Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Outline of Differences Between Shi’ite and Sunni Schools of Thought

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Introduction

There is no difference of opinion amongst Muslim schools that the religion of Allah is Islam; that the only way to know Islam is through the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet; and that the Book of Allah is what is known as the Qur’an, without any "addition”or "deletion". The difference is in the interpretation of some of the verses of the Qur’an; and in believing or not beliving some of the sunnah as genuine; or in its interpretation.

This difference of approach has led towards the difference in some basic principles and some laws of religion. As the basic principles of Islam are well known, I do not think it is necessary to enumerate all the beliefs. It will be sufficient if some of the important differences are described here to give the readers a fairly comprehensive idea of the main characteristics which distinguish the Shiats from the Sunnis.

All the Muslims argee that Allah is one, Muhammad (S) is His last prophet, and that one day Allah will resurrect all the human beings, and all will be questioned about their beliefs and actions. All of them agree that anyone who does not believe in any of the above three basic principles is not a Muslim. Also, they agree that anybody denying the famous tenets of Islam, like salat (prayers), sawm (fasting), hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca), zakat (religious tax), etc., or believing that the famous sins, like drinkig wine, adultery, stealing, gambling, lie, murder, etc., are not sins, is not a Muslim, though he might have been believing in Allah and His Prophet Muhammad (S). That is because to deny such things is like to deny the prophethood of Muhammad and his shariah (Divine Laws).

When we go further, we come across those subjects which are not agreed amongst Muslims, and the differences between different schools of Islam begin there. Many people think that the difference between Shi’a and Sunni is the issue of leadership after the death of prophet. This is true, but as a matter of fact, different leaders instruct different ways of approach to each issue. This may result to more differences as the the time goes. I try to briefly explain these basic differences here.

Person Of God

Some Sunni scholars hold beliefs which would imply that Allah has body, but not like the bodies that we know, of course. There are quite a number of traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari describing that God has a sign in his leg, and he put his leg over the hell and so on. For instance see Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-Englich version, 9.532s in which alleges Allah has a sign in His Shin (leg) and when He uncovers His Shin (leg) people will recognize Him. Or in the same volume see Tradition 9.604 and 9.510 where it is said that Allah has fingers! Please also see the consequetive articles given by Kaamran refrenced to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

Wahhabis who follow Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328) confirm that the organs of God is physical entity and Allah is firmly seated in the trone. However Ash’arites (followers of Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari) which include a vast amount of Sunnis, do NOT interpret face, hand, and leg as physical organs. They believe that Allah has face, hand, and leg, but they say: "We do not know how."

The Shi’a firmly believe that Allah has NOT got a body, nor face, nor hands, nor fingers, nor legs. Shaykh Saduq, one of the most distinguished of Shi’a scholars says:

"Verily, Allah is One, Unique, nothing is like Him, He is Eternal; Hearing, Seeing, Omniscient, Living, Omnipotent, above every need. He cannot be described in terms of substance, nor body, nor form, nor accident, nor line, nor surface, nor heaviness, nor lightness, nor color, nor movement, nor rest, nor time, nor space. He is above all the descriptions which can be applied to His creatures. He is away from both extremes: Neither He is just a non-entity (as atheists and in a lesser degree Mutazilites implied), nor He is just like other things. He is Existent, not like other existing things."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq Of course, there are some verses in Qur’an which ascribe the words used for limbs to the person of God. But according to the interpretation of Shi’ite Imams, they are used in metaphorical and symbolic sense, not literal sense.

for example, the verse (28:88) of Qur’an which says: "Every thing is mortal except His face”means ‘except His person’. Surely, even Sunni scholars can not say that only the face of God will remain, while His other so-called limbs (either physical or not) will die! Similarly, Allah has used

the word ‘Hand’ (Yad) in several places in the Qur’an. But it means His power and His Mercy, as in the verse (5:64): "But His hands are outspread".

