(Tuesday Night, 27th Rajab 1345 A.H.) : Fifth Session
(Tuesday Night, 27th Rajab 1345 A.H.) : Fifth Session
Well-Wisher: In this hadith the word "Manzila" (Rank) is used in the general sense. The
word showing exception clearly proves that the reference is of general significance. The
Prophet named Ali along with the word "prophet" and described his Manzila using the
phrase 'except that there shall be no prophet after me.' Most eminent ulema and authors
have quoted the hadith from the Prophet, who is reported to have said to Ali. "Are you
not content that you are to me as Aaron was to Moses except that there shall be no
prophet after me?"
During his absence of forty days, Moses did not leave matters to the discretion of his
followers. He appointed Aaron, the best man among the Isra'ilis, to act as his Caliph and
successor. Similarly, the last prophet, whose religion is most perfect, had even greater
reason to protect his people from the chaos of their free will. He preserved the code of
religion so that it might not pass into the hands of the ignorant, those who would change
it according to their whims. The ignorant people would depend on their own conjecture
and create divisions in the matter of law. So, in this sacred hadith the Prophet says: "Ali is
to me as Aaron was to Moses," confirming that Ali held the same levels of merit and
authority as Aaron did. Ali was superior to the whole umma (community), and therefore
the Prophet appointed him his helper and his successor.
Hafiz: What you have said about this hadith is above question. But if you just consider
the matter carefully, you will admit that this hadith has no general significance. Its
significance is confined to the Battle of Tabuk when the Prophet appointed Ali his Caliph
for a fixed time.
HADITH OF MANZILA
NARRATED SEVERAL TIMES
Well-Wisher: You might have been justified in your remark if this hadith had been
narrated at Tabuk only. But the Prophet repeated the same hadith on different occasions.
It was narrated when brotherhood among different individuals among the muhajirs
(refugees) was established in Mecca. It was also narrated in Medina when brotherhood
was established between the Muhajirin and the Ansar. On each occasion the Prophet
selected Ali as his brother, saying, "You are to me as Aaron was to Moses except that
there shall be no prophet after me."
Hafiz: So far as I have observed, the hadith of Manzila was narrated only at the Battle of
Tabuk. The Prophet left Ali in his place, which caused Ali to worry. The Prophet consoled
him with these words. I think you have been misled.
Well-Wisher: No, I am not mistaken. Your own authentic books have narrated it. Among
them are Mas'udi (a reliable reporter according to both sects) who writes in his
Muruju'dh-Dhahab, Volume II, page 49, Halabi in Siratu'l-Halabiyya, Volume II, pages
26 and 120, Imam Abdu'r-Rahman Nisa'i in Khasa'isu'l-Alawiyya, page 19, Sibt Ibn Jauzi
in his Tadhkira, pages 13-14, Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, chapter 9
and 17, and several others have narrated this hadith. They all say that, apart from the two
occasions of establishing brotherhood, it has been narrated on many other occasions as
well. Therefore, this hadith is not to be construed in a restricted sense or for a particular
occasion only. Its general significance is an established fact. lt was through this hadith
that the Holy Prophet declared on appropriate occasions Ali's succession after him. One
of those occasions was the Battle of Tabuk.
Hafiz: How is it possible that the companions of the Prophet heard this hadith in its
general sense, knowing that it meant the succession of Ali was willed by the Prophet and
yet, after the death of the Prophet, they became hostile and accepted another man as
caliph?
Well-Wisher: I have many references in support of my answer to your question, but the
best response for this occasion is to consider the trials of Aaron in a very similar
situation. The Holy Qur'an states that when Moses appointed Aaron his successor, he
gathered round him the Bani Isra'il (according to some reports, 70,000 people). Moses
emphasized that in his absence they should obey Aaron, his Caliph and successor. Moses
then went up the mountain to be alone with Allah. Before a month passed, Samiri incited
dissension among the Isra'ilis. He fashioned a golden calf and the Bani Isra'il, having left
Aaron, gathered round the treacherous Samiri in large numbers. It had been only a short
time before this that the same Bani Isra'il had heard Moses say that during his absence
Aaron was to be his Caliph and that they should obey him. Nevertheless, 70,000 people
followed Samiri. The Prophet Aaron loudly protested this action and forbade them from
indulging in such sinful acts, but no one listened to him. The verse of Sura A'raf states
that when Moses came back, Aaron said to him: "Son of my mother! Surely the people
reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me..." (7:150)
Nawab: When the succession of Ali had been established, why did the Prophet use
words which only implied that sense? Why didn't he clearly announce that Ali was his
successor, so that no objection could have been raised after him?
Well-Wisher: I told you that the Prophet expressed the truth in both ways. This is
evident from your own books, which have recorded numerous hadith in this regard.
Literary people know that allusion is more impressive than a mere statement, particularly
when the allusion is so deep-rooted that it contains in it a world of meaning.
Nawab: You say that there are many clear hadith recorded by your ulema concerning the
succession of Ali. Will you please tell us more about this? We are told that there is no
hadith which proves Ali's succession.
Well-Wisher: There are many hadith concerning the caliphate in your own authentic
books.
The Prophet repeated the last sentence three times, and each time none except Ali
responded to him, saying, "I will aid and help you, O Prophet of Allah!" So the Prophet
declared: "This Ali is my brother, and he is my successor and Caliph among you."
(4) Mir Seyyed Ali Hamadani in Mawaddatu'l-Qurba, at the beginning of the sixth
Mawadda, narrates from the second Caliph, Umar Bin Khattab, that when the Prophet
established the relationship of brotherhood among the companions, he said: "This Ali is
my brother in this world and in the Hereafter; he is my successor from among my kin and
my Vicegerent among my umma; he is the heir of my knowledge and the payer of my
debt; whatever he owes to me, I owe to him. His profit is my profit, and his loss is my
loss; one who is his friend is my friend; one who is his enemy is my enemy."
(5) In the same Mawadda, he quotes a hadith from Anas bin Malik, which I have
mentioned earlier. Toward its end he says that the Holy Prophet said, "He (Ali) is my
Vicegerent and helper."
(6) Muhammad Bin Ganji Shafi'i quotes a hadith from Abu Dharr Ghifari in his book,
Kifayatu't-Talib, that the Prophet said, "The flag of Ali, the commander of the believers,
the leader of the bright-faced people, and my Vicegerent, will come to me at the Fountain
of Kauthar."
