Responding to Doubts
Date : Apr. 2, 2007
Professor Husseini Qazvini
As our dear audience is well aware, our discussion today is going to be about a number of doubts raised in publications of the Amir Kabir University of Technology last week. The publications included insults to Hazrat Wali Asr (AS), Amir al-Momenin (AS) as well as the Holy Prophet (PBUH).
In an article entitled “Where can prostitutes be found the most?” the holiness of Qom, known as the city of blood and uprising, was brought into question. And in a separate article, “Black Crows”, the girls wearing black chadors (semicircular cloak used for covering the head and body), were clearly insulted. And the chador as the best Hijab (Islamic veil) was regarded as an issue rooted in jealousy. The four student publications were Sahar, with Ahmad Qassaban as its managing director; Atiye, with Miqdad Khalil Pur as its managing director; Sar Khat with Majid Sheikh Pur as its managing director as well as Rivar, with Puyan Mahmoudian as its manager.
The sentence which they published about Hazrat Wali Asir (AS) and which really fills the heart with sorrow was as follows,
“We are awaiting someone after whom our country is named. This is just a bunch of illusions and myths which we have been fed with.”
It means that believing in Mahdavism, belief in and efforts to prepare for the re-appearance of Imam Mahdi (AS), is just an illusion and a myth. And it was written in the last part the same article,
“If they (the government) have a real faith in Ali, they must know that Ali could simply tolerate the opposition and the critics. Ali was neither light, heaven, sacred nor infallible. If he really had been so, he would never have called on people to freely criticize him. Ali was a fallible man not an infallible person; as the person placed in the higher rank, namely, Mohammad, was also like this. Now it can be easily guessed how Wali Faqih (supreme jurist) should be.”
As soon as I got informed of such a publication, I reported it to one of the jurists. He told me that Howza (religious schools) is duty-bound to give a crushing response to the raised doubts. We don’t care what Muslim and committed students do in universities. They are fulfilling their own responsibilities. For its part, Howza needs to fulfill its own obligation, react and give a crushing response to the doubts.
Just after the simultaneous publication of this article in all four student journals prompted reactions against the authorities of the university, they categorically denied it and claimed that the logos of their journals have been abused. In a later statement, they claimed that it was a plot or a scenario to create rift among university students and to tarnish their image. In their defense, they insulted the Islamic establishment, Basij and security forces.
Political issues should be resolved by related authorities. They know how to counter them according to the law. We do not consider ourselves in a position to interfere in the field of politics. We are only in a position to explain and respond to doubts and analyze scientific issues. Let’s take a look at the four journals which strongly denied what they had already published. Let’s see what the ideology of those in charge of the publications is like. Should we believe their denial or no whatever they wrote did simply reflect their actual beliefs?
After my colleagues and I rummaged in 30 or 40 publications of this university, we found out that the printed materials were not new at all. We were faced with similar or even worse insults in them. But unfortunately, their action had never faced any reactions.
I want to point to some articles which these guys claim that they were unaware of their publication. This university owns various publications such as Khat Sefr, Jaras, Rivar, Darook, Tardid, Shayad Farda, Kiyan, Radikal, News-sheet Of Islamic Assembly of Students and so on.
In November first in 2006, Sahar whose managing director is Ahmad Qassaban wrote in its 58th volume,
“The glory and magnificence of Iran during the terms of Darius and Cyrus might have slipped their minds because they claim that Iran was born right after Islam’s emergence. They might have forgotten what a magnificent and glorious civilization Iran had before the Arab army stepped into Iran and caused that much heavy destruction.”
The same journal published the following in November second in 2006,
“Fourteen centuries after the emergence of Islam, the theory of Wilayat Faqih began to surface just all of a sudden.”
In April 28, 2007, the journal desecrated Hazrat Wali Asr (AS),
“When God hid Hazrat Mahdi from sights, didn’t He really know that the religious laws and regulations might be left suspended? And if there were not any way to avoid the suspension, what was the need for a hidden Imam disappearing from the public sight?”
In the journal of Tardid, some Quranic verses had come under attack. It is painful in a real sense of the word. God knows how my heart was filled with grief when I read the materials. It is really sad that today Islam is this much oppressed in scientific centers and is being this much targeted. And the worse is that no one dares to find fault with the attackers. Have a look at the sentences below,
“Indeed, we created the cow to show human that he was not too idiotic.
We created the donkey to assure him that there existed a creature more stupid. God is wise and life is beautiful but you are not conscious of. God is capable but you are unaware of. We created you because we had the power. O believers! Stop struggling because you lack any power. You cannot change anything. Stop nagging and do your own business. You may be blessed after all.”
This kind of wordage can only belong to the thugs and hooligans. It is by no means becoming to the prestige of a university student. It was a clear example of defiling God as well as the Quranic verses.
The journal of Darook, in its fourth volume, profaned the religious authorities.
“We only have to imitate. Our jurists know more, of course. We must listen to what they say and then just say ‘sure’. We possess the Well of Jamkaran, [in Qom]. We sell each petition written for Sir [Imam Mahdi] for as much as some pennies and drop it into the holy well. Once the well is filled up, the petitions are taken out and squashed down in order to make new copies again.”
Defiling the Howzas (seminaries),
“Does the lion’s share of the budget go to universities for the education of the country’s youths or to the Howzas to train clerics? Of course, the latter seems to be more essential.”
In an insult to the government, the journal of Jaras, No. 4, published an article in April 27, 2007 containing the following sentences,
“With the all-out support of the ninth government and with a dagger of dogmatic look at the religion in their hands, they have once again started trampling on humanity, freedom and people’s choice. They have, as usual, held up the stick of religion to press ahead with their ominous plans.”
Similar comments were published in the journal of Sahar, No. 51, in December 1, 2006; Sar Khat, No. 2 in December 2006 and February 11, 2006; the journal of Rivar,December 11, 2006; Atiye, No. 1; Shayad Farda, No. 3, May-June 2006; Kiyan, No. 3, April-May, 2006; Aghaz in December 26, 2006; Radikal, No. 1, April-May, 2006; Khat Sefr in May 26, 2006 and No. 12 in May 9, 2006 as well as the News-sheet Of Islamic Assembly Of Student, May 9, 2006. But the latter is currently in control of the committed students. Any way, the denial of the authorities of the Amir Kabir University is by no means acceptable for Howza.
They said, “Ali was a fallible man not an infallible person; as the person placed in the higher rank, namely, Mohammad, was also like this. Now it can be easily guessed how Wali Faqih (supreme jurist) should be.”
Mentioning the name of Hazrat Ali (AS) and the Holy Prophet (PBUH) without salutations is considered blasphemous to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Amir al-Momenin (AS). Even if these guys are not Shia, but Sunni or Wahhabi, they should know that the Wahhabis themselves even avoid mentioning the name of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) without immediately saying any salutation.
