SHIA_SUNNI We Defend The Truth, You Spread It…

 

EXCLUSIVE HERE ON SHIA ONLINE !

 SOURCES TAKEN FROM  S.dol.org

Contents

Shiaism Discussed Offline

Abu Talib: The Staunch Believer
Ahl e Bayt – The Prophet’s Household
Ahl e Bayt and Their Enemies
Ali is to Muhammad as Aaron to Moses
Ali Mawla
Asahab e Muhammad: The Shia Perspective
Ashra Mubashra: The Ten Blessed Companions
Attacking The House of Fatima Zahra (AS)
At-Tahera: Verse of Purity
Ayesha’s Actual Age
Ayesha’s Rebellion Against Imam Ali
Ayesha’s Role In Islam
Azadari: The Mourning
Bida: Innovation in Islam
Demise of Prophet Muhammad
Difference Between Shias and Sunnis
Fadak: The Garden
Fitnatul Wahab: The Menace of Wahabism
Ghadeer e Khum
Imamat: The Perfection Of Deen
Imams: The Holy Twelve
Infallibility
Kalimah: The Shia Stand
Kerbala: The Revival Of Islam
Mahdi (AS): The Twelfth Imam
Majlis e Hussain
Muawiya, The Cursed
Muhammad (SAW) and Ali ibn Abu Talib: The Shia Persepective
Murder Of Uthman
Muta: Temporary Marriage In Islam
Nomination of First Caliph
Qasim Ibn al-Hassan’s (AS) Marriage
Quran: The Shia Perspective
Quran Compiled by Imam Ali
Rangeela Rasool
SahaheSittah: The 6 Authentic Sunni Books
Salat: The Shia Way
Shia Factions
Sippah e Sahaba Kill-List
Tabarra
Taqiyah
Tawassul
Tawassul: The Negative Approach To Wasila and Intercession
Teachers of The Quran
Tragedy of Thursday
Umer: The Shield Of Islam
Ummekalthum’s Marriage to Umer
Usama’s Expedition
Usool e Deen and Froo e Deen
Visitng Holy Graves/Shrines
Why Become A Shia: The Conversion Story
Why Believe The Shia Mahdi    

Abu Talib: The Staunch Believer

The Quranic verse states: 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]

Sunnis claim this verse to be revealed when Abu Talib died and the prophet plead for his forgiveness. This is not true. The above sura is totally a Medinite sura, except the verses 128-129. The above sura was revealed after the migration of prophet and logically, a lot later after the death of Hz Abu Talib. 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 establish relations for the polytheists, let alone pray for them, out of love and respect !

Surah 4 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!

Surah 9 Verses 23 and 80: 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.

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 (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF). Come back, my nephew, go on, say what ever you like. I shall never let you down at any time. 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

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 (PBUH&HF) believes, if any one from you stands up I will hit him with my sword.”

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 (PBUH&HF), The One, The Great.

Then Abu Talib asked the Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF). It was on this occasion that Abu Talib said : I believe that Mohammed’s faith is the best of all the religions of the Universe. 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

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 continue till 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 (PBUH&HF), and often chaged room as a precaution aganist sudden violence.

At the close of the third year of the Interdict, Mohammad (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF) as the receiver of the revelations from heavens, unhesitantly went to the Quraish and told them what Muhammad (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF). 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 …

Once during the childhood of the Prophet (PBUH&HF) on the occasion of a scarcity of rains Abu Talib took him (PBUH&HF) to the Holy Kaaba and standing with his back touching the wall of the sanctuary lifted up the Prophet (PBUH&HF) in his lap and sought medium in his prayers to the Almighty for the rains. The Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 Mohammed 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.” Sharah of Bukhari by Qastalani, v 2 p 227 – Al Seerah Al Halebeyah, v 1 p 125

Abu Talib was a man of great faith and had strong belief in the truthfulness of Mohammed (PBUH&HF). 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 remarked : … The Quraish never met me with such treatment during the life time of Abu Talib, since they were cowards. History of Ibn Asakeer, v 1 p 284 – Mustadrak of Al Hakim, v 2 p 622

Abu Talib addresses the men of Quraysh, who were present at the marriage ceremony of his nephew, Muhammad, 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. Were Muhammad (PBUH&HF), 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. – Seerah al-Halabiyyah, vol 1 p 139

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 Mohammed. 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 Mohammed 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. – Al Muhabil Dunya, v 1 p 72

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!. – Dalail al-Nubuwwah by al-Bayhaqi, vol 2 p 101 – Ibn Hisham, Cairo Edition, p146 , v1, pp 219-220

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 Mohammed (PBUH&HF) with the truth, if my father intercedes for every sinner on the face of the earth, God would accept his intercession. – al-Ihtijaj, by al-Tabarsi, v1, p341

Some questions arise:
1. Why is it that we accuse Abu Talib of paganism, when he chose to believe in the Prophet’s (PBUH&HF) message and declared it by political statements and sometimes by frank declarations?
2. 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?
3. Why do we accuse him of paganism when he defended the Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF) for 11 years ?
4. Why do we attribute paganism to the man who read the Nikah for the Prophet (PBUH&HF) ? How can your mind comprehend the notion of a pagan/disbeliever carrying out the ceremony of the marriage for a Prophet?

1. The Holy Prophet says in a hadith (joining his two fingers): “I and the supporter of the orphan are together in Paradise like these two fingers.”

Ibn Abi’l-Hadid also has reported this hadith in his Sharh-e-Nahju’l-Balagha, vol.IV, p.312, where he says that it is obvious that the Holy Prophets statement does not mean all supporters of orphans, since most of the supporters of orphans are sinners. So the Holy Prophet meant by it Abu Talib and his distinguished grandfather, Abdu’l-Muttalib, who looked after the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet was known in Mecca as the yatim (orphan) of Abu Talib because after the passing away of Abdu’l-Muttalib, the Prophet, from the age of eight, had been in the care of Abu Talib.

2. There is a well known hadith which both the Shia and Sunni sects have narrated in different ways. Some of them say that the Holy Prophet said: “Gabriel came to me and gave me good news in these words: ‘Allah has definitely exempted from the fire the loins through which you appeared, the womb which sustained you, the breasts which suckled you, and the lap which supported you.’”

These reports and hadith clearly prove the faith of the Prophet’s supporters, namely, Abdu’l-Muttalib, Abu Talib and his wife Fatima Bint Asad, and also the Holy Prophet’s father, Abdullah, and mother, Amina Bint Wahhab, and his wet nurse, Halima.

Why did Abu Talib Conceal his Faith? If Abu Talib had revealed his faith, all of the Quraish and the entire Arab nation would have united against the Bani Hashim. Abu Talib understood the expedience of concealing his Islam. He pretended to be loyal to the Quraish in order to thwart the activities of the enemy. So long as Abu Talib remained alive the same condition continued, and the Holy Prophet was protected. But at the death of Abu Talib, the Angel Gabriel appeared before the Holy Prophet and said: “Now you should leave Mecca. After Abu Talib, you have no helper here.”

Just a passing thought….. Isnt it weird how the man who protected the Prophet Muhammad with all his strength since he was a child and helped propogate the religion of Islam in its infancy (I talk about Abu Talib ) can be labeled as a kafir, while those who ran away from the Battle of Uhud and numerous ather conforntations are labeled as the champions of the faith and the caliphs of Islam. Its weird how Sunnis call Abu Talib a Kafir, simply on the basis that history does not provide any legal document of Abu Talib reciting the Kalimah.

For 40 years the Prophet SAW ate at Abu Talibs house, so does that mean that the food our Prophet ate for the majority of his blessed life was haraam? Did he or did he not read the Prophets SAW Nikah? Does that also mean that his weddding was invalidated?

Common Sense should prevail…it obviously doesnt! I implore them to reflect upon the following.
1. Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. raised up two of the greatest dignitaries of Islam, one was the Seal of the Prophets Muhammad Mustafaa SAWW. and the other was Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib A.S. the first and foremost of the Imams A.S. What a blessed personality was Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. to have received such an honour.
2. History tell us that Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. read the Nikkah of Prophet Muhammad and Ummulmomineen Khadeejah binte Khuwaylid A.S.  Is it possible for a kafir to conduct the marriage of the Prophet of Islam?
3. Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. was the one who offered protection to Prophet Muhammad and the early Companions at the Shibb-e-Abi Talib when the Quraishis of Makka boycotted Prophet Muhammad SAWW. and the early Muslims. The early Muslims were besieged by the kafirs. If Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. was a kafir why would he want to shelter the Muslims?
4. Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. gave his Son Imam Ali A.S. into the care of Prophet Muhammad SAWW. at a very early age. Why would he need to do this if he was a kafir? What did he have to gain from this?
5. All the direct Ancestors of Prophet Muhammad SAWW. and Imam Ali A.S. were pure Muwahhids, ie, they were the followers of the concept of Tawhid, the Oneness of ALLAH SWT. The Holy Quran refers to them as Hanifs. Please note that the Barelawi sect of the Sunni Bretheren, and those like them believe that Hadrat Abu Talib A.S. was a Muslim.

Furthermore, was Abu Talib a kaafir only because history fails to testify that he did not recite the kalimah??? Actions are judged by intentions and his actions were as if he feared Allah more than anyone would and he believed in his last prophet more than anyone else could have believed.

022.018:  Seest thou not that to Allah bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens and on earth,- the sun, the moon, the stars; the hills, the trees, the animals; and a great number among mankind? But a great number are (also) such as are fit for Punishment: and such as Allah shall disgrace,- None can raise to honour: for Allah carries out all that He wills.

This verse testifies that even the sun and the moon are muslims who believe in Allah, they are believers. And I challenge anyone to give me an authenticated report if the sun and the moon ever recited the kalimah? Did anyone hear their kalimah or see their prostration? Yet they are believers…. And pitty, Hz Abu Talib is a kaafir……

Ahl e Bayt – The Prophet’s Household

The love of the household of the prophet is necessary, as the Quran orders. As it has been proved that the Verse of purity was revealed for the holy 5, the household of prophet of Muhammad, The Ahl-e-Bait. These include Hz Ali, Hz Fatima, Hz Hassan and Hz Hussain.
“Finally the Prophet’s Waris (Executors) are of three types, those that possess Hikmah (Sagacity, wisdom), Ismah (Infallibility) and Qutbiyat Batiniyah (are Spiritual Pivots) they are his Ahl’ul bayt”. – At-Tafhimatu l-Iahiyah Volume 2 page 14

Leaving aside these arguments, the wives of the Holy Prophet are not included in the Ahle Bait. It is narrated in Sahih Muslim and Jam’u'l-Usul that Hasan Ibn Samra asked Zaid Ibn Arqam whether the wives of the Holy Prophet were included in his Ahle Bait. Zaid said: “By Allah, no. A wife remains with her husband for a certain period, but when he divorces her, she goes to her father’s home, joins her mother’s family, and is completely cut off from her husband. The Ahle Bait are those members of the family of the Holy Prophet for whom charity is forbidden. They will not be separated from the Ahle Bait wherever they go.”

Apart from the unanimity of views among the Ithna’ Ashari Shias about the holy progeny, there are many hadith recorded in your own books, which disprove the assumption that the wives of the Prophet are included in his Ahle Bait.

During Mubahila, the prophet took none other than these 4 holy personalities with him for the mubahila with the Christians.

Ahlul Bayt (AS) who must be followed by all people are niether his wives,nor the whole Muslim Ummah, but the Prophet`s closest family members who were explained by him, in many Prophetic Hadeeths narrated by Sunni and Shia scholars

Some of the Sunni Narrations are:- From Aeysha, daughter of Abu Bakr, and a wife of the Prophet, that the Prophet (SAWA) had a black cover under which he put Hasan and Hussain, and Fatema, and Ali, then recited (Surely Allah wants to kep away from you all impurities O` Ahlul Bayt, and purify you best purifying). 33:33

This Hadeeth explains who are Ahlul Bayt (AS), and is narrated in : Saheeh Muslim vol.7, p130. And Mustadrak Al-Saheehayn by Al-Haakim Al-Neesabori vol.3, p. 147. And Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi vol.2, p. 149. And Tafseer Al-Tabari vol. 22, p. 5. And Tafseer Ibn Katheer vol.3, p.485. And Tafseer Al-Durr Al-Manthoor by Al-Soyooti vol.5, p. 198 & 199.

There are many Hadeeths in this regard stating that this Quranic verse (33:33) was revealed on the Prophet (SAWA) when he was at the house of his wife Um Salamah, and he called Ali, Fatemah, Hasan, and Hussain and put them under a cover and said :- O`Allah, these are my Ahlul Bayt, O`Allah, keep from them all impurities, and purify them best purifying). Um Salamah wished to be with them, but the Prophet (SAWA) did not include her, but told her: you are on good.Yet again we see Ali is also menchoned in Ahl al bait(AS)

The following of Quran and (Ahlul Bayt) is – No Doubt – the only way to be on the straight path of Real Islam, the Islam of the Prophet (SAWA) and his holy progeny (Ahlul Bayt).

1-The Prophet Ebrahim (AS) was ordered by Allah (SWT) to guide people to following his progeny, as was our last Prophet Mohammed (SAWA) ordered by Allah (SWT) to do the same. Allah (SWT) says in Quran:- ..Surely Allah has chosen Adam, Noah, Ebrahim’s Progeny and Imran’s Progeny above everyone else. 3:33.

2-Ahlul Bayt (AS) who must be followed by all people are niether his wives,nor the whole Muslim Ummah,but the Prophet`s closest family members who were explained by him, in many Prophetic Hadeeths narrated by Sunni and Shia scholars. Some of the Sunni Narrations are:-

From Aeysha, daughter of Abu Bakr,and a wife of the Prophet, that the Prophet (SAWA) had a black cover under which he put Hasan and Hussain, and Fatema, and Ali, then recited (Surely Allah wants to kep away from you all impurities O` Ahlul Bayt, and purify you best purifying). 33:33

This Hadeeth explains who are Ahlul Bayt (AS), and is narrated in : Saheeh Muslim vol.7, p130. And Mustadrak Al-Saheehayn by Al-Haakim Al-Neesabori vol.3, p. 147. And Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi vol.2, p. 149. And Tafseer Al-Tabari vol. 22, p. 5. And Tafseer Ibn Katheer vol.3, p.485. And Tafseer Al-Durr Al-Manthoor by Al-Soyooti vol.5, p. 198 & 199.

From Um Salamah,a wife of the prophet(SAWA) that when the verse ( Surely Allah wants to keep away from you O`Ahlul Bayt all impurities, and purify you best purifying) was revealed, then the Prophet (SAWA) called Ali, Fatema, Hasan, and Hussain, and covered them with a cover and said (O`Allah these are my Ahlul Bayt…..).

This Hadeeth was narrated by Abu Sa`eed Al- Khidri fom Um Salamah, Tafseer Al-Tabari vol.22, p. 6. And Tafseer Al-Durr Al-Manthoor by Al-Soyooti vol.5, p. 198.

This Hadeeth shows that even the wives of the Prophet (SAWA) were not included in (Ahlul Bayt) as Um Salamah wished to be included and that Ali(as) was part of Ahl al bait(AS), but was told by the Prophet (SAWA):- You be at your place, and you are on good.

You may refer to find some of these Hadeeths to:- Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi ; vol. 2, p. 150, Tafseer Ibn Katheer; vol. 3, p. 483. Al-Durr Al-Manthoor by Al-Sayooti; vol.5, p.198. Al-Mustadrak by Al-Hakim Al-Nisabori; vol. 2, p. 416. Tareekh Baghdad by Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdadi; vol. 9, p. 126. Tafseer Al- Tha`alibi; vol.1 , p. 334. Saheeh Al-Tirmithi; vol. 13, p. 248 &249. Musnad Ahmad Bin Hanbal; vol.6, p. 292. And Tahtheeb Al-Tahtheeb; vol. 2, p. 297.

3-The prophet (SAWA) ordered all Muslims to keep following Quran, and Ahlul Bayt, so that they will never go astray if they keep following both of them. (Saheeh Muslim vol.4 p.1874,Sunan Al-Tirmithi vol.5 p.662,Munad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal vol.3 p.14,and many other sources), So how can you accept the claim that (Ahlul Bayt) are all the Muslims?.

Can the Prophet order the Muslims to keep following themselves?. What about the great differences which happened among the Muslims,and obviously had right and wrong? Whom to follow from the different groups amongst the Ummah ? Does it make sense for the greatest leader in the history to order his followers to follow anyone or any group among themselves,without guiding them to the proper and pious leadership?. No doubt, this is a baseless claim from people who try to degrade the proper leadership of (Ahlul Bayt), and empty it from its meaning.

The Ahlul Bayt are infallibles, as Quran testifies in At-Tahera, pure from all rijs. But his wives did disobey the prophet and Allah was angry at his wives, namely Hafsa and Ayesha. Disobeyance to Allah is Ar-rijs and the Ahlul Bayt are free from it, but the wives are not. Thus the wives are not included in the AhlulBayt.

As the Quran says: “O (Our) Prophet! Why dost thou forbid (unto thyself) what God hath made lawful unto thee? Thou seekest to please thy wives; and God is Oft-Forgiving, the Most Merciful.” (66:1) “Indeed, hath God made lawful for you the dissolution of your oaths (in such cases), and God (alone) is your Lord, and He is the All-Knowing, the All Wise.” (66:2) “When the Prophet confided unto one of his wives a matter, but when she divulged it (unto others) and God apprised him therefore, he made known a part of it and avoided a part; so when he informed her of it, said she: ‘Who informed thee of this?’ He said: ‘Informed, me, the All-Knowing, the All-Aware’.” (66:3) “If ye two turn (in repentance) unto Him, then indeed your hearts are inclined (to this) but if ye two back up each other against him, then verily God it is Who is his Protector, and Gabriel, and the (most) Virtuous one among the believers, and the angels thereafter will back (him) up.” (66:4) “Happily his Lord if he divorceth you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, repentant, prayerful, observers of fast, widows and virgins.” (66:5)

Thus God threatened to substitute Prophet’s wives with better ones. This clearly explains that the wives were not included in the AhlulBayt, they were not even the best women of their own times save the whole world.

Allah SWT is showing the Muslims that Aisha and Hafsa contrived behind the Prophet’s back, causing him (s.) to make an oath, restricting himself from something for their sake. Allah SWT is telling our beloved Messenger (s.) that he need not do this, that such oaths hold no weight and therefore he did not have to keep it.

Allah is further letting us know that these two should repent and if they are inclined then Allah will forgive them. BUT He, the Most High, warns them that if they persist in their wretched deed, then, “verily God it is Who is his Protector, and Gabriel, and the (most) Virtuous one among the believers, and the angels thereafter will back (him) up.”

Such a statement by the Lord of the Worlds is not a vain statement. Allah is very serious about Aisha and Hafas’s wrong deed towards His Messenger. Further Allah warns that “Happily his Lord if he divorceth you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, repentant, prayerful, observers of fast, widows and virgins.”

Obviously by this statement Aisha and Hafsa were not the best Muslimat out there. And the fact that they committed sins shows that they are not infallible, therefore, they and the rest of the wives are not of the Ahlul Bayt which Allah (SWT) speaks of so reverently in the Qur’an; those whom He purified and those whom He said can only touch the Hidden Book.

The following of Quran and (Ahlul Bayt) is – No Doubt – the only way to be on the straight path of Real Islam, the Islam of the Prophet (SAWA) and his holy progeny (Ahlul Bayt).

Ahl e Bayt and Their Enemies

Hadhrath Umar played an instrumental role at the Saqifa and Hadhrath Abu Bakr recognized and rewarded him for this by appointing him as his successor. If we are to accept the argument that the Prophet (saaws) left no successor then what right did Hadhrath Abu Bakr appoint a successor (He appointed Hz Umer as a successor)? He should have likewise left the issue to the Ummah to decide, as the Prophet (saaws) did (according to the Ahlul’ Sunnah belief).

During his reign, Hadhrath Umar, the post as Governor of Syria was successively given to the 2 sons of Abu Sufyan, Yazid and then Mu’awiya. What was the aim behind these appointments?

These two men were not from among the Muhajireen or the Ansar, they were not from amongst those who had pledged allegiance at Hudaibiya, and on the contrary they embraced Islam following the conquest of Makka.

Al Alwani writes that during his reign Hadhrath Abu Bakr decided: “…that everyone should receive an equal share from the public treasury. ‘Umar asked him: “How can you consider one who entered Islam with misgvivngs to be equal to one who left his home and wealth behind, and migrated and migrated to be with the Prophet? Abu Bakr however insisted that: “They all entered Islam for the sake of Allah, and their reward is with Him; this world is nothing”. When however ‘Umar became khalifa, he differentiated between people and paid the “stipend” according to how early each person had entered Islam, whether they had migrated, and how much they had suffered for the sake of Allah”. – Usul al Fiqh al Islami – Source methodology in Islamic Jurisprudence, Taha Jabir Al Alwani, pg 19

If Hadhrath ‘Umar had taken such a staunch line when distributing money amongst the faithful, salaries being rewarded on account of when an adherent embraced Islam and their subsequent service to the faith, why did he adopt a completely different approach when it came to granting positions of power? If those who had embraced Islam later and had no service to Islam, received less money than the early converts, why were these same individuals more entitled to receive administrative control / ‘physical power’ over an entire region? Why was preference given to them over prominent Sahaba who had accompanied the Prophet (saaws) very early on in his mission? Why appoint them when they had provided no service to Islam in the past?

The position of Governor of Syria passed from Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan to Mu’awiya ibn Abu Sufyan, following his death, this was direct lineal succession – the sons of Abu Sufyan were able to inherit the land of Syria. Is it not unusual that the Banu Ummaya could inherit land, but the family of the Prophet (saaws) was not allowed to inherit anything?

The History of Al-Tabari,Volume 14 page 137 -138, English translation, by G. Rex Smith: This scheme paved the way for Hadhrath Uthman to become the next khalifa, once in power his position was strengthened by the presence of Mu’awiya in Syria. This would probably result in checkmate for Imam Ali, who was hated vehemently by the Banu Ummaya since he and his clan, the Holy Prophet’s clan of Banu Hashim, had slaughtered so many of their closest kin. A perfect example of this is the reaction of ‘Abu Sufyan when Hadhrath Uthman was made the khalifa, Ibn al-Hadid records: “…he went to Uhud and kicked at the grave of Hamzah (the uncle of the Prophet) and said: “O Abu Ya’la! See that the kingdom which you fought against has at last come to us”. – Sharh Nahjul-balaghah, by Ibn al Hadid,Volume 16, page 136 second edition, Egypt

Syria was an agriculturally rich land; it generated a high amount of income. Hadhrath Umar knew that there was a long standing hatred by the Banu Ummaya towards the Banu Hashim, they would never tolerate a member of the Ahlul’bayt becoming khalifa in the long run and that this would cause inevitable rivalry….this happened on the plains of Siffeen. Mu’awiya in fact justified his hostility pointing to the fact that he was merely adhering to a policy of opposition that had been created by the earlier khalifa’s. This is what he wrote in reply to a critical letter by Muhammad bin Abu Bakr: “We and your father during the lifetime of the Prophet, used to consider the right of Ibn Abi Talib binding upon us, and his excellence was well above ours. Despite this when Allah chose for the Prophet what he had in store for him…He took him to Himself. Then your father and his Faruq were the first to snatch it and oppose him, they both worked together on this…If it was injustice, then your father founded it and we are his partners. We followed his guidance and imitated his action”. – Waq’at Siffin by Minqari p118-120 (Cairo edition 1962); Ansab al Ashraf by Baladhuri Volume 2 page 393-397 (Beirut edition 1974); Masudi Muruj ud Dhuhab Vol 3 page 197 – 201 (Beirut 1969 edition)

Hadhrath Uthman became Khalifa at the age of 74, again the question arises why was he preferred to younger more able Sahaba? This was part of Hadhrath Umar’s thinking to vest absolute power to the Banu Ummayya clan. This was secured via the coming to power of Hadhrath Uthman. Hadhrath Uthman appointed the enemy of the Prophet (saaws) his cousin Abdullah bin Sarh to quote Ameer Ali: “…the satrapy of Egypt. This Abdullah was at one time a Secretary to the Prophet, and when the Master dictated his revelation he used to change the words and ‘deneutralise’ their meanings”. – The Spirit of Islam, by Syed Ameer Ali, p 294

He appointed Waleed as Governor of Kufa. Walid was a transgressor according to the word of Allah (swt). Once when ordered by the Prophet (saaws) to collate Zakat from a tribe, he lied alleging they had refused to hand over their due, this lead to the descent of this verse: “Oh you who believe, if a transgressor comes to you with news try to verify it..” (49:6-7). – See Tafseer of Surah Hujuraat by Bilal Philips, commentary of the above verse

Most significantly Hadhrath Uthman appointed Marwan, who to quote Baladhuri: “…embraced Islam following the conquest of Makka, but continued to insult the Prophet, as a result Hakim and his sons were banished from Madina, this ruling was upheld by Umar and Abu Bakr. When Hadhrath Uthman came to power he chose to ignore the Prophet (saaws)’s order, he called back Marwan and Hakim, and made Marwan his Assistant and Chief Officer of the Court”. – Ansab al ashraf, by al Baladhuri, Vol 5 p 17. It was this same Marwan who then shaped the long-term policy for the Banu Ummaya.

So in these three key posts Hadhrath Uthman appointed three men, one who the Prophet (saaws) wanted executed, a transgressor and a man who was banished by the Prophet (saaws). Even the revered Sunni scholar Sayyid Qutb Shaheed was unable to mask his discontent over these facts, he writes:  “the khalifa – in his old age, and his state brought about by advanced age – did not possess control of his affair to the expense of Marwan. It is difficult to accuse the spirit of Islam in the person of Islam, but it is likewise difficult to pardon him for the error of the unfortunate occurrence of his taking the khilafa whilst he was a weakened old man, who was surrounded by evil courtiers from Banu Umayyah”. – Al-Adaalat ul-Ijtimaa’iyyah by Sayyid Qutb Shaheed p.189, 5th edition

When prominent pious Sahaba were still living why was priority given to such men? The answer is that the objective was to have a Caliphate that would permanently belong to the Banu Ummaya. A clan whose supremacy had been effectively extinguished with the coming to power of Islam, now had the reigns of power, nothing no one, especially their sworn enemies the Banu Hashim were going to stand in their way or humiliate them again.

Absolute favoritism was given to the Banu Ummayya they were rewarded with power and financial clout a means to eliminate any likelihood of Banu Hashim attaining the Khilafath. Hadhrath Uthman gave a fifth of the spoils of the first expedition of Africa to his foster brother Abdullah Ibn Abu Sarh. Marwan purchased a fifth of the second expedition of Africa; then the Caliph gave him the whole amount(1). Fadak land belonging to the Prophet (saaws) that Hadhrath Abu Bakr had confiscated and made a part of the State was awarded to Marwan(2). He gave his cousin Harith a gift of camels that had been collected as part of alms tax and brought to Madina(3). Is it not curious that land that Hadhrath Abu Bakr stated belonged to the State which Ahlul’bayt could not claim was ‘given’ to Marwan? Hadhrath Uthman gave Harith the Zakat of Qud-ah that amounted to 300,000 dirhams(4) and Abdul Rahman bin Auf had 3 million dirhams(5). – Tarikh, Ibn al Athir, Volume 3 page 49 publishers, Dar ul Kitan al Lubnani, 1973
al Ma’arif by Ibn Qutayba, page 190 edited by Tharwat ‘Ukasha, Cairo edition 1960

It may alternatively be viewed that Hadhrath Umar, realizing the greed of the Banu Ummaya, stalled a civil war by handing it over to them in all but name and thus preserved the integrity of the Muslim state for a while longer before the Banu Ummaya would tear it apart. This also excluded Imam Ali.

It explains how the terrible wars of Jamal and Siffeen, the first Muslim civil wars after the earliest period came to be. It also explains the later genocide of the family of the Holy Prophet (saaws) and persecution of the Shi’i Imams. In here lie further origins of Muslim disunity.

Ali is to Muhammad as Aaron to Moses

A very authentic hadith, narrated by tons of shia and sunni hadith and history books confirms that Hz Ali was To Hz Muhammad As Hz Haroon was to Hz Musa.

Narrated Ubaida: Ali said (to the people of ‘Iraq), “Judge as you used to judge, for I hate differences (and I do my best ) till the people unite as one group, or I die as my companions have died.” And narrated Sad that the Prophet said to ‘Ali, “Will you not be pleased from this that you are to me like Aaron was to Moses?”

Sa’d reported Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying to ‘Ali: Aren’t you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses? – Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56, 5.700 – Sahih Muslim, Arabic, v4, pp 1870-71 – Sunan Ibn Majah, p12 – Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174 – al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16 – Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

The authenticity of this hadith can neither be questioned, nor can it be doubted. The hadith implies that the Story of Moses, or Hz Musa was similar to that of Hz Muhammad, and the story of Aaron or Hz Haroon, was similar to that of Hz Ali. The relationship between Aaron and Moses was similar to that of Hz Ali and Hz Muhammad. After coming this far, I will go on to quote the Quranic stories of Moses and Aaron, and will compare it to Hz Muhammad and Hz Ali. This might give you some historical hints, flashbacks or answers to your queries. Haroon (as) was Musa (as)’s Brother (19:53), Vizier (20:29-36) and in his absence the Khalifa (7:142). And thus so was Ali (as).

(Note: All Quranic translations used here are of Shakir’s, due to his use of easy english)

043.046: And certainly We sent Musa with Our communications to Firon and his chiefs, so he said: Surely I am the messenger of the Lord of the worlds.
043.047: But when he came to them with Our signs, lo! they laughed at them.
Remember the feast of Banu Hashim, when the Prophet Muhammad invited the tribe to Islam, they laughed at him and made fun of him….

007.103: Then we raised after them Musa with Our communications to Firon and his chiefs, but they disbelieved in them; consider then what was the end of the mischief makers.
007.104: And Musa said: O Firon! surely I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds:
007.105: (I am) worthy of not saying anything about Allah except the truth: I have come to you indeed with clear proof from your Lord, therefore send with me the children of Israel
007.106: He said: If you have come with a sign, then bring it, if you are of the truthful ones.
007.107: So he threw his rod, then lo! it was a clear serpent.
007.108: And he drew forth his hand, and lo! it was white to the beholders.
007.109: The chiefs of Firon’s people said: most surely this is an enchanter possessed of knowledge:

Interestingly, same was the case with Hz Muhammad. The Meccans asked him to show miracles if he was the true prophet. The Holy Prophet divided the moon into two parts with the orders of his fingers, where the Meccans went away blaming Prophet Muhammad of sorcery.

010.075: Then did We send up after them Musa and Haroun to Firon and his chiefs with Our signs, but they showed pride and they were a guilty people.
010.076: So when the truth came to them from Us they said: This is most surely clear enchantment!
010.077: Musa said: Do you say (this) of the truth when it has come to you? Is it magic? And the magicians are not successful.
010.078: They said: Have you come to us to turn us away from what we found our fathers upon, and (that) greatness in the land should be for you two? And we are not going to believe in you.
010.079: And Firon said: Bring to me every skillful magician.
010.080: And when the magicians came, Musa said to them: Cast down what you have to cast.
010.081: So when they cast down, Musa said to them: What you have brought is deception; surely Allah will make it naught; surely Allah does not make the work of mischief-makers to thrive.
010.082: And Allah will show the truth to be the truth by His words, though the guilty may be averse (to it).
010.083: But none believed in Musa except the offspring of his people, on account of the fear of Firon and their chiefs, lest he should persecute them; and most surely Firon was lofty in the land; and most surely he was of the extravagant.

We must note that Aaron accompanied Moses since the beginning of his prophetic mission. So did Hz Ali. Since the Feast of Banu Hashim, he accompanied the prophet and assisted him in his mission. The Kuffars of Mecca had been blaming Hz Muhammad for sorcery, rejecting his miracles.

020.025: He (Moses) said: O my Lord! Expand my breast for me,
020.026: And make my affair easy to me,
020.027: And loose the knot from my tongue,
020.028: (That) they may understand my word;
020.029: And give to me an (aider, Henchman, Minister) from my family:
020.030: Haroun, my brother,
020.031: Strengthen my back by him,
020.032: And associate him (with me) in my affair,
020.033: So that we should glorify Thee much,
020.034: And remember Thee oft.
020.035: Surely, Thou art seeing us.
020.036: He said: You are indeed granted your petition, O Musa

This is a crucial text. Musa asked for a helper from Allah. This helper would assist him in his mission. This helper would be from his family. He would be his minister, vizier, khalifa, brother and a prophet….. But the prophethood ended after Hz Muhammad, and Immamate started. The role of immamate is to nourish Islam, spread it, protect it, defend it. Imam Ali could not attain the title of a prophet, but of an imam, a caliph, and the rightful vizier of prophet Muhammad. Thus we learn, Khilafat comes from Allah, and stays in the family…. *Hint*

020.088: So he brought forth for them a calf, a (mere) body, which had a mooing sound, so they said: This is your god and the god of Musa, but he forgot.
020.089: What! could they not see that it did not return to them a reply, and (that) it did not control any harm or benefit for them?
020.090: And certainly Haroun had said to them before: O my people! you are only tried by it, and surely your Lord is the Beneficent Allah, therefore follow me and obey my order.
020.091: They said: We will by no means cease to keep to its worship until Musa returns to us.
020.092: (Musa) said: O Haroun! what prevented you, when you saw them going astray,
020.093: So that you did not follow me? Did you then disobey my order?
020.094: He said: O son of my mother! seize me not by my beard nor by my head; surely I was afraid lest you should say: You have caused a division among the children of Israel and not waited for my word.

To shorten the episode, when Musa left for 40 days to communicate with Allah, his people started to worship a calf. Moses on his return was furious at Aaron who didnt stopped them from doing so. Aaron replied that he feared divisions. Similarly, after the demise of Prophet Muhammad when he left this world to meet Allah, Hz Ali was the lawful Caliph/Imam/Vizier. People disobeyed him and his orders, objecting his right to khilafat and usurping the property. Sunnis question, why didnt Hz Ali Asked for his rights? The answer is simple, ayats 020.090 and 020.094. Hopes this clearifies the matter.

032.023: And certainly We gave the Book to Musa, so be not in doubt concerning the receiving of it, and We made it a guide for the children of Israel.
032.024: And We made of them Imams (leaders) to guide by Our command when they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications.
032.025: Surely your Lord will judge between them on the day of resurrection concerning that wherein they differ.

002.087: And most certainly We gave Musa the Book and We sent messengers after him one after another; and We gave Isa, the son of Marium, clear arguments and strengthened him with the holy spirit, What! whenever then a messenger came to you with that which your souls did not desire, you were insolent so you called some liars and some you slew.
002.088: And they say: Our hearts are covered. Nay, Allah has cursed them on account of their unbelief; so little it is that they believe.

The progeny of Moses produced Imams/Prophets/Leaders to guide mankind. Similarly, the progeny of Muhammad bore 12 Imams, whose duty is the same. And a very interesting prospective is the mentioning of Jesus… as Imam Mahdi’s disappearance and reappearance before the resurrection is similar to that of Jesus…..

061.005: And when Musa said to his people: O my people! why do you give me trouble? And you know indeed that I am Allah’s messenger to you; but when they turned aside, Allah made their hearts turn aside, and Allah does not guide the transgressing people.

007.159: And of Musa’s people was a party who guided (people) with the truth, and thereby did they do justice.

Notice that not all of the companions/people of Moses were truthful, righteous and the guided ones. There were factions among them. I assume, similar was the case with Prophet Muhammad?

037.120: Peace be on Musa and Haroun.

Ali Mawla

Once a learned Christian told me that Abu Bakr is more knowledgeable than Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (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?! If the companions gave so much importance to the appointment of a successor that they failed to attend the prophet’s fuenral, why didn’ the prophet gave as much importance to the matter?

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 Husain, Saddam Husain, 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 take 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.

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” – Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56, 5.700 – Sahih Muslim, Arabic, v4, pp 1870-71
Sunan Ibn Majah, p12 – Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174 – al-Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, pp 15-16 – Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309

Haroon (as) was Musa (as)’s Brother (19:53), Vizier (20:29-36) and in his absence the Khalifa (7:142). And thus so was Ali (as). The Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 verses of Quran 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 Announced. His Successor in His First Preach. 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 Quran 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 (Quran 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 what 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!” – History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 88-91 – History of Ibn Athir, v2, p62 – History of Ibn Asakir, v1, p85

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. “Shia” means “The Followers”, and it is exclusively used for “The Followers of Imam Ali”. Thus Shia school of thought was in fact established by the Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH&HF) from the beginning of his mission.

