A Shi'ite Encyclopedia

A vast collection of information that addresses Shi'a/Sunni inter-school related issues. An effort of the Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project Team

Introduction

Respected Reader,
'assalamu alaykum,

The editor of this work is pleased to announce the release of the "Shia Encyclopedia", which forms itself as the collection of articles that emanated from an intra-faith dialogue, ranging from exploring commonalities, differences and a train of thought specific to the Shia (also known as the school of the Ahlul Bayt).

We are pleased to release a collection of information which addresses inter-school related issues between the school of Ahlul Bayt and the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah. This encyclopedia which covers the most important lines of thought of the Ahlul Bayt, is the contribution of various individuals.

Most of the articles provided in this encyclopedia are original contributions, while the rest are excerpts from the Ahlul Bayt and the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah books.

The information presented in this encyclopedia is based on the understanding and the knowledge of the contributors. The subjects are classified and are divided into several chapters, so that one can get an overhead view of all the major issues.

The approach taken with respect to the sources can be delineated as follows:

1. When an article references both sources from the school of the Ahlul Bayt and the school of the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah it is meant to impress on the reader the common areas of understanding

2. When an article references both sources from the school of the Ahlul Bayt and the school of the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah it is also meant to impress on the reader the areas where the understanding has diverged

3. When an article references both sources from the school of the Ahlul Bayt and the school of the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah it is also meant to impress on the reader the areas where the understanding is common, but whether they school of Ahlul Bayt has more detail to shed light in the subject matter

4. When an article references only sources from the school of the Ahlul Bayt, it is meant to impress on the reader that this subject only finds its mention in this school and not the school of the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah

5. When an article references only sources from the school of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah, it is meant to impress that the same beliefs also exist in the school of the Ahlul Bayt but that the former school followers are not privy to

6. When an article references only sources from the school of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jama'ah in detail, it is meant to impress to the reader of the divergence of opinion on that particular matter

This approach ensures that each school of thought is properly represented, for more than often, it is the deliberate misrepresentation, distortion, that is meant not just to villify the other school, but also wilfully misrepresent them, that is the underlying cause of dis-information

We are grateful that in this day and age, when avenues of communication are wide open, access to the primary texts is easily attainable, scholarship is available in the form of written books from both schools, that the need to forge an understanding on the truth becomes critical and even leaves us with the ethical and moral obligation to undertake such an endeavor.

This is the magnificent path which Prophet Muhammad (S) introduced to humanity centuries ago, as mentioned in Qur’an:

"(O’ Prophet) Say: ‘This is my way: I do invite you unto Allah, on discernment (insight and enlightenment), I and whoever follows me.’“(Qur’an 12:108)

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided. (Qur'an, 16:125)

We hope you’ll find this encyclopedia helpful and constructive, and we thank God for giving us this opportunity.

The articles are being modified and improved. We appreciate your comments, improvements and corrections. Your feedback makes this work more insightful. Please do not hesitate to contact us by clicking on the "Contact Us” link.

Blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad and the Members of his House.

Best wishes,
‘Ali Abbas
Editor

Preliminary Notes

• SWT = "Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala”= Exalted He is (used for Allah)

• S = Peace be upon him and his family (used for Prophet Muhammad)

• as = "Alayhi al-Salam”= Peace be upon him (used for the prophets and the Imams)

• RA = "Radhiyallah Anh/Anha”= may Allah be pleased with him/her

Please note that the addresses of Sahih al-Bukhari which are given in the form of x.xxx match the Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari which is available in most mosques. The first number before the point indicates the volume number, and the number after the point indicates the tradition number (not the page number). For example al-Bukhari Hadith 8.578 indicates volume 8, tradition #578 for the Arabic-English version.

Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Based on a parallel (Mutawatir) tradition upon whose authenticity all Muslims agree, the Messenger of Allah (S) informed his followers in several occasions that he would leave them two precious/weighty things and that if Muslims adhere to both of them, they will never go astray after him. They are the Book of Allah (Qur’an) and the Members of the House of the Prophet (Ahlul-Bayt), peace be upon them all.

It is narrated in Sahih Muslim as well as many other sources that:

Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (S) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said: "O’ people! Behold! It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. Behold! I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance...The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times)."

Sunni Reference:

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v 4, p1873, Tradition #36.

• And many others such as Sahih al-Tirmidhi, Musnad Ahmad (see below).

For the English version of Sahih Muslim, see Chapter CMXCVI, v4, p1286, Tradition #5920

Here is the Arabic text of the above tradition in Sahih Muslim:

 قام رسول الله يوما فينا خطيبا بماء يدعى خما بين مكة والمدينة ، فحمد الله وأثنى عليه ، ووعظ وذكر ، ثم قال: أما بعد ، ألا أيها الناس ، فإنما أنا بشر ، يوشك أن يأتي رسول ربي فأجيب ، وأنا تارك فيكم ثقلين ، أولهما: كتاب الله ، فيه الهدى والنور ، فخذوا بكتاب الله ، واستمسكوا به ، فحث على كتاب الله ورغب فيه ، ثم قال: وأهل بيتي ، أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي، أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي ، أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي

As we can see in the above tradition in Sahih Muslim, not only Ahlul-Bayt has been put beside the Qur’an, but also it has been mentioned three times by the Prophet (S).

Despite the fact that the author of Sahih Muslim and many other Sunni traditionists have recorded the above tradition in their authentic books, it is regrettable that the majority of Sunnis are unaware of its existence at the best, or deny it at the worst. Their counter argument is that the most reliable tradition in this regard is the one recorded by al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak, on the authority of Abu Huraira, attributing to the Messenger of Allah saying: "I leave amongst you two things that if you follow or act upon, you will not go astray after me: The Book of God and my Sunnah (traditions)."

There is no doubt that ALL Muslims are required to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (S). However, the question remains that which Sunnah is genuine and which one is invented later and was falsely attributed to the Prophet.

On tracing the source of this report of Abu Huraira which states "Qur’an and Sunnah,”we found out that it has NOT been recorded in any of the six authentic Sunni collections of the traditions (Sihah Sittah). Not only that, but also al-Bukhari, al-Nisa’i, and al-Dhahabi and many others rated this report (Qur’an and Sunnah) as weak because of its weak Isnad. It should be noted that although the book of al-Hakim is an important Sunni collection of traditions, yet it is ranked inferior to the six major Sunni books. This is while Sahih Muslim is in the second rank among the six Sunni collections of traditions.

al-Tirmidhi reported that the "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”version of the tradition is traced to 30+ companions. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami reported that he knows of 20+ companions witnessed that also. This is while the "Qur’an and Sunnah”version reported by al-Hakim has only one source! Thus we must conclude that the "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”version is much more reliable. Moreover al-Hakim has also mentioned the "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”version in his book (al-Mustadrak) through several chain of authorities and confirmed that the "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”version of the tradition is authentic based on the criteria of al-Bukhari and Muslim.

Moreover, the word "Sunnah”by itself does not serve the purpose of knowledge. All Muslims irrespective to their persuasions claim that they follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (S). The differences among Muslims come from the transmitted Prophetic traditions through different avenues. Such traditions serve as explanatory means of the Holy Qur’an upon whose authenticity all Muslims agree.

Thus divergence in the transmitted traditions, which in turn has led to differing interpretation of Qur’an and the prophetic Sunnah, has created numerous versions of Sunnah. All Muslims, as a result, splintered into different schools, groups, offshoots, which is believed to add up to seventy three groups.

All of them are obeying their own version of Sunnah which they claim to be the true one. Which of these groups follow the true Sunnah of the Prophet? Which one (out of 73 groups) will be the prosperous one, and will survive? Other than the tradition of Sahih Muslim mentioned above, the following authentic traditions provide a unique detailed answer for this question:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "I am leaving for you two precious and weighty Symbols that if you adhere to BOTH of them you shall not go astray after me. They are, the Book of Allah, and my progeny, that is my Ahlul-Bayt. The Merciful has informed me that These two shall not separate from each other till they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."

Sunni references:

1. Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 662-663,328, report of 30+ companions, with reference to several chains of transmitters.

2. al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, Chapter of "Understanding (the virtues) of Companions, v3, pp 109,110,148,533 who wrote this tradition is authentic (Sahih) based on the criteria of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim).

3. Sunan, by Daarami, v2, p432

4. Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 14,17,26,59, v4, pp 366,370-372, v5, pp 182,189,350,366,419

5. Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p585, Tradition #990

6. al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 21,30

7. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p230

8. al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani, v3, pp 62-63,137

9. Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, Chapter al-Iti’sam bi Habl Allah, v1, p44.

10. Tafsir Ibn Kathir (complete version), v4, p113, under commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an (four traditions)

11. al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, p194, Pub. by Dar Isadder, Lebanon.

12. al-Jami’ al-Saghir, by al-Suyuti, v1, p353, and also in v2

13. Majma’ al-Zawa’id, al-Haythami, v9, p163

14. al-Fateh al-Kabir, al-Binhani, v1, p451

15. Usdul Ghabah fi Ma’rifat al-Sahaba, Ibn al-Athir, v2, p12

16. Jami’ al-Usul, Ibn al-Athir, v1, p187

17. History of Ibn Asakir, v5, p436

18. al-Taj al-Jami’ Lil Usul, v3, p308

19. al-Durr al-Manthoor, al-Hafidh al-Suyuti, v2, p60

20. Yanabi al-Mawaddah, al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, pp 38,183

21. Abaqat al-Anwar, v1, p16

... and many more ...

 إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم بهما لن تضلو بعدي أبدا:كتاب الله وعترتي أهل بيتي وهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض

Of course, any Muslim should follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (S), and as such, we, the Followers of Ahlul-Bayt, submit to the genuine (practice) Sunnah of the Holy Prophet of Islam (S) and consider it to be the only path of salvation. But the above tradition gives evidence to the fact that any so-called Sunnah (practice) which contradicts Ahlul-Bayt is NOT a genuine Sunnah and has been innovated later on by some pay-rolled individuals in support the tyrants.

That’s why the Prophet had emphasized so much on Ahlul-Bayt in loving them and following them since they carry his genuine Sunnah. And this is the basis of the Shi’a School of Thought (the School of Ahlul-Bayt). The Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet who are raised in his house know more than anybody else about the Sunnah of the Prophet and what it entails, for as the proverb goes: "The people of Mecca know its paths better than anyone else."

For the sake of argument, if we accept that the two versions of the tradition ("Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”vs. "Qur’an and Sunnah") are both authentic, then one must submit to the interpretation that the word "my Sunnah”given by al-Hakim means the Sunnah which is derived through Ahlul- Bayt and not any other source, as it is evident from the Ahlul-Bayt version given by both Mustadrak al-Hakim and Sahih Muslim. Now let us take a look at the following tradition:

Narrated Umm Salama:

The Messenger of Allah said: "‘Ali is with Qur’an, and Qur’an is with ‘Ali. They shall not separate from each other till they both return to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p124 on the authority of Umm Salama

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, section 2, pp 191,194

• al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani; also in al-Saghir

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173

The above tradition gives evidence to the fact that Imam ‘Ali and Qur’an are non-separable. If we accept the "Qur’an and Sunnah”version to be authentic, then one can conclude that the one who carries the Sunnah of Prophet is Imam ‘Ali since he is the one who has been put beside Qur’an.

Interesting to see, al-Hakim has many other traditions about necessity of following Ahlul-Bayt, among which is the following tradition. This tradition is also narrated by many other Sunni scholars and is known as the "Tradition of the Ship”in which the Prophet (S) stated:

"Behold! My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah. Whoever embarked in it was SAVED, and whoever turned away from it was PERISHED."

إنَّما مثلُ أهلُ بيتي كَمَثل سَفينَةُ نوح

مَنْ رَكَبها نَجى و مَنْ تَخَلَّفَ عنها هَلكْ.

Sunni references:

1. al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p343, v3, pp 150-151 on the authority of Abu Dharr. al-Hakim said this tradition is authentic (Sahih).

2. Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p786

3. Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, under the commentary of verse 42:23, Part 27, p167

4. al-Bazzar, on the authority of Ibn Abbas and Ibn Zubair with the wording "drowned”instead of "perished".

5. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p234 under Verse 8:33. Also in section 2, p282. He said this Hadith has been transmitted via numerous authorities.

6. Tarikh al-Khulafaa and Jami’ al-Saghir, by al-Suyuti

7. al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani, v3, pp 37,38

8. al-Saghir, by al-Tabarani, v2, p22

9. Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p306

10. al-Kuna wal Asmaa, by al-Dulabi, v1, p76

11. Yanabi al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, pp 30,370

12. Is’af al-Raghibeen, by al-Saban

The above tradition gives evidence to the fact that those who adopt the school of Ahlul-Bayt and follow them, shall be saved from the punishment of Hell, while those who run away from them shall meet with the fate of the one who tried to save his life by climbing up the mountain, with the only difference that whereas he (Noah’s renegade son) was drowned in water, but these people will be drowned the fire of Hell. The following tradition also confirms it:

The Prophet (S) said about Ahlul-Bayt:

"Do not be ahead of them for you will perish, do not turn away from them for you will perish, and do not try to teach them since they know more than you do!"

 لا تتقدموهم فتهلكوا ولا تتخلفوا عنهم فتهلكوا ولا تعلموهم فإنهم أعلم منكم.

Sunni references:

1. al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, p60

2. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p230, quoted from al-Tabarani, also in section 2, p342

3. Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v3, p137

4. Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, p41, and P335

5. Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v1, p168

6. Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p163

7. Aqabat al-Anwar, v1, p184

8. A’alam al-Wara, pp 132-133

9. Tadhkirat al-Khawas al-Ummah, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 28-33

10. al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, by Noor al-Din al-Halabi, v3, p273

Here is another one:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "My Ahlul-Bayt are like the Gate of Repentance of the Children of Israel; whoever entered therein was forgiven."

إنما مثل أهل بيتي فيكم مثل باب حطة في بنى إسرائيل من دخله غفر

Sunni References:

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p168

• al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani, Tradition #18

• Arba’in, by al-Nabahani, p216

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 230,234

Another fairly similar tradition was recorded by al-Darqunti as well as Ibn Hajar in his al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, Ch. 9, section 2, p193 where the Prophet (S) said: "‘Ali is the Gate of Repentance, whoever entered therein was a believer and whoever went out was an unbeliever."

The above tradition was in connection with verses 2:58 and 7:161 of Qur’an which describe the Gate of Repentance of Bani Israel. Those of companions of Moses who did not enter the Gate of the Repentance were lost in the desert for forty years, while those who did not enter the ark of Noah were drowned. Ibn Hajar concludes that:

"The analogy of the Ark of Noah signifies that those who love and honor the Ahlul-Bayt and derive from their guidance will be rescued from the darkness of opposition, and those who will turn against them will be drowned in the sea of ingratitude and will perish in the desert of insubordination and rebellion."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, p. 91

Have we ever asked ourselves why the Prophet put so much emphasis on Ahlul- Bayt? Was is just because they were members of his family, or was it because they carried his true teachings (Sunnah) and they were the most knowledgeable individuals among his community after him?

Different versions of the Tradition of Two Weighty Things (al-Thaqalain) which prove conclusively that it is compulsory to follow the Qur’an and the Ahlul-Bayt, are not ordinary traditions. They are repeated many times and are related on the authority of more than thirty of the companions of the Holy Prophet (S) through various sources.

The Holy Prophet (S) repeated these words over and over again (and not merely in one isolated instance but on several occasions) publicly to show that it is compulsory to follow and obey the Ahlul-Bayt. He made the announcement during the Farewell Pilgrimage, on the day of Arafat, on the day of Ghadir Khum, on the return from Ta’if, also in Medina from the pulpit, and in his deathbed when the room was packed with his disciples, he said:

"O folk! I am soon going to depart from here, and although I have already told you, I repeat once more that I am leaving with you two things, namely, the Book of Allah and my descendants, that is, my Ahlul-Bayt.”Then he lifted ‘Ali by the hand and said: "Behold! this ‘Ali is with the Qur’an and the Qur’an is with him. These two shall never separate from each other until they come to me at the Pool of Kawthar."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, section 2

Ibn Hajar al-Haythami wrote:

"The Traditions of Adherence has been handed down through a large number of sources and more than twenty of the disciples have related it."

He further wrote:

"Here a doubt arises, and it is that while the Tradition has come down through various sources, some say that the words were spoken during the last pilgrimage, others that they were spoken at Medina when he lay on his deathbed and the room was packed with his disciples, yet another saying that he spoke these words at Ghadir Khum, or in another Hadith, on the return from Ta’if.

But there is NO inconsistency in these, since having regards to the importance and greatness of the Qur’an and the pure Ahlul-Bayt, and with a view of emphasizing the point before the people, the Holy Prophet might have repeated these words on all these occasions so that any one who had not heard them before might hear them now."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p230

Concluding the above traditions, the Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt are the only two precious things that the Prophet left for Muslims, and stated that if Muslims follow BOTH of them, they will not go astray after him, and they will be led to Paradise, and that those who forsake Ahlul-Bayt will not survive. The above traditions have been designed by Prophet (S) to answer which "Sunnah”is genuine and which group caries the true "Sunnah”of the Prophet. It is aimed at not leaving Muslims at loss as to which way to go after the departure of the Prophet (S).

On the other hand, if we use the word "Sunnah”alone, it does not give us any specific answer for this question since all the groups among the Muslim nation follow their own version of Sunnah as well as their own interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Thus the prophetic instructions were clear in urging Muslims to follow the interpretation of Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet transmitted through the channel of Ahlul-Bayt whose sinlessness, purity, and righteousness is confirmed by the Holy Qur’an (the last sentence of verse 33:33).

Why School of Ahlul-Bayt?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The purpose of this article is merely to demonstrate that Shi’a views about the special importance and the leadership of Ahlul-Bayt do not come out of the blue. In this way, I hope to contribute to better understanding among Muslims and hence help to reduce some people’s hostility against the followers of the Members of the House of the Prophet (S).

The fact that we (Shi’a) have adopted a creed which differs from that of the Ash’arites as far as the fundamental beliefs are concerned, and differs from the four schools of Sunni jurists as far as the laws, rites, and observances are concerned, is not due to any sectarianism or prejudice. It is rather the theological reasoning which has led us to adopt the creed of those Imams who belong to the Ahlul-Bayt of the Holy Prophet, the Messenger of Allah (S).

We have, therefore, wholly and solely bound ourselves to them in our observances as well as our beliefs; in the derivations of our knowledge of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet; and in all our material, moral and spiritual values on the grounds of theological and logical proofs. We have done this in obedience of the Holy Prophet and in submission to his Sunnah.

Had we not been convinced by these proofs to disallow all Imams except the Ahlul-Bayt, and to seek to draw near to Allah only through them, we might have inclined towards the creed of the majority for the sake of unity and fraternity. But incontrovertible reasons command a believer to follow the truth regardless of all other considerations.

The majority of the Muslims are unable to produce any argument to show which one of their four different jurists is the best. It is impossible to follow all of them, and therefor, before one can say that it is "compulsory”to follow them, one has to prove which one must be followed. We have pondered over the arguments of the Hanafis, the Shafi’is, the Malikis and the Hanbalis with the eyes of a seeker of truth and we have searched far and wide, but we have found no answer to this, except they were all acclaimed as very great jurists and honest and just men. But you are fully aware that jurist’s capacity, honesty, justice and greatness are not monopoly of these four persons only. Then, how can it be "compulsory”to follow them only?

We do not think that anyone can hold that these four Imams are in any way better than our Imams, the pure and holy descendants of the Prophet (S), the Ark of Salvation, the Gate of Repentance, through whom we can attain protection against disagreement in religious matters; for they are the emblems of guidance, and the leaders towards the straight path.

But alas, after the demise of the Holy Prophet (S), politics began to play its part in the affairs of religion and you know what took place in the heart of Islam as a result. During all these periods of trials, the Shi’a continued to hold fast to Qur’an and the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt whom the Holy Prophet left among us as the two most weighty things (al-Thaqalain).

There have been some extremists sects (al-Ghulat) which appeared every now and then in course of the history of Islam; nonetheless, the main body of the Shi’a have never deviated from this path since the time of Imam ‘Ali and Fatimah (peace be upon them) up to the present day.

The Shi’a existed when Ash’ari and all the four Sunni Imams were unborn and unheard of. Up to the first three generations since the Holy Prophet’s time, Ash’ari and the Sunni Imams were unknown. Ash’ari was born in 270 AH and died in 320 AH; Ibn Hanbal was born in 164 AH and died in 241 AH; Shafi’i was born in 150 AH and died in 204 AH; Malik was born in 95 AH and died in 169 AH; Abu Hanifa was born in 80 AH and died in 150 AH.

The Shi’a, on the other hand, follow the path of Ahlul-Bayt which include Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (peace be upon them all) who were all contemporaries of the Holy Prophet (S) and raised in his House.

As far as the knowledge of the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt is concerned, it is sufficient to say that Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) was the teacher of the two Sunni Imams, i.e., Abu Hanifa al-Nu’man , and Malik Ibn Anas. Abu Hanifa said: "Except for the two years Nu’man would have starved,”referring to the two years he had benefited from the knowledge of Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as). Malik also confessed straightforwardly that he had not met anyone learned in Islamic Jurisprudence better than Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as).

The Abbasid Caliph, al-Mansoor, commanded Abu Hanifa to prepare for Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) a number of hard questions concerning the Islamic Law and to ask the Imam those questions in the presence of al-Mansoor. Abu Hanifa prepared forty difficult questions and asked Imam Ja’far about them in al-Mansoor’s presence. The Imam not only answered all the questions but also informed about the opinions of the Iraqi as well as the Hijazi Scholars. Abu Hanifa commented on this episode saying:

"Certainly, the most knowledgeable among people is the most knowledgeable of their different opinions."

Sunni reference:

• Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "al-Imam al-Sadiq", p27

Abu Hanifa described his feelings (when he entered the palace of al-Mansoor and found Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) sitting with him) by saying:

"When I saw Imam Ja’far, I felt his personality commands more respect than that of the Caliph himself. Yet the Caliph was ruling the Muslim World, and Imam Ja’far was a private citizen."

Sunni reference:

• Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "al-Imam al-Sadiq", p27

Malik (the other Sunni Imam) said:

"I used to come to Ja’far Ibn Muhammad (as) and went to him for a long time. Whenever I visited him, I found him praying, fasting, or reading the Qur’an. Whenever he reported a statement of the Messenger of God, he was with ablution. He was a distinguished worshipper who was unconcerned with the material world. He was of the God fearing people."

Sunni reference:

• Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "al-Imam al-Sadiq", p66

Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah who was one of the outstanding Sunni contemporary Scholars said:

"The Muslim Scholars of various Islamic Schools never agreed unanimously on a matter as much as they agree on the knowledge of Imam Ja’far and his virtue. The Sunni Imams who lived during his time were his students. Malik was one of them and those who were as contemporary as Malik such as Sufyan al-Thouri and many others. Abu Hanifa also was his student in spite of their being close in age, and he considered Imam Ja’far the most knowledgeable in the Muslim World."

Sunni reference:

• Shaikh Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "al-Imam al-Sadiq", p66

The ties of unity and fraternity can be strengthened and disagreement ended if all Muslims agree that to follow the Ahlul-Bayt is a must. In fact many grand Sunni scholars have acknowledged the Shi’a school as one of the richest Islamic schools for they very reason that the knowledge of the Shi’a school of thought is derived from the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (S) whose supreme knowledge and purity are confirmed in Qur’an.

These Sunni scholars have even issued Fatwa that the Sunnis are allowed to follow the Twelver Shi’ite Jurisprudence. Among these grand scholars are Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot, the head of al-Azhar University (in 1950’s and 60’s).

Moreover, disagreement between the various schools of Sunni thought is by no means less than the lack of conformity between the Shi’a and the Sunnis. A large number of writings of scholars of both sides will bear this out.

Since based on the tradition of Two Weighty things Ahlul-Bayt carry as much weight in the eyes of Allah as the Holy Qur’an, the former have the same qualities as the latter. Just as the Qur’an is true from beginning to end without any shadow of doubt, and just as it is incumbent upon every Muslims to obey its commandments, so are Ahlul-Bayt perfect and sincere guides whose commands must be followed by all.

Therefore there can be no excuse to escape from accepting their leadership and following their creed and their faith. The Muslims are bound by these sayings of the Holy Prophet to follow them and no one else. Just as it is impossible for any Muslims to turn away from the Holy Qur’an or to adopt any set of rules which is at variance with it, so when the Ahlul-Bayt have been unequivocally described as equal in weight and importance to the Holy Qur’an, the same attitude has to be adopted with regard to their orders, and it cannot be permissible to turn away from them in order to follow any other persons. After mentioning the tradition of Two Weighty Things, Ibn Hajar holds that:

"These words show that those members of the Ahlul-Bayt who posed these distinctions were superior to all the people."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, p136

The Messenger of Allah said:

"Whosoever wishes to live and die like me and enter that heaven (after death), which my lord has promised me, namely, the ever lasting heaven should acknowledge ‘Ali (as) as his patron after me, and after him he should acknowledge the sons of ‘Ali, because they are the people who will never leave you outside the door of guidance nor will they let you enter the door of misguidance."

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p155, Tradition #2578

• Also abridged Kanz al-Ummal on the margin of Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v5, p32

Again the significance of leadership of Ahlul-Bayt has been confirmed by the following beautiful analogy of the messenger of Allah:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Regard the Ahlul-Bayt among you as the head to the body, or the eyes to the face, for the face is only guided by the eyes."

Sunni references:

• Is’af al-Raghibeen, by al-Saban

• al-Sharaf al-Mua’abbad, by Shaikh Yusuf al-Nabahani, p31, by more than one authority

Also:

The Messenger of Allah said: "My Ahlul-Bayt are the protected place of refuge about the dispute in religion.”(Mustadrak Hakim)

These traditions, therefore, leave no room for any doubt. There can be no other way except to follow the Ahlul-Bayt and give up all opposition to them.

The Messenger of Allah said: "Acknowledgment of Aale-Muhammad (the family of Muhammad) means salvation from the fire, and love for them is a passport for crossing the bridge of the Siraat, and obedience to them is a protection from divine wrath."

Sunni references:

• Kitab al-Shafa, by Qadhi ‘Ayadh, published in 1328 AH, v2, p40

• Yanabi al-Mawaddah, al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, section 65, p370

Abdullah Ibn Hantab related:

The Messenger of Allah addressed us at Juhfa saying: "Do I not have authority over you more than yourselves?”They all said, "Yes of course.”Then he said: "I shall hold you answerable for two things, namely, the Book of Allah and my descendants."

Sunni reference:

• Ihyaa al-Mayyit, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti

• Arba’in al-’Arbain, by Allamah al-Nabahani

Therefore the reason we have adopted the faith of the Ahlul-Bayt to the exclusion of all others is that Allah himself has given preference to them only. It is sufficient to quote the poem of al-Shafi’i (one of the Sunni Imams) about Ahlul-Bayt which goes as follows:

Members of the House of the Prophet, your love is a Divine duty on mankind. God revealed it in His Qur’an. It is enough among your great privileges that whoever does not bless you, his prayer is void.

If the love of the members of the House of the Prophet is Rafdh (rejection), let mankind and the Jinns testify that I am a Rafidhi (rejector).

The above poem of Shafi’i are too well known among the Arabic speaking people to require any reference. But for the benefit of those who insist on reference see:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, v27, p166, under the commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an.

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, p88, in connection with the verse 33:33 of Qur’an.

Brother/Sister in our prayers, and I am sure that in your prayers also, we say:

"I declare that Muhammad is the servant of God and His Messenger. O Lord, send Your blessings upon Muhammad and his family"

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

According to most authentic traditions in collections of both Sunni and Shi’a, Ahlul-Bayt (People of the House) of the Prophet are one of the two most precious Symbols of Islam after the departure of the Prophet (S). There are numerous traditions in the collection of both schools that the Prophet (S) has reminded us to stick to these two weighty things (al-Thaqalain), namely Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt, in order not to go astray after him.

The Messenger of Allah also informed us that these two weights are non-separable and are with each other till the day of Judgment. This requires us that for understanding the interpretation of Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet (S) we should refer to those who are attached to it, namely Ahlul-Bayt.

Knowing exactly who Ahlul-Bayt are, thus becomes a very vital matter when one considers the above tradition of the Prophet (S) as well as many other traditions which unequivocally state that adherence to Ahlul-Bayt is the only way of salvation. This clearly implies that the one who follows a wrong set of Ahlul-Bayt (!!), will be led astray.

Considering the critical importance of the subject, it will not be surprising to see that the Shi’a differ from some Sunnis in this subject. In fact, the Sunnis do not have one voice in specifying the Members of the House the Prophet. Most Sunnis are in the opinion that the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (S) are:

• Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) (the daughter of the Messenger of Allah),

• Imam ‘Ali (as),

• Imam al-Hasan (as),

• Imam al-Husayn (as),

• Wives of the Prophet (S)

Others among the Sunnis further include ALL the descendants of the Prophet to the list! Some other Sunnis are very generous and include all the descendants of Abbas (the Abbasid) as well as the descendants of Aqil & Ja’far (the two brothers of Imam ‘Ali) to the list. It should be noted, however, that there have been some leading Sunni scholars who did NOT consider the wives of the Prophet among Ahlul-Bayt. This happens to be consistent with the Shi’a point of view.

To the Shi’a, the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (S) consist of the following individuals ONLY:

• Fatimah al-Zahra (sa),

• Imam ‘Ali (as),

• Imam al-Hasan (as),

• Imam al-Husayn (as),

• Nine descendants of Imam al-Husayn (as).

and including the Prophet (S) himself, they will become fourteen individuals. Of course, at the time of the Holy Prophet only five of them (including the Prophet) were living and the rest were not born yet.

The Shi’a further assert that these fourteen individuals are protected by Allah from any kind of flaws, and thus worthy of being obeyed beside Qur’an (the other Weighty Symbol), and they are the only people who have the full knowledge of the interpretation of the Qur’anic verses.

In this discussion, we would like to explain why the Shi’a exclude the wives of the Prophet from Ahlul-Bayt, and also we will briefly discuss why Ahlul-Bayt are protected/infallible. (More detailed discussion on the infallibility is provided in Chapter 2). We base our proofs on:

1. Qur’an,
2. Traditions from the authentic Sunni Collections,
3. Historical events.

Evidence From Qur’an

The Holy Book of Allah mentions Ahlul-Bayt and their exceptional virtue in the following verse which is known as "Purification Verse”(Ayah al-Tat’hir):

إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّـهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا 

"Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you with a perfect purification". (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33)

Note that the word "Rijs”in the above verse has got the article "al-”at its beginning which makes the word universal. Thus "al-Rijs”means "EVERY KIND of impurity". Also at the end of the verse, Allah states "and purify you a PERFECT purification.”The word "perfect”comes from the emphasis of "Tat’hiran". This is the only place in Qur’an that Allah uses the emphasis of "PERFECT purification".

According to the above verse, Allah expresses his intention to keep Ahlul-Bayt pure and flawless/sinless, and what Allah intends it will certainly take place as Qur’an itself testifies (see 16:40).

Indeed, a human can be sinless because he is not forced to commit sin. It is the human’s choice to accept the instructions of Allah and get His help to avoid sin, or to neglect Allah’s commandments and commit the sin. Allah is advisor, and encourager, and warner. A sinless human is still a human; no doubt about it. Some people assert that in order to be human, one SHOULD have some mistakes. Such claim is unsupported. The truth is that Human CAN make mistakes but he does not have to.

It is the Grace of Allah that attracts His servants towards Him, WITHOUT compelling them any way. This is our choice to pursue this attraction and refrain from doing mistakes, or to turn away and commit the mistakes. However, Allah has GUARANTEED to show the Right Path and to provide a pure life for those who seek it:

Whoever works righteousness man or woman and is faithful, We shall revive a PURE life for him. (Qur’an 16:97)

And whosoever keeps his duty to Allah, Allah will appoint a way out for him. (Qur’an 65:2)

It is worth mentioning the sentence of Qur’an in verse 33:33 which is related to purification of Ahlul-Bayt, has been placed at the middle of verses related to the wives of the Prophet (S), and this was the main reason why some Sunnis include the wives of the Prophet in Ahlul-Bayt.

However, the sentence related to Ahlul-Bayt (given above) distinguishes itself from the sentences before and after it with a clear distinction. The sentences before and after, use only feminine gender which clearly shows they are addressing the wives of the Prophet (S). However, in contrary, the above sentence uses only masculine gender which is a clear indication that that Qur’an is changing the individuals who it is referring to.

People who are familiar with Qur’an to some extent, know that such a sharp change of addressee is not a weird-thing, and it has been applied to several places in Qur’an. For instance we read in Qur’an:

"O Joseph! pass this over and (O wife of Aziz!) ask forgiveness for your sin, for truly you have been at fault."(Qur’an 12:29)

In the above verse, "O wife of Aziz”has not been mentioned and the address to Joseph (as) looks to continue. However the transition of the address from masculine gender to feminine gender clearly shows that the second sentence is addressing the Aziz’s wife and not Prophet Joseph (as). Notice that both sentences are within one verse. Also note the immediate change of addressing from Aziz’s wife to Joseph and again back to the wife in verses before verse 29 and also within that verse.

In Arabic language, when a group of women are being addressed, feminine gender is employed. However, if only one man exists among that group, masculine gender is used instead. Thus the above sentence of Qur’an clearly shows Allah is referring to a group other than the wives of the Prophet, using masculine gender, and that group includes some male members.

From the verse 33:33 alone, we cannot conclude that the wives of the Prophet are not included in Ahlul-Bayt. This latter claim can be proven by the authentic traditions of the Sunnis from Sihah Sittah in which the Prophet mentioned who Ahlul-Bayt are; and also by comparing the specifications of Ahlul-Bayt given in the verse of Qur’an with the behavior of the some of the wives of the Prophet mentioned in Sihah Sittah to prove the contrary.

What can be understood from the verse ALONE is that Allah is changing His address (which was exclusively the wives of the Prophet at the beginning of the verse) to some people who include some male members, and may or may not include the wives of the Prophet.

Authentic Traditions

It is interesting to see that both Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Tirmidhi as well as many others confirm the Shi’ite point of view explained above. In Sahih Muslim, there is a chapter named "Chapter of Virtues of the Companions". Inside this chapter, there is a section called "Section of the Virtues of the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet". There exists ONLY ONE tradition in this section, and this tradition has no reference to the wives of the Prophet (S). The tradition is known as "The Tradition of Cloak/Mantle”(Hadith al-Kisaa), and is as follows:

Narrated Aisha:

One day the Prophet (S) came out afternoon wearing a black cloak (upper garment or gown; long coat), then al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali came and the Prophet accommodated him under the cloak, then al-Husayn came and entered the cloak, then Fatimah came and the Prophet entered her under the cloak, then ‘Ali came and the Prophet entered him to the cloak as well. Then the Prophet recited: "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification (the last sentence of Verse 33:33)."

Sunni reference:

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of virtues of companions, section of the virtues of the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (S), 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1883, Tradition #61.

Below is the Arabic text of above tradition given in Sahih Muslim:

خرج النبي غداة وعليه مرط مرحل من شعر أسود فجاء الحسن فأدخله معه ، ثم جاء الحسين فأدخله معه ، ثم جاءت فاطمة فأدخلها، ثم جاء علي فأدخله ثم قال: إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا 

One can see that the author of Sahih Muslim confirms that:

1. Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn are the Ahlul-Bayt,

2. The purification sentence in Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33) was revealed for the virtue of the above-mentioned individuals, and NOT for the wives of the Prophet (S).

Muslim (the Author) did not put any other tradition in this section (section of the virtues of Ahlul-Bayt). If the author of Sahih Muslim believed that the wives of the Prophet were included in Ahlul-Bayt, he would have quoted some traditions about them in this section.

It is interesting to see that Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (S) is the narrator of the above tradition, and she herself is testifying that Ahlul- Bayt are the above-mentioned individuals (i.e., Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, may the blessing of Allah be upon them all).

Another version of the "Tradition of Cloak”is written in Sahih al-Tirmidhi, which is narrated in the authority of Umar Ibn Abi Salama, the son of Umm Salama (another wife of Prophet), which is as follows:

The verse

"Verily Allah intends to ... (33:33)"

was revealed to the Prophet (S) in the house of Umm Salama. Upon that, the Prophet gathered Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and covered them with a cloak, and he also covered ‘Ali who was behind him. Then the Prophet said: "O’ Allah! These are the Members of my House (Ahlul-Bayt). Keep them away from every impurity and purify them with a perfect purification.”Umm Salama (the wife of Prophet) asked: "Am I also included among them O Apostle of Allah?”the Prophet replied: "You remain in your position and you are toward a good ending."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 351,663

Here is the Arabic text of above tradition given by Sahih al-Tirmidhi:

نزلت هذه الآية على النبي "إنَّما يريدُ اللهَ...”في بيت أُم سلمه فدعا النبي فاطمه و حسناً و حسيناً فجعلهم بكسائه و علي خلف ظهره ثم قال: ألَّلهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي فاْذهب عنهم الرجس و طهرهم تطهيراً. قالت أمُّ سلمه: و أنا معهم يا نبي الله؟ قال أنتِ على مكانك و أنتِ إلى خير.

As we see, al-Tirmidhi also confirms that Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn are the Ahlul-Bayt, and the purification sentence in Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33) was revealed for the virtue of the above-mentioned individuals, and NOT for the wives of the Prophet (S). Also it is apparent from above authentic tradition that the Prophet himself excluded his wives from Ahlul-Bayt. If Umm Salama (ra) was among Ahlul-Bayt, why didn’t the Prophet answer her positively? Why didn’t he enter her into the cloak? Why did the Prophet tell her that she remains in her own position? If the Prophet (S) would consider Umm Salama among Ahlul-Bayt, he would surely have entered her to the cloak and would have prayed for her perfect purity as well.

It is also worth mentioning that the Prophet (S) did NOT say: "These are among the Members of my House". He rather said: "These are THE Members of my House”since there was no other member of Ahlul-Bayt who was alive at the time of the Prophet (S). Also notice that Umm Salama (ra) who is the virtuous wife of the Prophet is the narrator of the tradition to his son and gives the testimony that who Ahlul-Bayt are.

In the tradition of al-Hakim the wording the last question and answer is as follows:

Umm Salama said: "O Prophet of Allah! Am I not one of the members of your family?”The Holy Prophet replied: "You have a good future but only these are the members of my family. O Lord! The members of my family are more deserving."

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p416

Also the wording reported by al-Suyuti and Ibn al-Athir is as follows:

Umm Salama said to the Holy Prophet: "Am I also one of them?”He replied: "No. You have your own special position and your future is good."

Sunni reference:

• Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v2, p289

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, p198

Also al-Tabari quotes Umm Salama saying:

I said, "O Prophet of Allah! Am I not also one of your Ahlul-Bayt?”I swear by the Almighty that the Holy Prophet did NOT grant me any distinction and said: "You have a good future."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Tabari, v22, p7 under the commentary of verse 33:33

Beside Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Tirmidhi from which we quoted the Tradition of Cloak on the authority of Aisha and Umm Salama respectively, below are more Sunni references of the Tradition of Cloak who reported both versions of the traditions:

(3) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, pp 323,292,298; v1, pp 330-331; v3, p252; v4, p107 from Abu Sa’id al-Khudri

(4) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p578, Tradition #978

(5) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p416 (two traditions) from Ibn Abi Salama, v3, pp 146-148 (five traditions), pp 158,172

(6) al-Khasa’is, by an-Nisa’i, pp 4,8

(7) al-Sunan, by al-Bayhaqi, narrated from Aisha and Umm Salama

(8) Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v1, part 2, p69

(9) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v2, p700 (Istanbul), from Aisha

(10) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, pp 198,605 from Aisha and Umm Salama

(11) Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, pp 5-8 (from Aisha and Abu Sa’id al-Khudri), pp 6,8 (from Ibn Abi Salama) (10 traditions)

(12) Tafsir al-Qurtubi, under the commentary of verse 33:33 from Umm Salama

(13) Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p485 (Complete version) from Aisha and Umar Ibn Abi Salama

(14) Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v2, p12; v4, p79 narrated from Ibn Abi Salama

(15) Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, sec. 1, p221 from Umm Salama

(16) Tarikh, by al-Khateeb Baghdadi, v10, narrated from Ibn Abi Salama

(17) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, v1, p193 narrated from Aisha

(18) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, pp 332-336 (seven traditions)

(19) Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibb al-Tabari, pp21-26, from Abu Sa’id Khudri

(20) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p166 (by several transmitters)

... and more ...

Here is another authentic variation of "The Tradition of Cloak”which is related to Safiyya who was another wife of the Prophet (S). Ja’far Ibn Abi Talib narrated:

When the Messenger of Allah noticed that a blessing from Allah was to descent, he told Safiyya (one of his wives): "Call for me! Call for me!”Safiyya said: "Call who, O the Messenger of Allah?”He said: "Call for me my Ahlul-Bayt who are ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn.”Thus we sent for them and they came to him.

Then the Prophet (S) spread his cloak over them, and raised his hand (toward sky) saying: "O Allah! These are my family (Aalee), so bless Muhammad and the family (Aal) of Muhammad.”And Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, revealed: "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a thorough purification (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33)".

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, Chapter of "Understanding (the virtues) of Companions, v3, p148. The author then wrote: "This tradition is authentic (Sahih) based on the criteria of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim)."

• Talkhis of al-Mustadrak, by al-Dhahabi, v3, p148

• Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v3, p33

Although the majority of traditions on this issue show that the last sentence of the verse 33:33 was revealed in the house of Umm Salama (as quoted earlier), the above tradition implies that it might have been revealed in the house of Safiyya.

Based on the opinion of the Sunni scholars including Ibn Hajar, it is quite possible that the verse was revealed more than once. In each occasion, the Prophet repeated his action in front of different wives so that they all realize who his Ahlul-Bayt are.

The testimony of three wives of the Prophet (Aisha, Umm Salama, and Safiyya) leaves us no room but to believe that the Ahlul-Bayt at the time of the Prophet were no more than five individuals: Prophet Muhammad, Lady Fatimah, Imam ‘Ali, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn (Peace be upon them all).

The fact that the gender in later part of Verse 33:33 is switched from feminine to masculine, has led the majority of Sunni commentators to believe that the last part was revealed for Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, as Ibn Hajar al-Haythami indicated:

Based on the opinion of the majority of (Sunni) commentators, the saying of Allah:"Verily Allah intends to ... (the last sentence of the verse 33:33)”was revealed for ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, because of the usage of masculine gender in the word "Ankum”and after that.

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p220

Although the Shi’a have great respect for the highly righteous wives among the wives of the Prophet (S), such as Khadija, Umm Salama, Umm Ayman and ... (may Allah be pleased with them) who closely followed the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt before and after the demise of Prophet (S), yet we do not include even those respected individuals into Ahlul-Bayt since the Prophet clearly excluded them according to the authentic Sunni and Shi’i traditions. Ahlul-Bayt have exceptional virtues that no other pious person after the Prophet would possess them in the world, which are according to Qur’an: sinlessness, flawlessness and perfect purity.

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the previous part, three authentic versions of "The Tradition of Cloak/Mantle”(Hadith al-Kisaa) reported in Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Tirmidhi, and Mustadrak al-Hakim. In these traditions three wives of the Prophet testified that the Prophet (S) specified that the Members of his House (in his lifetime) are restricted to his daughter Fatimah (sa), her husband ‘Ali (as) and their two sons: al-Hasan (as), and al-Husayn (as).

Also according to the quoted traditions, the purification sentence in Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33) was revealed for their virtue and NOT for the wives of the Prophet (S). Now, let us see what the Messenger of Allah used to do for quite some time after the revelation of the verse:

The Long-Term Custom Of The Prophet After The Revelation Of The Purification Verse

It has been widely narrated that after the revelation of the purification verse of Qur’an (Ayah al-Tat’hir), the Messenger of Allah used to recited this verse at the door of the House of Fatimah and ‘Ali before every prayer when people were gathering to pray with the Messenger of Allah. He continued this practice for many months simply to show the people who his Ahlul-Bayt are. Anas Ibn Malik narrated:

The Messenger of Allah (S), from the time the revelation of "Verily Allah intends to... (the last part of Verse 33:33)”and for six (6) months thereafter, stood by the door of the House of Fatimah and said: "Time for Prayer Ahlul-Bayt; No doubt! Allah wished to remove all abomination from you and make you pure and spotless."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v12, p85

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, p258

• Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p158 who wrote this tradition is authentic as per the criteria of Muslim and Bukhari

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, pp 197,199

• Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, pp 5,6 (saying seven month)

• Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p483

• Musnad, by al-Tiyalasi, v8, p274

• Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v5, p146

Abu al-Hamra narrated:

"The Messenger of God continued eight (8) months in Medina, coming to the door of ‘Ali at every morning prayer, putting his two hands on the two sides of the door and exclaiming: "Assalat! Assalat! (prayer! prayer!) Certainly God ward off all uncleanness from you, O Members of the House of Muhammad, and to make you pure and spotless."

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, pp 198-199

• Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p6

• Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p483

• Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p24 on the authority of Anas Ibn Malik

• Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v5, p637

• Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v5, p146

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, pp 121,168

• Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, p338

Also Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated:

"We have witnessed the Messenger of God for nine (9) months coming to the door of ‘Ali, son of Abu Talib, at the time of each prayer and saying: ‘Assalamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah Ahlul-Bayt (Peace and Mercy of God be upon you, O Members of the House). Certainly God wants only to keep away all the evil from you, Members of the House, and purify you with a thorough purification.’ He did this seven times a day."

Sunni reference: al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh al-Suyuti, v5, p198

In Majma’ al-Zawa’id and exegesis of Suyuti it has been quoted from Abu Said Khudri with a variation in words that:

For forty days the Holy Prophet approached the house of Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) every morning and used to say: ‘Peace be upon you O people of the House! The time for the prayers has come’. And thereafter he used to recite this verse: O people of the Prophet’s House.... And then said: ‘I am in a state of war with him who fights with you and am in a state of peace with him who is at peace with you’.

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh al-Suyuti, v5, p199

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, pp 121,168

He repeated this openly at the time of each prayer so as to demonstrate the meaning of this verse verbally as well as practically and he explained it to his followers on the lines of the sacred verse: "We have revealed the Qur’an to you so that you could tell the people what has been revealed to them and that perhaps they will think. (Qur’an 16:44)”This concept became well known among the people and even the companions of the Holy Prophet argued on its basis on behalf of the Holy Prophet’s family:

Those Who Protested Based On The Purification Verse To Prove The Virtues Of The Holy Family

1. Imam al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (as)

al-Hakim (in al-Mustadrak) in connection with the attainments of Imam al-Hasan, and al-Haythami (in connection with the excellence of the Holy Family) have narrated that Imam al-Hasan (as) addressed the people after the martyrdom of his father Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) and said during his speech:

O People! Whoever knows me, knows me and whoever doesn't know me should know that I am al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali; I am the son of the Holy Prophet and of his executor (Wasi). I am the son him who invited people to Allah and warned them of the torture of His Hell-fire. I am the son of the luminous Lamp. I belong to the family upon whom Gabriel used to descend and from there ascend to heavens. I belong to the family from whom Allah has ward off all filth and made them pure.

Sunni references:

    • al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p172

    • Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p172

It has been narrated in Majma’ al-Zawa’id and Tafsir Ibn Kathir that:

After his father’s martyrdom when (Imam) al-Hasan attained the Caliphate, one day while he was performing his prayers, a man attacked him and thrust a sword in his thigh. He remained confined to bed for some months.

Thereafter, he recovered and delivered a sermon and said: "O People of Iraq! Fear Allah. We are your Amirs (leaders) and your guests and belong to the family about whom Almighty Allah has said: ‘O People of the Prophet’s House..’ Imam al-Hasan dwelt on this subject so much that all those present in the Mosque began to cry."

Sunni references:

    • Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p172

    • Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p486

    • This tradition has also been quoted by al-Tabarani and others

2. Ummul Mu’minin, Umm Salama (ra)

In Mushkil al-Athar, al-Tahawi has quoted Umrah al-Hamdaniyyah as saying:

I went to Umm Salama and greeted her. She inquired: "Who are you?”I replied: "I am Umrah Hamdaniyyah.”Umrah says, "I said O mother of the Faithful! Say something about the man who has been killed among us today. One group of the people like him and another group is inimical towards him,”(He meant Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib). Umm Salama said, "Do you like him or are you hostile to him?”I replied, "I neither like him nor I am hostile to him.”(Here the narrative is defective and thereafter it is like this:)

Umm Salama began to tell about the revelation of the verse of Tat’hir and said in this behalf: "Allah revealed the verse: O People of the Prophet’s House... There was none in the room at that time, except Gabriel, the Holy Prophet, ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn. I said: ‘O Prophet of Allah! Am I too one of the people of the House?’ He replied: ‘Allah will reward you and recompense you.’ I wished that he might have said ‘Yes’ and would have valued such a reply much more than anything else in the world.’"

Sunni reference: Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, p336

Ahmad in Musnad; Tabari in his exegesis and al-Tahawi in Mushkil al-Athar have quoted Shahr Ibn Haushab, to have said:

When the news of the martyrdom of al-Husayn reached Medina I heard Umm Salama, wife of the Holy Prophet, saying: "They have killed al-Husayn. I myself observed that the Holy Prophet spread his Khaibari cloak on them and said: ‘O Allah! These are the members of my family! Ward off any uncleanness from them and keep them clean and pure!’"

Sunni references:

    • Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p298

    • Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p6

    • Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, p335

3. Ibn Abbas (ra)

Ahmad, al-Nisa’i, Muhibbuddin, and al-Haythami have reported (the wording being of Ahmad’s Musnad):

‘Amr Ibn Maimoon said: "I was with Ibn Abbas when nine persons came to him and said: ‘Ibn Abbas! Either come out with us or provide us privacy.’ He said: ‘I shall go out with you.’ In those days the eyes of Ibn Abbas were all right and he could see. They had mutual conversation and I am not aware as to what they talked about. After some time Ibn Abbas returned to us. He was then shaking off his dress saying: ‘Fie be upon them! They are talking about the man who enjoys ten excellences.’

(Later in the narration Ibn Abbas details the virtues of the Imam till he says:) ‘The Holy Prophet spread his cloak upon ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn and said: O People of the Prophet’s House! Allah intends to keep you pure from all sorts of uncleanness and blemish and to purify you with a thorough purification.’"

Sunni references:

    • Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p331 (First edition)

In al-Khasa’is, al-Nisa’i has quoted Amir Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas as saying:

Muawiyah said to Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, "Why do you refrain from abusing Abu Turab?”Sa’d said, "I don’t abuse ‘Ali for three attributes of his which I heard from the Holy Prophet. If even one of them had been for me, I would have valued it much more than anything else on earth. I heard from the Holy Prophet that When he left Imam ‘Ali as his representative in Medina and proceeded to fight a battle, ‘Ali said: ‘Are you leaving me with the women and the children in Medina?’ The Holy Prophet replied: ‘Don't you like that your position vis-a-vis me should be like that of Aaron (Haroon) with Moses. You enjoy the same position in regard to me as Aaron enjoyed with Moses.’

On the fateful day of Khaibar, too, I heard the Holy Prophet as saying: ‘Tomorrow I shall give the standard (of the army) to one who loves Allah and His Prophet and Allah and His Prophet also love him’. All of us were keen to be graced and singled out in the face of this declaration and wished that the standard might be in our hands. In the meantime the Holy Prophet said: ‘Bring ‘Ali to me.’ ‘Ali came in such a condition that he had some trouble in his eyes.

The Holy Prophet applied the saliva of his mouth to (Imam) ‘Ali’s eyes and gave the standard in his hand. Moreover, when the verse of Tat’hir was revealed, the Holy Prophet called ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn near himself and said: ‘O Allah! These are the People of my House.’"

Sunni references:

        • al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p4

        • A fairly similar narration is given in Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter CMXCVI (Virtues of ‘Ali), p1284, Tradition #5916

Also al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, al-Hakim, and al-Tahawi have quoted from Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas that:

At the time of the revelation of the verse, the Holy Prophet called ‘Ali along with his two sons and Fatimah and accommodated them under his own cloak and said: ‘O Lord! These are the members of my family’.

Sunni references:

        • Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p7

        • Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p485

        • al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p147

        • Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, p336; v2, p33

        • History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, v5, p31

    • Abu Sa’id al-Khudri

It narrated on that:

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri: I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "This verse has been revealed about five individuals: Myself, ‘Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn, and Fatimah."

Sunni references:

        • Tafsir Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p5, under the verse 33:33

        • Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p24

        • al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p221

        • Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami

    • Wathilah Ibn Asqa’

al-Tabari while commenting on the verse 33:33, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, al- Hakim who considers the tradition to be authentic according to the criteria of Muslim and al-Bukhari, also Bayhaqi, al-Tahawi, and Haythami quote Abu Ammar as having said (the wording is of al-Tabari):

I was sitting with Wathilah Ibn Asqa’ when a discussion took place about ‘Ali and the people abused him. When those present rose to leave he said to me: ‘Keep sitting so that I may talk with you about the man whom they have been abusing. I was with the Holy Prophet when ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn approached him and the Holy Prophet spread his cloak on them and said: "O Allah! These are the members of my family. Ward off every uncleanness from them and keep them clean and pure."

Sunni references:

        • Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p6

        • al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p416; v3, p417

        • Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p107

        • Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p167

        • Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v1, p346

        • Sunan, al-Bayhaqi, v2, p152

Also Ibn al-Athir quoted Shaddad Ibn Abdullah saying:

I heard from Wathilah Ibn Asqa’ that when the head of (Imam) al-Husayn was brought, one of the Syrians abused (Imam) al-Husayn and his father, Wathilah stood up and said: "I swear by Allah that ever since I heard the Holy Prophet say about them: ‘O People of the Prophet’s House! Allah intends to keep you pure from uncleanness and blemish and to purify you with a thorough purification,’ I have always loved ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (Peace be upon them).’"

Sunni reference: Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v2, p20

    • ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn, Zain al-Abideen (as)

While commenting on the verse 33:33, al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir and al-Suyuti have stated in their exegesis:

‘Ali Ibn Husayn said to a Syrian: "Have you read this verse in Surah al-Ahzab, O people of the House! Allah intends to keep you pure from blemish and to purify you with a thorough purification (Qur’an 33:33)?"

The Syrian said: "Does this verse pertain to you?”The Imam replied: "Yes, it pertains to us."

Sunni references:

        • Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v22, p7

        • Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v3, p486

        • Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh al-Suyuti, v5, p199

al-Kharazmi has quoted this very narration in his Maqtal in the following words:

When, after the martyrdom of (Imam) al-Husayn the grandson of the Holy Prophet, (Imam) Zain al-Abideen and other prisoners belonging to the House of the Holy Prophet were carried to Damascus and stationed in a jail located by the side of the Grand Mosque of Damascus, an old man approached them and said: "Praised be Allah who killed you and annihilated you and relieved the people from your men and provided the Commander of the Faithful (Yazid) with authority over you.”

‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn said: "O old man! Have you read the Holy Qur’an?” He replied: "Yes.”Then the Imam said: "Have you read the verse: Muhammad! ‘Say, I do not ask you of any reward for my preaching except the love of my kinsfolk’?”The old man said: "Yes. I have read it."

The Imam said: "Have you read the verse: ‘So give what is due to the near ones, the needy and the wayfarer.’ and the verse: ‘Know that whatever (income) you gain, one fifth belongs to Allah, the Messenger, his near ones, orphans the needy and the wayfarers, if you believe in Allah and what We revealed to Our servant in the Holy Qur’an’?” The old man replied: "Yes. I have read them."

The Imam said: "I swear by Allah that the word ‘near ones’ refers to us and these verses have been revealed about us. (The Imam added): And have you also read this verse in the Holy Qur’an wherein Allah says: ‘O people of the Prophet’s House...’ (33:33)?”The old man said: "Yes. I have read it". The Imam said: "What is meant by people of the Prophet’s House! It is we whom Allah has especially associated with the verse of Tat’hir (purification)."

The old man said: "I ask you by Allah! Are you of the same family?”The Imam replied: "I swear by my grandfather the Prophet of Allah that we are the same people."

The old man was stunned and expressed regret for what he had said. Then he raised his head towards the sky and said: "O Allah! I ask forgiveness for what I have said, and forsake enmity against this family and hate the enemies of the progeny of Muhammad."

Sunni reference: Maqtal al-Husayn, by al-Khateeb al-Kharazmi

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Incident Of Mubahala

Here I would like to bring another evidence from Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Tirmidhi that why the wives of the Prophet are not included in Ahlul-Bayt, which is also, by the way, another reason for the superiority of ‘Ali (as) for the position of leadership after the Prophet (S).

The following incident is related to the event of "Mubahala”(which means imprecation, or invoking the curse of Allah upon the liar), which took place in the 9th-10th year of Hijrah. In that year a delegation consisting of 14 Christian priests came from Najran to meet the Prophet (S).

When they met the Prophet they asked him what is his opinion about Jesus (as). The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "You may take rest today and you will receive the reply afterwards.”The next day, 3 verses of Qur’an (3:59-61) about Jesus were revealed. When Christians did not accept the words of Allah, The Prophet recited the last revealed verse:

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons, and our women and your women, and our selves and your selves ; then let us be earnest in prayer and invoke the curse of Allah upon the liars. (Qur’an 3:61).

فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَاوَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ..

In this way, the Prophet (S) challenged the Christians. The next day the Christian priests came out on one side of the field. Also on the other side, the Prophet came out of his house carrying al-Husayn in his arm with al-Hasan walking along with him while he was holding his hand. Behind him was Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), and behind her was ‘Ali, peace be upon them all.

When the Christians saw the five pure souls, and how determined the Prophet is in his idea that he put the closest people to him at risk, the Christians were terrified and abstained from the proposed malediction (Mubahala) and submitted to a treaty with the Prophet (S).

al-Suyuti who was a great Sunni scholar, wrote:

In the above verse (3:61), according to what Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (the great companion of the Prophet) said, the word "sons”refers to al-Hasan and al-Husayn, the word "women”refers to Fatimah, and the word "our selves”refer to the Prophet and ‘Ali. Thus ‘Ali is referred as "the self”of the Prophet (Nafs of the Prophet).

Reference: al-Durr al-Manthoor by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v2, p38

It follows that just as it is unlawful to seek to be superior to the Prophet, similarly it is unlawful to supersede ‘Ali (who is the "self”of the Prophet according to the words of Allah). Any one who presumed to supersede ‘Ali, was, in essence, presumed to supersede the Prophet! This is another Qur’anic proof for the right of Imam ‘Ali as the immediate successor of the Prophet (S).

Muslim and al-Tirmidhi both confirm the above incident, and recorded the following tradition in their authentic collections of traditions:

Narrated Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas:

...And when the verse 3:61 was revealed, the Prophet called ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. Then the Prophet said: "O Lord! These are my family members (Ahli)."

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of virtues of companions, section of virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1871, the end of tradition #32.

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p654

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p150, who said this tradition is authentic based on the criteria set by two Shaikhs, al-Bukhari and Muslim.

• Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p25

Here is the Arabic text of the above tradition given by both

Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Tirmidhi:

و لمَّا نزلَت هذه الآية: فقل تعالوا ندع أبنائنا و أبنائكم... دعا رسول الله علياً و فاطمة و حسناً و حسيناً فقالَ اللهمَّ هؤلاءِ أهلي.

The point, here, is that the Messenger of Allah (S) did not bring any of his wives to the field of "Mubahala", and according to above tradition, he used the word "Ahl”(family) ONLY for the above-mentioned individuals (i.e., Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn).

Note that in the verse 3:61 of Qur’an Allah uses plural form "women”by saying "Let us bring our women", but the Prophet only brought his daughter Fatimah (sa). If there were more than one woman in Ahlul-Bayt, the Prophet was required by this verse to bring them, but since there was not any other woman among his Ahlul-Bayt, he brought Fatimah (sa) only.

Again, in that incident, the Prophet explicitly mentioned who Ahlul-Bayt are, and named them one by one, and Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim, and many other Sunni scholars recorded that and all confirmed its authenticity. There was no mention of his wives in any of these reports.

Some Sunni scholars have narrated that on the day of consultation for appointing the ruler after the death of Umar, Imam ‘Ali (as) argued with the members of Shura reminding them his rights to the Caliphate, and one of his reasons was the incident of Mubahala:

On the day of consultation, ‘Ali argued with the committee members saying: "I adjure you in the name of Allah, is there anyone amongst you closer in relationship to the Messenger of Allah than me? Is there any other man whom the Prophet made him ‘his (own) soul’ (Nafs), and that he made his children ‘his (own) children’, and his women ‘his (own) women’?”They replied: "No, by God!"

Sunni reference:

• al-Darqunti, as per:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p239

It is also narrated that:

The Prophet (S) said: "Verily, Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, has placed the progeny of each prophet into his backbone (Sulb), and He, Exalted, has placed my progeny into the backbone of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib."

Sunni references:

• al-Tabarani

• Abul-Khair al-Haakimi, on the authority of al-Abbas

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p239

• al-Kunooz al-Mataalib

It is also narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Me and ‘Ali are from one tree, and the rest of people are from different trees."

أنا و عليٍ من شجرةٍ واحدةٍ و سائرِ الناس من شجرٍ شتَّى.

Sunni references:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, section 2, p190

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171

• al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani, from Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari

In another Sunni commentary of Qur’an, it is narrated on the authority of Abdullah Ibn Umar that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Had there been any soul on the whole earth better than ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, Allah would have commanded me to take them along with me to Mubahala. But as they were superior in dignity and respect to all human be beings, Allah confined His choice on them only for participation in Mubahala."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Baidhawi, under the commentary of Verse 3:61

Concluding, the event of Mubahala between the Prophet (S) the Christians was significant in many aspects, among them are:

1. It proved to be a lesson for all the Christians of Arabia who no longer dared any confrontation with the Holy Prophet (S).

2. The invitation of "Mubahala”(literally meaning cursing each other) was directed by Allah and it was in compliance with His Command that the Holy Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt along with him to the field of Mubahala. This serves to show how affairs pertaining to prophethood and Islam are determined by the Will of Allah; allowing no margin of interference from the common people (Ummah). (The matter of Imam ‘Ali’s (as) succession after the Prophet should be viewed similarly)

3. The indispensability of Imam ‘Ali, Lady Fatimah, Imam al-Hasan and Imam al-Husayn in the following of the precepts of the Holy Prophet could no longer be disputed.

4. Notwithstanding their childhood, al-Hasan and al-Husayn did nevertheless serve as two active partners of the Holy Prophet on the field of Mubahala. This yields the conclusion that age is no criteria for the greatness of those infallible souls.

5. That the Holy Prophet’s act of having preferred a few obviously elevates their status above all others.

6. Traditions from the Prophet with regards to this event clearly indicates who the Ahlul-Bayt are.

7. Imam ‘Ali (as) has been mentioned as the ‘Self’ of the Prophet (S) according to the revelation of Allah, and is, in fact, superior to all others with regard to the matter of succession.

Is It Just Blood Relationship?

It is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Any relation will end on the day of Judgment except my relation. And the root (identification) of everyone is his father, except the progeny of Fatimah, since I am their father and their root (identification)."

Sunni references:

• Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Bayhaqi, and al-Darqunti, al-Dhahabi on the authorities of Umar Ibn al-Khattab, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Zubair, and Ibn Umar.

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p239

• Similar tradition has been narrated by Abu Ya’la, al-Tabarani on the authority of Fatimah (sa) and Ibn Umar

The above precious tradition proves that, blood relationship is of little value in Islam and it will soon melt away when the day of Judgment appears. But what makes the relationship of the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt different than others is the qualifications and spiritual purity that they have besides their pure gene (which is also necessary).

It is worth mentioning that Lady Fatimah (sa) is the only surviving child of the Messenger of Allah (S) who left progeny for him. All other children of the Prophet died in their early ages, without being able to leave an issue behind themselves. The infidels of Hijaz (Arabia) used to dishonor the Prophet by saying that he does not have a son to preserve his generation. For that reason, Allah revealed the Chapter of "al-Kawthar":

"Lo! We have given you Abundance (i.e., a long-standing pure progeny). So pray unto your Lord, and sacrifice. Lo! It is your insulter (and not you) who is without progeny.”(Qur’an, Chapter 108).

إِنَّا أَعْطَيْنَاكَ الْكَوْثَرَ ﴿١﴾ فَصَلِّ لِرَبِّكَ وَانْحَرْ ﴿٢﴾ إِنَّ شَانِئَكَ هُوَ الْأَبْتَرُ ﴿٣﴾

In the above Chapter, Allah refers to Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) as Abundance who brings for the Prophet a sanctified progeny. Again, by progeny we do not mean all those whose ancestor are the Prophet (S). We rather mean those among his descendants who have been thoroughly purified by Allah, and the history and the Hadith can not count more that 14 of them (including the Prophet). Here is the commentary of the above Chapter by Yusuf ‘Ali (the translator of Qur’an):

Abu Jahl and his Pagan confederates vented their personal spite and venom against the holy Prophet by taunting him with the loss of his two infant sons by Khadija, but where were these venomous detractors a few years afterwards, when the divine Light shone more brilliantly than ever?

Fatimah received severe injuries and was martyred at the age of eighteen, just six months after the demise of the Prophet, leaving two sons: al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. After martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali (as), Imam al-Hasan came to power.

But Muawiyah, the disloyal governor of Syria, continued his aggression by preparing another attack (after the war of Siffin), and meanwhile he bought the key elements of the army of Imam al-Hasan by money and bribe, and by corrupting his army, was finally able to complete a peaceful military coup, and to take over the power. Imam al-Hasan was poisoned to death shortly after.

The second (and the last) grandson of the Prophet was Imam al-Husayn (as), who was slaughtered along with his family (except one of his sons), relatives, and companions, in the desert of Karbala, by the army of Yazid, the corrupt and drunk son of Muawiyah. That catastrophe took place only 50 years after the demise of the Prophet!!!

The above was a very short horrible story of what happened to Ahlul-Bayt, whom Qur’an and the Prophet (S) ordered us to love them and obey them beside the book of Allah.

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 4

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Matrimonial Relationship

In the previous parts, we quoted extensive authentic traditions from Sahih Muslim and else, proving that during the lifetime of the Prophet, his Ahlul-Bayt constituted only Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and also the purification sentence in Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33) was revealed on their virtue and NOT for the wives of the Prophet (S). These facts were proven based on the testimony of the Messenger of Allah as well as the testimony of his wives and his companions.

Here I would like to quote another interesting tradition from Sahih Muslim, in which another famous companion of the Prophet (S) swears in the name of Allah that wives of the Prophet are NOT included in his Ahlul-Bayt. The tradition explains the reasoning of this companion and his justification. Here is the tradition recorded in Sahih Muslim:

Narrated Yazid Ibn Hayyan:

We went to Zaid Ibn Arqam and said to him: You have found goodness (for you had the honor) to live in the company of the Prophet (S) and offered prayer behind him, and the rest of the Hadith is the same (as 3 traditions before) but the Prophet said: "Behold, for I am leaving amongst you two weighty things, one of them is the Book of Allah...", and in this (Hadith) these words are also found: We said: "Who are his Ahlul-Bayt (that the Prophet was referring to)? Are they his wives?”

Thereupon Zaid said: "No, by Allah! A woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a while; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and her people. The Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet are his lineage and his descendants (those who come from his blood) for whom the acceptance of charity (Sadaqah) is prohibited."

Reference:

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of virtues of companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1874, Tradition #37

For the English version of Sahih Muslim, please see Chapter CMXCVI,

Tradition #5923

Here is the Arabic text of the above tradition narrated by Sahih Muslim:

قلنا: "مَنْ أهل بيته؟ نساؤه؟”قال: "لا، وأيم الله، إن المرأة تكون مع الرجل العصر من الدهر، ثم يطلقـهــا فترجع إلى أبيها وقومها، أهل بيته: أصله وعصبته الذين حرموا الصدقة من بعده"

As we see, even some of the companions of the Prophet swear in the name of Allah that Ahlul-Bayt do NOT include the wives of the Prophet (S). However Sahih Muslim has another tradition from Zaid Ibn Arqam in the very same chapter which is:

Zaid Ibn Arqam said: I have grown old and have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). So accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day, Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is situated between Mecca and Medina.

He praised Allah, Extolled Him and delivered the sermon and exhorted (us) and said: "Now to our purpose, O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I shall answer that call (would bid good-bye to you). But I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah... The second are the members of my household (Ahlul-Bayt). By Allah I remind you (of your duties) to the Members of my House (saying three times)."

He (Husayn Ibn Sabra) said to Zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren’t his wives the members of his family? Thereupon Zaid said: His wives are among Ahlul-Bayt but here Ahlul-Bayt are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: ‘Ali and the offspring of ‘Ali; Aqil and the offspring of Aqil, and the offspring of Ja’far and the offspring of Abbas.

Reference:

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36.

For the English version of Sahih Muslim, see Chapter CMXCVI, p1286, Tradition #5920

Please note that the second Paragraph of the above tradition is NOT the saying of the Prophet (S). It is the alleged opinion of Zaid Ibn Arqam. In contradiction to the previous tradition, here Zaid asserts that: "The wives of the Prophet are among his Ahlul-Bayt BUT HERE (what the Prophet meant by) Ahlul-Bayt (were some other people who) are ‘Ali and his offspring,... and the offspring of Abbas."

My question is that: Should we obey the saying of the Prophet who specified who Ahlul-Bayt are, or we should accept the opinion of a companion which, in this case at least, is in contradiction with the opinion of the Prophet?

Besides, the history tells us that there were many tyrant rulers among the Abbasid (the descendants of Abbas). So how can we obey them and love them? Allah in Qur’an said:

"...and obey not from among them a sinner or an ungrateful one.”(Qur’an 76:24).

Were Abbasid tyrants among Ahlul-Bayt who the Messenger of Allah put them beside Qur’an as one of the two precious thing that he left for his community to be obeyed after him?!

This shows Ahlul-Bayt are special individuals and do not cover all the relatives of the Prophet (S). The word Ahlul-Bayt, linguistically, does not cover all relatives at all. It means family who come from his blood as pointed in the first tradition of Zaid. Thus, even the Prophet’s wives are not going to be included in Ahlul-Bayt.

Those of Sunni brothers who believe all the traditions in Sahih Muslim are authentic, can find a contradiction here between the two traditions which are in the same chapter and only tree traditions away from each other.

In one tradition, Zaid said that the Prophet’s wives are among Ahlul-Bayt, and in three traditions away from it, the very same person (Zaid) is swearing in the name of Allah that the Prophet’s wives are NOT among his Ahlul-Bayt? What should we conclude?

• Should we disregard the clarification of the Prophet and stick to the opinion of a companion?

• If yes, then should we accept the saying of a companion who tells two contradicting opinion while he himself said in the second tradition that he has grown old and he does not remember too much?

• Should we accept such contradicting narrations as Sahih (authentic)?

• If yes, then should we accept the one in which he swears in the name of Allah, or the one in which he does not swear for?

When the Prophet clearly excludes his wives from Ahlul-Bayt, and when his wives such as Aisha, Umm Salama and Safiyya also testify to this fact (please see part I), and when Zaid Ibn Arqam swears by Allah that the wives of the Prophet are NOT among Ahlul-Bayt, then there will remain no choice but to accept the fact that the wives of the Messenger of Allah were NOT included in the Ahlul-Bayt.

It might be possible to accepts both narrations, if we carefully look at what Zaid said: "The wives are among his Ahlul-Bayt but here (what the Prophet meant by) Ahlul-Bayt (were some other people who) are ‘Ali and his offspring, ..."

Zaid is saying that we may say (in general sense) the wives included in Ahlul-Bayt, BUT HERE the Prophet meant a special meaning for Ahlul-Bayt which does not cover the wives of the Prophet. It is with this meaning that the Prophet put Ahlul-Bayt beside the Qur’an. In this case, the contradiction between the two traditions can reconciled.

Now, let us focus on the last part of saying of Zaid in the above tradition where he said:

"A woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a while; he then divorces her and she goes back to her parents and her people. The Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet are his lineage and his descendants (those who come from his blood) for whom the acceptance of charity (Sadaqah) is prohibited."

This is a correct reasoning. The matrimonial relation between and a man and a woman can never be considered permanent; it is only circumstantial and can be given up at any moment since the wife could be divorced. In fact two wives among the wives of the Prophet, namely Aisha (the daughter of Abu Bakr) and Hafsa (the daughter of Umar) were threatened to divorce by Qur’an, because of a secret news that they released to their parents. It is well-known that the following verses of Qur’an were revealed about Aisha and Hafsa:

When the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives (i.e., Hafsa) and she then divulged it (to Aisha) and Allah made it known to him, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. Then when he (i.e., the Prophet) told her thereof, she said: "Who told you this?”He said "He who knows and is well-aware (of all things) told me.”(Qur’an 66:3)

If you two (i.e., Aisha and Hafsa) turn unto Allah repentant, (you have cause to do so) for your hearts indeed desired (against the order of the Prophet); and if you two aid one another against him (Muhammad) then lo! Truly Allah is his Protector and Gabriel and the righteous one among those who believe and furthermore the angels will back (him) up. (Qur’an 66:4)

If he divorces you, Allah may give him instead wives better than you who will be submissive (to Allah), believing, pious, penitent, inclined to fasting, widows and maids.”(Qur’an 66:5)

Explanation Sahih Al-Bukhari On Verse 66:5

In the Volume 6 of the Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari, in a chapter titled: "It may be, if he divorces you, that his Lord (Allah) will give him, instead of you, wives better than you ... (66:5),”we read:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 6.438

Narrated Umar:

The wives of the Prophet out of their jealousy, backed each other against the Prophet, so I said to them, "It may be, if he divorced you all, that Allah will give him, instead of you wives better than you.”So this Verse (66.5) was revealed.

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 6.436

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

I intended to ask Umar so I said, "Who were those two ladies who tried to back each other against the Prophet?”I hardly finished my speech when he said, They were Aisha and Hafsa."

If the Allah threatened the two wives of the Prophet by divorce, because they backed each other against the Prophet, then how can we render them as pure and sinless? Moreover, the following tradition states that the Prophet (S) deserted Aisha and Hafsa for one full month as punishment for revealing the secret news:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 7.119

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

I had been eager to ask Umar bin al-Khattab about the two ladies from among the wives of the Prophet regarding whom Allah said ‘If you two (wives of the Prophet namely Aisha and Hafsa) turn in repentance to Allah, your hearts are indeed so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet likes). (66.4) till Umar performed the Hajj and I too, performed the Hajj along with him... Then I said to him, "O chief of the Believers! Who were the two ladies from among the wives of the Prophet regarding whom Allah said:

‘If you two (wives of the Prophet) turn in repentance to Allah your hearts are indeed so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet likes)?”(66.4)

He said, "I am astonished at your question, O Ibn Abbas. They were Aisha and Hafsa.”

Then Umar went on narrating the Hadith and said, "... I shouted at my wife and she retorted against me and I disliked that she should answer me back. She said to me, ‘Why are you so surprised at my answering you back? By Allah, the wives of the Prophet answer him back and some of them may leave (do not speak to) him throughout the day till the night.’

The (talk) scared me and I said to her, ‘Whoever has done so will be ruined!’ Then I proceeded after dressing myself, and entered upon Hafsa and said to her, ‘Does anyone of you keep the Prophet angry till night?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘You are a ruined losing person! Don’t you fear that Allah may get angry for the anger of Allah’s Apostle and thus you will be ruined?

So do not ask more from the Prophet and do not answer him back and do not give up talking to him. Ask me whatever you need and do not be tempted to imitate your neighbor (i.e., Aisha) in her manners for she is more charming than you and more beloved to the Prophet."

Umar added, "At that time a talk was circulating among us that (the tribe of) Ghassan were preparing their horses to invade us. My Ansari companion, on the day of his turn, went (to the town) and returned to us at night and knocked at my door violently and asked if I was there. I became horrified and came out to him.

He said, ‘Today a great thing has happened.’ I asked, ‘What is it? Have (the people of) Ghassan come?’ He said, ‘No, but (What has happened) is greater and more horrifying than that: Allah’s Apostle; has divorced his wives. Umar added, "The Prophet kept away from his wives and I said "Hafsa is a ruined loser.’ I had already thought that most probably this (divorce) would happen in the near future. So I dressed myself and offered the morning prayer with the Prophet and then the Prophet entered an upper room and stayed there in seclusion. I entered upon Hafsa and saw her weeping. I asked, ‘What makes you weep? Did I not warn you about that? Did the Prophet divorce you all?’ She said, ‘I do not know. There he is retired alone in the upper room.’ ...

I said (to Allah’s Apostle) chatting, ‘Will you heed what I say, O Allah’s Apostle? We, the people of Quraish used to have power over our women, but when we arrived at Medina we found that the men (here) were overpowered by their women.’

The Prophet smiled and then I said to him, ‘Will you heed what I say, O Allah’s Apostle? I entered upon Hafsa and said to her, "Do not be tempted to imitate your companion (Aisha), for she is more charming than you and more beloved to the Prophet.’ ...Then the Prophet kept away from his wives for twenty-nine days because of the story which Hafsa had disclosed to Aisha. The Prophet had said, ‘I will not enter upon them for one month,’ because of his anger towards them ... Some of his wives were the cause of him taking that decision, therefore he deserted them for one month. See Qur’an: (66.4)

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 6.435

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

For the whole year I had the desire to ask Umar bin al-Khattab regarding the explanation of a Verse (in Surat al-Tahrim) ... Umar went aside to answer the call of nature by the Arak trees. I waited till he finished and then I proceeded with him and asked him. "O chief of the Believers! Who were the two wives of the Prophet who aided one another against him?”He said, "They were Hafsa and Aisha.”...

Then Umar added, "Once while I was thinking over a certain matter, my wife said, "I recommend that you do so-and-so.”I said to her, "What have you got to do with the is matter? Why do you poke your nose in a matter which I want to see fulfilled?”

She said, How strange you are, O son of al-Khattab! You don’t want to be argued with whereas your daughter, Hafsa surely, argues with Allah’s Apostle so much that he remains angry for a full day!”Umar then reported how he at once put on his outer garment and went to Hafsa and said to her, "O my daughter! Do you argue with Allah’s Apostle so that he remains angry the whole day?”Hafsa said, "By Allah, we argue with him.”

Umar said, "Know that I warn you of Allah’s punishment and the anger of Allah’s Apostle . . . O my daughter! Don’t be betrayed by the one who is proud of her beauty because of the love of Allah’s Apostle for her (i.e. Aisha).”... Umar added, (One day) my Ansari friend unexpectedly knocked at my door, and said, "Open Open!”I said, "Has the king of Ghassan come?”He said, "No, but something worse; Allah’s Apostle has isolated himself from his wives.”I said, "Let the nose of Aisha and Hafsa be stuck to dust (i.e., humiliated)!"

In the above tradition, Hafsa swears by Allah that she argues with the Messenger of Allah and keeps him angry for the whole day! Is this a sign of purity and righteousness? According to Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33), perfect purity and sinlessness is the characteristic of Ahlul-Bayt.

The above verses of Qur’an as well as the above traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari proves that some of the wives of the Prophet were not righteous and pure, otherwise Allah would not have threatened them in Qur’an by divorce.

This is the main reason why I preferred the reference from Sahih Muslim on the authority of Zaid Ibn Arqam in which he “swears by Allah “that the Prophet’s wives are NOT among Ahlul-Bayt since they can be subject to divorce and being substituted with women better than them (Qur’an 66:5).

Another astonishing tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari is as follows:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336

Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here,”saying three times, "and from where the side of the Satan’s head comes out."

قام النبي خطيباً فأشار نحو مسكن عائشة فقال: ها هنا الفتنه، ثلاثاً، من يطلع قرن الشيطان.

All these traditions give us more alarms not to include the wives of the Prophet into the Ahlul-Bayt who are spotless and sinless based on the testimony of the Messenger of Allah:

Ibn Abbas Narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah recited "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification". (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33) and then the Messenger of Allah said: "Thus Me and my Ahlul-Bayt are clear from the sins."

فأنا و أهل بيتي مطهرون من الذنوب

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, as quoted in:

• al-Durr al-Manthoor, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v5, pp 605-606,198 under the commentary of Verse 33:33 of Qur’an

• Dala’il al-Nabawiyyah, by al-Bayhaqi

• Others such as al-Tabarani, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu Nu’aym, etc.

Please note the word "thus”in the highlighted part of the above tradition. It means the Prophet himself is CONCLUDING that the verse MEANS Ahlul-Bayt are sinless.

In his exegesis, Ibn Jarir Tabari quotes Qatadah who interpreted the sacred verse of Tat’hir that people of the Holy Prophet’s family are those whom Almighty Allah has purified from every sin and showered special blessings on them. He also stated in explanation of the verse:

"It is this and nothing else that Allah willed to ward off every badness and indecency from the people of the family of Muhammad and to keep them clear from every contamination and sin!"

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Tabari, v22, p5 under commentary of verse 33:33

Thus the Purification Verse (Ayah al-Tat’hir) and the Tradition of Mantle (Hadith al-Kisaa) confer a special distinction and honor upon the Holy Family that is: being free from every blemish and uncleanness, being infallible, and being kept purified by Allah and absolved of any sin.

They are therefore entitled to absolute obedience from the Muslim Ummah not only as a logical inference, but as a fulfillment of the very intention and utmost desire of the Prophet of Islam in pin pointing them and making them distinguished from the rest of the Muslim Ummah.

As we discussed earlier, in the special meaning that the Prophet elucidated in the previously mentioned traditions, Ahlul-Bayt even does NOT cover all those who come from his blood. Only those among them who are pure and sinless (Qur’an 33:33) are the Ahlul-Bayt. These are a very selected individuals among his progeny.

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 5

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Mother Of Believers

One thing that our Sunni brothers/sisters usually say as means of justifying Aisha is that she was "Ummul Mu’minin”-- the mother of believers. In fact, Qur’an states that the wives of the Prophet (S) are the mothers of the believers. But let us ponder the following points:

1. Let’s consider someone who is a believer. It naturally follows that his mother becomes a mother of believer. Does it automatically mean that his mother is also a good believer? Most certainly not! Being a mother of believer does not make that mother a good believer and righteous. The same argument applies for the mother of all the believers.

2. All the Sunni collections of traditions are replete with the traditions reported by Ummul Mu’minin Aisha. The Prophet (S) had many other wives, and all of them were mothers of believers. Many of the wives of the Prophet were highly pious and righteous, such as Umm Salama and Umm Ayman.

But unfortunately there are not many traditions from them in the Sihah Sittah (not even 5% of what is conveyed by Aisha). But we hear from Aisha in a bulk rate. Was it because she was the daughter of Abu Bakr? Or because she was the only one among the wives of the Prophet who fought Imam ‘Ali (as)?

3. According to Islam, a believer is required to respect his mother. However, if such mother goes against the instruction of the Messenger of Allah, conducts and leads the rebellions, and kills innocents, we are religiously required to disassociate ourselves from such mother, and more importantly, we can NOT trust such mother for transmitting the traditions of the Prophet in such volume.

4. Indeed, there is a good reason why Allah gave them the title of "Mothers of Believers.”Allah gave them this title in order to prevent people to marry them after the demise of the Prophet (S). We cannot marry our mother. Right?

If Allah wouldn’t have given this title to them, some influential people would have married them and would probably have brought sons from them and would have ordered people to follow them as the Ahlul-Bayt, or even worst, they might have claimed that they are the real sons of the Prophet and would have claimed prophethood for them and many more possible dangerous consequences. As such, Allah (SWT) gave them this title (the mother of believers) to prevent such marriages.

The Best Wife Of The Prophet Vs. The Most Envious

It is well-known among Muslims that the best wife of the Prophet (S) was Khadija (ra). She was the first woman who embraced Islam and spent all her wealth for the cause of Allah and the Prophet never married another woman as long as Khadija was alive.

The Messenger of Allah gave the name of the best women of the world in chronological order and one should not be surprised that the name of Aisha is missing:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "The most excellent of the women of all worlds whom Allah chose over all women are: Asiya the wife of Pharaoh, Mary the daughter of Imran, Khadija the daughter of Khuwaylid, and Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p702

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p157, who said this tradition is authentic based on the criteria of two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim)

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, p135

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p755, Tradition #1325

• Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v2, p344

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p223

• al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v4, p377

• al-Awsat by al-Tabarani, as well as Ibn Habban, etc.

Furthermore, Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: Four women are the mistress of the worlds: Mary, Asiya (the wife of Pharaoh), Khadija, and Fatimah. And the most excellent one among them in the world is Fatimah."

Sunni references: Ibn Asakir, as quoted in Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor

Moreover, after the demise of Khadija (ra) when the Prophet (S) married Aisha and others, he explicitly preferred some of them over Aisha and said they are better than Aisha (see Sahih al-Tirmidhi; al-Isti’ab by Ibn Abd al-Barr; and al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in the biography of Safiyya).

Also the verse:

"Perhaps if he divorces you, his Lord will give him wives who are better than you, who submit and believe (Qur’an 66:5)”

clearly indicates that there were believing women among the Muslims who were much better than Aisha.

Envy so controlled her heart and her mind that she conducted herself in the presence of the Messenger of Allah (S) without respect or manners. On one occasion, Aisha said to the Prophet (S), when he mentioned Khadija in her presence:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 5.168.b

... Narrated Aisha: Once Hala Bint Khuwailid, Khadija’s sister, asked the permission of the Prophet to enter. On that, the Prophet remembered the way Khadija used to ask permission, and that made him sad. He said, "O Allah! Hala!”So I became jealous and said, "What makes you remember an old woman amongst the old women of Quraish an old woman (with a teethless mouth) of red gums who died long ago, and in whose place Allah has given you somebody better than her?"

The Prophet of Allah (S) became very angry at this until his hair stood. (also reported in Muslim). Moreover, al-Bukhari narrated that Aisha confessed:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 5.166

Narrated Aisha:

I did not feel jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet as much as I did of Khadija though I did not see her, but the Prophet used to mention her very often, and whenever he slaughtered a sheep, he would cut its parts and send them to the women friends of Khadija. When I sometimes said to him, "(You treat Khadija in such a way) as if there is no woman on earth except Khadija,”he would say, "Khadija was such-and-such, and from her I had children."

Khadija was the foremost believing woman, to whom Gabriel gave Greetings, and was given the glad tidings of Paradise:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 9.588

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said that Gabriel said, "Here is Khadija coming to you with a dish of food or a tumbler containing something to drink. Convey to her a greeting from her Lord (Allah) and give her the glad tidings that she will have a palace in Paradise built of Qasab wherein there will be neither any noise nor any fatigue (trouble)."

Similar traditions was reported by the authority of Isma’il and Aisha (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Traditions: 3.19, 5.164, 5.165, 5.167, 5.168, 7.156, 8.33, and 9.576).

When Aisha was jealous, she would exceed her bounds and would do strange things like breaking dishes or tearing clothes. On another occasion when the Prophet was in the house of Aisha, one of the mothers of the believers (namely Safiyya) sent to the Prophet a dish that he really loved. She destroyed the dish, together with the food in it. Let us see how Aisha herself described this episode:

Aisha said: "Safiyya, the wife of the Prophet (S), sent a dish she had made for him when he was with me. When I saw the maidservant, I trembled with rage and fury, and I took the bowl and hurled it away. The Prophet of Allah (S) then looked at me; I saw the anger in his face and I said to him: ‘I seek refuge from Allah’s Apostle cursing me today.’ The Prophet said: ‘Undo it’. I said: ‘What is its compensation, O Prophet of Allah?’ He said: ‘The food like her food, and a bowl like her bowl.’"

Sunni references:

• Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p227

• Sahih al-Nisa’i, v2, p148

Al-Bukhari confirms this episode as well:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 7.152 (The Chapter of Envy)

Narrated Anas:

While the Prophet was in the house of one of his wives, one of the mothers of the believers sent a meal in a dish. The wife at whose house the Prophet was, struck the hand of the servant, causing the dish to fall and break.

The Prophet gathered the broken pieces of the dish and then started collecting on them the food which had been in the dish and said, "Your mother (my wife) felt jealous.”Then he detained the servant till a (sound) dish was brought from the wife at whose house he was. He gave the sound dish to the wife whose dish had been broken and kept the broken one at the house where it had been broken.

And on another occasion, speaking of herself:

Aisha said: "I said to the Prophet (S) ‘Enough for you about Safiyya is such and such.’ The Prophet of Allah (S) said to me: ‘You have uttered words which, if they were mixed with the waters of the sea, would color it.’"

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, and al-Zamakhshari has related it from him on, p73

By this Aisha was trying to disclose Safiyya’s faults. Glory be to Allah! How far was this mother of the believers away from the ethics and basic rights which Islam has enjoined concerning forbidding of backbiting and slander? No doubt her speech: "Enough for you about Safiyya is such and such”and the response of the Prophet of Allah (S) "You have uttered words which, if they were mixed with the waters of the sea, would color it”shows what Aisha had said regarding Safiyya was a grave thing and of immense concern. The narrators of the Hadith found it repulsive, and since they respected her, they changed the words to "so and so”as is their normal practice in such scandals.

And here is Aisha, the mother of the believers, narrating, once again, of her envy of Mariya (another mother of the believers). Aisha said:

"I have never been as jealous of any woman as I have been of Mariya. That was because she had beautiful ringlets. She used to stay in the house of Haritha Ibn al-Numan. We frightened her and I became concerned. The Prophet of Allah (S) sent her to a higher place and he would visit her there. That was very hard upon us, and then Allah blessed him with a boy through her and we shunned him".

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v8, p212

• al-Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, p339

Aisha’s jealousy went beyond the person of Mariya, and was directed even against Ibrahim, the innocent, newly born suckling baby:

Aisha said: "When Ibrahim was born, the Prophet of Allah (S) brought him to me and said: ‘Look how much he resembles me.’ I said: ‘I do not see any resemblance.’ The Prophet of Allah (S) said: ‘Don’t you see how robust and fair he is?"‘ Aisha said: "I said: ‘Whoever is fed with the milk of sheep becomes fair and robust.’"

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v1, p37

• also in al-Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri

Aisha was very partial and yielded to emotions and selfish motives. When some people maliciously accused Mariya (the wife of the Prophet), she was Aisha who supported the accusers and tried to confirm the false blame.

But Allah, the Mighty and Glorious, absolved her from blame and saved her from injustice, through the Commander of Believers, Imam ‘Ali (as). (For details refer to the account of Lady Mariya, may Allah be gracious to her, in al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v4, p30, or Talkhis of al-Mustadrak, by al-Dhahabi).

When she was overcome by suspicion and devilish insinuation, her jealousy crossed all boundaries and was beyond the expression of words, leading her to suspect the Prophet of Allah (S). Quite often, she used to pretend to be asleep when the Prophet stayed the night at her house, but, in fact, she would closely observe her husband, spying upon him in the darkness, following behind where he went. Here is a report, in her own words, which was narrated by Muslim in his Sahih, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad and other Sunni scholars:

Aisha said: When it was my turn for Allah’s Messenger to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle, and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep.

He then took hold of his mantle and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed the door lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil, and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached (the cemetery of) al-Baqi.

He stood there for a long time and then he lifted his hand three times and then returned, and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I also ran. He came (to the home) and I also came (to the home). I, however, preceded him and entered and lay down on the bed. He entered and said: Why is it, O Aisha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware will inform me. I told him the story. He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain and the said: Did you think Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, chapter CCCLII (titled: What is to be said while visiting the graveyard), v2, pp 461-462, Tradition #2127

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, pp 669-670, Tradition #103

• Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p147

On another occasion, she said:

"I lost track of the Prophet of Allah (S), and I suspected that he had gone to another of his wives. I went looking for him and I found him in prostration, saying. "O My Lord! Forgive me"

Sunni reference: Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p147

On another occasion:

Aisha said: "One night, when he was with me, the Messenger of Allah (S) went out". She said: "I became jealous. When he came and saw what I had done, he said: ‘What is the matter, O Aisha? Are you jealous?’ I replied: ‘And why should not those like me be jealous of those like you?’ The Prophet of Allah (S) then said: ‘Has your devil taken possession of you?’".

Sunni reference: Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p115

No doubt Aisha was quite often overcome or confused by her devil, for he found a way to her heart through jealousy. It has been narrated that the Prophet (S) said: "Jealousy for a man is faith and for a woman disbelief", meaning that a man may get jealous concerning his wife, for his wife is not religiously allowed to have sexual relation with another man.

The woman, however, does not have the right to be jealous of her husband, because Allah, Glory be to Him, has allowed him to marry more than one wife. An upright and believing woman who submits to the rulings of Allah, accepts her co-wife wholeheartedly, especially if her husband is just, upright, and God-fearing. How about the leader of humanity, the symbol of perfection and justice, and the most noble character, the Messenger of Allah?

Once the Prophet asked Aisha to collect certain information about a particular woman, namely, Sharraf, the sister of Dihya al-Kalbi. The information that she conveyed to him was not the information she had gathered, but wrong information prompted by selfish motives. When the Prophet (S) informed her of the truth of what she had observed, Aisha replied: "O Prophet of Allah! No secret is unknown to you. Who is able to hide anything from you?"

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p294

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v8, p115

She said once she addressed to the Messenger of Allah: "I smell Maghafir (a kind of flower having a very bad odor) from you.”She said this in order to prevent him from visiting the house of Umm al-Mu’minin Zainab (ra) and eating honey there. This is the claim of Aisha. No other people mentioned this. As I will point out shortly, the story said by Umar regarding the revelation of divorce verses, is much different than the context of what Aisha said.

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 6.434

Narrated Aisha:

Allah’s Apostle used to drink honey in the house of Zainab, the daughter of Jahsh, and would stay there with her. So Hafsa and I agreed secretly that, if he come to either of us, she would say to him "It seems you have eaten Maghafir (a kind of bad-smelling resin), for I smell in you the smell of Maghafir."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith 7.192

Narrated ‘Ubaid bin Umar:

I heard Aisha saying, "The Prophet used to stay for a long while with Zainab Bint Jahsh and drink honey at her house. So Hafsa and I decided that if the Prophet came to anyone of us, she should say him, "I detect the smell of Maghafir (a nasty smelling gum) in you. Have you eaten Maghafir?’... So there was revealed: ‘O Prophet! Why do you ban (for you) that which Allah has made lawful for you . . . If you two (wives of Prophet) turn in repentance to Allah,’ (66:1-4) addressing Aisha and Hafsa. ‘When the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to some of his wives.’(66:3)

Tradition 8.682 of Sahih al-Bukhari is also similar to above and is narrated by Aisha himself. No other person narrated the story of honey in connection with the divorce verses. Please also see the previous article where we mentioned Sahih al-Bukhari, Tradition 7.119. In that tradition which is narrated by Umar, the Prophet (S) did not enter to the house of Aisha and Hafsa for one full month as a punishment for their aggressive actions.

Considering the compassionate and the gentle personality of the Prophet (S), such severe punishment and the threat to divorce just for their saying to the Prophet "You smell Maghafir”(as Aisha claimed) does not seem reasonable. Qur’an confirms that the charges against Hafsa and Aisha was revealing a secret news:

When the Prophet disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives (i.e., Hafsa) and she then divulged it (i.e., to Aisha) and Allah made it known to him, he made known (to her) part thereof and passed over part. Then when he (i.e., the Prophet) told her thereof, she said: "Who told you this?”He said "He who knows and is well-aware (of all things) told me.”(Qur’an 66.3)

It seems that the report of Umar is more accurate. Umar said: "The Prophet kept away from his wives for twenty-nine days because of the story which Hafsa had disclosed to Aisha.”(See Sahih al-Bukhari 7.119 and 6.435). This is much different than the story made by Aisha about honey.

After one month that the Prophet deserted his wives, and when the words of Allah: "You may defer any one of them you wish and take to your self any you wish and there is no sin for you to take back any of them you have (temporarily) set aside (33:51)”were revealed, Aisha said to the Prophet:

"It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire!"

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DLXXII (titled: Permissibility of bestowing the turn on one’s fellow wife), v2, pp 748-749, Traditions #3453-3454

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, pp 1085-1086, Traditions #49-50

Her evil conduct in the presence of the Prophet of Allah (S) reached a point that while he was praying, she would spread her feet towards his direction of prostration. When he prostrated and pinched them, she retracted them. When he stood up for the rest of the prayer, she would spread her feet out again:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 1.492 & 1.379

Narrated Aisha:

"I used to sleep in front of Allah’s Apostle with my legs opposite his Qibla (facing him); and whenever he prostrated, he pushed my feet and I withdrew them and whenever he stood, I stretched them."

One day, in the presence of her father, she started a quarrel with the Prophet and told him: "Be just.”Her father punished her for the impudence by giving a powerful a slap on her face so that she bled profusely and the blood ran onto her clothes.

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v7, p116, Tradition #1020

• Ihyaa al-Ulum, by al-Ghazzali, Chapter 3, Bab al-Nikah, v2, p35

• Mukashifat al-Qulub, by al-Ghazzali, Chapter 94, p238

If Aisha got angry at the Prophet - which she did quite often - she would avoid uttering the name of the Prophet (S). She would not mention the name of Muhammad, but rather used to say: "By the Lord of Abraham”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition #7.155 and #8.101, The Chapter of Jealousy and Wiles of a woman).

Once she angrily said to the Messenger of Allah (S):

"It is you who pretend to be a prophet from Allah."

Sunni references:

• Ihyaa al-Ulum, by al-Ghazzali, Chapter 3, v2, p29, The Book on the Etiquettes of Marriage

• Mukashifat al-Qulub, by al-Ghazzali, Chapter 94

Subhana Allah!!! This is the Messenger of Allah, and submitting to his order is obligatory for every believing men and women. Disputing him is a sign of great impurity and the one who does that cannot be regarded as pure and righteous since s/he has committed a grave sin, let alone casting doubt on the prophethood of Muhammad (S).

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 6

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Most Beloved Wife?

Some people claim that Aisha was the most beloved and affectionate wife of the Prophet, and that the Prophet could not be separated from her. They even report that some of his wives gave up their turn of visitation for her when they came to know that the Prophet (S) loved her and could not wait for her turn!!! Such claims are in clear contradiction with authentic reports mentioned previously about Khadija being the best wife of the Prophet, and about Aisha being the most jealous one.

For if Aisha was the most beloved wife, can we find any justification or explanation for Aisha’s excessive jealousy? More over, in that case, one would have assumed that the opposite, i.e., that the rest of the wives of the Prophet (S) would have been jealous of Aisha due to his intense love and inclination towards her, according to what they report and claim. If she was pampered by the Prophet of Allah (S), what was the need for the jealousy?

Here we relate another narration which al-Bukhari and several others of the Sunni transmitters have reported. It speaks of the extent of aversion which Aisha felt towards her husband, the Prophet of Allah (S). al-Bukhari reports that Aisha swears in the name of Allah that the Prophet wishes Aisha dies! Here is the tradition:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 7.570

Narrated al-Qasim bin Muhammad:

Aisha, (complaining of headache) said, "Oh, my head"! Allah’s Apostle said, "I wish that (i.e., your death) had happened while I was still living, for then I would ask Allah’s Forgiveness for you and invoke Allah for you.”Aisha said, "A likely story! By Allah, I think you want me to die; and If this should happen, you would spend the last part of the day sleeping with one of your wives!"

Does this narration indicate that the Prophet of Allah (S) loved Aisha so much so that he could not live without her?! Aisha, filled with jealousy, is confessing that the Prophet wishes to be with his other wives than to spend time with Aisha! Forecasting her future deeds, the Prophet wished she would have died in his lifetime so that he could have asked Allah for her forgiveness.

Moreover, how could the Prophet (S) love someone who would lie, backbite, slander and would doubt Allah and his Prophet, suspecting them of injustice? (See the traditions in the previous part as well as the traditions below). How could the Prophet of Allah (S) love someone who spied upon him, going out of her house without his permission to find out where he had gone? How could the Prophet of Allah (S) love someone who, in his presence, insulted his wives (like Khadija) even though they were dead? How could the Prophet of Allah (S) love someone who hated his son Ibrahim, and accused his wife, Mariya, of lying?

How could the Prophet of Allah (S) love someone who hated his daughter, Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), and who hated his brother and cousin, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, to the extent where she could not mention his name and think any good of him? (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, traditions 3.761 and 5.727 and 5.736).

All these deeds are detested by Allah and His Prophet (S), and they do not love those who committed them, for with Allah is the truth, and His Messenger (S) is the reflection of the truth, and as such, it is not possible for him to love one who is against the truth. In fact, not only the Messenger of Allah did not love Aisha, but also, he warned the nation against her seditions/Fitna.

The weak reports claiming excessive love of Prophet for Aisha are, in fact, fabricated by the rivals of Imam ‘Ali (as). They gave her the highest preference when she served their interests. She narrated for them what they loved to hear, and she fought against their enemy, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as).

We should also point out that due to their hatred against the Prophet, the Umayad strove to distort the truth and turn everything head over heels, from the time the Caliphate fell into the hands. They, thus, elevated to the zenith of power people who were, during the life of the Prophet (S), ordinary, with no special standing, while they ignored others who were at the peak of honor and nobility during the lifetime of the Prophet (S).

As we have partially witnessed so far, and if we study the actual events which occurred, ignoring the spurious narrations which the Umayad composed, we will observe that the Prophet of Allah (S) was, on many occasions, severely troubled and angered by Aisha.

Once I asked some Sunnis the reason for the Prophet’s (S) excessive love for Aisha, specifically to the exclusion of his other wives.

One of them said: "Because she was beautiful and young, and she was the only virgin he had, for no man had taken her before him!"

Another said: "Because she was the daughter of Abu Bakr, the truthful one, his companion in the cave."

The third said: "Because she memorized half the religion from the Prophet of Allah (S) and was a learned jurist!"

Non of the above claims has any basis, and non is acceptable to either the intellect or to reality. We will refute these answers with indubitable proofs.

As for the first claim, if the Prophet loved her because she was beautiful and the only virgin that he had, what prevented him from marrying the beautiful virgins who excelled her in charm and beauty, and were the role models among the Arab tribes, and who were at his beck and call?

On the other hand, the historians mentioned that Aisha’s jealousy towards Zainab Bint Jahsh, Safiyya Bint Huyayy, and Mariya the Copt, was because they were more beautiful than her. Furthermore, Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Kathir reported that:

The Prophet (S) married Malika Bint Ka’b who was known for her outstanding beauty. Aisha went to see her and said to her: "Aren’t you ashamed to marry your father’s killer?”She then sought refuge against the Prophet of Allah (S), whereupon he divorced her. Her people came to him and said: "O Prophet of Allah, she is young and lacking in perception. She was deceived, so take her back". The Prophet (S) refused to do so. Her father was killed on the day of the conquest of Mecca, and his killer was Khalid Ibn al-Walid al-Khandama."

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v8, p148

• Ibn Kathir, v5, p299

This narration clearly proves that the Prophet of Allah (S) was not concerned with youth and beauty in his marriages, otherwise, he would not have divorced Malika Bint Ka’b when she was young and of outstanding beauty.

This narration, and others like it, also show us the methods which Aisha adopted in deceiving the innocent believing women, and prohibited them from marrying the Prophet of Allah (S). Here, Aisha was instigating in Malika feelings for her father’s death, and that the killer was the Apostle of Allah (S), saying to her: "Aren’t you ashamed to marry your father’s killer?”What could this poor woman do but seek refuge against the Prophet of Allah (S)?

Perhaps she said more than that, at a time when people still had traits of Jahiliyya in them, which instigated people to retaliation and reproached whoever did not exact revenge against his father’s killer. This is while the Prophet was not the killer of his father as the above report also testifies.

Other than the above divorce case, history testifies the case of divorce of Asma Bint Nu’man, who due to her beauty, was also targeted by the envy of Aisha. Her envy reached a point whereby she lied to Asma when she was married to the Prophet. It has been reported that:

When Asma Bint Nu’man was being led as a bride to her groom (i.e., the Prophet), Aisha told her that the Prophet was highly pleased with the woman who, when he approaches her, says to him: "May Allah save me from you."

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v4, p37, on the account of Asma

• al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v4, p233

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, p104, v8, p145

• Tarikh al-Ya’qubi, v2, p69

Her underlying aim was to have the Prophet (S) divorce this naive woman for these offensive words, and the Prophet (S) did divorce her before consummating the marriage due to these words as the above references further testify.

It is now left for us to ask why did the Prophet of Allah (S) divorce these two naive women (Asma and Malika), who both fell victims to the plotting and deception of Aisha?

Before anything else, we must realize that the Prophet of Allah (S) was infallible, and as such, he would not oppress anyone nor would do anything which was not right. Therefore, in divorcing the two women, there must have been some wisdom known to Allah and His Prophet (S). Similarly, in spite of Aisha’s deeds, there must have been wisdom in him not divorcing her which we will talk shortly.

As far as the second woman is concerned, i.e., Asma Bint al-Nu’man; her naive disposition became apparent when Aisha’s tricks captured her, and the first words that she greeted the Prophet of Allah (S) with, when he stretched out his hand to her were: "I seek refuge in Allah from you". Despite her excessive beauty, the Prophet (S) did not let her remain due to her simple mindedness.

Along with some other narrators, Ibn Sa’d, in his al-Tabaqat, v8, p145, on the authority of Ibn Abbas said: "The Prophet of Allah (S) married Asma Bint al-Nu’man, and she was among the most beautiful and complete women of her time". Perhaps the Prophet of Allah (S) wanted to teach us that the importance of intelligence outweighs that of physical beauty, for how many pretty women have been led by their foolishness towards corruption?

As for the first mentioned woman, i.e., Malika Bint Ka’b, who Aisha incited by telling her that her husband was her father’s killer, the Prophet (S) did not want this poor girl (who was young and lacked perception as her people testified) to live in fear and terror which would cause great problems for her, especially since Aisha would never let her live in peace with the Prophet of Allah (S). No doubt, there are other reasons known to the Prophet which are not known to us.

The important thing to realize is that the Prophet of Allah (S) did not crave for beauty or physical and sexual desires, as some ignorant persons and orientalists assume. They claim that Muhammad was pre-occupied with beautiful women. We have observed how the Prophet (S) divorced these two women despite their tender age and beauty. They were the most beautiful women of their times, as documented in the historical and Hadith books. Thus the claim of those perverts who say that the Prophet (S) loved Aisha for her youth and beauty is baseless and unacceptable, and rather insulting.

If we also recall the narration reported by Aisha (mentioned in the previous part), she said that the Messenger of Allah (S) did not wait for long before he thought she was asleep, then he took his upper garment, slowly opened the door, went out and then closed it, we can perceive the lie of the claim that he could not do without her.

Also as we quoted from Sahih al-Bukhari in the previous part, the Prophet of Allah (S) never lost an opportunity to mention Khadija. This used to cause Aisha’s heart burn with jealousy, and she would lose control of herself and forget her manners. She would abuse (Khadija) as she liked, with no respect for her husband’s feelings. Aisha said to the Prophet (S): "Why do you mention that old woman of the Quraish? She who had reddened cheeks that time had destroyed!”(See the previous part for references).

Dare we ask Aisha who never saw Khadija for a single day in her life nor ever met her, how did she know that she was an old woman with red cheeks? Is this the conduct of the average believer who is forbidden to speak ill of a believer in his/her absence if that person is alive? How about if that person is dead and has been taken up to the Lord?

And how severe is the crime if the person being backbitten is the lady in whose house Gabriel came down and gave her the tidings of a house in paradise, a house without noise or trouble? (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Traditions: 9:588, 3.19, 5.164, 5.165, 5.167, 5.168, 7.156, 8.33, and 9.576).

There is no doubt that all these authentic narrations refute the contention of the claim that Aisha was the most beloved wife of the Prophet’s (S) wives. It is clear that Aisha’s jealousy and hatred increased when the Prophet of Allah (S) informed her that His Lord had not given him someone better than Khadija.

Once again, the Prophet (S) teaches us that he did not have any sort of inclination for base desires, and had no inclination towards beauty and virginity, because Khadija (S) had been previously married twice and was older than himself by fifteen years.

Despite this, he loved her and never ceased to praise her. By my life, this is the true character of the Prophet of Allah (S), who loved for Allah’s sake and hated for Allah’s sake. There is a huge difference between these authentic traditions and the forged one which claims the Prophet preferred Aisha, so much so that his wives sent to him someone imploring him to show fairness with regard to the daughter of Abu Quhafa (i.e., Abu Bakr)!!!

As for those who allege that he loved her because she was the daughter of Abu Bakr, this is also untrue. We can say that he married her for the sake of Abu Bakr’s tribe. The Messenger of Allah (S) married into several tribes for political reasons so as to placate their hearts and foster affection and feelings of mercy between those tribes, replacing rancor and hatred.

The Prophet (S) married Umm Habiba, the sister of Muawiyah and the daughter of Abu Sufyan, the foremost enemy of the Prophet (S). The Prophet’s compassion and love for the Arab tribes led him to marrying Jews, Christians and Copts so that the people of the scriptures could get closer to each other.

This is especially so if we realize, from our readings of the biographical works, that it was Abu Bakr who asked the Prophet (S) to marry his daughter Aisha, just as Umar had asked him to marry Hafsa. The Prophet (S) accepted these proposals because his heart encompassed all mankind. Allah, the Exalted, states:

"And if you were harsh and of severe heart, they would have deserted you.”(Qur’an 3:159)

Muslim in his Sahih as well as many other Sunni traditionists reported that:

Umar Ibn al-Khattab reported: When Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) kept himself away from his wives, I entered the mosque and found people striking the ground with pebbles and saying: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) has divorced his wives, and that was before they were commanded to observe seclusion. Umar said to himself: I must find this today. So I went to Aisha and said (to her): O Daughter of Abu Bakr, have you gone to the extent of giving trouble to the Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him)?

Thereupon she said: Son of Khattab! You have nothing to do with me. You should look to your own receptacle (i.e., your own defects, or your own daughter). He (Umar) said: I visited Hafsa, daughter of Umar and said to her: O Hafsa! This (news) has reached me that you cause Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) trouble. By Allah! You know that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) does not love you, and had I not been (your father) he would have divorced you. (On hearing this) she wept bitterly ...

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DLXXXI (Titled: Ila and Keeping away from the wives), v2, p763, Tradition #3507.

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, v4, p188, The book of Divorce, Chapter on separation and being away from them, giving them a choice and Allah’s words: ‘And if you two support each other against him...’

This narration clearly illustrates for us, without doubt, that the Prophet’s (S) marriage to Hafsa was not due to love, but rather, for the political needs that circumstances dictated. What makes us certain of our deduction is the fact that Umar Ibn al-Khattab swore by Allah that the Prophet of Allah (S) did not love Hafsa.

Therefore not even the slightest of doubt is left in our minds about the marriage to her being for political considerations when he said to her: "Had it not been for me, the Prophet of Allah (S) would have divorced you".

Also we will quote later on, there are in numerous traditions in which the Prophet (S) ordered Muslims to love his Ahlul-Bayt as an order from Allah. This is also mentioned in Qur’an. Yet, in the above tradition Umar swears by Allah that the prophet does not love Hafsa. This clearly shows that Hafsa (the wife of the Prophet) was not among Ahlul-Bayt whose love is obligatory to all the believing men and women.

This narration also gives us some idea about the Prophet’s (S) marriage to Aisha, the daughter of Abu Bakr, and that, despite all her troubles, he exercised patience and perseverance for the sake of Abu Bakr’s tribe.

Otherwise, Hafsa was more worthy of the love and affection of the Prophet of Allah (S), for she did not do a tenth of the things that Aisha, the daughter of Abu Bakr, did to offend the Prophet (S).

If we return to the claim that the Prophet of Allah (S) loved Aisha since she had memorized half the religion from him, and that he used to say, "Take half your religion from this Humayra", we realize that this tradition is fabricated and has no basis of truth, nor is it compatible with the ridiculous and sorrowful rulings which have been reported from Aisha.

As such, it is not fitting that the Prophet (S) should have mentioned them. It would be sufficient to refer to the incident of the suckling of an adult, which she used to report from the Prophet of Allah (S), and which was narrated by Muslim in his Sahih and by Malik in his Muwatta’. All the other wives of the Prophet (S) rejected this detestable claim and refused to act according to it. Even the reporter of the Hadith remained silent for a complete year and was scared to mention it due to its repulsive and shameless nature.

One of the methods for a person to become "Mahram”(intimate; forbidden to marry) is through fosterage. A woman may suckle the child and become her foster-mother when the child is less than two years old. It is forbidden for a female to show any parts of her body such as breasts, chest, hair, and so on, to a grown male who is not Mahram.

However, Aisha claimed that a woman can suckle a grown up man who understands sexuality and has even beard! For a female who wants to suckle such adult male for the first time, she must do the following:

1) To allow this grown-up man to enter her house,
2) To open her clothes intentionally (by the intention of suckling)
3) To allow such stranger adult to see parts of her body, chest, breasts, and so on,
4) To allow this man to touch her body.

This is for the first time when the person in question is not Mahram as yet based on the Fatwa of Aisha, he will become Mahram after being suckled, and nothing would be wrong! Here are some traditions from Aisha attributing such shameful thing to the Prophet:

Aisha reported that Sahla Bint Suhail came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, I see on the face of Abu Hudhaifa (signs of disgust) on entering of Salim (who is an ally) into (our house), whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She said: How can I suckle him as he is a grown-up man?

Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) smiled and said: I already know that he is a young man. Amr has made this addition in his narration that he participated in the Battle of Badr and in the narration of Ibn Umar (the words are): Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) laughed.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, Chapter DLXVI, titled: Suckling a Young boy, Tradition #3424.

Ibn Abu Mulaika reported that al-Qasim Ibn Muhammad Ibn Abu Bakr had narrated to him that Aisha reported that Sahla Bint Suhail Ibn Amr came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Salim (the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa) is living with us in our house, and he has attained (puberty) as men attain it and has acquired knowledge (of the sex problems) as men acquire, whereupon he said: Suckle him so that he may become unlawful (in regard to marriage) for you.

He (Ibn Abu Mulaika) said: I refrained from narrating this Hadith for a year or so on account of fear. I then met al-Qasim and said to him: You narrated to me a Hadith which I did not narrate (to anyone) afterwards. He said: What is that? I informed him, whereupon he said: Narrate it on my authority that Aisha had narrated that to me.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, Chapter DLXVI, titled: Suckling a Young boy, Tradition #3426.

Zainab daughter of Abu Salama reported: I heard Umm Salama, the wife of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), saying to Aisha: By Allah, I do not like to be seen by a young boy who has passed the period of fosterage, whereupon She (Aisha) said: Why is it so? Sahla daughter of Suhail came to Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah’s messenger, I swear by Allah that I see in the face of Abu Hudhaifa (the signs of disgust) on account of entering of Salim (in the house), whereupon Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Suckle him. She (Sahlah Bint Suhail) said: He has a beard. But he (again) said: Suckle him, and it would remove what is there (expression of disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa. She said: (I did that) and , by Allah, I did not see (any sign of disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, Chapter DLXVI, titled: Suckling a Young boy, Tradition #3428.

Umm Salama, the wife of Allah’s Apostle, used to say that all wives of Allah’s Apostle disclaimed the idea that one with this type of fosterage (having been suckled after the proper period) should come to them... and no one was going to be allowed to enter (our house) with this type of fosterage and we do not subscribe to this view.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, Chapter DLXVI, titled: Suckling a Young boy, Tradition #3429.

Aisha herself testified that:

Aisha reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) visited me when a man was sitting near me, and he seemed to disapprove of that. And I saw signs of anger on his face and I said: Messenger of Allah, he is my brother by fosterage, whereupon he said: Consider who your brothers are because of fosterage since fosterage is through hunger (i.e. in infancy).

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, Chapter DLXVI, titled: Suckling a Young boy, Tradition #3430.

Also al-Bukhari narrated:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.815

Narrated Aisha:

Once the Prophet came to me while a man was in my house. He said, "O Aisha! Who is this (man)?”I replied, "My foster brothers”He said, "O Aisha! Be sure about your foster brothers, as fostership is only valid if it takes place in the suckling period (before two years of age)."

The last three traditions in the above show that the prophet (S) does not approve an adult male to be with his wife (Aisha). He said that fosterage relationship is only possible if the male is less than two years old. These set of traditions are in clear contradiction with the claim of Aisha stated in the early traditions. Besides, I would like you to think whether you would allow your wife to suckle a grown-up man? If no, why do you think that the most honorable man on the earth, the Prophet (S), will allow it?

Regarding the scandal of the above traditions, the translator of Sahih Muslim (Abdul Hamid Siddiqui, Saudi Arabia) wrote in the footnote of the above traditions that:

This Chapter (i.e., suckling a young boy) is one of the most difficult chapters of this book. Fosterage which makes marriage unlawful is only that which has been referred to in the Holy Qur’an:

"And the (divorced) mothers may nurse their children for two whole years if they wish to complete the period of nursing.”(2:233)

It implies that the fosterage within two years of the child’s birth is effective in determining the nature of relationship, and that of the subsequent period, and specially in a grown-up age, is NOT effective. This view is held by Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Muhammad, and is supported on the authority of Ibn Mas’ud, Abu Huraira, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar.

Sunni reference: Footnote of Sahih Muslim, English version, by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui, v2, p43

The above astonishing issue was just one of the false verdicts of Aisha. Let us now turn to Sahih al-Bukhari in the Chapter on: "Whoever Leaves his Place of Residence Must Shorten the Prayer."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.206

Narrated Ibn Umar:

I accompanied Allah’s Apostle and he never offered more than two Rakat during the journey. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman used to do the same.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.188

Narrated Abdullah bin Umar:

I offered the prayer with the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Umar at Mina and it was of two Rakat. Uthman in the early days of his caliphate did the same, but later on he started praying the full prayer.

It is clear that Uthman changed the regulation of the prayer of the traveler in the later years of his reign. For more traditions concerning this innovation, please also see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 2.190.

It is noteworthy that Aisha also followed this innovation as al-Bukhari testified:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.196

Narrated Aisha:

"When the prayers were first enjoined they were of two Rakat each. Later the prayer in a journey was kept as it was but the prayers for non-travelers were completed.”al-Zuhri said, "I asked ‘Urwa what made Aisha pray the full prayers (in journey).”He replied, "She did the same as Uthman did."

Muslim also reported the first tradition in "The Chapter on the Prayer recited by the Travelers and Shortening it”He narrated on the authority of al-Zuhri from ‘Urwa from Aisha, that: "The prayer was first decreed as two rak’ah. Then this ruling was preserved for the prayer during a journey, and the prayer at (a person’s town of) residence was made complete". al-Zuhri said: "I said to ‘Urwa ‘So how come Aisha (recites the) complete prayer on a journey?’ He replied: ‘She interpreted (the ruling) as Uthman interpreted it.’

The above traditions show that the action of Aisha was in opposite of her own claim. For she is the one who reports that the prayer of a traveler was decreed as two units but she opposes what Allah has made obligatory, and what the Prophet of Allah (S) followed, and she changed the ruling of Allah and His Prophet, reviving the practice of Uthman.

Aisha had not lived with the Prophet of Allah (S) for more than six to eight years, according to different reports, along with nine other co-wife who had also share from the time of the Prophet (S). She spent the first years of this period playing games that children play whilst she was the wife of the Prophet (S). She was, as Barira, the slave girl of the Prophet of Allah (S), described her: "A young girl, who sleeps leaving the dough (unguarded) that the goats come and eat". (Sahih Bukhari Hadith, Arabic-English version, Tradition 9.462).

After the demise of the Prophets, she modified the religion as she wished, and issued scandalous verdicts, and as such, it is quite impossible that Aisha’s husband, the Prophet of Allah (S), would be pleased with her and would order the people to follow her. In fact, as implied in the following tradition which has been related in Sahih al-Bukhari, Muslim and the other Sunni documents, obedience to her is disobedience to Allah:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 9.220

Narrated Abu Maryam Abdullah bin Ziyad al-Aasadi:

When Talha, al-Zubair and Aisha moved to Basra, ‘Ali sent Ammar bin Yasir and al-Hasan bin ‘Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. al-Hasan bin ‘Ali was at the top of the pulpit and Ammar was below al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard Ammar saying, "Aisha has moved to al-Basra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her (Aisha)."

This Hadith indicates that obedience to her is disobedience to Allah, and to oppose and disobey her is to obey Allah. We can also note in the Hadith, that the Umayad narrators have added the phrase "and the hereafter”to the saying of Ammar (ra) and making it "She is the wife of your Prophet in this life and the hereafter”so that they may lead the masses into thinking that Allah has forgiven her every sin she Committed, and allowed her to enter the heaven, and to continue to live with her husband.

Otherwise, how did Ammar know that she will be his wife in the hereafter? How could Ammar take an oath about something he did not know? Did he have a verse from the book of God? Or was it a covenant promised to him by the Prophet (S)? Thus, excluding what has been falsely added, we are left with the true Hadith, i.e., that Aisha traveled to Basra, and that she is the wife of your Prophet, but Allah is testing you through her to know whether you obey Him or her.

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 7

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

(Note: I apologize in advance, if my Sunni brothers/sisters feel offended by the content of these parts of the article due to their previous background on Aisha. The purpose of this article is not to make you feel bad, but to provide you with some pieces of information that the Sunni collections carry, but they have been ignored due to some scholars who prevented discussing them. The final judgment is with you.)

Aisha After The Prophet’s Demise

Another important approach to realize who Ahlul-Bayt are, is studying the historical events after the demise of the Prophet. According to the purification sentence in Qur’an (the last sentence of Verse 33:33), Ahlul-Bayt are free from any dirt and impurity.

On the other hand, the documented Sunni history testifies that Aisha (one of the wives of the Prophet) was not righteous. If we examine her life after the demise of the Prophet, we will find her misconducts more horrible than what she did during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (S).

Undoubtedly, on of her most terrible misconduct was instigating the Battle of Camel during the Caliphate of Imam ‘Ali (as). The battle was named Camel (Jamal) since Aisha was riding a Camel to lead the rebels. How can she be pure when she fought against the legitimate Caliph of his time and when she is responsible for shedding the blood of more than 10,000 Muslims? What impurity can be imagined greater than this horrible Fitna which caused to disunite the Muslim Ummah once and forever. Let us first briefly discuss the event preceding to this strife.

Agitation Against Uthman

Aisha claimed that the reason for her rise against Imam ‘Ali (as) (which was manifested in the battle of Camel) was getting revenge of the blood of Uthman. Yet, the history testifies that Aisha herself was one of the main figures of agitation against Uthman which ended up with his murder. Once she went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance from the Prophet (after so many years passed from the demise of the Prophet).

Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money, and reminded her that she was one of those who counseled Abu Bakr not to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah al-Zahra (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share, then why should she? Hearing this, Aisha became very angry at Uthman, and came out and said to the people:

"Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

Sunni references:

• History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p206

• Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141

• al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290

• Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v16, pp 220-223.

The following paragraph from the History of al-Tabari shows the struggle of Aisha to agitate against Uthman and to push the famous companions against him. It also shows her position toward Imam ‘Ali (as), and her plots with Talha for overthrowing Uthman when Talha was able to take over the treasury of state during the siege against Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow in the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Another Sunni historian, al-Baladhuri, in his history (al-Ansab al-Ashraf) said that when the situation became extremely grave, Uthman ordered Marwan Ibn al-Hakam and Abdurrahman Ibn Attab Ibn Usayd to try to persuade Aisha to stop campaigning against him and to help him pass this difficult time. They went to her while she was preparing to leave for pilgrimage, and they told her:

"We pray that you stay in Medina, and that Allah may save this man (Uthman) through you.”Aisha said: "I have prepared my means of transportation and vowed to perform the pilgrimage. By God, I shall not honor your request... I wish he (Uthman) could fit to one of my sacks so that I could carry him. I would then through him into the sea."

Reference: "al-Ansab al-Ashraf", by al-Baladhuri, v4, part 1, p75

The Battle Of Camel

Some traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari imply to the reader that the dislike of Aisha toward Imam ‘Ali was because ‘Ali suggested the Prophet to divorce her. The fact is that the Prophet was about to divorce her because he himself found her troublesome since Aisha and Hafsa backed each other against the Prophet to the extent that Allah sent down a revelation in this regard.

(Please see Part IV for the verses related to divorce of Aisha and Hafsa and the corresponding traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari). She often used to offend the Prophet (S) and caused him distress, but the Prophet (S) was compassionate and kind, his character lofty, his patience deep, therefore he frequently said to her, "Your Satan has confused you, O Aisha."

Even if we suppose the story is true (that Imam ‘Ali advised the Prophet to divorce her), is it a sufficient excuse for her to disobey the words of God and her husband? Allah, in the beginning of the verse 33:33 of Qur’an, orders the wives of the Prophet saying:

And stay in your houses . Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of ignorance. ... (Qur’an 33:33)

Aisha was required by the above verse of Qur’an to stay at home, but she disobeyed the order of God. Is this a sign of piety, purity and righteousness? All of other wives of the Prophet obeyed the above injunction with the exception of Aisha. Historians relate that Hafsa Bint Umar wanted to go with her for the battle of the Camel.

But her brother, Abdullah, reproached her and recited the aforementioned verse to her. Hafsa then canceled her plans. Aisha, however, rode the camel that that Prophet had forbidden her from riding and warned her about the barking of al-Haw’ab’s dogs:

The Prophet (S) said to his wives: "I wonder which one of you will be the instigator of the Camel Affair, at whom the dogs of Haw’ab will bark, and she will be the one who has deviated from the straight path. As to you Humayra (i.e., Aisha), I have warned you in that regard."

Sunni references:

• History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p120

• al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah, by Ibn Qutaybah

This prophecy of the Messenger of Allah (S) took place 28 years later in the plain of al-Haw’ab. The story that all historians tend to agree is that during her journey to Basra (to lead the war of Camel), Aisha passed by the waters of al-Haw’ab and heard the dogs barking. She remembered the warning of the Prophet, and she cried and said: "Take me back! Take me back!”

But Talha and Zubair brought fifty men and bribed them to testify in front of her that the place was not the plain of al-Haw’ab. Many Sunni historians believe that those fifty men gave the first falsified testimony in the history of Islam. (al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir, and al-Mada’ini who wrote on the events of the year 36 AH. See also "The Great Sedition”-- "al-Fitna al-Kubra", by Taha Husayn).

I believe that this narration was fabricated during the time of the Umayad to reduce the severity of disobedience of Aisha, thinking that she would be exonerated after her nephew, Abdullah Ibn al-Zubair, deceived her, coming with fifty men who swore by God and gave false testimony that the water was not that of al-Haw’ab.

Did the fabricator of the report who forged this narration find an excuse for her disobedience to the order of the Prophet of Allah (S) to stay within her house and the prohibition of riding a camel before arriving at the well of al-Haw’ab, the watering place of the barking dogs? Did they find an excuse for her after she rejected the advice of the Mother of Believers, Umm Salama? Historians have recorded that:

Umm Salama said to Aisha: "Do you remember the day the Prophet of Allah (S) proceeded and we were with him and he turned left from (a place called) Qadid and sat alone with ‘Ali and whispered to him for a long time? You wanted to force yourself on them; I tried to prevent you, but you disobeyed me and intruded. It did not take long before you returned in tears. I asked: ‘What happened to you?’ And you replied: ‘I approached them and they were in conversation, so I said to ‘Ali: ‘I get with the Prophet of Allah one day out of nine, so can you not, O son of Abu Talib, leave me with him on my day?’ The Messenger of Allah came towards me and he was red with anger, and said: ‘Go back! By Allah, none except those who have abandoned faith can hate him’. Then you returned repentant and sad.”Aisha said: "Yes, I remember that."

Umm Salama continued: "I also remind you that you and I were with the Prophet of Allah and he said to us: ‘Which one of you will be the rider of the trained camel, at whom the dogs of Haw’ab will bark, and she will have deviated from the right path?’ We said: ‘We seek refuge from Allah and His Prophet from that’. He touched your back and said: ‘Don’t be that one, O Humayra.’“Aisha said: "I remember that."

Umm Salama said: "Do you not remember that day when your father came with Umar, so we put on our veils. They came in and spoke about what they wanted to, until they said: ‘O Prophet of Allah (S) we do not know how long you will be with us. If only you were to tell us who will succeed you as Caliph over us, so that there will be after you a place we can turn to.’ He said to them: ‘As for me, I have seen his position (in front of you). Were I to do this, you would all fall into disunity as the Israelites dispersed from Aaron’. They remained quiet and left. After they had departed, we came out to the Prophet of Allah and you said to him, as you were more forthcoming with him than all of us: ‘O Messenger of Allah who did you appoint as Caliph over them?’ He said: The wearer of the mended shoe.’ we went out and we saw it was ‘Ali. You said: ‘O Prophet of Allah, I do not see anyone apart from ‘Ali’. He replied- ‘He is the one.’“Aisha said "Yes, I remember that.”Umm Salama said to her: "So then, Aisha, how can you go ahead after all these"? She replied "I venture forth to reconcile the people."

Sunni reference: Commentary of Ibn Abil Hadid, v2, p77

Umm Salama also sought to prevent her from the uprising, using strong words, saying:

"The pillars of Islam, if they lean, are not set erect by women; and if they crack, are not joined by women. The praiseworthy things for women are lowering their gazes and protecting their chastity. What would you say if the Messenger of Allah (S) appear before you in one of these deserts and finds you driving your camel from one watering place to another? By Allah, if I were to embark upon this journey of yours, then it was said to me: ‘Enter paradise’ I would be ashamed to face Muhammad after having thrown off the veils he has placed upon me.’"

Sunni reference: Kitab al-Musanif fi Gharib al-Hadith, by Ibn Qutaybah, Chapter of Imamat and Politics.

Just as Aisha did not accept the advice of many sincere companions, al-Tabari in his history related that:

Jariyah Ibn Quddama al-Sa’di said to her: ‘O mother of the believers, by Allah, the murder of Uthman is less despicable than you going out on this accursed camel from your house and bearing arms. Allah has imposed on you the veil and sanctity, you have destroyed your cover and defiled your respect. Surely, whoever sees your uprising, sees your destruction. If you come to us obeying, then go back to your house. If you have come to us in coercion, then seek the help of the people".

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, v6, p482

Historians have recorded that she was the general leader of the battle, supervising, separating people and issuing commands. Even when Talha and al-Zubair argued as to who should lead the prayer, and when both of them wanted to lead, Aisha intervened and removed them both and ordered Abdullah Ibn Zubair, her nephew, to lead the dissents in prayer.

She would dispatch messengers with letters which she sent to several regions, requesting their assistance against ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib and urging them with the Jahili zeal. She even recruited twenty thousand or more rabble and greedy Arabs to fight and depose the Commander of the Faithful. Her urging resulted in zealous discord, where large numbers of people were killed in the name of defending and aiding the mother of the believers.

The historians say that when the companions of Aisha came to Uthman Ibn Hanif, the governor of Basra, they took him along with seventy of his officers who were in charge of the public treasury as prisoners. They brought them to Aisha who ordered that they be put to death. They were slaughtered as sheep are slaughtered. It is even reported there were 400 men in all and that they were the first Muslims whose heads were cut off whilst they were patient.

Sunni references:

• History of al-Tabari, v5, p178

• Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v2, p501

al-Sha’bi reported from Muslim Ibn Abi Bakra from his father "When Talha and Zubair reached Basra, I put on my sword as I wanted to help them. I visited Aisha, she was ordering, prohibiting; she was in command. I remembered a Hadith from the Prophet of Allah (S) which I used to hear him say: ‘A community which has its affairs administered by a woman will never succeed.’ I (therefore) withdrew from them and left them". (reported by al-Bukhari, v8, p97; al-Nisa’i, v4, p305; al-Hakim, v4, p525)

One of the things that makes us laugh and weep at the same time is that Aisha, went out of her residence in disobedience to Allah and His Prophet and then ordered the companions to remain in their houses. This is surely an amazing phenomena! Ibn Abil Hadid, in his Sharh, along with some other historians, reported that Aisha sent a letter when she was in Basra to Zaid Ibn Sawhan al-’Abdi in which she said to him: "From Aisha, the mother of the believers, daughter of Abu Bakr, the truthful one, wife of the Prophet. To her devoted son, Zaid Ibn Sawhan. Remain at home and make the people abandon the son of Abu Talib. I hope to hear what I would love from you, since you are the most trustworthy of my family...Wassalam".

This righteous man replied to her thus: "From Zaid Ibn Sawhan to Aisha Bint Abi Bakr: Allah issued a commandment to you and, He also issued a commandment to us. He ordered you to remain in your residence, and He ordered us to fight. Your letter has come to me instructing me to do contrary to what Allah has ordered me to do, (You have asked me) to do what Allah has ordered you to do, and that you do what Allah has asked me to do! Your order to me is (something) that I cannot obey, therefore there is no reply (necessary) to your letter."

From this, it becomes clear to us that Aisha was not content with leading the army of the Camel, but rather, she craved for absolute control over the believers in all the corners of the land. In all matters, she would command Talha and al-Zubair, who had been nominated for the Caliphate by Umar. Due to this, she made it lawful for herself to correspond with the chiefs of the tribes and with the governors, enticing them and seeking their help. If the heroes and men, famous for their courage, abandon and flee from the lines of battle when facing Imam ‘Ali (as) and would not stand in front of him, she stood, inciting, screaming and arousing the people.

Aisha permitted the killing of innocent people, and led the first civil war against Imam ‘Ali who was chosen by people as Caliph. The result was massacre of thousands of Muslims according to the historians (See the History of al-Tabari and the History of Ibn al-Athir on the events of the year 36 AH). Allah to whom belong Might and Majesty stated in Qur’an:

"And Whoever kills a believer deliberately, his reward is Hell forever, and the Wrath of Allah is upon him, He cursed him and prepared a great punishment for him.”(Qur’an 4:93)

Nevertheless, the Prophet (S) did not divorce her. So why all this hatred toward Imam ‘Ali (as)? History has recorded some of her aggressive actions that could not be explained. When she was on her way back to Mecca, she heard that the plot of Killing Uthman finally took place, so she became very delighted.

But when she heard that people had chosen Imam ‘Ali (as) to succeed him, she became very angry and said: "I wish the sky would collapse on the earth before son of Abu Talib (i.e., ‘Ali) could succeed the Caliphate". Then she said: "Take me back,”and thus she started the civil war against Imam ‘Ali (as) whose name she disliked to mention. Sunni traditionists narrated that:

When Ubaydullah Ibn Utbah mentioned to Ibn Abbas that Aisha said "In his death-illness the Prophet was brought to (Aisha’s) house while his shoulders were being supported by Fadhl Ibn Abbas and another person", then Abdullah Ibn Abbas said: "Do you know who this ‘other man’ was?”Ibn Utbah replied: "No.”Then Ibn Abbas said: "He was ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, but she is averse to name him in a good context."

Sunni references:

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, pp 34,228

• al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p29

• History of al-Tabari (Arabic), v1, pp 1800-1801

• al-Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, pp 544-545

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p29

• al-Sunan al-Kubra, by al-Bayhaqi, v3, p396

• A milder version of the above tradition has also been mentioned by al-Bukhari. (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, traditions 3.761 and 5.727 and 5.736).

The hatred of Aisha toward Imam ‘Ali (as) is well known. This was not just limited to waging war against Imam ‘Ali. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal recorded that:

"Ata Ibn Yasar, who says that a certain person came to Aisha and began to use impudent and abusive words for ‘Ali while Ammar, was in her presence. She said to him: "As regards ‘Ali, I have nothing to tell you, but as regards Ammar, I have heard the Messenger of Allah saying about him that if he has to make a choice between two things he will always choose that which is better from the point of view of good guidance and salvation."

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p113

Aisha’s hatred for Imam ‘Ali (as) was so much that she always tried to distance him from the Prophet (S) whenever she could find the means to do so. Ibn Abil Hadid, in his commentary on the Nahjul Balagha reported:

The Prophet of Allah (S) beckoned to ‘Ali to come close. He came close until he sat between him and Aisha, and he and the Prophet (S) were clung together. She said to him "Can you not find a seat for this one except on my thigh?”

Ibn Abil Hadid also reported that one day the Prophet of Allah (S) was walking with Imam ‘Ali and the conversation became prolonged. Aisha approached as she was walking from behind until she came between them saying: "What is it between you two that you are taking so long?”Upon this the Prophet of Allah (S) became angry.

Sunni reference: Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v9, p195

It is also reported that she once came upon the Prophet (S) whilst he was conversing quietly with ‘Ali. She screamed and said: "What is it with you and me, O son of Abu Talib? I have (just) one day with the Prophet of Allah (S)". Thereupon the Prophet (S) became angry.

Would the Prophet (S) be pleased with any believing man or woman whose heart was filled with hatred and malice towards his cousin, the leader of his progeny, about whom he said: "He loves Allah and His Prophet, and Allah and His Prophet love him"? He also said about him: "Whoever loves ‘Ali has loved me, and whoever hates ‘Ali has hated me.”(al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p130 who said this Tradition is authentic as set by the two standards of Muslim and Bukhari).

Had Aisha not heard the saying of the Prophet about ‘Ali that "Non but a believer would love him, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against him"? (Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter XXXIV, p46, Tradition #141; Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p643; Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p142; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v1, pp 84,95,128; Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari, v1, part 1, p202; Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p185; Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v14, p462).

This saying of the Prophet was so well-known that some of the companions used to say: "We recognized the hypocrites by their hatred of ‘Ali.”(Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p639, Tradition #1086; al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p47; al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p242; Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p91).

Moreover, Had Aisha not heard the saying of the Prophet: "Whoever I am his master, ‘Ali is his master. O God! Love those who love him and be hostile to those who are hostile to him"? (Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p298, v5, p63; Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, pp 12,43) Undoubtedly she heard all of them, but she did not like them, and when she heard of the assassination of Imam ‘Ali (as), she knelt and thanked Allah!!! (See the History of al-Tabari and the History of Ibn al-Athir on the events of the year 40 AH).

She was also involved in the intercepting the funeral procession of al-Hasan, the leader of the Heaven’s youth, and prevented his burial beside his grandfather (the Prophet), and she said: "Do not let anybody that I don’t like enter my house.”She forgot, or maybe ignored the saying of the Prophet (S) about al-Hasan and al-Husayn that: "I love them, and Allah loves those who love them”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, Traditions 5.90 and 3.333), or the saying of the Prophet that: "Nothing has been dearer to me than al-Hasan.”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, Tradition 7.772).

Who Are Ahlul-Bayt? Part 8

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Background Of Enmity Of Aisha Against Imam ‘Ali (as)

During the Prophet’s life, Aisha used to see that the son of Abu Talib way excelled her father on every occasion, and that the Prophet (S) continued to love him and preferred him above everyone else. she also knew that her father had returned defeated with the forces who were with him on the day of Khaibar, and that the Prophet (S) was pained by this and said: "I will give the standard tomorrow to a man who loves Allah and his Prophet, and whom Allah and his Prophet love, (a man) who will be steadfast and will not flee".

The next day Allah’s Apostle gave ‘Ali the flag and Allah granted victory under his leadership. (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.52, 5.520). After ‘Ali had captured Khaibar, he returned with Safiyya Bint Huyayy who the Prophet (S) married. This descended like a flash of lightning upon the heart of Aisha.

She also knew that the Prophet of Allah (S) had sent her father to proclaim the Chapter al-Bara’a (Ch. 9) to the pilgrims, but then had sent ‘Ali after him, to taking back the responsibility from him. Her father returned in tears and asked the reason for this action, whereupon the Prophet of Allah (S) responded: "Allah commanded me that none should proclaim this except me or someone from my Ahlul-Bayt". and thus he sent ‘Ali for this mission.

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p183, v5, pp 275,283

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 3,151, v3, pp 212,283

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p562, Tradition #946

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p51

• Khasa’is al-Alawiyyah, by al-Nisa’i, p20

• Fadha’il al-Khamsa, v2, p343

• Sirah al-Nabi, by Shibli Numani, v2, p239

She also knew that the Prophet (S) had appointed his cousin, ‘Ali, as the Caliph over the Muslims after him and had ordered his companions and his wives to congratulate him for this leadership over the believers in Ghadir Khum. Her father was among the first people to say: "Congratulations, Congratulations to you, O son of Abu Talib. Today you became the master of every believing man and woman".

Sunni references:

1. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p281

2. Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50

3. Mishkat al-Masabih, by al-Khateeb al-Tabrizi, p557

4. Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part 3, p144

5. Kitabul Wilayah, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari

6. al-Musannaf, by Ibn Abi Shaybah

7. al-Musnad, by Abu Ya’ala

8. Hadith al-Wilayah, by Ahmad Ibn ‘Uqdah

9. Tarikh, by Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v8, pp 290,596 from Abu Huraira

... and more.

Aisha fully realized that the Prophet (S) preferred Imam ‘Ali (as) over her and her father. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad narrates that:

Abu Bakr once came to the Prophet of Allah (S), and sought permission to enter. Before he went in, he heard Aisha’s voice raised, saying to the Prophet (S): "By Allah! I surely know that ‘Ali is dearer to you than me and my father", she repeated this twice or three times".

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Hanbal, v4, p275

She also knew that the Prophet (S) had put Usamah Ibn Zaid in command over her father a youth with no hair yet grown on his cheek, for Usamah Ibn Zaid was only seventeen years old, yet the Prophet commanded Abu Bakr to go on military expeditions under the leadership of Usamah and to pray behind him. He ordered all the immigrants and Helpers except ‘Ali to go with Usamah and to fight the Romans.

There is no doubt that Aisha was influenced by these events. Deep inside she was concerned for her father, and his competing for the Caliphate. Her envy and hatred for ‘Ali grew, and she tried her best to intervene, at all costs, to change the situation to her father’s advantage using various methods. We know how she sent for her father, supposedly on behalf of her husband, ordering him to lead the people in prayer, after she learnt that the Prophet of Allah (S) had summoned ‘Ali for this duty.

When the Prophet (S) learnt of this plot, he was forced to come out, remove Abu Bakr from his place and lead the people in prayer while he was sitting. He was angry at Aisha and said to her: "You women are like the companions of Joseph (Yusuf)”meaning that their plots were great. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition #1.680).

A researcher of this event will find clear contradiction since it is explained by Aisha in several different and discordant ways. The Prophet had called her father to join the army and commanded him to embark under the leadership of Usamah Ibn Zaid three days before that prayer. It is known logically that the leader of the army also leads the prayer. Usamah Ibn Zaid was, therefore, the Imam of Abu Bakr on that expedition. Aisha sensed this disdain and understood the Prophet’s motive, especially as he had not drafted ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib into that army in which even the notable Emigrants and Helpers, leaders and people of stature from the Quraish, had been drafted.

al-Bukhari reported that, Aisha narrated that the Prophet (S) ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayer, but later the Prophet decided to go to mosque and he went in front of Abu Bakr and led the prayer instead of Abu Bakr. Here is the tradition of al-Bukhari as claimed by Aisha:

Sahih al-Bukhari Tradition: 1.680

Narrated Aisha:

When the Prophet, became ill in his fatal illness, Someone came to inform him about the prayer, and the Prophet told him to tell Abu Bakr to lead the people in the prayer. I said, "Abu Bakr is a soft-hearted man and if he stands for the prayer in your place, he would weep and would not be able to recite the Qur’an.”The Prophet said, "Tell Abu Bakr to lead the prayer.”I said the same as before.

He (repeated the same order and) on the third or the fourth time he said, "You are the companions of Joseph. Tell Abu Bakr to lead the prayer.”So Abu Bakr led the prayer and meanwhile the Prophet felt better and came out with the help of two men; as if I see him just now dragging his feet on the ground. When Abu Bakr saw him, he tried to retreat but the Prophet beckoned him to carry on. Abu Bakr retreated a bit and the Prophet sat on his (left) side. Abu Bakr was repeating the Takbir (Allahu Akbar) of Allah’s Apostle for the people to hear.

The fact, however, is that the Prophet never ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayer. This can be proven by the following reasons:

1. Based on the above Tradition, if the Prophet was the one who ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayer, then why he later went to mosque and lead the prayer by himself? (Based on other traditions, the Prophet even pushed Abu Bakr away with his hand). Why such humiliation toward Abu Bakr?

This proves that once the Prophet realized the plot of Aisha, he became very angry and with all his illness, he decided to go to mosque to prevent what others now claim!!! Remember What Aisha said in the above tradition: "The Prophet came out (to lead the prayer) with the help of two men; as if I see him just now dragging his feet on the ground.”This shows that the condition of the Prophet was severe, yet he was so angry at the plot of Aisha and the implication of leading the prayer by Abu Bakr that he decided to stop it at any cost.

2. All Muslims agree that the Prophet had ordered Abu Bakr and Umar to join the camp led by Usamah Ibn Zaid, and as such they should have been outside Medina where the camp was located. Then, the existence of Abu Bakr and Umar and others inside Medina was illegal and was against the order of the Prophet (S). How can, then, the Prophet order Abu Bakr to lead the prayer inside Medina while he was supposed to be outside Medina with the direct order of the Prophet?!

The Messenger of Allah said: "May the curse of Allah be upon those who turn away from the army of Usamah”and he ordered the army to be dispatched immediately, and ordered all Helpers and all Immigrants except ‘Ali to leave Medina. But some companions disobeyed and complained about the leadership of Usamah (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition #5.552, 5.744 and 5.745) and they delayed in joining the camp, and finally returned to Medina, in order to prepare themselves for discussion about successorship as soon as the Messenger of Allah passes away.

Aisha further claimed that the Prophet (S) expired while he was resting on her chest. This claim contradicts the narrations transmitted and recorded by others. In the tradition reported by Imam ‘Ali as recorded by Ibn Sa’d who named consecutive sources up to Imam ‘Ali, we read:

‘Ali said: "In the last moments of his life, the Messenger of Allah said: ‘Call me my brother.’ So I approached him. He asked me to get nearer to him and I got quite close to him. He leaned on me and continued resting on my chest and speaking to me till his spittle fell on me and the Messenger of Allah breathed his last."

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p51, in the Chapter entitled "The Prophet demised in ‘Ali’s lap"

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v1, p392

In connection this event, it has also been narrated that:

Imam ‘Ali said: "The Messenger of Allah at that time (before his last breath) taught me one thousand chapters (Bab) of knowledge, every one of which opened for me one thousand other chapters."

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v1, p392

• Hilyatul Awliyaa, by al-Hafidh Abu Nu’aym

• Nuskhatah, by Abu Ahmad al-Faradi

• and many others...

Also, in a tradition which is recorded by Muslim and others, Aisha said:

"The Messenger of Allah left behind neither a single Dinar nor a Dirham, nor a sheep nor a camel, nor did he make any will."

If she meant that the Prophet (S) did not leave left behind anything at all and was devoid of everything worth making a will about, it is definitely incorrect. The Prophet who has strongly encouraged others to write their will, should have made a will for himself as well. Of course, he did not leave behind, like other worldly people, things which are regarded as worldly vanities, for he was the most religiously devoted person and most indifferent person to worldly pleasure.

However when he passed away, he had some outstanding debts (see Kanz al-Ummal, v4, p60) to be cleared, some promises and commitments to be fulfilled, and certain goods for which it was incumbent upon him to make a will. He left behind himself enough cash and property for repayment of his debts, fulfillment on his promises and commitments, and for inheritance in favor of his daughter, Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (sa). This latter fact is supported by Fatimah’s claim to the property as the heir of the Prophet.

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Chapter of "The battle of Khaibar", (Arabic-English), Traditions 5.546, and 4.325;

• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Jihad, v2, p72

Aisha Was A Test

The Prophet (S) sensed the depth and danger of the schemes that revolved around him from all sides. He knew specifically that one of his wives, Aisha, was the instigator of the dangerous role because of the hatred and rancor that she felt towards his successor ‘Ali in particular and his family in general.

How could he not know, when he lived observing her role and her enmity towards them? He sometimes got angry; sometimes his face would change color and he would try to placate her at all times, informing her that one who loved ‘Ali loved Allah, and the one who hated ‘Ali was a hypocrite, whom Allah hated.

As a result, the Prophet of Allah (S) was patient when he realized that she was the test that Allah had sent to the Ummah, to examine it as He had tested the previous nations. "Do the people think that they will be left alone when they say: ‘We believe’ and they will not be tested?”(Qur’an 29:2)

The fact that she was a test for people is clear from the previously quoted tradition of al-Bukhari where Ammar Ibn Yasir said to people before the battle of Camel that: "Allah has put you to test whether you obey Allah or her (Aisha).”(See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 9.220).

The Prophet of Allah (S) warned the Ummah against her on several occasions. In Sahih al-Bukhari, there is a chapter about what went on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet in which there is the following tradition:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336

Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here,”saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan’s head comes out."

قام النبي خطيبا فأشار نحو مسكن عائشة فقال: ها هنا الفتنه، ثلاثاً، من حيث يطلع قرن الشيطان.

In the above tradition the Prophet predicted the sedition which Aisha will bring for Muslims and that she will be seduced by Satan for instigating the first civil war in the history of Islam.

Muslim has also related in his Sahih from Ikrima Ibn Ammar from Salim from Ibn Umar who said:

"The Prophet of Allah (S) emerged from the house of Aisha and said. ‘The pivot of disbelief is from here, where the horns of Satan will rise.’"

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229

A Sunni brother mentioned that the following two traditions have the same reference to "one side of Satan’s head", and they show that the Prophet (S) was pointing to Najd where the Wahhabis later emerged.

Thus the above tradition (about Aisha) must be referring to the same thing (i.e., Najd). It might be that the house of Aisha was located in the east, and the Prophet was perhaps referring to Najd and not the house of Aisha. Here are the two traditions:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.147:

Narrated Ibn Umar:

(The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen.”People said, "Our Najd as well.”The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen.”They said again, "Our Najd as well.”On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the head of Satan."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.672:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Belief is Yemenite while afflictions appear from there (the east) from where the side of the head of Satan will appear."

This argument does not seem to be correct for the following reasons:

1. al-Bukhari has put the tradition related to Aisha in a section named: "what went on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet". This shows that al-Bukhari did not understand the tradition as this brother proposed.

If the author ever thought that the Prophet (S) meant Najd in that particular tradition, he wouldn’t have put the tradition in the section of what was going on in the houses of the wives of the Prophet (S). He probably would have put it in the Chapter of al-Fitan or else. You agree that Najd has nothing to do with what was going on in the house of Aisha! Do you claim that you know better than the author of Sahih al-Bukhari?

2. The name of Aisha has been explicitly mentioned in that tradition while those of related to Najd do not have reference to Aisha.

3. Although the Prophet himself did not name Aisha, yet he mentioned in that particular tradition "right here”and the pointing was so clear that the companions understood that he was pointing to the house of Aisha as it is mentioned in the text of the tradition. Najd can not be "right here”in Medina in front of the Prophet.

That is why the Messenger of Allah used "there”in the traditions related to Najd. I have highlighted the phrase "right here”in the tradition referring to Aisha, and the word "there”in the traditions referring to Najd for comparison. (See above).

4. The brother mentioned that the other traditions have the same reference to "one side of Satan’s head", so this particular tradition must be referring to the same thing (i.e., Najd). Well, you agree that Satan’s head does not have one side (or one horn) only.

In fact, any Fitna is the manifestation of Satan. This includes all major Fitna which happened in the past (in the early history of Islam and civil wars, as well as the Wahhabi emergence in Najd) and also the great incoming Fitna by al-Dajjal and Sufyani as predicted in the traditions. Satan does not belong to Najd Metropolitan only!

Like it or not, Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab (the inventor of Wahhabism) and Aisha were both Fitna as the documented history proves. However they have been in different era. When the Messenger of Allah mentions anywhere the phrase "one of the horns of Satan", it is a symbolic way to say "one of the great Fitna induced by Satan.”You agree with me that the inducing of Fitna by Satan has not been particular to one occasion. In fact, this has been Satan’s business for long!

5. The problem is not Aisha alone. In a similar tradition in Sahih Muslim it is said that the Prophet was pointing the house of Hafsa (daughter of Umar). In the other tradition in Sahih Muslim (same page), the Prophet uses the phrase "The Chief of Unbelief/Blasphemy (Kufr)”instead of "Fitna”(see Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229).

6. There is a great possibility that the additions which exist in other traditions parallel to the genuine Hadith and their explanation: "That means the east”is a mere fabrication to dilute the accusation against Aisha. The way of adding words to genuine traditions was a typical scheme of the Umayad to face the widespread traditions of the Prophet (S). Nonetheless, the two traditions mentioned above about Aisha from al-Bukhari and Muslim, do not include such additions.

Examples Of Women Mentioned In Qur’an

Most surely, there has been other examples in history of religions that the wives of some prophets went astray, and this is not anything exclusive to the history of the religion of Islam. In the very same chapter that Allah, the most Glorious, had warned Aisha and Hafsa jointly in His words (Chapter 66), He also provided for both of them a significant parable to teach them and the rest of the Muslims that the mother of the believers will NOT enter heaven without any reckoning or punishment, simply because they is the wives of a prophet.

Most Certainly not! For Allah has informed His servants, male and female, that mere spousal relationship will neither harm nor benefit a person, even if the husband is a prophet of Allah. What benefits or harms a person, in the eyes of Allah, are an individual’s deeds. Allah stated in the very same chapter of Qur’an:

Allah has set forth an example to the disbelievers, the wife Of Noah and the wife of Lot. They were both married to two servants from among our righteous servants, but they were deceitful/treacherous to their husbands. And they benefited nothing before Allah on the account of their (husbands). Instead they were told: "Enter the Fire with those who enter.”(Qur’an 66:10)

Allah cited an example for the believers, the wife of Pharaoh when she said: "O my Lord, build for me a house in paradise, and save me from Pharaoh and his deeds; and save me from the people who do wrong.”(Qur’an 66:11)

And Mary, the daughter of Imran who guarded her chastity and We breathed Our spirit into her. She testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His scriptures and she was one of the devout (servants).”(Qur’an 66:12)

Allah informed Prophet Noah (as) and Prophet Lot (as) that those of their wives who do not follow their instructions are not related to them and they will perish along with the rest of unbelievers. By this it becomes clear to all that spousal relationship and companionship, even though they both have a lot of merits, do not, in themselves, prevent the punishment of Allah unless they are accompanied by righteous deeds.

If they are not, punishment is, in fact, increased. Allah’s justice dictates that He does not punish the distant one who does not hear the revelation as much as he punishes the close one in whose house the Qur’an was revealed. A man who knows the truth and yet opposes it and an ignorant person who does not know the truth, are not alike. This is also confirmed in the following verse of Qur’an:

"O’ Consorts of the Prophet! if any of you were guilty of evident misconduct the Punishment would be doubled to her and that is easy for Allah.”(Qur’an 33:30)

Conclusion

The above was just few pages of the thick file of Aisha in the history of Islam, which gives enough evidence to prove that she does not have any compatibility whatsoever with the virtues mentioned in the purification verse of Qur’an (Ayah al-Tat’hir). Therefor it is inconceivable that one could consider such a personality to be from Ahlul-Bayt who are sinless and pure and should be obeyed beside Qur’an.

The removal of filth and purification is as remote from Aisha as the sky is from the earth, and that those who believe otherwise are the victims of the forgery of the Umayad without realizing it. This is beside many authentic traditions were mentioned earlier, in which the Messenger of Allah himself excluded even his righteous wives from the Ahlul-Bayt.

As for the question that whether or not Aisha was a believer, I would say Allah knows best, and we are not in a position to judge on that. Based on the traditions of the Prophet (S) which are even recorded in the authentic Sunni collections, anybody who fights Ahlul-Bayt has declared war on the Prophet and is an infidel unless he/she truly repents and Allah accepts his/her repentance. There are some claims that Aisha repented when she was defeated in the battle of Camel.

Other Sunni reports (some of which we quoted above) show that she continued her misconduct even after the battle of Camel. What is clear, however, is that such questionable individuals are not trustworthy in transmitting the Sunnah of the Prophet (S).

We do not have to bear the hatred of Aisha or others in our heart. We believe that these individuals were fallible and committed some small and some very big sins. We are not here to sentence them to Hell or Paradise, for this is Allah’s business. It is not for us to be pleased with Aisha or to curse her. We cannot, however, follow her nor can we condone her deeds.

We speak of all this so as to enlighten the people about the truth on who should be followed as the guardian of the Sunnah of the Prophet (S) after him. We should study the history of Islam to take lessons from the events and to analyze the action of the influential individuals in order to learn which of them were trustworthy for transmitting the Sunnah of the Prophet (S).

We can not take Hadith from any one who saw the Prophet (S) since some of them have done gross injustice in the history by shedding the blood of thousands of Muslims and usurping the rights of those whom the Messenger of Allah put them beside Qur’an and ordered us to follow them. Logic requires us not to blindly follow what the unjust individuals said or attributed to the Prophet (S).

Again I apologize from Sunni brothers/sisters if they feel offended by the content of the final parts of this article. However the above information were referenced by the most important Sunni collections of Hadith/History which provides undeniable and conclusive pieces of evidence for our Sunni brothers and sisters with regard to the question of who Ahlul-Bayt are.

The Word House (Ahlul-Bayt) in Qur’an

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

House Of Abraham (as)

Qur’an testifies that Sarah, the wife of Prophet Abraham (as), was blessed by angels and was given the glad tiding that she will give birth to two prophets of God:

And his wife, standing by, laughed when We gave her good tidings (of the birth) of Isaac , and, after Isaac, of Jacob. (Qur’an 11:71)

She said: "Alas for me! Shall I bear a child when I am an old woman and my husband now is an old man? That would indeed be a strange thing!”(Qur’an 11:72)

The (angles) said: Do You wonder at Allah’s decree? The grace of Allah and His blessings be upon you, O People of the House ! He is indeed worthy of all praise full of all glory!”(Qur’an 11:73)

Since in the mercy and the bounty of God offered in the above verse to the People of the House of Abraham, it has been a tendency of some Sunni commentators and their anxiety to find some argument for their counting the wives of the Holy Prophet (S) in the terms Ahlul-Bayt. They argue that since Sarah the wife of Abraham is included in the term Ahlul-Bayt mentioned in the above verse, then all the wives of the Prophet (S) are included in the verse 33:33 relating to the purity and the excellence of the Ahlul-Bayt of Prophet Muhammad.

However, these commentators intentionally or otherwise ignore the significance of the address by the Angels. If Sarah, the wife of Abraham, is included in the term Ahlul-Bayt used in the above verse, it is not because she was the wife of Abraham, but because she was going to be the mother of two prophets (Isaac and Jacob). She was mentioned by angles in the above verse as a member of Ahlul-Bayt, after she received the glad tiding that she is pregnant of Prophet Isaac (as).

The matrimonial relation between and a man and a woman is only circumstantial and can be given up at any moment. She could never be a permanent partner to any husband to be included in the heavenly address who are endowed with the unique and heavenly excellence UNLESS she brings a son who becomes a Prophet or an Imam.

Thus if we consider Sarah as a member of the House, it would be only because she would be the mother of Isaac, and not being the wife of Abraham. The verses 11:71-73 quoted above show that Sarah was called among Ahlul-Bayt after she got to know that she is having Isaac (as).

House of Imran (as)

Likewise, Qur’an mentions the mother of Moses among the Ahlul-Bayt of Imran. Again, as we can see in the following verses, the emphasis here is the MOTHER of Moses and not the wife of Imran:

And We ordained that he refuse to seek any foster mother before so she said: Shall I point out to you a household who will take care of him for you, and will be kind to him? (Qur’an 28:12)

So We restored him to his mother that she might be comforted and not grieve, and that she might know that the promise of Allah is true. But most of them know not. (Qur’an 28:13)

The mother of Moses is termed as Ahlul-Bayt, not for being the wife of Imran, but for being the mother of Moses, otherwise the wives who are subject to divorce and being substituted with women better than them (Qur’an 66:5) can’t be considered as Ahlul-Bayt as pointed out by Zaid Ibn Arqam as well. This is illustrated with the wife of Noah and Lot, though they were the wives of such great servants of God, they were not considered Ahlul- Bayt. They perished along with the rest of community.

Let’s remember what Zaid Ibn Arqam said: "Ahlul-Bayt (household) of the Prophet are his lineage and his descendants (those who come from his blood) for whom the acceptance of charity (Zakat) is prohibited."

The wife of Imran was in the lineage of the Moses, so was the wife of Abraham who was in the lineage of Isaac and Jacob. Similarly, if Fatimah (sa) is among the Ahlul-Bayt Prophet of Islam, it is because not only she was the daughter of the Prophet (S), but also she was the mother of two Imams.

House Of Noah (as)

And Noah Cried unto his Lord and said: "My Lord! Verily my son is of my family; and verily Your promise is true, and You are the most just of the judges."

He (Allah) said: "O Noah! Verily he is not of your family ; Verily he is (of) conduct other than the righteous; Therefore do not ask what you have no knowledge about; Verily I advice you not to be of the ignorant ones.”(Qur’an 11:45-46)

Abul Ala Maududi wrote in his commentary of the above verse that:

"If a part of the body of a person becomes rotten and the surgeon decides to cut it off, he will not comply with the request of the patient, who says ‘Do not cut because it is a part of my body’. The surgeon will reply, ‘It is no longer a part of your body because it is rotten.’ Likewise when a righteous father is told that his son is a worthless act, it means to imply that the efforts that you made to bring him up as a good son have gone waste for the work is spoilt and ended in utter failure."

Sunni reference:

• Commentary of Qur’an by Abul Ala Maududi (published by the Islamic Publications (Pvt) Limited), p367, under verse 11:45-46

Prophet Noah (as) was pleading for his own son and the reply was that the lad was not worthy of being his son. It is made crystal clear by this verse that though one might be of the same blood and flesh, born through the same parents, but if the issue doesn’t possess the good qualities of the parents then he or she is not of his parents’ stock (as said in the second verse).

Noah had three other sons, Aam, Sam and Yafas who were believers and who with their wives entered the Ark and were saved and Kanan was Noah’s son by his OTHER wife who was a disbeliever and perished along with her son.

It can be concluded that if any one does not hold the goodness of the correct faith in Allah, be he the son of the Apostle, he is not to be of the stock of his parentage; His very birth through his own parents is denied to him, even the right to be on God’s earth is withdrawn from him, and he is to be destroyed.

Thus, even one is to be the son of a prophet of Allah, the lack of righteousness gets him disowned from the progeny (Itrat) of the apostolic family. It is for this reason that the term Ahlul-Bayt is restricted to the deserving members of the House of the Prophet and doesn’t cover all of those who are born from his blood. Ahlul-Bayt are only the individuals among Prophet’s descendants who also had close affinity in character and utmost spiritual attainment with Prophet (S).

Sunni Feedback on the Issues of Infallibility and Ahlul-Bayt

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In this article, we reply on the comments of the Sunni brothers who studied the previous articles regarding to who Ahlul-Bayt are, and why they are infallible. More discussions on the issue of infallibility will be presented later in the next chapter.

A Sunni brother mentioned that the verse 33:33 expresses the decision of Allah to purify Ahlul-Bayt and make them spotless. How could this imply that they are flawless/sinless? This is adding an incorrect implication to the Arabic language!

To answer this question, we would like to ask: Isn’t sin a kind of impurity? A person who commits sin is not a pure person.

If you think this is adding an incorrect meaning to the Arabic language, then I would ask you to quote one example where a scholar of Qur’an, Arabic grammar, and literature claims that committing sin is a sign of purity!!!

Also, based on your translation, you used the word "spotless". Then what will be the difference between "spotless”and "flawless"? Any spot is a flaw and is sin; and vice versa.

Moreover, which scholar of Arabic language can we find better than the Messenger of Allah? We quoted from the authentic Sunni collections that

The Messenger of Allah recited "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul- Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification". (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33) and then the Messenger of Allah said: "Thus Me and my Ahlul-Bayt are clear from sins."

The word "thus”in the highlighted part means that the Prophet himself is CONCLUDING that the verse means Ahlul-Bayt are sinless. Is the Prophet violating the Arabic language?

Another Sunni brother commented that the Verse 33:33 does not make Ahlul-Bayt infallible any more than verse 5:6 makes anyone who performs ablution infallible! Allah sates:

O you who believe! when you prepare for prayer wash your faces and your hands to the elbows; rub your heads and your feet to the ankles. If you are in a state of ceremonial impurity bathe your whole body. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you had call of nature or you have touched women and you find no water then take for yourselves clean sand or earth and rub therewith your faces and hands. Allah does not wish to place you in a difficulty but to make you clean and to complete His favor to you that you may be grateful. (Qur’an 5:6)

To answer this brother, we would like to point out that purification/ cleansing has degrees and is of different types. If ones hand and face become dirty, and then if he washes them with soap and warm water they will become cleansed. The above verse (5:6) also tells us by ablution one can become cleansed. Now if somebody argues that the degree of cleansing with ablution is not any more than cleansing the hands and face with soap, then what will be your answer to him? You will tell him that ablution make different type of cleansing than of washing the body by soap.

The same goes for the difference between cleansing of every kind of impurity and the cleansing of ablution. Surely if a murderer makes ablution, he will not cleans his crime by that, because the impurity caused by murder can not go away by ablution even though Allah sent down the verse 5:6. Qur’an never said that by ablution you will get a Perfect purification.

There are different degrees of Purification. The only place that Allah said I intend to do a perfect purification is in verse 33:33 where He is addressing the Ahlul-Bayt. The word "perfect”comes from the emphasis of Allah by "Tat’hiran”which has been used only in verse 33:33. This emphatical word occur in any other place in Qur’an. Do you see the difference brother?

Do you agree that any small sin is a type of impurity? If yes, then a perfect purification will not leave any small sin for the Ahlul-Bayt. If Allah intends to keep off every kind of uncleanless from Ahlul-Bayt, no impurity, no matter how small, will reach them, because Allah is omnipotent. (The phrase "every kind of “is due to article of "al-”at the beginning of the world "al-Rijs").

A Sunni mentioned that saying ‘we have respect for the pious wives among the wives of the Prophet’ indicate that you consider some of them to be otherwise!

This is not something strange. After all, they were non-infallible humans who may have had some or many mistakes. That’s exactly why they are not among Ahlul-Bayt. Even Qur’an confirms that some of the wives of the Prophet might have been wrong-doers:

But if you seek Allah and His Apostle and the Home of the Hereafter verily Allah has prepared for the well-doers amongst you a great reward. (Qur’an 33:29)

In the above verse, Allah states that He will only give the good reward to the well-doers among the wives of the Prophet. If all the Prophet’s wives were well-dowers, then there was no need for Allah to say this. Allah would have said, "all of you will receive a great reward". Now look at the next two verses after the above verse:

O’ Consorts of the Prophet! if any of you were guilty of evident misconduct conduct the Punishment would be doubled to her and that is easy for Allah. (Qur’an 33:30)

But any of you that is devout in the service of Allah and His Apostle and works righteousness to her shall We grant her reward twice , and We have prepared for her a generous Sustenance. (Qur’an 33:31)

Again Allah is threatening the wives of the Prophet that they will receive a double punishment if they have misconduct, while giving glad tidings that the good wives of the Prophet will receive twice reward. You see, God is selective toward the wives of the Prophet (S), but you are not!

Please check the traditions narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari on the misconduct Aisha and Hafsa, some of which I provided in Parts IV through VIII of the article of "Who are Ahlul-Bayt?”and then let me know what you think of them? This is exactly what I mean by non-pious. If the Allah threatened Aisha and Hafsa by divorce, because they backed each other against the Prophet (S), then how can we render them as pure?

The verse of Qur’an tells us that Ahlul-Bayt are perfectly pure. According to the traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari, Hafsa is swearing by Allah that she argues with the Prophet (S) and keeps the Prophet angry for the whole day. Umar is advising her not to imitate Aisha who is proud of her beauty! Are these attitudes signs of perfect purity mentioned for Ahlul-Bayt? Perhaps you might want to also look at the history, and see who rode the Camel and allowed shedding the blood of ten thousand Muslims.

I also would like to remind you there have been some prophets in the past that some of their wives were not pious. Among them are the wife of Prophet Noah, the wife of Prophet Lot, and so on. Allah informed those prophets that those wives who don’t follow your instructions are not related to them and they will perish along with the rest of people. Non of those prophets took it as insult.

I also would like to say that it happened to me that I heard from a Sunni Muslim claiming that Shi’a believe that Aisha committed adultery! (May Allah protect us). This is a false accusation. Shi’a do NOT attribute such a thing to any of the wives of the Prophet (S). The problem of the Shi’a with Aisha is mainly around the line of politics and her hostility toward Ahlul-Bayt.

A naive contributor mentioned that:

It is reported on the authority of ‘Akrama that Ibn Abbas said this verse (33:33) is addressed to the wives of the Prophet.

There is no denial to the fact that the above report exists in some Sunni books. Such reports also indicate that Akrama even had the audacity to yell in the public places that the verse was revealed only for the wives of the Prophet (S).

But the issue doesn’t stop here, and it is important to look at the very personalities of those individuals involved. Surprisingly, al-Dhahabi wrote in his work:

The very first reason to reject the tradition(s) of Akrama is based on the fact that he was Kharijite. Secondly his being a Kharijite, he even justified the killings of the fellow Muslim(s).

Sunni reference: al-Kashaf, by al-Dhahabi, v2, p272

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani quoting from Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others, wrote:

In the season of Hajj Akrama came to Africa, and said: It would be very dear to me if I were at Hajj at this moment, I would have had swords in both my hands, and I would massacre the Muslims. After these statements by Akrama, the people of Africa avoided him.

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal says: Akrama narrates contradictory Hadiths.

Yahya Ibn Sa’id Ansari says: Akrama is a compulsive liar.

Sunni reference: Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v8, p268

In fact, Akrama was a slave of the son of Ibn Abbas. Abdullah Ibn Harith reported:

I once went to ‘Ali Ibn Abdullah Ibn Abbas, and I was surprised to see that Akrama was tied to the rest room. I said to ‘Ali: Is this how you treat your slaves, and he replied: Akrama associates many lies to my father (Ibn Abbas).

Sunni reference: Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v8, p268

At this point, it would be nice to quote another report which is also falsely attributed to Ibn Abbas:

Abul Qasim Abdurrahman Ibn Muhammad Siraj says: it is related through Muhammad Ibn Yaqub, through Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Affan through Abu Yahya al-Hamanithrough Saleh Ibn Musa al-Qurshi through Khaseef through Sa’id Ibn Jubair through Ibn Abbas that the verse 33:33 was revealed for the wives of the Prophet.

Sunni reference: Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi, p239

The scrutiny of the above tradition by the Sunni scholars yields the following facts about three individuals in the chain of authorities of the above report:

Imam al-Nisa’i says: Abu Yahya al-Hamani (one of the narrators in the chain) is not a reliable reporter.

Sunni references:

• al-Kashaf, by al-Dhahabi, v2, p152

• Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v1, p469

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal says: Sa’id Ibn Jubair (one of the narrators in the chain)is not an authority and this Hadith is not a reliable Hadith. Abu Hatem Salah says: He has a weak memory and tends to mix up Hadiths.

al-Dhahabi writes: Khaseef Ibn Abdurrahman (one of the narrators in the chain) is the slave of the Umayad, but he has a weak memory and Ahmad has declared him as weak.

Sunni references:

• Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, pp 143-44

• al-Kashaf, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p280

A contributor claimed that there exists a tradition narrated by both Shi’a and Sunni which reads: "al-Salmanu minna Ahlal-Bayt”and translates to: "Salman (al-Farsi) is one of us, Ahlul-Bayt". This contradicts the Shi’ite doctrine that Ahlul-Bayt are some selected individuals from the progeny of the Prophet (S).

My comment is: Yes, there is a tradition with the above mentioned Arabic words. However the correct translation is as follows:

The Messenger (S) of Allah said: "Salman is from us Ahlul-Bayt."

which means he is our agent and is attached to us Ahlul-Bayt. In fact, Salman was an agent and a trustee for Ahlul-Bayt to the end of his life-time. His affinity to Ahlul-Bayt was to the extent that he was attached to them. An analogy would be a friend who would visit a family a lot, such that one would consider him attached to the family, although the blood relation is the only thing missing. Salman (ra) was one of the best companions of the Messenger of Allah. It is narrated that:

The Messenger of God said: "Certainly Allah commanded me to love four persons and informed me that He loves them.”The companions asked the Prophet: "O’ Messenger of God, who are those four persons?”The Prophet (S) replied: "‘Ali is from them (repeating that three times), Abu Dharr, Salman al-Farsi, and Miqdad."

Sunni References:

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p52, Tradition #149

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p130

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p356

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p648, Tradition #1103

• Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p172

Notice that the Prophet (S) said, "Salman is from us Ahlul-Bayt". This does NOT necessarily mean that "Salman is one of us Ahlul-Bayt". The Arabic word "min”has different meanings. In the above tradition (about Salman) as well as many other traditions "min”does not mean "one of". For instance, al-Bukhari recorded that:

The Prophet (S) said to ‘Ali: "You are from me, and I am from you"

أنت مني و أنا منك

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, v5, Tradition #553.

There is no mention of Ahlul-Bayt here. So if we suppose that the only meaning of "min”is "one of", then the saying of the Prophet will become:

"‘Ali is one of me and I am one of ‘Ali"

What a beautiful translation! How many persons is the Prophet, so that one of the Prophet is ‘Ali? Funnier phrase in this translation is the latter part, that is, the Prophet is one of ‘Ali!

Now, similarly it is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Husayn is from me and I am from al-Husayn."

حسينٌ مني و أنا من حُسين

Sunni references:

(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p172

(2) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p772, Tradition #1361

(3) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p177

(4) Amali, by Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, p64

(5) al-Kuna wal Asmaa, by al-Dulabi, v1, p88

(6) al-Tabarani, v3, p21

(7) Adab by al-Bukhari, also al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah, as quoted in:

(8) al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p291

(9) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tradition #6160

Again, if we suppose that the only meaning of "min”is "one of", then the saying of the Prophet will become:

"Husayn is one of me and I am one of al-Husayn."

So this does not make sense either (specially the second phrase which is "The Prophet is one of al-Husayn").

One meaning for the saying of the Prophet (S) who said: "Husayn is from me and I am from al-Husayn,”is that al-Husayn is attached to him and he is attached to al-Husayn. In other words, the path of the Prophet Muhammad and the path of al-Husayn are non-separable. And their instructions are the same and will not contradict each other.

Another contributor commented that if based on Sunni references we quoted, Ahlul-Bayt are the Prophet, Fatimah, ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, then how can you include the nine descendants of al-Husayn?

As we have already pointed out, only five members of Ahlul-Bayt were alive at the time of the Prophet (S). They were Prophet Muhammad, Lady Fatimah, Imam ‘Ali, Imam al-Hasan, and Imam al-Husayn. They were mentioned as Ahlul-Bayt by the Prophet (S) and the most important Sunni collections testify to this fact.

However the nine descendants of Imam al-Husayn were not alive at that time so that the Prophet could not cover them by his mantle! But the Prophet did, in fact, mention their names and their numbers. Let us review some traditions from Sihah Sittah:

The Prophet (S) said: "al-Mahdi is one of us Ahlul-Bayt."

Sunni reference: Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4085

also:

The Prophet (S) said: "The Mahdi will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah (the Prophet’s daughter).

Sunni references:

• Sunan Abi Dawud, English version, Ch. 36, Tradition #4271 (narrated by Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet)

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4086

• al-Nisa’i and al-Bayhaqi, and others as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p249

By the above traditions, the Prophet extended Ahlul-Bayt up to Imam al-Mahdi (as). So Ahlul-Bayt are not just those five, and Imam al-Mahdi is the last member of Ahlul-Bayt, but he was not born at the time of the Prophet so that he could take him into the Cloak as well! Also the messenger of Allah said:

"There shall be twelve Imams/Caliphs/Amirs for my nation"

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v9, Tradition #329;

• Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV, v3, pp 1009-1010, Traditions #4476 --> #4483;

• Sunan Abi Dawud, v2, p421 (three traditions);

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v4, p501;

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p106;

• Others such as al-Tiyalasi, Ibn al-Athir, etc.

These 12 Imams will cover till the day of resurrection as Sahih Muslim testifies. The last of them is surely Imam al-Mahdi (as) who will appear in the last days and who is also from Ahlul-Bayt as the above tradition specified. There are other traditions in the Sunni collections in which the Prophet (S) has even mentioned the name of all these twelve individuals one by one. (see Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi).

Referring to the tradition narrated by Aisha where the Messenger of Allah named the members of his house, a Sunni brother commented that Aisha is by no means a trusted source of Hadith for the Shi’a. Then why do the Shi’a take her narration in this instance?

The first part is true. The Shi’a believe that all the narrators in the chain of a document should have been just. If Aisha used to argue with the Prophet, and keep him angry for the whole day, or led the battle of Camel (the first civil war) then we consider these as BIG injustice. If any narrator has done any injustice in the history their narrations are void for us unless the same tradition has been narrated via another chain of authorities who are all trustworthy. Thus some of the traditions of six Sunni collections fall in this category, i.e., accepted for us.

Although Aisha is not a trustworthy narrator in the opinion of the Shi’ites, any part of his narrations that has also been transmitted by a trustworthy narrators such as Umm Salama (who also, by the way, reported the tradition of Cloak), will be accepted. All those traditions which we quoted from Sunni sources in support of the Shi’ite views, fall in this category, and we believe in them.

Moreover, the reason that we brought the Tradition of Aisha is that this is a tradition which is reported in Sahih Muslim and the Sunnis can not dispute its authenticity.

After reading my article on the necessity of following Ahlul-Bayt, a Sunni brother asked me what exactly following Ahlul-Bayt means, and if there is anything which is taught by the Imams and not explained by the Prophet himself?

As we have pointed out, following Ahlul-Bayt means to inquire about the Sunnah of the Prophet (S) only through them. In fact, Ahlul-Bayt are THE MEANS of identifying the true Sunnah of the Prophet from the innovations.

No doubt that the Prophet (S) explained all the fundamentals of the religion. However, people around him did not benefit from his knowledge equally. We have only one companion whom the Prophet called him the Gate of the City of Knowledge. Others got their knowledge based on their capacity. The major duty of the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt was to PRESERVE the Islamic teaching in its true spirit and reject the innovations and mutilation of the religion.

The deputies/successors of the Prophet don’t bring any new massage, and they just serve as leaders (Imams), Guardians for their true followers. They explain/elaborate Shari’ah (Divine law) for people. They clear up confusing things and events that may happen in each era. Also they are the only individuals who can be trusted for the correct interpretation of the Qur’anic verses as pointed in Qur’an and the traditions of the Prophet (S). Adhering to Qur’an is not enough to guarantee our survival, because Qur’an only specifies very general rules, and has lots of ambiguous (Mutashabihat) verses which only Ahlul-Bayt know its true meaning:

He is Who has revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations, which are the Essence of the Book, and others (verses which are) ambiguous. But those who have sickness in their hearts follow the part of which that is ambiguous, seeking discord and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge who say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed. (Qur’an 3:7)

The term "Those who are firmly grounded in knowledge”refers to Ahlul-Bayt. In fact Ahlul-Bayt are "Qur’an, the Speaker.”In another verse, Allah states:

"Ask the people of Reminder (the possessors of the Message, i.e., Qur’an) if you do not know.”(Qur’an 21:7)

Again this is referring to Ahlul-Bayt. Ahlul-Bayt know the internal meaning/commentary of Qur’an which was revealed to Prophet along with Qur’an but were not a part of Qur’an. These pieces of information are hidden but to the purified ones:

None touches (the depth of meaning of Qur’an) save the purified ones. (56:79)

Please refer to the article titled: "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”in which we quoted authentic traditions from the Sunni sources where the Messenger of Allah declared that Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt are non-separable.

Regarding the necessity of following Ahlul-Bayt, a Wahhabi mentioned:

No thanks I am not a Christian, I only obey God and he is my savior. not Christ, not Ahlul-Bayt.

This reminds me of what Imam ‘Ali said to al-Khawarij when they said what is highlighted above! Imam ‘Ali commented: "kalimatu haqqin yuridu biha al-batil”(a word of truth, but falsehood was meant by it). I should even say that there is no truth in what you said. Do you believe in Qur’an, or you say you only follow God and not Qur’an?! If you are a true believer in Qur’an, then read the following verse please:

"O’ you who believe! Obey Allah, and Obey Apostle and those from among you who are given authority (by Allah).”(Qur’an 4:59)

Allah tells you to obey His Messenger and His Ulul-Amr (Imam), but you say you ONLY obey Allah! Khawarij said exactly the same thing! Don’t you reflect? You insist to ONLY obey Allah while Allah orders you to obey others also.

If you come down and say (for heck of it) you also obey the Prophet, then according to the most authentic traditions the Prophet order you to OBEY Ahlul-Bayt. But you mentioned you do not obey them. What kind of rhetoric is this? You said you are not Christian. Do you think if you obey the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt, you will become Christian? Exalted be Allah (SWT) from such ignorant and stupid allegations against His commandments by people who lack all knowledge!

You are mixing apples and oranges, my friend. Christians believe that Jesus went on cross to save them. So if they commit any sins, they are already forgiven by the Christ. And in this way they do what they wish to do.

However, to your surprise, the Shi’a think exactly the other way around. They say:

"The Prophet ordered you to OBEY him and his Ahlul-Bayt. The most important books of the major Islamic schools testify to this fact. If you do not OBEY them you will be doomed to Hell."

Do you see the difference? Christians say you do not really have to obey to be saved. It is enough if you believe in Jesus. However Prophet Muhammad (S) said that you should obey Ahlul-Bayt to be saved from Hell. A person who calls himself a Shi’a, but does not really obey the instructions of Ahlul-Bayt, is not any better than a Christian.

As I mentioned, true love requires the person to obey the one who loves. If one claims the love of Ahlul-Bayt, but he does not obey their instructions, then he is only fooling his own soul. Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:

"Whoever wishes to live and die like me, and to abide in the Garden of Eden after death, should acknowledge ‘Ali as WALI after me, and take his WALI (i.e., Imams after him) as WALI, and should follow the Imams after me for they are my Ahlul-Bayt and were created from my clay and are gifted with the same knowledge and understanding as myself. Woe unto those who deny their virtues and those who disregard their relationship and affinity with me, for my intercession shall never reach them."

Sunni references:

(1) Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, pp 84,86

(2) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p128

(3) al-Jami’ al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani

(4) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani

(5) Kanz al-Ummal, v6, p155

(6) al-Manaqib, by al-Kharazmi, p34

(7) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, p149

(8) History of Ibn Asakir, v2, p95

Who Offended the Blind?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Chapter 80 (Abas)

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful.

He (a certain Umayad chieftain) frowned and turned away (while he was with the Prophet). (Qur’an 80:1)

Because there came to him the blind man (Ibn Um-Maktoom). (Qur’an 80:2)

And what would make you know, but that, per chance, he (the blind man) might grow in purity, (Qur’an 80:3)

Or become reminded so that the reminder should profit him? (the blind man) (Qur’an 80:4)

As for him (the Umayad chieftain) who considers himself free from need (rich), (Qur’an 80:5)

To him do you address yourself? (Qur’an 80:6)

And it is not necessary for you (to preach that arrogant chieftain) if he does not purify himself. (Qur’an 80:7)

And as to him who comes to you striving hard, (Qur’an 80:8)

And he fears (Allah), (Qur’an 80:9)

To him (his question) you did not pay attention? (Qur’an 80:10)

Nay! surely this is (this chapter) a reminder. (Qur’an 80:11)

The occasion for the revelation of this Chapter was a historic event which took place. Once the Holy Prophet (S) was with some the rich individuals of Quraish from the tribe of Umayad, among them was Uthman Ibn Affan, who took the office of caliphate later. While the Messenger of Allah was preaching them, Abdullah Ibn Umm Maktoom who was blind and was one of the companions of the Holy Prophet (S) came to see him. The Holy Prophet received him with honor and pleasure and gave him the closest place to himself.

However, the Prophet did not answer the question of the blind immediately Since he was at the middle of his speech with the Qurashites. Since Abdullah was poor and blind, the chieftains of the Quraish looked down upon him and they did not like the honor and the respect bestowed upon him by the Prophet (S). They also did not like the presence of the blind among themselves and his interrupting their conversation with the Prophet (S). Finally one of the wealthy Umayad (namely Uthman Ibn Affan) frowned at Abdullah and turned his back to him.

This act of the chieftains of Quraish displeased Allah and thus He revealed the Chapter 80 (Abas) through Gabriel at the same time. This Chapter commended Abdullah’s position though poor and blind. In the first 4 verses, Allah denounced the detesting attitude of the chieftain of the Quraish. And in the later verses, Allah “reminds” his Prophet (S) that preaching an unbeliever is not necessary if the unbeliever does not intend to purify himself and offenses a believer just because of his lack of wealth and health.

There are some Sunni commentators who align the Holy Prophet (S) along with below-average ordinary morals, and accuse him of insulting Abdullah, and by that, they try to say that he was not free from the weakness of character and conduct. This is while the one who insulted the poor man was a wealthy member of Umayad who was either still non-Muslim, or had recently joint the companions (namely Uthman).

Yet some people, in order to clear the face of Uthman from such misconduct, do not have any hesitation to accuse the Prophet of such action, and to put down the Prophet in favor of Uthman. Such twist of the event was done by the Umayad during their reign through pay-roll narrators. It is well-known that Umayad were the most ardent enemies of the family of the Prophet (S) and Islam; as such, it was not befitting of them that their leader, Uthman, be reprimanded in the Qur’an; thus, the scholars who worked for the Umayad were forced to write that this verse was revealed to reprimand the Prophet (S), not Uthman. Such flat-out lie was to preserve the dignity of Uthman with the price of humiliating the master of all the prophets. Here is the opinion of some Sunni commentators:

It is said that these verses came down concerning Abdullah Ibn Maktoom, he is Abdullah Ibn Shareeh Ibn Malik Ibn Rabi’a al-Fihri from (the tribe of) Bani ‘Amir Ibn Louay. He came to the Messenger of Allah while he was trying to convert these people to Islam: Utbah Ibn Rabi’ah, Abu Jahl Ibn Husham, al-Abbas Ibn Abd al-Muttalib, Ubay and Umayyah sons of Khalaf. The blind man said: "O Messenger of Allah read me and teach me from what Allah has taught you.”

He kept calling the Prophet and repeating his plea, not knowing that the Prophet was busy facing someone else, until the hatred appeared on the face of the Messenger of Allah for being interrupted. The Prophet said to himself these great people will say that his followers are but the blind and the slaves, so he turned away from him and faced the people he was talking to. Then the verses were revealed.

After that the Messenger used to be kind to him and if he sees him he would say "welcome to the one whom my God reproached me in him". He used to ask him if he needed anything and kept him behind as the deputy on Medina twice during wars.

The above Sunni commentary has also been mentioned in "al-Durr al- Manthoor", by al-Suyuti, with some minor differences. Abul Ala Maududi who is another Sunni commentator of Qur’an has a more moderate view. Here is his interpretation of Verse 80:17:

Here displeasure has been expressed directly for the disbelievers who were being indifferent to the Message of truth. Before this, from the beginning of the Chapter to the Verse 16, the address though apparently directed to the Holy Prophet (S), was actually mean to reprimand the disbelievers.

Sunni reference:

• Commentary of Qur’an, by Abul Ala Maududi, p1005, under the commentary of verse 80:17 (Islamic Publications (Pvt.), Lahore)

However, the fact is that Qur’an does NOT give any evidence that the person who frowned at the blind was the Prophet (S), and does not state who is being addressed. In the above verses of Qur’an Allah (SWT) did NOT address the Prophet either by name or title (i.e. O Muhammad, or O Prophet, or O Messenger). Moreover, there exists switching in the pronoun from "he”in the first two verses to "you”in the later verses of the chapter. Allah did NOT state: "You frowned and turned away". Rather, Almighty stated:

He frowned and turned away (while he was with the Prophet), (Qur’an 80:1)

Because there came to him the blind man. (Qur’an 80:2)

And what would make you know, but that, per chance, he (the blind man) might grow in purity, (Qur’an 80:3)

Even if we assume that "you”in the third verse addresses the Prophet (S), then it is clear from the above three verses that the words "he”(the one who frowned) and "you”address two different individuals. The following two verses support this as well:

As for him who considers himself free from need (rich), (Qur’an 80:5)

To him do you address yourself? (Qur’an 80:6)

Thus the one who frowned was other than the Prophet himself due to distinction between "him”and "you". In Verses 80:6 Allah addresses his Prophet (S) saying that preaching arrogant members of Quraish who frown at a blind is not worthy and is not necessary to be preferred over preaching a blind, even though the blind came later. The reason is that preaching anyone who does not intend to purify himself (to the extend that he frowns at a believer) is not fruitful.

Moreover, frowning is not from the manners/descriptions of the Prophet (S) even with his obvious enemies, let alone believers seeking guidance! One may question how can a Prophet (S) who was sent as a mercy to mankind be cruel when an AVERAGE believer does not in such behavior? This allegation is also in contradiction with the announcement of the sublime morals and the ethics of the Holy Prophet (S) by God himself:

"And most certainly you are on sublime morality (exalted standard of character).”(Qur’an, al-Qalam 68:4).

A man who insult others does not deserve such compliments. It is agreed that Chapter al-Qalam (Ch. 68) came before Chapter Abas (Ch. 80). It was even revealed next after Chapter Iqra’ (Ch. 96 -- the first revealed chapter). How could it be reasonable that Allah bestow greatness on his creature in the very beginning of his prophethood, declares that he is in the sublime morality, and thereafter reverts to reproach and criticize him on some apparent misgiving in his moral actions.

Also Almighty said:

And warn your near tribe, And be kind to him who follows you of the believers. (Qur’an 26:214-215)

It is well known that these verses are early Meccan revelation. The same words can be found in the tail of verse 15:88. Allah, Exalted He is, furthermore said:

Therefore declare openly what you are bidden and turn aside from the polytheists. (Qur’an 15:94)

He was ordered to turn away from the unbelievers in this verse which is known to have been revealed at the beginning of the "open call to Islam”(after the initial secrecy period).

How could it be imagined that after all these earlier commandments that the great, kind Prophet would err in such a way that would require pronounced interdiction?

The commentators of Qur’an from the school of Ahlul-Bayt further argue that even the questioning in the third and forth verses of the Chapter concerning the doubt about Abdullah being benefited by the talk with the Holy Prophet (S) or not, has been in the mind of one who had not yet embraced Islam, and was not aware of the sprite of Islam.

This could never have occurred in the mind of the Holy Prophet (S) who has been sent to preach the faith to every one and all, irrespective of any worldly position of the People. Based on that, they conclude that the word ‘you’ in the third verse does not still apply to the Prophet, rather it applies to one of the Umayad attendees, and that none of the first four verses of this chapter (80:1-4) addresses the Prophet (S) even though the latter verses address the Prophet (S).

Those who are familiar with the language of Qur’an and read the original Arabic Qur’an are aware of the constant jumping between the first, second, and third person writing style of Qur’an. In many verses in Qur’an Allah changes the address sharply, and as such, it is not always easy to figure out who is being addressed when the name of addressee is not mentioned.

That’s why the Prophet has ordered us to refer to Ahlul-Bayt (as) for the interpretation of the verses of Qur’an since they are "firmly grounded in knowledge”(Qur’an 3:7) and are "The People of Reminder”(Qur’an 16:43, 21:7) and they are the purified people who have touched the meaning of Qur’an (see 56:79).

It is narrated that Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) said:

It came down regarding a man from the Umayad; he was at the Prophet’s (S) presence, then Ibn Umm-Maktoom came, when he saw him he despised him, withdrew himself, frowned and turned his face away from him. So Allah said what He said in disapproval of his action.

Also it is told that Imam al-Sadiq (as) said:

"Whenever the Messenger of Allah (S) saw Abdullah Ibn Umm- Maktoom, he said: Welcome, welcome, by Allah, you won’t find Allah reproaching me in you ever (80:5-11). He used to get kindness from the Prophet so much that he used to avoid from (being in the presence of) the Prophet (S), because of what the Prophet used to do to him.”Out of shyness.

In Tafsir of Sayyid Shubbar it is reported from al-Qummi that:

The verse was revealed about Uthman and Ibn Umm-Maktoom, and he was blind. He came to the Messenger of Allah (S), while in the company of companions, and Uthman was there. The Messenger introduced him to Uthman and Uthman frowned and turned his face away.

Allah Almighty said in Qur’an about Prophet Muhammad that:

Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is nothing but revelation that is revealed. (Qur’an 53:3-4).

وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ 

So how can the Prophet (S) say something offensive if his speeches are revelation or inspiration?! The Prophet never speaks out of his own desire. Interestingly, Sunnis confirm that Chapter Abas (Ch. 80) was revealed right after Chapter al-Najm (Ch. 53) where it states the Prophet does not speak out of his desire.

Also Verse 33:33 of the Holy Qur’an confirms that Ahlul-Bayt are perfectly pure and flawless. We all know that the virtue of the Prophet was higher than that of his family. He is also counted among Ahlul-Bayt. Then how can he offend a believer and yet maintains PERFECT purity?!

Also note that in the revealed verses Allah states:

And it is not necessary for you (to preach that arrogant chieftain) if he does not purify himself. (Qur’an 80:7)

The above does not mean that what the Prophet did was a mistake, because Allah uses the phrase "it is not necessary for you". This means the Prophet’s choice was not wrong, but it was not something necessary to do.

Also when Allah states: Preaching him is not necessary "IF”the Qurashite does not purify himself. Well, the Prophet (S) did not know beforehand that the Qurashite is going to frown at the blind, as such, the "IF”condition has not been satisfied and therefore what the Prophet did was necessary before the time that man frowned (because the Prophet was at the middle of his speech with those Qurashites when the blind man arrived). And as soon as the Qurashite frowned, the Prophet stopped preaching, and the verses were revealed. As we can see, what the Prophet (S) did was his duty second by second.

The reminder was for future, as is the case of another verse of Qur’an where Allah reminds his Prophet that it is not necessary for him to bother himself too much for guiding people since some of them can never be guided, and the Prophet should not be unhappy about those.

In conclusion, we provided evidences from Qur’an, Hadith, History, and Arabic grammar, to support the fact that the very early verses of this chapter do NOT refer to the Prophet Muhammad (S) and the one who frowned at the blind was not the Prophet (S). We also mentioned that Verses 80:5-11 were just a reminder for the future to the Prophet Muhammad that preaching an unbeliever is not fruitful if the unbeliever does not try to purify himself and when the unbeliever offends a believer just because of his lack of wealth and health.

Wassalam.

Shi’i references:

1. al-Mizan, by al-Tabataba’i (Arabic), v20, pp 222-224

2.al-Jawhar al-Thameen fi Tafsir al-Kitab al-Mubeen, by Sayyid Abdullah Shubbar, v6, p363

Side Comments

A Sunni brother mentioned that the scholars of Tafsir wrote the verses of Chapter 80 was revealed after the Prophet was trying to convince the four most powerful people of Quraish to join Islam, namely, Utbah Ibn Rabi’ah, Abu Jahl (Amr Ibn Hisham), Umayyah Ibn Khalaf, and his brother, Ubayy (no mention of Uthman Ibn Affan). Furthermore, al-Qurtubi mentioned in his Tafsir book that these verses are Medanite (revealed in Medina) meaning that Uthman was already a Muslim by that time.

My response was as follows: Muslims agree that the Chapter Abas (Ch. 80) was revealed in Mecca long before the migration of the Prophet to Medina. More interestingly, they agree that Chapter Abas (Ch. 80) was revealed right after Chapter al-Najm (Ch. 53) where Allah said the Prophet does not speak out of his desire! Again, based on Sunnis, Chapter al-Najm was the 23rd revealed chapter of Qur’an and Chapter Abas was the 24th revealed chapter and both of them were early Meccan revelation.

Perhaps, what al-Qurtubi has mentioned was merely to drift the reader’s attention from the issue of Uthman being addressed in the Chapter, and thereby preserving his integrity Uthman with the price of accusing the Prophet (S).

Another bug in the above report is that, you said one of those Qurashite whom the Prophet was talking to, was Abu Jahl. What was Abu Jahl doing in Medina? Do you know, brother, that Abu Jahl lived in Mecca, and was one of the biggest enemies of the Prophet, and never moved to Medina to see the Prophet, and was among those who was killed in the Battle of Badr (the first war).

The other people mentioned in the above report: Utbah and Umayyah were also killed along with their leader, Abu Jahl, in the Battle of Badr. None of them ever had a chance to meet the Prophet (after the migration of the Prophet) except in the battlefield in Badr where their corpse were taken to that famous well!

Infallibility of the Prophets Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

This article deals with the contention of whether or not the prophets and the messengers of Allah are infallible (sinless). In Part 1, we will examine the Sunni point of view, and then we will present the Shi’a opinion on the matter with reference to the verses of Qur’an. In Part 2, we will provide logical reasoning behind the issue of the infallibility. In addition, we look at some of the authentic Sunni traditions in support of the infallibility. In Part 3, we respond to the arguments of the opponents in this regard.

Is it possible for a human being to be sinless? Is it realistic to believe that Allah (SWT), the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe, would send forth a sinful man to guide mankind? What about the Qur’an, what information and evidence about the matter does it provide? These are the questions, among others, that the article at hand is attempting to answer.

Disclaimer

The Twelver Shi’ites do NOT hold ANY human being, whether he be a prophet, a messenger, or an Imam, to be divine. We do not worship human beings, nor do we approve of such a custom. Allah (SWT) is never compromised in Shi’ite theology or philosophy! All the negative stuff you may hear about us is pure propaganda with political motives. Allah (SWT) is Exalted above all that scratches dignity and justice.

We hold Allah (SWT) to be the JUST Creator (SWT), Who never commits any injustice against His creation. Allah (SWT) is indivisible, and He does not relinquish His (SWT) Majesty and Sovereignty to anyone. No one is permitted to interfere with His Wishes, except by His leave. This is the Authentic Twelver Shi’ite Creed, and everything else that is negative in nature, and is attributed to the Shi’a, is crap.

Infallibility According to the Sunnis

The Sunni scholars do not speak in one voice on this subject. Some Sunnis claim that the Prophet (S) is sinless or infallible ONLY in the delivery of Allah’s message. Other than that, he (S), just like others, sins and makes mistakes in many things.

This faction of Sunnis base their opinion on the traditions narrated in their books about how the Prophet (S) falls asleep and forgets the prayer time, and even forgets to perform the necessary ablution (Wudu) for prayer (Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic version, v1, p37,44,171). Furthermore, they claim that he (S) used to sit with Aisha and watch a dance with music (Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic version, v3, p228).

They also claim that he (S) was affected by a magical spell that caused severe episodes of hallucination on his part (Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic version, v7, p29; and v4, p68). These are but a FEW of the most heinous of acts that these "scholars”attribute to the Mercy to Mankind, the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (S).

Note that according to the Shi’a, these traditions are NOT authentic, nor do they constitute ANY truth whatsoever. Again, these traditions were inserted into their books by the Umayad, among others, to justify their own corruption and insolence. For when the Prophet (S) sins so heinously as they depict him (S) in the above traditions, we can no longer blame Uthman, or Muawiyah, or Yazid, or Amr Ibn al-Aas, among others, when they sin. It is to their advantage to portray the Prophet (S) as a man who listens to music and watches a dance with his wife, to justify the dancing and the music that was (and still is) rampant in their palaces.

The current state of the Ummah is NOT because a few of us aren’t praying or fasting,; it is because some people have changed and mutiliated the religion of Allah (SWT) to satisfy their lusts, just like the Christians and Jews did. That’s exactly what we have fallen into. We sin, then we say: so what -- the Prophet (S) himself was a sinner! Purified be the prophets and messengers of Allah (SWT) from being of such a sinful nature!

By Allah, to say such a thing is more of an insult to Allah, than it is to the prophet and messengers. Because when we assert that Allah sends forth sinful men, we are claiming that Allah (SWT) Himself approves of sin; or why, then, would he send forth a sinful man? Yet, on the other hand, Allah (SWT) forbids us from doing evil! What kind of twisted logic is this? Exalted be Allah (SWT) from such an insult!

Infallibility According to the Shi’a

The Shi’a, on the other hand, state that ALL the prophets and messengers of Allah, with NO exception, are sinless and infallible, even before they became prophets and messengers. For instance, although Prophet Muhammad (S) became Messenger at the age of forty, the Shi’a assert that even in the first forty years of his life, he was sinless and infallible -- an assertion that history attests to as well.

It is indeed frustrating to conceive of a human being who is NOT sinful. So, let us first define the concept of infallibility:

The Concept of Infallibility

According to the scholar Muhammad Jawad Mughniyah (May Allah rest his soul in peace), in his book "al-Islam Wa al-’Aql -- Islam and Reason,”the concept of Ismah (Infallibility) is very often misunderstood. What we mean by that concept is that a prophet, by virtue of his prophethood, has a pure soul. As the Qur’an states:

"...the (human) soul certainly incites evil, UNLESS my lord do bestow His Mercy... (Qur’an 12:53)"

Clearly Allah (SWT) has made an exception (by using the term "UNLESS") to the human soul that incites evil. We can understand, based on Shi’ite philosophy, that the attachment of the soul (Nafs) to being is that of a relationship of control and administration. Therefore, the soul may incite evil; but the individual has the freedom and the authority to reject that invitation to evil. If the individual accepts the invitation to evil, he becomes accountable for that evil which he commits. This is a very simplified explanation, but it serves the purpose.

Now, the prophets or the messengers, are among the exception as Allah (SWT) has indicated. That is, there is something in the soul of these virtuous HUMANS that precludes the incitement of evil, and as such they never commit it. Their virtue is so high that they never even think of committing a sin. It is NOT that if a prophet or a messenger wanted to commit a sin, he can’t; rather, it is that "Mercy,”mentioned in the above verse, that is bestowed upon him from Allah (SWT) that precludes him from doing so. As such, he is sinless and infallible even though they have full ability of committing any kind of sin.

When Satan refused to prostrate to Adam, He was driven away and became an accursed one. Qur’an states that thereupon Satan said:

He said: My Lord, Because You has sent me astray, verily I shall adorn the path of error for them on the earth, and shall deceive them all. (Qur’an 15:39)

Except those of them who are Your perfectly devoted Servants. (Qur’an 15:40)

(Allah) said: "This (Way of My sincere servants) is indeed a Way that leads straight to Me. (Qur’an 15:41)

Lo! as for My slaves, you have NO way into them except the wrong-doers who follow you. (Qur’an 15:42)

And verily for all such people, hell is the promised place. (Qur’an 15:43)

It is clear from the above conversation that Allah has promised that Satan has NO WAY into His sincere Servants, and only wrong-doers will follow the Satan. Thus the Sincere Servants of Allah are not wrong-doers and shall not be deceived. Also Allah confirms that the Path of His Sincere Servants is a path which leads straight to Him. All these facts prove that the Sincere Servants of Allah never fall into the trap of Satan, and as such they are infallible, due to Allah’s Mercy.

One side remark here is that there is no mention of "prophet”or "messenger”in the above verses. In other words, the "perfectly devoted Servants”who are infallible are not necessarily "prophets”or "messengers". The issue of the infallibility of the Imams will be discussed in a separate article, however.

The Qur’an Speaks About the Prophets

First, it would be of help to take a look at the commandment of obeying the messenger, to see how all-encompassing and all-pervading this commandment is, and how great the authority of the messenger of Allah is. Allah states in Qur’an:

"And we did not send any messenger, unless he should be obeyed by Allah’s authority.”(Qur’an 4:64)

The prophet or the messenger of God is to be obeyed and followed; the followers are not expected to check every order of the Prophet to decide what is to be obeyed and what is not to be obeyed. There is no way to check his commands, because he himself gave us all the rules and divine laws in the form of Scripture and his traditions (sayings/actions/satisfactions). If we become suspicious to some of the actions of the prophet, this suspicion can cause all his commands and laws that he has already conveyed to go under question. This shows that the prophets and messengers were free from error and sin; otherwise Allah would not have ordered people to obey them unconditionally.

There are many verses in which Allah commands us to obey the prophet:

"O you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and do not burn your deeds (by disobeying him).”(Qur’an 47:33)

Allah, Exalted, also states:

"Whoever obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys Allah.”(Qur’an 4:80)

In the above verses as well as many other verses of the Qur’an, obedience of Allah has become synonymous with the obedience of the prophets. Such assertion would have been impossible if the prophets were not infallible (Ma’soom). Now, note the following verse:

"....and obey not from among them a sinner or an ungrateful one.”(Qur’an 76:24)

The picture is complete! "The prophets are to be obeyed,”and "the sinners are NOT to be obeyed.”The only conclusion is that the prophets were NOT sinners or wrong-doers. In other words, they were infallible (Ma’soom) and sinless.

Looking specially at the Holy Prophet of Islam (S), Allah tells us:

"And whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.”(Qur’an 59:7)

This is another indication that whatever the Prophet (S) offered must be accepted unconditionally and with no doubt. This means that the permission or prohibition of the Holy Prophet was always in accordance with the will of Allah and was always favored by Him. It proves that the Holy Prophet was protected (Ma’soom). No one can be so sure about the commands of a man who is not infallible.

Now, if the Prophet (S) was a sinner as some people falsely allege, then how can Allah (SWT) order us to accept that which could be sinful? Fear Allah (SWT) in your reasoning. For those who argue that the above verse is specific only to religious injunctions, and the Prophet (S) is sinless in that matter only, I would say such assertion is baseless. This is a basic rule that to the time that there is no exclusion or condition or particularization has been mentioned in conjunction with a text of Qur’an, it covers all aspects. Second, everything the Prophet (S) spoke had something to do with Allah (SWT) and His religion; then how can you claim that Allah (SWT) is making a separation?

Haven’t you heard what Aisha said when she was asked about the Prophet’s behavior? She said: "His life was the Qur’an, especially the first ten verses of the Chapter al-Noor, the Light.”Now, if the Prophet’s (S) life was the Qur’an verbatim, how can he (S) be a sinner? That means that the Qur’an is full of sinful things! Exalted be Allah (SWT) from revealing such a book!!! There is another verse in which Allah said:

"(O prophet) tell (people) If you really love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you and forgive you your sins.”(Qur’an 3:31)

Here the love of Allah is made contingent on following the orders of the Prophet of Islam. Both sides of love are included in it. If you love Allah follow the Prophet; if you follow the Prophet, Allah will love you. Does it not show that the Prophet was absolutely free from any type of blemish?

Not only the orders of the Prophet, but also all his decisions are protected from error for Allah said to his Prophet:

But no by thy Lord! They can have no (real) Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Qur’an 4:65)

If ALL the decisions of the Prophet should be accepted unconditionally, then the Prophet should be protected from error in ALL his decisions.

Beside his actions and his decisions, even any single word of his speeches was the Commands of Allah. Almighty states in the Qur’an:

By the Star when it sets, (Qur’an 53:1)

Your companion (i.e., Prophet) does not err/wander, nor is he deceived (Qur’an 53:2)

Nor does he speak out of his desire; (Qur’an 53:3)

It is no less than a revelation that is revealed. (Qur’an 53:4)

The Mighty in Power has taught him. (Qur’an 53:5)

The above verses not only proves that the Prophet did not err or sin, but also testifies that all his speeches were revelation (either directly or indirectly). These verses unequivocally clears the Messenger of Allah (S) from ever saying anything of his (S) own desire. That includes his (S) tradition and the Qur’an.

For those who argue otherwise, don’t forget that the tradition is used in ANY interpretation of the Qur’an; and in matters of Jurisprudence (Fiqh), as well as in other areas. If the tradition is corrupt because you claim that the Prophet (S) is a sinner (May Allah forgive us!!!), then the interpretation of the Qur’an is also corrupt!!! Fear Allah (SWT) in your reasoning!

For those who claim that the Prophet (S) is sinless in the delivery of the Message of Allah (SWT), and that includes the Hadith, then you have already admitted what the Shi’a say!!! It is unanimously agreed that the Sunnah of the Prophet covers the Prophet’s sayings, actions, and thought/satisfaction. Since the Sunnah are reflections of the Prophet’s actions, he (S) is then sinless in the actions as well.

Allah also said:

"Have We not caused thy bosom to dilate? And removed from thee thy burden? That which weighed down thy back? And exalted the esteem (in which) thou (art held)?...”(Qur’an 94:1-4)

I will not personally comment on the above verse, but here’s what Abdullah Yusuf ‘Ali, a Sunni translator of the Qur’an, has to say in his footnotes to the verse:

"(This is also) the prayer of Moses (asking for the expansion of the breast). The breast is symbolically the seat of knowledge and the highest feelings of love and affection, the treasure-house in which are stored the jewels of that quality of human character which approaches nearest to the divine. The holy Prophet’s human nature had been purified, expanded, elevated, so that he became a Mercy to all Creation. Such a nature could afford to ignore the lower motives of ordinary humanity which caused shameful attacks to be made on him. Its strength and courage could also bear the burden of the galling work which it had to do in denouncing sin, subduing it, and protecting Allah’s (SWT) creatures from its oppression.

It is indeed a grievous and galling burden for a man to fight single- handed against sin. But Allah sends his grace and aid, and that burden is removed, or converted into joy and triumph in the service of the One True God.

The Prophet’s virtues, the magnanimity of his character, and his love for mankind were fully recognized in his lifetime, and his name stands highest among the heroic leaders of mankind. The phrase used here is more comprehensive in meaning that used for various prophets..."

(End of quote from A. Yusuf ‘Ali)

Do I need to say more? Let us see if Allah said any more:

"It is He who has sent His Messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth...”(Qur’an 9:33)

"And the unbelievers say: Why is not a Sign sent down to him from his Lord? But thou art truly a warner and for every nation there exists a guide.”(Qur’an 13:7)

A Messenger, who rehearses to you the Signs of Allah containing clear explanations, in order to lead forth those who believe and do righteous deeds from the depths of Darkness into Light .”(Qur’an 65:11)

The above verses of Qur’an testify that the Prophet Muhammad (S) was a Guide sent to lead forth people from the depths of Darkness into Light. (65:11) And that he (S) is a warner (27:91) and one of the guides for people. (13:7). Sin is darkness, and as such, how can the Prophet was sent to move people from darkness into light when he himself is sitting in the darkness?! May Allah protect us from slandering His Prophet (S).

Similarly Qur’an informs us that the Prophet has come to us to sanctify and cleanse us and to teach us wisdom:

As We have sent unto you a messenger from among you who recites unto you Our revelations and cleanses you , and teaches you the Scripture and wisdom , and teaches you that which you knew not. (Qur’an 2:151)

Allah did bestow a great favor unto the believers when He sent among them an Messenger from among themselves reciting unto them the Signs of Allah sanctifying them and teaching them the Scripture and Wisdom while before that they had been in manifest error. (Qur’an 3:164)

See also Qur’an 2:129, 62:2 which also testify that one of the missions of the Prophet (S) was to cleanse the true believers. Then how could a prophet purify others of wrong-doings if he himself were not pure? How could Allah send an impure and sinful person to cleanse others?

How could a man teach others wisdom if he had no wisdom to distinguish right from wrong; or worst still, if he had no willpower to resist from doing wrong? The Prophet was to teach people the Book of Allah; this means that he KNEW the Commandment of Allah. He was to purify them and teach them wisdom. This means he himself had wisdom and purity.

Witness to the perfection of his character is found in Qur’an where Allah states:

"And most certainly you are on sublime morality (exalted standard of character).”(Qur’an 68:4)

A man committing mistakes does not deserve such compliments. All these verses clearly prove two things:

1.The authority of the Holy Prophet upon the believers was unlimited and all-comprehensive. Any order given by him, under any condition, in any place, at any time, was to be obeyed unconditionally.

2.Supreme authority was given to him because he was sinless (Ma’soom) and free from all types of errors and sins. Otherwise, Allah would not have ordered us to obey him with no questioning or doubt.

Infallibility of the Prophets Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In this part, we discuss the logical support for the infallibility of the Prophets, and we then provide some traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih al-Tirmidhi with regard to the issue of infallibility.

Reason And Logic

Apart from the analysis of the character of a prophet historically or as a character from the Qur’an, such character can also be judged within the confines of reason and logic. As such, the obvious question is: Is it rational and/or realistic for a Prophet sent by the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe to be a sinner? Let’s find out:

First, when Allah (SWT) sends forth a Prophet, He (SWT) distinguishes him from all the creatures by cleansing him from evil and sin, so that he may serve as an example. Indeed, Allah (SWT) asserts:

"You have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the Final Day, and who remember Allah much. (Qur’an 33:21)”

As such, a man that has been chosen by the Creator of the Universe to represent Him (SWT) on the Earth, cannot be of an evil nature, nor can he be a sinner that commits ignoble acts. If the Prophet is sent to advice humanity to do good deeds, then he himself commits sins, do you believe that he will serve as an outstanding example to be followed? That would be like an Imam of Mosque who waves his right hand saying: "Don’t drink beer!”while a holds a beer can in his left hand!!!

Second, if the Prophet (S) enjoins righteousness and forbids evil when he himself is a sinner who commits evil, he has gone against what Allah said in Qur’an that:

O you who believe! why do you say that which you do not act? It is most hateful in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not act. (Qur’an 61:2-3)

Based on the above verse of Qur’an, if prophet was a sinner, he should not have preached others in the first place!! As such, a sinful prophet faces a dilemma: If he does not preach, he has disobeyed the order of God who has ordered him to convey the message (Qur’an 5:67).

On the other hand, if he preaches, he again has disobeyed God where Allah states "O you who believe! why do you say that which you do not act? It is most hateful in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not act.!!!"

Didn’t Allah (SWT) reprimand the Jews by saying:

"Do you enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (to practice it) yourselves, and yet you study the Scripture? Will you not understand? (Qur’an 2:44)”

Clearly, a Prophet cannot order a layman to perform prayer on a timely basis, when the Prophet himself forgets to pray, and when he remembers, he prays without ablution (Wudu) (as Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic version, v1, p123; and v1, p37)!!! Purified be the Representatives of Allah (SWT) from such false accusations!

Third, a prophet that sins is a repulsive character. We, as humans, detest a person who comes to us and says don’t do this and don’t do that, yet he himself commits wicked acts. He automatically becomes repulsive to us, and we cannot stand to listen to him anymore.

Similarly, if Prophet Muhammad (S) was cruel to a blind man, which he was not, how can he ask us to have good manners? (Note again: The blind man’s story is not related to the Prophet (S) as some Sunnis state; it was a chapter revealed to reprimand Uthman Ibn Affan, who was the one who frowned in the face of the blind man. Please see the earlier article which was exclusively in this regard).

Do you seriously believe that a Prophet of Allah (SWT) was a sinner and so offensive? Why do you follow him then? I, personally, will not believe in a man who claims to be sent by Allah (SWT), the Creator of the Universe, and then sins and behaves in a manner that is not even befitting of a beast!

Forth, was Allah (SWT) so incapable as to make His (SWT) prophets and messengers sinless? Why would Allah (SWT) even bother to send a sinning prophet to be an example to a community? If sin is something that even the prophets and messengers can not avoid, then what is the purpose of sending a religion to the mankind any way? Does God expect the ordinary people to follow his instructions when his own deputies can not?

Fifth, a prophet or messenger is an interpreter of Allah’s commands. As such, if the prophet is the first to violate these commands, who among the Ummah will abide by these commands? Or if he is in a state that deprives him of his mental faculties causing him to err, then he will MISinterpret the commands of Allah (SWT). If that happens, then surely Allah (SWT) is playing a game with His creation!

For He (SWT) sends them a man to interpret the religion for them, yet this man is subject to magical spells, as the Israelites reports claim, and mental hallucinations that cause him to become unaware of his own behavior (See Sahih Bukhari, Arabic version, v7, p29)! What kind of interpreter is that? Exalted be Allah (SWT) from such allegations against His Prophet (S)!

sixth, for those among Sunnis who say that the Prophet (S) is sinless or infallible ONLY in the delivery of Allah’s (SWT) message, and other than that, just like any other man, he (S) sins and makes mistakes in many things, such assertion is full of logical holes. For instance, Sunnis narrated that once the Prophet gave advice on agriculture, and people did it, but they suffered a big loss by following that advice!! Then Prophet told them that what he said was his personal advice and not revelation!!! (which is, by the way, in contradiction with the verse:

"Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. What he says is nothing but revelation that is revealed.(Qur’an 53:3-4)")

How do we know which of the Prophet’s sayings are from Allah (SWT), and which are his personal sayings? He (S) may say something which the companions take as Allah’s command, but it may be that he (S) was only expressing his OWN opinion. If that happens, then all of Allah’s laws will be in chaos and disarray!

That is why, even the Prophet’s opinion has to conform with Allah’s orders, for fear of misinterpretation by the people. In fact the Prophet had a perfect reason and his Ijtihad was in perfect compliance with the Allah’s orders and satisfaction and that is why Qur’an orders us to obey WHATEVER he states without condition.

Also, how can we understand which acts of the Prophet are wrong, and which are right? What is the measure for us? Isn’t a part of this measure the practice of the Prophet (S) himself? Since the practice of the Prophet (S) is considered to be one of the sources of deriving the rules of Islam, we can NOT evaluate the Prophet’s actions by the rules which are derived from his actions! As such all the actions of the Prophet should have been protected.

Seventh, for the Prophet (S) to be chosen to deliver Allah’s (SWT) message (one of which was the Qur’an) and be himself a sinner, will cast doubt on the authenticity of the Qur’an. When the Prophet (S) recites a verse from the Qur’an, how do we know that that verse is indeed from Allah (SWT), and not a side effect from the hallucinative episode that the Prophet (S) was allegedly experiencing as a result of the magical spell cast upon him?! That would mean that Allah’s (SWT) Book will be distorted by the same man who was sent to deliver it!

Eighth, just imagine what impossible situation would have been created if any prophet begin to exhort his followers to commit a mistake or sin. The wretched followers would be condemned to the displeasure of Allah in any case.

If they obey the Prophet and commit that sin, then they have disobeyed the command given by Allah and thus are disgraced. If, on the other hand, they disobey the Prophet, they again have disobeyed the command of Allah about obeying the Prophet. So, it appears that a fallible prophet could bring nothing but disgrace and condemnation to his people.

Ninth, a punishable sin will cause sadness and depression to the soul of the believer. The believer who sincerely loves Allah (SWT) is angered and depressed by the sin he has committed. Feelings of sadness begin to roam the mind, and the believer will lose confidence many times.

Feelings of doubt are evoked in the sense that the believer feels that Allah (SWT) may not support him at a certain point in time as punishment for what he has rendered. This doubt is NOT in the sense that he feels Allah (SWT) is not merciful enough to forgive him; rather, it is the doubt about what will happen if Allah ever decides to retaliate for what he has done.

With the above in mind, a prophet should not be a sinner, because that would entail that he loses confidence at certain stages in his mission. If doubt strikes the soul of a prophet, you can be assured that his mission is in jeopardy.

Also, from a political and psychological standpoint, doubt automatically translates into disaster. On the other hand, it is a known historical fact that the Prophet (S) never displayed any doubt in his mission, and thus he could not have been guilty of sins. Having doubt could not have only undermined his mission, but it would also have undermined his credibility among the believers.

Tenth, a Prophet is a teacher by virtue of his prophethood. If a teacher errs when he is supposed to be sent directly by Allah (SWT) as a mercy to mankind, then he will need a more knowledgeable and a more virtuous teacher to guide him and to punish him in the case that he violates the limits of God; which means that the Prophet himself will need an unerring teacher sent by God, and so on, ad infinitum. Thus, it cannot be except that the Prophet MUST be the number one teacher and the highest in virtue among his own people, and that he be sinless and infallible to begin with.

As for the Imams (divinely appointed Caliphs), the same argument applies, but they are NOT prophets or messengers. They are, however, successors and vicegerents to the Seal of Prophethood. As such, if these Imams are to guide the Ummah of Muhammad (S), they also must have the same qualities that the above argument illuminates. Please see the next article which is exclusively about the infallibility of Imams.

Reference To Infallibility In Sahih Al-Bukhari

There is an interesting tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari which asserts that there are people who are Ma’soom (infallible/protected). The tradition clearly specifies that these people are the prophets and their successors (Caliphs). The tradition also illuminate the fact that He is Allah who gives the position of Caliphate to the Caliph which implies that the infallible Caliph is the one who is assigned by Allah, not by people.

Moreover, the tradition asserts that there are good advisors/companions and bad advisors/companions for the prophets and their successors, but those who are protected by Allah will not be deceived by the evil advisors around them. Here is the tradition:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.306

Narrated Abu Sa’id al-Khudri:

The Prophet said, "Allah never sends a prophet or gives the Caliphate to a Caliph but that he (the Prophet or the Caliph) has two groups of advisors: A group advising him to do good and exhorts him to do it, and the other group advising him to do evil and exhorts him to do it. But the protected person (Ma’soom) is the one who is protected by Allah.’"

فالمعصوم من عصم الله تعالى

Do I need to make any comment?!

Is Any One Like Him?

The Holy Qur’an states that the Prophet (S) is HUMAN being like us Human beings. The likeness between us and him is in the sense that both of us are human and both are accountable for our deeds. However there is no similarity between us and him in terms of virtue, knowledge, closeness to Allah. Allah gave him abilities and authorities which were not given to us ordinary beings. In the following traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari, the Prophet clearly stated that he is not like any of us, meaning that although he is human, we can not compare our weak and sinful soul with his:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.182

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet said, "Do not practice al-Wisal (fasting continuously without breaking one’s fast in the evening or eating before the following dawn).”The people said to the Prophet, "But you practice al-Wisal?”The Prophet replied, "I am not like any of you, for I am given food and drink (by Allah) during the night.”(Qala: Lastu Ka ahadin minkum).

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.183

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar:

Allah’s Apostle forbade al-Wisal. The people said(to him),"but you practice it?”He said, "I am not like you, for I am given food and drink by Allah.”(Qala: Inni lastu mithlikum).

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.184

Narrated Abu Sa’id:

That he had heard the Prophet saying, "Do not fast continuously (practice al-Wisal), and if you intend to lengthen your fast, then carry it on only till the Suhur (before the following dawn).”The people said to him, "But you practice (Al-Wisal), O Allah’s Apostle!”He replied, "I am not similar to you, for during my sleep I have One Who makes me eat and drink.”(Qala: Inni lastu ka Hay’atikum).

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.185

Narrated Aisha:

Allah’s Apostle forbade al-Wisal out of mercy to them. They said to him, "But you practice al-Wisal?”He said, "I am not similar to you, for my Lord gives me food and drink.”(Qala: Inni lastu ka Hay’atikum)

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.187

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said twice, "(O you people) Be cautious! Do not practice al-Wisal.”The people said to him, "But you practice al-Wisal?”The Prophet replied, "My Lord gives me food and drink during my sleep. Do that much of deeds which is within your ability."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.188

Narrated Abu Said al-Khudri:

Allah’s Apostle said, "Do not fast continuously day and night (practice al-Wisal) and if anyone of you intends to fast continuously day and night, he should continue till the Suhur time.”They said, "But you practice al-Wisal, O Allah’s Apostle!”The Prophet said,

"I am not similar to you; during my sleep I have One Who makes me eat and drink.

It appears from these authentic Sunni evidences, among others, that the Prophet is like us ONLY in the sense that he is human being (i.e., like us, he has choice to do right or wrong and has a human flesh). Other than that, there is no similarity between his Supreme soul/virtues and ours.

Reference To Infallibility In Sahih Al-Tirmidhi

In fact, the Prophet (S) himself testified that he and his Ahlul-Bayt are sinless. Interesting to see that Messenger of Allah used the purification verse of Qur’an to prove his point. Ibn Abbas Narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah recited "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a perfect purification". (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33) and then the Messenger of Allah said: "Thus Me and my Ahlul-Bayt are clear from sins."

فأنا و أهل بيتي مطهرون من الذنوب

Sunni reference:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, as quoted in:

• al-Durr al-Manthoor, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v5, pp 605-606,198 under the commentary of Verse 33:33 of Qur’an

• Dala’il al-Nabawiyyah, by al-Bayhaqi

• Others such as al-Tabarani, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu Nu’aym, etc.

Please note the word "thus”in the highlighted part of the above tradition. It means the Prophet himself is concluding that the verse means Ahlul-Bayt (including himself) are sinless.

Infallibility of the Prophets Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This part addresses the questions and counter arguments on this subject in the current and the previous rounds of discussions, and the responses to them.

Side Comments

A person asked how we explain the following verse of Qur’an considering the subject of infallibility:

Was Allah to seize the people immediately for their Dhulm (wrong-doing; injustice), no living creature would be left on earth. He gives them respite for an appointed time. When their term is over, they will not be able to change the inevitable. (Qur’an 16:61)

My comment is as follows: First, "the people”at the beginning of the verse refers to "the unjust people”and "the disbelievers". Note that in the preceding verse the disbelievers have been explicitly addressed.

The above verse does not imply that everyone on Earth is unjust. It rather refers to the fact that, unlike the Hereafter, when an earthly punishment comes as a result of injustice of the unjust people it will inflict all leaving creatures on the Earth including good and bad people as well as the animals. Of course, the affliction is a total loss and punishment for wrong-doers while for the believers it will be test. In another verse, Allah states:

And fear the affliction that affects not just those of you who do wrong: and know that Allah is strict in punishment (Qur’an 8:25)

Thus, the verse (16:61) does not prove that everyone is Dhalim (unjust).

Moreover, the term "Dhulm”was used in Qur’an with different meanings. Only one of the general meanings of Dhulm is "wrong doing”that entails punishment in the Hereafter. Surely, the Prophets and the Imams were not wrong-doers (Dhalim) and we can readily prove this by Qur’an (see few paragraphs later).

However, before presenting the Qur’anic argument and in order to get a better picture of the issue, let me quote a famous explanatory statements of the Sufis mentioned by the Sunnis scholars including al-Razi and al-Baidhawi, which states:

"The good deeds of the righteous people are sins for those who are close (to Allah)."

حسنات الابرار سيئات المقربين

This means that for people who are very close to Allah such as the Prophets, sin has a much subtle meaning, and its meaning is much different from what we usually consider as sin. In their high level, they consider themselves sinful when they question themselves by saying: "I should have done more good deeds than of what I have done till now.”

This is while they did their best. Or "I did not worship Allah to the extent that He deserves by His Majesty.”Or "I could be closer to God.”These are the sort of sins to them which is much more different than what we think of as sin. Their sin is just a feeling of shyness toward the Glory of Allah.

According to his genuine nature, an advanced human being does not make any hesitation in following the path of Almighty God. In every step that he takes towards development, the greatness and grandeur of the power of the Almighty will become more obvious him, and he will look at his past from a higher level. For what he has done he will sometimes apologize, even if what he has done was his duties. That is because he now comprehends its inadequacy.

He interprets his past worships as sin and does not see any value for his work when presented to the Great position of the Lord. With his elevated view, he perceives his submission to God’s presence as sinful and even an action far from politeness.

The prophets and the divinely-appointed Imams have reached this point. Since they realize the Magnificence of their Lord and comprehend the position of the Life-Giver, they see themselves, their activities, and their prostrations and praises so little that they interpret the worship of that much affluence and greatness as sin, and with supplication and invocation, they ask for pardon and they hope for forgiveness.

When they face the divine commandments and consider the Holy Position of the Almighty, they submit themselves to the Master. They see their action in front of the Lord as nothing, and recognize it as not suitable for praise. They hope it would be accepted by the Generosity and Majesty of the Creator, otherwise it is a sin to submit such inadequate worship to the Holy Presence of the Lord.

Those people like the Prophet Muhammad and his Ahlul-Bayt (peace be upon them all) realized the Divine position with a much wider view. Continuously upon the two wings of knowledge and action, they progressed to a higher and superior position. They were, at every moment, finding out more about the Magnificence of the Life-Giver of the world, and more about their own needs; consequently better understanding of their inadequate actions in comparison with that much Power and Greatness.

To compensate for that, they confessed to their sins and asked the Lord for the permission to apologize with the excuse that they can NOT do to the extent of what Allah deserves, and with the hope that He would guide them to a higher and superior position until they could continue their development process in order to reach the sublime morality.

Now the verse you mentioned should be understood in this context. No HUMAN could warship Allah to the extent of what Allah deserves to be worshipped. It is like one wants to pay an infinite debt by finite resources. Thus everybody is sinful and shameful in front of His Glory. The closer to God, the more shameful of your insufficient worship in front of God you are.

Let me also give you a proof from Qur’an that "Dhulm”for prophets has much different meaning. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty states in Qur’an:

"And when Abraham was tested by his Lord with certain commands and he fulfilled them. Then He said: Lo! I appoint you an Imam for mankind. (Abraham) said: And of my offspring (will there be Imam)? He said: My covenant does not reach the wrong-doers (among them).”(Qur’an 2:124).

In the above verse Allah states that the position of God-assigned leadership does not reach to a person who is "Dhalim”(wrong-doer). Now, there is no dispute that Prophet Muhammad (S) was a divinely appointed leader and a descendant of Abraham (as). Not only him, but also Moses, Jesus, David, Sulayman (Solomon) were also descendants of Abraham and all of them were assigned by Allah as Imam. This goes to prove that non of them were "Dhalim”(wrong-doer), otherwise the last sentence of Verse 2:124 will become untrue!

Thus, there is no conflict amongst verses 16:61, 2:124, 33:33, etc. since firstly, the verse 16:61 does not attribute the Dhulm to all people, and secondly, Dhulm has been used in Qur’an with more than one meaning and not just the "wrong-doing”that deserves Allah’s punishment in the Hereafter. Sin has a different meaning for those who are close to Allah.

Their sins can only be interpreted as insufficient good deeds or worship before Allah in comparison to the infinite worship that Allah deserves. Such type of sin --that is even unobservable to the righteous people-- does not cause the wrath of Allah, nor does it lead to punishment in the Hereafter.

***
A Muslim convert (former Catholic) stated that there is a report of David’s adultery in the Old Testament. The Prophets were human. Remember that Muhammad’s past and future sins were forgiven. It is not that he didn’t have any. The Prophet (S) used to ask forgiveness for himself. Clearly, that would constitute the attitude of a sinner repenting after an act of sin.

In reply to the disparaging quote about David (as) from the Bible, I won’t even dignify that statement by the Bible writers with a comment! one should know better than to quote a mutilated book!

As for the Prophet (S) asking for forgiveness from Allah (SWT), I have just answered this few lines before and proved it by Qur’an and Hadith that the sin of the Prophets and Imams are much different than what we consider sin (which is punishable), and as such they will not be held accountable for that. That is why Allah informed the Prophet (S) that his past and his future "sins”are forgiven!

If Allah (SWT) had inspired "sinful”prophets and messengers to lead people to the Right Path, it would mean that Allah (SWT) approves of sinfulness! Why then does He prohibit it? What kind of game is Allah (SWT) playing? What kind of Creator is He Who approves of something while prohibiting it at the same time? Cease and desist from insulting Allah (SWT) by claiming that His prophets and messengers were sinners. Fear Allah (SWT) O People before the day comes when you will account for your deeds! Exalted be the Merciful from these ludicrous insinuations!

***

A reader mentioned that Moses (as) killed a man with his fist. What sin could be greater than killing a human?

Well, The Prophet Muhammad (S) and Imam ‘Ali (as) killed many unbelievers! They did this to comply with Allah’s regulations. Also killing a person during self-defense or when protecting believers from the assault of a non-believer, is not a crime.

Moreover, in many instances the sin of the prophets mentioned in Qur’an is the act they have committed which is considered violation by the tyrants of their time and NOT by Allah. It means that the governor considered such prophet is GUILTY of a specific act. This does NOT mean that they are guilty before Allah. The case of Prophet Moses killing a non-believer in defense of one of his Shi’a (followers) falls into this category. In fact Qur’an testifies the above mentioned fact by saying:

Behold your Lord called Moses: "Go to unto the wrongdoing folk: (Qur’an 26:10)

The people of Pharaoh, will they not fear Allah? (Qur’an 26:11)

He said: "O my Lord! I do fear that they will charge me with falsehood"(Qur’an 26:12)

"My breast will be straitened and my speech may not go (smoothly), so send Aaron (to help me). (Qur’an 26:13)

"And (further) they hold a charge of sin against me ; and I fear they may slay me.”(Qur’an 26:14)

وَلَهُمْ عَلَيَّ ذَنبٌ فَأَخَافُ أَن يَقْتُلُونِ ﴿الشعراء: ١٤﴾

As we can see in the last verse, the sin of murder is what the people of Pharaoh considered to be sin and not Allah. They considered Moses guilty. As such, that was not a sin before Allah, but rather the charge of the government.

Prophet Moses did what he was supposed to do, that is helping the oppressed believer against the oppressor. Although he did not intend to kill the oppressor, it happened during that defense. It was a Satan’s plan to make the situation more difficult for Moses (as). By that unplanned murder, life was made harder for Moses (as) since he had to stay away from Egypt, but this does not mean that he sinned. Sometimes defending the truth may cause trouble but not sin.

Despite all such troubles, Allah finally granted Moses (as) victory over the unbelievers. Again, Prophet Moses (as) was not a wrong-dower (Dhalim) otherwise it contradicts Verse 2:124 where Allah said that the position of God-assigned leadership shall not reach to the wrong-doers.

***

Another brother argued that Allah (SWT) has forbidden us from purifying anybody in verse: "... hold NOT yourselves purified (53:32)”As such, even prophets and messengers can not be considered purified.

My response was that the verse is taken out of context, and thus has clouded the meaning. Let us carefully study the WHOLE verse:

Those who avoid great sins and shameful deeds, and only fell into small reprehensible faults, verily thy Lord is ample in forgiveness. He knows you well when He brings you out of the earth and when you are hidden in your mother’s wombs therefore justify not yourselves. He knows best who (among you) guards against evil. (53:32)

This verse is saying: those who have committed small reprehensible faults should not justify themselves. They should be careful not to fall victim to their egoism and pretend that they are the best when only Allah (SWT) knows what is really in their hearts.

As such, this verse does not apply to the Prophet (S) who did not have any fault, or Allah (SWT) would have directed the verse at him (S) as He (SWT) does when talking to or about him (S). Therefore, the verse does not even come close to supporting an argument that the Prophet (S) was a sinner.

Moreover Allah mentioned in Verse 33:33 of Qur’an that the Ahlul-Bayt of Prophet (S) are perfectly pure and flawless, then we can conclude that Allah is the one who is confirming that the Prophet is pure and thus it is in conformity with the above quoted verse which states only Allah knows who is the best and most purified. No need to mention that the Prophet (S) is the first member of the Ahlul-Bayt, and if the Ahlul-Bayt are perfectly pure, so is the Prophet (S).

***
A reader mentioned that: We identify with the Prophets and Messengers through their sin. That is, we look at the sin of the Prophets and the Messengers, and we identify our OWN sins with theirs!

The above assertion is off base. We do NOT identify with the Prophets through their SIN; we rather identify with them through their suffering. There is a big difference between the two: Suffering necessitates patience in times of tribulation and adversity to survive through the ordeal one is undergoing.

All the prophets and messengers (May Allah bless them) suffered greatly by virtue of their title as representatives of the of Supreme Being, Allah (SWT). We identify with that, and remain steadfast during our times of despair. As such, a prophet did NOT sin, but rather suffered.

The Mercy from Allah (SWT) is not, as you state, that the prophets and messengers sin, but rather that they were sent to communicate and deliver the message of Allah (SWT) to us. And in so doing, they were not kings or high priests who would not be able to identify with the oppressed masses. Indeed, look at Moses (as), the great Messenger from Allah (SWT), whose entire life was a miracle. The suffering that Moses (as) endured evoked a sense of peace in the minds of his (as) followers that served to strengthen them in times of great hardship under Pharaoh’s oppression.

Similarly, the Messenger of Allah (SWT), Muhammad (S), suffered when he was struck in his head, causing a severe injury to his jaw. He also suffered from hunger, rejection, a boycott from disbelievers, sarcasm, temptation, wars, mutiny, distrust from some of his followers, the hypocrites, betrayal, and then he, after his demise, also suffered by virtue of the massacring of his family.

It is an authentic tradition that the Prophet (S) during his lifetime said: "No Prophet has EVER suffered as I have suffered.”The indication here was to how his own flesh and blood, his family-- which were dearer to him than his own soul, would be treated after his demise; not to mention the hardship he was exposed to during his lifetime. It is that kind of suffering that allows us to identify with the Prophets, NOT their sins!

Again, the argument clearly fails when we analyze it from the perspective of the "example or model”par excellence sent to humanity: If Allah (SWT) says:

"You have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the Final Day, and who remember Allah much. (Qur’an 33:21),”

(Emphasis Mine) He (SWT) means that our lives should be modeled around that "excellent exemplar.”That’s where the word "Sunnah --- the Prophet’s (S) custom or tradition”comes from. Now, if that model was corrupt (May Allah forgive us), then how can we model ourselves around it; we, then, will NEVER be able to cleanse ourselves!

***

Another brother stated To be human is to be a sinner; that is, sin is an innate part of us as human beings. I find highly disturbing the tendency among Muslims, Shi’a and Sunni likewise, to regard the Prophet Muhammad (saws) almost as a species of infallible demigod.

I would like to first ask this brother if knows Muslims believe that angels are infallible, i.e., they do not make any mistakes. (Otherwise, some major flaws, among many, would be that the validity of Qur’an transmitted by Gabriel which will go seriously under question; and that the angels who record our deeds may write things incorrectly; and also the angel of death may take the life of a wrong person instead of another!!!!). Allah stated in Qur’an:

"...the angels do not violate the Commands of Allah, and do (precisely) what they are ordered. (Qur’an 66:6)"

If you also agree that angels are infallible, and if your above statement is true, then you consider angels are either god or demigod (?!) (may Allah protect us). Therefore, your above statement is wrong. I just gave you an example of infallible species who are nothing but the creatures of God. They are neither God nor semi-god, nor demi-god, yet infallible.

Angels are programmed and work like faultless bug-free computers. They can not go against the orders of Allah. However, the prophets are NOT angels. They are all human, but purified human beings. That purification by Allah (SWT) as alluded to in the previously mentioned verses does NOT make them divine, but it does elevate them above the level of ordinary human beings in terms of denouncing sin.

The advantage of human over angel is that human is able to willingly obey God. In other words, the prophet has choice to either go right or wrong, but he chooses to go right always, and such, he is infallible while he has choice.

A human can make mistakes, but he does not have to. If we make mistakes, it is not because we have to, but it is because of our foolishness, ignorance and lack of knowledge, or else because of the lack of control of our carnal desires. Those who say human has to make mistakes to be human, are generalizing their own weak soul to all others. They follow their lusts, and are envious to see if one never does that.

Based on Qur’an, the level of human CAN BE much higher than angels. (and of course, could go even lower than animals, on the other side!) Qur’an states that all angels prostrated Prophet Adam (as). This is enough to prove that the rank of the prophets is higher than that of angels. In fact, the best human beings (in terms of Taqwa) are the best of all the creatures, and the most honored before Allah. Remember also the story of Mi’raaj where there were places in the heavens that only Prophet Muhammad (S) could get into, but the Angel Gabriel could not fly to. The Gabriel said to the Prophet that he (Gabriel) will burn if he wants to go further with the Prophet (S).

One side remark, here, is that, Satan is not an angel. He was from Jinn (unseen creatures). Witness to that is Qur’an where it quotes the statement of Satan saying: "You have created me from fire.”The unseen (Jinn) creatures are made of fire, and as such, they are not the angels. The Jinns, like human beings, have choice to go right or wrong, and will be accountable for their acts in the day of judgment.

***

A brother mentioned that there is a religious part of the prophet’s life and a non-religious part. The danger of believing that every thing the prophet did was by order of God, causes that Muslims should imitate the prophet (S) to the finest details otherwise they won’t be obeying God!!! Even to what the prophet liked to drink and eat,...

My response to him was that ALL the acts of the Prophet were acts of worship. Even his eating, sleeping, etc., were worship, and as such, there was no non-religious part in his life! All he did were in full accordance with Allah’s wishes and commandments. But religion is not limited to what is obligatory and what is forbidden. Most of the Prophet’s actions fall in the category of what is "Mustahabb”(i.e., recommended) or what is "Mubaah”(i.e., OK either way).

Moreover, no one said we are required to imitate all the actions of the Prophet. If one eats what the Prophet preferred to eat, it will be all right and no one can blame him unless he claims that one should eat only what the Prophet ate. Obeying the Prophet (S) means that if the Prophet ordered to do something or forbade to do something, then one is religiously required to follow it, no matter if the order does not seem to be religious (which is a false imagination).

In fact, all the orders and prohibitions of the Prophet were a part of religion. This is actually what the religion is about. Even his Ijtihad was in full accordance with the wish of Allah for Allah granted him the most perfect reason. Whatever came to the heart of Prophet (S) is the order of God, and such it is a part of religion. Forget about that fabricated Hadith on agriculture.

As for eating food: Everything is Halaal, unless the Prophet prohibited it explicitly or implicitly. For instance, pork has been prohibited explicitly. Also any today’s new product which was not at the time of the Prophet but has some ingredients which are extracts from those Haraam products, becomes Haraam implicitly.

Therefore, if the Prophet (S) did not eat a special food, but he did not prohibit it either, we still can eat it, because we follow his general order that whatever has not been made Haraam, is Halaal. Also if he preferred a special food, but he did not mention that it is obligatory to eat it, it does not become obligatory to eat.

Thus, the preference of the prophet for a special food is not considered to be the order of Prophet as you tried to imply. In religion, there are many things that are neither obligatory nor prohibited, and we have choice to do it or not. What the Prophet ate might be considered as recommended food, and not obligatory unless otherwise specified.

***

Regarding the verse:

"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is no less than revelation that is revealed (Qur’an 53:3-4),”

a brother said: The above verse is only limited to Qur’an. The pagan Arabs were calling the Prophet insane, and discrediting the Qur’anic revelations as the handiwork of the prophet. The meaning of the above verses is that the Qur’anic verses which the prophet is speaking about are not out of his desire, but are indeed Revelation. If everything the prophet said or did is revelation, then what is the difference between Qur’an and authentic Hadith?

My answer to this brother was that: Neither the above verses, nor the verses surrounding them specify limitation of any kind. There is no mention of "Qur’an”in the above verses nor the verses before and after, and therefor, your claim is unsupported, at least from the Qur’an.

The Verse 53:3 exactly talks about "the speech”of the Prophet and not necessarily Qur’an, and thus, the rule mentioned in the next verse covers ALL his speeches. The pagan Arabs did not criticize the Prophet for the Qur’an alone. They also criticized him for his claim of prophethood as well as his teachings and ideas.

As for the difference between Qur’an and Hadith: Both Qur’an and genuine Hadith are from Allah. The Prophet did not say anything of his own desire. However, there is a difference between Qur’an and Hadith:

• Qur’an is well-proven, but is NOT well-understood (see note below)

• Hadith is NOT well-proven, but is well-understood.

What I meant by "Qur’an is well-proven", is that we have no doubt about its authenticity, genuineness, and that has not been fabricated.

What I meant by "Qur’an is NOT well-understood", is that most of its verses are ambiguous and only "Those who are Firmly Grounded in Knowledge”(i.e., the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt) have touched the depth of its meaning. Also Qur’an only specifies the general rules. For all these and many other reasons, Qur’an can not be considered as the sources of Guidance ALONE. It needs an interpreter, and this is where the Hadith plays its role. By genuine Hadith we can get close to the understanding of Qur’an. Allah said in Qur’an:

He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book, in it are some clear verses; they are the Essence of the Book; and others which are ambiguous. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part there of that is ambiguous seeking discord and searching for its hidden meanings but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge (Qur’an 3:7)

What I meant by "Hadith is NOT well-proven", is that, since we have not personally met the Prophet (or his successors), we are not sure if such and such Hadith are genuine. The important point which has the answer to your question is: If we were at the time of the Prophet and would have heard the Hadith from the mouth of the Prophet (S), then that Hadith would have been as binding as Qur’an for us, and we can not prefer Qur’an over that Hadith, rather I would say, that Hadith which was heard in person is preferred to our defective understanding of Qur’an because most verses of Qur’an are ambiguous, but the Hadith we heard from the Prophet is clear. Also, there are many cases where the Hadith explains the exceptions of the general Qur’anic rules, and as such, it may seem to be contradictory with the Qur’an.

However, since we have not personally heard the Hadith from the Prophet (or his true successors), we need to examine its documentation (i.e., the chain of narrators who passed the Hadith) and the number of similar narrations in that regard to determine the overall strength of what has been attributed to the Prophet (S). Some of the requirements of the authenticity of Hadith are as follows:

• It should not be in clear contradiction with well-established concepts in Qur’an;

• It should not be in clear contradiction with other well-established traditions;

• All the transmitters of the Hadith in the chain of transmitters should be righteous and just, etc.

Most Sunnis, however, do not consider the justice of the narrators as a criterion. They narrate from whoever saw the Prophet (S) and claimed to be Muslim.

The bother, then, asked: If the speech of prophet are the literal word of God, then why are they not included in the Qur’an itself?

Not all the traditions are literal words of God. Only some traditions are the literal words of God such as Hadith al-Qudsi. They are not a part of Qur’an though. Some other traditions are the commands of Allah transmitted by Gabriel, and thus, they are indirect words of Allah.

They include the divine commentaries of the verses of Qur’an which were revealed along with Qur’an, but not as a part of Qur’an. The rest of genuine traditions are the information and commandments that Allah induced into the heart of the Prophet directly, and as such, they are the indirect words of God. This includes his Ijtihad and whatever passed through his mind.

Therefore, the some traditions are direct literal word of God, and some are indirect words of God, and as such, all of them are either revelation or inspiration, and are all from Allah. The Prophet did not say anything of his own. The reason that they are not a part of Qur’an, is because they were not supposed to be! A better answer is: Qur’an is an encapsulated database which provides general information for all ages. The Hadith is more specific and furnishes more details and also provides commentary to the Qur’anic injunctions without which Qur’an can not be understood correctly.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I repeat the question: If Allah (SWT) had inspired "sinful”Prophets and Messengers to lead people to the Right Path, it would mean that Allah (SWT) approves of sinfulness! Why then does He (SWT) prohibit it (sin, that is)?

Allah and His Angels, send blessings on the Prophet: O you who believe! Send your blessings on him, and salute him with all respect. (Qur’an: 33:56)

Wassalam.

Leadership and Infallibility Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Imamat Is Of Allah’s Grace

From the Shi’ite point of view, Imamat (God-assigned leadership) is an Allah’s bounty upon mankind by which the religion was perfected. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.”(Qur’an 5:3)

See the articles on "Ghadir Khum”in Chapter 3 which provides the list of Sunni commentators of Qur’an who confirmed the revelation of the above verse in Ghadir Khum after the Prophet (S) announced ‘Ali (as) as the master of all believers.

Imamat is the Grace (Lutf) of Allah which attracts mankind towards His obedience and keeps them away from His disobedience, without compelling them in any way. When Allah orders mankind to do something yet He is aware that either they can not do it, or it is very difficult for them to do it without His assistance, then if Allah does not provide His assistance, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously, such negligence is evil according to reason.

As such, Grace (Lutf) is one of Allah’s character, and He is purified/exalted from inadequacy of lacking such attribute. In fact, the holy Qur’an states that: "Allah is Gracious to His servants...”(Qur’an 42:19). And, there are many other places that Almighty uses the word Grace (Lutf) in His book. See for instance, 6:103, 12:100, 22:63, 31:16, 33:34, 42:19, 67:14, etc.

The messengers of God were entrusted the responsibility of bringing new commandments from Allah to the people. They were warners as Qur’an testifies. However, some of the messengers were Also Imams/Guides. The successors of the last Messenger of God were not messengers/prophets, and as such, they did not bring any new massage nor did they cancel any of the regulations set by the Prophet (S).

They just served as guides and guardians of religion. Their mission is to explain, elaborate Shari’a (Divine law) for the people. They clear up confusing things and events which may happen in each era. Also they are the only individuals who have the full knowledge of Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet Muhammad (S) after him, and as such, they are the only qualified people who can properly interpret the verses of the holy Qur’an and explain its meaning, as mentioned in Qur’an itself (See 3:7 and 21:7).

Imamat is a great bounty of Allah, because when people have a righteous leader who guides them, they can get closer to righteousness and depart from corruption and deviations in the matter of religion.

A divinely appointed Imam is also the most liable person to rule as the head of the community who can maintain justice and remove oppression. Of course, people have been given free will and can refrain from accepting the Imam, but they will be held responsible for that, as was for the case of the prophets. Nonetheless, the Imam would remain as a Proof of God on the earth and as spiritual leader for the believers among people who benefit his guidance.

Superiority Of The Imam

The Shi’a believe that, like the prophets, a divinely appointed Imam should excel the community in all virtues, such as knowledge, bravery, piety, and should possess complete knowledge of divine law.

If he does not, and Allah entrusts this high position to a less perfect person when a more perfect person is available, the inferior has been given preference over the superior, which is wrong rationally, and is against divine justice. Therefore no inferior person may receive Imamat from Allah when there exists a person superior to him.

Infallibility Of The Imam

If a divinely appointed leader is not infallible (Ma’sum), he would be liable to errors and to deceive others as well. In such a case, no implicit confidence may be placed in his sayings/commands/actions. A divinely appointed Imam is the most liable person to rule as the head of the community, and people are supposed to follow him in every matter.

Now if he commits a sin, people would be bound to follow him in that sin as well, because of their ignorance of whether that action is sin or not (Keep in mind the assumption that Imam is the most knowledgeable person in his community).

Such a situation is not acceptable by the Grace of Allah since obedience in sin is evil, unlawful, and forbidden. Moreover it would mean that leader should be obeyed and disobeyed at the same time, that is obedience to him is obligatory yet forbidden which is clearly a contradiction and is not commendable.

Besides, if it would be possible for an Imam to commit sin, it would be the duty of other people to prevent him from doing so. (Because every Muslim is obliged to forbid other people from unlawful acts.) In such a case, Imam will be held in contempt, and instead of being the leader of community, he will become their followers, and his leadership will be of no use as far as religion is concerned.

