Rabi’ al-Madkhali, the Reviler of Prophet’s Companions
The Prophet SAW said:
Whoever abuses my Companions, upon them is the curse of Allaah, the angels and the people.
Rabi al-Madkhali attacks the companions:
والله كان صحابة فقهاء، في أمور السياسة ما ينجحون، ما يستطيعون في الإذاعة، والإشاعة، يقعون في فتنة، قضية الإفك طاح فيها كثير من الصحابة، فتنة، ليش ؟!!! ما هم مثل أبي بكر، مثل عمر، مثل علي هؤلاء وقعوا !!!
By Allah, the companions were jurists, but they would never be successful in politics! They were incompetent in terms of media and propaganda! They would easily fall into fitna! So many companions strayed in the slander (of Aisha ra) incident! Fitna! Why?! Because they are not like Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali! This is why they fell! (Audio record: al-Shabab wa-Mushkilatuhu)
Apart from belittling the companions, Rabi’ al-Madkhali lies against the companions by saying ‘Many companions strayed.’ Rather, they were only a handful who erred in this episode.
Rabi’ al-Madkhali’s attack on Abdullah b. ‘Umar, Ubay b. Ka’b, Zayd b. Thabit, and Abdullah b. Mas’ud:
كان عبد الله، وأُبيّ بن كعب، وزيد بن ثابت، وابن مسعود، وغيرهم، وغيرهم من فقهاء الصحابة وعلمائهم ما يصلحون للسياسة!!!، معاوية ما هو عالم ، ويصلح أن يحكم الدنيا كلها، وأثبت جدارته وكفاءته ، المغيرة بن شعبة مستعد يلعب بالشعوب على إصبعه دهاءً، ما يدخل في مأزق إلا ويخرج منه، عمرو بن العاص أدهى منه
Abdullah (b. ‘Umar), Ubay b. Ka’b, Zayd b. Thabit, (‘Abdullah) b. Mas’ud and others were the jurists from amongst the companions and their scholars, but they were not good at politics!!! As for Mu’awiyya, then he was not an ‘Alim (scholar)! Even though, he could rule the entire world! He proved to be serious and competent. al-Mughira b. Shu’ba could play with an entire population with his fingers, because he was astute. He wouldn’t enter a problem except that he would safely get out of it. ‘Amr b. al-‘Aas was more intelligent than him. (Audio recording titled: al-‘Ilm wal-Difa’ ‘an al-Shaykh Jamil)
No doubt some companions were more clever than others, but it doesn’t mean that other companions were not good at politics. Yes, Mu’awiyya was a good politician, but would Rabi’ al-Madkhali now say that ‘Ali was a bad politician because he out did him? Rather, Ahl al-Sunnah firmly believe that Ali was one of the best Muslim politicians, and hence, the fourth rightly guided Khalifa of Allah’s Messenger SAW! The same goes for the noble companions Rabi belittled.
The most pathetic of all his comments here is to say that Mu’awiyya was not a scholar! Rabi’, out of his conceitedness did not even spare the companions of Allah’s Messenger SAW from his childish comments on who is and who isn’t a scholar! Yet, ‘Abdullah b. Abbas says, “Indeed, he (mu’awiyya) is a faqih!”
Who knows more ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abbas – may Allah be pleased with him – or the conceited and shameless Rabi’ al-Madkhali?
Rabi’ al-Madkhali attacks Khalid b. al-Walid
خالد يصلح للقيادة، ما يصلح للسياسة، وأحياناً يلخبط
Khalid is only good as a leader, and not as a politician. Sometimes, he even makes blunders!
One has to be a blithering idiot to suggest that a person could be a good leader without being a good politician! But the most shameful thing to notice here is al-Madkhali’s loose tongue (May Allah sever it) reviling the Prophet’s companion, Khalid b. al-Walid – may Allah be pleased with him and protect his honour from cowards like al-Madkhali.
This is the shameful state of the cult leader himself, Rabi’ al-Madkhali, yet he has the gall to accuse Sayyid Qutb of the same when the latter has repented and al-Madkhali himself has not.
Imaam Ahmad said: “If you see anyone speaking ill of the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), doubt his Islaam.” (Al-Laalikaa’ee (d. 418H) in as-Sunnah, no.2359)
Imaam al-Barbahaaree (d. 329H) said in his Sharh us-Sunnah: “If you see a man criticising the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) know that he is a person of wicked speech and desires, since the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘When my Companions are mentioned then withhold‘.” The hadeeth is reported by at-Tabaraanee from Ibn Mas’ood and it is Saheeh. See Silsilatul Ahaadeeth is-Saheehah (no.34) of Shaikh al-Albaanee). Imaam al-Barbahaaree also said in Sharh us-Sunnah (Explanation of the Creed, p.84): Do not discuss about their slips or wars, nor that of which you have no knowledge. Do not listen to such talk from anyone, for if you do, your heart will not remain safe and sound.
