Sunday 16 June 2024
Answering the Doubts on Qadir Hadith
ID: 10 Publish Date: 13 December 2008 - 12:35 Count Views: 3062
Speeches » public
Answering the Doubts on Qadir Hadith

 Mashhad - 05 Decamber 2008 (1387 / 09 / 23 shamsi)

It was mentioned earlier that today Wahhabis use all equipment and facilities to raise doubts about the culture of Imamat and Ahle Bait. Their extreme purpose is to remove Ahle Bait from Islamic culture and they seek an Islam in which Ahle Bait has no role. That might result in Islam without Shiism. For this purpose, they will do whatever they can and they have spent lots of money and trained some special people and, regarding the facilities they have, they are moving forward very fast.

When I was studying and thinking about that, I saw that there are about ten thousand questions and doubts that they have posed in pamphlets, books, websites, and satellite channels about Shiism. Ten thousand is really a big number. Perhaps 70 percent of these issues are baseless and they are just defamations, though even such defamations need to be answered, but the other 30 percent must be studied on and analyzed and accurate, complete, and strong answers must be given, so that our young people may not think that they have any valuable doubts or our scholars are unable to answer them. They, themselves, should not feel relaxed in rising doubts and void questions. They must know that there are some people who would rapidly answer their doubts through documents and acceptable sources.

Only about the Hadith of Thaqalain, which is among the strongest evidences of Shiites, they have rose about 148 questions and doubts. If we do not reply them should we expect the merchants, politicians, military forces, or university students to answer them?! First of all, this is our duty to answer these questions. If our friends do not get angry with me, I would say that we should seek forgiveness from Imam Zaman (Imam Mahdi (AS)) for our failures and shortcomings. One example of such failures that must be compensated quickly, and that is an obligation for us, is the very issue of answering doubts. In the studies we had about Hadith of Qadir,  

There are some websites inside the country or outside that they contain questions and sometimes doubts about Hadith of Qadir that they cannot be seen even in our opponents’ books. That is because when they sit and think for 30 or 40 hours and find a question and publish it on a website, soon it is reflected on ten or twenty thousand websites, but when we reply to that question, in its best option, it is published in 50 or 60 websites. That is another evidence of our failure and another reason for seeking forgiveness. 

We counted over 53 doubts about the story of Qadir from the very first book against Shiites which was named Al Uthmaniya and written by Jahiz (deceased in 255 after hijrat) to Qazi Abdul Jabbar (deceased in 415 after Hejra) and Ibne Timiya (deceased in 728). They need to be answered. In this session and the next one, I will mention one or two of these doubts and say some things about them and will talk about how to answer such doubts. I hope this is a very, very small gift to the master and king of this world, Imam Mahdi (AS).          

About Hadith of Qadir, Ibne Timiya Hurrani has a sentence which says:

If the Holy Prophet had not said this Hadith and this Hadith is a lie, so there is nothing to say about it. And if he had said that Hadith, for sure he did not mean his succession. We do not see any sign of such intention in this Hadith. Such important matter, as important as Khilafat, needs more accurate, clear, and direct words.

Then he says some things and quotes Hassan Muthanna, Hassan Ibne Hassan Ibne Ali Ibne Abi Talib who is introduced in many of such websites as Hassan Muthanna, who said:

Didn’t the Holy Prophet say on Qadir that “Whoever I am his master, so Ali is his master”? If the Holy Prophet meant to talk about power, Khilafat, or his succession, he would speak more clearly, like what he did about salat, hajj, zakat, etc. He could say Ali is your master after me. Listen to what he says after me and follow him.

Osul Mazhab Al Shiia by Dr. Al Qafari, vol. 2, p 840

Abdul Aziz Dihlawi has a book named Tuhfa Al Ithna Ashariya. In that, he thought he had collected all doubts which were rose about Shiism and of course, Mir Hamid Hussein wrote a critical book about that named Abaqat Al Anwar. Abdul Aziz says:

Arab literary figures and linguists and those who founded Arabic grammar deny appliance of the word “Mola” in favor of “supremacy”.     

Sharh Maqasid Taftazani, vol. 2, p 290 – Abaqat Al Anwar, vol. 8, p 15

The same matters are mentioned in the new books that Wahhabis write. The book which is written by Abdul Rahman Salimi, an Iranian Sunni scholar who is originally from the city of Turbat and is professor of Ferdowsi University in Mashhad, is named Khilafat and Selection in Sunni View Point. Unfortunately, this book is published by Publication of University of Mashhad and exactly the same words which were once said by Wahhabis and Ibne Timiya is repeated in eloquent Persian. He has posed 18 doubts about incidence of Qadir and of course all of them are rejected. One of his doubts is that, according to Arab linguists, the word “Mola” could not be interpreted as “supreme”. If it was so, then there would be no problem. That means “friendship and affection”.          

In this regard, we give them some answers in manner of religious students to show that they do not consider necessities of their own language in posing doubts. They all know it, but they misuse our people’s lack of knowledge (about Arabic) and claim that none of linguists have defined “Mola” as “supreme”. They even say if it was so, then what Shiites were saying was true. We quote the founders of Arab Literature such as Akhfash, Fira, or Zujaj. So we will see whether they are unaware of basics of Arabic language and literature or they pretend to be illiterate.

From among founders of Arabic literature, we quote Abu Ishaq Zujaj (deceased in 311 after hijrat), Fara Abu Zakaria Yahya Ibne Ziyad (deceased in 207 after hijrat), Abu Ubaida, one of founder of philology in Arabic (deceased in 210 after hijrat), and famous figure Akhfash Abu Al Hassan Said Ibne Musada (deceased in 215). Let us see what they say in this regard:

The First Response:

Fakhr Razi, whose opinions are acceptable to all Islamic sects, writes under the holy verse “Your abode is the Fire: that is the proper place to claim you: and an evil refuge it is!” (Sura Al Hadid, Verse 15):

قال الکلبي: يعني أولى بكم و هو قول الزجاج و الفراء و أبي عبيدة.

Tafsir Al Razi, vol. 29, p 227

Then why these guys say that the Arab literature denies it and Arab literary figures and linguists do not refer to “Mola” as “supreme”. Three Arab linguists say that “Your Mola” means “Superior to you”. So “Mola” means “supreme” according to what Arab linguists express.

Also, Fakhr Razi writes under this holy verse:

    معناه هي أولى بكم و ذكر هذا أيضا الأخفش.

Let me explain a little about these four people. Zahabi, a       famous Rijal scientist (who study about historical figures), writes about Zujaj, who is a famous Arab literary figure and deceased in 311 after hijrat, “He is Master in Arabic (language)”.

Seir Aalaam Al Nibla by Al Zahabi, vol. 14, p 482

Khatib Bagdadi says “He has several publications in Arabic literature”.

Tarikh Bagdad by Al Khatib Al Bagdadi, vol. 6, p 87

Khatib Bagdadi writes about Farra “It is because of Farra that Arab literature exists”.

Tarikh Bagdad by Al Khatib Al Bagdadi, vol. 14, p 154

Zahabi writes about Abu Ubaida “He is master, scientist, and sea of knowledge … there is none like Abu Ubaida in Arab literature”.