In fact in the Qur’an and the Prophetic such mytaphorical meanings were greatly used. For example, Allah describes his Prophets as:

"Men of Hands and vision.”(Qur’an 38:45)

Even all Sunni scholars agreed that here ‘hands’ means power and strength. I should mention that the view of Shi’a is also different than Mu’tazalites who take God to the boundary of non-existence.

Can Allah Be Seen?

As a direct result of the above-mentioned difference, Sunni scholars believe that Allah can be seen. Some of them, like Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, say that He can be seen in this world, as well as in the word after. Others say that He can only be seen in the hereafter. (Reference: Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Traditions 9.530-532 which clearly state that God can be seen, and God changes His look to be recognized by people).

On the other hand, Shiats say that He cannot be seen physically anywhere, because He has no body, and because Allah says in the Qur’an:

"Sight cannot reach Him”(Qur’an 6:103).

Sunni scholars use the following verse as their proof:

"Some faces on that day (day of judgement) will be fresh (blooming), looking towards their Lord”(Qur’an 75:22-23).

But in Arabic language the word "nazar”(looking toward) does not imply "seeing". Often it is said: "nazartu ilal-hilal falam arahu”which means "I looked towards the new moon (crescent) but I did not see it.”Therefore, the verse does not imply that they will see God. According to the Shi’ite interpretstion, the verse means that they will be looking forward to the blessing of Allah.

Attributes Of Allah

According to the Shi’a belief, attributes of Allah can be put in two distinct groups: first those attributes which denote His person, and second, those attributes which denote His actions. Shaykh Saduq says:

"For example, we say that Allah was from ever Hearing, Seeing, Omniscient, Wise, Omnipotent, Having power, Living, Self-existent, One and Eternal. And these are His personal attributes. and we do not saythat He was from ever Creating, Doing, Intending, pleased, displeased, Giving sustenance, Speaking; because these virtues describe His actions; and they are not eternal; it is not allowed to say that Allah was doing all these actions from eternity.

The reason for this distinction is obvious. Actions need an object. For example, if we say that Allah was giving sustenance from ever, then we will have to admit the existence of sustained thing from ever. In other words, we will have to admit that the world was from ever. but it is against our belief that nothing except God is Eternal."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

It appears that the Sunni scholars have no clear view of this distinction, and they say that all His attributes are Eternal. This is the actual cause of their belief that Qur’an, being the Kalam (speech) of God, is Eternal, and not created. Because they say that He was mutakallim (speaking) from ever.

"Hanbalites”so far said that ‘Not only were the words and sounds of the Qur’an eternal, so that even its recital was uncreated, but its parchment and binding shared the same qualities. In the Testament of Abu Hanifa a more moderate view is expressed: We confess that the Qur’an is the speech of Allah, uncreated, His inspiration, and revelation, not He, yet not other than He, but His real quality, written in the copies, recited by the tongues. The ink, the paper, the writing are created, for they are the work of man”(Revelation and Reason in Islam by A.J. Arberry, pp 26-27).

But since Shi’a distinguish between His personal virtues and His actions, they say:

"Our belief about the Qur’an is that it is the speech of God, and His revelation sent by Him, and His word and His book... And that Allah is its Creator and its Sender and its Guardian..."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

Among the Sunnis, the bitter quarrel between the Mutazilites and the Asharites on this subject is well-known, and there is no need to release it here.

Some claim that every created things has flaws in it and thus Qur’an should be ethernal since it is without flaw. This argument is baseless since we Muslims believe that angels, though created, are flawless, otherwise how can we trust Gabriel when he brought Qur’an to the Prophet? How can you trust Prophet himself? Is Allah unable to create a flawless creature? As such, we believe that Qur’an as well as all other things in the universe are all created. Nothing is eternal except Allah. There is a tradition from the Prophet (S) which states that:

"(There was a time when) Allah existed, and there was nothing beside Him".

