Publisher : Imam Hassan (AS) has stated : “ those who save people trapped into misgivings and ignorance and have no access to their Imams are superior even to those who feed the orphans like the superiority of the sun to dimmer stars in the sky”
فضل کافل یتیم آل محمد المنقطع عن موالیه الناشب فی رتبة الجهل یخرجه من جهله ، ویوضح له ما اشتبه علیه على فضل کافل یتیم یطعمه ویسقیه ، کفضل الشمس على السهى) بحار الانوار ج 2 ص،3)
The revered author of this book has tried to answer some of the accusations and slanders made by adversaries of the Ahlol-Beit then he has posed 40 questions regarding issues like caliphate and imamate (religious leadership) using the Sunni community’s references and sources. We do recommend reading this book to all the interested and those fond of Islamic cognition specially our intellectual brothers in Sunni community (perhaps it could be good starting point in their quest for the truth).
List of contents
Ø Attack on Shiism, Why?
Ø Appalling figures on the Number of Attack against Shiism
Ø The motive behind extensive assaults on Shiism after the Iran 's Islamic revolution
Ø Unmanly accusations against Shiism
Ø The Future of Shiism
Ø Question 1: why didn 't Abu-Bakr follow the holy prophet in the matter of caliphate?
Ø All the prophets had a successor, but!
Ø Failure to set the successor: the main factor for mayhem and turmoil in the society
Ø Umar more caring for the Islamic society than the holy prophet of Islam!!
Ø Failure to appoint a successor is not against the book of God
Ø Were the first three caliphs true successors of the holy prophet (PBUH)?
Ø Accusing the holy prophet (PBUH) of delirium
Ø Ibn Abbas and the tragedy of Companions’ opposition with the holy prophet The myth of consensus over Abu-Bakr’s allegiance
Ø The grand Sunni scholars: denying the consensus over Abu-Bakr’s caliphate
Ø Umar: Threatening to kill the Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH)
Ø Did Ali (AS) consider Abu-Bakr and Umar as treacherous individuals?
Ø Annoying Fatima (AS): an act against the book of God and the holy prophet (PBUH)’s traditions
Ø Opposing Fatima (AS): a proof for the illegitimacy of Abu-Bakr and Umar’s caliphate
Ø Appointing the caliph by God
Ø Insurgency of Nakithin and Qasitin against Islamic governor
Ø The martyrdom of Ammar: a proof for the illegitimacy of Mu’awiya
Ø The fairness of the holy prophet (PBUH)’s Companions: a myth or truth?
Ø The spread of religious hypocrisy among the Companions
Ø The second caliph’s fear of being called a religious hypocrite
Ø The assassination plot against the holy prophet (PBUH) by the religious hypocrites
Ø The caliphs’ role in the assassination attempt against the holy prophet
Ø Taking advantage of religious hypocrites
Ø Umar’s recommendation as to provide facilities for the desert Arabs
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds and the Prayer and peace be upon Muhammad and his pure and immaculate Household!
Attack on Shiism, Why?
Of all the Islamic sects, Shiism is the only one emerged from the Quran and the true traditions of the holy prophet of Islam (PBUH) which has , compared to other sects recognized by the governments, provided us with the best and richest programs in judicial, cultural, political and economic areas.
Under no circumstances and at no time, did Shiism compromise with the oppressing and dictatorial regimes and that is why it has always come under attack by the tyrant dominances that have spared no effort to blacken its image.
Inspired by its true and rightful leader, Amir-al-Momenin Ali (AS) who once said:
کونا للظالم خصماً وللمظلوم عوناً ، أوصیکما وجمیع ولدی وأهلی ومن بلغه کتابی
Shiism has always been in fights with subjugating dictators and has chosen “defending the oppressed” as its slogan. However, in caliphs’ school of thought there is no any trace of any attempt to fight the oppression or the dictatorial governments, instead they have tried their best to justify dictatorial policies and by ascribing some made-up Hadiths to the holy prophet (PBUH), they seek to suggest to their followers that what the nation should do is to obey the rulers even if they are corrupted with oppression and tyranny since they believe what rulers do has nothing to do with what the nation does:
إسمعوا وأطیعوا فإنّما علیهم ما حمّلوا وعلیکم ما حملّت
Now, we can see how different these two ways of thinking. Umar Ibn Khatab would say: “if a Muslim ruler does you injustice and even assaults you, takes away your absolute rights , and issues unlawful and irreligious decrees, your responsibility is just to obey him unquestionably since it is considered as your religious obligation!”
فأطع الإمام . . . إن ضربک فاصبر ، وإن أمرک بأمر فاصبر ، وإن حرَمَک فاصبر ، وإن ظلمک فاصبر ، وإن أمرک بأمر ینقص دینک فقل : سمع وطاعة ، دمی دون دینی
However, on the day of Ashura, the leader of all the freemen in the world, Husein ibn Ali (AS) regarded martyrdom in the way defending the oppressed and fighting the oppression as salvation but he believed living under the shadow of the oppressing governments and comprising with them was a shameful act:
فإنّی لا أرى الموت إلّا سعادة ولا الحیاة مع الظالمین إلّا برماً
And how different are these two sects one of which issues a decree like this: “Any uprising and fight against the corrupted and oppressing rulers is against the religious laws”.
وأمّا الخروج علیهم وقتالهم ، فحرام بإجماع المسلمین وإن کانوا فسقة ظالمین
And another sect stating: “If the silence of the religious scholars leads to the continuation of sins and heresies by the tyrannizing governors, it is a religious obligation for them to break their silence and stand up to the oppressors”.
لو کان سکوت علماء الدین ورؤساء المذهب – أعلى اللَّه کلمتهم – موجباً لجرأة الظلمة على ارتکاب سائر المحرّمات وإبداع البدع ، یحرم علیهم السکوت ویجب علیهم الانکار.
Appalling figures on the Number of Attack against Shiism
Given the abovementioned facts, the tyrannies have been trying to fight Shiism with all their power and facilities, hindering the spread of an anti-oppression ideology. This trend began with the division of the Islamic Ummah into Sunnis and Shiites and has increasingly progressed.
In the recent years, we have witnessed heavy attacks by Wahhabism against the divine Shiite ideology. For instance, based on the report of the Islamic republic of Iran’s embassy in Pakistan, 60 books in 30 million copies have been printed against Shiism in a year. Only during the Hajj of 2002, 10685 thousand books (mostly anti-Shiism) have been distributed among the Hajj pilgrims in 20 living languages by the Saudi government.
On the 12th of Rajab in holy Mecca, 1424 AH, One of the well-known Shiite clergymen in Qatif area of Saudi Arabia reported: A book called “ Lalah Soma Tarikh” was distributed among the Shiites for free.” The same book was published and distributed in 100 hundred thousand copies. This action was reported to Kuwaiti government by the representative of the supreme leader, Mr.Mehri, a committed scholar:" if the publication and distribution of this insulting anti-Shiite book is not stopped, there will be some concerns that Kuwait turns into another Lebanon in the region. In some of the research centers, the number of the book which have been published or identified since 14 centuries ago against Shiism has reached 5000 titles. Of these books 30,000 have been published in Urdu language
, 1500 in Arabic, and 500 in other languages. In addition, the contents of these books have been studied and thousands of misgivings have they found and collected from hundreds of books. Although most of these misgivings have resulted from slanderers, lies, ignorance or lack of knowledge, it does not lessen the heavy responsibility of the scholars and researchers answer them.
The motive behind extensive assaults on Shiism after the Iran 's Islamic revolution
It is interesting to note that 70% of the aforesaid books have been written after the glorious victory of Islamic revolution in Iran; meaning that in 24 years approximately 2.5 times as many books as in 14 centuries have been compiled against Shiism.
It is largely because the opponents of Ahlol-Beit couldn 't have imagined a day when Iranian people, backed by the rich Shiite culture, would enter the arena empty-handedly but with hearts full of faith and love towards Islam and Shiism and topple, once and for all, a government armed to the teeth supported fully by the East and the West, setting the foundation for an Islamic government based on Shiite Jurisprudence.
The opponents of Ahlol-Beit school of thought and lovers of wealth and war feel threatened by the spread of Shiism, therefore, they are making an attempt to blacken the brilliant image of Shiism all over the globe by publishing anti-Shiite books filled with lies and accusations. Here, we reflect the gravity of the situation by giving some of these unmanly accusations.
Unmanly accusations against Shiism
1- Egyptian scientist Dr. Abdullah Mohammed Gharib in his book, full of lies and slanders, “Vaja Dor al-Majos” states:
إنّ الثورة الخمينيّة مجوسيّة وليست إسلاميّة، أعجميّة وليست عربيّة، كسرويّة وليست محمّديّة
“The revolution of Khomeini is nothing but a Zoroastrian not Islamic, a Persian not an Arab and a Kasravi (Iran’s king) not a Muhammad uprising” . He reveals his deep-rooted animosity toward Shiism by adding:
نعلم أنّ حكّام طهران أشدّ خطرا على الإسلام من اليهود، ولاننتظر خيرا منهم، وندرك جيّدا أنّهم سيتعاونون مع اليهود في حرب المسلمين
“We are all quite aware of the fact that Iranian rulers are more serious dangers for Islam than are the Jews and no good can be expected from them and we are certain that soon they will abet the Jews in a war against Muslims”.
It makes such remarks while everybody in the world knows that there is no stronger enemy for the Zionist regime than is Islamic Republic of Iran one of whose proud moments was the closure of Israeli embassy in Iran forever and opening of Palestine 's embassy in its place.
2-In his dissertation, now a textbook in the University of Medina, Dr. Nasser Ghaffari mentions:
أدخل الخمينى إسمه في أذان الصلوات، وقدّم إسمه حتّى على إسم النبيّ الكريم، فأذان الصلوات في ايران بعد استلام الخمينى للحكم وفى كلّ جوامعها كما يلى: اللّه أكبر، اللّه اكبر، خمينى رهبر، أي الخميني هو القائد، ثمّ أشهد أنّ محمّدا رسول اللّه
“Imam Khomeini has entered his name into Azan(call to prayers) and even put it before the holy prophet(PBUH) ’s name and in Iran Azan starts after Imam Khomeini’s Name being announced :”Allah is greater, Allah is greater , Khomeini’s the leader , Khomeini is the leader, then they say “I bear witness that Muhammad is God 's messenger”.
(The author: in the lectures I had in the current year (2003) with some of the students of Umol Qara University near Kabaa, I told them if anyone listened to the Azans which are broadcast at by the Islamic public of Iran broadcasting agency, or Jame-Jam international network which is broadcasted for all the countries in the world especially Saudi Arabia they would realize what this writer has written in his book are nothing but lies and accusations. It is all the more surprising that the number of books written on the Zionist crimes against Palestinians is far fewer that those published against Shiites.
The Future of Shiism
One of the main reasons behind widespread attacks of Wahhabism against Ahlol-Beit (AS) is their fear of this culture spreading among the young and educated scholars, a culture based on the true teachings of the Quran and Islam’s holy prophet (PBUH).