Seir Aalaam Al Nibla Al Zahabi, vol. 9, p 445

Ibne Khalakan and others write about Akhfash “He is a linguist from Basra and was a leading Arab figure. Although he was student of Sibuya, but he is more powerful in Arab literature than he master”.

Wafiyat Al Ayan wa Anba Abna Al Zaman by Ibne Khalkan, vol. 2, p 380

These are founders of Arabic literature. If interpreters have analyzed the holy Quran, they have used their opinions and words. These four believe that “Mola” means “superior”. Those who say, in websites and satellite channels, that the Hadith of Qadir cannot be related to Imamat, though it only talks about that issue, must explain if they believe in what these linguists say or no. Perhaps as one of Wahhabis said in a website “We believe that resort to the Holy Prophet is dualism. Even if the Holy Prophet returns to life and he allows resort, we will not accept it”.

If this is their logic, we have nothing to say. We would just say “Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he!” (Sura Al Massad, Verse 1). 

This is our logic. According to Sura Taha, verse 44, we should speak to them like what Quran tells us: “But speak to him mildly; perchance he may take warning or fear (Allah)”.         

But it is useless. “Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur)”. (Sura Al Baqara, Verse 7)

But if you change your logic, we would discuss you.

The Second Response:

More interesting is Sahih Bukhari, which is considered by Sunnis as the most accurate book and even its content is more precious than words of the Holy Prophet and it is a kind of completion of the holy Quran. Even recently Hanafis have held a conference in Zahidan named “Reading Sahih Bukhari” and officially announced that any analysis and search about (validity of contents of) Sahih Bukhari is heresy. That means all that is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari is like content of the holy Quran. Anyway, in interpretation of Sura Al Hadid, it is written in there:

“Your master (Mola) is superior to you”.

Sahih Bukhari, vol. 6, p 57

You, Ibne Timiya! You Dihlavi! Don’t you still accept? Or perhaps because Bukhari had something in favor of Shiites in this case, you do not accept what he says. Do you dare to say Bukhari is wrong? You are facing a dilemma and you have only two possible options: whether you should say what you said that “Mola” does not mean “superior” is wrong and Shiites are right or you ought to say that Bukhari made a mistake in this matter. You have no third option.

Also Ibne Hajar Asqalani, who is famous scholar of Sunnis and deceased in 852 and he is also known as Al Hafiz (the keeper), writes in his book Fath Al Barri Fi Sharh Sahih Al Bukahri under what Bukhari had written:

قال الفراء في قوله تعالى مأواكم النار هي مولاكم يعني أولى بكم و كذا قال أبو عبيدة و في بعض نسخ البخاري هو أولي بكم و كذا هو في كلام أبي عبيدة.

Fath Al Bari Fi Sharh Sahih Bukhari, vol. 8, p 482

He mentioned two leading linguists of Arabic language and says that “Mola” means “superior”.

The Third Response:

It is enough that we take a look at some interpretive books of those Sunni interpreters who are accepted by people such as Ibne Timiya. Look how they have talked about the words “Mola” and “superior”.

The first one here is Tafsir Tabari (deceased in 310). Ibne Timiya, himself, says “Tafsir Tabari is a fine and good book of interpretation. He has not mentioned false and inaccurate Hadiths in his book, as some interpreters like Thalabi did”.   

Even Ibne Kathir Damishqi has mentioned Tafsir Tabari and says that there is nothing redundant in there.

Tabari writes in his Tafsir:

قوله: هي مولاكم، يقول: النار أولى بكم.

Jami Al Bayan by Al Tabari, vol. 27, p 296

Abu Al Leith Samarqandi, who is a famous Sunni interpreter, says “You are superior to this fire due to the sins you have committed in the past”.

Tafsir Al Samarqandi, vol. 3, p 384 – Tafsir Ibne Kathir, vol. 4, p 332

In Tafsir Samaani it is said:

هي مولاكم أي النار أولى بكم.

Tafsir Al Samaani, vol. 5, p 371

Also Ibne Jozi has the same phrase in Zad Al Massir, vol. 7, p 304.

Ibne Kathir Damishqi Salafi, who is told Wahhabis not to have even one word in his interpretations without purpose, writes:

    و قوله تعالي هي مولاکم أي هي أولي بکم.

Tafsir Ibne Kathir, vol. 4, p 332

Allama Amini has a beautiful idea and I would very much like to mention it here. He says:

I do not blame those who quote linguists to pose doubts about Hadith of Qadir. They do not understand basics of Arabic language and literature; from Fakhr Razi and Dihlawi to Hindi, Kabuli, and Panipati. They really do not have any knowledge of Arabic language and they are illiterate. How should they have learned Arabic?   

Al Qadir by Al Sheikh Al Amini, vol. 1, p 357

The Fourth Answer:

We put Hadith of Qadir aside and do not talk about it. We will not refer to that ever. In this regard, there are true and reliable revayats which are approved by people such as Albani, who is a contemporary scholar, and is also approved by Zahabi and Ibne Kathir and some others who have called it a true Hadith. It does not include “Mola” or “superior”. The Holy Prophet said on the day of Qadir:

من کنت وليه فعلي وليه.

Do you still have anything to say in this regard? There are several reliable revayats which show that the Holy Prophet said the above mentioned sentence in presence of some people.   

Sunan Ibne Majih, one of the six Sahihs, quotes Barra Ibne Azib, who was a respected companion of the Holy Prophet, in vol.1, p 43 who says:

We were in the Last Hajj when the Holy Prophet:

فأخذ بيد على، فقال: ألست أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم؟ قالوا: بلى. قال: ألست أولى بكل مؤمن من نفسه؟ قالوا: بلى. قال: فهذا ولى من أنا مولاه. أللهم وال من والاه، أللهم عاد من عاداه.

There are separate discussions about the phrase ألست أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم. That is absolutely meant to show Welayat of Imam Ali (AS). It is one of the highest degrees that the holy Quran granted to the Holy Prophet:

“The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves” (Sura Al Ahzab, verse 6)   

That means absolute supremacy even over believers. Look at Tafsir Tabari or Ibne Kathir or other Sunni interpreters that how nice they have explained this supremacy under this verse. The Holy Prophet, on the day of Qadir, first mentioned one of the greatest virtues of his that was given to him by Allah.   

In this Hadith that we read, there is no word “Mola” that Iji, Dihlawi, or Ibne Timiya say that it does not mean “superior”. If they do, so we may say that “Wali” means “supervisor”. According to Sahih Muslim, Omar Ibne Khattab says to Ali Ibne Abi Talib (AS) and Abbas:

  لما توفى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم قال أبو بكر: أنا ولى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم، . . . ، ثم توفى أبو بكر و أنا ولى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم.

Sahih Muslim, vol. 5, p 152, book of Jihad

When the second Khalifa was dying, he said “If Salim, master of Abu Hazifa, was alive, I would choose him as your wali”.

Here, he is not talking about friendship or intimacy. He means I would chose him as your superior and your Khalifa and he is talking about governance.

When Naser Al Din Albani, who is named Bukhari of the present age and even Banbaz, the Saudi Mufti, said that Albani should be called Imam of Hadith, comes to this revayat, writes under Sunan Ibne Majeh through his own study, vol. 1, p 43 that:

This revayat is accurate.   

