Umar formulated the Non-Appointment Theory

THE THEORY OF NON - APPOINTMENT AND WHY IT WAS INVENTED

Very soon after the arrival of the Prophet at Medina, it became evident to all that a Muslim state was in the making. With this knowledge, the idea naturally entered every mind as to who the next ruler of this state after the Prophet would be. As time went on and the state expanded, this idea took deeper root and different shapes in the minds of different persons. It was all too plain that the Prophet (P) had selected Imam Ali to be his successor. But this was not to the liking of many people, and their sullen mood was fed and fostered for their own ends by those who thought themselves to be in a position to make a bid for the prize. They set about canvassing and inviting people to their way of thinking, with the result that a party comprising this ambitious and refractory element was soon formed. By the time the question of the succession arose, this opposition party had gained considerable strength and momentum of its own. The gradual acquisition of power and the cause that led to their ultimate success, form the subject matter of the following pages. But a formidable difficulty faced the opposition from the outset. According to the tenets of Islam and the behests of the Qur’an, they had to yield unquestioning submission to the will of the Prophet and were to carry out his orders without demur, nay without feeling even the slightest disinclination in their hearts. They were to take these orders with a joyful acceptance springing from their firm conviction in the infallibility of the Prophet and the honesty of his purpose. In fact this was the main condition of their being accepted into the fold of Islam. Without this unquestioning submission and unhesitating obedience, they could not be Muslims(1) .

(1)The Qur ‘an: Sura 4, vs 59, 60.

Now the dilemma before them was this: if they unquestioningly accepted and obeyed the orders of the Prophet designating Imam Ali as his successor, they would have to give up the long cherished desire of their hearts and lose the Caliphate for ever; yet if they were to declare themselves openly in opposition to the wishes of the Prophet, they would be stigmatized as Kafirin (unbelievers) and so lose all influence with the people, which would be tantamount to losing the Caliphate anyway as no opponent of the Prophet could be his successor. It was certainly a mastermind of politics who devised the means to steer clear of this rock. The device was this: instead of openly disobeying the orders of the Prophet, they feigned not to believe that the Prophet (P) had designated Imam Ali, or anyone else for that matter, as his successor. This is the raison d'etre of the Non-appointment Theory.

The person who formulated this Theory was definitely 'Umar, and it has become an accepted article of faith with one of the two " factions of the Muslim nation into which it has since been divided on the question of the Caliphate, as we have learnt before. On his death-bed, when asked to nominate' his successor, 'Umar said that if he did so he would be following the example of one who was better than himself, namely Abu Bakr, and that if he did not designate anyone as his successor, he would be following the example of one who was also better than himself, that is, the Prophet(1)". 

It has been an article of faith with this faction ever since(2). They have proclaimed it as an established fact that the Prophet (P) did not designate anyone as his successor, whether Imam Ali or Abu Bakr.

Not only this; they maintain that the Prophet did not give any direction as to how the succession should be regulated. At the Saqifa, where Abu Bakr was selected as Caliph, no definite direction of the Prophet was cited and none was followed (3).

The so-called election at the Saqifa, the arguments that were advanced there, and the conduct of 'Umar and Abu Bakr in abruptly leaving the dead body of the Prophet and 'hastening to the Saqlfa to get Abu Bakr selected as the Caliph can have a meaning only on the assumption that the Prophet did not nominate his own successor.

All the Muslim writers whose works on Islamic History have been acknowledged as authentic have been -Sunnis, that is, belonging to the majority party who formulated the Non-appointment Theory, and they believe as an article of their faith that Abu Bakr was rightfully elected by the Umma as Caliph (4).

This explains why they are unanimous in saying that the Prophet did not nominate his successor. But as a piece of historical evidence, this unanimity is of no value.

1) Muslim: "Sahih", Vol. 6, pp, 4, 5; Al-Bukhari: "Kitab al-Ahkarn", "Bab al-Istikhlaf", at-Tabari: Vol. 5, p. 34; Ibn al-Athir: "Tankh al-Karnil", Vol. 3, p. 25.
(2) Imam Al-Ghazali: "Ehya' al-'Uliim", Vol. l , Rukn 4, p. 86; Ibn Hijr AI-Asqalani: "Fath al-Bari'" Vol. 13, p. 177; Ibn :Hijr al-Makki: "as-Sawa'iq". Chptr l. Fas1 4. Pg 15.
(3) Al-Bukhari: "Kitab al-Ahkam", "Bab al-Istikhalaf"; Muslim: "Bab al- Istikhlaf Tarakah, Vol. 6, pp, 4, 5; at-Tabarl: Vol. 5, p. 14; Ibn Al-Athir: "al-Kamil", VoL 3, p. 25; Husain Deyar Bakri: "Tarikh al-Khamis", Vol. 2, p. 26; Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal: "Musnad", Vol 1, pp. 43,46,47; Vol. 6, p. 63; Ali ibn Burhan Ed-Dine "as-Slra al-Halabiyya", Vol. 3, p. 310.
(4) Shibli: "Al-Ma'rnun", Part 1, p. 61.

Preparatio​n of the attack on the house of J. Zahra (sa) - Part 3

By Br. Hisham Merchant

Umar was incensed by the reply of Janabe Zahra (s.a.) and said, “Why should these women interfere in our work?” He ordered the people present there to collect firewood.[1]

As per another report, on hearing the reply of Janabe’ Zahra (a.s.), Umar became extremely restless. He said to Khalid ibne Waleed and Qunfuz, “Gather wood and fire.”[2] Abu Bakr told Umar to call the most hardhearted and insensitive person that he could find.[3] Go to their house and draw them out. If they do not agree, then wage war with them.[4]

Umar gathered a large group[5] which included the companions[6], Mohajir, Ansar[7], those who were freed after the conquest of Mecca[8], hypocrites[9], some weak Arabs, foot soldiers[10] and led them to the house of Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.). A narration reports that the group was made up of 300 people.[11] Some narrators have even reported a higher number. Some of the members of that group were”

1.      Umar bin Khattab[12]
2.      Khalid bin Waleed[13]
3.      Qunfuz[14]
4.      Abdur Rahman bin Auf[15]
5.      Aseed bin Azeer (Haseen) Ash’haly[16]
6.      Salmah bin Salaamah bin Duqsh Ash’haly[17]
7.      Salmah bin Aslam.[18] According to one tradition it is Salmah bin Aslam bin Jarish Ash’haly
8.      Mughyara bin Sha’ab[19]
9.      Abu Obaydah bin Jarrah[20]
10.  Sabith bin Qays bin Shemas[21]
11.  Mohammed bin Salmah[22]
12.  Saalem Maula, Abu Huzayfah[23]
13.  Aslam Adavi[24]
14.  Ayyash bin Rabi’[25]
15.  Hirmaz Al Farsi (Grandfather of Umar bin Abil Miqdam)[26]
16.  Usman[27]
17.  Zaid bin Lubayd[28]
18.  Abdullah bin Abi Rabi’[29]
19.  Abdullah bin Zama’[30]
20.  Sa’ad bin Malik[31]
21.  Hammad[32]

Some narrators have reported that Abu Bakr too was present in this group.[33] Some have mentioned the name of Zayd ibn Saabit.[34] Umar said to them, “Come, let us all collect firewood.”[35] The people brought wood[36] and fire[37], while Umar himself clutched a lighted rope[38] (or as per another narration, Umar was holding a lighted piece of wood) [39]. He was heard saying, “If these people do not come out of their house to pay their allegiance, I will burn down their house.” The people asked him, “Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.) is within this house. Will you also burn her along with the house?” He replied, “I will confront Fatemah.”[40]

[1] Sulaym Ibne' Qays, page 83
[2] Sulaym Ibne' Qays, page 250
[3] Insaabul Ashraf, volume 1 page 587/588
[4] Eqdul Fareed, volume 1 page 259 (Egypt edition)
[5] Al Ya’qoobi, volume 2 page 126; Al Mustarshid page 377/378; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha volume 2 page 49; Al Ihtejaj page 70
[6] Al Kashkul, page 73/74
[7] Tareekhe' Khamees, volume 2 page 169
[8] Ilmul Yaqeen, volume 2 page 676
[9] Kamil Bahai, volume 1 page 305; Hadeeqatush Shiah, page 30
[10] Misbah ul Jaraer, volume 463/464
[11] Jannatul Kholood, page 19
[12] All historians are unanimous that Umar was present in that group
[13] Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 66; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 57; Al Ikhtesas, page 176, Sulaym Ibne' Qays, page 251; Kamil Bahai, volume 1 page 305; Al Kashkul, page 73/74; Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 178/179; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 290/347 and volume 35 page 13.
[14] Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 307/308; Al Jamal page 117; Sulaym Ibne' Qays, page 174; Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 178/179/400; Hadeeqatush Shiah, page 30; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 290/347 and volume 53 page 17
[15] As Sonan by Behqi, volume 7 page 152; Nustadrak volume 3 page 66; Hayatus Sahabah by Kanz Halawi, volume 2 page 13; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 47; Al Kashkul, page 73/74; Hadeeqatush Shiah, page 30
[16] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 50 and volume 6 page 11/47; Al Imamah was Siyasah, volume 1 page 17; 49; Al Ihtejaj page 73; Tareekhe' Khamees, volume 2 page 169
[17] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 50 and volume 6 page 11/47; Al Ihtejaj page 73; ; Tareekhe' Khamees, volume 2 page 169
[18] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 6 page 11; Al Imamah was Siyasah, volume 1 page 17
[19] Al Mustarshid, page 378
[20] Al Ikhtesas, page 176; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 66; Kaukabe' Durriyah, volume 1 page 194
[21] Kaukabe' Durriyah, volume 1 page 194
[22] Tareekhe' Khamees, volume 2 page 169; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 47
[23] Al Jamal, page 117, Al Ikhtesas, page 176; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 67
[24] Ash Shafi by Ibne’ Hamzah, volume 4 page 173
[25] Ash Shafi by Ibne’ Hamzah, volume 4 page 173
[26] Al Ikhtesas, page 176; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 66/67
[27] Al Ikhtesas, page 176; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 66/67
[28] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 3 page 56 and volume 6 page 47
[29] Tashbeetul Imamah, page 17
[30] Masalebun Nawaseb, page 136
[31] Masalebun Nawaseb, page 136
[32] Masalebun Nawaseb, page 136
[33] Al Ikhtesas, page 176; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 66; Kaukabe' Durriyah, volume 1 page 194/195. Perhaps this is taken from the narration reported by Shaykh Mufeed in his Amali, page 49/50
[34] The name of Zayd bin Saabit is in a fabricated tradition which Abu Sa’eed Khudri has narrated in Kanzul Ummal, volume 5 page 613
[35] Dalaelul Imamah volume 2; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 293
[36] Taraef page 239; Nahjul Haq, page 271; Sulaym Ibne' Qays page 173
[37] Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 307, Sulaym Ibne' Qays page 250;Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 178/179
[38] An Nasabul Ashraf, volume 1 page 576
[39] Eqdul Fareed, volume 4 page 242; Taarekhe’ Abul Fida’, volume 1 page 156
[40] Ash Shafi by Ibne’ Hamzah, volume 4 page 173

Umar and Abu Bakr meets Janabe Zahra (sa)

By Br. Hisham Merchant

The effects of this tyranny stayed on the holy body of Janabe’ Zahra (a.s.). After this, she remained sad and became sick, till she was confined to the bed.

The body started becoming weak and thin and nothing remained till she was reduced to a shadow of herself. She became severely sick. She did not permit those who had troubled her to visit her. Nobody saw her smile towards the end of her life.

When her sickness intensified Umar told Abu Bakr, “I wish to visit Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.). We have offended her.” They sought permission to meet her, but she did not grant them permission. They kept on insisting. Then, one day they met Hazrat Ali (a.s.) and said, “You know what has transpired between us and Janabe’ Zahra. If you find it appropriate, then obtain us permission to meet her so that we can apologise for our crimes.