To put the issue into perspective, here we give some examples of this new tendency among the youth toward Shiism:
1. Dr. Esam al-Emad, a graduate of Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud university in Riyadh and a student of Ibn Baz (the grand Saudi Mufti) Friday prayer’s leader and preacher in one of the great mosques in Sana and a missionary of Wahhabism who also has written a book on proving the infidelity and polytheism in Shiism called
“al-Sela Bein al-Asna Ashaiyah va Ferghe al-Ghalah” converted to Shiism after having investigated this divine sect and gave up believing in Wahhabism.
He once wrote:
«وكلَّما نقرأ كتابات إخواننا الوهّابيّين نزداد يقيناً بأنّ المستقبل للمذهب الاثنى عشرى؛ لأنّهم يتابعون حركة الانتشار السريعة لهذا المذهب فى وسط الوهّابيّين وغيرهم من المسلمين»
“After having read the books written by Wahhabis during the past few years, there is no doubt that the only sect of the future is 12-Imam Shiism since they seek to spread it among Wahhabis community and other Muslim groups.”
Citing Abdullah al-Ghaniman, a professor of “al-Jameatol Islamiyah” in median: “
إنّ الوهّابيّين على يقين بأنّ المذهب (الاثنى عشر) هو الذى سوف يُجذبُ إليه كلّ أهلالسنَّة وكلّ الوهّابيّين فى المستقبل القريب
“Wahhabism have undoubtedly realized that Shiism will be the only sect attracting the Sunnis and Wahhabis to itself in the future.”
Mr. Sheikh Rabi bin Mohammed, the reputed author in Saudi Arabia writes:
وممّا زاد عجبي من هذا الأمر أنّ إخواناً لنا ومنهم أبناء أحد العلماء الكبار المشهورين فى مصر، ومنهم طلاّب علم طالما جلسوا معنا في حلقات العلم، ومنهم بعضُ الإخوان الذين كنّا نُحْسن الظنَّ بهم؛ سلكوا هذا الدَرْب، وهذا الاتّجاه الجديد هو (التشيّع)، وبطبيعة الحال أدركت منذ اللحظة الأولى أنّ هؤلاء الإخوة كغيرهم في العالم الإسلامي بهرتهم أضواء الثورة الإيرانيّة.
“What came to me as a shock was the fact that some of our wahhabi brothers ,a few of whom were the children of Egyptian scholars, participating in our scientific meeting for a long time , and also some of our brothers with a promising religious future have turned to Shiism. And something interesting about this situation is that they are all affected by the bright light of the Iran’s Islamic revolution.”
The renowned Wahhabi author, Sheik Mohammad Magharavi states:
بعد انتشار المذهب الإثنى عشري في مشرق العالم الإسلامي، فخفت على الشباب في بلاد المغرب ...
“With the spread of Shiism in the orient, I am fearful of this culture spreading among the young Westerners.”
Dr.Naser Ghaffari, a professor at Medina universities, says:
وقد تشيّع بسبب الجهود التى يبذلها شيوخ الإثنى عشريّة من شباب المسلمين، ومن يطالع كتاب عنوان المجد فى تاريخ البصرة ونجد يَهُولُه الأمر حيث يجدُ قبائل بأكملها قد تشيّعت
“Recently , a large number of Sunnis have turned to Shiism and if you read the book called” Onvan al-Majd fi Tarikh al-Basareh Vanajd” , you will be frightened by the fact that many of Arab tribes have completely embraced Shiism.”
5. Sheikh Majdi Mohammed Ali Mohammed, a prominent Wahhabi author has an interesting remark to say:
جاءني شابّ من أهل السنّة حيران، وسبب حيرته أنّه قدامتدّت إليه أيدى الشيعة ... حتّى ظنّ المسكين أنّهم ملائكة الرحمة وفرسان الحقّ
“ one of the young Sunni people approached me full of surprise and when I asked him for the reason why he was seemed so shocked, he explained a Shiite had shaken hands with him and this young Sunni had thought Shiites were the angels of mercy and true lions (powerful symbols) of God.”
Question 1: why didn 't Abu-Bakr follow the holy prophet in the matter of caliphate?
1-you believe that the holy prophet of Islam did not appoint a Caliph and left it to people to decide. If what the holy prophet did for the good of the society and guaranteed the guidance, so it would be a religious obligation for everyone to follow his orders since his instructions should be a model for all the truth-seeking individuals who believed in the Day of Judgment:
لَّقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَذَكَرَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا
“Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.”
Therefore, what Abu Bakr did concerning appointing a Caliph was wrong and against the holy prophet 's transitions and led the nation astray. In addition, Umar appointed a six-member committee to decide who would be the next caliphate and action which was also against the holy prophet 's transitions and against Abu-Bakr’s lifestyle.
If you say that what those Caliphs did was for the good of the society, then you have to say that what the holy prophet did was wrong (may God forgive me for saying that).
Appointing a one-day successor:
2-when the holy prophet left the city for a few days it would appoint one of his companions as his successor:
لأنّ النبیّ – صلّى اللَّه علیه وسلم – استخلف فی کلّ غزاة غزاها رجلاً من أصحابه
For example, he appointed Ibn Umm Maktum in 13 wars like: Badr, Ohud, Abva, Suvayq, Zaturriqa, Hajjatul Vida and …. He also selected Abu Raham when he was leaving for Mecca for Hunayn, Kheibar battles and authorized Muhammad Ibn Muslimah at Qirqirah battle, Also Namilat Ibn Abdullah in Banil Mustalaq and Uvayf in Hudaybiya battle.
Therefore, you think it sounded logical for the holy prophet to set a successor even for one-day when he wanted to leave Medina, but it wouldn 't appoint a Caliph when he knew it was going to pass away? The holy prophet of Islam appointed the successor for himself when he went to Khandagh war near Medina, do you think it would not appoint anyone when he was going to go away for a long time? In all the above-mentioned, cases can you give me an example when the holy prophet left the decision to the people or consultant Muslims regarding his successor?
All the prophets had a successor, but!
3- On one hand, in one of Sunni narration books we read that the holy prophet was quoted as saying: “all the prophets had successors and heirs”.  They even quote Salman Farsi asking the holy prophet (PBUH): “every prophet had a successor. Who would be yours? إنّ لکلّ نبیّ وصیّاً ، فمن وصیّک؟. And on the other hand, you say that the holy prophet did not appoint anyone as his own successor!
Among all the divine prophets, was the holy prophet (PBUH) an exception? Was it one of the features and characteristics of the holy prophet of Islam not to the point a successor for himself? Did he act the opposite of all the previous prophets?
We believe that what the holy prophet said about other prophets’ prophethood and successors included his too. In the question Salman Farsi asked is a proof to such claim.
Have you ever contemplated upon the meaning of this holy verse?
أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ هَدَى اللَّهُ ۖ فَبِهُدَاهُمُ اقْتَدِهْ
“Those were the (prophets) who received Allah´s guidance: Copy the guidance they received”.
As we can see, in this verse God Almighty commands the holy prophet to follow previous prophets after mentioning the names.
Failure to set the successor: the main factor for mayhem and turmoil in the society
4- Our Sunni brothers asserts that the holy prophet of Islam left the Islamic nation without having appointed a Caliph for success. Do they really believe that the holy prophet of Islam left the nation to decide about caliphate in the best possible way they deemed necessary? And he himself did not say anything about the conditions of the election for the qualities of the leadership and the candidates such election? Admittedly, thinking in that way is not logical since after the demise of the holy prophet the Islamic community was experiencing the worst condition, on one hand, it was threatened by powerful nations like Iran and Rome, on the other hand, the religious hypocrites, infidels, and Jews were causing problems for the Islamic society day in day out.
It goes without saying that even if the ruler of society was an ordinary individual, he wouldn 't have left the society without having appointed a successor him first. Then how Kennedy said the idea that the holy prophet of Islam left his own nation without determining the person for such a sensitive position? The holy prophet of Islam was the most caring person toward the Muslims and he wouldn 't have spared any efforts for their welfare and the following holy verse is a great indication of that:
لَقَدْ جَاءَكُمْ رَسُولٌ مِّنْ أَنفُسِكُمْ عَزِيزٌ عَلَيْهِ مَا عَنِتُّمْ حَرِيصٌ عَلَيْكُم بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ رَءُوفٌ رَّحِيمٌ
“Now hath come unto you a Messenger from amongst yourselves: it grieves him that ye should perish: ardently anxious is he over you: to the Believers is the most kind and merciful.”
Moreover, having such belief is the outermost insult to the holy prophet (PBUH) because we can claim that by having done so the holy prophet of Islam has put the Islamic society in a very bad position facing a difficult decision to make.(As Dr. Ahmad Ameen, an Egyptian scholar, explicitly says: " the holy prophet of Islam passed away without having selected a successor for himself or without having explained what were the terms for electing such a person and by doing so he created a very difficult and dangerous problem for the Islamic society:
“توفّی رسولاللَّه – صلّى اللَّه علیه وآله – ولم یعیّن من یخلفه ، ولم یبیّن کیف یکون اختیاره ، فواجه المسلمون أشقّ مسألة وأخطرها”
Also, Ibn Khaldon says: it would be impossible to think that the holy prophet of Islam left the society without any leader or successor, leading the people and politicians to fights and conflicts. Therefore, it 's a must for every society to have a ruler so that he could prevent diffusion and mayhem later.”
فاستحال بقاؤهم فوضیّ دون حاکم یزع بعضهم عن بعض واحتاجوا من أجل ذلک إلى الوازع وهو الحاکم علیهم
Umar more caring for the Islamic society than the holy prophet of Islam!!
5- in Sahih Moslem we read that Hafse advises Umar to appoint someone as his own successor and right after Abdullah, Umar’s so, tells him: if your shepherd left a camels and sheep all alone, you would object to him why he endangered the lives so think about the future of your people and assign a person with the caliphate after you since people are more important than camels and sheep.”
عن ابن عمر قال : دخلت علىّ حفصة فقالت : أعلمت أنّ أباک غیر مستخلف؟
قال : قلت : ما کان لیفعل .
قالت : إنّه فاعل .
قال ابن عمر : فحلفت أنّی أکلّمه فی ذلک . فسکت ، حتّى غدوت ولم أکلّمه .