Also in Musnad Bizar, vol. 4, p 41, it is quoted from Sad Ibne Abi Waqas who said

إن رسول الله أخذ بيد علي، فقال: ألست أولي بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم؟ من کنت وليه فإن عليا وليه.

Heithami, who is a famous Sunni scholar, writes in Majma Al Zawaid, vol. 9, p 107:  

رواه البزار و رجاله ثقات.

Nissai quotes another revayat from the Holy Prophet in Khasais Amir Al Momenin who said 

إن الله مولاي و أنا ولي کل مؤمن، ثم أخذ بيد علي فقال: من کنت وليه فهذا وليه.

Khasais Amir Al Mumenin (AS), p 93 – Asad Al Qaba by Ibne Al Athir, vol. 1, p 308 – Insab Al Ashraf by Al Bilazari, p 111

Hakim Neishabouri has this in Mustadrak Al Sahihein. He says “This Hadith is true and has qualities of a true Hadith of Sahih Bukhari”.

Mustadrak Al Sahihain by Al Hakim Al Neishabouri, vol. 3, p 109

What would they reply in response to what we said? Do they still believe, as Ibne Timiya claims, that “The Holy Prophet said something by which he was not talking about Khilafat of Ali (AS)?”

In response to what he said, he mentioned that Arab literary figures and linguists such as Akhfash, Zujaj, Farra, and Abu Ubaida believed that the word “Mola” means “superior”. Also in revayats of the Sahih, they have said that “wali” is mentioned in what the Prophet said and not “mola”. Answer our questions if you can!

But about what they have quoted from Hassan Muthanna, that Hadith of Qadir is not talking about succession and Khilafat of Imam Ali (AS), we gave an answer that faced some reactions about that. Some days ago, many friends asked about this sentence of Hassan Muthanna. They search in some minor and secondary Shiite sources, like some weak revayats of Bihar Al Anwar, or in Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa of Ibne Meitham, or search Nahj Al Bilaqa to find some multi dimensional sentences and quote them in a way that it could implied that even Shiites have doubts and uncertainties about this matter of Khilafat and what was mentioned in Hadith Qadir.

One of rude actions that they did was that they have collected some phrases and sentences from Nahj Al Bilaqa or Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa of Ibne Meitham or Ibne Abi Al Hadid to show that the Holy Prophet had not introduced Imam Ali (AS) as his successor and Khalifa of Muslims.

Answering the Doubt of Revayat of Hassan Muthanna      

Hassan Muthanna’s Hadith, which is mainly quoted in Al Itiqad Beihaqi, p 355 and also mentioned in Mir Hamid Hussein’s Abaqat Al Anwar, vol. 9, p 240, who said “If the Holy Prophet meant to introduce Ali (AS) as his successor, he would say it in a more direct way”.

Qafari, in Osul Mazhab Al Shia, vol. 2, p 840, reflects this Hadith with so much explanation and interpretations.

What is necessary to know in order to answer such doubt is our skillfulness and ability in the science of Rijal (study of historical figures). That is, they try to quote some secondary-sourced Hadiths and weak revayats from some unknown or ambiguous people and, in this case, we need full ability in recognizing that person with our ability in science of Rijal. If we do not have full acquaintance with that, we will not be able to answer posed doubts.

The First Response:


Ibne Timiya had quoted this revayat of Hassan Muthanna from Abu Nuaim. Here is what we can doubt about this Hadith. There is another revayat from Ibne Timiya in Minhaj Al Sunna, vol. 7, p 52, where he wants to reject a Hadith from Abu Nuaim. He says “Abu Nuaim’s book is full of false and weak Hadiths according to most of Hadith scholars of Shiites and Sunnis”.

Well! It is very interesting! Isn’t it what we call double standard? When you want to put Shiites under question, you quote Abu Nuaim and consider all his Hadiths and his book true and reliable, because he is attacking Shiites, but when you want to reject him, you refer to agreement of all Shiite and Sunni scholars in his being unreliable!

Ibne Timiya, in the same book, vol. 5, p 79, says “If a revayat is mentioned in Heliya Al Uliya, it is not useful and cannot be an evidence of its accuracy. Abu Nuiam has some revayats about virtues of companions and some others which are whether very weak or false. That is what all scholars believe”.

The Second Response:

In the reference of this revayat, it is said “From Yahya Ibne Ibrahim Ibne Muhammad Ibne Ali”. If you read all historical books of Sunnis, like Tahzib Al Kamal of Mazi or Seir Aalam Al Nabla of Zahabi or Tahzib Al Tahzib of Ibne Hajar Asqalani, we cannot find even one person who had talked about them and he is an ambiguous person. They believe that if narrator of a revayat is unknown, that Hadith cannot be trusted in. After that, it is said “From Fuzail Ibne Marzuq”. Zahabi, in Mizan Al Itidal, quotes Nassani, writer of Sunan who is a reliable figure among Sunnis, who said “His Hadiths are false. He has quoted some weak Hadiths from some people and has false and void Hadiths”.

Mizan Al Itidal by Al Zahabi, vol. 3, p 362

Also in the book Al Muqni fi Al Zuafa, vol. 2, p 515, Zahabi says “Nassani and Ibne Muin believed that he is weak (in quoting Hadiths). One of failures of Muslim is that he had quoted some revayats from this guy in his Sahih”.  

So this revayat from Hassan Muthanna, that these men quote in different occasions and use that to put us under question, is false regarding its reference and a void revayat is not worthy of being mentioned and quoted. In other words, they repeatedly refer to a revayat which is, according to them, false. If we do such a thing, they will cry out that you have no information about science of Rijal and you have not searched and you are quoting a void Hadith. In the very book of Minhaj Al Sunna, Ibne Timiya refers to some Hadiths of Allama Hilli which have weak reference or it may have weak narrator and tries to misuse that and rise doubts about him.

The Third Response:

First of all, this revayat is mentioned in Sunni books. We do not accept what is mentioned in your books and do not accept your reference to them. Ibne Hizm Andolosi expresses “It is nonsense that we refer to our own book, which Shiites do not believe in, in our debates with them. Also it is nonsense that they refer to their own books in their debates with us”.

Second, this revayat of Hassan Muthanna is not mentioned in either of Sahihs. Ibne Timiya had questioned Allama Hilli in several occasions that his revayats are mentioned in the two Sahihs and, as the result, they are void. This revayat is not also mentioned in Musnad Ahmad, which is not a Sahih but its revayats are true. Ahmad Ibne Hanbal says “If you could not find a revayat in my book, beware that it might not be true”.

Seir Aalaam by Al Zahabi, vol. 11, p 329

The Fourth Response:

Imagine that this Hadith is true and is repeatedly mentioned in Hadith books. Is Hassan Muthann innocent that his word should be acceptable to all? What is his value and position among Shiites? We only consider words of the 14 innocents as absolute and accept it without any question. What we refer to in basics of jurisprudence, Rijal, or other things is word, act, or expression of the Imams. This is what we refer to as Tradition. Hassan Muthanna is not innocent.

The Fifth Response:

What Hassan Muthanna says is in contradiction with hundreds of revayats from Imam Baqer (AS), Imam Sadeq (AS), and several other Imams. They all have expressed that Hadith of Qadir is about Imamat of Imam Ali (AS).