In another narration it is found, that when Abu Bakr realised he was not getting permission, he took an oath that till he secured permission to meet Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.) and pleased her, he would not sit in the shade. That night he spent in Baqi under the sky. Umar told Hazrat Ali (a.s.), “he (Abu Bakr) is old, weak hearted, he has spent a night in the cave with the Prophet (s.a.w.). We visited Janabe’ Zahra many times, sought permission to meet her, but she refused. We want to meet and please her. If you find it appropriate, then obtain permission for us to meet her.”

Hazrat Ali went to Janabe’ Zahra (a.s.) and told her, “you know the intensity with which these two had troubled you. They often came (to meet you), but you refused them permission. Now they have requested me that I obtain permission for them from you.”

She (a.s.) said, “By Allah, I will never grant them permission, nor shall I talk to them. And I shall complain to my father about all that they have done to me.”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “I have spoken to them about getting them permission.”

She (a.s.) said, “if that is the case, then this house is yours, and I am dutiful to you. I shall not oppose you. You give permission to whomsoever you wish.” Hazrat Ali (a.s.) obtained permission for them.

When they came and conveyed salaams to Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.), she turned her face away from them, and did not reply to their salutations. They went to another side and saluted her, but yet, she did not reply and turned her face away. This happened many times.

Janabe’ Zahra (a.s.) said, “O Ali put the curtain.” She said to the ladies present, “turn my face the other way.” When she turned her face away, Abu Bakr said, “O daughter of the Prophet (s.a.w.), we have come in your presence, to please you and seek refuge from your annoyance. We request you to forgive us.”

She (a.s.) answered, “I will not talk to you, not even a word. I shall complain to my father about your atrocities.”

They said, “We seek forgiveness from you, forgive us. And whatever difficulties you faced on account of us, do not complain about them. We confess to our crimes and request you not be offended with us.”

Janabe’ Zahra (a.s.) faced Ali (a.s.) and said, “I will not talk to these two. I shall ask them about what they have heard from the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.), and if they answer correctly then I shall consider.”

The replied, “please speak up. Question us and we shall not say anything, but the truth.”

She (a.s.) said, “I ask you by God, did you hear the Prophet say, Fatemah is a piece of my flesh, and I am from her. Whoever troubles her has troubled me. And whoever troubles me has troubled Allah. Whoever troubled her after my death, is like the one who troubled her during my lifetime. And whoever troubled her during my life, is like the one who troubled her after my death.’

Both replied, “Yes, we have heard this.”

She said, “praised be to Allah! Then she continued, “O Allah! I make you a witness, and make all those present here a witness and confirm that these two have troubled me during my life and after my death. I shall not speak to you both till I am alive. And whatever you have done to me, I shall complain to Allah about it all.”

Hearing this Abu Bakr began crying and complained, “I wish my mother had not given birth to me.” Umar said, “I am surprised at how the people made you the Caliph! You have lost your senses due to your old age. You cry on account of the displeasure of women, and are pleased with their pleasure.”

In another narration it is found that Janabe’ Zahra (s.a.) said, “I give you God’s oath, and ask you – have you not heard the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.) say, ‘Fatemah’s pleasure is my pleasure and her displeasure is my displeasure. Whoever loves my daughter Zahra loves me. Whoever has hurt her has hurt me.’

Both answered in the affirmative.  She said, “I make God and the angels a witness and say that you both have hurt me, and have not pleased me. When I meet the Prophet, I shall complain to him about you both.”

After they left, Janabe’ Zahra asked Hazrat Ali (a.s.), “Did I do what you wanted me to do. Ali (a.s.) replied, “you did exactly that.” ‘If I ask you something, will you do that.’ ‘Yes.’ “For God’s sake, these two should not recite my funeral prayers nor visit my grave.” Abu Bakr started weeping, while she (s.a.) said, ‘By Allah! I shall curse you in every prayer.”[1]

[1] al – Imamah wal Siyasah pg 19, 20. The author says “When Abu Bakr went to visit Janabe Zahra (s.a) at the time of her illness due to the injury caused by the falling door, she (s.a) said “I will pray to Allah that He should punish you”  This has been narrated by Balazari in his book Ansaab – ul – Ashraaf 10 / 79; Jahiz in his book Ar Rasael page 467; Shar’he Nahjul Balagha volume 16 page 264. The visit of these two elders to the house of Janabe’ Zahra (s.a) at the time of her injury has been mentioned by many scholars. Some of the notable books  are Sayyada Fatima Zahra (s.a) page 145; Ahlul Bait (a.s) page 168 by Taufeeq Abu Ilm; al Imam Ali volume 1 page 193 by Ustad Abdul Fatah; Fatima Zahra volume 2 page 253 by Ustad Abdul Fatah; Qurratul Aainain page 229 by Mohaddis Dehlavi; Sulaym Ibne’ Qays page 253; Kifayatul Asar page 60; Dalailul Imamah page 45; As Shafee volume 4 page 214; Shar’he Nahjul Balagha volume 16 page 218; Ealalush Sharaee page 186/187; Beharul Anwaar volume 28 page 303, volume 36 page 307, volume 43 page 170/202/203. The author (of al Imamah) says “Why did these two delay in paying a visit to Janabe Zahra (s.a) till the time that it had become clear that she would succumb to her injuries? Why did she (s.a) refuse to meet them at all while these two pleaded with Hazrat Ali (a.s) to let them come in the house. Even they finally entered the house, why did she (s.a) not reply to their salutations? Why did she (s.a) refuse to forgive them while forgiving is a very noble characteristic and it has been emphasized in the Quran as well in the traditions? The real reasons for all this are very clear. Their visit to inquire about the health of Janabe Fatima (s.a) was politically motivated while their real intention was to keep the truth away from the masses and it was precisely for this reason that they delayed their visit of Janabe Zahra (s.a). When Hazrat Ali (a.s) allowed them to enter in the house, then too she (s.a) was firm in not talking to them. In fact she turned the table on them when she said to Abu Bakr that she (s.a) would pray to Allah to chastise him. On hearing this, Abu Bakr ran out of the house in tears. The one who accepts his mistake is forgiven, not the one who is obstinate. If these two were truly repentant then they should have given the caliphate back to Hazrat Ali (a.s) to whom it lawfully belonged. If the usurper is regretful of his actions then its remedy is to return that thing which he has usurped. Merely seeking forgiveness is not sufficient. Besides, why was Fadak – which was the right of Janabe Zahra (s.a) not returned back to her? Besides this is such a heinous crime that the entire humanity is engulfed in it. So how could she (s.a) forgive these two?

Umar forcibly dragged Hazrat Ali (a.s.) from his House - Part 1

By Br. Hisham Merchant

The people forcibly dragged Hazrat Ali (a.s.) from his house.[1] Umar was especially harsh on Hazrat Ali (a.s.)[2] and was pulling him mercilessly.[3] The rest of the people followed this procession. Hazrat Ali (a.s.), while talking about this incident says, “I was dragged by the people for bay’at just as a camel is dragged.[4] The swords of the people were drawn and their spears were shining in readiness.” His condition was such that he was in a state of extreme sadness and often was filled with fury. But with great patience he overcame his anger.[5] He was also extremely weary and tired.[6]

In another narration it is reported that he (a.s.) was made to run and brought to the mosque.[7] The people were watching this as if it were some great spectacle or show. The streets of Medina were packed with people.[8] At every place along the journey, he was told, “C’mon do bay’at.”[9] Salman, Abu Zar, Miqdad, Ammar and Boraydah were with him and they kept on telling the people – “Alas, how soon have you have done khayanat with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and openly displayed the malice and hatred, which you had concealed in your hearts.”

Boraydah Ibne Khaseeb Al Aslami narrates, “O Umar, you are mistreating the brother of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) and his successor in this manner; and have caused grievous harm to his (s.a.w.) daughter, while the Quraysh are sufficiently aware of your state.”[10]

At that time, Hazrat Ali (a.s.) was the victim of treachery and injustice. He was calling out to the people for help.[11] He said to them, “I swear by Allah, if I had my sword in my hand, then none amongst you would have had the courage to perform such deeds. If I had been supported by only 40 companions, I would have done jehad with you and scattered your ranks. May Allah curse those people who turned away and betrayed me after completing my bay’at.”[12]

He was also heard saying, “Alas O Ja’far. Sadly Ja’far is not amongst us today. Nor is Hamzah. Alas, Hamzah is not there with us today.”[13]

The people took Hazrat Ali (a.s.) near the grave of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). He (a.s.) stood there at the grave and recited,

قَالَ ابْنَ أُمَّ إِنَّ الْقَوْمَ اسْتَضْعَفُونِي وَكَادُوا يَقْتُلُونَنِي فَلاَ تُشْمِتْ بِيَ الأعْدَاء وَلاَ تَجْعَلْنِي مَعَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَْ

(Surah Aaraf: 150)

“O my brother, the people have weakened me and have sought to kill me.” At this, hands were seen raised from the holy grave. The people were aware that these blessed hands were none than those of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.).

Adi ibn Hatim says, “When I saw Ali (a.s.) in this condition my heart was filled with so much pity for him as it had been never been filled before for any person.”

Witnessing this scene, Salman said, “Does one behave in such a lowly manner with somebody[15] of such high stature? I swear by Allah, if these people (Ahle’ Bayt) pray to Allah, the skies would fall down on the earth.” Abu Zar said, “I wish we had been armed with our swords today.”[16]

[1] Al Mustarshid, page 371; Al Ihtejaj, page 76; Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 138/139; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 11
[2] Al Mustarshid, page 378; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 2 page 50 and volume 6 page 47
[3] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 6 page 49
[4] Ali (as) wrote this in one of his letters to Mua’wiyah – Waqae’ Siffeen, page 87; Al Fotooh by Aaseme’ Kufi, volume 2 page 578; Eqdul Fareed, volume 4 page 308/309; Nahjul Balagha, page 122/123;Al Fosoolul Mukhtarah, page 287; Taqreebul Ma’aref, page 237; Manaqebe’ Khwarazmi, page 175; Al Ihtejaj, page 171; Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 1 page 74/15/173; Jawaherul Matalib, volume 1 page 357/374; As Seraatul Mustaqeem, volume 3 page 11
[5] Misbahul Zaraes, page 463/464
[6] Tareekhe' Tabari, volume 2 page 203
[7] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 6 page 45
[8] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 6 page 49
[9] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 6 page 45
[10] Sulaym Ibne' Qays, page 251
[11] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 11 page 111
[12] Al Ihtejaj, page 73
[13] Shar'he Nahjul Balagha, volume 11 page 111
[14] Basaerud Darajat, page 275; Al Ikhtesas, page 275; Al Manaqeb, volume 2 page 247; Al Kashkul, volume 3 page 244; Ash Shafi, volume 3 page 79
[15] Al Ikhtesas page 11
[16] Rejale’ Kashi, volume 1 page 37

Umar forcibly dragged Hazrat Ali (a.s.) from his House - Part 2

By Br. Hisham Merchant

The people took Hazrat Ali (a.s.) to Abu Bakr and made him sit before him.[1] At that moment Umar stood behind him holding a sword to his neck. Khalid ibne Waleed, Abu Obaydah bin Jarrah, Saalem Maula Abu Huzayfah, Ma’az bin Jabal Mughayrah bin Shoaybah, Aseed ibne Saeed and some other companions were gathered there with their arms.

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, How soon have you attacked the house of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.). O Abu Bakr! On the basis of which right, on the basis of which inheritance or which merit are you seeking allegiance from the people. Did you not, on the order of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.), give bay’at to me and acknowledge my wilayat and leadership?[2] At this, Umar sat on Hazrat Ali’s (a.s.) thigh and held him tight with both hands.[3] He shook Hazrat Ali (a.s.) and said, “Leave all this aside and just do bay’at. ” Hazrat Ali (a.s.) challenged him saying, “and if I do not agree to give bay’at? ” They said, “We will kill you with utmost disgrace and humiliation.” Some narrations attribute this statement to Abu Bakr and others to Umar – “We swear by La ilaha illallah, we will sever your head.”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) asked, “Will you kill a servant of God and the brother of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.)?” Umar or Abu Bakr replied, “We accept that you are a servant of God. But your claim to be the brother of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) is not correct.”[4]

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “if my Lord had not made a clear decision in this regard, and if my brother, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) had not taken a covenant from me, I would have shown you all whose helpers and aides are less.” Then Ali (a.s.) turned his attention towards the people and said, “O Muslims, Mohajir and Ansar both, I ask you for the sake of Allah, did you not hear the narration of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) on the day of Ghadeer? Did you not hear what he (s.a.w.) said on the Day of Tabuk?”