قال : فکنت کأنّما أحمل بیمینی جبلاً ، حتّى رجعت فدخلت علیه ، فقلت له : إنّی سمعت ، الناس یقولون مقالة فآلیت أن أقولها لک ، زعموا أنّک غیر مستخلف ، وأنّه لو کان لک راعی إبل ، أو راعی غنم ثمّ جاءک وترکها رأیت أن قد ضیّع ، فرعایة الناس أشدّ
6-also, Ayesha asked Abdullah ibn Umar to tell Umar: “do not leave Mohammed’s nation without a Shepherd and appoint yourself a successor because I feel after you the nation may be trapped in addition’
ثمّ قالت ( أی عائشة ) : یا بُنیّ! أبلغ عمر سلامی ، وقل له : لا تدع أمّة محمّد بلاراع ، استخلف علیهم ولا تدعهم بعدک هملاً ، فإنّی أخشى علیهم الفتنة
Or as Mu’awiya arrived in Medina to ask people swear allegiance to Yazid, he addressed the companions and Abdullah Ibn Umar: “I am really concerned that one day I leave the nation of the prophet without the shepherd one day and pass away.”
إنّی أرهب أن أدع أمّة محمّد ( ( ص ) ) بعدی کالضأن لاراعی لها
In Tabaqat book, Abdullah ibn Umar told his father: “if you summon the person who is supervising your farmlands, won 't you substitute someone else for him? The answer: definitely!”Then he asked: if you summon the person who is a Shepherd for your sheep, won 't you replace him with someone else? Again he replied: yes skirmish mode”
وقال عبداللَّه بن عمر لأبیه : لو استخلفت ؟ قال : من ؟ قال : تجتهد فإنّک لست لهم بربّ ، تجتهد ، أرأیت لو أنّک بعثت إلى قیّم أرضک ألم تکن تحبّ أن یستخلف مکانه حتّى یرجع إلى الأرض ؟ قال : بلى . قال : أرأیت لو بعثت إلى راعی غنمک ألم تکن تحبّ أن یستخلف رجلاً حتّى یرجع؟
Don 't you think it would be the most humiliating insult to the holy prophet of Islam to think that it couldn 't think right or he couldn 't predict the future of his nation as much as Ayesha, Hafasah, and Mu’awiya to leave them without a leader? Wasn 't there any individual who could remind the holy prophet of Islam about the overriding importance of appointing a successor or set the procedures to choose one?
Failure to appoint a successor is not against the book of God
7- Those who say the holy prophet of Islam passed away without having said his will, are not aware of the fact that they are accusing him of doing something against the book of God and the traditions? In his Sonan book, Nesa’Ee has written: عن عائشة قالت: ما ترک رسول اللّه صلى الله علیه وسلم درهماً ولا دیناراً ولا شاة ولا بعیراً وما أوصى
Since the Quran commands everyone in the Muslim community to write a will before they die. This commandment is a religious obligation like the commandment for the Muslims fast during Ramadan. On the other hand, the holy prophet (PBUH) himself has advised us: it is every Muslim’s responsibility to make a will and three days should not go by before he has drawn up a will”.
Abdullah ibn Umar says when I heard this Hadith from the holy prophet (PBUH) , I immediately wrote a will” .
Do you believe that Abdullah ibn Umar was more committed to this Hadith than the holy prophet (PBUH) himself? Is acceptable to say the holy prophet (PBUH) was all talk and no actions? God Almighty states :
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لِمَ تَقُولُونَ مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ- كَبُرَ مَقْتًا عِندَ اللَّهِ أَن تَقُولُوا مَا لَا تَفْعَلُونَ 
“O ye who believe! Why say ye that which ye do not? Grievously odious is it in the sight of Allah that ye say that which ye do not.”
And this contradiction has been so clear that some Hadith-narrators objected to it, for instance, Talhat Ibn Mosref known as Abdullah ibn Ofi said: “how is it possible that the holy prophet (PBUH) himself did not leave a will while he recommended others to do so?”
عن طلحة بن مصرف ، قال : سألت عبداللّه بن أبی أوفى : هل کان النبى ( ص ) أوصى؟ قال : لا . فقلت : کیف کتب على الناس الوصیّة ، ثمّ ترکها – قال : أوصى بکتاب اللّه
Even if we say that the above-mentioned verse and Hadith make it obligatory for the Muslims to observe such an act , at least we can say it a recommendation to do a proper act and it is appropriate for the holy prophet (PBUH) to quit such act because the Quran states :
أَتَأْمُرُونَ النَّاسَ بِالْبِرِّ وَتَنسَوْنَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَتْلُونَ الْكِتَابَ ۚ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ
“Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget (To practice it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will ye not understand?”
8- Those who say the holy prophet (PBUH) of Islam passed away without having appointed a caliph fir and left the nation to decide about it, have to ask them: did he set some laws and conditions for the person who was to become the leader of the society and also those who were to appoint such a leader?
If he set those rules, where can we find them? In what narration and what Hadith? If the holy prophet (PBUH) has stated all the pre-requisites for appointing a caliph, why didn’t the Hadith-narrators of Saghife Bani Saede refer to it? Besides, if Abu-Bakr matched the descriptions of the future caliph and regulations set by the holy prophet (PBUH), why did Abu-Bakr call his allegiance an unexpected, unplanned and disorganized event whose dire consequences were eradicated by God?:
قال أبو بکر فی أوائل خلافته : إنّ بیعتی کانت فلتة وقى اللّه شرّها وخشیت الفتنة .
Ibn Athir says: “such an allegiance is undoubtedly hazardous.”
The same remark was made by Umar during the last days of his caliphate saying:
إنّ بیعة أبی بکر کانت فلتة وقى اللّه شرّها فمن عاد إلى مثلها فاقتلوه
“If anyone does the same, he will be executed”. Ibn Kathir writes: a vain action is called “Falata” in Arabic and many people swore allegiance to Abu-Bakr for the fear of disunity and conflicts in over the caliphate Islamic Ummah.”
I wish someone had asked ibn Kathir which caliphate he meant or what type of fear. The caliphate set by the holy prophet (PBUH)? Or the fear of having people like Abu-Bakr as the caliph?
The caliphate set by the holy prophet (PBUH) would not have caused any fear and could have guaranteed the good of the society and it was incumbent on everyone to follow the holy prophet (PBUH)’s orders and not to defy him.
 ما کان لمؤمن و لا مؤمنة إذا قضى اللّه ورسوله أمراً أن یکون لهم الخیرة من أمرهم
“It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision.”
Also, if Abu-Bakr was not afraid of a little competition, he would have allowed other candidates to try their chances .if people realized other candidates were no match for Abu-Bakr; they would go back to him. And if they were at the same level of competence, would be the difference between Abu-Bakr and other candidates? But if any other candidate had better qualities than Abu-Bakr, then it would better for the good of the society to elect him not Abu-Bakr.
9- Most importantly, if, indeed, Abu-Bakr’s caliphate happened based on the circumstances and the traditions of the holy prophet (PBUH), then why did Umar say: “if anyone doe the same, he will be executed”?
Were the first three caliphs true successors of the holy prophet (PBUH)?
10- On one hand, our Sunni brothers say the holy prophet (PBUH) did not appoint anyone as his successor and did not assign the job to anyone either and it was people who appointed Abu-Bakr as the caliph and later he appointed Umar as his own successor and Ottoman was elected by a six-member-council, on the other hand, they say they were the caliphs and successors of the holy prophet (PBUH), calling them “Khalifat al-Rasol” , do you not think you are ascribing a lie to God? And you know that based on a Motavater Hadith:
من کذب علیّ متعمّداً فلیتبّؤ مقعده من النّار
Attributing any lie to the holy prophet (PBUH) is considered a sin, therefore, if your claim as to the fact that the holy prophet (PBUH) did not appoint any caliphs, then we can easily conclude that the first three caliphs are not the holy prophet (PBUH)’s caliphs.
Accusing the holy prophet (PBUH) of delirium
Eleven serious faults with Umar and his followers’ performance:
1- When the holy prophet (PBUH) was sick in bed and said: bring me some inkwell and pen so that I can write you some guideline not to go astray”, why did Umar say: he is in pain and the book of us would suffice us”:
« إنّ النبیّ – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – قد غلب علیه الوجع ، وعندکم القرآن حسبنا کتاب اللّه
Or they said that the holy prophet (PBUH) had slipped into a slate of delirium. This event was so painful that whenever ibn Abbas remembered it, tears would come rolling down:
عن ابنعبّاس قال : « یوم الخمیس وما یوم الخمیس ، ثمّ جعل تسیل دموعه حتّى رأیت على خدّیه کأنّها نظام اللؤلؤ قال : قال رسول اللّه : ائتونى بالکتف والدواة ( او اللوح والدواة ) اکتب لکم کتاباً لن تضلّوا بعده أبداً فقالوا : إنّ رسول اللّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – یهجر
Regarding the abovementioned Hadith in Sahih Bokhari and Moslem and some other Hadith books, we have to pose a few questions: what Umar said in that situation was not against this Quranic verse satiating:
ما ینطق عن الهوى إن هو إلّا وحی یوحى
Not he speaks out of his own desire- he relates to you only what is revealed to him”
عن ابنعبّاس قال : « یوم الخمیس وما یوم الخمیس ، ثمّ جعل تسیل دموعه حتّى رأیت على خدّیه کأنّها نظام اللؤلؤ قال : قال رسول اللّه : ائتونى بالکتف والدواة ( او اللوح والدواة ) اکتب لکم کتاباً لن تضلّوا بعده أبداً فقالوا : إنّ رسول اللّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – یهجر صحیح مسلم ، ج ۵ ، ص ۷۶ کتاب الوصیّة باب ترک الوصیة لمن لیس عنده شیء ، صحیح البخارى ، ج ۴ ص ۳۱ ، کتاب الجهاد والسیر . النجم : ۴ .
2- When Umar said: “the book of God would suffice us!” was he not defying the holy prophet (PBUH)’s traditions? Since the holy prophet (PBUH) said he was going to write something to protect us against going astray.
3- Did Umar’s disobeying the holy prophet (PBUH) not mean defying the Quran which stated: وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانتَهُوا?
“So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you.”?
4- Bokhari said that people started controversies next to the holy prophet (PBUH)’s prophet and raised their voices, do you not think that they were acting against the teachings of the Quran which considers any opposition with the holy prophet (PBUH) as a destroyer of all the good deeds:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَرْفَعُوا أَصْوَاتَكُمْ فَوْقَ صَوْتِ النَّبِيِّ وَلَا تَجْهَرُوا لَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ كَجَهْرِ بَعْضِكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ أَن تَحْبَطَ أَعْمَالُكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَشْعُرُونَ
“O ye who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor speak aloud to him in talk, as ye may speak aloud to one another, lest your deeds become vain and ye perceive not.”
5- When conflicts arouse between the Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) and they did not listen to what the Quran said about obeying him, they were actually opposing the holy prophet (PBUH) and especially the Quran which emphasizes that Muslims should listen to the prophet in matters of dispute and does not consider those who oppose him as believers.
فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا
“But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.”
6- The holy prophet (PBUH) was going to make a will to prevent the nation from going astray, do you not think hindering him from writing such an important will caused the nation’s heterodoxy? Do you accept the holy prophet (PBUH)’s remarks or not? In the second case, do you reject the heterodoxy taken place? Then you have accept what a widespread heterodoxy took place as the result of first three caliph’s ruling.