The Sixth Response:

This word of Hassan Muthanna is in contradiction with what Imam Ali (AS) says about Hadith of Qadir. Answer this one at least. Ahmad Hanbal quotes Abu Tufail, the companion, in his Musnad who says:

Ali gathered people in a place named Rohbe, the yard of Mosque of Kufa or somewhere near Kufa, and asked those who were present on the day of Qadir to stand up and explain what they have seen and heard in detail. 30 people stood up and testified that they were present on the day of Qadir and the Holy Prophet held Ali’s hand and said “من كنت مولاه فهذا مولاه، أللهم وال من والاه و عاد من عاداه”.    

Musnad Ahmad, vol. 4, p 370

Heithami, one of founders of Rijal science among Sunnis, quotes this revayat in his Majma Al Zawaid and says “Ahmad has quoted this revayat and its narrators are reliable”.      

Majma Al Zawaid by Al Heithami, vol. 9, p 104

Ahmad Ibne Zeid, a famous Sunni scholar, has studied Musnad of Ahmad and writes under this revayat “Its references are reliable”.

Musnad Ahmad, vol. 14, p 436, research by Ahmad Zein

Shuaib Arnaut, a famous contemporary Sunni scholar, has an explanation over Ahmad Hanbal’s revayats and writes about this Hadith:

اسناده صحيح، رجاله ثقات، رجال الشيخين.

Musnad Ahmad, vol. 4, p 370, research by Shuaib Arneut

When Albani comes to this revayat, he says:

Its references are reliable according to what Bukhari says.

Silsila Al AHadith Al Sahiha, vol. 4, p 331

So Imam Ali (AS) refers to Hadith of Qadir to show his righteousness and witnesses 30 people to prove his Welayat and Khilafat and succession of the Holy Prophet. They also swore that they had heard such as mentioned before from the Prophet’s mouth.

We also have several revayats about appealing of Imam Ali (AS) in different places such as that of Imam Ali (AS) to Talhe in the war of Jamal. This is very interesting. When in one side Talhe, the Best, Zubair, the Sword of Allah, and Aisha, Mother of Believers, are standing and on the other side Commander of Believers, Imam Ali (AS) and 400 companions of the war of Badr could be seen, Imam Ali (AS) did something to show his righteousness and to remind that the Holy Prophet had assigned him as his successor and these three came to occupy what is his right. Hakim Neishabouri quotes:

Talhe came forward and Imam Ali (AS) said “I ask you something. Haven’t you heard the Holy Prophet say “من كنت مولاه فعلى مولاه اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه”? Talhe said “Yes! I heard it”. Imam said “So why do you fight me?” He replied “I forgot it”. And then Talhe refused to fight against Imam Ali (AS).    

Mustadrak Al Sahihain by Al Hakim Al Neishabouri, vol. 3, p 371

And of course later some things happened that Zubair refused to fight, too. These all show that Imam Ali (AS) raised the issue of Imamat and Khilafat and his righteousness and succession after the Holy Prophet even to commanders of a war in which many people from different Islamic lands were gathered and about 30000 people were killed. Ibne Timiya claims that they came for vengeance of Othman. Othman was not killed in Basra. He was killed in Medina and his murderers were in Medina, too.

What these people quote from Hassan Muthanna is, more to basics errors that it has, in contradiction with Imam Ali’s appeal and his emphasis over his righteousness in the story of Qadir. Why didn’t Talhe reply that the Holy Prophet did not mean what you claim and he was not talking about your (Imam Ali’s) Khilafat? What didn’t he say that “Mola” does not mean “superior” according to Arabic literature?

Talhe knew Prophet’s word better than you. Talhe knew Arabic language and literature better than you. Talhe, himself, was present in the gathering of the day of Qadir. What didn’t he ask such questions?

This is a summary of this doubt.

After the end of the Prophet’s speech on the day of Qadir, the companions came forward and congratulated to Imam Ali (AS). Among the first ones were the first and second Khalifas.

In my opinion, the reference of this revayat is true and reliable. I will mention it in another occasion since we have shortage of time here. This revayat is from Abu Harira and you Sunnis all accept what he says.

 أخذ النبي بيد علي بن أبي طالب، فقال: ألست ولي بالمؤمنين؟ قالوا: بلى يا رسول الله، قال: من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه، فقال عمر بن الخطاب: بخ بخ لك يا ابن أبي طالب، أصبحت مولاي و مولى كل مسلم، فأنزل الله: اليوم أکملت لکم دينکم و أتممت عليکم نعمتي و رضيت لکم الاسلام دينا.

Tarikh Bagdad by Al Khatib Al Bagdadi, vol. 8, p 284      

Its reference is absolutely true and I am ready to discuss it with any Sunni or Wahhabi scholar who doubts about that. I even will take an oath over that. That is because this revayat is one of the most considerable Hadiths.

If here “Mola” would not refer to khilafat and governance and it was about friendship, he must have said “من أنا أحبه فعلي يحبه  * يا من أنا ناصره فعلي ناصره”. In such an occasion, it was something useless and redundant that the Holy Prophet gathers 120 thousand people to tell them that whoever I like him, he is liked by Ali, too. What would that mean?

If by “Mola”, friendship was meant, why in the holy Quran we have “The Believers, men and women, are protectors one of another” (Sura Al Towba, verse 71)? And it had nothing to do with the true story. When Omar congratulated in such a manner, was anything else but welayat meant? If the word “Mola” does not means welayat, so what is meant by “Today your religion is completed …”? We cannot understand it! Would you please explain it to us? Does it mean that whoever loves Ali (AS), his religion is complete? How can we claim that the word “Mola” here means friendship and it refers to completion of religion?! With such justifications and interpretations, not only you disrespect the Holy Prophet, but even you obtrude to the holy and sacred realm of Allah, the Almighty! According to your interpretation, this verse would not have a complete meaning!

Here Hassan Ibne Thabit stood up and said a piece of poem:

قال له: قم يا علي فإني    رضيتک من بعدي اماما و هاديا

Al Izdihar by Al Soyuti, p 19

 Poets are among literary figures and linguists. They know well about details of a language.

There are several other matters in this regard that show the Hadith of Qadir only refers to the issue of Imamat and Khilafat of Imam Ali (AS) and there cannot be any other reading for that. Doubts that these people rise are example of the person who is sinking and he grabs whatever he touches though it is a grass.

God blesses us all

Dr. Seyyed Muhammad Husseini Qazvini













Answering doubts about Qadir (2)

In the name of Allah

Master Husseini Qazvini:

In our last session, we introduced some doubts about the issue of Qadir which are posed by Wahhabis and in this session, too, we are going to discuss about some other related matters.

The most important and basic doubts that they have ever posed is about the meaning and interpretation of the word “Mola”. They claim that it does not directly refer to Imamat and Khilafat. We answered it. This was a scientific discussion and such scientific issues are usually debated and discussed in scientific committees or at universities. They have other matters and doubts which are presented in public meetings. This is their trick. Here I talk about that.

