Translated by: muhammad hassan heidary
Commander of faithful [AS] and accepting the government.
In the name of god the beneficent the merciful.
Hello! God shall guide us to the direct path. I hope that you answer the questions following the sermon said by commander of faithful [AS], to remove any misgiving.
Commander of faithful says in sermon 91 of Nahj al balagheh:
دَعُونِي وَ الَْتمِسُوا غَيْرِي فَإِنَّا مُسْتَقْبِلُونَ أَمْراً لَهُ وُجُوهٌ وَ أَلْوَانٌ لَا تَقُومُ لَهُ الْقُلُوبُ وَ لَا تَثْبُتُ عَلَيْهِ الْعُقُولُ وَ إِنَّ الْ آفَاقَ قَدْ أَغَامَتْ وَ الَْمحَجَّةَ قَدْ تَنَكَّرَتْ. وَ اعْلَمُوا أَنِّي إِنْ أَجَبْتُكُمْ رَكِبْتُ بِكُمْ مَا أَعْلَمُ وَ لَمْ أُصْغِ إِلَي قَوْلِ الْقَائِلِ وَ عَتْبِ الْعَاتِبِ وَ إِنْ تَرَكْتُمُونِي فَأَنَا كَأَحَدِكُمْ وَ لَعَلِّي أَسْمَعُكُمْ وَ أَطْوَعُكُمْ لِمَنْ وَلَّيْتُمُوهُ أَمْرَكُمْ وَ أَنَا لَكُمْ وَزِيراً خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ مِنِّي أَمِيراً.
1: if “Emamat” is a principle of religion principles, if Ali [AS] has been selected by god like Prophet Muhammad [PBUH], if he has been appointed as prophet’s successor, according to “Tathir” verse, “Qadir and dignity” hadiths, if he has any right to say, look for another person for reign?
2: is it the speaking manner of someone who has been appointed by god? If he has really appointed on behalf god almighty and Prophet [PBUH] so what are these preconditions? Has it ever occurred that a Prophet says: firstly, way is not paved yet leave me alone and secondly, if you persist I’ll accept provided I can govern on people in any way that I like?
3: he says:” and if you leave me I’ll be someone like you”. How? Is that mean that someone whose responsibility is even more important than prophets, dodges his responsibility and consider himself as others who don’t have any responsibility?
4: Ali [AS] said: someone whom you give him your ruling” why did he say, Your ruling? Is ruling people’s loan and they have power to give it to anybody that they want? Is it not true that caliph is appointed by god almighty and people have no right in this regard? Do they not say that selecting caliph isn’t done in council? Is it not true that they called the number of council “usurper”? So how come that Ali [AS] says I’ll obey any one that you select. Why didn’t he say any one who god selects I’ll obey him?
5: commander of faithful says: if I sit on the position of counseling it’ll be better than being caliph
Why? Someone who has been selected by god and Prophet PBUH] has introduced him as caliph and has been appointed to “Emamat” by tens and hundreds of verses and narratives, how much authority does he have to withdraw divine position and give compliment generously that don’t persist, me being colleague and consultant for you is better than being caliph. If he’s been appointed by god as caliph so why he says that being consultant’ s better than being caliph? Who decides about people’s interest? Is it god who determines that being caliph is better or consultant or that person who is follower and obligated? Let’s accept that he was infallible, is that possible that infallible changes god’s decree with his own discretion? Why?
1: commander of faithful [AS] said this sermon when riot and sedition were epidemic and people were away of real Islam due to caliphs’ oppression and real tradition had gone into oblivion. The Imam of “Shafei” quotes from “Wahab ibn keisan” that:
“كلّ سنن رسول الله قد غيّرت حتي الصلاة”
And “Ibn sa’ad” says in the book “ALtabaqat”:
“عن الزهري قال: دخلت علي أنس ابن مالك بدمشق و هو وحده يبكي، فقلت: ما يبكيك؟ قال: لا أعرف شيئا مما أدركت ، إلا هذه الصلاة وقد ضيّعت”
Sahih Al-termezi v 3. P 302.
And “Imam malek” has quoted from his grandfather:
ما أعرف شيئاً ممّا أدركت الناس إلا النداء بالصلاة
Al muta v 1, p 93
And tens of other examples show that because rulers of the society were not familiar with Islam and actiting against tradition, Islam real signs had been removed amongst people. And when Ali [as] was saying prayer people would say: his prayer reminds us of Prophet’s prayer.