7- There were some people against Umar and his culprits who wanted to help the will to be written:
منهم منیقول : قرّبوا یکتب لکمالنبی -صلىاللَّه علیه وسلم- کتاباً لا تضلّوا بعده ومنهم من یقول : ما قال عمر
Even the wives of the holy prophet (PBUH) stated objecting to Umar’s supporters but he reacted impolitely and the holy prophet (PBUH) defended them:
فقالت النسوة من وراء الستر : ألا تسمعون ما یقول رسول اللّه؟! قال عمر : فقلت إنّکنّ صواحبات یوسف ، إذا مرض رسول اللّه ، عصرتنّ أعینکنّ ، وإذا صحّ ، رکبتنّ عنقه! قال : فقال رسول اللَّه : دعوهنّ فإنهنّ خیر منکم
“the holy prophet (PBUH)’s wives proclaimed for the behind the curtain:” do you not hear what the holy prophet (PBUH) is saying?” Umar shouted: “you are like the lovers of Josef who would cry whenever the holy prophet (PBUH) is sick and would ride on his neck when he is healthy.”
The holy prophet (PBUH) objected by saying: “leave them alone, since they are much better than you!”
We should really analyze and see what really happened which helped Umar’s team win and which one of these groups acted against the Quran and the tradition of the holy prophet (PBUH).
Ibn Abbas and the tragedy of Companions’ opposition with the holy prophet (PBUH)
8- What did Ibn Abbas mean when he decided that incident as a tragedy and disaster?
إنّ الرزیّة کلّ الرزیّة ما حال بین رسول اللّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – وبین أن یکتب لهم ذلک الکتاب من اختلافهم ولَغَطهم
Didn’t his mournful crying mean that we have to contemplate upon the issue and feel its gravity?
The holy prophet (PBUH), though known as a kind and patient prophet, became so furious by that insulting behavior which was against the Quran and his own tradition that he ordered everyone to leave his house:
فلمّا أکثروا اللغط والاختلاف عند النبىّ قال لهم رسول اللّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – قوموا) صحیح البخارى ، ج ۷ ، ص ۹ ، کتاب المرضى باب قول المریض قوموا عنّى(
Now, how can we forgive such treatment towards the holy prophet (PBUH) when the Quran clearly stated?
إنّ الذین یؤذون اللّه ورسوله لعنهم اللّه فیالدنیا والآخرة وأعدّ لهم عذاباً مهیناً 
“Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.”
10- With regard to what Umar said about the remarks made by the holy prophet (PBUH) claiming that the holy prophet (PBUH) had slipped into a state of delirium and his word could not be counted on, then why don’t you call delirium what the holy prophet (PBUH) said to Ayesha as he was dying ? You claim the holy prophet (PBUH) said: “tell Abu-Bakr to perform the prayers for people!”
“مروا أبا بکر فلیصلّ”-صحیح البخاری ، ج ۱ ص ۱۶۲ کتاب الأذان ، با وجوب صلاة الجماعة وص ۱۶۵ باب أهل العلم والفضل أحقّ کما عن أحمد بن حنبل: بأنّه إنّما قدّمه من هو أقرأ ، لتفهم الصحابة من تقدیمه فی الإمامة الصغرى استحقاقه للإمامة الکبرى ، وتقدیمه فیها على غیره. کشاف القناع للبهوتی ، ج۱ ، ص ۵۷۳ ؛ المواقف ، ج ۸ ص ۳۶۵ .
11- Even though Abu-Bakr lost consciousness for the severity of his disease as he was making his will and then regain cam around and finished his will, no one accused him of going through a state of delirium? :
لما حضرت أبا بکر الصدیق الوفاة دعا عثمان بن عفان فأملى علیه عهده ، ثم أغمی على أبی بکر قبل أن یملی أحدا فکتب عثمان عمر بن الخطاب ، فأفاق أبو بکر فقال لعثمان کتبت أحدا ؟ فقال : ظننتک لما بک وخشیت الفرقة فکتبت عمر بن الخطاب فقال : یرحمک اللَّه ، أما لو کتبت نفسک لکنت لها أهلا .
However, the same person who ascribed delirium to what the holy prophet (PBUH) said exploited Abu-Bakr’s will at his death time to legitimize his own caliphate:
عن إسماعیل بن قیس ، قال : رأیت عمر بن الخطاب وهو یجلس والناس معه وبیده جریدة وهو یقول : « أیّها الناس اسمعوا وأطیعوا قول خلیفة رسول اللّه إنّه یقول : إنّى لم آلکم نصحاً قال : ومعه مولى لأبى بکر یقال له : شدید ، معه الصحیفة التى فیها استخلاف عمر.
12- Tabari and Seiyoti quote the holy prophet (PBUH) as saying: whenever nations started conflicts after the passing away of their prophets’, they were easily dominated by the wrong group:
ما اختلفت امّة بعدنبیّها إلّا ظهر أهلباطلها علىأهلحقّها
Then how do our Sunni brothers can justify the violent conflicts in Saqife and final dominance of Abu-Bakr and Umar?
The myth of consensus over Abu-Bakr’s allegiance
13- Our Sunni brothers claim that the allegiance with Abu-Bakr was made through a consensus of all the Muhajerin and Ansars but Umar ibn Khatab said that all the Muhajerin were against such decision and so were Ali (AS) and Zobeir:
حین توفى اللّه نبیّه -صلى اللَّه علیه وسلم- أنّ الأنصار خالفونا ، واجتمعوا بأسرهم فى سقیفة بنى ساعدة وخالف عنّا على والزبیر ومن معهما
Are you telling the truth or Umar?
The grand Sunni scholars: denying the consensus over Abu-Bakr’s caliphate
To justify Abu-Bakr’s caliphate, you bring up the consensus of all the Muslim groups over the legitimacy of his ruling, while the grand Sunni scholars deny such consensus: Maverdi Shafei (died in 450AH) and Abu Yali Hanbali (died in 458) have explicitly said that over the allegiance with Abu-Bakr there was no consensus and any talk about it is just exaggeration:
فقالت طائفة : لاتنعقد إلّا بجمهور أهل العقد والحلّ من کلّ بلد ، لیکون الرضا به عامّاً ، والتسلیم لإمامته إجماعاً ، وهذا مذهب مدفوع ببیعة أبی بکر -رضی اللّه- عنه على الخلافة باختیار من حضرها ، ولم ینتظر ببیعته قدوم غائب عنها
Are you telling the truth or these two prominent Sunni figures?
15- Our Sunni brothers say that all the Companions and the Muhajerin all had a hand in consolidating Abu-Bakr’s caliphate while Qartabi, the grand Sunni the Quran interpreter (died in 671) strongly rejects that idea and believes it only happened through the allegiance of Umar and his assistance:
فإن عقدها واحد من أهل الحلّ والعقد فذلک ثابت ، ویلزم الغیر فعله ، خلافاً لبعض الناس حیث قال : لا ینعقد إلّا بجماعة من أهل الحلّ والعقد ، ودلیلنا : أنّ عمر ( رض ) عقد البیعة لأبی بکر
16- Now, can you tell us what type of consensus are you talking about? A consensus which is even denied by your own great theologian like Imam al-Haramein (died in 478AH), Qazali’s master? He said: “For a religious leadership (Imamate) to form, there is no need for a consensus like Abu-Bakr’s caliphate which happened without any consensus of people and even before the news reached other Islamic territories, all the decrees were signed and circulars were distributed”. Then he concludes that imamate can be confirmed by only one prominent person:
اعلموا أنّه لا یشترط فی عقد الإمامة ، الإجماع ، بل تنعقد الإمامة وإن لم تجمع الأمّة على عقدها ، والدلیل علیه أنّ الإمامة لمّا عقدت لأبی بکر ابتدر لإمضاء أحکام المسلمین ، ولم یتأن لانتشار الأخبار إلى من نأى من الصحابة فی الأقطار ، ولم ینکر منکر . فإذا لم یشترط الإجماع فی عقد الإمامة ، لم یثبت عدد معدود ولا حدّ محدود ، فالوجه الحکم بأنّ الإمامة تنعقد بعقد واحد من أهل الحلّ والعقد
17- What do you regard as the supporting evidence for backing up one’s claim for caliphate? Azdodin Eiji (died in 756) , the author of the book called “al-Movaqif” and one of the founding-fathers of Sunni theology , denies such a consensus by saying : “ there is no logical and traditional reason for a consensus and as long as one or two prominent council swears allegiance, imamate is formed as it was regarding :
وإذا ثبت حصول الإمامة بالاختیار والبیعة ، فاعلم أنّ ذلک لا یفتقر إلى الإجماع ، إذ لم یقم علیه دلیل من العقل أو السمع ، بل الواحد والإثنان من أهل الحلّ والعقد کاف ، لعلمنا أنّ الصحابة مع صلابتهم فی الدین اکتفوا بذلک ، کعقد عمر لأبی بکر ، وعقد عبد الرحمن بن عوف لعثمان
More interestingly, he adds: “as for the Abu-Bakr’s caliphate, even the consensus of Medina’s people was not deemed necessary, let alone the consensus of the entire nation:
ولم یشترطوا اجتماع مَن فی المدینة فضلاً عن اجتماع الأمّة . هذا ولم ینکر علیه أحد ، وعلیه انطوت الأعصار إلى وقتنا هذا
Also, ibn Arabi Maleki (died in 543AH) one of the great Sunni scholars, says: when selecting an Imam, we do not need the opinion of all the people and one or two people can make such decision:
لا یلزم فی عقد البیعة للإمام أن تکون من جمیع الأنام بل یکفی لعقد ذلک إثنان أو واحد
Are you telling the truth or these grand Sunni scholars?
Umar: Threatening to kill the Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH)
18- If reaching a consensus over the legitimacy of someone’s caliphate requires only one or two people on the election committee , why did Umar threaten to kill those people who would do the same in the future by saying : “ If anyone does what we did concerning the caliphate , both parties to the allegiance will be killed!”?
من بایع رجلاً عن غیر مشورة من المسلمین فلا یبایع هو ولا الذی بایعه ، تغرّة أن یقتلا
If doing so is unlawful and Haraam and leads to a person’s execution, then why didn’t Umar practice what he preached regarding Abu-Bakr’s caliphate?
Did Ali (AS) consider Abu-Bakr and Umar as treacherous individuals?
19- You say that Ali (AS) accepted Abu-Bakr and Umar’s caliphates , while Umar himself addressed Ali (AS) and Abbas, the holy prophet (PBUH)’s uncle, and said that he knew they looked at him as a tricky, treacherous liar:
فلمّا توفّی رسول اللّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلّم – قال أبو بکر : أنا ولیّ رسول اللّه ، فجئتما . . . فرأیتماه کاذباً آثماً غادراً خائناً . . . ثمّتوفّی أبوبکر فقلت : أنا ولیّ رسولاللَّه – صلى اللّه علیه وسلّم – وولیّ أبی بکر ، فرأیتمانی کاذباً آثماً غادراً خائناً
Are you telling the truth or Umar?
