Another one of the errors of the Murji’ah is
that they make disbelief of one type. They negate any existence of minor
disbelief or disbelief which is not like the major form of disbelief. In short,
they deny the presence of major and minor disbelief. They argue that disbelief
is defined as rejection and rejection can only be one of kind.
Again, they present a notion which clearly
contradicts the texts which defines some acts of disbelief as being major and
others minor. This is highlighted in the Hadeeth which has been reported by
al-Bukhaaree and Muslim on the authority of Ibn Ma’sood [May Allaah be Pleased
with him] that the Prophet used the word Kufr to mean sin, where he said,
“Insulting your brother is vile and fighting him is Kufr (i.e. a major sin)[1].”
There is also a narration on the authority of
Ibn ‘Umar that the Prophet said, “Do not return to Kufr (i.e. the major sin of
being disunited) after my demise, striking the necks of one another[2].”
He also said, “Two types of people have Kufr
(i.e. major sins) within them; those who (1) deny their lineage and those who (2)
wail over the deceased.[3]”
For this reason, a large number of the
Companions have been narrated in describing the sins mentioned in these
narrations as a kind of Kufr which are major sins and there exists no
contradiction between this understanding and the apparent wording of the texts.
Therefore, having an aspect of Kufr does not
negate total Emaan and belief of a person. The opposite is true, it is possible
that a person may possess Emaan and minor Kufr simultaneously. For instance,
the minor form of hypocrisy has been reported in the Hadeeth narrated by
‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr that the Prophet said, “There are four characteristics
whoever has all of them is pure hypocrite and whoever has an aspect of them has
an aspect of hypocrisy until they leave it.[4]”
Likewise there is also the example of minor
Shirk and that it is possible that a person be a believer and possess minor
Shirk.
Equally, it is not correct to interpret Kufr
that appears in these narrations as being a metaphor for something else. This
is because the use of a word is taken in its reality and apparent meaning and it is not permitted to change the meaning of a word to define it as a metaphor for
something else except with strong supporting evidence.
This is like the
definition of the word al-Mandoob. Al-Mandoob in the Arabic language entails an
obligation and the origin of commands in the Sharee’ah is that they necessitate an
obligation. However, some commands may be recommended and not obligatory based
on an evidence which explains its lower ranking in ruling.
No comments:
Post a Comment