(7) Baihaqi, Khatib Khawarizmi, and Ibn Maghazili Shafi'i write in their Manaqib that
the Prophet said to Ali: "It is not proper that I depart from the people without you
becoming my successor since you are the choicest of the believers after me."
(8) Imam Abu Abdu'r-Rahman Nisa'i, one of the Imams of the Six Books of Traditions,
narrates in detail from Ibn Abbas the virtues of Ali in connection with hadith 23 in
Khasa'isu'l-Alawi. After describing the rank of the prophet Aaron, the Holy Prophet said
to Ali: "You are my Vicegerent after me for every believer."
This hadith and others in which the Holy Prophet used the phrase "after me" clearly prove
that Ali was his immediate successor.
(9) There is the "Hadith of Creation," which has been narrated in different ways. Imam
Bin Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, Mir Seyyed Ali Hamadani in Mawaddatu'l-Qurba,
Ibn Maghazili Shafi'i in Manaqib, and Dailami in Firdaus have quoted the Prophet as
saying: "I and Ali were created of the same Divine Light 14,000 years before Adam was
created. From the loins of the Prophet Adam and through his holy progeny, the Light was
inherited by Abdu'l-Muttalib, and from him it was divided and inherited by Abdullah,
(father of the Prophet) and Abu Talib, (father of Ali). I was granted prophethood, and Ali
was granted the caliphate."
(10) Hafiz Abu Ja'far Muhammad Bin Jarir Tabari (d.310 A.H.) writes in his Kitabu'l-
Wilaya that the Prophet said in the beginning of his renowned address at Ghadir-e-Khum:
"The angel Gabriel has conveyed Allah's command to me that I stop at this place and
inform the people that Ali Bin Abu Talib is my brother, my successor, my Caliph
(Vicegerent) after me. O men! Allah has made Ali your Wali (guardian), and Imam
(guide). Obedience to him is obligatory on each one of you; his command is supreme; his
utterance is truth; curse be on him who opposes him; Allah's mercy be on him who
befriends him."
(12) Abu Mu'ayyid Muwafiqu'd-Din, the best orator of Khawarizm, in his Faza'il of the
Commander of the Faithful, printed in 1313 A.H., Chapter XIX, page 240, quotes the
sources who reported that the Prophet said: "When I reached Sidratu'l-Muntaha ('the
farthest Lote Tree,' the highest station during the Mi'raj), I was addressed thus: 'O
Muhammad! When you tested the people, whom did you find the most obedient?' I said
'Ali.' Allah then said, 'You have told the truth, Muhammad!' Further, He said, 'Have you
selected a Vicegerent who will convey your knowledge to the people, and teach my
servants from My Book those things which they do not know?' I said, 'O Allah!
Whomever you select, I will select.' He said, 'I have selected Ali for you. I make him your
Vicegerent and successor.' And He furnished Ali with His knowledge and forbearance. He
is the Commander of the Faithful whom no one can equal in rank among his predecessors
or successors."
There are many such hadith in your authentic books. Some of your just ulema, like
Nizzam Basri, have acknowledged this fact. Salahu'd-Din Safdi in his Wafa Bi'l-Wafiyya,
in connection with the account of Ibrahim Bin Sayyar Bin Hani Basri, known as Nizzam
Mu'tazali, says: "The Prophet of Allah confirmed the Imamate of Ali and appointed him
the Imam (Guide). The companions of the Prophet were also fully aware of it, but Umar,
for the sake of Abu Bakr, covered the Imamate of Ali with a curtain."
It is clear from your own books, hadith, and Qur'anic commentaries that Ali occupied the
highest position of virtue. Khatib Khawarizmi reports from Ibn Abbas in Manaqib,
Muhammad Bin Yusuf Ganji Shafi'i in his Kifayatu't-Talib, Sibt Ibn Jauzi in his Tadhkira,
Ibn Sabbagh Maliki in Fusulu'l-Mawadda, Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in Yanabiu'l-
Mawadda and Mir Seyyed Ali Hamadani in Mawaddatu'l-Qurba, Mawadda V, quotation
from the second Caliph, Umar Bin Khattab - all confirming with slight variations of
words - that the Prophet said: "If all the trees were pens, if the seas were ink, if all the
jinn and men were recorders - even then the virtues of Ali Bin Abu Talib could not be
enumerated."
Well-Wisher: I'm not concerned with personalities. The Qur'anic verses and authentic
hadith lead us in one direction. I swear by Allah that I do not blindly love or hate anyone.
I ask the audience to stop me if at any time I resort to anything which is against reason or
common sense. hadith acknowledged by both sects should be relied upon. I do not deny
the good qualities of the upright companions of the Prophet, but we should search among
them for one who is superior to the whole community. Our discussion is not about
virtuous men, as the virtuous are many. We should find out who was the most meritorious
person after the Prophet so that we may follow him.
Sheikh: You make unnecessary restrictions. In your books there is not a single hadith in
praise of the caliphs. How can we argue on that basis?
Well-Wisher: On the first night of our discussions, you will recall that Hafiz Sahib
himself agreed to a debate on the condition that our arguments be based on verses of the
Holy Qur'an and on hadith accepted by both sects. Since I have your authentic books, I
agreed to it. As all of you will confirm, I have not deviated from that stand. In support of
my points, I have cited only verses of the Holy Qur'an and hadith recorded in the
authentic books of your own eminent scholars. When you made this condition, you did
not realize that you would be trapped later on. Still, I don't want this condition to be taken
absolutely. I am prepared to hear even your one-sided hadith if they are authentic. Then
we can determine facts justly. I have no hesitation in accepting facts in comparing the
merits of Ali.
Sheikh: You cited a hadith concerning Ali's vicegerency but overlooked the fact that
there are many hadith about Caliph Abu Bakr.
Well-Wisher: Keeping in mind that your own prominent ulema, like Dhahabi, Suyuti,
and Ibn Abi'l-Hadid have reported that the Amawi's and the followers of Abu Bakr have
fabricated many hadith in praise of Abu Bakr, you may cite a hadith from many of those
so that a just man may judge its authenticity.