20- The second caliph chose six individuals and ordered them to pick one from among themselves and if any one did not accept the chosen one’s caliphate, he had to be beheaded:
عن عمر بن الخطاب أنّه قال لصهیب : صلّ بالناس ثلاثة أیّام ، وأدخل علیّاً وعثمان والزبیر وسعداً وعبد الرحمن بن عوف وطلحة ، إن قدم وأحضر عبداللّه بن عمر ، ولاشیء له من الأمر ، وقم على رؤوسهم فإن اجتمع خمسة ورضوا رجلاً وأبى واحد ، فاشدخ رأسه ، أواضرب رأسهبالسیف ، وإن اتّفق أربعة فرضوا رجلاً منهم وأبى اثنان ، فاضرب رؤوسهما ، فإن رضی ثلاثة رجلاً منهم ، وثلاثة رجلاً منهم ، فحکموا عبد اللّه بن عمر ، فأی الفریقین حکم له فلیختاروا رجلاً منهم ، فإن لم یرضوا بحکم عبد اللّه بن عمر فکونوا مع الذین فیهم عبدالرحمان بن عوف ، واقتلوا الباقین إن رغبوا عمّا اجتمع علیه الناس 
How can he order the execution of someone deserving of being a caliph?
Annoying Fatima (AS): an act against the book of God and the holy prophet (PBUH)’s traditions
21- in Sahih Moslem and Bokhari, we read that the holy prophet (PBUH) once said:” anyone who annoys Fatima (AS), he has annoyed me since she is my flesh and blood”: فاطمة بضعة منّی فمن أغضبها أغضبنی
On the other hand, in Sahih Moslem and Bokhari, it has been mentioned that Fatima (AS) was estranged from Abu-Bakr and did not talk to him as long as she was alive.
And in the Quran, God says:
إنّ الذین یؤذون اللّه ورسوله لعنهم اللّه فیالدنیا والآخرة وأعدّ لهم عذاباً مهیناً 
“Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.”
By referring to the above-mentioned Hadiths, one of great Sunni scholars, Soheili (died in 581) argued that if anyone insulted Fatima (AS), he would be considered as an infidel:
استدلّ به السهیلی على أنّ من سبّها کفر لأنّه یغضبه وأنّها أفضل من الشیخین
To justify it, Ibn Hajar has said:
وتوجیهه : إنّها تغضب ممّن سبّها وقد سوّى بین غضبها وغضبه ، ومن أغضبه -صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – یکفر
Manavi, the writer of Feyzul Ghadir quotes Abu-Naeem and Deylami citing the holy prophet (PBUH) that:
فاطمة بضعة منّی من آذاها فقد آذانی ومن آذانی فقد آذى اللّه ، فعلیه لعنة اللّه ملء السماء وملء الأرض
22- Taking into account all the above mentioned issues, do you not think you have to contemplate upon the most derogatory and insulting remarks Abu-Bakr made about Fatima (AS) and Ali (AS) after Fatima (AS)’s speech in the mosque?
إنّما هو ثعالة شهیده ذنبه ، مرب لکلّ فتنة ، هو الذی یقول : کرّوها جذعة بعدما هرمت ، یستعینون بالضعفه ، ویستنصرون بالنساء ، کأمّ طحال أحبّ أهلها إلیها البغی
In these remarks, Abu-Bakr has called Ali (AS) a fox whose tail is Fatima (AS). Were these insults the reward for the holy prophet (PBUH)’s prophethood’s troubles?! What happened to all the recommendations given by the holy prophet (PBUH) on respecting Fatima (AS) after his demise? Do you think such a person deserved the caliphate of the holy prophet (PBUH) who was known for his kindness and patience?
We ask you to take a look at the dialogue between Ibn Abi Habib Sunni and his master Naqib and then judge for yourself:
قال ابن أبی الحدید : قلت : قرأت هذا الکلام على النقیب أبی یحیى جعفر بن یحیى بن أبی زید البصری وقلت له : من یعرض ؟ فقال : بل یصرّح . قلت : لو صرّح لم أسالک . فضحک وقال : بعلیّ بن أبى طالب علیه السلام ، قلت : هذا الکلام کلّه لعلی یقوله؟ ! قال : نعم ، إنّه الملک یا بُنیّ . قلت : فما مقالة الأنصار؟ قال : هتفوا بذکر علی ، فخاف من اضطراب الأمر علیهم ، فنهاهم . . . وثُعالة : اسم الثعلب علم غیر مصروف ، ومثّل ذؤاله للذئب ، وشهیده ذنبه ، أی لا شاهد له على ما یدّعی إلّا بعضه وجزء منه ، وأصله مثل قالوا : إنّ الثعلب أراد أن یغری الأسد بالذئب ، فقال : إنّه قد أکل الشاة التی کنت قد أعددتهإ؛!!”" لنفسک ، وکنت حاضراً ، قال : فمن یشهد لک بذلک؟ فرفع ذنبه وعلیه دم ، وکان الأسد قد افتقد الشاة ، فقبل شهادته وقتل الذئب . . . وأمّ طحال : إمرأة بغى فی الجاهلیّة ، ویضرب بها المثل فیقال : أزنى من أمّ طحال .
Opposing Fatima (AS): a proof for the illegitimacy of Abu-Bakr and Umar’s caliphate
23- In our reliable sources, we read “if anyone dies without having known his Imam, he dies an infidel’s death”: من مات بغیر إمام مات میتة جاهلیّة
And Bokhari in his Sahih has quoted ibn Abbas and the holy prophet (PBUH) who said:
لیس أحد یفارق الجماعة قید شبر فیموت إلّا مات میتة جاهلیّة
“If anyone moves away from the Islamic Ummah slightly, his death will be the death of a person in pre-Islamic period (he has died in ignorance)”.
In Sahih Moslem, we read that Abu Harireh quotes the holy prophet (PBUH):
من خرج عن الطاعة وفارق الجماعة فمات ، مات میتة جاهلیّة
“Anyone defying the caliph and separating from the Islamic society will die an infidel”.
Now, I would like to ask our Sunni brothers a question: what will happen to Fatima (AS) who did not swear allegiance to Abu-Bakr? (Taking into account the Tathir Verse and hundreds of narrations by the holy prophet (PBUH) about Fatima (AS) like: فاطمة سیّدة نساء هذه الأمّة »or « سیّدة نساء اهل الجنّة
Are our Sunni brothers implying that the abovementioned narrations are not authentic or do they believe that (may God forgive me for saying this) Fatima (AS) acted against the holy prophet (PBUH) tradition and recommendations?
Appointing the caliph by God
24- The Sunni community scholars say that the holy prophet (PBUH) did not appoint anyone as the caliph and leader of the Islamic Ummah and left people to decide about it w, while it is against Quranic verses and the holy prophet (PBUH) traditions as well since God Almighty told Ibrahim:
إنّی جاعلک للنّاس إماماً
“We have appointed you as the Imam and leader of the people”
یا داود إنّا جعلناک خلیفة فیالأرض فاحکم بین الناس بالحقّ)ص:27)
“O David! We did indeed make thee a vicegerent on earth: so judge thou between men in truth (and justice)”.
Or in another verse God asks Muses to appoint a successor for himself:
قال قد أوتیت سؤلک یا موسى- طه :36
Or He addresses children of Israel: And we appointed from among them messengers and Divine leaders for the guidance of their people.
As it can be seen, in all the above-mentioned cases, it is God who has the right to appoint a leader and ruler. Also, some of the grand Sunni scholars like ibn Hesham, ibn Kathir, ibn Habban and some others have said: “when the holy prophet (PBUH) invited Arab tribes to accept Islam, some of their grand figures like Bani Amer ibn Sasae used to say “if we aid you and you succeed, will you appoint us as your successors?” The holy prophet (PBUH) would reply: Appointing a leader is not within my powers and only God can choose whomever He wants”:
الأمر إلى اللّه یضعه حیث یشاء
And they said: we would not sacrifice ourselves for your causes so that after the victory someone else sits on the throne:
فقالوا : أنهدف نحورنا للعرب دونک ، فإذا ظهرت کان الأمر فی غیرنا؟ لاحاجة لنا فی هذا من أمرک the Qashir Ibn Kaab Rabiah asked for the same thing from the holy prophet (PBUH):
If we cannot have a share of the government, we will not convert into Islam!”
Under the worst possible conditions which help was needed the most, the holy prophet (PBUH) did not promise the succession to any tribe.
Another case in point was Hozah, Yamamah’s king, who was invited to Islam but he sent a delegate asking the holy prophet (PBUH) for a share in the administration in exchange for his assistance and conversion to Islam but the holy prophet (PBUH) turned him down by saying that: I would not agree to his ruling over an abandoned piece of land.”
Insurgency of Nakithin and Qasitin against Islamic governor
25- In Sahih Moslem and Bokhari the holy prophet (PBUH) of Islam has been quoted as saying: “If you witness an indecent act done by your Muslim governors, you have to ignore it and be patient since if a person separates from the Islamic Ummah even slightly and he will die as an infidel.”
And in Mosnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Sahih Tormazi, we read: “when a person moves away from Islamic Ummah even slightly, it means he is not a Muslim anymore”: من فارق الجماعة شبرا فقد خلع ربقة الاسلام من عنقه
مسند أحمد ، ج ۵ ص ۱۸۰ ؛ سنن أبی داود ، ج ۲ ص ۴۲۶ ؛ سنن الترمذی ، ج ۴ ص ۲۲۶ ؛ المستدرک ، ج ۱ ص ۱۱۷ وصحّحه . وهکذا رواه الحاکم فیالمستدرک ، ج ۱ ص ۷۷ ، ثمّ قال : هذا حدیث صحیح على شرط الشیخین وج ۱ ص ۱۱۷ قائلاً : وقد روى هذا المتن عبد اللَّه بن عمر باسناد صحیح على شرطهما ، وهکذا فیج ۱ ص ۴۲۲ وقال : هذا حدیث صحیح على شرط الشیخین ولم یخرجاه وفى مجمع الزوائد ، ج ۵ ص ۲۱۷ قائلاً : رواه أحمد ورجاله ثقات رجال الصحیح خلا علیّ بن إسحاق السلمی وهو ثقة
Tabarani and Heithami have quoted the holy prophet (PBUH) as saying : “ even if a person separates from the praying crowd for an inch, his prayers and fasting will not be accepted by God and his body will be the firewood of Hell .
فمن فارق الجماعة قید قوس لم تقبل منه صلاة ولا صیام وأولئک هم وقود النار
Regarding the aforesaid narrations, we have to ask: What will happen those who revolted against Amir-al-Momenin Ali (AS) who was the official governor of the Islamic society after Ottoman was murdered?
Who do you justify the actions of Ayesha, Talhe, Zobeir, etc. who separated from the Islamic society and caused destructive seditions and deaths of thousands of Muslims?
