1. The Prophetic tradition of the two weighty things
The messenger of Allah (saw) said,
O People, I leave amongst you two things which if you follow, you will
never go astray. They are the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt [family].
He also said: The messenger of my God is about to come to me and I shall
answer. I am leaving with you the two weighty things: The first is the
Book of Allah, in which you find guidance and enlightenment, and the
people of my household. I remind you, by Allah, of the people of my
household... I remind you by Allah of the people of my household." [95]
- [95]
- Sahih, Muslim, Chapter on the Virtues of Imam Ali (as), vol 5 p 122
Sahih, al Tirmdhi, vol 5 p 328
Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 148
Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, vol 3 p 17
If we examine with some care this honourable tradition, which has been
cited by the Sihahs of the Sunnis and al-Jamaah, we will find that the
Shiites alone followed the two weighty things: "The Book of Allah and
honourable members of the Prophet's Household". On the other hand, the
Sunnis and al-Jamaah followed the saying of Umar "The Book of Allah is
sufficient for us", but I wish they had followed the Book of Allah without
interpreting it in their own ways. If Umar himself did not understand the
meaning of al-Kalalah and did not know the Qur'anic verse regarding the
Tayammum and other rules, so how about those who came later and followed
him without the ability to interpret the Qur'anic texts?Naturally they will answer me with their own quoted saying, and that is:
"I have left with you the Book of Allah and my tradition [Sunnah]." [96]
- [96]
- The saying is cited in al Nisa'i, al Tirmdhi, Ibn Majah
and Abu Dawood
This tradition, if it were correct - and it is correct in its general
meaning - would correspond to the tradition of the two weighty things,
because when the Prophet(saw) talked about his Household (Ahl al- Bayt) he
meant that they should be consulted for two reasons. Firstly, to teach the
tradition [Sunnah], or to transmit to people the correct tradition because
they are cleared from telling any lies, and because Allah - praise be to
Him - made them infallible in the purification verse. Secondly, to explain
and interpret the meanings and aims of the tradition, because the Book of
Allah is not enough for guidance. There are many parties who claim to
follow the Qur'an but in actual fact they have gone astray, and the
Messenger of Allah said, "How many are the readers of the Qur'an whom the
Qur'an curses!. The Book of Allah is silent and could be interpreted in
various ways, and it contains what is vague and what is similar, and to
understand it we have to refer to those who are well endowed with
knowledge as regards the Qur'an, and to Ahl al-Bayt, as regards to the
Prophet's traditions.
The Shiites referred everything to the infallible Imams of Ahl al-Bayt
[the Prophet's Household], and they did not interpret anything unless it
had a supporting text.
We refer in every case to the Companions, whether it concerns Qur'anic
commentary or the confirmation of the Sunnah and its explanation, and we
know about the Companions and their interpretations and their personal
opinions vis-a-vis the clear texts, and there are hundreds of them, so we
cannot rely upon them after what they have done.
If we ask our religious leaders, "Which Sunnah do you follow?" They answer
categorically, "The Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah!"
But the historical facts are incompatible with that, for they claim that
the Messenger of Allah said, "Take my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly
Guided Caliphs after me. Hold firmly to it." But the Sunnah they follow is
often the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, and even the Messenger's
Sunnah which they claim to follow is in fact transmitted by those people.
However, we read in our Sihahs that the Messenger of Allah prevented them
from writing his Sunnah so that it was not confused with the Qur'an. Abu
Bakr and Umar did the same thing during their caliphate, we therefore have
no proof for the saying, "I left you my Sunnah" [97]
- [97]
- The term 'my Sunnah' does NOT appear in all the six sihahs. It
appears in al Muwatta by Malik ibn Anas, some of the subsequent
writers, such as al Tabari and Ibn Hisham referred to the saying
as transmitted by Malik.