Then Hazrat Ali (a.s.) questioned the people one by one about all those reports, which were made by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) in his favor on innumerable occasions. Each one of them said, yes, we have heard this from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.).

Sensing that the people may change their minds and become prepared to support Hazrat Ali (a.s.), Abu Bakr stepped forward and said, “Whatever you have said is correct and is the truth. We heard all this with our ears and captured it well within our hearts. But then we also heard the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) say, “Allah has chosen us, Ahle’ Bayt (a.s.) and granted us respect and honor. He favored us and chose the hereafter for us over this world. Surely Allah did not ordain both Nabuwwat and Khilafat for us (at one place).”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “Has any companion other than you heard this tradition?”

Umar said, “The caliph of Allah has spoken the truth. Yes, I have heard this tradition too.”

Abu Obaydah who was the freed slave of Huzayfah, Salem and Ma’az bin Jabal also said that yes, we have heard this tradition from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.).

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “In reality, you are fulfilling the accursed pact, which you made amongst yourself in the Ka’bah – that if ever Mohammed is killed or departs from this world, we will snatch the caliphate from the Ahle’ Bayt (a.s.).”

Hearing this, Abu Bakr was stunned. He said, “How did you come to know of this? We never disclosed this to you.”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “Zubayr, Salman, Abu Zar and Miqdad – I ask you one question for the sake of Allah. Were you not present when the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) narrated that “some people” – he (s.a.w.) even took their names – had made a pact amongst themselves. Is this not the same pact which is being put into effect here?

All of them answered in the affirmative and confirmed that they had heard this narration of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) – that these people had made a disruptive pact amongst themselves to act in this manner – that if I die, O Ali, these people will seek to take the caliphate far away from you. At that time, you had asked the Holy Prophet what would be the best course of action when this event occurs.

The Holy Propet (s.a.w.) said, “If you find supporters and helpers then perform jehad with the Quran. If you are forsaken and do not find helpers, then take all possible steps to protect your life.”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “I swear by Allah! If the 40 people who swore allegiance to me would have been faithful, I would have surely done jehad with you for the sake of Allah. I swear by Allah, you will not find this in your progeny till the Day of Qiyamat. And you dare to falsify this saying of Allah with the narration of the Prophet (s.a.w.)?”

أَمْ يَحْسُدُونَ النَّاسَ عَلَى مَا آتَاهُمُ اللهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ فَقَدْ آتَيْنَآ آلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَآتَيْنَاهُم مُّلْكًا عَظِيمًا

(Surah Nisa: verse 54)

“In this verse, the word Kitab means Nabuwwat, Hukumat means Sunnat, Mulk means Khilafat and Ale’ Ibrahim means us, Ahle’ Bayt (a.s.)”

At this moment, Boraydah stood up and said, “O Umar, did not the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) order you and Abu Bakr to go to Ali (a.s.) and to convey salaam to him and address him as Ameerul Mo’meneen? Then you both questioned the Prophet (s.a.w.) whether this order from was from Allah (s.w.t.). The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) had replied, yes.”

Abu Bakr spoke up, “O Boraydah, this was as you say. But you were not present there while we were. After this, there arose a completely different situation.”

Another narration reports that Abu Bakr replied, “Yes, it was as you say. But after this, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said that both Nabuwwat and Khilafat will not be present in Ahle’ Bayt (a.s.).”

Boraydah said, “By Allah, did the Prophet (s.a.w.) say such a thing?”

Umar shouted, “What do you have to do with these matters. Why are you interfering in this issues?”
Boraydah replied, “I do not like to stay in the same city as you.” After this Umar ordered that Boraydah be thrown out of the city.

Then Janabe’ Salman arose and addressed the gathering as follows, “O Abu Bakr, fear Allah. Step down from your position and return the seat to it rightful owners. By this action, people will be able to lead their lives in peace and safety till the Day of Qiyamat. There will remain no dispute amongst the people.”
Abu Bakr did not have any reply to this. Salman repeated his words. Umar pushed Salman and said to him, “what say do you have in these matters?” Salman asked Umar to calm down and addressed Abu Bakr, “O Abu Bakr, relieve your position and return it to its rightful owners. By this action, people will be able to lead their lives in peace and safety till the Day of Qiyamat. If you do not do so, there will be bloodshed and dispute will be rife amongst the people. By Allah! If I knew that I could protect a single oppressed person, or be the cause of pride for Islam, then I would fight shoulder to shoulder with my sword. But you have joined forces to rebel against the successor of the Prophet (s.a.w.). Then become ready to face calamities and despair of ever regaining peace.”

Then Janabe’ Abu Zar arose and addressed the gathering as follows, “O the people who have been deviated after the prophet! O the people who have been disgraced by their disobedience! Allah (s.w.t.) has said

إِنَّ اللهَ اصْطَفَى آدَمَ وَنُوحًا وَآلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ ذُرِّيَّةً بَعْضُهَا مِن بَعْضٍ وَاللهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ

“Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations. Offspring, one of the other; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing”
(Surah Ale Imran verse 33/34)

They are the respected Aale’ Mohammed from the progeny of Hazrat Nuh (a.s.). They are Ale’ Ibrahim who continued from Janabe’ Ismail. They are the family of the prophet (s.a.w.). The centre of prophethood, the place of angels. Their position is elevated like the heavens, firm like the mountains and sacred like the Ka’aba. They are the fountainhead of purity and the rising stars, the blessed tree, sweet nectar and beautiful blossoms.

The Holy Prophet Mohammed Mustafa (s.a.w.) Khatmun Nabiyyeen (the seal of the prophets) is the master of all prophets and Ali (a.s.) is the leader of vicegerents – the chief of the pious, a shining star for the guided. He is Siddeeqe’ Akbar and Farooque’ Azam and none other than him is the heir of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and the inheritor of his knowledge. He has more authority on the selves of Mo’meneen than they have over themselves. As Allah declared in the Holy Quran,

النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ وَأُوْلُو الْأَرْحَامِ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلَى بِبَعْضٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللهِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ إِلاَ أَن تَفْعَلُوا إِلَى أَوْلِيَائِكُم مَّعْرُوفًا كَانَ ذٰلِكَ فِي الْكِتَابِ مَسْطُورً

“The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, and his wives are (as) their mothers; and the possessors of relationships have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other) believers, and (than) those who have fled (their homes), except that you do some good to your friends; this is written in the book ”
(Surah Ahzab verse 6)

Then you prefer those whom Allah has preferred and follow those whom Allah has ordered to follow. Then whoever Allah has chosen as his wali and his representative, you accept him and submit to him.”

After this Abu Zar, Miqdad and Ammar addressed Hazrat Ali (a.s.), “What is your command for us.” If you order us, we will keep fighting for the truth till our death. Hazrat Ali (a.s.) replied, “May Allah bless you with His Mercy. Be silent. Remember what the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) has willed. Then these people become silent.

After this the grandmother of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and Janabe’ Umme' Salma came forward and said, “O Ateeq! To what extent have you expressed your intense jealousy for the family of Mohammed” Umar ordered them to be expelled from the mosque and said, “What do we have to do with the talks of women.”[5]

Then Umar turned to Abu Bakr (at this time, Abu Bakr was seated on the pulpit of the mosque) and said, “Who made you sit on the pulpit? (granted you with the authority to take decisions) These people (Hazrat Ali (a.s.)) continue to sit (oppose) you and refuse to stand and swear allegiance to you. Why don’t you order that they be beheaded?”

Imam Hasan (a.s.) and Imam Hussain (a.s.) were standing there and witnessing this scene. On hearing these harsh words from Umar, they began crying. Hazrat Ali (a.s.) embraced them and said, “Don’t cry, these people cannot murder your father.” At this moment, Umar once again said, “O son of Abu Talib, stand up and offer your allegiance!”

Hazrat Ali (a.s.) challenged him, “and if I refuse to do so?” Umar replied, “We will sever your head from your body”

Then Hazrat Ali (a.s.) turned his face towards the sky and said, “O my Lord! You be a witness to these events.” The people then tried to forcibly open the hands of Hazrat Ali (a.s.), but he clenched them so tightly that none was able to do so. Finally, Abu Bakr rubbed his hand over the clenched fist of Hazrat Ali (a.s.).
At this moment, Hazrat Ali (a.s.) said, “I heard the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) say that some selected, powerful and influential companions will come to me on the Day of Qiyamat so that they may pass over the Bridge of Seraat. They will see me and I will see them. They will recognise me and I will recognise them. But they will be taken far away from me. I (s.a.w.) will call out to my Lord, “These are my companions, these are my companions…” I will receive a reply, “O Mohammed, you do not know what these companions have done after your death. As soon as you left them, they turned away from the religion.” I will then order that they be taken away and enveloped in punishment"

[1] Al Mustarshid, page 377/378
[2] Sulaym Ibne' Qays page 74/75 and page 251
[3] Kaukabe' Durriyah, volume 1 page 194/195
[4] Sulaym Ibne' Qays page 76; Al Iezah, page 367, Al Imamah was Siyasah, volume 1 page 19/20; Tafseer'e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 67; Al Ikhtesas page 187; Ash Shafi, volume 3 page 244; Al Mustarshid, page 377-381; Al Ihtejaj page 73
[5] Sulaym Ibne' Qays page 86/87 and pages 251/252

Hazrat Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.): A Victim of Oppression and Terrorism

The demise of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) triggered a chain of events that caught the Muslims unaware. Worse, they accepted these events as if that was the most natural thing to do and remained unmindful of the far-reaching consequences of their submission.

One such incident that stands out in the aftermath of the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise is the siege on Hazrat Fatimah’s (s.a.) house and the eventual attack that claimed two lives in its wake, one of them being Hazrat Fatimah (s.a.) herself. The other one being the martyrdom of Hazrat Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.), the subject of this article.

*Unbelievably True*

Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) martyrdom is so unsettling and incredible that some Muslims have even gone to the extent of denying it.

To think of it, indeed the incident is unbelievably true. Not just the martyrdom of Hazrat Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.), the entire chain of incidents, the oppressors and oppressed ones, everything about the attack on Hazrat Fatimah’s (s.a.) house is unbelievable.

It is unbelievable that the slightest harm would come on Fatimah (s.a.), let alone her being inflicted with a fatal body blow. Especially, when the Muslims were served a crystal clear warning by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in this regard when he (s.a.w.a.) informed them that Fatimah’s displeasure was the cause of his (s.a.w.a.) displeasure, which in turn was Allah’s
displeasure and finally, driving one to Hell.

It is unbelievable that Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) who was anointed Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) publicly by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) on divine command less than three months before his (s.a.w.a.) demise in Ghadeer-e-Khumm and was the unmatched choice of Allah and His Messenger (s.a.w.a.) as highlighted by every notable incident in Islam’s history should be subjugated by individuals who could not even compare to the dust of his horse’s hooves which incidentally Allah swears by in Surah Aadiyaat.

It is unbelievable that the perpetrators of this crime were none other than the so-called companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and his so-called successors who claimed proximity and brotherhood with the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and after whose names the Muslims invoke Allah’s satisfaction and mercy.

It is unbelievable that the atrocities meted out to Fatimah (s.a.) would eventually claim her life inducing Ameerul Momineen Ali (a.s.) to declare that she was like a flower nipped in the bud and expressing to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) his helplessness in safeguarding his (s.a.w.a.) trust.

All this within a few days of the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise and revelation of the Verse of Purification (Surah Ahzaab (33): 33) and Incident of the Cloak testified to by all the Muslims as being related to Fatimah (s.a.) along with her husband and sons.

It is unbelievable that Fatimah (s.a.) willed her burial to be carried out in the dead of the night deeming the companions in question unworthy to attend her funeral and in this way categorically refuting their claim to caliphate and so-called proximity to her father (s.a.w.a.) and inflicting a slap so hard on her oppressors that its reverberations will always be felt by her oppressors and their partisans.

