl sunnah usul scholars had accepted that the Khawaarij are fasiq however because they uttered the shahadatayn and performed the Arkan (requirements) of Islam they believed that the hukm of Islam was prevailing upon them.  They had made takfir of the Muslim with fasid ta'weel and for this reason have become fasiq and this has dragged them to believe the blood and property of their opponent to be halaal, and make shahadah they are mushrik and kafir. Khattabi stated: “The scholars of the Muslimeen had made ijmaa of this; with their dalalah the Khawaarij are a sect from the sects of the Muslimeen. Likewise permission had been given to marry them and eat their slaughter. They believed as long as they continued to embrace the bases of Islam they (the Khawaarij) could not be made takfir of.” Iyad stated: This matter had almost become the most difficult matter to the mutakallim and others. When Abdulhaq asked Imam Abu Maali he explained it like this: ‘Surely entering a kafir into deen and a Muslim being excluded from it is a great matter in deen.’ Likewise Qadi Abu Bakr al Bakkilanee had paused at this before and said ‘these men had not performed any open kufr. They may have used words which paved the way for kufr.’ In his work ‘The difference between Iman and Zindeeq’ Ghazali states: ‘The necessary thing is to avoid takfir as opportunity is found. Surely it is a mistake to make the blood halaal of an individual who utters tawhid and performs salah. Mistakenly leaving (abandoning killing) a thousand kafir alive is lesser a mistake than shedding the blood of even one Muslim.’ There is also this statement which those who do not make takfir of them rely on. It is the third hadith of the matter which after describing them exiting deen he (saw) states: “The archer looks at his arrow, at its iron head and glances at its end (which he held) in the tip of his fingers to see whether it had any stain of blood.” Ibn Battal states: ‘The majority had said the Khawaarij are not outside of the extent of being Muslim (Islam). The reason is in the hadith ‘fawqa tamarra’ he glances at its end (which he held) in the tip of his fingers to see whether it had any stain of blood) and ‘tamarra’ glancing contains doubt. In this matter when doubt is present against them they can’t be given the hukm they have exited deen. The reason is with whomever the agreement of Islam has been established it is fundamental that they exit it with certainty.’ Surely Ali was asked whether the people of the river are kafir or not. He replied: They escaped from kufr. I will say if this is stable from Ali in this case it will be ascribed to Ali to not have been informed of the belief which necessitates takfir of those who make takfir of them. Likewise him taking the statement ‘yatamaara fil fawqati’ ‘he glances at its end (which he held) in the tip of his fingers to see whether it had any stain of blood)’ as evidence is also debatable. The reason is that in some of the narrations of the mentioned hadith this had been pointed out -also this will be mentioned later- that “It had not been able to do anything to it” and in some ‘looks for stain of blood’ the method of reconciling these is: He had hesitated whether there had been anything on it or not. Then, it had been understood that nothing had stuck to the arrow, as there had been nothing on it, no trace was left on it. Fundamentally it is possible to ascribe the ikhtilaaf that the individuals among them are diverse. In this case the word ‘yatamara’ in his statement could refer that on some of them a trace of Islam could be left. In al-Mufhim Qurtubi states ‘in the hadith making takfir of them is much clear.’ Likewise building upon the idea of making takfir of them they are fought with and their properties are taken from them. Fundamentally this is the view of a group among the ahli hadith regarding the properties of the Khawaarij. According to the view that opposes making takfir of them, the hukm carried out for the baghiy will be applied to them. They will be fought when they rebel. There has also been ikhtilaaf in the matter, will the person be killed after his tawbah who among them embraces their bid'ah and tries to spread this (bid'ah) or will he need to try and show his effort in rejecting his bid'ah; just as there is ikhtilaaf in their takfir. The gate of takfir is a dangerous gate. There will be nothing left to evaluate with peace…In this it is also mabni that there is the factor of those Muslim who exit Islam without the intention of leaving deen and those who exited deen without the intention to choose another deen other than Islam. Besides this, surely the Khawaarij are the most evil among the sects of bid'ah from the ummah of Muhammad, the Jews and the Christians. Of course this last matter is certainly mabni for the idea of their takfir.” (Fath'ul-Bari, Bab'ur-riddah, 12/295-313)

These are with absolute certainty; absolute evidences regarding a sect of people among the ummah. These individuals are at the summit of effort in ibadah, they have reached such degree that when the sahabah performed salah beside them they’d see their salah next to their salah, their recitation next to their recitation, their sawm next to their sawm as worthless. They narrate this from the most khair among the creations. Moreover these were mujtahid qurra (those who are occupied with the Qur’an) individuals who went to Jihaad with Ali (ra) in the path of Allah. In ibadaah while they had been in this sublime position although the Qur’an they recited was in their favor they accounted it was against them. For this reason they fell in a dangerous and vile position. Their calamity was ignorance and fasid ta'weel which was not fitting.

Ibn Kathir said: “I say this group of people is from the strangest type of children of Adam (as). So how free from all imperfection is the One who varied His creation as He willed and initiated with His magnificent degree. And what is better than what some of the salaf used to say concerning the Khawaarij, that they are mentioned in the statement of Allah (awj): “Say: ‘Shall we tell you of those who lose most in respect of their deeds? Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life, while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works?’ They are those who deny the Signs of their Lord and the fact of their having to meet Him (in the Hereafter): vain will be their works, nor shall We, on the Day of Judgment, give them any weight.” (al-Kahf 18/103-105) So the intended meaning is that these misguided ignoramuses and these criminals in terms of statements and actions have united their view that of the Khawaarij whilst they are in the midst of Muslims. And they agreed to travel to the cities in order to overtake the people and fortify the cities and then to send out delegations to their brothers and followers from amongst those who are upon their opinion and madhhab. These are from the people of Basrah and other than them, so they agreed upon this and their unity was based on upon this. So Zayd ibn Husayn at-Tai said about them: ‘Indeed the cities can not be overtaken, since they have armies that you can not overpower and they will prevent you from them. However arrange to meet your brothers at the bridge of Jawfaa. And do not come from Kufah in groups but come out of it one by one so that you do not rouse suspicious.’ So they wrote a general letter to whomsoever was upon their madhhab and methodology from the people of Basrah and other than them. So in the letter, they mentioned to them to meet at the river so that they may be one hand against the people. Then they come out, pulling out one by one so that no one would know about them. So he prevented them from khuruj. So they came out in the midst of fathers, mothers, maternal uncles and maternal aunts and they separated the ties of kinship. They believed, due to their ignorance lack of knowledge and intellect that the Lord of the heavens and the earth would be pleased with this affair. So they did not know that this was from the greatest of major sins, disasters and offenses. This was from that which was made to look to beautiful to them by Iblis an accursed devil who was banished from the heavens, who raised enmity for our father Adam (as) then to his children for as long as their souls inhabit their bodies. And Allah is the One Who is asked to protect us from him, by His might and power. Indeed He answers the invocations.” (al-Bidaya wa’n-nihaya 7/228)

These nass from the ulamaa put forth the following:

Surely their sole ignorance and mistaken ta'weel of the ayah in the Qur’an in an unintended way, lead them to this disastrous position. When it it's like this, they still believe they are the carriers of the Qur’an and believe they exalt its flag. According to their claims they were fighting with murtad individuals who had exited the hakimiyyah of the Qur’an. For this reason they were sacrificing their souls, lives and properties for the sake of this belief. RasulAllah (saw) had surely said the most correct regarding them. They’ll read the Qur’an although it is against them they believed it gave them acknowledgment. Whereas clear narrations have come which prove they exit Islam without a remnant left from it. Just like the strength of the arrow which shoots through its pray without having anything left on it; the ummah in complete had agreed that they are upon dalalah and that they should be condemned. However there is ikhtilaaf among them regarding the issue of the Khawaarij being made takfir of or not.