Well-Wisher: Your own prominent ulema have rejected it. Because the reporters of this
hadith were notorious liars and forgers, your ulema do not consider it worthy of
acceptance. Dhahabi in his Mizanu'l-I'tidal, writing about Ibrahim Bin Khalid, and Khatib
Baghdadi, writing about Umar Bin Ibrahim say, "He is a great liar." A hadith narrated by
a liar is unacceptable.
Sheikh: It is reported from reliable sources that one of the pious companions of the
Prophet, Abu Huraira, narrated that Gabriel appeared before the Holy Prophet and said,
"Allah sends His salutation to you. He says, 'I am satisfied with Abu Bakr; ask him if he
too is satisfied with me or not.'"
Well-Wisher: We should be very cautious about citing hadith. I draw your attention to a
hadith which your own ulema, like Ibn Hajar (in Isaba) and Ibn Abdu'l-Bar (in Isti'ab)
quote from Abu Huraira that the Prophet said, "There are many who misquote me, and
one who misrepresents me has his abode in Hell. When a hadith is reported to you on my
behalf, you should put it before the Holy Qur'an."
Another hadith acknowledged by both sects, narrated by Imam Fakhru'd-Din Razi in his
Tafsir Kabir, Volume lI, page 271, reports that the Prophet said, "When a hadith from me
is reported to you, put it before the Book of Allah. If it agrees with the Holy Qur'an,
accept it. Otherwise, reject it." The books of your own eminent ulema state that one of
those who fabricated hadith in the name of the Holy Prophet was this rejected man, Abu
Huraira, whom you have called pious.
Sheikh: I didn't expect a man of your standing to make slanderous remarks about the
Prophet's companions.
Well-Wisher: You want me to be in awe of the word "Sahabi" (companion), but you are
mistaken if you think the word "Sahabi" necessarily conveys honor. True, the
companionship of the Holy Prophet enhances one's virtue, but this is based on the
condition that the companion is obedient to the Prophet. If he acts against the instructions
of the Prophet, then surely he will be rejected. Weren't the munafiqin (hypocrites)
companions of the Prophet? Yes, and they were all cursed.
Sheikh: It is not proved that they were rejected. If they were rejected, what is the proof
that they will go to Hell? Is everyone who is rejected or cursed destined for Hell? A
cursed person is one who, according to the explicit ordinance of the Holy Qur'an, or the
saying of the Prophet, is declared as such.
The same Abu Huraira himself narrates (as recorded by your own eminent ulema, like
Hakim Nishapuri in Mustadrak, Volume II, page 124, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal Tibrani,
and others) that the Prophet said, "Ali is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with Ali. These
two shall not be separated until they reach me at the Fountain of Kauthar. Ali is from me,
and I am from Ali. He who profanes Ali, profanes me. He who profanes me, profanes
Allah." Mu'awiya, in his address of the Jum'a prayers, cursed Ali, Hasan, and Husain. He
ordered that in all congregations those revered people should be cursed. So if a man is so
intimately associated with such damned people and is pleased with their actions, is he not
to be condemned? And, while associating with such people, if he helps them by
fabricating hadith and forces people to utter curses against revered people, is he not to be
condemned?
Sheikh: Is it reasonable for us to accept these slanders, that a sincere companion of the
Prophet, fabricating hadith, may force people to curse Ali?
Sheikh: To be frank, when you slander the companions of the Holy Prophet, saying that
they fabricated hadith, how can we hope that you will not attribute evil motives to the
high-ranking ulema of the Sunnis? You Shias have a remarkable tendency for slandering
great men.
Well-Wisher: You are unfair in attributing such things to us. Islamic histories of the past
1,400 years testify against it. From the beginning of the first century of Islam, the
Umayyads abused the infallible Imams, the descendants of the Holy Prophet, and their
adherents, the Shias . Even today, your prominent ulema record slanderous reports
against the Shias in their books in order to mislead the people.
In Volume I, page 131, he states that the Shias do not gather in the mosques. They do not
offer jum'a or congregational prayers. If they ever offer prayer, they do it individually.
(Laughter among the Shias .) But of course we place great emphasis on congregational
prayers. In many cities of Iraq and Iran, which are centers of the Shias, our mosques are
crowded with worshippers offering congregational prayers. On the same page, he writes
that the Shias do not make the pilgrimage to the Ka'ba. "Their Hajj (pilgrimage) consists
only in visiting the tombs, which they consider superior to the Pilgrimage to Mecca. They
condemn those who do not go for ziarat to the tombs." (Laughter.) Shia books of prayer
contain a special Chapter for the Hajj prayer (Kitabu'l-Hajj). Shia theologians have
written many books prescribing the rituals for the Hajj, wherein special instructions have
been given to perform the Hajj rites. Many hadith from our Imams insist that if a Muslim
(Shia or Sunni) has the means, and yet fails to perform the Hajj, he is excommunicated
from Islam. When he dies, he is told: "Die whatever death you can, be it the death of a
Jew, a Christian, or a fire-worshiper." Can you believe that in the face of such instructions
Shias would refrain from performing the Hajj? In addition to these misrepresentations,
this wicked man has said that a great Shia Scholar, Muhammad Bin Muhammad Bin
Nu'man (Sheikh Mufid), wrote Manasikhu'l-Hajj li'l-Mashahid. The correct title is
Mansikhu'z-Ziarat, which is available everywhere and which contains instructions about
the visit to the places of ziarat, including the holy shrines of the most revered Imams. If
you consult these books of ziarat, you will find that a visit to the tombs of the Holy
Prophet and the Imams is commendable, not obligatory. The best proof against the
allegation of this irreligious man is the practice followed by Shias, who make the
pilgrimage by the thousands every year. Another false accusation of this liar can be found
in Volume I, page 11, where he says that the Shias call their dogs by the name of Abu
Bakr and Umar and always curse them (Abu Bakr and Umar). (Laughter among the Shias
.) This is ridiculous. According to the Shia belief, the dog is utterly polluted. A Muslim
house with a dog is deprived of Allah's blessings. Therefore, Shia Muslims are strictly
forbidden to domesticate dogs except under certain conditions (hunting, protecting the
house, or herding sheep). One of the many reasons for discord between Yazid and the
grandson of the Prophet, Imam Husain, was that Yazid was fond of dogs and
domesticated them without good reason. Ibn Taimiyya also writes that since the Shias are
awaiting the reappearance of the last of their Imams, in many places, particularly in the
sardab (underground hall) of Samarra (where the holy Imam disappeared), they keep
ready a horse. They call for their Imam to appear, saying that they are fully armed to
serve him. He also writes that the Shias turn toward the East during the last days of
Ramadhan and call for the Imam to appear. Some of them even forego their ritual
prayers, thinking that if they were busy saying their prayers and the Imam appeared, they
might be deprived of their service to him (laughter by the Sunnis and the Shias ). We are
not so much surprised at this wicked man's ridiculous stories. But we are surprised at the
behavior of the present ulema of Egypt and Damascus who, without asking the Shias with
whom they live, follow the absurdities of men like Ibn Taimiyya. It would be tiring to
give a long list of the inaccurate reports of Ibn Hajar Makki, Hafiz, and Qazi Ruzbahan.