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 prophet according to the orders and laws of god wanted to mantain the pure lineage of caliphs and imams. Besides, a heir or wasi comes from your own family, not an outsider.

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 (PBUH&HF) chose as his successor. The official announcement, however, was in “Ghadir Khum” as Sihah Sittah (the six Sunni collections of the traditions) testify.

Prophet (PBUH) said: Ali is with truth, and truth is with Ali – Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi

“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!’” (Quran 27:40)

A Non Prophet was able to transport the atoms inside of the throne of Bilqis before Hadhrath Sulayman within the twinkling of an eye. He had a control over these atoms, this does not mean that this faithful Servant was Allah (swt)! How did he attain that feat? Simple the verse states he had a ‘partial’ knowledge of the book. If one with partial knowledge can obtain control over the atoms, what power do you think is possessed by Imam Ali (as) who has a complete knowledge of the Book? As the Sahaba and Hafiz of the Qur’an Ibn Masud himself testified:

“The Holy Quran has outward and inward meanings, and Ali Ibn Abi Talib has the knowledge of both.” Hilyatul Awliyaa, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p65

If Imam Ali possessed a complete knowledge of the Book as is vouched by Ibn Masud and other traditions then he to by the will of his Creator had the ability to control the atoms of the Universe.

In addition contemplate these words of Imam Ali (as): “Ask me about the Book of Allah, because there is no Ayah but that I know whether it was revealed at night or in daytime, on the plain or in the mountain” History of the Khailfa’s who took the right way by Jalaladeen Suyuti, pg 194

It is incumbent that we search for that wasila through which deen can be recognised. Allah (swt) tells us in his glorious book “Guide us to the right path, the path of those you have favoured” (1:6-7) and your priority should be to seek those persons on the right path who will likewise guide you to it. This point can not be ignored; particularly when Rasulullah (saaws) warned that the Ummah would be divided in to 73 sects and that only one would be saved.

At the same time the Prophet (saaws) told us which party would be saved, when he said “I am leaving amongst you two things, the Qur’an and my Ahlulbayt, if you follow them you will never go astray”. – Sahih Muslim, part 7, Kitab fada’il alSahabah  pp. 122-123

The Prophet recounted this tradition to his Sahaba, which proves the Sahaba could go astray if they turned away from these two sources of guidance. When the Christians of Najran came to debate with the Prophet (saaws) he first presented Islam as a theory via verses from the Qur’an, when the challenge of mubahila was made to prove which Deen is correct, the Prophet (saaws) took with him those who presented Islam on a complete practical level, he took his Ahlulbayt and no one else.

Muslims are dependent on Islam while Islam is dependent on the Ahlulbayt, that is why when a prominent sahabi advised Imam Hussain (as) to pledge allegiance to Yazid the reply from the Imam was “by my doing so do you think Islam will remain on the earth?”.

It is the Party which has taken hold of both the Qur’an the Ahlulbayt who are on the right path, for they have grasped the Qur’an which sets out deen and the Imams from Ahlulbayt who are walking commentaries of deen, through which Islam can be recognised.

As further evidence of the inherited power of Ghayb, we shall cite this incident recorded by the renowned Hanafi scholar Abdul Rahman Jami: “During the Battle of Sifeen, the army under the command of Ali were unable to find any water. There was a church nearby and Ali went there to ask the people inside where water could be obtained from. They replied that water could only be found several miles away. The army then asked Ali if they could go and drink from it, Ali told them not to worry. The army began to travel west, all of a sudden he stopped and pointed to the ground and told the army to start digging there. They began to dig, and they found a big stone, Ali (as) told them to lift the stone, but they were unable to do so. Ali, then pulled the stone out with his hand, and fresh water began to spurt out of the ground. A Christian priest had been watching the episode, he went upto Ali and asked: ‘Are you a Prophet?’ to which Ali replied ‘No’, the priest then asked ‘Are you an Angel?’, Ali replied ‘No’. The Priest then said ‘You are not a Prophet or Angel, so what are you?’. Ali replied ‘I am a wasi of the Seal of all Prophet’s, Muhummud al Mustapha’. The Priest then said ‘Take out your hand so that I can embrace Islam’. Ali told him what to say (ie. the shahada) and the Priest then said the following “I testify there is no God but Allah. I testify that Muhummud is the Prophet of Allah, and I testify that Ali is the wasi of the Prophet Muhummud” Shawahid un Nubuwwa, by Abdul Rehman Jami, (Urdu edition printers Maktaba Nabavi, Gunjbaksh Rd, Lahore), p 287.

Clearly the existence of the spring was ghayb but Allah (swt) had unlocked the key in this regard on account of Maula Ali (as)’s position as the Wasi of Rasulullah (S).

“Only Allah is your Wali, and His messenger and those among believers who keep alive prayers and pay Zakat while they are in the state of bowing”. (Quran 5:55)”

Hazrat Ali was the only one at the time of Prophet who paid Zakat while he was in the state of bowing (ruku’). Muslim scholars are unanimous in reporting this event. here are few sunni references which mentioned the above revelation is in the honour of Imam Ali .
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38. Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by Al-Zamakhshari, v1, p505, 649. Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68. Tafsir al-Bayan, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, p186, 288-289.

Quran 53.1:  I swear by the star when it goes down.
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 53:1]: It is reported by Ibn Abbas that one night, after praying the Isha salat, the Holy Prophet told his companions: “At dawn, tomorrow, a star will descend on the earth from the heaven. On whomsoever’s house it will come upon will be my heir, my successor, and he is the divinely commissioned guide.” The star descended on Ali’s house. The hypocrites began to whisper that in love of Ali the Holy Prophet had gone astray. On this occasion these verses were revealed. The Holy Prophet is mentioned as sahib (companion) because he was living among the people addressed in this verse He does not speak of his own will”

Asahab e Muhammad: The Shia Perspective

I always wonder if all companions are good, for whom was sura-e-munafiqeen revealed for? The Shia 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 Shia divide the companions into three factions: First, are those who believed in Allah (SWT), believed in the Prophet (PBUH&HF), 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 Dhar al-Ghifari, Salman al-Farsi, Miqdad, Ammar 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 (PBUH&HF) 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!!!” – 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 (PBUH&HF), and this is an intentional pun suggesting that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF).

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.” – al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v4, p1679

Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v9, p53 quotes the last sentence as follows: 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.”

Now let us look at the Holy Quran for different categories:
1. 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), seeking 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. [48:29]“

These companions (May Allah (SWT) be Pleased With Them), the Shia 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 Shia are trying to convey to the world! The Sunnis, whenever they bless the Prophet (PBUH&HF), 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?

2. 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.”[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! [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.” (Quran 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. 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. 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. 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 (PBUH&HF). There was the battle of “Hunain” where they accused the Prophet of injustice in distributing the war booty. 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.

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.

3. As for the third faction of the companions, there is a whole chapter in the Quran 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 Quran: “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 (PBUH&HF) 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, fighting 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. [5:54]“

Before giving more straightforward verses from Quran 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.

Sahih-Al-Bukhari volume 8, tradition #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.’

These traditions, nonetheless, indicate the Prophet’s (PBUH&HF) knowledge and awareness that some of his companions will change after him (PBUH&HF), and, therefore, will be condemned to hell. This is another reason why the Shia maintain that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) 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 (PBUH&HF), 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.” 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 (PBUH&HF) 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.

There were companions who are in great respect for us. These are those whom Allah admired in the Holy Quran. As you might have noticed, those verses in the Holy Quran 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. (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. (9:101)

The above verses show that: Allah WAS satisfied with them, but may not be applicable later. Allah addressing those who preceded in belief from among them, thus it means He is not addressing all of the companions. 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.

Allah Also states: “Fulfill your propmise, so that I fullfill My Promise.” (Quran 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.

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.” (Quran 2:217)

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 Quran.

Ashra Mubashra: The Ten Blessed Companions

According to our sunni friends, there is a hadith which promises paradise to ten companions of the prophet, which gives them a license to do anything, and a ticket to heaven at all costs. This promise opposes the concept of questioning/answering on the day of judgment. These ten blessed companions are called Ashra Mubashra, which includes Hz Ali, and the other 9 who opposed him, and some fought him. And yes, they all will go to heaven I guess.

Ten of the companions are claimed to have been promised Paradise during their lives. They are:
1) Abu Bakr
2) Omar
3) `Uthman
4) Ali
5) Talha
6) al-Zubair
7) Saad bin Abi Waqqass
Saeed bin Zaid
9) Abdulrahman bin `Awf and
10) Abu `Ubaida binal-Jarrah

Note the placement of the Imam Ali is, conveniently, the fourth in a group which does not contain a single supporter of the Imam from among the companions of the prophet (s). Accordingly, the people of the Sunna have agreed on holding these ten in high regard. Clearly, the nine mentioned with the Imam are his adversaries and none were on his side.

This suspicious hadeeth was not even mentioned by Bukhari or Muslim, but it was narrated within al-Tirmithi’s, abu- Daoud’s, and Ibn Maja’s collections in two flavors. Let’s take a look at the hadeeth to see the extent of amplifying selected personalities.

1. Abu Daoud in his book , narrates from “Saeed bin Zaid said: I bear witness, I heard the messenger of Allah (s) say: Ten are in Paradise: The prophet is in Paradise, Abu Bakr in Paradise, Talha in Paradise, Omar in Paradise, ‘Uthman in Paradise, Saad bin Malik in Paradise, and AbdulRahman bin `Awf in Paradise. If you wish I could tell you the tenth? He said. They said: Who is he? He said: Saeed bin Zaid.”

2. al-Tirmithi in his book under #3747, narrates from “AbdulRahman bin `Awf said: The prophet (s) said: Abu Bakr in Paradise, Omar in Paradise, ‘Uthman in Paradise, Ali in Paradise, Talha in Paradise, al- Zubair (bin al-’Awwam) in Paradise, AbdulRahman bin `Awf in Paradise, Saad (bin Abi Waqqass) in Paradise, Saeed (bin Zaid), and abu ‘Ubaida bin al- Jarrah in Paradise.” (Saad is not in Abu Daoud’s book)

3. al-Tirmithi , under #3748, narration by “Saeed bin Zaid, that the prophet (s) said in a number of people, ten are in Paradise: Abu Bakr in Paradise, Omar in Paradise, ‘Uthman, Ali, al-Zubair, Talha, AbdulRahman, Abu ‘Ubaida, and Saad bin Abi Waqqass. He counted these nine and was quite about the tenth. They said: By Allah, abu-alAawar (i.e. Saeed), who is the tenth? He said: You swore by Allah – abu-alAawar is in Paradise.” al-Tirmithi commented that abu-alAawar is Saeed bin Zaid bin Amr bin Nawfal. – al-Tirmithi, v5, p605, #3747 and #3748  – abu Daoud, #4649 and #4650

Several things raise the doubts about these traditions and supports the belief that they were fabricated forgeries for political reasons to elevate the adversaries of the Imam Ali and the remainder Family of the Household of the prophet (s), as follows.
1. They struggle in narrowing down who the ten are. One time they insert Saad bin Abi Waqqass and another they put Saad bin Malik in his place.
2. The first of the hadeeths did not mention Imam Ali, nor Ibn al-Jarrah; yielding only seven promised Paradise, of course, not counting the prophet (s).
3. The first and third are essentially the same hadeeth, by the same person, but the order of those in Paradise is different, one person added and another dropped, and only seven people are listed in Abu Daouds’.
4. Listing of the prophet (s) among those promised Paradise is something that confirms forgery! Does anyone really believe that his companions enter Paradise and he will be left behind? He need not advertise that – it is a given!
5. Both narrators are telling the hadeeth about themselves! According to Islamic law, when someone praises others by praising himself, it is disregarded altogether. The same is true if someone bears witness for someone else, while at the same time, even partially selfserving, his testimony is rejected. “Therefore justify not yourselves; He knows best who it is that guards against evil.” [53:53]
6. The history of the so called ten does not mandate this great reward, at the expense of exclusion of other pious companions, who in fact remained unblemished till their demise.
7. The narrator of the tradition is one of those promised Paradise, this way he is bringing good tidings to himself!
8. Bukhari and Muslim did not even set aside a virtues section on neither Saad bin Zaid nor AbdulRahman bin `Awf, while Bukhari has a sections for Mu’awiya, one hadeeth for Khalid bin al-Waleed and just a section heading for Mus’ab bin `Umair (see volume 5, Book of Virtues).
8. Saad bin Malik, in fact, is not among the 10 highly regarded by the people of the Sunna.
9. The second narration only named nine persons in addition to dropping out Saad bin Abi Waqqass.
10. Bukhari adds to the suspicion, by considering only three to have been promised paradise by the prophet (s): Abu Bakr, Omar and `Uthman (see Bukhari, v5, p68, #194). Nevertheless, the narrator “Mohammed bin Miskeen is weak, not well known,” (Lisan al-Mizan, al- ‘Asqalani, v5, p380, #1233).

A reasonable person can not judge, unconditionally, that an ordinary fallible human being is guaranteed paradise, therefore, is immune from Hell Fire. One who is open to the possibility of committing sinful acts, by his nature, can not be predictable. Especially, if promised paradise while not infallible, he would have the tendency to act freely due to his feeling of assurance that his acts will have no bearing on his outcome.

It is, therefore, not logical nor reasonable that the prophet (s) would promise such an outcome early on to people of an unknown future.

If this hadeeth were indeed true, then how come one did not see the khalifa `Uthman use it in protest against those who found it lawful to murder him. Nor did any of his companions come to his aid, protesting the unlawfulness of killing someone who is guaranteed paradise. Actually, it would have been unlawful for them to stay silent in this matter. The fact of the matter is: the hadeeths were fabricated at a later date.

If one accepts the hadeeth to be true, one must also accept that other than these ten from among the companions of the prophet (s), will certainly go through Hell Fire, because there is no in-between on the day of judgment. And this is, by necessity, is wrong by reasoning and religion.

Besides the questionable hadith, what convinces you that the 10 are guaranteed heaven? Talha and Zubair fought Imam Ali, resulted the killing of thousands of Muslims (Jamal), and all three of them will be in heaven. History testifies that anyone who fought Hz Ali, was on the wrong path, wether it be the Kufar of mecca, the jews of Khaiber, the wife of the prophet, Ayesha, or the great companion Muawiya. Abu Bakr did not give Hz Fatima her rights, Umer has a long list on his name which goes from the Tragedy Of Thursday till the Attacking The House Of Fatima.

Logically, the ones who have been promised Heaven, or the ones which are understood to go to Heaven are, The prophets, All those who are connected to the verse of purification and All 4 chosen women (Asiya (not aisha), Khadija, Maryam, Fatima)

Others may or may not go through the process of judgement. It doesn’t mean they’re going to hell, just that Allah know’s best.

I also cannot be convinced by the hadith, if these people, during their lifetime:
1- Raised their voice against the prophet SAWA
2- Did not follow the prophet’s SAWA order to go on the expedition with the army of usama
3- Went to war against Ali AS

They will be judged on their account.

Attacking The House of Fatima Zahra (AS)

After the demise of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), 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 (AS). Even Talha and al-Zubair were loyal to Imam Ali at the beginning and joint the others in the house of Fatimah (AS). 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.”-  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.” – Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55 -  Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309

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. – History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, pp 188-189

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).” – History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, pp 1118-1120 – History of Ibn Athir, v2, p325 – al-Isti’ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, p975

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.” – 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, 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.” – History of Tabari, in the events of the year 11 AH – 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.” – Kanz al-Ummal, v3, p140

“From Umar’s irritable and peevish temperament such an action on his part was not improbable.” – 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.” – 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 house of Fatimah to disperse people who sheltered there: Abu Bakr – Umar Ibn al-Khattab – Khalid Ibn Walid – Abdurrahman Ouf – Thabit Ibn Shammas – Ziad Ibn Labid – Muhammad Ibn Maslamah – Salamah Ibn Salem – Salamah Ibn Aslam – Usaid Ibn Hozair – Zaid Ibn Thabit

Everybody came out of the house except Imam Ali (AS), who said: “I have sworn to remain home until I collect the Quran.” 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 cried loudly; “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 Mohammad 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-Husain 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 (AS)) 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 (AS) 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 (AS) 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 (AS), 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 (AS) 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 (PBUH&HF) I will complain about you two.” – al-Imamah wa al-Siyasah, by Ibn Qutaybah, v1, p14.

… 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.  – Sahih al-Bukhari, Chapter of “The battle of Khaibar”, v5, tradition #546, pp 381-383

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 Messenger of Allah (PBUH&HF) had frequently said: “Fatimah is a part of me. Whoever makes her angry, makes me angry.” – 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?”

The Messenger of Allah (PBUH&HF) 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.” – Ibn Asakir, as quoted in Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor

Allah, Exalted He is, said in Quran:”(O Prophet) tell (people) I don’t ask you any wage except to love my family.” (Quran 42:23).

People ask that why did not Ali, the war hero and the bravest of all the companions unsheathe his sword which won the ghazwas and battles single handedly to defend himself and his wife. The character of Ali was unmatched by anyone. During a battle, when Ali gained the upper hand and his enemy was under his feet, Ali went for the kill, but the very moment, the man spit at the face of Imam Ali. At the very moment, the man asked why didn’t Ali kill him, on which Ali replied that his fight was only in the way of Allah almighty, as soon as the man spit on him, he got angry and Ali feared that if at that moment he killed the man, it would have been due to his personal fury, personal reason, that is why Ali didn’t kill him then. So Imam Ali was a man who never used his sword, the gift from Allah for his personal reasons. This might help answering the different allegations regarding the cowardice of the Islamic hero.

At-Tahera: Verse of Purity

The Holy Book tells us about the Words of Allah, the Great and Almighty, concerning them: “Allah only desires to keep away uncleanness from you, O members of the House! and to purify you a (thorough purification).” (33:33)

It is a virtue for them. No one of all people has this virtue. There is no dignity more precious than keeping away uncleanness from them and purifying them from all defects, that is the purifying which the Most kind (Allah) likes for them with His care, and it is not limited to a certain uncleanness or from a certain thing. So, it implies general purifying from every defect and sin. From this holy verse, we conclude the infallibility of the members of the Prophetic House (Ahlul-Bayt), because every sin is uncleanness and committing sins does not agree with their keeping away from them and their purification from them, so, they are, according to this verse purified from uncleanness and sins.

Is infallibility a thing behind this? Yes, all importance is in the concerned persons with this virtue which no one of the community had, except them. Does this virtue concern those who were in the House when the above- mentioned Holy Verse came down or does it concern every one who belonged to the most purified Prophet because of a certain affinity or ancestry?

If the second question is accepted, then the reality opposes it, because some of the Prophet’s wives disobeyed him, and no uncleanness is greater than this disobedience. So, certainly his wives are not concerned with this virtue. Also some of those who belonged to the Prophet because of ancestry committed grave sins and crimes, and it is not right that Allah, the Almighty, wants to do a thing by the creation will, but the thing does not happen. As it is impossible that Allah wants to create a thing and the thing does not happen, so all the Prophet’s wives and all the Hashimites are not included in the foregoing verse, because the women and the Hashimites might commit what conflicts with purification, besides no one has said that all his wives and all the Hashimites were infallible. And if the intended meaning in the verse was the legal will, then no sense would the will of purification concerning the members of the House (Ahlul-Bayt) have because Allah, the Exalted, wants it from all people. As the verse concerns the outstanding merit of Ahlul-Bayt, it indicates that the creation will is confined to them.
Then the legislation will is related to the acts of creatures, while the verse concerns the act of Allah.

Discourse can only be logical when first we explore the justification of Ahlul-Bayt and then we introduce their attributes.
The Identity of Ahlul-Bayt: Umm Salama, the wife of our beloved Prophet says, “Ayah 33 of surah 33 (Al-Ahzaab) was revealed to the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) when he was at my house. After this revelation, the Messenger of Allah called upon Ali, Fatima, Al-Hasan and Al-Husain to come to him and be under the mantle with him; then he proclaimed “O’ Lord, these are my Ahlul-Bayt, I implore thee to cleanse them of all stigmas, and to purify them.”

Thus, the Prophet made known the identity of Ahlul-Bayt so as to prevent any exploitation of this verse in the future.

Umm Salama then remarked, “I asked if I could join them, but the Prophet said “halt” and declared that “I am in goodness”, meaning she was not of Ahlul-Bayt as mentioned in the Ayah.

No statement could have more clearly identified Ahlul-Bayt than this one. The Messenger of Allah did not even permit his wife Umm Salama to join the ranks of Ahlul-Bayt, thus by so doing he hindered any claims by his other wives in the future to that honor.

Tibari, the great historian, writes in his interpretation of the Holy Qur’an that Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) said, “This Ayah was a revelation about me, Ali, Fatima, Al-Hasan and Al-Husain. It is true that this Ayah is revealed amidst verses referring to the wives of the Prophet, however, references to the masculine gender (words like An’kum and Yu’tahirukum) prevents one from assuming that these verses were referring to the wives of Allah’s Messenger, too. On the contrary, according to oft-repeated narrations and testimonials, no one but the daughter of the Prophet and her husband and their two beloved boys, meaning the progeny of the Messenger of God, are intended when references are made to Ahlul-Bayt.

Fundamentally, this verse cannot be referring to the wives of the Prophet because the language of the Qur’an in revelations about the spouses of the Prophet is harsh and assertive whereas the references in the aforementioned Ayah are affectionate and benevolent.

To clarify these two languages, we point to the following judgments rendered by the Qur’an regarding the wives of the Holy Prophet.

1. At times the Revelation threatens them with distress and declares:

“O’ Wives of the Prophet, those of you who commit misdeeds will face twice the punishment and this is easy for Allah to do.” (33:35)

2. At times, the Holy Book forbids them from treading the same course as the women of Jahiliya. When such references are seen in the Qur’an (regarding the spouses of the Prophet), is it fair to attribute the Ayah (which declares God’s affection towards Ahlul-Bayt) to no one but the Prophet’s Pure Family?

3. In the 3rd Ayah, two spouses of the Prophet (who revealed his secret) are reprimanded. They are told to repent and that repentance is to their benefit since their hearts have veered from righteousness and that if they conspire against the Prophet they will not triumph since Allah and Gabriel, and the righteous and the angels are the protectors and supporters of the Prophet.

The nature of the secret that was about to be revealed is not pertinent at this point but the important fact is that such people who are at the verge of openly opposing the Prophet and are asked to repent are not in position to be pronounced immaculate and cleansed. of sin as such.

There is no doubt that all the spouses of the Prophet deserve special respect due to the fact that they are related to the Messenger of God. However, such respect does not mean the Qur’an’s judgment about them can be ignored or that if anyone would speak unkindly about them should be condemned.

Besides, according to the verse, god has purified the AhlulBait of the prophet. On the other hand, he is asking the wives of the prophet to ask for forgiveness and try to stay away from sins, thus the wives are not infallibles and pure, according to the verses.

Now that we familiarized ourselves with the meaning and the usage of the term “Ahlul-Bayt” the time has come for recounting some of their attributes.

According to Ayah 80 of Surah Wa’qi’ah, these individuals are the ones who have the ability to come in contact with this fountain of knowledge in the Qur’an.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the Ahlul-Bayt of the Prophet who are (according to Surah 33, Ayah 33), free of all ignominy, are the ones who shall witness the true status (meaning) of the Qur’an.

The Love of Ahlul-Bayt is incumbent upon us. The Messengers of God propagate Allah’s Word in order to please the Almighty, and the motto of the final Messenger of God, Muhammad (p.b.u.h.), was commanded by the Qur’an in Surah Al-Shoora, Surah 42, Ayah 23: ” Declare [O' Muhammad]: “I ask you of no recompense for my toil except the love for my kin (family).” Whose earns good, We shall expand it for him. Verily Allah is oft-forgiving, appreciates good works”.

Sahih-e-Muslim – Book 031, Number 5955: ‘A’isha reported that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel’s hair that there came Hasan b. ‘Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came ‘Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

Ayesha’s Actual Age

Have we ever thought that why will the Prophet of Islam marry a 9, 6 in some places, year girl. What was the requirement for it? Sunni historians have recorded that the prophet didnot allow Abu Bakr or Umer to marry with his daughter, Hz Fatima, due to the vast age difference. She was too young for them. The prophet refused to marry her YOUNG daughter with older men, and he himself would marry a 9 year old minor, with an age difference of more than 35 years?

Many anti-Islamic sites accuse our Beloved Holy Prophet, Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, of , God Forbid, marrying a minor. We present here an article that will clear our Beloved Holy Prophet (pbuh) off this blasphemous charge.

Most narrations carry misstatements about the age of Hazrat ‘Aishah Siddiqah at the time of her marriage to the Holy Prophet, (peach and blessings of Allah be upon him). They place this marriage in the tenth year of the Call and state that Hazrat ‘Aishah was only 6 years old at that time. On proper sifting of the material facts, these statements turn out to be incorrect and it becomes evident that she, in fact, was about 19 or 20 years of age when she arrived in the house of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as his wife in 2 A.H.

It will be in the fitness of things to quote from the writings of two well-known Muslim scholars of the present century who are the main exponents of the view that Hazrat ‘Aishah Siddiqah was 6 years old at her Nikah and 9 years old at the time of the consummation of her marriage. Both Maulana Syed Sulaiman Nadvi and Maulana Syed Abul Ala Maududi are well-known Muslim authors of Seerat (biography).

Maulana Syed Sulaiman Nadvi writes on page 21 of his book ‘Seerat-i-Aishah’: “Books of history and biography are generally silent about the birth date of Hazrat ‘Aishah. The historian Ibn Sa’d, whom many later biographers have followed, has written that Hazrat ‘Aishah was born in the fourth year of the Call, and was married at the age of 6 years in the tenth year of the Call. Apparently this cannot be correct, because if her birth in the fourth year of the Call be admitted as correct then her age at the time of her marriage in the tenth year of the Call works out to 7 and not 6 years. The fact remains that some matters about the age of Hazrat ‘Aishah are admitted to be correct by most historians and biographers, and these are: She was married three years before Hijrah at the age of six years; the marriage was consummated in the month of Shawal in the year 1 A.H. when she was 9 years old, and she became a widow in Rabi-al-Awwal 11 A.H., at the age of 18 years. According to this account, the correct date of her birth works out to the end of the fifth year of the Call or 614 A.D. of the Christian calendar. For a proper comprehension of the events of history, one should bear in mind that out of a total period of 23 years of the Call, the first 13 years were passed in Mecca and the last 10 years in Madina. Thus, the fourth year of the Call had already been out before her birth and the fifth year was running.”

In the article, “The Nikah Date of Sayedah ‘Aishah,” published in the ‘Tarjuman al-Quran’ of September 1976, Maulana Abul Ala Maududi wrote: “It is apparent from the detailed reports of Imam Ahmad Tibrani, Ibn Jareer and Baihaqi that the Nikah of Sayedah ‘Aishah was solemnised before the Nikah of Sayedah Saudah. It is also evident that her Nikah with the Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was solemnised in the month of Shawal of the tenth year of the Call, three years before Hijrah, when she was 6 years old. Here a question arises, that if Sayedah ‘Aishah was 6 years of age in the Shawal of the tenth year of the Call, then she should have been 9 years of age at the time of Hijrah and should have been of 11 years in 2 A.H. at the time of consummation. But all narrators agree that her Nikah was solemnised when she was 6 years old and the marriage was consummated when she was 9 years old. Some Ulema have tried to meet this discrepancy by saying that the marriage was consummated seven months after Hijrah. Hafiz Ibn Hajar has preferred this view. On the other hand, Imam Nauvi in his ‘Tahzeeb al-Asma’a al-Lughat’, Hafiz Ibn Katheer in his ‘Al-Badaya’ and Allama Qustalani in his ‘Mawahib al-Deeniah’ report consummation in 2 A.H. Hafiz Badr-ud-Din Aini has written in his Umdat al-Qari that the marriage of ‘Aishah Siddiqah was consummated in Shawal 2 A.H. after the return of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) from the battle of Badr. Both Imam Nauvi and Allama Aini consider the above-quoted reports of consummation of marriage seven months after Hijrah as irresponsible and untrustworthy. Thus we are faced with a question that if the marriage was consummated at the age of 9 years in Shawal 2 A.H., then what should be the date of Nikah which should tally with her age of 6 years? An answer to this question is found in Bukhari wherein it is reported from Urwah ibn Zubair, “Sayedah Khadijah died three years before Hijrah; the Holy Prophet solemnised Nikah with Sayedah ‘Aishah two years after that. Then it was consummated at the age of 9 years.” This works out to be correct that Nikah was solemnised one year before Hijrah when she was 6 years old and consummation took place in 2 A.H. when she was 9 years.” The above quotations amply bear out that both Syed Nadvi and Syed Maududi agree to the correctness of reports stating the age of Sayedah ‘Aishah at 6 years at Nikah and 9 years at the consummation. Their only worry seems to be the calculation of the correct year of the Call and the Hijrah for fixing these ages in those calendar years. Both of them start with a preconception that the age of 6 years for Nikah and 9 years for consummation are correct and true, and set out in search of the correct year of the Call and Hijrah in which these preconceived ages will fit in. This hardly can be called a scientific method of finding her correct age. This rather may be called an effort to find a correct date for a given age.

As far as my information goes the first voice against the common misconception about the age of Sayedah ‘Aishah at her marriage was raised by Maulana Muhammad Ali, M.A., LL.B., in 1924 in his ‘Muhammad the Prophet’, wherein he wrote: “The popular misconception as to Aishah’s age may be removed here. That she had not attained majority is clear enough, but that she was not so young as six years of age is also true. In the first place, it is clear that she had reached an age when betrothal could take place in the ordinary course and must therefore have been approaching the age of majority. Again, the Isabah, speaking of the Prophet’s daughter Fatimah, says that she was about five years older than ‘Aishah. It is a fact (According to the Sunnis/The Shia Version Differs) that Fatimah was born when the Ka’bah was being rebuilt, i.e., five years before the Call or a little before it, and so ‘Aishah was certainly not below ten years at the time of her marriage with the Holy Prophet (pbuh) in the tenth year of the Call. This conclusion is borne out by the testimony of ‘Aishah herself who is reported to have related that when the chapter entitled ‘The Moon’ (the 54th chapter) was revealed she was a girl playing about and that she remembered certain verses then revealed. Now the fifty-fourth chapter could not have been revealed later than the fifth year of the Call, and therefore the report which states her to have been six years old in the tenth year of the Call when her marriage ceremony was gone through cannot be correct, because this would show her to have born about the time of the revelation of the 54th chapter. All these considerations show her to have been not less than ten years old at the time of her marriage. And as the period between her marriage and its consummation was not less than five years, because the consummation took place in the second year of the Fight, it follows that she could not have been less than fifteen at that time. The popular account that she was six years at marriage and nine years at the time of consummation is decidedly not correct, because it supposes the period between the marriage and its consummation to be only three years, while this is historically wrong.”

In spite of this severe criticism of Muhammad Ali’s view, Nadvi not only contradicts himself about the age of Hazrat ‘Aishah, but provides supporting evidence to Muhammad Ali’s views when, writing about the last days of the life of Hazrat ‘Aishah, he writes at page 111 of the same ‘Seerat-i-Aishah’: “Hazrat ‘Aishah was a widow and she passed 40 years of her life as a widow.”

Further, at page 153 he writes: “The last days of Khilafat (Caliphate) of Amir Muawiyya were the last days of the life of Hazrat ‘Aishah and her age at that time was 67 years.” Now if we deduct 40 years of her widowed life from 67 years then we find she was 27 years of age at the time of the passing away of the Holy Prophet in 11 A.H. and not 18 years as reported by Nadvi in the earlier pages of the same book. Since the total period of the Call is 23 years, therefore, according to this account she was born about four years before the Call and not in the fourth year of the Call as Nadvi tried to make us believe in his earlier pages quoted herein above. Consequently, her age at the time of the Nikah in the tenth year of the Call works out to 14-15 years and not 6 years, as Nadvi himself so assertively reported. According to this account, Hazrat ‘Aishah’s age at the time of consummation of her marriage in 2 A.H. works out to 19-20 years and not 9 years as stated in earlier pages of Seerat-i-Aishah. A further enquiry is most naturally necessitated to find out which of the reports of Nadvi should be given credence.

There are other important events recorded in history which provide definite evidence about the age of Hazrat ‘Aishah.

1. The well-known historian Ibn Jareer al-Tabari writes at page 50 of volume 4 of his ‘Book of History’: “Abu Bakr married two ladies in the days of ignorance (pre-Call era). Fateelah daughter of Abd al-Aza was the first, from whom Abdullah and Asma were born. Umm-i-Rooman was the second, from whom Abd al-Rahman and ‘Aishah were born. All the four children of Abu Bakr were born in the days of ignorance (Jahiliyyah, i.e., pre-Islamic days) from the above-named two ladies.

2. It is a well-known fact of history, that Abu Bakr’s son Abd al-Rahman fought against the Muslims in the battle of Badr. His age at that time was 21-22 years, and although he was older than ‘Aishah, there is no evidence to show that the difference between their ages was more than three or four years. This fact lends support to the view that Hazrat ‘Aishah was born four or five years before the Call.

3. The well-known historian and scholar ‘Allama ‘Imad-ud-Deen Ibn Katheer writes in his ‘Al-Badayah’ about Sayedah Asma’ daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr’: Asma’ died in 73 A.H. at the age of 100 years. She was ten years older than her sister ‘Aishah. Now according to this report ‘Asma’ would have been 27-28 years old at the time of Hijrah and since she was ten years older than Sayedah ‘Aishah, therefore the age of Sayedah ‘Aishah would have been 17 or 18 years at the time of Hijrah. Accordingly, her birth falls about four or five years before the Call, and her age at the time of the consummation of marriage in 2 A.H. will work out to 19-20 years.

4. The author of the well-known collection of Hadith ‘Mishkat al-Masabeeh’, Sheikh Waheed-ud-Deen, writes in his well-known book ‘Ahmal fi Asma’ al-Rijjal’: “At the time of the consummation of her marriage Sayedah ‘Aishah’s age was not less than 18-19 years.”

Besides the above, there are many evidences as well.

1. Evidence 1: Reliability of Source
Most of the narratives printed in the books of hadith are reported only by Hisham ibn `Urwah, who was reporting on the authority of his father. First of all, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported. It is strange that no one from Medina, where Hisham ibn `Urwah lived the first 71 years of his life narrated the event, despite the fact that his Medinan pupils included the well-respected Malik ibn Anas. The origins of the report of the narratives of this event are people from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medina for most of his life.

Tehzibu’l-Tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet, reports that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah: “He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq” (Tehzi’bu’l-tehzi’b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala’ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, 15th century. Vol 11, p. 50).

It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people in Iraq: “I have been told that Malik objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq” (Tehzi’b u’l-tehzi’b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala’ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol.11, p. 50).

Mizanu’l-ai`tidal, another book on the life sketches of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet reports: “When he was old, Hisham’s memory suffered quite badly” (Mizanu’l-ai`tidal, Al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatu’l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, p. 301).

Based on these references, Hisham’s memory was failing and his narratives while in Iraq were unreliable. So, his narrative of Ayesha’s marriage and age are unreliable.

It is vital also to keep in mind some of the pertinent dates in the history of Islam:
pre-610 CE: Jahiliya (pre-Islamic age) before revelation
610 CE: First revelation
610 CE: AbuBakr accepts Islam
613 CE: Prophet Muhammad begins preaching publicly.
615 CE: Emigration to Abyssinia
616 CE: Umar bin al Khattab accepts Islam
620 CE: Generally accepted betrothal of Ayesha to the Prophet
622 CE: Hijrah (emigation to Yathrib, later renamed Medina)
623/624 CE: Generally accepted year of Ayesha living with the Prophet

2. Evidence 2: The Betrothal
According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn ‘Urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with the Prophet at the age of nine years.

However, in another work, Al-Tabari says: “All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period” (Tarikhu’l-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of seven) and started to live with the Prophet in 624 CE (at the age of nine), that would indicate that she was born in 613 CE and was nine when she began living with the Prophet. Therefore, based on one account of Al-Tabari, the numbers show that Ayesha must have born in 613 CE, three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). Tabari also states that Ayesha was born in the pre-Islamic era (in Jahiliya). If she was born before 610 CE, she would have been at least 14 years old when she began living with the Prophet. Essentially, Tabari contradicts himself. Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.