Ibn Taymiyyah: “So the ummah has agreed upon rebuking the Khawaarij and declaring them misguided. They have only differed with regards to performing takfir upon them. So there are two famous statements in the madhhab of Malik, Ahmad and Shafii as well. They differed with regards to the kufr of the Khawaarij.” (Fatawa 28/518) Khawaarij are misguided people and it is befitting that they be fought and killed until not a single one of them remains amongst the ummah because their harm is great and their evil is severe.

The difference opinion over the hukm of Khawaarij among the ulamaa is based on the deviation of Khawaarij on the furu of deen and not in the asluddeen. Mainly Khawaarij groups are classified as people of bid'ah, but their bid'ah does not cause them to go out of the religion from asluddeen. And there is no different opinion among the ulamaa about al-Ajaridah; a sect of Khawaarij who deny Surah Yusuf and label it a love story, in addition to the denial of some other verses in the Qur’an. Another sect of Khawaarij, Yazidiyya; who claimed that there will be another prophet after RasulAllah (saw) or Maymuniyya; is a sect of Khawaarij who reject some types of the prohibited marriages. These Khawaarij are out of the fold of Islam and classified as complete kuffar (non-Muslims), as they deny verses from the Book of Allah and their kufr is in the asluddeen. (Bagdadi, al-Farq bayn’al-Firaq, 168-170)

Ibn Taymiyyah said, “So the words of Ali and others besides him concerning the Khawaarij necessitates that they are not kuffar like the murtadeen from the basis of Islam, and this is what was clearly stated from the Imams, like Ahmad and others besides him.” (Majmu al-Fatawa 28/518)

Shaykhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said, “And the way, seerah, of the Muslims has never ceased upon this (methodology). They did not declare them (i.e. the Khawaarij) to be apostates like those whom as-Siddiq (ra) fought against. And this despite the command of RasulAllah (saw) to fight against them, as occurs in the authentic hadiths, and also despite what has been reported about them in the Hadith of Abu Umamah, collected by Tirmidhi and others that they are “the most evil of those who are killed under the sky and how excellent is the one killed by them”. Meaning that they are more harmful to the Muslims than others, for there are none which are more harmful to the Muslims than them, neither the Jews and nor the Christians. For they strived to kill every Muslim who did not agree with their view , declaring the blood of the Muslims, their wealth, and the slaying of their children to be lawful, while making takfir of them. And they considered this to be worship, due to their ignorance and their innovation that caused to stray…” (Minhaj us-Sunnah 5/248)

Ibn Hajar said, “Most of the people of usuol from Ahlu’s-Sunnah took the opinion that the Khawaarij are fussaq and that the rulings of Islam are implemented upon them due to them saying the Shahadatayn and their diligence in the pillars of Islam, but that they only fell into fisq by their declaring takfir upon the Muslims, using as evidence a false ta’wil, and that lead them to permitting the blood of those who contradict them, as well as their wealth, and them bearing witness upon them with kufr and shirk. And Khattabi said, ‘The scholars of the Muslims have formed consensus upon that the Khawaarij, despite their misguidance, are a sect from the sects of the Muslims, and they permitted the marrying of them, the eating of their slaughter and that they do not disbelieve as long as they hold on to the root of Islam.” (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/300)

Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned that no narrations from the Companions have been recorded mentioning they were disbelievers. None of the Companions used to declare them to be disbelievers, neither Ali nor any other Companion. Instead, they judged them as oppressive Muslim transgressors. (Majmu’l-Fatawa, 3/282; 5/247; 7/217)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Evidences regarding the Khawaarij being kafir

Surely a great number of the muhaqqiq imams have clarified them to be kafir. For example those like the imam of the muhaddith Bukhari, the Shaykh of the Mufassir Tabari also Subki, Abu Bakr al Arabi and Rafii. Qurtubi stated: Surely in the hadith the view of them being made takfir of is much evident. Let alone the dhahir of the hadith narrated by Abu Said shows that he also saw them as kafir. This is the most known view of Malik, Ahmad and Shafii. Likewise the evidence of the nass strengthens and supports this view. The evidence of the other group of scholars do not have any support other than making ta'weel of the nass. Likewise regarding this ta'weel, no evidence is considered. Let alone the dhahir of the nass also rejects this. As much as it is understood, these scholars have found making takfir of them as a mistake. The reason is the Khawaarij embrace the asl of Islam. For example Abu Sulaiman Al Khattabi is one of them. On the other hand there is no ikhtilaaf that the one who abrogates anything from the asl of deen will exit the fold of Islam. In fact the hukm of Islam is made stable only with the assumption that asl of deen is present, when this is abrogated, without debate, the hukm of murtad will be given. This matter had been mentioned before.

The opposing ulamaa had used the statement of RasulAllah that ‘the shooter will (be doubtful of his shot and) glance at it’ as evidence. Hafidh replies to this and says in the other narrations “nothing had stuck to it from the flesh and blood” these will be brought together as such: At the beginning there had been doubt, after viewed very well, the person who glances is convinced nothing is on it. Also they had used as evidence “from my ummah” which are in some of the narrations. Hafidh replies to this as “Surely what had been meant in the statement ‘in this nation’ is the nation who had shown compliance. With the narration ‘from my ummah’ the ummah who showed compliance had been meant or it is possible that with ‘from my ummah’ their era had been meant.

Likewise the ta'weel of the ulamaa to this narration of this statement also carries this meaning: “They would pass clean through their religion/Islam” What had been meant here is obedience to the imam. This ta'weel rejects the narration which refers they will exit deen. Also when Ali (ra) had been asked about the Khawaarij their use of the statement ‘they escaped from kufr’ (Ibn Kathir, Bidaya wan Nihayah) as evidence is also like this. The answer is as Hafidh said: Surely if this riwayah is stable from Ali, it will be ascribed that Ali did not know of their kufr. Or he may have said this when they (Khawaarij) first appeared prior to them making takfir of the ummah in complete.   

Fundamentally ta'weel can only be considered correct if there is evidence or a reason which may take us away from the dhahir meaning of the nass. Now in the riwayah mentioned here, this is not under consideration. On the contrary these have come by stabilising and they strengthen the dhahir (apparent) meaning. Likewise the Prophet (saw) stated: “arise in this nation”, “they would pass through the religion as an arrow goes through the prey”, “as the arrow would pass so quickly that nothing would stick to it neither excrement nor blood.” “They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone” Whereas as it is known, the Qur’an is a hujjah in favor of the Muslim and not against them. Salah will not be accepted only by the kafir or if some of its necessities or arkaan are missing or due to actions which will nullify it. Other than these there is nothing left but kufr. There is this narration from the Prophet (saw) also said: “they would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey, and they would never come back to it.” It is known that if they had been included then in this case there would be no meaning to his (saw) statement: “and they would never come back to it.” Likewise “They state the truth with their tongue, but it does not go beyond this part of their bodies (and the narrator pointed towards his throat).” This shows that the heart becomes abstract from iman. As known for the health of Islam, iman of the heart is necessary. It is the sole means of salvation from the punishment of dunya and akhirah. Also there are the following words of the Prophet (saw): “They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures.”; “The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.”; “They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures”; “The most hateful among the creation of Allah” and “The most evil of the people to be slayed beneath the sky and on the face of earth”.

Surely these narrations are clear in means of their kufr. Let alone that which is said about them “They would be the worst among the creation and the creatures.”; “The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.”; “They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures”; “The most hateful among the creation of Allah” and “The most evil of the people to be slayed beneath the sky and on the face of earth” are known in certainty to be valid only for the kafir.