And Harb bin Ismaa’eel al-Kirmani (d. 280H), in the treatise “Masaa’il Harb bin Ismaa’eel al-Kirmaanee Anil-Imaam Ahmad” said:
هذا مذهب أهل العلم، وأصحاب الأثر، وأهل السنة المتمسّكين بها، المُقتدى بهم فيها من لَدُن أصحاب النبي -صلى الله عليه وسلم- إلى يومنا هذا، وأدركت من أدركت من علماء أهل الحجاز والشام -وغيرهم-؛ فَمَن خالف شيئاً من هذه المذاهب أو طعن فيها، أو عاب قائلَها، فهو مخالفٌ مبتدعٌ خارجٌ عن الجماعة، زائلٌ عن منهج السّنّة وطريق الحق.قال: وهو مذهب أحمد وإسحاقَ بن إبراهيم بن مَخْلَد، وعبدالله بن الزبير الحُمَيدي، وسعيد بن منصور -وغيرهم- ممن جالسْنا وأخذنا عنهم العلم، فكان من قولهم
This is the madhhab of the People of Knowledge, the Ashaabul-Athar (People of the Narrations), Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, those who stick fast to it [Ahl us-Sunnah] and who seek to guide themselves by [them i.e. the Ahl us-Sunnah] from among those in the presence of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) up until this day of ours. And I met whomever I met from among the Scholars of the people of Hijaaz and Shaam and others besides them. Whoever differs with and opposes a single matter from the madhaahib [of these People of Knowledge] or contests and defames them or criticizes the one who speaks [by what they speak with], then he is a mukhaalif (opposer), a mubtadi’ (an innovator) and one who has left the Jamaa’ah, who has ceased to be upon the manhaj of the Sunnah and the Path of Truth.
And this [i.e. the path of the People of Knowledge] is the madhhab of [Imaam] Ahmad, Ishaaq bin Ibraaheem, Abdullaah bin Zubair al-Humaidee, Sa’eed bin Mansoor and others besides them amongst those with whom we have sat and taken knowledge from…
Then he says later in the treatise from that which is from the madhhab ijmaa’ of the people of knowledge, Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah:
وذكر محاسن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، والكف عن ذكر مساويهم التي شجرت بينهم؛ فمن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، أو واحدا منهم، أو تنقصه أو طعن عليهم، أو عرض بعيبهم، أو عاب أحدا منهم، فهو مبتدع رافضي خبيث مخالف، لا يقبل الله منهم صرفا ولا عدلا، بل حبهم سنة، والدعاء لهم قربة، والإقتداء بهم وسيلة، والأخذ بآثارهم بها فضيلة
And the mentioning of the good qualities and deeds of the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and refraining from mentioning their shortcomings and mistakes, those which occurred between them. Whoever reviles the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), or a single one amongst them, or reduces [their worth and status] or insults them or exposes their faults or criticises a single one amongst them then he is a mubtadi’ (an innovator), a raafidee (an extreme shi’ite), a khabeeth (vile and repugnant) and a mukhaalif (an opposer) and Allaah will not accept from him any of his efforts nor his fair dealings. Rather loving them is a sunnah, supplicating for them is nearness (Allaah), taking them as a model for guidance is a means (of nearness to Allaah) and accepting and taking from their narrations is an excellence
And then he mentions shortly afterwards:
لا يجوز لأحد أن يذكر شيئا من مساويهم، ولا أن يطعن على أحد منهم بعيب أو نقص؛ فمن فعل ذلك فقد وجب على السلطان تأديبه وعقوبته، ليس له أن يعفو عنه، بل يعاقبه، ويستتيبه، فإن تاب قبل منه، وإن لم يتب أعاد عليه العقوبة، وخلده في الحبس، حتى يموت أو يرجع
It is not permissible for anyone to mention anything of their shortcomings, and nor to revile anyone of them on account of a fault or deficiency. Whoever does that, then it is obligatory upon the ruler to discipline him and punish him. It is not for him (the ruler) to pardon him, rather he should punish him and seek his repentance. So if he repents, it is accepted from him and if he does not repent, the punishment is repeated upon him, and he is kept in prison until he dies or recants.