The examples that I have cited in this study - besides many that I have
not mentioned - are enough to refute this saying, because there are
elements in the Sunnah of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman which contradict and
negate the Prophet's Sunnah, as is so apparent.
The first incident that took place immediately after the death of the
Messenger of Allah, which the Sunnis as well as the historians recorded,
was the argument between Fatimah al-Zahra and Abu Bakr regarding the
alleged saying, "We, the prophets, do not leave an inheritance, all that
we leave behind should go to charity."
Fatimah denied and refuted this saying, with the support of the Book of
Allah, and protested against Abu Bakr's allegation and said that her
father, the Messenger of Allah, could not contradict the Book of Allah
which was revealed to him, for Allah - praise be to Him the Most High -
said: '-Allah enjoins you concerning your children. The male shall have
the equal of the portion of two females ... " (Holy Qur'an 4:11).
This Qur'anic verse is general and is applicable to prophets and
non-prophets alike.
She also protested with the following words of the most High: "And
Sulaiman was Dawood's heir" (Holy Qur an 27:16), and both of them were
prophets.
Allah - Glory be to Him - also said: "... Grant me from Thyself an heir,
who should inherit from me and inherit from the children of Yaqub, and
make him, my Lord, one with whom You are well pleased" (Holy Qur'an
19:5-6).
The second incident that involved Abu Bakr during the early days of his
caliphate, which the Sunni historians recorded, was his disagreement with
the nearest of all people to him, Umar ibn al-Khattab. The incident
evolves around Abu Bakr's decision to fight those who refused to pay Zakat
[alms] and kill them, but Umar protested and advised him not to fight them
because he had heard the Messenger of Allah saying: I have been ordered to
fight the people until they say, "There is no other god but Allah and
Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." And he who says it can keep his
wealth to himself and I have no right to his [blood], and he is
accountable to Allah.
This is a text cited by Muslim in his Sahih: "The Messenger of Allah (saw)
gave the flag to Ali on the Day of Khayber, and Ali said, "O Messenger of
Allah, what am I fighting them for?" The Messenger of Allah replied,
"Fight them until they testify that there is no other god but Allah and
that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and if they do that then they
will prevent you from killing them and taking their wealth, except by
justice, and they will be accountable to Allah." [98]
- [98]
- Muslim, Sahih, vol 8 p 151
But Abu Bakr was not satisfied with this tradition and said, "By Allah, I
will fight those who differentiate between the prayers and Zakat because
Zakat is justly charged on wealth." And also said, "By Allah if they
refuse me a rope which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah. I will
fight them for it." After that Umar ibn al-Khattab was satisfied and said,
"As soon as I saw Abu Bakr determined I felt very pleased. "
I do not know how Allah could please somebody who is preventing the
tradition of the Prophet. This interpretation was used to justify their
fight against Muslims although Allah had prohibited making war against
them, and Allah said in His Glorious Book:
O You who believe! When you go to war in Allah's way, make investigation,
and do not say to any one who offers you peace, "You are not a believer."
Do you seek the goods of this world's life? But with Allah there are
abundant gains, you too were such before, then Allah conferred a benefit on
you; therefore make investigation surely Allah is aware of what you do"
(Holy Qur'an 4:94) .
Those who refused to give Abu Bakr their Zakat did not deny its necessity,
but they only delayed it to investigate the matter. The Shiites say that
these people were surprised by the succession of Abu Bakr, and some of
them had been present with the Messenger of Allah at the Farewell
Pilgrimage and had heard the text in which he mentioned Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Therefore they decided to wait for a while until they obtained a
clarification as to what had happened, but Abu Bakr wanted to silence them
lest they spoke the truth. Because I do not reason with nor protest
against what the Shiites say, I will leave this issue to somebody who is
interested in it.