3. Evidence 3: Ayesha’s Age in relation to Asma’s Age
According to Abda’l-Rahman ibn abi zanna’d: “Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha (Siyar A`la’ma’l-nubala’, Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu’assasatu’l-risalah, Beirut, 1992).

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933).

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives, she died not after five days but 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.” (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: “She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.” (Taqribu’l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, p. 654, Arabic, Bab fi’l-nisa’, al-harfu’l-alif, Lucknow).

According to almost all the historians, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha was 10 years older than Ayesha. If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of the hijrah.

If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha should have been 17 or 18 years old. Thus, Ayesha, being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with the Prophet between at either 19 to 20 years of age.

4. Evidence 4: The Battles of Badr and Uhud
A narrative regarding Ayesha’s participation in Badr is given in the hadith of Muslim, (Kitabu’l-jihad wa’l-siyar, Bab karahiyati’l-isti`anah fi’l-ghazwi bikafir). Ayesha, while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey, says: “when we reached Shajarah”. Obviously, Ayesha was with the group travelling towards Badr. A narrative regarding Ayesha’s participation in the Battle of Uhud is given in Bukhari (Kitabu’l-jihad wa’l-siyar, Bab Ghazwi’l-nisa’ wa qitalihinna ma`a’lrijal): “Anas reports that on the day of Uhud, people could not stand their ground around the Prophet. [On that day,] I saw Ayesha and Umm-i-Sulaim, they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to avoid any hindrance in their movement].” Again, this indicates that Ayesha was present in the Battles of Uhud and Badr.

It is narrated in Bukhari (Kitabu’l-maghazi, Bab Ghazwati’l-khandaq wa hiya’l-ahza’b): “Ibn `Umar states that the Prophet did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was 14 years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was 15 years old, the Prophet permitted my participation.”

Based on the above narratives, (a) the children below 15 years were sent back and were not allowed to participate in the Battle of Uhud, and (b) Ayesha participated in the Battles of Badr and Uhud. Ayesha’s participation in the Battles of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine years old but at least 15 years old. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden on them. This account is another contradiction regarding Ayesha’s age.

5. Evidence 5: Surat al-Qamar (The Moon)
According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha was born about eight years before hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari, Ayesha is reported to have said: “I was a young girl (jariyah in Arabic)” when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed (Sahih Bukhari, kitabu’l-tafsir, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa’l-sa`atu adha’ wa amarr).

Chapter 54 of the Quran was revealed eight years before hijrah (The Bounteous Koran, M.M. Khatib, 1985), indicating that it was revealed in 614 CE. If Ayesha started living with the Prophet at the age of nine in 623 CE or 624 CE, she was a newborn infant (sibyah in Arabic) at the time that Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed. According to the above tradition, Ayesha was actually a young girl, not an infant in the year of revelation of Al-Qamar. Jariyah means young playful girl (Lane’s Arabic English Lexicon). So, Ayesha, being a jariyah not a sibyah (infant), must be somewhere between 6-13 years old at the time of revelation of Al-Qamar, and therefore must have been 14-21 years at the time she married the Prophet.

6. Evidence 6: Arabic Terminology
According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah, when Khaulah came to the Prophet advising him to marry again, the Prophet asked her regarding the choices she had in mind. Khaulah said: “You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)”. When the Prophet asked the identity of the bikr (virgin), Khaulah mentioned Ayesha’s name.

All those who know the Arabic language are aware that the word bikr in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year-old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier, is jariyah. Bikr on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady without conjugal experience prior to marriage, as we understand the word “virgin” in English. Therefore, obviously a nine-year-old girl is not a “lady” (bikr) (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 6, p. .210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).

7. Evidence 7:  The Qur’anic Text
All Muslims agree that the Quran is the book of guidance. So, we need to seek the guidance from the Quran to clear the smoke and confusion created by the eminent men of the classical period of Islam in the matter of Ayesha’s age at her marriage. Does the Quran allow or disallow marriage of an immature child of seven years of age? There are no verses that explicitly allow such marriage. There is a verse, however, that guides Muslims in their duty to raise an orphaned child. The Quran’s guidance on the topic of raising orphans is also valid in the case of our own children. The verse states: “And make not over your property (property of the orphan), which Allah had made a (means of) support for you, to the weak of understanding, and maintain them out of it, clothe them and give them good education. And test them until they reach the age of marriage.

Then if you find them maturity of intellect, make over them their property…” (Quran, 4:5-6).

In the matter of children who have lost a parent, a Muslim is ordered to (a) feed them, (b) clothe them, (c) educate them, and (d) test them for maturity “until the age of marriage” before entrusting them with management of finances.

Here the Quranic verse demands meticulous proof of their intellectual and physical maturity by objective test results before the age of marriage in order to entrust their property to them.

In light of the above verses, no responsible Muslim would hand over financial management to a seven- or nine-year-old immature girl. If we cannot trust a seven-year-old to manage financial matters, she cannot be intellectually or physically fit for marriage. Ibn Hambal (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal, vol.6, p. 33 and 99) claims that nine-year-old Ayesha was rather more interested in playing with toy-horses than taking up the responsible task of a wife. It is difficult to believe, therefore, that AbuBakr would betroth his immature seven-year-old daughter to the 50-year-old Prophet. Equally difficult to imagine is that the Prophet would marry an immature seven-year-old girl.

8. Evidence 8: Consent in Marriage
A women must be consulted and must agree in order to make a marriage valid (Mishakat al Masabiah, translation by James Robson, Vol. I, p. 665). Islamically, credible permission from women is a prerequisite for a marriage to be valid.

By any stretch of the imagination, the permission given by an immature seven-year-old girl cannot be valid authorization for marriage. It is inconceivable that AbuBakr, an intelligent man, would take seriously the permission of a seven-year-old girl to marry a 50-year-old man. Similarly, the Prophet would not have accepted the permission given by a girl who, according to the hadith of Muslim, took her toys with her when she went live with Prophet.

All the above quotations give ample refutation to the common misconception that  ‘Aishah’s age at the time of her Nikah was 6 years and at the time of consummation of marriage it was only 9 years. If Muslim scholars of the present era deem fit to make an objective research instead of beating the old track, they will find ample material in the pages of history to arrive at a correct age for ‘Aishah. This indeed would be a great service to the cause of Islam.

Ayesha’s Rebellion Against Imam Ali

Hadhrath Ayesha’s entry onto the battlefield of Jamal was a violation of the Qur’an. Allah (swt) states clearly with regards to the wives of Rasulullah (s):  “And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance;….” – Al-Quran 33:33

In Tafsir Durre Manthur Volume 5 page 196 under the commentary of this verse we read a narration that states “when Hadhrath Saudah (RA), wife of the Prophet (s), was asked why she did not perform Hajj and Umrah (regularly) like other wives of the Prophet (s)? Saudha (RA) said, “I have performed Hajj and Umrah (before) and Allah has given me the order to stay at home. By God I will not leave home until my death.” The narrator added “by God, Saudah (RA) did not leave her home after the Prophet (s) until her death, when her funeral was taken out”.

This verse came down exclusively for the wives of Rasulullah (s) and in the commentary of this verse we can see that Hadhrath Sauda deemed it as a clear injunction for her to remain at home.

Rasulullah (s) had told his wives during Hajjatul Wida (final pilgrimage) that this WAS their first and last Hajj and that in future they were to remain within their homes. To prove our claim we present al Bidaya wa al Nihaya Volume 7 page 104, where Ibn Kathir under the Chapter “Zainab binte Jahsh” records the following: “During the Farewell Hajj, Prophet (s) had told his wives that “This is your last Hajj, after that you have to pray on floor mats”. The narrator then added that except for Zainab bint e Jahsh (RA) and Saudah(RA) all other wives used to go for Hajj but these two used to say that “nothing shall move us”.

Rasulullah’s order and Hadhrath Saudah’s commentary of this verse is clear proof that there was a mandatory duty placed by Allah on the wives of Rasulullah (s), that they remain within the confines of their homes. Despite this Hadhrath Ayesha opposed this explicit verse of the Qur’an and left her home to instigate opposition against the Imam of the time. We have already proven that this verse placed an unconditional order on the wives to stay at home.

On the contrary we read in Tafsir Durre Manthur Volume 5 page 196 commentary of Surah Ahzab, Hilayat al Awliya Volume 2 page 48, Chapter “Dhikr Ayesha” and Tabaqat al Kabeer Volume 8 page 81 under the Chapter “Dhikr Ayesha” that: “When Hadhrath Ayesha used to recite the Ayat (“And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance;..” Al-Quran 33:33) she used to cry so much that her cover used to get wet with tears”.

Therefore we can say that it was mandatory for Hadhrath Ayesha to stay at home. The crying of Hazrat Ayesha at the recitation of the verse is clear proof that during her battle with Imam ‘Ali (as) she had gone against this ayat which is specific for the Prophets (s) wives. By leaving her house and fighting Imam ‘Ali (as) she had violated this Qur’anic order, one that placed a condition on the wives of Rasulullah (s) to remain within their homes.

Imam Ali (as)’s letter to Hadhrath Ayesha testifies to her being on the wrong path
We read in al Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 38, Matalib al Sa’ul page 112 and Fusul ul Muhimma page 72 that: “Prior to the Battle of Jamal he [Imam Ali] wrote a letter to Ayesha in which he said ‘by leaving your home you have opposed the order of Allah (swt) and his Rasul (s)”

Hadhrath Ayesha’s reply demonstrates her uncompromising attitude towards an amicable settlement Matalib al Sa’ul page 116 and Fusul ul Muhimma page 72 both record Hadhrath Ayesha’s defiant reply to Imam ‘Ali (as)’s letter: “Son of ‘Abu Talib, the difference between us is irreconcilable, time is running out, and we shall not submit to your authority, whatever you wish to do, do it”.

Hadhrath Ayesha had demonstrated open opposition to Imam ‘Ali (as), a refusal to accept his authority and a challenge to him to stop her opposition party. Imam ‘Ali (as) hence was left with no other choice but to quash the opposition. Hadhrath Ayesha had made clear that her intention was that of open defiance and disobedience to the Imam of the time. Letter of Ummul Momineen Hadhrath Umme Salmah to stop Hadhrath Ayesha from participating in the Battle of Jamal is concrete evidence that Hazrat Ayesha was in error.

“When Ummul Momineen Aisha decided to go for Jamal, Ummul Momineen Umme Salmah wrote to her: “From Umme Salmah wife of the Holy prophet to Aisha Ummul Momineen, And I praise Allah, There is no God except Allah, and then (I want to say), you are the medium between the prophet and his followers (Ummah). And you are guardian of his honour. The Holy Quran has gathered you so don’t despair…. Pillars of this religion cannot be upheld on women. Women are praised for keeping down their eyes and hiding their bodies. Allah has exempted me and you from this task (of leading the battle). What will you say on the day of Judgement when Allah’s Prophet will denounce you from Paradise on the deserts that you torn the veil which Allah had concealed you with”. Then the announcer will announce that the mother (Umme Salmah) remained here (didn’t go for the battle) so should you”.

We read in al Bidaya Volume 7 page 231 that: “Hadhrath Hafsa binte Umar made preparations to join Ayesha, but (her brother) Abdullah Ibne Umar prevented her from going”.

If the stance of Ayesha was correct then why did ‘Abdullah Ibne Umar; a leading companion prevent his sister from joining in the rebellion? Clearly he deemed it inappropriate for the wife of Rasulullah (s) to behave in such a manner.

Ayesha wanted to install herself as the Imam over the nation. In Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 43 Chapter “Dhikr Jamal” the narrator states: “I was walking through Jamal and witnessed a man on the ground rubbing his heels and reciting poetry, another narrators states that someone asked (the same man) ‘Who are you?’ to which he replied ‘I am in that woman’s army who intends to become Ameerul Momineen”.

Rasulullah (s) condemned women at the helm of a people. We read in Sahih al Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 219: Narrated Abu Bakra: During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”

Ayesha’s Role In Islam

Ayesha is a wife of prophet Muhammad but her role in Islam, infact distorting it is great. Her character, her role, her status is revealed in the Quran as well as the sunni books. Her being the wife of prophet Muhammad gives her neither any merit nor a blood relation, as wives of Hz Nug and Lut will be in hell as per the Quranic order.

Quran 66:3 “When the Prophet confided unto one of his wives a matter, but when she divulged it (unto others) and God apprised him therefore, he made known a part of it and avoided a part; so when he informed her of it, said she: ‘Who informed thee of this?’ He said: ‘Informed, me, the All-Knowing, the All-Aware’.”
Quran 66:4 “If ye two turn (in repentance) unto Him, then indeed your hearts are inclined (to this) but if ye two back up each other against him, then verily God it is Who is his Protector, and Gabriel, and the (most) Virtuous one among the believers, and the angels thereafter will back (him) up.”
Quran 66:5 “Happily his Lord if he divorceth you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, repentant, prayerful, observers of fast, widows and virgins.”

Thus according to these verses, two wives of prophet Muhammad (ayesha and hafsa) disobeyed the prophet. They were told to repent or else face Allah, Gabriel and some virtuos believers (Hz Ali perhaps!!?). Allah tells them that if he wills he will get them divorced by Prophet and be replaced by better women who are more submissive and faithful. This Ayesha was not even the best women of her own time, save the best wife. She was replaceable.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 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.”

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 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 was revealed. (66.5)

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 63, Number 192: Narrated ‘Ubaid bin ‘Umar: I heard ‘Aisha saying, “The Prophet used to stay for a long while with Zanab 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 the Prophet visited one of them and she said to him similarly. The Prophet said, “Never mind, I have taken some honey at the house of Zainab bint Jahsh, but I shall never drink of it anymore.” 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) namely his saying: But I have taken some honey.”

Similar hadith is also found in Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 63, Number 193, Also in Sahih Muslim Book 009, Number 3496

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3453: ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: I felt jealous of the women who offered themselves to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Then when Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, revealed this:” You may defer any one of them you wish, and take to yourself any you wish; and if you desire any you have set aside (no sin is chargeable to you)” (xxxiii. 51), I (‘A’isha.) said: It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire.

Sahih Muslim Book 039, Number 6759: A’isha the wife of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), reported that one day Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came out of her (apartment) during the night and she felt jealous. Then he came and he saw me (in what agitated state of mind) I was. He said: A’isha, what has happened to you? Do you feel jealous? Thereupon she said: How can it he (that a woman like me) should not feel jealous in regard to a husband like you. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: It was your devil who had come to you, and she said: Allah’s Mes- senger, is there along with me a devil? He said: Yes, everyone has a devil with him…

Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5991: ‘A’isha reported that when Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) set ont on a journey, he used to cast lots amongst his wives. Once this lot came out in my favour and that of Hafsa. They (Hafsi, and ‘A’isha) both went along with him and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) used to travel (on camel) when it was night along with ‘A’isha and talked with her. Hafsa said to ‘A’isha: Would you like to ride upon my camel tonight and allow me to ride upon your camel and you would see (what you do not generally see) and I would see (what I do not see) generally? She said: Yes. So ‘A’isha rode upon the camel of Hafsa and Hafsa rode upon the camel of ‘A’isha and Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came near the camel of ‘A’isha. (whereas) Hafsa had been riding over that. He greeted her and then rode with her until they came down. She (‘A’isha) thus missed (the company of the Holy Prophet) and when they sat down, ‘A’isha felt jealous. She put her foot in the grass and said: O Allah, let the scorpion sting me or the serpent bite me. And so far as thy Messenger is concerned, I cannot say anything about him.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 164: Narrated ‘Aisha: I did not feel jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet as much as I did of Khadija (although) she died before he married me, for I often heard him mentioning her, and Allah had told him to give her the good tidings that she would have a palace of Qasab (i.e. pipes of precious stones and pearls in Paradise), and whenever he slaughtered a sheep, he would send her women-friends a good share of it

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 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 when ever 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.”

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6939: Ibn ‘Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood by the door (of the apartment of) gafsa and, pointing towards the east, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side, viz. where the horns of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice and Ubaidullah b. Sa’ld in his narration said. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had been standing by the door of ‘A’isha.

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6941: Ibn Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) came out from the house of ‘A’isha and said: It would be from this side that there would appear the height of unbelief, viz. where appear the horns of Satan. i. e. cast.

Then her greatest sin, fighting the Khalifa e rashid and Imam e waqt, Ali ibne Abu Talib in the battle of Camel (Jamel).

Quran 033:030 O wives of the prophet! whoever of you commits an open indecency, the punishment shall be increased to her doubly; and this IS easy to Allah.
Quran 033:031 And whoever of you is obedient to Allah and His Messenger and does good, We will give to her her reward doubly, and We have prepared for her an honorable sustenance.
Quran 33:32 O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (Allah), be not too complacent of speech, lest one in whose heart is a disease should be moved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just.
Quran 33:33 (O wives of Prophet) And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger…………………
Quran 033:034 And keep to mind what is recited in your houses of the communications of Allah and the wisdom; surely Allah is Knower of subtleties, Aware.

Allah strictly orders all wives of Prophet to stay in their houses after death of Prophet Muhammad, no matter what the circumstances are. If they sin, their punishment will be doubled.

Allah also sets examples of previous prophets whose wives were sinners and companions of hell.

Quran 066:010 Allah sets forth an example to those who disbelieve the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut: they were both under two of Our righteous servants, but they acted treacherously towards them so they availed them naught against Allah, and it was said: Enter both the fire with those who enter.

Thus according to the Quran, the wives of previous prophets were not free from hell punishment if they did wrong. Therefore we can say that it was mandatory for Hadhrath Ayesha to stay at home. The verse is clear proof that during her battle with Imam ‘Ali (as) she had gone against this ayat which is specific for the Prophets (s) wives. By leaving her house and fighting Imam ‘Ali (as) she had violated this Qur’anic order, one that placed a condition on the wives of Rasulullah (s) to remain within their homes.

Imam Ali (as)’s letter to Hadhrath Ayesha testifies to her being on the wrong path
We read in al Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 38, Matalib al Sa’ul page 112 and Fusul ul Muhimma page 72 that: “Prior to the Battle of Jamal he [Imam Ali] wrote a letter to Ayesha in which he said ‘by leaving your home you have opposed the order of Allah (swt) and his Rasul (s)”

Ayesha had demonstrated open opposition to Imam ‘Ali (as), a refusal to accept his authority and a challenge to him to stop her opposition party. Imam ‘Ali (as) hence was left with no other choice but to quash the opposition. Hadhrath Ayesha had made clear that her intention was that of open defiance and disobedience to the Imam of the time. Letter of Ummul Momineen Hadhrath Umme Salmah to stop Hadhrath Ayesha from participating in the Battle of Jamal is concrete evidence that Hazrat Ayesha was in error.

Ayesha wanted to install herself as the Imam over the nation. In Tadkhirath al Khawwas page 43 Chapter “Dhikr Jamal” the narrator states: “I was walking through Jamal and witnessed a man on the ground rubbing his heels and reciting poetry, another narrators states that someone asked (the same man) ‘Who are you?’ to which he replied ‘I am in that woman’s army who intends to become Ameerul Momineen”.

Rasulullah (s) condemned women at the helm of a people. We read in Sahih al Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 219: Narrated Abu Bakra:… When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”

Anyhow, read the above ahadith and quranic verses clearly. And we have the right to judge between right and wrong, that is why we have the quran with us, and our aql (logic) which helps us judge the right and wrong.

Azadari: The Mourning

Sunnis usually attack the twelvers by calling them kaafirs, because they perform Matam and shed blood at ashura (zanjeer). The question arises, Is shedding of blood on Ashura allowed. Is this the Sunnah of the Ahl-ul-Bayt at all?

The shedding of blood during Muharram for Imam Hussain, peace be upon him, is not only Halal, but it is also very Mustahab indeed, and all PROMINENT scholars and religious authorities – Maraje’ – always encouraged it throughout the history of Islam. This included the Tatbir or Qamah-Zani – which is the hitting of the head with swords. The Maraje’ have even decreed that it is acceptable and permissible if one is harmed in this process, provided of course the injuries sustained do not constitute permanent injuries or endanger the life of the individual.
The people who practice Tatbir take lead, amongst the teachings of other infallibles, from Zaynab al-Kubra, heroin of Karbala and sister of Imam Hussain peace be upon them. Zaynab peace be upon her was the first person who hit her forehead to a bar inside the carriage she was in, causing considerable bleeding, when the head of al-Hussain (AS) was being paraded in Kufa. This is one evidence that the shedding of blood is permissible; whether from the head or from the back etc. It is a sunna of Hz Zainab Binte Ali. The infallible Imam Zayn-el-’Aabidin (AS) used to address Lady Zaynab al-Kubra (AS) by saying to her: “You are al-Hamdu-Lillah an untaught scholar” – “Anti al-Hamdu-Lillah ‘Alimah Ghayr Mu’allimah” This statement is seen by scholars as indicating a degree of infallibility for Lady Zaynab (AS).

There are also reports that Imam al-Saadiq (AS) arranged for SHABEEH or enactment about Ali the Junior (Ali al-Asghar the son of Imam Hussain (AS) whose throat was slashed by Harmalah when the imam sought water for him) to recreate the scene of Karbala for the people, and the Imam (AS) does not hold this enactment solely for the Ali al-Asghar but for all the martyrs of Karbala.

On another occasion a poet comes to the Imam (AS) and asks permission to recite a poem about al-Hussain (AS). The Imam (AS) said to the poet to wait so that he could set up a Hijaab to that the women could come to the Majlis and listen to the lamentation. When the Hijaab was set up the imam invited the women to come to the Majlis and asked the poet to start reciting, which he did. The imam (AS) stopped him asked him to recite the lamentation in way and dialect, which he does it in their hometown (in Iraq for example).

All these indicate that the Ahl-ul-Bayt (AS) used to teach and proactively encourage their followers to uphold the memory, torment, and the teachings of Imam Hussain by words and poetry, by enactment – SHABEEH – to recreate the scenery of the day of Ashura in Karbala, and by show devotion to Imam Hussain in Tatbir as shown by Zaynab al-Kubra (AS).

Last, but not least, al-Imam al-Mahdi (AS) states in his “Zeyarat al-Nahiya” addressing Imam Hussain (AS): ” . . . . now that I could not help you when you needed most help . . . I shall mourn you every morning and every evening, and I shall cry blood for you instead of tears. . . “

Thus to perform matam, shed blood at ashura and to hold majlis-e-aza for Hussain is the sunna of the Ahl-e-Bait. This is not anti-Islamic at all. And this does not increase the sectarian gap. I will like to mention another incident.

Did ever Oways Kerni (ra) the famed contemporary of the Holy Prophet (saws) who punched his own teeth out when he heard of the news of the Holy Prophet losing a tooth in jihad ever see Mohammad (saws)? Yet he is acclaimed as a great companion and an exemplar of the teachings of the Holy Prophet (saws). This is nothing but love and respect for the holy prophet Muhammad. Shi’a perform Matam and zanjeer zunni just out of the love for the prophet’s ahl-e-bait.

The Tazia taken out in the procession is a shabi. This is as stated above, a sunnat of Imam Al-Sadiq.

When we respect the Maqam-e-Ibrahim, we are not worshipping a stone or a place, rather cherishing and re-living the memory of Hazrat Ibrahim, whom we love. And we love Hazrat Ibrahim for his love for Allah and because Allah loves him… Therefore, when we trace this line of “love”, we find that it originates from and ends at the Almighty Creator, the Most Merciful!!!! Similarly, the ziarats in the procession are shabis, as Imam Jaffer-Al-Sadiq did. We re-live the memories of AL-Hussain and his sufferings. This is the love of Shi’a towards prophet’s ahl-e-bait.

“Say (O Muhammad!): I do not ask of you any reward (or fee) for it (my service to you) but love for my near relatives” [Quran, 42:23]

Imam Zayn al-Abidin wept for his father for twenty years until hebreathed his last, and every time he was served food and drink, he wept for Imam Hussain , until on one occasion his servant said to him, “Is your sorrow and grief not going to end?”, Imam Zayn al-Abidin, replied, Woe unto you! The prophet Jacob had twelve sons, and (when) Allah made one of them disappear, his eyes turned white (i.e. blind) because of his increasing crying for him, his head turned gray because of grief, and his back humped because of sorrow, and all this while his son was alive in the world. Whereas I saw my father, my brother, my uncle, and seventeen members of my family killed around me . . . so how can my grief and sorrow end?”

As the Ummah enters a new millennium and the coming of our Imam (as) comes ever closer, the Shi’a community is now being faced with new challenges, the traditional opposition from the majority school but also from the Shi’a community itself. Voices of opposition to the mourning rituals for Imam Hussain (as) is becoming all the more prevalent. This is why we felt that it was our duty to defend the traditions of Aazadari.

Is Mourning for Imam Hussain (as) Bidah? This is the common argument of the Ahl’ul Sunnah. Our response is that such rituals have passed through history and were rituals cited in the Bible, the Qur’an and in the practices of the Sahaba.

1. Christian sources
The Bible, Isaiah 22:12 – “On that Day the Lords called for weeping and beating the breast, for shaving the head and putting on sack cloth”

“You are now at ease, be anxious; tremble, you who have no cares. Strip yourselves bare; put a cloth round your waists and beat yourselves” The Bible, Isaiah 32:11

“Howl, Heshbon, for Ai is despoiled. Cry aloud you villages round Rabbath Ammon, put on sack cloth and beat your breast and score your body with gashes” The Bible, Jeremiah 49:3

“The crowd that had assembled for the spectacle, when they saw what had happened went home beating their breasts” The Bible, Luke 23:48

2. Mourning from the Qur’an
From the Holy Quran from the Chapter ADH-DHAARIYAAT we learn that Hadhrath Sara (as) struck her face when she was told that she would conceive a baby.

“Then came forward his wife in grief, she smote her face and said (what! I) an old barren woman?” Quran 51:29

Thus it is evident that smiting the face was not an objectionable act in the sight of Allah, otherwise Allah would have reprimanded her for doing so.

3. The mourning rituals of the Sahaba, wives and Ahl’ul bayt (as)

We can read from the book of Muwatta of Imam Malik, that a Bedouin came to Holy Prophet (s.a.w) while beating his chest and tearing his hair in front of the holy prophet (s.a.w) because he slept with his wife while fasting during month of Ramadhan.

Malik’s Muwatta – Book 18, Number 18.9.29: Yahya related to me from Malik from Ata ibn Abdullah al-Khurasani that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, “A bedouin came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, beating his breast and tearing out his hair and saying, ‘I am destroyed.’ The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, ‘Why is that?’, and he said, ‘I had intercourse with my wife while fasting in Ramadan.’ The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, asked him, ‘Are you able to free a slave?’, and the man said, ‘No.’ Then he asked him, ‘Are you able to give away a camel?’, and the man replied, ‘No.’ He said, ‘Sit down,’ and someone brought a large basket of dates to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he said to the man, ‘Take this and give it away as sadaqa.’ The man said, ‘There is no one more needy than me,’ and (the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace), said, ‘Eat them, and fast one day for the day when you had intercourse.’ “

The incident should be considered in the light of the following facts :-
The Bedouin being a Muslim was Sahabi (companion) of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). He was beating his chest and tearing his hair in presence of Holy Prophet (s.a.w) who neither objected to it nor reprimanded him for the same. The action of the Bedouin was a result of spiritual pain he suffered as his fast was invalidated. This incident has been authentically recorded by Sunni traditionists.

Sheikh Abdul Haq Mohaddis Hanafi Dehlavi who is regarded as one of the greatest Scholars of the Sunni Sect, describing the events at the fatal illnes of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) in his book ‘Modaarejun Nubuwwat’ vol II page 544 records:- “Bilal emerged beating his head and loudly wailing (from the room of Aisha).”

Even in this case none of the companions raised any objection at the action of Bilal, the special Muezzin of the Prophet (s.a.w). Moreover, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was yet alive and not dead. This is the extreme extent of grief. Then how can similar action for Imam Hussain (a.s) be prohibited?

Allamah Shibli Numani al Hanafi is a renowned Sunni scholar from the Indian subcontinent, in his Sirat-un Nabi (Eng translation Volume 2 pg 74) quoting Sirat Ibn Hisham we read following Hadhrath Humza (ra) martyrdom:

“The Holy Prophet (P) returned to Madina and found the whole city gone into mourning. Whenever he went, he heard wailing and lamentation in every house. He was grieved to find that all who fell in the battle had their mourners doing their duty to the memory of their dear ones; but their was none to mourn the death of Humza (ra). Overwhelmed with grief the words that there was none to mourn the loss of Hamza escaped his lips. The Ansaris were touched to the core when the remark came to their ears. They asked their women to go to the house of the Prophet (S) and lament over the death of Humza. The Prophet (p) thanked them for their sympathy, prayed for their well being, but added that it was not permissible to cry lamentations in memory of the dead. (Women in Arabia were used to wailing and lamenting aloud, they would tear off their garments, dig their nails into their cheeks, slap themselves on the face and put up loud screams. This undesirable practice was from that day stopped for future”.

Suffice it to say:
The Sahaba’s wives performed mourning rituals upon the death of Amir Humza (ra).
Coming back to Numani’s final comments I would pose these questions: If Lamenting was haraam why would the Prophet (S) had been saddened that no-one was mourning his slain Uncle? Why would the Prophet (S) allow the women to do something that is haraam? If as Numani tells us that this was a common practice amongst Arab women and it was banned it would have definitely received maximum publicity.

Curiously, not a single wife of the Prophet (S) ever heard of this ban (as claimed by Numani). On the contrary Hadhrath Aisha regarded by Ahl’ul Sunnah as the most knowledgeable women on Qur’an and Sunnah performed the following when the Prophet (S) left this earth:

As narrated by al Tabari in History Volume 9 page 183 (English translation by Ismail Poonawalla) Abbas narrates: “I heard Aisha saying “The Messenger of God died on my bosom during my turn, I did not wrong anyone in regard to him. It was because of my ignorance and youthfulness that the Messenger of God died while he was in my lap. Then I laid his head on a pillow and got up beating my chest and slapping my face along with the women”.

Need we say anymore? Would the wives of the Prophet (S) indulge in a haraam activity? According to Musnad of Imam Ahmad Hanbal Vol. 6, page 274; Aisha mourned the demise of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) with other women by beating her head.

Again the same book of ‘Modaarejun Nubuwwat’ Vol 2, page 163, the high ranking Sunni Scholar, Sheikh Abdul Haq Mohaddis Hanafi Dehlavi recorded that: “Fatima Zahra (a.s) hearing the rumour of the martyrdom of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) at Uhud came out of her house running and beating her head”.

Does it not transpire from the above that beating of head during the act of mourning for a martyr is also allowed by the religion as Sayyeda (a.s) was well aware of the religious code and was also infallible according to aya tat-hir (33:33). In addition an action of any member of Ahl’ul bayt is a Sunnah for the Ithna Ashari Shia’s, mourning is not bidah it is a Sunnah of Sayyida Fatima Zahra (as).

From these sources it is evident that to mourn in this way is a natural reaction to distress. Who in this life can claim that he never and will never beat himself, if he dare to claim that than he just deceive himself! We human being naturally beat ourselves at the time when something make us happy or sad.

We all goes to the conference, meeting, party and other occasions when the time come to cheer someone for what he has done we start clapping. Some people will clap so much that their hands become red, but here there is no one to protest that we are hurting ourselves. Not only is there no one to protest but we join other people by beating ourselves with our hands.

Also when we hear surprise or sad news we hit ourselves on the forehead, on our chest or any place in our body. You can see this behavior to all human beings it does discriminate between Sunni, Shia, Christians, Jews or any one. Again we do not hear condemnation from those who accuse the Shia of beating themselves for the sake of Imam Hussain! Take the example from the Bible you see how it is the human nature:

The most explicit proof of self inflicted injury comes Owais Qarni, the great Muslim Sahaba, praised by both Shia as well as Sunni erudites, had an immense love for the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). When the news reached him in Yemen that two teeth of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) were broken in the battle of Ohad, he extracted all his teeth. When the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) got the news in Medina that Owais had struck down all his teeth, he (s.a.w) exclaimed, “Indeed Owais is our devoted friend.”

This event can be found written in ‘Tazkeratul Aulia’ by Sheikh Fariddun Attar, also ‘Ihsanul Uyun’ commonly known as ‘Seerate Halbia’ vol II, page 295.

We should point out that breaking one’s teeth is a thousand times more painful than the beating of one’s chest for a few hours. It is even more extreme than breast beating with chains or knives (Zanjir) because those who have suffered from tooth ache will understand the immense pain that circulates in the mouth and head. Compare the removal of a tooth to the forced removal of a full set of teeth without the benefit of modern day anaesthetic and instruments the pain must have been unbearable. This was clearly an act of great courage.

It is quite clear for the holding mourning of Imam Hussain (a.s) by means of beating the chest or Zanjir is to give Physical expression of sympathy for the grief that befall Imam Hussain (a.s) and it expresses nothing but love and loyalty.

Zaynab[sa] was the first person who hit her forehead to a bar inside the carriage she was in, causing considerable bleeding, when the head of al-Hussain (AS) was being paraded in Kufa. – Bihaar al-Anwaar; volume 45, page 114

Are we really losing the Message of Imam Hussain(AS) performing by these rituals? People opposed to the mourning rituals will make comments like: “Instead of telling the world that Human Rights, Truth, Justice, Integrity is what Imam Husayn stood for we are shown as barbarians who cut the heads of their babies”

The message of Imam Hussain(AS) is strong!! As promised by the Prophet (S), it will remain intact till the day of Judgement!! To say that the message of Imam Hussain(AS) is lost is ludicrous as it goes against the traditions of the Prophet(S).

On the birth of Imam Hussain(AS), when Angel Gabriel informed that this child would be one day be martyred, Lady Fatima(AS) wept and asked the Prophet(PBUMHF) who will be there to mourn for him? , The Prophet(PBUMHF) assured her that group of people shall arise and will mourn her child till the day of Judgement. No where did he state that Shias shall indulge in Haram acts, when they will mourn for Imam Hussain(AS).

Had the message really been lost, we would have been seeing a very different Islam today Islam is alive today because of their sacrifice, therefore on what basis do you state that the Imam Hussain(AS) values and teachings are lost. If this was the case then the ISLAM that we would be seeing today would not have been in the original form.

Zaynab[sa] was the first person who hit her forehead to a bar inside the carriage she was in, causing considerable bleeding, when the head of al-Hussain (AS) was being paraded in Kufa. This is one evidence that the shedding of blood is permissible; whether from the head or from the back etc. The infallible Imam Zayn-el-’Aabidin (AS) used to address Lady Zaynab al-Kubra (AS) by saying to her “You are al-Hamdu-Lillah an untaught scholar” – “Anti al-Hamdu-Lillah ‘Alimah Ghayr Mu’allimah” Bihaar al-Anwaar; volume 45, page 114, Jalaa’ al-‘Oyun; volume 2, page 238, Zaynab al-Kubra; page 112, Asraar al-Shahadah; page 474, Al-Muntakhab; volume 2, page 478, Nusrat-ul-Madhlum; page 18.

Thus the act of self-flagellation is nothing more than the believer trying to feel as his Master felt and more, realising he cannot be at Karbala the anguish this causes him – the anguish of separation – the helplessness creates this phenomenon of self-flagellation. The shedding of blood is a message to Imam Hussain and to the world, that if we were present with Aqa Hussain at Kerbala, we would not refrain from shedding our blood for the Holy Imam and Islam.

The symbolism of the spilling of blood by the devotee, his own blood, is thus symbolic of the very nature of Karbala and brings that event, the supreme sacrifice, to the fore, a sacrifice that for which the lamb was sacrificed instead of his son by a knife by Ibrahim Khalilullah. And what, if Mohammad (saws)’s blood is spilt will man not spill his own blood? And even then the spilling of the blood has a deeper, more personal reason – the heart of worship is love, and here we find love of ahl-ul-bait.

Bida: Innovation in Islam

Bid’ah is a very common word used in Saudi Arabia, the center of wahabism. Anything which is new to religion is bada to them. As a matter of fact, most sunnis themselves do not know the exact meaning of bidah, or innovation.

According to the sunnis, a Bid’ah is that innovation which came into practice after the blessed age of the Prophet be it worldly or religious. Things which were not present at the time of Rasool and were brought in the religion later on is innovation.

