____________________________________
| |
| || || | || |
| o_,_7 _|| . _o_7 _|| 4_|_|| o_w_, |
|( : / (_) / ( . |
|____________________________________|
Conspiracy Against Imam Ali (AS)
A Sunni brother mentioned that:
It is quite difficult for us to digest the so-called "conspiracy
theory." Despite many years of companionship, how could only few
people out of all his companions hold on to Muhammad's instructions on
the issue of Caliphate and the rest disobey him?
I would certainly accept the argument of this brother if he can convince me
why almost all the companions of Moses became worshipers of a golden calf
after so many years of training?! According to Sahih al-Bukhari, the
Messeenger of Allah has told Ali that the story of Moses and Aaron (Haroon)
is similar to that of the story of him and Ali. The tradition is as
follows:
"Your position to me is like the position of Aaron to Moses, except
that there shall be no Prophet after me"
| : |. . . .. . |
_w q_o . _o . q |_8 4_| _,_o_, _,_o __,_, |
(_S / (_) (_) / / / . (_S
. | | . | | ||
]_e_, _,_, |_| 4_, | |_||
(_S . (_S.
Sunni References:
(1) Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 5.56 and 5.700
(2) Sahih Muslim, Arabic, section of virtues of Ali, v4, pp 1870-71
(3) Sunan Ibn Majah, p12
(4) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p174
(5) al-Khas'is, by al-Nisa'i, pp 15-16
(6) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, p309
Now, the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses is given by the verses of
Quran, among which are the following three:
(Moses said: "O' Allah) assign me a vizier from my family, (that is)
my brother Aaron (Haroon) ...," (Allah) said: "We granted your
requests, O' Moses." (Quran 20:29-36).
Allah, Exalted, also said:
"Surely We gave the book to Moses and assigned his brother Aaron as
his vizier." (Quran 25:35).
He, Exalted He is, also said:
"... And Moses said unto his brother Aaron: Take my place in my
comunity." (Quran 7:142). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: . . . | .| | .| | | | :
_o q_o _9 _,_9_|_7| . q |_8 4_,_7|_| _w q_o | |_o q
(_S / (_S (_S (_) / / : (_S / (_| /
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Notice that "Ukhlufni" and "Khalifa" (Caliph) are exactly from the same
root. Now, to realized what was narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, we need to
replace the word "Moses" with "Muhammad" and "Aaron" with "Ali", and we are
all set!! The sentence becomes "And Muhammad (PBUH&HF) said to his
'brother' Ali, take my place among my community." Of course, the tradition
in Sahih al-Bukhari excluded the Prophethood for Imam Ali, and what remains
for him is the leadership of the community.
Putting the above 3 verses of Quran beside what has been narrated by al-
Bukhari and Muslim, Ibn Majah and many others, we solves the mystery! Ali
is the "brother" and his deputy/successor. By the above authentic
tradition, the Prophet (PBUH&HF) meant that as Moses had left behind Aaron
to look after his people when he went to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
same way he was leaving Ali behind to look after the affairs of Islam after
he met Allah (i.e., his death).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Confirming what the above tradition implies, we find in the many reports
that Imam Ali (AS) received the title of the "brother" of Prophet when
Prophet established the "brothering" among his followers (see Sahih al-
Tirmidhi, v5, p363; Sirah Ibn Hisham, p504; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, v4, p251).
Interestingly enough, the Prophet in that occasion made Abu Bakr and Umar
brother of each other (al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa'd, v3, part 1, p123). If Abu
Bakr was really the closest to the Prophet, he would have chose him for
himself instead of Imam Ali.
In fact, if we look deeper to the situation of after death of Prophet
Mohammad (PBUH), and the leaving of Moses to MIQAAT (appointment with
Allah), we will see more analogy to what Prophet (PBUH) said to Ali (AS).
Quran states that: Moses (AS) with the order of Allah, assigned Haroon (AS)
as his successor (Caliph) and left his people to him, and left for MIQAAT
(appointment with Allah) for a total of forty days. After leaving of Moses,
most of his companions turned against Haroon, and were deceived by Sameri,
and became worshipers of a golden calf. (See Quran 7:142, 20:90-97, 20:83-
88).
The analogy that Prophet (PBUH) mentioned in the above tradition, seems to
be a reality after his demise. Most of companions (except Abu Dhar, Miqdad,
Salman al-Farsi, Ammar, and ...) became disloyal to Ali (AS) after the
death of Prophet (PBUH), turned against him, and preferred some other
people to him. The majority of people disobeyed Ali (AS), as their
forefathers disobeyed Haroon (AS). They did not take lessons from Quran
and the history, and thus the history repeated over and over again. The
repetition of the history of the Children of Israel for Muslims is
confirmed by Prophet (PBUH&HF):
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 9.422
Narrated Abu Sa'id al-Khudri:
The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were
before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so
much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure (lizard), you
would follow them." We said, "O Allah's Apostle! (Do you mean) the
Jews and the Christians?" He said, "Whom else?"
This tradition is also narrated by Muslim in his Sahih , v8, p57. It is
also narrated in Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 84, 94.
Think for a while... Why would the Prophet (PBUH&HF) compare his companions
to the Jews and the Christians, knowing full well that the Jews and the
Christians have mutilated and perverted the religion of Allah (SWT)?
Because Allah (SWT) had told him (PBUH&HF) that your companions will turn
back, except the select few.
Imam Ali (AS) was still a divinely-appointed Imam during the time of the
first three rulers, and what these rulers could take from him was the
rulership (which is one of the rights of Imam) and not the position of
Imamat. As for Imam Ali pledging Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, he was
compelled to that since he had no choice and he was compled to do so. We,
however, never accuse the Imams of being cowards. What Imam Ali did was his
duty which is similar to what Haroon did as his duty.
Quran states that when Moses (PBUH) came back from MIQAAT he was very angry
since Allah had informed him that his community went astray during his
absence. Moses came and started questioning his brother Haroon, that why he
did not take action to prevent this corruption. Quran states that Haroon
(Aaron) replied:
"(O' Moses) people did oppress me and they were about to kill me."
(Quran 7:150).
. . |: : | | / . . .: | : || |
_,_, q_|_,_o_, | q > |_) q _, q_9_e,_p_,_w | o q_o_|| . |
(_S / : / / (_S / ( / (_)
The above verse gives another striking similarity between Ali and Haroon.
Since Muslims all believe that Haroon was a true prophet of God, they do
not allow themselves to call him coward. In fact Taqiyya (dissimulation) is
mentioned in Quran in several verses. This requires another article by its
own, to explain the importance of Taqiyya according to Quran and the
numerous traditions of Prophet (PBUH&HF) reported in the authentic Sunni
collections.
Nevertheless Ali did his duty after the death of the Messenger of Allah, as
Haroon (Aaron) did:
"Before this, Aaron had already said to them: 'O my people! you are
being tested in this, for verily your Lord is (Allah) Most Gracious;
so follow me and obey my order.'" (Quran 20:90).
Sahih al-Bukhari confirms that Imam Ali refused to give his allegiance to
Abu Bakr for six months. He gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr only after the
martyrdom of his wife Fatimah al-Zahra, Daughter of the Holy Prophet, six
month after the departure of Prophet. (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English
version, Tradition 5.546).
After the death of Prophet (PBUH&HF), for forty days, Ali (AS) was
contacting the well-known people at night, reminding them the instructions
of prophet about his right to Caliphate, asking them to join him to get the
power. But non responded except Abu Dhar, Miqdad, and Salman al-Farsi and
some more. The Prophet had already instructed Ali that if the number of his
followers at that upheaval exceeds 40 men, he should take the action
otherwise he should keep silent since the only remaining pious people would
be killed without being able to help Islam. Ali (AS) was not afraid of
being killed, and he kept silent only to keep the faded lawn of Islam
alive. After he was sure that there would no success in his revolting, he
kept silent. During his silence, he indeed started cooperating with the
first 2 Caliphs as consultant and did his best to decrease the damage as
much as possible. If he had not done so, Islam would have been destroyed
completely. Imam Ali said: "I tolerated those periods as if there was a
thorn in my eye and a sharp bone stuck in my throat." (Nahjul Balagha,
the sayings of Imam Ali).