Their books are known, although from the point of view of authenticity, they have no
value.
For instance, the Milal wa'n-Nihal of Muhammad Ibn Abdu'l-Karim Shahrastani (died
548 A.H.), in the eyes of scholars, has not the least value. One will not find anything in it
except utterly false beliefs attributed to Shias, like the worship of Ali and belief in the
transmigration of the soul. Obviously he was not a man of learning. Writing about Ithna
Ashari Shias, he says that the tomb of Ali Ibn Hadi Muhammad Naqi, who came after
Imam Muhammad Taqi, is in Qum. But even children know that the holy shrine of Imam
Ali Naqi is located adjacent to the shrine of his son, Imam Hasan Askari, in Samarra. I
don't think further references of this nature are necessary to prove that the Sunni ulema
have concocted false reports concerning the Shias. And I am not alone in levelling
charges against the integrity of Abu Huraira. The Sunni ulema have also exposed his bad
character in their own books.
Well-Wisher: There are many arguments in support of our view. One of them is that one
who abuses the Prophet is, according to both sects, condemned. According to the hadith
which I mentioned earlier, the Holy Prophet said, "One who abuses Ali, abuses me; one
who abuses me, abuses Allah." It is clear that Abu Huraira was one of those who not only
abused Ali Bin Abu Talib, but who fabricated hadith to incite others to abuse him.
Sheikh: It is unkind of you to call the most reliable companion of the Holy Prophet an
irreligious fabricator.
property?" He replied, "I never committed theft, but the people have given me gifts." Ibn
Sa'ad in Tabaqat, Volume IV, page 90, Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Isaba, and Ibn Abd-e-Rabbih
in Iqdu'l-Farid, Volume I, write that the Caliph said: "'When I made you the governor of
Bahrain, you had not even shoes on your feet, but now I have heard that you have
purchased horses for 1,600 dinars. How did you acquire this wealth?' He replied, 'These
were men's gifts which profit has multiplied much.' The Caliph's face grew red with
anger, and he lashed him so violently that his back bled. Then he ordered the 10,000
dinars which Abu Huraira had collected in Bahrain be taken from him and deposited in
the account of the Baitu'-Mal."
This was not the first time that Umar beat Abu Huraira. Muslim writes in his Sahih,
Volume I, page 34, that during the time of the Prophet, Umar Bin Khattab beat Abu
Huraira so severely that the latter fell down on the ground. Ibn Abi'l-Hadid writes in his
commentary on Nahju'l-Balagha, Volume I, page 360: "Abu Ja'far Asqalani has said:
'According to our great men, Abu Huraira was a wicked fellow. The hadith narrated by
him were not acceptable. Umar beat him with a lash and told him that he had changed
hadith and had attributed false sayings to the Holy Prophet.'" Ibn Asakir in his Ta'rikh
Kabir and Muttaqi in his Kanzu'l-Umma report that Caliph Umar lashed him, rebuked
him, and forbade him to narrate hadith from the Holy Prophet. Umar said: "Because you
narrate hadith in large numbers from the Holy Prophet, you are fit only for attributing lies
to him. (That is, one expects a wicked man like you to utter only lies about the Holy
Prophet.) So you must stop narrating hadith from the Prophet; otherwise, I will send you
to the land of Dus." (A clan in Yemen, to which Abu Huraira belonged.) Ibn Abi'l-Hadid,
in his commentary on Nahju'l-Balagha, Volume I, page 360 (printed in Egypt) reports
from his teacher, Imam Abu Ja'far Asqalani, that Ali said, "Beware of the greatest liar
among the people, Abu Huraira Dusi." Ibn Qutayba, in Ta'wil-e-Mukhtalifu'l-Hadith, and
Hakim in Mustadrak, Volume III, and Dhahabi in Talkhisu'l-Mustadrak and Muslim in his
Sahih, Volume II, reporting about the characteristics of Abu Huraira, all say that A'yesha
repeatedly contradicted him and said, "Abu Huraira is a great liar who fabricates hadith
and attributes them to the Holy Prophet." In short, it is not we alone who have rejected
Abu Huraira. According to Caliph Umar, the Commander of the Faithful, Ali, Ummu'l-
Mu'minin A'yesha, and other companions and followers of the Prophet said that he was
completely unreliable. Accordingly, the Sheikhs of the Mu'tazilites and their Imams and
the Hanafi ulema generally reject the hadith narrated by Abu Huraira. Moreover, in his
commentary on Muslim's Sahih, Volume IV, Nadwi emphasizes this point: "Imam Abu
Hanifa said, 'The companions of the Prophet were generally pious and just. I accept every
hadith with evidence narrated by them, but I do not accept the hadith whose source is
Abu Huraira, Anas Ibn Malik, or Samra Bin Jundab."
We reject the same Abu Huraira, whom Caliph Umar lashed and called a thief and a liar.
He was rejected by Ummu'l-Mu'minin A'yesha, Imam Abu Hanifa, and by many
companions and followers of the Holy Prophet. We reject the same Abu Huraira who was
rejected and called a liar by our master, the chief of the monotheists, Ali, and by the holy
Imams and descendants of the Prophet. We reject Abu Huraira who was a belly-
worshiper, who, despite knowing the superiority of Ali, ignored him. He preferred his
patron, the damned Mu'awiya, sat at his table to relish dainty dishes, and concocted
hadith in opposition to Ali. In view of our discussion so far, you and I are obliged to see
to it that when a hadith from the holy Prophet is under consideration, we should first refer
it to the Holy Qur'an. If the hadith agrees with the Qur'an, we should accept it, otherwise
not.