If you say that had their own logical reasons for having done so but made a mistake, then we have to say we will not be able to find any wrongdoer in this world since all of them have seemingly logical reasons for their action.
By the way, what will happen to Mu’awiya who rebelled against the Amir-al-Momenin Ali (AS) the true caliph and crated sedition among Muslims whose consequence are still with after 15 century?
Interestingly, Hakim Neishabori, Tabarani and Seioti have quoted Mu’awiya citing the holy prophet: “when a person moves away from Islamic Ummah even slightly, it means he is not a Muslim anymore and he will be doomed to Hell”.
If our Sunni brothers say that Mu’awiya was a caliph to whom the people of Syria had sworn allegiance then our answer is: according to a narration from Sahih Moslem cited from the holy prophet (PBUH) if two caliphs are sworn allegiance to, it is an obligation for the people to kill the second caliph.
اذا بویع لخلیفتین فاقتلوا الآخرمنهما
The martyrdom of Ammar: a proof for the illegitimacy of Mu’awiya
Do you not know that, based on a Motavater Hadith, the holy prophet (PBUH) stated: Ammar will be killed by some outlaws and rebellions”:
تقتله الفئة الباغیة یدعوهم إلى اللّه ویدعونه إلى النار
Did the holy prophet (PBUH) not say that the killer of Ammar will be in the fire of Hell? إنّ عمار قاتله وسالبه فی النار
After his murder, even some of the high-ranking figures in Mu’awiya like Amru A’s stopped fighting and said: we won’t fight since it is clear now that we are the unjust and wrong group since the holy prophet said he would be killed by people belonging to hell.
إنّ عمرو بن العاص کان وزیر معویة فلما قتل عمار بن یاسر أمسک عن القتال وتابعه على ذلک خلق کثیر فقال له معویة لِم لا تقاتل ؟ قال قتلنا هذا الرجل وقد سمعت رسول اللَّه – صلى اللَّه علیه وسلم- یقول : تقتله الفئة الباغیة ، فدلّ على أنّا نحن بغاة
When Mu’awiya found himself in such a dangerous position, he shouted at Amru A’s: “be quite, you are always talking nonsense! We didn’t kill Ammar, It was Ali who killed him because he made Ammar confront us and be killed with our swords.”
أو نحن قتلناه؟ إنْما قتله عليْ و أصحابه، جاؤوا به حتى ألقوة بين رماحنا أو قال: بين سيوفنا. هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين و لم يخرجاه بهذه السياقة
It is interesting to note that when Ali (AS) heard of this, he said:” really? Then we must say our holy prophet killed Hamzeh Seyed al-Shahada since he took Hamzeh to war and caused his death.
The fairness of the holy prophet (PBUH)’s Companions: a myth or truth?
Our Sunni brothers say that all the holy prophet (PBUH)’s Companions were just and belong to paradise: وقال ابن الأثیر: کلّهم عدول لا یتطرّق إلیهم الجرح. أسد الغابة، ج ۱ ص ۳
And we should not criticize them for their actions and if anyone intend to question their performance, he is no longer considered a Muslim:
قال أبوزرعه : إذا رأیت الرجل ینتقص أحداً منأصحاب رسولاللَّه – صلّىاللَّهعلیهوسلم – فاعلم انه زندیق
Since they believe that the Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) are the Hadith narrators and if we question their trustworthiness, it is regarded as an act of questioning the Quran and the holy prophet (PBUH):
ذلک أنّ الرسول – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – عندنا حقّ والقرآن حقّ وانّما أدّى إلینا هذا القرآن والسنن أصحاب رسول اللَّه صلّىاللَّه علیه وسلم وانّما یریدون ان یجرحوا شهودنا لیبطلوا الکتاب والسنّة والجرح بهم أولى وهم زنادقة . الکفایة فی علم الروایة ص ۶۷
Even some Sunni scholars have gone to the extremes, issuing Fatwas based on which if anyone dares to question the truthfulness of the Companions, he will be considered as an apostate and he must be executed:
قال السرخسی : من طعن فیهم فهو ملحد ، منابذ للإسلام ، دواؤه السیف ، إن لم یتب
One of the most important faults Sunnis found with Shiism was that Shiites criticized the performance of some of the Companions , believing this kind of thinking was against the Quran and the traditions of the holy prophet (PBUH) and that is why they called Shiites heretics and infidels. Here, we have to pose a few questions to our Sunni freethinkers so that they can themselves judge and see if what we say matches the Quran and the traditions of the holy prophet (PBUH):
26- Do you think that justice and infallibility just belonged to some special Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) or others possessed that feature too?
27- Is this claim backed up by the Quran or narrations or is it just the opinion of some radical scholars?
The spread of religious hypocrisy among the Companions
28- Various verses in the Quran have warned Muslims of the threats religious hypocrites can pose and criticized them and even we have an entire surah just for Munafeqin( religious hypocrites), stating that the worst place in hell belongs to them: إنّ المنافقین فی الدرک الأسفل من النار
Even some of the scholars argue that one third of the Quran is allocated to talking about religious hypocrites and their treachery (see AN-NIFAQ VAL MUNAFIQUN, PROFESSOR IBRAHIM ALI SALIM MISRI).
Were these hypocrites an independent and identified group? Were they members of the Companions’ team or close Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH)?
Whatever your answers are, we can infer from the Quranic verses that the religious hypocrites at the time of the holy prophet (PBUH) were a strong group and posed a very serious threat to the Islamic society and they acted so furtively that even the rulers did not know anything about their activities :
وَمِمَّنْ حَوْلَکُم مِّنَ الْأَعْرَابِ مُنَفِقُونَ وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِینَةِ مَرَدُوا عَلَى النِّفَاقِ لَاتَعْلَمُهُمْ نَحْنُ نَعْلَمُهُمْ
“Some of the desert dwellers Arabs around you are hypocrites and some of the people of Medina city are those who persist in hypocrisy, you [O, Messenger] do not know them, and we know them”.
29- Did all the hypocrites die right after the demise of the holy prophet (PBUH) and their generations get extinct? Or did they continue to live among Muslims? As a result, we can say that those religious hypocrites were mixed in the Muslim community that it was difficult even for the holy prophet to identify them and we cannot, therefore, say that all the Companions were fair individuals.
30- In Sahih Moslem, we read that the holy prophet (PBUH) said: “among my Companions are 12 religious hypocrites who try to plot against Islam” now, do you think we can say that all the Companions were trustworthy?
The second caliph’s fear of being called a religious hypocrite
Religious hypocrites team was so widespread and complicated and hypocrites had permeated so deeply into the group of Companions that each of the Companions feared being called a religious hypocrite by the revelation of a Quranic verse by their treacherous acts being revealed to the public and their losing face. Umar ibn Khatab, the second caliph, said: when Bera’a surah was revealed and showed the real intention of the religious hypocrites, we stated to think that a verse might be revealed for each of us and show our true colors:
ما فرغ من تنزیل براءة حتّى ظننّا أن لن یبقى منّا أحد إلّا ینزل فیه شیء
In another narration by him, we read that Al-Tawbah surah should be called “Punishment” surah since it revealed almost everybody’s secrets:
نماند : « أنّ عمر – رضى اللّه عنه – قیل : له سورة التوبة ، قال : هی إلى العذاب أقرب! ما أقلعت عن الناس حتّى ما کادت تدع منهم أحداً
Taking into account all that was said, can we now claim that all the companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) were fair individuals and belong to heaven?
31- ibn Kathir, one of the grand Sunni scholars, says: “Umar ibn Khatab would not say prayers for any of the Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) if Hazifeh (an authority in identifying the religious hypocrites) did not confirm his honesty:
إنّ عمر بن الخطاب – رضی اللّه عنه – کان إذا مات رجل ممّنیرى أنّه منهم ، نظر إلىحذیفة فإن صلّىعلیهوإلّا ترکه
How can Our Sunni brothers justify this act by Umar while they believe criticizing any companion would be considered as apostasy and infidelity?
32- Have you ever asked yourselves why Umar implored to Hazifeh to tell him whether he was in the group of plotters against Islam? :
قال ابن کثیر : وروینا عن أمیر المؤمنین عمر بن الخطاب -رضیاللَّهعنه- أنّه قال لحذیفة : أقسمت علیک باللَّه ، أنامنهم؟
33- Why didn’t other infallible Companions of the holy prophet (PBUH) like Abozar, Salman, Meqdad, etc. ask Hazifeh the same question? Was Umar uncertain about his own honesty?
34- Don’t you say that Umar ibn Khattab was among 10 people to whom the holy prophet (PBUH) gave glad tidings about going to heaven? When Umar asked such a question, do you not think he was questioning the holy prophet (PBUH)’s promise?
The assassination plot against the holy prophet (PBUH) by the religious hypocrites
35- When the holy prophet was returning from the Tabok war, who were those people who tried to assassinate the holy prophet (PBUH)?!
Was it the Jews or the polytheists who plotted against the holy prophet (PBUH) or his own Companions? If God had not protected the holy prophet (PBUH) against this conspiracy, what would have happened to the Islamic community?
36- What happened to all those religious hypocrites who hurt the feelings of the holy prophet (PBUH) about whom there is nothing mentioned in the history books? Was the reason for all that hypocrisy the holy prophet (PBUH) himself by whose demise all those hypocrites turned into the best and most God-fearing individuals whom could not be criticized?
Or did the first three caliphs turn them into true believers by using a magic drug? Or was it because after the holy prophet (PBUH) overt religious hypocrisy united with covert religious hypocrisy and shared key positions in the governmental system between themselves and justified their unity when faced with some objections? عن عبدالملک بنعبید قال : قال عمر بن الخطاب : « نستعین بقوّة المنافق ، وإثمه علیه
And why did Umar (from among so many Companions) feel the need to ask Hazifeh Yamani to tell him whether he was in the list of the religious hypocrites?
وذکر لنا أنّ عمر قال لحذیفة أنشدک اللّه أمنهم أنا ؟ قال لا ، ولا أومن منها أحداً بعدک
The caliphs’ role in the assassination attempt against the holy prophet (PBUH)
According to Ibn Hazm Andolosi’s book, who was one of the grand Sunni scholars, we can see the names of Abu-Bakr, Umar, and Ottoman among those who planned the assassination of the holy prophet (PBUH):
إنّ أبابکر وعمر وعثمان وطلحة وسعد بن أبی وقّاص أرادوا قتل النبی ( ص ) وإلقاءه من العقبة فی تبوک
One of the most important questions raised here is if you accept such facts, and if you do, how do you justify it?
Although ibn Hazm rejects such Hadith because of Valid Ibn Jomay in the list narrators of this Hadith and calls it a weak Hadith, when we refer to other Sunni Hadith books we realize that most of the Hadith experts have authenticated him.