Islam was very young at that time (only 23 years old!) and division among
Muslims could have totally removed Islam from the surface of the earth. So
he kept silent, as Haroon (Aaron) kept silent to prevent division:
(Moses) said: "O' Aaron! what kept you back when you saw them going
wrong?"... (Aaron said:) "...Truly I feared you would say 'You caused
a division among the Children of Israel and you did not respect my
word!'" (Quran 20:92-94).
Abu Sufyan was one of those who wanted to destroy the young Islam by
encouraging Ali to revolt when he was sure that Ali will have no success
due to small number of his followers. But the revolt of Ali would at least
cause the civil war and the destruction of Islam. al-Tabari reported:
When people gathered to give their oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Abu
Sufyan came while saying, "By God, I see a cloud of smoke which
nothing but blood will clear. O family of Abd Manaf! Who is Abu Bakr
that he should be the master of your affairs? Where are Ali and al-
Abbas, the two oppressed ones?" He then said (to Ali): "O Abul Hasan!
stretch your hand so that I give you the oath of allegiance."... Ali
rebuked him, saying: "By God, you do not intend anything but (to stir
up) Fitnah (dissension). For long you have desired evil for Islam. We
do not need your advice."
Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v9, p199
As we quoted the tradition of al-Bukhari earlier, the Prophet confirmed
that
the history of the Children of Israel will be repeated for Muslims. In
fact Quran has mentioned the stories of the Children of Israel to give us a
way to understand the true history of Islam itself. There are many other
striking similarities in this regard written in Quran. Please see the
artcle of "The Twelve Imams (Part II)" for the Quranic verses in this
regard.
=============
Side Comments
=============
A Sunni brother mentioned that Aaron (Haroon) died during the liftime of
Moses, and as such, this is not a correct analogy to confirm the caliphate
of Ali using the tradition of Sahih al-Bukhari in which the Prophet said:
"Your position to me is like the position of Aaron (Haroon) to Moses but
there is no prophet AFTER me."
The claim that Aaron died during the life-time of Prophet Moses (if true)
does not hurt this argument at all, if you very carefully read the
following paragraphs:
As Moses (AS) had left behind Aaron to look after his people when he went
to Miqaat (meeting Allah), in the same way the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
leaving Ali behind as his deputy to look after the affairs of Islam after
he met Allah (i.e., his death).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This assertion becomes more evdient when we look at the last phrase of the
tradition of al-Bukhari where the Messenger of Allah mentioned: "but there
is no prophet AFTER me". Think about the word "AFTER" in the statement of
the Prophet. Don't you think that the Prophet Muhammad is talking about
AFTER his death? That position (leadership) which the Prophet entrusted to
Ali was with Ali till his death. No body except the Prophet Muhammad can
take this position back from him.
Prophet Moses (AS) was away from his people for 40 days and he came back
and met them along with Haroon (AS). Likewise, Prophet Muhammad is away
from us (living in the heaven), but he will soon meet us and his companions
as well as Imam Ali on the Day of Judgment. He will then question them the
same way as Moses questioned his people, specially those who left his
religion and worshipped the golden calf. Look at the following tradition
from Sahih al-Bukhari to have some idea about the would-be conversation
between Prophet Muhammad and some of his companions:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.585
Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa'd:
The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake-
Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and
whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come
to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me,
but a barrier will be placed between me and them." Abu Hazim added:
Nu'man bin Abi 'Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from
Sahl?" I said, "Yes." He said, " I bear witness that I heard Abu Said
Al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: 'I will say:
They are my companions. Then it will be said to me, 'You do not know
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left'.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I will say, 'Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
after me." Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, "On the Day of
Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, 'O Lord
(those are) my companions!' It will be said, 'You have no knowledge
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as
renegades (reverted from the true Islam)."^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
=========
Another person claimed: Not all of the people of Moses worshipped the calf
and those who did not killed the ones who did by the order of God.
Perhaps, this brother has been told another story. But Quran tells us that
all the followers of Moses (except a few) were deceived by Sameri. The
companions of Moses did not kill Sameri either. The were rather about to
kill Aaron (AS) who tried to advise them on that affliction. If the number
of those who preserved their faith was a lot, Aaron wouldn't have been in
trouble. Here are some verses of Quran concerning the event:
7:148 And the community of Moses, after (he had left them), chose a calf
(for worship), (made) out of their ornaments, of saffron hue, which
gave a lowing sound. Saw they not that it spake not unto them nor
guided them to any way? They chose it, and became wrong doers.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
7:150 And when Moses returned unto his people, angry and grieved, he said:
Evil is that (course) which ye took after I had left you. Would ye
hasten on the judgment of your Lord? And he cast down the tablets,
and he seized his brother by the head, dragging him toward him.
(Aaron) said: "Son of my mother! Lo! People did oppress me and they
were about to kill me. Make not the enemies rejoice over my
misfortune nor count thou me amongst the sinful people."
20:90 Before this, Aaron had already said to them: "O my people! you are
being tested in this, for verily your Lord is (Allah) Most Gracious;
so follow me and obey my order."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
20:91 They had said: "We will not abandon this cult but we will devote
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ourselves to it until Moses returns to us."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So the last verse disproves the claim that the true followers killed the
wrong doers before Moses (AS) come back. Yes, after Prophet Moses came
back, he punished the influential individuals among those who led people
astray. But he did not kill them:
20:97 (Moses) said (to Sameri): "Go! Your (punishment) in this life will be
that you will say 'Touch me not'; and moreover (for a future
penalty) thou hast a promise that will not fail: now look at thy god
of whom thou hast become a devoted worshipper: we will certainly
(melt) it in a blazing fire and scatter it broadcast in the sea!"
=========
Another brother mentioned that if Ali wished could very well incite forcful
rebelion since he is from a very strong tribe Bani Hashm, and both Abu Bakr
and Umar from a week tribe Adiyy, and Taym. Then why did he keep silent and
did not use force to restore his right after the election held in Saqifah?
If Bani Hashim were strong with respect to other tribes, as the above
brother claims, then Muslims wouldn't have had to migrate from Mecca to
Medina. Also they wouldn't have been subject to economical sanctions in
She'b Abi Talib.
The exceptional brevity of Imam Ali (AS) in various wars and his killing of
the most important warriors of Arabs, is well-known for even Sunnis. Imam
Ali mentioned that he himself has killed 40,000 infidels by his sword (this
figure includes those who were killed by him in the civil wars). Killing
the lions of Arabs developed a very intensive and long-lasting hatred in
the heart of the Arabs from different tribes. For this very reason, most
Arabs due to their tribal ties, even after embracing Islam, were not
friendly toward Imam Ali and other members of Ahlul-Bayt. This hatred gave
its fruit on the issue of Caliphate, and later in the civil wars at the
time of Imam Ali (AS) as well as the prosecution of Ahlul-Bayt and their
partisans after his martyrdom which continued with utmost brutality for a
number of centuries.
The hatred of the house of Umayyah against Bani Hashim (the clan of Prophet
and Ali) is well-known. The wars of Abu Sufyan and his son Muawiyah against
Prophet and Ali respectively, also the horrible massacre of the grandson of
prophet at Karbala by the grandson of Abu Sufyan, are only some of top
items among the long list of such crimes. You might also want to refresh
the memory that when Muawiyah took over the power, he instituted the Sunnah
of cursing Imam Ali. Sunni history books and Sunni collections of
traditions clearly state that Muawiyah commanded all the Imams of the
mosques throughout the Muslim world to CURSE Imam Ali in every Friday
prayer. (Sunni references are available upon request).
Now, we turn to the events of Saqifah and the "election" of Abu Bakr:
During the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Mosque of Prophet was the
center of all Islamic activities. It was there that the decision of war and
peace were made, delegations were received, sermons were delivered and
cases were decided. It is not surprising that when the news of the demise
of the Prophet (PBUH&HF) spread, the Muslims assembled in that very Mosque.
On the other hand, Saqifah of Bani Sa'idah was located three miles OUTSIDE
Medina and was a secret location for the evil activities of some Arab
tribes. (see Ghiyath al-Lughah, p228).