However, I should not forget to note here that the Messenger of Allah
(saw) had an encounter with Tha'alabah who asked him repeatedly to pray
for him to be rich and he promised Allah to give alms. The Messenger of
Allah prayed for him and Tha'alabah became so rich that his sheep and
camels filled al-Medinah, and he started to neglect his duties and stopped
attending the Friday Prayers. When the Messenger of Allah sent some
officials to collect the Zakat, he refused to give them anything saying
that it was a Jiziah [head tax on free non-Muslims under Muslim rule] or
similar to it, but the Messenger of Allah did not fight him nor did he
order his killing, and Allah revealed the following verse about him:
"And there are those of them who made a covenant with Allah. If He gives
us out of His Grace, we will certainly give alms and we will certainly be
of the good. But when He gave them out of His Grace, they became niggardly
of it and they turned back and they withdrew"(Holy Qur'an 9:75-76).
After the revelation of the above Quranic verse. Tha'alabah came to the
Messenger of Allah crying and asked him to accept his Zakat, but the
Messenger of Allah refused to accept it, according to the story.
If Abu Bakr and Umar were following the tradition of the Messenger why did
they allow the killing of all these innocent Muslims just because they
refused to pay the Zakat?
As for those apologists who were trying to correct Abu Bakr's mistake when
he interpreted the Zakat as a just tax on wealth, there is no excuse for
them nor for Abu Bakr after considering the story of Tha'alabah who with
held the Zakat and thought of it as "Jiziah". Who knows, perhaps Abu Bakr
persuaded his friend Umar to kill those who refused to pay the Zakat
because otherwise their call would have spread throughout the Islamic
world to revive al-Ghadir's text in which Ali was confirmed as successor
[to the Messenger of Allah]. Thus Umar ibn al-Khattab wanted to fight
them, and it was he who threatened to kill and burn those who remained in
Fatimah's house in order to extract the acclamation from them for his
friend.
The third incident which took place during the early days of Abu Bakr's
caliphate in which he found himself in disagreement with Umar, and for
which certain Qur'anic and Prophetic texts were interpreted, was that of
Khalid ibn al-Walid who killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah and took his wife and
married her on the same day. Umar said to Khalid, O enemy of Allah, you
killed a Muslim man, then you took his wife ... by Allah, I will stone
you." [99]
- [99]
- Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 280
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110
Tarikh, al Fida, vol 1 p 158
al Isabah fi Marifat as Sahabah, vol 3 p 336
But Abu Bakr defended Khalid, and said, "O Umar, forgive him, he made a mistake, but do not rebuke him."
This is another scandal that history has recorded for a prominent
Companion, and when we talk about him, we talk with respect and reverence,
we even gave him the title 'The ever drawn sword of Allah." What can I say
about a Companion who did all that? Who killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah, the
honourable Companion, leader of Bani Tamin and Bani Yarbu, famous for his
courage and generosity, and furthermore the historians tell us that Khalid
killed Malik and his followers after they put down their arms and stood
together to pray. They were tied by ropes and with them was Leyla bint
al-Minhal, wife of Malik, who was considered to be one of the most
beautiful Arab ladies of her time, and Khalid was captured by her beauty.
Malik said, "O Khalid, send us to Abu Bakr and he will be our judge."And
Abdullah ibn Umar together with Abu Qutadah al-Ansari intervened and urged
Khalid to send them to Abu Bakr, but he refused and said, "Allah will
never forgive me if I do not kill him."