قال الذهبی : ابن حزم ، الإمام الأوحد ، البحر ، ذو الفنون والمعارف ، . . . فإنّه رأس فی علوم الاسلام ، متبحر فی النقل ، عدیم النظیر . سیر أعلام النبلاء ، ج ۱۸ ص ۱۸۴ وقریب من هذا فى العبر ، ج ۳ ص ۲۳۹ ؛ دول الإسلام ، ج ۱ ص ۲۰۷ .
قالالسمعانی : ابن حزم ، من أفضل أهل عصره بالأندلس وبلادالمغرب . الأنساب – الیزیدی . وقال السیوطی : وکان صاحب فنون وورع وزهد ، وإلیه المنتهى فی الذکاء والحفظ وسعة الدائرة فی العلوم . طبقات الحفّاظ : ۴۳۶ . قال الزرکلی : عالم الأندلس فی عصره ، وأحد أئمّة الإسلام ، کان فی الأندلس خلق کثیر ینتسبون إلى مذهبه . الأعلام ، ج ۴ ص ۲۵۴ . کما صرّح بوثاقته العجلى تاریخ الثقات ص ۴۶۵ ، رقم ۱۷۷۳ . وقال ابن سعد : کان ثقة وله أحادیث . طبقات ، ج ۶ ص ۳۵۴ . وأورده ابن حبّان فی الثقات . کتاب الثقات ، ج ۵ ص ۴۹۲ . وقد نقل الذهبی وابن أبی حاتم عن أبی عبداللّه بن أحمد بن حنبل قال : قال أبی : لیس به بأس . وعن یحیى بن معین أنّه قال : ثقة وقال أبو حاتم : صالح الحدیث . وقال أبو زرعة : لا بأس به . 
And this Hadith narrator is considered as one of the narrators of Bokhari, Moslem, Tormazi Sahih and Sonan Abi Dawood.
Taking advantage of religious hypocrites
37- When we read the Quran, we realize that the danger religious hypocrites posed to Islam was much more serious than that of infidels and polytheists and in many Quranic surahs and verses we see references to them and their activities. One of the Egyptian authors, Ibrahim Ali Salem, states that around 10 chapters of the Quran i.e. one of third of it is about religious hypocrites.
And holy Quran considers them as an obstacle in Islam’s path:
رأیت المنافقین یصدّون عنک صدود
“Thou seest the Hypocrites avert their faces from thee in disgust.” And no pity and sympathy is recommended for them:
فما لکم فی المنافقین فئتین واللّه أرکسهم بما کسبوا أتریدون أن تهدوا من أضلّ اللّه ومن یضلل اللّه فلن تجد له سبیلاً
“Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shall thou find the Way.”
And God has given them a ranking as low as that of infidels in hell:
وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْمُنَافِقِينَ وَالْمُنَافِقَاتِ وَالْكُفَّارَ نَارَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا ۚ هِيَ حَسْبُهُمْ ۚ وَلَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُّقِيمٌ
“Allah hath promised the Hypocrites men and women, and the rejecters, of Faith, the fire of Hell: Therein shall they dwell: Sufficient is it for them: for them is the curse of Allah and an enduring punishment”.
And He has reserved a place in the most humiliating site of hell:
إِنَّ الْمُنَافِقِينَ فِي الدَّرْكِ الْأَسْفَلِ مِنَ النَّارِ وَلَن تَجِدَ لَهُمْ نَصِيرًا
“The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them”
Why then, despite all that was said, did the second caliph employ them in his government and give them posts? He also said: “we exploit their power and their sin are for God to decide and fro them to be held responsible for”:
نستعین بقوّةالمنافق ، وإثمهعلیه
This act was objected to by one of the Companions (Hazifeh) but he answered: “I take advantage of their power and have an eye on them!”
عن عبد الملک بن عبید قال : قال عمر بن الخطاب : « نستعین بقوّة المنافق ، وإثمه علیه
Although Umar Ibn Khattab is quoted as saying: “if anyone employs a sinner, he himself becomes a sinner”, he did it himself:
عن عمر قال : من استعمل فاجرا وهویعلم أنّه فاجر فهو مثله .
Was Umar all talk and no action? کبر مقتاً عند اللّه أن تقولوا ما لاتفعلون
38- Someone might say that the religious hypocrites were softer or less dangerous during Umar’s ruling that the time of the holy prophet (PBUH):
قال البیهقی : فإن صحّ فإنّما ورد فی منافقین لم یعرفوا بالتخذیل والارجاف واللَّه أعلم .
But based on the narration in Sahih Bokhari, there was more evil in the hearts of the religious hypocrites during Umar’s ruling according to what Hazifeh has said that their hypocrisy had turned into infidelity:
إنّ المنافقین الیوم شرّ منهم على عهد النبی – صلى اللّه علیه وسلم – کانوا یومئذ یسرّون ، والیوم یجهرون عن حذیفة ، أنّه قال : إنّما کان النفاق على عهد النبی -صلى اللّه علیه وسلم- فأمّا الیوم فإنّما هو الکفر بعد الإیمان
Umar’s recommendation as to provide facilities for the desert Arabs
About the desert Arabs, the Quran says: الأعراب أشدّ کفراً ونفاقا
“The desert-dweller Arabs are the worst in disbelief and hypocrisy.”
While interpreting this Quranic verse, ibn Kathir says: “The infidelity and hypocrisy of the desert Arabs is more serious and deeper than that of others”:
وإنّ کفرهم ونفاقهم أعظم من غیرهم وأشد
Despite all the negative qualities of the Arab deserts, the second caliph recommended others at his death time to treat the desert Arabs right since they (in his eye) were the origins of Islam.
Don’t these words contradict with the explicit content of the Quran?
40- If someone asks you: “Did Umar serve the desert Arabs so that they would help Abu-Bakr’s caliphate to be consolidated? What do you have to say? When Umar ibn Khattab, facing serious opposition from Saqife-dwellers and strong objections of Muhajerin and Ansar, saw desert Arabs entering the fight by pre-planned arrangements , he become happy and said: “ when I saw Aslam tribe( one of the grand tribes of nomadic Arabs around medina), he said : I was assured that our victory was close:
حین توفى اللّه – نبیّه صلّى اللَّه علیه وسلم – أنّ الأنصار خالفونا ، واجتمعوا بأسرهم فى سقیفة بنى ساعدة وخالف عنّا على والزبیر ومن معهما » . صحیح البخارى ، ج۸ ، ص ۲۶ ، کتاب المحاربین ، باب رجم الحبلى من الزنا
حین توفى اللّه – نبیّه صلّى اللَّه علیه وسلم – أنّ الأنصار خالفونا ، واجتمعوا بأسرهم فى سقیفة بنى ساعدة وخالف عنّا على والزبیر ومن معهما 
Therefore, history shows that Umar ibn Khatab took the most advantage of the desert Arabs power to suppress the opposition groups operating against Abu-Bakr’s caliphate.
روى ابن أبی الحدید عن البراء بن عازب : فلم ألبث وإذاً أنا بأبى بکر قد أقبل ومعه عمر وأبو عبیدة وجماعة من أصحاب السقیفة وهم محتجزون بالأزر الصنعانیّة لایمرّون بأحد الّا خبطوه وقدّموه فمدّوا یده فمسحوها على ید أبی بکر یبایعه شاء ذلک أو أبى
 . Nahjol Balagha, Letter, 47.
 . Sahih Muslim, Vol.6, P. 19, Kitabul Imarah, Babul Amr Bissabr Inda Zulmul Vulah, Sunanul Biyhaqi, Vol. 8, P. 158.
 . Sunanul Beyhaqi: 159/8: Almusannaf Li Ibn Abi Shiybah: 737/7; Ad Durul Manthur: 177/2: Kanzul Ummal: 778/5).
 . Manaqib Ibn Shahr Ashub, Vol. 3, P. 224; Baharul Anvar, Vol 44, P. 192).
 . Sharh Sahih Muslim L.., Vol.12, P. 229; Iltifazani; Sharhul Maqasid, Vol. 2, P. 71, Al Qazi Al Iji, Almavaqif, Vol. 8, P. 349
 . Tahrirul Vasilah, Vol. 1 P.450
 . Trathna Magazine, No.6, P. 32, Article: Maqefush Shiite Min Hajamatil Khusum.
 . Miqat Magazin, No. 43, P. 198, Quoted By Akkaz Paper Dated 81/9/11)
 . Arrayul Am Al-Kuwait Newspaper, Date:2001/06/30: The Above-Mentioned Letter Has Been Posted On Many Sites Online.
 . Vaja Dor Al-Majos, P.357.
 . Ibid, P.374.
 . Osol Al-Mazhab Al-Shiite Al-Imamiyeh, Vol.3, P.1392.
 . Al-Manhej Al-Jadid Va Al-Sahih Fi Al-Havar Ma Al-Wahhabin, P.178.
 . Ibid.
 . Al-Shiatol Imamiyeh Fi Mizan Al-Islam. P.5.
 . Men Sabba Al-Sahabeh Va Moaviyeh Faomaho Haviyeh, P.4.
 . Osol Mazhab Al-Shiite Al-Imamiyah Al-Asna Ashariyeh, Vol.1, P.9.
 . Al.Entesar Al-Hagh,P.11&14.
 . Sura Al-Ahzab, Verse 21.
 . See: Al-Munazirat Fil Imamat, P. 246, 259 – Qisasul Ulama, 391 – Shaykh Saduq’s Debate With Malak Ruknud Dalah And Mamun’s Debatew Sunni Scholars
 . Alqartby Interpretation, Vol 1, P.
 . Aoun Almabvod Lezzy Abaci, Vol 8, P 106; Kenzalmal, Vol 8, P 268; Altabqat Alkobry Labn Saad, Vol 4, P 209; Alasabh, Vol 4, P 495; Almghny Labn Qdamh, Vol 2, P 30.
 . Altanbyh Valashraf Lelmsvdy, Pp. 211, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 221, 225, 228, 231 And 235, On The Bin Khlyfh Tailor, P 60.
 . History Of Damascus, Vol 42, P 392; Valryaz Alnzrh, Vol 3, P 138, Stock Alqaby, P 71; Almnaqb Lelkhvarmy Page 42 Of 85. He
 . Al-Mujamul Kabir: 221/6, Majmauz Zavaeid 113/9, Fathul Bari: 114/8.
 . Al-Anaam, Verse 90.
 .Al-Twabah, Verse,128.
 . Fajrol Islam,P.225.
 . Introduction In Ibn Khaldun’s Book , 187 P.
 . Sahih Moslem 5/6 (1823/3), Kitabul Imarah, Babul Istikhlaf Va Tarakah, Mosnad Ahmad: 47/1, Almusannaf Li Abdir Razzaq: 448/5 Him
 . Al-Imamah Vas Siyasah:42/1 Bi Tahqiq Ash-Shiri, 28/1 Bi Tahqiq Az-Aiei.