Finally, it is unbelievable that the struggle launched by a few individuals for worldly power and status would mercilessly uproot the existence of a six-month unborn infant from the comfort of his mother’s womb.

Over here, the martyrdom of Hazrat Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.), the third son of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) after Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.), has been analyzed in detail. Other events before and after the martyrdom, although very significant from the viewpoint of Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) in particular and Muslims in general, are referred to in lesser detail.

Despite claims to the contrary by misinformed and uninformed Muslims, it is well-documented by scores of scholars from both the sects – Sunnis and Shias

– that there was a full-scale attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house only a few days after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise. The objective of the companions who assaulted Fatimah (s.a.) and Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) was to extract Ali’s (a.s.) allegiance for Abu Bakr, without which they knew Abu Bakr’s caliphate would lack any form of legitimacy.

*Timing of the Attack*

Although the exact day of the attack on Hazrat Fatimah’s (s.a.) house is a matter of some debate among historians, the broad consensus is that it all happened within three days of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise. This is concluded from the fact that Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) refused to leave the house when the mobsters demanded allegiance for Abu Bakr, citing the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) recommendation that he remain confined to the house until he had compiled the Holy Quran and Ali (a.s.) took three days to complete the task. (Tafseer-e-Furaat-e-Kufi p. 398-399 from Imam Muhammed Baqir (a.s.), which has been recorded by Ibne Nadeem in his book Al-Fehrist p. 30, Behaar al-Anwaar, vol. 23 p. 249. However in some traditions the number of days for compiling the Quran has been narrated varyingly as seven days and nine days.)

Based on this, it is apparent the attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house was executed within a maximum of nine days of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise.

Many narrations that mention the attack and compilation of the Quran mention two days and three days and it is likely that the two events have been mixed up by narrators. At any rate, it is most probable that the attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house was engineered by the government-backed mob within two-three days as opposed to a more prolonged period of seven or nine days.

A quicker attack also appears more plausible given the alacrity and keenness with which this group had moved within moments of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise on 28th Safar to select a caliph amongst themselves. Since Ali’s (a.s.) allegiance to Abu Bakr was very important to lend legitimacy to their scheme, it is unlikely they would have delayed the move (to force Ali’s (a.s.) consent) as with every passing day the danger of tables turning on them increased manifold. Also, once the entire Madinah (save the Bani Hashim and Ali’s (a.s.) select companions) had pledged allegiance, they realized they had to move fast to acquire Ali’s allegiance which was conspicuous by its absence. (Kitab-e-Sulaim Ibne Qays pp. 82, 249)

If one considers the attack three days after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise then 1st Rabi al-Awwal is the fateful day in the lives of Ali (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) and their Shias that altered the course of Islam forever. It marked the subjugation of the Ahle Bait (a.s.) at the hands of the unworthy creatures and laid the foundation of other heinous crimes like the battle of Karbala and the martyrdom of all Imams (a.s.) ending in the occultation of Imam Mahdi (a.t.f.s.). All these events were triggered by that single attack on the house of Fatimah (s.a.) and if anyone believes otherwise, then he has undermined the significance of Ali (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) and/or not fully comprehended the consequences of Karbala and other calamities that befell the nation.

It is for this reason that Shias across the globe observe 1st Rabi al-Awwal as the date of Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) martyrdom. The idea is not so much to observe a specific date as it is to observe the martyrdom of someone who by giving his life invalidated the efforts of those who forcefully attempted to legitimize their caliphate by illegitimately entering Fatimah’s (s.a.) house despite her pleas and lamentations to be left alone.

*Who is Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.)?*

Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) is the third son of Ali (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) after Hasan (a.s.) and Husain (a.s.). He is also referred to as Mushabbar which is also the name of Prophet Haroon Ibn Imran’s (a.s.) third son. He was no more than six months fetus at the time of the attack. (Al-Hidaayat al-Kubra, p. 407, Behaar al-Anwaar, vol. 53 p. 19)

Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) was the least involved in the business of politics and machinations which the attack on Fatimah’s (a.s.) was all about. He was not concerned with anything that transpired on that day and no one who had any grouse with Ali (a.s.) and Fatimah (s.a.) had an argument against Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.). Even those who debate about the infallibility of Ali (a.s.) and
Fatimah (s.a.) fall silent when the infallibility of an unborn child is raised because they have no answer.

Therefore, although the entire attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house was illegitimate, the attack on Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) in many ways was the most illegitimate part of the attack.

Just like this vicious attack laid the foundation of another murderous attack 50 years later in Karbala, it is perhaps Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) martyrdom to safeguard the infallibility of his parents (a.s.) that inspired his nephew Ali Ibn Husain (al-Asghar) to wage a battle against the enemies in Karbala to safeguard the infallibility of his father Imam Husain Ibn Ali (a.s.). Imam Husain (a.s.), of course, is unique among the oppressed ones as he is the only one present on the scenes of both the attacks – one on his parents and brother and the second on his children, nephews and another brother.

It is perhaps the powerful influence of Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) martyrdom that has led some Muslims to deny his death in the attack, attributing it to other causes. This is clearly a campaign based on misinformation or lack of information that is similar to the campaign to deny the attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house altogether. The attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house has no
justification whatsoever and therefore the only way out is to deny it altogether.

Of course, the biggest blow to the deniers is the martyrdom of Fatimah (s.a.) and Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) in the aftermath of the attack. It is widely documented that both (a.s.) were martyred as a result of the attack; Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) instantly and Fatimah (s.a.) a few days later.

*Documentary evidence of Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) Martyrdom*

There are several well-documented narrations to establish Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) martyrdom from the attack on Fatimah’s (s.a.) house. Those interested in seeking the truth of the matter should not be surprised to find scores of scholars and historians from across eras and predispositions (Shia and Sunni) record the martyrdom of Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) in a manner that puts the issue beyond doubt.


Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) Martyrdom from Sunnah and History*
 
**

1. Allamah Muhammad Baqer Majlisi (r.a.) records in Behaar al-Anwaar vol. 43 p. 171 on the authority of Abu Baseer who relates from Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s.), ‘*Fatimah’s (s.a.) death resulted from being pierced by the sword which claimed (the unborn) Mohsin’s life. The perpetrator of this crime was Qunfuz, who was acting on his master Umar’s explicit command…*’

2. Ibn Shahr Aashob al-Sarvi al-Mazandarani in vol. 3 p. 132 records from Al-Maarif of Ibne Qutaybah al-Dainoori (reputed Sunni historian) – “The following were Fatimah’s children – Hasan, Husain, Zainab, Umme Kulsum and Mohsin Ibn Ali who was killed by Qunfuz Adawi (i.e. from Bani Adi, the same tribe as Umar Ibn Khattaab).”

3. Masoodi records in Isbaat al-Wilaayah p. 142 – “They attacked Fatimah’s (s.a.) house. They crushed the Chief of All Women behind the door so violently that it resulted in the miscarriage of Mohsin.”

4. Muhammad al-Shahrastaani reports in Al-Milal wa al-Nehal vol. 1 p. 57 (Beirut Edition) – “Umar struck Fatimah violently in the abdomen (on the Day of Allegiance) so much so that she fell on her abdomen (resulting in the infant’s death).”

5. Abu Abdillah Shams al-Deen al-Zahabi records in Mizaan al-Etedaal vol. 1 p. 139 – “Undoubtedly Umar kicked Fatimah so much so that it led to Mohsin’s miscarriage.”
 
6. Allamah Khalil Ibn Aybak al-Safadi in Al-Waafi be al-Wafiyyaat vol. 6 p. 17 records – “The Motazelah sect is of the view that on the Day of Allegiance Umar undoubtedly struck Fatimah so much so that Mohsin was killed.”

7. Abdul Qadir al-Tamimi al-Baghdadi in Al-Farq bain al-Faraaq p. 107 records on the same lines as above.

8. Sadr al-Deen Ibraheem Ibn Sa’d al-Deen Muhmmad al-Hammuee in Al-Faraaed al-Simtain vol. 2 p. 35 records on the authority of Ibne Abbas who heard the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) prophesize – ‘*…it is as if I see grief and anxiety entering my daughter’s house, her respect being violated, her rights being usurped, her inheritance being denied to her, her unborn being miscarried and (in this moment of distress) she will call out – O Muhammad, but no one replies to her pleas.’*

*Bibliography of References Documenting Mohsin Ibn Ali’s (a.s.) Martyrdom *
 
Mohsin Ibn Ali (a.s.) martyrdom has been recorded by the following scholars/historians:

I) Sunni Sources

1. Al-Milal wa al-Nehal vol. 1 p. 57 (Beirut Edition) by Muhammad al-Shahrastaani exp. 548 AH

2. Mizaan al-E’tedaal vol. 1 p. 139 by Abu Abdillah Shams al-Deen al-Zahabi exp. 748 AH

3. Al-Waafi be al-Wafiyyaat vol. 6 p. 17 by Allamah Khalil Ibn Aybak al-Safadi exp. 746 AH

4. Al-Farq bain al-Feraq p. 107 by Abdul Qadir al-Tamimi al-Baghdadi exp. 429 AH

5. Al-Faraaed al-Simtain vol. 2 p. 35 Sadr al-Deen Ibraheem Ibn Sa’d

By Syed Aelia Rizvi

Part 1 : The True Face of Umar khattab - Deviant khalifah did against true S...

Patt 2 : The True Face of Umar khattab - Run away from fighting with Kuffar and M...

Part 3 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - Deviant corrupt made Fake sunnah ...

Part 4 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - Deviant Umar ibn Kh...

Part 5 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - Khalid ibn Walid rape m...

Part 6 : The True Face of Umar khattab - Deviant Islam s...

Part 7 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - Deviant Sunnah Muta'h Muta Mutah T...

Part 8 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - Deviant Sunnah Muta'h Muta Mutah T...

Part 9 : The True Face of Umar Khattab - intoxicated disobeying Quran Laws Sunnah...

Part 10 : True Face of Umar Khattab - Baby killer, did invasion

The True Face of Evil - Umar Ibn Al-Khattab

WHY the theory of Non-Appointment is highly improbable and entirely illogical.

One fact which cuts to the root of the Theory of Non-appointment is that its advocates are unable to find any sensible explanation' or show any reasonable grounds for why the Prophet (P) should have adopted this attitude of "non-cooperation", so to speak, towards this very important problem of the Caliphate. 

Without this explanation, no intelligible history of the Caliphate can be written. In fact, a true conception and thorough understanding of the History of Islam and the Muslim peoples is absolutely impossible without a correct answer to this very essential question. The entire course of Islamic History, for good or for bad was shaped by the way in which this problem was handled after the death of the Prophet (P). The innumerable wars and massacres which throughout the long period of Islamic rule almost continuously drenched the Muslim world with blood and eventually brought it to a sad close, and the sighs and sorrows of countless Muslim widows and orphans that saddened the heart of man and brought the wrath of God upon erring humanity, can be traced directly, with not a single "missing link", to the wrong and sinful manner in which this problem was approached on the death of the Prophet (P). I say sinful, because it implied a cotumacious disregard of the orders and wishes of the Prophet (P), implicit obedience to which had been enjoined by the Qur'an, On account of this, Islamic History became a long tragedy of errors, from the horrible massacre of Karbala' to the more recent times of Aurangzeb whom a misguided zeal to serve his religion induced to invade the Shia States of Deccan, and thus clear the way right up to Delhi for the pagan Marahattas. How the succession to the State acquired by Muhammad was to be regulated was the question. They rejected the principle of selection or nomination as not having been ordered by the Prophet (P); but at the same time they could not formulate any rules of their own. Sometimes the nomination of one man, sometimes the nomination of six candidates, out of whom the candidates themselves were to select one man -a queer method of succession- bur no definite rule was fixed. The organisers of the opposition to' the Prophet were afraid of an open and free election; "Umar said publicly that the manner in which Abu Bakr was elected to the Caliphate was a calamity from Whose evil effects God saved the Muslims; he ordered that no,one in future should attempt that method, and in the event that anyone did, both he and his candidate Would he beheaded.   1

 1.  Al-Bukhari: Bab "Rajm-Al-Hubla min az-zina Idha Absanat";

   At'Tabari: Vol. 3, pg. 200;

   Ibn Althir: 'Tarikh-Al-Kamil", Vol. 2, p, 124;

  Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: "Musnad", Vol. 1, p. 55;

  Ibn Hajar Al-Makki:-"As-Sawa'iq", Chptr 1. Fasl 1pg. 5;

  Mohib At-Tabari': "Al-Riyad-At-Nadra", Part 2, Fasl 3, p. 164;

  Ibn Hisham: "Sirat-Al-Nabi:", Vol. 4', p. 338;
    .
  Ibn-Kathir Al-Shami; "Tarikh", Vol. 5, p. 245.