Malik then turned to his wife Leyla and said, "This is the one who will
kill me." After that Khalid ordered his execution and took his wife Leyla
and married her that very night. [100]
- [100]
- Tarikh, al Fida, vol 1 p 158
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110
Tarikh, Ibn al Shinanah, vol 11 p 114 (On the margin of
al Kamil, vol 2 p 114)
What can I say about those Companions who trespassed on what Allah deemed
to be forbidden; they killed Muslims because of personal whims and
permitted themselves to have women that Allah had forbidden us to have. In
Islam, a widow cannot be wed by another man before a definite period of
time had elapsed, and this period of time has been specified by Allah in
His Glorious Book. But Khalid followed his whims and debased himself, for
what would this period of time ['Iddah] mean to him after he had already
killed her husband and his followers despite the fact that they were
Muslims. Abdullah ibn Umar and Abu Qutadah have testified to this, and the
latter became so angry about Khalid's behaviour that he returned to
al-Medinah and swore that he would never serve in an army led by Khalid
ibn al-Walid. [101]- [101]
- Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 280
Tarikh, al Fida, vol 3 p 336
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110
As we are talking about this famous incident, it is worth looking at what
Haykal said in his book "al-Siddiq Abu Bakr" in a chapter entitled "The
opinion of Umar and his reasoning on the subject matter": Umar, who was an
ideal example of firm justice, saw that Khalid had dealt unjustly with
another Muslim man and took his widow before the end of her ['Iddah],
therefore he should not stay in command of the army. So that no such
incident would be repeated again and spoil the affairs of the Muslims and
give them a bad name amongst the Arabs, he said, "It is not right to leave
him unpunished after his affair with Leyla."
Let us suppose that it was right that he passed a judgement on Malik but
got it wrong, which was something Umar would not permit, what he had done
with his widow alone would have meant that he had to be brought to
justice. Furthermore, being the "sword of Allah" and the commander of the
victorious army, did not give him the right to do what he had done,
otherwise people like Khalid would abuse the law. Worse still, they would
be bad examples for all Muslims on how to respect the Book of Allah. Thus
Umar kept the pressure on Abu Bakr until he recalled Khalid and rebuked
him." [102]
- [102]
- Al Siddiq al Akbar, Haykal, p 151
May we ask Mr. Haykel and his like from our scholars, who would compromise
in order to preserve the honour of the Companions: Why did Abu Bakr not
bring Khalid to justice? And if Umar was an ideal example of firm justice,
as Haykel puts it, why did he only remove him from the command of the
army, and not bring him to justice so that he would not be a bad example
for all Muslims of how to respect the Book of Allah, as he said. And did
they respect the Book of Allah and discharge the laws of Allah? Nay! It
was politics! It does wonders, it changes the truth and throws the
Qur'anic texts over the wall.
Some of our scholars tell us in their books that the Messenger of Allah
(saw) once became very angry when Usamah tried to mediate on behalf of an
honourable woman accused of stealing, and the Messenger said, "Woe unto
you! Do you mediate about one of the laws of Allah? By Allah if it was
Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad, I would cut her hand. He destroyed those
before you because they would let the thief go if he was an honourable
person, but would bring him to justice if he was a weak one." How could
they be silent about the killing of the innocent Muslims, and the marriage
of their widows on the same night despite the tragic loss of their
husbands? I wish they had remained silent ! But they try to justify
Khalid's misdeed by inventing various virtues for him, they even called
him "The ever drawn sword of Allah" I remember being surprised by a friend
of mine, who used to like joking and changing the meaning of the words,
when I mentioned the virtues of Khalid ibn al-Walid during my days of
ignorance and called him "The ever drawn sword of Allah". He replied, "He
is the crippled sword of the devil!"
I was surprised then, but after my research, Allah has opened my eyes and
helped me to know the true value of those who seized the caliphate,
changed the laws of Allah and violated the boundaries of Allah.