If this is the case, then Construction of Madressas is innovation, Dividing the Quran into thirty parts and printing the Holy Book and other religious books in the press is bida, The compilation of I’lm-e-Hadith and Fiqh is bida and to put down the Holy verses of the Quran in paper form is innovation.

The Hadith: “Whosoever invents a new thing in our religion is rejected” means that whoever innovates a new belief or whoever innovates a new action which is in contradiction with the Quran and Sunnah will be rejected. This is the true definition of Innovation according to Shiaism. Bidah is divided into 2 parts.

Bid’ah-e-Hasana (praiseworthy innovation) is that action which does not contradict with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah and was brought into practice after the time of the Holy Prophet for example, to construct religious institutions, to print the Holy Quran in the press, to hold gatherings of Meelad, to hold Majalis-e-Hussain etc. Bid’ah-e-Hasana is not only permissable (Ja’iz) but at times it can be appreciable (Mustahab) and even essential (Waajib).

Bid’ah-e-Sai’iyya (offensive innovation) is that action which was not in practice in the blessed age of the Holy Prophet and which contradicts with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah, for example, praying Tarawih in congregation (Discussed Later On). Bid’ah-e-Sai’iyya can be Makruh Tanzhi or Makruh Tahrimi or even Haraam. It is Bidah e Saiyya which takes the innovator outside the boundaries of Islam.

Hizb at Tahir states: “… As for the appointment of the six people by ‘Umar, it was a nomination to them by him upon the request of the Muslims. Then ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Auf consulted the Muslims about whom they wanted from the six people. The majority wanted ‘Ali if he adhered to the practices of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, otherwise they wanted ‘Uthman. When ‘Ali rejected to adhere to the practices (/Sunnah/Bidah) of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Auf gave the pledge to ‘Uthman and the people gave their pledge ……” – Tareekh Abu Fida Volume 1 page 166 Dhikr Maqaathil Umar – Tareekh Tabari Volume 5 page 2793 Dhikr Sunnat Chapter 23

Khilafat has always been the most important issue in Islam. What made Imam Ali Reject it? What was wrong in following the previous to Caliphs? Let us take some hadith from the sunni sahihs.

Allah has told very clearly in “Sura Talaq”, Al-Qur’an Surah 65, Ayah 1-2 (Translation by Yusuf Ali), the way of giving divorce:

O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed periods, and count (accurately), their prescribed periods: And fear Allah your Lord: and turn them not out of their houses, nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case they are guilty of some open lewdness, those are limits set by Allah: and any who transgresses the limits of Allah, does verily wrong his (own) soul: thou knowest not if perchance Allah will bring about thereafter some new situation. Thus when they fulfil their term appointed, either take them back on equitable terms or part with them on equitable terms; and take for witness two persons from among you, endued with justice, and establish the evidence (as) before Allah. Such is the admonition given to him who believes in Allah and the Last Day. And for those who fear Allah, He (ever) prepares a way out,”

Umar innovated and changed the ruling of Rasool/Allah by treating three pronounced divorces at the same time one Pronounced Divorce where Allah’s law is different. No one has the authority to change what Allah and his Rasool have decided upon. Who gave Umer such a right?

Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3491: Ibn ‘Abbas (Allah be pleased with them) reported that the (pronouncement) of three divorces during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and that of Abu Bakr and two years of the caliphate of Umar (Allah be pleased with him) (was treated) as one. But Umar b. Khattab (Allah be pleased with him) said: Verily the people have begun to hasten in the matter in which they are required to observe respite. So if we had imposed this upon them, and he imposed it upon them.

Sahih Muslim, Book 009, Number 3493: Abu al-Sahba’ said to Ibn ‘Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of ‘Umar (Allah be pleased with him) people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).

Qur’an makes it Obligatory to take 2 persons as witness when one wants to give Talaq/divorce. Umar, by imposing the law of pronouncement of three divorces at same place and same time, also abandoned the rule of taking witnesses. (According to Shia Fiqh, divorce can only take place in the presence of two witnesses).

Umar innovated Tarawih as well. And remember, we are followers of Allah, His Rasool, The Quran and AhleBait, not Umer.

Prophet Muhammad offered (and people joined behind him for 3 nights) night prayer (i.e. Tahajjud prayer which is offered after midnight). So, what is known as Tarawih nowadays (i.e. 20 or 8 rakat prayer after Isha prayer), had never been a Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. Infact, the prophet gave clear orders that non-compulsory prayers should be offered individually in the homes. But contrary to the orders of Rasool Allah [saww] Umar collected the people in mosque, and started offering non-compulsory congregational prayer in congregation.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 134: Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Allah’s Apostle made a small room (with a palm leaf mat). Allah’s Apostle came out (of his house) and prayed in it. Some men came and joined him in his prayer. Then again the next night they came for the prayer, but Allah’s Apostle delayed and did not come out to them. So they raised their voices and knocked the door with small stones (to draw his attention). He came out to them in a state of ANGER, saying, “You are still insisting (on your deed, i.e. Tarawih prayer in the mosque) that I thought that this prayer (Tarawih) might become obligatory on you. So you people, offer this prayer at your homes, for the best prayer of a person is the one which he offers at home, except the compulsory (congregational) prayer.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 393: Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: The Prophet took a room made of date palm leaves mats in the mosque. Allah’s Apostle prayed in it for a few nights till the people gathered (to pray the night prayer (Tarawih) (behind him.) Then on the 4th night the people did not hear his voice and they thought he had slept, so some of them started humming in order that he might come out. The Prophet then said, “You continued doing what I saw you doing till I was afraid that this (Tarawih prayer) might be enjoined on you, and if it were enjoined on you, you would not continue performing it. Therefore, O people! Perform your prayers at your homes, for the best prayer of a person is what is performed at his home except the compulsory congregational prayer.”

So, it is found in Sunni history and Authentic Shia reports that Rasool ordered The prayers to be prayed alone, not in a congregation. Let us now have a look what Umer did.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 32, Number 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(Tahajjut). (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night.”

Clear innovation, and that too against the likeness of Prophet Muhammad. I ask the followers of Umer, do you love the Prophet or not? If yes, then why do you do which he disliked? Why are you following the Sunnah of Umer?

Mawatta of Malik, Book 3, Number 3.1.8: Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the muadhdhin came to Umar ibn al-Khattab to call him to the subh prayer and found him sleeping, so he said, “Prayer is better than sleep,” and Umar ordered him to put that in the adhan for subh.

Can you show from the times of Prophet Muhammad, or even Abu Bakr, if such a thing was found in the adhan?? The list does not end here. Under the topics of Muta, you can find that Umer forbade Muta, Forbade Tayammum, Forbade Khums etc.

Let us now look at the innovations of other Companions.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 20, Number 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. – Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 20, Number 190

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 20, Number 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.”  – Sahih Muslim, Book 004, Number 1460

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 26, Number 633: Narrated ‘Aisha: We set out with Allah’s Apostles (to Makka) 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. – Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 26, Number 631, 636 and 639

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 26, Number 640: Narrated Said bin Al-Musaiyab: ‘Ali and ‘Uthman differed regarding Hajj-at-Tamattu’ while they were at ‘Usfan (a familiar place near Makka). ‘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. – Sahih Muslim, Book 007, Number 2816

Sahih Bukhari, Book 007, Number 2830: ‘Imran b. Hussain (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We performed Tamattu’ (Hajj and ‘Umra combining together) in the company of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and nothing was revealed in the Qur’an (concerning the abrogation of this practice), and whatever a person (Hadhrat ‘Umar) said was his personal opinion. ‘Imran b. Hussain narrated this hadith (in these words also):” Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) performed Hajj Tamattu’ and we also performed it along with him.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 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.’ “

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 13, Number 38: Narrated As-Sa’ib bin Yazid I : ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan introduced the second Adhan on Fridays when the number of the people in the mosque increased. Previously the Adhan on Fridays used to be pronounced only after the Imam had taken his seat (on the pulpit).

Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, “Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognise 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.” – Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 8.584 – Sahih Muslim, part 15, pp 53-54

I think these sunni hadith are self explanatory. I need not comment on them. If I were to publish more sunni or shia hadith regarding innovations of Umer and Uthman, I guess I would run out of webspace. So I better not. But one final word from me. Follow the Quran and Prophet Muhammad, no one else.

Demise of Prophet Muhammad

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 713: Narrated Ibn Abbas: ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab used to let Ibn Abbas sit beside him, so ‘AbdurRahman bin ‘Auf said to ‘Umar, “We have sons similar to him.” ‘Umar replied, “(I respect him) because of his status that you know.” ‘Umar then asked Ibn ‘Abbas about the meaning of this Holy Verse:– “When comes the help of Allah and the conquest of Mecca . . .” (110.1) Ibn ‘Abbas replied, “That indicated the death of Allah’s Apostle which Allah informed him of.” ‘Umar said, “I do not understand of it except what you understand.” 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.”

Thus Prophet Muhammad was a martyr, the posin of khaiber was the reason of an early demise, even if it wasn’t, as the famous saying goes, a believer doesnot die, a believer’s death is martyrdom. With the death of prophet Muhammad in Ad 630, the series of prophet hood ended and Immamate started. But there are certain events before and after the death of prophet Muhammad which are ignored by many.

Here is the extract from:
The Life and Religion of Muhammad: Hiyatul Quloob vol 2 by Allama Mommmad Baqir al-Majlisi translated by Rev. James L. Merrick, Chapter 21: Sickness, Death, and Burial of Mohammed, pp367-369. Publisher Ansariyan Publications, IRAN, 1997.

“Mohammed made Osama bin Zayd ameer of a company of hypocrites and seditious people, and commanded them to depart to Room, where Osama’s father had been slain. The object of the prophet was to free Medeenah of those opposed to the rights of Ali, till he should be established in the khalafat. He ordered Osama to proceed to Jeraf and stop there till the army should be collected, and commanded a party of Musulmans to drive the hypocrites out of the city to the camp of Osama. In the midst of these preparations the prophet fell sick of that disease by which he departed in the mercy of God.

Taking the hand of the commander of the faithful he went out to Bakeea (Jeraf was a short distance from Medeenah, of which city Bakeea appears to have been the burying place) with most of his companions, saying, the Most High has commanded me to implore pardon for the dead at Bakeea. On arriving there he said, As-salam-alaykum! O ye people of the tombs, be happy in the state in which the morning finds you, saved from the seditious that await the living, verily, calamities are coming on men, like fragments of a dark night. After imploring for a long time forgiveness for the dead at Bakeea, he turned to Ali and said, Jibraeel has every year recited the Koran to me once, but this year has done it twice, which I think is a sign that my death is near. Verily, the Most High offered me perpetual possession of the treasures of earth, or paradise: and I chose the latter, and to meet my Lord. When I die do thou cover my secrets, for whoever else looks on them will become blind.

The prophet returned to his house, and in the space of three days his sickness became severe. .. …Ayesha, having satisfied his other wives on the subject, came to the prophet and induced him by entreaties to go to her house, where his sickness became very oppressive. At the hour for morning prayers Bilal shouted the azan, but the prophet, near his departure from the world, heard it not. Ayesha then sent to her father, Abubekr, to go to the mesjid and lead the devotions of the people, and Hafsah sent the same message to Omar. As these two women were conversing about the matter before the prophet, not seeming to suppose that he understood them, he interrupted them, saying, Quit such talk; you are like the women that tried to lead Yousaf astray. Finding that contrary to his orders Abubakr and Omar were in the city with seditious designs, he was very sorrowful, and oppressed as he was with a severe disease, he rose, and leaning on Ali and Fazl-ibn-Abbas, with extreme difficulty went to the masjid, lest Abubekr or Omar should perform prayers and the people doubt who should be his successor. On arriving at the masjid he found that Abubakr, had occupied the place of the leader of prayers, and already begun the devotions with the people. The prophet with his blessed hand signed to Abubakr to remove, and he took the place, and from weakness sat down to perform prayers, which he began anew, regardless of Abubakr’s commencement.

On returning to his house Mohammed summoned Abubakr, Omar and some others, and demanded if he had not ordered them to depart with the army of Osama. They replied that he did. Abu bekr said that he went and retuned again, and Omar said that he did not go, for he did not wish to hear of the prophet’s sickness from another. Mohammed then told them to go with the army of Osama, and three times pronounced a curse on any who should disobey. His exertions produced such exhaustion that he swooned, on which the Musulmans present and his wives and children wept and lamented aloud. At length the prophet opened his blessed eyes, and said, Bring me an inkstand and a sheep’s shoulder blade, that I may write a direction which will prevent you going astray. One of the companions of the prophet rose to bring what he had ordered, but Omar said, Come back; he speaks deliriously; disease has overcome him, and the book of God is sufficient for us. However, they said to the prophet, Shall we bring what you ordered? He replied, After what I have heard from you I do not need them, but I give you a dying charge to treat my family well and not turn from them. The compiler observes that this tradition about the inkstand and the shoulder blade is mentioned in several sunni books.”

The Prophet died on 28th Safar, 11 Ah.

The house was crowded with crying people; but Fatima’s weeping was the greatest. She had lost her great father and with him went her happiness and joy; with his death came sadness and pain.

When the Muslims heard of the Prophet’s death, they rushed towards the Mosque. The people were overwhelmed and did not realize what had actually happened… They became like scattered sheep on a rainy night without their shepherd. What were they to do? Ali was busy attending to washing the Prophet’s body and could not speak to them in details.

It was undoubtedly true! He had died! Yet, Umar Ibn Al-Khattab refused to allow people to believe what had happened. He began shouting in their faces and threatening them by saying: ‘Allah’s Messenger did not die, nor will he die until his religion reigns over all other religions. He shall return to amputate the hands and legs of the men who believed in his death. I will not hear a man say: `The Messenger of Allah died save that I will cut off his head.”

Umar’s call was decisive and rebellious… he, the speaker, used the most effective method of speech to persuade his listeners to believe him… Umar had sparked hope in their hearts that the Prophet was still alive…

He put fear in the hearts of the Muslims by telling them that the Prophet would come to amputate the hands and legs of those who believed in his death. Furthermore, Umar threatened them by saying: “I will cut off the neck of anyone who says: Allah’s Messenger died.”

Fear and hope were the tools that Umar used to control the nerves of the Muslims. Because of the people’s great love for the Prophet the call to refuse accepting his death, easily found its way into their minds. Hence, no one objected to Umar and the belief that the Messenger had not died; this overtook all other news.

The Muslims lived several hours in total suspense and confusion. They were prevented from believing in the Prophet’s death until Abu Bakr returned from a nearby village.

As soon as Abu Bakr returned, he proceeded towards the prophet’s house and uncovered his face to make sure that he was actually dead. He then went to the Mosque and found Umar still stating that the Prophet had not died. Abu Bakr ordered Umar to sit down; Umar refused until he ordered him three times; yet, Umar still refused. Thus, Abu Bakr stood in another corner of the Mosque and addressed the people: “He who worships Muhammad should be informed that Muhammad has died. He who worships Allah should know that Allah is ever?living and does not die.”

Abu Bakr then recited the following verse: “Muhammad is no more than a Prophet: many were the Apostles that passed away before him. If he died or was slain, will ye then turn back your heels?”

When the Muslims heard this, they submitted to the fact… Even Umar believed that he had actually died, and as Umar himself said: “I only believed that he died after I had made sure that the verse was from the Holy Quran.”

Note: Umar shouts, swears, threatens those who say that the Messenger of Allah has actually died… But when Abu Bakr recites a verse from the Quran which Umar himself did not recognize!! the later suddenly collapses; and believes that Muhammad really died!!

How did Umar know that the Prophet will not die until his religion reigns over all other religions?!  Did he inform Umar that he will return to cut off the arms and legs of those who said he was dead?  Didn’t Umar really know that the verse recited by Abu Bakr was a Quranic verse, so that he could claim to believe in the Prophet’s death?!

Actually, by behaving in such a way, Umar was able to suspend the Muslims and hold them back for several hours until Abu Bakr returned. It was then that they (Abu Bakr and Umar immediately started the execution of their premeditated plan to seize power.

The companions along with Abu Bakr and Umer gathered at Saqeefa where as Hz Ali along with other prominent Sahaba were busy with the prophet’s funeral.
Difference Between Shias and Sunnis

Lately, all we hear about is how different Muslim sects are and how one is better to deal with than another. So-called experts, who are not Muslims, would tell us how different we are. Others would label one sect as extreme, barbaric, and fanatic when a political disagreement surfaces. We do have some differences. However, our path to salvation stems from common basic tenants.

All Muslims believe that Allah is one and that the unity of God is the most cherished belief in Islam. They also believe that Mohammed (pbuh) is his last prophet, the Qur’an is His last book for mankind, and that the final resurrection of all human beings will occur on the Day of Judgment.

The above beliefs are what make us Muslims. There are, however, disagreements between the two schools of Islam and they are in two areas:

1) The Leadership/Successors of Muslims after the Prophet (pbuh): Imam or Caliph
2) The Islamic rule where there is no specific or clear Ayah from the Qur’an or a Hadith.

The second issue has root in the first one. The Shi’a bound themselves to refer to Ahlul-Bayt for deriving the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh). They do this in conformity with the order of the Prophet reported in the authentic Sunni and Shi’a collections of traditions beside what the Qur’an attests to their perfect purity. 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) can be elected or nominated by the preceding Caliph, selected by a committee, or may attempt to gain the power through a military coup (as seen in the case of Muawiyah).

The Shi’a scholars say that a divinely appointed Imam is sinless and Allah does not grant such a position to the sinful. The Sunni scholars say that the Imam can be sinful as he is appointed by other than Allah. 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.

Why is the choosing of the Imam important? It is important because the Imam is responsible for deriving the Islamic rule where there is no clear Qur’anic statement or Hadith. One may conclude that if the Islamic rule is in question, the differences between the Sunni and Shi’a must be huge. In reality, this is not true, because unlike other religions, we have one book that has provided us with CLEAR rulings on most issues.

Fadak: The Garden

In volume 5, page 82 in “The Book of Military Campaigns” in “The Chapter of the Conquest of Khaybar”, on the authority of ‘Urwa, from ‘A’isha, al-Bukhari reports that Fatima (A.S.), the daughter of the Prophet (S.A.W.), sent someone to Abu Bakr asking for her inheritance from what Allah’s Apostle had left behind. [This included] the fay property bestowed on him by Allah, i.e., booty gained without fighting in Medina and Fadak, and from what remained of the khumus booty from [the battle of] Khaybar. On that, Abu Bakr said: “Allah’s Apostle said: ‘Our property is not inherited. Whatever we leave, is sadaqa, but the family of 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 he used to do”. So Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatima. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not speak 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”.

So we learn that after the demise of prophet, Hz Fatima went to Abu Bakr for fadak, which according to her was her right. The two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim) abridged and shortened these reports so that the truth may not be clear to the researchers. In any case, the narrations they have reported are sufficient to disclose the truth about Abu Bakr, who refuted the claim of Fatima al-Zahra, which merited her anger upon him and her shunning him unto her death (A.S.), and necessitated her burial at night in secret by her husband; and, according to her will, Abu Bakr was not being permitted by her to attend.

What al-Bukhari and Muslim altered was Fatimaís (A.S.) claim that her father, the Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.), had given her Fadak as a gift during his lifetime; and it (Fadak) was not therefore an inheritance. Even if we were to assume that Prophets do not leave inheritances, as Abu Bakr narrated from the Prophet (P), she refuted his claim and opposed him by [quoting] the text of the Qur’an which states “And Solomon inherited from David”. In any case, Fadak was not covered by this alleged hadith, since it was a gift to her and was in no way a part of inheritance.

If, it was an inheritance, prophets do have heirs. (027.015) “We gave (in the past) knowledge to David and Solomon: And they both said: “Praise be to Allah, Who has favoured us above many of his servants who believe!” (027.016) “And Solomon was David’s heir.”

As we see, the two verses talk about different things. Firstly, God tells us David and Solomon, both had knowledge. Secondly, we are informed that “AND” Solomon was David’s heir, which clearly tells us that god is speaking of 2 different things in these verses. The inheritance is not knowledge. Both of these prophets were rich kings. Thus prophets do have heirs. Can any Sunni prove that the kingdom of Sulaiman was a different one from that of David? Where did the kingdom of Sulaiman come from?

As per Abu Bakrs claim, can the Sunnis also show us if the kingdom of Sulaiman and David was divided and distributed to the poor as charity?

Lets take another odd example of Adam. Adam was the prophet of god and was the first man. If prophets do not have inheritance, then the concept of inheritance is disallowed for the whole of mankind as Adam is the father of mankind as well as a prophet and prophets do not have heirs. If Adam’s family, the only humans then could not inherit, the concept of inheritance should not exist at all. Thus this hadith is extremely illogical to agree to. Besides, Bible testifies that Simon inherited Jesus.

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 (PBUH) received inheritance from his father as follows; Abdullah Ibn Abdul Muttalib left to Umme Aiman a legacy of five dust coloured camels and a small flock of sheep, which was inherited by the Prophet of Allah. – Tabaqat Ibn Sad – Part I p39 – Siratun Nabi by Moulana Shibli Noumani, v1, p122

[2:248] And the prophet said to them: Surely the sign of His kingdom is, that there shall come to you the chest in which there is tranquillity from your Lord and residue of the relics of what the children of Musa and the children of Haroun have left, the angels bearing it; most surely there is a sign in this for those who believe.

The relics Belonged to Prophet Musa and Haroon themselves, they contained their belongings like turban etc and other relics. The children of Musa and Haroun had the possession of these relics, how? When the prophets left no inheritance?

Consequently, one finds that all historians and scholars of tafsir, as well as of hadith, relate that Fatima (A.S.) claimed that Fadak was her property and that Abu Baker refuted her, asking her to provide witnesses to support her claim. She brought ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and Umm Ayman, but Abu Bakr did not accept their testimony, considering it insufficient. Ibn Hajar admitted this in his al-Sawaíiq al-Muhriqa when he reported that Fatima claimed that the Prophet (S.A.W.) had given her Fadak as a gift but had no witness to her claim except ‘Ali and Umm Ayman. Yet their testimony did not meet the stipulated conditions to be considered as sufficient proof.

Fatima’s claim that Fadak had been given to her as a gift from the Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.), and Abu Bakr’s denial of her claim, as well as his rejecting the testimony of ‘Ali and Umm Ayman, are well known to the historians. Indeed all [of them] have mentioned this, from Ibn Taymiyya to the author of al-Sira al-Halabiyah and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziya, and others.

There is enough evidence for the conviction of Abu Bakr who knew al-Zahra and her status with Allah and His Prophet (P) more than al-Bukhari and Muslim did. Despite this, he refuted her, and did not accept her testimony or that of her husband, of whom the Prophet of Allah said: “‘Ali is with the truth, and the truth is with ‘Ali, hovering about him wherever he goes”. Thus, let us compare the testimonies of al-Bukhari and Muslim with what the bearer of the Message (S.A.W.) confirmed about the merits of his [own] flesh and blood, al-Zahra.

In his Sahih, volume 7 in “The Chapter of the Virtues of the Ahl al-bayt” Muslim reports that ‘A’isha said: “The Prophet (S.A.W.) emerged one morning wearing a cloak of black hair. Al-Hasan came and he covered him with the cloak. Then al-Husayn came, and he joined him. Then Fatima came and he brought her within. Then ‘Ali came and he covered him too. Then he recited: ‘Allah desires to cleanse you from impurities, O ahl al-bayt, and purify you completely’. Since Fatima al-Zahra was the only woman in the umma whom Allah had thus cleansed and purified from every sin and disobedience, I wonder who was Abu Bakr to reject her testimony and ask her for witnesses?

If Fatima al-Zahra (A.S.), is the leader of the believing women, as is affirmed by the Prophet of Allah, and yet Abu Bakr denies her claim to Fadak and rejects her testimony, then what testimony is acceptable after this, I wonder?

How then could Abu Bakr, “the truthful one” have repudiated her evidence? Don’t they allege that he attained the title “al-Siddiq” because he used to believe in everything that his companion Muhammad said to him? Why did he not believe him regarding what he said of own “part”, al-Zahra? Or was it that the issue pertained not so much to Fadak, charity and the gifts as it pertained to the Caliphate, which was the right of ‘Ali, the husband of Fatima? His denial of Fatima and her husband, who bore witness on her behalf on the question of the gift, was by far the better choice for him because, in so doing, he closed the doors to any further claims she might make. What a monstrous plot this was, nearly enough to make the mountains disappear.

Here we have al-Bukhari as well as Muslim admitting apologetically that Abu Bakr used to believe any ordinary companion who petitioned him. But he denied Fatima, leader of the women of paradise, the one about whom Allah had affirmed [His] cleansing and [His] purifying her; and he (Abu Bakr) repudiated [the testimonies of] ‘Ali and Umm Ayman!

It is reported in volume 3 of Bukhariís Sahih, in “The Book of Testimonies”, in “The Chapter of one Ordered to Fulfill a Promise”, and, likewise, by Muslim in “The Book of Merits” under the heading: “Godís Prophet (S.A.W.) was never asked for something and he denied [the request] and his [generous] giving”, that Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah (R) said: “After the Prophet (S.A.W.) died, some property came to Abu Bakr from ‘Alaí b. Hadramiyy, and Abu Bakr said: ‘Whoever has given a loan to the Prophet (S.A.W.), or to whom he had promised anything, let him come to us’”. Jabir said: “I said: ‘The Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.) promised to give me this and this..’ and he thrice spread his hands’”. Jabir said: “And he counted five hundred [dinars], then another five hundred and another five hundred in my hands”.

Did anyone ask Abu Bakr why he believed Jabir b. ‘Abd Allahís claim that the Prophet (S.A.W.) had promised to give him this and this and this, and filled his hands three times to the sum of fifteen hundred [dinars], without asking him to produce a single corroborating witness? Was Jabir b. ‘Abd Allah more God-fearing and pious than Fatima, leader of the women of all the worlds? Even more strange than all of the above, is the fact that Abu Bakr repudiated the testimony of her husband ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, he whom Allah had cleansed from all impurity and had purified; he upon whom the invocation of blessings is an obligation for each Muslim, just as he invokes on the Prophet (S.A.W.). The Prophet made love for him [an act of] faith, hatred towards him [an act of] hypocrisy.

Imam Ali (A) proved Fatima’s infallibility using the verse of purification in his argument with Abu Bakr.

The Imam (A) said: “Abu Bakr, do you read Allah’s book?”
He answered: “yes”
Imam Ali (A) then said: “Then tell me about whom was the following verse revealed? ‘And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye Members of the Family, and make you pure and spotless.’ “Was it not revealed in regard to us, Ahlul-Bayt?”
Abu Bakr said: “Yes, it was revealed regarding you”
He (A) said: “If some men testify that Fatima, the Messenger’s daughter, committed an abomination what would you do?”
Abu Bakr said: “I would administer the legal punishment to her, just like any other Muslim woman!’
He (A) then said: “If you did so, you would be an infidel in the eyes of Allah.”
Abu Bakr said: “Why?”
Imam (A) replied: “Because you would have rejected Allah’s testimony of her purity and virtue (infallibility), and surpassed people’s testimony over it…”

Taken from Baladhuri’s Futuhul Buldan, 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).

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).

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’ . (p 48)

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 Quran 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.

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.

As mentioned in the history books, 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 (PBUH&HF).

When Uthman ibn Affan became the caliph after the death fo 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.

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). – Tabaqat, Ibn Sa’ad, vol 5 p 286-7 – Subh al Asha, vol 4 p 291

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). – at Tarikh, Yaqubi, vol 2 p 199

It was in the possesion of the three above mentioned persons untill 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). When Umar ibn Abd al Aziz became the Caliph he retured Fadak to the children of Ali. – al Awail, Abu Hilal al Askari, p 209

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. It seemed that Fadak was recaptured from the descendants of Fatima (as) after the death of al Muntasir.

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!

Fitnatul Wahab: The Menace of Wahabism

During the reign of Sultan Salim III (1204-1222 AH) many tribulations took place. One was the tribulation of the Wahhabiyyah which started in the area of al-Hijaz where they captured al-Haramayn, and prevented Muslims coming from ash-Sham and Egypt from reaching their destination to perform Pilgrimage (Hajj). Another tribulation is that of the French who controlled Egypt from 1213 A.H. until 1216 A.H. Let us here speak briefly about the two adversities, because each was mentioned in detail in the books of history and in separate treatises.

The fighting started between the Wahhabis and the Prince of Mecca, Mawlana Sharif Ghalib Ibn Bu Sa’id, who had been appointed by the honored Muslim Sultan as his ruling representative over the areas of al-Hijaz. This was in 1205 AH during the time of Sultan Salim III, the son of Sultan Mustafa III, the son of Ahmad. Previous to the outbreak of fighting, the Wahhabis began to build power and gain followers in their areas. As their territories expanded, their evil and harm increased They killed countless numbers of Muslims, legitimated confiscating their money and possessions, and captured their women. The founder of their wicked doctrine was Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab, who originated from eastern Arabia, from the tribe of Banu Tamim. He lived a long life, about one-hundred years. He was born in 1111 AH and died in 1200 AH. His history was narrated as follows:

Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab started as a student of knowledge in the city of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam: Medina al-Munawwarah. Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s father was a good, pious man among the people of knowledge as was his brother, Shaykh Sulayman. His father, his brother, and his shaykhs (teachers of religion) had the foresight Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab would innovate a great deal of deviation and misguidance, because of their observance of his sayings, actions, and inclinations concerning many issues. They used to reprimand him and warn people against him.

What Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s father, brother, and shaykhs speculated about him came true-by the Will of Allah, Ta’ala. Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab innovated deviant and misleading ways and beliefs and managed to allure some ignorant people to follow him. His deviant and misleading ways and beliefs disagreed with the sayings of the scholars of the Religion. His deviant beliefs led him to label the believers as blasphemers! He falsely claimed visiting the grave of the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and performing the tawassul by him as shirk. Additionally, he falsely claimed visiting the graves of other prophets and righteous Muslims (awliya’) and performing tawassul by them was shirk as well.

In an effort to give credibility to his innovations Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab embellished his sayings by quotations which he selected from Islamic sources, i.e., quotations which are used as proofs for many issues but not the issues which Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab was attempting to support. He brought false statements and tried to beautify them for the laymen until they followed him. He wrote treatises for them until they believed that most of the People of Tawhid were blasphemers.

Moreover, Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab called upon the princes of eastern Arabia and the people of ad-Dar’iyyah to support him. They carried his doctrine and made this endeavor a means to strengthen and expand their kingdom. They worked together to suppress the Bedouins of the deserts until they overcame them and those Bedouins followed them and became foot-soldiers for them without pay. After that, these masses started to believe that whoever does not believe in what Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab said is a blasphemer, and it is Islamically lawful (halal) to shed his blood and plunder his money.

The matter of Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab started to evidence itself in 1143 A.H. and began spreading after 1150 A.H. Subsequently, the scholars–even his brother, Shaykh Sulayman and the rest of his shaykhs– authored many treatises to refute him. But Muhammad Ibn Su’ud, the Prince of ad-Dar’iyyah in eastern Arabia, supported him and worked to spread his ideology. Ibn Su’ud was from Banu Hanifah, the people of Musaylimah al-Kadhdhab(9). When Muhammad Ibn Su’ud died, his son ‘Abdul-’Aziz Ibn Muhammad Ibn Su’ud took over the responsibility of fulfilling the vile task of spreading the Wahhabi beliefs.

Many of the shaykhs of Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab in Medina used to say, “He will be misguided, and he will misguide those for whom Allah willed the misguidance.” Things took place as per the speculation of the scholars. Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab claimed his intention behind the madhhab he invented was “to purify the Tawhid” and “repudiate the shirk.” He also claimed people had been following the shirk for six-hundred years and he revived their Religion for them!!

Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab took the verses revealed to speak about the blasphemers and applied them to the Muslims. The following examples from the Qur’an illustrate this point. Allah, ta’ala, said in Surat al-Ahqaf, Ayah 5: Who is more astray than the one who performs supplication (du’a') to [worship] other than Allah; the one other than Allah he supplicates to will not answer his du’a’.

Allah, ta’ala said in Surat Yunus, Ayah 106 : Do not perform supplication (du’a') to [worship] other than Allah; the one other than Allah you supplicate to will not benefit you and will not harm you”

The verses in the Qur’an similar to these ones are numerous. Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab gravely misinterpreted the previously cited verses and said: “The Muslim who asks help from the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, other prophets, or the righteous people (salihun), or who calls or asks any of them for intercession is like those blasphemers mentioned in the Qur’an.” According to the false claim of Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab, the Muslims who do these things are blasphemers.

He misinterpreted Quranic Verses and overlooked most of them. He used the verses out of context for his own benefit. For more than two centuries, Wahhabism has been Saudi Arabia’s dominant faith. It is an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don’t practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies. Critics say that Wahhabism’s rigidity has led it to misinterpret and distort Islam, pointing to extremists such as Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Wahhabism’s explosive growth began in the 1970s when Saudi charities started funding Wahhabi schools (madrassas) and mosques from Islamabad to Culver City, California.

Here are excerpts from Frontline’s interviews with Mai Yamani, an anthropologist who studies Saudi society; Vali Nasr, an authority on Islamic fundamentalism; Maher Hathout, spokesperson for the Islamic Center of Southern California; and Ahmed Ali, a Shi’a Muslim from Saudi Arabia.

1. A Shi’a Muslim who grew up in Saudi Arabia: The religious curriculum in Saudi Arabia teaches you that people are basically two sides: Salafis [Wahhabis], who are the winners, the chosen ones, who will go to heaven, and the rest. The rest are Muslims and Christians and Jews and others. They are either kafirs, who are deniers of God, or mushrak, putting gods next to God, or enervators, that’s the lightest one. The enervators of religion who are they call the Sunni Muslims who … for instance, celebrate Prophet Mohammed’s birthday, and do some stuff that is not accepted by Salafis. And all of these people are not accepted by Salafi as Muslims. As I said, “claimant to Islam.” And all of these people are supposed to be hated, to be persecuted, even killed. And we have several clergy — not one Salafi clergy — who have said that against the Shi’a and against the other Muslims. And they have done it in Algeria, in Afghanistan. This is the same ideology. They just have the same opportunity. They did it in Algeria and Afghanistan, and now New York.

Well, when it was a local problem, the American media did not really care much about it. But until September 11, you saw how this faith of hate, I call it, did to all of us, to New Yorkers and to the rest of the world, honestly. … Prince Nayif condemned bin Laden, and other princes… Prince Turki condemned bin Laden. They did not condemn that message. They condemned bin Laden. … Bin Laden learned this in Saudi Arabia. He didn’t learn it in the moon. That message that Bin Laden received, it still is taught in Saudi Arabia. And if bin Laden dies, and this policy or curriculum stays, we will have other bin Ladens.

Well, here, this is a book, hadif, for ninth grade. Hadif is a statement of Prophet Mohammed. This is a book that start for ninth graders. This is talking about the victory of Muslims over Jews. This is a hadif that I truly believe it’s not true, as a Muslim: “The day of judgment will not arrive until Muslims fight Jews, and Muslim will kill Jews until the Jew hides behind a tree or a stone. Then the tree and the stone will say, ‘Oh Muslim, oh, servant of God, this is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.’ Except one type of a tree, which is a Jew tree. That will not say that.” This is taught for 14-year-old boys in Saudi Arabia.

2. An Anthropologist Specializing In Saudi Society : When the Saudi government came to power in 1932, it tried to get rid of these various different groups, or ethnic groups or beliefs, and unify it all into one. Into the Wahhabi Islamic thought, They regarded it as much purer because it’s more fundamentalist, much more conservative than the people who are like in the south, the people in Mecca, who had more mystical religious trends, such as the Sufi trend, which is very mystical.

I think that the new mood, the new trend, especially after the Gulf War, has become for all these neo-Wahhabis … [is to use] Islam … as a platform for political ideas and activities, using Islam to legitimize political, economic, social behavior. These people have been brought up in a country where Islam legitimizes everything. And they have used the teachings from the religious establishment, but became more political in expressing dissent and criticism of the regime.

And it’s been exported. To Pakistan, through systems of madrassas and throughout the Islamic world. And it has been exported, yes, indeed. There’s been a politicization of Islam. You’ve said it. But bin Laden, and his, if you will, similar people, are using Islam to promote political goals.