“Mislem” quotes from “Matraf”:
صلّيت أنا وعمران بن حصين خلف علي بن أبي طالب فكان إذا سجد كبر، وإذا نهض من الركعتين كبر،
فلما انصرفنا من الصلاة قال: أخذ عمران بيدي، ثم قال: لقد صلي بنا هذا صلاة محمد صلي الله عليه وسلم، أو قال: قد ذكرني هذا صلاة محمّد صلي الله عليه وسلم
Sahih muslem. V 2. P 8
“Bukhari” quotes from “Omran ibn hasin”:
صلّي مع علي بالبصرة فقال: ذكرنا هذا الرجل صلاة كنّا نصليها مع رسول اللّه صلي الله عليه وسلم”
Sahih Al bukhari. V 1/ P 200.
“Matraf ibn Abdu Alah” says:
صليت خلف علي بن أبي طالب أنا وعمران بن حصين فكان إذا سجد كبر، وإذا رفع رأسه كبر، وإذا نهض من الركعتين كبر، فلما قضي الصلوات أخذ بيدي عمران بن حصين فقال: لقدذكرني هذا صلاة محمّد صلي الله عليه وسلم، أو قال: لقد صلّي بنا صلواة محمّد صلي الله عليه وسلم.
Sahis bukhari. V 1, p 191.
2: some of people who had accustomed to constant seizing of public property at the time of “Osman”, and expected to be able to do so at the time of “Ali” [AS], that’s why Ali [AS] says to people: if you mean that I have the same method in governing as former caliphs, and god’s book and prophet’s traditions are forgotten, I won’t accept such ruling”. As, after “Omar” died, “Abd Al rahman” suggested Ali [AS] in six-person council, to accept caliphate in condition of living up to “Abu Bakr” and “Omar” method, but commander of faithful rejected it.
وخلا (عبد الرحمن بن عوف) بعلي بن أبي طالب، فقال: لنا اللّه عليك، إن وليّت هذا الأمر، أن تسير فينا بكتاب اللّه، وسنّة نبيّه، وسيرة أبي بكر وعمر. فقال: أسير فيكم بكتاب اللّه، وسنّة نبيّه ما استطعت. فخلا بعثمان فقال له: لنا اللّه عليك، إن وليّت هذا الأمر، أن تسير فينا بكتاب اللّه، وسنّة نبيّه، وسيرة أبي بكر وعمر. فقال: لكم أن أسير فيكم بكتاب اللّه، وسنة نبيه، وسيرة أبي بكر وعمر.
Al yaqubi history. V 2, P 162. The description of Nahj Al balagah from “Ibn abi Al hadid” v 1,
“aus ibn vael” says: I said to “Abd Al rahman”: why did you swear “Osman” an allegiance despite the presence of figure like Ali [AS]? He said: I suggested him three times to accept the caliphate provided that he lives up to god’s book, prophet’s tradition and “Aba Bakr’s and Omar’s sirah [method], but he didn’t accept, but “Othman” accepted it.
عن عاصم، عن أبي وائل، قال: قلت: لعبد الرحمن بن عوف كيف بايعتم عثمان وتركتم عليا رضي اللّه عنه، قال: ما ذنبي قد بدأت بعلي فقلت أبايعك علي كتاب اللّه، وسنة رسوله، وسيرة أبي بكر وعمر رضي اللّه عنهما، قال: فقال: فيما استطعت، قال: ثم عرضتها علي عثمان رضي اللّه عنه فقبلها.
Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal. V 1, P 75
And in your intended Sermon, commander of faithful [AS] mentions to this matter and says:
فَإِنَّا مُسْتَقْبِلُونَ أَمْراً لَهُ وُجُوهٌ وَ أَلْوَانٌ لَا تَقُومُ لَهُ الْقُلُوبُ وَ لَا تَثْبُتُ عَلَيْهِ الْعُقُولُ وَ إِنَّ الْ آفَاقَ قَدْ أَغَامَتْ وَ الَْمحَجَّةَ قَدْ تَنَكَّرَتْ.
Because we’re facing an event which is covered by colors and faces, the event that hearts and minds are not firm and steady on it, the horizon of truth is covered by black cloud, the direct path has changed and is unknown.