If it is said: These riwayah are absolute and all of these should be ascribed to the narrations which include “the most evil among my ummah”. This will be understood as the most evil among the Muslim. As necessarily known by shari'ah, surely some groups among the ummah have fallen into the filth of shirk, irtidad and returning to the deen of their ancestors. This situation has been mentioned in the following ayah: “Did ye reject Faith after accepting it?” (Al-i Imran 3/106) “Make ye no excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it.” (at-Tawbah 9/66) “We appointed the Qiblah to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger from those who would turn on their heels (From the Faith).” (al-Baqarah 2/143)

Also this hadith mentioned by Bukhari: "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round Dhi-al-Khalasa." (Fathu’l-Bari 13/82; Bukhari) Ibn Hajar said: Also in the hadith of Thawban (ra) related by Muslim and Ahmad it is stated that RasulAllah (saw) said: “Day will not come until a section of my ummah will have followed the polytheists and begun to worship idols.” (Fath'ul-Bari, 13/81) These ahadith strengthens Hafidh uniting the narrations “from this ummah” and “in this ummah”. Surely the statement “from this ummah” is absolute. With this either their past status will be taken under consideration or they have only been an ummah which dawah had been directed and not an ummah who had complied with. The reason is the Prophet (saw) states: “Until a section of my ummah will have followed the polytheists.” These had been people from the ummah. Moreover from the ummah that had accepted/complied. However, this had been their state prior to joining the mushrikeen. Only after they had joined (the mushrik) they are not from them (the Muslim) any longer. However both after they had joined and prior to it they had been among the dawah ummah. Likewise the riddah incident which took place after the death of the Nabi (saw) is also among this group.

From what had been explained we understand with certainty that surely the one who is addicted to this disaster and makes irtidad will this way be among those who join the mushrikeen who are also from among the ummah. In this sense the Khawaarij being the most evil among the ummah and the most disliked by Allah shows evidence to their kufr.

Likewise the Prophet (saw) saying I would destroy them like Ad- Samud reminds the truth of noth of these being tribes which had died upon kufr and for this reason they had been destroyed. It is also for this reason that he says: “until the arrow returns to its place, they will not return to Islam.” There is also the situation that the rawi of the hadith stating this ayah had been revealed for this purpose and Sarahsee in his narration stating the ayah had been revealed regarding them: “And among them are some who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of the (distribution of) alms…” (at- Tawbah 9/58)

Now it is clear that the cursed individual who objected to the distribution of the Nabi (saw) had made irtidad. Therefore as this ayah is regarding him, it also comprises his partisans because they are equivalent to him in kufr. For this reason in the hadith narrated by Sarahsee it had been said it is revealed regarding them. This understanding shows that Abu Said had seen them as kafir also because along with those who fell into kufr and irtidad at Zulhuwaysira are included in the ayah; he states the hukm of the ayah also comprises them (the Khawaarij).

The hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad and Abu Dawud from Abu Said also shows this: One of the narrator of the hadith, Asim bin Shumaikh said: “I saw Abu Sa’ed when his hand began tremble saying ‘Fighting them (Khawaarij) is greater to me than fighting an equal number of the Turks’.” (Ibn Abi Shaybah, 15/305; Ahmad, Musnad 3/33; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wa’n-Nihaya 7/299)

Likewise the example given regarding them also confirms their kufr. Here the arrow due to the strength and speed of its shooter, shoots through its prey without anything from the pray sticking to it. As the arrow passes though the rumen and organs, the Khawaarij pass through Islam without having anything sticking to them. And as the arrow does not return back likewise they do not return back to Islam either.

Those who hold the opinion of making takfir of Khawaarij use the following as a proof:

Firstly: the use the ahadith about Khawaarij, such as the hadith from Suwayd bin Ghaflah that Ali (ra) said: “A people will emerge at the end of time who will be young in age and foolish minded and will have the speech of the best of creation. Iman will not reach beyond their throats and they will pass through the deen just like an arrow passes through its target, wherever you find them kill them because in killing them is a reward on the Day of Judgement.” And in another narration: “I would have killed them just as how Aad were killed.” (Bukhari; Muslim; Abu Dawud; Nasai) And in another narration: “I would kill them just as how Thamood were killed.” (Bukhari; Muslim)

They also use the hadith of Dhu’l-Khuwaysarah wherein RasulAllah (saw) said: “This one and his companions recite the Qur’an yet it does not reach beyond their throats, and they will pass through it just like an arrow passes through its target.” (Muslim; Ahmad, Musnad)

They also use as a proof the saying of RasulAllah (saw) regarding the Khawaarij: “They are the worst of creation…” (Ahmad, Musnad; Muslim; Nasai, al-Kubra; Ibn Hibban)

Imam Nawawi said: “Within these ahadith is evidence to whoever makes takfir of the Khawaarij.” (Sharh Muslim, 7/160) Hafidh Ibn Hajar said: With this, Qadi Abu Bakr bin al-Arabi expressed in Sharh at-Tirmidhi that: “It is correct that they are kuffar based on the saying of RasulAllah (saw): “They pass through Islam” and the Prophet’s saying: “I would kill them just as how Aad were killed” and in another wording: “Thamood.” Both of these were destroyed due to their kufr. RasulAllah (saw) also said “They are the worst of creation” (Muslim; Ibn Hibban) and this is not used to describe anyone except kuffar. RasulAllah (saw) also said: “They are the most hated creation with Allah.” So they ruled with kufr and eternity in the hellfire of all those who oppose their belief, while they were the most deserving of it all.” (Ahmad; Bukhari; Muslim; Ibn Maajah)

Secondly: They use as a proof what was reported by Abu Salamah and Ataa bin Yasaar that they went to Abu Sa’ed al-Khudri (ra) and asked him about the Haruriyyah and said: “Did RasulAllah (saw) say anything about them?” Abu Sa’ed said: “I do not know what Al-Haruriyyah is, but I heard RasulAllah saying “There will appear in this nation…” - he did not say: “From this nation” – “…a group of people (apparently righteous) that you will consider your prayers as deficient compared to their prayers. They will recite the Qur’an but it will not reach beyond their throats and will pass through the deen as arrow darts through its target. The archer will look at his arrow and its Nasl at its Risaf and its Fuqa to see whether it is blood-stained or not (i.e. they will have not even a trace of Islam in them).” Hafidh Ibn Hajar said regarding “There will appear in this nation…” - he did not say: “From this nation”: This indicates the fiqh of the Sahabah and their…of words and it also indicates from Abu Sa’ed takfir of the Khawaarij and that they are not from this Ummah.” (Fathu’l-Bari, 12/289)

Thirdly: the ulamaa make takfir of them: Those who make takfir of them are as-Subki, Hafidh said: “From those later Imams who incline to this view (of making takfir of the Khawaarij) are Shaykh Taqiyuddin as-Subki who mentioned this in his Fatawa. He based his argument of the kufr of the Khawaarij and the extremist Rawafid on the fact that they make takfir of the Companions. This is due to their denial (takdhib) of the Prophet’s testimony that the Companions are in Paradise. As-Subki stated in his Fatawa: this is a correct proof (of the kufr of the Khawaarij and Rawafid). This is also what Qurtubi said in al-Mufhim: “The view that takfir is to be made of the Khawaarij is manifest in the hadith, based on the view of making takfir of them is that they are to be fought against, executed and their wealth is to be taken, this is a view of a group of scholars from Ahlu’l-Hadith. There is also a view which does not make takfir of them and that rather they are to be treated as rebels if they break off and cause war.”