Probably there would be a relation between an interpretation of Islam that lacks tolerance, and is a more narrow vision of the world. But particularly the problem is about the political systems that promote this type of interpretation of religion. This gives people the excuse, the platform, to go ahead and express themselves in Islamic language to suit their purpose of political ends.

3. Vali Nasr, An Aauthority On Islamic Fundamentalism: Saudi Arabia has its own particular interpretation of Islam which is very legalistic, is very austere, it’s very black-and-white. [Wahhabism is] sort of an extreme orthodoxy that historically has not been shared by a majority of Muslims, particularly nobody outside of the Arabian Peninsula. There is a connection between the fundamentalism of the Taliban and the fundamentalism of the Wahhabi. The connection has been growing very, very strong in the past 20 years, and particularly in the past ten years. The dominant school of Islam with which the Taliban associate — which is known as the Deobandi school — is very prominent in Afghanistan and also in wide areas of Pakistan. Northern India has increasingly gravitated toward Wahhabi teaching, and has very, very strong organizational ties with various Wahhabi religious leaders.

Wahhabis don’t believe in tombstones, don’t believe in images being acceptable, don’t believe in statues. They believe all of these are forms of polytheism. A majority of Muslims don’t share that degree of literal reading of religious texts or banning of these kinds of reflections. …

The Wahhabis dominate in Saudi Arabia, with also significant influence and presence in United Arab Emirates, Oman, Kuwait. The teachings are fundamentalist in the definition you have in mind. The question is who’s going to cross the line and engage in violent acts or not. So you see, recruitment into terrorist movements is small generally. There’s a big swamp out there of people. And what we’re confronting is not just flushing out Al Qaeda. The bigger headache for the U.S. government is dealing with the Muslim world as a whole, with the political ramifications of our counterattack. That’s the bigger problem.

4. A Senior Adviser To The Muslim Public Affairs Council and The Spokesperson For The Islamic Center of Southern California: Well, the word “creed” is important because the creed of Islam is the same: the belief in one God, the belief in the oneness of his message, the oneness of the human family. And the devotion to God should be expressed in human rights, good manners, and mercy, peace, justice, and freedom. No two Muslims will argue about this creed. It is documented in the Koran as the highest authority, modeled by the authentic teaching of the prophet, and the authenticity has always been subject of study and debate.

So the creed is crystal clear. But the interpretation or the way you approach life, which should be a dynamic thing, should change from time to time. When you freeze it at a certain period or at a certain interpretation, problems happen. I know that people called it Wahhabism; I don’t subscribe to the term. [Muhammed bin Abd al-Wahhab] at his time was considered a progressive person.

If you freeze things at his time — which was the eighteenth century, or the late part of the seventeenth century, I don’t remember the dates exactly — it becomes very stagnant and very literalist. And a very straitjacketed puritan approach that does not cater to the changeables and the dynamics of life. People call this Wahhabism.

Saudis, by the way, never say, “We are Wahhabis.” They say, “We are just Muslims.” But they follow the teachings, and the major booklets taught in all schools are the books of Muhammed bin Abd al-Wahhab. Anyone who’s subscribing to someone else is not very much welcomed. This is probably some of the Saudi scholars. They are playing the role of clergy; there should be no church in Islam. There should be no theological hierarchy. But they acquired that position and, of course, them and the ruling family are very close. After all, Muhammed bin Abd al-Wahhab is the one who paved the road for Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, the patriarch of the family, to conquer the rest of the [Arabian] Peninsula and to rule. So there is very great cohesiveness between the two.

And so they believe that that’s it, this is the truth. And not only that that is it, it does not change, which is very problematic. Because we know that even at the early history of Islam, as new issues emerged, new jurisprudence was created to suit the change of the time and age. That’s early on, at probably 25 years after the death of the prophet, peace be upon him.

We wanted to actually protect Islam from that very narrow tunnel-visioned look that will make it irrelevant, will marginalize Islam as one of the shaping factors of human civilization, as it has always been. Once you are irrelevant to the civilization of the time and age, you can have your own cocoon and say whatever you want. But who cares?

The Menace of Wahabbism continues today, under the names of Al-Qaeda, Taliban, Lashker-eJhangvi, Sippah-e-Sahabba and the very own Saudi Government.

Ghadeer e Khum

It is common sense that any Leader when leaving a post puts in to position an individual to succeed him and administer the affairs of the State. Failure to do so will lead to insecurity in the State, uncertainty, confusion and worse still leaves the nation to the mercy of an enemy nation that might take the opportunity and seize power over a leaderless people. Appointment of a successor is the first thing that any ‘sensible’ leader will do. That is why we believe that in accordance with the guidance of Allah (swt) revealed this verse to Rasulullah (s), to openly declare his successor to the masses who had joined him at the time of the Farewell Pilgrimage. The declaration of Ali’s wilayath was to quell the scheming / nefarious planning of the hypocrites. That is why Allah (swt) declared:

“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…” (Quran 5:67).

The question now arises that people oppsed La Illaha Illallah, as well as Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah but the quran never said that allah will protect the prophet from the people who oppose this message but Allah will protect the prophet from the people who oppose the message of Gadeer, Ali Yun Wali Allah. It was beautifully explained by Talib Johri that when La Illaha Illallah was under threat, Ali protected the prophet, when Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah was under threat, Ali protected the prophet, and when Ali Yun Walli Allah is under threat, Allah will protect. Such a bond existed between Ali and Allah. Allah knew the reactions of ummah.

This was clearly that matter that Rasulullah (s) feared that the people would oppose. With the open declaration of Ali’s Wilayath all rules / regulations were completed. Deen was completed with the appointment of a successor / a Guide to ensure that the people followed the right path.

We believe that the evidence is so clear that any rational mind will conclude that this was a declaration of Imamate. Mohib al Tabari, in his “Riyadh al Nadira”, records that the Holy Prophet (saaws) declared: “On the Day of Judgement, when the people will be brought together, no one will be able to pass the Bridge, until they have the ticket declaring Ali’s wilayat” Riyadh al Nadira, by Mohib al Tabari, Part 3, p 116

Prophet said at Gadeer about Obedience to Imam ‘Ali (as): “Whoever obeys ‘Ali, obeys me, whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, whoever disobeys ‘Ali disobeys me, whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah” – Kanz ul Ummal, hadith numbers 32973-32976 – Mustadrak al Hakim Volume 3 page 123 – Riyadh ul Nadira Volume 3 page 110

The birth, the alliance, the character of Ali, which exalted him above the rest of his countrymen, might justify his claim to the vacant throne of Arabia. The son of Abu Talib was, in his own right, the chief of the family of Hashim, and the hereditary prince or guardian of the city and temple of Mecca. The light of prophecy was extinct, but the husband of Fatima might expect the inheritance and blessing of her father: the Arabs had sometimes been patient of a female reign: and the two grandsons of the Prophet had often been fondled in his lap and shown in his pulpit, as the hope of his age, and the chief of the youth of paradise. From the first hour of his mission to the last rites of his funeral, the apostle was never forsaken by a generous friend, whom he delighted to name his brother, his vicegerent, and the faithful Aaron of a second Moses’. Gibbon abridged by W. Smith, p. 466.

“Ali was cousin-germane of Muhammad and husband of Fatima, his beloved daughter. The right of succession, in order of consanguinity, lay with Ali; and his virtues and services eminently entitled him to it. On the first burst of his generous zeal, when Islamism was a derided and persecuted faith, he had been pronounced by Muhammad his brother, his vicegerent; he had ever since been devoted to him in word and deed, and had honored the cause by his magnanimity as signally as he had vindicated it by his valor.” W. Irving

The various occasions when the Holy Prophet mentioned Hazrat All as his Successor are given below:

1. The First Declaration known as Dawat-e-Asheera
2. At the time of his flight to Medina, the Holy Prophet deputed Ali to lie in his bed
3. The Betrothal of Fatima, the beloved daughter of the Holy Prophet, to his cousin and faithful disciple was another proof of his Successor ship
4. When All returned successfully from the Tayef expedition, the Prophet on seeing him exclaimed “Allah-O-Akbar” and took him alone to his sacred apartments to have a long and confidential talk with him. His companions began to murmur, wondering why the Prophet had engaged his cousin so long in confidential conversation, not allowing others to interfere. Hearing this, the Prophet said, that God himself had inspired Ali with Divine Secrets, and that it was for this reason that he was engaged in confidential discourse so long.
5. The Purge of the Symbols from the Walls of the Kaaba was significant in that the Holy Prophet made Ali his partner in their effacement. The Prophet’s move in making Ali stand on his shoulders with the seal of prophet-hood under his feet, was intended to convey to the people around and to show the world that he had designated Ali as his partner and Successor in the very House of God.
6. Announcement of Sura Bara’at: The Prophet had received a revelation forbidding the unrighteous to perform the pilgrimage after this year (9 A.H.), as contained in the opening verses of Sura IX of the Quran. He therefore deputed Abubakr to proceed on pilgrimage to Mecca in order to announce the revelation to the pilgrims. Shortly after the departure of Abubakr, the Prophet received command from God, and in obedience thereto, he dispatched Ali on his swiftest camel, the Al- Ghadzba, with instructions to overtake the ‘caravan and to take back the book containing the verses from Abubakr, and to proceed himself with it, to announce it to the pilgrims at Mecca. Ali overtook the caravan at Araj, and taking the book from Abubakr, proceeded to Mecca. Abubakr returned to Medina dejected, not knowing what had made the Prophet change his mind. Upon asking the Prophet, he was informed that he had a revelation to the effect (according to Hishami) that none should deliver the revelation to the people but he himself or a man of his family, or (according to Tirmizhi and Nasai) that none should deliver it to the people but himself or Ali.

7.The Final declaration at Ghadir-E-Khum confirmed finally what had been formerly pointed out time and again. Whilst returning from the final Pilgrimage, when the Holy Prophet arrived at Ghadir-E-Khum, suddenly the signs of a revelation appeared, and the voice of Archangel Gabriel coaxed him saying:

“O thou esteemed Messenger, impart the guidance that has been revealed unto thee”, and in order to impress the urgency of the command, Gabriel went on to say:  “For if thou doeth it not, thou hast not imparted His message at all”; and again in the same breath to allay his fears and misgivings the angel added:  “God will protect thee from the evil designs of men Ch. 5 verse 67.

As the Prophet pulled up his reins, the whole entourage came to a halt. Those who had gone ahead were summoned back. The pebbles and thorns were brushed aside and a makeshift pulpit of saddles was set up. People clustered round, the Prophet bent down and lifted Ali in his hands, and showing him to the crowds on all sides of the pulpit and proclaimed.

“Mun Kunto Maulaho Fe Haaza Ali-yun Maulah” meaning “Of whomsoever I am the Master (Maula), This Ali is his Master (Maula).” So Saying the Prophet lifted his hands heavenwards and prayed “O our Lord! Love those who love Ali, despise those who will despise Ali; support those who will support Ali; reject those who will reject Ali.”

It was on this occasion that the Holy Prophet made the choice final, leaving no doubt or uncertainty in the selection of his Successor. It was a matter of prime importance that the Divine Guidance should continue after him and that the Divine Sovereignty should be exercised by the chosen ones of God, to be appointed by the Prophet.

Sunni Traditionists who mentioned the Tradition of Ghadir Khum
==============================================================
1. Mohammed 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”

Sunni Commentators of Quran who mentioned Ghadir Khum
=====================================================
1. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310), in “Tafsir al-Bayan”
2. al-Jassas (d. 370), in “Ahkam al-Quran”
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-Quran”
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”

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”

The Tradition of Ghadir Khum is parallel (mutawatir)
====================================================
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.

Anyhow there were several reasons why there was a general hate towards Imam Ali from the people contrary to the Quranic and Prophetic orders.

1. Imam Ali was the undisputed Muslim hero, the war champion, Haider e Qarar (who doesn’t run away from battles), Shah e Mardan (king of men), Sher e Yazdaan (Lion of yazdan), Kuwat e parvardigaar (strength of Almighty himself), la fata (unconquerable). He killed many pagans and infidels during various gazwas. Before conquest of Mecca, there were only 10,000 Muslims, but after the fall of Mecca, the number rose to 124,000. People who rejected Islam for 23 years converted overnight. Most of their pagan brothers, fathers, husbands, sons were killed by Imam Ali during anti-Islamic wars. They didn’t forget their loved ones and naturally hated their killer, Imam Ali.

2. Imam Ali’s excellence exceeded everyone else’s, his qualities remained unshared. Jealousy amongst the Arabs was common. Most of the sahabis of Prophet were jealous of him.

3. Imam Ali was Prophet Muhammad’s ultimate first choice in all fields. The flag carrier, cousin, son in law, war heroe, even a successor. Muslims didn’t wanted prophethood and imamat to remain in one family. They started to oppose imam Ali. It is natural too that if a student in a university is a close relative of the chancellor, and this student is preferred by all teachers, made the head of council and gains the highest marks and excels in sports (deservably), people will still doubt the ability of the student and the honesty of the chancellor considering their relationship. Same was the issue with Prophet Muhammad and Imam Ali.

“Love of Ali is a sign of purity and his hatred is wickedness”.

Imamat: The Perfection Of Deen

Finally the Prophet’s Waris (Executors) are of three types, those that possess Hikmah (Sagacity, wisdom), Ismah (Infallibility) and Qutbiyat Batiniyah (are Spiritual Pivots) they are his Ahl’ul bayt and special people”. – At-Tafhimatu l-Iahiyah Volume 2 page 14

“One should remember that there may be some that inherit one, two or three traits with the Prophets, hence Imamate is of different states, some are superior to others, this is ‘Absolute Imamate’ when an individual shares all the traits of Prophets – his Imamate is superior to all people, the only difference is that he is not a Prophet. We can say, in support of such a person that had Prophethood continued after our Prophet (s) it would have been this person”. – Taken from Munsub-e-Imamate page 42

Shibli Numani in al Faruq Volume 2 page 96 whilst discussing the topic of Imamate and Jihad states: “The position of Imamate is in fact the mirror image of the Prophet, an Imams nature is like that of Prophets”.

Both of these renowned Hanafi scholars had said that Imamate was like Prophethood, and the Imam shared characteristics with Prophets, with the exception that he (The Imam) is NOT a Prophet.

Compare these comments to the Shi’a position as vouched for by Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi in Haq al Yaqeen Volume 1 page 29: “The position of Imamate is like that of Prophethood”.

Can those with open minds show us the difference between the Shi’a and Sunni viewpoints on Imamate based on these comments? “Imamate is that Kingdom that is spiritual and wordly, it acts on behalf of Prophethood”.
Who appoints the Imam? Whilst there is no difference on the importance of having an Imam, the difference lies on the method of appointment. The Shi’a believe Allah appoints the Imam, Sunni’s believe this is the right of the Ummah.

For the Sunni argument we need to go no further than quote Mulla Ali Qari’s book “Sharh Fiqh Akbar”, which sets out the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa, this is what we read in the Chapter “Masala Nusbul Imamah” (Issue of appointment of the Imam):  “It is the majority opinion that there is a duty to appoint an Imam. But there is a difference, as to whether this is Allah’s duty or whether this is incumbent on the public. The belief in the eyes of Ahl’ul Sunnah and Muttazalites is that the duty to appoint an Imam is a duty of the public. In terms of hadith and logic this is a duty of the public. In accordance with this belief, there is a hadith in Sahih Muslim, narrated by Abdullah ibne Umar ‘He who dies without giving bayah to an Imam dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya’. This is why the Sahaba viewed the appointment of the Imam as so important that they preferred it to attending the Prophet’s funeral, because the Muslims need an Imam so that orders can be made on Jihad, and so that Islamic Laws can be implemented” – Taken from Sharh Fiqh Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175

Here lies the difference between the two Sects
1. Ahl’ul Sunnah believe that the Imam is appointment by the People
2. Shi’a believe that Allah (swt) and his Prophet (s) appoint the Imam

It is common sense that the Imam was just not needed after the death of Rasulullah (s) but is ‘always needed’ because failure to recognise the Imam of the Time leads to a Muslim dying the death of jahiliyya. At the same time Numani stated that the Imamate is the mirror image of Prophethood. Recognising the Imam saves a Muslim from dying as a Kaafir, and yet when we look at previous Imams from the Banu Ummayya and Abbaside era, can it really be said that recognising these Imams prevented the death of jahiliyya? Can Imams like Mu’awiya, Yazeed and Marwan etc be deemed to be the mirror image of Prophethood? Are these Imams who in Shah Ismails words shared characteristics with Prophet’s that made them ‘absolute Imams’?

Let us leave the past, what about today, which Imams recognition will prevent us from dying the death of jahiliyya? The Imam is said to be the mirror image of Prophethood, whilst the Imams are the mirror image of American-Israeli policy. And yet the duty is to have an Imam, but there are so many to choose from, and Mullah Ali Qari states in Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 178: “We are not allowed to have two Imams at any one given time, otherwise disputes shall break out”.

As Shi’a we believe that Allah (swt) knows what is best for His servants in the same way he appointed Prophet’s to guide mankind, he also appointed Imams to continue the mantle of guidance. We believe that the fallible human being is not competent enough to appoint an Imam that shall represent the Deen on a complete level. Many factors ‘influence’ appointment.

If one assesses the politics of the world we see regular change, with regards to the selection of people. People are appointed on to different positions. That can be at different levels, at a Committee level, a Council level, a Governmental level. When we choose that person, we do so having a specific expectation, a faith in that individual. Unfortunately the person elected often does not live up to expectation. You become disillusioned with that individual, he has not fulfilled the promises he made during the elections, pledges you relied on when deciding to vote for him.

Man chooses without knowledge of the unseen, he does not know what the future holds. He elects an individual via his own limited capacity, his own limitations. The person elected likewise has limitations, he has limited knowledge, and he is unaware of what will happen in the future.

When Allah (swt) selects an individual who is perfect on all accounts, his knowledge is perfect, he has blessed knowledge; Allah (swt) has endowned him with his treasures such as the Ghayb to help him. We believe that Allah (swt)’s individual is without fault he is not an Alim (learned) he is Aleem (Exalted). When man selects an individual he comes out defective, when Allah (swt) selects an individual he is masum (infallible).

The leader elected by men has weaknesses, he can make mistakes, Allah (swt)’s chosen leader faultless. The leader elected by men will seek the counsel / advice of others, they are dependent on others for help. Allah (swt)’s leader has no such worries, he is being guided by Allah (swt) alone and does not need to turn to others for assistance.

When the man made leader comes to power he is frequently subject to stern criticism by his opponents, Allah (swt)’s select individual is so pious that even his enemies are unable to pick any fault in him.

People will also take in to account factors such as relationship to the election candidate, they might have some tribal / familial loyalty which forces them to vote in a particular way. On the other hand, when Allah (swt) chooses a leader he does so without considering such factors, neither does he have a family or tribal loyalty, he will not be swayed in this way because as Surah Ikhlas makes clear He (swt) is: ‘Lum ya lid wa lum yu lad’ (‘Neither is he begotten nor has been begotten’)

When man makes his selection he looks at his own problems / situation and he asks himself ‘how will my voting this individual benefit me/my family, my business’. Mans’ selection is based on self interest. Allah (swt) has no such self-interest; his concern is for the welfare of the Ummah and and individual who will benefit the entire community and not just a class of individuals.

And by the Shi’a believing that the Imams are infallible how does that make them Kaafir? They will no doubt proclaim that isma (infallibility) is a right bestowed only on Prophets. What they fail to inform the people is there 100% conviction in the authenticity of Sahih al Bukhari means that they cannot even prove the isma of Rasulullah (s). Isma means aloof from sin, and in Shi’a aqeedah it is deemed to be a right, that was bestowed on Allah (swt)’s Prophet’s and after them on the Imams from Ahl’ul Bayt (as).

From a logical point we argue that the Imam is that individual that is occupying the position of Rasulullah (s); he is the guide over the nation and hence in the same way the Prophet (s) was masum so are his Imams who have been entrused the duty to guide mankind. How can the people have failth in an Imam that is capable of making mistakes, whose character is one that does not reflect the seat that he occupies? How can a man capable of mistakes ensure the smooth running of the Islamic State, free from incorrect edicts, rulings etc? This could naturally lead to disastarous consequences and we believe that this would go against the Justice of Allah (swt). Hence we argue that the Imam as the legitimate leader at the helm of the State has to be masum, since he shall rule solely by the rule of law, he shall be untouched by personal views, bribery, corruption and his goal shall be one, that of serving Allah (swt).

Like the Shi’a viewpoint leading Ulema of Ahl’ul Sunnah have also vouched for the fact that isma (infallibility) can be bestowed on non Prophets.

Al Muhaddith Shah Waliyullah Dehlavi states in At-Tafhimatu l-Iahiyah Volume 2 page 21: “No one doubts that truthfulness, purity, piety and good deeds were present in those individuals before they were appointed as Prophets. Similarly non Prophets can also naturally posses such virtues, this is called ismah (infallibility)”.

So the question arises ‘who are these people (other than Prophet’s) that have attained the rank of infallibility. Shah Waliyullah answers this question as follows:  “Finally the Prophet’s Waris (Executors) are of three types, those that possess Hikmah (Sagacity, wisdom), Ismah (Infallibility) and Qutbiyat Batiniyah (are Spiritual Pivots) they are his Ahl’ul bayt and special people”. At-Tafhimatu l-Iahiyah Volume 2 page 14

Shah Waliyullah then proceeds to expand on the concept of ismah of the Ahl’ul bayt (as) yet further:  “And He is (Allah’s) beloved, and whatever Allah has created was created for him. And when ‘ismah is completed, all his actions become haqq (true, correct). I do not say that his actions occur according to the haqq: but (I say that) his actions are the haqq (personified); rather, the haqq is a thing which is reflected from those actions as the rays are (reflected) from the sun. And the messenger of Allah has pointed to this rank when he prayed to Allah Ta’ala about ‘Ali, saying: “O Allah! turn the haqq with him wherever he (‘Ali) turns”; and he did not say: Turn him (‘Ali) wherever the haqq turns.” – At-Tafhimatu l-Iahiyah Volume 2 page 22

As his (s) executors, the Imams from the Ahl’ul bayt inheritred the knowledge and wisdom of Rasulullah (s). After Rasulullah (s) Imam ‘Ali (as) was the yardstick of truth. Shah Waliyullah was an open advocate of the ismah of the Ahl’ul bayt (as) that Minhajj al Nasibi have taken issue with the Shia on. His student Mullah Muhammad Moeen Sindhi expanded on this yet further in his discussion on the verse of purity (33:33): “Whoever has the slightest intergrity in him cannot doubt that the hadith and verse refers to the 12 Imams and Leader of Women of Paradise Sayyida Fatima Zahra. There exists no doubt of their infallibility, they are free from sin, in the same way that Imam Mahdi (who is from among them) is Masum – for there are hadith where we are told that he shall tread the path of Rasulullah (s), similarly Shaykh Akbar elaborated on this, as we cited in response to a previous question”. – Dhurasthul Bheeb pages 208-209

We the Shi’a believe that our Imams as the legitmate guides appointed by Allah (swt) have been bestowed with the virtue of infallibility, that ensures they always tread the path of righteousness. Our belief has been vouched for by leading Sunni Ulema, who have made it clear that Ismah is NOT the exclusive right of Prophets. If this aqeedah is kufr then perhaps Minhajj al Nasibi would be so kind as to offer their views on Shah Ismail Shaheed, Shah Waliyullah, Fakhraddin Razi, Shaykh Hasan Ali and Shaykh Akarm. It is only when they get their own house in order and issue verdicts on these individuals who share their aqeedah, that they can then look to the views held outside.

The AhleSunnah have sought to intentionally mislead the facts as a means of issuing takfeer on the followers of the Ahl’ul bayt (as). When we are talking about superiority it is with regards to their role in protecting the Din al Islam. Previous Prophets brought a part of the Deen that was completed by Prophet Muhammad (saaws). These Imams are the Imams of the completed Deen the Imams of the Final Messenger hence their role in the protection of the deen is far greater than that of previous Prophets, they are the Imams of the complete Deen al Islam, hence their more superior rank. That is why Khomeini had stated “our Imams occupy a station unattainable by either an angel or a major Prophet”. The word ‘station’ is the key word here, the position / role that they hold at that particular time.

Imam Mahdi (as)’s station shall be superior to that of Prophet Isa. The superior station of Imamate is even acknowledged by Sunni Ulema. Hadith confirm that Prophet Isa (as) will pray Salat BEHIND Imam Mahdi (as) – why? Because he is representing the complete Deen whilst Isa (as) only brought a part of it.

We the Shi’a believe that Rasulullah (s) and the Imams of Ahl’ul bayt (as) as the Chosen of Allah (swt) have been given the Keys of Allah (swt). One such key is the power of ghayb. This does NOT in any way mean that Allah (swt) has retired and left administration of the Universe to them (Allah Forbid), they have been given the knowledge such as Ghayb to the extent that they need to do so as to carry out their duties. No Sunni or Shi’a worships anyone other than Allah (swt), we deem our Imams to be the Faithful Servants of Allah (swt) selected by Allah (swt) to guide the people to the right path.

We believe that Allah (swt) let the Prophet and Imams know whatever they needed to know. It is by the will of Allah (swt) he gives it to them, they don’t possess it exclusively!

We read: “He possesses the Ghayb and He does not discloses His Ghayb to anyone except to such a Messenger as He is well-pleased with.” (72:26-27)
Imams: The Holy Twelve

The Khalifatullah is Allah’s representative on Earth. His existence is a consequence of the Mercy of Allah to mankind. It is a component of the Shia creed to believe in the Justice of Allah. Thus Allah acts with justice, and in this capacity He who is most Just and has commanded mankind to address Him as the Most Merciful has ordained that man will be guided by His rightful authority on Earth, the Khalifatullah appointed by Allah for else man would deviate from the right path. He who is most Beneficient states in Sura 75, verse 36: “Does man think that he is to be left aimless?” The context of this ayat and its grammatical sense render the above translation as the most appropriate.

In man’s examination in this world, and in his quest for seeking closeness to the Reality of Allah, it is the Khalifatullah who guides man to Allah. Though Allah is closer to his slave than his jugular vein and the relationship between Allah and his creations is also direct, the Khalifatullah can bring the slave closer to Allah and to the path ordained by Allah, both as a guide as well as an intercessor. The Khalifatullah thus represents Allah’s authority on Earth and guides man to the straight path, the sirat al-mustaqim of Sura al Hamdh, the only Sura compulsorily recited in the obligatory prayer. He is the Imam, another word that also denotes a man of authority among men, a title that as used by the Shia incorporates the role of the Khalifatullah.

This authority is comprehensive, for Allah has authority over all aspects of our lives. The existence of the Khalifatullah or the Imam is thus rational for those who believe that Allah is Just and is Merciful. His existence can be sensed from the intellectual reasoning of even those opposed to the Shia path and who do not believe that Allah appoints the Khalifa, Abul A’la Mawdoodi writing that “Khalifa, viceregent, is one who exercises the delegated powers on behalf of the supreme authority…”

The Qur’an states very directly that the Khalifa is appointed by Allah and not by man, for Allah states Himself in Sura Noor, verse 55, that: “Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good deeds that He will certainly appoint them Khalifas as he appointed Khalifas those before him.”

Many copies of the Qur’an compiled in English by translators who do not follow the Khalifas appointed by Allah will specifically use an alternative word to describe the word Khalifa in this context, when there is no grammatical justification for this, for the Arabic states Khalifa and this word is readily translated into English as khalifa or caliph, an English word.

Furthermore, Allah states in the above Sura that He will appoint those who have faith and do good deeds to the position of the Khalifatullah, the hallmark of faith being patience, as shall be proved later, and these virtues are exemplified by the Twelve Imams of the Shia to the extent that they alone fulfilled the requirements to be the Khalifas of Allah from all men of their age.

The role of the Khalifatullah is guidance to the sirat al mustaqim, and in every age, for every moment of time, there exists the divine guide, for Allah states in Sura 13, verse 7 that: “And there is a guide for every people.”

This guidance is different to Prophethood, for the Prophethood has ended, and the ayat specifies that the guide is living, guiding to the way of the Prophets, whereas with Prophethood Allah uses the past tense which is not the case with the guide, as in Sura 35, verse 24, where the Prophets are spoken of, “There is not a nation but a warner has passed among them.”

Since the death of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (saws) there have been no prophets nor shall there be any. Yet Imamat continues, as it has continued since Adam (as) the first Imam such that should there be left two men on Earth one would be the Imam, such is the powerful Justice and Mercy of Allah. At this point it is possible to become confused, so there is need for some clarification of what it is that we will speak of.

The next question that must be asked is where the Khalifatullahs are found. Allah himself provides the answer most directly. Since Imamat is a consequence of Allah’s Mercy and Justice, it is obvious that the first Khalifatullah would be the first man in material Creation, just as the last Khalifatullah would be the last man living in material Creation, which is also a belief of the Shia. Thus we read in Sura 2, verse 30, that after creating Adam (as), Allah told his angels “Verily I intend to appoint a Khalifa in the earth.”

It is the belief of the Shia, and one that is referred to in various Sunni accounts including the history of Masudi, that this authority over mankind as the Khalifa of Allah or the Imam passed in a specific lineage down through purified sons of Adam (as) beginning with Seth (as) to Noah (as).

There is not space in this discussion to list all these Imams, save those noted in the Qur’an by the title of Khalifa. From Noah (as), it passed through his descendants, the best in each age according to the criteria of Sura Noor, verse 55, being the Imam of that age or the Khalifatullah, thus reaching Ibrahim Khalilullah (as).

These divine guides throughout all these ages illuminated the people of their time for Allah is Just and would not let his creation who was born innocent wander aimlessly, as is testified to by the Qur’anic verse quoted in the title of this article. Many of these Khalifatullahs were also wronged greatly by the people, an action that greatly angered Allah and for which Allah would punish them by removing the Imam from them and giving His favour to another people. And it is here, with Ibrahim Khalilullah (as) that a great juncture is arrived at in the history of the Khalifatullah.

In Sura Al Baqara, verse 124, Allah says that after He tested Ibrahim Khalilullah (as), ultimately with the offering of his own son Ishamel (as) as a sacrifice, “I appoint you the Imam of mankind. Ibrahim requested that the leadership be inherited by his descendants. Allah repied, “I do not promise leadership to those (of them) who are arrogant, hardhearted, unjust and greedy.”

Thus the Khalifatullah must be, as testified to in Sura Noor, 55, a man of faith and good actions, and not any from amongst the descendants of Ibrahim (as)’s 2 sons Ishmael (as) and Ishaq (as), only those who fulfilled these qualities. In Sura Nahl, verses 120-121, Allah affirms the Imamat of Ibrahim Khalilullah again, “Verily Ibrahim was an Imam… He (Allah) chose him and He guided him towards the right path.”

And Allah states that He saved the offering of Ishmael (as), replacing him with an animal, for the greatest sacrifice, which was that of the greatest Imam, Mohammad (saws) in his giving his family, ultimately on the battlefield of Karbala.

Referring to one of the most powerful of the Khalifatullahs from the lineage of Ishaq (as), Allah states in Sura 38, verse 26, “O Dawud, verily we have you a Khalifa in the Earth.”

And with the great khalifatullah Musa (as), also from the lineage of Ishaq (as), Allah states in Sura 7, verse 142, “…and Musa said to his brother Haroon: take my place (as Khalifa – ukhlufni) among the people.”

But the Bani Israil, the lineage of Ibrahim (as) via Ishaq (as), despite many warnings from their Lord, swerved from the sirat al mustaqim despite the blessings of so many Imams among them. For example, no sooner had Musa (as) left his people than they started worshipping idols as they had done so before, and reverted to their former ways. Then after many Khalifatullahs Allah sent Isa Ibn Mariam (as), whose teachings were briefly maintained in a pure form by men such as his loyal disciple Simon (as) who was also his inheritor. Then when the people deviated from the sirat al mustaqim once again, after having received the blessing of Isa ibn Mariam (as), Allah withdrew his support of the Bani Israel and the Christians, and took the lineage of Imamat from them and gave it to the lineage from Ibrahim Khalilullah’s son Ishmael, the father of the Arabs.

The Holy Prophet Mohammad (saws) was born from the lineage of Ishmael from pure ancestors. His father’s name was Abdullah (as), meaning slave of Allah, and he was of the tribe of Hashim, who were noble people from the Quraysh. It was into this lineage that Allah affirmed the covenant of Imamat, though gave it to the good among them, as in Al Baqara, verse 124.

It was here that the Holy Prophet (saws)’s noble uncle Abu Talib (as) had a son called Ali (as) who was, like his cousin Mohammad (saws), also of this lineage, and who would be the inheritor of the Holy Prophet (saws) and of the covenant of Imamat, which would fuse through the marriage of Ali (as) to Fatima (sa) the only daughter of Mohammad (saws) to produce a lineage of 12 Holy Imams with Ali (as) the first and the rest the descendants of the Holy Prophet (saws) and Imam Ali (as). The Shia are those who follow these Khalifas of Allah and are guided to the way of the Seal of Prophets through them.

As for the Imamat of the Holy Prophet (saws), it permeates the substance of the Qur’an. Specifically, in Sura al Ahzab, verse 6 it is stated “The Prophet has authority (awla) over you more than your own selves.”

And it is authority over men that is the role of the Khalifatullah, the Imam. It was only those Prophets who were also exalted to the level of Imamat that brought Books with authority over mankind and with messages that were not only for their own family, tribe or nation like the messages of many prophets, but came additionally with the authority of the Khalifatullah that made them the leaders of mankind with authority over mankind.

Those that came for the world were by definition Imams and the Khalifas of Allah. And they were all of this lineage. This is why the Qur’an speaks directly of the prophets of Banu Israel and not of those of China or India, for it was these prophets, many of them, that were also the Imams of their time and were thus of significance to humanity as a whole. Thus the Qur’an, which is a guidance to all mankind and has authority over all mankind, notes them.

Why Allah chose this lineage was because they produced men that were capable of fulfilling the requirements of the covenant of Imamat, faith and good actions. It is also be seen that this lineage comes from the place from where all the races of mankind originated from – the Middle East – where lie buried so many of these Khalifas of Allah, from the first Adam (as) to Imam Hasan Al Askari (as), the Eleventh Imam of the Shia and the father of the present Imam (as).

And it was using the example of one of these prophets who was also an Imam that Mohammad (saws) said many times in his life, as recorded in the Sahih of Bukhari as the last Hadith listed under the section on the virtues of Ali Ibn Abu Talib (as), “Ali is to me like Haroon was to Musa.”

Haroon (as) was Musa (as)’s Brother (19:53), Vizier (20:29-36) and in his absence the Khalifa (7:142). And thus so was Ali (as).

It was on the day of Ghadhir, shortly before his own departure from this world, that the Holy Prophet drew on the words denoting his own authority as the Khalifa of Allah mentioned above in Sura Al Ahzab, verse 6, in the form of asking the believers “Do I have more right over the believers than they have over themselves?, and when the people cried “Yes O Messenger of Allah” he transferred that authority to Ali (as), with the words “Of whomsoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla (master).”

There is no mention of men being given the authority to appoint the Khalifa in the Qur’an, only abundant, clear and direct evidence for it being Allah, and this position was given to Ali (as). This fact in itself negates the lawfulness of the khilafat of Hadrath Abu Bakr, even taking aside the historical, rational and traditional context which is similarly opposed to his position.

And after Ali (as), Al Hasan (as) and Al Husain (as), the products of the union of the line of Mohammad (saws) with Ali (as), both themselves in the line of Ishmael (as), who would transfer the Mercy of their grandfather the Holy Prophet (saws) to mankind in their noble sacrifices, are thus extolled as the twofold blessing in Sura Al Hadid, Verse 28, another verse that when translated in its proper grammatical sense reads: “O believers, fear Allah and have faith in His Prophet. And you will receive a twofold blessing, and a light (noor) will be appointed for you which will guide you and by which you shall receive blessings.”

It is here in the Ahl-ul-Bait, the purified and specified members of the family of the Holy Prophet, that the lineage of the Khalifatullah continues. Of the Ahl-ul-Bait Allah says in Surah 42, verse 23: “Say (O Mohammad): I do not ask of you a wage for this except love of my kinsfolk.”