Many have been definitely informed of the publication of such comments. The publications in support of the May 22 Movement, specifically, quoted once and again the above-mentioned fragment from Amir al-Momenin’s (AS) statement. I even held a heated debate with Mr. Ayazi and Abdullah Nuri over this quotation in Nahj al-Balagha. I told them that what they say and write in their speeches and newspapers in a bid to deal a blow to the opposite party, is in fact a blow to Amir al-Momenin (AS). But they answered, “When Amir al-Momenin (AS) himself does not regard himself above erring, why are you more Catholic than the Pope?”
I told them yes I agree that Amir al-Momenin (AS) stated,
فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخطئ
But you need to read the following sentence too,
إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي
It is exactly the same as when we only read what stated in the chapter of The Cave: 110,
قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ
Say: "I am but a man like yourselves,
but ignore the following words of
“(but) the inspiration has come to me”
Isn’t it really an unfair and biased look? The chapter of Abraham: 11 has stated,
قَالَتْ لَهُمْ رُسُلُهُمْ إِنْ نَحْنُ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ
Their messengers said to them: "True, we are human like yourselves”
Yet, it has immediately added,
وَ لَكِنَّ اللَّهَ يَمُنُّ عَلَى مَنْ يَشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ وَ مَا كَانَ لَنَا أَنْ نَأْتِيَكُمْ بِسُلْطَانٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ
But Allah doth grant His grace to such of his servants as He pleases. It is not for us to bring you an authority except as Allah permits.
Alike is what Hazrat Joseph (AS) has said,
مَا أُبَرِّئُ نَفْسِي إِنَّ النَّفْسَ لَأَمَّارَةٌ بِالسُّوءِ إِلَّا مَا رَحِمَ رَبِّي
"Nor do I absolve my own self (of blame): the (human) soul is certainly prone to evil, unless my Lord do bestow His Mercy”
If we read a phrase from Hazrat Amir al-Momenin’s (AS) sermon, we need to immediately take a look at the following ones,
فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخطئ إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي
This very phrase of Amir al-Momenin (AS) has been a lot abused in the past seven or eight years. Some points merit mentioning here. Notice the responses that our top figures have made in this regard.
The Sermon 216 of Nahj al-Balagha was made during the Battle of Siffin. The sermon was about the mutual rights of a ruler and people. There, Amir al-Momenin (AS) has talked of the rights of the ruler of an Islamic country along with those of a nation. While enlisting the rights of the ruler, he did not make a distinction between a fallible ruler and an infallible one. Amir al-Momenin (AS) only offered a paradigm for the rulers of all times and at the end referred to himself as an example of a ruler. He said that he, as a ruler of a nation, had all rights that a ruler did. He told people that they should act with him as comfortably as they did with fallible rulers. This is what he said,
فلا تكلّموني بما تكلّم به الجبابرة و لا تتحفّظوا مني بما يتحفّظ به عند أهل البادرة و لا تخالطوني بالمصانعة و لا تظنوا بي استثقالا في حق قيل لي و لا التماس إعظام لنفسي، ... ، فلا تكفوا عن مقالة بحق أو مشورة بعدل، فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخطئ و لا آمن ذلك من فعلي إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي.
Do not evade me as the people of passion are (to be) evaded, do not meet me with flattery and do not think that I shall take it ill if a true thing is said to me, because the person who feels disgusted when truth is said to him or a just matter is placed before him would find it more difficult to act upon them. Therefore, do not abstain from saying a truth or pointing out a matter of justice because I do not regard myself above erring. I do not escape erring in my actions but that Allah helps me in avoiding errors and I am infallible.
In addition to saying that he was not immune from errors, Amir al-Momenin (AS) insisted that he enjoy a unique feature of infallibility as a designate by God and the Holy Prophet (PBUH). Mulla Mohammad Salih Mazandarani who was a prominent Islamic author and researcher has written the lengthiest commentary on Usul Kafi. He has said in Sharh Usul Kafi, vol. 12, p. 511,
«فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخطأ» هذا تواضع لله باعث لهم على الانبساط معه بقول الحق مثل قول يوسفj « و ما أبرىء نفسي إن النفس لأمارة بالسوء»، «و لا آمن ذلك من فعلي إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي ما هو أملك به مني» أي أقوى مني على رفعه و كفايته من شرورها و هو إسناد عصمته إلى الله تعالى
What Amir al-Momenin (AS) meant was to convince people to behave friendly toward him. It was like what Hazrat Joseph (AS) said, وَ مَا أُبَرِّئُ نَفْسِي إِنَّ النَّفْسَ لَأَمَّارَةٌ بِالسُّوءِ . Amir al-Momenin intended to attribute his infallibility to God by saying,
و لا آمن ذلك من فعلي إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي ما هو أملك به مني
Sayyid Murteda Muhri has said in Daf’ Abatil al-Katib, p. 42,
“What Amir al-Momenin (AS) stated is similar to a verse in the chapter of The Night Journey: 74,
وَ لَوْلَا أَنْ ثَبَّتْنَاكَ لَقَدْ كِدْتَ تَرْكَنُ إِلَيْهِمْ شَيْئًا قَلِيلًا
And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little.”
In al-Sahih Min Sirat al-Nabi, vol. 2, p. 200, Allame Sayyid Jafar Murteda ‘Amili, one of the contemporary Shia researchers, has said
لولا لطف الله و عصمته و توفيقه
The Hazrat meant, “If it were not thanks to God’s Ismat (divine protection), mercy and blessing; otherwise, I was fallible too.”
Mr. Rey Shahri has also believed so in al-Qiyadat Fi al-Islam, p. 355.
He makes it quite clear that when Amir al-Momenin (AS) says,
فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخطأ إلا أن يكفي الله من نفسي
he indeed means that heedless of the issue of Ismat, all Islamic rulers are fallible. Thus, they need to make consultations, welcome constructive criticisms and follow up suggestions. If we only take up the first part which is usually done so, فإني لست في نفسي بفوق أن أخط , it is like when we only say,
So woe to the worshippers
And avoid reading the rest,
الَّذِينَ هُمْ عَنْ صَلَاتِهِمْ سَاهُونَ * الَّذِينَ هُمْ يُرَاءُونَ * وَ يَمْنَعُونَ الْمَاعُون
Who are neglectful of their prayers, Those who (want but) to be seen (of men), But refuse (to supply) (even) neighbourly needs.
And a similar case is when we say,
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا لَا تَقْرَبُوا الصَّلَاةَ
O ye who believe! Approach not prayers
and ignore the following words,
وَ أَنْتُمْ سُكَارَى
with a mind befogged.