 From all the different methods adopted, only one principle seems to emerge, and that is "Get your man in by any means you can". Obviously the result was reversion to the Rule of Might, which destroyed the spirit of Islam. 

Any rational human being Would realise that the Theory of Non-appointment is untenable, unreasonable and illogical, and this will be apparent When we consider the following points:




1.    There is no explanation of, nor reasonable grounds for the silence of the Prophet regarding the Caliphate. 

2.    There is nothing in the Qur'an requiring the Prophet to observe this silence. 

3.    The first Caliph nominated 'Umar as his successor, and 'Umar nominated six persons as the  only allowable candidates, from amongst whom one candidate was to be selected as the Caliph by those candidates themselves.

4.    As affirmed by the first two Caliphs, they were anxious to nominate their successors for two reasons, viz.

(i)     in the interests of Islam. and to guard against confusion and commotion, the nomination of their successors was absolutely essential: 

ii)     they would have to answer before God as to what arrangement they had made for the leadership of the Ummah after them, and also as to the personality of the Caliph they had appointed. 

5.    Was not the Prophet then also aware of this immediate necessity and of his liability to answer before God? 

6.    The people themselves never demanded the right to appoint the Caliph; on the other hand. they would implore the dying Caliph to nominate his successor. 

7.    Did the constitution of the theocratic state founded by the Prophet demand that he should not select or nominate his successor, or that he should put a seal on his lips on this point?

8.  There was no precedent of a Prophet keeping silence on this point. On the contrary, everyone of them nominated his own son or relative as his successor. 

9.    Did the Prophet consider each and everyone of his followers to be equal in the qualifications required of his successor, and thus not mind which of them happened to step into his place? Was there no likelihood of an undesirable person installing himself in power and elbowing out, by fair means Or foul, a more fit and deserving person? 

10.    Were the people fit and qualified to choose the Caliph by election'? 

11.   In view of the Prophet's claim that he was the last messenger of God to man, and that Islam was to continue till the end of the world, does it stand to reason that he would not give even a passing thought to the question of the succession? 

12.    In view of the fact that the Prophet claimed to have direct communion with God, is not this omission unbelievable?

        I will  expand  most of the above points in turn, INsha Allah

Umar sought Allah’s help through Ahle Bait (a.s.)

NUMBER #1

Ibn Hajar Makki writes in his Sawa’iq-e-Muhriqa, after verse 14 (from The History of Damascus) that in the 17th year of the Hijra people prayed for rain but to no effect. Caliph Umar said that he would pray for rain the next day through the means of approach to Allah. Next morning he went to Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet and said: “Come out so that we may invoke Allah through you for rain.”

Abbas asked Umar to sit for some time so that the means of approach to Allah could be provided. The Bani Hashim (Ahle Bait a.s.) were then informed. Abbas then came out with Imam Ali, Imam Hasan, and Imam Husain. Other Bani Hashim were behind them. Abbas asked Umar that no one else be added to their group. Then they went to the place of prayers where Abbas raised his hands for prayers and said:

“O Allah, you created us, and you know about our actions. O Allah, as you were kind to us in the beginning, so be kind to us in the end.”

Jabir says that their prayers had not ended when clouds appeared and it began to rain. Before they could reach their homes, they were drenched.

NUMBER # 2

Bukhari also reports that once during the time of famine, Umar Bin Khattab invoked Allah through Abbas Bin Abdu’l-Muttalib and said:

“We betake ourselves to our Prophet’s uncle with you; so Allah, send down rain.” Then it began to rain.

NUMBER # 3

Ibn Abi’l-Hadid Mu’tazali in his Sharh Nahfu’l-Balagha (Egyptian edition), page 256, writes that Caliph Umar went along with Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet, to invoke Allah for rain. In his prayers for rain, Caliph Umar said: “O Allah, we betake ourselves to your Prophet’s uncle and of his ancestors and of their remaining respectable men. So guard the position of your Prophet through his uncle. We were guided toward You through the Prophet so that we may seek their help and do repentance.”

Umar killed Janabe Fatima Zehra-the beloved daughter of Prophet Mohammad(s.a.w.a)

Burning of the door of Janabe Zahra(sa)

Umar ordered the group to gather the wood and he, himself came forward with the fire.[1]

He was screaming,

Burn the house! Burn the house along with its people! [2]

Janabe Zahra (s.a.) raised her voice and wailed,

  

O father! O Prophet of Allah! After your departure, Ibne Khattab (Umar) and Ibne Quhafah (Abu Bakr) troubled us a lot and caused us distress to no end.

When the people heard the wailing of Janabe Zahra (s.a.), they too began weeping and, in that condition, left that place. Now just Umar and a few people remained there.[3]

Umar asked for the fire and set the door alight.[4]

The wood gathered at the door caught fire.[5]

The entire house was filled with smoke.[6]

Qunfuz put his hand inside to open the door.[7]

Janabe Zahra (s.a.) held the door tightly with both her hands and prevented them from opening the door. She said, I implore you for the sake of Allah and for the sake of my father, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)! Leave us alone and return to your homes.

Umar ordered Qunfuz to bring a whip and strike Janabe Zahra (s.a.) with it.
The whip struck her on the hand and left a black mark on it.[8]

Umar then kicked at the door and broke it down.[9]

Janabe Zahra (s.a.) turned her womb away from the door to protect it and shield it from the door. All this while, Umar kept on kicking the door.[10]

He crushed Janabe Zahra (s.a.) with great force between the door and the adjoining wall. She was in so much difficulty that it appeared that she would die there.

A nail on the door pierced her chest.[11]

 Her chest and arms were stained with her blood[12]

Blood  was flowing with great force from her wounds. She fell on her face and came down to the ground. At this time, the fire was still burning.[13]

She raised her voice in a heart-rending plea, 

O father! O Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.a.), look at what the people have done to your darling daughter! O Fizzah! Come and help me. By Allah! they have killed the child in my womb.

She managed to stand with support from the wall. She was in severe pain and was experiencing intense labour pain.[14]

The six month old Mohsin was martyred in her womb.[15]

At that time, Umar entered her house(here at this place, the narrator has described the such horrifying events that one cannot even enumerate) and her earnings fell on the ground and got scattered.[16]

________________________________

[1]    Tafseer’e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 307.
[2]    Al Milalo was Nihal, volume 1 page 57
[3]    Al Imamah was Siyasah, volume 1 page 20;Al Mustarshid, page 377/378.
[4]    Sulaym Ibne’ Qays, page 250.
[5]    Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 407; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 53 page 19.
[6]    Ash Shaafi by Sayyed Murtaza, volume 3 page 241.
[7]    Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 407; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 53 page 19.
[8]    Ibid. page 178/179 and page 407; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 53 page 13.
[9]    Tafseer’e Ayyashi, volume 2 page 67; Al Ikhtesas, page 176.
[10]   Dalaelul Imamah, volume 2; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 294.
[11]   Muattamire’ Ulamae’ Baghdad, page 63 (Sunni reference).
[12]   Kaukabe’ Durri page 194-195.
[13]   Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 178/179.
[14]   Dalaelul Imamah, volume 2; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 294.
[15]   Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 407; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 53 page 19.
[16]   Dalaelul Imamah, volume 2; Behaarul Anwaar, volume 30 page 294 & 349; Al Hidayatul Kubra, page 179/407; Al Mukhtasar, page 44/45.

As per some traditions, these crimes were committed when Hazrat Ali (as) was being dragged away. Refer Kaukabe-Durri page 195.

How Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan came to Power?

How Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan one of the staunchest enemies of Prophet Mohammad (P) and of Islam came to power?

Muawiya was a staunch follower of the pre-Islamic polytheism like his known  father Abu Sufyan. He was after the Battle of Badr the heir-apparent to the pagan throne of Mecca which was occupied in effect by his father Abu Sofyan and mother Hind. After the defeat of his family following the fall of Mecca in 8 AH Muawiya, and most of the Meccans, including the Abd-Shams, formally submitted to Prophet Muhammad (P) and accepted Islam. General consensus among early Islamic historians is that Muawiyah, along with his father Abu Sufyan, became Muslims at the conquest of Mecca when further resistance to Muslims became an impossibility.

In the year 640, Umar ibn al-Khattab appointed Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan as governor of Syria when his brother died in an outbreak of plague. Muawiyah gradually gained mastery over the other areas of Syria, building wealth and politically instilling personal loyalty among his troops and the people of the region.

All these campaigns came to a halt with the accession of Imam Ali (AS) to the caliphate and removed Muawiyah's governorship of Syria. This resulted in Muawiyah refusing to acknowledge Imam Ali's caliphate and engaged him at the Battle of Siffin. Muawiyah proposed a cease-fire which Imam agreed to and it was decided to end the conflict through peaceful talks.

After Imam Ali (as) was assassinated in 661, Muawiyah signed a truce with Imam Ali's son Imam Hasan ibn Ali(as) and took over as the commander of the largest force in the Muslim Empire.

 Imam Hasan deemed Mu'awiya an unjust thief

We will prove this from the following Sunni works:

    Matalib al Seul, Volume 2 page 17, Dhikr Hasan
    Nazal al Abrar, page 81 Dhikr Hasan by Allamah Badkashani al-Harithi
    Tadhkirathul Khawwas al Ummah, page 113
    Nasa al Kifaya, page 58
    Sawaiqh al Muhriqa, page 81 Chapter 10, Part 1
    al Istiab, page 372 Dhikr Hasan
    Fusl al Muhimma, page 146 Dhikr Hasan

Shaykh Mufti Kamaluddin Ibn Talha Shafiyee recorded in Matalib al Seul:

When the battle came to an end Imam Hasan gave a sermon wherein he said'People of Allah! You know that Allah (swt) guided the people through my grandfather, and saved you from error and took you out of Jahiliyya. Mu'awiya has fought me over that matter which is my right not Mu'awiya's. I was worried about protecting the Ummah, and you gave me bayya on the condition that you make peace with whoever I make peace with and fight whosever I fight. I looked at the problems and made peace with Mu'awiya and put an end to war.

The comments of Imam Hasan (as) prove that Mu'awiya was not entitled to the Khilafath, rather he deemed him an unjust thief, and he made peace due to difficulties, and made peace like the Prophet (s) did with the Kufafr of Makka. In the same way objections and wrong interpretations cannot be brought for the Prophet (s) making peace with the Kuffar of Makka, the same is the case with Imam Hasan (as) making peace.

Imam Hasan (as) deemed the Khilafath to be his own right

    al Istiab, Volume 1 page 343 Dhikr Hasan
    Asad'ul Ghaba, Volume 2 page 15 Dhikr Hasan
    Tareekh Ibn Asakir, Volume 4 page 228 Dhikr Hasan
    Tadhkiratul Khawas al Ummah, page 113 Dhikr Imam Hasan
    Maqatil Husayn, page 134
    Dhakayr al Uqba, page 140
    Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 2 page 300 Dhikr Imam Hasan
    Seerat al Halbeeya, Volume 3 page 352

We read in 'Maqtal Hussain' and 'Asadul Ghaba' that Imam Hasan (as) said:

"Verily, the matter in which I and Muawiya disputed, either this is my right, and I left this in Muawiyah's favour in order to protect the Ummah, or this is the right of a person who is more deserving for this post, hence I left this on account of that person".

The words of Imam Hasan (as) prove that he (as) deemed caliphate to be his own right and did not deem Muawiyah to be eligible for that responsibility but since Muawiyah was a terrorist and wasnt hesitant in sheding the blood of innocents thus Imam Hassan (as) accepted the treaty which doesnt mean he accepted the caliphate of Muawiyah.