Apart from these clear facts, your own distinguished ulema, like Muqaddasi in his
Tadhkiratu'l-Muzu'a, Firuzabadi Shafi'i in his Safaru's-Sa'adat, Hasan Bin Athir Dhahabi
in Mizanu'l-I'tidal, Abu Bakr Ahmad Bin Ali Khatib Baghdadi in his Ta'rikh, Abu'l-Faraj
Ibn Jauzi in Kitabu'l-Muzu'a, and Jalalu'd-Din Suyuti in Al-Lu'ali'l-Masnu'a fi'l-
Abadusi'l-Muzu'a - all concluded that these hadith are fabricated. They all insisted that
these hadith are forged. They conflict with The Holy Qur'an and with common sense.
Sheikh: But consider another hadith, which surely is authentic. The Holy Prophet said:
"Abu Bakr and Umar are the masters of the old men of Paradise."
Well-Wisher: If you would examine this supposed hadith more closely, you might find
that, apart from the fact that your own ulema have rejected it, this hadith cannot possibly
be from the Holy Prophet. Everyone knows that Paradise will not be inhabited by old
people. There are no gradual changes there. There are many reports accepted by both
sects which relate to this matter. One of them is the affair of Ashja'iyya, an old woman
who came to the Prophet. In the course of his talk, the Prophet said: "Old women will not
enter Paradise." The woman was deeply saddened and she said, weeping, "O Prophet of
Allah, this means I shall not enter Paradise." Saying this, she departed. The Prophet said:
"Tell her that on that day she will be young and will enter Paradise." Then he recited the
following verse of the Holy Qur'an: "Surely We have made them to grow into a (new)
growth, then We have made them virgins, loving, equals in age, for the sake of the
companions of the right hand." (56:35-38)
In another hadith accepted by both you and us, the Holy Prophet said: "When the
inhabitants of Paradise enter Heaven, they will be youthful with pure clean faces, curly
hair, charming eyes, 33 years of age."
Sheikh: Your statements are true as they are, but this is a specific hadith.
Thus, apart from my previous arguments, even your own ulema consider it a false hadith.
In fact, it is probable that it was fabricated by the followers of Abu Bakr, the Umayya
family. In order to humiliate the Bani Hashim and the progeny of the Holy Prophet, they
used to fabricate hadith parallel to those authentically narrated in praise of the family of
the Prophet. Men like Abu Huraira, in order to gain access to the ruling coterie of the
Bani Umayya, often fabricated hadith. Because of their hostility to the descendants of the
Prophet, they concocted hadith parallel to those accepted by both Shia and Sunni ulema.
Well-Wisher: I regret that you accept a hadith so uncritically. Had this hadith been
narrated by the Prophet, he himself would have acted upon it. But he gave preference to
Ali in the presence of Abu Bakr. Was Abu Bakr not present at the time of Mubahila when
Ali was chosen as the Prophet's self? In the Battle of Tabuk, when the older and more
experienced Abu Bakr was there, why did the Prophet make Hazrat Ali his deputy and
Caliph? Why was Abu Bakr deposed by divine command in favor of Ali when the older
man had been sent to Mecca to preach Islam and to recite verses from the ninth Chapter
of the Qur'an, "The Immunity"? While Abu Bakr was present, why did the Prophet take
Ali with him to Mecca to break the idols, letting him mount his own shoulders, ordering
him to smash the idol Hubal? Why, in the presence of Abu Baker, did the Prophet send
Ali to preach among the people of Yemen? Finally, why did the Prophet make Ali his
successor and Vicegerent instead of Abu Bakr?
Sheikh: There is a very strong hadith from the Holy Prophet which cannot be
contradicted. It is related by Amr bin As who said: "One day I asked the Prophet: 'O
Prophet of Allah! Whom do you love most among the women?' He replied, 'A'yesha.' I
said: 'Whom do you love best among the men?' He replied, 'A'yesha's father, Abu Bakr.'"
Since the Prophet preferred Abu Bakr over all other men, he was superior to the whole
community. This fact in itself is the most compelling proof of the legitimacy of Abu
Bakr's caliphate.
SHAFI'IS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
THAT LOVE FOR AHLE BAIT IS
OBLIGATORY
Even Ibn Hajar (a very intolerant person) in his Sawa'iq Muhriqa, page 88, Hafiz
Jamalu'd-Din Zarandi in Mi'raju'l-Rasul, Sheikh Abdullah Shabrawi in Kitabu'l-Ittihaf,
page 29, Muhammad Bin Ali Sabban of Egypt in As'afu'r-Ra'ghibin, page 119, and others
have related from Imam Muhammad Bin Idris Shafi'i, who is one of your four Imams and
the religious head of the Shafi'is, that he used to say: "O Ahle Bait of the Prophet of
Allah! Love for you has been made obligatory for us by Allah, as revealed in the Holy
Qur'an (referring to the above verse). It is sufficient for your dignity that if one does not
send salutations to you in the ritual prayers, his prayers will not be accepted." Now I ask
you, can the one-sided hadith reported by you stand against all these authentic hadith
which have been accepted by both the Sunni and Shia sects?
MISCONCEPTION REGARDING
HOLY PROPHET'S LOVE FOR A'YESHA
In regard to the Prophet's love for you A'yesha, do you think that because of his sensual
desires he loved A'yesha more than Fatima? It is true that A'yesha was his wife and
therefore an Ummu'l-Mu'minin (mother of the believers) like the other wives of the
Prophet. But is it conceivable that he loved A'yesha more than he loved Fatima, whose
love was made obligatory in the Holy Qur'an, for whom the verse of purity was revealed
and who was included in the Mubahila? Surely you know that the Prophet and the
vicegerents were not motivated by sensual desires, and that they looked only to Allah.