This indicates that the ruling on them is not fixed even if one holds that it is better to withhold from making takfir of them based on the saying: the issue of takfir is dangerous. Those who also view that takfir is to be made of them are al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Ali, also there are narrations from Imams Shaafi’i and Malik and a view from a group of Ahlu’l-Hadith. (al-Ibaanah as-Sughraa, 152; ash-Shifa, 2/1057; al-Mughni, 12/239)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

The reasons for making takfir of the Khawaarij

The disaster that dragged this group into kufr and its defect (Allahu Alim) is their making takfir of the sahabah. The reason is because this situation necessitates them being condemned in the things they narrated in the context of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Is not the shahadah of the fasiq rejected; than the shahadah of the kafir is much rejected.

In the tafsir of the following ayah “O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth.” (al-Hujurat 49/6) Abu Bakr ibn al Arabi stated: the second issue; whosoever fisq is stable, his shahadah regarding risalah will be baatil with ijmaa. The reason is, risalah is trust and fisq is indication that invalidates it. (Ahkam'ul Qur'an, 4/1715)

Nevertheless their takfir of the sahabah at the same time will necessitate rejecting the Qur’an. Let alone, from the Prophet (saw) it has been stabilized that they were praised and those notable among them have been given the good news of jannah. Now in the risalah it is known that the commands and restrictions will not be invalidated. Essentially in absolute sense the most dangerous of this is that their takfir of the sahabah necessitates their imputation in regards to what they narrated from the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Qadi Iyad stated: This way we will certainly make takfir of those who state the ummah is in dalalah, and like the al Kamiliyyah from among the Rafidhi who claim the entire ummah is kafir for different reasons such as the entire ummah after the Prophet (saw), those who did not present khilafah to Ali and Ali not surpassing in khilafah and besides this, him not requesting his right in being presented as khilafah; similarly those who make claims which refer to making takfir of the entire sahabah. The reason is they will have invalidated the entire shari'ah with their mentioned claims. It is such that according to this claim, when those who narrate it become kafir, his and the narration of the Qur'an will end completely. Likewise (Allahu Alam) Imam Malik had pointed this out with one of his views when he had said those who make takfir of the sahabah will be killed.” (Shifa, 5/ 427-428)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Revile towards the sahabah will indicate kufr

While Ibn Taymiyyah describes reviling, he stated: “Revile is the statement which is intended to degrade and to belittle. It is the statement which expresses the meaning of curse, disgrace and other words which express swearing, in the minds of people amongst different aqidah. This is the indication of the ayah of Allah: “Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance.” (al-Anam 6/108) Reviling is the worst statement of which the tongue utters. When it comes to the statements which are accepted as aqidah and seen as the truth and just by some and deemed as there is no degrading nor condemning in it; however it has (degradation & condemnation) in reality and according to its ruling, is also kufr and the doer is either a murtad who exposes his irtidad or a munafiq who hides his nifaq.”  (as-sarimu’l-Maslul, 556)

In the tafsir of the following ayah “like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them” (al-Fath 48/29) Qurtubi states: “The fifth: Abu Urwa Az-Zubayri narrated from the son of Zubayr: we were with Malik ibn Anas. Before him they mentioned a man who belittles the sahabah upon this Malik recited this ayah: “Muhammad is RasulAllah” until up to “like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29) Malik continued to say: Whoever feeds hostility in his heart towards one among the ashab of RasulAllah (saw) surely he will be directed to this ayah. Hatib Abu Bakr had narrated this.”   

Surely Malik had said the correct thing, and hit the target with his ta'weel. Whoever belittles or in his narrations condemns one of them (the sahabah) surely he will have rejected what Rabbil Alameen had said and will have invalidated the signs of the Muslim (Islam). Allah informs us: “Muhammad is RasulAllah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure.” (al-Fath 48/29) and “Allah's Good Pleasure was on the Believers when they swore Fealty to thee under the Tree.” (al-Fath 48/18) and other similar ayahs which include praising them and shahadah to their honesty and salvation: “Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah.” (Ahzab 33/23)

“(Some part is due) to the indigent Muhajirs, those who were expelled from their homes and their property, while seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure, and aiding Allah and His Messenger: such are indeed the sincere ones: But those who before them, had homes (in madinah) and had adopted the Faith,- show their affection to such as came to them for refuge, and entertain no desire in their hearts for things given to the (latter), but give them preference over themselves, even though poverty was their (own lot). And those saved from the covetousness of their own souls,- they are the ones that achieve prosperity.” (al-Hashr 59/8-9)

All of these show us that Allah is surely aware of their situation and their intentions… (After narrating some hadith he continues) Fundamentally there are many hadith in this sense. For this reason a situation regarding one of them as such should be avoided. 

For instance like the one who condemns deen –and says-: ‘The surah al-Falaq and surah an-Naas (Muawizatayn) are not from the Qur’an. Let alone there is no stable proof from RasulAllah (saw) and other than Ukba ibn Amr included in the chain of revelation, there is no sahih hadith. Ukba ibn Amr is weak and there has not been anyone to give his consent. For this reason his narration is invalid.’ This is a refutation to what we had mentioned from the Book and Sunnah, in addition it is invalidating completely what the sahabah had narrated to us as deen. Surely Ukba ibn Amr ibn Isa al Juhayni is one among those who had narrated the shari'ah to us in the Sahihayn of Bukhari and Muslim and in others. Above all, he is also among those who Allah had praised, attributed and glorified and with mercy promised great ajr. According to this, whoever attributes him or one of the sahabah with lies (fabrication) he will have left the shari'ah, it will mean that he invalidates the Qur’an and condemns RasulAllah”   

Ibn Kathir states: “like a seed which sends forth its shoot (Shat`ah) its shoot or branch, (then makes it strong,) able to stand on its own, (and becomes thick), youthful and long, (and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers,) such is the parable that describes the Companions of RasulAllah. They gave the Messenger aid, support and victory, just as the shoot hardens the plant, that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Relying on this Ayah, Imam Malik stated that the Rawafid are disbelievers because they hate the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them (the sahabah) all. Malik said, "The Companions enrage them, and according to this Ayah, he who is enraged by the Companions is a disbeliever.'' Several scholars agreed with Malik's opinion, may Allah be pleased with them. There are numerous Hadiths mentioning the virtues of the Companions and prohibiting the criticism on their mistakes. It is sufficient that Allah (jj) has praised them and declared that He is pleased with them. Allah (awj) said: Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds, forgiveness) for their sins (and a mighty reward) a generous reward and honorable provisions. Certainly, Allah's promise is true and shall come to pass and will never be broken or changed. Surely, all those who follow the guidance of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, will be similar to them. However, the Companions have the better virtue, the obvious lead and the perfection in character, on account of which none among this Ummah will be able to attain their level. May Allah be pleased with them and make them pleased. May He place them in the gardens of Al-Firdaws, and make it their abode, and He indeed has done all of that. In his Sahih, Muslim recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that RasulAllah said, Do not abuse my Companions, for by the One in Whose Hand is my soul! If one of you spends the amount of Uhud in gold, that amount will never reach the level of one of them spending a Mudd half of it.” (Tafsir)

Baghawi interprets the ayah as follows: “As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29) meaning he increased and strengthened them so that they will be means of hatred to the kuffar. Malik ibn Anas said: Whoever feels ill will towards the ashab of RasulAllah will be included in the scope of this ayah.