Concerning the Holy Prophet (PBUH), the Qur’an has stated,
لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ
Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct)
If God’s Messenger (AS) who is to be a role model for mankind makes mistakes, won’t his mistakes be considered as a shortcoming of the religion? It means that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) will become a misleader rather than a leader. A prophet or an Imam needs to be a role model from all aspects; both in their words and deeds. If he did not enjoy the divine protection, he would not deserve to become a role model. In our view, Sunna includes both the speeches and actions of an infallible person. If an infallible Imam took a wrong action and if it were blamed on Islam, wouldn’t it be regarded as the deviation of Islam? Wouldn’t it signify that guidance has turned into misguidance?
According to the following verse,
مَا ضَلَّ صَاحِبُكُمْ وَ مَا غَوَى * وَ مَا يَنْطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَى * إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَى
Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled. Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him.
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) never speaks out of his own desire. The speech is absolute whether it is out of inspiration or Sunna. Whatsoever comes out of the Holy prophet’s (PBUH) mouth is precisely what has been initially revealed to him. Some claim that it might only be found in the Qur’an and the Quranic verses are standing apart from what the Holy Prophet (PBUH) himself had said.
Now we point to some comments that Sunni scholars have made about the matter.
Mr. Showkani, who is considered a scientific Sunni pillar, has said,
اي ما يصدر نطقه عن الهوى لا بالقرآن و لا بغيره
Neither inside the Qur’an nor outside it has the Prophet spoken out of his own desire.
The notable Sunni interpreter, Mr. Sabini, has said,
«و ما ينطق عن الهوى» اي لا يتکلم عن هوي نفس و رأي شخص و «إن هو إلا وحي يوحى» إي لا يتکلم إلا عن وحي من الله
And Mr. Qurtabi whom Sunnis admire as Imam Qurtabi has explained the verse as,
و فيها دلالة على أن السنة كالوحي المنزل في العمل
The Sunna of the Prophet (PBUH) including both his words and deeds is precisely like the revelation.
You might have heard this narrative over and over,
Abdullah Ibn Amr Ibn ‘As was writing down the Prophet’s (PBUH) Hadiths. The Quraysh sneered at him asking why he was doing so. They said the Prophet (PBUH) was a human like others and he might get mad and say something while mad. “Why do you write down all words he has said?, they asked” He went to the Prophet and told him that the Quraysh had censured him for writing down his words. “So I relinquished writing,” added he. But in response, the Prophet (PBUH) stated,
أکتب، فوالذي نفسي بيده! ما خرج من إلا حق
Resume writing my words. I swear by God in whose control my life is, no word other than the truth ever comes out of my mouth.
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal has cited a narrative from Abu Harira in his book, quoting the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as saying,
إني لا أقول إلا حقا، قال بعض أصحابه: فإنك تداعبنا يا رسول الله؟ فقال: إني لا أقول إلا حقا
I do not say anything other than the truth. Some of the companions have said, “O God’s Messenger! You, at times, play jokes with us, should we also consider them as part of Sunna?” He replied, “Even the jokes I play are the truths. I say nothing except the truth”.
The third and fourth verses of the chapter of The Star have provided evidence for proving that the Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) all speeches and actions even his jokes reflect the truths. Now these guys say very rudely,
In a higher rank, Mohammad is also like this.
Isn’t it in defiance of the Qur’an? Isn’t it equivalent to bringing into question the Ismat of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and the Quranic decrees?
Ibn Hajar has similarly raised a doubt about the Hadith of Qurtas. Bukhari has quoted the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as saying,
هلمّوا اکتب لکم کتابا لن تضلوا بعدي
Bring in a pen and a piece of paper so that I can write something that would protect you from misguidance for ever.
قال عمر بن الخطاب: قد غلبه الوجع
Omar said, the Prophet’s disease has apparently deteriorated, so what he is saying is out of his control.
قال بعضهم: أن الرجل ليهجر
The Prophet –God forbidden- is speaking deliriously.
Ibn Hajar said,
إنه معصوم في صحته و مرضه، لقوله تعالى «و ما ينطق عن الهوى» و لقولهk: إني لا أقول في الغضب و الرضا إلا حقا
Another similar verse is the Verse of Tathir (Purification),
إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت و يطهركم تطهيرا
And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.
The verse is about the Holy Prophet (PBUH), Amir al-Momenin (AS), Hazrat Siddiqa Tahira (AS), Imam Hassan (AS) and Imam Hussein (AS). There are various narratives concerning the verse. While elaborating on the verse, Ibn Kathir Damishqi has quoted Imam Sajjad (AS) as saying,
“The Verse of Tathir is referring to us.”
It is cited in Sahih Muslim, “Ali along with Fatima, Hassan and Hussein came into Ayisha’s house. Then the Prophet (PBUH) spread his cloak over them and said,
إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت و يطهركم تطهيرا
And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.”
Here the prefix of الف and لام (al-) in the word الرجس stands for “all", namely, کل الرجس (all abomination). It means that should the Holy Prophet (PBUH) produce a single erroneous sentence, whether intentionally or without intention, it would be considered رجس .
The Qur’an has stated in the chapter of The Cow: 124,
إني جاعلك للناس إماما قال و من ذريتي قال لا ينال عهدي الظالمين
He pleaded: "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" He answered: "But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers."
In this verse, the word ظالم (evil-doer) includes all kinds of sins and mistakes committed in the past, present and future, in a real sense of the word.
And in the Hadith of Thaqalayn,
أني تارك فيكم الثقلين: كتاب الله و أهل بيتي
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) has introduced his household as identical to the Qur’an. His household need to be far away from any minor or major errors as the Qur’an is. Otherwise, the Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) statement would be labeled as a lie. In case Ahl al-Bayt make a mistake,
و لن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض، ما إن تمسكتم بهما لن تضلوا بعدي أبدا
It is necessary that something be chosen that is as infallible as the Qur’an.
The Hadith of Safina (the Ark),
مثل أهل بيتي مثل سفينة نوح من ركبها نجا و من تخلف عنها غرق
My Ahl al-Bayt are like Noah’s Ark, whoever boards it will attain salvation and whoever denies it will be destroyed.
If Ahl al-Bayt were fallible, it would be wrong to put salvation tantamount to embarking the vessel.
And according to Hadith of Nojum,
النجوم أمان لأهل الأرض من الغرق و أهل بيتي أمان لامتي من الاختلاف، فإذا خالفتها قبيلة من العرب اختلفوا فصاروا حزب إبليس
The stars protect the people on Earth from drowning, and my household protects my Ummah from disputes. So if any people oppose my family and dispute with them, they will become the party of Satan.