Why then Sa'd Ibn Ubadah and his fans as well as Abu Bakr and Umar, left
the Mosque secretly and without informing other prominent companions and
went three miles outside Medina to discuss the issue of Caliphate? Why
didn't they discuss the issue as important as this among the Muslims inside
the mosque? Wasn't that they wanted to usurp the Caliphate without the
knowledge of people? Why did Abu Bakr and Umar with Abu Ubaydah slip out
the mosque secretly? Was it because Ali and Bani Hashim were present in the
mosque and in the house of Prophet, and they did not want them to know the
plot?
Also, we should keep in mind that it was the custom of the Arabs that once
a person was declared, even by a small group, to be the chief of the tribe,
others hesitated to oppose him, and willy nilly followed suit. Due to their
dislike of Imam Ali (AS) (which I discussed earlier), they did not respect
his right, nor did they even informed him of this meeting. They SIMPLY
neglected the last sermon of Prophet in Ghadir Khum where the Messenger of
God declared him as his successor just two and a half months months before
the incedent of Saqifah.
=========
A Sunni brother mentioned that: If Imam Ali disaproved Uthman, then why did
he risk the lives of his beloved sons, al-Hassan and al-Hussain, trying to
protect the life of his adversary from the blood-thirsty rioters in Medina?
According to the Shia sources such news are dubious. We do not have any
strong evidence that Imam Ali sent his sons to support Uthman's House. In
fact, al-Tabari who is one of the important Sunni Historians said that Imam
Ali deserted Uthman since Uthman did insisted in keeping Marwan in his
administration. Here is the related part from the History of al-Tabari,
when the siege over Uthman was very severe:
People informed Ali of the news. Then Ali came to Uthman and
said: "Surely you have satisfied Marwan (again), but he is satisfied
with you only if you deviate from your religion and reason, like a
camel carrying a litter that is led around at will. By God, Marwan is
devoid of sense in regard to his religion and his soul. I swear by
God, I think he will bring you in and then not send you out again.
After this visit, I will not come again to chide you. You have
destroyed your own honor and you have been robbed of your authority."
When Ali departed, Uthman's wife told him: "I have heard that Ali said
to you that he will never return to you, and that you have obeyed
Marwan (again), who leads you wherever he wishes." Uthman said: "What
shall I do?" She responded: "You should fear God alone, who has no
partner, and you should adhere to the practice of your two
predecessors (Abu Bakr and Umar). For if you obey Marwan, he will kill
you. Marwan enjoys no prestige among the people, and inspires neither
awe nor love. People have only abandoned you due to Marwan's position
(in your councils). Send to Ali, then, and trust in his honesty and
uprightness. He is related to you and he is not a man whom people
disobey." So Uthman sent to Ali, but he refused to come, saying: "I
told him I would not return."
Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 176-179
Even we suppose that Imam Ali protected Uthman in his last days, the
protection was not because he loved Uthman to be on power. He did so (if
true) since he knew that this is a conspiracy, and he knew that those
companions who plotted to kill Uthman, would become the avenger of his
blood tomorrow, as it happened (e.g., the companions like Talha, Zubair,
Muawiyah, and ...) and it became a custom of assassination of Caliphs with
self-judgments including the assassination of Ali (AS) himself.
=========
Another reader mentioned that, if some companions conspired against Imam
Ali and usureped his right of Caliphate, is it not a possibility that they
conspired to alter the Quranic text? The compilers and transmitters of the
Quran were fallible and sinners.
As for protection of Quran, it is the will of Allah! Even if all the
people of the world gather to change it they will fail. Muslims could
recall the history that Allah willed to raise and preserve Moses in the
house of His Enemy, Pharaoh.
Also there was no reason for Umar or Abu Bakr to delete something from
Quran, because the name of Imam Ali did not appear in Quran. (eventhough
his name was in the divine commentary which was revealed with Quran but was
not a part of text of Quran. It is no surprise that this divine commentary
was suppressed). Nonetheless, Sunni documents agree that at least 300
verses of Quran directly revealed on the honor of Imam Ali. (reported by
Ibn Asakir, al-Suyuti, Ibn Hajar, etc.) Beside that that, Ibn Abbas said:
"There is no verse in Quran in which the term 'Believers', unless Ali
is at the top of them and the chief of them and the more virtuous one
among them. Surely Allah has admonished the companions of Muhammad
(PBUH) in Quran, but He did not refer to Ali except with honor."
Sunni references:
- Fadha'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p654, tradition #1114
- al-Riyadh al-Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v3, p229
- Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
- Dhakha'ir al-Uqba, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, p89
- al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 9, section 3, p196
- Others such as Tabarani and Ibn Abi Hatam
Also, not all were sinners. The Sunni traditionists and historians Imam Ali
(AS) was the FIRST who compiled Quran. It took Imam Ali one week after the
death of Prophet to Finnish his compilation. Imam Ali presented this Quran
to the rulers of that time and they had a chance to review it and learn
about the missing verses of their own collections and they did correct what
they missed. (Please see the article of "The Quran Compiled by Imam Ali"
for the references in this regard) As you see the one who corrected them
was an infallible one, and thus we have all reasons to believe that the
Quran that we have today is the very same as what was revealed to Prophet
except that it is not in the correct sequence. But nothing is missing from
it.
=========
A brother mentioned that according to the verse:
If two parties among the Believers fall into fighting make peace
between them. If then one of them transgresses against the other,
fight that which transgresses until it complies with the command of
Allah; but if it complies then make peace between them with justice
and be fair, for Allah loves those who are just. (Quran 49:9)
Quran did not remove the characeristic of belief from either of the two
warring factions. That two Muslims fight is not an indication that one of
them is unbeliever.
The above comment is correct. But the verse does not imply that any warring
faction is necessarily Muslim even though they say so by their tong. There
is no doubt that a believer can be killer of an innocent and also there is
no doubt that such killer will go to Hell for ever as the foolowing verse
testifies:
"And Whoever kills a believer deliberately, his reward is Hell
forever, and the Wrath of Allah is upon him, He cursed him and
prepared a great punishment for him." (Quran 4:93)
The above verse (4:93) does not exclude believers from that punishment.
Whoever does so, is entitled to the same punishment be it believer or
unbeliever.
I also think you forgot to think about the latter portion of the verse you
quoted which was: "If then one of them transgresses against the other,
fight that which transgresses until it complies with the command of Allah."
Talha and Zubair are entitled to this last portion. Because Imam Ali
frequently asked them for reconciliation, but they killed his messenger
when he was carrying Quran to them for a sign of asking for reconciliation.
The story is written in the History of Tabari, v4, P312. So those
companions are "Baaggee" -- transgressor according to the verse you quoted,
and should have been fought as Imam Ali did, and they will be the
companions of Hell forever.
=========
A brother mentioned that according to Quran, Moses who was a Prophet of god
was confused with the strange actions of al-Khidhr. But when at the end ,
Moses (AS) was told about the reasons behind those actions, he completely
admired them. Moses (AS) was a Prophet, but still He could not see the
complete picture related to these events; none of us are in the position of
Moses (AS). None of us has a clear picture of what we are criticizing from
the actions of the companions.
I would like to remind that brother that he is discrediting you the most
important investment which Allah gifted to everyone that is logic (Aql). If
I came to know God, it was due the using this investment. If I found that
Islam is the best religion, it is because I used my brain and concluded
that the instructions given in Quran are sound instructions and the
regulations of Islam are the best among all other alternatives.
If one discredit this precious thing, he will lose every thing including
his religion, and he will accept any irrational 'fatwa' as a religious
command, he will accept some killers of innocents go to paradise without
giving it a thought.
Moses (AS) did not discredit this precious thing, and he asked Prophet
Khidr for clarification, and he finally got the answers and was convinced
shortly after the incidents. Now, can provide any rational justification
for what some companions did after the demise of prophet? It it about 14
centuries passed and we could not come up any justification for their
deads. So why should we still blindly follow their narrations and their
sayings which are in clear contradiction with tha sayings of Ahlul-Bayt?
Asking question is not sin. Remaining ignorant is a big loss though. Also
comparing a sinless prophet with a sinfull companion is like comparing
heavens with the earth.
=========
A Wahhabi contributor claimed that the Shia do not follow the Sunnah of the
prophet since it was transmitted by his companions.
This Wahhabi fellow did not even give it a second thought that the Shia
follow Imam Ali (AS) who was the BEST of the companions of the Prophet and
their most knowledgeable one, the Strong Rope of Allah (3:103), and His
Right Path (1:6). Neither his proximity of relationship with Prophet was
preceded (42:23), nor his preceding in accepting the religion (56:10-11).