There is a famous story about Khalid which happened during the lifetime of
the Prophet who sent him on a mission to Bani Judhaymah to call them to
Islam, but did not order him to fight them. But they did not declare their
Islam very well, instead they said, "We are turning to... we are turning
[to Islam]". As a result Khalid started to kill them and took prisoners
from them, and pushed them towards his friends whom he ordered to kill
those prisoners. But some of his friends refused to do what they were told
because they realized that these people had been truly converted to Islam,
and they went back and told the Prophet what had happened. He said. "O
Allah I am innocent of Khalid's deed." He said it twice [103], then sent
Ali ibn Abi Talib to Bani Judhaymah with money to pay compensation for
their dead and for the loss of their wealth, even down to a dog. The
Messenger of allah stood up and faced the Qiblah [the direction of al-
Ka'ba] and raised his hands to the sky then said, 'O Allah, I am innocent
of Khalid's deed three times". [104]
- [103]
- Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 171
- [104]
- Sirah, Ibn Hisham, vol 4 p 53
Tabaqat, Ibn Sa'd
Usud al Ghabah, vol 3 p 102
May we ask where the alleged fairness of the Companions, which these
people claim to have had is ? If Khalid ibn al-Walid who is considered to
be one of our greatest military leaders was the sword of Allah, does that
mean that Allah drew his sword to kill the innocent Muslims and to violate
the integrity of people? There is a clear contradiction here, because
Allah forbids the killing of human beings and prohibits the committing of
vile deeds, but Khalid seems to have drawn the sword of injustice to kill
innocent Muslims and to confiscate their wealth and to take their women.
There is a blatant lie and a clear deception. Praise and thanks he upon
You, our God ... Blessed be You the Most High ... Praise be upon You, You
did not create the skies and the earth and what is in between them
unjustly. These are the doubts of those who blaspheme. Woe to those who
committed blasphemy, for Hell is awaiting them. How did Abu Bakr, who was
the caliph of the Muslims, allow himself to listen to all these crimes and
be silent about them? Moreover he asked Umar to stop attacking Khalid and
was very angry at Abu Qutadah because he protested strongly about Khalid's
action. Was he convinced that Khalid had passed a judgement but got it
wrong? What excuse could be given to those corrupt criminals who violated
human integrity and claimed to have passed judgement. I do not think that
Abu Bakr was trying to pass judgement on Khalid who Umar ibn al-Khattab
called "The enemy of Allah". Umar thought that Khalid should be killed
because he had killed an innocent Muslim, or be subjected to a hell of
stones because he had committed adultery with Leyla, the widow of Malik.
But nothing like that happened to Khalid, rather he defeated Umar because
he had the full support of Abu Bakr who knew the whole truth about Khalid
more than anybody else. Historians have recorded that after this terrible
misdeed, Abu Bakr sent Khalid on a mission to al-Yamamah, from which he
came out victorious and subsequently married a girl from there in the same
way as he had Leyla, before the blood of those innocent Muslims and the
blood of the followers of Musaylama had dried. Later, Abu Bakr rebuked
him about what he had done and used stronger words than those he used
during the affair of Leyla [105]. Undoubtedly, this girl's husband was
killed by Khalid who took her for himself, in the same way as he had
Leyla, the widow of Malik. It must have been so, otherwise Abu Bakr would
not have rebuked him using stronger words than the previous event. The
historians mention the text of the letter which Abu Bakr sent to Khalid
ibn al-Walid in which he said, "O Ibn Umm Khalid. Upon my life you are
doing nothing but marrying women, and in the yard of your house there is
the blood of one thousand two hundred Muslims yet to dry!" [106]. When
Khalid read the letter, he commented, "This must be the work of al-A'sar"
meaning Umar ibn al-Khattab.
- [105]
- Al Siddiq al Akbar, Haykal. p 151
- [106]
- Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 254
Tarikh al Khamis, vol 3 p 343
These are the strong facts that made me shun these types of Companions,
and their followers who support them and defend them eagerly and invent
various texts and stories to justify the deeds of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman,
Khalid ibn al-Walid, Muawiyah, Amr ibn al-As and their brethren. O Allah!
I am innocent of the deeds and the sayings of those people who opposed
Your rules, violated Your prohibitions and trespassed on Your territories.
I am innocent of their followers and their supporters despite their full
knowledge of the latter's misdeeds. Forgive me for my previous support for
them because I was ignorant and Your Messenger said, "He who does not know
[the ignorant] cannot be excused for his ignorance."