Imam is the defender of divine law, and this work can not be entrusted to fallible hands, nor can any such person maintain this task properly. Thus infallibility is an indispensable condition for a divinely appointed Imam or Caliph who is the protector and interpreter of the religious law.

Allah, Exalted, stated in Qur’an that:

"O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority (Ulul-Amr) from among you.”(Qur’an 4:59).

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّـهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ

This verse obliges the Muslims to obey two things: First, to obey Allah; second, to obey Messenger and those vested with authority (Ulul-Amr). The arrangement of the words shows that the obedience of Ulul-Amr is as much obligatory as is the obedience of the Messenger because Qur’an uses just one verb for both of them without repeating the verb again.

Naturally, it means that Ulul-Amr should be of the same importance as the Messenger; otherwise Allah would not have joined them together in this verse (Waw of Atf) under one verb. Interesting to note that Allah employs a separate verb for Himself before mentioning the Messenger and Ulul-Amr which shows that Allah has higher authority than that of the Messenger and Ulul-Amr.

It is also clear from the above verse that Ulul-Amr are not restricted to messengers otherwise Allah would only have said: "Obey Allah, and Obey Messenger only.”But He added Ulul-Amr (those who are given authority by Allah). This is one of the places where the concept of Imams and the necessity of obedience to them come from.

In the previous article titled "Infallibility of the Prophets,”we quoted many verses of Qur’an to prove the infallibility of the Prophet (S). All those verses proved the following two points:

1. The authority of the Messenger of Allah (S) upon the believers was unlimited and all-comprehensive. Any order given by him, under any condition, in any place, at any time, was to be obeyed unconditionally.

2. Supreme authority was given to him because he was sinless (Ma’sum) and free from all types of errors and sins. Otherwise, Allah would not have ordered us to obey him with no questioning or doubt.

In that Article, we also gave reference to a tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari which proves that both prophet and divinely appointed Caliphs are infallible (Ma’sum).

Also from the verse 4:59 we concluded that Ulul-Amr have been given exactly the same authority over Muslims as of Messenger, and that the obedience of Ulul-Amr has the same standing as the obedience of the Messenger.

It naturally follows that Ulul-Amr must also be sinless (Ma’sum) and free from any type of error, otherwise, their obedience would not have been joined with the obedience of the Prophet and without any condition. The Commander of Believers, Imam ‘Ali (as), said:

The one who disobeys Allah is not to be obeyed; and "verily obedience is for Allah and of His Messenger and those vested with authority.”Verily, Allah ordered (people) to obey the Messenger because he was sinless and clean (pure), who would not tell people to disobey Allah; and verily He ordered (people) to obey those vested with authority because they are sinless and clean (pure), and would not tell people to disobey Allah.”(Ilal al-Sharaye’, by Shaikh al-Saduq, v1, p123).

Does Ulul-Amr Mean Muslim Rulers?

Many of our Sunni brothers tend to interpret "Ulul-Amr Minkum”as the rulers from among yourselves, i.e., Muslims rulers. This interpretation is not based on any logical/Qur’anic reasoning; it is solely based on the twists of history. The majority of the Muslims have remained as a vassal of the monarchs and rulers, interpreting and reinterpreting Islam and the Qur’an to strengthen their own kingdom.

The history of Muslims (like any other nations) is replete with the names of rulers whose injustice, debauchery and tyranny have tarnished the name of Islam. Such rulers have always been and will be. And we are told that they are the Ulul-Amr mentioned in this verse!

If Allah were to order us to obey such kings and rulers, an impossible situation would be created for Muslims. The wretched followers would be condemned to the displeasure of Allah, no matter what they do. If they obey these rulers, they have disobeyed the Command of Allah:

"Do not obey a sinner”(Qur’an 76:24).

And if they disobey such rulers, they have again disobeyed the Command of Allah: "Obey the Muslim rulers”(if it would mean so). Therefore if we accept this interpretation, Muslims are condemned to eternal disgrace whether they obey or disobey their fallible (sinful) Muslim rulers.

Also, there are Muslim rulers of different schools and persuasions. There are Shafi’is, Hanbalis, Malikis, Hanafis, as well as the Shi’a and Ibadis. Now, according to this interpretation the Sunnis residing under an Ibadi king (like in Amman) should follow Ibadi tenets; and those residing under a Shi’a ruler (like in Iran) should follow the Shi’a beliefs. Do these people have the conviction of courage to follow their professed interpretation to its logical end?

The famous Sunni scholar, Fakhr al-Razi, concluded in his Tafsir al-Kabir that this verse proves that Ulul-Amr must be infallible (Ma’sum). He argues that Allah has commanded people to obey Ulul-Amr unconditionally; therefore, it is essential for the Ulul-Amr to be infallible; because if there is any possibility of their committing sin (and sin is forbidden), it means that one has to obey them and also disobey them in that very action, and this is impossible!

However, in order to dissuade his readers from the Ahlul-Bait, Fakhr al-Razi invented the theory that the Muslim community as a whole is infallible!!! (Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhruddin Muhammad Ibn Umar al-Razi, v10, p144)

This interpretation is unique, and no Muslim scholar ever subscribed to this theory and it is not based on any tradition. It is quite surprising that Fakhr al-Razi accepts that each individual of the Muslim nation is fallible, yet claims that their sum total is infallible. Even a primary school student knows that 200 cows plus 200 cows makes 400 cows and not one horse.

But Fakhr al-Razi says that 70 million fallible people plus 70 million fallible people will make one infallible! Does he want us to believe that if all the patients of a mental hospital join together they would be equal to one sane person?

Obviously, with his knowledge of Qur’an, he was able to conclude that Ulul-Amr must be infallible; yet he did not pause to see that the verse contains the word "minkum”(from among you) which shows that Ulul-Amr should be part of Muslim community, not the whole Muslim nation. Moreover, if the whole Muslim nation is to be obeyed, then who is there left to obey?

Moreover, the whole community have never had a single voice. Then who should we follow among them? Also, the opinion of majority is not a good criteria to distinguish the false from the truth. Looking at the Qur’an, one could see that Qur’an severely denounces the majority of by frequently saying that "the majority do not understand,”"the majority do not use their logic,”"the majority follow their whims"... since the vision of the majority of people is always impaired due to their tendencies.(see e.g. 6:116, 5:49, 10:92, 30:8)

The Real Meaning Of Ulul-Amr

We now turn to the correct interpretation of the above verse, that is the interpretation of the verse by Ahlul-Bait. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (the 6th Imam) said that this verse was revealed about ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, peace be upon them. Upon hearing this, someone asked the Imam: "People say, why did Allah not mention the name of ‘Ali and his family in His Book?”Imam answered: "Tell them that there came the command of Salat (prayer), but Allah did not mention whether three or four units to be performed; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained all the details. And (the command of) Zakat (religious tax) was revealed, but Allah did not say that it is one in every forty Dirhams; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained it; and Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) was ordered but Allah did not say to perform Tawaf (turning around Ka’ba) seven times; it was the Messenger of Allah who explained it. Likewise, the verse was revealed: Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you, and it was revealed about ‘Ali and al-Hasan and al-Husayn (who were the only living Imams at the time of the Prophet)."

It is quite obvious that if Allah would have ever mentioned the name of Imam ‘Ali (as) in Qur’an explicitly, those who bore mountains of hatred against him would have attempted to alter the Qur’an. Thus this was the Grace of Allah that He codified all the branches of knowledge of religion in Qur’an to be understood only by the processors of the understanding mind. And in this way, Allah kept Qur’an intact.

On the commentary of the verse 4:59 of Qur’an in which Allah orders us to obey Ulul-Amr, al-Khazzaz in his book, Kifayatul Athar, gives a tradition on the authority of the well-known companion of the Prophet (S), Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (ra):

When the verse (4:59) was revealed, Jabir asked the Prophet (S): "We know Allah and the Prophet, but who are those vested with authority whose obedience has been conjoined to that of Allah and yourself?"

The Prophet (S) said: "They are my Caliphs and the Imams of Muslims after me. The first of them is ‘Ali; then al-Hasan; then al-Husayn; then ‘Ali son of al-Husayn; then Muhammad son of ‘Ali who has been mentioned ‘al-Baqir’ in the Torah (the old testament). O Jabir! You will meet him. When you see him, convey my greetings to him. He will be succeeded by his son, Ja’far al-Sadiq (the Truthful); then Musa son of Ja’far; then ‘Ali son of Musa; then Muhammad son of ‘Ali; then ‘Ali son of Muhammad; then al-Hasan son of ‘Ali. He will be followed by his son whose name and nick name will be the same as mine. He will be Proof of Allah (Hujjatullah) on the earth, and the one spared by Allah (Baqiyyatullah) to maintain the cause of faith among mankind. He shall conquer the whole world from the east to the west. So long will he remain hidden from the eyes of his followers and friends that the belief in his leadership will remain only in those hearts which have been tested by Allah for faith."

Jabir said: "O Messenger of Allah! Will his followers benefit from his seclusion?”The Prophet said: "Yes! by Him who sent me with prophethood! They will be guided by his light, and benefit from his leadership during his seclusion, just as people benefit from the sun even though it is hidden in the clouds. O Jabir! This is from the hidden secrets of Allah and the treasured knowledge of Allah. So guard it except from the people who deserve to know.”(Kifayatul Athar, by al-Khazzaz, p53).

Now that we know who "those vested with authority”are, it is evident that the question of obeying tyrant and unjust rulers does not rise at all. Muslims are not required by the above verse to obey rulers who may be unjust, tyrannical, ignorant, selfish and sunk in debauchery. They are, in fact, ordered to obey the specified Twelve Imams, all of whom were sinless and free from evil thoughts and deeds. Obeying them has no risks whatsoever. Nay, it protects from all risks; because they will never give an order against the order of Allah and will treat all human beings with love, justice, and equity.

Leadership and Infallibility Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Is Imamat A Matter Of Inheritance?

According to the Shi’a, Imam is chosen by Allah. It is not the matter of inheritance, for if it was the case, then Imam al-Husayn (as) should not have become Imam after the martyrdom of Imam al-Hasan (as). Imam al-Hasan had many children and descendants, yet non of them became Imam. Rather, his brother, Imam al-Husayn (as), became Imam after him.

Also there have been some heretical sons and grandsons for some of the Imams, non of whom received the position of Imamat. This shows that leadership is not hereditary. Of course, a pure gene is necessary for the Imam, but Imam needs many other qualifications as well. Allah knows who has all such qualifications. It was just Allah’s wish to put all the Imams in the Progeny of the Prophet (S).

In fact, if one study the history of the prophets of God, he will find that they were from the same family. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"And when Abraham was tested by his Lord with certain commands and he fulfilled them. Then He said: Lo! I appoint you an Imam for mankind. (Abraham) said: And of my offspring (will there be Imam)? He said: My covenant does not reach the wrong-doers (among them).”(Qur’an 2:124).

In the above verse, Allah did not deny leadership from the descendants of Abraham, but He rather limited this position to the qualified progeny of the Prophet Abraham. Allah said that God-assigned leadership does not reach to a person who is a "Dhalim”(wrong-doer), even if such person is the descendant of Abraham. Thus being the descendant of Abraham does not necessarily make the person Imam because there should be other qualifications beside it.

Those among them who were not wrong-doer (free from sin) were qualified, since they not only had pure gene, but they have gained other qualifications through hardship. As Allah had the foreknowledge of their patience and qualifications, He entrusted them with this position, and preferred them above all His creation:

Lo! Allah preferred Adam and Noah and the Family of Abraham and the Family of ‘Imran above (all His) creatures. (3:33)

Prophet Muhammad’s lineage goes back to Prophet Ishmael (Isma’il) (as), the son of Prophet Abraham (as). Also Prophet Moses (as) and Prophet Jesus (as) were both from Prophet Isaac (as) who was the other son of Prophet Abraham (as). In fact ALL the prophets after Abraham were from his House. Yet, we do not claim that Prophethood is hereditary. He was Allah who chose them one by one.

In other words, we do not say that the son of the Prophet should always be a prophet. There should be many other qualifications beside it, otherwise Kan’an, the son of Noah (as), would have survived. Prophet Noah (as) had three other sons: Aam, Sam and Yafas who were believers and who with their wives entered the Ark and were saved. They were from different mother than that of Kan’an, however. Therefore being son of a prophet or an Imam does not necessarily make the person prophet or Imam or even righteous. In short, pure gene for the prophets and Imams is necessary but NOT sufficient.

Ulul-Amr/Imam is assigned by Allah, the same way that prophet is assigned by Allah. Look at Holy Qur’an in which Allah frequently stated that He is the one who assigns Imam. (see Qur’an 2:124, 21:73, 32:24, etc.)

There are twelve Imams who are assigned by Allah as the successors of Prophet Muhammad (S). There is a widespread tradition in the Sunni documents which states that the number of Imams after the Prophet are twelve. (See for instance, Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, v9, p250, tradition #329; Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV, v3, p1009, traditions #4477, #4478; Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v4, p501; Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p421 ; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p106). There are other Sunni documents in which the Prophet (S) even mentioned these twelve Imams name by name. (see, for instance, "Yanabi’ al-Mawadda”by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi).

Allah assigned these twelve Imams, not just because they were from the House of the Prophet (S), but because they were, in their times, the most knowledgeable, the most illustrious, the most god-fearing, the most pious, the best in personal virtues, and the most honored before Allah; and their knowledge was derived from their ancestor (the Prophet) through their fathers, and also by direct teachings from Allah through inspiration (Ilham).

The successors of the prophets (except the successors of Prophet Muhammad) were also prophets, and thus they were all assigned by Allah. Also Qur’an tells that some prophets, with the order of Allah, assigned Imams (who were not prophets). Let me give you some verses of Qur’an:

Didn’t you turn your vision to the chiefs of the children of Israel after Moses? They said to a Prophet (that was) among them : "Appoint for us a king that we may fight in the cause of Allah.”(Qur’an 2:246)

Anyone who has been specifically assigned by Allah as king is an Imam. A prophet can also be Imam/king but not all the prophets were Imam. If one becomes a divinely appointed king/Imam, it does not necessarily mean that he will physically govern. The above verse of Qur’an is about Talut (as) Below is another verse of Qur’an which provides more details:

Their Prophet(1) said to them: "Allah has appointed Talut (Saul) as king(2) over you.”They say: "How can he exercise authority over us when we are better fitted than he to have authority and he has not been given wealth enough?(3) ”He (i.e., their Prophet) said: " Allah has chosen him(4) above you and has gifted him abundantly with knowledge(5) and bodily prowess; Allah grants His authority to whom He pleases.(6) Allah cares for all and He knows all things.”(Qur’an 2:247)

The first part of the above verse (marked 1) proves that the community had a prophet and Talut was among the people of that community, so that their Prophet was the prophet of Talut also. Thus Talut was not a prophet.

The part marked 2, shows that Allah appointed Talut as Imam/leader/king. Part 3 shows that divinely appointed king is not chosen based on wealth. This kingship is primarily spiritual, and of course Talut is the most qualified person to govern physically also, but the latter depends on the adherence of people to them while the former position (spiritual leadership) is always fixed for the Imam.

Electing Imam/king is not the duty of People, and as Part 4 suggests, Allah chooses king/Imam for He knows who is the most qualified for such eminent position. King here means the person who has authority by Allah. This is proved by Part 6 of the above. The person who has this authority is replete with knowledge and wisdom as Part 5 testified. In the next verse, we read:

And (further) their Prophet said to them: "A sign of his authority is that there shall come to you the Ark of the Covenant with (an assurance) therein of security from your Lord and the relics left by the family of Moses and the family of Aaron carried by angels. In this is a Symbol for you if you indeed have faith.”(Qur’an 2:248)

Also in another verse, Allah mentions:

Or do they envy mankind for what Allah has given them of His bounty? But We have bestowed the House of Abraham the Book and Wisdom and bestowed upon them a great kingdom . (Qur’an 4:54)

Again this kingdom is Imamat since only very few members of the House of Abraham physically governed.

Can People Choose Imam?

The Sunnis claim that the issue of successor of the Prophet is resolved by consultation (Shura) for Allah stated in Qur’an that their matter is resolved through Shura.

The claim that the very issue of leadership is to be resolved through consultation is unsupported. such claim is due to misunderstanding the meaning of consultation (Shura). Consultation is different than voting/election, and for that very reason, it can not be used for the issue of Caliphate. Let me explain why:

When a leader wants to decide on a matter, based on the Islamic regulations he may attempt to consult with a group of experts to get their opinion on that specific matter. But he finally decides HIMSELF. He does not take any vote. To prove my point, let us see the following verse:

"... And consult with them (Shawirhum) in the matter, then when thou (Prophet) decided , put thy trust in Allah”(Qur’an 3:159)

The above verse asks for the Shura, but Allah states "fa itha azamta...”means only Prophet takes the final decision. There is no voting at all. It is just the matter of getting the opinion. The final decision by the Prophet may be different than of the majority of people being consulted (because of "Maslaha”(discretion for the goodness) that the leader realizes and because the leader is supposed to be superior in knowledge, smarter, etc.).

One side remark here is that, due to his supreme knowledge, the Prophet (S) did not even need to get the opinion of any of his people. However, he did in some circumstances just to teach people the importance of consultation.

In the issue of consultation (Shura), the existence of a leader is already assumed who makes the final decision. This clearly proves that, in the issue of successorship, consultation is meaningless (unless it is done by the previous leader before his death).

After the death of a leader, there exists no leader who could do consultation, unless such late leader had a deputy (or say vice-president) who could carry out this function. Usually such appointed deputy is the most qualified person for the position of leadership, and even if he decides on somebody else to be the leader, such leader is still appointed by this previously-appointed deputy, and not by people!

Voting, however, is a totally different issue. In a democratic community, all people have a chance to elect the choice of their nominee. Such procedure has no support in Qur’an and Sunna for the issue of leadership of the whole Muslims, because Islam is based on theocracy (kingdom of Allah) and not democracy (government of people over people).

In fact, Qur’an denounces the opinion of the majority of people (see 6:116, 5:49, 10:92, 30:8) since the vision of the majority of people is usually impaired due to their tendencies. Also, such popular election did not happen for the first three rulers who came after the Prophet (S), not even among the people of Medina.

Also, what if people choose an unqualified person who seems to be qualified in their eyes, like a hypocrite? How can such corrupt person becomes Ulul-Amr and his obedience becomes necessary? Certainly Allah and His Prophet know better who is more qualified to be successor of the Prophet (S).

Believe In Ulul-Amr

If Qur’an tells us to unconditionally obey a person, it means that we

should believe in him and in his authority over us voluntarily (with satisfaction). Note, however, that one should distinguish between "believing that we should obey Ulul-Amr”and "obeying Ulul-Amr".

If one believes that he should obey Ulul-Amr, yet he sometimes disobeys Ulul-Amr, he is a sinner and a weak believer. However if one does NOT believe that he should obey Ulul-Amr, then such person is unbeliever since he does not believe in a part of the religion of Allah, which is explicitly mentioned in Qur’an.

In fact, both Shi’a and Sunni believe in Ulul-Amr since it is the clear text of Qur’an. However they differ in how to choose Ulul-Amr. According to the Shi’a, leadership of the whole Muslims is not a choice of people so that the leader could be elected by people or selected by a committee, and then is artificially made the Ulul-Amr whom Allah has ordered people to obey!

I also remember a claim by a Sunni brother who mentioned that this verse commands Muslims to obey people in authority (i.e., rulers) as long as they do not interfere with religion!

To answer this claim, we would like to stress that there is no restriction whatsoever given by Qur’an for obeying Ulul-Amr. In fact, in the above verse, Ulul-Amr have been given exactly the same authority over Muslims as that of Messenger, because both the Messenger and the Ulul-Amr have been jointly mentioned (Waw of Atf) under one word "Obey", which shows that the obedience of Ulul-Amr has the same standing as the obedience of the Messenger, and therefore Ulul-Amr is the head of religious affairs also.

He is the one who can properly interpret Qur’anic verses (See 3:7 and 21:7) and is the most knowledgeable to the Sunna of the Prophet (S). Thus claiming that Ulul-Amr should not interfere with the religious affairs is absurd, for he is the most qualified individuals to do exactly such thing.

The Twelve Imams Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This article is in reference to the question that: Where did the twelve Imams (as) come from and why should the number of Imams be twelve and twelve only?

As a matter of fact, the answer is right inside the Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim. There are numerous Sunni collections of traditions which all recorded the following authentic tradition from the Prophet (S). Here, for the sake of brevity, I only quote from Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

In Sahih al-Bukhari (Arabic-English version), the tradition is as follows:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.329

Narrated Jabir Ibn Samura:

I heard the Prophet saying, "There will be twelve commanders (Amir).”He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, the Prophet added, "All of them will be from Quraish."

سمعتُ النبي يقول: يكون إثنا عشر أميراً. فقال كلمة لم أسمعها. فقال أبي كلُّهم من قريش.

In Musnad Ahmad, the tradition is as follows:

The Prophet (S) said: "There shall be twelve Caliphs

for this community, all of them from Quraish."

يكون لهذهِ ألامة إثنا عشر خليفة كلُّهَم من قريش.

Reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p106

In Sahih Muslim, the traditions are as follows:

Narrated Jabir Ibn Samura:

The Prophet (S) said: "The matter (life) will not end, until it is passed by twelve Caliphs.”He then whispered a sentence. I asked my father what the Prophet said. He said, the Prophet added: "All of them will be from Quraish."

إنَّ هذا الامر لا ينقضي حتَّى يمضي فيهم إثْنا عشر خليفة. ثمَّ تكلم بكلام خفيٍّ. فقلتُ لإبي: ما قال؟ قال: كلُّهُم من قريش.

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Imaara, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v3, p1452, Tradition #5

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraish and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraish), v3, p1009, Tradition #4477

Again from Sahih Muslim:

The Prophet (S) said: "The affairs of people will continue to be conducted (well) as long as they are governed by the twelve men."

لا يزال أمرُ الناس ماضياً ما وليَهُم إثْنَي عشر رجلاً.

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Imaara, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v3, p1453, Tradition #6

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraish and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraish), v3, p1010, Tradition #4478

Also:

The Prophet (S) said: "Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs."

لا يزال الاسلامُ عزيزاً إلى إثْنَي عشر خليفة.

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Imaara, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v3, p1453, Tradition #7

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraish and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraish), v3, p1010, Tradition #4480

Again:

The Prophet (S) said: "The Islamic religion will continue until the Hour (day of resurrection), having twelve Caliphs for you, all of them will be from Quraish."

لا يزالُ الدين قائماً حتَّى تقوم الساعة أو يكون عليكم إثْنا عشرَ خليفةً كُلُّهُم من قريش.

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Imaara, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v3, p1453, Tradition #10

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraish and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraish), v3, p1010, Tradition #4483

More Sunni references of similar traditions:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v4, p501

- Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p421 (three traditions).

- Others such as al-Tiyalasi, Ibn al-Athir, etc.

Also in another wording, the Messenger of Allah uses the word "Imam”instead of "Caliph". It is widely narrated that:

The Prophet (S) said: "The Imams are from Quraish"

ألأئِمة من قُريش.

Sunni references:

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p149

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal

- Sahih al-Nisa’i, from Anas Ibn Malik

- Sunan, by al-Baihaqi

- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, by Ibn Hajar al-Haithami, Ch. 11, section 2, p287

Obviously, the above traditions are not fit to the first four Caliphs all together, as they were less than twelve.

And they can not be applied to the Umayad Caliphs, because

(a) they were more than twelve;

(b) all of them were tyrants and unjust (except Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz);

(c) they were not from the Hashimites and the Holy Prophet had said in another tradition that: "All of them will be from the Bani Hashim..."

Also they cannot be applied to the Abbasid Caliphs, because:

(a) they were more than twelve;

(b) they persecuted the descendants of the Prophet every where which means they did not comply with the Qur’anic verse: "I don’t ask you any wage except to love my family.”(42:23).

My recollection about the unfortunate history of Caliphate indicates that, even from the Sunni point of view, there was no good Caliph left after the first 4 Caliphs (It would be 5 if we include Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz. Some Sunnis are very generous and they add Imam al-Hasan (as) and Imam al-Mahdi (as) to the list as well.)

To fill out the twelve set, some even included the well-known tyrants to the list such as Yazid Ibn Mu’awiya, Marwan Ibn al-Hakam, Abdul-Malik Marwan, and Husham Ibn Abdul-Malik. The reason is clear and as I stated previously, it is due to the lack of decent and sincere rulers in the History of Islam.

I would like to remind you that "Caliph”means successor/deputy. The successor of the Prophet (or the preceding Caliph) should come immediately after the demise of the Prophet (or the preceding Caliph). If there is any gap between the successors, the word "successor”does not make any sense. So successors should come right after the other without any gap. Also as the Prophet (S) suggested in the above traditions, those twelve Caliphs will cover till the day of resurrection.

As you may know, the Followers of the Members of the House of the Prophet (S) refer to these 12 Caliphs as of their 12 Imams starting with Imam ‘Ali (as) and ending with Imam Mahdi (as) the leader of our time. There are Caliphs because Allah made them Caliphs (They are vice-regents of Allah on the earth). With the passage of time and through historical events, we know that by the above traditions the Holy Prophet (S) meant the twelve Imams from his Ahlul-Bait who are the descendants of the Prophet since we have no other 12 pure candidates in the history of Islam upon whose righteousness all Muslims agree. It is interesting to know that even the enemies of Shi’a have NOT been able to find any fault in the virtues of the twelve Imams of Shi’a. Moreover these twelve Imams came one after another without any gap.

It is now clear that the only way to interpret the previously mentioned traditions which are narrated by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal is to accept that it refers to the Twelve Imams from the Prophet’s Ahlul-Bait, because they were, in their times, the most knowledgeable, the most illustrious, the most god-fearing, the most pious, the best in personal virtues, and the most honored before Allah; and their knowledge was derived from their ancestor (the Prophet) through their fathers. These are the Ahlul-Bait whose sinlessness, flawlessness, and purity is confirmed by the holy Qur’an (the last sentence of verse 33:33).

Also the above mentioned traditions of the Prophet which are considered to be authentic by the Sunnis, proves beyond doubt that the concept of "Twelve Imams”can NOT be a Twelver Shi’ites concoction! It is amazing that despite the acknowledgment of al-Bukhari and Muslim and other prominent Sunni scholars about the twelve Imams, the Sunnis always stop at the four Caliphs!

More interestingly, there are Sunni reports in which the Messenger of Allah named these twelve members of his Ahlul-Bait one by one starting with Imam ‘Ali (as) and ending with Imam al-Mahdi (as). (see Yanabi’ al-Mawadda, by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi).

Now after reviewing all these straightforward authentic traditions which ALL Muslims unanimously agree upon, I would like to ask, based on the Sunni point of view who are those twelve Caliphs after Prophet Muhammad (S)?

Please support your assertion by references from Qur’an and or the six Sunni collections of traditions, and also justify their deeds in the course of history. Remember that the instructions of these twelve successors of the Prophet should be obeyed. As such, if you don’t know your twelve leaders, how do you want to obey them? Indeed, the Messenger of Allah (S) said:

He who dies while he does not know the Imam of his age, is like the one who died during days of Jahiliyya (the era before Islam).

من ماتً و لم يعرف إمام زمانهِ مات ميتة جاهلية.

Few Facts About The Twelve Imams Of Ahlul-Bait

The First Imam: The Commander of Believers, Abul-Hasan, ‘Ali al-Murtadha, son of Abu Talib, was born on the 13th of Rajab, 10 years before the declaration of the Prophethood (600 A. D.), inside Ka’bah. He became Imam, on the demise of the Prophet on the 28th of Safar 11/632, and was fatally wounded by the poisoned sword of Ibn Muljam while engaged in prayers at the Mosque of Kufa (Iraq), and expired two days later on the 21st of Ramadhan 40/661, and was buried at al-Najaf (Iraq).

The Second Imam: Abu Muhammad, Al-Hassan al-Mujtaba, son of ‘Ali, was born on the 15th of Ramadhan 3/625 in Medina; martyred of poison on the 7th or 28th Safar 50/670 in Medina by the order of Mu’awiya.

The Third Imam: Abu Abdillah, al-Hussain, The Chief of Martyrs (Sayyid al-Shuhadaa), son of ‘Ali, was born on the 3rd of Sha’ban 4/626 in Medina; was martyred with his sons (except one), relatives and companions, on the 10th of Muharram (Ashura) 61/680 in Karbala (Iraq) by order of Yazid (LA). He and his elder brother, al-Hasan, were sons of Fatimah, the daughter of the holy Prophet.

The Fourth Imam: Abu Muhammad, ‘Ali Zain al-Abidin, son of al-Husayn, was born on the 5th of Sha’ban 38/659; martyred of poison on the 25th of Muharram 94/712 or 95/713 in Medina by the order of Husham Ibn Abdul-Malik.

The Fifth Imam: Abu Ja’far, Muhammad al-Baqir, son of ‘Ali, was born on the 1st of Rajab 57/677 in Medina; martyred of poison by Ibrahim on the 7th Dhul-Hajja 114/733 in Medina.

The Sixth Imam: Abu Abdillah, Ja’far al-Sadiq, son of Muhammad, was born on the 17th of Rabi’ul-Awwal 83/702 in Medina; martyred there of poison on the 25th of Shawwal 148/765 by the order of al-Mansur.

The Seventh Imam: Abul-Hasan al-Awwal, Musa al-Kadhim, son of Ja’far, was born in al-Abwa (7 miles from Medina) on the 7th Safar 129/746; martyred of poison on the 25th of Rajab 183/799 in the prison of Harun al-Rashid in Baghdad and was buried at al-Kadhimiyya, near Baghdad (Iraq).

The Eighth Imam: Abul-Hasan al-Thani, ‘Ali al-Ridha, son of Musa, was born in Medina on the 11th Dhul-Qa’da 148/765; martyred of poison on the 17th of Safar 203/818 in Mash’had (Khurasan, Iran) by the order of Ma’mun.

The Ninth Imam: Abu Ja’far al-Thani, Muhammad al-Taqi al-Jawad, son of ‘Ali, was born on the 10th of Rajab 195/811 in Medina; martyred of poison by the order of Mu’tasim in Baghdad on the 30th Dhul-Qa’da 220/835; was buried near his grandfather at al-Kadhimiyya.

The Tenth Imam: Abul-Hasan al-Thalith, ‘Ali al-Naqi al-Hadi, son of Muhammad, was born on the 5th of Rajab 212/827 in Medina; martyred of poison in Samirra (Iraq) on 3rd of Rajab 254/868 by the order of Mutawakkil.

The Eleventh Imam: Abu Muhammad, Al-Hassan al-Askari, son of ‘Ali, was born on the 8th of Rabi al-Thani 232/846 in Medina; martyred of poison by Mu’tamid in Samirra (Iraq) on the 8th of Rabi’ul-Awwal 260/874.

The Twelfth Imam: Abul-Qasim, Muhammad al-Mahdi, son of al-Hasan, was born on the 15th of Sha’ban 255/869 in Samirra (Iraq). He is our present and alive Imam. He went into Lesser Occultation in 260/874 which continued until 329/844. Then the greater occultation began which still continues. He will reappear when Allah allows him to establish the kingdom of Allah on earth and to fill the world with justice and equality as it would be full of injustice and tyranny. He is al-Qa’im (the one who shall stand to establish the rule of Allah); al-Hujja (the proof of Allah over His creatures); Sahib al-Zaman (the master of our time); and Sahib al-Amr (the one who is supported by divine authority).

The Twelve Imams Part 2

There is an interesting tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari as well as Sahih Muslim, in which the Prophet (S) said the following:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.422

Narrated Abu Sa’id al-Khudri:

The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure (lizard), you would follow them.”We said, "O Allah’s Apostle! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?”He said, "Whom else?"

As the above tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari confirms, the Prophet stated that the history of the Children of Israel will be repeated for Muslims. In fact, Qur’an has mentioned the stories of the Children of Israel to give us a way to understand the true history of Islam itself. There are many striking similarities in this regard written in Qur’an including the similarities of the leaders and the similarities of the people. I just mention few of them here. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"Surely Allah aforetime took a covenant from the Children of Israel and We appointed twelve leaders among them”(Qur’an 5:12)

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللَّـهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنْهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا

Who are those twelve leaders among the Children of Muhammad (S)?

Allah, Exalted, also said:

"And when Moses prayed for water for his (thirsty) people; We said: ‘Strike the rock with your staff.’ Then from there surged forth twelve springs so that each group knew its own place to drink .”(Qur’an 2:60).

وَإِذِ اسْتَسْقَىٰ مُوسَىٰ لِقَوْمِهِ فَقُلْنَا اضْرِب بِّعَصَاكَ الْحَجَرَ فَانفَجَرَتْ مِنْهُ اثْنَتَا عَشْرَةَ عَيْنًا قَدْ عَلِمَ كُلُّ أُنَاسٍ مَّشْرَبَهُمْ

Who are those twelve springs (streams) of knowledge who quench the thirst of Muslims to the end of the world so that each generation is utilized with one of them? He, Exalted He is, also said:

" We divided them into twelve nations . We directed Moses by revelation when his (thirsty) people asked him for water: ‘Strike the rock with your staff;’ out of it there gushed forth twelve springs so that each group knew its own place for water. We gave them the shade of clouds and sent down to them manna and quails (saying): ‘Eat of the good things We have provided for you,’ (but they rebelled.) To Us they did no harm but they harmed their own souls .”(Qur’an 7:160).

Verily those who did not follow those twelve leaders, harmed non but themselves. The above verse suggests that the nation of the Prophet Muhammad (S) in the span of history (after his demise till the day of judgment) are divided into 12 intervals of time which coincides with one Imam who is assigned as leader for them. In the next verse Allah said:

"And when it was said unto them: ‘Dwell in this Town and eat therein as you wish, and say Repentance, and enter the Gate (of the city) in a posture of humility, in order that We forgive you your sins and increase (the portion of) those who do good.’“(Qur’an 7:161)

or:

"And when We said: ‘Enter this Town and eat of the plenty therein as you wish; but enter the Gate (of the City) with humility in posture and in words so that We forgive you your sins and increase (the portion of) those who do good.’“(Qur’an 2:58).

The Gate in the above verses has a striking similarity with one of the attributes of Imam ‘Ali (as) mentioned by our Prophet (S) that is: "The Gate of the City of Knowledge."

The Messenger of Allah said: "I am the City of Knowledge, and ‘Ali is its Gate. So whoever intends to enter the City and the Wisdom, he should enter from its Gate."

إنا مدينة العِلْم و عليٌ بابها، فَمَنْ أرادَ المدينة و الحكمة فليأتِها من بابها.

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 201,637

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 126-127,226

- Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p635, Tradition #1081

and many more...

Furthermore the following Prophetic tradition gives the utmost similarity with the above two verses:

The Messenger of Allah said: "My Ahlul-Bait are like the Gate of Repentance of the Children of Israel; whoever entered therein was forgiven."

إنما مثل أهل بيتي فيكم مثل باب حطة في بنى إسرائيل من دخله غفر

Sunni References:

- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haithami, v9, p168.

- al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani, Tradition #18

- Arba’in, by al-Nabahani, p216

- A fairly similar tradition reported by al-Darqunti and by Ibn Hajar al-Haithami in al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqa, Ch. 9, section 2, p193, in which the Prophet (S) said: "‘Ali is the Gate of Repentance, whoever entered therein was a believer and whoever went out was an unbeliever."

Also Allah (SWT) stated in Qur’an:

Lo! The number of the months with Allah is twelve which is Allah’s ordinance when He created the heavens and the earth. Four of them are sacred. That is the firm religion. So wrong not your souls in them. (Qur’an 9:36)

إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ عِندَ اللَّـهِ اثْنَا عَشَرَ شَهْرًا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ 

In connection with the above verse of Qur’an, it would be nice to look at the following tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.688

Narrated Abu Bakra:

The Prophet said, "Time has taken its original shape which it had when Allah created the Heavens and the Earth. The year is of twelve months, four of which are sacred... Surely, you will meet your Lord, and He will ask you about your deeds. Beware! Do not become infidels after me, cutting the throats of one another. It is incumbent on those who are present to convey this message (of mine) to those who are absent. May be that some of those to whom it will be conveyed will understand it better than those who have actually heard it.”He (i.e. Prophet) then added twice, "No doubt! Haven’t I conveyed (Allah’s Message) to you?"

Now one may ask that what was in the above message that could not be understood by the companions who were listening to the speech of the Prophet during his last pilgrimage in Mecca? (For timing see also Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.798).

The Message of the Prophet (S) had twofold meaning. The obvious meaning is that the number of months are twelve and four months, namely Dhul-Qa’da, Dhul-Hajja, Muharram, and Rajab are sacred months. In fact, these months were believed to be sacred even before Islam. So there was nothing in this message that the audience could not comprehend.

Moreover, the fact the above mentioned sacred months of the year were accepted by the Jews and Christians, makes it clear that these months can not be "the firm religion”as mentioned in the verse. So one should look for a more delicate meaning.

The other meaning (as interpreted by Ahlul-Bait) is that the Prophet in his last pilgrimage (less than three month before his demise) wanted to convey that he will be followed by twelve Imams and people should not wrong their souls by disobeying them in their leadership periods. Among these twelve Imams, four have a sacred name, i.e., "‘Ali", which is derived from the name of Allah. In fact, four Imams of Ahlul-Bait (peace be upon them all) have been named "‘Ali".

In the Sira of Ibn Hisham, there is an extra sentence of the Messenger of Allah which is, in fact, the verse of Qur’an. The Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"‘ Postponement of a sacred month is only an excess of disbelief whereby those who disbelieve are misled; they allow it one year and forbid it another year that they may make up the number of months which God has hallowed so that they permit what God has forbidden (Qur’an 9:37),

and forbid what God has allowed. Time has completed its cycle and is as it was on the day that God created the heavens and the earth. The number of months with God is twelve. Four of them are sacred."

Sunni references:

- Sira, by Ibn Hisham at the end of Chapter of "Farewell Pilgrimage", p968

- The Life of Muhammad (English translation of Sira Ibn Hisham), Translated into English by A. Guillaume, 1955 Edition, London, p651

Postponement of the sacred month is delay in accepting their leadership and as the messenger of Allah said, those who disbelieve in their leadership will be misled. They permit what God has forbidden, and forbid what God has allowed. They try to make up the twelve Imams by that which Allah has not honored.

The fact that some sects departed from the main body of the Shi’a in the history was because they only accepted first few Imams and rejected the rest. It is interesting to know that he who acknowledged all four "‘Ali”among the Imams, he has acknowledged all the twelve Imams, since there did not remain any sect believing in these four Imams and rejecting others. In a tradition on the authority of Jabir (ra), Imam Muhammad al-Baqir, the fifth Imam of Ahlul-Bait, interprets the above verse which is as follows:

Jabir said: I asked Imam Muhammad al-Baqir about the meaning of the verse: "Verily the number of the months … (9:36).”He (as) breathed long (out of sorrow) and said: "O Jabir, The ‘year’ is my grandfather, the messenger of Allah (S), and his family are its ‘months’ who are the twelve Imams, and are … (naming the Imams one by one). They are the Proofs of Allah on His creation, and Trusties of His revelations and His knowledge. And Those of ‘four sacred who are the firm religion’ are those four who have the same name, and are ‘Ali, the Commander of Faithful (as), and my father ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn (as), and later ‘Ali Ibn Musa (as), and ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad (as). Thus acknowledging these four is ‘the firm religion, so wrong not your souls in them’ and believe in all of them to be guided."

Shi’i reference: Kitab al-Ghaiba, by Shaikh Tusi.

Side Comments

A Sunni brother mentioned that there is a tradition which states "The Caliphate will last 30 years after me then there will be kings.”These 30 years covered the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, as well as the 6 month rule of al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali. After these 30 years, the leadership went to Mu’awiya. As for the 5th Caliph through the 11th Allah knows best, and the 12th will be al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar.

The above alleged tradition seems to be very odd, because Caliph means successor/deputy. The successor of the Prophet (or the preceding Caliph) should come right after the demise of the Prophet (or the preceding Caliph) without any gap so that the word "successor”or "deputy”make any sense. Also as narrated in Sahih Muslim, The Prophet (S) suggested those twelve Caliphs cover till the day of resurrection.

See Qur’an 13:7 in which Allah states that Prophet Muhammad is a warner, and for every community (generation) there exists a Guide (Imam). Who was the Guide after the fifth Caliph? Who is the Guide today? Who is the Ulul-Amr whose obedience is as much obligatory as the Prophet? Who is the one spared by Allah (Baqiyyatullah) about whom Allah said:

That who is spared by Allah (on the earth) is better for you if you are believers. (Qur’an 11:86)

The above verse is another proof for the fact that there exists one individual at each era whom Allah has spared on the earth to maintain the cause of faith and he is the Imam of that age. Thus the position of God-assigned leadership is never vacated so long as the earth carries even one human being. (Please see the article titled: "Necessity of the Existence of Imam al-Mahdi (as)”for more detailed discussion of this subject).

Moreover, You still did not answer who the rest of those twelve Imams are? You claimed that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, ‘Ali, al-Hasan are the first five Caliphs, but you did not mention the rest. There is no doubt that the Caliph should be known to his followers, otherwise an imaginary Caliph can not be followed while the Prophet had asked us to closely follow them. If you don’t know your leaders, how can you obey them?

It is very important to know that the saying of whom should be followed (Which Caliph or Imam) since Allah unequivocally ordered us in Qur’an to follow them as Ulul-Amr, and moreover, the Prophet ordered us to follow them as one of the two weighty things. Obeying them is the only way of salvation as the Prophet testified (Please see the article titled: "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bait").

Now tell me my brother, what happened that after 30 years the kings were going to come? Do you agree that misconduct of some people like Mu’awiya caused such scandal for the Muslim nation? What went wrong? You claim that these people were the best generation. Then how could they allow themselves to convert the caliphate into a hereditary monarchy? It is quite probable that the very same kings fabricated the tradition of "Thirty Years”in order to dissuade people from the issue of twelve Imams and to justify their usurping the rule.

Another Sunni brother commented that out of the twelve Shi’a Imams, only Imam ‘Ali and his son Imam al-Hasan physically governed, and as such, how do the Shi’a assert that the Prophet was referring to these individuals when he mentioned the twelve Caliphs?

The answer is: Allah by His Grace, has assigned Prophets and their successors to warn us and to guide us to the Right Path. It is upon our decision whether we use our wisdom and accept their instructions or not. We are not compelled to follow a divinely appointed Imam, though we will be held responsible for that. It is our choice to go right or wrong.

Leadership has two parts. The first part is the leader. We believe that since Allah knows who is the best for such position, He assigns the leader for mankind, as indicated in Qur’an (see Qur’an 2:124, 21:73, 32:24, etc.). The appointment of Imam may be known through the declaration of the Prophet or the preceding Imam.

In order that the leadership manifests itself in rulership, there is a second part necessary, that is the followers. There should be some followers for that leader to lead them and eventually be able establish his government.

Allah has completed His bounty upon us by assigning leadership. It is upon us to do the other part, that is to follow the leadership of the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bait. If we do so, the leader will come automatically into power in this worldly life. However, if we disobey them, the leader seemingly has no power in appearance and he will remain as the spiritual leader for his few loyal followers (Imam al-Muttaqin/ leader of god-fearing people).

Muslims can not deny that prophets (some of whom were Imams of their time as well) were assigned by God. Now, if we study their lives, some of which have been explained in Qur’an, we see that the majority of them were oppressed in their communities. Let us look at the life of Prophet John (Yahya). He was a prophet assigned by Allah, and people were supposed to obey him, but they did not support him. Instead, they slaughtered him and chopped his head off. Now, one may ask: Was not he an Imam? Did Allah fail to support his Prophet? The answer is that Allah has given people some free will to either accept or reject the leadership He assigns. In the case of Prophet John, people rejected him, and obviously they will go to Hell for their disobedience. The same goes for the Prophet Abraham (as) who was also Imam. Qur’an states:

"And when Abraham was tested by his Lord with certain commands and he fulfilled them. Then He said: Lo! I appoint you an Imam for mankind.”(Qur’an 2:124).

People were supposed to follow such divinely appointed who was assigned by Allah, but they stood against him. They even went as much as throwing him into fire. Thus the above verse clearly shows that the Imam who is assigned by Allah may not physically govern in appearance.

Therefore leadership has two parts. Allah does His part out of His Grace. It is our choice if we fulfill the other part by adhering to such leader in order to attain the prosperity of this world and of the hereafter. In the case of our Imams, though they were the best qualified people for leadership and though they were assigned by Allah and His Prophet, the majority of people disobeyed them. This is not surprising since the history of mankind repeats itself.

As such, Imam ‘Ali (as) was Imam during the time of the first three rulers after the demise of the Prophet (S), and what these rulers could take from him was the rulership and not the position of Imamat.

In other words, a divinely appointed Imam is the most the qualified individual to be the ruler, but concept of Imamat has much more than just rulership. Imam is the Guide for the God-fearing people, and possesses the full knowledge of Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet, and is the protected place of refuge for the disagreements in the matter of religion.

A remark, however, is that the case for Imam al-Mahdi (as) would be different. He is the one who will en his rule with the help of Allah when Allah let him appear. That is why he has been given the title of al-Qa’im (the one who shall stand).

***

A Sunni brother replied that according to Qur’an Abraham (as) said: And make me for the God fearing an Imam. Imam- you translate it as leader, but with political connotation; however, it is clear here that the meaning is leader in the sense of first. You make it seem as if he is seeking to campaign for the position of Namrud or govern Iraq, or something like that when the message of Abraham was to lay out the road for the people to know Allah and worship him which is the main thing prophets were sent for.

My response was: As to whether the Prophet Abraham was supposed to be merely a spiritual Imam for the believers or an Imam who rules on the earth, my argument was clear, and apparently this brother did not comprehend it. I mentioned that a divinely appointed Imam such as Abraham, is an Imam whether people follow him or not. If (say the majority of) people follow him, he will automatically come into power, and if they disobey him, he will still possess his spiritual leadership for his few faithful followers (the God fearing people).

Brother, do you claim that Allah ordered only Muttaqin (the God fearing people) to follow Abraham, and other people were not ordered to follow him?! Every body at that time was supposed to obey Abraham, and those who did not are doomed to Hell. Also the verse 2:124 of Qur’an clearly sates Allah assigned him Imam for "mankind", not a specific group.

Moreover, your above comment that the prophets did not have any political agenda is not correct. By the above statement you are unintentionally opposing Prophet Muhammad who campaigned against the unbelievers of the Arabian Peninsula like Abu Sufyan, and made the first Islamic government. It is true that all the prophets were sent to educate people and make them mindful of Allah. But this can not be fully achieved without any political power.

Also I never mentioned that governing the state is the first goal of a divinely appointed leader. Rather, I said that such leader is the most qualified person for such position. People should realize this fact and submit to his command, and if they do that he will be automatically on the head of community without a need for "agenda".

A Sunni brother mentioned that even some individuals who disliked Shi’a very much such as Ibn Kathir in his book "al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya”has mentioned that al-Husayn (ra) is considered to be one of the twelve Caliphs.

About this, I would like to comment that if these Sunnis really believe that Imam al-Husayn (as) was one of the Caliphs, then they have already acknowledged what the Shi’a say! That is, the position of deputy/successor of the Prophet is not identified with the one who gains the control of power, otherwise Imam al-Husayn who did not physically govern, could not have been counted among the twelve Caliphs.

Also I agree that Ibn Kathir along with Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya hated the Shi’a, and most probably they learnt their hatred from their teacher Ibn Taimiyya. None of these personalities are admired by the Sunnis even though the Wahhabis have filled the libraries with the books of these individuals.

The Holy Qur’an and the Pure Imams

Assalamu Alaykum brothers/sisters:

Here are some verses from the Holy Qur’an concerning true and pure Imams:

It is Allah’s wish to remove all blemish from you, O Ahlul-Bayt, and purify you with a perfect purification. (Qur’an 33:33)

Say, I ask no reward from you for it except the love of my kinsfolk. And whosoever does a good deed we add unto it a greater good for him. Lo, Allah is Forgiving, Responsive. (Qur’an 42:23)

And whoever disputes with thee concerning him after the inspired knowledge which has been given unto thee, tell him, "Come, let us call our sons and your sons; our women and your women; and ourselves and yourselves; then let us pray and invoke Allah’s curse upon those who lie.”(Qur’an 3:61)

Hold fast to the Rope of Allah, all of you together and do not diverge. (Qur’an 3:103)

Be careful of your duty to Allah and be with the Truthful. (Qur’an 9:119)

Lo, this is My Straight Path, so follow it and do not follow other ways or else you will diverge from His way. (Qur’an 6:153)

O you believe, obey Allah and obey His Messenger and those amongst you who are give supreme authority (by Allah). Qur’an (4:59)

Whoever opposes the Prophet after the guidance has been made manifest unto him and follows any path other than the path of the true believers, We will turn him towards that unto which he himself has turned, and We will expose him to Hell and a bad journey it will be. Qur’an (4:115)

(O Prophet) Lo! thou art a warner and for every community there is a guide. (Qur’an 13:7)

Guide us in the Straight Path: The Path of those whom Thou hast blessed... (Qur’an 1:6-7)

They are those whom Allah has blessed among the prophets and the verifiers, the martyrs and the righteous. (Qur’an 4:69)

They (i.e., prophets and Imams) do not say anything until He orders, and they act (in all things) by His command. He knows what is before them and what is behind them and they (i.e., those saints) offer no intercession except for anyone whom Allah accepts, and they are in awe and reverence of His (glory). Qur’an (21:27-28)

Verily your master is only Allah, and His messenger and those among the believers who establish worship and pay the poor due while they are bowing down in prayer. Qur’an (5:55)

And lo! Verily I am the Most forgiving towards him who repents and believes and does good and then follows the guidance. Qur’an (20:82)

O you who believe, enter into peace, all of you, and do not follow the footsteps of the Satan. (Qur’an 2:208)

Then, on that day, you will be asked concerning the blessing. (Qur’an 102:8)

O you Messenger, convey what has been revealed unto you by your Lord, for if you do not do so, you will not have conveyed His message at all. And Allah will protect you from the people. Lo! Allah guides not the disbelieving folk Qur’an (5:67)

This day have We perfected for you your religion and finalized Our blessing upon you, and We are pleased that Islam be your religion. (Qur’an 5:3)

A questioner asked for the inevitable punishment to befall the disbelievers which no one can avert. (Qur’an 70:1-2)

And when your Lord brought forth from the lions of the Children of Adam their seed, and made them bear testimony about their souls (He asked):"Am I not your Lord?”They said: "Yes, we bear witness.”(Qur’an 7:172)

Or are they jealous of those men because of that which Allah has bestowed upon them in His bounty? (Qur’an 4:54)

None touches (the depth of meaning of Qur’an) save the purified ones. (Qur’an 56:79)

No one knows its interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly ground in knowledge. (Qur’an 3:7)

Ask the people of Reminder if you do not know. (Qur’an 21:7, 16:43)

The Reward of Loving Ahlul-Bayt

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

I found the following astonishing tradition in one of the most famous Tafsir book of the Sunni brothers, that is, "Tafsir al-Kabir", by Fakhr al-Razi who is a leading Sunni scholar with multiple specialties in Tafsir, Fiqh, and theology.

The full address of the document is given at the end. I have provided Arabic text for each sentence of this tradition. This tradition can also be found in other Sunni commentary books of Qur’an, "Tafsir al-Kashshaf,”written by al-Zamakhshari, as well as "Tafsir al-Tha’labi."

Before going over the text of the tradition, it is important to point out that a true love is always accompanied by obedience. A person who is crazy about somebody, does every thing to satisfy the lover, and does not allow himself to disobey the one who loves.

That is why the "true love”is necessary and sufficient. A true love affects every single action of human being and directs it to a special direction in harmony with the one who loves. Thus anyone who claims to love the Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt (peace be upon them all), but he insists in disobeying them, is simply a liar.

After giving the text of the tradition I shall quote the related verse of Qur’an under whose commentary this tradition was mentioned. I will also present some other traditions transmitted by the Sunnis which clearly specify the individuals whose love is obligatory.

“““““

The Messenger of Allah said:

من مات على حب آل محمد ، مات شهيداً

He who dies with love of the family of Muhammad is a Martyr.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، مات مغفورا له

And behold! He who dies with love of the family of Muhammad is forgiven.

 ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، مات تائبا

And more! The one who dies with love of the family of Muhammad is died repented.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، مات مؤمنا مستكمل الإيمان

Lo! He who dies with love of the family of Muhammad is died as a believer with a COMPLETE belief.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، بشره ملك الموت بالجنة ،ثم منكر ونكير 

And no doubt! The one who dies with love of the family of Muhammad, the angle of death gives him the glad tiding of Paradise, and so do the two angels who question him (Munkar & Nakeer).

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، يزف إلى الجنة كما تزف العروس إلى بيت زوجها

And verily he who dies with love of the family of Muhammad, will be led toward the Paradise as the bride is led to the house of her husband.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، فتح له في قبره بابان إلى الجنة

Behold! And he who dies with love of the family of Muhammad, for him there will open two gates in his grave toward the Paradise.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، جعل الله زوار قبره ملائكة الرحمة

Lo! And the one who dies with love of the family of Muhammad, Allah will make his grave a sacred place of visit for the angels of mercy.

ألا ومن مات على حب آل محمد ، مات على السنة

And verily he who dies with love of the family of Muhammad, has died on Sunnah.

 ألا ومن مات على بغض آل محمد جاء يوم القيامة مكتوب بين عينيه "آيس من رحمة الله"

And no doubt! The one who dies with the HATE of the family of Muhammad, will arrive in the day of judgment while it is printed on his forehead that he is desperate from the Mercy of Allah.

ألا ومن مات على بغض آل محمد ، مات كافرأ 

Behold! He who dies with the hate of the family of Muhammad, has died unbeliever.

ألا ومن مات على بغض آل محمد ، لم يشم رائحة الجنة

And verily he who dies with the hate of the family of Muhammad, will never hear the smell of Paradise.

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Din Muhammad Ibn Umar al-Razi, Pub. in Egypt (1357/1938), under commentary of verse 42:23, Part 27, pp. 165-166.

• Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi

***

Fakhr al-Razi and others mentioned the above tradition under the commentary of the following verse of Qur’an, in which Allah tell his Messenger:

"(O Prophet) tell (people) I don’t ask you any wage (in return for my prophethood) except to love my near kin. And if anyone earns any good We shall give Him an increase of good (in return for it)”(Qur’an 42:23).

قُل لَّا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا الْمَوَدَّةَ فِي الْقُرْبَىٰ

It has been widely reported by the Sunni commentators of the Holy Qur’an that:

Ibn Abbas narrated: When the above verse (42:23) was revealed, the companions asked: "O’ the Messenger of Allah! Who are those near kin whose love Allah has made obligatory for us?”Upon that the Prophet (S) said: "‘Ali, Fatimah, and their two sons.”He (S) repeated this sentence thrice.

Sunni references:

1. Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Part 27, pp 165-166

2. Tafsir al-Tha’labi, under the commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an

3. Tafsir al-Tabari, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under verse 42:23

4. Tafsir al-Qurtubi, under commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an

5. Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, under commentary of verse 42:23

6. Tafsir al-Baidhawi, under the commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an

7. Tafsir al-Kalbi, under commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an

8. al-Madarik, in connection with verse 42:23

9. Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p25

10. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal,

11. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p259

12. Shawahid al-Tanzeel, Hakim Hasakani, al-Hanafi, v2, p132

13. Many others such as Ibn Abi Hatam, al-Tabarani, etc.

Then the Prophet (S) continued:

"Verily Allah has dedicated my wage (of prophethood) to love of my Ahlul-Bayt, and I shall question you about it on the day of judgment."

Sunni references:

• Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p26

• al-Sirah, by al-Mala

In another tradition, we read:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "I advice you to be kind to my Ahlul-Bayt for verily I will dispute you about them on the day of Judgment, and whoever I dispute him shall enter the Fire.”He (S) also said: "One who regards me by regarding my Ahlul-Bayt, he has taken a promise from Allah (to enter the Paradise)."

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d

• al-Sirah, by al-Mala

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p231

Furthermore, al-Kateeb and Ibn Hajar narrated on the authority of Anas Ibn Malik saying:

The Prophet (S) said: "The title of the Book (Saheefah) of believer is love of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib."

Sunni references:

• Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, section 2, p193

In the above tradition, "The Book of believer”refers to the way a believer conducts the affairs, i.e., his daily life, and his diary.

On the commentary of the Qur’anic verse: "Lo! those who believe and do good, the Beneficent will appoint for them love (Qur’an 19:96),”al-Hafidh al-Salafi wrote: Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyyah said: "There will not be a believer unless in whose heart love of ‘Ali and his family exists.”In this connection, al-Bayhaqi, Abu al-Shaikh, and al-Daylami reported that the Messenger of Allah said: "A servant (of God) will not be a (true) believer unless he loves me more than his own soul, and loves my progeny more than his own soul and his own family.”See al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 261-262 quoted from al-Hafidh al-Salafi, al-Bayhaqi, Abu al-Shaikh, and al-Daylami).

al-Tirmidhi and Ahmad narrated:

The Messenger of Allah said: "He who loves me and loves these two: al-Hasan and al-Husayn, and loves their father and mother, he will be with me in Paradise."

Sunni reference:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p641

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, on the authority of Imam ‘Ali (as)

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p693, Tradition #1185

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p264

It is also narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Verily the prosperous and the only prosperous and the true prosperous is he who loves ‘Ali in his lifetime and in his hereafter."

Sunni reference:

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p658, Tradition #1121

• al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p176

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p132

• Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v2, p429

Sunni scholars also narrated that Imam al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (as) said the following in a discourse which he delivered on the martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali:

"... I am among Ahlul-Bayt whom Allah has made their love obligatory for any Muslim when He revealed to His Prophet (S): "Say: I don’t ask you any wage except to love my near kin. And if anyone earns any good We shall give Him an increase of good (Qur’an 42:23).”

Thus earn the good deed through loving us Ahlul-Bayt."

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, "Chapter of understanding the virtues of companions,”v3, p172

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p259

• Many others such as al-Bazzar, al-Tabarani, etc.

Furthermore, it is narrated from Ibn Abbas:

Ibn Abbas said:

"The good deed in the verse: ‘And if anyone earns any good We shall give Him an increase of good (Qur’an 42:23)’

is the love of family (Aal) of the Muhammad (S)."

Sunni references:

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as mentioned in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p259

Sunni traditionists also narrated that:

After the murder of al-Husayn when his family were taken prisoners and were moved to Damascus, a man in the city (who among others was looking at the passing of prisoners in the city) said to Zain al-Abideen (Imam ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn) that "Praise be to Allah who destroyed you and made you helpless and cut the root of sedition.”On that, Zain al-Abideen said: "Didn’t you read ‘Tell I don’t ask you any wage except to love my near kin’?”The man answered: "Are you those?”He (Zain al-Abideen) said: "Yes."

Sunni references:

• Tafsir Ibn Kathir (complete version), v4, p112, under commentary of verse 42:23 of Qur’an

• al-Tabarani, as mentioned in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p259

In contrary to all above traditions, Yusuf ‘Ali has a very strange commentary for the verse 42:23. He wrote:

No sort of tangible reward does the Prophet of Allah ask for proclaiming the Glad Tidings of Allah. But at least he has the right to ask that his kith and kin should not persecute him and put all sorts of obstacles in his way, as did the Quraish against the holy Prophet. (Yusuf ‘Ali’s commentary of 42:23)

What Yusuf ‘Ali implied was that, by the above verse, the Prophet was asking his kin not to prosecute him and they should love his kin, i.e., the Prophet. The fact is that the above mentioned traditions of the Prophet regarding the revelation of verse 42:23, contradict what Yusuf ‘Ali commented. I wonder if we Should take the opinion of the Prophet or the opinion of Yusuf ‘Ali?! It is noteworthy that the above mentioned traditions were narrated by the prominent Sunni traditionists through various transmitters. Yusuf ‘Ali was not a traditionist nor do Sunnis consider his commentary an authoritative one.

Besides, we can prove logically that Yusuf ‘Ali’s commentary is incorrect. "Those of near kin”are the kin of the Prophet himself. Because Prophet Muhammad is only one person. If Allah wanted to say "Love the Prophet because he is your kin", He could say so, and He would not use "Those of near kin". Moreover, from the verse it is clear that Allah was not addressing non-Muslims, because the verse is about his wage in return for his prophethood. Thus those unbelievers (among his kin or else) who do not recognized him as a prophet, were not being addressed. What kind of wage could the Prophet expect from an unbeliever (among his kin or else) who do not recognize him as a prophet?!

Thus they are Muslims who are being addressed by the verse. Now, if Yusuf ‘Ali meant that the verse was addressing those Muslims who were his kin, then I would like to ask: Who among the near kin of the Prophet who was Muslims but tried to prosecute the Prophet? The answer is Non. If you think otherwise, please present your evidence from the history of the life of the Prophet (S).

Therefore, the Yusuf ‘Ali’s commentary is neither in harmony with the above-mentioned Sunni traditions in this regard, nor in harmony with logic.

I do not intend to discuss all the mistakes which exist in the Yusuf ‘Ali’s works. I myself have found some trivial mistakes in his translation of Qur’an, and there is even a book named "Discussion on the errors of Yusuf ‘Ali", (Paperback, $12.00 in the United States) which discusses some of his errors. Although I do not intend to fully discredit his works, it would be beneficial to mention his translation of a verse of Qur’an in connection with the current topic, and then compare it to other translations. This verse is very similar to the above-mentioned verse of Qur’an (42:23). Allah, to whom belong might and majesty, similarly said:

"(O Prophet) tell (people) whatever I asked you as wage (in return for my prophethood) is in the benefit of you (people)”(Qur’an 34:47).

Here is the Pickthall’s translation:

"Say: Whatever reward I might have asked of you is yours”(34:47).

Now, let us look at the Yusuf ‘Ali’s translation:

"Say: No reward do I ask of you; it is (all) in your interest”Yusuf ‘Ali (34:47).

One can see that the translation of Yusuf ‘Ali provides meaning quite contradictory to the others. In the translation of the above verse, Yusuf ‘Ali states that the Prophet did not ask any wage. By that, Yusuf ‘Ali contradicted his own translation of the other mentioned verse (42:23) where he states the Prophet did, in fact, ask for the wage:

"Say: No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.”(42:23)

There is no doubt that the reward of the Prophet is with Allah. However, with the above order of Allah, the Prophet did ask People to love his family as his wage. Such request is, in fact, for the benefit of people as verse 34:47 testifies. The verses of Holy Qur’an explain one another. More Surprisingly, there is a third verse with another wording which implies that the benefit that people get by fulfilling the Prophet’s request (i.e., affection and devotion to Ahlul-Bayt) is that they will be led to the path (Sabeel) of Allah:

"Say: I ask of you no reward for it except that one who wishes, may adopt a Path (Sabeel) toward his Lord.”(Qur’an 25:57)

Pickthall’s translation:

"Say: I ask of you no reward for this save that whoso will, may choose a Way unto his Lord.”(25:57)

Putting verse 25:57 beside 42:23 and 34:47 gives evidence to the fact that each member of Ahlul-Bayt is the Right Path (Sabeel) toward Allah, and the way toward His satisfaction. The Right Path of Allah is no more than one even though it manifested in a sequence of divinely appointed leaders. As such, each of these leaders were the unique Path (Sabeel) of Allah in their own time, and through whom people can attain protection against disagreement in religious matters. In fact, the Messenger of Allah confirmed the above conclusion from the latter verse. Ibn Sa’d and Ibn Hajar recorded that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Me and my Ahlul-Bayt are a tree in Paradise whose branches came to this world (Dunyaa). Thus whoso will, may choose a Path unto his Lord (by taking a branch and reaching to the stem in Paradise)."

Sunni references:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d

• Sharaf al-Nubuwwah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, on the authority of Abu Sa’id

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p231

The above underlined part of the Hadith of the Prophet (S) is the Qur’anic verse mentioned above (25:57). The true love for Ahlul-Bayt will, in fact, oblige us to follow their Right Path which guarantees the human prosperity in this world as well the Paradise in the world after.

Wassalam.

How to Send Greetings to Prophet Muhammad?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

When sending greetings to Prophet Muhammad,

• some say: Peace be upon him (PBUH)

• others say: Peace be upon him and his family (S)

• some others say are more generous and say: Peace be upon him and his family (Aalihi) and his wives (wa Azwajihi) and all his companions (wa Sahbihi Ajma’een).

Now let us see how the Prophet himself thought us to send blessing for him:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said, "Do not salute for me in short!”The companions asked, "What is saluting in short?”The Prophet replied, "Saying that Blessing of Allah be upon Muhammad.”They asked, "what should we say?”the Prophet (S) answered, "Say: Blessing of Allah be upon Muhammad and his Ahlul-Bayt.”In another wordings the Prophet replied: "Say: O Allah bless Muhammad and his household the same way as you blessed Abraham and his household. Verily you are worthy of all praise full of all glory!".

Sunni reference:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p225

This saying of the Prophet was in connection with the following verse of Qur’an which was related about the House of Abraham (as):

They said: "Do you wonder at Allah’s decree? The Mercy of Allah and His Blessings be upon you O people of the house! for He is indeed worthy of all praise full of all glory!”(Qur’an 11:73)

Moreover, Ibn Hajar also mentioned that some of the Sunni commentators of Qur’an have narrated from Ibn Abbas (ra) that the Qur’anic verse "Peace be upon the family of Yaaseen (Qur’an 37:130)”refers to the family of Muhammad. (See al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p228).

From the tradition given earlier, one can see that the Messenger of Allah (S) mentioned his name and his Ahlul-Bayt together, and disliked mentioning his name alone. He specifically ordered that his followers SHOULD include his family in all their greetings to the Prophet Muhammad. This because ONLY those individuals whom Qur’an testifies to their perfect purity (the last sentence of Verse 33:33) are worthy of being saluted. Let us look at more traditions, this time from Sahih al-Bukhari:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.320

Narrated Ka’b bin Ujra:

It was said, "O Allah’s Apostle! We know how to greet you, but how to invoke Allah for you?”The Prophet said, "Say: O Allah! Send your blessings/greetings (Salawat) on Muhammad and his family, the same way as You sent Your blessings/greetings on Abraham’s family. You are indeed worthy of all praise, full of glory.’"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.321

Narrated Abu Said al-Khudri:

We said, "O Allah’s Apostle! (We know) this greeting (to you) but how shall we invoke Allah for you?”He said, "Say: O Allah! Send your greetings on Muhammad who is Your servant and Your Messenger, the same way as You sent Your greetings on Abraham’s family. And send Your blessings on Muhammad and on Muhammad’s family, the same way as You sent Your blessings on Abraham’s family."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.322

Narrated Ibn Abi Hazim and Ad-Darawardi:

Yazid reported (similarly with the following wordings) "...And send Your blessings on Muhammad and on Muhammad’s family, the same way as You sent Your blessings on Abraham and on Abraham’s family."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.368

Narrated ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Abi Laila:

Ka’b bin ‘Ujra met me and said, "Shall I give you a present? Once the Prophet (saw) came to us and we said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! We know how to greet You; but how to send Salat upon you?’ He said ‘Say: O Allah! Send your greetings (Salawat) on Muhammad and his family, the same way as You sent Your Salawat on Abraham’s family. O Allah! Send Your blessings on Muhammad and on Muhammad’s family, the same way as You sent Your blessings on Abraham’s family. You are indeed worthy of all praise, full of glory.’"

Two more traditions are as follows:

Abu Masud Badri relates: (Once) we, were sitting with Sad bin Ubadah when the Holy Prophet came to us. Bashir Ibn Sad asked the Holy Prophet: O Messenger of Allah, we have been commanded by Allah to invoke blessings on you by reciting Salat, then how shall we do this ? The Holy Prophet kept quite for sometime, so much so that we wished that Bashar bin Sad had not asked the question from the Holy Prophet. After some time the Holy Prophet said these words:

O Allah, send Thy blessings on Muhammad and on the children of Muhammad as Thou didst send Thy blessings on Abraham, and bless Muhammad and the children of Muhammad as Thou didst bless Abraham. Indeed Thou art the praiseworthy, the Glorious. Continuing, the Holy Prophet said: and the salutation is already known to you.

Sunni reference: Riyadh al-Saliheen, by al-Nawawi, English version, Tradition #1406

Although the above traditions confirm that the Prophet (S) ordered people to send Salawat on him and his family. This can not be regarded as self-esteem, rather it was the order by Allah to do that. It served as teaching the Sunnah to people. Specially the highlighted part in the last tradition shows that the Prophet was hesitating to salute himself at first, but since it was the order of Allah, he conveyed the message. In another tradition:

When the Messenger of Allah noticed that a blessing from Allah was to descent, he told Safiyya (one of his wives): "Call for me! Call for me!”Safiyya said: "Call who, O the Messenger of Allah?”He said: "Call for me my Ahlul-Bayt who are ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn.”Thus we sent for them and they came to him.

Then the Prophet (S) spread his cloak (upper garment) over them, and raised his hand (toward sky) saying: "O Allah! These are my family (Aalee), so bless Muhammad and the family (Aal) of Muhammad.”And Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, revealed: "Verily Allah intends to keep off from you every kind of uncleanness O’ People of the House (Ahlul-Bayt), and purify you a thorough purification (Qur’an, the last sentence of Verse 33:33)".

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, Chapter of "Understanding (the virtues) of Companions, v3, p148. The author then wrote: "This tradition is authentic (Sahih) based on the criteria of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim)."

• Talkhis of al-Mustadrak, by al-Dhahabi, v3, p148

• Usdul Ghabah, v3, p33

Similarly, it is narrated that in another occasion, when the Messenger of Allah gathered ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan, al-Husayn (peace be upon them all) under his cloak, he said:

"O Allah! Verily they are from me and I am from them. Thus place Your blessings and Your mercy and Your satisfaction on me and them."

and:

"O Allah! These are Aale-Muhammad (family of Muhammad). Thus place Your blessings and Your bounty upon the family of Muhammad, for, indeed You are the praiseworthy, the Glorious."

Sunni reference:

al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p225, quoted from Ahmad Ibn Hanbal

Also it is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "If one prays, and in it he does not send blessings to me and my family, his prayer will not be accepted."

Sunni references:

• al-Darqunti, and al-Bayhaqi, as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, p349

In fact, invoking Salawat on the Prophet’s family was so important that it has been included in ANY Salawat on the Prophet (S). Invoking Salawat on the family of the Prophet is a sign of pledging allegiance to them, and affirming what Allah Himself has affirmed for them: They are perfectly cleansed and worthy of being saluted.

Side Comment

Earlier, a Sunni brother mentioned that,

I thought that "SWS”and "AS”were used for the prophets whereas "RA”was used for others including ‘Ali (ra)

The abbreviation "(as)”stands for "Alayhi-s-Salam”meaning "peace be upon him". I am interested to know from where you concluded that we can not use this term for a non-prophet? Could you quote a verse from Qur’an or an authentic tradition that we can not use the phrase "Peace be upon him”after his (as) name?

Dear brother, if we want to follow the Sunnah of Prophet (S), we are ordered by the above authentic traditions to send peace not only to Imam ‘Ali (as) but also to all the members of the House of Prophet. If the Prophet (S) ordered us to send Peace and blessing to his family, then who are we to set regulations in contrary to that and yet claim to follow the Sunnah of Prophet?

The phrase "May Allah be please with him”(ra) can be used for the companions, not for Prophet and his Ahlul-Bayt who are perfectly pure, flawless, and sinless.

Is Being a Member of a Party Forbidden in Islam?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Some people claim that a Muslim should not call himself other than Muslim. They quote the verses of Qur’an which denounces sectarianism, and as such, they conclude that being a member of any party is not allowed for Muslims.

It is true that Islam is against sectarianism and dividing into sects. However, being a member of a party does not necessarily mean sectarianism unless such party is a sect itself.

The opinion that one should not call himself other than Muslim, contradicts Qur’an. As a matter of fact, Allah sometimes has used other terms than Muslim, when referring to a subset of Muslims. For instance, in a couple of places in Qur’an, Allah mentions a group of Muslims with the name "Hizbullah”which means "The Party of Allah". If being a member of any party is resented in Qur’an and one should call himself Muslim and Muslim only, then Allah will become sectarian (may Allah protect us) by promoting His own party! The fact is that, Allah uses a different name because He wants to address a highly virtuous subset of Muslims. In fact, any member of "The Party of Allah”is a Muslim, but the reverse is not necessarily true. Some Muslims are weak Muslims, and some are just Muslim in ID, and as such, these people do not belong to the Part of Allah about whom Allah said:

"Verily the Party of Allah are the real prosperous.”(Qur’an 58:22)

This goes to prove that not any party within Islam are condemned. In fact, the origin of the word Muslim goes back to Prophet Abraham (as). Qur’an states that Prophet Abraham (as) was a Muslim:

Abraham was not a Jew, nor yet a Christian; but he was an upright man and MUSLIM, and he was not of the idolaters. (Qur’an 3:67)

Also in another verse Allah states that Prophet Abraham is the one who has named us Muslims:

It is the religion of your father Abraham who has called you MUSLIM from before and in this (revelation). (Qur’an 22:78)

In another verse, Prophet Abraham (as) advises his sons not to die without being Muslim:

And this was the advise that Abraham left to his sons and so did Jacob; "O my sons! Allah has chosen the faith for you; then die not except in the faith of Islam.”(Qur’an 2:132)

Now, surprisingly enough, Qur’an testifies that the Prophet Abraham was a Shi’a (follower; a member of the party) of the Prophet Noah (as):

"And most surely Abraham was among the Shi’a (followers) of him (i.e., Noah)”(Qur’an 37:83)

 وَإِنَّ مِن شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿الصافات: ٨٣﴾

One may ask, why Prophet Abraham (as) who has been called Muslim and also advised others to be Muslim till death, has been named Shi’a? This leaves no room but to believe that his being the Shi’a of Noah (as) does not contradict his being Muslim.

Now, we realize that being a member of a party does not contradict our identity as being Muslim as long as the leader of the Party is assigned by Allah, or at least, as long as the leader does not order something against the order of Allah and His Prophet.

Suppose there exists a party with a leader whose name is Imam xxxx. One may subscribe to this party as long as he does not prefer the order of Imam xxxx over the order of the Prophet (S).

When does a party become a sect and thereby denounced by Allah? The answer is that it will be a sect if Imam xxxx states something against the commandments of Allah or His Prophet, and when we as followers prefer the order of Imam xxxx over the order of Allah and his Prophet (S). This has been severely condemned in Qur’an, and such party is no longer a school of though within Islam but it rather has divided his followers from the religion of God and has split into a sect. May Allah protect us from such parties.

The Term Shi’a in Qur’an and Hadith

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The word "Shi’a”means "followers; members of party". As such, the term "Shi’a”alone has no negative or positive meaning unless we specify the leader of the party. If one is a Shi’a (follower) of the most righteous servants, then there is nothing wrong with being Shi’a, specially if the leader of such party has been assigned by Allah.

On the other hand, if one becomes the Shi’a a tyrant or a wrong-doer, he shall meet with the fate of his leader. In fact, Qur’an indicates that on the day of Judgment people will come in groups, and each group has its leader in front of it. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

One day We shall call every group of people by their respective Imams. (Qur’an 17:71)

In the day of judgment, the destiny of the "followers”of each group highly depends on the destiny of his Imam (provided that they really followed that Imam). Allah mentioned in Qur’an that there are two types of Imams. Some Imams are those who invite people to Hell fire. They are tyrannical leaders of each era (like Pharaoh, etc.):

And We made them (but) Imams inviting to the Fire; and on the Day of Judgment no help shall they find. In this world We continued to curse them; and on the Day of Judgment they will be among the hateful. (Qur’an 28:41-42).

Certainly, being the members of the parties of such Satanic Imams has been severely denounced in Qur’an, and the followers of such parties will meet the fate of their leaders. However, Qur’an also reminds that there are Imams who are appointed by Allah as Guides for the mankind:

"And We assigned from among them some Imams who GUIDE by Our authority since they were patient and believed firmly in Our Signs.”(Qur’an 32:24)

Certainly, the true followers (Shi’a) of these Imams will be the real prosperous on the day of resurrection. Thus being a Shi’a does not mean anything, unless we know the Shi’a of whom. Allah mentioned in Qur’an that Some of His righteous servants were Shi’a of His other righteous servants. An example was Prophet Abraham who was mentioned in Qur’an specifically as the Shi’a of Noah:

"And most surely Abraham was among the Shi’a of him (i.e., Noah)”(Qur’an 37:83)

 وَإِنَّ مِن شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿الصافات: ٨٣﴾

(Notice that the word "Shi’a”is explicitly used, letter by letter, in the above verse as well as the following verse.) In another verse, Qur’an talks about the Shi’a of Moses versus the enemies of Moses:

"And he (Moses) went into the city at a time when people (of the city) were not watching, so he found therein two men fighting, one being of his Shi’a and the other being his enemy , and the one who was of his Shi’a cried out to him for help against the one who was of his enemy ”(Qur’an 28:15)

فَوَجَدَ فِيهَا رَجُلَيْنِ يَقْتَتِلَانِ هَـٰذَا مِن شِيعَتِهِ وَهَـٰذَا مِنْ عَدُوِّهِ ۖفَاسْتَغَاثَهُ الَّذِي مِن شِيعَتِهِ عَلَى الَّذِي مِنْ عَدُوِّهِ...

In the above verse of Qur’an, one is named the Shi’a of Moses (as) and the other one is named the enemy of Moses, and the people at that time were either the Shi’a or the enemy of Moses (as). Thus Shi’a is an official word used by Allah in His Qur’an for His high rank prophets as well as their followers. Do you want to say Prophet Abraham was sectarian? How about Prophet Noah and Prophet Moses?

If somebody calls himself a Shi’a, it is not due to any sectarianism, nor any innovation. It is because Qur’an has used the phrase for some of His best servants. The above verses that I mentioned in support of Shi’a, has used this term singular form (i.e., one group of followers).

This means that it has special meaning, such as: The Shi’a of Noah (as), The Shi’a of Moses (as). Also in the History of Islam, Shi’a has been specially used for the "followers of ‘Ali". The first individual who used this term was the Messenger of Allah himself:

The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: "Glad tiding O ‘Ali! Verily you and your companions and your Shi’a (followers) will be in Paradise."

يا علي أبشر فإنك و أصحابك و شيعتك في الجنَّة

Sunni references:

1. Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p655

2. Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p329

3. Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v12, p289

4. al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani

5. Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v10, pp 21-22

6. al-Darqunti, who said this tradition has been transmitted via numerous authorities.

7. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p247

Thus the Messenger of Allah (S) used to say the phrase of "Shi’a of ‘Ali". This phrase is not something invented later! Prophet Muhammad (S) said that the TRUE followers of imam ‘Ali will go to Paradise, and this is a great felicity. Also Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "The Shi’a of ‘Ali are the real victorious in the day of resurrection/rising"

شيعة علي هم الفائزون يوم القيامة

Sunni references:

• al-Manaqib Ahmad, as mentioned in:

• Yanabi al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, p62

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, who quotes the tradition as follows: "We were with the Holy Prophet when ‘Ali came towards us. The Holy Prophet said: He and his Shi’a will aquire salvation on the day of judgment."

The "day of rising”may also refer to the day of rising of al-Mahdi (as). But in more general term, it means the day of judgment. Also it is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "O ‘Ali! On the Day of Judgment I shall resort to Allah and you will resort to me and your children will resort to you and the Shi’a will resort to them. Then you will see where they carry us. (i.e. to Paradise)"

Sunni reference: Rabi al-Abrar, by al-Zamakhshari

Furthermore, it is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "O ‘Ali! (On the day of Judgment) you and your Shi’a will come toward Allah well-pleased and well-pleasing, and there will come to Him your enemies angry and stiff-necked (i.e., their head forced up).

Sunni references:

• al-Tabarani, on the authority of Imam ‘Ali

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p236

A more complete version of the tradition which has also been reported by the Sunnis, is as follows:

Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated:

When the verse "Those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of the creation (Qur’an 98:7)”

was revealed, the Messenger of Allah (S) said to ‘Ali: "They are you and your Shi’a.”He continued: "O ‘Ali! (On the day of Judgment) you and your Shi’a will come toward Allah well-pleased and well-pleasing, and your enemies will come angry with their head forced up. ‘Ali said: "Who are my enemies?”The Prophet (S) replied: "He who disassociates himself from you and curses you. And glad tiding to those who reach first under the shadow of al-’Arsh on the day of resurrection.”‘Ali asked: "Who are they, O the Messenger of Allah?”He replied: "Your Shi’a, O ‘Ali, and those who love you."

Sunni references:

• al-Hafidh Jamaluddin al-Dharandi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 246-247

Then Ibn Hajar provides a bizarre commentary for the first tradition, saying:

The Shi’a of ‘Ali are the Ahlussunnah since they are those who love Ahlul-Bayt as Allah and His Prophet ordered. But others (i.e., other than Sunnis) are the enemies of Ahlul-Bayt in reality for the love outside the boundary of law is the great enmity, and that was the reason for their fate. Also, the enemies of Ahlul-Bayt were al-Khawarij and their alike from Syria, not Muawiyah and other companions because they were Muteawweloon, and for them is a good reward, and for ‘Ali and his Shi’a is a good reward!

Sunni reference:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p236

And this is how Sunni scholars cope with the prophetic traditions in favor of "Shi’a of ‘Ali"! They say that they are the real Shi’a!

Let us look at one more tradition in this regard:

The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: "The first four individuals who will enter the Paradise are me, you, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and our progeny will be behind us, and our wives will be behind our progeny, and our Shi’a will be on our right side and in our company."

Sunni references:

• al-Manaqib, by Ahmad

• al-Tabarani, as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p246

From the above pieces of evidence, the word "Shi’a”is used by Allah in Qur’an for His prophets as well as their followers. Further, His blessed Prophet, Muhammad (S) has repeatedly used this word for the followers of Imam ‘Ali (as). The word Shi’a is used here in its special meaning, and moreover, it is not in plural form (Parties), rather the above verses and traditions are referring to a special party, i.e., one single party. If Shi’a meant sectarian, neither Allah would use it for His high rank prophets nor Prophet Muhammad (S) would have praised them.

However there are some verses in Qur’an which uses the plural form of Shi’a that is "Shi-ya’a”which means "Parties/groups". This is a general meaning of this term, and not the special meaning in singular form which has been given in previous examples. Of course, only one single party is accepted by Allah and the rest are severely denounced because they have separated from that unique party. So it is clear why Allah denounced "Groups/Parties/sects”(plural form) who separated from that unique group in some verses of Qur’an. There can’t be two righteous groups (with conflicting ideas) at the same time, because between the two leaders one is surely better and more qualified, and thus the claims and the motives of the other leader goes under question.

However I did not locate the exact term of "Ahlussunnah wal-Jama’ah", nor did I find "al-Wahhabiyyah", "al-Salafiyyah”anywhere in the Holy Qur’an or the traditions of the Prophet. I agree that we should follow the Sunnah of Prophet, but I would like to discover the origin of the exact term here. We Shi’a are proud to follow the Sunnah of Prophet.

However, the question is that which Sunnah is genuine and which one is not. The word "Sunnah”by itself does not serve the purpose of knowledge. All Muslims irrespective to their persuasions claim that they follow the Sunnah of Prophet (S). Please refer to the article titled "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt”for a detailed discussion in this regard.

It should be emphasized that the Messenger of Allah never wished to divide Muslims into groups. Prophet ordered all people to follow Imam ‘Ali (as) as his agent during his life time, and as his Caliph after him. Prophet wished everybody does that.

But unfortunately those who heeded him were few and were known as "Shi’a of ‘Ali”who were subject to all sort of discrimination and prosecution, and suffered from day one of the demise of the Mercy to Mankind, Muhammad (S). If every one (or say the majority Muslims) had obeyed what prophet wished, then there wouldn’t exist any group or school within Islam. Allah said in Qur’an:

"Hold fast to the Rope of Allah, all of you together and do not separate”(Qur’an 3:103)"

The Rope of Allah which we should not separate from, are the Ahlul-Bayt. In fact, some Sunni scholars narrated from Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) saying:

" We are the Rope of Allah about whom Allah has said: ‘Hold fast to the Rope of Allah, all of you together and do not diverge (3:103)’"

Sunni references:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p233

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 3:103

Thus, if Allah denounces the sectarianism, He denounces those who separated from His Rope, and not those who hold fast to it! Also some said the Rope of Allah is Qur’an. This is also true. But by looking at the following tradition narrated by Umm Salama who said:

The Messenger of Allah said: "‘Ali is with Qur’an, and Qur’an is with ‘Ali. They shall not separate from each other till they both return to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p124 on the authority of Umm Salama

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, section 2, pp 191,194

• al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani; also in al-Saghir

• Tarikh al-Khulafa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173

Then we can conclude that Imam ‘Ali is “the Qur’an verbatim “. That is, Imam ‘Ali is the Strong Rope of Allah also, because they (Qur’an and ‘Ali) are non-separable. In fact, there are a huge number of traditions in authentic Sunni sources where Prophet said Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt are inseparable and if Muslims want to remain in the right path, they should stick to both of them. (Please refer to the article titled: Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt). Therefore, one can conclude that those who separated from Ahlul-Bayt are the sectarian who divided into sects and were denounced by Allah and His prophet due to their divergence.

In fact, the opinion of majority is not a good criteria to distinguish the false from the truth. If you look at the Qur’an, you will see that Qur’an severely denounces the majority of by frequently saying that "the majority do not understand", "the majority do not use their logic", "the majority follow their whims"...

In another verse, Allah said:

"You are the best nation (Ummah) that has been raised up for the (benefit of) people. You enjoin the good and forbid the evil...”(Qur’an 3:110).

The best nation is also the Ahlul-Bayt. Let us remember that according to Qur’an, "nation”does not mean the whole people. This is even clear from the above verse that such Ummah (nation) are raised FOR benefiting the people. Thus Ummah can be only a subset of people and not the whole people. In fact one person can be a nation. Sometimes the act of a single person is worthier than the deeds of the whole nation. This was the case for Prophet Muhammad, Imam ‘Ali, as well as the case for Prophet Abraham, peace be upon them all. Qur’an states that Abraham (as) was a nation (Ummah), meaning that his deeds was more valuable than all other people. Allah stated:

"Lo! Abraham was a nation (Ummah) who was obedient to Allah, by nature upright, and he was not of the idolaters”(Qur’an 16:120)

Thus, one single individual can be a nation in the language of Qur’an. As for the Verse 3:100, it is interesting to note that some Sunni scholars have narrated from Abu Ja’far (Imam Baqir (as)) that:

Abu Ja’far (as) said about the verse ‘You are the best nation raised up for the (benefit of) people...(3:110)’: "The Members of the House of the Prophet."

Sunni references:

• Ibn Abi Hatam, as mentioned in:

• al-Durr al-Manthoor, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti under commentary of verse 3:110 of holy Qur’an.

Also Allah mentioned in Qur’an:

"O’ you who believe! Fear Allah and be with the truthful ”(Qur’an 9:119)

According to some Sunni Commentaries, "the truthful”means Imam ‘Ali (as):

Sunni reference:

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, two reports: one from Ibn Mardawayh by Ibn Abbas and the second from Ibn Asakir by Abi Ja’far (as).

This means that people should have feared Allah and should not have separated from Imam ‘Ali (as) after the demise of Prophet (S). This unfortunately did not happen at large, and therefore, unfortunate divisions followed it.

With respect to the world al-Siddeeq -- "The Truthful", there are many Sunni narrations in which the Messenger of Allah said:

The Truthful are three: Hazqeel (who was) the believer of the family of Pharaoh (see Qur’an 40:28), and Habeeb al-Najjar (who was) the believer of the family of Yaasin (see Qur’an 36:20), and ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib who is the most virtuous one among them (see Qur’an 9:119)."

Sunni references:

• Abu Nu’aym and Ibn Asakir, on the authority of Abu Layla

• Ibn al-Najjar, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, section 2, pp 192-193

In conclusion, we have shown in this article that the term Shi’a has been used in Qur’an for the followers of the great servants of Allah, and in the traditions of the Prophet for the followers of Imam ‘Ali (as). One who follows such divinely appointed Guide is safe from the disputes in the religion and has grasped the Strong Rope of Allah, and has been given the glad tiding of Paradise.

Side Comments

A Sunni brother wrote: Sunni means the one who follows the traditions (Sunnah) of the Prophet, and this is supported by the following verse of Qur’an:

Certainly you have in the Apostle of Allah an excellent exemplar (beautiful pattern of conduct) for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much. (Qur’an 33:21)

لَّقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّـهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّـهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَذَكَرَاللَّـهَ كَثِيرًا ﴿الأحزاب: ٢١﴾

My comment was as follows:

1)In the above verse neither the word "Sunnah”nor any of its derivative has been used. As I mentioned earlier, Allah has used the terminology of "Muslim”in its exact form, letter by letter, in the verse 22:78. Also Allah used the word "Shi’a”again in exact form in verse 37:83 for the Prophet Abraham. However, Allah never used the words such as "Sunni”or as "Ahlussunnah”for the followers of the Prophet (S).

2)If you say we do not find such exact terminology, but we understand that the Prophet is our pattern, then one may say that Qur’an testifies that Prophet Abraham (as) was a pattern for us as well:

"Indeed, there is for you an excellent exemplar (beautiful pattern of conduct) in Abraham...”(Qur’an 60:4)

قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ 

Notice that in the above verse, the phrase which has been used for Prophet Abraham (as) is exactly the same as that of the previous quoted verse used for Prophet Muhammad (S). That is true for the following verse as well:

Certainly there is for you in them (Abraham and his followers) an excellent exemplar (beautiful pattern of conduct) for him who fears Allah and the last day; and whoever turns back, then surely Allah is the Self-sufficient, the Praised. (Qur’an 60:6)

لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِيهِمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّـهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّـهَ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ ﴿الممتحنة: ٦﴾

Now please tell us if we can be called a Sunni because we follow Abraham’s traditions? Certainly Prophet Muhammad followed the tradition of Prophet Abraham, yet Muhammad (S) was never called Sunni, as that result. Similarly, Prophet Abraham followed the traditions of Prophet Noah, but he was never called a Sunni. Qur’an mentioned that he was a Shi’a of Noah.

3) The word "Sunnah”has used in Qur’an to refer to the custom of God and the way Allah conducts the affairs and the rules governing the universe (Sunnatullah). But here we are discussing the word Sunnah referred to the Prophet (S), and not the rules governing the universe. As such we are looking for the term such as "Sunnatu Rasoolillah".

4) A word XXXX can be used in two ways:

XXXXX by definition

or

XXXXX by label

All Muslims are Sunni by definition, but only a group of people, which are famous to this name, are Sunni by label. How they got such label needs to be investigated though.

Also, all Muslims are "obedient”by definition, but there is no special group among Muslims who are called "obedient". This shows that having a certain characteristic by definition does not force us to specify such characteristic in our label. In fact, in most cases (not all cases) the label is just a stereotype and does not reflect the real attributes of the holder of such label.

Sometime the label is used to allure people to specific version of something which is found in various versions, each of which is claimed to be genuine one, by different groups. As such, it wouldn’t be an intelligent practice, in general, to identify the genuineness of something with its label.

Surely, the followers of the Prophet are supposed to follow his Sunnah by definition. But were they called Sunni when Prophet Muhammad was alive? or even few years after his demise? In other words, the question to be answered is: When did the title "Ahlussunnah wal Jama’ah”come into existence in the history of Islam for a specific group of Muslims?

Al-Azhar Verdict on the Shi’a

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

What follows is the Fatwa (religious verdict/ruling) of one of the Sunni world’s most revered scholars, Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot with regard to the Shi’a. Shaikh Shaltoot was the head of the renowned al-Azhar Theological school in Egypt, one of the main centers of Sunni scholarship in the world. It should be of interest to know that a few decades ago, a group of Sunni and Shi’a scholars formed a center at al-Azhar by the name of "Dar al-Taqreeb al-Madhahib al-Islamiyyah”which translates into "Center for bringing together the various Islamic schools of thought".

The aim of the effort, as the name of the center indicates, was to bridge the gap between the various schools of thought, and bring about a mutual respect, understanding and appreciation of each school’s contributions to the development of Islamic Jurisprudence, among the scholars of the different schools, so that they may in turn guide their followers toward the ultimate goal of unity, and of clinging to one rope, as the well-known Qur’anic verse, "Hold fast to the Rope of Allah and do not diverge”clearly demands of Muslims.

This massive effort finally bore its major fruit when Shaikh Shaltoot made the declaration whose translation is appended below. It should be made unequivocally clear as well, that al-Azhar’s official position, vis a vis the propriety of following any of the Madhaahib, including the Shi’ite Imami school, has remained unchanged since Shaikh Shaltoot’s declaration.

Some people who follow pseudo-scholars in Hijaz may beg to differ; that notwithstanding, what you see below is the view held by the overwhelming majority of Sunni scholars, and not just those at al-Azhar. Let it be known to those who strive to divide us, that their efforts are but in vain.

For the readership’s reference the phrase "al-Shi’a al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna ‘Ashariyyah”means the Twelver Imami Shi’ite School of thought which comprises the overwhelming majority of Shi’ites today. The phrase "Twelver Shi’ites”is used interchangeably with "Ja’fari Shi’ites”and "Imami Shi’ites”in various literature. They are merely different names for the same school of thought.

"al-Shi’a al-Zaidiyyah”are a minority among the Shi’ites, concentrated mainly in Yemen located in the Eastern part of Arabian peninsula. For a more detailed description of the Zaidis vs. the Twelver Shi’ites, please refer to the book, "Shi’ite Islam”written by the great Shi’ite scholar, Allamah Tabataba’i, and translated by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, and published by the State University of New York Press (SUNY).

And as for Shaikh Shaltoot’s declaration:

Head Office of al-Azhar University:

In the name of Allah, the Benefient, the Merciful

Text of the Verdict (Fatwa) Issued by His Excellency Shaikh al-Akbar Mahmood Shaltoot, Head of the al-Azhar University, on Permissibility of Following "al-Shi’a al- Imamiyyah”School of Thought

His Excellency was asked:

Some believe that, for a Muslim to have religiously correct worship and dealing, it is necessary to follow one of the four known schools of thought, whereas, "al-Shi’a al-Imamiyyah”school of thought is not one of them nor "al-Shi’a al-Zaidiyyah.”Do your Excellency agree with this opinion, and prohibit following "al-Shi’a al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah”school of thought, for example?

His Excellency replied:

1) Islam does not require a Muslim to follow a particular Madh’hab (school of thought). Rather, we say: every Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following such Madhahib (schools of thought) can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime on him for doing so.

2) The Ja’fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shi’a al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah”(i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi’ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.

Muslims must know this, and ought to refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school of thought, since the religion of Allah and His Divine Law (Shari’ah) was never restricted to a particular school of thought. Their jurists (Mujtahidoon) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the "non-Mujtahid”to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in worship (Ibadaat) or transactions (Mu’amilaat).

Signed,

Mahmood Shaltoot.

The above Fatwa was announced on July 6, 1959 from the Head of al-Azhar University, and was subsequently published in many publications in the Middle East which include, but are not limited to:

1. al-Sha’ab newspaper (Egypt), issue of July 7, 1959.

2. al-Kifah newspaper (Lebanon), issue of July 8, 1959.

The above segment can also be found in the book "Inquiries about Islam", by Muhammad Jawad Chirri, Director of the Islamic Center of America, 1986 Detroit, Michigan.

English and Arabic text Images

The Last Luminary

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

There is no doubt that the Holy Qur’an is the book of Allah and that all Muslims of the world are required to accept its teachings and instructions. When one opens Qur’an and casts a glance at its verses he will come across to what seems to be a clear landscape of an extraordinary, sensational, and exciting future and the end of the universe.

Qur’an indicates that the ultimate mission of the Prophet of Islam was to make this religion prevail over all other religions in the world; and one day this holy aspiration will finally be fulfilled. Allah stated in Qur’an:

"It is He who has sent His messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the Religion of truth, to prevail over all religions, even though the idolaters may detest.”(Qur’an 9:33)

The Holy book of the last Messenger of Allah gives the glad tidings that the rule over the earth shall finally belong to the righteous and virtuous servants of Allah:

"The earth is Allah’s. He gives it as a heritage to whom He wills, and the good end is for the righteous people.”(Qur’an 7:128)

 إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لِلَّـهِ يُورِثُهَا مَن يَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ ﴿الأعراف: ١٢٨﴾

And He, Exalted, also said:

"And We wrote in Psalm (Zabur) after the Reminder that surely My righteous servants will inherit the earth.”(Qur’an 21:105)

وَلَقَدْ كَتَبْنَا فِي الزَّبُورِ مِن بَعْدِ الذِّكْرِ أَنَّ الْأَرْضَ يَرِثُهَا عِبَادِيَ الصَّالِحُونَ ﴿١٠٥﴾

The earth which will be full of corruption destruction and ignorance, like a lifeless body, will be revived with the glowing light of justice as indicated in His book:

"Know that Allah gives life to earth after its death!”(Qur’an 57:17)

اعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ يُحْيِي الْأَرْضَ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهَا ...

We also read in Qur’an:

"Allah has promised to those among you who believe and do good deeds that He will surely make them succeed (the present rulers) in the earth as he caused those who were before them to succeed others and that He will surely establish for them religion which He has approved for them and will give them safety after their fear to worship Me and not to associate anything with Me.”(Qur’an 24:55)

Allah also stated:

"They intend to put out the light of Allah with their mouths but Allah will complete His Light even though the unbelievers may detest.”(Qur’an 61:8)

He, Exalted He is, also said:

"And We desired to show favor unto those who were oppressed in the earth to make them symbols and to make them inheritors.”(Qur’an 28:5)

These were some short examples of the divine glad tidings mentioned in Qur’an. By studying these matters and tens of other similar indications, it is deduced that the Islamic message will reach its complete fulfillment when these holy aspirations will take place.

All fabricated and superstitious objectives will disappear and then only the Islam, the unique and true religion, will be the faith of the people in the east and west of the world. Injustice, oppression, and inequality shall vanish, and instead, justice and equality which is the law of the creation of the world will be established everywhere.

The Kingdom of the divinely appointed Caliph (Khalifatullah) will manifest itself in all the corners of the world. The light of the guidance of Allah will shine and the earth shall belong to the virtuous ones. Yes, Qur’an gives the Good News which the day that all Muslims of the world are enthusiastically waiting for it, will arrive.

Beside Qur’an, the sayings of the Prophet (S) are the most important and worthiest treasure of Islamic learning. In the sea of jewels of Islamic traditions glad tidings on the Government of Justice can be seen which is regarding to the "Divine Revolution”and the "divinely appointed leader”who will fulfill this holy aspiration.

In a tradition upon whose authenticity all Muslims agree, the Messenger of Allah (S) has said:

"Even if the entire duration of the world’s existence has already been exhausted and only one day is left before Doomsday, Allah will expand that day to such length of time as to accommodate the kingdom of a person from my Ahlul-Bayt who will be called by my name. He will fill out the earth with peace and justice as it will have been full of injustice and tyranny (by then)."

(Please see the next article for the list of Sunni references for the above tradition as well as many other traditions.)

لو لم يبقَ من الدنيا إلا يوم واحد لطوَّل الله ذلك اليوم حتى يبعث فيه رجلاً من أهل بيتي يواطيء إسمُهُ إسمي يملأ الأرض قِسْطاً و عدلاً كما مُلِئَتْ ظلماً و جوراً.

The above precious tradition testifies that the golden divine promises will take place, sooner or later, one way or another, as also mentioned in most of the Shi’ite and Sunnite sources.

In both subjects of prophecy and Imamat (leadership) it is discussed that as a result of the law of general guidance which governs all of creation, human is of necessity endowed with the power of receiving revelation through prophecy, which directs him toward the perfection of the human norm and the well-being of the human species.

Obviously, if this perfection and happiness were not possible for human, the very fact that he is endowed with this power would have been meaningless and futile. But there is no futility in creation.

In other words, ever since he has inhabited the earth, human has had the wish to lead a social life filled with happiness in its true sense and has striven toward this end. If such a wish were not to have an objective existence it would never have been imprinted upon human’s inner nature, in the same way that if there were no food there would have been no meaning for hunger (since hunger is understood when one compares a person who has eaten food and a person who has not), and if there were no water there would have been no thirst and if there were no reproduction there would have been no sexual attraction between the sexes.

Therefore, by the reason of inner necessity and determination, the future will see a day when human society will be replete with justice, when all will live in peace and tranquillity, and when human beings will be fully possessed of virtue and perfection. The establishment of such a condition will occur through human hands but with Divine Assistance. And the leader of such a society is called in the language of the traditions, al-Mahdi (the Mahdi; the guided one).

In the different religions that govern the world (either divine or not) such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam there are references to a person who will come as the savior of mankind. These religions have given glad tidings of his coming, although there are naturally minor differences in detail that can be discerned when these teachings are compared carefully.

However one thing that all these teachings have in common is that "A human will come to establish peace and tranquillity all over the earth". Every religion has a different attachment to it, however. The least thing that a human being (regardless of his religion) is supposed to do, is to accept what all these teachings have in common. This goes to prove the necessity of belief for "his coming". Thus, the saviors of all these religions who are all expected to come at the end of the time, are manifested in one individual, since the foundation of such belief is established by all.

The attachments of different religions can be reconciled on their own tendencies, and thus rejected. The fact remains that the teachings of the previous religions have been under a long alteration process, and only Islam has been guaranteed its survival.

Thus we should accept the attachment that the traditions of the Prophet (S) has offered us with regard to the one who is coming whose name is Imam al-Mahdi (and, of course, there will come Jesus as one of the Imam al-Mahdi’s follower, based on the prophetic traditions).

There are numerous traditions cited in the Sunni and the Shi’i sources from the Holy Prophet concerning the appearance of the Mahdi, such as that he is of the progeny of the Prophet and that his appearance will enable human society to reach true perfection and the full realization of spiritual life.

In addition, there are numerous other traditions concerning the fact that the Mahdi is the son of the Eleventh Imam, al-Hasan al-Askari, and that after being born and undergoing a long occultation (disappearance; living among people while he is not identified) the Mahdi will appear again, filling the world with justice as it has been corrupted by injustice and tyranny.

In a tradition the holy Prophet (S) said to the Commander of believers, ‘Ali (as), that:

"There will be twelve Guides after me, the first of whom is you, O’ ‘Ali, and the last one will be the ‘Support’ (al-Qa’im) who, with the grace of Allah, will gain victory over the whole east and west of the world."

Imam ‘Ali al-Ridha (the eighth Imam) said, in the course of a tradition:

"The Imam after me is my son, Muhammad, and after him his son ‘Ali, and after ‘Ali his son, al-Hasan, and after al-Hasan his son Hujjat al-Qa’im (the proof of Allah who shall stand), who is awaited during his occultation and obeyed during his manifestation. Even if there remain from the life of the world but a single day, Allah will expand that day until he becomes manifest and fills the world with justice in the same way that it had been filled with injustice. But when? As for news of the hour (i.e., the moment of appearance), frequently my father told me, having heard it from his father who heard it from his father who heard it from his ancestors who heard it from ‘Ali (as), that it was asked from the holy Prophet, O Prophet of God, when will the ‘Support’ (al-Qa’im) who is from your family appear? He said, His case is like that of the Hour (of time of the resurrection). ‘Allah alone knows it and He will manifest it at its proper time. It is heavy in the heavens and the earth. It cometh not to you save unawares’ (Qur’an 7:187)."

Musa al-Baghdadi said, I heard Imam Hasan al-Askari (the eleventh Imam) who said:

"I see that after me differences will appear among you concerning the Imam after me. Whoever accepts the Imams after the Prophet of God but denies my son is like the person who accepts all the prophets but denies the prophethood of Muhammad, the Prophet of God, upon whom be peace and blessing. And whoever denies (Muhammad) the Prophet of God is like one who has denied all the prophets of God, for obeying the last of us is like obeying the first of us and denying the last of us is like denying the first of us. But beware! Verily, for my son there is an occultation during which all people will fall into doubt except those whom Allah protects."

There are hundreds of prophetic traditions about Imam al-Mahdi (as) which have been recorded in both the Shi’ite and Sunnite collections of traditions. A large number of religious scholars form all Islamic schools of thought have independently compiled books about Imam al-Mahdi, the leader of the time. Their number runs to tens of volumes. (For more information in this regard, please see the next article.) Thus believing in Imam al-Mahdi is not exclusive to the Shi’ites, and the Sunni scholars believe in him, though they do not have the extensive information about him that the Shi’a possess.

For more information about Imam al-Mahdi (as), You may look at the following English books:

1- "The Awaited Savior,”by B. al-Sadr and M. Mutahhari. ($3.5)
2- "An Inquiry Concerning al-Mahdi,”by B. al-Sadr. ($8)
3- "A Reply To: Belief of Mahdism in Shi’a Imamia". ($6)

Please add $3 shipping and handling and send to:

al-Khoei Foundation,
89-89 Van Wyck Expressway,
Jamaica, NY 11435-4123 USA

Sunni Documentation on Imam al-Mahdi (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

For the Sunni brothers, there are six major collections of traditions based on the Sunni standards for verifying the authenticity of a tradition. These six books are: Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Majah, Sunan Abu Dawud, and Sahih al-Nisa’i. I just quote few traditions from these six books to prove that a knowledgeable Sunni brother/sister can NOT deny that:

• al-Mahdi (as) will come in the last days to make a universal Government,

• al-Mahdi (as) is from the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet (S),

• al-Mahdi (as) is from the progeny of Fatimah (sa), the daughter of the Prophet (S),

• al-Mahdi (as) is different than Prophet Jesus (the Messiah),

• Prophet Jesus (as) will come as one of the followers of Imam al-Mahdi and will pray behind him in congressional prayer.

Another undeniable fact is that many leading Sunni scholars have written books after books exclusively about Imam al-Mahdi (as) which I included some of their names at the end of this article.

Moreover, Insha Allah in the next article, I will give a list of Sunni scholars who believe that Imam al-Mahdi (as) is son of Imam Hasan al-Askari (as), and is alive and went into occultation. In that article will also discuss the special specifications of Imam al-Mahdi which are the points of disagreement between the Shi’a and the Sunni.

The following are only some of the traditions about Imam al-Mahdi which Sunnis admit to their authenticity and existence:

The Prophet (S) said: "Even if the entire duration of the world’s existence has already been exhausted and only one day is left (before the day of judgment), Allah will expand that day to such a length of time, as to accommodate the kingdom of a person from my Ahlul-Bayt who will be called by my name. He will fill out the earth with peace and justice as it will have been full of injustice and tyranny (by then)."

Sunni References:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p86, v9, pp 74-75

• Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p7

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,376; V3, p63

• al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, by al-Hakim, v4, p557

• Jami’ al-Saghir, by al-Suyuti, pp 2,160

• al-Urful Wardi, by al-Suyuti, p2

• al-Majma’, by al-Tabarani, p217

• Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v9, p144

• Fat’h al-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, v7, p305

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p249

• al-Tathkirah, by al-Qurtubi, p617

• al-Hawi, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 165-166

• Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, by al-Zurqani, v5, p348

• Fat’h al-Mugheeth, by al-Sakhawi, v3, p41

• Kanz al-Ummal, v7 P186

• Iqd al-Durar Fi Akhbar al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar, v12, Ch. 1,

• al-Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman, By Ganji al-Shafi’i, Ch. 12

• al-Fusool al-Muhimmah, by Ibn Sabbagh al-Maliki, Ch. 12

• Arjahul Matalib, by Ubaidallah Hindi al-Hanafi, p380

• Muqaddimah, by Ibn Khaldoon, p266

• and also in the works of Ibn Habban, Abu Nua’ym, Ibn Asakir, etc.

Also:

The Prophet (S) said: "al-Mahdi is one of us, the members of the household (Ahlul-Bayt)."

Sunni reference: Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4085

It is evident from the above traditions that Imam al-Mahdi (as) is from the Ahlul-Bayt of Prophet Muhammad, so he can not be Jesus (the Messiah; al-Maseeh). Thus, al-Mahdi and Messiah are two different personalities but they come at the same time, al-Mahdi as Imam and Jesus as his follower. The following tradition clearly mentions that Imam al-Mahdi is one of descendants of the daughter of Prophet Muhammad (S):

The Prophet (S) said: The Mahdi will be of my family, of the descendants of Fatimah (the Prophet’s daughter).

ألمَهديُّ مِن عترتي من ولد فاطمة

Sunni references:

• Sunan Abu Dawud, English version, Ch. 36, Tradition #4271 (narrated by Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet)

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4086

• al-Nisa’i and al-Bayhaqi, and others as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p249

Also:

The Prophet (S) said: "We the children of Abd al-Muttalib are the Masters of the inhabitants of the heaven: Myself, Hamza (ra), ‘Ali (as), Ja’far Ibn Abi Talib (ra), al-Hasan (as), al-Husayn (as), and al-Mahdi (as)."

Sunni references:

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4087

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, on the authority of Anas Ibn Malik

• al-Daylami

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p245

The Prophet (S) said: "The Mahdi will appear in my Ummah. He will appear for a minimum of 7 or a maximum of 9 years; at that time, my Ummah will experience a bountiful favor like never before. It shall have a great abundance of food, of which it need not save anything, and the wealth at that time is in great quantities, such that if a man asks the Mahdi to give him some, and the Mahdi (as) will say: Here! Take!"

Sunni reference: Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #5083

Remark: According to Shi’i sources, the Government of Peace and equality that Imam al-Mahdi will establish will last hundreds of years with no rival, and then the day of Judgment will commence. What is mentioned in the above tradition as 7 or 9 years is the length of time that Imam al-Mahdi (as) will fight to conquer the world when he starts his mission.

The Prophet (S) said: "We (I and my family) are members of a household that Allah (SWT) has chosen for them the life of the Hereafter over the life of this world; and the members of my household (Ahlul-Bayt) shall suffer a great affliction and they shall be forcefully expelled from their homes after my death; then there will come people from the East carrying black flags, and they will ask for some good to be given to them, but they shall be refused service; as such, they will wage war and emerge victorious, and will be offered that which they desired in the first place, but they will refuse to accept it till they pass it to a man from my family (Ahlul-Bayt) appears to fill the Earth with justice as it has been filled with corruption. So whoever reaches that (time) ought to come to them even if crawling on the ice/snow since among them is the Vice-regent of Allah (Khalifatullah) al-Mahdi."

Sunni references:

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, Tradition #4082,

• The History Tabari

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, pp 250-251

Also:

The Messenger of Allah said: "The world will not perish until a man among the Arabs appears whose name matches my name."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v9, p74

In Sahih Muslim, in the Chapter of al-Fitan, there are some interesting traditions on what will happen in the last days of the world. I would like to quote two of them here:

Abu Nadra reported: We were with the company of Jabir Ibn Abdillah... Jabir Ibn Abdillah kept quite for a while and then reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) having said: "There would be a Caliph in the last (period) of my Ummah who would freely give handfuls of wealth to the people without counting it.”I said to Abu Nadra and Abu al-Ala: Do you mean Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz? They said: NO, (he would be Imam Mahdi).

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, p1508, Tradition #6961

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Fitan, v4, p2234, Tradition #67

(NOTE: What are inside the parentheses in the above tradition are NOT my comments. They are the words of the translator of Sahih Muslim (Abdul Hamid Siddiqui).)

Similarly, we read in Sahih Muslim:

Abu Sa’id and Jabir Ibn Abdullah reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: "There would be in the last (phase) of the time a Caliph who would distribute wealth but would not count."

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, p1508, Tradition #6964

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Kitab al-Fitan, v4, p2235, Tradition #69

It is also narrated:

In the end of the time, my Ummah will undergo very hard affliction like never before, so that man can not find any way out. Then Allah will appear a person from my progeny, that is my Ahlul-Bayt, who will fill the earth with justice as it was filled with injustice. The inhabitants of the earth and the inhabitants of the heaven love him. The sky will bring down its water everywhere and the earth will bring all what it can offer and will become green all over.

Sunni references:

• al-Sahih fi al-Hadith, by al-Hakim, as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p250

Ibn Majah in his Sunan quotes Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyyah and Imam ‘Ali saying that the Holy Prophet (S) said:

"al-Mahdi is from our Ahlul-Bayt, no doubt Allah will enforce his appearance within a night (i.e., his coming is very unpredictable and is very sudden)."

Sunni references:

• Sunan Ibn Majah, v2, p269

• Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p250

Moreover, it is narrated that:

‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) said: "When the ‘Support’ of the family of Muhammad (al-Qa’im Aale Muhammad) rises Allah will unite the people of east and the people of west."

Sunni references:

• Ibn Asakir, as quoted in:

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p252

Ibn Hajar wrote that:

Muqatil Ibn Sulayman and those who followed him among the (Sunni) commentators of Qur’an said that the verse: "And he shall be a Sign for (the coming of) the Hour”(Qur’an 43:61) was revealed about al-Mahdi.

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p247

Also Ahmad Ibn Hanbal recorded:

The Prophet (S) said: "Allah will bring out from concealment al-Mahdi from my Family and just before the Day of Judgment; even if only one day were to remain in the life of the world, and he will spread on this earth justice and equity and will eradicate tyranny and oppression."

Sunni references:

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p99

• A close version has also been narrated in Sunan Abu Dawud, English version, Ch. 36, Tradition #4270 narrated from ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as).

It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that:

Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (ra) said: I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "A group of my Ummah will fight for the truth until near the day of judgment when Jesus, the son of Marry, will descend, and the leader of them will ask him to lead the prayer, but Jesus declines, saying: "No, Verily, among you Allah has made leaders for others and He has bestowed his bounty upon them."

Sunni reference:

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic, part 2, p193

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 45,384

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p251

• Nuzool Isa Ibn Maryam Akhir al-Zaman, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p57

• Musnad, by Abu Ya’ala which provides another version of the tradition with more clear words on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of Allah said: "A group among my Ummah will continue to fight for the truth until Jesus, the son of Marry, will descend, and the Imam of them will ask him to lead the prayer, but Jesus replies: "You have more right to it, and verily Allah has honored some of you over others in this Ummah."

• Sahih Ibn Habban, whose tradition reads: "their leader al-Mahdi”and the rest of tradition is the same.

• Ibn Abu Shaybah, another Sunni traditionist, and the mentor of al-Bukhari and Muslim, has reported several traditions about Imam al-Mahdi (as). He has also reported that the Imam of the Muslims who will lead Prophet Jesus in prayer is Imam al-Mahdi himself.

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentioned that: "I have heard some of the deniers of (truth) deny what has been conveyed about Jesus that when he descends will pray the Fajr prayer behind al-Mahdi. They say, Jesus has higher status than to pray behind a non-Prophet.

This is a bizarre opinion since the issue of prayer of Jesus behind al-Mahdi has been proven strongly via numerous authentic traditions from the Messenger of Allah, who is the most truthful.”And then al-Suyuti goes on narrating some of the traditions in this regard. (See Nuzool Isa Ibn Maryam Akhir al-Zaman, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p56).

Also al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani mentioned that:

"The Mahdi is of this Ummah, and that Jesus (S) will come down and pray behind him."

Sunni reference: Fat’h al-Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v5, p362

This is also mentioned by another Sunni scholar, Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, who wrote:

"The Ahlul-Bayt are like the stars through whom we are guided in the right direction, and if the starts are taken away (or hidden) we would come face to face with the signs of the Almighty as promised (i.e., the Day of Resurrection). This will happen when the Mahdi will come, as mentioned in the traditions, and the Prophet Jesus will say his prayers behind him, the Dajjal will be slain, and then the signs of the Almighty will appear one after another."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p234

Also Ibn Hajar quoted Abu al-Husayn al-Ajiri saying:

The traditions of al-Mustafa (S) on the rising of al-Mahdi has been transmitted via numerous authorities and is more than the level of (being sufficient for) Mutawatir, describing that he is of his Ahlul-Bayt, and will fill the earth with justice, and that Jesus (as) will come at the same time and he will assist Jesus for killing al-Dajjal in the land of Palestine, and that he will lead this nation and Jesus will pray behind him.

Sunni reference:

• Abu al-Husayn al-Ajiri as quoted in al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p254

So if al-Mahdi and Jesus are to be the same person as some ignorants claim, then how can one prays behind himself?! Moreover this shows that Imam al-Mahdi and Jesus (the Messiah) will come at the same time so that they could pray the morning prayer together in Jerusalem.

In fact, the equivalent word of "Messiah”in Arabic is "al-Maseeh”which means "Wiped Clean; Purified". This word has been used in Qur’an as the title of Prophet Jesus (as). As such, the "Messiah”is the Prophet Jesus (as) and not the Imam al-Mahdi (as).

However, the word "Messiah”in English has another meaning, that is "savior". As a result, there have been some English translators who used the word "Messiah”for Imam al-Mahdi (as) with the meaning of "Savior”which does NOT have anything to do with Arabic word "al-Maseeh".

I should point out that, there exists a fabricated tradition which is mainly used by Ahmadis and Qadianis to prove that al-Mahdi and Jesus are the same. The tradition states: "And no Mahdi except Jesus.”

This tradition has been rated by al-Hakim as unknown and strange and he said there are discrepancy in its chain of authorities. al-Bayhaqi said Muhammad Ibn Khalid said this tradition is single (Mufrad). al-Nisa’i has mentioned that this tradition is unfamiliar and is denied, and that the memorizers of traditions confirm that the traditions which state that al-Mahdi is the descendants of Fatimah are authentic and reliable. (See al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, Ch. 11, section 1, p252 for details).

Prophet Jesus is not the Imam of Muslims, and when he comes back, he will be the follower of the Imam of Muslims who is known as Imam al-Mahdi (as).

In Sahih al-Bukhari, it is narrated that:

The Prophet (S) said: "What would be your situation if the Son of Marry (i.e. Jesus) descends upon you and your Imam is among you?"

Sunni reference:

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v4, Tradition #658

NOTE: The above is my own translation. The Saudi-paid translator of Sahih al-Bukhari (Muhammad Muhsin Khan) has shown pure dishonesty in translating the above tradition. His translation of the last portion of the tradition does not bear any similarity what so ever with the Arabic text of the tradition which is as follows:

كيف أنتم إذا نزل اْبنُ مريم فيكم و إمامكم منكم؟

Now let us look at the false translation of Mr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 4.658

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said "How will you be when the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Qur’an and not by the law of Gospel.

Mr. Muhsin Khan has trimmed the last part of the tradition which states that the Imam of Muslims (i.e., Imam al-Mahdi) is among Muslims when the son of marry descends. Instead, the translator has added another sentence which does not exists in the Arabic text. I should mention that this is not the only place that he has altered the text, and there are much more examples in this regard which proves his bias and his dishonesty.

Al-Hafidh Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali al-Shawkani (d. 1250/1834) wrote in a book called "al-Tawdhih fi twawatur ma jaa’a fil muntadar wad-djjal wal masih”(the explanation about the frequent reports concerning the Awaited one, the Dajjal, and the messiah) in which he wrote about Imam al-Mahdi (as) that: "The traditions about al-Mahdi have been related by numerous authorities and are therefor reliable beyond doubt or confusion, because in jurisprudence the qualification of Mutawatir is valid even for (traditions) with less than this number of narrations.

There are also many sayings of the companions (of the Prophet) which explicitly mention the Mahdi, which have the status of narrations from the Prophet since there is no question of establishing such saying through Ijtihad (one’s opinion and research)". The author gives the same opinion in his other book "al-Fat’h al-Rabbani". (In this connection see also Mawsu’atil Imam al-Mahdi, v1, pp 391-392,413-414,434, and also Tuhfatul Ahwadhi, v6, p485).

The author of the book, "Ghayah al-Ma’amool,”mentioned that: "It is a famous narration among the Scholars of the past and the present that there has to appear a man from the family of the Prophet (S) named al-Mahdi. In addition, the traditions about the Mahdi have been narrated by the most renowned companions of the Prophet (S), as well as by the most renowned scholars such as Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, al-Tabarani, Abu Ya’ala, al-Bazzar, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, and al-Hakim (May Allah be pleased with them all); furthermore, those who claim that the traditions narrated with regard to the appearance of the Mahdi are weak, are themselves in error."

Al-Saban in his book, "Is’af al-Raghibeen,”mentioned that: "The news about the appearance of the Mahdi are traceable back to the Prophet (S), and that he is one of the members of the family of the Prophet (S); and that he will fill the Earth with justice."

Al-Suwaydi in his book, "Saba’iq al-Dhahab,”reported that: "The scholars have a consensus that the Mahdi (as) will appear at the end of time and fill the Earth with justice; and the traditions supporting his appearance are indeed numerous."

al-Hafidh Abul-Hasan Muhammad Ibn al-Husayn al-Sijistani al-Aburi al-Shafi’i (d. 363/974) said: "The traditions were related by numerous authorities and were spread far and wide by many narrators, from al-Mustafa (S) concerning al-Mahdi who is from the household (of the Prophet) and who will fill the world with justice..”

This statement was accepted by the subsequent scholars as testified by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (See Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, v9, p144; Fat’h al-Bari, v7, p305), al-Qurtubi (al-Tathkirah, p617), al-Suyuti (al-Hawi, v2, pp 165-166), al-Muttaqi al-Hindi (al-Burhan fi Alamat Mahdi Akhir al-Zaman, pp 175-176), Ibn Hajar al-Haythami (al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, Ch. 11, section 1, p249), al-Zurqani (Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, v5, p348), al-Sakhawi (Fat’h al-Mugheeth, v3, p41), etc.

The best formulation of the belief of all Muslims about al-Mahdi (as) has been given by a person who himself did not believe in his coming and who denied the validity of the traditions concerning this matter. He was Ibn Khaldoon (d. 808/1406), a famous historian, in whose book, "al-Muqaddamah,”wrote:

"Let it be known that it is a narrated event by ALL Muslims in EVERY era that at the end of time a man from the family of the Prophet (S) will, without fail, make his appearance and will strengthen Islam and spread justice; Muslims will follow him and he will gain domination over the Muslim realm. He will be called al-Mahdi.”(An Introduction to History, by Ibn Khaldoon, English version, London, 1967 Edition, pp 257-258)

The above quote proves that even Ibn Khaldoon was in the opinion that the belief in Imam al-Mahdi was not a characteristic of a special sect of Islam, but was a common belief to ALL Muslims.

Sunni scholars openly criticized those elements (like Ibn Khaldoon) who tried to cast doubt the traditions about al-Mahdi (as), and have strongly asserted that the belief in Mahdi is well-established for ALL Muslims. See for instance: "Awnul Ma’bud”(which is the commentary of Sunan Abu Dawud), by al-Azimabadi, v11, pp 361-362, Tuhfatul Ahwadhi (which is the commentary of Sahih al-Tirmidhi), by al-Mubarakfuri, v6, p484, al-Tajul Jami’ lil Usul, by Shaikh Mansoor ‘Ali Nasif, v5, p341.

Shaikh Ahmad Muhammad Shakir (d. 1377/1958), one of the greatest contemporary scholar of Hadith and Tafsir, whose major work was his commentary on Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (for a biography of Ahmad Shakir, see al-Aalam, v1, p253; Mu’jam al-Mu’allifeen, v13, p368) wrote in his commentary: "Belief in al-Mahdi is not particular to the Shi’a because it is from the narration of many companions of the Prophet in such way that NO one can cast doubt the truth (of this belief).”After this, he proceeds to a strong refutation of Ibn Khaldoon’s weakening the traditions regarding al-Mahdi. (see Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal with commentary of Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, Pub. by Dar al-Ma’arif, Egypt, v5, pp 196-198, v14, p288).

Al-Sayid Sabiq, the Mufti for the "Muslim Brotherhood,”in his book, "al- ‘Aqa’id al-Islamiyyah,”that: "The idea about the Mahdi is indeed valid, and is one of the Islamic tenets that one must believe in.”Mr. Sabiq also narrated a variety of traditions relating to the appearance of al-Mahdi (as) in the above book.

The recent Fatwa in this issue was given in Mecca by "The Muslim World League”(Rabitatul ‘Alamil Islami) on Oct. 11, 1976 (23 Shawwal 1396). This Fatwa states that more than twenty companions narrated traditions concerning al-Mahdi, and gives a list of those scholars of Hadith who have transmitted these narrations, and those who have written books on al-Mahdi. The Fatwa states:

"The memorizers (Huffadh) and scholars of Hadith have verified that there are authentic (Sahih) and acceptable (Hasan) reports among the traditions related to al-Mahdi. The majority of these traditions are related through numerous authorities (Mutawatir). There is no doubt that the status of those reports are Sahih and Mutawatir. (They have also verified) that the belief in Mahdi is obligatory, and that it is one of the beliefs of Ahlussunnah wal Jama’a. Only those ignorant of the Sunnah and innovators in doctrine deny it.

For the transcription and reproduction of this Fatwa, see, among others, the Introduction of al-Ganji al-Shafi’i, in the book named "al-Bayan,”Beirut, 1399/1979, pp 76-79 and in Appendix.

Two Shafi’i scholars, Ganji in his book "al-Bayan", and Shablanji in his book "Noor al-Absar", on the verse 48:28 of Qur’an: "He is the One who sent his Messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the true religion that in order to prevail over all the religions”narrated from Sa’id Ibn Jubair that "this promise to Prophet Muhammad will be fulfilled by al-Mahdi who is in the progeny of Fatimah (sa)."

Even Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328), who is acclaimed by the Wahhabis, wrote in his book "Minhaj al-Sunnah”(v4, pp 211-212) that the traditions concerning the Mahdi are certainly reliable, and his student, al-Dhahabi, conformed with him in his summary of his teacher’s book. (See Mukhtasar Minhaj al-Sunnah, pp 533-534).

Among the Shi’a scholars, I would like to mention the masterpiece of Lutfullah al-Safi al-Golpaygani, who compiled an encyclopedia named "Muntakhab al-Athar". In this book, there is a comprehensive narration of the traditions regarding to the appearance of Imam al-Mahdi (as) and the description of the world before and after his appearance. He has used over 60 Sunni sources, including their six major book of Hadith; and over 90 Shi’ite sources to illuminate the fact that al-Mahdi is not a fabricated event.

As far as we have been able to discover, at least 35 prominent Sunni scholars have written 46 of books exclusively about Imam al-Mahdi (as), the leader of our time. Here are some of the name of some of these books:

(1) "Kitab al-Mahdi,”by Abu Dawud.
(2)"Alamat al-Mahdi,”by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti.
(3)"al-Qawl al-Mukhtasar fi Alamat al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar,”by Ibn Hajar.

(4)"Al-Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman,”by Allamah Abu Abdillah Ibn Muhammad Yusuf al-Ganji al-Shafi’i.
(5)"Iqd al-Durar fi Akbar al-Imam al-Muntadhar,”by Shaikh Jamaluddin Yusuf al-Damishqi.
(6)"Mahdi Aale Rasool,”by ‘Ali Ibn Sultan Muhammad al-Harawi al-Hanafi.
(7)"Manaqib al-Mahdi,”by al-Hafidh Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani.
(8)"Al-Burhan fi Alamat al-Mahdi Akhir al-Zaman,”by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi.
(9)"Arba’in Hadith fi al-Mahdi,”by Abdul Ala al-Hamadani.
(10)"Akhbar al-Mahdi,”by al-Hafidh Abu Nu’aym.

In conclusion, the belief in the coming Mahdi (as) who is a person other than Jesus (as), is an undeniable fact for the Sunnis. As we discussed above, the Sunni scholars affirm that belief in "Mahdi of the House of the Prophet”is one of the Islamic tenets for "Ahlussunnah wal Jama’a". In the next part, however, we will discuss the points of differences between the Shi’a and most Sunnis on the issue of Imam al-Mahdi.

Special specifications of Imam al-Mahdi (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the previous part, I provided extensive traditions from the six authentic Sunni collections concerning the fact that Imam al-Mahdi (as) who is different than Jesus (the messiah) WILL come and he is the descendant of the Prophet (S) and his daughter Fatimah (sa). The traditions further illuminated the fact that Jesus (who was a great Prophet) will pray behind al-Mahdi (who is a divinely appointed Imam).

Also I gave some of the Fatwa of Sunni scholars which state that the belief in "the Mahdi of the House of the Prophet”is one of the Islamic tenets for "Ahlussunnah wal Jama’a", and any one who denies it is either ignorant or an innovator.

In this part however, I would like to talk about some special attributes of Imam al-Mahdi which are not acknowledged by most Sunnis.

Imam Al-Mahdi’s Identification

The Shi’a believe that Imam al-Mahdi is the only son of Imam Hasan al-Askari (the 11th Imam) who was born on the 15th of Sha’ban 255/869 in Samarra, Iraq. He became the divinely appointed Imam when his father was martyred in 260/874. Imam al-Mahdi went into occultation (disappearance; leaving among people while he is not identified) at the same time. He will re-appear when Allah wills. More specifically:

• His title is "al-Mahdi”which means "The Guided One."

• His name is Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan (as).

• His lineage, traced back to Imam ‘Ali (as), is: Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Musa Ibn Ja’far Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as).

On the other hand, most Sunnis are not so sure that he has been born yet! They believe he will be born some time before his mission. The name of Imam al-Mahdi is Muhammad (which is the same as what the Shi’a believe). There is, however, one Sunni report which adds that the name of the father of Imam al-Mahdi is Abdullah. Now let us see what is the argument of each side:

Q1) Some Sunnis question the Shi’a that how a five year old boy can become the Imam of mankind?

First, we must question whether or not in the history of religion, the phenomenon of young leaders has a parallel. Undoubtedly, there is. The Qur’an strikes a number of examples which are worthy of mentioning:

We have the example of Jesus (as) who became prophet and spoke to people when he was a baby in the cradle:

"But she pointed to the baby. They said: ‘How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?’ He said: ‘I am indeed a servant of Allah. He has given me Scripture and assigned me a prophet, and He has made me blessed wherever I be, and has enjoined on me Prayer and Zakat as long as I live.’“(Qur’an 19:29-31)

فَأَشَارَتْ إِلَيْهِ قَالُوا كَيْفَ نُكَلِّمُ مَن كَانَ فِي الْمَهْدِ صَبِيًّا ﴿٢٩﴾ قَالَ إِنِّي عَبْدُ اللَّـهِ آتَانِيَ الْكِتَابَ وَجَعَلَنِي نَبِيًّا﴿٣٠﴾ وَجَعَلَنِي مُبَارَكًا أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُ وَأَوْصَانِي بِالصَّلَاةِ وَالزَّكَاةِ مَا دُمْتُ حَيًّا ﴿٣١﴾

Thus Jesus (as) became prophet and received revelation and Book while he was less than two years old!

Furthermore, in few verses before, Qur’an mentions the case of Prophet Yahya (John), to whom Allah (SWT) said:

"‘O Yahya! Take hold of the Book with might,’ And We gave him the appointment (of prophethood) in his childhood.”(Qur’an 19:12)

يَا يَحْيَىٰ خُذِ الْكِتَابَ بِقُوَّةٍ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْحُكْمَ صَبِيًّا ﴿١٢﴾

So if a two-year old boy can become a prophet and receives revelation and Scripture, then why cannot a five-year old boy become an Imam?

The third example is Prophet Solomon (Sulayman) who was appointed by Allah the heir of his father, David (Dawud), and became the king of his community while he had not reached the age of puberty.

Have you ever heard of prodigies? They are kids between the ages of four to 18 that exhibit signs of exceptional skills that are usually found in highly qualified adults only. Here are some examples from the modern history:

John Stuart Mill (1806-73), a 19th-century English philosopher and economist, advocated utilitarian reforms in his many writings and as member of Parliament. A child prodigy, Mill had mastered Greek by the age of 7 and studied economics at the age of 13. His works express his social thought with great clarity and thoroughness. (The Bettmann Archive).

The French thinker, mathematician, and scientist Blaise Pascal (1623-62) has been credited not only with imaginative and subtle work in geometry and other branches of mathematics, but with profoundly influencing later generations of theologians and philosophers. A prodigy in mathematics, Pascal had mastered Euclid’s Elements by the age of 12. Pascal invented and sold the first calculating machine (1645).

Wolfgang was the greatest musical child prodigy who ever lived. He began composing minuets at the age of 5 and symphonies at 9.

Beethoven’s own talent was such that at the age of 12 he was already an assistant to the organist Christian Gottlob Neefe, with whom he studied.

Sarah Caldwell, born Maryville, Mo., Mar. 6, 1924, is a conductor and producer. A child prodigy in both mathematics and music, before reaching the age of ten.

While not exhaustive, the list serves the purpose of demonstrating that this phenomenon occurs naturally among normal human beings from all walks of life. Therefore, scientifically speaking, it is quite possible that a child demonstrates abilities that adults can not. Also religiously speaking anything Allah desires will happen no matter how strange. Indeed Allah (SWT) asserts unequivocally in Qur’an that if He wanted something, all He has to do is to say to it is: "Be! and it will be!".

Q2) Every human is mortal. Then, how can Imam al-Mahdi (as) live so long?

Yes, every one but Allah is mortal, and in fact, Imam al-Mahdi will pass away too. But the difference is the length of life in this world. The holy Qur’an and the prophetic traditions inform us that some people have had/have long life in this world. Thus the possibility of the occurrence of such phenomena is confirmed by the religion of Islam.

Are you aware that according to the Qur’an (see 29:14), Prophet Noah has just been prophet for 950 years? His age should have been even more than that because we should add his age before prophethood to the above number.

Do you agree that Prophet Jesus (as) is still alive? He is, in fact, 1995 years old by now. Of course, he is not living on the earth. He is rather in the heavens, and according to the Muslim’s belief, he will come back to the earth, and will pray behind Imam al-Mahdi (as).

Do you agree that al-Khidr (as) is still alive? Qur’an mentions the story of his meeting with Prophet Moses (as). He existed before the time of the Prophet Moses (as), and as such, al-Khidr (as) is now more than 3000 years old! He lives right here on the earth, but we can not recognize him (fairly similar to the case of Imam al-Mahdi). He serves Allah (SWT) as one of His agents.

The Hanafi scholar, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi, in his book "Tathkirat al-Khawas al-Ummah", pp 325-328 gives the names of 22 people believed by Muslims to have lived various ages from 3,000 down to 300 years! No doubt! Allah has the ability to give a very long life to His servants, but He also has assigned a death time for everyone (including the above mentioned individuals) which can be very soon or very late.

Moreover, scientifically speaking, there are no objections whatsoever to the extended life span assertion. A group of scientists conducted a series of experiments at the Rockefeller Institute in New York in 1912 on certain "parts”of plants, animals, and humans. These scientists included Dr. Alex Carl, Dr. Jack Lope, and Dr. Warren Lewis and his wife, among others. Among the experiments conducted was one that directly treated the nerves, muscles, hearts, skin, and kidneys of human beings.

These organs were not connected to a human body; they were independent organs that were perhaps donated for the experiment. It was concluded by the scientists that these "parts or organs”can continue to live almost indefinitely as long as they are nourished properly, and as long as they are shielded from external negative interactions like microbes and other obstacles that might inhibit the growth of these organs; furthermore, the assertion was made that the cells would continue to grow normally under the above conditions, and that the growth is directly related to the nourishment provided.

Again, aging had no effect on these organs, and they grew every year without any signs of deterioration. The scientists concluded that these organs will continue to grow as long as the patience of the scientists themselves is not exhausted, causing them to abandon the nourishment process.

Q3) Where is Imam al-Mahdi (as) now?

Imam al-Mahdi disappeared in 260/874 when he became Imam. The last time that he was seen, was in the cellar of his father’s house in Samarra, Iraq. That is why it is rumored regarding Shi’a that they believe al-Mahdi is in the cave!!!

Some Sunni historians ignorantly attributed that Shi’a believe al-Mahdi is hiding in the cellar. Shi’a do NOT believe that Imam al-Mahdi is in the Cave or Cellar! He was just seen there for the last time. He can be anywhere Allah wishes. However one thing is clear is that he lives on the earth among people while people do not perceive.

If that cellar has become famous as "Cellar of Occultation”(Sardab al-Ghaybah), it is because it was made so by the non-Shi’i sources. There is NO mention of such name by the Shi’a scholars. Imam al-Mahdi (as) may sometimes live in one place and travels around the world, just the same as the common belief of Muslims about al-Khidr (as). (For more details see Kashf al-Ghummah, by Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Musa al-Irbili, v3, p283; Kashf al-Astar, by Mirza Husayn al-Noori, pp 210-216).

Second, with regards to the occultation of al-Mahdi (as), the Qur’an does NOT rule out such an occurrence at all. Again, the examples of Jesus (as) and al-Khidr (as), who are both in occultation, are worthy of mentioning.

Q4) Why did Imam al-Mahdi (as) disappear?

The above question shares the same answer with the following two questions:

Q4.b. Why does not Imam al-Mahdi (as) appear now?

Q4.c. When will he (as) come?

There are MANY reasons behind it. The most important reason of it will be disclosed when Imam al-Mahdi (as) will appear. However, I mention few reasons that I know.

1. A very easy answer would be: This is Allah’s Will. His Will is based on His infinite wisdom. The appearance of Imam al-Mahdi solely depends on the decision of Allah. He knows best how to act. The question might be as naive as asking: Why some people are black and some are white? Why some are beautiful while others are not? This is Allah’s decree.

2.A better answer (which also answers why some are beautiful and others are not, etc.) would be: IT IS A TEST. Allah could send all people to paradise directly. But He didn’t, because He wanted to TEST us. (The test of Allah is actually a test that proves the facts for ourselves as witness, otherwise Allah has the foreknowledge of everything).

Only those who are obedient to Allah deserve paradise. Now, Allah is testing us that how we react in the sinful environment. If somebody preserve himself in today’s world has much more reward than if he does that at the time when Imam al-Mahdi appears, because at that time the environment will be absolutely healthy and it will be much easier to preserve oneself.

This was just one aspect, however. Remember that ONLY Imam al-Mahdi will have an opportunity to conquer the whole world. Even our Prophet (S) could not do that. So the difficult test was for all era and was not just for us.

3.Imam al-Mahdi (as) will come as soon as people become ready for him. People throughout the history were NEVER ready. They killed prophets, and Imams one after the other. However Allah continued to send prophets till He finally sent Prophet Muhammad who brought the last message at the time when the evolution of the mind of human being reached its maturity, and thus Allah provided them with the most complete and final religion. After that there was no need to send a new message.

Thus He sent Guides (Imams) who preserved and explained the message during the time of tribulation, for people. They also did that, and we are proud that we have had Imams like Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) who explained all aspects of Jurisprudence, etc. He had a golden opportunity of teaching during the clashes between the Umayad and the Abbasids. During that short period when the tyrants of both sides were busy with each other, the Imam was teaching Jurisprudence and theology in classes with as much as 5000 students. (No need to mention that Abu Hanifa was one of his students). Now the time is for action. But unfortunately the majority of people were/are reluctant to follow the right path, and instead, they opposed and killed the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt, and treated them in the same way that their ancestors treated the prophets. (Even Prophet Muhammad said: "No Prophet was ever annoyed as much as me").

The situation will continue till such time when people realize that they need a divinely appointed Imam who rule over them since they can’t solve their problems by themselves. When this happens universally, and when people become frustrated and disappointed from any type of "ism”(way of life, ideology), and when all raise their hands for help, then people are then ready for him. They will not kill him like they did with the others, nor do they treat him unjustly. They will rather accept him.

Of course, this will not happen till people of the word undergo much heavier afflictions, world-wide wars, mass destructions by satanic powers (such as Dajjal and Sufyani) which are not difficult to foresee in a near future.

4.Imam al-Mahdi will come when all types of ideologies are tested and they fail. At that time people will understand that they do not have any more solution and they will accept the solution of Imam al-Mahdi easily. For instance, look at communism which came to practice in Russia 100 years ago. People of the world at that time thought that this would be the best way of life which guarantees the prosperity of mankind.

But to their surprise, it crashed recently from within itself showing that this solution is failed in practice. Now some people think that Capitalism may solve their problems completely. This system is also about to crash, because the whole system is based on interest (Riba). The situation has reached to the point that people of the USA have the heaviest debt in the world. The studies even show that People here will never be able to pay their debt in full. And this was just from economy point of view.

People also suffer from other type of corruption, lust, and lack of spiritualities, etc. Such system is subject to crash sooner or later, one way or another. And when all type of ways of life showed their deficiency IN PRACTICE, people will, then, honor the truth.

5.Imam al-Mahdi (as) will come when he has 313 top virtuous helpers become available. Imam al-Mahdi can not govern the world with no helper, minister, etc. The communities should generate these top individuals. In fact, non of our other 11 Imams had such number of high rank followers. Let me give you two examples:

Before his demise, Prophet Muhammad (S) instructed Imam ‘Ali (as) that if the number of his followers loyal to him (after the demise of the Prophet) exceeds 40 men, he should use force to restore his right and take the power, otherwise he should keep silent since the only remaining pious people would be killed without being able to help Islam. Unfortunately, the number of people who remained loyal to Imam ‘Ali (as) did not reach to this amount, at that crucial moment. Another example:

Sahl Ibn al-Hasan al-Khurasani who was one of the followers of Ahlul- Bayt in Khurasan (a province in Iran) came to Medina to meet Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as). Sahl al-Khurasani said: "O son of the Messenger of Allah! You are of the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt. What prevents you from getting your right (i.e., the rule) while you find more than one hundred thousand Shi’a who are ready to fight for you?”

The Imam (as) asked him to sit down, and then ordered to turn on the oven that was in the house. After the oven became very hot and turned red, the Imam (as) said: "O Khurasani step into the oven and sit in it.”The Khurasani said: "My master, O son of the Messenger of Allah! Do not punish me by fire and make it easy for me.”At this time, Harun al- Makki (ra) entered the room, and after the greetings exchanged, the Imam (as) told him to put down his shoes and to sit down inside the oven. He did so and the Imam (as) started talking to Sahl about Khurasan as if nothing has happened.

After some time, the Imam (as) said: "O Khurasani stand up and look inside the oven.”Sahl looked into the oven and saw Harun sitting cross-legged inside the fire. Then Imam al-Sadiq (as) asked Harun to come out of oven and he came out healthy with no burn or injury. At this time, the Imam (as) asked Sahl: "How many individuals do you know in Khurasan like this man?”Sahl replied: "By Allah, not even one.”The Imam (as) confirmed his saying and said, "We do not rise at this time when we do not even have five helpers (like him). We know better about the proper time.”(al- Bihar, v47, p123, Hadith #172; also in Manaqib by Ibn Shahr Ashub)

The traditions state that Imam al-Mahdi needs 313 followers which are not only sincere and faithful, but also possess supreme knowledge and wisdom. Imam al-Mahdi should also have another 40,000 faithful followers who will fill the secondary positions. These people will not fall out of sky! It is up to us to educate our communities which could help to bring up such people, by first starting from our family, and friends, then school, then city, and then country to the extent our ability. We should however start from ourselves to avoid sin and to acquire more knowledge and wisdom and become more obedient to Allah.

Q5) The Shi’a state that the mother of Imam Mahdi (as) was a bondwoman. Isn’t it shameful that he (as) should be born to a slave-girl?

The answer would be in the form of the following questions: Wasn’t Hagar (as), the Prophet Abraham’s wife, a bondwoman? Did she not bear Isma’il (Ishmael) (as), whom the Prophet Muhammad (S) is a direct descendant of? If it is acceptable for the Prophet Muhammad (S), the Seal of Prophethood, to be a descendant of Isma’il (as) who was born to a bondwoman, then why should that be shameful for Imam al-Mahdi (as)?

The Imam al-Mahdi’s mother was Narjis and was a roman captive who was bought by Imam al-Askari (as) and then was married to him. She actually saw the Lady Fatimah (sa) in dream who told her to travel near the border where the Muslim army were fighting, and to become captive, and to be sold to the agent of Imam al-Askari who would be waiting for the arrival of the captives to the city.

I need to mention that the birth of al-Mahdi (as) was an event surrounded with secrecy, because the Abbasid authorities knew that the Mahdi who is to bring about a revolution is going to be the son of the eleventh Imam of Ahlul-Bayt, and were awaiting his coming to capture him for execution. Owing to that, Imam Hasan al-Askari (as), the Mahdi’s father, could not behave conspicuously by revealing who the mother of the Mahdi (as) was. Notwithstanding, what has created the confusion among the critics of the Shi’a is the fact that Imam al-Askari (as) did not refer to her with one name.

A variety of names were used in an effort to fool the authorities, and to prevent them from recognizing who she was. That was part and parcel of the plan to protect the Mahdi (as). Had the father (as) been slightly negligent in protecting his son, it is clear that al-Mahdi (as) would not have survived. The story of birth of Imam al-Mahdi is like that of the Moses. All the women in the house of Imam al-Askari were being regularly inspected by female specialists of the Abbasid to find out if anyone has become pregnant.

In fact, the word "al-Askari”became the title of the father of Imam al-Mahdi, because he was forced to live inside an army base so that his house could be under full control of the authorities. Similar to Moses’s mother, the Mahdi’s mother did not have any sign of pregnancy to the last hours. But no doubt that what Allah wishes will certainly take place.

Given these adverse conditions and hardships, the birth of the Imam (as) was kept in utmost secrecy, that even the followers of Imam al-Askari (as), did not know of the time of the birth of al-Mahdi (as). Only very few close associates were notified. The obvious contention was that the birth of Imam al-Mahdi (as) constituted a direct threat to the continuance of the corrupt government to rule. This situation is best understood when we refer back to the first few years of Islam when the Prophet (S) preached the religion in utmost secrecy among a few loyal followers. The Prophet (S) feared for the lives of these believers and, as such, he forbade them from revealing any information that might jeopardize the entire mission.

Q6) Who was the father of Imam al-Mahdi (as)?

The Shi’a along with some Sunni scholars believe that his father was Imam Hasan al-Askari (d. 260/874). Below I have included the name of 31 Sunni scholars who confirm this fact. The overwhelming majority of prophetic traditions about Imam al-Mahdi (some of which I mentioned in the previous part) state that the name of Imam al-Mahdi is the same as the name of the Prophet (i.e., Muhammad).

However there exists a single Sunni report that has an additional phrase concerning that "his father’s name is also similar to that of the Prophet’s father (i.e., Abdullah).”This extra phrase does NOT exist in all other reports transmitted by the Shi’a and the Sunni traditionists who narrated the Hadith. Moreover, the extra phrase in some Shi’i traditions is in the form of: "his nickname is the same as the Prophet’s nickname (i.e., Abul Qasim)”which is correct. In fact, Sunnis narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: "An issue will be born to you whom I have gifted him with my name and my nickname."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p137

• Sunan Abu Dawud, v4, p292

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v4, p278 who said it is authentic based on the criteria of the two Shaikhs (i.e., al-Bukhari and Muslim)

• Ma’arifat Ulum al-Hadith, by al-Hakim, p189

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p95

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p676, Tradition #1155

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v5, p91

The single report which has the additional phrase (that his father’s name is the same as that of the Prophet’s father) has been probably fabricated by Abdullah Ibn al-Hasan (Muthanna -- the second) Ibn (Imam) al-Hasan (as). Abdullah (d. 145/762) had a son named Muhammad who called him "Nafs al-Zakiyyah”and the Mahdi. (See Ibn Taqtuqa, al-Fikr fi al-Adab al- Sultaniyyah, pp 165-166). Abdullah used all his power and wealth to support the revolt of his son. Abdullah concealed his son several times during the Umayad period when there was still no danger for him. When he was asked why he did this, he said: "What an idea, their time has not come yet.”(Murooj al-Dhahab, by al-Mas’udi, v6, pp 107-108). In the first letter that Muhammad wrote to the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mansoor, he wrote: "From Muhammad Ibn Abdillah, the Mahdi, ...”(Tabari, v3, p29, Ibn Kathir V10, p85, Ibn Khaldoon, v4, p4).

Muhammad Ibn Abdillah started his claims at the end of the rule of the Umayad caliphs. Muhammad became powerful and tried to gain the support of the last Umayad Caliph who was Marwan Ibn Muhammad (132/750), but the Caliph did not pay attention to him:

Abul Abbas al-Falasti said to Marwan: "Muhammad Ibn Abdillah is striving to gain the power for he is claiming to be al-Mahdi". Marwan replied: "What does he have to do with me? (the Mahdi) is not him, nor any of his father’s descendants. He will be the son of a slave woman."

Sunni Reference:

• Maqatil al-Talibeen, by Abul Faraj al-Isbahani, Pub. in Saudi Arabia, pp 247,258

When Marwan said that al-Mahdi (as) is not one of his father’s descendants, he meant the descendants of Imam al-Hasan (as), for al-Mahdi (as) is the descendant of Imam al-Husayn (as) and is son of a slave woman (umm walad). Even Marwan was aware of these traditions because of which he did not pay attention to Muhammad Ibn Abdillah. This shows that the true versions of traditions from the Prophet were wide-spread at that time.

There is also a possibility that the fabrication of that extra phrase was done the Abbasid Caliph, Abdullah al-Mansoor, who called his son the Mahdi:

Muslim Ibn Qutaybah said: "Mansoor called me and said: Muhammad Ibn Abdillah rebelled and he called himself the Mahdi. By Allah he is not. I will tell you something else which I have told no one before, and will tell no one after you. By Allah my son is not the Mahdi either,... but I did so to make a good future for him."

Sunni Reference:

• Maqatil al-Talibeen, by Abul Faraj al-Isbahani, Pub. in Saudi Arabia, pp 246-247

Also the Caliph al-Mansoor fabricated the following "tradition":

Ibn Abbas (allegedly) said: "These four are from us Ahlul-Bayt: al-Saffah, al-Mundhir, al-Mansoor, and al-Mahdi.”(Recorded by al-Hakim).

It is clear that by fabricating the above reports, al-Mansoor was sorting the chain of Abbasid Caliphs and included his name and the name of his son, Mahdi, among Ahlul-Bayt! Ibn Abbas (ra) never uttered such words, and he himself is not among Ahlul-Bayt, let alone those Abbasid tyrants.

From all above it can be seen that the fabrication of the report which includes that extra phrase, could be reconciled on Muhammad Ibn Abdillah and/or the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mahdi. This is not the place to examine the Hadith critically, but merely to point out the historical background of it.

As I mentioned, some Sunni scholars rejected that single report. The following are the name of some Sunni scholars who wrote that Imam al-Mahdi has already been born, and is the only son of Imam Hasan al-Askari (as), and he is alive and in occultation, and will re-appear to establish the government of Justice. With this, they are in agreement with the Shi’a. Their names are:

1.Kamal al-Din Ibn Talha, in his book "Matalib al-Su’aal Fi Manaqib Aal al-Rasool"

2.Sulayman Ibn Ibrahim al-Qundoozi, al-Hanafi (known as Khawajah Kalan), in his book "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah”who has also established from important Sunni sources that love for Ahlul-Bayt is the only right path and the Islamic Way of Life.

3.Abu Abdullah Muhammad Ibn Yusuf Ganji, al-Shafi’i, (d. 658 AH), the author of "Al-Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman”and "Kifayah al-Talib".

4.Shaikh Nooruddin ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Sabbagh, al-Maliki, from Mecca, in his book "al-Fusool al-Muhimmah", pp 310,319.

5.Ahmad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hashim al-Baladhuri is one of the great scholars and traditionists who also asserts the Imamat and occultation of the twelfth Imam in his book called "al-Hadith al-Mutasalsil"

6.Ibn Arabi (Muhyiddin Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad al-Arabi), al-Hanbali, in his book "Al-Futuhat al-Makkia”(Chapter 366) discusses a detailed account of the birth of al-Mahdi, son of al-Askari (as), and of his re-appearance before the day of resurrection.

7.Ibn Khashab (Abu Muhammad Abdullah Ibn Ahmad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Khashab), has given a detailed account of the twelfth Imam in his biographical book called "Tawarikh Mawaleed al-A’imma wa Wafiyatihim"

8.Shaikh Abdullah Sha’rani (d. 905 AH), the celebrated Sufi, in his work "Yaqaqeet", Chapter 66, deals with the birth and the occultation of the twelfth Imam. Also He extensively talks about Imam al-Mahdi (as) in his other book "Aqa’id al-Akabir".

9.Shaikh Hasan Iraqi who accepts the twelfth Imam, praises Sha’rani as a pious and a learned ascetic, and narrates the story of Sha’rani’s meeting with the twelfth Imam.

10.Sayyid ‘Ali, known as Khawas, the teacher of Sha’rani, also a believer of the twelfth Imam, confirms what Shaikh Hasan asserted about the meeting of Sha’rani with the twelfth Imam.

11.Nooruddin Abdul Rahman Ibn Ahmad, known as Mulla Jami, in his book Shawahid al-Nubuwwah (The Evidence of Prophethood of Muhammad) gives an account of the birth of the twelfth Imam and his statement is in complete agreement with the Shi’a records.

12.Muhammad Ibn Mahmood al-Bukhari, al-Hanafi, known as Khawaja Parsa in his book "Fasl al-Khitab”gives the account of the birth, occultation, and re-appearance of the twelfth Imam.

13.Shaikh Abdul Haq Dehlawi, in his book "Jazb e Qulub", narrates the statements of Hakima, the daughter of the ninth Imam who was asked by the eleventh Imam, Imam al-Askari, to stay with Narjis, mother of the last Imam during the night at the end of which she gave birth to her son.

14.Sayyid Jamaluddin Husayni Muhaddith who is the author of the celebrated book "Rawdhat al-Ahbab". According to Dayar Bakri, Mulla ‘Ali Qari, Abdul Haqq Dehlawi, "Rawdhat al-Ahbab”is one of the reliable sources of reference. The author mentions the twelfth Imam in the most reverential terms. He states:

The auspicious birth of the pearl of the Vicegerency and the precious form of the mine of guidance took place on the 15th of Sha’ban in the year of 225 AH at Samarra. He has described the Imam in the following words:

• al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar (the expected Mahdi)

• al-Khalaf al-Salih (the righteous successor)

• Sahib al-Zaman (the master of the time)

15.al-Arif Abdul Rahman Sufi, in his works "Mir’at al-Asrar”(The Mirror of Mysteries) gives a detailed account of the birth, and the occultation of the twelfth Imam.

16.’Ali Akbar, son of Asadullah Maududi, in his book Mukashifaat (Visions), which is a commentary on "Nafahat al-Uns”by Abdurrahman Jami, asserts the existence of the Mahdi as being the pole of guidance after his father Imam Hasan al-Askari, who was also the pole of guidance and Imamat.

17.Malik al-Ulama Dulatabadi who is a well known scholar, in his work "Hidayat al-Saada”has confirmed the Imamat and the occultation of al-Mahdi.

18.Nasr Ibn ‘Ali Jahzami Nasri, one of the most reliable reporters of traditions whom Khateeb al-Baghdadi has praised him in his works on history, and Yusuf Ganji al-Shafi’i, in his book Manaqib has introduced Nasr as one of the masters of al-Bukhari and Muslim. Nasr asserts the existence of:

Qa’im Aale Muhammad (The ‘Support’ among the family of Muhammad), the one among the Imams of the House of the Prophet (S) whose duty is to establish Islam throughout the world.

19.Mulla ‘Ali Qari, one of the greatest traditionists, in his famous book, "Mirqat", talks about Imam al-Mahdi after mentioning the celebrated statement of the Holy Prophet (S) that after him there would be twelve successors (Caliphs). Mulla ‘Ali states whether they are in power or not makes no difference as they are the rightful Imams.

20.Kazi Jawad Sibti was a Christian but later became a Muslim. He wrote "Baraheen Sibtiyya”(Proofs forwarded by Sibti), which is a refutation of the Christian writers. He narrates the Prophecy from Ashaya (Joshua) concerning the coming of a man from the chosen branch of the chosen lineage of Adam who would be the seat of the spirit. In other words, he will be filled with the spirit of wisdom, sympathy, justice and knowledge and he will be God fearing. God will bestow on him a sound and glorying reason and make him firm.

His judgment would be based on hearing an external evidence, but he will have a guided insight about everything and judge people according to what they really are in their hearts. He further states that his method of judgment is peculiar to him and has not been adopted by any prophet or Vice-regent of God. The Muslims are unanimous that the Mahdi of this description shall be descendant of Fatimah, daughter of the holy Prophet (S). Particularly the view of the Shi’a seems to be real interpretation of this real prophecy.

21.Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Hanafi, (Shams al-Din Abul Mudhaffar Yusuf), the author of "Tathkirat al-Khawas", pp 325-328 gives the names of 22 people believed by Muslims to have lived various ages from 3,000 down to 300 years! He also writes about the twelfth Imam as follows

• He (al-Mahdi) is Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Musa al-Ridha

• His title is Abu Abdillah and Abul Qasim

• He is the last successor of the Prophet (S)

• He is the Last Imam of the House

• He is the authoritative proof of God (al-Hujjah)

• He is the master of time (Sahib al-Zaman)

• and he is the expected one (al-Muntadhar)

22. Abu Bakr Ahmad Ibn Hasan al-Bayhaqi, the famous Shafi’i jurist, has confirmed the birth of the son of al-Askari and his being as the expected Mahdi.

23.Shaikh Sadruddin, known as Hamavi, who has written a book about the Last Imam of the House of the Prophet (S). He quotes a tradition of the Holy Prophet (S) as follows

Prophet (S) said: "The learned one among my followers are in the rank of the Prophets from among the Children of Israel", also referring to the twelve Naqeeb (chiefs)of the Children of Israel (see Qur’an 5:12). But the last Wali, who is the last of the successors of the Prophet (S) and who is the Twelfth Wali in the chain of Awliaa, is al-Mahdi, "Sahib al-Zaman", his appellation and title should not be used for any one else.

24.Shaikh Ahmad Jami, (as quoted by Qundoozi, author of "Yanabi al- Mawaddah", and Qadhi Noorullah author of "Majalis al-Mu’mineen") has composed the following poem:

My heart is fine and bright with the love of Haydar

Next to Haydar, al-Hasan is our Guide and Leader.

The dust beneath the Shoes of al-Husayn

is the eyeliner (surmah) for my eyes.

al-Abideen, the ornament of all devotees

is like a crown on my head.

al-Baqir is the light of both my eyes.

The religion of Ja’far is true and the path of Musa is right.

O, loyal, ones: listen to me praising the King of Kings (al-Ridha)
who is buried in Khurasan.

A particle from the dust of his tomb is the cure of all pains

Leader of men of faith is al-Taqi, O dear Muslims

If you love al-Naqi in preference to all other people,

you have done the thing which is proper and right.

al-Askari is the light of the eyes of both Adam and the world.

Where can be found, in the world,

such a chief in command like al-Mahdi?

25. Shaikh Amir Ibn Basri has composed an eulogy called Qasidah Tayya. The composition contains theosophical lore, maxims, mystical points, and matter of etiquette. Here are some lines quoted:

O’ Imam al-Mahdi! How long will You be hidden?

Oblige us, O’ our father, with your return!

We feel sad the waiting time is prolonged.

For the sake of Thy Lord, bless us with your audience.

O the pole of being! Hasten, O our beloved!

Return, so that we may enjoy the sight.

Surely, it is a great a pleasure

for a lover to meet his beloved after a long absence.

26.Husayn Ibn Hamdan al-Husayni, in his book "al-Hidaya”mentions the twelfth Imam, the master of time, as the son of the eleventh Imam Hasan al-Askari.

27.The well known biographer, Ibn Khallakan in his book "Wafayat al-A’ayan", has given a brief account of the birth of the Imam.

28.Ibn al-Azraq, as quoted by Ibn Khallakan, asserts the existence of the twelfth Imam.

29.Ibn al-Wardi the historian, in his work asserts the birth of the son of al-Askari in 255 AH.

30.Sayyid Mu’min Shablanji in his work "Noor al-Absar”gives the genealogy of Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi (as), the twelfth Imam.

After these and many more, those who deny his birth and his present life have no proof against those who have accepted this fact, while they still recognize the correctness of traditions about Imam al-Mahdi. The Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"He who dies not knowing the Imam of his era, has died the death of al-Jahiliyya (Days of Ignorance; the era before Islam)."

Necessity of the Existence of Imam al-Mahdi (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This article addresses the necessity of the existence of the Representative of Allah on the earth at any time. The opponents of Shi’a protest that although Shi’a consider the Imam necessary in order to expound the injunctions and verities of religion and to guide the people, the occultation of the Imam is the negation of this very purpose, for an Imam in occultation who cannot be reached by mankind cannot be in any way beneficial or effective. The opponents argue that if God wills to bring forth an Imam to reform mankind, He is able to create him at the necessary moment and does not need to create him thousands of years earlier.

In answer to this, it must be said that such people have not really understood the meaning of the Imam, for the duty of the Imam is not only the explanation of the religious sciences and external guidance of the people. In the same way that he has the duty of guiding men outwardly, the Imam also bears the function of "Walayah”and the internal guidance of human.

The divinely appointed Imam directs human’s spiritual life and orients the inner aspect of human action toward God. Clearly, his physical presence or absence has no effect in this matter. Imam is the representative of Allah (Khalifatullah) on the earth, and is His vice-regent.

He is the connection between the heavens and the earth, and is appointed by Allah as the intermediate for the rest of creatures. His existence is always necessary even if the time has not as yet arrived for his outward appearance and the universal reconstruction that he is to bring about.

Let me provide an example to clarify this delicate issue. Any human needs blood to continue his life, and the existence of blood is necessary in every single moment of life. This need is not, in anyway, independent of God. He is God who has created this need for human, and He is the one who has fulfilled it. Similarly the function of Imam over the rest of creatures is not independent of God.

He was Allah who created this need for the universe and He was Allah who has fulfilled it. Allah (SWT) wished the inhabitants of the earth not to be able to live without the existence of His representative on the earth, the same way that Allah wished our body not to be able to survive without blood. Notice that in the above examples, both Imam and blood are no more than the creation of Allah.

A divinely appointed Imam is a human, but being human does not mean that he could not have any authority over other human by the permission of Allah. The closer the human is to Allah, the more authority he will have. Closeness to Allah is obtained through obedience and piety.

When one reaches that level of perfection, he does not desire anything except Allah’s orders. Imam is not divine, but he is fully supported by divine power. He has been given authority as the Qur’anic verses below testifies. This authority has come from Allah and is also controlled by Allah.

Another example would be to consider a company with a president and some managers and employees. The one who is closer to the president (in his position or any other aspects) has more authority than the others. This authority is given and is controlled by the president at any time. This authority is not in parallel with the authority of president, and remains as long as the president wishes to. The authorized person does not feel independence and can not do anything against the order of the president, otherwise the position will be taken away from him. The president has appointed that person to carry out a task.

Similarly, a divinely appointed Imam is not considered a parallel power beside Allah, and his authority is not independent of Allah since Allah does not relinquish His Majesty and Sovereignty to anyone. If He gives His righteous Servant a certain power or authority, He will still have control over that individual. Qur’an testifies that Allah has assigned some Imams with authority to guide mankind:

"And We assigned them Imams who guide by our authority and We have inspired in them the doing of good deeds.”(Qur’an 21:73)

وَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ أَئِمَّةً يَهْدُونَ بِأَمْرِنَا وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْهِمْ فِعْلَ الْخَيْرَاتِ 

Also:

"And We appointed from among them some Imams who guide by our authority since they were patient and believed firmly in Our Signs.”(Qur’an 32:24)

وَجَعَلْنَا مِنْهُمْ أَئِمَّةً يَهْدُونَ بِأَمْرِنَا لَمَّا صَبَرُوا وَكَانُوا بِآيَاتِنَا يُوقِنُونَ 

Moreover, on the commentary of Qur’anic verse: "And lo! verily I am Forgiving toward him who repents and believes and does good deeds, and afterward he accept guidance (20:82)", Ibn Hajar mentioned that it is narrated from Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as) as well as Thabit al-Lubnani that, the end of verse means "he is guided to the Wilayah of the Ahlul-Bayt.”(al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p235).

Allah, Exalted, also said:

"O’ you who believe! Obey Allah, and Obey Apostle and those from among you who are given authority (by Allah).”(Qur’an 4:59)

Who are those Imams whom Allah gave them authority and are to be obeyed beside the Prophet?

The above verses of Qur’an prove beyond doubt that a divinely appointed Imam has authority and he guides. The authority of Imam is not restricted over a group of people but also covers every other creatures (see Qur’an 36:12 which uses the word Imam for keeping the account of everything). Again, this authority is controlled by Allah.

Allah also said in Qur’an:

"(O’ Muhammad!) You are but a Warner, and for every community there exists a Guide.”(Qur’an 13:7).

إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ 

Prophet Muhammad was a Warner, and the Imams of his Ahlul-Bayt were each a Guide for the people of their time. In fact, the following Sunni commentators of Qur’an narrated that the word "Guide”in the above verse was Imam ‘Ali (as):

• Tafsir al-Tabari, v13, p72;

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, on the commentary of verse 13:7

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, under verse 13:7 of Qur’an

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p157

• Noor al-Absar, by al-Shablanji, p70

• Kunooz al-Haqa’iq, by al-Manawi, p42.

If there should be a Guide for each time, as the verse 13:7 testifies, then my question is: Who is this guide today? There should be an alive Imam in every instant of time, in order the above verses make sense. This is another proof for the fact that Imam al-Mahdi (as) is alive. Moreover, Allah said:

That which is spared by Allah (on the earth) is better for you if you are believers. (Qur’an 11:86)

بَقِيَّتُ اللَّـهِ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

The above verse is another proof for the fact that there exists one individual at each era who is spared by Allah (Baqiyyatullah) on the earth to maintain the cause of faith and he is the Imam of that age, and this position was never vacated so long as the earth carries even one human being.

This, in fact, is a doctrine of Shi’a Muslims that a "Proof (Hujjah) of Allah”should always exist on earth for earth to continue its function as a living place for human being. It is NOT that Hujjah is god or life-giver, rather it is because Allah has created the world for the best of His servants. The best of Allah’s creation is the one who is the most obedient to him at each time.

Other creatures are considered to be secondary objects in the sight of Allah. Besides, there are traditions stating that if it happens that there exists only one human on the earth, he is the "Proof (Hujjah) of Allah".

This implies that Allah never left the human on the earth without His representative. At the time of the prophets, the Hujjah were the prophets. Now that there will be no prophet after Prophet Muhammad, the Hujjah is his living Ahlul-Bayt at each era till the day of resurrection. The necessity of the existence of a Hujjah on the earth follows that this world will end when the last Imam passes away.

Beside what we quoted from Qur’an, let us quote some traditions from Sunni sources to support the above assertions. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and many others narrated:

The Messenger of Allah said: "The stars are amnesty for the inhabitants of the heavens, and if the stars go away (i.e., become non-existent), the inhabitants of the heavens will be destroyed. And my Ahlul-Bayt are amnesty for the inhabitants of the earth, and if my Ahlul-Bayt go away (i.e., all die), the inhabitants of the earth will be destroyed."

Sunni references:

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p671, Tradition #1145

• Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p14

• Manaqib Ahmad, and many more such as al-Tabarani, etc.

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p234

• Musnad, Abu Ya’ala, on the authority of Salama Ibn Awka’ in which the wording is: "The stars are amnesty for the inhabitants of the heavens, and my Ahlul-Bayt are the amnesty for my Ummah."

Also:

The Messenger of Allah said: "The stars help prevent the inhabitants of the earth from being drowned, and my Ahlul-Bayt are the protectors of my community against disputes (in religious matters). Therefore, whichever groups among the Arabs opposes my Ahlul-Bayt, shall be split up by dissensions and will become (a party of) Satan."

Sunni reference:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p149, who said this tradition is authentic (Sahih).

• al-Tabarani, quoting Ibn Abbas

• Also in al-Manaqib Ahmad, as quoted by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari.

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p234

Ibn Hajar mentioned the above two traditions as well as many other similar ones under the commentary of the following Qur’anic verse:

" It is not for Allah to punish them while you are among them. ”(Qur’an 8:33)

Then Ibn Hajar comments that: "Ahlul-Bayt are amnesty for the inhabitant of the earth the same as the Messenger of Allah was amnesty for them.”In the next page, after mentioning a tradition from Sahih Muslim which states that after the end of government of Justice in the last days, just before the day of resurrection Allah sends a wind which takes the souls of all the believers and only wrong-doers will remain when the earthquakes of hour of resurrection occurs. Then Ibn Hajar comments:

To my opinion, it probably refers to the Ahlul-Bayt, since Allah created this world for the sake of the Prophet, and has made its existence conditional to the existence of his Ahlul-Bayt for they have certain virtues in common with the Prophet as Fakhr al-Razi mentioned, and because the Messenger of Allah said on their virtue that: "O Allah! They are from me and I am from them”since they are a part of him as their mother, Fatimah, was a part of him. Thus they (Ahlul-Bayt) are also amnesty for the earth (similar to what the above verse establishes for the Prophet himself).

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p234

In another tradition, it is narrated that:

The holy Prophet was asked: "What would be the condition of the people after the Ahlul-Bayt,”and he replied: "Their condition will be like that of an ass whose spine is fractured."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, p143

These traditions, therefore, leave no room for any doubt regarding to existence of Ahlul-Bayt in each era, and that the Imam of the time, Imam al-Mahdi (as), is alive. Now look at the following tradition:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Regard the Ahlul-Bayt among you as the head to the body, or the eyes to the face, for the face is only guided by the eyes."

Sunni references:

• Is’af al-Raghibeen, by al-Saban

• al-Sharaf al-Mua’abbad, by Shaikh Yusuf al-Nabahani, p31, by more than one authority

Also the Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"In every generation of my followers there are going to be just and righteous members of my Ahlul-Bayt to counteract the alterations and corruption’s which the misguided people will try to make in my religion, to remove the false allegations of the untruthful and contradict the misinterpretations of the ignorant. Be aware! Your Imam shall be your representative before Allah, so be careful whom you adopt as your representative."

Sunni references:

• al-Sirah, by al-Mala

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p231 under the commentary of verse: "And stop them, for they shall be questioned! (37:24)"

And now a saying from Commander of Believers, Imam ‘Ali (as):

"I and my pure holy descendants and my virtuous household are most sober in childhood and when we grow up we are the wisest: we are the means through which Allah shall exterminate falsehood and break the teeth of blood-thirsty wolves and restore you the freedom by removing the ropes that are tied around your necks. Allah wishedto commence (all things) through us, and to complete (all things) through us."

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p36

• Aydah al-Ishkal, by Abd al-Ghani

The clear and unequivocal terms in which the Holy Prophet has directed us about these matters in the above-mentioned traditions cannot be surpassed or equaled in any other language. The word Ahlul-Bayt can not cover all the family of the Prophet (S). This label applies only to those who occupy the position of Imams by Divine Decree, as established by reasons and upheld by the traditions. Learned scholars from the major section of the Muslims also admit this. For instance, Ibn Hajar writes in his al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah:

"The Ahlul-Bayt, whom the Holy Prophet has designated as protectors are the learned men among his family, since the guidance can be attained only through them. They are like the stars through whom we are guided in the right direction, and if the starts are taken away (or hidden) we would come face to face with the signs of the Almighty as promised (i.e., the Day of Resurrection). This will happen when the Mahdi will come, as mentioned in the traditions, and the Prophet Jesus will say his prayers behind him, the Dajjal will be slain, and then the signs of the Almighty will appear one after another."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p234

This is why the demise of the twelfth Imam will bring the end of the world, and this is one of the reasons that he should be alive. In another place, Ibn Hajar writes:

"The traditions which describe the necessity of adherence to Ahlul-Bayt until the day of Judgment, also imply that the existence of the righteous members of the family of the Prophet will NOT terminate until the day of Judgment the same way as the Book of Allah will remain."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 11, section 1, p232

The occultation of the twelfth Imam is divided into two parts: the first, the minor occultation (Ghaybah al-Sughra) which began in 259/873 and ended in 329/939, lasting about seventy year. On that period, people were in contact with him through four special deputies. These four deputies knew the place of Imam and were able to directly contact him. That period served as preparing his followers to the absence of the Imam. The second, the major occultation which commenced in 329/939 and will continue as long as God wills it. There is no special deputy in direct contact with him in this period, and Muslim scholars are his general deputies at this time without having ability to meet him. It might be that the Imam (as) showed himself to someone during the major occultation, but it was never a regular occurrence, and no one can claim to meet him anytime he wishes.

Moreover, even if Imam (as) appears to a person and gives him an instruction, it is only personal, and is not meant for all people. The Shi’a doctrine quite clearly states that the Imam (as) would not deputize a person at this time. In fact, any claim of receiving new public orders (which are not found in our traditions narrated from Ahlul-Bayt) during the major occultation is considered itself to be the proof of the falsity of such claim.

There is no specific place of residence known for Imam al-Mahdi (as) and no one knows his whereabouts on the earth except Allah, and he has been seen by different people throughout his life in various locations of the world.

Imam al-Mahdi (as) wrote through one of his special deputies during the minor occultation:

"Rest assured, no one has a special relationship with Allah. Whoever denies me is not from my (community). The appearance of the Relief (al-Faraj) depends solely upon Allah. Therefore those who propose a certain time for it are liars.

As to the benefit of my existence in occultation, it is like the benefit of the sun behind the clouds where the eyes do not see it. Indeed, my existence is an amnesty for the inhabitants of the earth. Pray much to Allah to hasten the Relief, for therein also lies the release from your sufferings."

إعلم أنه ليس بين الله عز وجل وبين أحد قرابة، ومن أنكرني فليس مني، وأما ظهور الفرج فإنه إلى الله عز وجل و كذب الوقاتون. وأما وجه الانتفاع بي في غيبتي فكالانتفاع بالشمس إذا غيبتها عن الابصار السحاب، وإني لامان أهل الارض كما أن النجوم أمان لاهل السماء وأكثروا الدعاء بتعجيل الفرج فإن ذلك فرجكم

Guidance can be of different ways. Do we need to see God to guide us? How about the Prophet who has already passed away? The above tradition of Imam al-Mahdi (as) gives a very interesting analogy, and the same analogy was given by the Prophet (S) on the account of Imam al-Mahdi (please see the article titled: Leadership and Infallibility).

If we want to see our way and in order to walk safely, we need light. The Sun provides this light for us even if it is hidden behind the clouds where the eyes do not see it directly. Similarly, we benefit from the guidance of Imam al-Mahdi (as) even though we can not see him during his period of occultation.

As I mentioned earlier, Imam al-Mahdi and all other Imams and prophets are not anything but the best creatures of Allah. They were NOT divine in any way. However, I have seen few English translated Shi’i books in which the phrases like "divine Imam”or "divine Prophet”have been used. By looking at those books in the original language, it became evident that by "a divine leader”the translator meant "a divinely appointed leader", that is, a leader who has been assigned by Allah (and not by people).

Such phrases should not any how imply that those leaders are divine themselves. This is the matter of understanding the phrase. Although there are many translated Islamic books which have very poor translation, but fortunately the occurrence of such ambiguous words which are critical to the understanding of the reader, is quite rare.

Also Imam al-Mahdi (as) is not a prophet, and as such he will bring neither a new religion nor a new religious law. He does not cancel any regulations set by Prophet Muhammad (S), but he will enforce the true Islamic based on the genuine Sunnah of the Prophet (S). However there are some authentic traditions which state that although Imam al-Mahdi does not bring any new law when he comes, some people say: he is bringing a new religion.

Those traditions further explain that it is as a result of many innovations set by pseudo-scholars into to the religion of Islam. Imam al-Mahdi’s mission is to reject all the innovations and to revive the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad which was polluted by people throughout the history. As a result of ignorance of people to the true Sunnah of Prophet, they think he is bringing a new religion. Some traditions say that Imam al-Mahdi will also provide the unique interpretation (Tafsir book; divine commentary) for the Qur’an.

More on Imam al-Mahdi (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Shi’ite point of view of living al-Mahdi is not something that is hard to believe if one believes in Allah (SWT) and His (SWT) Book, the Qur’an. Indeed, the Shi’a aggressively assert that the concept of the Mahdi (as) being alive does not violate the Qur’an in any way, shape, or form.

For the believer whose heart has been filled with the love of and belief in Allah (SWT), there is no hesitance whatsoever in accepting the doctrine of al-Mahdi (as). For we as believers in Allah (SWT), believe in many hidden, unknown, miraculous, and seemingly impossible things that are stated in the Qur’an. Not only are they stated in the Qur’an, but a Muslim MUST submit in obedience and believe in these events. We also believe that Allah (SWT) is capable of anything and nothing is difficult or impossible for Him (SWT) to accomplish. Indeed Allah (SWT) asserts unequivocally that if He (SWT) wanted something, all He (SWT) has to do is to say to it: "Be! and it will be!"

Let us look at some examples of miraculous events reported in Qur’an. Please take note of that NOTHING in the following verses or stories can occur, except by Allah’s (SWT) leave.

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that a man passed by a village and said to himself: "How can Allah (SWT) revive this dead land?”Allah (SWT), in turn, put him to death for one hundred years, and then brought him back to life. Furthermore, Allah (SWT) had left the man’s food INTACT for one hundred years!!! Then Allah (SWT) told the man to look at the donkey and observe how Allah (SWT) brings him back to life by reconstructing his bones and enclosing them with flesh. When the man saw that, he said: "Now I know (for certain) that Allah (SWT) is indeed All Powerful, and is capable of anything."

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that the Prophet Abraham (as) chopped up the birds into pieces and dispersed their parts over the mountains and then called on to them and they came flying by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that the blazing fire prepared by the nonbelievers for the Prophet Abraham (as) turned cool when the Prophet Abraham (as) was placed in it!!! Not only did the fire turn cold, but it turned cold in moderation to prevent the chill from killing the Prophet Abraham (as)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that Jesus (as) was born without a father by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!! We also believe that he (as) is not dead and that he (as) will return to Earth when Allah (SWT) wishes!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that Jesus (as) brought the dead back to life by the leave of Allah (SWT); and that he (as) cured the sick, the blind, and others!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that the stick of Moses (as) turned into a snake!!! We also believe that the ocean was split in half to allow a safe passage for the Jews to escape the persecution of the Pharaoh!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that the water of the Nile River was turned into blood by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that Solomon (as) understood the language of the birds and conversed with them; and with the ants; and with the Jinn; and that his (as) kingdom can fly up in the air; and that the kingdom of the Queen Bilqis was brought before him (as) in the blink of an eye, ALL by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that the people of the Cave (Ahl al-Kahf) were put to death for 309 years or more or less, and then were brought back to life by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that al-Khidr (as) is alive and that he (as) has met the Prophet Moses (as) when they were together in a boat by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that Satan, the accursed, is still alive even though he was born before Adam (as); and that he watches us from where we cannot see him by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe Allah (SWT) when He (SWT) states in the Qur’an that Adam (as) was born without a mother or a father by the leave of Allah (SWT)!!!

We as Believing Muslims, believe that Prophet Noah (as) lived more than 950 years. We as Believing Muslims, believe Jesus (as) is still alive and he is 1,994 years old now. We as Believing Muslims, believe that al-Khidr (as) is still alive.

All the above CANNOT be proved or disproved scientifically, logically, or symbolically for that matter; yet, you ARE to ACCEPT it and BELIEVE it, or you are NOT a Muslim that has TOTALLY submitted to Allah (SWT). Why then believe all the above, but not the notion of the Mahdi (as)?

Now, the question is: If you, as a Believing Muslim, are COMMANDED to BELIEVE (there is no choice here) in the above issues, why is it so strange to you when the Shi’a say that the Mahdi (as) is alive and will return when Allah (SWT) wills? Do you not believe in the Infinite Wisdom of Allah (SWT), in that He (SWT) will bring forth the Mahdi (as) when the time is right? Is it not a clear promise by Allah (SWT) to grant victory to His (SWT) religion?

Other than the concept of his being alive, there is no fundamental difference between the Shi’a and the Sunni on the subject of the al-Mahdi (as). Since they both believe in his appearance towards the end of this world, and that Jesus (S) will pray behind him in group prayer, and that he will fill the earth with fairness and justice just like it has been filled with injustice and unfairness, and that the Muslims will control the whole earth in his time and that prosperity fills the earth such that there won’t be a poor person, and that all Muslims will unite under his command. So let’s pray together to Allah that He would make that day near, since his appearance is the victory for the nation of the Prophet Muhammad (S).

The Knowledge of The Unseen & The Knowledge of The Book

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This article aims at clarifying two concepts namely "Ilm al-Ghayb”(the Knowledge of the Unseen) and "Ilm al-Kitab”(the knowledge of the Book) which both seem to be confusing in many people’s mind. The article provides references to Qur’an and both Shi’ite and Sunnite collections of traditions.

The Knowledge Of The Unseen

The original meaning of "Ghayb”in Arabic is "that which has been concealed", and it is with this meaning which has appeared in the Holy Qur’an (4:34, 12:52, etc.) It signifies a meaning opposite to "Hadhir”which means "present to the senses", and thus denotes with things to the external world (i.e., Ma’lumat; known things). This opposition of Ghayb/Hadhir (unseen/present) should not be confused with the opposition of Ilm/Jahl (knowledge/ignorance) in which the latter pair is concerned with the internal act of knowing. So it may happen that something is "Ghayb”in the dimension of time which does not exist now but it will be or it was; or in the dimension of place that is the knowledge of something which is located elsewhere but not here.

Thus we can divide own our knowledge into two parts:

A) The knowledge of something which is present to us right here and right now (Ilm bil Hadhir),

B)The knowledge of something which we know but is not here now (Ilm bil Ghayb/Gha’ib; the knowledge of what is concealed from the senses).

It should be noted however that the above division is according to general/original linguistic meaning of the term. The knowledge of Ghayb itself can be divided in two kinds:

1)The knowledge that comes to us through our senses, but indirectly. Examples are our knowledge of history which comes either through narration from one person to another, by speech or in writing or through examining the relics and remainings of the past, and then deducing certain historical facts from them.

2)The type of the knowledge of Ghayb which does not come through our senses.

It should be observed that the first type can be by means of ordinary senses (the five normal senses) or may be by a special sense which has been given to a person like telepathic sense (if there is such a thing). It is, however, only to the second type (the non-sensory one), that the technical/special meaning of "The Knowledge of Ghayb/Gha’ib”is denoted. The historical events mentioned in Qur’an has been named by Qur’an as "the tidings/news of Ghayb”(11:49, 12:102, 25:4-6) which are all the second kind which did not come via senses.

The Holy Qur’an is quite specific about the fact that Allah alone has the knowledge of Ghayb (what is concealed) in the heavens and the earth. Qur’an tells us that there are keys to the Ghayb which are with Allah:

"With Him are the Keys of the Ghayb; non knows them but He.”(Qur’an 6:59)

and that no one knows anything of Allah’s knowledge except if He will. Qur’an tells about the knowledge and the intercession of the Prophet Muhammad and his twelve successors that:

"Who can intercede with Him except the cases He permits? He knows what is in front of them (the Prophet and the Imams) and what is behind them, and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He will .”(Qur’an 2:255)

This shows that the core/keys of the Knowledge of Ghayb is with Allah, but He may release "a news of Ghayb”to the one He wills.

According to the Qur’an, things which are special property of Allah, such as creation, giving life, curing without medicine, the knowledge of what has happened and what will happen, may either be momentarily given by Him at the moment they are required, or else the power and ability to do them may be given so that they can be used when necessary, by the permission of Allah. An example of the latter comes in the story of Prophet Jesus (as) who, according to Qur’an, said:

"I have come to you with a sign from your Lord; I will create for you out of clay a figure of a bird, then I will breath into it, and it will be a bird by leave of Allah; I will also heal the blind and the leper, and bring to life the dead, by leave of Allah. I will also inform you of what things you eat and what you treasure up in your houses. Surely, in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.”(Qur’an 3:49; see also 5:110)

To give a simple example, consider a person who looks at a monitor which displays some part of a database located in the hard drive of a computer. The user can retrieve any part of this database and see it on the monitor. But the whole database is always in the computer and not in the user’s head. Furthermore, the user is unaware of any real-time modifications that may happen to this data base and the formulas behind the modifications.

Allah let the Prophet and Imams know whatever they needed to know. However, they don’t have the whole knowledge within themselves. But Allah would give them whatever they needed any time. It is important to understand that what the prophets or the Imams wish to know is exactly what Allah wished to release to them. They do not wish to know anything that Allah do not want to release to them (among which is the keys to the knowledge of unseen).

Based on Qur’an and the transmitted traditions by Ahlul-Bayt, Allah has two types of knowledge:

1-The knowledge that is withheld (i.e., Ghayb). As I mentioned Nobody has control over this type of knowledge except Allah. Allah may inform "a news from Ghayb”to some of His servants, but this is different than "possessing Ghayb". In fact, there is a whole chapter in Usul al-Kafi which discusses this type of knowledge where it is clearly mentioned that neither the Imams nor the prophets possess the knowledge Ghayb. "The Will (Mashiyyah) of Allah operates on this knowledge. If He wishes He decrees it. And If He wishes He modifies it and does not carry it out.”(See Usul al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, Tradition #664)

2-The knowledge that is granted. "This is the knowledge that Allah fore- ordained (Qadar, Taqdeer), He decrees it, and carries it out (with no modification). And this is the knowledge that has 1been passed down to the Prophet Muhammad, and then to the Imams.”(See Usul al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, Tradition #664)

If the Prophet or Imams possessed any knowledge about the future, it is this second type of knowledge (the knowledge of what has been foreordained), and NOT the first type of knowledge (the Knowledge of the Unseen).

For the First type of knowledge, Qur’an states:

"Allah removes what He wills, and confirms what He wills, and with Him is the Essence of the Book.”(Qur’an 13:39).

 يَمْحُو اللَّـهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ وَعِندَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ 

The Essence of the Book is the withheld knowledge (Ghayb) which is only possessed by Allah, and nobody possesses this database but Him. Also see the following verses:

He said: "The knowledge of that is with my Lord in a Record. My Lord neither errs nor forgets.”(Qur’an 20:52)

Now, let us look at the following verse:

"He possesses the Ghayb and He does not discloses His Ghayb to anyone except to such a Messenger as He is well-pleased with.”(Qur’an 72:26-27).

عَالِمُ الْغَيْبِ فَلَا يُظْهِرُ عَلَىٰ غَيْبِهِ أَحَدًا ﴿٢٦﴾إِلَّا مَنِ ارْتَضَىٰ مِن رَّسُولٍ...

From the above verse, it is evident that although Allah alone possesses the withheld knowledge (Ghayb), but He may disclose a news from it to Prophet Muhammad (S). On the other hand, Prophet Muhammad transferred whatever he was reached from the news of "Ghayb”to those who qualified, as the following verse testifies:

"And he (Muhammad) is not niggardly the Knowledge of the Unseen.”(Qur’an 81:24).

وَمَا هُوَ عَلَى الْغَيْبِ بِضَنِينٍ﴿٢٤﴾ 

Therefore, if the news of Ghayb reached to the Prophet Muhammad (and consequently the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt), it is only because it was given to him by Allah. It is for this reason that according to Qur’an the messengers are all instructed to tell people that they do not possess the Knowledge of Ghayb of their own, for it is reached to them by Allah only as He wishes.

In Usul a-Kafi, it is narrated that:

Ammar al-Sabati said: I asked Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq) concerning if Imam knows al-Ghayb (Unseen). He replied: "No, but when he wishes to know something, Allah causes him to know that.”(Usul al-Kafi, Kitab al- Hujjah, Tradition #666)

Shaikh al-Mufeed (d. 413/1022) who was one the outstanding Shi’a scholars said:

“... Saying that they (Prophet and Imams) possess the knowledge of Ghayb should be refuted as being something clearly incorrect, because the attribute of this can only be for someone who possesses the knowledge of (all) things within himself, not the knowledge obtained from another. And this can only be for Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty. All Imamis agree on this except those who deviated from them and are called Mufawwidah and extremists (al-Ghulat).”(Awa’il al- Maqalaat, p38).

in fact, neither the prophets nor Imams ever claimed that they have all the knowledge within themselves. Obviously they did not know those of information which was "hidden”to them. However, this does not mean that whatever they knew is "visible”to us as well. The information which is considered to be "hidden”to us may be "visible”to them. Thus the visibility of knowledge is relative to the person.

The Knowledge Of The Book

Qur’an mentions the second type of knowledge, explained above, which has been released to the prophets and the Imams. This is the knowledge of what has been foreordained and the knowledge of the rules governing the universe. This type of knowledge is known as "the knowledge of the Book". Qur’an testifies that some prophets and non-prophets had this type of knowledge by which they could perform many extraordinary things with the permission of Allah. We read in Qur’an that:

So We did show Abraham the power and the laws of the heavens and the earth that he might (with understanding) have certitude. (Qur’an 6:75)

Also earlier, we quoted a verse of Qur’an related to Prophet Jesus who said: "I will also INFORM you of what things you eat and what you treasure up in your houses.”(Qur’an 3:49; see also 5:110). References can also be made in this respect to the power of the interpretation of the tales given to Prophet Joseph (as) (see Qur’an 12:6,15,21,37), to the language of the birds given to Prophet David (as) and Solomon (Sulayman) (as) (see Qur’an 21:79). We also read:

We gave knowledge to David and Solomon, and they both said: "Praise be to Allah Who has favored us above many of His servants who believe!”And Solomon was David’s heir. He said: "O People! we have been taught the speech of Birds and we have been given (some knowledge) from all things . This is indeed manifest favor.”(Qur’an 27:15-16)

Having "the Knowledge of the Book", one can do many extraordinary things with the permission of Allah. For example Qur’an mentions that at the time of Prophet Solomon (Sulayman), a person in the name of Asaf, who was the Minister of Solomon and had only a very small part of "the Knowledge of the Book", was able to bring the throne of Queen Bilqis from another place of the world within the twinkling of an eye:

"The One with whom was just a part of the Knowledge of the Book said: ‘I shall bring it to you within the twinkling of an eye!’ Then when (Solomon) saw (the throne) set in his presence, he said: ‘This is by the grace of my Lord! to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful!’“(Qur’an 27:40).

The source of this Divine Knowledge is God. He gave part of it to Prophet Adam (2:31), Jesus (5:110/113)... and some people who were not prophets like Taloot (2:247), and Asaf (see the above verse). According to Qur’an, "The knowledge of the Book”is for those who are immersed in Knowledge (3:7, 4:162), who are given authority by Allah (4:83), who are assigned by Allah as referee (16:43, 21:7), who are the stars of Guidance (6:97).

According to some traditions, the Knowledge of The Book is a part of the Greatest Name of Allah. The Greatest Name of Allah consists of seventy three units. These are not letters, but they are rather the knowledge of governing the universe. In one of the traditions in Usul al-Kafi, Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (as) explained this issue as well as the mystery of the action of Asaf, the Minister of Solomon:

Abu Ja’far (as) said: "Verily, the Greatest Name of Allah consists of seventy three units (Harf). Asaf possessed only one unit of it, and when he spoke it (i.e., used it) the ground between him and the throne of Bilqis (the Queen of Sheba/Saba) folded/subsided so that he could take the throne with his hands, and then the ground opened out and returned to what it was originally in less than the twinkling of an eye.

We (Ahlul-Bayt) have seventy two units of the Greatest Name, and one unit remained with Allah which is kept exclusively in His knowledge of Unseen (Ilm al-Ghayb); and there is no efficacy or power except by Allah, the High, the Great.”(Usul al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, Tradition #613)

As stated in Verse 27:40 of Qur’an, the one who possessed a small part of "the Knowledge of the Book", was able to bring the throne of King Bilqis from another place of the world within the twinkling of an eye. So those who have the whole "Knowledge of the Book”should be able to do more! The whole knowledge of the Book was with Prophet Muhammad and his twelve successors. Allah, Exalted, said in Qur’an:

"(O’ Prophet) say: Enough for witness between me and you is Allah and he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book.”(Qur’an 13:43)

 قُلْ كَفَىٰ بِاللَّـهِ شَهِيدًا بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ وَمَنْ عِندَهُ عِلْمُ الْكِتَابِ 

From the verse, it is clear that in the phrase "he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book", Qur’an is specifically referring to a person other than Allah and Prophet Muhammad. Of course, the source of this knowledge is Allah and He possesses it and He also granted it to Prophet Muhammad (S) in full.

However, the choice words in the above verse shows that "he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book”referred specifically in the above verse, is a person (or persons) other than Allah and His Prophet (S). It refers to Imam ‘Ali (as) and the Imams after him (see below for details).

Also notice that in the above verse, Allah does NOT say "a part of the knowledge of the Book”while Allah used the phrase "a part of”for the case of minister of Solomon.

Some Sunnis have mentioned that the above verse refers to Abdullah Ibn Sallam, the Jewish Rabbi who converted to Islam. some other Sunnis said that it refers to all scholars of the Jews and the Christians who found the attributes of the incoming Prophet in their ancient scriptures.

The above interpretation does not seem to be correct. "The knowledge of the Book”as Qur’an mentions in one more place, is not as simple as recognition of the attributes of the incoming Prophet in the scripture. "The knowledge of the Book”includes the knowledge of governing rules in the Universe. As Qur’an stated, Asaf had only a very small part of "the Knowledge of the Book", and was able to do that extraordinary thing.

Thus this type of power has no connection with just knowing the name of an incoming prophet from a book. Furthermore, if the Sunni interpretation is correct, then it means whenever Muslims have a question, they should refer to Christians and Jews, because they have the whole knowledge of the Book while Muslims do not!

Some may argue that if the above verse is referring to Imam ‘Ali and the rest of the twelve Imams, then what sort of evidence will this be for the unbelievers who would not accept the words of Muslims by saying the above verse to them?

The answer is that the verse starts with the phrase: "And the Kuffar (unbelievers) say: You are not a messenger. Say: Sufficient as witness is...”As such, the verse is about Kuffar (unbelievers). They don’t believe in Allah either. Therefore, the same question may rise again: If the Kuffar do not believe in Allah, then what sort of evidence will be for them to say "Allah is the witness"?

The above verse is, in fact, just a threat by the Prophet (S) to unbelievers, that that will be accounted on the day of judgment for their blasphemy, and he (the Prophet) has enough two witness for that: One is, Allah, the Creator, and the other one is Imam ‘Ali, the Prince of Believers. In general, it refers to all the twelve Imams. But at that time of the Prophet he was just Imam ‘Ali (as).

Witness to the fact that "he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book”in verse 13:43 refers to Imam ‘Ali (as) and no other companions of the Prophet, is the numerous traditions reported by both Shi’a and Sunni.

It is confirmed in the authentic Sunni books that Imam ‘Ali was the MOST knowledgeable man in the Muslim community after the Prophet (S). Those who testified this fact include: The Prophet (S), Imam ‘Ali himself, Abu Bakr, Umar, Aisha, and many other companions.

The Holy Prophet (S) informed his followers of the very existence of a man who was the treasurer of Knowledge of the Holy Prophet (S), and he had declared to them that if they want to reach the Knowledge of the Holy Prophet, they should take that Knowledge from the treasurer:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "I am the City of Knowledge, and ‘Ali is its Gate. So whoever intends to enter the City and the Wisdom, he should enter from its Gate."

إنا مدينة العِلْم و عليٌ بابها، فَمَنْ أرادَ المدينة و الحكمة فليأتِها من بابها.

Sunni references:

1. Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 201,637

2. al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 126-127,226, Chapter of the Virtues of ‘Ali, narrated on the authority of two reliable reporters: one, Ibn Abbas, whose report has been transmitted through two different but chain of authorities, and the other, Jabir Ibn Abdullah al-Ansari. He said this tradition is Authentic (Sahih).

3. Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p635, Tradition #1081

4. Jami’ al-Saghir, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v1, pp 107,374; Also in Jami’ al-Jawami’; Also in Tarikh al-Khulafaa, p171. He said this tradition is accepted (Hasan).

5. al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani (d. 360); Also in al-Awsat

6. Ma’rifah al-Sahaba, by al-Hafidh Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani

7. Ihyaa al-Ululm, by al-Ghazzali

8. History of Ibn Kathir, v7, p358

9. History of Ibn Asakir

10. Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v2, p337; v4, p348; v7, p173; v11, pp 48-50; v13, p204

11. al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p38; v2, p461

12. Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn al-Athir, v4, p22

13. Tahdhib al-Athar, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari

14. Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p114

15. Bahr al-Asateed, by al-Hafidh Abu Muhammad Hassan Samarghandi (d. 491)

16. Siraj al-Muneer, by al-Hafidh ‘Ali Ibn Ahmad Azizi Shafi’i (d.1070), v2, p63

17. Manaqib, by ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Tayyib al-Jalaabi Ibn Maghaazi (d. 483)

18. Firdaws al-Akhbar, by Abu Shuja’a Shirwayh Hamadani al-Daylami (d. 509)

19. Maqtal al-Husayn, by Khateeb Kharazmi (d. 568), v1, p43

20. Manaqib, by Khateeb Kharazmi (d. 568), p49

21. Alif Ba’a, by Abul Hajjaaj Yusuf Ibn Muhammad Andulesi (d.605), v1, p222

22. Matalib al-Su’ul, by Abu Salim Muhammad Ibn Talhih Shafi’i (d. 652), p22

23. Jawahi al-Aghdi’in, by Noor al-Din al-Shafi’i (d. 911)

24. Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in Chapter 14

25. Tadhkirat al-Khawas al-Ummah, by Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 654), p29

26. Kunz al-Baraheen, by Shaikh Khathri

27. Kifayat al-Talib, by Yusuf al-Ganji al-Shafi’i (d. 658), Chapter 58

28. Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, part 15, p13, Traditions #348-379

29. al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, section 2, p189

30. Hafidh Salah al-Din al-Ulai, after copying the weakening arguments by al-Dhahabi, has remarked "There are in this only mean attempts to oppose for the sake of opposition, and not a single valid argument."

31. Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Siddeeq al-Hasani al-Maghribi, from Cairo, has compiled a magnificent book named "Fat’h al-Mulk al-’Ali bi Sihah Hadith-e-Bab-e-Madinat al-Ilm”to prove the genuinness of the very above tradition. This book was printed in the year 1354 AH in Matba’ al-Islamiyyah, Egypt.

32. Also reported by Ibn Adi on the authority of Ibn Umar, and by al-Bazzar on the authority of Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari

... and more ...

In the Arabic form of this Hadith, the word "The Knowledge”comes as "al-Ilm”which has the article "al”which makes the word universal. This means that in the city of knowledge of the Prophet (S), all kind of the knowledge (which could possibly be attained by human being) existed.

Remark: The above tradition also supports the infallibility of Imam ‘Ali (beside what is conveyed by Qur’an 33:33 on the issue of infallibility of Ahlul-Bayt). The reason behind the non-intentional mistakes is lack of knowledge, i.e., not to know what is right to do at the time. Therefore, if Imam ‘Ali (as) contained all the knowledge of the Prophet (S), it reasons that if the Prophet was infallible, so is Imam ‘Ali (as).

In addition to that, al-Tirmidhi also recorded that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "I am the House of Wisdom and ‘Ali is it’s door."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 201,637

• Ibn Jarir al-Tabari recorder this tradition and wrote: "We believe this tradition to be genuine and authentic.”(as quoted by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi in Kanz al-Ummal, v6, p401)

• Jami’ al-Saghir, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v1, p170; Also in Jami’ al-Jawami’

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 2, p189

Moreover:

The Messenger said to his daughter Fatimah al-Zahra (sa): "Would it not please you that I have married you to the first Muslim in my nation, their most knowledgeable, and their greatest in Wisdom."

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, p136; v5, p26

Similarly, Barida narrated:

The messenger of Allah (S) said to Fatimah (sa) that: "I gave you in marriage to the best in my Ummah, the most knowledgeable in them, the best in patience in them, and the first Muslim among them."

Sunni reference: Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p398

Abu Bakr said: "May Allah never put me in a situation where I can not have access to Abul Hasan (i.e., ‘Ali) to solve a problem.”Similarly, Sa’id al-Musayyib said: "Umar Ibn al-Khattab used to beg God to preserve him from a perplexing case which the father of al-Hasan was not present to decide.”Furthermore Umar said: "If there was not ‘Ali, Umar would have perished."

Sunni references:

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p647, Tradition #1100

• al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p39

• Manaqib, by al-Khawarizmi, p48

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, p338

• al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v2, p194

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171

Aisha once said: "He (‘Ali) was the most knowledgeable person among those who remained on the Sunnah (of the Prophet)."

Sunni References:

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196

• Ibn Asakir

Ibn Abbas (ra) said: "There was 18 exclusive virtues for ‘Ali which was not for any other person in the Muslim community."

Sunni Reference: al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani

Ibn Mas’ud said: "We were talking that the most trustful referee/Judge in Medina to solve the problems was ‘Ali."

Sunni References:

• Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v1, part 2, p6

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p646, Tradition #1097

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p352

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171

• al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, section of word "Ain", v2, p462; v3, p39

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, p338, He also reported that Umar said: "‘Ali was our Judge."

• Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v1, p84

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p116

• al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p213

Furthermore:

Ibn Mas’ud said: "The Holy Qur’an has outward and inward meanings, and ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib has the knowledge of both."

Sunni references: Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p65

Much of the knowledge of the Prophet was transferred to Imam ‘Ali (as) when the Prophet was taking his last breath:

Imam ‘Ali said: "The Messenger of Allah at that time (before his last breath) taught me a thousand chapters of knowledge, every one of which opened for me one thousand other chapters."

Sunni references:

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v1, p392

• Hilyatul Awliyaa, by al-Hafidh Abu Nu’aym

• Nuskhatah, by Abu Ahmad al-Faradi

Furthermore, Imam ‘Ali (as) once said:

"By Allah, I am the Brother of the Messenger of Allah and his friend and his cousin and the inheritor of his knowledge. Who has a better title for succeeding him than me?

Sunni references:

• al-Khasa’is al-Alawiyyah, al-Nisa’i

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim v3, p112

• al-Dhahabi in his Talkhis of al-Mustadrak has admitted the above words to be genuine.

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p40

Also Imam ‘Ali (as) himself frequently stated in his sermons:

"Ask me before you lose me. By Allah, if you ask me about anything that could happen up to the Day of Judgment, I will tell you about it. Ask me, for, by Allah, you will not be able to ask me a question about anything without my informing you. Ask me about the Book of Allah, for by Allah, there is no verse about which I do not know whether it was sent down at night or during the day, or whether it was revealed on a plain or in a mountain."

Sunni References:

• al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v4, p568

• Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v7, pp 337-338

• Fat’hul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v8, p485

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Suyuti, p124

• al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v2, p319

• al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v2, p198

• at-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, Part 2, p101

• al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p1107

Sa’id Ibn Musayyib as well as Umar Ibn al-Khattab said:

"No companion of the Prophet ever said ‘Ask me’ except ‘Ali."

Sunni References:

• Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p647, Tradition #1098

• al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v2, p509

• al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196

• al-Faqih wal Mutafaqih, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v2, p167

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171

• al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, p338

• al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p40

• al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p212

• al-Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p83

The conclusion is that "he who possesses the Knowledge of the Book”in verse 13:43 refers to Imam ‘Ali (as) and no other companions. And if "a part of Knowledge of the Book", provided a supernatural power for Asaf, then it is clear that those who have the whole knowledge of the Book, have more ability of this type by leave of Allah.

Also according to the above tradition written in Sihah Sittah, in which the Prophet (S) said "I am the City of Knowledge, and ‘Ali is its Gate. So whoever intends to enter the City and the Wisdom, he should enter from its Gate", it is clear that the only source of knowledge after Prophet Muhammad (S) was Imam ‘Ali (as), and those who seek other sources do not gain the genuine Sunnah of the Prophet because nobody can enter this City from a direction other than its door.

Concluding Remarks

It should be emphasized that The Twelver Shi’a Scholars believe that neither the Prophet nor the Imams possess the Knowledge of Ghayb with the special meaning used in Qur’an, since this type of knowledge is something which belongs to Allah only. However, as Qur’an mentions "news of Ghayb”have been transmitted to the Prophet Muhammad, and from that channel, it has been transmitted to the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt. What they fully possess is the Knowledge of the Book described above.

It should also be noted that the prophets and Imams share with the rest of humanity the means for obtaining knowledge which Allah has given: the senses, the intellect, etc. They also possess special powers and means which other people do not have.

In carrying out the commands of Allah in which people have also responsibility, and likewise in ordinary behavior, the prophets and Imams only make use of the first way of knowing, that is the commonly available means. The second means (extraordinary means) is only used by them in duties and works which are connected with their position of prophethood and Imamat.

Thus in matters such as knowing the beginning of the month, passing judgment, finding out if something is unclean or pure, etc., they make use of ordinary means such as sighting of the moon, and so forth, which anyone else employs. The extraordinary means of knowledge can not be the basis for their action, and what they volitionally do must be determined by the means available to everyone. Thus, such knowledge has spiritual aspect as being the Representative of Allah (Khalifatullah), and the reason for it must be sought on this level, and it is not for the purpose of influencing and controlling the events on the level of ordinary understanding.

And Allah knows best.

Side Comments

A contributor mentioned that there exists another version of the tradition of "The City of Knowledge”where the Prophet states: "I am the city of knowledge and ‘Ali is its gate, and Abu Bakr is its foundation, Umar its walls and Uthman its roof."

To answer this, I would like to first mention this weak tradition is not reported in any of the six sound collections of the Sunnis, where as the correct version of the tradition provided in our article is, in fact, in the Sihah Sittah of the Sunnis.

Adding the words to the genuine traditions of the Prophet, was another trick which the falsifiers of tradition narrators resorted to during the time of the Umayad. When they found that a tradition was so widespread amongst the people that there was no way to deny or refute it, they decided to add a paragraph or words, or to change some phrases so as to dampen the impact of the tradition or to make it lose its intended meaning.

This trick is not hidden to the objective researchers who refute these additions which, most of the time, indicate the lack of intelligence of the falsifiers and their lack of wisdom in contrast to the light of the Prophetic traditions. Even some well known Sunni scholars were aware of such forgeries and have rated many of such traditions as forged or weak due to the discrepancy in the Isnad as well as the contents.

For instance, in the above forged tradition, we can observe the saying "Abu Bakr is it’s foundation”means the knowledge of the Prophet (S) is derived from the knowledge of Abu Bakr and this is disbelief (Kufr). Likewise, the statement "Umar is its walls”means Umar prevents people from entering the city, i.e., prevents them from getting to the knowledge. Also the saying "Uthman is its roof”is undoubtedly absurd since there is no city which has a roof!!!

All praise is due to the Lord of the Worlds, who has given us intelligence through which we will be able to differentiate between the truth and falsehood, and He has made clear to us the Right Path and then tests us by many things so that they can bear witness on the day of judgment.

Some Traditions on the Virtues of Imam ‘Ali (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

It is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "He who wants to see Noah (as) in his determination, Adam (as) in his knowledge, Abraham (as) in his clemency, Moses (as) in his intelligence and Jesus (as) in his religious devotion should look at ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as)."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Bayhaqi

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as quoted in

• Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v2, p449

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhruddin al-Razi, under the commentary of the Verse of Imprecation (Mubahilah), v2 p288. He wrote this tradition has been accepted as all genuine.

• Ibn Batah has recorded it as a tradition related by Ibn Abbas as is stated in the book "Fat’h al-Mulk al-’Ali bi Sihah Hadith-e-Bab-e-Madinat al-Ilm", p34, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Siddeeq al-Hasani al-Maghribi.

• Among those who have admitted that Imam ‘Ali (as) is the store house of the secrets of all the Prophets is the Chief of Gnostics, Muhyiddin al-Arabi, from whom al-Arif al-Sha’rani has copied it in his al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir (p172, topic 32).

It is also narrated that:

The Prophet (S) said: "There is amongst you a person who will fight for the interpretation of the Qur’an just as I fought for its revelation.”The people around him raised their heads and cast inquisitive glances at the Prophet (S) and at one another. Abu Bakr and Umar were there. Abu Bakr inquired if he was that person and the Prophet (S) replied in the negative. Then Umar inquired if he was that person and the Prophet (S), replied "No. He is the one who is repairing my shoes (i.e., ‘Ali)."

Abu Said Khudri said: Then we went to ‘Ali and conveyed the good news to him. He did not even raise his head and remained as busy as he was, as if he had already heard it from the Messenger of Allah (S)."

Sunni references:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p122, who said this tradition is genuine based on the criteria of al-Bukhari and Muslim.

• al-Dhahabi, also records it in his Talkhis al-Mustadrak and admitted that it is genuine according to the standard of the two Shaikhs.

• Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p40

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 32-33

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p155

• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p133

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and al-Hakim recorded with authentic document from Abu Said al-Khudri, that the Apostle of God said to ‘Ali: "Verily you will do battle for (implementation of) the Qur’an, as you has done for its revelation."

Sunni reference: Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173

al-Hakim recorded that Anas Ibn Malik narrated that the Holy Prophet said to ‘Ali:

“You shall inform my nation about the truth and what they dispute after me":

Sunni reference:

• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112, who wrote this is an authentic Hadith according to the stipulation of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim). (This would mean that the chain of narrators are considered to be authentic as stipulated by Bukhari and Muslim)

The First Muslim

It is an undisputed fact that Imam ‘Ali was the first man to embrace Islam after the Holy Prophet (S). Below are some of the references

Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Asakir recorded on the authority of Salim Ibn Abi Jaad that he said: I asked of Muhammad Ibn Hanifah, "was Abu Bakr the first of the people to adopt Islam?”He replied: "No".

And Ibn Asakir on a reliable ascription from Muhammad Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, that he said to his father Sa’d: "was Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq the first of you in embracing the faith?”He said: "No, for there were more than five people in faith before him"

Ibn Kathir says: "it is clear that Muhammad’s family believed before every other - his wife Khadija, his freedman Zaid and the Wife of Zaid Umm Ayman and ‘Ali and Warakah."

Sunni reference:

• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p33 (History of the Caliphs translated by Major Barrett)

It is also narrated that

Anas Ibn Malik said: "The Messenger was commissioned on Monday and ‘Ali believed in him on Tuesday."

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112

al-Hakim also narrated that:

Salman al-Farsi said that the Messenger of God said: "The first one of you to drink from the Basin on the Day of Judgment is your first Muslim, ‘Ali, the son of Abu Talib."

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112

Ibn Hisham recorded that:

‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib was the first male to believe in the Messenger of God and that he prayed with him while he was only ten years old.

Sunni reference: Biography of the Prophet, by Ibn Hisham, v1, p245

The famous Sunni Historian, al-Tabari also wrote:

The first three to offer prayers were Muhammad (S) , Khadija and ‘Ali (as).

Sunni reference: History al-Tabari, v2, p65

Also Khateeb al-Baghdadi, in his book quotes Imam ‘Ali that:

‘Ali said: "I was the first one to accept Islam at the hands of the Holy Prophet."

• Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v4, p333

The Major Difference Between the Shi’a and the Sunni

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

All the Muslims agree that Allah is One, Muhammad (S) is His last Prophet, the Qur’an is His last Book for mankind, and that one day

Allah will resurrect all human beings, and they will be questioned about their beliefs and actions. There are, however, disagreements between the two schools in the following two areas:

1. The Caliphate (successorship/leadership) which the Shi’a believe is the right of the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt.

2. The Islamic rule when there is no clear Qur’anic statement, nor is there a Hadith upon which Muslim schools have agreed.

The second issue has root into the first one. The Shi’a bound themselves to refer to Ahlul-Bayt for deriving the Sunnah of Prophet (S). They do this in conformity with the order of Prophet reported in the authentic Sunni and Shi’i collections of traditions beside what the Qur’an attests to their perfect purity.

The disagreement about the caliphate should not be a source of division between the two schools. Muslims agree that the caliphate of Abu Bakr came through election by a limited number of people and was a surprise for all other companions. By limited number, I mean, the majority of the prominent companions of prophet had no knowledge of this election. ‘Ali, Ibn Abbas,

Uthman, Talha, Zubair, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, Salman al-Farsi, Abu Dharr,

Ammar Ibn Yasir, Miqdad, Abdurrahman Ibn Owf were among those who were not consulted nor even informed of. Even Umar confessed to the fact that the election of Abu Bakr was without consultation of Muslims. (See sahih al-

Bukhari, Arabic-English, Tradition 8.817)

On the other hand, election implies choice and freedom, and that every

Muslim has the right to elect the nominee. Whoever refuses to elect him does not oppose God or His Messenger because neither God nor His Messenger appointed the nominated person by people.

Election, by its nature, does not compel any Muslim to elect a specific nominee. Otherwise, the election would be coercion. This means that the election would lose its own nature and it would be a dictatorial operation.

It is well known that the Prophet said: "There is no validity for any allegiance given by force."

Imam ‘Ali refused to give his allegiance to Abu Bakr for six months. He gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr only after the martyrdom of his wife

Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), Daughter of the Holy Prophet, six month after the departure of Prophet. (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 5.546). If refusal to give allegiance to an elected nominee was prohibited in Islam, Imam ‘Ali would not have allowed himself to delay in giving his allegiance.

In the same tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari, Imam ‘Ali (as) said that he had some rights in Caliphate which was not honored, and he complained why Abu Bakr should have not consulted him in deciding upon the ruler. He later gave his allegiance when he found that the only way to save Islam is to leave the isolation which occured due to his refusal of giving the oath of allegiance.

What’s more? The well known companions, Abdullah Ibn Umar and Sa’d Ibn Abi

Waqqas, refused to give their allegiance to Imam ‘Ali for the entire duration of his caliphate. (Ibn Al-Athir, his history Al-Kamil, v3, p98).

But the Imam did not punish these companions.

If it was permissible for a Muslim, who was a contemporary of the caliph,to refuse to give his allegiance, it would be more permissible for a person who came in a later century to believe or not to believe in the qualifications of that elected caliph. In doing so, he would not be sinning, provided that the Caliph is not assigned by Allah.

The Shi’a say that Imam must be appointed by God; that appointment may be known through the declaration of the Prophet or the preceding Imam. The

Sunni scholars say that Imam (or Caliph, as they prefer to say) can be either elected, or nominated by the preceding Caliph, or selected by a committee, or may attempt to gain the power through a military coup (as was in the case of Muawiyah).

The Shi’a scholars say that a divinely appointed Imam is sinless and

Allah does not grant such position to the sinful. The Sunni scholars (including Mu’tazilites) say that Imam can be sinful as he is appointed by other than Allah. Even if he is tyrant and sunk in sins (like in the case of Muawiyah and Yazid), the majority of the scholars from the schools of Hanbali, Shafi’i, and Maliki discourage people to rise against that Caliph. They think that they should be preserved although they disagree with the evil actions.

The Shi’a say that Imam must possess above all such qualities as knowledge, bravery, justice, wisdom, piety, love of God etc. The Sunni scholars say it is not necessary. A person inferior in these qualities may be elected in preference to a person having all these qualities of superior degree.

Ghadir Khum Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In this year, Thursday, May 18, 1995 coincides with the 18th of Dhul-Hajjah, the anniversary of the event of Ghadir Khum where the Messenger of Allah delivered his LAST sermon. The greatest parallel/frequent (Mutawatir) tradition in the History of Islam is related to this sermon of the Prophet (S).

Please see Part 3 for a complete list of 110 companions of Prophet who narrated this tradition, as well as classified lists of the Sunni traditionists/historians/commentators of Qur’an who confirmed this tradition to be authentic and frequent, and their corresponding books where the tradition can be found. Also in Part 2 we discuss the meanings of wali, mawla, and wilayah.

The Farewell Pilgrimage

Ten years after the migration, the Messenger of Allah ordered to his close followers to call all the people in different places to join him in his last pilgrimage. On this pilgrimage he taught them how to perform the pilgrimage in a correct and unified form. This was first time that the Muslims with this magnitude gathered in one place in the presence of their leader, the Messenger of Allah. On his way to Mecca, more than seventy thousand people followed Prophet (S). On the fourth day of Dhul-Hajjah more than one hundred thousand Muslims had entered Mecca.

Revelation Of Verse 5:67

On the 18th of Dhul-Hajjah, after completing his last pilgrimage (Hajjatul-Widaa), Prophet was leaving Mecca toward Medina, where he and the crowd of people reached to a place called Ghadir Khum (which is close to today’s Juhfah). It was a place where people from different provinces should say Good bye to each other and take different routes for their home. In this place, the following verse was revealed:

"O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people ...”(Qur’an 5:67).

Some of Sunni references confirming that the revelation of the above verse of Qur’an was right before the speech of Prophet in Ghadir Khum:

(1) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, under commentary of verse 5:67, v12, pp 49-50, narrated on the authorities of Ibn Abbas, al-Bara Ibn Azib, and Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali.

(2) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi, p50, narrated on the authorities of Atiyyah and Abu Sa’id al Khudri.

(3) Nuzul al-Qur’an, by al-Hafiz Abu Nu’aym narrated on the authorities Abu Sa’id Khudri and Abu Rafi.

(4) al-Fusool al Muhimmah, by Ibn Sabbagh al-Maliki al-Makki, p24

(5) Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz al-Suyuti, under commentary of verse 5:67

(6) Fathul Qadir, by al-Shawkani, under commentary of verse 5:67

(7) Fathul Bayan, by Hasan Khan, under commentary of verse 5:67

(8) Shaykh Muhi al-Din al-Nawawi, under commentary of verse 5:67

(9) al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, by Noor al-Din al-Halabi, v3, p301

(10) Umdatul Qari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by al-Ayni

(11) Tafsir al-Nisaboori, v6, p194

(12) and many more such as Ibn Mardawayh, etc...

The last sentence in the above verse indicates that the Prophet (S) was mindful of the reaction of his people in delivering that message but Allah informs him not to worry, for He will protect His Messenger from people.

The Speech

Upon receiving the verse, the Prophet (S) stopped on that place (the pond of Khum) which was extremely hot. Then he sent for all people who have been ahead in the way, to come back and waited until all pilgrims who fell behind, arrived and gathered.

He ordered Salman (ra) to use rocks and camel toolings to make a pulpit (minbar) so he could make his announcement. It was around noon time in the first of the Fall, and due to the extreme heat in that valley, people were wrapping their robes around their feet and legs, and were sitting around the pulpit, on the hot rocks.

On this day the Messenger of Allah spent approximately five ours in this place; three hours of which he was on the pulpit. He recited nearly one hundred verses from The Glorious Qur’an, and for seventy three times reminded and warned people of their deeds and future. Then he gave them a long speech. The following is a part of his speech which has been widely narrated by the Sunni traditionists:

The Messenger of Allah declared: "It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am leaving for you two precious things and if you adhere both of them, you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my progeny, that is my Ahlul-Bayt. The two shall never separate from each other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."

Then the Messenger of Allah continued: "Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?”People cried and answered: "Yes, O’ Messenger of God.”Then Prophet (S) held up the hand of ‘Ali and said: "Whoever I am his leader (Mawla), ‘Ali is his leader (Mawla). O’ God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him."

ألَسْتُ أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم؟ قالوا بلى يارسول الله. قال: من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه. اللهم وال من والاه و عاد من عاداه.

Some of the Sunni references:

(1) Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, v5, p63
(2) Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43
(3) Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 4,21
(4) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p129, v3, pp 109-110,116,371
(5) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,118,119,152,330, v4, pp 281,368,370, 372,378, v5, pp 35,347,358,361,366,419 (from 40 chains of narrators)
(6) Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, pp 563,572
(7) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p103 (from several transmitters)
(8) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50
(9) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v3, p19
(10) Tarikh al-Khulafa, by al-Suyuti, pp 169,173
(11) al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v3, p213, v5, p208
(12) Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn Athir, v4, p114
(13) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, pp 307-308
(14) Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part 3, p144
(15) Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p26
(16) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v2, p509; v1, part1, p319, v2, part1, p57, v3, part1, p29, v4, part 1, pp 14,16,143
(17) Tabarani, who narrated from companions such as Ibn Umar, Malik Ibn al-Hawirath, Habashi Ibn Junadah, Jari, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, Anas Ibn Malik, Ibn Abbas, Amarah,Buraydah,...
(18) Tarikh, by al-Khatib Baghdadi, v8, p290
(19) Hilyatul Awliya’, by al-Hafiz Abu Nu’aym, v4, p23, v5, pp26-27
(20) al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, Chapter of word "ayn”(‘Ali), v2, p462
(21) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, pp 154,397
(22) al-Mirqat, v5, p568
(23) al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v2, p172
(24) Dhaka’ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p68
(25) Faydh al-Qadir, by al-Manawi, v6, p217
(26) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qudoozi al-Hanafi, p297 ... And hundreds more. Please see part 3 for more classified references (traditionists, historians, and commentators).

The above was just a part of speech of the Prophet (S). For a more detailed speech of the Prophet, please see the end of this part.

Revelation Of Verse 5:3

Immediately after the Prophet (S) finished his speech, the following verse of Holy Qur’an was revealed:

"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.”(Qur’an 5:3)

Some of Sunni references which mentioned the revelation of the above verse of Qur’an in Ghadir Khum after the speech of the Prophet:

(1) al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v3, p19
(2) Tarikh, by Khatib al-Baghdadi, v8, pp 290,596 from Abu Hurayra
(3) Manaqaib, by Ibn Maghazali, p19
(4) History of Damascus, Ibn Asakir, v2, p75
(5) al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p13
(6) Manaqib, by Khawarazmi al-Hanfi, p80
(7) al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v3, p213
(8) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qudoozi al-Hanafi, p115
(9) Nuzul al-Qur’an, by al-Hafiz Abu Nu’aym narrated on the authority Abu Sa’id Khudri.

... and more.

The above verse clearly indicates that Islam without clearing up matter of leadership after Prophet was not complete, and completion of religion was due to announcement of Prophet’s immediate successor.

Oath Of Allegiance

After his speech, the Messenger of Allah asked every body to give the oath of allegiance to ‘Ali (as) and congratulate him. Among those who gave him the oath were Umar, Abu Bakr, and Uthman. It is narrated that Umar and

Abu Bakr said:

"Well done Ibn Abi Talib! Today you became the leader (Mawla) of all believing men and women."

Sunni references:

(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p281
(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50
(3) Mishkat al-Masabih, by al-Khatib al-Tabrizi, p557
(4) Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part3, p144
(5) Kitabul Wilayah, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari
(6) al-Musannaf, by Ibn Abi Shaybah
(7) al-Musnad, by Abu Ya’ala
(8) Hadith al-Wilayah, by Ahmad Ibn `Uqdah
(9) Tarikh, by Khatib al-Baghdadi, v8, pp 290,596 from Abu Hurayra ... and more.

The Number Of People In Ghadir Khum

It was Allah’s will that an increased popularity is associated with this tradition via the tongs of narrators and over the times. So that there is a standing proof for the guiding Imam (peace be upon him). Allah ordered His Prophet (S) to notify people at a time of crowded populous so that all become the narrators of the tradition, while they exceeded a hundred thousand.

Narrated by Zaid Ibn Arqam: Abu al-Tufail said: "I heard it from the Messenger of Allah, and there was no one (there) unless he saw him with his eyes and heard him with his ears."

Sunni reference:

(1) al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p21;

(2) al-Dhahabi said it is sahih (authentic), as said in:

(3) History of Ibn Kathir, v5, p208

It is also narrated that:

"The Messenger of Allah called at the height of his voice."

Sunni reference: Manaqib al-Khawarizmi, by al-Khawarizmi, p94

"There were with the Messenger (S) from the companions, Arabs, residents around Mecca and Medina one hundred and twenty thousand (120,000) and they are those who were present in the Farewell Pilgrimage and heard this speech."

Sunni reference: Manaqib, by Ibn al-Jawzi

Revelation Of Verse 70:1-3

Some Sunni commentators further claim that the first three verse of the chapter of al-Ma’arij (70:1-3) was revealed when a dispute arose after Prophet reached Medina. It is recorded that:

On the day of Ghadir the Messenger of Allah summoned the people toward ‘Ali and said: "‘Ali is the mawla of whom I am mawla.”The news spread quickly all over urban and rural areas. When Harith Ibn Nu’man al-Fahri (or Nadhr Ibn Harith according to another tradition) came to know of it, he rode his camel and came to Medina and went to the Messenger of Allah (S) and said to him: "You commanded us to testify that there is no deity but Allah and that you are the Messenger of Allah. We obeyed you. You ordered us to perform the prayers five times a day and we obeyed. You ordered us to observe fasts during the month of Ramadhan and we obeyed. Then you commanded us to offer pilgrimage to Mecca and we obeyed. But you are not satisfied with all this and you raised your cousin by your hand and imposed him upon us as our master by saying `’Ali is the mawla of whom I am mawla.’ Is this imposition from Allah or from You?”The Prophet (S) said: "By Allah who is the only deity! This is from Allah, Mighty and the Glorious."

On hearing this Harith turned back and proceeded towards his she-camel saying: "O Allah! If what Muhammad said is correct then fling on us a stone from the sky and subject us to severe pain and torture.”

He had not reached his she-camel when Allah, who is above all defects flung at him a stone which struck him on his head, penetrated his body and passed out through his lower body and left him dead. It was on this occasion that Allah, the exalted, caused to descend the following verses:

"A questioner questioned about the punishment to fall. For the disbelievers there is nothing to avert it, from Allah the Lord of the Ascent.”(70:1-3)

Sunni references:

(1) Tafsir al-Tha’labi, by Is’haq al-Tha’labi, commentary of verse 70:1-3 from two chain of narrators.
(2) Noor al-Absar, by Shablanji, p4
(3) al-Fusool al-Muhimmah, by Ibn Sabbagh al-Maliki al-Makki, p25
(4) al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, by Noor al-Din al-Halabi, v2, p214
(5) Arjah al-Matalib
(6) Nazhat al-Mujalis from al-Qurtubi

The Events That Imam ‘Ali (as) Reminded The Tradition

Imam ‘Ali (as), in person, reminded others who witnessed the event of Ghadir and the tradition of the Messenger of Allah; these are some of the events:

- On the day of Shura (Election Day for Uthman)
- During the days of Uthman’s rule
- The Day of Rahbah (year 35) where 24 companions stood up and swore that they attended and heard the tradition of the Prophet (S) first hand, of whom were the warriors of Badr.
- The Day of Jamal (the War of Camel, year 36) where he reminded Talha.
- The Day of the Riders where 9 witnesses testified.

About the Battle of Camel, al-Hakim and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others recorded that:

We were in the camp of ‘Ali on the day of Battle of Camel, where ‘Ali sent for Talha to talk to him (before the beginning of war). Talha came forward, and ‘Ali told him: I adjure you by Allah! Didn’t you hear the Messenger of Allah (S) when he said: `Whoever I am his MAWLA, this ‘Ali is his MAWLA. O God, love whoever loves him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him’?”Talha replied: "Yes.”‘Ali said: "Then why do you want to fight me?”

Sunni reference:

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 169,371
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, on the authority of Ilyas al-Dhabbi
- Muruj al-Dhahab, by al-Mas’udi, v4, p321
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p107

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal recorded in his Musnad that:

Abu Tufayl narrated that He (‘Ali) gathered the people in the plain of Rahbah (on year 35 AH) and adjured in the name of Allah every Muslim male present there who had heard the proclamation of al-Ghadir from the Messenger of Allah (S) to stand up and testify what they had heard from the Messenger on the Day of Ghadir.

Thereupon thirty (30) stood up and gave evidence that the Prophet grasped ‘Ali’s hand and said to the audience: "He (‘Ali) has superior authority over those who believe me to have superiority over their lives. O Allah! Love him who loves him and hate him who hates him.”

Abu Tufayl says that it was in a state of great mental agitation that he left the plain of Rahbah, the Muslim masses had not complied with the tradition. He therefore called on Zaid Ibn Arqam and told him what he heard from ‘Ali. Zaid told him not to entertain any doubt about it for he himself had heard the Messenger of Allah uttering those words.

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p370 also:

Abd al-Rahman Ibn Abu Laylah said: I witnessed ‘Ali administering an oath to the people in the plain of Rahbah. ‘Ali said: "I adjure those of you in the name of Allah who heard the Messenger of Allah on the day of Ghadir saying `’Ali is the Mawla of whom I am Mawla’ to stand up and to testify. He who was not an eyewitness doesn’t need to stand up.”Thereupon twelve (12) such companions who had participated in the Battle of Badr stood up. The occasion is still fresh in my memory.

Sunni references:

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p119, see also v5, p366

- Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 21,103, narrated similar to above on the authority of three others: Umayah Ibn Sa’d, Zaid Ibn yathigh, and Sa’id Ibn Wahab.

It is also recorded that:

When ‘Ali said to Anas: "Why don’t you stand up and testify what you heard from the Messenger of Allah on the day of Ghadir?”He answered, "O Amir al-Mumineen! I have grown old and do not remember.”Thereupon ‘Ali said: "May Allah mark you with a white spot (of leprosy; Alphosis) unconcealable with your turban, if you are intentionally withholding the truth.”And before Anas got up from his place he bore a large white spot on his face, Thereafter Anas used to say, "I am under the curse of the righteous servant of Allah."

Sunni references:

(1) al-Ma’arif, by Ibn Qutaybah, p14, in the account of Anas among disabled persons.
(2) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p199, where he testifies to the above anecdote, as he says: "All stood up except three persons who came under the curse of ‘Ali."
(3) Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v5, p27

A More Detailed Speech Of Prophet At The Pond Of Khum

Messenger of Allah said:

"Praise belongs to Allah. We ask Him for help, and we believe in Him, and to Him we trust. We seek refuge to Him from the evil of our souls and the sins of our deeds. Verily there is no guide for the one whom Allah leaves in stray, and there is non who leads astray the one whom Allah has guided."

"O People! Know that Gabriel came down to me several times bringing me an order from the Lord, the Merciful, that I should stop at this place and inform you. Behold! It is as if the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call."

"O Folk! Don’t you witness that there is no deity but Allah, Muhammad is His servant and His Apostle, Paradise is truth, Hell is truth, is truth, resurrection is truth, and that the Hour shall certainly arrive, and Allah shall raise people from the graves?"

People replied: "Yes, we believe in them."

He continued: "O People! Do you hear my voice (clearly)?”

They said: Yes".

The Prophet said: "Behold! I am leaving among you two precious and weighty Symbols that if you adhere to both of them, you shall never go astray after me. Each of these two surpasses the other in its grandeur."

A person asked: "O Messenger of Allah, what are those two precious things?"

The Prophet replied: "One of them is the Book of Allah and the other one is my select progeny (Itrat), that is family (Ahlul-Bayt). Beware of how you behave them when I am gone from amongst you, for Allah, the Merciful, has informed me that these two (i.e., Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt) never separate from each other until they reach me in Heaven at the Pool (of al-Kawthar). I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt. Once more! I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt.”

"Behold! I am your predecessor at the Pool (of Paradise) and I shall be a witness against you. Thus be careful how you treat these two precious things after me. Do not precede these two for you will perish, and do not stay away from them for you will perish."

"O People! Don’t you know that I have more authority upon you than yourself?”People cried and said: "Yes, O Messenger of Allah.”Then prophet repeated: "O Folk! Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?”People said again "Yes, O Messenger of Allah.”Then Prophet said: "O People! Surely God is my Master, Whoever and I am the master of all believers.”Then he grasped the hand of ‘Ali and raised it and said: I am his master, ‘Ali is his master (repeating three times). O God! Love those who love him. Be hostile to those who are hostile to him. Help those who help him. Forsake those who forsake him. And keep the truth with him wherever he turns (i.e., make him the axis of the truth)."

"‘Ali, the son of Abu Talib, is my brother, my executor (Wasi), and my successor (Caliph), and the leader (Imam) after me. His position to me is the same as the position of Haroon (Aaron) to Moses, except that there shall be no prophet after me. He is your master after Allah and His Messenger."

"O Folk! Verily Allah has appointed him to be your Imam and ruler. of him is obligatory for all Immigrants (Muhajirin) and Helpers (Ansar) and those who follow them in virtue, and on the dwellers of the cities and the nomads, the Arabs and the non-Arabs, freeman and the slave, the young and the old, the great and the small, the white and the black.”

"His commands should be obeyed, and his word is binding and his order is obligatory on everyone who believes in one God. Cursed is the man who disobeys him, and blessed is the one who follows him, and he who believes in him is a true believer. His WILAYAH (belief in his mastery) has been made obligatory by Allah, the Powerful, the Exalted."

“O Folk! Study the Qur’an. Reflect on its clear verses and do not presume the meaning of the ambiguous verses. For, by Allah, nobody can properly explain them to you its warnings and its meanings except me and this man (i.e., ‘Ali) whose hand I am lifting up in front of myself."

"O People! This is the last time that I shall stand in this assembly. Listen to me and obey and submit to the command of Lord. Allah, He is your Lord and God. After Him, His prophet, who is addressing you, is your master. Then after me, this ‘Ali is your master and your leader (Imam) according to Allah’s command. Then after him leadership will continue through some selected individuals in my descendants till the day you meet Allah and His Prophet."

"Behold! Certainly you shall meet your Lord and He will ask you about your deeds. Beware! Do not become infidels after me by striking the necks of one another. Lo! It is incumbent upon those who are present to inform what I said to those who are absent for perhaps the informed one might comprehend it (understand it) better than some of the present audience. Behold! Haven’t I conveyed the Message of Allah to you? Behold! Haven’t I conveyed the Message of Allah to you?”People replied: "Yes.”The Prophet said: "O God! Bear witness."

References:

- A’alam al-Wara, pp 132-133

- Tadhkirat al-Khawas al-Ummah, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 28-33

- al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, by Noor al-Din al-Halabi, v3, p273

Ghadir Khum Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Meaning Wali, Mawla, And Wilayah

No Muslim scholar could ever cast any doubt in the documentation of the tradition of Ghadir Khum, for it has been narrated with as much as 150 authentic chains of transmitters by the Sunnis alone. (Please see Part III for the evidences in this regard).

A Mutawatir report is a report which has been narrated unbrokenly and independently by so many people so that no doubt can be entertained about their authenticity. Even the students of Ibn Taymiyyah such as al-Dhahabi and Ibn Kathir who have proven their enmity toward the Shi’a, emphasized that the tradition of Ghadir Khum is Mutawatir and Sahih (authentic) (See al-Bidayah wan Nihayah).

However some people did try to interpret the tradition in a different way. They particularly tried to translate the words Wali (master/guardian), Mawla (master/leader), and Wilayah (mastery/leadership/guardianship) as friend and friendship. Dictionaries give a minimum of 20 meanings for the Arabic word Wali,
depending on context, most have to do with the position of leadership and guardianship. Only in one instance it could mean a friend.

Arabic References:

- Elias’ Modern Dictionary, by Elias A. Elias, Arabic-English, p815-816, Lebanon.
- al-Munjid fi al-Lughah, v1.

Some suggested that what really the Prophet (S) wanted to say was: "Whoever I am his friend, ‘Ali is his friend.”There was no doubt that Imam ‘Ali (as) had a very high status in comparison with all other people.
He was the first male who embraced Islam (Sahih Tirmidhi, v5, p642; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v4, p317; Mustadrak by al- Hakim, v3, pp 111,136; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p345; Tabaqat by Ibn Sa’d, v3, p71,72; al-Istiab by Ibn Abd al-Bar, v3, p30).

He received the title of the "brother”of Prophet (Sahih Tirmidhi v5, p363; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p504; Tahdhib v4, p251).

He was the one for whom Prophet said: "Loving ‘Ali is believing, hating ‘Ali is hypocrisy.”(Sahih Muslim, v1, p48; Sahih Tirmidhi, v5, p643; Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p142; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v1, pp 84,95,128).

Thus it does not seem to be logical for the Prophet (S) to keep more than a hundred thousand people in such unbeatable heat, and keep them waiting in such condition until those who have left behind reach the place, and then all to tell them was that "‘Ali is the friend of believers!"

Moreover how can we justify the revelation of Verse 5:67 which was revealed before the speech of the Prophet in which Allah said:

"O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all);

and

Allah will protect you from the people ...”(Qur’an 5:67).

Is it logical to say that Allah warned his Prophet that if he does not convey the message of "friendship of ‘Ali", he has spoiled all he has done?!

Also what danger can be imagined for Prophet if he states "‘Ali is the friend of believers"? Then what danger from the side of people is the above verse referring to?

Furthermore, how can the phrase "‘Ali is the friend of believers”complete the religion? Is the verse of completeness of religion (5:3) which was revealed after the speech of Prophet suggesting that without saying "‘Ali is the friend of believers”the religion is not complete?

Also, as we quoted in the first part, Umar and Abu Bakr congratulated ‘Ali by saying: "Congratulations O son of Abu Talib! Today you became the MAWLA of all believing men and women.”If, here, the word Mawla means friend then why the congratulations? Was ‘Ali the enemy of all believers before that time, so that Umar said that this day you became the friend of them?!

In fact, every Wali is a friend, but the reverse is not always true. This is why the Arabs use "Wali al-Amr”for the rulers, meaning the master of the affairs. Thus, logically speaking, the word Mawla can not be interpreted as friend, and we should rather use its other more-frequently-used meanings which are Leader and Guardian.

Perhaps one would ask why Prophet didn’t use other words to further explain his intention. In fact, people asked him the same question, and the following Sunni documentations are the answers of the Prophet (S):

1. When the Messenger of Allah (s) was asked about the meaning of "whomever I am his MAWLA then ‘Ali is his Mawla". He said: Allah is my Mawla more deserving of me (my obedience) than myself, I do not dispute him. I am the Mawla of the believers, deserving in them than themselves, they do not dispute me., whomever I was his Mawla, more deserving in him than himself (and) does not dispute me, then ‘Ali is Mawla, more deserving in him than himself, he does not dispute him."

Sunni references:

- Shamsul Akhbar, by al-Qurashi, ‘Ali Ibn Hamid, p38

- Salwat al-’Arifin, by al-Muwaffaq billah, al-Husayn Ibn Isma’il al Jurjani.

2. During the reign of Uthman, ‘Ali protested by reminding people the following tradition. Also, he reminded it again during the war of Siffin:

When the Messenger of Allah spoke of (Tradition of Ghadir)..., Salman stood up and said: "O’ Messenger of Allah! What does WALAA mean? and how?”Prophet replied: "The same way that I am your WALI (Wala-un ka wala’i). Whomever (considered me) I was more deserving in him than himself, then ‘Ali is more deserving in him than himself."

Sunni reference: Fara’id al-Samtain, by Hamawaini (Abu Is’haq Ibrahim Ibn Sa’d al-Din Ibn al-Hamawiyia), section 58.

3. ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib was asked about the saying of the Messenger of Allah "Whomever I am his MAWLA then ‘Ali is his MAWLA". He said: He erected me chief (‘alaman). To the time I am up there, whomever contradicts me then he is lost (misguided in religion)."

Sunni reference: Zain al-Fata, by al-Hafiz al-’Asimi

4. On the commentary of Verse: "And stop them, they are to be asked (Qur’an 37:24)", al-Daylami narrated that Abu Sa’id al-Khudri said: The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "And stop them, they will be asked of WILAYAH of ‘Ali."

Also, al-Hafiz al-Wahidi commented on the above verse saying: This WILAYAH that the Prophet (S) affirmed to ‘Ali, will be asked about on the Day of Judgment. It is said that WILAYAH is what Allah meant in the verse 37:24 of Qur’an where He said: "And stop them, they are to be asked (37:24)". This means that they will be asked about the WILAYAH of ‘Ali (ra). The meaning is: They will be asked if they truly accepted him as their WALI as they were instructed by the Prophet (S)? or did they loose and ignore it?"

Sunni references:

- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, subheading 1, p229 quoted from al-Wahidi; also quoted from al-Daylami on the authority of Abi Sa’id al-Khudri.

- Fara’id al-Samtain, by Hamawaini (Abu Is’haq Ibrahim Ibn Sa’d al-Din Ibn al-Hamawiyia), section 14

- Nudhum Durar al-Samtain, by Jaml al-Din al-Zarandi

- al-Rashfah, by al-Hadhrami, p24

Countless scholars of Qur’an, Arabic grammar, and literature have interpreted the word MAWLA as Awla which means "having more authority."

The following Sunni specialists all confirmed the above meaning:

1. al-Wahidi (d. 468), in "al-Wasit"

2. al-Akhfash Nahwi (d. 215), in "Nihayat al-Uqul"

3. al-Tha’labi (d. 427), in "al-Kashf wal Bayan"

4. Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276), in "al-Qurtayan", v2, p164

5. al-Kalbi (d. 146, quoted in "Tafsir al-Kabir", by al-Razi, v29, p227)

6. al-Farra’ (as quoted in "Ruhul Ma’ani", by al-Alusi, v27, p178)

7. al-Nasafi (d. 701), in his "Tafsir", v4, p229

8. al-Tabari (d. 310), in "Tafsir al-Tabari", v9, p117

9. al-Bukhari (d. 215), in "Sahih al-Bukhari", v7, p271

10. al-Zamakhshari (d. 538), in "Tafsir al-Kashshaf", v2, p435

11. Qazi Nasiruddin al-Baydawi (d. 692), in "tafsir al-Baydawi", v2, p497

12. al-Khazin al-Baghdadi (d. 741), in his "Tafsir", v4, p229

13. Muhib al-Din al-Afandi, in "Tanzil al-Ayat"

14. Mu’ammar Ibn Muthanna al-Basri (as quoted in "Sharh al-Mawaqif", by al-Sharif al-Jurjani, v3, p271)

15. Abul Abbas Tha’lab (as quoted in "Sharh al-Sab’ah al-Mu’allaqah", by al-Zuzani)

16. Ibn Abbas, in his "Tafsir”written on the margin of Durr al-Manthur, v5, p355

17. Abu al-Saud al-Hanafi (d. 972), in his "Tafsir"

18. and many more such as Yahya Ibn Zaid Kufi (d. 207), Abu Ubaida Basri (d. 210), Abu Zaid Ibn Aus Basri (d. 125), Abu Bakr Anbari (d. 328), Abul Hasan Rummani (d. 384), Sa’d al-Din Taftazani (d. 791), Shaba Uddin Khafaji (d. 1069), Hamzawi Maliki (d. 1303), Husayn Ibn Mas’d (d. 510), Abu Baqa Ukbari (d. 616), Ibn Hajar al-Haythmai (d. 974), Sharif Jurjani (d. 618), Abdul Abbas Mubarrad (d. 285), Abu Nasr Farabi (d. 393) and, Abu Zakariya Khateeb Tarizi (d. 502),...

Thus the word WALI or MAWLA in the tradition of Ghadir Khum does not mean a simple friend, rather it means master and guardian who has more authority over believers than what they have over themselves as Prophet himself mentioned by saying "Don’t I have more authority (Awla) on believers than what they have over themselves?". At least 64 Sunni traditionists have quoted this preceding question of the Prophet, among them are al-Tirmidhi, al- Nisa’i, Ibn Majah, Ahmad In Hanbal.

Therefore, the opinion of the above Sunni scholars accords with what Prophet (S) said by using the word Awla before the word Mawla. In fact, when a word has more than one meaning, the best way to find out its true connotation is to look at the association (qarinah) and the context. The word Awla (having more authority) used by the Prophet gives a good association for the word Mawla. Also the prayer of Prophet after his declaration in which he said:

"O’ God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him. Help those who help him, and forsake those who forsake him",

shows that ‘Ali (as) on that day was entrusted with a responsibility (rulership) which, by its nature, would make some people his enemy, and in carrying out that responsibility he would need some helpers and supporters. Are helpers ever needed to carry on a "friendship"?

Moreover, The declaration of Prophet (S) that "It seems the time is approached when I will be called away (by Allah) and I will answer that call”clearly shows that he was making arrangements for the leadership of Muslims after his death.

Also when at the end of his speech, the Prophet (S) said twice: "Behold! Haven’t I conveyed the message of Allah?”or "It is incumbent upon every one who is present to inform the absent for they may understand it better than those who are present”(Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, traditions 5.688, 7.458, and 9.539) shows that the Prophet was conveying a very important message which was going to be transferred to all coming generations. This matter could not have been a simple friendship.

It is worth mentioning that Prophet did use the word Caliph in his speech in Ghadir Khum, but it does not appear in the majority of Sunni documents since there is no way to tamper the meaning of that word. However the Prophet (S) also used the word MAWLA in his speech to survive this event from being wiped up from the historical records with no trace.

It is interesting to note that the words WALI and MAWLA are also used in Qur’an frequently with the meaning of master and guardian. For instance, the Holy Qur’an states:

"Allah is the Wali of those who believe; He brings them out of darkness (and takes them) into light.”(Qur’an 2:257)

The above verse does not mean that Allah is just a friend of believers, because a simple friend who has no authority can not move anybody into light. Rather it means Allah is the Master of believers and that is why He moves them from darkness to light. In another verse Allah said:

"Surely the Awliyaa of Allah have no fear nor do they grieve.”Qur’an 10:62)

The word Awliyaa is the plural form of Wali. The above verse does not mean that whoever is the friend of Allah does not have any fear. Many good Muslims may have experienced fear for some events in their lifetime while they are not the enemies of Allah. Thus the above verse suggests something else than a simple friend. Here the word Wali is in the form of Faeel with the meaning of Maf’ool. So the above verse means: "Those whose guardian and the master of their affairs is Allah are not subject to fear and apprehension.”

So if a believer totally submits to Allah, he then will not have any fear. But ordinary believers whose submission are not perfect, will probably be subject to fear of this and that, while we are still friends of Allah. Thus "Wali of Allah”is a person who has totally submitted his affairs to Allah and therefore he is totally protected by Allah from any kind of flaw and sin. This status is much higher than position of being just a "Friend of Allah".

Nevertheless Allah uses the word Awliyaa in its general meaning that is "protectors". The Holy Qur’an states:

"The believers, men and women, are Awliyaa of one to the other: they command to what is just and forbid what is evil”(Qur’an 9:71).

Looking at different translations, one can find that they have used the word "protectors”for the meaning of Awliyaa. The above verse does not want to say that believers are just friends of each other. Rather the believers are under a mutual obligation to one another, and are occupied with each other’s affair. As a result of these obligations, they "command each other what is good and forbid each other what is evil”as the rest of above verse suggests. Thus here the meaning of Awliyaa, though is still higher than "friends", but it is clearly lower than "master”and "leader". Here Awliyaa has been used in its general meaning. But for a special meaning of Wali, see the following verse:

"Only Allah is your Wali, and His Messenger and those among believers who keep alive prayer and pay Zakat while they are in the state of bowing.”(Qur’an 5:55)

The above verse clearly suggests that not all the believers are our Wali with the special meaning of WALI in this verse which is "master”and "leader". Again, here it is clear that Wali does not mean just friend, because all the believers are friends of each other. The above verse mentions that only three things are your special Wali: Allah, Prophet Muhammad, and Imam ‘Ali for he was the only one at the time of Prophet who paid Zakat while he was in the state bowing (ruku’). Muslim scholars are unanimous in reporting this event. Here are just some of the Sunni references which mentioned the revelation of the above verse of Qur’an in the honor of Imam ‘Ali:

(1) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha’labi, under Verse 5:55

(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289

(3) Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Qur’an, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219

(4) Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68

(5) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294

(6) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649

(7) Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the authority of Ibn Abbas

(8) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi

(9) Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji

(10) Ahkam al-Qur’an, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543

(11) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38

(12) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391

(13) al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir

(14) Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas... and more.

Paying Zakat during bowing (ruku’) is not a Sunnah. This is accepted by ALL Muslim scholars. Thus the above verse does not seek to set down the desirability or the necessity of paying Zakat during bowing (ruku’), nor does it want to lay it down as duty or something recommended legally in the Islamic sense as a kind of Divine Law (Shari’ah).

Rather it is a reference to an action which took place when someone did something in the external world, and now Qur’an is pointing that action to indicate that person. In an indirect way, the verse wants to say that this WALI is a special WALI whose authority has been put beside the authority of Prophet Muhammad (S) since they are jointly mentioned.

One may object that even though ‘Ali did this action, a plural form has been used in the above verse, thus it might encompass some other people as well. First, the history tells us that there was no other individual who did this at the time of Prophet. Second, this way of approach in Qur’an which uses plural form but actually referring to just one person who did that particular act, is NOT uncommon in Qur’an. For instance Allah mentioned:

"They say: If we return to Medina the mightier (element) will soon drive out the weaker.”(63:8)

Here also Qur’an is referring to a story which took place, and uses the phrase "They say”while the speaker of the above sentence was not any more than one person. According to Shi’a and Sunni commentators he was Abdullah Ibn Ubayy Ibn Salul.

Qur’an tries to avoid using names of people as much as possible. This is done for many reasons such as generality to make it a universal book, and also to make Qur’an safer from any possible alteration by those who hate a special individual who has been praised in Qur’an, or by those who love a person who has been denounced in Qur’an.

Using plural while referring to single, has another application too. Sometimes the act of a single person is worthier than the deeds of a whole nation. This was the case for Prophet Muhammad, Imam ‘Ali, as well as the case for Prophet Abraham. Qur’an mentions that Abraham (as) was a nation (Ummah), meaning that his deeds was more valuable than all other people.

Allah stated:

"Lo! Abraham was a nation (Ummah) who was obedient to Allah, nature upright, and he was not of the idolaters”(Qur’an 16:120)

The famous and respected companion of Prophet, Ibn Abbas (ra) said:

"There is no verse in Qur’an in which the term `Believers’, unless ‘Ali is at the top of them and the chief of them and the more virtuous one among them. Surely Allah has admonished the companions of Muhammad (S) in Qur’an, but He did not refer to ‘Ali except with honor."

Sunni references:

- Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p654, tradition #1114
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p229
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p89
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196
- Others such as Tabarani and Ibn Abi Hatam

And further, Ibn Abbas said:

"There hath not been revealed in the Book of God regarding any one what hath been revealed concerning ‘Ali,”and that "three hundred verses have been revealed concerning ‘Ali."