In the tafsir of the ayah Imam Tabari stated: “like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29) Meaning the sprout shooting out and strengthening, it erecting over its stem and with its all the beauty of the plant with its growth and maturing will please those who planted it “As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29) Meaning the situation of Muhammad (saw) and his friends and the increase in their numbers is like this. It is such that the increased, enlarged and like this crop they developed and grew. Allah first clarifies their attribute then states the kuffar will rage at them.” (Tafsir)

In As Sarim ul Maslul Ibn Taymiyyah stated: "A fuqaha group among the ahl kufah and others informed a certain view regarding those who curse the sahabah being killed and that the Rafidhi are kafir. When Firyabi (Muhammad ibn Yusuf) was asked about a (person) which insulted Abu Bakr.  (Firyabi) replied: "Kafir". Then person asked: "Should we pray over him (his body)?". (Firyabi) replied: "No". Man asked: "What should we do? He used to say "La-ilaha illallah". Firyabi replied: "Don't touch him with hands, take two sticks and push him into the grave. Ahmad ibn Yunus had said: If a Jew and a Rafidhi are to slaughter a sheep each, I will eat the slaughter of the Jew but not the slaughter of the Rafidhi. The reason is he (the Rafidhi) is a murtad who had left Islam. Abu Bakr ibn Hani said: The slaughter of the Rafidhi and the Qadari can not be eaten.  As known, the slaughter of the ahl kitab is eaten but the slaughter of a murtad is not. Now these people are submitted to the treatment of Murtad. The ahl Dhimmi utter their own deen. Likewise for this reason jizya is taken from them. Likewise among the elite of the imams of kufah Abdullah b. Idris said: the rafidhi does not have the right of shufa this is only valid for the Muslim. (As-Saarimul-Maslul, 504)

“A group from among our friends had declared the kufr regarding those Khawaarij who believed it was necessary to distance from Ali and Uthman, and (they made takfir on) the Rafidhi who believed in cursing the entire sahabah -they (Rafidhi) made takfir of the sahabah and accounted them deviated-. In the work al Mukni Abu Bakr AbdulAziz stated: When it comes to the Rafidhi if he is among those who curse, he is kafir and will not be married with. Some scholars had said –Qadi Abu Yala had confirmed this- If he curses the sahabah and if this harms their deen and justice, they will be kafir with this. No if they only curse and do not criticize their deen and justice, for example, if one among them curses his father or one among them and with this he is only showing his anger, he will not become kafir.

In a narration from Abu Talib, Ahmad said regarding someone who cursed Uthman: He is zindeeq. In the narration from Marwazi he said: Those who curse Abu Bakr, Umar and 'Aishah, I do not see them to be upon Islam. Qadi Abu Ya’la had used this statement of Ahmad regarding them in absolute. He informs that the individual who curses the sahabah will be made takfir of. However in the narrations from Abdullah and Abu Talib they had paused regarding killing them. Likewise his view that hadd and ta’zir is necessary shows us that he did not give the hukm of kufr to them. In this case the statement of Ahmad referring that he would not see them upon Islam, carries the possibility that those who see this (type of) cursing as halaal are without doubt kafir and besides this those who don’t see this halaal the hukm of being killed is aborted. The reason is, he had performed this believing it is haraam, just like the performer of sins. 

Fundamentally his statement that he would not see them upon Islam is also open to the interpretation that this can be regarding those who condemn their justice. Just like his statement after the Nabi (saw) they oppressed and became fasiq. At this time they made decisions that didn’t rely on haqq. Likewise his statement that their killing will be abrogated will ascribe their condemning without condemning their (the sahabas) deen. Just like this following statement of his: They had little skill regarding knowledge, strategy and courage. They were excessively devoted to dunya etc, and had embraced these with passion. Nevertheless it is possible to ascribe his statement to the dhahir. In this case this means regarding them –in the sense of their cursing- there are two narrations:

1- Making takfir

2- Explaining they are fasiq

According to this the narrations of Qadi and others containing the two narrations in their takfir are stabilized. Also Qadi had said whoever slanders 'Aishah (raa) in a matter which Allah had confirmed of her having good character, is without a doubt kafir. Here we will arrange the evaluation in two sections:

1- Their (sahabah) being reviled in certain

2- Explaining the hukm of the reviler.   

(After this point he begins to list the evidences of those who make takfir of them (the sahabah condemners) and those who express they are not kafir but sinners)” (as-Saarimul-Maslul, 505)

“Those who say the condemner will be killed or made takfir of have their evidences. This evidence is among them: “Muhammad is RasulAllah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29)

As a necessity of their status the kuffar must be angry with them. If the kuffar are angry with them, who are those that are angry? Yes in this state, they got together with those Allah will perish and punish and had been condemned of their kufr. Whereas only a kafir can participate in the anger that due to their kufr, the kafir are condemned. This portion of the ayah explains this: “As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them.” (al-Fath 48/29)

This is an evaluation regarding the hukm proper to the attribute put forth. The reason is the kufr in an individual is (makes it) suitable to rage at his friend.  Now Allah had made the owner of kufr rage at the friends of Muhammad (saw) and in this sense whomever Allah had made rage at the friends of Muhammad (saw) this means that regarding him, he did carry the necessities of this, which is kufr. 

In the Sahihayn, the hadith narrated by Anas is in the same manner: ‘The sign of iman is to love the ansar. The sign of nifaq is to revile the ansar.’ In another narration it is: ‘Only the mu’min will love them and only the munafiq will revile them.’ 

It is reported on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) said: “A person who believes in Allah and the Last Day never nurses a grudge against the Ansar.” (Muslim)

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Sa'ed al-Khudri (ra) that RasulAllah (saw) observed: “The person who believes in Allah and the Last Day never nurses a grudge against the Ansar.”

According to this, whoever curses them will surely have deepened in his revile. In this state this will necessitate that he is a munafiq who does not believe in Allah and the day of Akhirah.” (as-Saarimul-Maslul, 512)

"A section regarding the details of what had been said about them: To this cursing whoever adds Ali as a deity or that he was a prophet and that Jibril had mistaken who to give the risalah to and if he adds his deviation, there is no doubt of his kufr. Moreover there is not doubt in the kufr of the individual who pauses at making takfir of such individual. 

Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said, "Whosoever claims that ayat are missing, or have-been concealed from the Qur'an, or he claims that its ayaat have inner meanings that cancel out the outward Shari'ah actions, then there is no disagreement concerning his kufr. (Of them these types are named as Karamita and Batiniya also at Tanasuhiyya is among these.) Without touching their justice and deen, whoever only curses them for instance describes them with stinginess or being timid, ignorance, ahl zuhd etc this individual will essentially deserve ta’dip and ta’zir. However we can not pass hukm of his kufr for these. Likewise this will also be ascribed to the ahl ‘ilm who do not make takfir of them. Whoever curses them absolutely and speaks ill of them, this is a point of ikhtilaaf regarding them. The reason is the status of the one cursing sourced from degrading and cursing sourced from i'tiqaad is different." (as-Saarimul-Maslul, 518-519)
 
“And whosoever claims that sahabah became murtad after RasulAllah (saw), except for a small group that did not reach ten odd people in number, or that the majority of them were disobedient sinners, then there is also no doubt about the kufr of this one. This is because he has denied what the Qur'an stipulates in more than one place about Allah (swt) being pleased with them and praising them. Rather, who can doubt in the disbelief of this one? This aside, even the kufr of the individual who doubts the kufr of an individual as such is obvious. So his disbelief is specific, since this statement implies that the carriers of the Book (Qur’an) and the Sunnah were kuffar or disobedient sinners. And with regards to the ayah: "You are the best nation raised up for mankind." (Al-i Imran 3/110) And the best of the Ummah is its first generation, but if they were generally kafir and disobedient sinners, then this is the most evil of nations and the early generations of this nation are the most evil ones within it. And the kufr of such a person is known from the religion of Islam by necessity. For this reason you will see that those who make such statements are all zindeeq " (as-Saarimul-Maslul 504-519) 

