After a long time, the scholars of Bareilly, who gained prominence among Muslims due to the conspiracy of apostasy, have once again taken to their age-old, rusted weapon—declaring fellow Muslims infidels (takfir). What can we say when, according to them, we have inherited this status from our predecessors? Those most injured by their venomous attacks are the scholars of Nadwah. Even the scholars of Deoband are behind us in this regard.
It is said that approximately 96 treatises have been written by them to declare Nadwah scholars as infidels and wrongdoers, with titles like Hadsah-e-JanKah Bar Molvi Lutfullah and Takfir Ulama al-Haramain, Ahl al-Nadwah Dhu al-Sin wa al-Sheen (“The Scholars of the Haram Declaring the Deceitful, Wretched Nadwah Scholars as Infidels”). And all this, for what crime? Simply because Nadwah advocated that no Muslim who faces the Qiblah (ahl al-Qiblah) should be declared a disbeliever and that Islamic scholars should practice mutual tolerance and unite against the enemies of Islam, despite theological differences.
This call led to thousands of fatwas of takfir being issued by the Dar al-Ifta of Bareilly. In response to their absurdities, the scholars of Nadwah have always maintained a dignified silence, refraining from retaliating by labeling their accusers as infidels, thereby upholding their scholarly decorum. Instead, they have defended their stance with abundant evidence from the Quran, authentic hadiths, historical accounts, and the practices of the righteous predecessors. These treatises are still available and can be obtained from the Nadwah office.
The opponents of Bareilly’s scholars have historically remained composed and serious, except for a few responses by Maulana Murtaza Hasan, who followed the principle of “Requital for evil is an evil equal to it”. The scholars of Deoband have also adhered to this principle. However, the Bareilly scholars’ zeal for excommunication grew to such an extent that even their own benefactor, from whom they inherited religious knowledge, was accused of heresy over a minor jurisprudential issue. This wound’s depth can be best understood by our friend Maulana Abdul Majid Qadri Badauni.
Recently, these adherents of a specific doctrine antagonized a few eccentric individuals in Punjab, leading to the principle of “he who throws clods of dirt receives stones in return.” They have now realized that declaring a Muslim an infidel is not as simple as they had imagined. By Allah, their actions have not only brought disrespect to knowledge and scholars but have also subjected Islam itself to humiliation. Moreover, their universal takfir—”Whoever does not consider those declared infidels by us to be infidels is also an infidel”—is unprecedented. Is there even a single example of such a general fatwa in the records of the righteous predecessors (salaf saliheen)?
What is most astonishing is that this fatwa is issued in the name of the Hanafi school, whose imams have unanimously stated:
“We do not declare any ahl al-Qiblah (those who face the Qiblah) as infidels.” (Wala nukaffir ahadan min ahl al-Qiblah.)
If a Muslim is declared an infidel based on their rejection of explicit beliefs and commandments of Islam and the Quran, it might be justified. However, these individuals issue takfir over matters they themselves have concocted or which are products of their intellectual reasoning.
Contrary to this, the people of ahl al-sunnah—and particularly the Hanafi school—hold another fundamental principle: “We do not declare those who engage in interpretation (ahl al-ta’wil) as infidels.”
A third principle is that if someone’s statement implies heresy but they deny it or refute the interpretation that leads to such heresy, they cannot be forcibly labeled an infidel. Even if their statement constitutes heresy, their denial or repentance suffices as atonement.
These principles are clearly outlined in our theological texts and are derived from the Quran, prophetic teachings, and the practices of the predecessors. The Quran commands:
And do not say to those who say salām to you: ‘You are not Muslims.’ (Al-Nisa 4:94)
Our situation today is that while we affirm our faith, we are told, “You are not believers.” Not because we associate partners with Allah, deny the Prophet, or attribute divine qualities to
Observe the stark difference between their path and ours.
ببیں تفاو ِت رہ از کجا است تا بکجا
humans, but simply because we do not interpret some issues as they do or fail to view everything through their lens.