So it’s clear that when Ali [AS] says: [leave me and go to another person] it means that if you want me to continue the path of former caliphs, I won’t accept, go to someone who govern like them.
And accepting such caliphate, not only doesn’t contain this holy verse:
وما كان لمؤمن ولا مؤمنة إذا قضي اللّه ورسوله امراً...
But it’s against god’s order. As god said to “David” [AS]:
يا داود إنّا جعلناك خليفة في الأرض فاحكم بين الناس بالحق
Surah: SAD. Verse 26
And Islamic ruler can set up government provided society can accept it, and if the ruler appointed by god can’t apply the truth, establishing the government or accepting it, isn’t obligatory for him. As prophet [PBUH] didn’t set up government during his presence in “Mecca”, but after going to “Medina” and people’s preparation, he set up his government.
And we should know that “Emamat” is different than “governing”, because “Emamat” is a divine position but “governing” is amongst the affairs of “Emamat”, so anyone is appointed to this high position is “Imam”, whether people want or not.
God almighty says about “Abraham”: I’ve appointed thee a leader for mankind.
Surah AL-BAQRA. Verse 124
And “Moses” [AS] asks god to appoint the successor after him:
واجعل لي وزيراً من أهلي.
And god says responding “Moses”:
“قال قد أوتيت سؤلك يا موسي”
And god says about “Isaiah”: we appointed among “Isaiah” leaders.
“وجعلنا منهم أئمّة يهدون بأمرنا”
So in all these verses god has ascribed the caliph and leader to himself. And Sunni prominent scholars such as: “Ibn hesham”, “ Ibn kathir”, “ Ibn hayan” and other have quoted that when prophet Muhammad [PBUH] invited Arab tribes to Islam, some of prominent figures of each tribe like: “bani amer ibn saesae” said to prophet [PBUH]: will we be your successor if we support you. Prophet [PBUH] said: appointing successor is out of my authority but god will select anyone that he likes. Then “bani amer” said: we don’t sacrifice ourselves for your goals till other get the position of directorship after victory.
“فقالوا: أنهدف نحورنا للعرب دونك، فإذا ظهرت كان الأمر في غيرنا؟ لا حاجة لنا في هذا من أمرك”
And such event happened again when “Qashir ibn ka’ab” said to prophet [PBUH]: if we don’t
Get any profit from Islamic government, we won’t believe in you.
The manner of “Ibn hesasm” V 2, P 289.
Despite prophet [PBYH] needed urgent contribution, he didn’t accept to convince Arab tribes to help him by the promise of succession.
And the way is paved for him to establish government or not:
“الحسن والحسين إمامان قاما أو قعدا”
“Ibn shar Ashoob” said:
“واجتمع أهل القبلة علي أنّ الرسول قال: الحسن والحسين إمامان، قاما أو قعدا”
But when society isn’t ready to accept the ruling and makes some barrier for government, establishing government isn’t obligatory for Islamic ruler, but once barriers are removed, he’ll set up government. And it’s obvious that people’s allegiance, has removed the obstacles of running the government and has paved the way for making government, not that it gives legitimacy to the government of Islamic ruler. After Prophet [PBUH] and even at the time of the caliphate of triple caliphs, Ali [AS] is the appointed “Imam” on behalf Prophet [PBUH] with god’s order and is the only person who has advantage on people and if he rises at the time of triple caliphs to save the religion, he doesn’t do so to assist caliphs, but it’s living up to his duty in possible circling, or it’s because of avoiding of a more unpleasant event. and this talk from Ali [AS] represents this fact:
“فنهضت في تلك الأحداث حتي زاح الباطل وزهق، واطمأنّ الدين وتنَهْنَه”
The terrible mistake of some of scholar is that they think that “Emamat” and “government” are synonyms, while governing is one of the affairs of “Emamat” as guiding people, keeping religious law, being mediator in grace for the cosmos and extending justice are other affairs of “Emamat”. All these affairs except extending justice, existed for commander of faithful [AS] at the time of triple caliphs but extending justice was prepared after “Osman’s death.
But about the response of second question:
Firstly: Ali [AS] means that: if I accept the ruling I’ll govern you based on what I’ve gotten from Quran and prophet’s tradition not as you wish. And he said this condition in six- person council.
Secondly: Quran says decisively that the base of the rule of Islamic ruler must be based on divine order not people’s wish.