We stick to the instructions of Ahlul-Bayt who are pure and infallible
according to Quran and Hadith. Hence, we do not need to follow those of
companions who opposed/fought Ahlul-Bayt.
Thus the Shia, indeed, follow the Sunnah transmitted by a Prophet's
companion, the best of them. However, Wahhabis follow the worst of them,
that is Muawiyah, and take his Sunnah which has no similarity with the
Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).
=========
A Wahhabi mentioned: It is part of our Sunni dogma to respect and love the
all the companions of the Prophet. Our scholars remind us that vilification
of the companions is Kufr.
Interestingly enough that those companions who remained loyal to Ali
received severe punishment from the government of the time, and were not
respected at all. One example is Abu Dhar who was exiled to the worst
climate location in the reign of Uthman because they could not stop him
from telling the truth. They kept him there till he died (martyred). Abu
Dhar was the one that prophet said in his virtue that "The Earth does not
carry nor the Heavens cover a man more frank and truthful than Abu Dhar".
Wasn't Abu Dhar a great companion of prophet? So why shouldn't they have
respected him according to your judgment? It seems that even Uthman did not
accept your type of judgment! nor Talha and Zubair when they were fighting
against their legitimate Caliph Ali (AS). Are all of them Kafir by your
judgment?
When the Shia reflect on the mistakes of the companions, they do so in
retrospect of history. It would be very interesting to look at some of the
comments of both the Wahabi and the Sunni scholars in this retrospect. Ibn
Taymiyyah, the Shaykhul Islam of the Wahabis, writes
And merely abusing some one other than the Prophets does
not necessarily make the abuser Kafir; because some of
those who were in the time of the Prophet (i.e companions)
used to abuse one another and none of them was declared
kafir because of this (practice); and (also) because it is
not Wajib to have faith particularly in any of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
companions; therefore abusing any of them does not detract
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
from the faith in Allah and His books and His messengers
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and the Last day.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wahabi reference: As Sarimu l masul, Ibn Taymiyyah, page 579
Published in 1402/1982 by Alam al-Kutub
The name of Mulla Ali Qari requires no introduction to the Sunnis, and
he writes in his work of Sharah Fiqh al Akbar that
To abuse Abu Bakr and Umar is NOT Kufr, as Abush Shakur
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
as Salimi has correctly proved in his book, at Tamhid. And
it is becuase the basis of this claim (claim that reviling
the Shaykhan is kufr) is not proven, nor its meaning is
confirmed.
It is so because certainly abusing a Muslim is fisq (sin) as
is proved by a confirmed hadith, and therefore the Shaykhan
(Abu Bakr and Umar) will be equal to the other (Muslims) in
this rule; and also if we suppose that some one murdered the
Shaykhan, and even the two sons in law (Ali and Usman), all
of them together, even then according to Ahlussunnah wa al-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jamah, he will not go out of Islam (i.e will not become
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
kafir) ...
Sunni ref: Mulla Ali Qari, Sharah al Fiqh al Akbar
Matba Uthmaniyah, Istanbul, 1303 page 130
Matba Mujtabai, Delhi, 1348, page 86
Matba Aftab e Hind, India, No date, page 86
Interesting note:
The above quote was taken from three (3) editions, printed in India and
Turkey. Now a new edition has been printed by Darul Lutubil Ilmiyah,
Beirut in 1404/1984, which claims to be the first edition, and from
which four pages (including the above text) have been OMMITED. The deleted
portion contains the declaration that
... those who believe that Allah has a body are definitely
kafir according to the Ijma without any difference of
opinions.
Do I need to comment on Wahabi scholarship?
=========
Another prson mentioned: Why is it that you want Sunnis accept a selected
number of traditions from the Sunni sources which refutes the integrity of
people like Abu Bakr, Umar Ibn al-Khattab? This point really irks me.
I am sorry it irks you! It is not completely correct, however. We have
nothing against the persons of Abu-Bakr, Umar and Ashia. We are looking at
history in retrospect and evaluating their actions - which should not be
considered a sin. Afterall, they were human beings who were capable of
making mistakes. Why not learn from their mistakes - particularly if done
in a sensetive way.
We just mentioned some traditions from Sunni books, actions and sayings of
the companions. If it sounds insulting it is not because the Shia put them
in there. I tried to give supportive evidence to my argument, objectively,
with no disrespect for the companions (khulafaa particularly).
We feel that they made ijtihad in certain cases, that we don't agree with -
we choose to follow the ijtihad and teachings of others such as Imam Ali
and th Imams of his decendent - what is wrong with that? We also feel that
there has been a lot that has been attributed to them in the form of
Hadiths, that they have not necessarily said or agree with. This is due, in
part, to the Umayads who hated Ahlul Bayt and wanted to make them look as
less than who they were, either by elevating the status of the people you
named and others, or by fabricating hadeeths in conflict.
***************************************************************************
About Saqifah
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In the following tradition in Sahih al-Bukhari:
A)- Umar said that:
One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance
given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful.
B)- Umar said that Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, and Ansar
disagreed with them :
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the
Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali
and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants
gathered with Abu Bakr. ^^^^^^^^^^^
C)- Umar gave his hand to Abu bakr without counselling with muslims.
He gave his hand FIRST, and then others gave their hands too.
Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose
so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O
Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged
allegiance to him, and THEN all the emigrants gave the Pledge of
allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards.
D)- There was news that Umar and his followers had killed Sa'd bin
Ubada. (I am not saying that he did. What I am saying that this was
a common news on those days. That is all.)
One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' I replied,
'Allah has killed Sa'd bin Ubada.
E)- While Umar gave his hand to Abu bakr without consulting others, he
ordered that such person should be killed:
So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become
a Caliph) WITHOUT consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has
selected should NOT be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be
killed."
F)- While he did not wish to accept others' decision, he, himself,
applied his own decision to others:
there was no greater problem [compared to death of the prophet] than
the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we
left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to
one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent
for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
caused great trouble.
Here is the tradition:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.817
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
I used to teach (the Qur'an to) some people of the Muhajirln
(emigrants), among whom there was 'Abdur Rahman bin 'Auf. While I was
in his house at Mina, and he was with 'Umar bin al-Khattab during
'Umar's last Hajj, Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you
had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers ('Umar),
saying, 'O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so
who says, 'If 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance
to such-and-such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu
Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established
afterwards.' 'Umar became angry and then said, 'Allah willing, I will
stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who
want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of
rulership)."
... In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers
for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having
glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said,...
... (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says,
'By Allah, if 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance
to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying
that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and
it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the
people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the
qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of
allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims,
neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance
was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari
brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached
them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final
decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) !
Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari
brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry
out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go
to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of
Bani Sa'da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped
in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa'd bin
'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.'
After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the
right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved,
he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority
of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and
some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from
practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.'
When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a
speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of
Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to
speak, Abu Bakr said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So
Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than
I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own
prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it
spontaneously. After a pause he said, 'O Ansar! You deserve all (the
qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question
(of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the
Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that
you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to
either of them as you wish. And then Abu Bakr held my hand and Abu
Ubada bin Abdullah's hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing
of what he had said except that proposal, for by Allah, I would rather
have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler
of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr, unless at the time of
my death my own-self suggests something I don't feel at present.'
And then one of the Ansar said, 'I am the pillar on which the camel
with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e.,
I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish. There
should be one ruler from us and one from you.'
Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose
so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O
Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged
allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of
allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards. And so we became
victorious over Sa'd bin Ubada (whom al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler).
One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' I replied,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'Allah has killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' Umar added, "By Allah, apart from
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the
Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to
Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might
give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which
case we would have given them our consent for something against our
real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble. So if
any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a
Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
killed."
^^^^^^
**************************************************************************
____________________________________
| |
| || || | || |
| o_,_7 _|| . _o_7 _|| 4_|_|| o_w_, |
|( : / (_) / ( . |
|____________________________________|
More on Companions
I shall discuss some issues about the companions in this article.
For a followup to this discussion, please see "Then I Was Guided" by Dr.