Do these revered scholars recall the Prophet’s (PBUH) statement when a Bedouin prayed, “O Allah, forgive me and Muhammad, and do not forgive anyone else?” The Prophet (PBUH) responded:
“You have restricted the vast mercy of Allah.”
In another narration, the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said:
“Is the man more ignorant or his camel?”
In the renowned hadith from Sahih Bukhari, during a battle, the beloved companion Usamah ibn Zayd (may Allah be pleased with him) raised his sword against a disbeliever. The man instantly proclaimed La ilaha illallah (There is no god but Allah). Believing it to be a ploy, Usamah struck and killed him.
When the incident reached the Prophet (PBUH), he rebuked Usamah severely. Usamah explained, “O Messenger of Allah, he only said it to save his life.” The Prophet repeated:
“What will you do with La ilaha illallah on the Day of Judgment?”
According to another narration, the Prophet (PBUH) added:
“Did you open his heart to see if he was sincere?”
Usamah later confessed:
“I wished I had embraced Islam only that day, so such a mistake would not have occurred.”
According to another narration from Sahih Bukhari, the Prophet (PBUH) sent Khalid ibn al- Walid (may Allah be pleased with him) to confront the Banu Jadhimah tribe. The tribe, unfamiliar with Islamic terminology, declared Sabuna, Sabuna (“We have abandoned our ancestral religion”), instead of the usual Aslamna (“We have embraced Islam”). Taking this as apostasy, Khalid ordered their execution.
Some Companions refused, arguing that this command was against Islamic principles. When the incident was reported to the Prophet (PBUH), he raised his hands and repeatedly declared:
“O Allah, I disassociate myself from Khalid’s actions.”
Miqdad RA once sought guidance from the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), asking: “O Messenger of Allah, if in battle I am confronted by an enemy who severs one of my hands with his sword, and then, when he comes under my control, he declares, ‘I accept Islam,’ can I kill him?”
The Prophet (PBUH) replied: “No, you may not kill him now.” Miqdad (RA) reiterated, “O Messenger of Allah, he severed one of my hands and then uttered the testimony of faith.” The Prophet (PBUH) again replied: “No, now you cannot kill him, for by proclaiming the testimony, he has attained the same rank as you. If you kill him now, you will descend to the level he was at before he uttered the testimony.”
Allahu Akbar! Killing a Muslim is itself an act of disbelief.
Who does not know that there existed in Medina a group of hypocrites who were not Muslims at heart but outwardly professed Islam? The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was fully aware of each of their identities. The Muslims suffered harm from them and faced threats from their betrayal in battles. Loyal Companions often sought permission to kill these hypocrites, but the Prophet (PBUH) always refused.
In Sahih Bukhari, it is recorded that once a Companion asked about Malik ibn Dukhshum and was told, “He is a hypocrite who does not love Allah and His Messenger.” The Prophet (PBUH) prohibited such statements, saying: “Do not say that. Do you not see that he sincerely says La ilaha illallah?” The Companion confirmed that Malik did say it. The Prophet (PBUH) then said: “No one who proclaims it will bring it forth on the Day of Judgment without Allah making Hellfire forbidden for them.”
This refers to those whose actions do not align with their declarations of faith.
During preparations for the conquest of Mecca, a Badr veteran informed the Quraysh of the Prophet’s plans. When the Prophet (PBUH) learned of this act, the letter was intercepted. Umar (RA) declared him a hypocrite, but the Prophet (PBUH) said, “O Umar, do not say that. What do you know? Allah may have said regarding the people of Badr, ‘I have forgiven you for your deeds.’”
Mu’adh (RA) once led the prayer and recited long chapters, including Surah Al-Baqarah. A laborer in the congregation, unable to endure the lengthy prayer, completed his own shorter prayer and left. Upon learning this, Mu’adh (RA) accused the man of hypocrisy. The man, distressed, approached the Prophet (PBUH) and explained: “O Messenger of Allah, we are laborers; we draw water for our camels and work hard. Yesterday, Mu’adh led the prayer and recited Surah Al-Baqarah, so I prayed briefly and left. He then accused me of hypocrisy.” The Prophet (PBUH) addressed Mu’adh (RA): “O Mu’adh, do you intend to cause hardship for people? Do you intend to cause hardship for people? Do you intend to cause hardship for people? Recite Wal-shams or Sabbih isma Rabbika al-A’la instead.”