 . Tarikh Tabari: 226/4, Al-Imamah Vas Siyasah: 206/1 Bi Tahqiq Ash-Shiri, 159/1 Bi Tahqiq Az Zini
 . Tabaqat Ibn Sad, Vol.3, P. 343, Tarikh Madinah Damishq: 435/44
 . Alnesayy: 6/240, Fatah Albary: 5/267.
 . Sahih Moslem: 70/5, Avvalu Kitabal Vassiyah).
 . As-Saf, Verses, 2 And 3.
 . Sahihul Bukhari: 186/3, Kitabul Jahad: 144/5 Babul Marazun Nabi Min Kitabal Mughazi: 107/6, Babul Vusat Bi Kitabillah)(Mosnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: 354/4, Fathul Bari: 268/5, Tuhfatul Ahvazy: 257/6
 . Al-Baqarah, Verse.44.
 . Sharh Nahjul Balagha Li Ibn Abil Hadid: 47/6 Bi Tahqiq Muhammad Abulfazl, Ansabul Ashraf Lilbilazeri: 590/1
 . An-Nahayatu Fi Gharibil Hadith: 467/3.
 . Sharh Nahjul Balagha Li Ibn Abil Hadid: 26/2, Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, P. 26, Kitabal Muharibin, Bab Rajm Al-Habli Minaz Zina, Mosnad Ahmad, Vol. 1, P. 55
 . An-Nahayatu Fi Gharibil Hadith: 467/3.
 . Al-Ahzab, Verse 36.
 . Sharh Nahjul Balagha Li Ibn Abil Hadid: 26/2, Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, P. 26, Kitabal Muharibin, Bab Rajm Al-Habli Minaz Zina, Mosnad Ahmad, Vol. 1, P. 55
 . Sahih Bukhari: 36/1, 81/2, 145/4, 118/7, Almuzuat: 57/1, Sharh Moslem Lilnuvi: 68/1
 . Sahih Bokhari: 9/7, Kitabul Marza, Bab Qaul Mariz Qumu Anni, 5/137, Kitabul Mughazi, Bab Marazan Nabi (S.A) Va Vafatuh, Sahih Moslem, Fi Akhar Kitabul Vassiyah, Vol. 5, P.76.
 . An-Najm, Verses 3&4.
 . Al-Hashr, Verse,7.
 .Al-Nisa, Verse.65
 . Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, P. 9, Sahih Moslem, Vol. 5, P. 75.
 . Attabaqat Al-Kuba, Li-Ibn Sad, Vol. 2, P. 244, Al-Mujam Al-Usat Lit-Tabrani: 288/5, Majmauz Zavaid Al-Heythami Ash-Shafei: 34/9, Kanzul Ummal: 644/5, Hadith: 14133.
 . Sahih Bokhari, Vol. 8, P. 161.
 . Al-Ahzaab, Verse,57.
 . Kanzul Amal, Vol. 5, P. 678, Tarikh Madinatul Dameshq Li Ibn Asakir, Vol. 39, P. 186 And Vol. 44, O. 248, See: Tarikhul Tabari 353/2, Sira Omar Li Ibn Al-Juzi: 37, Tarikh Ibn-Khldun: 85/2.
 . Tarikh Tabari, Vol 2, P 618.
 . Al-Mujamul Ausat: 370/7, Al-Jamius Saghir Les-Soyuti: 481/2: Majmauz Zavaid: 157/1, Az-Zahabi, Sir Alamun Nabla: 311/4, Tazkiratul Hofaz: 87/1
 . Almjm Awsat, Vol 7, P 370, Aljame Alsaghyr Lelsyoty, Vol 2, P 481, Majma Alzvayd, Vol 1, P 157, Sier Alnbla’, Vol 4, P 311; Tazkerat Al-Hifaz, Vol 1, P 87.Sahih Bukhari, Vol.8, P. 26, Kitabul Muharabin, Bab Rajmul Hibli Minaz Zina.
 . Maverdi, Al-Ahkamus Sultaniyah: 33, Abu-Ali Muhammad Ibn Hassan Al-Fara, Al-Ahkam Sultaniyyah: 117.
 . Jamiul Ahkam Al-Quran: Vol.1, P. 269-272.
 . Al-Irshad Fil Kalam, P. 424.
 . Al-Mavaqif Fi Elmil Kalam: 8, P.351).
 . Al-Mavaqif Fi Elmil Kalam: 8, P.351.
 . Sharh Sonan Termezy, 13 P. 229
 . Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, P. 26
 . Sahih Moslem, Vol. 5, P. 152, Kitabl Jihad, Bab 15, Hukmul Faye Hadith 49
 . Tarikh Tabari: 294/3, Tarikh Al-Medina Li Ibn Shabat An-Namiri: 925/3, Alkamil Li Ibn Athir: 35/3.
 . Sahih Al-Bokhari: 210/4, 141/7, Al-Mustafrak, 153/3, Majmauz Zavaid: 203/9, Al-Mujam Al-Kabir Lil Tabrani: 108/1, 401/22, Tarikh Madinah Damishq: 156/3, Asadul Ghabah: 522/5, Al-Isabah: 265/8, 266, Tahzibut Tahzib: 391/21, Sahih Al-Bukhari: 210/4, Shahih Moslem; 141/7, Al-Musnaf Li Ibn Shibatul Kufi: 526/7, As-Sunanul Kubra Lin Nisaei: 97/5 Hadith 8370, Al-Mujamul Kabir Lit Tabrani: 404/22, Al-Jami As-Saghir Lis-Suyuti: 208/2 Tarikh Madinah Damishq: 156/3.
 . Sahih Al-Bukhari: 42/4, Sahih Muslim: 154/5.
 . Al-Ahzaab, Verse,57.
 . Feyzul Ghadir Sharh Al-Jame As-Saghir Lilminavi: 554/4
 . Fathul Bari: 82/7: Sharhul Mahib Liz Zarghani Al-Maliki: 205/3
 . Feyzul Ghadir, Sharhul Jam As-Saghir Lilmanvi: 24/6, Hadith 8267
 . Saqifatu Va Fadak Liljuhari, P. 104, Sharhul Najul Balagha Li Ibn Abi Hadid: 215/16, Dalail Al-Imamah Lit Tabari, P. 123
 . Sharh Nahjul Balagha: 215/16.
 . Mosnad Ahmad, Vol. 4, P. 96, Al-Mujam Al-Kabir Lit Tabrani, Vol. 19, P. 388, Majmauz Zavaid Al-Heythami, Vol. 5 P. 218, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Ibn Abil Hadid, Vol. 9, P. 155
 . Sahih Al-Bukhari: 105/8 Kitabal Ahkam
 . Sahih Moslim; 21/6, Kitabal Imarah Babul Amr Bi Luzumil Jamaah
 . Sahih Bokhari, Vol. 7, P. 142, Sahih Muslim, Vol. 7, P. 143, Sahih Bokhari, Vol. 4, P. 209, 219
 .Al-Baqareh, Verse,124.
 . Sajdah, Verse 24.
 Th-Thaqat Li Ibn Habban: 89/1, Al-Badayatu Van-Nahaya I Ibn Kathir, Vol. 9, P. 171
 . Sira Ibn Hisham, Vol. 2, P. 289, As-Siratun Nabaviyah Li Ibn Kathir Vol.2, P. 157, Maal Mustafa Lid Dukturah Bintash Shati, P. 161
 . Tabaghat Ibn Sad: 262/1, Nasbur Rayah Liziali: 567/6.
 . Sahih Al-Bukhari: 87/8, Sahih Muslim: 21/6 Kitabul Imarah
 . Al-Mujamul Kabir: 302/3, Majmauz Zavaeed: 217/5.
 . Mustadrak Al-Hakim: 118/1, Al-Mujam Al-Kabir Lit Tabrani: 53/6, Ad-Durul Manthur: 113/5, Kanzul Ummal: 208/1, Hadith: 1039
 . Sahih Muslim: 23/6 Kitabl Imarah, Al-Mujamul Auosat: 144/3, Tafsir Al-Qirtabi: 272/1
 . Sahih Bukhari: 207/3, Sahih Muslim; 186/8, Sayr Alam An-Nabla: 421/1
 . Al-Mustadrak: 387/3.
 . Ihqaqul Haq: 448/8, An Nurul Absar Lishablanji, P. 90, Khulasa Abaqat Al-Anvar: 59/3, Nafahatul Azhar, Vol. 3, P. 54
 . Mosnad Ahmad: 199/4, Majmauz Zavaid: 242/7, Al-Mustadrak: 155/2
 . Al-Mieyar Val-Muvazinah, P. 97, Vaqat Siffin, P. 343, Sahih Sharul Aqidah… P. 642, An-Nasaih Al-Kafiyah, P. 39
 . Usulul Sarakhsi: 134/2.
 . An-Nesa, Verse, 145.
 . Al-Tawbah,Verse,100.
 . Sahih Moslem, Vol 8, P 122; Mosnd Ahamd, Vol 4, P 320; Albdayh Valnhayh Labn Kathir, Vol 5, P 20.
 . Zadul Masir: 316/3
 . Ad-Durul Manthur: 208/3
 . Tafsir Ibn Kathir: 399/2
 . Tafsir Ibn Kathir: 399/2, Al-Badayah Van-Nahayah: 25/5, Jamiul Bayan Lit-Tabari: 16/11
 . Al-Musnaf Li-Ibn Abi Shibah: 269/7, Hadith: 120, Kanzul Amal, Vol.4, And P. 614
 . Tafsir Ibn Kathir: 399/2, Jamiul Bayan Lit-Tabari: 16/11.
 . Sir Alamun Nabla: 184/18, Va Qarib Min Haza Fi Ebr: 239/3, Duvalul Isalm: 207/1, Tabaqatul Huffaz: 436, Al-Alam: 254/4.
 . Tarikhuth Thuqat: 465 Ragham: 1773, Tabaqat: 354/6, Kitabuth Thaqat: 492/5, Al-Jarh Val Tadil: 8/9 Raqam 34, Va Tahzibul Kamal: 35/31m Tarikhul Islam: 661/9
 . An-Nifaq, Ibrahim Li Salim.
 . An-Nisa, Verse 61.
 . An-Nisa, Verse 88.
 . At-Taubah, Verse. 68.
 . An-Nisa, Verse 145.
 . Al-Musnaf Li-Ibn Abi Shibah: 269/7, Hadith 120, Kanzul Ummal, Vol. 4, P. 614.
 . Kanzul Ummal: 5, P. 771
 . Kanzul Ummal: 5, P. 761, Hadith 14306
 . As-Saf, Verse 3.
 . Sunan Alkubra: 36/9
 . Sahih Al-Bukhari: 100/8, Kitabul Fitan
 . At-Taubah, Verse97
 . Tafthir Ibn Kathir, Vol. 2, P. 397, Tafsir Al-Qirtabi, Vol. 8, P. 231.
 . Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, P. 206.
 . Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 8, P. 26, Kitabal Muharibin-Tarikh At-Tabari, Vol. 2, P. 458, Kamil Ibn Athir, Vol. 2, P. 224.
 . Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid: 219/1