The Bible reads, “I have heard your prayer for Ishmael. I have blessed him and will make him fruitful. I will multiply his descendants; he shall be the father of twelve princes; and I will raise a great nation from him.” Genesis: 17,19-20, New English Bible

Neither are these 12 princes the 12 founders of the 12 tribes of Israel, for they were from Ishmael (as)’s brother Ishaq (as), nor were they the 12 Arabs mentioned later on in the Bible, for they were not men of authority in the way of princes. They are the 12 Khalifas of Allah that followed the Holy Prophet (saws), after whom the Ithna Ashari Shia, or Twelver Shia, are named, and whose names adorn the Mosque of their father the Holy Prophet (saws) in Madina to this day.

Thus Sahih Muslim reads, “The affairs of the people will continue to be conducted as long as they are governed by 12 men, he than added from Quraysh.” Sahih Muslim, Hadith number 4478, English translation by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui

As a final point in this discussion it is worth considering the marvellous nature of the lineage of the Khalifas of Allah and its situation in our time. We mentioned earlier how the Imamat that was conferred upon Ibrahim Khalilluah was monumental in the history of the Imamat, incepting the beginning of the divide between the Khalifatullahs descended from Ishaq (as) and later those from the lineage of Ishmael (as), the Arabs.

And it shall be Isa (as) the descendant of Ibrahim (as)’s son Ishaq (as) and Imam Mahdi (as) the descendant of Ibrahim Khalilullah’s son Ishmael (as) who shall jointly under the Imamat of the Twefth Imam (as) who is the Khalifatullah of this age, rise and destroy the Dajjal and the Sufyani, systems of kuffar and hypocrisy who will worship the Devil and man’s ego. These systems are already amongst the people of the world, and the Imam’s rising is coming rapidly closer, may Allah hasten that day. And thus the Khalifa of Allah will destroy the system of Shaitan, and victory will come to the righteous, and the blood of Imam Husain (as), the sacrifice of Mohammad (saws) who is the Seal of Prophets and the greatest Khalifatullah, will be avenged in this earthly abode by the last Khalifatullah, for as promised by the Almighty.

Vol 9, Book 89. Judgments (Ahkaam) Hadith 329. (Sahih Bukhari): Narrated By Jabir bin Samura: I heard the Prophet saying, “There will be TWELVE Muslim rulers (who will rule all the Islamic world).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, “All of them (those rulers) will be from Quraish.”

Similar hadith can also be found in:
Book 20. On Government. Hadith 4477, 4478, 4480, 4481, 4482 (Sahih Muslim)
Book 31. The Promised Deliverer. Hadith 4266, 4267 (Abu Dawud)

Mulla Ali Qari sets out who the 12 khalifas/Imams are: 1. Abu Bakr – 2. Umar – 3. Uthman – 4. Ali – 5. Mu’awiya – 6. Yazid bin Mu’awiya – 7. Abdul Malik bin Marwan – 8. Walid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan – 9. Sulayman bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan – 10. Umar bin Abdul Aziz – 11. Yazid bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan – 12. Hasham bin Abdul Malik bin Marwan;Taken from Sharra Fiqa Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 176

This was one route, now lets have a look at the other path – the path of the Ahlul Bayt e Muhammad (saww):
1. Imam Abul-Hasan Ali ibn e Abi Talib (al-Murtaza) (as)
2. Imam Abu Muhammad al-Hassan (al Mujtaba) (as)
3. Imam Abu Abdallah al-Hussain bin Ali (Sayyid al-Shuhada) (as)
4. Imam Abu Muhammad Ali bin al-Hussain (Zainul-’Abideen) (as)
5. Imam Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Ali (al-Baqir) (as)
6. Imam Abu Abdallah Ja’far bin Muhammad (al-Sadiq) (as)
7. Imam Abu Ibrahim Musa bin Ja’far (al-Kazim) (as)
8. Imam Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Musa (al-Reza) (as)
9. Imam Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Ali (Taqi al-Jawaad) (as)
10. Imam Abul-Hasan Ali bin Muhammad al-Hadi al-Naqi(as)
11. Imam Abu Muhammad al-Hasan bin Ali (al-Askari) (as)
12. Imam Abul-Qasim Muhammad bin al-Hasan (al-Mahdi) (as)

It is interesting to note that there are The Twelve Imams in the Old Testament.

Ibn Kathir says: We see the following prophecy in the Taurat which is in the hands of the Jews and the Christians: “Indeed Allah, the Exalted, has given Ibrahim (a.s.) the glad tidings of Isma’il, and he has bestowed a favour and multiplied it and placed in his progeny twelve mighty (personalities).”

And he says: Ibn Taymiyya said: “And these are the same, regarding whom the Prophet (s.a.w.s.) has given the glad tidings in the tradition of Jabir bin Samurah and stated their number; indeed this is with regard to the Imams and the Hour will not come till they last. And many of those who accepted Islam from among Jews think they are the same Imams of the Rafidi sect.” Ibn Kathir, Ta’rikh, 6:249 and 250.

The Holy Qur’an mentions in the following words the prayer of Ibrahim (a.s.). “O Our Lord! Surely I have settled a part of my offspring in a valley unproductive of fruit near Thy Sacred House, Our Lord! That they keep up prayer; therefore make the hearts of some people yearn towards them and provide them with fruits; haply they may be grateful.” (Sura Ibrahim 14 : 37)

The holy verse points to the fact that Ibrahim (a.s.) had settled some of his progeny, that is Isma’il (a.s.) in the area of Mecca and he also prayed that the Almighty Allah may bestow them with His Mercy and that they remain the medium of guidance for humanity till the end of time. The Almighty accepted his invocation by appointing Muhammad (s.a.w.s.) from his progeny, and after him his twelve successors as the leaders of humanity for the time to come.

Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (a.s.) says: “We are the remnant of progeny. And that was the prayer of Ibrahim (a.s.) regarding us.”

Infallibility

Infallibility is a quality where one is free from doing evil and sins. He can not be misguided, and will always remain on the Sirat e  Mustaqeem. He can not be misguided by Iblees, nor will he do injustice and wrong. Shias give such a quality to the Prophets, specially Prophet Muhammad, the 12 Imams and the AhleBait. This allegation is not baseless. There is concrete proof of their infallibility in the Quran and Hadith.

Firstly, I will shed some light on Surah Al-Fil.
105.001: Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the Companions of the Elephant?
105.002: Did He not make their treacherous plan go astray?
105.003: And He sent against them Flights of Birds,
105.004: Striking them with stones of baked clay.
105.005: Then did He make them like an empty field of stalks and straw, (of which the corn) has been eaten up.

We should note that Allah sent birds in order to throw stones of the elephants. Now, a bird in general has no sense, and its capability to err is far greater than humans. Err in a sense that no matter how trained an animal/bird is, it will take a lot of time to teach it something. For instance, you tell a bird to send a message to some one miles away, there is a minute chance that the bird will fulfill the task successfully. On the other hand, we see that the birds sent by allah did exactly what Allah orded them to do. They did not throw baked clay else where but only on the elephants which was the order. Thus we see that birds sent by allah did not err, how can prophets/Imams sent by Allah err?

Secondly, lets have a look at the rebellion of Iblees. The Quran Says:
[17:61] And when We said to the angels: Make obeisance to Adam; they made obeisance, but Iblis (did it not). He said: Shall I make obeisance to him whom Thou hast created of dust?
[17:62] He said: Tell me, is this he whom Thou hast honored above me? If Thou shouldst respite me to the day of resurrection, I will most certainly cause his progeny to perish except a few.[17:63] He said: Be gone! for whoever of them will follow you, then surely hell is your recompense, a full recompense:
[17:64] And beguile whomsoever of them you can with your voice, and collect against them your forces riding and on foot, and share with them in wealth and children, and hold out promises to them; and the Shaitan makes not promises to them but to deceive:
[17:65] Surely (as for) My servants, you have no authority over them; and your Lord is sufficient as a Protector.

We can see the Iblees disobeyed God and asks for a time limit till the judgment day. During this limit, Iblees says he will misguide almost all the descendents of Adam except few men. Allah confirms that his servants will not be misguided at all (Infallibles). Satan will have no authority over them. So we see that almost all of mankind will follow Iblees in some way or the other except few, who are the servants of Allah. May I ask who these servants are who will not leave the SirateMustaqeem at any cost? Who is a better servant of Allah than the Holy Prophet Muhammad himself, the 12 Imams and the AhleBait?

Thirdly, Quran testifies the purification of AhlulBayt.
Allah (SWT) says: “…Verily, verily God intendeth but to keep off from you (every kind of) uncleanness O ye the People of the House, and purify you (with) a thorough purification.”(33:33)

Ah! So there we have it. Allah (SWT) purified the Ahlul Bayt, the People of the House. Isn’t this grand? Not only did Allah (SWT) send His Book to our beloved Prophet, Muhammad (s.), but He has also blessed his house with a pure progeny.

Allah (SWT) says that He intends to keep off from you ar-rijs O ye People of the House. What is Ar-Rijs? Rijs means filth, uncleanliness, disease, abomination.

For example: “They are rijs {filthy} and their dwelling will be hell as a recompense for what they had gained.” (9:95) “But those who hearts are sick, it adds more rijs {disease} to their rijs {disease} and they die as unbelievers.” (9:125)  “Thus God places rijs {wickedness} on those who do not accept the faith.” (6:125) “Believers, wine, gambling, the stone alters and arrows (that the pagans associate with certain divine characters) are all rijs {abominable} acts associated with satanic activities. Avoid them so that you may have everlasting happiness.” (5:90)

So what this concludes is that rijs pertains to actions and faith. That disbelievers have a lot of rijs. But Allah (SWT) has intended to keep off ar-rijs from the Ahlul Bayt. AR-rijs! The fact that it has a definitely article in front, shows to the English speaking person that Allah (SWT) is saying “the filth” but with the definite article in Arabic, it is most encompassing, meaning all filth. Not just one type or another type but all types of filth.

Kalimah: The Shia Stand

Some people have said that we have added 2 more lines to the Islamic kalimah, We shall use quranic verses, since hadith is not sufficient for some. Since I don’t know exactly what is meant here by the “two lines to our kalama”, I will assume they mean “Ashhadu anna ‘Alian waliyul Allah”, which is also optionally said in adhan.

The proof is in Surat al-Maeda [5:55].
By Mir Ahmad Ali translation: “Verily, verily, your guardian is (none else but) God and His Apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe: those who establish prayer and pay the poor-rate, while they be (even) bowing down (in prayer).”

Yusuf Ali’s weaker translation: “Your (real) friends are (no less than) Allah, his apostle, and the (fellowship of) believers, those who establish regular prayers and regular charity, and they bow down humbly (in worship).”

The ayat clearly instruct Muslims to follow three entities for guidence and authority who are our awliya as well:
(1) Allah;
(2) Prophet Mohammad;
(3) Ali bin abi Talib.

Imam Ali was the one whom this holy aya was revealed about, when he was praying and gave his ring as zakat to beggar while in the state of ruku’. Consult any expanded multi-volume Sunni tafseer (commentary) for this aya and you will find that this aya was revealed in none but Ameerul Moemineen Ali bin Abi Tablib .

Hazrat Ali was the only one at the time of Prophet who paid Zakat while he was in the state of bowing (ruku’). Muslim scholars are unanimous in reporting this event. here are few sunni references which mentioned the above revelation is in the honour of Imam Ali. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38. – Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by Al-Zamakhshari, v1, p505, 649 – Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68 – Tafsir al-Bayan, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, p186, 288-289.

Therefore, the shias say “Ali Wali Allah” per Allah’s definition.

The Quran then says [5:56]: “Whoever taketh as his guardian, God and His Apostle and those who believe, verily, (he hath joined) God’s battalion; They are those that shall (always) by triumphant.”

Bukhari narrates in Volume 1, Book 12, Number 764: Narrated Rifa’a bin Rafi AzZuraqi: One day we were praying behind the Prophet. When he raised his head from bowing, he said, “Sami’a-l-lahu Liman hamida.” A man behind him said, “Rabbana walaka-l hamd hamdan Kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi” (O our Lord! All the praises are for You, many good and blessed praises). When the Prophet completed the prayer, he asked, “Who has said these words?” The man replied, “I.” The Prophet said, “I saw over thirty angels competing to write it first.” Prophet rose (from bowing) and stood straight till all the vertebrae of his spinal column came to a natural position.

Ibn Hajar says in Fath al-Bari that the hadith indicates the permissibility of initiating new expressions of dhikr in the prayer other than the ones related through hadith texts, as long as they do not contradict those conveyed by the hadith [since the above words were a mere enhancement and addendum to the known, sunna dhikr].

Besides, Ahle Sunnah themselves have 6 Kalimahs.
1) First Kalima – The Word of Purity (Tayyabah)
2) Second Kalima – The word of Testimony (Shahaadat)
3) Third Kalima – The word of Glorification (Tumjeed)
4)Fourth Kalima – The word of Unity (Tauhid)
5) Fifth Kalima – The word of Penitence (Astaghfar)
6) Sixth Kalima – The word in the disproving of Kufr (Rud-A-Kuffer)

These are the six kalimas. However you should know only the first one is necessary and the rest are just ways of expressing the beleif like shias express about Ali. Purpose of the Kalimah is to express ones belief, you testify that this is your belief. Is their any harm if Shias testify that Ali is the Wali of Allah? After all its derived from the Quran as well. And this does not make them a kaafir. Does it?

The Shia Kalimah: There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is his last prophet, Ali is the wali of Allah and the successor of prophet Muhammad.

Kerbala: The Revival Of Islam

Every artery is Farat (Euphratres), every heart is kerbala, this world needs another hussain

In 50 A.H. when Imam Hasan (A), the grandson of prophet Muhammad (S), was poisoned, the duty of Imamat became the responsibility of his younger brother Imam Husain (A). At the time, Muawiya bin Abu Sufyan, the governor of Syria and arch-enemy of the family of the Holy Prophet (S), was virtually the ruler of the whole Muslim Empire. Muawiya, who had caused the poisoning of Imam Hasan (A), continued to disregard the human rights of the people and employed gangs of criminals to terrorise them. Imam Husain (A) was not frightened by the power of Muawiya, and openly condemned him and criticised his actions in his letters, warning him against the punishment of Allah. Muawiya broke the conditions of the treaty he had signed with Imam Hasan (A) and declared his evil son Yazid as Caliph. In 60 A.H., news was conveyed to Walid, Yazid’s governor in Madina, about the death of Muawiya. At the same time, Yazid sent orders to Walid to demand the oath of allegiance (Bay’at) from Imam Husain (A). The orders stated that if Imam (A) refused, his head should be cut off and sent to Yazid in Damascus.

Walid was well aware of the position of Imam (A) and greeted him with respect and offered him a seat beside him. He then read out the letter he had received from Yazid, and when he reached the part about sending the severed head of Imam (A) if he refused to pay allegiance, he was too embarrassed to continue and handed over the letter to Imam (A) to read.

Imam (A) read it and smiled and said: “O Walid, invite the Muslims of Madina tomorrow and ask them if they say I should pay allegiance to Yazid, and then let us decide.”

Walid accepted this reply, but Marwan, the old enemy of Islam who the Holy Prophet (S) had expelled from Madina, said, “Do not let Husain out of your grip now. If the fox gets out of the four walls of your court you will not see it again. Cut off his head here and now and do not let this opportunity pass or you will not get it again.”

When Imam (A) heard these insulting words of Marwan, he put his hand on his sword and said aloud, “O enemy of Allah, will you or Walid touch my head?” On hearing the raised voice of Imam (A), the young men of Bani Hashim burst into the court room. Abbas (A), who was well known for his skill in combat, had already drawn his sword. Imam (A) managed to calm the boiling blood of his companions and averted a situation which would have certainly resulted in a blood bath. The shaken and cowardly Marwan took advantage of Imam’s (A) mercy and quickly ran away from the scene.

Imam (A) flatly refused to pay allegiance to Yazid, well knowing that giving ‘Bay’at’ to him would leave Islam and the Muslims in ruins. His famous answer to the governor of Yazid was, “A man like me can never give allegiance to a man like him.”

After this confrontation the life of Imam (A) was in danger, and with a heavy heart he began to plan to leave Madina, the city of his beloved grandfather.

When Imam (A) announced that he was leaving Madina, the people of the city were struck with grief. They could not bear the loss of their dear Imam (A) who reminded them so much of the Holy Prophet (S) in his appearance, manner and speech. Groups of people approached him asking him why he was leaving, and begging him not to go. Imam (A) explained that Yazid had demanded his allegiance and that because of his refusal, the tyrant would not hesitate to make Madina a battlefield. Imam (A) did not want bloodshed of innocent Muslims in the city of his grandfather. Therefore, he was going to Makka for pilgrimage and then he would decide what to do.

Imam (A) then visited the graves of his grandfather, his mother Bibi Fatimah (A) and his brother Imam Hasan (A). After this, he went home to make preparations for the journey. Imam Husain’s (A) sister Bibi Umme Kulthum (A) was a widow and lived with him. His other sister Bibi Zainab (A) was married to Abdullah bin Ja’far (R), and she asked her husband for permission to accompany her brother, saying that she could not live without him in the city. Abdullah, who was ill and could not travel, granted Bibi Zainab (A) his permission and told her to take their two sons, Aun and Muhammad with her so they can also serve and help Imam Husain (A). She returned to Imam (A) and prepared to leave with him. The caravan began moving and Imam Husain (A) bid farewell to the people of Madina. The people were weeping openly, wondering whether they would ever see him again.

Imam (A) arrived in Makka on 3rd Sha’baan 60 A.H. While he waited for the Haj season, he pondered about his future action. He could not have continued to live in Madina after refusing to pay Yazid the allegiance he demanded.

Had he stayed on in Madina, he would have undoubtedly been killed and his murder would cause the clash of the loyal people of Madina, especially the Hashimites, with the forces of Yazid.

This would result in the massacre of innocent people and destruction of the city of his beloved grandfather, the Holy Prophet (S). Besides if he had stayed in Madina, the world would always ask why he had not sought shelter elsewhere.

The whole empire was going through terrible times. Yazid’s grip on the people was absolute and anyone who dared to say anything against him was harshly dealt with. Yazid favoured those worthless people who flattered him, and he installed them as governors and leaders in the mosques.

The chastity of women was no longer safe, with their dignity at the mercy of Yazid’s brutal soldiers. Marriage lost its sanctity and protection to married women. If a woman was desired by men of the government, deceitful measures were adopted to force the husband to divorce his wife so that she could be made available to these shameless men.

At last, people could bear it no longer and messengers began to come to Imam (A), with written requests to come to the rescue of Islam and the Muslims. People wrote to Imam (A) saying that if he did not do something to defend the religion of Allah from getting lost and the people from going astray, they would complain about him to Allah and the Prophet (S) on the Day of Judgement.

Many of these desperate messages came from Kufa, begging Imam (A) to come to their urgent aid. When Imam (A) received these calls for help in Makka, he had to respond. However, he could not blindly accept the call from Kufa, because the people of that city were well known for their fickle and unstable character and conduct.

Therefore, he decided to send a deputy to Kufa who would write to him after having studied the sincerity of the invitation.

Imam (A) sent his cousin Muslim bin Aqeel (R) to Kufa and asked him to report from there. Muslim left for Kufa on the 14th of Ramadhan, along with his two sons and two guides.

Meanwhile, Yazid received news in Damascus that Imam (A) was in Makka for Haj. He therefore hired 30 men to disguise themselves as pilgrims and murder Imam (A). These men entered Makka with daggers under their Ehram (special white robes worn during Haj) with a view to kill Imam (A) even if he was within the boundaries of the Holy Ka’ba.

At the same time, Imam (A) received a letter from Muslim bin Aqeel (R) that it was safe for him to come to Kufa. Scores of people had assured Muslim (R) that they would help and welcome Imam Husain (AS). He decided to leave for Kufa once the Haj was over. However, he was then made aware of the presence of Yazid’s assassins in Makka.

On the eve of Haj, Imam (A) decided to change his intention to Umrah instead of Haj, and leave Makka immediately to avoid bloodshed on the sacred ground of Makka.

In response to the call of the people of Kufa, Imam (A) made his way towards that city. By that time however, Muslim was in dreadful trouble in Kufa, where after being welcomed, he was now having to fight for his very life. Although Muslim desperately tried to send a message to Imam Husain (A) to avoid Kufa at all costs, he was not successful.

In Kufa, Muslim was given a very warm reception and thousands of people swore the oath of allegiance to Imam Husain (A) at Muslim’s hands. He was impressed, and, guided by the enthusiasm and assurances of the people, he immediately wrote a letter to Imam (A) advising him to come to Kufa.

When Yazid learnt of Muslim’s arrival in Kufa and the reaction of the people, he despatched Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad as his governor to Kufa with instructions to force the people to withdraw their support of Muslim. Soon after his arrival, the new governor had managed to bribe all the leading figures of Kufa to change their allegiance. To the rest of the population a strong threat was issued. At the time of evening prayers, the following message was announced: “The Caliph Yazid will consider anyone who is found associating with Muslim bin Aqeel, the Deputy of Husain bin Ali, to be a rebel. By way of punishment, such people will be hanged, their families put to sword and their property confiscated. If anyone has extended any help to him upto now, no harm will come to him as long as the support is withdrawn immediately”.

The time for prayers came and Muslim (R) rose to lead the congregation as he had done since his arrival. When he completed his prayers, he turned back to find the whole mosque deserted, except for Hani bin Urwah (R), at whose house Muslim was a guest. The people of Kufa had all succumbed to the warning of the governor, too cowardly to make a stand against this injustice and knowing that they had effectively passed the death sentence on Muslim (R). These were the same people who had deserted Imam Ali (A) and Imam Hasan (A) in their times of need.

Both men realised that their first priority was to get a message to Imam Husain (A) and warn him to turn away from Kufa. Hani knew the town better so they decided that he should get away with the message. With a quick farewell, Hani ran out. He knew that before he left Kufa he had to do something to secure the safety of Muslim’s two little boys. He rushed home and told his wife to get the children out of the back door with instructions to leave the city.

As Hani prepared to leave, his house was surrounded by armed soldiers. Hani drew out his sword, determined not to give in easily. However, he was hopelessly outnumbered and was overpowered, chained and taken to the governor. Meanwhile, Muslim (R) left the mosque not knowing where to go. At last he rested against a doorway, tired and thirsty. The door opened and an old lady stood there.

On learning his identity she quickly pushed him in, warning him that soldiers everywhere were hunting for him. This pious lady, who’s name was Tau’a (R), told Muslim (R) to hide in her attic till it was safe to leave. Before retiring into the attic, Muslim (R) told the old lady that he had to get an urgent message to Imam Husain (A). She assured him that her son would soon return and he was a noble young man who would do his best to help.

When Tau’a’s son returned she explained the situation to him. The evil man immediately thought of the reward being offered for Muslim’s capture. He cunningly assured his mother that he would make arrangements for Muslim’s escape the next day. In the morning the traitor went and informed the governor of Muslim’s whereabouts.

When Muslim (R) heard the approach of soldiers, he knew that he had been betrayed and had to leave. He snatched a sword from the room and rushed out. The soldiers, who were expecting a meek surrender, were surprised to see Muslim (R) emerge from the house like an enraged lion. The lane outside was too narrow for the soldiers to attack him in a group and Muslim (R) could thus fight in single combat. Muslim (R) was no ordinary soldier. He had extensive experience and skill in combat and the enemies began to fall back under his attack, dying and being trampled by the hooves of the horses of their own men. The leader of the soldiers sent word to the governor that they needed more men, a request that astounded Ubaidullah. He tauntingly asked how many warriors they needed to capture a single man. When it was suggested that perhaps he would like to go and capture Muslim (R) himself, the coward backed away. Instead, he suggested that it would be better to trap Muslim by foul means.

Accordingly, a trench was dug and then disguised with straw and sticks.

As Muslim surged forwards attacking the enemy, they broke away and he unsuspectingly fell into the trench. Immediately, the cowards who had been running from him, returned to pelt him with stones.

His head pouring with blood, Muslim (R) fell unconscious. He was dragged up, chained and brought to Ubaidullah. When Muslim (R) was presented to Ubaidullah, he stood erect with dignity. He was asked for his last wish before he joined Hani (R), who had already been killed. Muslim (R) asked for a messenger to be sent to Imam Husain (A). This request surprised the governor, who expected a plea for mercy for Muslim’s sons, who had also been found and captured. In any case, he refused the request. Muslim (R) then asked for his armour to be sold and his debts in Kufa be paid with the proceeds. Agreeing to this, Ubaidullah then ordered that Muslim (R) be beheaded.

As the sword of the executioner fell on his neck, Muslim spoke his last prayer: “O Holy Imam, pardon me for I was misled. O Allah!, let him know what has happened here and not come to Kufa.”

When Imam Husain (A) left Makka for Kufa, a large group of people accompanied him. Many of these people thought that if the grandson of the Holy Prophet (S) was making a stand against Yazid, the whole Muslim world would support him and Yazid would surely be toppled. They thought that they would be able to share in the glory and war booty that would follow. Although Imam Husain (A) repeatedly warned them that they were mistaken in their thinking, the crowd persisted in travelling with him.

Imam Husain (A) continued on his journey towards Iraq until he neared Kufa. From there he wrote a letter to the people of Kufa and sent it through Qays bin Mashar Saidaawi (R). In the letter he informed the people of Kufa that he had received Muslim’s letter and that he was on his way to Kufa and would arrive soon. Qays took the letter to Kufa but was arrested outside the city and taken to the governor, Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad.

As he was led to the governor, Qays managed to tell some people where Imam Husain (A) was, and the word spread secretly amongst the loyal Kufans, many of whom managed to reach Imam (A) in Karbala.

The governor told Qays (R) that the only hope he had to save himself was to mount the pulpit and publicly abuse Imam Husain (A). Qays (R) addressed the people by first praising Alláh and then said, “O People, Husain (A) is the best of men living at present and is the son of Fatima (A) the daughter of your Prophet (S). I have been sent by him. All of you should rise and assist him.” He then cursed Ubaidullah and his father and praised Imam Ali (A). By this time, the governor had heard enough and ordered that Qays be thrown down from a high roof. Qays (R) did not survive this brutal treatment and was martyred. His broken body was left on the ground where it fell.

Meanwhile, Imam Husain (A) continued his journey towards Kufa until he reached a place called Zurud. There, he learnt about the martyrdom of Muslim (R) and Hani (R) and said: “We are from Allah and to Him we all will return.” He prayed to Allah to bless them.

At the stopping place of Uzaybul Hajanaat, Imam Husain (A) received news about Qays. When the caravan stopped at Zabala, he informed his companions of the deaths of Muslim, Hani and Qays and the state of affairs in Kufa. Thereafter, he said, “Our supporters have withdrawn their support from us. Whoever wishes to leave us and go his own way should do so.” At this time most of his companions left and very few remained. These few were his sincere followers and had not come with him for material gains. In response to the news of Imam Husain’s (A) approach, several military parties had been sent out to search the desert and stop his advance. One such party, led by a famous commander, Hur ibne Yazid ar-Riyahi, met the caravan of Imam Husain (A) on the 1st of Muharram 61 A.H.

When they met, Hur’s army was exhausted and desperately thirsty. Imam Husain (A) instructed that water from their stores be provided to Hur’s men and horses.

It was time for noon prayers. Imam Husain (A) led the Jamaat prayers and Hur’s army also prayed behind him. After the prayers were over, Imam Husain (A) addressed Hur and his companions. He reminded them that he was only there in response to their written invitations. He also explained that he was the rightful Imam and that he was one of the people mentioned in the Holy Qur’an in the verses relating to Mubahila (3:61) and Purification (33:33). He warned them of the consequences of obeying a man like Yazid, and urged them to refrain from staining their hands with the innocent blood of the family of the Holy Prophet (S).

Hur did not accept these words of advice, and although there was no fighting, he diverted the path of Imam Husain (A) away from Kufa and led him into the desert. On Thursday, 2nd of Muharram 61 A.H., they reached a place where the horse of Imam Husain (A) stopped. Although he changed horses several times, the animals would not carry him further.

Gathering the people who lived there, Imam Husain (A) asked the name of the place. Some said that it was called Naynava, others said it was also called Mariya. Imam Husain (A) asked if there was any other name. Someone said it was also known as Shattul Furaat. Then one old man came forward and said that he had heard his ancestors say that one name for this area was Karbala.

When Imam Husain (A) heard this, he smiled and thanked Allah and then said, “Surely this is the plain where my Holy Grandfather has prophesied that I, with my faithful companions shall lay slain after suffering three days of hunger and thirst. We will not move from here – we have reached our destination.”

Imam Husain (A) then ordered for his caravan to stop and tents were pitched next to the banks of the river Euphrates.

The caravan of Imam Husain (A) had arrived in Karbala and their tents were pitched next to the river Euphrates. As his companions settled down, Imam Husain (A) took his brother Abbas (A) around the barren desert and pointed out the various places where each of his comrades would fall and be slain on the Day of Ashura.

The people living in the area were from the tribe of Bani Asad. Imam Husain (A) purchased the land of Karbala from them and then gifted it back to them. He then addressed the men of Bani Asad saying, “On the tenth of this month you will see our dead bodies lying on this plain with our heads severed and taken away. Please bury us, and when our devotees come to visit our graves, treat them with honour and point out to them the places of our burial.” He then turned to the women of the tribe and said, “O virtuous ladies! If your husbands, fearing Yazid, do not bury us, then please encourage them to do so or do it yourselves.” Finally, he turned to the children of Bani Asad and said, “O innocent ones! If your parents, out of fear of the ruler, do not bury us then, by way of playing, bring some earth and throw it on our bodies to hide them.” This heartrending appeal of Imam Husain (A) made all the listeners weep.

When Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad, Yazid’s governor in Kufa, learnt that Hur had brought Imam Husain (A) and his companions to Karbala, he sent his troops to surround them. The first man to arrive in Karbala on behalf of Yazid was Amr ibne Sa’ad, who was the commander-in-chief of all the forces. He brought with him 6,000 men. After that, regiment after regiment began to pour in onto the plains of Karbala. Historians all agree that at least 33,000 of Yazid’s men gathered to fight Imam Husain (A), while some state that the figure was closer to 900,000 men. This large army was bent on the massacre of Imam Husain (A) and his companions for the sake of the rewards that Yazid had promised them. Many amongst them were the same people of Kufa who had invited Imam Husain (A) to come there in the first place.

The first act of the enemy was to order Imam Husain (A) to remove his tents from near the river. Abbas (A) objected to this demand, claiming priority of occupation and the right of the grandson of the Holy Prophet (S) to stay where he had first camped.

When the enemy threatened to march towards their tents, the lion-hearted Abbas (A) stood firm and drew out his sword shouting, “If anyone dares to advance one more step forward, he shall lay headless on the ground.” His bravery was well known and none dared to step closer. However, Imam Husain (A) called to his brother saying, “Brother Abbas, do not let the bloodshed be started by our side. When Allah is with us, it does not matter how far the river is.”

Imam Husain (A) then ordered for their camp to be moved further into the interior of the desert.

In the days that followed there were several meetings between Imam Husain (A) and Amr ibne Sa’ad. Amr kept on insisting that the only way to stop war was for Imam Husain (A) to give the oath of allegiance to Yazid. He said that once the allegiance was given, all worldly comforts would be at the disposal of Imam (A). However, Imam (A) remained firm on his stand and replied: “I shall never yield to the one who does not believe in Allah and one who defies Him, both by words and actions. I am willing to meet any calamity but will never surrender Truth to falsehood.”

On the 7th of Muharram, Amr ibne Sa’ad received orders to block all sources of supply of water to Imam Husain (A). From that day onwards, not a single drop of water was allowed to reach the camp of Imam (A). The scorching desert sent heat waves everywhere and the little children began to cry with intense thirst. Even little babies could not receive milk, because their poor mothers were themselves suffering from thirst.

The brave group of Imam Husain (A) suffered these tortures with patience as they watched the enormous army that faced them prepare for war.

On the 9th of Muharram, Shimr arrived in Karbala with orders from Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad for Amr ibne Sa’ad. The orders stated that if Imam Husain (A) did not surrender and give the oath of allegiance at once, he must be fought and killed immediately.

On receipt of these orders, Amr rallied a part of his army and marched towards the camp of Imam Husain (A). Abbas (A) advanced towards the enemy with 20 horsemen and enquired from them the reason for their sudden approach. When he was told of the ultimatum, he said that he would inform Imam Husain (A) of the position and bring back the reply.

When Abbas (A) briefed Imam Husain (A) of the situation, Imam (A) said to his brother, “Go back to them, and if possible, ask for an extension of time till tomorrow morning, so that tonight we may offer prayers to Allah, make Du’as and ask for His forgiveness”.

Amr granted them respite till the next morning with great reluctance. Now that they knew that death was inevitable the next morning, the whole camp of Imam Husain (A) readied themselves for martyrdom.

Imam Husain (A) gave a speech on the night of Ashura saying in part, “O Lord! I thank You, because You have honoured us by means of Prophethood and taught us the Qur’an, made us understand the religion and its commandments, granted us eyes, ears and hearts, kept us free from the evils of idol-worship and then enabled us to thank You for Your blessings. I am not aware of any companions more faithful and honest than my companions, and any relatives more righteous and kind than my relatives. May Allah grant you all a good reward. I think the day of our fighting with this army has arrived. I permit you all to go away, because the enemies are after me only. You are free to depart without any restriction and can take advantage of the darkness of night”.

The people who had come with the wrong intentions had already left before, and the ones who remained were perfect in their faith and loyalty. The listeners all rejected the option of abandoning Imam (A). One said, “Should we go away to live after you? We pray to Allah that the time may not come when you may be killed while we remain alive”.

Thereafter the whole camp busied itself in preparation for the events of the next day. The sound of prayers and supplications filled the air like the buzz of hundreds of bees. Some soldiers checked their weapons, while others discussed tactics of warfare that would allow them to cause the most damage to Yazid’s army. Mothers prepared their sons to lay down their lives with Imam Husain (A) in the cause of Islam.

Imam Husain (A) went around the camp talking to his men as well as his family and giving encouragement and last minute instructions. He consoled his sister Bibi Zainab (A) and urged her to remain patient in the face of the hardship that was to follow his martyrdom.

The night eventually came to an end and the morning of the day of great sacrifices arrived. After reciting the dawn prayers, Imam Husain (A) arranged his small army in readiness for the battle. Just about one hundred brave men readied themselves to face the onslaught of thousands.

The 10th of Muharram 61 A.H. is known as the day of Ashura. On this day in Karbala, the army of Yazid fought the army of Imam Husain (A). On this day the household of the Holy Prophet (S) was killed, alongside the faithful companions of Imam (A).

Imam Husain (A) and his companions had spent the entire night in prayer. In the morning Ali Akbar gave the Adhan. He resembled the Holy Prophet (S) greatly and his recital reminded the people of the early days of Islam.

After the morning prayer, Imam’s (A) followers took it in turns to come forward to address Yazid’s army. Many had relatives and friends in the enemy camp and they tried to convince them of the terrible crime they were about to commit.

Finally, Imam Husain (A) came forward himself and addressed the enemy. He introduced himself and informed them that he was a peaceful man, living quietly in Madina and not harming anyone. He asked them why they were so bent on killing the grandson of the Holy Prophet (S), in whom they all believed.

Hur bin Yazid ar-Riyahi meanwhile realised that he had committed a big sin by siding with Yazid. He went to Imam Husain (A) and begged for forgiveness.

He stood before Hussain (A), eyes cast down, and asked him, “0! could I but sacrifice myself for you, You son of the Messenger of Allah! I have been stalking you all the way. It was me who prevented you from going back (to where you came from), kept close watch on you, and roared on you in this place. I have never thought that the people would not agree to your proposition. Oh Lord! I turn to you in repentance for I frightened the hearts of Your friends, the offspring of Your Messenger.”

“Oh father of Abdullah! I seek penitence from Allah for what I did. Do you, think that He will accept it? ” Imam Husain (A) answered, “Yes, he will accept your repentance”.

Hur then addressed Yazid’s army after taking permission from Imam Husain (A).

“Oh, people of Kufa! You called on this good servant of God; when he responded you welcomed him and claimed that you do not mind getting killed to spare him. Then you changed your minds, transgressing against him with a view to killing him. You put a stranglehold on him, stretched his patience, and besieged him to prevent him from seeking a safe haven in Allah’s vast land. He became like a hostage. You denied him, members of his household, and companions access to the waters of the River Euphrates from which Jews, Christians, and fire worshippers drink, and pigs and dogs wade in. Yet Husain, his family, and companion, are dying of thirst. What misery you inherited the offspring of Mohammad (S)! May Allah not give you drink on the day of thirst.”