They claim that Shiites believe that the Holy Prophet had repeatedly talked about succession of Imam Ali (AS) during the 23 years of his life after his prophecy. Also he has raised the issue of his succession in great gathering of Qadir in presence of more than one thousand people. These companions were from among Ansar and Muhajirin who left their homes and lands for the sake of the Holy Prophet and moved from Mecca to Medina and in there they did very brave acts and fought side by side the Holy Prophet and some of them were injured. So, how is it possible that they were present in the place where the Holy Prophet introduced Ali (AS) as his successor and all of them were indifferent toward this matter? Is it acceptable to say that all companions, in whose praise several verses of the holy Quran were sent, were indifferent toward the Holy Prophet’s order in case of Khilafat?      

This is what they frequently repeat as a critique of Shiism and today Wahhabis elaborate on that. It can be seen in many CDs, brochures, books, and websites which are produced and controlled by Wahhabis and even some people inside Iran.

The answer to this doubt is very clear and simple. That only needs to analyze the details of this matter and separate them from one another and answer each of them separately.

A man from Sham came to Imam Sadeq (AS) and said “I came to have a debate with you”. Imam said “You want to debate over what?” The man replied “Over Sciences of Quran”.

There is a code and sign in this for us who are scholars and students of religious schools. Imam Sadeq (AS) did not debate with that man himself. He turned to Hamran, one of the followers, and said “You, Hamran! You go and debate with this man”. The man got shocked and said “I want to debate with you and not your students”. Imam Sadeq (AS) replied “If you defeated him, it is like you have defeated me”.

What had Imam Sadeq (AS) done and what had this companion had to be put in such situation? They are not like us who just sit down and claim that we are servants and soldiers of Imam Mahdi (AS) and claim that we are ready for his re-coming, but we think about everything but defending his right and benefits. Now they have posed more than 15000 doubts in their websites that more than 80 percent of them are left unanswered. We, religious scholars, should answer them, not the university students, merchants, or authorities.

Imam Baqer (AS) says in Wasail Al Shia:

بني الإسلام علي خمس: علي الصلاة و الزکاة و الصوم و الحج و الولاية و لم يناد بشئ ما نودي بالولاية.

Wasail Al Shia by Al Hur Al Amili (Ale Bait Edition), vol.1 , p 18

How much time do I, as a religious scholar, spend in a year over such an important matter like Welayat compared to some other issues like salat, cleanness, and other juridical matters?

My dear friends! These revayats that we read for people will not leave us on the day of Resurrection. We are responsible for that.     

يغفر للجاهل سبعون ذنبا قبل أن يغفر للعالم ذنب واحد.

Al Kafi by Al Sheikh Al Kuleini, vol. 1, p 47

Sins for a religious scholar are not limited to adultery, murder, thievery, or lucre. Our sins are these. As Ayatullah Mazahiri says “Satan deceives a religious student through manners of a students and a faqih through manners of Fiqahat”.

The Satan which is going to take hold of a student knows all about stages of religious study and the Satan which is going to deceive a merchant is a professional merchant himself.  

Although doubts which were raised at that time were one in a million compared to those of the present age, but still Imam Sadeq (AS) had thought of it and trained such students that defeating them, by the Shami man, was like defeating Imam himself. Then the man said “I want to debate over juridical matters”. Imam referred him to Zirara. Then he said “I want to debate over dialectic issues”. Imam referred him to Momen Al Taq. Then he said “I want to debate over issues of Imamat”. Imam referred him to Husham Ibne Hakam.

The man was defeated in all his debates with students of Imam Sadeq (AS). So, Imam Sadeq (AS) laughed, such a laugh that his teeth could be seen. The man said to Imam Sadeq (AS) “Did you mean to show what great students you have trained (and you Shiites are like this)?” Imam said “Yes!”

Imam Sadeq (AS) meant to say that we are not just sitting here that you pose such doubts and we do nothing against that and only say salat and pray or just watch films or write in magazines and acts like those. No! We do train scholars and students for this occasion.

The more interesting part is that after a game, the couch of the team gathers his players and analyzes the film of the game and talks to them about weak points and parts that they had failed or been successful. Imam Sadeq (AS), too, did it 1400 years ago. When the debate was over, he says “Abaan! You made a mistake in that and must be in this way. Hamran! You made a mistake in that matter. Husham Ibne Salim! You were not true on that. Husham Ibne Hakam! You did well”.

Rijal Al Kashi, p 275, number 494 – Bihar Al Anwar by Al Allama Al Majlisi, vol. 47, p 407

Answering the Doubt:

This is the doubt that Wahhabis pose. Regarding my experience, I will show you the general guidelines and you will study about details and think more about it. Here we want to say what ways should be taken in order to answer these questions and we are not going to answer a doubt here. Here are the raised questions and we should divide it into the following parts:

The First Question:

What was the purpose behind removing Imam Ali (AS) from power? Why did they gather in the council of Saqifa as soon as, or even before, the Holy Prophet died? What was the story?

The Second Question:

Why did the companions opposed what the Holy Prophet said about his succession? Here the background of the companions in their opposition to the Holy Prophet, except in Mecca, should be studied carefully. Their acts and disagreements from the very first day should be analyzed and reviewed; what happened in Medina, what happened in the war of Ohod where 70 people of companions of the Holy Prophet were martyred due to disobedience of some other companions and it led to defeat of Muslims. They even opposed in the war of Badr. Who were those who opposed in the story of war of Badr? They should be identified.

Who said, in war of Khandaq, that we should stay in Medina and the Holy Prophet rejected their idea and led the war outside of Medina and it resulted in their success.

Who stood against the Holy Prophet’s order in the war of Kheybar? The Holy Prophet ordered the attack, but they did not move forward. It even led to mental weakening of the army of Islam. 

Who were those who opposed the Holy Prophet in the issue of Hudaibiya Peace Treaty and said “We did not have any doubt about his prophecy until today. If we had an army of 100 people, we would rebel against the Prophet”.

In the events of war of Hawazin, when Taif was occupied after the conquest of Mecca, who disrespected the Holy Prophet and said “The Holy Prophet is not just” and the Holy Prophet replied angrily “If the messenger of God is not just, so who possibly might be just?”

Who were these? Is rereading history a sin? Everyone likes history, whether Shiite or Sunni. In that journey, everyone was fastening and the Holy Prophet ordered to break it, but they did not. So, the Holy Prophet said “These are rebellious, these are rebellious”.

Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p 141

Aren’t these worthy of being read? Why haven’t we read them and have not retold them? Why don’t we inform others of what went on and do not tell our youth about that? We have nothing to do with Sunnis. If they read them, their basics of thoughts and ideology will be weakened, as well as that of their youth. But why shouldn’t our scholars, professors, and students study that? Today’s matter is not issue of Imamat. These are the doubts that we should be involved with. As Imam Ali (AS) entered the matter of wars of Khandaq and Kheibar, we should as well fight in today’s Kheibar and Ahzaab. This fight in the battlefield of answering doubts is as worthy as that. This is our Khandaq and Hazaab.

The Holy Prophet goes on his Last Hajj and ordered to stop Ihram (a religious act during hajj). It is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim that Arabs before Islam believed that “Omra in Zi Qada and Zi Hajja (two last months in lunar calendar) is the worst possible act”.

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol. 2, p 152 – Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p 56

The Holy Prophet wanted to stop this false tradition of the Ignorant Arabs (before Islam). What was their reaction? They mocked the Holy Prophet and said “Do you want us to leave Ihram and mate with our wives and leave for Arafat while semen is fluent from our penis?”