This dedication was particularly true for the last of the Prophets. He loved those whom
Allah loved. Should we reject these authentic hadith which have been accepted by ulema
of both sects, and which agree with the verses of the Holy Qur'an, or should we regard
the hadith that you have just narrated as fabricated? You claim that the Prophet said that
he loved Abu Bakr more than any other man. But this claim is also at variance with many
other authentic hadith which have been narrated by your own ulema, who have insisted
that, according to the Prophet, the most dearly loved man was Ali.
dearest to me and the most honored among all men. Recognize his right and pay
respectful regard to his position.'"
Sheikh Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Amir Shabrawi Shafi'i, who is one of your
prominent ulema, recorded in Kitabu'l-Ittihaf bi Hubbi'l-Ashraf, page 9, Sulayman Balkhi
in Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, and Muhammad bin Talha Shafi'i in Matalibu's-Su'ul, page 6,
from Tirmidhi, and he from Jami' bin Umar - all narrated the following: "I went to
Ummu'l-Mu'minin A'yesha with my aunt (father's sister), and we inquired of her who was
loved most by the Holy Prophet. She replied, 'Among women it was Fatima and among
men, her husband, Ali bin Abu Talib.'" This same hadith has been related by Mir Seyyed
Ali Hamadani Shafi'i in Mawaddatu'l-Qurba, Mawadda II, with the variation that Jami'
bin Umar said that he received this reply from his aunt.
Similarly, Khatib Khawarizmi has related this hadith from Jami' bin Umar, and the latter
from A'yesha at the end of Chapter 4 of his Manaqib. Ibn Hajar Makki, in Sawa'iq
Muhriqa, towards the end of Chapter 2, after recording 40 hadith on the merits of Ali,
relates the following hadith from A'yesha: "Among women, Fatima was the woman most
loved by the Holy Prophet of Allah and among men, her husband." Muhammad bin Talha
Shafi'i, in Matalib-us Su'ul, page 7, after recording several specific hadith on this issue,
expresses his own conclusion in the following words: "These authentic and unequivocal
narrations prove that Fatima was the most beloved of the Prophet above all other women.
She is the highest in rank of all the women of Paradise and also the foremost of women of
this community as well as the foremost of the women of Medina." These reliable hadith
clearly establish that of all creatures, Ali and Fatima were the most loved by the Prophet.
Another proof of the Prophet's preferring Ali to other men is the "Hadith of the Bird"
(Hadith-e-Ta'ir). This hadith is so well known and so commonly accepted that we need
not mention all its sources. I will mention only some of them.
According to this hadith, one day a woman brought a gift of a roasted bird to the Prophet.
Before eating it, the Prophet, raising his hands, invoked Allah thus: "O Allah! Of your
whole creation, send the person who is the dearest to you and to me, so that he may
partake of this roasted bird with me."
Ali then came in and ate the roasted bird with the Holy Prophet.
Well-Wisher: Allah sent Ali, the most deserving person in His creation, to the Prophet.
Your own scholars have confirmed this event. Muhammad bin Talha Shafi'i has in his
Matalib-us Su'ul, Chapter 1, Part 5, page 15, established the high position of Ali as the
beloved of Allah and of the Prophet on the basis of the hadith of Ensign (Rayat) and the
hadith of the Bird (Ta'ir). In that connection he says: "The intention of the Prophet was
that the people should understand the unique and high distinction of Ali, who attained the
highest pinnacle to be reached by the pious." Also Hafiz and Muhammad Bin Yusuf Ganji
Shafi'i (died 658 A.H.) writes in his Kifayatu't-talib, Chapter 33, referring to the virtues
of Ali Bin Abi Talib, that this hadith clearly proves that Ali was the dearest person in
creation to Allah. Later he says that Hakim Abu Abdullah Hafiz Nishapuri related this
hadith-e-Ta'ir of Anas from 86 narrators and also recorded the names of all 86 narrators.
(See Kifayatu't-Talib, Chapter 32). That "hadith" quoted by you, in comparison with the
hadith narrated by your own high-ranking ulema (excepting a few stubborn fanatics),
cannot be relied upon and would be rejected by learned men.
Sheikh: I'm afraid that you have made up your mind not to accept what we say.
Well-Wisher: How can you attribute such bias to me? Can you cite a single instance in
which you have put forward a cogent argument and I have unreasonably rejected it? I
swear that in religious debates with the Jews, the Christians, the Hindus, and the
Brahmins, the ignorant Baha'is in Iran, the Qadanis in India, and the materialists - in all
of these circumstances, I never acted obstinately in my argument. I never adopted a
refractory attitude towards these unbelievers - how could I do so with you, my brothers in
Islam?
Sheikh: We read the account of your debate with the Hindus and Brahmins of Lahore in
the newspapers. We were greatly impressed by it. Although we had not met you, we felt
we were morally affiliated with you. I hope that Allah will lead you and us to the right
path. We believe that if there is any doubt about a certain hadith, we should, according to
your proposal, refer it to the Holy Qur'an. However, if you question the excellence of
Caliph Abu Bakr and the mode of caliphate of the major caliphs, and if you consider the
hadith dubious, will you also hesitate to believe an argument based on the verses of the
Holy Qur'an?
Well-Wisher: May Allah not grant us the day when we doubt facts based on the Holy
Qur'an or authentic hadith. However, when we have entered into a religious debate with
any nation or community, they also argued from the verses of the Holy Qur'an to establish
their point of view. Since the verses of the Holy Qur'an have various levels of meaning,
the last Prophet, in order to guard the people against misunderstanding, did not leave the
Holy Qur'an as the sole source of guidance. As has been acknowledged by both sects
(Shias and Sunnis), he himself said: "I leave with you two great things: the Book of Allah
(Qur'an) and my descendants. If you are attached to these two, never, never shall you go
astray after me. Verily, these two shall never be separated from one another until they
meet me at the Fountain of Kauthar." For this reason, the meaning of the revelation of the
Holy Qur'an should be sought either from the Prophet, the primary interpreter of the Holy
Qur'an, or after him, from the equals of the Holy Qur'an, the holy descendants of the
Prophet. The Holy Qur'an says: "So ask you the people of the Remembrance if ye know
not." (21:7)
Therefore, basing arguments upon verses of the Holy Qur'an should be in accordance
with their authentic meaning and the interpretations given by those capable of reliable
commentary. Otherwise, everyone would give his own interpretation of the verses of the
Qur'an, according to his scope of knowledge and faith, and that would only result in
differences of opinion and conflicting ideas. With this in mind, I ask you to cite your
verses.