Muhammad al-Tijani al- Samawi; Published in 1989 by the Fajr Establishment
in London, Great Britain. The Author has four books out now, may Allah
(SWT) reward him generously for risking his life in the Arab World to speak
the TRUTH about the Shi'i/Sunni problem, and why he became a Shia.
The four books are:
1. Thooma Ihtadiyat -- Then I Was Guided (1989)
2. Ma'ah al-Sadiqin -- With the Truthful Ones (1989)
3. Fas'aloo Ahl al-Zikr -- Ask Those Who Possess the Message (1992)
4. al-Shia Hum Ahl al-Sunnah -- The Shia Are The (True) Followers of the
Sunnah (Sunnah--here meaning the custom/way of the Prophet (PBUH&HF))
(I am NOT sure if this book has been published and released to the
public yet -- It was still in the writing process when I first heard of
it).
Please note that the author, Dr. Muhammad al-Tijani al-Samawi, spent years
of research before writing these books and becoming, himself, a Shia. He
is also now a recognized and certified Shi'i Religious Scholar, with
authority to give Fatwas (Religious Opinions), which is no easy task in the
Shi'i schools of jurisprudence, philosophy, and the sciences. He received
his Doctorate degree from the Sorbone University, the French University
that is ranked among the best universities in the world. His thesis was a
discussion of al-Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib's (AS) most famous book "Nahjul
Balagha" (The Way of Eloquence). This book is recognized by both the
Sunnis and the Shia as a model Par Excellence in classical Arabic
Eloquence, next only to the Quran itself in beauty and grandeur. The proof
to that statement is that the Sunnis themselves have taken it upon
themselves to explain the meanings of the text and to teach it in various
Islamic universities. Among those Sunnis who wrote the commentary
for this book is Ibn Abil Hadid. A mor recent commentary by the Sunnis is
of Muhammad Abduh from al-Azhar University. The commentary of these
scholars on the book of "Nahjul Balagha" can be found in many Mosques
and libraries.
===============================
Shedding the blood of Innocents
===============================
al-Bukhari narrated that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH&HF) said the
following to his companions in his last speech:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 5.688 and 7.458
Narrated Abu Bakra:
The Prophet said: "... Surely, you will meet your Lord, and He will
ask you about your deeds. Beware! Do not become infidels after me by
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
cutting the throats of one another. It is incumbent on those who are
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
present to convey this message (of mine) to those who are absent. May
be that some of those to whom it will be conveyed will understand it
better than those who have actually heard it."
On the other hand, the documented history confirms that some companions
(some of whom were also promised paradise according to some fabricated
traditions) shed the blood of thousands of Muslims in various civil wars.
Good examples of them are Talha and Zubair who were the first companions
who waged war against Ali (AS) after people paid oath to him as their
legitimate Caliph. They could not see him in power, and found him a great
obstacle for their robberies. Thus shed the blood of 10 thousand Muslims in
the battle of "Camel", in order to overthrow Ali from power. (see any
Sunni history books for details). Their plot was finally failed and both
Talha and Zubair were killed. Muawiyah and Amr Ibn al-Auss are another
examples, who waged the war of Siffin against Ali (AS) killing other
thousands of Muslims. Allah states:
"And Whoever kills a believer deliberately, his reward is Hell
forever, and the Wrath of Allah is upon him, He cursed him and
prepared a great punishment for him." (Quran 4:93)
As such, is there any reason we should respect ALL of the companions and
follow ALL of them, even those among them whom Allah cursed by the above
verse of Quran? Why should we love one whom Allah curses, and why should we
follow one whom Allah has promised Hell forever?
==========================
Collecting Gold and Silver
==========================
al-Bukhari narrates the Prophet (PBUH&HF) said the following after the
Battle of Uhud:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.434
Narrated 'Uqba bin 'Amir:
The Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayer for the martyrs of
the (battle of) Uhud and then ascended the pulpit and said, "I am your
predecessor and I am a witness against you. By Allah, I am now looking
at my Tank-lake (Al-Kauthar) and I have been given the keys of the
treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth). By Allah! I am not
afraid that you become polytheist after me, but I am afraid that you
will start competing (for the luxuries of this world).
The tradition clearly indicates that after his (PBUH&HF) death, some of the
companions will abandon the religion, and compete against one another for
the wealth of this temporary existence. And they indeed competed until the
swords were drawn and the wars were waged, thereby fulfilling the prophecy.
Some of the famous companions were eager to collect gold and silver.
Great Sunni Historians like Mas'udi and Tabari and others stated that the
wealth of Zubair on its own came out to 50,000 Dinars and 1000 horses with
1000 slaves and many holdings in Basrah, Kufah, Egypt, and many other
places. This massive wealth was accumulated while many Muslims starved to
death. (See Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, v2, p341)
The agricultural products from Iraq alone brought for Talha 1000 Dinars
EVERY DAY!, and perhaps more than that. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi,
the same page)
Abdul Rahman Ibn Awf had 100 horses, 1000 camels, and 10,000 sheep.
After his death, the quarter of his wealth which was divided among his
wives came out to 84,000 Dinars. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi,
the same page)
Uthman Ibn Affan left on the day of his death 150,000 Dinars, apart from
an enormous wealth of land, cattle and villages. (Muruj al-Dahab by
al-Masudi, the same page)
Zayd Ibn Thabit left an amount of gold and silver that HAD TO BE BROKEN
BY HAMMERS! apart from money and agricultural holdings which came to
100,000 Dinars. (Muruj al-Dahab by al-Masudi, the same page)
These were just few examples to show that some of the companions were
more interested in the present life. Comparing the poverty of people at
that time, one get suspicious to how they got so much money from nothing
while the rest of people were in poverty. This gives a good idea of why
they waged war against Ali (AS) to overthrow him from power. They found him
a big obstacle for their misconducts of treasury and territories.
The question now is this: If these so-called pious companions were so busy
collecting money and competing among one another in worldly gain, while
many Muslims died from poverty, where then was that so-called piety and
sense of sacrifice that the Sunnis attribute to them (the companions)?
This is a sign for those who reflect!
================================
The Companions Among One Another
================================
In the previous articles we have seen how Allah (SWT) describes the
companions in the Quran; how the Prophet (PBUH&HF), before his (PBUH&HF)
death, foretells their behavior after his death; and now we will take a
look at what the companions thought of one another's actions and their
remarks concerning their own behavior.
It is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v1, p122, under the chapter of
"al-Eidiyan -- The Two Eids (Muslim Festivals)" that the Prophet (PBUH&HF)
used to pray first, and then deliver the sermon (khutba). That custom
(sunnah) remained as such until Marwan, the Ruler (Amir) of Medina during
Muawiyah's reign, started to deliver the sermon (khutba) before the prayer.
It should be noted that the Sunnis do exactly the same thing to this day.
This was NOT the sunnah (way or custom) of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). Keep in
mind that the Sunnis maintain that the actions of the companions are enough
to alter the custom of the Prophet (PBUH&HF)!!! The question to the Sunnis
is: If the companions' actions were enough to alter the Prophet's (PBUH&HF)
custom, why then do we need the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) custom in the first
place? Let's just follow any innovations the companions may come up with!
You might wonder why the companions made the sermon before the prayer? Dr.
al-Samawi states that many people would not stay for the sermon after they
prayed. As such, the prayer and sermon times were switched. Superficially,
this is true, but this is not the real reason, he continues. During the
days of Muawiyah, it was ordered, as I mentioned in other posts, that
whenever the name of al-Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (AS) was mentioned, he (AS)
should be cursed! Many of the believers at that time loved Ali (AS) and
would not tolerate such an action; as a result, they were killed one after
the other, until all the believers had to listen to the curses and maintain
their silence at the threat of the sword. One way to escape the listening
to the repeated cursing was to escape the sermon. Muawiyah and his men
didn't like that, so the sermon was switched to precede the prayer in an
effort to force the people to stay through the whole sermon and listen to
the cursing! Allahu Akbar (Allah is Great)! By Allah (SWT), do you still
not see the conspiracy against the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) family? Is this how
al-Imam Ali (AS) is to be treated? The Prophet (PBUH&HF) had said:
"To love Ali (AS) is a sign of Faith, and to hate him (AS) is a sign
of hypocrisy!!!"
This tradition is narrated in Sahih Muslim, v1, p61. Check for yourself.
In Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, p76; and Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p300 narrate that
the Prophet (PBUH&HF) said to Ali (AS):
"You are a part of me, and I a part of you."
Also, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, p201 narrates that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) said:
"I am the city of knowledge, and Ali is it's door." Keep in mind that you
can only enter a city through its door; meaning that any knowledge from the
Prophet (PBUH&HF), since he (PBUH&HF) is the City of Knowledge, can only be
accessed through the door, his (PBUH&HF) son-in-law Ali (AS). What's more,
Musnad al-Imam Ibn Hanbal, v5, p25, narrates that the Prophet (PBUH&HF)
said:
"Ali is the master of every believer after me."
If ANY head of state, whether today or in times immemorial, ALWAYS has a
trusted vicegerent to take his place and manage his affairs in his absence,
would you then believe that the Prophet (PBUH&HF), who was sent as the
FINAL Messenger from He (SWT) Who created the universe, didn't also have a
vicegerent to manage his (PBUH&HF) affairs after his (PBUH&HF) death? A
vicegerent that Allah (SWT) also trusts and loves? Would you believe that
Allah (SWT) would leave the affairs of the "...Best of Nations sent forth
to mankind...[3:110]" to random selection and ruling? No, by Allah (SWT), a
vicegerent was INDEED chosen by Allah (SWT) and His (SWT) Messenger
(PBUH&HF), and that vicegerent was al-Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (AS).
Again, Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, narrates that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) said:
"Whoever I was his Master, then Ali is his Master! O Allah, support
those who support him, and alienate those that alienate him!!!"
That is Ali (AS), the fearless warrior, and the defeater of the champions
of Quraish. May the Blessings and Peace of Allah (SWT) be extended to the
Prophet (PBUH&HF) and his (PBUH&HF) Family, Amen.
Now, ask yourself: If this is how the Prophet (PBUH&HF) praised Ali (AS),
then who are the companions, especially Muawiyah, to curse him (AS)? Did
you know that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) said, as narrated in Musnad Ahmad Ibn
Hanbal, v6, p33:
"Whoever curses (or verbally abuses) Ali, then he has cursed me, and
whoever has cursed me, then he has cursed Allah (SWT), and whoever has
cursed Allah (SWT), then Allah (SWT) will throw him into the
hellfire."
That means that by cursing Ali (AS), the companions were cursing the
Prophet (PBUH&HF), and by cursing the Prophet (PBUH&HF), they were cursing
Allah (SWT), and by cursing Allah (SWT), they shall enter the hellfire! By
Allah (SWT), they will be asked to account for what they've said! That is
a promise by Allah (SWT), which He (SWT) shall not break!
Dr. al-Tijani asserts that during his search for the truth, he tried
wholeheartedly to identify these heinous charges with the hypocrites and
the malevolent companions ONLY; but he soon discovered that there is NO way
of excluding the SO-CALLED righteous companions, in the sight of the
Sunnis, from these charges. For we see that the first companion to threaten
the burning down of al-Imam Ali's (AS) house is none other than `Umar Ibn
al-Khatab himself -- the man that the Sunnis claim is of such faith and
courage that he terrifies Satan himself! And the first to wage war against
al-Imam Ali (AS) were Talha, al-Zubayr, and none other than `Aisha herself,
the wife of the Prophet (PBUH&HF) that is the most beloved woman in the
sight of the Sunnis. Note that `Aisha is also the daughter of Abu Bakr!
Others aggressors include, but are NOT limited to, Amr Ibn al-Aas,
Muawiyah, and many others that oppressed the family of the Prophet
(PBUH&HF). Are these not righteous companions in the sight of the Sunnis?
Do we need to say more?
As Dr. al-Samawi states: "If we wanted to provide all the occurrences
(sayings) of the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) praise of Ali (AS), we can easily fill
an entire book!"
The companions also changed the prayer rules, and the first to do so was
`Uthman Ibn `Afan, the third caliph. Sahih Bukhari narrates in v2,
page 154, that the Prophet (PBUH&HF) always prayed two (instead of four)
rak'at during travel, as is mandated by Allah (SWT) in the Quran. Abu Bakr
and `Umar did the same, then came `Uthman and prayed four rak'at during
travel instead of two! This tradition is also narrated in Sahih Muslim,
v1, p260. Who is `Uthman to violate the orders of Allah (SWT) and
His (SWT) Prophet (PBUH&HF) with regards to the Salat (Prayer)? Question
and reflect, and may Allah (SWT) guide us all.
Let's see what `Umar did: Sahih al-Bukhari narrates in v1, p54:
"Shaqiq Ibn Salamah said: I was with Abdullah and Abu Musa, so Abu
Musa told Abdullah: What should a man do if he was in a state of
Janabah (the biological state of sperm ejaculation after a dream or
when a man has sexual intercourse with his wife) and had no water to
clean?" Abdullah said: "He shall not pray until he finds water." So
Abu Musa said: "But didn't you hear the Prophet (PBUH&HF) tell `Amar
Ibn Yasir (RA) that all he had to do was Tayamum?" Abdullah replied:
"Didn't you know that `Umar (Ibn al-Khatab) didn't approve of that?"
So Abu Musa answered: But Allah (SWT) said in the Quran: "...Or ye
have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for
yourselves clean sand (or earth), and rub therewith your faces and
hands...[Quran 4:43]" So Abdullah didn't know what to say, except:
"If we allow them that (meaning the Tayamum), then they will use it at
the slightest instance like when the water is too cold (to make
ablutions or bathe)." Abu Musa told Shaqiq: "Is that why Abdullah
disapproved of the matter?" Shaqiq said: "Yes."
NOTE: Tayamum is the pounding of the hands on sand, mud, or rock, and then
wiping the face and the hands; this is considered a full ablution (Wudu')
in the absence of water. Note that there are more details to the process
Tayamum which are not covered here.
As one can see, `Umar violated the Quran, Allah's (SWT) DIRECT orders, and
the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) custom by his disapproval of the Tayamum! By Allah
(SWT), who is `Umar to disapprove of what Allah (SWT) has commanded? This
is a sign for those who reflect!
The companions themselves have admitted that they changed the sunnah
(custom of the Prophet (PBUH&HF)) many times: Sahih al-Bukhari narrates in
v3, p32, under the category of "The Battle of Hudaiybiyah" that:
`Ala Ibn al- Masib said: "I met al-Bara Ibn `Azib, so I said may you
be happy all the time, for you were the companion of the Prophet
(PBUH&HF) and you have made a pact (bay'ah) with him (PBUH&HF) under
the tree." So al-Bara said: "O son of my brother, you know not of
what we have changed after his (PBUH&HF) death!!!"
This is a direct confession by a very close companion that they have
changed the religion of Allah (SWT) and violated His (SWT) orders. Again,
who are the companions to change the religion of Allah (SWT)? This is the
same reason that the Islamic Ummah (Nation) is still living in deplorable
conditions where the most basic of human rights is not even granted. This
is a sign for those who reflect.
It is also narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari, v2, p201, after a long tradition
that:
`Umar, when he was stabbed and Ibn `Abbas was offering some form of
consolation, said: ".......By Allah (SWT), if I had enough gold to
fill the entire earth, I would offer it to ransom myself from Allah's
(SWT) punishment before I see Him (SWT)."
If `Umar was such a faithful companion, why would he wish to ransom himself
from Allah (SWT)? Could it be because he committed many injustices and he
will on the Day of Judgment be held accountable for them? Question for
yourself.
Abu Bakr was no different: It is narrated in "The History of al-Tabari
(Tarikh al-Tabari),", p41 that:
Abu Bakr said when he saw a bird on a tree: "How happy are you O bird!
You eat of the fruit and you lay on the tree, and there is no
punishment or reward for you! I wish I was a tree on the side of the
road, so that a camel might eat me and excrete me, and I was never a
born human!!!"
