The Brutal Consequences of the Misuse of Takfir

The marked tendency of several Islamic groups and movements to resort to takfir or branding other Muslims as apostates, often misusing it as a tool to settle scores with personal or ideological opponents, has had a brutalizing effect on the wider Muslim society. It has contributed in a major way to promoting extremist and exclusivist thinking, and has further widened intra-Muslim divisions and conflicts.


In India, takfiri tendencies are apparent in ongoing and longstanding Deobandi-Barelvi controversies and in harangues between the Ahl-e Hadith, on the one hand, and the Sunni Hanafis, including both the Deobandis and the Barelvis, on the other.

In Pakistan, these conflicts also exist, as do conflicts between Shias and Sunnis, which have assumed violent and very bloody forms in recent years. In that country, sectarian strife has led to bombings of mosques and other religious institutions of rival sects, causing much wanton loss of innocent life. Lamentably, there has been no serious effort in both these countries to bring the ulema and other leaders of these different Muslim sects together to engage in meaningful and productive dialogue.


Fierce sectarian rivalries, instigated by sections of the ulema of different groups, have had a profound effect on relations between ordinary Muslims belonging to different sects. Numerous cases have been reported in India of Barelvi Muslims forbidding Deobandi Muslims from mosques controlled by them. In some cases, Deobandis who enter Barelvi-controlled mosques are forcibly expelled from them, after which the mosques have to be ‘cleaned’ in order to ‘purify’ them. Recently, a case was reported from Moradabad, in which when some Barelvi men prayed behind a Deobandi imam at a funeral service, a Barelvi maulvi issued a fatwa declaring the marriage of these men to their wives to have been annulled thereby, because, the Barelvi maulvi argued, by praying behind a Deobandi they had ceased to be Muslims and so could not be married to Muslim women. According to this Barelvi maulvi, Deobandis are not Muslims at all, but are, actually, kafirs. This is a widely-shared view among the Barelvis.


The mass media, ever on the prowl for sensational news about Muslims, routinely highlight such cases in their reporting—with unconcealed glee. Obviously, such cases of naked obscurantism prove a blessing, and also a source of perverse amusement, for elements that thrive on mocking the shariah and the ulema. Further dividing Muslims among themselves and playing into the hands of those who miss no opportunity to mock Islam are thus among the most alarming consequences of the wielding of the sword of takfir.

In some Muslim countries, violent groups have resorted to takfir to engage in war against their own governments. These groups brand their governments as ‘agents of the West’, and, on that basis, declare them to be ‘kafir governments’ against which armed jihad is, so they claim, a binding religious duty. This obviously never-ending war, needless to say, is only leading to the further destruction of Muslim countries, besides further tarnishing the image of Islam and Muslims in the eyes of others.


Given the bloody and devastating consequences of takfiri tendencies, how should we Muslims, seriously committed to our faith and our people, seek to combat them? This is a critical issue, for which we must seek guidance from the Quran and the practice of the Prophet.


In this regard, it is pertinent to note what the Prophet’s own stance was on the matter. In a well-known hadith contained in the Sahih al-Bukhari, the Prophet declared, ‘ [if someone] engages in takfir of a true believer, it is as if he has killed him’. He also said, ‘If someone calls his brother (fellow Muslim) a kafir, then either of them is a kafir.’


On this issue, the noted classical Islamic scholar Imam Ghazali writes in his acclaimed Faisal al-Tafriqa Bayn al-Islam wa al-Zandaqa (‘The Decision Regarding the Difference Between Islam and Disbelief’):


‘The basis of faith are three: faith in God; faith in the Prophet; and faith in the Hereafter. Besides this, [all else] are minor branches (fur‘u). One should know that takfir [of anyone] cannot be engaged in on the basis of the minor branches except in one matter, and that is if a person denies any aspect of the principles of religion (usul ud-din) that has been continuously transmitted from the Prophet.’


In the same book, Imam Ghazali argues that there is danger in engaging in takfir, while there is no danger in ‘remaining silent’—that is to say, in refraining from engaging in takfir of others. In another of his works, titled Al-Iqtisad fi al-Itiqad (‘The Moderate Position in Matters of Faith’), Imam Ghazali contends, ‘To mistakenly release a thousand infidels is a lighter [sin] than to spill the blood of a single Muslim.’ In a similar vein, Allama Taftazani, another accomplished classical Islamic scholar, explains in his Sharh ul-‘Aqaid al-Nasafiya a basic principle of the Sunni school, according to which one should not engage in takfir against any person from among the ahl-e qibla, that is people who pray in the direction of the Ka‘aba—which is to say, any Muslim. The well-known Hanafi text Sharh Mawaqif relates that Imam Abu Hanifa, putative founder of the Hanafi school, never engaged in takfir against any one belonging to the ahl-e qibla. The Imam is also said to have opined, ‘If there are 99 reasons to declare a person a kafir and only reason not to do so, takfir shall not be engaged in against him.’ Likewise, another noted classical Islamic scholar, Allama Tajuddin Subqi, argued, ‘Till such time as a person believes that there is no god but God and [that] Muhammad is the prophet of God, it is difficult to engage in takfir against him.’


According to the noted Indian Deobandi scholar Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, a leading ‘alim of the Deoband school Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, was of the view that even if there are 999 aspects of kufr in a person from among the ahl-e qibla, takfir should not be engaged in against him. Yet, despite this clear stand, some Deobandi ulema have committed enormous blunders, not sparing noted Islamic scholars such as Maulana Hamiduddin Farahi and Maulana Shibli Numani from the unsheathed sword of takfir.


The attitude and behaviour of the ulema of the Barelvi school is even more extreme in this regard. They openly declare all Deobandis and followers of the Ahl-e Hadith sect to be kafirs. The leading light of the Barelvi sect, Ahmad Riza Khan Barelvi, issued a fatwa claiming that if any person even doubts the ‘infidelity’ of the Deobandis, he, too, is a kafir. He was of the view that all Deobandis were kafir in the full sense of the term. Accordingly, in various fatwas he argued that Barelvis must desist from treating them as fellow Muslims in any manner whatsoever.


From all these details, it is amply clear that takfiri tendencies have today become a deadly disease that is eating away at the very vitals of Muslim society. It has divided the entire Muslim society against itself. It has also given a tremendous boost to extremism in influential Muslim religious and political circles. It has thus now become imperative for Muslims seriously concerned about and committed to their faith to deal with this monster, and to seriously work together to seek a solution to this menace.