Any researcher stands dumbfounded when he collides with the reality
about "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah" and comes to know that they were the
enemies of the pure Progeny of the Prophet, following those who fought
Ahl al-Bayt and cursed them and spared no means to murder them and obliterate
their legacy. This is why you find "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah" placing
the label of "reliable" on all traditionists if they are Kharijites or
Nasibi followers of Uthman. They charge and accuse all the traditionists
who are loyal to Ahl al-Bayt of being "weak."
You do not find such matters recorded openly in their books. But when
they try to challenge the authenticity of accurate traditions recounting
the merits of Ali ibn Abu Talib, they label them as "weak," saying, "Among
the chain of its narrators is so-and-so who is a Rafidi."[126]
And they label as "sahih," authentic, false traditions which were
fabricated in order to raise the status of and glorify the other caliphs
even if their narrators were Nasibis. Being a Nasibi, according to them,
is indicative of one's zeal about the Sunnah.
Ibn Hajar, for example, says the following about Abdullah ibn Idris
al-Azdi, a very well known Nasibi, "He was a man who followed the Sunnah
and Jama`ah, a zealot with regard to the Sunnah, and a follower of Uthman."[127]
About Abdullah ibn Awn al-Basri he says, "He is held as reliable, and he
is a man of piety and zeal about the Sunnah and toughness against the people
of innovations. Ibn Sa`d has said that Abdullah ibn Awn al-Basri was a
follower of Uthman."[128] And
about Ibrahim ibn Ya`qub al-Jawzjani, who was famous for hating Ali, peace
be upon him, he says that his sect was Hareezi, i.e. a follower of Hareez
ibn Uthman of Damascus, the sect known as Nasibism.[129]
Ibn Hayyan describes Ibrahim as being zealous about the Sunnah, a man who
memorized hadith.
It is noteworthy that this same Nasibi whom they praise by saying that
he is zealous about the Sunnah and that he memorized hadith used
to take the opportunity of other traditionists gathering at his door [asking
permission to enter] to send one of his slave-girls with a hen in her hand
to tour the town then to go back to her master, Ibrahim ibn Ya`qub al-Jawzjani,
to tell him that she could not find anyone to slaughter it for her; he
would then cry out: "Subhan-Allah! There is none to slaughter a
hen whereas Ali in broad day light slaughters twenty thousand Muslims!"
Through such cunning and conniving, the Nasibis, enemies of Ahl al-Bayt,
try to dissuade people from following the truth and mislead them through
such false accusations in order to fill the Muslims' hearts, especially
those of traditionists [such as the ones who used to meet al-Jawzjani to
learn hadith from him] with hatred and animosity towards Ali ibn
Abu Talib, peace be upon him, and thus permit cursing, taunting, and condemning
him.
You can find such phenomenon even in our time. Despite the claim of
contemporary "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah" that they love Ahl al-Bayt and
seek Allah's Pleasure with our master Ali, karrama-Allahu wajhahu
(Allah glorified his countenance), as they say, if you narrate one hadith
containing one of the virtues of Ali, peace be upon him, they ridicule
you, charge you with Shi`ism, with being an innovator, and with being "extremist."
When you, however, discuss the caliphs Abu Bakr and Umar, and other
sahaba they feel very comfortable talking to you.
This is exactly the doctrine of their "good predecessors." Historians
have transmitted saying that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal used to label as "weak"
any traditionist who belittled Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman, while holding
in high esteem Ibrahim al-Jawzjani, the afore-mentioned Nasibi, praising
him a great deal. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal corresponded with him, recited
his books from the pulpit, and used his works in support of his arguments.
If this is the case with regard to Ahmad ibn Hanbal who forced his contemporaries
to recognize the caliphate of Ali, whom he ranked as their fourth, do not
ask me about the others who did not admit even one single merit for Ali,
or about those who cursed and condemned him from the pulpits during Fridays
and Eids.
Al-Dar Qutni, for example, says, "Ibn Qutaybah, spokesman of Ahl al-Sunnah,
inclines to ascribing human characteristics (to Allah) and deviates from
the line of the Prophet's `Itrat."[130]
This proves that most "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`a" deviated from the path
of the Progeny of the Messenger of Allah.
Al-Mutawakkil, whom traditionists called muhyi al-Sunnah, the
person who revived the Sunnah, and whom Ahmad ibn Hanbal used to respect
and hold in high regards and whose orders he endorsed in appointing judges,
was one of the most notorious Nasibis who were antagonistic towards Ali
and his Ahl al-Bayt, so much so that his grudge prompted him to desecrate
the graves of both Ali and his son Husayn, peace be upon them. He used
to forbid anyone from visiting their sites and would kill anyone named
"Ali." In his dissertation, al-Khawarizmi quotes him saying that he used
to generously reward with money only those who cursed the descendants of
Abu Talib, peace be upon them, and support the sect of Nasibism.[131]
Needless to say, Nasibism is one of the sects of "Ahl al-Sunnah wal
Jama`a;" therefore, the promoter of Nasibism, namely al-Mutawakkil, is
the same one labelled as muhyi al-Sunnah, the person who revived
the Sunnah; so, consider.