Well-Wisher: Certainly this verse does not give any obvious indication about the mode
of appointment of the caliphs or about the excellence of Abu Bakr. Therefore, you must
point out at what place of the verse this meaning is concealed.
Sheikh: In the beginning of this verse, the phrase "those who are with him" refers to that
great man who was with the Prophet on the 'Night of the Cave.' The order of succession
in the caliphate is also apparent from this verse. "Those who are with him" means Abu
Bakr, who accompanied the Prophet in the Cave of Thawr on the night of Hijra. The
phrase "strong against unbelievers" means Umar Bin Khattab, who was very harsh with
the unbelievers. The phrase "compassionate to each other" refers to Uthman Bin Affan,
who was very kind. The phrase "on their faces are their marks, the traces of their
prostration" refers to Ali. It is clear that Ali is the fourth Caliph, not the first, since Allah
mentioned him in the fourth place.
Well-Wisher: I wonder how I should reply so that I may not be accused of self interest.
No Qur'anic commentaries, including those of your great ulema have interpreted these
words as you have. Had this verse been about the order of the caliphate, the first day after
the death of the Prophet, when Ali, the Bani Hashim, and the distinguished companions
of the Prophet raised objections and refused to swear allegiance to the Caliph, baseless
arguments would not have been put forward. They could have given a silencing reply by
citing this holy verse there and then. Hence, it is clear that your interpretation is an
afterthought. None of the great commentators of your sect, like Tabari, Imam Tha'labi,
Fazil Nishapuri, Jalalu'd-Din Suyuti, Qazi Baidhawi, Jarullah Zamakhshari, Imam
Fakhru'd-Din Razi, or others have interpreted it thus. I fail to understand how you derive
this meaning. Where and by whom was such a meaning given? This verse, from the
literary and technical point of view, also goes against what you say.
Sheikh: I never expected that you would stand so boldly in opposition to the obvious
meaning of such a verse. Of course if you have anything to say against this you may let
us know so that the real position may be established.
First, this verse supports the previous verse and proves that the phrase "and those who are
with him," refers to Abu Bakr who was with the Prophet in the cave on the night of the
Hijra. Second, the fact that he was with the Holy Prophet is in itself a great proof of Abu
Bakr's merit and his superiority to the whole umma. The Prophet could foretell that Abu
Bakr was his successor, and that the existence of the Caliph after him was necessary.
Therefore, he realized that he should protect Abu Bakr as he would his own. So, he took
him with him so that Abu Bakr might not be caught by the enemy. Such treatment was
not shown to any other Muslim. This clearly proves his right to the caliphate in
preference to others.
Well-Wisher: If you would look at the verse more objectively, you would see that your
conclusion is wrong.
Sheikh: Can you advance reasons against the conclusions that we have drawn?
Well-Wisher: I should like you to pass over this issue at the moment because speech
breeds speech. Some biased people may interpret our comments with ill will. I do not
wish to incite hatred. One might conclude that we wish to dishonor the caliphs, though
the position of each individual is fixed, and it is not necessary to make useless
interpretations.
Sheikh: You are being evasive. Be assured that reasonable argument does not breed
contempt; it removes misunderstandings.
Well-Wisher: Since you have used the word "evasive," I am constrained to reply, so that
you may know that I am not avoiding the issue. I wanted to maintain the propriety of our
debate. I hope that you will not find fault with me. You made a thoughtless assertion that
the Prophet knew that Abu Bakr would be his Caliph after him. Therefore, it was
necessary for him to save his life, and so he took him with him.
FACTS ABOUT ABU BAKR'S
ACCOMPANYING THE HOLY PROPHET
Reply to your statement is simple. If Abu Bakr had been the only Caliph after the
Prophet, such a view could be possible, but you believe in four caliphs. If this argument
of yours is correct, and if it had been necessary for the Prophet to safeguard the life of the
caliph, then the Prophet should have taken with him all four caliphs in Mecca. Why
would he leave three others there, one of them in the perilous position of sleeping in the
Prophet's bed, which was dangerous on a night when his enemies had gathered to murder
him? According to Tabari (Part III of his History), Abu Bakr was not aware of the
Prophet's movement from Mecca. When he went to Ali and asked him about the Prophet,
he told him that the Prophet had gone to the cave. Ali told him that if he had any business
with him, he should run up to him. Abu Bakr ran and met the Prophet on the way. So he
accompanied him. This series of events indicates that the Prophet did not intend to take
Abu Bakr with him. The latter accompanied him from the middle of the way without the
Prophet's permission. According to other reports, Abu Bakr was taken on the journey for
fear of his causing a disturbance and giving information to the enemy. Your own ulema
have admitted this fact. For instance, Sheikh Abu'l-Qasim Bin Sabbagh, who is one of the
well known ulema of your sect, writing in his Al-Nur wa'l-Burhan about the life of the
Prophet, narrates from Muhammad Bin Ishaq, and he from Hasan Bin Thabit Ansari, that
he went to Mecca to perform the Umra before the emigration of the Prophet. He saw that
the Quraish unbelievers were railing at the Prophet's companions. The Prophet ordered
Ali to sleep in his bed, and, fearing that Abu Bakr would disclose this fact to the
unbelievers, the Prophet took Abu Bakr with him.
Finally, it would have been better if you had pointed out what evidence there is in this
verse to show the superiority of Abu Bakr or whether accompanying the Prophet on a
journey is proof that one is entitled to the caliphate.
Sheikh: The evidence is there. First, the companionship of the Prophet and that Allah
called him the Prophet's companion is in itself a qualification. Second, the Prophet
himself said: "Verily, Allah is with us." Third, the sending down of tranquility upon him
from Allah, as mentioned in this verse, is the most compelling proof of Abu Bakr's
excellence. Therefore, all of these points taken together indicate his superiority to others
regarding the caliphate.
Regarding this verse, commentators have said that when Joseph was taken to the prison,
on the same day the King's cook and the wine bearer, both of whom were unbelievers,
were also put into the prison with him. For five years these three men (both believers and
unbelievers) lived together as companions. When preaching to them Joseph, called them
his companions. Was this companionship of the Prophet ever made grounds for regarding
the two infidels as virtuous or dignified? Did their companionship with the Prophet effect
a change in their faith? The writings of the commentators and historians tell us that after
five years of companionship, they were separated from each other in the same condition.