Sunni references:

- Ibn Asakir, as quoted in:
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196

Thus the verse (5:55) is actually saying that ONLY Allah is your WALI, and then Prophet Muhammad, and Imam ‘Ali. Thus we can conclude that the WILAYAH (mastership/leadership) of Imam ‘Ali is the same as that of Prophet Muhammad (S) since Allah put them beside each other. The authority of Prophet Muhammad is explained by the following verses of Qur’an:

"The Prophet has a greater priority/authority (Awla) over the believers than what they have over themselves”(Qur’an 33:6)

or:

"O’ you who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those from among you who are given authority (by Allah).”(Qur’an 4:59)

One may look at other verses with regard to the authority of Prophet such as 4:65, 59:7, 9:103, 33:21. Putting all these verses beside the verse 5:55, one can derive that this priority and authority will also be for Imam ‘Ali after the demise of the Messenger of Allah.

al-Nisa’i and al-Hakim have also recorded other versions of the tradition of Ghadir Khum with different wordings which provide more insight to the meaning of the tradition. They narrated on the authority of Zaid Ibn Arqam that:

Prophet added: "Certainly Allah is my MAWLA and I am WALI (master/ guardian) of all the faithful.”Then he grasped the hand of ‘Ali and said: "He (‘Ali) is the Wali of all those of whom I am Wali. O Allah! Love those who love him and hate those who hate him."

Sunni references:

- Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p21

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p109

In another wording:

Prophet (S) asked three times: "O’ people! Who is your Mawla? They replied: Allah and His Messenger.”Then he grasped the hand of ‘Ali and raised it and said: "Whoever his Wali is Allah and his Messenger, then this man is his Wali also."

Sunni reference: Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p6

If WALI means friend, then why people answered only Allah and His Messenger are Wali? They should have answered all the believers are Wali. This clearly shows that people got it right, but they later chose to act otherwise. Now let us look at the following tradition:

‘Ali came to the plain of Rahbah, and some people told him "Peace on you O’ our Mawla!”‘Ali replied: "How can I be your Mawla while you are Arabs (free men)?”They said: "We heard the Messenger of Allah (S) on the day of Ghadir Khum who said: `Whoever I was his Mawla he (‘Ali) is his Mawla.’"

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p419

If Mawla means friend, then why was ‘Ali (as) asking the above question?

Was friendship new to Arabs? In fact Imam ‘Ali was asking this question to reiterate the importance of the word Mawla and showing that people at that time did not mean it friend for him, and that what they meant is master of the believers.

Concluding the above discussion, it is clear that any individual who tries to trivialize the tradition of Ghadir Khum by saying that Prophet just wanted to say "‘Ali is the friend of believers", is neglecting the above- mentioned traditions of prophet in which he explained what he meant by Wali, and also neglecting the above-mentioned verses of Qur’an (those which were revealed in Ghadir Khum and those which explain the importance of Wali). Finally, the following tradition from Sunni references further illuminates the fact that WALI means Imam since the tradition uses the
phrase "follow them”and "Imam". Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:

"Whoever wishes to live and die like me, and to abide in the Garden of Eden after death, should acknowledge ‘Ali as Wali after me, and take his Wali (i.e., Imams after him) as Wali, and should follow the Imams after me for they are my Ahlul-Bayt and are created from my clay and are gifted with the same knowledge and understanding as myself. Woe unto those who deny their virtues and those who disregard their relationship and affinity with me, for my intercession shall never reach them."

Sunni references:

(1) Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, pp 84,86
(2) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p128
(3) al-Jamiul Kabir, by al-Tabarani
(4) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
(5) Kanzul Ummal, v6, p155
(6) al-Manaqib, by al-Khawarizmi, p34
(7) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi, p149
(8) History of Ibn Asakir, v2, p95

‘Ali Vs. Truth (Right Path):

In some versions of the Tradition of Ghadir Khum there is an extra sentence that is he Prophet (S) said:

"Wa dara al-haqq ma’ahu haithu dar", literally: "And the truth (the right path) turns with him (i.e. ‘Ali) wherever way he turns."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, under the commentary of "al-Bismilah"

Similarly in Sahih al-Tirmidhi, it is narrated that:

The Messenger of God said: "O God, have Thy Mercy on ‘Ali. O God, make the right and the truth with ‘Ali in all situations."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p297

In Arabic, linguistically, the wording (balagha) could play tricks on the listener. Logically, truth is absolute and not variable. A person, relative to the truth, could be variable in action.

In this case, the person (i.e. Imam ‘Ali) is placed as the absolute fixed axes around which the event is taking place; such that, if anything changes in the person’s decision, the event is the thing that will change its track -- truth in this case!!! Since, such change is not logically reasonable due to the absolute nature of truth, then one can conclude that the two are married and are inseparable. Hence, ‘Ali (as) stands for truth at all times.

Thus the saying of the Prophet (S) is a metaphoric way to stress ‘Ali’s importance and attachment to the truth (right path) such that ‘Ali (as) and the "right path”are indistinguishable.

Whereas, if put in the reverse order (i.e. ‘Ali turns with truth...) it would leave room, theoretically, for ‘Ali to make other possible turns, by virtue of ‘Ali being the moving object. This would sound weaker, and would imply the nature of a non-infallible person.

Ghadir Khum Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Chains (Asnad) Of Narrations Of Ghadir Khum

The importance of the tradition of Ghadir Khum in history is reflected in its widespread documentation and mentioned by the multitude of personalities over the centuries. Although, some trivialized, only listed the occurrence among the historical events without giving it a thought, or discussed the matter in a mixture of emotional judgments, none could deny the authenticity of these narrations. The essence of what the Messenger of Allah (S) delivered on the day of Ghadir was not disputed among any, even if they disagreed on its interpretation, for reasons obvious to the alert.

Let us look at the lists of some of the Sunni traditions, commentators, and historians who have documented the tradition of Ghadir Khum in chronological order:

Sunni Traditionists Who Mentioned The Tradition Of Ghadir Khum

1. Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafi’i (Imam al-Shafi’i, d. 204) per "al-Nihayah”by Ibn al-Athir
2. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (Imam al-Hanbali, d. 241), in "Masnad”and "al-Manaqib"
3. Ibn Majah (d. 273), in "Sunan Ibn Majah"
4. al-Tirmidhi (d. 279), in "Sahih al-Tirmidhi"
5. al-Nisa’i (d. 303), in "al-Khasa’is"
6. Abu-Ya’la al-Mousilli (d. 307), in "al-Masnad"
7. al-Baghawi (d. 317), in "al-Sunan"
8. al-Doolabi (d. 320), in "al-Kuna wal Asmaa"
9. al-Tahawi (d. 321), in "Mushkil al-Athar"
10. al-Hakim (d. 405), in "al-Mustadrak"
11. Ibn al-Maghazili al-Shafi’i (d. 483), in "al-Manaqib"
12. Muhammad al-Ghazzali (d. 505), in "Sirrul `Alamayn"
13. Ibn Mindah al-Asbahani (d. 512), in his book
14. al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi (d. 568), in "al-Manaqib”and "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt"
15. Abul Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597), in "Manaqib"
16. al-Ganji al-Shafi’i (d. 658), in "Kifayat al-Talib"
17. Muhib al-Din al-Tabari (d. 694), in "al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah”and "Dhakha’ir al-’Aqabi"
18. al-Hamawainy (d. 722), in "Fara’id al-Samdtin"
19. al-Dhahabi (d. 748), in "al-Talkhis"
20. al-Khatib al-Tabrizi (d. 8th century), in "Mishkat al-Masabih"
21. al-Haythami (d. 807), in "Majma’ al-Zawa’id"
22. al-Jazri (d. 830), in "Asna al-Matalib"
23. Abul Abbas al-Qastalani (d. 923), in "al-Mawahib al-Ladaniya"
24. al-Muttaqi al-Hindi (d. 975), in "Kanz al-Ummal"
25. Abdul Haqq al-Dihlawi, in "Sharh al-Mishkat"
26. al-Hurawi al-Qari (d. 1014), in "al-Muraqat fi Sharh al-Mishkat"
27. Taj al-Din al-Manawi (d. 1031), in "Kunooz al-Haqa’iq fi Hadith Khair al-Khala’iq”and "Faidh al-Qadir"
28. al-Shaikhani al-Qadiri, in "al-Siratul Sawi fi Manaqib Aal al-Nabi"
29. Ba Kathir al-Makki (d. 1047), in "Wasilatul Amal fi Manaqib al-Aal"
30. Abu-Abdullah al-Zarqani al-Maliki (d. 1122), in "Sharh al-Mawahib"
31. Ibn Hamzah al-Dimashqi al-Hanafi, in "al-Bayan wal Taarif"
... and many others.

Sunni Commentators Of Qur’an Who Mentioned Ghadir Khum

The following Sunni commentators mentioned that one or some or all of the mentioned verses of Qur’an (such as (5:67) which was about the Allah’s order to Prophet for announcement of appointment of ‘Ali, (5:3) which was about completeness of religion, and (70:1) which was about the curse of a person who became angry at the Prophet for this announcement) were reported to have been revealed in the event of Ghadir Khum:

1. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310), in "Tafsir al-Bayan”
2. al-Jassas (d. 370), in "Ahkam al-Qur’an"
3. al-Hafiz Abu Nu’aym (d. 430), in "Asbab al-Nuzool"
4. al-Tha’labi (d. 427 or 437), in "Tafsir al-Tha’labi"
5. al-Wahidi (d. 468), in "Asbab al-Nuzool"
6. al-Qurtubi (d. 568), in "Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Qur’an"
7. al-Fakhr al-Razi (d. 606), in "al-Tafsir al-Kabir"
8. al-Khazin Baghdadi (d. 741), in "Tafsir al-Khazin"
9. al-Nisaboori (8th century), in "Tafsir al-Nisaboori"
10. Ibn Kathir (d. 774), in his "Tafsir”(complete version) under the verse 5:3 (It is ommitted in coincise version!) narrated from Ibn Mardawayh.
11. al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti (d. 910), in his "Tafsir"
12. al-Khatib al-Sharbini, in his "Tafsir"
13. Abu al-Saud al-Hanafi (d. 972), in his "Tafsir"
14. al-Aloosi al-Baghdadi (d. 1270), in his "Tafsir"
... and many others.

Sunni Historians Who Mentioned The Tradition Of Ghadir Khum

1. Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276), in "Ma’arif”and "Imamah wal Siyasah"
2. al-Baladhuri (d. 279), in "Ansab al-ashraf"
3. Ibn Zawlaq al-Laithi al-Misri (d. 287), in his book
4. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310), in an exclussive book "Kitabul Wilayah"
5. al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463), in "Tarikh Baghdad"
6. Ibn Abd al-Bar (d. 463), in "al-Isti’ab"
7. al-Shahristani (d. 548), in "al-Milal wal Nihal"
8. Ibn ‘Asakir (d. 571), in "Tarikh Ibn ‘Asakir”and "Yaqoot al-Hamawi"
9. Ibn al-Athir (d. 630), in "Usd al-Ghabah"
10. Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 654), in "Tadhkirat Khawas al-Ummah"
11. Ibn Abi al-Hadid (d. 656), in "Sharh Nahjul Balagha"
12. Ibn Khalkan (d. 681), in "Tarikh Ibn Khalkan"
13. Abul Fida (d. 732), in his "Tarikh"
14. al-Dhahabi (d. 748) , in "Tadhkirat al-Huffadh"
15. al-Yafi’i (d. 768), in "Miraat al-Jinan"
16. Ibn al-Shaikh al-Balawi, in "Alef Baa"
17. Ibn Kathir (d. 774), in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah"
18. Ibn Khaldoon (d. 808), in "al-Muqaddimah"
19. al-Nuwairi (d. ~833), in "Nihayat al-Irab fi Finoon al-Adab"
20. al-Maqrizi (d. 845), in "al-Khitat"
21. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852), in "al-Isabah”and "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib"
22. Ibn al-Sabbagh al-Maliki (d. 855), in "al-Fusool al-Muhimmah"
23. Mir Khand (d. 903), in "Habib al-Siyar"
24. Jalalulddin al-Suyuti (d. 910), in "Tarikh al-Khulafa"
25. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, (d. 974), in "al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah"
26. al-Hafiz Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-’Asimi, in "Zain al-Fata"
27. al-Qirmani al-Dimashqi (d. 1019), in "Akhbar al-Duwal"
28. Noor al-Din al-Halabi (d. 1044), in "al-Sirah al-Halabiyah"
... and many others.

The Tradition Of Ghadir Khum Is Parallel (Mutawatir)

The Tradition of Ghadir is narrated in parallel (mutawatir) and is proven by the Sunnis to be from numerous chain of transmitters:

1. Ahmad Ibn Hanbal narrated it from 40 chains;
2. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari in more than 70 chains;
3. Abu Sa’id al-Sijistani from 120 chains;
4. Abu Bakir al-Jaabi from 125 chains;
5. al-Amir Muhammad al-Yamani (2nd century) had 150 chains;
6. al-Dhahabi has written a complete book on its chains and passed a verdict that it is Mutawatir;
7. Abul Abbas Ibn `Uqdah has narrated it through 150 chains.

The Tradition Of Ghadir Khum Is Authentic (Sahih)

1. al-Hafiz Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi (d. 279, the author of Sahih Tirmidhi) wrote: "This is an acceptable (Hasan) and authentic (Sahih) tradition.”(Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298)

2. Muhammad Ibn Abdillah al-Hakim (d. 405) wrote: "This tradition is authentic (Sahih) with the criteria of two shaykhs, al-Bukhari and Muslim.”(al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihain, v3, pp 108-110)

3. al-Hafiz Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tahawi (d. 321) wrote: "This Hadith is authentic (Sahih) according to the chains of narrators (asnad) and no one has said anything contrary to its narrators.”(Mushkil al-Athar, v2, pp 307-308)

4. al-Hafiz Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-’Asimi wrote: "This tradition is accepted by Ummah and it is in conformity with the principles.”(Zain al-Fata) Likewise the following Sunni scholars in (chronological order) and many more pointed that the tradition of Ghadir Khum is authentic (Sahih) with no doubt:

5. al-Mahamili al-Baghdadi, in "Amali"
6. Ibn Abd al-Bar (d. 463), in "al-Isti’ab"
7. Ibn al-Maghazili al-Shafi’i (d. 483), in "al-Manaqib"
8. Muhammad al-Ghazzali (d. 505), in "Sirrul `Alamayn"
9. Abul Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597), in "Manaqib"
10. Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 654), in "Tadhkirat Khawas al-Ummah"
11. Ibn Abi al-Hadid (d. 656), in "Sharh Nahjul Balagha"
12. al-Ganji al-Shafi’i (d. 658), in "Kifayat al-Talib"
13. Ibn Kathir (d. 774), in his "Tarikh"
14. `Ala al-Din al-Simnani, in "Al-’Urwatul Wuthqa"
15. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852), in "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib"
16. Jalalulddin al-Suyuti (d. 910), in several of his books
17. Abul Abbas al-Qastalani (d. 923), in "al-Mawahib al-Ladaniya"
18. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, (d. 974), in "al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah"
19. Abdul Haqq al-Dihlawi, in "Sharh al-Mishkat"

... and many others.

The Companions Who Narrated The Tradition Of Ghadir Khum

At least 110 companions of the Prophet (S) narrated the tradition of Ghadir Khum. Here are their names listed alphabetically (sorted in Arabic), followed by some of the Sunni references in which their traditions are located. Most of them heard it first hand at the site.

- A -

أ

1. Abu Huraira al-Dowsi (d. 57~59):

“al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, in "Tarikh Baghdad", v8, p290; from two ways.
“Abi al-Hajjaj al-Mazzi, in "Tahdhib al-Kamal fi asmaa al-rijal";
“Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib", v7, p327;
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "al-Manaqib", p 130;
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“al-Jazri, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3;
“Jalalulddin al-Suyuti, in "al-Durr al-Manthoor", v2, p259;
“Jalalulddin al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114;
“Hamawaini, in "Fara’id al-Samtain";
“Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p154, p403; also from 12 companions;
“Ibn Abd al-Bar, in "al-Isti’ab", v2, p473;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-bidaya wal Nihaya", v5, p214; from various narrators;
“Abi Bakr al-Ja’abi, in "Nukhab al-Manaqib"; via al-Surawi in "al-Manaqib", v1, p529;
“al-Badukhshi, in "Nuzul al-Abrar", p20.

2. Abu Laila al-Ansari (d. 37 in Siffin):

“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Manaqib al-Khawarizmi", p35;
“al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114;
“al-Samhoudi, in "Jawahir al-’Aqdain".

3. Abu Zainab Ibn ‘Aouf al-Ansari:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v3, p307; and v5, p205;
“Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, in "al-Isabah", v3, p408; and v4, p80.

4. Abu Fadhalah al-Ansari (who took part in the battle of Badr, was martyred in Siffin while he was with ‘Ali (as)):

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v3, p307; and v5, p205;
“al-Qadhy Bahlool Bahjat, in "Tarikh Aali Muhammad", p67.

5. Abu Qidamah al-Ansari:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v4, p159; and v5, p276;
“al-Samhoudi, in "Jawahir al-’Aqdain".

6. Abu ‘Umrou Ibn Muhsin al-Ansari:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v3, p307;
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";

7. Abu al-Haitham Ibn al-Tihan (d. 37 in Siffin):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“al-Samhoudi al-Shafi’i, in "Jawahir al-’Aqdain".
“al-Qadhy, in "Tarikh Aali Muhammad", p67.

8. Abu Rafi’ al-Qabti (Servent of the Messenger of Allah):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";

9. Abu Thuwaib Khuwailid (or Khalid) Ibn Khalid Ibn Muhrith al-Hathli (the pre-islamic and post-islamic poet, died during the reign of Uthman):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt", in section 4.

10. Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Qahafah al-Taymi (the First Caliph, d. 13):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Mansour al-Razi, in "al-Ghadir"
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3.

11. Usamah Ibn Zaid Ibn Harithah al-Kalbi (d. 54)

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";

12. Ubay Ibn Ka’ab al-Ansari:

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah"; in "al-Yaqin", section 37;
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p4.

13. Asmaa bint ‘Umaice al-Khadh’amiya

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah"; in "al-Yaqin", section 37;

14. Um Salmah (wife of the Prophet):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Samhoudi al-Shafi’i, in "Jawahir al-’Aqdain".
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p40;
“Ahmed Ibn al-Fadhl Ibn Muhammad ba-Kathir al-Makki al-Shafi’i, in "Wasilat al-Ma-al".

16. Um Hani bint Abi Talib:

“al-Bazzar, in "Musnad al-Bazzar";
“al-Samhoudi al-Shafi’i, in "Jawahir al-’Aqdain".
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p40;
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";

17. Abu Hamzah Anas Ibn Malik al-Ansari al-Khazraji (the servent of the

Prophet, d. 93):

“al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, in "Tarikh Baghdad", v7, p377;
“Ibn Qutaibah al-Daynouri, in "al-Ma’arif", p291;
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114; from al-Tabarani;
“Muttaqqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p154, p403;
“al-Badukhshi, in "Nuzul al-Abrar", p20; from al-Tabarani &
al-Khatib.
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p4.

- B -

ب

18. Baraa Ibn ‘Azib al-Ansari al-Awsi (d. 72):

“Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, in "al-Musnad", v4, p281; from two ways;
“Ibn Majah, in "Sunan ibn Majah", v1, p28-29;
“al-Nisa’i, in "al-Khasa’is", p16;
“al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, in "Tarikh Baghdad", v14, p236;
“Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, in "Tafsir al-Tabari", v3, p428;
“Abi al-Hajjaj al-Mazzi, in "Tahdhib al-Kamal fi Asmaa al-rijal";
“al-Tha’labi, in "al-Kashf wal Bayan";
“Ibn Abd al-Bar, in "al-Isti’ab", v2, p473;
“Muhib al-Din al-Tabari, in "al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah", v2, 169;
“Muhib al-Din al-Tabari, in "Dhakha’ir al-’Aqabi", p67;
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "al-Manaqib", p94;
“Ibn al-Sabbagh al-Maliki, in "al-Fusool al-Muhimmah", p25;
“al-Hafiz al-Ganji al-Shafi’i, in "Kifayat al-Talib", p14;
“al-Fakhr al-Razi, in "Tafsir al-Fakhr al-Razi", v3, p636;
“al-Nisaboori, in "Tafsir al-Nisaboori", v6, p194;
“Jamaluddin al Zarandi, in "Nudhum Durar al-Samtain";
“"al-Jame’ al-Saghir", v2, p555;
“"Mishkat al-Masabeeh", p557;
“Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p152, p397;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v5, p209; v7, p349;
“... Several others from the above sources.

19. Baridah Ibn al-Hasib Abu-Sahal al-Aslami (d. 63):

“al-Hakim, in "Mustadrak al-Hakim", v3, p110;
“Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, in "Hilyat al-Awliyaa", v4, p23;
“Ibn Abd al-Bar, in "al-Isti’ab", v2, p473;
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3;
“al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114;
“"al-Jame’ al-Saghir", v2, p555;
“al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p397;
“al-Badukhshi, in "Nuzul al-Abrar", p20;
“"Tafsir al-Manar", v6, p464.
“...

- Th -

ذ

20. Abu Sa’id, Thabit Ibn Wadi’a al-Ansari al-Khazraji al-Madani:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v3, p307; v5, p205;
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Qadhy, in "Tarikh Aali Muhammad", p67.

- J -

ج

21. Jabir Ibn Samrah Ibn Janadah, Abu Sulaiman al-Suwa’i (d. 70~74):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt", section 4;
“al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p398;

22. Jabir Ibn Abdullah al-Ansari (d. 73/74/78 in Madina):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“Ibn Abd al-Bar, in "al-Isti’ab", v2, p473;
“Abi al-Hajjaj al-Mazzi, in "Tahdhib al-Kamal fi asmaa al-rijal";
“Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in "Tahdhib al-Tahdhib", v7, p337;
“al-Hafiz al-Ganji al-Shafi’i, in "Kifayat al-Talib", p16;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v5, p209;
“Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p398;
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p41;
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3.
“al-Tha’labi, in "Tafsir al-Tha’labi"

23. Jublah Ibn ‘Amrou al-Ansari:

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";

24. Jubair Ibn Mut’am Ibn ‘Uday al-Qurashi al-Nawfali (d. 57/58/59):

“al-Qadhy Bahlool Bahjat, in "Tarikh Aali Muhammad", p67.
“Shahab al-Din al-Hamadani, in "Mawaddat al-Qurba";
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p31, p336.

25. Jarir Ibn Abdullah Ibn Jabir al-Bajali (d. 51/54):

“al-Haythami, in "Majma’ al-Zawa’id", v9, p106; from "al-Mu’jam al-Kabir”of al-Tabarani;
“al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114; from al-Tabarani;
“Muttaqqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p154, p399;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v7, p349;

26. Abu Dharr al-Ghafari, Jundub Ibn Janadah (d. 31):

“Hamawaini, in "Fara’id al-Samtayn", section 58;
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p4.

27. Abu Junaidah, Junda’ Ibn ‘Amrou Ibn Mazin al-Ansari:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v1, p308;
“al-Qadhy Bahlool Bahjat, in "Tarikh Aali Muhammad", p67.

- H -

ح

28. Habbah Ibn Juwayn, Abu Qudamah al-’Urani al-Bajali (d. 76-79):

“al-Haythami, in "Majma’ al-Zawa’id", v9, p103;
“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Doolabi, in "al-Kuna wal Asmaa", v2, p88;
“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v1, p367;
“Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in "al-Isabah", v1, p372;
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p34;

29. Hubshi Ibn Janadah al-Salouli:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v3, p307; v5, p205;
“Muhib al-Din al-Tabari, in "al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah", v2, p169;
“al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, in "Kanz al-Ummal", v6, p154;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v5, p211; v7, p349.
“al-Haythami, in "Majma’ al-Zawa’id", v9, p106;
“al-Suyuti, in "Tarikh al-Khulafaa", p114;
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri, in "Asna al-Matalib", p4;

30. Habib Ibn Badil Ibn Warqaa al-Khaza’i:

“Ibn al-Athir, in "Usd al-Ghabah", v1, p368;
“Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, in "al-Isabah", v1, p304;

31. Hudhaifa Ibn Usaid, Abu Sarihah, al-Ghafari (from the companions who plegde under the "Tree", d. 40~42):

“al-Tirmidhi, in "Sahih al-Tirmidhi", v2, p298;
“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p38; from Samhoodi and Ibn ‘Uqdah as in "al-Muwalat".
“Ibn al-Sabbagh al-Maliki, in "al-Fusool al-Muhimmah", p25;
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v5, p211; v7, p348.
“Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, in "al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah", p25;
“Noor al-Din al-Halabi, in "al-Sirah al-Halabiyah", v3, p301;

32. Hudhaifa Ibn al-Yaman al-Yamani (d. 36):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Hakim al-Hasakani, in "Du’at al-Hudat ila Adaa Haqq al-Muwalat";
“al-Jazri, in "Asna al-Matalib", p4;

33. Hassan Ibn Thabit (one of the poets of al-Ghadir who composed poem during the ceremony):

“Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani (d. 430), in "Ma Nazala min al-Qur’an fi ‘Ali"

34. al-Imam, al-Sibt, al-Mujtaba, al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (as):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";

35. al-Imam, al-Sibt, al-Shahid, al-Hussain Ibn ‘Ali (as):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“Abu Bakr Ju’abi, in "Nakhb al-Manaqib";
“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“al-Hafiz Ibn al-Maghazili al-Shafi’i, in "al-Manaqib";
“Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, in "Hilyat al-Awliyaa", v9, p64;

Note: from this point, for the sake of brevity, we skip the references under the name of each companion except for the case of few critical individuals. Interested readers can look up the rest of the references in the encyclopedia of "al-Ghadir", by Allamah al-Amini (ra), volume 1 of 11.

- KH -

خ

36. Abu Ayyoub, Khalid Ibn Zaid al-Ansari (d. 50/51/52):

37. Abu Sulaiman, Khalid Ibn al-Walid Ibn al-Mughairah al-Makhzoomi (d. 21/22):

38. Khuzimah Ibn Thabit al-Ansari (Dhul Shahadatain, d. 37 in Siffin):

39. Abu Sharih, Khuwailid Ibn ‘Amrou al-Khuza’i (d. 68):

- R -

ر

40. Rufa’ah Ibn Abdul Munthir al-Ansari:

- Z -

ز

41. Zubair Ibn al-’Awwam al-Qurashi (d. 36):

42. Zaid Ibn Arqam al-Ansari al-Khazraji (d. 66~68):

43. Abu Sa’id, Zaid Ibn Thabit (d. 45~48):

44. Zaid/Yazid Ibn Sharahil al-Ansari:

45. Zaid Ibn Abdullah al-Ansari:

- S -

س

46. Abu Is’haq, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas (d. 54-58):

47. Sa’d Ibn Janadah al-’Awfi:

48. Sa’d Ibn ‘Abadah al-Ansari al-Khazraji (d. 14~15)

49. Abu Sa’id, Sa’d Ibn Malik al-Ansari al-Khudri (d. 63/65/74):

50. Sa’id Ibn Zaid al-Qurashi al-’Adwi (d. 50~51):

51. Sa’id Ibn Sa’d Ibn ‘Abadah al-Ansari:

52. Abu Abdullah, Salman al-Farsi (d. 36~37):

53. Abu Muslim, Salmah Ibn ‘Umrou Ibn al-Akwa’ al-Aslami (d. 74):

54. Abu Sulaiman, Samrah Ibn Jundab al-Fazari (d. 58~60):

55. Sahl Ibn Hanif al-Ansari al-Awsi (d. 38):

56. Abu al-Abbas, Sahl Ibn Sa’d al-Ansari al-Khazaraji al-Sa’idi (d. 91):

- SAD & DHAD -

ص ض

57. Abu Imamah, al-Sadi Ibn ‘Ajlan al-Bahili (d. 86):

58. Dhamirah al-Asadi:

- TAA -

ط

59. Talha Ibn ‘Ubaidullah al-Timimi (d. 36):

- ‘A (AYN) -

ع

60. ‘Amir Ibn ‘Umair al-Numairi:

61. ‘Amir Ibn Laila Ibn Dhamrah:

62. ‘Amir Ibn Laila al-Ghafari:

63. Abu al-Tufail, ‘Amir Ibn Wathilah al-Laithi (d. 100/102/108/110):

64. ‘Aisha Ibn Abi Bakr Ibn Abi Qahafah (wife of the Prophet):

65. ‘Abbas Ibn Abdul Muttalib Ibn Hashim (Uncle of the Prophet):

66. ‘Abdul Rahman Ibn ‘Abdu-Rabb al-Ansari:

67. Abu Muhammad, ‘Abdul Rahman Ibn ‘Aouf al-Qurashi al-Zuhri (d. 31/32):

68. ‘Abdul Rahman Ibn Ya’mur al-Daili:

69. ‘Abdullah Ibn Abi Abdul Asad al-Makhzoomi:

70. `Abdullah Ibn Badil Ibn Warqaa (d. 37 in Siffin):

71. ‘Abdullah Ibn Bashir al-Mazini:

72. ‘Abdullah Ibn Thabit al-Ansari:

73. ‘Abdullah Ibn Ja’afar Ibn Abi Talib al-Hashimi (d. 80):

74. ‘Abdullah Ibn Hantab al-Qurashi al-Makhzoomi:

75. ‘Abdullah Ibn Rabi’a:

76. ‘Abdullah Ibn Abbas (d. 68):

77. ‘Abdullah Ibn Abi Ofa ‘Alqamah al-Aslami (d. 86/87):

78. Abu Abdul Rahman, ‘Abdullah Ibn Umar Ibn al-Khattab al-’Udawi (d. 72/73):

79. Abu Abdul Rahman, ‘Abdullah Ibn Masoud al-Hathli (d. 32/33):

80. ‘Abdullah Ibn Yamil/Yamin:

81. ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan (d. 35):

82. ‘Ubaid Ibn ‘Azib al-Ansari:

83. Abu Tarif, ‘Uday Ibn Hatam (d. 68):

84. ‘Atiya Ibn Busr al-Mazini:

85. ‘Aqabah Ibn ‘Amir al-Jahani:

86. Amirul Mouminin, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (as):

87. Abul Yaqdhan, ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir al-’Unsi al-Shahid (in Siffin 37):

88. ‘Ammar al-Khazraji al-Ansari (d. ied the day of Yamamah):

89. ‘Umar Ibn Abi Salmah Ibn Abdul Asad al-Makhzoomi (his mother

Um Salmah was the wife of the Prophet):

90. ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab (d. 23):

“Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, in "al-Manaqib";
“Muhib al-Din al-Tabari, in "al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah", v2, p161 & p244;
“al-Hafiz Ibn al-Maghazili al-Shafi’i, in "al-Manaqib":

Two narrations, one via Abu Hurairah, Umar Ibn al-Khattab said: "The Messenger of Allah (s) said: Whomever I was his mawla then ‘Ali is his mawla."

“al-Khatib al-Khawarizmi, in "Maqtal al-Imam al-Sibt";
“Ibn Kathir, in "al-Bidayah wal Nihayah", v7, p349;
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3;
“Shahab al-Din al-Hamadani, in "Mawaddat al-Qurba”and in:

“al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, in "Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah", p249: "Umar Ibn al-Khattab (ra) said: The Messenger of Allah raised ‘Ali up clearly, and said: "Whoever I was his leader (Mawlah) then ‘Ali is his leader (Mawlah), O’ Allah! Be a guard (Wali) to whomever is his adherent (Walah), and be the enemy to his enemy, forsake the one who forsakes him (abandons him), support the one who supports him. O’ Allah! You are me witness on them.”Umar said: "O’ Messenger of Allah? (i.e. Why ‘Ali?) And there was a young man next to me, with a handsome face and good fragrance. He said to me: "O’ Umar, the Messenger of Allah has agreed to an agreement. No one dissolves it except a hypocrite.”Then the Messenger of Allah took my hand and said: "O’ Umar, it is not sons’ of Adam (i.e., it not a human decision), but Gabriel wanted to make certain to you what I said about ‘Ali."

91. Abu Najid, ‘Imran Ibn Hasin al-Khuza’i (d. 52):

92. ‘Amrou Ibn al-Hamq al-Khaza’i al-Koufi (d. 50):

93. ‘Amrou Ibn Sharahil:

94. ‘Amrou Ibn al-’Asy (a poet of al-Ghadir):

95. ‘Amrou Ibn Murrah al-Jahani, Abu Talha or Abu Mariam:

- F -

ف

96. al-Siddiqah, Fatimah (sa) (the daughter of the Propet, d. 11):

“Ibn ‘Uqdah, in "Hadith al-Wilayah";
“al-Mansour al-Razi, in "al-Ghadir"
“Shams al-Din al-Jazri al-Shafi’i, in "Asna al-Matalib", p3.

“Shahab al-Din al-Hamadani, in "Mawaddat al-Qurba": She said: "The Messenger of Allah (s) said: Whomever I was his leader (wali), then ‘Ali is his leader (wali). And whomever I was his Imam then ‘Ali is his Imam."

97. Fatimah bint Hamzah Ibn Abdul Muttalib:

- Q & K -

ق ك

98. Qais Ibn Thabit Ibn Shammas al-Ansari:

99. Qais Ibn Sa’d Ibn ‘Abadah al-Ansari al-Khazraji:

100. Abu Muhammad, Ka’b Ibn ‘Ajrah al-Ansari al-Madani (d. 51):

- M -

م

101. Abu Sulaiman, Malik Ibn al-Huwairith (d. 74):

102. al-Miqdad Ibn ‘Amrou al-Kindi al-Zuhri (d. 33):

- N -

ن

103. Najiyah Ibn ‘Amrou al-Khaza’i:

104. Abu Barza, Fadhlah Ibn ‘Atabah al-Aslami (d. 65)

105. Nu’aman Ibn ‘Ajlan al-Ansari:

- W & h & Y -

و هـ ي

106. Abu Wasmah, Wahshi Ibn Harb al-Habashi al-Humsi:

107. Wahab Ibn Hamzah:

108. Abu Juhaifah, Wahab Ibn Abdullah al-Suwa’i (d. 74):

109. Hashim al-Murqal Ibn ‘Atabah Ibn Abi Waqqas al-Zuhri al-Madani (d. ied in Siffin year 37):

110. abu Murazim, Ya’la Ibn Murrah Ibn Wahab al-Thaqafi:

More Available

“84 Names of narrators from "Tabi’in”(the following generation of the companions) who narrated the Tradition of Ghadir Khum.

“360 Names of the Sunni Scholars over the past 14 centuries of the Islamic calendar who reported the Tradition of Ghadir Khum.

“22 Documented Protests with some companions and others about the event of Ghadir Khum.

Poetry

Many poems mention the event or are entirely about it. The first poem was the famous companion, Hassan Ibn Thabit, the poet of the Messenger of Allah. Immediately after the Prophet’s speech, Hassan asked for the permission of the Prophet (S) to compose a few verses of poetry about
‘Ali (as) for the audience. The Prophet said: "Say with the blessings of Allah". Hassan stood up and said: "O’ people of Quraish. I follow with my words what preceded and witnessed by the Messenger of Allah. He then composed the following verses at the scene:

He calls them, (on) the day of Ghadir, their Prophet In Khum so hear (and heed) the Messenger’s call, He said: "Who is your guide and leader? (Mowlakum wa Waliyukum)”They said, and there was no apparent blindness (clearly): "Your God, our guide, and you are our leader And you won’t find from among us, in this, any disobedient,"

He said to him: "Stand up O’ ‘Ali, for I am pleased to announce you Imam and guide after me, So whomever I was his leader, then this is his leader So be to him supporters in truth and followers,”

There he asked (du’aa): "Allah? Be a friend and guide to his follower And be, to the one who is ‘Ali’s enemy, an enemy"

“Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani (d. 430), in "Ma Nazala min al-Qur’an fi ‘Ali”Here is the Arabic text of the above highlighted piece from the poem of Hassan Ibn Thabit:

فقال له قم يا عليُّ فإنَّني

رضيتك من بعدي إماماً و هادياً

On The Occasion of Eid Al-Ghadir

In praise of Allah
Be it Badr, Uhud or Khaibar,
We hear the cry, Haidar - Haidar.
We see his shining sword strike
the ones who Allah dislikes.

All those who even dare
to fight him and aren’t aware
of his valor - can’t survive.
They shall lose their lives.
And there is one who claims to be
the greatest warrior of Arabia - but see
the mighty sword falls on him too.

Even though to challenge him were few.
The Muslims are struck with terror.
They can’t conquer the fort of Khaibar.
Each attack they make is turned back.
The will to fight they utterly lack.
The one who Allah loves, then comes
and out of fear the enemy is numb.

He takes the standard in one hand
and leads this seemingly defeated band.
A group of losers, say the books of history
under his command proceed to their victory.
His advances no one can ever cut short.
Finally he conquers the impenetrable fort.
In another battle the Prophet is betrayed.
As his followers have become so afraid.

They leave him wounded and run away.
Kufr still seems to hold it’s sway.
But there is Haidar e Karrar to aid him.
A lost battle, he will be able to win.
Whenever Asadullah will be there,
to fight Islam, no one shall dare.

These astonishing feats no one can hide,
as time and again he turns the tide.
A battle comes and a battle goes by
Islam’s standard always remains high.
So when in Ghadir - he is proclaimed
Mawla - that Muslims should follow him.

The Prophet’s mission is complete. He alone
can bear the burden of this throne.
Only he can feel the Muslim’s needs,
make sure they perform good deeds,
and guide them to the path of salvation.
He deserves the rulership of this nation.
He has the understanding and wisdom
to be the Imam in Allah’s kingdom.

He is the gateway to the city of knowledge
and above all he has the most courage,
which is seen by his extraordinary feats.
With his scholarly skills none can compete.
Admire his piety. He is not guided by greed.
The Prophet of Allah - only he can succeed.

‘Ali Rizwan Shah

ashah@bass.gmu.edu [17]

Certainly your Master is ...

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Certainly your Master is Allah and His Messenger and those who believe who eshtablish prayer and give charity while they bow. And who ever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious. (Qur’an 5:55-56)

It is unanimous that the verse descended about Imam ‘Ali (as) when he gave away in charity his ring while he was in a state of kneeling in his prayer. This is also authenticated successively according to the 12 Imams. Here are some of the Shi’ite references

- Bihar al-Anwar, by Allama Majlisi

- Tafseer al-Mizan, by Allama Tabatabai

- Tafseer al-Kashaf, by Allama Muhammad Jawad Mughniyah

- al-Ghadir, by Allama Abdul Husayn Ahmad al-Amini

- Asbat al-Hudate, by Allama Muhammad Ibn Hasan Amuli

But for the sake of the readers I shall produce some Sunni references, and traditions in this respect through other sources. Many Sunni commentators of the Qur’an confirm the fact that the above verse descended on the honor of Imam ‘Ali (as) and many Sunni scholars have also mentioned the unanimity or consensus of opinion in their books. Here are some references in this regard:

(1) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha’labi, under Verse 5:55

(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289

(3) Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Qur’an, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219

(4) Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68

(5) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294

(6) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649

(7) Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the authority of Ibn Abbas

(8) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

(9) Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji

(10) Ahkam al-Qur’an, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543

(11) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38

(12) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391, Tradition #5991

(13) al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir

(14) Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

... and more.

There is also a tradition related by Ibn Salam whose chain of sources rises up to the Prophet (S) himself. Please refer to the Sahih of Nisa’i or the commentary of Sura Ma’idah in Jam’a Bayn al-Sihah al-Sittah. In Ghayah al-Maram, p18, Sayyid al-Bahrayni forwards twenty four (24) traditions from sources other than the Ahlul-Bayt, all supporting the above fact.

For the sake of brevity, I am going to confine my self to a tradition occuring in the commentary of the Qur’an by Abi Is’haq Ahmad Ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Nisaboori al-Tha’labi. A few comments on the respected personality: He died in 337 AH and Ibn Khallikan gives an account of his death saying: "He was unique as a commentator of the Qur’an and his Tafsir al-Kabir is superior to all other interpretations.”

When he reached this verse he recorded this in his Tafsir al-Kabir on the authority of Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, who said: Both of my ears may turn deaf and both of my eyes may become blind if I speak a lie. I heard the Messenger of Allah, Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, saying, "‘Ali is the guide of the righteous and the slayer of the infidels. he who has helped him is victorious and he who has abandoned him is forsaken.”

One day I said my prayers in the company of the Prophet. A beggar came to the mosque and begged for alms, but nobody gave him anything. ‘Ali was in a state of kneeling in the prayer. He pointed out his ring to the beggar, who appraoched him and removed the ring from his finger. Thereupon the Prophet, Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, implored Allah the Mighty and Glorious, saying: "O Allah! My brother Moses begged you saying, ‘My Lord, delight my heart and make my task easy and undo the knot in my tongue so that they may understand me, and appoint from my kinsmen, Haroon, my brother, as my vizier, and strenghthen my back with him and make him participate in my mission so that we may glorify You and remember You more frequently. Certainly You see us.’ And You inspired him: ‘O Musa! All your requests have been granted.’ O Allah! I am your slave and your prophet. Delight my heart and make my task easy and appoint from among my kinsmen ‘Ali as my vizier and strengthen my back with him."

Abu Dharr, then, proceeded By Allah, the Messenger of Allah, Allah’s blessings and peace be upon
him and his posterity had not yet finished his supplication when the trustworthy Gabriel descended to him with this Verse "Certainly Allah is Your Master, and His Prophet and those who believe
who establish prayer and give charity while they bow. And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi under the commentary of verses 5:55-56 of Qur’an.

A Few Comments By The Other Commentators

Allama al-Tabarsi, while commenting on this verse in Majma’ al-Bayan states: "The plural form has been used for ‘Ali, Commander of the faithful, in order to express his honor and eminence.”And masters of the Arabic language use the plural form for an individual to show respect.

Allama al-Zamakshari in his Tafsir al-Kashshaf, has mentioned another nice point which is as follows:

If you inquire how this plural word is applicable to ‘Ali, may Allah be gracious to him, who is an individual, I shall say that though this verse is about ‘Ali, an individual, the plural form is used in order to presuade others to act similarly and to give alms as readily as ‘Ali did.

There is also an implied instruction that the faithful should keep themselves always on the look out for occasions of acts of sympathy, benevolence and charity to the poor and the needy, and readily do the needful without waiting till the completion of even so important a duty as saying a prayer.

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, v1, p649

Please refer to the Part II of the article of Ghadir Khum for further argument in this regard.

Who is the successor of the Prophet (S)?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Once a person told me that Abu Bakr is more knowledgeable than Prophet Muhammad (S) (Na’oozo Billah)! I asked him how come?! He said because Abu Bakr understood that he should assign a person as his successor to keep the system and community working in order. As it is well-known Abu Bakr assigned Umar as his successor. But the Prophet failed to realize this important task that the Islamic community needs a qualified leader after him, or perhaps it was not important for the prophet that who is going to take over the power after him!

When I heard that, I started asking the following question from myself: Is it possible that the Prophet of Islam who has tried hard to implement Islam, and tolerated a lot of problems, disasters, and paid big price to establish Islam in Arabian peninsula, leaves people without assigning any person to keep this religion alive after him?!

The religion that is to be the last religion of God for this world; the religion that was supposed to be for every nation all over the world both inwardly and outwardly (political authority). What happened that we Muslims are in this miserable situation in the world for centuries? What happened that the chain of successors/rulers (Ulul-Amr) has reached to people like King Fahd, King Husayn, Saddam Husayn, Husni Mubarak, ...?

Something is terribly wrong! Yes, The problem is leadership and Guardianship. Was this problem not so important for prophet or he didn’t take it serious? Of course, he did ake it serious and he must have assigned a chain of successors (Caliphs) who where the most qualified as the head of Islamic state and as the guardian of Shari’ah (divine law).

Another question that came out to my mind was that: Are Allah and His prophet more qualified to assign the Caliphs, or people? Is Islam on the basis of democracy (government of people over people) or on the basis of theocracy (Kingdom of Allah over the earth)? The history of Islam testifies that the government after the death of prophet was neither democratic nor theocratic. Just a few people gathered in "Saqifah bani Saaedah”and assigned Abu Bakr as Caliph while Imam ‘Ali was busy of the burial of the holy prophet in Medina. Is it our choice as to whom should be a Prophet or it is Allah’s choice? Can we select Prophet by Shura?

The same goes for assigning the successor of Prophet, for Allah knows best who is the most qualified for this position. It seems very strange that a deputy of a chief is assigned by any person other than him. Deputy of God (or prophet) is only assigned by God (or prophet), and it is not people’s business! There are many examples in Qur’an where Allah states that He is the one who assigns a successor on the earth. Allah, Exalted He is, states in Qur’an:

"O’ David, we assigned you as Caliph (successor) on the earth ...”(Qur’an 38:26)

He also states:

"... We have assigned you (Abraham) as Imam (leader) for people ...”(Qur’an 2:124)

As we see, Caliph/Imam for the mankind is assigned by Allah. See also 2:30 (about Adam). Even Prophet Moses, when he wanted to go to Miqaat, did not ask people to form a Shura to assign a Caliph for him. Qur’an tells us that:

(Moses said: "O’ Allah) assign me a vizier from my family, (that is) my brother Aaron (Haroon) ...,”(Allah) said: "We granted your requests, O’ Moses.”(Qur’an 20:29-36).

Allah, Exalted, also said:

"Surely We gave the book to Moses and assigned his brother Aaron as his vizier.”(Qur’an 25:35).

Allah also said:

"... And Moses said unto his brother Aaron: Take my place among the people.”(Qur’an 7:142).

وَقَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي

Notice that "Ukhlufni”and "Khalifa”(Caliph) are exactly from the same root.

In this connection, let us take a look at the following interesting tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari:

The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: "Your position to me is like the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses, except that there shall be no Prophet after me"

أنتَ مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا إنَّهُ لا نبيَّ بعدي

Sunni References:

(1) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56, 5.700

(2) Sahih Muslim, Arabic, v4, pp 1870-71

(3) Sunan Ibn Majah, p12

(4) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174

(5) al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16

(6) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

The Prophet (S) thereby meant that as Moses had left behind Aaron to look after his people when he went to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the same way he was leaving ‘Ali behind to look after the affairs of Islam after he met Allah (i.e., his death). Let this reminder be food of thought for the possessors of pure heart and open mind. The above verses of Qur’an concerning Aaron show that even the prophet does not assign his deputy/successor, and it is rather Allah who does that. Prophet Moses prayed to Allah and requested that Aaron becomes his deputy, and Allah approved the suggestion/request of Prophet Moses (as).

The Prophet Announcing His Successor in His First Preach

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The following two traditions are written, one after the other, in the History of al-Tabari which is one of the important history book for the Sunnis. Besides al-Tabari, many other historians and traditionists and commentators of Qur’an from among Sunnis have recorded this tradition in their books. (see below for the list of references). The two traditions explicitly indicate that the Holy Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his family), with the order of Allah, has introduced ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib as his successor even in his first open preach to the people:

Narrated Ibn Humayed, from Salamah, from Muhammad Ibn Is’haq, from Abd al- Ghaffar Ibn al-Qasim, from al-Minhal Ibn Amr, from abdallah Ibn al-Harith Ibn Nawfal Ibn al-Harith Ibn Abd al-Muttalib, from Abdallah Ibn Abbas, from ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib:

When the verse "And warn your close tribe (Qur’an 26:214)”was revealed to the prophet, he called me and said to me, "‘Ali, God has commanded me to warn my tribe of near kindred. I was troubled by this, since I knew that when I discuss the matter to them they would respond in a way which I would not like. I kept silent until Gabriel came to me and said "If you do not do what you are commanded, your Lord will punish you.”So prepare a measure of wheat for us, add a leg of lamb to it, fill a large bowl of milk for us, and then invite sons of Abd al- Muttalib for me so that I may speak to them what I have been commanded to tell them."

I did what he had told me to do. At that time they numbered forty men more or less, including his uncles Abu Talib, Hamzah, al-Abbas, and Abu Lahab. When they had gathered together, he called me to bring the food which I had prepared. I brought it, and when I put it down, prophet took a piece of meat, broke it with his teeth, put it in the dish.

Then he said, "Take in the name of God.”They ate until they could eat no more, and yet the food was as it had been. I swear by God, in whose hand ‘Ali’s soul rests, that a single man could have eaten the amount of food which I prepared for them. Then he said "Give them something to drink.”So I brought them the bowl and they drank from it until they became full, and I swear by God that one man could have drunk that amount. When prophet wanted to speak to them, Abu Lahab interrupted him and said "Your host has long since bewitched you.”Then they dispersed without the prophet speaking to them.

On the following day he said to me "‘Ali, this man interrupted what I wanted to say so that people dispersed before I could speak to them. Prepare the same food for us as you did yesterday, and invite them here.”I did this, and brought them food when he called me. He did as he had done the other day, and they ate until they could eat no more.

Then he said, "Bring the bowl,”and they drank until they could drink no more. Then he spoke to them, saying, "Banu Abd al-Muttalib, I don’t know of any young man among Arabs who has brought for his people something better than what I have brought to you. I bring the best of this world and the world after, since God has commanded me to summon you to him.

Which of you will aid me in this matter, so that he will be my brother, my executor (Wasi), my successor (Caliph) among you?”They all held back, and even though I was the youngest, I said "I will be your helper, O’ prophet of God.”He put his hand on the back of my neck and said "This is my brother, my executor (Wasi), my successor (Caliph) among you, so listen to him and obey him.”They rose up laughing and saying to Abu Talib, "He has commanded you to obey your son and to obey him!"

إنَّ هذا أخي و وصيِّي و خليفتي فيكم فاْسمًعوا لهُ و أطيعوا

Sunni References:

(1) History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 88-91

(2) History of Ibn Athir, v2, p62

(3) History of Ibn Asakir, v1, p85

(4) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v5, p97

(5) Tafsir al-Khazin, by Ala’uddin al-Shafi’i, v3, p371

(6) Shawahid al-Tanzil, by al-Hasakani, v1, p371

(7) Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, p15, pp 100-117

(8) al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, v1, p311

(9) Dala’il al-Nabawiyyah, by al-Baihaqi, v1, pp 428-430

(10) al-Mukhtasar, by Abul Fida, v1, pp 116-117

(11) Life of Muhammad, by Hasan Haykal, p104 (First Arabic Edition only. In the second edition the last sentence of Prophet is deleted.)

(12) Tahdhib al-Athar, v4, pp 62-63.

The above tradition was also narrated by important Sunni figures such as Muhammad Ibn Is’haq, Ibn Abu Hatem, and Ibn Mardawayh. It is also recorded by many orientalists including T. Carlyle, E. Gibbon, J. Davenport, and W. Irving.

As we see, Prophet ordered people to LISTEN AND FOLLOW ‘ALI even in his first open preach, that is, when he declared his prophethood openly. "Shi’a”means "The Followers", and it is exclusively used for "The Followers of Imam ‘Ali". Thus Shi’a school of thought was in fact established by the Holy Prophet of Islam (S) from the beginning of his mission.

If we follow Imam ‘Ali (as), this is because the Holy Prophet asked us to do so. Moreover, whatever Imam ‘Ali (as) (and other 11 Imams) has said is the exact teachings and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, and whatever Prophet Muhammad has said is the exact teachings and sayings of Allah. This is because the prophets and Imams are infallible and they do not say anything in contrary to what they have been commanded to say.

The next tradition in the History of al-Tabari is as follows:

Narrated Zakariyya Ibn Yahya al-Darir, from Affan Ibn Muslim, from Abu Awanah, from Uthman Ibn al-Mughirah, from Abu Sadiq, from Rabiah Ibn Najid:

A man said to ‘Ali: "O Commander of believers, how did you become the heir of your cousin to the exclusion of your paternal uncle?”‘Ali said:"Ahem”three times until every body craned their necks and pricked up their ears, and then said "Prophet invited the whole of the Banu Abd al-Muttalib, including his own closest relatives, to eat a year old lamb and to drink some milk. He also prepared a quantity of wheat for them, and they ate until they were full, while the food remained as it was, as though it had not been touched.

Then he called for a drinking cup and they drank until they could drink no more, while the drink remained as though it had not been touched and they had not drunk. Then he said Banu abd al Muttalib, I have been sent to all men in general and to you in particular. Now that you have seen what you have seen, which of you will swear an oath of allegiance to me to become my brother, my companion, and my inheritor? Not one of them rose up, so I stood up before him even though I was the youngest there. He said Sit down. He repeated the words he had spoken for three times while I would rise up and he would say to me sit down. On the third occasion, he struck his hand on mine. In this way I became the heir of my cousin to the exclusion of my uncle."

Sunni References: History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 91-92

Side Comments

A Sunni brother mentioned that in the above incedent the Prophet was only addressing his own family Banu Abd al-Muttalib and not the whole of the Muslims. The most probable explanation here is that the Prophet intended ‘Ali as his successor in taking care of the affairs that relate to the family of Banu Abd al-Muttalib only in his absence and after his demise and not as a successor to the leadership of all Muslims.

Here I should state, first, that the Children of Abd al-Muttalib were not the family of Prophet. They were the relatives of Prophet. From the quoted tradition, we can not conclude that what he said was just for his relatives. He just started with his relatives.

Now, do you honestly believe that Prophet assigned a successor after him for the tribe of Abd al-Muttalib, but he forgot to assign any successor for the rest of community? Prophet was not a nationalist. He was not sent only for the children of Abd al-Muttalib. He was sent to all mankind as he mentioned himself in the tradition. So why is this negligence (about forgetting other people)? If assigning a successor is duty of prophet, it can not be limited to a certain people, because the Prophet was not sent just to a certain people.

Moreover, it was not the only time that the prophet declared ‘Ali as his successor. However, it was the first time. There are many traditions inside Sunni collections of traditions which either implicitly or explicitly indicate whom the Prophet (S) chose as his successor. The official announcement, however, was in "Ghadir Khum”as Sihah Sittah (the six Sunni collections of the traditions) testify.

It is also important to recall that the historical accounts are always written and controled by people who are in power. this is the case for every era, and the tyrant governments of the Umayad and the Abbasid were not exempt from this rule. As such, in most cases, facts are not explicitly written in the history, but one can find them implicitly. These are the peicies of information which have been mistakenly passed trough the censorship of the Governors throughout history.

Prophet (S) said:

عليٌ مع الحق و الحقُ مع علي

‘Ali is with truth, and truth is with ‘Ali.

Sunni reference: Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi

How is This Possible?

(The following article is adopted from the book "Brother of Muhammad (S)”written by late Muhammad Jawad Chirri (ra). The event under discussion is when the Prophet (S) were ordered by Allah (swt) to preach to his relatives)

The two Shaikhs: al-Bukhari and Muslim did not mention the important event pertaining the first preach of the Prophet (S) though it was reported by many historians and traditionists. Instead, Muslim and some other traditionists reported an event that took place after this event.

They reported the appearance of the Messenger on Al-Safa and his call to the Qureshite clans (the Meccans) and his invitation to them to believe in the new faith. Muslim and these reporters mentioned this late event and tied it with the verse of the warning of the closest relative of the Holy Prophet.

Muslim recorded that Abu Huriarah reported the following:

When this verse was revealed: "And warn thy closest relatives,”the Messenger of God called the Qureshites and they came together. He addressed them in general and in particular. He said: "O children of Ka’ab Ibn Lu’ay, save yourselves from Hell. O children of Murrah lbn Ka’ab, save yourselves from Hell. O children of Hashim save yourselves from Hell. O Fatimah, save yourself from Hell. For I do not possess any protection for you from God, except that you have relations to me which I would like to observe."

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, v3, pp 79-80

It is amazing that God commanded His Messenger to warn the closest of his relatives, who were the children of Abdul-Muttalib, but the Prophet called upon the children of Ka’ab Ibn Lu’ay and the children of Murrah Ibn Ka’ab who are from the remotest of his relatives. It is inconceivable that the Messenger of God disobeys what his Lord commanded him to do.

And what is more amazing is that the messenger called upon his daughter (Fatimah) publicly, to save herself from Hell, yet she was the purest Muslim girl whose father and mother were the purest parents. Fatimah, at the time of the revelation of the above verse was according to the historians, either two years or eight years old. al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak, v3, p61 reported that she was born 41 years after the birth of her father.

It would be illogical that the Prophet addresses himself to a two year old child or that he put a pure Muslim girl (who was still a minor, not exceeding eight years of age) on the same level with the pagans of Banu Ka’ab and Banu Murrah.

And more curious is the Hadith of Aisha which Muslim recorded in his Sahih as follows:

"When the verse of warning was revealed, the Messenger of God said: ‘O Fatimah, daughter of Muhammad, Safiya, daughter of Abdul-Muttalib, I have nothing in my power to protect you against God. Ask me from my wealth whatever you want.’ "

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, v3, p79-80

This Hadith does not agree with the previous one. For this Hadith reported that the Holy Prophet addressed himself to the children of Abdul-Muttalib alone, while the other Hadith reported that the Holy Prophet publicly addressed himself mostly to other than the Prophet’s clan. And most weird in this Hadith is that the Messenger addressed himself publicly while on the Safa mainly to his youngest daughter Fatimah while she was living with him where he sees her every hour. It is also curious that the address which he directed to her and to the other members of the children of Abdul- Muttalib did not contain any message, such as calling upon them to worship God or to avoid idol-worshipping.

Furthermore, Aisha was not born at the time of the event. The Messenger died when she was only eighteen years old. (See al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v8, p61). And this event took place ten years before the Hijrah (twenty years before his death). Abu Hurairah also was not an eye-witness to the event because he saw the Messenger for the first time when the Messenger was coming back from Khaibar in the 7th year after the Hijrah. (See al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v4, p327).

And more curious than all is that Al-Zamakhshari reported that Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr and Hafsa, daughter of Omar, were among the ones whom the Holy Prophet addressed after the revelation of this verse of warning (which was revealed before the birth of Aisha). (See al-Sirah al- Halabiyyah, by ‘Ali Ibn Burhanuddin al-Halabi, v1, p321)

This clearly indicates that recorders or the reporters of these traditions were seriously confused. They overlooked the fact that the verse commands the Prophet to warn his closest relatives, who were the children of Abdul- Muttalib, and that the Holy Prophet is not expected to disobey the order of God.

What these traditions convey is opposed to the verse itself, and whatever disagrees with the Holy Qur’an has to be disregarded. The event which the historians and many Hadith recorders reported of holding a conference with his immediate relatives is the only logical course which the Holy Prophet was expected to follow after the revelation of the verse.

The Opinion of Imam ‘Ali (as) on Caliphate

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A contributor mentioned that, in one of the sermons of Nahjul Balagha it is written that Imam ‘Ali mentioned consultation as one of the reason why he has the legitimate right for Caliphate. Here, ‘Ali is contradicting the Shi’a thesis that Muhammad wanted to appoint ‘Ali as the Imam. What you are referring to is not a sermon of Imam ‘Ali to Muslims, and you have also taken it out of context. it was a part of his letter to Muawiyah when he refused to give his oath to Imam ‘Ali (as).

Moreover, in contrary to your claim, in that letter Imam ‘Ali (as) did NOT say that he believes in the function of election for Caliphate. (Please see the full text of the letter below). He rather wanted to use the argument of his opponents against themselves.

When all the people of Medina unanimously swore allegiance to Imam ‘Ali (as), Muawiyah refused to comply apprehending danger for his own power, and in order to provide an excuse for his disloyalty, he claimed that since he did not participate in the election, the election of Imam ‘Ali (as) was unlawful, and thus there should be another general election. This was while Abu Bakr was elected by a very few number of people and there was no national vote so that one could consider the caliphate of Abu Bakr as a result of people’s election.

But the rulers who came after the Prophet imposed upon people that this is what election means, and this became a principle imposed on people and assumed to be their verdict that whoever the nobles of Medina elect would be deemed to represent the entire world of Islam, and no person has right to question it, whether he was present at the time of election or not, and that no one has right to reconsider the matter.

People, from whom Muawiyah was later receiving support, were those who had clamored the loudest about that argument. But when the rulership of the Muslim State in the form of caliphate came to Imam ‘Ali, they rebelled against it, many of them were rebelling even after having sworn the oath of allegiance to him.

Here, in this letter to Muawiyah, Imam ‘Ali (as) is quoting the argument which was once employed against him when he refused to give his oath to Abu Bakr. Imam ‘Ali (as) mentioned that if an election by people is the criterion to decide on the Caliphate, a general election took place in Medina to elect him as Caliph by Emigrants and Helpers and nobody can deny this fact. Therefore even according to the principles formulated by the opponents of Imam ‘Ali (as), his election was lawful, regular and bonafide.

Thus Muslim who already accepted such principles to legitimize the election of the Abu Bakr, have no the right to speak or act against him (‘Ali). And Muawiyah had no right to propose re-election nor to refuse allegiance when, in practice, he recognized this principle for Abu Bakr.

In his letter, the Imam wrote to Muawiyah:

"Verily those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. On this basis, he who was present has no choice (to reconsider), and he who was absent has no right to reject. And consultation was confined to Emigrant and Helpers. If they agree on an individual and name him leader, it was supposed that it is Allah’s satisfaction. If any one goes against such decision due to innovation, they (used to) return him from what he kept away, and if he refuses (to abide the decision) they (used to) fight him for following a course other than of the believers, and Allah will put him back from where he had run away."

"O’ Muawiyah, if you use your brain without your tendencies and desires, you will find me the most innocent of all in respects to Uthman’s blood, and you surely know that I was in seclusion from him, unless you conceal what is quite open to you and attribute all these false rumors to me."

In the above letter Imam ‘Ali is using counter argument to demolish the argument of Muawiyah. This method is known as arguing with the adversary on the basis of his wrong premises so as to demolish his argument.

On the point of religion, Imam ‘Ali (as) never regarded consultation with chiefs or the common vote to be the criterion of the validity of Caliphate, otherwise he would not have allowed himself to delay to give allegiance to Abu Bakr for the first six month of his Caliphate which is an undeniable fact held by all Muslims. This is proof of the fact that he did not regard these self- concocted methods as the criterion for the validity of caliphate.

However, to place before Muawiyah meant opening the door to questions and answers. He, therefore, attempted to convince him with his own premises and beliefs so that there could be no scope for interpretation or for confusing the matter. Imam ‘Ali cited the above argument merely as a stopple against Muawiyah (and in another occasion to Talha and Zubair) simply to prove how fictitious and flimsy were the points raised by his enemies to deprive him of his just rights and how they would go back upon their accepted principles to harm him.

One may recall that such counter argument was used by Prophet Abraham in the Qur’an where he once claimed to be the worshipper of the Sun and the moon to show people that how a wrong premise would result in self- contradictory result.

On this occasion, Imam ‘Ali (as) did not argue on the strength of any saying of the prophet which would serve as his final say about the caliphate, because the grounds for refusal in his case was in respect of the style of the principle of the election. Therefore, in keeping with the requirements of the situation, a reply based on the opponent’s principles could alone quiten him. Even if he had argued on the strength of the Prophet’s command, it would have subjected to various interpretations and the matter would have prolonged instead of being settled.

In fact Muawiyah’s real aim was to prolong the matter that at some point his own authority might get support. Imam ‘Ali had already witnessed that soon after the death of Prophet (S) all his sayings regarding to appointment of his successor had been set aside. Therefore, how after the laps of a long time, could one be expected to accept it when habit had been established to follow one’s free will against the Prophet’s commandments?

Moreover, there are many sermons in Nhajul Balagha where Imam ‘Ali unequivocally states his right was usurped from day one of the death of the Mercy to Mankind, Muhammad (S). below is one example of it:

Sermon 7 of Nahjul Balagha: Survey of the Period After The Demise Of The Holy Prophet (S)

(This is the famous sermon of Shiqshiqiyyah. It is so named because while Imam ‘Ali was delivering it an Iraqi got up and presented a letter to him. He got busy in reading it. When he had finished the letter Abdullah Ibn Abbas requested him to continue his sermon. The Imam replied, “Ibn Abbas! This speech of mine was extempore and was being delivered at the impulse of that moment like the Shiqshiqiyyah (the roar of a camel), it can’t be continued.”So far as the subject is concerned the sermon is self-explanatory.)

Beware! By Allah the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr) dressed himself with it (the caliphate) and he certainly knew that my position in relation to it was the same as the position of the axis in relation to the hand-mill. The flood water flows down from me and the bird cannot fly upto me. I put a curtain against the caliphate and kept myself detached from it.

Then I began to think whether I should assault or endure calmly the blinding darkness of tribulations wherein the grown up are made feeble and the young grow old and the true believer acts under strain till he meets Allah (on his death). I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was pricking in the eye and suffocation (of mortification) in the throat. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself.

(Then he quoted al-A`sha’s verse).

My days are now passed on the camel’s back (in difficulty) while there were days (of ease) when I enjoyed the company of Jabir’s brother Hayyan.

It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released from the caliphate but he confirmed it for the other one after his death. No doubt these two shared its udders strictly among themselves. This one put the Caliphate in a tough enclosure where the utterance was haughty and the touch was rough. Mistakes were in plenty and so also the excuses therefore. One in contact with it was like the rider of an unruly camel. If he pulled up its rein the very nostril would be slit, but if he let it loose he would be thrown. Consequently, by Allah people got involved in recklessness, wickedness, unsteadiness and deviation.

Nevertheless, I remained patient despite length of period and stiffness of trial, till when he went his way (of death) he put the matter (of Caliphate) in a group(4) and regarded me to be one of them. But good Heavens! what had I to do with this "consultation"? Where was any doubt about me with regard to the first of them that I was now considered akin to these ones? But I remained low when they were low and flew high when they flew high. One of them turned against me because of his hatred and the other got inclined the other way due to his in-law relationship and this thing and that thing, till the third man of these people stood up with heaving breasts between his dung and fodder. With him his children of his grand-father, (Umayyah) also stood up swallowing up Allah’s wealth(5) like a camel devouring the foliage of spring, till his rope broke down, his actions finished him and his gluttony brought him down prostrate.

At that moment, nothing took me by surprise, but the crowd of people rushing to me. It advanced towards me from every side like the mane of the hyena so much so that Hasan and Husayn were getting crushed and both the ends of my shoulder garment were torn. They collected around me like the herd of sheep and goats. When I took up the reins of government one party broke away and another turned disobedient while the rest began acting wrongfully as if they had not heard the word of Allah saying:

That abode in the hereafter, We assign it for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief (therein); and the end is (best) for the pious ones. (Qur’an, 28:83)

Yes, by Allah, they had heard it and understood it but the world appeared glittering in their eyes and its embellishments seduced them. Behold, by Him who split the grain (to grow) and created living beings, if people had not come to me and supporters had not exhausted the argument and if there had been no pledge of Allah with the learned to the effect that they should not acquiesce in the gluttony of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed I would have cast the rope of Caliphate on its own shoulders, and would have given the last one the same treatment as to the first one. Then you would have seen that in my view this world of yours is no better than the sneezing of a goat.

Don’t tell me this is the product of Sayyed Radhi. In fact, this particular sermon of Imam ‘Ali was being circulated among the Sunni scholars 200 years before the birth of Sayyed Radhi and they acknowledged that the above sermon is the genuine sayings of Imam ‘Ali (as), and I have 27 documents to prove this. In fact, Nahjul Balagha is not merely a Shi’ite source, and many Sunni scholars have also written commentary to it.

Prophet (S) said:

مَن كنتُ أنا نبيه فعليٌ أميره

Whoever I am his prophet, ‘Ali is his ruler.

- On the Khilafa of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (as): Abdullah Ibn Masud narrated:

The messenger of Allah (S) ordered me to follow him, on the night of the Jinn. I went with him until we reached the hight of Macca... (the prophet) said: "I was promised that the Jinn and human will believe in me. As to the human they believed in me, as to the Jinn you have seen"; he continued: "I feel that my end is drawing near.”I said: O Messenger of Allah, won’t you make Abu Bakr as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won’t you make Umar as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won’t you make ‘Ali as your Caliph? He said: "(That’s) him. By the One whom there is no God beside Him, if you chose him and obeyd him He (Allah) entered you into Paradise all together."

Sunni references:

- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v8, p314
- Also mentioned by al-Tabarani

Respecting the Righteous Companions

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Shi’a devote a great respect for some of the companions of the Prophet S) who closely followed Prophet and the Ahlul-Bayt before and after death of Prophet (S). Among these great companions, are the following individuals:

Abu Dharr Al-Ghifari

The Holy Prophet said concerning Abu Dharr al-Ghifari that "Heaven has not shaded, nor has the earth carried a person more straight forward than Abu Dharr. He walks on earth with the immaterialistic attitude of Jesus, the son of Mary.”

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p334, Tradition #3889
- Tahdhib al-Athar, v4, pp 158-161
- Musnad Ahmad Hanbal, #6519, #6630, #7078
- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p342
- al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v4, part 1, pp 167-168
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, pp 329-330

Ammar Ibn Yasir

The Holy Prophet had told Ammar Ibn Yasir along with his parents that:

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p233,

The Holy Prophet also told him that

"Ammar be cheerful, the aggressor party shall kill you."

Sunni references:

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p383

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Traditions #6968& #6970

The English translator of Sahih Muslim (Abdul Hamid Siddiqui) has written in the footnote of the above traditions that:

This narration is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hadrat ‘Ali and his opponents, Hadrat ‘Ali was on the right as Ammar Ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in the camp of Hadrat ‘Ali. (Footnote of Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, p1508).

Al-Miqdad Ibn Al-Aswad

He is among the four men whom the Prophet (S) was commanded to love, as the Prophet said:

"God commanded me to love four, and He informed me that he loves them. People asked him: Messenger of God who are they? He said: ‘Ali is from them (repeating that three times). And Abu Tharr and Salman and al-Miqdad."

Sunni reference: Sunan ibn Majah, v1 p53 Hadith 149

The Messenger of Allah also said:

"Every prophet was given by God seven righteous companions. I was given fourteen righteous companions". He included in them ‘Ali, al- Hasan, al-Husayn, Hamza, Ja’far, Ammar Ibn Yasir, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Salman.

Sunni references:

- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, Traditions #109, #277
- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p329, p662
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp88,148,149 from several chain of narrators
- al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani, v6, p264, p265
- Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p128

Salman Al-Farsi

Concerning him, the Messenger of Allah (S) said that

"Paradise longs for three men, ‘Ali, Ammar and Salman."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p332, Tradition #3884

Ibn Abbas

He was the person about whom the Prophet (S) said:

"God I ask Thee to teach him the interpretation and make him knowledgeable in religion and make him from the people of belief."

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p536

A Shi’ite View of the Companions

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The topic in this article is how the Shi’a view the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S). In this part we shall look at Allah’s (SWT) opinion, as stated in the Qur’an, with regards to the companions as well as the Prophet’s (S) opinion through authentic Sunni traditions.

Introduction

The Shi’a do not have a unique opinion towards the companions of the Prophet. Based on the relative authenticity and interpretations of the transmitted traditions, some arrive at different conclusions for the second faction of the companions mentioned below. Which tradition is more authentic and what is its correct meaning, is something debatable. However, here, I provide what is considered to be a typical Shi’ite position in this regard.

The Shi’a divide the companions into three factions: First, are those who believed in Allah (SWT), believed in the Prophet (S), and gave all they could for the sake of Islam. These are the highest in rank. These companions always supported the Prophet and were with him. They never disobeyed him in every other issue, nor did they ever accused him of talking non-sense! (may Allah protect us). Examples include, but are not limited to, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as), Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, Salman al-Farsi, Miqdad, Amar Ibn Yasir, Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari, ... may Allah (SWT) be pleased with them.

The second group, are those who were Muslims, but were not sincere in their acts.

The third group, are those who became apostate after the death of Prophet as al-Bukhari recorded (see below), or those who neither believed in Allah (SWT), nor the Prophet (S) in the first place, but managed to infiltrate the Islamic isles to be included among the Muslims. These are the hypocrites, like Abu Sufyan, his son Muawiyah, and his grandson Yazid. Yazid, when he became caliph, said:

"Hashimite played with the throne, but no revelation was revealed, nor was there a true message!!!"

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, Arabic, 13, p2174
- Tadhkirat al-Khawas, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, p261

"Hashimite”is the clan and tribe of the Prophet (S), and this is an intentional pun suggesting that the Prophet (S) was a liar, not a true prophet. The "throne (sovereignty)”is an allusion to the control of the affairs of Mecca and the entire region, meaning that the tribe of Hashim controlled the entire region by virtue of the Message of Islam and that Muhammad (S) is the chosen Prophet, but really there was no revelation and there was no message!!! That is Yazid’s opinion of Allah (SWT), Islam, and the Prophet (S). His father, Muawiyah, and his grandfather, Abu Sufyan, were no better. At the beginning the reign of Uthman when Umayad occupied the prominent positions, Abu Sufayn said:

"O Children of Umayyah! Now that this kingdom has come to you, play with it as the children play with a ball, and pass it from one to another in your clan. We are not sure whether there is a paradise or hell, but this kingdom is a reality."

Sunni references:

- al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v4, p1679
- Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v9, p53 which quotes the last sentence as follows:

"By him in whose name Abu Sufyan swears, there is neither punishment nor reckoning, neither Garden nor Fire, neither Resurrection nor Day of Judgment!"

Then Abu Syfyan went to Uhud and kicked at the grave of Hamza (the uncle of the Prophet who was martyred in the Battle of Uhud in fighting against Abu Sufyan) and said: "O Abu Ya’la! See that the kingdom which you fought against has finally come back to us.”(Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v16, p136).

Now let us see what his son, Muawiyah, said when he took over the Caliphate:

"I didn’t fight you to pray, fast, and pay charity, but rather to be your leader and control you!!!"

This is an indication that Muawiyah never cared about any of Islam’s mandates, nor Allah’s (SWT) orders; rather his war was politically motivated to gain control of the whole region and take over the Caliphate. It is no wonder or surprise! Muawiyah poisoned Imam al-Hasan (as), the greater son of Fatimah (sa) -- the daughter of the Prophet (S).

Sunni references:

- Tadhkirat al-Khawas, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 191-194
- Ibn Abd al-Barr, in his "Seera"
- Abu Nu’aym
- Also reported by the traditionists such as al-Suddi and al-Sha’bi.

Then Yazid, the Muawiyah’s son, slaughtered Imam al-Husayn (as), in the desert of Karbala in Iraq, and ordered that Imam al-Husayn’s (as) head be carried on a spear and displayed in towns for people to see it! May Allah avenge the Prophet’s family!!! May Allah avenge the Prophet’s family!!!

May Allah avenge the Prophet’s (S) family!!!

The Holy Qur’an

Now let us look at the Holy Qur’an for different categories:

The first faction of the companions are characterized by Allah (SWT) in this verse:

"Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against the unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration.

This is their similitude in the Taurat (Torah); And their similitude in the Gospel is: Like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds Forgiveness, and a great Reward. (Qur’an 48:29)"

These companions (May Allah (SWT) be Pleased With Them), the Shi’a and the Sunnis have no quarrel about. As such, they will not be discussed here. However, note what Allah (SWT) in His (SWT) infinite wisdom states in the last line: "Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds Forgiveness, and a great Reward.”Now, note "...those among them...”Why didn’t Allah (SWT) say "Allah has promised all of them?”Because not all of them were righteous! That’s what the Shi’a are trying to convey to the world! The Sunnis, whenever they bless the Prophet (S), they also bless all the companions, with no exception. Why did Allah (SWT), their Creator (SWT), make an exception, while the Sunni Muslims don’t? This is a sign for those who reflect...

Moreover, the verse specifies those who were with the Prophet, which means those who were obedient to him and did not oppose/discredit him. Certainly the hypocrites walked with the Prophet and used to attach themselves to him, yet no Muslim ever entitle them to the above verse which states "those who were with him".

As for the second faction of the companions, Allah (SWT) said:

"O ye who believe! What is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the Cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; But Him ye would not harm in the least, For Allah hath power over all things."(Qur’an 9:38-39)

This is a clear indication that some of the companions were lazy during the call to Jihad and other activities, and, thus, deserved the above reprimand by Allah (SWT). This is not the only instance where Allah (SWT) threatened to replace them:

"... If you turn back (from the path), He will substitute in your stead another people; then they would not be like you! (Qur’an 47:38)"

Could you tell me Who Allah is referring by "you”in the above verse? Allah also said:

"O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.”(Qur’an 49:2).

Authentic Sunni traditions confirm that there have been some companions who used to oppose the Prophet’s order and quarrel with him in several occasions:

a) There was the issue of the captives of the battle "Badr”that the Prophet ordered their freedom for payment of the ransom money (Fidyah), and these companions went against it.

b) There was the battle of "Tabook”that the Prophet ordered to slaughter the camels, to save their lives, and the same people went against it.

c) There was the treaty of "Hudabiyyah”that the Prophet wanted to make peace with people of Mecca, and the very same companions went against it and they even cast doubt about the prophethood of Muhammad (S).

d) There was the battle of "Hunain”where they accused the Prophet of injustice in distributing the war booty.

e) There was the appointment of "Usamah Ibn Zayd”who was assigned as the leader of Islamic army by the Prophet, and these companions disobeyed the order to follow him.

f) There was a tragic Thursday when the Messenger of Allah wanted to state his will, and the very same companions accused him of talking non-sense and prevented him to do so.

And there are many more of such reports which can be even found in Sahih al- Bukhari.

As for the third faction of the companions, there is a whole chapter in the holy Qur’an addressing them: "al-Munafiqun --The Hypocrites -- Ch. 63", and beside that there are many other verses in this regard as well. Allah (SWT) states in the Qur’an:

"Muhammad is no more than a Messenger: many were the Messengers that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; But Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude. (3:144)"

This verse was revealed when some of the companions ran away from the battle of Uhud, when they falsely heard that Prophet was killed. Although they were forgiven by Prophet later, but the above verse gives a possibility that some of the companions may abandon Islam if the Prophet
(S) dies. But Allah (SWT) makes exceptions:

"...those who (serve Him) with gratitude.”

Again, Allah (SWT) states:

"O ye who believe! If any from among you turn back from his faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom He will love as they will love Him, --Lowly with the Believers, Mighty against the Rejecters, in the way of Allah, and never afraid of the reproaches of such as find fault. That is the Grace of Allah, which He will bestow on whom He pleaseth. And Allah encompasseth all, And He knoweth all things. (Qur’an 5:54)"

The Authentic Traditions

Before giving more straightforward verses from Qur’an for this third group, let me give you some traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari which confirms apostasy for them. Since al-Bukhari has confirmed the authenticity of the following tradition, I hope you do not consider him a "Kafir”after reading these traditions.

Note: As usual, the numbers match the Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari which is available in almost every places. The first number before the point indicates volume number, and the number after the point indicates the tradition number (NOT the page number). For example Hadith 8.578 indicates volume 8, tradition #578.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.578

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount.”‘Abdullah added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know what they did after you had left.’

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.584

Narrated Anas:

The Prophet said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, ‘My companions!’ Then it will be said, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you.”(also Sahih Muslim, part 15, pp 53-54)

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.585

Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa’d:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake- Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come
to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them.”Abu Hazim added: Nu’man bin Abi ‘Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from Sahl?”I said, "Yes.”He said, “I bear witness that I heard Abu Said al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: ‘I will say: They are my companions. Then it will be said to me, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left’.

I will say, ‘Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed after me.”Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, ‘O Lord (those are) my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from the true Islam

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.586

Narrated Ibn al-Musaiyab:

"Some men from my companions will come to my Lake-Fount and they will be driven away from it, and I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no knowledge of what they innovated after you left: they turned APOSTATE as renegades (reverted from true Islam)."

(also Sahih Muslim, part 10, p64, also P59)

Here is the original Arabic text of above Hadith (8.586) of al-Bukhari:

يردُ عليَّ الحوض رجال من أصْحابي فيحلون عنه. فأقول يا ربِّ أصحابي، فيقول إنَّكَ لا علم لك بما أحدثوا بعدك. إنَّهم ارْتَدَّوا على أدبارهم القهقري.

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 8.587

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "While I was sleeping, a group (of my followers were brought close to me), and when I recognized them, a man (an angel) came out from amongst (us) me and them, he said (to them), ‘Come along.’ I asked, ‘Where?’ He said, ‘To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah’ I asked, ‘what is wrong with them?’ He said, ‘They turned apostate as renegades after you left.’ Then behold! (Another) group (of my followers) were brought close to me, and when I recognized them, a man (an angel) came out from (me and them) he said (to them); Come along.’ I asked, "Where?’ He said, ‘To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah.’ I asked, What is wrong with them?’ He said, ‘They turned apostate as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.592

Narrated Asma ‘bint Abu Bakr:

The Prophet said, "I will be standing at the Lake-Fount so that I will see whom among you will come to me; and some people will be taken away from me, and I will say, ‘O Lord, (they are) from me and from my followers.’ Then it will be said, ‘Did you notice what they did after you? By Allah, they kept on turning on their heels (turned away from true Islam).’ “The sub-narrator, Ibn Abi Mulaika said, "O Allah, we seek refuge with You from turning on our heels, or being put to trial in our religion."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.172

Narrated Asma’:

The Prophet said, "I will be at my Lake-Fount (Kauthar) waiting for whoever will come to me. Then some people will be taken away from me whereupon I will say, ‘My followers!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know they turned apostates as renegades (deserted their religion).’“(Ibn Abi Mulaika said, "Allah, we seek refuge with You from turning on our heels from the (Islamic) religion and from being put to trial").

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.173

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount (Kauthar) and some men amongst you will be brought to me, and when I will try to hand them some water, they will be pulled away from me by force whereupon I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ Then the Almighty will say, ‘You do not know what they did after you left, they introduced new things into the religion after you.’“

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.174

Narrated Sahl bin Sa’d:

I heard the Prophet saying, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount (Kauthar), and whoever will come to it, will drink from it, and whoever will drink from it, will never become thirsty after that. There will come to me some people whom I know and they know me, and then a barrier will be set up between me and them.”Abu Sa’id al- Khudri added that the Prophet further said: "I will say those people are from me. It will be said, ‘You do not know what changes and new things they did after you.’ Then I will say, ‘Far removed (from mercy), far removed (from mercy), those who changed after me!’ "

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.434

Narrated ‘Uqba bin ‘Amir:

The Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayer for the martyrs of the (battle of) Uhud and then ascended the pulpit and said, "I am your predecessor and I am a witness against you. By Allah, I am now looking at my Tank-lake (Al-Kauthar) and I have been given the keys of the treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth). By Allah! I am not afraid that you become polytheist after me, but I am afraid that you will start competing for it (i.e., the pleasures and treasures of this world).

إنِّي و الله ما أخافُ عليكم أن تشركوا بعدي و لكني أخافُ عليكم أن تنافسوا فيها.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.555

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, I will drive some people out from my (sacred) Fount on the Day of Resurrection as strange camels are expelled from a private trough."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.375

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

... The Prophet said to the Ansar: "You will find after me some great selfishness (UTHRAH). Then be patient till you meet Allah and meet His Apostle at al-Kauthar (i.e. a fount in Paradise).”(Anas added:) But we did not remain patient.

Note: In English translation of Sahih al-Bukhari ‘Uthrah’ (selfishness) has been translated to another word, but the rest are the same.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.488

Narrated al-Musaiyab:

I met al-Bara bin ‘Azib and said (to him). "May you live prosperously! You enjoyed the company of the Prophet and gave him the Pledge of allegiance (of al-Hudaibiya) under the Tree (of al-Hudaybiyah).”On that, al-Bara’ said, "O my nephew! You do not know what we have done after him (i.e. his death)."

These traditions, nonetheless, indicate the Prophet’s (S) knowledge and awareness that some of his companions will change after him (S), and, therefore, will be condemned to hell. This is another reason why the Shi’a maintain that the Prophet (S) MUST have had a special vicegerent to trust the affairs of the Ummah (Nation) to -- a vicegerent that will NOT mutilate the religion and will remain steadfast until he meets his Creator (SWT).

It is a known fact that the companions quarreled after the death of the Prophet (S), and wars were waged. The fact, again and again, that the companions were divided is illuminated by Allah (SWT) in the following verse:

"Let there be among you an Ummah inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong. They are the ones to attain felicity. Be not like those who are divided
amongst themselves and fall into disputations after receiving Clear Signs: For them is a dreadful Chastisement. On the Day when some faces will be (lit up with) white, and some faces will be (in the gloom of) black: To those whose faces will be black, (will be said): Did ye reject Faith after accepting it? Taste then the Chastisement for rejecting Faith.”(Qur’an 3:104-106)

The above verse shows among the companion there were a group (Ummah) who will remain righteous. The verse emphasizes that this Ummah is among them so it does not cover all of them. However. the latter part the verse describes the thrid group who were apostatized (turned back on) their faith after the Prophet (S) died. The verse indicates that on the Day of Judgment, there will be two factions: one with white-lit faces, and the other with black-lit faces; that’s another hint that the companions will be divided.

Here are some more verses from the Qur’an that address the third group of companions and their actions:

"They swear by Allah that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they uttered it after accepting Islam: and they meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with which Allah and His Messenger had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best for them: But if they turn back (to their evil ways), Allah will punish them with a grievous chastisement in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none on earth to protect or help them. (Qur’an 9:74)”

"So He hath put as a consequence hypocrisy into their hearts, (to last) till the Day whereon they shall meet Him: because they broke their Covenant with Allah, and because they lied (again and again). (Qur’an 9:77)"

"The Arabs are the worst in unbelief and hypocrisy, and most fitted to be in ignorance of the command which Allah hath sent down to His Messenger: But Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. (Qur’an 9:97)"

"Hast thou not turned thy thought to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to thee and to those before thee? Their (real) wish is to resort together for judgment (in their
disputes) to the Evil (Tagut) though they were ordered to reject him. But Satan’s wish is to lead them astray far away (from the Right). (Qur’an 4:60)"

"In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the chastisement they (incur), because they lied (to themselves). (Qur’an 2:10)"

Now let us look at the following verse:

"Has not the time arrived for the Believers that their hearts in all humility should engage in the remembrance of Allah and of the Truth which has been revealed (to them), and that they should not become like those to whom was given The Book aforetime, but long ages passed over them and their hearts grew hard? For many among them are rebellious transgressors. (Qur’an 57:16)"

There may be some translations which state that the above verse is meant to address the Jews and the Christians. That is not true, because it contradicts the verse itself. First, Allah (SWT) is addressing the companions and then comparing them to the Jews and the Christians. How then could it be that Allah (SWT) tells the Jews and the Christians: "Has not the time arrived for the Believers that their hearts in all humility should engage in the remembrance of Allah...”and then tell them: "...and that they should not become like those to whom was given The Book aforetime...”

Why would Allah (SWT) compare the Christians (or the Jews) to themselves? Does that make sense? No, and Allah (SWT) doesn’t contradict Himself (SWT). Rather, the verse was revealed as a questioning by Allah (SWT) regarding some of the the Muhajiroon (the Immigrants), who 17 years after the Qur’an was revealed, had still not fully believed in their hearts. Allah (SWT), as a result, showed disapproval. Again, at the end, Allah points out that among them are many rebellious transgressors.

As we mentioned, there are some verses in Qur’an which admired the first faction among the companions. Nevertheless, these verses do not include ALL the companions. Qur’an often uses the phrase "believers among them”or "those who preceded in belief among them”which shows it does not address the whole companions. In fact some hypocrites were among the companions. If hypocrites were known among the companions they would be no longer hypocrites and would become known enemy,

Moreover, when Allah states I WAS pleased with them till today, it does not imply that they will also be good tomorrow. It is inconceivable that Allah will give a permanent immunity to some people who supposedly have done some good things earlier, but they shed the blood of thousands of innocent Muslims later after the departure of Prophet.

If it were so, it would mean that a companion could cancel all the Qur’anic rules and the instructions of the Prophet. However, as I mentioned, Shi’a do not discredit all the companions. There were companions who are in great respect for us. These are those whom Allah admired in the Holy Qur’an. As you might have noticed, those verses in the Holy Qur’an do not include all the companions. When Allah states:

And those who preceded (in belief), from among Immigrants and Helpers and those who followed them in what was good, Allah “WAS “satisfied with them; He has prepared for them gardens under which rivers flow to dwell therein for ever. That is the great felicity. (Qur’an 9:100)

And (however) among the Arabs around you are hypocrites, and also among the people of Madina (there are some who) persist in hypocrisy whom you (O Muhammad) do not know. We, We know them, and We shall punish them twice; then they will be sent to a painful doom. (Qur’an 9:101)

The above verses show that:

1- Allah WAS satisfied with them, but may not be applicable later.

2- Allah addressing those who preceded in belief from among them, thus it means He is not addressing all of the companions.

3- Immediately in the next verse, Allah talks about the hypocrites arround Prophet who pretend to be his sincere companions and even Prophet does not know them according to the above verse. This is in conformity with the traditions of Sahih al-Bukhari mentioned above that Allah will say to His Prophet that "You do not know what these companions have done after you left them."

Of course, there are verses in Qur’an in which Allah uses past tense verb, but it is intended as present and/or future tense verb. However it is not always the case. There are many verses in Qur’an in which Allah clearly states that He changes His decisions in time based on our actions at each instant of time. Allah is not in the domain of time, but He has ability to change his decision in the dimension of time. Of course He previously know what He will to change later, and He has the foreknowledge of every thing. He does not treat a believer in a bad manner today, even though He knows that this believer will become apostate tomorrow.

To clarify this point, please see verses of Qur’an such as 8:65-66, 7:153, 16:110, 16:119, 13:11, in which Allah clearly states He changes His decision based on our behavior. You can locate many verses like these in Qur’an.

Thus Allah’s judgment about human beings changes in time according to our actions. If we do something good, He will get please with us, and then if we do something bad, He gets angry from us, and so on. Companions are not exempt from this rule. Any body who does good deeds, Allah was pleased with him, no matter if he was companion or not.

Allah is JUST. He does not discriminate between companion and others who live at this time. No body is guaranteed to go to paradise if he or she does wrong things, kills innocents,... . Otherwise Allah is not just. Allah states in Qur’an that

"Every body is responsible for what he has done.”(Qur’an 74:38).

Allah Also states: "Fulfill your propmise, so that I fullfill My Promise.”(Qur’an 2:40).

Thus even if we assume for the sake of argument that the verse 9:100 implies "all”the companions have been promised Paradise, the verse 2:40 clearly states that if those people break their convenant
after the death of the messenger of Allah and kill innocents, then Allah will not fulfill His promise for them either.

Let us also look at the following Qur’anic verses which clearly shows that even a person with high virtues who deserves paradise, can burn out all his good deeds (Habt of Amal) at once! So never judge people for their early good work (if any!). We should always look at the final result of each person. Even prophet didn’t know what will be his destiny till he died (i.e., till he passed his final exam!) because he had freedom to do wrong things too.

Allah said:

"(O Prophet) If you ascribe a partner to Allah, your work will burn out, and you will be among the losers.”(Qur’an 39:65)

If prophet’s deeds are in danger of burning, it is clear how to judge for the companions. Of course prophet did not burn out his deeds, but there was potential of danger of burning for him too.

Allah also said:

"And if any of you turn back from their faith and die in disbelief, their works burn out and will be of no use in this world and Hereafter, and they will be companions of Fire for ever.”(Qur’an 2:217)

He, Exalted, also said: "Those who become unbeliever after they have been believer, and grow violent in disbelief, their repentance will not be accepted and such people are those who go astray.”(Qur’an 3:90)

He also said:

"On that day (Doomsday) some faces will be bright and some faces will be dark. To those whose faces will be dark (will be said:) Did you reject faith after accepting it? Taste the penalty for rejecting faith!”(Qur’an 3:106)

Allah also said:

"Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again), and then reject faith (again) and go on in disbelief, Allah willnot forgive them nor guide them on the way.”(Qur’an 4:137)

So it is quite possible for a believer whom Allah is satisfied with him, to become unbeliever tomorrow. Otherwise if somebody is promised that Allah is satisfied with him for ever and unconditionally (no mater he kills innocents or does any other wrong thing later), then it means that he is no longer under the test of Allah, which is in contradiction with several verses of Qur’an.

The Tragedy of Thursday

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

On a Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (S), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will and repeat the declaration/assignment of his successor for his Ummah. Major Sunni sources including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim mentioned that an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar, accused prophet of talking non sense (May Allah protect us) in order to prevent this writing. They questioned the rationality of Prophet to discredit the his will. Below is some of the traditions concerning this tragic episode:

It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that:

Ibn Abbas said: "Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was!”Then Ibn Abbas cried severely so that his tears flowed to his cheeks. Then he added Prophet said: "Bring me a flat bone or a sheet and an ink so that I could write (order to write) a statement that will prevent you people to go astray after me.”They said: "Verily the messenger of Allah is talking no sense.”

Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul-Wasiyyah”in section "Babut-

Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3,

P1259, Tradition (#1637/21).

Here is the original Arabic text of above Hadith given by Sahih Muslim:

عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ: يَوْمُ الْخَمِيسِ وَمَا يَوْمُ الْخَمِيسِ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ جَعَلَ تَسِيلُ دُمُوعُهُ حَتَّى رَاَيْتُ عَلَى خَدَّيْهِ. قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ ‏"‏ ائْتُونِي بِالْكَتِفِ وَالدَّوَاةِ - اَوِ اللَّوْحِ وَالدَّوَاةِ - اَكْتُبْ لَكُمْ كِتَابًا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدَهُ اَبَدًا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالُوا اِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ يَهْجُرُ .

The other version is given by al-Bukhari and Muslim which indicates the role of Umar in that catastrophe:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was ‘Umar Ibn al-Khatttab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray.”‘Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, you have the Qur’an, so Allah’s Book is sufficient for us.”

The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah’s Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,”while the others said what ‘Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me.”Ibn ‘Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah’s Apostle from writing a statement for them.

لما حضر النبي وفي البيت رجال فيهم عمر قال النبي: هلم أكتب لكم كتاباً لاتضلون بعده. قال عمر: إن النبي قد غلب عليه الوجع وعندكم القرآن ، فحسبنا كتاب الله...

. .

The above tradition can also be found in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul-Wasiyyah”in section "Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1259, Tradition (#1637/22).

As you see in the above traditions, the Prophet (S) was accused of talking no sense by an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar. In the above tradition, Ibn Abbas mentioned Umar and his company prevented Prophet from writing his will which could prevent people from going astray after him. So the conclusion from the above tradition is that the writing it did NOT take place. In the following tradition, however, Sa’id Ibn Jubair alleged that the Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.393

Narrated Said bin Jubair:

I heard Ibn ‘Abbas saying, "Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn ‘Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn ‘Abbas, "What is about) Thursday?”He said, "When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah’s Apostle deteriorated, he said, ‘Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.’ The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said, ‘What is wrong with him? Do you think he is talking no sense (delirious)? Ask him (to see if he is talking no sense). The Prophet replied, ‘Leave me, for I am in a better state than what you are asking me.’

Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying: ‘Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.’ The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn ‘Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot!

Sa’id Ibn Jubair claims that Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims. It is interesting to see that the narrators who used to memorize thousands of traditions, simply forgot the last will of Prophet (S). Now if you look at the two things that the sub-narrator allegedly attributed to the Prophet, i.e.,

1. Expelling pagans from Arabian Peninsula
2. respecting foreign delegates

One can see that these are not the things that if Muslim do, they will NEVER go astray after Prophet. The matter should be much more important that would Guarantee the salvation of Muslims, and it could be no less important than the subject of leadership. Moreover such claim contradicts the saying of Ibn Abbas (in the early mentioned traditions) who claimed that the quarrel of the companions prevented the prophet from stating his will. Here is the last tradition I would like to mention in this regard.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.716

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah’s Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said "Bring me something so that I (order) to write for you something after which you will never go astray.”The people (present there) quarreled in this matter, and it was not right to quarrel in front of prophet. They said, "What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is talking no sense (delirious)?”

Here is the original Arabic text of above Hadith (5.716) given by al-

Bukhari:

قالَ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ: يَوْمُ الْخَمِيسِ وَمَا يَوْمُ الْخَمِيسِ ‏.‏ إشْتَدَّ برسولِّ اللهِ وَجَعهُ فقال: ائْتُونِي أكْتُبُ لَكُمْ كِتَابًا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدَهُ اَبَدًا. فَتَنازَعوا و لا يَنْبَغي عِندَ النَّبي تنازع. فَقالو: ما شأَنَهُ أَهَجَرَ .

The above tradition is also in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul-Wasiyyah”in section "Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version, (Saudi Arabia), v3, pp 1257-58, Tradition (#1637/20).

More addresses for similar traditions:

Sahih al-Bukhari, in the chapter named "The Book of Knowledge"
(Kitabul-Ilm), also in the chapter named "The Book of Medicine"
(Kitabut-Tib), also in the chapter named "Kitabul Itisam bil Kitab was-Sunnah".
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1,pp 232,239,324f,336,355.
And much more...

Also as indicated above (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573), Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur’an, so Allah’s Book is sufficient for us.”Umar and those who supported him prevented prophet from writing (ordering to write) that statement, by accusing him of talking no sense. As I have mentioned in the discussion about "Qur’an and Ahlul-Bayt", prophet clearly indicated that we should follow both Qur’an AND Ahlul-Byte in order not to go astray. So Qur’an alone is not sufficient as opposed to what Umar said above.

There is a bizarre commentary in the footnote of above traditions in Sahih Muslim (1980 Edition, Arabic version). It says: The above incident shows the high virtue of Umar, since he knew that people might not follow what prophet would write, and as a result, people would go to hell because of their disobedience of the order of prophet. So Umar prevented Prophet from writing, in order to save people from going to hell!

Also in the footnote of the same section of Sahih Muslim it is mentioned that Prophet possibly wanted to assign a Caliph on that Thursday, and the matter might have been the matter of successorship which caused such dispute.

In fact, most of the people who where present there, understood the intention of prophet, the same as what Umar did. Because prophet had previously indicated the issue when he said several times that: "I shall leave for you two precious Symbols: The book of Allah, and my progeny, that is my family (Itrat & Ahlul-bayt). If you follow them, you will never go astray after me.”(Sahih al-Tirmidhi; a close version is also given in Sahih Muslim), and also they were present in Ghadir Khum where prophet said: "Whoever I am his master, ‘Ali is his master.”(see Sahih al-Tirmidhi; Sunan Ibn Maja; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i).

So when prophet during his illness said that "Let me write something that you never go astray after me", those people who were present, including Umar, quickly understood that prophet wants to repeat what he had already mentioned, but this time in writing. A few Qur’anic verses should also be mentioned here. Allah said in Qur’an:

"O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.”(Qur’an 49:2).

Allah also said:

"Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed.”(Qur’an 53:3-4).

He, Exalted, also said:

"Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.”(Qur’an 59:7).

He, Exalted He is, also said:

But no by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Qur’an 4:65)

So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense (paranoid)!

The reason that prophet did not repeat his request (if it is true) was that he already was discredited by his companions and was accused of talking no sense. So even if he would say something, those people would not believe in him and would say such instruction has been given while he was talking no sense (paranoid). So Umar made it easy, and by saying that prophet is talking nonsense, ended it up.

There are few Sunni traditions which allege that prophet was confused to assign which person as his successor and finally failed to assign any body as his successor and left it to people to decide. Some even claim that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr, but he left it to people.

If Umar have ever heard of such sayings (that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr as his successor), he would never stop prophet from stating his will, and would never accuse him of talking no sense. Rather he would let prophet tell his will and assign Abu Bakr as his successor. We all know, the main support in "Saqifah Bani Sa’idah”for the secret nomination of Abu Bakr for Caliphate, was Umar. So if Umar have not heard of such traditions (the tendency of Prophet to assign Abu Bakr), there is a great possibility that those traditions were fabricated later.

Also it contradicts several authentic Sunni traditions regarding the assignment of ‘Ali-Ibn-Abi-Talib as prophet’s successor. As you know there are a huge number of fabricated traditions which was created by several pay- rolled scholars in support of some rulers, and mainly to justify what happened.

Finally, I would like to bring to your attention the importance and seriousness of the tragedy:

1- Notice that any person utters his most important wishes when he wants to write the statement of his will at the end of his life.

2- Notice the importance of the person who wants to write the will, who is the last Prophet of God, the best mankind ever. No human in the world was more enthusiastic than him about his community. The person who Allah has ordered us in Qur’an to follow him unconditionally.

3- Notice that prophet said this statement would be the key element in the destiny of Muslims according to the above traditions. They will never go astray if they abide it.

In such critical moment, people who claimed to be his sincere companions, stopped/insulted him. Those companions are responsible for misleading the Muslims throughout history and the generations to come.

Side Comments

Reading the article, a Sunni brother commented that: How could Umar prevent the manifestation of a Divine Commandment? If writing the will was the order of Allah to his Prophet, then how could be possible that Allah fails to manifest His own wish?

This brother has confused two different issues. Umar was able to prevent the manifestation of divine commandment since he was a human and was gifted some free will. Yet, Umar or any other human can NEVER prevent what Allah foreordained (Taqdir) and what Allah wills (Mashiyyah).

Please take a note of this: There is a difference between the commandment of Allah (which people can disobey) and the will of Allah (which people have no ability to go against). It was the commandment of Allah to write that statement, yet the Will of Allah was what happened.

Another brother mentioned that Prophet Muhammad never wrote a single commandment or teaching of his during his 23 years of ministry. Then how could he order people to bring pen and paper to write somthing for them? Yes, the messenger of Allah did not write in public, because he used to dictate writing. However, this does not mean that he did not know how to write. It is also true that the Prophet was "Ummi", but this does not necessarily mean he did not know how to read and write.

It rather means that Prophet did not have any human teacher to teach him how to read and write since the time he was born to his mother ("Ummi”derived from "Umm”meaning mother). His only teacher was Allah. And this is why Qur’an is a true miracle from a person who did not have a teacher and he who did not go to school. I would say, clearing doubt about the Qur’an as God’s revelation was the only reason that the Messenger of Allah was not ordered attempt to write in public or claim as such.

Reading and writing not only in Arabic but also in all other languages, as well as the knowledge of language of all other creatures are not a lot to claim for the master of all messengers when we see in Qur’an that Prophet Sulayman and David knew the language of the animals.

Again, all such knowledge could be released to the Prophet when he really needed, by the permission of Allah. But to the time it is not necessary, he would act as if he does not have such knowledge. It is like having access to the database rather than having all the knowledge within oneself.

About the Tragedy of Thursday, however, what the Prophet (S) meant by "writing”was the common sense of "ordering to write", and people were aware of it and was not the first time they have heard of it. Based on the traditions no body even said at that time that how he wants to write.

Moreover, even we suppose that Prophet wanted to write by himself and people did not know about his ability to write, they could have given him the benefit of doubt (!!) to see if he can do such miracle (!?) beside all the miracles he has had already shown. Were they suspicious to his miracles?

This is the same Prophet that God said about him "laa yantqu anil Hawaa”(he does not talk of his own desires)? Never mind verses 33:36, 59:7, 4:80, 4:59, etc., and yet to justify a disobedience by some companions can we accuse him of rave? Did God know that there would be a time that His prophet could not stand to the above standard, and still going ahead and revealing such verses in his honor?

Another brother mentioned that if the Prophet inteneded to appoint ‘Ali as the Imam, why did he not do so in the presence of the whole people and not in his house few days before his demise? The Prophet had already declared the appointment Imam ‘Ali as Imam in many occasions from his first open preach in Mecca (see al-Tabari English, v6, pp 88-92; Ibn al-Athir, v2, p62; Ibn Asakir, v1, p85; al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, p97) to his last open sermon in Ghadir Khum (see Sahih
Tirmidhi, v2, p298; Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i). Note that it was not Prophet who appointed him on his own, but it was rather Allah who appointed him.

What the messenger of Allah wanted to do in his last will was to write (or order to write) what he has already said. But, as quoted earlier, some people around him shamelessly reduced him to the level of insanity. What happened on that thursday is a proof by itself that the Prophet ALREADY assigned a successor, otherwise, there was no point of disobedience!

Another person mentioned the verse "Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion (Qur’an 5:3)”which was revealed 2 months before the death of the Prophet shows that there was no new religious command is going to come thereafter. Otherwise, if that important statement the prophet was going to dictate to his followers would have been somthing which was forgotten, would make the verse untrue.

Perhaps the above brother would be surprized to know that many Sunni commentators of Qur’an have confirmed that the above verse (5:3) was revealed in Ghadir Khum AFTER the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever I am his leader, ‘Ali is his leader. O’ God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.”(See the ariticled titled "Ghadir Khum”for extensive references). This means the perfection of the religion was due announcing the successor of the Prophet (S).

In fact what prophet wanted to do on that Thursday (three days before his death) was just to repeat, to remind, and to emphasize the things that has been revealed before. He didn’t want to add any thing new. No Muslim ever claimed that the position of prophethood has been taken from Muhammad sometime before his death.

We do not have such case about other prophets either. Even let’s suppose he was not prophet any more, or he wanted to say something new. Do you think you can find any man better or more enthusiastic than him about the destiny of his community?! Do you think his last wish was against the prosperity of his people?! How much should they have been rude that even they didn’t let him talk!!!

The Prophet (S) said:

و لولا أنت يا علي لم يعرف المؤمنون بعدي

"Have you not beeen there O’ ‘Ali, the believers would not have been recognized after me.”

Conspiracy Against Imam Ali (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A Sunni brother mentioned that:

It is quite difficult for us to digest the so-called "conspiracy theory.”Despite many years of companionship, how could only few people out of all his companions hold on to Muhammad’s instructions on the issue of Caliphate and the rest disobey him?

I would certainly accept the argument of this brother if he can convince me why almost all the companions of Moses became worshipers of a golden calf after so many years of training?! According to Sahih al-Bukhari, the Messeenger of Allah has told ‘Ali that the story of Moses and Aaron (Haroon) is similar to that of the story of him and ‘Ali. The tradition is as follows:

"Your position to me is like the position of Aaron to Moses, except that there shall be no Prophet after me"

أنتَ مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا إنَّهُ لا نبيَّ بعدي

Sunni References:

(1) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56 and 5.700
(2) Sahih Muslim, Arabic, section of virtues of ‘Ali, v4, pp 1870-71
(3) Sunan Ibn Majah, p12
(4) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174
(5) al-Khas’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16
(6) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

Now, the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses is given by the verses of Qur’an, among which are the following three:

(Moses said: "O’ Allah) assign me a vizier from my family, (that is) my brother Aaron (Haroon) ...,”(Allah) said: "We granted your requests, O’ Moses.”(Qur’an 20:29-36).

Allah, Exalted, also said:

"Surely We gave the book to Moses and assigned his brother Aaron as his vizier.”(Qur’an 25:35).

He, Exalted He is, also said:

"... And Moses said unto his brother Aaron: Take my place in my comunity.”(Qur’an 7:142).

وَقَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي

Notice that "Ukhlufni”and "Khalifa”(Caliph) are exactly from the same root. Now, to realized what was narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, we need to replace the word "Moses”with "Muhammad”and "Aaron”with "‘Ali", and we are all set!! The sentence becomes "And Muhammad (S) said to his ‘brother’ ‘Ali, take my place among my community.”

Of course, the tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari excluded the Prophethood for Imam ‘Ali, and what remains for him is the leadership of the community. Putting the above 3 verses of Qur’an beside what has been narrated by al- Bukhari and Muslim, Ibn Majah and many others, we solves the mystery! ‘Ali is the "brother”and his deputy/successor.

By the above authentic tradition, the Prophet (S) meant that as Moses had left behind Aaron to look after his people when he went to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the same way he was leaving ‘Ali behind to look after the affairs of Islam after he met Allah (i.e., his death).

Confirming what the above tradition implies, we find in the many reports that Imam ‘Ali (as) received the title of the "brother”of Prophet when Prophet established the "brothering”among his followers (see Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p363; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p504; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, v4, p251).

Interestingly enough, the Prophet in that occasion made Abu Bakr and Umar brother of each other (al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v3, part 1, p123). If Abu Bakr was really the closest to the Prophet, he would have chose him for himself instead of Imam ‘Ali.

In fact, if we look deeper to the situation of after death of Prophet Muhammad (S), and the leaving of Moses to Miqaat (appointment with Allah), we will see more analogy to what Prophet (S) said to ‘Ali (as). Qur’an states that: Moses (as) with the order of Allah, assigned Haroon (as) as his successor (Caliph) and left his people to him, and left for Miqaat (appointment with Allah) for a total of forty days. After leaving of Moses, most of his companions turned against Haroon, and were deceived by Sameri, and became worshipers of a golden calf. (See Qur’an 7:142, 20:90-97, 20:83- 88).

The analogy that Prophet (S) mentioned in the above tradition, seems to be a reality after his demise. Most of companions (except Abu Dharr, Miqdad, Salman al-Farsi, Ammar, and ...) became disloyal to ‘Ali (as) after the death of Prophet (S), turned against him, and preferred some other people to him.

The majority of people disobeyed ‘Ali (as), as their forefathers disobeyed Haroon (as). They did not take lessons from Qur’an and the history, and thus the history repeated over and over again. The repetition of the history of the Children of Israel for Muslims is confirmed by Prophet (S):

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.422

Narrated Abu Sa’id al-Khudri:

The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure (lizard), you would follow them.”We said, "O Allah’s Apostle! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?”He said, "Whom else?"

This tradition is also narrated by Muslim in his Sahih , v8, p57. It is also narrated in Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 84, 94. Think for a while... Why would the Prophet (S) compare his companions to the Jews and the Christians, knowing full well that the Jews and the Christians have mutilated and perverted the religion of Allah (SWT)?

Because Allah (SWT) had told him (S) that your companions will turn back, except the select few.

Imam ‘Ali (as) was still a divinely-appointed Imam during the time of the first three rulers, and what these rulers could take from him was the rulership (which is one of the rights of Imam) and not the position of Imamat.

As for Imam ‘Ali pledging Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, he was compelled to that since he had no choice and he was compled to do so. We, however, never accuse the Imams of being cowards. What Imam ‘Ali did was his duty which is similar to what Haroon did as his duty.

Qur’an states that when Moses (as) came back from Miqaat he was very angry since Allah had informed him that his community went astray during his absence. Moses came and started questioning his brother Haroon, that why he id not take action to prevent this corruption. Qur’an states that Haroon (Aaron) replied:

"(O’ Moses) people did oppress me and they were about to kill me.”(Qur’an 7:150).

 إِنَّ الْقَوْمَ اسْتَضْعَفُونِي وَكَادُوايَقْتُلُونَنِي

The above verse gives another striking similarity between ‘Ali and Haroon.

Since Muslims all believe that Haroon was a true prophet of God, they do not allow themselves to call him coward. In fact Taqiyya (dissimulation) is mentioned in Qur’an in several verses. This requires another article by its own, to explain the importance of Taqiyya according to Qur’an and the numerous traditions of Prophet (S) reported in the authentic Sunni collections.

Nevertheless ‘Ali did his duty after the death of the Messenger of Allah, as Haroon (Aaron) did:

"Before this, Aaron had already said to them: ‘O my people! you are being tested in this, for verily your Lord is (Allah) Most Gracious; so follow me and obey my order.’“(Qur’an 20:90).

Sahih al-Bukhari confirms that Imam ‘Ali refused to give his allegiance to Abu Bakr for six months. He gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr only after the martyrdom of his wife Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), Daughter of the Holy Prophet, six month after the departure of Prophet. (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 5.546).

After the death of Prophet (S), for forty days, ‘Ali (as) was contacting the well-known people at night, reminding them the instructions of prophet about his right to Caliphate, asking them to join him to get the power. But non responded except Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Salman al-Farsi and some more. The Prophet had already instructed ‘Ali that if the number of his followers at that upheaval exceeds 40 men, he should take the action otherwise he should keep silent since the only remaining pious people would be killed without being able to help Islam. ‘Ali (as) was not afraid of being killed, and he kept silent only to keep the faded lawn of Islam alive. After he was sure that there would no success in his revolting, he kept silent.

During his silence, he indeed started cooperating with the first 2 Caliphs as consultant and did his best to decrease the damage as much as possible. If he had not done so, Islam would have been destroyed completely. Imam ‘Ali said: "I tolerated those periods as if there was a thorn in my eye and a sharp bone stuck in my throat.”(Nahjul Balagha, the sayings of Imam ‘Ali).

Islam was very young at that time (only 23 years old!) and division among Muslims could have totally removed Islam from the surface of the earth. So he kept silent, as Haroon (Aaron) kept silent to prevent division: (Moses) said:

"O’ Aaron! what kept you back when you saw them going wrong?"... (Aaron said:) "...Truly I feared you would say ‘You caused a division among the Children of Israel and you did not respect my word!’“(Qur’an 20:92-94).

Abu Sufyan was one of those who wanted to destroy the young Islam by encouraging ‘Ali to revolt when he was sure that ‘Ali will have no success due to small number of his followers. But the revolt of ‘Ali would at least cause the civil war and the destruction of Islam. al-Tabari reported:

When people gathered to give their oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Abu Sufyan came while saying, "By God, I see a cloud of smoke which nothing but blood will clear. O family of Abd Manaf! Who is Abu Bakr that he should be the master of your affairs? Where are ‘Ali and al- Abbas, the two oppressed ones?”

He then said (to ‘Ali): "O Abul Hasan! stretch your hand so that I give you the oath of allegiance."... ‘Ali rebuked him, saying: "By God, you do not intend anything but (to stir
up) Fitnah (dissension). For long you have desired evil for Islam. We do not need your advice."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, p199

As we quoted the tradition of al-Bukhari earlier, the Prophet confirmed that the history of the Children of Israel will be repeated for Muslims. In fact Qur’an has mentioned the stories of the Children of Israel to give us a way to understand the true history of Islam itself. There are many other striking similarities in this regard written in Qur’an. Please see the artcle of "The Twelve Imams (Part II)”for the Qur’anic verses in this regard.

Side Comments

A Sunni brother mentioned that Aaron (Haroon) died during the liftime of Moses, and as such, this is not a correct analogy to confirm the caliphate of ‘Ali using the tradition of Sahih al-Bukhari in which the Prophet said:

"Your position to me is like the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses but there is no prophet after me.”

The claim that Aaron died during the life-time of Prophet Moses (if true) does not hurt this argument at all, if you very carefully read the following paragraphs:

As Moses (as) had left behind Aaron to look after his people when he went to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the same way the Prophet (S) was leaving ‘Ali behind as his deputy to look after the affairs of Islam after he met Allah (i.e., his death).

This assertion becomes more evdient when we look at the last phrase of the tradition of al-Bukhari where the Messenger of Allah mentioned: "but there is no prophet AFTER me". Think about the word "after”in the statement of the Prophet. Don’t you think that the Prophet Muhammad is talking about after his death? That position (leadership) which the Prophet entrusted to ‘Ali was with ‘Ali till his death. No body except the Prophet Muhammad can take this position back from him.

Prophet Moses (as) was away from his people for 40 days and he came back and met them along with Haroon (as). Likewise, Prophet Muhammad is away from us (living in the heaven), but he will soon meet us and his companions as well as Imam ‘Ali on the Day of Judgment. He will then question them the same way as Moses questioned his people, specially those who left his religion and worshipped the golden calf. Look at the following tradition from Sahih al-Bukhari to have some idea about the would-be conversation between Prophet Muhammad and some of his companions:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.585

Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa’d:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake- Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come
to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them.”Abu Hazim added: Nu’man bin Abi ‘Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from Sahl?”I said, "Yes.”He said, “I bear witness that I heard Abu Said Al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: ‘I will say: They are my companions. Then it will be said to me, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left’.

I will say, ‘Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed after me.”Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, ‘O Lord (those are) my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from the true Islam).

Another person claimed: Not all of the people of Moses worshipped the calf and those who did not killed the ones who did by the order of God. Perhaps, this brother has been told another story. But Qur’an tells us that all the followers of Moses (except a few) were deceived by Sameri. The companions of Moses did not kill Sameri either. The were rather about to kill Aaron (as) who tried to advise them on that affliction. If the number of those who preserved their faith was a lot, Aaron wouldn’t have been in trouble. Here are some verses of Qur’an concerning the event:

And the community of Moses, after (he had left them), chose a calf (for worship), (made) out of their ornaments, of saffron hue, which gave a lowing sound. Saw they not that it spake not unto them nor guided them to any way? They chose it, and became wrong doers. (Qur’an 7:148)

And when Moses returned unto his people, angry and grieved, he said: Evil is that (course) which ye took after I had left you. Would ye hasten on the judgment of your Lord? And he cast down the tablets, and he seized his brother by the head, dragging him toward him. (Aaron) said: "Son of my mother! Lo! People did oppress me and they were about to kill me. Make not the enemies rejoice over my misfortune nor count thou me amongst the sinful people.”(Qur’an 7:150)

Before this, Aaron had already said to them: "O my people! you are being tested in this, for verily your Lord is (Allah) Most Gracious; so follow me and obey my order.”(Qur’an 20:90)

They had said: "We will not abandon this cult but we will devote ourselves to it until Moses returns to us.”(Qur’an 20:91)

So the last verse disproves the claim that the true followers killed the wrong doers before Moses (as) come back. Yes, after Prophet Moses came back, he punished the influential individuals among those who led people astray. But he did not kill them:

(Moses) said (to Sameri): "Go! Your (punishment) in this life will be that you will say ‘Touch me not’; and moreover (for a future penalty) thou hast a promise that will not fail: now look at thy god of whom thou hast become a devoted worshipper: we will certainly (melt) it in a blazing fire and scatter it broadcast in the sea!”(Qur’an 20:97)

Another brother mentioned that if ‘Ali wished could very well incite forcful rebelion since he is from a very strong tribe Bani Hashm, and both Abu Bakr and Umar from a week tribe Adiyy, and Taym. Then why did he keep silent and did not use force to restore his right after the election held in Saqifah? If Bani Hashim were strong with respect to other tribes, as the above brother claims, then Muslims wouldn’t have had to migrate from Mecca to Medina. Also they wouldn’t have been subject to economical sanctions in She’b Abi Talib.

The exceptional brevity of Imam ‘Ali (as) in various wars and his killing of the most important warriors of Arabs, is well-known for even Sunnis. Imam ‘Ali mentioned that he himself has killed 40,000 infidels by his sword (this figure includes those who were killed by him in the civil wars). Killing the lions of Arabs developed a very intensive and long-lasting hatred in the heart of the Arabs from different tribes.

For this very reason, most Arabs due to their tribal ties, even after embracing Islam, were not friendly toward Imam ‘Ali and other members of Ahlul-Bayt. This hatred gave its fruit on the issue of Caliphate, and later in the civil wars at the time of Imam ‘Ali (as) as well as the prosecution of Ahlul-Bayt and their partisans after his martyrdom which continued with utmost brutality for a number of centuries.

The hatred of the house of Umayyah against Bani Hashim (the clan of Prophet and ‘Ali) is well-known. The wars of Abu Sufyan and his son Muawiyah against Prophet and ‘Ali respectively, also the horrible massacre of the grandson of prophet at Karbala by the grandson of Abu Sufyan, are only some of top items among the long list of such crimes.

You might also want to refresh the memory that when Muawiyah took over the power, he instituted the Sunnah of cursing Imam ‘Ali. Sunni history books and Sunni collections of traditions clearly state that Muawiyah commanded all the Imams of the mosques throughout the Muslim world to CURSE Imam ‘Ali in every Friday prayer. (Sunni references are available upon request).

Now, we turn to the events of Saqifah and the "election”of Abu Bakr: During the lifetime of the Prophet (S), the Mosque of Prophet was the center of all Islamic activities. It was there that the decision of war and peace were made, delegations were received, sermons were delivered and cases were decided. It is not surprising that when the news of the demise of the Prophet (S) spread, the Muslims assembled in that very Mosque. On the other hand, Saqifah of Bani Sa’idah was located three miles outside Medina and was a secret location for the evil activities of some Arab tribes. (see Ghiyath al-Lughah, p228).

Why then Sa’d Ibn Ubadah and his fans as well as Abu Bakr and Umar, left the Mosque secretly and without informing other prominent companions and went three miles outside Medina to discuss the issue of Caliphate? Why didn’t they discuss the issue as important as this among the Muslims inside the mosque? Wasn’t that they wanted to usurp the Caliphate without the knowledge of people? Why did Abu Bakr and Umar with Abu Ubaydah slip out the mosque secretly? Was it because ‘Ali and Bani Hashim were present in the mosque and in the house of Prophet, and they did not want them to know the plot?

Also, we should keep in mind that it was the custom of the Arabs that once a person was declared, even by a small group, to be the chief of the tribe, others hesitated to oppose him, and willy nilly followed suit. Due to their dislike of Imam ‘Ali (as) (which I discussed earlier), they did not respect his right, nor did they even informed him of this meeting. They SIMPLY neglected the last sermon of Prophet in Ghadir Khum where the Messenger of God declared him as his successor just two and a half months months before the incedent of Saqifah.

A Sunni brother mentioned that: If Imam ‘Ali disaproved Uthman, then why did he risk the lives of his beloved sons, al-Hassan and al-Hussain, trying to protect the life of his adversary from the blood-thirsty rioters in Medina?

According to the Shi’a sources such news are dubious. We do not have any strong evidence that Imam ‘Ali sent his sons to support Uthman’s House. In fact, al-Tabari who is one of the important Sunni Historians said that Imam ‘Ali deserted Uthman since Uthman did insisted in keeping Marwan in his administration. Here is the related part from the History of al-Tabari, when the siege over Uthman was very severe:

People informed ‘Ali of the news. Then ‘Ali came to Uthman and said: "Surely you have satisfied Marwan (again), but he is satisfied with you only if you deviate from your religion and reason, like a camel carrying a litter that is led around at will. By God, Marwan is devoid of sense in regard to his religion and his soul. I swear by God, I think he will bring you in and then not send you out again. After this visit, I will not come again to chide you. You have destroyed your own honor and you have been robbed of your authority."

When ‘Ali departed, Uthman’s wife told him: "I have heard that ‘Ali said to you that he will never return to you, and that you have obeyed Marwan (again), who leads you wherever he wishes.”Uthman said: "What shall I do?”She responded: "You should fear God alone, who has no partner, and you should adhere to the practice of your two predecessors (Abu Bakr and Umar). For if you obey Marwan, he will kill you. Marwan enjoys no prestige among the people, and inspires neither awe nor love. People have only abandoned you due to Marwan’s position (in your councils). Send to ‘Ali, then, and trust in his honesty and uprightness. He is related to you and he is not a man whom people disobey.”

So Uthman sent to ‘Ali, but he refused to come, saying: "I told him I would not return."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 176-179

Even we suppose that Imam ‘Ali protected Uthman in his last days, the protection was not because he loved Uthman to be on power. He did so (if true) since he knew that this is a conspiracy, and he knew that those companions who plotted to kill Uthman, would become the avenger of his blood tomorrow, as it happened (e.g., the companions like Talha, Zubair, Muawiyah, and ...) and it became a custom of assassination of Caliphs with self-judgments including the assassination of ‘Ali (as) himself.

Another reader mentioned that, if some companions conspired against Imam ‘Ali and usureped his right of Caliphate, is it not a possibility that they conspired to alter the Qur’anic text? The compilers and transmitters of the Qur’an were fallible and sinners.

As for protection of Qur’an, it is the will of Allah! Even if all the people of the world gather to change it they will fail. Muslims could recall the history that Allah willed to raise and preserve Moses in the house of His Enemy, Pharaoh.

Also there was no reason for Umar or Abu Bakr to delete something from Qur’an, because the name of Imam ‘Ali did not appear in Qur’an. (eventhough his name was in the divine commentary which was revealed with Qur’an but was not a part of text of Qur’an. It is no surprise that this divine commentary was suppressed). Nonetheless, Sunni documents agree that at least 300 verses of Qur’an directly revealed on the honor of Imam ‘Ali. (reported by Ibn Asakir, al-Suyuti, Ibn Hajar, etc.) Beside that that, Ibn Abbas said:

"There is no verse in Qur’an in which the term ‘Believers’, unless ‘Ali is at the top of them and the chief of them and the more virtuous one among them. Surely Allah has admonished the companions of Muhammad (S) in Qur’an, but He did not refer to ‘Ali except with honor."

Sunni references:

- Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p654, tradition #1114
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p229
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p89
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196
- Others such as Tabarani and Ibn Abi Hatam

Also, not all were sinners. The Sunni traditionists and historians Imam ‘Ali (as) was the FIRST who compiled Qur’an. It took Imam ‘Ali one week after the death of Prophet to Finnish his compilation. Imam ‘Ali presented this Qur’an to the rulers of that time and they had a chance to review it and learn about the missing verses of their own collections and they did correct what they missed. (Please see the article of "The Qur’an Compiled by Imam ‘Ali”for the references in this regard)

As you see the one who corrected them was an infallible one, and thus we have all reasons to believe that the Qur’an that we have today is the very same as what was revealed to Prophet except that it is not in the correct sequence. But nothing is missing from it.

A brother mentioned that according to the verse:

If two parties among the Believers fall into fighting make peace between them. If then one of them transgresses against the other, fight that which transgresses until it complies with the command of
Allah; but if it complies then make peace between them with justice and be fair, for Allah loves those who are just. (Qur’an 49:9) Qur’an did not remove the characeristic of belief from either of the two warring factions. That two Muslims fight is not an indication that one of them is unbeliever.

The above comment is correct. But the verse does not imply that any warring faction is necessarily Muslim even though they say so by their tong. There is no doubt that a believer can be killer of an innocent and also there is no doubt that such killer will go to Hell for ever as the foolowing verse testifies:

"And Whoever kills a believer deliberately, his reward is Hell forever, and the Wrath of Allah is upon him, He cursed him and prepared a great punishment for him.”(Qur’an 4:93)

The above verse (4:93) does not exclude believers from that punishment. Whoever does so, is entitled to the same punishment be it believer or unbeliever.

I also think you forgot to think about the latter portion of the verse you quoted which was: "If then one of them transgresses against the other, fight that which transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah.”

Talha and Zubair are entitled to this last portion. Because Imam ‘Ali frequently asked them for reconciliation, but they killed his messenger when he was carrying Qur’an to them for a sign of asking for reconciliation. The story is written in the History of Tabari, v4, P312. So those companions are "Baaggee”-- transgressor according to the verse you quoted, and should have been fought as Imam ‘Ali did, and they will be the companions of Hell forever.

A brother mentioned that according to Qur’an, Moses who was a Prophet of god was confused with the strange actions of al-Khidhr. But when at the end , Moses (as) was told about the reasons behind those actions, he completely admired them. Moses (as) was a Prophet, but still He could not see the complete picture related to these events; none of us are in the position of Moses (as). None of us has a clear picture of what we are criticizing from the actions of the companions.

I would like to remind that brother that he is discrediting you the most important investment which Allah gifted to everyone that is logic (Aql). If I came to know God, it was due the using this investment. If I found that Islam is the best religion, it is because I used my brain and concluded that the instructions given in Qur’an are sound instructions and the regulations of Islam are the best among all other alternatives.

If one discredit this precious thing, he will lose every thing including his religion, and he will accept any irrational ‘fatwa’ as a religious command, he will accept some killers of innocents go to paradise without giving it a thought.

Moses (as) did not discredit this precious thing, and he asked Prophet Khidr for clarification, and he finally got the answers and was convinced shortly after the incidents. Now, can provide any rational justification for what some companions did after the demise of prophet? It it about 14 centuries passed and we could not come up any justification for their deads. So why should we still blindly follow their narrations and their sayings which are in clear contradiction with tha sayings of Ahlul-Bayt?

Asking question is not sin. Remaining ignorant is a big loss though. Also comparing a sinless prophet with a sinfull companion is like comparing heavens with the earth.

A Wahhabi contributor claimed that the Shi’a do not follow the Sunnah of the prophet since it was transmitted by his companions. This Wahhabi fellow did not even give it a second thought that the Shi’a follow Imam ‘Ali (as) who was the BEST of the companions of the Prophet and their most knowledgeable one, the Strong Rope of Allah (3:103), and His Right Path (1:6). Neither his proximity of relationship with Prophet was preceded (42:23), nor his preceding in accepting the religion (56:10-11).

We stick to the instructions of Ahlul-Bayt who are pure and infallible according to Qur’an and Hadith. Hence, we do not need to follow those of companions who opposed/fought Ahlul-Bayt.

Thus the Shi’a, indeed, follow the Sunnah transmitted by a Prophet’s companion, the best of them. However, Wahhabis follow the worst of them, that is Muawiyah, and take his Sunnah which has no similarity with the

Sunnah Of The Prophet (S)

A Wahhabi mentioned: It is part of our Sunni dogma to respect and love the all the companions of the Prophet. Our scholars remind us that vilification of the companions is Kufr. Interestingly enough that those companions who remained loyal to ‘Ali received severe punishment from the government of the time, and were not respected at all.

One example is Abu Dharr who was exiled to the worst climate location in the reign of Uthman because they could not stop him from telling the truth. They kept him there till he died (martyred). Abu Dhar was the one that prophet said in his virtue that "The Earth does not carry nor the Heavens cover a man more frank and truthful than Abu Dharr".

Wasn’t Abu Dharr a great companion of prophet? So why shouldn’t they have respected him according to your judgment? It seems that even Uthman did not accept your type of judgment! nor Talha and Zubair when they were fighting against their legitimate Caliph ‘Ali (as). Are all of them Kafir by your judgment?

When the Shi’a reflect on the mistakes of the companions, they do so in retrospect of history. It would be very interesting to look at some of the comments of both the Wahabi and the Sunni scholars in this retrospect. Ibn Taymiyyah, the Shaykhul Islam of the Wahabis, writes And merely abusing some one other than the Prophets does not necessarily make the abuser Kafir; because some of those who were in the time of the Prophet (i.e companions) used to abuse one another and none of them was declared kafir because of this (practice); and (also) because it is not Wajib to have faith particularly in any of the companions; therefore abusing any of them does not detract from the faith in Allah and His books and His messengers the Last day.

Wahabi reference: As Sarimu l masul, Ibn Taymiyyah, page 579

Published in 1402/1982 by Alam al-Kutub

The name of Mulla ‘Ali Qari requires no introduction to the Sunnis, and he writes in his work of Sharah Fiqh al Akbar that To abuse Abu Bakr and Umar is NOT Kufr, as Abush Shakur as Salimi has correctly proved in his book, at Tamhid. And it is becuase the basis of this claim (claim that reviling the Shaykhan is kufr) is not proven, nor its meaning is confirmed.

It is so because certainly abusing a Muslim is fisq (sin) as is proved by a confirmed hadith, and therefore the Shaykhan (Abu Bakr and Umar) will be equal to the other (Muslims) in this rule; and also if we suppose that some one murdered the Shaykhan, and even the two sons in law (‘Ali and Usman), all of them together, even then according to Ahlussunnah wa al- Jamah, he will not go out of Islam (i.e will not become kafir) ...

Sunni ref: Mulla ‘Ali Qari, Sharah al Fiqh al Akbar

Matba Uthmaniyah, Istanbul, 1303 page 130
Matba Mujtabai, Delhi, 1348, page 86
Matba Aftab e Hind, India, No date, page 86

Interesting note:

The above quote was taken from three (3) editions, printed in India and Turkey. Now a new edition has been printed by Darul Lutubil Ilmiyah, Beirut in 1404/1984, which claims to be the first edition, and from which four pages (including the above text) have been OMMITED. The deleted portion contains the declaration that... those who believe that Allah has a body are definitely kafir according to the Ijma without any difference of opinions.

Do I Need To Comment On Wahabi Scholarship?

Another prson mentioned: Why is it that you want Sunnis accept a selected number of traditions from the Sunni sources which refutes the integrity of people like Abu Bakr, Umar Ibn al-Khattab? This point really irks me. I am sorry it irks you! It is not completely correct, however. We have nothing against the persons of Abu-Bakr, Umar and Ashia. We are looking at history in retrospect and evaluating their actions - which should not be considered a sin. Afterall, they were human beings who were capable of making mistakes. Why not learn from their mistakes - particularly if done in a sensetive way.

We just mentioned some traditions from Sunni books, actions and sayings of the companions. If it sounds insulting it is not because the Shi’a put them in there. I tried to give supportive evidence to my argument, objectively, with no disrespect for the companions (khulafaa particularly).

We feel that they made ijtihad in certain cases, that we don’t agree with - we choose to follow the ijtihad and teachings of others such as Imam ‘Ali and th Imams of his decendent - what is wrong with that? We also feel that there has been a lot that has been attributed to them in the form of

Hadiths, that they have not necessarily said or agree with. This is due, in part, to the Umayads who hated Ahlul Bayt and wanted to make them look as less than who they were, either by elevating the status of the people you named and others, or by fabricating hadeeths in conflict.

About Saqifah

In the following tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari:

A)- Umar said that: One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful.

B)- Umar said that ‘Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, and Ansar disagreed with them:

And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’da. ‘‘Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr.

C)- Umar gave his hand to Abu bakr without counselling with muslims. He gave his hand FIRST, and then others gave their hands too. Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, ‘O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.’ He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and THEN all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards.

D)- There was news that Umar and his followers had killed Sa’d bin Ubada. (I am not saying that he did. What I am saying that this was a common news on those days. That is all.) One of the Ansar said, ‘You have killed Sa’d bin Ubada.’ I replied, ‘Allah has killed Sa’d bin Ubada.

E)- While Umar gave his hand to Abu bakr without consulting others, he ordered that such person should be killed:

So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) WITHOUT consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should NOT be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed."

F)- While he did not wish to accept others’ decision, he, himself, applied his own decision to others: there was no greater problem (compared to death of the prophet) than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble.

Here is the tradition:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.817

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

I used to teach (the Qur’an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with ‘Umar bin al-Khattab during ‘Umar’s last Hajj, Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers (‘Umar), saying, ‘O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, ‘If ‘Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.’ ‘Umar became angry and then said, ‘Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership)."

... In the meantime, ‘Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, ‘Umar stood up, and having and praised Allah as He deserved, he said,... (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, ‘By Allah, if ‘Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.’

One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.

And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’da. ‘‘Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, ‘Let’s go to these Ansari brothers of ours.’ So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, ‘O group of Muhajirin (emigrants)! Where are you going?’

We replied, ‘We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.’ They said to us, ‘You shouldn’t go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.’ I said, ‘By Allah, we will go to them.’ And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa’da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, ‘Who is that man?’ They said, ‘He is Sa’d bin ‘Ubada.’ I asked, ‘What is wrong with him?’ They said, ‘He is sick.’

After we sat for a while, the Ansar’s speaker said, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, ‘To proceed, we are Allah’s Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.’

When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Bakr said, ‘Wait a while.’ I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it spontaneously.

After a pause he said, ‘O Ansar! You deserve all (the qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question (of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to either of them as you wish.

And then Abu Bakr held my hand and Abu Ubada bin Abdullah’s hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing of what he had said except that proposal, for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr, unless at the time of my death my own-self suggests something I don’t feel at present.’

And then one of the Ansar said, ‘I am the pillar on which the camel with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e., I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish. There should be one ruler from us and one from you.’

Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, ‘O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.’ He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards. And so we became victorious over Sa’d bin Ubada (whom al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler).

One of the Ansar said, ‘You have killed Sa’d bin Ubada.’ I replied, ‘Allah has killed Sa’d bin Ubada.’ Umar added, "By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble. So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed."

More On Companions

I shall discuss some issues about the companions in this article.

For a followup to this discussion, please see "Then I Was Guided”by Dr. Muhammad al-Tijani al- Samawi; Published in 1989 by the Fajr Establishment in London, Great Britain. The Author has four books out now, may Allah (SWT) reward him generously for risking his life in the Arab World to speak the TRUTH about the Shi’i/Sunni problem, and why he became a Shi’a.

The four books are:

1. Thooma Ihtadiyat -- Then I Was Guided (1989)

2. Ma’ah al-Sadiqin -- With the Truthful Ones (1989)

3. Fas’aloo Ahl al-Zikr -- Ask Those Who Possess the Message (1992)

4. al-Shi’a Hum Ahl al-Sunnah -- The Shi’a Are The (True) Followers of the Sunnah (Sunnah--here meaning the custom/way of the Prophet (S)) (I am NOT sure if this book has been published and released to the public yet -- It was still in the writing process when I first heard of it).

Please note that the author, Dr. Muhammad al-Tijani al-Samawi, spent years of research before writing these books and becoming, himself, a Shi’a. He is also now a recognized and certified Shi’i Religious Scholar, with authority to give Fatwas (Religious Opinions), which is no easy task in the Shi’i schools of jurisprudence, philosophy, and the sciences. He received his Doctorate degree from the Sorbone University, the French University that is ranked among the best universities in the world. His thesis was a discussion of al-Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib’s (as) most famous book "Nahjul Balagha”(The Way of Eloquence).

This book is recognized by both the Sunnis and the Shi’a as a model Par Excellence in classical Arabic Eloquence, next only to the Qur’an itself in beauty and grandeur. The proof to that statement is that the Sunnis themselves have taken it upon themselves to explain the meanings of the text and to teach it in various Islamic universities. Among those Sunnis who wrote the commentary for this book is Ibn Abil Hadid. A mor recent commentary by the Sunnis is of Muhammad Abduh from al-Azhar University. The commentary of these scholars on the book of "Nahjul Balagha”can be found in many Mosques and libraries.

Shedding the Blood of Innocents

Al-Bukhari narrated that the Messenger of Allah (S) said the following to his companions in his last speech:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 5.688 and 7.458

Narrated Abu Bakra:
The Prophet said: "... Surely, you will meet your Lord, and He will ask you about your deeds. Beware! Do not become infidels after me by cutting the throats of one another. It is incumbent on those who are present to convey this message (of mine) to those who are absent. May be that some of those to whom it will be conveyed will understand it better than those who have actually heard it.”

On the other hand, the documented history confirms that some companions (some of whom were also promised paradise according to some fabricated traditions) shed the blood of thousands of Muslims in various civil wars. Good examples of them are Talha and Zubair who were the first companions who waged war against ‘Ali (as) after people paid oath to him as their legitimate Caliph.

They could not see him in power, and found him a great obstacle for their robberies. Thus shed the blood of 10 thousand Muslims in the battle of "Camel", in order to overthrow ‘Ali from power. (see any Sunni history books for details). Their plot was finally failed and both Talha and Zubair were killed. Muawiyah and Amr Ibn al-Auss are another examples, who waged the war of Siffin against ‘Ali (as) killing other thousands of Muslims. Allah states:

"And Whoever kills a believer deliberately, his reward is Hell forever, and the Wrath of Allah is upon him, He cursed him and prepared a great punishment for him.”(Qur’an 4:93)

As such, is there any reason we should respect ALL of the companions and follow ALL of them, even those among them whom Allah cursed by the above verse of Qur’an? Why should we love one whom Allah curses, and why should we follow one whom Allah has promised Hell forever?

Collecting Gold And Silver

al-Bukhari narrates the Prophet (S) said the following after the Battle of Uhud:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.434

Narrated ‘Uqba bin ‘Amir:

The Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayer for the martyrs of the (battle of) Uhud and then ascended the pulpit and said, "I am your predecessor and I am a witness against you. By Allah, I am now looking at my Tank-lake (Al-Kauthar) and I have been given the keys of the treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth). By Allah! I am not afraid that you become polytheist after me, but I am afraid that you will start competing (for the luxuries of this world).

The tradition clearly indicates that after his (S) death, some of the companions will abandon the religion, and compete against one another for the wealth of this temporary existence. And they indeed competed until the swords were drawn and the wars were waged, thereby fulfilling the prophecy.

Some of the famous companions were eager to collect gold and silver. Great Sunni Historians like Mas’udi and Tabari and others stated that the wealth of Zubair on its own came out to 50,000 Dinars and 1000 horses with 1000 slaves and many holdings in Basrah, Kufah, Egypt, and many other places.

This massive wealth was accumulated while many Muslims starved to death. (See Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, v2, p341) The agricultural products from Iraq alone brought for Talha 1000 Dinars every day!, and perhaps more than that. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, the same page) Abdul Rahman Ibn Awf had 100 horses, 1000 camels, and 10,000 sheep. After his death, the quarter of his wealth which was divided among his wives came out to 84,000 Dinars. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, the same page) Uthman Ibn Affan left on the day of his death 150,000 Dinars, apart from an enormous wealth of land, cattle and villages. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, the same page) Zayd Ibn Thabit left an amount of gold and silver that had to be broken by hammers! apart from money and agricultural holdings which came to 100,000 Dinars. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, the same page)

These were just few examples to show that some of the companions were more interested in the present life. Comparing the poverty of people at that time, one get suspicious to how they got so much money from nothing while the rest of people were in poverty. This gives a good idea of why they waged war against ‘Ali (as) to overthrow him from power. They found him a big obstacle for their misconducts of treasury and territories.

The question now is this: If these so-called pious companions were so busy collecting money and competing among one another in worldly gain, while many Muslims died from poverty, where then was that so-called piety and sense of sacrifice that the Sunnis attribute to them (the companions)? This is a sign for those who reflect!

The Companions Among One Another

In the previous articles we have seen how Allah (SWT) describes the companions in the Qur’an; how the Prophet (S), before his (S) death, foretells their behavior after his death; and now we will take a look at what the companions thought of one another’s actions and their remarks concerning their own behavior.

It is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v1, p122, under the chapter of "al-Eidiyan -- The Two Eids (Muslim Festivals)”that the Prophet (S) used to pray first, and then deliver the sermon (khutba). That custom (sunnah) remained as such until Marwan, the Ruler (Amir) of Medina during Muawiyah’s reign, started to deliver the sermon (khutba) before the prayer. It should be noted that the Sunnis do exactly the same thing to this day.

This was not the sunnah (way or custom) of the Prophet (S). Keep in mind that the Sunnis maintain that the actions of the companions are enough to alter the custom of the Prophet (S)!!! The question to the Sunnis is: If the companions’ actions were enough to alter the Prophet’s (S) custom, why then do we need the Prophet’s (S) custom in the first place? Let’s just follow any innovations the companions may come up with!

You might wonder why the companions made the sermon before the prayer? Dr. al-Samawi states that many people would not stay for the sermon after they prayed. As such, the prayer and sermon times were switched. Superficially, this is true, but this is not the real reason, he continues. During the days of Muawiyah, it was ordered, as I mentioned in other posts, that whenever the name of al-Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) was mentioned, he (as) should be cursed!

Many of the believers at that time loved ‘Ali (as) and would not tolerate such an action; as a result, they were killed one after the other, until all the believers had to listen to the curses and maintain their silence at the threat of the sword.

One way to escape the listening to the repeated cursing was to escape the sermon. Muawiyah and his men didn’t like that, so the sermon was switched to precede the prayer in an effort to force the people to stay through the whole sermon and listen to the cursing! Allahu Akbar (Allah is Great)! By Allah (SWT), do you still not see the conspiracy against the Prophet’s (S) family? Is this how al-Imam ‘Ali (as) is to be treated? The Prophet (S) had said:

"To love ‘Ali (as) is a sign of Faith, and to hate him (as) is a sign of hypocrisy!!!"

This tradition is narrated in Sahih Muslim, v1, p61. Check for yourself.

In Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, p76; and Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p300 narrate that the Prophet (S) said to ‘Ali (as):

"You are a part of me, and I a part of you.”

Also, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p201 narrates that the Prophet (S) said:

"I am the city of knowledge, and ‘Ali is it’s door.”Keep in mind that you can only enter a city through its door; meaning that any knowledge from the Prophet (S), since he (S) is the City of Knowledge, can only be accessed through the door, his (S) son-in-law ‘Ali (as). What’s more, Musnad al-Imam Ibn Hanbal, v5, p25, narrates that the Prophet (S) said:

"‘Ali is the master of every believer after me."

If any head of state, whether today or in times immemorial, always has a trusted vicegerent to take his place and manage his affairs in his absence, would you then believe that the Prophet (S), who was sent as the final Messenger from He (SWT) Who created the universe, didn’t also have a vicegerent to manage his (S) affairs after his (S) death? A vicegerent that Allah (SWT) also trusts and loves? Would you believe that Allah (SWT) would leave the affairs of the

"...Best of Nations sent forth to mankind...(3:110)"

to random selection and ruling? No, by Allah (SWT), a vicegerent was indeed chosen by Allah (SWT) and His (SWT) Messenger (S), and that vicegerent was al-Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as).

Again, Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, narrates that the Prophet (S) said:

"Whoever I was his Master, then ‘Ali is his Master! O Allah, support those who support him, and alienate those that alienate him!!!"

That is ‘Ali (as), the fearless warrior, and the defeater of the champions of Quraish. May the Blessings and Peace of Allah (SWT) be extended to the Prophet (S) and his (S) Family, Amen.

Now, ask yourself: If this is how the Prophet (S) praised ‘Ali (as), then who are the companions, especially Muawiyah, to curse him (as)? Did you know that the Prophet (S) said, as narrated in Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p33:

"Whoever curses (or verbally abuses) ‘Ali, then he has cursed me, and whoever has cursed me, then he has cursed Allah (SWT), and whoever has cursed Allah (SWT), then Allah (SWT) will throw him into the hellfire."

That means that by cursing ‘Ali (as), the companions were cursing the Prophet (S), and by cursing the Prophet (S), they were cursing Allah (SWT), and by cursing Allah (SWT), they shall enter the hellfire! By Allah (SWT), they will be asked to account for what they’ve said! That is a promise by Allah (SWT), which He (SWT) shall not break!

Dr. al-Tijani asserts that during his search for the truth, he tried wholeheartedly to identify these heinous charges with the hypocrites and the malevolent companions only; but he soon discovered that there is no way of excluding the so-called righteous companions, in the sight of the Sunnis, from these charges.

For we see that the first companion to threaten the burning down of al-Imam ‘Ali’s (as) house is none other than `Umar Ibn al-Khatab himself -- the man that the Sunnis claim is of such faith and courage that he terrifies Satan himself! And the first to wage war against al-Imam ‘Ali (as) were Talha, al-Zubayr, and none other than `Aisha herself, the wife of the Prophet (S) that is the most beloved woman in the sight of the Sunnis. Note that `Aisha is also the daughter of Abu Bakr!

Others aggressors include, but are not limited to, Amr Ibn al-Aas, Muawiyah, and many others that oppressed the family of the Prophet (S). Are these not righteous companions in the sight of the Sunnis? Do we need to say more?

As Dr. al-Samawi states: "If we wanted to provide all the occurrences (sayings) of the Prophet’s (S) praise of ‘Ali (as), we can easily fill an entire book!"

The companions also changed the prayer rules, and the first to do so was `Uthman Ibn `Afan, the third caliph. Sahih Bukhari narrates in v2, page 154, that the Prophet (S) always prayed two (instead of four) rak’at during travel, as is mandated by Allah (SWT) in the Qur’an.

Abu Bakr and `Umar did the same, then came `Uthman and prayed four rak’at during travel instead of two! This tradition is also narrated in Sahih Muslim, v1, p260. Who is `Uthman to violate the orders of Allah (SWT) and His (SWT) Prophet (S) with regards to the Salat (Prayer)? Question and reflect, and may Allah (SWT) guide us all.

Let’s see what `Umar did: Sahih al-Bukhari narrates in v1, p54:

"Shaqiq Ibn Salamah said: I was with Abdullah and Abu Musa, so Abu Musa told Abdullah: What should a man do if he was in a state of Janabah (the biological state of sperm ejaculation after a dream or when a man has sexual intercourse with his wife) and had no water to clean?”Abdullah said: "He shall not pray until he finds water.”So Abu Musa said: "But didn’t you hear the Prophet (S) tell `Amar Ibn Yasir (ra) that all he had to do was Tayamum?”Abdullah replied: "Didn’t you know that `Umar (Ibn al-Khatab) didn’t approve of that?”

So Abu Musa answered: But Allah (SWT) said in the Qur’an: "...Or ye have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand (or earth), and rub therewith your faces and hands...(Qur’an 4:43)”So Abdullah didn’t know what to say, except: "If we allow them that (meaning the Tayamum), then they will use it at the slightest instance like when the water is too cold (to make ablutions or bathe).”Abu Musa told Shaqiq: "Is that why Abdullah disapproved of the matter?”Shaqiq said: "Yes."

Note: Tayamum is the pounding of the hands on sand, mud, or rock, and then wiping the face and the hands; this is considered a full ablution (Wudhu’) in the absence of water. Note that there are more details to the process Tayamum which are not covered here.

As one can see, `Umar violated the Qur’an, Allah’s (SWT) direct orders, and the Prophet’s (S) custom by his disapproval of the Tayamum! By Allah (SWT), who is `Umar to disapprove of what Allah (SWT) has commanded? This is a sign for those who reflect!

The companions themselves have admitted that they changed the sunnah (custom of the Prophet (S)) many times: Sahih al-Bukhari narrates in v3, p32, under the category of "The Battle of Hudaiybiyah”that:

`Ala Ibn al- Masib said: "I met al-Bara Ibn `Azib, so I said may you be happy all the time, for you were the companion of the Prophet (S) and you have made a pact (bay’ah) with him (S) under the tree.”So al-Bara said: "O son of my brother, you know not of what we have changed after his (S) death!!!”

This is a direct confession by a very close companion that they have changed the religion of Allah (SWT) and violated His (SWT) orders. Again, who are the companions to change the religion of Allah (SWT)? This is the same reason that the Islamic Ummah (Nation) is still living in deplorable conditions where the most basic of human rights is not even granted. This is a sign for those who reflect.

It is also narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, p201, after a long tradition that:

`Umar, when he was stabbed and Ibn `Abbas was offering some form of consolation, said: ".......By Allah (SWT), if I had enough gold to fill the entire earth, I would offer it to ransom myself from Allah’s (SWT) punishment before I see Him (SWT)."

If `Umar was such a faithful companion, why would he wish to ransom himself from Allah (SWT)? Could it be because he committed many injustices and he will on the Day of Judgment be held accountable for them? Question for yourself.

Abu Bakr was no different: It is narrated in "The History of al-Tabari (Tarikh al-Tabari),", p41 that:

Abu Bakr said when he saw a bird on a tree: "How happy are you O bird! You eat of the fruit and you lay on the tree, and there is no punishment or reward for you! I wish I was a tree on the side of the road, so that a camel might eat me and excrete me, and I was never a born human!!!"

Would you believe, by Allah (SWT), that if a man was of such spiritual purity, as the Sunnis claim Abu Bakr to be, he would wish that he was never born, let alone be a human? Indeed, Abu Bakr realized that his time has come and all his actions will be scrolled before him in an open book, and that is when his loss will be manifested; thus, he wished he was never born a human! Allah (SWT) says in His (SWT) Holy Qur’an:

"Behold! Verily on the friends of Allah there is no fear, nor shall they grieve; those who believe and (constantly) guard against evil;-- for them are Glad Tidings, in the life of the Present and in the Hereafter: No change can there be in the Words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme Triumph. (Qur’an 10:62-64)"

Also, Allah (SWT) says: "In the case of those who say, "Our Lord Is Allah,”and further, stand straight and steadfast, the angels descend on them (from time to time):

"Fear ye not!”(they suggest), "Nor grieve! But receive the Glad Tidings of the Garden (of Bliss), the which ye were promised! We are your protectors in this life and in the Hereafter: Therein shall ye have all that you shall desire; therein shall ye have all that ye ask for! -- A hospitable gift from One Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful! (Qur’an 41:30-32)"

The question is that if these Glad Tidings from Allah (SWT) are for ALL of the believers of mankind, and that they should have "...no fear, nor shall they grieve...,”why then were Abu Bakr and `Umar fearful? It should be that they, if they were true believers, should be the least fearful of us, for they were the companions of the Seal of Prophethood (S) himself!

But Allah (SWT) is the Most Truthful when He (SWT) says:

"Every soul that hath sinned, if it possessed all that is on earth, would fain give it in ransom: They would declare (their) repentance when they see the Chastisement: But the judgment between them will be with justice, and no wrong will be done unto them. (Qur’an 10:54)"

Again, Allah (SWT) says:

"Even if the wrong-doers had all that there is on earth, and as much more, (in vain) would they offer it for ransom from the pain of the Chastisement on the Day Of Judgment: but something will confront them from Allah, which they could have never counted upon! For the evils of their deeds will confront them and they will be (completely) encircled by that which they used to mock at! (Qur’an 39:47-48)"

These are the so-called companions that the Sunnis strike as an example of spiritual purity and guidance!!! By Allah (SWT), they shall answer for their deception of the Muslims all these years, and their concealment of the truth.

Again, you might wonder, if the companions were of such high honor and spiritual elevation, why did they kill `Uthman Ibn `Afan, the third Caliph that destroyed Islam? Keep in mind that `Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (S), herself called for the death of `Uthman -- check The History of al- Tabari (Tarikh al-Tabari), v4, p407. Also check The History of Ibn Atheer (Tarikh Ibn Atheer), v3, p206.

Did you know also that the Muslims during the reign of `Uthman were so infuriated by him, that when he died, he was NOT buried in the same area as the other companions? Nor was he washed or Islamically prepared for burial! If this is a rightly guided caliph, I seriously question what is a misguided Caliph then? Then we hear of `Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (S), who, along with the other wives, was ordered by Allah (SWT) to:

"...stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former times of Ignorance; and establish regular prayer, and give Zakat and obey Allah and His Messenger ...(Qur’an 33:33)”

Why, then, if `Aisha was ordered to stay in her home after the death of the Prophet (S), did she go out and ride a camel and wage war against al- Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as), whom she NEVER liked? (This is known as `The Battle of the Camel’) This is a sign for those who reflect.

Side Comments: Responses To Sunni Brothers

Some Sunni brothers, in response to my article when it was first posted, have forwarded two contentions:

First, they have defended the motives of Abu Bakr and `Umar in the traditions I quoted above, such the saying of Umar that: ".......By Allah (SWT), if I had enough gold to fill the entire earth, I would offer it to ransom myself from Allah’s (SWT) punishment before I see Him (SWT).”

Or the saying of Abu Bakr that: "How happy are you O bird! You eat of the fruit and you lay on the tree, and there is no punishment or reward for you! I wish I was a tree on the side of the road, so that a camel might eat me and excrete me, and I was never a born human!!!"

The Sunni brothers contended that it is the spiritual purity of a believer to wish that he was never born, as Abu Bakr did; or that small sins in the eyes of a true believer warrant that he wishes to ransom himself with the treasures of the Earth from the flames of the hellfire, as `Umar did, to prove his sincerity and faith. The Sunni brothers also asserted that the Prophet (S) asked forgiveness for himself (S).

The SECOND objection was that the verses I quoted from the Book of Allah (SWT) are NOT addressing Abu Bakr and `Umar, and that those companions addressed are NOT to be equated with the ranks of Abu Bakr and `Umar. My response to their FIRST contention was as follows:

As for the Prophet (S) asking forgiveness for himself, then that doesn’t mean that he wishes that he (S) was never born; and that doesn’t invalidate his (S) infallibility. His (S) asking for forgiveness is a sign of piety and an admittance of infirmity (weakness) before Allah (SWT). It is not that he (S) has committed a grievous sin, and is now asking for forgiveness; for if the Prophet (S) was a sinner, who in the community will punish him (S)? Or who is qualified to punish him (S)? -- for they are all sinners, and a sinner cannot punish a sinner. Or if he (S) was a sinner, what kind of idiot would follow him (S), and believe him (S) to be a guided Messenger (S) sent by He (SWT) Who created the Universe?

Furthermore, if he (S) was a sinner, that would mean that Allah (SWT), by sending a sinful Messenger, approves of sin! (May Allah (SWT) Forbid Such A Ludicrous Contention!) And we know that Allah’s (SWT) justice and His (SWT) abhorrence of sin and evil are among the First and Foremost articles in our faith. As such, Allah (SWT) will NOT send a sinful Messenger.

Purified be all the Prophets and Messengers of Allah (SWT) from such claims that scratch their character by claiming that they are sinners. Or have we become like the Jews and the Christians, where the Bible states that the Prophet Lot (as) was drunk and lay naked before his (as) children!? This is a sign for those who reflect!!!

As for Abu Bakr and `Umar, I render the following: To ask forgiveness is one thing, and to wish that you were never born, or to wish to ransom yourself with all the gold of the earth, is another matter altogether. Indeed, to wish that you were never born is an insult to Allah (SWT), because you are claiming that Allah’s (SWT) Justice and Mercy are not enough for you.

It is also an insult because there is an underlying implication that your entry into hell is not really your fault; such an insinuation means that your entry into hell is an act of injustice by Allah (SWT)! (May Allah (SWT) Forbid Such A Ludicrous Contention!)

If one truly believes, he realizes that not the least injustice will be done to him; and he will NOT enter hell unless he truly deserves it. Such is the Justice of Allah (SWT). Not like people who wish they were never born to hide their OWN guilt and sins. A true believer submits to Allah (SWT) in totality, and admits that he is weak and sinful; then he asks for forgiveness.

He doesn’t insult Allah (SWT) by wishing that he was never born. Indeed, the concept of sin and repentance has always baffled me, until Allah (SWT) guided me. Listen to what the Shi’a say about repentance (tawbah): "al-Tawbah (Repentance) is the mechanism by which Allah (SWT) regulates evil in society.

By giving each person a chance to repent, the sinner is assured that he is not compelled to keep on sinning. That regulatory mechanism ensures that the feelings of guilt that usually accompany acts of sin, are not turned into feelings of desperation and uselessness, thereby leading to more sin and the destruction of society. It (tawbah -- repentance) is a great mercy from Allah (SWT) indicating His (SWT) infinite wisdom.”

I add, that sin itself is part of your own creation. Not that Allah (SWT) has forced you to sin, and then punishes you for it; but, rather, Allah (SWT) has made you an erring human being, then He (SWT) tests you to see whether you will admit your error (sin), or claim that you didn’t commit any sin and it wasn’t your fault, thereby fostering a level of arrogance detested by Allah (SWT).

Indeed, to sin and admit your guilt sincerely with the true belief that it was all your fault (when it really is), and then ask for forgiveness from Allah (SWT) is much more favorable than insulting Allah (SWT) by wishing that you were never born.

I would also add that erring is part and parcel of the learning process, which is an innate feature of our composition and existence. If we don’t make mistakes, we will never learn, and if we never learn, we will never evolve and grow. It is the arrogance that has polluted the minds of many individuals that has precluded our growth -- for we err and sin, yet we refuse to acknowledge our fault therein!

Enough is what al-Imam Zayn al-’Aabidin (as), the son of al- Imam al-Husayn (as), said in his (as) supplication (dua’): "O Allah, for even if I enter the hellfire, I will tell the people there of my love of Thee!!!”What does this eloquent, beautiful, and striking statement mean? It is by Allah (SWT), one of the most beautiful and touching prayers I have ever heard! Here’s what it means before you jump to conclusions on your own: al-Imam Zayn al-’Aabidin (as) is saying: "O Allah, my belief in You is such that I don’t doubt Your Justice; for even if You throw me into hell, it is because I deserve that and it is due to what I have done in this earthly existence.

Nonetheless, even if I enter the hellfire, I will tell the people there of my love to (and faith in) Thee, such that You haven’t done ANY injustice to me, and I love You for Your Justice, Mercy, and Greatness.”That is what a true believer says, even if he’s entering the hellfire!!! He doesn’t wish he wasn’t born! My response to their second contention is as follows: (The second contention, in case you forgot, was that the verses I quoted from the Book of Allah (SWT) are not addressing Abu Bakr and `Umar, and that those companions addressed are not to be equated with the ranks of Abu Bakr and `Umar.)

Assuming that these verses are NOT addressing Abu Bakr and `Umar (and Allah (SWT) knows best who He (SWT) is addressing), they (the verses), nonetheless, illustrate an important point: NOT ALL the companions are considered equal in the sight of Allah (SWT). As such, my question is: why do the Sunnis claim that all the companions were righteous?

Why, when Allah (SWT), Himself, has acknowledged that certain companions are not righteous, do the Sunnis stubbornly object to the Shi’a’s view of the companions? It is indeed ironic that Allah (SWT), our CREATOR Who (SWT) knows us BEST, makes a statement about His (SWT) Own creatures, yet the Sunnis refuse to abide by that (statement), and claim they know better!

At the expense of repetition, I reiterate my previous statement: If Allah (SWT) has made a CLEAR distinction among the companions, why do the Sunnis refuse to acknowledge that?

Furthermore, my Sunni brothers, by suggesting (themselves) that these verses address companions other than Abu Bakr and `Umar, have advocated and strengthened the Shi’a’s claim: NOT ALL the companions were righteous; and, as such, there is a favoritism extended by Allah (SWT) to some companions, but not to others. Similarly, as Allah (SWT) favors CERTAIN companions, so do the Shi’a take the same stance.

Is it not closer to reason that we make distinctions among the companions? Didn’t the disciples of Jesus (as) betray him (as)? Didn’t the Jews betray Musa (as)? And so on... Are the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S) any different? Are they not humans who may err and sin? Do you not see a pattern of differentiation among all of Allah’s (SWT) creation? Are all believers, whether today or in times past, of equal stature? Do we not observe that some believers are sincere and others not? Why then do the Sunnis refuse to accept this truism?

Even if the Shi’a excluded Abu Bakr and `Umar from their direct attack, the Sunnis will still refuse to acknowledge that some of the Prophet’s (S) companions were non- righteous, malicious individuals. By Allah (SWT)! Didn’t Allah (SWT) devote a whole Surah (Chapter) in His (SWT) Book about the hypocrites? And doesn’t Allah (SWT) say:

"They are in varying grades in the sight of Allah, and Allah sees well all that they do. (Qur’am 3:163)"

Another remark, which my Sunni brothers overlooked in defense of their arguments, might be that the individuals addressed in the aforementioned verses or the Hypocrites Chapter are NOT considered companions in the sight of the Sunnis. If my Sunni brothers should ever forward such a remark, my response would be:

The definition of the word "companions,”according to the Sunnis, is: any person who has seen the Prophet (S) is considered a companion. The generation that appeared after the Prophet’s (S) death are called "Tabi-’uoon -- The Followers.”

As such, the above contention fails again. Now, if my Sunni brothers suggest that the word "companions”only addresses those sincere believers that were close to the Prophet (S) and memorized the Qur’an and the hadiths, and kept constant prayer, then they have said exactly what the Shi’a have been always trying to say: not all the companions were righteous.

Nonetheless, even under this assertion, the Shi’a will refuse to admit Abu Bakr and `Umar, among others, to be included among the ranks of the righteous; not after what they have done to the family of the Prophet (S).

Suffice it to conclude with what al-Zamakhshari, the great Sunni scholar and poet, said:

Doubt and conflict have abounded,
each claims he is on the right path
I have chosen to hold tight to (the belief that)
"There Is No Deity, But Allah"
and my love for Ahmad (Muhammad) and ‘Ali
A dog won a great reward
by loving the People of the Cave (Ahl al-Kahf),
how, then, can I lose anything
by loving the family of the Prophet (S)!?

In conclusion, I appeal to your sense of truth and honesty to objectively study the arguments presented by the Shi’a. After all we say, do you still believe that we are Kuffar? Are we asking you to blindly accept our arguments, or are we supporting our belief with unimpeachable proofs? Are we not using your OWN books as evidence? Question and ask for the truth. May Allah (SWT) forgive us our sins, and guide us to that which pleases Him (SWT).

The Enemies of Islam as Depicted in Nahjul Balagha

(Here is a general description of the enemies of Islam, as well as its true followers, and what happenned to them.) "The sway of tyrants was long, so that their tyranny and oppression could be fully exposed and their infamy and disgrace could be disclosed. They deserved the revolution which overtook them. They were destroyed and annihilated, and the people were rescued from calamities and destruction, were relieved of war, and bloodshed, which were brought about by the tyrants.

"The pious people, who bravely passed through those days, patiently bore the suffering and gave their lives for the cause of justice and Islam. They humbled themselves, before God, they never for a moment magnified their patience and bravery and never imagined that they were obliging God and His religion. Then God ordained that the times of trials and tribulations should come to an end. They were given permission to defend their faith with the help of their swords and they obeyed the orders of God according to the teaching of the Holy Prophet (S).

"Things continued like that until God called the Prophet back. Then many became apostate, or turned to heathenism, they were damned by the preversity of their minds and waywardness. They put faith in their relatives, who were misguided, or in instigators who were heathens. They discarded the medium (the progeny of the Prophet), whom they were ordered to love, to respect and to follow, and who would have kept them within the limits of the true religion.

Thus, they undermined the foundation of the true religion and tried to introduce heresy in Islam. They adopted the ways of the Pharoahs and his people, attached to worldly power and pleasures, and drifted away from true religion."

Khutba 153

"O people! remember that the present time is the time when something which has been promised will happen, and events which you do not know or cannot forsee will take place. During the days of trials and temptations, those who recognize the significance and worth of the Ahlul-Bayt will, like a person walking in the dark with a lamp in his hand, not only go safely through the times, but will be of help to others and will act like pious people.

This will free the people from oppression and tyrrany , will educate the ill-informed and ignorant, introduce reforms into society, and will cement the gaps which wickedness and impiety may have created in the true teachings of Islam. For some time, he (i.e. Imam Mahdi) will be hidden from the eyes of man in such a way that the greates searcher of the day will not be able to find a trace of him however he may try.

But when he will appear, he will educate mankind in such a way that human vision will expand through the teachings of the Qur’an, men will be able to acquire true wisdom, and their minds will be able to rise to higher planes of science and philosophy."

I strongly urge Muslims to reject any false myths about our Islamic heritage. Many of you already know the Sunni view of history. I strongly urge you to read the Sunni works in history such as of al-Tabari, and Syed Amir ‘Ali, to understand the forces that shaped the Muslim world in the 1st century AH. They are still alive and kicking today.

Attacking the House of Fatimah (sa)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A Sunni Brother mentioned that the Caliphate of Abu Bakr is the Consensus of scholars (Ijma’). It is incumbent upon Muslims to accept the Ijma’. First I would like to point out that we also believe that Ijma’a is binding. But, my brother, how can Sunni scholars make Ijma’a on something that the Prophet and some of his companions opposed it?

This opposition is a clear evidence to the fact that there is no Ijma’a in that very matter. As for the Prophet (S), I mentioned the authentic Sunni traditions in the previous articles where he gave Imam ‘Ali the position that Haroon had to Moses. That position is explained in Qur’an whose verses I mentioned. The verses show that:

1-Allah is the one who appoints the Caliph.

2-The verse also uses the word "Ukhlofni”which is exactly the verb form of Khalif.

Moreover, I reproduced the historical reports documented by the Sunni scholars concerning the fact that the Messenger of Allah unequivocally announced Imam ‘Ali (as) as his successor in his first open preach. I also mentioned the authentic and frequent tradition of Ghadir Khum where the Prophet declared the leadership of Imam ‘Ali (as) officially.

Now, my brother, how can Ijma’a exist on this important issue when the Messenger of Allah oppose it? This is enough for us to close the issue of Ijma’a on this subject. However let us, now, go a little further: Even the companions did not all agree that all these four individuals are the legitimate successors of the Prophet (S).

Muslims agree that the caliphate of Abu Bakr came through election by a limited number of people and was a surprise for all other companions. By limited, I mean, a majority of the prominent companions of prophet had no knowledge of this election. ‘Ali, Ibn Abbas, Uthman, Talha, Zubair, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, Salman al- Farsi, Abu Dharr, Ammar Ibn Yasir, Miqdad, Abdurrahman Ibn Owf were among those who were not consulted or even informed of. Even Umar confessed to the fact that the election of Abu Bakr was without consultation of Muslims.

(See sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v8, Tradition #817)

My dear brother, we can not close our eyes to the undeniable facts documented even by the Sunni scholars, and yet claim to have Ijma’a. After the demise of the Prophet (S), those who heed what the Messenger of Allah ordered them such as Ammar Ibn Yasir, Abu-Dhar al-Ghafari, Miqdad, Salman al-Farsi, Ibn Abbas, and others such as al-Abbas, Utbah Ibn Abi Lahab, Bara Ibn Azib, Ubay Ibn Ka’b, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas ... etc., all gathered in the house of Fatimah (sa). Even Talha and al-Zubair were loyal to Imam ‘Ali at the beginning and joint the others in the house of Fatimah (sa).

They assembled in the house of Fatimah as a place of refuge since they were opposing the majority of people. According to the authentic traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari, Umar confessed that the Imam ‘Ali (as) and his followers opposed Abu Bakr.

Al-Bukhari narrated:

Umar said: "And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’da. ‘‘Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr."

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v8, Tradition #817

Other Sunni traditionists narrated that on the day of Saqifah:

Umar said: "‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, daughter of the messenger of Allah."

Sunni References:

- Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55
- Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309
- History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822
- History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

Also: demanded confirmation of the oath, but ‘Ali and al-Zubair stayed away. Al-Zubair drew his sword (from the scabbard), saying, "I will not put it back until the oath of allegiance is rendered to ‘Ali.”When this news reached Abu Bakr and Umar, the latter said, "Hit him with a stone and seize the sword.”It is stated that Umar rushed (to the door of the House of Fatimah) and brought them forcibly while telling them that they must give their oath of allegiance willingly or unwillingly.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, pp 188-189

Dear brother, let’s just think a little! What kind of election was that?! Election implies choice and freedom, and that every Muslim has the right to elect the nominee. Whoever refuses to elect him does not oppose God or His Messenger because neither God nor His Messenger appointed the nominated person by people.

Election, by its nature, does not compel any Muslim to elect a specific nominee. Otherwise, the election would be coercion. This means that the election would lose its own nature and it would be a dictatorial operation. It is well known that the Prophet said: "There is no validity for any allegiance given by force."

Now let us see what Umar did on those days. Sunni historians reported that: When Umar came to the door of the house of Fatimah, he said: "By Allah, I shall burn down (the house) over you unless you come out and give the oath of allegiance (to Abu Bakr)."

Sunni References:

- History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, pp 1118-1120
- History of Ibn Athir, v2, p325
- al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p975
- Tarikh al-Kulafa, by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, p20
- al-Imamah wal-Siyasah, by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, pp 19-20

Also:

Umar Ibn al-Khattab came to the house of ‘Ali. Talha and Zubair and some of the immigrants were also in the house. Umar cried out:

"By God, either you come out to render the oath of allegiance, or I will set the house on fire.”al-Zubair came out with his sword drawn. As he stumbled (upon something), the sword fell from his hand so they jumped over him and seized him."

Sunni Reference: History of Tabari, English version, v9, pp 186-187

In the footnotes of the same page (p187) in the English version of the History of al-Tabari the translator has commented:

Although the timing is not clear, it seems that ‘Ali and his group came to know about Saqifa after what had happened there. At this point, his supporters gathered in Fatimah’s house. Abu Bakr and
Umar, fully aware of ‘Ali’s claims and fearing a serious threat from his supporters, summoned him to the mosque to swear the oath of allegiance. ‘Ali refused, and so the house was surrounded by an armed band led by Abu Bakr and Umar, who threatened to set it on fire if ‘Ali and his supporters refused to come out and swear allegiance to Abu Bakr. The scene grew violent and Fatimah was furious. (See Ansab Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri in his , v1, pp 582-586; Tarikh Ya’qubi, v2, p116; al-Imamah wal-Siyasah, by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, pp 19-20).

Abu Bakr said on the authority of an authentic report that, after the demise of the holy Prophet when the people had paid fealty to him, ‘Ali and Zubair used to go to Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), daughter of the Prophet, for consultation. When this fact was known to Umar, he went to Fatimah and said:

"O’ daughter of the Prophet! I didn’t love anyone as much as I loved your father, nor anyone after him is more loving to me as you are. But I swear by Allah that if these people assemble here with you, then this love of mine would not prevent me from setting your house on fire."

Sunni references:

- History of Tabari, in the events of the year 11 AH
- al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, beginning of the book, and pp 19-20

- Izalatul Khilafa, by Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlavi, v2, p362

- Iqd al-Farid, by Ibn Abd Rabbah al-Malik, v2, chapter of Saqifah

Also it is reported that:

Umar said to Fatimah (who was behind the door of her house): "I know that the Prophet of God did not love any one more than you, but this will not stop me to carry out my decision. If these people stay in your house, I will burn the door in front of you."

Sunni reference: Kanz al-Ummal, v3, p140

In fact Shibli Numani himself testifies the above event in the following words:

"From Umar’s irritable and peevish temperament such an action on his part was not improbable."

Sunni reference: al-Faruq, by Shibli Numani, p44

It is also reported that:

Abu Bakr said (on his death bed): "I wish I had not searched for Fatimah’s house, and had not sent men to harass her, though it would have caused a war if her house would have continued to be used as a shelter."

Sunni references:

- History of Ya’qubi, v2, pp 115-116

- Ansab Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, pp 582,586

The historian named the following people among those who attacked the houseof Fatimah to disperse people who sheltered there:

- Umar Ibn al-Khattab
- Khalid Ibn Walid
- Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf
- Thabit Ibn Shammas
- Ziad Ibn Labid
- Muhammad Ibn Maslamah
- Salamah Ibn Salem Ibn Waqash
- Salamah Ibn Aslam
- Usaid Ibn Hozair
- Zaid Ibn Thabit

The revered Sunni scholar, Abu Muhammad Abdullah Ibn Muslim Ibn Qutaybah Daynuri in his history of Caliphs known as "al-Imamah wa al- Siyasah”reported:

Umar asked for wood, and told those people inside the house: "I swear by Allah who has my soul in his hand, that if you do not come out, I will burn the house.”Someone told Umar that Fatimah was inside the house. Umar said: "So what! It doesn’t matter to me who is in the house.”

Sunni reference: al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, pp 3,19-20

Another Sunni historian, al-Baladhuri, reported that:

Abu Bakr asked ‘Ali to support him, but ‘Ali refused, then Umar went toward the ‘Ali’s house with a burning torch. At the door he met Fatimah who said to him: "Do you intend to burn the door of my house?”Umar said: "Yes, because this act will strengthen the faith brought to us by your father."

Sunni reference: al-Ansab Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, pp 582,586

Also Jouhari in his book said: "Umar and a few Muslims went to the house of Fatimah to burn it down and to burn those who were in opposition.”Ibn Shahna said the same statement adding "to burn the house and inhabitants".

Furthermore, it is reported that:

‘Ali and Abbas were sitting inside the house of Fatimah, Abu Bakr told Umar: "Go and bring them; if they refuse, kill them.”Umar brought fire to burn the house. Fatimah came near the door and said: "O son of Khattab, have you come to burn our house on me and my children?”Umar replied: "Yes I will, by Allah, until they come out and pay allegiance to the Prophet’s Caliph."

Sunni reference:

- Iqd al-Fareed, by Ibn Abd Rabb, Part 3, Pg. 63
- al-Ghurar, by Ibn Khazaben, related from Zayd Ibn Aslam

Everybody came out of the house except Imam ‘Ali (as), who said: "I have sworn to remain home until I collect the Qur’an.”Umar refused but Lady Fatimah’s remonstration caused him to return. He instigated Abu Bakr to pursue the matter, and he send Qunfuz (his slave) several times but received a negative reply each time.

Ultimately, Umar went with a group of people to the Fatimah’s house. When she heard their voice, she criedloudly; "O father, O Messenger of Allah, how are Umar Ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Quhafah treating us after you and how do they meet us.”

The Sunni scholars, Ahmad Ibn Abdul Aziz al-Jawhari in his book ‘Saqifah’, Abu Waleed Muhibbuddin Muhammad al-Shahnah al-Hanafi in his book ‘Rawdhat al-Manadhir Fi Akhbaar al-Awayil wal-Aawaakhir’, Ibn Abil Hadid in his book ‘Sharh al-Nahj’, and others have reported the events to the same effect.

Also refer to the esteemed Sunni historian Abul Hasan, ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn al-Mas’udi who in his book ‘Isbaat al-Wasiyyah’ describes the events in detail and reports that: "They surrounded ‘Ali (as) and burned the door of his house and pulled him out against his will and pressed the leader of all women (Hadhrat Fatimah (sa)) between the door and the wall killing Mohsin (the male-child she was carrying in her womb for six months).”

Salahuddin Khalil al-Safadi another Sunni scholar in his book ‘Waafi al- Wafiyyaat’ under the letter ‘A’ while recording the view of Ibrahim Ibn Sayyar Ibn Hani al-Basri, well-known as Nidhaam quotes him to have said: "On the day of ‘Bay’aat’ (paying allegiance), Umar hit Fatimah (sa) on the stomach such that child in her womb died."

Why do you think an 18 year old young lady was forced to walk with the help of a walking-stick? Unbelieveable acts of cruelty and oppression had led Hadhrat Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) to lament: "Such calamities have visited me that had they descended on the day it would have darkened it.”She fell into bed till she was martyred as a results of these calamities and injuries while she was just eighteen years old!

During her last days, when Abu Bakr and Umar sought the mediation of Imam ‘Ali (as) to visit the ailing Hadhrat Fatimah (sa), as quoted by Ibn Qutaybah, she tured her face to the wall when they greeted her and in response to their plea for appeasement reminded them of the prophetic declaration that one who displeases Fatimah (sa) has displeased the Prophet and finally said: "I take Allah and the angels to be my witness that you have not pleased me; on the other hand, you have angered me. When I shall meet the Prophet (S) I will complain about you two.”(al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah, by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, p14).

For the same reason, she willed that those who have hurt her should not participate in her funeral rites and that she be buried at night. al- Bukhari in his Sahih attests to this fact that Imam ‘Ali (as) complied with the will of Lady Fatimah (sa). al-Bukhari narrated on the authority of Aisha that:

... Fatimah became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not talk to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband ‘‘Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself.

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Chapter of "The battle of Khaibar", Arabic-English, v5, tradition #546, pp 381-383, also v4, Tradition #325

Howsoever they tried, people failed to locate her grave. It was known only to a handful of Imam ‘Ali (as)’s family members. And to this date, the grave of the daughter of prophet is unknown which is another sign of her unhappiness from some of the companions.

The Opinion of the Prophet About Who Hurts Fatimah

The Messenger of Allah (S) had frequently said:

"Fatimah is a part of me. Whoever makes her angry, makes me angry."

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v5, Traditions #61 and #111

- Sahih Muslim, section of virtues of Fatimah, v4, pp 1904-5

According to al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Messenger of Allah has testified that Fatimah is the best of the ladies of the worlds:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.819

Narrated ‘Aisha:

The Messenger of Allah said to Fatimah (who was crying at her father’s deathbed): "Are you not satisfied that you are the chief of all the ladies of Paradise or the chief of all the believing women?"

أما ترضين أن تكوني سيدة نساء أهل الجنة أو نساء المؤمنين؟

Furthermore, Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: Four women are the mistress of the worlds: Mary, Asiya (the wife of Pharaoh), Khadija, and Fatimah. And the most excellent one among them in the world is Fatimah."

Sunni references: Ibn Asakir, as quoted in Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor

Allah, Exalted He is, said in Qur’an:

"(O Prophet) tell (people) I don’t ask you any wage except to love my family.”(Qur’an 42:23).

He also said:

"(O Prophet) tell (people) whatever I asked as wage (in return or my prophethood) is in the benefit of you (people)."(Qur’an 34:47).

The above two verses of Holy Qur’an explicitly indicate that the Prophet, with the order of Allah, has asked people to love his family as a command. Moreover loving them is in our benefit since "true love”requires to follow and obey the purified members of his family who carry his true Sunnah. It is unfortunate that those who claimed to be his sicere companions inflicted such horrible pains to his family while a week had not been passed since the death of the Prophet (S). Is this the love, Allah ordered for the family of prophet?!

From: IN%"ashah@bass.gmu.EDU [18]”25-NOV-1992 18:59:27.59

Subj: In remembrance of Hadhrat Fatimah al-Zahra (sa)

Where Is Her Grave?

The Muslims have been deeply pained.
Their beloved prophet has passed away.
And especially for his kith and kin,
it is one of their lives saddest day.
A lady who happens to be his daughter,
above all is the most afflicted one.
She was the nearest to her father.
Alas her troubles have just begun.
What in the Prophet’s eyes was her status,
unfortunately the people shall forget.
She should be respected by all of us.
But a harsh treatment, she’ll be met.
Everyone had heard her father say,
"My daughter is a part of me".
For her safety he would often pray;
Not wanting her to bear any agony.
But his words fell on deaf ears.
His followers were lead astray.
So, were realized those worst fears,
and his tidings were disobeyed.
Each forthcoming day brings her sorrow
and only a few more months she’ll live.
Each night she worries about her woes.
Her tormentors, she may not forgive.
In her last days, she is seen weeping.
Awake all night, she seldom sleeps.
Of her troubles, she keeps thinking.
The wounds in her heart are so deep.
The thoughts of her father alone
cause tears from her eyes to flow
and what will happen to her children?
What fate do they have in stow?
"Be kind to them and take care",
she wills about her poor children,
because she’ll be no longer near
and they’ll soon be orphans.
As she spends the time crying,
her neighbours come and complain.
But look! She is already dying.
Their complaint will be in vain.
And that dark moment finally comes,
for her heavenly abode, she departs.
Holding back their tears, her children,
see their baba, who, with a heavy heart,
hands trembling and with great anguish
takes away her coffin during the night.
He makes sure to fulfill her last wish.
She will rest, out of everyones sight.
Has gone from this world forever,
the mother of children so brave!
But why was she buried in a manner
that no one knows, where is her grave?

‘Ali Rizwan Shah,

14th Jamadiul Awwal, 1413 A.H.

ashah@bass.gmu.edu [17]

But also they cut all the financial resources of Ahlul-Bayt in order to crush the opposition. In Sahih al-Bukhari the following has also been narrated by Aisha:

Fatimah the daughter of the Prophet sent someone to Abu Bakr (when he was a caliph), asking for her inheritance of what Allah’s Apostle had left of the property bestowed on him by Allah from the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) in Medina, and Fadak, and what remained of the Khumus of the Khaibar booty. ...but Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatimah. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not task to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband ‘‘Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself.

Sunni References:

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Chapter of "The battle of Khaibar", Arabic-English, v5, tradition #546, pp 381-383, also v4, Tradition #325

(Please see the appendix for the whole tradition.)

Now either Fatimah was liar or Abu Bakr treated her unjustly. If she was liar, then she did not deserve such a saying from the Prophet that Fatimah is a part of me and whoever angers her, angers me. This itself is a clear indication of her infallibility. The purification sentence of the Holy Qur’an (the last sentence of verse 33:33) is another indication of her infallibility, as Aisha herself testified (See Sahih Muslim, 1980 Edition, Arabic, v4, p1883, Tradition #61). Hence there is nothing left for the sensible people but to accept the fact that she was unjustly treated, and that she was easy to be branded as a liar by Umar who was willing to let her burn unless the remaining people in her house come out to vote for Abu Bakr.

So logical conclusion from the above traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim is that Fatimah was treated unjustly, and that she was angry at Abu Bakr and Umar, which follows Allah and his prophet are angry at them according the above tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari. The excuse that Abu Bakr used to refuse to pay the right of Fatimah (see Appendix) was against the text of Qur’an. How can he be the executor of prophet while he does not obey the clear text of Qur’an? Abu Bakr claimed that prophet has said: "We prophets do not leave any inheritance, and whatever we leave should go to charity.”This is false allegation that he has made up, because prophet can not contradict Qur’an which in two verses testifies that prophets had heir, and their children inherited from them.

Allah says in Qur’an:

"And Solomon (Sulaymaan) inherited from David.”(Qur’an 27:16)

While both Sulaymaan and David were prophets and very wealthy. They were kings of their times. Allah , Exalted, also says:

"(Zakariya prayed to Allah by saying)... Grant me a son from yourself, who inherits from me and inherit from the children of Jacob, and make him, O’ my Lord, the one with whom you are well-pleased.”(Qur’an 19:5-6).

These are examples that prophets left inheritance. In fact, Fatimah (sa) mentioned these verses as her proof for her right, but Abu Bakr refused due to the suggestion of Umar, and they intentionally went against the clear text of Qur’an.

Historical facts testifies that prophet even had already transferred Fadak (Which was a big and rich piece of land in Hijaz) to Fatimah and it was the property of Fatimah long before the demise of the Prophet. As such, even it was not even the matter of inheritance as claimed by Abu Bakr. The reason that the Prophet has transferred Fadak to Fatimah was to provide financial resources for the followers of Ahlul-Bayt.

But after the Prophet passed away, Abu Bakr and Umar dismissed the managers of that land (who were assigned by Fatimah in the life time of his father), and confiscated that land and other properties of Ahlul-Bayt. The reason is very simple: They knew that if this rich property remains in the hand of Imam ‘Ali and Fatimah, peace be upon them, they will spend its revenues to their followers and this would give strength to the rival party and endangers their position. Abu Bakr and Umar realized the fact that in order to control the oppositions, it is necessary to remove all the funding abilities first.

Thus the problem was not a simple financial problem. It was absolutely political in nature. The quarrel Fatimah (sa) was not for the pleasure of this world. History testifies that Imam ‘Ali and Fatimah have had a very simple life during the life time of prophet as well as thereafter. It is well known that verses (76:8-9) of the holy Qur’an was revealed for them when for 3 consecutive days, they gave their meal to needy people at the time of IFTAR, when they were going to break their fast, and there was noting left for them and their children to eat for three consecutive days.

So such pious people do not struggle or GET ANGRY because of such worldly things. THAT IS WHY, ANGER OF FATIMAH IS ANGER OF PROPHET. They were, in fact, struggling for the sake of Allah and for spending their legitimate properties for His Right Path and its followers.

At the time of Harun al-Rashid (one of the Abbasid Tyrants) the Islamic country was in its biggest extent. It was extended from Afghanistan and central Asia to the North Africa. So it was not important for government to give up a piece of land. Moreover, by returning it they could make propaganda for their interest. According to some reports, Harun told to Imam Musa al-Kadhim (the 7th Imam of the Ahlul-Bayt): "Let us know the location of the land of Fadak so that I could return it to you.”The Imam (as) replied: "I would accept it only in its entirety.”Harun said: "Specify its boundaries then.”

The Imam (as) said: "If I specify its borders, you will not return it.”Harun said: "I swear in the name of your grandfather that I shall return it.”At this time, the Imam (as) said: "It extends from one side to Aden (Southern part of Arabian peninsula), and from one side to Samarqand (Afghanistan), and from one side to Armenia (south of Russia) and from one side to Egypt in Africa.”The face of Harun turned red and said: "This does not leave anything for us.”The Imam (as) replied: "I told you that you will not return it if I specify its limits!”(al-Bihar, v48, p144, Hadith #20).

Wassalam.

Appendix

Here is the whole tradition which was referred above:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 5.546

Narrated ‘Aisha:

Fatimah the daughter of the Prophet sent someone to Abu Bakr (when he was a caliph), asking for her inheritance of what Allah’s Apostle had left of the property bestowed on him by Allah from the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) in Medina, and Fadak, and what remained of the Khumus of the Khaibar booty. On that, Abu Bakr said, "Allah’s Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited. Whatever we leave, is Sadaqa, but the family of (the Prophet) Muhammad can eat of this property.’ By Allah, I will not make any change in the state of the Sadaqa of Allah’s Apostle and will leave it as it was during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle, and will dispose of it as Allah’s Apostle
used to do.”

So Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatimah. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not talk to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband ‘‘Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself.

When Fatimah was alive, the people used to respect ‘‘Ali much, but after her death, ‘‘Ali noticed a change in the people’s attitude towards him. So ‘Ali sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and gave him an oath of allegiance. ‘Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet’s death and Fatimah’s death). ‘‘Ali sent someone to Abu Bakr saying, "Come to us, but let nobody come with you,”as he disliked that ‘Umar should come, ‘Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No, by Allah, you shall not enter upon them alone “Abu Bakr said, "What do you think they will do to me? By Allah, I will go to them’ So Abu Bakr entered upon them, and then ‘‘Ali uttered Tashah-hud and said (to Abu Bakr), "We know well your superiority and what Allah has given you, and we are not jealous of the good what Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did not consult us in the question of the rule and we thought that we have got a right in it because of our near relationship to Allah’s Apostle .”

Thereupon Abu Bakr’s eyes flowed with tears. And when Abu Bakr spoke, he said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is to keep good relations with the relatives of Allah’s Apostle is dearer to me than to keep good relations with my own relatives. But as for the trouble which arose between me and you about his property, I will do my best to spend it according to what is good, and will not leave any rule or regulation which I saw Allah’s Apostle following, in disposing of it, but I will follow.”On that ‘‘Ali said to Abu Bakr, "I promise to give you the oath of allegiance in this after noon."

So when Abu Bakr had offered the Zuhr prayer, he ascended the pulpit and uttered the Tashah-hud and then mentioned the story of ‘‘Ali and his failure to give the oath of allegiance, and excused him, accepting what excuses he had offered; Then ‘‘Ali (got up) and praying (to Allah) forgiveness, he uttered Tashah-hud, praised Abu Bakr’s right, and said, that he had not done what he had done because of jealousy of Abu Bakr or as a protest of that Allah had favored him with. ‘‘Ali added, "But we used to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that he (i.e. Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore caused us to feel sorry.”On that all the Muslims became happy and said, "You have done the right thing.”The Muslims then became friendly with ‘‘Ali as he returned to what the people had done (i.e. giving the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr).

Usurping the Land of Fadak

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Hadhrat Fatimah (sa) the only surviving child of the Prophet, his most beloved, claimed inheritance of the properties in the lands of Medina, Khaibar, and also Fadak, which were acquired by Prophet from the Jews without the use of force. The Prophet (S) had already given her those properties in order to maintain Ahlul-Bayt and their followers, in accordance with the commands of Allah. However they were confiscated after the death of prophet (S).

Brother Khalid wrote:

Next the issue of RasulAllah’s inheritance. Garden of Fadak, as it is known. First we have to ascertain, if RasulAllah ever had any property at the time of his death. We all know that after Nabuwat, Prophet (SAAW) had no means of income.

All of his time was being devoted in the cause of Allah. In Mecca his own means for living was whatever Khadija had and after hijrat to Medina he was absolutely broke. Later on when the chains of war against infidels started, it was revealed by Allah to obtain 5th part of the plunder was meant for RasulAllah. Please refer sura "Anfal”ayat 41.

Accordingly, RasulAllah’s source of income was from few oasis which were abandoned by Bani Alnaseer in Medina. RasulAllah used part of this income for the maintenance of his family and what ever was left, used to be spent in the name of Allah. Please note that this was not a property owned by RasulAllah, but was in his use as a leader of Islamic state.

Obviously, he was NOT there to accumulate properties and estates for himself. This privilege could only be extended to him as long as he was alive And he had made it quite clear in his lifetime.

Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Motha and Masand-e-Ahmed have recorded,"my heirs will not distribute anything. Whatever I leave will be an allowance for my wives and payment for my doers and whatever is left is Alms. Now observe how this inheritance issue arose and what actions was taken by the caliphs. According to Islamic law, there could only be three heirs. One Fatimah as his daughter, then Abbas as his uncle and third his wives. The first two parties presented their inheritance soon after Abu- Bakr came to power. In certain stories Fatimah even said this to Abu-Bakr,O if your bequest is to be distributed among your heirs, then how come I can not get my inheritance from what is left by my father?

Upon this Abu-Bakr said,O RasulAllah said that I will not leave any inheritance. Whatever I will leave will go to the Alms. But, Abu-Bakr said, I will not leave any such thing which RasulAllah did, because I am afraid if I do so I will go astray.

However I will continue maintaining those who were being maintained by him and continue spending on those on whom he used to spend. By Allah, it is more lovable for me to be kind to his relatives than it is for me to my relative. I have not read anywhere that upon listening to this Fatimah or Abbas accused Abu-Bakr for any wrong doing.

Now the third group, ie; his wives. They also thought of sending Usman to Abu Bakr as their rep to demand their eighth share. But Aisha opposed it and all the wives withdrew from such demand. One thing in this regards is that it is also said that RasulAllah, in his lifetime decided that this particular oasis (fidak) will be given to Fatimah.

Therefore Fatimah demanded this property and she presented ‘Ali and Ume-Yamin as a witness in the court of Abu Bakr. But he refused to accept this witnesses and did not allocate the property to her. But this story is no where in the authentic Hadith, However Baladhuri and Ibn-Saad has copied it. But there is a lot of contradiction in their statements.

Ibn-Saad narrates that Fatimah had not heard this directly from RasulAllah , but from Ume-Yamin and that is why she presented her as a witness. On the other hand Baladhuri says that Fatimah claimed that her father had given her Fadak oasis. Whatever! Now let us look at the legal aspect of this issue. Legally, it could be either RasulAllahOs deed of gift (Hiba) or his will. If it was a gift, it should have been given to Fatimah in his lifetime. But this was not the case as we all know. If we call it a will, then this violates the Qur’anic Inheritance Law, Apart from Will or Gift, as discussed above, if we just examine the witnesses presented in the court of Abu-Bakr when Fatimah demanded this property, we will find that this again violates the Islamic witness Laws. Fatimah presented (if my brother ‘Ali believes that it was true) one male/and or one woman in her claim. As per the Qur’anic Laws, more witnesses were required. One man or Two women. I am sure brother ‘Ali will not change the entire divine law just because of the personalities involved.

Most important, I would like to ask brother ‘Ali, that after all ‘Ali (RAA), himself became Caliph after Usman. Why he did not grant this property to Fatimah as the inheritance of RasulAllah? Question is how come ‘Ali (RAA), in his caliph ship, deprived of its rightful owners. If it is ok to call Abu-Bakr or Omar as oppressors, then all those who did not grant this property to Fatimah, should also be declared Oppressors. Makes sense or not. Measuring rod should be the same for everyone!

My brother ‘Ali, when quoting RasulAllahs Hadith concerning Fatimah whosoever hurts her, hurts me, is perhaps not aware of the background of this hadith. Here is when and how it became necessary for RasulAllah to say this. It is narrated by Imam Zain- Ul- Abaideen ‘Ali Ibn Hussain and Abu-Mulaika through Miswar Ibn Muhazma and further endorsed by Abdullah Ibn

Zubair. Bokhari, Muslim, Abu-Daood, Ibn-e-Maja, Trinddi and Hakim have all narrated this in their various book. Anyhow the story is: After the conquer of Mecca, when the family of Abu- Jahl embraced Islam, ‘Ali wanted to to marry Abu-Jahl’s daughter named Jamila (some say Auora and some say her name was Jewaira). ...Fatimah came to know the intentions of ‘Ali and went to RasulAllah and said. Upon this RasulAllah delivered this sermon: OBani Hasham Ibn Mughaira wants to marry his daughter to ‘Ali and has asked my permission. I don’t approve it. I don’t approve it. I don’t approve it. Abu Talib’s son can divorce my daughter and marry his daughter. My daughter is my piece.

Whatever is unpleasant to her is unpleasant to me and whoever will give her pain will give me pain ... But please note that it was perfectly halal for ‘Ali to do so and that is why he thought of it. After all RasulAllah himself had many marriages and that is why RasulAllah never said that it is Haram. He only disliked the idea for reasons of Abu-Jahls old enmity of Islam. This family embraced Islam after the Conquer of Mecca and it was too early to tell if they had a change of heart or it was only to get into RasulAllah’s house.

To start with I would like to mention the verse from the Qur’an that brother Khalid has mentioned, concerning the verse for Khums. Though it is out of context but it won’t hurt to mention that the word Khums (literally meaning 1/5 th) is NOT restricted to the plunder of the war against the infidels.

Here I would rely on the hadith, but before that the Verse is as follows

And know ye (O believers) that whatever of a thing ye acquire a fifth of it is for God, and for the Apostle and for the (Apostle’s) near relatives and the orphans and the needy and the way farer ... (Qur’an 8:41)

Now the hadith that clearly mentions the fact that the Khums is not restricted to the plunders of wars as many Sunni brothers and sisters believe.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.327 (page 213)

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The delegates of the tribe of Abdul Qais came and said: `O Allah’s Apostle! We are from the tribe of Rabia and between us and you stand stand the infidels of the tribe of Mudar, so we cannot come to you except in the Haram Months. So please order us some instructions that we may apply it to ourselves and also invite our people left behind us to observe as well. ‘ The Prophet (S) said: `I order you to do four (4) things and forbid you to do four (4): I order you to believe in Allah, that is, to testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah (the Prophet (S) pointed with his hand) ; to offer prayers perfectly, to pay Zakat, to fast the month of Ramadhan, and to pay the Khums.

Now a few points, before we proceed to the conclusion - It seems that the tribe of Bani Abdul Qais was not a strong tribe. More over when they had to travel to Medina, they had to cross a land that was inhabited by a tribe (Muzar) that was against the Muslims. - This left them no portions to travel only in the Haram months, the months when the war fare was forbidden. This therefore leaves us no room to interpret the application in the above hadith to the spoils of war exclusively.

You have mentioned that the Prophet (S) had narrated (as you claim in the books of al-Bukhari, Muslim, Musnad Ahmed etc ...) his heirs will not distribute anything. Before I impart you with the authenticated references let me make it clear what the word ‘heir’ means, it means one who inherits or who is legally entitled to inherit. (Also in the later part of the article you have mentioned that only three (3) persons were entitled to claim the property of Fadak (Imam ‘Ali, Fatimah and Ibn Abbas), so it would be safe to assume following your claim that only the above three (3) would be the Prophets (S) heirs).

Your claim that the ‘heirs’ will not distribute anything is contrary to what I found in the Sunni books of traditions:

Imam ‘Ali (as) said that he heard the Messenger of Allah (S) saying:

I have granted in ‘Ali five things, none of which was granted to any Prophet (S) before me. One of these is that ‘Ali will repay my debts and will bury me.

Sunni reference:

- Musnad of Imam Ahmed, v5, p45
- Musnad of Imam Ahmed, v6, p155
- Kanz al-Ummal, v6, pp 153,155,404

I shall cite a Qur’anic Verse in the support of the statement that the heirs of the Prophet (S) repaid his debts. With reference to the Qur’anic Verse (26: 124), Ibn Mardawayh has recorded a tradition as related by ‘Ali, who said that when the verse "Give warning to your closest relatives”was revealed, the Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"‘Ali will repay my debts and fulfill my promises."

- Kanz al-Ummal, v6, p401
Again Imam Ahmed (in his Musnad) states a hadith from the Prophet (S) as follows:

"None will repay my debts and discharge my duties except me or ‘Ali."

- Musnad of Imam Ahmed, v4, p174

Now with reference to the above hadiths who gave Abu Bakr the right to distribute the Property of the Prophet (S), when the Holy Apostle (S) had clearly mentioned that it was Imam ‘Ali (as) and Imam ‘Ali (as) alone who was entitled to distribute his property and/or repay his debts. Let me quote one more tradition that would state that Imam ‘Ali (as) paid of the debts of the Prophet (S) through his “own account”. The tradition is as follows:

After the death of the Prophet (S) ‘Ali discharged certain duties. Most of these were the promises and the contracts made by the Prophet which ‘Ali fulfilled. I think that he had mentioned 5000 (Five thousand) dirhams, which were repaid by ‘Ali.

- Kanz al-Ummal, v4, p60

Please bear in mind that the debt was paid from the personal property of Imam ‘Ali (as) and not from the Baitul-Mal, this was also followed by Imam Hasan, Imam Hussain.

In this connection, the following is reported in Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’d:

Abdul Wahid Abi Aun reports that after the demise of the Holy Prophet (S), ‘Ali ordered an announcer to make it known if there was some one to whom the Prophet (S) owed some debt or promise, he should have if from ‘Ali. After ‘Ali, hassan, hussain repeated the same thing. It means that after the passing away of the Prophet (S) his descendants continued announcing publicly for fifty (50) years their responsibilities, which they fulfilled.

It is very interesting to note that the promises of the Holy Prophet (S) and his debts are paid off by the Ahlul-Bayt and the heir to the Prophet’s property becomes Abu Bakr, what a weird phenomena!

Contrary to your claim that Abu Bakr was not accused of doing something wrong, and I can base this on the attitude of Hadhrat Fatimah (sa) here I present a hadith from al-Bukhari:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.325 (page 208)

Narrated Aisha, the mother of believers:

After the death of Allah’s Apostle Fatimah (sa), the daughter of Allah’s Apostle asked Abu Bakr As Siddiq to give her, her share of inheritance from what Allah’s Apostle (S) had left of the Fai which Allah had given him. Abu Bakr said to her: "Allah’s Apostle said: `Our Property will not be inherited, what ever we (Prophets) leave is Sadiqa (to be used for Charity)."

Fatimah (sa) the daughter of the Prophet (S) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatimah (sa) remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet (S). She used to ask Abu Bakr for her share from the Property of Allah’s Apostle which he (S) left at Khaibar and his Property at Medina ...

I can base the following conclusions from the above hadith

- Janabe Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) were displeased with the refusal of her share by Abu Bakr

- She continued to be displeased (Bukhari uses the word angry) till the day she departed from this World, that had showed her so much pain and trouble after the death of the Prophet (S) that reminds me of the famous saying from her holiness "If my father (S) were alive today, and he had seen me succumb to all the pain and miseries, the days would have turned into nights."

- She asked for her share of inheritance repeatedly, as confirmed in the above report.

- Brother Khaild also claims that Hadhrat Fatimah (sa) never accused Abu Bakr of some thing wrong, before I make my point it would be helpful to bring another hadith from al-Bukhar:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.546 (page 381):

... She (Fatimah (sa)) remained alive for six (6) months after the death of the Prophet (S). When she died, her husband ‘Ali buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer himself ...

Also the reknowned Sunni Historian Tabari writes:

Abu Salih al Dirari- Abd al Razzaq b. Hammam- Mamar- al Zuhri - Urwah- Aishah: Fatimah and al Abbas came to Abu Bakr demanding their (share of) inheritance of the Messenger of God. They were demanding the Messenger of Gods’s lan in Fadak and his share of Khaybar (‘s tribute). Abu Bakr replied, "I have heard the Messenger of God say: ‘Our (i.e the prophet’s property) cannot be inherited and whatever we leave behins is alms (i.e to be given in charity). The family of Muhammad will eat from it. ‘ By God, I will not abandon a course which I saw the Messenger of God practicing, but will continue doing it accordingly.”Fatimah shunned him and did not speak to him about it untill she died. ‘Ali buried her at night and did not permit Abu Bakr to attend (her burial).

Sunni references:

- Tabari, vol IX p 196 (The Events of the Year 11, English version),
- Tabaqat of Ibne Sad, vol VIII p 29,
- Yaqubi History, vol II p 117,
- Masudi in his Tanbih, p 250 (The last three are mentioned in the footnotes of Tabari’s book)
- al Bayhaqi, vol 4 p 29
- Musnad, Ahmad Hanbal, vol 1 p 9
- Tarikh, Ibn Katheer, vol 5 p 285-86
- Sharah, ibn al Hadid, vol 6 p 46

In this connection, Umm Jafar, the daughter of Muhammad ibn Jafar, narrated about the request of Fatimah (sa) to Asma bint Umays near her death that:

When I die, I want you and ‘Ali to wash me, and do not allow anyone to go into me (in my house).

When she died Aishah came to enter, Asma told her, ‘ Do not enter, ‘ Aishah complained to Abu Bakr saying,

This Khathamiyyah (a woman from the tribe of Katham, i.e Asma) intervenes between us and the daughter of Messenger of Allah (S).

Then Abu Bakr, came and stood at the door and said:

O Asma, what makes you prevent, the wives of the Prophet from entering into the daughter of the Messenger of Allah?

Asma replied:

She had herself ordered me not to allow anyone to enter into her.

Abu Bakr said: Do what she has ordered you.

Sunni references:

- Hilyatul Awliya, vol 2 p 43
- as Sunan al Kubra, vol 3 p 396
- Ansab al Ashraf, vol 1 p 405
- al Istiab, vol 4 p 1897-98
- Usudul Ghabah, vol 5 p 524
- al Isabah, vol 4 p 378-89

Muhammad ibn Umar al Waqidi said:

It has been proved to us that ‘Ali (as) performed her funeral prayer and buried her by night, accompanied by al Abbas and al Fadl (his son), and did not notify anyone. It was for this reason that Fatimah’s (as) burial place was hidden and is unknown till today.

Sunni references:

- Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 162-63
- Ansab al Ashraf, vol 1 p 402, 405
- al Istiab, vol 4 p 1898
- Usudul Ghabah, vol 5 p 524-25
- al Isabah, vol 4 p 379-80
- Tabaqat, Ibn Sa’ad, vol 8 p 19-20
- Sharah, Ibn al HAdid, vol 16 p 279-81

If I were to assume that She didn’t accuse Abu Bakr of anything wrong, then why was She angry with Abu Bakr, why did she not allow Abu Bakr to attend her funeral (as stated in her will). Surprisingly, al-Bukhari clearly mentions that She had instructed Imam ‘Ali (as) not to inform Abu Bakr.

If Fatimah is the leading ladies among all the ladies, and if She is and was the only lady in the entire Muslim Nation that Allah kept clean and pure, then her anger could not be but just. It is because of this very reason that:

Abu Bakr said: "May Allah save me from His anger and Fatimah’s anger”(the same words used by al-Bukhari) then he cried bitterly when she said, "By Allah, I will curse you in every prayer that I do.”He came crying out and said: "I do not need your pledge of allegiance and discharge me from my duties."

- Sunni reference: Tarikhul Khulafa by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, p120

Was Fadak Muhammads (S) Property ?

Fadak was alloted to the Prophet (S), because it had been acquired by treaty. The inhabitants, according to the treaty, were to remain there while giving up half of their lands and half the produce.

Sunni references:

- Tabari, vol IX p 196 (The Last years of the Prophet English version)
- Futuhal Buldan p 42
- Tarekhe Khamees vol 2 p 64
- Tarikhe Kamil (Ibn Atheer) vol 2 p 85
- Seerah by Ibn Hisham vol 3 p 48
- at Tarikh, Ibn Khuldun, vol 2 part 2

The historian and the geographical scholar Ahmad ibn Yahya al Baladhuri writes

Fadak was the personal property of the Prophet (S) as the Muslims had not used their horses or camels for it.

- Futuhul Baldan, vol 1 p33

Umar ibn al Khattab himself regarded Fadak as the unshared property of the

Holy Prophet when he declared:

The property of Banu an Nadir was among that which Allah has bestowed on His Messenger; against them neither horses nor camles were pricked but they belonged to the Messenger of Allah especially.

Sunni references:

- Sahih Bukhari, vol 4 p 46, vol 7 82; vol 9 p 121-22
- Sahih Muslim, vol 5 p 151
- Sunan Abi Daood. vol 3 p 139-41
- Sunan Nasai, vol 7 p 132
- Musnad of Ahmad Hanbal, vol p 25, 48, 60, 208
- Sunan al Kubra (al Bayhaqi), vol 6 p 296-99

Did The Prophet (S) Present The Land To Fatimah (sa) ?

The Prophet in his life time with the instructions from Allah the almighty presented this Land to Hadhrat Fatimah (sa), as is found in the Commentary of the respected Sunni Scholar, Jalaluddin al-Suyuti. Here is the historical background for the Land of Fadak, and after that is the text for the Tafseer for the Verse 26 Chapter XVII.

Imam ‘Ali (as) was sent to Fadak, a Jewish town not far from Khaibar to take it. But, before the use of any force, the inhabitants tendered their submission, ceding half of their property to the prophet. When the Angel Gabriel revealed to the Prophet the Divine Command as in the Verse 26 of Chapter XVII (17)

"And give unto one who is of Kin (to thee) that which is due”(17:26)

and the Prophet asked as to who was meant as "being of Kin". the Angel named Janabe Fatimah (sa) and told the Prophet to give Fadak to her (as) as the Income from Fadak belonged wholly to him on account of its being ceded to him without the use of force. the Prophet (S) accordingly bestowed upon Janabe Fatimah (sa) his estate of Fadak for the substinence of herself and her children.

With reference to the above Qur’anic Verse, many Sunni commentators have written that:

when the Verse was revealed, the Holy Prophet (S) asked the Angel Gabriel: "Who are the Kinsmen and what is their due?”The Angel Gibrael replied "Give Fadak to Fatimah for it is her due, and whatever is due to Allah and the Prophet (S) out of Fadak, that also belongs to her, so entrust to her also."

(The above is narrated through al Bazzar, Abu Yala, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Marduwayh and others from Abu Said al Khudri and through Ibn Marduwayh from Abdullah ibn al Abbas for the above verse)

Sunni references:

- Tafsir Durr al-Mansur, v4, p177
- Kanz al-Ummal, v2, p158
- Sawaiq al Muhriqah Chapter 15 p 21-22
- Rozatul Safaa vol 2 p 135
- Sharah e Muwaqif p 735
- Tareekh Ahmadi p45
- Ruh al ma’ani, vol 15 p 62

It leaves no room for us to believe that the Land of Fadak was not the personal belonging of Hadhrat Fatimah (sa)!

Historians also write that

Certainly, Abu Bakr snatched Fadak from Fatimah (sa)

Sunni references:

- Sharah, vol 16 p 219

- Wafa al Wafa (as Samhudi), vol 3 p1000

- Sawaiq al Muhriqah, p 32

Concerning the claim that You have made, that the above story is no where to be found in the hadith books, I would like you to refer to these books, that are termed as authentic and reliable by the Sunni scholars that contains the very event that you have had mentioned.

- Commentary of the Qur’an by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi , v8, p125 (Under the Tafseer of Surah Hashr)
- Sawaiq al-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar Haythmi, p21

Fatimah (sa) raised a voice when Fadak was stolen from her, protesting to Abu Bakr, she said:

You have taken over possesion of Fadak although the Prophet had gifted it to me during his life time.

On this Abu Bakr asked her to produce witnesses of the gift. Consequently, Imam ‘Ali (as) and Umm Ayman gave evidence on her favor. (Umm Ayman was the freed bond maid and the dry nurse for the Holy Prophet (S), She was the mother of Usamah ibn Zayd ibn al Harith. The Holy Prophet usted to say Umm Ayman is my mother after my mother. The Holy Prophet (S) also bore witness that she is among the people of paradise.

Sunni references:

- al Mustadrak, vol 4 p 63
- History of Tabari, vol 3 p 3460
- al Istiab, vol 4 p 1793
- Usud al Ghabah, vol 5 p 567
- Tabaqat, vol 8 p 192
- al Isabah, vol 4 p 432

But this evidence was held in-admissible by Abu Bakr and Fatimah’s (as) claim was rejected as being based on false statement. About this Baladhuri writes:

Fatimah (sa) said to Abu Bakr: The Messenger of Allah had apportioned Fadak to me. Therefore give it to me. Then he asked for another witness than Umm Ayman, saying: O daughter of the Prophet, you know that evidence is not admissible except by two men or one man and two women.

Besides, them, Imam Hasan (as) and Imam Hussain (as) gave evidence in support of Fatimah (sa), but their evidence was also rejected; on the ground that the evidence of the offspring and minors was not acceptable in favour of their parents. Then Rabah the slave of the Holy Prophet (S) was also produced as a witness in support of the claim of Fatimah but he was rejected too.

Sunni references:

- Futuhul Buldan, vol 1 p 35
- at Tarikh, Yaqubi, vol 3 p 195
- Muruj ad Dhahab, al Masudi, vol 3 p 237
- al Awail, Abu Hilal al Askari, p 209
- Wafa al Wafa, vol 3 p 99-1001
- Mujam al Buldan, Yaqut al Hamawai, vol 4 p 239
- Sharah, Ibn al Hadid, vol 16, p 216, 219-220, 274
- al Muhalla, Ibn HAzm, vol 6 p 507
- as Sirah al halabiyah, vol 3 p 261
- at Tafsir, al Fakr ad Din al Razi, vol 29 p 284

Talking about the very hadith that Abu Bakr had sited to support his decision that has been mentioned in many books, that goes as follows It is narrated on the authority of Urwa Ibn Zubair who narrated from Aisha that she informed him that Fatimah, the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (S) sent some one to Abu Bakr to demand from him her share of the legacy left by left by the Messenger of Allah (S) from what Allah had bestowed upon him at Medina and Fadak and what was left from 1/5 th of the income from Khaibar. Abu Bakr said that: the Messenger of Allah (S) said:

We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is to be given in charity. The household of the Messenger of Allah will live on the income of these Properties, but, by Allah I will not change the charity of the Messenger of Allah from the condition in which it was in his own time.
I will do the same with it as the Messenger of Allah (S) himself used to do.

So Abu Bakr refused to hand over any thing from it to Fatimah who got angry with Abu Bakr for this reason. She forsook him and did not talk to him untill the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (S). When she died her husband ‘Ali Ibn Abu Talib buried her at night. he did not inform Abu Baker about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself ......

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v3, Chapter DCCXIX, p956, Tradition #4352

Now let us analyze the statement that Abu Bakr stated:

We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is to be given in charity.

and the word heir means: "One who inherits “or “is legally entitled to inherit the property”(the American Dictionary - 2nd College Edition p324). Now, the very first statement goes against the facts since, historically it is admitted the holy Prophet (S) received inheritance from his father as as follows

Abdullah Ibn Abdul Muttalib left to Umme Aiman a legacy of five (5) dust coloured camels and a small flock of sheep, which was inherited by the Prophet of Allah.

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat Ibn Sad - Part I p39
- Siratun Nabi by Moulana Shibli Noumani, v1, p122
- Fath al Bari vol 3 p 360-361 (Mentions a house from Hashim, a sword, some goats and five (5) camels).
- Seerah al Halabiyah vol 1 p 56
- Ansab al Ashraf v 1 p 96

When the first part of the tradition is proved wrong, then how can the second part that is "What we leave behind is to be given in charity", be true as well! This very statement also clearly violates the Verses that are stated in the Holy Qur’an, that are as follows:

"And Solomon (Sulaymaan) inherited from David.”(Qur’an 27:16)

While both Sulaymaan and David were prophets and very wealthy. they were kings at their era. Allah , Exalted, also says:

"(Zakariya prayed to Allah by saying) ... Grant me a son from yourself, who inherits from me and inherit from the children of Jacob, and make him, O’ my Lord, the one with whom you are well- pleased.”(Qur’an: 19:5-6).

These are examples that Prophets left inheritances, and as might you have seen that they seem to contradict the hadith that was narrated by Abu Bakr. The traditon mentioned by Abu Bakr is fabricated otherwise it would not contradict Qur’an. It would also be very helpful to cite an incident, where Imam ‘Ali (as) had quoted the verses of the Qur’an, the same as the ones cited above. The incident runs as follows:

It is reported by Jafar that Fatimah came to Abu Bakr to demand her inheritance. Ibn Abbas also came to demand his inheritance, ‘Ali ibn Talib also came with him. Abu Bakr said that the Prophet of Allah (S) had said: "We do not make any heir to inherit our property, what we leave is charity, and the support that he gave them is now my responsibility."

‘Ali said: "Prophet Sulayman was the heir of Prophet Da’ud. Prophet Zakariya prayed to Allah: `Bestow upon me a son, who is heir to me and the family of Yaqoub.’"

Abu Bakr said: "The matter of the Prophet’s legacy is as it is. By Allah! You know it as I do.”

‘Ali said: "And see what the Book of Allah is saying.”

- Sunni reference: Tabaqat Ibn Sad, v4, p121-122

This report proves that the descendants of Muhammad did not regard the tradition, put forward by Abu Bakr in response to Fatimah’s claim for the inheritance, as true rather they refuted it through the verses of the Qur’an which they say that Allah has made the prophets heirs to one another.

There are also many instances when Abu Bakr never asked for any witness when people made claim to the promise of the Prophet (S). I would as usual rely on the authentic sources of hadith for my Sunni brethren and sisters:

Sahih al-Bukahri Hadith 3.848 (page 525)

Narrated Muhamamd Ibn ‘Ali:

Jabir Ibn Abdullah said: `When the Prophet (S) died, Abu Bakr received some property from al-Ala al-Hadrami. Abu Bakr said to the people, ‘ whoever has a money claim on the Prophet (S) or was promised something by him , should come to us, (so that we may pay him right). ‘ Jabir added: `I said (to Abu Bakr), Allah’s Apsotle (S) promised me that he would give me this much, and this much, and this much (spreading his hands three times). Jabir added, ‘ Abu Bakr counted for me and handed me five hundred (500) gold pieces, and then five hundred, and then five hundred.

Sunni references:

- Sahih, Muslim, vol 7 p 75-76
- Sahih, al Tirmizi, vol 5 p 129
- Musnad, Ahmad Hanbal, vol 3 p 307-308
- Tabaqat, Ibn Sa’ad, vol 2 part 2 p 88-89

In the annotations of this tradition, Ibn Hajar Asqalani and Ahmad al Ayni al Hanafi have written:

This tradition leads to the conclusion that the evidence of one just companion can also be admitted as full evidence though it may be in his own favor, because Abu Bakr did not ask Jabir to produce any witnes in proff of his claim.

Sunni references:

- Fath al Bari, vol 5 p 380 (Ibn Hajar Asqalani)
- Umdatul Qari, vol 12 p 121 (al Hanafi)

It it was lawful to allow property to Jabir on the basis of good impression; without calling for witness or evidence, then what stopped allowing Fatimha’s claim on the basis of similar good impression? If good impression could exist in the case of Jabir to such an effect that he would not benefit by speaking a lie, then why should there not be the good belief about Fatimah (sa) that she would not attribute a false saying to the Prophet (S) just for a piece of land.

Firstly, her admitted truthfulness and honesty was enough for holding her truthful in her claim and evidence of Imam ‘Ali (as) and Umm Ayman in her favor was also available besides her other evidences. It has been said that the claim could not be decided in favor of Fatimah (sa) on the basis of two witnesses because the Holy Qur’an lays down the principle of evidence that: (2: 282)

... then call witness two witnesses from among your men and if there not be two men, then (take) a man and two women...

If this principal is universal and general then it shoudl be taken into regard on every occasion, but one some occasion it is found not to have been followed; for example when an Arab had a dispute with the Prophet (S) about a camel, Khuzaymah ibn Thabit al Ansari gave evidence in favour of the Prophet (S), and this one evidence was deemed to be equal to two, because there was no doubt in the honesty and the truthfulness of the individual in whose favor the evidence was led. It was for this reason that the Holy Prophet (S) granted him the title of Dhush Shahadatayn (one whose evidence is equivalent to the evidence of two witnesses)

Sunni references:

- al Bukhari, vol 4 p 24, vol 6 p 146
- Sunan of Abu Dawood, vol 3 p 308
- Suna of an Nasai, vol 7 p 302
- Musnad of Ahmad Hanbal, vol 5 p 188-89. 216, vol 2 p 448
- Usudul Ghaba, vol 2 p 114
- al Isabah, vol 2 p 425-26

Consequently, neither was the generality of the verse about the evidence affected by this action nor was it deemed to be against the cannons of evidence. So, if here in view of the Prophet’s (S) truthfulness, one evidence in his favor was deemed to be equal to two, then could not the evidence of ‘Ali and Umm Ayman be regarded enough for Fatimah in view of moral greatness and truthfulness?

Also there is a tradition mentioned by more than twelve companions that The Messenger of Allah (S) used to decide cases on the strength of one witness and the taking oath.

It has been explained by some companions of the Prophet (S) and some scholars of jurisprudence that this decision is specially related to rights, property and transactions; and this decision was practiced by the three Caliphs

- Abu Bakr
- Umar
- and Uthman

Sunni references:

- Sahih, Muslim, vol 5 p 128
- Sunan, Abu Dawood, vol 3 p 308-309
- Sahih, Tirmidhi, vol 3 627-29
- Sunan, Ibn Majah, vol 2 p 793
- Musnad, Ahmad Hanbal, vol 1 p 248, 315, 323, vol 3 p 305
- al Muwatta, Malik, vol 2 p 721-25
- Sunan, al Bayhaqi, vol 10 p 167-176
- Suna, ad Darqutani, vol 4 p 212-215
- Majma az Zawaid, vol 4 p 202
- Kanz al Ummal, vol 7 p 13

Now brother Khalid, a few points

- Why did Abu Bakr not call upon witnesses at the time of his giving away the gold pieces that was in accordance with the promise of the Holy Prophet (S). Why did he take their statement for granted that the Prophet (S) had made a promise?

- On the contrary when Fatimah, the daughter of the Prophet whom he called the Chief of the women of the Worlds, made a claim for Fadak, then witnesses were called upon to appear before the caliph and one some pretext or other their evidence was rejected!

According to the following traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari, Umar, during his reign, gave the property to Imam ‘Ali (as) and Abbas. So there was nothing for Imam ‘Ali to retake when he became Caliph. However, the tradition implies that Umar gave Fadak to Imam ‘Ali to manage it, and spend its revenues for the sake of Allah. The tradition also confirms that Imam ‘Ali overpowered Abbas and took over the land (after he became Caliph), and the Imam Hasanin herited the land, till it was usurped again (by Umayad). Here is the tradition:

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 5.367

‘Umar said to ‘‘Ali and ‘Abbas: "... I kept this property in my possession for the first two years of my rule (i.e. Caliphate and I used to dispose of it in the same wa as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr used to do; and Allah knows that I have been sincere, pious, rightly guided an the follower of the right (in this matte Later on both of you (i.e. ‘‘Ali and Abbas) came to me, and the claim of you both was one and the same, O ‘Abbas! You also came to me. So I told you both that Allah’s Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited, but whatever we leave is to be given in charity.’

Then when I thought that I should better hand over this property to you both or the condition that you will promise and pledge before Allah that you will dispose it off in the same way as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr did and as I have done since the beginning of my caliphate or else you should not speak to me (about it).’ So, both of you said to me, ‘Hand it over to us on this condition.’ And on this condition I handed it over to you. Do you want me now to give a decision other than that (decision)?

By Allah, with Whose Permission both the sky and the earth stand fast, I will never give any decision other than that (decision) till the Last Hour is established. But if you are unable to manage it (i.e. that property), then return it to me, and I will manage on your behalf.”The sub-narrator said, ... this property was in the hands of ‘Ali who took it from ‘Abbas and overpowered him.

Then it came in the hands of Hasan Ibn ‘‘Ali, then in the hands of Husayn Ibn ‘‘Ali, and then in the hands of ‘Ali Ibn Husayn and Hasan Ibn Hasan, and each of the last two used to manage it in turn, then it came in the hands of Zaid Ibn Hasan, and it was truly the Sadaqa of Allah’s Apostle.”I am not sure (according to Shi’a) if Muawiyah usurped the Fadak at the time of Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn or not.

Nevertheless it was usurped shortly after. See also tradition 4.326. As we see in the above tradition, if Imam ‘Ali believed that this is charity, he wouldn’t ask for his share from Umar, nor would he drive Abbas out of the land.

The following traditions clearly mention that Imam ‘Ali claimed the land. Do you think Imam ‘Ali who lived with Prophet, who was the first man who embraced Islam, and was the most knowledgeable companion, did not know what the rule of Allah is?

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 8.720

Narrated Malik Ibn Aus:

‘Umar said to ‘‘Ali and ‘Abbas: "... Then I took charge of this property for two years during which I managed it as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr did. Then you both (‘‘Ali and ‘Abbas) came to talk to me, bearing the same claim and presenting the same case. (O ‘Abbas!) You came to me asking for your share from the property of your nephew, and this man (‘Ali) came to me, asking for the share of his wife from the property of her father. I said, ‘If you both wish, I will give that to you on that condition (i.e. that you would follow the way of the Prophet and Abu Bakr and as I (Umar) have done in managing it).’ ... If you are unable to manage it, then return it to me, and I will be sufficient to manage it on your behalf.’ “

Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 9.408

Narrated Malik Ibn Aus An-Nasri:

... Then he (Umar) turned to ‘‘Ali and ‘Abbas and said,

"You both claim that Abu Bakr did so-and-so in managing the property, but Allah knows that Abu Bakr was honest, righteous, intelligent, and a follower of what is right in managing it. Then Allah took Abu Bakr unto Him, ‘I said: I am the successor of Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr.’ So I took over the property for two years and managed it in the same way as Allah’s Apostle, and Abu Bakr used to do. Then you both (‘‘Ali and ‘Abbas) came to me and asked for the same thing! (O ‘Abbas!)

You came to me to ask me for your share from nephew’s property; and this (‘‘Ali) came to me asking for his wives share from her father’s property, and I said to you both, ‘If you wish, I will place it in your custody on condition that you both will manage it in the same way as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr did and as I have been doing since I took charge of managing it;

The above story that you have cited is considered weak, because of its narrator, Miswar Ibn Muhazma, and as usual I shall cite Sunni references to prove my point. This person that you have mentioned, i.e., Miswar Ibn Muhazma, was related to Abdul Rahman Ibn Auf, and he was born 2 (two) years after the Hijrah and he came to Medina in the end of the Eight (8th) Year of the Hijrah. The Sunni hadith Scholar, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani states as follows

Born in Mecca two (2) years after the Hijrah, and he came to Medina with his father in the end of the month of Zhilhajjah for the year 8th (eight) hijri.

Sunni reference: Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, v10, p151

Now a few points, this would make Miswar only 6 (six) years old and according to the standard set by the hadith scientists, any hadith that is narrated by a child (minor) is not to be accepted. I am not saying this on the basis of my knowledge, infact I am borrowing words from the mouth of great Sunni Scholar and Historian from India ‘ Maulana Shibli Numani ‘. In his volumnious work on the Seerah of the Prophet, where he scrutinizes the nature of the reports (hadiths) and the status of the narrator, he writes:

For instance a commonly debated question is this: Is it necessary to impose the age limit for narrators? Furthermore he also states the belief held by Imam Shafi’i that ‘He is inclined not to accept a narration referring to the experience of a minor.’

Sunni reference: Siratun Nabi (The Life of the Prophet) by Shibli Numani English Edition , p55

Furthermore it also reminds me of the saying from the lady (Jewaira) at the time of the conquest of Mecca, when Bilal gave the call of the Prayer from the House of Allah (The Kaabah) God has saved my father from hearing the unpleasent voice of Bilal in the Kaabah! How do you expect me to believe that Imam ‘Ali (as) would offer his hand to an un-believer?

In the end, would be very unfair not to look at the arguments presented by he Sunnis in favor of their First Caliph, Abu Bakr. In the footnote of Sahih Muslim, the commentator writes:

It was a sort of a misgiving on the part of the Hadrat Fatimah that Hadrat Abu Bakr was reluctant to give the due share of her part of her great father. Noble Abu Bakr could not conceive of that. He had intense love and affection for the family of the Holy Prophet (S) but he was not yielding to her demand since he found it against the verdict of the Holy Prophet (S) in regards to the legacy of the Prophets as we find in a hadith!

- Footnote of Sahih Muslim, v3, p958 (English), footnote number 2235

How can it be a misgiving on the part of the Chief of the Women in Paradise when Her highness was bestowed by the Prophet (S) himself the title of al-Siddiqah? How can the commentator accuse her of a misgiving when She was also known as The Splendid One, The Chaste and The Pure One? How can any Muslim accuse Her of a misgiving with the facts in mind that the Qur’an talks about her in the following Verses

“The Verse of Purity (Chapter 33 Verse 33)
“The Verse of Imprecation (Mubihala Chapter 3 Verse 61)

How can we take it for fact that what Abu Bakr stated was a hadith of the Holy Prophet (S) when the statement is in direct contradiction with not only Historical facts, Interpreatations of the Sunni Commentators, but also with the Qur’anic injunctions?

Wassalam.

Lady Fatimah (sa) protests against Abu Bakr’s Actions

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Fatimah (sa) felt grieved by Abu Bakr’s actions, and was so displeased with him that when she knew of his attempt to seize Fadak, she accompanied a group of women to the mosque. There she sat down and delivered the following speech:

Praise be to Allah for that which He bestowed (upon us); And thanks be to Him for all that which He inspired; and commended in His Name for that which He Provided: From prevalent favors which He created, And abundant benefactions which He offered and perfect grants which He presented; (such benefactions) that their number is much too plentiful to compute; Bounties too vast to measure; Their limit was too distant to realize; He recommended to them (His creatures) to gain more (of His benefaction) by being grateful for their continuity; He ordained Himself praiseworthy by giving generously to His creatures; I bear witness that there is no God but Allah Who is One with out partner, a statement which sincere devotion is made to be its interpretation; hearts guarantee its con- tinuation, and dominated in the minds is its sensibility. He Who can not be perceived with vision; neither be described with tongues; nor can imagination surround His state.

He originated things but not from anything that existed be- fore them, and created them with- out examples to follow. Rather, He created them with His might and dispersed them according to His will; not for a need did He create them; nor for a benefit for Him) did He shape them,

But to establish His wisdom, Bring attention to His obedi- ence, manifest His might, lead His creatures to humbly vene- rate Hun, and to exalt His decrees. He then made the reward for His obedience, And punishment for his dis- obedience, so as to protect His creatures from His Wrath and amass them into His Paradise.

I too bear witness that my Father, Muhammad, is His Slave and Messenger, Whom He chose prior to sending him, named him before sending him; when creatures were still concealed in that which was transcendental, guarded from that which was appalling, and associated with the termination and nonexistence. For Allah the Exalted knew that which was to follow, comprehended that which will come to pass, And realized the place of every event.

Allah has sent him (Muhammad) (S) as perfection for His commands, a resolution to accomplish His rode, and an implementation of the decrees of His Mercy. So he found the nations to vary in their faiths; Obsessed by their fires, Worshipping their idols, And denying Allah despite their knowledge of Him.

Therefore, Allah illuminated their darkness with my Father, Muhammad, (S) uncovered obscurity from their hearts, and cleared the clouds from their insights He revealed guidance among the people; So he delivered them from being led astray, led them away from misguidance, guided them to the proper religion and called them to the straight path.

Allah then chose to recall him back in mercy, love and pre- ference. So, Muhammad (S) is in comfort from the burden of this world, he is surrounded with devoted angels, the satisfaction of the Merciful Lord, and the nearness of the powerful King. So may the praise of Allah be upon my Father, His Prophet, Trusted one, the chosen one from among His creatures, and His sincere friend, and may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Fatimah then turned to the crowd and said:

Surely you are Allah ‘s slaves at His command Prohibition; You are the bearers of His religion and revelation; You are Allah’s trusted ones with yourselves; and His messengers to the nations. Amongst you does He have righteous authority; A covenant He brought unto you, and an heir He left to guard you; That is The eloquent book of Allah; The truthful Qur’an; The brilliant light; The shining beam; Its insights are indis- putable; Its secrets are revealed; Its indications are manifest; and its fol- lowers are blessed by it. (The Qur’an) leads its adherents to good will; and Hearing it leads to salvation; with it are the bright divine authorities achieved, His manifest determination acquired, His prohibited decrees avoided; His manifest evidence recognized; His satisfying proofs made apparent, His permissions granted, and His laws written. So Allah made belief to be a purification for you from poly- theism He made: Prayer- An exaltation for you from conceit. Alms- A purification for the soul and a (cause of) growth in subsistence.

Fasting-An implantation of devotion. Pilgrimage- A construction of religion. Justice- A harmony of the hearts; Obeying us (Ahlul-Bayt)- Management of the nation. Our leadership (Ahlul-Bayt): Safeguard from disunity.

Jihad (struggle) - A strengthening of Islam. Patience- A helping course for deserving (divine) reward. Ordering goodness (Amr Bil Maruf)- Public welfare. Kindness to the parents- A safeguard from wrath. Maintaining close relations with one’s kin- A cause for a longer life and multiplying the number of descend- ants. Retaliation (Qesas)-For sparing blood (souls). Fulfillment of vows-subjecting oneself to mercy. Completion of weights and measures- A cause for preventing the neglect of others’ rights. Forbiddance of drinking wine- An exaltation from atrocity. Avoiding slander- A veil from curse. Abandoning theft- a reason for deserving chastity. Allah has also prohibited polytheism so that one can devote himself to His Lordship.

Therefore; Fear Allah as He should be feared and die not except in a state of Islam, Obey Allah in that which He has commanded you to do and that which He has forbidden, for surely those truly fear among His servants, who have knowledge.

Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) then added: O People! Be informed that I am Fatimah, and my father is Muhammad (S) I say that repeatedly and initiate it continually; I say not what I say mistakenly, nor do I do what I do aimlessly. Now hath come unto you an Apostle from amongst yourselves It grieves him that you should perish; Ardently anxious is he over you;; To the believers he is most kind and merciful. Thus, if you identify and recognize him, you shall realize that he is my father and not the father of any of your women; the brother of my cousin (‘Ali (as)) rather than any of your men. What an excellent identity he was, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his descendants.

Thus, he propagated the Message, by coming out openly with the warning and while inclined away from the path of the polytheists, (whom he) struck their strength and seized their throats, while he invited (all) to the way of his Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, He destroyed idols, and defeated heroes, until their group fled and turned their backs.

So night revealed its dawn; righteousness uncovered its genuineness; the voice of the religious authority spoke out loud; the evil discords were silenced; The crown of hypo- crisy was diminished; the tightening of infidelity and desertion were untied, So you spoke the statement of devotion amongst a band of starved ones; and you were on the edge of a hole of fire; (you were) the drink of the thirsty one; the opportunity of the desiring one; the fire brand of him who passes in haste; the step for feet; you used to drink from the water gathered on roads; eat jerked meat.

Lady Fatimah (sa) was stating their lowly situation before Islam You were despised outcasts always in fear of abduction from those around you. Yet, Allah rescued you through my father, Muhammad S) after much ado, and after he was confronted by mighty men, the Arab beasts, and the demons of the people of the Book Who, whenever they ignited the fire of war, Allah extinguished it; and whenever the thorn of the devil appeared, or a mouth of the polytheists opened wide in defiance, he (S) would strike its discords with his brother (‘Ali (as)), who comes not back until he treads its wing with the sole of his feet, and extinguishes its flames with his sword.

He is (‘Ali (as)) diligent in Allah’s affair, near to the Messenger of Allah, A master among Allah ‘s worshippers, setting to work briskly, sincere in his advice, earnest and exerting himself (in service to Islam); While you were calm, gay, and feeling safe in your comfort- able lives, waiting for us to et disasters, awaiting the spread of news, you fell back during every baffle, and took to your heels at times of fighting.

Yet, When Allah chose His Prophet from the dwell of His prophets, and the abode of His sincere (servants); The thorns of hypocrisy appeared on you, the garment of faith became worn out, The misguided ignorant(s) spoke out, the sluggish ignorant came to the front and brayed. The he camel of the vain wiggled his tail in your Courtyards and the Devil stuck his head from its place of hiding and called upon you he found you respon- sive to his invitation, and observing his deceits. He then aroused you and found you quick (to answer him), and invited you to wrath, therefore; you branded other than your camels and proceeded to other than your drinking places.

Then while the era of the Prophet was still near, the gash was still wide, the scar had not yet healed, and the Messenger was not yet buried. A (quick) undertaking as you claimed, aimed at preventing discord (trial), Surely, they have fallen into trial already! And indeed Hell surrounds the unbelievers. How preposterous! What an idea!

What a falsehood! For Allah’s Book is still amongst you its affairs are apparent; its rules are manifest; its signs are dazzling; its restrictions are visible, and its commands are evident. Yet, indeed you have casted it behind your backs! What! Do you detest it? Or according to something else you wish to rule? Evil would be the exchange for the wrongdoers! And if anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), it never will it be accepted from him; And in the hereafter, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost.

Surely you have not waited until its stampede seized, and it became obedient. You then started arousing its flames, instigating its coal, compiling with the call of the misled devil, quenching the light of the manifest reli- gion, and extinguished the light of the sincere Prophet. You concealed sips on froth and proceeded towards his (the Prophet) kin and children in swamps and forests (meaning you plot against them in deceitful ways), but we are patient with you as if we are being notched with knives and stung by spearheads in our abdomens, Yet-now you claim- that there is not inheritance for us! What! Do they then seek after a judgment of (the Days of) ignorance ? But how, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah? Don’t you know? Yes, indeed it is obvious to you that I am his daughter.

O Muslims! Will my inheritance be usurped? O son of Abu Quhafa! Where is it in the Book of Allah that you inherit your father and I do not inherit mine? Surely you have come up with an unprecedented thing. Do you intentionally abandon the Book of Allah and cast it behind your back? Do you not read where it says: And Sulaiman inherited Dawood ? And when it narrates the story of Zakariya and says: ‘So give me an heir as from thyself (One that) will inherit ones and inherit the posterity of Yaqoob’.

And; ‘But kindred by hood have prior rights against each other in the Book of Allah’ And: ‘Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children’s (inheritance) to the male, a portion equal to that of two females’ And: ‘...If he leaves any goods, that he makes a bequest to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the pious ones.’

You claim that I have no share! And that I do not inherit my father! What! Did Allah reveal a (Qur’anic) verse regarding you from which He excluded my father? Or do you say: ‘These (Fatimah and her father) are the people of two faiths, they do not inherit each other?!’ Are we not, me and my father, a people adhering to one faith? Or is it that you have more knowledge about the specifi- cations and generalizations of the Qur’an than my father and my cousin (Imam ‘Ali) ? So, here you are! Take it! (Ready with) its nose rope and saddled! But if shall encounter you on the Day of Gathering, (thus) what a wonder- ful judge is Allah, a claimant is Muhammad, and a day is the Day of Rising.

At the time of the Hour shall the wrongdoers lose; and it shall not benefit you to regret (your actions) then! For every Message, there is a time limit; and soon shall ye know who will be inflicted with torture that will humiliate him, and who will be confronted by an everlasting punishment.

Fatimah then turned towards the Ansars and said: O you people of intellect! The strong supporters of the nation! And those who embraced Islam; What is this short-coming in defending my right? And what is this slumber (while you see) injustice (being done toward me)? Did not the Messenger of Allah (S) my father, used to say:

‘A man is upheld (remembered) by his children ?!’ O how quick have you violated (his orders)! How soon have you plotted against us? But you still are capable (of helping me in) my attempt, and powerful (to help me) in that which I request and (in) my pursuit (of it).

Or do you say: "Muhammad (S) has perished;”Surely this is a great calamity; Its damage is excessive its injury is great, Its wound (is much too deep) to healed The Earth became darkened with his departure; the stars eclipsed for his calamity; hopes were seized; mountains submitted; sanctity was violated, and holiness was encroached upon after his death. Therefore, this, by Allah, is the great affliction, and the grand calamity; there is not an affliction- which is the like of it; nor will there be a sudden misfortune (as surprising as this).

The Book of Allah-excellent in praising him-announced in the courtyards (of your houses) in the place where you spend your evenings and mornings; A call, A cry, A recitation, and (verses) in order: It had previously came upon His (Allah’s) Prophets and Messengers, (for it is) A decree final, and a pre- destination fulfilled: ‘Muhammad is not but an Apostle: Many were the apostles that passed away before him. If he died or was slain, will ye then turn back on your heels If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah; but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude.’

O you people of reflection; will I be usurped the inheritance of my father while you hear and see me?! (And while) You are sitting and gathered around me? You hear my call, and are included in the (news of the) affair? (But) You are numerous and well equipped! (You have) the means and the power, and the weapons and the shields.

Yet, the call reaches you but you do not answer; the cry comes to you but you do not come to help? (This) While you are characterized by struggle, known for goodness and welfare, the selected group (which was chosen), and the best ones chosen by the Messenger (S) for us, Ahlul-Bayt. You fought the Arabs, bore with pain and exhaustion, struggled against the nations, and resisted their heroes. We were still, so were you in ordering you and you in obeying us. So that Islam became triumphant, the accomplishment of the days came near, the fort of polytheism was subjected, the outburst of fabrication subsided, the flames of infidelity calmed down, and the system of religion was well-ordered.

Thus, (why have you) become con- fused after clearness? Conceal matters after announcing them ? Turned on your heels after daring? Associated (others with Allah) after believing? Will you not fight people who violated their oaths? Plotted to expel the Apostle and became aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if you believe! Nevertheless, I see that you are inclined to easy living; dismissed he who is more worthy of guardianship (‘Ali (as)) You secluded yourselves with meekness and dismissed that which you accepted. Yet, if you show ingratitude, ye and all on earth together, yet, Allah free of an wants, worthy of appraise. Surely I have said all that I have said with full knowledge that you intent to forsake me, and knowing the betrayal which your hearts sensed. But, it is the state of soul, the effusion of fury, the dissemination of (what is) the chest and the presentation of the proof

Hence, Here it is! Bag it (leadership and) put it on the back of an ill she-camel, which has a thin hump, with ever lasting grace, marked with the wrath of Allah, and the blame of ever (which leads to) the Fire of (the wrath of) Allah kindled (to a blaze), that which doth mount (right) to the hearts; For, Allah witnesses what you do, and soon will the unjust assailants know what vicissitudes their affairs will take!! And I am the daughter of a Warner (the Prophet S.) to you against a severe punishment. So, act and so will we, and wait, and we shall wait. (The end of Lady Fatimah’s speech.)

It appears from recorded historical events, that Lady Fatimah (sa) was successful at the beginning in persuading Abu Bakr to hand back Fadak to her; listen to part of a speech he (according to some historians) delivered after hearing Fatimah’s speech. He said:

‘ O daughter of the Messenger of Allah. . . Surely the Prophet is your father, not anyone else’s, the brother of your husband, not any other man’s; he surely preferred him over all his friends and (‘Ali) supported him in every important matter, no one loves you save the lucky and no one hates you save tile wretched. You are the blessed progeny of Allah’s Messenger, the chosen ones, our guides to goodness, our path to Paradise, and you-the best of women-and the daughter of the best of prophets, truthful is your sayings, excelling in reason. You shall not be driven back from your right...But I surely heard your father saying: ‘ We the group of prophets do not inherit, nor are we inherited. ‘

Yet, this is my situation and properly, it is yours (if you wish); it shall not be concealed from you, nor will it be stored away from you. You are the Mistress of your father’s nation, and the blessed tree of your descendants. Your property shall not be usurped against your will, nor can your name be defamed Your judgment shall be executed in all that which I possess. This, do you think that I violate your father’s (will) ? ‘

Fatimah then refuted Abu Bakr’s claim that the Prophet (S) had stated that prophets can not be inherited, and said: Glory be to Allah! Surely Allah’s Messenger (S) did not abandon Allah’s Book nor did he violate His commands. Rather, he followed its decrees and adhered to its chapters. So do you unite with treachery justifying your fabrications?

Indeed this-after his departure-is similar to the disasters which were plotted against him during his lifetime. But behold! This is Allah’s Book, a just judge and a decisive speaker, saying One that will (truly) inherit Me, and inherit the posterity of Yaqub, and Sulaiman inherited Dawood.

Thus, He (Glory be to Him) made clear that which He made share of all heirs, decreed from the amounts of inheritance, allowed for males and females, and eradicated all doubts and ambiguities (pertaining to this issue which existed with the) by gones.

Nay! But your minds have made up a tale (that may pass) with you, but (for me) patience is most fitting against that which ye assert; it is Allah (alone) whose help can be sought. It is apparent that Abu Bakr chanced the mode with which he addressed Lady atimah (as) after delivering her speech. Listen to his following speech; which is his reply to Fatimah’s speech. Abu Bakr said:

Surely Allah and His Apostle are truthful, and so has as (the Prophet’s) daughter told the truth. Surely you are the source of wisdom, the element of faith, and the sole authority. May Allah not refute your righteous argument, nor invalidate your decisive speech But these are the Muslims between us-who have entrusted me with leadership and it was according to their satisfaction that I received what I have. I am not being arrogant, autocratic, or selfish, and they are my witnesses.

Upon hearing Abu Bakr speak of the people’s support for him, Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (sa) turned towards them and said:

O people, who rush towards uttering falsehood and are indifferent to disgraceful and losing actions! Do you not earnestly seek to reflect upon the Qur’an, or are your hearts isolated with locks? But on your hearts is the stain of the evil which you committed; it has seized your hearing and your sight, evil is that which you justified, cursed is that which you reckoned, and wicked is what you have taken for an exchange!

You shall, by Allah, find bearing it (to be a great) burden, and its consequence disastrous. (That is) on the day when the cover is removed and appears to you what is behind it of wrath. When you will be confronted by Allah with that which you could never have expected, there will perish, there and then, those who stood on falsehoods.

Although parts of Abu Bakr’s speeches can not be verified with authentic evidence, and despite the fact that we have already mentioned part of the actual speech which Abu Bakr delivered after Lady Fatimah’s (as) arguments, it appears certain that Abu Bakr was finally persuaded to submit Fadak to her.

Nevertheless, when Fatimah (sa) was leaving Abu Bakr’s house, Umar suddenly appeared and exclaimed: What is that you hold in your hand ?

Abu Bakr replied: ‘ A decree I have written for Fatimah (sa) in which I assigned Fadak and her father’s inheritance to her.

Umar then said: With what will you spend on the Muslims if the Arabs decide to fight you.

Umar then seized the decree and tore it up!!!

Sunni references:

- Seerah al Halabiyah, vol 3 p 391 -> 400
- Fadak in History, Murtaza Muttaheri, p 85
- Fatimah the Gracious, Abu Muhammad Ordoni, 217 -> 240

More Facts on Fadak

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Comments from Futuhul Buldan by Baladhuri’s

Now we present with some comments, regarding Khums and Fa’y some quotations from Baladhuri’s Futuhul Buldan, Urdu translation, Jami’a Uthmania, Hyderabad Deccan.

1. At last they sought peace on these terms - ‘ We shall go away from your town, leaving our weapons and mail coats, shall take with us only those articles which can be loaded on camels. All other articles including weapons, mail coats, oases, and lands will be the property of the Prophet of Allah. On this account the properties of Bani Nazir became under the Holy Prophet’s ownership. He used to get the land with the palm-date trees cultivated, and from its income he defrayed the expenses of his dependents for the whole year.’

(Vol. 1, page 25, Chapter The properties of Bani Nuzair).

From narration 1, it is established that the properties of Bani Nuzair exclusively belonged to the Holy Prophet. He got these lands cultivated for the subsistence of his dependents.

2. The narrator says that in this verse Allah has brought home to the Muslims that these properties were exclusively of the Holy Prophet and for no one else. (page 26).

From narration 2, it is established that since Muslims had not exhausted their horses and camels against Bani Nuzair their properties were meant exclusively for the Holy Prophet and for no one else.

3. Caliph Umar said ‘ The properties of Bani Nuzair were among those properties which Allah had given to His Prophet without fighting and on which the Muslims had not galloped their horses or camels. On that account they were the Holy Prophet’s exclusive property. From them he used to defray the expenses of his dependents for the whole year, and whatever was saved from it was spent in the way of Allah or for horses and weapons. (page 28).

From narration 3, it is established that Caliph Umar used to say that the properties of Bani Nuzair exclusively belonged to the Holy Prophet and from them he used to defray the expenses for his dependents for the whole year.

4. It is said on return from Khyber the Holy Prophet sent Mohayyasah bin Mas’ud Ansari to the people of Fadak to invite them to Islam. At that time their chief was a man from among themselves named Yusha’ bin Noon, the Jew. He offered to make peace with the Prophet by giving half the land to him, and the Holy Prophet accepted it. Hence, Fadak became exclusively the Prophet’s property because the Muslims had not advanced on it with their horses and camels. (page 45).

From narration 4, it is established that Fadak was granted by Allah to His Prophet without fighting. Therefore it was exclusively meant for the Holy Prophet.

5. Fatimah said to Caliph Abu Bakr, ‘ Give Fadak to me because the Holy Prophet had reserved it for me’ and presented ‘Ali as her witness. He (Abu Bakr) demanded another witness. She produced Umme Aiman. He said, ‘ O daughter of the Prophet! You know that evidence is not complete unless it is given by one man and two women’. Hearing this she went away. (pp. 47- 48).

From narration 5, it is established that Fatimah said to Abu Bakr ‘ Give Fadak to me, since the Prophet of Allah had reserved it for me’ . In reply she was asked to produce witnesses who were afterwards rejected.

6. Fatimah said to Caliph Abu Bakr ‘ Give Fadak to me because the Holy Prophet had given it to me’ . He deman- ded proof. She produced Umme Aiman and Rubab, the freed slave-girl of the Prophet. Both gave evidence. Abu Bakr said, ‘ In any case this evidence is not enough. The evidence should be of one man and two women’ . (page 48).

From narration 6, it is established that Fatimah said to Abu Bakr, ‘ Give Fadak to me because the Prophet of Allah had given it to me’ , which means that Fadak was in the possession and control of Fatimah from the days of the Holy Prophet and no one had the authority to deprive Fatimah of it.

7. Fatimah went to Caliph Abu Bakr and inquired, ‘ When you- die who will be your successor’ ? He said, ‘ My issues’ . Fatimah said, ‘ Then how is it that despite our presence you have become the successor of the Holy Prophet’ . He said, ‘ O daughter of the Prophet! By Allah I have not inherited gold or silver or any other thing from your father’ . She said, ‘ Khyber is our share and Fadak is a gift to us’ . He said, ‘ O daughter of the Prophet! I have heard from the Holy Prophet, ‘ This source of living is till my life. After me, it should be distributed among the Muslims’ . (page 48).

>From narration 7, it is established that F Fatimah inquired from Abu Bakr, ‘ When you die who will be your successor?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘ My issues ‘. Fatimah there-- upon said, ‘and then how is it that despite our presence yolk -have become the successor of the Holy Prophet ‘, and in reply Abu Bakr said, ‘ I have heard the Holy Prophet saying, ‘ this source of living is till my life; after me it should be distributed among the Muslims’ .

A few questions arise here. First, whether after the Holy Prophet the economic necessities of Ale Muhammad would also come to an end? Secondly, whether Allah excluded Ale Muhammad from the rule of inheritance. Thirdly, is there any verse in the Holy Qur’an from which it may be established that if Abu Bakr dies his issues should inherit him and when Muhammad bin Abdullah dies, his issues should not inherit him.

8. The verse ‘ Since you did not have to exhaust your horses and camels (or even fight)’ , pertains to Fadak and such other areas of Arabia, which were exclusively reserved for the Holy Prophet. (page 49).

From narration 8, it is established that Fadak and some areas of Arabia were exclusively reserved for the Holy Prophet.

9. After this in the year 210 A.H. Amirul Mo’minin, Mamun Abdullah bin Harunur Rashid ordered restoration of Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah and wrote about it to Qasim bin Ja’far who was his Governor in Medina ‘ By virtue of his position in the religion and being a near kinsman of the Holy Prophet, Amirul Mo’minin is apt to abide by his Sunnah and enforce his commands, and to give over anything that he might have bequeathed to anyone as charity or gift. The succour and protection of Allah is in favour of Amirul Mo’minin and by every act, he aims at His Pleasure.