If Ahl al-Bayt were not infallible, it would be wrong to introduce them as security for people. The majority of the Sunni scholars believe in Islamt of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and the Aimma. Commenting on the following verse of,
أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ
O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you.
Fakhr Razi has even said that obedience to أولي الأمر (those charged with authority among you) is absolute as it is put beside obedience to God and the Prophet (PBUH). If they were not infallible, the comparison was false beyond any doubt. Such an attribution entails Ismat (Divine protection and infallibility). Some individuals claim that it is hard to accept this attribution since Omar and Abubakr were not infallible. It is really a shame to compare the Islamic realities with a handful of certain individuals in the society!
Mr. Qurtabi has sais,
قال جمهور من الفقهاء من أصحاب مالك و أبي حنيفة و الشافعي: إنهم معصومون من الصغائر كلها كعصمتهم من الكبائر أجمعها، لأنا أمرنا بإتباعهم في أفعالهم و آثارهم و سيرهم أمرا مطلقا من غير التزام قرينة، فلو جوزنا عليهم الصغائر لم يمكن الإقتداء بهم
All Shafei, Maliki and Hanbali jurists have admitted that the prophets are infallible both in their swords and deeds. We have been called on to obey them without any condition. Obedience to them would be out of the question if they committed mistakes. (Tafsir al-Qurtabi, vol. 1, p. 308)
The distinguished Shia figure, Mr. Fadil Miqdad, has said,
و اصحابنا حکموا بعصمتهم مطلقا، قبل النبوة و بعدها، عن الصغائر و الکبائر، عمدا و سهوا و عن السهو مطلقا
Concerning the link between Aimma’s Ismat and the Hadith of Thaqalayn, a number of top scholars such as Samhuri and Ibn Hajar Heithami have confirmed that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) introduced Ahl al-Bayt as equal to the Qur’an. If Ahl al-Bayt were not as infallible as the holy book, such an attribution would be totally mistaken.
Wahhabis were the first ever people who brought into question the Ismat of the prophets and Aimma. The seeds of doubts about the infallibility of the Prophet’s (PBUH) household were originally sowed by the founder and the theoretician of Wahhabism, Ibn Taymiyyah. Following in his footsteps, other Wahhabi leaders added doubts about the infallibility of the prophets to the list. Ibn Taymiyya has said in Mihaj al-Sunna, vol. 2, p. 434 which was written in rejection of Allame Helli’s book,
إن النبي يجوز عليه الخطأ و النسيان
One of the Wahhabi leaders and university professors in Riyash, Dr. Qaffari, whose book is being taught in Medina universities as a textbook, has said in Usul Mathhab al-Shi’a al-Ithna ‘Ashariyya,
لا عصمة مطلقا لأحد من البشر حتي الأنبياء
Even prophets are not absolutely infallible.
قد يکون مبدأ العصمة ورثته الشيعة عن المذهب المجوسي
Shias who believe in Ismat of Aimma are in fact Zoroastrian.
And now to what the publications have claimed about the Hazrat Wali Asr (AS),
“We are awaiting someone after whom our country is named. This is just a bunch of illusions and myths which we have been fed with.”
Shias, Sunnis and Wahhabis all believe in the variety of narratives about the issue of Mahdavism, i.e. belief in and efforts to prepare for the re-appearance of Imam Mahdi (AS). In other words, Mahdavism is one of the principles of Islam and does not exclusively belong to Shiism. Here I point out the decrees of a number of scholars in this regard. Even Ibn Taymiya, who struggled to wipe off all hadiths quoted from Ahl al-Bayt, has cited a narrative from Abdullah Ibn Omar about Mahdavism.
يخرج في آخر الزمان رجل من ولدي اسمه كاسمي و كنيته كنيتي، يملأ الأرض عدلا كما ملئت جورا، فذلك هو المهدي
A man will reappear at the end of time who is named after me … he is Mahdi in fact.
Ibn Taymiyya who is an arch foe of Shiism and Ahl al-Bayt has openly defiled Amir al-Momenin (AS) and his wife, Hazrat Fatima Zahra (AS). But in his book he has referred to,
إن الأحاديث التي يحتج بها على خروج المهدي أحاديث صحيحة، رواها أبو داود و الترمذي و أحمد و غيرهم من حديث ابن مسعود و غيره
The narratives which foretell about the appearance of Mahdi are all sound and reliable… (Minhaj al-Sunna Libn Taymiyya, vol. 4, p. 211)
When asked about Mahdavism, the senior Saudi Mufti, Ibn Baz, said,
إن ظهور المهدي حقيقة لا شک فيها و أن أحاديثه متواترة ... ، فأمر المهدي أمر معلوم و الأحاديث فيه مستفيضة بل متواترة متعاضدة
The reappearance of Mahdi is a reality and there is no doubt about it. And there are many Mutawatir hadiths (widely transmitted) concerning the event. (Journal of al-Jami’a al-Islamiyya, 1st year, No. 3, p. 162)
According to Sunnis, a Mutawatir hadith is as dependable as a Quranic verse. And the denial of such a hadith is tantamount to denial of the Qur’an. Some Sunni figures are of this belief that,
من أنکر المهدي فقد کفر
Denial of Mahdi is equal to infidelity.
Jabir Ibn Abdullah Ansari is said to have quoted the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as stating,
من أنکر خروج المهدي فقد کفر بما أنزل علي محمد
Mr. Hamvini has the same idea in Faraid al-Samtayn, vol. 2, p. 334. And so does Mr. Qunduzi in Yanabi’ al-Mawadda Li Thawi al-Qurba, vol. 3, p. 295. In al-Burhan, p. 178, Allame Yahya Ibn Mohammad Hanbali has voiced a similar view. Well, now with regard to all these facts, how can we bring Mahdavism into question under the guise of a Muslim in an Islamic university and brand them as a bunch of illusions and myths?
Now some may come up with a question whether Sunnis and Shias have a general consensus on the issue of Mahdavism. In truth, they have differences of ideas over the matter. Yet, there are a series of narratives in Shia books which can also be found in Sunni sources. For instance you might have heard the following narrative over and over,
لا تقوم الساعة حتى يلي رجل من أهل بيتي يواطئ اسمه اسمى
The Day of Judgment will never come up unless a man from my household who is named after me rises up and takes the power.
Another narrative which you might have heard a lot is,
لو لم يبق من الدهر إلا يوم واحد لبعث الله رجلا أهل بيتي يملأ الأرض قسطا و عدلا كما ملئت ظلما و جورا
Even if only one single day is to remain in this world, God will surely send a man from my Ahl al-Bayt who shall fill the world with justice…
Sunnis agree with Shias over the issue of Mahdavism and over the fact that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) had foretold about the existence of a man named Mahdi. They agree that he will definitely appear some day. They consider the fact as one of the basic principles of Islam. But is Mahdi born or not yet? The answer of this question is the area of difference between Shias and Sunnis. Sunnis believe that he is not born yet. They say that God will have him born at the very end of the time so that he can fill the world with justice. Meanwhile, there are a number of Sunni scholars who believe the otherwise. They say Hazrat Wal Asr (AS) was born in 255 AH from Narjes as his mother and Imam Hassan Askari (AS) as his father. To sum up the views surrounding this issue, I do refer to some narratives.