Another verse of the Qur'an states, "His companion said to him while disputing with him:
'Do you disbelieve in Him who created you from dust, then from a small seed, then He
made you a perfect man?'" (18:37) Commentators agree that this verse refers to two
brothers: one was a believer, whose name was Yahuda. The other was an unbeliever
whose name was Bara'tus. This fact has also been reported in the Tafsir-e-Kabir by Imam
Fakhru'd-Din Razi, who is one of your ulema. These two talked to each other, the details
of which cannot be given here. Allah has, however, called both of them (believer and
unbeliever) "companions." Did the unbeliever derive benefit from his companionship
with the believer? Obviously not. Thus, companionship alone is no basis for claiming
one's excellence. There are many examples in support of this view.
Sheikh: The expression "Allah is with us" meant that they were Allah's dearly loved ones
because they traveled in the way of Allah for the purpose of preserving His religion.
Allah's blessings were with them.
Well-Wisher: But surely this expression does not prove that one possesses an eternal
blessing. Allah Almighty looks at people's deeds. It has often happened that at one time,
people performed good deeds and were recipients of mercy from Allah. Later they
disobeyed Allah and were subjected to divine wrath. Satan, as you know, worshiped Allah
for thousands of years and received kindness from Him. However, as soon as he
disobeyed His Command, he was damned. The Holy Qur'an says: "He said: 'Then get out
of it, for surely you are driven away. And surely upon you is a curse until the Day of
Judgement.'" (15:34-35)
Excuse me, there is no harm in citing examples. My purpose is to clarify the point.
History contains many examples of those who were close to Allah but who, after being
tested, were cursed. Bal'am Bin Ba'ur, for example, a contemporary of Moses, became so
close to Allah that Allah revealed to him the Ism-e-A'zam (the greatest name of Allah,
through which anything sought for is immediately granted by Allah). He invoked Allah
by means of the Ism-e-A'zam and caused Moses to suffer in the valley of Tia! But at the
time of trial, Bal'am was overpowered by his love for the material world. He followed
Satan and was condemned. Commentators have given detailed accounts of this event.
Imam Fakhru'd-Din Razi in his Commentary, Part IV, page 463, has reported this matter
from Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, and Mujahid. Allah in the Holy Qur'an tells us: "And recite
to them the narrative of him to whom We give Our revelations, but he withdraws himself
from them; so Satan overtakes him, and he is of those who go astray." (7:175)
BARSISA ABID
Or consider the case of Barsisa Abid, who originally worshipped Allah so much that he
became Mustajabu'd-da'wa (one whose invocations are granted). However, when the time
of trial came, he failed. Misled by Satan, he committed fornication with a girl, was sent to
the gallows, and died an unbeliever. The Holy Qur'an refers to him in these words: "Like
Satan when he says to man: 'Disbelieve,' but when he disbelieves, he says; 'I am surely
quit of you; surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds.' Therefore, the end of both of
them is that they are both in the fire to abide therein, and that is the reward of the unjust."
(59:16-17)
So if man has done good deeds at one time, it does not follow that his end will be good. It
is for this reason that we are instructed to say in our invocation: "Let all our actions end
in good."
Sheikh: I really didn't expect an honorable man like you to cite the examples of Satan,
Bal'am-e-Ba'ur, and Barsisa.
Well-Wisher: Excuse me, I have already stated that there is no harm in citing examples.
In fact, we must cite them in learned debates to prove facts. Let Allah be my witness: I
never intended to defame anyone by citing these examples. My purpose is to prove my
point.
Sheikh: This verse clearly proves Abu Bakr's excellence because it says: "So Allah sent
down His tranquility upon him..." (9:40) The pronoun here refers to Abu Bakr, which
proves his superiority.
WELL-Wisher: You have misunderstood it. The pronoun used after Sakina (peace) refers
to the Prophet. Peace was sent to him and not to Abu Bakr, as is evident from the later
sentence in which Allah says: "...and strengthened him with hosts which you did not see."
(9:40) The fact is that the hosts of unseen angels were to aid the Prophet, not Abu Bakr.
Sheikh: I admit that the divine help was for the Prophet, but Abu Bakr, being in
company of the Prophet, was not without blessings.
Sheikh: The Prophet of Allah was independent of the divine bestowal of peace. He did
not need it because he was assured of divine blessings. Hence, the bestowal of peace was
for Abu Bakr.
Well-Wisher: On what grounds do you say that the Prophet was independent of divine
blessings? No person - Prophet, Imam, or saint - is independent of divine blessings.
Perhaps you have forgotten what the Holy Qur'an says about the incident of Hunain.
"Then Allah sent down His tranquility upon His Apostle and upon the believers." The
same thing has been said in chapter 48 (Fath) verse 26, of the Holy Qur'an. The believers
are included after the Prophet in this verse, just as in the "verse of the cave." If Abu Bakr
had been a believer who deserved the bestowal of peace, either the pronoun for two
persons would have been used, or his name would have been mentioned separately. This
matter is so clear that your own ulema admit that the pronoun connected with peace does
not refer to Abu Bakr. You might consult Naqzu'l-Uthmaniyya, compiled by Sheikh Abu
Ja'far Muhammad Bin Abdullah Iskafi, who is one of the prominent ulema and Sheikhs of
the Mu'tazilites. That scholar completely refutes the absurdities of Abu Uthman Jahiz. Ibn
Abi'l-Hadid also recorded some of those replies in his Sharh Nahju'l-Balagha, Volume III,
pages 253-281. In addition, there is a phrase in this verse, the implication of which is
contrary to your point. The Prophet said to Abu Bakr: "Fear you not." The phrase
indicates that Abu Bakr was frightened. Was this fear praiseworthy or not? If it was, the
Prophet would not prohibit anyone from doing a good deed. A vicegerent of Allah
possesses certain qualities. The most important of them, as pointed out in the Holy
Qur'an, is that he never fears the vicissitudes of life. He exercises patience and fortitude.
The Holy Qur'an says: "Now surely the friends of Allah - they shall have no fear nor shall
they grieve."(10:62)