‘ The Holy Prophet had gifted Fadak to his daughter Fatimah. This was such a well-known matter that there was no difference about it among the descendants of the Prophet. On this basis Fadak had been demanded from Amirul Mo’minin. The disposal of this matter was very important for him by virtue of his sincerity towards the Prophet. Therefore, Amirul Mo’minin deems it proper to restore Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah, and entrust it to them so as to secure Pleasure of Allah by upholding right and justice and of the Prophet by enforcing his command. Accordingly Amirul Mo’minin orders that this be entered in his records and his officers be informed accordingly.

Since after the Prophet it was announced in every Haj that whoever had been given any charity or gift or had been promised anything should come and his statement would be accepted, and his share would be made over to him,Fatimah was more entitled to it that her statement in respect of what had been reserved for her should be taken as true. Amirul Mo’minin has ordered his freed slave Mubarak Tabari that Fadak in its original boundaries together with all the rights appertaining to it now and also along with its working slaves, and its revenues, should be handed over to the descendants of Fatimah i.e. Muhammad bin Yahya bin Husayn bin Zayd bin ‘Ali bin Husayn bin ‘Ali bin Abi Talib, because Amirul Mo’minin has made them trustees for the administration of these matters.

So know that this is according to the view of Amirul Mo’minin and it has been put in his mind by Allah because of the obedience and service that he performs and of the determination that Allah gave him through the nearness that he enjoys with Allah and His Prophet. You should appraise Mubarak Tabari of this and deal with Muhammad bin Yahya and Muhammad bin Abdullah whom Amirul Mo’minin has appointed trustees in the same manner in which you had held dealing with Mubarak Tabari, and co-operate with them in the matter in which, if Allah wills, the development, improvement and prosperity of Fadak is involved, and increase of its produce is aimed at. (page 50).

The edict has been written on Wednesday the 2nd day of Zi’qadah in the year 210 A.H. But when Mutawakkil became the caliph, he reversed the position of Fadak.

>From narration 9, an edict of Caliph Mamun has been given. He wrote to his Governor at Medina, Qasim bin Ja’far to restore Fadak to- the descendants of Fatimah. In it Mamun has clearly written that the Holy Prophet had gifted Fadak to Fatimah. He has also written that during the days of Haj it was announced that if the Holy Prophet made any promise to someone he should say so, and the words of those making such claims were accepted and no witnesses were asked for. As such, Fatimah argued that her claim should be accepted and she should be given what had been reserved for her by the Holy Prophet. But alas, it was not done. Everyone among the common people was given according to his claim, without any witness as called for, but the daughter of the Holy Prophet, for whose truthful- ness Allah revealed the verse of Purification (Vide, al-Qur’an, 33 33) in the Holy Qur’an, was made to produce witnesses, and on presentation of the witnesses also, the claim was disallowed.

A Short History of Fadak after the Martyrdom of Fatimah (sa)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The motive which causes us to further pursue the history of Fadak and to extract the continuation of events after it for a period of three centuries from the texts of the historical books is to clarify three questions

a. The rule of annulment of inheritance from prophets made by the Holy Prophet (S), in other words, that the property of the Holy Prophet (S) is a part of the public treasurey and belongs to all Muslims. This was claimed by the first Caliph Abu Bakr, and was rejected by his successors, both by the next two caliphs (Umar and Uthman), and by the Umayyads and the Abbasids. We must consider that the lawfulness and rightfulness of their caliphate depended upon the correctness

b. Imam ‘Ali (as) and the descendants of Fatimah (sa) never had any hesitation regarding the rightfulness and justifiability of their claim. They insisted and confirmed that Fatimah (sa) had always been right and that Abu Bakr’s claim had always been rejected, and they did not yield to the false claim.

c. Whenever one of the Caliphs made a decision to put into effect Allah’s command, in regards to Fadak, to observe justice and equity, and to restore the right to the entitled one in conformity with Islamic rules, he used to return back the Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah (sa) and to hand it over to them.

1. Umar was the most harsh person in keeping Fatimah (sa) from Fadak and her inheritance as he himself confessed:

When the Messenger of Allah (S) died I came along with Abu Bakr to ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib, and said: ‘ What do you have to say about what has been left by the Messenger of Allah? ‘, He replied: ‘ We have the most rights with the Holy Prophet (S). ‘ I (Umar) said: ‘ Even those properties of Khaibar?’

He said: ‘ Yes, even those of Khaybar. ‘ I said: ‘ Even those of Fadak? ‘, He replied: ‘ Yes, even those of Fadak.’ Then I said: ‘By Allah, we say no, even if you cut our necks with saws.’

Sunni reference:

- Majma al Zawaid, vol 9 pp 39-40

As mentioned in the previous article, Umar took the document of Fadak and tore it up. But when Umar became caliph (13/634-23/644) he gave back the Fadak to the inheritors of the Holy Prophet (S). Yaqut al Hamawi, the famous historian and geographer, following the event of Fadak said:

Then, when Umar ibn al Khattab became the caliph and gained victories and the Muslims had secured abundanr wealth (i.e the public treasury satisifed the caliphate’s needs), he made his judgement contrary to that of his predecessor, and that was to give it (Fadak) back to the Prophet’s heirs. At that time ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and Abbas ibn Abd al Muttalib disputed Fadak. ‘Ali said that the Holy Prophet (S) had bestowed it on Fatimah (sa) during his life time. Abbas denied and used to say, ‘This was in the possesion of the Holy Prophet (S), and I am sharing with his heirs.’ They were disputing this with among each other and asked Umar to settle the case: ‘Both of you are more conscious and aware to your problem; but I only give it to you.’ (See note for this para)

Sunni references:

- Mujam al Buldan, vol 4 p 238-9
- Wafa al Wafa, vol 3 p 999
- Tadhib al Tadhib, vol 10 p 124
- Lisan al Arab, vol 10 p 473
- Taj al Arus, vol 7 p 166

(Note: The last part of the historic event has been inserted after wards to demonstrate the matter of inheritance by the brother of the deceased or the paternal uncle of the deceased when he has no sons. problem is a matter of dispute between Islamic Sects. The judicial and the jursipridencial discussion is seperate from our goal. We are only discussing the matter historicaly. Abbas had no claim in this case because he had not shown that he had a share in this property, nor did his descendants consider it to be among their assests even when they had become caliphs and were reigning. They owed this estate either in their position as Caliphs, or they used to return it to the descendants of Fatimah (sa) when they had decided to be just governors.)

2. When Uthman ibn Affan became the caliph after the death for Umar he granted Fadak to Marwan ibn al Hakam, his cousin, and this was one of the causes of the vindictive feelings among the Muslims towards Uthman, which ended in the revolt against him and his murder.

Sunni references:

- as Sunan al Kubra, vol 6 p 301
- Wafa al Wafa, vol 3 p 1000
- Sharah, ibn Al Hadid, vol 1 p 198
- al Maarif, al Qutaybah, p 195
- al Iqd al Farid, vol 4 p 283, 485
- at Tarikh, Abul Fida, vol 1 p 168
- Ibn al Wardi, vol 1 p 204

In this way Fadak fell into the possesion of Marwan; he used to sell crops and products for at least ten thousand dinars per year, and if in some years its income decreased, this drop was not very pronounced. This was its usual profit untill the time of the Caliphate of Umar ibn Abd al Aziz (in 100.718).

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat, Ibn Sa’ad, vol 5 p 286-7
- Subh al Asha, vol 4 p 291

3. When Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan became the Caliph, he became the partner with Marwan and others in Fadak. He alloted one thrid to Marwan, and one thrid to Amr ibn Uthman ibn Affan and one thrid to his son, Yazid. This was after the death of Imam Hasan (as). In the words of the Sunni historian, Yaqubi

To Make Angry The Progeny Of The Holy Prophet

Sunni reference:

- at Tarikh, Yaqubi, vol 2 p 199

It was in the possesion of the three above mentioned persons until Marwan became Caliph and then he completely took over posession over it. Then he donated to his two sons, Abd al Malik and Abd al Aziz. Then Abd al Aziz donated his share to his son (Umar ibn Abd al Aziz).

4. When Umar ibn Abd al Aziz becmae the Caliph he delivered a lecture and mentioned that: ‘Verily, Fadak was among the things that Allah had bestowed on His Messenger, and no horse, nor camel was pricked against it.’

As he mentioned the case of Fadak during the past caliphates he said: Then Marwan gave it to my father and to Abd al Malik. It became mine and and al Walids and Sulaymans (two sons of Abd al Malik).

When al Walid became caliph I asked him for his share and he gave it to me. Then I gathered the three parts and I possess no property more preferable to me than this. Be witness that I returned it to its original state. He wrote this to his governer in Medina (Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Hazm) and ordered him to carry out what he had declared in the speech be delivered. Then Fadak came into the possession of the children of Fatimah (sa).

This was the first removal of oppresion by returning Fadak to the Children of ‘Ali (as).

Shi’a reference:

- al Awail, Abu Hilal al Askari, p 209

5. When Yazid ibn Abd al Malik became caliph (101/720-105/724) he seized Fadak and they (the children of Imam ‘Ali (as)) were dispossesed. It fell into the possesion of the Banu Marwan as it had been previously. They passed it from hand to hand untill their caliphate expired and passed away to Banu al Abbas.

6. When Abul Abbas Abdullah as Saffah became the first caliph of the Abbasid Dynasty (132/749-136/754) he gave back Fadak to the Children of Fatimah (sa) and submitted it to Abdullah ibn al Hasan ibn al Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.

7. When Abu Jafar Abdullah al Mansur ad Dawaniqi (136/754-158/775) became the calpih, he seized Fadak from the children of Fatimah (sa).

8. When Muhammad al Mahdi ibn al Mansur became caliph (158/775-169/785) he returned Fadak to the children of Fatimah (sa).

9. The Musa al Hadi ibn al Mahdi (169/785-170/786) and his brother Harun ar Rashid (170/786-193/809) seized it from the descendants of Fatimah (sa) and it was in the possesion of Banu al Abbas untill the time that al-Mamun became the Caliph (193/831-218/833)

10. al Mamun al Abbasi gave it back to the descendants of Fatimah (sa). It is narrtaed through al Mahdi ibn Sabiq that: al Mamun one day sat to hear the complaints of the people and to judgein cases. The first utter complaint which he received caused him to weep when he looked at it. He asked where the attorney of Fatimah (sa), daughter of the Holy Prophet (S) was? An old man stood up and came forth, arguing with him about Fadal and al Mamun also argued with him untill he overcame al Mamun.

Shi’a reference:

- al Awail, p 209

al Mamun summoned the Islamic Jurisprudents and interrogated them about the claim of Banu Fatimah. They narrated to al Mamun that the Holy Prophet (S) gifted Fadak to Fatimah (sa) and that after the death of the Holy Prophet (S), Fatimah (sa) demanded Abu Bakr to return Fadak to her. He asked her to bring witnesses to her claim reagrding the gift. She brought, ‘Ali, al Hasan, al Hussain and Umm Ayman, as her witnesses. They witnessed the case in her favor. Abu Bakr rejected their witness.

Then al Mamun asked the scholars: ‘What is your view about Umm Ayman?’ They replied:’She is a woman to whom the Holy Prophet (S) bore witness that she is an inhabitant of Paradise.’ al Mamun disputed at lenght with them and forced them to accept the arguments put forth by proofs till they confessed that ‘Ali, al Hasan, al Hussain and Umm Ayman had witnessed only the truth. When they unanimiously accepted this matter, he restored Fadak to the descendants to Fatimah (sa).

Sunni reference:

- at Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 3 p 195-96

11. During the period of al Mamun’s caliphate Fadak was in the possesion of Fatimah’s descendants, and this was confirmed during the caliphate of al Mutasim (218/833-227/842) and al Wathiq (227/842 - 232/847).

12. When Jafar al Mutawakkil became the caliph (232/847-247/861), the one among them who was marked as an arch enemy of the progeny of the Holy Prophet (S), both of those alivce and of those dead, gave the order to recapture Fadak from the descendants of Fatimah (sa).

Shi’a references:

- Kashf al Ghumnah, vol 2 p 121-2
- al Bihar, vol 8 p 108
- Safinah al Bihar, vol 2 p 351

13. When al Mutawwakil was killed and al Muntasir (his son) succeeded him (247/861-248/862), he gave the order to restore Fadak to the descendants of al Hasan and al Husayn and delivered the donations of Abu Talib to them and this was in 248/862.

Sunni references (For 3 - 13)

- Futuh al Buldan, vol 1 p 33-8
- Mujam al Buldan, vol 4 p 238-40
- at Tarikh, Yaqubi, vol 2 p 199, vol 3 p 48, 195-96
- al Kamil, Ibn Atheer, vol 2 p 224-225, vol 3 p 457, 497, vol 5 p 63 vol 7 p 116
- al Iqd al Farid, vol 4 p 216, 283, 435
- Wafa al Wafa, vol 3 p 999-1000
- al Tabaqat al Kabir, vol 5 p 286-7
- Tarikh ul Khulafa, p 231-32, 356
- Muruj ad Dhahab, vol 4 p 82
- Sirah Umar ibn Abd al Aziz, Ibn al Jawzi, p 110
- Sharah, ibn Al Hadid, vol 16 p 277-78

14. It seemed that Fadak was recaptured from the descendants of Fatimah (sa) after the death of al Muntasir, because Abul Hasan ‘Ali ibn Isa al Iribili (died 692/1293) mentioned: al Mutadid (279/892-289/902) retured Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah.

Then he mentioned that al Muqtafi (289/902-295/908) seized it from them. It is said also that al Muqtadir (295/908-320/932) returned it to them.

Shi’a references:

- Kash al Ghummah, vol 2 p 122
- al Bihar, vol 8 p 108

15. After this long period of recapturing and restoration, Fadak was returned to the posession of the usurpers and their heirs as it seems, no further mention was made in History and the curtain fell!

Is it (then that) the judgement of (the times of pagan) ignorance they desire? And who (else) can be better than Allah to judge for a people of assured faith. (5:50)

Muawiyah and Abusing Imam Ali (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

What The Prophet Said About Those Who Fight, Hate, Or Abuse His Ahlul-Bayt

The Messenger of Allah said: "Loving ‘Ali is the sign of belief, and hating ‘Ali is the sign of hypocrisy."

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, v1, p48;
- Sahih Tirmidhi, v5, p643;
- Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p142;
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal v1, pp 84,95,128
- Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v1, part 1, p202
- Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p185
- Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v14, p462

This tradition of Prophet was popular to the extent that some of the companions used to say:

"We recognized the hypocrites by their hatred of ‘Ali."

Sunni references:

- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p639, Tradition #1086
- al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p47
- al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v3, p242
- Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p91

Also Muslim in his Sahih narrated on the authority of Zirr that: ‘Ali (ra) said: By him who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessing be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter XXXIV, p46, Tradition #141

Abu Huraira narrated: The Prophet (S) looked toward ‘Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn, and Fatimah, and said: "I am in the state of war with those who will fight you, and in the state of peace with those who are peaceful to you.”

Sunni references:

(1) Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p699
(2) Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p52
(3) Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p767, Tradition #1350
(4) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p149
(5) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p169
(6) al-Kabir, by Tabarani, v3, p30, also in al-Awsat
(7) Jamius Saghir, by al-Ibani, v2, p17
(8) Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v7, p137
(9) Sawai’q al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p221
(10) Talkhis, by al-Dhahabi, v3, p149
(11) Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p25
(12) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6145
(13) Others such as Ibn Habban, etc.

It is the well-known fact in the history that Muawiyah fought Imam ‘Ali (as). And based on the above tradition of the Prophet(S) the Prophet has declared war on Muawiyah. How can we still love a person whom the Prophet has declared war on him?

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever hurts ‘Ali, has hurt me"

Sunni references:

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, p483
- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p580, Tradition #981
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p129
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p263
- Ibn Habban, Ibn Abd al-Barr, etc.

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever reviles/curses ‘Ali, has reviled/cursed me"

Sunni reference:

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p121, who mentioned this tradition is Authentic.
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p323
- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p594, Tradition #1011
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p130
- Mishkat al-Masabih, English version, Tradition #6092
- Tarikh al-Khulafa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173
- and many others such as Tabarani, Abu Ya’la, etc.

Muawiyah Instituting The Curse Of Imam ‘Ali (as)

Muawiyah not only fought Imam ‘Ali, he cursed Imam ‘Ali as well. Furthermore, he did force/make everybody to curse ‘Ali (as). To prove it, we begin with

Sahih Muslim:

Narrated Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas: Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan, give order to Sa’d, and told him: "What prevents you that you are refraining from cursing Abu Turab (nickname of ‘Ali)?”Sa’d replied: "Don’t you remember that the Prophet said three things about (the virtue of) ‘Ali? So I will never curse ‘Ali."

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Virtues of Companions, Section of Virtues of ‘Ali, Arabic, v4, p1871, Tradition #32.

For the English version of Sahih Muslim, see Chapter CMXCVI, p1284,

Tradition #5916

 أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدا ، فقال: مامنعك أن تسب أبا التراب ، فقال: أما ما ذكرت ثلاثا قالهن له رسول الله (ص) فلن أسبه 

The above tradition, by the way, indicates that Muawiyah was surprised why Sa’d does not follow his order of cursing ‘Ali, like others do. This shows that cursing ‘Ali was a habit (Sunnah) for people at that time. Who made this Sunnah? Was it ‘Ali, or those who fought him? Now, who fought against ‘Ali? Wasn’t he Muawiyah (the beloved companion of Wahhabis)? So this implies that Muawiyah did innovate that habit (cursing ‘Ali as Sunnah).

Below is more references in Sahih Muslim about Sunnah cursing Imam ‘Ali (as), to prove that people were urged/forced to curse ‘Ali in public, otherwise they would face a costly sentence. It is narrated on the authority of Abu Hazim that:

The Governor of Medina who was one of the members of the house of Marwan called Sahl Ibn Sa’d, and ordered him to curse ‘Ali. But Sahl refused to do so. The governor said: "If you don’t want to curse ‘Ali, just say God curse Abu Turab (the nickname of ‘Ali).”Sahl said: "‘Ali did not like any name for himself better than Abu Turab, and ‘Ali used to become very happy when somebody would call him Abu Turab.”

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Virtues of Companions, Section of Virtues of ‘Ali, Arabic version, v4, p1874, Tradition #38.

Here is the Arabic text of the above tradition given by Sahih Muslim:

استعمل على المدينة رجل من آل مروان ، قال فدعا سهل بن سعد فأمره أن يشتم عليا ، قال: فأبى سهل ، فقال له: أمّا إذ أبيت فقل: لعن الله أبا التراب. فقال سهل: ما كان لعليٍّ اسم أحب إليهِ من أبي التراب و إن كان ليفرح إذا دُعيَّ به.

Cursing Imam ‘Ali (as) was an order from the beginning of Muawiyah’s reign for 65 years. He was Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz (may Allah be easy with him) who canceled this order after more than half a century. Some historians even believe that the Umayyah descendants themselves killed (poisoned) Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz, because he changed their Sunnah, one of which was cursing ‘Ali.

(See the Sunni book entitled "History of the Saracens,”by Amir ‘Ali, Chapter X, pp 126-127).

One of the ugliest innovations that started during the reign of Muawiyah was that Muawiyah himself, and through his order to his Governors, they used to insult Imam ‘Ali (as) during the Sermons in the Mosques. This was even done on the pulpit of the mosque of the Prophet in Medina in front of the grave of the Prophet Muhammad (May Allah bless him and his Progeny), so that even the dearest Companions of the Prophet (S), and Imam ‘Ali (as), his family and his near relatives used to hear these swears with their ears.

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, v4, p188
- History of Ibn Kathir, v3, p234; v4, p154
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, v8, p259; v9, p80

On insulting ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib and cursing him during the Umayah period starting in Muawiyah’s reign, it is reported that:

"‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (ra) was cursed on the pulpits (manabir) of the east and west...", during the time of Muawiyah.

Sunni reference: Mu’jam al-Buldan, al-Hamawi, v5, p38

In her letter, Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet (S) wrote to Muawiyah: "...You are cursing Allah and His messenger on your minbar, and that is because you are cursing ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib and whomever loves him, and I am a witness that Allah and His messengerloved him.”But no one paid any attention to what she said.

Sunni reference: al-Aqd al-Fareed, v2, p300

"That it was in the days of Bani Umayyah, more than seventy thousand minbar (in mosques) upon which they cursed ‘Ali Ibn Abi-Talib, in some of what Muawiyah made a Sunnah for them."

Sunni references:

- Rabeea’ al-Abrar, al-Zamakhshari
- al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti

al-Shaikh Ahmad al-Hafdhi al-Shafi’i, composed 9 verses of poetry expanding on what al-Suyuti has reported in the previous quote, I translated the first three verses:

And Shaikh al-Suyuti told:

That it was what they made into a "Sunnah". Seventy thousand mibar plus ten from the top of which they cursed Haydara (‘Ali). And next to this the greatest (sins) look small, but blame ought to be directed.

Let us now see the opinion of the son of Yazid about his father and his grandfather, who was the witness from within the royal family! ...When (Yazid) offered the kingdom (throne) to his son, Muawiyah the second, in order that the flag of caliphate continues to wave in the house of Abi Sufyan!!

After his death, Muawiyah the second, gathered the people on a well known day, he stood in them preaching, he said:

"My grandfather Muawiyah stripped the command from those who deserved it, and from one who is more justified of it, for his relation to the Messenger of Allah and his being first in Islam, and that is ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, he (Muawiyah) took over it by your help as you are fully aware."

"Then following it my father Yazid wore the command after him, and he did not deserve it. He quarreled with the son of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah, and by that he shortened his own life... He rode his whim and hope left him behind.”

Then he cried and continued: "Surely, the greatest problems of us is our knowledge of his bad behavior and his awful ending, and that he killed the progeny (Itrah) of the Messenger of Allah, and he permitted drinking alcohol, and he fought in the sanctuary of Mecca, and destroyed the Ka’ba.”

"And I am not the one who is dressing up for your command, nor the one to be responsible for your followers... You choose for yourselves..!!"

Sunni references:

- Khulafaa al-Rasool, by Khalid Muhammad Khalid, p531 (The above quote includes author’s punctuation.)

- Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of Ch. 11, pp 336

Muawiyah and Yazid murdering Imam al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (as) by poison, reported by many, here are a few Sunni references:

1. Tathkarat al-Khawass, Sibt ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 191-194.
2. Ibn Abd al-Barr, in his "Seera"
3. al-Suddi
4. al-Sha’bi
5. Abu Nu’aym

No reference is required that Yazid and his gang murdered the other son of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the grandson of the Messenger of Allah (S): Imam al- Husayn (as) along with 70+ of his family members and loyals.

More Sunni References On The Mischief Of Muawiyah

It is reported from Abdullah, son of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal saying:

I asked my father about ‘Ali and Muawiyah. He (Ahmad Ibn Hanbal) answered: "Know that ‘Ali had a lot of enemies who tried hard to find a fault in him, but they found it not. As such, they joined a man (i.e., Muawiyah, as given in the footnotes) who verily fought him battled him, and they praised him (Muawiyah) extravagantly setting a snare for themselves for him.

Sunni references:

- al-Toyuriyyat, by al-Salafi, from Abdullah Ibn Ahmad Hanbal
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, section 4, p197
- History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p202

al-Tabari reported:

When Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan put al-Mughairah Ibn Shubah in charge of Kufah in Jumada 41 (September 2- October 30, 661), he summoned him. After praising and glorifying God, he said:

"Now then, indeed a forbearing person has been admonished in the past... The wise might do what you want without instruction. Although I have wanted to advise you about many things, I left them alone, trusting in your discernment of what pleases me, what helps my regime and what sets my subjects (raiyyah) on the right path. I would continue to advise you about a quality of yours- do not refrain from abusing ‘Ali and criticizing him, not from asking God’s mercy upon Uthman and His forgiveness for him. Continue to shame the companions of ‘Ali, keep at a distance, and don’t listen to them. Praise the faction of Uthman, bring them near, and listen to them."

Sunni reference: History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, Execution of Hujr Ibn Adi, v18, pp 122-123

Also:

The Messenger of Muawiyah then came to them with orders to release six and to kill eight, telling them: We have been ordered to let you disavow ‘Ali and curse him. If you do so, we shall release you, and if you refuse, we shall kill you.

Sunni reference: History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, v18, p149

More from Sahih Muslim:

Allah’s messenger (S) said to Ammar: "A group of rebels would kill you."

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6968

Also:

Umm Salama narrated that Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) said: "A band of rebels would kill Ammar.”

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6970

Do you know that Ammar, the great companion of the Prophet was martyred in the battle of Siffin by Muawiyah soldiers, at the age of ninety-three? Is it clear, now, that The gang of Muawiyah were rebels? Do you know what is the sentence of rebels (Taghee) mentioned in Qur’an?

It is interesting to see that the English translator of Sahih Muslim (Abdul Hamid Siddiqui) has written in the footnote of the above traditions that:

This narration is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hadrat ‘Ali and his opponents, Hadrat ‘Ali was on the right as Ammar Ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in the camp of Hadrat ‘Ali. (Footnote of Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, p1508).

Do I need to comment?!

The very first head that was amputated from the body during the Islamic period was of Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra). Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad narrates a tradition which has also been mentioned in the

Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’d, and is as follows:

"In the Battle of Sifin, when the head of Ammar Yasir (ra) was cut off and taken to Muawiyya, two people were arguing over it, each one claimed that he had killed Ammar."

Sunni references:

- Musnad Ahmad (Pub. in Dar al-Maarif, Egypt 1952), Tradition #6538, #6929
- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v3, p253

Finally, I would like to finish this article by the following two traditions:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: If one while praying between the Rukn and Maqam (near Ka’bah) and fasting, dies but with the hate of the family of Muhammad, he will enter the Fire. And he who abuses my Ahlul-Bayt is verily an apostate and is driven out of Islam. And he who inflicts pain on my progeny upon him is the curse of Allah. And he who hurts me by hurting my progeny has verily hurt/angered Allah.

Certainly Allah has made Paradise forbidden to he who does injustice to my Ahlul-Bayt, or kills them, or assists against them, or abuses them.

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, p357 who said this tradition is authentic.

Also:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever curses (or verbally abuses) ‘Ali, he has, in fact, cursed me, and whoever has cursed me, he has cursed Allah, and whoever has cursed Allah, then Allah will throw him into the Hell-fire."

Sunni reference: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p33

Thus Muawiyah and his associates were, in fact, cursing the Prophet (S), and by cursing the Prophet, they were cursing Allah (SWT), and by cursing Allah, they shall enter the hellfire! By Allah, they will be asked to account for what they’ve said! That is a promise by Allah (SWT) which He shall not break!

"And do not think Allah to be heedless of what the unjust do; He only respites them upto a day on which the eyes will be fixedly open.”(Qur’an 14:42)

Wassalam

More On Muawiyah

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Here is more evidence on Muawiyah from the History and Hadith:

On His Character

al-Hasan al-Basri said:

Muawiyah had four flaws, and any one of them would have been a serious offense:

1. His appointment of trouble makers for this community so that he stole its rule without consultation with its members, while there was a remnant of the Companions and possessors of virtue among them.

2. His appointment of his son as his successor after him, a drunkard and a winebibber who wears silk and plays tunburs.

3. His claim about Ziyad (as his son), while the Messenger of God (S) has said: ‘The child belongs to the bed, and the adulterer should be stoned.’

4. His killing of Hujr and his companions. Woe unto him twice for Hujr and his companions.

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, English version, The Events of Year 51 AH, v8, p154
- History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p242
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v8, p130 who mentions the first crime as: "His fighting ‘Ali."
- History of Ibn Kathir, v3, p242
- Khilafat Mulukiyat, Syed Abul Ala Maududi, pp 165-166

Here is some background on the Tragedy of Hujr:

Who Was Hujr Ibn ‘Adi?

In an effort to eradicate freedom of expression, Muawiyah started off with the killing of Hujr, who was a famous Tabi’i and the respected Sahabi of Imam ‘Ali (as). During the time of Muawiyah when Imam ‘Ali (as) was being cursed from the pulpits of the mosques, it caused a lot of pain and grief to the Muslims, but people were patient. However Hujr in Kufah could not further bear this and in resistance Hujr used to praise Imam ‘Ali (as) and curse Muawiyah.

Mughairah who was the Governor of Kufah at that time was considerate towards Hujr. However, during the Governership of Ziyad, when Basra was also included with Kufah, differences emerged between Ziyad and Hujr. Ziyad used to swear (say bad words) and Hujr used to reply to Ziyad.

During this period Hujr also corrected Ziyad when he delayed the Friday Prayer. Eventually Hujr along with his twelve companions were arrested on the following charges

- Hujr had organized a group and he used to swear at Muawiyah
- He instigates people to fight against Muawiyah
- He claims that the Caliphate belongs to Imam ‘Ali and his progeny (as)
- He supports Abu Turab (nickname of Imam ‘Ali (as))
- He sends his blessings on Imam ‘Ali (as)

So under these charges, these personalities were sent to Muawiyah, and Muawiyah ordered their killing. Before their execution, the executors said to them:

We have been ordered that if you show negative feelings towards ‘Ali and curse him you shall be free to go, otherwise you shall have to die (shall be killed).

Upon hearing this Hujr and his companions refused to do what they were asked to do, and Hujr replied:

I can’t utter those words from my tongue that would anger my Lord!

Following this they were killed, with the exception of Abdurrahman Ibn Hassaan who was sent by Muawiyah to Ziyad with the order that Ziyad himself should brutally kill him, and thereby, he was buried alive.

Sunni references:

- Histroy of al-Tabari, v4, pp 190-206
- al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v1, p135
- History of Ibn Kathir, v3, pp 234-242
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, v8, pp 50-55
- History of Ibn Khaldoon, v3

Reviving The Customs Of The Jahiliyyah

Amputations of the head and moving the heads from one place to another, the mistreatment of the dead bodies out of sheer passion of revenge, that was prevalent during the days of ignorance (al-Jahiliyyah), started again among the Muslims during this era.

Case 1

The very first head that was amputated from the body during the Islamic period was of Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra), the famous companion of the Messenger of Allah (S). Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad narrates a tradition as follows, that has also been mentioned in the Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’d that:

In the Battle of Siffin, when the head of Ammar Yasir (ra) was cut off and was taken to Muawiyah, two people were arguing over it, each one claiming that he had killed Ammar.

Sunni references:

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Traditions #6538, #6929 Printed in Dar al- Maarif, Egypt 1952

- al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v3, p253

Case 2

The second head that was amputated from the body was for Umro Ibn al- Hamaq, who was among the companions of the prophet (Allah’s blessings on him and his cleansed progeny). Muawiyah alleged that he has participated in the assassination of Uthman. When efforts were carried out for his arrest, he hid in a cave, where a snake bit him. The people who were in his pursuit cut off the head from the dead body and took it to Ziyad. He then sent it to Muawiyah in Damascus, where the head was roamed around the city and was finally presented to his wife in her lap.

Sunni references:

- al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v6, p25
- al-Isti’ab, v2, p440
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, v8, p48
- Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, v8, p24

Case 3

The same atrocity was committed against Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr (ra) who was the Governor for Imam ‘Ali (as) in Egypt. When Muawiyah captured Egypt, he was arrested and was killed. His dead body was placed in a belly of a dead donkey and then was brutally burnt.

Sunni references:

- al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v1, p235
- History of al-Tabari, v4, p79
- History of Ibn Kathir, v3, p180
- History of Ibn Khaldoon, v2, p182

Case 4

After this, it became a tradition for people who sought vengeance after their enemies were killed. Imam Husayn’s (as) head was amputated, and was taken from Karbala to Kufah and from Kufah to Damascus. The body of Imam Husayn (as) was brutally ruined by the running of horses.

Sunni references
- History of al-Tabari, v4, pp 349-351,356
- History of Ibn Kathir, v3, pp 296-298
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, v8, pp 189-192

On Some Of His Accounts

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti worte:

Ibn Asakir records on the authority of Hamid-b Hilal, that Akil the son of Abu Talib begged of ‘Ali and said , ‘ I am poor and needy, therefore give unto me. ‘ He replied, ‘ wait untill my stipend cometh with that of the other Muslims, and I will give unto thee with them,’ but he was importunate and ‘Ali said to a man, ‘ take him by the hand and go with him to the shops of the people of the market and say, ‘ break these locks and take what is in these shops, ‘ Akil said, ‘ dost thou wish to make me a thief ?, ‘

‘Ali retorted, ‘ and dost thou wish to make me a thief that I should take the property of the Muslims and give it to thee, and not to them ?. ‘ He answered, ‘ I shall assuredly go to Muawiya. ‘ He replied,’ that as thou wilest, ‘ and he went to Muawiya and begged of him, and he gave him a hundred thousand dirhams and said, ‘ get up on the pulpit and mention what ‘Ali hath given to thee and what I have fiven thee.’ Then he mounted, and praised God and glorified him, and said, O people I tell ye, verily I tempted ‘Ali in regard to his religion and he preferred his religion, and verily I tempted Muawiyah in regard to his religion and he preferred me to his religion.

Sunni refernce: History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p208

al-Suyuti also recorded:

al-Sha’abi said that the first who preached seated to the people was Muawiyah and that was when his flesh had increased and his stomach had grown large. (Recorded by Ibn Abi Shaybah). Az Zuhri states that Muawiya was the first who introduced the discourse before prayers on the Eid. (Abdur Razzaq in his Musannaf). And Said-b-ul Musayyab says that he was the first who introduced the call to prayers on the Eid, (Ibn Abi Shaybah), and he who diminished the number of Takbirs. Sunni refernce: History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p204

Raising Qur’an On Spear

In addition to the atrocities commited by Muawiyah, perhaps his act of raising the Qur’an on the spear against Imam ‘Ali (as) in the Battle of Siffin undoubtedly reflects on his character as a ruler, a person that would resort to any means to make his plan a success. He played with the book of Allah in order to deceive the naive people. As a result of this trick, al-Khawarij (those who believed Imam ‘Ali is politheist and unbeliever) emerged in the history of Islam.

Ibn Sa’d reports a tradition from al-Zuhri that:

At the eve of the Battle of Siffin when fight was at it’s peak and people had started to loose hope, Amr Ibn al-Aas said to Muawiyah: Accept my proposal and order the people (i.e., army of Muawiyah) to open the Qur’an (i.e., raise the Qur’an on spears) and say, O people of Iraq, we call you towards the Qur’an, and we decide by virtue of what is contained in it from al-Hamd to al-Naas. This act will create dissension in the ranks and file of the Iraqis and will create hopes for the people of Shaam. Thereby Muawiyah accpeted his proposal. (to do as he said).

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’d, v4, p255 as per
- Khilafat Mulikiyat, Abul Ala Maududi, p345

The same fact has been mentioned in great detail by al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, Ibn al-Athir, and Ibn Khaldoon. The purpose behind the propsal was to create dissension in the ranks and file of Imam ‘Ali’s (as) army, and even if they accept the proposal (of calling towards the Qur’an), Muawiya’s army would manage to buy time to delay the battle.

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, v4, p34
- al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, by Ibn Katir, v7, p272
- Histoty of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p160
- History of Ibn Khaldoon, v2, p174
- Khilafat Mulukiyat, Maududi, p345

Muawiyah And The Origin Of The Word "Al-Jama’ah"

al-Tabari recorded that: Sajah remained with Banu Taghlib untill Muawiya transferred them in his days on the "year of the union (al-Jama’ah)". When the people of Iraq agreed (to recognize) Muawiyah (as caliph) after ‘Ali, Muawiyah took to expelling from al-Kufa those who had been vehement in the cause of ‘Ali, and to settle in their homes those people of Syrai and al-Basrah and the Jazirah who were most vehement in his own cause; it was they who were called the "transfers”in the garrison towns.

(The translator of the work writes in reference to the year of the union as follows:)

Aam al-Jama’ah the year 40 A.H/A.D 660-661, so called because the Muslim Community came together in recognizing Muawiyah, ending the political division of the first civil war. Pace Caetani, 648; see Abu Zahrah al-Dimashqi, Tarikh, 188 (no. 101) and 190 (no. 105)

Sunni reference:

History of al-Tabari, English version, v10, p97

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentions this very fact, with the utmost clarity in his work, History of the Caliphs (Tarikhul Khulafa) with the following words:

al-Dhahabi says that Ka’ab died before Muawiyah was made caliph, and that Ka’ab was right in what he said, for Muawiyah continued for twenty years, and none of the princess of the earth contended with him, unlike others who came after him, for they had opponents and portions of their dominions passed out of their sway. Muawiyah went forth against ‘Ali as has preceded, and assumed the title of Caliph.

Then he marched against al-Hasan, who abdicted in his favor. He therefore became firmly eshtablished in his Caliphate from Rabi’iul Akhir or Jumadal Awwal 41 AH. The year was therefore called the Year of the Union (al-Jama’ah), on account of the gathering of the people under one Caliph. During this year Muawiyah appointed Marwan Ibn al- Hakam over Medina.

Sunni refernce: History of the Caliphs, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, English version, p204 (Chapter of Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan)

The Scribe Of Revelation

A a pro-Umayad mentioned that: Muawiyah was a scribe of the revelation. Is your character judgement better then that of the Prophet?

In the previous parts, I have given the opinion of the Prophet (S) about those who will fight Ahlul-Bayt based of the most authentic Sunni collections of the traditions. According to the opinion of the Prophet, such people were hypocrites and infidels.

Muawiyah and his father Abu Sufyan were among those who fought the Prophet till last minutes and when they found that Mecca will be captured shortly and their turn is over, they decided to go under the guise of Islam to save their life and to destroy Islam from inside. This is what Abu Sufyan, his son Muawiyah and his grandson Yazid were trying to achieve every day and night. Now they suddenly became the Scribe of Revelation! Here is the reason behind it:

From the time the Caliphate fell into the hands of the Umayad, they strove to distort the truth and turn everything head over heels. They, thus, elevated to the zenith of power people who were, during the life of the Prophet (S), ordinary, with no special standing, while they ignored others who were at the peak of honor and nobility during the lifetime of the Prophet (S).

Their sole criterion in for honor and dishonor, was their intense enmity and excessive hatred for Muhammad (S) and the members of his household, ‘Ali, Fatimah, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, peace be upon them. The Umayad elevated the status, and fabricated false traditions, on the merits of every person who opposed the Prophet (S) and his Ahlul-Bayt whom Allah has purified and from whom He removed all abomination in Qur’an. They sought nearness to those who opposed the Prophet, accorded them high positions and grants so that they enjoyed favors and respect among the populace. They sought to denigrate, fabricate defects, falsify reports that denied the superiority and merits of anyone who used to love the Prophet (S) and would defend him.

Thus Umar Ibn al-Khattab, who used to dispute every command of the Prophet of Allah (S), even accusing the latter of hallucination in his last days, became the hero of Islam amongst the Muslims during the time of the Umayad dynasty.

On the other hand, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib who was, to him, what Aaron was to Moses, and who loved him, and who was loved by Allah and His Prophet, he who was the guardian of every believer, was cursed from the pulpits for eighty years. The effect of false propaganda reached to the point that when the news of assassination of Imam ‘Ali (as) during the Fajr prayer in Mosque reached to the people of Syria, they were surprised and asked if ‘Ali used to pray!

Similarly Aisha, who caused the Prophet of Allah (S) much torment and disobeyed his instructions and the instructions of her Lord, rose against the successor of the Messenger of Allah and caused the worst strife known to the Muslims, a strife which resulted in the death of thousands of Muslims, became the most famous lady in Islam, with religious rulings being accepted from her.

But Fatimah al-Zahra (sa), the leader of the women of this world and the world after, she for whom the Lord gets angry if she becomes angry, and she for whom the Lord is happy when she is happy, became a forgotten woman, and was buried in the secrecy of the night, after they had threatened to burn her, and after they forced the door of her house against her stomach, causing her to lose her child.

You can hardly find one amongst Sunnis who knows a single Hadith which she reported from her father. This is while their books are replete with the traditions of Aisha simply because she was the only woman who fought Imam ‘Ali (as).

Similarly, Yazid Ibn Muawiyah, Ziyad, the son of his father, Ibn Marjanah, Marwan, al-Hajjaj, Ibn al-Aas, and others from the accursed tree mentioned in Qur’an, and who were cursed by the tongue of the Prophet (S), they became the commanders of the believers and the guardians of their affairs.

As for al-Hasan and al-Husayn, the masters of the youths of paradise, the delights of the Prophet of this nation, the Imams from the progeny of the Prophet (S), the custodians of this Ummah, they were banished, imprisoned, murdered, and poisoned. In this way, Abu Sufyan the hypocrite, the leader in every battle that was waged against the Prophet, came to be praised and thanked.

As for Abu Talib, the protector and defender of the Prophet (S) with all that he had, who passed his life in hostility with his people and relatives for the sake of his nephew’s call, so much so that he spent three years in the enclave with the Prophet in the valley of Mecca, keeping his belief secret, for the benefit of Islam, that some bridges remained still open with the Quraish and so that they would not persecute the Muslims as they wished (he was like the believer from the family of Pharaoh who hid his belief; see Qur’an 40:28), Abu Talib’s alleged reward turns out to be a pair of slippers in the hellfire, his feet placed into it and his brain is popping out from the pain!!!

In this way, Mu’awiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan, who was the freed man, son of the freed man, the accursed one, and the son of an accursed one, he who used to play with the injunctions of Allah and His Prophet, not attaching any importance to it, he who used to murder the upright and innocent ones so as to pursue his vile goals and would revile the Prophet of Allah (S) while the Muslims would see and hear, became known as the scribe of revelation!!! They say that Allah entrusted His revelation to Gabriel, Muhammad and Muawiyah. He also came to be described as a man of wisdom, political acumen and reflection.

As for Abu Dharrr al-Ghifari, the earth did not carry nor the sky did put its shadow on anyone more truthful in speech than him; he was treated as a mischief monger. He was beaten, exiled and banished to Rabdha. Salman, Miqdad, Ammar and Hudaifah and all the sincere companions who took Imam ‘Ali as their leader and followed him, they met with punishment, banishment and murder.

Similarly, those who followed the school of the Caliphs, the followers of Muawiyah and the companions of the schools founded by the tyrannical rulers, they turned out to be Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’a and they represented Islam. Whoever opposed them was judged to be a disbeliever.

As for those who followed the school of the Ahlul-Bayt and followed the gate to the city of knowledge and the first one to accept Islam, he whom the truth revolved around wherever he was, those who followed the Ahlul- Bayt and the infallible Imams came to be considered as the people of innovation and misguidance, and whoever opposed and fought against them came to be seen as a Muslim.

Surely there is no power and no strength except with Allah, the Highest, and the most Powerful. Allah surely spoke the truth when He said:

"If it is said to them; ‘Make not any mischief on earth’, they say: ‘We are the righteous ones’. Certainly they are indeed the corrupt ones but they do not realize it. And if it is said to them: ‘Believe as other people have believed’ they say: ‘Shall we believe as the stupid ones believe’? They are the stupid ones, though they know it not.’“(Qur’an 2:13)

A Side Comment

A brother mentioned that one may kill another with good intention and with love towrd each other and both (the killer and the killed one) would go to Paradise. We have the example of Prophet Abraham (Ibrahim) who received commandment to kill his son, Ismail, though it was just a test and Allah wanted to test both of them, and finally they slaughtered a ship by Allah’s command.

The above incedent is true. However, there is a falacy hiden in the above argument. Abraham (as) was a prophet and the order (to sacrifice his son) was given by God through revelation. Also he did not fight with Isma’il, nor Ismail fought back. It was the order of Allah, and both father and son were submissive to that. There was no dispute between them.

But let me ask you this question: Did Talha and Zubair received revelation from God to kill people? Did Qur’an tell them to fight against their legitimate Caliph? If so, why not against the first three Caliphs? Did Muawiyah and Marwan received revelation of ordering people to curse Imam ‘Ali (as) and make it a popular habit of people? ... And finally, they slaughtered the whole household of Prophet (S) including his beloved son (grandson) in the same way. Do You believe when somebody is ready to kill the whole house-hold of prophet, he refrains or is afraid of cursing them? La Wallah...

- Is cursing Imam ‘Ali a sign of love and good intention?
- Is shedding the blood of thousands of innocent Muslims a sign of affection and obedience to Allah?
- Is erdicating the houshold of the Prophet a sign of love toward them?

Development of History and Hadith Collections

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Let us read the following tradition very carefully and judge for ourselves if we can ever give a possibility that such words have been uttered by the messenger of Allah. The tradition is in Sahih Muslim, and is written in the section of necessity of joining to the majority of people, and is as follows:

Narrated Hudayfh Ibn al-Yaman:

Prophet said: "There will come rulers after me who do not guide to my guidance and do not practice my Sunnah, and the hearts of some them are the hearts of Satans but they are in the body of human.”I said: "What should we do at that time?”Prophet (S) said: "You should just listen to them and obey those rulers. No matter if the hurt you and take your wealth, you should follow them and obey them."

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of al-Imaarah (chapter 33 for the Arabic version), Section of necessity of joining the majority, 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1476, Tradition #52.

This is the Arabic text of the above tradition narrated by Sahih Muslim:

يكون بعدي أئمة لا يهتدون بهداي ولا يستنون بسنتي، وسيقوم فيهم رجال قلوبهم قلوب الشياطين، في جثمان إنس، قال قلت: كيف أصنع يا رسول الله إن أدركت ذلك؟ قال: تسمع وتطيع، وإن ضرب ظهرك وأخذ مالك فاسمع وأطع

The above was just one example. There are more than 12 traditions similar to this in the same section of Sahih Muslim. Who sold such traditions as Sahih (authentic) to us? Aren’t they those who wanted to make their kingdom strong and away from any possible opposition? Any complaint is against the above alleged word of prophet, and those people are sentenced to death. In another tradition in the following section in Sahih Muslim, prophet has ordered to kill those who disobey these unjust rulers. Let us see where the origins of these books are, and who controlled the writing of them.

Muawiyah was the first one who turned his attention to write the history and collecting the fabricated Hadiths (traditions). He got a history of the ancients written by a person in the name of Ubayd whom he called him from Yemen.

Marwan who had been exiled by the Prophet for his anti-Islamic activities and who had a great influence with Uthman, was the implacable foe of ‘Ali. His son, Abdul Malik ascended the throne in year 65 AH, reestablished himself in year 73, and died in year 86. Abdul Malik was the one under whose funding finally a set of Islamic History, Hadith (tradition), and Tafsir (interpretation of the Qur’an) was provided. al-Zuhri was the first historian who wrote the history of Islam under the direct order and fund of Abdul Malik. He also wrote Hadith collection. The works of al-Zuhri was one of the main source for al-Bukhari. al-Zuhri was attached to the royal family of Abdul Malik, and was the tutor of his sons. (See "al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah,”by Shibli who is a great Sunni historian, part I, pp.13-17).

Among the students of al-Zuhri, two persons, namely Musa Ibn Uqbah, and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq became famous historians. The former was a slave of the house of Zubair. Although his history is not available today, it had been the most popular work on history for a long time. You will find its references in many history books on different subjects.

The second student, Muhammad Ibn Ishaq is the most famous historian for Sunnis. His biography of the Prophet, called "Sirah Rasul Allah", is still the accredited authority on the subject in the shape that was given to it by Ibn Hisham, and is known as "al-Sirah of Ibn Hisham".

al-Zuhri is the first who compiled the Hadith also. (See "al-Sirah al- Nabawiyyah,”by Shibli, part I, pp.13-17). All Sunni History and Hadith books written afterwards by other people were in great influence of these works.

The above gives evidence to the following facts:

1- Sunni Hadith and History books were first compiled under the direct order of Umayyah Kings,

2- The first authors were al-Zuhri, and his two students Musa and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq,

3- These authors were attached to the royal family of the Umayyah kings.

The hatred of the house of Umayyah against Bani Hashim (the house of Prophet and ‘Ali) is well-known. The wars of Abu Sufyan and his son Muawiyah against Prophet and ‘Ali respectively, also the horrible massacre of the grandson of prophet at Karbala by the grandson of Abu Sufyan, are only some of top items among the long list of such crimes. These are the criminals who FIRST wrote the history and Hadith books. (The books written afterwards by other people were in great influence of these works.) They fabricated many traditions to justify their deeds, and to say that prophet has ordered us to obey them even if they are unjust. What I quoted above was just one example of such traditions.

Who was the first one that used the term "Ahlussunnah and al-Jama’ah"? If one searches through the history books, he will find that they agreed to call the year in which Muawiyah seized the power as "The Year of al- Jama’ah”meaning the majority of people. It was called so, because the nation had already become divided into two factions after the death of Uthman: The Shi’a of ‘Ali and the followers of Muawiyah. When Imam ‘Ali (as) was martyred and Muawiyah took over the power, the year was called "al- Jama’ah". Out of these two parties, the majority leading by Muawiyah won the throne, and the other party was considered as a dangerous rival.

Therefore the name of "Ahl al-Sunnah and al-Jama’ah”indicates the Sunnah of Prophet merged by the innovations by Muawiyah, and the agreement on his leadership.

The Imams and members of Ahlul-Bayt who are the descendants of the Prophet, know more than anybody else about the Sunnah of their grandfather and what it entails, for as the proverb goes: "The people of Mecca know its paths better than anyone else". But the majority of people did/do not follow the 12 Imams whom prophet has mentioned their numbers (see Sahih al-Bukhari) and their names (see Sunni books like "Yanabi’ul Mawaddah”by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi). Despite the acknowledgment of al-Bukhari and Muslim about 12 Imams, they always stop at the four Caliphs.

Shi’a-Sunni And Scrutinizing Hadith

One major difference between the Shi’a and the Sunnis is that Sunnis accept any tradition from any companions no matter if these companions fought each other, abused each other, rebelled against their righteous Caliph, and or innovate new things in to the religion.

The Shi’a, however, believe that all the narrators in the chain of a document should have been just. If they have done any injustice in the history (such as those mentioned above) their narrations are void for us unless the same tradition has been narrated with another chain of narrators who all of them are proven to be trustworthy.

One of the Wahhabi friends said that Shi’a, when narrating a Hadith, only say the Imam so and so said, one of our friends said...Now how we can authenticise the Hadith?

If a person has heard something directly from the 12 Imams, and that person is trustworthy for the Shi’a and his narration is not against Qur’an, then the tradition is authentic for us, since we believe in the infallibility of Imams as well as Prophets. The knowledge of Imam has been derived from the knowledge of their fathers and forefathers up to the Prophet (S).

However, the chain of narrators should be evaluated. If the chain turns out to be broken (i.e., one element in the chain is missing), then the tradition is considered weak in Isnad. Thus all the narrators should be named, and this is the case for the majority of Shi’i collections of traditions.

Nevertheless, there are only a number of traditions in Usul Kafi in which the last element in the chain is missing, i.e., the name of the person who reported to Kulaini in person. In stead of mentioning his name, Kulaini has used the phrase "a group of our associates". But Kulaini has mentioned all other elements in the chain.

The reason for this was that, as I mentioned, Shi’a have always been under prosecution of unjust rulers including the Abbasids. If Kulaini (ra) have mentioned the names of those who reported to him and were still alive, and if the book could have found his way to the officials, then all those reporters would have been killed. To protect them, he did not mention their names and codified it by saying "a group of our associates". However he mentioned the name of those who reported to him but died during Kulaini’s life.

But the good news is that since Kulaini knew the regulations of scrutinizing of the traditions by the Shi’a, he told some of his students how the names of the last narrators are codieifed. More specifically, it was mentioned that:

I. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Isa", then the group here means the following five persons:

1.Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Yahya al-Attar al-Qummi
2.’Ali Ibn Musa Ibn Ja’far al-Kamandani
3.Abu Sulayman Dawud Ibn Kawrah al-Qummi
4.Abu ‘Ali Ahmad Ibn Idris Ibn Ahmad al-Ash’ari al-Qummi
5.Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hashim al-Qummi.

II. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khalid al-Barqi", then the group here means the following four persons:

1.Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hashim al-Qummi
2.Muhammad Ibn Abdillah Ibn Udhaynah
3.Ahmad Ibn Abillah Ibn Umayyah
4. ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn al-Sa’d Abadi.

III. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Sahl Ibn Ziyad", then the group here means the following four persons:

1. Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Aban al-Razi, who is known as Allan al-Kulaini
2. Abul Husayn Muhammad Ibn Abdillah Ja’far Ibn Muhammad Ibn Awn al- Asadi al-Kufi, resident of ray.
3. Muhammad Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Farrukh al-Saffar al-Qummi
4. Muhammad Ibn Aqil al-Kulaini.

IV. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ja’far Ibn Muhammad who narrated from al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn al-Faddal", then the group here consists of the following person:

1. Abu Abdillah al-Husayn Ibn Muhammad Ibn Imran Ibn Abi Bakr al- Ash’ari al-Qummi.

Thus the narrators of those traditions are known and can be evaluated accordingly. Nontheless, we do not claim that al-Kafi is an all authentic book of traditions for the Shi’a. There are certain traditions in al-Kafi which are reported by weak narrators who are known to the Shi’a scholars of Hadith.

Imam ‘Ali (as) said: Be the enemy of the oppressor and the helper of the oppressed one.

 قالَ الإمام علي عليه السلام: كونو للظالم خصماً و للمظلوم عوناً 

(Nahjul Balagha, the sayings of Imam ‘Ali)

Please compare this tradition of Imam ‘Ali with the tradition of Sahih Muslim given at the beginning of the article.

Islam of Abu Talib Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

It would be interesting if we analyze the verses that some Sunni commentators have aleged to have revealed for the disbelief of Abu Talib (ra). The first one is:

And they prohibit (others) from it and go far away from it, and they only bring destruction upon their own souls while they do not perceive it. Surah 6- The Cattle (An’aam) - Verse 26

- Tabari relates from Sufiyan Soori who relates it from Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit who narrated it from somebody saying that Ibn Abbas said ‘that this verse came down for Abu Talib, because he used to
protect Muhammad from the Kufar but he never recited the Kalima.’

Sunni references

- Tabaqat of Ibne Sa’ad, v 2 p 105
- History of Tabari, v 7 p 100
- Tafseer Ibn Katheer, v 2 p 127
- Tafseer Kashaf, v 1 p 448
- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 6 p 406
- ... and many many more

Now let us see for ourselves if the ideology behind the above interpretation is correct or not, so that we would have no doubts in our minds. Further scrutiny of the above interpretation would lead us to believe that it is nothing but a futile effort to discredit Abu Talib:

- The verse talks about living people, since the verse mentions that ‘ people who prevent others from doing it and neither do it ‘. Of course a dead person can’t think of preventing others from a course of action, and they have to be living to do so. This convinces us to believe that this verse can’t be for Abu Talib.

The chain of narrators terminates after Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit and Sufyan doesn’t mention who narrated it from Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit, and all he says that he (Habeeb) narrated it from some one who heard it from Ibn Abbas. This criterion is not acceptable according to the standards of hadeeth, since the chain of narrators is incomplete, therefore this hadeeth is unacceptable.

But for argument sake if we still accept the chain of narrators, and the fact that Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit is the only person who narrates it, the books of Rijal testify to the fact that we can’t accept this tradition, for the following reasons

In the eyes if Ibn Habban, Habeeb is a ‘deceiver’, and Aqeeli Ibn Aun has ‘avoided’ Habeeb since Habeeb has copied hadeeths from Ata’a which are ‘ absolutely unacceptable ‘.

Qita’an says that Habeeb’s hadeeths other than Ata’a are also unacceptable and are not safe from being fake. Abu Dawood quotes from Ajri that the hadeeths narrated by Habeeb from Ibn Zamrah are not correct. Ibn Khazeema comments that Habeeb is a ‘deceiver’

Sunni reference

- Tahzeeb al-Tahzeeb, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v 2 p 179

Therefore the tradition narrated by Habeeb is his personal innovation, and after reading the views of so many Rijal experts how can we accept his hadeeth?

But this shouldn’t stop us from further investigating the issue, and if we accept the fact that Habeeb can be trusted, let us look at Sufyan who is the last narrator in the chain of the tradition against Abu Talib. We still have to declare this hadeeth void, because, al-Dhahabi writes about him that

"Sufyan narrations are lies”

Sunni reference

- Mizan al-Itidal, by al-Dhahabi, v 1 p 396

I find it very difficult to believe that despite the fact the commentators who have written down the traditions are respectable personalities, they have copied it down from cheap people such as above, without any hesitation.

Despite all these weak traditions that have been narrated by weak narrators, we find hadeeths related by Ibn Abbas that are genuine and state the opposite of what we find in the hadeeth mentioned above. Let see what they have to offer

Tabari states that the above verse came down for all the mushrikeen who used to stay away from the Prophet and used to advise others to stay away from him (the Prophet).

Sunni reference

- Tafseer Tabari, v 7 p 109
- Tafseer Durre Manthoor, v 3 p 8

The fact is that Abu Talib never advised others to stay away from Prophet (S). Even many of those who accused him for not uttering Shahadah, confess that he helped the Holy Prophet (S) during those days of tribulations of the young Islam with all his means. Also he raised the Prophet when he was child, and then accepted that Imam ‘Ali (as) to be raised by Prophet. He, in fact, was Muslim from the begining, but was ordered by Prophet to practice Taqiyya (to conceal his belief) so that he could play as a mediator between Prophet and chiefs of unbelievers in Mecca (like Abu Sufyan).

Also it is important to note that we do NOT believe that the parents of Prophets and Imams were necessarily perfect (Infallible). However we believe that their parents and all their forefathers were righteous and believers and monotheist during their entire life.

Islam of Abu Talib Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A number of historians and hadith recorders reported that Abu Talib died while he was a pagan. Some of them reported the verse ‘ It is not permissible to the Prophet and the believers to ask God to forgive the pagans even if they were akin to them, after it became clear to them that those pagans are from the people of hell .’

Such false commentaries and statements were fabricated as a part of the smear campaign which the Omayyads and their allies waged against Imam ‘Ali (as). By fabricating such traditions they tried these to convince people that Abu Sufyan, father of Muawiyyah was better than Abu Talib, father of
Imam ‘Ali, claiming that Abu Sufyan died while he was a Muslim and Abu TAlib died while he was a pagan.

The recorders of the hadiths and the historians took these hadiths without paying attention to the evidence of their forgery. They did not try to examine these hadiths, yet the date of the revelation of the above mentioned verse testifies that it was not revealed about a matter pertaining to Abu Talib (May Allah be well pleased with him). Now coming to the hadith by itself, let see what the most authenticated book in the eyes of the Sunnis has to say. al-Bukhari in his Sahih writes

Narrated Al Musaiyab: When Abu Talibs death approached, the Prophet (saw) went to him while Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya were present with him. The Prophet (saw) said: ‘ O Uncle, say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, so that I may argue for your case with it before Allah. ‘ On that Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said: ‘ O Abu Talib! Do you want to renounce Abdul Muttalib’s religion ? ‘

Then the Prophet (saw) said, ‘ I will keep on asking (Allah for) forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden to do so. ‘ Then there was revealed

It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should pray for forgiveness for pagans even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are the companions of the fire. (9: 113)

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6

Page 158 Tradition no. 197

The above mentioned verse is a part of the Chapter of Baraat (number 9).

A few points on this Chapter

- this is a totally medinite Chapter, with the exception of the last two verses (128 and 129)
- the verse which is the subject of our discussion is Verse 113
- the Chapter of Baarat was revealed during the ninth (9th) year of Hijra.

The chapter speaks of the events that took place during the campaign of Tabuk, which was during the month of Rajab in the ninth Year. The Prophet (saw) had ordered Abu Bakr to announce first part of it during the days of the pilgrimage of that year when he sent him as an ‘ Amir Al Hajj ‘.

Then he sent Imam ‘Ali to take that part from him and announce it, because God commanded him that no one should deliver the revelation other than himself or a man from the members of his House. The chapter speaks of the events that took place during the campaign of Tabouk, which was during the month of Rajab in the ninth Year.

Many Sunni traditionist reported that:

The Messenger of Allah sendAbu Bakr to the people of Mecca with the Chapter of al-Bara’ah and when he proceeded, (the Prophet) sent for him and asked him to return the chapter and said: "No one takes it to them except one of my Ahlul-Bayt.”and thus he sent ‘Ali for this mission."

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p183, v5, pp 275,283
- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, v1 pp 3,151, v3, pp 212,283
- Fadha’l al-Sahabah, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p562, Tradition #946
- Hakim in his Mustadrak, v 3 p 51
- Al Nisai in his Khasais al Awliyah, p 20
- Fadhail al Khamsah, v 2 p 343
- Siratun Nabi by Shibli Numani, v 2 p 239

Ahmad in his musnad added that Abu Bakr said: The Prophet (saw) had sent me with the chapter of Baarat to the people of Mecca

No pagan should make pilgrimage after this year. No naked shall circumnavigate around the Ancient House. No one shall enter paradise except a Muslim soul. Any pagan community that has been between them and the Messenger of God a peace accord, the accord will end by the end by the end of the specified period (without extension), and God and His Messenger are clear of pagans

Also Shibli Numani in his work on the Seera of the Prophet (saw) writes as follows (p 239 -- > p 240)

Now in the year 9th Hijri, the Kaaba was for the first time, consecrated as the central House of Worship for the followers of Abraham ...... On return from Tabuk the Holy Prophet (saw) sent out a caravan of three hundred muslims from Mecca to Medina to perfrom the Hajj at Mecca.

Now coming back to the verse of (9: 113), the verse could not mean Abu Talib, because he died in Mecca at least two years before the Hijrah! I now quote Shibli Numani, in his most celebrated work on the Seera of the Prophet, Siratun Nabi (v 1, p 219 and 220)

Death of Khadija and of Abu Talib (10th Year Of Revelation)

On return from the mountain, the Prophet had hardly passed a few days in peace when Abu Talib and Khadija both died. He paid his last visit to Abu Talib when he was dying. Abu Jahl and Abd Allah ibn Ummaya were already there. The Prophet asked Abu Talib to recite the credo of Islam, so that he might bear witness to his faith in the presence of Allah. Abu Jahl and Ibn Umayya expostulated with Abu Taleb and asked if he was going to turn away from the religion of Abd Al Muttalib.

In the end Abu Talib said that he was dying with is belief in the religion of Abd Al Muttalib. Then he turned to the Prophet and said that he would have recited the creed but he feared lest the Quraish should accuse him of fear of death. The Prophet said that he would be praying to Allah for him till He forbade (Bukhari on the Chapter of Funeral. The last sentence has been taken from Muslim and not Bukhari). This is the version of Bukhari and Muslim. Ibn Ishaq says that while dying Abu Talib’s lips were in motion. al-Abbas who was till then a nonbeliever, put his ear to his lips and then said to the Prophet that he was reciting the KALIMA the Prophet had wanted of him. (Ibn Hisham, Cairo Edition, p 146).

(Please do bear in mind that all the references cited in the above para are “NOT “my adition, and “NEITHER “are the block letters my addition, they have been rendered by Shibli Numani himself)

Then Shibli Numani further writes

But from a traditionist’s point of view this report of Al Bukhari is not worthy taking as reliable because the last narrator is Musaiyyab who embraced Islam after the fall of Mecca, and was not himself present at the time of Abu Talib’s death. It is on this account that al Aini in his commentary has remarked that this tradition is MURSAL (Al Aini, Chapter Janaiz or Funeral, VOL IV, p 200).

Also he writes on page 221

Abu Talib made great sacrifices for the Prophet none can deny that. He would even sacrifice his own children for his sake. For his sake he had exposed himself to the odium of the whole country, and for his sake he had passed years in state of siege, suffering starvation as an exile, unprovided with food or drink. Will all this love, sacrifice and devotion go unrewarded ?

- asking God to forgive a deceased usually takes place at the time of the uneral prayer. The wording of the verse ‘ It is not permissible to the Prophet and the believers to ask God to forgive the pagans ‘ , indicates that the Prophet was with other believers (in a congregational prayer) when he asked forgiveness for the pagans.

- as a matter of fact, the funeral prayer was not instituted before the Hijrah (migration to Medina). The first prayer offered by the Messenger for a deceased was his prayer for Al Bura Ibn Maarour. it is likely that this verse was revealed after the Prophet offered a funeral prayer for one of the hypocrites who used to pretend Islam and conceal paganism. It is very likely that the verse was revealed when the Holy Prophet (saw) offered a funeral prayer for Abdullah bin Obai bin Salool who died during the ninth year and who was well noted in his hypocrisy, his hatred towards the Messenger of Allah and his adversary to the faith of Islam. About him and his followers, the Chapter of Al Munafiqoon (the Hypoctites) was revealed before that time. Had historians and hadith recorders thought with some depth and logic, they would not have commited this terrible historical error!

Here is another hadeeth from Sahih Bukhari that mentions the event similar to the previous hadeeth

Narrated Al Musaiyab: When Abu Talib was on his death bed, Allah’s Apostle same to him and found Abi Umaiya bin Al Mughira. Allah’s Apostle said: ‘ O uncle! say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, a sentence with which I will defend you before Allah. ‘

On that Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said to Abu Talib: ‘ Will now you leave the religion of Abdul Mutallaib ? ‘ Allah’s apostle kept on inviting him to say that senetnce while the other two kept on repeating their sentence before him till Abu Talib said as a last thing then he said to them , ‘ I am on the religion of Abdul Muttalib ‘ and refused to say: None has the righ to be worshipped except Allah. On that Allah’s Apostle said: ‘ By Allah I will keep on asking Allah’s forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so. So Allah revealed It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans (9: 113) And then Allah revealed especially about Abu Talib:

Verily! You (O, Muhammad) guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He will (28:56)

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6 page 278 -> 279

Tradition no. 295

Readers will be surprised to know that the two hadeeths cited above, prove that the two verses descended one after the other. But this is contrary to another hadeeth that Bukhari cites in his Sahih, and it proves that Surah Baarat was among the last revealed chapters. Here is the hadith

Narrated Al Bara: The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’a ...

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6

Page 101 Tradition 129

Other Sunni references that affirm to the fact that Sura Baarat was among the last revealed chapters and a Medanite Sura, please refer to

- Tafseer Kashshaf, v 2 p 49
- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 8 p 273
- Tafseer Itqan, v 1 p 18
- Tafseer Showkani, v 3 p 316

But where is the fault in the Hadeeths? The verse cited from Surah Qasas, was revealed at least ten (10) years before Surah Baarat, and that it was revealed in Mecca, where as Surah Baarat was revealed in Medina. Please think about it, and you shall find out that in a futile effort to discredit
Abu Talib and declare him as an unbeliever, the order of the revelation of the Qur’an was not taken into consideration. Just imagine the time gap in between the revelation of the two chapters, and the matter will be very clear.

Also history tells us that Al Musaiyab

- disliked Imam ‘Ali
- refused to say the funeral prayers for the grandson of Imam ‘Ali, and the son of Imam Hussain, Imam Zainul Abidin

Sunni Reference

- Sharah of Ibn al Hadid, v 1 p 370

One could conclude that this fabrication was done to simply elevate Umayad over Hashimites. Also I came across a very ashtonishing commentary, by the most revered Sunni commentator, Fakr ar Din Al Razi in his Tafseer, with reference to Surah Qasas (28:56). He has mentioned this verse about Abu Talib, “not “because of his personal opinion; because of the opinion of some other scholars ‘. Surprisingly, he admits, that this verse could not be associated with Abu Talib’s beliefs ...

Reference: Tafseer Kabir, v 25 p 3 (Fakhr ar Din al Razi)

Islam of Abu Talib Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Qur’an And The Unbelievers

It is not (fit) for the Prophet and those who believe that they should ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even though they should be near relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are inmates of the flaiming fire. (9: 113)

Now since we have already proved that the above verse was not revealed for Abu Talib, where the Prophet and the Muslims have been advised not to pray for the polytheists, it would help us to look at those verses that asked the Prophet and the Believers not to eshtablish relations for the polytheists, let alone pray for them, out of love and respect!

Surah 58 - The Pleading One (Mujadilah) - Verse 22

You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Apostle, even though they were their own fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him; these are Allah’s party: Surely the party of Allah are the successful ones.

This was revealed in the Battle of Badr and this event occured in the 2 year of the Hijra. However there are some commentators that relate its revelation with The Battle of the Uhud, that occured in the 3 year of the Hijra. How ever, the verse advises us not to make friends with the non believers or even love them. This Chapter was revealed well before Surah Baarat (Chapter 9, for the verse cited in the beginning)

Sunni references

- Tafseer Ibn Katheer, v 4 p 329
- Tafseer Sho Kafi, v 5 p 189
- Tafseer Aloosi, v 28 p 37

Surah 4 - Women (Surah Al Nisa)- Verses 139 And 144

Those who take the unbelievers for guardians rather than believers. Do they seek honor for them ? Then surely all honor is for Allah. O you who believe! do not take the unbelievers as protectors instead of than believers; do you desire that you should give to Allah a manifest proof against yourselves ?

This is a Mecci Surah, where the above verses advise the believers not to take unbelievers as helpers or protectors. How could the Prophet get help from an unbeliever if we assume Abu Talib is unbeliever?! Ofcourse, this verse was revealed well before Chapter 9, that has been the focus our attention!

Sunni reference:

- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 5 p 1

Surah 3 - The Family Of Imran (Surah Ale Imran) - Verse 28

Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribition from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual journey.

According to reference (1) the first eighty (80) verses of this Chapter were revealed during the beginning of the Hijra. The latter references indicate that the above verse (verse 28) was revealed during the Battle of Ihzab (5 Hijra). The last reference indicates that Surah Ale Imran and Surah Baarat were revealed with a difference of four Surahs.

Sunni references

- Seera of Ibn Hisham, v 2 p 207
- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 4 p 58
- Tafseer Khazan, v 1 p 235
- Tafseer Itqan, v 1 p 17

Surah 9 - Repentance - Verses 23 And 80 (Surah Baarat)

O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and who ever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

Ask forgiveness for them or do not ask forgiveness for them; even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times, Allah will not forgive them; this is because they disbelieve in Allah and the Apostle, and Allah does not guide the transgressing people.

These two verses were revealed before Verse 9:113 (the verse used against Abu Talib), and as I conclude this discussion, let me pose a question to these accusers:

- Is it possible that the Prophet (saw) would ask for forgiveness for Abu Talib (May Allah bless his soul), especially when these two verses declare that it is futile to do so, assuming that Abu Talib died as an unbeliever? If your answer is yes, then isn’t it against the text of the Holy Book and the Will of Allah, the Almighty?!!

- The fact is that the verse 9:113 is just a command to Prophets in general, and not apprehension for what Prophet Muhammad did not! This will become clear when one looks at the next verse that (i.e., 9:114) which shows this is the command of Allah to Prophet Abraham who prayed for his uncle Azar (not to be confused with his father whose name was Tarokh. This needs a separate discussion) before it was known to him that he is the enemy of Allah. Qur’an states:

.. But when it became clear to him that he (Azar) was an enemy to Allah he dissociated himself from him; for Abraham was most tender- hearted forbearing. (9:114)

Islam of Abu Talib Part 4

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Certainly what has been said about this topic in the last parts, must have left some questions unanswered, and this article would focus on the attitude adopted by Abu Talib (May Allah bless his soul) towards his nephew, the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him and his cleansed progeny), and his contribution towards spreading Islam, and the declaration of his faith in several occasions reported by the Sunnis.

The readers of Islamic History know how the Quraish clans delivered to Abu Talib an ultimatum, to stop his nephew from defaming their fathers and belittling their gods and ridiculing their minds; otherwise, they would confront him and the Prophet (S) on a battlefield untill one of the two parties perished. Abu Talib had no doubt that his acceptance of the Quraishite challenge meant his death and total annihilation of his clan; yet he did not pressure his nephew to stop his campaign. He only informed him of the Qurashite ultimatum, and he told him kindly

Save me and yourself, my nephew, and burden me not with what I cannot bear.

When the messenger rejected the ultimatum, declaring to his uncle that he would not exchange his message with the possesion of the whole universe, Abu Talib immediately reversed his attitude and decided to go along with the Messenger to the end. This is evident from the statement he made to the prophet (S)

Come back, my nephew, go on, say what ever you like. I shall never let you down at any time.

Sunni references

- Ibn Husham, Biography of the Prophet, v 1 p 266
- Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’ad, v 1 p 186
- History of Tabari, v 2 p 218
- Deewan e Abu Talib, p 24
- Sharah of Ibn al Hadid, v 3 p 306
- History of Ibn Katheer, v 2 p 258
- History of Abul Fida, v 1 p 117
- Al Seerah al Halabiyyah, v 1 p 306

Abu Talib fulfilled this huge promise with distinction. When a Meccan threw some dirt on the Messenger while he was prostrating, Abu Talib went on brandishing his sword and holding the hand of his nephew untill he came to the sacred mosque. A group of the enemies were sitting there, and when some of them tried to stand for Abu Talib, he said to them

By the One in whom Muhammad (S) believes, if any one from you stands up I will hit him with my sword.

See few lines later below for the Sunni references.

When a person wants to swear, he swears by something that has sanctity for him, and not something that he does not believe in it. The above diplomatic/political statement proves for those who have intelligience that he believed in the God of Muhammad (S), The One, The Great.

Then Abu Talib asked the Prophet (S) who was the person responsible for the shameful act, and upon his (Prophet’s) answer, Hamza as instructed by Abu Talib smeared the dust on the individuals who showed animosity towards the Prophet (S). It was on this occasion that Abu Talib said:

I believe that Muhammad’s faith is the best of all the religions of the Universe.

Sunni references

- Khazanatal Adaab by Khateeb Baghdadi, v 1 p 261
- Tareekh of Ibn Katheer, v 3 p 42
- Sharh of Ibn al Hadid, v 3 p 306
- History of Abul Fida, v 1 p 120
- Fath al Bari (Sharah of Sahih Bukhari), v 7 p 153
- Al Isaba, v 4 p 116
- Al Seerah Al Halebiyyah, v 1 p 305
- Talba tul Talib, p 5

The above highlighted part is another obvious statement which proves his Islam.

The Quraish could see that despite their obstructive efforts the progress of Islam had continued. They now decided to put an end to the Prophet and his family in a state of siege and excommunication till they were all done away with.

With this end in view a pact was drawn, to which each tribe was a party and it was to the effect that none should have marital ties with Banu Hashim or do any buying or selling with them; and none was to associate with them or allow any provision to them. This was to continuetill the Prophet’s family handed him over for execution. This pact was then hung on the door of the Kaaba.

Thus forced Abu Talib with the whole family moved to a mountain cave known as ‘ Shi’b Abi Talib ‘. Now the Hashmites were entirely alienated from the rest of the town dewelers. The fortress was also beleagured at times by the Quraish to enforce the ban in all its rigour, and to prevent the possibility of supplies.

They found themselves sometimes reduced to starvation for want of supplies. Under constant surveillance by the Quraish, Abu Talib even feared night attacks and for this reason he was on guard for the safety of Muhammad (S), and often chaged room as a precaution aganist sudden violence.

At the close of the third year of the Interdict, Muhammad (S) told his uncle Abu Talib, that Allah had shown His disapproval of the convention against him, and had sent out worms to eat every word of the document placed in the Kaaba, except His own name written thereon. Abu Talib believing his nephew (S) as the receiver of the revelations from heavens, unhesitantly went to the Quraish and told them what Muhammad (S) had spoken. The discussion is recorded as follows Muhammad has informed us and I ask you to confirm it for yourselves.

For if it is true then I ask you to rethink, instead of troubling Muhammad or putting our patience to the test. Believe us, we would prefer to lay down our lives; rather hand over Muhammad to you. And if Muhammad proves to be wrong in his words, then we would hand over Muhammad to you unconditionally. Then you have the liberty of treating him any way you like; kill him or keep him alive.

To these proposals of Abu Talib, the Quraish agreed upon to inspect the document, and to their ashtonishment they found it worm eaten; only the name of Allah was still there and no more, and they said that it was an enchantment of Muhammad (S). Abu Talib enraged upon the Quraish and demanded that the document be declared void and the ban be removed. Then he clutched to one end of the cloth of the Kaaba, as he raised the second hand in the air and prayed

O Lord! Help us against those, who have subjugated us to torture ...

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat of Ibne Sa’ad, v 1 p 183
- Seerah of Ibn Hisham, v 1 p 399 and p 404
- Aiwanul Ikbar by Qutaiybah, v 2 p 151
- Tareekhe Yaqoobi, v 2 p 22
- Al Istiab, v 2 p 57
- Khazantul Ihbab by Khateeb Baghdadi, v 1 p 252
- History of Ibn Katheer, v 3 p 84
- Al Khasais al Kubra, v 1 p 151
- Al Seerah Al Halebiyyah, v 1 p 286

Once during the childhood of the Prophet (S) on the occasion of a scarcity of rains Abu Talib took him (S) to the Holy Kaaba and standing with his back touching the wall of the sanctuary lifted up the Prophet (S) in his lap and sought medium in his prayers to the Almighty for the rains. The Prophet (S) also joined him in his prayers with his face upturned. The prayers were not finished when the clouds began to appear and the rain fell in torrents. This incident is alluded in the following verses composed by Abu Talib:

Don’t you see that we have found Muhammad a prophet like Moses; he is already predicted in the previous Scriptures. He is the illumined face which is the medium for the rains; he is the spring for the orphan and a protector for the widow.

Sunni references

- Sharah of Bukhari by Qastalani, v 2 p 227
- Al Seerah Al Halebeyah, v 1 p 125

Another verse that testify’s to the belief of Abu Talib is as follows

To exalt him He derived his name from His own; the One on High is called Mahmud while He named him Muhammad
There is no doubt that Allah appointed Muhammad as a prophet, therefore Ahmed is the most exalted personality in the entire Universe.

Sunni references

- Dalail al-Nubuwwah, by Abu Nu’aym, v 1 p 6
- History of Ibn Asakeer, v 1 p 275
- Sharah of Ibn al Hadid, v 3 p 315
- History of Ibn Katheer, v 1 p 266
- Tareekhe Khamees, v 1 p 254

Abu Talib was a man of great faith and had strong belief in the truthfulness of Muhammad (S). He lived with that mission for about eleven years, and the difficulties for Muhammad and him increased in size by the passage of time. This was especially noticeable after his death, since the Quraish subjected him to more sufferings; sufferings that were not imaginable during the life time of Abu Talib. Ibn Abbas narrates a tradition that when a person from the Quraish put dirt on his head, he went home. It was on this occasion that the Prophet (S) remarked:

... The Quraish never met me with such treatment during the life time of Abu Talib, since they were cowards ...

Sunni references

- History of Tabari, v 2 p 229
- History of Ibn Asakeer, v 1 p 284
- Mustadrak of Al Hakim, v 2 p 622
- History of Ibn Katheer, v 3 p 122
- Al Faiq by Al Zamakshari, v 2 p 213
- Tareekhe Khamees, v 1 p 253
- Al Serah Al Halebiyyah, v 1 p 375
- Fathul Bari, v 7 p 153 and p 154
- Seerah of Ibn Husham, v 2 p 58

The Marriage Ceremony Of The Prophet (S)

Abu Talib addresses the men of Quraysh, who were present at the marriage ceremony as follows:

Praise be to Allah Who made us from the seed of Abraham and progeny of Ishmael. He granted as a Sacred house and a place of pilgrimage. He made us to dwell in a secure sanctuary (haram), to which the fruits of everything are brought. He made us, moreover, arbiters in men’s affairs, and blessed for us this land in which we dwell. Then he said:

Were Muhammad (S), the son of my brother ‘Abdullah son of Abdul Muttalib ‘, to be weighed any man among the Arabs, he would excel him. Nor would any man be comparable to him. He is peerless among men, even though he is a man of little welath. Yet riches are only transient possesions, and an epheramel security. He has expressed a desire for Khadijah, and she likewise has shown interest in him. As for any bride gift (mahr) you demand, both the part to be presented now and the one presented at a later date - it will be of my own wealth.

Sunni reference:

- Seerah al-Halabiyyah, vol 1 p 139

Abu Talib’s (May Allah Bless His Soul) Last Breath

In spite of his concealing his faith, Abu Talib, on more than one occasion made his belief in Islam clearly known (as already mentioned above) long before his death. But it would be interesting to quote his saying at his deathbed.

While on his death bed, Abu Talib said to the Hashimites:

I command you to be good to Muhammad. He is the most trustworthy of the Quraish and the ever truthful of the Arabs. He brought a message which is accepted by the heart and denied by the tongue for fear of hostility. By God whoever walks in the way of Muhammad shall be on the right road and whoever follows his guidance shall have the happy future.

And you Hashimites, respond to Muhammaed’s invitation and believe him. You will succeed and be well guided; certainly he is the guide to the right path.

Sunni references

- Al Muhabil Dunya, v 1 p 72
- Tareekhe Khamees, v 1 p 339
- Balughul Adaab, v 1 p 327
- Al Seerah Al Halebeyah, v 1 p 375
- Sunni al Mutalib, p 5
- Uruzul Anaf, v 1 p 259
- Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’ad, v 1 p 123

It is reported in the book of al-Bayhaqi (Dalail al-Nubuwwah) that when Abu Talib was at the point of death, he was seen moving his lips. al Abbas (the Prophet’s uncle) bent down to listen to what he was saying. he then lifted his head and said:

By Allah, he has uttered the word which you requested, O Messenger of Allah!.

Sunni references:

- Dalail al-Nubuwwah by al-Bayhaqi, vol 2 p 101
- Ibn Hisham, Cairo Edition, p146 as quoted in Siratun Nabi, by Shibli Numani, v1, pp 219-220

Also in the same book, it is related that the Prophet (saw) stood at the funeral of Abu Talib and said:

You have indeed acted kindly to your next of kin; may you be well rewarded, O uncle.

Sunni references:

- Dalail al-Nubuwwah by al-Bayhaqi, vol 2 p 101
- Ibid, vol 2 p 103
- History of Khateeb Baghdadi, vol 13 p 196
- History of Ibn Katheer, vol 3 p 125
- al Isaba, vol 4 p 116
- Tadhkirat Sibt, p 2
- History of Yaquubi, vol 2 p26

Some Shi’ite references on Abu Talib

Abu Abdillah, Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) said:

The case of Abu Talib was like that of the people of the Cave (Qur’an 18:9-26); they concealed their faith and disclosed shirk. Yet Allah bestowed upon them double reward.

Shi’a Reference:

- al Kulayni in al Kafi, vol 1 p 448
- al Amini, al Ghadir, vol 7 p 330

In another tradition, Imam Jafer al-Sadiq (as) said:

While Imam ‘Ali (as) was sitting with Ruhbah in Kufa, surrounded by a group, a man stood up and said: ‘ Commander of the Believers, you are in this great position at which God has placed you while your father is suffering in hell. ‘ The Imam replied, saying: Be silent. May God disfigure your mouth. By the One Who sent Muhammad (S) with the truth, if my father intercedes for every sinner on the face of the earth, God would accept his intercession.

Shi’a reference: al-Ihtijaj, by al-Tabarsi, v1, p341

Now, I would like to end this discussion with the following thoughtful questions:

- Why is it that we accuse Abu Talib of paganism, when he chose to believe in the Prophet’s (S) message and declared it by political statements and sometimes by frank declarations?

- What benefit does it have for us to daclare him Kafir when there are strong proofs to the contrary? Do we get any other benefit except to make ourselves Kafir by pronouncing one of the early Muslim as Kafir?

- Why do we accuse him of paganism when he defended the Prophet (S) by all of what he had of men and means? Why do we attribute paganism to such a personality who was so benevolent to all the Muslims by guarding the life of the Messenger of Allah (S) for 11 years ?

- Why do we attribute paganism to the man who read the Nikah for the Prophet (S) ? How can your mind comprehend the notion of a pagan/disbeliever carrying out the ceremony of the marriage for a Prophet?

- Isn’t this ungratefulness in the worst form ?

- Isn’t this the worst insult in reward of the great favor that he did for the Prophet (S) ?

Indeed his presence in relation to the continuity of Islam was NOT incidental and we Muslims all owe him! May Allah grant us his intersession.

Some Side Comments On Abu Talib

I brother mentioned I had a carefull examination of what you wrote but one thing is not clear wheather Abu Talib did ever uttered ‘my god’. So far you informed there is that Abu Talib several times uttered ‘ Muhammad’s god’ and seemed he had faith in that god but he could never say ‘my god’. That obviously reveals that he never explicitly uttered Islamic belief although it seems that he believed it.

Here I present two references that testify to the fact that Abu Talib uttered the credo of Islam before his death. I am sure that I cited this reference in Part # 2 of my article (s), perhaps you missed it ...

Ibn Ishaq says that while dying Abu Talib’s lips were in motion. Abbas who was an unbeliever till then put his ear to the lips and then said to the Prophet that he was reciting the KALIMA the Prophet had wanted of him.

- Ibn Hisham, Cairo Edition, p 146 (as quoted by Shibli Numani) A similar tradition is as follows ...

Abu Talib moved his lips as he was about to die. Abbas then heard what he uttered, and he said to the Prophet that Abu Talib had uttered the KALIMA that was required by you.

- Tarike Abul Fida, V 1 p 120

Thus his Shahadah before his death is established by the Sunni historians. However my argument was that he uttered shahadah from the very begining of Islam, but not in public. So it is natural that no explicit proof for that could be found in the history, for history is written based on the public news (and not private ones!).

However, there are implicit proofs in the history which could lead even Sunnis to believe that he was a Muslim long before his death. One could be what you refered to. He said to the unbelievers that "I swear by the God of Muhammad!". Does history have another example where an unbeliever swears by the name of God who does not believe? When one wants to seawr, he/she swears by something that is eminent for him/her.

Otherwise he/she does not make his statement any more credible for others. Let me give you an example. If a man goes to court here in USA, if he is Christian he will have to swear by Bible. But if he declares to be non-Christian, then he will have to swear by his holy book (or any imortant thing otherwise) and not the bible because his swear by bible does not make the court convinced because he performed the oath.

Please think about it. Quraish have had many important Gods at that time (like Hubal and Uzza). Why should Abu Talib leave all of them beside and swears by the God that he does not believe in?!

The Sunni brother further commented:

Is it possible for some one to be a Muslim without explicitly pronouncing this belief ? True, he was a monothiest and not a Mushrik. But All monotheists are not Muslim. Your kind opinion please ....

Islam is the state of submission in ones heart. A Hypocite, though declares that he is Muslim, is indeed non-Muslim. For this very reason, it is difficult to judge if one is Muslim or not. However you are right. One has to utter Shahadah to become Muslim, but he does NOT have to do it in public if he fears of prosecution or if he finds out that by concealing his belief he can serve better to his nobel thoughts. This is called Taqiyyah. So one can Utter his Shahadah privately (for instance when he is alone or when he is with the Prophet (S) alone) and he will be Muslim.

In fact Taqiyyah and hypocracy are two opposite extremes. I have a file on that which I will send you shortly Insha Allah, which proves it from Qur’an and the Hadith prespective as well as Logic.

Was Azar the Father of Prophet Abraham?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

And when Ibrahim said to his sire, Azar: Do you take idle for gods ? Surely I see you and your people in manifest error. (Qur’an: Surah Al Anaam, Verse 74)

And Ibrahim asking forgiveness for his sire was only owing to a promise that he made to him; but when it became clear to him that he was an enemy of Allah, he declared himself to be clear of him; most surely Ibrahim was very tenderhearted and forbearing. (Qur’an: Surah Al Tauba, Verse 114)

In the above verses, the word ‘ Ab ‘ has been used for Azar. However, ‘Ab’ has different meanings and does not necessarily mean ‘Walid’ (biological father).

The Holy Prophet (S) has said that the essence of his existence had been transmitted and ultimately conveyed to his immediate parents through a pure, a holy and sanctified progeny.

Now the word ‘ Ab ‘ in Arabic language may mean father as well as ancestor or even uncle as Ishmael (Ismail) the uncle of Jacob (Yaqoub) has been addressed as ‘ Ab ‘ in the following Qur’anic verse ...

Nay! were you witnesses when death visited Yaqoub, when he said to his sons: What will you serve after me ? They said: Well will serve your God and the God of your fathers, Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq, one God only, and to Him do we submit. (Qur’an 2:113)

Since Ishmael was not the father of Jacob, and yet Qur’an uses the word ‘Ab’ for him as uncle, then the usage of this word for other than biological father is established...

Besides Prophet Abraham prays for his biological father (Walid) along with the other believers, which clearly indicates that his biological father was not a polytheist. This is evident from the following Qur’anic verse ...

O our Lord! grant me protection and my parents (Walidayn) and the believers on the day when the reckoning shall come to pass. (Qur’an 14:41)

رَبَّنَا اغْفِرْ لِي وَلِوَالِدَيَّ وَلِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يَوْمَ يَقُومُ الْحِسَابُ 

But what is surprising, that knowing for fact Ibrahim’s (as) father was ‘Tarakh’ and not ‘Azar’ as stipulated by some Sunni historians, which is in total conformity with the opinion of Shi’a. Ibn Katheer in his work on history writes:

Ibrahim (as) was the son of Tarakh. When Tarakh was 75 years of age, Ibrahim (as) was born to him.

Sunni reference: al-Bidaya wan Nahaya, by Ibn Katheer, v 1 p 139

This is also confirmed by Tabari, as he gives the lineage of Ibrahim’s (as) family in his history collection, but then also in his Commentary of the Qur’an he states that ‘Azar’ was NOT the father of Ibrahim (as).

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, v 1 p 119
- Tafsir Tabari, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v 7 p 158

On the Companions Who Murdered Uthman

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A Wahhabi mentioned:

Amirul Mu’mineen Mu’awiya ibn Abu Sufyan Radiya Allahu ‘anhu Siffin

Muawiya felt that the killers of Amirul Mumineen Uthmaan RA (the fathers of Shiasm) should not be allowed to continue their evil against Islaam. He did not fight for personal power.

‘Ali did not hand over these assassins to Muawiya due to some sound and concrete proof that he possessed. Thus the people of Shaam joined forces with Muawiya against ‘Ali.”

It is not surprising that this Wahhabi has overlooked what the Messenger of Allah (S) said about the fate of those who will fight Imam ‘Ali (as) which are recorded in what they call Sahih books, and stick to what is fabricated by the Leader of the Hypocrites (Amir al-Munafiqeen) Muawiyah (LA) himself. After all, I should not expect from their Wahhabi mentors to do better than that for bread and butter.

The claim that Muawiyah raised against the legitimate Caliph of his time and killed thousands of Muslims to take revenge from the murderers of Uthman is a flat-out lie! Had Muawiyah this in mind, he should first kill the commander of his army and many of his assistants for the Sunni history testifies that those who killed Uthman were the companions who were on the side of Muawiyah (as well as other opponents of Imam ‘Ali).

The fact is that any deceitful power-hungry leader needs to provide an excuse for his horrible acts, and this was not unique to Muawiyah. As we can see in the following Sunni references, those who agitated against Uthman were ones who came first to revenge for his blood with one aim in their mind, that was destroying the rule of Imam ‘Ali (as).

Sunni historians confirm that the agitation against the Caliph started by some influential individuals among the companions. The weakness of Uthman in handing the affairs of the State caused many companions to oppose him. This naturally resulted in a power struggle among the influential companions in Medina. Sunni historians such as al-Tabari, Ibn Athir, and al-Baladhuri and many others provide traditions which confirm that these companions were the first who asked the other companions, resided in other cities, to join them in revolt against Uthman. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari reported:

When the people saw what Uthman was doing, the companions of the Prophet in Medina wrote to other companions who were scattered throughout the frontier provinces: "You have gone forth but to struggle in the path of Almighty God, for the sake of Muhammad’s religion. In your absence the religion of Muhammad has been corrupted and forsaken. So come back to reestablish Muhammad’s religion.”Thus, they came from every direction until they killed the Caliph (Uthman).

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p184

In fact al-Tabari quoted the above paragraph form Muhammad Ibn Is’haq Ibn Yasar al-Madani who is the most celebrated Sunni Historian and the author of "Sirah Rasool-Allah".

History testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas (the army commander of Muawiyah).

A) Talha

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against ‘Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel). I just give few paragraphs from both of al-Tabari and Ibn Athir to prove my point. Here is the first one which is narrated by Ibn Abbas (in some manuscripts it is Ibn Ayyash):

I entered Uthman’s presence (During the agitation against Uthman) and talked with him for an hour. He said: "Come Ibn Abbas/Ayyash,”and he took me by the hand and had me listen to what the people were saying at his door. We heard some say, "what are you waiting for,”while others were saying, "wait, perhaps he will repent.”While the two of us were standing there (behind the door and listening), Talha Ibn Ubaydillah passed by and said: "Where is Ibn Udays?”He was told, "He is over there.”Ibn Udays came to (Talha) and whispered something with him, and then went back to his associates and said: "Do not let anyone go in (to the house of Uthman) to see this man or leave his house.”

Uthman said to me: "These are the orders of Talha.”He continued, "O God! Protect me from Talha for he has provoked all these people against me. By God, I hope nothing will come of it, and that his own blood will be shed. Talha has abused me unlawfully. I heard the Messenger of God said: ‘The blood of a Muslim is lawful in three cases: apostasy, adultery, and the one who kills except in legitimate retaliation for another.’ So why should I be killed?"

Ibn Abbas/Ayyash continued: I wanted to leave (the house), but they blocked my path until Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr who was passing by requested them to let me go, and they did so.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 199-200

The following report also supports that the murder of Uthman was led by Talha, and the killers came out to inform their leader that they took care of Uthman:

Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!”

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

Uthman was besieged in Medina while Imam ‘Ali (as) was in Khaibar. The Imam (as) came to Medina and found people gathering at the residence of Talha. Then Imam ‘Ali (as) went to met Uthman. Ibn Athir wrote:

Uthman said to ‘Ali: "You owe me my Islamic right and the right of brotherhood and relationship. If I have non of these rights and if I were in pre-Islamic era, it would be still shame for a descendants of Abd Munaf (of whom both ‘Ali and Uthman are descendants) to let a man of Tyme (Talha) rob us of our authority.”‘Ali said to Uthman: "You shall be informed of what I do.”Then ‘Ali went to Talha’s house. There were a lot of people there. ‘Ali spoke to Talha saying: "Talha, what is this condition in which you have fallen?”Talha replied: "O’ Abul Hasan! it is to late!"

Sunni reference: al-Kamil, by Ibn Athir, v3, p84

Tabari also reports the following conversation between Imam ‘Ali and Talha during the siege over Uthman:

‘Ali said to Talha: "I ask you by Allah to send people away from (attacking) Uthman.”Talha replied: "No, by God, not until the Umayad voluntarily submit to what is right.”(Uthman was the head of Umayad).

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p235

Talha even deprived Uthman of water:

Abdurrahman Ibn al-Aswad said: "I constantly saw ‘Ali avoiding (Uthman) and not acting as he formerly had. However, I know that he spoke with Talha when Uthman was under siege, to the effect that water skins should be taken to him. ‘Ali was extremely upset (from Talha) about that until finally water skins were allowed to reach Uthman.”

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 180-181

Now let us take a look at a report from the battle of Camel which has been mentioned in numerous Sunni books of History and Hadith. The following report proves that even the Umayad leaders such as Marwan who (along side with Talha) was fighting against Imam ‘Ali, knew that Talha and Zubair were the killers of Uthman. Sunni scholars recorded that Yahya Ibn Sa’id narrated:

Marwan Ibn al-Hakam who was in the ranks of Talha, saw Talha is retreating (when his army was being defeated in the battlefield). Since he and all Umayad recognized him and al-Zubair as the murderers of Uthman, he shot an arrow at him and severely wounded him. He then said to Aban, the son of Uthman, that: "I have spared you from one of your father’s murderers.”Talha was taken to a ruined house in Basra where he died.

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159
- al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, pp 532-533
- History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p244
- Usdul Ghabah, v3, pp 87-88
- al-Isti’ab, Ibn Abd al-Barr, v2, p766
- History of Ibn al-Kathir, v7, p248
- A similar report is given in al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 169,371

B) Al-Zubair

al-Zuhri, another important Sunni narrator who is famous for his dislike of Ahlul-Bayt, reported the following dialogue of Imam ‘Ali with Zubair and Talha before the start of battle of Camel:

"‘Ali said: ‘Zubair, do you fight me for the blood of Uthman after you killed him? May God give the most hostile to Uthman among us the consequence which that very person dislikes.’ He said to Talha:

‘Talha, you have brought the wife of the Messenger of God (Aisha) to use her for war and hid your wife at your house (in Medina)! Did you not give me your allegiance?’ Talha said: ‘I gave you the allegiance while the sword was on my neck.’

(At this point, ‘Ali tried to invite them to peace, leaving them no excuse.) ‘Ali addressed his own army saying: ‘Who among you will display this Qur’an and what is in it to the opposing army with the understanding that if he loses one of his hand he will hold the Qur’an with his other hand...?’ A youth from Kufa said: ‘I will take the mission.’ ‘Ali went through his army offering them the mission. Only that youth accepted it. Then ‘Ali said to him: ‘Exhibit this Qur’an and say to them: It is between you and us from its beginning to its end.

Remember God, and spare your blood and our blood.’ As the youth called upon them to resort to the Qur’an and surrender to its judgment, the Basrites army attacked and killed him. At this time, ‘Ali said to his army: ‘Now the fight has become legal.’ The battle then started.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

As we see in the above tradition, Imam ‘Ali clearly stated that Zubair was among those who killed Uthman. Had the revolters elected Talha or Zubair instead of Imam ‘Ali (as) as Caliph, they would have given the killers of Uthman the biggest prize. Certainly the leaders did not seek revenge for the blood of Uthman, for they themselves were behind the plot. They only pretended to do that as a means of destroying the Imam’s caliphate.

C) Aisha

Talha and Zubair were not the only collaborators against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that Talha’s cousin, Aisha, was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

"Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

Sunni references:

- History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206
- Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141
- al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290
- Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223

Another Sunni historian, al-Baladhuri, in his history (Ansab al-Ashraf) said that when the situation became extremely grave, Uthman ordered Marwan Ibn al-Hakam and Abdurrahman Ibn Attab Ibn Usayd to try to persuade Aisha to stop campaigning against him. They went to her while she was preparing to leave for pilgrimage, and they told her:

"We pray that you stay in Medina, and that Allah may save this man (Uthman) through you.”Aisha said: "I have prepared my means of transportation and vowed to perform the pilgrimage. By God, I shall not honor your request... I wish he (Uthman) was in one of my sacks so that I could carry him. I would then through him into the sea.”

Sunni reference: Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, part 1, v4, p75

D) Amr Ibn Al-Aas

Amr Ibn al-Aas (the number 2 person in the government of Muawiyah) was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman and he had all the reasons to conspire against him. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph. However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abu Sharh. As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman.

He returned to Medina and started a malicious campaign against Uthman, accusing him of many wrong doings. Uthman blamed Amr and spoke to him harshly. This made Amr even more bitter. He used to meet Zubair and Talha and conspire against Uthman. He used to meet pilgrims and inform them of the numerous deviations of Uthman.

According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman: ..Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?”The man replied: "He has been killed.”Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock.”

Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Quraishites, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?”Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal ooting as regards the truth.”

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of influential companions in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayad, such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman’s life as well as his death.

Imam ‘Ali said in the battle of Camel:

"Truth and falsehood can not be identified by the virtue of people. First understand the truth, you will then realize who is adhering to it.”(Nahjul Balaghah, by Imam ‘Ali)

إنَّ الحقَّ و الباطل لا يعرفان بأقدارِ الرجال. إعرف الحق تعرف أهله.

The Innovations of the Early Caliphs

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Subject: The Personality Of Uthman (Part 1: Was There No Better Man?)

The ahaadith in this article have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari

Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

There is a rule among Sunni people that:

Those who have participated in Hudaibiyah are saved forever. They will not lie on prophet, and they will not do great sins.

The same is sometimes told upon those who participated on the battle of Badr. Let us accept these two rules as long as you are reading this articles.

(Fascinating!: As if they are sinless people.)

Utman, the third Caliph after the death of the prophet,

1)- did not participate in the battel of Badr,
2)- fled away in the battle of Uhud,
3)- failed to attend the Ar Ridwan Pledge (Hudaibiya Plege) and did not witness it.

Begin (the algorithm)

1)- If you think that the address of this hadith is not correct, or it is twisted, or it has been intentionally mistranslated, Please bring your version of the hadith, and your translation along with your address of the ahadith. Thanks.

2)- Please read the following hadith. The same is also narrated in Volumn 5, Hadith number 395. Please read this hadith carefully, and tell us if you are satisfied with the answers of Ibn-Umar in this hadith.

In any case (Yes/No), please evaluate the position of Uthman among the sahabah of the prophet. For example, how do you compare Uthman with those who actually participated in the battle of Badr, who did not fly away in Uhud, and who participated in Hudaibyiah. Please give me your explanations such that I understand your feelings toward him.

3)- Please name all of the sahabah who did all the following three things at the same time:

a)- They did participate in Badr,
b)- They did not fly away in Uhud,
c)- They participated in Hudaibiyah.

(I know how many participated in one of them individually. But there are only a few who did all three together. Please name them, and bring your references as well. Thanks.)

4)- Were the people of (3) alive in the time Umar was killed or not? If yes, which one would you have chosen as your caliph?

5)- End of the algorithm.

5. 48:

Narrated ‘Uthman:

(the son of Muhib) An Egyptian who came and performed the Hajj to the Kaba saw some people sitting. He enquire, "Who are these people?”Somebody said, "They are the tribe of Quraish.”He said, "Who is the old man sitting amongst them?”The people replied, "He is ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar.”He said, "O Ibn Umar! I want to ask you about something; please tell me about it. Do you know that ‘Uthman fled away on the day (of the battle) of Uhud?”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes.”The (Egyptian) man said, "Do you know that ‘Uthman was absent on the day (of the battle) of Badr and did not join it?”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes.”The man said, "Do you know that he failed to attend the Ar Ridwan pledge and did not witness it (i.e. Hudaibiya pledge of allegiance)?”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes.”The man said, "Allahu Akbar!”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Let me explain to you (all these three things). As for his flight on the day of Uhud,

I testify that Allah has excused him and forgiven him; and as for his absence from the battle of Badr, it was due to the fact that the daughter of Allah’s Apostle was his wife and she was sick then.

Allah’s Apostle said to him, "You will receive the same reward and share (of the booty) as anyone of those who participated in the battle of Badr (if you stay with her).’ As for his absence from the Ar-Ridwan pledge of allegiance, had there been any person in Mecca more respectable than ‘Uthman (to be sent as a representative). Allah’s Apostle would have sent him instead of him. No doubt, Allah’s Apostle had sent him, and the incident of the Ar-Ridwan pledge of Allegiance happened after ‘Uthman had gone to Mecca. Allah’s Apostle held out his right hand saying, ‘This is ‘Uthman’s hand.’ He stroke his (other) hand with it saying, ‘This (pledge of allegiance) is on the behalf of ‘Uthman.’ Then Ibn ‘Umar said to the man, ‘Bear (these) excuses in mind with you.’

Subject: Re: Uthman

Article: 7342 of soc.religion.islam

From: hareb@spot.Colorado.EDU [19] (HAREB SAEED ‘ALI)

The fascinating thing to me is that you distrbute (sinless attribute) on whom you like and do not accept that those sahabah whom Allah (JWA) himself pardoned (look Surah ‘Ali Imran) and/or was pleased with - look surah Muhammad and altaubah as well as others, mau go to Jannah on Allah’s promise. Mind you , Jannah is not only for a sinless person.

2)- This aayah referred by Sunni brothers several times. The aayah is perfect as it was revealed by Allah, but YOUR understanding from the aayah has so many BUGs which need at least three 300-lines articles to cover. Sorry that I am not going to do that right now. You want the heaven, you go ahead and find out about it.

3)- You say that the sahabah are not sinless. This is a point which I would like to address:

Since they are not sinless, would you be kind to answer the following questions:

1)- Had they ever lied on behalf of the prophet?
2)- Had they ever done great sins such as killing, Zina, and so on.
3)- Had they ever been treacherous to the prophet?
4)- Had they ever added to islamic laws?
5)- Had they ever prohibited islamic laws?

My answers to the above questions will be with references. I would like you to show me your evidences if you want to say NO to any part.

Please support your answers. Thanks. Please give us some examples to realize what you mean by "sinless". Utman, the third Caliph after the death of the prophet,

1)- did not participate in the battel of Badr, You already put the answer to this at the bottom of you article (albeit unhighlighted).

I see that you and others have some little problem to understand the questions in the hadith. Let me first analyze them for you. Then I will give a reference to see the positive sentence as well.

1)- Do you know that ‘Uthman fled away on the day (of the battle) of Uhud? Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes."

What do you understand from this conversation? The a person asks if 2 + 2 becomes 10, and the other person says YES, which means what? It means that this person believes that 2+2 is 10. Now, let see the above question and answer again. If you carefully open your eyes, you will see that:

Ibn Umar is saying that Uthman fled away on the battle of Uhud. Another part:

2)- "Do you know that ‘Uthman was absent on the day (of the battle) of Badr and did not join it?”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes.”

The same conclusion will be true. Uthman was absent on the day of the battle of Badr, and Ibn Umar is testifying that.

3)- "Do you know that he failed to attend the Ar Ridwan pledge and did not witness it (i.e. Hudaibiya pledge of allegiance)?”Ibn ‘Umar said, "Yes.”

Do you understand what YES means? It means that:

Yes, Uthman failed to attend the Ar Ridwa pledge and did not witness it.

(Just look at the highlighted part, and understand that it was called Hudaibiya pledge as well. This is the translation of the translator of that book, and not mine.)

Now, you do not want to easily accept my simple logic, do you? If not, read the following and see that it is in positive sentence now.

4.359:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

‘Uthman did not join the Badr battle because he was married to one of the daughters of Allah’s Apostle and she was ill. So, the Prophet said to him. "You will get a reward and a share (from the war booty) similar to the reward and the share of one who has taken part in the Badr battle."

It is really unfair that I have to bring another reference to prove that the positive meaning of the conversation of an egyption and Ibn Umar is valid, and none of you, so far, have brought any reference in your articles. It is really unfair.

When one daughter was in her last days before death (ill), uthman was with this hounorable lady attending her. In badr, only 314 sahabah participated, and there was not an official military call. When the Prophet (S) heard about the news of the caravan he told the sahabah who were readily able to go with him (i.e. not those who have to go baclk to Medina to get their camels) to do so. Uthman (by the instruction of his father in law) stayed with the prophet’s daughter (RAA).

Moreover, I take the above statement as an insult to the prophet because if the prophet (SAAW) treated Uthman like one who did, why should you belittle the decision of the prophet and not agree.

I have read and I have known your answers myself too. You did not need to bother them again. You did not understand my question at all. My question is that whatever Uthman’s reasons was not to participate in the battle of Badr, how do you evaluate him among others who participated in the battle of Badr? You want me to bring more references, that is fine:

5.290:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The believers who failed to join the Ghazwa of Badr and those who took part in it are not equal (in reward). There is an aayah revealed in connection with ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb, and he was given a special status. Read the following, and compare Uthman, on whom no aayah (in regard to Badr’s battle) was revealed, with ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb. That is very simple to understand, isn’t it?

5.304:

Narrated Abu Mijlaz:

From Qais bin Ubad: ‘‘Ali bin Abi Talib said, "I shall be the first man to kneel down before (Allah), the Beneficent to receive His judgment on the day of Resurrection (in my favor).”Qais bin Ubad also said,

"The following Verse was revealed in their connection:--

"These two opponents believers and disbelievers) Dispute with each other About their Lord.”(22.19) Qais said that they were those who fought on the day of Badr, namely, Hamza, ‘‘Ali, ‘Ubaida or Abu ‘Ubaida bin al-Harith, Shaiba bin Rabi’a, ‘Utba and al-Wahd bin Utba.

5.305:

Narrated Abu Dharr:

The following Holy Verse:--

"These two opponents (believers & disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord,”(22.19) was revealed concerning six men from Quraish, namely, ‘‘Ali, Hamza, ‘Ubaida bin al-Harith; Shaiba bin Rabi’a, ‘Utba bin Rabi’a and al-Walid bin ‘Utba.

5.306:

Narrated ‘‘Ali:

The following Holy Verse:-- "These two opponents (believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord.”(22.19) was revealed concerning us.

5.307:

Narrated Qais bin Ubad:

I heard Abu Dharr swearing that these Holy Verses were revealed in connection with those six persons on the day of Badr.

5.308:

Narrated Qais:

I heard Abu Dharr swearing that the following Holy verse:--

"These two opponents (believers and disbelievers) disputing with each other about their Lord,”(Qur’an 22.19)

was revealed concerning those men who fought on the day of Badr, namely, Hamza, ‘‘Ali, Ubaida bin al-Harith, Utba and Shaiba----the two sons of Rabi’a-- and al-Walid bin ‘Utba.

The same goes to Hudaibyiah. I have read the history as well as the hadith, my dear. I want you to explicity prove to me that the aayah regarding the Ar-Ridhwan where God was pleased with them is also applicable on Uthman. I do not want to read your imagination. I need references as I have given in several articles.

The same goes to those who did not fly away in the battle of Uhud. So there you go. That is one insult. I wish you insulted me or personally attaked me but not the prophet (S) and his judjment. I am sorry to tell you and others. You do not understand what "insult”means at all. I fail to understand why SOME of my Sunni brothers as well as SOME of women do not understand this word correctly.

2)- fled away in the battle of Uhud, Fr your reminder (not information), there is an Ayah in surat ‘Ali Imran sating "Those who turned away among you when the two crowds met were only caused to do so by some of what they have commited - and Allah has FORGIVEN them”- my own translation -figure out the ayah number, etc. You even did not bother to look at the holy book of Allah. Perhaps you are talking about Chapter(3), verses (152) and (155). You need to read the verses from 152 to 156. I wish I was dead and was not among those people. God forgives people. That is his mercy. God has forgiven several sahabah during the life time of the prophet. God has forgiven those three who fled away in the war of Tabuk. Do you wish you could have been one of those three who did not follow the order of the prophet and finally Allah forgave them?

However, my question wasn’t this even. I asked you to compare those who fled away (or dispresed) in Uhud with those who did not fly away for me. How do you value them?

3)- failed to attend the Ar Ridwan Pledge (Hudaibiya Plege) and did not witness it.

Not true. A lie. What do you mean failed to attend.

A typical person to me.

What I meant was that he physically was not in the area where people gave their hands to the prophet, and I wanted you to tell me with your proves that whether the aayah of Ar-Ridhwan is applicable on him or not?

If yes, please bring your evidences from Sahih Bukhari or Muslim.

Thanks.

I am aware of the reason he couldn’t make it. I want you to prove to me that he was counted among the sahabah who gave their hands to the prophet on that day, and he was one of those whom God was pleased with.

For example, You have seen that the prophet gave bounty to Uthman since he was awarded as those who participated in the Battle of Badr.

I would like you to give us a reference where the prophet tells Uthman that:

Uthamn, you have been rewarded as those who participated in Ar-Ridhwan.

It would be nice.

As for references, I am not sitting on a mound of them and I don’t have dedicated resources as you do, but I am sure you yourself will be kind enough to do a quick search on your databases and pick them out.

That is pitty. You are sitting on a mopund of them. You just do not know where to put your feet.

I assume it is a problematic issue for shia’h that Uthman was married to two of the daughters of rasoolul Allah. And I do not understand why you do not understand that marriage with two daughter of the prophet does not help Uthman too much. Since I am sitting on a mound of sources, I am going to give another one to help you to realize that the relationship does not come with dry names.

Noah had a son, and God, himself, announced that this "son”is not any person related to Noah. He said that he should not be counted among the relatives of Noah. I do not understand why you do not understand such simple verses in Qur’an.

4.706:

Narrated Jubair bin Mut’im:

‘Uthman bin Affan went (to the Prophet) and said, "O Allah’s Apostle! You gave property to Bani al-Muttalib and did not give us, although we and they are of the same degree of relationship to you.”The Prophet said, "Only Bani Hashim and Bani Al Muttalib are one thing (as regards family status)."

I hope that can see and understand that the prophet treated Bani Hashim and Bani Al Muttalib differently than Uthman and his family.

Subject: The Personality Of Uthman Part 2.1

(Creation of new islamic laws/ Journey prayers)

The following ahaadith have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

By reading the following ahaadith and carefully, you will notice that:

1)- The journey prayer was essentially shortened and the prophet did not pray in full when he was in a short journey.

2)- Abu Bakr and Umar did the same.

3)- Uthman did the same in his early years of rulling.

4)- Then Uthman changed the rule and prayed at journey in FULL.

5)- Aisha followed Uthman in this manner.

My question is:

By whose authority, Uthman gave the prayers in journeys in full?

Why Aisha obeyed Uthman on this?

An Important Note

If you want to read Fiqh books, please feel free and do that. I would like you to bring all the reasonings of Sunni scholars from scratch. I want you to show me how they understood some islamic laws out of these ahaadith, and I would like you to confirm their outcomes with these ahaadith, word by word.

Let me put it this way:

I bring a few ahaadith which has no exception. Not even one key word exists that you can apply such and such rule only on some specific persons. This is what you really see inside of hadith. Now, when you read the scholars book, you will note that they have said this and this are for some special cases, and they are not applicable to anybody. I would like you to show me how you can not apply the hadith to anybody. I want you to split the hadith piece by piece, and prove what you have heard or read inside scholars books. I have brought you the original hadith and I did not mention name of any scholar, and I do not care if such and such person is scholar or not. I simply want you to show me how your knowledgeable men achived to such and such conclusion out of these ahaadith. Thanks a lot.

{To be honest, I already know what you may say, and I already have my answers.}

2.206:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

I accompanied Allah’s Apostle and he never offered more than two Rakat during the journey. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman used to do the same.

2.717:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar:

Allah’s Apostle offered a two-Rakat prayer at Mina. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman, (during the early years of his caliphate) followed the same practice.

2.196:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

"When the prayers were first enjoined they were of two Rakat each. Later the prayer in a journey was kept as it was but the prayers for non-travellers were completed.”Az-Zuhri said, "I asked ‘Urwa what made Aisha pray the full prayers (in journey).”He replied, "She did the same as ‘Uthman did."

2.188:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar:

I offered the prayer with the Prophet, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar at Mina and it was of two Rakat. ‘Uthman in the early days of his caliphate did the same, but later on he started praying the full prayer.

2.189:

Narrated Haritha bin Wahab:

The Prophet I led us in the prayer at Mina during the peace period by offering two Rakat.

2.190:

Narrated ‘Abdur Rahman bin Yazid:

We offered a four Rakat prayer at Mina behind Ibn ‘Affan . ‘Abdullah bin Masud was informed about it. He said sadly, "Truly to Allah we belong and truly to Him we shall return.”And added, "I prayed two Rakat with Allah’s Apostle at Mina and similarly with Abu Bakr and with ‘Umar (during their caliphates).”He further said, "May I be lucky enough to have two of the four Rakat accepted (by Allah)."

2.195:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

offered four Rakat of Zuhr prayer with the Prophet (S) at Medina and two Rakat at Dhul-Hulaifa. (i.e. shortened the ‘Asr prayer).

Subject: The Personality Of Uthman Part 2.2

Creation of new islamic laws / The Hajj of Umra

The following ahaadith have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari

Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

By reading the following ahaadith, you will notice that:

1)- In the last Hajj of the prophet, SOME people performed Umra and Hajj together.

2)- Uthman forbade people from performing Umra and Hajj together in his caliphates.

3)- ‘Ali clearly disagreed with Uthman, and informed him that his order has not come from following the tradition of the prophet.

I have one question:

By whose authority, Uthman forbade people from performing Hajj and Umra together?

Why Uthman disobeyed the prophet in this matter?

As you see, Uthman did not follow the tradition of the prophet. Do you think that his decision was correct?

One important note:

Please read your Fiqh books, and bring the reasoning of Sunni scholars from the scratch. Please split the following ahaadith piece by piece, and show me how you get your outcomes.

As I brought you the original ahaadith, I would like you to bring all your understanding from the very beginning. I give the most priority to the narrators of these ahaadith, and very less priority to the personal opinions of scholars.

{I have to add that you had better to carefully examine what scholars said since I almost know what kind of ahaadith you would bring for me.}

2.633:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

We set out with Allah’s Apostles (to Mecca) in the year of the Prophet’s Last Hajj. Some of us had assumed Ihram for ‘Umra only, some for both Hajj and ‘Umra, and others for Hajj only. Allah’s Apostle assumed Ihram for Hajj. So whoever had assumed Ihram for Hajj or for both Hajj and ‘Umra did not finish the Ihram till the day of sacrifice. (See HadithNo.631, 636, and 639).

2.634:

Narrated Marwan bin al-Hakam:

I saw ‘Uthman and ‘‘Ali. ‘Uthman used to forbid people to perform Hajj-at-Tamattu’ and Hajj-al-Qiran (Hajj and ‘Umra together), and when ‘‘Ali saw (this act of ‘Uthman), he assumed Ihram for Hajj and ‘Umra together saying, "Lubbaik for ‘Umra and Hajj,”and said, "I will not leave the tradition of the Prophet on the saying of somebody."

2.640:

Narrated Said bin al-Musaiyab:

‘‘Ali and ‘Uthman differed regarding Hajj-at-Tamattu’ while they were at ‘Usfan (a familiar place near Mecca). ‘‘Ali said, "I see you want to forbid people to do a thing that the Prophet did?”When ‘‘Ali saw that, he assumed Ihram for both Hajj and ‘Umra.

2.642:

Narrated ‘Imran:

We performed Hajj-at-Tamattu’ in the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle and then the Qur’an was revealed (regarding Hajj-at-Tamattu’) and somebody said what he wished (regarding Hajj-at-Tamattu’) according his own opinion.

(Note: This "somebody”is Uthman-Ibn-Affab)

2.747:

Narrated Abu Jamra:

I asked Ibn Abbas about Hajj-at-Tamattu’. He ordered me to perform it. I asked him about the Hadi (sacrifice). He said, "You have to slaughter a camel, a cow or a sheep, or you may share the Hadi with the others.”It seemed that some people disliked it (Hajj-at-Tamattu).

I slept and dreamt as if a person was announcing: "Hajj Mabrur and accepted Mut’ah (Hajj-At-Tamattu’)”I went to Ibn Abbas and narrated it to him. He said, "Allah is Greater. (That was) the tradition of Abu al-Qasim (i.e. Prophet). Narrated Shu’ba that the call in the dream was. "An accepted ‘Umra and Hajj-Mabrur. "

2.638:

Narrated Shu’ba:

Abu Jamra Nasr bin ‘Imran Ad-Duba’i said, "I intended to perform Hajj-at-Tamattu’ and the people advised me not to do so. I asked Ibn Abbas regarding it and he ordered me to perform Hajj-at-Tammatu’. Later I saw in a dream someone saying to me, ‘Hajj-Mabrur (Hajj performed in accordance with the Prophet’s tradition without committing sins and accepted by Allah) and an accepted ‘Umra.’ So I old that dream to Ibn Abbas. He said, ‘This is the tradition of Abu-l-Qasim.’ Then he said to me, ‘Stay with me and I shall give you a portion of my property.’ “I (Shu’ba) asked, "Why (did he invite you)?”He (Abu Jamra) said, "Because of the dream which I had seen."

Subject: The Personality Of Uthman Part 2.3

Creation of new islamic laws /Paying Zakat

The following hadith is taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

The following Hadith clearly shows that Uthman had created some new laws regarding the payement of Zakat. ‘Ali disagreed with him, and informed him of what the prophet really did on Zakat. Uthman clearly stated that he does not need the tradition of the prophet.

I would like to ask you to explain to me why Uthman did against the tradition of the prophet?

4.343:

Narrated Ibn al-Hanafiya:

If ‘Ali had spoken anything bad about ‘Uthman then he would have mentioned the day when some persons came to him and complained about the Zakat officials of ‘Uthman. ‘‘Ali then said to me, "Go to ‘Uthman and say to him, ‘This document contains the regulations of spending the Sadaqa of Allah’s Apostle so order your Zakat officials to act accordingly.”I took the document to ‘Uthman. ‘Uthman said, "Take it away, for we are not in need of it.”I returned to ‘‘Ali with it and informed him of that. He said, "Put it whence you took it.”

Narrated Muhammad bin Suqa: I heard Mundhir At-Tuzi reporting Ibn Hanafiya who said, "My father sent me saying, ‘Take this letter to Uthman for it contains the orders of the Prophet concerning the Sadaqa.’ "

As I stated in another article, this document became famous as the book of ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb. Other ahaadith inside Sahih Bukhari also confirms the existance of such document.

Subject: The Personality Of Umar (Part 1: Creation Of New Islamic Law)

When Umar created new islamic law by his own authority as you see in the following reference, he said:

Ne’ma-al Bid’a Hadha

Do you know what is the God’s rule upon a person who, himself, creats a new islamic law and announce it publicly, and is happy with his innovation?

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 3.227

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, "Whoever prayed at night the whole month of Ramadan out of sincere Faith and hoping for a reward from Allah, then all his previous sins will be forgiven.”Ibn Shihab (a sub-narrator) said, "Allah’s Apostle died and the people continued observing that

(i.e. Nawafil offered individually, not in congregation), and it remained as it was during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and in the early days of ‘Umar’s Caliphate.”‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Abdul Qari said, "I went out in the company of ‘Umar bin al-Khattab one night in Ramadan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, ‘Umar said, ‘In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter) (i.e. let them pray in congregation!)’. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka’b.

Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, ‘Umar remarked, ‘What an excellent Bid’a (i.e. innovation in religion) this is; but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.’ He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night."

Subject: The personality of Umar

(Part 2: Prohibition of islamic law on temporary marriage)

Please see the chapter of Temporary Marriage in Islam for the detailed discussion of temporary marriage.

Subject: The personality of Umar

(Part 3: More on prayrs)

This concerns pointing the finger during the salat, after reading the recent posts on this issue, a few questions come to my mind

1- Who instituted this practice ?
2- Was it practiced by the Prophet (S) ?
3- If yes, please cite the references!
4- If no, then how did this come into practice ?

Here is my answer:

Omar was the one who instituted this practice. As far as my knowledge asserts, I have not come across a hadith that asserts it’s truthfulness. Here is the reference

He (Omar) was saying prayers once when at the verse ‘ Then Serve the Lord of this House ‘ he pointed his finger to the Ka’ba. Shah Waliullah remarks that a gesture of this kind is permitted in prayers.

Sunni references:

- ‘ Al Faruq ‘ Life of Umar the great-Second caliph of Islam, Volume II of II, page 314
Shibli Numani, Publishers Sh. Muhammad Ashraf
Lahore, Pakistan

- Izalatul Khifa, Volume III of IV, page 346
Shah Wali Ullah Muhaddith Dehlavi,
Publishers Qadeemi Kitab Khana, Karachi
Pakistan.

Also the book ‘ The Reliance of Traveller ‘ doesn’t mention a hadith in this context (as far as practiced by the Prophet, May Allah Bless him and his progeny) ... If this was practiced by the Prophet(S), please prove it!

Subject: Is the prophet Kafir? (Shi’a says no, what do you say?)

The following ahaadith have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari

Arabic-English

Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan

Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara

Kaze Publications.

1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)

(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)

Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

There is a rule among one branch of Sunni school of thought which believe that the sahabah of the prophet will never lie on him, and will never be disloyal to the prophet. They also say that the prophet never said harsh things upon his sahabah. The following is one example where seems that loyalty of the people who participated in Badr is patched by God, and is not changeable.

5.327:

Narrated Rifaa:

(who was one of the Badr warriors) Gabriel came to the Prophet and said, "How do you look upon the warriors of Badr among yourselves?”The Prophet said, "As the best of the Muslims.”or said a similar statement. On that, Gabriel said, "And so are the Angels who participated in the Badr (battle)."

The follwoing hadith, also, confirms this rule. While a woman was cursing her relative, Aisha told her not to do that. One interesting point in the following hadith is about Az-Zuhri. He was a companion of the prophet as well. But as the hadith is telling you, he forged ahaadith against Aisha. It was common on those days that people tell forged ahaadith on behalf of the prophet, and against each other.

"Sahabh against Sahab”is one article which would be sent to SRI, Insha-allah, and will discuss this issue. The science of Hadith came out like this. Imam Bukhari or Muslim, for example, went to find the correct ahaadith. They tried to gather such ahaadith by chains which are ended to a Sahabah. Interesting enough that the existance of such science, itself, confirms that sahabah did not tell the truth always on behalf of the prophet. (Not all of them. Of course, there were some trustable sahabah who narrated ahaadith correctly. But, this science deals with those who are not telling the truth. A scholar must detect this person, and reject his narrations. These rejected people by scholars, by Imam Bukhari or muslim, were, in fact, the sahabah of the prophet sometime.)

5.359:

Narrated Yunus bin Yazid:

I heard Az-Zuhri saying, "I heard ‘Urwa bin Az-Zubair. Said bin al-Musaiyab, ‘Alqama bin Waqqas and ‘Ubaidullah bin ‘Abdullah each narrating part of the narrative concerning ‘Aisha the wife of the
Prophet. ‘Aisha said: When I and Um Mistah were returning, Um Mistah stumbled by treading on the end of her robe, and on that she said, ‘May Mistah be ruined.’ I said, ‘You have said a bad thing, you curse a man who took part in the battle of Badr!.”Az-Zuhri then narrated the narration of the Lie (forged against ‘Aisha).

Now let us see if we have understood these rules correctly:

In the first reference, the prophet says that he is free of the work which one of his sahabah, Khlid Ibn Waleed, has done, which was KILLING people. Note that I am not talking about after the death of the prophet. I am talking about an event which took place in the life time of the prophet.

In the second reference, one of his sahabah who participated in the battle of Badr was becoming disloyal to the prophet at the very last years of the prophet’s life. He wanted to send a woman to tell Mecca about the invasion of muslim. He was forgiven by the prophet since he participated in the battle of Badr. However, participating in the battle of Badr does not guarantee that the sahabah will be always loyal to the prophet. It is not an automatic conclusion from being in the Badr.

9.299:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

The Prophet sent (an army unit under the command of) Khalid bin al-Walid to fight against the tribe of Bani Jadhima and those people could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna,”but they said, "Saba’na! Saba’na! “Khalid kept on killing some of them and taking some others as captives, and he gave a captive to everyone of us and ordered everyone of us to kill his captive. I said, "By Allah, I shall not kill my captive and none of my companions shall kill his captive!"

Then we mentioned that to the Prophet and he said, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid bin al-Walid has done,”and repeated it twice.

{The arabic text of the highlighted part is: Allahomma Ennii Abra’o elaika memma Sana’a Khalif Ibn alwaleed Baraa-at and Abra’o are from the same root.}

The following hadith narrated with different chains, and in one of them, Umar says:

Let me chop off the head of this hypocrite

By hypocrite, he meant Hatib who participated in the battle of Badr, and was in fact one of the sahabah of the prophet.

4.251:

Narrated ‘Ubaidullah bin Abi Rafi:

I heard ‘‘Ali saying, "Allah’s Apostle sent me, Az-Zubair and al-Miqdad somewhere saying, ‘Proceed till you reach Rawdat Khakh. There you will find a lady with a letter. Take the letter from her.’ “So, we set out and our horses ran at full pace till we got at Ar-Rawda where we found the lady and said (to her). "Take out the letter.”She replied, "I have no letter with me.”We said, "Either you take out the letter or else we will take off your clothes.”So, she took it out of her braid.

We brought the letter to Allah’s Apostle and it contained a statement from Hatib bin Abi Balta a to some of the Meccan pagans informing them of some of the intentions of Allah’s Apostle. Then Allah’s Apostle said, "O Hatib! What is this?”Hatib replied, "O Allah’s Apostle!

Don’t hasten to give your judgment about me. I was a man closely connected with the Quraish, but I did not belong to this tribe, while the other emigrants with you, had their relatives in Mecca who would protect their dependents and property . So, I wanted to recompense for my lacking blood relation to them by doing them a favor so that they might protect my dependents. I did this neither because of disbelief not apostasy nor out of preferring Kufr (disbelief) to Islam.”Allah’s Apostle, said, "Hatib has told you the truth.”Umar said, O Allah’s Apostle! Allow me to chop off the head of this hypocrite.”Allah’s Apostle said, "Hatib participated in the battle of Badr, and who knows, perhaps Allah has already looked at the Badr warriors and said, ‘Do whatever you like, for I have forgiven you.”

The same hadith is narrated at: 4.314, 5.319, 5.572, 6.412, 8.276, 9. 72.

Are Munafiqeen counted among Sahabah?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

I have some simple questions from my Sunni friends. Most of you say that ALL Sahabah are not Munafiqeen, not even one single person. Let us accept this opinion for a while. My question is:

Were Munafiqeen Counted As Sahabah?

In other words:

1)- Please define the word "Sahabah”clearly, and mathematically such that it is complete without any lack.

2)- Please tell us that some people such as Abdullah-Ibn-Obai, who was the most famous Munafiq, are considered Sahabah or not?

3)- Please tell us if other Munafiqeen who existed in the life time of the prophet were among Sahabah or not?

4)- And if your answer to (3) is NO, please name all of Munafiqeen for us who are not sahabah. In other words, you should be able to distinguish between Sahabah and Munafiqeen. You should be able to categorize and NAME the Munafiqeen for us, all of them. If not all of them, at least 100 of them. If you can not put a border between Sahabah and Munafiqeen, then how am I supposed to know who is Munafiq and who is one of the sahabah?

5)- And if your answer to (3) is YES, which means that Munafiqeen were Sahabah, do you agree that I can bring one person who was Sahabah and was Munafiq as well, and his name is Abdullah-Ibn-Obai? Then, do you agree that I can think of some other sahabah who were Munafiq too or not?

The truth is (I do not care if a Shi’a/Sunni likes this or not) that you can not announce a person as non-muslim when he says that:

1)- There is no God, but Allah,

2)- Muhammad is the true messenger of Allah.

If you call such person as non-muslim as easily as wind coming out of your mouth, you must prepare yourself for the hard time when facing the fire of Allah.

A person will remain muslim as long as he confesses the above two rules, no matter if he/she says:

a)- A hadith is true or not,
b)- One of Sahabah lied upon prophet or not,
c)- One of sahabah has made adultry,
d)- One of Sahabah has stolen something (or he is thief),
e)- One of Sahabah has killed somebody intentionally and without having the right to do so,
f)- One of sahabah has fought wrongly for the sake of Sheitan,
g)- ...

Replace "Sahabah”with "A very respected scholar", and read it again. The problem with the present society of islam is that people allow themselves to attack their brothers and sisters (Sunni or Shi’a) and call each other as non-muslim. If these people get the power, they will kill whoever disagrees with them, as they did hundred years ago. (Thanks God that they do not have the power now.) This ugly habit which is pleasing sheitan, and upsetting Allah is now spread over the entire islamic societies.

I chanllenged you several times, and I saw you fail over and over again. If you understand that there is no source for your ugly habit, at least try to hide it. Such habit does not come from a true muslim.

Once a person said:

If a person says that one of Sahabah (named XXX) has lied upon the prophet, he/she has meant that this one of Sahabah (XXX) is Kafir, or non-muslim. Since he has declared a muslim (XXX) as non-muslim, he, himself, becomes non-muslim.

I have no objection for the second part of the statement as I brought it myself. My question is specifically for the first part. I asked you to bring me a japanese or arabic dictionary and show this new word to me.

If you fail to bring such evidence, be human, and leave your ugly habit. A person who uses such word upon another muslim, is considered to be non-muslim. I am not saying this. I am nobody to say this. (This word "non-muslim”is not a simple word, it is a very heavy word which comes along with the fire of the Hell, and it should be spelled with the authority of Allah and his messenger.) This is what is recorded in the book of Sahih Bukhari and Muslim. If you care about these two books, and if you "listen and obey”these two books, at least "obey”these ahaadith in these two books. I am warning you explicitly that such person is considered as non-muslim by the following rule:

If a person (XX) declares another muslim (YY) as non-muslim while he (XX) knows that YY is muslim, XX becomes immediately non-muslim.

Such person is considered to be Mortadd, since he is leaving islam by calling his muslim brother/sister as non-muslim intentionally.

The Pillars Of Islam

In the name of Allah, who is aware of the hearts of people;

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.7

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

Allah’s Apostle said: Islam is based on (the following) five (principles):

1. To testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle.
2. To offer the (compulsory congregational) prayers dutifully and perfectly.
3. To pay Zakat (i.e. obligatory charity) .
4. To perform Hajj. (i.e. Pilgrimage to Mecca)
5. To observe fast during the month of Ramadan.

Do you see anything else?

Shi’a vs. Iran

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Some people have fallen victims of confusing Iran with Shi’a. They try to imply that Shi’a were persians who hated Arabs and that is why they oppose Umar and some other companions.

Iran is a country and Shi’a is a belief, they are two different entities!

Many people are Shi’a but they are NOT Iranian. There are Shi’a in Iraq, Hijaz (Arabian Peninsula), Syria, Lebanon, and all of them are Arabs. In addition to that, there are Shi’a in Pakistan, India, Africa, America, and all of them are neither Arabs nor Persians.

More over all of the 12 Imams of Shi’a are Arabs, from Quraish and from Bani Hashim. If Persians were prejudice and hated Arabs, as some people claim, they would have chosen Salman al-Farsi as their Imam since he was a great companion of the Prophet, and respected by both Shi’its and Sunnits.

On the other hand, most of the leading Sunni Imams were Persian, such as Abu Hanifa, al-Nisa’i, al-Tirmithi, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah, al- Ghazzali, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi, and many others.

If Shi’a were all Persians who rejected Umar because he destroyed their power, then how can we explain the rejection of Arabs who were not Persians? Thus, this is an illogical claim. These people refused Umar because of his role in excluding ‘Ali from leadership after the departure of prophet and because of the tragic disputes.

It is true that Shi’a whether they were Arabs or Persians or any other nationalities, followed closely Qur’an, and the tradition of the Prophet transmitted by his family, and refused to accept the alternatives, despite the repressive/oppressive policies of the Umayad and later the Abbasid for seven centuries. During that period, they chased Shi’a every where. They killed them, displaced them, denied their rightful grants, tried to destroy their cultural and intellectual heritage, and spread all sorts of rumors about them in order to keep people away from them. The legacy of such policies is still felt up to now.

Another Wahhabi (Umayad reborn) mentioned:

All the historical records show that truely Iran was the hotbed for most of the turbulence in the Islamic history, be it the Khurramiah, the Khawarij, the Hashshasheen, the Qaramitah, and all kind of corrupted groups including the worshippers of the 12.

Pure non-sense. Khawarij appeared in Iraq. Hamdan Qarmat (the head of Qaramitah) was living in Kufah. Most of Qaramitah were from Yemen. FYI, there is no group who worship 12. This is what you have been granted by your mother’s milk.

Although I do not want to favor any nationality, but the authentic Sunnicollections contain many traditions which is in favor of the Persians. I just quote some of them here:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.420

Narrated Abu Huraira:

While we were sitting with the Prophet Surat al-Jumu’a was revealed to him, and when the Verse, "And He (Allah) has sent him (Muhammad) also to other (Muslims).....’ (62:3) was recited by the Prophet, I said, "Who are they, O Allah’s Apostle?”The Prophet did not reply till I repeated my question thrice. At that time, Salman al-Farisi was with us. So Allah’s Apostle put his hand on Salman, saying, "Even if Faith were at (the place of) Ath-Thuraiya (pleiades, the highest star), then some men or man from these people (i.e. Salman’s folk) would attain it."

The next tradition right after the previous one:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.421

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said "Then some men from these people would attain it."

I have to also mention that Salman was from a province inside of Iran named "Fars". It is now in the middle of present Iran. Sahih Muslim has also many traditions in this regard:

Abu Hurairah reported: We were sitting in the company of Allah’s Apostle(may peace be upon him) that Sura al-Jumua was revealed to him and when he recited (these words):

"Others from amongst them who have not yet joined them (62:3)”

a person amongst them (those who were sitting there) said: Allah’s messenger! But Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) made no reply, until he questioned him once, twice, or thrice. And there was amongst us Salman the Persian. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) placed his hand on Salman and then said: Even if faith were near the Pleiades, a man from amongst these would surely find it.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter MLI, titled as: The merit of the people of Persia, Tradition #6178

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If the din (religion) were at the pleiades, even then a person from Persia would have taken hold of it, or one amongst the Persian descent would have surely found it.

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter MLI, titled as: The merit of the people of Persia, Tradition #6177

Again, I do not intend to favor any nationality, but I merely quoted these traditions to show the absurdity of the false aqusations against the Muslims from Iran.

The Wahhabi contributor further mentioned:

Actually most of Iran have accepted the SUnnah of the prophet and joined the Jamaah before they were forcefuly converted to Rafidhism by the Safwiyyeen, to show the extent of the strength of the fitnah in there.

Most people of Persia followed Ahlul-Bayt from the beginning of the appearance of Islam in that place, eventhough the Umayad and Abbasid oppressive governments continued to prosecute the followers of Ahlul-Bayt in Persia, Iraq, Hijaz, and other places.

No body can force a person to convert into another religion, since religion is in the heart of People and not in ID. Your logic slips away from me when I see many Arabs inside the Arabian Peninsula (what is now know as the kingdom of Saudi Arabia) are the Shi’a of Imam ‘Ali (as) despite the oppressive regimes in Hijaz since the early history of Islam. Perhaps you give me an excuse that Hijaz was a part of Iran at the time!

Imam Husayn (as): A brief Description and Analysis

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Since we are approaching to the day of Ashura (10th of Muharram), the anniversary of the martyrdom of al-Husayn (as), the grandson of Prophet (S), we use this opportunity to give a short biography of Imam Husayn.

Al-Husayn (as), the second child of ‘Ali and Fatimah, was born in the year 4 AH, and after the martyrdom of his elder brother, al-Hasan, became his successor. Husayn was Imam for 10 years which was mostly during the reign of Muawiyah, except the last 6 month which coincided with the reign of Yazid. Imam Husayn lived under the most difficult conditions of suppression and persecution. This was due to the fact that, first of all, religious laws and regulations had lost much of their weight and credit, and the edicts of the Umayyah government had gained complete authority and power.

Secondly, Muawiyah and his fans made use of every possible means to put aside the Household of prophet and to move them out of the way. Above all, Muawiyah wanted to strengthen the basis of future kingdom of his son, Yazid, who because of his lack of principles and scruples was opposed with a large group of Muslims. Therefore, in order to quell all opposition, Muawiyah had undertaken more severe means until he died in 60 AH and his son Yazid took his place.

Giving the oath of allegiance, was an old Arab practice which was carried out in important matters like governorship. Well-known people would give the oath of allegiance as a sign of agreement and obedience to their king and showing their support for his future actions. Braking the agreement after the oath of allegiance, was considered as a definite crime. Muawiyah during his life time, had asked well-known people to give the oath of allegiance to Yazid, but did not impose this request upon Imam Husayn.

He particularly told Yazid in his last will that if Imam Husayn refused to give the oath of allegiance, he should take it easy because Muawiyah knew the bad consequences of such enforcement. However because of his egoism and recklessness, Yazid neglected his father’s advice, and immediately after taking over the power, ordered the governor of Medina to either take the pledge of allegiance from Imam Husayn, or send his head to Damascus. After the governor of Medina informed this demand to him, Imam Husayn asked for a delay to think about the matter, and moved with his family toward Mecca overnight. He sought refuge in the sanctuary of God in Mecca which is official place of refuge in Islam. This happened at the beginning of Shaban 60 AH. Imam Husayn stayed in Mecca for nearly four month.

This news spread throughout the Islamic world, and many people who were tired of inequalities during Muawiyah reign and were even more disturbed when Yazid took over, corresponded with Imam Husayn and expressed their sympathy for him. On the other hand, a flood of letters began to flow, specially from Iraq and particularly from the city of Kufah, inviting the Imam to go there and to build up a government. Naturally such situation was dangerous for Yazid.

The stay of Imam Husayn in Mecca continued until the season of pilgrimage when Muslims from all over the Islamic world came to Mecca to perform Hajj. The Imam realized that some of the followers of Yazid had entered Mecca as pilgrims with the mission of killing Imam during the ceremonies of Hajj with the arms they carried under the special pilgrimage dress.

In order to safeguard the great sanctuary of Mecca, Imam Husayn decided to leave for Iraq before completing the ceremony of Hajj. When he was asked the reason for the mysterious departure, Imam Husayn said that he would perform this year’s pilgrimage in the desert of Karbala, offering the sacrifice of not any animals, but himself and his family and friends. Giving a short speech in the vast crowd of people, he announced that he was setting for Iraq, and said he would be martyred. He asked people to join him in attaining the goal of offering their lives in the path of God.

Imam Husayn was determined not to give his allegiance to Yazid and fully knew that he would be killed. But it was not the time to save the life. That moment was the right time to water the faded lawn of Islam by his blood. Some of outstanding people of Mecca stood in the way of Imam Husayn and warned him the danger of the move he was making.

But he answered that he refused to pay allegiance and to give his approval to a government of injustice and tyranny. He added that wherever he would go, he would be killed, so he would leave Mecca in order to preserve the respect for the House of God, and not to allow this respect be destroyed by letting his blood spilled there.

While on the way of Kufah, he received the striking news that under the pressure of Yazid’s agents, people of Kufa did not support his representatives and turned back, and some of them joined the Yazid’s army to kill Imam’s representatives in Kufah. The feet of those martyrs were tied and they were dragged through the streets of Kufah. The city and its surroundings were under very strict marshal law by countless soldiers of enemy who where waiting to face Imam. There was no way for Imam to turn into unless to march ahead and face the death.

Approximately 44 miles from Kufah, in a desert called Karbala, Imam and his followers were surrounded by the army of Yazid. They cut off the water supply of the Household of Prophet and their companions and their families among them were many women and children. For eight days they stayed in that place under the heat of the sun, and the circle among them narrowed and the number of enemy’s army increased by a number of 30,000 fully equipped soldiers of Yazid.

In the following night, Imam gathered his companions and gave the a short speech saying that there was nothing ahead but martyrdom. He added that since the enemy was concerned only with his person, he would free them from all obligations so that any one who wished could escape in the darkness of the night and save his life. Then he ordered the lights to be turned off, and most of his companions who had joint him for their own advantages, dispersed. Only those whose hearts were tested by Allah remained who were about 40 companions and some from Bani Hashim (his relatives).

Once again, Imam gathered those who remained to put them on the test. He addressed his companions and Hashimite relatives, repeating that enemy was only concerned with him and they could escape the danger in the darkness of night. But this time the faithful companions answered each in own way that they would not deviate from the right path and would never leave him alone. They said that they would defend the Household of Prophet to the last drop of their blood as long as they could carry a sword.

The enemy intended to start the war in the eve of the ninth day of the month, but Imam asked for a delay till next morning to worship all over the night for the last time. During the night, some 30 soldiers of enemy joint Imam, among them was Hurr who was one of the Generals of the army of enemy. They finally chose their way to be with Imam, and Imam accepted their repentance. In this way the number of his followers became close to 90 people consisting of 72 companions and 18 male members of his family and relatives, while enemy was more than 45,000 by then.

On the tenth of Muharram of the year 61 (680) That inequitable war began. That day, they fought from morning till their final breath, and all the companions and the relatives were martyred. Among those who were killed were two children of Imam Hasan, only thirteen and eleven years old, and a five years old child of Imam Husayn.

When Imam himself was ready to fight, he saw his six-month-old baby is dying from thirst. Imam brought his infant near to enemy demanded some water for baby, saying: You want me but not this baby so take him and give him some water. The words of Imam has not been finished that the thirst of the baby was quenched by a deadly poisoned arrow from enemy which pinned the baby’s neck to the arm of his father. Imam threw some of his blood toward sky saing: "O’ Lord! Your Husayn has offered whatever You have given him. Bless me by acceptance of this sacrifice.”Finally Imam came to the field and fought for a long time and was finally martyred. The army of Yazid having killed Imam Husayn, cut his head and raised it on a lance.

The army of enemy, after ending the war, burned the tents of women and children accompanying Imam and his companions, and plundered those helpless women. They decapitated the bodies of the martyrs, denuded them and threw them to the ground without burial. Then they moved women and children along with the heads of the martyrs to Kufah. The bodies of the martyrs were under the sunshine for three days till a tribe passing that place found them and performed the burial.

The event of Karbala, the capture of women and children of the Household of Prophet, their being taken as prisoners from town to town, and the speeches made by Zaynab, the daughter of ‘Ali, who was one of the prisons, became a scandal for Umayyah Kingdom. Such abuse of the Household of Prophet nullified the propaganda which Muawiyah had built up for years. The scandal reached to the extent that Yazid denounced the action of his agents in public. That was what excactly Imam Husayn wanted to do, otherwise he would not bring women and children with him and sacrifice some, and let the rest to become captives. That was the only way to make a wave in order to awaken the Muslim nation.

The event of Karbala was a major factor in the overthrow of Umayyah kingdom though its effect was delayed. Among its immediate results were the revolts and rebellions combined with bloody wars which continued for twelve years.

During those riots non of the important elements in Karbala could escape revenge and punishment, including Yazid.

Muhammad Iqbal (from Lahore, Pakistan) said:

"Imam Husayn uprooted despotism forever till the day of Judgment. He watered the dry garden of freedom with surging wave of his blood, and indeed he awakened the sleeping Muslim nation. If Imam Husayn had aimed at acquiring a worldly empire, he would not have traveled he did. Husayn weltered in blood and dust for the sake of truth. Verily he, therefore, became bed-rock (foundation) of the Muslim creed; There is no God but Allah."

Charles Dickens had said the following about Imam Husayn (as):

"If Husayn fought to quench his worldly desires, then I do not understand why his sisters, wives and children accompanied him. It stands to reason therefore that he sacrificed purely for Islam."

Thomas Carlyle has relayed this about the Tragedy of Karbala:

"The best lesson which we get from the tragedy of Karbala is that Husayn and his companions were the rigid believers of God. They illustrated that numerical superiority does not count when it comes to truth and falsehood. The victory of Husayn despite his minority marvels me!"

The famous, Dr. K. Sheldrake on Imam Husayn (as) said this:

"Husayn marched with his little company not to glory, not to power or wealth, but to a supreme sacrifice and every member of that gallant band, male and female, knew that the foes were implacable, were not only ready to fight but to kill. Denied even water for the children, they remained parched under a burning sun, amid scorching sands yet no one faltered for a moment and bravely faced the greatest odds without flinching."

World famous Arab historian al-Fakhri has said this about Imam Husayn’s sacrifice:

"This is a catastrophe whereof I care not to speak at length, deeming it alike too grievous and too horrible. For verily, it was a catastrophe than that which naught more shameful has happened in Islam...There happened therein such a foul slaughter as to cause man’s flesh to creep with horror. And again I have dispersed with my long description because of it’s notoriety, for it is the most lamented of catastrophes."

The previous four quotes have been taken from "The Martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as)”- Yousuf Lalljee

Some Traditions on Imam al-Husayn (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In this article, I would like to present some of the traditions recorderded in the Sunni collections of the traditions Regarding him:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the chiefs of the youth of Paradise and Fatimah is the chief of their women."

Sunni references:

(1) Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p660, on the authority of Abu Sa’id and Hudhayfa
(2) Sunan Ibn Majah, Introduction 8
(3) al-Tabarani, on the authorities of: Umar, ‘Ali, Jabir, Abu Hurayrah, Usamah Ibn Zaid, al-Baraa, Ibn ‘Adi, and Ibn Masud.
(4) al-Kubra, by al-Nisa’i
(5) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 62,82, v3, pp 3,64, v5, p391
(6) Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p771, Tradition #1360
(7) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 166,167
(8) Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v5, p71
(9) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p187
(10) Tuhfatul Ashraf, by Lumzi, v3, p31
(11) Ibn Habban, as mentioned in al-Mawarid, pp 551,553
(12) al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p290
(13) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6154

Also it is narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "Husayn is from me and I am from Husayn."

Sunni references:

(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p172
(2) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p772, Tradition #1361
(3) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p 177
(4) Amali, by Abu Nu’aym al-Isbahani, p 64
(5) al-Kuna wal Asmaa, by al-Dulabi, v1, p88
(6) al-Tabarani, v3, p21
(7) Adab by al-Bukhari, also al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah, as quoted in:
(8) al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p291
(9) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6160

The last part of the above tradition probably means that Imam Husayn (as), by sacrificing himself and his family, preserved the religion of Prophet Muhammad (S) from full annihilation.

Abu Huraira narrated:

The Prophet (S) looked toward ‘Ali, Hasan, Husayn, and Fatimah (sa), and then said: "I am in war with those who will fight you, and in peace with those who are peaceful to you."

Sunni references:

(1) Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p699
(2) Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, p52
(3) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p767, Tradition #1350
(4) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p149
(5) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p169
(6) al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani, v3, p30, also in al-Awsat
(7) Jami’ al-Saghir, by al-Ibani, v2, p17
(8) Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v7, p137
(9) Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p144
(10) Talkhis, by al-Dhahabi, v3, p149
(11) Dhakha’ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p25
(12) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6145

Also:

The Messenger of Allah said: "He who loves al-Hasan and al-Husayn, loved me, and he who makes them angry has made me angry."

Sunni reference:

- Sunan Ibn Majah,
- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, from Abu Hurairah
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as quited in:
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p292

It has been narrated in two wordings that:

The Messenger of Allah said: "I named Hasan and Husayn and Muhsin the names of the sons of Aaron (Haroon) who were: Shubbar, Shubair, and Mushbir."

Sunni references:

(1) Sunan Abu Dawud al-Tilyasi, v1, p232 (without mentioning Muhsin)
(2) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p774, Tradition #1365
(3) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 165,168
(4) Kashf al-Astar, by al-Bazzar, v2, p416
(5) Ibn Habban, as quoted in al-Mawarid, p551
(6) al-Tabarani, v3, p100
(7) Idhaah, Abdul Ghani, from Salman al-Farsi
(8) al-Mu’jam, by al-Baghawi, as quoted in:
(9) al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p292

The third son of Lady Fatimah (sa) who was pre-named by the Prophet as Muhsin, was miscarried shortly after the demise of Prophet.

Usamah ibn Zayd narrated:

I went to the Prophet (S) one night about something I required and he came out with something (I did not know what) under his cloak. When I had finished telling him my business I asked him what he had under his cloak, and when he opened it I saw al-Hasan and al-Husayn on his hips. He then said, "These are my sons and my daughter’s sons. O Allah, I love them, so I beseech Thee to love them and those who love them.”

Sunni References:

- Sahih Tirmidhi, per:
- Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6156

Anas ibn Malik Narrated:

When Allah’s Messenger (S) was asked which member of his family was dearest to him, he replied, "Al-Hasan and al-Husayn.”He used to say to Fatimah, "Call my two sons to me,”and then would sniff and cuddle them.

Sunni References:

- Sahih Tirmidhi, per:
- Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6158

Imam Husayn (as) said: "Don’t you see that the truth is not followed and the falsehood is not discouraged? (The situation is so severe) so that a Believer wishes to meet Allah (i.e., to die). And today I don’t see death but prosperity, and living with tyrants is nothing but disgust and disgrace."

Sunni Reference: Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v2, p39

إني لا أرى الموت إلا السعادة و الحياة مع الظالمين إلا برما.

Imam Husayn (as) said in the day of Ashura: "If you do not have any religion, then at least be free (open-minded) in your present life."

إن لم يكن لكم دين فكونوا أحراراً في دنياكم.

Imam Husayn (as) said: "By Allah, I shall not give my oath to you like a humiliated one, and nor shall I flee like the captive."

و الله لا أعطيكم بيدي إعطاء الذليل و لا أفِرُ فرار العبيد.

al-Bukhari Narrated from Ibn Abi Na’m:

I have heard Prophet saying: "They (Hasan and Husayn) are my two sweet- smelling flowers in this world."

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v8, Tradition #23

Again al-Bukhari narrated from Ibn Abi Nu’m:

A person asked Abdullah Ibn Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply): "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah’s Apostle . The Prophet said, They (i.e. Hasan and Husayn) are my two sweet basils in this world.”

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v5, Tradition #96

Narrated Anas Ibn Malik said:

"The head of al-Husayn was brought to Ubaidullah Ibn Ziyad and was put in a tray, and then Ibn Ziyad started playing with a stick at the nose and mouth of al-Husayn’s head, and saying something about his handsome features.”Anas then said (to him): "Al-Husayn resembled the Prophet more than any other people."

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v5, Tradition #91

Imam Husayn said: "I revolted not for wickedness nor for fame. Verily I rose only to seek for rectification in the nation of my grandfather, The Messenger of Allah."

إني لم أخرج اشراً و لا بطراً و إنما خرجت لطلب الإصلاح في أمة جدي رسول الله.

Imam Husayn said: "The true life is all having a strong idea and striving (for that idea)."

إن الحياة عقيدة و جهاد.

Imam Husayn said: "People are the slaves of this world, and religion is just in their tong. They keep it as long as it meets their comfortable life. But when the test comes, religion holders become very few."

إن الناس عبيد الدنيا و الدين لَعِقٌ على ألسِنَتهم يحوطونه ما درَّت معائشهم. فإذا مُحِّصوا بالبلاء قل الديَّانون.

Peace, with sception and hope, I seek, (congruity’s scope I know is bleak)
To mend I crave (rather than kill)
To spill blood, abhor I will.
Intend I do, no force to use (If sense in you I can infuse)
But the rules, supreme, of the divine faith
Resolved I am, to defend till death.
Face your hostile moves I will.
Thought accord I covet, seek peace still.
A holy war it means indeed
If waged to crush the devil’s creed.
No rancor, `against you,’ I hold
But faith do cherish - as I told.
Islam I will resolutely shield
Burnt will stand and never yield.
Would welcome death (and make it tame)
Would rather die than live in shame.
Your Prophet’s scion I’m - you know
At least some regard to his name show.
His singular dictum is my creed:
"Universal good”I adore, indeed.
‘Ali, the paragon, the seraphic Imam
Cham of the faith, the shield of Islam
Inimitable, impeccable: I am his son
His peerless attributes I have won.
My heart is virtues’ abode and nest
Blessedness harbors in my breast.

The Prophet Crying For Imam Al-Husayn

Narrated Salma:

"I went to visit Umm Salamah and found her weeping. I asked her what was making her weep and she replied that she had seen Allah’s Messenger (S) (meaning in a dream) with dust on his head and beard. She asked him what was the matter and he replied, `I have just been present at the slaying of al-Husayn.’"

- Sahih Tirmidhi, per:

- Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6157

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

One day at midday he saw in a dream the Prophet (S) disheveled and dusty with a bottle containing blood in his hand and said, "You for whom I would give my father and mother as ransom, what is this?”

He replied, "This is the blood of al-Husayn and his companions which I have been collecting today.”He told that he was reckoning that time and found that he had been killed at that time.

- Musnad Ahmad Hanbal;
- Dala’il an-Nubuwwah, by al-Bayhaqi; per:
- Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6172

Aisha narrated:

The Prophet (S) said: "Gabriel informed me that my grandson al- Husayn (as) will be killed after me in the land of al-Taff and brought me this Turbah (mudd/soil) and informed me that this is the soil of the place he will be martyred."

Sunni reference:

- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d,
- al-Tabarani, as quoted in:
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p292

Not only human beings, but also the Jinns mourn for Imam al-Husayn. It has been narrated that after his (as) martyrdom:

Um Salama (the wife of Prophet (S)) said: I heard the Jinns (the unseen creatures) mourning for al-Husayn."

Sunni references:

(1) Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v4, part 1, p26
(2) Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p776, Tradition #1373
(3) Tabarani, v3, pp 130-131
(4) Tahdhib, v7, p404 As for the Shi’ite references, there is a traditions from the Prophet

(S) that: "When al-Khidr (as) met Moses (as), he explained and forecast the catastrophe of Karbala (the place where this tragedy took place) in the day of Ashura for Moses, and the calamities that will happen on that day, and then both al-Khidr and Moses cried and screamed severely.”

Also Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated that he met Imam ‘Ali (as) in Ziqar, and Imam ‘Ali pulled out a book that was written of the words of Prophet (S) in which the Prophet had explained the tragedy of Ashura and the slaughtering of his grandson al-Husayn and how he will be killed and who kills him and who assist them and who will be martyred with him. Then Imam ‘Ali (as) screamed severely and caused Ibn Abbas (ra) to cry.

Umayad Sanctifying Ashura

Bani Umayyah (Umayad) forced people to celebrate the day of Ashura (10th of Muharram) as a blessed day, and encouraged people to buy and store their annual food on that day and to fast that day as Sunnah, by fabricating traditions in this regard which were solely designed to overshadow and to cover up the great catastrophe of the slaughtering the household of Prophet (S).

To make people believe that Ashura is a blessed day, day fabricated that it was in that day when Allah saved Bani Israel from Pharaoh. this is while Moses (as) and his companions were saved and passed the Nile river in the month of Rabiul-Awwal.

They also invented that the repentance of Adam was accepted on that day, while it was accepted in the month of Zil-Hajjah. They say that it was the day that Jonah (Yunos) was saved from the body of fish and the ark of Noah was settled on earth while it was on the 18th of Zil-Hajjah. All those traditions were fabricated By Bani Umayyah to cover their crimes. Imran ibn Husayn narrated that:

The Prophet (S) at the time of his death disliked three tribes:

Thaqif, the Banu Hanifah and the Banu Umayyah.

- Sahih Tirmidhi, per:
- Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #5983

"The Children of Umayad shall ascend to my pulpit. I have seen them in my dreams jumping on my pulpit like monkeys."

Then the Prophet said that the following verse was revealed about the Umayad:

And We made that dream, which We have shown you, only as a test to the people and the cursed tree in the Qur’an. And We warn them but it only increases their extreme transgression! (17:60)

Sunni references:

- Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Volume 3 page 81
Printed by Muhammad ‘Ali Subaih in Egypt

- Fakhr al-Din al-Razi in his commentary of the Holy Qur’an, Chapter 17 Volume 5 Pages 413 - 414
Second Printing by al-Matbaah al-Sarafeyah 1304 H

Ashura is the day of mourning and lamentation. In a tradition from Ahlul- Bayt, it is said that "whoever celebrates this day as a blessed day, he will be resurrected in the day of judgment with Yazid.”The reason is clear, and it is because there are traditions from Prophet (S), every body who is pleased with an action, he will be resurrected in the day of judgment with the one who did that action. Performing a non-obligatory Fasting is a sign of being pleased and a sign of happiness.

I know you say such traditions are narrated in Sahih xxxx. But remember that there are many contradictory reports are within these xxxx which disprove your hypothesis as being Sahih books.

Bismillah-hirehman-nirraheem

Muhammad came in the kingdom of God,
as a messenger of peace as the master of creed.
He influenced the world with ‘Ali’s help,
and all the sons from his daughter’s breed.

Fatimah the lady of God’s paradise,
‘Ali the warrior, the leader, the wise.
Hassan, the heir of eternal lore,
Hussain, the martyr, the heaven’s door.

Call ‘Ali in the trouble, Almighty says,
because in his presence the evil decays.
He’s the lion of God, he’s the sword of God,
and all his believers are one righteous squad.
Islam’s prosperity is the gift of Hussain,
in the way of God, he sacrificed his clan.

He gave his head but not his grace,
His martyrdom is a slap on the devils face.
The grandson of prophet decided to fight,
to unveil the Satan, and bring him in light.
The food was banned, the water was stopped,
but on his mind the triumph had topped.

Zainab was with her brother all the time,
and participated as much to demolish the crime.
Her surety was Abbas, the holder of the flag,
whose hand on the emblem is the victory’s tag.

The thirst was a menace, the hunger a threat,
an example for all the mankind was set.
But the righteuos fought, and died on the faith,
and the right won, against the evils wraith.

More Sayings From The Holy Prophet About Imam Husayn:

1. Whosoever wishes to such a person who lives on earth but whose dignity is honoured by the Heaven-Dwellers, should see my grandson Husayn.

2. O my son! Thy flesh is my flesh and thy blood is my blood; thou art a leader, the son of a leader and the brother of a leader; thou art a spiritual guide, the son of a spiritual guide and the brother of a spiritual guide; thou art an Imam the son of an Imam and the brother of an Imam; thou art the father of nine Imams, the ninth of whom would be the Qaim (the last infallible spiritual guide)

3. The punishment inflicted on the murderer of Husayn in hell would be equal to half of the total punishment to be imposed on the entire sinners of the world.

4. When the Holy Prophet informed Lady Fatimah of the Martyrdom in store for his grandson, she burst into tears as asked "O my father! when would my son be martyred?”"In such a critical moment,”replied the Holy Prophet, "when neither I nor you, nor ‘Ali would be alive.”

This accentuated her grief and she inquired again, "Who then, O my father, would commemorate Husayn’s Martyrdom?”The Holy Prophet said, "The men and the women of a particular group of my followers, who will befriend my Ahlul Bayt, will mourn for Husayn and commemorate his martyrdom each year in every century."

Reasons Behind the Commemoration of Imam al-Husayn (as)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

From: rached@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu [20] (Rached Zantout)

Subject: Martyrdom of Hussein Bin ‘Ali (The Master of the Youth in Jannah)

Allow me to shift the emphasis of the discussion a little bit to a misunderstanding I might have. This misunderstanding might be due to the environment in which I was brought up.

Assalamu Alaykum,

After reading your article, I realized that the misunderstanding here is due to accepting what you have heard by some of your Wahhabi friends without giving it a second thought. What they have provided you as an argument against the Shi’ites is fully rejected by logic, let alone the History and Hadith. Had you have think about their argument, you would never have bought it nor would you have posted it, my friend. However, I presume that you are searching for the truth, and I will be glad to share my understanding of the subject with you.

The Shi’a netters refer to Karbala and what they do at that time as a celebration of the Martyrdom of Imam Hussein. Any Muslim must mourn the killing of one of the most beloved youth to the Prophet (S) as well as one of the most important Sahabi’s, the son of two of the most important and loved people among the Sahabah (‘Ali and Fatimah RAA both). Still, I do not understand why people celebrate the Martyrdom, I mean I mourne it and I am sad at what happened, but celebrate is the wrong word.

Brother, if you have tuned to SRI, you would have seen many reasons behind commemoration of the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as). Since you mentioned that this subject has been discussed in SRI and MSA, then you should have had some idea about these arguments. Do you have any comments on those arguments?

Let me put it in simple words. If your father (may Allah grant him long life if he is still alive) dies, what will be your reaction to his death? If you loved him a lot, you or other members of your family will cry for him. crying is a sign of missing a highly dear one for a person who has human heart.

Now, suppose he has been killed on the path of Allah with some noble ideas to implement. What will be your reaction to his martyrdom? Do you pass from it as in the case of a simple death? Or you raise your voice and try to keep his noble ideas alive by reminding people of his actions and thoughts and give them a lesson on his bravery and sacrifices, and asking people to join his path and to keep alive his noble thoughts?

(One side remark here is that, just imagine that you and your brothers and sisters mourn for your father who has been martyred, and meanwhile some body jumps and accuses you of killing your father because you are mourning for him and based on his logic mourning is a sign of feeling guilty of murdering. What will be your reaction to such corrupted logic? I am really interested to hear from you.)

Now, let us go further and consider a religious leader who has spent his lifetime in learning the religion and teaching others the way one should live and explaining the Islamic duties and thoughts. If such person is martyred by the tyrannical rulers, then our commemoration will include a much wider aspect, since this man is no longer a father of an individual, but rather a father for all those who were benefiting from his knowledge and guidance.

Finally, if we consider the supreme level of the Prophet Muhammad and his Ahlul-Bayt who were the best of mankind, the most knowledgeable, the most illustrious, the most god-fearing, the most pious, the best in personal virtues, and the most honored before Allah and the leaders for all the generations till the day of judgment, then one can comprehend that keeping their path alive is a duty upon us as their followers.

By commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (as), we learn lessons from his noble thoughts and convictions. Learning about what happened to him and his companions in the history will provide us a light for the future. Learning about his actions has inspiring effects on our actions as well.

The other more puzzling thing is what happens during the celebration. Again I might be wrong and please correct me in a gentle way if I am. Usually during this celebration, my Shi’a brothers start hitting themselves on the head (Is it at that time or am I wrong ?) until in some cases they faint or blood starts getting out of their heads. I have even seen (on TV) pictures of small children being hit or being made to hit themselves (I admit that those could be fabrications and out of context pictures but that’s what I’ve seen and I am ready to be corrected). I ask my Shi’a brothers and sisters, is this the way to celebrate ? Why do you hit yourselves ?

I have never heard of small children being hit, nor have ever seen adults are being hit. What you pictured should be really an amazing ceremony. No my dear friend, there is no such silly actions. These are propagated by those who hate to see the remembrance of Ahlul-Bayt, and they resort to all possible means to mock to Followers of the Members of the House of the Prophet (S). And you has become their voice unwittingly, I presume. Usually the ceremony includes speech by a learned man with regard to the movement of Imam Husayn and his aims and his message. Then the speech continues to reminding the heart-breaking events of the catastrophe of Ashura and those who have human heart will cry, and mourn.

Of course, there are traditions transmitted by Ahlul-Bayt which state, crying for Imam Husayn, or making others to cry for him (through speech and reminding the events) has a lot of rewards. In fact, all the prophets of God without any exception cried for Imam Husayn and commemorated Ashura, including Prophet Muhammad (S). Not only that, but also the Jinns (unseen creatures) mourn for Imam Husayn. I have mentioned some of traditions affirming this fact in my previous posts quoting from Sunni collections.

Nonetheless, we affirm that hurting own body is forbidden. Some people may get very emotional and do that, yet the rest are not to be blamed. An analogy is the case when a person loses a dear one, where s/he will cry for him. Due to the height of emotion one (specially women) may start beating herself to the extent that it causes harm for her body. This is what i s forbidden, while what has no harm to body (including beating chest) is allowed. Thus the commemoration can not be questioned by the innocent overreaction of certain individual(s).

The explanation that I was given (by Non-Shi’a’s mind you), that Shi’a hit themselves as a punishemnt that they left Imam Hussein go from Koufah (?) alone with a few men and did not help him. At the same time it was them who sent for him to come and lead them to fight for his right to be the Khalifah.

It is really amazing that you readily accept such rumor without even giving it a second thought. Even I suppose the Shi’a killed Imam Husayn in year 61 AH, why should I feel guilty about what some people did in the history? Even suppose my father killed Imam Husayn, then why should I feel guilty of what my father did? The sin of a sinner will never be inherited to his offspring. (The ancestors may have a share of such sin if they mislead their offspring, but the reverse is never true). Thus such argument that we cry for Imam Husayn since our fathers allegedly killed him would be the most stupid interpretation on the reason behind commemoration of Imam Husayn (as). I shouldn’t expect any more intelligence from the enemies of Ahlul-Bayt.

My dear brother, we cry in the memory of Imam Husayn, for:

1- all the messengers of God cried for him;

2- all the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt cried for him;

3- we love him more than we love our fathers and our dear ones;

4- he is a Symbol of resistance against tyranny and the leader of the Martyrs for us;

5- we want to swear allegiance to him and his path and keep aloof from their enemies;

6- his aims have not been fully achieved and his blood has not been revenged yet. As such, we keep this event with all its emotion alive until such time that Imam Mahdi (as) appears who will cleanse the surface of the Earth form all such tyrants;

7- condolence to the Prophet Muhammad (S) and the members of Ahlul- Bayt;

8- abiding the instruction of Ahlul-Bayt in remembering this event and seeking the reward associated with it.

And there are much more reasons that you will find if you switch the books at your disposal and study some Shi`ite literature regarding to Imam Husayn (as).

As for the stupid claim that the Shi’a killed Imam Husayn (as), I would like to first ask you what is the definition of Shi’a. If Shi’a means all those who claim to love Ahlul-Bayt, then I can tell you that all Muslims, with no exception from the time of the Prophet till today are Shi’a! Even the Wahhabis are Shi’a by your definition. Shi’a means "followers", and as such those who forsake their leader can not be considered his followers by any stretch of imagination.

The true followers (Shi’a) of Ahlul-Bayt have always been in minority. The Shi’a of Imam Husayn were those who stayed with him in Karbala (beside those who did not have ability to join him due to justifiable reasons. Examples include, but are not limited to: Ibn Abbas and Jabir Ibn Abdullah al-Ansari who were both blind at that time.)

Those who fought Imam Husayn comprise those you claim to be Tabi’een (disciples of companions) whom you believe you should follow! Those who fought Imam Husayn were NEVER the followers of Ahlul-Bayt unless you believe in contradiction. Those who joined the army of Yazid were rather the followers of Satan. Yes, some of those who wrote to Imam Husayn to come over Iraq, did not support him later, for the simple reason that they were not his followers but rather the followers of their own whims. They were people who were tired of the oppression of the Umayad, and they were looking for a an easy relief. Some of them thought if Imam Husayn takes over the power and they will be able to get rid of oppression and more importantly they were thinking of reaching to money, position in his government. But after the pressure of the agent of Yazid in Kufah and the enforcement of marshal law, and when they saw that their lives are in jeopardy and their dreams are unlikely to take place, they forsook Imam Husayn’s deputy.

They were no better than Talha and Zubair who supported Imam ‘Ali at the beginning for their own worldly interests, but when they found that the Imam will not fulfill such interests for them they went against him and fought him. Do you ever claim that Talha and Zubair were the Shi’a of ‘Ali?

Certainly not. Shi’a means "followers", and those who forsake their leader can not be considered his followers by any stretch of imagination. By the way, you, as a Sunni, acknowledge Imam ‘Ali to be a righteous Caliph. Does that make you Shi’a? Certainly not.

Similarly, most of those who were living under the government of Imam ‘Ali were not his followers, and that was why they rebelled against him for their own worldly interest, the list include: Aisha/Talha/Zubair and their supporters, as well as those whom Imam ‘Ali named them al-Khawarij (kharijites) who disobeyed Imam ‘Ali in the battle of Siffin and announced that ‘Ali is a polytheist (Mushrik).

No doubt that Imam ‘Ali gave an oath that he will fight and kill all of them except nine individuals who will be able to escape (one of which later murdered Imam ‘Ali (as)), and this exactly happened in the battle of Nahrawan. Imam ‘Ali never called them Shi’a, nor the historians claimed them as such, but you do! The Shi’a of Imam ‘Ali are those for whom the Messenger of Allah as follows:

The Messenger of Allah said to ‘Ali: "Glad tiding O ‘Ali! Verily you and your companions and your Shi’a (followers) will be in Paradise."

يا علي أبْشر، فإنَّك و أصحابك و شيعتك في الجنة.

Sunni references:

(1) Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p655

(2) Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p329

(3) Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v12, p289

(4) al-Awsat, by al-Tabarani

(5) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v10, pp 21-22

(6) al-Darqunti, who said this tradition has been transmitted via numerous authorities.

(7) al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p247
Thus the Messenger of Allah (S) used to say the phrase of "Shi’a of ‘Ali". This phrase is not something invented later! Prophet Muhammad

(S) said that the true followers of imam ‘Ali will go to Paradise, and this is a great felicity. Also Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari narrated that:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "The Shi’a of ‘Ali are the real victorious in the day of resurrection/rising"

شيعةُ عليٍ هُمُ الفائِزون يوم القيامة.

Sunni references:

- al-Manaqib Ahmad, as mentioned in:

- Yanabi al-Mawaddah, by al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, p62

- Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, who quotes the tradition as follows: "We were with the Holy Prophet when ‘Ali came towards us. The Holy Prophet said: He and his Shi’a will aquire salvation on the day of judgment."

The "day of rising”could also refer to the day of rising of al-Mahdi (as). But in more general term, it means the day of judgment. The stupid claim that Shi’a killed Imam Husayn follows that the Prophet states those who will kill Imam Husayn will go to Paradise! Perhaps, you believe that’s why Yazid did so.

Such claim by Wahhabis has been made solely to cover the nasty face of the tyrannical leaders of that time and to drift the attention from their horrible crime, and to justify their rule. It will not be surprising that they have gone as far as saying it was the legitimate right of Yazid to take all possible action to preserve his dynasty. In contrast with the claim of these individuals, the Sunni history confirms that Imam Husayn was killed by the direct order of Yazid (LA):

Ubaydullah Ibn Ziyad (the governor of Yazid in Kufah) was leaving Iraq to Syria after killing the battle of Karbala, with a guard of his followers. Shuraih (the payroll Judge who gave verdict that the blood of Imam Husayn is Halaal) noticed that he was silent for a long time, he approached him and said: "O Ubaydullah, I think it bothered you that you killed Husayn?! Ubaydullah said: No! Indeed Yazid had ordered me to either kill Husayn or he (Yazid) will kill me.

Sunni reference: History of Ibn Athir, v.4, p140

The above gives evidence to the fact that he was Yazid who gave the direct order to kill Imam Husayn (as). Later, when the scandal of his horrible crime and the abuse of the household of the Prophet started shaking his regime, he condemned the act of Ibn Ziyad in public and disassociated himself. It has also been reported that:

Yazid ordered the head of Husayn brought to Syria, when it was put to him he started abusing it and beating it with his stick and said the following Poetry

I wish that my elders in Badr witness the fear of Khazraj from the falling of the swords. Then they would have cherished and savored (my act) and by saying O Yazid may your arm be powerful (for getting revenge by killing Husayn).

Sunni refernces:

- Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of ch. 11, pp 331-332
- al-Radd Ala al-Muta’assib al-Aneed, by Ibn al-Jawzi, p47-48
- Tarikh Alisalm v5, p18-19

Ibn al-Jawzi comments:

It is not difficult to understand why Ibn Ziyad (the governor of Yazid in Kufah) fought Husayn, but the more surprising was the brutality of Yazid in abusing the head of Husayn and whipping Husayn’s mouth with his stick, and ordering to carry the household of the Prophet on camels without saddle, and many other shameful acts such as displaying his head in the city.

It is certain that he (Yazid) did not have any intention but to humiliate (the household of the Prophet) by displaying the head. Such action is permissible only for al-Khawarij and transgressors. Had not Yazid have the rancor of the al-Jahiliyyah (the era before Islam) and the malice of (the defeat of his clan in) the battle of Badr, he would have respected the head (of Imam Husayn) when he had received it and he would have buried it with shroud.

Sunni references:

- Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of ch 11, pp 331, quoted from Ibn al-Jawzi.
- al-Radd Ala al-Muta’assib al-Aneed, by Ibn al-Jawzi, p48

Also Ibn Jawzi in his commentary about Ibn Hanbal’s damning of Yazid said: "would there be a greater crime than killing Husayn?!"

It should be noted that many Sunni scholars allow explicit curse of Yazid, among them are Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Ibn al-Jawzi. Ahmad proves his opinion by Qur’an. (See al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v8, p223; also Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of Ch. 11, pp 331-332; also al-Radd Ala al-Muta’assib al-Aneed, by Ibn al-Jawzi, p47-48). However, as Ibn Hajar wrote, the least thing that is agreed upon by ALL the Sunni scholars (including the pseudo ones) is as follows:

It is unanimously agreed that it is permissible to curse those who killed Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) and those who ordered his killing and those who allowed it and those who were pleased with that action, without explicitly mentioning the name of Yazid.

Sunni reference: Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of ch 11, p334

Let us now see the opinion of the son of Yazid about his father and grandfather, who was the witness from within the royal family!

...When (Yazid) offered the kingdom (throne) to his son, Muawiyah the second, in order that the flag of caliphate continues to wave in the house of Abi Sufyan!!

After his death, Muawiyah the second, gathered the people on a well known day, he stood in them preaching, he said:

"My grandfather Muawiyah stripped the command from those who deserved it, and from one who is more justified of it, for his relation to the Messenger of Allah and his being first in Islam, and that is ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, he (Muawiyah) took over it by your help as you are fully aware."

"Then following it my father Yazid wore the command after him, and he did not deserve it. He quarreled with the son of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah, and by that he shortened his own life... He rode his whim and hope left him behind.”Then he cried and continued:

"Surely, the greatest problems of us is our knowledge of his bad behavior and his awful ending, and that he killed the progeny (Itrah) of the Messenger of Allah, and he permitted drinking alcohol, and he fought in the sanctuary of Mecca, and destroyed the Ka’ba.”

"And I am not the one who is dressing up for your command, nor the one to be responsible for your followers... You choose for yourselves..!!"

Sunni References:

- Khulafaa al-Rasool, by Khalid Muhammad Khalid, p531 (The above Quote included author’s punctuation.)

- Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, end of ch 11, pp 336

Now, please offer these reports to your Wahhabi friend and see if they to know better than the son of Yazid as to who killed Imam Husayn.

Also Shabrawi wrote in his book that:

"Would any man of reason doubts that Yazid killed Husayn?"

Sunni reference: Alethaf, by Shabrawi, pp 62,66

Moreover, In Ibn Abbas’s reply to a letter by Yazid, he said: Do not think that I will forget your crime of killing Imam Husayn (as)

Sunni reference: Tarikh Ya’qubi, v2, p249

Then can any man of reason think that Yazid did not order killing Imam Husayn?!!! The above was just few Sunni documents out of many, to prove this fact. Please refer to the articles of Br. Abbas which were posted in SRI for more.

Throughout Islamic history many mass conversions between Sunni and Shi’a occured. Two big examples are Egypt (Shi’a mostly and then mass conversion to Sunni) and Iran (Sunni mostly at one time and then mass conversion to Shi’a).

Dear brother, you have very distorted information for which you have no evidence. I am afraid, you are confusing between the government and people. Most people of Persia were the followers of Ahlul-Bayt from the beginning of their conversion to Islam.

One reason for their tendency to Shi’a was the discrimination that Umar enforced between the rights of Arabs and non- Arabs. Another reason was the injustice of some governors and their misconduct that was being carried on in the name of Islam, and so on.

This gave reason to people for searching the truth and they found the shining light of Ahlul-Bayt and their followers such as Salman al-Farsi who was also an important factor. However, later, Umayad and Abbasid oppressive governments continued their injustice to Arabs and non-Arabs alike! They prosecuted the followers of Ahlul-Bayt in Persia, Iraq, Hijaz, and other places. The early Sunni government in Iran did not represent the belief of people as much as the today’s governments in Iraq, Lebanon, Kuwait, United Arab Emirate, Amman, and Bahrain (which are all Shi’a dominated) do not represent the belief of their people.

As for the Fatimid rule in Egypt, you should better know that they were the offshoot of Ismailis. We do not consider Fatimid to be Shi’a of Imam ‘Ali at all. They were among the political movements appeared centuries later. Again the difference between the belief of people and the government should be noticed. Your claim concerning the conversion in Egypt is false. Based on "The Encyclopedia of Islam,”the majority of people in Egypt were Sunnis during the entire reign of Fatimid, and as such, no conversion occurred when the Fatimid government collapsed. It was politically started and politically ended.

Thus neither in Iran nor in Egypt mass conversion from Sunni to Shi’a or vice versa occurred. No body can force a person to convert into another religion or school of thought, since belief is in the heart of People and not in ID. Those who convert their religion in their heart due to the pressure of government, did not have religion at all!

Recall the existence of many Arabs inside Hijaz in the Arabian Peninsula (what is now known as the kingdom of Saudi Arabia) who have been Shi’a of Imam ‘Ali (as) from the time of Imam ‘Ali till now despite the fact that Hijaz has had the most oppressive regimes since the early history of Islam.

Did Imam al-Husayn (as) Know He Would Be killed?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A sunni brother mentioned:

al-Husayn (ra) was truthful in his detrmination to change the munkar, but he was adviced by the likes of Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar that he was overoptimistic with the people of Iraq and their help. Husayn, being a human who is not ma3soom like the prophets, excersised his Ijtihad. Based on what is even reported by the Sunnis, Imam Husayn knew that he will be killed in Ashura in Karbala, and yet he went forward. Not only Imam Husayn, but also all the Prophets of God knew about the detail of this catastrophe. From Adam, to Noah, to Moses, to Zakariyya, to Yahya (John), to Muhammad, all cried for Imam Husayn (as) and remembered him on the day of Ashura.

Imam Husayn, before he leaves Medina, saw the Messenger of Allah in dream who told him:

"Verily Allah willed to see you martyred. Verily Allah willed to see your family captives"

He knew that he will be killed where and how. There was no error in his part or what you called overestimation of the people of Iraq. A person who goes to a battle which has an uncertain ending, never takes his family, women, and children with him, and never put their lives in to jeopardy. But Imam Husayn did all that, knowing all the tragic events which will happen to them from setting their tents on fire (by the soldiers of Yazid) to plundering them and moving them from town to town.

But he took with him women and children because they were supposed to deliver a message to the people of each town and to wake them up from their deep sleep. No doubt that the event of Karbala was a turning point in the destiny of the religion of Islam, by which the religion was immuned form annihilation. Individuals, however, are not immune from going astray. But the blast in Karbala and its inspiring effects on the hearts of people never let Islam to be eradicated.

Another brother mentioned that if one knows that by going to certain place, he would be certainly killed, the going to that place is considered to be suicide, and as such, how could Imam al-Husayn go toward Karbala if he knew that he would be killed?

The above question is interesting. Imam al-Husayn knew where and how he will be killed and who will kill him. This was the case for the other Imams of Ahlul-Bayt as well. Even Sunnis narrated that the Prophet (S) told Imam ‘Ali who kills him and when will he be killed. But non of them avoided what Allah foreordained. Thus Imams having the knowledge of when they die is confirmed by both Sunni and Shi’a.

It should be noted that the prophets and Imams share with the rest of humanity the means for obtaining knowledge which Allah has given: the senses, the intellect, etc. They also possess special powers and means which other people do not have.

In carrying out the commands of Allah in which people have also responsibility, and likewise in ordinary behavior, the prophets and Imams only make use of the first way of knowing, that is the commonly available means. The second means (extraordinary means) is only used by them in duties and works which are connected with their
position of prophethood and Imamat.

Thus in matters such as knowing the beginning of the month, passing judgment, finding out if something is unclean or pure, etc., they make use of ordinary means such as sighting of the moon, and so forth, which anyone else employs. The extraordinary means of knowledge can not be the basis for their action (unless in some rare circumstances when Allah wishes otherwise), and what they volitionally do must be determined by the means available to everyone.

In other words, the act of Imam is based on the conclusion of pieces of evidences which can be obtained by the ordinary human beings, and not by the information related to what Allah has foreordained, otherwise a contradiction would arise: For instance, Allah foreordained that Imam ‘Ali be killed by Ibn Muljam (LA) in the Mosque on a specific date, but since Imam ‘Ali knows this via an extraordinary means of
knowledge given by Allah, if he avoids the Mosque, he would have gone against what Allah foreordained which is impossible.

Likewise, Imam al-Husayn (as), though knew most of the people of Iraq will not follow him, he did his duty by answering their unanimous call. Imam al- Husayn sent his agent, Muslim Ibn Aqil to Kufa, since he wanted to do the investigation as an ordinary human being does. This is while he knew the situation in Kufa by extra-ordinary means of knowledge and that Muslim Ibn Aqil will be killed, yet he was not supposed to act based on what is concealed from an ordinary human being. He acts based on the extraordinary means of knowledge ONLY IF Allah wishes so, and such circumstances are rare.

Thus, such extraordinary knowledge has spiritual aspect as being the Representative of Allah (Khlifatullah), and the reason for it must be sought on this level, and it is not for the purpose of influencing and controlling the events on the level of ordinary understanding.

More On Commemoration

The Commemoration of Imam Hussain (as) has been observed by the followers of Ahl al Bayt (members of the House of the Prophet (saw)) for centuries; yet many Muslims resent it, thinking that this would divide or increase the division of the Muslims. To my understanding this argument is un-sound for the following reasons:-

- Imam Hussain and his opponent Yazeed are on the opposite ends of the Heavenly Scale. There is no Muslim School that doubts the purity and qualification of the Imam. Righteous Muslims also know that Imam Hussain is a dear grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), and that he is a leader of the youth of the paradise. On the other hand, Yazeed is un-acceptable to any Muslim, and every Mulsim condemns him, and will continue to do so, for his transgression and for the crimes he commited againts the Ahl al Bayt. With such a clear distinction there should be no confusion among the Muslims on account of the commemoration of this great Imam. No Muslim party should be angered by hearing the truth about the great Imam and his opponent Yazeed!

- Imam Hussain and the rest of the Ahl al Bayt did not receive in their lives the fairness and respect due to them on the part of the Muslims, while the rest of the Companions of the Prophet (saw) received of that as much as they deserved (or more). The members of the House of the Messenger were denied even the right to live or feel safe. The Muslims, should therefore try to correct the mistake of history by un-covering the virtues of these distinguised people.

- To keep the names of these people alive is in the interest of the Muslims. The Messenger of God, Muhammad (saw), said when he was returning from his valedictory pilgrimage, while at Ghadir Khum: -

I am about to be called (by the Lord to depart from this World) and respond (to His call). I am leaving for You the Two Valuables (one of them is bigger than the other): The Book of God and the members of my House. Beware how you shall treat the two after me, because they will not part with each other untill they join me on the Day of Judgement!

Ref:

- Mustadrak of al Hakim, vol 3 p 109, Arabic Printed in Hyderabad 1334
- Sahih of Tirmizi, vol 2 p 307, Arabic Printed in Cairo 1350-1352
- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, vol 3 p 14, 217, Arabic Printed in Cairo 1313
- Khasais of al Nasai, p 30, Arabic Printed in Najaf 1369
- Sahih of Muslim, vol 4 p 1286 hadith 5920, English Printed in Lahore (Pakistan) 1992
- ... and many many more

Thus honoring their memories and informing people about them would be in accord with the advice of the Messenger (saw), and would provide the Muslims with what they need of Guidance.

- The History of this great Martyr is a school for the seekers of the truth. Every Muslim can learn a great deal from the supreme sacrifice and the courage of the Imam. The Muslims are still living under similar conditions now as before. Corruption is still prevalent in our society, and tyrants, like Yazeed, are no rarity in Muslims and non - Muslim countries, but we don’t have men like the Imam Hussain. Fortunately, this commemoration is providing the Muslim World with some of his excellent students.

The Martyred Ones

Men weep for you today in many lands
And on their breasts in bitter anguish beat
And in sad, mournful tunes, the tales repeat
Of how you lost your life upon the sands

You nobly spurned the tyrant’s base demands
And Chose death to prevent your soul’s defeat
Became a martyr with unflinching feet
For these well may one weep who understands

Hussain is King, the King of Kings
He is faith, defense of faith from him springs
Beheaded though

He never bowed to Yazeed
By God, God’s unity by him is established
In which grave is his throne, and his crown where is it
O Earth! Show us where us where is the Might of Yazeed Today

Those Martyred In Karbala

The Hashmites - from the seed of Abu Taleb
- Those mentioned in Ziarate Nahiyah 18
- Those not mentioned in the Ziarat 13
- Young Children 3

No. distributed according to the Immediate parentage of the Martyrs
- The Holy Imam Hussain 1
- The sons of the Holy Imam 3
- The sons of Imam ‘Ali 9
- The sons of Imam Hasan 4
- The sons of Aqeel 12
- The sons of Jafar 4
- Total 33

The Comrades of the Holy Imam

- Those names who are mentioned in the Ziarat e Nahiah 70
- Those who names are not mentioned in the Ziarat 27
- Total numbers of Martyrs in Kufa 8
- Total comrades martyred 105
- Total martyrs including the Bani Hashim and the Holy Imam 138

The above inquiry is based on the following sources
- Tabari
- Ibne Athir
- Kitabaul Jamal of Sheikh Mufid
- Rijal Mumqani
- Abu Maqnaf
- Zakhiratud Darain
- Hadaiq
- Irshad
- Oyaonal Akhbiar
- Manaqib e Ibne Shahr Ashoob
- Absarul Ain Fi Ansaral Hussain
- ... and many more

Brief Notes On Some Of Those Who Martyred In Kufa And Karbala

“Abu Bakr ibne ‘Ali ibne Abi Taleb He was called Muhammad e Azghar or Abdullah from Laila daughter of Masud son of Hanzala son of Manath son of Tameem

“Abi Bakr son of the Second Imam Hasan, son of Imam ‘Ali

“Abdul Hatoof Ansari and his Brother

“Sa’d (both Son’s of Hur)

Both from Kufa who joined the Holy Imam at Karbala

“Adham son of Omayya al Abdi From Basra son of Obaida, whose father had been constant attendant on the Holy Prophet (S)

“Aslam - The slave who was purchased and liberated by the Holy Imam – was scribe engaged to write communications from the Holy Imam

“Anas Ibn Hars e Kahili son of Baniah son of Kahli who was one of the Companions of the Holy Prophet (S)

“Borair Zibe Khozair e Hamdani A very old pious and devoted companion of Amirul Momineen, Imam ‘Ali, one of the prominent noblemen of Kufa. He was the one who came to the Holy Imam begging him humbly to permit him to get martyred for he wanted to die in the way of the Lord and show his face to the Holy Prophet (S) on the Day of Judgment.

“Omayyabib Sa’d at Taie He was one of the Companions of Imam ‘Ali (as)

“Bashr Ibn Amrual Hazrami, was among one of the famous ones from faithful devotees of the Holy Prophet (S)

“Bakr bib Hai at Taimi Of the Bani Taimi tribe who came to the Holy Imam and volunteered to be martyred in the way of the Lord.

“Jabib ibne Hajjaj al Taimi He was the follower of Muslim Ibn Aqeel in Kufa. Since Muslim was arrested he hid himself untill Imam Hussain arrived in Karbala and reported to the Imam and got martyred.

“Jibilath ibne ‘Ali e Shaibani, Among the ones who was attending on Imam ‘Ali in the battle of Siffin

“Jafar ibne Aqeel ibne Abi Talib, The third brother of Abbas, the Standard Bearer of the Holy Imam

“Jafar ibne Aqeel ibne Abi Talib, Brother of Muslim Ibn Aqeel, the Deputy of the Holy Imam to Kufa

“Jinadat ibne Ka’b Ansari al-Khazraji, Along with his son - Martyred at Karbala - One of the greatest devotees of Imam Hussain

“Jundab Ibn Mujee al Khaulani, One of the Companions of the Imam ‘Ali who came to the Holy Imam and fell down to his feet and prayed to be permitted to be martyred

“Jaun, The liberated slave of Abi Zar who after the death of Abi Zar joined the Second (2nd) Holy Imam and thereafter remained with Imam Hussain and came to Karbala with him. He was trained under Abi Zar.

“Jaun Ibn Malikee Tameemi Of the tribe of Bani Tameem. One who was in Yazed’s army. He left the ranks of Yazeeds army and joined Imam Hussains camp

“Hars, The liberated slave of Hazrat Hamza, the Uncle of the Prophet (S), who came along with Imam Hussain to Karbala and was martyred.

“Habshi Ibn Qais e Nahmi, Of a group from the tribe of Hamdan. His grand father was one of the faithfuls of the Prophet (S).

“Hars Ibn Amraul Qais e Kandi, A very brave Noble of Arabia. He went into the army of the oppressors and found his own Uncle there and he (Uncle) asked him: ‘ Have you come to Kill your Uncle ? ‘ He replied: ‘ Yes! You are my Uncle, no doubt, but God is my Lord and you have come here against Him. ‘ He killed His Uncle. Along with him three (3) others joined the Holy Imam and they were martyred.

“Habib Ibn Amir e Taimi, One who had already payed allegiance to the Holy Imam at the hands of Muslim Ibn Aqeel was martyred in Kufa, Habib left Kufa and joined the Holy Imam on his way to Karbala and got martyred.

“Habib Ibn Muzahir al Asadi, He was known as Habib ibne Mazahir Ibn Re’aab Ibn al-Ashtar from the lineage of Asad Abdul Qasim al-Asadi.

“Hajjaji Ibn Badr as S’di, From Basra of the tribe of Bani Sa’d, a famous noble man of Kufa. He was the one who carried communications of the Holy Imam to the pious ones of the devotees of the House of the Holy Prophet (S) in Kufa.

“Hajjai Ibn Masrooq al Jaufi, A faithful companion of Imam ‘Ali

“Hur ibne Yazid ar Riyahi, He was the Son of Yazid ibne Najiyah Ibn Qanab Ibn Yatib Ibn Hur in the lineage of al-Yarboir Riyahi. A famous nobleman of Kufa, an experienced warrior specially selected by Ibne Ziad to command against Hussain. He was the one who obstructed Imam Hussain’s way near Kufa, but he never believed that the venture of Ibne Ziad was to end in the martyrdom of the Holy Imam. When at Karbala he found out, Hur left the oppressors forces and joined the Holy Imam seeking pardon for his previous mis-conduct. At this Imam Hussain said: -

Hur, as they Mother has named thee Hur (a free man) thou art Hur in this World and the hereafter. He was among the foremost martyrs in the way of God.

“Hallas Ibn Amro ar Rasibi, He was the son of Amru ar Rasibi who was one of the faithful companions of Imam ‘Ali

“Hanzala Ibn Asadus Shabami, He was the one who carried the message of exhortation from Imam Hussain to Ibne Sa’d in Karbala

“Rafe - The liberated slave of Muslim Azdi, He came from volunteered to be with the Imams army

“Zavir Ibn Amro al Kandi, A sincere devotee of the Ahl al Bayt who was a devoted companion of the Imam Hussain.

“Zohair al Qaine Bijilly, He was a noble chieftain of his tribe, a man of great influence in Kufa. In the beginning he was attached to Othman, and once returning from Haj he met the Imam Hussain, and since then he became a staunch devotee. He is the one who bade good-bye to his wife Dalham daughter of Amru, liberating her with a divorce to go to her relatives and he joined the Imam and got martyred.

“Ziad Ibn Areeb al Saidi, Son of Areeb one of the faithful companions of the Holy Prophet and also a traditionalist. A very pious and brave noble personality enjoying the trust and the confidence of the people.

“Salim the liberated slave of Aamire Abdi, A devotee of Imam ‘Ali from Basra

“Sa’d Ibn Hars and Abul Hatoof Ibn Harse Ansari, These twin brothers had come from Kufa employed in the forces of the oppressor to fight Imam Hussain. Later they left the ranks of the army of Yazeed and joined the Imam’s army

“Sa’d the liberated slave of Imam ‘Ali, After the martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali he remained attached to Imam Hasan and after the martyrdom of Imam Hasan he remained attached to Imam Hussain and got martyred

“Sa’d - the liberated slave of Amro Ibn Khalid, He volunteered to be martyred for the truth. A noble personality with a high degree of fidelity and valiance.

“Sayeed Ibn Abdullah Hanafi, A noble, brave and influential personality from Kufa. He was very helpful to Muslim Ibn Aqeel in Kufa, as he carried Muslim’s letter from Kufa to Imam Hussain and remained with him and was martyred. He was the one, while the Holy Imam was offering prayers in Karbala stood infront of the Holy Imam and received arrows from Yazeed’s army on his breast, protecting the Imam and got martyred.

“Salman Ibn Mazarih Ibn Qais al Ammari al Bijjili, A cousin of Zohair al Qain. He went to Mecca with Zohair and when on his return he decided to join Imam Hussain.

“Sulaiman Ibn Razeen - A liberated slave of Imam Hussain, He carried Imam Hussain’s letter to the devotess of the Ahl al Bayt in Basra. Ibne Ziad the governor of the oppressor of Basra caught him and the faithful servant of the Holy Imam got martyred willingly.

“Sawar Ibn Manyim e Nahmi, Travelled all the way from Iraq to join the forces of Imam Hussain.

“Suwaid Ibn Amro Ibn Abil Mataa al Ammari al Khashmi, As he was fighting he got seriously wounded, lying un-conscious, the enemy thinking that he was dead left him, but on regaining consciousness and hearing the rejoicing of the oppressors forces that the Imam was martyred, he got up and fought till he also got martyred.

“Saif Ibn Hars al Jabiri and Malik, These two cousins from Kufa joined the Imam and got martyred.

“Saif Ibn Malik al Abdi al Basri, A leading devotee of the Ahl al Bayt

“Shabeeb a liberated slave of Hars e Jabiri e Hamdani, Was martyred on the first attack of the enemy

“Shaueb e Shakiri, Well known in Kufa for his nobility of character, courage, and a revered noble veteran of town

“Zarghamah Ibn Malik e Taghlabi, A lion hearted brave gentleman who was faithful to Muslim Ibn Aqeel in Kufa, and after Muslims martyrdom he joined Imam Hussain and was martyred along with him

“Aaiz Ibn Majma al Aazi, He was among one of the six who along with Hur ibne Yazid e Riyahi had joined the Imam

“Aabis ibne Abi Shabeeb e Shakiri, He was among one of those who helped Muslim in Kufa

“Amir Ibn Muslim at Badi Basri, With his liberated slave Salim, both the devotees of Imam ‘Ali in Basra joined the Imam and were martyred.

“Abbas Ibne ‘Ali ibne Abi Taleb, Qamare Bani Hashim, This is the great son of the First Holy Imam, Imam ‘Ali, from the noble Lady Hazrat Ommul Baneen. Abbas is so well known to the Muslim World for his noble qualities he was endowed with, that in the first place needs no introduction, secondly if a proper attempt is made, it would need a separate volume.

The great Lion Hearted son of the Lion of God in his qualities in Karbala is next to the Holy Imam, Imam Hussain. He was the next only to the Imam in Karbala. The Alam or the banner, which he held on the behalf of the Imam, was the standard of Islam or Truth.

“Abdullah ibne Hussain, Known as ‘Ali e Azghar

The six (6) old month baby of the Holy Imam, martyred in the very lap of his father whose martyrdom no human heart can bear without shedding tears.

When the Imam stood all alone in the Battle field surrounded by the enemies he was summoned a call from his sister Zainab in his camp. When he went into the tent, he found his baby son dying of thirst in his cradle and the poor mother Rubab, whose Milk had dried up by the continuos thirst and hunger for the three (3) consecutive days, could not help the baby with a drop of milk.

Telling the mother that he would show the baby to the enemy and get some water, Imam Hussain took the child to the field getting on a camel and raising it up in his arms to en-able every one to see him, said: -

O People! If, in your opinion, Hussain is guilty of any sin or crime, this innocent babe has done nothing to hurt any one of you. It does not speak and has not even uttered anything against you or your Amir at Damascus. He is dying of thirst. He neither had milk nor water for the last three days. Would you quench his thirst by a few drops of water. If you suspect that I demand water for myself in the name of the Babe, then I will leave him here, if you want, and go away and you may return him with his thirst quenched!

But despite this, the Ibna i Sad, fearing the revolt of his forces in the sympathy of the Imam at once ordered Hurmula to answer Hussain. They tyrant shot a three pronged arrow from his bow which after piercing the Imams arm got stuck in the tiny arm of the innocent baby. Blood flowed from the baby’s neck and the baby died looking at the fathers face!

“Abdullah Ibn Hasan ibne ‘Ali

The son of the Second (2nd) Holy Imam, Imam Hasan, a young boy, who ran out of the tent to save Hussain when he being martyred, and was martyred before the Holy Imam.

“Abdullah Ibn Bushr Khashami

Of the Anmari e Khashami tribe, he came out of Kufa with Ibne Sa’d but joined the Holy Imam and got martyred with him.

“Abdullah Ibn Omair Kalbi

He had come to Kufa from Medina, and joined the Imam. His wife also accompanied him to serve the Holy Ladies. When Abdullah was martyred his wife sitting at the dead body of her husband said: -

O Abdullah! Thou hath entered Paradise, take me along with Thee. The good Lady had not finished her lamentations when a slave of Shimar delivered a blow on her head with an axe and she was martyred.

“Abdul Rahman and Abdullah sons of Orawah Ibn Harraq al Ghaffari

These two (2) brothers were the noblemen of Kufa, their grandfather, Harraq was one of the faithful companions of Imam ‘Ali. The joined the noble Imam and were martyred.

“Abdullah Ibn Muslim Ibn Aqeel

Son of Muslim Ibn Aqeel ibne Abi Taleb.

“Abdullah Ibn Yaqtar e Himyari

“Abde Qais Basri e Abdi, Alongwith Abdullah Ibn Zaid e Abdi. Obaidullah Ibn Zaide Abdi, Yazid Ibn Sabeet al Abdi

“Abdul Ala Ibn Yazeed al Kalbi al Aleemi

“Abdul Rahman Ibn Abdul Rab e Ansari Khazriji

“Abdul Rahman Ibn Aqeel ibne Abi Taleb

“Abdul Rahman e Arhabi

“Abdul Rahman Ibn Masood at Taimi

“Othman Ibn ‘Ali ibne Abi Taleb, One of the brothers of Hazrate Abbas, the third son of Ommul Baneen

“Omar Ibn Janade e Ansari

“‘Ali e Akbar son of the Imam

The eighteen (18) year old son of the Imam who resembled the Holy Prophet the most, was martyred by a lance pierced through his breast. When Imam Hussain sent ‘Ali e Akbar to the battle field, who was also known as Ahmad i Thani (Muhammad the Second - due to his resemblance), the Imam raised his hands towards the Heaven and said: -

Lord! Here is sent in Thy way, the one who resembleth the most with Thy Prophet Muhammad, whenever we did desire to have a view of the Holy Face departed away from us, we used to look at the face of this Youth

Lord! Hussain has one ‘Ali e Akbar and he is sent to be sacrificed for Thy cause, had I many more like him, I would have similarly offered them in Thy way!

“Omer Ibn Zabiah Az Zabiyee, Came out of Kufa with Ibne Sad but later joined the Imam and was martyred

“Amro Ibn Khalid e Saidavi

“Amru Ibn Abdullah e Junday, From the tribe of Hamdan, was martyred with the Imam

“Amru Ibn Qarta al Ansari

“Amru Ibn Hab Abu Thamama al Sai’di

“Amru Ibn Hasan at Talee

“Aun and Muhammad (Sons of Jafar e Tayyar)

Two (2) sons of Hazrate Zainab, the Sister of Hazrat Imam Hussain. Aun was her own son and Muhammad was from the deceased wife (Khausa) of her husband Abdullah Ibn Jaffar Tayyar. These two (2) boys were the only young boys of about nine (9) and ten (10) years of age. The Holy Lady Zainab, the daughter of Imam ‘Ali and Lady Fatimah, brought these two boys and implored her brother, the Imam, to permit them to free the enemy. At the persistent implorings from his sister the Imam permitted, and these two (2) young souls were martyred before the eyes of their mother.

“Qarib, The son of a liberated slave girl of Imam Hussain. This lady after being liberated by the Imam was married to a gentleman and brought her son Qarib and presented him to the Imam, and he was brought up by the Imam. He was martyred along with the other devotees, offering himself in the way of the Lord!

“Qasim Ibn Hasan Ibn ‘Ali ibne Abi Talib

When the young Qasim aged fourteen (14) years, son of Imam Hasan sought, permission to go, it is reported that Imam Hussain remembered the wish of his brother, Imam Hasan, that one of his daughters be wedded to Qasim. At the same time when Qasim presented to the Imam Hussain a closed note, written to him by his father (Imam Hasan) to be opened in the worst calamity situation, in which was written addressing Qasim:-

My dear son Qasim when your Uncle Hussain is besieged by his enemies from all sides and when every true lover of God and the Holy Prophet, lays down his life, defending the cause of truth, you sacrifice yourself for the cause on my behalf.

“Qasim Ibn Habib al Azdi

“Qasith, Kardoos, Musqit - the three (3) sons of Zohair al Taghlabi

“Qanab an Namri

“Qais Ibn Mushir as Saidavi

“Kannah at Taghlabi

“Majma ul Jahni

Son of Ziad Ibn Omar Jahni one of the aged companions of the Imam. When people started deserting him on the Night of Ashoora, this old devotee of the Imam remained and achieved martyrdom.

“Muslim Ibn Aqeel

The Deputy of Imam Hussain to Kufa, where he was martyred.

“Muslim ibne Ausaja al Asadi One of the faithful companions of the Prophet (S). An aged veteran who had earned a glorious name and fame for his valour and prowness against the infidels. When on the Ashoora Night, the Holy Imam told his companions to find their own ways and save themselves from the wholesale massacre of his supporters, which was in store for them the following day, he said to the Imam: -

O son of the Holy Prophet! Where am I to go before myself getting martyred here ?

“Muslim Ibn Katheer al Awaj all Azdi

“Masood Ibn Hajjaj Taimy and his son Abdur Rahman Ibn Masood

“Muhammad Ibn Abdullah ibne Jafar, A young son of Abdullah son of Hazrat Jafar e Tayyar, his mother was Khausa, daughter of Hafsa Ibn Rabi’a

“Muhammad Ibn Muslim Ibn Aqeel, One of the two (2) young sons of Muslim Ibn Aqeel, the Deputy of the Imam Hussain to Kufa

“Muhammad Ibn Abi Syeed Ibn Aqeel

The grandson of Muslim Ibn Aqeel, the Deputy of the Imam

“Munjeh, The liberated slave of the Second Holy Imam

“Mauq Ibn Thamamah Asadi Saidavi Abu Musa

“Nafebin Hilale Jamali

A companion of Imam ‘Ali, reciter of the Qur’an and tradionist, a noble personality of Kufa, escaped from Kufa and joined the Imam in Karbala. He remained by the side of Abbas, the Standard Bearer of Imam Hussain.

“Nasr Ibn Naizar

A liberated slave of Imam ‘Ali. He was presented to the Holy Prophet (S) by the King of Persia and the Prophet (S) presented him to Imam ‘Ali who freed him. He came to Karbala and got martyred.

“Wazeh the Turk, The Turkish liberated slave of Harse Mashaji. He came to Karbala and presented himself to the Imam and got martyred.

“Hani Ibn Orwah, Martyred with Muslim Ibn Aqeel at Kufa

“Yazid Ibn Ziad Mohasir e Kandi Behdile Abush Shasa, A noble of Kufa, joined the Imam from Kufa and got martyred

“Yazid Ibn Maghful Jafi, A devotee of Imam ‘Ali

And finally

“Hussain Ibn ‘Ali - The KING of the MARTYRS

This sorrow at your death, despite the years

Is still as fresh, which time has failed to quell
In every heart this day a new pain appears
And of your sufferings men each other tell
They see a vision through slow falling tears
Of that lone battle where athirst you fell

From: ashah@bass.gmu.edu [17] (‘Ali Shah) 13-JUL-1995 01:23:29.22

Subject: A Poem For The Fortieth Day Of Martyrdom (Arbaeen)

Look at the heads atop the spears
and the eyes that are full of tears.
Husayn has gone and his sister is alone,
and her lonely sight is so hard to bear.
It will touch so many hearts of stone
but her suffering, so few shall share.
The daughter of Fatimah is full of sorrow.
In her path, so many woes have been steered.
She doesn’t know what will happen tomorrow.
She hasn’t finished wiping her tears.
The world has seldom seen such a bold woman.
So courageous and without a spec of fear.
She is so strong, that she can’t be broken.
Even by her loved ones’ heads, on the spears.
Her parents are Fatimah and ‘Ali, none other,
and to the Prophet Muhammad, she is so dear.
But this day, she is without her brother.
And no comfort seems to be near.
The people present, do nothing but stare.
For the victims, everyone should shed tears.
For the Prophet’s progeny, doesn’t anyone care?
The indifference of these "Muslims”is so severe.
Don’t all the people present, understand,
the noble family of the Prophet, has no peers?
Everyone’s salvation is verily in their hands.
Why’re they being driven, to the verge of tears?
This lady is not afraid to loose her life.
She speaks out against cruelty, without fear.
To spread her brother’s message, she strives,
breaking everyone’s heart with her silent tears.
On hurting the innocent, the cruel are bent.
But these wicked plots fail and she perseveres.
She faces calamity with her spiritual strength.
She is anguished, but holds back her tears.
The tyrants wanted to crush the struggle
but it shall never end and also our tears.
Everyone is moved, on hearing her troubles.
Karbala is and will be remembered each year.
In the stormy seas we’ve not yet set ashore,
many evil minds would want to stop our tears.
But this mourning will continue, forever more,
with cries of Yaa Husayn, ringing in our ears.

‘Ali Rizwan Shah

Arbaeen - 1416 AH

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In this series we provide the history of the events of Karbala as recorded by the Sunnis. Although dampened, and sometimes inaccurate on the favor of the tyrants, such Sunni documents are the lasting testimony for the undeniable horrible massacre of the household of the Prophet (S). The
information, unless otherwise specified, are from the History of al-Tabari. Few remarks on the History of al-Tabari by the Sunni scholars. Shibli Numani wrote:

Among books of historical character, an authentic and very comprehensive book is that of the Imam al Tabari, known was Tarikh Kabir. Al Tabari is a writer whose scholarly attain- ments and whose sure and extensive knowledge are unanimiuosly recognised by the traditionists. His commentary by far is the best of the commentaries.

The well known traditionist, Ibn Khuzaima, says that he knew no man learned than al Tabari. Al Tabari died in the year 310 A.H - 921 C.E. Some traditionists, al Sulaimani in particular, have remarked that al Tabari coined traditions for the Shi’a. Regarding this charge against al Tabari, Allama al Dhahabi, in his Mizan al-I’tidal says:

This is an allegation based on false misgivings. The fact is that Ibn Jarir is one of the most trust worthy Imam. -Dhahabi has further remarked:

All the authentic and comprehensive books of history, such as Tarikh al Kamil and those written by Ibn al Athir, Ibn Khuldun, Abual Fida etc, are based on his work and abridged Tarikh of al-
Tabari.

Sunni reference: Sirah al-Nabi -- The Life of the Prophet, by Shibli

Numani, English version, v1, p25

The Martrydom Foretold

On the death of Muawiya, when Imam Hussain (as) refused to pledge his allegiance to Yazeed, he went to the tomb of his grandfather, Prophet Muhammad (saw, S). He worshipped there for the most of the night, and also slept there for a while, in his dream he saw the Messenger of Allah, May
Allah bless him and his cleansed progeny, surronded by angels.

The Prophet (saw, S) embraced him and said:

My beloved Hussain, I foresee you when you will be, in the very near future, covered with your blood, slain at the land of Karballa, while thirsty, being deprived of water. This will be done to you by people who claim that they are from my followers.

Imam Hussain (as) in his dream looked at his grandfather and said:

My grandfather, I ask you to admit me into your grave. I do not desire to go back to the earthly world.

The Messenger of Allah (saw, S) answered him:

My beloved Hussain, there are degrees which you will not acquire except through martyrdom.

Before he departed to Iraq, he uttered the following words:

I am as eager to join my ancestors as Jacob was eager to join Yousef. I visualize my body being dismembered by the wolves of the desert which shall fill from my flesh their empty abdomens and hungry stomachs. The pleasure of God is our pleasure. We are patient at His trial and he gives us the reward of the patient. (Men from) the flesh of the Messenger of God will never part with him. They will join him on the Day of Judgement, and he will be very pleased by the re-union.

Yazid’s Efforts For Allegiance

According to Hisham b. Muhammad (al Kalbi) - Abu Mikhnaf: Yazid succeeded at the beginning of the month of Rajab in the year 60 (April 8, 680). Al Walid b. Utbah b. Abi Sufyan was governor of
Medina, al Numan b. Bashir al Ansari of al Kufah, Ubaydallah b. Ziyad of al Basrah, and Amr b. Said b. al as of Mecca. Yazid’s only concern, when he assumed power, was to receive the oath of allegiance from the individuals who had refused to agree with Muawiyah’s demand for this oath of allegiance from Yazid. Muawiyah had summoned the people to give an oath of allegiance to him that Yazid would be his heir. Yazid’s concern was to bring their attitude to an end.

When he wrote to al Walid, he wrote to him on a patchment as small as a rat’s ear:

Seize Husayn, Abdallah b. Umar, and Abdallah b. al Zubayr to give the oath of allegiance. Act so fiercely that they have no chance to do anything before giving the oath of allegiance. Peace be with you.

Therefore, al Walid sent in the night for al Husayn, peace be on him, and summoned him (to attend). Al Husayn, peace be upon him, was aware of what he wanted and so he called a group of his retainers and ordered them to carry arms.

Imam Hussain, peace be upon him, said:

Al Walid has summoned me (to come to him) at this time (of night). I cannot be sure that he might not burden me with a matter I may be unwilling to respond, he is unpredictable man, so remain with me. When I go to him, sit at the door. If you hear my voice raised, come in to prevent him from (doing anything to) me.

Al Husayn, peace be upon him, went to al Walid, and Marwan b. al Hakam was with him. Al Walid gave him news of the death of Muawiya and al Husayn replied with the formula:

We belong to God and to Him we will return.

Then al Walid read out Yazid’s letter and his order to get the pledge of allegiance from him. Then al Husayn said to al Walid:

I do not see that my pledge of allegiance to Yazid in private would be sufficient. Wouldn’t you prefer me to give it in public so that people are aware ?

Indeed, said al Walid So see what you think about that in the morning, suggested al Husayn, peace be on him.

Go, then, in the name of God but come to us when the people gather, said al Walid.

By God, interrupted Marwan, if al Husayn leaves you now without giving the pledge of allegiance, you will never have the same power over him untill there is a great number of slain men between you and him. Imprison the man and don’t let him leave you untill he has paid homage (to Yazid), or you have executed him.

At that al Husayn said:

O son of a foreign woman, would you or he kill me? By God you are a liar.

With that he went out and walked away accompanied by his retainers untill he reached his house.

You disobeyed me, Marwan told al-Walid, No by God he will never give you the same opportunity over his life. Then blame someone other than yourself, said Marwan

Replied al Walid: Indeed, you had chosen for me something which would have involved the destruction of my own faith. By God, I would not want all the worldy wealth and dominion which the sun rises and sets over, (if it involved) killing al Husayn. Glory be to God, should I kill al Husayn because he said ‘I will not swear allegiance”By God, I do not think that on the Day of Resurrection a man who is (responsible) for the blood of al edvj(;Husayn (will weigh) little in the scale of God."

Al Husayn, peace be upon him, spent that night at his house. It was the night of Saturday when there were three days left on the month of Rajab in the year 680. Al Walid b. Utba was occupied with sending to Ibn al Zubayr about the pledge of allegiance to Yazid, and with his refusal to come to them. Ibn al Zubayr left Medina at night heading for Mecca. In the morning al Walid sent men after him, he sent a party of eighty horse men under the command of a retainer of the Banu Umayya. They pursued him but did not catch up with him, so they returned. Towards the end of Saturday he sent men to al Husayn, peace be upon him, to bring him to pledge allegiance to al Walid on behalf of Yazid b. Muawiya. Al Husayn peace be upon him, said to them:

Come in the morning. Then you will have time to consider the situation and so shall we.

They left him that night without insisting upon him. He, peace be upon him, left under the cover of the night, it was the night of Saturday night with two days left in the month of Rajab, and he headed towards Mecca accompanied by his sons, his brother’s (al Hasan’s) sons and his brothers. There was most of the House except for Muhammad b. al Hanafiyya. Al Husayn, peace be upon him, left for Mecca reciting:

Then he left it out of fear while he kept on the lookout. He said: My Lord, save me from the unjust people. (XXVIII 21)

He kept to the high road and the members of the house suggested:

If you had avoided the high road like Ibn al Zubayr did, the search party could not follow you.
No by God, he replied, I will not leave untill God judges what He will judge.

When al Husyan, peace be upon him, entered Mecca, his entry occured on the night of Friday (i.e Thursday), 3rd of the month of Shaban. As he entered, he recited:

And when he set out towards Madyan, he said: Perhaps my Lord will guide me in the right path. (XXVIII 22)

Then he stayed there and its inhabitants began to visit him frequently, as did those who had some to make the lesser pilgrimage and other people from far and wide. Ibn al Zubayr had settled himself there, near the Ka’ba, where he used to stand in prayer and perform the circumbulation. He came to visit al Husayn, peace be upon him, with the others who came to visit him. He used to come to him at intervals of two consecutive days, and sometimes between the two day interval. He was the most troublesome of God’s creatures to Ibn al Zubayr, who realized that the people of Hijaz would not pledge allegiance to him as long as al Husayn, peace be upon him, was in the land. He was more capable of commanding the people’s obedience than him, and was more respected.

Muslim B. Aqil Is Sent To Kufa

In response to the messages that Imam Hussain received from the people of Iraq, asking him to come to them and pledging their full support and promise to die in his defense, that goes as follows

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

To al Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be upon them

From Sulayman b. Surad, al Musayyib b. Najaba

Rifa’a b. Shaddad al bajali, Habib b. Muzahir and the believers and Muslims of his Shi’a among the Kufans.

Greetings, we praise God before you, other than Whom there is no deity. Praise be to God Who has broken your enemy, the obstinate tyrant who had leapt upon this community, stripped it of its authority , plundered its fay and seized control of it without its consent.

Then he had killed the choice members of it and had preserved the wicked members of it. He made the property of God a state (divided) among its tyrants and wealthy. He was destroyed as Thamud were destroyed. (Now) there is no Imam over us. Therefore come; through you, may your God unite us under truth. Al Numan b. Bashir is in the governers palace and we do not gather with him for the Friday (service).

Nor do we accopmany him (out of the mosque) for the Festival service. If we learn that you will come to us, we will drive him away untill we pursue him to Syria, if God the Exalted, wills.

Imam Hussain’s (as) reply was as follows

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

From al Husayn b. ‘Ali,

To the leaders of the believers and the Muslims

Hani and Said have brought me your letters; they are the last two of your messengers who have come to me. I have understood everything which you have described and mentioned. The (main) statement of your great men is: "There is no Imam over us.

Therefore come; through you, may God unite us under truth and Guidance.”I am sending you my brother, Muslim b. Aqil, who is cousin and my trusthworthy (representative) from my House. If he writes to me that the opinions of your leaders and the men of wisdom and merit among you is united in the same way as the messengers who have come to me have described and as I have read in your letters, I will come to you speedily, God willing. For by my life, what is the Imam except who judges by the Book, one who upholds justice, one who professes the religion of truth, and one who dedicates himself to the essence of God.

Greetings.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Events That Transpired With Muslim B. Aqil

Al Husayn, peace be upon him, summoned Muslim b. Aqil and despatched him with Qays b. Mushir al Saydawi and Umara b. Abd Allah al Saluli, and Abd Allah and Abd al Rahman, sons of Shaddad al Arhabi. He enjoined him to be pious before God and to conceal his affair, and to act in a kindly way. If he saw that the people were united and had commited themselves to an agreement, he should speedily inform him of that.

Muslim, the mercy of God be on him, departed until he came to Medina. There he prayed in the mosque of the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, and said farewell to the dearest members of his family. Then he hired two guides. These two set out with him, but they missed the way and got lost. Both were struck by severe thirst and were unable to continue their journey. They indicated the path to him after it again appeared clear to them. Muslim carried on along the path and the two guides died of thrist. Muslim b. Aqil, the mercy of God be with them both, wrote a letter from the place known as al Madiq and sent it with Qays b. Mushir:

I set out from Medina with two guides and they missed the way and got lost. Both were overcome by thirst and soon died. But we kept going until we came to water. We were only saved at the last moment of our lives. That water is in a place called al- Madiq in a low valley. I have taken this as a bad omen for my mission. If you consider it so, you could relieve me and send another in my place.
Greetings.

Al-Husayn, peace be upon him, wrote (back):

I am afraid that your urging me in the letter to relieve you from the task which I sent you on is only cowardice. Therefore go on with your task which I gave you.

Greetings.

Muslim read the letter, he said: "It is not for myself that I am afraid.”So he continued (once more) until he came to a well belonging to (the tribe of) Tayyi’. He stayed there (the night) then as he rode off (he saw) a man hunting. He saw him shoot a fawn as it came into his sight, and kill it. Muslim said: "(Thus), will we kill our enemies, God willing."

He went on until he entered Kufa. There he stayed in the house of al-Mukhtar b. Abi Ubayda, which is called today the house of Muslim b. al-Musayyib. The Shi’a began to come regularly to (see) him. Whenever a group of them gathered together with him, he would read the letter of al-Husayn, peace be upon him, and they would weep. The people pledged allegiance to him (on behalf of al-Husayn) to the extent that eighteen thousand men made such a pledge to him.

Therefore Muslim wrote to al-Husayn, peace be upon him, informing him of the pledge of allegiance to him of the eighteen thousand and urging him to come.

The Shi’a began to visit Muslim b. Aqil so frequently that his place (of residence) became well-known. Al-Numan b. Bashlr, who had been Muawiya’s governor of Kufa and had been confirmed in office by Yazid, knew of his where abouts. He went up on the the pulpit and after praising God said: "Servants of God, fear God and do not rush into rebellion and discord. For in that men will be destroyed, blood will be shed, and property will be plundered. I do not combat anyone who does not combat me, nor do I disturb those of you who remain quiet. I do not oppose you, nor do I apprehend (you merely) on grounds of suspicion, accusation or hearsay. However, if you turn your faces away from me, violate your pledge of allegiance and oppose your Imam, by God, other than Whom there is no deity, I will strike you with my sword as long as its hilt remains in my hand, even though I do not have any of you to help me. Yet I hope that those among you who know the truth are more numerous than those whom falsehood will destroy."

Abd Allah b. Muslim b. Rabi’al al-Hadrami, an ally of the Banu Umayya stood before him and said: "O governor, what you see can only be adequately dealt with by violence; for the view which you hold about what (should be done) between you and your enemy is that of the weak."

"I would prefer to be one of the weak (while remaining) in obedience to God than to be one of the mighty (while at the same time being) in rebellion against God,”answered al-Nu’man. Then he went down (from the pulpit).

Abd Allah b. Muslim went out and wrote the (following) letter to Yazid b. Mu’awiya:

Muslim b. Aqil has come to Kufa and Shi’a have pledged allegiance to him on behalf of al-Husayn b. Abi Talib, peace be on them. If you have any need for Kufa, then send it a strong man, who will carry out your orders and act in the same way as you would against your enemy. Al-Nu’man b. Bashir is a weak man, or he is acting like a weak man.

Umara b. Uqba wrote to him in a similar vein, as did Umar b. Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas. When the letters reached Yazid, he summoned Sarjun, a retainer (mawla) of Muawiya and asked (him): "What is your view (of the fact) that Husayn has sent Muslim b. Aqil to Kufa to receive pledges of homage on his behalf? I have (also) learnt that Numan is weak,and had other bad reports of him. Who do you think that I should appoint as governor of Kufa?"

Now Yazid was angry with ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad so Sarjun answered him, "Do you think, if Muawiya was alive and advising you, that you would take his advice?"

"Yes,”he answered.

Sarjun produced a (letter of) appointment for ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad (as governor) of Kufa, and said: "This is the advice of Mu’awiya, which he ordered before he died. So join the two cities of Basra and Kufa (under the authority) of Ubayd Allah.”

"I’ll do that,”replied Yazid. "I’ll send the letter of authority (which my father wrote) for ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad to him.”

After this he summoned Muslim b. ‘Amr al-Bahili and he sent him to ‘Ubayd Allah with the following (letter):

My Shi’a among the people of Kufa have informed me that Ibn ‘Aqil is there gathering units in order to spread rebellion among the Muslims. Therefore, when you read this letter of mine, go to Kufa and search for Ibn Aqil as if you were looking for a bead until you find him. Then bind him (in chains), kill him or expel him.

Greetings.

In this way he gave him authority over Kufa. Muslim b. ‘Amr went to Ubayd Allah at Basra and brought him the authorization and the letter. ‘Ubayd Allah ordered that preparations should be made
immediately and that the departure for Kufa would take place on the next day. He himself left Basra after he had made his brother, ‘Uthman, his deputy. He took with him Muslim b. Amr, Sharik b. al- A’war al-Harithi, together with his entourage and household.

When he reached Kufa, he was wearing a black turban and he was veiled. News of al Husayn’s departure had reached the people and they were expecting his arrival. When they saw Ubayd Allah, they thought that he was al-Husayn. He (i.e. Ubayd Allah) did not pass a group of people without them greeting him. They were saying:

"Welcome, son of the Apostle of God, your arrival is a happy (event)."

He saw in their welcoming of al Husayn something which (greatly) troubled him. Muslim b. Amr said, when their number had become so great (that) they were delaying them: "This is the governor ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad."

He went on so that he was approaching the (governor’s) palace at night. With him was (still) a great crowd who had gathered round him and who did not doubt that he was al-Husayn. Al-Numan b. Bashir had (the palace) bolted against him and against his entourage. One of those with him called on him to open the door to them. But al-Numan, still thinking that he was al-Husayn, went up to the balcony and called down: "I invoke God before you, unless you withdraw (from me), by God, I will not hand over my of fice (amana) to you but I have no wish to fight you."

(Ibn Ziyad) did not answer him. But he went closer while al- Nu’man was hanging over the balcony of the palace. Then he began to say to him: "Open, you have not opened yet and you have already had a long night (in which you have slept instead of governing).

A man behind him heard this and withdrew to the people from Kufa who had followed (Ibn Ziyad) (believing) him to be al-Husayn. He said: "O people, it is Ibn Murjana, by Him other than Whom there is no deity.”Al-Numan opened the door for him and he entered. They slammed the door in the faces of the people and they dispersed.

In the morning the call was made among the people: "Al Salat jamia (the prayer is a general prayer which all should gather for).”The people gathered and he went out to them. He praised and glorified God and said: "The Commander of the faithful (Yazid) has appointed me to be in charge of your town and your frontier-station and the distribution of your booty (fay). He has ordered me to give justice to the oppressed among you, to be generous to those of you who are deprived, and to treat the obedient among you with generosity like a good father, but to use the whip and the sword against those who abandon my commanus and oppose my appointment. Let each man protect himself. True belief (sidq) should declare itself on your behalf, not the threat of punishment (wadis).”

Then he went down, he took the group leaders (arifs) and (some of) the people forcibly and he said: "Write to me about the strangers, those among you who supported the Commander of the faithful (i.e. ‘‘Ali b. Abi Talib), those among you who support the Haruriyya (i.e. Kharijites), and the trouble-makers whose concern is discord and turmoil. Whosoever of you makes these lists for us will be free from harm. But those of you who do not write anyone, will have to guarantee that there is no opponent in his group (irifa) who will oppose us, and no wrongdoer who will try to wrong us. Anyone who does not do so, will be denied protection and his blood and his property will be permitted to us. Any group leader (arif) in whose group is found anyone with partisanship for the Commander of the faithful, who has not been reported to us, will be crucified at the door of his house, and I wil abolish the pay (atal) of that group (irafa)"

When Muslim b. Aqil heard of the coming of Ubayd Allah to Kufa, of the speech he had made and his treatment of the arifs and (other) people, he left the house of al-Mukhtar and went to the house of Hani’ b. Urwa and went in (to stay) there. The Shi’a began to visit Hani’s house secretly to keep it hidden from Ubayd Allah and they enjoined that it should be kept secret.

Ibn Ziyad summoned a retainer (mawla) of his called Maqil.

"Take three thousand dirhams,”he told him, "and look for Muslim b. ‘Aqil and search out his followers. If you get hold of one or a group of them, give them these three thousand dirhams. Tell them to use it to help in the war against your enemy. Let them know that you are one of them. For if you give them it, they will be sure of you and have confidence in you, and they will not keep any of their information from you. So go (looking) for them and continue until you find where Muslim b. ‘Aqll is staying and you have met him."

He did that. He came (to a place where) he sat near Muslim b. Awsaja al-Asad; in the great mosque. The latter was praying, and he (Maeqil) heard some people saying that this (was one of those who) had pledged allegiance to al-Husayn. He went up and sat right next to him until he had finished praying.

"O servant of God,”he said, "I am a Syrian whom God has blessed with love for the House and love for those who love them."

He pretended to weep (in front of) him. Then he continued: "I have three thousand dirhams with which I want to meet a man from them (the House) whom I have learnt has come to Kufa to receive pledges of allegiance on behalf of the son of the daughter of the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family. I have been wanting to meet him but I have not found anyone who will direct me to him and I don’t know the place (where he is staying). While I was sitting (here), I heard a group of the faithful saying that this is a man (i.e. Muslim b. Awsaja) who is acquainted with this House. Therefore I have come to you so that you may take this money from me and introduce me to your leader (sahib); for I am one of your brethren and someone you can trust. If you wish, you may receive my pledge of allegiance to him before my meeting him."

"I thank God for you meeting me,”replied (Muslim) b. ‘Awsaja, "and it gives me great joy to get (you) what you desire, and that God should help the House of His Prophet, peace be on them, through you. Yet the people’s knowledge of my (connection) with this affair before it is finished troubles me, because of (my) fear of this tyrant and his severity."

"It would be better (if) you took the pledge of allegiance from me (now),”Maqil told him. So he took his pledge of allegiance and testaments heavily supported by oaths that he would be sincere and keep the matter concealed. He (Maqil) gave him whatever would make him content in that way.

"(Some to visit me at my house for (a few) days,”said (Muslim b. ‘Awsaja), "for I will seek permission for you (to visit) your master.”He began to go to visit him frequently with the people (i.e. the other members of the Shi’a) and sought permission for him (to visit).

Permission was given and Muslim b. Aqil received (Maqils) pledge of allegiance. He told Abu Thumama al Saidi to take the money from him. The latter was the one who collected money from them and what could be used to help each other, and he used to buy their arms.

He was a perceptive man and one of the knights (faris) of the Arabs and one of the notables of the Shi’a.

That man (i.e. Ma’qil) began to visit them regularly. He was the first to enter and the last to leave, in order to become acquainted with (everything of) their affairs which Ibn Ziyad wanted. He used to keep him informed about that at regular intervals.

Hani’ b. Urwa began to fear for himself and he stopped attending Ibn Ziyad’s assembly (majlis). He pretended to be sick. Ibn Ziyad asked those who did attend, "Why is it I don’t see Hani’?"

"He is sick.”they replied.

"If I had been informed of his illness, I would have paid him a sick visit,”said Ibn Ziyad. Then he summoned Muhammad b. al-Ashath, Asma’ b. Kharija and ‘Amr b. al-Hajjaj al Zubaydi. Ruwayha, daughter of ‘Amr was married to Hani’ b. Urwa, she was the mother of Yahya b. Hani’.

"What prevents Hani’ from coming to visit us?”he asked them.

"We don’t know,”they replied, "but it is said that he is sick."

"I have learnt,”replied (Ibn Ziyad), "that he is better and that he sits at the door of his house. Go and tell him that he should not abandon his duty towards us. For I do not like one of the Arab nobles like him to ill-treat me."

They went until they stood before his (house) in the evening. He was sitting at his door.

"What is stopping you from seeing the governor?”they asked.

"For he has mentioned you and said that if he had been told you were ill, he would have paid you a sick-visit."

"An illness has stopped me,”he answered.

"He has been informed,”they said, "that you sit at the door of your house every evening. He finds you tardy and tardiness and churlish behaviour are things which the authorities will not tolerate. We adjure you to ride with us."

He called for his clothes and got dressed. Then he called for a mule and rode (with them). When he got near the palace, he began to feel some apprehension. He said to Hassan b. Asma’ b. Kharija,

"Nephew, by God,l fear this man. What do you think?"

"Uncle, by God, I do not fear anything for you. why do you invent a reason (for blame) against yourself?”he answered, for Hassan did not know why Ubayd Allah had sent for him. (So) Hani’ went on until he came to ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad. With him was a group (of people).

When he looked up, ‘Ubayd Allah said (to himself): "The fool’s legs have brought him to you.”Then, when Hani’ had drawn near Ibn Ziyad who had the qadi Shurayh, with him, Ibn Ziyad turned towards him and recited:

I want his friendship but he wants my death.

The one who makes excuses to you is one of your own bosom friends from the tribe of Murad.

He was referring to his earlier kindness and gentleness to him (Hani’).

"What is that, governor?”asked Hani’.

"Yes, Hani’, what are these matters which you have been plotting in your house against the Commander of the faithful and the general community of the Muslims?”asked Ibn Ziyad. "You have brought

Muslim b. Aqil and taken him into your house. You have gathered arms and men for him in houses around you. You thought that was hidden from me."

"I have not done that and Muslim is not with me,”he replied.

"Oh yes (you have),”was the answer.

After the argument between them had gone on for some time and Hani’ persisted in contradicting and denying (the accusations), Ibn Ziyad summoned that spy, Maqil. He came and stood before him.

"Do you know this man?”(Ibn Ziyad) asked him.

"Yes,”he replied.

At that (moment) Hani’ realised that he had been a spy against them and had brought (Ibn Ziyad) all their information. For a moment he was bewildered, and then his spirit returned to him.

"Listen to me,”he said, "and believe what I say. I swear by God that I do not lie. By God, I did not summon him to my house. I did not know anything about his business until he came to me asking to stay with me. I was too ashamed to refuse him. As a result of that, the duty of giving (him) protection fell upon me.

Therefore I gave him lodging and refuge. Then his affair developed as you have been informed. If you wish,I will give you strongly sworn testaments that I will not do you any harm and danger, and I will come to you and put my hand in your hand. If you wish, I will give you a guarantee which will be in your hand until I return to you. Then I will go to him and order him to leave my house for wherever in the land he wants to go. Then he will leave his right of protection."

"You will never leave me unless you bring him,”answered Ibn

Ziyad.

"No, by God, I will not bring him to you,”(the other) declared.

After the argument between them had gone on for some time, Muslim b. ‘Amr al-Bahih rose (to speak). There was no other Syrian or Basran in Kufa except him.

"May God make you prosper, governor,”he interjected, "(please)

leave me with him (for a time) so that I can speak to him.”He arose and took him (Hani’) aside from Ibn Ziyad. They were (standing) where he could see them and when they raised their voices, he could hear what they were saying.

"I adjure you before God, Hani’,”said Muslim, "you are killing yourself and bringing tribulation on your clan. By God, I hold you too precious to be killed. This man is the cousin of (your) tribe so they will not fight against him, nor harm him. Therefore give him (i.e. Muslim b. Aqil) to them (the authorities). There will be no shame and failure for you by that for you would only be handing him over to the authorities."

"By God, indeed there would be shame and disgrace for me,”answered Hani’, "were I to hand over one who has come under my protection and is my guest, while I am still alive and sound. I can hear; I see well; I have a strong arm and many helpers. By God, if I was the only one without any helper, I would not hand him over until I had died on his behalf."

He began to shout at him saying: "By God, I will never hand him over to him."

Ibn Ziyad heard that. "Bring him to me,”he said. They brought him. "Either bring him to me or I will have your head cut off,”demanded Ibn Ziyad.

"Then there will be much flashing (of swords) around your house,”replied Hani, thinking that his clan would prevent him (from being killed).

"Come near me,"demanded (Ibn Ziyad). He came nearer and Ibn Ziyad struck his face with his cane and went on beating at his nose, forehead and cheeks so that he broke his nose and the blood flowed from it on to his face anal heard and the flesh of his forehead and cheeks was sprinkled over his beard. Eventually the cane broke.

Hani’ stretched out his hand towards the hilt of the sword of one of the armed attendants but the man pulled it away and prevented him.

"You have been behaving like one of the, Haruri (i.e. Kharijites) all day long!”yelled Ibn Ziyad, "so your blood is permitted to us. Take him away!"

They took him and threw him into one of the rooms in the building. They locked the doors on him. He had told them to put guards on him and that (also) was done. However Hassan b. Asma’ arose and said: "Are (we) messengers of treachery now? For you told us to bring the man to you. yet when we brought him to you, you smashed his nose and face, and his blood flowed on his beard. Then you claimed that you would kill him."

"You will be for it here (and now),”cried ‘Ubayd Allah and he ordered him to be struck, shaken, and pushed aside.

"We are satisfied with the governor’s attitude on our behalf and against (those of) us (who are wrong); the governor is only punishing (those who are wrong),”declared Muhammad b. al Ashath.

However when it was reported to Amr b. al-Hajjaj and he learnt that Hani’ had been killed, he advanced with Madhhij and surrounded the palace. He had a great crowd with him.

"I am ‘Amr b. al-Hajjaj,”he called out, "and these are the knights of Madhhij, and their leading men. We have not broken away from obedience, nor have we separated from the community."

It had been reported to them that their colleague had been killed, and they regarded that as a great crime. Ubayd Allah was told that Madhhij were at the gate. He told the qadi Shurayh: "Go in to their colleague, look at him and then go out and inform them that he is still alive and has not been killed."

Shurayh went in and looked at him. When Hani’ saw Shurayh, he said, with blood flowing down his beard: "Oh what a God! Oh what Muslims! Has my clan been destroyed? Where are the people of religion? Where are the people of the town?”When he heard the tumult at the door of the palace he said: "I think those are the voices of Madhhij and my group of the Muslims. If ten of them got in, they would be able to rescue me."

After Shurayh had listened to what he had to say, he went out to them and told them: "When the governor learnt about your attitude and your statements concerning your collegue, he ordered me to go and see him. I went and I saw him. Then he ordered me to meet you and inform you that he is still alive and that the report that he had been killed was false."

"Praise be to God since he has not been killed,”answered CAmr b. al-Hajjaj and his colleagues. Then they went away.

Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad went out and went up on the pulpit. (He had brought) with him the nobles of the people, his bodyguard (shurat) and his entourage. He said: "O people, seek refuge in obedience to God and your Imams. Do not cause division, for you will be destroyed, humiliated, killed or harshly treated and deprived. Your brother is he who speaks the truth to you. He who warns is excused.”

After he had finished, he was about to go down but had not gone from the pulpit, when the look-outs at the date-sellers’ gate of the mosque rushed in yelling: "Muslim b. Aqil has come!"

Ubayd Allah quickly went into the palace and locked the gates.

Abd Allah b. Hazim reported:

By God, I was Ibn ‘Aqil’s messenger at the palace to see what was done to Hani’. When he was beaten and imprisoned I mounted my horse and was the first to enter the house to bring information of him to Muslim b. Aqil. There the women of Murad had gathered and they were crying out: "O tears of grief for him! O bereavement of him!"

I went in to see Muslim and gave him the news of him (Hani’). He ordered me to summon his supporters. The houses around him were full of them; there were four thousand men there. He told his messengers to cry out: "O victorious, kill!”so I cried out: "O victorious, kill!”

Then the Kufans gathered and assembled before him. Muslim, may God have mercy on him, appointed leaders over the quarters, over the tribes of Kinda, Madhhij, Tamlm, Asad, Mudar and Hamdan. The people had answered the call and gathered, except for a few who had delayed so that the mosque and the market place were full of people. They were full of enthusiasm until the evening.

Ubayd Allah’s situation was grim. All his energy was concentrated on holding the door, for he only had thirty members of his bodyguard with him in the palace, twenty nobles of the people, and his family and entourage. The nobles who had not been with him began to come to him through the door which adjoined the building of the Romans. Then those of the nobles who were with Ibn Ziyad began to look down on them (the people outside). (These) were looking at them, while they hurled stones at them and cursed them and abused ‘Ubayd Allah and his father. Ibn Ziyad summoned Kathir b. Shihab and ordered him to go out among those of Madhhij who obeyed him and to go round Kufa and make the people desert Ibn Aqil; he should make them afraid of (the possibility of) war and threaten them with the punishment of the authorities. Then he ordered Muhammad b. al-Ashath to go out among those of Kinda and Hadramawt who obeyed him; he should raise a standard which would guarantee security to those people who came to him. He gave similar instructions to al-Qa’qa al-Dhuhli, Shabath b. Rib’i al- Tamimi, Hajjar b. Abjar al-’Ijli and Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan al- Amin.

He kept the rest of the nobles of the people with him, not wishing to be without them because of the small number of people who were with him. Kathir b. Shihab went out (and began) making the people desert Muslim. Muhammad b. al-Ashath went out until he reached the houses of the Bana Umara. Ibn ‘Aqil sent ‘Abd al- Rahman b. Shurayh al-Shibami to Muhammad b. al-Ashath from the mosque.

When Muhammad b. al-Ashath saw the great number of those who had come to him (Muslim), he lingered where he was (i.e. he did not carry out Ibn Ziyad’s instructions). Then he- Muhammad b. al-Ashath- Kathir b. Shihab, al-Qaqa b. Shawr al- Dhuhli, and Shabath b. Ribi began to make the people withdraw from their close adherence to Muslim for they made them afraid of the authorities so that a great number of their tribesmen and others gathered to them and they went to Ibn Ziyad through the house of the Romans. The tribesmen went in with them.

"May God make the governor prosperous,”said Kathir b. Shihab, "you have many of the nobles of the people with you, (as well as) your bodyguard, family and servants. Let us go out against them."

Ubayd Allah refused but he gave Shabath b. Ribi a standard and he sent him out. The people with Ibn Aqil remained numerous until evening.

Their situation became strong. ‘Ubayd Allah sent for the nobles and he assembled them. They (went up to the roof to) look down on the people. They offered additional (money) and kind treatment to those who would obey and they terrified the disobedient with (threats of) dispossession and (dire) punishment. They told them that the army from Syria was coming against them. Kathir b. Shihab spoke until the sun was about to set.

He said: "O people, stay with your families. Do not hurry into evil actions. Do not expose yourselves to death. These are the soldiers of the Commander of the faithful Yazid, who are approaching. The governor has given God a promise that if you persist in fighting him and do not go away by nightfall, he will deprive your children of their (right to a) state allotment of money fate’) and he will scatter your soldiers in Syrian campaigns. He will make the healthy among you responsible for the sick and those present responsible for those who are absent until none of those rebellious people will remain who has not tasted the evil consequences of what their hands have earned."

The (other) nobles spoke in a similar vein. After the people had heard what they had to say, they began to disperse. Women began to come to their sons and brothers (saying): "Go, the people will be enough (without) you.”Men were going to their sons and brothers and saying: "Tomorrow, the Syrians will come against you. What are you doing, causing war and evil? Come away.”Thus (a man) would be taken away or would leave.

They continued to disperse so that by the time evening came and Muslim b. Aq’il prayed the evening prayer, he had only thirty men with him in the mosque. When he saw that it was evening and he only had that group with him, he left the mosque and headed for the gates of Kinda. He reached the gates with only ten of them (left) with him. When he left the gate, there was no one with him to guide him. He looked around but could see no one to guide him along the road, to show him to his house and to give him personal support if an enemy appeared before him.

He wandered amid the lanes of Kufa without knowing where he was going until he came to the houses of the Banu Jabala of Kinda. He went on until he came to a door (at which was) a woman called Tawa. She had been a slave-wife (umm walad) of al-Ashath b. Qays and he had freed her. She had, then, married Usayd al-Hadrami and had borne him (a son called) Bilal. Bilal had gone out with the people and his mother was standing at the door waiting for him.

Ibn ‘Aqil greeted her and she returned the greeting.

"Servant of God, give me water to drink,”he asked her. she gave him a drink and he sat down. she took the vessel inside and then came out again.

"Servant of God, haven’t you had your drink?”she asked.

"Yes,”was the answer

"Then go to your people,”she said. But he was silent. She repeated it but he was still silent. A third time she said: "Glory be to God, servant of God, get up - may God give you health - (and go) to your people. For it is not right for you to sit at my door and I will not permit you to do it."

(At this) he got up and said: "Servant of God, I have neither house nor clan in this town. Would you (show) me some generosity and kindness? Perhaps I will be able to repay it later on.”

"What is it, servant of God?”she asked.

"I am Muslim b. Aqil,”he replied. "These people have lied to me, incited me (to action) and then abandoned me."

"You are Muslim,”she repeated.

"Yes,”he answered.

"Come in,”she said and he was taken into a room in her house but not the room she used. She spread out a carpet for him and offered him supper but he could not eat.

Soon her son returned. He saw her going frequently to and fro between the rooms and exclaimed: "By God, the number of times which you have gone into and come out of that room this evening, makes me suspect that you have something important (there).”

"My little son, forget about this,”she answered.

"By God, tell me,”he replied.

"Get on with your own business and don’t ask me about anything,”she retorted. However he persisted until she said: "My little son, don’t tell any of the people anything about what I am going to tell you."

"Indeed,”he answered and she made him take an oath. When he swore (not to do) that, she told him. He went to bed without saying anything.

After the people had deserted Muslim b. ‘Aqil, a long time passed for Ibn Ziyad without him hearing the voices of the supporters of Ibn Aqil as he had heard them before. He told his followers to look down at them and see whether they could see any of them. They looked down and did not see anyone. Then he told them to see whether they were in the shadows and were lying in ambush for them. They removed the (bamboo) roof covers of the mosque and began to lower the torches of fire in their hands, and to look.

Sometimes the torches gave light for them and sometimes they did not give (as much) light for them as they would have wished. They let down the torches and sticks of cane tied with rope on which was fire. They were let down until they reached the ground. They did this in (places in which was) the deepest darkness, (as well as) those parts which were closer and those which were in between. They (also) did that in the darkness around the pulpit. When they saw that there was nothing, they informed Ibn Ziyad that the people had dispersed.

Then he opened the gateway which (went) into the mosque. He came out and went up on the pulpit. His followers had come out with him. He told them to sit for a little while before the night prayer. He ordered ‘Amr b. Nafi to call out that there would be no guarantees of security for any man of the bodyguard, the arifs, the supporters and the fighters who prayed the night prayer (anywhere) except in the mosque.

Not an hour passed before the mosque was full of people. After ordering his caller (to call for prayer), he rose for the prayer. His guard rose behind him but told them to guard him against anyone coming in (to try) to assassinate him. After praying with the people, he went up on the pulpit, When he had praised and glorified God ,he said:

Ibn ‘Aqil, stupid and ignorant (man as he is) has attempted the opposition and rebellion which you have seen. There will be no security from God for a man in whose house we find him. Whoever brings him, will have the reward for his blood. Fear God, you servants of God, and keep to obedience and your pledge of allegiance. Do not do (anything which will be) against yourselves. Husayn b. Numayr, your mother will lose you, if any of the gates of the lanes of Kufa is open or this man gets away, and you do not bring him to me. I give you authority over the houses of the inhabitants of Kufa. Send lookouts (to inspect) people on the roads. Tomorrow morning clear out (the people from) the houses and search them thoroughly so that you bring me this man."

Al-Husayn b. Numayr was in charge of the bodyguard and was of the Banu Tamim. After this, Ibn Ziyad went back into the palace. He gave Amr b. Hurayth his standard and put him in charge of the people. In the morning he held an assembly and gave permission for the people to come to him. Muhammad b. al-Ash’ath approached. "Welcome to one of those whose loyalty is above suspicion,”he said to him and sat him by his side.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Martyrdom Of Muslim Ibn Aqil

That same morning the son of that old woman went to ‘Abd al- Rahman b. Muhammad b. al-Ash’ath and told him about Muslim b. ‘Aqil being with his mother. ‘Abd al-Rahman went to his father who was with Ibn Ziyad. He went to him and Ibn Ziyad learned his secret. "Get up and bring him to me immediately,”said Ibn Ziyad to (Muhammad b. al-Ashath), poking a cane into his side. He sent (Amr b.) Ubayd Allah b. Abbas al-Sulam, with him, together with seventy men from the tribal group of Qays. They went to the house where Muslim b. Aqil was. When the latter heard the beating of horses’ hooves and the voices of men, he knew that it was him whom they had come for. He went out against them with his sword (drawn) as they rushed blindly towards the house. He fell upon them and struck them with his sword so that he drove them away from the house. They repeated the attack, and Muslim counter-attacked in the same way.

He and Bakr b. Humran al-Ahmari exchanged blows and Bakr struck Muslim’s mouth, cutting his top lip and slicing down to the lower lip to knock out two of his teeth. Muslim struck him a terrible blow on the head and repeated it again, cutting a nerve along his shoulder with a blow which almost reached his stomach.

When the people saw that, they (went up and) looked down on him (Muslim) from the tops of the houses, and began to hurl stones at him and to light canes of wood with fire which they threw from the top of the house. When he saw that, he went out against them into the lane with his sword unsheathed.

"You can have my guarantee of security,”said Muhammad b. al- Ashath, "don’t kill yourself."

But he continued to fight against them saying:

I swear I will only be killed as a free man, although I see death as something horrible, Or it makes the cold a bitter heat and deflects the ray of the sun (for ever).

Every man one day will meet an evil, I fear that I will be cheated and deluded.

"You will not be cheated, deluded or deceived,”replied

Muhammad b. al-Ashath. "These people (i.e. the Banu Umayya) are your cousins and they will not fight against you or strike you.”

He had been hurt by stones and weakened by the fighting. He was out of breath and he was propping his back up against the wall of that house. Ibn al-Ash’ath repeated the offer of security to him.

"Am I granted security?”he said.

"Yes,”he replied and he said to the people who were with him, "he is given security by me."

"Yes,”replied the people, except (Amr b.) ‘Ubayd Allah b. al-Abbas al-Sulami.

"I have neither she camel or camel in this (i.e. I will have nothing to do with it),”he said and he turned aside.

"If you will not grant me security,”declared Muslim, "I will not put my hand in yours."

A mule was brought and he was put on it. They gathered around him and pulled his sword away. At that he was in despair for his life and his eyes filled with tears.

"This is the first betrayal,”he cried.

"I hope no harm will come to you,”called out Muhammad b. al- Ashath.

"Is it only hope?”he retorted as he wept. "Where then is your guarantee of security? Indeed we belong to God and to Him we will return."

"One who has sought for the like of what you have sought for, should not weep when there befalls him what has befallen you,”‘Amr b. ‘Ubayd Allah b. al-’Abbas goaded him.

I would not weep for myself,”he replied, "nor would I grieve for my own death, even though I have not the slightest desire for destruction. But I am weeping for my family who are coming to me, I am weeping for al-Husayn and the family of al-Husayn, peace be on them.

Then he went closer to Muhammad b. al-Ash’ath and said:

"O servant of God, by God, I see that you are unable to grant me a guarantee of security. Yet do you have the goodness to be able to send one of your men with my message so that it will get to al-Husayn? For I have no doubt that he has already set out towards you, or will be setting out soon with his House.

(This messenger) would say:

Ibn ‘Aqil has sent me to you. He is a prisoner in the hands of the people, and he does not expect to see evening before he is killed; and he says:

Return, may my father and mother be your ransom, with your House and do not let the Kufans tempt you, for they were the followers of your father and he desired to leave them even through death and murder. The Kufans have lied to you. A liar has no judgement.

"By God, I will do that,”replied Ibn al-Ash’ath, "and I will inform Ibn Ziyad that I have given you a guarantee of security."

Ibn al-Ash’ath went with Ibn Aqil to the door of the palace. He asked permission to enter. Permission was given him and he went in (to see) Ibn Ziyad. He gave a report about Ibn ‘Aqil and Bakr’s blow against him, and about his own guarantee of security to him.