Cursing a particular believer is a major sin, (Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, al-Zawajir an Iqtiraf al-Ka'ba'ir, 2/93) and “The reality of cursing (la`n) is to distance from Mercy, which cannot be for other than kafir. Because of this, it is not permitted to curse a particular individual, unless it is known that they died in a state of disbelief, with proof. (It remains impermissible to curse an individual person) even if they were openly corrupt, like Yazeed, according to the relied upon scholarly opinion. As for Iblis Satan, and the likes of Abu Jahl (i.e who we know are in the Fire), it is permitted to curse them. It is also permitted to curse non-specific individuals, such as wrongdoers and liars, because what is understood is these people as a category, and it necessarily includes those who shall die in kufr. In such cases, the purpose of cursing would be to show that such a trait is a trait of unbelievers, in order to warn and keep people away from it. One may not intend to curse everyone of such a group, because if cursing one particular individual, such as a given wrongdoer, is not permitted, then how would cursing every single oppressor be allowed?” (Radd al-Muhtar, 3/416, Kitab al-Talaq, Bab al-Raj’a)

Attributing sahabah with kufr is the clearest sign of kufr of the doer, it is because Allah (swt) commands in the ayah: "the disbelievers may become enraged with them (Sahabah)". During a class of Imam Malik, it was mentioned that the Rafawid curse the Sahabah. In reply, he quoted the Qur’anic verse, "Muhammad is RasulAllah and those with him are harsh with the disbelievers and gentle among themselves. So that the disbelievers may become enraged with them." (al-Fath 48/29) He then said, "Whoever becomes enraged when the Sahabah are mentioned is one about whom the verse speaks." (Qurtubi, Tafsir) And Qurtubi commented, "Indeed, Malik did well in his statement and he reached the correct explanation. So whoever belittles a single one of them or reviles him in his narration, then he has rejected Allah, the Lord of the worlds and he has nullified the Shari'ah of the Muslims.” (Qurtubi, Tafsir) Ibn Kathir also quoted this from Imam Malik in the tafsir of the same ayah: “On this ayah, Imam Malik stated that the Rawafid are disbelievers because they hate the Companions. Imam Malik said, ‘The Companions enrage them, and according to this ayah, he who is enraged by the Companions is a kafir.’ Several scholars agreed with Malik's opinion. There are numerous ahadith mentioning the virtues of sahabah and prohibiting the criticism on their mistakes. It is sufficient that Allah (awj) has praised them and declared that He is pleased with them.” (Tafsir) Imam Malik also said:

"The one who reviles the Companions of RasulAllah (saw) does not have any share in Islam.” (al-Khallal, as-Sunnah 2/557) “Whoever verbally abuses the Sahabah of RasulAllah (saw) he has no share in Islam.” (Al-Khalaal, as-sunnah, 3/493)

Allish al-Maliki said, quoting Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani stated: “It is not permitted to denigrate Mu`awiya, because he was a major sahabah. It is not permitted to curse Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah  or to declare him kafir, for he is one of the believers. Rather, we assign his affairs to Allah: if He wills, He will punish him, as stated by Ghazali, Mutawalli, and others. Imam Ghazali and others stated, ‘It is impermissible (haraam) for preachers and others to transmit the killing of Husayn (ra) and to talk (at length) about it… for it can stir up dislike for the sahabah and their denigration, and they are the greatest notables of this religion, from whom the imams took the religion by transmission, and we took it from these imams through understanding. Thus, the ones who denigrate them are themselves denigrated, and only denigrate themselves and their own religiousness. This is the end of the meaning of what the great hadith master Ibn Hajar said.” (Fath al-Aliyy al-Malik, 2/353)

Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) said, "Whosoever claims that ayaat are missing, or have-been concealed from the Qur'an, or he claims that its ayaat have inner meanings that cancel out the outward Shari'ah actions, then there is no disagreement concerning his kufr. And whosoever claims that sahabah became murtad after RasulAllah (saw), except for a small group that did not reach ten odd people in number, or that the majority of them were disobedient sinners, then there is also no doubt about the kufr of this one. This is because he has denied what the Qur'an stipulates in more than one place about Allah (swt) being pleased with them and praising them. Rather, who can doubt in the disbelief of this one? So his disbelief is specific, since this statement implies that the carriers of the Book (Qur’an) and the Sunnah were kuffar or disobedient sinners. And with regards to the ayah: "You are the best nation raised up for mankind." (Al-i Imran 3/110) And the best of the Ummah is its first generation, but if they were generally kafir and disobedient sinners, then this is the most evil of nations and the early generations of this nation are the most evil ones within it. And the kufr of such a person is known from the religion of Islam by necessity." (as-Saarimul-Maslul 586-587)

Abu Butayn quotes Ibn Taymiyyah saying, “Whoever claims that the companions became apostates after RasulAllah (saw) except a few; not more than ten odd, or that they became sinners, then there is no doubt in the kufr of the one who says it. In fact, whoever doubts his kufr is also a kafir.” then comments, “Notice how he (Ibn Taymiyyah) made takfir of the doubter, even though it is known for certain that one only doubts due to ignorance, and despite that he said what he said, with full knowledge that most if not all of these people (i.e. the Rafida) are ignorant and do not know what they say is kufr.” (Al-Durar al-Saniya 10/358) Abu Butayn also says, “If a person were to say about the Rafida today that they are excused for cursing Abu Bakr, Umar and 'Aishah because they are ignorant muqallids, everyone from the laity and clergy would rebuke him.” (Al-Durar al-Saniya 10/393)

Again Ibn Taymiyyah said: "If a person slanders them (i.e. the Sahabah) in a way that does not impugn their good character or religious commitment, such as describing one of them as being stingy or cowardly or lacking in knowledge or not being an ascetic and so on, then he deserves to be rebuked and disciplined, but we do not rule him to be a kafir because of that. This is how the words of those who were not regarded as kafirs by the scholars are to be understood. If a person curses them and slanders them in general terms, this is an area of scholarly dispute, depending on whether this cursing is motivated by mere feelings or religious doctrines. If a person goes beyond that and claims that they apostatized after the death of RasulAllah (saw), apart from a small group of no more than ten or so individuals, or that most of them rebelled and did evil, then there is no doubt that such a person is a kafir, because he has denied what is stated in more than one place in the Qur’an, that Allah was pleased with them and praised them. Indeed whoever doubts that such a person is a kafir is himself a kafir, because this implies that those who transmitted the Qur’an and Sunnah were kafirs or evildoers and that the best of this ummah which is described in the verse “You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind” (Al-e Imran 3/110) – the first generation – were mostly kafirs and hypocrites. It implies that this ummah is the worst of nations, and that the first generations of this ummah are the most evil. No doubt this is blatant kufr, the evidence for which is quite clear. Hence you will find that most of those who proclaim such views will sooner or later be shown to be heretics. Heretics usually conceal their views, but Allah has punished some of them to make an example of them, and there are many reports that they were turned into pigs in life and in death. The scholars have compiled such reports, such as al-Haafid al-Saalih Abu Abd-Allah Muhammad ibn Abd al-Waahid al-Maqdisi, in his book al-Nahi ‘an Sabb al-Ashaab in which he narrated the punishments that befell such heretics. In conclusion, there are some groups of those who slander the Sahabah concerning them is no doubt that they are kafirs, others who cannot be judged to be kafirs, and others concerning whom there is some doubt regarding that." (Al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasul, 590-591)