Would you believe, by Allah (SWT), that if a man was of such spiritual
purity, as the Sunnis claim Abu Bakr to be, he would wish that he was never
born, let alone be a human? Indeed, Abu Bakr realized that his time has
come and all his actions will be scrolled before him in an open book, and
that is when his loss will be manifested; thus, he wished he was never born
a human! Allah (SWT) says in His (SWT) Holy Quran:
"Behold! Verily on the friends of Allah there is no fear, nor shall
they grieve; those who believe and (constantly) guard against evil;--
for them are Glad Tidings, in the life of the Present and in the
Hereafter: No change can there be in the Words of Allah. This is
indeed the supreme Triumph. [10:62-64]"
Also, Allah (SWT) says: "In the case of those who say, "Our Lord Is Allah,"
and further, stand straight and steadfast, the angels descend on them (from
time to time):
"Fear ye not!" (they suggest), "Nor grieve! But receive the Glad
Tidings of the Garden (of Bliss), the which ye were promised! We are
your protectors in this life and in the Hereafter: Therein shall ye
have all that you shall desire; therein shall ye have all that ye ask
for! -- A hospitable gift from One Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful!
[41:30-32]"
The question is that if these Glad Tidings from Allah (SWT) are for ALL of
the believers of mankind, and that they should have "...no fear, nor shall
they grieve...," why then were Abu Bakr and `Umar fearful? It should be
that they, if they were true believers, should be the least fearful of us,
for they were the companions of the Seal of Prophethood (PBUH&HF) himself!
But Allah (SWT) is the Most Truthful when He (SWT) says:
"Every soul that hath sinned, if it possessed all that is on earth,
would fain give it in ransom: They would declare (their) repentance
when they see the Chastisement: But the judgment between them will be
with justice, and no wrong will be done unto them. [10:54]"
Again, Allah (SWT) says:
"Even if the wrong-doers had all that there is on earth, and as much
more, (in vain) would they offer it for ransom from the pain of the
Chastisement on the Day Of Judgment: but something will confront them
from Allah, which they could have never counted upon! For the evils
of their deeds will confront them and they will be (completely)
encircled by that which they used to mock at! [39:47-48]"
These are the so-called companions that the Sunnis strike as an example of
spiritual purity and guidance!!! By Allah (SWT), they shall answer for
their deception of the Muslims all these years, and their concealment of
the truth.
Again, you might wonder, if the companions were of such high honor and
spiritual elevation, why did they kill `Uthman Ibn `Afan, the third Caliph
that destroyed Islam? Keep in mind that `Aisha, the wife of the Prophet
(PBUH&HF), herself called for the death of `Uthman -- check The History of
al- Tabari (Tarikh al-Tabari), v4, p407. Also check The History of
Ibn Atheer (Tarikh Ibn Atheer), v3, p206. Did you know also that
the Muslims during the reign of `Uthman were so infuriated by him, that
when he died, he was NOT buried in the same area as the other companions?
Nor was he washed or Islamically prepared for burial! If this is a rightly
guided caliph, I seriously question what is a MISGUIDED Caliph then?
Then we hear of `Aisha, the wife of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), who, along with
the other wives, was ordered by Allah (SWT) to:
"...stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like
that of the former times of Ignorance; and establish regular prayer,
and give Zakat and obey Allah and His Messenger ...[33:33]"
Why, then, if `Aisha was ordered to stay in her home after the death of the
Prophet (PBUH&HF), did she go out and ride a camel and wage war against al-
Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib (AS), whom she NEVER liked? (This is known as `The
Battle of the Camel') This is a sign for those who reflect.
==========================================
Side Comments: Responses to Sunni Brothers
==========================================
Some Sunni brothers, in response to my article when it was first posted,
have forwarded two contentions:
FIRST, they have defended the motives of Abu Bakr and `Umar in the
traditions I quoted above, such the saying of Umar that: ".......By Allah
(SWT), if I had enough gold to fill the entire earth, I would offer it to
ransom myself from Allah's (SWT) punishment before I see Him (SWT)." Or
the saying of Abu Bakr that: "How happy are you O bird! You eat of the
fruit and you lay on the tree, and there is no punishment or reward for
you! I wish I was a tree on the side of the road, so that a camel might
eat me and excrete me, and I was never a born human!!!"
The Sunni brothers contended that it is the spiritual purity of a believer
to wish that he was never born, as Abu Bakr did; or that small sins in the
eyes of a true believer warrant that he wishes to ransom himself with the
treasures of the Earth from the flames of the hellfire, as `Umar did, to
prove his sincerity and faith. The Sunni brothers also asserted that the
Prophet (PBUH&HF) asked forgiveness for himself (PBUH&HF). The SECOND
objection was that the verses I quoted from the Book of Allah (SWT) are NOT
addressing Abu Bakr and `Umar, and that those companions addressed are NOT
to be equated with the ranks of Abu Bakr and `Umar.
My response to their FIRST contention was as follows:
As for the Prophet (PBUH&HF) asking forgiveness for himself, then that
doesn't mean that he wishes that he (PBUH&HF) was never born; and that
doesn't invalidate his (PBUH&HF) infallibility. His (PBUH&HF) asking for
forgiveness is a sign of piety and an admittance of infirmity (weakness)
before Allah (SWT). It is not that he (PBUH&HF) has committed a grievous
sin, and is now asking for forgiveness; for if the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was a
sinner, who in the community will punish him (PBUH&HF)? Or who is
qualified to punish him (PBUH&HF)? -- for they are all sinners, and a
sinner cannot punish a sinner. Or if he (PBUH&HF) was a sinner, what kind
of idiot would follow him (PBUH&HF), and believe him (PBUH&HF) to be a
GUIDED Messenger (PBUH&HF) sent by He (SWT) Who created the Universe?
Furthermore, if he (PBUH&HF) was a sinner, that would mean that Allah
(SWT), by sending a sinful Messenger, approves of sin! (May Allah (SWT)
Forbid Such A Ludicrous Contention!) And we know that Allah's (SWT)
JUSTICE and His (SWT) abhorrence of sin and evil are among the First and
Foremost articles in our faith. As such, Allah (SWT) will NOT send a
sinful Messenger. Purified be ALL the Prophets and Messengers of Allah
(SWT) from such claims that scratch their character by claiming that they
are sinners. Or have we become like the Jews and the Christians, where
the Bible states that the Prophet Lot (AS) was drunk and lay naked before
his (AS) children!? This is a sign for those who reflect!!!
As for Abu Bakr and `Umar, I render the following: To ask forgiveness is
one thing, and to wish that you were never born, or to wish to ransom
yourself with all the gold of the earth, is another matter altogether.
Indeed, to wish that you were never born is an insult to Allah (SWT),
because you are claiming that Allah's (SWT) Justice and Mercy are not
enough for you. It is also an insult because there is an underlying
implication that your entry into hell is not really your fault; such an
insinuation means that your entry into hell is an act of injustice by Allah
(SWT)! (May Allah (SWT) Forbid Such A Ludicrous Contention!) If one truly
believes, he realizes that not the LEAST INJUSTICE will be done to him; and
he will NOT enter hell unless he TRULY DESERVES it. Such is the Justice of
Allah (SWT). Not like people who wish they were never born to hide their
OWN guilt and sins. A true believer submits to Allah (SWT) in totality,
and admits that he is weak and sinful; then he asks for forgiveness. He
doesn't insult Allah (SWT) by wishing that he was never born.
Indeed, the concept of sin and repentance has always baffled me, until
Allah (SWT) guided me. Listen to what the Shia say about repentance
(tawbah): "al-Tawbah (Repentance) is the mechanism by which Allah (SWT)
regulates evil in society. By giving each person a chance to repent, the
sinner is assured that he is NOT COMPELLED to keep on sinning. That
regulatory mechanism ensures that the feelings of guilt that usually
accompany acts of sin, are not turned into feelings of desperation and
uselessness, thereby leading to more sin and the destruction of society. It
(tawbah -- repentance) is a great mercy from Allah (SWT) indicating His
(SWT) infinite wisdom." I add, that sin itself is part of your own
creation. Not that Allah (SWT) has forced you to sin, and then punishes
you for it; but, rather, Allah (SWT) has made you an erring human being,
then He (SWT) tests you to see whether you will admit your error (sin), or
claim that you didn't commit any sin and it wasn't your fault, thereby
fostering a level of arrogance detested by Allah (SWT). Indeed, to sin and
admit your guilt SINCERELY with the true belief that it was all your fault
(when it really is), and then ask for forgiveness from Allah (SWT) is much
more favorable than insulting Allah (SWT) by wishing that you were never
born. I would also add that erring is part and parcel of the learning
process, which is an innate feature of our composition and existence. If we
don't make mistakes, we will never learn, and if we never learn, we will
never evolve and grow. It is the arrogance that has polluted the minds of
many individuals that has precluded our growth -- for we err and sin, yet
we refuse to acknowledge our fault therein!
