Assalaamu’alaikum warohmatullaahi wabarokaatuh
Ustadz, I am a man who is still in the process of learning the knowledge of shari’a, which I learn from a salafee teacher, alhamdulillaah (all praises be to Allah). I used to have a discussion with a secular man who claimed that in political view, since he is a student of political faculty in one of the famous state university in Jogjakarta, mushaf Al Qur’an possessed by Muslim today is Mushaf ‘Uthmaanee. He claimed that under the governance of ‘Uthmaan (may Allah be pleased with him), there was a political upheaval between ‘Uthmaan (may Allah be pleased with him) and ‘Ali Ibn Abi Thalib (may Allah be pleased with him). Due to this political riot, ‘Uthmaan, who was the first caliph to compile Al Qur’an, rejected the recitation from Companions who supported ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). I feel pity for him, for being influenced by secularism. Please help me to give an explanation about this matter! And how I suppose to advise him regarding this matter? Jazakallaahu khairan (May Allah reward you with goodness).
Wassalaamu’alaikum warahmatullaahi wabarakatuh.
All praises be to Allah, peace and blessings may be upon Prophet Muhammad Shallallaahu’alayhe wa Sallam, his family, his Companions, and anyone who follow his guidance until The Hour, aameen.
To be straight, the man’s statement just proved that he does not understand, or he never read the history of Islam. Because the first caliph to compile Al Qur’an was Abu Bakr Ash Shiddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), and not ‘Uthmaan Ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him). What ‘Uthmaan did was unifying Qur’an recitation, by using dialect of Quraish, no less or more. While the first compilation of Qur’an in mushaf done at the time of Abu Bakr was not unifying the recitation in one dialect. And for information, the revelation of Al Qur’an was in 7 type of dialects in Arabic language, and previously, Allah’s messenger Shallallaahu’alayhi wa Sallam allowed all of those different dialects. But since this dialect difference caused clashes among Muslim, which occurred at the time of ‘Uthmaan as the caliph, thus he ordered all Muslim to recite Al Qur’an in one dialect; the dialect of Quraish, and the compilation should suit that dialect. This is the brief story about the compilation at the time of caliph ‘Uthmaan Ibn Affan, and it was far from what the man has claimed about.
Second reason why we believe that the man’ statement is wrong, because there was no single riot at the time of caliph ‘Uthmaan Ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him), between him and ‘Ali Ibn Abi Thalib (May Allah be pleased with him). ‘Ali Ibn Abi Thalib (may Allah be pleased with him) even became one of the most trusted person to ‘Uthmaan Ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him) at that time. This is a clear proof that the man was merely boasting, since he learned politic, and that made him confidence to carelessly talk about Islam and it’s history. Only by analyzing events in Islamic history according to political principles, although those principles contradict the basic principles of Islam.
Muslim, particularly the devoted Companions, were not wicked as politicians he knows. Muslim, the Companions in particular, had a pure heart, together with honest and objective manner in dealing with every matter they faced. And their attitude continuously reflected their noble and faithful personalities to Allah and The Day of Resurrection. They rejected to legalize all tricks (containing forbidden ones) to achieve their aim, moreover to manipulate or deny truth due to personal or sectarian needs. Their soul were too lofty to be compared with people of today, moreover the politicians who are mostly evil and indifferent to humanity in order to reach their goals.
Shortly speaking, the man’s word is an accusation and disgrace toward Caliph ‘Uthmaan Ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him), since he accused him of being injustice by putting his personal importance rather than Al Qur’an and Muslim’s as a whole. This, is an embarrassing and wicked accusation, which should not came from a person who claimed to have faith in Allah and The Day of Resurrection. Allah had decreed that:
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاء عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاء بَيْنَهُمْ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعاً سُجَّداً يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلاً مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَاناً سِيمَاهُمْ فِي وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ السُّجُودِ ذَلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ فَآزَرَهُ فَاسْتَغْلَظَ فَاسْتَوَى عَلَى سُوقِهِ يُعْجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ الْكُفَّارَ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْراً عَظِيماً
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating (in prayer) , seeking bounty from Allah and (His) pleasure. Their sign is in their faces from the effect of prostration (i.e. prayer). That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces it’s offshoots and strengthens them, so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers, so that He (Allah) will enrage by them the disbelievers.” (Al Fath / The Victory: 29)
That is why Imam Malik Ibn Anas used this verse to argue that the Rafidha (Shi’a) are unbelievers, since they hated the Companions of The Messenger of Allah- Shallallaahu’alayhe wa Sallam. Whereas Allah had declared that only disbelievers that hated the Companions of the Prophet Shallallaahu’alayhe wa Sallam.
Hopefully this short answer can clearly depict the deviation of the man’s claim.
And Allah knows best.
Wassalaamu’alaikum warahmatullaahi wabarakaatuh
Questioner: Rizki Mula
Answered by: Ustadz Dr. Muhammad Arifin Badri