O Allah! Our leaders have led us astray and veiled the truth from us and
presented us with distorted pictures of those renegade Companions and led
us to believe that they were the best people after Your Messenger. There
is no doubt that our forefathers were victims of the deception and the
intrigues of the Umayyads and later the Abbasids.
O Allah! Forgive them and forgive us hecause You know what is in our inner
souls. They loved and respected those Companions out of goodwill assuming
that they were supporters of Your Messenger, may Your blessings and peace
be upon him and upon those who love him. You know, my Lord their and our
love for the purified family, the Imams whom You cleansed and purified.
and at their head. the master of all Muslims. the Commander of the
Believers, chief of the singularly radiant, Imam of all those who fear
Allah. our lord Ali ibn Abi Talib.
O Allah ! Let me be one of their followers who have committed themselves
to their cause amd followed their path. Let me be on their ship and help
me to hold on to their strong link. Let me enter their doors and assist me
in dedication to their love, help me to follow their words and their
deeds, and let me be grateful to their virtues. O Allah! Let me be with
them, for Your Prophet (saw) said, "Man is assembled together [on the day
of Judgement] with those whom he loves."
2. The Prophetic tradition of the Ship
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said,
Behold! My Ahl al-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah, whoever embarked in it
was saved, and whoever turned away from it was drowned. [107]
- [107]
- Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 151
Yanabi Muwaddah, Qundoozi Hanafi, p 30, 370
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p 184, 234
Majmaa al-Zawaed, al-Haithami, v9, p168
He also said,My Ahl al-Bayt are like the Gate of Repentance of the
children of Israel; whoever entered therein was forgiven. [108]
- [108]
- 1. Majmaa al-Zawaed, al-Haithami, v9, p168
2. al-Sawaeq al-Muhriqa, ibn Hajar al-Haithami, p193
also in:
3. Noor al-Absar, al-Shiblinji
4. al-Ifrad, al-Darqutni
Ibn Hajar cited the above tradition in his book "Al-Sawa'iq al-Mahriqa" and gave the following commentary: The idea behind comparing them with
the Ark [ship] is to say that whoever loves them and reveres them as a
sign of his gratitude for their graces, and whoever is guided by their
learned people, will be saved from the darkness of contradictions. On the
other hand whoever decides to stay behind, will sink in the sea of
ingratitude and will be destroyed in the wilderness of tyranny. The reason
for comparing Ahl al-Bayt with the Gate of Repentance is that Allah - the
Most High - made the Gate of Repentance [the Gate of Jericho or Jerusalem]
a sign of His forgiveness. Similarly, Ahl al-Bayt are the means of
Repentance for this nation.
I wish I could ask Ibn Hajar if he was one of those who went on board the
ship and entered the door and was guided by the religious leaders [Ulama],
or was he one of those who order what they do not do in practice. and
contradict their belief. There are many of those unfair people when I ask
them or argue with them they say. "We are in a more favourable situation
vis-a-vis Ahl al-Bayt and lmam Ali than others, we respect and appreciate
Ahl al Bayt and nobody can deny their graces and their virtues."
Yes, they say with their tongues what is not in their hearts, or they
respect them and appreciate them but follow and imitate their enemies who
fought them and contradicted them, or even perhaps on many occasions do
not know who Ahl al-Bayt are, and if you ask them who Ahl al-Bayt are,
they answer you immediately, "they are the Prophet's wives from whom Allah
kept the dirt away and purified them." When I addressed the question to
one of those people, he solved the puzzle by giving me the following
answer, "All the Sunni people and al-Jama'ah follow Ahl al-Bayt." I was
surprised and said, "How could that be?" He answered, "The Messenger of
Allah said that we should take half of our religion from this Humayra,
meaning Aisha, therefore we took half of the religion from Ahl al-Bayt."