A Nasibi excuse and its reply

Here Nawasib may argue that Imam Hassan (as) mentioned 'right' (haq) through the words 'Imma' and 'Aw' which shows the possibility that he deemed the 'right' (haq) belonged to Muawiyah. To those Nawasib, we would like to remind them the verse of Holy Quran (34:24) which also contained the words 'Imma' and 'Aw'.
[Yusufali 34:24] Say: "Who gives you sustenance, from the heavens and the earth?" Say: "It is Allah; and certain it is that either we or ye are on right guidance or in manifest error!"


If we look at this verse, apparently this shows that (godforbid) Prophet [s] was not sure about Him (as) being on guidance but that was certainly not the required meaning. Sometimes the aspect of eloquence and rhetorical demands that the addressee is addressed in a manner that may show dual meanings/possibilities. The manner in which the Prophet [s] adopted an either-or question in his statement, Imam Hassan (as) likewise adopted the manner in his statement. The Prophet [s] was tactically taunting the misguidance of the infdels similarly Imam Hassan (as) was actually taunting the misguidance of Muawiyah.

By making peace Imam Hasan (as) was able to show the Ummah that Mu'awiya was a hypocrite

This will be evidenced from the following esteemed Sunni works.

    Fathul Bari Sharh Bukhari, Volume 13 page 65 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat, Volume 11 page 38 Bab Manaqib Ahl'l bayt
    al Bidayah wa al Nihaya, Volume 8 page 80 Dhikr 57 Hijri
    al Istiab, Volume 1 page 37 Dhikr Hasan

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalaini records in Fathul Bari:

اني اشترطت على معاوية لنفسي الخلافة بعده

"Hasan said:'I placed a condition on Mu'awiya that I will become leader after Mu'awiya"

al Bidaya:

وقد كان معاوية لما صالح الحسن عهد للحسن بالأمر من بعده

"When Mu'awiya made peace with Hasan, he made a promise that leadership would go to Hasan after him"

Sahih Bukhari makes it clear that a hypocrite is one who makes a promise and then breaks it.
The peace treaty exposed the hypocrisy of Mu'awiya, and his enmity to the family of Maula'Ali (as). The treaty was set up to show to the Ummah that he was a hypocrite and his breaking of this promise through the poisoning of Imam Hasan (as) made this absolutely clear. Allah (swt) says in Holy Quran (13:25)

But those who break the Covenant of Allah, after having plighted their word thereto, and cut asunder those things which Allah has commanded to be joined, and work mischief in the land;- on them is the curse; for them is the terrible home!

Mu'awiya's renaging on his promise proves that he was a accursed one and a hypocrite (munafiq). The peace treaty rather than prove the faith of Mu'awiya exposes him as a hypocrite.

 Mu'awiya was not well intentioned when he made peace with Imam Hasan (as)

If we read history, it becomes clear that Muawiyah's heart was (as usual) impure and was not clear of bad intentions at the time of making treaty with Imam Hassan (as). We shall prove this from the following Sunni sources:

    Sahih Muslim, Kitab al Imara, Book 20, Number 4553
    Miskhat al Msaabih, Volume 2 page 166 Bab ul Fitan
    Ash'at al Umaat, Volume 3 page 286 Kitab al Fitan
    Mirqat Sharh Mishqat, Volume 1 page 114 Kitab al Fitan
    Hujjatul Balagha, Volume 2 page 213
    al Nihaya, Volume 2 page 109
    Majm'a al Imthaal, Volume 2 page 386 Chapter 27
    Minhaaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 560
    Fatwa Meheriya, page 145 by Syed Meher Ali

We read in Sahih Muslim:

It has been narrated on the authority of Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman who said: People used to ask the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) about the good times, but I used to ask him about bad times fearing lest they overtake me. I said: Messenger of Allah, we were in the midst of ignorance and evil, and then God brought us this good (time through Islam). Is there any bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. I asked : Will there be a good time again after that bad time ? He said: Yes, but therein will be a hidden evil. I asked: What will be the evil hidden therein? He said: (That time will witness the rise of) the people who will adopt ways other than mine and seek guidance other than mine. You will know good points as well as bad points. I asked: Will there be a bad time after this good one ? He said: Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call they will throw them into the fire. I said: Messenger of Allah, describe them for us. He said: All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language. I said: Messenger of Allah, what do you suggest if I happen to live in that time ? He said: You should stick to the main body of the Muslims and their leader. I said: If they have no (such thing as the) main body and have no leader ? He said : Separate yourself from all these factions, though you may have to eat the roots of trees (in a jungle) until death comes to you and you are in this state.

Ibn Tamiyah al-Nasibi stated about this hadith:

والخبر الثاني اجتماع الناس لما اصطلح الحسن ومعاوية لكن كان صلحا على دخن

"The second news is about the people who gathered when al-Hassan and Mu'awiya made treaty, but the treaty was based on malice"

 Minhaaj al Sunnah, Volume 1 page 560

Mullah Ali Qari wrote:

وبالخير الثاني ما وقع من صلح الحسن مع معاوية والإجماع عليه وبالدخن ما كان في زمنه من بعض الأمراء كزياد بالعراق

"The second news refers to the treaty that took place between Mu'awiya and Hasan, and Dakhan refers to some of Mu'awiya's Governors like Ziyad in Iraq".

Mullah Ali Qari says the word 'Dakhan' refers to Ziyad but fails to include his teacher Mu'awiya under this definition/word. These Nawasib try to legitimise the reign of a leader who came to power my making a peace that he has no support for, and the Prophet (s) used the term for one that referring to a hypocritical agreement. Shah Abdul Haq Dehalvi in his Sharh Mishkat stated:

'Dakhan' refers to a treaty involving dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Nawawi said in 'Sharh Muslim' Volume 6 page 227 that:

'Dakhan' among animals refers to a colour that is black and in this hadith it refers to a heart which is not pure and its impurity doesnt erase.

Ibn Atheer stated in 'Al-Nihayah' that 'Hadna Ala Dakhan' refers to:

"A treaty about which hearts are not pure".

Shah Waliullah Dehalvi in 'Hujjuthul Balagha' stated:

"Dakhan refers to the peace treaty between Mu'awiya and Hasan"

Imam Hasan was the grandson of the Prophet, one of the members under the cloak of puritiy, the rightful leader and the master of the youth of paradise, He (as) was of pure intention when making peace, unlike Mu'awiya, later on proven by his flagrant violation of the conditions, killing of Imam Hasan (as) and showing happiness over His (as) murder. Thus, the fitlhy heart being referred to by the word 'Dakhan' was the heart of Muawiyah.

Imam Hasan (as) made peace on account of pressure

Ibn Asakir in his authority work 'Tareekh Damishq' and Imam Dhahabi in 'Siyar Alam Nubla' Volume 3 page 269 records:

إلا وان معاوية دعانا إلى أمر ليس فيه عز ولا نصفة فان اردتم الموت رددناه عليه وحاكمناه إلى الله جل وعز بظبا ( 5 ) السيوف وان اردتم الحياة قبلناه واخذنا لكم الرضا فناداه القوم من كل جانب البقية البقية ( 6 ( فلما افردوه امضى الصلح

Hasan said: "Be informed that Mu'awiya has called us to such a treaty that is neither honourable nor is based on justice. If you are ready for death then we will reject this offer, and answer the matter with our swords and leave the matter with Allah. If you like life then we can accept it. Upon saying this, the calls from all around were'Taqqiyyah, Taqqiyyah' when the people left Hasan, he made peace".

 Tarikh Ibn Asakir, Volume 13 page 268

Ibn Asakir has used to words 'Baqqiyyah Baqqiyah' but he said Dahabi has recorded it as 'Taqqiyah Taqqiyah' in 'Siyar Alam Nubla' Volume 3 page 269 hence we used it likewise.

We appeal to justice! The Taqiyyah mentioned above was the same Taqiyyah that a terrified / tearful Abu Bakr adopted in the cave, that the Prophet (s) adopted at Hudaibya where he had to delete the words 'Prophet of Allah' from the treaty doucment.

If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit kill him (hadeeth)

We will cite this Prophetic Hadeeth from the following esteemed Sunni works:

    Mizan al-Itidal Volume 2 page 17; Volume 2 page 129 on the authority of Abu Said al Khudri; Volume 7 page 324 and Volume 8 page 74
    al Bidayah wa al Nihaya Volume 8 page 133 Dhikr Mu'awiya
    Kunzul Haqaiq, Volume 1 page 18
    Tatheer al Janaan, columm on Sawaiqh al Muhriqa page 62
    Al Nasa al Kifaya page 35
    Maqatil al Husayn, page 175
    Tareekh Tabari, Volume 13 the events of 284 Hijri, the rule of Banu Ummayya
    Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 5 page 110 Dhikr Ubada bin Yaqoob
    Tareekh al Baghdad, Volume 12 page 181 Dhikr bin Ubayd
    Tabaqat by Ibn Sad, Volume 4 page 134-135
    al Kamil fi Safa al Rijal, Volume 2 page 146 hadith number 343,
    Ansab al Ashraf, Volume 5 page 136,
    Waqt Sifeen, page 216 and 221

We read the following hadith in the above cited books:

اذا رايتم معاوية على منبري فاقتلوه

"If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then kill him"

Sheikh Muhammad bin Aqeel al-Hadrami (d. 1350 H) said in his book 'al-Atab al-Jameel ala ahl al-Jarh wa al-Tadeel' page 63 that the hadith is Sahih. An interesting event in connection with this event can be located in 'Ansab al Ashraf' Volume 5 page 136:

"On one occasion an Ansari individual wanted to kill Mu'awiya, the people said, 'the sword can not be raised during the reign of Umar, they said that he should write to Umar and seek his consent. He replied ' I heard that Rasulullah had said: 'If you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then kill him'. The people confirmed that they had also heard the hadith, but said we have not carried out this action, so let us write to Umar on the matter, which they did, but Umar did not write back to resolve the matter, until he died"

We read in Maqatil al Husayn:

"Hussain said to Marwan: 'My grandfather said: 'Khilafah in the family of Abu Sufyan is haraam, since they embraced Islam after the conquest of Makka'. My grandfather also said: 'When you see Mu'awiya on my pulpit then rip open his stomach'. The people of Madina failed to kill Mu'awiya, which is why Allah (swt) on account of His wrath gave them the leadership of Yazeed".

We appeal to justice. If Mu'awiya had not become Khalifa after making peace with Imam Hasan (as), the Prophet (s) would not have issued an order that he be killed. It is clear that when the Prophet (s) dreamt of the Banu Ummayya climbing his pulpit like monkeys it referred to Mu'awiya, which is why he (s) wanted him to be killed. The leadership of anyone who has to be killed when attaining power, is unacceptable. Imam Hasan (as) made peace, that was it. The Prophet (s) deemed the Khilafath of Mu'awiya to be so unpalatable that he said he had to be killed the moment he sat on his throne. That makes all the arguments of Nasibis that the son of Hind's reign was legitimate to sheer nonsense.

Muawiyah died on May 6, 680, from a stroke brought on by his weight.

UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB AND THE UMAYYADS

In order to prove our above mentioned discussions, it seems necessary to disclose the role of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in consolidating the opinions of the Umayyad rulers as regards the religious laws. As he nominated Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the ruler of Syria after Yazid,(1) `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB fastened the steps of the Umayyads and helped them have control over the Muslim community. In the same way, he suggested to Abu-Bakr that he would allow Abu-Sufyan to keep the taxes that he had levied for himself and that he would appoint Yazid ibn Abi-Sufyan as the commander-in-chief of the Muslim army of Syria.(2) Moreover, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB likened Mu`awiyah to Khosrow, the emperor of Persia, and said in this regard, "How do you mention Khosrow while Mu`awiyah is among you?"(3) Furthermore, `Umar said about Mu`awiyah, "Do not criticize the hero of Quraysh and the son of Quraysh's master. Surely, he is one of those who smile at rage, and those who cannot be convinced unless when he is satisfied, and those who cannot be overcome."(4)
Other narrations have confirmed that when Mu`awiyah was nominated by `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB as the ruler of Syria, he received two messages from his parents. His father's message reads, "O Son! In fact, these groups of the Muhajirun preceded us while we lagged behind. Hence, their precedence has elevated them while our lagging behind has delayed us. They therefore have become the leaders and the masters while we have become only fellows. As they have nominated you for a great matter, you must not violate them, for this is the outset of a perpetual authority. You should thus compete on this matter, and if you attain it, you should dedicate your intellect to it."
In her message, Mu`awiyah's mother said, "O Son! In fact, it is rarely that a free lady can give birth of one like you. As this man (namely `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB) has chosen you for this matter, you must obey him in all matters, whether you like or dislike."(5)
It has been also narrated that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB visited Syria, Mu`awiyah said to him, "I will carry out any order that you make to me."

