 |
||
 |
|
|
GHIBAT (BACK-BITING)
QUESTION
If Gibat Is Haraam why the Sunni Maulana are telling (speaking) against the
Deobandi in most of speech. Is this correct or wrong?
ANSWER
Indeed Gheebat (Back-biting) is Haraam (unlawful) but the person seeking rule
of Shariah needs to know the definition of “Gheebat” and he needs as well to
be aware of such condition in which Gheebat is forbidden.
Gheebat means fault finding and caviling a Muslim without any right of Shariah
(legal right) either in his presence or absence verbally or by any means of
indication or to make eyes at some one. Through this, the person seeking the
rule of Shariah can derive his answer.
Now, I come to elaborate the answer that Deobandis are no more Muslims because
they have made derogatory remarks against ALLAH and His Holy Messenger (Sallal-Laahu
Alaihi Wasallam) and even they have refused many principles of Islam. For
example: One of the leaders of Deobandis, Qasim Nanautavi, claims that our
beloved Prophet Sallal-Laahu Alaihi Wa Sallam is not the final Messenger of
Allah. In the very beeginning of his book “Tahzir-un-Na'as” he declared, “This
is the view of ordinary people (ignorants) to believe our beloved Prophet
Sallal-Laahu Alaih Wa Sallam as final Messenger of ALLAH and this is evident
to the intelligentsia that being prior or later in the period has no virtue.”
(abridged).
He further says, “Suppose any other Prophet takes birth after Hazrat Muhammad
(Sallal-Laahu Alaihi Wasallam), even then it will make no difference in the
finality of Hazrat Muhammad Sallal-Laahu Alaih Wasallam”. (Tahzir-un-Na'as)
Whereas Allah has declared Hazrat Muhammad (Sallal-Laahu Alaihi Wasallam), the
final Prophet saying “Khatam-un-Nabieen”, i.e. the Seal of the Prophets. From
the beginning of Islam till this moment the Ummah has admitted him the last
and final Prophet of Allah. The leaders of Deobandies are not only refusing
one principle of Islam rather they refuse as well the consensus of Ummah and
even the Holy Quran. Therefore, most of the Ulama and knowledgeable
theologians of Arab and non-Arabs have issued the verdict unanimously
regarding them that, “he who doubts in their infidelity and visitation for
them is certainly Kaffir!” Thus, we see that Deobandies have been declared
apostates.
I have presented here only one example of insolence and blasphemous chattering
of the leaders of Deobandies in the sanctified court of Allah's last and
beloved Prophet (Sallal-Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) otherwise, there are much more
such examples of derogatory remarks which they have made against Allah and His
Prophet (Sallal-Laahu Alaihi Wasallam). Before ending the answer I would like
to ask the questioner: if you complaint against the person for this tyranny or
file a suit against the oppressor or ask the rule of Shariah about such a
person, would you consider this action to be a back-biting?
Let me know if you want to make a person be aware of a man and it depends on
giving him some particulars like blind, deaf, lame, etc. Would you call it a
back-biting? Likewise, if you want somebody to protect him from a cruel
(person), would you regard name-talking about him as backbiting? I know well
that you have to say in all these conditions “NO”. Now, I have elaborated all
the conditions in which the back-biting is allowed, in other words, it would
not be regarded as back-biting. Similarly, you can think, talking about
“Deobandies” and you can realize that it does not come under the forbidden
back-biting. Wallahu Ta'ala Aalam.
Ja Nashine Mufti Azam, Allama Mufti Mohammed Akhtar
Raza Khan Azhari Qaadiri