Seeing the result of the words of Imam Husain, Amr ibne Sa’ad, the commander of Yazid’s army, was concerned that the morale of his troops would be affected. He therefore declared that all should witness that he was casting the first arrow in battle and he shot an arrow towards Imam (A).

This was the beginning of the battle. Imam (A) had only 32 horsemen and about 72 to 110 soldiers in all. He had fortified his camp by locating it so that it was enclosed by a chain of hills on three sides. This area is known as “Haa-yer” and can be seen even today.

He pitched his tents close together and dug a ditch at the exposed rear. The ditch was filled with firewood which was set alight when the enemy attacked the camp.

After a few single combats, there was a general attack in the mid-morning. Although the enemy was repulsed. Most of the army of Imam (A) was killed. By now it was time for the Zuhr prayer. Imam (A) prayed Salatul Khawf (prayers under attack) while the battle continued.

In the afternoon, it was the turn of the family of the Holy Prophet (S), the Banu Hashim, to sacrifice themselves. Ali Akbar (A) was the first to go and within an hour, no adult male remained alive in Imam’s (A) camp except his ill son Ali Zainul Abideen (A) and himself.

The mother of Ali Asghar, Imam Husain (A)’s six month-old child, requested the Imam to ask Yazid’s army for some water as the infant had been thirsty for three days. The Imam held the child in his arms and brought him infront of Yazid’s army. Instead of providing him with water, Hurmala bin Kahil on orders of Omar bin Sa’ad, shot the baby with an arrow, killing him in the arms of his father.

After burying the baby, it was Asr time when Imam Husain (A) bid the ladies and children farewell and entered the battle-field. He gave his last speech, once more urging the enemy to consider their actions. Yazid’s army did not want to listen. They wanted to fight. The Imam met in duel with many a man, killing them all.

Thereupon Omar bin Sa’ad yelled at the crowd, “Mind! He is the son of the exterminator of the Arabs. Set upon him from every direction.” They rained him with 4,000 arrows. The soldiers cut him off his camp. Imam Husain (A) fought bravely, scattering them wherever he turned. The enemy could not stop him.

Finally, Imam (A) paused. He was dizzy with the loss of blood. He slid off his horse in a little hollow. Here the enemy found him with his head in Sajdah. The accursed Shimr committed the most terrible of crimes when he beheaded Imam (A).

Inna Lillahi wa Inna Ilayhi Raji’oon.

After the supreme sacrifice had been accepted and our Holy Imam Husain (A) had been martyred, a gloomy silence hung over the battlefield of Karbala.

Every now and then the silence would be broken by the sound of drum-beating to celebrate victory. Not content with spilling the innocent blood of Imam Husain (A) and his companions, Amr ibne Sa’ad, the commander of Yazid’s army, ordered the horses to be shod afresh and then run over the bodies of the dead Muslims. Although some people from his army objected to this gross disrespect to the dead, he managed to enforce this horrible action. Having trampled over the bodies of the martyrs, the enemy next turned their attention to the defenceless camp of Imam Husain (A).

Yazid’s soldiers marched into the camp where they subjected the grief-stricken ladies to further torment and indignity. They had expected to find luxurious articles in the tents of the family of the Holy Prophet (S), but all they found were simple items and clothes, some of which had been stitched by Bibi Fatima (A) with her own hands. The ruthless soldiers snatched away these few possessions of sentimental value. They were angry at the lack of booty, and they took the veils off the struggling ladies forcing them to expose their hair and faces. This humiliation was almost too much to bear.

Looting and Burning of the tents – Shame Ghariba (Eve of the Disposessed)
Not satisfied with this, the enemy set fire to the tents. The terrified ladies of the prophet’s family gathered their children and rushed from tent to tent, trying to escape the burning flames. One young child was seen rushing out of a tent with her clothes on fire. One of the enemy soldiers, seeing her pitiable condition came forward and put out the flames. The child looked at him, surprised at the unexpected kindness. Tearfully, the little child asked him, “O Shaikh, do me one more kindness and tell me the way to Najaf.” The soldier was very surprised at this unusual request, and replied, “Najaf is far away from here. Why do you want to know the way there?”.

The child said with heartbreaking innocence, “I want to go to the grave of my grandfather Imam Ali (A) and complain about what your people have done to us – how our men were butchered and how our ladies have been whipped. I want to tell him how the earrings were snatched from my cousin Sakina’s ears, leaving her earlobes torn and bleeding.”

Bibi Zainab (A), who had been left in charge of the camp by Imam Husain (A), was at a loss as to what to do. She went to the seriously ill Imam Ali Zainul Abideen (A). He lay unconscious on the ground after the enemy had even robbed the mattress on which he lay. She shook him urgently to ask his advice. He was burning with fever but with a great effort he replied that it was compulsory on them to save their lives and he asked her to get everyone out from the burning tents into the open.

Soon the raging fires subsided leaving only one tent standing, although it was also damaged by fire. The ladies and children salvaged whatever they could of their few belongings and huddled together in that little shelter waiting for nightfall.

The night following the day of Ashura is known as Shaam e Ghariban. It was the night when the bereaved family of Prophet Muhammad (S), exhausted by the tragic events of Ashura and after being looted by the Muslims, sat in loneliness, each thinking about the loved ones they had lost in the unjust battle on that day.

Due to the illness of Imam Ali Zainul Abideen (A), Bibi Zainab (A) realised that she would have to take care of the small group of women and children herself. She called her sister Bibi Umme Kulthum (A) to help her and they decided to count all the children to see that none had gone missing in the confusion of the fire. To her horror and dismay Bibi Zaynab (A) found that Bibi Sakina (A), the beloved daughter of Imam Husain (A), was not there.

The two ladies searched everywhere for the young girl but in vain. Finally, in desperation, Bibi Zainab (A) went to the place where the body of her brother Husain (A) lay and cried, “O my brother, Sakina, who you left in my care, is nowhere to be found. Where shall I look for her in this wilderness?” Just then, the moon came out from behind a cloud and Bibi Zainab (A) saw that little Sakina (A) lay on her father, sleeping on his chest like she always used to. She shook the child awake and said, “My child, how did you find your father’s beheaded body in this darkness?”

The little girl replied innocently, “I wanted to tell my father about what the people had done to me. I wanted to tell him how Shimr had robbed the earrings that my father had so lovingly given me. I wanted to tell him how he had ripped them from my ears leaving my earlobes torn and bleeding. I wanted to tell him how the beast had mercilessly slapped me when I cried in pain. When I was running aimlessly in the desert I thought I heard my father’s voice telling me he was here. I followed the voice and I found him lying here. I told him everything and then I felt like sleeping on his chest the way I always did, for the last time. So I kept my head on his chest and slept till you came.”

Bibi Zainab (A) took the little child’s hand and led her back to the camp where her mother Bibi Rubab waited anxiously. She had just returned the exhausted child to her mother when she noticed that a group of people were advancing towards the camp carrying flame torches. She thought that some soldiers had returned to loot them and she hurried to stop them from disturbing the children who had finally gone to sleep despite their hunger and thirst.

However, it turned out that the arrivals were a group of ladies, the wives of some of the enemy soldiers. They were led by the widow of Hur, who had joined Imam Husain’s (A) army from the enemy camp.

Hur’s widow said, “Dear lady, we have been asked to bring food and water for the children and bereaved ladies of your camp.” She continued sadly, “I am the widow of Hur who died fighting for your brother. When the soldiers of Amr ibne Sa’ad realised that all of you would perish of hunger and thirst, and that they would not be able to take you back to Yazid according to his command, they sent me to bring food and water to you.”

Bibi Zainab (A) offered her condolences at the death of Hur and apologised that they had not been able to offer him much hospitality. This remark prompted Hur’s widow to say, “My lady, I do not know how to offer you condolences, because you lost not one, but 18 members of your family.”

Bibi Zainab (A) supervised the feeding of all the children and ladies. She then took a broken sword in her hands and began going around the camp ensuring that the small group was safe from any further disturbances during that night.

On the morning of 11th Muharram, the army commander, Amr ibne Sa’ad called his officers to decide what steps they should take next. It was decided that the captives should be led through Kufa to Damascus to the court of Yazid. Amr ibne Sa’ad marched directly on to Damascus to inform Yazid about the events of Karbala, and to obtain his promised reward. He left Shimr and Khooli in charge of the captives.

With these arrangements completed, some soldiers were appointed to bind the ladies and children. They tied ropes and chains round their hands and feet. The ladies were put on camels with no saddles. The hands of some of the ladies were tied behind them and linked to the necks of the young children. Imam Ali Zainul Abideen (A) was heavily chained and made to walk on foot, despite his weakened condition. The heartless officers made the captives pass by the place where the bodies of their loved ones lay, headless and without even shrouds over them. Many of the ladies and children threw themselves down from the camels to the bodies of their dead relatives, only to be whipped by the soldiers. Even the innocent children were not spared the lashes.

Once the captives were made ready, the heads of all the martyrs were mounted on spears. Every soldier who was given a severed head was made in charge of it and marched at the front of the army. The head of Imam Husain (A) was given to Khooli, who was a hard-hearted tyrant.

Finally the caravan got underway for Kufa. The pitiful condition of the little children was such that they could not hold on to the camels due to their inexperience and the rapid pace of the march. Many children fell to the ground as a result. Despite the pleading of the mothers, the heartless soldiers would not halt the march to remount a fallen child. Today, the road from Karbala to Kufa has many graves of such children who were left to die in the hot desert.

Within a few hours, the caravan reached the outskirts of Kufa. Shimr decided to send a messenger to inform the governor, Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad, of their arrival. The messenger returned, saying that all preparations had been made, and the captives should be marched through the main streets of the town.

The people of Kufa lined the streets and looked from the balconies of their houses as the family of prophet Muhammad (S) was paraded in front of them. The announcer was saying, “O people of Kufa, we are bringing you the grand-daughters of the Prophet and other women and children of the family of Husain son of Ali. Husain, who had risen in rebellion against our Caliph Yazid, has been defeated and killed with his companions on the battlefield of Karbala. The members of his family are now being taken to the court of Yazid, to face whatever punishment he wishes to inflict upon them. People of Kufa, this is the fate that awaits all those who question the authority of Yazid, and no person who tries to rise against Yazid will be spared.”

The people heard all this in astonishment. Not long ago Kufa was the capital of Imam Ali (A), and they all remembered the kindness shown to them by him and his sons and daughters. On seeing the pitiful condition of the captives, many were crying, but none dared to raise their voice against the oppressors, in case a similar fate befell them.

Finally the caravan reached the court of the governor. When he saw the condition of the captives, he mockingly said that it seemed that some slave girls had been brought before him, and not the grand-daughters of the Holy Prophet (S). This remark made Bibi Zainab (A) lose her temper and she addressed Ubaidullah ibne Ziyad with a fiery and eloquent speech.

Bibi Zainab (A) related the status of the Holy Prophet (S) and his Holy Ahlul Bayt (A). She reminded him of the teachings of Islam about the considerations to be given to prisoners, especially women and children. She warned him about the temporary nature of his victory and the doom that he and his evil master Yazid would soon face. She began to tell the assembled people about the inhuman crimes committed against Imam Husain (A) and his companions.

As she spoke, the people were reminded of the eloquence of her father Imam Ali (A). Ubaidullah became worried at the effect the speech of Bibi Zainab (A) was having on the people. He tried to shout her down by threatening the worst possible torture if she did not stop. Undaunted by his threats, the brave lady continued and her words moved many to tears. One of the aged companions of the Holy Prophet (S), Zaid bin Arkan, who was blind, rose up and protested at the cruel treatment of the members of the family of the Holy Prophet (S).

Ubaidullah realised at once that the situation could get out of hand. The speech of Bibi Zainab (A) could cause an uprising against him if he did not act quickly. He ordered his men to get rid of the companion of the Holy Prophet (S) and told Shimr and Khooli to get the captives out of Kufa immediately.

Arrangements were made for departure straight away, and Shimr chose the quietest route to Damascus so that he would not face any surprise attacks from anyone wishing to avenge the martyrs of Karbala. The caravan of the captive families of Imam Husain (A) and his companions was led by Shimr through the deserts of Iraq and Syria, from Kufa to Damascus (Sham).

Throughout the journey people noted with wonder that the lips of the cut head of Imam Husain (A) kept on moving, reciting verses from the Holy Qur’an. Clearly heard was the following verse: Do you think that the people of the Cave and of the Inscription were of Our wonderful miracles? Surae Kahf, 18:9

By reciting this verse, the Holy Imam (A) was calling the attention of the people to the next verses of this chapter of the Holy Qur’an (18 : 9-14), where Allah relates how He increased the guidance and strengthened the hearts of the Companions of the Cave, when they stood up against the evil- doers. Even in death, our Holy Imam (A) was pointing out the similarity of the message of his stand in Karbala to the other event from ancient history.

The captives finally reached Damascus. On reaching the city gates, the caravan was halted and Yazid was informed of their arrival and his permission was sought to bring the captives into his court.

By the time the captive ladies and children of prophet Muhammad’s family reached Damascus, they were in a terrible state. Their bodies were covered in dust, their clothes were in rags and blood oozed from the wounds and cuts inflicted by the tight ropes and whips.

As the caravan was paraded through the streets, majority of the people of Damascus hurled stones at them. Some were moved by their pitiable condition. They could not believe that these ladies, who were covering their faces with their hair, were actually from the family of the Holy Prophet (S). They wondered how Yazid had dared to humiliate these holy people in such a manner.

Finally, the prisoners arrived at the court of Yazid. After a wait of one full hour under the scorching sun, the orders came from Yazid to admit the captives into the court. As they entered they saw that Yazid sat on an elevated gold throne while his courtiers and foreign envoys sat on gilded chairs around him. Yazid was already quite drunk. What a terrible spectacle the poor prisoners had to witness. They saw that the accursed oppressor had the head of Imam Husain (A) on a tray at his feet and he was rattling a cane against the teeth and lips of the Holy Imam (A). He was boasting, “Ah, aren’t these the same lips that received the kisses of Muhammad? How delighted will be my ancestors when they see how I have taken revenge for their defeats in the battles of Badr and Hunayn.” In his drunk state, Yazid could not believe that the people he saw before him were members of the family of the Holy Prophet (S). In a quivering rage he accused Amr ibne Sa’ad of substituting slaves instead of the relatives of Imam Husain (A).

Amr ibne Sa’ad knew that Yazid was more dangerous than normal when he was drunk so he quickly reassured him and began to point out the ladies. He said, “O Commander of the Faithful, your slave has done exactly what you asked. Those are the sisters of Husain, Zainab and Umme Kulthum. The young girls are Sakina and Rukayya, the daughters of Husain. That lady is Rubab, the widow of Husain, while the others are orphans and widows of Husain’s friends and relatives. The man before you is Husain’s son Ali.”

Yazid turned his attention to the people that Amr ibne Sa’ad had identified. He noticed that an old lady was standing in front of one of the lady prisoners, as if shielding her from the gaze of Yazid. He pointed towards the direction of the lady and shouted, “Who is that one sheltering behind the old woman, and why?” Amr ibne Sa’ad replied, “Your Majesty, she is Zainab, daughter of Ali and Fatima and the old woman standing in front of her is Fizza, the Abyssinian princess, who calls herself the slave of Fatima and Zainab.”

Yazid ordered Shimr, who was guarding the prisoners, to throw Fizza aside so he could have a full view of Bibi Zainab (A). Seeing Shimr advance towards her, Fizza turned to the Abyssinian slaves who stood armed behind Yazid as his bodyguards, and said, “O brothers from my native country, will you watch silently while an aged lady from your land is molested in this manner?”

Hearing the words of Fizza, some of the slaves stepped forward and warned Yazid, saying, “Your Majesty, ask Shimr to step back from our lady Fizza. If he does anything to her, blood will flow like water in your court.”

Yazid was stunned at this threat and immediately stopped Shimr and assured his bodyguards that he would not harm Fizza. However, he was furious at the fact that he had been humiliated in this manner in front of everyone and he soon wound up the court session, deciding to imprison the captives in the dark dungeons of the fort of Damascus.

For is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries; and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood; for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates (furat). Jeremiah 46:10 Bible

Mahdi (AS): The Twelfth Imam

From the times of Prophet Muhammad (saw) up to and long after the times of Mutamid and Motasim of the Abasi khalif, it was known to all the Muslims that the 12th successor of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), by the name of Mahdi, would form a government and establish the law of God on earth. This is why both Shia and Sunni Muslims are looking forward to the coming of Mahdi.

Just as Pharaoh feared the coming of Mosses and ordered the killing of every male child born to Israelis, Motamid the Khalif of the time also feared the 12th successor of Muhammad and hence ordered his spies to keep a keen eye on Hassan al Askari (the 11th successor of prophet Muhammad (saw)). His spies were to inform him as soon as the child was born so that he may slay the child thus preventing him from taking to rule over the people. Little did the faithless tyrant know that he could not alter what Allah (SWT) willed.

The birth of Mahdi (A) was not announced openly but people who gathered at the house of Hassan al Askari heard the introduction and the praises of Mahdi and kept their contact after the demise of Imam Hassan (A). When Imam Hassan (A) died as a result of the poison administered to him by the tyrant Motamid, His son Muhammad ibn Hassan al Mahdi was only five years old.

The City of Samarah was so immersed in sadness and lamentations upon the martyrdom of Imam Hassan, that all the people closed down their place of work and went to Imam Hassan’s house. The great multitude, carried the body of Imam Hassan for burial in the most respectable manner. Mutamid was bewildered at the movement of masses, that he tried hard to cover up his crime, and he tried to portrayed the passing away of Hassan as a natural death. Mutamid sent the brother of Hassan Askari to attend to the burial rituals and to make people believe that nobody killed Hassan (A). And he also took up the work of distributing the wealth of Imam Hassan (A) so as to show that he had no heir. When the people gathered for funeral prayers and Hassan’s brother stood to lead the prayers, Imam Mahdi who was only 5 years old came forward, pushed his Uncle aside and led the funeral prayer himself, indicating to the public that he was the heir to Hassan al Askari. After leading the Funeral prayers Imam Muhammad al Mahdi went into Ghaibah Sugrah (short disappearance from public which lasted for 71 years (from the age of 5 to 76))

In this period of 71 years, when Imam would only see his friends and associates, who came with their problems and received guidance, while the government officials and agents were deprived from his audience. During this period Imam (A) appointed four representatives, one after the other, who would attend to the affairs of people and carry the letters to and fro, between Imam (A) and the people. The four Representatives of Imam (A) were:- 1) Usman bin Saeed 2) Muhammad bin Usman 3) Husain bin Raoh 4) Ali bin Muhammad Sumairi. These were the trusted companions who executed their duties faithfully.

The period of Ghaibah-e-Kubrah (Disappearance for a longer period), started from 329 AH and has continued to date. When the life of the fourth representative was coming to an end, Imam (A) informed him that he will pass away from this world in four days, and thus he should finish the pending work. Imam (A) ordered him not to nominate any person after him and that he should inform the Shias that Imam (A) will be going into ghaibah kubrah for a long period. People will not have access to him and so they should follow the most learned in religious maters. This is the reason the Shias in accordance to the orders of Imam Mahdi, do takleed (i.e. follow the most learned in religion).

Near the end of the world when the religion will almost be nonexistent and there will be pain and tribulation, war and famine, and the world will be drowned in sorrows, Imam (A) will come out of ghaibah by the orders by Allah (SWT) and take control and establish the divine law on the earth. Peace will return to the world and mankind will see the benefit of the guidance of Allah (SWT).

“The world will not come to an end,” said the Prophet Muhammad, ” until a man from my family (Ahlulbayt) and of my name shall be master of the world, When you see a green ensign coming from the direction of Khorasan, then join them, for the Imam of God will be with the standards who will be called al-Mahdi.” “The Mahdi will be descended from me, he will be a man with an open countenance and a face with a high nose. He will fill the earth with equity and with justice, just as it has been filled with tyranny and oppression.” (Biharul Anwar, Majlisi)

There is a famous saying of Imam Hussain (AS) about the twelvth Imam. ” The Ninth of my descendants is the Imam who will rise with the Truth. God will grant life to earth through him after its death. The true faith will supersede all religions through him. His absence shall be lengthy during which many people will go astray. Only a few will remain on the Right Path. They shall suffer pains, people will put pressure on them, saying,” let us know when this promise of the Return of the Mahdi is fulfilled”. Those who will bear the pains and denials patiently will get the same rewards as those who accompanied the Prophet during his expeditions for Jihad.” Imam Zainul Abedeen (AS) has said, ” Of us one will be born whose birth will remain secret so much so that the people will say that he was not born at all.” Imam Muhammad al Baqir (AS) is quoted by Kulaini in Al-Kafi, ” Nine Imams after Hussain are destined, the last of them will be al-Qaim.” Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (AS) is quoted in Ilal al-shaa’i saying, ” The fifth of the descendants of my son Musa will be the Qa’im a descendant of the Prophet (SA). Imam Musa ibn Ja’afar (AS) was asked once, ” Are the Qa’im with the truth?” The Imam replied, ” I also rise truthfully, but the real Qa’im is he who will remove the enemies of God from earth and will fill it with justice. He shall be my fifth descendant. His absence will be lengthy during which multitudes will turn away from the faith while only a few will uphold it”. Imam Ali al-Reza (AS) as in the above saying of Imam Hussain (AS) said due to the excessive the length of the concealment of the 12th Imam many believers will have doubts about his existence. Many will question the very longevity of his life and the usefulness of his presence as an Imam. Reza said, ” O Da’bil, my son Muhammad (AS) will come when I am gone. After him, his great grand son will be named Muhammad(AS) who will be the Qa’im. He will be awaited during his absence. When he appears, the world shall bow down before him.” Imam Muhammad Taqi (AS) has said ” The Qa’im will be from amongst us the third of my descendants”. Imam Ali Naqi (AS) said, ” My successor will be my son Hasan; but what will be your condition during the reign of Hasan’s successor”? Those who were present asked, “Why, what do you mean by that”? Imam replied, ” you will not have the chance to see him, later you will not be allowed to mention his name”. Then the Imam was asked as to how they should mention him. Imam replied, ” You may say that he is the last of Muhammad’s (infallible) descendants. ” Some people asked Imam Hasan al-Askari (AS), ” your forefathers have said that the earth would never be without knowing the sign of Allah (Hujjatullah) till Doomsday, and he who dies without knowing the Imam of his time will die the death of ignorance”. Imam replied, ” That was as true as the shining day. They inquired as to who would be the Imam who would be the sign of the Mercy of God after his death, Imam replied, ” He will be my son, the namesake of the Holy Prophet (Muhammad Abul Qasim). He who died without knowing him will die the death of ignorance. His absence will be so lengthy that the ignorant will wander puzzled and would surely stray from the Right Path. But the Righteous shall remain steadfast and pray for their Imam to appear within their life time”.

As far as the longevity of his life, in Qur’anic terms it is not difficult to explain. Prophet Jesus is alive and will come out with the 12th Imam. Prophet Sheeth and Prophet Khidhr are still alive according to the Verdict of the Qur’an. If God keeps his guided ones alive for a certain purpose there should not be any doubt.

As for the usefulness of his concealed existence, there are numerous occasions when the Imam miraculously helped those who called him for help. Although absent and unrepresented, Imam al-Mahdi (AS) still guides people and defends the faith. Even though unseen, the Imam supervises the world affairs and guides it. This curtain will exist as long as Providence deems it necessary. The time will come, which may be too late for many of us, but when the curtain of absence will be removed, Imam al-Mahdi (AS) will reappear and as predicted by the Prophet, fill the world with justice and equity, discarding the prevailing injustices and oppressions. May God bring about his early reappearance and ease his coming.

The Shia 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-Husain Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib (AS).

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 Shia that they believe al-Mahdi is in the cave!!! Some Sunni historians ignorantly attributed that Shia believe al-Mahdi is hiding in the cellar. Shia 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 Shia scholars.

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”).

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.

Before his demise, Prophet Muhammad (PBUH&HF) 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.

Majlis e Hussain

The Commemoration of Imam Hussains ( 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 unsound 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 unacceptable to any Muslim, and every Mulsim condemns him, and will continue to do so, for his transgression and for the crimes he committed against 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 uncovering the virtues of these distinguished people.

To keep the names of these people alive is in the interest of the Muslims. The Messenger of God, Mohammad ( 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 until they join me on the Day of Judgement! – Mustadrak of al Hakim, vol. 3 p 109 – Sahih of Tirmizi, vol. 2 p 307 – Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, vol. 3 p 14, 217 – Khasais of al Nasai, p 30 – Sahih of Muslim, vol. 4 p 1286 hadith 5920

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.

Today, the tragic tale remains the same. There is nonetheless a growing vigour amongst the participants in the aza. The hearts cry out “Ya Hussain!”, the tears flow uncontrollably at the very mention of the name of a martyr. The audience may have heard it all hundreds of time, and yet the sorrow and grief never seem to abate.

To a dispassionate observer all this may seem to be incomprehensible. Yet he can not but appreciate the underlying strength of character, the devotion of the participants to their Imam and his followers and the determination of the traders, industrialists, working men and women and the youths constituting the community to preserve their identity as Shiahs. This is our resource. This is our strength. This is our dormant volcano which can unleash the lava of spirituality to enlighten not only the Muslim ummah but also the entire mankind. Sadly they remain as yet not fully exploited.

The first majlis-e-Hussain was recited in the market-place of Kufa by a lady (Hz Zainab binte Ali (AS)) from whose head her veil had been ripped off, whose hopes and aspirations had been destroyed on the blood-drenched sands of Kerbala but whose indomitable spirit stepped forward to free the Islamic values from the yoke of tyranny and oppression. Standing on her unsaddled camel, she looked at the multitude rejoicing the victory of Yezid. As soon as people saw her, they were quiet. They knew that a historic moment for Kufa had arrived. Looking straight at them, the daughter of Ali said: “Woe upon you O people of Kufa. Do you realise which piece of Muhammad’s heart you have severed! Which pledge you have broken! Whose blood you have shed! Whose honour you have desecrated! It is not just Hussain whose headless body lies unburied on the sands of Kerbala. It is the heart of the Holy Prophet. It is the very soul of Islam!”

The first majlis touched and moved the people of Kufa so deeply as to give rise to both the Tawwabun movement and al-Mukhtar’s quest for vengeance. When the news of tragedy reached Medina in the third week of Muharram there was such intense weeping and wailing from the homes of Banu Hashim that the very walls of masjidun-nabawi began to tremble. Zainab, Umme Luqman, the daughter of Aqeel ibne Abi Talib came out screaming: “What will you say when the Prophet asks you: “What have you, the last ummah, done with my offspring and my family after I left them? Some of them are prisoners and some of them lie killed, stained with blood. What sort of ajr-e-risaalah is this that you disobey me by oppressing my children ?”

Fatimah Binte Huzaam, also known as Ummul Baneen, carried her young grandson Ubaidullah ibne Abbas and prepared to go out. When asked where she was going, she said that she was taking the orphan of Abbas to offer condolences to the mother of Hussain.

Marwan ibne Hakam reports that every afternoon men and women would gather at Jannat-ul-Baqee and there would be remembrance of the tragedy of Kerbala and the weeping and wailing could be heard miles away.

When the prisoners were finally freed by Yezid, Bibi Zainab asked for an opportunity to have rites of remembrance in Damascus. A house was made available to them and aza-e-Hussain went on for over a week. Bibi Zainab (A.S.) laid the foundation of aza-e-Hussain in the very capital of his murderer!

On their return to Madina, Bibi Zainab (A.S.) took over the leadership of aza-e-Hussain in the city of the Holy Prophet. This aroused such strong emotions in the people and such revulsion against the oppressor that Amr ibne Said ibne al-Aas wrote to Yezid to have Bibi Zainab exiled from Madina. This was done in the beginning of 62 A.H. Bibi Zainab (A.S.) died shortly afterwards.

We have, however, several ahadeeth about the merits of participating in the mourning ceremonies. In this connection we must remember that the regime was hostile to the shiahs and was anxious to cover up the tragedy of Kerbala.

Imam Zainul Abideen (A.S.) is reported to have said: “When a believer’s eyes shed tears for the death of al-Hussain until they flow over his cheeks, Allah will provide for him rooms in Paradise which he will inhabit for a long time. When a believer’s eyes shed tears until they flow over his cheeks because of the atrocities inflicted upon us by our enemies in this world, Allah will provide him with a true abode in paradise.” – Ibn Qawlawayah p. 103

Imam Muhammad Baqir (A.S.) issued a directive which gave a definite form to the keeping of the memory of Imam Hussain (A.S.) alive. He recommended that for those believers for whom it was possible and convenient they should go for the ziyarah of the grave of Imam Hussain. For those for whom it was not possible or convenient, they should gather together and hold mourning ceremony and weep. – Ibn Qawlawayah p. 104

There is also the following tradition reported from the fifth Imam: May Allah have mercy on a man who meets with another in order to remember our situation. There will be an angel with them who will seek forgiveness for them. If you gather together and occupy yourselves in remembering us, then our memory will be kept alive in your meetings and remembrances. The best of people after us are those who remember our situation and urge others to remember us. – Ibn Qawlawayah p. 174/5

It is reported that al-Fudhayl Ibne Yasaar came to pay his respects to the Imam Ja’far Sadiq (A.S.): After the exchange of usual courtesies, Imam asked al-Fudhayl: “Do you people ever organise majaalis to recall the martyrdom of Imam Hussain?” Al-Fudhayl, with tears pouring down his eyes, replied: “Yabna Rasulillah, indeed we do.” The Imam said: “May Allah bless you. I highly approve of such majaalis.”

On another occasion, the poet Ja’far ibne Iffaan recited to our Imam al-Sadiq a poem on the tragedy of Kerbala. The Imam began to weep uncontrollably. He then addressed the poet in the following terms: “O Iffaan, do not think that it is only those whom you can see here are listening to your poetry. In fact Allah’s closest angels are present here at this majlis and they are all listening to your recitation and they too lament and weep. May Allah bless you for what you have recited. He will, inshallah, reward you with paradise for your efforts on our behalf.”

It must be borne in mind that the Arabs mostly expressed their emotion through poetry. Poetry thus became the medium of describing the horrors of the tragedy of Kerbala, the cause of Imam Hussain and the atrocities which the ahlul-bayt were made to endure. There are today extant several poems which the poets recited in presence of our holy Imams and as such can be regarded as having been approved by them both as to form and substance.

The only historical account in prose that was written not long after the massacre of Kerbala was that of Abi Mikhnaf. His account is relied upon both by Tabari and Shaykh Mufeed (A.R.). Many other accounts were written and published after the ghaybah. The most well known amongst these are the Aamali by Shaykh Suduq (A.R.) and the great work of Allamah Majlisi (A.R.), the Bihar-ul-Anwaar.

Aza-e-Hussain is a force that can be mobilised to take the community to the pinnacle of spiritual enrichment. The people who can make us attain this objective are our dhakirs. They have the undivided attention of their audience during the months of Muharram and Safar. The audience is there willing and waiting to surrender their emotions to the words of the dhakir. This also prepares them to listen to and imbibe the account of the cause of Imam Hussain (A.S.), the basic values of Islam and what is expected of them as good Muslims. They would be willing to be placed in the ‘discomfort zone’ by some home truths from the dhakir, so long as the dhakir does not go into personal attack of any person or group.

We must never lose sight of the fact that we have only two institutions to impart knowledge of Islamic precepts, ethics, the basic values and to deal with social and other problems confronting the community. One is the madressa and the other is the majaalis. For the adults and the youths no longer in the madaaris they have only one forum for spiritual enlightenment. This is the majaalis.

In a letter which he addressed to the people of Kufa Imam wrote: “An Imam is one who judges by the Holy Qur’an, upholds justice, professes the religion of truth and dedicates himself to obeying Allah and His Prophet.”

When Hur and his army stopped Imam caravan from going to Kufa, and Hur told Imam that his order from ibne Ziyad was to ask Imam for Bai’at to Yezid, Imam refused to declare Bai’at to someone who was only serving his own ends and not of Islam. Hur said that such an attitude might cost Imam his life. Imam replied: “Are you threatening me with death? Death is many thousands of times better than the dishonour of Bai’at to an enemy of Islam. Do you not see that truth is not being practised and falsehood is not being prevented? I see death as a blessing and life with tyrants as the most disgusting state one can be in.”

Imam addressed Yezid’s army and concluded his speech with these immortal words: “My parents did not raise me to submit myself to an evil tyrant. I am your Imam and it is my duty to tell you that you have surrendered the freedom of your mind to the evil ways of Yezid. If you do not care for Islam, and do not fear the day of judgement, at least do care for that precious gift from Allah, the freedom of your spirit!”

Towards the eve of 10th Muharram, when Imam was left alone in Kerbala (everyone else martyrred) he climbed a sand dune and cries out: “hal minnasireen yansuroona – Who is there who would help us?” He turned himself towards west, east, north and south repeating the same words. Was our Imam crying out for someone to come and help him in his plight or assist him in the battle against the forces ranged against him? There was no one left. Hur had come over and laid down his life. Even infant Asghar had been killed. Who was then our Imam calling out to? He was calling out to the future generations to continue his frustrated cause of doing amr bil ma’ruf and nahya anil munkar. (Stop evil and support good)

When a dhakir sits on the minbar he has assumed the responsibility to help the holy Imam in his cause. The dhakirs should during the months of Muharram and Safar repeatedly remind our audience that aza-e-Hussain what was the concept and mission of Kerbalal. It is a commitment to Imam Hussain (A.S.). A commitment by each one of us, men and women, young and old, to uphold the values of Islam and to subordinate our hearts to the wishes of Imam Hussain. Aza is our way of responding to his call of ‘hal minnasireen yansuroona’. We weep for Hussain and his progeny, we remember him and his mission. Is this kufr? Does this create a difference between the Sunnis and Shias?

Shiahs, have answered this call with the unique institution of aza-e-Hussain. With every tear that we shed for him we pledge to resist the oppression of injustice, immorality, inequity and falsehood. Every time we raise our hand and bring it down on our chest in matam, we are saying: “Labbaik, Labbaik Ya Mawla!” to our Imam, Hussain Ibne Ali, the grandson of the Holy Prophet (SAWA).

For long the word aza-e-Hussain has been exclusively used in connection with the remembrance ceremonies for the martyrdom of Imam Hussain. Aza-e-Hussain includes mourning congregations, lamentations, matam and all such actions which express the emotions of grief, anger and, above all, repulsion against what Yezid stood for. These emotions, are accompanied by a will to reform both at the individual level and the community level.

It is our duty to deliver Imam Hussain’s message to the indigenous population of the country we live in. We can succeed in this only if we ourselves appear to be true followers of Imam in all our interaction with the community at large. We must reflect the maximum integrity, Islamic values and our sincere commitment to Imam’s cause.

We have to remember that the ‘ashra-e-Muharram is a very emotional period and this emotion has to be exploited by the ahle minabir to convey the message of Kerbala, to awaken a hatred against all that Yezid stood for and to rekindle a commitment to Islam as preached by the Ahlul Bayt and for which Imam Hussain laid down his life.

Muawiya, The Cursed

Mu’awiya was son of Abu Sufyan, a leader of Benu Umayya clan which was one of the clans of Quraish tribes. Mu’awiya grew up in a family known to be cunning, worldly, materialistic, and power hungry. Mu’awiya became Muslim only when Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) triumphed over Mecca. Those who became Muslim in this manner were called Tulaqaa’, (a term scornfully used for the disbelievers who became Muslims to save their lives). Mu’awiya, his father Abu Sufyan, his mother Hind, and his brother Yazid son of Abu Sufyan were all Tulaqaa’; Mu’awiya never forgot this stigma for the rest of his life; he could never shake it from his mind, thus a feeling of malicious vengeance always existed in his heart. Mu’awiya’s character and aspirations were entirely opposite to that of his sister, Umm Habiba, who was one of the wives of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). Unlike Mu’awiya, Umm Habiba was a sincere believer and a pious person.

Omar, the second Khalifa, appointed Mu’awiya’s brother, Yazid son of Abu Sufyan ( Do not confuse with Yazid, son of muawiya who slaughtered al-Hussain), as the Governor of Syria when the Muslims captured that territory from the Byzantines. Within a few years, Yazid son of Abu Sufyan died of a disease, and Omar appointed Mu’awiya in his brother’s place as the Governor. Upon coming to power, Mu’awiya took advantage of the rich public treasury of Syria using it personally to buy favors and influence people. Thus he built a large base of support among some tribes, almost to the fanatic level. He used this to his advantage in later years to form a network of informants (spies) against Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) and their devotees.