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol. 8, p 162 – Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p 37

What a rude word! If a pupil tells his master such word, he will break his teeth and will punish him. One must be very rude to tell his Prophet such a word! This revayat is mentioned in the most accurate book among Sunnis as well as other Sahihs.

The Holy Prophet wants to write a letter.

إئتوني بكتاب أكتب لكم كتابا لا تضلوا بعدي، قال عمر: إن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم غلبه الوجع و عندنا كتاب الله حسبنا.

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol. 1, p 37 – Sahih Muslim, vol. 5, p 76

هلموا أکتب لکم کتابا لن تضلوا بعدي. فقال بعضهم: إن رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم قد غلبه الوجع و عندكم القرآن حسبنا كتاب الله.

Sahih Al Bukhari, vol. 5, p 137

Who were those who disrespected the Holy Prophet with such words? You Sunnis claim that Omar is your leader and he says that the Book (the holy Quran) is important to you. What do you say about these verses?

“So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you”. (Sura Al Hashr, Verse 7)

“We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought”. (Sura Al Nahl, Verse 44)

“Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him”. (Sura Al Najm, Verses 3 and 4)

Isn’t it from the Book? Book cannot be imagined without the Tradition. We ask Omar that you who want to say the morning salat in two rakats (parts of salat). Where in the Quran is it mentioned?

Don’t we have the right to ask question? They pose thousands of doubts, but when it comes to us, they say they will get sad. Do not ask such questions. We do not seek others’ happiness. The one thing we consider is happiness of Imam Mahdi (AS). Others are not important to us. Let them like us or hate us.

Yunis Ibne Abdul Rahman was companion and representative of Imam Reza (AS) in Basra. He was opposed by a number of people in there. He says:

One day a number of people knocked the door of Imam Reza’s house and rushed inside the house. Imam Reza (AS) told me to hide behind a door and said to me not to come out before his order. I saw them tell Imam Reza (AS) that “Yunis is dualist, polytheist, lecher, and dissolute”. My body was shaking and I started to cry. I was worried about Imam Reza’s reaction after such words. They left and Imam Reza (AS) called me. I went to him and he told me “If you hold gold in your hand and people say it is mud in his hand, do people’s words undervalue the gold?” I said “No!” He added “If you hold mud in your hand and people say that you have gold in your hand, do people’s words give value to the mud?” I replied “No!” Then he said “Try to gain satisfaction of Imam of your time. Forget about people’s satisfaction and happiness. If your Imam was happy with you, be happy and if he was not happy with you, happiness of even all people on the earth does not have any value”.

This is a message for us that brings responsibility, too. We should act in a way that when at night we go to bed, we do not feel ashamed in front of God. We must make Imam Mahdi (AS) happy with our deeds. We do not need to visit Imam Mahdi (AS). Imam Sadeq (AS) says:

Do you love us or not? Look at yourself. If you love us, we, too, love you.

Are we really satisfied with what we have done? For us it is very clear. She should not think that we should hide historical truths. We do not insult, disrespect, or lie. Doing so is a betrayal to all Shiites. This will lead to that Sunni youths might separate themselves from us and even Shiite youth will say that if that man had any logic, he would not insult others. Insulting is logic of the illogical people. Someone insults who has nothing to say. Thanks to God, Shiite has a lot to say. With such logical words, there is no need to insult. We reflect historical truths from Sunni sources and beside it, we ask some questions. We even do not judge. I suggest you that do not attack them when you quote from Sunni sources. That is because when you attack, your grandeur will be questioned and the effect of your word will lower. First quote what they have said and then say “if someone asks you this, how would you reply to that?” Today, it is the best way of debate and discussion. Perhaps this method was not effective one hundred years ago, but I, as a person who have worked in this area for more than 26 years and a person who can claim that no one in Iran had debated the Wahhabis as I did, tell you that the best, the most logical, and the most polite way is to quote something from Sunni sources and do not attack our opponent. That will decrease influence of our word. He will stand against us and will start to attack us. The best and wisest way is to ask questions.

This is story of companions and today must be reread. Today they go everywhere and defend the companions and they use this as a weapon against us. We should take it away from them and disarm them.

Mr. Qarzawi, who had some words against Shiism this year, says “Shiites, in my opinion, are heretics and their idea is false and void. That is because Shiites believe that Ali is successor of the Holy Prophet”.

Well, if Shiites have such a claim, they have thousands of documents and evidences from the holy Quran and the Tradition. You would better come forth and study them one by one and say, for example, Hadith Qadir, Hadith Manzilat, Verse of Prophecy, or Verse of Completion are false.

He continues “One who believes in succession of Ali, he is in fact accusing the Companions of the Holy Prophet of rejecting the Holy Prophet’s word and of betraying the Holy Prophet”.

This man is one of leader of Sunnis and Wahabbis and he is the president of Global Union of Islamic Scholars. He is an effective person among Sunnis. If the Great Mufti of Saudi Arabia had said it, that was not so much effective. That was because some special people follow him. Even if orator of Mecca or Medina had said it, no one would listen to them. But Mr. Qarzawi, whether we like it or not, is an effective person among Sunni youth. He is such a man who has an experience of fighting against Shiism for over 60 or 70 years. We should learn from this and see how they pose doubt against us. As Seyyed Sharaf Al Din says “The stone must return to where it came from”.

If anyone is throwing stones from this shelter, you should shoot at that place. They will surely surrender.

So, the first point is that why they have gone to the council and betrayed Imam Ali (AS).

The second point is that why the companions disobeyed the Holy Prophet.

The Third Question: 

Had Imam Ali (AS) spoken of his righteousness or no?

Has Imam Ali (AS), after occupying his Khilafat, come among the companions and Omar and Abubakr and say that I am successor and Imam of the society or no?

They say that Imam Ali (AS) had never spoken of such matters and he never claimed succession and Shiites are more catholic than the Pope, that is to say. This should be studied over and be mentioned in books, websites, and TV channels.

When Abubakr sent Qonfoz to Imam Ali (AS) for the first meeting, he says “Successor of the Holy Prophet invited you”. Imam Ali (AS) shouted “How fast you ascribed a lie to the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet never appointed Abubakr as his successor”.

Al Imama wa Al Siyasa by Ibne Qatiba Al Dinwari, research by Al Zeini, vol. 1, p 19

This is what recorded in history. This is not for ten years after death of the Holy Prophet. They looked for cooperators and servants from the early times. They dragged Imam Ali (AS) for paying homage. Imam shouts among Muhajirin “You must pay homage to me and not I to you”. The second Khalifa shouts to Imam Ali (AS) and says “Pay homage!” Imam says “What if I don’t?” He replies “I will cut your head”. Imam Ali (AS) says “Then you have killed a servant of God and brother of his Messenger”. Omar replies “Servant of God, yes; but not brother of his Messenger”.

Al Imama wa Al Siyasa by Ibne Qatiba Al Dinwari, research by Al Zeini, vol. 1, p 18

While people knew Ali (AS), they have known him as conqueror of Kheibar, Badr, and Hunain and he was symbol of bravery. They have not seen him crying. But they suddenly saw that he turned to the sacred tomb of the Holy Prophet and cried:

فلحق علي بقبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يصيح و يبكي و ينادي: يا بن أم إن القوم استضعفوني و كادوا يقتلونني.