"What (is this about) you and a guarantee of security?”demanded ‘Ubayd Allah, "as if we sent you to guarantee him security when we only sent you to bring him."

Ibn al-Ashath fell silent.

While Ibn Aqil remained at the palace door, his thirst had become severe. At the palace door there were people sitting waiting for permission to enter. Among them were ‘Umara b. ‘Uqba b. Abi

Mu’ayt, ‘Amr b. Hurayth, Muslim b. Amr and Kathir b. Shihab.

There was a jug of cold water placed at the doorway.

"Give me a drink of that water,”asked Muslim.

"See how cold it is,”replied Muslim b. Amr, "but by God, you will never taste a drop of it until you taste the heat of Hell-fire.”

"Shame on you whoever you are!’ cried Ibn Aqil.

"I am the one who recognized the truth when you denied it; who was sincere to his Imam when you deceived him; who was obedient to him when you opposed him. I am Muslim b. Amr al-Bahili."

"Your mother has been bereft of a son,”replied Ibn ‘Aqil. "How coarse you are, how rough, how hard your heart is. Man of Bahila, you are more appropriate for the heat of Hell-fire and to remain there forever, than I am."

He sat down, propping himself against a wall. ‘Amr b. Hurayth sent one of his boys to bring a jug with a napkin and cup. He poured water into it and told him to drink. But whenever he went to drink, he filled the cup with blood so that he was not able to drink. He did that once, and then twice. When he made as if to drink for the third time, his tooth fell into the cup.

"Praise be to God,”he said, "if it had been a provision granted me (by God), I could have drunk it."

Ibn Ziyad’s messenger came out and ordered him to go to (see) him. He went in but did not greet him as governor.

"Don’t you greet the governor?”demanded the guard.

"If he wants my death, what is (the point of) my greeting him with words of peace?”he replied. "If he did not want my death, my greetings (of peace) to him would be profuse."

"By my life, you will be killed,”declared Ibn Ziyad.

"So be it,”he replied.

"Indeed, (it will)."

"Then let me make my will to one of my fellow tribesmen.

"Do (so)."

Muslim looked at those sitting with Ubayd Allah. Among them was ‘Umar b. Saed b. Abl Waaaas. He said to him: “Umar, there is kinship between you and me and I have need of you. So you could carry out what I need of you. But it is secret.”

Umar refused to listen to him.

"Why do you refuse to consider the need of your cousinT’ asked Ubayd Allah. So Umar got up with him and sat where Ibn Ziyad could watch both of them.

"I have a debt in Kufa,”said Muslim. ‘I borrowed seven hundred dirhams when I came to Kufa. Sell my sword and armour and pay the debt for me. When I have been killed, ask Ibn Ziyad to give you my corpse and bury it. Send to al-Husayn, peace be on him, someone to send him back. For I have written to him telling him that the people are with him and now I can only think that he is coming."

"Do you know what he said to me, governor?”Umar said to Ibn Ziyad. "He mentioned these things."

"The faithful would not betray you,”said Ibn Ziyad to (Muslim),

"But the traitor was confided in. As for what you have, it is yours, and we will not prevent you from doing with it what you like. As for the body when we have killed it, we do not care what is done with it. As for al-Husayn, if he does not intend (harm) to us, we will not intend (harm) to him.

Then Ibn Ziyad said: "Ibn Aqil, you came to the people while they were all (united) and you scattered them and divided their opinions so that some of them attacked others."

"No,”replied Ibn ‘Aqil, "I did not come for that but (because) the people of the town claimed that your father had killed their best men, shed their blood and appointed governors among them like the governors of Choesroe and Caesar. We came to enjoin justice and to urge rule by the Book."

"What are you (to do) with that, you great sinnerT’ cried Ibn Ziyad. "Why did you not do that among the people when you were drinking wine in Medina?"

"Me, drink wine! By God, God knows you are not speaking the truth, and have spoken without any knowledge, for I am not like you have said. It is you who are more correctly described as drinking wine than me, (you) who lap the blood of Muslims and kill the life whose killing God has forbidden and (you are one) who sheds sacred blood on behalf of usurpation, enmity and evil opinion while he (Yazid) enjoys himself and plays as if he had done nothing."

"You great sinner (fasiq),”shouted Ibn Ziyad, "your own soul made you desire what God prevented you from having (i.e. authority) (because) God did not regard you as worthy of it."

"Who is worthy of it, if we are not worthy of it?’ asked Muslim. "The Commander of the faithful, Yazid,’’ answered Ibn Ziyad.

"Praise be to God,”called out Muslim. "We will accept God’s judgement between us and you in every circumstance.”

"May God kill me, if I do not kill you in such a way as no one in Islam has (ever) been killed before,”retorted Ibn Ziyad.

"You are the person with the most right to commit crimes of innovation in Islam which have not been committed before,”Muslim replied, "for you will never abandon evil murder, wicked punishment, shameful practice, and avaricious domination to anyone (else)."

Ibn Ziyad began to curse him, and to curse al-Husayn, ‘Ali and ‘Aqil, peace be on them, while Muslim did not speak to him. "Take him up to the top of the palace,”ordered Ibn Ziyad, "and cut off his head, (throw it to the ground) and make (his body) follow it (to the ground)."

"By God,”said Muslim, "if there was any (real) kinship between you and me, you would not kill me."

"Where is the man whose head Ibn Aqil struck with (his) sword?”asked Ibn Ziyad. Then Bakr b. Humran al Ahmari was summoned and he told him: "Climb up, and you be the one who cuts his head off."

He went up with him. He (Muslim) said: "God is greater (Allahu Akbar)”He sought forgiveness from God and prayed for blessings on the Apostle, saying:

O God, judge between us and a people who have enticed us, lied against us and deserted us.

They (took) him to a part which overlooked where the shoemakers are today. His head was cut off (and thrown down) and his body was made to follow his head. Muhammad b. al-Ash’ash, then approached ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad and spoke to him of Hani’ b. ‘Urwa. He said:

"You know of the position of Hani’ in the town and of his House in the clan. His people know that I and my colleague brought him to you. I adjure you before God, hand him over to me for I would not like (to face) the enmity of the town and his family.”

He promised to do that but then afterwards something occurred to him and he ordered Hani’ (to be) taken (immediately) to the market- place and (his head) cut off.

Hani’ was taken in chains until he was brought to a place where sheep were sold. He began to shout: "O Madhhij! There is no one from Madhhij for me today! O Madhh,ij, where is Madhhij?”

When he realised that no one was going to help him, he pulled his hand and wrenched it free of the chain, crying: "What is there, stick, knife, stone or bone, with which a man can defend his life?”(At this) they jumped upon him and tied the chains (more) tightly. He was told to stretch out his neck but he answered: "I am not so liberal with my life and I will not help you (to take) my life."

A Turkish retainer (mawla) of Ubayd Allah called Rashid struck him with a sword but it did not do anything.

"To God is the return, O God to Your mercy and Your paradise,”called out Hani’. Then (Rashld) struck him with another blow and killed him.

Concerning Muslim b. ‘Aqil and Hani’ b. Urwa, may God have mercy upon them, Abd Allah b. al-Zubayr al-Asadi said:

If you do not know what death is, then look at Hani’ in the market-place and Ibn Aqil:

(Look at) a hero whose face has been covered with wounds and another who fell dead from a high place. The command of the governor struck them (down) and they became legends for those who travel on every road.

You see a corpse whose colour death has changed and a spattering of blood which has flowed abundantly;

A young man who was (even) more bashful than a shy young woman, was more decisive than the polished blade of a two- edged sword.

Is Asma’ riding in safety a mount which moves at walking pace while Madhhij urged him to seek vengeance And Murad wander around him? Are all of them in fear of the questioner and the questioned?

If you do not avenge your two brothers, then be harlots satisfied with little.

When Muslim and Hani’ were killed, the mercy of God be on them, Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad sent their heads with Hani’ b. Abi Hayya al- Wadi’i and al-Zubayr b. al-Arwah al-Tamimi to Yazid b. Muawiya

He ordered his secretary (katib) to write to Yazid about what had happened to Muslim and Hani’. The secretary who was ‘Amr b. Nafi’ - wrote but he was very wordy (in his style). He was the first to be wordy in writing letters. When Ubayd Allah saw the letter, he disliked it.

"What is this prolixity and this excessr’ he asked.

"Write:

Praise be to God, Who exacted the dues of the Commander of the faithful and has given him sufficient provisions against his enemy. I (am writing to) inform the Commander of the faithful that Muslim b. ‘Aqil took refuge in the house of Hani’ b. ‘Urwa al-Muradi. I set look-outs and spies on them, concealed men against them, I tricked them until I brought them out. God gave me power over them. Thus I came upon them and had them executed. I have sent their heads to you with Hani’ b. Abi Hayya and al-Zubayr b. Arwah al-Tamimi. They are both people who are attentive and in obedience to you, and of sincerity. Let the Commander of the faithful ask them about whatever of the affair he may wish; for they have knowledge and truth.

Farewell. Greetings."

Yazid b. Muawiya wrote (back):

You have not gone beyond what I wanted. You have acted with the decisive action I wanted. You have launched into the attack with the violence of man who has control of his emotion. You have satisfied me, been sufficient for (the task) and corroborated my view of you and my opinion of you. I have summoned your two mes sengers and questioned them, and talked to them.

I found them in their views and merit as you had mentioned. Receive them both with kindness on my recommendation. I have been informed that al-Husayn has set out for Iraq. Therefore set look-outs and watches, be vigilant and detain suspicious (characters). Put to death (any who are) accused and write to me about any news which occurs. God, the Exalted, wishing.

Muslim b. ‘Aqil’s (attempted) rising in Kufa was on Tuesday, 8th of Dhu al-Hijja in the year 60 A.H. (680). He, may God have mercy on him, was killed on Wednesday, 9th of Dhu al-Hijja, the Day of Arafa.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 4

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Journey, The Martrydom And Other Events

Al Husayn, the blessings of God be on him, set out from Mecca to Iraq on the day of Muslim’s (attempted) rising in Kufa, that is the day of Tarwiya, after staying in Mecca for the rest of Shaban, the month of Ramadhan, Shawwal and Dhu al Qada and eight days of Dhu- al-Hijja in the year 60 A.H. (680). During his stay in Mecca, peace be on him, a number of Hijazis and Basrans had gathered around him, joining themselves to his household and his retainers (mawali).

When he determined on journeying to Iraq, he made the circumbulation of the (sacred) House and the ritual running between al-Safa and al-Marwa. Then he left the state of consecration (for the pilgrimage) (after) he had performed the lesser pilgrimage (umra) because he was not able to perform the greater pilgrimage (hajj). Through fear of being apprehended in Mecca, and being taken to Yazid b. Muawiya, he, peace be on him, had set out early with his House, his sons and those of his Shi’a who had joined him.

(As it has been reported to us:)

News of Muslim’s (capture and death) had not yet reached him because (it had only happened) on the day he set out. (It is reported that al-Farazdaq, the poet, said:)

I made the pilgrimage with my mother in the year 60 A.H. (680). I was driving her camel when I entered the sanctuary. (There) I met al- Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, leaving Mecca accompanied by (some men carrying) swords and shields.

"Whose caravan is this?”I asked.

"Al-Husayn b. ‘Ali’s, peace be on them,”was the reply. So I went up and greeted him.

"May God grant you your request and (fulfil) your hope in what you want, by my father and mother, son of the Apostle of God,”I said to him. "But what is making you hurry away from the pilgrimage?"

"If I did not hurry away, I would be apprehended,”he replied.

Then he asked me: "Who are you?"

"An Arab,”I answered and he did not question me (about myself) any further.

"Tell me about the people you have left behind you,”he asked.

"You have asked a good (question),”I answered. "The hearts of the people are with you but their swords are against you. The decision comes from Heaven and God does what he wishes."

"You have spoken truly of the affair belonging to God,”he replied.

"Every day He (is involved) in (every) matter”(LV, 29) If fate sends down what we like and are pleased with, we praise God for His blessings. He is the One from Whom help should be sought in order to give thanks to Him. However, although fate may frustrate (our) hopes, yet He does not destroy (the souls of) those whose intention is the truth and whose hearts are pious."

"True, God brings you what you wish for (ultimately) and guards you against what you are threatened by,”I said. Then I asked him about matters concerning vows and pilgrimage rites. He told me about them and then moved his mount off, saying farewell, and so we parted.

When al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, left Mecca, Yahya b.Said b. al-’As met him with a group (of men). They had been sent to him by ‘Amr b. Said.

"Come back from where you are going,”they ordered. But he refused (to obey) them and continued. The two groups came to blows and hit at each other with whips. However al-Husayn and his followers resisted fiercely. Al-Husayn continued until he got to al- Tanim. There he met a camel-train which had come from Yemen. He hired from its people (additional) camels for himself and his followers to ride.

Then he said to the owners (of the camels): "Whoever (of you) wants to come with us to Iraq, we will pay his hire and enjoy his company and whoever wants to leave some way along the road we will pay his hire for the distance he has travelled."

Some of the people went with him but others refused. Abd Allah b. Jafar sent his sons, Awn and Muhammad, after him, and he wrote a letter to him which he gave to them. In it, he said:

I ask you before God (to return) if you have set out when you see my letter. For I am very concerned because the direction in which you are heading will have within it your destruction, and the extirpation of your House. If you are destroyed today, the light of the land will be extinguished; for you are the (standard) those who are rightly-guided and the hope of the believers.

Do not hurry on your journey as I am following this letter.

Greetings.

Abd Allah, then went to ‘Amr b. Sad and asked him to write to al-Husayn (offering him) a guarantee of security, and (promising) to favour him, so that he would return from where he was going. Amr b. Said wrote a letter in which he offered him favour and a guarantee of security for himself. He dispatched it with his brother Yahya b. Said. Yahya b. Said went after him (as did) Abd Allah after dispatching his sons. The two handed (‘Amr’s) letter to him and strove (to persuade) him to return.

"I have seen the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, in my sleep,”answered (al-Husayn), "and he ordered me (to do) what I am carrying out."

"What was that vision?”they both asked.

"I have not told anyone of it,”he answered, "and I am not going to tell anyone until I meet my Lord, the Mighty and Exalted."

When ‘Abd Allah b. Ja’far despaired of (persuading) him, he told his sons, Awn and Muhammad, to stay with him, to go with him and to struggle on behalf of him. He returned with Yahya b. Sa’id to Mecca.

Al Husayn, peace be on him, pressed on swiftly and directly towards Iraq until he reached Dhat’ Irq.

When Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad had learnt of the journey of al- Husayn, peace be on him, from Mecca to Kufa, he had sent al- Husayn b. Numayr, the commander of the bodyguard (shurta), to station himself at al-Qadisiyya and to set up a (protective) link of cavalry between the area of al-Qadisiyya to Khaffan and the area of al-Qadisiyya to al-Qutqutaniyya. He informed the men that al- Husayn was heading for Iraq.

When al-Husayn, peace be on him, reached al-Hajiz (a hill above) Batn al-Rumma, he sent Qays b. Mushir al Saydawi - some say it was his brother-in-nurture, Abd Allah b. Yuqtur to Kufa. For he, peace be upon him, had not yet learnt the news of (the fate of) Ibn ‘Aqil. He sent a letter with him:

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate

From al-Husayn b. ‘Ali

To his brother believers and Muslims,

Greetings to you, I praise God before you, other than Whom there is no deity. Muslim b. Aqil’s letter came to me, informing me of your sound judgement and the agreement of your leaders to support us, and to seek our rights. I have asked God to make your actions good and reward you with the greatest reward. I set out to you from Mecca on 8th of Dhu al-Hijja, the Day of Tarwiya. When my messenger reaches you, be urgent and purposeful in your affiars, for I am coming to you within the (next few) days.

Greeting and the mercy and blessings of God.

Muslim had written to al-Husayn seventeen days before he was killed and the Kufans had written to him: "Here you have a hundred thousand swords. Do not delay."

Qays b. Mushir went towards Kufa with the letter. However, when he reached al-Qadisiyya, al-Husayn b. Numayr apprehended him and sent him to Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad.

"Go up on the pulpit,”Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad ordered him, "and curse the liar, al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on him”Qays went up on the pulpit and praised and glorified God. Then he said:

People, this man, al-Husayn b. ‘‘Ali the best of God’s creatures, the son of Fatimah, the daughter of the Apostle, God bless him and his family and grant them peace, (is nearby). I am his messenger to you. Answer him.

Then he cursed Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad and his father and prayed for forgiveness for ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and blessed him. ‘Ubayd Allah ordered him to be thrown from the top of the palace. They threw him and he was smashed to pieces.

(It is (also) reported:)

He fell on the ground in chains and his bones were crushed and there only remained to him his last breath. A man called ‘Abd al- Malik b. ‘Umayr al-Lakhmi came to him and cut his throat. When he was told that that had been a shameful (thing to do) and he was blamed for it, he said: "I wanted to relieve him (of his suffering).”

(While this had been going on) al-Husayn, peace be on him, had left Hajiz in the direction of Kufa until he came to one of the watering (places) of the Arabs. There there was ‘Abd Allah b. Muti al-’Adawli, who was staying there. When he saw al-Husayn, peace be on him, he got up and said to him: "(May I ransom) my father and mother for you, son of the Apostle of God, what has rought you (here)?”He brought him (forward) and helped him to dismount.

"It is a result of the death of Muawiya as you would know,”replied al Husayn, peace be on him. "The Iraqis have written to me urging me to (come to) them"

"I remind you, son of the Apostle of God, (of God) and the sacredness of Islam, lest it be violated. I adjure you before God (to think) about the sacredness of Quraysh. I adjure you before God (to think) about the sacredness of the Arabs. By God, if you seek that which is in the hands of Banu Umayya, they will kill you. If they kill you, they will never fear anyone after you. Then it will be the sacredness of Islam which is violated, and the sacredness of Quraysh and the sacredness of the Arabs. Don’t do it! Don’t go to Kufa! Don’t expose yourself to Banu Umayya!"

Al-Husayn, peace be on him, insisted on continuing his journey.

(In the meantime) ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad had ordered (the area) which was between Waqisa and the roads to Syria and Basra to be occupied (so that) they should not let anyone enter, nor anyone leave (Kufa).

However, al-Husayn, peace be on him, went on without knowing anything (of that) until he met some Arabs. He asked them (about the situation) and they told him: "No, by God, we don’t know (anything about it) except that we cannot get into or out of (Kufa).”He continued on his journey.

(A group of Fazara and Bajila reported (the following account).

They said:

We were with Zuhayr b. al-Qayn al-Bajah when we came from Mecca. (Although) we were travelling alongside al Husayn, peace be on him, there was nothing more hateful to us than that we should stop with him at a halting place. (Yet) when al-Husayn, peace be on him, travelled and halted, we could not avoid halting with him. Al-Husayn halted at the side (of the road) and we halted at the (other) side (of the road). While we were sitting, eating our food, a messenger of al- Husayn, peace be on him, approached, greeted us and entered (our camp).

"Zuhayr b. al-Qayn,”he said, "Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Husayn, peace be on him, has sent me to you (to ask) you to come to him.”Each man of us threw away what was in his hands (i.e. threw up his hands in horror); it was (as surprising) as if birds had alighted on our heads.

"Glory be to God,”(Zuhayr’s) wife said to him, "did the son of the Messenger of God send for you? Then aren’t you going to him? If you went to him, you would hear what he had to say. Then you could leave him (if you wanted to)."

Zuhayr b. al-Qayn went (across) to him. It was not long before he returned to announce that he was heading east. He ordered his tent (to be struck) and (called for) his luggage, mounts and equipment.

His tent was pulled down and taken to al-Husayn, peace be on him, then he said to his wife: "You are divorced, go back to your family, for I do not want anything to befall you except good."

Then he said to his companions:

Whoever wants to follow me (may do so), otherwise he is at the end of his covenant with me (i.e. released from obedience to follow Zuhayr as the leader of his tribal group). I will tell you a story (of something which happened to me once): we were raiding a rich land. God granted us victory and we won (a lot of) booty. Salman al-Farsi, the mercy of God be on him, said to us: ‘Are you happy with the victory which God has granted you and the booty you have won?’

We said: ‘Yes.’ Then he said: ‘Therefore when you meet the lord of the young men of the family of Muhammad be happier to fight with them than you are with the booty which you have obtained today.’ As for me. I pray that God may be with you."

He remained among the people with al-Husayn until he was killed.

(Abd Allah b. Sulayman and al-Mundhir b. Mushamill both from Asad, reported:)

When we had finished the pilgrimage, there was no concern more important to us than to join al-Husayn, peace be on him, on the road, so that we might see what happened in his affair. We went along trotting our two camels speedily until we joined him at Zarud. As we approached, there we (saw) a man from Kufa who had changed his route when he had seen al-Husayn, peace be on him. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, had stopped as if he wanted (to speak to) him, but (the man) ignored him and went on. We went on towards the man.

One of us said to the other: "Come with us to ask this man if he has news of Kufa."

We came up to him and greeted him. He returned out greeting.

"From which (tribe) do you come, fellow?”we asked.

"(I am) an Asadi,”he answered.

"We also are Asadis,”we said. "Who are you?"

"I am Bakr b. so and so,”he answered and we told him our lineage.

"Tell us of the people (you have left) behind you?”we asked.

"Yes,”he replied, "I only left Kufa after Muslim b. ‘Aqil and Hani’ b. ‘Urwa had been killed. I saw them being dragged by their legs into the market-place."

We went on to join al-Husayn, peace be on him, and we were travelling close to him until he stopped at al-Thalabiyya in the evening. We caught up with him when he stopped and we greeted him. He returned our greeting.

"May God have mercy on you,”we said, "we have news. If you wish, we will tell it to you publicly or if you wish, secretly.”

He looked at us and at his followers.

"There is no veil for these men,”he answered.

"Did you see the rider whom you were near, yesterday evening?"

"Yes,”he answered, "I had wanted to question him."

"We have got the news from him and spared you (the trouble of) questioning him,”we said. "He was a man from our (tribe), of sound judgment, honesty and intelligence. He told us that he had only left Kufa after Muslim and Hani’ had been killed, and he had seen them being dragged by their legs into the market-place."

"We belong to God and to Him we shall return; may God have mercy on them both,”said al-Husayn, and he repeated that several times.

"We adjure you before God,”we exhorted him, "for your own life and for your House that you do not go from this place, for you have no one to support you in Kufa and no Shi’a. Indeed we fear that such men (will be the very ones who) will be against you."

"What is your opinion,”he asked, looking towards the sons of ‘Aqil, "now that Muslim has been killed?”

"By God,”they declared, "we will not go back until we have taken our vengeance or have tasted (the death) which he tasted.”
Al-Husayn, peace be on him, came near us and said: "There is nothing good (left) in life for these men."

Then we knew that his decision had been taken to continue the journey.

"May God be good to you,”we said.

"May God have mercy on you both,”he answered.

Then his followers said to him: "By God, you are not the same as Muslim b. Aqil. If you go to Kufa, the people will rush to (support) you."

He was silent and waited until daybreak. Then he ordered his boys and servants to get a lot of water, to give (the people) to drink and more for the journey. They set out (once more) and went on to Zubala. News of Abd Allah b. Yuqtur reached him. He took out a written statement to the people and read it to them:

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate,

News of the dreadful murder of Muslim b. Aqil Hani’ b. Urwa, and Abd Allah b. Yuqtur has reached us. Our Shi’a have deserted us . Those of you who would prefer to leave us, may leave freely without guilt.

The people began to disperse from him to right and left until there were only left with him those followers who had come with him from Medina, and a small group of those who had joined him. Al-Husayn had done that because he realised that the Arabs who had followed him had only followed him because they thought that he was going to a land where the inhabitants’ obedience to him had already been established. And he did not want them to accompany him without being (fully) aware of what they were going to.

At dawn, he ordered his followers to provide themselves with water and with extra (supplies of it). Then they set out until they passed Batn al Aqaba. He stopped there and was met by a shaykh of the Banu Ikrima called Amr b. Lawdhan.

"Where are you headings.”he asked.

"Kufa,”replied al-Husayn, peace be on him.

"I implore you before God,”exhorted the shaykh, "why are you going there? You won’t come to anything there except the points of spears and the edges of swords. If those who sent for you were enough to support you in battle and had prepared the ground for you, and you came to them, that would be a wise decision. However, in the light of the situation as it has been described I don’t think that you ought to do it."

Servant of God,”he answered, "wise decisions are not hidden from me. yet the commands of God, the Exalted, cannot be resisted. By God, (my enemies) will not leave me till they have torn the very heart from the depths of my guts. If they do that, God will cause them to be dominated and humiliated until they become the most humiliated of the factions among nations.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 5

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

He, peace be on him, went on from Batn al Aqaba until he stopped at Sharaf (for the night). At dawn he ordered his boys to get water and more (for the journeys When he continued from there until midday. While he was journeying, one of his followers exclaimed:

"God is greater (Allahu akbar)!"

"God is greater (AllAhu akbar)!”responded al-Husayn, peace be on him. Then he asked: "Why did you say Allahu akbar?”

"I saw palm-trees,”answered the man.

"This is a place in which we never see a palm-tree,”a group of his followers asserted.

"What do you think it is then?”asked al-Husayn, peace be on him.

"We think it is the ears of horses,”they answered.

"By God, I think so too,”he declared. Then he said: "(So that) we can face them in one direction (i.e. so that we are not surrounded), we should put at our rear whatever place of refuge (we can find)."

"Yes,”said to him, "there is Dhu Husam over on your left. If you reach it before them,it will be (in) just (the position) you want.”So he veered left towards it and we went in that direction with him. Even before we had had time to change direction the vanguard of the cavalry appeared in front of us and we could see them clearly. We left the road and when they saw that we had moved off the road, they (also) moved off the road towards us. Their spears looked like palm branches stripped of their leaves and their standards were like birds’ wings. Al-Husayn ordered his tents (to be put up) and they were erected. The people came up; (there were) about one thousand horsemen under the command of al-Hurr b. Yazid al-Tamimi. (It was) during the heat of midday (that) he and his cavalry stood (thus) facing al-Husayn, peace be on him. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, and his followers were all wearing their turbans and their swords (ready to fight).

"Provide (our) people with water and let them quench their thirst and give their horses water to drink little by little,”al Husayn ordered his boys. They did that and they began filling their bowls and cups and took them to the horses. When a horse had drunk three or four or five draughts, the water was taken away and given to another horse-until they had all been watered.

(‘Ali b. al Taan al Muharibi reported:)

I was with al-Hurr on that day, I was among the last of his followers to arrive. When al-Husayn, peace be on him, saw how thirsty both I and my horse were, he said: "Make your beast (rawiya) kneel.”I thought rawiya meant water-skin so he said: "Cousin, make your camel (jamal) kneel.”I did so. Then he said: "Drink.”I did so, but when I drank, water flowed from my water-skin.

"Bend your water-skin,”said al-Husayn. I did not know how to do that. He came up (to me) and bent it (into the proper position for drinking). Then I drank and gave my horse to drink.

Al-Hurr b. Yazid had come from al-Qadisiyya. Ubayd Allah b.

Ziyad had sent al-Husayn b. Numayr and ordered him to take up (his) position at al-Qadisiyya. Then al-Hurr had been sent in advance with one thousand horsemen to meet al-Husayn.

Al-Hurr remained positioned opposite to al-Husayn, peace be on him, until the time for the midday prayer drew near. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, ordered al-Hajjaj b. Masruq to give the call to prayer. When the second call to prayer immediately preceding the prayer (iqama) was about (to be made) al-Husayn came out (before the people) dressed in a waist-cloth czar) and cloak (rida’) and wearing a pair of sandals. He praised and glorified God, then he said:

People, I did not come to you until your letters came to me, and they were brought by your messengers (saying), ‘Come to us for we have no Imam. Through you may God unite us under guidance and truth.’

Since this was your view, I have come to you. Therefore give me what you guaranteed in your covenants and (sworn) testimonies. If you will not and (if you) are (now) averse to my coming, I will leave you (and go back) to the place from which I came.

They were silent before him. Not one of them said a word.

"Recite the iqama,”he said to the caller for prayer (mu’adhdhin) and he recited the iqama.

"Do you want to lead your followers in prayer?”he asked al-Hurr b. Yazid.

"No,”he replied, "but you pray and we will pray (following the lead of) your prayer."

Al-Husayn, peace be on him, prayed before them. Then he returned (to his tent) and his followers gathered around him. Al-Hurr went back to the place where he had positioned (his men) and entered a tent which had been put up for him. A group of his followers gathered around him while the rest returned to their ranks, which they had been in and which now they went back to. Each of them held the reins of his mount and sat in the shade (of its body).

At the time for the afternoon (asr) prayer, al-Husayn, peace be on him, ordered his followers to prepare for departure. Then he ordered the call to be made, and the call for the easr prayer was made, and the iqama. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, came forward, stood and prayed. Then he said the final greeting (of the prayer) and turned his face towards them (al-Hurr’s men). He praised and glorified God and said:

People, if you fear God and recognise the rights of those who have rights, God will be more satisfied with you. We are the House of Muhammad and as such are more entitled to the authority (wilaya) of this affair (i.e. the rule of the community) over you than these pretenders who claim what does not belong to them. They have brought tyranny and aggression among you. If you refuse (us) because you dislike (us) or do not know our rights, and your view has now changed from what came to us in your letters and what your messengers brought, then I will leave you.

"By God,”declared al-Hurr, "I know nothing of these letters and messengers which you mention."

"Uqba b. Siman,”al-Husayn, peace be on him, called to one of his followers, "bring out the two saddle-bags in which the letters to me are kept."

He brought out two saddle-bags which were full of documents, and they were put before him.

"We are not among those who wrote these letters to you,”said al- Hurr, "and we have been ordered that when we meet you we should not leave you until we have brought you to Kufa to ‘Ubayd Allah.”

"Death will come to you before that (happens),”al-Husayn, peace be on him, told him. Then he ordered his followers, "Get up and get mounted."

They got mounted and (then) waited until their women had been mounted,

"Depart,”he ordered his followers.

When they set out to leave, the men (with al-Hurr) got in between them and the direction they were going in.

"May God deprive your mother of you,”said al-Husayn, peace be on him, to al-Hurr, "what do you want?"

"If any of the Arabs other than you were to say that to me,”retorted al-Hurr, "even though he were in the same situation as you, I would not leave him without mentioning his mother being deprived (of him), whoever he might be. But by God there is no way for me to mention your mother except by (saying) the best things possible.”

"What do you want?”al-Husayn, peace be on him, demanded.

"I want to go with you to the governor, Ubayd Allah,”he replied.

"Then by God I will not follow you."

"Then by God I will not let you (go anywhere else)."

These statements were repeated three times, and when their conversation was getting more (heated) al-Hurr said: "I have not been ordered to fight you. I have only been ordered not to leave you until I come with you to Kufa. If you refuse (to do that), then take any road which will not bring you into Kufa nor take you back to Medina, and let that be a compromise between us while I write to the governor, ‘Ubayd Allah. Perhaps God will cause something to happen which will relieve me from having to do anything against you. Therefore take this (road) here and bear to the left of the road (to) al Udhayb and al-Qadisiyya."

Al-Husayn, peace be on him, departed and al-Hurr with his followers (also) set out travelling close by him, while al Hurr was saying to him:

Al-Husayn, I remind you (before) God to (think of) your life; for I testify that you will be killed if you fight.

"Do you think that you can frighten me with death?”said al- Husayn, peace be on him. "Could a worse disaster happen to you than killing me? I can only speak (to you) as the brother of al-Aws said to his cousin when he wanted to help the Apostle of God, may God bless him and grant him and his family peace. His cousin feared for him and said: ‘Where are you going, for you will be killed?’ but he replied:

I will depart for there is no shame in death for a young man, whenever he intends (to do what is) right and he strives like a Muslim,

(Who) has soothed righteous men through (the sacrifice of) his life, who has scattered the cursed and opposed the criminal.

If I live, I will not regret (what I have done) and if I die, I will not suffer. Let it be enough for you to live in humiliation and be reviled.

When al-Hurr heard that he drew away from him. He and his followers travelled on one side (of the road) while al-Husayn, peace be on him, travelled on the other, until they reached Udhayb al- Hijanat. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, went on to Qasr Bani Muqatil.

He stopped there and there a large tent had (already) been erected.

"Whose is that?”he asked.

"That belongs to Ubayd Allah b. al-Hurr al-Jufi,”he was told.

"Ask him to come to me,”he said.

The messenger went to him and said: "This is al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, and he asks you to come to him."

"We belong to God and to Him we shall return,”said ‘Ubayd Allah. "By God, I only left Kufa out of dread that al-Husayn, peace be on him, would enter Kufa while I was there. By God, I do not want to see him, nor him to see me."

The messenger returned to him (al-H. usayn). Al-Husayn, peace be on him, rose and went over to him. He greeted him and sat down.

Then he asked him to go with him. Ubayd Allah b. al Hurr repeated what he had said before and sought to excuse himself from what he was asking him (to do).

"If you are not going to help us,”al-Husayn, peace be on him, said o him, "then be sure that you are not one of those who fight against us. For, by God, no one will hear our cry and not help us without being destroyed."

"As for that (fighting against you),”he replied, "it will never happen, if God, the Exalted, wishes."

Then al-Husayn, peace be on him, left him and continued to his camp. Towards the end of the night, he ordered his boys to get provisions of water. Then he ordered the journey (to continue). He set out from Qasr Bani Muqatil.

(‘Uqba b. Sim’an reported:)

We set out at once with him and he became drowsy while he was on his horse’s back. He woke up, saying: "We belong to God and to Him we will return. Praise be to God, Lord of the worlds."

He did that twice or three times, then his son, ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn approached him and asked: "Why are you praising God and repeating the verse of returning to Him?"

"My son,”he answered, "I nodded off and a horseman appeared to me, riding a horse and he said: ‘Men are travelling and the fates travel towards them.’ Then I knew it was our own souls announcing our deaths to us."

"Father,”asked (the youth), "does God regard you as evil? Are we not in the right?"

"Indeed (we are),”he answered, "by Him to Whom all His servants must return."

"Father,”said (the youth), "then we need have no concern, if we are going to die righteously."

"May God give you the best reward a son can get for (his behavior towards) his father,”answered al-Husayn, peace be on him.

In the morning, he stopped and prayed the morning prayer. Then he hurried to remount and to continue the journey with his followers, veering to the left with the intention of separating from (al-Hurr’s men). However al-Hurr b. Yazid came towards him and stopped him and his followers (from going in that direction) and he began to (exert pressure to) turn them towards Kufa, but they resisted him. So they stopped (doing that) but they still accompanied them in the same way until they reached Ninawa, (which was) the place where al-Husayn, peace be on him, stopped.

Suddenly there appeared a rider on a fast mount, bearing weapons and carrying a bow on his shoulder, coming from Kufa. They all stopped and watched him. When he reached them, he greeted al-Hurr and his followers and did not greet al- Husayn and his followers. He handed a letter from Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad to al-Hurr. In it (was the following):

When this letter reaches you and my messenger comes to you, make al-Husayn come to a halt. But only let him stop in an open place without vegetation. I have ordered my messenger to stay with you and not to leave you until he brings me (news of) your carrying out my instructions.

Greetings.

When al-Hurr had read the letter, he told them: "This is a letter from the governor Ubayd Allah. He has ordered me to bring you to a halt at a place which his letter suggests. This is his messenger and he has ordered him not to leave me until I carry out the order with regard to you."

Yazid (b. Ziyad) b. al-Muhajir al-Kindi who was with al-Husayn, peace be on him, looked at the messenger of Ibn Ziyad and he recognized him.

"May your mother be deprived of you,”he exclaimed, "what a business you have come to!"

"I have obeyed my Imam and remained faithful to my pledge of allegiance,”(the other man) answered.

You have been disobedient to your Lord and have obeyed your Imam in bringing about the destruction of your soul,”responded Ibn al-Muhajir. "You have acquired (eternal) shame (for yourself) and (the punishment of) Hell-fire. What a wicked Imam your Imam is! Indeed God has said: we have made them Imams who summon (people) to Hellfire and on the Day of Resurrection they will not be helped. (XXVIII, 41) Your Imam is one of those.

Al-Hurr b. Yazid began to make the people stop in a place that was without water and where there was no village.

"Shame upon you, let us stop at this village or that one,”said al- Husayn, peace be on him. He meant by this, Ninawa and al- Ghadiriyya, and by that, Shufayya."

"By God, I cannot do that,”replied (al-Hurr), "for this man has been sent to me as a spy."

"Son of the Apostle of God,”said Zuhayr b. al-Qayn, "I can only think that after what you have seen, the situation will get worse than what you have seen. Fighting these people, now, will be easier for us than fighting those who will come against us after them. For by my life, after them will come against us such (a number) as we will not have the power (to fight) against."

"I will not begin to fight against them,”answered al-Husayn.

That was Thursday, 2nd of (the month of) Muharram in the year 61 A.H.(680). On the next day, Umar b. Sad b. Abi Waqqas, set out from Kufa with four thousand horsemen. He stopped at Ninawa and sent for ‘Urwa b. Qays al-Ahmasi and told him: "Go to him (al- Husayn) and ask him: What brought you, and what do you want?”

Urwa was one of those who had written to al-Husayn, peace be on him, and he was ashamed to do that. The same was the case with all the leaders who had written to him, and all of them refused and were unwilling to do that. Kathir b. Abd Allah al-Shabi stood up - he was a brave knight who never turned his face away from anything – and said: "I will go to him. By God, if you wish, I will rush on him."

"I don’t want you to attack him,”said ‘Umar, "but go to him and ask him what has brought him."

As Kathir was approaching him, Abu Thumama al-Saidi saw him and said to al-Husayn, "May God benefit you, Abu Abd Allah, the wickedest man in the land, the one who has shed the most blood and the boldest of them all in attack, is coming towards you."

Then (Abu Thumama) stood facing him and said: "Put down your sword."

"No, by God,”he replied, "I am only a messenger. If you will listen to me, I will tell you (the message) which I have been sent to bring to you. If you refuse, I will go away."

"I will take the hilt of your sword,”answered (Abu Thumama), "and you can say what you need to."

"No, by God, you will not touch it,”he retorted.

"Then tell me what you have brought and I will inform him for you. But I will not let you go near him, for you are a charlatan."

They both (stood there and) cursed each other. Then (Kathlr) went back to Umar b. Sad and told him the news (of what had happened).

Umar summoned Qurra b. Qays al-Hanzali and said to him: "Shame upon you Qurra, go and meet al-Husayn and ask him what brought him and what he wants."

Qurra began to approach him. When al-Husayn, peace be on him, saw him approaching, he asked: "Do you know that man?"

"Yes,”replied Habib b. Muzahir, "he is from the Hanzala clan of Tamim. He is the son of our sister. I used to know him as a man of sound judgement. I would not have thought that he would be present at this scene."

He came and greeted al-Husayn, peace be on him. Then he informed him of ‘Umar b. Sa’d’s message.

"The people of this town of yours wrote to me that I should come,”answered al Husayn, peace be on him. "However, if now you have come to dislike me, then I will leave you."

"Shame upon you, Qurra,”Habib b. Muzahir said to him, "will you return to those unjust men? Help this man through whose fathers God will grant you (great) favour."

"I will (first) return to my leader with the answer to his message,”replied Qurra, "and then I will reflect on my views.”

He went back to ‘Umar b. Sa’d and gave him his report. "I hope that God will spare me from making war on him and fighting against him,”said ‘Umar and then he wrote to ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad:

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

I am (writing this from) where I have positioned myself, near al Husayn, and I have asked him what brought him and what he wants. He answered: ‘The people of this land wrote to me and their messengers came to me asking me to come and I have done so. However if (now) they have some to dislike me and (the position) now appears different to them from what their messengers brought to me, I will go away from them.

(Hassan b. Qa’id al-’Absi reported:)

I was with ‘Ubayd Allah when this letter came to him, he read it and then he recited:

Now when our claws cling to him, he hopes for escape but he will be prevented (now) from (getting) any refuge.

He wrote to ‘Umar b. Sa’d:

Your letter has reached me and I have understood what you mentioned. Offer al-Husayn (the opportunity) of him and all his followers pledging allegiance to Yazid. If he does that, we will then see what our judgement will be.

When the answer reached Umar b. Sa’d, he said: "I fear that ‘Ubayd Allah will not accept that I should be spared (fighting al- Husayn)."

(Almost immediately) after it, there came (another) letter from Ibn Ziyad (in which he said):

Prevent al-Husayn and his followers from (getting) water.

Do not let them taste a drop of it just as was done with ‘Uthman b. Affan.

At once Umar b. Said sent Amr b al-Hajjaj with five hundred horsemen to occupy the path to the water and prevent al-Husayn and his followers from (getting) water in order that they should (not) drink a drop of it. That was three days before the battle against al- Husayn, peace be on him.

Abd Allah b. al-Husayn al-Azdi, who was numbered among Bajila, called out at the top of his voice: "Husayn, don’t you see that the water is as if in the middle of heaven. By God, you will not taste a drop of it until you die of thirst."

"O God, make him die of thirst and never forgive him", cried al- Husayn, peace be on him.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 6

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

(Humayd b Muslim reported:)

By God, later I visited him when he was ill. By God, other than Whom there is no deity, I saw him drinking water without being able to quench his thirst, and then vomiting. He would cry out, "The thirst, the thirst!”Again he would drink water without being able to quench his thirst, again he would vomit. He would then burn with thirst. This went on until he died, God curse him.

When al-Husayn saw the extent of the number of troops encamped with ‘Umar b. Sa’d, may God curse him, at Ninawa in order to do battle against him, he sent to ‘Umar b. Sa’d that he wanted to meet him. The two men met at night and talked together for a long time.

(When) ‘Umar b. Sa’d went back to his camp, he wrote to Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad, may he be cursed.

God has put out the fire of hatred, united (the people) in one opinion (lit. word), and set right the affairs of the community. This man, al-Husayn, has given me a promise that he will return to the place which he came from, or he will go to one of the border outposts - he will become like any (other) of the Muslims, with the same rights and duties as them; or he will go to Yazid, the Commander of the faithful, and offer him his hand and see (if the difference) between them (can be reconciled). In this (offer) have the consent (to what you have demanded) and the community gains benefit.

When Ubayd Allah read the letter, he said: "This is the letter about a sincere man who is anxious for his people.”

"Are you going vo accept this from him,”demanded Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan, jumping up,

When he has encamped on your land nearby? By God if he was a man from your land and he would not put his hand in yours, whether he was in a position of power and strength (or) whether he was in a position of weakness and impotence you would not give this concession, for it would be (a mark) of weakness. Rather let him and his followers submit to your authority.

Then if you punish them, (it will be because) you are the (person) appropriate to punish, and if you forgive them, you have the right (to do so)."

"What you have suggested is good,”replied Ibn Ziyad. "Your view is the correct view. Take this message to ‘Umar b. Sad and let him offer al-Husayn and his followers (the opportunity of) submitting to my authority. If they do that, let him send them to me in peace. If they refuse, he should fight them. If he (‘Umar b. Sa’d) acts (according to) my instructions, then listen to him and obey him. However if he refuses to fight them then you are the commander of the army (lit. people), attack him, cut his head off and send it to me."

Then he wrote to Umar b. Sa’d:

I did not send you to al-Husayn for you to restrain yourself from (fighting) him, nor to idle the time away with him, nor to promise him peace and preservation (of his life), nor to make excuses for him, nor to be an intercessor on his behalf with me. Therefore see that if al-Husayn and his followers submit to my authority and surrender, you send them to me in peace. If they refuse,v then march against them to fight them and to punish them; for they deserve that.

If al-Husayn is killed, make the horses trample on his body, both front and back; for he is a disobedient rebel, and I do not consider that this will be zany way wrong after death. But it is my view that you should do this to him if you kill him. If you carry out your command concerning him, we will give you the reward due to one who is attentive and obedient. If you refuse, then we withdraw (the command of) our province and army from you and leave the army to Shamir b. Dhl al-Jawshan. We have given him our authority.

Greetings.

Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan brought the letter to ‘Umar b. Sad. After he had brought it and read it, ‘Umar said to him:

Shame upon you, what is this to you? May God never show favour to your house. May God make abominable what you have brought to me! By God, I did not think that you would cause him to refuse what I had written to him, and ruin for us a matter which we had hoped to set right. Al Husayn will not surrender, for there is a spirit like (his) father’s in his body."

"Tell me what you are going to do,”demanded Shamir. "Are you going to carry out the governor’s command and fight his enemy or are you going to leave the command of the army to me?"

"No, (there is going to be) no advantage to you. I will carry that out instead of you. you take command of the foot-soldiers.”

‘Umar b. Sa’d prepared to (do battle with) al-Husayn, peace be on him, on the night of Thursday, 9th of the month of Muharram. (In the meantime) Shamir went out and stood in front of the followers of al- Husayn, peace be on him.

"Where are my sister’s sons?”he demanded. Al Abbas, Jafar, Abd Allah and Uthman, sons of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, peace be on him, came forward.

"What do you want?”they asked.

"Sons of my sister, you are guaranteed security,”he said. "God curse you and curse the security which you offer without offering itlto the son of the Apostle of God,”the young men replied.

"Cavalry of God, mount and announce the news of Heaven (i.e. death),”Umar b. Sa’d called out and the people mounted and he approached (the supporters of al-Husayn) after the afternoon (asr) prayer.

Meanwhile, al-Husayn, peace be on him, was sitting in front of his tent dozing with his head on his knees. His sister heard the clamour (from the enemy’s ranks). She came up to him and said, "My brother, don’t you hear the sounds which are getting nearer?"

I have just seen the Apostle of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, in my sleep,”said al-Husayn, peace be on him, as he raised his head. "He said to me: ‘You are coming to us.’

His sister struck at her face and cried out in grief.

"You have no (reason) to lament, sister,”al-Husayn, peace be on him, told her. "Be quiet, may God have mercy on you."

Then he turned to al-Abbas b. ‘Ali "Brother, the enemy have come, so get ready; but first, al-Abbas, you, yourself, ride out to meet them, to talk to them about what they have (in mind) and what appears (appropriate) to them and to ask about what has brought them (against us)."

Al-Abbas went towards them with about twenty horsemen, among whom was Zuhayr b. al-Qayn.

"How do you see (the situation)?”he asked. "What do you want?’

"The command of the governor has arrived that we should offer you (the opportunity of) submitting to his authority, otherwise we (must) attack you,”they answered.

"Do not hurry (to do anything) until I have gone back to Abu Abd Allah (al-Husayn) and told him what you have said, ‘Abbas requested.

They stopped (where they were) and told him: "Go to him and inform him, and tell us what he says to you.”

Al ‘Abbas went galloping back to al Husayn, peace be on him, to give him the information. While his companions remained exchanging words with the enemy, trying to test them and dissuade them from fighting against al-Husayn, peace be on him, (al-’Abbas) told him what the enemy had said.

Go back to them,”he, peace be on him, said, "if you can, delay them until the morning and (persuade) them to keep from us during the evening. Then, perhaps, we may be able to pray to our Lord during the night to call upon Him and seek His forgiveness. He knows that I have always loved His formal prayer, the recitation of His Book and (making) many invocations to Him, seeking His forgiveness.

Al Abbas went back to the people, and returned (after) being with them, accompanied by a messenger on behalf of Umar b. Saed, who had said: "We will grant you a day until tomorrow. Then if you surrender, we will send you to our governor, Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad but if you refuse we will not leave you (any longer).”

(After) he departed, towards the evening al-Husayn gathered his followers around him.

(‘Ali b. al Husayn, Zayn al Abidin, reported:)

I went near to hear what he would say to them (even though) at that time I was sick. I heard my father say to his followers: I glorify God with the most perfect glorification and I praise Him in happiness and misfortune. O God, I praise You for blessing us with prophethood, teaching us the Qur’an and making us understand the religion. You have given us hearing, sight and hearts, and have made us among those who give thanks (to You). I know of no followers more loyal and more virtuous than my followers, nor of any House more pious and more close-knit than my House. May God reward you well on my behalf. Indeed, I do not think that there will be (any further) days (left) to us by these men. I permit you to leave me. All (of you) go away with the absolution of your oath (to follow me), for there will be no (further) on you from me. This is a night (whose darkness) will give cover to you. Use it as a camel (i.e. ride away in it).

His brothers and sons, the sons of his sisters and the sons of ‘Abd Allah b. Ja’far said:

We will not leave you to make ourselves continue living after your (death). God will never see us (do) such a thing.

Al Abbas b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, was the first of them to make this declaration. Then the (whole) group followed him, (all) declaring the same thing.

"Sons of ‘Aqil”said al-Husayn, "enough of your (family) has been killed. So go away as I have permitted you."

"Glory be to God,”they replied, "what would the people say?

They would say that we deserted our shaykh, our lord, the sons of our uncle, who was the best of uncles; that we had not shot arrows alongside them, we had not thrust spears alongside them, we had not struck swords alongside them. At such an accusation) we do not know what we would do. No, by God, we will not do (such a thing). Rather we will ransom you with our lives, property and families. We will fight for you until we reach your destination. May God make life abominable (for us) after your (death)."

Then Muslim b. Awsaja arose and spoke:

Could we leave you alone? How should we excuse ourselves before God concerning the performance of our duty to your

By God, I will stab them with my spear (until it breaks), I will strike them with my sword as long as the hilt is in my hand. If I have no weapon (left) to fight them with, I will throw stones (at them). By God we will never leave you until God knows that we have preserved through you (the company of His Apostle) in his absence. By God, if I knew what I would die and then be revived and then burnt and then revived, and then scattered, and that would be done to me seventy times, I would never leave you until I met my death (fighting) on your behalf. So how could I do it when there
can only be one death, which is a great blessing which can never be rejected.

Zuhayr b. al-Qayn, may God have mercy on him, spoke:

By God, I would prefer to be killed and then recalled to life; and then be killed a thousand times in this manner; that in this way God, the Mighty and Exalted, should protect your life and the lives of these young men of your House.

All his followers spoke in similar vein, one after the other. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, called (on God to) reward them well and then went back to his tent.

(‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them, Zayn al Abidin reported:)

I was sitting on that evening (before the morning of the day) in which my father was killed. With me was my aunt, Zaynab, who was nursing me when my father left to go to his tent. With him was Juwayn, the retainer (mawla) of Abu Dharrr al-Ghiffarl, who was preparing his sword and putting it right My father recited:

Time, shame on you as a friend! At the day’s dawning and the sun’s setting,

How many a companion or seeker will be a corpse! Time will not be satisfied with any substitute. The matter will rest with the Mighty One, and every living creature will have to journey along my path.

He repeated it twice or three times. I understood it and realized what he meant. Tears choked me and I pushed them back. I kept silent and knew that tribulation had come upon us. As for my aunt,
she heard what I heard - but she is a woman and weakness and grief are part of the qualities of women; she could not control herself, she jumped up, tearing at her clothes and sighing, and went to him.

"Then I will lose (a brother),”Zaynab said to him. "Would that death deprived me of life today, (for) my mother, Fatimah, is dead, and my father, ‘Ah, and my brother, al-Hasan, peace be on them (all)."

"O sister,’ al-Husayn said to her as he looked at her with his eyes full of tears, “don’t let Satan take away your forbearance.

(Remember:) If the sandgrouse are left (alone) at night, they will sleep (i.e. let nature take its course)."

"O my grief, your life will be violently wrenched from you and that is more wounding to my heart and harsher to my soul,”she lamented, and then she struck at her face. she bent down to (the hem of) her garment and (began to) tear it. Then she fell down in a faint.

Al-Husayn, peace be on him, got up and bathed her face with water

Then he said to her:

Sister, fear God and take comfort in the consolation of God. Know that the people on the earth will die and the inhabitants of heaven will not continue to exist (for ever). For everything will be destroyed except the face of God Who created creation by His power (qudra); He sends forth creatures and He causes them to return; He is unique and alone. My grandfather was better than me, my father was better than me and my mother was better than me. I and every Muslim have an ideal model in the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family.

By This and the like he tried to console her and he said:

Sister, I swear to you - and I (always) keep my oaths – that you must not tear your clothes, nor scratch your face, nor cry out with grief and loss when I am destroyed.

Then he brought her and made her sit with me. He went out to his followers and ordered them to bring their tents (much) closer together so that the tent-pegs came within the area of each other’s tents, and so that if they remained among their tents, the enemy could only approach (them), from one side (for there would be) tents behind them, and to their right and left. Thus (the tents completely) surrounded them except for the one way which the enemy could come against them.

(After that) he, peace be on him, returned to his place and spent the whole night in performing the prayer, in calling on God’s forgiveness and in making invocations. In the same way, his followers performed the prayer, made invocations and sought God’s forgiveness.

(Al Dahhak b. Abd Allah reported:)

(A contingent of) Umar b. Sa’d’s (continually) passed us keeping watch over us while al-Husayn, himself, recited:

Let not those who disbelieve think that our giving them a delay is better for their souls. We give them a delay only that they might increase their wickedness. They shall have a disgraceful punishment. God does not leave the believers in the situation you are in until He has made the evil distinct from the good. (Qur’an III, 117/8)

A man called ‘Abd Allah b. Samir, (who was) among those horsemen heard that. He was given to much laughter, and was a brave fighter, a treacherous knight and a noble. He cried out: "By the Lord of the Ka’ba, we are the good, we have been distinguished from you.”

"O terrible sinner,”cried Burayr b. Hudayr, "has God made you one of the good?"

"A curse on you, whoever you are?”he shouted back.

"I am Burayr b. Hudayr,”he replied. And they both cursed each other.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 7

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the morning al Husayn, peace be on him, mobilised his followers after the morning prayer. He had with him thirty two horsemen and forty foot-soldiers. He put Zuhayr b. al-Qayn in charge of his right wing and Habib b. Muzahir in charge of his left wing, and he gave his standard to his brother, al-Abbas. They positioned themselves with the tents at the rear. He ordered (the) firewood and cane which was behind the tents to be left in a ditch which had been dug there and to be set on fire, fearing that they would attack them from the rear.

Umar b. Sad began the morning of that day - it was Friday, or Saturday as some say - by mobilising his followers. He went out with the men with him towards al-Husayn, peace be on him. ‘Amr b. al- Hajjaj was in command of his right wing, Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan of the left wing, Urwa b. Qays was in command of the cavalry,

Shabath b. Ribi of the foot-soldiers. He gave his standard to Durayd, his retainer (mawla).

(‘Ali b. al Husayn, Zayn al Abidin, peace be upon them, reported:)

When the cavalry began to approach al-Husayn, he raised his hands and said:

O God, it is You in W’hom I trust amid all grief. You are my hope amid all violence. You are my trust and provision in everything that happens to me, (no matter) how much the heart may seem to weaken in it, trickery may seem to diminish (my hope) in it, the friend may seem to desert (me) in it, and the enemy may seem to rejoice in it. It comes upon me through You and when I complain to You of it, it is because of my desire for You, You alone. You have comforted me in (everything) and have revealed its (significance to me). You are the Master of all grace, the Possessor of all goodness and the Ultimate Resort of all desire.

When the enemy began to move around the tent of al-Husayn, peace be on him, they saw the ditch behind and the fire burning the firewood and cane which had been thrown in it. (At this) Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan called out at the top of his voice:

Al-Husayn, are you hurrying towards the fire (of Hell) before the Day of Resurrection?

"Who is that?”asked al-Husayn, peace be on him. "(It sounds) like Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan?"

"Yes, (it is),”they told him.

"Son of a goat-herdess, you are more worthy to be burnt by that,”he retorted.

Muslim b. Awsaja wanted to shoot an arrow at him, but al- Husayn, peace be on him, stopped him from (doing) that.

"Let me shoot at him”he asked, "for he is a wicked sinner, one of the enemies of God, and the great tyrants. (Now) God has made it possible (to kill) him."

"Do not shoot at him,”ordered al-Husayn, peace be on him, "for I am unwilling to begin (the fighting) against them."

Then al-Husayn called for his mount and mounted it. He called out at the top of his voice:

O people of Iraq,

and most of them (began to) listen to him

People, listen to my words and do not hurry (to attack me) so that I may remind you of the duties you have towards me and so that (by telling you the true circumstances) I may free myself from any blame in (your attacking me). If you give me justice, you will become happier through that. If you do not give me justice of your own accord (as individuals), then agree upon your affairs (and your associates); let not your affair be in darkness to you. Then carry (it) our against me and do not reflect (any further) (X: 71). Indeed my guardian is God, Who created the Book, He takes care of the righteous (VII: 196)

Then he praised and glorified God, and mentioned what God is entitled to. He called for blessings on the Prophet, may God bless him and his family, and on the angels and (other) prophets. No speaker has ever been heard before or after him more eloquent in his speech than he was. He continued:

Trace back my lineage and consider who I am. Then look back at yourselves and remonstrate with yourselves. Consider whether it is right for you to kill me and to violate the honour of my womenfolk. Am I not the son of the daughter of your Prophet, of his testamentary trustee (wall) and his cousin, the first of the believers in God and the man who (first) believed in what His Apostle, may God bless him and his family, brought from his Lord? Was not Hamza, the lord of the martyrs, my uncle? Was not Ja’far, the one who flies in Heaven, my uncle? Have you not heard the words of the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, concerning myself and my brother:

‘These are the two lords of the youths of theinhabitants of heaven’? Whether you believe what I am saying and it is the truth, for by God I have never told a lie since I learnt that God hated people (who told) them – or whether you regard me as a liar, there are among you those who, if you asked them, would tell you: Ask Jabir b. Abd Allah al- Ansari, Abu Said al-Khudri, Sahl b. Sad al-Saidi, Zayd b. Arqam and Anas b. Malik to tell you that they heard these words from the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, concerning myself and my brother. Is there not (sufficient) in this to prevent you shedding my blood?

"If I understand what you are saying,”interrupted Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan, "then I only worship God (very shakily) on the edge.”

"I think that you worship God (very shakily) on seventy edges,”said Habib b. Muzahir. "For I testify that you are right. You do not understand what he is saying. For God has impressed (ignorance) upon your heart."

If you are in any doubt about this, al-Husayn, peace be on him, told them,

You are in doubt that I am the son of the daughter of your Prophet. By God there is no son of a prophet other than me among you and among the peoples from East to West. Shame on you, are you seeking retribution from me for one of your dead whom I have killed, or for property of yours which I expropriated, or for a wound which I have inflicted?

They did not say anything to him. They he called: "Shabath b. Ribi, Hajjar b. Abjar, Qays b. al-Ashath, Yazid b. al-Harith, didn’t you write: ‘The fruit has ripened; the dates have grown green; come to an army which has been gathered for you’?"

"We don’t know what you are talking about,”said Qays b. al-Ashath. "Submit to the authority of your kinsmen (the Umayyads). They have never treated you with anything but what you liked."

"By God, I will never give you my hand like a man who has been humiliated; nor will I flee like a slave,”said al-Husayn, peace be on him. Then he called out,

O Servants of God, I take refuge in my Lord and your Lord from your stoning. (XLIV: 20)

I take refuge in my Lord and your Lord from every haughty man who does not believe in the Day of Reckoning. (XL: 27)

He made his mount kneel and ordered ‘Uqba b. Sim’an to tie its reins. They (the Kufans) began to advance towards him (al-Husayn). When al-Hurr b. Yazid perceived that the people were determined to fight al-Husayn, peace be on him, he said to ‘Umar: "Are you going to fight this man?"

"Yes,”he replied, "it will be a terrible battle, the least part of which will be heads falling and severed hands flying (through the air)."

"Haven’t you any other way of getting what you want?"

"If the matter rested with me,”answered Umar, "I would do (anything else), but your governor has refused (any alternative).”

Al-Hurr went and stood apart from the people. With him was a man from his tribe called Qurra b. Qays.

"Qurra, have you watered your horse, today?”he asked.

"No."

"Do you want to water it?"

(Qurra reported (later):)

I thought that he (al-Hurr) was going to leave the battle, and did not want to be present at it but was unwilling to be seen when he (left). So I said: "I have not watered it and I was going to water it.”Then I left him where he was. By God,if he had told me what he was intending to do, I would have gone with him to al-Husayn, peace be on him.

He (al-Hurr) began gradually to draw closer to al-Husayn.

"What do you want, Ibn Yazid?’’ asked Muhajir b. Aws, but he did not answer. (Instead) a great shudder came over him.

"Your behaviour is suspicious,”said Muhajir. "By God, I have never seen you act like this before. If I was asked who was the bravest of the Kufans, I would not (normally) neglect (to mention) you. What is this I see in you, (today)?"

"By God, I am giving my soul the choice between Heaven and the fire (of Hell),”answered al-Hurr. "By God, I will not choose anything before Heaven, even though I am cut to pieces and burnt."

(With that) he whipped his horse and (galloped over) and joined al- Husayn, peace be on him.

May I be your ransom, son of the Apostle of God?, he said, I was your companion who stopped you from returning. I accompanied you along the road and made you stop in this place. But I did not think that the people would refuse to respond to what you have offered them and that they would
ever come to this position I (which they have now come to) with regard to you. By God, if I had I known that they would finish up (by doing) what I am seeing (them do) to you, I would not have committed what I have committed against you. I repent to God for what I have done. Will you accept my repentance?

"Yes,”replied al-Husayn, peace be on him, "God will forgive you. So get down."

"You will have (no) horseman better than me, (nor), while I am on foot, any foot-soldier,”he said. "I will continue fighting on foot to the (bitter) end."

"Do so,”replied al-Husayn, peace be on him. "May God grant you mercy (though) what He has revealed to you.”

He advanced, in front of al-Husayn, peace be on him, and called out:

People of Kufa, your mother(s) will be deprived of their sons and tears will come to their eyes. Have you summoned this righteous man (to come to you),then, when he has come to you, have you handed him over (to his enemies)? Did you claim that you would fight with your own lives for him, and then have you begun to attack him in order to kill him? You have laid hold of his life; you have seized his throat; you have encircled him on every side in order to prevent him returning to God’s broad land (i.e. the Hijaz). He has come into your hands like a prisoner who no longer has the power to use his own life and cannot defend it against harm. You have prevented him, his womenfolk, his children and his people from (getting) the water of the Euphrates which Jews,
Christians and Majians may drink, and which the pigs and dogs of Sawad drink. They (al-Husayn’s family) are likely to die of thirst. How wickedly you have treated the offspring left by Muhammad. May God not give you water to drink on the Day of Thirst.

Some of the foot-soldiers attacked him by shooting arrows at him. He went and stood in front of al-Husayn, peace be on him.

"Durayd,”‘Umar b. Sad called out, "bring forward your standard (for us)."

He brought it forward. (‘Umar) put an arrow in his bow and let it fly. He said, "(All of you) be witnesses of who was the first to shoot.”

The people began to shoot at each other and to come forward (for single combat). Yasar, retainer (mawla) of Ziyad b. Abi Sufyan, came forward (from Umar’s army). ‘Abd Allah b. Umayr (al-Kalbi) came forward (from al-Husayn’s ranks) to meet him.

"Who are you?”Yasar asked him, and (Ibn al-Kalbi) gave him his lineage.

"I do not know you,”(Yasar) answered. "Let Zuhayr b. al-Qayn or Habib b. Muzahir come out against me."

"Son of a prostitute, you wanted to do single combat with one of the people,”retorted Abd Allah b. Umayr (al-Kalbi).

With that (Ibn al-Kalbi) struck him with his sword until he had quietened him. While he was occupied with striking against him, Salim, retainer (mawla) of ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad, attacked him (Ibn al-Kalbi). Al-Husayn’s followers cried out (in warning): "The (other) servant is closing in on you!”(Ibn al-Kalbi) did not notice (Salim) until the latter was upon him. With his left arm he warded off Salim’s blow but the fingers of his hand were cut off. Then he turned on (Salim) and struck him and killed him. After (thus) killing them both, (Ibn al-Kalbl) came forward and recited:

If you do not know me, I am Ibn al-Kalbl: I am a man of bitterness and anger, I am not a weakling in the face of disaster.

Amr b. al-Hajjaj, with the Kufans under his command, launched an attack on the right wing of the supporters of al-Husayn, peace be on him. When they drew near, the followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, knelt down and pointed their spears at them. The (attackers) horses would not come forward against the spears and they swung round to retreat. The followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, began to shoot arrows at (the enemy), killing some of them and wounding others.

Abd Allah b. Hawza, one of the Banu Tamim, approached al- Husayn’s camp and the people called out to him, "Where are you going, may your mother be deprived of you?"

"I am (in the right) advancing to a merciful Lord and an intercessor who is listened to (i.e. the Prophet),”he answered.

"Who is that ?”al-Husayn, peace be on him, asked his followers.

"Ibn Hawza al-Tamimi”he was told.

"O God, drive him into the fire!”(al-Husayn) exclaimed. With that his horse upset him in its stride and feli. His left leg was stuck in thestirrups and his right leg was free. Muslim b. Awsaja attacked himand struck his right leg and cut it off. The horse galloped off (dragging) him (along) and his head struck every stone and clod of earth until he died. God hurried his soul to (Hell) fire. (More) fighting then broke out and more men were killed.

Al-Hurr b. Yazid attacked the followers of ‘Umar b. Sa’d and (as he did so), he recited the words of ‘Antara:

With my charger’s neck and breast thrust forward I will launch myself at them again and again until (the beast) is clothed in blood.

Yazid b. Sufyan, from Banu al-Harith (of Tamim), came forward to meet him. Soon al-Hurr killed him.

(In the meantime) Nafi’ b. Hilal came forward, declaring:

I am the son of Hilal. I believe in the religion of ‘Ali. Muzahim b. Hurayth came against him, crying, "I follow the religion of Uthman."

"Rather you follow the religion of Satan,”Nafi replied and attacked and killed him.

"You stupid fellows,”Amr b. al-Hajjaj cried out to (his) men, "don’t you realise whom you are fighting? (These) knights of the town are people who are seeking death. Don’t let any of you go forward to fight them in single combat. They are only few and their time is running out. If you only threw stones at them, you would kill them (eventually)."

"True, you’ve come to the right conclusion,”‘Umar b. Sad said to him. Then he sent (the message) to the commanders that none of their men should fight in single combat.

Amr b. al-Hajaj and his men launched an attack against al- Husayn, peace be on him, from the direction of the Euphrates. They fought together fiercely for a time. Muslim b. Awsaja was struck down, may God have mercy on him, (but) Amr and his men withdrew. When the dust settled, (al-Husayn’s followers) found Muslim stretched out dying. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, walked towards him and he was on the point of death.

Muslim, may God have mercy on you, said (al-Husayn), of them (the believers) is he who has accomplished his vow, and of them is he who waits; they have not changed at all (XXXIII: 23)

Habib b. Muzahir approached and said, "Muslim, your death is hard for me to bear but I bring you good news of Heaven (where you are going)."

"May God bring you good news too,”replied Muslim in a weak voice.

"Even if I knew that I would follow you at this very moment, I would still like you to appoint me to carry out everything which concerns you."

Then the people came again against al-Husayn, peace be on him.

Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan attacked with his left wing (and thrust at) (al-Husayn’s) left wing, but they stood firm against him and forced him away (with their spears). Al-Husayn, peace be on him, and his followers were attacked on every side but the followers of al-Husayn fought fiercely. Then their cavalry began to attack and even though they were only thirty-two horsemen, they did not attack any side of the Kufan cavalry without putting it to flight.

When Urwa b. Qays saw that - he was in command of the Kufan cavalry - he sent word to ‘Umar b. Sad: "Don’t you see what my calvary is receiving today from this small number (of men)? Send the foot-soldiers and archers against them."

He sent the archers against them. Al-Hurr b. Yazid’s horse was lamed. He dismounted and began to shout:

You have lamed my (horse) but I am the son of freedom and braver than a maned lion.

He struck out against them with his sword but a great number came against him. Ayyub b. Musarrih and another of the Kufan horsemen shared in killing him.

The followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, continued to fight fiercely against the enemy until it was midday. When al-Husayn b. Numayr - he was in command of the archers - perceived the steadfastness of the followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, he advanced against his supporters with five hundred archers so that they showered the followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, with arrows. They continued shooting at them until they had lamed (most of) their horses and wounded some of their men. Then they moved against them and a fierce battle was fought between them for some time. Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan (also) attacked them with his followers but Zuhayr b. al-Qayn with ten of the followers of al- Husayn (counter) attacked and drove them away from the tents.

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 8

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan turned back against them but (some) of his men were killed and the rest retreated to their positions. (The number) of killed was apparent among the followers of al-Husayn, peace be on him, because of the fewness of their number while it was not so apparent among the followers of ‘Umar b. Sa’d because of their great number. The battle (continued to be) fought fiercely and desperately. The number killed and wounded among the followers of Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Husayn, peace be on him, continued to grow until the sun began to decline. Al-Husayn and his companions prayed the prayer according to the rite of the prayer of fear.

Hanzala b. Sa’d al-Shibami advanced in front of al-Husayn, peace be on him, and called out:

People of Kufa, O people fear for you the same (that happened) on the Day of Parties. If earforyou on the Day of Summoning (XL: 30,32). O people, do not kill al-Husayn, for God will destroy you with punishment. He who forges a lie will be disappointed. (XX, 61)

He advanced and fought until he was killed, may God have mercy on him. After that, Shawdhab, retainer (mawla) of Shakir, went forward, (after saying): "Greetings, Abu ‘Abd Allah and may God
store his mercy and blessings for you."

He fought until he was killed, may God have mercy on him. Then came Abis b. Shabib al-Shakiri. He greated al-Husayn, peace be on him, and fought until he was killed. Each man of (al-Husayn’s) followers continued to go forward and be killed until there only remained with al-Husayn, peace be on him, the members of his own House.

His son, ‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them, whose mother was Layla daughter of Abu Murra b. Urwa b. Masud al-Thaqafi, was (the next) to advance. He was one of the most handsome men of the time. On that day he was nineteen years of age. He attacked the enemy declaring:

I am ‘Ali b. al-Husayn b. ‘Ali. By the House of God, we are those rightly (endowed) with the Prophet. God, the son of a spurious son will not judge us. I will strike with my sword in defence of my father. I will strike with the blow of a Hashimi, a Qurayshi.

He did that several times, and the Kufans were afraid to kill him.

Then Murra b. Munqidh al-Abdi saw him. He said: "May the felonies of the Arabs come on me, if he gets past me doing the same as he has been doing, (and) if I do not deprive his mother of him."

(‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn) continued to attack the enemy as he had been doing but then Murra b. Munqidh came against him and stabbed him. He was struck down and the enemy fell upon him, cutting him with their swords. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, went out until he stood over him and said:

May God kill (the) people who killed you, my son. How fool hardy they are against the Merciful and in violating the sacredness of the family of the Apostle, may God bless him and his family.

His eyes filled with tears and he said: "There will (only) be dust on the world after you."

Zaynab, the sister of al-Husayn, peace be on him, came hurrying out, crying: "My brother, my nephew!”

She came up and threw herself on (her dead nephew). Al-Husayn raised her head and then led her back to the tent. He told his young (sons): "Carry your brother back."

They carried him and put him before the tent which they had been fighting in front of. (Then) one of ‘Umar b. Sad’s men called ‘Amr b Subayh shot an arrow at ‘Abd Allah b. Muslim b. Aqil. Abd Allah put his hand to guard his brow. The arrow struck his hand and penetrated through his brow, and riveted the hand to it. He was not able to move it when another man came down on him with a spear, thrust it into his heart, and killed him.

Abd Allah b. Qutba al-Ta’i attacked Awn b. ‘Abd Allah b. Ja’far b. Abi Talib and killed him.

Amir b. Nashhal al-Tamimi attacked Muhammad b. Abd Allah b. Ja’far b. Abi Talib and killed him.

Uthman b. Khalid al-Hamdam launched himself against ‘Abd al- Rahman b. ‘Aqil b. Abi Talib, and killed him.

(Humayd b. Muslim reported:)

It was like that among us (i.e. many of al-Husayn’s supporters had been killed by ‘Umar b. Sa’d’s army) when a young lad came out against us. His face was young like the first splinter of the new moon and he carried a sword. He was wearing a shirt and a waistcloth (izar), and a pair of sandals, one of whose straps was broken. ‘Umar b. Sa’d b. Nufayl al-Azdi said to me: "et me attack him.”I said:

Praise be to God, what do you want to do that for? Leave him. While even one of the family of al-Husayn remains, that will be enough to take vengeance on you for his (death).

But he insisted: "By God, let me attack him."

So he rushed against him and did not turn back until he had struck his head with his sword and split it in two. The young lad fell face downwards and he called out: "O uncle!"

At this, al-Husayn, peace be on him, showed himself just like the hawk shows itself. He launched into attack like a raging lion and struck Umar b. Sad b. Nufayl with his sword. That man tried to fend off the blow with his arm but his arm was cut off from the elbow, and he gave a great shriek (of pain) which was (even) heard by the people in the camp. As al-Husayn, peace be on him, turned away from him, the cavalry of Kufa attacked in order to save him but they (only succeeded) in trampling him to death beneath the horses’ hooves, and the dust rose.

I saw al-Husayn, peace be on him, standing by the head of the young lad, looking at his feet and al-Husayn, peace be on him was saying:

May the people who have caused your death perish. For the one who will oppose them on the Day of Resurrection on your behalf will be your grandfather (‘Ali, or great grandfather, i.e. the Prophet).

Then he continued:

By God, it is hard on your uncle that you called him and he did not answer you, or rather he answered but your cry was (too late) to help you. For by God, those who kill his relatives are many but those who help him are few.

Then he carried him in his arms. It is just as if (even now) I am looking at the two legs of the boy making marks (as they trail) on the ground. He took him and put him with his son, ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them both, and the other members of the household who had been slain. I asked about the boy and was told that he was al-Qasim b. al-Hasan b. ‘Ali b. Abl Talib, peace be on them.

Then al-Husayn, peace be on him, sat in front of the tent. He brought his son, ‘Abd Allah b. al-Husayn, peace be on him, who was (just) a baby and sat him on his knee. But one of the Banu Asad shot an arrow which slaughtered the child. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, caught the child’s blood in the palm of his hand. When his palm was full, he poured (the blood) on to the ground and said:

O Lord, if it be so that You have kept the help of Heaven from us, then let it be because (Your purpose) is better than (immediate help). Take vengeance on these people who are (such) oppressors.

Then he carried the child and laid him with the (other) members of his household who had been slain.

(Just then) Abd Allah b. Uqba al-Ghanawi shot an arrow at Abu Bakr b. al-Hasan b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, and killed him. When al-Abbas b. ‘Ali saw the number of his family who had been killed, he said to his brothers on his mother’s side, Abd Allah, Ja’far and Uthman:

My brothers through my mother, go forward so that I may see that you have remained true to God and His Apostle. For you have no children (to defend).

Abd Allah, may God have mercy on him, advanced and fought fiercely. He exchanged blows with Hani’ b. Shabib al-Hadrami and Hani’ killed him. After him Ja’far went forward and Hani’ also killed him. Khawali b. Yazid al-Asbahi, may God curse him, went against Uthman who had taken the place of his brother. He fired an arrow at him and brought him down. One of the Banu Darim attacked him (while he was down) and cut off his head.

The group then launched an attack against al-Husayn, peace be on him, and cut off his access to his camp. His thirst became severe, and he set off towards the dam, trying to reach the Euphrates. In front of him was his brother, al-’Abbas. However, the calvary of Ibn Sa’d, may God curse him, blocked his route. Among these was a man from

the Banu Darim; he said to (the cavalry):

Woe upon you! Prevent him from reaching the Euphrates, don’t let him get water.

Then al-Husayn, peace be on him, cried out: "O God, I am thirsty.”The Dariml became angry and shot an arrow at him which lodged in his throat. Al-Husayn, peace be on him, pulled out the arrow and held his hand below his throat. Both his palms were filled with blood which he shook away, then he said:

O God, I complain to You about what is being done to the son of the daughter of Your Prophet.

Then he returned to his position, while his thirst had become (even more) severe.

Meanwhile the people had surrounded al-Abbas and cut him off from (al-Husayn). Single-handed he began to attack them until he was killed, may God have mercy on him. The two who took part in killing him were Zayd b. Warqa al-Hanafi and Hahm b. al-Tufail al- Shabsi, after he had been covered with wounds and could not move.

(The account of al Abbas death is missing from Tabari)

When al-Husayn, peace be on him, came back from the dam to his tents, Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan advanced towards him with a group of his followers and surrounded him. The fastest of them was a man called Malik b. al-Nusayr al-Kindi. He cursed al-Husayn, peace be on him, and struck him on the head with his sword. (Al-Husayn) was wearing a cap. (The sword) went through it right into his head and made it bleed. The cap was filled with blood.

Al-Husayn, peace be on him, said to him:

May you never eat or drink with your right hand! May God gather you (on the Day of Judgement) with those people who are wrong-doers.

Then he threw away the cap and called for a cloth which he tied around his head. Then he called for another cap, put it on and bound it (in place).

(The above portion is missing from the account of Tabari)

Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan and those who were with him had withdrawn from him to their (earlier) positions. After a short delay they came again against him and surrounded him. ‘Abd Allah b. al-
Hasan b. Alieace be on them, came out against them, he was only a boy, not yet mature enough to leave the women. He rushed forward until he stood beside his uncle, al-Husayn, peace be on him. Then Zaynab, the daughter of ‘Ali, peace be on him, came after him to stop him, and al Husayn, peace be on him, told her to stop him. However he refused (to take any notice of her) and determinedly prevented her (from taking him away). He said: "By God, I will not leave my uncle."

(At this) Abjar b. Ka’b rushed towards al-Husayn, peace be on him. With sword (in hand), the young lad said to him: "Woe upon you, you son of an impure woman, are you trying to kill my uncle?”

Abjar struck at him with his sword. The boy tried to fend off (the blow) with his arm. The sword cut through (his arm) to the skin (on the other side). There was the arm hanging (by the skin). The boy cried out: "O my mother!”Al-Husayn took hold of him and embraced him. He said to him:

My nephew, try to bear what has come to you and be comforted with the news that God will unite you with your righteous ancestors.

Then al-Husayn, peace be on him, raised his hand and said:

O God, even as You have made life pleasant for them for a time, divide them into factions and make them follow the ways of factions and let their rulers never be pleased with them. They summoned us so that they might support us and then they became hostile to us and killed us.

(Abjar is mentioned as Bahr in Tabari)

The foot-soldiers launched an attack from right and left against those who were left with al-Husayn, peace be on him, until only a group of three or four remained with him. When al-Husayn, peace be on him saw that, he called for a pair of dazzling Yemen trousers (sarawil). He tore them and put them on. He tore them so that he should not have them plundered after he had been killed. When al- Husayn, peace be on him, was killed, Abjar b. Kab set on him, plundered him of the trousers and left him naked. After that the two hands of Abjar b. Ka’b, may God curse him, became so dry in the summer that they were like sticks and then soaking wet in the winter so that they sprinkled drops of water and puss, until God destroyed him.

When nobody except a group of three members of his family was left with al-Husayn, peace be on him, he moved against the people, while the three protected him until (all) three were killed. Al-Husayn, was left alone. Despite being weighed down by wounds in his head and body, he began to strike against them with his sword and they scattered, to right and left, away from him.

Then Humayd b. Muslim said:

By God, I have never seen such persistence. His sons have been killed, and the members of his household and his followers, yet he is still as brave as ever and he has not allowed his spirit to leave him. When the soldiers attack him, he fights back with his sword and scatters them to right and left of him like goats when a wolf comes upon them.

When Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan realised (the position), he called for the cavalry and they came up at the rear of the foot-soldiers. He ordered the archers to shoot at (al-Husayn) and they showered him with arrows until he became (quilted with arrows) like a hedgehog (iZ with spikes).

He drew back from them and they stood facing him. His sister Zaynab, came to the door of the tent and called out to ‘Umar b. Sad b. Abi Waqqas: "Woe upon you, Umar. Is Abu Abd Allah being killed while you (stand by and) watch?”But Umar did not answer. Then she called out: "Woe upon you (all), is there not a Muslim among you?”But no-one answered.

Then Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan shouted at the foot soldiers and the Calvary: "Why are you waiting for the man? May your mothers be deprived of you!”So they attacked him from every side. Zura b. Sharik struck him on the left shoulder-blade and cut into it. Another of them struck him on the shoulder.

He fell prostrate on his face. Sinan b. Anas al-Nakhai stabbed him with a spear and killed him. Khawali b. Yazid al-Asbahi hurried to him and bent down to cut off his head but he trembled (too much). Shamir said to him: "May God crush your arm why are you trembling?”Then Shamir bent down and decapitated him. He lifted the head (and handed it) to Khawati saying: "Take it to the commander ‘Umar b. Sa’d.”

Then they began to plunder (the body of) al-Husayn, peace be on him. Ishaq b. al-Hayat al-Hadrami, may God curse him, took his shirt. Abjar b. Ka’b, may God curse him, took his trousers. Akhnas b. Marthad, may God curse him, took his turban. One of the Banu Darim took his sword. They plundered his saddle and his camel and they looted his womenfolk.

(The name of the plunderers and the plundered objects are different in Tabari)

(Humayd b. Muslim reported:)

By God, I did not see one of his women or daughters or the women of his family who did not have her clothes ripped from her back, taken away and removed from her forcibly. Then we came to ‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them both. He was stretched out on a bed and he was very ill. Shamir had a group of foot-soldiers with him and they asked him, "Shall we kill this sick one?”I said: "Praise be to God, will boys be killed (too)? This is only a youth even though he is what he is.”And I went on (arguing) until I had moved them away from him.

Then ‘Umar b. Sa’d arrived and the women cried out and wept in his face. He ordered his followers: "None of you should enter the tents of these women nor disturb this sick boy.”The women asked him to return what had been taken from them so that they could clothe themselves again. So he commanded that whoever had taken any of their belongings should return them to them. But by God, none of them returned anything. He then entrusted charge of the main tent and the tents of the women to a group (of men) who were; with him. He said: "Guard (the women) so that none of them may leave and do not harm them."

After this, he returned to his tent and called out to his followers:

"Who will volunteer (to go) to al-Husayn and make his horse trample on (al-Husayn’s body)?”Ten volunteered. Of these, Ishaq b. Hayyat and Akhnas b. Marthad trampled on (the body of) al-Husayn with their horses until they had broken and bruised his back. Umar b. Sad despatched on that day-it was the day of ‘Ashura’, - the head of al-Husayn, peace be on him, with Khawali b. Yazid al-Asbahi and Humayd b. Muslim al-Azdi, to Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad.

Then he ordered the heads of the remainder of his followers and members of his House (who had been slain) to be cut off. There were seventy-two heads. He sent Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan, Qays b. Ash’ath and Amr b. al-Hajjaj with these. They journeyed until they brought them to Ibn Ziyad. He (‘Umar b. Sad) remained there for the rest of that day and the next day until just after midday.

Then he summoned the people for the journey, and set out towards Kufa. He took with him the daughters and sisters of al-Husayn, peace be on him, together with ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on him. The latter was still sick with a dysentry and was almost on the point of death.

When Ibn Sad departed, some of Banu Asad, who had been staying at al-Ghadiriyya went to al-Husayn, peace be on him, and his followers. They performed the funeral prayer over them. Then they buried al-Husayn at the place where his tomb still is, and they buried his son ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn al-Asghar (the younger) at the foot of the body. They dug around the area next to the two feet of al-Husayn, peace be on him, for the martyrs from his House and his followers.

They gathered them together and buried them all together. However, they buried al-Abbas b. ‘‘Ali, peace be on them both, in the place where he was killed, on the road to al-Ghadiriyya, where his tomb still is.

(These details are not given by Tabari)

Tragedy of Karbala as reported by the Sunnis Part 9

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

When the head of al Husayn, peace be on him, arrived and after Ibn Sad arrived on the next day (bringing) with him the daughters and household of al-Husayn, peace be on him, Ibn Ziyad sat before the people in the governor’s palace. He had given the people a general summons and had ordered them to be present (to see) the head. He put it in front of him, and he began to look at it with a smile. In his hand he had a cane and he began to poke at the teeth with it.

When Zayd b. Arqam, a Companion of the Prophet who was (then) an old man, saw him poking at the teeth with the cane, he said

Take your cane away from those two lips. For, by God, other than Whom there is no deity, I have seen the lips of the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, touch those two lips countless times.

(With that) he began to weep.

"Does God make your eyes weep?”asked Ibn Ziyad. "Or are you weeping because of God’s victory? If it was not for the fact that you are an old man who has become silly and your mind has left you, I would cut off your head."

Zayd b. Arqam stood up in front of him and went to his house.

(Meanwhile) the family of al-Husayn, peace be on him, was brought before Ibn Ziyad. Zaynab, the sister of al-Husayn, peace be on him, came in in the middle of the group, pretending not to be herself; she was wearing her dirtiest clothes. She went and sat in a corner of the palace and her maids crowded around her.

"Who is that woman who has gone to the side and has sat in a corner with her women?”Ibn Ziyad demanded but Zaynab did not answer. He repeated the question about her a second time.

This is Zaynab, daughter of Fatimah, the daugher of the Apostle of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, one of her women told him.

"Praise be to God Who has disgraced you, killed you and revealed the false nature of your claims,”said Ibn Ziyad as he came towards her.

Praise be to God Who has favoured us with His Prophet, Muhammad, may God bless him and his family, answered Zaynab, and He has purified us completely from sin. He only disgraces the great sinner and reveals the false nature of the profligate. Such men are not among us, praise be to God.

"How do you consider God has treated your House?”asked Ibn Ziyad,

God decreed death for them and they went forward (bravely) to their resting-places, Zaynab replied, God will gather you and us together. You will plead your excuses to Him and we will be your adversaries before Him.

Ibn Ziyad became enraged and burnt with anger.

"Governor,”intervened ‘Amr b. Hurayth, "She is only a woman and women are not responsible for anything that they say. Do not blame her mistakes."

"God has healed my soul from your tyranny and the rebellion of your House,”he said to her.

Zaynab, peace be on her, became weak and wept.

By my life, she cried out to him, You have killed the mature ones (of my family); you have pierced my family; have cut down my young branches; and you have pulled out my root. If this heals you, then you have been healed.

"By my life,”declared Ibn Ziyad, "this is a woman who makes poetry. Your father was a poet."

What has a woman to do with poetry?, she answered. Indeed I have (things) to distract me from poetry but my heart causes me say what I am saying.

‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them, was presented to him.

"Who are you?”he asked.

"I am ‘Ali b. al-Husayn”he answered.

"Didn’t God kill ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn?"

"I have a brother who is also called ‘Ali,”answered ‘‘Ali, peace be on him, "the people killed him."

"Rather God killed him,”affirmed Ibn Ziyad.

"God receives the souls at the time of their death (XXXIX: 42)."

"How dare you answer me like that!”shouted Ibn Ziyad angrily, "and that will be the last of you because of (your) answer to me. Take him away and cut his head off!"

Zaynab, his aunt, clung on to him, pleading: "O Ibn Ziyad, haven’t you had enough of our blood?"

Then she clung on to him and said: "By God, I will not leave him. If you kill him, kill me with him."

Ibn Ziyad looked at her and at him, and said, "How wonderful is family relationship! I think she wants me to kill her with him. Leave him, for I see him (now) for what he is."

He rose from his assembly to leave the palace and go to the mosque. He went up on the pulpit. He praised and glorified God, then he said:

Praise be to God Who has revealed the truth and the followers of the truth, and has given victory to the Commander of the faithful, Yazid, and his party, and has killed the liar who is the son of a liar and his Shi’a.

At this ‘Abd Allah b. Afif al-Azdi, who had been one of the Shiaa of the Commander of the faithful (‘Ali b. Abi Talib) stood in front of him and shouted:

O enemy of God, you are the liar and your father and (the man) who appointed you and his father. O Ibn Murjana, you kill the sons of Prophets and take the place of men of truth on the pulpit.

"Get him for me,”ordered Ibn Ziyad.

The soldiers seized him but he gave the battle cry of al-Azd. Seven hundred of them (quickly) gathered and took him away from the soldiers.

At night Ibn Ziyad sent someone to get him out of his house. He was executed and crucified in al-Sabkha, may God have mercy on him.

The (next) morning Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad sent the head of al- Husayn, peace be on him, (to Yazid) after it had been taken through all the streets and tribes of Kufa.

(It is reported from Zayd b. Arqam:)

It was brought past; it was stuck on a spear and I was in a room in my (house). As it was opposite me I heard it recite: "Or do you think that the Companions of the Cave and the inscription were among Our wonderful signs. (XVIII, 9)."

My flesh shuddered and I called out,

O son of the Apostle of God, your head is miraculous, miraculous.

(This account is not in Tabari)

When they had finished taking it around Kufa and had brought it back to the palace door, Ibn Ziyad gave it to Zahar b. Qays and he (also) gave him the heads of his companions. He despatched him to Yazid b. Muawiya and he sent with him Abu Burda b. ‘Awf al-Azdi, and Tariq b. Abi Zubyan al-Azdi together with a group of Kufans, to take them to Yazid b. Mu’awiya in Damascus.

(Abd Allah b. Rabiaa al-Himyari reported:)

I was with Yazid b. MuCawiya in Damascus when Zahar b. Qays brought the head to him.

"Woe upon you! What is behind you? What have you got?”demanded Yazid.

Commander of the faithful, he replied, I bring good news of God’s victory and support. Al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on them, came against us with eighteen men of his House and sixty of his Shi’a. We went out to meet them and we asked them to surrender and submit to the authority of the governor, ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad, or to fight. They chose to fight rather than to surrender.

We attacked them as the sun rose and surrounded them on every side. Eventually (our) swords took their toll of the heads of the people and they began to flee without having any refuge (to go to). They (tried to) take refuge from us on the (open) hills and in the hollows, like the doves seek refuge from a hawk.

By God, Commander of the faithful, it was nothing but the slaughtering of animals for slaughter. (It was only the time taken by) the sleep of a man taking his siesta (before) we had come upon the last of them. There were their naked bodies, their blood-stained clothes, their faces thrown in the dust.

The sun burst down on them; the wind scattered (dust) over them; their visitors were (scavenging) eagles and vultures.

Yazid looked down for a time, then he raised his head and said:

I would have been satisfied with your obedience (to my orders) without this killing of al-Husayn, peace be on him. If it had been me who had accompanied him, I would have let him off (such a fate).

After Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad had despatched the head of al- Husayn, he ordered the women and the young boys to be made ready for travelling. He ordered ‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them, to be chained with a chain around his neck. Then he despatched them, to follow the heads, with Muhaffir b. Thalaba al Aidhi and Shamir b. Dhi al-Jawshan. They set out with them until they caught up with the people with the head. ‘Ali b. al-Husayn did not speak a word to any of the people who had the head on that journey. Eventually they reached (their destination). When they reached the door of Yazid’s (palace), Muhaffir b. Tha’laba raised his voice and shouted: "Here is Muhaffir b. Thalaba who has brought the Commander of the faithful these vile profligates."

‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on him, answered him:

What did the mother of Muhaffir give birth to more evil and more grievous (than him)?

When the heads were put in front of Yazid and among them was the head of al-Husayn, peace be on him, Yazid recited:

We will split the skull of proud men (who come) against us; they were very disobedient and oppressive.

Yahya b. al-Hakam, the brother of Marwan b. al-Hakam recited:

On the bank (of the river) a great army met him who is closer in kinship (to Yazid) than Ibn Ziyad (is), the man with a false lineage.

The offspring of Sumayya has acquired status, while the offspring of the daughter of the Apostle of God is (given) none.

Yazid struck his hand against the chest of Yahya b. al-Hakam and shouted, "Be quiet!"

Then he said to ‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them

Son of al Husayn, your father cut (the bond of) kinship with me and showed ignorance of my rights, trying to deprive me of my position of authority. (Now) God has treated him in the way you have seen.

No misfortune strikes the earth nor yourselves unless it has been written in a book before we bring it into existence; that is easy for God (Quran 57: 22)

replied ‘‘Ali b. al-Husayn.

"Answer him,”Yazid urged his son, Khalid. However Khalid did not know what to say in reply. So Yazid answered:

Say rather: Whatever misfortune has struck you is because of what your hands have earned. And (God) forgives much (Qur’an 42: 30)

He summoned the women and the children and they were made to sit in front of him. What he saw was dreadful.

"May God detest Ibn Murjana,”he said: "If there had been (any bond of) kinship between him and you, he would not have done this to you; he would not have sent you in this state."

(Fatimah, daughter of al-Husayn, peace be on him, reported:)

When we sat before Yazid, he showed pity on us. An Ahmar of the Syrians stood up and said to Yazid: "Commander of the faithful, give me this one."

He meant me. (Then) I was a pretty young girl. I shuddered for I thought that that would be allowed to them. I caught hold of the skirt of my aunt Zaynab and she told (me) that that would not happen. She said to the Syrian:

By God, you are a liar. By God, you are (too) lowly born! Such a thing is not for you nor for him (to decide).

"You are a liar,”Yazid cried out angrily. "That is for me (to decide). If I wish to do anything, I can do it."

No, by God, she replied, God would only let you do that if you left our faith and professed belief in another (religion).

"It is me,”screamed Yazid, distraught with anger, "whom you are treating in this (way). It is your father who has left the religion, and your brother

I am led by the religion of God, the religion of my father and the religion of my brother, she answered, and (it is what) you are led by, and your grandfather and your father, if you
are a Muslim.

"Enemy of God, you lie,”he shouted.

You are a Commander of the faithful, (yet) you vilify unjustly and you have become oppressive with your authority, she answered.

(At this) he was ashamed and became silent."Give me that girl,”repeated the Syrian. "Be a bachelor,”Yazid said to him, "May God strike you dead!"

Then he ordered the women to be lodged in a house on (the) banks (of the river). With them (also he sent) their brother, ‘‘Ali b. al- Husayn, peace be on them. (Later) a house was set aside for them, which was attached to Yazid’s own house. They resided (there) for several days, (After a short time) he summoned al-Nu’man b. Bashir and told him to make preparations to take these women back to Medina. When he was aoubt to despatch them, he summoned ‘Ali b. al-Husayn, peace be on them. He took him aside.

"God curse Ibn Murjana,”he said. "If I had been with your father, he would never have asked me for a favour without me granting him it; I would have protected him from death with all my power. But God has decreed what you have seen. Write to me from Medina and everything that you need will be yours."

He presented clothes to him and to his family. He sent with them in the group (of men under the command) of Numan b. Bashir, a messenger, who brought him (al-Numan) the order to set out with them in the night; and that they should go in front of him but they should never be out of his sight. When they stopped, he should go aside from them and he and his followers should separate around them like a group of guards over them. He should (only) keep away from them when any person of their group wanted to wash or perform a need, so he (or she) would not be ashamed.

(The messenger) set off with them amid the group of al-Numan. (Al-Nu’man) continued to stay close to them along the road but he was kind to them as Yazid had instructed him and he looked after them until they entered Medina.

After Ibn Ziyad had despatched the head of al-Husayn, peace be on him, to Yazid, he went to Abd al-Malik b Abi al-Harith al-Sulami and told him,

Go to ‘Amr b. Sad b. al-As in Medina and give him the good news of the killing of al-Husayn (peace be on him).

(Abd al-Malik reported:)

I rode my mount and went towards Medina. (On the way) one of Quraysh met me.

"What is the news?”he asked.

"The news is for the governor, (then) you will hear it,”I answered.

"We belong to God and to Him we will return,”he said. "By God, al-Husayn, peace be on him, has been killed."

When I went to Amr b. Said, he asked: "What is your purpose?”

"What will please the governor,”I answered, "Al-Husayn, peace be on him, has been killed."

"Go out and announce his being killed,”he told me.

I announced (it). I have never heard such wailing as the wailing of the Banu Hashim in their houses for al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on him, when they heard the announcement of his death. I went back (in) to ‘Amr b. Said. When he saw me, he smiled at me and laughed. Then he quoted a verse of Amr b. Madikarib:

Then women of Banu Ziyad raised a great lament like the lamentation of our women mourning (after the battle) of al-Arnab.

"This lamentation is in return for the lamentation for Uthman,"

‘Amr exclaimed. Then he went up on the pulpit and informed the people about the killing of al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, and he summoned (them to obey) Yazid b. Muawiya. (After that) he went down.

One of the retainers (mawali) of Abd Allah b. Jafar b. Abi Talib, peace be on him, went to him and announced the news of the killing of his two sons and he said that we (all return) to God.

"This is what we have through al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be on them,”said Abu Salasil, the retainer (mawlº) of Abd Allah.

O son of an obscene (woman),”exclaimed Abd Allah b. Jafar, taking off his shoe (to strike him). "Are you saying this of al- ,Husayn, peace be on him? If I had been present with him, I would have preferred not to leave him and to be killed with him. By God, I would not have withheld those two from him and I take consolation fromwhat befell them in that these two were struck down with my brother and cousin, consoling him and enduring with him.

He went forward to those who were sitting with him and said:

Praise be to God, Who has (made life hard for me) through the death of al-Husayn. For I did not console al-Husayn with my own hands, my two sons consoled him.

Umm Luqman, the daughter of Aqil b. Abi Talib, may God have mercy on them, came out crying when she heard the news of the death of al-Husayn, peace be on him. With her were her sisters Umm Hani’, Ramla and Zaynab, daughters of Aqil b. Abi Talib, may God have mercy on them. She wept for her (relatives) slain on the bank and she recited:

What would you say if the Prophet asked you: What have you, the last of the (religious) communities, done With my offspring and my family after my departure from them? They are prisoners and slain and have been stained with their own blood.

What sort of reward is this for my advice to you, that you should oppose me by doing evil to my blood relations?

On the night of the day upon which Amr b. Said had given the public notice of the killing of al Husayn b. ‘Ali, peace be upon them, in Mecona, in the middle of the night the Medians heard a voice calling out. They listened to the voice but they did not see any person.

The voice called out:

O men who ignorantly killed al Husayn; hear the news of punishment and chastisement
All the people of heaven, prophets, angels and slain, prosecute you.
You have been cursed by the tongue of the son of David, and (that) of Moses and (that) of the master of the Gospels.

End of Part 9

End of this Series

References:

The History of al Tabari
Volume XIX The Caliphate of Yazid b. Muawiyah
Translated by I.K.A Howard
Paper back - ISBN 0-7914-0041-7

Extra quotes are from:

Kitab al Irshad
Shaykh al Mufid
Translated by I.K.A Howard

Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an
Paper back - ISBN 0-940368-11-0

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

Fixed-Term/Temporary/Pleasure Marriage are different names for the Arabic word of "Mut’a”which is a contract between a man and woman, much in the same way the Long-Term/Permanent/Conventional Marriage is. The main difference is that the temporary marriage longs only for a specified period of time, and man and woman will become stranger to each other after the expiration date without divorce.

One misconception regarding temporary marriage is that some people think that the woman engaged in temporary marriage can have contract every other hour. This is completely misrepresentation of temporary marriage. After such contract has been expired, the woman has to wait for two months (Iddah) before which she can not marry any one else. This issue, among others, will be discussed later in detail.

The first one who legislated Mut’a with all the rules pertaining to it, was the Messenger of Allah (S), after it was revealed in Qur’an. All Muslims agree that the Messenger of Allah legislated Mut’a and made it legal after his migration to Medina, and the Muslims practiced it during his lifetime. (see al-Mughni, by Ibn Qudamah, v6, p644, 3rd Edition).

However there is a disagreement between the Shi’a and most of the Sunnis concerning whether the Prophet later banned it or not. Most Sunnis assert that although the Prophet legislated it, he later forbade it. This is while the Shi’a believe that temporary marriage was never abandoned by the Prophet (S). Allah revealed it in Qur’an, and it was being widely practiced to the end of his lifetime and during the period of Abu Bakr and the early days of Umar’s rule, until Umar forbade it.

In Parts I through IV, we study the verse of Mut’a marriage in Qur’an and look into the Sunni commentary (Tafsir) of this verse, and review the traditions reported in the six authentic Sunni collections about Mut’a. In Part V we discuss the purposes of marriage as well as the chronological orders of the prohibition of illegal sex and the permission of Mut’a in the history of Islam. In Part VI the similarities and differences which exist between the two types of marriage are presented in detail. In Part VII we discuss the necessities and the advantages of the temporary marriage, and finally in Part VIII we answer some frequently asked questions regarding to the Mut’a.

Evidences From Qur’an And The Sunni Commentaries

Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

(...Except the forbidden women) the rest are lawful unto you to seek them with gifts from your property (i.e., dowry), provided that you desire protection (from sin), not fornication. So for whatever you have had of pleasure (Istamta’tum) with them by the contract, give unto them their appointed wages as a duty . And there is no sin for you in what you both agree (in extending the contract) after fulfilling the (first) duty. Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise. (Qur’an 4:24)

.. فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُم بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً ..

In the above verse, the Arabic equivalent of the word "marriage”or any of its derivatives has NOT been used. Rather the derivative of word "Mut’a”(pleasure/temporary marriage) has been used, i.e., "Istamta’tum". The word Istamta’a is the tenth verbal form of the root m-t-a. As we will show shortly, the word Istamta’a has also been widely used in the authentic Sunni collections for Temporary Marriage. Of course, Mut’a is one type of marriage, but some of it’s regulations are different than the permanent marriage, including the fact that the couple can extend this contract by mutual agreement as the end of verse specifies.

Moreover, if we look at the Sunni commentaries of Qur’an, many Sunni scholars such as Fakhr al-Razi confirm that the above verse (4:24) was revealed about the Temporary Marriage (Mut’a). They straightforwardly mentioned that temporary marriage became Halaal (permitted) DUE TO the above verse, but they assert that it was later prohibited. It is astonishing that many Sunni commentators mentioned under the above verse that:

‘Ali (ra) said: The Mut’a is a mercy from Allah to his servants. If it were not for Umar forbidding it, no one would commit (the sin) of fornication except the wretched (Shaqi; an utmost wrong-doer)."

إنَّ المتعة رحمةٌ رحِمَ الله بها عباده. لولا أنَّ عمر نهيَّ عن المتعة ما زنى إلا شقي.

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an;

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p200, commentary of verse 4:24;

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under commentary of verse 4:24 with authentic chain of narrators, v8, p178, Tradition #9042;

• Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, p140, from several chain of transmitters;

• Tafsir al-Qurtubi, v5, p130, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an;

• Tafsir Ibn Hayyan, v3, p218, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an;

• Tafsir Nisaboori, by al-Nisaboori (8th century);

• Ahkam al-Qur’an, by Jassas, v2, p179, under commentary of verse 4:24.

A very similar tradition has also been narrated by Ibn Abbas (ra), and was mentioned by al-Tabari and al-Tha’labi in their Tafsir of Qur’an.

It is interesting to note that Umar did not attribute the prohibition of Mut’a to the Prophet (S). They were others who did that after Umar mainly to justify what he did. Umar clearly mentioned that: "Mut’a WAS permitted at the time of the Prophet and I PROHIBIT it!”The great Sunni scholar, Fakhr al-Razi, who has been given the title of "Imam al-Mushakkikeen”(the leader of ever-questioners/ever-doubtful) by the Sunnis, in his voluminous commentary of Qur’an mentioned under the verse of Temporary Marriage that:

Umar said: Two types of Mut’a were (legal) during the time of the Prophet and I forbid them both, and I punish those who commit it.

They are: Mut’a of pilgrimage and Mut’a of women.

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p201 under verse 4:24

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p52

Here is the Arabic text of the above masterpiece of Umar:

متعتان كانتا على عهد الرسول و أنا انهي عنهما و أعاقب عليهما: متعة الحج و متعة النساء.

Notice that Mut’a can be of two kinds: Mut’a of women (pleasure/temporary marriage) and Mut’a of Pilgrimage (Hajj al-Tamattu’). The latter is a way of performing Pilgrimage and has no relation with the former which is one way of performing marriage. Both types of Mut’a were practiced at the time of the Prophet and Abu Bakr and the early days of Umar’s rule. But they were prohibited by Umar. There is another verse in Qur’an which gives evidence to the permissibility of the Mut’a of Pilgrimage. However this type of Pilgrimage is not the subject of our discussion here.

As we see from the above quote, Umar did NOT say that Mut’a was canceled by the Prophet. If it was really the Prophet who canceled Mut’a, Umar would have say: The two Mut’a were Halaal and then became Haraam at the time of the Prophet, and I am informing you about the second law set by the Prophet which canceled the first. But it is evident that Umar is straightforwardly saying that he is the one who is making it Haraam!

Al-Zamakhshari, another Sunni commentator of Qur’an Under the commentary of 4:24, reported that this verse is from the "Muhkamat”of Qur’an, relating that from Ibn Abbas (ra). (Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, v1, p519).

Also Both Ibn Jarir al-Tabari and al-Zamakhshari narrated that:

"al-Hakam Ibn Ayniyah was asked if the verse of Mut’a of women is abrogated. He answered: ‘No’."

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Tabari, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an, v8, p178

• Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, under the verse 4:24, v1, p519

Also Ibn Kathir mentioned his commentary:

"al-Bukhari declared that Umar used to forbid people on Mut’a."

Sunni reference: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, v1, p233

Also in another Sunni commentary it is reported that:

Umar said, while on the pulpit: "O folk! Three were (allowed) during the time of the Messenger of Allah (S), and I forbid them, and make them Haraam, and punish on them. They were: Mut’a of women, Mut’a of Hajj (pilgrimage), and saying ‘Hayya Ala Khair al-Amal’."

Sunni references:

• Sharh Al-Tajreed, by al-Fadhil al-Qoshaji, (Imama Section)

• al-Mustaniran, by al-Tabari

• al-Mustabeen, by al-Tabari

Remark: The third item mentioned above which was prohibited by Umar, is what is said in the Call for Prayer and Iqaamah after the phrase "Hayya Ala al-Falah", and it is practiced by the Shi’a to this date. It means "Hasten for the best deed". This part of call for prayer was abolished by Umar as well. Instead, he replaced it by the sentence: "Prayer is better than sleep"!

Interesting to know that there are some Sunni scholars who accepted that the Mut’a marriage is legal (Halaal) forever exactly based on the above verse of Qur’an. Among those scholars are the Tunisian scholar, Shaikh al-Tahir Ibn ‘Aashoor, under his Tafsir of the verse 4:24 of Qur’an. (See al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir", by al-Tahir Ibn ‘Aashoor, v3, p5). And there has been such open-minded scholars who did not allow the love of their leaders affect their judgment.

Some tried to cast doubt about the meaning of "Mut’a", by saying that it literally means pleasure and not necessarily a special type of marriage. These people, instead of searching for the practical definition of Mut’a in the History, Hadith, and Jurisprudence, they look it up Arabic dictionary!

Even the Arabic dictionary gives the practical meaning of Mut’a, that is temporary marriage. All Shi’a and Sunni scholars agree to this very fact. al-Qurtubi, who is one of the great Sunni commentators of Qur’an, wrote: "There is no dispute among the scholars, either early (salaf) and late (khalaf) scholars, that Mut’a is a marriage for a fixed period of time and that it does not involve inheritance."

Replacing the practical meaning and the linguistic meaning is very dangerous and is prohibited in the religious rules, because one may also say, "Salat”(prayer) means praise/supplication and is not necessarily the acts that Muslims do every day. Or "Zakat”(alms) means "to cleans”and is not necessarily paying money, and so on...

Perhaps such people did not even read the traditions related to "Mut’a of women”which gives its practical meaning used at the time of the Prophet and the early Caliphs and how the companions used to contract by a handful of date as dower.

Even the English version of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim have translated the word "Mut’a al-Nisa”to "Temporary Marriage,”and they also translated "Istimta’a”to "marrying temporarily", and the traditions in that section which is a section in the chapter of marriage, gives the total picture of its meaning. (Please see Part II for the details of these traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim). Have these people ever heard of any other type of "Mut’a of women”in the history of Islam?

Some also tried to cast doubt about the meaning of the verse of Mut’a in Qur’an (4:24) by saying that the word "Istamta’a”refers to the consummation of the permanent marriage, after which dowry should be paid.

The above assertion is not correct. The best way to understand the meaning of the verse, is first to learn Arabic (since the exact translation of Qur’an to any other language is quite impossible), and second, to look at various commentaries (not just a filtered one), and third, to look at the traditions related to temporary marriage to see if they have used the word "Istamta’a". If we do all the three and search completely for different and controversial opinions, then we can say that we are close to the target.

In this part, we already provided references to many Sunni commentaries of Qur’an, in which the commentators confirmed that the verse was revealed for the temporary marriage, and they mentioned many traditions about the temporary marriage under the commentary of this verse. Then how can this verse be related to permanent marriage?! or perhaps you think these Sunni scholars had some loose screws upstairs. Few lines later, more interesting traditions from the Sunni commentaries under this verse are provided. Yet there many more available.

Moreover, who could we find better that Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (ra), the great companion of the Prophet, who according to Sahih Muslim said: "Istamta’a means contracting temporary marriage”(Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI titled: Temporary Marriage, Tradition #3246. Please see part II for the full Arabic text of the tradition). Jabir did not relate "Istamta’a”to consuming the marriage in general.

Furthermore, in the verse 4:24 Allah states, "...And there is no sin for you in what you both agree after fulfilling the duty (i.e., dowry of the first contract)". The mutual agreement after the duty refers to extending the period of temporary marriage after full payment of the previous dower, so that the woman can freely decide on the continuation of the marriage with no pressure or temptation. In this way, Allah encourages that people who are engaged in Mut’a will get more reward if they extend it to a bigger period (or perhaps convert it to a permanent marriage) by assigning a new dower after fulfilling the previous dower. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari wrote in his commentary of Qur’an:

Some traditions mention that the meaning of "And there is no sin for you in what you both agree after fulfilling the duty”means: O people! There is no sin for you to have an agreement between you and the women who you have had pleasure with them in a fixed-term contract, to extend the period at the time when the first period expires, and thus to prolong the temporary marriage by increasing the reward (of the Hereafter) as well as the duty (dowry) before you leave them. It is narrated on the authority of al-Suddy (ra) who said:

"And there is no sin for you in what you both agree after fulfilling the requirement. If the husband wishes he could convince her (to accept the renewal) after paying her the first dowry and just before the expiration date of marriage. In that case he would say to his wife: I contract Mut’a with you for such and such again. Thus he extends it before he leaves her due to the expiration of the first contract, and this is what the verse means.”(Tradition #9046)

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Tabari, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, v8, p180.

Another reason for the fact that the dowry mentioned in the above verse does not refer to permanent marriage, is that Qur’an has already talked about the dowry for permanent marriage at the early part of the very same chapter by saying:

"...Marry women of your choice two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them) then only one...”(Qur’an 4:3)

"And give the women (of permanent marriage) their dower as a free gift"(Qur’an 4:4)

It is clear that the above verses are about permanent marriage and the dowry associated with it. So there would be no need that Allah repeats it along with its associated dowry again in the very same chapter. However if Allah intended to discuss about Mut’a, then it is some thing new. And this can be inferred from the choice of words which Allah used in the verse of Mut’a (4:24) by using the derivative of Mut’a in contrast with the other verses around it.

(...Except the forbidden women) the rest are lawful unto you to seek them with gifts from your property, provided that you desire protection (from sin), not fornication. So for whatever you enjoyed (Istamta’tum) them by the contract, give unto them their wages as a duty . And there is no sin for you in what you both agree (in extending the contract) after fulfilling the duty (i.e., dowry of the first contract). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise. (Qur’an 4:24)

Thus, in fact, Allah is discussing different types of marriages: first, permanent marriage in the verses before Verse 24, then temporary marriage in Verse 24, and then marriage with the slave girls in Verse 25:

If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women they may wed believing bondwomen from among those whom you rightfully possess, and Allah has full knowledge about your faith. You are one from another; wed them with the leave of their owners and give them their wages according to what is reasonable; they should be chaste not lustful nor taking paramours; when they are taken in wedlock if they fall into shame their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; And if you be patient, it is better for you; and Allah is forgiving and Merciful. (Qur’an 4:25)

Here Allah mentions the dower related to slave girls. Thus Allah repeated the issue of dowry three times, one for permanent marriage, one for temporary marriage and one for the bondwomen.

Again, to stress that Verse 4:24 was revealed about temporary marriage, we present more traditions from the Sunni commentators. Al-Tabari mentioned that:

Mujahid (ra) said: "The phrase ‘So for whatever you have had of pleasure (Istamta’tum) with them by the contract (4:24)’ means the Temporary Marriage (Nikah al-Mut’a)."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Tabari, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, v8, p176, Tradition #9034.

Also many Sunni commentary books mentioned similar to the tradition of Sahih al-Bukhari (see part II) with more details and put it under the verse 4:24 of Qur’an:

Imran Ibn Husayn narrated: "The verse of Mut’a (4:24) was revealed in Allah’s Book, and there did NOT came any other verse after that to abrogate it; and the Prophet ORDERED US to do it, so we did it at the time of Allah’s Apostle, and he did not forbade us from it till he died. But a man (who regarded it illegal) expressed what his own mind suggested."

Sunni reference:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, pp 200,202, under the verse 4:24

• Tafsir Ibn Hayyan, v3, p218, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an

• Tafsir Nisaboori, by al-Nisaboori (8th century)

So it is clear that ‘Imran Ibn Husayn is talking about Mut’a of women here, otherwise the above Sunni commentators would not put it under this verse, or else such scholars are just stupid (may Allah protect us from such words). The positioning of such traditions is another proof for the fact that the verse 4:24 is about Mut’a of women.

In many traditions in the Sunni commentaries of Qur’an, the phrase "to an appointed time”has been added to Verse 4:24 after the word Istamta’tum. In other words, it reads "So for whatever you have enjoyed (Istamta’tum) them by the contract to an appointed time":

فما استمتعتم به منهن إلى أجلٍ مسمى.

This however should be considered as commentary of the verse which was revealed along with Qur’an, but NOT as a part of the Qur’an. In fact, many verses were revealed by Allah which are not embodied in the present Qur’an because they were commentaries of the verses of Qur’an, but not a part of Qur’an itself. It is well-known that Hadith Qudsi is also revelation, but it is not a part of Qur’an. In fact Qur’an testifies that anything that the Prophet said was revelation. Allah Almighty said in Qur’an about Prophet Muhammad (S) that:

"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. Whatever he says is nothing but a revelation that is revealed.”(Qur’an 53:3-4).

Thus all the speeches of the Prophet were revelation, and surely the speeches of the Prophet were not limited to Qur’an. It also includes interpretation of Qur’an as well as his Sunnah. Now let’s go back to the traditions which I wanted to present. It is narrated that:

Abu Nadhra said: Ibn Abbas (ra) recited the verse 4:24 with the addition of "to an appointed time". I said to him: "I did not read it this way.”Ibn Abbas replied: "I swear by Allah, this is how Allah revealed it,”and Ibn Abbas repeated this statement three times."

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, v8, p177, Tradition #9038

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an narrating similar tradition from Jubair.

also:

Abu Nadhra said: I asked Ibn Abbas about temporary marriage (Mut’a of women). Ibn Abbas (ra) said: "Do you not read ‘For whatever you enjoyed (Istamta’tum) them by the contract to an appointed time’?”I said: "If I would have read it this way, I wouldn’t ask you (about temporary marriage)!”He replied: "Certainly the verse is about it."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the commentary of verse 4:24, v8, p177, Traditions #9036-9037

It is also narrated that:

al-Suddy (ra) said: "The verse ‘So for those of whom you have had pleasure with them by the contract to an appointed time’ is about Mut’a, that is, a man marries a woman with a provision (i.e., dowry) for a fixed period of time and makes two witnesses, and (if virgin,) he asks the permission of her guardian, and when the time period is expired, they should separate and they will not inherit each other."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the commentary of verse 4:24, v8, p176, Tradition #9033

Moreover:

Abu Karib said Yahya said: "I saw a book with Nasir in which it was: ‘So for whatever you have had of pleasure with them by the contract to an appointed time.’"

Sunni references:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, pp 176-177, Tradition #9035

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Qur’an narrating similar tradition from Ibn Abi Thabit.

Another companion, Ubay Ibn Ka’ab (who based on authentic Sunni sources the Prophet ordered the companions to trust him in the matter of Qur’an as one of the three trustee persons in this regard. See Sahih al-Bukhari, English, vol. 6, Tradition #521) also mentioned that additional phrase:

Qatadah (ra) said: "The way that Ubay Ibn Ka’ab recited the verse was: ‘So for those of whom you enjoyed by the contract to an appointed time.’"

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the commentary of verse 4:24, v8, p178, Tradition #9041

Beside the above mentioned authorities, there were others such as Sa’id Ibn Jubair, Abi Is’haq, and Umay who have also mentioned this extra phrase when reading this verse. Well, as I said, this extra phrase, though revealed, was only commentary and not a part of Qur’an.

If one wants to write it, he should put it inside curly brackets showing that it is not a part of Qur’an. There are many of such extra phrases which can be found in both Shi’a and Sunni sources, but they are only the divine interpretation of the verses.

This concludes the discussion on the Qur’anic verse of Mut’a and what Sunni commentators had to say about the verse. In the next part, we Insha Allah study the authentic Sunni collections of traditions with regard to temporary marriage.

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 2: Evidences From the Sunni Hadith Collections

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

After a brief overview of books of Tafsir in Part I, let us now look at some of the Sunni collections of traditions. It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that:

Jabir Ibn Abdullah and Salama Ibn al-Akwa’ narrated: There came to us the proclaimer of Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him) and said: "Allah’s Messenger has granted you to benefit yourself (Istamta’u), i.e., to contract temporary marriage with women."

إنَّ رسول الله قد أذِنَ لكم أن تستمتعوا. يعني متعة النساء.

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3246

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1022, Tradition #13, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

In the above tradition the verb Istamta’a (to enjoy; to have pleasure) has been used which is the exact form of the verb used in Qur’an in the verse of Mut’a 4:24, and moreover, Jabir said in the above tradition that Istamta’a means performing Mut’a of women (temporary marriage). Similarly it is narrated that:

Salama Ibn al-Akwa’ and Jabir Ibn Abdullah reported: Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him) came to us and permitted us to contract temporary marriage.

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3247

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1022, Tradition #14, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

Moreover al-Bukhari narrated from another companion of the Prophet (S) the following tradition:

Narrated ‘Imran bin Husayn:

" The Verse of Mut’a was revealed in Allah’s Book , so we did it at the time of Allah’s Apostle, and nothing was revealed in Qur’an to make it illegal, nor did the Prophet prohibit it till he died. But a man (who regarded it illegal) expressed what his own mind suggested."

(Note: For the above Hadith, the Saudi translator of Sahih al-Bukhari (Muhammad Muhsin Khan) has changed the word "Mut’a”to "Hajj-at-Tamatu". This is while in the Arabic text of the Hadith of al-Bukhari which is beside the English text, the word "Mut’a”has been used alone:)

نزلت آية المتعة في كتاب الله

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v6, Hadith #43

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic, v2, p375, v6, p34

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p436 on the authority of ‘Imran Ibn al-Qasir

As we pointed out, Mut’a can be of two kinds: Mut’a of women (pleasure marriage) and Mut’a of Hajj (Hajj-at-Tamatu). Both were practiced at the time of the Prophet and Abu Bakr and the early days of Umar’s rule. But they were abolished by Umar.

Thus basically, the above tradition refers to both types of Mut’a which were prohibited by Umar. Moreover, as we gave evidences in Part I, many Sunni commentators have put this very same tradition of Imran Ibn Husayn under the commentary of verse of Mut’a marriage (4:24) showing that this Mut’a refers to Mut’a marriage.

It is interesting to know that in Sahih Muslim as well as in the commentaries of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim it is mentioned that the "man”mentioned in the above tradition ("But a man expressed what he wished") is Umar:

"A person said according to his personal opinion, and it was Umar."

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter CDXLII, Tradition #2825

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p898, Tradition #166.

Also:

"The man intended here is the Caliph Umar Ibn al-Khattab."

Sunni references:

• Fat’h al-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, v4, p177

• Sharh al-Nawawi on Sahih Muslim, v3, p364, Dar al-Sha’ab print

The reason that in the original tradition, Imran Ibn Husayn did not mention the name of Umar is that he was mindful of the bad temper of Umar, and because Umar said he will stone anyone who does that.

It is also narrated in Sahih Muslim that:

Abu Nadhra said: Ibn Abbas commanded to do Mut’a while Ibn Zubair forbade to do it. I mentioned this to Jabir Ibn Abdillah and he said: It is through me that this Hadith has been circulated. We did Mut’a (of Hajj and women) at the time of the Messenger of Allah. When Umar was installed as Caliph, he said:

Verily Allah made permissible for his Messenger whatever He like and as He liked. And its command was revealed in Qur’an. Thus accomplish Hajj and Umra for Allah as Allah has commanded you, and confirm (by reverting to permanent marriage) the marriages of those women (with whom you have performed Mut’a). And any person would come to me with a marriage of appointed duration (i.e. Mut’a) I would stone him.

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter CDXLII, Tradition #2801

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p885, Tradition #145.

Again the above tradition has references to both Mut’a, and Umar said that Allah made permissible what he wished at the time of the Prophet and its corresponding command was revealed in Qur’an, yet he will stone any one who contracts the fixed-term marriage.

Also, both al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated the following tradition from Abdullah Ibn Masud who was another companion of the Prophet:

Narrated ‘Abdullah Ibn Masud:

We used to participate in the holy battles led by Allah’s Apostle and we had nothing (no wives) with us. So we said, "Shall we get ourselves castrated?”He forbade us (to castrate ourselves) and then allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract (Mut’a) and recited to us:

‘O you who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression.’ (Qur’an 5:87)

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, v7, Tradition #13a

• Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic, v6, p11, under Tafsir of verse 5:87 of Qur’an

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1022, Tradition #11, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3243

Following the above tradition in Sahih Muslim, it is narrated that:

This Hadith has been narrated on the authority of Isma’il with the same chain of transmitters (but the words are): "We were young so we said: "O Allah’s Apostle! should we not have ourselves castrated? But he (the narrator) did NOT say we were on an expedition."

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3245

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1022, Tradition #12, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

One side comment here is that, based on the above authentic traditions, masturbation is forbidden, otherwise the Prophet (S) would have ordered his companions to masturbate instead of contracting temporary marriage!

The above action of the Prophet (S) proves that if one is in danger of fornication, he should contract temporary marriage and avoid masturbation. The prohibition of masturbation is also supported by the verses of Qur’an, as we will discuss in Part V.

Some claim that the Prophet used to allow temporary marriage in a particular expedition and then prohibited it on the day of victory. This allegation falls apart when we see that some of the famous companions said that Mut’a was widely practiced from the time of the Prophet till the time of Umar, and was continued to be promoted by some companions even after the death of Umar.

Moreover, if Mut’a was just for an expedition, the Prophet would have mentioned it at the time he allowed it. They, of course, did Mut’a in the expeditions as well, but certainly it was not limited to that. Moreover, the verse of Qur’an does not have any limitation of this kind. This leads us to believe such allegation is just a mere excuse to justify the present situation. As we will witness in the following traditions, the companions supported Mut’a without mentioning the battle. They did not mention that we only did it during the expeditions.

Beside what was quoted at the beginning, Sahih Muslim has more traditions with reference to the prominent companion, Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (ra), which are as follows:

Narrated Abu Nadhra:

While I was in the company of Jabir Ibn Abdullah (ra), a person came to him and said that Ibn Abbas (ra) and Ibn Zubair differed on the two types of Mut’a (Mut’a of Hajj and Mut’a of women), whereupon Jabir said: We used to do these two during the life time of Allah’s Messenger (S). Umar then forbade us to do them, and so we did not revert to them.

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3250.

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1023, Tradition #17, also v2, p914, Tradition #1249.

Again the above tradition emphasizes that both Mut’a were abolished by Umar, and some people did not return to it at least publicly, because Umar threatened people that he will stone any one who does it. Below is a more straight forward tradition:

Jabir Ibn Abdullah reported: "We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of the dates or flour as a dower during the life time of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and during the time of Abu Bakr until Umar forbade it because of Amr Ibn Huraith.

كنا نستمتع

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3249

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1023, Tradition #16, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

Again, in the Arabic text of the above tradition, the verb "Istamta’a”has been used for the temporary marriage which exactly what Qur’an has used. Also as we see, there is no mention of its restriction to battle. It was being widely practiced at the time of the Prophet and the rulers who came after him. Also:

Ibn Juraih reported: Ata’ reported that Jabir Ibn Abdullah came to perform Umra, and we came to his abode, and the people asked him about different things, and then they made a mention of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Yes, we had been benefiting ourselves by this temporary marriage during the life time of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and during the time of Abu Bakr, and Umar.

استمتعنا على عهد رسول الله و أبي بكر و عمر

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3248

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1023, Tradition #15, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

As we witness here again, the verb "Istamta’a”has been used in the above tradition for the temporary marriage which in conformity with the verse of Qur’an.

Another person who opposed Umar’s idea in this regard, was Abdullah Ibn Abbas (ra) who was one of the great companions of the Prophet (S). Al-Bukhari wrote in his Sahih:

Narrated Abu Jamra: I heard Ibn Abbas (giving a verdict) when he was asked about the Mut’a with the women, and he permitted it (Nikah al-Mut’a). On that a freed slave of his said to him, "That is only when it is very badly needed and (qualified permanent) women are scarce, or similar cases.”On that, Ibn Abbas said, "Yes."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v7, Hadith #51

Do you see anything about battle as a condition here? Moreover, if Ibn Abbas relied to what others alleged that the Prophet later prohibited it, he would not allow himself to give Fatwa in this regard. He did that since he knew these allegations are false and are solely to justify Umar’s opinion. Also Muslim narrated in his Sahih that:

Urwa Ibn Zubair reported that Abdullah Ibn Zubair stood up (and delivered an address) in Mecca saying: Allah has made blind the hearts of some people as he has deprived them of eyesight that they give religious verdict in favor of temporary marriage, while he was alluding to a person (Ibn Abbas). Ibn Abbas called him and said: You are a rude person and devoid of sense. By my life, Mut’a was Practiced during the life time of the leader of pious (he meant Allah’s Messenger, may peace be upon him), and Ibn Zubair said to him: Just do it yourself, and by Allah, if you do that I will stone you with your stones.

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3261

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1026, Tradition #27, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

Did Ibn Abbas say, just during a battle? certainly not. This is what some Sunni scholars invented simply to justify the action of Umar. In the above tradition Abdullah Ibn Zubair insults Ibn Abbas (ra) by saying that his heart is blind, simply because he believed that Mut’a should be promoted since it was the Sunnah of the Prophet (S). Ibn Zubair forgot that he himself was born out of Mut’a! (See Sahih Muslim, v1, p354; al-Iqd al-Fareed, v2, p139). Then Ibn Zubair threatened that he will stone Ibn Abbas (ra). This is while Ibn Abbas (ra) was one of the outstanding companions of the Prophet (S), and Abdullah Ibn Zubair wanted to teach him his religion, after he fought both Imam ‘Ali and Ibn Abbas in the battle of Camel, and shedding the blood of innocent Muslims.

Also in Sahih Muslim it narrated that:

"Muslim al-Qurri said: I asked Ibn Abbas about Mut’a and he permitted it, where as Ibn Zubair had forbidden it. So Ibn Abbas said: "This is the mother of Ibn Zubair who states that Allah’s Messenger had permitted it, so you better go to her and ask her about it. He (Muslim al-Qurri) said: So we went to her and she was a bulky blind lady. She said: Verily Allah’s Messenger permitted it.

• Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p909, Traditions #194-195. In Tradition #195 the subnarrator said: "The narrator used the word Mut’a alone, and I do not know if it was Mut’a of Hajj or Mut’a of women.”However it is known that what Ibn Zubair used to forbid was Mut’a of women as is clear from the traditions mentioned earlier.

Even after the death of Umar, and even after Uthman, many companions did not accept the order of Umar and insisted that temporary marriage is lawful. These advocates of Mut’a never mentioned that it was restricted to a battle.

Some people believe that a certain individual did Mut’a with one of the daughters of Umar during the Umar’s rule, and when Umar got to know of it, he decided to prohibit Mut’a.

Let me clear the fact that we do not have hatred toward Umar. We believe that he was one of the companions of the Prophet, but we do not put him in a high position since, as you witnessed partially, there are strong proofs that he did some innovations based on his own Ijtihad which were terribly wrong.

We strongly believe that Fatwa does not work when there is explicit text of Qur’an or authentic Hadith to the contrary. Abolishing Temporary Marriage is just one example of such innovations. Even according to Sahih al-Bukhari Umar himself straightforwardly confessed that he did some innovations in prayers and said: "What a nice innovation"!!! (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version, v3, p227). He also did change the regulations on Tayammum and many other rules of Islam.

Another companion who opposed this innovation of Umar, was his own son!! His name was Abdullah Ibn Umar. He was in favor of both Mut’a of Hajj and Mut’a of women. I give two traditions expressing each Mut’a. It is narrated in Sahih al-Tirmidhi that:

"some one asked Abdullah Ibn Umar about Mut’a (of Hajj), he said: It is permitted (Halaal). So he was asked: your father forbade it. He said: Do you think that my father can forbid what the Prophet did? Should I follow what my father said, or should I follow what the Prophet ordered? The man said: Of course the orders of the Prophet (S)."

Sunni references:

• Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v1, p157

• Tafsir al-Qurtubi, v2, p365, reported from al-Darqunti

Another report in the above source:

"When a man from Syria asked Abdullah Ibn Umar about the Mut’a of women, he said it is Halaal. The man said: Your father had made it forbidden! Ibn Umar said: Do you think that if my father was forbidding it and the Messenger of Allah used to (allow) its practice, then you should leave the Sunnah and follow what my father said?"

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi

What I provided here was just some traditions, out of many, available in the six Sunni collections of Hadith in support of Mut’a. There are much more available. In the next parts, Insha Allah, we shall briefly review the Sunni History/Fiqh/Misc. books, and then we will study and analyze the few traditions which allege that the Prophet banned Mut’a towards the end of his life.

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 3: Evidences From the Sunni History-Fiqh-Miscellanea Books

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

After an overview of the commentaries of Qur’an and the authentic collections of Traditions, let us, now, look at some other types of Sunni references in with regard to Mut’a.

The previously-mentioned tradition of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) given in Sunni commentary books of Qur’an (please see Part I), has also been reported in many other Sunni books with a simple variation in some, that is, using the word "Shafa”meaning "a few”instead of "Shaqi”meaning a playboy:

"‘Ali (ra) said: The Mut’a is a mercy from Allah to his servants. If it were not for Umar forbidding it, no one would commit (the sin of) fornication except a (Shaqi/Shafa)."

Sunni references:

• Bidayat al-Mujtahid, by Ibn Rushd, v2, p58

• al-Nihaya, by Ibn al-Athir, v2, p249

• al-Faiq, by al-Zamakhshari, v1, p331

• Lisan Al-Arab, Ibn Mandhoor, v19, p166

• Taj al-Aroos, v10, p200

• Fat’h al-Bari, v9, p141

• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v8, p293

• Al-Iqd Al-Fareed, v2, p139

• Umadat al-Qari, by al-’Ayni, v8, p310, (reports Mut’a was Halaal at the time of the Prophet Abu Bakr some of the Umar’s period.)

Also al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti said about Umar:

"He (Umar) is the first who made Mut’a forbidden (Haraam)."

Sunni reference: Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p136

Also al-Qastalani wrote:

The phrase "But a man said with his opinion what he wished”(as was mentioned in the authentic Sunni books such as Sahih al-Bukhari), is Umar Ibn al-Khattab and not Uthman, because he was the first to forbid Mut’a. So the one came after him (i.e., Uthman) was only following him in that action."

Sunni reference: al-Irshad, by al-Qastalani, v4, p169

As we mentioned, Ibn Abbas supported Mut’a even after the battle of Camel (which happened when Imam ‘Ali became the head of Islamic states), and years after he lost his eyes. Let me give you one interesting tradition reported by Ibn Abi al-Hadid. The brief version of this tradition was mentioned in Sahih Muslim (which was presented in Part II), but here there are more details including the events related to the war between Aisha and Imam ‘Ali (as). Ibn Abbas (ra) was known for his smart answers in the debates. Here is the tradition:

Ibn Zubair gave a speech over the pulpit in Mecca when Ibn Abbas was sitting under the pulpit beside other people. Then Ibn Zubair said:

"Among these people is a man whom Allah has made his heart blind as He did with his eyes (referring to Ibn Abbas who was blind at the time); and he thinks that Mut’a of woman is permitted by Allah and his Messenger; and he issues religious verdicts for every single issues; and he has stolen the treasury of Basra yesterday and caused financial problems for the people of that city, and how can I blame him when he fought the mother of believers (Aisha) and the companions of the Messenger of Allah and those who protected him.”Hearing that, Ibn Abbas said to Sa’d Ibn Khuthaimah to take him in front of Ibn Zubair since Ibn Abbas was blind. After he faced Ibn Zubair, Ibn Abbas said:

"O’ Ibn Zubair! As for blindness, verily Allah said in Qur’an that:

‘For indeed it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts, which are within the bosoms, that grow blind.’ (Qur’an 22:46)

And as for my religious verdicts, there are reasons behind them that neither you nor your companions comprehend them. And as for the treasury, it was the money which was collected and we gave every liable person his just share. As for Mut’a, you better ask your mother Asma’! (note: Ibn Zubair was born of Mut’a marriage between Zubair and the daughter of Abu Bakr, Asma’). And as for our fighting the mother of believers, her title is referring to us, not you and your father (i.e., ‘believers’ is referring to us).

Your father (Zubair) and your uncle (Talha) destroyed the protection that Allah provided for her, and used her for Fitna by fighting beside her while keeping their own wives at their homes; and they were not fair to Allah and His Messenger by exposing the wife of the Prophet and protecting their own wives; and as our fight against you (in the battle of Camel), we came forward to you, and if we were infidels (Kuffar) then you have become infidels by running away from us (after being defeated in the battle field), and if we were believers then you have become infidels by fighting against us. And if a woman was not among you, I wouldn’t leave any bone among your people unless I would have broken."

When Ibn Zubair came back to her mother and ask her about Mut’a, she replied: "Did I not warn you from facing Ibn Abbas and facing Bani Hashim (The clan of the Prophet(S)), because they have answer for everything. O my son! Avoid this blind man for neither human nor unseen creatures (Jinn) can corner him."

Sunni reference: Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v4, pp 489-490

Also, in this connection, al-Raghib al-Isbahani reported:

Ibn Zubair denounced Ibn Abbas for his opinion on Mut’a. Thus Ibn Abbas told him: "Go and ask your mother what she did with your father.”When Ibn Zubair asked her, she said: "By God, I did not conceive you except through Mut’a."

Sunni reference: al-Muhadhiraat, by al-Raghib al-Isbahani, v2, p96

It is also reported that:

Yahya Ibn Aktham asked a Shaikh from Basra: "Why do you permit Mut’a?”He answered: "Due to Umar Ibn al-Khattab". Yahya asked: "How is that? Umar was the most sever one against it?”He answered: "Yes, it is an authentic narration that Umar ascended the pulpit and said: ‘Allah and His Prophet permitted you two Mut’a, but I forbid you on both and will punish those who commit it’, so we accepted the witness of Umar (that Allah and His Prophet permitted it) but we did not accept his prohibition."

Sunni reference: al-Muhadhiraat, by al-Raghib al-Isbahani, v2, p94

Malik Ibn Anas and al-Shafi’i (two of the four Sunni Imams) as well as many Sunni traditionist reported the following with authentic chain of narrators:

Urwah Ibn Zubair narrated that Khulah Bint Hakim came to Umar Ibn al-Khattab and said: Rabi’ah Ibn Umayyah practiced Mut’a with a woman and the woman has become pregnant from him. Umar became angry and said: "About this Mut’a, had I done (the ban) sooner than this, I would have stoned him."

Sunni references:

• al-Muwatta’, by Malik Ibn Anas, on the topic of Mut’a, v2, p30

• Kitab al-Am, by al-Shafi’i, v7, p219

• Sunan al-Kubra, by al-Bayhaqi, v7, p206

Moreover, it is reported that:

Umm Abdillah, the daughter of Abu Khuthaimah said that a single (unmarried) man from Syria came to her and said: "I am under emotional pressure for remaining unmarried, thus find for me a woman so as to contract temporary marriage with her.”Therefore She found a woman for him and he made Mut’a contract with her having some witnesses. He remained with her till the marriage was over. When Umar found out what happened, he called him and said: "Why did you do that?”The man replied: "We did it at the time of the Prophet and he did not forbid us till Allah took his soul, then we did it at the time of Abu Bakr and he did not forbid us till Allah took his soul too, and then we did it during your rule and you have not forbid us before.”Umar replied: "By whom my sole is in His hand! Had I forbidden it sooner, I would have stoned you so that you could understand the difference between marriage and fornication."

Sunni reference: Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v8, p294, via al-Tabari

How can Umar prohibit something which the messenger of Allah did not? How can he threat to stone an unmarried man who did Mut’a, while the punishment of an unmarried man is not stoning? Even the four Sunni schools do not subscribe to such idea. They consider the punishment of a person who does Mut’a to be "Ta’zeer”which is even much less than the punishment of an unmarried person who commit fornication!

What I am trying to say is that there are numerous documented traditions as well as Sunni historical records which assert that Umar was the one who forbade Mut’a, and if he did that it means that the Prophet (S) really didn’t; otherwise, Umar would not have had to! This is contrary to the various sporadic reports that claim otherwise, to a different point in time. These contradicting reports will be discussed in Part IV.

Now the question is: What is the "measure”for us? Which opinion and channel of transmission of Sunnah should we trust? As we know, there have been many other instances where the companions did not agree with one interpretation of Qur’an and Sunnah, and the Sunnah of the Prophet has reached us through these very same companions. In this case, (as well as other issues) we have chosen to follow ‘Ali (as) who was admittedly the most knowledgeable among the companions. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with this choice, just as others have chosen to follow other parties. The fact is that one can not follow ALL the companions when they disagreed in such issues.

A Sunni brother claimed that the majority of the Companions held the view that after the completion of the Islamic legislation, temporary marriage was made Haraam.

The above assertion is not true however. The fact is that No companion ever mentioned it Haraam until after the rule of Umar. It was then, that some started saying that it is made Haraam.

Even if we suppose that the majority of companions said something, this does not oblige us to follow them. What we are supposed to follow are the words of Allah in Qur’an and the Sunna of the Prophet (S). The Shi’a scholars also agree on the validity of Ijmaa’ (consensus), not as a source of religion, but rather as a fact. Ijmaa’ means what is unanimously held by ALL Muslims. This fact is taken from the Sunna and is due to the tradition of the Prophet (S) where he said:

"My community shall not unite on something wrong."

This proves the fact that even if most of Muslims go wrong in some issues there should exist one or some individuals who do not join them in that regard as they might have evidence at hand from Qur’an and Sunna regarding those issues.

It is clear that Ijmaa’ does not give any weight to the majority. In fact, it gives more weight to the minority because even if one scholar disagrees, the Ijmaa’ (consensus) is broken!

There is no Ijma’ in the subject of Mut’a. Most of the companions and their disciples did not agree with its prohibition by Umar. But only some of them dared to raise their voice.

There is no Ijma’ in this issue among the Sunni scholars either. I have mentioned the name of some the Sunni scholars in the previous parts who believed Mut’a is permitted. Moreover Shi’a scholars are another reason for breaking this Ijma’.

Ibn Hazm (d. 456) who is one of the Sunni scholars, in his book "Muhalla”gave the name of some of the companions and their disciples who believed that Mut’a is Halaal. In the 9th section of the chapter of Marriage in his book "Muhalla", Ibn Hazm gives a detailed account of Mut’a and its regulations. Among the numerous companions and their disciples who believed in practicing Mut’a after the demise of the Prophet are:

Imam ‘Ali (as), Abu Dharr, Jabir Ibn Abdillah, Abdullah Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn Masud, Zubair Ibn al-Awwam, Imran Ibn Husayn, Abdullah Ibn Umar, Ubay Ibn Ka’ab, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, Salamah Ibn Umayyah, Awka’ Ibn Abdillah, Salamah Ibn al-Awka’, Khalid Ibn Muhajir, ‘Amr Ibn Huraith, Rabi’a Ibn Umayya, Suhair, Sa’id Ibn Jubair Tawoos, Qotadah, Mujahid, Ataa al-Madani al-Suddy, and Imam al-Hasan (as), ...

Many of their narrations in this regard has been recorded in many Sunni references such as the first volume of Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

To give a better picture of the opposition of the companions, let us look at the History of al-Tabari (English version) which reports that the companions were unhappy about four things out of the innovations made by Umar. One of those who dared to talk to Umar about these issues was Imran Ibn Sawadah. The report indicates that even Umar was unhappy about what he did and surprisingly confessed that temporary marriage is permitted (Halaal)!!! Here is the report:

Imran Ibn Sawadah reported:

I went to Umar’s house and told him that I want to give him some advice. His reply was, "The person giving good advice is welcomed anytime.”I said, "Your community finds fault with you on four accounts.”Umar put the top of his whip in his beard and the lower part on his thigh. Then he said, "Tell me more.”I continued, "It has been mentioned that you declared the lesser pilgrimage forbidden during the months of pilgrimage...”He answered, "It is permitted. (But the reason that I forbade it was that) if they were to perform the lesser pilgrimage during the months of the pilgrimage, they would regard it as being a lieu of the full pilgrimage, and (Mecca) would be celebrated by no one, although it is part of God’s greatness. You are right."

I continued, "It is also said that you have forbidden temporary marriage, although it was a license given by God. We enjoy a temporary marriage for a handful (of dates), and we can separate after three nights.”He replied, "The Messenger of God permitted it at the time of necessary. Then people regained their life of comfort. I do not know any Muslim who has practiced this or gone back to it (after I forbade). Now, anyone who wishes to, can marry for a handful (of dates) and separate after three nights. You are right.”I continued, "You emancipate a slave girl if she gives birth, without her master’s (consenting to) the emancipation... (and the fourth complain is) There have been some complaints of your raising your voice against your subjects and your addressing them harshly.”...

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v14, pp 139-140

I was really astonished when I read the above passage. Umar is saying that people can engage in Temporary Marriage again!!! Interesting to see that the one who was talking to Umar, says that you forbade it but we still enjoy this type of marriage! He uses the word "enjoy”and not "enjoyed”meaning that what is important to us is Allah’s command and not Umar’s, and thus we still do it. He also mentioned that Temporary Marriage is licensed by Allah and people are unhappy about this innovation of Umar.

It is interesting to note that Umar never attributed the prohibition of Mut’a to the Prophet (S). They were others who did that after his death, mainly to justify what Umar did which was also being enforced in the reign of Uthman. We gave two different traditions in Part I where Umar clearly mentioned that: "Mut’a WAS permitted at the time of the Prophet and I prohibit it!”If it was really the Prophet who canceled Mut’a, Umar would have said: The two Mut’a were Halaal and then became Haraam at the time of the Prophet, and I am informing you about the second law set by the Prophet which canceled the first.

Moreover, Sunnis believe that Mut’a of al-Hajj is permitted, and Umar made a mistake in his judgment in prohibiting it. Then the question is that: why do the Sunnis differentiate between the two Mut’a while both were prohibited by Umar according to the above tradition and the traditions of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim? When Sunnis agree that Umar made a mistake in forbidding the Mut’a of al-Hajj, then isn’t it probable that he also made the very same mistake for the Mut’a of women?

I only would like you to observe that the Shi’a follow the Imams of Ahlul- Bayt (as), the pure descendants of the Prophet (S), and if the Prophet (S) had said something to that effect (i.e., prohibition of Mut’a), then his Ahlul-Bayt would not have hidden it from their followers. This gives more credence and leads one to believe that Umar did forbid it and not the Prophet, and Umar did it as an act of "Ijtihad", on his own!!

In the next part, Insha Allah, we will analyze the few Sunni reports which allege that the temporary marriage was forbidden by the Prophet (S).

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 4: Some Contradicting Reports

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

There are few traditions which claim that the Prophet forbade Mut’a. There are however many contradictions among these reports. Let us look at the following traditions which alleged that the temporary marriage was forbidden FOREVER in the battle of Khaibar (1/7 AH). We will discuss what types of problems these traditions have shortly.

Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali narrated on the authority of his father ‘Ali that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the contracting of temporary marriage and eating of the flesh of the domestic asses.

• Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3265

also:

‘Ali (may peace be upon him) heard that Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) gave some relaxation in connection of temporary marriage, whereupon he said: Don’t be hasty (in your religious verdict), Ibn Abbas, for Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the doing of it and eating of the flesh of domestic asses.

• Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3266

Surprisingly, the following traditions claim that, long after the battle of Khaibar, the Prophet ordered to do Mut’a when he Captured Mecca (9/8 AH) but he allegedly forbade it when they left Mecca:

Sabra al-Juhanni narrated: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered us to contract temporary marriage in the Year of Victory, as we entered Mecca, and we did not come out of it (Mecca) till he forbade us.

(Note: The Saudi-paid translator has used "permitted”instead of "ordered". This while the Arabic text of the Hadith uses "ordered". This shows that the Prophet not only allowed Mut’a, but also promoted it in Mecca.)

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3257

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1025, Tradition #22, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

also:

Sabra narrated: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered his companions to contract temporary marriage in the Year of Victory... (then I made Mut’a) and I remained with her for three (nights), and then Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded us to part with them.

(Note: Again the Saudi-paid translator has used "permitted”instead of "ordered”while the Arabic text of the Hadith uses "ordered":)

إنَّ نبيِّ الله عام فتح مكة أمر أصحابه بالتمتع بالنساء...

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3258

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1025, Tradition #23, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

Now, let us look at the following traditions which claims that the Temporary marriage was forbidden forever in Mecca when the Prophet (S) was speaking beside Ka’ba. We will shortly see why these traditions do not seem to be correct.

Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), he said: O’ people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women, but Allah has forbidden it (now) until the Day of Resurrection. So he who has any (woman with this type of marriage contract) he should let her off, and do not take back anything you have given to them (as dower).

إنِّي قد كنت أذِنتُ لكم في الاستمتاع من النساء و انَّ الله قد حرَّمَ ذلك إلى يوم القيامة

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3255

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1025, Tradition #21, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

A side comment here is that again the word "Istimta’a”has been used in this tradition for temporary marriage which is exactly what Qur’an has used.

In the next tradition after the above tradition in Sahih Muslim, the same narrator (Sabra) has narrated the same tradition with addition that:

"I saw Allah’s Messenger standing between the pillar and gate of Ka’ba when speaking the Hadith."

Sunni references:

• Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3256

• Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1025, Tradition #21, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

The following tradition, however, indicates that the Prophet allowed Temporary marriage after the battle of Hunain (after 10/8 AH) which was after the conquest of Mecca:

Narrated Iyas Ibn Salama on the authority of his father that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) gave sanction for contracting temporary marriage for three nights in the year of Autas (this was after the Battle of Hunain in 8H), and then forbade it.

{Note: The sentence inside parentheses is the Saudi translator’s footnote, and is NOT mine.}

Sunni references:

Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter DXLI (titled: Temporary Marriage), Tradition #3251

Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p1023, Tradition #18, "Kitab al-Nikah, Bab Nikah al-Mut’a"

Now, let us see what the problems are:

1. Some Sunni scholars have rated these traditions as single (Mufrad), i.e., they are single reports. Ibn Asakir has mentioned the above tradition attributed to ‘Ali, in whose chain of authority is Ibn Saa’ed. Then he wrote: "Ibn Saa’ed is a liar". Also other Sunni Scholars such as Darqunti mentioned that these traditions are single. (See Ifraad, by Darqunti).

2. If the Prophet has forbidden the temporary marriage in the Day forever of Khaibar (1/7 AH), why it was practiced even after the battle of Hunain (after 10/8 AH) with the direct order of the Prophet? (See the reference above) In other words:

3. How is that possible that one is forbidden forever and in two different points of time, in the Day of Khaibar (1/7 AH) and on the victory Mecca (9/8 AH) forever, and people were practicing it between these two instants of time and after these two instances with the order of the Prophet? In the mentioned tradition about the battle of Hunain, it is said that the messenger of Allah allowed to do Mut’a for after the battle of Hunain. So we can not say people did it because they did not know it was forbidden forever.

The traditions confirms that Mut’a was done with the direct order of the Prophet. So how can we justify these few alleged traditions that the Prophet forbade it forever before that? This contradiction itself supports the fact that all these few narrations were made up to cover up and to justify what Umar enforced during his rule based on his idea. How nice is the verse 4:82 of Qur’an describes that one can find many contradictions in something that is not from Allah.

4. Two Sunni scholars: al-Qurtubi (in his commentary of Qur’an) and al-Nawawi (in his commentary of Sahih Muslim) are in the opinion that different traditions concerning the ban of Mut’a specify seven different dates!!!

5. How is that possible that people after the demise of the Prophet were practicing it? To answer this, some claim that although the Messenger of Allah had forbidden it, but it had not been given wide publicity, and thus some continued to practice it till Umar reinforced that law during his rule.

6. If this allegation is true, then it implies that all the companions except Umar were ignorant of the Sunnah of the Prophet, and ignorant of the fact that Mut’a was forbidden forever, and they continued practicing it after the demise of the Prophet, and quarreled amongst each other in this issue. They committed the sin of fornication and encouraged others to do that, and no body said to them not to do that BEFORE the rule of Umar. All of a sudden, some of them started saying it after the rule of Umar.

7. Then how can we conclude that they all carried the Sunnah of the Prophet and if we follow anyone among them we will go to paradise, because any single one of them is a star of guidance (no matter if it came out to be Muawiyah). What will be wrong if we follow Jabir who said Umar forbade it? What about Imran Ibn Husayn who believed that Umar said what he wished, and neither Allah nor His Prophet prohibited it? What will be wrong if we take the opinion of Imam ‘Ali (as), the most knowledgeable one among the companions who said:

The Mut’a is a mercy from Allah to his servants. If it were not for Umar forbidding it, no one would commit (the sin) of fornication except the wretched (Shaqi).”(See above for two set of references given before, one set from books on Tafsir and one set from books on history and misc. in Parts I & III respectively.)

Imam ‘Ali (as), Abu Dharr, Jabir Ibn Abdillah, Abdullah Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn Masud, Zubair Ibn al-Awwam, Imran Ibn Husayn, and Abdullah Ibn Umar, Ubay Ibn Ka’ab, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, Salama Ibn Umayyah, Awka’ Ibn Abdillah, Salama Ibn al-Awka’, Khalid Ibn Muhajir, ‘Amr Ibn Huraith, Rabi’a Ibn Umayya, Suhair, Sa’id Ibn Jubair Tawoos, Qotadah, Mujahid, Ataa al-Madani al-Suddy, and Imam al-Hasan (as), ... are also the stars of guidance if that Sunni tradition is true. So if we follow them with regard to permissibility of Mut’a, are we not guided then?

Also if the claim that the Messenger of Allah (S) allowed it for a single instance is true, then he would have told them at the same time that they can do it only for this certain period of time, and it will be forbidden after that for ever. In other words, he should have mentioned its prohibition at the time that he prescribed it. In this way there would be no confusion, and we can say the Prophet (S) delivered the Message in this regard. Now the question is: Did the Prophet mentioned its prohibition at the time when he allowed it momentarily?

If yes, then why did prominent companions such as Jabir Ibn Abdillah al- Ansari, Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn Masud, Imran bin Husayn, and Abdullah Ibn Umar, practiced (and some even promoted) Mut’a long after the demise of the Prophet?

If no (i.e., the Prophet did not mention its prohibition at the time he allowed it momentarily), then the Prophet intentionally confused some of his own companions such as those I mentioned above, because as a result of their "ignorance", some of them even practiced and promoted Temporary Marriage even after the rule of Umar!

Moreover if the prohibition of Mut’a was not given wide publicity by the Prophet, then it would contradict the following verse of Qur’an:

"He (Allah) has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you”(Qur’an 6:119)

Is it possible that the Messenger of Allah does not publicize what has been prohibited by Allah, which led the companions commit adultery till near the end of the rule of Umar, until it was finally decided that it is time to publicize this fact and stop the Muslims and companions from committing adultery!! How can we justify the above verse of Qur’an if the Prophet did not inform his companions the prohibition of Mut’a so that they do not quarrel amongst each other because of their ignorance of such important subject?

Also, do Sunnis think that the above mentioned companions did not have any fear of Allah? If they had any fear of Allah, and if they did not have strong proof that Mut’a is allowed forever, they would quit promoting Mut’a after Umar. Ibn Abbas did not accept what Umar said and he continued to promote Mut’a even after the battle of Camel when he argued with Ibn Zubair.

Was Ibn Abbas suspicious to Umar? Why didn’t he believe in him? The reason simply is the fact that Umar did not attribute this prohibition to the Prophet. Umar said: "The Prophet allowed it and I prohibit it.”Then if I were Ibn Abbas, I would do the same. Reviving the Sunnah of the Prophet which has been forsaken is a duty and has a lot of reward, and this was the concern of Ibn Abbas.
This goes for other companions who supported Mut’a even after the death of Umar, because they were sure that this is a man-made prohibition, and is not issued by Allah, nor by His Prophet (S). Otherwise, if these companions were unsure then they would at least keep silent for the fear of Allah. But the fact is that they knew what they were doing.

8. The speeches of the Prophet in Mecca was narrated through different narrators. Why only one narrator, named as Sabra al-Juhanni, had heard these words from the Prophet, and this part of the speech of the Prophet was not narrated by others? It is hardly conceivable that the Prophet could have stood before the Ka’ba in front of a large group of Muslims and ban something until the Day of Resurrection, and that then only one person Sabra should have heard him or related his words.

9. Moreover, there are discrepancies in the various versions of Sabra’s in different Sunni collections of Hadith. In some versions the prohibition is said to have occurred in the year of the victory of Mecca (8 AH), in others in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage (10 AH). This discrepancy makes the Hadith even more untrustworthy.

The version of the Hadith of Sabra which states that the Prophet momentarily permitted Mut’a at the Farewell Pilgrimage in Mecca in the year 10/632, shows another fact. People could not have complained from the separation of their wives during the Farewell Pilgrimage, since all of the wives were present, and the single men could have taken permanent wives in Mecca.

This is another proof for absurdity of the allegation that temporary marriage was in the case of battles! This is beside many traditions mentioned above that the companions never mentioned practicing Mut’a was limited to battles, and acknowledged that it was a usual practice up to the end of Umar’s rule.

10. Another contradiction with the narration of Prohibition of Mut’a in Mecca, is that the Prophet is alleged to have said:

I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage, and Allah has forbidden?

The problem is that the sentence is in reverse order based on the alleged narration attributed to ‘Ali that the Prophet have forbidden it. Based on the one of the early references of this article, the Prophet did not allow the temporary marriage when there was no command from Allah. Then the verse was revealed and Allah made it lawful and the Prophet permitted it, then. Based on what was attributed to ‘Ali (mentioned above from Sahih Muslim), it was the Prophet who had forbidden the temporary marriage. So, the sentence, must have been:

Allah had permitted you and I have forbidden you.

While this is in reverse order for the narration of Sabra. Why? Does any of them make sense?! How can the Prophet’s word and Allah’s word contradict each other. It is reported that:

"The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "I did not make anything Halaal except what Allah made Halaal, and I did not make anything Haraam except what Allah made Haraam."

    • Sunni reference: Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v4, p72

Then, how can the Prophet’s word and Allah’s word contradict each other?

11. The other problem with the tradition by Sabra al-Juhanni is that, if Allah has forbidden an Islamic law, he must have revealed some verse(s), or He must have whispered in the ears of the Prophet that the verse of Mut’a is abrogated. Since there is no record that Allah has whispered such important order in the ears of the Prophet, Allah must have revealed a verse about abolishing temporary marriage. Where is the abrogating verse(s)? Also, is it possible that Allah has whispered in the ears of his Prophet privately that the verse is abrogated, and the Prophet did NOT tell people when there was no new verse revealed in this regard?

12. The traditions can not abrogate the existing verses of Qur’an. Qur’an is always in higher authority. The traditions are always subject to check with Qur’an, and if they are found to be in contradiction with Qur’an, those contradicting traditions are rejected.

13. More over, the abrogated verse is either deleted from Qur’an by the Prophet, or if it is present in Qur’an, there should be another verse revealed at a later time to abrogate the previous one. In other words, the only way to establish that a verse which is present in Qur’an is abrogated, is to have an abrogating verse which should have been revealed after that verse, since the traditions alone can not abrogate an existing verse of Qur’an. Since there is no verse revealed after 4:24 abrogating it, it is still in effect.

14. And there are more problems with these three traditions on forbidding the temporary marriage which will be discussed later. Our humble suggestion is what the Prophet recited when he allowed the Temporary marriage:

O’ those who believe, do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, and do not transgress. Allah does not like transgressors. (Qur’an 5:87)

This was the verse mentioned in the tradition of Abdullah Ibn Masud about temporary marriage (see the previously-mentioned tradition from Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim). What do Sunnis think of the Prophet’s intention for mentioning this verse to people? How come temporary marriage is a bad thing for the Sunnis while the above verse of Qur’an refers it as a "good thing"? Do Sunnis want to listen to this verse about something like temporary marriage?:-)

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 5

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Purpose Of The Marriage

Some Sunnis claim that based on the following verse of Qur’an

"And Allah has made for our spouses of your own nature, and from your spouses has made for you sons and grandsons ...”(Qur’an 16:72)

the purpose of marriage is reproduction. However, in the temporary marriage the above-mentioned purpose is not realized, and thus the couple can not be considered husband and wife.

To answer this assertion, we should say: It is true that temporary marriage is not primarily intended for reproduction (though the couples can do that if they want to). As a matter of fact, many temporary marriages were/are the gate for entering the permanent marriages and the establishments of lucky families. In many cases the partners will finally permanently marry after they saw a good deal of success in their temporary relation.

Even though the human race is guaranteed its survival through marriage, the Holy Qur’an did NOT authorize it exclusively for that, otherwise, it should have illegalized any marriage which does not give birth to new generation. For instance, the marriage of barren/infertile women as well as old women should have been prohibited. Also contraceptive means should not have been allowed. But the fact is that none of them are prohibited in Islam. This goes to prove that reproduction is NOT the mere goal in marriage.

Moreover, when discussing the issue, fairness requires one to bring other reasons that Qur’an mentioned for engaging in marriage. The above was just ONE reason which is usually the case of permanent marriage. But the above verse does not say that reproduction is the ONLY reason to marry. There are other goals mentioned in Qur’an for marriage, among which are the following:

1- Having pleasure and enjoying the other partner

This is clear from the verse of Mut’a itself where Allah said:

"So for those of whom you have pleasure with them (by the contract), you are required to give (them) their wages. And there is no sin for you in what you both agree after the requirement...”(Qur’an 4:24)

Pleasure and enjoying mentioned here do not necessarily restrict to physical aspects. They do cover the spiritual aspects as well.

2- Tranquillity

Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"And among His great Signs is that He created for you mates from among yourselves so that you get tranquillity by them and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts); verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.”(Qur’an 30:21)

The goals for marriage mentioned in the above verse are: achieving spiritual stability, social and psychological tranquillity, and love and mercy to each other. These goals can be attained by both permanent and temporary marriages.

3- Providing an alternative way to avoid the sin of fornication

"Successful indeed are the believers... those who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond or with the slave girls whom they rightfully possess for (in their case) they are free from blame. But those who go beyond that are transgressors.”(Qur’an 23:1-7)

The traditions of the Prophet (S) provide other reasons for marriage, one of which is:

4- Protecting one’s religion

The Messenger of Allah said: "The one who gets married earns half/(one-third) of his religion, and therefore, he should fear God for the other half/(two third)."

Temporary marriage has safeguarded many good believers (both brothers and sisters), and has protected them from falling into the hands of evil and sin, and has persevered their faith and religion.

Also "spreading Islam”could be another goal for marriage. In this case, however, the temporary marriage is less risky than the permanent marriage. And there are many more reasons and goals for marriage.

Mut’a versus Alcohol

To justify the practice of Mut’a at the time of the Prophet (S), some people assert that similar to the way that Allah prohibited Alcohol gradually, Mut’a was allowed but it was forbidden gradually before the demise of the Prophet.

Other than the fact that many companions and their disciples (see part III for the list of their names) were promoting Mut’a long after the demise of the Prophet, which clearly contradicts above proposal, we should say that there is no similarity between the case of Alcohol and Mut’a. Alcohol was known before Islam for many centuries and Islam did not legislate nor legitimized it. This is while Mut’a with the Islamic regulations surrounding it was not known before Islam, and Islam legitimized it and defined its rules.

The Prophet never promoted to drink Alcohol from the beginning of his mission to its end, but he promoted Mut’a. (See the traditions quoted from Sahih Muslim in Part IV which state that the Prophet ordered his companions to practice Mut’a). Similarly, Allah never promoted or legalized drinking Alcohol in Qur’an but HE promoted and legalized both types of Mut’a in Qur’an in two different verses. As I mentioned many Sunni commentators confirmed that the verse 4:24 is revealed for the Mut’a of women. (As for the Mut’a of Pilgrimage, there is another verse which specifies that type of Mut’a).

The course that Islam took for banning Alcohol, was to order at the beginning that "Do not be drunk when you are praying". This does not imply that Islam promoted drinking at any other time, rather it kept silent on the issue while the Prophet was discouraging people not to drink at any other time. Allah never sent a verse to say "You can drink alcohol when you do not pray."

In fact the abrogated verses and the abrogating verses of Qur’an do not contradict each other, rather the abrogating verse gives a more restraint law than the abrogated verse. Moreover, there exists NO abrogating verse in Qur’an to abrogate the verse about Mut’a (temporary marriage), and there is NO declaration from the Prophet concerning the abrogation of the verse related to Mut’a.

For the case of alcohol, we can see a clear and indisputable trend in Qur’an starting from not allowing the believers to pray while they are drunk, and completing with very clear verse that getting involved in such actions is strictly prohibited. Such prohibition about temporary marriage does not exist in Qur’an, however.

Prohibition of Illegal Sex

Some people claimed that adultery was common among the companions, till close to the end of the Prophet’s life time where it was prohibited by the Prophet. These people have no shame to call the companions who they adore, as fornicators. Perhaps they do it similar to what Jews attribute such shameful thing to their own prophets, mainly to justify what they themselves do. They say since our Prophets committed such grave sins, it is going to be all right for us as well, and God will forgive!

NO prophet of God ever promoted to commit adultery or established prostitution; then do these people expect that the master of all the prophets does that? Were his companions worse than the people of Lot so that they would need to do adultery for a period of time? Even Prophet Lot did not allow such shameful thing for his people.

Moreover, the Prophet never legitimized a wrong thing to achieve a goal (like spreading Islam by expedition). In other words, the Prophet never allowed fornication to keep his companions in good mood (!!) in order to fight better for Islam! The goal does not justify the means, and this is a basic teaching of Islam.

It is hilarious and rather insulting to believe that at any time the Prophet (S) had ordered his companions to get drunk, or to murder, or to rape, or to gamble, or to commit fornication because of necessity"!

These people even do not know that fornication was prohibited by the Prophet (S) in Mecca, and before his migration to Medina. For instance, let us look at the following verses:

"Successful indeed are the believers... those who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond or the captives whom their right hands possess for (in their case) they are free from blame. But those who go beyond that are transgressors.”(Qur’an 23:1-7)

and also:

"And those who guard their private parts, except with their wives or the slave girls who rightfully possess for (in their case) they are free from blame. But those who go beyond that are transgressors.”(Qur’an 70:29-31)

The above verses clearly state that sex is only permitted either by marriage or through bondwoman whom one may rightfully possesses. If the above verses in the Chapter of Believers (Ch 23) and the chapter of al-Ma’arij (Ch 70) would have been revealed after the verse 4:24 (which is about Mut’a), then one could say the verse 4:24 might have been abrogated by the above verses.

Surprisingly enough, all Muslims agree that the above verses in the chapter of Believers (Ch 23) and the chapter of al-Ma’arij (Ch 70) were revealed in Mecca, long before the migration of the Prophet (S).

Therefore fornication was, indeed, prohibited in Mecca in the early advent of Islam. This is while all Islamic schools agree that the verse of 4:24 (verse of temporary marriage) was revealed in Medina. Also Shi’a and Sunni unanimously acknowledge that the Prophet (S) legitimized Mut’a after migration to Medina, and the companions started practicing it.

This, in fact, proves that Mut’a is a legitimate type of marriage, and man and woman are real husband and wife, otherwise the Prophet would have gone against the Meccan-revealed-verse in the Chapter of believers which restricted sex only through marriage or bondwomen. The Prophet does not go against the previously revealed verse of Qur’an when they are not abrogated. Thus if he permitted Mut’a later in Medina, it should comply with the previously revealed verse in Mecca including the above two verses mentioned. The conclusion is that Mut’a is a legitimate type of marriage, and was legitimized long after the prohibition of fornication and after limiting sexual relation only to marriage and bondwomen.

Again some Sunni brothers, to provide an excuse for the practice of Mut’a by the companions, said that among the companions were some who were weak in faith. The weak ones feared that they would be tempted to commit the sin of fornication, a major sin and an evil course, and thus the Prophet allowed them to practice Mut’a.

These brothers unwittingly acknowledge the fact that not all the companions were strong in their faith. This is really a step forward. Sometimes in order to justify something, people have to compromise on their beliefs. Surprisingly enough, the Shi’a also believe in the same thing.

If the Shi’a follow ‘Ali (as) to the exclusion of all other companions, it does not mean that the rest were unbelievers. It rather means the rest were not as qualified as him in their knowledge and their faith. However fornication was prohibited and sex was limited to marriage before even the constitution of Mut’a, and Allah does not compromise on what He had established already no matter what the companions feel about it.

One side comment here is that, according to the Shi’a Jurisprudence, masturbation is absolutely forbidden, due to the above mentioned verses where Allah limited the sexual gratification to marriage and slave-girls. Sunnis also consider masturbation to be forbidden, but some of them say if one falls into sin of fornication, then he may resort to masturbation since it is a lesser evil. Actually, such idea has no support in Qur’an or the Sunnah of the Prophet (S).

However, this Sunni opinion that masturbation is a lesser evil than fornication, gives another proof that the above mentioned excuse for the permission of temporary marriage for the companions is absurd. If masturbation is a lesser evil, then why the Prophet didn’t order his companions to masturbate instead of contracting temporary marriage?!! This action of the Prophet (S) proves that if one is in danger of fornication, he should contract temporary marriage and avoid masturbation.

Temporary marriage was one of Islam’s new ideas and solutions for the problems mankind presented by the last Prophet God for all the generations to come. It aimed at purifying this nation to make it the best, cleansed from any crimes, impurities and weird behavior, and to make it strong in its social structure.

But this nation was not successful in protecting this type of marriage and respecting its rules and reviving its legality. Instead, it was treated with false traditions and ignorant complications. This consequently invited various types of sickness, corruption, and adultery in Muslim nations which can be observed today.

More Side Comments On Mut’a

A Sunni brother mentioned that Ibn Abbas permitted temporary marriage under necessity. This is true. As we pointed out before, al-Bukhari mentioned:

Narrated Abu Jamra: I heard Ibn Abbas (giving a verdict) when he was asked about the Mut’a with the women, and he permitted it (Nikah al-Mut’a). On that a freed slave of his said to him, "That is only when it is very badly needed and (qualified permanent) women are scarce, or similar cases.”On that, Ibn Abbas said, "Yes."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v7, Hadith #51

The last sentence of the tradition is a little confusing however. The reason is: How can women be scarce and yet we find one for the temporary marriage?! If women are scarce, they are scarce for both types of marriage! On the other hand, if women are available for temporary marriage, then they are not scarce any more!

So, granted that the last phrase in the above tradition is genuine, then the freed slave of Abbas meant that if the qualified women for permanent marriage are scarce, then one may resort to temporary marriage till such time when he finds a qualified permanent partner, based on the above verdict of Ibn Abbas (and some other companions). But for the cases such as western countries where a Muslim can not easily find a qualified spouse for long term marriage, and he/she is under pressure, then the only chance for him/her is temporary marriage.

Even in Muslim countries, if a man/woman is not sure about the qualification of his proposed wife/husband, he/she may engage in temporary marriage for sometime before his/her official permanent marriage. In this period he/she will realize if the other partner is qualified for a long-term relationship. The other suitable case for temporary marriage is when a boy can not afford the expenses of a permanent wife which brings many financial responsibilities.

A Sunni contributor mentioned that Ibn Abbas probably meant when Muslim woman is scarce one may practice temporary marriage with women from the People of the Book.

Although the above tradition does not specify the religion of women, this brother believes that Mut’a marriage with the people of Book is permitted when Muslim woman are not available. I believe this is also a step forward!

Even we accept that the tradition wants to say what this brother said, then there still exists the very same contradiction. All Muslims unanimously agree that permanent marriage with the People of the Book is allowed. If it is allowed, then again in that case women are not scarce!!! If Christian girls are not scarce, then they are available for both types of marriage. And the same argument comes in again. Is the tradition saying that Sunnis can commit the sin of fornication with Christian girls when Muslim women are scarce? Thus we ought to agree that temporary marriage is not fornication otherwise Ibn Abbas would not have dared to allow it even with the girls from the People of the Book.

Moreover, the above tradition clearly states that Ibn Abbas allowed temporary marriage under some conditions. This can be inferred without need of any interpretation. Now, my question is that do you believe what Sunnis acknowledge concerning that Ibn Abbas was a highly respected companion and the interpreter of Qur’an? If yes, then you should obey him in this issue also. Or, at least, you can not object a Muslim if he chooses to follow Ibn Abbas and other companions who had the same idea in this issue.

A Wahhabi mentioned if Shi’a really follow ‘Ali, then Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim both have a tradition from him on the prohibition of Mut’a!

We have discussed already about this tradition which has contradiction in it and the Sunni scholars have rated it Mufrad. Moreover, we do not consider Sahih al-Bukhari (or Sahih Muslim) to be all-authentic. It is the work of man, and is not revealed by God to al-Bukhari. Neither him nor those who conveyed the traditions to him were infallible, and they made some or many mistakes. (Unless Wahhabis want to claim that the companions and the narrators were infallible). Not to mention that there are many contradictions inside this book. As a result I do not consider ANY Hadith collection to be all-authentic.

I bet these Sunnis do not also believe in all the traditions inside Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. If they believe in all of them then they have found many controversy on this very subject among the companions. The traditions inside these two books say that some companions continued to believe that temporary Marriage is Halaal after the demise of the Prophet and issued verdicts. Then, how can they say these books are all-authentic when they do not believe in those traditions I mentioned?

We should be naive to accept what al-Bukhari attributed to Imam ‘Ali (as) as genuine when other reports from Imam ‘Ali inside Sunni books say totally the opposite. We only accept those traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari which does not have contradiction with other Mutawatir traditions in side that book and other books. (The common traditions between Shi’a and Sunni are Mutawatir (frequent) since they have been narrated by both rival authorities.) This is exactly what we do with the Shi’i sources as well. If we find a tradition in the Shi’i sources which contradicts Qur’an or the established Sunnah of the Prophet, we just ignore it.

In Parts 6 through 8, we will discuss the regulations of Mut’a in detail, Insha Allah.

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 6: Similarities and Differences of Mut’a and Regular Marriage

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Some people assume that some of the Shi’a practices are not Islamic because they haven’t heard about it before, or they do not know the justifications behind it. What I tried to prove by the previous parts of the discussion was:

1. Temporary marriage was not invented by the Shi’a.

2.Allah made it legal in the Qur’an (4:24).

3.There are authentic Sunni references which indicate that various companions did NOT agree on being it abolished. This happens to agree with the Shi’a point of view.

4.It was also indicated that there are few allegations for its banning, but they are inconsistent and are weaker claims. Their variety is sufficient indication of the fact that they are based on opinion-only, mainly to justify the present situation. Also, not to mention their obvious conflict with above three points. Moreover, the Hadith is always tested against the Qur’an and not the other way around. The Qur’an is always in the higher authority.

In that effort, I was not trying to convince the Sunnis that Mut’a is permitted for them as a "Sunni", as much as, I was trying to show that the Shi’a point of view in this issue has a very strong basis in Qur’an and Hadith, and is not inconsistent with Islam and its documented history. I also tried to illuminate the fact that Mut’a can be legal, depending on which companion’s point of view we take.

In this part and the next two parts, however, I would like to talk More about Mut’a itself, its specifications, regulations, advantages, and to answer some the questions which I received from the Sunnis on this issue.

Warning: What follows in this and the next parts is only a scientific discussion and in NO way it should be considered as some kind of verdict. Interested readers may contact the Shi’a scholars or read books on Shi’a Jurisprudence to learn more about this issue, its terms, and its restrictions.

Fixed-Term/Temporary/Pleasure/Mut’a Marriage is a contract between a man and woman, much in the same way the Long-Term/Conventional Marriage is. The same vows are exchanged by the partners or their authorized representatives in both cases, including stating the dowry. In temporary marriage a fixed period of time (like one year, four years of college, etc.) should be clearly specified. After the expiration date of the marriage, the couple must either extend it to another specified time or they will automatically separate without divorce, and the woman must count the "Iddah”(waiting period) before which she can not marry any one else.

The dowry (Mahr/Sidaq) should be specified at the time of contract. It may be a calculated sum of money, or a certain work like teaching a certain science, or something like a ring or bracelet by specifying or showing them. As for the dower which are not present at the time of contract, it is sufficient that the dower be described in such a manner that the woman’s misunderstanding will be removed, i.e., that it be described exactly as it is.

Usually in this type of marriage, the couple do not plan to have any child. But it becomes accidentally the case, then the kids from this marriage are the legal sons/daughters of their parents. All regulations of permanent marriage will apply to the children.

The man and woman are husband and wife till the expiration date of the contract, much in the same way as the normal marriage is. In fact the author of al-Jawahir (the biggest Shi’a Encyclopedia in Jurisprudence) said:

"Originally the same rules apply to permanent and temporary marriage, except what was excluded by certain proofs."

For instance, similar to the permanent one, in the temporary marriage it is necessary for the virgin girl to get the permission of her guardian (which is usually her father) before accepting such offer. Imam al-Ridha said: "A virgin may not be married temporarily without her father’s permission.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p458). As for a non-virgin, she can make her decision alone without getting the agreement of her guardian or any other person, but it is still encouraged to get the permission.

Temporary marriage is valid with the Muslim women and the woman of the People of the Book like the Christians and the Jews. And if the Christian/ Jewish girl is virgin, the prosper should still seek the permission of her guardian even if that guardian is not a Muslim. Under very extraordinary circumstances, if it is proved that her guardian does not care about her benefit, a Muslim scholar (or the judge when the government is truly Islamic) can let her marry. In this case the necessity of the permission of the father is lifted and will be shifted to the permission of the scholar/judge. This is true for permanent marriage as well.

Marriage with a woman who is atheist, or blasphemer, or apostate, or a woman who declares animosity against Ahlul-Bayt, or the extremist (one who believes ‘Ali is God) is not allowed; and the same applies to man with the addition that marriage of Muslim woman with a non-Muslim man is not allowed either.

It is undesirable/discouraged (Makrooh) that one temporarily marries the fornicatress who is not famous for practicing fornication. Conservative way is to avoid marrying her at all. As for the woman who is famous for committing fornication like a prostitute, it is forbidden to do Mut’a with her, unless she repents. Her repentance is known if she was called to commit sin and she refused; then that should indicate her trustworthiness, and an indication for the possibility that she may revive her soul with the opportunity of temporary marriage and being in the company of a person who can guide her to the right path. Nonetheless, it is highly encouraged that the wife in both temporary and permanent marriage to be modest and temperate, not reckless or cheap.

It is recommended that a Muslim man contract a temporary marriage only with a chaste (‘Afifa) Muslim woman. Here chaste means someone who has never committed fornication and who follows the Shari’ah in her activities, and in general is honest and upright. The two attributes ‘Muslim’ and ‘chaste’ are mentioned in the following two tradition:

Imam al-Ridha (as) was asked: "Is it possible for a man to contract a temporary marriage with a Jew or a Christian?”He (as) answered: "I would prefer that he engage in Mut’a with a free Muslim woman.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p452).

To a question about performing Mut’a, the Imam Ja’far replied: "It is permissible. So marry none but a chaste woman, for God says, ‘And those who guard their private parts’ (Qur’an 23:5). Hence you should not put your private parts where you do not feel safe with your dirhams.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p452).

How to distinguish a modest and temperate woman? In the case that one may have suspicious to the unknown woman who want to offer the temporary marriage, one way is to test her, yet this is not necessary as we will discuss shortly. It was reported that a modest woman was astonished when a believer asked her to commit the sin of fornication. She thought the man committed sin by saying such thing. She did not know that it was a test with no lying meant. That was a question and not a decision to do wrong. For it was Abdullah Ibn Ya’fur who asked the Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) that if she can temporarily marry an unknown woman. The Imam answered: "One could invite her to commit sin, and if she accepted he should not marry with her."

If someone makes an accusation against a woman, it is recommended that before contracting of Mut’a with her the man ask her about her situation, i.e., as to whether or not she has a husband and whether or not she is chaste. However, in general, asking is not a condition of the contract (Jawahir, v5, p165).

The rule of Jurisprudence regarding to "the principle of correctness of the acts of a Muslim”demands that one consider the act of a woman who has declared herself ready to enter into Mut’a as correct. According to this principle, whenever we are in doubt concerning the correctness of the act of a Muslim, we preserve the social and legal order by judging that his/her act was correct, unless otherwise proven by chance. Several traditions are related which demonstrate the reprehensibility of asking about the woman’s situation AFTER the contract has been made.

Temporary marriage is discouraged when one has a permanent wife who is sexually available to him. ‘Ali Ibn Yaqtin (ra) who was married, asked Imam al-Ridha (as) about pleasure marriage. The Imam said to him:

"Why do you want to bother with it while God has provided you what’s better (i.e., permanent wife)."

Another one also asked him about Mut’a, and the Imam (as) said:

"It is absolutely permissible and allowed to whom is not provided with (permanent) marriage, then he may act decently by resorting to pleasure marriage. If he was provided with a (permanent) wife, then it is allowed for him (to engage in temporary marriage) when he is away from his wife (e.g., like a traveler)."

Also Imam al-Ridha (as) wrote to one of his followers:

"You should revive the Islamic law, but do not persist on pleasure marriage where it would keep you occupied from your permanent wives, for they (permanent wives) might reject the faith and then accuse us."

The scholars consider such restricted allowance only as undesirable, but not forbidden. This is due to other traditions that make it permissible, but it is undesirable/discouraged in the case of having a permanent wife who is sexually accessible.

As we mentioned earlier, there are some differences between the temporary marriage and the permanent marriage which I now briefly pinpoint here:

1) Temporary Marriage is NOT Necessarily A Sex Relationship

The couple who want to enter in temporary marriage contract may put a condition at the time of contract that the marriage shall not be consummated. Such condition can not be put in permanent marriage and it is the religious obligation of the permanent wife to be sexually available to her husband and should be responsive to his sexual requests; and at the same time, man should not avoid intercourse for more than four month and should sleep with his permanent wife at least once each four nights.

Such sexual necessities do not apply in temporary marriage, because it has been designed for wider purposes which will be explained later. In the case that the couple put a condition that they do not have sex, then they can only enjoy other things in a couple life. If, later, the woman agrees to have sex, the condition is resolved, and the marriage can be consummated.

This is due to the fact that the obstacle to sexual relations was the woman’s unwillingness to permit anything more than what was agreed upon in the contract. But the marriage contract warrants intercourse, i.e., the marriage contract itself establishes the permissibility of intercourse. Thus if the obstacle is removed, the default contract will come into play, unless such obstacle could not be removed by the woman (e.g., permission of the father of a virgin girl). (see Matajir, v2, p300; Riyadh, v2, p116)

In other words, if the condition of non-intercourse is laid down, that is the woman’s right over the man. So if she chooses to waive the condition, union is lawful.

2) Mut’a With Sex Is Strongly Discouraged For A Virgin Girl

Although a virgin girl can temporarily marry if her guardian permits, such marriage is strongly discouraged (Makrooh Muakkad) for a virgin girl “if “having sex is to be involved. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) in one tradition mentioned this and gave the reason that "it may bring shame for her family.”In practice, most Muslim parents do not allow such thing either. But there is no problem for a virgin girl to temporarily marry if they put the condition at the time of the contract that the marriage can not be consummated, by saying for instance: they can just visit each other under the supervision of the parents.

However, under some circumstances, the temporary marriage (with no restriction) may become necessary even for a virgin girl if her guardian feels that there is a great possibility of committing sin for her girl due to personal and or environmental situation, and if no qualified man proposed her permanent marriage.

3) Inheritance

In temporary marriage the wife and the husband don’t inherit each other, while their kids inherit from their parents. According to the Imam Ja’far (as): "Among the regulations of Mut’a is that you do not inherit from the woman, nor does she inherit from you.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v4, p486).

However man and woman can inherit each other if it is made a condition at the time of contract. Also it is possible that only one of the spouses may be named heir to the other, in which case the inheritance is one-sided.

The reason that inheritance is permissible provided that the condition is entered into the contract is first the universal applicability of the prophetic Hadith: "The believers hold fast to their promises.”(Sahih al-Bukhari, v3, p120). Second, according to the Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq: "If they should stipulate the condition of inheritance (in the contract of Mut’a), they must hold fast to this condition.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v4, p486).

4) Financial Support

In this type of marriage, man is not required to financially support his wife, yet he is required to support the kids if any. However, man should financially support his wife if it is made a condition at the time of contract.

5) The Length Of The Waiting Period (Iddah)

After the expiration of marriage woman should wait for a specific amount of time before which she can not marry any one else. This is the case if the couple had intercourse, otherwise there is no waiting period. This rule also applies for permanent marriage in the case of divorce. However the length of this waiting period is slightly different. The waiting period of a temporarily married woman is equal to that of slave-girl which is different from the permanent married woman since temporary marriage is a "weaker”marriage much the same as marriage with slave-girl is a "weaker”marriage.

The length of waiting period for woman is two complete menstrual periods (about two month) for temporary marriage, if she menstruates. If the woman is of menstruating age but for some reason does not menstruate, her waiting period is 45 days. (It should be emphasized that having intercourse with a girl who has not reached to the age of puberty is forbidden in Islam).

Imam al-Baqir (as) said:

"The waiting period of a divorced (free) woman is three months, ... and what is required of a wife by Mut’a is the same as what is required of a slave.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p484)

It has been narrated from both Imam Baqir (as) and Imam Musa (as) that:

"To divorce a slave, one must pronounce the formula of divorce twice; her waiting period is two menstrual periods.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v15, p469).

If the woman is pregnant, her waiting period is the remaining time it takes to give birth, provided that this time is not shorter than her regular waiting period in this case. (See al-Fiqh ala al-Madhahib al-Khamsah, by Muhammad Jawad Mughniyyah).

As for the case of free permanent married woman who is divorced, it is the clear text of Qur’an that her waiting period of three complete menstruation (about three month). In temporary marriage the couple will separate from each other automatically after the expiration date without divorce, and it is the consensus of the scholars that there is no divorce in Mut’a.

Even for the permanent marriage, the waiting period is not three month if the separation is not due to divorce. For instance see 2:234 where it prescribes a different waiting period for the case of death of husband.

The Holy Qur’an only provided some general regulations and left behind many specific regulations to be specified by the Prophet himself. For instance Qur’an does not say that we should pray two units in Fajr or how we should pray. It was the Prophet (S) who explained all these regulations which were all revelations but were not a part of Qur’an. This is the Sunnah of the Prophet which has been transmitted by his Ahlul-Bayt (peace be upon them all).

The fact is that we do NOT need to know the reasons behind the religious regulations set by Allah and His Prophet in order to obey them. These regulations are based on the infinite wisdom of Allah. However, using logic, one may find some of the reasons behind them. Yet, one can never claim these findings are the only reasons behind those regulations. Allah mentioned in Qur’an that "You have not been granted knowledge but little."

Logically speaking, the waiting period for woman has many advantages:

1. If woman is pregnant she will realized this fact within the first two months.

2. If not, this waiting period will serve as preparation time for woman to adopt a new lifestyle. It is neutral interval for rest, psychological relaxation, and the transition from one state to another.

3. In most cases in permanent marriage, the divorce is the result of dispute between the couple, and they separate from each other with broken heart and tragic feelings. It is likely that after a period of isolation, they soon realize that they need each other and they still love one another, and what they did was wrong. This period provides enough time for both couple to rethink about their behavior which may lead to re-uniting before the woman marries a different man.

However, in the temporary marriage the problem mentioned in Item 3, does not exist. The couple know from the beginning that they will separate from each other after a fixed period of time, and with that understanding they entered to such contract. Therefore there is no surprises nor is any hard feelings when the marriage period expires. They need no extra time to rethink about returning to each other or to pass the period of hard feelings and mistreatments which is the case when permanently married couples divorce. Thus it seems reasonable why in the temporary marriage, the waiting period is a little shorter.

Moreover, as we mentioned, the waiting period for temporary marriage is equal to that of the slave-girls which does not follow the rule of permanent marriage in this regard.

According to a Sunni report:

Ibn Abbas was asked: "Is Mut’a fornication or marriage?”He answered: ‘Neither the one nor the other.’ The questioner then asked: "Well then, what is it?”Ibn Abbas replied: "It is Mut’a’, just as God has said.”The questioner continued: "Is there a waiting period in Mut’a?”He replied: "Yes, a menstrual period.”He was also asked: "Do the husband and wife inherit from each other?”He answered: "No."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p286

In the above Sunni tradition, it is attributed to Ibn Abbas that the waiting period for Mut’a is only one menstrual period. However, this is not acceptable for us due to more accurate traditions from the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt which explain that it is two menstrual periods.

6) The Time-Period Of Marriage

The time period of a temporary marriage must be expressed at the time of contract in a manner which allows no possibility of increase or decrease. According to the Imam al-Ridha (as): "...(Mut’a must) be a stipulated thing for a stipulated period.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p479).

The Imam was once asked if it is possible to conclude a contact of Mut’a for ‘one or two hours’. He replied, "No exact time limit is understood from ‘one or two’ hours.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p479).

Based on the opinion of some of the scholars, if the stipulated period is not mentioned at all in the text of the contract, the marriage cannot take place and the contract is invalid. (Matajir, v2, p299; Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p287; Jawahir, v5, p169).

Some scholars, however, are in the opinion that if the time period is not specified then the marriage reverts to a long-term marriage and separation can only happen by death or by divorce. In this case, all the rules of the regular marriage apply. They base their opinion on a tradition from Imam Ja’far Sadiq (as) who said: "If a time period is stated, the marriage is Mut’a; if it is not stated, it is permanent.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p469).

al-Shahid al-Thani comments that the above tradition does not state explicitly that the desire of the two parties to the contract was to establish a marriage of Mut’a, but then they fail to mention the time period. On the contrary, the purport of the Hadith is that marriage with a stated period is Mut’a while marriage without a stated period is permanent marriage. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p287).

There is no upper or lower limit to the duration of the time period. It makes no difference if the period is extremely long, so that one doubts whether the parties will survive its duration; or if it is extremely short, so that there is no possibility of consummation. In other words, any time period is permissible, so long as it is specific and both sides are aware of the situation and are satisfied. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p285).

There are traditions which indicate that it is permissible for the agreed upon time period either to be joined to the moment of establishing the contract or to be postponed. (Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p446).

As for the possibility of postponing the beginning of Mut’a, this is conditional upon the stipulation of the day and the month in which it is to begin. For example, if the man states that the contract will be for one month but fails to stipulate exactly when that month is to begin, the contract is invalid because the exact time is not stated. But if the contract is meant for both sides to be in effect immediately, without any mention of a postponement, then the marriage begins as soon as the contract is made, and the marriage is valid. (Matajir, v2, p300; Jawahir, v5, p171).

7) The Due Dowry Vs. Consummation

In the permanent marriage the consummation of marriage is only due to sexual act. But the temporary marriage is different from the permanent marriage because there is an extra form of consumation, that is the consummation of the time period. Therefore the consummation of the time period also must also be taken into account for the issue of dowry. (Masalik, v1, p538).

The above explanation follows that once the Mut’a contract is made the wife receives the whole dowry, whether or not the husband consummates the marriage before the time period expires. Starting the Mut’a marriage means consuming the time period which requires full dowry.

The wife is entitled to the dowry as long as she places herself at her husband’s disposal and does not present him with any obstacles to consummating the marriage. When the time period is over, the wife is freed from the obligations of the contract. (Matajir, v2, p300; Jawahir, v5, p170).

If the couple made a condition at the time of contract to avoid or limit sex, then the woman is not religiously obliged to be sexually available to her husband and she is still entitled to the dowry.

The woman may ask for the whole amount of the dower at the beginning of the marriage. In this case, the man may not take back any of the dower under any circumstances, unless for some reason the contract turns out be invalid from the beginning. Several traditions are recorded which establish this point without question. (Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, pp 482-483).

In a situation where a contract is made, but BEFORE THE BEGINNING of the time period the man decides not to go through with the marriage but to ‘give back’ to the woman the contracted time, she is entitled to one-half the dower. The situation is similar to divorce before consummation in permanent marriage. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p285; Shara’i, v2, p24; Matajir, v2, p300; Masalik v1, p538).

Since the consummation of time is taken into account in the issue of dowry for Mut’a, it follows that if a woman who has made a contract of Mut’a separates from her husband on her own free will before the end of the time period, whether before or after consummation, the man is allowed to reduce the dower in proportion to the amount of time by which the time period of the Mut’a has been reduced, provided that he has not already paid her the full dower. (Sharh al-Lum’a v5, p285).

Thus, for example, if the woman’s dower is $300 and the time period 30 days; and if the woman decides to avoid her husband after 20 days, her husband would reduce the dower by one-third. Hence, if the woman should fail to fulfill any of the conditions of the marriage for the whole time period, she forfeits the whole dower.

Numerous traditions have been recorded concerning this particular point. For example, the Imam Ja’far (as) was asked if it is permissible to hold back part of the dower if the woman fails to put herself at her husband’s disposal. He replied: ‘It is permissible for you to hold back what you can (i.e., what you have not already given her). so if she goes back on her word, take from her (in proportion to) the amount she has broken the contract. (Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p481).

However, if the woman fails to provide the man with conjugal rights because of an excuse sanctioned by the Shari’ah, such as menstruation or ‘fear of an oppressor’, then the dower can not be reduced. A man came to the Imam Ja’far and said: "I contracted Mut’a marriage with a woman for one month for a given amount. But the woman only came to me for part of the month, and part she stayed away.”The Imam replied: "An amount should be held back from her dower equivalent to the amount she avoided you, except for the days of her menstruation, for those belong to her.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p481).

If the marriage has been consummated and the woman was aware of the contract’s invalidity, she can have no claim to a dower, since she is a fornicatress, and there is no dower for fornication. In this case, if the man has already given the woman the whole dower, she must return it as soon as the invalidity of the contract becomes apparent. If she no longer possesses the amount which must be returned, she is liable for it, no matter how it may have left her hands, whether, for example, she has spent it or it was stolen. (Matajir, v2, p301; Sharh al-Lum’a v5, pp 287-288).

If the woman passes away during the period of the Mut’a, even if it be before consummation, her dower may in no way be lessened, exactly as is in permanent marriage. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p286).

In the next part, we will discuss the necessities and the advantages of the Temporary marriage, Insha Allah.

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 7: The Necessities and the Advantages of Mut’a

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Sexual feelings are strong forces within human beings which are created by God, and like any other force or instinct, should be directed and supervised. Marriage is God’s legislation to direct this very strong force which might otherwise destroy the human being’s prosperity and salvation. Permanent marriage is the most recommended form of marriage, however, there are situations in which for different reasons permanent marriage, where the intention is to construct a family, is NOT possible. Then what should be done in these cases? Can we accept that God has left us on our own in this important issue, or should we expect some legislation in this case as well? If we do not accept temporary marriage, there are two options left:

1)Sexual promiscuity and licentiousness, with all it’s results. This is what happens (and is promoted by media, Hollywood, etc.) openly in the West, and not very openly in other cultures.

2)Suppressing all sexual feelings and instincts until a permanent marriage is possible. There are, however, a few problems with this choice:

A)It is not possible to enforce it in any large scale form, as a general rule for society.

B)Even if we assume that it can be enforced, it may cause psychological disorders, and many other complexities. Suppressing natural needs and instincts (sexual or otherwise) is not a healthy practice and Islam does not approve of it either.

It is evident that permitting temporary marriage (until a permanent marriage becomes possible) is the best solution. Mut’a is just a sanctification of the boyfriend/girlfriend relationship. Two people may also live together all their lives without marrying. But a marriage ceremony sanctifies the relationship. The couple acknowledge their actions as fulfillment of God’s will and not merely their personal desires. They are under an obligation to God to fulfill their commitment. In a similar way, Mut’a sanctifies what would otherwise be just a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship.

One person mentioned that the Imam ‘Ali’s (as) narration: "If it were not for Umar’s prohibition of temporary marriage no one would commit adultery except a wretched”is not acceptable because it draws a distorted picture of men’s sexuality! Well, I must say that it is not just men who commit adultery, and Imam ‘Ali (as) is referring to both men and women. Temporary marriage, as well as permanent marriage, has two sides, and both sides are supposed to benefit from it. Consequently, depriving them for these benefits may cause both men and women to go wrong.

It seems that some people have no problem with what is promoted in the West, with a culture of nudity and nakedness, with using women as adverting objects, with reducing the sexual values and ethics to the garbage and obscenity we see everyday on TV, media, etc. There is nothing humiliating and unethical about using a young, pretty, half-naked girl (the ideal woman!) as a sex object to sell bear. A woman selling her beauty to a magazine or show is considered to have a "respectable”career and is called a "model"! What a meaningful terminology!

On the contrary, playing the role of a "mother”in a family is considered to be unimportant, if not humiliating. Being boyfriend-girlfriends is accepted as a sign of freedom, culture, and growth. However, if we talk about temporary marriage suddenly these people start to cry!

Some also believe that the spread of pre-marital relationships in the West is not completely a result of moral breakdown, rather it is also due to changed socio-economic conditions. In older times, marriage was simpler and the average age of marriage was much lower. In today’s complex society, it is no longer possible to be economically self-sufficient enough to get married until one is nearly thirty years old. This means that the only option to avoid pre-marital relationships is to extend the period of pre-marital celibacy to as much as 15 years.

Education is another obvious example. The man and woman usually can not find a job if they are unskilled or uneducated, and therefore financial independence is not feasible in the early stages of their life. Such prolonged celibacy is unnatural and cannot be sustained in any society for long. This is one reason why the traditional marriage customs broke down in the west during the last 30 years.

Today, most Muslim countries are also rapidly modernizing. It is inevitable that they will also face many of the pressures that most Western countries are facing. They have a choice to make. They can either try to mount a futile struggle against inevitable change and face a chaotic breakdown of their traditional customs. Or they can courageously take the initiative and revive the Islamic values such as Mut’a to respond to changing needs of the society in the true spirit of Islam. Choosing the second option will be a satisfying answer to the problem of prolonged pre-marital celibacy. Allowing an open and honest relationship committed to in the name of God with best of intentions, will discourage secret or promiscuous sexual behavior which is much more harmful to the moral fabric of a society.

Below I have summarized few reasons, out of many, for the necessity of Temporary Marriage, and the advantages associated with it:

1)As I mentioned, temporary marriage is not necessarily a sexual relation, and it could be for many other reasons. One purpose could be: getting to know each other closely. In the Shi’a communities it is even widely applied for a virgin girl to enter into such temporary marriage with the condition that the marriage is not to be consummated.

This is actually for done a boy and girl want to permanently marry, but they don’t know much about each other, and to familiarize themselves to each other, they will enter to such contract few months before the official permanent marriage. This period is what is known as "engagement". The engagement for the Shi’a Muslims means that they have contracted Mut’a marriage. (There is no other way for engagement in Islam!)

In this period the boy regularly visits the girl in the house of the girl’s parents and he is considered as a part of their family. They are "Mahram”to each other (i.e., boy can see the girl and her mother without head-cover, as a result of temporary marriage contract). They talk, study, have fun, go to picnic along with their parents, and so on. The boy and girl are husband and wife, but the only thing that they can’t do, is to sleep together.

This gives an opportunity to the boy and the girl in order to know each other more closely and to see if they can live together for the rest of their life and if their personal feelings are sort of compatible. Usually if something is found to be wrong, they will break up before the time when they want to permanently marry. This helps to decrease the rate of divorce in permanent marriage (when the permanent marriage may have been consummated and they may even have children) which is the worst thing in the family life.

2)Another justification about temporary marriage is that, in Islam, the right of divorce has been given to the husband and not the wife. Also according to the Islamic teaching, a girl and a boy can not be with each other before marriage. So if the only way in Islam was to permanently marry, then this would be unjust towards a woman who does not know his husband before marriage.

What if the woman later finds out that she does not have a very happy life with her husband because they are not morally compatible? Is she is bound to live with the husband that she didn’t know and she does not like him to the extent that she desires? The answer for permanent marriage is Yes. She can not get divorced unless her husband wants to divorce her. (Under some circumstances, a Muslim scholar/Judge can divorce her if she can prove that she is being harassed and is deprived of her rights or her man is sexually impotent, etc. But this is not likely to happen if she just does not like her husband too much or if she finds that she does not have too much compatibility and interest with her husband. Moreover, such procedure is risky, since the verdict of judge may be different than the wish of woman).

The option of temporary marriage removes this unjust look of authority. In Temporary marriage a girl and a boy have opportunity to live together for sometime to find if they will see a good future for their permanent marriage. As I said, the couple entered in temporary marriage contract may put the condition at the time of contract that the marriage is not to be sexually consummated. The guardian of the girl can also enforce such condition and the couple can just visit each other during the day to talk, study, and take part in any other non-sexual activities.

3)Temporary marriage is a conditional marriage. The purpose of such contract can be even only for talking to each other. Although necessary talks between two sexes in order to get along with daily life, without evil intention and without possible evil consequences, is not forbidden in Islam, but a man and woman who are presently unmarried and who are in close contact with each other due to the job, study or whatever, are encouraged to enter to such contract. This removes any possibility of sin.

4)In another case, a boy and a girl may not have reached to a point to manage a family life with all financial and legal responsibilities. Or they might be able to manage it financially but they are in a temporary situation where they can’t plan for permanent marriage, like bachelor students who come to other countries to study where they may not be able to find a good match for the permanent life in the foreign country as a result of cultural differences. If they feel they can’t stand emotionally, they may enter to such contract for the few years that they are away from home.

In any situation, if one can not control himself/herself, it is necessary to either temporarily or permanently marry. Obviously, temporary marriage is more practical in such situations.

5)In each community, there are some women who have lost their husbands either by death or divorce, and no body had offered them a permanent marriage proposal after their first husband. She will have to do one of the three things:

First to imprison the calls of nature in her body and bury her feelings, and then become like a nun. Sometimes this happens when the society tries to keep her as a prisoner of injustice, cultural traditions, and priesthood which Islam has made illegal.

Second, she also could fight back and run towards indecency and immorality which is what happened in the western societies. Third, she could also become poor, weak, and homeless if she could not find a job to support herself.

Islam should have a solution for such problems and emotional needs, and that is temporary marriage which she could benefit to the time she finds a qualified permanent husband. Of course, she can refuse to marry either way, and agree to a life of piety and loneliness away from any marriage, then that’s no problem! The problem occurs when the matter becomes one of the two: whether she would fall into indecency as what happened in the western societies, or whether she would preserve her chastity from sin through temporary marriage, based on the rule of Almighty God and His Messenger (S).

6)According to the Islamic teaching, although the permanent marriage of a Muslim man with a woman from the People of the Book is not forbidden, but it is discouraged (Makrooh). Because permanent marriage is a plan for the whole lifetime while there is no guarantee that such woman will change her belief in future. Islam is not a custom but is a complete way of life. Such marriage could not be a successful marriage if the opposition in beliefs and practices wants to continue for the whole lifetime.

In contrary, temporary marriage is a plan which expires after its period, and by that time, it would be apparent if the non-Muslim woman is really interested in the teaching of Islam, and whether she is a suitable match for the whole lifetime.

7)A nice aspect of temporary marriage is that the couple can extend the period of their contract or even can convert the temporary marriage into a permanent marriage if they find that they both wish to live with each other permanently. They can do this only after the expiration of the first contract, or else the man can wave the rest of time period to his wife, so as to finish the temporary marriage earlier, and he should give her the dower (if it has not been paid yet), and then start a new contract with her with another specified period with a new dower. When the woman remarries the same man, she has no waiting period.

This latter method of renewing the contract is established by a tradition related from Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as). He was asked about a man who married a woman for a period of one month, but then found that a love for her was developing in his heart. Before the period expires, could he renew the contract and increase the time period and dowry? The Imam answered that such a course of action was not permissible so long as the first contract remained in effect.

Therefore: "He must return to her the remainder of the days (of the contract) and then set up a new contract.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p478). This way guarantees that woman has free choice without any pressure or temptation to decide if she would like to renew the marriage after she has fully received the dower of the previous marriage contract and after the previous marriage has ended.

In any way, it is necessary that the contract be repeated all over again, with specifying dowry (Mahr; Sidaq), new permission of the father of virgin girl (if the case), and also the marriage sentences (‘Aqd) need to be spoken literally again. The acceptance in heart is not enough, and some specific words should be uttered. One of the requirements of any kind of marriage is verbal offer and equal acceptance by the other party or their authorized representatives.

8)Temporary marriage is not like polygamy which should be rare. It can be widely applied in an ideal Islamic society. Temporary marriage will result in less divorce rate, less rate of the youth committing unlawful sex, less eye-contact sins and so on.

There are many more advantages for this Sunnah of the Prophet (S), but here we are limited by space. Tawfiq al-Fukaiki in his book "The Mut’a and its effect/benefit on society", in Arabic, discusses some of the would-be benefits.

However, we emphasize that the allowance of temporary marriage should not cause the importance of the institution of permanent marriage and family to be overlooked. All efforts should be made to promote permanent marriage, to eliminate the barriers and problems in its way.

Therefore, temporary marriage, in general, should be looked upon as a secondary measure to protect both society and the individuals from the effects which otherwise would rise. It is not very difficult to see these problems both in the West and in the "Islamic”countries.

Temporary Marriage in Islam Part 8: Some Frequently Asked Questions on Mut’a

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

After reading the earlier parts of this discussion, some people corresponded with me asked me some hypothetical questions, and also some good questions. I present their questions in the following format.

Q1: Can Someone Contract Mut’a Marriage for 1 hour?

I would say theoretically yes! Much in the same way that it is possible for some one to marry a woman permanently and then divorce her in one hour or even less. Logically, since the possibility of this action does not invalidate the regular marriage, therefore, it should not be applied in the case of Mut’a either!

Q2: What could be the difference between temporary marriage and prostitution?

In the previous sections, we explained the difference between the Mut’a and the long-term marriage (conventional), and one can see that there is not much differences between them. Also as I mentioned, one may marry permanently and then divorces his wife after one day. So what will be the difference?

Moreover, Allah (SWT) did not consider it prostitution when He revealed the verse, but you do!? All Muslims agree that the Prophet (S) has legislated Mut’a at some point, and we as Muslims believe that the Prophet does not speak from his own desires (La Yantiqu Anil Hawa), so God has permitted it at some point of time. This very fact differentiates between temporary marriage and adultery, because God and His Prophet do not legitimize adultery. No prophet of God ever did that.

A simple answer for your question is that one is legal and the other one is illegal. Let me give you an example:

Suppose a foreigner who may be very experienced in driving car back home, when going to another country he may need to apply for a driver license to be able to drive. Now if he drives without driver license, then what is the difference between him and a person who drives with license but may not be as experienced as the former? The answer simply is that the act of the former is illegal while the latter is legal.

The partners may have sex in the three cases of prostitution, temporary marriage, and permanent marriage. Qur’an declares the first one illegal but has made the latter two legal. The other difference, of course, is that the prostitute has another contract one hour later, but in both temporary and permanent marriage it is the duty of woman to wait for a couple of months before entering another contract.

As I mentioned according to all of the Shi’a scholars the "Iddah”for the Mut’a is two menstrual cycles (or at least 45 days if the woman is of menstruating age but for some reason does not menstruate). This would provide less than 8 customers a year for a prostitute!!!

I think any prostitution agency would go bankrupt in the first year if it wants to follow the regulations of Mut’a. And there are many more differences between prostitution and temporary marriage. May Allah guide those who unknowingly ridicule His religion and His Prophet.

Q3: Would someone give the hand of his own daughter in temporary marriage?

I would say yes! Other than because they already do in a normal marriage, there are good reasons to do that in temporary marriage. Let’s say a father has a daughter who if not married will commit the sin of fornication, but no one has come forward to ask her hand in long term marriage - whatever the reasons maybe.

Would he give her to some known pious person who ask in temporary (if it is proved to be the Sunnah of the Prophet), or would he risk her committing fornication. I am sure many can think of other circumstances. This does not even address the issue from the man’s perspective - students in foreign countries who do not wish to marry permanently from People of the Book (Ahlul Kitab); the possibility of turning the foreign wife to a Muslim and Da’wa (call to Islam) to her family, etc. Do you think "Christian”parents mind? I think not!

Even about Muslim countries I should say: Although Islam intends to revolve the culture of people, as a result of tendencies and ignorance in many countries dominated by Muslims, the culture affected the Islamic teachings, while it is supposed to be the other way around. One should be able to discriminate between the true teachings of a divine religion like Islam, and a culture.

About marriage in general, many Muslim families still have major "traditional”and cultural problems in marrying their daughters, for all kinds of seemingly stupid reasons. Yet, we do not blame the religion for such old tribal mentality and the shortcomings of the followers of Islam.

Such feelings are all as a result of our cruel cultural traditions and not the true sense of normal feeling and pure instinct. Is trying to safeguard the boys and girls by putting laws to a relationship of pleasure a corruption? What is the standard with which we determine what is corruption and what is not? Shouldn’t we only depend on the proven legal Islamic ruling? If that is the case, then we have already proven that temporary marriage is authorized and should not be prevented.

My feeling is that the average Muslims today are more tolerant of friends and family whom they know or have heard that they have committed fornication; but less tolerant on accepting that the idea of Temporary Marriage could solve many social problems and prevent the majority of adultery in many communities, if it were allowed and promoted as it was the case before the rule of Umar.

Q4: Does any brother accept that her sister contracts Mut’a marriage?

This question is fairly similar to the previous one. Is the standard what brother accepts or rejects? Isn’t it first satisfaction of Almighty God? Or may be the religion of God should submit to the desires of brother and his jealousy.

Also why would a brother in many cases allow himself to do things which he prevents his sister from doing? Since when did our desires become the standards of what is wrong?

Sex is a natural desire that Allah created within the human nature. What difference does it make if a husband had pleasure with someone’s sister in a temporary or a permanent marriage that is followed with a fast divorce? By such standard, permanent marriage is even more wicked because it is having continuous pleasure with the sister.

Why do we suppose that the husband is having pleasure and the wife is not? Why don’t we accept that the right of pleasure is for both of them, as it is in reality? Why don’t we accept that temporary marriage is not just a physical relationship, but it involves love, emotions, and sensational feelings even if it is for one month?

I guess what we should really avoid is to distort Islam based on the darkness of our complications and our unjust traditional problems.

Q5: Why can’t we use the permanent marriage for the purpose of familiarization between husband and wife?

Permanent marriage can not be used for familiarization period because:

1. After the contract of permanent marriage woman can not divorce her husband if she finds that her man is not so great! Thus in the case that man likes his wife, but his wife does not like him very much, the divorce will not happen. In other words, the proposal of using the first few months of permanent marriage as familiarization) is only good for men!!! In contrary, temporary marriage will end after its period, and BOTH man and woman can decide again (to convert it to a permanent one or not).

However, as I mentioned before, under some circumstances, a Muslim scholar/Judge can divorce her, but this would be a risky way for woman since the Judge’s decision might be different than her wishes and certainly a period of familiarization does not worth for all these headaches.

2. In permanent marriage contract, one can not make the condition that marriage is to be unconsummated. In other words, sex is an indispensable part of permanent marriage. Then how can a woman enter into permanent marriage contract for familiarization only? On the other hand, such necessities do not exist in temporary marriage.

3. Although one can divorce her permanent wife, this is considered the most hateful permitted act in Islam. The reason is that the couple have some moral obligations/expectations that they intend to live together for good. If a man divorces his wife after a couple of month being with her and after removing her virginity, by saying that he did not like her too much in this period of familiarization(!!) then it will be a very bitter experience for that Muslim woman. Remember if a man does this shameful act, no body can punish him because he has just used his divorce right. But this action is morally detestable. This in fact shows that permanent marriage is not a good choice for familiarization period. Remember that your proposal should be practical, and not imaginary based on the ideal case where the unfamiliar couple have full trust to each other before the marriage.

In contrary, Temporary marriage is risk free. First of all, both man and woman are aware that they will separate after the specified period and so there will be no surprises. Non of them has any moral obligation to extend the marriage beyond that period nor do s/he has any such expectation from the other side. Also, as mentioned, they can set a condition that marriage is not to be consummated.

Q6: If the husband leaves the town after the expiration of Mut’a marriage, is it incumbent upon him to later inquire whether the union was fruitful, and take the custody of his child?

When a man goes to a journey and temporarily marries, it is incumbent upon him to provide some information to that woman about his original place and how he can be reached, so that in the case of pregnancy, the father is informed, and he should provide all the financial means for his child. This goes for permanent marriage too. If a man divorces his wife, and immediately leaves the town for another place, it is incumbent upon him to provide information to his ex-wife as how he can be reached in the case of pregnancy. In both cases, the child is the legal heir of his father and his mother.

Q7: Can a man engage in temporary marriage even if he already has four temporary/permanent wives?

Yes. The case of the temporarily married girl in this regard (as well as other issues such as waiting period) is similar to the case of the bondwomen in Islam. All Muslims do agree that one can marry an unlimited number of slave-girls. Islam did not limit it as it did with the permanent marriage.

The reason that Islam strictly limited the number of permanent wives into four, is that in permanent marriage there are obligations which do not exist in the other types of marriage, and these obligations can not be fulfilled if one goes more than four permanent marriages. For instance, the permanent couples are necessary to be sexually active, and man should sleep with his wife once each four nights; so how can he go further than four permanent wives?

Also necessity of support of wife financially is no easy! These obligations do not apply to temporary marriage, and thus one may go further than that, yet it is not recommended at all. As I quoted some traditions earlier, it is also discouraged for a person who has permanent wife available, to engage in temporary marriage (even one) because it may cause complications for his family.

Q8: Is there any witness required for Mut’a, or the persons can say the sentences of marriage alone?

The above question has the same answer for both permanent marriage and temporary marriage. In both cases, religiously speaking, there is no witness necessary. They themselves can pronounce the sentences of marriage. However if the girl is virgin, then the boy needs the permission of her guardian beforehand. But her guardian does not have to be present as witness when they are pronouncing the marriage sentences.

Please note that I am only talking about the religious law. However, if the couple want to register their marriage by the secular government (which is not religiously necessary), they may have to do many other things, including the witness (if the secular government requires).

However those who choose to temporarily marry in western countries, do not need to register since they know they will separate from each other soon. This is a temporary relation only, without many legal responsibilities that a permanent marriage bears (like the necessity financial support, inheritance and so on). In the view of a western government, such relationship is nothing worse than boyfriend-girlfriend relationship which is commonly practiced in the West without any barrier. However, religiously speaking, the couple who would like to temporarily marry, are required to satisfy all the religious obligations when entering such contract and when separating from each other.

Also, for the same reason, in the western countries, there is no need for witness because no body cares about the relation of a boy and a girl. However in Muslim countries where people may accuse the boy and the girl of committing adultery, it might be necessary to have some witnesses just for the protection of the couple. But this is not a condition for the validation of marriage.

Also in the case of temporary marriage, the couple do not have to announce the marriage publicly, specially when the public opinion is not in favor of Mut’a. Public announcement is not necessary for the permanent marriage either, though it is encouraged.

Q9: The sentences of Mut’a as I have seen, are in Arabic, is it necessary to say them in Arabic?

Again, the above question has the same answer for both permanent marriage and temporary marriage. Scholars do not have the same idea as to whether the marriage sentences (for both types) are necessary to be in Arabic or not. The majority of scholars require it to be in Arabic. Others state that it should be in Arabic if one of them knows Arabic, otherwise they can pronounce its equivalent in their mother language. Please note that the marriage sentences are very short. So learning its Arabic equivalent is not so difficult. Also it is not necessary that both boy and girl know it. If the boy knows it, it is enough. The girl can authorize the boy to pronounce the marriage sentence in her behalf, much the same as a third party usually does. In the case that neither boy nor girl know the Arabic sentences of marriage, and if there exists a third party who will do it in Arabic, they can authorize him to pronounce it on their behalves.

Q10: In your opinion (which I do not consider as a Fatwa) how is it to follow some of the things that one feels logical in Shi’a Fiqh while keeping his Sunni faith? Is it Haraam?

My personal answer is that you can. In fact, I know some Sunni brothers who believe that although they know more about the specific school that they have been raised with, they do not bound themselves to that specific school. If some thing is proven to us by Qur’an and authentic Hadith, then they follow it. For instance, I personally know a few of knowledgeable Hanafi friends who believe they can join Duhr and Asr prayer like what the followers of Ahlul-Bayt do.

When I asked them why, they said we found in Sahih al-Bukhari some traditions which state that the Messenger of Allah (S) joint Duhr and Asr prayer while he was not in travel and while he did not have any emergency. So since there exists at least one Islamic school which allows joining the prayers (referring to Shi’a Imamiyyah), and at the same time there exists authentic traditions in support of it, then we feel free to do that even though we are raised as Hanafi.

Below I have included the Fatwa of Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot, the head of al-Azhar University which clearly removes the barrier between the Sunni and the Shi’a, and allows the Sunnis to follow the Fatwa of any of them. I just give a part of his Fatwa here:

Head Office of al-Azhar University:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful
Text of the Verdict (Fatwa) Issued by His Excellency

Shaikh al-Akbar Mahmood Shaltoot,

Head of the Al-Azhar University on Permissibility of Following "Al-Shi’a Al-Imamiyyah”School of Thought

His Excellency was asked:

Some believe that, for a Muslim to have religiously correct worship and dealing, it is necessary to follow one of the four known schools of thought, whereas, "al-Shi’a al-Imamiyyah”school of thought is not one of them nor "al-Shi’a al-Zaidiyah.”Do your Excellency agree with this opinion, and prohibit following "al-Shi’a al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah”school of thought, for example?

His Excellency replied:

1) Islam does not require a Muslim to follow a particular madh’hab (school of thought). Rather, we say: every Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following such madhahib (schools of thought) can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime on him for doing so.

2) The Ja’fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shi’a al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah”(i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi’ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.

Muslims must know this, and ought to refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school of thought, since the religion of Allah and His Divine Law (Shari’a) was never restricted to a particular school of thought. Their jurists (Mujtahidoon) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the "non-Mujtahid”to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in worship (Ibaadat) or transactions (Mu’aamilaat).

Signed,

Mahmood Shaltoot.

The above Fatwa was announced on July 6, 1959 from the Head of al-Azhar University, and was subsequently published in many publications in the middle east which include, but are not limited to:

1. Al-Sha’ab newspaper (Egypt), issue of July 7, 1959.

2. Al-Kifah newspaper (Lebanon), issue of July 8, 1959.

Debate on the Legitimacy of Mut’a

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The following piece is adopted from the book "Temporary Marriage in Islamic Law,” by Abul Qasim Gourji, and is presented with some modifications.

Introduction

The word Mut’a was more commonly used than other terms for temporary marriage both during the lifetime of the Prophet and afterwards. Both its proponents and opponents preferred this word and its derivatives. In books on jurisprudence the terms Mut’a, al-Nikah al-Munqati’ (discontinued marriage), and al-Nikah al-Muwaqqat (temporary marriage), Istimta’ (having pleasure), and the related word of tamattu’ (pleasure) are all employed.

The scholars both Sunni and Shi’a, agree that Mut’a was permitted at the beginning of Islam. However, they disagree as to the reasons it was permitted.

The Shi’a View

In the chapter titled "Women", after listing those women to whom marriage is forbidden, the Qur’an states as follows:

"Lawful for you is what is beyond all that, that you may seek, using your wealth, in wedlock and not in license. So those of them whom you enjoy, give them their appointed wages; it is no fault in you in mutually agreeing after fulfillment (of the wage). God is All-Knowing, All-Wise”(4:24).

All Shi’a scholars and many Sunni scholars hold that this verse - especially the words: "Such woman as you enjoy (Istamta’tum)”- refers to the permissibility of Mut’a. The Shi’a present several arguments to prove this point. (See Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p248-253; Jawahir, v5, p163).

This verse was revealed towards the beginning of the Prophet’s stay in Medina. By the revelation of this verse, the temporary marriage became a legal custom in Medina and was looked upon as one kind of marriage and was referred to by the term Istimta’a, the same word employed in the Qur’anic verse - even though the literal meaning of the word is "to seek benefit”or "to take enjoyment".

Hence the meaning of the Qur’anic verse must be understood in terms of the conventional usage of the time, for as is well-known in the science of Qur’anic commentary and Islamic jurisprudence, the Qur’an follows the conventional usage of the people in all edicts and legal prescriptions. If someone wants to understand a word in the Qur’an in other than the conventional meaning of the time, he must supply a strong reason for doing so.

Moreover if one looks up the traditions of the chapter of temporary marriage in the authentic Sunni collections such as Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, one can see that the messenger of Allah and his companions exactly used the word Istimta’a when referring to this contract, which is exactly the same word as what Qur’an employed.

The context of the verse also indicates that it is referring to the temporary marriage. In the previous verse, i.e. 4:23, the Qur’an enumerates the women who are forbidden to men. These are divided into seven kinds stemming from blood relationship and seven more stemming from other causes: "Forbidden to you are your mothers and daughters...".

The next verse adds a fifteenth category of women forbidden to men: "And married women, save what your right hands own.”It continues with the words quoted above: "Lawful for you is what is beyond all that.”In other words, any woman not belonging to one of the fifteen categories is permitted, whether by marriage or ownership.

Next the verse states: "that you may seek, using your wealth, in wedlock and not in license.”Grammatically, this clause is in apposition to "what is beyond all that.”It explains the legitimate mode of seeking sexual relationships with women, whether as the result of marriage or the purchase of slaves.

The next part of this same verse states as follows: "So those of them whom you enjoy, give them their appointed wages.”The word "so”(fa) shows that this part of the verse is either part of the previous subject matter, or an example of it; in other words, its relation to the previous section is either that of the part which is completing the whole, or the particular example to the universal principle.

And since the previous section deals with the different kinds of legitimate sexual relationships, either by marriage or the purchase of slaves, we can conclude that this section of the verse is the exposition of a further kinds of marriage, not mentioned previously; a kind which also requires that the man pay the wages of his wife.

Many sayings have been related from the Companions of the Prophet and those who followed them (al-Tabi’een) confirming the Shi’a view that verse 24 of this chapter concerns Mut’a. Several of the companions, including Ibn-Abbas, one of the highly respected companions of the Prophet, Ibn Masud, one of the first to accept Islam, and Ubayy Ibn Ka’ab, one of the scribes of the revelation, and many others used to read the verse with three more words resulting in the sentence of the form: "So those of them whom you enjoy to an appointed time (Ila Ajal Musamma).”This clearly indicates that the verse refers to Mut’a.

In Majma’ al-Bayan, Abu ‘Ali al-Fadl Ibn al-Hasan al-Tabarsi (d. 548/1153), one of the Shi’a commentator of the Qur’an summarizes the Shi’a arguments:

the word ‘enjoy’ in this verse refers to the marriage of Mut’a, i.e., a marriage for a specified dower and a determined time period. This opinion has been related from Ibn Abbas and many of the ‘followers’ of the Companions such as Isma’il Ibn Abdurrahman al-Suddy (d. 127/744-45) and Sa’id Ibn Jubair al-Asadi (95/713-14).

In fact, this clearly must be the case, for although the words Istimta’a and Mut’a have the literal meaning of ‘enjoyment’, in Shari’ah (divine law) they refer to the contract of temporary marriage, especially when they are followed by the word ‘women’. Hence the meaning of the verse is: ‘Whenever you draw up a contract of Mut’a with a woman, you must pay her wages.’

Reference: Majma’ al-Bayan, by Abu ‘Ali al-Tabarsi, v3, p32

The Sunni View

As was indicated above, the Sunnis agree that at the beginning of Islam Mut’a was permitted. For example, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 606/1209), the famous Sunni theologian, writes in his Commentary on the Qur’an that Mut’a was at first permitted. The Prophet made a lesser pilgrimage (Umrah) to Mecca, and the women of Mecca made themselves up especially for the occasion. Some of the Companions complained about the long separation from their wives, and the Prophet replied: "Then go and enjoy (Istamta’a) these women.”(Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p286)

Those Sunnis who hold that the Qur’anic verse mentioned above (4:23) does indeed refer to the permissibility of Mut’a also maintain that the verse was subsequently abrogated (Naskh) by other Qur’anic verses. They offer three arguments to prove their point: other Qur’anic verses, the sermon of Umar banning Mut’a, and the Hadith transmitted by some Companions. The Shi’a, in turn, reject each of the arguments:

Debate On The Qur’anic Verse Of Mut’a

Some Sunnis argue that sexual intercourse is forbidden except with one’s wife or a slave by reason of the verse:

"Prosperous are the believers ... who guard their private parts save from their wives and what their right hands own.”(Qur’an 23:14).

According to the Prophet’s wife Aisha and others: ‘Mut’a is forbidden and abrogated in the Qur’an where God says: "who guard their private parts..."

(al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, by al-Qurtubi, v5, p130).

The Sunni argument continues by pointing out that without question a woman enjoyed through Mut’a is not a slave. Nor is she a wife, for several reasons: if she were a wife, she and her husband would inherit from each other, since God says:

"And for you a half of what your wives leave...”(Qur’an 4:12).

But everyone agrees that Mut’a does not involve inheritance. If she were a wife, the child would belong to the husband, since according to the Prophet: "The child belongs to the bed.”But again this is not the case. And finally, if she were a wife, it would be necessary for her to maintain the waiting period, since this is commanded by God (2:234); but this also is not the case.

We have already seen that some of these arguments, taken from Fakhr al-Razi’s Commentary, do not in fact apply to Mut’a as the Shi’a understand it. It is the Ijma’ of the Shi’a scholars that the child born of Mut’a belongs to the husband and that the woman is obliged to observe the waiting period after the expiration date of the marriage. However, it will be useful to see how the Shi’a answer each of the above Sunni claims:

As for the ‘abrogation’ of the verse concerning Mut’a, historical considerations show that this can not be the case. The verse mentioned as abrogating Mut’a was revealed in Mecca before the migration, while the verse establishing Mut’a was revealed after the Prophet had emigrated to Medina. But a verse which abrogates another verse must have been revealed after it, not before it.

It is also well-known that the Prophet allowed the companions to practice Mut’a in Medina, and if Mut’a had already been illegalized in Mecca (before Hijra) by Qur’an, then the Prophet would not have allowed his companions to practice it after the migration. (Tafsir al-Mizan, by al-Tabatabai, v3, p132).

As for the Sunni claim that a wife by Mut’a is not a legitimate wife because she does not fulfill the religious requirements for being a ‘wife’, this also is false. In the question of inheritance, the Qur’anic verse is a general one, and there is no reason to suppose that it may not have certain exceptions. In fact, the specific requirements of Mut’a as established by the Hadith literature show that Mut’a is an exception. Nor is it the only exception, since a non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim, nor can a murderer inherit from his victim.

Also if a man is sick and marries a woman, but dies due to that sickness before consummating the marriage, the woman will not inherit from his husband. Thus being husband and wife (even in the permanent marriage) does not always necessitate the inheritance. Qur’an usually provides the general rules and he was the Messenger of Allah who clarified the exceptions as well as the conditions for applying the rule.

In short, inheritance pertains to permanent marriage, but even in permanent marriage it has certain exceptions, so that the verse establishing it cannot be interpreted as nullifying the validity of Mut’a. Also inheritance is possible in the temporary marriage as long as it is made condition at the time of contract. (See Asl al-Shi’a wa Usuliha, by Kashif al-Ghita’, p116; al-Bayan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, by al-Khoei, p219)

In the question of the child, there is no reason to claim that it is illegitimate. In Mut’a the "bed”is legitimate, so is the offspring. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p277)

The Imam Ja’far was asked: "If the wife becomes pregnant as a result of Mut’a, to whom does the child belong?”He replied: "To the father,”i.e., the child is legitimate. (Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p488)

In a similar manner numerous traditions exist to prove that a wife by Mut’a must observe the waiting period of two months. Some of such traditions are even documented in the Sunni sources. For example Fakhr al-Razi himself quotes a relevant saying from Ibn Abbas that:

Ibn Abbas was asked: "Is Mut’a fornication or marriage?”He answered: ‘Neither the one nor the other.’ The questioner then asked: "Well then, what is it?”Ibn Abbas replied: "It is Mut’a’, just as God has said.”The questioner continued: "Is there a waiting period in Mut’a?”He replied: "Yes, a menstrual period.”He was also asked: "Do the husband and wife inherit from each other?”He answered: "No."

Reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p286

Certain Sunnis also argue that Mut’a cannot be considered a legitimate form of sexual union because it excludes such things as inheritance, divorce, sworn allegation, forswearing, and Bihar. Since these necessary concomitants of marriage do not apply to Mut’a, it cannot be considered marriage, so the woman cannot be considered a legitimate wife.

If she is neither a wife nor property, sexual intercourse with her is illegitimate: "Prosperous are the believers, who... guard their private parts, save from their wives and what their right hands own. . .; but whosoever seeks after more than that, those are the transgressors”(23:1-7). Hence, people who engage in Mut’a transgress God’s law.

A typical Shi’a answer to this argument runs as follows: First, the Qur’anic verse is a general statement, and there is no reason why its specific applications may not be clarified by other verses and the traditions. Second, it is not true that the above things are concomitants of marriage: there is no inheritance in the case of a non-Muslim wife, a murderer, or a slave-girl.

A legitimate sexual relationship may be dissolved without divorce in the case of a wife who is the subject of a sworn allegation, a spouse who leaves Islam, or a slave-girl who is sold. Sworn allegation, forswearing, and Bihar are all concomitants of permanent marriage, not of legitimate sexual relationships in general (i.e., they do not apply to sexual relationships with a slave).

Even if we suppose that these things do in fact pertain to legitimate sexual relationships, then it will be necessary to specify that there are certain exceptions. This is the only way we will be able to combine the Qur’anic verses and the traditions which show that these pertain to legitimate sexual relationships with those traditions which demonstrate that they do not pertain to Mut’a. (Jawahir, v5, p163).

Debate Over The Sermon Of Umar

In a famous sermons the second caliph Umar banned Mut’a with the following words: "Two Mut’a were practiced during the time of the Prophet: Mut’a of women and Mut’a of Hajj, but I forbid both of them and will punish anyone who practices either."

References:

• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, commentary of verse 4:24

• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p52

Al-Razi summarizes the Sunni interpretation of Umar’s words by saying that they were pronounced in a gathering of Companions and no one protested. Therefore, the situation must have been as follows: either

1. everyone knew that Mut’a was forbidden, so they remained silent; or

2. they all knew that it was permitted, yet they remained silent out of negligence and in order to placate Umar; or

3. they did not know whether it was forbidden or permitted, so they remained silent since the matter had just then been clarified for them, so they had no reason to protest.

Reference: al-Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p287

Al-Razi continues by saying that the first possibility is what he is trying to prove. If we maintain the second possibility, then we must call Umar and the companions who were with him unbelievers. For they knew that the Qur’an and the Prophet had permitted Mut’a, yet Umar went ahead and banned it without the Qur’anic verse permitting it having been abrogated. This is unbelief (Kufr); and those who knew Umar was wrong without protesting shared in his unbelief. But such a supposition requires that we call Islam a religion of unbelief, which is absurd.

The third possibility that Umar’s listeners had not known whether Mut’a was permitted or forbidden is also absurd. For, if we suppose that Mut’a was permitted, then people would need to have knowledge of that fact in their everyday lives, just as they need to have knowledge about the permissibility of marriage. So the legal situation of Mut’a must have been known, just as everyone knew about marriage.

Al-Razi concludes that as soon as we see that the second and third possibilities are in absurd, then we know for certain that the companions remained silent only because they all knew that Mut’a had already been abrogated.

The Shi’a answer Fakhr al-Razi’s arguments as follows: Umar’s sermon demonstrates that during the lifetime of the Prophet Mut’a was permitted. The reason Umar attributed the banning to himself is that he wanted to show that he was expressing his own view. If the Prophet himself had prohibited Mut’a, or if its permissibility pertained only to a specific period in time, then Umar would have attributed its prohibition to the Prophet, not to himself. (Majma’ al-Bayan, v3, p32).

Another saying concerning Mut’a is also attributed to Umar: "God permitted for His Prophet what He willed, and the Qur’an has been revealed in its entirety. So complete the Hajj and the Umrah as God has commanded you. But avoid marrying these women, and do not bring before me any man who has married a woman for a specified period, or I will stone him.”(Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p885, Tradition #145. For English version see: v2, chapter 442, Tradition #2801)

As for the fact that no one protested against Umar’s pronouncement cannot be considered proof that the Prophet himself had forbidden Mut’a. For Umar threatened the people with stoning, and considering his fabled severity and harsh temper, no one would have dared to speak against him

. If ‘Ali had been able to protest against Umar, he would not have remained silent. But because of the circumstances he had no choice but to have patience and to bide his time. The case of Mut’a is similar. For it was ‘Ali himself who said: "If Umar had not prohibited Mut’a, no one would commit fornication except the wretched!”(Sunni commentaries of Qur’an by Tabari, Tha’labi, Qurtubi, Fakhr al-Razi, Suyuti, Ibn Hayyan, Nishaboori, and Jassas. As for Shi’a, see al-Mut’a, by al-Dizfuli, pp 68-69).

The Shi’a scholars also point out that without question stoning as a punishment for having performed Mut’a could not be permissible, even if we were to accept that Mut’a is forbidden. For stoning can only be a punishment when a married man has committed fornication with a woman. Hence Umar had no right for laying down this edict. (Jawahir, v5 p161, al-Bayan, p229).

Fakhr al-Razi answers this line of reasoning by saying that perhaps Umar only mentioned stoning to intimidate his listeners and make them think more seriously about the consequences of temporary marriage. (al-Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p287).

Concerning Umar’s two sayings banning Mut’a, the Shi’a argue as follows: If his prohibition was based on "independent judgment”(Ijtihad), then it is baseless, since all scholars agree that independent judgment can never gain or contradict the saying of the Qur’an or the traditions. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, p182-183; Jawahir, v5, p161; al-Bayan, p229).

As for the Qur’anic basis of Mut’a, we have already seen that as far as the Shi’a and certain individual Sunnis are concerned, the Qur’an permits it in the chapter of Women. As for its basis in the prophetic Hadith, many traditions have been related in the standard Sunni collections which proves the permissibility of Mut’a of women at the time of the Prophet.

Concerning Umar’s "independent judgment", one of the contemporary Shi’a scholars argues as follows: Umar may have made his judgment completely on his own initiative and in direct contradiction to the words of the Prophet; or he may have based his judgment on a prohibition issued by the Prophet himself. If the first case is true, then Umar’s judgment is groundless, as noted above. And the second case cannot be true, since a number of the companions have given witness to the fact that Mut’a was permitted during the lifetime of the Prophet and up until the time of his demise. (al-Bayan, p229).

In general the Shi’a argue that if Umar’s prohibition had been based upon the words of the Prophet, then other Companions would have known about it. How is it possible for the Prophet to have forbidden Mut’a, yet, during the rest of his life, the period of Abu Bakr’s caliphate and the beginning of Umar’s caliphate, for prohibition to have remained unknown to everyone but Umar? Moreover, if his prohibition were based upon the words of the Prophet, why did he not attribute it to the Prophet instead of to himself?

Fakhr al-Razi answers that it might be that beside Umar, some other Companions had heard the prohibition from the Prophet, but they forgot it later. But when Umar mentioned the prohibition in a large gathering, everyone knew he was speaking the truth, so they remained silent.

The Shi’a reply to the argument of Fakhr al-Razi as follows: It is impossible to imagine that all of the Companions other than Umar had forgotten that Mut’a had been forbidden, considering its everyday importance. People need legitimate sexual relationships almost as much as they need food and water. They could not have forgotten when they continued practicing Mut’a after the demise of the Prophet till the time of Umar’s rule.

The Shi’a authors also point out that Umar banned the two kinds of Mut’a together, whereas everyone, Sunnis and Shi’a agree that the Mut’a of al-Hajj is permissible. Hence the Mut’a pertaining to women should also be permissible. (Majma’ al-Bayan, v3, p33).

Debate On The Controversial Reports

In the Sunni sources few traditions have been attributed the Prophet showing that he banned Mut’a during his lifetime. In most of the Sunni "sound”collections (Sihah), it is related from ‘Ali that he said: "Verily the Prophet of God banned the Mut’a of temporary marriage and the eating of the meat of domesticated asses on the day of Khaibar."

Ibn Sabra relates from his father the following: I came upon the Prophet of God who was leaning against the Ka’ba. He said: "O People! I commanded you to seek enjoyment (Istimta’a) from these women, but now God has forbidden that to you until the Day of Resurrection. So if you have a temporary wife, let her go her way; and do not take back anything of what you have given her."

Another Hadith is related from Salama Ibn al-Akwa’. Through his father he reported that the Prophet of God permitted Mut’a in the year of Autas (8/629) for three days; but then he prohibited it.

Shi’a do not consider these three traditions of any authority. To illustrate how they reject them, we can summarize the arguments of al-Khoei. The Hadith attributed to ‘Ali cannot be authentic, since all Muslims agree that Mut’a was permitted in the year Mecca was conquered. So how could ‘Ali have claimed that Mut’a was banned on the Day of Khaibar (close to two years before Mecca’s conquest)?!

Because of this obvious discrepancy, some of the great Sunni authorities have maintained that the words "on the day of Khaibar”probably refer only to the meat of domestic asses. But this is absurd, for two reasons: First, it is counter to the rules of Arabic grammar: if the phrase referred only to asses, the verb would have to be repeated.

Thus, in Arabic one says: "I honored Zaid and Amr on Friday", or one says: "I honored Zaid and I honored Amr on Friday", thus making it clear that "on Friday”refers only to Amr. If the adverbial phrase referred only to the meat, the text of the Hadith would have to read: "Verily the Prophet of God banned Mut’a, and he banned the eating of the meat of domesticated asses on the Day of Khaibar.”In short, since everyone agrees that Mut’a was permitted when Mecca was conquered, the Prophet cannot have banned it three years before that. Hence the Hadith is not authentic. (al-Bayan, pp 222-224).

The second reason that the "Day of Khaibar”cannot refer only to the meat of domesticated asses is that this clearly conflicts with Hadith related by al-Bukhari, Muslim, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (three of the authoritative Sunni collections). For their versions of ‘Ali’s Hadith is as follows: "The Prophet banned the Mut’a of marriage on the Day of Khaibar, as well as the meat of domesticated asses."

As for the tradition related by Ibn Sabra from his father, al-Khoei points out that although his Hadith has been related by many chains of authority, they ALL go back to Ibn Sabra himself, and thus the Hadith is of the type known as Wahid, i.e., it derives from a single companion. And a Qur’anic verse cannot be abrogated even by the most authentic kind of Hadith, and thus by far, it can not be abrogated by a relatively weak one.

Moreover the very content of the Hadith shows that it is not correct. It is hardly conceivable that the Prophet could have stood before the Ka’ba in front of a large group of Muslims and ban something until the Day of Resurrection, and that then only one person Sabra should have heard him or related his words.

Where were those Companions who recorded even the gestures and the glances of the Prophet? Certainly they should have joined Sabra in reporting the prohibition of Mut’a until the Day of Resurrection. And where was Umar himself? He certainly should have known about the prohibition so that it would not have been necessary to attribute the banning of Mut’a to himself.

Finally, there are discrepancies in the various versions of the Hadith of Sabra. In some versions the prohibition is said to have occurred in the year of the victory of Mecca (8/630), in others in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage (10/632). This discrepancy makes the Hadith even more untrustworthy.

Shahid al-Thani points out another problem concerning the Hadith of Ibn Sabra. He mentioned Ibn Sabra himself is the only source for his father’s words, but no one knows anything about him. He is not mentioned in any of the books on Hadith as a transmitter, nor has any other Hadith been related from him. For this reason al-Bukhari the most famous Sunni authority, and generally considered the most reliable for the Sunnis, left the Hadith of Ibn Sabra out of his collection. (Sharh al-Lum’a, v5, pp 264-282).

As for the Hadith of Salama Ibn al-Akwa, al-Khoei remarks that again it is a saying related from only one Companion (Wahid) and cannot abrogate a Qur’anic verse. In addition, if it is an authentic Hadith, it is strange that it remained unknown to such important Companions as Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masud, and Jabir Ibn Abdillah. How is it possible for the Hadith to be authentic, while Abu Bakr did not forbid Mut’a during the whole period of his caliphate and Umar only banned it towards the end of his own? (al-Bayan, pp 222-223).

There are many sayings of the Companions which indicate that Mut’a was permitted up until the time of Umar’s prohibition. Three of the most famous are those of ‘Ali, Ibn Abbas, and Imran Ibn al-Husayn. As we have already seen, ‘Ali said: ‘If Umar had not prohibited Mut’a, no one would commit fornication except the wretched.’ This is the most famous form of a saying reported in numerous sources and a number of different versions.

The above version is derived from Sunni works; a Shi’a version is related from the fifth Imam, al-Baqir: "If it were not for that (i.e., Mut’a) with which (Umar) Ibn al-Khattab preceded me, no one would commit fornication except the wretched."

The saying related from Ibn Abbas is reported by the tenth/sixteenth century Sunni scholar al-Suyuti in this form: "God have mercy on Umar! Mut’a was naught but a mercy from God, through which He showed mercy to Muhammad’s community. If Umar had not banned it, no one would need fornication except the wretched.”(al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, p141).

More Arguments On The Hadith

The Sunni argument for the prohibition of Mut’a based upon the Hadith can be summarized as follows: The reason that the scholars have differed concerning Mut’a is that it was permitted and then banned a number of times.

Ibn al-Arabi (d. 638/1240), the famous Sufi who wrote on the meaning of the Shari’ah, calls Mut’a one of the most remarkable edicts in Islamic law, since it was permitted at the beginning of Islam, then forbidden at the Battle of Khaibar, then permitted again at the war of Autas. Finally it was forbidden and remained forbidden. No other edict in Islam was changed a number of times with the exception of the Qibla (the direction of prayer), for that was abrogated twice before being finalized.

Al-Qurtubi reports that other authorities who have studied the traditions concerning Mut’a say that its edict was changed seven times. He refers to the traditions in six Sunni collections explaining how the situation of Mut’a was changed.

As for the Hadith of Sabra, which states that the Prophet permitted Mut’a at the Farewell Pilgrimage in the year 10/632, Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi acknowledges that this is not in keeping with the other Hadith. He explains that the Prophet permitted Mut’a at the conquest of Mecca, when the men complained of separation from their wives. They could not have complained of such separation during the Farewell Pilgrimage, since all of the wives were present, and the single men could have taken permanent wives in Mecca.

So the special situation that existed during the other journeys and battles was lacking. However, we can explain the situation as follows: Since the Prophet usually permitted Mut’a during journeys away from Medina, in this case also he permitted it; but then he banned it for the final time wanting all the Muslims to know about it, for all of them were present for the Farewell Pilgrimage. There is also the fact that the Meccans were in the habit of practicing Mut’a widely. Thus the Prophet banned Mut’a in Mecca so that they would understand that they could not continue in their former custom.

The Shi’a answer to the Sunni argument on the basis of Hadith can be summarized as follows: As has been mentioned already, if Mut’a was made forbidden in the last pilgrimage where according to al-Tahawi’s argument most of the Muslims were with the Prophet, then how can only Sabra have heard of the saying of the Prophet?! Moreover, the Hadith demonstrating that Mut’a is forbidden are in conflict with those that show it is permitted. They also conflict with Hadith that show that Mut’a continued to be permitted during the times of the Prophet, Abu Bakr, and Umar, up until the time that Umar banned it. The correct course of action is to prefer those Hadith which establish its permissibility, for a number of reasons:

• The Hadith indicating the permissibility of Mut’a outnumber those which show that it is banned.

• Everyone agrees that the, traditions indicating that Mut’a was permitted at certain times are authentic and have been transmitted in parallel, but this is not the case concerning those which indicate that it was banned. Hence one can speak of a consensus (Ijma’) in the sense that all Muslims at one time agreed that Mut’a was permitted, even though afterwards a disagreement arose. In order to choose the right course, we can not base ourselves upon opinion but must hold fast to that which we have certainty. Hence we must conclude that Mut’a is still permitted, as long as we do not have firm knowledge to the contrary.

• The traditions which point to the banning of Mut’a are themselves questionable. When we realize that one of the incontestable elements of Shi’a as established by the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt is the permissibility of Mut’a, then no Hadith related from ‘Ali stating that Mut’a is forbidden can be authentic. Someone who held without question that Mut’a is permissible would not relate a Hadith from the Prophet that it is forbidden. On many occasions ‘Ali censured Umar’s banning of Mut’a. His saying: ‘If Umar had not banned Mut’a, no one but the wretched would practice fornication’ is well-known, and no one has questioned its authenticity.

Reference: Jawahir, v5, pp 162-163.

Those who hold that Mut’a is forbidden have also claimed the consensus of the Community as one of their proofs. They say that after Umar banned Mut’a, all of the Prophet’s Companions went along with him with the exception of Ibn Abbas, and perhaps he might have changed his opinion towards the end of his life.

In answer to this claim, the Shi’a point out that ‘consensus’ was never established for the banning of Mut’a; and in any case, the very fact that the Shi’a Imams (the Household of the Prophet) who are the very pillars of Islam, have all agreed that Mut’a is permitted shows that there was in fact no consensus. Moreover, from the first the Shi’a have agreed on the permissibility of Mut’a, to such an extent that this view has always been singled out as one of the specific features of Shi’a. Given this fact, to claim consensus is meaningless.

In addition, as we have seen above, many of the Prophet’s outstanding Companions and their followers held that Mut’a was permitted. Finally, the claim that Ibn Abbas changed his view on Mut’a toward the end of his life has never been substantiated. Even if it were to be proven, one could only claim consensus if we were certain that no one was opposed to the view that Mut’a is forbidden; whereas we know that in fact the number of opponents was quite large. In short, the Shi’a conclude, there is no real evidence to show that Mut’a is not permitted; and when the Hadith are investigated, the conclusion is likely to be reached that not only is it permitted (Mubaah), it is even recommended (Mustahabb).

The Opinion Of The Four Sunni Schools Of Law

The four Sunni schools of law agree that temporary marriage is invalid. That which invalidates the contract is the stipulation of a time period. If such a marriage takes place, it must be annulled, and if it is consummated before the annulment takes place, the woman must be paid the "normal dowry".

The Shafi’i school adds that even if the time period stipulated by the contract is the life-time of the husband or the wife, the contract is still invalid, since the contract of marriage requires that its effects continue after death. That is why a spouse may give his or her spouse the ritual purification of the dead before burial (otherwise, the washer of the dead must be of the same sex as the corpse). A marriage contracted with a stipulation that it comes to an end when one of the spouses dies would mean that the effects of the marriage would end at death. So such a stipulation invalidates the contract.

The Hanafis add that if the time period stipulated is so long that as a rule the spouses could not remain alive until it comes to an end (e.g., if the man were to say: "I will marry you until the hour of Resurrection"), then we can no longer call the marriage "temporary". in effect this stipulation means forever.

Hence it is not considered as a stipulation of a time-period and the contract is sound. If the husband’s intention in contracting the marriage is to enjoy the woman’s company only for a period of time, but he does not make such a stipulation in the contract, the marriage is correct. In the same way, if a person should marry making it a condition of the contract that a divorce will take place after a certain period of time, the contract is correct but the condition is nullified, since such a condition can not limit the contract.

Reference: Fiqh Ala al-Madhahib al-Arba’a, v4, pp 90-94

In any case the four Sunni sects agree that the punishment for a person who enters into a temporary marriage is not the same as that of the fornication. In the latter case the punishment (Hadd) is 100 lashes for each party in the case of an unmarried woman, and stoning to death in the case of a married woman. But the punishment for Mut’a is defined as Ta’zeer, i.e., less than the full punishment for fornication, depending on circumstances and the opinion of the judge. The penalty for fornication is not specified by the Sunnis because certain doubts remain concerning the status of Mut’a as a result of the traditions of Ibn Abbas.

The Opinion Of The Shi’a School Of Law

The Shi’a have always considered Mut’a to be of special importance and have tried to keep it alive as an institution of Islamic society. The Shi’a law of Jurisprudence is often referred to as the "Ja’fari school of law", since in reality the sixth Imam, Ja’far al-Sadiq (as), had a golden opportunity of teaching during the clashes between the Umayad and the Abbasid.

During that short period when the tyrants of both sides were busy with each other, the Imam was teaching Jurisprudence and theology in classes with as much as 5000 students. Hence it is appropriate to quote a few of his many sayings concerning the Mut’a.

Imam Ja’far Sadiq (as) said: "Mut’a was approved by the text of the Qur’an and became part of the Sunnah of the Prophet.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p437).

Imam Ja’far considered the Qur’anic verse referred to above (4:24) the basis for Mut’a. He said: "The verse proves the permissibility of Mut’a.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p439).

Once Abu Hanifa, the founder of one of the four Sunni sects (who was a student of the Imam Ja’far before he starts his business), asked the Imam about Mut’a. He replied: "Which of the two Mut’a do you mean?”Abu Hanifa answered: "I have already asked you about the Mut’a of the Hajj. So tell me about the Mut’a of marriage.”The Imam said, "Glory be to God! Have you not read the Qur’an? ‘So those of them whom you enjoy, give to them their appointed wages’ (4:24).”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p437).

Someone asked Imam Ja’far (as): "Why is it that four witnesses are necessary (for proof to be established) in cases of adultery, but two are sufficient in the case of murder?”He replied: "God made Mut’a permissible for you, but He knew that you would not approve of it. So He made the witnesses to number four as a protection for you. If it were not for that, it would be brought against you (that you are committing fornication, whereas you are in fact practicing Mut’a). But seldom do four witnesses come together on a single matter.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p439).

The Imam Ja’far (as) considered Mut’a a divine mercy by means of which people were saved from the sin of fornication and delivered from God’s retribution. Concerning the Qur’anic verse: "Whatsoever mercy God opens to men, none can withhold (35:2),”the Imam said: "Mut’a is part of that mercy.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p439).

The Imam Ja’far said: "I do not like a man to leave this world without having married temporarily, even if only on one occasion.”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p444).

The Imam Ja’far said: "It is reprehensible in my eyes that a man dies while there yet remains a practice of the Messenger of God that he has not adopted.”He was asked: "And did the Messenger of God practice Mut’a ?”He replied: "Yes.”Then he recited the Qur’anic verse: "And when the Prophet confided to one of his wives a certain matter...(66:3-5)”(Wasa’il al-Shi’a, v14, p442).

Note how beautiful the Imam explains the reason why one should uphold the practice of Mut’a. The encouragement, promotion, and rewards for the Mut’a are not for the physical/sexual action, but are rather due to REVIVING the Sunnah of the Prophet (S) which has been forsaken by the majority of Muslims. If Umar would not have abolished this Sunnah of the Prophet, such reward would not have been attached to the Mut’a.

The Shi’a call Abu Ja’far Muhammad al-Tusi (d. 460/1068) the "Elder of the Denomination”(Shaikh al-Ta’ifa), since he was the first who organized a systematic methodology for demonstrative jurisprudence (al-Fiqh al-Istidlali). We can conclude this discussion with a summary of his views on Mut’a. He writes that the Shi’a reasons for considering Mut’a permissible are as follows:

• The Consensus of the Twelver Shi’ites.

• The words of the Qur’an:

"Marry such women as seen good to you! (Qur’an 4:3),”

since Mut’a is a kind of marriage, but one which men desire to perform by expending their property.

• The words of the Qur’an:

"So those of them whom you enjoy, give to them their appointed wages (Qur’an 4:24).”

The word Istimta’a (enjoy), unless otherwise qualified, signifies temporary marriage.

• Ibn Masud’s version of the Qur’an, which adds the words "to an appointed time”to the above verse.

• There is no disagreement over the fact that Mut’a was allowed at the beginning of Islam. So those who claim that the verse was abrogated must prove their assertion.

• The principle from which discussion must begin is that Mut’a is permitted. That it should be forbidden should be proven.

• The words of Umar concerning the two types of Mut’a. Here Umar tells us that at the time of the Prophet, Mut’a was permitted, i.e., that it was a part of the religion of Islam. Proof must be provided that it is no longer so.

Reference: al-Khilaf, v2, pp 179-180

After referring to the above reasons, al-Tusi answers the arguments of those who claim Mut’a is forbidden in much the same way that we have seen above.

References

(1) al-Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, Istanbul, 1307/1889-90

(2) al-Durr al-Manthoor, by Jalaluddin Suyuti, 1377/1957

(3) al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Abi Bakr al-Ansari al-Qurtubi (d. 671/1273), Cairo, 1967

(4) al-Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Published in Beirut

(5) Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, Saudi Arabia, 1980

(6) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Saudi Arabia

(7) al-Fiqh Ala al-Madhahib al-Arba’a,by Abd al Rahman al-Jaziri, Cairo 1969

(8) Wasa’il al-Shi’a, by Muhammad Ibn al-Hasan al-Hurr al-Amili, Tehran, 1385/1965-66

(9) Sharh al-Lum’a (al-Rawdat al-Bahiyya fi Sharh al-Lum’at al-Dimashqiyya), by al-Shahid al-Thani (Zayn al-Din Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali al-Jab-i al-Amili d. 965/1558), Beirut 1967.