لتحكم بين الناس بما أراك اللّه]. ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل اللّه فأولئك هم الكافرون الفاسقون الظالمون[
Thirdly: did “Moses” govern in any way that people like? If so, he wouldn’t disagree with those who would worship veal and tens of illegitimate things asked by people.
Fourthly: if any Islamic and non- Islamic ruler governs people as they like the structure of the society will be demolished, because part of people request something which is in contradictory with others’ request.
But about the silence of Ali [AS] or the number of his friends and companions.
If you refer to “Nahj Al Bbalagha” and some of Sunni books you wouldn’t have asked such question. Because Ali [AS] says in “Nahj Al Balagha” decisively:
اللهمّ إني أستعديك علي قريش فإنهم قد قطعوا رحمي، وأكفأوا إنائي ، وأجمعوا علي منازعتي حقا كنت أولي به من غيري ، وقالوا: ألا إن في الحق أن تأخذه وفي الحق أن تمنعه، فاصبر مغموما أو مت متأسفا ، فنظرت فإذا ليس لي رافد ولا ذاب ولا مساعد إلا أهل بيتي، فضننت بهم عن المنية فأغضيت علي القذي ، وجرعت ريقي علي الشجي، وصبرت من كظم الغيظ علي أمر من العلقم، وآلم للقلب من حز الشفار.
Nahj Al Balagha, sermon 217.
“Ibn abi al hadi Mo’tazeli” has written this sermon in his description from “Nahj Al Balagha” -entire this book is defending of Sunni beliefs and rejecting Shiite beliefs- V 6 , p 95.
And Ali [AS] says: you would see my decisive reaction, if there weren’t the fear of division between new Islamic government.
وأيم الله لولا مخافة الفرقة بين المسلمين ، وأن يعود الكفر ، ويبور الدين ، لكنا علي غير ما كنا لهم عليه...
And he says: despite I’m superior than “Omar” and “Abu Bakr” for caliphate, but I realized if don’t remain silent and don’t obey people would return to idolatry and they’ll face division and civil war.
قال عامر بن واثلة: (كنت علي الباب يوم الشوري ، فارتفعت الأصوات بينهم ، فسمعت عليا (عليه السلام) يقول: بايع الناس أبا بكر وأنا والله أولي بالأمر وأحق به ، فسمعت وأطعت مخافة أن يرجع الناس كفارا ، يضرب بعضهم رقاب بعض بالسيف ، ثم بايع أبو بكر لعمر وأنا والله أولي بالأمر منه ، فسمعت وأطعت مخافة أن يرجع الناس كفارا”
“kharazmi virtues, chapter 19. “Kanz al amal”. V 5, p 724.
Third pint: Ali [AS] says:
وَ إِنْ تَرَكْتُمُونِي فَأَنَا كَأَحَدِكُمْ
If you leave me, I’ll be like one of you. He doesn’t mean dodging responsibility but he means, I don’t accept non-divine government that people want and this sentence”
“لِمَنْ وَلَّيْتُمُوهُ أَمْرَكُمْ”
Is the best reason for this matter that your desired government is not acceptable by me and give to any one that you want and go to the one who accepts to have such ruling.
And that point is that Ali [AS] says:
“وَ أَنَا لَكُمْ وَزِيراً خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ مِنِّي أَمِيراً”
He means if I accept government, I’ll throw away all wrong criteria and will remove incompetent persons from different positions and competent persons will take their place:
“ولتساطنّ سوط القدر حتّي يعود أسفلكم أعلاكم وأعلاكم أسفلكم”
And all unfairly seized properties will be returned to public treasury.
“واللّه لو وجدته قد تزوّج به النساء وملك به الإماء لررددته”
And in short, If I take the responsibility I’ll govern people as Prophet [PBUH].
“وإن بليتكم قد عادت كهيئتها يوم بعث اللّه نبيّكم والذي بعثه بالحق”
certainly such thing will cost you a lot, and you can’t tolerate such justice and it’s not in your interest either, but if don’t have any responsibility in the society so I won’t be obligated and I’ll counsel in time of need like the past and it’s in your interest and this sentence:
Doesn’t show the withdrawal of divine caliphate but it’s complaining for people’s illegitimate demands.