Enough is what al-Imam Zayn al-'Aabidin (AS), the son of al- Imam al-Husain
(AS), said in his (AS) supplication (dua'): "O Allah, for even if I enter
the hellfire, I will tell the people there of my love of Thee!!!" What
does this eloquent, beautiful, and striking statement mean? It is by
Allah (SWT), one of the most beautiful and touching prayers I have ever
heard! Here's what it means before you jump to conclusions on your own:
al-Imam Zayn al-'Aabidin (AS) is saying: "O Allah, my belief in You is such
that I don't doubt Your Justice; for even if You throw me into hell, it is
because I deserve that and it is due to what I have done in this earthly
existence. Nonetheless, even if I enter the hellfire, I will tell the
people there of my love to (and faith in) Thee, such that You haven't done
ANY injustice to me, and I love You for Your Justice, Mercy, and
Greatness." That is what a true believer says, EVEN if he's entering the
hellfire!!! He doesn't wish he wasn't born! My response to their SECOND
contention is as follows: (The second contention, in case you forgot, was
that the verses I quoted from the Book of Allah (SWT) are NOT addressing
Abu Bakr and `Umar, and that those companions addressed are NOT to be
equated with the ranks of Abu Bakr and `Umar.)
ASSUMING that these verses are NOT addressing Abu Bakr and `Umar (and Allah
(SWT) knows best who He (SWT) is addressing), they (the verses),
nonetheless, illustrate an important point: NOT ALL the companions are
considered equal in the sight of Allah (SWT). As such, my question is: why
do the Sunnis claim that ALL the companions were righteous? Why, when Allah
(SWT), Himself, has acknowledged that CERTAIN companions are NOT righteous,
do the Sunnis stubbornly object to the Shia's view of the companions? It
is indeed ironic that Allah (SWT), our CREATOR Who (SWT) knows us BEST,
makes a statement about His (SWT) Own creatures, yet the Sunnis refuse to
abide by that (statement), and claim they know better!
At the expense of repetition, I reiterate my previous statement: If Allah
(SWT) has made a CLEAR distinction among the companions, why do the Sunnis
refuse to acknowledge that?
Furthermore, my Sunni brothers, by suggesting (themselves) that these
verses address companions other than Abu Bakr and `Umar, have advocated and
strengthened the Shia's claim: NOT ALL the companions were righteous; and,
as such, there is a favoritism extended by Allah (SWT) to some companions,
but NOT to others. Similarly, as Allah (SWT) favors CERTAIN companions, so
do the Shia take the same stance.
Is it not closer to reason that we make distinctions among the companions?
Didn't the disciples of Jesus (AS) betray him (AS)? Didn't the Jews betray
Musa (AS)? And so on... Are the companions of the Prophet Muhammad
(PBUH&HF) any different? Are they not humans who may err and sin? Do you
not see a pattern of differentiation among all of Allah's (SWT) creation?
Are all believers, whether today or in times past, of equal stature? Do we
not observe that some believers are sincere and others not? Why then do the
Sunnis refuse to accept this truism? Even if the Shia EXCLUDED Abu Bakr
and `Umar from their direct attack, the Sunnis will STILL REFUSE to
acknowledge that some of the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) companions were non-
righteous, malicious individuals. By Allah (SWT)! Didn't Allah (SWT)
devote a WHOLE Surah (Chapter) in His (SWT) Book about the hypocrites? And
doesn't Allah (SWT) say:
"They are in varying grades in the sight of Allah, and Allah sees well
all that they do. [3:163]"
Another remark, which my Sunni brothers overlooked in defense of their
arguments, might be that the individuals addressed in the aforementioned
verses or the Hypocrites Chapter are NOT considered companions in the sight
of the Sunnis. If my Sunni brothers should ever forward such a remark, my
response would be:
The definition of the word "companions," according to the Sunnis, is: ANY
person who has seen the Prophet (PBUH&HF) is considered a companion. The
generation that appeared AFTER the Prophet's (PBUH&HF) death are called
"Tabi-'uoon -- The Followers." As such, the above contention fails again.
Now, if my Sunni brothers suggest that the word "companions" ONLY addresses
those sincere believers that were close to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) and
memorized the Quran and the hadiths, and kept constant prayer, then they
have said EXACTLY what the Shia have been always trying to say: NOT ALL THE
COMPANIONS WERE RIGHTEOUS. Nonetheless, EVEN under this assertion, the
Shia will refuse to admit Abu Bakr and `Umar, among others, to be included
among the ranks of the righteous; not after what they have done to the
family of the Prophet (PBUH&HF).
Suffice it to conclude with what al-Zamakhshari, the great Sunni scholar
and poet, said:
Doubt and conflict have abounded,
each claims he is on the right path
I have chosen to hold tight to (the belief that)
"There Is No Deity, But Allah"
and my love for Ahmad (Muhammad) and Ali
A dog won a great reward
by loving the People of the Cave (Ahl al-Kahf),
how, then, can I lose anything
by loving the family of the Prophet (PBUH&HF)!?
In conclusion, I appeal to your sense of truth and honesty to objectively
study the arguments presented by the Shia. After all we say, do you still
believe that we are Kuffar? Are we asking you to blindly accept our
arguments, or are we supporting our belief with unimpeachable proofs? Are
we not using your OWN books as evidence? Question and ask for the truth.
May Allah (SWT) forgive us our sins, and guide us to that which pleases Him
(SWT).
*************************************************************************
The Enemies of Islam as Depicted in Nahjul Balagha
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[ Here is a general description of the enemies of Islam,
as well as its true followers, and what happenned to them.]
"The sway of tyrants was long, so that their tyranny and oppression
could be fully exposed and their infamy and disgrace could be
disclosed. They deserved the revolution which overtook them. They were
destroyed and annihilated, and the people were rescued from calamities
and destruction, were relieved of war, and bloodshed, which were
brought about by the tyrants.
"The pious people, who bravely passed through those days, patiently
bore the suffering and gave their lives for the cause of justice and
Islam. They humbled themselves, before God, they never for a moment
magnified their patience and bravery and never imagined that they were
obliging God and His religion. Then God ordained that the times of
trials and tribulations should come to an end. They were given
permission to defend their faith with the help of their swords and
they obeyed the orders of God according to the teaching of the Holy
Prophet(AS).
"Things continued like that until God called the Prophet back. Then
many became apostate, or turned to heathenism, they were damned by the
preversity of their minds and waywardness. They put faith in their
relatives, who were misguided, or in instigators who were heathens.
They discarded the medium (the progeny of the Prophet), whom
they were ordered to love, to respect and to follow, and who would
have kept them within the limits of the true religion. Thus, they
undermined the foundation of the true religion and tried to introduce
heresy in Islam. They adopted the ways of the Pharoahs and his people,
were attached to worldly power and pleasures, and drifted away from
true religion."
==========
Khutba 153
==========
"O people! remember that the present time is the time when something
which has been promised will happen, and events which you do not know
or cannot forsee will take place. During the days of trials and
temptations, those who recognize the significance and worth of the
Ahlul-Bayt will, like a person walking in the dark with a lamp in his
hand, not only go safely through the times, but will be of help to
others and will act like pious people. This will free the people from
oppression and tyrrany , will educate the ill-informed and ignorant,
will introduce reforms into society, and will cement the gaps which
wickedness and impiety may have created in the true teachings of
Islam. For some time, he (i.e. Imam Mahdi) will be hidden from the
eyes of man in such a way that the greates searcher of the day will
not be able to find a trace of him however he may try.
But when he will appear, he will educate mankind in such a way that
human vision will expand through the teachings of the Quran, men will
be able to acquire true wisdom, and their minds will be able to rise
to higher planes of science and philosophy."
I strongly urge Muslims to reject any false myths about our Islamic
heritage. Many of you already know the Sunni view of history. I stronly
urge you to read the Sunni works in history such as of al-Tabari, and Syed
Amir Ali, to understand the forces that shaped the Muslim world in the 1st
century AH. They are still alive and kicking today.
Comments
Post a Comment