Ibn Kathir, in his Al-Bidaya wal Nihaya, tells us that when "Ahl
al-Sunnah wal Jama`a" heard al-A`mash narrating the tradition of the roasted
bird, which contains a praise of Ali ibn Abu Talib (peace be upon him),
they took him out of the mosque then washed the place where he used to
sit.[132]
They also opposed the burial of Imam Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, author
of Al-Tafsir al-Kabir (the great exegesis) and the great historian,
for no reason other than his admission of the authenticity of hadith
al-Ghadeer in which the Prophet is quoted saying, "Whoever regards me as
his/her mawla (master), this Ali is (henceforth) his/her master."
He collected its sources from various avenues. Those sources were quite
numerous, so they came to be referred to as mutawatir, consecutively
reported.
Ibn Kathir has said, "I have seen one of his books wherein he compiled
the traditions relevant to the Ghadeer incident, and it was in two huge
volumes, in addition to another book in which he compiles the incidents
relevant to the tradition of the roasted bird."[133]
Ibn Hajar, too, has discussed him in his book Lisan al-Mizan, saying,
"He is the great Imam and the highly respected interpreter of the Qur'an;
he is trustworthy, truthful, and there is a good deal of Shi`ism in him
and support (for Ahl al-Bayt, as) which is not detrimental (to his reliability)."[134]
When Imam al-Nasa'i, the great traditionist and one of the authors of
Al-Sihah al-Sittah (the six books of traditions which the Sunnis
regard as sahih, authentic), wrote a book dealing with the merits
of the Commander of the Faithful Ali, he was asked about Mu`awiyah's "merits,"
whereupon he answered: "I do not know of any except that the Messenger
of Allah said to him once: `May Allah never satisfy your stomach.'" He
was, therefore, beaten on his genitals till he lost consciousness. His
body was carried to some place to die of such beating.
Ibn Kathir tells us the following in his Tarikh where he describes
the violent confrontations that took place in Baghdad in 363 A.H./954 A.D.
between the Shi`as and "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`a" on the anniversary of
Ashura:
A group from "Ahl al-Sunnah" seated a woman on an animal to play the
role of Ayesha and brought some of their men to play Talha and al-Zubayr.
They expressed their objective thus: "We want to fight the followers of
Ali." A large number of people were killed.[135]This is what goes on nowadays, too: "Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`a" attack Shi`as
on Ashura in order to prohibit them from participating in the commemorative
procession, killing many innocent Muslims. After having conducted such an expose, it becomes clear to us that the
Nasibis who antagonized Ali, peace be upon him, and who fought Ahl al-Bayt,
peace be upon them, are the ones who labelled themselves "Ahl al-Sunnah,"
and we have already come to know what "Sunnah" they mean and to what "consensus"
they refer.
It is self-evident that whoever antagonizes the Progeny of the Messenger
of Allah is an enemy of their grandfather the Prophet, and whoever antagonizes
the Messenger of Allah is an enemy of Allah.
It is likewise self-evident that anyone who is an opponent of Allah,
His Messenger and Ahl al-Bayt cannot be among the true servants of the
Merciful One, nor can he be among the followers of the Sunnah except when
such a "Sunnah" is meant to be the "sunnah" of the devil. As for the Sunnah
of the Merciful One, it is loving Allah and His Messenger and Ahl al-Bayt,
following them and following in their footsteps. The most Exalted One has
said, "Say: I do not ask you for any reward for it except to love my near
relatives" (Holy Qur'an, 42:23).
So how can one compare Mu`awiyah with Ali, or the "imams" of misguidance
with the Imams of guidance?
This is a clear statement for people, and guidance, and admonition,
to those who fear their Lord. (Holy Qur'an, 3:138)
[126] What they mean by "Rafidi"
[literally: rejectionist] is someone who follows Ali and rejects the caliphate
of those who preceded him in ruling over the Muslims. [127] Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib,
Vol. 5, p. 145 and Vol. 1, p. 82.
[128] It is well known that
the followers of Uthman are the Nasibis who accused Ali of being kafir,
apostate, and they accused him of killing Uthman ibn Affan. They are headed
by Mu`awiyah ibn Abu Sufyan, Uthman's cousin; so, he is their chief and
leader.
[129] The Nasibis are Ali's
enemies and the enemies of his Ahl al-Bayt from among the Kharijites, the
Qasitis, and the renegades who antagonized him and fought him. After his
martyrdom, they took to cursing and condemning him.
[130] Al-Dhahabi, Lisan al-Mizan,
Vol. 3, p. 357.
[131] Refer to p. 135 of al-Khawarizmi's
Rasaail (Letters).
[132] [As an act of purification
from najasa, uncleanness or filth.] This incident is narrated on p. 147,
Vol. 11, of Ibn Kathir's book Al Bidaya wal Nihaya.
[133] Ibid.
[134] This is mentioned when
Ibn Hajar, author of Lisan al-Mizan, discusses the biography of Ibn Jarir
al-Tabari.
[135] Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidaya
wal Nihaya fil Fitan wal Malahim, Vol. 11, p. 275.