And you’ve written at end: our job is just discovering the secrets of “Nahj Al Balagha”
I ask you, that if you’ve discovered just this sermon from entire of this book? Or you’ve read rest of sermons and letters of commander of faithful [AS]? or if you’ve accepted this sermon out of all sermons of “Nahj AL balagha” or you accept all other sermons that Ali [AS] has stated in them the matter of caliphate and “Emamat” decisively and has questioned former caliphs ? doesn’t he say in his third sermon decisively: that “Abu Bakr” himself knew that caliphate is my certain due but I tolerated against this illegitimate and ruinous matter, while I had thistle in my eye and bone in throat and my due got looted before me.
أما واللّه ، لقد تقمّصها ابن أبي قحافة ، وإنّه ليعلم أنّ محلي منها محل القطب من الرحا ، ينحدر عني السيل ، ولا يرقي إلي الطير. فسدلت دونها ثوبا ، وطويت عنها كشحا ، وطفقت أرتئي بين أن أصول بيد جذاء ، أو أصبر علي طخية عمياء ، يهرم فيها الكبير ، ويشيب فيها الصغير ، ويكدح فيها مؤمن حتي يلقي ربه ، فرأيت أن الصبر علي هاتا أحجي ، فصبرت وفي العين قذي ، وفي الحلق شجا ، أري تراثي نهبا
The description of “Nahj Al Balagha”, from Ibn Abi Al hadid. V 1, P 151.
Didn’t Ali [AS] say in the second sermon decisively: that leadership is the due of Muhammad [PBUH] and his descendent and they are the heirs and the successors of Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and now, with accepting the government I got to my due, and this due returnee due returned to its main position.
لا يقاس بآل محمد صلي الله عليه وآله من هذه الامة أحد، ولا يسوي بهم من جرت نعمتهم عليه أبدا. هم أساس الدين، وعماد اليقين. إليهم يفئ الغالي، وبهم يلحق التالي، ولهم خصائص حق الولاية، وفيهم الوصية والوراثة، الآن إذ رجع الحق إلي أهله ونقل إلي منتقله.
The description of “Nahj Al Balagha” from Ibn Abi Al hadid. V 1, P 139.
And he writes in his letter to Egyptians: [I swear to god I didn’t believe, It didn’t even come to my mind that Arab nation turn their backs on Prophet’s[PBUH] advises this way and keep the caliphate away from prophecy dynasty, my only concern was people’s going toward “Abu Bakr”, but I didn’t accept such allegiance [ that didn’t have religious indicator], as far as I saw some people have left Islam and are trying to destroy Prophet’s [PBUH] religion and I was afraid that if I remain silent I ‘ll see the irreparable gap in religion or will see its destruction, this disaster will be more difficult for me than losing caliphate on people, so I decided to rise among all those riots and uproar and removed the plot of religion’s foes and saved prophet’s religion.
فو اللّه ماكان يلقي في روعي ولا يخطر ببالي أنّ العرب تزعج هذا الأمر من بعده صلي الله عليه وآله عن أهل بيته ، ولا أنّهم منحوه عنّي من بعده ، فما راعني إلا انثيال الناس علي فلان يبايعونه ، فأمسكت يدي حتّي رأيت راجعة الناس قد رجعت عن الاسلام يدعون إلي محق دين محمد صلي الله عليه وآله ، فخشيت إن لم أنصر الاسلام وأهله أن أري فيه ثلماً أو هدماً تكون المصيبة به علي أعظم من فوت ولايتكم التي إنما هي متاع أيام قلائل يزول منها ما كان كما يزول السراب ، أو كما يتقشع السحاب ، فنهضت في تلك الاحداث حتي زاح الباطل وزهق ، واطمأن الدين وتنهنه). نهج البلاغة، الكتاب الرقم 62، كتابه إلي أهل مصر مع مالك الأشتر لمّا ولاه.
Several question from Sunni brothers.
At the end, there are question in this regard, hope that you and your other honorable like-minded offer acceptable response:
1: you say that Prophet [PBUH] didn’t appoint caliph, and entrusted it to people.
If what Ali [AS] did, was right and was in people’s interest and the guarantee for guiding people, so everyone is obligated to obey him, because his deed must be pattern for the god-seekers who believe in day of resurrection.