(10) Jawahir al-Kalam, by Shaykh Muhammad Hasan (d. 1266/1850), Tehran, 1325/1907.

(11) al-Khilaf, by Abu jafar Ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi, Tehran 1372/1952-53

(12) Tafsir al-Mizan, by Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai (d. 1982), Beirut 1974.

(13) Majma’ al-Bayan, cited as al-Bayan, by Abu ‘Ali al-Fadl Ibn al-Hasan al-Tabarsi (d. 548/1153) Tehran, 1339/1960

(14) al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, by Abul Qasim al-Musawi al-Khoei, Najaf, 1375/1955-56

(15) al-Mut’a, by Murtada Ibn Muhammad Amin al-Dizfuli (1214-81/1800-64) Tehran, 1352/1973

(16) Temporary Marriage in Islam, by Abdullatif Berry, Arabic-English, Al-Zahra International Co.

(17) Fixed Term Marriage, by Muhammad Sharif, English, Islamic Seminary Publications.

(18) Temporary Marriage in Islamic Law, by Abul Qasim Gourji, rendered to English by Sachiko Murata.

Al-Taqiyya, Dissimulation Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Assalamu `Alaykum,

Today, I would like to present the concept of "al-Taqiyya”in the following exposition. This topic is as thorny as previous ones have been, and many people have experienced great difficulty in trying to understand it. I pray to Allah (SWT) that this discussion will help loosen some of the intellectual rust that has accumulated over the years in many peoples’ minds.

The interminable negative propaganda that people are bombarded with on a daily basis serves to nurture feelings of animosity and disbelief towards the Shi’a; additionally, it may promote the explicit denial of proven facts and truths. Nonetheless, you owe it to yourself to search for the truth; and, indeed, Allah (SWT) has commanded that you do.

As such, it is your prerogative to believe or reject everything that the Shi’a claim; but my plea is that the next time you hear a discussion about the Shi’a in your Mosque, or any place else, please remember my posts, and question the person who is discussing the topic. Only then, will you see my point, In Sha’ Allah (SWT).

I intend to demonstrate and prove that the concept of "al-Taqiyya”is an integral part of Islam, and that it is NOT a Shi’ite concoction.

As usual, the two perspectives, the Sunnis and the Shi’a, will be presented to maintain a level of fairness and integrity in the reporting of this topic.

Introduction

The word "al-Taqiyya”literally means: "Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.”A one-word translation would be "Dissimulation."

The above definition must be elaborated upon before any undertaking of this topic is to ensue. Although correct, the definition suffers from an apparent generalization, and lacks some ndamental details that should be construed:

First, the concealment of one’s beliefs does not necessitate an ABANDONMENT of these beliefs. The distinction between "concealment”and "abandonment”MUST be noted here.

Second, there are numerous exceptions to the above definition, and they MUST be judged according to the situation that one is placed in. As such, one should NOT make a narrow-minded generalization that encompasses all situations, thereby failing to fully absorb the spirit of the definition.

Third, the word "beliefs”and/or "convictions”does NOT necessarily mean "religious”beliefs and/or convictions.

With the above in mind, it becomes evident that a better, and more accurate definition of "al-Taqiyya”is "diplomacy.”The true spirit of "al- Taqiyya”is better embodied in the single word "diplomacy”because it encompasses a comprehensive spectrum of behaviors that serve to further the vested interests of all parties involved.

Al-Taqiyya According To The Sunnis

Some Sunnis assert that al-Taqiyya is an act of pure hypocrisy that serves to conceal the truth and reveal that which is the exact opposite (of the truth). Furthermore, according to those Sunnis, al-Taqiyya constitutes a lack of faith and trust in Allah (SWT) because the person who conceals his beliefs to spare himself from eminent danger is fearful of humans, when, in fact, he should be fearful of Allah (SWT) only. As such, this person is a coward.

Sunni Sources In Support Of Al-Taqiyya

The following exposition will Insha Allah demonstrate the existence of al-Taqiyya in the Qur’an, Hadith, the Prophet’s (S) custom, and the companions’ custom. As usual, Sunni books will be used to further the argument. This is in keeping with the commitment to reveal the truth by showing that the Sunnis reject the Shi’a’s arguments, while their own books are replete (full) with the same ideologies that the Shi’a uphold!

Although some Wahhabis staunchly argue their aforementioned statements, and aggressively defame the Shi’a and refute their doctrines, they have failed to explain the validity of their argument vis-a-vis the existence of these same doctrines in their own books, as has been demonstrated in all the past posts about the Shi’a.

Those who think that they are the true protectors of the custom of the Prophet (S) and the only guardians of the Islamic Faith, how can they explain their own rejection of that which they are supposed to protect? Rejecting al-Taqiyya is rejecting the Qur’an, as will be shown shortly.

Let’s Begin...

Reference 1

Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his book, "al-Durr al-Manthoor Fi al-Tafsir al- Ma’athoor,”narrates Ibn Abbas’, the most renowned and trusted narrator of tradition in the sight of the Sunnis, opinion regarding al-Taqiyya in the Qur’anic verse: "Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, (they) shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution ("tat-taqooh"), that ye may guard yourselves ("tooqatan") from them....(3:28)”that Ibn Abbas said:

"al-Taqiyya is with the tongue only; he who has been coerced into saying that which angers Allah (SWT), and his heart is comfortable (i.e., his TRUE faith has not been shaken.), then (saying that which he has been coerced to say) will not harm him (at all); (because) al- Taqiyya is with the tongue only, (not the heart)."

Note: The two words "tat-taqooh”and "tooqatan,”as mentioned in the Arabic Qur’an, are BOTH from the same root of "al-Taqiyya.”

Note Also: The "heart”as referred to above and in later occurrences refers to the center of faith in an individual’s existence. It is mentioned many times in the Qur’an.

Reference 2

Ibn Abbas also commented on the above verse, as narrated in Sunan al- Bayhaqi and Mustadrak al-Hakim, by saying:

"al-Taqiyya is the uttering of the tongue, while the heart is comfortable with faith."

Note: The meaning is that the tongue is permitted to utter anything in a time of need, as long as the heart is not affected; and one is still comfortable with faith.

Reference 3

Abu Bakr al-Razi in his book, "Ahkam al-Qur’an,”v2, p10, has explained the aforementioned verse "...except by way of precaution ("tat-taqooh"), that ye may guard yourselves ("tooqatan") from them....(3:28)”by affirming that al-Taqiyya should be used when one is afraid for life and/or limb. In addition, he has narrated that Qutadah said with regards to the above verse:

"It is permissible to speak words of unbelief when al-Taqiyya is mandatory."

Reference 4

It has been narrated by Abd al-Razak, Ibn Sa’d, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh, al-Bayhaqi in his book "al- Dala-il,”and it was corrected by al-Hakim in his book "al- Mustadrak”that:

"The nonbelievers arrested `Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra) and (tortured him until) he (ra) uttered foul words about the Prophet (S), and praised their gods (idols); and when they released him (ra), he (ra) went straight to the Prophet (S). The Prophet (S) said: "Is there something on your mind?”`Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra) said: "Bad (news)! They would not release me until I defamed you (S) and praised their gods!”The Prophet (S) said: "How do you find your heart to be?”`Ammar (ra) answered: "Comfortable with faith.”So the Prophet (S) said: "Then if they come back for you, then do the same thing all over again.”Allah (SWT) at that moment revealed the verse: "....except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith...(16:106)"

Note: The full verse that was quoted partially as part of the tradition above, is:

"Any one who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief, EXCEPT UNDER COMPULSION, his heart remaining firm in faith -- but such as open their breast to unbelief, -- on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Chastisement (16:106).”(Emphasis Mine)

Reference 5

It is narrated in Sunan al-Bayhaqi that Ibn Abbas explained the above verse "Any one who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief....(16:106)”by saying:

"The meaning that Allah (SWT) is conveying is that he who utters unbelief after having believed, shall deserve the Wrath of Allah (SWT) and a terrible punishment. However, those who have been coerced, and as such uttered with their tongues that which their hearts did not confirm to escape persecution, have nothing to fear; for Allah (SWT) holds His (SWT) servants responsible for that which their hearts have ratified."

Reference 6

Another explanation of the above verse is provided by Jalal al-Din al- Suyuti in his book, "al-Durr al-Manthoor Fi al- Tafsir al-Ma-athoor,”vol. 2, p178; he says:

"Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Munzir, and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated on the authority of Mujtahid (a man’s name) that this verse was revealed in relation to the following event: A group of people from Mecca accepted Islam and professed their belief; as a result, the companions in Medina wrote to them requesting that they emigrate to Medina; for if they don’t do so, they shall not be considered as those who are among the believers.

In compliance, the group left Mecca, but were soon ambushed by the nonbelievers (Quraish) before reaching their destination; they were coerced into disbelief, and they professed it. As a result, the verse

"...except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith (Qur’an 16:106)...”

was revealed."

Reference 7

Ibn Sa’d in his book, "al-Tabaqat al-Kubra,”narrates on the authority of Ibn Sirin that:

The Prophet (S) saw `Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra) crying, so he (S) wiped off his (ra) tears, and said: "The nonbelievers arrested you and immersed you in water until you said such and such (i.e., bad-mouthing the Prophet (S) and praising the pagan gods to escape persecution); if they come back, then say it again."

Reference 8

It is narrated in al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, v3, p61, that:

After the conquest of the city of Khaybar by the Muslims, the Prophet (S) was approached by Hajaj Ibn `Aalat and told: "O Prophet of Allah: I have in Mecca some excess wealth and some relatives, and I would like to have them back; am I excused if I bad-mouth you (to escape persecution)?”The Prophet (S) excused him and said:

"Say whatever you have to say."

Reference 9

It is narrated by al-Ghazzali in his book, "Ihya `Uloom al-Din,”that:

Safeguarding of a Muslim’s life is a mandatory obligation that should be observed; and that LYING is permissible when the shedding of a Muslim’s blood is at stake.

Reference 10

Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his book, "al-Ashbah Wa al-Naza’ir,”affirms that:

"it is acceptable (for a Muslim) to eat the meat of a dead animal at a time of great hunger (starvation to the extent that the stomach is devoid of all food); and to loosen a bite of food (for fear of choking to death) by alcohol; and to utter words of unbelief; and if one is living in an environment where evil and corruption are the pervasive norm, and permissible things (Halal) are the exception and a rarity, then one can utilize whatever is available to fulfill his needs."

Note: The reference to the consumption of a dead animal is meant to illustrate that even forbidden things become permissible in a time of need.

Reference 11

Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his book, "al-Durr al-Manthoor Fi al-Tafsir al- Ma’athoor,”v2, p176, narrates that:

Abd Ibn Hameed, on the authority of al-Hassan, said: "al-Taqiyya is permissible until the Day of Judgment."

Reference 12

Narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v7, p102, that Abu al-Darda’ said:

"(Verily) we smile for some people, while our hearts curse (those same people)."

Reference 13

Narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v7, p81, that the Prophet (S) said:

"O `Aisha, the worst of people in the sight of Allah (SWT) are those that are avoided by others due to their extreme impudence."

NOTE: The meaning here is that one is permitted to use diplomacy to get along with people. The above tradition was narrated when a person sought permission to see the Holy Prophet (S) and prior to his asking permission the Prophet (S) said that he was not a good man, but still I shall see him. The Prophet talked to the person with utmost respect, upon which Aisha inquired as to why did the Prophet (S) talk to the person with respect despite his character, upon which the above reply was rendered.

Reference 14

Narrated in Sahih Muslim (English version), Chapter 1077 v4, p1373, Tradition #6303:

Humaid b. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of ‘Uqba b. Abu Mu’ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).

The (Sunni) commentator of this volume of Sahih Muslim, Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, provides the following commentary:

Telling of a lie is a grave sin but a Muslim is permitted to tell a lie in some exceptional cases, and this permission is given especially on three occasions: in case of battle for bringing reconciliation amongst the hostile Muslims and for bringing reconciliation between the husband and the wife. On the analogy (Qiyas) of these three cases, the scholars of Hadith have pointed out some other exemptions:

for saving the life and honor of innocent person from the highhandedness of tyrants and oppressors if one finds no other way to save them.

Notice that neither the above tradition nor the commentary are concerned with dealing with non-Muslims only.

Please refer to Sahih Muslim Volume IV
Chapter 1077
Tradition no. 6303 p1373
English only - Abdul Hamid Siddiqui

Al-Taqiyya, Dissimulation Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Al-Taqiyya According To The Shi’a

The Shi’a did NOT innovate or concoct anything new, they simply followed the injunctions of Allah (SWT), as stated in the Qur’an, and the custom of the Seal of Prophethood, Muhammad (S). Nonetheless, one must also examine what the Shi’a themselves say about al-Taqiyya:

al-Shaykh Muhammad Ridha al-Mudhaffar in his book, "Aqa’id al-Imamiyah,”wrote that:

"al-Taqiyya should conform to specific rules vis-a-vis the situation wherein eminent danger is present; these rules, listed in many books of Fiqh (Jurisprudence), along with the severity of the danger determine the validity, or lack of, al-Taqiyya itself. It is not mandatory to practice it (al-Taqiyya) at all times; on the contrary, it is permissible, and sometimes necessary, to abandon it (al-Taqiyya) altogether; as in the case where revealing the truth will further the cause of the religion, and provide a direct service to Islam; and (when the revealing of the truth is such that it constitutes) a jihad (striving) for (Islam’s) sake; (verily,) in such a situation, wealth and life should be forsaken. Furthermore, al-Taqiyya is prohibited in instances wherein the killing of innocent people and the spread of corruption will result; and in cases wherein the marring of the religion will result, and/or a significant harm will befall the Muslims, either by leading them astray or corrupting and oppressing them.

Either way, al-Taqiyya, as the Shi’a uphold it, does not make of the Shi’a a secret cooperative that seeks to destroy and corrupt, as the enemies (of the Shi’a) wish to present them; (these critics launch their verbal attacks) without really heeding the subject (of al- Taqiyya); and (without even) laboring to understand our own opinion on the matter (of al-Taqiyya).

Nor does it (al-Taqiyya) mandate that the religion and its injunctions become a secret of secrets that cannot be disclosed to those who do not subscribe to its teachings. How so, when the books of the
Imamiyah (the Shi’a) that deal with the (subjects of) Fiqh, Kalam, and beliefs are in abundant supply, and have exceeded the limits (of publications) expected from any nation professing its beliefs."

Imam Khomeini in his book, "Islamic Government,”also presents his view on al-Taqiyya. He believes that al-Taqiyya is permitted only when one’s life is jeopardized. Whereas in cases wherein the religion of Allah (SWT), Islam, is in danger, it is not permitted even if it leads to one’s death:

The Imams, may peace be upon them, imposed on the jurisprudence very important ordinances and committed them to shouldering and preserving the trust. It is not right to resort to dissimulation on every issue, small and big. Dissimulation was legislated to preserve one’s life or others from damage on subsidiary issues of the laws. But if Islam in its entirety is in danger, then there is no place for dissimulation and for silence. What do you think a jurisprudent should do if they force him to legislate or innovate?... If dissimulation forces on us to jump on the sultan’s bandwagon then it should not be resorted to even if such refrainment leads to the death of the person concerned, unless his jumping on the bandwagon constitutes a real victory for Islam and the Muslims, as in the case of ‘Ali Ibn Yaqtin and Nasiruddin in al-Tusi, may Allah have mercy upon their souls.

In his book, "Shi’ite Islam”(translated into English by Sayyed Hussein Nasr), the Shi’i scholar Allama Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai defines Taqiyya as the situation where a person "hides his religion or certain of his religious practices in situations that would cause definite or probable danger as a result of the actions of those who are opposed to his religion or particular religious practices.”He goes on to define the nature of the danger:

The exact extent of danger which would make permissible the practice of Taqiyya has been debated among different Shi’a scholars. In our view point, the practice of Taqiyya is permitted if there is definite danger facing one’s own life or the life of one’s family, or the possibility of the loss of the honor and virtue of one’s wife or of other female members of the family, or the danger of the loss of one’s material belongings to such an extent as to cause complete destitution and prevent a man from being able to continue to support himself and his family.

Tabatabai cited two verses from the Qur’an in support of al-Taqiyya:

"...except for precaution and dissimulation that you may protect yourselves against them..."(Qur’an 3:28)

إِلَّا أَن

تَتَّقُوا

مِنْهُمْ

تُقَاةً

...

For the above verse, the great Sunni scholar, Mawdudi, has a commentary in support of Taqiyya. Notice that in the above verse, the words "tattaqu”and "toqat”have exactly the same root as Taqiyya.

The second verse is the following:

"Any one who becomes unbeliever after being believer, EXCLUDING the one who is under compulsion and force while his hurt is firm in faith, but the one go on in disbelief, Wrath of Allah is on to them and they will have a dreadful penalty,”(Qur’an 16:106)

مَن كَفَرَ بِاللَّـهِ مِن بَعْدِ إِيمَانِهِ إِلَّا مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالْإِيمَانِ وَلَـٰكِن مَّن شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْرًا فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِّنَ اللَّـهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ

Then Tabatabai explained:

As mentioned in both Sunni and Shi’ite sources this verse was revealed concerning ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir. After the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet, the infidels of Mecca imprisoned some of the Muslims of that city and tortured them, forcing them to leave Islam and to return to their former religion of idolatry.

Included in this group who were tortured were Ammar and his father and mother. Ammar’s parents refused to turn away from Islam and died under torture. But Ammar, in order to escape torture and death, outwardly left Islam and accepted idol worship, thereby escaping from danger. Having become free, he left Mecca secretly for Medina. In Medina he went before the Holy Prophet--upon whom be blessings and peace--and in a state of penitence and distress concerning what he had done, he asked the Prophet if by acting as he did, he had fallen outside the sacred precinct of religion. Then Prophet said that his duty was what he had accomplished. The above verse was then revealed.

The two verses cited above were revealed concerning particular cases but their meaning is such that they embrace all situations in which the outward expression of doctrinal belief and religious practice might bring about a dangerous situation. Besides these verses, there exist many traditions from the members of the Household of the Prophet, ordering Taqiyya when there is fear of danger.

Some have criticized Shi’a by saying that to employ the practice of Taqiyya in religion is opposed to the virtues of courage and bravery. The least amount of thought about this accusation will bring to light its invalidity, for Taqiyya must be practiced in a situation where man faces a danger which he cannot resist and against which he cannot fight.

Resistance to such a danger and failure to practice Taqiyya in such circumstances shows rashness and foolhardiness, not courage and bravery. The qualities of courage and bravery can be applied only when there is at least the possibility of success in man’s efforts. But before a definite or probable danger against which there is no possibility of victory--such as drinking water in which there is probably poison or throwing oneself before a cannon that is being fired or lying down on the tracks before an onrushing train—any action of this kind is nothing but a form of madness and contrary to logic and common sense. Therefore, we can summarize by saying that Taqiyya must be practiced only when there is a definite danger which cannot be avoided and against which there is no hope of a successful struggle and victory.

Please refer to Shi’ite Islam
Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabatai
Translated by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
pp 223-225

It is apparent then, from the above quotes, that the Shi’a are NOT advocates of hypocrisy, secrecy, and cowardice, as some of the Wahhabis, among others, purport.

The following is from the book of Moojan Momen, which is entitled "An Introduction to Shi’i Islam: History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi’ism,”

When discussing the sixth Shi’i Imam (successor to the prophet), Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as), he writes:

The doctrine of Taqiyya (dissimulation) was widely used at that time. It served to protect the followers of Imam al-Sadiq at a time when al- Mansur (the caliph) was conducting a brutally oppressive campaign against the Followers of the Members of the House of Prophet and their supporters.

Al-Taqiyya, Dissimulation Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Qur’an Speaks: Al-Taqiyya Vs. Hypocrisy

Some people have fallen victim to confusing al-Taqiyya with hypocrisy, when in fact they (al-Taqiyya and Hypocrisy) are two opposite extremes. al- Taqiyya is concealing faith and displaying nonbelief; while Hypocrisy is the concealment of unbelief and the display of belief. They are TOTAL opposites in function, form, and meaning.

The Qur’an reveals the nature of hypocrisy with the following verse:

"When they meet those who believe, they say: `We Believe;’ but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say: `We are really with you, we (were) only jesting (2:14)."

The Qur’an then reveals al-Taqiyya with the following verses:

"A Believer, a man from among the people of Pharaoh, who had CONCEALED his faith, said: "Will ye slay a man because he says, `My Lord is Allah’?....(40:28)”(Emphasis Mine.)

Also:

"Any one who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief, EXCEPT under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith -- but such as open their breast to unbelief, -- on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Chastisement (16:106).”(Emphasis Mine.)

And also:

"Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, (they) shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution ("tat-taqooh"), that ye may guard yourselves ("tooqatan") from them....(3:28)"

Moreover:

And when Moses returned unto his people, angry and grieved, he said: Evil is that (course) which ye took after I had left you. Would ye hasten on the judgment of your Lord? And he cast down the tablets, and he seized his brother by the head, dragging him toward him. (Aaron) said:

"Son of my mother! Lo! People did oppress me and they were about to kill me. Make not the enemies rejoice over my misfortune nor count thou me amongst the sinful people. (Qur’an 7:150)"

وَلَمَّا رَجَعَ مُوسَىٰ إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ غَضْبَانَ أَسِفًا قَالَ بِئْسَمَا خَلَفْتُمُونِي مِن بَعْدِي أَعَجِلْتُمْ أَمْرَ رَبِّكُمْ وَأَلْقَى الْأَلْوَاحَ وَأَخَذَ بِرَأْسِ أَخِيهِ يَجُرُّهُ إِلَيْهِ قَالَ ابْنَ أُمَّ إِنَّ الْقَوْمَ اسْتَضْعَفُونِي وَكَادُوا يَقْتُلُونَنِي فَلَا تُشْمِتْ بِيَ الْأَعْدَاءَ وَلَا تَجْعَلْنِي مَعَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ ﴿الأعراف: ١٥٠﴾

Now, we see that Allah (SWT) Himself has stated that one of His (SWT) faithful servants concealed his faith and pretended that he was a follower of the Pharaoh’s religion to escape persecution. We also see that Prophet Aaron (Haroon) observed Taqiyya when his life was in danger. We also observe that al-Taqiyya is clearly permitted in a time of need. In fact, the Book of Allah instructs us that we should escape a situation which causes our destruction for nothing:

"and make not your own hands contribute to your destruction (2:195)"

Reason And Logic

Aside from the instuctions of Quan and Hadith on the permissibility and necessity of Taqiyya, such necessity can also be derived from a logical and rational standpoint. It is apparent to any discerning observer that Allah (SWT) has bestowed upon His (SWT) creation certain defense mechanisms and instincts to protect themselves from impending danger. What follows are some examples that serve to illustrate the above point.

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Instinct:"

"Instinct is inherited, essentially unlearned, and generally adaptive animal behavior that is typical to each species. Instinct is prominent in aggression, courtship, and mating, and in various social behaviors, although learning, maturation, growth, or circumstance can modify the behavior. Human behavior is mostly a product of learning, whereas the behavior of a moth, a snail, or a bird mainly depends on instinct."

"Behaviors that are most instinctive include reproduction, concealment, defense, escape, threats or warnings, and aggression, all of which are essential to the survival of the species."

"A species’ instinctive behaviors appear similar in form: chickens and turkeys seek a high place to roost at night, cats stalk prey in a characteristic manner, and dogs mark their territories in a species-
specific method.

Typical behavior patterns appear even in animals that are raised isolated from other members of their own species, a situation in which learning by observation, imitation, or instruction cannot occur. Many, but not all, birds sing the songs of their conspecifics (other members of their species) even though they are removed from the nest before hatching and are raised in a quiet room.

Others sing a simplified version of the species’ song."

It is apparent then that instincts play a crucial role in the animal kingdom, as well as the human one. Furthermore, the above quote asserts that: "Behaviors that are most instinctive include reproduction, CONCEALMENT, DEFENSE, escape, threats or warnings, and aggression, all of which are essential to the survival of the species.”(Emphasis Mine)

Given the above, we may suggest that although al-Taqiyya is a learned behavior, it nonetheless originates from the survival instinct that is innate to creation. That is, out of fear and the instinct to survive, one conceals that which may jeopardize his well-being. It is a fact that one can overcome the fear within him, and utter the truth even if it jeopardized him; but one must also set priorities and judge when the telling of the truth will serve a noble purpose, and when it won’t make a difference.

If a person is about to be slaughtered because he is a Shi’i, then his concealment of his beliefs is of utmost importance, IF that concealment does not serve as an injustice to someone else. For example, if I, a Shi’i, deny my beliefs to protect myself; and, as a result, an innocent man is blamed instead, then I must come forward, at the risk of death, to protect that man; but when my denial serves no injustice whatsoever, then I must conceal my beliefs to protect myself.

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Insect:"

"Most insects try to escape when threatened and some insects "play dead,”for example, some beetles fall to the ground after folding up their legs, giving the appearance of a clump of dirt. Many insects use shelters ranging from burrows in the ground to elaborate shelters constructed of various materials. Insects also employ camouflage.

Many are so colored that they blend into their background, such as moths colored like the bark of trees. Some insects bear a close resemblance to objects in the environment, such as inchworms, which resemble twigs. Other insects will cover themselves with debris or excrement.

Chemical defenses often involve distasteful body secretions, repellent secretions, or poisonous injection into an attacker. The use of the sting is probably the most effective and often a severe method. The only stinging insects are Hymenoptera (bees, wasps, and some ants)."

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Mammal:"

"The name pangolin is from a Malay word for "round cushion”and refers to the animal’s DEFENSE of curling up into a ball. As a further defense, the pangolin will spray urine and anal gland secretions on a persistent intruder.”(Emphasis Mine)

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Coloration, Biological:”

"Both the ringed plover chick and its egg are cryptically colored. Plovers are shore birds that dig shallow nests in the open ground; the coloration acts as camouflage, helping the young blend with their surroundings as protection against predators."

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Bear:"

"The polar bear, Thalarctos maritimus, travels great distances along arctic coasts. Its white fur furnishes camouflage against snow and ice."

The following quote is taken from the Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia (1992) under the topic of "Deep-Sea Life:"

"Fishes of the shallower parts of the deep sea often have very large eyes relative to their size, suggesting that they respond to the minimal light present in the upper zones. Both fishes and invertebrates in these zones also often possess complex organs capable of producing light (see BIOLUMINESCENCE). These organs frequently exist in definite patterns on the body and may be important in species and sexual recognition, in the attracting of prey or repelling of predators, in camouflage, or in other ways not yet understood."

Other examples of naturally-occurring defense mechanisms include, but are not limited to, the thorns on certain flower stems and the poisonous chemicals in plants to protect them from danger.

It is clear from the above quotations that defense mechanisms are Allah’s (SWT) mercy to His (SWT) creation, such that He (SWT) has not left them unprotected. As such, al-Taqiyya, I contend, is an instinctive defense mechanism that Allah (SWT) has endowed humans with. The ability to use one’s tongue to escape persecution is indeed a supreme example of defense.

I read once in a Sufi book that "Islam is truth without form.”Indeed, that is so; and Islam is Allah’s (SWT) natural religion, it is the Primordial Truth, it is the ONLY religion that conforms to man’s instincts and natural inclinations. Given that, al-Taqiyya, I contend, is a truism because it satisfies an instinctive need to survive and prosper.

Comments

It has been demonstrated under the section of "Sunni Sources In Support of al-Taqiyya”that it is permissible to lie to save oneself, as al-Ghazzali asserted; and that it is legitimate to utter words of unbelief as al-Suyuti stated; and that it is acceptable to smile at a person while your heart curses him as al-Bukhari confirms; and that al- Taqiyya is an integral part of the Qur’an itself, as has been shown under the section of "The Qur’an Speaks: al-Taqiyya vs. Hypocrisy;”and that it was practiced by one of the most notable companions of the Prophet (S), none other than `Ammar Ibn Yasir (May Allah Reward him generously); and we have seen that al- Suyuti narrates that al-Taqiyya is permissible until the Day of Judgment; and that a person can say anything he wants, even to badmouth the Prophet (S) if he is in a dangerous and restrictive situation; and we have also seen that even the Prophet (S) himself practiced al-Taqiyya in a manner of diplomacy that served to advance good relations among the people.

Furthermore, the Prophet did not disclose his mission for the first three years of his prophethood, which was, in fact, another practice of al- Taqiyya by the Prophet to save the young Islam from annihilation.

Now, the question to our opponent is: If your MOST authentic books explicitly advocate al-Taqiyya, as has been demonstrated above, why then do you mock the Shi’a and accuse them of hypocrisy? By Allah (SWT), who is the hypocrite now?

Apparently now, there is no difference between the Sunnis and Shi’a vis-a- vis al-Taqiyya, except that the Shi’a practice al-Taqiyya for fear of persecution, while the Sunnis don’t.

The Shi’a have to practice al-Taqiyya as part of the persecution that they have suffered from day one of the death of the Mercy to Mankind, Muhammad (S). It is enough to say "I am a Shi’i”to get your head chopped off, even today in countries like Saudi Arabia. As for the Sunnis, they were never subjected to what the Shi’a have been subjected to, primarily because they have always been the friends of the so-called Islamic governments throughout the ages.

My comment here is that Wahhabis themselves do indeed practice al-Taqiyya, but they have been psychologically programmed by their mentors in such a way that they don’t even recognize al-Taqiyya when they do actually practice it. Ahmad Didat said that the Christians have been programmed in such a way that they may read the Bible a million times, but will never spot an error! They are fixed on believing it because their scholars say so, and they read at a superficial level. I say that this also applies to those who oppose al-Taqiyya.

Dr. al-Tijani wrote a short event where he was sitting next to a Sunni scholar on a flight to London; they were both on their way to attend an Islamic Conference. At that time, there was still some tension due to the Salman Rushdi affair. The conversation between the two was naturally concerned with the unity of the Ummah. Consequently, the Sunni/Shi’a issue introduced itself as part of the conversation.

The Sunni scholar said: "The Shi’a must drop certain beliefs and convictions that cause disunity and animosity among the Muslims.”Dr. al-Tijani answered: "Like what?”The Sunni scholar answered: "Like the Taqiyya and Muta’ ideas.”Dr. al-Tijani immediately provided him with plenty of proofs in support of these notions, but the Sunni scholar was not convinced, and said that although these proofs are all authentic and correct, we must discard them for the sake of uniting the Ummah!!! When they both got to London, the immigration officer asked the Sunni scholar: "What is the purpose of your visit sir?”The Sunni scholar said: "For medical treatment.”Then Dr. al-Tijani was asked the same question, and he answered: "To visit some friends.”Dr. al-Tijani followed the Sunni scholar and said: "Didn’t I tell you that al-Taqiyya is for all times and occasions!”The Sunni scholar said: "How so?”Dr. al- Tijani answered: "Because we both lied to the airport police: I by saying that I came to visit some friends, and you by saying that you are here for medical treatment; when, in fact, we are here to attend the Islamic Conference!”The Sunni scholar smiled, and said: "Well, doesn’t an Islamic Conference provide healing for the soul?!”Dr. al-Tijani was swift to say:

"And doesn’t it provide an opportunity to visit friends?!"

So you see, the Sunnis practice al-Taqiyya whether they acknowledge the fact or not. It is an innate part of human nature to save oneself, and most often we do it without even noticing.

My comment again is: Who, in Allah’s (SWT) Name, is this Scholar to state that although the proofs provided to him by Dr. al-Tijani are ALL authentic, they must be discarded for the sake of uniting the Ummah???! Do you truly believe that the Ummah will be united by abandoning Allah’s (SWT) commandments?

Does the above statement represent scholarly merit, or pure rhetoric, ignorance, and hypocrisy on the part of that scholar? Is a scholar who utters such words of ignorance worthy of being obeyed and listened to? Who is he to tell Allah (SWT), the Creator of the Universe, and His (SWT) Messenger (S) what is right and wrong? Does he know more than Allah (SWT) about al-Taqiyya? Exalted be Allah (SWT) from being insulted by those who lack all forms of intelligence to interpret His (SWT) religion.

al-Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) (The Sixth Imam of Ahlul-Bayt) said:

"al-Taqiyya is my religion, and the religion of my ancestors.”He (as)also said: "He who doesn’t practice al-Taqiyya, doesn’t practice his religion."

In conclusion, I repeat my appeal to you to comprehend what I say in these discussions. The Shi’a are Muslims, no doubt about it. Be your own judge, and verify what I say here. Better yet, download everything and go to the scholar that you trust the most; ask him to refute what the Shi’a claim; and then judge whether he himself is honest or not. Remember:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: Whoever rejects Taghoot and believes in Allah, (he) hath grasped the most trustworthy hand- hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. (2:256)”

Wassalam.

Side Comments on al-Taqiyya

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A Wahhabi contributor mentiond:

Taqqiyah means to pretend by doing or saying exactly the opposite of what you believe or feel

Not a correct definition. It does not necessarily have to be in exact opposite, though it might be so in some cases. al-Taqiyya is primarily concealing the belief. You might want to refresh your memory by reading my original article in which I mentioned the definition of al-Taqiyya as

"Concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings,opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury."

e.g. to pretend to be nice while cursing the person in the heart without a present danger (al-Kafi fi alFrua’, Vol. 3, pp. 188-9).

Again you are scrupulously quoting from a 33-page booklet written by "Saeed Ismaeel". The minimum amount of decency requires you to mention this since you did not directly looked up the above tradition. I doubt even Saeed Ismaeel (your mentor) has also touched al-Kafi. He got them from the books of "Ihsan Ilahi Zahir”and "Muhammad Manzoor Nomani", etc. I have read the books of these individuals from cover to cover. What I have found was malicious misquotations or quoting the traditions out of context. Sometimes they do not even bother themselves to quote the tradition (even partially) similar to above.

We do not have any authentic tradition which sates you may apply al-Taqiyya without present or future danger. If you think otherwise, please quote a tradition which explicitly states the above. These are all interpretation of your mentors from the traditions. No tradition explicitly states as such.

The danger might be present of later in time. Also the danger might be for oneself our for another person related to you. As such, the Imam may conceal some information from his own followers, if he knows that if they do that they will be trapped into the hand of officials.

In fact, I have seen some Wahhabis, to mock Shi’a in the concept of Taqiyya, refer to a tradition in Usul Kafi and partially quote it out of context in order to misrepresent the concept of Taqiyya for the Sunni brothers. The correct translation of the tradition that they refer to, is as follows:

Usul Kafi, Tradition #195:

Zurarah said: I asked Abu Ja’far (as) a question, for which the Imam gave me an answer. Afterwards another person came to the Imam and asked him the same question but Imam gave him a different answer.

Again, a third person came and asked Imam the same question to which Imam gave an answer which was still different from mine and the second person. When the two had left, I asked "O son of Prophet, two of your followers from Iraq asked you a question and you gave them two different answers.”Hearing this, the Imam replied, "O Zurarah, these different answers are in our own interests and they contribute to the stability of both (me and my followers). (In such severe moments) if all of you present a unite stand, it will enable the people (opponents and rulers) to verify the allegiance of yours to us and this will endanger and shorten the life of you (Shi’ites) as well as the life of ours."

I have seen these Wahhabis that they quote the first part of the tradition and drop the explanation of Imam to show that Imam applied al-Taqiyya two his own followers with no reason. From the tradition, it is not clear what exactly the question of those followers was. However the clarification of the Imam at the end implies that the question was related to some social and political actions which were planted by the ruler of the time in order to identify and trap the Shi’ites. This is exactly what al-Taqiyya is used for. Note that the Imam is emphasizing that he is preserving the life of his followers as well as the Ahlul-Bayt.

Another example is explained by another tradition where the Imam attended the funeral prayer of one of the officials who was a hypocrite form Umayad Government, in order to fool the authorities which would cause to decrease the prosecution of Ahlul-Bayt and their followers. These kinds of diplomacies were widely used even by Prophet (S) himself.

Have you ever thought why Prophet applied al-Taqiyya and did not disclose his mission for the first three years of his prophethood? It was because, if he have done that, Islam would have been destroyed from the very beginning.

The specific purpose of Taqqiyah is the "preservation of Islam and the Shii school of thought; if the people had not resorted to it, our school of thought would have been destroyed"

If the Prophet applied al-Taqiyya for the first three years of his prophethood, and concealed his mission, then why not Shi’a do that to escape the prosecutions of so-called Islamic governors? Was the Prophet a coward? Or he wanted to preserve Islam from being destroyed?

Also let me give you another example from another prophet who concealed his belief. Qur’an states that: Moses (as) with the order of Allah, assigned Haroon (as) as his successor (Caliph) and left his people to him, to go to Miqaat (appointment with Allah) for a total of forty days. After leaving of Moses, all his companions (except very few) turned against Haroon, and were deceived by Sameri, and became worshipers of a golden calf. (See Qur’an 7:142, 20:90-97, 20:83-88).

When Moses (as) came back from Miqaat he was very angry since Allah had informed him that his community went astray during his absence. Moses came and started questioning his brother Haroon, that why he did not take action to prevent this corruption. Qur’an states that Haroon replied:

"(O’ Moses) people did oppress me and they were about to kill me.”(Qur’an 7:150).

If you believe in Haroon as a true prophet of God, you do not allow yourself to call him coward. Or do you think that Aaron was a Shi’a? In fact, he was a Shi’a (follower) of Prophet Moses (as). It was his duty to save his life, though it appears that Wahhabis think he should have killed himself.

As Ibn Taymiyyah said, the verse 3:28 about Taqiyyah is applicable in the case of a non-believer only under special cases, e.g., a Muslim cannot apply it against a Muslim.

A so-called Muslim who prosecute an innocent person, is not any better than a non-Muslim. If you look around the world, from Saudi Arabia, to Iraq, to Afghanistan,... the majority of those who prosecute Muslims call themselves Muslims too. If you look at the History also, they majority of Muslim rulers who called themselves Muslims and Khalifa, were oppressors and tyrant (like Umayad and Abbasid Caliphs). Are you suggesting that we should not safeguard our lives from those tyrants who label themselves as Muslims?

Moreover, by his above saying, Ibn Taymiyyah did not accept Sahih Muslim as authentic, or else Ibn Taymiyyah has rejected the testimony of Prophet (S). Even the Prophet (S) himself practiced al-Taqiyya in a manner of diplomacy that served to advance good relations among the people.

The tradition from Sahih Muslim which I mentioned in my article talks about Muslims. In the case that there is a dispute between two Muslims to such extent that it is considered as an eminent danger, and if nothing else works, it is permitted to twist the words in order to make the reconciliation. You see, there always exists a requirement of an eminent DANGER for al-Taqiyya. For instance, the danger of divorce for a Muslim couple who have a dispute. The commentary of the tradition talks about Muslims too.

Verse 16:106 is applicable only when a Muslim faces a situation smilar to a situation of the great Companion Ammar when he had to choose between dying under torture like his parents or pretending to be an unbeliever hy tongue These cases are not the basic rule but only exceptions

This a basic rule, otherwise Allah would not have mentioned it in Qur’an in a number of verses.

Could you ever trust a Muslim if this were the case?

If a Muslim is not in danger he should not apply al-Taqiyya, the same way that I do not apply al-Taqiyya behind this terminal. But if I were in a country like Saudi Arabia, then I would have practiced it.

If a person considers that Iying about Allah, His Prophet (pbuh) and the Muslims to serve his biased and misguided goals as an essential part of his bliefs, can we trust him? Surely not. But who said so?

The verse (3:28) is not only an exception but also a restricted exception. Not only is it forbidden to be used against Muslims but it also does not give permission to lie to others. What it means is that if you oppose certain behaviors and you are in a situation where condemnation would endanger Islam or Muslim community you can keep silent but you must avoid Iying. (ibn Taymiyah, Minhaj, Vol. p. 213 and ibn Kathir, Tafseer).

Again, the saying of your "clergymen”such as Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Kathir is clearly in contradiction with Qur’an where Allah stated:

"Any one who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief, except under compulsion while his heart remaining firm in faith... (Qur’an 16:106)

As you see, Qur’an states "uttering unbelief". This does not mean keeping silent. Uttering means either saying or acting something in contrary to belief. What lie is bigger than uttering unbelief?

Also, if the most authentic Sunni collections of Hadith such as Sahih al- Bukhari and Sahih Muslim advocate al-Taqiyya, then why do Wahhabis insist to the contrary? Is this not a sign of pure hypocrisy by itself?

Khums (one Fifth)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

We read in the Holy Qur’an:

Know that whatever of a thing you acquire, a fifth of it is for Allah, for the Messenger, for the near relative, and the orphans and the needy and they way farer ..... (Qur’an 8:41)

Thus Khums (literally one fifth of gain) should go to six people:

1. Allah
2. His Messenger
3. The near relative of the Messenger (Ahlul-Bayt)
4. Orphan
5. needy
6. the person who has fallen away from his home-town (and has no money to comeback to his own place).

The portion of Allah goes to His Messenger to be spent for the path of Allah. After the Prophet passed away, and at the time of the first 11 Imams, the first 3 portions used to go to the Imam of Ahlul-Bayt to be spent in the path of Allah.

Now that we have no access to Imam Mahdi (as), a religious scholar will receive the first three portions (which will be half of total Khums) who will spend it on behalf of Allah, His Messenger, and his Ahlul-Bayt in the path of Allah (like spending it on the theological schools or any other things that they feel necessary in religious matters). also, if the scholar does not have any source of income and all his effort is for the religion, he can only spend a portion of what he receives as Khums for his ordinary expenses which could provide him an average or below average lifestyle. The scholar does NOT have to be the descendants of the Prophet (S) to be entitled to receive Khums.

As for the last three portions, it doesn’t go to a scholar. It can be directly spent on the needy people who should be, of course, the descendants of the Prophet (S). Note that it is forbidden to give Zakat (another religious tax which both Shi’a and Sunnis pay) and charity to the descendants of the Prophet. Thus Zakat revenues and charities go to those needy who are NOT the descendants of the prophet, while half of the Khums goes to those needy people who are the descendants of the Prophet.

One should also note that during the history of Islam till now, the descendants of the prophet were being prosecuted every where and were deprived of their rights. Also a minority among Muslims continue to pay Khums (i.e., only Shi’a follow this Sunnah of the Prophet). In other words, only 20% of all Muslims pay Khums which heavily decreases the amount of what the needy descendants of Prophet get from Khums (=20%”1/2”1/5=2%) when it is compared with the amount that needy people who are not the descendants of the Prophet get through Zakat from all Muslims (2.5%) plus

all the charities which could be much more than 2.5%. In the verse of Khums mentioned above "ghanimtum”has been used which has been translated as ‘you acquire’. As explained above, it means, ‘certain items which a person acquires as wealth’. What are these certain items?

According to the hadiths of the Ahl al-Bayt Imams, the items that are eligible for Khums are seven, and they are

1. the profit or the surplus of income
2. the legitimate wealth which is mixed with the illegitimate wealth
3. mines and minerals
4. the precious stones obtained from sea by diving
5. treasures
6. the land which a dhimmi kafir buys from a muslim
7. the spoils of war.

However there are some people who interpret the word ghanimtum as ‘whatever of a thing that you acquire as spoils of war’, thus confining the obligation of khums to the spoils of war only. The interpretation is based on ignorance of

“the Arabic langauage
“the history of khums
“the Islamic laws
“and the interpretation of the Qur’an

Please bear in mind that the word ghanimtum has been derived from al- ghanimah.

The Meaning Of The Word Ghanimtum

The famous Arabic dictionary of al-Munjid (Father Louis Maluf of Beirut) states, al-ghanim and al-ghanimah means

“what is taken from the fighting enemies by force
“all earnings generally

Furthermore the saying "al-ghunm bil ghurm”means that profit stands against expenses, i.e, the owner is the sole proprieter of the profit and nobody shares it with him, therefore only he bears all the expenses and risk. For the readers satisfaction, they are also encouraged to look up dictionaries like Lisan al-Arab and al-Qamus.

This implies that in the Arabic langauge ‘ al-ghanimah ‘ has two meanings, one is the spoils of war, and the other is profit. The above quoted proverb also proves profit is not an uncommon meaning. When a word in the Qur’an can interpreted in more than one way, it is incumbent upon the muslims to seek guidance from the Holy Prophet (S) and the Ahl al-Bayt.

The History Of Khums

Khums is one of those things which were introduced by Abdul Muttalib (ra) the grandfather of the Prophet (S), and it continued in Islam when it was revealed in Qur’an. Acting upon a command of God given to him in his dream, when Abdul Muttalib rediscovered the well of Zamzam, he found in it many valuable things that were buried in it very remote past by the Ismailites when they feared that their enemies would usurp them. When Abdul Muttalib found that buried treasure, he gave away one fifth (literally khums) in the way of God and kept the remaining four fifth to himself.

Then it became a custom in his family to and after the Hijrah of the Prophet (S) the same system was incorporated in Islam. Thus the first khums was not given from the spoils of war, but from a buried treasure (which is one of the seven items eligible for khums).

The Islamic Laws

Not a single Islamic school confines the meaning of ghanimah to the spoils of war. In addition to the spoils of war the following items are subjected to khums

“minerals: eligible in the Hanafi and the Shi’a
“buried treasure: eligible for all the muslims.

As already mentioned earlier, the interpretation of the Qur’an must be based on the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt. The word ghanimah in the verse under discussion has been clearly interpreted as "the earned profit”(al- fa’idatul muktasabah) by our Imams.

Some Sunni References

To conclude, we can say that the word ghanima was never treated as being confined to the spoils of war by any Islamic school; and as far as our Imams are concerned, it meant many things besides the spoils of war right from the day of Imam ‘Ali (peace be upon him), as many authentic traditions show.

What has been quoted above is substantiated from the practice of the Holy Prophet (S) as well. For example when the Prophet (S) sent Amr bin Hazm to Yemen, he wrote instructions in which, among many other things, he says ‘ ... to gather khums of Allah from the gains (of Yemenis).

Please refer to

“Ibn Khaldun, Tarikh Volume 2 part II p54 (Beirut 1971)
“Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wan Nihayah Volume 5 p76-77 (Beirut 1966)
“Ibn Hisham, Sirah Volume 4 p179 (Beirut 1975)

And when the tribe of Bani Kilal of Yemen sent Khums to the Prophet, the later acknowledges it by saying, ‘ Your messenger has returned and you have paid the khums of Allah from the gains (al-ghanaim). ‘ Please refer to

“Abu Ubayd, al-Amwal p13 (Beirut 1981)
“al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak Volume 1 p395 (Hyderabad 1340 A.H)
“Jafar Murtada al-Amili, al-Sahih fi Sirat al-Nabi Volume 3 p309 (Qum 1983)

It is very interesting to note that the Bani Kilal obeyed Prophet’s order and sent the khums of gains to him while no war had taken place between the muslims and the un-believers. This is a clear indication that khums was not restricted by the Prophet (S) to the Spoils of War!

The importance given by the Prophet (S) to the issue of Khums can also be seen in his advice to the delegation of Bani Abdul Qays. It seems that Bani Abdul Qays (which was a branch of Rabiah) was not a very strong tribe. More over in order to travel to Medina, they had to cross an area inhabited by the Muzar tribe, which was against the muslims. Consequently, the Bani Abdul Qays could not travel safely to Medina except during the months in which war fare was forbidden according to the Arab custom.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.327 (pages 212-213)

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The delegates of the tribe of Abdul Qais came and said: `O Allah’s Apostle! We are from the tribe of Rabia and between us and you stand stand the infidels of the tribe of Mudar, so we cannot come to you except in the Haram Months. So please order us some instructions that we may apply it to ourselves and also invite our people left behind us to observe as well. ‘ The Prophet (S) said: `I order you to do four (4) things and forbid you to do four (4): I order you to believe in Allah, that is, to testify that None has the right to be worshipped but Allah (the Prophet (S) pointed with his hand) ; to offer prayers perfectly, to pay Zakat, to fast the month of Ramadhan, and to
pay the Khums.

Considering the facts that they travelled in the haram months (when the war fare) was forbidden, the circumstances of the Bani Abdul Qays who were weak and small in numbers (evident from their travelling in the haram months), it leaves no room for interpreting the application of khums in the above hadith on the spoils of war exclusively! Please refer for the above hadith to

“Sahih Bukhari Volume 4 pp 212-213 (Beirut)
“Abu Ubayd, al-Amwal p13 (Beirut 1981)

More On Khums

The following discussion is taken from Dr. al-Tijani’s book, "Ma’a al- Sadeeqeen -- With The Truthful Ones,", pp 149-153. Moreover, I used a Fiqh book based on the teachings of al-Khumeini for some of the details. I also added my own remarks for purposes of clarity.

To begin with, we must quote the Book of Allah (SWT):

"And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire, a fifth share is assigned to Allah, and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,--if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to our Servant.....(Qur’an 8:41)"

The above verse is a clear injunction by Allah (SWT), the Creator of the Universe, to give out a fifth (Khums) of our wealth in the way of Allah (SWT) to the needy, orphans, etc....

Let’s continue...

The Prophet (S) said: "I command you to do four things: To believe in Allah (SWT); to establish prayer; to pay Zakat; to fast Ramadan; and to pay the fifth of all the booty that you acquire for
the sake of Allah (SWT)”

Sunni reference: Shahih al-Bukhari, v4, p44.

Now, the problem with the interpretation of the text is that the word "Ghaneema -- Booty”is interpreted by the Sunnis as that wealth collected as part of a war. That is not an accurate interpretation of the Arabic word. The Semitic languages, which Arabic belongs to, are based on the verb form, not the noun form. As such, the translation of the word "Ghaneema”is not all that accurate when the word "booty”is used.

The Shi’a, in conformity with Allah’s (SWT) and His (SWT) Messenger’s (S) orders, pay 20% (a fifth) of their wealth at the end of every year. In addition, the grammatical usage of the word "Ghaneema”in Arabic, as the Shi’a translate it, means that certain things that a believer acquires by way of a profit from a legitimate business deal or otherwise, is considered a "Ghaneema,”and becomes subject to the laws and regulations thereof.

Of course there are exclusions. Actually, the Khums is only applicable in the following areas: First, anything extracted from the earth like gold, silver, metal, oil, and other natural elements is subject to the Khums. The minimum value of that which is extracted from the earth is 20 "dinars", and one "dinar”is equal to 3.45 grams gold in value. If that minimum is not met, then the Khums is not required. Second, anything by way of hidden treasures, if it meets the minimum value requirements, is also subject to the Khums. Third, anything extracted from the ocean like pearls, coral, etc..., if it meets the minimum value of 1 dinar, not 20, is also subject to the Khums. Fourth, any excess wealth that has remained for one year untouched is also subject to the Khums. Exclusions to the Khums include, but are not limited to, gifts, prizes, inheritance, a woman’s dowry, etc...

The details of the Khums are “very “involved, and it is almost always necessary to seek the advice of a Mujtahid before the Khums is taken out. The Sunnis have rejected that, EVEN though it is in the Book of Allah (SWT). Furthermore, it is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, pp 136-137 that the Prophet (S) stated that any wealth that was buried under the ground in the Days of Ignorance (Ayam al-Jahiliyah) is subject to al- Khums. Moreover, Ibn Abbas, the most trusted narrator of hadith in the eyes of the Sunnis, said that pearls extracted from the ocean are subject to the Khums also.

It is apparent, that the Khums is NOT restricted to a booty from a war, as the Sunnis claim; rather, it extends to all of the above issues. If a truly Sunni Islamic nation was to be established, it would fall short of fulfilling its financial obligations because it depends on the Zakat only, which is only 2.5% of one’s wealth. Realistically speaking, can an Islamic nation, as the Sunnis contend, survive on 2.5% a year from the Muslim Ummah? Can it truly build an infrastructure that would support the masses? Can it build hospitals, schools, highways, etc...? No, it cannot, because 2.5% is not enough, not by any stretch of the imagination.

The Khums also serves another very important purpose in the current Shiite community. It helps the Mujtahids maintain an independence and separation from the political implications which will happen if a religious scholar becomes dependent on the government for his bread and butter. That is extremely important. The Sunnis scholars in Muslim countries receive their salaries from the government, which means that they cannot utter a word of objection to the policies of the ruler because their source of income will be threatened. The Shiite scholars, on the other hand, receive NO funding from the government. This way, they are free to dedicate their lives to the pursuit of justice for the community.

Now, for those wondering how the Shi’a treat the Zakat, then follow along. The Zakat, according to Shiite jurisprudence (Fiqh), is only applicable to the following categories: cattle (camels, cows, sheep, and goats), silver, gold, dates, raisins, wheat, and barley.

It should be noted however that although Zakat is not mandatory on other items the same way that Khumus is, to the Shi’a it is still encouraged (mustahab) to give out Zakat on things other than the above mentioned items - in a similar way to how Sunnis apply Zakat (i.e. 2.5%).

The details on Zakat are not as complicated as the Khums, but there are still details to be addressed. For example, was the land from whence the wheat was harvested, irrigated by rain water or regular water? In addition, there is a minimum bracket for the number of cattle that has to be met for the Zakat to be applicable. If you want details, let me know, I will be more than happy to provide them.

There is also the Zakat al-Fitr, which is paid on the first day after the month of fasting, Ramadan, ends.

In conclusion, I appeal to your sense of justice, objectivity, and fear of Allah (SWT) to recognize that the Shi’a are THE followers of Islam as it should be implemented. The Sunni legists have changed many aspects of the religion of Allah (SWT), and I am not here to trash them; but be fair and judge the Shi’a objectively. Don’t we follow the Qur’an better than ANYBODY else? Don’t we follow the custom of the Prophet (S) to the letter?

Don’t we use reason to explain our belief, rather than being blind followers? Don’t we...........?

Wassalam.

Tawassul (Resorting to Intermediary)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Some people claim that asking for help to other than god is polytheism. Such people should never go to doctor when they becomes sick because this is polytheism (shirk)! Their going to doctor is a type of seeking a help from a specialist even though they do not say by their tongue that they are getting help from the doctor. Acting shirk is enough.

Also they should not ask any question from anyone or request anything from any one because all these are shirk. Furthermore, they shouldn’t eat any food because they should not help themselves by any other than God!

If they say that we do all these because Allah told us to do so, then based on their own doctrine Allah is also polytheist (Mushrik). Na’udhu Billah! Here is what they are missing: If we get help from any body, we do it with the understanding that he by his own can not help us. He can not benefit us unless Allah wishes to.

If one calls Prophet Muhammad (S) or Imam ‘Ali (as) for help, he is, in fact, calling Allah for help through intermediary of the Prophet or the Imams, and he does that with the understanding that the Prophet or the Imams doe not have any independent power, but rather what they have (which many others lack) is that they have credit in front of Allah and that Allah does not put down their requests if they pray to Allah on my behalf. Imam ‘Ali and all the martyrs are alive as Qur’an clearly testifies, though they are not on the earth. So please do not treat them as dead. Allah states in Qur’an:

Think not of those who are martyred in the way of Allah as dead. Nay! They are living, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.”(Qur’an 3:169)

In fact all of our Imams except Imam Mahdi were martyred either by sword or by poison. Moreover, there are quite strong proofs in both Shi’a and Sunni that the Prophet himself was also poisoned by a Jew in the battle of Khaibar, and the poison slowly worked on his body till it finally killed him. I just bring two traditions from Sahih al-Bukhari:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.551

Narrated Abu Huraira:

When Khaibar was conquered, a (cooked) sheep containing poison, was given as a present to Allah’s Apostle. Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 5.713

... Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet in his ailment in which he died, used to say, "O ‘Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaibar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from
that poison.”

So they should not be called dead since they are alive according to Qur’an. Thus we can make Tawassul to them the same way that the Shi’a of Moses made

Tawassul to Moses:

"And he (Moses) went into the city at a time when people (of the city) were not watching, so he found therein two men fighting, one being of his Shi’a and the other being his enemy, and the one who was of his Shi’a cried out to him for help against the one who was of his enemy”(Qur’an 28:15)

Two things which distinguishes Tawassul and Shirk should be noted here.

First, we do not believe that the Prophet and Imams have any independent power from Allah. Second, Allah is the one who assigned the intermediate. The idol worshipers used a wrong intermediate, and that was another reason why it was condemned. Moreover, the idol worshippers believed that the idols can cause harm or render a benefit.

Muslims are monotheists and they know that only Allah can cause harm or render a benefit. But calling the Prophet and Imams with the understanding that they could only be an intermediary to Allah, is not polytheism. All Muslims agreed on this point from the time of the Prophet (S) up to the present day, except Wahhabis. They contradict all Muslims with their new creed and accused Muslims of blasphemy; they never let any body touch the blessed grave of Prophet (S).

The Holy Qur’an further supports intermediary for approaching toward Allah where it states:

"O’ you who believe! Be mindful (of your duties) to Allah, and seek the means of approaching toward Him.”(Qur’an 5:35)

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ

آمَنُوا

اتَّقُوا

اللَّـهَ

وَابْتَغُوا

إِلَيْهِ

الْوَسِيلَةَ

..

Qur’an tells us that there exists a means of approaching "al-Wasilah”for us in each era, which is different than Allah and we should seek him if we want to approach toward Allah. In fact, both Tawassul and Wasilah are from the same root. When we make Tawassul, it means that we seek the Mercy of Allah by resorting to a connection who was more obedient toward Allah and, as a result, Allah answers his/her prayers faster than us. Allah may forgive us for the credit and the honor of that man/woman. It is true every where that doing a job (specially if it is asking for a big courtesy) without any connection is difficult or might be impossible. Approving such a courtesy needs credit, and the one without it should resort to the one who has the credit and the connection. This credit has been acquired by absolute obedience of Allah. Nonetheless, approving any intercession still depends on Allah:

"Who can intercedes with Him except the cases that He permits?”(Qur’an 2:255)

"They (i.e., prophets and Imams) do not say anything until He orders, and they act (in all things) by His command. He knows what is before them and what is behind them and they (i.e., those saints) offer no intercession except for anyone whom Allah accepts, and they are in awe and reverence of His (glory).”(Qur’an 21:27-28)

As you see there are exceptions. Some specific people can intercede with Allah by His permission. But this is not granted to every people. Now, I would like to give also more references from Sunni Hadith collections in this regard. The first reference is on the Tawassul of Ibn Abbas (ra) to Imam ‘Ali (as). Please note that Ibn Abbas spoke the following words after the martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali. Thus he did ask for intermediary of what you called a dead person.

"When the death time of Abdullah Ibn Abbas (ra) approached, he said: `O Allah! I seek to approach toward you by means of Wilayah (accepting the mastery) of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib.’“

Sunni references:

- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p662, Tradition #1129
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p167
- Manaqib Ahmad

لما حضرت عبد الله ابن عباس الوفاة قال: اللَّهم إني أتقربُ إليك بولاية علي ابن أبي طالب

Please note that Ibn Abbas died in 68/687 which was 28 years after the martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali (as). If resorting (Tawassul) to a dead was considered association (shirk), then Ibn Abbas would not dare to say so, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal would not have recorded it.

As for resorting to alive, al-Bukhari reported that Umar used make Tawassul to al-Abbas for rain:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.59

Narrated Anas:

Whenever there was drought, ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab used to ask Allah for rain through Al-’Abbas bin ‘Abdul Muttalib, saying, "O Allah! We used to request our Prophet to ask You for rain, and You would give us. Now we request the uncle of our Prophet to ask You for rain, so give us rain.”And they would be given rain."

Another related question is that: Is kissing the grave of the Prophet Shirk (association)? Is honoring the belongings of Prophet association?

Sahih al-Bukhari tells us it is NOT Shirk:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.373

Narrated Abu Juhaifa:

I saw Allah’s Apostle in a red leather tent and I saw Bilal taking the remaining water with which the Prophet had performed ablution. I saw the people taking the utilized water impatiently and whoever got some of it rubbed it on his body and those who could not get any took the moisture from the others’ hands.

Then I saw Bilal carrying an ‘Anza (a spear-headed stick) which he planted in the ground. The Prophet came out tucking up his red cloak, and led the people in prayer and offered two Rakat (facing the Ka’ba) taking ‘Anza as a Sutra for his prayer. I saw the people and animals passing in front of him beyond the ‘Anza.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 7.750

Narrated Abu Juhaifa:

I came to the Prophet while he was inside a red leather tent, and I saw Bilal taking the remaining water of the ablution of the Prophet, and the people were taking of that water and rubbing it on their
faces; and whoever could not get anything of it, would share the moisture of the hand of his companion (and then rub it on his face).

As we see, the great companions were honoring the drop of water which had touched the Prophet (S).

Sayyid Sharafuddin, a famous Shi’a scholar, went on pilgrimage to the House of Allah during the reign of King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud. He was one of those who were invited to the King’s palace to celebrate the Eid of al- Adh’ha. When his turn came to shake the King’s hand, he presented a leather bound Qur’an to the King. The King took the Qur’an and placed it on his forehead and then kissed it.

Sayyid Sharafuddin said: "O’ King! why do you kiss and glorify the cover which is made of a goat’s skin?!”The king answered: "I meant to glorify the Holy Qur’an, not the goat’s skin.”Sayyid Sharafuddin said: "Well said O’ King! We do the same when we kiss the window or the door of the Prophet’s Chamber, we know that it is made of iron, and could not harm or render a benefit, but we mean what is behind the iron and wood, we mean to respect the Messenger of Allah in the same way as you meant with the Qur’an when you kissed its goat’s skin cover.”

The audience was impressed by his speech and said: "You are right.”The King was forced to allow the pilgrims to ask for blessings from the Prophet’s relics, until the order was reversed by the successor of that King.

The issue is not that they are afraid of people associating others with Allah, rather, it is a political issue based on antagonizing Muslims in order to consolidate their own power and authority over Muslims, and history is the witness to what they have done.

Evidence for Tawassul by a Sunni Writer

From: mas@cadence.com [21] (Masud Khan)

Date: 3 Jul 1994 22:55:34 GMT

There has been a lot of discussion about intercession recently, and a few ill-informed people have issued "fatawa’s”condeming the practice as "shirk". If, as some individuals say, tawassul is "shirk”then from from the evidence available it seems that The Prophet (pbuh) taught a man to commit "shirk”and so did the Rightly Guided Khalifa ‘Uthman ibn Affan! (May Allah be our refuge from such thoughts).

wa’asalaam
Mas’ud

Tawassul - Supplicating Allah Through And Intermediary

Definition: Supplicating Allah by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, or a name or attribute of Allah Most High. Yusuf Rifa’i: I here want to convey the position, attested to by compelling legal evidence, of the orthodox majority of Sunni Muslim on the subject of supplicating Allah through an intermidiary (tawassul), and so I say (and Allah alone gives success) that since there is no disagreement among scholars that supplicating Allah through an intermediary is in principle legally valid, the discussion of it’s details merely concerns derived rulings that involve interschool differences, unrelated to questions of belief or unbelief, monotheism or associating partners with Allah (shirk); the sphere of the question being limited to permissibility or impermissibility, and its ruling being that it is either lawful or unlawful. There is no difference among groups of Muslims in their consensus on the permissibilty of three types of supplicating Allah through an intermediary (tawassul):

1 tawassul through a living righteous person to Allah Most High, as in the Hadith of the blind man with the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) as we shall explain;

2 the tawassul of a living person to Allah Most High through his own good deeds, as in the hadith of the three people trapped in a cave by a great stone, a hadith related by Imam Bukhari in his Sahih (Ref: vol 3 no 418); 3 and the tawassul of a person to Allah Most High through His entity (dhat), names, attributes, and so forth.

Since the legality of these types is agreed upon there is no reason to set forth the evidence for them. The only area of disagreement is supplicating Allah (tawassul) through a righteous dead person. The majority of the orthodox Sunni community hold that it is lawful, and have supporting hadith evidence, of which we will content ourselves with the hadith of the Blind Man, since it is the central pivot upon which the discussion turns.

The Hadith Of The Blind Man

Tirmidhi relates, through his chain of narrators from ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf, that a blind man came to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and said, "I’ve been afflicted in my eyesight, so please pray to Allah for me.”The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "Go make ablution (wudu), perform two rak’as of prayer, and then say:

“‘O Allah, I ask You and turn to You through my Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy; O Muhammad (Ya Muhammad), I seek your intercession with my Lord for the return of my eyesight (and in another version: "for my need , that it may be fulfilled. O Allah, grant him intercession for me").’"

The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) added, "And if there is some need, do the same."

Scholars of Sacred Law infer from this hadith the recommended character of the need, in which someone in need of something from Allah Most High performs such a prayer and then turns to Allah with this supplications together with other suitable supplications, traditional or otherwise, according to the need and how the person feels. The express content of the hadith proves the legal validity of tawassul through a living person (as the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) was a alive at the time).

It implicitly proves the validity of tawassul through a deceased one as well, since tawassul through a living or dead person is not through a physical body or through a life or death, but rather through the positive meaning (ma`na tayyib) attached to the person in both life and death. The body is but the vehicle that carries that significance, which requires that the person be respected whether alive or dead; for the words "O (Ya) Muhammad”are an address to someone physically absent - in which state the living and the dead are alike - an address to the meaning, dear to Allah, that is connected with his spirit, a meaning that is the ground of tawassul, be it through a living or a dead person.

The Hadith Of The Man In Need

Moreover, Tabarani, in his al-Mu`jam al-saghir, reports a hadith from ‘Uthman ibn Hanayf that a man repeatedly visited ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan (Allah be well pleased with him) concerning something he needed, but ‘Uthman paid no attention to him or his need.

The man met Ibn Hunayf and complained to him about the matter - this being after the death of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and after the caliphates of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar - so ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf, who was one of the Companions who collected hadiths and were learned in the religion of Allah said: "Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then come to the mosque, perform two rak’as of prayer therein, and say,

“‘O Allah, I ask You and turn to You through our Prophet Muhammad, the Prophet of Mercy; O Muhammad (Ya Muhammad), I turn through you to my Lord, that He may fulfill my need,’

"and mention your need. Then come so that I can go with you (to the caliph ‘Uthman)."

So the man left and did as he had been told, then went to the door of ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan (Allah be pleased with him), and the doorman came, took him by the hand, brought him to ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan and seated him next to him on a cushion. ‘Uthman asked, "What do you need?”and the man mentioned what he wanted, and ‘Uthman accomplished it for him and then said, "I hadn’t remembered your need until just now,”adding, "Whenever you need something, just mention it.”Then the man departed, met ‘Uthman ibn Hunayf, and said to him, "May Allah reward you! He didn’t see to my need or pay any attention to me until you spoke with him.”‘Uthman ibn Hunayf replied, "By Allah, I didn’t speak to him, but I have seen a blind man come to the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and complain to him of the loss of his eyesight. The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said, ‘Can you not bear it?’ and the man replied, ‘O messenger of Allah, I do not have anyone to lead me around, and it is great hardship for me.’ The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) told him, ‘Go to the place of ablution and perform ablution (wudu), then pray two rak’as of prayer and make these supplications.’ “Ibn Hunafy went on, "By Allah, we didn’t part company or speak long before the man returned to us as if nothing had ever been wrong with him."

This is an explicit, unequivocal text from a prophetic Companion proving the legal validity of tawassul through the dead. The account has been classed as rigorously authenticated (Sahih) by Bayhaqi, Mundhiri, and Haytami.

(Muhammad Hamid - a leading Hanafi scholar of this century:) As for calling upon (nida’) the righteous (when they are physically absent, as in the words "O (Ya) Muhammad”in the above hadiths), tawassul to Allah Most High through them is permissable, the supplication (du’a) being to Allah Most Glorious, and there is much evidence for its permissibility.

Those who call on them intending tawassul cannot be blamed. As for someone who believes that those called upon can cause effects, benefit, or harm, which they create or cause to exist as Allah does, such a person is an idolator who has left Islam - Allah be our refuge! This then,and a certain person has written an article that tawassul to Allah Most High through the righteous is unlawful, while the overwhelming majority of scholars hold it permissable, and the evidence that the writer uses to corroborate his view point is devoid of anything that demonstrates what he is trying to prove.

In declaring tawassul permissable, we are not hovering on the brink of idolatory (shirk) or coming anywhere near it, for the conviction that Allah Most High alone has influence over anything, outwardly, is a conviction that flows through us like our very lifeblood. If tawassul were idolatory (shirk), or if there were any suspicion of idolatory in it, the Prophet (Allah Most High bless him and give him peace) would not have taught it to the blind man when the latter asked him to supplicate Allah for him, though in fact he did teach him to make tawassul to Allah through him. And the notion that tawassul was permissible only during the lifetime of the person through whom it is done but not after his death is unsupported by any viable foundation from Sacred Law (Rudud ‘ala abatil wa rasa’il al- Shaykh Muhammad al-Hamid).

Mostly taken from "Reliance of the Traveller”(Umdat as-Salik) by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri (b. 702/1302 d. 769/1368) translated by Noah Ha Mim Keller.

Did Muhammad Receive Revelation by Mistake?!

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The following article is adopted from the "Shi’ites Under Attack”by Muhammad Jawad Chirri with some modification.

Do The Shi’ite Muslims Say That The Revelation Came To Muhammad By Mistake, And That It Was Intended For ‘Ali?

This (false accusation is) widely spread in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other Arab countries in order to discredit the followers of the members of the House of the Prophet. This accusation was made during periods of oppression against the Shiites. The rulers of the periods of the Omayads and Abbasids used to consider every follower of the Members of the House of the Prophet revolutionary and dangerous. They conspired against these Shiites and accused them of heresy and disbelief in order to encourage the Muslims to shed their blood and usurp their rights and wealth.

The centuries of oppression passed with all their injustices and terrors. It was expected that during the new period of freedom, the mistakes of the past would be corrected. It was hoped that Muslim scholars would make a serious study in order to see if there is any justification for such terrible accusations.

It is very easy to know the truth.

There are hundreds of books written by Shiite scholars about their beliefs. Had the Sunni scholars read any of these books, they would have found that the Shiite beliefs are in full agreement with the Book of God and the well- known statements of the Prophet.

We are living in the era of speed and easy movement. It is easy for Muslim scholars to have conferences, discuss problems, and find solutions.

The simplest principle of justice is to follow the commandment of the Holy Qur’an:

"Oh you who believe, if a transgressor comes to you with news, try to verify it, lest you inflict damage on people unwittingly; then you may consequently regret your hasty action”(ch. 49, v.6)

The Almighty commanded us to try to find out whether an accusation is true or false, and that we ought not to try people and convict them without questioning them.

We do not know of any court in the world in which the judge convicts a person before interviewing him, provided the accused is available and honors the summons.

In spite of the ease with which one can find the correct information nowadays, we find that those who accuse and spread hatred among Muslims do not take one single step in order to find the truth which may unite the Muslim world.

While writing these words, I recollect that the Egyptian government during the fifties sent the late Dr. Muhammad Bisar to Washington, D.C., as director of the Islamic Center there. I went to visit him and he received me kindly and informed me of the knowledge that he had acquired concerning
American Muslims. He initiated a dialogue between us, saying:

"Some of the Muslims in this country asked me about the various Islamic sects. I declared to them that all Muslim sects are good except the Shiite Ithnashari."

I immediately realized that R. Bisar did not know the meaning of Shiite Ithnashari. Otherwise, he would not have been rude enough to say that to me while I am a Shiite Ithnashari (meaning The Twelvers). Thus, we had the following dialogue:

Chirri: What is wrong with the Ithnashari?

Bisar: They believe in things opposed to Islam.

Chirri: Give us an example of their wrong belief.

Bisar: They say the revelation came to Muhammad by mistake, and that ‘Ali Ibn Abu Talib was supposed to receive the revelation.

Chirri: How did you learn that?

Bisar: I read it in the book of al-milal and al-nihal by al-Shahristani.

Chirri: Have you asked any Shiite scholar about this subject?

Bisar: No, I have not.

Chirri: Then you have convicted millions of Muslims and considered them "kafir”without asking any of them about this serious accusation. Did the Almighty command you to do that? And did Egypt send you to propagate such (an unjust) message?

A year after our meeting in Washington, I met Dr. Bisar in Philadelphia at an Islamic conference. He informed me that he re-examined the book of al- milal and al-nihal by al-Shihristani and found that what was attributed to Shiites, that the revelation came to Muhammad by mistake, was not the
belief of the Ithnashari Shiite school of thought. It was rather, a sect which existed and disappeared hundreds of years ago. Hearing that from him, I accepted his apology. Yet, I was amazed that it took him a whole year to re-read the book and discover the truth.

I spent years studying hadith and Islamic history in books which were written by Sunni and Ithnashari scholars. I never found in any Shiite book a hadith or a historical report indicating that ‘Ali Ibn Abu Talib was hugher than or equal to Muhammad. As a matter of fact, I found only the opposite. The Shittes consider ‘Ali to be the best man after the Messenger because he was the most obedient to him.

One of the hadith which the Shiites pride themselves upon is a hadith attributed to the Messenger of God:

The Prophet (S) said to the tribe of Wolai-ah:

"Bani Wolai-ah, you must change your attitude, or I shall send to you a man who is from me to punish you severely."

Some of the people who were present asked the Prophet "Who is the man you are going to send to them?”The Prophet replied: "He is the man who was patching the sole of my shoes.”They looked around and found ‘Ali patching the sole of the Prophet’s shoes.

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p634
- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p571, Tradition #966
- al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v3, p152
- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v1, p349
- Matalib al-’Aliyah, v4, p56
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p163

It is inconceivable that the Shiites can be proud of the fact that ‘Ali was the patcher of the Prophet Muhammad’s shoes and claim that the Imam is higher than or equal to the Prophet. Therefore, I do not find any justification for directing such an accusation at the Shiites who glorify the Prophet the most.

The Shiites say that the highest honor that Imam ‘Ali acquired is that he was chosen by the Prophet to be his brother. When the Prophet commanded every two Muslims to become brothers, he held ‘Ali’s hand and said, "This is my brother.”Thus, the Messenger of God, the highest Messenger, the Imam of all righteous people, the one who had no equal among the servants of God, made ‘Ali his brother. (Al-Seerah Al-Nabawiyah, by Ibn Hisham, part 1, p505).

Side Comments

A Wahhabi mentioned that:
There was a sect that claimed Gibreel (Alaihi Alsalam) erred in delivering the message. This sect were called the "Sheeah Ghurabiah". They might no longer exist by that name -- and they are a different sect than the Twelvers sect. ...

Dear friend, the Ghurabiyyah and similar sects are fictitious sects created y some story tellers such as al-Shahrastani and Abdul-Qahir Ibn Tahir al- Baghdadi, etc.

Nonetheless, we do not deny that there existed some extremist sects (al- Ghulat) who departed from the body of Shi’a, who believed ‘Ali is God, or those who believed in incarnation (Hulool). The reason was that they found so many virtues in Imam ‘Ali, and by their narrow-minded-brain, they could not believe that a human can possess all such virtues. As a result of that, they believed in the deity of ‘Ali. Surely they have gone astray. Thanks to God that they have perished in the course of History in a great deal.

However the leaders of such extremist groups and other deviated groups from Shi’a (whose leaders falsely claimed to be Imams) were not as simple minded as their followers. Those leaders were agents of the tyrranical rullers and their activities were purely political.

The Imams of Ahlul-Bayt and their followers disassociated themselves from these groups who were being established by the governments of each era to deviate the followers of Ahlul-Bayt and to destroy their path by keeping them away from the Imams and moving them toward the puppets of governments.

But these groups were melting down few months after their appearance, since people soon recognized the falsehood and ignorance of their leaders and their connection with the rulers, and thus people did not subscribe to these groups. A group without followers can not live for long, and its leader becomes out of business shortly after. Allah, Exalted He is, said in Qur’an:

"... and in this way, Allah strikes the examples of truth and falsehood. Then, as for the bubbles, it passes away (like disappearance of scum/foam upon the banks), while that which is for the good of mankind, remains in the earth...”(Qur’an 13:17)

What remained from these artificial groups was just a history written by those officials (who created those groups in the first place) which also includes fictitious stories.

We do not call such bankrupt groups Shi’a. From the demise of Prophet till today, the followers of Imam ‘Ali (as) are The Twelver Shi’ites. There are however few Zaydis and Ismailis around the world. Although the majority of scholars believe that they are Muslims (except those of them who abandoned the Islamic practices), yet we consider them out of the circle of Ahlul- Bayt. All other groups such as Alavi (or Nudhayri), etc. are NOT Shi’a for sure, and their emergance did not have anything to do with the Shi’a. To be a Shi’a one should meet all the following specifications:

1. Believing in all the articles of faith. These are comon amongst Muslims.

2. Believing that Imam ‘Ali is the immediate successor/executor of the Prophet Muhammad (S), appointed by Allah.

3. Believing that one should follow the genuine Sunnah of Prophet, and this Sunnah is transmitted by Ahlul-Bayt who are pure and sinless according to Qur’an. Furthermore, the instructions of the twelve Imams of Ahlul-Bayt are binding since they are in fact the instructions of the Prophet (S).

4. Believing that Imam Mahdi (as), the son of the 11th Imam is the Imam of our time and is living (contrary to the majority of Sunnis who believe he will be born later).

If any of the above conditions is missing for a person, he is not considered to be a Shi’a. Also in contrary to the rumors, to curse any of the companions is not a part of our belief.

The wahhabi contributor further mentioned:

The muslims who say one of the beliefs of shia is the above are not wrong; therefore, because the Ghurabi sect is a part of the shiaah herecy throught the history - but to attribute this claim to the
Ithnaasharis "official”beleifs is not just to say the least.

It is interesting to see that the above writer forgot that many deviant groups departed from the body of Sunnis such as Nation of Islam who believe God was a human, yet I haven’t heard of any Shi’a to say:

The muslims who say one of the beliefs of Sunni is the above are not wrong, because the Nation of Islam parted from the Sunnis - but to attribute this claim to the "official”beleifs of Sunnis is not just
to say the least.

You may replace the "nation of Islam”with "Ahmadis", "Qadianis", ... and the followers of Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab, and you can see how silly the above statement is going to be. Thanks to God that Shi’a do not attribute such things to the four Sunni schools.

Imamat versus Prophethood Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Shi’a believe that the rank of Imamat (the position of a divinely- appointed leader) is higher than that of prophethood and messengership.

Note that here we are comparing the rank of positions and not the rank of persons. As such, two divinely appointed Imams which both have the highest possible position from Allah, may have different ranks. For instance, out of the twelve Imams of Ahlul-Bayt, Imam ‘Ali (as) is the most virtuous. Also Prophet Muhammad (S) is more virtuous than Imam ‘Ali (as) thought they were both appointed by Allah as leaders.

In other words, Prophet Muhammad (S) is has the highest rank among mankind, and is the most virtuous creature of God and the most honored before Allah. The above belief does not undermine his position since Prophet Muhammad was an Imam during his time as well!

However, comparing the “duty “of prophet and Imam is like comparing apples and oranges or is like comparing the duty of a physician and an engineer. Imamat and prophethood are totally different functions though they may gather in one person such as Prophet Muhammad or Prophet Abraham, peace be upon them.

Evidence From Qur’an

People who are familiar with Qur’an to some extent, know that this belief is not a weird-thing. In fact, Qur’an testifies that the position of Imamat is higher than the position of prophethood and messengership. Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"And when Abraham was tested by his Lord with certain commands and he fulfilled them. Then He said: Lo! I appoint you an Imam for mankind.”(Qur’an 2:124).

 وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

As we can see, Prophet Abraham was further tested by Allah during his prophethood, and when he successfully passed the tests (which were the test on his life, leaving his wife, sacrificing his son), he was granted the position of Imamat. This shows position of Imamat is higher in degree than prophethood which has been given to him later after acquiring more qualifications. Degrees are always granted in ascending order. We have not seen any person who got his Ph.D. degree first, and then gets his highschool diploma. At least in the administration of God there is no such mess!

The first degree of Abraham, may the blessing of Allah be upon him, was becoming a servant of Allah (‘Abd), then he became Prophet (Nabi), then he became Messenger (Rasul), then he became a Confident (Khalil), and then he finally became Imam.

By the way,, the above verse of Qur’an (2:124) proves that Allah assigns Imam, and the designation of Imam is not the business of people.

Below is the Sunni commentary of Yusuf ‘Ali on the above verse (2:124):

Kalimat, literally "words", here used in the mystic sense of God’s Will or Decree or Purpose. This verse may be taken to be the sum the verses following. In everything Abraham fulfilled God’s wish: he purified God’s house; he built the sacred refuge of the Kaba; he submitted his will to God’s (referring to sacrifice of his son)

He was promised the leadership of the world; he pleaded for his progeny, and his prayer was granted, with the limitation that if his progeny was false to God, God’s promise did not reach the people who proved themselves false.

As we see, Qur’an clearly justifies the Shi’ite point of view in this matter. But again, since Prophet Abraham, Prophet Muhammad, and few others were also Imams, such belief (i.e., Imamat higher than prophethood) does not undermine their position.

Imam means a person who is appointed by God as a leader and as a guide (see Qur’an 21:73 and 32:24) to whom obedience is due, and whom people should follow. Messengers are Warners and Imams are Guides (13:7). Imams are the Stars of Guidance (6:97).

Muhammad (S) was a Prophet, a Messenger, and an Imam. By His death the door of prophethood and messengership was closed for ever. But the door of Imamat (leadership) remained open because he had successors (Caliphs; deputies).

Successor means a person who succeeds the position of the previous one. It is the obvious that successors of Prophet Muhammad did not share anything about his position of prophethood and messengership. What remained for them was Imamat (leadership).

And the number of these Imams are twelve as the Prophet himself testified. Also note that Qur’an clearly says that Imam and Caliph is assigned by God and this designation has nothing to do with people. For more evidence in the assignment of Imam by Allah, see the following verses of Qur’an: 38:20 (about David), 2:124 (about Abraham), 2:30 (about Adam), and 7:142, 20:29-36, 25:35 (about Aaron).

A Wahhabi contributor implied that the Shi’a are non-Muslims because they believe the above thing (Imamat higher than Messengership) while he did not present any single evidence from Qur’an and authentic Hadith against it. But I have presented a proof from Qur’an, and as such, better better be their own judge as to whether you are a Muslims or not.

As for Angels, Muslims agree that the level of the prophets are higher than that of angels. Qur’an states that all angels prostrated Adam. This is enough to prove that the rank of the prophets is higher than that of angels. And based on the previous conclusion that the position of Imamat is higher than that of prophethood, the position of Imamat will be higher than the rank of angels as well.

Evidence From Sunni Collections Of Traditions

The Shi’a further believe that the twelve Imams of the House of Prophet Muhammad have the rank higher than that of ALL the messengers (be Imam or not) except Prophet Muhammad (S). In other words, the Status of the successors of the Seal of the Prophets is higher than that of the successors of all the previous prophets. (Note that the sucessors of the previous Prophets were themselves prophets). Need Sunni reference? Here are some:

- Imam ‘Ali (as) having the highest virtues of the early great Messengers:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "He who wants to see Noah (as) in his determination, Adam (as) in his knowledge, Abraham (as) in his clemency, Moses (as) in his intelligence and Jesus (as) in his religious devotion should look at ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as)."

Sunni references:

- Sahih al-Bayhaqi
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as quoted in
- Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v2, p449
- Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhruddin al-Razi, under the commentary of the Verse of Impreciation (Mubilah), v2 p288. He wrote this tradition has been accpeted as all genuine.

- Ibn Batah has recorded it as a tradition related by Ibn Abbas as is stated in the book "Fat’h al-Mulk al-’Ali bi Sihah Hadith-e-Bab-e- Madinat al-Ilm", p34, by Ahmed Ibn Muhammad Ibn Siddiq al-Hasani al- Maghribi.

- Among those who have admitted that Imam ‘Ali (as) is the store house of the secrets of all the Prophets is the Chief of Gnostics, Muhi al- Din al-Arabi, from whom al-Arif al-Sha’arni has copied it in his al- Yuwaqit wa al-Jawahir (p172, topic 32).

- The Light (Noor) of the Prophet (S) and ‘Ali (as) preceded the creation of Adam (as):

Salman al-Farsi (ra) narrated that:
I heard the Messenger of Allah (S) saying: "I myself, and ‘Ali were one light in the hands of Allah fourteen thousand years (14,000) before He created Adam (as). When Allah created Adam (as) He divided that light into two parts, one part is me and one part ‘Ali."

Sunni References:

- Mizan Al-Ei’tidal, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p235
- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p663, Tradition #1130
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v2, p164, v3, p154
- History of Ibn Asakir Remark: "hand of Allah”means His power. The phrase "within the hands
of Allah”means in His presence, domain, realm, kingdom.

This clearly shows that the rank of Prophet Muhammad (S) and Imam ‘Ali (as) are better than any human being ever created by Allah.

- No one crosses the Path except by a passport from ‘Ali (as):

Anas Ibn Malik narrated:
"When Abu Bakr neared death,..., Abu Bakr said that he heard the Messenger of Allah (S) saying: That there is an obstacle on the Path which no one crosses unless with a passport (permission) from ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as). And I heard the Messenger of Allah (S) saying: "I am the seal of the prophets and you, ‘Ali, the seal of the Awliyaa."

Sunni references:

- Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v10, p356
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, subheading 2, p195

Imam ‘Ali (as) narrated:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: When Allah gathers the first-ones and the last-ones on the Day of Judgment, and the Path has been erected on the bridge of Hell, no one can cross it unless he had along proof of allegiance (Wilaya) to ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib."

Sunni reference: al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v2, p172

- ‘Ali (as) is the divider of People to Paradise and Hell:

"The prophet (S) said to ‘Ali (as): You are the divider of Paradise and Hell on the Day of Judgment, you say to Hell: This one for me and that one for you."

Sunni reference: al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar, Ch. 9, subheading 2, p195

"‘Ali (as) said: I am the alloter/divider of Hell."

Sunni references:
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p402
- Radd al-Shams, by Shathan Al-Fudhaily

"The Messenger of Allah (S) has said: ‘Ali is the divider of Hell."

Sunni reference: Kunooz Al-Haqa’iq, by Abdul Raouf al-Manawi, p92

And here is a poem from al-Shafi’i (one of the four Sunni Imams):

"‘Ali will judge mankind and allot them either paradise or hell. He was the leader of men and Jinns, the true Testator of the Holy Prophet. If the followers of ‘Ali are ‘Rafidhi’ verily I am one of that sect. ‘Ali at the time of breaking of the symbols in the Ka’ba put his feet on that shoulder where God had put his hand on the ‘Night of Mi’raj’ and verily ‘Ali was that into whose eyes shone the light of God."

Do I need to comment?! Now look at what your master Umar said on the virtue of Imam ‘Ali (as):

Umar Ibn al-Khattab said: "If all the seven planets, and the all the seven heavens are put in one scale of balance and the faith of ‘Ali in the other, ‘Ali’s pan will turn the scales."

Sunni References:

- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari
- Izalat al-Khifa Maqsad

- ‘Ali (as) the best of people after Prophet Muhammad (S):

"...Jabir said: The messenger of Allah (S) said: ‘Ali is the best of humanity (after me), so whoever has doubt is a Kafir."

Sunni references:
- Kinooz Al-Haqa’iq, by Abdul Raouf al-Manawi, p92
- Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v7, p421

Here is another one:

...Zar quoting Abdullah, quoting ‘Ali (as), that the Prophet (S) said: "Whoever does not say that ‘Ali is the best in my people, is a Kafir."

Sunni references:
- Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v3, p19
- Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v9, p419

also Barida narrated:

The messenger of Allah (S) said to Fatimah (sa) that: "I gave you in marriage to the best in my Ummah, the most knowledgeable in them, the best in patience in them, and the first Muslim among them."

Sunni reference: Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p398

Now, let us now look at a future episode on the appearance of Imam Mahdi (as) (the last Imam of the House of the Prophet(S)). Sunnis have narrated in their authentic books that when Imam Mahdi (as) comes, Prophet Jesus (as) will descent and will pray behind him. This clearly shows that the rank of Imam Mahdi (as) is higher than that of Prophet Jesus who was one of the five greatest messengers of Allah. It is narrated in Sahih

Muslim that:

Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari (ra) said: I heard the Messenger of Allah saying: "A group of my Ummah will fight for the truth until near the day of judgment when Jesus, the son of Marry, will descend, and the leader of them will ask him to lead the prayer, but Jesus declines, saying: "No, Verily, among you Allah has made leaders for others and He has bestowed his bounty upon them."

Sunni reference:

- Sahih Muslim, Arabic, part 2, p193
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 45,384
- Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p251
- Nuzool Isa Ibn Maryam Akhir al-Zaman, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p57
- Musnad, by Abu Ya’ala which provides another version of the tradition with more clear words on the authority of Jabir that the Messenger of

Allah said: "A group among my Ummah will continue to fight for the truth until Jesus, the son of Marry, will descend, and the Imam of them will ask him to lead the prayer, but Jesus replies: "You have more right to it and verily Allah has hnonored some of you over others in this Ummah.”

Ibn Abu Shaybah, another Sunni traditionist, and the mentor of al-Bukhari and Muslim, has reported several traditions about Imam al-Mahdi (as). He has also reported that the Imam of the Muslims who will lead Prophet Jesus in prayer is Imam al-Mahdi himself.

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti mentioned that: "I have heard some of the deniers of (truth) deny what has been conveyed about Jesus that when he descends will pray the Fajr prayer behind al-Mahdi. They say, Jesus has higher status than to pray behind a non-Prophet.

This is a bizarre opinion since the issue of prayer of Jesus behind al-Mahdi has been proven strongly via numerous authentic traditions from the Messenger of Allah, who is the most truthful.”And then al-Suyuti goes on narrating some of the traditions in this regard. (See Nuzool Isa Ibn Maryam Akhir al-Zaman, by Jalaluddin al-
Suyuti, p56).

Also al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani mentioned that:

"The Mahdi is of this Ummah, and that Jesus (S) will come down and pray behind him."

Sunni reference: Fat’h al-Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v5, p362

This is also mentioned by another scholar, Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, who wrote:

"The Ahlul-Bayt are like the stars through whom we are guided in the right direction, and if the starts are taken away (or hidden) we would come face to face with the signs of the Almighty as promised (i.e., the Day of Resurrection). This will happen when the Mahdi will come, as mentioned in the traditions, and the Prophet Jesus will say his prayers behind him, the Dajjal will be slain, and then the signs of the Almighty will appear one after another."

Sunni reference: Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch 11, p91

All these clearly show that the rank of Imam Mahdi (as) is higher than that of Prophet Jesus (as) who was one of the five greatest messengers of Allah.

Are The Imams Inspired

There is no doubt that when the verse:

"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.”(Qur’an 5:3)

the religion completed. Allah revealed Qur’an as well as the Shari’ah (Divine law) ONLY to the Prophet (S), and non of such things was revealed to Imam ‘Ali (as). If Imam ‘Ali was inspired (Ilham) it had nothing to do with religious commandments; it was rather about what happened and what will happen.

There are many methods that Allah may inform His servants of something. One way is revelation (Wahy). The other way is inspiration (Ilham). By inspiration, Allah induces the knowledge into the heart of His servant.

This is unanimously held by the all the Islamic Schools.

But do you really think revelation (Wahy) is only for the prophets and the messengers? If yes, then you have contradicted Qur’an, for Qur’an confirms that Allah sent revelation (Wahy) to the mother of Moses. The mother of Moses was neither a prophet nor a messenger. Agreed? Allah revealed to her to leave her son in the river so that Pharaoh’s soldier could take it to the Palace:

And We revealed to the mother of Moses: Suckle (thy child) but when thou hast fears about him cast him into the river but fear not nor grieve: for We shall restore him to thee and We shall make him one of Our apostles. (Qur’an 28:7)

وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ أُمِّ مُوسَىٰ

...

Notice that Qur’an straightforwardly uses the word Wahy (revelation). Here, Yusuf ‘Ali has translated the word Wahy into inspiration. But Qur’an uses Wahy (revelation), and not Ihlam (inspiration). Wahy and Ihlam are two different things.

However one thing which is clear is that the revelations to those who were neither prophet nor messenger, did not have anything to do with Shari’ah (divine law). It did NOT have anything to do with religious practices etc.

Rather, It was an order to what way to choose at the time of confusion and/or informing what has happened or what will happen.

So we can conclude that even revelation has different types. Only the revelation to Prophets and messengers is related to Shari’ah (divine law) and new religious practices, while others do not receive this type of revelation.

Remark: Qur’an also uses the word Wahy for non-human beings, but I am not concerned about that. I was focusing on different types of Wahy for human being only.

About our Imams: There are twelve Imams (Guides) after Prophet Muhammad (S). Prophet mentioned that the number of his successors are twelve, and al-Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ahmad, ... recorded that.

The first of them, Imam ‘Ali, got his knowledge of religion and the Divine Laws from Prophet Muhammad directly. Later Imams got it from the preceding Imams. There was NO revelation of Divine Law (concerning oneself or people) after Prophet Muhammad (S). Allah may inform something to his appointed Imam, but the information is not any how related to Divine Law since the religion is complete. The information is only related to what happened and what will happen.

Do Imams Meet Angels

Also, according to Qur’an, talking to angels is NOT exclusive to prophets and messengers. Allah mentioned in Qur’an that Mary (the mother of Jesus) talked to angels, and angels talked to him. Look at Qur’an, to see the conversation of Mary and the angels:

"Behold! the angels said "O Mary! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus the son of Mary held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. (Qur’an 3:45)"

There is a whole conversation between Mary and the angel. See a couple of verses before and after the above verse. Mary (as) was neither a prophet nor a messenger, yet she talked to angels. However the communication of Mary with angels had nothing to do with Shari’ah (Divine Law). It did not have anything to do with religious practices. Rather it was a news to what is about to happen, and instructions of what to do.

In this connection, also see verses 11:69-73 where angels talked to the wife of Abraham and gave her the glad tiding that she is pregnant of prophet Isaac (as).

Even Sunnis claim that Imran Ibn al-Husayn al-Khuza’i (d. 52/672) who was one of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (S), was visited by angels, greeted by angels, shook hands with angels and saw them, only being left by them for a short period after which the angels returned to him till the end of his life.

Sunni references:

(1) Sahih Muslim, V4, pp 47-48
(2) Also commentaries of Sahih Muslim by al-Nabawi, V8, P206, and by al-Abi and al-Sanusi, V3, P361.
(3) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, V4, PP 427-428
(4) Sunan Darimi, V2, P305
(5) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, V3, P472
(6) Tabaqat, by Ib Sa’d, V7, part 1, P6
(7) al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, V3, P1208
(8) Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn Athir, V4, P138
(9) Jami’ul Usul, by Ibn Athir, V7, P551
(10) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, V3, PP 26-27
(11) Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, V8, P126
(12) Fathul al-Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, V12, P261
(13) Sharh al-Mawahib, by al-Qastalani, V7, P133

There is no shadow of doubt that Imam ‘Ali (as) was "Muhaddath”which means "a person who has been spoken to". Not only him, but also, all the twelve Imams as well as Lady Fatimah (sa) were Muhaddath/Muhaddathah.

Based on the authentic Sunni traditions, it is narrated by Abu Huraira and Aisha that:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.675 (Arabic-English Version)

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Amongst the people preceding you there used to be ‘Muhaddathun’ (i.e. persons who can guess things that come true later on, like those persons have been inspired by a divine power), and if there are any such persons amongst my followers, it is ..."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.38 (Arabic-English Version)

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, "Among the nations before you there used to be people who were inspired (though they were not prophets). And if there is any of such a persons amongst my followers, it is ."
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Among the nation of Bani Israel who lived before you, there were men who used to be inspired with guidance though they were not prophets, and if there is any of such persons amongst my followers, it is ..."

Also:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Verily among the nations before your time there have been Muhaddathoon (those who have been spoken to), and if there is one among my people it is ...”Also the Messenger of Allah said: "Verily among the Children of Israel before your time there have been men who have been spoken to (rijalun yukallamoon) who were NOT prophets and if there is one among my people it is ..."

Sunni reference:

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic version, v4, p211, v5, p15, and also its commentaries:
- Fat’h al-Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v7, p324, v8, pp 49-51
- Umdatul Qari, by al-Ayni, v16, pp 55,198-199
- Irshad al-Sari, by Qastalani, v6, p103
- Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, part 7, p115, and its commentaries:
- Sharh Nawawi (sahih Muslim), part 15, p166
- Sharh al-Abi, part 6, pp 203-205
- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p622, and its commentaries:
- Aridah al-Ahwadhi, by Ibn al-Arabi, v13, pp 149-150
- Tuhfah al-Ahwadhi, by al-Mubarak Furi, v10, pp 182-183
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v6, p55

Note: I have deleted the name of the companion of the Prophet mentioned in the above traditions since his being Muhaddath is not confirmed by the Shi’a. Concerning the opinion of the Shi’a see al-Ghadir, by al-Amini, v5, pp 42-54, v8, pp 90-91.

It is mentioned in the above Sunni commentaries that the meaning of Muhaddath here is a person who is divinely inspired, who meets the angels and is spoken to by them, and who is informed of the news of Ghayb (not to be confused with the knowledge of Ghayb which belongs to Allah only) which is the information about the present time and the future, and that the companions who are mentioned in those traditions had these attributes!!!

The conclusion is that the existence of Muhaddathoon (those who are spoken to) is a matter attested by all Muslims and that it is not something contrary to the fundamentals of Islam. The above Sunni documents also give evidence to the fact that Muhaddathoon are not prophets and they did not bring Shari’ah (divine law) from Allah to people.

Here are the defenitions of messenger, prophet, and Imam:

1. A Prophet (Nabi) is a person to whom the Divine Law (Shari’ah) descends; this divine law may be concerned with beliefs (`aqa-id) or with practical activities (Ibadat, like prayer). This Divine Law either deals with the Nabi’s own life or with that of his community; or both.

This is the fundamental definition of prophethood, though the prophet may also be informed of other things. The descent of the Divine Law (Shari’ah) may be direct, or through an intermediary like an angel.

2. A Human Messenger/Apostle (Rasool) is a Prophet who receives a Divine Law that concerns himself AND people other than himself.

3. Imam means a person who is appointed by God as a leader and as a guide (see Qur’an 21:73 and 32:24) to whom obedience is due, and whom people should follow. Messengers are Warners and Imams are Guides (13:7). Imams are the Stars of Guidance (6:97).

It is also interesting to remark about the time when the verse of the completeness of religion was revealed. It should be quite surprising that many Sunni scholars of Tafsir have confirmed that the verse:

"Today I have completed your religion and my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.”(Qur’an 5:3)

Was revealed in Ghadir Khum when the Messenger of Allah declared his successor. Some of Sunni references which mentioned the revelation of the above verse of Qur’an in Ghadir Khum after the speech of the Prophet:

(1) al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v3, p19
(2) Tarikh, by Khatib al-Baghdadi, v8, pp 290,596 from Abu Hurayra
(3) Manaqaib, by Ibn Maghazali, p19
(4) History of Damascus, Ibn Asakir, v2, p75
(5) al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p13
(6) Manaqib, by Khawarazmi al-Hanfi, p80
(7) al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v3, p213
(8) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qudoozi al-Hanafi, p115
(9) Nuzul al-Qur’an, by al-Hafiz Abu Nu’aym narrated on the authority Abu Sa’id Khudri.

... and more.

The above verse clearly indicates that Islam without announcing the leadership of Imam ‘Ali was not complete, and perfection of religion was due to announcement of the Prophet’s immediate successor.

Imamat versus Prophethood Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Difference Between Nabi And Rasool

In Arabic there are no separate words for Messenger and Apostle. The distinction is between Nabi (Prophet) and Rasool (Messenger or Apostle).

1- Nabi (=Prophet)
2- Rasool (=Messenger=Apostle)

Note that the degree of prophethood is lower than the degree of messengership/apostleship.

By definition:

1. A Prophet (Nabi) is a person to whom the Divine Law (Shari’ah) descends; this divine law may be concerned with beliefs (`aqa-id) or with practical activities (Ibadat, like prayer). This Divine Law either deals with the Nabi’s OWN life or with that of his community; or both.

This is the fundamental definition of prophethood, though the prophet may also be informed of other things. The descent of the Divine Law (Shari’ah) may be direct, or through an intermediary like an angel.

2. A Human Messenger/Apostle (Rasool) is a Prophet who receives a Divine Law that concerns himself and people other than himself. So every (human) Rasool is Nabi, while the reverse is not true. Also every Nabi whom Qur’an has mentioned along with a community (Umma), is consequently a Rasool.

Thus when Qur’an states that Muhammad (S) is the last Prophet (33:40), then by the above definition, he is the last Messenger/Apostle also. Note that the word "Human”is important in the definition of Rasool because the Qur’an uses the term "Rasool”also for angels who issue a command at the will of Allah (SWT):

"Allah chooses Messengers from ANGELS and from men, for Allah is He Who hears and sees (all things). (Qur’an 22:75)"

"There came Our Messengers to Abraham with glad tidings. They said, "Peace!”he answered, "Peace!”and hastened to entertain them with a roasted calf. (Qur’an 11:69)"

"When Our Messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and felt himself powerless (to protect) them. He said: This is a distressful day. (Qur’an 11:77)"

"(The Messengers) said: O Lut! we are Messengers from thy Lord!...(Qur’an 11:81)"

----Also see: 7:37, 15:57, 15:61, 19:19, 29:31, 29:33.

However, a Nabi is only a human being -- no angel can be called a Nabi. So every (human) Rasool is a Nabi, while every human Nabi is not necessarily a Rasool.

The number of Messengers (Rusul) is less than the number of Prophets (Nabiyoon); and every Rasool received a book, while some Nabees received abook. In addition, since he has to convince his people to accept a new religion with new practices, a Rasool’s work is much harder than that of a Nabi.

This is on top of the fact that people’s needs, minds, and abilities have changed; and accepting a new religion is not an easy task. This is while a Nabi’s new religious instructions are for himself (unless he is a Rasool). Surely a Nabi invites people toward Allah (SWT); however, he does not set any new practices for the people. So, in essence, if a Nabi is NOT a Rasool, the people that he invites to Allah (SWT) would be ordered to follow the custom and practices of a previous Rasool.

Among Rasools, however, there are five individuals who are higher than the others. As you might know, the only difference between those five and other rasools is that they are assigned universally (for the whole mankind at their time), while the rest of rasools were locally (just for one city or area). My recollection is that the word ‘Alameen and/or Jamee’an has been used in Qur’an for Prophet Jesus (as) supporting this idea.

Once a Bahai claimed that Rasools (who came before Bab!) were only those five who had book. But the rest were Nabi. This is not correct since Qur’an states that Dawood had Zaboor and yet he is not counted among those five great Messengers. So he is Rasool because he brought a book for people.

Imam/Muhaddath

Imam means a person who is appointed by God as a leader and as a guide (see Qur’an 21:73 and 32:24) to whom obedience is due, and whom people should follow. Messengers are Warners and Imams are Guides (13:7). Imams are the Stars of Guidance (6:97).

Imam does not receive divine revelation about Sharia (divine law). He does not receive any commands concerning new religous paractices, and so on.

However, he may be informed of the events about the past and future. Another difference between Rasool and Nabi and Muhaddath (i.e., Imam) is on how they communicate with the angels, and is given in Usul Kafi, kitabul Hujjah usder verse 22:52:

Rasool sees and hears the angel in awakness and sleep. Nabi hears the angel and sees him while asleep, but does not see him while awake though hears the speech. Imam (muhaddith) is the one who hears the angel in awakness while does not see him in awakness or sleep.

In the previous part we quoted from Qur’an that Mary (as) had communication with angels. If according to Sahih al-Bukhari, Fatimah (sa) was the best of ladies in this world and in hereafter, then why can’t she communicate with the angels?

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.819

Narrated ‘Aisha:

The Messenger of Allah said to Fatimah (who was crying at her father’s deathbed): "Are you not satisfied that you are the chief of all the ladies of Paradise or the chief of all the believing women?"

أما ترضين أن تكوني سيدة نساء أهل الجنة أو نساء المؤمنين؟

Furthermore, Ibn Abbas (ra) narrated:

The Messenger of Allah (S) said: Four women are the mistress of the worlds: Mary, Asiya (the wife of Pharaoh), Khadija, and Fatimah. And the most excellent one among them in the world is Fatimah."

Sunni references: Ibn Asakir, as quoted in Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor

For those who love Sahih al-Bukhari, I will quote this book once more which confirms that Lady Fatimah (sa) had, indeed, communication with Gabriel:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.739

Narrated Anas:

When the ailment of the Prophet (S) got aggravated, he became unconscious whereupon Fatimah said, "Oh, how distressed my father is!”

He said, "Your father will have no more distress after today.”When he expired, she said, "O Father! Who has responded to the call of the Lord Who has invited him! O Father, whose dwelling place is the Garden of Paradise (i.e. al-Firdaus)! O Father! We convey this news (of your death) to Gabriel.”When he was buried, Fatimah said, "O Anas! Do you feel pleased to throw earth over Allah’s Apostle?"

Not only that, but also Sunnis reported that Imam Hasan Ibn ‘Ali has said that Gabriel used to descend to Ahlul-Bayt. It is reported that Imam al- Hasan Ibn ‘Ali (as) said the following in a discourse which he delivered on the martyrdom of Imam ‘Ali:

"I am from the Ahlul-Bayt that Gabriel used to descend on us and ascend (back to heavens) from among us."

إنَّا من أهل البيت الذي كان جبرئيل ينزل إلينا و يصعد من عندنا

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, "Chapter of understanding the virtues of companions,”v3, p172

Now, when Imam Hasan uses the word "us", it means that it was not just prophet who used to received Gabriel. Surely Gabriel did NOT reveal anything of Qur’an to Imam Hasan. But, the above Sunni tradition shows that, they could communicate with the Gabriel.

Mushaf (book) of Fatimah (sa) was also of this type. Some booklets of hatred and lie published by anti-Shi’i groups allege that based on Usul Kafi, Shi’a believe there is a Qur’an called "Qur’an of Fatimah"! This is a false accusation. There is no tradition in Usul Kafi saying "Qur’an of Fatimah". There are however, very few traditions in one chapter of Usul Kafi which assert that Fatimah (sa) wrote a book (mushaf). The tradition states "The book of Fatimah". Surely Qur’an is a book (mushaf), but any book is NOT Qur’an. This allegation is as silly as saying "Qur’an of al-Bukhari”instead of "book of al-Bukhari"!

Also those few traditions in al-Kafi clearly state that there is no single verse of Qur’an in the Book of Fatimah. This shows that the book of Fatimah is totally different than Qur’an. Of course, it was three time bigger than Qur’an in length.

In one tradition it said that Lady Fatimah (sa), after the Prophet (S) passed away, used to write what she was told that would happen to her descendants and stories about other rulers to come (up to the day of resurrection). It was the sayings of Gabriel about what will happen. As I mentioned and proved by Qur’an and Hadith, talking to angels is not exclussive to the prophets and messengers.

Fatimah (sa) recorded (or asked Imam ‘Ali to record) those information, which was kept in her family of Imams, and was called "The Book (Mushaf) of Fatimah". A tradition which follows this one clearly states that what is referred to by "The Book of Fatimah”is not a part of Qur’an and has nothing to do with Allah’s commandments/halals/harams. It does NOT have anything to do with Shari’ah (divine law) and the religious practices. Let me give you some of those traditions:

Abu Abdillah (as) said: "... We have with us the Book of Fatimah, but I do not claim that anything of the Qur’an is in it.”(Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #637)

Abu Abdillah (as) also said about the book of Fatimah: "There is nothing of what is permitted and what is forbidden (al-Halal and al- Haram) in this; but in it is the knowledge of what will happen.”(Usul Kafi, Tradition #636)

Abdul Malik Ibn Ayan said to Abu Abdillah (as): "The Zaydiyyah and the Mu’tazilah have gathered around Muhammad Ibn Abdillah (Ibn al-Hasan, the second). Will have they any rule?”He (as) said: "By Allah there are two books in my possession in which every prophet and every ruler who rules on this earth (from the beginning of the earth till the day of Judgment) has been named. No, by Allah, Muhammad Ibn Abdillah is not one of them.”(Usul Kafi, Tradition #641)

"Mushaf”refers to a collection of "Sahifa”which is singular for "page". The literal meaning of Mushaf is "The manuscript bound between two boards". In those days they used to write on leather and other materials. They either rolled the writings -- what is known as scroll in English.

Or they kept the separable sheets and bound them together, in what could be called as "Mushaf", a book in today’s terms. The equivalent to the word book "Kitab”used to (and still is) refer to either a letter (e.g. of correspondence) or to an document that was written down or recorded. The Arabic word for wrote "Kataba”is a derivative of the same word.

Although the Qur’an is commonly called a "Mushaf”today, perhaps referring to its "collection”after it was dispersed. Qur’an is a Mushaf (book), but any Mushaf (book) is not necessarily the Qur’an! There is no Qur’an of Fatimah! As the above and many other traditions suggest, The book of Fatimah has absolutely no connection with Qur’an. This concept is commonly pulled out of context and published by anti-Shi’i groups due to their hatred toward the Followers of the Members of the House of Prophet (S). I have seen it mentioned in a book printed by the government of Saudi Arabia.

What is also very important to recognize and understand is that belief in Mushaf Fatimah is not a requirement of belief to the Shi’a. It is just very few traditions which report such a thing. It is nothing crucial for us as the followers, nor any Shi’a (except Imam Mahdi) has access to it.

Some Side Comments

A Wahhabi mentioned that the Shi’a believe:

“The Imams know when they will die, and they do not die execpt with their choice.

Well, this is also granted to the prophets. So consequently I don’t see why Imam should not have it. Here are the two traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari which confirms such claim for Moses:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 2.423 and 4.619

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The angel of death was sent to Moses and when he went to him, Moses slapped him severely, spoiling one of his eyes. The angel went back to his Lord, and said, "You sent me to a slave who does not want to die.”

Allah restored his eye and said, "Go back and tell him (i.e. Moses) to place his hand over the back of an ox, for he will be allowed to live for a number of years equal to the number of hairs coming under his hand.”(So the angel came to him and told him the same). Then Moses asked, "O my Lord! What will be then?”He said, "Death will be then."

He said, "Let it be now.”He asked Allah that He bring him near the Sacred Land at a distance of a stone’s throw. Allah’s Apostle (S) said, "Were I there I would show you the grave of Moses by the way near the red sand hill."

Sahih Al Bukhari
Arabic English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan v2, p236 (2.423 reference)
Chapter: Whoever desired to be buried in the Sacred Land .....

Sahih Al Bukhari
Arabic English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
v4, p409 (4.619 reference)
Chapter: The death Of Moses and his rememberance after his death.

According to the above tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari, Moses alleged to resist against death, and then was told by Allah when he would die (the number of hairs). Again Moses asked God to change that decision to be now.

The mockery tone of the above tradition by al-Bukhari is questionable for us, but since you call it authentic, then you should agree that prophets may know their death time. So why not Imam?

Here I should mention that according to Islamic teaching, Allah didn’t/doesn’t relinquish His authority to prophets and Imams. The authority of prophets and Imams is not independent of God. This authority is given to them by Allah and is controlled by Allah too. If they disobey Allah, such authority will be taken away immediately.

So if Moses or other prophets and Imams died in their choice, we should keep in mind that such sinless people do not desire anything that Allah does not desire. So their wish about the time of their death is exactly what Allah wished, since they are absolutely obedient toward Allah. Actually what I just said here is somehow contradicting the report of Abu Huraira given by al-Bukhari (saying that Moses resisted).

But since you believe in al-Bukhari, then you actually go further than the claim written in al-Kafi. In other words, the above tradition of al-Bukhari suggests that a prophet can resist and change the order of God and even knock out the angel of death. (May Allah protect us from such evil words).

“All of the Earth belongs to the Imams. (p.407)

Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty said:

"The earth is Allah’s. He gives it as a heritage to whom He will, and the good end is for the righteous servants.”(Qur’an 7:128).

... إِنَّ الْأَرْضَ لِلَّـهِ يُورِثُهَا مَن يَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ

May Allah guide those who have such beliefs to the True Islam. And make this net and its members a cause to that.

May Allah help all of us to understand the above Qur’anic verses, and may Allah let us understand the traditions mentioned above which are from authentic Sunni books and let us not die in ignorance. Amen

Their is no denying that ‘Ali was one of the most knowledgeable of the sahaba. Even if we do accept that ‘Ali is the most knowledgeable, what then? Would that mean no one else had any knowledge?

No. It means others had much less knowledge. This implies those who chose other inferior people in knowledge to lead the community for their own desires, are responsible for the Misfortune of all Muslims throughout the history. Shiats say that Imam must possess above all such qualities as knowledge, bravery, justice, wisdom, piety, love of God etc., in order to assure the prosperity of the Islamic community.

Is Qur’an correct that Imamat is a degree higher than prophethood and messengership?

There are different levels of imamat. The imamat of the Prophets is higher than any other imamat. Certainly, an imam of a masjid is by no means higher than a Prophet or Messenger.

Certainly you did not answer my question. I was not talking about the degrees of Imamat. Please read the question again. As for Imam of Masjid, this shows you did not read the definition that I gave for the Imam in my original article. I said:

Imam means a person who is appointed by God as a leader and as a guide to whom obedience is due, and whom people should follow.

Does the above definition fit to Imam of Masjid?! Allah said that Prophet Muhammad is a warner, and for every community (generation) there exists a guide (Imam). (Qur’an 13:7). It is clear that there is no prophet after Prophet Muhammad. So those guides who are for every generation are not prophets.

because even the best pious person can only be pious if he believes in all the Prophets, how then can he become better than one in whom he must believe in order to be considered pious?

Prophet Muhammad believed in all prophets before him, but his position is higher than all of them. Agreed?

Finality of the Prophethood

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

The following article is a response to an individual questioning whether or not the Prophet Muhammad (S) is indeed the Final Messenger sent by Allah (SWT) to mankind. He cited some verses from the Qur’an, and questioned if they do in fact refer to a Prophet and/or Messenger after the Prophet Muhammad (S).

In response to the following verses, I render my own, relative understanding of the verses. I am not a scholar in Islam, and very few people are; as such, I take full responsibility for what I say here, and I emphasize that my answer is not to be taken exhastive, definitive, or absolute.

I was not able to access books of Tafsir (Qur’anic Commentaries) to ascertain some meanings, but my assurance to you is that there is no messenger after the final messenger, Muhammad (S & His Family), as will be demonstrated, Allah (SWT) Willing. Again, I restate that the following is my own understanding. It should not be taken as a perfect representation of the Islamic belief and/or Shi’i ideology.

Here are some of the perplexing verses:

33. O children of Adam! there shall come to you Apostles from among yourselves, rehearsing my signs to you; and whoso shall fear God and do good works, no fear shall be upon them, neither shall they be put to grief. (The Heights (al-Araf)

The verse you quote is numbered incorrectly; the correct number is (7:35). The verse does NOT suggest another Messenger at all. The way I understand it is that Allah (SWT) is making a statement about the Messengers which He (SWT) sends to His (SWT) creation. As such, the warning to the people is that if a Messenger, like Moses, Jesus, or Muhammad (S), among others, should emerge from amongst you, then follow him.

For those who follow him, they shall not grieve, but those that don’t, shall indeed suffer. The verse is really saying that throughout the ages, there shall come Messengers sent by Allah (SWT) as a Mercy to His (SWT) creation; whosoever follows these Messengers and abides by the message which they (the Messengers) bring, shall grieve not, nor fear nothing.

Let me elaborate some more. In Arabic, one word can have many, many meanings that sometimes seem totally conflicting. As such, any translation of the Qur’an is not acceptable as the platform whence an argument concerning a verse is to be launched. We must return to the Arabic original. I will surrender to your postulate that Prima Facie (superficially) the verse does suggest that a Messenger shall emerge, but deep in the inner meaning of the verse, it is not so.

If we momenterly disregard the literal religious meaning of Rasool, we can forward the statement that if a friend of yours is a believing individual, and he approaches you in a sincere fashion advising you to do righteous deeds and to avoid wicked acts, then that friend of yours is a Rasool. Moreover, keep in mind that in Arabic, any individual sent with a message to someone else is also called a Rasool (Messenger). Here is how the American Heritage Dictionary defines "Messenger:"

messenger n. 1. One that carries messages or performs errands, as:

a. A person employed to carry telegrams, letters, or parcels.
b. A military or official courier. c. An envoy to another person, party, or government.
2. A bearer of news.
3. A forerunner; a harbinger.
4. A prophet.
5. Nautical. A chain or rope used for hauling in a cable. In this sense, also called messenger line. -- meszsenzger tr.v. meszsenzgered, meszsenzgerzing, meszsenzgers. To send by messenger.

Given the above definition, we can contend that any "carrier”from a king to another king is also called a Messenger or a Rasool (in Arabic). This, I believe, clarifies the verse for you. Let us examine some other verses:

"Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets: And Allah has full knowledge of all things. (Qur’an 33:40)"

It is clear from the above verse that Muhammad (S) is the SEAL of the Prophets. Notice that if we abide by the meaning of a Prophet (Nabi), and understand that a Nabi’s status is lower than that of a Rasool (Messenger), we can discern that Muhammad (S), by virtue of the what the verse states, is the Seal of both the Prophets and the Messengers.

By stating that he (S) is the Seal of the Prophets, Allah (SWT) has made it evident that NOT even a Prophet (Nabi) will come after Muhammad (S). That is, if Allah (SWT) had said that Muhammad was the Seal of “Messengers”, He (SWT) would leave the door open for people to say that Muhammad (S) is NOT the seal of the prophets then -- because a Prophet is a step below a Messenger. But by stating that he (Muhammad) (S) is the seal from the bottom up, Allah (SWT) has clarified the point that nobody will come after Muhammad (S).

"We have not sent thee but as a (Messenger) to ALL MANKIND, giving them glad tidings, and warning them (against sin), but most men know not. (34:28)"

Again, we may forward the contention by Allah (SWT) that Muhammad was sent as a Messenger to all mankind. Why then would Allah (SWT) send anyone after him (S) as a new Messenger?

"For me, I have been commanded to serve the Lord of this City, Him Who has sanctified it and to Whom (belong) all things: And I am commanded to be of those who bow in Islam to Allah’s Will, -- and to rehearse the Qur’an: And if any accept guidance, they do it for the good of their souls, and if any stray, say: I am only a Warner. (Qur’an 27:91)"

Again, listen to what the above verse concludes with:

"And if any accept guidance, they do it for the good of their souls, and if any stray, say: I am only a Warner. (Qur’an 27:91)”

This is in conformity with my statement at the beginning of this article: You are at liberty to accept or to reject faith and guidance; however, you may reject it at the expense of injury to your soul, or you may accept it and reap its benefits.

"It is He who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Religion of Truth. That he make it prevail over all religion, even though the pagans may detest (it). (Qur’an 61:9)"

The clear assertion by Allah (SWT), in the above verse, that He (SWT) "...make it prevail over all religion...”indicates that this is the final and complete religion. This is also in conformity with the statement that Islam is the Truth without form, it is THE primordial religion of mankind, which will never change:

"So set thou thy face truly to the religion being upright, the nature in which Allah has made mankind: no change (there is) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that is the true religion: But most among mankind know not. (Qur’an 30:30)"

"...For Allah hath indeed sent down to you a Message,-- A Messenger, who rehearses to you the Signs of Allah containing clear explanations, that he may lead forth those who believe and do righteous deeds from the depths of Darkness into Light. (Qur’an 65:11)"

The above verse, although not directly related to the topic of a final messenger, it, nonetheless, outlines the mission of the Prophet Muhammad (S); and asserts that he (S) is a guide sent to "...lead forth those who believe and do righteous deeds from the depths of Darkness into Light."

Perhaps all revelations have a fixed time, we read:

32. Every nation hath its set time. And when their time is come, they shall not retard it an hour; and they shall not advance it. (The Heights (al-Araf))

Again, the correct number for the verse is (7:34), not 32. (Which translation are you using?)

I don’t know how you interpreted the above verse to allude to a Fixed Revelation. Unless your claim is that a revelation is valid only for a limited time, and that there are no timeless truths, I fail to see your point. Moreover, if we assume that a revelation is indeed fixed, then it must be that we are now waiting for a New Revelation to come. Obviously, that would directly and undoubtedly contradict the Islamic Belief System. Now, let’s the examine the verse in detail:

"To every people is a term appointed: when their term is reached, not an hour can they cause delay, nor (an hour) can they advance (it in anticipation). (Qur’an 7:34)"

The verse is dealing with the dimension of time that engulfs every nation or generation. In that frame of time, they are supposed to achieve whatever good they can; if they do so, they shall not grieve, otherwise they shall suffer the consequences. For example, you as a person, will exist only for a fixed time on this Earth, then you shall perish. In that time, if you strive to perform good deeds, then you have nothing to worry about in the hereafter; otherwise you shall account for your actions.

Now, your existence on Earth is fixed: you came into being at a certain time (which you had no choice in), and you will leave at a certain time; there is nothing you can do to change that. If you add suicide to the formula, the meaning of the verse would change to: when the necessary conditions for death are gathered, then no delay or advancement can there be.

That is, if the necessary conditions or factors that cause death have been met, then the individual who is trying to commit suicide will surely die, there is nothing he can do after those conditions have been met, nor can he change his mind and return to life. Again, keep in mind that Time moves only in one direction.

Another explanation is that offered by Abdullah Yusuf ‘Ali in his translation of the Qur’an:

"I do not know whether "generation”would not be more appropriate here. If so, it would refer to the Time-Spirit, for it affects a whole number of people living contemporaneously, and while we deal
grammatically with a group, we really have in mind the individual’s composing the group. Anyway, the lesson is what is suggested in the following verses. There is only a limited time for an individual or for a group of people. If they do not make good during that time of probation, the chance is lost, and it cannot come again. We cannot retard or advance the march of time by a single hour or minute. ("Hour”in the text expresses an indefinite but short period of time.)"

To each age its Book. (The Thunder (al-Rad))

The above verse is misquoted, here’s the exact verse:

"We did send messengers before thee, and appointed for them wives and children: And it was never the part of a messenger to bring a Sign except as Allah permitted (or commanded). For each period is appointment. (Qur’an 13:38)"

Now, the verse in Arabic does indeed mention "Kitab -- Book,”but the translation of meaning is not a literal book. Remember that I said a word in Arabic may have many meanings; as such, one of the meanings of the word Kitab means the collection and gathering of conditions to cause or form something. For example "Kitab-al-Mowt --- The Book of Death”means the collection and gathering of all the conditions and factors that cause death.

Just like a normal book is a collection of ideas, so is this symbolic book, referred to above, a collection of conditions that cause an event to occur. As such, we find that the word appointment is a better word for the translation of meaning.

45. Neither too soon, nor too late, shall a people reach its appointed time - (The Believers (al-Muminun))

The correct verse is:

"No people can hasten their term, nor can they delay (it.) (Qur’an 23:43)"

The verse has the exact meaning as the verse:

"To every people is a term appointed: when their term is reached, not an hour can they cause delay, nor (an hour) can they advance (it in anticipation). (Qur’an 7:34)"

I have already explained that verse above -- please consult that aforementioned part for elaboration.

"And to you there came Joseph in times gone by, with Clear Signs, but ye ceased not to doubt of the (mission) for which he had come: at length, when he died, ye said: `No apostle will God send after him.’ Thus doth God leave to stray such as transgress and live in doubt (Qur’an Surah 40:34)

If you are trying to state that people are mislead in believing that there are no more Messengers and/or Prophets after Muhammad (S), then I assure you that you are wrong. The verse is talking about the fixed Time- Frame of Joseph’s (as) existence and what was to come immediately after him. It is not that Allah (SWT) has told the people of Joseph (as) that NO Messenger will come after Joseph (as) and then changed His (SWT) mind, and sent a Messenger!

In the case of Islam and Muhammad (S), we are clearly told that no more messengers will be sent by He (SWT) Who created the Universe and Sustains it. There is a clear distinction here: the people of Joseph (as) said that there will not come a prophet or messenger after Joseph (as), whereas Allah (SWT) never said such a thing! It was the concoction of the people to say that Allah (SWT) will not send another messenger. Now, in the case of Muhammad (S), the people have been notified by Allah (SWT) that there shall come no Messenger after Muhammad (S). Therein lies the distinction in this verse.

Another point worthy of mentioning is that: why do we wait until the Messenger dies to rethink our existence and actions? Why does remorse begin after a Messenger’s death? Why can’t we follow that Messenger when he was alive? The lesson clearly stated here is that we shouldn’t wait until the milk is spilled and then weep and cry over it, we should prevent the milk from being spilled in the first place (if you know what I mean!?).

Again, the verse alludes to Allah’s (SWT) Mercy in that even if a Messenger dies, Allah (SWT) is still merciful enough to send another one. However, in the case of Muhammad (S), the warning is loud and CLEAR that Muhammad (S) is the FINAL Mercy to mankind from Allah (SWT).

Ah! alas for (My) servants! There comes not an apostle to them but they mock Him! (Qur’an Surah 36:30)

What do you intend by quoting this verse? The meaning is abundantly clear, unless your intention is that there has come to us an apostle after Muhammad (S) and we mocked him!!! Now, I question if you really meant that? The verse is clear, but let me make it a bit clearer:

Obviously, the verse states that the Messengers of Allah (SWT) are indeed mocked by ignorant men, and that Allah (SWT) has indeed sent messengers to mankind, but mankind has transgressed and mocked these men.

Now, let me add something else: Muhammad (S) was sent as a Messenger, and it is clear that his (S) message contained the affirmation that he (S) is the final Messenger; if we state that there may come a messenger after him (S), then we are mocking him (S), and, as a result, mocking Allah (SWT)! Such is the concept of mockery referred to in the above verse. Also, as I said above, any person that calls people to the righteous path is considered a Rasool (within the confines of the definition of a messenger (rasool) as a "carrier”or a "caller to righteousness”as stated above. He is not, however, an inspired individual sent by Allah (SWT)). As such, if people mock him, then they have also mocked a messenger, as the above verse suggests.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I hope that these answers clarify many points, and I repeat my apology for the late response. Let me also state that an answer to your references of a possible prophet after Muhammad (S) requires that we examine creation from several facets: sociological, evolutionary, political, historical, scientific, religious, and philosophical, among others. This, clearly, is beyond the scope of this paper. Nonetheless, Islamically, that contention is null and void.

Let me also add that all the above is my own explanation of the verses. Nonetheless, certain Truths are integral to Islam, and cannot be compromised (like the FACT that Muhammad (S) is the Final Messenger of Allah (SWT)).

Side Comments To A Bahai

A Baha’i contributor presented Baha’i views about the Seal of Prophets quoting from Islamic sources. Here I mainly focus on Shi’i point of view in this matter. He wrote in his article that:

Clearly, the concept of no Nabi, or prophet, appearing after Muhammad must have been associated with His immediate successorship, and had nothing to do with coming of future Messengers from God. Otherwise, It is not clear to me though. You are using induction which is logically incorrect. If Qur’an wanted to say that "Muhammad is the last Nabi among his children,”he could say so! When such thing is not specified and nothing is exempted, then it covers every human being. There is no Prophet after Muhammad (S).

More over, your Logic is convoluted. Here you are saying that There will be no prophet from the household of Muhammad (S). In another place, you say that Mahdi is from the Family of Prophet (which is actually the belief of all Muslims who have the knowledge of their own books). In another place you say that "the Bab”was the promised Mahdi. In the other place you say that Bab was a messenger. The conclusion from the above sentences is that according to you, Mahdi who was the descendant of Muhammad, was a messenger. This “contradicts”what you just said above, that the verse (33:40) is saying Muhammad was the last Prophet among his family!!!

How nice is the verse 4:82 of Qur’an which describes that one can find many contradictions in something that is not from Allah (i.e., a man-made religion). A British-made religion is not any better.

Many of the Shi’ah commentators believe in a literal meaning of the term Khatam-u-Nabieen (Seal of the Prophets, after Whom no other Messengers of God shall come), however, there are other commentatorswho believe differently:

I did not see anything differently from the following tradition!

Ibn-i Babuyih known as Sheikh Sadoogh, another highly respected Shi’ah scholar/theologian argues in his book, Ekmaal-ud-Din vol I:

"All the Messengers of God who appeared prior to Muhammad, were succeeded by a Nabi (i.e. a prophet). Adam was a Rasool (Messenger of God), and His successor was Shais the Nabi (Seth the prophet). Noah was a Messenger of God and His successor was Saam the Nabi (Shem the prophet). Abraham, Moses, Jesus and David (peace be upon Them!), were also God’s Messengers, Whose successors were Isaac, Jashua, Simon (St. Peter) and Solomon Who were all prophets. However, the successors of Muhammad, Rasool-Allah (the Messenger of God), were not called Nabis (prophets). They were referred to as Imams. Therefore, ‘Ali was not a Nabi, Hasan was not a Nabi, Hossein was not a Nabi, etc...., since, with the Manifestation of Muhammad, the usage of the term Nabi was abandoned (i.e. He was Khatam-u-Nabieen), and ended.

As you can see, Shaykh Sadooq is confirming that there will be neither prophet nor messenger after Muhammad (S). How could he explain more simple than that?!

Allamah Majlesi in Bahar’ul-Anvar Vol 13, p.323 mentions one of the discourses of Imam ‘Ali. In that discourse ‘Ali says: "I am the Commander of the faithful. I am the King among the pious..... I am the Khatam’u-Vasieen (which can be either taken as "The Seal of the guardians and successors", or, as "The Ornament of the Guardians and successors".) and the heir of the prophets and the representative of the God of the worlds."

This Hadith is referd to as the Hadith Nuraniah as is reported by several people such as Ibn Babyih (Sheikh Sadooq) in "Uyoon’ul-Akhbar Ar-Rida".

This tradition of Imam ‘Ali is a very interesting. One must be fair in one’s judgment. If we are to take, in this tradition, the term "Khatam”as "the Seal", "the ender", "one who completes", then one is obliged to accept that ‘Ali was "the seal of the guardians, and successors", after Muhammad, Who is the Seal of the prophets.

Yet, Shi’ahs believe that after Muhammad there was supposed to be twelve Imams, only the first of Whom was ‘Ali. So, assuming that the term Khatam in Khatam’u-Vasieen must have a similar meaning to the term Khatam in Khatam’u- Nabieen, then one is to question why were there more Imams after ‘Ali. How are we to reconcile the existence of the other Imams, Who came after ‘Ali, based on this interpretation? Let this be food for thought for the possessors of pure heart and open mind.

NOTE: I hope Shi’ah friends contemplate on the meaning of this quotation and its theological implication.

Good question. First I should say that in most of the traditions in this regard, the term "Sayyid al-Wasiyyin”(the master of executors) has been used for Imam ‘Ali, and not the above phrase (the ender of executors).

Every Prophet had an executor. Prophet Muhammad was the master of all other Prophets. Naturally his executor (wasi) is the master of all other executors (of previous prophets).

However there is no contradiction in the above tradition. Out of twelve Imams, only Imam ‘Ali (as) was the executor (wasi) of prophet (S). Because each person can only have one immediate executor (wasi). Prophet Muhammad was the last Messenger, thus his executor is the last executor among the executors of prophets. This is because there shall not come any prophet after Prophet Muhammad.

Imam Hasan (as), the second Imam, was the immediate executor (wasi) of Imam ‘Ali. However we could say Imam Hasan (as) was indirect executor of Prophet too. The third Imam was immediate executor of the second Imam and so on. Thus in this sense, Imam ‘Ali was the last immediate executor among the executors of prophets. I hope this is enough "food for thought for the
possessors of pure heart and open mind".

"O children of Adam, verily apostles from among you shall come unto you, who shall expound my signs unto you: whosoever therefore shall fear God and amend, there shall come no fear on them, neither shall they be grieved.”(Qur’an 7:35)

2) Appearance of future Apostles of God is explicitly mentioned here.
3) These Apostles (more that one Apostle -i.e. Mahdi and Isaa bin Maryam) must come from among the Muslim ummah.
4) These Apostles SHALL COME in the future.

You got it wrong my friend. You are quoting Qur’an out of context. Please read the verses before the above verse (7:11-35). Particularly see verses 11, 19, 26 and 27. All of them are the commands of Allah to Prophet Adam (as) who was the first Prophet. Allah is saying O’ sons of Prophet Adam, there shall come many prophets after Prophet Adam (a total of 123999 prophets after Prophet Adam).

About Jesus (as): He was a Prophet and came BEFORE prophet Muhammad (S). Prophet Jesus will return but he is not a new Prophet for he is older than Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Jesus also does not bring any new law for people. Christianity was expired when Prophet Muhammad came. Prophet Jesus will come as a follower of Imam Mahdi and will be his assistant. He will pray behind him. So Jesus (as) is not a new prophet. He is an old one who has lived long.

Imam Mahdi (may Allah hasten his relief) is going to establish a world-wide government and all people throughout the world will live peacefully under his Government. Bahais believe that "the Bab”(Mirza ‘Ali-Muhammad) was the Imam Mahdi who claimed as such in May 1844 A.D. (1260 AH). He was executed in Iran shortly after (in July 1850 AD).

The above paragraph is enough for an elementary-school-age child to reject the Bahais. Because if he was really Imam Mahdi, then when did he establish the world-wide government in all corners of the world? "The Bab”could not even govern the city in which he was living! He was executed by people for his blasphemy six years later.

Imam Mahdi brings neither new religion nor new religious law. He does not cancel any regulations set by Prophet Muhammad. However there are some authentic traditions which state that although Imam Mahdi does not bring any new law when he comes, some people say: he is bringing a new religion.

Those traditions further explain that it is as a result of many innovations set by pseudo-scholars into to the religion of Islam. Imam Mahdi comes to reject any innovations and to revive the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad which was corrupted by people after him. As a result of ignorance of people to the true Sunnah of Prophet, they think he is bringing a new religion.

Shia Scholars

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The topic of the following discussion deals with the Shi’ite view of religious scholars. I will attempt to illuminate the differences and similarities between Sunni and Shi’a.

The Shi’a in matters of jurisprudence and legal effort to interpret new issues offer three alternatives to the believer:

First, IF the believer is competent and capable according to Islamic requirements to analyze the texts, then he can exert his own judicial effort to interpret the issue and abide by his own ruling.

Second, the concept of (Ihtiyat--Cautiousness) can be used. Ihtiyat really means that when in doubt, do that which is not doubtful. The Prophet (S) said: "Leave the one which makes you doubtful and prefer the alternative which does not cause you to be doubtful.”For example, in performing Ihtiyat, the believer might be faced with a scenario where he is traveling and he is not sure whether to shorten the prayer or not. He performs Ihtiyat, and prays the prayer as usual without shortening it.

Then he prays it shortened. This way, he has fulfilled the obligation no matter what the judicial opinion is. Keep in mind that Ihtiyat is only to be performed when you really donot n’t know what to do.

Third, the concept of (Taqleed--Imitating or Following) would be used. Taqleed is where a believer who is not qualified according to Islamic mandates to perform Ijtihad (the effort by scholars to interpret new issues) will follow what a learned scholar issues as permissible or prohibited. For example, I am qualified to render Islamic injunctions regarding issues that face every believer; moreover, I do not possess a high level of fluency in the Arabic language such that I can interpret the texts that deal with these issues.

As such, I follow a scholar and adhere to all that he says. The Scholar that a believer follows is a matter of choice, not compulsion. He cannot be less than a Mujtahid, however. Also it is necessary to follow a Mujtahid who is the most knowledgable among others and must be righteous in every aspect of the definition of righteousness, otherwise he should not be followed.

These qualifications should be investigated by the follower personally, or he/she can the opinon of two just and trsutfull person in order to know which Mujtahid is the most knowledgable (provided that he does not find two other just friends who tell him/her in the contrary of the first two). As a result people may follow different Mujtahids based on their investigations on the qualifications of Mujtahids.

Moreover, Mujtahid has to be alive when you decide to follow him. You cannot follow a dead scholar to begin with. However, if you follow a scholar and he dies after you have already decided to follow him, you may stay his follower with some conditions, but you must consult with the dead scholar’s Wakeel --Agent. Every Mujtahid in Shi’a has several agents in many countries to address the questions of his followers. Some scholars, however, are in the opinon that one can not continue with a dead Mujtahid.

Others say that one is allowed to continue to follow his previous Mujtahid if nothing new comes up or if he does not forget the fatwa of the dead Mujtahid. If you look carefully at this condition, you will see that people have to eventually choose a live Marja’ since confusing and debating issues will come up sooner or later , and this is what Marja’ for. It is important to understand that you cannot begin your Islamic life by following a dead scholar, but you can remain a follower of that scholar if he dies and you were one of his followers before his death and meet the above conditions.

The Prophet (S) said:

"Whosoever Allah (SWT) wishes to grant him a favorable bounty, He (SWT) will teach him the Fiqh (Deep-Rooted Religious Knowledge) of religion."

As such, being a scholar in religion and reaching the level of Ijtihad, thereby earning the title of Mujtahid, is NOT an easy task, nor is it achievable by every individual.

Now, for the Sunnis, they also acknowledge the concept of Taqleed, but they understand it differently. For the Sunnis, Taqleed is following any one of the Four Schools of thought -- Shafeea’i, Hanbali, Maliki, and Hanafi. If you follow one of these Mujtahids, who died more than 10 centuries ago, then you must adhere to their mandates which vary significantly in many issues. Some Sunnis will shop around and take from here and there.

The Sunnis also believe that the differences among the four schools of law are a mercy from Allah (SWT). Dr. Tijani narrates a story of a girl who loved a man, but her father refused to allow the marriage for some unknown reason. The girl, who was never married before and was 25 years of age, ran away with the man and got married. Her father, a Maliki Sunni, took her to court before a Qadi--Judge to arbitrate the matter. When the girl appeared, she said: "My father wants to force me into a marriage which I do not desire; and it is my right under the Hanafite school to choose my husband even though I have never been married before.”

The Qadi agreed with the girl and granted her her request to marry the man of her choice. The Judge, a personal friend of Dr. Tijani, told Dr. Tijani that as the girl’s father was leaving the court, he said: "That dog has become a Hanafite!!!”Moreover, the father has disowned his daughter as a result of that marriage.

Now, Dr. Tijani questions where is that mercy that the Sunnis claim when the Scholars are at different poles of an argument? We have seen, at least in the above true story, that due to the difference of opinion between Malik and Abu Haneefa, a daughter was disowned and insulted by her own father!

As we have seen, the difference between the Sunnis and Shi’a in relation to Taqleed is not that great. There are, however, a few differences: First, while the Sunnis will allow a believer to follow a dead scholar, at least initially, the Shi’a will not.

Second, the Mujtahid in the perspective of the Shi’a is also a legitimate ruler of the affairs of the Muslims. He is also a general agent of al- Mahdi. (As I mentioned before, there is no special agent from Imam Mahdi in this time. All Mujtahids are his general agent without being able to contact with him.) Mujtahid also receives the shares of Zakat (The Alms) and Khums (20% of excess wealth--I have also addressed this topic in a previous article.) from the believers and is in charge of distributing it and doing what he feels is necessary for the Ummah’s (Nation) best interest.

Given the above, it is most apparent that a Shi’ite scholar has far more power and influence than a regular Sunni scholar. The Sunnis have accused the Shi’a, on many occasions, of elevating these scholars to the level of spiritual leaders that have been appointed by Allah (SWT).

Needless to say, these scholars are not sinless or infallible, they are simple human beings who have passed the tests of belief and have reached an elevated spiritual stage of belief and learning that entitles them to be scholars who should be followed and obeyed. It is a given fact that you will blindly follow, for example, an individual with a Ph.D. in Computer Science at your early stages of learning how to program a computer. Why? Because he is more learned and experienced than you are. Is he a spiritual leader?

Of course not! He is simply a mentor and a person who is more qualified than you are at this stage. As such, you surrender to him in an effort to learn from his vast knowledge. Similarly, that’s how the Shi’a view their scholars. We do NOT consider them infalliables. They may make mistakes every now and then, but surely less than us.

It should be noted that for the Shi’a there are TWO stages to the concept of Taqleed or Following a scholar. The First stage was during the lives of the Twelve Imams, which lasted for approximately 350 years after the death of the Prophet (S). During these years, the believers followed the Imams themselves. After those 350 years, there began the period of the occultation of the final Imam, al-Mahdi (as). It is in this period that the Twelve Imams instructed the believers to follow the righteous scholars; that initiated the second stage of Taqleed.

As a final note, I would like to state my personal opinion about the Wahabis.

The Wahabis, on the other hand, which are situated primarily in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and a few other places, have rejected the four schools of thought and any Ijtihad. They claim that they follow al-Salaf al-Saleh-- (The Righteous First Group). By that they are alluding to the companions.

Their reasoning is that the companions did not need a scholar, so they too don’t need one either. However, their sect is full of shortcomings. For example, they might make the above claims, but they don’t adhere to them.

They are followers of Muhammad Ibn Abdul al-Wahab, a so-called scholar that propagated his beliefs about 200 years ago. His motives were primarily political, and he is not a scholar by any stretch of the imagination.

Furthermore, all their teachings are based on Ibn Taymiyah’s interpretations. Ibn Taymiyah, in turn, had based all his teachings on those of Ibn Hanbal. Indeed, the Wahabis identify themselves as Hanbalis, not Wahabis, among strangers (people who they don’t trust yet.); but among themselves they admit to being Wahabis. As such, no matter how we look at it, the Wahabis are still followers of scholars, NOT the companions, as they claim. What’s more, the companions did not need a scholar because they had the Prophet (S) himself as a teacher; why would they need a scholar to teach them the religion when they enjoyed the company of the Vehicle of the Message himself (S)?

In conclusion, you have know seen how the Shi’a view the reality of an ever- changing life: they adpat to it by maintaining an open-minded approach, and by leaving the doors of Ijtihad (thee effort by scholars to interpret new issues) wide open to address new and perplexing issues that face the Ummah (Nation).

And you have seen how the Sunnis are still stuck in the 10th century trying to implement laws and regulations that are both outdated and obsolete. If Ijtihaad is forbidden, then why they allow it for their four Imams, but forbid it for the previous or later generations? Why just four schools?

It is this fact, among others, that should evoke a nerve of curiosity within you to question: Are the Shi’a really Kufar, given the above? Are they not the true followers of the Prophet Muhammad (S)? Does it not make sense to leave the door of Ijtihad open? Question and reflect, and remember that the Prophet (S) said: "Knowledge is a locked closet whose key is the Question!"

Wassalam.

The Rules of Modesty According to Five Islamic Schools of Law

By: ‘Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This issue is one of those from which numerous bylaws are derived, such as those specifying the parts of one’s body that must be covered (‘awrah) and the parts of another person’s body which it is haram to look at, those relating to the difference between maharim (relatives through lineage or marriage with whom marriage is prohibited) and non-maharim persons in this regard, the difference in this regard due to sameness or difference of sex, the difference between looking and touching and similar rules which are discussed below.

1. Looking at One’s Own Body: The schools differ concerning covering of one’s ‘awrah (private parts) from one’s own view and whether it is haram for one to uncover one’s ‘awrah in privacy.

The Hanafis and the Hanbalis observe: In the same way that it is not permissible for a person to expose his ‘awrah in the presence of anyone for whom it is not permissible to look at it, it is not permissible for him to expose it when alone without necessity, as arises at the time or bathing or answering the call of nature.

The Malikis and Shafi’is say: It is not unlawful but reprehensible (makruh) to be bare without necessity.

The Imamis, state: It is neither haram nor makruh when no one else is looking at.

2. Woman and Her Maharim: The schools differ concerning the parts of the body a woman must cover in the presence of her maharim (except the husband) and Muslim women.(6) In other words, what constitutes the ‘awrah of a woman in the presence of Muslim women as well as her maharim, both through lineage and marriage?

The Hanafis and the Shafi’is say: It is wajib for her to cover the area between the navel and the knees in their presence.

The Malikis and the Hanbalis observe: She must cover the area between the navel and the knees in front of women, and in the presence of her maharim, her whole body except the head and the arms.

Most Imamis state: It is wajib for her to cover her rear and private parts in the presence of women and her maharim; to cover other parts as well is better though not wajib, except where there is a fear of sin.

3. Women and ‘stranger’: About the extent of the body to be covered by a woman in the presence of a ‘stranger’ (any male apart from the mahrim), the schools concur that it is wajib for her to cover her whole body except the face and hands (up to the wrists) in accordance with the verse 31 of Surat al-Nur:

...And reveal not their adornment save such as is outward; and let them cast their veils over their bosoms (Qur’an 24:31)

considering that ‘outward adornment’ (al-zeenah) implies the face and hands. The word ‘al-khimar’ (whose plural ‘khumur’ occurs in the verse) means the veil which covers the head, not the face, and the word ‘al-jayb’ (whose plural ‘juyub’ occurs in the verse) means the chest. The women have been commanded to put a covering on their heads and to lower it over their chests. As to verse 59 of Surat ‘Ahzab:

‘0 Prophet, say to your wives and daughters and the believing women that they draw their veils close to them..., (Qur’an 33:59)

the word ‘al-jilbab’ (whose plural jalabib occurs in the verse) means a veil covering the head; rather it is a shirt or garment.

4. Man’s ‘Awrah: The schools differ concerning the parts of man’s body which it is haram for others to see and for him to expose. The hanafis and the Hanbalis state: It is wajib for a male to cover the area between the navel and the knees before all except his wife. It is permissible for others, irrespective of their being men or women maharim or strangers, to look at the rest of his body when there is no fear of sin.

The Malikis and the Shafi’is say: There are two different situations for a male with respect to the extent he can expose his body:

the first, in the presence of men or those women who are his maharim; the second, in the presence of women who are not his maharim. In the former instance he is only supposed to cover the area between the waist and the knees, while in the latter it is, haram for a woman stranger to look at any
part of a man’s body. Though the Malikis exclude the face and the arms if looked at without any sensual motive, the Shafi’is do not permit any exception (al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al’arba’ah, vol. mabhath satr al-’awrah).

The Imamis differentiate between the parts of other person body which can be looked at and those parts of one’s own body which ought to be covered. They observe: It is wajib for a male to cover only his rear and private parts, though it is wajib for women who are not his maharim to abstain from looking at any part of his body except his head and hands (up to the wrist).

To summarize the Imami opinion, it is permissible for a male to view the body of other men and his female maharim except the rear and private parts provided no sensual motive is involved. Similarly, a woman can view the body of other woman and her male maharim excepting the rear and private parts provided no sensual motive is involved.

5. Children: Concerning the body of a child, the Hanbalis say: It is not prohibited to touch or look at the body of a child below seven years. It is not permissible to look at the rear and private parts of a male child between the age of 7 to 9 years, and for ‘strangers’ the whole body of a female child above the age of seven.

The Hanafis observe: No part of the body of a boy of four years and below is prohibited from being looked at. Above this age only his rear and private parts are prohibited from being looked at as long as sexual desire has not awakened in him. If he reaches the age of sexual desire, the rule applicable to adults will be applicable to him with respect to both the sexes.

The Malikis state: It is permissible for a woman to look at and touch the body of a boy below the age of eight years, and only look at it till the age of twelve. A boy above the age of twelve is considered similar to an adult. It is permissible for a man to look at and touch the body of girl below two years and eight months, and to look at, though not touch, till she reaches the age of four years.

According to the Shafi’is, the rules applicable to an adult apply to an adolescent male child. But if a child is below that age and is also incapable of describing what he sees, all parts of his body can be looked at. But if he can describe what he sees with a sexual interest, he will be considered similar to an adult. As to a girl below the age of adolescence, only if she has developed sexual appeal will she be considered similar to a full-grown woman, not otherwise, though it will be haram for anyone except someone who looks after her to look at her parts.

The Imamiyyah observe: It is wajib to cover one’s ‘awrah in front of a child of discriminating age, who can describe what he sees, though it is not wajib before the one who is incapable of doing so. That was regarding the covering of the body in the presence of a child, but with respect to looking at a child’s ‘awrah, al-Shaykh Ja’far in his book Kashf al-ghita’ states: It is not unwise to abstain from looking at the parts of a child below five years, though it is absolutely impermissible to look at them with a sexual interest.

From what I have been able to ascertain from the traditions of the Ahlul Bayt, the age limit for the permissibility of looking at the child’s ‘awrah is six years, not five.

6. Woman’s Voice: All the schools concur that listening to the voice of a woman is not prohibited, except where pleasure is involved or when there is a fear of sin. The (Imami) author of al-Jawahir, at the beginning of the chapter on marriage, has mentioned as his proof the continuing practice of Muslims belonging to different periods and regions, the sermons of Fatimah (sa) and her daughters, the innumerable instances of conversations of the wives of the Prophet (S) and the Imams, and also the holding of mourning and wedding ceremonies by women in the presence of men from early times, the conversations between opposite sexes while conducting transactions, as well as the Qur’anic verse (Be not complaisant (attractive) with your speech, 33:32), in which not speech itself but its complaisant manner has been prohibited.

8. The difference Between Looking and Touching: Every part that is permissible to touch, may be looked at, and every part that is haram to be looked at may not be touched. Here there is a general consent among the schools because touching involves greater pleasure than looking, and no leggiest of any school claims concomitance between the permissibility of looking and the permissibility of touching.

Hence though it is permissible for a man to look at a female stranger’s face or bands, it is not permissible for him to touch her except in an emergency such as for medical treatment or for rescuing her from drowning. The following tradition has been narrated from al-’Imam al-Sadiq (as) (Al-’Imam al-Sadiq (A) was asked:) "Can a man shake hands with a woman who is not his mahrim?”The Imam (A) replied: "No, unless there is cloth in between..”

The Hanafis exclude shaking hands with an old woman from prohibition. In the book of Ibn ‘Abidin (v1, p284) it is stated: It is not permissible to touch the hands or face of a young woman even with the assurance of absence of any sexual motive. As to an old woman who has no sexual appeal, there is nothing wrong in shaking hands with her with the assurance of absence of a sexual motive.

The Imamis and the Hanafis allow touching the body mahrim provided no sexual motive or pleasure is involved.

The Shafi’is prohibit touching even those parts of a mahram’s body which it is permissible to look at. It is even not permissible in their opinion for a person to touch the belly or back of his mother, pinch her ankles or beet or kiss her face. Similarly, it is not permissible for a person to ask his daughter or sister to press his legs.

9. The Difference Between Exposing and Looking at: The Imamis observe:

There is no concomitance between the permissibility of exposing the body and the permissibility of looking at it. Hence it is permissible in their opinion for a man to expose the whole of his body except his rear and private parts, while it is not permissible for a non-mahram woman to look at it. I have not found anyone expressing this opinion in the numerous books of the four Sunni schools.

10. Old Women: God Almighty says in the Qur’an:

"And such women as are past child-bearing and have no hope of marriage, it is no sin for them if they put off their clothes, so be it that they flaunt no ornament; but to abstain is better for them, and God is All-hearing, All- knowing.”(Qur’an 24:60)

This noble verse indicates that it is permissible for old women who have no desire for marriage due to their old age "to expose their face and a part of their hair and arms, and such other parts which aged women usually keep exposed. The traditions of the Ahlul Bayt (as) also point to the same, on condition that such exposure is not with the intent of display. Rather, it is to allow them to come out for fulfilling their needs, though it is better for them to keep themselves covered."(7)

This permission is with the assumption that it is not permissible to expose any of the above-mentioned parts of the body if there is fear of its leading to something haram, because a woman, regardless of her elderly age, may remain sexually attractive. Therefore, if there is any likelihood of that kind, the rule applicable to her will be the rule applicable to young women.

Islam is lenient with respect to elderly women and strict regarding young women. But in practice we observe the opposite of what the Qur’an has ordered. We see shamelessness and display of charms among some young women, while elderly women keep themselves covered and are reserved. So where God is strict, they are lenient, and where He is lenient, they are strict.

The Numbers that follow some of the words refer to notes that will appended in the coming issues in shaa Allah.

Fasting According to Five Islamic Schools of Law

By: ‘Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyya

Translated from the Arabic by Mujahid Husayn

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Fasting in the month of Ramadan is one of the ‘pillars’ of the Islamic faith. No proof is required to establish its being obligatory (wajib) and one denying it goes out of the fold of Islam, because it is obvious like salat, and in respect of anything so evidently established both the learned and the unlettered, the elderly and the young, all stand on an equal footing.

It was declared an obligatory duty (fard) in the second year of the Hijrah upon each and every mukallaf (one capable of carrying out religious duties, i.e. a sane adult) and breaking it (iftar) is not permissible except for any of the following reasons:

1. Hayd and nifas: The schools concur that fasting is not valid for women during menstruation and puerperal bleeding.

2. Illness: The schools differ here. The Imamis observe: Fasting is not valid if it would cause illness or aggravate it, or intensify the pain, or delay recovery, because illness entails harm (darar) and causing harm is prohibited (muharram). Moreover, a prohibition concerning an ‘ibadah (a rite of worship) invalidates it. Hence if a person fasts in such a condition, his fast is not valid (sahih). A predominant likelihood of its resulting in illness or its aggravation is sufficient for refraining from fasting. As to excessive weakness, it is not a justification for iftar as long as it is generally bearable. Hence the extenuating cause is illness, not weakness, emaciation or strain, because
every duty involves hard- ship and discomfort.

The four Sunni schools state: If one who is fasting (sa’im) falls ill, or fears the aggravation of his illness, or delay in recovery, he has the option to fast or refrain. Iftar is not incumbent upon him; it is a relaxation and not an obligation in this situation. But where there is likelihood of death or loss of any of the senses, iftar is obligatory for him and his fasting is not valid.

3. A woman in the final stage of pregnancy and nursing mothers. The four schools say: If a pregnant or nursing woman fears harm for her own health or that of her child, her fasting is valid though it is permissible for her to refrain from fasting. If she opts for iftar, the schools concur that she is bound to perform its qada’ later. They differ regarding its substitute (fidyah) and atonement (kaffarah).

In this regard the Hanafis observe: It is not at all wajib. The Malikis are of the opinion that it is wajib for a nursing woman, not for a pregnant one. The Hanbalis and the Shafi’is say: Fidyah is wajib upon a pregnant and a nursing woman only if they fear danger for the child; but if they fear harm for their own health as well as that of the child, they are bound to perform the qada’ only without being required to give fidyah. the fidyah for each day is one mudd, which amounts to feeding one needy person (miskeen).1

The Imamis state: If a pregnant woman nearing childbirth or the child of a nursing mother may suffer harm, both of them ought to break their fast and it is not valid for them to continue fasting due to the impermissibility of harm. They concur that both are to perform the qada’ as well as give fidyah, equaling one mudd, if the harm is feared for the child. But if the harm is feared only for her own person, some among them observe: She is bound to perform qada’ but not to give fidyah, others say:

She is bound to perform qada’ and give fidyah as well.

4. Travel, provided the conditions necessary for salat al-qasr, as mentioned earlier, are fulfilled as per the opinion of each school. The four Sunni schools add a further condition to these, which is that the journey should commence before dawn and the traveler should have reached the point from where salat becomes qasr before dawn. Hence if he commences the journey after the setting in of dawn, it is haram for him to break the fast, and if he breaks it, its qada’ will be wajib upon him without a kaffarah.

The Shafi’is add another condition, which is that the traveler should not be one who generally travels continuously, such as a driver. Thus if he travels habitually, he is not entitled to break the fast. In the opinion of the four Sunni schools, breaking the fast is optional and not compulsory. Therefore, a traveler who fulfills all the conditions has the option of fasting or iftar. This is despite the observation of the Hanafis that performing salat as qasr during journey is compulsory and not Optional.

The Imamis say: If the conditions required for praying qasr are fulfilled for a traveler, his fast is not acceptable. Therefore, if he fasts, he will have to perform the qada’ without being liable to kaffarah. This is if he starts his journey before midday, but if he starts it at midday or later, he will keep his fast and in the event of his breaking it will be liable to the kaffarah of one who deliberately breaks his fast. And if a traveler reaches his hometown, or a place where he intends to stay for at least ten days, before midday without performing any act that breaks the fast, it is wajib upon him to continue fasting, and in the event of his breaking it he will be like one who deliberately breaks his fast.

5. There is consensus among all the schools that one suffering from a malady of acute thirst can break his fast, and if he can carry out its qada’ later, it will be wajib upon him without any kaffarah, in the opinion of the four schools. In the opinion of the Imamis, he should give a mudd by way of kaffarah. The schools differ in regard to acute hunger, as to whether it is one of the causes permitting iftar, like thirst. The four schools say: Hunger and thirst are similar and both make iftar permissible. The Imamis state: Hunger is not a cause permitting iftar except where it is expected to cause illness.

6. Old people, men and women, in late years of life for whom fasting is harmful and difficult, can break their fast, but are required to give fidyah by feeding a miskeen for each fast day omitted: similarly a sick person who does not hope to recover during the whole year. The schools concur upon this rule except the Hanbalis, who say: Fidyah is mustahabb and not wajib.

7. The Imamis state: Fasting is not wajib upon one in a swoon, even if it occurs only for a part of the day, unless where he has formed the niyyah of fasting before it and recovers subsequently, whereat he will continue his fast.

Disappearance Of The Excuse

If the excuse permitting iftar ceases such as on recovery of a sick person, maturing of a child, homecoming of a traveler, or termination of the menses --it is mustahabb in the view of the Imamis and the Shafi’is to refrain (imsak) from things that break the fast (muftirat) as a token of respect. The Hanbalis and the Hanafis consider imsak as wajib, but Malikis consider it neither wajib nor mustahabb.

Conditions (Shurut) Of Fasting:

As mentioned earlier, fasting in the month of Ramadan is wajib for each and every mukallaf. Every sane adult (al-baligh al-’aqil) is considered mukallaf. Hence fasting is neither wajib upon an insane person in the state of insanity nor is it valid if he observes it. As to a child, it is not wajib upon him, though valid if observed by a mumayyiz. Also essential for the validity of the fast are Islam and niyyah (intention).

Therefore, as per consensus, neither the fast of a non-Muslim nor the imsak of one who has not formed the niyyah is acceptable. This is apart from the afore-mentioned conditions of freedom from menses, puerperal bleeding, illness and travel.

As to a person in an intoxicated or unconscious state, the Shafi’is observe: His fast is not valid if he is not in his senses for the whole period of the fast. But if he is in his senses for a part of this period, his fast is valid, although the unconscious person is liable to its qada’, whatever the circumstances, irrespective of whether his unconsciousness is self-induced or forced upon him. But the qada’ is not wajib upon an intoxicated person unless he is personally responsible for his state. The Malikis state: The fast is not valid if the state of unconsciousness or intoxication persists for the whole or most of the day from dawn to sunset. But if it covers a half of the day or less and he was in possession of his senses at the time of making niyyah and did make it, becoming unconscious or intoxicated later, qada’ is not wajib upon him. The time of making niyyah for the fast in their opinion extends from sunset to dawn.

According to the Hanafis, an unconscious person is exactly like an insane one in this respect, and their opinion regarding the latter is that if the insanity lasts through the whole month of Ramadan, qada’ is not wajib upon him, and if it coves half of the month, he will fast for the remaining half and perform the qada’ of the fasts missed due to insanity.

The Hanbalis observe: Qada’ is wajib upon a person in a state of unconsciousness as well as one in a state of intoxication, irrespective of whether these states are self-induced or forced upon them. In the opinion of the Imamis, qada’ is only wajib upon a person in an intoxicated state, irrespective of its being self-induced or otherwise; it is not wajib upon an unconscious person even if his loss of consciousness is brief.

Muftirat

The muftirat are those things from which it is obligatory to refrain during the fast, from dawn to sunset. They are:

1. Eating and drinking (shurb) deliberately. Both invalidate the fast and necessitate qada’ in the opinion of all the schools, though they differ as to whether kaffarah is also wajib. The Hanafis and the Imamis require it, but not the Shafi’is and the Hanbalis. A person who eats and drinks by an oversight is neither liable to qada’ nor kaffarah, except in the opinion of the Malikis, who only require its qada’. Included in shrub (drinking) is inhaling tobacco (smoking)

2. Sexual intercourse, when deliberate, invalidates the fast and makes one liable to qada’ and kaffarah, in the opinion of all the schools. The kaffarah is the manumission of a slave, and if that is not possible, fasting for two consecutive months; if even that is not possible, feeding sixty poor persons. The Imamis and the Malikis allow an option between any one of these; i.e. a mukallaf may choose between freeing a slave, fasting or feeding the poor. The Shafi’is, Hanbalis and Hanafis impose kaffarah in the above-mentioned order; i.e. releasing a slave is specifically wajib, and in the event of incapacity fasting becomes wajib. If that too is not possible, giving food to the poor becomes wajib.

The lmamis state: All the three kaffarahs become wajib together if the act breaking the fast (muftir) is itself haram, such as eating any- thing usurped (maghsub), drinking wine, or fornicating. As to sexual intercourse by oversight, it does not invalidate the fast in the opinion of the Hanafis, Shafi’s and Imamis, but it does according to the Hanbalis and the Malikis.

3. Seminal emission (masturbation; al-’istimna’): There is consensus that it invalidates the fast if caused deliberately. The Hanbalis say: If madhy is discharged due to repeated sensual glances and the like the fast will become invalid. The four schools say: Seminal emission will necessitate qada’ without kaffarah. The Imamis observe: It requires both qada ‘ and kaffarah.

4. Vomiting: It invalidates the fast if deliberate, and in the opinion of the Imamis, Shafi’is and Malikis, also necessitates qada’. The Hanafis state: Deliberate vomiting does not break the fast unless the quantity vomited fills the mouth. Two views have been narrated from Imam Ahmad. The schools concur that involuntary vomiting does not invalidate the fast.

5. Cupping (hijamah) is muftir only in the opinion of the Hanbalis, who observe: The cupper and his patient both break the fast.

6. Injection (of vitamines or other nutritions) invalidates the fast and requires qada’ in the opinion of all the schools. Imami legists observe: It also requires kaffarah if taken without an emergency.

7. Inhaling a dense cloud of suspended dust invalidates the fast only in the opinion of the Imamis. They say: If a dense suspended dust, such as flour or something of the kind, enters the body the fast is rendered invalid, because it is something more substantial than an injection or tobacco smoke which are also invalidating.

8. Application of kohl invalidates the fast only in the opinion of the Malikis, provided it is applied during the day and its taste is felt in the throat.

9. The intention to discontinue the fast: If a person intends to discontinue his fast and then refrains from doing so, his fast is considered invalid in the opinion of the lmamis and Hanbalis; not so in the opinion of the other schools.

10. Most Imamis state: Fully submerging the head, alone or together with other parts of the body, under water invalidates the fast and necessitates both qada’ and kaffarah. The other schools consider it inconsequential.

11. The Imamis observe: A person who deliberately remains in the state of janabah after the dawn during the month of Ramadan, his fast will be invalid and its qada’ as well as kaffarah will be wajib upon him. The remaining schools state- His fast remains valid and he is not liable to anything.

12. The Imamis observe: A person who deliberately ascribes some- thing falsely to God or the Messenger (S) (i.e. if he speaks or writes that God or the Messenger said so and so or ordered such and such a thing while he is aware that it is not true), his fast will be invalid and he will be liable to its qada’ as well as a kaffarah.

A group of Imami legists go further by requiring of such a fabricator the kaffarah of freeing a slave, fasting for two months, and feeding sixty poor persons. This shows the ignorance or malice of those who say that the Imamis consider it permissible to forge lies against God and His Messenger (S).

The Various Kinds Of Fasts

The legists of various schools classify fasts into four categories: Wajib, mustahabb (supererogatory), muharram (forbidden), and makruh (reprehensible).

Obligatory Fasts

All the schools concur that the wajib fasts are those of the month of Ramadan, their qada’, the expiatory fasts performed as kaffarah, and those performed for fulfilling a vow. The Imamis add further two, related to the Hajj and i’tikaf. We have already dealt in some detail with the fast of Ramadan, its conditions and the things that invalidate it. Here we intend to discuss its qada’ and the kaffarah to which one who breaks it becomes liable. Other types of obligatory fasts have been discussed under the related chapters.

Qada’ Of The Ramadan Fasts

1. The schools concur that a person liable to the qada’ of Ramadan fasts is bound to perform it during the same year in which the fasts were missed by him, i.e. the period between the past and the forth- coming Ramadan. He is free to choose the days he intends to fast, excepting those days on which fasting is prohibited (their discussion will soon follow). However it is wajib upon him to immediately begin their qada’ if the days remaining for the next Ramadan are equal to the number of fasts missed in the earlier Ramadan.

2. If one capable of performing the qada’ during the year neglects it until the next Ramadan, he should fast during the current Ramadan and then perform the qada’ of the past year and also give a kaffarah of one mudd1 for each day in the opinion of all the schools except the hanafi which requires him to perform only the qada’ without any kaffarah.

And if he is unable to perform the qada’ such as when his illness continues throughout the period between the first and the second Ramadan -he is neither required to perform its qada’ nor required to give kaffarah in the opinion of the four schools, while the Imamis say: He will not be liable to qada’ but is bound to give a mudd as kaffarah for each fast day missed.

3. If one is capable of performing the qada’ during the year but delays it with the intention of performing it just before the second Ramadan, so that the qada’ fasts are immediately followed by the next Ramadan, and then a legitimate excuse prevents him from performing the qada’ before the arrival of Ramadan, in such a situation he will be liable only to qada’ not to kaffarah.

4. One who breaks a Ramadan fast due to an excuse, and is capable of later performing its qada’ but fails to perform the qada’ during his lifetime, the Imamis observe: It is wajib upon his eldest child to perform the qada’ on his behalf. The Hanafis, Shafi’is, and Hanbalis state: A sadaqah of a mudd for each fast missed will be given on his behalf. According to the Malikis, his legal guardian (wali) will give sadaqah on his behalf if he has so provided in the will: in the absence of a will it is not wajib.

5. In the opinion of the four schools, a person performing the qada’ of Ramadan can change his intention and break the fast both before and after midday without being liable to any kaffarah provided there is time for him to perform the qada’ later. The Imamis observe: It is permissible for him to break this fast before midday and not later, because continuation of the fast become compulsory after the passing of the major part of its duration and the time of altering the niyyah also expires. Hence if he acts contrarily and breaks the fast after midday, he is liable to kaffarah by giving food to ten poor persons; if he is incapable of doing that, he will fast for three days

Fasts Of Atonement (Kaffarah)

The fasts of atonement are of various kinds. Among them are atonement fasts for involuntary homicide, fasts for atonement of a broken oath or vow, and atonement fasts for zihar. These atonement fasts have their own rules which are discussed in the related chapters.

Here we shall discuss the rules applicable to a person fasting by way of kaffarah for not having observed the fast of Ramadan. The Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanafis say: It is not permissible for a person upon whom fasting for two consecutive months has become wajib consequent to deliberately breaking a Ramadan fast to miss even a single fast during these two months, because that would break their continuity. Hence, on his missing a fast, with or without an excuse, he should fast anew for two months.

The Hanbalis observe: If he misses a fast due to a legitimate excuse, the continuity is not broken.

The Imamis state: It is sufficient for the materialization of continuity that he fast for a full month and then a day of the next month.

After that he can skip days and then continue from where he had left. But if he misses a fast during the first month without any excuse, he is bound to start anew; but if it is due to a lawful excuse, such as illness or menstruation, the continuity is not broken and he/she will wait till the
excuse is removed and then resume the fasts. The Imamis further observe:

One who is unable to fast for two months, or release a slave or feed sixty poor persons, has the option either to fast for 18 days or give whatever he can as sadaqah. If even this is not possible, he may give alms or fast to any extent possible. If none of these are possible, he should seek forgiveness from God Almighty .

The Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanafis state: If a person is unable to offer any form of kaffarah, he will remain liable for it until he comes to possess the capacity to offer it, and this is what the rules of the
Shari’ah require .

The Hanbalis are of the opinion that if he is unable to give kaffarah, his liability for the same disappears, and even in the event of his becoming capable of it later, he will not be liable to anything. The schools concur that the number of kaffarahs will be equal to the number of causes entailing it. Hence a person who breaks two fasts will have to give two kaffarahs. But if he eats, drinks or has sexual intercourse several times in a single day, the Hanafis, Malikis and Shafi’is observe: The number of kaffarahs will not increase if iftar occurs several times, irrespective of its manner.

The Hanbalis state: If in a single day there occur several violations entailing kaffarah, if the person gives kaffarah for the first violation of the fast before the perpetration of the second, he should offer kaffarah for the latter violation as well, but if he has not given kaffarah for the first violation before committing the second, a single kaffarah suffices. According to the Imamis, if sexual intercourse is repeated a number of times in a single day, the number of kaffarahs will also increase proportionately, but if a person eats or drinks a number of times in a single day, one kaffara will suffice.

Prohibited Fasts

All the schools except the Hanafi concur that fasting on the days of ‘Id al-Fitr and ‘Id al-’Adha is prohibited (haram). The Hanafis observe: Fasting on these two ‘Ids is makruh to the extent of being haram

The Imamis say: Fasting on the days of Tashriq is prohibited only for those who are at Mina. The days of Tashriq are the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth of Dhu al-Hijjah.

The Shafi’is are of the opinion that fasting is not valid on the days of Tashriq both for those performing Hajj as well as others.

According to the Hanbalis, it is haram to fast on these days for those who do not perform Hajj, not for those performing it. The Hanafis observe: Fasting on these days is makruh to the extent of being haram.

The Malikis state: It is haram to fast on the eleventh and the twelfth of Dhu al-Hujah for those who do not perform Hajj, not for those performing it.

All the schools excepting the Hanafi concur that it is not valid for a woman to observe a supererogatory fast without her husband’s consent if her fast interferes with the fulfillment of any of his rights. The Hanafis observe: A woman’s fasting without the permission of her husband is makruh, not haram.

The Doubtful Days

There is consensus among the schools that imsak is obligatory upon one who does not fast on a "doubtful day”(yawm al-shakk) that later turns out to be a day of Ramadan, and he is liable to qada’ later. Where one fasts on a doubtful day that is later known to have been a day of Ramadan, they differ as to whether it suffices without requiring qada’.

The Shafi’i, Maliki and Hanbali schools observe: This fast will not suffice and its qada’ is wajib upon him. In the opinion of the Hanafis, it suffices and does not require qada ‘. Most Imamis state: Its qada’ is not wajib upon him, except when he had fasted with the niyyah of Ramadan.

Supererogatory Fasts

Fasting is considered mustahabb on all the days of the year except those on which it has been prohibited. But there are days whose fast has been specifically stressed and they include three days of each month, preferably the ‘moonlit’ days (al-’ayyam al-bid), which are the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth of each lunar month. Among them is the day of ‘Arafah (9th of Dhu al-Hijjah)

Also emphasized are the fasts of the months of Rajab and Sha’ban. Fasting on Mondays and Thursdays has also been emphasized. There are other days as well which have been mentioned in elaborate works. There is consensus among all the schools that fasting on these days is mustahab.

Reprehensible (Makruh) Fasts

It is mentioned in al-Fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-’arba’ah that it is makruh to single out Fridays and Saturdays for fasting. So is fasting on the day of Now Ruz (21st March) in the opinion of all the schools except the Shafi’i, and fasting on the day or the two days just before the month of Ramadan.

It has been stated in Imami books on fiqh that it is makruh for a guest to fast without the permission of his host, for a child to fast without the permission of its father, and when there is doubt regarding
the new moon of Dhu al-Hijjah and the consequent possibility of the day being that of ‘Id.

Evidence Of The New Moon

There is a general consensus among Muslims that a person who has seen the new moon is himself bound to act in accordance with his knowledge, whether it is the new moon of Ramadan or Shawwal. Hence it is wajib upon one who has seen the former to fast even if all other people don’t2 , and to refrain from fasting on seeing the latter even if everyone else on the earth is fasting, irrespective of whether the observer is ‘adil or not, man or woman. The schools differ regarding the following issues:

1. The Hanbalis, Malikis and Hanafis state: If the sighting (ru’yah) of the new moon has been confirmed in a particular region, the people of all other regions are bound by it regardless of the distance between them; the difference of the horizon of the new moon is of no consequence.

The Imamis and the Shafi’is observe: If the people of a particular place see the new moon while those at another place don’t, in the event of these two places being closeby with respect to the horizon, the latter’s duty will be the same; but not if their horizons differ.

2. If the new moon is seen during day, either before or after mid- day, on 30th Sha’ban, will it be reckoned the last day of Sha’ban (in which case, fasting on it will not be wajib) or the first of Ramadan (in which case fasting is wajib)? Similarly, if the new moon is seen during the day on the 30th of Ramadan, will it be reckoned a day of Ramadan or that of Shawwal? In other words, will the day on which the new moon is observed be reckoned as belonging to the past or to the forth- coming month?

The Imamis, Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanafis observe: It belongs to the past month and not to the forthcoming one. Accordingly, it is wajib to fast on the next day if the new moon is seen at the end of Sha’ban, and to refrain from fasting the next day if it is seen at the end of Ramadan.

3. The schools concur that the new moon is confirmed if sighted, as observed in this tradition of the Prophet (S) (‘Fast on seeing the new moon and stop fasting on seeing it’). They differ regarding the other methods of confirming it. The Imamis observe: It is confirmed for both Ramadan and Shawwal by tawatur (i.e. the testimony of a sufficiently large number of people whose conspiring over a false claim is impossible), and by the testimony of two just men, irrespective of whether the sky is clear or cloudy and regardless of whether they belong to the same or two different nearby towns, provided their descriptions of the new moon are not contradictory. The evidence of children, fasiq men and those of unknown character is not acceptable.

The Hanafis differentiate between the new moons of Ramadan and Shawwal; they state: The new moon of Ramadan is confirmed by the testimony of a single man and a single woman, provided they are Muslim, sane and ‘adil (just). The Shawwal new moon is not confirmed except by the testimony of two men or a man and two women.

This is when the sky is not clear. But if the sky is clear -and there is no difference in this respect between the new moon of Ramadan and Shawwal -it is not confirmed except by the testimony of a considerable number of persons whose reports result in certainty. In the opinion of the Shafi’is, the new moon of Ramadan and Shawwal is confirmed by the testimony of a single witness provided he is Muslim, sane, and ‘adil. The sky’s being clear or cloudy makes no difference in this regard.

According to the Malikis, the new moon of Ramadan and Shawwal is not confirmed except by the testimony of two ‘adil men, irrespective of the sky’s being cloudy or cloudless. The Hanbalis say: The new moon of Ramadan is confirmed by the testimony of an ‘adil man or woman, while that of Shawwal is only confirmed by the testimony of two ‘adil men.

4. There is consensus among the schools, excepting the Hanafi, that if no one claims to have seen the new moon of Ramadan, fasting will be wajib after the thirtieth day allowing thirty days for Sha’ban. According to the Hanafis, fasting becomes wajib after the twenty- ninth day of Sha’ban.

This was with respect to the new moon of Ramadan. As to the new moon of Shawwal, the Hanafis and the Malikis observe: If the sky is cloudy, thirty days of Ramadan will be completed and iftar will be wajib on the following day. But if the sky is clear, it is wajib to fast on the day following the thirtieth day by rejecting the earlier testimony of witnesses confirming the first of Ramadan regardless of their number. The Shafi’is consider iftar as wajib after thirty days even if the setting in of Ramadan was confirmed by the evidence of a single witness, irrespective of the sky’s having been cloudy or clear.

According to the Hanbalis, if the setting in of Ramadan was confirmed by the testimony of two ‘adil men, iftar following the thirtieth day is wajib, and if it was confirmed by the evidence of a single ‘adl, it is wajib to fast on the thirty-first day as well. In the opinion of the Imamis, both Ramadan and Shawwal are confirmed after the completion of thirty days regardless of the sky’s being cloudy or clear, provided their beginning was confirmed in a manner approved by the Shari’ah.

1. Approximately 800 grams of wheat or something similar to it.

2. But the Hanafis observe: If he testifies before a qadi who rejects his testimony, it is wajib upon him to perform its qada' without liability to kaffarah (al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-'arba'ah).

Call for Prayer According to Five Islamic Schools of Law

By: ‘Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Call For Prayer (Adhan)

Adhan literally means ‘announcement’, and in the Shari’ah it means the announcement made in specific words at the time of salat. It was introduced in the first year of the Hijrah at Madinah. The cause of its introduction, in the opinion of the Imamis, was that Gabriel came down with the adhan in a message from God to the Prophet (S). The Sunnis say that ‘Abd Allah ibn Zayd saw a dream in which he was taught the adhan by someone. When he related his dream to the Prophet (S), he approved it.

Adhan Is A Sunnah Of Prophet(S)

The Hanafis, Shafi’is and Imamis say: Adhan is a sunnah which has been emphatically recommended (mu’akkadah).

The Hanbalis observe: It is a wajib kifa’i for non-traveling men in villages and towns to make the adhan for the five daily prayers.

The Malikis state: It is a wajib kifa’i in towns where the Friday prayer is held, and if the people of such a place abandon adhan they will be fought on that account. Adhan is invalid in Certain Cases.

The Hanbalis observe: It is not valid to make adhan for a funeral prayer (salatal-janazah) or for a supererogatory prayer (al-salat al nafilah) or for one performed to fulfill a vow (al-salat al-mandhurah).

The Malikis say: It is not valid for a supererogatory or funeral prayer or for an obligatory daily prayer performed after the lapsing of its time (al-salat al- fa’itah).

The Hanafis state: It is not valid for the prayers performed on the two celebrations (‘idayn), for the prayer performed on the occurrence of an eclipse (salat al- kusuf), for prayers made for rain (istisqa’), and for tarawth and sunnah prayers.

The Shafi’is do not consider it valid for janazah, mandhurah and nawafil prayers.

The Imamis observe: The Shari’ah has introduced adhan only for the five daily salats, and it is mustahabb for them, whether performed as ada’ or qada’, with a group (jama’ah) or singly (furada), during journey or stay, both for men and women. It is not valid for any other salat, mustahabb or wajib, and the Performer (mu’adhdhin) will just call out "al-salat”three times on occasions of salat al-kusuf and ‘Idayn.

The Conditions For Adhan

The schools concur that the conditions for the validity of adhan are: maintaining continuity of its recital and the sequence of its different parts, and that the mu’adhdhin be a sane Muslim man. Adhan by a child of discerning age is valid. All the schools concur that Taharah is not required for adhan.

The schools differ regarding other aspects. The Hanafis and the Shafi’is say: Adhan is valid even without niyyah. The other schools require niyyah.

The Hanbalis consider making adhan in any language other than Arabic as being unconditionally valid. The Malikis, Hanafis and Shafi’is state: It is not valid for an Arab to make adhan in any other language, though it is valid for a non Arab to make it in his own tongue, for himself and his co-linguals.

The Imamis observe: Adhan is not valid before the arrival of the time of salat except in the case of salat al-fajr. The Shafi’is, Malikis,

Hanbalis and many Imamis permit the making of the adhan of announcement before the dawn. The Hanafis do not permit it, making no difference between salat al-fajr and other salats. This opinion is closer to caution.

The Form Of Adhan

The following is the form of adhan:

Allahu akbar -- four times according to all the schools and twice according to the Malikis.

Ashhadu an la ilaha illallah -- twice according to all the schools.

Ashhadu anna Muhammadan rasul Allah - twice according to all the schools.

(It is Mustahabb (recommended) to also say at this point: Ashhadu anna Aliyyan wali Allah - twice according Imamis only. It means I bear witness that ‘Ali is protected by Allah (from any evil))

Hayya ‘ala al-salat -- twice according to all the schools.

Hayya’ala al- falah -- twice according to all the schools.

Hayyah ‘ala khayril-’amal -- twice according to the Imamis only.

Allahu akbar twice according to all the schools.

La ilaha illallah -- once according to the four schools and twice according to the Imamis. The Malikis and Shafi’is permit repetition of the last line, considering it sunnah; that is the adhan, according to them, is not invalid if it is recited only once, as the Imamis hold.

The author of al-Fiqh ‘ala al- madhahib al-’arba’ah mentions a consensus among the four Sunni schools regarding ‘al-tathwib’ being mustahabb. ‘Al-tathwib means reciting the words "al-salatu khayrun min al-nawm",

(‘Salat is better than sleep’) twice after "hayya ‘ala al-falah ". The Imamis prohibit it.(9)

Iqamah (A call immediately before prayer)

For both men and women it is mustahabb to recite iqamah before every daily obligatory salat, with the salat immediately following it. The rules applicable to adhan, such as continuity, sequence, its being in Arabic, etc., apply to iqamah as well. Its form is as follows: Allahu akbar-- twice according to all the schools except the Hanafis who require it four times. Ashhadu an la ilaha illallah -- once according to the Shafi’is,

Malikis and Hanbalis and twice according to the Hanafis and Imamis. Ashhadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah -- once in the opinion of the Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis, and twice according to the Hanafis and Imamis. Hayya ‘ala as- salat -- once in the opinion of the Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis, and twice according to the Hanafis and Imamis.

Hayya ‘ala al-falah -- once in the opinion of the Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis, and twice according to the Hanafis and Imamis. Hayya’ala khayr il-’amal -- twice only according to the Imamis. Qad qamat is-salat -- twice in the opinion of all schools, except The Malikis who recite it once. Allahu akbar -- twice in the opinion of all the schools. La ilaha illallah -- once in the opinion of all the schools. A group of Imami legists observe: It is valid for a ‘traveler’ and a person in a hurry to recite each sentence of the Adhan & Iqama only once.

Call For Prayer & Ablution

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

From: Abbas Khan 24-MAY-1993 07:05:35.56

you would do a great deal by enlightening us about your Azzan (call for prayer)

Call for prayer that you are wondering about, is not a basic difference between Shi’a and Sunni. So even if I prove it for you that the way we call for prayer is the right one, it is not going to help you. Because the origin of differences is somewhere else, that is leadership. The details of call for prayer is not indicated in Qur’an, so we simply ask our leadership (Prophet and his 12 successors) to know how to call for prayer.

But let me ask you this Question: The detail of call for prayer is not written in Qur’an. But I am wondering why don’t you accept the things that are explicitly explained in Qur’an? One of them is the way you make Wudhu’ (Ablution). Qur’an, using WAW of ATF, clearly says that you should rub you feet, but you wash it. Am I right?

Allah says:

"Wash your faces and your hands..., rub your heads and your feet...”(Qur’an 5:6)

 فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ ... وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ...

Allah, exalted did not repeat the verb for "feet", and joined "heads”and "feet”together under one verb "Rub", using Waw of Atf. This is exactly what he did for "faces”and "hands”that came under one verb "Wash". Would you please let us know kindly why don’t you accept the above verse of Holy Qur’an?

Wudhu’ Or Ablution

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

From: Wael 28-MAY-1993 00:42:01.68

This is the issue of wudhu’. The brother asks a question:

Allah said:

 فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ ... وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ...

Wash your faces and hands... Rub your heads and feet... (Qur’an 5:6)

Allah, exalted did not repeat the verb for "feet", and joined "heads”and feet”together under one verb "Rub", using Waw of Atf. This is exactly what he did for "faces”and "hands”that came under one verb "Wash". waw al-’aTf requires that al-ma’Toof and al-ma’Toof ‘alaih share the same status in i’rab ie if the ma’Toof (in this case heads) has a kasra, the ma’Toof ‘alaih should also have a kasra. In this case, the ma’Toof has a kasra, but the word feet has a fatHa indicating that it is ma’Toofa ‘ala the word wujuhakum and aydiyakum.

No! Dear brother if you are Arab then you should probably know that the reason that ‘S’ in ‘ruusikum’ has Kasrah is because of the ‘B’ at the beginning of the ‘beruusikum’, and nothing else.

Moreover, when Allah uses a new verb, the old verb is already knocked out, and you can not come back to it, because this is A NEW SENTENCE. There is no possible way to use the verb of a previous sentence, when that sentence has been already finished and a new sentence is started with a new verb. I appreciate your consideration any way.

Joining Prayers and Other related Issues

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

One of the issues, among many others, that the Sunnis quarrel with the Shi’a about is the form, method, and time of the Prayer (Salat) prescribed on every male and female believer. Indeed, they make a mockery of the Shi’I prayer!

The Shi’a acknowledge five daily prayers. However, they are allowed to pray them in three distinct times, not five; the five prayers are: Fajr (Morning), Zuhr (Noon), `Asr (Afternoon), Maghrib (Sunset), and Isha (Night).

The Fajr (morning) is prayed at the same time as the Sunnis do; however, the Shi’a usually wait 10 minutes before they consider it to be time for Fajr.

We are allowed to pray noon and afternoon prayer one after another (without a lot of delay between the two). Similarly we are allowed to pray sunset prayer and night prayer one after another.

Actually it is better to pray in their own specific time (close to what Sunnis do), but it is not necessary. Thus instead of five separate times, we can pray all the five daily prayers only in three separate times.

(Note: The prayers in all cases are distinct (separate), it’s not that they (the Shi’a) pray eight Raka’t (for Zuhr and `Asr) straight, or seven Raka’t (for Maghrib and Isha) straight, as part of one prayer. It is the SAME regular form of prayer, but combined into one time, not one prayer.)

It should also be noted that the Sunnis agree to the combining of prayers in the case of Rain, Travel, Fear, or other emergencies. Two forms are allowed: Jam’a Taqdeem (Early Combination) or Jam’a Ta-ikheer (Late Combination). An example of Early combination is the combining of Zuhr and `Asr to be prayed in the time of Zuhr. An example of Late Combination is the combining of the Zuhr and `Asr to be prayed in the time of `Asr. The exception among the Sunni schools are the Hanifites (Followers of Abu Hanifa): They contend that you cannot combine the prayers at any time, not even if you’re traveling.

This clearly violated the other Sunni schools of thought, but it was and still is tolerated. The Maliki’s, Shafeei’s, and Hanbali’s all agree to the combining of prayers when one is traveling, but are in conflict on other times. The Shi’a said that one can combine the prayers anytime without any cause of fear, rain, or whatever. Nonetheless, the Shi’a also contend that if you want to pray them separately, it is acceptable as well.

Now, let’s question why the Shi’a perform the Prayers as described above, and who is more accurate in their Prayer, the Sunnis or the Shi’a? Here is what Allah (SWT) says in the Holy Qur’an:

"Establish regular prayers at the Sun’s decline till the darkness of the night, and the recital of the Qur’an in the morning prayer; for the recital of the dawn is Witnessed. (Qur’an 17:78)"

How many prayer times are mentioned? Three, not five. Count them: the "Sun’s Decline, Darkness of the Night, and the Morning Prayer.”That’s three, not five.

Now, what did the Prophet (S) do? Here’s what Ibn Abbas, one of the most famous narrators, says according to the Musnad of Ibn Hanbal (One of the books of tradition):

"The Prophet (S) prayed in Madina, while residing there, not travelling, seven and eight (this is an indication to the seven Raka’t of Maghrib and Isha combined, and the eight Raka’t of Zuhr and
`Asr combined)."

Musnad al-Imam Ibn Hanbal, vol. 1, page 221.

Also, in the Muwatta’ of Malik (Imam of Maliki sect), vol. 1, page 161, Ibn Abbas says:

"The Prophet (S) prayed Zuhr and `Asr in combination and Maghrib and Isha in combination without a reason for fear or travel."

As for Sahih Muslim, see the following under the chapter of "Combination of prayers, when one is resident":

Ibn Abbas reported: The messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him) observed the noon and the afternoon prayers together, and the sunset and Isha prayers together without being in a state of fear or in a state of journey

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1515

Ibn Abbas reported that the messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him) combined the noon prayer with the afternoon prayer and the sunset prayer with the Isha prayer in Medina without being in a state of danger or rainfall. And in the hadith transmitted by Waki(the words are): "I said to Ibn Abbas: What prompted him to do that? He said: So that his(prophet’s)Ummah should not be put to (unnecessary) hardship."

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1520

Abdullah b. Shaqiq reported: Ibn Abbas one day addressed us in the afternoon(after the afternoon prayer) till the sun disappeared, and the stars appeared, and the people began to say: Prayer, prayer. A person from Banu Tamim came there. He neither slackened nor turned away, but (continued crying): Prayer, prayer. Ibn Abbas said: May you be deprived of your mother, do you teach me sunnah? And then he said:

I saw the messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him) combining the noon and afternoon prayers and the sunset and Isha prayers. Abdullah b. Shaqiq said: Some doubt was created in my mind about it. So I came to Abu Huraira and asked him(about it) and he testified his assertion.

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1523

Abdullah b. Shaqiq al-Uqaili reported: A person said to Ibn Abbas(as he delayed the prayer): Prayer. He kept silent. He again said: Prayer.

He again kept silent, and he cried: Prayer. He again kept silent and said: May you be deprived of your mother, do you teach us about prayer? We used to combine two prayers during the lifetime of the messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him).

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1524

Ibn Abbas reported: The messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him) observed the noon and afternoon prayers together in Medina without being in a state of fear or in a state of journey. Abu Zubair said: I asked Sa’id(one of the narrators) why he did that. He said: I asked

Ibn Abbas as you have asked me, and he replied that he(the Holy prophet) wanted that no one among his Ummah should be put to (unnecessary) hardship.

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1516

Ibn Abbas reported that the Messenger of Allah(may peace be upon him) observed in Medina seven (rakahs) and eight(rakahs), i.e., (he combined) the noon and afternoon prayers(eight rakahs) and the sunset and Isha prayers(seven Rakahs).

Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter 250, Tradition #1522

Now, who is it that follows the customs and tradition of the Prophet (S)??? The Shi’a who follow it to the letter, or the Sunnis who don’t even acknowledge the traditions in their own books? This is a SIGN for those who reflect!

Furthermore, Allah (SWT) continually reminds us in the Qur’an that Islam was revealed to make your life easier, not more difficult. How then, can one work, eat, sleep, study, etc... with five prayers a day in five different times? You pray Maghrib, and an hour later, you pray Isha. Is this
convenient, say for doctors in a surgery room? Believe me, if the Sunnis followed what the Prophet (S) did (five prayers in three times a day), many people would be praying today.

I witnessed this myself in this holy month of Ramadan. My Sunni friends pray Zuhr, then sleep. They then wake up about 30 minutes before Iftar (the time to break the fast), and pray `Asr. Many also miss the prayer! Is this really convenient???

Question and ask for the truth, and if you are honest and sincere, Allah (SWT) will guide you.

There is another aspect which the Sunnis make a mockery of when they see a Shii praying: The Shi’a will only pray on natural rock (not cement), the ground (if it is not planted something that is either edible and/or something of which clothe can be made to be worn by humans), rugs made of Palm tree leaves, or rugs made of dry grasslike material (the same stuff as that used in building huts). The Shi’a will not pray on regular carpet.

That’s why, if you see a Shii praying, you will notice that he is praying on a peace of mud that is about the size of matchbox. The Sunnis mock the Shi’a and say that the Shi’a worship the rock!

It should also be noted that the piece of mud that the Shi’a pray on is from he mud of Karbala, the place in Iraq where al-Imam al-Hussein (as) was slaughtered by Yazid’s army. Nonetheless, this is not a mandatory requirement; the mud can be from any place on Earth as long as it is clean
and, as I mentioned earlier, is not planted edible foods or materials which can be made into clothe that humans can wear.

Now, let’s question why the Shi’a pray on the above materials only, and, again, who is wrong or right?

First, carpets are not allowed, nor is cement because the ingredients that they are made up of are not known. They may contain materials which are Haram (Islamically illegal) to prostrate one’s head on (make sujud).

Second, the prostration on the ground is more humble and modest when one is between the Hands of Allah (SWT). It is a form of eliminating pride, arrogance, and flamboyance.

Third, the Shi’a pray on the rock, not for the rock. We do not worship rocks.

Note: The Sunnis allow the prostration on anything that is clean, but they do favor rugs made from Palm tree leaves.

But what did the Prophet (S) do?

Sahih Muslim, v1, p168, under the chapter of "A Menstruating Woman’s

Eligibility to Wash Her Husband’s Head”narrates that the Prophet (S) had a special rug made of Palm tree leaves that he (SAAS) used to pray on.

Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, p256, under the chapter of "Retreating to

Prayer in the last ten days (of Ramadan)”narrates at the end of a long tradition that when the Prophet (S) raised his (SAAS) head from prayer, the companions saw the marks of mud and water on his (SAAS) forehead. This indicates that he (SAAS) prayed on the ground.

Sahih al-Bukhari, v1, p86, under the chapter of "Tayamum”narrates that the Prophet (S) said: "The GROUND has been cleansed and made a masjid for me."

Do I need to comment? Who, now, is it that follows the custom of the Prophet (S)?

Some of the other differences between the Shi’a and Sunnis are: The Shi’a pray with their hands hanging down the sides (like the Sunni Malikis), not clasped above their navel. Also, the Shi’a don’t say "Ameen”after the recitation of the first Surah (chapter) in prayer is completed. The reason is that there is no proof to support the notion that this kind of behavior was performed by the Prophet (S).

Again, there is a difference in the Azan (Call to Prayer) among the Shi’a and the Sunnis. The Shi’a add one line to the Azan, which they consider to be a mandatory component of the Azan. This line, repeated twice, is: "Haya `ala Khair al-’amal -- Rise Up For The Best of Works.”It comes right after the line: "Haya `ala al-Falah -- Rise Up For Salvation.”Another addition by the Shi’a, which is NOT a mandatory part of the Azan, is the affirmation: "Ash-hadoo Ana ‘Ali-yan Walayo Allah -- I witness that ‘Ali is the Vicegerent of Allah.”This line is repeated twice and follows the line:

"Ash-hadoo Ana Muhamadan Rasool Allah -- I witness that Muhamad is the Messenger of Allah.”As I mentioned, the latter line is not considered mandatory, and any Shii individual that argues otherwise, has invalidated the Azan. The origin of this assertion and addition goes back to the days of the Ummayads and the political environment during those days. The Ummayads attempted wholeheartedly to eliminate the memory of al-Imam ‘Ali (as) from among his (as) followers.

This effort reached astronomical proportions, that during and after the days of Muawiyah’s ruling, it became customary to curse al-Imam ‘Ali (as) whenever his (as) name was mentioned (May Allah (SWT) forgive us).

As such, the followers of al-Imam ‘Ali (as) chose to oppose the corrupt Ummayad government, and assert that ‘Ali (as) was truly the Vicegerent of Allah (SWT). That served as both an annoyment to the authorities, and a reminder to the posterity that al- Imam ‘Ali (as) was indeed the Agent and Vicegerent of Allah (SWT).

In conclusion, I simply appeal to all believing individuals to engage in a serious soul-searching effort to find the truth for themselves. May Allah (SWT) forgive us our sins, and guide us to that which pleases Him (SWT).

Prayer (Salat): According to Five Islamic Schools of Law Part 1

By: ‘Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

Translated from the Arabic by Mujahid Husayn

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Salat (prayer) is either obligatory (wajib) or supererogatory (mandub). The most important of prayers are the obligatory prayers performed daily five times, and there is consensus among Muslims that a person who denies or doubts their wujub is not a Muslim, even if he recites the shahadah, for these prayers are among the ‘pillars’ (arkan) of Islam. They are the established necessity of the faith (al-Din) that doesn’t need any ijtihad or study, taqlid.

The Daily Supererogatory Prayers (Rawatib)

Supererogatory prayers are of various kinds, and among them are those which are performed along with the obligatory daily prayers (fara’id). The schools differ regarding the number of their rak’ahs. The Shafi’is consider them to be eleven rak’ahs: two before the morning (subh) prayer, two before the noon (zuhr) prayer and two after it, two after the sunset (maghrib) prayer, two after the night (‘isha’) prayer and a single rak’ah called ‘al-watirah’

The Hanbalis consider them to be ten rak’ahs; two rak’ahs before and after the noon prayer, two after the sunset and The night prayer, and two rak’ahs before The morning prayer.

According to the Malikis there is no fixed number for the supererogatory (nawafil) prayers performed with the obligatory salat,

Though it is best to offer four rak’ahs before the zuhr and six after the maghrib prayer.

The Hanafis classify the nawafil performed along with the fara’id into ‘masnunah’ and ‘mandubah’.1 The ‘masnunah’ are five: two rak’ahs before the subh; four before the zuhr, and two after it, except on Friday; two after the maghrib and two after the ‘isha’ prayer.

The ‘mandubah’ are four: four -or two- rak’ahs before the ‘asr, six after the maghrib, and four before and after the ‘isha’ prayer.

The Imamis observe: The rawatib are 34 rak’ahs: eight before the zuhr, eight before the ‘asr, four after the maghrib, two after the ‘isha’ (recited while sitting and counted as a single rak’ah; it is called ‘al watirah’), eight rak’ahs of the midnight prayer (salat al-layl), two rak’ahs of al-shaf’, a single of al-watr,2 and two rak’ahs before the morning prayer, called ‘salat al-fajr’.

The Time Of Zuhr And ‘Asr Prayers

The fuqaha’ begin with salat al-zuhr, because it was the first salat to be declared obligatory, followed by the ‘asr, the maghrib, the ‘isha’ and the subh prayer, in that order. All the five prayers were made obligatory on the night of Prophet’s cosmic journey (al ‘Isra’), nine years after the beginning of his mission (bi’thah). Those who hold this opinion cite as proof verse 78 of the Surat al-’Isra’ which stipulates all the five prayers:

“Perform salat from the declining of the sun to the darkening of the night and the recital of the dawn; surely the recital of the dawn is witnessed.”(Qur’an 17:78)

The schools concur that salat is not valid if performed before its appointed time and that the time of the zuhr prayer sets in when the sun passes the meridian. They differ concerning its duration.

The Imamis say: The specific period of the zuhr prayer extends from the moment the sun crosses the meridian up to a period required to perform it, and the specific period of the ‘asr prayer is the duration required to perform it just before sunset. The time between these two specific periods is the common period for the two salats. This is the reason they consider it valid to perform both the prayers successively during their common period.3 But if the time remaining for the end of the day is sufficient only for performing the zuhr prayer, the ‘asr prayer will be offered first with the niyyah of ada’ and later the zuhr prayer will be performed as qada’.

The four Sunni schools observe: The time of the zuhr prayer begins when the sun crosses the meridian and continues till the shadow of an object becomes as long as its height; and when the length of the shadow exceeds the height of the object, the time for the zuhr prayer comes to an end. Here the Shafi’is and the Malikis add: These limits are for an unconstrained person (mukhtar), and for one who is constrained (mudarr), the time for zuhr prayer extends even after an object’s shadow equals its height. The Imamis consider the time when an object’s shadow equals its height as the end of the time of fadilah (honor) for the zuhr, and when it equals twice the height of the object as the time of fadilah for the ‘asr prayer.

The Hanafis and the Shafi’is state: The time of ‘asr prayer begins when the length of an object’s shadow exceeds its height and continues up to sunset.

The Malikis say: For the ‘asr prayer there are two times, the first for ordinary circumstances and the second for exigencies. The former begins with an object’s shadow exceeding its height and lasts until the sun turns pale. The latter begins from when the sun turns pale and continues until sunset.

The Hanbalis observe: One who delays offering the ‘asr prayer till after an object’s shadow exceeds twice its height, his salat will be considered ada’ if performed before sunset, though he will have sinned because it is haram to delay it until this time. They are alone in all the schools in holding this opinion.

The Time Of Maghrib And ‘Isha’ Prayers

The Shafi’i and the Hanbali schools (in accordance with the view of their respective Imams) state: The time for the maghrib prayer begins when the sun sets and ends when there radish after glow on the western horizon vanishes.

The Malikis say: The duration for the maghrib prayer is narrow and confined to the time required after sunset to perform the maghrib prayer along with its preliminaries of taharah and adhan, and it is not permissible to delay it voluntarily. But in an emergency, the time for the maghrib prayer extends until dawn. The Malikis are alone in considering it impermissible to delay the maghrib prayer beyond its initial time.

The Imamis observe: The period specific to the maghrib prayer extends from sunset4 for a duration required to perform it, and the specific period of the ‘isha’ prayer is the duration required to finish it before midnight. The time between these two specific periods is the common time for both maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers. Hence they allow the joint performance of these two salats during this common time.

That was with respect to someone who is in a position to act out of free choice (mukhtar), but as to a person constrained by sleep or forgetfulness, the time for these two salats extend until dawn, with the period specific for the ‘isha’ prayer becoming the time required to perform it just before dawn and the specific period for the maghrib prayer becoming the time required to perform it just after midnight.

The Time Of Subh Prayer

There is consensus among The schools, with the exception of the Maliki, that the time for the morning prayer begins at day-break (al fajr al-sadiq) and lasts until sunrise. The Malikis say: The subh prayer has two times: for one in a position to act out of free choice it begins with daybreak and lasts until there is enough twilight for faces to be recognized; for one in constrained circumstances it begins from the time when faces are recognizable and continues up to sunrise.

Ignorance Of The Qiblah (Direction)

It is wajib for a person ignorant of the qiblah to inquire and strive to determine its exact or approximate direction5, and in case neither of the two is possible, the four Sunni schools and a group from among the Imamis say: He may perform salat in any direction; his salat will be valid and it will not be wajib for him to repeat it except in the opinion of the Shafi’is.

Most Imamis observe: He will perform Salat in four directions to comply with the command for salat and to ascertain its proper performance. But if there isn’t sufficient time for performing salat four times or if one is incapable of performing it in four directions, he may perform, salat in the directions that he can.

A Subsidiary Issue

If a person prays not facing the qiblah and comes to know about his mistake, the Imamis state: If the error is known during the salat and the correct qiblah lies between his two hands, the part of the salat already performed will be valid and he will have to correct his direction for the remaining part of the salat. But if it is known that he has been praying facing the right or the left (90 degree off the direction) or his back towards the qiblah (180 degree off the direction), the salat will be invalid and he will perform it anew.

If the error is known after performing the salat, it should be performed again if its time is still there, not otherwise. Some Imamis say: The salat will not be repeated if there is only a little deviation from the qiblah, irrespective of whether its time is still there or not.

But if it has been performed facing the right or the left (90 degree off), it should be repeated if its time is there, not otherwise. If the salat is performed with one’s back to the qiblah (180 degree off), it should be repeated regardless of whether its time is still there or has passed

The Hanafis and the Hanbalis observe: If after inquiring and striving to find the qiblah one is unable to ascertain its approximate direction and performs salat in a direction which turns out to be wrong,
he must change his direction accordingly if the mistake is known during the salat, and if it is known afterwards his salat is valid and he has no further obligation.

The Shafi’is say: If it becomes certain that there has been a mistake in determining the qiblah, it is wajib to repeat the salat, but if there is only a likelihood of mistake, the salat is valid Irrespective of whether the probability arises during the salat or after it.

As to one who neither makes an inquiry nor an effort to determine the qiblah, but by chance performs the salat in the right direction, the Malikis and Hanbalis consider his salat to be invalid.

The opinion of the Imamis and the Hanafis is that his salat is valid provided he has no doubts while praying and was sure about the direction of the qiblah at the time of starting the salat, because, as pointed out by the Imamis, in such a situation it is correct for him to make the niyyah of acquiring nearness (qurbah) to God.

Wajib Covering During Salat

The schools concur that it is wajib (necessary) upon both men and women to cover those parts of their bodies during salat which should ordinarily be kept covered before ‘strangers’6. Beyond that their positions differ. Is it wajib for a woman to cover, fully or partly, her face and hands during salat, although she is not required to do so outside salat? Is it wajib for a man to cover other parts of his body during salat apart from the area between the navel and the knees, though it is not wajib to do so outside salat?

The Hanafis observe: It is wajib upon a woman to cover the back of her hands and the soles of her feet as well, and upon a man to cover his knees in addition to the area between the navel and the knees.

The Shafi’is and Malikis say: It is permissible for a woman to keep her face and both the palms and the back of her hands uncovered during salat.

The Hanbalis state: It is not permissible for her to expose any part except the face.

The Imamis observe: It is wajib for both men and women to cover only those parts of their body during salat which they are supposed to cover ordinarily in the presence of a ‘stranger’. Hence it is permissible for a woman to expose during salat that part of her face which is washed during wudhu’; her hands up to the wrists, and her feet up to the ankles both the back as well as the palms of hands and the soles of feet. For a man, it is wajib to cover the rear and the private parts, though better to cover the entire area between the navel and the knees.

The Material Used For Covering During Salat

The covering should meet the following requirements where the ability and freedom to meet them exist:

1. Taharah: The purity of The covering and the body are necessary for the validity of salat in the opinion of all the schools, although each of them concedes certain exceptions in accordance with the following details:

The Imamis state: Blood from wounds and sores, irrespective of its quantity, is considered excusable on The dress as well as the body if its removal entails difficulty and harm (mashaqqah and haraj). A blood spot smaller than the size of a dirham coin, regardless of its being due to one’s blood or that of someone else, is also excusable provided that: it is in a single place and not in different places; it is not the blood of hayd, nifas and istihadah; it is not the blood of anything intrinsically najis, such as dog and pig, or the blood of a dead body.

Also excusable is the impurity of anything that does not constitute part of essential dress during salat, e.g. a sash, cap, socks, shoes, ring, anklet and that which one carries with oneself, e.g. knife or currency. The impurity of the dress of a woman rearing a child, irrespective of whether she is the mother or someone else, is exempted on condition that it be difficult for her to change it and that she washes it once every day. In other words, in their opinion every najasah on dress or body is exempted in conditions of emergency (idtirar).

The Malikis observe: Cases of uncontrolled discharge of urine or excrement, as well as piles, are excusable; so is any impurity on the body or clothes of a woman suckling an infant that may be soiled by the infant’s urine or feces. So also are exempted the body and clothes of a butcher, surgeon and scavenger. Also exempted is: blood –even that of a pig- if it is less than the size of a dirham coin: the discharge from boils, the excrement of fleas, and other things which need not be mentioned because they occur rarely.

The Hanafis say: Najasah, blood or anything else, if less than the size of a dirham coin is exempted. Also exempted in emergencies is the urine and excrement of a cat and mouse. Tiny splashes- as small as the point of a needle- of urine, the blood that unavoidably stains a butcher, and the mud on roads- even if it is usually mixed with najasah and provided the najasah itself is not visible- are exempted. Consequently, they consider najasah in a small quantity as exempted, such as the urine of an animal eating which is halal, if it covers a fourth of the clothes and less than one-fourth of the body.

According to the Shafi’is, every najasah which is in such a small quantity that the eye cannot see it is exempted. So is the mud on roads which is mixed with a small quantity of najasah, worms present in fruits and cheese, najis liquids added in medicines and perfumes, excrements of birds, najis hair in small quantity if they do not belong to a dog or a pig, and other things as well which are mentioned in detailed works.

The Hanbalis say: Minute quantities of blood and pus are ex- empted, and so is the mud on roads whose najasah is certain, as well as the najasah that enters the eyes and washing which is harmful.

2. Wearing Silk: There is consensus among the schools that wearing silk and gold is haram for men both during and outside salat, while it is permissible for women. This is in accordance with this statement of the Prophet (S):

Wearing silk and gold is unlawful for the men of my ummah, while it is lawful for its women.

Accordingly, the Imamis observe: A man’s salat is not valid if he wears pure silk and any clothing embroidered with gold during it, regardless of whether it is a waistband, cap, socks, or even a gold ring. They allow wearing silk during salat in times of illness and during war.

The Shafi’is state: If a man performs salat while wearing silk or over something made of it, it will be considered a haram act, though his salat will be valid (al-Nawawi, Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, iii, 179). I have not found an express statement in the books of the remain- ing schools concerning the validity or invalidity of salat performed in silk, though the Hanafis as well as the Hanbalis (in accordance with one of two narrations) concur with the Shafi’is regarding the general rule that if there is any command prohibiting something which is not directly connected with salat such as the command prohibiting usurpa- tion- the salat will be valid if it is not observed and The person will be considered as having performed a wajib and a haram act together.

Accordingly the salat performed in a dress of silk is valid. The author of al-fiqh ‘ala al-madhahib al-’arba’ah reports a consensus for the Sunni schools that that it is valid for a man constrained to perform salat while wearing silk, and it is not wajib for him to repeat it.

3. Lawfulness of the Clothing: The Imamis consider it necessary that the clothing worn to be lawfully owned. Hence if a person performs salat in usurped clothes with the knowledge of their being so, his salat is invalid. This is also the opinion of Ibn Hanbal in one of the two statements narrated from him.

The other schools regard salat in usurped clothes as valid on the grounds that the prohibition does not directly relate to salat so as to invalidate it.

The Imamiyyah are very strict concerning usurpation, and some of them even observe: If a person performs salat in clothes in which a single thread is usurped, or carries with him an usurped knife, dirham, or any other thing, his salat will not be valid. But they also say: If one performs salat in usurped clothes out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his salat is valid.

4. The Skin of Uneatable Animals: The Imamis are alone in holding that it is invalid to perform salat while wearing the skin (even if tanned) of an animal whose flesh is not allowed to be eaten, as well as anything consisting its hair, wool, fur or feathers. The same is true of clothes bearing any secretion from its body- eg. sweat and saliva- as long as it is wet.

Hence, even if a single hair of a cat or any such animal happens to be present on the dress of a person performing salat and if he performs it with the knowledge of its presence, his salat is invalid.

They exclude wax, honey, the blood of bugs; lice, fleas and other insects which have no flesh, as well as the hair, sweat and saliva of human beings.

They also consider salat invalid if any part of a dead animal (maytah) happens to be on the clothes irrespective of whether the animal is one used for food or not, whether its blood flows when cut or not, and its skin is tanned or not.

A Subsidiary Issue: If there is only a single clothing to cover the body and that too is najis to an extent that is not excusable, what should one do if he has no alternative other than either performing salat in the najis clothing or in the state of nature?

The Hanbalis say: He should perform salat in the najis clothing, but it is wajib upon him to repeat it later.

The Malikis and a large number of Imamis observe: He should perform salat in the najis clothing and its repetition is not wajib upon him.

The Hanafis and the Shafi’is state: He should perform salat naked and it is not valid for him to cover himself with the najis clothing.

The Place Of Salat

An Usurped Place: The Imamis consider salat performed in an usurped place and usurped clothing as invalid provided it is done voluntarily and with the knowledge of the usurpation. The other schools observe: The salat performed in an usurped place is valid, though the person performing it will have sinned, since the prohibition does not relate directly to salat; rather, it relates to dispensations (of property). Their position in this regard is the same as in the case of usurped clothing.

Furthermore in the opinion of the four schools the Salat of usurper himself is valid in usurped property.

The Imamis also consider as valid the salat of the true owner and anyone whom he permits, and regard as invalid the salat of the usurper and anyone whom the owner has not granted permission. The Imamis however permit salat in vast stretches of (owned) land which are either impossible or difficult for people to avoid, even if the permission of the owner has not been acquired.

Taharah (purity) of the Place: The four Sunni schools observe: The place should be free from both wet and dry najasah (impurity). The Shafi’is overdo by saing: The taharah of all that which touches and comes into contact with the body or clothes of the performer is wajib.

Therefore, if he rubs himself against a najis wall or cloth or holds a najis object or a rope laying over najasah, his salat will be invalid. The Hanafis require only the location of the feet and the forehead to be tahir. The Imamis restrict it to the loca- tion of the forehead, i.e. the place of sajdah. As to the najasah of other locations, the salat will not be invalid unless the najasah is transmitted to the body or clothing of the performer (the person performing salat).

Salat Performed on a Mount: The Hanafis and the Imamis require the place to be stationary; hence it is not valid in their opinion to perform salat while riding an animal or something that swings back and forth, except out of necessity, because one who has no choice will perform salat in accordance with his capacity.

The Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis observe: Salat performed on a mount is valid even during times of peace and despite the ability to perform it on the ground, provided it is performed completely and meets all the requirements.

Salat Inside the Ka’bah: The Imamis, Shafi’is and Hanafis state: It is valid to perform salat, faridah or nafilah, inside the Ka’bah. The Malikis and the Hanbalis say: Only nafilah, not faridah, is valid therein.

A Woman’s Prayer Beside a Man: A group of Imami legists observe: If a man and a woman perform salat in a single place so that she is either in front of him or beside him, and there is neither any screen between them nor does the distance between the two exceed 10 cubits, the salat of the one who starts earlier will not be invalid, and if both star simultaneously, the salat of both will be invalid.

The Hanafis say: If the woman is in front or beside a man, the salat will be invalid if performed in a single place with no screen at least a cubit high between them, the woman has sex appeal, her shanks and ankles are adjacent to his, the salat is not a funeral prayer, and the salat is being jointly performed, i.e. either she is following him or both are following a single imam.

The Shafi’is, the Hanbalis and most Imamis are of the view that the salat is valid, though the manner of performance is makruh. The Locale of Sajdah: The schools concur that the place where the forehead is placed during prostration should be stationary and should not be inordinately higher than the location of the knees (during sajdah). They differ regarding that on which sajdah is valid.

The Imamis state: It is valid to perform sajdah only on earth and those things which grow on it which are not used for food or clothing. Therefore, a person cannot perform sajdah on wool, cotton, minerals and that which grows on the surface of water, for water is not earth.

They permit sajdah on paper because it is made of a material which grows on earth. They argue their position by pointing out that sajdah is an ‘ibadah (obedience) prescribed by the Shari’ah that depends for its particulars on textual evidence (nass). The legists of all the schools concur regarding the validity of sajdah on earth and that which grows on it, thus Imamis restrict it to that because there is certainty. They offer as further evidence these traditions of the Prophet (S):

The salat of any of you will not be valid unless he performs wudhu’ as instructed by God and then performs sajdah by placing his forehead on the earth. The earth has been created a masjid (a place for performing sajdah) and a purifier.

Khabbab says: "We complained to The Prophet (S) regarding the excessive heat of sun-baked ground on our foreheads, but he did not accept our complaint."7

Had it been valid to perform sajdah on carpets, why would they have complained?! However Imamis permit sajdah on cotton and linen in the case of emergency.

The four schools observe: It is valid to perform sajdah on anything, including even a part of one’s turban, provided it is tahir. Rather, the Hanafis permit sajdah on one’s palm even without an emergency, though it is considered as makruh.

Prostrating On Mud

For the Shi’a it is only acceptable to perform "Sujood”on a material that is not worn (used to make cloths) or eaten (i.e. foods for people) The best thing to make sujood on is earth (soil/clay) the second being Hasir (bamboo-nitted mat/rug). That’s what the prophet used to do based on even Sunni refernces such as Sahih Bukhari, volume 1, section on prayer on the "Khumrah”(a formed clay, referred to as "turbah”today):

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.376

Narrates ‘Abdullah bin Shaddad:

Maimuna said, "Allah’s Apostle was praying while I was in my menses, sitting beside him and sometimes his clothes would touch me during his prostration.”Maimuna added, "He prayed on a Khumra (a small mat ufficient just for the forehead while prostrating during prayers).

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.378

Narrated Maimuna:

Allah’s Apostle used to pray on Khumra.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.331

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said: "... The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) the place for prostrating and a mean to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 1.373

Narrated Abu Juhaifa:

I saw Allah’s Apostle in a red leather tent and I saw Bilal taking the remaining water with which the Prophet had performed ablution. I saw the people taking the utilized water impatiently and whoever got some of it rubbed it on his body and those who could not get any took the moisture from the others’ hands. Then I saw Bilal carrying an ‘Anza (a spear-headed stick) which he planted in the ground. The Prophet came out tucking up his red cloak, and led the people in prayer and offered two Rakat (facing the Ka’ba) taking ‘Anza as a Sutra for his prayer. I saw the people and animals passing in front of him beyond the ‘Anza.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 7.752

Narrated ‘Aisha:

The Prophet used to construct a loom with a Hasir (a wooden carpet) at night in order to pray therein, and during the day he used to spread it out and sit on it.

It is noteworthy that both Hasir (wooden carpet) and Khumra (formed clay) are natural made of earth, and are not eatable nor used for clothing. Thus they can be used for the place of Sajdah. Regural rugs (woollen or synthetic materials) are not natural made of earth.

1. The Hanafis use two terms ('fard' and 'wajib') for something whose performance is obligatory and whose omission is impermissible. Hence they divide obligation into two kinds: fard and wajib. 'Fard 'is a duty for which there is definite proof, such as Qur'anic text, mutawatir sunnah, and ijma' (consensus). 'Wajib' is a duty for which there is a Dhanni (non-definite) proof, such as qiyas (analogy) and khabar al-wahid (isolated tradition). That whose performance is preferable to its omission is also of two kinds: 'masnun' and 'mandub'. 'Masnun' is an act which the Prophet (S) and the 'Rashidun' caliphs performed regularly, and 'mandub' is an act ordered by the Prophet (S) though not performed regularly by him (S). That which it is wajib to avoid and whose performance is not permissible is 'muharram' if it is established by a definite proof. If based on a Dhanni proof, it is 'makruh', whose performance is forbidden.

2. According to the Hanafis, the salat al-watr consists of three rak'ahs with a single salam. Its time extends from the disappearance of twilight after sunset to dawn. The Hanbalis and Shafi'is say: At minimum it is one rak'ah and at maximum eleven rak'ahs, and its time is after the 'isha' prayer. The Malikis observe: It has only one rak'ah.

3. There are among 'ulama' of the Sunni schools those who agree with the Imamis on performing the two salats together even when one is not travelling. al-Shaykh Ahmad al-Siddiq al-Ghumari has written a book on this topic, Izalat al khatar 'amman jama'a bayn al-salatayn fi al-hadar.

4. There is no difference regarding the definition of sunset between the Imamis and the other four schools. But the Imamis say that the setting of the sun is not ascertained simply by the vanishing of the sun from sight, but on the vanishing of the reddish afterglow from the eastern horizon, for the east overlooks the west and the eastern afterglow, which is a reflection of sun's light, pales away as the sun recedes.

That which is rumored regarding Shi'is that they do not break their fast during Ramadan until the stars become visible, has no basis. In fact they denounce this opinion in their books on fiqh with the argument that the stars may be visible before sunset, at the time of sunset or after it, and declare that "one who delays the maghrib prayer till the stars appear is an accursed man (mal'un ibn mal'un).”

They have said this in condemnation of the Khattabiyyah (an extrimist sect which deviated from Shi’a), the followers of Abu al-Khattab, who held this belief. Thanks to God that they are now one of the extinct sects. lmam al-Sadiq a.s. was told that the people of Iraq delay the maghrib prayer until the stars become visible. He answered, "That is on account of Abu al-Khattab, enemy of Allah."

5. The command to face Masjid al-Haram has come in verse 144 of Surat al-Baqarah (...So turn your face towards Masjid al-Haram), and the leave to turn in any direction in verse 115: (To God belong the East and the West; where ever you turn there is the Face of God). Some scholars have held that the former verse abrogates the latter.

Others disagree and point out that there is no abrogation involved here, nor is it a case of one being particular and the other general. The way to reconcile the two verses, they point out, is that the former verse applies to those who know the direction of the qiblah and commands them to turn towards it. The latter verse specifically applies to one who is at a loss regarding its direction and orders him to perform salat in any direction he wants. This opinion seems to be more credible.

6. Verse 31 of Surat al-Nur mentions those before whom women can expose their adornment, and among them are Muslim women. Thus the verse prohibits a Muslim woman from exposing herself before a non-Muslim woman. The Shafi'is Malikis and Hanafis construe this prohibition as implying tahrim.

Most Imamis and the Hanbalis say: There is no difference between Muslim and non-Muslim women. But according to the Imamis it is makruh for a Muslim woman to expose herself before a non-Muslim woman, because she may describe what she observes from that muslim woman to non-muslim man.

7. al-Jawahir, at the beginning of bab al-zawaj.

Prayer (Salat): According to Five Islamic Schools of Law Part 2

By: ‘Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

Translated from the Arabic by Mujahid Husayn

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Essentials (Arkan) Of Salat

The validity of the Salat is dependent upon purity (Tahara from both hadath and khabath), the time of performing it, facing the Qibla, and wearing sufficient clothing. The fulfilment of these conditions (Shurut) before starting the salat is necessary, and they have been discussed in details in the preceding sections. Salat also comprises certain essentials (arkan wa fara’id) which are performed as parts of salat.

They are many, and among them are the following:

1. Intention (Niyyah)

The Schools -- or rather the legists of each school among themselves -- differ regarding the content of the niyyah (intention) required for salat, that is, whether it is necessary to specify the salat (such as its being zuhr or asr prayer), whether it is obligatory or supererogatory, complete (tamam) or shortened (qasr), in time (ada’) or late (Qada’), and so on. . .

the essence of the niyyah, as mentioned in the chapter on ablution is the intention to perform an act with the motive of obedience to a command of Almighty God. Specification of a particular salat, whether it is obligatory or supererogatory, ada’ or qada’, is dependent upon the intention of the musalli. Thus if he intends to perform a supererogatory salat at the beginning and performs it with this intention, it will be supererogatory; if he intends to perform an obligatory salat, such as zuhr or asr prayers, it will be so.

But if he does not intend anything it will be a waste of labour, though it is possible for one not to intend anything. Because any act performed by a sane person can not be without an intention regardless of whether he expresses it in specific words or not, and irrespective of whether he is attentive to his intention or not. Therefore, all the schools concur that expressing the niyyah in words is not necessary. Similarly, it is also ordinarily impossible for one who knows the difference involved to intend zuhr while performing asr and an obligatory salat while performing a supererogatory one.

However discusions regarding niyyah and its various forms were not in vague among the pioneering scholars of the shari’ah. It would be good to quote here the observations of two great sscholars, Ibn al-Qayyim from among the Sunni legists, and sayyid Muhammad, the author of al-Madarik, from the Imamiyyah.

The former observes in his "Zad al-Ma’ad”as quoted in the first volume of ibn Qudamah’s "al-Mughni": "The prophet (S) used to say ‘Allahu Akbar’ when he stood for prayer and did not say anything before it. He did not expresss the niyyah in words, such as saying: ‘I perform such and such prayer in four rak’ahs facing the qibla as an imam or ma’mum. Neither did he mention whether it was ada’ or qada’ nor its time. These ten are later elaborations and no one has ever narrated them from him (S) in either sahih or da’if form. And neither the tabi’un nor the four imams have opted for them."

The latter, in Madarik al-Ahkam observes: "That which is inferable from the sources of the shari’ah is that niyyah is a simple matter and all that it involves is the intention to perform an act in obedience to God, the Exalted. This is something which no sane person can do without while turning to perform an act of worship (Ibadah)."

2. Takbirat al-’Ihram

Salat does not materialize without ‘takbirat al-’ihram.’ Its name derives from the statement of the Prophet (S):

Purity (taharah) is the key to salat; its start (tahrim) is the takbirah (i.e., saying only one time Allahu Akbar); and its termination (tahlil) is taslim (i.e., saying Assalamu Alaykum).

It means that with takbirat al-’ihram it becomes haram to speak and perform any act incompatible with salat, and by reciting taslim those acts which were prohibited after reciting the takbir become permissible again.

Its formula is ‘Allahu akbar", and according to the Imamis, Malikis and Hanbalis no other form is permissible. The Shafi’is observe: Both "Allahu akbar", and "Allahu al-’akbar”(with the addition of alif and lam to "akbar") are permissible. The Hanafis state: Any other synonymous words such as ‘Allahu al-’a’zam’ and ‘Allahu al-’ajall’ will do it.

All the schools, excepting the Hanafi, concur that it is wajib to recite it in Arabic, even if the performer is a non-Arab. If he cannot, it is obligatory for him to learn it; and if he cannot learn, he may translate it into his own tongue. The Hanafis observe: it is valid to recite it in any language even if one can recite it in Arabic.

There is consensus among the schools that at the time of reciting takbirat al-’ihram all the conditions necessary for salat (such as purity, facing the qiblah, covering the body etc.) should be present, and that it should be recited-- when one has the ability to do so--while standing stationarily, and in a voice that he can hear. The word Allah’ should precede ‘akbar’, and the reverse, ‘akbar Allah’, will not suffice for entry into qiyam.

3. Qiyam (standing)

The schools concur that qiyam is wajib in the obligatory salats from the beginning of takbirat al-’ihram until going to ruku’, and that standing uprightly, stationarily and independently are its requisites.

Hence it is not valid to recline on any support when one is able to stand without it. If one cannot stand, he may perform salat sitting, and if this too is not possible, while laying down on the right side facing the qiblah (in the same position that a dead body is placed in the grave).

This is the opinion of all the schools except the Hanafis, who state: A person who cannot sit will perform salat laying down on his back with his feet pointing towards the qiblah, so that his gestures in lieu of ruku’ and sajdah are made towards the qiblah.

If it is not possible to perform salat while laying on the right side, the Imamis, Shafi’is and Hanbalis permit him to perform salat laying on his back by making gestures with his head. If gesturing with the head is not possible, he will gesture with the eyelids.

The Hanafis say: If his state is as bad as that, the duty of salat will no longer apply to him, though he will have to perform it qada’ when his condition improves and the hindrance is removed.

According to the Malikis, a sick person such as this, is not required to perform salat and it is also not wajib for him to perform its qada’

The Imamis, Shafi’is and Hanbalis state: The duty of salat does not disappear in any situation; if he is unable to gesture by blinking his eyes he will pass the salat through his mind and move his tongue for reciting the qira’ah and dhikr. If he is unable to move the tongue he will imagine it in his mind as long as his mind works. To sum up, salat is wajib upon those who are fully capable and those who are not so capable. It may not be neglected in any situation, and every person must perform it in accordance with his ability.

Hence it is performed while standing, then sitting, then laying down on one’s side, then laying down on one’s back, then gesturing by blinking the eyes, and passing it through the mind, in that order. A fully capable person as well as one not capable will move from the previous state to the new situation which has come into existence. Hence if a fully capable person loses his ability during salat or one not capable regains it, either of them will perform the remaining part in accordance with his ability.

Therefore, if he performs one rak’ah (unit) standing and is then unable to stand, he will complete it sitting, and if he performs the first rak’ah sitting and then regains the strength to stand, he will complete the remaining salat standing.

4. Qira’ah (reciting)

The schools differ whether the recitation of Surat al-Fatihah is wajib in every rak’ah (unit), or in the first two rak’ahs, or in all the rak’ahs without there being any other alternative. They give different answers to the following questions: Is the bismillah an essential part of al-Fatihah or is it valid to omit it? Is it wajib or mustahabb to recite aloud or in a low voice? Is it wajib to recite another surah after al-Fatihah in the first two rak’ahs? Can the tasbih replace the surah? Is takattuf (the folding of arms during salat) a sunnah or is it haram?

And so on.

(‘tasbih’ means: saying "subhanallah wal-hamdu lillah wala ilaha illallah wallahu akbar”which is usually recited three times in the third and the forth rak’ahs (units). Also ‘qunut’ means rasing both hands toward the sky and holding them in front of the chest or face and then reciting a supplication, like asking for forgiveness. It could be some verses of Qur’an or not. However it should be in Arabic for obligatory prayers.)

The Hanafis observe: It is not compulsory to recite only Surat al-Fa-tihah in the daily obligatory salats, and anything recited from the Qur’an may take its place, because God the Exalted, says:

‘Therefore recite of the Qur’an so much as is feasible’ (73:20) (Bidayat al-mujahid, v1, p 122 and al-Shi’rani’s , "bab sifat al-salat").

The recital from the Qur’an is wajib in the first two rak’ahs; but in the third rak’ah of the maghrib prayer and the last two rak’ahs of ‘asr and ‘isha’ prayer there is an option between reciting from the Qur’an or saying the tasbih or keeping quiet (al-Nawawi, Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, v3, p361).

Moreover, the Hanafis say: It is valid to skip the bismillah because it is not a part of any surah. Neither reciting aloud nor in a low voice are mustahabb, and a performer praying alone is free to recite in a voice that he alone can hear or in a voice hearable to others. There is no qunut in salat with the exception of salat al-watr. As to takattuf, it is masnun (a sunnah) but it is not wajib, and its preferable form is for a man to place the palm of his right hand on the back of his left hand, and for a woman to place her hands on her chest.

The Shafi’is state: Surat al-Fatihah is wajib in every rak’ah, without there being any difference in this regard between the first two rak’ahs and the other rak’ahs and between wajib and mustahabb salats.

The bismillah is a part of the surah and cannot be omitted in any circumstance. The recitation should be aloud in the morning prayer and the first two rak’ahs of maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers; the remaining recitals are to be in a low voice. The qunut is mustahabb only in the morning prayer, and is to be performed after rising from the ruku’ of the second rak’ah. Similarly, it is mustahabb to recite another surah after al-Fatihah only in the first two rak’ahs. Takattuf is not wajib but a sunnah for both the sexes, and its preferable form is to place the right hand palm on the back of the left hand between the chest and the navel and towards the left side.

According to the Malikis, reciting Surat al-Fatihah is necessary in every rak’ah, without there being any difference in this regard between the earlier and later rak’ahs and between fard and mustahabb salats, as observed earlier by the Shafi’is. It is mustahabb to recite another surah after al-Fatihah in the first two rak’ahs.

The bismillah is not a part of the surah and it is mustahabb to omit it altogether. Reciting aloud is mustahabb in the morning prayer and the first two rak’ahs of maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers. Qunut is to be recited only in the morning prayer.

Takattuf is valid in their opinion, though it is mustahabb to keep the hands hanging freely in the fard prayers.

The Hanbalis consider al-Fatihah to be wajib in even rak’ah, and to recite a surah after it in the first two rak’ahs as mustahabb. The morning prayer and the first two rak’ahs of maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers are to be recited aloud. The bismillah is a part of surahs though it will be recited in a low voice and not aloud. Qunut is to be recited in Salat al-watr and not in any other salat. Takattuf is a sunnah for both men and women and its preferable form is to place the right hand palm on the back of the left hand below the navel.

It is evident that takattuf, which the Sunni legists call it ‘qabd’ and the Shi’a legists call it ‘takfir’--i.e. to conceal, is not wajib in the opinion of any of the four Sunni schools.

The Imamis state: Reciting Surat al-Fatihah is necessary in the first two rak’ahs of every salat and no other surah can replace it. But it is not wajib in the third rak’ah of maghrib and the last two rak’ahs of four-rak’ah prayers; rather, one has an option between it and tasbih, though even once is sufficient. It is wajib to recite another complete surah in the first two rak’ahs, and the bismillah is a part of the surahs which cannot be omitted in any circumstance. It is wajib to recite aloud only the surahs and not the other recitations in the morning prayer and the first two rak’ahs of maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers.

except for the bismillah, the recitation in zuhr and asr prayers is to be done in a low voice in their first two rak’ahs and also in the third rak’ah of maghrib and the last two rak’ahs of ‘isha’ prayers.

Qunut is mustahabb in the five daily prayers and its place is the second rak’ah after the recital of the surahs and before ruku’ . The minimum level of voice considered ‘Hud’ is that a person nearby be able to hear it, and the minimum for ‘low’ voice is that the person himself be able to hear it. The schools concur that reciting aloud is not prescribed for women, nor is reciting in a voice lower than what can be heard by herself. If a performer voluntarily recites loudly something which is to be recited in a low voice and vice versa, his/her salat will be invalid, if this is not done due to ignorance or forgetfulness.

The Imamis also considers saying "Ammin”(Amen) during salat to be haram and doing so invalidates the salat, irrespective of whether one is praying individually or in group prayer as an imam or ma’mum, because it is something adopted by the people, and nothing adopted by people is capable of being included in the salat.

The four Sunni schools concur that it is mustahabb in accordance with the narration of Abu Huraira that the Prophet (S) said:

When the imam says, "ghayr il maghdubi ‘alaymhim wa la-ddallin,’ then say: "Ammin"

The Imamis negate the authenticity of the above tradition.

Also most Imamis consider takattuf (putting hands over each other) renders the salat invalid (batil) because there is no explicit text (nass) in support of it. However, some of them say: Takattuf is haram and the one who does it has committed sin, though his salat is not invalid. A third group from among them observe: It is makruh (discouraged) and not haram.

To be continued Ensha Allah...

This is written by a Sunni brother about Qunoot:

Qunoot:

Qunoot is an established practice of the prophet, and is accepted as such by all 4 Sunni schools. According to Malikis it is performed in the Fajr prayer before rukoo`. Hanafis have it in the witr prayer before rukoo`.

Shafi`is have it in the fajr prayer after rukoo`, and in the witr prayer in the last half of ramadhan. Many sunni scholars have seen it as recommended to perform qunoot in times of trouble and affliction (nawaazil), especially in the fajr prayer, and also in the maghrib and eshaa prayer.

According to the shafi`ee school it shoould be done in every prayer under such circumstances. It was reported that ABu Hurayra used to perfrom Qunoot even in the Afternoon prayer, and there was no mention of affliction.

Ibn Abbas performed it before rukoo` in the fajr prayer. Abdullah ibn Mas`ood performed it before rukoo` in the 3rd rak`ah of witr.

I do not ‘belong’ to any school of thought as such - I I belong to the Ummah of Islam. However, as far as practicing particulars, I follow for the most part the fiqh of Abdullah ibn Mas`ood and the other jurists who later moved to Kufa, notable among them being Imam Abu

Haneefah (incidentally a student of Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq), Imam Muhammad ibn allHasan al-Shaybaanee, and Imam Abu Yusuf al-Ansaree.

Wassalam

5. Ruku’(bowing)

There is consensus among the schools that ruku’ is obligatory (wajib) in salat but they differ regarding the extent to which it is wajib and the necessity of staying motionless in that position. The Hanafis observe: What is obligatory is to bend down in any possible manner, and staying motionless is not obligatory. The remaining schools consider it obligatory to kneel down until the palms of the hands of the performer reach his knees and to stay motionless during bowing.

The Shafi’is, Hanafis and Malikis state: It is not obligatory to recite anything during ruku’, though it is sunnah that the performer say: "Sub- hana Rabbl al-’azim. “The Imamis and the Hanbalis consider tasbih to be obligatory during ruku’ and its formula in the opinion of the Hanbalis is "Subhana Rabi al-’azim", and according to the Imamis "Subhana Rabbi al- ‘azim wa bi hamdih”or just "SubhanAllah”thrice. It is encouraged (mustahabb) in the opinion of the Imamis to add after the tasbih, to ask for belssing of Allah on Muhammad (S) and his Family (Allahumma sali ‘ala Muhammadin wa ‘‘Ali Muhammad).

The Hanafis say: It is not obligatory to return to the standing position after ruku’, and it is sufficient, though makruh (discouraged), to perform sajdah (prostration) straight-away. The other schools consider it obligatory to return to the standing position and mustahabb to recite the tasmi’, which is to say: "Sami ‘allahu li man hamidah”(God hears one who praises Him). According to the Imamis, it is obligatory to stay motionless in this standing (qiyyam) too.

6. Sujud (prostration)

There is consensus among the schools that sujud (prostration) is obligatory twice in each rak’ah. They differ regarding its details, as to whether it is obligatory to prostrate with all the seven parts of the body touching the ground while performing it or if it is sufficient to lay on the ground only some of them. These seven parts are; the forehead, the palms, the knees and the big toes. The Malikis, Shafi’is and Hanafis state: It is obligatory to lay only the forehead on the ground in sujud, and laying down the other parts is encouraged (mustahabb). The Imamis and the Hanbalis observe:

It is obligatory to lay on the ground all the seven parts while performing sujud. It has been narrated from the Hanbalis that they add the nose to these seven, thus making them eight. The difference of opinion regarding reciting tasbih and being motionless during sujud is similar to the difference mentioned concerning ruku’. Those who consider them obligatory there, consider them here as well.

The Hanafis do not consider it obligatory to sit between the sajdahs; the remaining schools consider it obligatory.

7. Tashahhud

Tashahhud is at most recited twice in salat; the first, after the second rak’ah of zuhr, ‘asr. maghrib and ‘isha’ prayers, which is not followed by taslim; the second in the last rak’ah of the two-, three-, and four- rak’ah prayers, which is followed by taslim. The Imamis and the Hanbalis state:

The first tashahhud is obligatory. The remaining schools consider it mustahabb and not obligatory. The second tashahhud is considered obligatory by the Shafi’is, Imamis and Hanbalis, and mustahabb by the Malikis and Hanafis (Bidayat al-mujtahid, v1, p125).

The following are the forms of tashahhud observed by the differentschools:

The Hanafis

"attahiyyatu lillahi wassalawatu wattayyibatu wassalamu ‘alayka ayyuha annabiyyu warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu, assalamu ‘alayna wa ‘ala `abadillahi assaliheena, ash-hadu anna la ilaha illa Allah, waAsh-hadu anna Mohammmedan ‘abduhu warasuluhu."

The Malikis

"Attahiyyatu lillah, azzakiyyatu lillah, attayyibatu assalawatu lillah. Assalamu alayka ayyuha annabiyyu warahmatu allahi wabarakatuhu, assalamu alayna wa ‘ala ‘abadi Allahi assaliheena, ash-hadu anna la ilaha illa Allah, wa ash-hadu anna muhammadan ‘abduhu warasuluhu.

The Shafi’is

"Attahiyyatu almubarakatu assalawatu attayyibatu lillah, assalamu ‘alayka ayyuha annabiyyu warahmatu allahi wabarakatuhu, assalamu alayna wa ‘ala ‘abadi allahi assalaiheena. Ash-hadu anna la ilaha illa Allah, wa ash-hadu anna sayyidana muhammadan rasulu Allah."

The Hanbalis

"Attahiyyatu lillahi wa-assalawatu wa-attayyibatu. assalamu ‘alayka ayyuha annabiyyu warahmatu allahi wabarakatuhu, assalamu alayna wa ‘ala ‘abadi allahi assalaiheena. Ash-hadu anna la ilaha illa Allah, wahdahu la shareekalah, wa ash-hadu anna sayyidana muhammadan ‘abduhu wa- rasuluhu. Allahumma salli ala Muhammadin."

The Imamis

"Ash-hadu anna la ilaha illa Allah, wahdahu la shareeka lah, wa ash- hadu anna muhammadan ‘abduhu wa-rasuluhu. Allahumma salli ala Muhammadin wa ‘‘Ali Muhammad."

8. Tasleem (farewell)

The Shafi’is, Malikis, and Hanbalis observe: Tasleem is obligatory. The Hanafis do not consider it obligatory (Bidayat al-Mujtahid, v1, p126).

The Imamis differ among themselves, a group considers it obligatory, while others, including al-Mufid, al-Shaykh al-Tusi and al-’Allamah al-Hilli, regard it as mustahabb.

Tasleem (farewell) has only one form in the opinion of the four Sunni schools, and it is "Assalamu alaikum warahmatu allah".

The Hanbalis say: It is obligatory to recite it twice. The others consider reciting once as sufficient.

The Imamis state: Tasleem (farewell) consists of two formulas; the first is: "Assalamu alaina wa ‘ala ‘abadi allahi assaliheen".

The second: "Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatu allahi wa barakatuh".

One of them is obligatory. Hence if a person recites the former, the latter will be mustahabb, and if he recites the latter, he will stop at it. As to "Assalamu alaika ayyuha annabiyyu wa rahmatu allahi wa barakatuhu", it is not a part of tasleem, and is a mustahabb addition to the tashahhud.

9. Sequence (tartib)

Proper Sequence (tartib) is obligatory between the different parts of salat. Hence the takbirat al-’ihram must precede reciting (qira’ah), the qira’ah must precede ruku’, the ruku’ must come before the sujud, and so on.

10. Continuity

Continuity (muwalat and tatabu’, i.e. to occur one after another) is Obligatory between the parts of salat and between the different portions of a part. Therefore, the reciting (qira’ah) must begin immediately after the takbirah and ruku’ must similarly follow the qira’ah, and so on. The verses, words and letters must not be recited in a manner breaking continuity.

Error And Doubt During Salat

The schools concur that a willful violation of any obligatory (wajib) act in prayer invalidates it. However mistake (sahw) can be compensated by performing sujud al-sahw as described below.

The Hanafis state: The form of sujud al-sahw is that the performer should perform two sajdahs followed by the recitation of tashahhud and taslim, prayer and blessing for the Prophet (S). This sujud should be performed after the termination of prayer (taslim), provided there is sufficient time (for that).

Hence if, for instance, someone makes an involuntary error in al-fajr prayer and finds that the sun has risen before his performing sujud al-sahw, he is not required to perform it any more. The cause necessitating sujud al-sahw is the performer’s omitting a obligatory part or repeating an essential part(rukn) --such as ruku’ or sujud. If numerous lapses occur (in a single), the two sajdahs will suffice for them all, because their repetition is not valid in their opinion. And if there occurs a lapse in the sujud al-sahw it requires no rectification (Majma’ al-’anhur, v1, "bab sujud al-sahw").

The Malikis observe: In its form, sujud al-sahw consists of two sajdahs followed by tashahhud without any supplication and benediction for the Prophet (S). As to the place of this sujud, in the event that it is on account of an omission or due to both an omission and an addition, it will be performed before the taslim; but if the cause is only an addition, then after the taslim.

Moreover, sujud al-sahw compensates for an involuntary omission of a mustahabb part; hence if the omitted part is a obligatory part, it cannot be compensated by sujud al-sahw and must be performed.

However, if the mistake is one of in voluntary addition -- such as an extra ruku’ or two, or one or two additional rak’ahs -- it is atonable by sujud al-sahw.

The Hanbalis say: It is valid to perform sujud al-sahw before or after the taslim. It consists of two sajdahs followed by tashahhud and taslim. Its causes are involuntary addition or omission as well as doubt. An example of addition is to perform an additional qiyam (standing) or qu’ud (sitting). One who sits where he is supposed to stand or vice versa will perform sujud al-sahw. Where there is an omission, the following procedure is to be followed in their opinion.

If he remembers the omission before starting the qira’ah of the next rak’ah, it is wajib for him to perform the part omitted as well as sujud al-sahw; and if he comes to remember it only after starting the qira’ah of the next rak’ah, the former rak’ah will be annulled and the latter will take its place and sujud al-sahw will also be performed.

To illustrate the same, if a person forgets ruku’ in the first rak’ah and becomes aware of it after performing the sujud (of the same rak’ah), he will perform the ruku’ and then repeat the sujud, and if he becomes aware of it only after starting the qira’ah of the second rak’ah, the former rak’ah will be considered null and void and the second rak’ah will take its place.

An example of doubt necessitating sujud al-sahw is the case when one doubts whether he has performed the ruku’, or has a doubt regarding the number of rak’ahs performed. Here he will consider that portion of the salat he is sure of having performed as the basis and will perform the remaining, and carry out sujud al-sahw on finishing it. Two sajdahs suffice for several mistakes, even if their causes differ, and a lapse committed by someone prone to making mistakes will not be considered a lapse.

According to the Shafi’is, the place of sujud al-sahw is after the tashahhud and benediction of the Prophet (S) and before the taslim. Its mode of performance is like the one prescribed by the above-mentioned schools. The reasons for its performance are: omission of an emphasized (mu’akkadah) sunnah, a little additional recital, the recital of al-Fatihah by mistake, the following of an imam whose has vitiated, a doubt in the number of rak’ahs, and the omission of a specific part.

The Imamis differentiate between the rules applicable to cases of doubt and those applicable to errors. They state: No attention will be paid to a doubt arising concerning any act of salat after its completion, or the doubt of a ma’mum regarding the number of rak’ahs if the imam has ascertained their number and vice versa, with each of them referring to the memory of the other.

No significance is attached to the doubts of a person who doubts excessively, and similarly to a doubt with respect to any act of salat arising after entry into its subsequent act. Hence if a doubt occurs regarding the reciting (qira’ah) of al- Fatihah after starting the reciting (qira’ah) of the subsequent surah, or regarding the surah after having gone into the ruku’, or with respect to the ruku’ after having entered the sajdah, the salat will be continued without any consideration to the doubt.

But if the doubt occurs before starting the performance of the subsequent act, it is obligatory (wajib) to rectify it. Hence a person who has doubt regarding the correct recital of al-Fatihah before starting the subsequent surah, will recite it again correctly, and similarly he should recite the surah again if he has a doubt concerning its recital before entering the ruku’.

As to sujud al- sahw, it should be done for every omission and addition, except for reciting aloud instead of in a low voice and vice versa -- as it does not entail anything -- and except for any omission or addition to the essencials (arkan) of salat.

In fact, any omission or addition of arkan invalidates the prayer irrespective of being intentionally or by mistake, and can not be compensated by sujud al-sahw. The arkan, in their opinion, are the following five: intention (niyyah), takbirat al- ‘ihram, standing (qiyam), bowing (ruku’) and the two sajdahs of each unit (rak’ah). it is not obligatory to perform any part omitted by mistake after the salat except sajdah and tashahhud, which are required to be performed out of all the forgotten parts.

These will be performed after the completion of the salat followed by sujud al-sahw, which consists of making two sajdahs and reciting Salawat (blessing of Muhammad and his progeny), in the state of prostration, followed by tashahhud and taslim.

Imamis consider the mistake of a person committing excessive mistakes and a mistake committed while rectifying it in its place, as no mistake.

Doubt in the Number of Prayer Units (Rak’ahs)

The Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis observe: If the performer has a doubt regarding the number of rak’ahs performed, he will consider the number of rak’ahs he is certain of having performed as the base and will complete the salat by performing the rest.

The Hanafis state: If the performer’s doubt in salat is for the first time in his life, he will repeat it from the beginning. But if it occurs to him that he has doubted in earlier as well, he will think for quite a while and will act in accordance with what seems more probable to him. But if the doubt remains (even after thinking), he will consider the number of rak’ahs he is certain of having performed as the base.

The Imamis state: If the doubt concerning the number of rak’ahs performed occurs in a two-rak’ah prayers (such as al-Fajr, the of a traveler, Friday, al-’idayn (two festivals) and al- kusuf (eclips of sun)) or in al-maghrib or in the first two rak’ahs of ‘isha’, zuhr and ‘asr prayers, the prayer will become invalid and it will be wajib to start it again from the beginning. But if the doubt occurs in the rak’ahs subsequent to the first two rak’ahs of the four-rak’ah prayers, he will perform cautionary extra units) al-’ihtiyat after completing the prayer and before performing any act incompatible with.

For example, if a doubt arises after the completion of the two sajdahs of the second unit (rak’ah) as to whether it is the second or the third rak’ah he will take the greater number of rak’ahs as his basis and complete the. He will then perform as ihtiyat (caution) a single rak’ah while standing or two rak’ahs while sitting. If the doubt concerns his being in third or fourth rak’ah, he will consider it the fourth rak’ah and complete the and follow it up with a single rak’ah standing or two rak’ahs sitting by way of caution.

If the doubt concerns his being in second or fourth rak’ah, he will consider it the fourth rak’ah. He will then offer two rak’ahs standing. If there is a doubt regarding its being second, third or fourth rak’ah, he will assume it to be the fourth rak’ah, and offer following it two rak’ahs standing and two rak’ahs sitting both.

According to them, the reason for performing these rak’ahs is to preserve the prescribed form of and avoid additions and omissions. Their point is illustrated by the example of a person who has a doubt between its being third or fourth rak’ah. He will consider it to be the fourth rak’ah and perform a single rak’ah separately after completing the salat. If his salat has been complete, the additional rak’ah performed separately will be considered as nafilah, and if the salat had been incomplete, the separate rak’ah will complement it.

However, this manner of performing al- ‘ihtiyat (cautionary prayer) is particular to the Imamis. They limit this procedure to the obligatory salats, and among them to zuhr, ‘asr and ‘isha’ prayers only. As to the nafilah prayers, the performer is free to consider the minimum or maximum rak’ahs probably performed as the basis, provided such supposition does not invalidate the (such as where he doubts his being in second or third rak’ah; due to the fact that the nafilah comprises only two rak’ahs; here he will consider the minimum number of rak’ahs probably performed as the basis). It is better in all mustahabb prayers to consider the minimum ascertainable number of rak’ahs as the basis...

The Festival (‘Id) Prayers

The schools differ concerning the prayers performed on the two festivals (‘Ids), al-Fitr and al-’Adha, as to whether they are obligatory (wajib) or recommended (mustahabb). The Imamis and the Hanafis observe: It is wajib for every individual if the conditions mentioned in Friday prayer are fulfilled. If some or all of these conditions do not exist, there is no obligation in the opinion of the two schools, except that the Imamis add:

In the absence of conditions necessary for its wujub, one can perform it as mustahabb either singly or in group prayer, during both journey and stay.

According to the Hanbalis it is fard kifa’i. The Shafi’is and the Malikis consider it a highly recommended practice (sunnah mu’akkadah).

In the opinion of the Imamis and the Shafi’is its time is from sunrise until the sun crosses the meridian. According to the Hanbalis, its time is from when the sun rises to the height of a spear until it crosses the meridian.

The Imamis say: Delivering of two sermons is wajib here as in the Friday prayer. The other schools consider it as mustahabb. All the schools concur that the sermons are to be delivered after the salat, as against the Friday prayer, in which they are delivered earlier.

According to the Imamis and the Shafi’is it can be validly per formed individually as well as in group prayer. The other schools consider perfoming in group is necessary for salat al-’ld.

As to the mode of its performance, it comprises two units (raka’ahs) performed differently by the various schools in the following manner:

The Hanafis: Takbirat al-’ihram will be said after making the niyyah, followed by the praise of God. Then will follow three more takb’irahs, with an interval of silence equaling three takb’irahs, and it is also correct to say: "Subhana Allahi wa alhamdu lillahi wa la ilaha illa Allah wa Allahu Akbar".

Then will follow the recital of Surat al-Fatihah, another surah, then ruku’ and sujud, in that order. The second rak’ah will begin by reciting Surat al-Fatihah, which will be followed by another surah, three takb’irahs, ruku’ and sujud. After this the salat will be completed. The Shafi’is: After saying the takbirat al-’ihram, the

Du’a’ al ‘Istiftah will be recited, followed by seven takbirahs, reciting after every two of them in a low voice: "Subhana Allahi wa alhamdu lillahi wa la ilaha illa Allah wa Allahu Akbar”; then after ta’awwudh (A’udhu billahi mina al-shaitani al-Rajeem), al-Fatihah and Surat Qaf will be recited, followed by ruku’ and sujud. After standing up for the second rak’ah and saying a single takb’irah for it, five more takb’irahs will be added, reciting after every two of them: "Subhana Allahi wa alhamdu lillahi wa la ilaha illa Allah wa Allahu Akbar". This will be followed by al-Fatihah and Surat Iqtarabat, and then the salat will be completed.