Taqiy al-Deen al-Subki said: "This refers to one who slanders some of the sahabah. But if a person slanders all of the sahabah, then he is undoubtedly a kafir. The same applies if he slanders one of the sahabah just because he is a Sahaabi, because this is demeaning the virtue of the sahabah and indirectly slandering the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). So undoubtedly the person who does this is a kafir. Based on this, the words of al-Tahaawi, “and hating them is kufr” should be understood as meaning that hating all of the sahabah is undoubtedly kufr, but if a person slanders a Sahaabi not because he is a Sahaabi but for some personal reason…The reason for the scholarly dispute on this issue is if a person slanders a specific person it may be for some personal reason, or he may hate someone for a worldly reason etc. This does not imply that he is a kafir. But undoubtedly if he hates one of the two Shaykhs because he was a companion of the Prophet (saw), then this is kufr, and indeed hating any of the sahabah who was lower in status than two Shaykhs just because he was a companions of the Prophet (saw) is also definitely kufr." (Fatawa al-Subki, 2/575)

Narrated from Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Firyabi: "I heard a man asked Sufyan (As Thawri) about (person who) abused Abu Bakr, and Umar. He replied: "Disbeliever in Great Allah". (Dhahabi, Siyar alamun nubala, 7/253)

Narrated from Musa ibn Harun: "I heard a person asking Firyabi (Muhammad ibn Yusuf) about (person) which insulted Abu Bakr and Umar. (Firyabi) replied: "Kafir". Then person asked: "Should we pray over him (his body)?". (Firyabi) replied: "No". Man asked: "What should we do? He used to say "La-ilaha illallah". Firyabi replied: "Don't touch him with hands, take two sticks and push him into the grave". (Khallal as-sunnan 1/499; Ibn Batta, Ibanatul Sughra 160)

Imam Abu Zurah ar-Razi said: "If you see someone who is disgracing one from the companions of RasulAllah (saw), know that such person is heretic (zindeeq)! ..." (al-Kifaya fi İlm Ar-Rivaya, 97) Ibn Hajar al-Haytami said: “The imam of his age, Abu Zar’ah al-Razi said:  If you see a man criticizing any of the companions of RasulAllah, then you should know that he is a heretic, because RasulAllah is true, the Qur'an is true, and what he brought is true. All of that was transmitted to us by the Sahabah, so whoever criticizes them is intending to prove that the Qur’an and Sunnah are false. So he is the one who most deserves to be criticized and the ruling that he is a heretic who has gone astray and is a liar and evildoer is more apt.” (Al-Sawaa’iq al-Muhriqah 2/608; al-Isaba 1/10)

“The one who slanders 'Aishah (raa) with adultery even though Allah had exonerated her or denies Abu Bakr being a sahabah or the Islam of Ashara-I Mubashshere or the Islam of the entire sahabah or the four caliphates or any one among them is kafir.” (Makdisi, Sharhu'l Iqna 4/29)

Yahya ibn Main said: "Whoever will abuse Uthman (ra) or Talha (ra) or any other companion of RasulAllah (saw) is dajjal, and he is not be recorded from. Upon him curse of Allah, angles and each human". (Ibn Hajar, Tahthib at tahthib, 1, #948)

Imam Awzai said "Whoever will abuse Abu Bakr, apostates from his religion, and his blood is permitted". (Ibn Batta, Sharh al-Ibanatul Sughra)

Abu Sayid Abdalkarim ibn Muhammad ibn Manthur At-Tamimi as-Samani said: "And nation is agreed upon takfir of Imamiya. Because they believe that; sahabah been deluded and they use to reject agreed opinion (of sahabah) and they attribute to things which doesn't suit to them". (Ansaab 6/341)

Abu Manthur Abdal Kahir ibn Tahhar ibn Muhammad Bagdadi, At-Tamimi Al-Isfarayani said: "Regarding people of desire like Jarudiya, Khashamiya, Jahmiyyah, and Imamiya, which use to make takfir upon the best from sahabah, (we can say) that they are kafir in our view. It's not permitted to pray upon them in our view, and neither permitted to pray behind them". (Bagdadi al-Fark bayna firak, 357)

Ali ibn Sultan ibn Muhammad, (Ali al-Qari Hanafi) stated: "As for whoever reviles one of sahabah, then he is a disobedient sinner and an innovator by ijmaa (consensus), except if he believes this to be, permissible, as some of the Shi’ah and their companions do; or if they believe that he is rewarded for it as is persistent in their speech, or he believes in the disbelief of sahabah and Ahlus-Sunnah, then he is a kafir by consensus.” (Shammul-Awaaridh fi Dhammir-Rawafid, 6, 252, 254)

Qadi Abu Ya‘la said, "The position of jurists concerning one who curses the Sahabah, believing that such an act is permissible, is that he has committed an act of kufr. If he curses them but does not believe that cursing them is permissible, then he is guilty of immorality, and not disbelief." (Qadi Abu Ya‘la, al-Mu'taqad 267; Ibn Taymiyyah, Saarimul-Maslul 569)

There are many narrations have been related from Ahmad b Hanbal concerning takfir of those who revile the sahabah: Abdul-Malik Ibn Abdul-Hamid informed me saying: I heard Abu Abdullah (Imam Ahmad) say: "Whosoever reviles sahabah, then I fear disbelief for him like the Rawafid." Then he said, "Whosoever reviles sahabah, then we do not believe he is safe from having rejected the Religion.” And he said: Abdullah Ibn Ahmad Ibn Hanbal informed me saying: I asked my father about a man who reviled a man from amongst sahabah of RasulAllah (saw). So he said, "I do not hold him to be upon Islam.” (al-Khallal as-Sunnah 2/557-558 with authentic chain.) Zakariyyah bin Yahya mentions he has heard Abu Taalib mention that he mentioned to Abu Abdullah concerning an individual who verbally abuses Uthman (ra) and people have mentioned this fact to me that he speaks ill of Uthman (ra),he replied they (the ones who speak ill) are zanadiqah.” (Al-Khalaal, as-sunnah, 3/493) And Imam Ahmad also said, "They are those who free themselves from the sahabah of Muhammad (saw) and they curse them and belittle them. They declare the Imams disbelievers, except four: Ali (ra), Ammar (ra), Miqdad (ra) and Salman (ra). And the Rafidah do not have anything to do with Islam.” (Usuolus-Sunnah 82) Imam Ahmad also said: "If you see anyone speaking ill of sahabah of RasulAllah (saws), doubt his Islam." (Imam al-Laalaiki, as-Sunnah #2359) Ibn Abdul-Qawi said, "And Imam Ahmad used to declare kuffar all those who freed themselves from them (i.e. sahabah) and whosoever reviled A'ishah (raa), the mother of the Believers and accused her of that which she was free from. And he used to recite: "Allah forbids you from it and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers." (an-Nur 24/17).” (Kitab Ma Yadhhab ilayhil-Imam Ahmad, 21)

Ibn Kathir mentioned the ahadith that are confirmed in the Sunnah and which comprise a negation of the claims of the Rafidah about the revelation. Then he followed this up by saying, "And if the affair had been as they claimed, no one from amongst sahabah would have confirmed that. Since, they were the most obedient to Allah and His Messenger (saw) during his life and after his death. So it is not possible that they would undermine him, such that they would give precedence to other than the one whom he had given precedence to, or that, they would defer one to whom he had given precedence to via his text. May Allah forbid such a thing, it would never happen! And whosoever suspects such a thing about the sahabah, then he has attributed to them that they united upon disobedience and agreed upon stubborn rejection of the Messenger (saw) and opposition to his ruling and his text. And whosoever from amongst the people reaches such a level, then he has thrown off the yoke of Islam from his neck and he has disbelieved according to the, ‘ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Imams and outstanding personalities. And spilling his blood is more lawful than spilling wine.” (al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah 5/252)