“لقد كان لكم في رسول اللّه أسوة حسنة لمن كان يرجوا اللّه واليوم الآخر”
Surah- AL-AHZAB. Verse: 21
So, selecting caliph by “Abu Bakr”, was against prophet’s tradition and caused nation’s misleading. As well as what “Omar” said in entrusting selecting caliph to the six-person council, was against prophet’s tradition and “Abu Bakr’s manner. If you say what they did was in people’s interest, so you should say that what Prophet [PBUH] did wasn’t true as well. 2: Prophet [PBUH] would appoint one of companions as his successor before leaving “Medina” for several days.
“لأنّ النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم استخلف في كلّ غزاة غزاها رجلاً من أصحابه”
Al qertabi interpretation. V 1, p 268.
Prophet [PBUH] appointed “Ibn umm maktoom” as his successor for thirteen times before setting off battles. Such as: “Badr”, “Ohod”, “Abva’e” and….
Kanz al omal. V 8, p 268.
And appointed “Abu rahm” as his successor when he wanted to set off “Mecca”, “Hunain” and “Kheibar” wars. And appointed “Muhammad ibn Muslemah” as caliph in “Ghar gharah” war, and selected “Avif” as his successor in “Hudaybiyah” war.
So, is it logical that Prophet [PBUH] has left Muslims forever without appointing successor, while he would select successor for setting off “Badr” war that took only one day, one mile away from “Medina”? As well as in “Khandagh” war that was beside “Medina”, he selected successor. It didn’t happen even once that he leaves selecting successor to people and didn’t even counsel with Muslims about it. From one side you say that prophet [PBUH] said: all Prophets had successor, and quotes from “Salman Farsi” that he asked prophet [PBUH]: any Prophet had a successor, who is your successor:
“لكل نبيّ وصيّ ووارث”, إنّ لكلّ نبيّ وصيّاً، فمن وصيّك؟”
From another side you say Prophet [PBUH] didn’t select anybody as his successor.
Majmae Al zavaed. V 9, p 113. Al majam Al kabir. V 6, p 221.
Was Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] an exaptation amongst all prophets, and it was amongst his traits? Or he acted against all prophet’s traditions? Despite god has ordered prophet [PBUH] in Quran, after saying the name of all great Prophets, to continue their guiding.
“أولئك الذين هدي اللّه فبهداهم اقتده”
Surah AL-ANAAM. Verse 90.
4: You say that Prophet [PBUH] has left people without appointing successor and caliph. Did prophet [PBUH] entrust appointing caliph to people to select anybody that they like as caliph and he didn’t say anything about the conditions of election, leading and participants? And this action is not logical definitely, because when Prophet [PBUH] passed away, Islamic society was in the worst condition, from one side “Rome” and “Iran” would threaten Islamic government that prophet’s persistence on equipping “Osamah” army is the best proof.
And from another side hypocrites, idolaters and Jewish would always make trouble for Islamic society. It’s clear that if ruler of the society were an average person, he wouldn’t have left the society without successor, so how is that logical Prophet [PBUH] leaves the society without caliph and successor? While he was worry about Muslims and didn’t withhold of any effort to help them and this holy verse is the best proof for this talk:
“لقد جاءكم رسول من أنفسكم عزيز عليه ما عنتّم، حريص عليكم بالمؤمنين رئوف رحيم”
And believing such thing is the worst insulting toward Prophet [PBUH] that with such decision, he
has made the society to face the most difficult problem, as doctor “Ahmad amin”, Egyptian scholar says: if Prophet [PBUH] dies, without selecting successor or saying the conditions of appointing ruler, he would have made Islamic society to face the most dangerous situation.
توفّي رسول اللّه صلي اللّه عليه وآله ولم يعيّن من يخلفه ، ولم يبيّن كيف يكون اختياره ، فواجه المسلمون أشق مسألة وأخطرها!
Fajr Al Islam p 225.
and “Ibn Khaldoo” says: it’s impossible that society is left without leader otherwise it will be the factor of quarrel amongst politicians and people, so there is urgent need to selecting ruler in any society who saves the society from chaos:
“فاستحال بقاؤهم فوضيّ دون حاكم يزع بعضهم عن بعض واحتاجوا من أجل ذلك إلي الوازع وهو الحاكم عليهم”
The preface of “Ibn khaldoon” p 187.
Quoted by “Sahi muslem”: “Hafseh” warns “ Omar” to select someone as his successor and his son tells him: if your rancher leaves your sheep and camel without caretaker, you’ll tell him off that why you caused them die? So think about this nation! And select someone as caliph! Because caring about these people is more important than caring about camels.