On this basis one could understand their respect and appreciation for Ahl
al-Bayt, but when you ask them about the twelve Imams they would only know
Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn from them, and they would not accept the
Imamate of al-Hasan nor al-Husayn. Besides, they respect Muawiyah ibn Abi
Sufyan who poisoned al-Hasan and killed him [they call Muawiyah "The
writer of the Revelations"], and they also respect Amr ibn al-As in the
same way as they respect Imam Ali.
This is nothing but contradictions and confusion and an attempt to cover
the right with the wrong and the light with darkness. For how could the
heart of the believer contain the love of Allah and the devil at the same
time, and Allah said in His Glorious Book: "You shall not find a people
who believe in Allah and the Latter day befriending those who act in
opposition to Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their (own) fathers, or their sons or their brothers or their kinsfolk; these are they
into whose hearts He has impressed faith and whom He has strengthened with
an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath
which rivers flow abiding therein; Allah is well-pleased with them and
they are well-pleased with Him; these are Allah's party: now surely the
party of Allah are the succesful ones. (Holy Qur'an 58:22).
Allah also said: "O You who believe! Do not take My enemy and your enemy
for friends. Would you offer them love while they deny what has come to
you of truth?" (Holy Qur'an 60:1).
3. The Prophetic tradition: "He who wishes to live like me."
The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Who ever wishes to live and die like
me, and to abide in the Garden of Eden after death should acknowledge Ali
as his patron and follow Ahl al-Bayt after me, for they are my Ahl al-Bayt
and they have been created out of the same knowledge and understanding as
myself. Woe unto those followers of mine who will deny the Ahl al-Bayt
their distinctions and who will disregard their relationship and affinity
with me. May Allah never let them benefit from my intercession." [109]
- [109]
- Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 128
Kanz al Ummal, vol 6 p 155
al Manaqib, Khawarizmi, p 34
Yanabi al Muwaddah, p 149
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 2 p 95
Hilyat al Awlia, vol 1 p 86
Al Jami al Kabir, al Tabrani and
al Isabah, Ibn Hajar
As you can see, the above tradition is one of those clear sayings which do
not require any interpretation, nor indeed gives any scope for the Muslims
to choose, rather, it eliminates any excuse. If he does not follow Ali and
acknowledge Ahl al-Bayt, the Prophet's Family he will be deprived of the
mediation of their grandfather, the Messenger of Allah (saw). It is worth
noting here that at the early stage of my research, I felt doubtful about
the authenticity of this tradition and I thought it carried a great threat
to those who are not in agreement with Ali and Ahl al-Bayt, especially
when the tradition does not allow any scope for interpretation. I became
rather worried when I read the book "Al- lsabah" in which Ibn Hajar
al-Asqalani gives the following commentary on the tradition: ". . .I based
the tradition on what Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharibi had said, and he is
feeble." In fact Ibn Hajar removed some of the doubt that remained in my
minds for I thought that Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharihi fabricated the
tradition and could not be a reliable transmitter. But Allah - Praise be
to Him the Most High - wanted to show me the whole truth. I read a hook
entitled Ideological discussions on the writings of Ibrahim al-Jabhan
[110]. This book clarified the situation and it became apparent to me that
Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharibi was a reliable transmitter of Hadith and the
two Shaykhs, Muslim and al-Bukhari. depended on what he transmitted. I
myself followed his case and found that al-Bukhari cited a few traditions
transmitted by him regarding the batttle of al-Hudaybiyah, and they were
put in Volume 3, Page 31. Muslim also cited a few traditions in his Sahih
Volume 5 in a chapter entitled "The Boundaries" Page 119. Even
al-Dhahabi, with all his restrictions, considered him a reliable
transmitter, together with the Imams of al-Jurh and al-Ta'deel (criteria
applied to Hadiths to find out the reliable and unreliable transmitter),
and of course the two Shaykhs [Muslim and al-Bukhari] used him as a
reliable reference. So why all this intrigue, falsification and deception
about a man who was considered to be a reliable transmitter by the authors
of al-Sihah? Is it because he told the truth regarding the necessity to
follow Ahl al-Bayt, and was therefore branded by Ibn Hajar as feeble and
weak?- [110]
- Mubaqasha Aqa diyya fi Maqdat Ibrahim al Jabhan, p 29
It seems that Ibn Hajar was unaware of the fact that his writings would
become subject to the security of some highly dedicated scholars and that
he would be accountable to them for all what he had written. These
scholars were able to uncover his prejudice and ignorance because they
were guided by the light of the Prophet and Ahl al-Bayt.