While talking of Imam Hassan Askari’s (AS) biography, Ibn Athir has said,
“Imam Hassan Askari (AS) passed away in 260 AH.
هو والد محمد الذي يعتقدونه المنتظر
He was Mohammad’s father. He is known as the one who is in waiting.
Thahabi, who is considered as one of the distinguished Sunni figures, has said in al-‘Ibar fi Khabar Min Ghibar, “He was born in 255 AH. Shias know him as al-Khalaf (caliph), al-Mahdi, al-Muntazar, Sahib al-Zaman and Khatimat al-Ithna ‘Ashar (the last and twelfth Imam)”.
And in his Tarikh al-Islam, he has said,
فولد سنة ثمان و خمسين و قيل: سنة ست و خمسين
He was born in 256 or 256 AH.
Wilayat (guardianship) of Hazrat Mahdi (AS) is a separate issue on which Seyr A’lam al-Nubala has put the spotlight.
In al-A’lam, Khayr al-Din Zarkali Wahhabi is of this belief,
محمد بن الحسن العسكري الخالص بن علي الهادي أبو القاسم، آخر الأئمة الاثني عشر عند الإمامية و هو المعروف عندهم بالمهدي و صاحب الزمان و المنتظر و الحجة و صاحب السرداب، ولد في سامراء و مات أبوه و له من العمر نحو خمس سنين
A similar description can be seen in Wafiyyat al-A’yan. 
In Isalat al-Mahdawiyyat fi al-Islam, the prominent researcher, Faqih Imani, has enumerated 112 senior Sunni scholars who have unanimously acknowledged the Wilayat of Hazrat Wali Asr (AS) in 255 AH. 
In Difa’ ‘An al-Kafi; likewise, Sayyid Thamir ‘Amidi, who is a notable researcher, has enlisted 128 top Sunni scholars with the same belief regarding the Hazrat’s Wilayat. 
Mohammad Ibn Yusuf Ganji Shifi’I has also said,
إن المهدي ولد الحسن العسكري، فهو حي موجود باق منذ غيبته إلى الآن و لا امتناع في بقائه بدليل بقاء عيسى و الخضر و إلياس
Mahdi is Hassan Askari’s son. He is still alive. He has been living since his disappearance. There is not any obstacle to his longer age as there is not any for Jesus, Ilyas and Khidr.
The survival of several prophets is a historical fact. All of the Sunni scholars, whose words are the most reliable, have confirmed the survival of a handful of prophets. There is an interesting narrative saying,
الإمام أمان لأهل الأرض
Imam maintains security for the people of the Earth.
And if such an Imam does not exist,
لولا الإمام لساخت الأرض باهلها
The Earth will suck in all its inhabitants.
Mr. Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani (died in 852 AH) as well as Mr. Siyuti (died in 911 AH) who are both considered scientific Sunni pillars have said,
أربعة من الأنبياء أحياء أمان لأهل الأرض، إثنان في الأرض: الخضر و إلياس و إثنان في السماء: إدريس و عيسى
Four prophets are still alive to provide the inhabitants of the Earth with security…
Professor Dr. Seyyed Mohammad Husseini Qazvini
Topic: Responding to Doubts Raised in Publications of Amir Kabir University 02
Responding to Doubts: May, 16, 2007
Professor Husseini Qazvini
In this session we are going to wrap up the discussion we got into it last session. One of the first issues which these publications had brought into question was Ismat of Amir al-Momenin (AS),
Ali was neither light, heaven, sacred nor infallible. If he really had been so, he would never have called on people to freely criticize him. Ali was a fallible man not an infallible person; as the person placed in the higher rank, namely, Mohammad, was also like this. Now it can be easily guessed how Wali Faqih (supreme jurist) should be.
The point of fallibility of Amir al-Momenin (AS) was adopted from the sermon 216 of Nahj al-Balagha. It was elaborated on last session. But I could only manage to briefly point to the aspect regarding the Holy Prophet (PBUH). But before embarking on the discussion, two points need to be taken into consideration.
The first point: In the past decade or so, whenever these guys intended to bring into question the issue of Wilayat Faqih, they started it with targeting Amri al-Momenin (AS) or the Holy Prophet (PBUH). And in order to be convincing enough, they tried to raise doubts about Imams’ Ismat. Then they finally jumped to the conclusion that if Imams are like this so it could be easily guessed how Wali Faqih which is just less important would be.
If your main target is Wilayat Faqih and you want to mount a challenge to it, you had better come out and debate. All along the history, Shiism has been providing reasons for Wilayat Faqih. Our scholars even Imam Khomeini (God Bless Him) himself have written books about it. Some of those books are so comprehensive that their volumes reach to at least three. If you are really educated and knowledgeable and if you are not chanting slogans or telling lies, come and challenge the justifications that Shia jurists have made to prove the necessity of Wilayat Faqih. Why do you target infallible Imams or the Prophet (PBUH) whenever you want to call Wilayat Faqih into question? Once I was studying the book of Lum’a, my professor used to say,
“When someone wants to talk about Salman’s positive character traits, he often first says that Miqdad was a good man while Salman was better. And sometimes he tries to prove the good personality traits of Salman through damaging Miqdad’s face.”
If the issue of Wilayat Faqih is their main aim, why should they launch an attack on the infallible Imams first? If they are really educated and knowledgeable enough, they can role up their sleeves and show up for a debate. Our scholars have written many books to indicate the authenticity of Wilayat Faqih. In the last three or four decades in particular, more than 100 books have been published about the matter. Find fault with these book if you dare.
The second point: One of the guys who initiated the destruction of Shia beliefs in his lectures and articles was Mr. Yusufi Eshkevari. Many topics that this guy has put forward in some of his articles are a bunch of myths. As far as I am concerned what he says is more like old wives’ tales. They might be intended to convey a meaning or a message but this way of speaking does nothing but tarnishing the speaker’s image. In his book, Rereading of the Creation Story, p. 100, he has written,
Human is an obedient animal that labors and carries heavy loads and lives a worldly life. By the way, what a great blessing is disobedience! How transcendent are the ones who mange to ascend to the peak of the high mountain of Islam! We do not approve disobedience but we say that only a disobedient human can show his will power and awareness.