عن ابن عمر قال: دخلت علي حفصة فقالت: أعلمت أنّ أباك غير مستخلف؟ قال: قلت: ما كان ليفعل.
قالت: إنّه فاعل. قال ابن عمر: فحلفت أنّي أكلّمه في ذلك. فسكت، حتّي غدوت. ولم أكلّمه.
قال: فكنت كأنّما أحمل بيميني جبلاً، حتي رجعت فدخلت عليه ، فقلت له: إنّي سمعت، الناس يقولون مقالة فآليت أن أقولها لك ، زعموا أنّك غير مستخلف ، وأنّه لو كان لك راعي إبل، أو راعي غنم ثمّ جاءك وتركها رأيت أن قد ضيّع ، فرعاية الناس أشدّ.
Sahih muslem. V 6, p 5.
6. And “Ayeshe” tells “Omar” via his son “Abd Allah”: don’t leave Prophet’s nation without rancher and select someone as successor, because I’m afraid that they face sedition:
ثمّ قالت (أي عائشة): يا بُنيّ! أبلغ عمر سلامي، وقل له: لا تدع أمّة محمد بلاراع، استخلف عليهم ولا تدعهم بعدك هملاً، فإنّي أخشي عليهم الفتنة.
Emamat and policy. V 1, P 42 searched by Al shiri.
And as well as “MuA’wiyah” who went to “Medina” to take allegiance for “Yazid” said amongst companions :
“إنّي أرهب أن أدع أمّة محمد بعدي كالضأن لا راعي لها”
I’m afraid to leave prophet’s nation like a sheep without rancher.
The history of “Al tabari” v 4, p 226
And “Abd Allah” says to “Omar”: if you call upon that person who is in charge of watching farm lands, will you put someone instead of him? He said: yes!
وقال عبد الله بن عمر لأبيه: لو استخلفت؟ قال: من؟ قال: تجتهد فإنّك لست لهم بربّ، تجتهد ، أرأيت لو أنّك بعثت إلي قيّم أرضك ألم تكن تحبّ أن يستخلف مكانه حتي يرجع إلي الأرض؟ قال: بلي. قال: أرأيت لو بعثت إلي راعي غنمك ألم تكن تحبّ أن يستخلف رجلاً حتي يرجع؟ طبقات ابن سعد 3 ص 343، ط. دار صادر بيروت، فليراجع.
The history of the city of Damascus. V 44, p 435
Isn’t it the highest insulting to prophet [PBUH] that he didn’t care about Islamic nation as much as “Hafseh”, “Ayeshe” or even “Mua’wiyah”?! And didn’t he feel that he shouldn’t leave his nation without rancher?!! Wasn’t there anybody telling him to appoint someone as his successor? Or ask him the way of appointing caliph?!!
7: you say that prophet [PBUH] passed away without testament, do you know that you’ve ascribed an action to him that is against Quran and tradition?!
Quran orders all Muslims to testate before their death:
“كتب عليكم إذا حضر أحدكم الموت إن ترك خيراً الوصيّة”
Surah AL-MAEDA, verse 3
And prophet [PBUH] has said: each Muslim is obligated to testate, and three nights of each Muslim’s life shouldn’t pass unless his will is written:
“ما حق امرئ مسلم له شئ يوصي به ، يبيت ثلاث ليال إلا ووصيّته عنده مكتوبة”
“Abdu Allah Omar” says: when I heard this hadith from prophet [PBUH] I didn’t spend any night without will:
“قال عبد اللّه بن عمر: ما مرّت عليّ ليلة منذ سمعت رسول اللّه صلي اللّه عليه وسلم قال ذلك، إلّا وعندي وصيّتي”
Sahih muslem. V 5, p70
Is that possible to say “Abdu Allah Omar” abided by prophet’s talks more than Prophet [PBUH] himself? Is that possible that prophet says something that himself wouldn’t live up to that? God says in Quran: why say you that which you do not? And contradictory in talking and acting is followed by god’s rage.