When Imam Ali (a.s.) became Khalifa, he decided to remove Mu’awiya immediately, not withstanding Mu’awiya’s strong base of support. At that time, Mu’awiya had been the governor of Syria, Palestine, and Jordan for 17 years. Mu’awiya became defiant, he refused to obey Ali’s orders. Brazen and unabashed, he even declined to recognize Ali or give allegiance of loyalty to him. Also in defiance, Mu’awiya established a parallel government in Greater Syria, and started a campaign of treacherous accusations and malicious rumors against Imam Ali (a.s.). He falsely blamed Imam Ali for the killing of Uthman, the third Khalifa, and urged people to take up arms against the Imam. He spread these notorious accusations constantly to incite an uprising against Ali.

At the same time A’isha, the Prophet’s widow, became highly vocal against Imam Ali (a.s.). She called for taking revenge for the blood of Uthman. As a result, a party of 3,000 insurgents supported by Sahaaba (Companions) such as Talha and Zubair, along with A’isha headed toward Basrah. The insurgents upon reaching Basrah clashed with the local authorities and finally occupied a portion of Basrah. Soon after the occupation these insurgents spread a reign of terror among the people, killing no less than 600 local Muslims, pilfering the treasury and stealing the arms supplies of the armory.

Upon returning to Kufa, Imam Ali (a.s.) immediately prepared for the anticipated clash with Mu’awiya. The defying Mu’awiya continued to violate the Islamic principles by personally using the public treasury for espionage and buying peoples’ loyalty. The people of Syria fully believed him and the in false picture he presented. Ultimately this resulted in a confrontation called Battle of Siffin when the troops of the two sides met at Siffin. The battle saw ferocious fighting for nine days when Mu’awiya’s forces were near collapse. His troops were fleeing and in disarray, and their retreat was in massive disorder, running helter skelter. Mu’awiya, alarmed, tense, and frightened, preparing to run away, when he learned of a clever trick. The trick was indecent and unbecoming, it was to make the Holy Quran as an instrument and exploit it, to use it as a tool to his advantage. Mu’awiya seized on this immediately and commanded his fighters to raise 500 Holy Qurans on tips of spears, in order to stun the troops of Imam Ali. As jolting as it was, this maneuver did break the onslaught and the momentum of Ali’s fighters, for they were very pious men. But Imam Ali was quick to recognize this deceit, he knew how deceptive Mu’awiya was, and now that being near collapse, Mu’awiya wanted to save his neck at the expense of the Quran itself.

With that in mind, Ali (a.s.) urged his generals not to halt, but to keep fighting since victory was almost at hand. Alas, Ali’s generals and fighters were in shock, for the sight of the Holy Quran high on spear heads was startling to say the least. They could not take it. Not willing to fight, they wanted to accept Mu’awiya’s offer to halt the fighting and negotiate instead. The termination of the battle in this manner and the consequences thereof proved to be disastrous to say the least, especially for Ahlul Bayt and Islam.

It is said that there was a conspiracy between Amr Ibnil Aas of Mu’awiya’s side, and Ash’ath Ibn Qais, a General in Imam Ali’s camp, who was working as a spy against Ali, secretly working as an agent for Mu’awiya. In this battle 45,000 men lost their lives in Mu’awiya’s camp, and about 25,000 in Ali’s (a.s.) camp. Many men of high caliber from both sides died, especially Ammar Ibn Yasir, the great Companion of the Prophet (pbuh), who was 90 years old and fought on Imam Ali’s side against Mu’awiya.

Imam Ali’s (a.s.) generals, who stopped the battle to negotiate with Mu’awiya, did not pick the right person for the negotiation. They unyieldingly refused to accept Imam Ali’s choice, instead they picked Kufa’s Governor, Abu-Musa Ash’ari, an incompetent Governor who had been previously dismissed from office by Imam Ali. Mu’awiya appointed Amr Ibnil Aas, a shrewd and cunning man, to be his representative in the negotiation. Negotiation between the two sides did not take place for about one year. When the two negotiators came face to face, it was clear that Ash’ari’s capability was no match for his opponent Ibnil Aas. In the negotiations, Ash’ari proposed that, both Mu’awiya and Imam Ali (a.s.) were to abdicate and to let the people hold election for the Khilaafah. Amr Ibnil Aas, a deceptive man at best, quickly agreed to Ash’ari’s proposal and asked Ash’ari to first announce the agreement. Ash’ari stood up and announced, “O people, we have agreed not to consider Ali or Mu’awiya for Khilaafah. You may choose or elect whomever you think is fit.” The cunning Amr Ibnil Aas stood up next to say, “O people! I won’t consider Ali for the Khilaafah. But Mu’awiya, in my opinion, is the person for that office!” Upon hearing this (and feeling deceived), the people screamed disapprovingly, an uproar was the result. Imam Ali’s (a.s.) camp was in shock, they were double-crossed, deceived and lied to, they felt deeply cut. Amr’s double crossing and deception was simply beyond their imagination. They left the place bewildered and utterly disappointed. Because of this a large group of Imam Ali’s supporters defected to form a separate group called Kharijies, meaning the Outsiders.

The Khariji became fanatically opposed to Imam Ali and Mu’awiya. Some of their members met secretly in Mecca and drew a plan to assassinate Ali (a.s.) in Kufa, Mu’awiya in Syria, and Amr Ibnil Aas in Egypt. Three fanatics took the responsibility, they were to attack their victims in the morning, the same day, as the would-be victims were going to the mosque to lead the morning salat. Ibn Muljim attacked and fatally wounded Imam Ali (a.s.), whereas Mu’awiya escaped with a light wound of his buttock. Amr Ibnil Aas was ill that day and his replacement was killed by the Khariji. Imam Ali (a.s.), in wounded condition, conferred the Imamah and the reign of the Islamic nation to his 37 years old son Al-Hasan.

Imam Hasan (a.s.) faced extremely difficult conditions from the start. He observed that fear, anxiety and much distress were ever present in Kufa, Basrah, Medina and other towns. The anxiety, uncertainty and insecurity were caused by Mu’awiya’s ill dealing of sincere Muslims. Mu’awiya had spread secret agents all over to defame Ahlul Bayt. Imam Hasan knew that his father Imam Ali (a.s.) had stood like a lion in all difficulties and fought battles against Mu’awiya, but these confrontations had resulted in heavy casualties on both sides. A mass scale family devastation was visible everywhere. Considering all circumstances, Imam Hasan (a.s.) discussed the matter with his brother Husain (a.s.) and other relatives. He revealed to them that in order to end the bloodshed and to provide a reasonable safety and security to the Ummah, he would make a peace agreement with Mu’awiya and abdicate until after Mu’awiya’s death. After a few days of careful consideration, Imam Hasan (a.s.) accepted an agreement as per the terms dictated by the Imam and agreed to by Mu’awiya. Four noteworthy terms of this agreement were: People of Syria, Iraq, Hijaz, Yemen and other places shall enjoy amnesty against persecution – Friends and companions of Imam Ali (a.s.) and all their women and children shall be protected from all dangers – Mu’awiya is to immediately stop the use of abusive language with reference to Ahlul Bayt (cursing Imam Ali) after Salat of Jumu’a) – Mu’awiya shall not appoint anyone as his successor.

Once the treaty was signed, Imam Hasan (a.s.) and brother Husain (a.s.) moved out of Kufa and settled in Medina. Over there both Imams lost no time in holding nightly meetings for Islamic discussions. The nightly meetings proved very successful and gained tremendous popularity. More people started to attend, to hear the Imams give of their fountain of knowledge on Islam and humanity.

In the meantime Mu’awiya, unabashedly elected to disregard the terms of his treaty with Imam Al-Hasan. a) He sent secret agents to terrorize, kidnap, or even kill innocent people specially those who were loyal to Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). b) Instead of helping the needy with the public treasury, Mu’awiya’s governors and their surrogates used the public treasury for personal use, freely and excessively as they wished. c) Freedom suddenly died, and dictatorship took its place (He chose his son Yazid as his successor). d) Mu’awiya gathered a very large number of collaborators who unabashedly would do any thing for money.

It was Mu’awiya’s ardent desire to impose his son Yazid (who had been named after his uncle) upon the Muslims by making him the succeeding Khalifa, despite the fact that Yazid was the playboy of the time, with many evil habits including gambling, heavy drinking, and indulgence in the pleasures of the flesh. But the peace agreement would not permit Mu’awiya to appoint Yazid as his successor, (According to the agreement Imam Hasan would immediately become Khalifa upon Mu’awiya’s death). Therefore, it was obvious to Mu’awiya that, if Al-Hasan did not outlive him, Mu’awiya could do as he pleased. Thus Mu’awiya planned to kill Imam Al-Hasan in order to pave the way for his son Yazid to be his successor.

Mu’awiya sent one of his agents to contact Imam Al-Hasan’s wife Joda who was the daughter of Al-Ash’ath (once a secret agent for Mu’awiya against Imam Ali in the Battle of Siffin). Joda was asked a small favor, i.e., to put a little poison in Al-Hasan’s food, and in return Mu’awiya would give her a large sum of money and also make her wife of his son Yazid. She found the offer too attractive to ignore, and foolishly agreed to accept it. A few days later, she mixed poison in honey and gave it to the Imam. As soon as the Imam took the poisoned honey he became seriously ill. Sensing that his death was imminent, the Imam designated his brother Al-Husain (a.s.) to be the third Imam. Although Imam Al-Hasan knew he was poisoned, he did not reveal that to anyone but to his brother Al-Husain.

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 (AS) — the daughter of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). – Tadhkirat al-Khawas, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 191-194 – Ibn Abd al-Barr, in his “Seera” Abu Nu’aym

One thing Al-Hasan had wished was to have his burial by the side of his grandfather, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Imam Husain made all the arrangements to fulfill that wish but Mu’awiya’s governor over Medina, Marwan, did not let that happen and used military force to stop it. Imam Al-Hasan was 47 year old when he died of poisoning. Medina was never the same without Imam Hasan (a.s.). Everyone missed him dearly.

When Husain (a.s.) was designated as the 3rd Imam he was 46 years old. Imam Husain (a.s.) carried on with his mission of teaching Islam as before. A large number of people kept coming to see him and to learn from him. This process continued for several years when people began to hear an ugly rumor that Mu’awiya wanted his son, Yazid, to succeed him.

Mu’awiya was getting older day by day. At the age of 75, he became seriously ill. He was nearing death. He lay weak and lifeless as if something was choking and strangling him. He felt tortured and tormented, and continuously cried for mercy. He was in terrible pain. He wanted to die but death would not come close to him. His conscience tormented him for the calamities that he brought upon the Islamic Ummah specially Ahlul Bayt. Mu’awiya suffered in agony for many many days. His suffering continued until he breathed his last. At the time of his death, the 30 year old Yazid was nowhere near him, he had gone for fun on a hunting trip, became the caliph.

Muhammad (SAW) and Ali ibn Abu Talib: The Shia Persepective

Shias have the highest respect for Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and his family. Shias consider Prophet Muhammad (SAW) as a fountain head of knowledge, Sayyied ul-Ambiah (leader of all the prophets). A prophet is a prophet, even in his mothers womb. It is not correct to say that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) receive the office of prophet hood in the cave of Al-Hira, because He was a prophet from birth. Jesus was a prophet when he was  days old, he showed men the miracles of god when he was in the arms of his mother, thus it is unacceptable to think that the greatest prophet of all times had to wait for  forty years for his prophethood. It would be more appropriate to say that he received his instructions to start his ministry in the cave. Shias say that Prophet Muhammad is far above all creations. He is pious of the pious, a Masoom (sinless). He wouldn’t even resort to tark-ul-awla (i.e. miss a recommended act that pleases Allah (SWT) let alone the compulsory ones.) He is an infallible.

In the spiritual state , he (Prophet Muhammad (SAW)) witnessed the rebellion of Azaazil (Shaitan), the creation of Adam (A), the coming of the prophets and the rebellion of mankind all through the ages, until Allah (SWT) willed him to come as the final prophet and take the office of finalizing the religion. In his childhood he knew that he was the Prophet of Allah (SWT) but chose to remained quiet until instructed by Allah.

As the Quran says:  (Recollect O’ Our Apostle Muhammad) When said thy Lord unto the angels: ‘Verily I (intend to) appoint a vicegerent in the earth’ they said, “Wilt Thou (O’ our Lord!) appoint therein one who will cause mischief and shed blood, while we celebrate by Thy praise and hallow Thee alone?” Said (the Lord to the angels) “Verily, I know what ye know not.” 2: 30

And (Recollect O’ Our Apostle Muhammad) When said Abraham: “My Lord! let me see how Thou enliveth the dead” He said, “What! Dost thou not (then) believe (in it)?” He said ” Yea but (I ask Thee for) only that my heart resteth convinced”. He said “Take thou four of the birds and make them to incline unto thee, and (cut them into parts) place thou on each mountain a part of them and thereafter call them and they will come unto thee rushing” and know (thou) that God is All-Mighty, All-Wise!” 2:260

And (recollect) When said the Disciples “O’ Jesus, son of Mary! ‘Is thy Lord able that He sendeth down unto us (a) table furnished with food from heaven?” said (Jesus) “Fear ye God! if ye be (true) believers (in Him).” Al-Maidah:112

In these and many other verses prophet Muhammad is asked to recollect the incident/memories of the events. One can only recollect the incidents if he is a witness to the events.

To understand this further, – look at the statement of Ali ibn Abi Talib (A). Ali said that he was not taught but rather fed the knowledge by Prophet Muhammad (SAW). This Ali ibn Abi Talib, who in his sermons explains the construct of earth saying that ‘the continents are masses of land floating on the ocean and held in place by mountains acting as pegs.’ This knowledge was passed to us by Ali ibn abi Talib who claims that he learned all he knew from prophet Muhammad (SAW). Also note that Ali ibn Abi talib explained this construct of the earth come 1400 years ago, while less then 200 years ago, in the west, they were disputed about the shape of the earth, and people were executed by the church in this regards. The knowledge about the continental plates, in the west is un-earthed less then 50 years ago.

This same Ali ibn Abi Talib, in his sermons in the last days of his life, announced to the people, “Ask me before I leave you, and I may tell you all. Ask me for I can tell you of the paths of the heavens more then the path of the earth.”

When this is the knowledge imparted by the Ali ibn Abi Talib, the student of Prophet Muhammad – imagine what is the status of that great teacher?

Not only do Shias believe Prophet Muhammad to be perfect, but all the ancestors of prophet Muhammad including Abutalib the uncle of Prophet Muhammad were Muslims following the creed of Prophet Ibrahim (A). Abu Talib accepted Prophet Muhammad as a prophet of God. They never worshiped or even bowed down before any idols. In short all the ancestors of Prophet Muhammad up to Prophet Adam (A) were all Muslims.

Shias believe Ali to be the rightful khalif/Imam after Prophet Muhammad (SAW). Prophet Muhammad during his life time announced this in various ways. The two incidents Dawaat-az-zul-aseera, and Ghadeer al Qumm are the best examples of this. Besides these two Hadith, (Dawaat-az-zul-aseera, and Ghadeer al Qumm) there are many more.

Ali’s creation was from Light and his association with the Holy Prophet. From the point of view of light, Amiru’l-Mu’minin occupied the foremost place, as many of your illustrious ulema point out. Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Mir Seyyed Ali Hamdani Faqih Shafi’i in his Mawaddatu’l-Qurba; Ibn Maghazili Shafi’i in his Manaqib and Muhammad Bin Talha Shafi’i in Matalibu’s-Su’ul Fi Manaqib-e-alu’r-Rasul narrate from the Holy Prophet that he said, “I and Ali Bin Abi Talib both were a single light in the presence of Allah 14,000 years before the creation of Adam. When Allah created Adam, he deposited that light in Adam’s loins. We remained together as one light until we separated in Abu’l-Muttalib’s loins. Then I was endowed with Prophethood and Ali with the caliphate.”

Among hadith which have been recorded in this Mawadda, there is a report from the third Caliph, Uthman Bin Affan, who said that the Holy Prophet said, “I and Ali were created from one light 4,000 years before the creation of Adam. When Allah created Adam, He deposited that light into Adam’s loins. We remained as one light until we were separated in Abdu’l-Muttalib’s loins. Then I was endowed with prophethood and Ali with vicegerency.”

Holy Prophet Muhammad and Ali were created from light thousands of years before the creation of the universe and that both of them were one light until they were separated from each other in the loins of Abdu’l-Muttalib. One part was placed in the loins of Abdullah and through it was born the Holy Prophet. The other part was placed in the loins of Abu Talib and through it was born Ali. Muhammad was selected for prophethood and Ali for vicegerency, as was disclosed by the Holy Prophet himself.

Abu’l-Mu’ayyid Mu’affaq Bin Ahmad Khawarizmi and many others have reported from reliable sources that the Holy Prophet said: “I and Ali were born of one light. We remained together until we reached the loins of Abu Talib where we were separated from each other.”

Ali’s Physical Ancestry follows. So far as Ali’s physical creation was concerned, he was evidently of the most exalted rank from both his maternal and paternal side. All of his forefathers back to Adam himself were worshipers of Allah. This light never settled in an impure loins or womb. None of the other companions can make such a claim.

The lineage of Ali is as follows: (1) Ali Bin (2) Abu Talib Bin (3) Abdu’l-Muttalib (4) Hashim (5) Abd-e-Manaf (6) Qusai (7) Kilab (8) Murra (9) Ka’b (10) Luwai (11) Ghalib (12) Fehr (13) Malik (14) Nazr (15) Kinana (16) Khazima (17) Madreka (18) Ilyas (19) Muzar (20) Nizar (21) Ma’d (22) Adnan (23) Awwad (24) Al-Yasa’ (25) Al-Hamis (26) Bunt (27) Sulayman (28) Haml (29) Qidar (30) Isma’il (31) Ibrahim Khalil-Ullah (32) Ta’rikh (33) Tahur (34) Sharu (35) Abraghu (36) Taligh (37) Abir (38) Shale’ (39) Arfakhad (40) Sam (41) Noah (42) Lumuk (43) Mutu Shalkh (44) Akhnukh (45) Yarad (46) Mahla’il (47) Qinan (48) Anush (49) Seth (50) Adam Abu’l-Bashir. Except for the Holy Prophet, no one else had such a brilliant ancestry.

Murder Of Uthman

Sunnis claim that Muawiya felt that the killers of Amirul Mumineen Uthmaan RA 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 (PBUH&HF) 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.

The claim that Muawiyah raised against the legitimate Caliph of his time and killed thousands of Muslims, just 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). – History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p184

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).

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. – 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!”  – 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 meet 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 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!”  – al-Kamil, by Ibn Athir, v3, p84

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.” – 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. – Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159 – al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v3, pp 532-533

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 Quran and what is in it to the opposing army with the understanding that if he loses one of his hand he will hold the Quran 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 Quran 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 Quran 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. – History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

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.” – 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 (AS). 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.” – History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206 – Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141

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.” – Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, part 1, v4, p75

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 footing as regards the truth.” – History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

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.”

Muta: Temporary Marriage In Islam

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. Besides, there are many other conditions for performing Muta as well.

The first one who legislated Mut’a with all the rules pertaining to it, was the Messenger of Allah (PBUH&HF), after it was revealed in Quran. 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 Shia 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 Shia believe that temporary marriage was never abandoned by the Prophet (PBUH&HF). Besides no Quranic verse was revealed to ban the previous Quranic verse which made Muta legitimate, and Hadith can not oppose Quran. Allah revealed it in Quran, 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.

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. (Quran 4:24)

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 Quran, 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 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).” Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran; – Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p200, 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 Quran. It is interesting to note that Umar did not attribute the prohibition of Mut’a to the Prophet (PBUH&HF). 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 Quran 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. – Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Fakhr al-Razi, v3, p201 under verse 4:24 – Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p52

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 (PBUH&HF), 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’.”  – Sharh Al-Tajreed, by al-Fadhil al-Qoshaji, (Imama Section) – al-Mustaniran, 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 Shia 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”!

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. 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 Quran has already talked about the dowry for permanent marriage at the early part of the very same chapter by saying: 4:3 “…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…”  4:4: “And give the women (of permanent marriage) their dower as a free gift”

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.

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. Thus Allah repeated the issue of dowry three times, one for permanent marriage, one for temporary marriage and one for the bondwomen.

Imran Ibn Husain 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.” Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran

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.” – Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, under the verse 4:24, v8, p177, Tradition #9038

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 Quranic verse – even though the literal meaning of the word is “to seek benefit” or “to take enjoyment”. Hence the meaning of the Quranic verse must be understood in terms of the conventional usage of the time, for as is well-known in the science of Quranic commentary and Islamic jurisprudence, the Quran follows the conventional usage of the people in all edicts and legal prescriptions. If someone wants to understand a word in the Quran 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 Quran employed.

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 Quran 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)

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-Shia, v14, p488)

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

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 Quranic 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-Shia, v14, p439).

According to Sunnis, Muta was practiced till 7th Hijri (i.e. after migration to Madina). This is agreed by almost all sunnis. But the argument lies whether it was prohibited later on by Allah or not. Before i continue, this point must be remembered that Muta was once allowed in Islam, so why criticize it such that it was a thing of pre-islamic days?

The Quranic Verses that Sunni brothers quote for prohibition of Muta are in Surahs, which are by Ijma revealed in Mecca or in initial time of Madina. Maulana Modoodi checked all these quranic verses and came to conclusion that it is only conjecture to say that these verses prohibit Muta.

Some people fabricated Ahadith to prove that quran prohibited Muta. Unfortunately, our sunni brothers still quote these Ahadith. Such fabricated ahadith are listed below.

Hadith 1:
Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbas (r.a.a.) said: “Temporary marriage was at the beginning of Islam. A man comes by a town where he has no acquaintances, so he marries for a fixed time depending on his stay in the town, the woman looks after his provisions and prepares his food, until the verse was revealed: “Except to your wives or what your right hands possess.” Ibn ‘Abbas explained that any relationship beyond this is forbidden. [narrated by Tirmidhee]

Objection: Contrary to above Hadith, Ibn Abbas was the person who very very strongly promoted Mutta and even fought people for that. There are a lot of Ahadith which confirm this fact. The above hadith claims that Ibn Abbas said that muta became Haram after the revelation of verse “Except to your wives or what your right hands possess.” Now this verse is either in Sura Nisa, or in Sura Muminoon (23rd Sura). And by Ijma of Sunni Ulama, Sura Muminoon was revealed in Mecca and Sura Nisa was revealed in the very early part of Madinan Life. While Muta was practiced(according to Sunnies) at least till 7th Hijri.

Hadith 2
‘A`isha said: “It has been forbidden in the Qur’an in the words of the Most High: “And those who preserve their private parts except with their spouses or what their right hands posses, then they would have no blame.” [23:5].

Objection: Verse [23:5] is from Sura Muminoon, which is by Ijma revealed in Mecca. Please see introduction to this Surah by Maudoodi. Extremist Sunni brothers forcefully try to deduce the result that it prohibits Muta. But understanding of Rasool Allah (saww) is contrary to these people and he allowed Sababa to perform Mutta long long after revelation of this verse.

There are only 4 such Ahadith, which are transmitted by only 3 Sahaba (through different chains). Please don’t get confuse when Sunni brothers present a lot of Ahadith. If you see the chain, then they return to only these 3 persons.

The names of these 3 companions are:
1) Rabi Ibn Sabra (who narrates it from his father Sabra Jahani)
2) Ali Ibn Talib
3) Salma b. al-Akwa’

ALL narrations of these 3 companions are CONTRADICTORY to each other. All these narrations from these 3 companions are contradictory to each other with respect to the “Time of Prohibitition Of Mutta”

1) Hadith of Ali claims Muta was prohibitted in 7th Hijri (at Khaiber)
2) In one Hadith, Ibn Sabra claims that Muta was prohibited in 8th Hijri (at victory of Mecca). While in other tradition, this same Ibn Sabra claims that Mutta was prohibited in 10th Hijri (at Last Pilgrimage Hujjatul Wida)
3) While Salma b. al-Akwa claims that Mutta was prohibited in 9th Hijri (i.e. in year of Autas, which was after battle of Hunain)

They cannot simulteneously use all these 3 in order to prove prohibitation of Mutta by Rasool Allah (saww). In comparison to above mentioned 3 Reports (which even contradict each other), there are witnesses of 20+ Sahaba and Tabaeen, which are unanimous that it was Umar who forbade Muta.

Narrated ‘Imran bin Husain: “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 Quran 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.”  – 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

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.’ (5.87) – Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, v7, Tradition #13a – Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic, v6, p11, under Tafsir of verse 5:87 of Quran – 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 –

[Please Note: Ibn Masood mentioned the verse (5:87) i.e. Sura Maida, which was revealed after Hudaybiyyah i.e. in 7th Hijri]

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 (&HF).” – Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v1, p157 – Tafsir al-Qurtubi, v2, p365, reported from al-Darqunti

“Ali 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).”
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 –

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.” …  – History of al-Tabari, English version, v14, pp 139-140

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 Quran. 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. – Sahih Muslim, English version, v2, chapter CDXLII, Tradition #2801 – Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p885, Tradition #145.

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.
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”

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. – Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, v2, p909, Traditions #194-195.

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 , Abu Dhar, Jabir Ibn Abdillah, Abdullah Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn Masud, Zubair Ibn al-Awwam, Imran Ibn Husain, 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 , …

004.082: Do they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.

How nice is the verse 4:82 of Quran describes that one can find many contradictions in something that is not from Allah.

There are 7 Fabricated “AHAD” Ahadith, which contradict each other. Two Sunni scholars: al-Qurtubi (in his commentary of Quran) and al-Nawawi (in his commentary of Sahih Muslim) counted the no. of Ahadith (which ban Mutta). At end, they come to conclusion that there are 7 such Ahadith.

But they also mentioned the following 2 facts about them:
1) All of them are Ahad
2) All of them are contradicting each other regarding the timings (i.e. when Rasool saww. banned it)

I have collected these 7 timings here, so that people can see the contradiction in those things, which they have made themselves:

1. 1st Timing: Reffered to Hadhrat Aisha that she claimed it was banned in Mecca (surah Mominun) (Quran 23:1-7)
2. 2nd Timing: Reffered to Ibn Abbas that he claimed it was banned when Sura Nisa was revealed (in the very early years of Madina)
3. 3rd Timing: It was claimed that it was made Haram when the following verse was revealed: “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.” (Quran 70:29-31)
But the person, which fabricated this hadith, didn’t know that this Surah of al-Ma’arij (Ch 70) was revealed in Mecca, and Mutta was practiced by Ijma of Sunnies till 7th hijri in Madina.
4. 4th Timing: Reffered to Ali that he claimed it was banned in 7th Hijri.
5. 5th Timing: Reffered to companin Ibn Sabra Al-Juhani, that he claimed it was banned in 8th Hijri at the time of victory of Mecca (i.e. he practiced mutta with a woman of tribe of Bani Aamir)
6. 6th Timing: Reffered to companion Iyas ibn Salam, who claimed mutta was practice till 9th Hijri and it was banned in the year of Autas (after the battle of Hunain).
7. 7th Timing: Again reffered to Ibn Sabra Juhani that he claimed that Mutta was banned in 10th Hifri at the time of last pilgrimage.

May Allah’s curse upon those who fabricate ahadith and lie upon Rasool Allah (saww).

Here is the Fatwa of Sunni Hadith Master “Hafidh Jalaluddin Syuti” about Umar Ibn Al-Khattab. “He (Umar) is the first who made Mut’a forbidden (Haraam).” – Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p136

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’.” – Tafsir al-Tabari, under commentary of verse 4:24 of Quran, v8, p178 – Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, under the verse 4:24, v1, p519

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.” – al-Irshad, by al-Qastalani, v4, p169

As proved that the sunni hadiths claiming to ban Muta are extremeley contradictory to one another and a fabrication, as the same sunni books also prove that Muta was allowed till the era of Umer, who later forbade it. According to shia traditions, only one kind of ahadith are found, Muta was allowed by Allah as a mercy for Muslims, until Umer forbade it and followed what his own mind said. And we, the shias tend to Follow Allah and his Rasool, not Umer.

The concept of mut’a has a very controversial, yet interesting part in history. Famastamta-tum bihi provides for a temporary marriage, known as muta. It has been specifically made lawful by the Quran and the Holy Prophet, therefore, this provision subsists as unrescinded.  (Pooya/Ali Commentary 4:24)

All shia scholars & many sunni scholars consider this verse of the Holy Qura’n as permitting Mut’a.  This verse, when revealed during the stay of Prophet PBUH in Madina, made temporary marriage a common legal custom & was referred by the term “Istimta’a.” The same word was used in the Quran to refer to “such woman as you enjoy.”  The literal meaning of “Istimta’a” is to seek benefit or enjoyment.

“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.” – Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v3, commentary of verse 4:24 – Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p52

The question thus arises that if Mut’a was mentioned in the Qur’an, & was accepted by Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), how is it that the Caliph who came to power AFTER Mohammad (PBUH) can rule Mut’a as forbidden when Allah permitted it in the Qur’an and Prophet (PBUH) accepted it as the Almighty’s word?

The clear controversies in the hadith and other fabrications clarify the fact that mut’a was not forbidden by Prophet PBUH & that the hadith regarding forbidding Mut’a were fabricated & created to cover & justify what Umar had forbidden & Allah has permitted.  If it truly was the word of Allah, you would not be able to find such contradictory statements in history regarding the issue.  After all, sunni’s do claim the Caliph’s as rightly guided & possessing immense knowledge, then why such contradictions to the word of the Qur’an and Prophet (PBUH) who would surely not go against the word of Allah, the Qura’n.  If Prophet (PBUH) had really forbidden mut’a as some sunni’s claim, why is it that Umar had to forbid it again?

Now we have clarified the issue that Prophet (PBUH) did not forbid temporary marriage or mut’a, & that it is mentioned in the Qur’an as a valid legal custom.  We should be able to conclude that if Prophet (PBUH) accepted & permitted mut’a as part of Islam, no one after him has the right to change the religious teachings or forbid what Allah has created as part of religion.

There are Four statutes or pillars of temporary marriage or mut’a.  Though a whole detailed article can be written about the rules of contract marriage, here is presenting a few basic guidelines in general.

1. Formula: Since Muta is a contract, it requires a declaration and an acceptance in any order.  The woman makes the declaration & the man satisfyingly accepts the declaration.  For the contract to be a valid one, it must be concluded by the man and woman themselves, or their representatives (wakil), or their fathers.
2. Persons: There are several provisions that need to be followed under this pillar or statute.  A few of the general provisions included are mentioned briefly.  A man can have a contract marriage only with a muslim woman or a woman from the people of the book (Ahl-e-kitaab).  A contract can not be made with a non believer or an enemy of the Ahl-e-bait (AS).  Muta’ should not be contracted with a virgin without the consent of her father or legal guardian since according to Imam Jaafar Sadiq (AS), “…it is a stain upon her family.” (Wasail, XIV, 459, hadith 10).  Imam Ali Rida (AS) says something similar in Ibid., 458, hadith 5, when he says “A virgin may not be married temporarily without her father’s permission.”  Thus it is quiet clear that mut’a is not meant to be a stain for a family, but rather a means to prevent forbidden/haraam acts due to suppression of desires. It is legal for widows and divorcees.
3. Muddah (time period): The time period of a marriage contract must be explicitly explained in the contract with no allowance for an increase or decrease in the time span.  When the time period is over, the wife is freed from the contract & the obligations associated with the contract.  Once the contract has ended, the wife must wait for a specific period of time (Iddah) before she is permitted to marry again, just as in the case of permanent marriage.  The difference however is that the time period specified for iddah in both cases differs.  In permanent marriage, the period of iddah is 4 months or 3 menstrual cycles, while that in temporary marriage is 45 days or 2 menstrual cycles.  Mentioned here are just a few of the general requirements of muddah, among the several others that exist, for example rules also exist for women who get pregnant during the marriage contract or find out about the pregnancy during the period of Iddah.
4. The Dower: A woman can explicity mention a condition at the time of contract to avoid or limit sexual relations.  She is then not obliged to be sexually available for her husband & is still entitled to dowry.  There are several other detailed provisions to be considered under this pillar as well that may need a detailed explanation.  However I shall limit the details about the pillars for the basic explanation and debate on this issue.

Human beings are Allah’s creations, created with instincts that may force them or guide them towards certain behaviors not permissible in Islam.  Sexual feelings or strong sexual desires are part of a human’s natural instinct that needs to be answered in order to prevent any haraam acts.

Permanent marriage is the most preferred form & recommended form of marriage, however there are certain situations when one can not possibly be part of a permanent marriage at a specific time or can not be part of constructing a family.  If the option of Mut’ah did not exist, people would commit adultery & fornication to answer to the sexual urges that naturally exist within a human.  Secondly, suppressing sexual urges, or for that matter any emotion, can be psychologically or emotionally unhealthy & Islam does not approve of it.  Thus temporary marriage stands as a logical choice of relationship between a man and woman till either or both of them are capable of permanent marriage.

With the changing faces of the muslim countries in the modern world, it is but logical to revive the Islamic value of muta to prevent sins such as premarital relationships.  A couple need not marry in mut’a for sexual relation, but it can be for other reasons as well, such as a couple who wish to know each other better before marriage, a time period usually marked in today’s society as “engagement.”  With mut’a marriage, the boy and girl are mahram for each other since they enter into a contract of temporary marriage & can get to know each other better before a long term commitment.  Sometimes a male and female wish to marry but due to circumstances are unable to do that due to financial problems or the inablility to manage a family after marriage.  Mut’a gives the couple the right to be married without financial burdens of a permanent wife.  Several other reasons exist behind the concept of mut’a, of which I have managed to explain a few major ones that people usually resort to.

With the proofs presented above & the logical reasons as to why one should and can contract into a temporary marriage, it is quiet clear that mut’a is actually a benefit granted to the muslims by Allah the almighty himself, for He knows his creation & is well aware of the sins that a human may commit due to natural urges.  If He has given permission for it, no one can deny it, and those who deny it, only resort to sins or unhealthy conditions that islam does NOT permit.  However, no matter what the issue, there are always regulations & rules to be followed when doing certain things.  As long as one stays within the preached barriers of religion, no harm shall be caused, but the moment one steps out of the barriers, the shaitaan waits to lead him to the land of forbidden acts.
Nomination of First Caliph

What justification is there for an institution which uses three different techniques for the selection of the caliph : – the dummy election at Saqifa for Abu Bakr, – nomination for Omar and – council choice for Othman ? What ayat in the Quran allows this change of selection method ? Abdur Rahman bin Auf, Omar’s choice for chief of the council had no merits compared to Ali and yet Omar nominated him to that post. Are you SO blind that you cannot see the politics in all this ?

As in the previous articles, it has been proved that men can not choose the Caliph/Imam of Islam. A Sunni friend mentioned that the Caliphate of Abu Bakr is the Consensus of scholars (Ijma’). It is incumbent upon Muslims to accept the Ijma’.

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. Allah is the one who appoints the Caliph.

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 (PBUH&HF). 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 Dhar, 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 (PBUH&HF), 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 (AS). Even Talha and al-Zubair were loyal to Imam Ali at the beginning and joint the others in the house of Fatimah (AS). 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..” – Sahih al-Bukhari, 008.082.817

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.” – Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55 – Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309

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. – History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, pp 188-189

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.

Sahih-Muslim – Volume 8, Book 82, Number 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).” ………

……. We reached Medina by the end of the month of Dhul-Hijja, and when it was Friday, we went quickly (to the mosque) as soon as the sun had declined, and I saw Sa’id bin Zaid bin ‘Amr bin Nufail sitting at the corner of the pulpit, and I too sat close to him so that my knee was touching his knee, and after a short while ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab came out, and when I saw him coming towards us, I said to Said bin Zaid bin ‘Amr bin Nufail “Today ‘Umar will say such a thing as he has never said since he was chosen as Caliph.” Said denied my statement with astonishment and said, “What thing do you expect ‘Umar to say the like of which he has never said before?” In the meantime, ‘Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, ‘Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, “Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. ……….

……. Then Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Do not praise me excessively as Jesus, son of Marry was praised, but call me Allah’s Slave and His Apostles.’ (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