Ibn Qayyim said: “Zayd bin Aslam said: ‘Those on whom Allah has bestowed His Grace; they are RasulAllah (saw) Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra).’ There is no doubt that those who are blessed are those who follow the Messenger. As for those who have anger upon them, then they are those who do not follow him. Those who followed and obeyed RasulAllah (saw) from the Ummah, were his sahabah and his family. Those who followed RasulAllah (saw)  the most from his sahabah; who were regarded as his sight and hearing, were Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra). Those who are the severest in opposition to RasulAllah (saw) are the Rafidah. Their opposition to him is well-known amongst all the sects of the Ummah. This is why the Rafidah hate the Sunnah and its people, they have enmity towards it and its people so, and they are the enemies of his (saw) Sunnah. Family of RasulAllah (saw) and those from their children who follow them are perfect heirs; rather they are his true heirs. So it becomes clear that the Siraat al-Mustaqim is the path of sahabah of RasulAllah (saw) and his followers. The path of the people, who have the Anger of Allah upon them and are upon misguidance, is the path of the Rafidah. In this exact, same way the Khawaarij are refuted, since their enmity towards the Companions is well known.” (Madarij as-Salikin, 1/95)

Abul-Mahaasin al-Waasiti said: "Indeed, by their takfir of sahabah of RasulAllah (saw), they have declared disbelievers those whose praise has been confirmed in the Qur'an by the statement of Allah (swt): "So that you may be witnesses over mankind." (al-Baqarah 2/143) And Allah (jj) has testified that they are not disbelievers with His statement: "And if these ones disbelieve therein, then We have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers therein." (al-An'am 6/89).” (al-Munadharah bayna Ahlus-Sunnah war-Rafidah 66)

Imam Tahawi states, "We love the companions of RasulAllah (saw), without going overboard in our love of anyone of them or remaining aloof (tabarra) from any of them. We hate those who hate them or speak ill of them and we only speak well of them. Loving them is a religious act and an expression of iman and righteousness, while hating them is an act of kufr, nifaq and transgression." (Sharh al-Aqidah at-Tahawiyyah, 528)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Until Dajjal and the last day

Every time a new generation springs forth from them, it gets cut off (i.e. from the Jamaa’ah). This is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah) The Khawaarij will never come to an end. Rather, they will continue to exist until the establishment of the Final Hour. This is related from Ali (ra). (Bukhari). There will emerge from amidst them the Dajjal. In a narration it states: “…from their treachery…” And in one manuscript: “…from their ranks…” And that refers to a great army and this is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). (Ibn Maajah) There will be from among them those who will be with the Dajjal during the Last Days. It was said to Ali (ra): “All praise be to Allah who rescued the servants from them.” He replied: “Nay. I swear by the One in whose Hand my soul is, there are still some of them that remain in the loins of men and verily, there are those amongst them who will be with the Dajjal.

When Ali ibn Abi Talib (ra) overcame the Khawaarij on the day of Nahrawan responded the people who came to congratulate him that Allah (awj) had finished them with his hands saying: ‘The praise is for Allah. O leader of the believers who eradicated them at their roots!’. He said, “No, by Allah, they are still in the backs and spines of men and the wombs of women. And when are alive, they hardly leave anyone alone.” (al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya, 7/295; 10/590)

Shaikhu’l-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said, “And this sign which RasulAllah (saw) mentioned would be the sign for the first people of the Khawaarij. But they are not the only people that are spoken of in these verses because He (saw) mentioned in other hadith that they would still keep coming until the age of the Dajjal. “It is concluded by the Muslims that the Khawaarij are not the only Khawaarij mentioned in the battles with Ali in the battle of Nahrawan.” (Majmual-Fatawa, 28/495-496)

Khawaarij will not only come out during one era form the ages only. Rather they have come out a number of times, until they will come out in rebellion along with Dajjal. So it is related from RasulAllah (saw) that he said: “A people will come out towards the end of time. It is as if this one (Thul-Khuwaysirah) is from amongst them. They will recite the Qur’an, yet it will not pass beyond their throats. They will shoot through Islam just as an arrow shoots through the hunted game. They will be called at-Tahaluq. They will not cease to revolt until the last of them revolts along with Dajjal. So when you encounter them, then kill them. They are the most evil of the creation.” (Ahmad; Nisai; Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musannaf; al-Bazzar, Musnad; Hakim, al-Mustadrak; Haythami, Majmauz Zawaid)

Narrated from Ali (ra) who said: "I heard RasulAllah (saw) say: ‘Towards the last days, a people will emerge who will be young in age and have foolish ideas. They will speak with the best speech of the creatures. Their iman will not go past their throats. So wherever you encounter them, kill them, for indeed there will be a reward for the one who kills them on the Day of Judgement.’" (Bukhari; Muslim; Ahmad, Musnad; Ibn Abi Asim, as-Sunnah; Abdullah bin Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as-Sunnah)

[Muferrid Muhammed Selefy]

Khawaarij and irtidad among ahl-qiblah

From these long narrations with the will and help of Allah it has been stabilized that: Surely the kufr of the individual who condemns the sahabah in their deen and justice, describing them as kafir or fasiq is clear and definite. Furthermore this is among the matters necessarily known in Islam. The reason is statements as such will mean condemning them in their narrations and denying the Qur’an which praises and honors them. Fundamentally the shari'ah has accounted degrading the sahabah as the sign of kufr of its owner. This is a suitable attribute and is suitable to be a reason for hukm. It is known that the Khawaarij had made takfir of Ali and Muawiya and those who helped them.

We can summarize this hadith regarding the Khawaarij like the imam of the mufassir imam Tabari explained: In this hadith there is a refutation to the thought of- after deserving the attribute of Muslim, from the ahl qiblah knowingly and acknowledging without the intention of exiting the fold of Islam no one will exit Islam. The reason is this view negates the expression in the hadith.   

“They will state haqq and recite Qur’an; nevertheless they will exit Islam with nothing left from it."

Likewise Hafidh had stated: From this hadith the outcome is ‘without the intention of exiting deen, also without the intention of choosing another deen over Islam, some among the Muslim will exit deen’. This outcome relies on the thought they must absolutely be made takfir of.   
With this it is understood that surely this regulation Hafidh mentions is stable by all those who assimilate to their takfir.

There is also the fact that matters as such are matters which do not touch upon asl of deen. And what if it does touch upon the asl of deen, then what would the hukm be?

Now can anyone surely dare to say that valuable sahabah Abu Said al Khudri, the imam of the muhaddith Bukhari, the imam of the mufassir Tabari, Qadi Abubakr ibn al Arabi, Subki, Rafii and others are ahl bid'ah?

The reason is they had given the hukm of kafir to the Khawaarij. Let alone they did not excuse them with things such as ignorance, being mistaken and ta'weel.

Bukhari relayed the ahadith regarding Khawaarij on the chapter ‘Kitabu’l-istitabatu’l-murtaddeen’.

Abu Aliya (ra) stated: “I read the Qur’an ten years after death of your prophet. So Allah bestowed upon me two blessings, I do not know which of the two is better: that He guided me to Islam or He did not make me a Haroori.” (Related with sahih chain by Abdurrazzaq; Ibn Sa’d; al-Lailake, Sharh Usulu’l-i'tiqaad; Ibn Abi Zammaan, usulus’sunnah; al-Harawi, dhammu’l-kalam; adh-Dhahabi, siyar)

Allah (awj) stated: "And whosoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger after the right path has been clearly shown to him and follows other than the path of the believers. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen and burn him in Hell, what an evil destination." (an-Nisa 4/115)