If such words were said by a green-grocer or a camel-rider, we would never protest. But a man who is wearing the clerical costume and is the claimant of knowing Islam is in no question expected to talk this way. The logic he talks about seems hard to understand. Does it imply that if someone wants to prove his will power, he should commit a sin, theft or adultery? Such a conclusion is neither in line with the religion’s logic, nor with the logic of natural instinct of a human. This kind of talking appears to be fit more for those living in jungles in ancient times rather than for a scientific center or a university. Our narratives are at odds with what you say. When someone was wrestling and showing off his power, knocking down the rivals one after another, the Hazrat said, “Knocking down a rival is by no means the sign of one’s power. The real power shows up when one wrestles with his own desires and knocks them to the ground”.
Only if you defeated your worldly desires as well as the Satan, then you have, in truth, showed out your strong power.
These guys have cast a doubt on Ismat as follows,
If human is supposed impossibly not to commit any sins, he would be like an animal of an angel indeed. He won’t be a human any way.
Look at the way he talks. Look what has happened to us. The claimants of knowing and preaching Islam are saying that if human does not commit sins, he will become either an animal or an angel; he is out of humanity in any way.
Another cleric who is also a claimant of knowing Islam, Kadivar, likewise raised the same doubts about Ismat of the Aimma in his speeches in Tehran this year. He dismissed the fact that Aimma are beyond ordinary people, saying they lack the capability of acting as a role model. Here, some points merit a mention before wrapping up the discussion.
The first discussion: The Qur’an has evidently referred to the Ismat (infallibility) of the prophets. Here, I point out a couple of verses in this domain. After Adam fell out from the Heaven following the Satan’s temptation, the Satan said,
قال فبعزتك لأغوينهم أجمعين * إلا عبادك منهم المخلَصين
(Iblis) said: "Then, by Thy power, I will put them all in the wrong, except Thy Servants amongst them, sincere and purified (by Thy Grace)."
The Satan who is mankind’s number one enemy has said that he has no way to المخلَصين (the sincere and purified). It reflects the logic of the Qur’an and it is undeniable at all. On the other hand, there is an adjective of مخلِص or مخلَص whenever there is a mention of any prophet. Concerning Hazrat Abraham (AS), Hazrat Issac (AS) and Hazrat Jacob (AS), the Qur’an has stated,
وَ اذْكُرْ عِبَادَنَا إبْرَاهِيمَ وَ إِسْحَاقَ وَ يَعْقُوبَ أُولِي الْأَيْدِي وَ الْأَبْصَارِ * إِنَّا أَخْلَصْنَاهُمْ بِخَالِصَةٍ ذِكْرَى الدَّارِ
And commemorate Our Servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, possessors of Power and Vision. Verily We did choose them for a special (purpose)- proclaiming the Message of the Hereafter.
In regard with Hazrat Joseph (AS) it has said,
إِنَّهُ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا الْمُخْلَصِينَ
For he was one of Our servants, sincere and purified.
And regarding Hazrat Moses (AS),
وَ اذْكُرْ فِي الْكِتَابِ مُوسَى إِنَّهُ كَانَ مُخْلَصًا وَ كَانَ رَسُولًا نَبِيًّا
Also mention in the Book (the story of) Moses: for he was specially chosen, and he was a messenger (and) a prophet.
The Qur’an is quoting the Satan as saying that he is not able to deceive the sincere and purified servants. Somewhere else the same Qur’an has described the prophets as مخلَص(sincere and purified servants). This is clear evidence that the Satan has no way into the mind and heart of the holy prophets and that’s why they are infallible and never make any kind of mistakes.
The second discussion:
God has stated,
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ
O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you.
God has indicated that the obedience to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is parallel with that to Himself.
وَ مَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا لِيُطَاعَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ
We sent not a messenger, but to be obeyed, in accordance with the will of Allah.
مَنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَ
He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah
وَ مَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَ الرَّسُولَ فَأُولَئِكَ مَعَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ مِنَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَ الصِّدِّيقِينَ وَ الشُّهَدَاءِ وَ الصَّالِحِينَ
All who obey Allah and the messenger are in the company of those on whom is the Grace of Allah,- of the prophets (who teach), the sincere (lovers of Truth), the witnesses (who testify), and the Righteous (who do good)
As you can see, in all of the verses above, obeying the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is mentioned along side with obeying God without any condition. If the prophets, who are responsible to guide people and obeying whom equated to obeying God, were possible to make mistakes of any kind, would it be يطع الله or يعص الله? How can God forbid people from evil while his prophet does evil whether intentionally or unintentionally? On the other hand, He has stated that anyone who obeys His prophet has in fact obeyed Him. It would be, therefore, the combination of command and prohibition. If a prophet happened to commit an error, his role of guidance would transform into that of misguidance. If a prophet, who has been sent to lead mankind, unintentionally declared an unlawful action as lawful, it would be deemed misguidance. He would lead people astray instead of leading them.
According to Fakhr Razi,
من أمر الله بطاعته على سبيل الجزم و القطع، لا بد و أن يكون معصوما عن الخطأ، إذ لو لم يكن معصوما عن الخطأ كان بتقدير إقدامه على الخطأ يكون قد أمر الله بمتابعته، فيكون ذلك أمرا بفعل ذلك الخطأ و الخطأ لكونه خطأ منهي عنه. فهذا يفضي إلى إجتماع الأمر و النهي في الفعل الواحد بالإعتبار الواحد و إنه محال
The person whom God has ordered people to obey, beyond no doubt, needs to be infallible. If he is not infallible and he commits mistakes while God has ordered people to obey him, it can be concluded that God has in deed ordered people to obey mistakes while declaring them as forbidden. It would be then the combination of command and prohibition.
Accordingly, he justifies the Ismat of the prophet as well as that of اولي الأمر (those charged with authority). And his reasoning is correct. But his following sentence contradicted all he said in preceding sentences.
The verse assures that اولي الأمر (those charged with authority) must be infallible but we can do nothing because Abubakr and Omar as اولي الأمر were not infallible. Hence, we have no other option except ignoring the verse.
How ridiculous! What a baseless and irrational statement! He says because our caliphs were not infallible, we have to overlook the verse.
The third discussion:
In the following verse of
وَ إِذِ ابْتَلَى إِبْرَاهِيمَ رَبُّهُ بِكَلِمَاتٍ فَأَتَمَّهُنَّ قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا قَالَ وَ مِنْ ذُرِّيَّتِي قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ
And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: "I will make thee an Imam to the Nations." He pleaded: "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" He answered: "But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers."
The Qur’an has certified that the prophets never commit any oppression. And the most minor oppression is in a form of a sin.
من أذنب فقد ظلم نفسه
As classified by Allame Helli,
The offspring of Hazrat Abraham (AS) are of four groups:
1. Those who have been committing oppression from the very beginning of their lives to the end. They were not definitely the ones for whom Hazrat Abraham (AS) asked Imamat.