---

1- Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:456 H. 9770; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab 2:625 H. 988; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:21; al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah 5:152 No. 8074.

 2- Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 2:44 as quoted from al-Jawhariy's Kitab al-Saqifah. 

3- Tarikh al-tabariy 6:184; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 3:396. 

4- Al-Muttaqiy al-Hindiy: Kanz al-`Ummal 13:587; Ibn Kathir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:125; Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 8:397. 

5- Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:118.

`Umar answered, "I will never order you to do or not to do anything."(1)

Through this policy of "I will carry out any order that you make to me," Mu`awiyah could occupy `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB's heart. As a result, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB appointed other Umayyad individuals in other governmental offices; he appointed `Amr ibn al-`as as the governor of Palestine and Jordan,(2) al-Walid ibn `Aqabah, who was one his dearest men,(3) as the tax collector of Banu-Taghlib,(4) Ya`liy ibn Umayyah as the governor of a part of the Yemen,(5) al-Mughirah ibn Shu`bah as the governor of Kufah,(6) `Abdullah ibn Abi-Sarh, `Uthman ibn `Affan's foster-brother, as the governor of Egypt,(7) and so on.
Obviously, `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB, during his reign, depended upon the Umayyads in the distribution of the offices. Meantime, he opposed the Hashimites absolutely. In this regard, it has been narrated that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB wanted to appoint `Abdullah ibn `Abbas as the governor of Hims, he said to him, "Listen, son of `Abbas! I am afraid that death will take me while you are still in this position, and then you will call people to follow you, the Hashimites, and to leave the others."(8)
The same thing can be said about the stipulation that `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf imposed upon Imam `Ali ibn Abi-talib when he said, "I will swear allegiance to you on the condition that you will not appoint anyone from the Hashimites in a position of leadership"'(9) It goes without saying that `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf was no more than a practicer of the policy of Abu-Bakr and `Umar.
When objections to `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB's decision of nominating

---

1- Tarikh al-tabariy 6:184; Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:125. 

 2- Tarikh Khalifah 1:155; Futuh al-Buldan 1:145; Tarikh Dimashq 46:157, 59:111. 

3- Al-Munta¨am 6:5; Tahdhib al-Kamal 31:54; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 11:126; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:214. 4- Tarikh al-tabariy 5:59; Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:214. 

5- Ibn `Abd al-Barr: al-Isti`ab fi Ma`rifat al-Ashab 3:664. 

6- Tarikh Khalifah 1:154; Futuh al-Buldan 1:297; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:516; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 5:350-351. 

7- Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' 3:43; al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah 4:110. 

8- Al-Mas`udiy: Muruj al-Dhahab 2:353 H. 454. 

9- Ibn Qutaybah: al-Imamah wa'l-Siyasah 1:31; Ibn Sa`d: al-tabaqat al-Kubra 3:344; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:560; Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:481 H. 9776; Musannaf Ibn Abi-Shaybah 7:439 H. 37071; al-Bayhaqiy: al-Sunan al-Kubra 8:151. 

Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the governor of Syria increased, `Umar said to the masses, "Do not mention Mu`awiyah save in words of praise, for I have heard the Messenger of Allah saying about him: O Allah, guide him."(1)

I cannot tell whether this narration was fabricated by the Umayyads and their fans in order to justify the wrong policies of Mu`awiyah when he was both governor and ruler or by `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in order to stop the people's objections to his decision. Of course, the Holy Prophet's "fabricated" supplication of guidance for Mu`awiyah is absolutely contradictory to the many narrations that have authentically reported the Holy Prophet's having cursed Mu`awiyah, Abu-Sufyan, and Yazid ibn Abi-Sufyan.
At any rate, Mu`awiyah benefited very much by the support of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB. Supporting this, it has been narrated that Mu`awiyah said to Sa`sa`ah ibn Sawhan, "I enjoy a priority to Islam although others have preceded me in this matter. However, none has been better than I am in holding this matter during my age. `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB noticed this. Had any other individual been more powerful that I was in holding this position, `Umar would have certainly chosen him… etc."(2)
Correspondingly, Muhammad ibn Abi-Bakr wrote a message to Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan mentioning the unmatched merits and virtues of Imam `Ali, saying,
"Woe to you! How dare you compare yourself to `Ali who is the inheritor and successor of the Messenger of Allah and the father of his sons and the first to follow him and the closest to him… etc."
Replying to this message, Mu`awiyah wrote,
"You have advanced as an argument against me the merit of one other than you and you have taken pride in one other than you. I thus thank the Lord Who has taken this merit away from you and made it to someone esle. Your father and I, during the lifetime of our Prophet, knew that the right of son of Abi-talib (i.e. Imam `Ali) incumbent upon us and knew that he was distinguished from us. However, when Allah chose for His Prophet what He

---

1- Ibn al-Athir: al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 8:123. Ibn `Asakir, in Tarikh Madinat Dimashq 59:85, has narrated on the authority of al-Sa'ib that when `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB appointed Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan as the governor of Aleppo, some people objected, for the latter was still young. On hearing this, `Umar said to them, "How dare you blame me for this, while I have heard the Messenger of Allah saying (about Mu`awiyah), 'O Allah! Make him guide and truly guided and guide him and make others be guided through him.'" 

 2- Tarikh al-tabariy 2:638; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 2:133; Ibn al-Athir: al-Kamil fi'l-Tarikh 3:35.

has in possession, and fulfilled His promise to him, and caused his promulgation to prevail, and proclaimed his argument and then took his soul to Him-when Allah did such to His Prophet, it was your father and his "faruq" (i.e. `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB) who preceded anyone else in usurping the right of `Ali and in violating him. They had already agreed on and planned to do this... It was your father who paved the way for him and established this realm. If that which we are experiencing is proved as true, then it is your father who started it; but if it is injustice, then it is your father who overwhelmed it and we are only his partners, since we have followed his path and pursued his example. Had it not for the past deeds of your father, we would not have mutinied against the son of Abu-talib and we would have certainly submitted to him. But as we saw your father committing that before us, we followed his example and took his deed as pattern for us. You should thus disgrace your father as you like or stop it. Peace be upon him who regrets and repents from errors."(1)

Similar words have been comprised by the missive of Yazid ibn Mu`awiyah to `Abdullah ibn `Umar who objected to him in the killing of Imam al-Husayn ibn `Ali. Yazid, in this missive, said,
"Listen, idiot! We have come to upholstered houses, furnished fixtures, and stuffed pillows. We therefore fought for these. If we are right, then we will have fought for the sake of our rights; and if the other party is right, then it was your father who began such violation and usurped these people their due."(2)
All these materials confirm the considerable role of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB in the strengthening of the Umayyad jurisprudence through making a large room for `Uthman ibn `Affan, Mu`awiyah ibn Abi-Sufyan, and their likes to lead a course opposite to the trend of pure compliance with the sacred texts, and to establish a new jurisprudential trend with innovative principles in the Islamic legislation.

ACCEPTABILITY OF THE SAHABAH'S SAYINGS

In his book of al-Mustasfa, al-Ghazzaliy talks about the acceptability of the Sahabah's sayings as proof and presents the various opinions in this regard. He says that some scholars have argued that the Sahabah's sayings are

---

1-Ahmad Zaki Safwat: Jamharat Rasa'il al-`Arab 1:447 as quoted from al-Mas`udiy: Muruj la-Dhahab 2:600; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 1:284. 

2- Al-Anwar al-Nu`maniyyah 1:53; Bihar al-Anwar 45:328; al-Mahuziy: Kitab al-Arba`in 104. 

 3-Qawl al-Sahabiy (the Sahabah's sayings): According to some Sunnite jurisprudential schools, Qawl al-Sahabiy is one of the principles and sources upon which these schools depend in the deduction of religious laws from their sources.

generally and without any exception decided as acceptable proofs; other scholars have argued that they are decided as acceptable proofs even if they violate the principle of Qiyas; other scholars have argued that only can the sayings of Abu-Bakr and `Umar be decided as acceptable proofs because the Holy Prophet said, "Follow those who will come after me!"; other scholars have argued that only the sayings of the Rashidite caliphs can be taken as acceptable proofs in the questions about which they agree. After the presentation of these arguments, al-Ghazzaliy refutes them all, saying that it is illogic to accept as irrefutable proofs the sayings of those who are exposed to erring and inadvertence, since their sinlessness has not been proven. Furthermore, it is illogic to claim the sinlessness of such individuals without resting upon any uninterrupted evidence and it is also illogic to believe in the sinlessness of people who are exposed to disagreement! The Sahabah agreed upon the permissibility of violating the Sahabah's opinions. For instance, Abu-Bakr and `Umar did not criticize those who disagreed with them in matters of Ijtihad; rather they deemed obligatory upon each mujtahid to follow his personal conclusions. The absence of evidences on the sinlessness of the Sahabah, the incidences of disagreements among the Sahabah, and the Sahabah's statements of the permissibility of violating them in opinions-these are three decisive evidences on the invalidity of deciding the Sahabah's sayings as binding proof.

Mr. Abu-Zuhrah says,
If truth be told, it is untrue to decide the Sahabah's sayings as binding proofs, for Almighty Allah has not sent in this ummah anyone except our Holy Prophet, Muhammad-peace be upon him and his family-, and we, the Muslims, have only one Messenger. The Sahabah, following the Holy Prophet, are in the same degree commissioned with following the law of Almighty Allah as found in the Holy QUR'AN and Sunnah. Anyone who claims that a proof concerning a religious affair may be found in other than these two sources has in reality said an unproven thing about the religion of Almighty Allah and has also confirmed a matter that has not been decided by Almighty Allah.(1)
Dr. Husayn al-Hajj Hasan has written down nice words in this respect,
The companions of the Holy Prophet are ordinary human beings just like the others. Some of them were seduced by this world and its pleasures. The social values left influences on their behaviors. Anyone who claims that the Sahabah are angels and sinless is in reality... It was nothing but bad luck that caused Abu-Jahl to be killed during the Battle of Badr while having been in the line

---

1- Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zahrah: al-Hadith wa'l-Muhaddithun 102.

of the polytheists. Had serendipity helped him, in the same way as it had helped others like him, and saved him from being killed during that battle to stay alive up to the day of the conquest of Makkah and to embrace Islam, he would certainly have been one of the grand Sahabah or the first-class Muslim leaders who claimed having raised the pennon of Islam. Thus, the question was no more than serendipity. Nothing but luck that played in the destinies of men so hugely. The examples of such serendipities are being openly experienced by us every day. We have very often seen how men belonging to the same class of Abu-Jahl are taken to the highest ranks by their lucks and are surrounded by reporters and traditionists who encompass them with haloes of greatness.(1)