This is what was mentioned in the most accurate and valid Sunni sources and in different places of Nahj Al Bilaqa, righteousness of Imam Ali Ibne Abi Talib (AS) and Ahle Bait is emphasized on. Also the issue of occupying the Khilafat is mentioned, as well, and the earlier leaders were referred to as Pharaoh. These must be reread. If not, these doubts will grow and will spread even in Shiite communions and society. Our children may come to ask and ask the same doubts and ask for our justification.

Some days ago, a religious, young man from Qom called one of my friends and said:

Is it true that the verse “The vanguard (of Islam)- the first of those who forsook (their homes) and of those who gave them aid, and (also) those who follow them in (all) good deeds,- well-pleased is Allah with them, as are they with Him: for them hath He prepared gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein for ever: that is the supreme felicity” (Sura Al Tawba, verse 100) was sent in praise of Abubakr and Omar? If so, why don’t we disrespect them?

Behold that this doubt is mentioned by a young man who had lived in Qom and was raised in mosques and religious gatherings. The posed doubts have their effects. We are not superior to Imam Ali (AS). Because of negative propaganda of Muawiya against Imam Ali (AS), when Imam Ali (AS) was martyred, people were surprised that he was killed in the mosque. They would say that for what purpose Ali (AS), who did not say salat, went to a mosque.

There are some others even from the blood of the Ahle Bait who had raised some doubts, like Zeid, Hassan Muthanna, and others. If we do not fight against these doubts, they will enter our domain and that is the time which is too late and everything is gone. That is the time when we will face, God forbids, anger of our Master, Imam Mahdi (AS).

Of course I just mention these doubts here. Discussing them needs at least seven or eight one-hour sessions. We just want to warm you up against such doubts.

The Fourth Question:

If Imam Ali (AS) was right, why didn’t he claim his right?

If by claim, we mean oral one, he did it all the time and everywhere. In different Shiite and Sunni books, there are several revayats about Imam Ali’s criticism of the first three Khalifas and claiming his own right. He has this sentence in Nahj Al Bilaqa:

فإن هذا الدين قد كان أسيرا في أيدي الأشرار، يعمل فيه بالهوى و تطلب به الدنيا.

Nahj Al Bilaqa, letter 53

Do you want him to speak more direct than this? Who was in charge of religion? Was it managed by Jews or Christians or the Iranian? He meant something else. He had defended his own right and where he had criticized, if they quote what he said, for sure you will be safe. This is Nahj Al Bilaqa and Ibne Abi Al Hadid’s interpretation. That is not our fault. Whether good or bad, this is what your fourth Khalifa says and we have nothing to say about that. We do not say your first Khalifa said it. Answer this one.

There is another matter that why Imam Ali (AS) did not do a military operation. This is discussed among Shiites and Sunnis.

First of all, Imam Ali (AS) said “If I did not fear internal division and a civil war and if I was not worried about future of Islam, then you might have seen what I would do to you”.

Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi  Al Hadid, vol. 1, p 307

This is mentioned in both Sunni and Shiite sources.

Second, the Holy Prophet did not defend himself in Medina for over thirteen years. Also Imam Ali (AS) says “If I had fourteen companions, I would fight them”.

Ayaan Al Shia, Seyyed Muhsin Amin, vol. 1, p 23

The Fifth Question:

Why did no one defend Imam Ali (AS)?

When in council of Saqifa they were arguing about Khalifa, “Ansar said that ‘We pay homage to no one but Ali (AS)’”.

Al Kamil Fi Al Tarikh by Ibne Al Athir Al Jizri, vol. 2, p 325 – Tarikh Al Tabari, vol. 2, p 443

In Tarikh Yaqubi, it is written that “Muhajirin and Ansar had no doubt that Ali must be the Khalifa”.

Tarikh Yaqubi, vol. 2, p 124 – Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi Al Hadid, vol. 6, p 21

Then, what happened that they left Imam Ali (AS) and sent him home and they, themselves, were places in ruling group? Why did they put Imam Ali (AS) aside and they replaced him?

This is not question of today. At the time of Imam Ali (AS) he was asked the very same question. One of his companions asked him “What happened that your tribe occupied your right while you deserved the position?”

Imam Ali (AS) replied:

أما الاستبداد علينا بهذا المقام و نحن الأعلون نسبا و الأشدون بالرسول صلى الله عليه و سلم نوطا، فإنها كانت أثرة شحت عليها نفوس قوم و سخت عنها نفوس آخرين و الحكم الله و المعود إليه يوم القيامة.

Nahj Al Bilaqa, lecture 162 – Nahj Al bilaqa Muhammad Abde, vol. 2, p 64 – Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi Al Hadid, vol. 9, p 241

When he says toward “us”, he meant that they oppressed not only me, but it was a start to oppression toward all members of Ahle Bait.

They were fighting with each other in the Council and both Ansar and Mujahidin claimed that they were right. Ansar said that they have served Islam a lot. The first Khalifa said that “I am a relative of the Holy Prophet and I am from the tribe of Quraish”. He also quoted the Holy Prophet who said “Imams are from Quraish”.

Imam Ali (AS) said nothing redundant. He says “If you speak of genealogy and supremacy, I am ahead of you. If you consider relationship with the Holy Prophet, our relationship with the Holy Prophet is closer than you. This occupation of Khilafat was an act that some people envied our position and they could not tolerate us. They betrayed us. And some were indifferent toward this matter. They did not fight them and defend us.

The Sixth Question:

The next point is walking on the red line. Its criticism must be done cautiously though it is through reliable Sunni sources. I usually warn other friends about it.

Companions still behave like what they used to do before Islam and habits and traditions of ignorant Arabs could be seen in their behavior. Islam could not affect their soles entirely. If you speak like this, they will attack you at once. But that is not our problem. Whether good or bad, Bukhari quotes Mother of Believers, Aisha, in his Sahih who said:

I asked the Holy Prophet “Is Hijr Ismail a part of Beit Allah Al Haraam (the Kaba) or not?” He replied “Yes, it is”. Then I asked “So, why don’t you order to destroy the wall of Kaba and put it inside the building of Kaba?” The Holy Prophet replied “I can still see traces of ignorance in your people and I fear if I make such a decision, they decline and abandon Islam”.

Sahih Bukhari, vol. 2, p 156 – Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p 100

Perhaps Sunni leaders will kindly tell us who people of Aisha are.

In my opinion, this revayat which is mentioned in the most accurate and reliable books of Sunnis is a miracle of Ahle Bait. But it must be reread well and in its rereading, all aspects of Shiism and our model of behavior and speaking should be considered. That might wound their pride and they may react harshly.

There is another revayat in Sahih Muslim that is harsher and more radical. Abdullah Ibne Omar says “I heard it from Aisha who said ‘If it was not for your people who still have their habit of the age of their blasphemy …”

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p 98, Hadith 3133

In another revayat in Sahih Muslim, it is said “If it was not because of your tribe which has newly converted to Islam and left blasphemy and Islam is not still permanent in your thought …”

Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p 98, Hadith 3134

It is more interesting that a Sunni scholar named Allama Sendi wrote an explanation on Sunan Nassai and he writes in there:

What the Holy Prophet meant was that Islam has not been placed in the companions’ hearts (and they do not believe in it from depth of their hearts.