2. Those who were oppressors at the beginning but they repented later. Some believe that Hazrat Abraham (AS) intended to plead for Imamat for this group but God rejected it.
3. Those who were good people at first but changed into tyrants at the end of their lives. Without any doubt, they were not the group Hazrat Abraham (AS) asked God for Imamat.
4. Those who in no condition oppressed anyone all along their lives. It was the group Hazrat Abraham (AS) requested God for their Imamat.
There are other verses which substantiate the fact that only those who have been always righteous and have never resorted to oppression deserve to become Imams. For instance, concerning Hazrat Lot (AS), the Qur’an has stated,
وَ لُوطًا إِلَى الْأَرْضِ الَّتِي بَارَكْنَا فِيهَا لِلْعَالَمِينَ * وَ وَهَبْنَا لَهُ إِسْحَاقَ وَ يَعْقُوبَ نَافِلَةً وَ كُلًّا جَعَلْنَا صَالِحِينَ * وَ جَعَلْنَاهُمْ أَئِمَّةً يَهْدُونَ بِأَمْرِنَا
But We delivered him and (his nephew) Lut (and directed them) to the land which We have blessed for the nations. And We bestowed on him Isaac and, as an additional gift, (a grandson), Jacob, and We made righteous men of every one (of them). And We made them leaders, guiding (men) by Our Command.
It means we made them both righteous and leaders.
وَ لَقَدْ آَتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ فَلَا تَكُنْ فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِنْ لِقَائِهِ وَ جَعَلْنَاهُ هُدًى لِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ * وَ جَعَلْنَا مِنْهُمْ أَئِمَّةً يَهْدُونَ بِأَمْرِنَا لَمَّا صَبَرُوا وَ كَانُوا بِآَيَاتِنَا يُوقِنُونَ
We did indeed aforetime give the Book to Moses: be not then in doubt of its reaching (thee): and We made it a guide to the Children of Israel. And We appointed, from among them, leaders, giving guidance under Our command, so long as they persevered with patience and continued to have faith in Our Signs.
If we put the verses above beside the verse of 124 of the chapter of The Cow, the following is what we will find out.
کل من تلبّس بالظلم و لو في لحظة من لحظات عمره لا يستحق مقام الإمامة
The fourth discussion:
Another issue is about the 52nd verse of the chapter of The Pilgrimage which is nowadays being abused by the opponents and critics of the Ismat of the prophets in general and the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in particular. Just in brief,
و ما أرسلنا من قبلك من رسول و لا نبي إلا إذا تمنى ألقى الشيطان في أمنيته فينسخ الله ما يلقي الشيطان ثم يحكم الله آياته و الله عليم حكيم
Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom:
Some opponents and uninformed individuals take a glance at this verse and make deduction that the prophets are not infallible.
The word أمنية means desire. It signifies that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) had the desire of making reforms in the society and of uprooting oppression and polytheism. No prophet wished to make reforms in his society unless the Satan created rift among his Umma through temptation and prevented the realization of his desires.
Here I point to two examples from Sunni interpreters and another two from the Shia ones.
In Safwat al-Tafasir, vol. 2, p. 255, Mr. Sabuni has said,
و معنى الآية: و ما أرسلنا رسولا و لا نبيا فحدث نفسه بشيء و تمنى لأمته الهداية و الإيمان إلا ألقى الشيطان الوساوس و العقبات في طريقه، بتزيين الكفر لقومه و إلقائه في نفوسهم مخالفة لأمر الرسول و كأن الآية تسلية للرسول (ص) تقول له: لا تحزن يا محمد على معاداة قومك لك فهذه سنة المرسلين
The meaning of the verse: Never did we send a prophet unless he had a desire of guiding his nation and making reforms in the society. But the Satan tempted some people of the society to stand against him and thwart the realization of his desires. The verse was just aimed to console the Prophet whose desires were not realized due to the enmity of a group. It intended to assure the Prophet that the prophets preceding him also faced similar hurdles placed by the Satan in their way.
In Fath al-Qadir, vol. 3, p. 462, the senior Sunni scholar, Mr. Showkani, has said,
فحاصل معنى الآية: أن الشيطان أوقع في مسامع المشركين ذلك من دون أن يتكلم به رسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم و لا جرى على لسانه، فتكون هذه الآية تسلية لرسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم: أي لا يهولنك ذلك و لا يحزنك، فقد أصاب مثل هذا من قبلك من المرسلين و الأنبياء
The verse implies that the Prophet desired to lead unbelievers but the Satan tempted the unbelievers, telling them that the Prophet’s desires are all baseless…
Allame Tabatabai has explained the verse in al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, vol. 14, p. 391 as follows,
و ما أرسلنا من قبلك من رسول و لا نبي إلا إذا تمنى و قدر بعض ما يتمناه من توافق الأسباب على تقدم دينه و إقبال الناس عليه و إيمانهم به ألقى الشيطان في أمنيته و داخل فيها بوسوسة الناس و تهييج الظالمين و إغراء المفسدين فأفسد الامر على ذلك الرسول أو النبي و أبطل سعيه فينسخ الله و يزيل ما يلقي الشيطان ثم يحكم الله آياته بإنجاح سعى الرسول أو النبي و إظهار الحق و الله عليم حكيم
There was no prophet sent in to the people without trying to pave the way for the guidance of the nation. But the Satan was quick to tempt groups of people and to stimulate some tyrants or corrupt persons to foil the Prophet’s efforts and plans.
Hazrat Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi has given a similar explanation about the verse in Tafsir Nimuna (in Arabic), vol. 10, p. 375.
The fifth discussion:
And now a look at another verse,
إنا فتحنا لك فتحا مبينا * ليغفر لك الله ما تقدم من ذنبك و ما تأخر
Verily We have granted thee a manifest Victory: That Allah may forgive thee thy faults of the past and those to follow.
Allame Tabatabai has elaborated on it as,
We assume that the word ذنب always conveys the meaning of sin. But in fact it is not always ‘sin’; it might imply ‘the negative effects or consequences’. And the term غفرdoes not always mean forgiveness. It sometimes stands for cover-up. With taking the secondary meanings of the two words of ذنب andغفر into account, and with regard to the existing connection between the first and the second verses , a similarity can be detected between them and a third verse which is about Hazrat Moses (AS). When God ordered him to move towards Pharaoh, he said,
و لهم علي ذنب فأخاف أن يقتلون
"And (further), they have a charge of crime against me; and I fear they may slay me."
“They are suspicious of me, looking at me as a wrongdoer. I left negative effects on them.”