Ibn Hazm says after quoting the following verses of the Holy QUR'AN, "And they say: We believe in Allah and the messenger, and we obey; then after that a faction of them turn away. Such are not believers. And when they appeal unto Allah and His messenger to judge between them, lo! a faction of them are averse. But if right had been with them they would have come unto him willingly. Is there in their hearts a disease, or have they doubts, or fear they lest Allah and His messenger should wrong them in judgmenta Nay, but such are evil-doers. The saying of (all true) believers when they appeal unto Allah and His messenger to judge between them is only that they say: We hear and we obey. And such are the successful. He who obeyeth Allah and His messenger, and feareth Allah, and keepeth duty (unto Him): such indeed are the victorious. They swear by Allah solemnly that, if thou order them, they will go forth. Say: Swear not; known obedience (is better). Lo! Allah is informed of what ye do. Say: Obey Allah and obey the messenger. But if ye turn away, then (it is) for him (to do) only that wherewith he hath been charged, and for you (to do) only that wherewith ye have been charged. If ye obey him, ye will go aright. But the messenger hath no other charge than to convey (the message) plainly. 24/47-54"
`Ali said, "These decisive verses have not left any opportunity to anyone to riot about them. Through these verses, Allah has exposed the characteristics of the people of our time. They claim that they are the only believers in Allah and His Messenger and they are the only obedient to them, but a party of them violates this confession and opposes what has been revealed to them from Almighty Allah and His Messenger. In the words of the law of Almighty Allah, these are surely not believers. When they are called to apply to themselves verses from the Holy QUR'AN or a Hadith from the Messenger that violate their accursed imitation, they will certainly loath it. Some of them will claim that they are not included with these verses, others will claim that these

---

1- Dr. Husayn al-Hajj Hasan: Naqd al-Hadith 1:350-351. The quoted words have been originally quoted from Dr. `Ali al-Wardiy: Wu``a¨ al-Salatin, pp. 118.

verses are dedicated to a certain occasion, others will claim that acting upon these verses has been decided as repealed, others will claim that so-and-so has not acceded to these, and others will claim that these verses violate Qiyas. But as soon as they find in the Hadith or the Holy QUR'AN a matter that conforms to what they follow, they propagate it to all sides and come to it willingly, as has been exactly described. Woe to them! What has happened to thema Is their hearts full of disease and doubta Or do they fear lest Almighty Allah and His Messenger would wrong thema Most certainly, these are the actual wrongdoers as has been described by Allah, Lord of the worlds. Away with those who do wrong!(1)

However, Ibn Hazm then attempts to justify the deeds of the grand Sahabah who violated the Hadith of the Holy Prophet and claims that lies have been fabricated against them as regards these deeds. This is because Ibn Hazm has carried for these Sahabah enormous haloes of greatness. He further says,
Abu-Muhammad says that some people argue that groups of the Sahabah and Tabi`un neglected carrying out many of the instructions that they had known from the Hadith of the Holy Prophet; hence, they neglected these Hadiths either on account of having belittled them or because they had an amount of knowledge due to which they knew the actual purpose of these Hadiths. Of course, it is better to think of them excellently and choose for the second option. `Ali says that this argument is inaccurate for many reasons. First, if one claims that it is probable that the Hadith whose instruction was neglected by the Sahabah has been forged or made-up, this can be answered that it is also probable that the narration, which reported the Sahabah having not carried out the instruction of a Hadith has been made-up. Nothing gives preference to the claim that forgery occurred to the reporting from the Holy Prophet over the claim that the Sahabah neglected acting upon the contents of these Hadiths. Similarly, some of the Sahabah acted upon a Hadith while others neglected. He also differentiated between those who claim that the Sahabah who neglected acting upon a Hadith must have had knowledge due to which they neglected and those who claim that the Sahabah who acted upon a Hadith must have had knowledge due to which they acted upon that Hadith. In fact, any claim that is not supported by a proof is worthless. As has been previously cited, do not feel an aversion for him who neglects acting upon the right, whether his neglect has been due to an excused idea or to an act of disobedience; and do not care about him who carries out the right deed no matter who that person was and whether he carried out or did not carry out that deed. At any rate, it is obligatory upon anyone who hears about it to carry

---

1- Ibn Hazm: al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam 1:100-101.

it out. Similarly, the Hadiths which have been reported that some of the past generation neglected acting upon them are, in most cases, not the same as those Hadiths neglected by those who objected to the Sahabah for having neglected acting upon them; rather these objectors neglected acting upon the Hadiths which had been adopted by those Sahabah and acted upon the Hadiths which had been neglected by those Sahabah. Hence, the previous Sahabah's having neglected acting upon a certain Hadith cannot be accepted as proof for these objectors, because they have been the first to violate the acts of these Sahabah and the first to decide the Sahabah's negligence as unacceptable. Nothing is worse than presenting as a pretext that which does not materialize that pretext; rather it annuls it in the same way, or even tenser, of annulling the one who presents it as pretext.

Also, if their forgery that the Sahabah neglected carrying out the instructions mentioned in some Hadiths because they had had knowledge due to which they neglected acting upon that Hadith; we seek Almighty Allah's protection against such forgery and seek Him to protect all those who think well of Him against any response to such false ascriptions to the most virtuous people of this sacred ummah-if this forgery had been true, all those who hid such knowledge would have been accursed by Almighty Allah Who says: Those who conceal the clear Signs We have sent down, and the Guidance, after We have made it clear for the people in the Book,-on them shall be Allah's curse, and the curse of those entitled to curse. 2/159
Our answer is that may Almighty Allah curse him whoever carries knowledge from Him and His Messenger but conceals it from people. Anyone who ascribes such a thing to the Sahabah-may Allah's pleasure be with them-has in fact ascribed them to forging lies against the religion and planning plots against the Islamic legislation. Of course, such matter are more catastrophic than infidelity.
Using similar conception, I have objected to the words of al-Layth ibn Harfash al-`Abdiy in the session of `Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Bishr-may Allah have mercy upon him-during a great celebration of the Malikkiyyah jurisprudents; yet, none of them could answer me with any word; rather they all kept silent except a few number of them who showed acceptance to my argument. During that session, I said to al-Layth,
"You have ascribed to Malik ibn Anas a matter that would make him the most wicked of all people if your words were true. You are claiming that Malik presented to the people the doubtful, uncertain, and repealed narrations and concealed the authentic, sound, and repealing narrations and he departed life without telling anybody about these narrations. Of course, this thing can be

done by none except those who intend for ruining Islam and cheating its people. Almighty Allah has protected Malik against such. In our conception, he is surely one of the master scholars who guided this nation to the right path although he sometimes made mistakes in the same way as he had been right. Like the other scholars, he exerted his efforts in the conclusion of religious laws. Almighty Allah has imposed promulgation for Him upon all scholars. The Holy Prophet said, 'Verily, one who conceals any item of (religious) knowledge about which he is asked shall be bridled with a rein of fire on the Resurrection Day.'...etc."(1)

The abovementioned discussion reveals that pluralism in opinions opposes the unity of doctrine. Similarly, the conception of the Sahabah's ultimate decency opposed the deeds of `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB with Sa`d ibn `Abadah when he shouted, "Kill Sa`d! May Allah kill Sa`d,"(2) and with Tamim al-Dariy when he whipped him,(3) and with `Amr ibn al-`as when he accused him of treason and of having stolen the spoils of war,(4) and with Khalid ibn al-Walid when he decided that he must be sentenced to stoning penalty.(5) All these incidents prove that the conception of the Sahabah's ultimate decency was not found during the reigns of Abu-Bakr and `Umar and even `Uthman; rather it was invented afterwards. In fact, this conception is baseless and is not supported by any tradition. All the reports that were ascribed to the Holy Prophet in this respect are carrying more than one sense and can be easily refuted. The same thing is applicable to the unfounded haloes of sacredness that were given to the Sahabah in addition to their having been regarded as sinless experts of the Holy QUR'AN. If truth be told, all such things were invented by the rulers and their fans.
Elaborately, let us quote the following text from al-Taftazaniy's Sharh al-Maqasid:
The disputes, disagreements, and arguments that occurred between the Sahabah, as is written in the books of history, indicate undoubtedly that some of them went astray and exceeded all limits in oppression and licentiousness whose motives must have been malice, stubbornness, envy, enmity, seeking of authorities and official positions, and tendency towards lusts and whims. Of

---

1- Ibn Hazm: al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam 2:251. 

2- Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq 5:444 H. 9758; Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal 1:55 H. 391; Ibn Sa`d: al-tabaqat al-Kubra 3:616; Tarikh al-tabariy 2:235. 

3- Al-tabaraniy: al-Mu`jam al-Kabir 2:58 H. 1281; Ibn Hazm: al-Muhalla 2:274. 

4- Ibn Abi'l-Hadid: Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 20:21. 

5- Tarikh al-tabariy 2:274; al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah 6:323; Ibn Habban: al-Thuqat 2:169.

course, not all the Sahabah are sinless and not all those who met the Holy Prophet are virtuous. Nevertheless, due to their good opinions about the companions of the Holy Prophet, the scholars have had to find excuses and justifications for them. They have also believed these Sahabah as having been divinely protected against deviation and wickedness so as to preserve the Muslims' doctrines from deviation and movement away as regards the personalities of the grand Sahabah, especially the Muhajirun and the Ansar as well as those predicted to be rewarded on the Resurrection Day. However, after the age of the Sahabah, the Household of Allah's Messenger (i.e. the Ahl al-Bayt) were oppressed and persecuted so harshly that none can deny and none can find any justification. Even the inanimate and the deaf can witness the oppression that was inflicted upon the Ahl al-Bayt-such an insensitive oppression that even the heavens and the earth wept for them; and even the mountains and the rocks were about to split. The evil of these deeds shall incessantly chase those who committed it all over ages. May the curse of Almighty Allah be upon all those who practiced and participated in these crimes and those who accepted it. "And certainly the chastisement of the hereafter is severer and more. 20/127" In any case, it may be said that some master scholars have not permitted cursing Yazid although they have known for sure that Yazid deserved more than mere cursing. We answer that those scholars have decided so in order that the other Sahabah would not be cursed, as is done by the Rafidah.(1)

The most important reason of the invention of such erroneous and baseless principles and fundamentals has been the decision of the prevention from reporting and recording the Hadith. This decision granted a big room for the authorities who adopted Opinionism to rule over the sacred texts.
In his Sharh al-Arba`in, Sulayman ibn `Abd al-Qawiy, a Hanbalite scholar died in AH 716, says,
The reason of disputes among the scholars is the contradiction of the narrations and reported texts. Some people allege that the reason beyond such dispute was `Umar ibn al-KHATTAB; when the Sahabah asked him to permit them writing down the Holy Sunnah, he prevented them although he knew that the Holy Prophet had ordered the Muslims to record the Hadith for Abu-Shat and had said, "Record the knowledge by means of writing it." Had `Umar let the Sahabah record what they had heard from the Holy Prophet, the Sunnah would have certainly been verified and no barrier would have stopped between the last generation of the Islamic nation and the Holy Prophet except

---

1- Al-Taftazaniy: Sharh al-Maqasid 5:310.

the Sahabah whose narrations would have been written down because these records were uninterruptedly reported from the Sahabah in the same way as they were uninterruptedly narrated by al-Bukhariy.(1)

Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zuhrah says,
Some of the Sahabah refrained from recording the Hadith and prevented the others from recording it not because the Holy Prophet warned them against writing down his traditions, for the traditions that are reported from the Sahabah as regards the prevention of or the refraining from recording the Hadith have not carried this justification at all; rather they used to present as pretext that they anticipated that people would occupy themselves with these traditions and disregard the Holy QUR'AN... etc.(2)
In so doing, many of the Holy Prophet's traditions wiped out and many more fabricated matters were ascribed to him and the Prophetic heritage was confused with the personal opinions and conclusions. In view of that, al-Bukhariy decided to pick for his book from among six hundred thousand Hadiths. A similar thing was decided by Muslim, al-Nassa'iy, and other compilers of Hadith.
The previously mentioned discussions have been lengthy, explicative presentation of the ordeal of the Holy Prophet's reported texts as well as the inconveniences of the decision of preventing the reporting and recording of the Hadith so as that the gentle reader will be acquainted with the confusions of the Islamic legislations as well as some of the reasons of disagreement among the Muslims. Nothing but truth has been our purpose-the truth that has been concealed from the Muslims for long ages and that has been besieged for about fourteen centuries.

---

1- This statement has been quoted by Asad Haydar in his famous book of 'al-Imam al-Sadiq wa'l-Madhahib al-Arba`ah (Imam al-Sadiq and the Four Schools of Muslim jurisprudence)'. 

 2- Shaykh Muhammad Abu-Zahrah: al-Hadith wa'l-Muhaddithun 234.

Thus the person responsible for all these tragic events in the history of Islam is Umar ibn Khattab, who knowing appointed Muawiya son of Abu Sufyan, the governor of Syria