Declaring a Muslim an infidel is no simple matter. In an authentic hadith narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) and Abu Hurairah (RA), the Prophet (PBUH) said:
“Whoever says to his brother, ‘You are a disbeliever,’ the label will revert to one of them.” (Sahih Bukhari Hadith 6103)
Meaning, if the accused is not truly a disbeliever, then the accuser’s act of declaring them as such amounts to disbelief.
Thabit ibn Dhahak RA narrated that the Prophet (PBUH) said:
“Cursing a believer is akin to killing him, and accusing a believer of disbelief is like killing him.” (Sahih Bukhari Hadith 6105)
The Khawarij sect emerged during the time of the Companions and the early righteous predecessors (salaf saliheen). Despite battles and bloodshed with them, they were never declared infidels. Their wives were not considered divorced, nor were their properties deemed permissible to seize. When asked whether they were disbelievers, Ali (RA) replied, “They fled from disbelief (according to their understanding).”
The later scholars’ statements also support this view. The author of Kitab al-Rawdah, as mentioned in Fath al-Bari, has recorded the opinion of most Sunni scholars of principles (Ahl al- Usul), stating that due to their proclamation of the two testimonies (Shahadatayn) and their adherence to the pillars of Islam, they cannot be declared disbelievers.
When someone asked Imam al-Haramayn for a ruling, he responded: “Including a disbeliever among Muslims or excluding a Muslim from Islam is a grave matter.” Imam Abu Bakr al- Baqillani hesitated to declare them disbelievers and remarked: “The community has not explicitly ruled on their excommunication.”
Imam Khattabi stated: “All Islamic scholars unanimously agree that the Khawarij, despite their misguidance, are still considered one of the sects within Islam. Marriage ties with them and consuming their slaughtered animals are permissible. As long as they adhere to the fundamental principles of Islam, they cannot be declared disbelievers.”
Imam Ghazali writes in Al-Tafriqah bayn al-Islam wa al-Zandaqah:
“Avoid declaring someone an infidel as long as possible. For deeming the blood of praying, monotheistic Muslims lawful is a grave error. It is better to mistakenly spare the lives of a thousand disbelievers than to erroneously shed the blood of a single Muslim.”
For the staunch followers of al-Ahnaf, the unanimous rulings of the Hanafi Imams will undoubtedly carry significant weight. The Hanafi Imams state:
“Know that no fatwa of disbelief (kufr) should be issued against a Muslim if their words can be interpreted in a positive manner, or if there is disagreement among jurists regarding their disbelief, even if that disagreement is based on a weak narration. If a particular issue contains multiple interpretations that could necessitate disbelief, but there exists even a single interpretation that negates disbelief, then it is obligatory for the jurist to incline toward the interpretation that negates disbelief.” (Shami, Chapter on the Rulings of Apostasy).
This demonstrates that when a Muslim’s statement could bear interpretations leading to disbelief but also allows for a non-disbelieving interpretation, it should be interpreted in the latter way— especially if the individual continues to pray, expresses love for the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and serves Islam. Thus, the triviality of such fatwas becomes even more evident and apparent. This particular detail is also mentioned in the books of Fatawa.
Imam Muhammad, a cornerstone of Hanafi jurisprudence, narrates in Athar al-Muhammad that someone once asked Ibn Umar (RA): “Those who steal our belongings and violate our property —are they disbelievers?” He replied, “No.” When asked further about those who reinterpret the Quran and deem them disbelievers, he again said, “No, as long as they do not associate partners with Allah.”
This was the approach of the Hanafi Imams, and this is the ruling of their followers today.