Hazrat Moses (AS) said so while he had killed an unbeliever tyrant. And it was never considered ذنب but it was his prophetic duty. However, from the viewpoint of the Children of Israel, it was considered ذنب with pending dire consequences. Therefore, they were seeking to take revenge.
That’s why God told the Holy Prophet (PBUH),
With a victory we brought up to you, we removed all negative looks that the Quraysh had at you whether before of after Hijrat (immigration), because before the Hijrat, you destroyed all their idols and after the Hijrat, you eradicated all their leaders. They were, as a consequence, looking for a chance to take their revenge on you. But we did remove all the possible negative consequences against you.
This is what both Shia and Sunni scholars believe.
Professor Dr. Mohammad Husseini Qazvini
. Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 216- al-Kafi Lil Koleini, vol. 8, p. 356.
. Chapter of Joseph: 53
. Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 216- al-Kafi Lil Koleini, vol. 8, p. 356.
. Chapter of Almsgiving: 4
. Chapter of Almsgiving: 5-7
. Chapter of The Women: 43
. Chapter of The Clans: 21
. Chapter of The Star: 2-4
. Fath al-Qadir Lil Showkani, vol. 5, p. 105
. Safwat al-Tafasir, vol. 3, p.235
. Tafsir al-Qurtabi, vol. 17, p. 85
. Masnad Ahmad, vol. 2, p. 162- al-Mustadrak al-Sahihayn Lil Hakim al-Neishaburi, vol. 1, p. 106- Fath al-Bari Libn Hajar, vol. 1, p. 185- Sunan al-Daremi, vol. 1, p. 125- al-Musnaf Libn Abi Shayba al-Kufi, vol. 6, p. 229- Sunan Abi Davud, vol. 2, p. 176
. Masnad Ahmad, vol. 2, p. 340- Sunan al-Tarmathi, vol. 3, p. 241- al-Sunan al-Kubra, vol. 10, p. 248-Majma’ al-Zawayid Lil Heitham, vol. 9, p. 17-al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya Libn Kathir, vol. 6, p. 54
. Fath al-Bari Libn Hajar, vol. 8, p. 101.
. Chapter of The Clans: 33
. Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 130
. Sahih Muslim, vol. 7, p. 123
. Al-Mustadrak al-Sahihayn Lil Hakim al-Neishaburi, vol. 2, p. 343- al-Mu’jam al-Awsat Lil Tabarani, vol. 5, p. 354- al-Mu’jam al-Kabir Lil Tabarani, vol. 3, p. 46.
. Al-Mustadrak al-Sahihayn Lil Hakim al-Neishaburi, vol. 3, p. 149
. Chapter of The Women: 59
. Irshad al-Talibin Ila Nahj al-Mustarshidin, p. 304.
. Usul Mathhab al-Shi’a al-Ithna ‘Ashariyya, vol. 2, p. 972
. Al-‘Urf al-Wirdi Fi Akhbar al-Mahdi Lil Siyuti, vol. 1, p. 392
. Shia sources: Bihar al-Anwar Lil ‘Allame al-Majlisi, vol. 51, p. 81- al-Malahim wa al-Futan Lil Sayyid Ibn Tawus, p. 297- Kashf al-Ghammat Lil Irbali, vol. 3, pp. 271& 244.
Sunni sources: Masnad Ahmad, vol. 1, p. 376- Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2, p. 309- Sunan al-Tarmathi, vol. 3, p. 343- al-Mustadrak al-Sahihayn Lil Hakim al-Neishaburi, vol. 4, p. 442- al-Musnaf Libn Abi Shayba al-Kufi, vol. 8, p. 678- al-Mu’jam al-Kabir Lil Tabarani, vol. 10, p. 133- Sahih Ibn Hibban, vol. 15, p. 237.
. Shia sources: Tafsir Majma’ al-bayan Lil Sheikh al-Tabarsi, vol. 7, p. 120- Kashf al-Ghammat Lil Irbali, vol. 3, p. 234- al-Taraif fi Ma’rifat Mathahib al-Tawaif Lil Sayyid Ibn Tawus, p. 176- al-Ghayba Lil Sheikh al-Tusi, p. 46- al-Irshad Lil Sheikh al-Mufid, vol. 2, p. 340
Sunni sources: Masnad Ahmad, vol. 1, p. 99- Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 2, p. 310-al-Musnaf Libn Abi Shayba al-Kufi, vol. 14, p. 267- al-Jami’ al-Saghir Lil Siyuti, vol. 2, p. 438- Kanz al-‘Ummal Lil Mottaqi al-
Hindi, vol. 14, p. 267- Fayd al-Qadir Sharh al-Jami’ al-Saghir Lil Munadi, vol. 5, p. 422- al-Durr al-Manthur Lil Siyuti, vol. 6, p. 58- Tafsir al-Alusi, vol. 18, p. 206.
. Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh Libn al-Athir, vol. 7, p. 274.
. Al-‘Ibar fi Khabar Min Ghibar, vol. 5, p. 37
. Tarikh al-Islam Lil Thahabi, vol. 19, p. 113.
. Seyr A’lam al-Nubala lLil Thahabi, vol. 13, p. 120
. Al-A’lam Li Khayr al-Din Zarkali, vol. 6, p. 80
. Wafiyyat al-A’yan Libn Khalkan, vol. 7, p. 176.
. Isalat al-Mahdawiyyat fi al-Islam Li Faqih Imani, p. 81
. Difa’ ‘An al-Kafi Lil Sayyid Thamir al-‘Amidi, vol. 1, p. 568.
. Kifayat al-Talib Lil Kanji al-Shafi’I, p. 521- al-bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman Lil Kanji al-Shafi’I, fi Akhir al-Bab al-‘Ashrin- Ghayat al-Maram Lil Sayyid Hashim al-Buhrani, vol. 7, p. 142- Yanabi’ al-Mawaddat Li Thawi al-Qurba Lil Qunduzi, vol. 3, p. 347- Matalib al-Siul Lil Kanji al-Shafi’I, p. 89.
. Fath al-Bari Libn Hajar, vol. 6, p. 310- al-Durr al-manthur Lil Siyuti, p. 239.
. Rereading of the Creation Story, p. 110
. Chapter of Saad: 82-83
. Chapter of Saad: 45-46
. Chapter of Joseph: 24
. Chapter of Mary: 51
. Chapter of The Women: 59
. Chapter of The Women: 64
. Chapter of The Women: 80
. Chapter of The Women: 69
. Tafsir al-Razi, vol. 10, p. 144
. Chapter of The Cow: 124
. Chapter of The Prophets: 71-73
. Chapter of The Prostration: 23-34
. Chapter of The Victory: 1-3
. Chapter of The Poets: 14
. Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, vol. 18, p. 254- Tafsir Nimuna (Arabic), vol. 16, p. 422