Summary of Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiri’s clarification regarding his statement on Kaa’b Bin Maalik radhiallaahu ‘anhu.

Summary of Shaykh ‘Ubayd al-Jaabiri’s clarification regarding his statement on Kaa’b Bin Maalik radhiallaahu ‘anhu.

Question:
You have mentioned in a lecture called ‘’Ithaaf al-Bashar bi-sharh hadeeth Hudayfah bin al-Yamaan inna kuna fi jahiliyyah wa shar.’ You said that Kaa’b Bin Maalik (radiallaahu 'anhu) used to say: “By Allaah what will happen to me if I die while the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam is in that state (of boycotting me)?”
So you said, “He feared that he dies and the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam dies while Kaa’b is still boycotted because If he died in that state of being boycotted, he dies misguided and misguides except if Allaah pardons him, may Allaah be pleased with him. If the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam died then he (Kaa’b radiallaahu ‘anhu) would have been boycotted until he dies because the revelation would have stopped.”
There are those who say that in your speech is revilement of this honourable companion Kaa’b Bin Maalik radiallaahu ‘anhu because if he dies then he dies being boycotted and dies misguided and misguides and we know that you honour and respect the companions (may Allaah be pleased with them). We would like you to clarify this affair to refute the evil plots and plans of the connivers.

Shaykh Ubayd al-Jaabiri answers:
“I begin in the name of Allaah and praise Him and ask Allaah to raise the mention the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam and protect him.
After which follows:
It is not surprising that speech is sought after with hatred, jealousy and sickness such that speech is given a meaning other than what is meant.
The just one refers the first part of the speech to the last part and the last part of the speech to its first part, that way a clear meaning is portrayed. That is in the first instance.
Secondly, with regards to the one who sees this as an error from me, then I say I don’t consider myself free from errors nor do I claim innocence from not erring nor do I claim to be infallible, nor is anyone after the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam infallible.

Infallibility is in the Book of Allaah and Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam so whatever has come authentically reported from the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam whether speech or action then that is infallible along with the consensus of the Companions and any consensus that is affirmed after the Companions then it is accepted by the scholars and also it is infallible whether the proof is known or not. If this is understood, then I say yes I said this statement and it was open not in a personal sitting and I said it and it was from me regarding what Kaa’b bin Maalik (radiallaahu ‘anhu) said and he feared that he be misguided. SO WHEN AFTER A WHILE I PONDERED OVER THE STATEMENT OF MINE IT BECAME CLEAR TO ME THAT I GENERALIZED SO THE ERROR OCCURRED. SO I WISHED TO SAY AND I HAVE CORRECTED IT IN A TREATISE WHICH WILL BE WIDESPREAD AND PRINTED, ALLAAH WILLING, BY THE NAME OF ‘IMDAAD AHLI ATHAR BI SHARH HADEETH HUDAYFAH KUNA FI JAHILIYYAH WA SHAR.’

I have said in which the meaning is, that I have distinguished the two affairs. I said that Kaa’b radiallaahu ‘anhu feared that he dies upon misguidance this no doubt there is no disagreement between the scholars, he didn’t feel this except having fear of dying upon misguidance so it is obligatory to distinguish that if he died before the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam then this is in the knowledge of the unseen whether revelation would be revealed to the Prophet sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam revealing his innocence or not. However, If the Messenger sallallaahu ‘alaihi wa sallam died then the revelation stops with his death so If the Messenger died while Kaa’b was boycotted then he would have been in that state there is no doubt in this is what must be understood and this is what I hold.