The Hanbalis: The Du’a’ al-’Istiftah will be recited followed by six takbirahs reciting after every two of them in a low voice: "Allahu akbaru Kabeera, wa alhamdu lillahi katheera, wa subhana allahi bukratan wa aseela, wa salla allahu ala Muhammadin wa alihi wa sallama tasleema". This will be followed by ta’awwudh, basmalah, al-Faitihah and Surat Sabbihisma Rabbik.

The rak’ah will be then completed. Upon standing up for the second rak’ah, five takbirahs, apart from the takbirah for the qiyam, will be said, reciting after every two of them what was mentioned concerning the first rak’ah. Then the basmalah, will be followed by Surat al-Ghashiyah and ruku’ and the salat will then be completed.

The Malikis: After the takbirat al-’ihram, six more takbirahs will be said, followed by al-Fatihah, Surat al-’A’ala, ruku’ and sujud. Then standing up for the second rak’ah and saying the takbirah for it, five more takb’irahs will be said, followed by al-Fatihah, Surat al-Shams or a similar surah; the salat will then be completed.

The Imamis: The takbirat al-’ihram will be followed by al- Fatihah and another surah. Then five takbirahs will be said with qunut (raising and holding hand in front of body for supplication) after each of them, there is a ruku’, and finally sujud will follow. After standing up for the second unit (rak’ah), al-Fatihah and another surah will be recited, followed by four takbirahs, each of them followed by qunut. Then the ruku’ will be performed and the salat completed.

The Friday Prayer

Its necessity (Wujub)

There is consensus among all the Muslims regarding the Friday prayer (salat aljumu’ah) being wajib in accordance with the words of God, the Exalted:

O believers, when proclamation is made for prayer on the Day of Congregation (yawm aljumu’ah) hasten to God’s remembrance and leave trading aside, (Qur’an 62:9)

as well as the mutawatir traditions narrated both by Shi’i and Sunni sources. They differ as to whether its wujub is conditional to the presence of the ruler or his deputy in it or if it is wajib unconditionally.

The Hanafis and the Imamis state: The presence of the ruler or his deputy is necessary; the Friday prayer is not wajib if neither of them is present. The Imamis require the ruler to be just (‘adil); otherwise his presence is equal to his absence. To the Hanafis, his presence is sufficient even if he is not just.

The Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis attach no significance to the presence of the ruler, and a large number of Imamis observe: In the absence of a ruler or his representative and the presence of a just faqih, there exists an option between performing either the Friday or the zuhr prayer, although preference lies with the performance of Friday prayer.

Conditions

The schools concur that the requirements for other salats (such as taharah, covering the body, and facing the qiblah) also apply to Friday prayers, that its time is from when the sun crosses the meridian up to when the shadow of an object equals its height, and that it can be performed in a mosque as well as any other place, except in the opinion of the Malikis who don’t consider it valid except in a mosque.

There is also consensus that it is wajib for men and not for women, and that one who performs is not required to perform the zuhr prayer, and that it is not wajib for the blind, and that it is not valid except when performed in jama’ah (congregation).

They differ regarding the minimum number of persons required to form a jama’ah; the Malikis state: Its minimum is 12, excluding the imam. The Imamis consider it to be 4, excluding the imam. In the opinion of the Shafi’is and Hanbalis, it is 40, including the imam; according to the Hanafis it is 5, though some of them say it is 7.

The schools, except the Hanafi, concur in its being prohibited for someone upon whom the Friday prayer has become wajib and its conditions fulfilled, to travel after the sun has crossed the meridian before performing it. The Hanafis allow it.

The Friday Sermons

There is consensus that the two sermons are required for convening the Friday prayer and that they are to be delivered before the salat, though after the setting in of its time and not earlier. They differ regarding the wujub of standing while delivering them. The Imamis, Shafi’is and Malikis require it, but not the Hanafis and Hanbalis.

As to their content, the Hanafis say: The sermon will be considered delivered even by a minimal dhikr, such as uttering "al-hamdu lillah”or "astaghfirullah", though such brevity is makruh.

The Shafi’is observe: It is necessary in both the sermons to praise God, invoke blessings on the Prophet (S), to exhort to piety, to recite a verse in at least one of the sermons, though reciting it in the first is better, and to supplicate for the faithful in the second sermon.

According to the Malikis anything considered by custom as a sermon suffices, provided it includes exhortation and announcement of good news.

The Hanbalis consider it essential to praise God, invoke blessings on the Prophet (S), recite a verse and counsel piety.

The Imamis state: It is wajib in each of the sermons to praise and extol God, invoke blessings on the Prophet (S) and his Family (A), preach, and recite something from the Qur’an, and in the second sermon, to implore God’s forgiveness and to pray for the faithful.

The Shafi’is and Imamis observe: It is wajib for the preacher to separate the two sermons by sitting down for a short while between them.

The Malikis and Hanafis consider it mustahabb.

According to the Hanbalis, the sermon should be delivered in Arabic, if possible.

The Shafi’is consider Arabic necessary if the people are Arabs, and if they are non-Arabs, the preacher should preach in their language even if he is well-versed in Arabic.

The Malikis say: It is wajib to preach in Arabic even if the people are non-Arabs and do not understand a word of Arabic. If there is no one among them who knows Arabic, there is no obligation to perform the Friday prayer.

The Hanafis and the Imamis do not consider Arabic a condition for delivering the sermons.

Its Mode of Performance

The Friday prayer comprises two units (rak’ahs), just like the morning prayers. The Imamis and the Shafi’is observe: After Surat al-Hamd of each rak’ah, it is mustahabb to recite Surat al-Jumu’ah in the first rak’ah and Surat al- Munafiqun in the second.

The Malikis state: Surat al-Jumu’ah will be recited in the first rak’ah and Surat al-Ghashiyah in the second. According to the Hanafis it is makruh to confine to a particular surah.

Prayer For Rain

Prayer for rain (salat al-’istisqa’) has been expressly mentioned in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and there is consensus concerning it. God Almighty says:

When Moses prayed for water for his people,... (Qur’an 2:60)

And I said: ‘Ask forgiveness of your Lord;surely He is ever All-forgiving, and He will lose heaven upon you in torrents. (Qur’an 71:10-11)

A tradition reports that once when the people of Madinah were facing drought and the Prophet (S) was delivering a sermon, a man stood up and said: "Horses and women have perished. Pray to God to give us rain.”The Prophet (S) extended his hands and prayed.

Anas narrates: "The sky was (clear) like a piece of glass. Then the wind began to blow. The clouds emerged and gathered and the sky poured forth its blessings. We went forth wading through the pools till we reached our homes. It continued to rain till the next Friday, and the same person stood up again and said: ‘O Prophet of Allah, houses have fallen and the caravans have been detained.

So pray to God to stop it. The Prophet (S) Smiled and then said: ‘O God, make rain around us, not upon us.’ Then I looked at the sky and saw it (i.e. the clouds) split and form a garland around Madinah."

The occasion for this salat is drought, scanty rainfall, and drying up of springs. The schools concur that if rain is delayed even after performing the salat, it is mustahabb to repeat it. If it is preceded by three days of fasting and the people go forth on foot, in a humble and supplicating manner, accompanied by their women and children, their elderly, men and women, and cattle, it will be more conducive for invoking Divine mercy.

There is consensus that it is valid to perform it individually as well as in jama’ah, and that it does not, have an adhan and iqamah; it is mustahabb for the imam to deliver a sermon after the salat. As to its mode, the schools concur that it comprises two rak’ahs, to be per formed like the two rak’ahs of salat al-’id in accordance with what each school specifies in that regard. The Malikis and the Hanafis say: It is like salat al-Eid though without the additional takbirat.

The Imamis observe: It is mustahabb after every takbirah to recite qunut imploring the mercy and blessing of God and seeking rainfall.

The four Sunni schools state: This kind of supplication will be mentioned by the preacher after the salat during the sermon, not in the salat itself.

The Prayer Of The Eclipses

The four Sunni schools observe: The solar- and lunar-eclipse prayer is an emphasized sunnah, but not wajib. The Imamis state: It is obligatory for every mukallaf (sane mature person).

It does not have a special form in the opinion of the Hanafis; rather it is to be performed in two rak’ahs like a nafilah prayer, each rak’ah comprising a single qiyam and ruku’. The performer is free to perform it in two, four, or more rak’ahs.

According to the Hanbalis, Shafi’is ant Malikis, it has two rak’ahs, with each rak’ah having two qiydms ant two ruku’s. After the takbirat al-Ihram, al-Fatihah and another Surah will be recited, followed by ruku: After rising from the ruku al-Fatihah and another surah will be recited, followed by ruku’ and sujud. Then standing up for the second rak’ah, it will be performed like the first, and the salat completed. It is also valid to perform it in the manner of a nafilah salat.

There is consensus that it can be performed singly as well as in jama’ah, except that the Hanafis observe regarding the lunar eclipse prayer: It has not been enacted for jama’ah, and has to be performed singly, at home.

As to its time, all the schools excepting the Malikis concur that it begins and ends with the eclipse. The Malikis say: Its time begins when the sun is at a spear’s height above the horizon and continues until noon.

The Hanafis and the Malikis say: A two-rak’ah salat is recommended at the time of any fearsome incident, such as an earthquake, thunderbolt, unusual darkness, epidemic, etc.

According to the Hanbalis, it is recommended only for earth quakes. The schools concur that this salat does not have an adhan and Iqamah, though an announcer will call out "al-salat”three times according to the Imamis, and "al-salat jami’ah”according to the other schools.

The Imamis observe: The salat is wajib upon every individual during solar and lunar eclipses, earthquakes, and on the occurrence of all unsettling celestial phenomena such as the sky’s darkening or being extraordinary red, strong winds, big sounds, etc.

If performed in jama’ah, the imam will recite only the surahs on behalf of those following him, just as in the daily prayers. The time for performing the salat for solar and lunar eclipses is the period of their occurrence, and one who does not perform. them at that time will perform them later as qada’.

There is no specific time for salats to be performed consequent to earthquakes and similar fearsome incidents; rather, it is wajib to perform these salats as soon as they occur, though in the event of delay they can be performed as ada’ as long as one is alive.

Its mode of performance is that after takbirat al-’ihram, al-Fatihah and another surah are recited, followed by ruku’. Upon rising from the ruku al-Fatihah and a surah will be repeated, followed again by ruku’. This will continue until five ruku’s are performed, and they will be followed by two sajdahs. On standing up for the second rak’ah, al-Fatihah and another surah will be recited, followed by a ruku’, this will be repeated till five ruku’s are performed in the second rak’ah as well. Then will follow two sajdahs, tashahhud, and tasleem.

Thus altogether there are ten ruku’s, and every five of them is followed by two sajdas, both in the first and the second rak’ahs. (another permissible way is to eliminate al-Fatiha for the last four Ruku’ and to recite 1/5 of a surah before each ruku’ spreading the Surah to five parts)

Courtesy of Islamic World Journal
The International Muslim Students Union
EMail: imnet1@u.washington.edu [22]
P.O.Box 85720, Seattle, WA 98105 Phone:(206)685-3309

O’ Lord!

Bless Muhammad and his family and make us know what we are ignorant of, and teach us what we do not know, and show us what we do not see. Help us die guided (righteous) and not misled, obedient and not unwilling, repentant not sinning and not persisting in sin. O’ Lord! Bless Muhammad and his family and make us one of the number of his followers, and raise us (in the day of judgment) amoung his Shiats (followers).

Belief of Shi’a in the Completeness of Qur’an

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A Wahhabi contributor mentioned that Shi’a believe Qur’an is not complete.

My answer to this matter is:

"Glory to (Allah), this is a big slander! (Qur’an 24:16)."

Shi’a do NOT believe that Qur’an is missing something. There are few weak traditions which “might “imply to the contrary. Such reports are rejected and unacceptable if they want to imply such a thing.

It is interesting to point out that there are numerous traditions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim which allege that many verses of Qur’an are missing. Not only that, but also they these Sunni reports allege that two chapters from the Qur’an are missing one of them was similar to chapter 9 (al-Bara’ah) in length!!! Some Sunni traditions even claim that the Chapter al-Ahzab (Ch. 33) was as lengthy as the Chapter of Cow (Ch. 2)!!!

The Chapter of Cow is the biggest Chapter of the present Qur’an. The traditions inside Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim even present some of the missing verses. (Some of these traditions will be mentioned in the following articles with full references.). Yet, fortunately Shi’a never accuse the Sunni brothers and sisters of believing that the Qur’an is incomplete. We say that either these Sunni reports are either weak or fabricated.

The completeness of Qur’an is so indisputable among Shi’a that the greatest scholar of Shi’a in Hadith, Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Babwayh, known as "Shaykh Saduq”(309/919-381/991), wrote:

"Our belief is that the Qur’an which Allah revealed to His Prophet Muhammad is (the same as) the one between the two covers (daffatayn).

And it is the one which is in the hands of the people, and is not greater in extent than that. The number of surahs as generally accepted is one hundred and fourteen ...And he who asserts that we say that it is greater in extent than that, is a liar."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-I’tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq, English version, p77.

It should be noted that Shaykh Saduq (ra) is the greatest scholar of Hadith among the Imami Shi’a and was given the name of Shaykh al-Muhaddithin (i.e., the most eminent of the scholars of Hadith). And since he wrote the above in a book with the name of "The beliefs of the Imami Shi’a,”it is quite impossible that there could be any authentic Hadith in contrary to it.

It is noteworthy that Shaykh Saduq lived at the time of minor occultation of Imam Mahdi (as) and he was one of the earliest Shi’a scholars. He had the honor that he was born with the prayer of Imam Mahdi (as).

Another prominent Shi’a scholar is Allama Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar who wrote in his Shi’a Creed book that:

"We believe that the Holy Qur’an is revealed by Allah through the Holy Prophet of Islam dealing with every thing which is necessary for the guidance of mankind. It is an everlasting miracle of the Holy Prophet the like of which can not be produced by human mind. It excels in its eloquence, clarity, truth and knowledge. This Divine Book has not been tampered with by any one. This Holy Book which we recite today is the same Holy Qur’an which was revealed to the Holy Prophet. Any one who claims it to be otherwise is an evil-doer, a mere sophist, or else he is sadly mistaken. All of those who have this line of thinking have gone astray as Allah in Qur’an said: "Falsehood can not reach the Qur’an from any direction (Qur’an 41:42)"

- Shi’i reference: The Beliefs of Shi’ite School, by Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar, English version, pp 50-51

Sayyid al-Murtadha, another prominent Shi’ite Scholar said:

"... our certainty of the completeness of the Qur’an is like our certainty of the existence of countries or major events that are self evident. Motives and reasons for recording and guarding the Holy Qur’an are numerous. Because the Qur’an is a miracle of the Prophethood and the source of Islamic Knowledge and religious rule, their concern with the Qur’an made the Muslim Scholars highly efficient concerning grammar, its reading, and its verses."

With this various concern by the most eminent Shi’a scholars, there is no possibility that the Qur’an was added or deleted in some parts. Besides what Allah mentioned in Qur’an about its protection, we can use our logic to derive the same result. Allah sent his last Messenger to show people (to the end of the time) His Right Path. Therefore if Allah does not preserve His message, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously, such negligence is evil according to reason. Thus, in essence, Allah preserves His message as He preserved Moses in the house of His Enemy, Pharaoh.

May Allah Bless Muhammad and his pure Ahlul-Bayt.

Different Arrangements of Qur’an

A Wahhabi alleged that it is reported in al-Kafi (one of the Shi’ite Hadith collection) that the Shi’a Imam said: "No one compiled the Qur’an completely except the Imams".

There is no such a tradition in Usul Kafi. I question the validity of the booklets that have misquoted the traditions. What is written in Usul Kafi in a tradition is as follows:

I heard Abu Ja’far (as) saying: "No one (among ordinary people) claimed that he gathered the Qur’an completely as it was revealed except a liar; (since) no one has gathered it and memorized it completely as revealed by Allah, the Most High, except ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) and the Imams after him (as)". (Usul al-Kafi, v1, p228, Hadith #1).

There are two other traditions which I will mention few lines later. The above tradition does not say Qur’an is incomplete. Rather it states it is not completely in the arrangement as it was sent down. The above tradition is not something new. As a matter of fact, the Qur’an that we use which was compiled by the companions is not in the sequence that has been revealed. In fact, the Sunni scholars confirm that the first Chapter of Qur’an which was sent down to the Prophet (S) was Chapter al-Iqra’ (al-Alaq, Ch. 96).

Sunni References:

- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi, v1, p259

- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p202

- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p417

- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani, v7, p454

As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present Qur’an. Also Muslims agree that the verse (5:3) was among one of the last revealed verses of Qur’an (but not the very last one), yet it is not toward the end of the present Qur’an. This proves that although the Qur’an that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been revealed.

I should point out that Imam ‘Ali was not the only one who had a Qur’an with different arrangements. According to the authentic Sunni reports, many companions had different arrangement (sequence) of Qur’an, one of them was Abdullah Ibn Masud:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518

Narrated Shaqiq:

Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza’ir which the Prophet used to recite in pairs in each Rak’a.”Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those Suras).

He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas’ud, and end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). And

"About what they question one another?”(Qur’an78.1)

Thus this is nothing exclusive to Imam ‘Ali. I should mention that the prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of Qur’an:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521

Narrated Masriq:

‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr mentioned ‘Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: ‘Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu’adh and Ubai bin Ka’b.’ “

This man (Abdullah Ibn Masud) not only had a different Qur’an but also (based on Sunni sources) he had a different sequence of chapters and different set of aayaat. He alleged that the present Qur’an has some extra words, and he swears in the name of Allah for his claim! (see Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.468, 5.105, 5.85). He also falsely alleged that the last two chapters of Qur’an are not Qur’anic chapters and they are only some prayers (Du’aa). (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.501)

According to the Shi’a, these allegations by the companions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari concerning Qur’an having extra words are FALSE. No single verse of Qur’an is extra.

Also it seems that Aisha has a different opinion as to which chapter was revealed first:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.515

Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:

While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?”‘Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?”He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Qur’an,”She said, "Why?”He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Qur’an according to it, for people recite it with its Surahs not in proper order.”‘Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire.

The second tradition in Usul Kafi which has been widely misinterpreted, states that what has been revealed to Prophet was as much as 17000 verses. Although this tradition is not rated authentic, there are two explanations for that. The first possibility mentioned by our scholars is that, the verses of Qur’an were originally shorter, and when the companions compiled the Qur’an, they appended short verses and thereby the number of verses reduced without any change to content of Qur’an.

The second possibility is that which was given by Shaikh Saduq (ra) who is the number one Shi’a scholar in the field of Hadith:

"We say that so much of revelation has come down which is not embodied in the present Qur’an that if it were to be collected, its extent would undoubtedly be 17000 verses ... Although all of them were revelation but they (the extra ones) are NOT a part of Qur’an. If they would be a part of Qur’an, it would surely have been included in the Qur’an we have."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-I’tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq, English version, pp 78-79.

The transcript of the Qur’an that Imam ‘Ali wrote contained commentary and hermeneutic interpretation (Tafsir and Ta’wil) from the Holy Prophet some of which had been sent down as revelation but not as a part of the text of Qur’an. A small amount of such texts can be found in some traditions in Usul al-Kafi and else. These pieces of information were Divine commentary of the text of Qur’an which was revealed along with Qur’anic verses but were NOT parts of Qur’an.

Thus the commentary verses and Qur’anic verses could sum up to 17000 verses. As Sunnis know, Hadith Qudsi is also revelation, but they are not a part of Qur’an. In fact Qur’an testifies that anything that Prophet said was revelation. Allah Almighty said in Qur’an about Prophet Muhammad that:

"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is no less than a revelation that is revealed.”(Qur’an 53:3-4).

Thus all the speeches of Prophet were revelation, and surely the speeches of Prophet was not limitted to Qur’an. It includes interpretation of Qur’an (part of which were direct revelation) as well as his Sunnah (part of which were indirect revelation).

The third tradition in Usul Kafi which is misinterpreted is as follows:

Abu Jafar said: "No one can claim that he completely has the Qur’an with its appearance (Dhahir) and its meaning (Batin), except the executors (Awsiyaa).”(Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #608).

again this tradition is referring to the fact that the commentary of Qur’an is missing. Although we have the appearance of Qur’an, its meaning (i.e., divine commentary) is not with it. The traditions refers to the Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali (as) which included the commentary.

In a follow up article, I will give some information about the Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali (as) which included all the above-mentioned divine commentaries.

It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shi’a are in agreement that the Qur’an which is at present among the Muslims is the very same Qur’an that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from it.

The Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali (excluding the commentaries) and the Qur’an that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing. A Wahhabi mentioned that al-Kafi is an authentic book of Hadith for the Shi’a, and as such Shi’a believe that Qur’an is not complete.

The above conclusion is based on two wrong hypotesis. First what was mentioned in the book of al-Kafi does not necessarily indicate that Qur’an is incomplete (see the above explanation). Second, we do not consider al- Kafi to be all-authentic book of tradition, nor his auther ever mentioned such a thing.

It is true that al-Kafi is among the most important Shi’a collections of traditions. The traditions of al-Kafi cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the fundamental of fiqh (jurisprudence). It includes more traditions than all 6 Sunni collections together (provided that if we remove the repetitions). For instance, al-Kafi has 16121 traditions, while Sahih al-Bukhari which has many repetition in itself has only 7275 traditions. If we remove the repetitions, al-Kafi has 15176 traditions while Sahih al-Bukhari will end up with 4000 traditions. The traditions mentioned here include both Usul al-Kafi and Furu’ al-Kafi.

The author of al-Kafi, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub al-Kulain al-Razi (d. 329/941), may Allah have mercy upon his soul, is considered to be highly honest and highly reliable. However, we should emphasize that neither the traditions are equal in value and significance, nor are the supportive evidence for the narrations. The authorities of the chain of narrations are not also equal in terms of reliability and credibility, and one can in NO way regard them as equally dependable.

A glance at the book entitled "Mir’atul Uqul”(reflection of the minds) will reveal this very point to the researcher in more detail. "Mir’atul Uqul”is an explanatory book to al-Kafi written by another great Shi’a scholar of Hadith, Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1111/1700) who is among the most loyal and faithful to the book of al-Kafi. Majlisi has rated some of the traditions of al-Kafi as weak.

However, being weak, does not mean the tradition is forged. If one of the chain of the authorities of a tradition is missing, then the tradition is weak in Isnad without regard to its content.

In fact, there are a number of traditions in al-Kafi which have one or more elements from the chain of narrators are missing. As such, all of them are regarded weak in Isnad. It might also be that a tradition is specific for a person who reported it from Imam, and may not have meant for the whole people. This very point is mentioned in Usul al-Kafi itself:

Ibn Abi Ya’fur said, I inquired of Abu Abdillah (as) about the different traditions related by those whom we trust and also by those whom we don’t.”Hearing this, the Imam (as) replied: "Whenever you receive a tradition which is borne out by any verse from the book of Allah or by a (established) saying of the Prophet (S), then accept it. Otherwise, the tradition is meant only for the one who has brought it to you.”(Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version, Tradition #202)

Shaikh al-Kulaini (ra), the author of al-Kafi, in the introduction of his book, mentioned the following:

Brother, may Allah lead you to the right path. You ought to know that it is not for anyone to distinguish the truth in the conflicting narrations attributed to the Ulama (i.e., Imams), peace be upon them, except through the standards which were declared by al-Alim (i.e., the Imam), peace be upon him: "Test the (conflicting) traditions by the Book of Allah, and that which agrees with it take it, and that which disagrees with it reject it...”(Usul al-Kafi, Arabic version, Introduction by al-
Kulaini, v1)

Is there any explanation better than that of the author? He mentioned that there are some conflicting narrations in his book, al-Kafi. He also mentioned that we should follow those Hadiths that are in agreement with the Book of Allah, and leave that which is in clear disagreement with Qur’an. To prove this point, al-Kulaini (ra) quoted a part of the Hadith of Ahlul-Bayt (as) that, in fact, confirms it as a criterion for the all the followers of Ahlul-Bayt (as).

After all, do the opponents of Shi’a expect us to leave what the author of al-Kafi confirmed in his own book, and to believe their false accusation that al-Kafi is all-authentic Hadith collection for the Shi’a?

Also a Wahhabi mentioned that in the introduction to the al-Kafi, it is written that the al-Mahdi has examined the book and said that it is good for his followers.

There is no such a thing in the introduction written by al-Kulain himself (who is the author of al-Kafi). This is what another person has mentioned in his own introduction to introduce al-Kafi and its author, which is placed before the introduction of the author. Also you did not correctly mentioned what is attributed to Imam Mahdi (as). If such report is ever true, Imam Mahdi (as) said:

"al-Kafi is sufficient of our Shi’a (followers)."

There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, as I mentioned, al-Kafi’s traditions cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the fundamentals of fiqh. Imam Mahdi (as) did NOT say whatever written in it is correct. Rather he (reportedly) said, it is sufficient, and includes all what his followers need in terms of the traditions. Again, such tradition is not mentioned by al-Kulain himself. al-Kafi means something that is sufficient. It does not mean all its content are perfectly correct, since the narrators were not perfect.

Actually the reason that the author named his book al-Kafi was explained in the introduction of the book written by himself. The scholars of his time asked him to compile a book of traditions which covers all necessary branches of religion of Islam. He wrote in his introduction that:

... and you complained that there is no book that could cover all the branches of the knowledge of religion (Ilm al-Din) to save the seeker of truth from referring to many books and which could not suffice as a guide and source of spiritual light in the matters of theology and the traditions of rightly guided Imams, peace be upon them. You expressedthe urgent need of such a book and I hope that the present book would serve this purpose. (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version, Introduction by al-Kulaini, part 1, pp 17-18)

al-Kulaini (ra) is not one of the twelve Imams of the Shi’ites. He was only a Hadith recorder who reported what was conveyed to him through one or more sources. He never said that he heard from Imam al-Sadiq (as), and he stated only a Hadith that came to him through some reporters. Let it be stated that the tradition of al-Kafi or any other Shi’a/Sunni book is not acceptable to the Imami Shi’ites if it wants to ever imply the incompleteness of the Qur’an.

These few traditions are rated weak. Even if we suppose that they are true, then the extra verses would mean the divine commentary of Qur’an which were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad along with Qur’an but not as a part of Qur’an as Shaykh Saduq and other scholars specified.

So, if one brings a weak tradition from Usul al-Kafi and then misinterpret the Hadith, it can not represent a belief of the Shi’a. However, when Sunnis claim that Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are all-authentic, they will have a big problem when they reach to those traditions in these books which allegedly imply the incompleteness of Qur’an. Do you see the difference, my friend?

In book, entitled "Science of Hadith”written by Zainul-Abideen Qurbani, discusses in great detail the traditions in which may imply the incompleteness of the Qur’an. Here is one passage from it:

More than 95% of Shi’a scholars believe that there has been absolutely no tampering of the Qur’an and that the Qur’an we hold in our hands today is exactly the same Qur’an that was revealed to Muhammad (saw), without a single word missing or being extra. To quote the words of
Shi’a scholars in this regard would require a whole separate treatise. But we briefly name just a few of them:

Beginning with Shaikh Suduq, whose words we already quoted, to Shaikh Mofid, Sayyed Murtada, Shaikh Tusi,..., Allamah Hilli, Muqaddas Aridibili, Khashif al-ghitaa, Shaikh Bahai, Fayz Kashani, Shaikh Hurr Ameli, Mohaqiq Kurki, Sayyed Mehdi Bahr ul-Uloom, Sayyed Muhammad Mujahid Tabataba’i, Shaikh Muhammad Husayn Ashtiyani, Shaikh Abdullah Mamqani, Shaikh Javad Balaghi, Sayyed Hibbat al-Din Shahristani, Sharif Radi, Ibn Idris, Sayyed Mohsin Amin Ameli, Sayyed Abdul-Husayn Sharif al-Din, Sayyed Hadi Milani, Sayyed Muhammad Husayn Allamah
Tabataba’i, Sayyed Abul-Ghasim Khoei, Sayyed Muhammad Rada Golbayegani, Sayyed Shahab al-Din Mar’ashi Najafi, Ruhullah Khomeini, etc.

The author then goes on to quote several pages of statements by top Shi’a scholars about the completeness and perfect authenticity of the Holy Qur’an. It is hoped that what was offered on this subject is sufficient for those who try to find the truth, that the Shi’a are the true believers in Qur’an.

It is improper for those who seek the truth to accuse others of something which they are entirely innocent of.

Wassalam

Some of the references of this article:

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version
- al-Imam al-Sadiq, printed by Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi Egypt
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani
- al-Kafi, printed by al-Haidari Printings - Tehran, Iran
- Shi’ite Creed (al-I’tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq
- Masadir al-Hadith ‘Indal Shi’a al-Imamiyyah", by Muhammad Husayn Jalali
- Science of Hadith, by Zainul-Abidin Qurbani

Some Sunni Reports on the Incompleteness of Qur’an

There are some traditions in Sihah Sittah (six authentic Sunni collections) which are not accepted by Shi’a scholars. Among them, some are talking about the changes made in Qur’an “after “the death of the Prophet. As I will show, in some Sunnis report 345 verses, two chapters of Qur’an (one of which is was as much as ch.9 in length) are missing from Qur’an. Here I give you some references in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and other important collections which falsely allege that Qur’an is incomplete. Let me first start with Sahih Muslim.

Sahih Muslim

Muslim in the Seventh (7th) part of his Sahih, in the book of Al Zakat about the virtue of being satisfied with what ever God gives about urging people to have that virtue, pp 139-140 (Arabic), reported that Abu al-Aswad reported that his father said:

“(For English version of Sahih Muslim see)”

“(Chapter CCCXCI, p500, Tradition #2286)”

Abu Musa al-Ashari invited the Qur’an readers of Basra. Three hundred (300) readers responded to his invitation. He told them

You are the readers and the choice of the People of Basra. Recite the Qur’an and don’t neglect it. Other wise a long time may elapse and your hearts will ne hardened as the hearts of those who came before you were hardened.

We used to read a Chapter from the Qur’an similar to Bara’ah in length and seriousness, but I forgot it.
I can remember from the Chapter only the following words:

Should a son of Adam own two valleys full of wealth, he should seek a third valley and nothing would fill Ibn Adam’s abdomen but the soil.

We also used to read a chapter similiar to the Musabbihat and I forgot it. I only remember out of it the following:

"Oh you who believe, why do you say what you do not do? (which is now in another place in Qur’an 61:2) Thus a testimony shall be written on your necks and you will be questioned about it on the day of judgment.”(which is a little different than what is in another place in Qur’an 17:13)

It is obvious that the above underlined words which Abu Musa mentioned are not from the Qur’an nor they are similar to any of the Words of God in the Qur’an. It is amazing that Abu Musa claims that two (2) chapters from the Qur’an are missing one of them is similar to Bara’ah in length!!! The following traditions are before the above tradition in Sahih Muslim:

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter 391, Tradition #2282:

Anas reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "If the son of Adam were to possess two valleys of riches, he would long for the third one. And the stomach of the son of Adam is not filled but with dust. And Allah returns to him who repents.”

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter 391, Tradition #2283:

Anas b. Malik reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) as saying this (the sentence of the above tradition), but I do not know whether this thing was revealed to him or not,
but he said so.

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter 391, Tradition #2284:

Anas b. Malik reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were two valleys of gold for the son of Adam, he would long for another one, and his mouth will not be filled with dust, and Allah returns to him who repents.

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter 391, Tradition #2285:

Ibn Abbas reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full of riches, he would long to possess another one like it, and Ibn Adam does not feel satisfied but with dust. And Allah returns to him who returns (to Him). Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from Qur’an or not, and in the narration transmitted by Zubair it was said: I do not know whether it is from the Qur’an, and he made no mention of Ibn Abbas.

Muslim also reported in the book of nursing (al-Ridha), v10 pages 29 (Arabic), that Aisha said the following:

There was in what was revealed in the Qur’an that ten (10) times of nursing known with certainty makes the nursing woman a mother of the nursed child. This number of nursing would make the woman ‘Haram’ to the child. Then this verse was replaced by ‘ five (5) known nursing ‘ to make the woman forbidden to the child. The Prophet died while these words were recorded and read in the Qur’an.

Also al-Zamakhshari recorded that Aisha said that the Qur’anic verse enjoining stoning for adultery was written on a leaf, but the leaf was accidentally eaten by a goat while the Prophet Muhammad was on his death-bed, and thus the verse was lost.

Umar (reportedly) Said Chapter 33 Is Incomplete:

al-Muttaqi ‘Ali Ibn Husam al-Din in his book (Mukhtasar Kanz al-Ummal, printed on the margin of Imam Ahmed’s Musnad, v2, p2) in his Hadith about chapter 33, that said Ibn Mardawayh

reported that Huthaifah said:

Umar said to me: How many verses are contained in the Chapter al-Ahzab ? I said 72 (seventy two) or 73 (seventy three) verses. He said: It was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 (two eighty seven) verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

If we take the report of Ibn Mardawayh which Huthaifah attributed to Umar in which he said that the Chapter of al-Ahzab, which contained 72 (Seventy two) verses, was as long as the Chapter of the Cow (containing 287) and take the report of Abu Musa which says that a chapter equal in length to the Chapter of Bara’ah (contains 130) was deleted from the Qur’an, then the deletion in the Qur’an according to these reports would be 345 Verses.

Sahih al-Bukhari

Al-Bukhari recorded in his Sahih, v8, pp 209-210, that Ibn Abbas reported that Umar Ibn al-Khattab said the following in a discourse which he delivered during the last years of the caliphate.

“(For Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari see 8.817:)”When Umar performed his last Hajj, he said:

Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth and revealed him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it.

The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, some one may say ‘ By God we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God ‘; thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.

Again, we used to read in what we found in the Book of God:
Do not deny the fatherhood of your fathers in contempt because it is a disbelief on your part to be ashamed of your fathers.

More references of similar tradition:

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (in the Musnad of Umar under the caption of the Hadith al-Saqeefah, pp 47,55)

- Sirah of Ibn Hisham (Pub. by Issa al-Babi al-Halabi of Egypt 1955), v2, p658

The above Hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.817) as well as similar ones in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.816 and 9.424(B)) all say "Umar’s last Hajj". Would you tell us when this Hadith could have been told originally? How long had it been passed by then from the death of prophet? Or from the gathering of Qur’an?

Please also note that the above verse which was recited by Umar in the above tradition, is not in present Qur’an.

The following Hadith is narrated without any Hadith number in Bukhari. It is in the title of one of the chapter of Bukhari. Fortunately, it was translated by the translator.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, vol 9, p212:

{Between Traditions 9.281 and 9.282}

(21) Chapter. If a judge has to witness in favor of a litigant when he is a judge or he had it before he became a judge (can he pass a judgment in his favor accordingly or should he refer the case to another judge before whom he would bear witness?).

And the judge Shuraih said to a person who sought his witness, "Go to the ruler so that I may bear witness(before him) for you.”And ‘Ikrima said, "Umar said to ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Auf, ‘If I saw a man committing illegal sexual intercourse or theft, and you were the ruler (what would you do)?. ‘Abdur-Rahman said, ‘I would regard your witness as equal to the witness of any other man among the Muslims. ‘Umar said, ‘You have said the truth.’ ‘Umar added:

If I were not afraid of the fact that people may say that ‘Umar has added to the Qur’an extra (verses), I would have written the Verse al- Rajm (stoning to death of married adulterers) with my own hands. and Ma’iz confessed before the Prophet that he had committed illegal intercourse, whereupon the prophet ordered him to be stoned to death.

It is not mentioned that the prophet sought witness of those who were present there.

Hammad said, "If an adulterer confesses before a ruler once only, he should be stoned to death.”But al-Hakam said, "He must confess four times.

My questions here are:

1)- Do you agree that Umar stated clearly that the verse famous as Rajm was in Qur’an originally (or was revealed originally)?

2)- To discuss the second part, I have given it more closely below:

If I were not afraid of the fact that people may say that ‘Umar has added to the Qur’an extra (verses), I would have written the Verse Ar-Rajm (stoning to death of married adulterers) with my own hands.

2.a)- Was Umar afraid of people talking behind him so and so?

2.b)- Was he afraid of God MORE at the same time he was saying?

(Was he MORE fearful of God, or afraid of people MORE than God?)

2.c)- Is anybody allowed to be afraid of people when revealing the truth about Qur’an is more important?

3)-

3.1)- If Umar were NOT afraid of people, would he have been writing the verse inside of Qur’an by his hand or not?

3.2)- If you were Umar, with the same knowledge and courage, would you have been adding this verse to Qur’an by your hand or not?

4)-

4.1)- Was Umar aware of abrogation or not?

4.2)- Was he aware of abrogation more than present scholars or not?

5)- Did he know that he should (or should not) have been adding the verse inside of Qur’an if it is abrogated or not? (This is not accepted by Shi’a. I will explain this situation very shortly. Some Sunnis say that it can be abrogated practically, and remained outside of Qur’an.

My question is that

Did he know that he should not have been adding this verse inside Qur’an since it is only practically abrogated?)

In other words, if he knew the rule, why he insisted on adding it, If he did not know that, is the above rule an invention of some of Sunni people who wanted to justify missing this verse?

Here is another example, that after the death of Prophet its is alleged that the phrase "Him who created”has been added to verse 92:3.

One of the narrator of this counterversy is Abdullah bin Masud. As I mentioned, The prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of Qur’an.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.468:

Narrated Ibrahim:

The companions of ‘Abdullah (Ibn Mas’ud) came to Abu Darda’, (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them,: ‘Who among you can recite (Qur’an) as ‘Abdullah recites it?”They replied, "All of us.”He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?”They pointed at ‘Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud reciting Surat al-Lail (The Night)?”

Alqama recited:

‘By the male and the female.’ Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:--

‘And by Him Who created male and female.’ but by Allah, I will not follow them."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5. 85:

Narrated ‘Alqama:

...Abu Darda further asked, "How does ‘Abdullah (bin Mas’ud) recite the Surah starting with, ‘By the Night as it conceals (the light).”(92.1)

Then I recited before him:

‘By the Night as it envelops: And by the Day as it appears in brightness; And by male and female.’ (Qur’an 91.1-3)

On this Abu Ad-Darda’ said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me recite the Surah in this way while

I was listening to him (reciting it)."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.105:

Narrated Alqama:

I went to Sham and was offering a two-Rak’at prayer; I said, "O Allah! Bless me with a (pious) companion.”Then I saw an old man coming towards me, and when he came near I said, (to myself), "I hope Allah has given me my request.”The man asked (me), "Where are you from?”I replied, "I am from the people of Kufa.”He said, "Weren’t there amongst you the Carrier of the (Prophet’s) shoes, Siwak and the ablution water container? Weren’t there amongst you the man who was given Allah’s Refuge from the Satan? And weren’t there amongst you the man who used to keep the (Prophet’s) secrets which nobody else knew?

How did Ibn Um ‘Abd (i.e. ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud) use to recite Surat al-Layl (The Night; ch. 92)?”I recited:--

"By the Night as it envelops By the Day as it appears in brightness. And by male and female.”(92.1-3) On that, Abu Darda said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me read the Verse in this way after listening to him, but these people (of Sham) tried their best to let me say something different."

Comments:

Please read the Verse itself. It is

By Him Who created male and the female.’ (Qur’an 92:3)

Do you see the word "Him who created”in that aayah? If no, please verify the Qur’an that you have. If yes, please tell us that these words are added to Qur’an or not?

As you see, what is written in the parentheses is missing in the Hadith while it is in the Qur’an. Do you think that the aayah is abrogated? If yes, please define the word "abrogation “for us.

{Abrogation is to delete something from Qur’an by the order of the prophet himself. For example, there is a rule for a while, then the prophet brings God’s order that the rule is extended and the previous rule is not acceptable any more. Therefore, the previous rule is abrogated. Now, do you think that "Him who created”is abrogated?

If yes, tell us what you understand from abrogation. Since these words are added, there is no room for abrogation here. If something were deleted, you could say that. Here, nothing is deleted from the present Qur’an. Something is added already based on these traditions.}

Do you think that these words were explanatory words? Your answer: Yes, they were:

Please tell us if the narrators of these traditions knew what is aayah and what is explanatory(commentary) statement?

These narrators say that the people of their time did not recite their way, however, they will not change anything, and they will continue reciting Qur’an that way
.

In addition, the commentary statements is not inside the Qur’an itself. It is in tafsir. However, present Qur’an contains these words "him who created”inside them. Now, please tell us that
the present Qur’an contains the commentary words of Sahabah or not?

Sunnis narrated that after the death of prophet, Qur’an was gathered in different ways, and by different people. Those who did not accept the government’ Qur’an (which was gathered by Abu-Bakr) kept their version of Qur’an at home and did not show it publicly. However, they did recite them as they wanted in public domain.

Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of famous narrators of sunni sources.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521:

Narrated Masriq:

‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr mentioned ‘Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: ‘Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu’adh and Ubai bin Ka’b.’

The prophet clearly indicated (by sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of Qur’an.

He, himself, says that:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.524:

Narrated ‘Abdullah (bin Mas’ud): By Allah other than Whom none has the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah’s Book but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse revealed in Allah’s Book but I know about whom.

This man had a different Qur’an (based on Sunni sources) with a different sequence of chapters and different set of aayaat. As I pointed out , he narrated that one aayat inside the present Qur’an has an extra word

"Him Who created". and He told this to people in different area. One of these differences are the last two chapters of Qur’an. He believed that these two chapters are not Qur’anic chapters and they are only some prayers (Du’aa).

Please read the following traditions very carefully.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.501:

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

I asked Ubai bin Ka’b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas’ud said so-and-so (i.e., the two Mu’awwidh-at do not belong to the Qur’an).”

Ubai said, "I asked Allah’s Apostle about them, and he said, ‘They have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the Qur’an),”So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah’s Apostle has said."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.500:

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

I asked Ubai bin Ka’b regarding the two Muwwidhat (Surats of taking refuge with Allah). He said, "I asked the Prophet about them, He said, ‘These two Surats have been recited to me and I have recited them (and are present in the Qur’an).’ So, we say as Allah’s Apostle said (i.e., they are part of the Qur’an"

Note:

The explanations inside the parentheses are from the translator (Muhammad Muhsin Khan, University of al-Medina, Saudi Arabia). They are not mine.

My comments:

1)- Do you agree that the speaker of these two traditions are "Ubai-ibn- Ka’b"?

2)- Do you agree that he was talking about these two chapters of Qur’an?

3)- Do you agree that in the first Hadith, the subject is about "Ibn-Masud"?

4)- Do you agree that Ubai-Ibn-Ka’b said that these two chapters are inside of Qur’an, and Ibn-Masud thought that these two are not inside of Qur’an?

5)- Do you trust Ubai-Ibn-Ka’b on this matter, or do you trust
"Ibn-Masud”on THIS matter?

6)- If you reject any of them, how do you justify your act with the first Hadith in this article where both of them are trusted by the prophet? How can you REMOVE and NOT remove these two chapters from Qur’an? Please explain, bring evidences, and references for any Hadith you may quote. Thanks. (I already know what you may quote, so please be careful in quoting them.)

As I said, these traditions are REJECTED by Shi’a since they are clearly illogical, and against the true content of Qur’an. This man, Abdullah-Ibn-Masud, had a different set of Qur’an too.

Please read the following Hadith and explain to us whether the Qur’an of Abdullah Ibn Masud was the same as your Qur’an.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518:

Narrated Shaqiq:

Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza’ir which the Prophet used to recite in pairs in each Rak’a.”Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas’ud, and end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). And

"About what they question one another?”(Qur’an, 78.1)

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.514:

Narrated ‘Umar bin al-Khattab:

I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah’s Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Surah which I heard you reciting?”He replied, "Allah’s Apostle taught it to me.”I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah’s Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours.”So I dragged him to Allah’s Apostle and said (to Allah’s Apostle),

"I heard this person reciting Surat al-Furqan in a way which you haven’t taught me!”On that Allah’s Apostle said, "Release him, (O ‘Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!”Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah’s Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way,”and added, "Recite, O ‘Umar!”I recited it as he had taught me. Allah’s Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way.

This Qur’an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you)."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6. 53:

Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:

I said to ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan (while he was collecting the Qur’an) regarding the Verse:-- "Those of you who die and leave wives ...”(2.240) "This Verse was abrogated by an other Verse. So why should you write it? (Or leave it in the Qur’an)?”‘Uthman said. "O son of my brother! I will not shift anything of it from its place."

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6. 60:

Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:

I said to ‘Uthman, "This Verse which is in Surat-al-Baqara: "Those of you who die and leave widows behind...without turning them out.”has been abrogated by another Verse. Why then do you write it (in the Qur’an)?”‘Uthman said. "Leave it (where it is), O the son of my brother, for I will not shift anything of it (i.e. the Qur’an) from its original position."

My comments: If the previously mentioned verses which are alleged to be in Qur’an as Sahih al-Bukhari claims, are abrogated, then why are they missing in the Qur’an? How can we justify the last two traditions? More over, how can something become abrogated after the death of Prophet?

If a verse is abrogated, there has to be an existing verse which is better or equal than the previous one. This is what Qur’an testifies:

None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar Do you not know that Allah has power over all things? (Qur’an 2:106)

Thus the abrogated and abrogating verses are always in pair.

As the above Sunni traditions confirm, the abrogated verse must be in Qur’an. There are quite a few verses in present Qur’an which are clearly stated in Tafaseer (of Sunni and Shi’a) that specific verses are abrogated by such and such verses. The only abrogated verses which do not exist in the Qur’an are those which Allah cause them to be "forgotten”(see the above verse of Qur’an). Since the forgotten verses were not in the mind of the prophet and the people, it is normal that these verses are not in the present Qur’an, since nobody could remember them because of Allah’s will.

The traditions mentioned from Sihah Sittah claim that some verses in Qur’an are missing and the companions not only “remember “them, but also recite them in public. So it can not be abrogated since it is not forgotten nor we have any similar verses (abrogating pairs) in Qur’an for them.

Moreover, the abrogation is only at the time of Prophet, and not after his death. However some of the above traditions allege that some companions believed that people after the death of Prophet have changed the words of Qur’an, however, they will not change anything, and they will continue reciting their own version of Qur’an. Abrogation can not be an answer for such disputes.

Also al-Hakim An-Nisaboori in his book "Al-Mustadrak”in the section of commentary on the Qur’an, part two, p224, reported that Ubai Ibn Kaab (whom the Prophet called the leader of al-ansar), said that the Messenger of God said to him:

Certainly the Almighty commanded me to read the Qur’an in front of you, and he read "The unbelievers from the people of the Book and the pagans will not change their way until they see the evidence. Those who disbelieve among the people of the scripture and the idolaters could not change until the clear proof came unto them. A Messenger from Allah, reading purified pages...”And of the very excellent part of it:

"Should Ibn Adam ask for a valley full of wealth and I grant it to him, he would ask for another valley. And if I grant him that, he would ask for a third valley. Nothing would fill the abdomen of Ibn Adam except the soil. God accepts the repentance of anyone who repents. The religion in the eyes of God is the Hanafiyah (Islam) rather than Yahudiyya (Judaism) or Nasraniya (Christianity). Whoever does good, his goodness will not be denied."

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, section of commentary on the Qur’an, v2, p224

Al-Hakim wrote: This is an authentic Hadith. al-Dhahabi also considered it authentic in his commentary (on al-Mustadrak). al-Hakim reported that

Obei Ibn Kabb used to read:

"Those who disbelieved had set up in their hearts the zealotry of the age of ignorance; and if you had had a similar zealotry, the Sacred Mosque would have been corrupted, and God (would have) brought down His peace of reassurance upon His Messenger"

When al-Hakim said this is authentic according to the standards of the two sheikhs (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)!!! and when al-Dhahabi also considered it authentic in his Commentary on al-Mustadrak, v2, pp 225-226, and when Muslim report similar to this from Abu Musa Ash’ari which I mentioned earlier, then what will be the conclusion?

Those who claim that anyone who has recoded a tradition which implies the incompleteness of Qur’an is Kafir, should first pass this verdict for al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Hakim, because they testified that such absurd traditions are authentic and have named their book "Sahih"! This is while the author of al-Kafi never claimed that his book is all-authentic, and mentioned that those traditions which contradict Qur’an should be rejected.

Furthermore, let’s suppose that al-Kulaini in his book, al-Kafi, had recorded some traditions which may imply the incompleteness of Qur’an. Why should all the Shi’a be accused of the belief in the incompleteness of the Qur’an? al-Kulaini was not an infallible, and if a scholar like him makes a mistake in recording a tradition which later found to be weak, why should we attribute the mistake to millions of the Shi’a?

If such an accusation is possible and permissible, why should we not accuse all the Sunnis of the belief of the incompleteness of the Qur’an because they are the followers of Umar who was quoted by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Ibn Mardawayh to have said that the Qur’an was incomplete, and that more than 200 verses were deleted? Why should Umar, Aisha, Abu Musa not be accused of the same thing because of all of them stated the incompleteness of the Qur’an?

We believe that the Qur’an as it is now is the entire Qur’an without any subtraction or addition. It is the Qur’an which no false hood from the era of pre revelation or post revelation entered it. It is a revelation from the Mighty, the Praised. Allah promised that He will protect the Qur’an. He said:

"Certainly We sent down the Reminder (i.e., Qur’an), and certainly we shall protect it”(Qur’an 15:9)

إِنَّا

نَحْنُ

نَزَّلْنَا

الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ

﴿الحجر: ٩﴾

It is the Qur’an through which the Messenger and the Members of his House commanded us to test the authenticity of every Hadith, and accept the Hadith that agrees with the Qur’an and reject the Hadith which contradicts the Qur’an. We believe that whoever says that the Qur’an is incomplete, was added is completely wrong. What was reported on this subject from Umar, Abu Musa, Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Hanbal, al-Hakim, and Kulaini is completely rejected and absolutely unacceptable, if they want to mean the incompleteness of Qur’an.

Despite the Sunni brothers who believe they have some authentic books, Shi’a believe that only Qur’an is all-authentic, and all the traditions attributed to prophet and Imams, are subject to check with well understood concepts in Qur’an.

Some of the references of this article:

- Sahih Bukhari printed by Muhammad ‘Ali Subaih in Egypt
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version
- Sahih Muslim printed by Muhammad ‘Ali Subaih in Egypt
- Sahih Muslim, English version
- Mustadrak by Hakim printed by al-Nasr in al-Riyadh 1335
- Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, printed Sader Beirute Lebanon 1969

The Qur’an Compiled by Imam ‘Ali (as)

There is no dispute among Muslim scholars, whether they are Sunni or Shi’a, concerning the fact that the Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as), possessed a special transcript of the text of Qur’an which he had collected himself, and he was THE FIRST who compiled Qur’an. There are a great number of traditions from Sunni and Shi’a which states that after the death of the Holy Prophet (S), Imam ‘Ali sat down in his house and said that he had sworn an oath that he would not put on his outdoor clothes or leave his house until he collects together the Qur’an.

Sunni references:

- Fat’hul Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p386
- al-fihrist, by (Ibn) an-Nadim, p30
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p165
- al-Masahif, by Ibn Abi Dawud, p10
- Hilyatul awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p67
- al-Sahibi, by Ibn Faris, p79
- ‘Umdatul Qari, by al-Ayni, v20, p16
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, pp 112-113
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p31

There are also traditions from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt which tell us that this was done by Imam ‘Ali by order of the Holy Prophet (See al-Bihar, v92, pp 40-41,48,51-52).

This transcript of Qur’an which compiled by Imam ‘Ali (as) had the following unique specifications:

a) It was collected according to its revelation, i.e., in the order in which it had been sent down. This is the reason that Muhammad Ibn Sireen (33/653 - 110/729), the famous scholar and Tabi’i (disciples of the companions of the Holy Prophet), regretted that this transcript had not passed into the hands of the Muslims, and said: "If that transcript were in our hands, we would found a great knowledge in it.”

Sunni References:

- at-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p101
- Ansab al-ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, p587
- al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, pp 973-974
- Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v6, pp 40-41
- al-Tas’hil, by Ibn Juzzi al-Kalbi, v1, p4
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p166
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p32

It is according to this transcript that Sunni scholars relate that the first Chapter of Qur’an which was sent down to the Prophet (S) was Chapter al-Iqra (al-Alaq, Ch. 96).

Sunni References:

- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi, v1, p259
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p202
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p417
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani, v7, p454

As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present Qur’an. Also Muslims agree that the verse (5:3) was among one of the last revealed verses of Qur’an (but not the very last one), yet it is not toward the end of the present Qur’an. This clearly proves that although the Qur’an that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been revealed. These few misplacements were done by some companions on purpose at worst, or out of ignorance at least.

It was for this reason that the Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as) frequently stated in his sermons: "Ask me before you lose me. By Allah, if you ask me about anything that could happen up to the Day of Judgment, I will tell you about it. Ask me, for, by Allah, you will not be able to ask me a question about anything without my informing you. Ask me about the Book of Allah, for by Allah, there is no verse about which I do not know whether it was sent down at night or during the day, or whether it was revealed on a plain or in a mountain."

Sunni References:

- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v2, p198
- at-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p101
- al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v4, p568
- Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v7, pp 337-338
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v8, p485
- al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p1107
- Tarikh al-Khulafa, by al-Suyuti, p124
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v2, p319

b) This transcript contained commentary and hermeneutic interpretation (Tafsir and Ta’wil) from the Holy Prophet some of which had been sent down as revelation but NOT as a part of the text of Qur’an. A small amount of such texts can be found in some traditions in Usul al-Kafi. These pieces of information were the Divine commentary of the text of Qur’an which were revealed along with Qur’anic verses. Thus the commentary verses and Qur’anic verses could sum up to 17000 verses. As Sunnis know, Hadith al-Qudsi (the Hadith in which the speaker is Allah) is also direct revelation, but they are not a part of Qur’an. In fact Qur’an testifies that anything that Prophet said was (either direct or indirect) revelation (See Qur’an 53:3-4). The direct revelation includes the interpretation/commentary of the Qur’an.

In addition, this unique transcript contained the information from the Holy Prophet about which verse was abrogated and which was abrogating, which verse was clear (Muhkam) and which was ambiguous (Mutashabih), which verse was general and which was specific.

c) This unique transcript also contained references to the persons, places etc., about which the verses were revealed, what is called "Asbab al- Nuzul". Since the Commander of Believers was aware of these facts, he frequently said: "By Allah, no verse has been sent down without my knowing about whom or what it was revealed and where it was revealed. My Lord has gifted me with a mind which has a quick and retaining understanding, and a tongue which speaks eloquently."

Sunni References:

- Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, pp 67-68
- at-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p101
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, p113
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197

After he compiled this transcript, Imam ‘Ali (as) took it and presented it to the rulers who came after the Holy Prophet, and said: "Here is the book of Allah, your Lord, in the order that was revealed to your Prophet.”but they did not accept it and replied: "We have no need of this. We have with us what you possess.”Thereupon, Imam ‘Ali (as) took the transcript back and informed them that they will never see it again. It is reported that Imam ‘Ali recited the latter part of the following verse of Qur’an:

"And when Allah took a Covenant from the People of the Book to clarify it to mankind and not to hide its (clarification); but they threw it away behind their backs and purchased with it some
miserable gain! and what an evil was the bargain they made!”(Qur’an 3:187)

By "its clarification", Imam ‘Ali meant the unique divine commentaries. The Commander of Believers then concealed that transcript, and after him it was passed to the Imams who also kept it concealed. It remained concealed with the Imams, one after the other to this day, because they wished to be only one sequence of Qur’an among the Muslims. Because otherwise if people have had two different sequences, it might later result to some alteration in Qur’an by some sick-minded people.

They wished people have strictly one sequence of Qur’an. The Qur’an and its commentary which were collected by Imam ‘Ali (as) is not available for any Shi’a in the world except to the Imam Mahdi (as). If the transcript of the Commander of Believers had been accepted, that would have been the Qur’an with unique commentary in the hand of people, but it turned out to be otherwise.

This gives the meaning of the traditions in Usul al-Kafi which say that no one but the Commander of Believers and the later Imams had the Qur’an in the order it was revealed, and that the Qur’an which they had contains "what can be understood of the heaven, etc.”and "the Knowledge of the Book, all of it,”because they were the commentaries and interpretations noted in the transcript of Imam ‘Ali directly from the Holy Prophet (S). Allah, to whom belong Might and Majesty, said:

"And We have sent down on you a Book in which is the clarification of ALL the things.”(Qur’an 16:89)

Sometimes the word "tahrif”is used in some traditions, and it must be made clear that the meaning of this word is changing of something from its proper place to another place, like changing the right position of sentence, or giving it a meaning other than its true or intended meaning.

Therefore, it has absolutely nothing to do with addition or subtraction from the text. It is thus with this meaning that the Qur’an states:

"Some of the Jews distort (yuharrifuna) words from their meaning”(Qur’an 4:46).

This meaning of "tahrif", i.e., changing of meaning or changing the context, as it appears in the Qur’an, has not only been applied in the Muslim community to the verses of the Qur’an but also to the ahadith of the Holy Prophet, even by rulers who have been prepared to use Islam to their own personal advantage. It is this "tahrif", with this meaning, that the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt have constantly sought to oppose. As one example, Imam al-Baqir (as) complained about the situation of the Muslims and their corrupt rulers, and said:

"One of the manifestations of their rejecting the Book (of Allah behind their backs) (see Qur’an 2:101) is that they have fixed its words. but they have altered the limits (of its command) (harrafu hududah). They have (correctly) narrated it, but they do not observe (what) it (says). Ignorant people delight in their preservation of its narration, but the knowledgeable people deplore their ignoring to observe (what) it (says)."

Shi’i references:

- al-Kafi, v8, p53
- al-Wafi, v5, p274 and v14, p214

This use of "tahrif”is taken as a definition for the word wherever it appears in the ahadith of the Imams, similar to what Qur’an (4:46) has used.

It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shi’a are in agreement that the Qur’an which is at present among the Muslims is the very same Qur’an that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from it.

The Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali (excluding the commentaries) and the Qur’an that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing. The only difference is that the current Qur’an (collected by the companions) is not in the order that was revealed.

The completeness of Qur’an is so indisputable among Shi’a that the great Shi’a scholar, Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Babwayh, known as

"Shaikh Saduq”(309/919-381/991), wrote:

"Our belief is that the Qur’an which Allah revealed to His Prophet Muhammad is (the same as) the one between the two covers (daffatayn). And it is the one which is in the hands of the people, and is not greater in extent than that. The number of Surahs as generally accepted is one hundred and fourteen...And he who asserts that we say that it is greater in extent than that, is a liar."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-I’tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaikh Saduq, English version, p77.

It should be noted that Shaikh Saduq (ra) was the greatest scholars of Hadith among the Imami Shi’a and was given the name of Shaikh al-Muhaddithin (i.e., the most eminent of the scholars of Hadith). And since he wrote the above in a book with the name of "The beliefs of the Imami Shi’a,”it is quite impossible that there could be any authentic Hadith in contrary to it. It is noteworthy that Shaikh Saduq lived at the time of minor occultation of Imam Mahdi (as) and he is one of the earliest Shi’a scholars.

He had the honor that he was born with the prayer of Imam Mahdi (as). For a more detailed discussion of completeness of Qur’an as well as the opinion of the Shi’a, interested readers may look at "al-Bayan,”by Abul Qasim al-Khoei, pp 214-278.

Some ignorant opponents of the Shi’a mentioned that we apply al-Taqiyya (dissimulation) and we do not release our actual belief on Qur’an. These people never tried to understand that Taqiyya is for the time when my life or the life of the other fellow is in danger. There is no need to conceal my belief here since I am not under prosecution. The above article is witness to what I say.

Taqiyya is not a good excuse for these people in front of Allah to disregard what Shi’a present. They have liberty to check the traditions which we have mentioned in different articles, or they can else ask their "honest”scholars to do that.

And the truth is the best to be followed...

Wassalam.

Tabarsi and Incompleteness of Qur’an

A Wahhabi wrote:

As for Khomeini, in his book Alhukumatul Islamia he speaks very highly of Nuri Tabrasi. He has even quoted from certain of his books in support of his teories. Tabrasi is the very same person who wrote a book titled "Faslul Khitaab fi tahrifi kitaabi Rabbil Arbaab”(the decisive say on the proof of Alteration of the book of the lord of lords) printed in Iran, 1298 A.H., to see that not only he claims the Qur’an is not complete but also he present examples of Surah that is deleted from the Qur’an

There are three individuals with the title of Tabarsi among the Shi’a. The one you mentioned who wrote a booklet on the incompleteness of Qur’an, is al-Nuri al-Tabarsi (Husayn Ibn Muhammad Taqi al-Nuri al- Tabarsi) (c 1254/1838 - 1320/1902).

Those who call the Shi’a Kafir due to this booklet will be surprised if they know that many of the Hadiths that al-Nuri al-Tabarsi has quoted are, in fact, from the Sunni documents and were quoted from their most authentic books!

Actually his book has two parts. In one part he has gathered the Sunni reports and in the other part he provided the Shi’a reports in this regard. The Wahhabis, who have recently distributed copies of this book to attack the Shi’a, have intentionally omitted the part related to the Sunni reports!

Nonetheless, the Shi’a scholars of his time disagreed with his conclusion regarding the alteration of Qur’an. This shows that the Shi’a scholars strongly believed nothing is missing from Qur’an.

One important remark, here, is that, we cannot call any person (Shi’a or Sunni) who claims Qur’an is incomplete, as Kafir. This is simply because believing in the completeness of Qur’an is not an article of faith, nor do we have any tradition saying that anyone who claims Qur’an is incomplete, is a Kafir. Also, the verse of Qur’an that states that Allah is the protector of the Reminder, can be interpreted differently. (Logically we cannot prove the lack of alteration in Qur’an by Qur’an!)

We can not add anything to the articles of faith after the demise of the Prophet (S), specially something like completeness of a Qur’an that was compiled at the time of Uthman long after the demise of the Prophet (S). Thus claiming Kufr would be an innovation and a false accusation and according to Islamic teachings such accusation will result in serious consequences for the accuser.

If a Muslim dose not agree with completeness of the Qur’an at hand, such wrong idea does not make his belief deficient if he still believes in all what have been revealed to the Prophet (S) is truth. Much the same as all Muslims agree that all the Sunna of the Prophet (S) is truth, though some of his Sunna may not have reached us.

What we can say about those individuals, who do not believe in completeness of the Qur’an that we have at hand, is that they are sadly mistaken in understanding the meaning of the traditions on which they based their proof. Also one should distinguish between a person who believes Qur’an is incomplete, and a person who has recorded some weak traditions among others in his book, simply because he wants to pass down all the information he has received (which are subject to verification at a later time).

The second person with the title of Tabarsi is Abu Mansoor Ahmad Ibn ‘Ali who lived in the sixth century after Hijrah. He is famous for some of his works. He never wrote any book to prove Qur’an is incomplete! Ayatullah Khomeini (ra) quoted from this person in his book, and not the first person as you alleged.

The highly-acknowledged Tabarsi in the Shi’a world is yet another person. His name is Abu ‘Ali al-Fadl Ibn al-Hasan al-Tabarsi (c 486/1093 - 548/1154), who is one of the famous Imami traditionists and the commentators Qur’an. His book on Tafsir is well-known. He believed in the completeness of Qur’an as other Shi’a scholars do. Abu ‘Ali al-Tabarsi mentioned:

"There are no words added to the Qur’an. Any claim of added words is unanimously denied by the Shi’ites. As to the deletion, some Shi’ites and some Sunnis said that there is deletion. But Our scholars deny that."

- Shi’i reference: Quoted from al-Tabarsi, in the Commentary of the Holy Qur’an, by al-Safi

- Sunni reference: Quoted from al-Tabarsi, by Professor Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "Imam al-Sadiq".

First of all, Tabarsi has confirmed that nothing has been added in to the Qur’an (as opposed to some of the traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari which claim otherwise). Second, he has mentioned that our scholars (the Shi’a scholars) rejected the idea that anything has been deleted from the Qur’an. His saying clearly shows that the Shi’a scholars disagreed with any idea concerning that Qur’an is missing something.

Thus the very small number of the traditions that might imply otherwise should have proper interpretation. Also as Tabarsi mentioned, such traditions which might imply deletion, are not exclusive to the Shi’ite books, and can be found in the most important Sunni collections of traditions such as Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Bukhari.

The Wahhabi opponent further wrote:

Nuri al-Tabarsi present examples of Surah that is deleted from the Qur’an, like the Surah of Wali “Oh you who belive, belive in the prophet and wali, the two whom we sent to guide you to the straight path. A prophet and wali who are of each other...and celebrate the praise of your lord, and ‘Ali is among the witnesses... What do you have to say to this!!!

All the Shi’a scholars unanimously rejected the opinion of Noori al-Tabarsi that there was a Chapter called Wali. But since you tried to solve all the problems concerning numerous traditions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim on the deletion of two chapters of Qur’an with the “length “of chapter of al-Bara’ah! (ch. 9) by saying that they were abrogated (even after the death of Prophet!!!), then let’s suppose for the sake of argument that the above small chapter called Wali was revealed, and then it was abrogated. How does that sound?

As for the concept of Wali, we do not need any new chapter to prove it. The concept of Wali has been mentioned in Qur’an with its general as well as its special meaning. Here is just one of the verses with its special meaning:

“Only “Allah is your WALI, and His Messenger and those among believers who keep alive prayer and pay Zakat while they are in the state of bowing. (Qur’an 5:55)

The above verse clearly suggests that “not “all believers are your Wali with the special meaning of Wali in this verse which is "master”and "leader". Here again, Wali does not mean just friend, because all the believers are friends of each other. The above verse mentions that only three items are your special Wali: Allah, Prophet Muhammad, and Imam ‘Ali for he was the only one at the time of Prophet who paid Zakat while he was in the state bowing (ruku’). Muslim scholars are unanimous in reporting this event. Here are just some of the Sunni references which mentioned the revelation of the above verse of Qur’an in the honor of Imam ‘Ali:

(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38

(2) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649

(3) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha’labi

(4) Tafsir al-Bayan, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289

(5) Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Qur’an, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219

(6) Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68

(7) Durr al-Manthur, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294

(8) Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the authority of Ibn Abbas

(9) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi

(10) Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji

(11) Ahkam al-Qur’an, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543

(12) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391

(13) al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir

(14) Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas

... and more ...

Please see the article of Ghadir Khum, Part II, for more information and clarification about the above verse.

The Book of Fatimah (sa)

Some anti-Shi’i booklets published by Wahhabis groups allege that based on Usul Kafi, Shi’a believe there is a Qur’an called "Qur’an of Fatimah"! This is a malicious accusation. There is no tradition in Usul Kafi saying "Qur’an of Fatimah". There are however, very few traditions in one chapter of Usul Kafi which assert that Fatimah (sa) wrote a book (mushaf). The tradition states "The book of Fatimah". Surely Qur’an is a book (mushaf), but any book is NOT Qur’an. This allegation is as silly as saying "Qur’an of al-Bukhari”instead of "book of al-Bukhari"!

Also those few traditions in al-Kafi clearly state that there is no single verse of Qur’an in the Book of Fatimah. This shows that the book of Fatimah is totally different than Qur’an. Of course, it was three time bigger than Qur’an in length.

In one tradition it said that Fatimah (sa), after the Prophet (S) passed away, used to write what she was told that would happen to her descendants and stories about other rulers to come (up to the day of resurrection). Fatimah (sa) recorded (or asked Imam ‘Ali to record) those information, which was kept in her family of Imams, and was called "The Book (Mushaf) of Fatimah".

A tradition which follows this one clearly states that what is referred to by "The Book of Fatimah”is not a part of Qur’an and has nothing to do with Allah’s commandments/halals/harams. It does not have anything to do with Shari’ah (divine law) and the religious practices. Let me give you some of those traditions:

Abu Abdillah (as) said: "... We have with us the Book of Fatimah, but I do not claim that anything of the Qur’an is in it.”(Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #637)

Abu Abdillah (as) also said about the book of Fatimah: "There is nothing of what is permitted and what is forbidden (al-Halal and al- Haram) in this; but in it is the knowledge of what will happen.”(Usul Kafi, Tradition #636)

Abdul Malik Ibn Ayan said to Abu Abdillah (as): "The Zaydiyyah and the Mu’tazilah have gathered around Muhammad Ibn Abdillah (Ibn al-Hasan, the second). Will have they any rule?”He (as) said: "By Allah there are two books in my possession in which every prophet and every ruler who rules on this earth (from the beginning of the earth till the day of Judgment) has been named. No, by Allah, Muhammad Ibn Abdillah is not one of them.”(Usul Kafi, Tradition #641)

"Mushaf”refers to a collection of "Sahifa”which is singular for "page". The literal meaning of Mushaf is "The manuscript bound between two boards". In those days they used to write on leather and other materials. They either rolled the writings -- what is known as scroll in English. Or they kept the separable sheets and bound them together, in what could be called as "Mushaf", a book in today’s terms. The equivalent to the word book "Kitab”used to (and still is) refer to either a letter (e.g. of correspondence) or to an document that was written down or recorded. The Arabic word for wrote "Kataba”is a derivative of the same word.

Although the Qur’an is commonly called a "Mushaf”today, perhaps referring to its "collection”after it was dispersed. Qur’an is a Mushaf (book), but any Mushaf (book) is not necessarily the Qur’an! There is no Qur’an of Fatimah! As the above and many other traditions suggest, The book of Fatimah has absolutely no connection with Qur’an. This concept is commonly pulled out of context and published by anti-Shi’i groups due to their hatred toward the Followers of the Members of the House of Prophet (S). I have seen it mentioned in a book printed by the government of Saudi Arabia.

What is also “very”important to recognize and understand is that belief in Mushaf Fatimah is NOT a requirement of belief to the Shi’a. It is just few traditions which report such a thing. It is nothing crucial for us, nor any one (except Imam Mahdi) has access to it.

Can ANY human do that?

There is an aayah inside Qur’an where Allah is saying:

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian (15:9)

As this verse is telling us, Qur’an is protected by Allah himself. This verse implies that Qur’an is not altered by the prophet, and it is not altered by the end of the prophet’s life. There are two different understandings, however, on this aayah, one is from sunni people and the other is from Shi’a-athna-ashari. Shi’a-athna-ashari says that the book of Allah is protected by Allah himself and along with the history.

Not even one single human being can add any letter, reduce any letter, or change any letter of it. This does include all types of human beings. It is , in reality, out of the power of human being to do that. As the result of such understanding, Shi’a-athna-ashari says:

Even a Budist can not change Qur’an and publish it and widely.
Even a zionist can not do that.
A Shi’a can not do that.
The prophet, himself, can not do that.
‘Ali and his sons can not do that,
None among SUNNI people can do that.
Not a pagan can do that.

Simply:

No single human being can alter Qur’an in any way.
On the other hand, there is sunni people who say that Shi’a have a different Qur’an. Let us see what this claim lead to:

If you accept that a group of people such as shia (or any group named as XXXX) has altered Qur’an, you are simply question the ability of Allah in preserving Qur’an. You are saying that a group were able to do that and publish such Qur’an among themselves and use it. Well, God was supposed to protect Qur’an, right? If such Qur’an exists,then Allah must be weak.

In other words, sunni people believe in a very weak version of protection of Allah. While Shi’a-athan-ashari people do not accept such weakness.

In other words, whoever says like this does indeed believe that a few people (even one single human being) has already altered Qur’an. In other words, he, himself, believes in the alteration of Qur’an, not by himself, but by others.

One may say that there is no physical different Qur’an. But Shi’a believe in that, just in their mind. You must be kidding. Don’t you think that such Shi’a exists only in your mind and nowhere else? Few ahaadith which are refering a different Qur’an also imply that the different Qur’an was seen by the narrator of the hadith. Sometimes, as you have seen by addition of "Who created”in Qur’an and I referred to before.

The narrators even give you the exact words of such Qur’an, sometimes, they even give the full aayah which is deleted or added, or even they talk about full chapters of Qur’an. These two does not come along with each other. If such Qur’an exists, then the God must be lying to people. If the God is the most truthful and the most powerful, then there is no such Qur’an.

Let me put this in another way: If you claim that such Qur’an did/does exist, you simply attack muslims and the present Qur’an and you are simply attacking the God.

I would like to ask sunni brothers to answer:

Do you think that a pagan indian can alter the Qur’an?

(Honest, sunni brothers know this. What they wanted to do was to attack Shi’a in front of usual people who have come back from their farms.)

Before I end this article, I would like to bring something to your attention. Have you ever played chess, or have you ever watched others playing chess? (I am not playing)

It has happened that (A) is very expert in playing chess. He plays with (B). When (B) is loosing and there is only one (or two) move(s) for (B) to loose the game, (A) suggests something interesting.

He rotates the chess sheet 180 degree. By this, the place of winner and looser will change. (A) who was winner before, is now looser, and (B) who was looser before, becomes closer to winning. But the story does not end here. (A) is so expert that he wins again. He can get rid of the problems, solve them, and gain power and the key rule in the play of chess.

The story of Shi’a-athna-ashari is very similar to this. If you attend their religious classes, (not any class, though), you will find the same game again. The teacher proves to you that one subject is such and such. You become confident that you will leave this religion forever. Then he starts explaining all the previous reasons and opens each problem, and brings other sources and reasons, and you can see that how amazingly the definition of the subject is changed. You become so happy that you have got the truth. The difference is now that you think your faith is MORE stronger.

This behavior is kept even inside of books. If a reader is not familiar with this method, he simply thinks that the author is Kafir. If he does not read the entire book, he will certainly be angry to some parts of the book. On the other hand, if the reader is patience, he will shortly see that the tone of the author is changed. This method has caused a lot of problem. One is for those readers who read these books partially. They simply accuse the author publicly that he is Kafir. If another person has read that book already, he will laugh at the first person for the lack of reading. Anyway:

The subject of alteration of Qur’an is one of these subjects. It is quite possible to prove for you, the readers of SRI, that Qur’an is altered using Qur’an itself. The problem is that this method is very dangerous. If a person like me fails to correctly transfer the subject to you, most of you will certainly loose your faith to Qur’an. I can disprove all the reasons I bring for you, though, but it is too risky.

I just wanted you to know that Shi’a-athna-ashari are so expert on this area that no other sects of islam have followed them in such subjects. They show that Qur’an is not altered using Qur’an, Hadith, and historical account. When the class ends, you will find a very firm system of thought about that special subject.You will find it closed and patched. They bring for you the sources from anywhere, simply anywhere, and show you the truth. As you can imagine, some babies of this schools of thought, such as me, know about 6 books of Sunni (Sehah Settah) even more than a normal sunni. I am sorry to say that Shi’a of this school is so progressed that they left others behind without paying any attention.

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur’an Part 1

(This article is written by Professor Hossein Modarresi from Princeton University, NJ)

This short article attempts to shed some light on the origins of the Sunnite-Shi’ite controversies on the integrity of the text of the Qur’an. The development of these debates in the first Islamic centuries represents an interest example of how ideas evolved in the early period through sectarian disputes, as well as contacts and communication between various Muslim sects and schools of thought.

Despite severe mistrust, various factors existed to facilitate the give and take among different sects. Most prominent was a group of hadith transmitters who frequented different sectatrian camps and, thereby, introduced much of each sect’s literature to the others. Often confusion on the part of these "bipolar”narrators of hadith helped "naturalize”segments of one sect’s literature into that of another sect.

This was particularly true in Shi’ism, many of transmitters heard hadith from both Shitite and Sunnite sources, and later misattributed much of what they had heard.1 The early Shi’ite mutakallimun also quoted statements from the Sunnite sources in their polemics against the Sunnites as argumentum ad hominem.

But from the mid 3rd/9th century onward, it was common for some Shi’ite authors and traditionisls to attribute a Shi’ite origin to this material, since it was thought that whatever the companions of the Imams and early Shl’ite mutakallimun said or wrote, even what they used in their polemics, necessarily represented the views and statements of the Imams. 2 This assumption led to the introduction of much alien material into Shi’ite thought.

Many of these early interchanges were forgotten over time. Hence it was not known that many of the ideas that were later labeled as Sunnite, Shi’ite, or the like were originally held by a different group or, at least in the early period before the sects took on their final shape, were shared by various mainstream elements of Islamic society.

The question of the integrity of the Uthmanic text of the Qur-an and the controversies surrounding it are a prime example of that phenomenon. The central issue in these debates was whether the Uthmanic text comprehended the entire body of material that was revealed to the Prophet, or whether there had been further material that was missing from the Uthmanic text. In the following pages, we shall examine the Sunnite-Shi’ite interchanges on this question.

The evidence in the text of the Qur’an itself as well as in hadith indicates that the Prophet compiled a written scripture for Islam during his own life-time, most likely in his first years in Medina.3 He reportedly continued until the end of his life to personally instruct the scribes where to insert new passages of the revelation in the scripture.4 There are also indications that parts of earlier revelations were not included in the scripture. One verse in the Qur’an acknowledges the absence of a part of revelation which was abrogated or "caused to be forgoeten,5 another spoke of verses that God substituted for uthers.6

Early Muslims reportedly used to recall verses of the revelation they did not find in the new scripture. They were however, aware that those passages were deliberately excluded by the Prophet, since the Muslims frequently referred to them as what "abrogated”(nusikha), "lifted”(rufi’a), "caused to be forgotten”(unsiya), or "dropped’t (usqita)7.

The concept of abrogation of the revelation (naskh al Quran) apparently referred originally to those parts were not included by the Prophet in the scripture.8 Later, however, the concept was developed in the Sunnite tradition to include several hypothetical categories, most of them with examples preserved in the present text of the Qur’an. With a single possible exception,9 however, it is highly doubtful that the Qur’an includes any abrogated verse.

The Sunnite account of the collection of the Qur’an is completely different from the above. It contends that the Qur’an was not compiled in a single volume until after the Prophet died in the year 11/632.10 The "recorders of the revelation”(kuttab al-wahy) used to jot down the verses immediately after the Prophet received and recited them. Others among the faithful memorized portions of the revelation or occasionally recorded them on whatever primitive writing material was available. According to the supporters of this account, the fact that the Qur’an was not compiled as a book until the death of the Prophet is perfectly logical. As long as he was alive there was always the expectation of further revelation as well as occasional abrogations. Any formal collection of the material already revealed could not properly be considered a complete text.11

Many people had memorized large parts of the revelation, which they repeated in their prayers and recited to others. As long as the Prophet was living among the faithful as the sole authority there was no need for a formal reference book of religion or a code of law. All of these considerations would change after his death and the new circumstances would necessitate the collection of the Qur’an. The story as reported by the Sunnis sources is as follows

Two years after the Prophet died, the Muslims were engaged in a bloody battle with a rival community at Yarnama in the deserts of Arabia. Many of the memorizers (qurra) of the Qur’an lost their lives at this time.12 Fearing that a great portion of the Qur’an would be lost should a similar situation arise and more memorizers of the Qur’an die, Abu Bakr, the first successor to the Prophet, ordered that the Qur’an be collected.

To this end, the Prophet’s companions and the memorizers of the Qur’an were asked to come forward with any parts of the revelation they had memorized or written down in any form. Abu Bakr ordered ‘Umar, his successor to be, and Zayd b. Thabit, a young recorder of revelation during the Prophet’s lifetime, to sit at the entrance to the mosque of Medina and record any verse or part of the revelation that at least two witnesses testified that they had heard from the Prophet. In one particular case, though, the testimony of a single witness was accepted.13 All of the material gathered in this manner was recorded on sheets of paper,14 or parchment, but was not yet compiled as a volume.

Furthermore, these materials were not made available to the Muslim community, which continued to possess the Qur’an only in its primitive scattered form. The sheets remained in the keeping of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and after ‘Umar’s death they passed to his daughter Hafsa. ‘Uthman took the sheets trom Hafsa during his caliphate and had them put together in the form of a volume. He had several copies sent to dif- ferent parts of the Muslim world and he then ordered that any other collection or portion of the Qur’an found anywhere else be burned.15. But he could not convince his colleagues to insert it in the Qur’an because nobody else came forward to support him,16 and the requirement that there be two witnesses for any text to be accepted as a part of the Qur’an was therefore not met.

Later, however, some other Companions recalled that same verse,17 including Aisha the Prophet’s youngest wife. She is alleged to have said that a sheet on which two verses, including that on stoning, were recorded was under her bedding and that after the Prophel died, a domestic animal18 got into the room and gobbled up the sheet while the household was preoccupied with his funeral.19 Umar also remembered other verses he thought dropped out (saqata) from the Qur’an20 or were lost, including one on being dutiful to parents21 and another on jihad.22 His claim regarding the first of the two was supported by three other early authorities on the Qur’an: Zayd b. Thabit, ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abbas, and Ubayy b. Ka’b.23 Anas b. Malik remembered a verse which was revealed in the occasion of some Muslims who were killed in a battle, but was later "lifted".24 Umar’s learned son, ‘Abd Allah25 as well as some later scholars26 maintained that much of the Qur’an had perished before the collection was made. Similar reports specifically addressed the official Uthmanic res- cension of the Qur’an.

They reported that many prominent Companions could not find in that official text portions of the revelation they had themselves heard from the Prophet, or found them in a different form. Ubayy b. Ka’b, for instance, recited sura 98 (al Bayyina) in a form he claimed to have heard from the Prophet. It included two verses unrecorded in the Uthmanic text.27

He also thought that the original version of sura 33 (al- Ahzab) had been much longer, from which he specifically remembered the stoning verse that is missing from the Uthmanic text.28 His claim was supported by Zayd b. Thabit,29 by Aisha who reported that during the Prophet’s lifetime the sura was about three times as long, although when Uthman collected the Qur’an he found only what was made available in his text,30 and by Hudhayfa b. al-Yaman (who found some seventy verses missing in the new official text, verses that he himself used to recite during the lifetime of the Prophet.31

Hudhayfa also contended that Sura 9 (al-Bara’a in its Uthmanic form was perhaps one-fourth32 or one-third of what it had been during the time of the Prophet, an idea later supported the prominent 2nd/8th century jurist and traditionist Malik b. Anas, founder of the Maliki school of Islamic law.33

There are also reports that Suras 15 (al-Hijr) and 24 (al-Nur) had once been of a different length.34 And Abu Musa al-Ash’ari recalled the existence of two long suras (one verse of each he still remembered) that he could not find in the present text.35 One of the two verses he recalled ("If the son of Adam had two fields of gold he would seek a third one...") is also quoted from other Companions such as Ubayy36 , Ibn Masud37, and Ibn ‘Abbas38. Maslama b. Mukhallad al-Ansari orfered two further verses that are not in the Uthmanic text39 and Aisha came forward with a third40. Two short chapters known as Sural al-Hafd and Sura al-Khal were recorded in the collections of Ubayy41, Ibn Abbas and Abu Musa42.

They were allegedly also known to Umar43 and other Companions44 although no trace of either chapter is found in the of official text. Ibn Masud did not have Suras 1, 113, and 114 in his collection45 but he had some extra words and phrases that were missing from the Uthmanic text.46 He and many other Companions also preserved some verses that differed from the official text47. There were also widely transmitted reports that after the death of the Prophet, ‘‘Ali put all the parts of the Qur’an together48 and presented it to the Companions; hut they rejected it, and he had to take it back home49. These reports also suggested thal there were substantial differences between the various versions of the Qur’an.

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur’an Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

It is universally acknowledged in the Islamic tradilion-based on the collective memory of the early generations of Muslims rather than simply on a number of isolated reports that Uthman promulgated an official rescension of the Qur’an and banned all other versions.

There were certainly differences between that official Qur’an and other early codices as there were differences among the variant codices themselves. It was, after all, those differences that necessitated the establihment of a standard and universally accepted text.

It is conceivable that close associates of the Prophet, especially those who had joined him during his years in Mecca, still remembe- red parts of the revelation that had not been included by the Prophet in the Qur’an. It is also plausible to speculate that ‘Ali whose version of the Scripture might have been one of the most complete and authentic, had offered it to Uthman to be consecrated as the official text, but that his offer was rejected by the caliph who preferred to select and combine elements of all the competing early codices. This in turn may have caused ‘‘Ali to withdraw his manuscript as a basis for compiling of the official rescension. Another Companion, ‘Abd Allah b. Mas’ud, is also reported to have stood aloof from the process and to have declined to offer his own text.50

The foregoing account of the first compilation of the Qur’an is, otherwise, extremely problematic51. Despite the significance of the sources quoted therein this report, it does not appear tn any work written by scholars of the 2nd/8th and early 3rd/9th centuries52. Some details of the story reportedly took place later at the time that Uthman ordered the creation of a standard Qur’an53. Several reports categorically deny that any official attempt to collect the Qur’an was made before ‘Uthman’s time54, an assertion reportedly supported by the collective recollections if the Muslim community55. Different versions of the story reveal major contradictions in regards to some of its main particulars. The name of the Companion whose testimony alone was accepted56 and the precise verses in question57 vary. Contradictory accounts are also given of the role of Zayd b. Thabit in the compilation process58. The inclusion of the clause related to the acceptance of the testimony of one man alone is an obvious attempt to make the story more acceptable through references to the familiar and widely quoted story Khuzayma Dhu ‘l-Shahadstayan, a man whos single testimony was aid to hav ebeen accpted by the Prophet as equivalent to the testimony of two witnesses59. In a variation of this story, in

which the witness is an unidentified man from Ansar, Umar is reported to have accepted the testimony of this single witness on the grounds that the message of the verse he orfered was, in Umar’s judgement, true since the verse described the Prophet with qualities that he had really possessed60.

In other variations. The verse or verses were said to have been accepted because ‘Umar61 , Uthman62 or Zayd63 themselves testified that they, too, had heard those Verses from the Prophet; or, alternatively, because the caliph had generally ordered that anybody’s testimony be accepted provided that he took an oath that he had personally heard from the Prophet the verse or part that he offered for inclusion64. Moreover, the story contradicts numerous and widely
.

In an obvious attempt to purge the sotry of these terrible contradictions a variation of it was authored by some later transmitters that suggested that (a) the collection of the Qur’an started during the reign of Abu Bakr but could not be completed before his death and was put together during the reigns of Umar, that (b), Zayd was the one who wrote the Qur’an first during the time of Abu Bakr on primitive writing material and then on paper during the time of Umar, that (c), there was no question of testimony or witness, but rather Zayd himself after completing the text once went ovr it and could not find Verse 33:23.

He then looked around for it, untill he found the record of it with Khuzayma b. Thabit. He then went over the text once more and this time noticed that the Verses 9:12-129 were missing, so he looked around again untill he found the record with another man who was incidently called Khuzayma as well. When he went over the text for the third time, he found no problem and so the text was completed. (Tabari, Jami, vol 1 p 59-61) transmitted reports65 which assert that a number of the Companions, notably ‘Ali, Abd Allah b. Masud and Ubayy b. Kab, had collected the Qur’an during the time of the Prophet66. Furthermore, a clear and suspicious attempt seems to have been made to somehow credit the first three caliphs with achieving the compilation of the sacred scripture of Islam to the exclusion of the fourth, ‘Ali.

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur’an Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

This latter point, when compared with the reports cited above on ‘Ali’s collection of the Qur’an after the death of the Prophet, may shed some light on the origins of the story. Taking into account some of the early political, and later polemical, disputes within the Muslim community, one may suggest the existence of a multi-stage process in the formation of that account.

There was apparently a widely circulating rumor In the first century ot the Hijra to the effect that ‘Ali did not attend the public meeting at which Abu Bakr was declared ruler after the death of the Prophet, and that it also took some time before he swore his allegiance to Abu Bakr.

From early times the partisans of ‘Ali have interpreted this as a reflection of his dissatisfaction with the choice of Abu Bakr and used this conclusion as a basis from which to attack the allege consensus of thc Companions which was put forward by the supporters of the caliphs as the legal hasis for the validity of Abu Bakr’s succession to caliphate. This line of argument seems also have appeared quite early; possibly even before the decline of the Umayyads in Lhe early 2nd/8th century whem sectarian debates began to flare in the Muslim communily67.

With the decline of the Umayyads, ‘‘Ali could no longer be ignored and a response had to be found. Many of the reports which alleged that ‘‘Ali retreated from public life after the death of the prophet in order to put the Qur’an together mention this as the explanation for his failure to tender an early allegiance to the caliph68. It scems very likely69, therefore, that these reports were composed-using as background material some pre-existing reports and recollections concerning ‘Ali70 - the sectarian purpose of suggesting that ‘Ali was known for his vast knowledge and of special dedication to the Qur’an. (Ibn Sa’d vol 1 p 204)

In his codex of the Qur’an he had reportedly indicated the verses which were abrogated and those which abrogated them (Itqan, vol 1 p 204).

The exact timing of when he had offered the codex for the official consecration was already blurred by the early 2nd/8th Century. The Shi’ites were themselves were now attributing it to the time of
Umar (Sulaymn, p 108, also quoted by Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 228, vol 2 p 7), but a vague memory of it was presumably still extant.

‘Ali’s delay was not a sign of his dissatisfaction. Instead, ‘Ali was quoted as telling Abu Bakr (when the caliph asked him whether he had failed to swear allegiance because he was unhappy with Abu
Bakr’s election) that he "had vowed to God not to put on his outside garment except for attending the communal prayer, until such a time as he had put the Qur’an together."71

The point that these reports had an anti Shi’ite polemical application can also be attested to by the fact that in some of its later versions, the report is quoted by the Sunnites on the authority of Jafar al Sadiq, who quoted it from his fore fathers (Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219)

It was a common practice in the sectarian reports to put the idea on the tongue of the respected authority of the opponent, a practice whioch can also be observed in the cases which shortly follow in the discussion above. (See also Kashshi, p 393-97)

The episode, however, created other problems for the supporters of orthodoxy for it added another item to the list of ‘Ali’s special privileges used by the Shi’ites to argue with for his claim to the caliphate. In addition to all his other alleged merits, he was now the one who had undertaken the critical task of assembling the Islamic scripture after the death of the Prophet72. This was potentially a dangerous weapon in the hands of his partisans in sectarian debates.

The partisans of ‘‘Ali might have already used it against the Uthmaniyya, to counter their argument in support of ‘Uthman on the basis that he was the one who established the official and standard Qur’an. For the Uthmaniyya that constituted a real challenge that they met, as in many other cases, by seeking to undermine Shi’ite claims for the special quality of ‘Ali or the House of the Prophet. Some examples are as follows73:

1. Many reports suggest that the Prophet chose ‘Ali as his brother74 at the time that he established the "brothering”among his followers75. A counter report claims this status for Abu Bakr76 , though it is widely believed that the Prophet made Abu Bakr and ‘ Umar brothers77. Many other reports quote the Prophet as saying that "if I could adopt an intimate friend I would adopt Abu Bakr, but your colleague (i.e. the Prophet) is already taken by God as His intimate friend."78 These seem to have been composed to counter the claim of ‘Ali’s selection as the Prophet’s brother.

2. The partisans of ‘Ali regarded him as the most excellent among the companions of the Prophet. Indeed, there are many indications in the history of the Prophet that ‘Ali was in fact one of the pre-eminent Companions. An obviously pro-Uthmaniyya report, however, emphasized that during the time of the Prophet only Abu Bakr ‘ Umar and ‘ Uthman were pre-eminent. All others followed with no distinctions of status or eminence.79

3. In an oft-quoted statement ascribed to the Prophet, he is reported as having called his two grandsons by Fatimah- al Hasan and al-Husayn-the "two masters of the youth of Paradise80. Another report from the Prophet applies the same epithet to ‘Ali81. A counter report calls Abu Bakr and Umar the to masters of the middle-aged of the paradise82.

4. A widely circulating statement attributed to the Prophet stated that he was the city of knowledge for which ‘‘Ali was the gate83. A counter statement described Abu Bakr as the foundation of the city, ‘Umar as the wall and ‘Uthman as the ceiling84.

5. It is reported that during the early years of the Prophet’s stay at Medina, the Companions who had their houses around the mosque of the Prophet had opened exit doors from their houses into the mosque in order to make it easier for themselves to attend the communal prayer there with the Prophet.

According to a widely quoted report, the Prophet later ordered all those doors to be closed, excepting only the door that led from the house of ‘Ali, which was virtually the door leading from the house of the Prophet’s daughter85. (The exception was not, therefore, to signify a merit or to establish a special status for ‘Ali himself.) A counter report, however, tried to establish that it was the door from the house of Abu Bakr which was the exception86.

6. It is unanimiously believed that during a ceremonial imprecation that took place between the Prophet and the Christians of Najran towards the end of the Prophet’s life he brought with him the members of his immediate family ‘‘Ali, Fatimah, and their two sons87. This clearly followed the traditional rules for the Arabs’ custom of the mutual curse, which required each party to attend in the company of his own household. A counter report however, asserts that the Prophet. was accompanied to the ceremony by Abu Bakr and his family, ‘Umar and his family and
Uthman and his family88.

7. According to a widely transmitted report, the Prophet described Fatimah, ‘Ali and their two sons as constituting his own household89. This definition of the Prophet’s house is supported by almost all early Muslim authorities90. A clearly pro Uthma- niyya report, however, quoted the Prophet as saying that ‘Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Fatimah were his own household while Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and A’isha were the household of God91.

It seems safe to assume that this same model was followed with respect to the reports about ‘Ali’s collection of the Qur’an and that the story in question was composed as part of an anti-Shl’ite polemic. The process seems to have beglin with assertions that, with the exception of Uthman, none of the caliphs or any of the

Companions collected the Qur’an92 some made the point more emphatically and stipulated that ‘Ali, in particular, passed away before he could collect it93. (In reality, of course, not only did ‘Ali witness the collection of the Qur’an, he did not die until years after the official Qur’an had been established.)

Another report asserted that the first person to collect the Qur’an was Salim, a client of Abu Hudayfa, who after the death of the Prophet "vowed to God not to put on his outside garment until such a time as he had put the Qur’an together."94This is exactly the statement attributed to ‘Ali in other reports. Salim was among those who lost their lives in the battle of Yamama95.

Other reports came forward with the straight forward assertion that the first to collect the Qur’an was Abu Bakr.96 Employing popular beliefs among Muslims concerning ‘Uthman’s establishment of the standard Qur’an-including the role of Zayd b. Thabit as the project’s main coordinator - the role of Abu Bakr in the collection of the Qur’an was then developed to what is seen in the above-cited account which, at the same time, reserves a major role for Umar as well, in the process.

To be completed...

1. Kashshi, Marifat al naqilin = Kitba al Rijal, abridged by Muhammad b. al Hasan al Tusi as Ikhtiyar Marifat ar Rijal p 590-91, where Shadhan b. Khalil al Naysaburi askes the celebrated hadith transmitter, Abu Ahmad Muhammad b. Abi Umayr al Azdi, who heard from bothe Shi'ite and Sunnite sources, why he never quoted any Sunnite hadith to his tudents in his works. He answered, that he deliberately avoided that since he found many of the Shi'ites studied both Shi'ites and Sunnites traditions, but later confused and ascribed Sunnite material to the Shi'ites sourcesand vice versa.

2. Kulayni, al Kafi, vol 1 p 99, Subhu al Salih, Mabahith fi ulum al Qur’an, p 134

3. Zarkashi, al Burhan fi ulum al Qur’an, vol 1 p 235, 237-38, 256, 258
Suyuti, al Itqan fi ulum al Qur’an, vol 1 p 212-13, 216

4. Ahmad b. Hanbal, vol 1 p 57
Tirimidhi, Sunan, vol 4 p 336-37
al Hakim al Naysaburi, al Mustadrak, vol 2 p 229

5. Qur’an Chapter II Verse 106

6. Qur’an Chapter XVI Verse 101

7. Abu Byad, al Naskih wa'l mansukh fi l Qur’an an al Karim, ed. John Burton (Cambridge 1987), p 6, Muhasibi, Fahm al Qur’an an wa manih ed. H. Quwwatli (in the collection of al Aql wa fahm al Qur’an (n.p., 1971) p 261-502) p 399 (quoting Anas b. Malik), 400 and 408 (quoting Amr b. Dinar)
403 (quoting Abd al Rahman b. Awf), 405 (quoting Abu Musa al Ashari), 406 Tabari, Jami al Bayan, vol 3 p 472-74, 476, 479-80 Ibn Salama, al Nasikh wa l mansukh, p 21 (quoting Abd Allah b. Masud) Suyuti, al Durr al manthur, vol 5 p 179 (quoting Ubayy b. Kab)

8. Abu Ubayd, al Naskih, p 6, Bayhaqi, Dalail al Nubuwwa, vol 7 p 154 (where it is argued that the Prophet never put the Qur’an together since there was always the expectation that some verses might be abrogated and some later modification was thus in-evitable in any collection of the Qur’an put together during his lifetime. Underlying this argument is the assumption that the abrogated verses had to be physically removed from the scripture.)
Zarkashi, vol 2 p 30 (the first interpretation of the concept of naskh)

9. Abu al Qasim al Khui, al Bayan, p 305-403

10. Ibn Sa'd, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, vol 3 p 211, 281
Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al Masahif, p 10
Ibn Babawayh, Kamal ad Din, p 31-32
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 147-8
Zarkashi, vol 1 p 262
Ibn al Hadid, Sharah of Nahj al Balagha. vol 1 p 27
Ibn Juzayy, al Tashil li ulum al tanzil, vol 1 p 4
Suyuti, Itqan, vol 1 p 202
Ibrahim al Harbi, Gharib al hadith, vol 1 p 270

11. Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 154
Zarkashi, vol 1 p 235, 262
Suyutim Itqan, vol 1 p 202
Ahmad al Naraqi, Manahij al ahkam, p 152

12. Yaqubi, Kitab al Tarikh, vol 2 p 15, most of the bearers of the Qur’an were killed during the battle. All together, some 360 persons among the distinguished companions of the Prophet lost their lives on that occasion.)
Tabari, Tarikh, vol 3 p 296
Larger figures upto 500 for Ibn al Jazari, al Nashr, p 7
Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al Qur’an, vol 7 p 439
Qurtubi, al Jami li Ahkam al Qur’an, vol 1 p 50
and a figure of 1200 for Abd al Qahir al Baghdadi, Usul al Din p 283
are also given. The last figure is however the number of all Muslims who were killed in the battle, Companions and others see Tabari vol 3 p 300

13. The case in question was the last two verses of Sura 9 in the present Qur’an which was added on the authority of Khuzayma b. Thabit al Ansari (or ABu Khuzayma according to some reports).
Bukhari, Sahih, vol 3 p 392-93
Tirimidhi, vol 4 p 346-47
Abu Bakr al Marwazi, Musnad Abi Bakr al Siddiq, p 97-99, 102-4
Ibn Abu Dawud, p 6-7, 9, 20
Ibn al Nadim, p 27
al Khatib al Baghdadi, Mudih awham al jam wa l tafrig, vol 1 p 276
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149-50

14. Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135
Itqan, vol 1 p 185, 207, 208

15. Bukhari, vol 3 p 393-94,
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347-8
Abu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99-101
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 18-21
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 15051
Abu Hilal Askari, Kitab al Awail, vol 1 p 218

This whole story about the collection ot the Qur’an was accepeed by the Sunnite scholars as trustworthy and served, as we shall see below, as the basis for the idea that later emerged of the incompleteness of the text of the Qur’an.

Sunnite literature contains many reports that suggest that some of the revelation had already been lost before the collection of the Qur’an initiated by Abu Bakr. It is reported, for example, that ‘Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the Qur’an he vaguely remembered. To his deep sorrow, he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of Yamama and that the verse was consequently lost. Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10
Itqan, vol 1 p 204

Umar allegedly had a recollection of a Qur’anic verse on stoning as a punishment for adultery. Malik b. Anas, Muwatta, vol 2 p 824
Ahmad, vol 1 p 47, 55
Muhasibi, p 398, 455
Bukhari, vol 4 p 305
Muslim, Sahih, vol 2 p 1317
Ibn Maja, Sunan, vol 2 p 853
Tirmidhi, vol 2 p 442-3
Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol 4 p 145
Ibn Qutayba, Tawil mukhtalif al hadith, p 313
Ibn Salama, p 22
Bayhaqi, al Sunan al Kubra, vol 8 p 211, 213

16. Itqan, vol 1 p 206

17. Ahmad, vol 5 p 183 (quoting Zayd b, Thabit and Said al-As Abd al Razzaq, AL Musannaf, vol 7 p 330
Itqan, vol 3 p 82, 86
al Durr al Manthur, vol 5 p 180 (quoting Ubayy b. Ka'b and Ikrima)

18. Dajin can mean any kind of domestic animal, including fowl, sheep, or goat. A narrative in Ibrahim b. Ishaq al Harbis, Gharib al hadith makes it more specific, as it uses the word shal, that is sheep or goat (see Zamakshari, al Kashaf, vol 3 p 518 footnote)

The same is in Qutaybas understanding from the word dajin in Tawil mukhtalif al hadith, p 310, apparently because of the context, since it is said that the animal ate the sheet of paper.

Also see Sulaym b. Qays al Hilali, Kitab Sulaymn b. Qays, p 108,

Al Fadl b. Shadahn, al Idah, p 211
Abd al Jalil al Qazwini, p 133

19. Ahmad, vol 4 p 269
Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 626
Ibn Qutayba, Tawil, p 310
Shafi'i, Kitab al Umm, vol 5 p 23, vol 7 p 208

20. Mabani, p 99
Itqan, vol 3 p 84 (See Also And al Razzaq vol 7 p 379-80;
Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 14 p 564, where the expression Faqadnah, "we lost it", is used)
The expression "saqata" is also used by Aisha in the case of another phrase that alledgly "dropped out" from the Qur’an. See Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 625 (See also Itqan, vol 3 p 70)
It is also used by Malik (Zarkashi, vol 1 p 263).

21. Abd al Razzaq, vol 9 p 50
Ahmad, vol 1 p 47, 55
Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 7 p 431
Bukhari, vol 4 p 306
Ibn Salama, p 22
Itqan, vol 3 p 84
Zarkashi, vol 1 p 39 (Also quoted from Abu Bakr)

22. Muhasibi, p 403
Mabani, p 99
Itqan, vol 3 p 84

23. Abd al Razzaq, vol 9 p 52
Muhasibi, p 400
Itqan, vol 3 p 84

24. Muhasibi, p 399
Tabari, Jami, vol 2 p 479

25. Itqan, vol 3 p 81-82

26. Ibn Abi Dawud, p 23 quoting Ibn Shihab (al Zuhri)
Itqan, vol 5 p 179 quoting Sufyan al Thawri
Ibn Qutaybah, Tawil, p 313
Ibn Lubb, Falh al bab, p 92

27. Ahmad, vol 5 p 132
Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 370
Hakim, vol 2 p 224
Itqan, vol 3 p 83

28. Ahmad, vol 5 p 132
Muhasibi, p 405
Bayhaqi, vol 8 p 211
Hakim, vol 2 p 415
Itqan, vol 3 p 82 (the same claim about the size of the Sura and it included the stoning verse is quoted from Umar anmd Ikrima in Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180)

29. by Zarkasi, vol 2 p 35, where the verse is said to to have been in Sura 25 (al Nur), and with Mabani, p 82, where Sura 7 (al Aaraf) is mentioned instead. This latter is however a slip of the pen or mis spelling as evidenced by the author's later mention of the Sura al Ahzab in p 83 and 86.

30. Al Raghib al Isfahani, Muhadarat al Udaba, vol 4 p 434
Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180
Itqan, Suyuti, vol 1 p 226

31. Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180, quoting from Bukhari book Kitab at Tarikh

32. Hakim, vol 2 p 331
Haytami, Majam al Zawaid, vol 7 p 28-29
Itqan, vol 3 p 84

33. Zarkshi, vol 1 p 263
Itqan, vol 1 p 226

34. Sulaym, p 108
Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, al Intijaj, vol 1 p 222, 286
Zarkshi, vol 2 p 35

35. Muslim, vol 2 p 726
Muhasibi, p 405
Abu Nuaym, Hilyat al Awliya, vol 1 p 257
Bayhaqi, Dalai, vol 7 p 156
Itqan, vol 3 p 83

36. Ahmad, vol 5 p 131-32
Muhasibi, p 400-01
Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 370
Hakim, vol 2 p 224

37. Raghib, vol 4 p 433

38. Itqan, vol 1 p 227

39. Itqan, vol 3 p 84

40. Abd al Razzaq, vol 7 p 470
Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 625, 626

41. Muhasibi, p 400-1
Ibn al Nadim, p 30
Raghib, vol 4 p 433
Zarkashi, vol 2 p 37
Haytami, vol 7 p 157
Itqan, vol 1 p 226, 227

42. Itqan, vol 1 p 227

43. Itqan, vol 1 p 226-7

44. Itqan, vol 1 p 227, vol 3 p 85

45. Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 146-47
Ahmad, vol 5, p 129-30
Ibn Qutayba, Tawail mushkil al Qur’an, p 33-34
Ibn al Nadim, p 29
Baqillani, al Intisar, p 184
Raghib, vol 4 p 434
Zarkashi, vol 1 p 251, vol 2 p 128
Haytami, vol 7 p 149-50
Itqam, vol 1 p 224, 226, 270-73

46. Arthur Jeffrey, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an, the Old Codices, p 20-113

47. See the lists, Ibid, p 114-238

48. Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 338
Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148
Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135
Ibn Abu Dawud, p 10
Ibn al Nadim, p 30
Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219-20
Abu Buaym, vol 1 p 67
Ibn Abd al Barr, al Istiab, p 333-34
Ibn Juzay, vol 1 p 4
Ibn Abi al Hadid, vol 1 p 27
Itqan, vol 1 p 204, 248
al Kafi, al Kulayni, vol 8 p 18

49. Sulaym, p 72, 108
Basair al Darajat, p 193
Kulayni, vol 2 p 633
Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 107, 255-28
Ibn Shahrashub, Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol 2 p 42
Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135-6

50. Ibn Abi Dawud, p 15-17
Ibn Asakir, Tarikh madinat Dimashq, vol 39 p 87-91

51. A.T Welch p 404-5

52. Thus the story doesn't appear in for instance in Tabaqat of Ibn Sa'd in sections of Abu Bakr, Umar and Zayd b. Thabit, nor in Musnad Ahmad Hanbal or Fadail as Sahaba where he gathered so
may reports about their virtues and good services to Islam.

53. Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93, vol 4 p 398-99
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7-9, 20, 29 with Bukhari vol 3 p 393-94
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 17, 19, 24-26, 31
Ibn Asakir, Tarikh, Biography of Uthman p 236

54. Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 170
Zarkashi, vol 1 p 241
Other reports suggest that the collection of the Qur’an had already been started during the time of Umar, but he died before the project was completed during the caliphate of Uthman (Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219)

55. Zarkashi, vol 1 p 235
Itqan, vol1 p 211
Ibn Asakir, p 243-46

56. He is (a) Khuazyma b, Thabit al Ansari in Bukhari vol 3 p 310, 394
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347
Abu Bakr al Marwasi, p 103
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7, 8, 9, 20, 29, 31
Bayhaqi, Dalial, vol 7 p 150
and (b) Abu Khuzayma (Aws b. Yazid) in Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348
Abu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 19
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149
and (c) an un-identified man of Ansar in Ibn Abi Dawud, p 8
Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588
and (d) Unayy in Ibn Abi Dawud p 9, 30
Khatib, Talkhis al Mustadrak, vol 1 p 403
There are also reports which indicate that Ubayy not only knew these verses he knew that they were the last to have been revealed to the Prophet, too (Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588-89)

57. It is the last two verses of Sura 9 in Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347
ABu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99, 103
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7, 9, 11, 20, 29, 30, 31
Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149
and Verse 23 of Sura 33 in Bukhari, vol 3 p 310, 393-94
Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 8, 19
Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 150
Khatib, Mudih, vol 1 p 276

58. In the above cited account of the collection of the Qur’an he is the one who undertook the task of putting the Qur’an together in two stages during the times of Abu Bakr and Uthman. Some other reports ascribe the collection of the Qur’an, including Zayd's participation in it, to the period of Uthman (Bukhari, vol 3 p 393-94; Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348; Ibn Abi Dawud, p 31; Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 234-36) Other reports don't mention his name at all (Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10-11)

Yets others assert that he had already collected the Qur’an doing the time of the Prophet, putting together all the fragments of it which were recorded on various sorts of primitive writing material, as in Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 390, Hakim, vol 2 p 229, 611

In another report, however, he is quoted as stating by the time the Prophet died, the Qur’an had not been collected, as in Itqan, vol 1 p 202

59. Bukhari, vol 3 p 310
Ibn Abi Dawud, p 29
Khatib, Mudih, vol 1 p 276
Itqan, vol 1 p 206

60. Tabari, Jami, vol 16, p 588

61. Ibn Abi Dawud, p 30

62. Ibid, p 31

63. Ibid, p 8, 19, 29

64. Ibn Asakir, p 236, where the episode is ascibed to the period of Uthman who asked the Muslism to come forward with whatever art of the Qur’an they had in hand. The Muslims came forward
with whatever primitive writing material on wwhich they had recorded parts of the Qur’an. The Uthman asked every single one to swear that he had personally heard what he had offered as a
part of the Qur’an from the Prophet. He then ordered the collected material to be put together as Scriptures

65. The list of the early collectors of the Qur’an is different in different sources, for instance, Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 112-14

Ibn al Nadim, Kitab al Fihrist, p 30
Tabarani, al Mujam al Kabir, vol 2 p 292
Baqillani, p 88-90
Dhahabi, al Maridat al qurra al kibar, vol 1 p 27
Zarkashim vol 1 p 242-43
Qurtubi, vol 1 p 57
Itqan, vol 1 p 248-49, quoting Abu Ubayd in his Kitab al Qira'at

66. In order to remove the obvious contradictions between these reports and the story in question, the supporters of the story have offered two suggestions. According to one, those who are said to have collcted the Qur’an during the time of the Prophet, had each made a collection of only a part of the revelation, not a complete version. According to the other, the word "collected", had to be understood to mean that those Companions memorized the Qur’an during the time of the Prophet, not they they had put a complete record of it together. As mentioned in Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10, Itqan, vol 1 p 204

67. For instance the poem attributed to ‘Ali in the Sharif al Radi, Nah al Balagha, p 503, "If you (claim that you) have come to power on the basis of consultation, how did then it happen while those who had to be consulted were absent."

68. Ibn sa'd, vol 2 p 101
Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148
Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219-20
Ibn ABi Dawud, p 10
Itqan, vol 1 p 204

69. Alternatively, there might actually have existed some rumours suggesting that ‘Ali, having noticed that the Seniors of Quraysh had chosen one among themselves as the succesor to the Prophet and having decided to withdraw from the public, kept himself busy with the Qur’an and took that as an excuse not to participate in any social activity. The Sunnites, however, put forward that excuse as the real cause and denied that '‘Ali was unahppy with the Quraysh process of Caliph making.

70. ‘Ali was among one of the early collectors of the Qur’an, one of those who collected it during the life time of the Prophet as mentioned in Ibn Asakir, vol 39 p 80.

71. Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 71

72. Kitab Mihnat Amir al Muminin (an early Shi'ite text preserved in Pseudo Mufid, al Ikhtisas, p 157-75), p 164 Sulaymn, p 113, 120

73. For other interesting examples see Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 146-68. 290-94

74. Nur Allah al Tastari, Ihqaq al haqq, vol 4 p 171-217; vol 6 p 461-86
p 450-17; vol 20 p 221-55
Abd al Husayn al Amini, vol 3 p 113-25

75. Muakhat in the Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd ed, vol 7 p 253-54

76. Ahmad b, Handal, Fadail al Sahaba, p 99, 166-7, 378 Bukhari, col 3 p 113-25

77. Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, vol 3 p 123

78. Ahmad, Fadail, p 99, 166-67, 177, 183-84, 378-79, 411

79. Ahmad, Fadail, p 86-92
Biography of Uthman, p 153-59
Bukhari, vol 2 p 418

80. Tustari, vol 10 p 544-95; vol 19 p 232-51

81. Ibn Asakir, Tarikh madinal Dimashq, Section on the Biography of ‘Ali, vol 2 p 260

82. Ibn Sa'd, vol 3 p 124
Ahmad, Fadail, p 158-59, 771, 774, 780, 788
Daylami, vol 1 p 530

83. Tustari, vol 5 p 468-515; vol 16 p 277-309; vol 21 p 415-28
Amini, vol 6 p 61-81

84. Daylami, vol 1 p 76

85. Ahmad, Fadail, p 581-82
Tustari, vol 5 p 540-86; vol 16 p 332-75; vol 19 p 243-55;
Amini vol 6 p 209-16

86. Bukhari, vol 2 p 418;
Ahmad, Fadail, p 70-71, 98, 152, 379

87. Tustari, vol 3 p 46-62; vol 9 p 70-91; vol 14 p 131-47
vol 20 p 84-87

88. Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 168-89, quoting on the authority of Imam Jafar al Sadiq, who acordingly related it from his father.
As noted above, this was a common phenomenon in this genre of material which was auhtored for anto Shi'ite polemical purposes.

89. Tustari, vol 2 501-62; vol 3 p 513-31; vol 9 p 1-69; vol 14 p 40-105
vol 18 p 359-83

90. Tabari, Jami al Bayan, vol 22 p 6-8

91. Daylami, vol 1 p 532
Tabari, Jami, vol 22 p 8 quotes that Ikrima, a tabi'i well known for his anti Alid tendencies was crying in the market, that the household of the Prophet were his wives only.

92. See above footnote 57

93. Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 170

94. Itqan, vol 1 p 205, quoting Ibn Ashta in his Kitab al Masahif

95. Ibn Abd al Barr, p 562

96. Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148
Ibn Abi Dawud, both quoting the report from ‘Ali

Outline of Differences Between Shi’ite and Sunni Schools of Thought

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

There is no difference of opinion amongst Muslim schools that the religion of Allah is Islam; that the only way to know Islam is through the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet; and that the Book of Allah is what is known as the Qur’an, without any "addition”or "deletion". The difference is in the interpretation of some of the verses of the Qur’an; and in believing or not beliving some of the sunnah as genuine; or in its interpretation.

This difference of approach has led towards the difference in some basic principles and some laws of religion. As the basic principles of Islam are well known, I do not think it is necessary to enumerate all the beliefs. It will be sufficient if some of the important differences are described here to give the readers a fairly comprehensive idea of the main characteristics which distinguish the Shiats from the Sunnis.

All the Muslims argee that Allah is one, Muhammad (S) is His last prophet, and that one day Allah will resurrect all the human beings, and all will be questioned about their beliefs and actions. All of them agree that anyone who does not believe in any of the above three basic principles is not a Muslim. Also, they agree that anybody denying the famous tenets of Islam, like salat (prayers), sawm (fasting), hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca), zakat (religious tax), etc., or believing that the famous sins, like drinkig wine, adultery, stealing, gambling, lie, murder, etc., are not sins, is not a Muslim, though he might have been believing in Allah and His Prophet Muhammad (S). That is because to deny such things is like to deny the prophethood of Muhammad and his shariah (Divine Laws).

When we go further, we come across those subjects which are not agreed amongst Muslims, and the differences between different schools of Islam begin there. Many people think that the difference between Shi’a and Sunni is the issue of leadership after the death of prophet. This is true, but as a matter of fact, different leaders instruct different ways of approach to each issue. This may result to more differences as the the time goes. I try to briefly explain these basic differences here.

Person Of God

Some Sunni scholars hold beliefs which would imply that Allah has body, but not like the bodies that we know, of course. There are quite a number of traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari describing that God has a sign in his leg, and he put his leg over the hell and so on. For instance see Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-Englich version, 9.532s in which alleges Allah has a sign in His Shin (leg) and when He uncovers His Shin (leg) people will recognize Him. Or in the same volume see Tradition 9.604 and 9.510 where it is said that Allah has fingers! Please also see the consequetive articles given by Kaamran refrenced to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

Wahhabis who follow Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328) confirm that the organs of God is physical entity and Allah is firmly seated in the trone. However Ash’arites (followers of Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari) which include a vast amount of Sunnis, do NOT interpret face, hand, and leg as physical organs. They believe that Allah has face, hand, and leg, but they say: "We do not know how."

The Shi’a firmly believe that Allah has NOT got a body, nor face, nor hands, nor fingers, nor legs. Shaykh Saduq, one of the most distinguished of Shi’a scholars says:

"Verily, Allah is One, Unique, nothing is like Him, He is Eternal; Hearing, Seeing, Omniscient, Living, Omnipotent, above every need. He cannot be described in terms of substance, nor body, nor form, nor accident, nor line, nor surface, nor heaviness, nor lightness, nor color, nor movement, nor rest, nor time, nor space. He is above all the descriptions which can be applied to His creatures. He is away from both extremes: Neither He is just a non-entity (as atheists and in a lesser degree Mutazilites implied), nor He is just like other things. He is Existent, not like other existing things."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq Of course, there are some verses in Qur’an which ascribe the words used for limbs to the person of God. But according to the interpretation of Shi’ite Imams, they are used in metaphorical and symbolic sense, not literal sense.
for example, the verse (28:88) of Qur’an which says: "Every thing is mortal except His face”means ‘except His person’. Surely, even Sunni scholars can not say that only the face of God will remain, while His other so-called limbs (either physical or not) will die! Similarly, Allah has used
the word ‘Hand’ (Yad) in several places in the Qur’an. But it means His power and His Mercy, as in the verse (5:64): "But His hands are outspread".

In fact in the Qur’an and the Prophetic such mytaphorical meanings were greatly used. For example, Allah describes his Prophets as:

"Men of Hands and vision.”(Qur’an 38:45)

Even all Sunni scholars agreed that here ‘hands’ means power and strength. I should mention that the view of Shi’a is also different than Mu’tazalites who take God to the boundary of non-existence.

Can Allah Be Seen?

As a direct result of the above-mentioned difference, Sunni scholars believe that Allah can be seen. Some of them, like Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, say that He can be seen in this world, as well as in the word after. Others say that He can only be seen in the hereafter. (Reference: Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 9.530-532 which clearly state that God can be seen, and God changes His look to be recognized by people).

On the other hand, Shiats say that He cannot be seen physically anywhere, because He has no body, and because Allah says in the Qur’an:

"Sight cannot reach Him”(Qur’an 6:103).

Sunni scholars use the following verse as their proof:

"Some faces on that day (day of judgement) will be fresh (blooming), looking towards their Lord”(Qur’an 75:22-23).

But in Arabic language the word "nazar”(looking toward) does not imply "seeing". Often it is said: "nazartu ilal-hilal falam arahu”which means "I looked towards the new moon (crescent) but I did not see it.”Therefore, the verse does not imply that they will see God. According to the Shi’ite interpretstion, the verse means that they will be looking forward to the blessing of Allah.

Attributes Of Allah

According to the Shi’a belief, attributes of Allah can be put in two distinct groups: first those attributes which denote His person, and second, those attributes which denote His actions. Shaykh Saduq says:

"For example, we say that Allah was from ever Hearing, Seeing, Omniscient, Wise, Omnipotent, Having power, Living, Self-existent, One and Eternal. And these are His personal attributes. and we do not saythat He was from ever Creating, Doing, Intending, pleased, displeased, Giving sustenance, Speaking; because these virtues describe His actions; and they are not eternal; it is not allowed to say that Allah was doing all these actions from eternity.

The reason for this distinction is obvious. Actions need an object. For example, if we say that Allah was giving sustenance from ever, then we will have to admit the existence of sustained thing from ever. In other words, we will have to admit that the world was from ever. but it is against our belief that nothing except God is Eternal."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

It appears that the Sunni scholars have no clear view of this distinction, and they say that all His attributes are Eternal. This is the actual cause of their belief that Qur’an, being the Kalam (speech) of God, is Eternal, and not created. Because they say that He was mutakallim (speaking) from ever.

"Hanbalites”so far said that ‘Not only were the words and sounds of the Qur’an eternal, so that even its recital was uncreated, but its parchment and binding shared the same qualities. In the Testament of Abu Hanifa a more moderate view is expressed: We confess that the Qur’an is the speech of Allah, uncreated, His inspiration, and revelation, not He, yet not other than He, but His real quality, written in the copies, recited by the tongues. The ink, the paper, the writing are created, for they are the work of man”(Revelation and Reason in Islam by A.J. Arberry, pp 26-27).

But since Shi’a distinguish between His personal virtues and His actions, they say:

"Our belief about the Qur’an is that it is the speech of God, and His revelation sent by Him, and His word and His book... And that Allah is its Creator and its Sender and its Guardian..."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

Among the Sunnis, the bitter quarrel between the Mutazilites and the Asharites on this subject is well-known, and there is no need to release it here.

Some claim that every created things has flaws in it and thus Qur’an should be ethernal since it is without flaw. This argument is baseless since we Muslims believe that angels, though created, are flawless, otherwise how can we trust Gabriel when he brought Qur’an to the Prophet? How can you trust Prophet himself? Is Allah unable to create a flawless creature? As such, we believe that Qur’an as well as all other things in the universe are all created. Nothing is eternal except Allah. There is a tradition from the Prophet (S) which states that:

"(There was a time when) Allah existed, and there was nothing beside Him".

Place Of Reason In Religion

This is one of the most important distinction between the Sunnis on one side, and Shi’ites on another. To be more exact, I should have used the word Asharites, in place of Sunnis since a vast number of Sunnis nowadays are Asharites; Mutazilites have become extinct a long time ago, though some of the great scholars of the recent time like Justice Amir ‘Ali were Mutazilites.

Anyhow, the Shiats say that irrespective of religious commandments, there is real merit or demerit in different courses of actions, and it is because a certain thing is good that God orders it, and because the other is bad that He forbids it. Sunni scholars deny this conception. They say that nothing is good or evil in itself. Only what God has commanded us is goodand what He has forbidden us is evil. If something is forbidden by God it is bad; then if God cancels the first order, and allows it, it will become good, after being bad.

In other words, the Shiats say that God has forbidden us to tell lie because it is bad; the Sunnis say that lie has become bad because God has forbidden it. Shiats recognize the relation of cause and effect. Sunni sholars deny it. They say that there is no cause except Allah. And it is just a habit of Allah that whenever, for example, we drink water He quenches our thirst.

Based upon the above difference of attitude about the position of reason in religion are the following differences: Shiats say that God never acts without purpose or aimlessly. All His actions are based on wisdom and intelligent purpose (e.g., Because it is not commendable, rationally, to act without purpose). The Sunni scholars on the other hand, because of their denouncement of rational merit or demerit, say that it is quite possible for God to act aimlessly.

It follows that, according to the Shiats, God does nothing which has inherent demerit in it. The Sunnis deny it. Shiats say that all actions of Allah are intended for the benefit of His creatures. Because He Himself has no need; and if His actions become devoid of benefits for His creation also, they will become aimless, which is rationally not commendable. The Sunnis deny it, because of their stand about rational merit or demerit.

Grace (Lutf Or Tafaddul)

Based on the above differences, there is a difference about their attitude towards the Grace of Allah. Shiats say that the Grace is morally, incumbent upon Allah. They say Grace is the actions of God which would help to bring His creatures closer to His devotion and obedience and facilitate their moral correction (which is) morally incumbent on Him. Allah has commanded us to be just, while He Himself treats us with something better, namely Grace (tafaddul). The Sunni scholars, on the other hand, say:

"God leades astray whom He wills and guides to right path whom He wills, and it is not incumbent upon God, the Most High, to do something that may be best for the creature."

Sunni reference: Creed of an-Nasafi

God’s Promises

Based upon Shi’a position on Justice and Grace, they say that:

"Whatever God has promised as reward for a good work, He will fulfill it; but whatever He has threatened as punishment for a bad work, it is upon His decision. If He enforces the punishment, it will be according to His Justice; but if He forgives it, it will be according to His Grace."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

Shi’a is confronted both by the Kharijites and Mutazilites on one side and the Asharites on other side. The Mutazilites and Kharijites say that it is incumbent upon God to fulfill His threats also. He has no power to forgive.

The Asharites, on the other hand say that it is not incumbent upon Him even to fulfill His promises of rewards. They go so far as to say, "Even if Allah wants to send the prophets in Hell, and Satan to Paradise, it is not against virtue, because there is no inherent demerit in any action."

Why Believe In God

The Shiats say: Man is obliged by his reason to know God, and to obey His commands. In other words, necessity of religion is proved, first of all, by reason. Sunni scholars say it is necessary to believe in Allah, but not on the account of reason. It is necessary because Allah has ordered us to know Him. According to the Shi’ite point of view, this type of proof creates vicious circle. Believe in God. why? Because God has ordered it. But we do not know who God is. Why should we obey Him?

Limit Of Law

The Shiats say: God cannot give us a command beyond our strength, because it is wrong rationally (La Yokalleffollaho nafsan illa vosaaha). Some Sunni scholars do not agree with it.

Our Actions: Taqdir

Are our actions really ours? Or we are just a tool in the hands of Allah!

Shi’a scholars say:

"Taqdir means that, Allah possesses foreknowledge of human action, but He does not compel anybody to act in any particular way"

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

The above quote gives evidence to the fact that according to Shi’a, human has option either to obey God’s rules, or disobey. To make it clear, it should be explained here, that man’s conditions or actions are of two kinds

(i) Those actions about which he can be advised, ordered, praised or blamed. Such actions are within his power and are dependent upon his will.

(ii) Such conditions about which he cannot be praised or blamed, like life, death, etc. Such conditions are outside of his sphere of will or power.

For example, we can advise a patient to consult this or that doctor and remain under his treatment; but we can not advise him to become cured. Why this difference? Because getting treatment is under his power, but getting cured is not in his power. It is something which comes from Allah.

Freedom of action is a gift of Allah. He has given us power, freedom, strength, limbs, wisdom and everything with which we do any work.

Therefore, we are not independent of Allah, because our freedom is not only given but even sustained by Him. However our actions are not compelled by God, because He, after His showing us the right and wrong ways, and after His encouraging us to do right, has left us to our own free will. If we go wrong, it is our own choice. Shaykh Saduq stated:

"Our belief in this respect is what has been taught by Imam Jafar al- Sadiq (the sixth successor/grandson of Prophet): There is no compulsion (by God) and no relinquishing the authority (of God); but a condition between these two conditions. Then Imam was asked: How is it? He said: Suppose you see a man intending to commit a sin; and you forbade him; but he did not listen to you; and you left him; and he did commit that sin. Now when he did not pay attention to you and you left him, nobody can say that you ordered him or allowed him to sin."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

In other words, we believe that God has given us power and will and then has left us free to do what we like. At the same time, He has taught us through prophets, what is right and what is wrong. Now, as He is Omniscient, He knows what will be our actions in different times of our life. But this knowledge does not make Him responsible for our actions more than a meteorologist can be responsible for cyclones and storms, if his forecasts comes true. True forecasts are the result, not the cause of the impending event. The Sunni scholars on the other hand say that Allah is the

Creator of all of our acts:

"No act of any individual, even though it is done purely for his benefit is independent of the will of Allah for its existence; and there does not occur in either in physical or extra terrestrial world
the wink of an eye, the hint of a thought, or the most sudden glance, except by the decree of Allah...of His power, desire and will. This includes evil and good, benefit and hurt, success and failure, sin and righteousness, obedience and disobedience, and polytheism or belief."

Sunni reference: al-Ghazali (as quoted in Shi’a of India, p43)

Prophethood

Based upon their belief of Lutf (Grace), the Shiats believe that it is incumbent upon Allah to send prophets and their successors in this world to put people on right path. The Sunni scholars say that it is not incumbent upon Allah, because they do not accept necessity of Grace.

Sinlessness

The Shiats and Sunnis in first instance, and then the Sunnis among themselves, disagree about the theory of Ismah (sinlessness; protection) of the prophets. What is our conception of sinlessness? It is the Grace of Allah which helps a person to refrain from sins, without effecting in any way his will and power. A Masum (sinless person) has power to commit sins; but he does not even think about sins because his spiritual standard is so high that such inferior things do not enter his mind.

The Sunni scholars do not speak with one voice in this subject:

1. They first differ about the point when sinlessness of prophets begins. Some Sunnis say it is after the declaration of prophet-hood; others say that it is since childhood.

2. The scope of sinlessness before declaration of prophet-hood: Some Sunni scholars say that it covers all sins; the majority say that they are protected from KUFR (infidelity) only.

3. The scope of sinlessness after declaration of prophet-hood: It is agreed that the prophets do not tell lie after prophet-hood. But what about other sins? Some Sunni scholars say that they commit other sins either intentionally or unintentionally; but the majority say that they could commit it unintentionally, but not intentionally.

4. The minor sins: Some Sunni scholars say it was possible for prophets to commit minor sins, even intentionally. But that they were protected from such minor sins which might have degraded them in the eyes of people.

The Shi’a point of view about sinlessness is that all the prophets were sinless and infallible; they did not commit any sin, whether capital or minor, and whether intentionally or unintentionally; and that they were sinless from the beginning of their life till their last breath. About the prophets, Shaykh Saduq wrote:

"Their word is the word of God, their order is the order of God, their forbidding is the forbidding by God ... And that the Chiefs of the prophets are five, and they are (called) ‘Ulul-Azm’ and they are Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (be blessings of Allah upon them all) and that Muhammad is their Chief and best of all."

Imam (Leader)

Shiats say that Imam must be appointed by God; that appointment may be known through the declaration of the Prophet or the preceding Imam. The Sunni scholars say that Imam (or Caliph, as they prefer to say) can be either elected, or nominated by the preceding Caliph, or selected by a committee, or may gain the power through a military coup (as was in the case of Muawiyah).

Shi’a scholars say that Imam must be sinless. The Sunni scholars (including Mutazilites) say that sinlessness is not a condition for leadership. Even if he is tyrant and sunk in sins (like in the case of Yazid, or Today’s King Fahd), the majority of the scholars from the shools of Hanbali, Shafi’i, and Maliki discourage people to rise against that Caliph. They think that they should be presevered.

Shiats say that Imam must possess above all such qualities as knowledge, bravery, justice, wisdom, piety, love of God etc. The Sunni scholars say it is not necessary. A person inferior in these qualities may be elected in preference to a person having all these qualities of superior degree.

Shiats say that ‘Ali was appointed by Allah to be the successor of the Prophet, and that the Prophet declared it on several occasions. More than one hundred of those occasions are recorded in the history. The Sunni scholars believe that the Prophet did not appoint anybody to be his successor. This is despite the fact that there are many traditions in the six authentic Sunni collections which support this assignment.

Wassalam.

Seeing Allah

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Shi’a say God has no body. So can not be seen. If Sunnis say He can be seen, they have to admit that He has a body. If not, how can be seen?

A brother wrote:

The answer is very simple. The Qur’an speaks of the hereafter as being another kind of universe operating with different laws.

If you can understand the verse below, you will also be able to understand the "hands”of Allah (far exalted above what they ascribe unto Him).

For indeed it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts, which are within the breasts, that grow blind. (Qur’an 22:46)

Dear brother the Qur’anic verse you quoted has nothing to do with my question. Hereafter has different laws, but it does not change the Person of God. If you want to see God, you should either see the whole God (i.e. your eyes should catch the whole God) which means you have limited God, or you should see a part of God (i.e. your eyes has captured a part of Him) which means you have partitioned God.

Both cases are in contradiction with Islamic belief that Allah, Exalted, is unlimited and has no part and organ. Moreover your belief in seeing God is in contradiction with clear text of Qur’an, in which Allah says that:

"Sight cannot catch Him”(Qur’an 6:103).

The verse does not exclude Hereafter from this rule, therefore it covers everywhere. There is no doubt that Sunni scholars believe that Allah can be seen (at least in Hereafter). To prove that it is logically wrong, I was using a counter argument. That was: If Sunnis believe that Allah can be seen, then they have to admit that Allah has body. They have to admit that either

He is limited or He has parts and organs.

Shi’a believes that Allah does not have any body. Also He can not be seen anywhere. He has no part, no organ. He is unlimited.

Is it your personal preference or a part of shia teaching to use so
much logic? As you see when you use too much logic you may confuse people

You are exactly pointing at one of the most important difference between Shi’a and Sunni schools of thought. As mentioned in the article of "Basic Differences...", the place of reason in religion is one of the most important issues that distinguishes Shiats from Sunnis.

According to our teaching, all basic beliefs should be understood by one’s ability. We can not follow what our scholars say about basic beliefs unless our mind recognizes them to be right and rational. These basic beliefs include believing in God, believing in the unity of God, some of His attributes, believing in the necessity of sending prophets and their successors, believing in the necessity of Justice and Grace (Lutf) for God, etc.

No imitation is accepted by Allah for those basic beliefs. For a person who imitates his mother and father and scholars on these kinds of issues, his identity as being Muslim is under question. Of course, every body is responsible in this matter to the range of his ability in thinking and reasoning. Those proofs needs to be more sophisticated for a person who has more ability in logical reasoning.

Once those basic beliefs were proved by mind, then the person can follow other commands of Allah without asking about them, because they are not included in those basic beliefs. We don’t ask why Fajr prayer is two units (Rakat). We don’t ask why we should make ablution (Wudhu’) before prayer. We don’t ask why we should fast during Ramadhan. We just follow whatever Allah and His messenger asked us to do in these matters without asking why.

So I think it is now clear that why do we use too much logic for the basic beliefs. This is the difference between human and animal, that human can THINK, and we should use this ability otherwise we are not different from them. In hundreds of places of Qur’an, Allah invites us to THINK and not to imitate the others since we may go astray.

Allah said in Qur’an:

"They say: enough for us are the ways we found our fathers following. What if their fathers had no knowledge and guidance?”(Qur’an 5:104)

He also said:

"The worst human for Allah, is the deaf and the dumb who does not use his logic.”(Qur’an 8:22)

He Exalted also said:

"They say (in Hell) that if we had listened or used our intelligence, we would not have been among the companions of the blazing Fire.”(Qur’an 67:10)

So Allah encourages us to think rather than to follow blindly. Now, the subject of seeing Allah is also one of the things that you should not hesitate to ask your scholars why.

Is there any kind of teaching that human kind is going to have same limitations in hereafter. Your postings in some context suggest that people in paradise are going to function like they used to in this world.

I never said so. We confirm that there are extended laws governing the Hereafter. But the person of God will remain the same. Those laws will not affect the person of God and His attributes.

From where do we get this teaching that Allah (SWT) needs a body or an organ to be seen by the people in the paradise if He (SWT) wants to be seen. To me you are still operating in this Dunya.
...please do not give me logical reasoning

From logical reasoning. But since you don’t like it, I don’t continue.

Peace.

Allah said:

Good news to My servants, those who listen to the sayings and follow the best one. (Qur’an 39:17-18)

 ... فَبَشِّرْ عِبَادِ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ...

From kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Is The God A Shape-Shifter? (Does God Have Finger And Leg?)

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Twelver Shi’ites believe that God has no shape, no physical hand, no physical leg, no physical body, and no visible appearance. He does not change along with the time, or does not occupy any physical place. Under no circumstances, God changes. There comes no TIME frame upon him. He has created time, and physical places. This is one of the most important bases of shiat. However, there are quite a few traditions in Sehah (specially Bukhari and Muslim) in which it is assumed that God has such attributes.

Since shiat sect knows what is wrong with hadith, shiat was very kind not to declare this sect of sunni as misguided (or Kafir) so far (because of this subject only, other subjects have their own place). This article is already long due to the references I am giving. Only a few questions have accompanied with these references, and the discussion will be for future.

1)-Does God Have Fingers? In the first and the fourth hadith, the prophet smiles AND confirms this (from sunni sources). In the second and the third, the prophet only smiles, which is known as confirmation of the prophet toward a subject.

For your information, all of these traditions are declared as "Israeeleeat”(which are intered by jews in islamic theology) and rejected for one simple reason:

They are in logical disagreement with the book of the God.

The following traditions have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number: BP135.A124E54

9.510:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

A Jew came to the Prophet and said, "O Muhammad! Allah will hold the heavens on a Finger, and the mountains on a Finger, and the trees on a Finger, and all the creation on a Finger, and then He will say, ‘I am the King.’ “On that Allah’s Apostle smiled till his premolar teeth became visible, and then recited:--

‘No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to him....(39.67) ‘Abdullah added: Allah’s Apostle smiled (at the Jew’s
statement) expressing his wonder and believe in what was said.

9.511:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

A man from the people of the scripture came to the Prophet and said, "O Abal-Qasim! Allah will hold the Heavens upon a Finger, and the Earth on a Finger and the land on a Finger, and all the creation on a Finger, and will say, ‘I am the King! I am the King!’ “I saw the Prophet (after hearing that), smiling till his premolar teeth became visible, and he then recited: --

‘No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to him... (Qur’an 39.67)

9.543:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

A Jewish Rabbi came to Allah’s Apostle and said, "O Muhammad! Allah will put the Heavens on one finger and the earth on one finger, and the trees and the rivers on one finger, and the rest of the creation on one finger, and then will say, pointing out with His Hand, ‘I am the King.’ "On that Allah’s Apostle smiled and said,

"No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to Him. (Qur’an 39.67)

9.604:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

A priest from the Jews came (to the Prophet) and said, "On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will place all the heavens on one finger, and the Earth on one finger, and the waters and the land on one finger, and all the creation on one finger, and then He will shake them and say.

‘I am the King! I am the King!’“I saw the Prophet smiling till his premolar teeth became visible expressing his amazement and his belief in what he had said. Then the Prophet recited: ‘No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to Him (up to)...;

High is He above the partners they attribute to Him.’ (Qur’an 39.67)

Sufuism is almost in every religion, in jewish, in christianity, in sunni sect, and in shiat sect. However, Twelver Shi’ites does not agree with this theology. Although some of knowledgeable people from this sect have accepted this theology, it is widely rejected.

2)- In the following hadith, the God shifts his shape to allow his believer to see him and accept him as true God. Just a few more questions:

a)- How do you know God in this world (right now that you are reading this article)? Assume that you are a faithful and you will certainly go to heaven. My question is that based on this hadith, you know God’s shape already, in this world. You will not know God when you see him first and you will say that he is not your God. Can you tell me how is your God?

b)- Is the God with the same visisbility of Moon and Sun?

c)- Does the God changes his shape to fit to your definition in the other day?

d)- Why Allah comes and returns and then comes back. My question is why time is passing on him on the other day?

(That is enough. Please be patient and see my comments on the second hadith.)

(This hadith and the next one are narrated in sahih muslim too:;h

Chapter 82, pp 115-119, #349, #350, #351, #352, #353, #354, and p1533, #7078)

Sahih al-Bukhari, v9, p390, part (A):

9.532A:

Narrated ‘Ata’ bin Yazid al-Laithi:

On the authority of Abu Huraira: The people said, "O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?”The Prophet said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the moon on a full moon night?”

They said, "No, O Allah’s Apostle.”He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun when there are no clouds?”They said,

"No, O Allah’s Apostle.”He said, "So you will see Him, like that.

Allah will gather all the people on the Day of Resurrection, and say, ‘Whoever worshipped something (in the world) should follow (that thing),’ so, whoever worshipped the sun will follow the sun, and whoever worshiped the moon will follow the moon, and whoever used to worship certain (other false) deities, he will follow those deities. And there will remain only this nation with its good people (or its hypocrites). (The sub-narrator, Ibrahim is in doubt.)

Allah will come to them and say, ‘I am your Lord.’ They will (deny Him and) say, ‘We will stay here till our Lord comes, for when our Lord comes, we will recognize Him.’ So Allah will come to them in His appearance which they know, and will say, ‘I am your Lord.’ They will say, ‘You are our Lord,’ so they will follow Him.

Then a bridge will be laid across Hell (Fire)’ I and my followers will be the first ones to go across it and none will speak on that Day except the Apostles. And the invocation of the Apostles on that Day will be, ‘O Allah, save! Save!’ In Hell (or over The Bridge) there will be hooks like the thorns of As-Sa’dan (thorny plant). Have you seen As-Sa’dan? “They replied, "Yes, O Allah’s Apostle!”

He said, "So those hooks look like the thorns of As-Sa’dan, but none knows how big they are except Allah. Those hooks will snap the people away according to their deeds. Some of the people will stay in Hell (be destroyed) because of their (evil) deeds, and some will be cut or torn by the hooks (and fall into Hell) and some will be punished and then relieved. When Allah has finished His Judgments among the people, He will take whomever He will out of Hell through His Mercy.

He will then order the angels to take out of the Fire all those who used to worship none but Allah from among those whom Allah wanted to be merciful to and those who testified (in the world) that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah. The angels will recognize them in the Fire by the marks of prostration (on their foreheads), for the Fire will eat up all the human body except the mark caused by prostration as Allah has forbidden the Fire to eat the mark of prostration. They will come out of the (Hell) Fire, completely burnt and then the water of life will be poured over them and they will grow under it as does a seed that comes in the mud of the torrent.

Then Allah will finish the judgments among the people, and there will remain one man facing the (Hell) Fire and he will be the last person among the people of Hell to enter Paradise. He will say, ‘O my Lord!

Please turn my face away from the fire because its air has hurt me and its severe heat has burnt me.’ So he will invoke Allah in the way Allah will wish him to invoke, and then Allah will say to him, ‘If I grant you that, will you then ask for anything else?’ He will reply, ‘No, by Your Power, (Honor) I will not ask You for anything else.’ He will give his Lord whatever promises and covenants Allah will demand.

So Allah will turn his face away from Hell (Fire). When he will face Paradise and will see it, he will remain quiet for as long as Allah will wish him to remain quiet, then he will say, ‘O my Lord! Bring me near to the gate of Paradise.’ Allah will say to him, ‘Didn’t you give your promises and covenants that you would never ask for anything more than what you had been given? Woe on you, O Adam’s son! How treacherous you are!’ He will say, ‘O my lord,’ and will keep on invoking Allah till He says to him, ‘If I give what you are asking, will you then ask for anything else?’ He will reply, ‘No, by Your (Honor) Power, I will not ask for anything else.’

Then he will give covenants and promises to Allah and then Allah will bring him near to the gate of Paradise. When he stands at the gate of Paradise, Paradise will be opened and spread before him, and he will see its splendor and pleasures whereupon he will remain quiet as long as Allah will wish him to remain quiet, and then he will say, O my Lord! Admit me into Paradise.’ Allah will say, ‘Didn’t you give your covenants and promises that you would not ask for anything more than what you had been given?’ Allah will say, ‘Woe on you, O Adam’s son! How treacherous you are! ‘

The man will say, ‘O my Lord! Do not make me the most miserable of Your creation,’ and he will keep on invoking Allah till Allah will laugh because of his sayings, and when Allah will laugh because of him, He will say to him, ‘Enter Paradise,’ and when he will enter it, Allah will say to him, ‘Wish for anything.’ So he will ask his Lord, and he will wish for a great number of things, for Allah Himself will remind him to wish for certain things by saying, ‘(Wish for) so-and-so.’

When there is nothing more to wish for, Allah will say, ‘This is for you, and its equal (is for you) as well.”‘Ata’ bin Yazid added: Abu Sa’id al-Khudri who was present with Abu Huraira, did not deny whatever the latter said, but when Abu Huraira said that Allah had said, "That is for you and its equal as well,”Abu Sa’id al-Khudri said, "And ten times as much, O Abu Huraira!”Abu Huraira said, "I do not remember, except his saying, ‘That is for you and its equal as well.’“Abu Sa’id al-Khudri then said, "I testify that I remember the Prophet saying, ‘That is for you, and ten times as much.’ ‘ Abu Huraira then added, "That man will be the last person of the people of Paradise to enter Paradise."

In the following hadith which is very similar to that of mentioned above, God has a special sign on his leg (or Shin). Would you please tell us when you have observed such sign, what is this sign and how misguided shiates can observe this sign such that they may know their lord too? Please be kind, and let shiat become guided. Thanks.

9.532s:

Narrated Abu Sa’id al-Khudri:

We said, "O Allah’s Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?”He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon when the sky is clear?”We said, "No.”He said, "So you will have no difficulty in seeing your Lord on that Day as you have no difficulty in seeing the sun and the moon (in a clear sky).”The Prophet then said, "Somebody will then announce, ‘Let every nation follow what they used to worship.’

So the companions of the cross will go with their cross, and the idolators (will go) with their idols, and the companions of every god (false deities) (will go) with their god, till there remain those who used to worship Allah, both the obedient ones and the mischievous ones, and some of the people of the Scripture. Then Hell will be presented to them as if it were a mirage.

Then it will be said to the Jews, "What did you use to worship?’ They will reply, ‘We used to worship Ezra, the son of Allah.’ It will be said to them, ‘You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son. What do you want (now)?’ They will reply, ‘We want You to provide us with water.’ Then it will be said to them ‘Drink,’ and they will fall down in Hell (instead). Then it will be said to the Christians, ‘What did you use to worship?’

They will reply, ‘We used to worship Messiah, the son of Allah.’ It will be said, ‘You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son. What: do you want (now)?’ They will say, ‘We want You to provide us with water.’ It will be said to them, ‘Drink,’ and they will fall down in Hell (instead). When there remain only those who used to worship Allah (Alone), both the obedient ones and the mischievous ones, it will be said to them, ‘What keeps you here when all the people have gone?’ They will say, ‘We parted with them (in the world) when we were in greater need of them than we are today, we heard the call of one proclaiming, ‘Let every nation follow what they used to worship,’ and now we are waiting for our Lord.’ Then the Almighty will come to them in a shape other than the one which they saw the first time, and He will say, ‘I am your Lord,’ and they will say, ‘You are not our Lord.’ And none will speak: to Him then but the Prophets, and then it will be said to them, ‘Do you know any sign by which you can recognize Him?’

They will say. ‘The Shin,’ and so Allah will then uncover His Shin whereupon every believer will prostrate before Him and there will remain those who used to prostrate before Him just for showing off and for gaining good reputation. These people will try to prostrate but their backs will be rigid like one piece of a wood (and they will not be able to prostrate). Then the bridge will be laid across Hell.”We, the companions of the Prophet said, "O Allah’s Apostle! What is the bridge?’

He said, "It is a slippery (bridge) on which there are clamps and (Hooks like) a thorny seed that is wide at one side and narrow at the other and has thorns with bent ends. Such a thorny seed is found in Najd and is called As-Sa’dan. Some of the believers will cross the bridge as quickly as the wink of an eye, some others as quick as lightning, a strong wind, fast horses or she-camels.

So some will be safe without any harm; some will be safe after receiving some scratches, and some will fall down into Hell (Fire). The last person will cross by being dragged (over the bridge).”The Prophet said, "You (Muslims) cannot be more pressing in claiming from me a right that has been clearly proved to be yours than the believers in interceding with Almighty for their (Muslim) brothers on that Day, when they see themselves safe.

They will say, ‘O Allah! (Save) our brothers (for they) used to pray with us, fast with us and also do good deeds with us.’ Allah will say, ‘Go and take out (of Hell) anyone in whose heart you find faith equal to the weight of one (gold) Dinar.’ Allah will forbid the Fire to burn the faces of those sinners. They will go to them and find some of them in Hell (Fire) up to their feet, and some up to the middle of their legs.

So they will take out those whom they will recognize and then they will return, and Allah will say (to them), ‘Go and take out (of Hell) anyone in whose heart you find faith equal to the weight of one half Dinar.’ They will take out whomever they will recognize and return, and then Allah will say, ‘Go and take out (of Hell) anyone in whose heart you find faith equal to the weight of an atom (or a smallest ant), and so they will take out all those whom they will recognize.”Abu Sa’id said: If you do not believe me then read the Holy Verse:--

‘Surely! Allah wrongs not even of the weight of an atom (or a smallest ant) but if there is any good (done) He doubles it.’ (Qur’an 4.40)

The Prophet added, "Then the prophets and Angels and the believers will intercede, and (last of all) the Almighty (Allah) will say, ‘Now remains My Intercession. He will then hold a handful of the Fire from which He will take out some people whose bodies have been burnt, and they will be thrown into a river at the entrance of Paradise, called the water of life.

They will grow on its banks, as a seed carried by the torrent grows. You have noticed how it grows beside a rock or beside a tree, and how the side facing the sun is usually green while the side facing the shade is white. Those people will come out (of the River of Life) like pearls, and they will have (golden) necklaces, and then they will enter Paradise whereupon the people of Paradise will say, ‘These are the people emancipated by the Beneficent. He has admitted them into Paradise without them having done any good deeds and without sending forth any good (for themselves).’ Then it will be said to them, ‘For you is what you have seen and its equivalent as well.’"

The following traditions are also narrated in Bukhari.

9.529:

Narrated Jarir:

We were sitting with the Prophet and he looked at the moon on the night of the full-moon and said, "You people will see your Lord as you see this full moon, and you will have no trouble in seeing Him, so if you can avoid missing (through sleep or business, etc.) a prayer before sunrise (Fajr) and a prayer before sunset (Asr) you must do so.”(See HadithNo.529,V1)

9.530:

Narrated Jarir bin ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, "You will definitely see your Lord with your own eyes."

9.531:

Narrated Jarir:

Allah’s Apostle came out to us on the night of the full moon and said, "You will see your Lord on the Day of Resurrection as you see this (full moon) and you will have no difficulty in seeing Him."

The above traditions have been taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number: BP135.A124E54

The traditions from Sahih muslim can be found in:

Sahih Muslim,
Rendered into English by
Abdul Hamid Siddiqi
Printed at Hafeez Press,
Sh.Muhammad Ashraf
Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore(Pakistan)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A144E57

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Where Is This God? Where Is This Man?

If you remember, we discovered that Allah has a few fingers, two legs which are left leg and right leg, and a special sign on one of his leg which is known only to my sunni brothers and they will know God in Ghyamat (the other day) using this special sign on the leg of the God.

When searching for the creation of Eva (woman) and Adam (man), I finally found out more about the almighty God. He is smaller than one of the buildings in New York city, or a tree. He is only 30 meters. Combining these signs of the almighty, I hope to become more familiar with the God, the most high (!!).

I also urge islamic and nonislamic scientists to search for the first human being on earth, named as Adam. He is 30 meters tall. Also, if scientists carefully examine the remained skeletons along with history, they have to be able to find a linear pattern for the hight of human beings up to their father. The reason is that human being is decreasing in its hight from 30 meters to 1.7 meters these days. I assure scientists that any other results is wrong, and they have to investigate more about this before finalizing their research. For example, if they find ice-man to be almost as tall as the present man, they must be wrong. The older, the taller the skeleton must be.

May Allah guide our scientists to the right path.

(In fact, I wonder why they do any research. They have to obey these traditions and issue their scientific rules immediately. Although a hadith is not equal to one verse of Qur’an, are we not supposed to listen to traditions and obey them?)

8.246:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Allah created Adam in His picture, sixty cubits (about 30 meters) in height. When He created him, He said (to him),

"Go and greet that group of angels sitting there, and listen what they will say in reply to you, for that will be your greeting and the greeting of your offspring.”Adam (went and) said, ‘As-Salamu alaikum

(Peace be upon you).’ They replied, ‘AsSalamu-’Alaika wa Rahmatullah

(Peace and Allah’s Mercy be on you) So they increased ‘Wa Rahmatullah’

The Prophet added ‘So whoever will enter Paradise, will be of the shape and picture of Adam Since then the creation of Adam’s (offspring) (i.e. stature of human beings is being diminished continuously) to the present time."

4.543:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Allah created Adam, making him 60 cubits tall. When He created him, He said to him, "Go and greet that group of angels, and listen to their reply, for it will be your greeting (salutation) and the greeting (salutations of your offspring.”So, Adam said (to the angels), As-Salamu Alaikum (i.e. Peace be upon you). The angels said, "As-salamu Alaika wa Rahmatu-l-lahi”(i.e. Peace and Allah’s Mercy be upon you). Thus the angels added to Adam’s salutation the expression, ‘Wa Rahmatu-l-lahi,’ Any person who will enter Paradise will resemble Adam (in appearance and figure). People have been decreasing in stature since Adam’s creation.
From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Re: Allah does not resemble to his creatures

Article: 7575 of soc.religion.islam

From: dabbous@milou.inria.fr [24] (Walid Dabbous)

Then you said:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Allah created Adam in His picture, sixty cubits (about 30 meters) in height. When He created him, He said (to him), The "His”article here means Adam, which means that Allah created Adam in his picture, i.e. Adam was not a child then grew up like other people. This also means to refute darwinism: Adam was created in his known picture (60 cubits...) and did not derive from any other animal creature.

In the Hadith, the word which is used as "his picture”is:

Ala Soorateh

We know that Allah knew his plan for the entire world from the beginning except that human beings are not aware of that. Such plan is "plan". It is not a picture of something. When you say that you have a picture, it means that you DO exist. You exist, hence, you have a picture. So, picture is the attribute of an existing thing or human being. That is why a photograph is called a "picture". If you see the picture of an animal, you will say that such animal does exist, or it did exist. When Allah wanted to created Adam, there was no Adam.

There was no picture of Adam, since there was no Adam. As the rsult of this reasoning, "His”in "His picture”refers to the God, and does not refer to Adam.

On the other hand, a plan which is not implemented yet remains a plan and is never referred as picture. The hadith could have been spoken as:

And Allah created Adam based on his plan, Or
And Allah created Adam by his knowledge, Or
And Allah created Adam by his power.

You can never find a single hadith anywhere (Even a garbage Hadith) that is said:

And Allah created the earth in its picture.
And Allah created a cow in its picture.

There is no single verse in the so called Twisted bible or the book of traditions where God has created an ass in its picture. There is, however, some lines at the beginning of the old testement like:

And Yahowah created Adam by his picture.

The reason is simple. When we are talking about a plan, it is a plan, and it is not a picture. You doubt, ask 5 billion normal human beings and they will tell you what they understand from this statement.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

The Way That The God Fills The Hell

As you have realized by now, The God has a shape as human, 30 meters tall, two legs with a special sign on one of his legs. This leg is very helpful. Once it would be used to say "shut up”to the Hell. I am also curious to know how many of you will use your feet to shut off the fire. Thanks.

6.372:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

(that the Prophet said) "It will be said to the Hell, ‘Are you filled?’ It will say, ‘Are there any more (to come)?’ On that Allah will put His Foot on it, and it will say ‘Qati! Qati! (Enough! Enough!)."

6.373:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Paradise and the Fire (Hell) argued, and the Fire (Hell) said, "I have been given the privilege of receiving the arrogant and the tyrants.’ Paradise said, ‘What is the matter with me? Why do only the weak and the humble among the people enter me?’ On that, Allah said to Paradise. ‘You are My Mercy which I bestow on whoever I wish of my servants.’

Then Allah said to the (Hell) Fire, ‘You are my (means of) punishment by which I punish whoever I wish of my slaves. And each of you will have its fill.’ As for the Fire (Hell), it will not be filled till Allah puts His Foot over it whereupon it will say, ‘Qati! Qati!’ At that time it will be filled, and its different parts will come closer to each other; and Allah will not wrong any of His created beings. As regards Paradise, Allah will create a new creation to fill it with."

Also, this Hell can not bear its hot environment on itself. I just do not understand how such hot environment can creat cold weather too!!.

4.482:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, "The (Hell) Fire complained to its Lord saying, ‘O my Lord! My different parts eat up each other.’ So, He allowed it to take two breaths, one in the winter and the other in summer, and this is the reason for the severe heat and the bitter cold you find (in weather)."

All traditions are from Sahih Bukhari:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

Abu Hurairah or Paul?

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Perhaps you have heard of the name "Paul”(spelling?). There was a Paul as the disciple of Jesus. But this famous Paul is not that one. He is a person who (some say) did not see Jesus himself except in his dreams. He was against the christians on those days, and after a revelation in a dream, he became christian, and he became the father of todays’ christianity. Nobody asked him those days:

Where have you been my son when Jesus was on the cross?
Why do you claim that you can now expand, explain, and
defend the religion which you fought for a few years?

My point is that: He became the base of christianity and the source of revelation. Everything, then, came through him. Several rules and theology of christianity, all came through his sentences which were not in the original religion at the beginning. How many sentences, you think, caused christians to deviate from their true roots? There is a person named as Abu Hurairah whose history I will bring after a while. This man says himself:

1.113:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

There is none among the companions of the Prophet who has narrated more Hadiths than I except ‘Abdallah bin Amr (bin al-’As) who used to write them and I never did the same.

All nine volumns of Sahih Bukhari contains 7068 traditions. From these traditions, about 1100 traditions are narrated from this man, in other words, 15.56% of the whole traditions in Sahih Bukhari (almost 1/6). (I will soon give you the number of traditions narrated by Abu Hurairah in Sahih Muslim.)

As I showed on "Abu Huraira or Loui Pasteur", he contradicted himself as well as science. The following hadith is another one where he clearly narrates a hadith which is not in accordance with what Aisha and Umm Salamh narrate. If we accept that Aisha and Umm Salamh were in the house of the prophet more than any other wives, we can easily see the problem here.

{This is in page 81, in a section titled as: Is a fasting person gets up in the morning in the state of Janaba (will his fast be valid?}

This hadith is translated by the translator only up to the end of the first paragraph. He then stopped translating. However, the arabic text is still there. The rest is my own translation. If you do not want to trust me, I suggest you refer to the arabic text. In addition, I will bring you more sources for the explanation and translation I made.

3.148

Narrated Aisha and Umm Salam: At times Allah Apostle (may peace be upon him) used to get up in the morning in the state of Janaba after having sexual relations with his wives. He would then take a bath and fast.

Marwan said to Abdu-arrahman ibn Hareth: Swear to God that by (hearing) this, Abu Huraira will scream. At this time, Marwan was in Madinah.

Abu Bakr said: Abd-arrahman did not like this. Then it happened that we gathered in Dhi-Hulaifah where Abu Hurairah had a piece of earth. Abd-arrahman told Abu Hurairah: I am telling you this, and if Marwan did not ask me (by swear) for this, I would not have been mentioning this to you. Then he mentioned the (traditions) narrated by Aisha and Umm Salamh. He (Abu Hurairah) said: al-fadhl Ibn Abbas narrated me so and he is more knowledgeable. Hammam and Ibn Abdullah Ibn Umar narrated from Abu Hurairah that the prophet ordered for opening the sawm (and not to fast), (obviously) the first chain (from Aisha and Umm Salam) is more trustable.

The above traditions are taken from: The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari

Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

From: asabati@sol.UVic.CA [25] (ahmad)

In article elrabaa@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [26] (M. ElRabaa) writes:

Again Kamran is spelling his misconceptions into the net ...

1) Abu-Hurirah (ra) stayed very close to the Prophet (alihi assalato wassalam) for few years, he did not go to markets

Dear Brother Muhammad, I would like to ask you the following question:

Do you know for how long Abu-Hurirah Has stayed with the Prophet?

The answer is found in the following sunni referances:

1. al-Milala wa al-Nihal, by iben al-Jawzia, Pub. Egypt.

2. Sirat iben Hisham, Pub. Egypt.

Abu-Hurirah became a moslem only two years before the Prophet (s.a.w) died. Therefore, How can he report some 2000 hadith in the Saheeh al-Bukhari alone, while there are olny very few hadiths are reported by Imam ‘Ali, Imam Al-Hasan,Imam al-Husayn, or Fatimah al-zahrah. How would you explain such things ? I am intrested in your objective and scientific answer supported by some referances.

Prophet (alihi assalato wassalam) almost 24 hrs a day!!!

That is why he narrated a lot of ahadith ...

2) He also narrated a lot of ahadith which he heard from other sahaba (RAA) ... sahaba were good muslims and trusted each other, so he took some ahadith from the sahaba ...

As for the example of contradiction Kamran gives, all I can say is this, go and check a fiqh book!!!
I mentioned this before several times ... to make a ruling of ahadith, you have to check fiqh books ... it is not a straight forword matter ... if someone is interested and does not have a fiqh book (like Fiqh El-sunnah) pls

Dear brother, I have The above mentioned book, Fiqh al-sunnah, by Said Sabiq, Published in Egypt. Would you kindly give me the page number so that I could look by myself.

On the other hand, since you have Fiqh al-Sunnah book please notce that when Said Sabiq (one of very respected sunni scholars and the auther of the well konwn books such as the above mentioned book) talk about some issues , he some time refer to the Shiat point of view of that issue. For example: Zawaj al-Mutah, Qanoon al-Hawal al-Shakhesaih (the Low of Marriage).Also, notice his tone when he talk about the shiat moslems or scholars!

Please, after you look at the above two chapter of the book let me know what you think.

AHMAD
UNIVERISTY OF VICTORIA
VICTORIA, BC, CANADA

From: IN%"kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.CA [27]”5-DEC-1993 14:28:43.53

Subject: Statistical numbers

The only hadith in this article was taken from:
The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

Among all sahabah and those who visited the prophet, only a few narrated MOST of the traditions inside Sehah. Their number is fewer that the number of fingers. While other traditions say that at least 1400 people were acompanied the prophet in Hudaybiyah. The Madinah itself had more than 3000 inhabitants.In the Battle of Macca (Fath-al-mobeen), more than 10,000 people were participant. In the last Hajj of the prophet, more than the same number were with the prophet. From all of these people, only a few have been mentioned inside Sehah. Some of these people, such as Abu Hurairah were converted to Islam only three years before the death of the prophet. Another, for example, is Aisha, the mother of faithful. She narrated a lot of traditions too. Let see how old she was:

5.236:

Narrated Hisham’s father:

Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married ‘Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.

Some simple computations say that:

1)- The prophet engaged with Aisha one year before his movement to Madinah. (One year before Hijrah). At that time, Aisha was six years old. (Another hadith narrated by Aisha herself says that she was playing with baby-tools on those days.)

2)- The prophet married her in the SECOND year of Hijrah, when Aisha was 9 years old.

3)- Assuming that the prophet lived only 10 years after Hijrah, Aisha lived only 8 years with the prophet in her adult age.

One more point should be added that , as I will give the exact references, a female easily forgets exact wordings, or the words themselves. This is the nature of woman. Aisha did not have a superior nature of humanity too. It is normal to expect that she might have forgotten some of traditions in its true form.

Let us see some numbers now. I am going to give you some statistics about the number of traditions narrated by different people. I do not claim these numbers are accurate, since I did not count them by finger.

The only persons whose traditions are counted by me and in person is ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb and his sons. Some of traditions which are written repeatedly by Imam Bukhari are also considered in the following numbers.

As the result, you have to sometime reduce 100 from them.

Total number of traditions in 9 volumns of Bukhari: 7068

Aisha the mother of faithful: 1250 (17.68%)
Abu Hurairah: 1100 (15.56%)
Ibn-Umar, son of Umar: 1100 (15.56%)
Anas-Ibn-Malik: 900 (12.73%)
Abdullah-Ibn-Abbas: 700 (9.9%)
Jobair-Ibn-Abdullah: 275 (3.89%)
Abu-Musa-Ashari: 165 (2.33%)
Abu-Said-Al-Khedri: 130 (1.84%)
‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb: 79 (1.11%)
Umar-Ibn-Khattab: 50 (0.71%)
Umm Salamh: 48 (0.68%)
Abdullah-Ibn-Masud: 45 (0.64%)
Muawiyah-Ibn-Abusofyan: 10 (0.14%)
Hasan-Ibn-’Ali: 8 (0.11%)
‘Ali-Ibn-Husayn: 6 (0.08%)
Husayn-Ibn-’Ali: 2 (0.03%)

(83% on the whole)

As you can see, there is so few traditions narrated from ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitalib, and specially his sons. I have not given other numbers for other narrators, yet. The author of this book, Imam Bukhari was living in the life time of Imam Bagher, son of ‘Ali-Ibn-Husayn, and Imam Jafar. He did not narrate ONE single hadith from them. This is when that Imam Jafar and Imam Bagher were narrating hadith from their fathers up to ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb and finally from the prophet himself. In other words, Imam Bukhari did not accept that these sons of ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb are WORTHY of narrating hadith, and he thought that they are liars.

If you look at the sources of Hadith of shiat, you will find that these people were not silent. They narrated a lot traditions from their fathers up to ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb, and finally from the prophet. Is it not interesting?

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Abu Huraira (Part 1: A confession?)

The following hadith is not strange as far as the content of the hadith goes. At the beginning, Abu Huraira is narrating the hadith from the prophet. When people asked him whether he heard this hadith from the prophet or not, he said that he did not, and he narrated by his ownself.

1)- What I would like you to do for me is to use your keyboard and clearly partition the first hadith to two parts:
a)- The part that is spoken by the prophet, and
b)- the part that is spoken ONLY by Abu Hurairah.
2)- I would like you to clearly tell me why people asked him whether these words are spoken by the prophet. As far as my knowledge says, people asked this question only if the hadith was really strange to them, such as the traditions which are talking about future and some events which were
unbelievable for them, and is taking place these days. What was strange in this hadith, and why people asked Abu Huraira whether he is telling what he heard from the prophet or not.

3)- I would like you to clearly tell me what would have happened if people did not ask Abu Huraira whether any part of the hadith is truly spoken by the prophet or not.

4)- If people did not ask Abu Huraira whether the hadith is told by the prophet or not, apparently, people would have considered the whole hadith as the words of the prophet. The truth was, in any case, that Abu huraira said something of his own and attached some EXTRA words to a hadith narrated (perhaps) spoken by the prophet. I would like you to clearly tell me why do you trust such person who adds some words of his own to the words of the prophet.

5)- Would you kindly quote all the traditions which are narrated by Abu Huraira and accepted by Imam Bukhari and Muslim, and clearly draw a line between parts which are spoken by the prophet and the words spoken by Abu Huraira.

I really do not understand how a man allows himself to say something which has not heard from the prophet and to attach it with prophet words without even warning in advance. Or, why he tells something of his own before clearly stating at the beginning of his own words that these are his words and not the prophet?

The second example clearly shows that Abu huraira has added to what the prophet (probably) said. How about cases where nobody has reported the something is extra given by Abu Huraira?

7.268:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

"The Prophet said, ‘The best alms is that which is given when one is rich, and a giving hand is better than a taking one, and you should start first to support your dependents.’ A wife says, ‘You should either provide me with food or divorce me.’ A slave says, ‘Give me food and enjoy my service.”A son says, "Give me food; to whom do you leave me?”The people said, "O Abu Huraira! Did you hear that from Allah’s Apostle ?”He said, "No, it is from my own self."

I would like to know why Abu Huraira used to add some other places as well?

7.492:

Anas bin Malik said:

Allah’s Apostle said, "Do not make drinks in Ad-Dubba’ nor in al-Muzaffat. Abu Huraira used to add to them al-Hantam and An-Naqir.

The above hadith is taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Abu Huraira (Part 2: The origin of Abu Huraira?)

Sunni brothers usually quote a few verses from Qur’an to show that the sahabah who participated in the pledge of Hudaibyia have high standard (virtue) and are considered very respectfully. Fine. I do not want to discuss the correctness of this interpretation and understanding here.

Did you know that Abu Huraira was not muslim on those days, and was not among muslims on those days, and certainly did not witness the plegdge of Hudaibyia? Yes, Abu Huraira never witnessed the plege of Hudaibyia. Abu Huraira was a Jew, became muslim on the day of Khaibar which took place one year after the pledge of Hudaibyia, and spent ONLY three years with the prophet.

1)- Abu Huraira became muslim on the day of Khaibar. This is testified by Jabir ibn Abdullah. (Second hadith)

Abu Huraira came to the Prophet during the day of Khaibar.

I do not need to emphasize this point that the battle of Khaibar took place between muslims and Jews. Abu Huraira was a Jew before he became muslim.

2)- Abu Huraira was with the prophet only three years. (He himself testifies in the first hadith.)

I enjoyed the company of Allah’s Apostle for three years

3)- Perhaps, you better know how others greeted him when he became muslim on that day.

4.789:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

I enjoyed the company of Allah’s Apostle for three years, and during the other years of my life, never was I so anxious to understand the (Prophet’s) traditions as I was during those three years. I heard him saying, beckoning with his hand in this way, "Before the Hour you will fight with people who will have hairy shoes and live in al-Bariz.”

(Sufyan, the sub-narrator once said, "And they are the people of al-Bazir.")

5.458:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

That he fought in a Ghazwa towards Najd along with Allah’s Apostle and when Allah’s Apostle returned, he too, returned along with him. The time of the afternoon nap overtook them when they were in a valley full of thorny trees. Allah’s Apostle dismounted and the people dispersed amongst the thorny trees, seeking the shade of the trees.

Allah’s Apostle took shelter under a Samura tree and hung his sword on it. We slept for a while when Allah’s Apostle suddenly called us, and we went to him, to find a bedouin sitting with him. Allah’s Apostle said, "This (bedouin) took my sword out of its sheath while I was asleep. When I woke up, the naked sword was in his hand and he said to me, ‘Who can save you from me?, I replied, ‘Allah.’ Now here he is sitting.”Allah’s Apostle did not punish him (for that).

Through another group of narrators, Jabir said, "We were in the company of the Prophet (during the battle of) Dhat-ur-Riqa’, and we came across a shady tree and we left it for the Prophet (to take rest under its shade). A man from the pagans came while the Prophet’s sword was hanging on the tree. He took it out of its sheath secretly and said (to the Prophet), ‘Are you afraid of me?’ The Prophet said, ‘No.’ He said, ‘Who can save you from me?’ The Prophet said, Allah.’

The companions of the Prophet threatened him, then the Iqama for the prayer was announced and the Prophet offered a two Rakat Fear prayer with one of the two batches, and that batch went aside and he offered two Rak’a-t with the other batch. So the Prophet offered four Rakat but the people offered two Rakat only.”(The sub-narrator) Abu Bishr added, "The man was Ghaurath bin al-Harith and the battle was waged against Muharib Khasafa.”Jabir added, "We were with the Prophet at

Nakhl and he offered the Fear prayer.”Abu Huraira said, "I offered the Fear prayer with the Prophet during the Ghazwa (i.e. the battle) of Najd.”Abu Huraira came to the Prophet during the day of Khaibar.

5.544:

Narrated ‘Anbasa bin Said:
Abu Huraira came to the Prophet and asked him (for a share from the Khaibar booty). On that, one of the sons of Said bin al-’As said to him, "O Allah’s Apostle! Do not give him.”Abu Huraira then said (to the Prophet) "This is the murderer of Ibn Qauqal.”Sa’id’s son said, "How strange! A guinea pig coming from Qadum Ad-Dan!"

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle sent Aban from Medina to Najd as the commander of a Sariya. Aban and his companions came to the Prophet at Khaibar after the Prophet had conquered it, and the reins of their horses were made of the fire of date palm trees. I said, "O Allah’s Apostle! Do not give them a share of the booty.”on, that, Aban said (to me), "Strange! You suggest such a thing though you are what you are, O guinea pig coming down from the top of Ad-Dal (a lotus tree)!

"On that the Prophet said, "O Aban, sit down! “and did not give them any share.

5.545:

Narrated Said:

Aban bin Said came to the Prophet and greeted him. Abu Huraira said, "O Allah’s Apostle! This (Aban) is the murderer of the Ibn Qauqal.”(On hearing that), Aban said to Abu Huraira, "How strange your saying is! You, a guinea pig, descending from Qadum Dan, blaming me for (killing) a person whom Allah favored (with martyrdom) with my hand, and whom He forbade to degrade me with his hand.’

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Abu Huraira (Part 3: His mental and physical conditions)

1)- After Abu Huraira became muslim, he did not have anything. He used to ask people to recite a verse of Qur’an, not because he wanted to benefit the Qur’an. He wanted the person to feel religiously close and ask Abu Huraira for a dinner or lunch. This is well known phenomena as "Comibing stomach and religion". (Or combing religion with the money, stomach, power, ... or with trivial things)

2)- Even people did not believe that such person can narrate so many traditions. {No reference now: It has been told that Abu Huraira narrated 40,000 traditions during his life time. Dinving such number of traditions to three years of his companionship will result to 36 traditions per day (!!!).

A reference I gave a few weeks ago confirms that he, himself, has confessed that nobody among the sahabah has narrated as many traditions as he did. Knowing this fact that he is the second person in rate of narrating hadith in Bukhari and Muslim, we conclude that he must have narrated more traditions than is recorded in these two books.}

In one given hadith, he, himself, has confessed that people accused him of madness.

3)- Interesting point is that there is NO single hadith narrated by others as the merit of Abu Huraira. If you search the whole Bukhari and Muslim as the merit of Abu Huraira, whatever hadith you see about his companionship with the prophet, and his so called knowledge is narretd by him ALONE. On the other hand, when you read the merit of ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb (Salman, Umar, Zubair, ...), you can see that there were different narrators to say one hadith for ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitaleeb (Or others). This does not happen with Abu Huraira at all. All the traditions like:

I was a good boy, I did this and that were narrated only by Abu Huraira. I am asking you to tell me if you accept the testimony of person in the court saying that he is a good boy.

5. 57:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The people used to say, "Abu Huraira narrates too many narrations.”In fact I used to keep close to Allah’s Apostle and was satisfied with what filled my stomach. I ate no leavened bread and dressed no decorated striped clothes, and never did a man or a woman serve me, and I often used to press my belly against gravel because of hunger, and I used to ask a man to recite a Qur’anic Verse to me although I knew it, so that he would take me to his home and feed me. And the most generous of all the people to the poor was Ja’far bin Abi Talib.

He used to take us to his home and offer us what was available therein. He would even offer us an empty folded leather container (of butter) which we would split and lick whatever was in it.

7.343:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

I used to accompany Allah’s Apostle to fill my stomach; and that was when I did not eat baked bread, nor wear silk. Neither a male nor a female slave used to serve me, and I used to bind stones over my belly and ask somebody to recite a Qur’anic Verse for me though I knew it, so that he might take me to his house and feed me. Ja’far bin Abi Talib was very kind to the poor, and he used to take us and feed us with what ever was available in his house, (and if nothing was available), he used to give us the empty (honey or butter) skin which we would tear and lick whatever was in it.

9.425:

Narrated Muhammad:

We were with Abu Huraira while he was wearing two linen garments dyed with red clay. He cleaned his nose with his garment, saying, "Bravo! Bravo! Abu Huraira is cleaning his nose with linen! There came a time when I would fall senseless between the pulpit of Allah’s Apostle and ‘Aisha’s dwelling whereupon a passerby would come and put his foot on my neck, considering me a mad man, but in fact, I had no madness, I suffered nothing but hunger."

7.287i:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Once while I was in a state of fatigue (because of severe hunger), I met ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, so I asked him to recite a verse from Allah’s Book to me. He entered his house and interpreted it to me.
(Then I went out and) after walking for a short distance, I fell on my face because of fatigue and severe hunger. Suddenly I saw Allah’s Apostle standing by my head. He said, "O Abu Huraira!”I replied, "Labbaik, O Allah’s Apostle, and Sadaik!”

Then he held me by the hand, and made me get up. Then he came to know what I was suffering from. He took me to his house, and ordered a big bowl of milk for me. I drank thereof and he said, "Drink more, O Abu Hirr!”So I drank again, whereupon he again said, "Drink more.”So I drank more till my belly became full and looked like a bowl. Afterwards I met ‘Umar and mentioned to him what had happened to me, and said to him, "Somebody, who had more right than you, O ‘Umar, took over the case. By Allah, I asked you to recite a Verse to me while I knew it better than you.”On that Umar said to me, "By Allah, if I admitted and entertained you, it would have been dearer to me than having nice red camels.

The above traditions are taken from:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

From: imran@panix.com [28] (Imran Anwar)

Subject: Re: Abu Huraira (Part 3: His mental and physical conditions)

Djamel has posted an attack on the posting about Abu Huraira that bears to be responded to . Djamel. If someone has superhuman abilities all of a sudden would you not be suspicious. We do not hear that Abu Huraira was a man with a super memory before he met the Prophet. Suddenly, he comes to Hazrat Muhammad (SAAS), spends three years with him and can remember everything by some magical powers.

It has nothing to do with someone trying to make people shia or sunni by questioning the baloney that Abu Huraira was spewing. This man was using his brief time with the prphet (SAAS) for personal gain and to continue to gain influence every time something came up that required an opinion he was the one who came up with some Hadees he suddenly fully remembered.

In particular he hated Aisha and it is a matter of record that he made up Hadeeth that Aisha directly contradicted. This man’s super memory came into existence after the Prophet’s death when suddenly from a PC XT type brain his mind became like a 486/33MHz with a CD-ROM built in with the entire encyclopaedia of Hadeeth. any subject, anytime, he would recall something that no one lese knew or had heard before.

Wow!

The likelihood of this man doing it for personal gain, influence, and political/social motivation is very high and we should be wary of that instead of questioning the motive of someone who raised these points.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Re: Abou Huraira

Article: 7885 of soc.religion.islam
From: U58369@uicvm.uic.edu [29]

For example they ask: How could one man narrate so many hadiths?

Aysha (respected mother of believers) narrated more than Abu Huraira in Sahih Bukhari. Ibn Umar narrated the same as Abu Huraira in Bukhari. I gave all these numbers in an article titled as Statistical numbers.

I did not ask why Ayesha narrated so many hadith from the prohet. I did not ask why Ibn-Umar narrated so many hadith, or Ibn-Abbas, or others. I asked:

How a person who was with the prophet less than three years has narrated so many traditions?

The rest is ignored since you misunderstood the original question from the base.

Abu Huraira only narrated 5,374 hadiths.

Let us assume that Abu Huraira was with the prophet full three years.
5,374/3 = 1791.33 traditions per year,
1791.33/(365-11)= 5.06 traditions per day.

You tell me how? How a man did this every day? Why he was so dedicated while much more better people such as Umar, his son, Ibn Abbas and Abu Bakr did not accomplish such? (with the same density as Abu Huraira, 5 hadiths per day?)

Not to mention that Abu Huraira narrated more than any other sahabah, based on his testimony. Some say that he narrated around 40,000 traditions. Even people who were living around him on that time were surprised by this man and his narrations (based on the testimony of Abu Huraira himself.)

Another part is why such man has narrated similar traditions to old testement? (parts which were clearly rejected by islamic theology?)

From: shaun@dt.wdc.com [30] (Shaun Astarabadi)
Subject: Re: Abu Huraira (Part 3: His mental and physical conditions)

In <2ghvfa$3nd@gap.caltech.edu> djamel@gemini.ldc.lu.se [31] writes:

miracle for Abu Huraira to get super memory?

Now you seem to recognize your lack of knowledge. Did you know that the companion and cousin of the prophet SAAS Abdullah Ibn Abbas has got from the prophet his blessings and once sweeped his chest with his hand and prayed Allah for him saying:”Allahumma faqqihhou fiddini wa ‘allimhou min ta’ouili l kitabi”(i.e. Oh Allah give knowledge in the religion and make him interprete the book)?and by some miracle Ibn Abbas became Hibr l oumma (the imam of the nation),that was one of the miracles of the prophet SAAS. In almost the same way the prophet SAAS made a prayer once for Abu Huraira whn he complained to him his shortage in memoizing.

As you noted, Ibn Abbas (r) is recognised, even by other sahabah that he knew "taaweel”(interpretation) of the Qur’an. This is different from memorizing of it. Many people, even today, memorize the whole Qur’an, that does not mean the know the true meaning behind all that is in it. ‘Ali ibn AbiTalib (as) was another who said that there was no aya in the Qur’an that he didn’t know when it was revealed or why it was revealed and what it meant. The other Sahabah recognized this about these persons and there are (mutawatir) hadeeths supporting their knowledge.

Now, on Abu Huraira. Although no one thinks/claims that he knew "taaweel”of the Qur’an, you did not show any proof that he got his memory-powers after the prophet (sawaws) prayed for him.

I would ask you to produce the reference(s) in that regard, preferably a mention by other sahabah on these special attributes of Abu Hurairah, as opposed to him describing himself.

I would like to make a further correction, Abu Hurairah after less than three years with the prophet (sawaws), did not or avoided telling hadeeths during the periods of the first three "khulafaa al rashideen", at least. His hadeeth telling was mainly during Mu’awiya’s time and later - this is at least 30 years after the prophet.

So he kept all these 3000 +/- hadeeths in his heart without telling others about them for all this time. The proof to what I am saying is that Abu-Bakir, Omar and Uthman (r) did not allow telling and recording of hadeeths. There is a report, in it Abu Hurairah is asked if he told such hadeeth in the time of Uthman? He said that he wouldn’t dare to, and that they would have hit/spank him if he did!!

There is nothing holy about any of the personalities of the sahabah, in particular Abu Hurairah, that should prevent someone searching for the truth to investigate and re/evaluate their actions. They were human beings capable of errors at various levels, this is not to say that Allah (swt) won’t forgive their errors, if He chooses.

However, if we are to follow their act, in this life, we must be clear in conscience that they don’t deserve to be mistrusted, after studying the evidence. For if it becomes evident that they should be mistrusted, then one’s brain (a gift from Allah) would (should) direct us not to use them as a guide, particularly, in what seems suspicious.

Jews/Christians/Muslims (Part 1: Is there any similarity?)

The following was sent a few months ago. Now it is going to continue:

The sequence of articles is important because some of conclusions are not valid until the last article.

Sahih Muslim,
Rendered into English by
Abdul Hamid Siddiqi
Printed at Hafeez Press,
Sh.Muhammad Ashraf
Kashmiri Bazar, Lahore(Pakistan)

Chapter MCXII, titled as

Following the footsteps of the jews and the christians

#6448

Abu Said Alkhudri reported Allah’s messenger (May peace be upon him) as saying: You would tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and step by step so much so that if they had entered into the hole of the lizard, you would follow them in this also. We said: Allah’s messenger, do you mean Jews and Christians (by your words)"those before you"? He said: Who else(than those two religious groups)?

#6449

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Atab b. Yasar through another chain of transmitters.

The same hadith is given in Sahih Bukhari with a little difference of translation. Here it comes:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)

9.422:

Narrated Abu Sa’id al-Khudri:

The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them.”We said, "O Allah’s Apostle! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?”He said, "Whom else?"

Also shiat has narrated the similar traditions through its own reliable narrators. As I recall, you can locate such traditions in Tafaaseer under the

Sourah(84) Aayah(19)
Laterkabonna tabagan an tabagen
Sourah: ensheghagh

O.K. Let see if anybody can go through the hole of a lizard(!!??)

Since I have not seen such creature among human beings, I answer to myself that this is not possible. There is no way that even a thin man can pass through the hole of a lizard. If not, then what these traditions mean? The way that this example is given in these traditions confirms the case of impossible acts. I conclude, therefore, that if any of Jews and/or Christians have done an impossible action, the same action would be perfomed by a muslim too.

Some of you may have already been searching for these traditions since they seem very strange. Will muslim worship an idol as Jews did when they worshipped a caw figure? Will muslims kill prophets while we know that there is no prophet after Muhammad(SAS)? Then what these traditions mean? How about the miracles that Muses and Jesus performed? How about the distortion they made on their books? Will muslim change their book by their hand? Will they think that Jesus is the son of God? And thousands of these questions. One more point:

Will the sequence of events be kept in the same way?

For example, will there be Jesus after Yahya(Jashowa, I think)?

We know that it is almost impossible to imagine muslims to worship Jesus as the son of God, to worship caw instead of true God, to go for hunting on Saturday as Jews did. What I can conclude from the traditions is that the similar action will be done, but not exactly the same action. For example, it is been told that the prophet warned muslims about different interpretation of Qur’an:

You will not change anything inside of Qur’an as previously done in the bible(Torat and Enjil), but you will certainly change the meaning of aayaat(verses) of Qur’an.

To me, there is no difference between these two events. In both cases you can hardly detect the truth since you usually do not follow the original sources of the religion and you listen to others(scholars) instead of searching for yourselves. There is no difference between changing the bible and misleading people through the interpretation of the Qur’an. What I conclude is that the similar acts would be done by muslim people. They may not kill a prophet after the prophet since there is no prophet. But it is not hard to imagine that some of them may have attempted killing their best knowledgeable men (scholars,...) How about the sequence of events? Surely there is no point in these two traditions that the sequence of events will be untouched. The words"inch by inch”is interpreted inside of the hadith:

such that if one did XXXX, you will do XXXX too

As the result, the sequence of events are not kept. In other words, similar act to worshipping caw may not happen exactly in the time of the prophet as it happened in time of muses. However, it may happen at the end of time. Although Jesus will not appear as the prophet to introduce christianity, he will come at the end of times as narrated.

I summerize the conclusion I would like to make in this article:

1)- The very similar events would take place for Muslims people as they happened for Jews and Christians. In case that the act is possible, muslims MAY do the EXACT act as others did. (I will explain what I mean by "possible”in my next articles.)

2)- The sequence of events are not necessarily preserved. For some cases, this sequence MAY be maintained.

In next article, I will, insha-allah, talk about some attitiudes of present muslims which are attributed to Jews and Christians.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Jews/Christians/Muslims (Part 2: Hiding the Truth)

“The likeness of those who are entrusted with the Law of Moses, yet apply it not, is as the likeness of the ass carrying books”

Wretched is the likeness of folk who deny the revelations of Allah”And Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk (Qur’an 62:5)

مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ

حُمِّلُوا

التَّوْرَاةَ

ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا بِئْسَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِ اللَّـهِ وَاللَّـهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

﴿الجمعة: ٥﴾

In part one, I proved that there are similarities among Jews, Christians, and Muslims. The above verse is apparently about Jews. Just around and among yourselves (Muslims). Don’t you see those who close their eyes and ears and hearts and do not look at their book of Allah, and the evidences from their own book?

They prefer to deny the orders of Allah, and insist in their ignorance.

And do not mix up the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know (it) (Qur’an 2:42)

وَلَا

تَلْبِسُوا

الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُوا الْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

﴿البقرة: ٤٢﴾

O followers of the Book! Why do you confound the truth with the falsehood and hide the truth while you know? (Qur’an 3:71)

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لِمَ تَلْبِسُونَ الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ ﴿

٧١

﴾

And when Allah made a covenant with those who weregiven the Book: You shall certainly make it known to men andyou shall not hide it; but they cast it behind their backs and tooka small price for it; so evil is that which they buy”(Qur’an 3:187)

وَإِذْ أَخَذَ اللَّـهُ مِيثَاقَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ لَتُبَيِّنُنَّهُ لِلنَّاسِ وَلَا تَكْتُمُونَهُ فَنَبَذُوهُ وَرَاءَ ظُهُورِهِمْ وَاشْتَرَوْا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا فَبِئْسَ مَا يَشْتَرُونَ ﴿

١٨٧

﴾

Those whom We have given the Book recognize him as they recognize their sons, and a party of them most surely conceal the truth while they know (it)”(Qur’an 2:146)

الَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْرِفُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِفُونَ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ وَإِنَّ فَرِيقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ ﴿

١٤٦

﴾

Surely those who conceal any part of the Book thatAllah has revealed and take for it a small price, they eat nothing but fire into their bellies, and Allah will not speak to them on the day of resurrection, nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful chastisement”(Qur’an 2:174)

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَشْتَرُونَ بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًاۙ أُولَـٰئِكَ مَا يَأْكُلُونَ فِي بُطُونِهِمْ إِلَّا النَّارَ وَلَا يُكَلِّمُهُمُ اللَّـهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَلَا يُزَكِّيهِمْ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ ﴿

١٧٤

﴾

I have shown in the first part of this series that whatever has happened on Jews/Christians should happen similarly on muslims.

Although the sequence of events may not be the same (sooner or later that the event in previous nations), they would happen, not exactly but very closely.

(Of course there is another choice that the prophet of Allah has lied. Obviously, a muslim does not accept such choice at all. Better to think and learn from previous nations.)

One of behaviours of Jews/Christians is that they knew the truth and they hided it. They knew the prophet of Islam very clearly and better than their own sons, and they denied him. They knew that Allah is one and everything was revealed by islam was true and they did not inform their people of it. They kept their people in darkness in order to get a good ride on them.

Unfortunately, this story is completely happened in Islamic environment. Scholars who knew the truth tried to hide it from their people. When you say that such and such exists, people open their mouth as if a new law is fallen. The true islam is unfortunately hiden from the eyes of usuall people who have little access to the source of traditions.

Others who hear the truth and confess to it, are afraid of revealing it. It is good to warn ourselves that the promises of Allah is not a game. When he implemens his plan, he will do as severe as he can, and Allah is the hard punishing God.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Jews/Christians/Muslims (Part 3: Religious text books)

Another similarity among Jews/Christians/Muslims is about some of theological deviations. When you open the old testement, the first thing you read is:

And the God created humans in his image.

When you go further, you read a wrestling between this God and Jacob.

And other stuff.

You can locate in new testement that God, word and Jesus are one plus Jesus is the son of God and so on. In Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and shiat sources (which were famous as "Israeelyyat”afterwards), you can easily locate several similarities. Although there is no wrestling between God and Jacob, there is a wrestling between Mouses and the angel of death. The first sentence of the old testement was accurately ransfered to the book of Hadith. What went wrong?

In this article, I am trying to clarify one reason for such behavior in religious text books. It is one of the narrators. In my mind, thereare too many similarities between two people of two religions, Christianity and Islam, Paul and Abu Huraira.

About 40% of the theological differences among different branches of Islam, from Sunni and Shiat to Sufism have come from the narrations of Abu Huraira. (Shiat brothers should note that I am not talking about practical differences right after the death of the prophet.) Such estimation is my personal data as a person who has read both shiat and sunni sources and others (such as Ahmadyya, and so and so).

Source for above claims: Read the articles which were sent to SRI about one month ago.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Re: What Muslims lack

Article: 7387 of soc.religion.islam

From: gwydion@gnu.ai.mit.edu [32] (Mercenary Programmer)

Well, I would like to have a chit-chat with a respectful man, a very thoughtful muslim named as: Basaalat ‘Ali. I would like to call him ‘Ali in my articles.

What we call Islam nowadays is a lot more than the final message to all people that was sent to us from Allah. We have added interpretations on top of interpretations of interpretations. I do not know what a.faris’ intent is in answering the article in the manner that he did.

Very nice paragraph.

Nonetheless, I do think that "Islam”needs to change. If I were you, I would have followed what you said above and would have been precise to say:

I do think that the interepretation of "Islam”needs to change.

Is Islam the Shi’a/Sunni debate? Anyone reading SRI would think so. I am sorry. People should be informed that the so called "debate”between shiat and sunni comes to net every other month, or more. As my records show, the first article on this was sent about one month ago.

That was from a Sunni himself. About a few days (or I think one week), some of Sunni people kept firing at shiat with no shame. Then Shiat started to answer these ignorant people.

It will not come to net if you moderators be careful when approving the very first article. If any revolution should be seen in SRI, it is from the moderators first, among you. it has consumed some of the finest minds of dozens of generations. This part of Islam needs to change.

What I brought to SRI was thrown away hundred years ago. Shiat simply does not care about this debate. Shiat has closed and patched this debate forever. If you think that shiats are sitting in Iran finding a better solution for this debate, you are wrong.

The present and main concern of shiat scholars in Iran is to locate sources and find the best way of handling muslim society, or islamic government, such as governmental issues, taxes, economy, and so on. They did not do that before, and they realize how ignoring about this fact they were before.

They are coming to solve the problems of present society through Islamic sources. They have simply put such "debate”to the bookshelves. The first book on the islamic government was written about 200 years ago. Look at yourself, then.

No. The simple fact is that we have allowed all this to happen to us.
It happens because of the hatred we have in our hearts.
Very nice sentence, and many more nice paragraphs.

Are we Muslims? Or are we too arrogant to learn from this? Do we have a monoploy on the faith of Islam?

The real backwardness is to live out our lives amongst our own heresies and bidaa. We have already left islam. We need to return to it.

Again, good advices. Since you are not arrogant, and learn from christians and jews faster than a muslim, I would like to bring one example for you:

I saw an interview three nights ago. It as about a group which were shaped three years ago. 75 christian scholars from all over the world gathered again, this year. The official name of this group is "Jesus Seminar Study". What they do and what they have done? They bring several different sciences such as archeology, history, phsychology, and many more. To do what?

They are reading the present new testament (which is referred in this article as Bible) sentence by sentence. They verify which sentence was spoken really by Jesus himself, and which one was spoken by his followers. How others twisted the exact word of Jesus. What do you think about the outcome of their search?

They announced that about 80% of the Bible is not from Jesus, himself, but rather from a few writters some of whom came after Jesus death. They announced that there is no single word truly spoken by Jesus which says that Jesus is the son of God. There is no single word which says that Jesus is God, or there are three Gods. The announced, also, that Jesus was one prophet himself.

Is this a backward?
Your answer: No.

How? Are they not reading the history, and the Bible and "wasting”their time on 2000 years ago?
Your answer: Yes.

How? Don’t they understand the Bible better than thousand years ago? Are you not happy with their outcomes?

That was about christians. How about Jews? Let me give you another example. Perhaps, you would understand the meaning of backward better.

About 40 years ago, a great discovery occured around the dead sea, and the findings on that area became famous as "dead sea scrolls.”One is peresently kept in Isreal musem named as "The Temple Scroll".

Although, the finding was related to Jews, it talks about a theology which matches islamic theology more than the old christianity (as some are claiming). If you read Qur’an, you will find some verses which are referring to some verses of the old teste mant. You can not find the referred verses in the present old testemant. But these Qur’anic references are found in the dead sea scrolls. One of the most important part is named "The book of Enoch". Now

Is this a backward?
Your answer: No.

How come? These people are looking at the scrolls which were written (as some claim) before the birth of Jesus.
Your answer: Yes.

How come? They have broken these contents of these scrolls piece by piece, they are understanding their book better than hundred years ago. How is this a backward?

My humble suggestion:

If muslims want to solve the present problems of islamic society, they have to analyze what others have recorded hundred years ago. Muslims have to sit and find out which narration (or Hadith) is
truely spoken by the prophet. (Obviously, Qur’an is complete, and needs no verification). But the traditions need to be differentiate.

If muslims want to solve the present problems of islamic society, they have to look at the interpretations again. See what muslims have eaten during the time. Why have muslims have accepted from their scholars, (or should I say, islamic churches?). Why muslims have trusted their scholars so much, and how muslims have been deviated because of this trust.

If muslims want to help, they have to return to Islam. As you said and I agreed with, what muslims have is not islam. What muslims believe in is not islam. Islam is over there, sitting and waiting for muslims to come and understand it. What muslims have done instead was to trust some scholars, and carry their hatred in their hearts, and fight. This is what most people inheritated from their fathers.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: the Shi’ites and Sunnis

From gwydion@gnu.ai.mit.edu [32] Mon Jan 17 15:46:22 EST 1994

Article: 7892 of soc.religion.islam

From: gwydion@gnu.ai.mit.edu [32]

Basically, a small number among the Sunni believe and claim that the Shi’a are non-Muslim; a number among the Shi’a hold a somewhat similar opinion of the Sunni.

As a person who belongs to that small group of shiat, I am declaring that none of us has ever told that sunni is non-muslim.

Briefly about shiat:

Shait says that "Logic”is very important and is a part of life. As you eat, you must use the logic.

The point is not that ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitalib should have been the Caliph. That is not the case any more. It is too late to choose ‘Ali as the first Caliph after the death of the prophet since it is almost 1350
years by now. (Even if all muslims, shiat and sunni, agree right now that ‘Ali must have been the first Caliph, nothing can be done.)

The point is that the true knowledge is transferred to muslims through ‘Ali and his sons, and other sources are not as reliable as this chain. The point is to know that it is not too late to listen, think, and obey these true sources of knowledge, ‘Ali-Ibn-Abitalib and his sons.

From: kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca [23]

Subject: Health rules in Hadith books?

I am getting closer to realize what Islam says about health of human. I strongly urge scientists to investigate the following important traditions. I hope that when they get Nobel Prize on this, share it with me (say %5 only).

I would be grateful if my sunni brothers and sisters tell me if they really benefit these islamic laws or not. Thanks a lot.

7.673:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, "If a fly falls in the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (into the vessel) and then throw it away, for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other there is healing (antidote for it) i e. the treatment for that disease."

4.537:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."

7.746:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, "None of you should walk, wearing one shoe only; he should either put on both shoes or put on no shoes whatsoever.”I understand that there might be some use not using any shoe, and more advantage using both shoes. I do not understand where ONE shoe can be applicable, and if not applicable at all, why it is mentioned anyway.

Thanks for your comments.

The traditions are taken from Sahih Bukhari:

The translation of the meaning of Sahih al-Bukhari
Arabic-English
Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan
Islamic University, Medina al-Munawwara
Kaze Publications.
1529 North Wells Street, Chicago. ILL.60610(USA)
(3rd revised, 1977)(4th revised Edition, March 1979)
Call Number(In library of Waterloo university): BP135.A124E54

The Ahl al-Sunnah View of Ibn Taymiya and his Works

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The following article is written by a Sunni brother

From: mas@Cadence.COM [33] (Masud Khan)

Subject: Ahl al-Sunnah and Ibn Taymiya

Ibn Taymiya and his writings and those of his students have recently been used by "Wahabbis”and "Reformists”to provide evidence against madhaib and the Aqueedah of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaat (The Four Schools).

As can be seen from the following brief biography, taken from "The Reliance of the Traveller”which is an authentic book of fiqh, Ibn Taymiya (Rahim-ullah) was considered an innovaitor and a heretic and some scholars went so far as to declare his writings as Kufr.

Ibn Taymiya is Ahmad Ibn Abd al-Salaam ibn Abdullah, Abu al-Abbas Taqi al-Din ibn Taymiya al-Harrani, born in Harran, east of Damascus, in 661/1263. A famous Hanbali scholar in Qur’anic exegesis (tafsir), hadith and jurisprudence, Ibn Taymiya was a voracious reader and author of great personal courage who was endowed with a compelling writing style and a keen memory.

Dhahabi wrote of him, "I never saw anyone faster at recalling the Qur’anic verses dealing with subjects he was discussing, or anyone who could remember hadith texts more vividly.”Dhahabi estimates that his legal opinions on various subjects amount to three-hundred or more volumes.

He was imprisoned during much of his life in Cairo, Alexandria, and Damascus for his writings, scholars of his time accusing him of believing Allah to be a corporeal entity because of what he mentioned in his al-aqida al-Hamawiyya and al-Wasitiyya and other works, such as that Allah’s ‘hand’, ‘foot’, ‘shin’ and ‘face’ are literal (haqiqi) attributes, and that He is upon the Throne in person.

The error in this is suggesting such attributes are literal is an innovation and unjustifiable inferance from the Qur’anic and hadith texts that mention them, for the way of early Muslims was mere acceptance of such expressions on faith without saying how they are meant, and without additions, subtractions, or substituting meanings imagined to be synonyms, while acknowledging Allah’s absolute transcedence beyond the characteristics of created things, in conformity with the Qur’anic verse

"There is nothing whatsoever like unto him”(Qur’an 42:11).

As for figurative interpretations that preserve the divine transcendence, scholars of tenents of faith have only had recourse to them in times when men of reprehensible innovation (bid’a), quoting hadiths and Qur’anic verses, have caused confusion in the minds of common Muslims as to whether Allah has attributes like those of His creation or whether He is transcendently beyond any image conceivable to the minds of men.

Scholars’ firmness in condemning those who have raised such confusions has traditionally been very uncompromising, and this is no doubt the reason that a number of the Imams of the Shafi’i school, among them Taqi al-Din Subki, Ibn Hajar Haytami and al-Izz ibn Jama’a, gave formal legal opinions (fatawa) that Ibn Taymiya was misguided and misguiding in tenents of faith, and warned people from accepting his theories.

The Hanafi scholar Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari has written "Whoever thinks that all the scholars of his time joined in a single conspiracy against him from personal envy should rather impugn their own intelligence and understanding, after studying the repugnance of his deviations in beliefs and works, for which he was asked to repent time after time and moved from prison to prison until he passed on to what he’d sent ahead."

While few deny that Ibn Taymiya was a copious and eloquent writer and hadith scholar, his career, like that of others, demonstrates that a man may be outstanding in one field and yet suffer from radical deficiencies in another, the most reliable index of which is how a field’s Imams regard his work in it.

By this measure, indeed, by the standards of all previous Ahl al-Sunnah scholars, it is clear that despite voluminous and influential written legacy, Ibn Taymiya cannot be considered an authority on tenents of faith (aqueeda), a field in which he made mistakes profoundly incompatible with the beliefs of Islam, as also with a number of his legal views that violated the scholarly consensus (ijma) of Sunni Muslims. It should be remembered that such matters are not the province of personal reasoning (ijtihad), whether Ibn Taymiya considered them to be so out of sincere conviction, or whether simply because, as Imam Subki said, "his learning exceeded his intelligence.”He died in Damascus in 728/1328.

Taken From:

English/Arabic Traditional Sunni Manual of Shari`ah
Reliance of the Traveller (`Umdat al-Salik):
A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Fiqh)
By Ahmad ibn al-Naqib al-Misri (d.769/1386)
Translated by Noah Ha Mim Keller
English/Arabic (dual columns)
xxii+1232 pages, Hardcover
Published by Sunna Books 1991, 1993

`Umdat al-Salik in Arabic with facing English Text, Commentary,
Appendices, Biographical Notes, Bibliography and Index

“`Umdat al-Salik is a traditional Fiqh manual by Ibn al-Naqib (d.769/1386).

It summerizes the conclusions of Imam al-Nawawi (d.676/1277),the great Hadith scholar and Shafi`i jurisprudent. It is based mainly on al-Nawawi’s Fiqh works; al-Majmu` and al-Minhaj.

“Reliance of the Traveller contains `Umdat al-Salik in Arabic with facing English translation, Commentary, Appendices, Biographical Notes about every person mentioned (391 biographies), Bibliography of each work mentioned (136 works), and a detailed subject Index (95 pages).

The Appendices form an integral part of the book and present readers with original texts and translation from classical works by Imam al-Nawawi, al-Ghazali, al-Dhahabi and other famous scholars on many Islamic topics such as Islamic Law (Fiqh), Principles of Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh), Faith (Iman/`Aqidah), Spirituality (Tazkiyah/Suluk). Of the 136 works drawn upon in its commentary and appendices, 134 are in the original Arabic. The sections and paragraphs have been numbered to facilitate cross-reference which is utilized extensively.

“Noah Ha Mim Keller is an American Muslim who produced this work in Damascus and Amman from 1982 to 1990. He studied the book word by word in the traditional way with two Shaykh-s (teachers) over a period of five years after which they gave him their written warrant (ijazah) to expound the book and translate it into English.

“Certificate: "...We certify that the above-mentioned translation corresponds to the Arabic original and conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni Community (Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a)...”

Islamic Research Academy (Majma` al-Buhuth al-Islamiyyah), al-Azhar. al-Azhar is the Muslim world’s most prestigious institution of higher Islamic learning, Cairo.

_______________________________________________________________________

The following article is written by a Sunni brother

From: dabbous@milou.inria.fr [24] (Walid Dabbous)

Subject: Re: Ahl al-Sunnah and Ibn Taymiya

Dear brothers,

as-Salamou alykum wa rahmatoullahi wa barakatouh,

I agree with brother Masud when he says that we can NOT rely on ibn taymiyya in matters os aqueedah in the end part of his posting (I only pur the beginning here above).

Someone was defending ibn taymiyya a few weeks, so please find a contribution on this subject taken from the aqueedah of Ahl-es-Sunna wal Jamaa (ashaira wa maturidiyya).

In article <11789@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, U58369@uicvm.uic.edu [29] writes:

Assalamo Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatu

Concerning the accusation of Ibn Taymiyyah that he attempted to ascribe human qualities to Allah Subhana wa Ta’ala: Some of the people who lived in the same era as Ibn Taymiyyah accused him of this and they had no proof to back up their accusations whatsoever. The people after them received this information from what Ibn Batutah collected. As most of us know, Ibn Batutah was not a scholar either of hadith or aquidah.

Besides, he never met nor heard Ibn Taymiyyah speak. The biography of Ibn Taymiyyah shows that he always strongly opposed those people who attempted to ascribe human qualities to Allah Subhana waTa’ala (See Hayat Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah by Muhammad al-Baytar).

You can find more proofs in Ibn Taymiyyah’s book, Sharh Hadith An-Nuzool (Commentary on the Hadith of Nuzool). There are many proofs that Ibn Taymiyyah had the same belief and aquidah as the Sahabah and the scholars of As-Salaf.

To show just one example: Ibn Taymiyyah says in his book, al-Aquidah al-Wasitiya, pg. 9, .and from the belief in Allah is the belief in what Allah ascribed for himself in the Qur’an and in the Sunnah without falsifying or denying or "takeef”(ie-to question how his attributes are).

And he quotes this ayah from the Qur’an, Surah al-Shurah, Ayah 11: ...there is nothing whatsoever like unto Him and He is the one that hears and sees. And Ibn Taymiyyah explains that the Muslims from Ahl al-Sunnah wa Jama’ah don’t deny what Allah ascribed to Himself & don’t falsify His words. And they believe in all His names and ayat. And they don’t make comparisons between Allah and his creatures because there is nothing like Him. And Allah knows best about everything and about Himself.

This is one of many examples that proves that Ibn Taymiyyah never claimed "tashbeeh”(ie-never attempted to ascribe human qualities to Allah).

I read many of ibn taymiyya books and the books wrote by other scholars to refute him. It is very clear that ibn taymiyya was refuted by the majority of scholars. he was accused not to belong to the
Salafi school. I showed this in a previous message and I will repost this message soon in sha’a Allah. The scholars of Ahl eSunna wal Jamaa from the 4 schools refuted his opinions and ibn taymiyya always tried to escape from punishment by saying the 2 shahadas.

ibn taymiyya and his disciple ibn aljawziyya (different from the great hanbali scholar Ibn alJawzi) are not considered to belong to the salafi school. ibn taymiyya was put in jail because of many of his wrong teachings concerning the aqeeda. He was not put in jail by some tyranic ruler. He was put in jail to preserve the people from his ideas. (See Rihlat Ibn Battoutah where ibn battoutah said: when I came to damascus there was a man called ibn taymiyya speaking about religion science, but there was something strange in his mind...

Once he was doing "kutbat aljuma’a”and he said yanzilou rabbuna ila assam’a adunya, then he went down two steps on the minbar and he said "kanuzuli hatha”(like my descending). the people of damascus jumped on him and wanted to kill him. al-’imam al-mujtahid asSubkiy wrote many books to refute ibn taymiya. This event of ibn Taymiya is registered by the bokks of history and they are available and may be the Muslims need to read them or some of their contents. Ibn Taymiyah was put in jail by the agreement of the Muslim scholars of Egypt and ashSham. His imprisonment came as a result of the ijma^ of the scholars of his age..

In addition, not only ibn battouta spoke about ibn taymiyya but a lot of scholars wrote books and letters to warn the people from this man. i have a long list of these Ulema and their books. I have a lot of their books also.

Among the great Ulemas from ahl es-Sunna wal jama’a who refuted him and decalred that his is out of the right way of islam:

1) "aSubki”in his "aRasae’l aSubkiyya firrad ala ibn taymiyya",
2) ibn hajar alhaytami, in al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya
3) Abou hayyan alandaloussi in an-Nahr almaadd
4) ibn hajar alaskalani in fath albari page 410 fascicle 13 kitab atawhid. from the 12th hegire century
5) Sheikh ahmad ibn Zayni dihlane in finat alwahhabiyya,
6) sheikh Muhammad ibn darwiche al-Hout from beirut in his book Rasail fi akidat ahl-esunna waljamaa. from the 20th century
7) sheikh muhammad Ouwayss from alAzhar in his book ibn taymiyya laysa salafiyyan, and many others.

In fact, there are many sayings of ibn taymiyya related to Tajsim, in his own books. He pretended in his fatawa, (al-asma’a was-sifat) that the ahl-esSunna wal Jamaa did not refute Mujassima (those who attributed body to Allah). He even said that there isn’t any single text from the Salaf to refute mujassima.

While in fact, al-’imam Ahmad said that the person commits kufr if he says Allah is a body (jism) even if he says that Allah is a body not like other bodies (jism la kalajsam). He was quoted saying that "The terms are taken from language and al-’Islam and the people of language have put this term (body) on something that has length, width, thickness, image, structure and components and it was not narrated in ash-shari^ah (Islamic law). Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used”(end of quotation of Imam Ahmad).

Al-bayhaqiyy narrated that about Ahmad in his book manaqib Ahmad and az-Zarkashiyy narrated the first saying of Ahmad. Notice that Ahmad did not accept the term (body not like other bodies) because it does not befit Allah and the language does not accept that. I also quoted the saying of al-Imam al-Ash^ary from

Kitab An-Nawader:
"If someone belives that Allah is a body then he ignores Allah and he is a kafir".

To be continued..

In sha’a Allah

Walid Dabbous

Ibn Taymiyyah

Ibn Taymiyah (d. 728/1328) was a theologian who was sent to the jail by the consensus (Ijma’a) of prominent Sunni scholars of his time (in Egypt and Damascus) because of his heretical beliefs. He was considered an innovator and a heretic and some Sunni scholars went so far as to declare his writings as Kufr. Now he has become a Muslim scholar for Wahhabis! I don’t want to go into the details of the charges against Ibn Taymiyah which was raised by prominent Sunni scholars about his heretical beliefs such as his idea that Allah has limbs and these limbs are physical (Haqiqi) and so on since it needs thousands of lines by itself.

Among those Sunni scholars who denounced him, are Taqi al-Din Subki, Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, al-Izz ibn Jama’a, Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari, Abu Hayyan al-Andalusi, Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Zayni dihlani, Shaykh Muhammad Ouwayss from al- Azhar, and many others. In their fatwa, they called Ibn Taymiyah as a misguided person who was deserting the Sunni tenets. I refer Sunni brothers to their authentic Fiqh book called "The Reliance of the Traveller”for a biography of Ibn Taymiyah.

Now, as for Ibn Taymiyyah: A number of prominent Muslim scholars of great repute -have- in fact pronounced kufr on Ibn Taymiyyah, although the majority of scholars of ahl-al-Sunnah have not pronounced kufr on him. Many have, however, criticized him for innovation (bid`ah). Among those who criticized him are

-Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani (FatH al-Baaree, (Vol 12, p202), (V 13, p 410)),

-Ibn Hajar al-Haytami ((al-Fataawaa al-Hadeethiyyah p116, p203), (Haashiyah, p443, p489))

-Taqi al-Deen al-Subki ((al-sayf al-Saqeel), (al-durrah al- maDiyyah)

Others include Taj al-Deen al-Subki, al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, Ibn Daqeeq al-`Eed and Zayn al-Deen al-`Araaqee.

Firstly, we should realize that those scholars who pronounced kufr on him based their verdicts on very real evidence from Ibn Taymiyyah’s own books. One of the primary contentions of these group of scholars was that Ibn Taymiyyah believed in - eternity of the universe, which is that he said that some kind of creation always existed.

Also a large number of scholars, of both former and latter times, have criticized some of Ibn Taymiyyah’s opinions as innovations. It cannot be denied that in some issues, Ibn Taymiyyah (though he may have had good intentions) has contradicted the consensus (ijmaa`) of the Muslim scholars.

Some of these issues are doctrinal (e.g. he believed that Allah can be described with (limits), compare this to the mainstream Sunni creed as presented by Imam al-Shafi`ee, for example in , p8, or Abu Haneefah (al-fiqh al-akbar, p57), al-Tahawi (al- `aqeeedah al-TaHaawiyyah), al-Bayhaqi (al-Asmaa’ waS-Sifaat, p410), etc), others are related to fiqh (jurisprudence) (e.g. his opinion that three divorces pronounced together do not all take effect - this fatwaa incidentally was the reason that Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali forsook Ibn Taymiyyah).

The following article is written by a Sunni brother. This also shows the fact that ortodox Sunnis beleive that Allah can be seen but we don’t know how? He talks but we don’t know how? He is stablished on the trone but we don’t know how? On the other hand Wahhabis attribute physical entities to it, while shia do not beleieve Allah has hand at all. Shi’a also believe he can not be seen at all, and so on.

From: mas@Cadence.COM [33] (Masud Khan)

Subject: The Aqeedah of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l Jamma’ah

Date: 3 May 1994 23:13:19 GMT

The Aqeedah of the Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa’l Jama’ah - in contrast with the Aqueedah of the "Salafi”sect.

What follows are some examples of the anthropomorphic nature of the neo ‘Salafite’ Aqeedah, and how it varies from the actual Aqeedah transmitted to us by the earliest generations of the Muslim Ummah. Today’s ‘Salafiyya’ claim to have the original and pristine Aqeedah of the first three pious generations of Islam; but in reality it is the Aqeedah of the likes of Ibn Taymiyya and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah when it comes to describing Allah and His attributes and so on. The following four points points have derived directly from the works of the "Salafi”scholars (al- Harras and al-Uthaimin) themselves.

In comparison to these points I have also quoted from the Aqeedah of Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi’s (d. 321 AH; Rahimullah) and others for you to compare and contrast. Imam Tahawi’s Aqeedah represents the Aqeedah as transmitted by the scholars of his Madhab (which represents in the main the Aqeedah of the Salaf-us-Salihin) - Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifa, Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam al-Shaybani (Allah mercy be upon them) - three of the greatest Ahl al-Sunnah scholars.

1) The Vision Of Allah In The Hereafter

Imam al-Tahawi (Rahimullah) said with regard to this issue in "al-Aqeedah at-Tahaweeah”(English trans. by I.A. A’zami, under the title ‘Islamic Belief’), "Belief of a man in the ‘seeing of Allah by the people of the Garden’ is not correct if he imagines what it is like, or interprets it according to his own understanding, since the interpretation of his ‘seeing’ or indeed, the meaning of any subtle phenomena which are in the realm of Lordship, is by avoiding its interpretation and strictly adhering to the submission. This is the din of Muslims. Anyone who does not guard himself against negating the attributes of Allah, or likening Allah to something else (anthropomorphism), has gone astray and has failed to understand Allah’s glory, because our Lord, the Glorified and the Exhalted, can only possibly be described in terms of Oneness and Absolute Singularity and no creation is in anyway like Him.”

In contrast, Muhammad Khalil Harras (a ‘Salafi’ scholar) said in his "Sharh-ul-Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyyah (of Ibn Taymiyya, pg. 73): "The Mutazila deny the vision. This denial is based on refusing to accept Allah in any direction for it is necessary for a thing being seen to be in the direction of the seer..”

Thus, al- Harras claims that for Allah to be seen in the Hereafter, He (Allah) must have a direction!! In comparison, Imam al-Shahrastani (d. 1153 CE; Rahimullah) said in his "Kitab al-Milal wa’l Nihal (Muslim Sects and Division, trans. by A,K, Kazi and J.G. Flynn, pg. 85): "Imam Ash’ari (Rahimullah) says, however, that the vision of God does not entail direction, place, form, or face to face encounter either by impingement of rays or by impression, all of which are impossible."

2) The Speech Of Allah

Imam al-Tahawi (Ramimullah) said: "The Qur’an is the word of Allah. It came from Him as speech without it being possible to say how...(next paragraph): It is not created, as is the speech of human beings, and anyone who hears it and claims that it is human speech has become an unbeliever.

Allah warns him and censures him and threatens him with Fire when He says, Exalted is He:

‘I will burn him in the Fire.’ (Qur’an 74:26)

When Allah threatens with the Fire those who say

‘This is just human speech’ (Qur’an 74:25)

we know for certain that it is speech of the Creator of mankind and it is totally unlike the speech of mankind.”

In contrast al-Harras stated in "Sharh-ul-aqeedat-il-wasitiyyah of Ibn Taymiyya”(pg. 87): "His statement, voice and speech take place with letters and sounds. One to whom He (ie Allah) speaks he hears. This includes the refutation of the stand taken by the Ash’aria (e.g. Imam al-Ghazali,
Rahimullah, in his ‘Ihya ‘ulum al-din’) that speech of Allah is primeval and is without letter or sound.”

NB- Imam ibn Tahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429/1037; Rahimullah) said with regards to this issue: "Another group (of anthropomorphists) is represented by those who draw a resemblance between God’s Word and the word of His creatures. They hold thatGod’s speech consists of sounds and letters belonging to the same species as the sounds and letters which are ascribed to mankind.”(vide: ‘al-Farq bayn al-firaq’, English trans. by A.Halkin: as ‘Moslem Schisms and Sects’, v2, p35)

3) Allah’s Hands

al -Harras stated without any definite proof (pg. 44, above reference):

"How can ‘hand’ be interpreted to mean power when the text proves mentioning of palm, fingers, right and left, closing, opening, etc. which can happen only in the case of a real hand."

Imam al-Tahawi said (no.34 in his above mentioned book): "Anyone who describes Allah as being in anyway the same as a human being has become an unbeliever. All those who grasp this will take heed and refrain from saying things such as unbelievers say, and they will know that He, in His attributes, is not like human beings."

4) Allah’s Establishment On The Throne

Imam Malik (Rahimullah) was asked about Allah’s establishment on the Throne; he said: "Establishment (Istiwa) is known, the how of it is unknown, belief in it is obligatory, and questions about it are reprehensible innovation (bid’ah).”(see Reliance of the Traveller, pg. 854). In contrast, Muhammad as- Saleh al-’Uthaimin (a leading ‘Saudi’ scholar) said in ‘The Muslim’s Belief’ (pg.11, this work was heard and approved by the foremost ‘Saudi’ Mufti - Abd al-Aziz ibn B’az, trans. M.H.
al-Johani): "‘His (Allah’s) settling on the Throne’ means that He is sitting in person on his Throne in a way that is becoming His majesty and Greatness.

Nobody except He knows exactly how He is sitting.”Imam al- Shahrastani (Rahimullah) stated that the leader of the heretical sect called the ‘Karramites - Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Karram declared: "God is firmly seated on the Throne and that he is sitting in person on the upper side of it...”(Muslim Sects and Divisions, pg. 92 trans. A.Kazi and J.Flynn).

The above are CLEAR proofs that the ‘Salafi/Wahabi’ interpretation of Allah (swt) is in essence athropomorphic, the claim that indivduals like Ibn Taymiyya, Bin Ba’z and al-Albani have the same Aqeedah as Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah is blatantly untrue and misleading to Muslims in genral.

From: azolfag@phoenix.princeton.edu [34] (‘Ali Zolfaghari)

Subject:Re: Wahhabis

Date: 15 Aug 93 04:28:16 GMT

Assalamu Alaikum:

In article hassan@cs.ubc.ca [35] (Moustafa Hassan) writes:

There are many scholars, most notably Ibn Teymiyyeh and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, that are very misunderstood, but I’ll limit the discussion to M. ‘Abd al-Wahhab.

To begin with, Arabia was, at a time in history, as mixed up and full of bid’ah as many of the other Muslim countries today.

Comparing Ibn Taymiyeh to Muhammad Ibn abdul Wahhab is like comparing apples and oranges. Yes they are both contraversial but one (ibn Taymyieh) was an early scholar who had some unique ideas even though I and a lot of Muslims do not agree with them, Ibn Abdul wahhab however was a pseudo-scholar that appeared under the British influence and was used by non-muslims (British) in their quest to bring the Arabian peninsula under a unified rule of an ally Ibn-Saud family in their bid to weaken the Ottaman empire through the control of the holy sites of Islam. These are historical facts.

Ibn Abdul Wahhab issued declarations (fatwa) that branded evry muslim in Arabia who was in dispute with the Ibn Saud family a Kafir Through Bida’a. Yet for him to declare Islamic the hereditary rule of kings (malik) from Ibn Saud family was the biggest Bidaa around in Arabia. He announced in his infamous fatwa that the ruling of Arabia should be a hereditary right of the sons of Saud (who by the way was related to him through marriage of his daughter).

Many wars followed the fatwas that Ibn abdul Wahhab issued and in those wars with the help of the british and through declaring other tribes Mushrik, the Saud family from Najd managed to become the undisputed tribe in Arabia.

All of us have seen the recent events in Arabia and it is easy for us to see how these similar events happened in the past. The ldea of Wahhabism is strictly a political affair of the early colonial era rather than an Islamic movement with Fiqh bases. That is why it is never thought of as a madhab even though they have tried to make it into one.

(I’m originally from Egypt, and I include Egypt in this list of countries filled with bid’ah. I’m not protecting ‘Abd al-Wahhab because I’m from Arabia.)

I don’t think of Egypt as a country full of bidaa.

To say that all Islamic countries are filled with bidaa takes a lot of nerves. Are you trying to tell us that Arabaian Hijaz is not!! because they stick to Wahhabism, That somehow is an inconsistency that all of us can see through.

The rule of Kings is and has been the biggest Bidaa in Islam and that started with Muawiayah the son of Hind (The woman who ate the heart of Hamza, prophet’s (sawaws) uncle) and the first of Umawi (ummayad) Khulafa.

The bidaa that affects the leadership of muslims is the gravest of all bidaas. Isn’t it?

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab is disliked for three reasons:

1. He did follow a single madh-hab, or school of thought. (some stuff deleted)

No my brother, he is disliked for the reasons I cited above.

2. Ignorance. He fought many of the psuedo-scholars of his time. The pseudo-scholars gained power and prestige by people following their traditional practices, so they slandered him and opposed him. Many true Muslims today still oppose him because they were taught that his teachings are heretical; this is not true.

It IS true my brother. Do you want me to cite you the infamous fatwa I mentioned above, by him.

No other real scholar of Sunni madhab has EVER declared a family to be rightful hereditary ruler of Muslim land, that is against Islam. Let me bring you an example:

It is said that the son of Imam Ahmad was a judge for the stablishment of Khalifa at the time, something he did with displeasure and just because he felt the need for the people to be judged according to Islam. He later left his post since he was in dispute with the hereditary khalifah kingdom.

He calculated all the money he earned from his post and bought bread with the money to give to the poor because he even disliked the money he was paid.

He told his household to let the poor receipient of the bread know that the bread was bought with the money from the khalifah and that he did not consume any of the bread himself. He did that to have a clear conscious.

The poor did not accept the breads even though they were hungry. The breads rotted, and he ordered them be thrown in Euphrates river, and he never ate fish from Euphrates till he died.

That is how strongly the real Ulemma disliked the Kingdom and kinghood. The terms "Malik”(king) and "malik of all maliks”were the terms most disliked by our prophet (sawaws).

3. He was Arabian, and there seems to still be quite a bit of racism in the Muslim world. Racism is futile, and more importantly is against Islam. We should not feel contempt towards a scholar
(or any person) simply because he’s from a certain part of the world.

The leaders of all four Madhabs of Sunni sect and alot of other respectable ulema are arabic, Your statement is not logical my brother.

Wahhabis

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The following article is written by a Sunni brother

From: bdogan@eecs.wsu.edu [36] (Bilge Dogan)

The founder of Wahhabism was Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab of Banu Tamim tribe. He was born in Uyaina village near Huraimila town in the Najd Desert in 1111 and died 1206(1792). Formerly, with the idea of travelling and trading, he went to Basra , Baghdad, Iran, India and
Damascus, where he won the name "Shaikh an-Najdi”because of his clever and defeatist attitude.

He saw and learnt a great deal at these places and set his heart on the idea of becoming a chief. He had thought it proper a to found a new religious reformation and movement to reach his goal , and, in preparation for this goal, attended the lectures of the Hanbali ‘ulama’ in the blessed city of Medina and later in Damascus for some time.

When he went back to the Najid, he wrote pamphlets on religious subjects for villagers. His harmful, heretical ideas which he took from Mu’tazila and other bid’a-groups and introduced in these small books deceived many ignorant villagers, particularly the inhabitants of Dar’iyya and their ignorant chief, Muhammad ibn Sa’ud (grand grand father of saudi royal family) as a tool to disseminate his reformation which he named Wahhabism.

He introduced himself as the qadi and Muhammad ibn Saud as the Hakim. He had it declared that both would be succeeded only by their children In 1306 when the book Mirat al-Haramain was written, the amir of the Najd, ‘Abdullah ibn Faisal, was a descendant of Muhammad ibn Sa’ud, and the qadi, that is, the head of religious affairs, was a descendant of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab.Mumammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s father , ‘‘Abd al-Wahhab, who was a pious pure alim in Medina, his brother Sulaiman ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and his masters had apprehended from his statements, behaviour and heretical ideas, which he frequently had put forward as questions to them when he was a student in Medina, that he would harm Islam from inside in future.

They advised him to correct his ideas and the Muslims to avoid him. But they encountered the very thing they were afraid of very untimely, and he started disseminating his heretical ideas openly under the name of Wahhabism.

To deceive the ignorant, stupid people, he came forward with reformism and innovations much impetuous to deem as kafirs the true Muslims who followed the Ahl as-Sunnat wa’l-Jamaa. He regarded it polytheism to ask Allahu taala for something through the mediation of the Prophet or other Prophets or awliya and to visit their graves.

According to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, the person who talks to the dead, when praying near a grave becomes a mushrik (Fat’h al-majid , p208) He asserted that attributing an action or effect to someone or something beside Allah, for example , saying "(such and such) medicine cured”or “I obtained whatI asked through our master Rasulullah”was polytheism, and the Muslim who said so would become polytheist.

Although the false documents Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab made up to support his statements were nothing but all lies and slanders, the ignorant people who couldn’t distinguish right from wrong, the unemployed , opportunists and the hard-hearted soon accepted his ideas and took part of his side and regarded the pious Muslims of the rightpath as kafirs.

When Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab applied to the rulers of Dar’iyya with the view of disseminating his heresies easily through them, they willingly cooperated with him with the hope of extending their territories and increasing their power. THey strove with all their might to disseminate his ideas everywhere.

They declared war against those who refused and opposed another in joining the army of Muhammad ibn Sa’ud when it was said that it is halal to plunder and kill non-Wahhabis. In 1143, Muhammad ibn Sa’ud and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab hand in arrived at the conclusion, that those who wouldn’t accept Wahhabism were kafirs and mushriks and it was halal to kill them and confiscate their possessions, and publicly announced their declaration seven years later. Then Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab started fabricating ijtihad when he was thirty-two years old and announced his false ijtihads at his forty.

As-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zaini Dahlan, Mufti of the blessed city of Mecca, described under the topic "Al-fitnat al-Wahhabiyya”the heretical tenest of Wahhabism and the tortures of the Wahhabis inflicted upon Muslims (Al-futuhat al-Islamiyya, v2, p228-233, Cairo 1968) Hw wrote: “To deceive the Ahl as-Sunna ‘ulama’ in Mecca and Medina , the Wahhabis sent their men to cities, but these men could not answer the questions of ulama. It became evident that they were ignorant heretics. A verdict about their being disbleivers was written and issued everywhere. Sharif Mas’ud ibn Sa’id , Amir of Mecca, ordered that the Wahhabis shall be imprisoned. Some Wahhabis fled to Dari’yya and told what had happened to them.

The ulama of Hijaz belonging to all the four madhhabs, including Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab’s brother Shaikh Sulaiman and also his masters who trained him studied Muhammad’s books, prepared answers to his disunioninst writings, which were distructive to Islam, and wrote, to call the attention of Muslims, well-documented books in refutation to his heretical writings and proclaimed Wahhabite tenets to be heretical and harmful.

Bilge Dogan

Abdullah Ibn Saba Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Enemies of Islam whose goal were/are to split the Muslims, in their effort to explain the emergence of Shi’a, claim that the Shi’a are a sect which was originated by Abdullah Ibn Saba, a Jew who embraced Islam during the reign of Uthman Ibn Affan, the third caliph. They further state that Abdullah Ibn Saba traveled in Muslim cities and towns, from Damascus to Kufa to Egypt, propagating among Muslims that ‘Ali is the Prophet’s successor. He provoked Muslims to kill Uthman since he believed Uthman had occupied the seat of Imam ‘Ali.

He also made mischief in the armies of ‘Ali and his opponents in the battle of Camel. He was also responsible for all the false ideas of the Shi’a forward. These mercenary writers believe that Abdullah Ibn Saba is the origin of Shi’a; and since he himself was a hypocrite and a falsifier of tales, then all the knowledge and beliefs of the Shi’a are also false. In fact, Abdullah Ibn Saba is the best scapegoat for all the claims of some Sunnis.

While the existence of a person in the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba in the early history of Islam is seriously under question, what is clear after extensively researching this topic is that even if a poor man with such name ever existed at that time, the stories propagated about this person are legendary, false, fabricated, and fictitious, and there exists no proof for the validity of these stories attached to him. This point will be studied in this discussion, by the willing of Allah.

Introduction

The fabricated stories around the character of Abdullah Ibn Saba are the malicious production of one of the disciples of the devil, namely Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi. He was a story teller, lived in the second century after Hijrah, who shaped his stories by some primary facts he found in the documented history of Islam available at that time. Sayf wrote a novel much the same as what Salman Rushdi did in "Satanic Verses”with similar motives, but with the difference that the role of Satan in this case was given to poor Abdullah Ibn Saba.

Sayf Ibn Umar distorted the biographies of the companions of the Holy Prophet (S) to please the government of his time, and to distort the history of Shi’a and to ridicule Islam. Sayf was a staunch advocate of the Umayads, who were known throughout history to be one of the worst enemies of Ahlul-Bayt, and as such, it was in his best interest to invent such stories to degrade the Shi’a.

In his stories however he followed many other goals one of which was to cleverly elevate the status of his tribe over others by inventing some imaginary companions form his tribe. However many Sunni scholars found numerous unjustifiable heresies in his reports which was not limited to the issue of Abdullah Ibn Saba, and consequently they abandoned his reports, and accuse him as a man of forgery and lies. Yet Sayf’s works enjoyed the support of a minority of Sunnis to this date.

Here, later on, I give the sayings of several leading Sunni scholars, who all confirmed that Sayf Ibn Umar was an untrustworthy person and his stories are void. Ideological studies indicate that most of those who hate the Shi’ite school of thought (a lot of whom being the enemies of Islam anyway) justify their enmity on this obvious heresy which they would exploit to backup their attack on Shi’a. The approach which resembles the one adopted by Sayf Ibn Umar himself.

The Origin Of The Tale

The tale of Abdullah Ibn Saba is over twelve centuries old. Historians and writers, one after the other recorded it, adding more and more to it. With a glance at the chain of transmitters of this story, you will find the name of Sayf sitting in there. The following historians recorded directly from Sayf:

(1) Tabari.
(2) Dhahabi. He has also cited from Tabari(1).
(3) Ibn Abi Bakir. He has also recorded from Ibn Athir(15), who has recorded from Tabari(1).
(4) Ibn Asakir.

The following have recorded indirectly from Sayf:

(5) Nicholson from Tabari(1).
(6) Encyclopedia of Islam from Tabari(1).
(7) Van Floton from Tabari(1).
(8) Wellhauzen from Tabari(1).
(9) Mirkhand from Tabari(1).
(10) Ahmad Amin from Tabari(1), and from Wellhauzen(8).
(11) Farid Wajdi from Tabari(1).
(12) Hasan Ibrahim from Tabari(1).
(13) Saeed Afghani from Tabari(1), and from Ibn Abi Bakir(3), Ibn Asakir(4), and Ibn Badran(21).

(14) Ibn Khaldoon from Tabari(1).
(15) Ibn Athir from Tabari(1).
(16) Ibn Kathir from Tabari(1).
(17) Donaldson from Nicholson(5), and from Encyclopedia(6).
(18) Ghiath al-Din from Mirkhand(9).
(19) Abul Fida from Ibn Athir(15).
(20) Rashid Ridha from Ibn Athir(15).
(21) Ibn Badran from Ibn Asakir(4).
(22) Bostani from Ibn Kathir(16).

The above list gives evidence to the fact that the fictitious stories around the character of Abdullah Ibn Saba has been started by Sayf and cited next by Tabari directly from Sayf’s book as Tabari mentioned himself (See the chain of narrators of traditions related to Abdullah Ibn Saba, inside the History of Tabari. For instance, see the index of Vol. 15, English version, under the name of Sayf Ibn Umar or Abdullah Ibn Saba).

Therefore, Sayf’s character and his history should be studied and analyzed with a great care.

Who Is Sayf?

Sayf Ibn Umar al-Dhabbi al-Usayyidi al-Tamimi lived in the second century of the Muslim era (8th century AD) and died after the year 170 AH (750 AD). al-Dhahabi said that Sayf died during the rule of Haroon al-Rashid in Baghdad (Iraq). During his life, Sayf wrote the following two books which were available even during the reign of Umayad:

1. "al-Fotooh wa al-Riddah”which is the history of the period before the death of the Prophet (S) until the third Caliph Uthman resumed office as the ruler of Muslim world.

2. "al-Jamal wa Maseeri Aisha wa ‘Ali”which is the history from the murder of Uthman to the battle of Jamal (the fight that happened between Imam ‘Ali and some companions).

These books are now lost but survived for a number of centuries after Sayf’s own lifetime. Based on what we found, the last person who had said that he had possessed Sayf’s books was Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 AH). These two books of Sayf contained more action than truth, some forged stories, and some true events which, intentionally, have been recorded in a ridiculing manner.

Since Sayf spoke about some of the companions of the Prophet (S) and also invented some companions with strange names, his stories have affected the history of early Islam. Some biographers such as the authors of "Usdul Ghabah", "Isti’ab”and "Isabah”and geographers such as the authors of "Mu’jamul Boldan”and "al-Rawzul mi’tar”have written the life of some companions of the Prophet, and named places which exist only in the books written by Sayf. Because of this, the life and character of Sayf and his credibility should be carefully investigated.

What Do Sunni Scholars Say About Sayf?

The following leading Sunni scholars confirm that Sayf Ibn Umar was a well known liar and untrustworthy:

(1) al-Hakim (d. 405 AH) wrote: "Sayf is accused of being a heretic. His narrations are abandoned."

(2) al-Nisa’i (d. 303 AH) wrote: "Sayf’s narrations are weak and they should be disregarded because he was unreliable and untrustworthy."

(3) Yahya Ibn Mueen (d. 233 AH) wrote: "Sayf’s narrations are weak and useless."

(4) Abu Hatam (d. 277 AH) wrote: "Sayf’s Hadith is rejected."

(5) Ibn Abi Hatam (d. 327 AH) wrote: "Scholars have abandoned Sayf’s narrations."

(6) Abu Dawud (d. 316 AH) wrote: "Sayf is nothing. He was a liar. Some of his Hadiths were conveyed and the majority of them are denied."

(7) Ibn Habban (d. 354 AH) wrote: "Sayf attributed fabricated traditions to the good reporters. He was accused of being a heretic and a liar."

(8) Ibn Abd al-Barr (d. 462 AH) mentined in his writing abut al-Qa’qa:

"Sayf reported that al-Qa’qa Said: I attended the death of the Prophet Muhammad.”Ibn Adb al-Barr continued: "Ibn Abu Hatam said: Sayf is weak. Thus, what was conveyed of the presence of al-Qa’qa at the death of the Prophet is rejected. We mentioned the Sayf’s traditions for knowledge only."

(9) al-Darqutini (d. 385 AH) wrote: "Sayf is weak".

(10) Firoozabadi (d. 817 AH) in "Towalif”mentioned Sayf and some others by saying: "They are weak."

(11) Ibn al-Sakan (d. 353 AH) wrote: "Sayf is weak."

(12) Safi al-Din (d. 923 AH) wrote: "Sayf is considered weak."

(13) Ibn Udei (d. 365 AH) wrote about Sayf: "He is weak. Some of his narrations are famous yet the majority of his narrations are disgraceful and not followed."

(14) al-Suyuti (d. 900 AH) wrote: "Sayf’s Hadith is weak."

(15) Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d. 852 AH) wrote after mentioning a tradition: "Many reporters of this tradition are weak, and the weakest among them is Sayf."

It is interesting to see that although al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) has quoted from the book of Sayf in his History, he has mentioned in his other book that Sayf as a weak narrator. In "al-Mughni fi al-Dhu’afa’“al-Dhahabi wrote:

"Sayf has two books which have been unanimously abandoned by the scholars.”(al-Mughni fi al-Dhu’afa’, by al-Dhahabi, p292)

The result of the investigation into Sayf’s life shows that Sayf was an agnostic and an unreliable story teller. Stories told by him are dubious and are entirely or partly forged. In his stories, he has used names of cities which never existed in the world. Abdullah Ibn Saba are the star of those stories. He also introduced some 150 imaginary companions for the Prophet to fill out the empty characters of his scenarios, by giving them some strange names which are not found in any other documents. Also the timing of the events given by Sayf’s narrations contradict the authentic Sunni documents. Sayf has also used imaginary chains of narrators, and reported many miraculous events (like talking cows with human etc...).

Some of the defenders of Sayf hold the opinion that eventhough he was known as a weak transmitter and many scholars of Hadith do not trust his reports, it is only in the matter of the Shari’ah (the Law), but not in the matter of historical report!

By that, they want to rely on the "historical”stories of someone who was regarded a liar and "zindeeq"! If the problem of Sayf was just lack of knowledge about Shari’ah (divine law), one could say he can be trusted on other accounts.

But the problem with Sayf was that he was a liar, and made lots of forgery by constructing the events, attributed fabricated traditions to good narrators. Then such person becomes questionable for almost everything. As for his historical accounts we will witness in Part V that even Christian historians have confirmed great inconsistencies between his historical report and other sober transmitters. No need to mention Sunni and Shi’a opinion on the heretical nature of Sayf.

The Stories About Abdullah Ibn Saba Which Do NOT Have Any Source Or Any Chain Of Transmitters

There are some reports from both Shi’a and Sunni scholars, historians, and story tellers of ancient cultures who wrote few lines about Abdullah Ibn Saba but did not supply any evidence for their claims, nor did they provide any chain of supportive authorities (isnad) for their reports to be examined.

For instance, their reports start with: "some people say so and so ...”or "some scholars say so and so ...”without mentioning who that scholar was, and where they got it from. It was based on rumor which was propagated by Umayads (AFTER Sayf’s work) which had reached them, and some based on the authors’ own creativity. This is inferred when we see these authors have reported some legends which are clearly false and rejected by logic. These reports are provided by those who wrote books about "al-Milal wa Nihal”(stories about civilizations and cultures) or "al-Firaq”(divisions/sects).

Among the Sunnis who mentioned the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba in their stories WITHOUT bringing any source for their claims, are:

(1) ‘Ali Ibn Isma’il al-Ash’ari (d. 330) in his book "Maqalat al- Islamiyin”(Essays about the People of Islam).

(2) Abdul-Qahir Ibn Tahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429) in his book "al-Farq Bain al-Firaq”(Differences of the Sects).

(3) Muhammad Ibn Abdil-Karim al-Shahrastani (d. 548) in his book "al-Milal wan Nihal”(Nations and Cultures).

The above mentioned Sunnis do not give any source or any chain of authority for their story about Abdullah Ibn Saba. They have competed with each other to increase the number of sects in Islam with strange names such as al- Kawusiyyah, al-Tayyarah, al-Mamturah, al-Ghrabiyyah, al-Ma’lumiyyah!!,

al-Majhuliyyah!!! and so on without giving any source or reference for their claims. Living in medieval times, these authors presumed that writing stranger stories and attributing unrealistic events to different Muslim nations will make them more reputable than the other competitors in this area. And by that, they caused a tragic damage to the history of Islam and committed a great crime for what they have falsely attributed to the Muslim nations.

Some of them have provided silly legends and fairy-tales whose falsehood are easy to detect nowadays, though it would have been possible for them to succeed in passing off such stories as history in those times. For instance, al-Shahrastani in his book "al-Milal wan Nihal”has mentioned that there was a group of semi-human creatures in the name of "al-Nas-Naas”with only half face, one eye, one hand, and one leg. Muslims could talk to these semi-human creatures and they even exchanged poetry!!!

Some Muslims even used to go hunting these semi-human creatures and they used to eat them!!! These semi-humans could jump faster than a horse and were ruminant/cud- chewers!!! al-Shahrastani further mentioned that al- Mutawakkil, the Abbasid Caliph, ordered the scientists of his time to investigate about these creatures!!! (See al-Milal wan Nihal, by al- Sharastani)

People at that time did not have the modern tools that would enable them to discover the falsehood these unrealistic stories and fairy-tales, and perhaps they would have preferred more extensive and more strange collections which may have seemed a guarantee of their accuracy, eventhough they were provided with no reference.

Also by chronological study of the life time of these authors, we can conclude that ALL of them were long after the era of Sayf Ibn Umar, and even after al-Tabari. So it is quite possible that they all got the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba from Sayf. This claim becomes more strong when one observes that non of them mentioned the source of their reports which might be due to the fact that Sayf Ibn Umar’s scandal was known to every body by that time and they did not want to discredit their books by mentioning its source. Moreover there exists NO document available related to Abdullah Ibn Saba BEFORE Sayf. The scholars or historians who lived before Sayf Ibn Umar NEVER mentioned the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba in their books. This shows that if Ibn Saba ever existed he was not anything important for the historians before Sayf. This is also another reason to believe that what was propagated around the personality of Abdullah Ibn Saba was initiated by the mass propaganda of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi.

Among the Shi’a who mentioned the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba but without any information regarding to their source, are the following two historians:

(1) Sa’ad Ibn Abdillah al-Ash’ari al-Qummi (d. 301) in his book "al-Maqalat wal-Firaq”mentioned a report in which there exists the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba. But he did not mention any chain of authorities nor did he mention from whom (or which book) he got the story and what his source was.

Moreover al-Ash’ari al-Qummi has narrated many traditions from Sunni authorities. al-Najjashi (d. 450) in his "al-Rijal”said that al-Ash’ari al-Qummi traveled to many places and was well-known for his relation with Sunni historians and heard many stories from them. He wrote many weak reports from what he heard, one of which is a short story about Abdullah Ibn Saba, with no reference.

(2) Hasan Ibn Musa al-Nawbakhti (d. 310) who was a Shi’a historian who provided in his book "al-Firaq”a report in which is the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba. However he never mentioned from whom he got the report and what his source was.

The above two were the Shi’a who originally provided some information about the existence of an accursed man in the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba at the time of Imam ‘Ali (as). Notice that all of them reported these information long after Sayf Ibn Umar and even after al-Tabari wrote his history. Thus they might perhaps got the information from Sayf or those who quoted from him such as al-Tabari. This becomes more probable when we see that they wrote "Some people say so and so...”without giving any documented support (isnad) or the name of those "some people"!

Reports About Abdullah Ibn Saba Which Were NOT Transmitted Through Sayf Ibn Umar

We should point out however that there are less than 14 reports available in the collections of Shi’a and Sunni which mentions the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba, and are supplied with the chain of authorities, but in their chain of authorities the name of Sayf does not exist.

As for the Shi’a, he was al-Kushshi (or al-Keshshi; also abbreviated as Kash) (d. 369) who wrote his book "Rijal”in 340 AH. In that book he mentioned few traditions in which there exists the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba, from the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt which were quoted below. As we will see, these traditions give a very different picture than those mentioned by Sayf.

However, it has been proven for Shi’a scholars that the book of al-Kashshi has some errors, especially in the names and also few errors in quotations. His book also contains some weak traditions, and as a result, it is not a fully reliable source for the Shi’a. Not to mention that the reports of al-Kushshi (Kash) are not found in any of the major 4-books of tradition for Shi’a. (For a critical evaluation of his errors, please see al-Rijal by al-Tusteri as well as al-Askari.)

Other Shi’a scholars who mentioned Abdullah Ibn Saba, have quoted al-Kushshi or the two historians mentioned above (i.e., al-A’sh’ari al-Qummi and al- Nawbakhti who did not provide any chain of transmitters or any source for their report). Among those who quoted al-Kushshi (Kash) are: Shaikh al-Tusi (d. 460), Ahmad Ibn Tawoos (d. 673), Allama al-Hilli (d. 726), etc.

As for the Sunnis, beside those who quoted from Sayf Ibn Umar whose names were given earlier, there are few reports from Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani which provide the very similar information of what al-Kushshi (Kash) provided (see below).

For these very few Shi’i and Sunni reports, we would like to mention the following points:

1. The story that these few Sunni and Shi’a traditions provide, are totally different than the heavy narrations propagated by Sayf Ibn Umar. These tradition say that there was a poor man in the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba appeared at the time of government of Imam ‘Ali (as).

He claimed that he was a Prophet and ‘Ali was God, and as soon as Imam ‘Ali heard the news, he imprisoned him, and asked him to repent. He did not do so, and thus, Imam ‘Ali ordered to burn him. The traditions confirm that Imam ‘Ali and his descendants cursed this man and disassociated themselves from his claim of deity for Imam ‘Ali (as). This is all there is about it, provided that these few traditions are genuine in the first place.

2. These few (less than 14) traditions do not exist in any authentic book. In fact, there is NO mention of Abdullah Ibn Saba in any of the six authentic Sunni collections (Sihah). Moreover, these few reports were never rated authentic by Shi’a or Sunni scholars, and there is a great possibility that a person in the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba never existed in the world, and was the total invention of Sayf Ibn Umar, similar to his invention of 150 imaginary companions for the Prophet (S) which do not exist in any other independent report. Granted that Abdullah Ibn Saba ever existed, Sayf has used his character and attributed many events to him for which there exists no similar report by other Sunni narrators.

Not only that, but also Sayf’s reports clearly contradict other reports by the Sunnis, as we will show in this part and the next parts. Such malicious construction of the events were easy to detect even by the Sunni scholars.

Now, let me give you some of these few traditions which have NOT been reported by Sayf, and compare what Sayf attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba.

As for Shi’a:

It is attributed to Abu Ja’far (as) saying:

Abdullah Ibn Saba used to claim being a prophet and claimed that The Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as) is God. Allah is Higher than such (claim). This news reached to The Commander of Believers (as), so he called him and questioned him. But he repeated his claims and said:

"You are Him (i.e., God), and it has been revealed to me that you are God and I am a prophet.”So The Commander of Believers (as) said: "How dare you! Satan has made a mockery of you. Repent for what you said. May your mother weep at your death! Quit (your claim).”But he refused, so (Imam ‘Ali) imprisoned him and asked him three times to repent, but he didn’t. Thus he burnt him with fire and said: "Satan had taken him into his whim, he used to come to him and to induce these (thoughts) in him.”(Rijal, by al-Kushshi)

Moreover it is reported that Imam ‘Ali Ibn Husayn (as) said:

"May the curse of Allah be upon those who tell lies about us. I mentioned Abdullah Ibn Saba and each hair in my body stood up, Allah cursed him. ‘Ali (as) was, by Allah, a proper servant of Allah, the brother of the Messenger of Allah (S). He did not earn the graciousness/honor from Allah except with the obedience to Allah and His Messenger. And (similarly) the Messenger of Allah (S) did not earn the honor from Allah except with his obedience to Allah.”(Rijal, by al-KuShshi)

It is reported that Abu Abdillah (as) said:

"We are a family of truthfulness. But we are not safe from a liar telling lies about us to undermine our truth with his lies in front of people. The Messenger of Allah (S) was the most truthful among people in what he said (Lahjatan) and the most truthful among all humanity; and Musaylima used to lie on him. The Commander of Believers (as) was the most truthful one among the creation of Allah after the Messenger of Allah; and the one who used to lie on him, and tried to undermine his truthfulness and claimed lies about Allah, was Abdullah Ibn Saba.”(Rijal, by al-Kushshi)

Also:

"As he (Aba Abdillah - Ja’far al-Sadiq) was telling his companions in the subject of Abdullah Ibn Saba and that he claimed in Godness of The Commander of Believers, ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib. He said: When he claimed that in ‘Ali, he asked him to repent and he refused, so he burnt him with fire.”(Rijal, by al-Kushshi)

As for the Sunnis, few reports from Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani which provide the very similar information of what al-Kushshi (Kash) provided. Ibn Hajar mentioned:

"Abdullah Ibn Saba was one of the extremist (al-Ghulat), dualist/seducee/manichaeist (Zindeeq), and misguided, which is conveyed that ‘Ali burnt him with fire.”(Lisan al-Mizan, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, p289)

Then Ibn Hajar continues:

"Ibn Asakir mentioned in his History that `his origin (Abdullah Ibn Saba) was from Yemen and that he was a Jew who adopted Islam and traveled in the cities of Muslims and preached them to disobey their rulers, to induce evil amongst them, then he entered Damascus for that purpose.’ Then Ibn Asakir mentioned a long story from the book of al-Futooh of Sayf Ibn Umar, which does not have correct support/ authorities (isnad).”(Lisan al-Mizan, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, p289)

Then Ibn Hajar gives a tradition among whose chain of authorities two individuals are missing. In footnote he says that its has been dropped.

This is the tradition:

"‘Ali ascended the pulpit and said: What is wrong with him? People said: He is denying (or lying upon) Allah and His Messenger.”(Lisan al-Mizan, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, p289)

In another tradition, Ibn Hajar reported:

"‘Ali said to Abdullah Ibn Saba: I have been told that there shall be thirty liars/imposters (who claim prophethood) and your are one of them”(Lisan al-Mizan, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, p290)

He also wrote:

"Ibn Saba and his followers believed in the deity of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, and certainly ‘Ali burnt them by fire during his rule.”(Lisan al-Mizan, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, p290)

These Sunni traditions were not rated authentic either. The total of these tradition by both Shi’a and Sunni (reported by other than Sayf), do not exceed fourteen at most. They will be even less if you remove repetitions.

These few Sunnite and Shi’ite traditions convey that:

1. Abdullah Ibn Saba appeared during the Caliphate of Imam ‘Ali (as), and not during the rule of Uthman as Sayf alleged.

2. Abdullah Ibn Saba did not say that ‘Ali is the successor of Prophet (S) as Sayf claimed. Rather he said ‘Ali (as) is God.

3. Imam ‘Ali (as) burnt him along with all other extremists (al-Ghulat). This is while Sayf does not state such a thing.

4. There is no mention of his existence or his playing a role at the time of Uthman. There is no mention of his agitation against Uthman which ended up with assassination of Uthman as Sayf attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba.

5. There is no mention of the role of Abdullah Ibn Saba in the battle of Camel as Sayf attributed to him.

6. These traditions do not indicate that any righteous companions of Prophet followed Abdullah Ibn Saba. This is while Sayf maliciously alleged that some of the most faithful pioneers of Islam such as Abu Darr (ra) and Ammar Yasir (ra) were the students of Abdullah Ibn Saba during the reign of Uthman.

Al-Saba’iya And The Multiple Personality Of Ibn Saba

Since pre-Islamic times, the term "Saba’iya”used to indicate those related to Saba son of Yashjub, son of Ya’rub, son of Qahtan; synonymous to "Qahtaniya", also used to be known as "Yamaniya”referencing their place of origin, Yemen.