"یا أيّها الذين آمنوا لِمَ تقولون ما لا تفعلون كبر مقتاً عند اللّه أن تقولوا ما لاتفعلون”
Surah AS-SAFF verse 2
And this contradictory was so obvious that was protested by some of narrators such as: “Talha ibn masref” who says to “Abdu Allah oufi”: how is that possible that Prophet [PBUH] orders people to testate then himself leaves without will:
“عن طلحة بن مصرف، قال: سألت عبداللّه بن أبي أوفي: هل كان النبي (ص) أوصي؟ قال: لا. فقلت: كيف كتب علي الناس الوصيّة، ثمّ تركها - قال: أوصي بكتاب اللّه”
Sahih bukhari. V 3, p 186.
“فكيف أمر المؤمنين بالوصيّة ولم يوص؟ قال: أوصي بكتاب اللّه”
Ahmad ibn hanbal Musnad, V 4. P 354.
recommendation hadith and verse, if they don’t imply compulsory, at least they imply the permission of will and shows that testate is a good and pleasant deed, and it’s blow Prophet’s dignity to avoid doing it, because Quran says: enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while you yourselves forget [to practice it]?
“أتأمرون الناس بالبرّ وتنسون أنفسكم”
Surah AL-BAQARAH, verse 44.
8: you said that prophet [PBUH] passed away without successor and entrusted appointing caliph to people, did he determine any condition for the one who becomes caliph and those who attend election? If he did so, in what narrative he’s mentioned them? If these conditions were amongst his talks, why didn’t any of “Bani saqife” heroes reason it in “Bani saedah Saqifah”? if selecting “Aba Bakr” as caliph were comply with conditions that prophet announced, why did “Abu Bakr” say: my allegiance was a sudden and accidental event and was done without tact and god fended its evil:
“قال أبو بكر في أوائل خلافته: إنّ بيعتي كانت فلتة وقي اللّه شرّها وخشيت الفتنة”
The description of “Nahj Al balaqah” from “ibn abi al-hadid” V 6/ P 47.
It means that his allegiance was naturally an evil deed and god removed its evil. “Ibn Kathir” says:
“أراد بالفلتة الفجأة، ومثل هذه البيعة جديرة بأن تكون مهيّجة للشر”
And “Omar” said this sentence at the end of his caliphate: if someone ventures doing such deed, is doomed to death:
“إنّ بيعة أبي بكر كانت فلتة وقي اللّه شرّها فمن عاد إلي مثلها فاقتلوه”
The description of “Nahj Al balaqah” from “ibn abi al-hadid” V 2/ P 26.
“Ibn Athir” says: irregular deed is called “felta” and due to fear of spreading caliphate state they ventured “Aba Bakr’s allegiance.
“والفلتة كلّ شي ء من غير رويّة وإنّما بودر بها خوف انتشار الأمر”
I wish someone had asked “Ibn Athir” the fear of which caliphate state? The fear of caliphate that prophet [PBUH] had determined? Or fear of the candidacy of people like “Abu Bakr” for caliphate state? Spreading the caliphate that prophet [PBUH] had determined, not only wasn’t scary, but It’d guarantee the interest of nation and was necessary for every one to abide by prophet’s order, and no one had right to make remark or oppose it.
“ما كان لمؤمن و لا مؤمنة إذا قضي اللّه ورسوله أمراً أن يكون لهم الخيرة من أمرهم”
Surah, AL AHZAB. Verse 36.
And the candidacy of others didn’t have any fear too, because after consideration, people wouldn’t swear him an allegiance if he wasn’t at the same level as “Abu Bakr”? And if their level were the same, what would be the difference between swearin him an allegiance or “Abu Bakr”. But if he were better than “Abu Bakr” in reforming society and were more competent, wasn’t what “Abu Bakr” did against the interest of society?
9: more important than all, if “Abu Bakr’s caliphate were really based on conditions and comply with prophet’s tradition, so why “Omar” said:
“فمن عاد إلي مثلها فاقتلوه”
10: from one side you say: prophet [PBUH] didn’t select his successor and didn’t order someone to appoint an certain person as caliph, but people appointed “Abu Bakr” as caliph and he selected “Omar” as his successor and ” Osman” was selected by six-person council, and from another side say that they were prophet’s successors and call them:
Isn’t ascribing lie to prophet [PBUH]. According to this successive narrative ascribing any lie to prophet is forbidden:
“من كذب عليّ متعمداً فليتبؤ مقعده من النار”
Sahih bukhari. V 1, P 36.
So, whether this talk of yours that prophet [PBUH] didn’t appoint successor is true, or this belief of yours in calling triple caliphs “Prophet’s caliph” is true.