I realized later that some of our scholars try hard to cover the truth so
that the affairs of the Companions and the caliphs, who were considered to
be their leaders and mentors, remain unknown. We see them trying to
interpret the correct tradition in their own ways and give them different
meanings, or they deny the traditions that contradict their creed, even if
they were mentioned in their own books and Sihahs. At times they remove
half or one-third of the prophetic tradition to replace it with something
else! Or they may throw doubts about the reliable narrators [of the
tradition] because they raise issues that are not to their liking, and on
a few occasions they publish them in the first edition [of a book] but
remove it from the subsequent editions without giving any indication to
justify their action, in spite of the full knowledge of the intelligent
readers as to why the saying has been removed!
I have become aware of all these things after conducting meticulous
research and investigation, and I have convincing proof to support what I
am saying. I wish they would stop giving me all these excuses to justify
the actions of those Companions who turned back on their heels, because
their views seem to contradict each other and contradict the historical
fact. I wish they would follow the just path, even if it was a bitter one,
then they would leave their minds and the minds of others in peace.
They claim that some of the early Companions were not reliable
transmitters of the Prophet's tradition, therefore they removed what they
did not like, especially if these traditions included some of the last
instructions of the Messenger of Allah before his death.
Al-Bukhari and Muslim both write about the fact that the Messenger of
Allah advised three things on his death-bed:
- Remove all the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula
- Reward the delegation in the same way as I have done
and the narrator then said, "I forgot the third." [111]
- [111]
- Sahih, Bukhari, vol 7 p 121
Sahih, Muslim, vol 5 p 75
It is possible that those Companions who were present at the death-bed and
heard the three instructions forgot the third one, when we know that they
used to learn by heart a whole epic after hearing it once? No. It is
politics that forced them to forget it and not to mention it again. This
is indeed another of those comedies organized by the Companions, because
there is no doubt vhat the first instruction of the Messenger of Allah was
to appoint Ali as his successor, but the narrator did not recite it.
The person who is involved with the investigation about this issue will
inevitably sense the undoubtable recommendation for the succession of Ali
despite all the attempts to cover it or to remove it. Al-Bukhari cited it
in his Sahih in a chapter entitled "Al-Wasaya" [The Legacies or the
Recommendations], Muslim also cited it in his Sahih and said that the
Prophet recommended Ali for the succession in the presence of Aisha [112].
Look how Allah shows His light even if the oppressors try to cover it.
- [112]
- Sahih, Bukhari, vol 3 p 68
Sahih, Muslim, vol 2 p 14
I repeat here what I said before; if those Companions were not reliable
enough to transmit the recommendations of the Messenger of Allah, then we
cannot blame the followers and those who came after them.
If Aisha, the mother of the faithful, could not bear mentioning the name
of Ali and could not wish him any good - as Ibn Sa'd writes in his Tabaqat
[113], and al-Bukhari in his Sahih in a chapter entitled "The illness of
the Prophet and his death", and if she prostrated herself to thank Allah
when she heard the news of Ali's death, then how can we expect her to
mention the recommendation in favour of Ali, when she was known, publicly
and privately, for her animosity and hatred towards Ali and his sons and
towards all the Family of the Prophet. Behold! There is no might or power
except in Allah the Most High, the Great.
- [113]
- Tabaqat, Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 29