This group of people (i.e., Saba’iya/Qahtaniya/Yamaniya) in contrast to the "Adnaniya", "Nazariya”and "Mudhariya", which used to refer to relation to Mudhar son of Nazar, son of Adnan, from the sons of Ishmael (as) the son of Abraham (as). There were some allies for each tribe who were under protection of that tribe, and at times they were referred by the name of that tribe.

In general, Arabs trace their roots to one of these two major tribes. When the two tribes joined in Medina to create what became the first Islamic society led by the Prophet(S) (year 0 AH), those related to Qahtan were named al-Ansar (Helpers) who were the residents of Medina at that time; and those from Adnan and their allies who traveled to Medina and were called al-Muhajireen (Immigrants).

The personality Abdullah bin Wahab al-Saba’i, the first leader of al- Khawarij (the group which opposed ‘Ali (as) during his rule), was from the first tribe, the Saba’iya or Qhatan above. As the friction increased between the two tribes of Adnan and Qahtan in Medina and Kufa, the Adhanies reportedly used to nickname the Qhantanies by the term Saba’iya.

However, this name-calling was purely tribal and ethnical until the appearance of the work of Sayf Ibn Umar (of Adnan) in the beginning of the second century (AH) during the Umayad rule, in Kufa. Sayf took the advantage of this purely tribal friction and created the mythical Saba’iya religious entity, with Abdullah Ibn Saba as its leader, altering the meaning of the tribal reference to Qahtan to that of the ill inference attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba’s deviant sect.

To come up with the alleged name of the creator of the sect (Abdullah Ibn Saba), Sayf Ibn Umar either transposed the name Abdullah (bin Wahab) al- Saba’i, described above, to Abdullah Ibn Saba as appears from reports by al- Ash’ari, al-Sama’ani and al-Maqrizi; or he created the story and invented the name on his own altogether. Either way, there was no strong proof for the existence to Abdullah Ibn Saba during the time of Uthman and ‘Ali, except as Abdullah bin Wahab al-Saba’i who was the leader of Khawarij, as mentioned earlier.

One also finds that "Saba’i”tag in persons’ names, who belong to the tribes of Qahtan, ceased especially in Iraq, the origin of the fairy tale, after that date. This naming convention then continued throughout the second and third century (AH) in the areas of Yemen, Egypt and Spain, where a number of Sunni Hadith narrators (including some of the narrators of the traditions in six Sunni collections) were labeled Saba’i due to their relation to Saba Ibn Yashjub and not Abdullah Ibn Saba the Jew who created disturbance per Sayf’s allegations.

Later as the books of the Tabari and others spread the fairy tale across the land, the naming convention of Saba’i was dropped every where. Whence this mention in the books is used to indicate a following to Abdullah Ibn Saba alone, even though they never enjoyed existence outside the covers of those books. The tale evolved over the years to include a multiple of its creator’s persona and beliefs.

At the same time, while Abdullah Ibn Saba was Ibn al-Sawda’ to the inventor of the tale (Sayf), you find them becoming two separate persons around the 5th century, along with the variation in their news (see "al-Farq”by Abdul-Qahir Ibn Tahir al- Baghdadi). We can delimit these variations in the fifth century onwards, in three personalites:

1. Abdullah bin Wahab al-Saba’i, head of the Khawarij, who opposed Imam ‘Ali (as).

2. Abdullah Ibn Saba who established the Saba’iya clan/group which believes in the deity of ‘Ali. He and his followers were burnt with fire shortly after.

3. Abdullah Ibn Saba, also known as Ibn al-Sawda’ to those who reported from Sayf. He was the creator of the Saba’iya clan/group who believed in successorship to ‘Ali, who agitated against Uthman and then they started the war of Jamal (Camel).

The first one existed in reality, and some of the traditions related to Abdullah Ibn Saba actually refers to this man who was the leader of al- Khawarij. For the second person, there are few traditions which was mentioned earlier, yet they were not authenticated by either schools.

The third personage, however, was the imagination of Sayf who perhaps invented it based on the original story he heard about the first and the second persons, and then attaching his own story to them.

Ibn Saba And Shi’a

One should distinguish between those Sunnis scholars who reported the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba (either from Sayf’s mass production (such as al- Tabari) or otherwise (such as Ibn Hajar)), and those pseudo-Sunnis who not only reported it, but also declared that Shi’a are the followers of this fictitious character.

It has been proven that those pseudo-scholars (i.e., the second group) who attributed the foundation of Shi’a to Abdullah Ibn Saba were never Sunnis. They were rather the followers of Sunnah of the House of Abu Sufyan and Marwan. This is clear when one observes their tendencies to these two families when they discuss their history.

When these pseudo-scholars want to talk about Imami Shi’a, they use the word of al-Saba’iyyah to undermine the devotion of the followers of the Members of the House of Prophet (S) to Islam, in the same way that they undermine the devotion of a group of Muslims who were killed in the reign of Abu Bakr since they followed what the Messenger of Allah ordered them in distributing the Zakat (alms) among their own poor people and thus did not give it to Abu Bakr.

Yet these mercenary scholars, when talking about those people, they mix them with the issue of Musaylamah who claimed Prophethood, and attribute these martyrs to him, in order to justify shedding their bloods, plundering their wealth and taking their women. But Allah will soon judge between us and them, for He is the best judge.

Such blending of falsehood and truth is not anything new for us when we see in today’s world of technology those who see Islam a barrier for their illegitimate interest in the world, accuse Muslims of terrorism, in order to justify shedding their bloods and taking their wealth.

To prepare their agenda, they take advantage of some foolish individual(s) who happened to be Muslim in ID, and who did a violation out of his/their anger. They call devoted Muslims terrorists because a pseudo-Sunni-Muslim blew up the World Trade Center. By that, they follow exactly the footsteps of Sayf Ibn Umar who in turn learnt this great idea from the devil.

Moreover, if they could not find any foolish act from Muslims to cover the media at any period, they pay money to emulate it artificially, and attribute it to the Muslims, much the same way that Sayf Ibn Umar shaped the character of Abdullah Ibn Saba (and most probably invented him by picking up his name at the middle of the night). They do this to provide an excuse for their malicious accusations and their attacks to the whole Muslim world, much the same as what Sayf and his disciples did to the House of Prophet (S).

According to both Shi’a and Sunni scholars, Sayf Ibn Umar was one of those who manipulated the truth and made some fake traditions based on some partial truth. Believing in the existence of Ibn Saba does not mean believing in the stories of Sayf who tried to relate him to Shi’a. The fact is that people like Abdullah Ibn Saba are useless without a story attached to their names. Fake stories around such characters are different than their actual existence. Such a person might be existent while the stories around him might not be.

Sayf’s Achievements: An Overview

What follows in this article and the next parts of this series is a comparison between Sayf’s stories and others. First I give a general view of achievements of Sayf Ibn Umar:

Sayf was paid to write some stories as a relief for the contradictions and disputes happened in the early history of Islam. Those critical disputes were from year 11 AH (demise of Prophet) till 40 AH. Sayf only focused on that period (11-40 AH) and left the rest.

The first dispute he has talked about is the dispute related the dispatch of the army of Usamah and the death of prophet. The Prophet (S), about four days before his death, ordered all Helpers and all Immigrants except ‘Ali to leave Medina, and to go Syria in order to fight with the Romans.

But companions disobeyed and complained about the leadership of Usamah (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions numbers 5.552, 5.744 and 5.745) and delayed in joining the camp, and finally returned to Medina, in order to prepare themselves for discussion about successorship as soon as the Messenger of Allah dies. Sayf tried to forge the story to show that there was no delay. Sayf said that after the death of Prophet, when Abu Bakr dispatched the army of Usamah, he said to them:

"March on! May God destroy you by murder and plague!"

Sunni references: History of al-Tabari and History of Ibn Asakir, reported from Sayf, Events of Year 11 AH

This is while other narrators never mentioned such a stupid thing from Abu Bakr. Sayf being a heretic, wanted to make a mockery of Islam as a religion, as well as to please the Caliph of his time.

The next thing he has talked, is about the pavilion of Saqifa. Sayf reported that:

"‘Ali was in his house when he was told that Abu Bakr had sat to receive the oath of allegiance. So He went out immediately wearing his night shirt only, out of dislike that he might be late. Then He gave the oath of allegiance and sat with Abu Bakr, and then sent for his clothes. When (the clothes) were brought to him, he put them and stayed in (Abu Bakr’s) assembly."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, pp 195-196 reported from Sayf Ibn Umar.

This ridiculous report is in clear contradiction with Sahih al-Bukhari where it has been mentioned that Imam ‘Ali did NOT give the oath to Abu Bakr for the first six month of his reign (Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 5.546).

Sayf has told seven stories about Saqifa, and has used three imaginary characters as the companions of prophet who played his scenarios in Saqifa, whose names are not mentioned anywhere else except in the work of those who reported from Sayf himself. He named them: Qa’qa, Mubashshir, and Sakhr.

His main legend is the malicious stories attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba, by which he had tried to solved the following puzzles:

-Creation of Shi’a
-Problem of exile of Abu Dharr
-Murder of Uthman
-The War of Jamal (Camel)

Sayf has also maliciously tried to link the forged stories of Abdullah Ibn Saba to the Shi’a Imam ‘Ali (as) which shows he did not know too much about Shi’a, otherwise he would not had attributed some of the beliefs which are not held by the followers of the members of the house of Prophet.

Insha Allah, in the next parts, I will analyze the fictitious story of Abdullah Ibn Saba in comparison with the other Sunni reports.

I should mention that al-Askari had a very distinguished achievement. He proved beyond any doubt, in his book named "Abdullah Ibn Saba and Other Myths", that Ibn Saba _with_ such achievements never existed, and that he was invented by Sayf Ibn Umar. If there was any Abdullah Ibn Saba at that time, his story was much different than what Sayf manipulated.

For brothers and sisters who like to know more about the business of Abdullah Ibn Saba and his fictitious character, I introduce the following two interesting books, in English, which can be ordered immediately:

1- "Abdullah Ibn Saba and Other Myths,”(English) by al-Askari, S. M.
To order, send $15.00 to:
al-Khoei Foundation Library,
89-89 Van Wyck Expressway,
Jamaica, NY 11435-4123 U.S.A.

Unfortunately only first volume, out of four volumes of this book is available in English which still gives enough information, however the rest are available in Arabic. The second two volumes in Arabic are separately named "One Hundred Fifty Companions".

2- "The Shiites Under Attack,”(English) by Chirri, M. J.
To order, send $8.00 to:
Muhammad Javad Chirri,
The Islamic Center of America,
15571 Joy Road,
Detroit, MI 48228 U.S.A.

Abdullah Ibn Saba Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

After an overview in the previous part, I will Ensha Allah analyze the fictitious story of Abdullah Ibn Saba reported by Sayf, in comparison with the other Sunni reports. First I give a brief tour of the allegations of Sayf Ibn Umar attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba:

Sayf alleged that a Yemenite Jew, called Abdullah Ibn Saba (also known as Ibn Amutus-Sawda’; son of a black slave), declared his Islam at the time of “Uthman “. He willfully associated himself with Muslims and traveled in their cities and towns, from Damascus to Kufa to Egypt, propagating among Muslims that Muhammad (S) will be resurrected like Jesus.

He also said ‘Ali is Prophet’s executor and was deprived of his divine office by Uthman. He provoked Abu Dharr and Ammar Ibn Yasir to agitate against Uthman and Muawiyah. He provoked Muslims to kill Uthman since he had usurped the seat of ‘Ali. Sayf also alleged that Ibn Saba was the key element in the tragedy of the battle of Camel. Let us now discuss each of the above allegations one by one:

The Return of Prophet Muhammad (S)

Saif alleged Abdullah Ibn Saba was the one who invented the idea that Prophet Muhammad (S) would return before the Day of Judgment. Saif wrote that Ibn Saba said: If Jesus is going to come back, Muhammad will also return because he is more important than Jesus.

Attributing the idea of al-Raj’a/al-Karra (Bodily resurrection of some dead and returning to this word before the Day of Judgment) to Abdullah Ibn Saba was another trick of Saif Ibn Umar to confuse people’s mind with regard to true Islamic beliefs. Had Saif studied Qur’an carefully he would have seen that many verses Qur’an confirms the miracle of al-Raj’a has happened in the past for some specific nations and individuals and will also happen in the future for some people.

Although the Shi’a sources may not be considered as proof to the Sunnis in general, yet in many of our Hadiths, the Ahlul-Bayt (as) proved the issue of al-Raj’a by Qur’an. Their logical conclusions from the Qur’anic verses are quite interesting and can be presented as proof for all Muslims since we all believe in the same Qur’an. As such, I am quoting some of the traditions of Ahlul-Bayt (as) below by classifying them into three categories:

I) Those which point to Qur’anic verses about return in the past.
II) Those which point to Qur’anic verses about return in the future.
III) Those which point to Qur’anic verses about returning the Messenger of Allah (S) and other Prophets.

1) Qur’an Speaks: Return in the Past

al-Asbagh Ibn Nabata narrated that Abdullah Ibn Abi Bakr al-Yashkari (also known as Ibn al-Kawwaa who was one of al-Khawarij) asked the Leader of Faithful (as) about the possibility of returning to this world after death. Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as) replied:

... Don’t you know that Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, said in His Book, "And Moses chose out of his people seventy men for Our appointment (Qur’an 7:155),

“... and when they said to Moses (as): "we will not believe in you until we see Allah manifestly (2:55),

“and Allah said "so the thunderbolt overtook you while you were watching. Then We raised you up after your death that you may be grateful. (Qur’an 2:55-56)

“Don’t you see O’ Ibn al-Kawwaa that they indeed returned to their homes after they died? Isn’t it that (after the above verse) Allah informed in his book "And We made the clouds to give shade over you and We sent to you manna and quails (Qur’an 2:57)”

Thus this was after they died and when Allah raised them again.

And similar to that, O’ Ibn al-Kawwaa, for some people from the Children of Israel about whom Allah said:

"Have you not considered those who went forth from their homes, for fear of death, and they were thousands, then Allah said to them, Die, and then He again gave them life (Qur’an 2:243)"

And also saying of Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, about Uzair where (Allah) said:

"Or the like of him (Uzair) who passed by a town, and it had fallen down upon its roofs; he said: Howshall Allah give it life after its death? So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him to life. He said: How long have you tarried? He said: I have tarried a day, or a part of a day. Said He: Nay! You have tarried a hundred years (Qur’an 2:259)"

So do not cast doubt, O’ Ibn al-Kawwaa, on the power of Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty. (al-Bihar, v53, p72, Hadith #72)

There are other verses of Qur’an about return in the past, including but not limited to: 2:260, 3:49, 8:26, 16:38-41, 18:18-19, 18:42, which I skip for the sake of brevity.

2) Qur’an Speaks: Return in the Future

The numerous verses of Qur’an indeed have pointers to a period in the future of the world that some top believers and top disbelievers of each era will return to this world. This phenomenon is called in the language of Qur’an and Hadith is called al-Raj’a/al-Karra. This happens at the time of the rising of Imam al-Mahdi (as) who he will get revenge from all tyrants throughout the history and will implement the government of Justice, and when the righteous will rule over the entire universe (not just this Earth). Let us study some of the verses of Qur’an in this regard through the words of Ahlul-Bayt (as). Abu Basir narrated:

I asked Imam al-Sadiq (as) about the verse: "And on the day when We will gather from every nation a group (27:83)”He (as) said: "What do people say about it?”I said: "They say it is in the Day of Judgment.”Thereupon Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "Do you think Allah will gather from every nation only a group, and leave the rest? Verily this verse is about al-Raj’a.

On the other hand, the verse related to the Day of Judgment is:

‘and We shall gather them together and shall not leave out anyone. (Qur’an 18:47)’“

(Tafsir ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim, as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, p51, Hadith #27)

Also, on the commentary of the verses: "And on the day when We will gather from every nation a group from among those who rejected Our Signs, then they shall be set in arrays. Until when they come, He will say: Did you reject my signs while you could not encompass them in knowledge? Or what was it that you did? (27:83-84)”Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "The Signs are the Leader of
Faithful and the Imams (after him)... and this is about al-Raj’a"

(Tafsir ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim, as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, p53, Hadith #30)

Muhammad Ibn Muslim as well as Abu Basir narrated:

On the commentary of verse:

"And (We) have made binding on the society which We destroyed that they shall not return. (Qur’an 21:95)"

Imam al-Baqir (as) and Imam al-Sadiq (as) both said: "Every society that Allah has destroyed by punishment do not return in al-Raj’a. Thus this verse is one of the greatest signs for al- Raj’a since no one among the People of Islam denies that all people return in the Day of Judgment whether they are destroyed by punishment or not.

Therefore His saying ‘they shall not return’ points to al-Raj’a (returning to the world). This is while they shall return to the Day of Judgment in order to enter the Fire.”(Tafsir ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim, as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, p52, Hadith #29)

Also on the commentary of verse "O Lord! Thou caused us die twice, and Thou hast given (back) to us life twice, so we do confess our faults; is there then a way to get out? (40:11)”it is narrated from Imam al-Baqir (as) who said:

"This is exclusive to those (Kuffar) who return to this world after death, and this is their (statement) in the Day of Judgment (after the second rising). So, far removed (from mercy) the wrongdoing folk.”(al-Bihar, v53, p116, Hadith #139. Similar narratives are given from Imam al-Sadiq (as) and Imam al-Ridha (as). See al-Bihar, v53, p56, Hadith #36 and also p144)

According to the above verse, in the Day of Judgment the Kuffar who had died twice would be asking a third chance in order to repent for their sins. Note especially in the above verse that death has been mentioned before life. So this giving life means rising after death.

There are two deaths for those people and after each death they will be brought back to life. In other words, after they die in this world, they will return to this world (al-Raj’a) and then will die again, and thereafter they will be resurrected in the Day of Judgment.

Also on the commentary of the verse

"And most certainly We shall make them taste of the nearer punishment before the greater punishment (Qur’an 32:21),”

Mufadhdhal Ibn Umar narrated:

Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "The ‘nearer punishment’ is the punishment of al-Raj’a (i.e., when they return to this world). And the ‘greater punishment’ is the punishment of the Day of Judgment about which (Allah said)

‘On the day when the earth shall be changed into a different earth, and the heavens (as well), and they shall come forth before Allah, the One, the Supreme (Qur’an 14:48).’“(al-Bihar, v53, p24)

Moreover, on the commentary of the verse:

"And surely for those who are unjust there shall be a punishment before that, but most of them do not know. (Qur’an 52:47)"

It is narrated that:

Imam al-Baqir said: "And surely for those who are unjust with regard to the right of family of Muhammad (S) there shall be a punishment before that (i.e., before the Day of Judgment) though most people do not know, and this refers to the punishment in al-Raj’a.”(al-Bihar, v53, p117, Hadith #144)

Further, on the commentary of the verses: "Nay! You shall soon know. Thereafter nay! You shall soon know. (102:3-4)”Abdullah Ibn Najih narrated that:

Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "The first instance refers to al-Karra (return to this world) and the second instance refers to the Day of Judgment.”(al-Bihar, v53, p120, Hadith #156)

Muhammad Ibn Abdullah al-Husayn narrated:

My father asked Imam al-Sadiq (as): "What do you say about al- Karra (return)?”He (as) said: "I say what Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, said and sent its interpretation to the Messenger of Allah... Allah, to Whom belong Might and Majesty, said: ‘They say: That is then a return with loss (79:12).’ This when they will return to this world (and will be punished) while the revenge from them would not expire (i.e., it is a return with loss since their punishment in this world will not suffice their punishment in the hereafter).”(al-Bihar, v53, p46, Hadith #17)

Zurara narrated:

I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) if death and being slain are the same. The Imam replied: "Allah has differentiated between dying and getting killed in Qur’an. Then He (as) recited

‘Then if he dies or is slain (Qur’an 3:144)’

and

‘And if indeed you die or you are slain, certainly to Allah shall you be gathered together (Qur’an 3:158)

‘ ... and also ‘Surely Allah has bought from the believers their persons and their property for that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain, a promise on this which is the truth (Qur’an 9:111)’

and also

‘Every soul will taste the death (Qur’an 21:35).’

Don’t you see that the one who is killed (by weapon) does not taste the death? He who is killed by sword is not like the one dies in bed. Thus (concluding the above verses) whoever (among believers) is killed should return to this world till he die (natural death)”(al-Bihar, v53, p65, Hadith #58)

The above-mentioned verse (9:111) (that is ‘Surely Allah has bought from the believers their persons and their property for that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain, a promise on this which is the truth’) proves that all true believers will be killed and this is Allah’s promise. Allah states they kill and will be killed. Those among true believers who die natural death will rise again and join the army of Imam al-Mahdi (as) and will be killed during in the holy war.

On the other hand, those among believers who were killed will rise and live in the government of justice till they die natural death. This fact has been mentioned in many other Hadiths including the following:

Abdurrahman Ibn Qasir narrated that Imam al-Baqir (as) recited
the verse: "Surely Allah has bought from the believers their
persons... (9:111)”and then said: "Do you know what it means?"

He (as) then continued: "Anyone among the believers who was killed will be resurrected till he dies, and anyone among them who was died will be resurrected till he is killed. And this is the power of Allah, so do not deny it.”(al-Bihar, v53, p74, Hadith #73; also in Rijal al-Najashi) In another Hadith, Imam al- Baqir (as) said: "For every believer there is a death and martyrdom.”(al-Bihar, v53, p64, Hadith #55)

Also about the verse: "And on the day when We will gather from every nation a group”Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "There shall not remain any killed believer but he shall return till he dies. And no one return but absolute believers and absolute disbelievers (i.e., only believers and disbelievers of highest degree)”(al-Bihar, v53, p53, Hadith #30)

Himran Ibn A’ayun narrated:

I asked Abu Ja’far (as): "Is there anything in what happened to the Children of Israel that would not happen to our nation?”He (as) said: "No.”Then I asked: "So tell me about the saying of Allah (on the Children of Israel):

‘Have you not considered those who went forth from their homes, for fear of death, and they were thousands, then Allah said to them, Die, and then He again gave them life (Qur’an 2:243)’

Were they brought to this world again after they died?”The Imam (as) said: "In fact, (Allah) returned them to this world till they stayed another period and eat food and married women and remained here to the extent Allah wished, and then they died (again) on their appointed time.”(Muntakhab al- Basa’ir, as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, p74, Hadith #74)

Al-Hasan Ibn Jahm narrated:

Al-Ma’mun asked Imam al-Ridha (as): "O’ Abul Hasan! What do you say about al-Raj’a?”The Imam (as) replied: "It is truth. Verily it had been in the ancient nations and Qur’an has spoken about it, and verily the Messenger of Allah (S) said: ‘There shall be for this nation all what had been for the previous nations like the similarity of two pair of shoes.”(Uyun Akhbar al-Ridha (as), as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, and p59, Hadith #45)

Rafa’a Ibn Musa narrated:

Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "The first (groups) who shall return to this world is al-Husayn Ibn ‘Ali (as) and his companions and Yazid Ibn Mu’awiya (LA) and his companions, and they will fight and
kill them one by one (in the same order). Then Imam al-Sadiq (as) recited the verse: ‘‘Then We returned for you in a new turn to prevail against them, and aided you with wealth and children and
made you the most numerous. (17:6)’“(al-Rijal al-Najashi, as quoted in al-Bihar, v53, p76, Hadith #78)

In this connection, al-Mu’alli Ibn Khunais narrated:

Imam al-Sadiq (as) said: "The first one who shall return to this world (at the time of al-Mahdi (as)) is al-Husayn Ibn ‘Ali (as) who rules until his eyebrow falls over his eyes due to his old age.”(al-Bihar, v53, p46, Hadith #19 quoted from Muntakhab al- Basa’ir; Similar traditions can be found in Tafsir ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi, Rijal al-Kashshi, and Tafsir al-Nu’mani)

3) Qur’an Speaks: Return of the Prophet (S)

In the previous part we provided many verses of Qur’an concerning the fact that most perfect believers will return to this world at the end of the world. This naturally follows that the Prophets, peace be upon them, should be among them. In this part, we specifically focus on the verses that point to return of all Prophets as well as those related to the return of Prophet (S) Muhammad and his Ahlul-Bayt (as).

Jamil Ibn Darraj narrated:

I asked Imam al-Sadiq (as) about the verse: "Most surely We help Our apostles, and those who believe, in the life of this world and on the day when the witnesses shall stand (40:51)”The Imam (as) said: "By Allah, this happens in al-Raj’a. Don’t you know that many of Allah’s Prophets were not helped in this world and were killed, and the Imams (i.e., the believers mentioned in the verse) after them were also killed and were not helped? Thus this (help) will happen in al-Raj’a.”I also asked about the verses:

"And listen on the day when the caller shall call from a near place. The day when they shall truly hear the cry; that is the day of rising (Qur’an 50:41-42).”

The Imam (as) replied: "This is al- Raj’a.”(al-Bihar, v53, p65, Hadith #57)

Asim Ibn Hamid narrated from Imam al-Baqir (as) who said:

The Leader of Faithful (‘Ali), peace be upon him said: "Verily Allah, the most High, the One, was alone in His oneness, then He spoke one word, thereupon it became light and then He created from that light Muhammad (S) and created me and my progeny,

... and while there was no sun, no moon, no night, and no day we were glorifying Him and were praising Him, and this was before He create the creatures and take covenant from the Prophets for faith and aiding us.

And this is the saying of Allah: ‘And when Allah took a covenant from the prophets: Certainly for what I have given you of Book and wisdom when an apostle comes to you verifying that which is with you, that you must believe in him, and you must aid him. (3:81)’“Then the Imam (as) continued:

"This means you (i.e., Prophets) must believe in Muhammad (S) and you must aid his executor. And they all will soon aid his (executor). Allah took the oath for me along with Muhammad (S) for aiding one another. Most cirtainly, I aided Muhammad (S) and made Jihad along with him and killed his enemies and fulfilled Allah’s promise while no one among the Prophets and Messengers aided me.

But they will soon aid me and I hold whatever between the East and the West. And verily Allahshall raise alive from Adam (as) to Muhammad (S) all the sent Prophets, and they fight along with me and along with all (other) notable dead and alive (believers).

How amazing and how astonishing shall be the dead whom Allah shall raise alive group by group while they shall be uttering ‘Labbaik Labbaik O the Caller of Allah’ holding their weapons over their shoulders by which they shall hit notable disbelievers and the tyrants and their followers from among the oppressors of the first to the last generations till Allah fulfill what he has promised them in

His saying: ‘Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them rulers in the earth as He made rulers before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they worship Me, not associate anything with Me (24:55).’ This means they worship Me in security without fearing from any one and without any dissimulation.”(al-Bihar, v53, p46, Hadith #20)

On the commentary of verse: "He is the One Who sent His Apostle with guidance and the religion of truth in order to prevail over all religions, even though the polytheists may be averse. (9:33),”al-

Mufadhdhal Ibn Umar narrated:

I asked Imam al-Sadiq (as): "Didn’t the Messenger of Allah (S) prevail over all religions?”He (as) replied: "O

Mufadhdhal! If the Messenger of Allah (S) had prevailed over all religions, there wouldn’t have been any Magi, Jew, or Christian, or any sect, disagreement, and doubt, or any polytheism and idol. Verily, His saying ‘in order to prevail over all religions’ is in the time of al-Mahdi during the al-Raj’a, and this is His saying: ‘And fight them until there is no more trouble and till religion is only for Allah (8:39).’“(al-Bihar, v53, p33)

Salih Ibn Maitham narrated:

On the commentary of "And We have not sent you but to ALL mankind as a bearer of good news and as a warner, but most men do not know. (34:28)”Imam al-Baqir (AS0 said: "There shall not remain any place on the Earth but in it (people) give testimony to ‘there is no god but Allah and Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of Allah’“and he (as) pointed by his hand to the horizons. (al-Bihar, v53, p113, Hadith #138-15)

Abu Khalid al-Kabuli (ra) narrated:

On the verse "Certainly the one who sent the Qur’an to you, shall return you to the returning (place) (28:85),”Imam ‘Ali Ibn al- Husayn (as) said: "Your Prophet (S) shall return to you.”(al-Bihar, v53, p56, Hadith #33, also p46, Hadith #19)

Abu Marwan narrated:

I asked Imam al-Sadiq (as) about the verse "Certainly the one who sent the Qur’an to you, shall return you to the returning (place) (28:85).”The Imam (as) replied: "No by Allah! The world does not end till the Messenger of Allah (S) and ‘Ali (as) come together in al-Thawiyya and meet each other and build a Mosque with 12000 entrance in al-Thawiyya, a place in al-Kufa.”(al- Bihar, v53, p113, Hadith #138-17)

The Sunnis And The Idea Of Al-Raj’a

Qur’an aside, we have no Hadith from the Sunnis to support the idea of al-Raj’a, except probably for the case of return of Prophet Jesus (as). To disclaim the idea that the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt will finally have rule on the Earth without any rival, and to make contrast between the beliefs, the Sunni traditionists and commentators have suppressed any Hadith that could imply the issue of al-Raj’a. Wherever they found any narrator who has narrated a tradition implying al-Raj’a, they have accused him of being Shi’a and extremist. They also interpreted the verses of al-Raj’a/al-Karra in Qur’an to the Day of Judgment, though we have already seen from the words of Ahlul-Bayt (as) (who are the most and only qualified individuals to interpret Qur’an) that this would require believing in contradiction and non-sense.

The Sunnis discredit the notion of al-Raj’a as being a kind of transmigration of the soul. They have not, or choose not to differentiated between transmigration and bodily resurrection. The meaning of transmigration is that the soul moves into another body, and this is not the same as bodily resurrection.

The meaning of the latter is that the soul returns to the same body with all its individual characteristics; and al-Raj’a is the same as this. If al- Raj’a were a kind of transmigration, the restoring to life by Jesus (as) must also be transmigration, and the Resurrection in the Day of
Judgment would be like that as well, which we know it is not true.

The same evidence that proves the possibility of resurrection will also prove the possibility of al-Raj’a. There is no reason for amazement, except in that it is unusual for us and we are not accustomed to such things in the life of this world. But we know of no cause or impossibility that would bring us near to refutation of al- Raj’a, except that human imagination does not find it easy to accept what is extraordinary. So there is no more reason to refute it than there is to refute resurrection. Allah states in Qur’an:

He said: Who will revive these bones when they have rotted away. Say: He will revive them Who brought them into existence in the first place, and He is Cognizant of all Creation. (36:78-79)

who belittle the idea of Raj’a of the Prophet (S), and mock the followers of Ahlul-Bayt (as) for their belief, should also know that their master Umar was one of those who claim a similar idea according to the historical evidences. Muslim historians agree that:

Umar stood at the Mosque of the Prophet when the Prophet passed away, and said: "There are hypocrites who allege that the Messenger of God has died. Certainly the Messenger of God did not die, but he went to his Lord, as Moses, son of Imran, went to his Lord (for receiving the heavenly commandments). By God, Muhammad will return as Moses returned, and he shall cut off the hands and legs of those who alleged that the Messenger of Allah has died."

Sunni Reference: al-Sira al-Nabawiyya, by Ibn Hisham, v2, p655

Although Umar’s motives in this regard was different and his opinion was not completely identical to the notion of al-Raj’a, yet we can not say that Umar took this idea from Abdullah Ibn Saba. Ibn Saba did not exist at that time, not even in the imagination of Saif Ibn Umar al- Tamimi who invented this character. Saif wrote that Ibn Saba came to Medina and became Muslim during the reign of Uthman, which is far after the death of Prophet (S).

The Doctrine Of ‘Ali’s Executorship

Sayf further alleged that Ibn Saba is the one who propagated the idea that ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib is the executor and the successor of the Messenger of God. He said that there were a thousand prophets before Muhammad, each of which had an executor after him, and that ‘Ali is the executor of the Prophet. Furthermore, Sayf alleged that Ibn Saba said that the three caliphs who ruled after the Prophet were usurpers of the Islamic rule. Sayf and his disciples forgot that they mentioned in their fiction that Abdullah Ibn Saba came to Medina and adopted Islam during the reign of Uthman. This is long after the death of the Messenger of Allah. On the other hand, Sunni history testifies that the Messenger of God himself is the one who declared that ‘Ali would be his executor right at the “beginning of his mission”. Here is the tradition concerning the first open preach the prophet (S):

‘Ali (as) narrated: When the verse: "And warn your closest tribe”was revealed, the Messenger of God called me and said:”‘Ali, certainly Allah commanded me to warn my closest tribe, and I feel the difficulty of this mission. I know that when I confront them with this warning, I will not like their response.”Then Prophet invited the members of his clan to dine with him on a small amount of food and little milk. There were forty of them. After they ate, the Prophet spoke to them:

"O Children of Abdul Muttalib, by God, I do not know of any young man from the Arabs who brought to his people better than I brought to you. I have brought to you the goodness of this world and the Hereafter. The Almighty commanded me to invite you to it. Who among you will assist me on this mission and become my brother, my executor, and my successor?"

No one accepted the invitation, and I said: "O Messenger of God, I shall be your assistant.”He held my neck and said to them: "This is my brother, my executor (Wasi), my successor (Caliph) among you. So listen to him and obey him.”They laughed, saying to Abu Talib: He (Muhammad) commanded you to listen to your son and to obey him.

إنَّ هذا أخي و وصيِّي و خليفتي فيكم فاْسمعوا له و أطيعوه

Sunni References:

(1) History of Tabari, English version, v6, pp 88-92 (two traditions)
(2) History of Ibn Athir, v2, p62
(3) History of Ibn Asakir, v1, p85
(4) Durr al-Manthur, by al-Suyuti, v5, p97
(5) al-Sirah al-Halabiyah, v1, p311
(6) Shawahid al-Tanzil, by al-Hasakani, v1, p371
(7) Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, p15, pp 100-117
(8) Tafsir al-Khazin, by Ala-ud-Din al-Shafi’i, v3, p371
(9) Dala’il al-Nabawiyah, by al-Baihaqi, v1, pp 428-430
(10) al-Mukhtasar, by Abul Fida, v1, pp 116-117
(11) Life of Muhammad, by Hasan Haykal, p104 (First Edition only. In the second edition the last sentence of Prophet (S) has been removed.)

(12) Tahdhib al-Athar, v4, pp 62-63.

The above tradition was also reported by important Sunni figures such as Muhammad Ibn Is’haq (who is the most celebrated Sunni historian), Ibn Abi Hatem, and Ibn Mardawayh. It is also recorded by orientalists such as T. Carlyle, E. Gibbon, J. Davenport, and W. Irving.

Here we would like ask the following question: Imam ‘Ali reported that the Messenger of God is the one who granted him the office of executorship, brotherhood, and successorship. Sayf Ibn Umar reported that the idea of the executorship of ‘Ali had came from a Jew called Abdullah Ibn Saba. We should ask the members of the Takfeer University (who call everyone who disagree with them unbeliever) the following question: Do you believe in Imam ‘Ali’s report or Sayf Ibn Umar’s? Sayf was accused by prominent Sunni scholars of weakness, forgery, and heresy.

Of course, we should not expect any true Muslim to choose the report of a liar such as Sayf Ibn Umar and to reject the report of the Imam ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the Leader of the Faithful, the "brother”of the Prophet (S).

The Messenger of God used to say to ‘Ali:

"Your position to me is like the position of Aaron to Moses, except that there shall be no Prophet after me"

أنتَ مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا إنَّهُ لا نبيَّ بعدي

Sunni References:

(1) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56 and 5.700

(2) Sahih Muslim, Arabic, v4, pp 1870-71

(3) Sunan Ibn Majah, p12

(4) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174

(5) al-Khas’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16

(6) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

The Prophet (S) thereby meant that as Moses had left behind Aaron to look after his people as his Caliph when he went to receive the Commandments, in the same way he was leaving ‘Ali behind as his deputy to look after the affairs of Islam after him. Allah said in Qur’an:

"... And Moses said unto his brother Aaron: Take my place among my community.”(Qur’an 7:142).

وَقَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ

اخْلُفْنِي

فِي قَوْمِي

Notice that "Ukhlufni”and "Khalifa”(Caliph) are exactly from the same root.

Do the mercenary writers who endeavor to spread hostility among Muslims forget that while returning from his farewell pilgrimage, and in the presence of over a hundred thousand pilgrims in Ghadir Khum, the Messenger of God declared:

"Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?”People cried and answered: "Yes, O’ Messenger of God.”Then Prophet (S) held up the hand of ‘Ali and said: "Whoever I am his leader, ‘Ali is his leader. O’ God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him."

Some of Sunni References:

(1) Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, v5, p63

(2) Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43

(3) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,118,119,152,330, v4, pp 281,368,370, 372,378, v5, pp 35,347,358,361,366,419 (from 40 chains of narrators!!!)

(4) Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, pp 563,572

(5) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p129, v3, pp 109-110,116,371

(6) Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 4,21

(7) Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p103 (from several transmitters)

(8) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50

(9) al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v3, p19

(10) Tarikh al-Khulafa, by al-Suyuti, pp 169,173

(11) al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v3, p213, v5, p208

(12) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, pp 307-308

(13) Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part 3, p144

(14) Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p26

(15) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v2, p509; v1, part1, p319, v2, part1, p57, v3, part1, p29, v4, part 1, pp 14,16,143

(16) Tabarani, who narrated from companions such as Ibn Umar, Malik Ibn al-Hawirath, Habashi Ibn Junadah, Jari, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, Anas Ibn Malik, Ibn Abbas, Amarah,Buraydah,...

(17) Tarikh, by al-Khatib Baghdadi, v8, p290

(18) Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v4, p23, v5, pp26-27

(19) al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, Chapter of word "ayn”(‘Ali), v2, p462

(20) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, pp 154,397

(21) al-Mirqat, v5, p568

(22) al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v2, p172

(23) Dhaka’ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p68

(24) Fayd al-Qadir, by al-Manawi, v6, p217

(25) Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn Athir, v4, p114

(26) Yanabi’ al-Mawaddah, by al-Qudoozi al-Hanafi, p297

... And hundreds more...

No Muslim would ever doubt that the Messenger of God is the leader of all Muslims for all generations. The Prophet in his statement granted ‘Ali the same position as his, when he said that ‘Ali is the leader of everyone who follows the Prophet.

This declaration which was narrated by more than one hundred and ten companions and rated authentic (Sahih) and frequent (Mutawatir) by the leading Sunni scholars, not only indicates that ‘Ali is the executor of Messenger, but also indicates that ‘Ali takes the place of the leadership of all Muslims after the Messenger of Allah.

However, these mercenaries still allow themselves to say that the belief that ‘Ali was the executor of the Messenger had come from a Jew who declared his Islam during the days of Uthman!!!

Abdullah Ibn Saba has no base on the disputes immediately after the death of prophet related to his successorship, and all relevant claims of Shi’a is proven to be on the death of the prophet or even before that, not during the reign of Uthman which is far long after prophet’s demise.

At the very start and immediately after the death of the prophet (S), the Shi’a of ‘Ali included those companions who where loyal to Imam ‘Ali, such as Ammar Ibn Yasir, Abu-Dhar al-Ghafari, Miqdad, Salman al-Farsi, Ibn Abbas ...etc., all gathered in the house of Fatimah (sa). Even Talha and Zubair were loyal to Imam ‘Ali at the beginning and joint the others in the house of Fatimah.

al-Bukhari narrated:

Umar said: "And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’da. ‘‘Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr."

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v8, Tradition #817

Other Sunni traditionists narrated that on the day of Saqifah:

Umar said: "‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, the daughter of the messenger of Allah."

Sunni References:

- Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55
- Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309
- History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822
- History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

Also:

They demanded confirmation of the oath, but ‘Ali and al-Zubair stayed away. al-Zubair drew his sword (from the scabbard), saying, "I will not put it back until the oath of allegiance is rendered to ‘Ali.”When this news reached Abu Bakr and Umar, the latter said, "Hit him with a stone and seize the sword.”It is stated that Umar rushed (to the door of the House of Fatimah) and brought them forcibly while telling them that they must give their oath of allegiance willingly or unwillingly.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, pp 188-189

Certainly that Jew did not have any role in the division of the companions into two factions right at the death of Prophet since he was non-existent at that time.

Attacking Two of Most Beloved Companions of the Prophet (S) and Their Disciples

Sayf alleged that Ibn Saba is the one who instigated the two prominent companions of the Prophet Muhammad, namely Abu Dharr (ra) and Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra), against Uthman. He said this Jew met Abu Dharr in Damascus, and that he introduced to him the idea of prohibiting treasuring gold and silver. Sayf included the following great companions of prophet and their disciples, among the list of the followers of Ibn Saba:

(1) Abu Dharr (ra),
(2) Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra),
(3) Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr (ra), son of the first Caliph,
(4) Malik Ashtar (ra).
... and more

To better understand the heresy of Sayf and his allegation, let us quickly review the biography of the above great Muslim pioneers:

(1) Abu Dharr al-Ghafari (Jundub Ibn Jonadah): He is the THIRD person in the list of the four pioneers who first embraced Islam. He was a monotheist even before his conversion. He frankly declared his faith in Islam at Mecca beside the Holy House of God. The infidels of Mecca beat him almost to death but he survived, and on the instruction of the Prophet Muhammad (S) he returned to his tribe. After the Battles of Badr and Uhud he came to Medina and stayed with Prophet until the demise of the Prophet (S). During the reign of the early Caliphs, Abu Dharr was sent to Damascus where he could not agree with Muawiyah. Later Muawiyah complained about Abu Dharr to Uthman, the third Caliph, and thus Uthman sent Abu Dharr into exile at Rabadha where he later died. Rabadha was known for having the worst climate.

(2) Ammar Ibn Yasir: He was also known as Abuyaqzan. His mother’s name was Somayyah. He and his parents were pioneers in embracing Islam, and he was the SEVENTH person to declare his faith. His parents were executed after the torture by the infidels of Mecca, because of their conversion to Islam, but Ammar managed to escape to Medina. Ammar fought on Imam ‘Ali’s side in the battle of Jamal (Camel) and later in the war of Siffin where he was killed in the battle field by Muawiyah soldiers, at the age of ninety-three.

(3) Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr: He was adopted by Imam ‘Ali after his father, Abu Bakr, died. Muhammad was one of the commanders of the army of Imam ‘Ali (as) in the battle of Camel. He was also in the battle of Siffin. Imam ‘Ali appointed him as the governor of Egypt, and he took his office 15/9/37 AH. Later, Muawiyah sent an army under the leadership of Amr Ibn al-Aas to Egypt in the year 38 AH, who fought and captured Muhammad, and then killed him. His body was placed in a belly of a dead donkey and then was brutally burnt. (See al-Istiab, v1, p235; History of al-Tabari, v4, p79; Ibn Kathir, v3, p180; Ibn Khaldoon, v2, p182)

(4) Malik Ashtar al-Nakha’i: He met the Prophet and was one of the trustworthy disciple of companions (Tabe’in). He was chief of his tribe, and after receiving an injury to one of his eyes in the battle of Yarmuk, he became known as Ashtar. He was the general of the army of Imam ‘Ali in the battle of Siffin and known for his bravery and combating the enemies of Islam. At the age of 38, he was appointed by Imam ‘Ali as the governor of Egypt. But on his way to Egypt, near the Red Sea, he died after eating poisonous honey which had been planned by Muawiyah.

The above were the short bibliographies of some eminent Muslim pioneers. It is regrettable that some historians who reported from Sayf’s heresy, allege that they followed a mysterious Jew. The mercenary workers did not even hesitate to attack such outstanding companions.

They said that Abu Dharr and Ammar Ibn Yasir met Ibn Saba, were affected by his propaganda, and thus turned against Uthman. However, we should not forget that by their attacking those two prominent companions, they are actually attacking the Messenger of God who attested to their purity and righteousness frequently:

The Messenger of God said: "Certainly Allah commanded me to love four persons and informed me that He loves them.”The companions asked:

"O’ Messenger of God, who are those four persons?”The Prophet (S) said: "‘Ali is from them (repeating that three times), Abu Dharr, Salman al-Farsi, and Miqdad."

Sunni references:

- Sunan Ibn Majah, v1, pp 52-53, Tradition #149
- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p130
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p356
- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p648, Tradition #1103
- Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p172

The Messenger of Allah also said:

"Every prophet was given by God seven righteous companions. I was given fourteen righteous companions". He included in them ‘Ali, al- Hasan, al-Husayn, Hamza, Ja’far, Ammar Ibn Yasir, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Salman

Sunni references:

- Fada’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, Traditions #109, #277
- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p329, p662
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp88,148,149 from several chain of narrators
- al-Kabir, by al-Tabarani, v6, p264, p265
- Hilyatul Awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p128

Also al-Tirmidhi, Ahmad, al-Hakim and many others narrated that the Messenger of Allah said:

"Heaven has not shaded, nor has the earth carried a person more straight forward than Abu Dharr. He walks on earth with the immaterialistic attitude of Jesus, the son of Mary."

Sunni reference:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p334, Tradition #3889

- Tahdhib al-Athar, v4, pp 158-161

- Musnad Ahmad Hanbal, #6519, #6630, #7078

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p342

- al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v4, part 1, pp 167-168

- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, pp 329-330

Ibn Majah, in his authentic Sunan, narrated that Imam ‘Ali said:

I was sitting in the house of the Prophet and Ammar asked to see him.

Then Prophet said: "Welcome the good and the purified.”Ibn Majah also narrated that Aisha narrated that the Messenger of God said

"Whenever Ammar is given two alternatives, he always chooses the most righteous of the two."

There are much more authentic narrations told by the Prophet (S) about Ammar, such as "Ammar is full of faith.”Also Prophet said:

"A band of rebels will kill Ammar."

Sunni references:

- Sahih Muslim, English version, Chapter # MCCV, pp 1508-1509, Traditions #6966-6970 (five traditions).

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p383

Now to see who those rebels were, look at Musnad Ahmad and Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d who narrated:

"In the Battle of Siffin, when the head of Ammar Yasir (ra) was cut off and taken to Muawiyah, two people were arguing over it, each one claimed that he had killed Ammar."

Sunni references:

- Musnad Ahmad (Pub. in Dar al-Maarif, Egypt 1952), Tradition #6538, #6929
- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v3, p253

Also it is narrated that the Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"Paradise longs for three men, ‘Ali, Ammar and Salman."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p332, Tradition #3884

Moreover al-Tirmidhi narrated:

When the Messenger of God heard that Ammar and his parents were tortured in Mecca, he (S) said: "Members of Yasir’s family, be patient. Your destination is paradise."

Sunni Reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p233,

Thus, Ammar and his parents were the first people declared by the Prophet to be dwellers of paradise.

Here we should say: When a Muslim knows that the Prophet has commended these two important companions (Abu Dharr & Ammar Ibn Yasir) so highly, and if he is a believer in the truthfulness of Muhammad, he does not allow himself to insult these two companions. Such an insult discredits the Prophet.

As we just saw, the above authentic traditions in the six Sunni collections claim that Prophet said he has only four or fourteen righteous companions, out of his 1400 companions. Interestingly enough that Abu Dharr and Ammar Ibn Yasir were mentioned among those very few individuals.

We find that the hostility of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, who lived during the second century after the Prophet, and the hostility of his students towards the Shi’ites, motivated them to spread such cheap propaganda.

Sayf knew that attributing the revolt against Uthman to the work of Ibn Saba contradicts known historical facts which show that the two companions, Abu Dhar and Ammar, were opposed to Uthman’s ever coming to power. Because Sayf knew of their opposition to Uthman, he tried to smear their reputations by adding the names of the two prominent companions to the list of students of that fictitious Jew.

If Ibn Saba ever existed, he had declared his Islam after Uthman was killed. Now let us suppose we accept what Sayf alleged concerning that Abdullah Ibn Saba declared his faith after Uthman came to power.

Abu Dharr and Ammar Ibn Yasir, on the other hand, had been opposed to Uthman’s caliphate before he came to power. The two companions were followers of the Imam ‘Ali (as), and they firmly believed that ‘Ali was appointed by the Prophet to be his successor. Since this was their belief before the appearance of Ibn Saba, the story of Sayf about their being influenced by Ibn Saba, is unfounded and untrue.

Thus, in order to clear the third caliph from all accusations pertaining to his ill-management of the Islamic treasury, Sayf accused the revolters being the students of Ibn Saba. He then completed his story by adding the two companions to the class of Ibn Saba’s students, intentionally overlooking the fact that the two companions belong to the first successful class of the school of the Prophet Muhammad (S). They were among the important companions who were honored by the Prophet. In fact, Sayf was led by his untrue story to reject the testimony of the Prophet. By this, Sayf had disproved his whole tale.

Abdullah Ibn Saba Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Agitation Against Uthman

Sayf alleged that the main reason behind the agitation against Uthman was Abdullah Ibn Saba. He provoked Muslims of different towns and provinces such as Basra, Kufa, Syria, and Egypt, to rush to Medina and to kill Uthman since he believed Uthman had occupied the seat of ‘Ali. Sayf also alleged that the companions inside Medina such as Talha and Zubair did not oppose Uthman.

Similar to his other allegations, this allegation of Sayf Ibn Umar about Abdullah Ibn Saba has NOT been reported by any other reporters. No trace of Ibn Saba can be found on the issue of agitation against Uthman, except through Sayf. In fact, other authorities have a totally the opposite story.

Should a reader of Islamic history be liberated from his emotion toward or against the third Caliph, he can be assured that the call for a revolt against Uthman did not start in Basra, Kufa, Syria, or Egypt. The weakness of Uthman in handing the affairs of the State caused many companions to oppose him.

This naturally resulted in a power struggle among the influential companions in Medina. Sunni historians such as al-Tabari, Ibn Athir, and al-Baladhuri and many others provide traditions (reported by other than Sayf) which confirm that the agitation against the Caliph started right inside Medina by some influential individuals among the companions. These companions were the first who asked the other companions, resided in other cities, to join them in revolt against Uthman. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari reported:

When the people saw what Uthman was doing, the companions of the Prophet in Medina wrote to other companions who were scattered throughout the frontier provinces: "You have gone forth but to struggle in the path of Almighty God, for the sake of Muhammad’s religion. In your absence the religion of Muhammad has been corrupted and forsaken. So come back to reestablish Muhammad’s religion.”Thus, they came from every direction until they killed the Caliph (Uthman).

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p184

In fact al-Tabari quoted the above paragraph form Muhammad Ibn Is’haq Ibn Yasar al-Madani who is the most celebrated Sunni Historian and the author of "Sirah Rasool-Allah".

History (reported by other than Sayf) testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas.

a) Talha

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against ‘Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel). I just give few paragraphs from both of al-Tabari and Ibn Athir to prove my point. Here is the first one which is narrated by Ibn Abbas (in some manuscripts it is Ibn Ayyash):

I entered Uthman’s presence (During the agitation against Uthman) and talked with him for an hour. He said: "Come Ibn Abbas/Ayyash,”and he took me by the hand and had me listen to what the people were saying at his door. We heard some say, "what are you waiting for,”while others were saying, "wait, perhaps he will repent.”

While the two of us were standing there (behind the door and listening), Talha Ibn Ubaydillah passed by and said: "Where is Ibn Udays?”He was told, "He is over there.”Ibn Udays came to (Talha) and whispered something with him, and then went back to his associates and said: "Do not let anyone go in (to the house of Uthman) to see this man or leave his house.”

Uthman said to me: "These are the orders of Talha.”He continued, "O God! Protect me from Talha for he has provoked all these people against me. By God, I hope nothing will come of it, and that his own blood will be shed. Talha has abused me unlawfully. I heard the Messenger of God said: ‘The blood of a Muslim is lawful in three cases: apostasy, adultery, and the one who kills except in legitimate retaliation for another.’ So why should I be killed?”Ibn Abbas/Ayyash continued: I wanted to leave (the house), but they blocked my path until Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr who was passing by requested them to let me go, and they did so.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 199-200

The Sayf’s claim is shattered into pieces when its is compared with any other reports similar to above. The above report gives evidence to the fact that Uthman himself knew companions like Talha were doing all this to him, and not the personage of Abdullah Ibn Saba. Do these mercenaries claim that they understand the situation better than the Caliph Uthman while they were born centuries after the incident? The following report also supports that the murder of Uthman was led by Talha, and the killers came out to inform their leader that they took care of Uthman:

Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!”

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

Uthman was besieged in Medina while Imam ‘Ali (as) was in Khaibar. The Imam (as) came to Medina and found people gathering at the residence of Talha.

Then Imam ‘Ali (as) went to met Uthman. Ibn Athir wrote:

Uthman said to ‘Ali: "You owe me my Islamic right and the right of brotherhood and relationship. If I have non of these rights and if I were in pre-Islamic era, it would be still shame for a descendants of Abd Munaf (of whom both ‘Ali and Uthman are descendants) to let a man of Tyme (Talha) rob us of our authority.”‘Ali said to Uthman: "You shall be informed of what I do.”Then ‘Ali went to Talha’s house. There were a lot of people there. ‘Ali spoke to Talha saying: "Talha, what is
this condition in which you have fallen?”Talha replied: "O’ Abul Hasan! it is to late!"

Sunni reference: al-Kamil, by Ibn Athir, v3, p84

Tabari also reports the following conversation between Imam ‘Ali and Talha during the siege over Uthman:

‘Ali said to Talha: "I ask you by Allah to send people away from (attacking) Uthman.”Talha replied: "No, by God, not until the Umayad voluntarily submit to what is right.”(Uthman was the head of Umayad).

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p235

Talha even deprived Uthman of water:

Abdurrahman Ibn al-Aswad said: "I constantly saw ‘Ali avoiding (Uthman) and not acting as he formerly had. However, I know that he spoke with Talha when Uthman was under siege, to the effect that water skins should be taken to him. ‘Ali was extremely upset (from Talha) about that until finally water skins were allowed to reach Uthman."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 180-181

To know why Imam ‘Ali (as) deserted Uthman, see the traditions close to the end of this article.

Furthermore, the historians confirm that those who plotted his killing, did not let the body of Uthman be buried in a Muslim Cemetery, and that he was finally buried in a Jew Cemetery called "Hashsh Kawkab", without washing and without a shroud. (See History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 246-250). If Jews were doing all that, they wouldn’t permit to bury him in their own Cemetery!!! After Muawiyah came to power, he joint that Jew Cemetery to al-Baqi including the land between them. (See History of Tabari, English version, v15, pp 246-250).

b) Aisha

Talha was not the only collaborator against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that his cousin, Aisha (the mother of believers), was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

"Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

Sunni references:

- History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206
- Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141
- al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290
- Sharh al-Nahj, by Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223

As we can see, the main figures in plotting against Uthman are some highly influential individuals, like Talha and Aisha. These Sunni reports are in clear contradiction with the reports related to Abdullah Ibn Saba, which were made up to cover up for those individuals centuries after the incident.

Another Sunni historian, al-Baladhuri, in his history (Ansab al-Ashraf) said that when the situation became extremely grave, Uthman ordered Marwan Ibn al-Hakam and Abdurrahman Ibn Attab Ibn Usayd to try to persuade Aisha to stop campaigning against him. They went to her while she was preparing to leave for pilgrimage, and they told her:

"We pray that you stay in Medina, and that Allah may save this man (Uthman) through you.”Aisha said: "I have prepared my means of transportation and vowed to perform the pilgrimage. By God, I shall not honor your request... I wish he (Uthman) was in one of my sacks so that I could carry him. I would then through him into the sea."

Sunni reference: Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, part 1, v4, p75

Certainly the revolution against Uthman “started “in Medina, and not in Basra, Kufa, and Egypt. The prominent people of Medina are the ones who first wrote to those outside Medina and instigated them against Uthman. To say that a Jew, named Ibn Saba, is the one who inspired people to revolt against the Caliph is not logical unless we accept that he was the one who also inspired Aisha, Talha, and Zubair to revolt. But those who speak of Ibn Saba and his role, do not include Aisha and people of her position as the followers of Ibn Saba.

The alleged role of Ibn Saba, in the revolt against Uthman, would also be credible if we were to say that Ibn Saba was the one who persuaded the Caliph to follow a path contrary to the first two Caliphs, and that he was the one who advised Uthman to give Islamic funds to his relatives and appoint them governors of Islamic provinces.

The manner in which Uthman conducted the affairs of the Islamic states gave Aisha, Talha, and Zubair and others, a reason to provoke Muslims against Uthman. However those who attribute the revolution against Uthman to Ibn Saba, do not accept that Ibn Saba was the one who advised Uthman to follow that wrong policy.

They are right, because that alleged Jew with such achievements never existed except in the imagination of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi and those who quoted from him. A few (less than 15) traditions (which are not even in any authentic Sunni books nor in any reliable Shi’a books) related to Abdullah Ibn Saba narrated by people other than Sayf give a totally different story in compare with Sayf’s heavy documentation which is being distributed everywhere. These traditions do not mention the presence of Ibn Saba in the revolt against Uthman.

c) Amr Ibn al-Aas

It is amazing that such an important role in the revolution against Uthman is attributed to a Jew for whose existence neither Shi’a nor Sunni have any strong evidence. Yet historians forget the important role which was played by a person well known in Islamic history, namely Amr Ibn al-Aas. He was more intelligent and more clever than any Jew ever existed in that era.

Amr had all the reasons to conspire against the Caliph, and he had all the abilities to instigate most of the people of Medina against him. Amr Ibn al-Aas was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph.

However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abu Sharh. As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman. He returned to Medina and started a malicious campaign against Uthman, accusing him of many wrong doings.

Uthman blamed Amr and spoke to him harshly. This made Amr even more bitter. He used to meet Zubair and Talha and conspire against Uthman. He used to meet pilgrims and inform them of the numerous deviations of Uthman. According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman:

...Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?”The man replied: "He has been killed.”Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock.”Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Quraishites, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?”Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal footing as regards the truth."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of prominent personalities in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. Instead of attributing the revolution to real people who rebelled against Uthman, the dividers of Muslims refuse to accept the truth or to mention it. They attribute the revolution to a fictitious Jew, relying on the reports of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, a man who was accused by prominent Sunni scholars to be a man of lies and innovations. They chose to accept Sayf’s report in order to cover up for the Caliph, Aisha, Talha, and Zubair. It is even more amazing that Aisha, Talha, and Zubair, and Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan fought Imam ‘Ali in two wars, unprecedented in the history of Islam, yet non of them accused the followers of Imam ‘Ali to be students of Ibn Saba.

Sunni history books and Sunni collections of traditions clearly state that Muawiyah commanded all the Imams of the mosques throughout the Muslim world to curse Imam ‘Ali in every Friday prayer. If the fictitious Jew, Ibn Saba, had any small role in the revolt against Uthman, Muawiyah would have made it the main topic of his defamation campaign against the Imam and his supporters.

He would have publicized throughout the world that those who killed Uthman were the student of Abdullah Ibn Saba, and that they were ones who brought ‘Ali to power. However neither Muawiyah nor Aisha took this route, because such stories attributed to Ibn Saba was invented by Sayf Ibn Umar who lived in the second century after Hijrah, long after their death.

The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayads such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman’s life as well as his death. The story of Ibn Saba in this regard has served to cover the face of those powerhungry individuals, and yet another way to attack Imam ‘Ali and his true followers.

Few Reasons Behind The Revolt Against Uthman

The Third Caliph, Uthman, was given the allegiance of the people with the stipulation that he would manage the affairs of the nation according to the book of God and the teachings of the Prophet (S). He was to follow the method of Abu Bakr and Umar, if there was no instruction from the Qur’an or the Prophet.

It is well-known that the first two caliphs lived simple lives. They did not give members of their clans a preference over other people, nor did they appoint any of their relatives to prominent positions in the State. Uthman, on the other hand, had his own opinions. He allowed himself to live luxuriously. He put members of his clan (Umayad) in prominent and strong positions in the State, preferring them over other Muslims, without monitoring their affairs. However, his relatives were not righteous.

Perhaps Uthman thought that his preference towards them was in accordance with the Book of God because Qur’an urges people to be kind to their relatives! This method of handing the affairs of the State did not please many companions. They found it extravagant and extreme.

The Companions criticized the Caliph for the following issues:

1. He brought his uncle, al-Hakam Ibn Abi al-Aas (son of Umayyah, son of Abd Shams), to Medina after the Prophet had exiled him from Medina. It was reported that al-Hakam used to hide and listen to the words of the Prophet as he spoke secretly to prominent companions, and then circulated what he heard. He used to imitate and ridicule the Prophet in the way he walked. The Prophet one time looked at him while he was being imitated and said: "This way you will be.”al-Hakam immediately started shaking and continued that way until he died. It is also reported that:

One day, while sitting with some of his companions, the Messenger of God said, "A cursed man will enter the room.”Shortly thereafter, al-Hakam entered. (He was the cursed man.)

Sunni reference: al-Isti’aab, by Yusuf Ibn Abd al-Barr, v1, pp 359-360

2. After bringing him to Medina, Uthman gave his uncle al-Hakam 300,000 Dirhams.

3. He made Marwan, son of al-Hakam, his highest assistant and top advisor, giving him influence equal to his own. Marwan bought a fifth of the revenues of the North Africa for 500,000 Dinars!!! However, he did not pay this amount. The Caliph allowed him to keep the money. This amount was equal to ten million dollars!!!

Imam ‘Ali (as) frequently reminded Uthman about the danger of Marwan, but in vain. The following conversation between Imam ‘Ali and Uthman testifies this fact. It happened when Uthman was being attacked, and thus he asked ‘Ali for help. Uthman said to Imam ‘Ali:

"You see the trouble caused by this band of dissidents when they came to me today. I know that you enjoy prestige among people and that they will listen to you. I want you to go to them and send them away from me. I do not wish them to come before me, for that would be an insulting act toward me on their part. Let others hear this as well.”‘Ali said: "On what grounds shall I send them away?"

Uthman replied: "On the grounds that I shall carry out what you have counseled me to do and you thought right, and I will not deviate from you direction.”Then ‘Ali said: "In fact I have spoken to you time after time, and you and I discussed such matters at length.

All this is the doing of Marwan Ibn al-Hakam, Saeed Ibn al-Aas, Ibn Amir, and Muawiyah. You have listened to them and defied me.”Uthman said: "then I shall defy them and listen to you."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p173

Then Imam ‘Ali spoke to people and asked them to go away from Uthman, and thus many of them retreated. Then Imam came to Uthman and informed him that people are gone, and said:

"Make a statement which the people will testify that they have heard from you, and God will be witness as to whether or not you desire to repent in your heart."

Thus, Uthman went out and preached the sermon in which he laid before the people his heartfelt desire to repent, and said: "By God, O people, if any one of you has blamed (me), he has not done anything that is unknown to me. I have done nothing unknowingly. But my soul has raised vain hopes within me and lied to me, and my virtue has slipped away from me. ...I ask God’s forgiveness for what I have done and I turn to him. A man like me yearns to repent."

Then people had pity on him, and some among them wept. Saeed Ibn Zayd stood up before him (Uthman) and said: "O commander of faithful, (from now on) no one comes to you who does not support you. Fear God, in your soul fear God, and fulfill what you have said!"

When Uthman descended (from the pulpit), he found Marwan Ibn al-Hakam and Seed Ibn al-Aas, and a few other Umayad at his house. Marwan said: "Should I speak (to people) or remain silent?”Uthman’s wife said: "Nay! Be silent, for they will kill him of sin. He has made a public statement from which he can not rightfully withdraw.”Marwan said: "What does this have to do with you?"
Then Marwan said to Uthman: "To persist in an error for which you must seek God’s forgiveness is better that to repent because you are afraid. If you so will, you may seek repentance without acknowledging error.”Uthman said: "Go out and speak to them, for I am ashamed to do so."

So Marwan went (to people) and said: "Why have you gathered here like looters? ... You have come to snatch our power (Mulk; kingship) from us. Go! By God, if you mean us (any harm), you will encounter something distasteful from us, and you will not praise the result of your opinions. Return to your homes, for by God we are not men to be robbed of our possessions."

People informed ‘Ali of the news. Then ‘Ali came to Uthman and said: "Surely you have satisfied Marwan (again), but he is satisfied with you only if you deviate from your religion and reason, like a camel carrying a litter that is led around at will. By God, Marwan is devoid of sense in regard to his religion and his soul. I swear by God, I think he will bring you in and then not send you out again.

After this visit, I will not come again to chide you. You have destroyed your own honor and you have been robbed of your authority.”When ‘Ali departed, Uthman’s wife told him: "I have heard that ‘Ali said to you that he will never return to you, and that you have obeyed Marwan (again), who leads you wherever he wishes.”

Uthman said: "What shall I do?”She responded: "You should fear God alone, who has no partner, and you should adhere to the practice of your two predecessors (Abu Bakr and Umar). For if you obey Marwan, he will kill you. Marwan enjoys no prestige among the people, and inspires neither awe nor love. People have only abandoned you due to Marwan’s position (in your councils). Send to ‘Ali, then, and trust in his honesty and uprightness. He is related to you and he is not a man whom people disobey.”So Uthman sent to ‘Ali, but he refused to come, saying: "I told him I would not return."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 176-179

On the death of Uthman, Imam ‘Ali (as) said: By God! I have persisted in defending him (Uthman) until I was filled with shame. But Marwan, Muawiyah, Abdullah Ibn Amir, and Sa’d Ibn al-Aas have dealt with him as you witnessed. When I gave him sincere counsel and directed him to send them away, he became suspicious of me, until what you now see has happened.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p198

Marwan and his descendants were the basis for some of the most serious charges of corruption and nepotism levied against Uthman. Marwan, of course, ultimately seized the Caliphate and ascended the throne in year 64/684, and was the lineal ancestor of all succeeding Umayad kings in Damascus as well as the Amirs of Cordoba till after 756 AD.

4. The Caliph appointed his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d, as the governor of Egypt. At that time, Egypt was the largest province in the Muslim State. Ibn Sa’d had declared his Islam and moved from Mecca to Medina. The Prophet listed him as a recorder of the revelation. However,
Ibn Sa’d then deserted the faith and returned to Mecca. He used to say: "I shall reveal equal to what God revealed to Muhammad.”

When Mecca was conquered, the Prophet ordered the Muslims to kill Ibn Sa’d. He was to be killed even if he was found tying himself to the cloth of the Ka’aba. Ibn Sa’d hid himself at the house of Uthman. When the situation calmed down, Uthman brought Ibn Sa’d to the Prophet and informed him that he had put Ibn Sa’d under his protection. The Prophet remained silent for a long while, hoping that one of those who were present, would kill Ibn Sa’d before he honors Uthman’s request. The companions, however, did not understand what the Prophet meant by his long silence. Since no one moved to kill Ibn Sa’d, the Prophet approved the protection of Uthman.

5. The Caliph Uthman appointed Walid Ibn Aqabah (one of his Umayad relatives) as the governor of Kufa after dismissing the previous governor, the famous companion of Prophet, Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas. Sa’d was a famous marksman known for combating the enemies of Islam in the Battle of Uhud.

On the other hand, the behavior of Walid during the time of the Prophet was not honorable. Qur’an discredited him and called him a transgressor. For instance, the Messenger sent him to Bani al-Mustalaq to collect their Zakat. Walid witnessed from a distance that Mustalaqites coming toward him on their horses.

He became frightened due to a previous hostility between the Mustalaqites and him. He returned to the Messenger of God and informed him that the Mustalaqites wanted to kill him. This was not true. However, Walid’s information infuriated the Muslims of Medina, and they wanted to attack the Mustalaqites. At this time, the following revelation came down:

"O you who believe, if a transgressor comes to you with news, try to verify it, lest you inflict damage on people unwittingly; then you may consequently regret your hasty action."

Walid continued in his non-Islamic way for the rest of his life. He used to drink wine and several witnesses testified to the Caliph that they had witnessed Walid drunk while leading a congregational prayer!!! Upon the testimony of good witnesses, Walid was lashed eighty times and was dismissed by the Caliph. The Caliph was expected to replace this transgressor with a good companion of the Prophet but, instead, he replaced Walid with Saeed Ibn al-Aas, another member of his Umayad relatives!

The following dialog between Imam ‘Ali (as) and Uthman, is also written in the History of al-Tabari which gives more insight to the situation of Uthman long before his murder:
People gathered and talked to ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib. Thus ‘Ali went to Uthman and said:
People came to me, and they have spoken to me about you. ... Remember God! You will be not awarded your sight after you become blind, by God!, nor you are being instructed after you were in ignorance. Verily the Path is manifest and clear, and the signs of true religion are standing upright.

Know, Uthman, that the best servant in the eyes of God, is a just Imam (leader), one who has been guided to the way, and who himself gives the right guidance (to people), for he upholds the true Sunnah and destroys rejected innovations. By God, every thing is clear. Sound and true Sunnah stands clearly, as do blameworthy innovations.

The worst Imam in the eyes of God, is a tyrannical leader, the one who has gone astray himself, and by whom others are led astray, for he destroys a true Sunnah and revives a rejected innovation.

Verily I heard the messenger of Allah saying: ‘In The Day of Resurrection, the tyrannical leader will be brought while he will have no helper and no advocate, so that he will be cast to the Hell, and he will be turning about in Hell as the mill turns, and he then will plunge into the fiery flood of Hell.’

I tell you (Uthman), to be aware of God and His sudden assault and His retaliation, for His punishment is harsh and painful indeed. I tell you to beware lest you be the murdered leader of this community. Indeed it is said that a leader will be killed in this community, and its bloody strife will be loosed upon it until the day of rising (of Imam Mahdi), and its affairs will become hopelessly entangled. It will leave people as sects, and they will not see the truth due to the great height of falsehood. They will toss therein like waves and wander in confusion.

Then Uthman replied:

By God, I knew that (people) would be saying what you have said. But by God, if you were in my place, I would not have blame you nor left you in the lurch nor shamed you nor behaved unfairly. If I have favored my relatives, and appointed them as governors, some of them are those whom Umar used to appoint. I appeal you by God, O ‘Ali, do you know that al-Mughirah Ibn Shubah is not there? ‘Ali said: Yes.

Then Uthman said: Do you know that Umar made him a governor? ‘Ali said: Yes. Then Uthman said: So why do you blame me for having appointed him Amir, simply because he is my relative?

Then ‘Ali said:

I would tell you that every one appointed by Umar, was kept under close inspection by him, and Umar would trample on his ear. If Umar would hear a single word concerning him, he would flog him and punish him with the utmost severity. But you do not do that. You have been weak and easygoing with your relatives. Uthman said: They are your relatives as well. ‘Ali replied: By my life, they are closely related to me, but merit is found in other people.

Then Uthman said:

Do you know that Umar was the one who kept Muawiyah in the office throughout his entire reign, and I have only done the same.

Then ‘Ali said:

I ask you by Allah, do you know that Muawiyah was more afraid of Umar than was Umar’s own slave, Yarfa? Uthman said: Yes. ‘Ali continued: Now it has been reached to the point that Muawiyah makes decisions on the issues without consulting you, and you know it.

Muawiyah says to people "This is Uthman’s command", and you hear of this, but you do not denounce him.

Then ‘Ali left Uthman, and Uthman went out on his heels. Then Uthman ascended the pulpit and said:

By God, you have surely blamed me for things like those you accepted from Umar. But he trampled you underfoot, smote you with his hand, and subdued you by his tongue, and thus you submitted to him whether you liked it or not. But I have been lenient with you. I let you step on my shoulders while I restrained my hand and tongue, and therefore you have been rude toward me. By God, I am stronger in the number of relatives, and have allies closer at hand, and possess more supporters.

I have appointed your peers over you. But you have attributed to me a nature that I do not possess. Restrain your tongue from slandering your rulers... By God! I have achieved no less than my predecessors or those about whom you have not disagreed. There is a surplus wealth, so why should I not do as I wish with the surplus?

Otherwise why did I become leader?

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 141-144

Abdullah Ibn Saba Part 4

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Who Started The Battle Of Camel?

The battle of Camel (Jamal) was the first war declared against Imam ‘Ali (as) in Basra in year 36/656 after people appointed ‘Ali as their leader of the Muslim community. It was called so, because Aisha, one of the leaders of the opposition group was riding a camel. The other leaders among the opposition were Talha and Zubair who were two well-known companions of the messenger of Allah. This war is also known in the history as the battle of Basra. The result was shedding the blood of more than ten thousand Muslims.

The circulators of false accusation against the Followers of the Members of the House of the Prophet quote from Sayf that the followers of Ibn Saba started the battle of Basra at night just before the negotiations between Imam ‘Ali and his three opponents (Aisha, Talha, and Zubair) were about to succeed.

They started the battle at night by attacking the two armies simultaneously in order to make them plunge into battle. Ibn Saba wanted to make each of the two armies accuse the other of starting the battle. This would abort the peaceful efforts whose stipulations were supposed to include the punishment of Uthman’s killers.

This allegation is in contradiction with many clear historical facts, of which the following events were recorded by the Sunni historians and traditionists:

1. al-Sha’bi (Amir Ibn Sharahil al-shi-abi) reported the following:

The right side of the army of the Commander of Believers (‘Ali) attacked the left side of Basra’s army. They fought each other and people resorted to Aisha and most of them were from Dhubbah
and al-Azd tribes. The Battle started after sunrise and continued until afternoon. The Basrites were defeated and a man from the tribe of al-Azd said: ‘Come back and attack.’ Muhammad (Ibn al-Hanafiya), son of ‘Ali, hit him with his sword and severed his hand. The man shouted: ‘Azdites, run away.’ When the Azdites were overwhelmed by the army of the ‘Ali, the Azdites shouted: ‘We belong to the religion of ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib.’

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p312. (The English version of this part is not yet published at the time of writing of this article)

The above report gives evidence to the fact that the fight did not start during the night as the inventor of Ibn Saba claimed. Rather it started after the sunrise. This collapses the whole alleged conspiracy of simultaneous attack to both armies during the night.

2. Qatadah reported the following:
When the two armies faced each other, Zubair appeared on his horse while he was well armed. People said to ‘Ali, ‘This is Zubair.’ Upon that ‘Ali said: ‘Zubair is the more expected of the two to remember God, if he is reminded.’ Talha also came to face ‘Ali. When ‘Ali faced them, he said: ‘Certainly you have prepared arms, horses, and men. Did you prepare an excuse for the Day of Judgment when you meet your Lord?

Fear God and do not be like the lady who unravels her weaving after she had woven it strongly. Was I not your brother and you used to believe in the sanctity of my blood? Did anything happen to make it legal for you to shed my blood?’ Talha said: ‘You have instigated people against Uthman.’

Imam ‘Ali replied, quoting from the Qur’an:

‘On that day (the day of judgment), Allah will pay them their just due, and they will know that, indeed, Allah is the Manifest Truth.(Qur’an 24:25).’

Then ‘Ali continued: ‘Talha, you are fighting for the blood of Uthman?

May God curse those who killed Uthman. Zubair, do you remember the day when you passed by with the Messenger of God at Banu Ghunam and he looked at me and smiled? I smiled back at him and you said to him: ‘Ibn Abu Talib is always conceited. ‘The Messenger of God said to you: ‘He is not conceited, and you shall fight him unjustly.’

Zubair said: ‘By God, this is true. Had I remembered that, I would not have made this journey. By God, I shall never fight you.’ Then Zubair left and informed Aisha and his son Abdullah that he took an oath to never fight ‘Ali. His son counseled him to fight against ‘Ali and pay atonement (Kaffaarah) for breaking his oath. Zubair agreed and made his atonement by freeing his slave Mak’hul.

Sunni references:

- History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH, v4, pp501-502
- History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p240
- al-Isti’ab, Ibn Abd al-Barr, v2, p515
- Usdul Ghabah, v2, p252
- al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v2, p557

This event clearly tells us that Talha and Zubair confronted Imam ‘Ali (as) BEFORE the start of the battle, and the confrontation was in the day time rather than at night. Otherwise, people could not have seen the confrontation or heard the conversation between the Imam and his opponents and recognize each other in the Helmet (metal head-cover). We are sure that there was no electricity for light, nor was there any voice amplifier to make conversations heard.

Since the conversation and the confrontation took place before the start of the battle, it is clear that the report of Sayf about the battle starting during the dark night and unpredictably, is a sheer lie.

3. al-Dhabbi narrated:

We were in the camp of ‘Ali on the day of Battle of Camel, where ‘Ali sent for Talha to talk to him (before the beginning of war). Talha came forward, and ‘Ali told him: I adjure you by Allah! Didn’t you hear the Messenger of Allah (S) when he said: `Whoever I am his MAWLA, this ‘Ali is his MAWLA. O God, love whoever loves him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him’?”Talha replied: "Yes.”‘Ali said: "Then why do you want to fight me?"

Sunni references:

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 169,371
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, on the authority of Ilyas al-Dhabbi
- Muruj al-Dhahab, by al-Mas’udi, v4, p321
- Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p107

4. Yahya Ibn Sa’id narrated:

Marwan Ibn al-Hakam who was in the ranks of Talha, saw Talha is retreating (when his army was being defeated in the battlefield).

Since he and all Umayad recognized him and al-Zubair as the murderers of Uthman, he shot an arrow at him and severely wounded him. He then said to Aban, the son of Uthman, that: "I have spared you from one of your father’s murderers.”Talha was taken to a ruined house in Basra
where he died.

Sunni references:

- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159
- al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, pp 532-533
- History of Ibn al-Athir, v3, p244
- Usdul Ghabah, v3, pp 87-88
- al-Isti’ab, Ibn Abd al-Barr, v2, p766
- History of Ibn al-Kathir, v7, p248
- A similar report is given in al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 169,371

5. al-Zuhri, another important Sunni narrator who is famous for his dislike of Ahlul-Bayt, reported the following dialogue of Imam ‘Ali with Zubair and

Talha before the battle:

"‘Ali said: ‘Zubair, do you fight me for the blood of Uthman after you killed him? May God give the most hostile to Uthman among us the consequence which that very person dislikes.’ He said to Talha: ‘Talha, you have brought the wife of the Messenger of God (Aisha) to use her for war and hid your wife at your house (in Medina)! Did you not give me your allegiance?’ Talha said: ‘I gave you the allegiance while the sword was on my neck.’

(At this point, ‘Ali tried to invite them to peace, leaving them no excuse.) ‘Ali addressed his own army saying: ‘Who among you will display this Qur’an and what is in it to the opposing army with the understanding that if he loses one of his hand he will hold the Qur’an with his other hand...?’

A youth from Kufa said: ‘I will take the mission.’ ‘Ali went through his army offering them the mission. Only that youth accepted it. Then ‘Ali said to him: ‘Exhibit this Qur’an and say to them: It is between you and us from its beginning to its end. Remember God, and spare your blood and our blood.’

As the youth called upon them to resort to the Qur’an and surrender to its judgment, the Basrites army attacked and killed him. At this time, ‘Ali said to his army: ‘Now the fight has become legal.’ The battle then started.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

All these reports and the similar ones clearly indicate that the battle started in the day time rather than at night as Sayf Ibn Umar alleged. The breaking war was not abrupt since the two armies met and talked to each other just before the start of battle. Had the confrontation between Imam

‘Ali and Talha and Zubair taken place at night, the final call of Imam ‘Ali would have had no benefit because the two armies would not have been able to witness it or hear their conversation. Also, the confrontation between the carrier of the Holy Qur’an and the Basrites would have been useless.

None of the opposing soldiers could have seen the Qur’an in the hands of the young man at night.

Furthermore, the alleged agreement between the Imam and the three rebellious leaders, to punish the individuals who murdered Uthman, would be logical only if the three leaders were serious in seeking punishment for the killers. But the three leaders (Aisha, Talha, and Zubair) were the main agitators who provoked people to kill the Third Caliph. As we see in the above tradition, Imam ‘Ali clearly stated that Zubair was among those who killed Uthman.

Had the revolters elected Talha or Zubair instead of Imam ‘Ali (as) as Caliph, they would have given the killers of Uthman the biggest prize. Certainly the leaders did not seek revenge for the blood of Uthman, for they themselves were behind the plot. They only pretended to do that as a means of destroying the Imam’s caliphate.

Imam ‘Ali said in the battle of Camel:

"Truth and falsehood can not be identified by the virtue of people. First understand the truth, you will then realize who is adhering to it.”(Nahjul Balaghah, by Imam ‘Ali)

إنَّ الحقَّ و الباطل لا يعرفان بأقدارِ الرجال. إعرف الحق تعرف أهله.

Short Summary Of Comparing Reports On The Character Of Abdullah Ibn Saba

Abdullah Ibn Saba Part 5

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

The Opinion Of The Historians

I have already provided the opinion of 15 famous Sunni scholars about the weakness of the reports of Sayf Ibn Umar in of this article.

Beside them, many Sunni historians have also denied the existence of Abdullah Ibn Saba and and/or the forged stories attributed to him. Among them are Dr. Taha Husayn, who has analyzed these stories and rejected them.

He wrote in "al-Fitnah al-Kubra”that:

In my opinion, those who have tried to emphasize on the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba, have committed a crime in the history and hurt themselves too. The first thing that is observed is that in the important collections the name of Ibn Saba does not appear when they discuss the agitation against Uthman.

Ibn Sa’d does not mention the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba when he discusses the Caliphate of Uthman and the revolt against him. Also the book by al-Baladhuri, "Ansab al-Ashraf", which I think the most important and the most detailed book about the revolt against Uthman, the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba has never been mentioned. It appears that al-Tabari was the first who reported the story of Ibn Saba from Sayf, and then other historians quoted al-Tabari in this regard.

In his other book "‘Ali wa Banuh", he also mentioned:

The story of Ibn Saba is nothing but myth, and is the invention of some historians, since it contradicts other historical documents. ...

The fact is that the friction between Shi’a and Sunni have had many shapes, and each group was advocating itself and denouncing the other by any means possible. This requires a historian to be much more cautious when analyzing the controversial reports related to seditions and revolts.

In , we briefly mentioned the masterpiece of Allamah al-Askari which was released in 1955 AD. Before that time, no analytical research had been done on the character of Abdullah Ibn Saba to investigate if he really existed in physical world and/or if the stories around this man had any single truth in it.

Although Sayf’s heresy was well-known for a number of centuries, no research had been done about the origin of the tale of Abdullah Ibn Saba. In his research, al-Askari proved that Sayf’s narration attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba and many other things are sheer lie since they contradict all other Sunni documents in content, timing of the events, names of cities and companions, imaginary chain of narrators, and miraculous records by Sayf (like talking cows with humans and so on). If there was any Abdullah Ibn Saba at that time, his story was much different than what Sayf manipulated.

Here is the response of a Sunni learned man, Dr. Hamid Dawud, the professor of Cairo University, after reading al-Askari’s book (I just give only a part of his letter):

The 1300th birthday of Islam has been celebrated. During this time, some of our learned writers have accused Shi’a of having un-Islamic views. Those writers influenced public opinion against Shi’a and created big gaps between Muslims. In spite of wisdom and learning, the enemies of Shi’a followed their own chosen beliefs and partiality, covering the truth, and accusing the Shi’a of being superstitious etc.

Hence Islamic science suffered much, as Shi’a views were suppressed.

As a result of these accusations, the loss to Islamic science was greater than the loss suffered by Shi’a themselves, because the source of this jurisprudence, though rich and fruitful, was neglected, resulting in limited knowledge. Also, in the past, our learned men were prejudiced, otherwise we would have benefited from many Shi’a views. Anyone who wishes to do research in Islamic Jurisprudence must consider Shi’a sources as well as those of Sunni.

Was not the Shi’a leader, Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (d. 148 AH), the teacher of two Sunni Imams? i.e., Abu Hanifa al-Nu’man (d. 150 AH), and Malik Ibn Anas (d. 179 AH). Imam Abu Hanifa said: "Except for the two years Nu’man would have starved,”referring to the two years he had benefited from the knowledge of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq. Imam Malik also confessed straightforwardly that he had not met anyone learned in Islamic Jurisprudence better than Imam Jafar al-Sadiq.

Yet, some of our so-called learned men, unfortunately disregard the rules for research to suit their own ends. Hence knowledge is not fully disclosed to them and thus they create a wider gap between
Muslims.

Ahmed Amin is one of those deprived of the light of knowledge, remaining in darkness. History has recorded this stain on the robe of Ahmed Amin and his friends, who blindly followed one special Madhab. Of many mistakes made by him, the biggest is told in the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba. This is one of the tales told in order to accuse Shi’a of heresy and foregoing events.

The great contemporary researcher, al-Askari, in his book, has proved with substantial evidence, that Abdullah Ibn Saba was fictitious, and it is therefore a greater lie to say that he was the founder of Shi’ism.

God has decreed that some learned men disclose the truth regardless of blame they may get. The pioneer in this subject is this man who has made the Sunni learned men of research revise the history book of Tabari (History of Nations and Kings), and to sift out the authentic stories from the false. The stories which have been preserved as God’s revelations.

The honorable writer, with much evidence, has stripped the veil or ambiguity from those historical events, and disclosed the truth, to some extent that some facts seem frightful. But we have to obey the truth no matter how difficult they appear. The truth is the best to be followed.

Dr. Hamid Hafni Dawud
Oct. 12, 1961
Cairo, Egypt.

We just heard from a Sunni Muslim. Now let us see what a third party has to say about Sayf and his character, Abdullah Ibn Saba. The following is the comment of Dr. R. Stephen Humpherys, from the University of Wisconsin at Madison, who has translated the Vol. 15 of the History of al-Tabari into English. This comment is written in the foreword of Vol. 15 of the History of al-Tabari. (again, I just give some parts of it. Please refer to Vol. 15 for details):

For events in Iraq and Arabia (the real key to the crises of Uthman’s caliphate) Tabari relies chiefly on Muhammad Ibn Umar al- Waqidi (d. 823) and the mysterious Sayf ibn Umar. Both of these authorities raise real problems ... It is Sayf Ibn Umar who is most troubling, however.

Tabari shows a unique fondness for him, in two senses. First, Sayf is the source most heavily used by Tabari for the whole period from the Riddah wars to the battle of Siffin (11-37 AH). Second, no one beside Tabari appears to use Sayf at all. There is no obvious way to explain Tabari’s preference.

It is certainly not explained by the formal characteristics of Sayf’s narratives, for he relies on informants who are usually obscure and often very recent. likewise, he makes heavy use of the collective report, which blends together in unspecified ways the accounts of several transmitters.

I would suggest that Sayf appealed to Tabari for two reasons. First, Sayf presents a "Sunday school”interpretation of Uthman’s caliphate.

In his presentation, one sees a profound unity and harmony within the core community of Muslims, a unity and harmony founded on strict fidelity to the legacy of Muhammad. It is unthinkable that men such as those portrayed by Sayf could have been moved by worldly ambition and greed.

On the contrary, in Sayf’s presentation most conflicts are illusory, a reflection of malicious misinterpretations by later commentators. Where real conflicts did arise among sincere Muslims,
they were instigated by outsiders like the notorious Abdullah Ibn Saba, a converted Jew from Yemen.

On this level, at least, Sayf’s version of events is obviously a very naive one, and no doubt Tabari perceived that as clearly as we do.

Even so, it served a very useful function for Tabari: By making Sayf’s reports the visible frame work of his narrative, he could slip in the much less flattering interpretations of early Islamic history presented by his other sources. Ordinary readers would dismiss this dissident testimony as irrelevant, and only few critical readers would catch his hint and pursue the issues raised by such secondary accounts.

In this way, Tabari could say what needed to be said while avoiding accusations of sectarianism. Accusations of this kind were of course no small matter in view of the enormous social and religious tensions in Baghdad during the late 9th and early 10th centuries.

Reference: History of al-Tabari, v15, pp xv-xvii

Also in the foreword of Volume 11 of the English version of the History of al-Tabari, the translator writes:

Although Tabari scrupulously cited his sources and can be shown to have often quoted from them almost verbatim, these source themselves can be traced with certainty only to an earlier stage in the collection of Islamic history, represented by the writers Ibn Is’haq (d. 151/767), Ibn al-Kalbi (d. 204/819), al-Waqidi (d. 207/822), and Sayf Ibn Umar (d. ~170/786).

From the first three, all of whom are cited in this volume, there are works extant that enable us to assess their tendencies to some extent, as well as to verify their use of their own sources. For an assessment of the value of their transmission, the reader is referred to the relevant articles in the Encyclopedia of Islam and other secondary literature.

It is the fourth writer extensively quoted by al-Tabari, Sayf ibn Umar, with whom we are mainly concerned here. As his work survives principally in the transmission of al-Tabari and those who took from him and is found nowhere in independent form, he has unfortunately been rather ignored in modern criticism. Yet it is Sayf’s lengthy reports that fill most of the pages of this and several other volumes.

The historical evaluation of this volume therefore depends to a large extent on our assessment of the nature of Sayf’s reports and al- Tabari’s use of them, and it is to these problems that we must turn
our attention.

Abu Abdillah Sayf Ibn Umar al-Usayyidi al-Tamimi was a Kufan traditionist who died in the reign of Harun al-Rashid (170-93/786- 809). Other than the possibility that he was accused of MANICHAEISM (Zandaqah) in the inquisition (Mihnah) that began under al-Mahdi in 166/783 and continued into the time of al-Rashid, nothing is known of his life, except what can be determined from his tradition. (On Mihnah itself, see History of al-Tabari, v3, pp 517, 522, 548-551, 604, 645; and the book called "Zindiqs”by Vajda, pp 173-229. On accusations against Sayf, see Majruheen, by Ibn Hibban, v1, pp 345-346; Mizan, by al-Dhahabi, v2, pp 255-256; Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar, v4, p296).

As he is alleged to have transmitted from at least nine traditionists who died in 140-146/757-763, and even from two who died in 126-128/744- 746, he may have been elderly when he died. This is also suggested by the possibility that Abu Mikhnaf, who died considerably earlier than Sayf in 157/774, may have quoted from him. Sayf’s work was originally recorded in two books which are now lost but survived for a number of centuries after Sayf’s own lifetime.

They made an enormous impact on the Islamic historical tradition, especially because al-Tabari chose to rely mainly on them for the events of 11-36/632-656, a period that spanned the reigns of the first three caliphs and included all the early conquests of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Iran.

Although al-Tabari also quoted other sources in this volume, as we have indicated, the overwhelming bulk of his material for this period is from Sayf. In deed, it is also probable, though not certain, that he has reproduced the vast majority of Sayf’s work. Sayf is only rarely cited by other writers independently of al-Tabari

Generally, Sayf’s description of the conquests transmitted in this and other volumes of al-Tabari emphasizes the heroism of the Muslim warriors, the hardships they endured, and the toughness of their opponents, features that seem plausible enough and are also found in other conquest narratives beside those of Sayf.

However, Sayf’s narratives differ in the extent to which he introduces traditions not found elsewhere, often reporting them from transmitters not otherwise known. These UNIQUE narratives frequently contain fantastic or legendary motifs to an extent far greater than is found in the versions of other historians. Although the fantastic and tendentious nature of Sayf’s reports has often been noted, for example, by Julius Wellhausen (see skizzen, pp 3-7), the exact value of his corpus as a primary source has never been assessed in detail.

...Although he hailed from Kufa, the crucible of early Shi’ism, Sayf belonged to a completely anti-Shi’i undercurrent, representing the Kufan faction that had earlier opposed the rebellions of al-Husayn Ibn ‘Ali and Zayd Ibn ‘Ali. (This is also indicated by his quotation from sources who were involved in the killing of al-Husayn. See for instance v11, pp 204, 206, 216, 222)...

The egregious tendentiousness of Sayf’s corpus comes out most plainly in other volumes of al-Tabari, in such episodes as Saqifah Bani Sa’idah (Tabari, v1, pp 1844-50), the burial of Uthman (3049-50), and the tale of ABDULLAH IBN SABA (2858-59,2922,2928,2942-44,2954,3027, 3163-65,3180). In each of these instances, other versions that do not confirm Sayf’s own are available for comparison and reveal the impudence of his daring constructions.

... Beside exaggerating the roles of certain Companions in the early conquests, Sayf also embellished his work with the exploits of other, IMAGINARY COMPANIONS and with heroes whom he invented, especially to represent his own tribal group. The most outstanding of these fabrications is al-Qa’qa Ibn Amr, a hero and alleged Companion of the Prophet, who is, not surprisingly, said to be a member of Sayf’s own subtribe, the Usayyidi (in this volume, pp 8,24,36,40,42-43,45,48,60- 63,65,90,95,166,168).

His being an Usayyidi suggests that his fabrication is owing to Sayf himself and not to any of Sayf’s alleged sources, as none of the latter is identified as an Usayyidi. In addition, many other persons supposedly belonging to the Tamim tribal group appear to be fabrication, some of them having stereotypical names that suggest almost playful invention, like "Wrap, the son of Skirt", "Spring Herbage, the son of Rain, the son of Snow", and "Sea, the son of Euphrates". The reader will find dozens of persons who are named only in Sayf’s traditions recorded in this volume. ...

Beside having fabricated many of the personages who appear in his transmissions, it also appear that Sayf fabricated the names of many, perhaps most, of his alleged authorities. ...

Frequently it seems that these invented "authorities”served as intermediate links between Sayf and earlier genuine traditionists whose authority Sayf wished to use to bolster his own inventions.

This assessment of Sayf in no way undermines the authority of other early Muslim writers whose works may have an entirely different character, just as the Late Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus is in no way affected by the fraud of the Historia Augusta.

On the contrary, it is greatly to the credit of the medieval Sunni Muslims who assessed the quality of traditions in the Rijal books that they unanimously rejected Sayf’s authority in the most absolute way possible. They did so despite the fact that his traditions could have been used to back their emerging Sunni consensus on early Islamic history.

This suggests that their condemnation of Sayf’s traditions was motivated by a concern for the truth, rather than by a wish to gain advantage in the partisan arena of the time. They realized that his transmissions were exaggerated and fraudulent, and they said so.

In fact, the condemnation of Sayf by the medieval Muslim Ulama ought to serve as a reminder to modern scholars that ancient and medieval texts were not always dictated by the prevailing political or religious climate and that the search for truth had its place in earlier times as well as in
our own. ...

In describing the conquests generally al-Tabari scarcely deviated from Sayf’s reports. This brings us to the second attraction that Sayf may have had for al-Tabari: DETAIL. Sayf’s transmissions are almost always far more verbose than parallel reports of more sober traditionists.

This characteristic probably not only made them preferable to al- Tabari but may have seemed a guarantee of their accuracy. Living in medieval times, al-Tabari did not, in the majority of instances, have available to him the modern tools that would have enabled him to discover Sayf’s tendentiousness. And, after all, Sayf’s reports have continued to receive the approbation of a minority of scholars even up to the present.

Reference: History of al-Tabari, v11, pp xv-xxix

Also Professor James Robinson, (D.Litt., D.D.Glasgow, U.K.) wrote:

I would like to make a remark about Tabari who had no hesitation in quoting from Sayf. His history is not a historical work in the manner of modern writing, for his main purpose seems to have been to record all the information in his possession without necessarily expressing an opinion on its value. One is, therefore, prepared to find that some of his material is less reliable than others. So, perhaps we can excuse him for using a method not approved nowadays. He has at least provided a mass of information. It remains for acute scholars to distinguish between the genuine and the false.

It is shown that Sayf often quotes men who are unknown. This raises the question why none of them should have been quoted by other transmitters, and leads one further to suggest that Sayf has invented them. This serious accusation is a reasonable assumption by comparing Sayf with others.

It is pointed out that Sayf has stories miraculous of happenings which are difficult to believe, such as desert sands becoming water for Muslim armies, seas becoming sand, cattle speaking and informing the Muslim army where they were hidden, etc. In Sayf’s time it was possible for him to succeed in passing off such stories as history, but nowadays the critical student naturally finds such stories quite impossible. Effective arguments are also used to show how Sayf’s information about Ibn Saba and the Saba’iyya is quite unreliable.

Sayf who lived in the first quarter of the second century belonged to Tamim, one of the Mudar tribes who live in Kufa. This helps one to study his tendencies and the influences leading to this legends. There is discussion of Zindeeq and of Manichaeism. Party spirit is said to have continued from the Prophet’s time, till that of the Abbasids.

Sayf upholds the northern tribes, inventing heroes, poets praising the tribe’s heroes, companions of the Prophet from Tamim, wars and battles which had no reality, millions killed and large numbers of prisoners with the purpose glorifying the heroes he invented, Poems attributed to imaginary heroes were in praise of Mudar, then Tamim, then Ibn Amr, the subtribe to which Sayf traced his origin. Sayf mentioned men of Mudar as leaders of battles which were led by men of other tribes, his fictitious leaders sometimes being real people, sometimes names produced by his imagination. It is argued that the falseness of his information was partly to upset the faith of many and partly to give non-Muslims a wrong conception. He was so skillful in his forgeries that they were accepted as genuine history.

There is a big difference between a Hadith work, such as Sahih al-Bukhari, and a history work such as the History al-Tabari. al-Bukhari was selective toward the traditions and might have recorded 1/10 of traditions that was conveyed to him, since he dropped all traditions which might have been weak in his point of view. However al-Tabari, though he was selective in his other works, but for his History he recorded 9/10 of what he had heard, and this is due to the nature of historical documentations which are not necessarily as accurate as the Hadith collections.

As a result, al-Bukhari did not transmit even one single tradition about Abdullah Ibn Saba in his nine-volume Sahih. But historians who favored heavy documentations more than the authenticity of narrators, recorded heavily about Abdullah Ibn Saba through Sayf.

The Shi’a historians are not exempt from the above reasoning. They have also recorded most of the things they have got. This includes those reports that they were not sure about. The final research by Shi’a related to Abdullah Ibn Saba was released only in 1955 AD, and it was not so clear before that time that the stories related to Abdullah Ibn Saba have been the total manipulation of Sayf with political motives.

The two Shi’a historian who mentioned the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba, lived 10 centuries before the publication extensive research about Abdullah Ibn Saba. A person is called expert in the history of Islam, if s/he has read all the early history books. As a matter of fact, many early history books were written by theSunni authors under the direct fund of Umayad and later Abbasid rulers.

A Shi’a historian does not ban Sunni sources, and consequently his work is affected, one way or another, by previous works. This is clear when one observes that the two Shi’a historians who mentioned the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba, did not give any chain of transmitters for their report meaning that they got it from rumor the mouth people which the result of Sayf’s mass propaganda.

As for those few traditions which have the chain of narrators (independent of Sayf), they provide a much different story which do not support any of the allegations of Sayf. These traditions picture an accursed man whom Ahlul-Bayt have declared their innocence from what he attributed to Imam ‘Ali (declaring ‘Ali as God). The Shi’a, their Imams and their scholars declare the curse of Allah to that man (if ever existed) he was lost, misguided and cursed. There is nothing in common between us and his name except our curse on him and all other extremists who believed in deity of Ahlul-Bayt.

The followers of Ahlul Bayt never claimed that ‘Ali is God, nor did they claim the rest of 12 Imams are God. This, in fact, shows that those who gave life to the stories attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba had hatred toward Shi’a, and tried to misrepresent the Followers of the Members of the House of Prophet. If Shi’a were the followers of that mysterious Jew, they should have believed in deity of ‘Ali and should also respect their mentor Abdullah Ibn Saba, instead of cursing him!

If Abdullah Ibn Saba is such an influential and important figure for the Shi’a, how come they never quote him like they do with the Imams of Ahlul Bayt? Surely, if Abdullah Ibn Saba was their Master Teacher, they must quote him and be proud to do so?

A religious student always quotes his teacher, why then would the Shi’a be any different? Why should they curse him instead? If one answers that the reason that the Shi’a do not quote from him is that he was a Jew who converted to Islam, then I would ask him what was the religion of the companions before converting to Islam? Was not Abu Huraira a Jew who killed a Muslim before converting to Islam? Was not that he converted to Islam just 2 years before the death Prophet? Then why do the bulk of traditions in the Sunni collections come from him? While the traditions reported by Imam ‘Ali (who was the first male who embraced Islam) in the Sunni collections is less than 1% of what is reported by Abu Huraira? This is a sign for those who reflect.

Moreover, It is a custom of Shi’a that they celebrate the birthday of Prophet and 12 Imams and Lady Fatimah, peace be upon them all. They also mourn in the memory of their martyrdom. Why then they do not hold the same practice for Abdullah Ibn Saba if he was their master?

Besides, are the Shi’a so stupid and ignorant that after 1400 years, they have never figured out that their belief and faith are based on fabricated traditions and tales going back to Abdullah Ibn Saba? I doubt, then, how the Shi’a, if they were indeed so stupid as to believe a so-called hypocrite Jew in their theology, philosophy, jurisprudence, history, and interpretations of the Qur’an, have survived to this day?

Surely if the knowledge of the Shi’a was based on such a shaky foundation as Abdullah Ibn Saba, they would have perished a long time ago. It is more interesting when we see the Imams of the majority of the Sunnis were the students of the Imams of Shi’a (Imam Muhammad Baqir and Imam Ja’far Sadiq, peace be upon them). Then one would say the Sunni schools got the basics of their Fiqh from Shi’a, which means the Sunnis along with Shi’a were the followers of the very same person, the mysterious Abdullah Ibn Saba! Who is left then? Perhaps the followers of Muhammad Ibn Abdil Wahhab!

Moreover, if Abdullah Ibn Saba did in fact exist with such stories that Sayf attributed to him, then there is 150 years between his birth and the publication of the story of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi. During those 150 years, there lived an innumerous number of scholars, scribes, historians, and philosophers who contributed many books. Why didn’t any of them EVER mention the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba? Surely, if he was such an influential figure for the Shi’a, you can bet that the Sunnis would have known him before Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi! The fact that he was NEVER mentioned in ANY book before the book of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi is enough to cast doubt on the entire story attributed to him and even his existence.

Can you believe that in the 150 years or so between the so-called birth of Abdullah Ibn Saba and the publication of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, no book ever mentioned Abdullah Ibn Saba? Yet some people still claim he with such stories existed!

More strange thing is that even in the next 160 years after the publication of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi not too many people knew the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba. It wasn’t wide-spread until the story of Ibn Saba extensively showed up in the History of al-Tabari (160 years after Sayf’s publication), and it was at that time when some mercenaries started giving it weight as a means of defense against Shi’a.

Now, what do these mercenaries have to offer? Nothing!!! They still cling to their own-made version of history, thereby contradicting themselves and the above proofs as well as the documented Sunni history, simply to defend their ignorant statements about the Shi’a.

Wassalam.

The Companions and the Jewish Influence Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

Putting the fictitious Abdullah Ibn Saba aside, there have been some non-fictitious Jews who influenced the companions in a great deal. The attitude of Imam ‘Ali (as) towards new converts from the people of the Scriptures was very alert, as he (as) preserved the purity of the Islamic Teachings. They didn’t listen to allegations from those who adopted Islam and claimed to have knowledge in religion through the Old Testament and wanted to pass it on to Islam.

This sober attitude was taken by Imam ‘Ali (as), while the prominent companions (in the eyes of the the Sunnis), were decieved by these scriptural scholars. I shall mention some of them in my discussion.

Kaab Al-Ahbar

A man named from Yemen named Kaab Ibn Mati al-Humyari also nicknamed as Abu Ishaq, from the Clan of Thee Ra-een (or the Clan of Thee al-Kila a) came to Medina during the time of Umar. He was a prominent Rabbi and came to be known as Kaab al-Ahbar. He declared his Islam and resided in Medina until the days of Usman. In this first part (Part I) I shall examine some of the claims that he made, his deceiving Caliph Umar, his participation in the plot of Caliph’s assination and Imam ‘Ali’s (as) attitude towards him.

This new Muslim was not an imaginary person as the Jew Abdullah Ibn Saba, indeed Kaab was a real person, since he resided in Medina and was looked upon with hight prestige by the second and the third Caliphs. He narrated many stories claiming that they were from the Old testemant. Many famous companions such as

- Abu Huraira
- Abdullah Ibn Umar
- Abdullah Ibn Amr Ibn al-Aas
- Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan

reported his stories. This international Rabbi had reported many strange tales, the contents of which testify for their own lack of authenticity.

One such tale is as follows:-

A companions named Qais Ibn Kharshah al-Qaisi reported that Kaab Al

Ahbar said:

Every event that has taken place or will take place on any foot of the earth, is written in the Tourat (Old Testament), which Allah revelaed to his Prophet Moses (as).

Sunni Reference:

Ibn Abdul Barr - al-Istiab, v3, p1287
Printed in Cairo 1380 A.H

Such a report should arouse the attention of the readers, because it states that which is in-conceivable. The earth contains billions of square miles, each mile contains millions of cubic feet (for lack of proper arithmetic), and each part of the earth may become a place of thousands of events from the time of Prophet Moses (as) untill the Day of Judgement. Yet, Kaab claimed that all these events are recorded in the Old Testament.

The parts of the Old Testament which were dictated or written by Prophet Moses (as), don’t come to 400 pages. Recording all the events of the World bewteen the time of Moses (as) till the day of Judgement, may take millions of pages.

Furthermore, the pages of the Old Testament do not record future events. All they contains are some past events which took place during or before the time of the biblical Prophets. Considering these aspects, the claim that Kaab made belies itself.

Ka’b Al-Ahbar Counts The Days Of The Caliph Umar

This rabbi was able to deceive many companions through his trickery. Ka’b’s influence had grown during the days of Umar’s caliphate to such a degree that he was able to say to Umar:

Ka’b: Amir al-Mu’minin, you ought to write your will because you will die in three days.

Umar: How do you know that ?

Ka’b: I found it in the Book of God, the Taurat (Old Testament).

Umar: By God do you find Umar Ibn al-Khattab in the Old Testament ?

Ka’b: By God, no. But I found your description in the Old Testament and your time is coming to an end.

Umar: But I do not feel any pain or sickness

On the following day Ka’b came to Umar and said: Amir al-Mu’minin, one day has passed and you have only two more days.

The following day Ka’b came to him and said: Amir al-Mu’minin, two days have gone and you have only one day and one night remaining.

The following morning Abu Lulu appeared carrying a dagger with two heads and a handle in the middle. He hit Umar six times, one of them hit the Caliph in the navel, killing him.

Sunni reference:

Tabari - History of al-Tabari, v4, p191
Printed by Dar al-Maarif - Cairo

Looking at the Old Testament, one does not find any names or predictions of Umar. Also no Rabbi other than Ka’b claimed that the Old Testament predicted the existence of Umar, his murder, or defined the time of his death. Had information of this kind been contained in the Tourat, the Jews would have been proud of it and would have used it in an attempt to prove that the Jewish religion is the right religion.

If the above Sunni account were true, it would imply that Umar’s assassination was a conspiracy of Ka’b and his associates. Announcing the event before it took place would make the companions believe in what Ka’b predicted and what he claimed to be recorded in the Old Testament, therefore making him a reliable source for future information. Such confidence would enable him to interfere in major events and suggest the name of the future Caliph. A number of prominent companions believed the information that Ka’b used to fabricate pertaining to the past and the future.

On the other hand, if the above prediction of event, documented in the Sunni history, is false and a pure fabrication, then it shows how much Ka’b and his supporters among the Sunnis were able to fabricate historical documents to elevate Ka’b’s position, and to manipulate the history of Islam.

Kaab did not speak only about the events that happened on the earth, but he also gave information concerning the heavens and the Divine throne. Al Qurtubi in his Commentary on the Qur’anic Chapter of Ghafir reported that Kaab said:

When God created his throne, the throne said: ‘ God didn’t create any creature greater than me. ‘ The throne then shook itself to show it’s glory. God roped the throne with a snake which had 70 thousand wings; each wing had 70 thousand feathers; each feather had 70 thousand faces; each face had 70 thousand mouths, and each mouth had 70 thousand tounges.

Out of these mouths words glorifying Allah with a quantity equal to the number of drops of rain that have fallen, and the leaves on the trees, and the number of pieces of gravel and soil and the number of the days of the world, and the number of angels. The snake coiled around the throne, for the throne was much smaller than the snake. The throne was covered by only half the snake.

Imam ‘Ali’s (as) Attitude Towards Kaab

Umar and a number of prominent companions had a very positive attitude towards Kaab. However the most knowledgable and the most farsighted among them, namely, Imam ‘Ali (as) discredited Kaab. Kaab did not dare to come close to Imam ‘Ali (as), despite the fact that the Imam was in Medina for the duration of Kaab’s stay. It is reported that Imam ‘Ali (as) said about Kaab: Certainly he is a professional liar!

Ibn Abbas’s Attitude Towards Kaab

Tabari notes in his chronicles that Ibn Abbas (as) was told:

Kaab says that on the day of the judgement the sun and the moon will be brought forth like two (2) stupefide bulls and thrown to hell!

Upon hearing this Ibn Abbas (as) was enraged and retorted three (3) times:

Kaab is a liar!
Kaab is a liar!
Kaab is a liar!

This is a Jewish notion, and Kaab wants to introduce it into Islam. Allah is free from the things they attribute to Him. He never punishes those who obey. Have you not heard that Allah says in the Qur’an:

And He has made subject you the sun and the moon, both diligently pursuing their course (Ibrahim 33)

Ibn Abbas further said:
The word ‘Daibain’ used in this Verse denotes constant obedience to Allah.

Then he continued:

How can He punish these two (2) heavenly bodies whom He Himself praises for obedience. God curse the Jewish Scholar and his learning! What a shameless audacity to attribute Lies to Allah, and to impute guilt to the two (2) obedient creatures!

Having said this, Ibn Abbas said this three (3) times:

To Allah we belong and unto Him shall we return!
To Allah we belong and unto Him shall we return!
To Allah we belong and unto Him shall we return!

Then Ibn Abbas went on to narrate what the Prophet (Peace and Salutations to his cleansed and Pure Progeny) had actually said about the sun and the moon:

Allah created two sources of light! That which He named the Sun was like the Earth, between the points of rising and setting. And that which He ordained to be lustreless at times, He called the moon and made it smaller than the Sun. And both of them appear to be small because of their height in the sky and their distance from the earth.

Sunni reference:

Tabari - History of al-Tabari, v1, p62 - 63
European Edition

This concludes my first part of the discussion, Insha Allah in the future portions I shall further pursue these topics:

- Kaab’s interference in the Caliphate
- Kaab’s during the reign of the Third Caliph

The Companions and the Jewish Influence Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Kaab Interfered In The Caliphate

Ka’b used all his shrewdness to make Umar keep Imam ‘Ali (as) away from the Caliphate. Kaab was motivated by his resentment towards Islam and his hatred of Imam ‘Ali (as). After all it was Imam ‘Ali (as) who had brought the Jewish Influence in Hijaz to an end in the battle of Khaibar.

It is amazing that the Caliph had so much confidence in Kaab, he even sought his advice about the future of the caliphate. Ibn Abbas reported that Umar said to Kaab, in the very presence of Ibn Abbas, the following

Umar asked: I would like to name my successor because my death is near. What do you say about ‘Ali ? Give me your opinion and inform me of what you find in “your books”, because you allege that we are mentioned in “them”?

Kaab answered: As to the wisdom of your opinion, it would be “unwise”to appoint ‘Ali as a successor because he is “very religious”. He notices every deviation and does not tolerate crookedness. He follows only his opinion in Islamic rules and this is not a good policy. As far as “our”scriptures, we find that neither he nor his children will come to power. And if he does, there will be confusion.

Umar asked: Why will he not to come to power ?

Kaab answered: Because he has shed blood and Allah has deprived him of authority.
When David wanted to erect Walls of the temple in Jerusalem, Allah said to him: ‘ You shall not build the Temple because you have shed blood. Only Solomon shall erect it. ‘

Umar asked: Did not ‘Ali shed blood rightly and for the truth ?

Kaab answered: Ameer al-Mumineen, David also shed blood for the truth

Umar asked: Who will come to power according to “your scripture”?

Kaab answered: We find that after the Prophet (Peace be upon him and his Cleansed and Pure Progeny) and his two (2) companions (Abu Bakr and Umar) power will be transfered to his enemies (the Omayyads) whom he fought for religion.

When Umar heard this, he “sadly”said: ‘ We belong to God and to Him we shall return ‘. Then he said to Ibn Abbas: ‘ Ibn Abbas, did you hear what Kaab said ? By God, I heard the Messenger of God say something very similiar. I heard him (Peace be upon him and his Cleansed Progeny) say:

The Children of Omayyad shall ascend to my pulpit. I have seen them in my dreams jumping on my puplit like monkeys.

Then the Prophet said that the following verse was revealed about the Omayyads:

And We made that dream, which We have shown you, only as a test to the people and the cursed tree in the Qur’an ...

Sunni reference:

- Ibn Abi al-Hadid in his Sharh, v3, p81
Printed by Muhammad ‘Ali Subaih in Egypt

- Imam Fakhr ad Din al-Razi in his commentaries of the Holy Qur’an
Chapter 17, v5, pp 413 - 414
Second Printing by al-Matbaah al-Sarafeyah 1304 H

This dialogue should alert us to the deceptive and succesful attempt on the part of Kaab to influence future events by Satanic suggestions. It contains a great deal of decepetion which produced many harmful results to Islam and the Muslims. It is very easy to read the following into this dialogue: -

1. Kaab was very indictive towards Imam ‘Ali (as) because he was the one who had smashed the Jewish strong hold in the Arabic Peninsula. Kaab thought, and rightly so, he would remove all the Jewish influence from the Arab Society. Therefore, Kaab was very anxious to have the leadership in the hands of the Omayyad who were un-concerned with the future of Islam. They only concerned themselves with the materialistic aspect of the World. In addition they were as hostile to Imam ‘Ali (as) as Kaab. The Omayyads and Kaab considered ‘Ali their common enemy. He had destroyed their
leaders in the defense of Islam.

2. Kaab comments that Imam ‘Ali is highly religious and he does not close his eyes on any crokkedness; nor does he tolerate any deviation from the Islamic path, when further examined reflects that either Kaab forgot or he deliberately deleted from his story that the Messenger (Peace be Upon him and his followers) was the most religious and the most successful head of the state in the history of the World.

3. Kaab also found in “his “scriptures that neither Imam ‘Ali (as) nor his children would come to power because he has shed blood. In addition, Kaab said that it is written that David did not build the Temple of Jerusalem becuase he shed blood and that his son, Solomon was destined to build it so. Kaab did not mention and he made the Caliph forget that David, in spite of his shedding blood and being prevented from constructing the Temple came to power and became the Ruling King!

The Holy Qur’an declares that Allah said to David:

Oh David, We certainly have made you Caliph on earth. You should judge between people rightfully ...(Quran: Chapter 28 Verse 26)

Kaab also forgot that the great Prophet (saw) shed the blood of enemies for truth. Infact he led several battles and this did not prevent him from ruling and administering the affairs of the Muslims, nor did it prevent him from building an Islamic State!

4. Furthermore, Kaab by saying that shedding blood prevents coming to power, makes those who endeavour in the name of God less valuable than those who do not endeavour. This contradicts the Holy Qur’an which declares: -

Those believers who sit still, other than those who have a disabling hurt, are not equal to those who endeavour in the way of Allah with their wealth and “lives “. Allah has conferred upon those who endeavour for religion with their lives and wealth a rank above those who sit (at home). And to each, Allah has promised good, but He has bestowed on those who strive a great reward above the sedentary; degrees of rank from Him, and forgiveness and Mercy. Allah is ever forgiving, merciful. (Qur’an: Chapter 4 Verse 95)

It would be illogical to think that Allah commands people to endeavour in His way, then punishes the endeavours by preventing them from coming to power.

5. It is indeed very curious that Kaab claimed that the Jewish scriptures mention that Islamic Leadership would pass from the Prophet (saw) and his 2 (two) companions to his enemies. There is no mention of anything to this in the Old Testament in spite of the fact that Kaab had said to Qais Ibn Kharsha:

There is no place on earth that is not mentioned in the Old Testament, along with the events which will happen at that place until the Day of Judgement.

Kaab actually did not find in his Jewish scriptures any of the events that he had fabricated. He only stole what he overheard from the Companions of the Prophet (saw). Companions including Umar, reported that the Messenger (saw) of Allah said:

Banu Omayyad shall climb on my pulpit and I have seen them in a dream jumping on the pulpit like monkeys.

Sunni reference:

- Jalal ud Din Suyuti, Tarikhul Khulafa
Translated by Major H. S. Barret, p12
Published by J. W. Thomas, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta

- Imam Fakhr ad Din al-Razi in his Commentaries of the Holy
Qur’an, Chapter 17, v5, pp 413 - 414
Second Printing by al-Matbaah al-Sarafeyah 1304 H

It is amazing that the Caliph heard these words from the Messenger of Allah and still did not suspect Ka’b had stolen them from the Jewish scriptures. It is more amazing that the Caliph heard all these false statements that Ka’b had attributed to the Old Testament and did not even command Ka’b to show him the Jewish book from which he received the information.

The second Caliph took the word of Ka’b as if it came from heaven and was inevitable. If he believed that the matter of successorship was of divine choice, then he should not have implemented the entire Caliphate system in the first place. On the other hand, if he believed that the matter of successorship was his right, then it was entirely up to him to choose Imam ‘Ali (as) or any other person. It was expected that the second caliph would please the Prophet (S) by preventing the Umayyad from coming to power after seeing the Prophet (S) disturbed over his dream in which the Umayyad were jumping on his pulpit like monkeys. One word from Umar could have had changed the course of History.

The second caliph could have appointed Imam ‘Ali (as) as his sucessor and prevented the Omayyads from coming to power. Unfortunately, he kept the Imam away from the Caliphate by forming a six member comittee, most of them who were very un-friendly to Imam ‘Ali (as) and friendly to Usman, the righteous Omayyad who was extremely attached to his clan. Contrary to what was expected, however, the second caliph did that which Kaab liked and the Prophet (saw) disliked.

Sunni reference:

- Ibn al-Atheer, al-Kamil, v3, p35
Published by Dar al-Kitab al-Lubnanai 1973 A.D

Thus a Jew, newly converted to Islam, claiming that he had knowledge of what was in the past and what will be in the future, was able to change the course of Islamic History through his influence on a prominent Caliph, Umar. What a historic catastrophe!

To be continued, Insha Allah ...

The Companions and the Jewish Influence Part 3

Kaab During The Reign Of Uthman

The influence of Kaab continued to grow after the death of Umar. During the reign of the Third Caliph, Kaab was able to give verdicts in Islamic affairs. The Calpih “often “agreed with him, and no one among the attendants of the Caliph’s meetings would oppose him, except for people like Abu Dharr who became so furious one time upon hearing Kaab’s verdicts in Islam that he hit him with his rod saying Son of a Jewsih lady, are you trying to teach us our religion ?

To secure for himself a bigger influence and a better future after the death of the Uthman, Kaab tried to please Muawiyah by predicting his future arrival at the helm of the Islamic Rule. Caliph Uthman was returning from his pilgrimage accompanied by Muawiyah and the caravan driver sang a song in which he predicted that ‘Ali would be successor of Uthman. Kaab belied the singer saying:

By God, you “lie “. The ruler after Uthman will be the rider of the blond mule.

Here Kaab was refering to Muawiyah, and he falsely attributed this information to the Old Testament! Muawiyah had also “ordered “Kaab to narrate to the people of Damascus anything that puts Damascus and its people above other provinces.

Sunni references:

- Ibn al-Atheer - Kamil, v3, p76
Known as ‘Ali Ibn al-Sahibani - Second Print (Mule reference)

- al-Tabari - History, v4, p343
Printed by Dar al-Maarif - Cairo (Mule reference)

- Ibn Hajar Asqalani (Sunni Hadith Scientist)
al-Isabah , v5, p323 (Muawiyah ordering reference)

On Other Incidents

Ahmed reported that Jabir Ibn Abdullah reported that Umar came to the Prophet (Peace be Upon him and his Cleansed and Pure progeny) with a book which he obtained from some followers of the scripture. He read it infront of the Prophet (Peace be Upon him and his Cleansed and Pure progeny).

The Prophet (saw) became furious and said:

Son of al-Khattab, by the One in Whose hand is my soul, if Moses were alive, he would have to follow me.

Al Bukhari reports that Ibn Abbas said:

How do you ask the people of the scriptures about anything while your book, which was revealed by Allah to His Messenger (Muhammad) is the newest Book ? You read it pure without any interpolation by any non Qur’anic words. The Qur’an has informed you that people of the scripture tampered with and changed their book.

On the contrary other Companions, like Abu Huraira and Abdullah Ibn Amr Al-Aas reported that the Messenger of God said:

Take from the Israelites, and you will “not “be commiting a sin.

Also al-Bukhari mentioned:

Sahih a-Bukhari Hadith: 4.667

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr al-Aas:

The Prophet said, "Convey to the people even if it were a single sentence, and tell others the stories of Bani Israel, for it is not sinful to do so.

It is worthy to note that Abu Huraira and Abdullah were both “students “of Kaab. It is also reported that Abdullah Ibn Amr al-Aas acquired two (2) camels loaded with books of people of the “scriptures “and used to give information to Muslims from these “books “.

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, who is the foremost “authority “on the Hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari, said:

Because of this (as mentioned above) many prominent scholars among the students of the companions of the Prophet (saw) “avoided “taking information from Abdullah Ibn Amr al-Aas.

Sunni reference:
- Fath al-Bari, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v1, p167

Kumayl’s Invocation and other Supplications

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Kumayl’s Invocation

The following invocation is the teaching of Imam ‘Ali (as) to one of his students, Kumayl Ibn Ziad, which is usually recited every Thursday night.
For more information please see the end.

دُعَاء كُميل بن زياد (رحمه الله)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In The Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Merciful

O Allah! Bless Muhammad and his progeny.

أَللّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسأَلُكَ بِرحَمتِكَ الَّتِي وَسِعَتْ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

O Allah! I beseech Thee by Thy mercy which encompasses all things O Allah! I beseech Thee by Thy mercy which encompasses all things

وَبِقُوَّتِكَ الَّتِي قَهرْتَ بِها كُلَّ شَيءٍ ، وَخضَعَ لَها كُلُّ شَيْءٍ ، وَذَلَّ لَها كُلُّ شَيْءٍٍ

And by Thy power by which Thou overcometh all things and submit to it all things and humble before it all things

وَبِجَبَرُوتِكَ الَّتِي غَلَبْتَ بِها كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy might by which Thou hast conquered all thingsAnd by Thy might by which Thou hast conquered all things

وَبعَزَّتِكَ الَّتِي لا يَقُومُ لَها شَيْءٌ

And by Thy majesty against which nothing can stand upAnd by Thy majesty against which nothing can stand up

وَبِعَظَمَتِكَ الَّتِي مَلاَتْ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy grandeur which prevails upon all thingsAnd by Thy grandeur which prevails upon all things

وَبِسُلْطانِكَ الَّذِي عَلا كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy authority which is exercised over all thingsAnd by Thy authority which is exercised over all things

وَبِوَجْهِكَ الباقِي بَعْدَ فَناءِ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy own self that shall endure forever after all things have vanishedAnd by Thy own self that shall endure forever after all things have vanished

وَبِأَسْمائِكَ الَّتِي ملاَ َتْ أَرْكانَ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy Names which manifest Thy power over all thingsAnd by Thy Names which manifest Thy power over all things

وَبِعِلْمِكَ الَّذِي أَحاطَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ

And by Thy knowledge which pervades all thingsAnd by Thy knowledge which pervades all things

وَبِنُورِ وَجْهِكَ الَّذِي أَضأَ لَهُ كُلُّ شَيءٍْ

And by the light of Thy countenance which illuminates everythingAnd by the light of Thy countenance which illuminates everything

يا نوُرُ ياقُدُّوسُ ياأَوَّلَ الاوَّلِينَ ، وَيا آخِرَ الآخِرينَ

O Thou who art the light! O Thou who art the most holy! O Thou who existed before the foremost! O Thou who shall exist after the last!

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ الذُّنُوبَ الَّتِي تَهْتِكُ العِصَمَ

O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would affront my contingency

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ الذُّنُوبَ الَّتِي تُنْزِلُ النِّقَمَ

O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would bring down calamity O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would bring down calamity

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ الذُّنُوبَ الَّتِي تُغَيِّرُ النِّعَمَ

O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would change divine favours (into disfavours)O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would change divine favours (into disfavours)

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ الذُّنُوبَ الَّتِي تَحْبِسُ الدُّعأَ

O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would hinder my supplication O Allah! Forgive me my such sins as would hinder my supplication

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ الّذنُوبَ الّتي تُنْزِلُ البَلاَ

O Allah! Forgive me such sins as bring down misfortunes (or afflictions)O Allah! Forgive me such sins as bring down misfortunes (or afflictions)

اللّهُمَّ اغْفِرْ لِيَ كُلَّ ذَنْبٍ أذْنَبْتُهُ ، وَكُلَّ خَطِيئَةٍ أَخْطَأْتُها

O Allah! Forgive every sin that I have committed and every error that I have erred O Allah! Forgive every sin that I have committed and every error that I have erred

اللّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَتَقَرَّبُ إِلَيْكَ بِذِكْرِكَ

O Allah! I endeavour to draw myself nigh to Thee through Thy invocation O Allah! I endeavour to draw myself nigh to Thee through Thy invocation

وَاسْتَشفِعُ بِكَ إِلى نَفْسِكَ

And I pray to Thee to intercede on my behalfAnd I pray to Thee to intercede on my behalf

وَأَسْأَلُكَ بِجوُدِكَ أَنْ تُدْنِيَنِي مِنْ قُرْبِكَ

And I entreat Thee by Thy benevolence to draw me nearer to TheeAnd I entreat Thee by Thy benevolence to draw me nearer to Thee

وَأَنْ تُوزِعَنِي شُكْرَكَ، وأَنْ تُلْهِمَنِي ذِكْرَكَ

And grant me that I should be grateful to Thee and inspire me to remember and to invoke TheeAnd grant me that I should be grateful to Thee and inspire me to remember and to invoke Thee

اللّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسأَلُكَ سُؤالَ خاضِعٍ مُتَذَلِّلٍ خاشِعٍ

O Allah! I entreat Thee begging Thee submissively, humbly and awestricken

أَنْ تُسامِحَنِي وَتَرْحَمَنِي وَتَجْعَلَنِي بِقِسَمِكَ راضِياً قانِعاً

To treat me with clemency and mercy, and to make me pleased and contented with what Thou hast allotted to me

وَفِي جَمِيعِ الاحْوالِ مُتَواضِعاً

And cause me to be modest and unassuming in all circumstancesAnd cause me to be modest and unassuming in all circumstances

اللّهُمَّ وَأَسأَلُكَ سُؤالَ مَنِ إِشْتَدَّتْ فاقَتُهُ وَأَنْزَلَ بِكَ عِنْدَ الشَّدائِدِ حاجَتَهُ ، وَعَظُمَ فِيما عِنْدَكَ رَغْبَتُهُ

O Allah! I beg Thee as one who is passing through extreme privation and who supplicates his needs to Thee and his hope has been greatly raised by that which is with Thee

اللّهُمَّ عَظُمَ سُلْطانُكَ وَعَلا مَكانُكَ

O Allah! Great is Thy kingdom and exalted is Thy greatness O Allah! Great is Thy kingdom and exalted is Thy greatness

وَخَفِيَ مَكْرُكَ ، وَظَهَرَ أَمْرُك وَغَلَبَ قَهْرُكَ ، وَجَرَتْ قُدْرَتُكَ ، وَلايُمْكِنُ الفِرارُ مِنْ حُكُومَتِكَ

Thy plan is secret, Thy authority is manifest, Thy might is victorious and subduing and Thy power is prevalent throughout and it is not possible to escape from Thy dominion

اللّهُمَّ لا أَجِدُ لِذُنُوبِي غافِراً وَلا لِقَبائِحِي ساتِراً

O Allah! Except Thee I do not find anyone able to pardon my sins nor to conceal my loathsome acts O Allah! Except Thee I do not find any one able to pardon my sins nor to conceal my loathsome acts

وَلا لِشَيٍْ مِنْ عَمَلِيَ القَبِيحِ بِالحَسَنِ مُبَدِّلاً غَيْرَكَ

Nor have I any one except Thee to change my evil deeds into virtuesNor have I any one except Thee to change my evil deeds into virtues

لا إِلهَ إِلا أَنْتَ ، سُبْحانَكَ وَبِحَمْدِكَ ظَلَمْتُ نَفْسِي ، وَتَجَرَّأْتُ بِجَهْلِي

There is no god but Thou glory and praise be to Thee I have made my own soul to suffer I had the audacity (to sin) by my ignorance

وَسَكَنْتُ إِلى قَدِيمِ ذِكْرِكَ لِي ، وَمَنِّكَ عَلَيَّ

Relying upon my past remembrance of Thee and Thy grace towards meRelying upon my past remembrance of Thee and Thy grace towards me

اللّهُمَّ مَوْلايَ كَمْ مِنْ قَبيحٍ سَتَرْتَهُ ، وَكَمْ مِنْ فادِحٍ مِنَ البَلاِ أَقَلْتَهُ

O Allah! My Lord! How many of my loathsome acts hast Thou screened (from public gaze)O Allah! My Lord! How many of my loathsome acts hast Thou screened (from public gaze)

وَكَمْ مِنْ عِثارٍ وَقَيْتَهُ ، وَكَمْ مِنْ مَكْروُهٍ دَفَعْتَهُ

How many of my grievous afflictions (distresses) hast Thou reduced in severity

The word "Maula" has here been used in the sense of "Master" and the word "Fadihin" means "heavy" or "grievous" (Malbubi).

وَكَمْ مِنْ ثَنأٍ جَمِيلٍ لَسْتُ أَهْلاً لَهُ نَشَرْتَهُ

And how many of my stumblings hast Thou protected, how many of my detestable acts has Thou averted, and how many of my undeserving praises hast Thou spread abroad!

The Arabic word "ithar" has been translated by Malbubi as meaning "laghzish" in Farsi language which means "a slip, slipping or stumbling." " Makruhin" is used in the general sense to mean "any blameworthy act."

اللّهُمَّ عَظُمَ بَلائِي ، وَأَفْرَطَ بِي سُؤُ حالِي ، وَقَصُرَتْ بِي أَعْمالِي

O Allah! My trails and sufferings have increased and my evilness has worsened, my good deeds have diminished and my yokes (of misdeeds) have become firm

According to Maibubi, the Arabic word "afrata" means "increased" and that "aghlal" is the plural of "ghalla" meaning restrained like imprisonment and deprived of Allah’s taufiq (the favour of Allah) to accomplish good deeds." When the yokes of sins become heavy, they over power the sinner and prevent him from accomplishing good deeds. ( Malbubi ) .

وَقَعَدَتْ بِي أَغْلالِي وَحَبَسَنِي عَنْ نَفْعِي بُعْدُ أَمَلِي وَخَدَعَتْنِي الدُّنْيا بِغُرُورِها ، وَنَفْسِي بِجِنايَتِها وَمِطالِي

And remote hopes restrain me to profit (by good deeds) and the world has deceived me with its allurements and my own self has been affected by treachery and procrastination

ياسَيِّدِي فَأَسْأَلُكَ بِعِزَّتِكَ أَنْ لايَحْجُبَ عَنْكَ دُعائِي سُؤُ عَمَلِي وَفِعالي وَلاتَفْضَحَنِي بِخَفِيِّ مااطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ سِرِّي

وَلاتُعاجِلْنِي بِالعُقُوبَةِ عَلى ما عَمِلْتُهُ فِي خَلَواتِي مِنْ سُؤِ فِعْلِي وَإِسأَتِي ، وَدَوامِ تَفْرِيطِي وَجَهالَتِي ، وَكَثْرَةِ شَهَواتِي وَغَفْلَتِي

Therefore, my Lord! I implore Thee by Thy greatness not to let my sins and my misdeeds shut out access to my prayers from reaching Thy realm and not to disgrace me by exposing those (hidden ones) of which Thou hast knowledge nor to hasten my retribution for those vices and misdeeds committed by me in secret which were due to evil-mindedness, ignorance, excessive lustfulness and my negligence

وَكُنِ اللّهُمَّ بِعِزَّتِكَ لِي فِي كُلِّ الاحْوالِ رَؤُوفاً ، وَعَلَيَّ فِي جَمِيعِ الامُورِ عَطُوفاً

O Allah! I beg Thee by Thy greatness to be compassionate to me in all circumstances and well disposed towards me in all matters

إِلهِي وَرَبِّي مَنْ لِي غَيْرُكَ أَسأَلُهُ كَشْفَ ضُرِّي وَالنَّظَرَ فِي أَمْرِي

My God! My Nourisher! Have I anyone except Thee from whom I can seek the dislodging of my evils and understanding of my problems?

إِلهِي وَمَوْلايَ أَجْرَيْتَ عَلَيَّ حُكْماً اتَّبَعْتُ فِيهِ هَوى نَفْسِي

My God! My Master! Thou decreed a law for me but instead I obeyed my own low desiresMy God! My Master! Thou decreed a law for me but instead I obeyed my own low desires

وَلَمْ أَحْتَرِسْ فِيهِ مِنْ تَزْيينِ

And I did not guard myself against the allurements of my enemy

عَدُوِّي فَغَرَّنِي بِما أَهْوى وَأَسْعَدَهُ عَلى ذلِكَ القَضاءُ

He deceived me with vain hopes whereby I was led astray and fate helped him in that respectHe deceived me with vain hopes whereby I was led astray and fate helped him in that respect

فَتَجاوَزْتُ بِما جَرى عَلَيَّ مِنْ ذلِكَ بَعْضَ حُدُودِكَ ، وَخالَفْتُ بَعْضَ أَوامِرِكَ فَلَكَ الحَمْدُ عَلَيَّ فِي جَمِيعِ ذلِكَ وَلاحُجَّةَ لِي فِيما جَرى عَلَيَّ فِيهِ قَضاؤُكَ

Thus I transgressed some of its limits set for me by Thee and I disobeyed some of Thy commandments; Thou hast therefore a (just) cause against me in all those matters and I have no plea against Thy judgement passed against me

وَأَلْزَمَنِي حُكْمُكَ وَبَلاؤُكَ

I have therefore become (justifiably) liable to Thy judgement and afflictionsI have therefore become (justifiably) liable to Thy judgement and afflictions

وَقَدْ أَتَيْتُكَ ياإِلهِي بَعْدَ تَقْصِيرِي وَإِسْرافِي عَلى نَفْسِي مُعْتَذِراً نادِماً مُنْكَسِراً مُسْتَقِيلاً مُسْتَغْفِراً مُنِيباً مُقِرّاً مُذْعِنا مُعْتَرِفاً لا أَجِدُ مَفَرّاً مِمّا كانَ مِنِّي وَلا مَفْزَعاً أَتَوَجَّهُ إِلَيْهِ فِي أَمْرِي، غَيْرَ قَبُوُلِكَ عُذْرِي وَإِدْخالِكَ إِيّايَ فِي سَعَةِ رَحْمَتِكَ

But now I have turned Thee, my Lord, after being guilty of omissions and transgressions against my soul, apologetically, repentantly, broken heartedly, entreating earnestly for forgiveness, yieldingly confessing (to my guilt) as I can find no escape from that which was done by me and having no refuge to which I could turn except seeking Thy acceptance of my excuse and admitting me into the realm of Thy capacious mercy

اللّهُمَّ فَاقْبَلْ عُذْرِي ، وَارْحَمْ شِدَّةَ ضُرِّي وَفُكَّنِي مِنْ شَدِّ وَثاقِي

O Allah! Accept my apology and have pity on my intense sufferings and set me free from my heavy fetters (of evil deeds)

يارَبِّ ارْحَمْ ضَعْفَ بَدَنِي ، وَرِقَّةَ جِلْدِي ، وَدِقَّةَ عَظْمِي

My Nourisher! Have mercy on the infirmity of my body, the delicacy of my skin and the brittleness of my bones

يامَنْ بَدَأَ خَلْقِي وَذِكْرِي وَتَرْبِيَتِي وَبِرِّي وَتَغْذِيَتِي هَبْنِي لابْتِدأِ كَرَمِكَ وَسالِفِ بِرِّكَ بِي

O’ Thou! Who originated my creation and (accorded me) my individuality, and (ensured) my upbringing and welfare (and provided) my sustenance (I beg Thee) to restore Thy favours and blessings upon me as Thou didst in the beginning of my life

ياإِلهِي وَسَيِّدِي وَرَبِّي ، أَتُراكَ مُعَذِّبِي بِنارِكَ بَعْدَ تَوْحِيدِك وَبَعْدَما انْطَوى عَلَيْهِ قَلْبِي مِنْ مَعْرِفَتِكَ ، وَلَهِجَ بِهِ لِسانِي مِنْ ذِكْرِكَ وَاعْتَقَدَهُ ضَمِيرِي مِنْ حُبِّكَ وَبَعْدَ صِدْقِ إِعْتِرافِي وَدُعائِي خاضِعاً لِرُبُوبِيَّتِكَ

O’ my God! My master! My Lord! And my Nourisher! What! Wilt Thou see me punished with the fire kindled by Thee despite my belief in Thy unity? And despite the fact that my heart has been filled with (pure) knowledge of Thee and when my tongue has repeatedly praised Thee and my conscience has acknowledged Thy love and despite my sincere confessions (of my sins) and my humble entreaties submissively made to Thy divinity?

هَيْهاتَ ! أَنْتَ أَكْرَمُ مِنْ أَنْ تُضَيِّعَ مَنْ رَبَّيْتَهُ ، أَوْ تُبَعِّدَ مَنْ أَدْنَيْتَهُ أَوْ تُشَرِّدَ مَنْ آوَيْتَهُ ، أَوْ تُسَلِّمَ إِلى البَلاءِ مَنْ كَفَيْتَهُ وَرَحِمْتَهُ

Nay, Thou art far too kind and generous to destroy one whom thyself nourished and supported, or to drive away from Thyself one whom Thou has kept under Thy protection, or to scare away one whom Thy self hast given shelter, or to abandon in affliction one Thou hast maintained and to whom Thou hast been merciful

وَلَيْتَ شِعْرِي ياسَيِّدِي وَإِلهِي وَمَوْلايَ ! أَتُسَلِّطُ النّارَ عَلى وُجُوهٍ خَرَّتْ لِعَظَمَتِكَ ساجِدَةً وَعَلى أَلْسُنٍ نَطَقَتْ بِتَوْحِيدِكَ صادِقَةً وَبُشُكْرِكَ مادِحَةً وَعَلى قُلُوبٍ أَعْتَرَفَتْ بِإِلهِيَّتِكَ مُحَقِّقَةً وَعَلَى ضَمائِرَ حَوَتْ مِنَ العِلْمِ بِكَ حَتّى صارَتْ خاشِعَةً وَعَلى جَوارِحَ سَعَتْ إِلى أَوْطانِ تَعَبُّدِكَ طائِعَةً ، وَأَشارَتْ بِإِسْتِغْفارِكَ مُذْعِنَةً ؟!

I wish I had known o’ my Master, my God and my Lord! Wilt Thou inflict fire upon faces which have submissively bowed in prostration to Thy greatness, or upon the tongues which have sincerely confirmed Thy unity and have always expressed gratitude to Thee, or upon hearts which have acknowledged Thy divinity with conviction, or upon the minds which accumulated so much knowledge of Thee until they became submissive to Thee, or upon the limbs which strove, at the places appointed for Thy worship, to adore Thee willingly and seek Thy forgiveness submissively?

ماهكَذا الظَنُّ بِكَ وَلا اُخْبِرْنا بِفَضْلِكَ عَنْك

Such sort (of harshness) is not expected from Thee as it is remote from Thy grace, o’ generous one!Such sort (of harshness) is not expected from Thee as it is remote from Thy grace, o’ generous one!

ياكَرِيمُ يارَبِّ وَأَنْتَ تَعْلَمُ ضَعْفِي عَنْ قَلِيلٍ مِنْ بَلاءِ الدُّنْيا وَعُقُوباتِها وَمايَجْرِي فِيها مِنَ المَكارِهِ عَلى أَهْلِها عَلى أَنَّ ذلِكَ بَلاٌ وَمَكْروهٌ قَلِيلٌ مَكْثُهُ ، يَسِيرٌ بَقاؤهُ قَصِيٌر مُدَّتُهُ

O’ Lord! Thou art aware of my weakness to bear even a minor affliction of this world and its consequence and adversity affecting the denizen of this earth, although such afflictions are momentary, short-lived and transient

فَكَيْفَ إِحْتِمالِي لِبَلاءِ الاخِرَةِ وَجَلِيلِ وُقُوعِ المَكارِهِ فِيها وَهُوَ بَلاٌ تَطُولُ مُدَّتُهُ وَيَدُومُ مَقامُهُ وَلايُخَفَّفُ عَنْ أَهْلِهِ لاَنَّهُ لايَكُونُ إِلاّ عَنْ غَضَبِكَ وَانْتِقامِكَ وَسَخَطِكَ وَهذا ما لاتَقُومُ لَهُ السَّماواتُ وَالارْضُ

How then can I bear the retributions and the punishments of the hereafter which are enormous and of intensive sufferings, of prolonged period and perpetual duration, and which shall never be alleviated for those who deserve the same as those retributions will be the result of Thy wrath; and Thy punishment which neither the heavens nor the earth can withstand and bear!

ياسَيِّدِي فَكَيْفَ لِي وَأَنا عَبْدُكَ الضَّعِيفُ الذَّلِيلُ الحَقِيرُ المِسْكِينُ المُسْتَكِينُ ؟!

My Lord! How can I, a weak, insignificant, humble, poor and destitute creature of Thine be able to bear them?

ياإِلهِي وَرَبِّي وَسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلايَ ، لايِّ الاُمُورِ إِلَيْكَ أَشْكُو ، وَلِما مِنها أَضِجُّ وَأَبْكِي

O’ my God! My Lord! My King! And Master! Which of the matters shall I complain to Thee and for which of them shall I bewail and weep?

لاَلِيمِ العَذابِ وَشِدَّتِهِ ، أَمْ لِطُولِ البَلاءِ وَمُدَّتِهِ ؟!

Shall I bewail for the pains and pangs of the punishment and their intensity or for the length of sufferings and their duration?

فَلَئِنْ صَيَّرْتَنِي لِلْعُقُوباتِ مَعَ أَعْدائِكَ ، وَجَمَعْتَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَ أَهْلِ بَلائِكَ وَفَرَّقْتَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَ أَحِبّائِكَ وَأَوْلِيائِكَ فَهَبْنِي ياإِلهِي وَسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلايَ وَرَبِّي ، صَبَرْتُ عَلى عَذابِكَ فَكَيْفَ أَصْبِرُ عَلى فِراقِكَ؟

Therefore (my Lord!) If Thou wilt subject me to the penalties (of hell) in company of Thy enemies and cast me with those who merited Thy punishments and tear me apart from Thy friends and those who will be near to Thee, then my God, my Lord and my Master, though I may patiently bear Thy punishments, how can I calmly accept being kept away from Thee?

وَهَبْنِي صَبَرْتُ عَلى حَرِّ نارِكَ فَكَيْفَ أَصْبِرُ عَنِ النَّظَرِ إِلى كَرامَتِكَ ، أَمْ كَيْفَ أَسْكُنُ فِي النّارِ وَرَجائِي عَفْوُكَ ؟

I reckon that though I may patiently endure the scorching fire of Thy hell, yet how can I resign myself to the denial of Thy pity and clemency? How can I remain in the fire while I have hopes of Thy forgiveness?

فَبِعِزَّتِكَ ياسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلايَ اُقْسِمُ صادِقاً ، لَئِنْ تَرَكْتَنِي ناطِقاً لاَضِجَّنَّ إِلَيْكَ بَيْنَ أَهْلِها ضَجِيجَ الامِلِينَ وَلاَصْرُخَنَّ إِلَيْكَ صُراخَ المُسْتَصْرِخِينَ

O’ my Lord! By Thy honour truly do I swear that, if Thou wilt allow my power of speech to be retained by me in the hell, I shall amongst its inmates cry out bewailingly unto Thee like the cry of those who have faith in Thy kindness and compassion

وَلاَبْكِيَنَّ عَلَيْكَ بُكأَ الفاقِدِينَ وَلاُنادِيَنَّكَ أَيْنَ كُنْتَ ياوَلِيَّ المُؤْمِنِينَ ، ياغايَةَ اَّمالِ العارِفِينَ ياغِياثَ المُسْتَغِيثِينَ ، ياحَبِيبَ قُلوُبِ الصّادِقِين وَيا إِلهَ العالَمينَ

And I shall bemoan for Thee (for being deprived of nearness to Thee) the lamentation of those who are bereaved, and I shall keep on calling unto Thee: "Where art Thou o’ Friend of the believers! O’ (Thou who art) the last hope and resort of those who acknowledge Thee and have faith in Thy clemency and kindness; o’ Thou who art the helper of those seeking help! O’ Thou who art dear to the hearts of those who truly believe in Thee! And o’ Thou who art the Lord of the universe."

أَفَتُراكَ سُبْحانَكَ ياإِلهي وَبِحَمْدِكَ تَسْمَعُ فِيها صَوتَ عَبْدٍ مُسْلِمٍ سُجِنَ فِيها بِمُخالَفَتِهِ وَذاقَ طَعْمَ عَذابِها بِمَعْصِيَتِهِ ، وَحُبِسَ بَيْنَ أَطْباقِها بِجُرْمِهِ وَجَرِيرَتِهِ وَهُوَ يَضجُّ إِلَيْكَ ضَجِيجَ مُؤَمِّلٍ لِرَحْمَتِكَ وَيُنادِيكَ بِلِسانِ أَهْلِ تَوْحِيدِكَ ، وَيَتَوَسَّلُ إِلَيْكَ بِرُبُوبِيَّتِكَ

My Lord! Glory and praise be to Thee, wouldst Thou (wish) to be seen (disregarding) the voice of a Muslim bondman, incarcerated therein (the hell) for his disobedience and imprisoned within its pits for his evildoings and misdeeds, crying out to Thee the utterance of one who has faith in Thy mercy and calling out to Thee in the language of those who believe in Thy unity and seeking to approach Thee by means of Thy epithet "the Creator, the Nourisher, the Accomplisher and the Protector of the entire existence"?

يامَوْلايَ فَكَيْفَ يَبْقى فِي العَذابِ وَهُوَ يَرْجوُ ماسَلفَ مِنْ حِلْمِكَ ؟

My Lord! Then how could he remain in torments when he hopefully relies upon Thy past forbearance, compassion and mercy?

أَمْ كَيْفَ تُؤْلِمُهُ النَّارُ وَهُوَ يَأْمَلُ فَضْلَكَ وَرَحْمَتَكَ ؟ أَمْ كَيْفَ يُحْرِقُهُ لَهِيبُها وَأَنْتَ تَسْمَعُ صَوْتَهُ وَتَرى مَكانَهُ ؟

أَمْ كَيْفَ يَشْتَمِلُ عَلَيْهِ زَفِيرُها وَأَنْتَ تَعْلَمُ ضَعْفَهُ ؟ أَمْ كَيْفَ يَتَقَلْقَلُ بَيْنَ أَطْباقِها وَأَنْتَ تَعْلَمُ صِدْقَهُ ؟ أَمْ كَيْفَ تَزْجُرُهُ زَبانِيَتُها وَهُوَ يُنادِيكَ يارَبَّاه ؟

And how can the fire cause him suffering when he hopes for Thy grace and mercy and how can its roaring flames char him when Thou hearest his voice and sees his plight? And how can he withstand its roaring flames when Thou knowest his frailness? And how can he be tossed about between its layers when Thou knowest his sincerity? And how can the guards of hell threaten him when he calls out to Thee?

أَمْ كَيْفَ يَرْجُو فَضْلَكَ فِي عِتْقِهِ مِنْها فَتَتْرُكُهُ فِيها ؟

"My Lord", and how would Thou abandon him therein (the hell) when he has faith in Thy grace to set him free?

هَيْهاتَ ! ما ذَلِكَ الظَنُّ بِكَ ، وَلا المُعْروفُ مِنْ فَضْلِكَ ، وَلامُشْبِهٌ لِما عامَلْتَ بِهِ المُوَحِّدِينَ مِنْ بِرِّكَ وَإِحْسانِكَ !

Alas! That is not the concept (held by us) of Thee nor has Thy grace such a reputation nor does it resemble that which Thou hast awarded by Thy kindness and generosity to those who believe in Thy unity

فَبِالْيَقِينِ أَقَطَعُ ، لَولا ماحَكَمْتَ بِهِ مِنْ تَعْذِيبِ جاحِدِيكَ وَقَضَيْتَ بِهِ مِنْ إِخْلادِ مُعانِدِيكَ ، لَجَعْلْتَ النَّارَ كُلَّها بَرْداً وَسَلاماً ، وَما كَانَ لاَحَدٍ فِيها مَقَرّاً وَلامُقاماً لكِنَّكَ تَقَدَّسَتْ أَسْماؤُكَ أَقْسَمْتَ أَنْ تَمْلاَها مِنَ الكافِرِينَ ، مِنَ الجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ ، وَأَنْ تُخَلِّدَ فِيها المُعانِدِينَ

I definitely conclude that hadst Thou not ordained punishment for those who disbelieved in Thee, and hadst Thou not decreed Thy enemies to remain in hell, Thou wouldst have made the hell cold and peaceful and there would never have been an abode or place for any one in it; but sanctified be Thy Names, Thou hast sworn to fill the hell with the disbelievers from amongst the jinns and mankind together and to place forever Thy enemies therein

وَأَنْتَ جَلَّ ثَناؤُكَ قُلْتَ مُبْتَدِئاً ، وَتَطَوَّلْتَ بِالاِنْعامِ مُتَكَرِّماً ، أَفَمَنْ كانَ مُؤْمِناً كَمَنْ كانَ فاسِقاً ، لايَسْتَوُونَ

And Thou, exalted be Thy praises, hadst made manifest, out of Thy generosity and kindness that a believer is not like unto him who is an evil-liver

إِلهِي وَسَيِّدِي ، فَأَسأَلُكَ بِالقُدْرَةِ الَّتِي قَدَّرْتَها وَبِالقَضِيَّةِ الَّتِي حَتَمْتَها وَحَكَمْتَها ، وَغَلَبْتَ مَنْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرَيْتَها أَنْ تَهَبَ لِي فِي هذِهِ اللّيْلَةِ وَفِي هذِهِ السَّاعَةِ ، كُلَّ جُرْمٍ أَجْرَمْتُهُ وَكُلَّ ذَنْبٍ أَذْنَبْتُهُ ، وَكُلَّ قَبِيحٍ أَسْرَرْتُهُ ، وَكُلَّ جَهْلٍ عَمِلْتُهُ ، كَتَمْتُهُ أَوْ أَعَلَنْتُهُ ، أَخْفَيْتُهُ أَوْ أَظْهَرْتُه وَكُلَّ سَيِّئَةٍ أَمَرْتَ بِإِثْباتِها الكِرامَ الكاتِبِينَ ، الَّذِينَ وَكَّلْتَهُمْ بِحِفْظِ مايَكُونُ مِنِّي وَجَعَلْتَهُمْ شُهُوداً عَلَيّ مَعَ جَوارِحِي ، وَكُنْتَ أَنْتَ الرَّقِيبَ عَلَيَّ مِنْ وَرائِهِمْ ، وَالشَّاهِدَ لِما خَفِي عَنْهُمْ ، وَبِرَحْمَتِكَ أَخْفَيْتَهُ ، وَبِفَضْلِكَ سَتَرْتَهُ

My Lord! My Master! I, therefore implore Thee by that power which Thou determineth and by the decree which Thou hast finalised and ordained whereby Thou hath prevailed upon whom Thou hast imposed it, to bestow upon me this night and this very hour the forgiveness for all the transgressions that I have been guilty of, for all the sins that I have committed, for all the loathsome acts that I have kept secret and for all the evils done by me, secretly or openly, in concealment or outwardly and for every evil action that Thou hast ordered the two noble scribes to confirm whom Thou hast appointed to record all my actions and to be witnesses over me along with the limbs of my body, whilst Thou observeth over me besides them and wast witness to those acts concealed from them? Which Thou in Thy mercy hast kept secret and through Thy kindness unexposed

وَأَنْ تُوَفِّرَ حَظِّي مِنْ كُلِّ خَيْرٍ أَنْزَلْتَهُ ، أَوْ إِحْسانٍ فَضَّلْتَهُ أَوْ بِرٍّ نَشَرْتَهُ، أَوْ رِزْقٍ بَسَطْتَهُ ، أَوْ ذَنْبٍ تَغْفِرُهُ أَوْ خَطأ تَسْتُرُهُ

And I pray to Thee to make my share plentiful in all the good that Thou dost bestow; in all the favours that Thou dost grant; and in all the virtues that Thou dost allow to be known everywhere; and in all the sustenance and livelihood that Thou dost expand and in respect of all the sins that Thou dost forgive and the wrongs that Thou dost cover up

يارَبِّ يارَبِّ يارَبِّ ، ياإِلهِي وَسَيِّدِي وَمَوْلايَ وَمالِكَ رِقِّي ، يامَنْ بِيَدِهِ ناصِيَتِي ياعَلِيماً بِضُرِّي وَمَسْكَنَتِي ، ياخَبِيراً بَفَقْرِي وَفاقَتِي يارَبِّ يارَبِّ يارَبِّ

O’ Lord! O’ Lord! O’ Lord! O’ my God! My Lord! My King! O’ Master of my freedom! O’ Thou who holdeth my destiny and who art aware of my suffering and poverty, o’ Thou who knoweth my destitution and starvation, o’ my Lord! O’ Lord, o’ Lord!

أَسأَلُكَ بِحَقِكَ وَقُدْسِكَ وَأَعْظَمِ صِفاتِكَ وَأَسْمائِكَ أَنْ تَجْعَلَ أَوْقاتِي مِنَ اللّيْلِ وَالنَّهارِ بَذِكْرِكَ مَعْمُورَةً ، وَبِخِدْمَتِكَ مَوْصُولَةً وَأَعْمالِي عِنْدَكَ مَقْبُولَةًً ، حَتَّى تَكُونَ أَعْمالِي وأوْرادِي كُلُّها وِرْداً وَاحِداً، وَحالِي فِي خِدْمَتِكَ سَرْمَداً

I beseech Thee by Thy glory and Thy honour, by Thy supremely high attributes and by Thy names to cause me to utilise my time, day and night, in Thy remembrance, by engaging myself in serving Thee (Thy cause) and to let my deeds be such as to be acceptable to Thee, so much so that all my actions and offerings (prayers) may be transformed into one continuous and sustained effort and my life may take the form of constant and perpetual service to Thee

ياسَيِّدِي يامَنْ عَلَيْهِ مُعَوَّلِي ، يامَنْ إِلَيْهِ شَكَوْتُ أَحْوالِي يارَبِّ يارَبِّ يارَبِّ ، قَوِّ عَلى خَدْمَتِكَ جَوارِحِي

وَاشْدُدْ عَلى العَزِيمَةِ جَوانِحِي وَهَبْ لِيَ الجِدَّ فِي خَشْيَتِكَ ، وَالدَّوامَ فِي الاِتِّصالِ بِخِدْمَتِكَ

O’ my Master! O’ Thou upon Whom I rely! O’ Thou unto Whom I express my distress! O’ my Lord! My Lord! My Lord! Strengthen my limbs for Thy service and sustain the strength of my hands to persevere in Thy service and bestow upon me the eagerness to fear Thee and constantly to serve Thee

حَتَّى أَسْرَحَ إِلَيْكَ فِي مَيادِينِ السابِقِينَ واُسْرِعَ إِلَيْكَ فِي البارِزِينَ ، وَأَشْتاقَ إِلى قُرْبِكَ فِي المُشْتاقِينَ وَأَدْنُوَ مِنْكَ دُنُوَّ المُخْلِصِينَ ، وَأَخافَكَ مَخافَةَ المُوقِنِينَ ، وَأَجْتَمِعَ فِي جِوارِكَ مَعَ المُؤْمِنِينَ

So that I may lead myself towards Thee in the field with the vanguards who are in the fore rank and be swift towards Thee among those who hasten towards Thee and urge eagerly to be near Thee and draw myself towards Thee like them who sincerely draw themselves towards Thee and to fear Thee like the fear of those who believe firmly in Thee and thus I may join the congregation of the faithful congregated near Thee (for protection)

اللّهُمَّ وَمَنْ أَرادَنِي بِسُؤٍ فَأَرِدْهُ ، وَمَنْ كادَنِي فَكِدْهُ وَاجْعَلْنِي مِنْ أَحْسَنِ عَبِيدِكَ نَصِيباً عِنْدَكَ ، وَأَقْرَبِهِمْ مَنْزِلَةً مِنْكَ ، وَأَخَصِّهِمْ زُلْفَةً لَدَيْكَ فِإِنَّهُ لايُنالُ ذلِكَ إِلا بِفَضْلِكَ وَجُدْ لِي بِجُودِكَ، وَاعْطِفْ عَلَيَّ بَمَجْدِكَ، وَأَحْفَظْنِي بِرَحْمَتِكَ وَأَجْعَلْ لِسانِي بِذِكْرِكَ لَهِجاً ، وَقَلْبِي بِحُبِّكَ مُتَيَّماً وَمُنَّ عَلَيَّ بِحُسْنِ إِجابَتِكَ ، وَأَقِلْنِي عَثْرَتِي ، وَاغْفِرْ زَلَّتِي فَإِنَّكَ قَضيْتَ عَلى عِبادِكَ بِعِبادَتِكَ ، وَأَمَرْتَهُمْ بِدُعائِكَ ، وَضَمِنْتَ لَهُمُ الاِجابَةَ

O’ Allah! Whosoever intendeth evil against me, let ill befall on him and frustrate him who plots against me and assign for me a place in Thy presence with the best of Thy bondsmen and nearer abode to Thee, for verily that position cannot be attained except through Thy grace and treat me benevolently, and through Thy greatness extend Thy munificence towards me and through Thy mercy protect me and cause my tongue to accentuate Thy remembrance and my heart filled with Thy love and be liberal to me by Thy gracious response and cause my evils to appear fewer and forgive me my errors for verily, Thou hast ordained for Thy bondsmen Thy worship and bidden them to supplicate unto Thee and hast assured them (of Thy) response

فَإِلَيْكَ يارَبِّ نَصَبْتُ وَجْهِي ، وَإِلَيْكَ يارَبِّ مَدَدْتُ يَدِي فَبِعِزَّتِكَ أَسْتَجِبْ لِي دُعائِي ، وَبَلِّغْنِي مُنايَ وَلاتَقْطَعْ مِنْ فَضْلِكَ رَجائِي ، وَاكْفِنِي شَرَّ الجِنِّ وَالاِنْسِ مِنْ أعْدائِي ياسَرِيعَ الرِّضا إِغْفِرْ لِمَنْ لايَمْلِكُ إِلا الدُّعأَ ،فَإِنَّكَ فَعَّالٌ لِما تَشأُ يامَنْ إِسْمُهُ دَوأٌ ، وَذِكْرُهُ شِفأٌ ، وَطاعَتُهُ غِنىً إِرْحَمْ مَنْ رَأسُ مالِهِ الرَّجأُ وَسِلاحُهُ البُكأُ

So, my Lord! I look earnestly towards Thee and towards Thee, my Lord! I have stretched forth my hands therefore, by Thy honour, respond to my supplication and let me attain my wishes and, by Thy bounty, frustrate not my hopes and protect me from the evils of my enemies, from among the jinns and mankind o’ Thou! Who readily pleased, forgive one who owns nothing but supplication for Thou doest what Thou willest o’ Thou! Whose Name is the remedy (for all ills) and Whose remembrance is a sure cure for all ailments and obedience to Whom makes one self sufficient; have mercy on one whose only asset is hope and whose only armour is lamentation

ياسَابِغَ النِّعَمِ ، يادافِعَ النِّقَمِ ، يانُورَ المُسْتَوْحِشِينَ فِي الظُّلَمِ ياعالِماً لايُعَلَّمُ ، صَلِّ عَلى مُحَمَّدٍ وَآلِ مُحَمَّدٍ ، وَأَفْعَلْ بِي ماأَنْتَ أَهْلُه

O’ Thou! Who perfected all bounties and Who warded off all misfortunes! O’ Light! Who illuminated those who are in bewilderment! O’ Omniscient! Who knoweth without (acquisition of) learning! Bless Muhammad and the Descendants of Muhammad and do unto me in accordance with that which befitteth Thee, and deal with me not in accordance to my worth

وَصَلَّى اللّهُ عَلى رَسُولِهِ وَالاَئِمَّةِ المَيامِينَ مِنْ آلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ تَسْلِيماً كَثِيرا.

May the blessings of Allah be bestowed upon His Apostle and the Rightful Imams from his Descendants and His peace be upon them plentifully

Ameen

Kumayl’s Life

Kumayl b. Ziyad b. Naheed b. Haytham b. Sa’d b. Malik b. Nakhai was chief of his tribe in Kufah, Iraq. He was a reliable reporter of Hadith, though he did not report much, and a great devotee to worship of, and service to, Almighty God.

He was born c. 18 A.H., became the Governor of Heet, Iraq during the time of

Imam ‘Ali, c. 35-40 A.H. The Imam used to advise him on the general characteristics of a Muslim ruler. On one occasion, the Imam told him,

"Neglecting the (immediate) duty and being concerned about what is not (urgent) is the permanent weakness,”i.e., in order to succeed, one must have clear agenda with a list of priorities and focus on one duty at a time.

In 81 or 88 A.H. the tyrant of Iraq, Hajjaj, killed Kumayl and many other believers for no reason but their faith. The shrine of Kumayl is in the suburb of Najaf, Iraq. (For details see al-Irshad by Shaykh al-Mufeed, d. 413 Najaf 1962, and Tahdhib al-Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani,d. 852, Hyderabad, India, v8, P.448, 1328.)

The Invocation’s Merit

Kumayl reports that he was with the commander of believers, Imam ‘Ali, at Basra Mosque, listening to him who was saying, "Whoever worships (the Almighty) on the night before the middle of Sha’ban (8th month of Islamic calendar) and recites the Khidr invocation, his wishes would be fulfilled.”

Shaykh al-Tusi, d. 460 A.H., reports the Kumayl had observed the commander of the believers during his prostration on that night, reciting this invocation.

Sayyid Ibn Tawus d.664 A.H. adds: Kumayl further asked the Imam about the merit of the invocation. Then, Imam replied: "When you (fully) understand the invocation, recite it every night before Friday, or once every month, or once every year, or once in your lifetime, you will be protected, helped, blessed, and forgiven (by the Almighty).”(for details see al-Tusi d. 460, "Misbah al-Mutahajjid", p.774, and Ibn Tawus, d.664, Iqbal al-Amal, p706.)

The Original Text

The Arabic text of Kumayl’s Invocation is an excerpt from the following sources:

1. "Key to Paradise", the concise edition of "Mafathih al-Jinan", by Shaykh Abbas al-Qummi, d. 1359 A.H., edited by Sayyid Hadi Suhufi, and the calligraphy by Abdul Rahim Afshari in 1381 A.H. However, the original Arabic text has been compared with the following sources:

2. "Misbah al-Mutahajjid", by Shaykh Muhammad b. al-Hassan al-Tusi, d. 460 A.H., edited by Haj Ismail Ansari, Qum, Iran, 1401. This edition is offset of the following:

3. Lithograph edition dated 1082 A.H., copyist, Muhammad Yahya b. Habib Allah. this was copied from the following:

4. Manuscript dated 1068 A.H., Copyist Ahmad b. Haj Tawwali. This has been compared with the following:

5. Manuscript dated 971 A.H., Copyist: ‘Imam al-Din’ ‘Ali al-Sharif al- Istrabadi. This was copied from the following:

6. Manuscript dated 571 A.H., Copyist: Muhammad b. Idris al-’Ijli. This has been compared with the original manuscript of "al-Misbah”written by the author, Shaykh Muhammad b. al-Hassan Abu Jafar al-Tusi, d. 460 A.H.

The chain of documents to Shaykh al-Tusi is mentioned in "al-Mashikha”by Shaykh Muhammad Muhsin al-Tehrani, d.1389 A.H. in Najaf, Iraq, as well as other sources.

In this translation, we have made all possible efforts to present an English version of Kumayl’s Invocation as close as possible to the original Arabic text, based on the meanings of the equivalent roots in both Arabic and English lexicons.

Why Invocation?

In Arabia, fourteen centuries ago, a man asked his friend for a recommendation: what prayer would be the most useful to the one seeking assurance of God’s mercy? This prayer was given in response. The man’s name was Kumayl, son of Ziad, and his friend was ‘Ali (as), the Leader of the Faithful.

Kumayl was a trusted companion of ‘Ali (as), well-known for his devotion, and unflinching adherence to his great master. Kumayl has transmitted a number of important sayings and teachings of the Leader of the Faithful.

The famous supplication, known by the title Du’a-e-Kumayl or supplication of Kumayl, is one of the most important of those teachings.

The instructions delivered with this prayer emphasize that it should be recited as frequently as possible. Faithful Muslims enjoy a weekly recitation, usually on the evening of Thursdays.

A sincere reading of this prayer can reveal many things: the Islamic concept of God, His Attributes, man’s well-founded hopes for reply to prayer and a tranquillity of spirit to be obtained with few other prayers.

O’ Nourisher, how can we thank You enough for the kind permission You have given us, that at any time and under any condition we can call upon You and You will take our hands. You have insisted that at any incident we should come to Your door, saying "I will support you and with My assistance you can overcome your problems."

O’ Lord, people are constantly wondering about invocation, which should be defined as relation with You. Sometimes people ask "what is invocation (Du’a)?”or they often ask "What effect does it have?”Sometimes they complain, saying their invocations (Du’a) are not accepted. Questions are raised about the invocations (Du’a) by sinless people and spiritual leaders, and the groans and wailing that accompany these prayers into Your Holy Presence. I now ask for help from You, for Your Aid in expressing this idea to present some points within a concise essay, hoping to provide a solution to the problems of researchers.

Human beings live in a world with billions of creatures, known and unknown. Their numbers seem impossible to know for human beings. The span of man’s vision is so small that he can not even obtain knowledge of creatures that are around him. Sometimes he can not even perceive them or get information concerning their existence. With the recognition of his own knowledge as so insufficient, when he reaches the climax of mental greatness, he cries out by saying "I am uninformed of other than myself."

How can a human being, a trivial portion of the Universe live in such a way that he always finds success and prosperity? Every moment he is surrounded by problems, with heavy waves pushing him through unbearable ups and downs and blights. Can a path be found through all these difficulties? The way that a human being can take to bring himself to the coast of rescue? And in some manner continue his route and strive for the development that he desires and find his God by reaching Him and joining with the Sublime Essence, to grasp the real development that he was created for?

Yes, the Creator of the World through the power which He entrusted to human beings directs all them to development. All human beings eagerly want to attain such development. This propensity that has been instilled in everyhuman heart by the Nourisher pulls man to his Creator and aids him in heading on the path of development. The only way to enhance this inclination is an attempt that must be made, according to the order of God, for the protection of the relation between the human being and his Creator.

If this link to God is broken, it is like an electrical wire that is cut. The connection between the power plant and the light bulb does not exist any longer, and therefore the light is extinguished. When the connection between man and God is cut, man becomes a corrupt being and a painful element in the society, and he is only filling space and making the space tighter for others.

This relation or connection is invocation (Du’a) that an alive human being offers to his Nourisher. With an expressive language, the supplicant presents his inability and helplessness and confesses to the ability, complete independence and absolute power of his Nourisher.

Obviously the smaller we see ourselves and the greater we see Him, the more potential and more ability is there for us realize the importance of this connection, and we would therefore gain more benefit from it. From the Reservoir of Power, humans ask for the fulfillment of their needs. As a result of this connection, the invocation (Du’a) adds to his scientific and moral abilities in every moment. The more intensively the human being prays, the more his scientific grasp will be stronger, with man viewing himself as less and less, and His Creator as stronger and greater.

As a result of this attempt, it gets to a point that an advanced human being according to his genuine nature does not make any hesitation in following the path of Almighty God. In every step that he takes towards development, the greatness and grandeur of the power of the Almighty will become more obvious him, and he will look at his past from a higher level. For what he has done he will sometimes apologize, even if what he has done was his duties.

That is because he now comprehends its inadequacy. HE INTERPRETS HIS PAST WORSHIPS AS SIN and does not see any value for his work when presented to the Great position of the Lord. With his elevated view, he perceives his submission to God’s presence as SINFUL and even an action far from politeness.

What is My Performance?

Offering praise in Your Presence is a lack and a sin. I am nobody and full of flaws and needs. Whatever goes from me to Your Presence is not only valueless but it is a fault due to my weakness and incapability. The only way out of this for me is to know myself with my imperfections and know You by Your Perfection. With the net of kindness that you have opened, I can reach complete development and benefit from the Grace pouring from the Essence of Being.

We strive moment by moment to reach You. Of course, in this path all people are not the same, and do not strive in the same manner. When the range of our knowledge about ourselves and about the Creator increases and we do not stray from the path of humanity, we can travel in a better, easier, and stronger way.

The Prophets and the Imams have reached this point. Since they realize the Magnificence of their Lord and comprehend the position of the Life-Giver, they see themselves, their activities, and their prostrations and praises so little that they interpret the worship of that much affluence and greatness as sin, and with supplication and invocation, they ask for pardon and they hope for forgiveness. When they face the divine commandments and consider the Holy Position of the Almighty, they submit themselves to the Master. They see this action in front of the Lord as nothing, and recognize it as not suitable for praise. They hope it would be accepted by the Generosity and Majesty of the Creator, otherwise it is a sin to submit such inadequate worshop to the holy presence of the Lord

Those people like the Prophet Muhammad and his Ahlul-Bayt realized the Divine position with a much wider view. Continuously upon the two wings of knowledge and action, they progressed to a higher and superior position.

They were at every moment finding out more about the Magnificence of the Life-Giver of the world, and more about their own incapability; consequently better understanding their inadequate actions in comparison with that much Power and Greatness. To compensate for that, they confessed to their sins and asked the Lord for the permission to apologize with the excuse that they CAN NOT do to the extent of what Allah deserves, with the hope that He would guide them to a higher and superior position until they could continue their development process in order to reach the sublime of morality.

Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (as) has proclaimed these instructions for invocation: "First we must testify to the Omnipotence of Almighty God, then we have to send greetings to the Prophet and his descendants, and then confess to our sins, flaws, and shortcomings. Then whatever we desire we should present before Him.”

It should be kept in mind that first a human being should make an acquaintance with his Lord and confess to His Grandeur, and then following the method of the Prophet (S) and the Chaste Leaders (as), make a connection to him. He should then get to know himself, how many imperfections he has that ask the submission of his worship an impolite act toward Him. When he finds out about the two aspects: His ability and his own incapability and how to reach to the Source of Power, then it is time to share his statements with his Lord.

It is at this time that a human being discovers the greatness of supplication and the degree of its value. This is the way of success in the existing world. Indeed, supplication or prayer is recognition of God and recognition of his own, and review and deliberation on one’s past with an expectation to one’s future.

The more the human being becomes curious at these stages and studies the world of nature, the greater will be his understanding: How great is his Lord and with what ability He has created such a vast universe and how small and incapable are human beings in such an environment. He must realize that he could never be rescued all by himself in this world which is full of disturbances, except to be under the Guidance of the Creator of the world and ask assistance from Him.

In that way, he can attain the position (that according to the tradition) he has been created for. In that way, he finds his way to the door of the Prophets and Saints. With the help of the Guider of the Righteous, he can continue his development process. When he makes progress, he becomes more shameful of his past and becomes more needful.

With the power from the Hidden Source of the world, he enters society. In his life, he overcomes all problems, solving any thing he faces, with the favor of God. Under these circumstances he neither abjects himself to others or is cruel to others. He is a human being that on his humanistic path, he benefits from everything and is supported by the Divine Power. He is not afraid of anyone except Him, and he is not lax in action and work and he never fails on any battlefield. That is because he sees himself connected to the endless Divine Power, with a world of strength in the battles of life, and with a tireless power he smoothes out all unevenness.

It is based on this principle that all Prophets and purified Imams, at every small or important event were first praying and begging for help from God, and then they began their task. The messenger of Islam first of all worshipped God before he was preparing to go to battle; he was offering his inability before the Holy Presence of the Almighty and resorting to the infinite Divine Power; only then, he was entering the battlefield with good moral, knowing that conditions for the real victory were His.

Yes, first power must be obtained and then action. Invocation can be this power-giver to all human beings.

Regards.

The Supplications for the Days of the Week

The Supplication for Sunday

دعاء يوم الأحد

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-merciful,

the All-compassionate

1. بِسْمِ اللهِ الَّذِي لاَ أَرْجُو إِلاَّ فَضْلَهُ،

وَلاَ أَخْشَى إلاَّ عَدْلَهُ،

وَلا أَعْتَمِدُ إلاَّ قَوْلَهُ،

وَلا أَتَمَسَّكُ إلاَّ بِحَبْلِهِ.

1- In the Name of God,
from whom I hope for nothing but bounty,
and from whom I fear nothing but justice!
I rely only upon His word,
And I cling only to His cord!

2. بِكَ أَسْتَجِيرُ

يا ذَا الْعَفْوِ وَالرِّضْوانِ

مِنَ الظُّلْمِ وَالْعُدْوانِ،

وَمِنْ غِيَرِ الزَّمانِ،

وَتَواتُرِ الاَحْزانِ،

وَمِنْ طَوارِقِ الْحَدَثَانِ ،

وَمِنِ انْقِضآءِ الْمُدَّةِ قَبْلَ التَّأَهُّبِ وَالْعُدَّةِ.

2- In Thee I seek sanctuary –
O Possessor of pardon and good pleasure –
from wrong and enmity,
from the changes of time
and the recurrence of sorrows,
from the striking of mishaps,
and from the expiration of my term before preparation and readiness.

3. وَإيَّاكَ أَسْتَرْشِدُ لِما فِيهِ الصَّلاحُ وَالاِصْلاحُ،

3 – From Thee I seek guidance to that wherein is righteousness and being set right.

4. وَبِكَ أَسْتَعِينُ فِيما يَقْتَرِنُ بِهِ النَّجاحُ وَالاِنْجاحُ.

4- From Thee I seek help in that which is linked to success and favorable response.

5. وَإيَّاكَ أَرْغَبُ فِي لِباسِ الْعافِيَةِ وَتَمامِها،

وَشُمُولِ السَّلامَةِ وَدَوامِها،

وَأَعُوذُ بِكَ يارَبِّ مِنْ هَمَزاتِ الشَّياطِينِ،

وَأَحْتَرِزُ بِسُلْطانِكَ مِنْ جَوْرِ السَّلاطِينِ،

فَتَقَبَّلْ ما كانَ مِنْ صَلاتِي وَصَوْمِي،

واجْعَلْ غدي وَمَا بَعْدَهُ أفَضَلَ من سَاعَتي وَيَوْمِي،

وَأَعِزَّنِي فِي عَشِيرَتِي وَقَوْمِي،

وَاحْفَظْنِي فِي يَقْظَتِي وَنَوْمِي،

فَأَنْتَ اللَّهُ خَيْرٌ حافِظاً،

وَأَنْتَ أَرْحَمُ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

5- Thee I beseech for the garment of well-being and its completion
and for the covering of health and its permanence.
I seek refuge in Thee, my Lord, from the goadings of the satans,
and I seek protection in Thy sovereignty
from the injustice of the sovereigns.
So accept my past prayers and fasting
and make my tomorrow and what is after
better than my present hour and my today!
Exalt me in my clan and my people
and protect me in my waking and my sleeping!
For Thou art God, the Best Guardian,
And Thou art the Most Merciful of the merciful.1

6. أَللَّهُمَّ إنِّي أَبْرَأُ إلَيْكَ

فِي يَوْمِي هذا وَ ما بَعْدَهُ مِنَ الاحادِ

مِنَ الشِّرْكَ وَالالْحَادِ،

وَأُخْلِصُ لَكَ دُعآئِي تَعَرُّضَاً لِلاِجابَةِ

واُقيم على طاعتِكَ رجاءً للأِثابَةِ خ ل.

6- O God,
I am quit before Thee
on this day of mine
and on all Sundays that follow it
of associating others with Thee and of heresy,
and I devote my supplication sincerely to Thee,
addressing myself to Thy response.

7. فَصَلِّ عَلَى مُحَمَّد وَآلِ مُحَمَّد

خَيْرِ خَلْقِكَ،

الدَّاعِي إلَى حَقِّكَ،

وَأَعِزَّنِي بِعِزِّكَ الَّذِي لا يُضامُ،

وَاحْفَظْنِي بِعَيْنِك الَّتِي لاتَنامُ،

وَاخْتِمْ بِالانْقِطَاعِ إلَيْكَ أَمْرِي،

وَبِالْمَغْفِرَةِ عُمْرِي،

إنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْغَفُورُ الرَّحِيمُ.

7- So bless Muhammad and the household of Muhammad,
the best of Thy creation,
the summoner to Thy truth,
exalt me with Thy exaltation, which is never made to suffer loss,
protect me with Thy eye, which never sleeps,
and seal my affiar by cutting me off from everything but Thee
and my life with forgiveness!
Surely Thou art the All-forgiving, the All-compassionate!

The Supplication for Monday

دعاء يوم الاثنين

In the Name of God, the All-Merciful,

the All-compassionate

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

1. أَلْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي

لَمْ يُشْهِدْ أَحَدَاً

حِينَ فَطَرَ السَّمواتِ وَالاَرْضَ،

وَلاَ اتَّخَذَ مُعِيناً حِينَ بَرَأَ النَّسَماتِ.

1- Praise belongs to God,
who allowed none to witness
when He created the heavens and the earth,
and who took no helper when He authored the spirits!

2. لَمْ يُشارَكْ فِي الالهِيَّةِ،

وَلَمْ يُظَاهَرْ فِي الْوَحْدانِيَّةِ.

2- He has no associate in Divinity
and no support in Unity.

3. كَلَّتِ الاَلْسُنُ عَنْ غايَةِ صِفَتِهِ،

وَ انْحَسَرَتِ الْعُقُولُ عَنْ كُنْهِ مَعْرِفَتِهِ،

وَتَوَاضَعَتِ الْجَبابِرَةُ لِهَيْبَتِهِ،

وَعَنَتِ الْوُجُوهُ لِخَشْيَتِهِ،

وَانْقَادَ كُلُّ عَظِيم لِعَظَمَتِهِ.

3- Tongues fall silent before the limit of describing Him,
intellects fail before the core of knowing Him,
tyrants fall low in awe of Him,
faces are humbled in fear of Him,2
and everything mighty yields to His mightiness!

4. فَلَكَ الْحَمْدُ مُتَوَاتِراً مُتَّسِقاً،

وَمُتَوَالِياً مُسْتَوْسِقَاً.

4- So to Thee belongs praise,
again and again, well-measured,
continually, methodically!

5. وَصَلَواتُهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ أَبَدَاً،

وَسَلامُهُ دَآئِماً سَرْمَدَاً.

5- And may His blessings be upon His Messenger endlessly,
His salutation everlastingly, eternally!

6. أَللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْ أَوَّلَ يَوْمِي هذَا صَلاحَاً،

وَأَوْسَطَهُ فَلاحَاً،

وَآخِرَهُ نَجاحَاً،

وَأَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ يَوْم أَوَّلُهُ فَزَعُ،

وَأَوْسَطُهُ جَزَعٌ، وَآخِرُهُ وَجَعٌ.

6- O God, make
the beginning of this day of mine righteousness, its middle prosperity,
and its end success!
I seek refuge in Thee
from a day whose beginning is fright,
whose middle is anxiety,
and whose end is pain!

7. أَللَّهُمَّ إنِّي أَسْتَغْفِرُكَ

لِكُلِّ نَذْر نَذَرْتُهُ،

وَلِكُلِّ وَعْد وَعَدْتُهُ،

وَلِكُلِّ عَهْد عاهَدْتُهُ،

ثُمَّ لَمْ أَفِ لَكَ بِهِ.

7- O God,
I pray forgiveness from Thee
for every vow I have vowed,
every promise I have promised,
and every pledge I have pledged
and then failed to keep for Thee.

8. وَأَسْأَلُكَ فِي مَظالِمِ عِبادِكَ عِنْدِي،

فَأَيُّما عَبْد مِنْ عَبِيدِكَ،

أَوْ أَمَة مِنْ إمآئِكَ،

كَانَتْ لَهُ قِبَلِي مَظْلَمَةٌ ظَلَمْتُها إيَّاهُ فِي نَفْسِهِ،

أَوْ فِي عِرْضِهِ، أَوْ فِي مالِهِ،

أَوْ فِي أَهْلِهِ وَوَلَدِهِ،

أَوْ غَيْبَةٌ اغْتَبْتَهُ بِها،

أَوْ تَحامُلٌ عَلَيْهِ بِمَيْل

أَوْ هَوَىً، أَوْ أَنَفَة، أَوْ حَمِيَّة، أَوْ رِيآء، أَوْ عَصَبِيَّة

غائِباً كانَ أَوْ شاهِداً، وَحَيّاً كانَ أَوْ مَيِّتاً،

فَقَصُرَتْ يَدِي، وَضاقَ وُسْعِي عَنْ رَدِّها إلَيْهِ،

وَالتَّحَلُّلِ مِنْهُ.

8- I ask Thee concerning the complaints of Thy servants against me:
If there is a servant from among Thy servants
or a handmaid from among Thy handmaids,
who has against me
a complaint because I have wronged him in respect to himself,
his reputation, his property,
his wife or his child,
evil words I have spoken about him in his absence,
an imposition upon him through inclination,
caprice, scorn, zeal, false show, bigotry, whether he be absent or present, alive or dead,
such that my hand has fallen short
and my capacity has been too narrow to make restitution to him
or to annul my obligation to him,

9. فَأَسْأَلُكَ يا مَنْ يَمْلِكُ الْحاجاتِ،

وَهِيَ مُسْتَجِيبَةٌ بِمَشِيَّتِهِ، وَمُسْرِعَةٌ إلى إرادَتِهِ،

أَنْ تُصَلِّيَ عَلَى مُحَمَّد وَآلِ مُحَمَّد ،

وَأَنْ تُرْضِيَهُ عَنِّي بِما شِئْتَ،

وَتَهَبَ لِي مِنْ عِنْدِكَ رَحْمَةً،

إنَّهُ لا تَنْقُصُكَ الْمَغْفِرَةُ،

وَلا تَضُرُّكَ المَوْهِبَةُ

يا أَرْحَمَ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

9- I ask Thee,
O He who owns all objects of need
- which are granted by His will and hasten to His desire -
that Thou blessest Muhammad and the Household of Muhammad,
makest [the one I have wronged] satisfied with me in the manner that Thou willest,
and givest me mercy from Thee!
Forgiveness decreases Thee not
and giving injures Thee not,
O Most Merciful of the merciful!

10. أَللَّهُمَّ أَوْلِنِي فِي كُلِّ يَوْمِ اثْنَيْنِ نِعْمَتَيْنِ مِنْكَ ثِنْتَيْنِ:

سَعادَةً فِي أَوَّلِهِ بِطاعَتِكَ،

وَنِعْمَةً فِي آخِرِهِ بِمَغْفِرَتِكَ

يامَنْ هُوَ الاِلهُ،

وَلا يَغْفِرُ الذُّنُوبَ سِواهُ.

10- O God,
give me on every Monday two favours from Thee:
the felicity to obey Thee at its beginning
and the favour of Thy forgiveness at its end!
O He who is God
and none other than whom grants forgiveness for sins!

The Supplication for Tuesday

دعاء يوم الثلاثاء

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-merciful,

the All-compassionate

1. أَلْحَمْدُ للّهِ

وَالْحَمْدُ حَقُّهُ كَما يَسْتَحِقُّهُ حَمْداً كَثِيراً.

1- Praise belongs to God
- and praise is His right, since He deserves it -
abundant praise!

2. وَأَعُوذُ بِهِ مِنْ شَرِّ نَفْسِي،

إنَّ النَّفْسَ لاَمَّارَةٌ بِالسُّوءِ إلاَّ ما رَحِمَ رَبِّي،

2- I seek refuge in Him from the evil of my soul,
for surely the soul commands to evil except as my Lord has mercy.3

3. وَأَعُوذُ بِهِ مِنْ شَرِّ الشَّيْطَانِ

الَّذِي يَزِيدُنِي ذَنْباً إلَى ذَنْبِي،

3- I seek refuge in Him from the evil of Satan
who adds sins to my sin.

4. وَأَحْتَرِزُ بِهِ مِنْ كُلِّ جَبَّار فاجِر،

وَسُلْطان جآئر، وَعَدُوٍّ قاهِر.

4- I seek protection with Him from every wicked tyrant,
unjust sovereign, and conquering enemy.

5. أَللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْنِي مِنْ جُنْدِكَ

فَإنَّ جُنْدَكَ هُمُ الْغالِبُونَ،

وَاجْعَلْنِي مِنْ حِزْبِكَ

فَإنَّ حِزْبَكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ،

وَاجْعَلْنِي مِنْ أَوْلِيآئِكَ;

فَإنَّ أَوْلِيَاءَكَ لا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ.

5- O God,
place me among Thy troops,
for Thy troops - they are the victors,4
place me in Thy party,
for Thy party - they are the ones who prosper,5
and place me among Thy friends,
for Thy friends - no fear shall be upon them,
nor shall they sorrow.6
and death an ease for me from every evil!

6. أَللَّهُمَّ أَصْلِحْ لِي دِيْنِي

فَإنَّهُ عِصْمَةُ أَمْرِي،

وَأَصْلِحْ لِي آخِرَتِي فَإنَّهَا دارُ مَقَرِّي،

وَإلَيْها مِنْ مُجاوَرَةِ اللِّئامِ مَفَرِّي،

وَاجْعَلِ الْحَياةَ زِيادَةً لِي فِي كُلِّ خَيْر،

وَالْوَفاةَ رَاحَةً لِي مِنْ كُلِّ شَرٍّ.

6- O God, set right for me my religion,
for it is the preserving tie of my affair,
set right for me my hereafter,
for it is the abode of my permanent lodging
and to it I flee from the neighbourhood of the vile!
Make life an increase for me in every good

7. أَللَّهُمَّ صَلِّ عَلَى مُحَمَّد خاتَمِ النَّبِيِّينَ

وَتَمَامِ عِدَّةِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ

وَعَلَى آلِهِ الطَّيِّبِينَ الطَّاهِرِينَ، وَأَصْحَابِهِ الْمُنْتَجَبِينَ

وَهَبْ لِي فِي الثُلُثآءِ ثَلاثاً:

7- O God, bless
Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets
and the completion of the number of the envoys,
his Household, the good, the pure,
and his Companions, the distinguished,
and give me on the Tuesday three things:

8. لا تَدَعْ لِي ذَنْباً إلاَّ غَفَرْتَهُ،

وَلا غَمّاً إلاَّ أَذْهَبْتَهُ،

وَلا عَدُوّاً إلاَّ دَفَعْتَهُ

.بِسْمِ اللهِ خَيْرِ الاَسْمآءِ،

بِسْمِ اللهِ رَبِّ الاَرْضِ وَالسَّمآءِ،

8- Leave no sin for me unless Thou forgivest it,
no grief unless Thou takest it away,
and no enemy unless Thou repellest him!
By means of ‘in the name of "God" ‘, the best of the Names,
in the name of God, Lord of earth and heaven,

9. أَسْتَدْفِعُ كُلَّ مَكْرُوه أَوَّلُهُ سَخَطُهُ،

وَأَسْتَجْلِبُ كُلَّ مَحْبُوب أَوَّلُهُ رِضاهُ.

9- I seek to repulse every hateful thing,
the first of which is His anger,
and I seek to attract every loveable thing,
the first of which is His good pleasure!

10. فَاخْتِمْ لِي مِنْكَ بِالْغُفْرانِ

يا وَلِيَّ الاِحْسانِ

10- So seal me with forgiveness from Thee,
O Patron of beneficence!

The Supplication for Wednesday

دعاء يوم الأربعاء

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-merciful,

the All-compassionate

1. أَلْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ الَّذِي جَعَلَ اللَّيْلَ لِباساً،

وَالنَّوْمَ سُباتَاً،

وَجَعَلَ النَّهارَ نُشُوراً.

1- Praise belongs to God,
who appointed the night to be a garment,
and sleep for a rest,
and day He appointed for a rising!7

2. لَكَ الْحَمْدُ أَنْ بَعَثْتَنِي مِنْ مَرْقَدِي،

وَلَوْ شِئْتَ جَعَلْتَهُ سَرْمَداً

حَمْداً دَائِمَاً لا يَنْقَطِعُ أَبَداً،

وَلا يُحْصِي لَهُ الْخَلائِقُ عَدَدَاً.

2- To Thee belongs praise, for Thou roused me from my sleep,
- and hadst Thou willed, Thou wouldst have made it everlasting -
an everlasting praise that will never be cut off
and whose number the creatures will never count!

3. أَللَّهُمَّ لَكَ الْحَمْدُ

أَنْ خَلَقْتَ فَسَوَّيْتَ،

وَقَدَّرْتَ وَقَضَيْتَ،

وَأَمَتَّ وَأَحْيَيْتَ،

وَأَمْرَضْتَ وَشَفَيْتَ، وَعافَيْتَ وَأَبْلَيْتَ،

وَعَلَى الْعَرْشِ اسْتَوَيْتَ، وَعَلَى الْمُلْكِ احْتَوَيْتَ.

3- O God, to Thee belongs praise,
for Thou created, then proportioned,
ordained and decreed,
gave death and bestowed life,
made sick and healed,
made well and afflicted,
sat upon the Throne and encompassed the Kingdom!8

4. أَدْعُوكَ دُعآءَ مَنْ ضَعُفَتْ وَسِيلَتُهُ،

وَانْقَطَعَتْ حِيلَتُهُ، وَاقْتَرَبَ أَجَلُهُ،

وَتَدانى فِي الدُّنْيا أَمَلُهُ،

وَاشْتَدَّتْ إلى رَحْمَتِكَ فاقَتُهُ،

وَعَظُمَتْ لِتَفْرِيطِهِ حَسْرَتُهُ،

وَكَثُرَتْ زَلَّتُهُ وَعَثْرَتُهُ،

وَخَلُصَتْ لِوَجْهِكَ تَوْبَتُهُ.

4- I supplicate Thee with the supplication of one whose mediation is weak,
whose stratagems have been cut off,
whose term has drawn near,
whose expectation from this world has shrunk,
whose neediness for Thy mercy has intensified,
whose remorse for his neglect has become great,
whose slips and stumbles have become many,
and whose repentance is devoted sincerely to Thy face.

5 ـ فَصَلِّ عَلى مُحَمَّد خاتَمِ النَّبِيِّينَ،

وَعَلى أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ الطَّيِّبِينَ الطَّاهِرِينَ،

وَارْزُقْنِي شَفاعَةَ مُحَمَّد صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ،

وَلا تَحْرِمْنِي صُحْبَتَهُ

إنَّكَ أَنْتَ أَرْحَمُ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

5- So bless Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets,
and his Household, the good, the pure,
provide me with the intercession of Muhammad
(God bless him and his Household)
and deprive me not of his companionship!
Surely Thou art the Most Merciful of the merciful!9

6 ـ أَللَّهُمَّ اقْضِ لِي فِي الاَرْبِعآءِ أَرْبَعَا:

إجْعَلْ قُوَّتِي فِي طاعَتِكَ،

وَنَشاطِي فِي عِبادَتِكَ،

وَرَغْبَتِي فِي ثَوَابِكَ،

وَزُهْدِي فِيما يُوجِبُ لِي أَلِيمَ عِقابِكَ،

إنَّكَ لَطِيفٌ لِما تَشآءُ.

6- O God,
decree for me on Wednesday four things:
Induce me
to be strong in obedience to Thee,
to be joyful in worshipping Thee,
to be desirous of Thy reward,
and to abstain from that which would make incumbent upon me Thy painful punishment!
Thou art Gentle to whom Thou wilt!

The Supplication for Thursday

دعاء يوم الخميس

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-merciful,

the All-compassionate

1. أَلْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ الَّذِي أَذْهَبَ اللَّيْلَ مُظْلِمَاً بِقُدْرَتِهِ،

وَجآءَ بِالنَّهارِ مُبْصِراً بِرَحْمَتِهِ،

وَكَسانِي ضِيآءَهُ

وَآتانِي نِعْمَتَهُ.

1- Praise belongs to God,
who has taken away the shadowy night by His power
and brought the sight-giving day through His mercy.
He has clothed me in its brightness
and given me its favour.

2. أَللَّهُمَّ فَكَما أَبْقَيْتَنِي لَهُ

فَأَبْقِنِي لاِمْثالِهِ،

وَصَلِّ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ مُحَمَّد وَآلِهِ،

وَلا تَفْجَعْنِي فِيهِ وَفِي غَيْرِهِ مِنَ اللَّيالِي وَالاَيَّامِ

بِارْتِكابِ الْمَحارِمِ، وَاكْتِسابِ الْمَاثِمِ،

وَارْزُقْنِي خَيْرَهُ، وَخَيْرَ ما فِيهِ، وَخَيْرَ ما بَعْدَهُ،

وَاصْرِفْ عَنِّي شَرَّهُ، وَشَرَّ ما فِيهِ، وَشَرَّ ما بَعْدَهُ.

2- O God, just as Thou hast spared me for this day,
so also spare me for its likes,
bless the prophet Muhammad and his Household,
torment me not in it and in other nights and days
by allowing me to commit unlawful acts
and to clothe myself in sins;
provide me with its good, the good of all within it, and the good of everything after it;
and turn away from me its evil, the evil of all within it, and the evil of everything after it!

3. أَللَّهُمَّ إنِّي بِذِمَّةِ الاِسْلامِ

أَتَوَسَّلُ إلَيْكَ،

وَبِحُرْمَةِ الْقُرْآنِ أَعْتَمِدُ عَلَيْكَ،

وَبِمُحَمَّد الْمُصْطَفى صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وآلِهِ

أَسْتَشْفِعُ لَدَيْكَ،

فَاعْرِفِ اللَّهُمَّ ذِمَّتِي

الَّتِي رَجَوْتُ بِها قَضآءَ حاجَتِي، يا أَرْحَمَ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

3- O God, by the protective compact of Islam,
I seek mediation with Thee!
By the inviolability of the Qur’an,
I rely upon Thee!
By Muhammad the chosen (God bless him and his Household) I seek intercession with Thee!
So recognize my protective compact
by which I hope my need will be granted,
O Most Merciful of the merciful!

4. أَللَّهُمَّ اقْضِ لِي فِي الخَمِيسِ خَمْساً

لا يَتَّسِعُ لَها إلاَّ كَرَمُكَ

وَلا يُطِيقُها إلاَّ نِعَمُكَ:

سَلامَةً أَقْوى بِها عَلَى طاعَتِكَ

وَعِبادَةً أَسْتَحِقُّ بِها جَزِيلَ مَثُوبَتِكَ،

وَسَعَةً فِي الْحالِ مِنَ الرِّزْقِ الْحَلالِ،

وَأَنْ تُؤْمِنَنِي فِي مَواقِفِ الْخَوْفِ بِأَمْنِكَ،

وَتَجْعَلَنِي مِنْ طَوارِقِ الْهُمُومِ وَالْغُمُومِ فِي حِصْنِكَ،

صَلِّ عَلى مُحَمَّد وَآلِهِ،

وَاجْعَل تَوَسُّلِي بِهِ شافِعَاً

يَوْمَ الْقِيامَةِ نافِعاً،

إنَّكَ أَنْتَ أَرْحَمُ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

4 O God, decree for me on Thursday five things
which none embraces but Thy generosity
and none supports but Thy favours:
health through which I may have the strength to obey Thee,
worship by which I may deserve Thy plentiful reward,
plenty in my state through lawful provision,
and that Thou makest me secure in the places of fear through Thy security,
and placest me in Thy fortress against the striking of worries and sorrows!
Bless Muhammad and his Household,
and make my seeking his mediation as an intercessor
give profit on the Day of Resurrection!
Surely Thou art the Most Merciful of the merciful!10

The Supplication for Friday

دعاء يوم الجمعة

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-Merciful,
the All-compassionate

1. أَلْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ الاَوَّلِ قَبْلَ الانْشآءِ وَالاحْيآءِ،

وَالاخِرِ بَعْدَ فَنآءِ الاَشْيَآءِ،

الْعَلِيمِ الَّذِي لا يَنْسَى مَنْ ذَكَرَهُ،

وَلا يَنْقُصُ مَنْ شَكَرَه،

وَلا يُخَيِّبُ مَنْ دَعاهُ،

وَلا يَقْطَعُ رَجآءَ مَنْ رَجاهُ.

1- All Praise belongs to God,
the First before the bringing forth and the giving of life,
and the Last after the annihilation of all things,
the All-knowing who forgets not him who remembers Him,11
decreases not him who thanks Him,12
disappoints not him who supplicates Him,
and cuts not off the hope of him who hopes in Him!

2. أَللَّهُمَّ إنِّي أُشْهِدُكَ

وَكَفى بِكَ شَهِيداً،

وَأُشْهِدُ جَمِيعَ مَلائِكَتِكَ،

وَسُكَّانَ سَمواتِكَ، وَحَمَلَةَ عَرْشِكَ،

وَمَنْ بَعَثْتَ مِنْ أَنْبِيآئِكَ وَرُسُلِكَ

وَأَنْشَأْتَ مِنْ أَصْنافِ خَلْقِكَ،

أَنِّي أَشْهَدُ أَنَّكَ أَنْتَ اللَّهُ

لا إلهَ إلاَّ أَنْتَ، وَحْدَكَ

لاَ شَرِيكَ لَكَ، وَلا عَدِيلَ

وَلا خُلْفَ لِقَوْلِكَ وَلا تَبْدِيْلَ،

وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّداً صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وآلِهِ

عَبْدُكَ وَرَسُولُكَ،

أَدَّى ما حَمَّلْتَهُ إلَى الْعِبادِ،

وَجاهَدَ فِي اللَّهِ [عزّوجل خ ل ]حَقَّ الْجِهادِ،

وَأَنَّهُ بَشَّرَ بِما هُوَ حَقٌّ مِنَ الثَّوابِ،

وَأَنْذَرَ بِما هُوَ صِدْقٌ مِنَ الْعِقابِ.

2- O God, I call Thee to witness
- and Thou art sufficient witness –
and I call to witness all Thy angels,
the inhabitants of Thy heavens, the bearers of Thy Throne,
Thy prophets and Thy messengers whom Thou hast sent out,
and the various kinds of creatures Thou hast brought forth,
that I bear witness that Thou art God;
there is no god but Thou, Thou alone,
who hast no associate nor any equal,
and Thy word has no failing, nor any change;13
and that Muhammad (God bless him and his Household)
is Thy servant and Thy messenger;
he delivered to the servants that with which Thou charged him,
he struggled for God as is His due,14
he gave the good news of the truth of reward,
and he warned of the veracity of punishment.

3. أَللَّهُمَّ ثَبِّتْنِي عَلى دِينِكَ ما أَحْيَيْتَنِي،

وَلا تُزِغْ قَلْبِي بَعْدَ إذْ هَدَيْتَنِي،

وَهَبْ لِي مِنْ لَدُنْكَ رَحْمَةً،

إنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْوَهَّابُ،

صَلِّ عَلَى مُحَمَّد وَآلِ مُحَمَّد

وَاجْعَلْنِي مِنْ أَتْباعِهِ وَشِيعَتِهِ

وَاحْشُرْنِي فِي زُمْرَتِهِ

وَوَفِّقْنِي لاَداءِ فَرْضِ الْجُمُعاتِ،

وَما أَوْجَبْتَ عَلَيَّ فِيها مِنَ الطَّاعاتِ،

وَقَسَمْتَ لاِهْلِها مِنَ الْعَطآءِ فِي يَوْمِ الْجَزآءِ،

إنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ.

3- O God, make me firm in Thy religion as long as Thou keepest me alive,
make not my heart to swerve after Thou hast guided me,
and give me mercy from Thee,
surely Thou art the Giver.15
Bless Muhammad and the Household of Muhammad,
make me one of his followers and his partisans,
muster me in his band,
and give me the success of accomplishing the obligatory observance of Friday,
performing the acts of obedience which Thou has made incumbent upon me within it,
and [receiving] the bestowal which Thou hast apportioned for its people
on the Day of Recompense!
Surely Thou art Mighty, All-wise!16

The Supplication for Saturday

دعاء يوم السبت

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the Name of God, the All-merciful

the All-compassionate

1. بِسْمِ الِلّهِ

كَلِمَةِ الْمُعْتَصِمِينَ،

وَمَقالَةِ الْمُتَحَرِّزِينَ،

وَأَعُوذُ بِالِلّه تَعالى مِنْ جَوْرِ الْجآئِرِينَ،

وَكَيْدِ الْحاسِدِينَ، وَبَغْيِ الظَّالِمِينَ،

وَأَحْمَدُهُ فَوْقَ حَمْدِ الْحامِدِينَ.

1- ‘In the name of God’,
the word of those who hold fast to Him,
the speech of those who seek His protection!
I seek refuge in God (high exalted is He) from
the injustice of the unjust,
the trickery of the enviers,
and the oppression of the wrongdoers,
and I praise Him beyond the praise of the praisers!

2 ـ أَللَّهُمَّ أَنْتَ الْواحِدُ بِلا شَرِيك،

وَالْمَلِكُ بِلا تَمْلِيك،

لا تُضَادُّ فِي حُكْمِكَ،

وَلا تُنازَعُ فِي مُلْكِكَ.

2- O God,
Thou art the One without partner,
and the King without having been made sovereign;
no one opposes Thee in Thy decree
and no one contests Thee in Thy kingdom!

3. أَسْأَلُكَ أَنْ تُصَلِّىَ عَلَى مُحَمَّد وَآلِهِ،

عَبْدِكَ وَرَسُولِكَ،

وَأَنْ تُوزِعَنِي مِنْ شُكْرِ نُعْماكَ

ما تَبْلُغُ بِي غايَةَ رِضاكَ،

وَأَنْ تُعِينَنِي عَلى طاعَتِكَ،

وَلُزُومِ عِبادَتِكَ، وَاسْتِحْقاقِ مَثُوبَتِكَ بِلُطْفِ عِنايَتِكَ،

وَتَرْحَمَنِي،

وَتَصُدَّنِي عَنْ مَعَاصِيكَ مَا أَحْيَيْتَنِي،

وَتُوَفِّقَنِي لِما يَنْفَعُنِي ما أَبْقَيْتَنِي،

وَأَنْ تَشْرَحَ بِكِتابِكَ صَدْرِي،

وَتَحُطَّ بِتِلاوَتِهِ وِزْرِي،

وَتَمْنَحَنِي السَّلامَةَ فِي دِينِي وَنَفْسِي،

وَلا تُوحِشَ بِي أَهْلَ أُنْسِي،

وَتُتِمَّ إحْسَانَكَ فِيما بَقِيَ مِنْ عُمُرِي

كَما أَحْسَنْتَ فِيما مَضَى مِنْهُ

يا أَرْحَمَ الرَّاحِمِينَ.

3- I ask Thee to bless Muhammad and his Household,
Thy servant and Thy messenger,
inspire me with a thanksgiving for Thy favours
which will take me to the utmost limit of Thy good pleasure,
help me through the gentleness of Thy solitude to obey Thee, hold fast to worshipping Thee,
and deserve Thy reward,
have mercy upon me,
bar me from acts of disobedience toward Thee
as long as Thou keepest me alive,
give me success in what profits me
as long as Thou sparest me,
expand my breast through Thy Book,
lessen my burden through its recitation,
bestow upon me health in my religion and my soul,
estrange not my intimates from me,
and complete Thy beneficence in what is left of my lifetime,
just as Thou hast shown beneficence in that of it which has passed!
O Most Merciful of the merciful!

1. 12:64

2. Allusion to 20:111: Faces shall be humbled unto the Living, the Subsistent.

3. 12:53

4. 37:173

5. 58:22

6. 10:62

7. 25:47

8. There are a number of Qur'anic allusions in this passage, including: He created, then proportioned (87:2), and He sat upon the Throne (7:54 etc.).

9. 7:151

10. 7:151

11. Allusion to such verses as: They forgot God, so He forgot them (9:67); Today We forget you, just as you forgot the meeting on this your Day (45:34; cf. 7:51).

12. Allusion to 14:7: If you are thankful, surely I will increase you, but if you are thankless, My chastisement is surely terrible.

13. Cf. 59.9 and note 283.

14. Reference to 22:78: Struggle for God as is His due!

15. 3:8

16. 2:129

Lessons From the Prophet and the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt: Excerpts from Usul al-Kafi

(Compiled by Thiqatul Islam al-Kulaini al-Razi)

Place Of Reason In The Religion (Part 1)

The Messenger of Allah (S) said:

"Almighty God has endowed upon mankind nothing better than reason (wisdom). Sleep of a wise man is better than the waking hours of an ignorant. Rest of a wise man is better than the movement (journeys for Hajj or Jihad) of ignorant. God has not send any prophet or messenger without first perfecting his reason; and his reason stands superior to all the reasons of (the people of) his community. What the Prophet has wished is preferable to all the Ijtihad (striving) of the Mujtahideen (those who strive).

No creature can ever discharge his obligations to God unless he comprehends those (obligations). All the worshippers weighted together can not reach the height of excellence of a wise man. The man of reason who are the possessors of understanding minds about whom Allah said:

`... Yet none takes to mind (understands these facts) except men of understanding. (Qur’an 2:269, 3:7)’"

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Arabic-English Version, Part 1, Pp 30-31, Tradition #11 (Part 2)

Next tradition is Tradition #12 from the Chapter entitled "The Book of Reason and Ignorance". This tradition is pretty large. So I decided to randomly select some parts of it, and I will continue to copy the other parts of this tradition in the next parts of these series. This tradition is the conversation of Imam Musa al-Kadhim (as), and one of his faithful disciples, Hisham Ibn al-Hakam (ra). Hisham was well-known for his exceptional ability in debate with the polytheists and the members of the heretical groups.

Hisham Ibn al-Hakam (ra) narrated that Imam Musa Ibn Ja'far (as) addressed him, saying:

O’ Hisham! Almighty God has given glad tidings to the people of reason and understanding to this effect:

"Glad tidings unto My servants! Those who hear the sayings and follow the best of it; those are who Allah has guided and those who are the possessors of understanding minds. (Qur’an 39:17-18)"

... O Hisham! It is through reason and understanding that God has completed evidence of proof (in respect of Himself and His religion) for mankind. He has helped His prophets and His messengers by endowing them with the gift of eloquence and guided them to comprehend His overlordship through reason and understanding. As He himself has said:

"And your Lord is one God. There is no God but He, the all-merciful, the compassionate. Surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alteration of night and day and the ship that runs in see with profit to men, and the water God sends down from heaven by which He revives the earth after its death and His scattering abroad in it all kinds of crawling creatures, and the turning about of the winds and the clouds suspended between the heaven and the earth - surely there are signs for the people of understanding. (Qur’an 2:163-164)"

... O’ Hisham! Remember that reason is in alliance with knowledge, as God has said: "And those examples we strike for people, but non comprehends them except those who have knowledge. (Qur’an 29:43)"

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Chapter Of "Reason And Ignorance", First Part Of The Tradition #12 (Part 3)

In this part the Imam talks about the meaning of heart in Qur’an.

Imam Musa al-Kazim (as) continued:

... O’ Hisham! Almighty God has said in His book:

"Surely in that there is a reminder to him who has a heart (Qur’an 50:37)".

Heart means reason. And God has further said:

"Indeed we gave Wisdom to Luqman. (Qur’an 31:12)”

Wisdom means (the capacity of) understanding and reasoning.

O’ Hisham! Luqman the Sage, counseled his son: "If you bow before the Truth and the Inevitable, you will be the wisest among people, since a wise man treats himself as little before the Truth and the Inevitable.

O’ my son! This world is like an unfathomable ocean in which many people have drowned. Make, therefore, the fear of God as your boat in this ocean, your faith as the main plank of the boat, the reliance of

God as its sails, the reason as its rower, the knowledge as its Captain, and patience as its anchor."

O’ Hisham! Everything has its indicator. Man’s thoughtfulness is the hall-mark of his reason. The symbol of thoughtfulness is silence.

Everything has its climax and the climax of reason is humility (before Allah’s commands). It is enough to prove you are ignorant and unwise if you do what Allah has prohibited.

... O’ Hisham! Almighty God has mentioned about the people of reason in high terms, and has adorned them with the finest ornaments as per

His own words:

"He gives Wisdom to whomsoever He wills, and whoever is given the Wisdom, has been given much good; yet none will grasp the message but the possessors of understanding minds. (Qur’an 2:269)"

"... And those who rooted firmly in knowledge say: We believe in it; all is from our Lord; yet none remembers, but the men who possess minds. (Qur’an 3:7)"

"What? Is he who knows what has been sent down to you from your Lord is the truth, like him who is blind (void of knowledge)? Only the possessors of understanding minds will remember. (Qur’an 13:19)"

"(O’ Muhammad!) A book We have sent down to you, blessed, that the people of understanding may ponder its signs and so remember. (Qur’an 38:29)"

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Chapter Of "Reason And Ignorance", A Part Of Tradition #12 (Part 4)

Tradition #12 continued:

Imam Musa al-Kazim (as) added:

O’ Hisham! God has appointed His prophets and messengers to make people wise and mindful of God. The more they accept and believe in these messengers, the greater is their God-consciousness. The wisest among men is he who knows about Allah most. He who is the most perfect in his reasoning enjoys the highest status among people in this life and the life of hereafter.

O’ Hisham! God has given two proofs for the guidance of mankind – the explicit/external, and the implicit/internal. The explicit/external proof is in the form of prophets, messengers, and the Imams (divinely- appointed guides). And the implicit/internal proof is in the form of reasoning and understanding.

O’ Hisham! A man of reason does not let his lawful occupations prevent him from thanksgiving/service to Allah, nor does the attraction of unlawful acts wear out his patient.

O’ Hisham! One who allows three things to be dominated by another set of three things, has actually destroyed his reason. The first thing is to allow the reason to be dominated by excessive hopes and expectations. The second thing is to allow the highest of wisdom to be dominated by excessive utterances. The third thing is to allow his admonition light to be extinguished/dominated by carnal desires. And the one who destroys his reason (by doing the above three) also destroys both his worldly life and his faith.

... O’ Hisham! Truth is a sign of obeying God (i.e., truth leads to obey God). And there is NO salvation except through obedience to God.

Obedience to Him can only be performed by means of knowledge. And knowledge is a matter of acquisition, and this acquisition is only through reason and intellect. And there can be NO knowledge except through the learned in divinity (`Aalimun Rabbani). And the consciousness of knowledge is through reason and intellect.

O’ Hisham! Virtuous conduct of a learned man, though limited, is acceptable (to God) at many times of its value. On the contrary, virtuous conduct of a greedy, lustful, and ignorant person is totally rejected.

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Chapter Of "Reason And Ignorance", A Part Of Tradition #12 (Part 5)

Tradition #12 continued:

O’ Hisham! Limited material possessions for a man with sound wisdom are perfectly acceptable to him. Whereas unlimited wealth for a man with little wisdom is not at all accepted to him; and this is why such people have actually earned profit of the trade of their life (in this world). (i.e., they will have no share of profit in hereafter).

O’ Hisham! Lo! A man of reason pondered over the world and its people. He realized that he could NOT get the success in worldly life without hard struggle. Then he pondered over the life of hereafter and again realized that the success in the life of hereafter would not also be secured without hard struggle. Thereupon, the man of reason decided in favor of the struggle which brought eternal success, as compared with the temporary one of the worldly life.

O’ Hisham! The wise people remain detached from the worldly possessions and its attractions, and they remain attached to the life of hereafter. It is because they have realized that the world
attracts/lures and is lured; and also, the life of hereafter lures and is lured. But the world itself runs after the man who struggles for the life of hereafter to the extent that he receives in full the share
which has been allotted to him for this worldly life.

On the contrary, the one who spends his life and struggles for the worldly gains will continue till such time as the life of hereafter demands its own share in the form of death. It is then that he realizes that he is the loser of both, this life and the hereafter.

O’ Hisham! Whoever seeks comfort without wealth, and relief free from jealousy, and security for his faith, must implore God from the bottom of his heart for making his reason perfect.

... O’ Hisham! Almighty God has related about a group of virtuous people who used to pray:

"Our Lord! Let not our hearts deviate after You have guided us; and grant us mercy from Your own Presence, for surely You are the Grantor of bounties without measure. (Qur’an 3:8)"

In offering this prayer, they realized that human hearts could be deflected and could tend towards blindness and low-ness. Secondly they also understood that those who do not seek guidance and reason from God, are the people who are not afraid of God’s (punishments) at all.

And whoever is deprived of reason by God, can never be firm and steady in God consciousness in a way as to enable him to realize the truth of God in his own heart. No one can reach this stage unless his deeds corroborate his words... God Almighty never guides the inside of reason, except what comes out of it through deeds and the words.

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Chapter Of "Reason And Ignorance", A Part Of Tradition #12 (Part 6)

Tradition #12 continued:

O’ Hisham! The Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as) used to say: "Of signs of a man of reason, one is that he has got three qualities:

(1) He replies only when he is questioned;
(2) speaks when all others fail;
(3) Advises what is suitable for the good of the person (who is talking to).

One who has none of these three qualities is stupid.”The Commander of Believers (as) further added: "No one should preside over a meeting except when he possesses either all the three or at least one of the above qualities. If a person presides over a meeting without having all or (at least) one of the above three qualities, he is just stupid!"

O’ Hisham! The Commander of Believers (as) (i.e., Imam ‘Ali), used to say:

"Of all the observance and devotions offered to God, the best one is of and by (the people of) reason. Reason of a person does not reach perfection unless it possesses some specific characteristics. The characteristics (of a perfect reason) is that:

(1) It gives immunity against disbelief (Kufr) and evil;
(2) Virtue and true guidance is expected to follow from such a man (of reason);
(3) He exhausts his excessive wealth in good deeds;
(4) He protects himself from irresponsible gossips;
(5) His share in the worldly life amounts to what is needed for his existence;
(6) He is never fed up with knowledge throughout his life;
(7) Humiliation in pursuit of (belief, obedience and favor of) God is dearer to him than any honor in pursuit of things other than God;
(8) Humbleness is dearer to him than dignity;
(9) He regards the little good of others to him as much, and regards any good from him to others as little;
(10)He regards people better than himself, and regards himself in his heart as of little consequence. And this is the climax!"

... O’ Hisham! He, who has no generosity, has no religion, and he who has no reason has no generosity. The greatest man is he who never deems himself equal in value to the worldly life. Verily there is NO lower price for your bodies except to be soled in exchange for Paradise. Hence, do NOT sell it for anything less than that.

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Chapter Of "Reason And Ignorance", A Part Of Tradition #12 - Majority Vs. Minority (Part 7)

Tradition #12 continued:

... O’ Hisham! God has condemned majority as criterion of truth with the words:

"And if you obey the majority of those on earth, they will lead you astray from the path of God. (Qur’an 6:116)"

"And if you ask them: Who created the heavens and the earth? Certainly they will say Allah. Say: All praise belongs to Allah. Nay, but the majority of them have no knowledge. (Qur’an 31:25)"

{my comment: the majority mentioned in the above verse is the majority of believers since the verse mentions that they believe in Allah}

"And if you ask them: Who sends down water from heaven thereby revives the earth after it’s death? Certainly they will say Allah. Say: All praise be to Allah. Nay, but most of them have no understanding. (Qur’an 29:63)"

and He said:

"... but most of them do not know { Qur’an 6:37, 7:131, 8:34, 10:55, 27:61, 28:57, 39:49, 44:39, 52:47)"

and said: "... and most of them have no understanding (Qur’an 5:103)"

and said: "... but most of them are not thankful (Qur’an 10:60, 27:73)"

O’ Hisham! On the contrary, Allah has praised the minority, by saying:

"Few of My servants are thankful. (Qur’an 34:13)"

and also said: "... And how few they are! (Qur’an 38:24)"

and said: "... and those who believed, and they did not believed with him (Noah) but a few (Qur’an 11:40)"

Shi’ite Reference: Usul Al-Kafi, Arabic-English Version, Part 1, Pp 31-49, Tradition #12 - Love of a Friend (Part 8)

There was a friend of Amir al-Muminin, a good and believing man, who unfortunately fell into error, and who had to be punished. Imam ‘Ali cut off the fingers of his right hand. The man took hold of his cut hand, with the blood dripping from it, with his left hand and went away. He was then instigated by a seditious Kharijite, who wanted to take advantage of the course of events for his own party and against Imam ‘Ali, so he came up to the man with an utter of compassion and said:

Who cut your hands off?

The Chief of the Prophet’s successors, he said, the leader of the untainted ones at the Resurrection, the most righteous among the believers, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, the Imam of Right Guidance, cut of the fingers of my right hand ..... the first to reach the Gardens of Felicity, the hero of the brave, the avenger against the promoters of ignorance, the giver of zakat .... the leader on the right and the perfect path, the speaker of what is true and appropriate, the Champion of Mecca, the steadfast exceller.

Poor you! said the man, he cut off your hands, and You extol him thus!
Why should I not extol him, replied the companion, now that his friendship is mixed with my flesh and blood? I swear by God that he did not cut off my hand except with a right that God has established.

Such was the love, attraction and the affection of the companion for ‘Ali.

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, v9 – Under the explanation of the chapter of al-Kahf - 9)

Shi’i reference: Bihar al-Anwar, v40, pp 281-282

On Imam ‘Ali (as)

Kufa was now the seat of the Islamic rule. The entire Muslim world with the exception of Damascus looked towards Kufa for guidance. They travelled to Kufa often.

Two men were in each other’s company on the road to Kufa. One was a muslim and the other was a non muslim. As they progressed, the non muslim traveller asked his companion:

I am going further than Kufa, to a small village where I live. Where are You going?

His muslim companion said:

I live in Kufa

They proclaimed happily, discussing various things, helping each other, all in a spirit of cordiality. When they drew near to Kufa, the non muslim took a side road towards his village. Just as he was about to bid farewell, he observed that his muslim companion was coming with him.

Didn't you tell me that You are going to Kufa where You lived?

The muslim replied:

Yes of course

On this the non muslim inquired

Then why were you coming this way? That is the only road leading to Kufa?

I know, said the muslim, But we have long been companions. Our Prophet (S) said that when two are companions to each other on a journey they have obligations and duties towards each other. You gave me company and now it is my duty to follow You a few steps and then make a gentle departure.

No wonder that Your Prophet (S) managed to spread his faith so quickly. His (S) teachings were indeed great.

And then it so happened that once the same non muslim entered Kufa. There he found that his muslim companion had been none other but the Khalifa of his time, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (as). He soon became a muslim and remained the most faithful of companion of the Imam.

To judge Your own souls before the time of judging of your action arrives. Make an assessment of Yourself before You are called upon to account for Your conduct in this existence.

Imam ‘Ali (as)

Sources:
Peak Of Eloquence
Nahjul Balagha
Sermons, Letters and Sayings of Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib
Translated by Askari Jafari
Islamic Seminary Publications

Sources:

Unto Thee I grant ........

A collection of historical events from the following books
o Tuhaful Uqool - Abu Muhammad al-Harrani
o Biharul Anwar - Allamah Majlisi
o al-Amthalan Nabawiyyah - Muhammad al-Gharawi
o Dastan e Rastan - Allama Murtaza Mutahhari

Islamic Scientists

1. Physics

(a). Abu ‘Ali al-Hasan ibn al-Haitham (965 - 1039)

“Known as Alhazen to the West
“Mathematical evolution of spherical mirrors
“Rectilinear motion of light and use of lenses
“Refraction angle variations
“Magnifying effects of the plano convex lens

(b). Abu Raihan al-Biruni (973 - 1051)

“Gravitational force
“Introduced the concept of elliptical shape of cosmelogical bodies

(c). Abu’l Fath’ Abd al-Rahman al-Khazini

“Mechanics and Hydrostatics
“Study of the Center of Gravity as applied to balance
“Measurement of specific weights of bodies

2. Mathematics

(a). Muhammad Ibn Musa al-Khwarazmi

“Known as Khwarizm to the West
“Rule of algebraic equations
“Solutions to quadratic and Cubic equations
“Work on square roots, squares, theory of numbers, solution of the fractional numbers

(b). Abul Fath Umar Ibn Ibrahim al-Khayyam

“Know for his translation of the Rubaiyat
“Solutions of equations of cubic order
“Wrote on conic geometry elaborating the solution of algebraic equations
“Determined the Trinomial Equation

3. Medicine

(a). Abu ‘Ali al-Hussain ibn Sina

“Known as Avicenna to the West
““Canon of Medicine “best known works
“Known as the Prince of Physicians to the West
“Wrote the first description of several drugs and diseases as meningitis.

(b). Hunain ibn Ishaq

“Known as Johannitius Onan to the West
“Translated 95 Works of Galen from Greek to Syriac and 99 into Arabic
“Greatest translator of medical works

(c). Muhammad ibn Zakariyya ar Razi

“Known as Rhazes to the West
“Student of ‘Ali ibn Rabban al-Tabari
“Skill in prognosis
“Treatment of Physiological shocks
“An expert on psychosomatic medicine and psychology
“al-Biruni mentions 56 (fifty six) manuscripts on pharmacology
“Credited for identifying Smallpox and its treatment
“Use of alcohol as an antiseptic
“Use of mercury as a purgative for the first time

(d). ‘Ali ibn al-Abbas al-Majusi

“Known to the West as Holy Abbas
“After Rhazes he was the most outstanding Physician
“His works were authoritative till the works of ibn Sina appeared

4. Chemistry

(a). Jabir Ibn Hayyan

“Known as Geber to the West
“Wrote on Cosmology; Astrology; Music; Science of numbers and letters
“Final authority on Chemistry for many many Centuries
“Classified metals into three classifications
“Laid the basis of the Acid Base theory

(b). Muhammad ibn Zakruyya ar RAzi

“Prominent Chemist
“Secrets of Secrets - where he describes
- chemical processes
- experiments he performed himself

“The processes were
- distillation
- calcination
- crystallization
- he mentions the use of
- beakers
- flasks
- phials
- casseroles
- naphtha lamps
- smelting furnaces
- chear tongues etc .....

“Credited for the discovery of many acids

(c). Abul Qasim al-Iraqi

“Disciples of Jabir’s school of thought
“Cultivation of Gold - is a continuation of Jabir’s work

5. Astronomy

(a). al-Farghani (Alfraganus)

“Celebrated astronomer known for his work ‘ Elements of Astronomy

(b). Thabit ibn Qurrah

“Theory of Oscillatory motion of equinoxes
“Addition of ninth sphere to the eight Ptolemaic astronomy

(c). al-Battani (Albategnius)

“Discovered the increase of the sun's apogee
“responsible for the discovery motion of the solar apsides
“Best known is ‘ On the Science of Stars ‘

(d). al-Biruni

“Determination of latitudes and longitudes
“Determination of geodetic measurements

(e). al-Hazen

“Wrote ‘ Resume of Astronomy ‘
“Described the motion of the planets

(f). ibn Yunus

“Solved the problems of spherical trigonometry
“First to study the isometric oscillatory motion of a pendulum

(g). al-Zarqali

“He was an Andulasian observational astronomer
“Invented the instrument ‘ Sahifah "
“Responsible for the proof of the motion of the apogee of the sun with respect to the fixed stars.

(h). ibn Tufail

“Known to the Occident as Abubacer
“An authority on the theory of the system of homocentric spheres

(i). Ummar Khayyam

“Prepared a calendar that was more accurate than the Gregorian one, in use present day.

6. Art And Culture

(a). Qutab al-Din Shirazi

“Known for his work ‘ On the Highest Understanding of the Knowledge of the Spheres ‘.

(b). Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khawarizmi

“Was well known for his work ‘ The Shape of the Earth ‘

7. Philosophy

(a). Abu Yusuf Yaqub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi

“The First Muslim Philosopher known to the West as Alkindus
“Also wrote treatise on mathematics, physics, medicine, natural history.
“Compiled the first vocabulary in Arabic of technical philosophy

(b). followed by Abu Nasr al-Farabi

“First Muslim to classify the sciences and delineate the limit of each
“Wrote extensively on Aristotle’s work
“Out of 70 works, more than half were devoted to Logic
“His commentaries on Metaphysics helped Avicenna understand the work
“Known for ‘ Logic of the Orientals ‘

8. Social Sciences

(a). Abd al-Rahman Abu Zaid ibn Khaldun

“Known as the ‘ Philosopher of History ‘
“His works analyze the cause and the fall of civilizations and cultures.
“His work ‘ Kitab al-Ibar ‘ discusses the History of the Arabs, Persians, Berbers and their contemporaries who possessed great Powers.

Subject: “References - Scientists “

This message is to the brother who had requested for the references of the Islamic Scientists.

1. Cultivation of Science by the Muslims by M. Abdul Aleem Siddiqui
2. Incredible Islamic Scientists (Two Volumes) by K. Ajram
3. Muslim Contribution to
“Civilization (by Haider Bammate)
“Geography (by Nafis Ahmed)
“Science and Culture (by M. Abdur Rahman Khan)
(These are infact 3 books in total that I have mentioned)

4. Muslim Contribution to Psycotherapy and Modern Trends by Dr. Syed Azhar ‘Ali Rizvi
5. Science and Islamic Civilization in Islam by Syed Hossain Noser

All these books are available at
Halalco Books (Ask for their free Catalog)
108 East Fairfax Street
Falls Church VA 322046
Phone no. 703 532 3202 (Call till 9 P.M)
Fax no. 703 241 0035

Some English Books on Shi’a Beliefs

The first book is of a Sunni brother who was exposed to the Shi’a for the first time, after studying several Sunni madhabs, including Sufism.

The book is written from a Sunni prespective.

1. "Then I was guided", by Dr. Muhammad al-Teejani al-Samawi $6
2. "Beliefs of Shi’ite School”by Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar $6
3. "Probe into the History of Hadeeth”$6
4. "Role of Ahlul-bayte in preserving the teaching of Islam”$8
5. "Imamate,”by Dr. Akhtar Rizvi. $12
6. "A Shi’a Anthology", by Tabatabai $5
7. "Arabic for English speaking students”$25
8. "Qur’an w/commentery+long intro”by S.V. Mir Ahmed ‘Ali (Shi’a) $25
9. "Abdullah Ibn Saba and Other Myths,”by al-Askari, S. M. $12
10. "The Awaited Savior,”by B. al-Sadr and M. Mutahhari. $3.5
11. "An Inquiry Concerning al-Mahdi,”by B. al-Sadr. $8
12. "A Reply To: Belief of Mahdism in Shi’a Imamia". $6

These are a couple of places that have these books:
TTQ (718) 446-6472 in NY
al-Khoei Foundation (718) 297-6520 in NY

More books in English:

13. "Shitte Islam", by Tabatabai (translated into English by Seyyed Hussein Nasr)

Note: Allamah Ayatollah Seyyed Muhammad Husayn Tabatabaei, who passed away recently, was one of the scholars and philosophers of Shi’a Islam. He is known for many contributions to Islamic scholarship, including _Tafsir al-Mizan_.

14. "An Introduction to Shi’i Islam: History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi’ism", by Moojan Momen

Note: The beginning chapters explain the historical events that lead to the Shi’a-Sunni split. I don’t think the author is a Shi’a himself, but the book is informative.

15. "The Shiites Under Attack", by Muhammad Javad Chirri. Available from: The Islamic Center of America, 15571 Joy Road, Detroit, Michigan, 48228.

This book is very interesting and highly recommended for those who would like to study Shi’a. It removes many doubts and allegations scientifically.

Books 13, 14 and 15 are available in many US public and/or university libraries.

The Following Book List is for the Imam al-Khoei Islamic Foundation
Phone no. 1 718 297 6520
al-Khoei Foundation Library,
89-89 Van Wyck Expressway,
Jamaica, NY 11435-4123 U.S.A.

Name Price in $

Books For Children

Islamic Teachings Book 1 - 4 20.00
Childrens Guide to Islam 7.00
Religious teachings for Children - Book 2 2.00
Imamia Book Of Religious knowledge(For K.G) 2.00
Imamia Book Of Religious knowledge (For Class 1) 2.00
Children’s Book 2.00
A Gift (Story Book) 1.00

Books For Adults

1) Qur’an & Qur’anic Studies

Essence of the Holy Qur’an 20.00
Guide Book of Qur’an 2.00
Qur’an made easy 7.00
Holy Qur’an - Arabic Text Only!!!!!!
Small print -P/B 20.00
Medium print - H/B 10.00
Large print - H/B 12.00

Holy Qur’an - Arabic Text with English Translation

By S V Mir Ahmed ‘Ali - H/B 30.00
Same P/B 25.00
By Shakir small P/B 6.00
Same large “12.00
““H/B 20.00
By Pikhtall small P/B 8.00
By Muhammad Sarwar P/B 5.00
The Qur’an translation - English text only
By Shakir 4.95
Al_Qur’an with Spanish Translation H/B 20.00
Same as above P/B 14.00
AL_Qur’an with french Translation H/B 25.00

2) Tradition And Prayers

Peak of Eloquence (Nahjul Balagha) (H/B) (IS) 12.00
Nahjul Balagha (H/B) 20.00
same (P/B) 9.00
Al-Sahife-Al-Sajjadiya 8.00
Supplications “Imam ‘Ali (as) “4.00
Al Salat (English translation) 3.00
Same in French Translation 2.00
The event of the Cloak (Hadith Kisa) 2.00

3) Islamic Studies

Man and Universe 18.00
Islamic Teachings (An Over View) 10.00
Islamic Hijab (Modest Dress) 14.00
What is to be done 15.00
Man and Islam 10.00
Jihad and Shahadat 15.00
The Bible, Qur’an and Science 10.00
The Justice of God 4.95
The Faith of Shi’a Islam 4.00
Elements of Islamic Studies 5.00
The Imamat and Khilafat 2.50
Know your Islam 7.00
The Awaited Saviour 3.50
Man & Faith 1.50
Rationality of Islam 7.50
Master & Mastership 6.00
Then I was Guided 4.00
Then I was Guided (IS) 6.00
Caliph’s Caliphate 8.00
Islam & School of Economics 4.00
What do you know about Islamic Economics 2.00
Temporary Marriage in Islam 6.00
Trends of History in Qur’an 8.00
He, His Messenger and His Message 6.00
Probe into the history of Hadith 6.00
What is our Mission 4.00
PORK, possible reasons for prohibition 5.50
Music & its Effects 1.00
Hajj, The Pilgrimage to Mecca 3.00
Unto Thee I Grant ... 3.00
Seeker of Truth 3.00
In Search of truth 3.00

4) Practical Laws And Fiqah

Articles of Islamic Acts (H/B) 18.00
Islamic Dietry Laws 15.00
Islamic Practical Laws Explained H/B 10.00
same as above P/B 7.00
A Short History Of Ilmul Usul 7.00
Namazee Jamaat 1.00
Fasting 2.00
Haj 3.00
Rules Of Hajj 2.00

5) History

Kitab al-Irshad P/B 12.00
Same as above H/B 20.00
The Voice Of Muman Justice (on life of hazrat ‘Ali A.S) 12.00
The Tragedy of Karbala 7.95
Muharram and Karbala 3.00
Khadija - Tul - Kubra 8.00
Salman al-Farsi 6.00
The memories of Mr. Humphrey 3.50

6) Ethics

Lessons form Islam 10.00
Islam a code of social life 10.00
Marriage 8.00

7) New Arrivals

Probe into the history of Ashoora 8.00
Light within me 8.00
Manners and Ethics 4.50
A Textbook of ethics 4.50
The Voice of Human Justice(PB) 9.00
Beliefs of Shi’ite School 6.00
Islamic Political System 5.00
Fixed term marriage 5.00
The Martyr 5.00
Tenents of Islam 4.50
The supplications of Kumal 0.50
The Occultation of Twelth Imam (HB) 25.00
Stories form Qur’an 12.00
Al Mizan 7 Volumes 84.00
Al Kafi 12 Volumes 96.00
A Shi’ite creed 18.00
Polarization around the character of Imam ‘Ali 10.00
Rights of Women in Islam 20.00
Beacons of Light 18.00
Arabic for English speaking students 25.00
Abdullah Ibn Sabah and other Myths 12.00
Immamate 12.00
Islam Jafari rules of personal status 8.00
An Inqury Concerning al-Mahdi 8.00
The Message 18.00
The Last Luminary (On Twelfth Imam) 5.00
The Family Life Of Islam 8.00
Contemporary Man and Social Problem 5.00
A Shi’it Anthology 5.00
Hazrat Zahra (sa) and heart rendering episode of Fadak 2.00
A REPLY TO “Belief Of Mahdism in Shi’a Imamia “6.00

Book List - Tahrike Tarsile Qur’an
P.O Box 731115 Corona Station
Elmhurst, NY 11373 - 1115
Tel 718 446 6472
Fax 718 779 6532

On how to place an Order Please see the end of the file

Holy Qur’an In Arabic With Translation In English

Holy Qur’an Ahmed ‘Ali (Paperback large) 20.00
M. H. Shakir (Casebound large) 19.95
M. H. Shakir (Paperback large) 12.00
M. H. Shakir (Paperback small) 6.00
Maududi (Casebound large) 20.00
N. J. Dawood (Paperback large) 30.00
M. Pickthall (Casebound) 15.00
M. Pickthall (Paperback small) 8.95
Sheikh M. Sarwar (Paperback) 12.00
T.B Irving (Casebound large) 30.00
Holy Qur’an in 30 parts (Arabic / English) 30.00
Holy Qur’an (English / Urdu / Arabic) 28.00
Qur’an The Final Testament (Hardback Large) 30.00

Holy Qur’an In Arabic With Translation & Commentary In English

Holy Qur’an A. Maududi (Casebound set of 16 vols) 160.00
A. Maududi (Paperback set of 16 vols) 140.00
A. Yusuf ‘Ali (Casebound large) U.S Ed 20.00
A. Yusuf ‘Ali (Casebound large) Saudi Ed 20.00
A. Yusuf ‘Ali (Paperback large) 12.00
Ahmadiyya (Casebound large) 20.00
S.V. Mir ‘Ali (Paperback large) 24.95

Holy Qur’an In Arabic With Translation In Roman Script

Holy Qur’an M. Pickthall (Casebound large) 20.00
Part 30th of Holy Qur’an (Paperback small 5 “x 4 “) pp 102 4.00
Part 30th of Holy Qur’an (Paperback large 11 “x 8.5 “) pp 34 4.00

Holy Qur’an In English Translation Only

The Qur’an M.H Shakir (Paperback 7 “x 4 “) 4.95
Glorious Qur’an Pickthall (Casebound 8 “x 5.25 “) 12.00
The Qur’an T.B Irving (Paperback large) 20.00

Holy Qur’an In Various Other Languages

Qur’an Kareem French/Arabic/Commentary - Yusuf ‘Ali (Casebound) 25.00
Qur’an Majeed Gukerati only (Casebound large) 20.00
Qur’an Majeed Persian / Arabic (Hardback 6.75 “x 5 “1208 pp) 15.00
El Coran Spanish / Arabic (Casebound large) 24.00
El Coran Spanish / Arabic (Paperback large) 16.00
El Coran Spanish only (Paperback) 12.00
Qur’ani Tukufu Swahili / Arabic (Casebound large) 30.00
Qur’an Kerim Turkish / Arabic (Casebound medium) 25.00
Qur’an Majid Urdu / Arabic Commentary in Urdu 35.00
Qur’an English / Urdu / Arabic 28.00
Jamalul Qur’an Urdu / Arabic (Casebound large) 25.00
Tarjuma Qur’an Urdu / Arabic (Casebound large) 30.00
Qur’an Hakeem Urdu / Arabic (Casebound 7 “x 5 “) 20.00
Qur’an Majeed Urdu / Arabic (4.5 “x 3.5 “pocket size pp 732) 9.00
Urdu / Arabic (6.5 “x 4.0 “pocket size pp 803) 7.00
Urdu / Arabic (7.25 “5. 0 “pp 799) 14.00

Titles On Qur’anic Subjects

Bible, Qur’an and Science (Paperback) 10.00
Commandments by Gid in Qur’an (Paperback) 12.00
Discussion on the errors of Yusuf ‘Ali (Paperback) 12.00
Distortion and Abrogation in the Bible 10.00
Essence of the Holy Qur’an (Paperback) 20.00
(Casebound) 30.00
Guide book of the Qur’an 4.00
Languages of the Qur’an 15.00
Lessons from the Qur’an 12.00
Qur’an made Easy 6.00
Seeker of Truth (Selected Suras) 5.00
Study of Part 1 of the Qur’an (Paperback) 8.00
Understanding the Bible through the Qur’an 9.00

Titles On Traditions (Hadiths)

Al Kafi (Usoole Kafi) Volume I - XII (Paperback) 120.00
Al Mizan Vols I - VII (Casebound) 140.00
Al Mizan Vols I - VII (Paperback) 110.00
Saheeh Bukhari Vols I - IX 130.00
Concise Encyclopedia of Islam 24.95
Encyclopedia of Seerah Vols I - VII 200.00
Fazail - e - Amal 20.00
First Encylopedia of Islam (Brills) Vols I - IX
(Paper back) 360.00
(Hard back) 700.00
Medicine of Prophet (Tibbun Nabli) 18.00
Mishkatul Masaabih Vol I only 8.00
Saheeh Muslim Vols I - IV 65.00
The Right Path 16.00
Ritadh Saleheen Vols I - II 40.00

Titles On Islamic History

Encyclopedia of Seerah (Hardback) VII Vols 250.00
Glance at the life of the Holy Prophet of Islam 8.00
Holy Prophet (Bilal Muslim Mission) 5.00
Life of Muhammad by Haykal (Paper back) 12.00
Life of Muhammad Islamic foundation 2.00
Message (Life of Muhammad) 18.00
Muhammad in the Bible by Prof. Abdul Daud (Paper back) 12.00
Muhammad Man Of Allah by Syed Hossein Nasr (Paper back) 5.00
Seal of the Prophet and his Message 12.00
Stories from the Qur’an (Prophet Adam to Muhammad (S)) 12.00
Tragedy of Kerbala 7.95
Tears and Tributes (On the martydrom of Imam Hussain) 8.00

On Imam Mahdi (as)

Belief of Mahdism in Shi’a’ism 6.00
Inquiry concerning al-Mahdi (as) 8.00
Last Luminary (Imam Mahdi (as)) 5.00
Occultation of the Mahdi (12th Imam (as) Paperback) 25.00
Reply to the Belief of Mahdism in Shi’a Imamia 6.00

On The Twelve Imams (as) And The Ahl Al-Bayt

Polarization around the Character of Imam ‘Ali (as) 10.00
Role of Ahl al-Bayt in preserving the teachings of Islam 8.00
Imam ‘Ali Raza (Shi’ite 8th Imam) 7.00
Kitab al-Irshad (On the Life of the 12 Imams (as))
(Casebound - Hardcover) 18.00
(Paperback) 12.00

Hussain the Saviour of Islam (Paperback) 4.00
Brother of Prophet Muhammad (S) Vols I - II 36.00
Voice of Human Justice (On Imam ‘Ali (as))
(Hard back) 21.00
(Paper back) 16.00

General Topics

Abdullah Ibn Sabah 12.00
Imam ‘Ali Raza (Shi’ite 8th Imam) 7.00
Ammar Yasir (Companion of the Prophet) 8.00
Anecdotes of a Pious man 4.50
Beacon’s Of Light (On Prophet & His daughter Fatimah) 16.00
Biography of the Leaders of Islam 8.00
Bilal Of Africa by Malik Eshteyani 7.00
Bilal (with Illustrations) by H.A.L Craig 9.00
Caliphs Caliphate 8.00
Concise Enclycopedia of Islam 24.95
Gospel of Barnabas 10.00
Ghadir - e - Khum (paper back) 1.50
Hijrah (Islamic Foundation - Paper back) 4.00
Imamate 12.00
Jesus, Prophet of Islam (Softcover) 8.00
(Hardcover) 12.00
Imam Khoemeini (The Inspirational Force) 25.00
Khadijatul Kubra - Wife of the Prophet 5.95
Salman al-Farsi (Companion of the Prophet) 5.95
Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam (Brill’s) 95.00
Then I was guided (al-Tijani al-Samawi)
(Paperback) 4.00
(Casebound) 7.95

Letters And Sermons Of Imam ‘Ali (as)

Nahjul Balagha - Peak of Eloquence (Paperback) 12.00
(Casebound) 18.00
(Spanish Paperback) 14.00
(Spanish Casebound) 25.00
(Arabic / English Casebound) 25.00
Sayings and the Wisdom of Imam ‘Ali (as) 15.00

On Shi’a’ism

Origin of Shi’a Islam 10.00
Shi’a (Allama Tabatai Casebound) 6.00
Shi’ite Anthology 12.00
Shi’ite Creed 18.00
Faith of Shi’a Islam 4.95

Titles On The Creator (God)

God and his attributes 12.00
God Arises (Evidence of God in Nature and Science) 15.00
He, His Messenger and His Message 6.00
Justice of God 4.95
Master and Mastership 5.00
Master and Mastership (Small Paperback) 2.00
Principles of Islamic Ideology 12.00
Seal of the Prophet and His Message 12.00

Titles On Mankind And Death

Eternal Life by Allama Murtaza Mutahheri 2.50
Journey of the Unseen World 5.00
Life after Death 8.00
Life, death and the Life after 8.00
Light within Me 8.00
Man and Faith by Allama Murtaza Murahheri 5.00
Man and Islam by Dr. ‘Ali Shariati 6.95
Man and Universe by Allama Murtaza Mutahheri 18.00
Mannes and Etiquettes 5.00
Martyr (Murtaza Mutahheri) 1.50
Medicine of the Prophet 18.00
Muslim Names 6.00
Our Philosophy
(Hard back) 25.00
(Paper back) 18.00
Rationality of Islam by Allama Murtaza Mutahheri 8.00
Resurrection, Judgement and the Hereafter 10.00
Road to Faith 4.00
Spectacle of death 12.00
Spiritual discourses by Allama Murtaza Mutahheri 5.00
Submission 3.00
Textbook of Ethics 5.00
What is to be done by Dr. ‘Ali Shariati 11.95
Whose Rule - God or man? 6.50
Youth and Morals 8.00

Titles On Islamic Laws And Acts (Fiqah)

Articles on Islamic Acts 13.00
Congregational Prayers 1.00
Dinniyat 1.00
Elements of Islamic Studies 4.95
Everday Fiqh (Islamic Laws) Vols I - II 12.00
Fatwas (Islamic Rulings) on Hajj - Manaske Hajj 5.00
by Ayatulla Gulpeygani 5.00
by Ayatulla Shirazi 12.00
Furoo Uddin 5.00
Fasting - Regulations and Practices 5.00
Fiqh as Sunna (Islamic Laws) Vols I - V Hard back 65.00
Hajj - Reflections on its Rituals by Dr. ‘Ali Sharaiti 12.00
Hajj - A Concise Pocket Guide 2.50
Hajj Umra - A Concise Poecket Guide 2.50
Khums (Islamic Tax) 2.00
Salaat 1.00
(in Spanish Language) 2.00
(in Urdu) 1.50
Taqleed - It’s meaning and Reality 2.50
Tendency of Rationalizing the Laws of Shariah 2.50

Titles On Supplications

Dua’s and Aamal 5.00
Event of the Cloak (Hadith e Kisa) 0.50
Mafatihul Jinaan 15.00
Majmou (Gujrati) 10.00
Majmu’a Wazeefah 8.00
Supplication of Kumail 0.50
Selected Supplications (Prayers and Salutations) 6.00
Saheefah Sajadiyyah (prayers by Imam Zainul Abidin) 8.00
Saheefah Sajadiyyah (Casebound 83 Supplications) 35.00
Tohfatus Sa’emeen (Supplications for Ramazan) 6.00
Ziyarat al-Jamea 4.00

Titles On Marriages

Marriage - A Step towards fulfillment in life 5.00
Matrimonial education in Islam 5.00
Principles of Marriage (Family Ethics) 8.00

Titles For Women

Ideal Women 10.00
Islamic Modest Dress 10.00

Titles On Al- Islam

Concise Encyclopedia of Islam 24.00
First Course in Islam 1.50
Guideline of Employment by Muslim Community 4.00
Inquiries about Islam 15.00
Introducing Islam to non - Muslims 5.00
Introduction to Islam 8.00
Islam - A Code of Social Life 8.00
Islam - Beliefs and Teachings 8.00
Islam the Straight Path 9.00
Islamic Teachings by Allama Tabatabai 10.00
Know Your Islam 7.00
Lessons from Islam 10.00
Miracles of Islamic Sciences 18.95
Muslims and non Muslims Face to Face 7.00
Muslims contributions to Science and Culture 5.00
Our Philosophy (Hardback) 25.00
(Paperback) 18.00
Pillars of Islam 1.00
Rationality of Islam 8.00
Religion of Islam (Maulana Muhammad ‘Ali Ahmadiya) 18.00
Spirit of Islam 8.00
Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam 95.00
Sufism in the View of Islam 5.00
Teachings of Islam 5.00
Towards Understanding Islam (Maududi) 5.00
What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims 9.00

Titles On Politics

Babri Mosque of India Dispute 4.00
Factors of Islamic Weakness 3.00
Islam and Intolerance (Reply to Salman Rushdie) 7.95
Islam and Revolution (Writings of Ayatollah Khomeini) 19.95
Islamic Fundamentalism 9.00
Makkah MAssacre and the Future of the Haramain 6.00
Qualities of a Thinker Missionary 4.00
Terrorism - Why America is the Target 10.00
They Dare To Speak Out (On Israel’s Lobby) 9.95

Titles On Economics

Economic Development in Islamic Framework 5.00
Iqtisad - Islamic Alternative for Economics 4.00
Islamic Jurisprudence in Modern World 8.00
What do You Know about Islamic Economics 4.00
Iqtisaduna (Translated as Our Economics
by Ayatullah Baqir as Sadr) Vols I - IV 36.00

Titles On Dietary Law

Comprehensive List Of Halal Food Products 8.00
Islamic Dietary Laws Explained 12.00
Muslim Guide to Food Ingredients 12.00
Pork - Possible reason for it’s prohibitions 3.50
Cultural Atlas of Islam by Ismail Faruqi 95.00
Aalim Software (Database) Qur’an and Hadith 115.00

Audio Cassettes

“45 cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an read by Sheikh Mehmood al- Husri in Arabic, translated by M. Pickthall and spoken in English by Aslam Azhar Price 75.00
“45 cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an recited by Qari Shakir Qazmi in Arabic, translation by M. Pickthall and spoken English by Aslam Azhar Price 75.00
“45 Cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an read by Maulana Ehtishamul Haqq Thanvi in Arabic and spoken in Urdu translation by Maulana Saleemudin Shamsi Price 75.00
“75 cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an read by Qari Ghulam Rasul in Arabic with Urdu translation by Muhammad Wajih as Seema Irfani Price 125.00
“15 cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an read by Qari Khushi Muhammad in Arabic Only Price 40.00
“30 cassettes (C - 60) full Qur’an by Sheikh Huzafyi Price 50.00
“C - 30 cassettes of recitation by Sheikh Abdul Basit Price 2.50
“Qur’an on the CD Price 25.00

They do have a seperate list for Arabic titles. Please call them up for the latest list available. The above list is however 6 months old.

For delivery and mailing they do ship Overseas. And in case You are looking a specific title, please have the following information ready
“the name of the author
“the publisher
“the ISBN number

and they shall be able to help you track it down.

Prophet Muhammad (S) said:
"He who wants this world should seek knowledge; he who wants the afterlife should seek knowledge; and he who wants both should also seek knowledge."

al-Imam ‘Ali (as) said:

"Through knowledge, one knows Allah (SWT) and is able to worship Him (SWT) properly."

Topic Tags:

Shi'a [6]

Sunnah [7]

Sunni [8]

Sunni-Shi'a [9]

Publisher(s):

Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project [3]

Category:

General [4]

Sunni & Shi’a [5]

Featured Category:

Muslim Practices [10]

Explore Shi'a & Sunni [11]

Debates & discussions [12]

Introducing the Ahlul Bayt [13]

Resources for Further Research [14]

Responses to Misconceptions [15]

Shi'a beliefs explained [16]

Source URL: https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia

Links
[1] https://www.al-islam.org/user/login?destination=node/28016%23comment-form
[2] https://www.al-islam.org/user/register?destination=node/28016%23comment-form
[3] https://www.al-islam.org/organization/ahlul-bayt-digital-islamic-library-project
[4] https://www.al-islam.org/library/general-belief-creed
[5] https://www.al-islam.org/library/sunni-shia
[6] https://www.al-islam.org/tags/shia
[7] https://www.al-islam.org/tags/sunnah
[8] https://www.al-islam.org/tags/sunni
[9] https://www.al-islam.org/tags/sunni-shia
[10] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/muslim-practices
[11] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/explore-shia-sunni
[12] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/debates-discussions
[13] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/introducing-ahlul-bayt
[14] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/resources-further-research
[15] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/responses-misconceptions
[16] https://www.al-islam.org/feature/shia-beliefs-explained
[17] mailto:ashah@bass.gmu.edu
[18] mailto:ashah@bass.gmu.EDU
[19] mailto:hareb@spot.Colorado.EDU
[20] mailto:rached@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu
[21] mailto:mas@cadence.com
[22] mailto:imnet1@u.washington.edu
[23] mailto:kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca
[24] mailto:dabbous@milou.inria.fr
[25] mailto:asabati@sol.UVic.CA
[26] mailto:elrabaa@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca
[27] mailto:kaamran@sun14.vlsi.uwaterloo.CA
[28] mailto:imran@panix.com
[29] mailto:U58369@uicvm.uic.edu
[30] mailto:shaun@dt.wdc.com
[31] mailto:djamel@gemini.ldc.lu.se
[32] mailto:gwydion@gnu.ai.mit.edu
[33] mailto:mas@Cadence.COM
[34] mailto:azolfag@phoenix.princeton.edu
[35] mailto:hassan@cs.ubc.ca
[36] mailto:bdogan@eecs.wsu.edu