He is not talking about faith, but he says Islam. This is what you say. What is your analysis? Say it and we hear what you say.

The Holy Prophet, in Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, describes the tribe of Aisha in the manner we explained. The Holy Prophet is described in the holy Quran as:

“Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him” (Sura Al Najm, Verse 3 and 4)

All Sunni interpreters, including Ibne Hajar Asqalani in his Fath Al Bari, believe that “This verse includes verses of the holy Quran, tradition and all the things the Holy Prophet say, whether seriously or joking or in health or while in bed. It covers all his deeds”.

Fath Al Bari by Ibne Hajar Asqalani, vol. 8, p 101 – Umda Al Qari by Al Aini, vol. 18, p 62

One of Sunni scholars said something that I cannot understand what he means. You explain it to us.

Abu Hamid Qazali, a famous Sunni scholar, is introduced by Soyuti in Al Tanbinat Biman Buethah Allah Ala Ras Kol Manah, p 12 and in Yafei’s Miraat Al Jinan, Incidents of the Year 505, as Imam and renewed in the 5th century after hijrat. Imam in Sunni discourse is an equivalent to Ayatullah or Marja (religious reference) of Shiites. Zahabi, in Seir Aalam Al Nubla, vol. 19, p 328, called him “Sea of Knowledge” and says:

This that Omar congratulated Ali (AS) on the day of Qadir shows that he accepted his succession and admitted to it and he ordered to it. But because of his will to supremacy, he was deceived and held power and forced others to stand against Ali (AS) and the Holy Prophet.

Sirr Al Aalamin, p 83 – Seir Aalaam Al Nibla by  Zahabi, vol. 19, p 328 – Tazkira Al Khawass by Sibt Ibne Jowzi, p 62

Imam Ali (AS) was the sole defender and protector of Islam and the Holy Prophet during those 23 years. Omar, himself, expresses “I swear to Allah, if it was not because of Ali’s sword, Islam’s banner would not be rose”.

Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi Al Hadid, vol. 12, p 82

Imam Ali (AS) was tough to them from the very first day to the last day. Count the number of Muslim at the time of Conquest of Mecca, including the very people who were forced to accept Islam after wars of Badr, Ohod, Ahzab, or Khandaq. It hardly exceeds ten thousand. How many companions did the Holy Prophet have at the time of his death? Soyuti in Tadrib Al Rawi counts them about 114 thousand people and Ibne Kathir Damishqi in Al Bidayat wa Al Nahayat counts them about 120 thousand. That means about 110 thousand people joined Islam in less than three years. Imam Ali (AS) says “I swear to the All-knowing God that those who joined Islam at the Conquest of Mecca were not really Muslim and they just pretended to be Muslim. Blasphemy was still in their hearts”.

Nahj Al Bilaqa, letter 16

They all had enmity with Imam Ali (AS). See how many of those who were killed in the war of Badr were cousins of the first and second Khalifas. This is really dangerous (to speak like this). Who went to the Holy Prophet when the captives of the war of Badr were taken to Medina and cried and asked for forgiveness for them? This must be discussed. In the war of Ohod, who fled to the top of the mount and shouted that “Muhammad is killed”?

Al Dur Al Manthur by Al Soyuti, vol. 2, p 80

They looked for someone who mediates between them and Abu Sufyan so that he might shelter them. There are some things in history that when you read them, you feel pitiful for Imam Ali (AS) that people left him with such bravery, greatness, and piety and went to such people! That is like in the middle of the day you forget about the sun and go after a candle. Only God knows that how oppressed Imam Ali (AS) was. The more we study about Imam Ali (AS), the deepest we are acquainted with his innocence. Sometimes when I am studying history, when I come to such parts, I shut my computer down, turn the light off, and start crying. Allama Amini’s son says about his father:

My father was in the hospital. I saw his lips are moving. I went closer and said “Do you want me to do anything?” He said “No!” He was murmuring silently. I got closer to him and heard him saying “I wish I had a lifetime of the very first day of Creation to the last”. I said “haven’t you completed Al Qadir and you want to finish that?” He said “No, my son! I just want to sit alone and cry for oppression toward Imam Ali (AS)”.

As one of famous scholars says:

Oppression toward Imam Ali (AS) was not occupation of his right of governance or killing his wife or forcing him to stay at home for 25 years or stabbing him in the head in the eve 19 of Ramadan. No! The most important oppression toward him was that people never knew him. Other matters are secondary and of lower importance compared to this.         

This is very hard. He has tried a lot for improvement of Islam by fighting many and he obeyed the Holy Prophet all the time. They all have hatred of Imam Ali (AS) in their hearts. The one whose father, brother, son, and cousin is killed by Imam Ali (AS) certainly has his hatred in his heart. They could do nothing while the Holy Prophet was alive. They could revenge after death of the Holy Prophet. According to Ibne Abi Al Hadid’s quotation in Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa, Imam Ali (AS) has a bitter and heart breaking word:

What does Quraush want from me? They sent me home (and did not allow to govern the society), dragged me to the mosque, bit my wife in my presence, and martyred her … if they claim that I have killed their friends and leaders and they are seeking revenge of Badr and Hunain, then I was following what God and His Prophet. Is this the reward of one who followed God and His Prophet?

Sharh nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi Al Hadid, vol. 20, p 328

So, the matter of revenging Imam Ali (AS) was a basic plan of the ruling group and due to that, they forced him to stay at home and that resulted in his and Ahle Bait’s innocence and oppression toward them. I have over 40 evidences in this regard from Sunni sources. Even the second Khalifa says to Ibne Abbas “Do you know why we went to Abubakr instead of Ali (AS)? That was because Ali (AS) was not the one who Quraish would tolerate. He had shed a lot of blood from Quraish”.

This is not matter of Islam. Imam Ali (AS) says “If it was not because of their love of supremacy and governance, Quraish would not pray God even one hour”.

There is another revayat which says:

“You, Ali! If the Holy Prophet had a child who would claim governance aftwe his father, what would Quraish do to him?” Imam Ali (AS) replied “They would kill him if he had done what I did”.

Those who fought against the Holy Prophet for 21 years (13 years in Mecca and 8 years in Medina) looked for a situation to take their revenge from him. When they found him dead, they decided to take their revenge from the Prophet’s family. So they first went to his daughter. Then, according to what Ibne Abi Al Hadid says in Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa, vol. 20, p 298, Imam Ali (AS) says:

O, God! Help me in confrontation with Quriash. They had several plots against the Holy Prophet and they took his revenge from me. May you keep safe my sons, Hassan and Hussein, from their harm …

That is why when the governor of Medina was informed of martyrdom of Imam Hussein (AS), he unconsciously turned to the holy tomb of the Holy Prophet and said:     

يا محمد! يوم بيوم بدر. فأنكر عليه قوم من الأنصار.

The companions were shocked with these words of Khalifa of the Messenger of Allah!!!

Sharh Nahj Al Bilaqa by Ibne Abi Al Hadid, vol. 4, p 72

God blesses us all

Dr. Seyyed Muhammad Husseini Qazvini

* Name:
* Email:
* Comment :
* Security code:

Latest Articles
Index | Contact us | Archive | Search | Link | List Comments | About us | RSS | Mobile | urdu | فارسی | العربیة |