Place Of Reason In Religion

This is one of the most important distinction between the Sunnis on one side, and Shi’ites on another. To be more exact, I should have used the word Asharites, in place of Sunnis since a vast number of Sunnis nowadays are Asharites; Mutazilites have become extinct a long time ago, though some of the great scholars of the recent time like Justice Amir ‘Ali were Mutazilites.

Anyhow, the Shiats say that irrespective of religious commandments, there is real merit or demerit in different courses of actions, and it is because a certain thing is good that God orders it, and because the other is bad that He forbids it. Sunni scholars deny this conception. They say that nothing is good or evil in itself. Only what God has commanded us is goodand what He has forbidden us is evil. If something is forbidden by God it is bad; then if God cancels the first order, and allows it, it will become good, after being bad.

In other words, the Shiats say that God has forbidden us to tell lie because it is bad; the Sunnis say that lie has become bad because God has forbidden it. Shiats recognize the relation of cause and effect. Sunni sholars deny it. They say that there is no cause except Allah. And it is just a habit of Allah that whenever, for example, we drink water He quenches our thirst.

Based upon the above difference of attitude about the position of reason in religion are the following differences: Shiats say that God never acts without purpose or aimlessly. All His actions are based on wisdom and intelligent purpose (e.g., Because it is not commendable, rationally, to act without purpose). The Sunni scholars on the other hand, because of their denouncement of rational merit or demerit, say that it is quite possible for God to act aimlessly.

It follows that, according to the Shiats, God does nothing which has inherent demerit in it. The Sunnis deny it. Shiats say that all actions of Allah are intended for the benefit of His creatures. Because He Himself has no need; and if His actions become devoid of benefits for His creation also, they will become aimless, which is rationally not commendable. The Sunnis deny it, because of their stand about rational merit or demerit.

Grace (Lutf Or Tafaddul)

Based on the above differences, there is a difference about their attitude towards the Grace of Allah. Shiats say that the Grace is morally, incumbent upon Allah. They say Grace is the actions of God which would help to bring His creatures closer to His devotion and obedience and facilitate their moral correction (which is) morally incumbent on Him. Allah has commanded us to be just, while He Himself treats us with something better, namely Grace (tafaddul). The Sunni scholars, on the other hand, say:

"God leades astray whom He wills and guides to right path whom He wills, and it is not incumbent upon God, the Most High, to do something that may be best for the creature."

Sunni reference: Creed of an-Nasafi

God’s Promises

Based upon Shi’a position on Justice and Grace, they say that:

"Whatever God has promised as reward for a good work, He will fulfill it; but whatever He has threatened as punishment for a bad work, it is upon His decision. If He enforces the punishment, it will be according to His Justice; but if He forgives it, it will be according to His Grace."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

Shi’a is confronted both by the Kharijites and Mutazilites on one side and the Asharites on other side. The Mutazilites and Kharijites say that it is incumbent upon God to fulfill His threats also. He has no power to forgive.

The Asharites, on the other hand say that it is not incumbent upon Him even to fulfill His promises of rewards. They go so far as to say, "Even if Allah wants to send the prophets in Hell, and Satan to Paradise, it is not against virtue, because there is no inherent demerit in any action."

Why Believe In God

The Shiats say: Man is obliged by his reason to know God, and to obey His commands. In other words, necessity of religion is proved, first of all, by reason. Sunni scholars say it is necessary to believe in Allah, but not on the account of reason. It is necessary because Allah has ordered us to know Him. According to the Shi’ite point of view, this type of proof creates vicious circle. Believe in God. why? Because God has ordered it. But we do not know who God is. Why should we obey Him?

Limit Of Law

The Shiats say: God cannot give us a command beyond our strength, because it is wrong rationally (La Yokalleffollaho nafsan illa vosaaha). Some Sunni scholars do not agree with it.

Our Actions: Taqdir

Are our actions really ours? Or we are just a tool in the hands of Allah!

Shi’a scholars say:

"Taqdir means that, Allah possesses foreknowledge of human action, but He does not compel anybody to act in any particular way"

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

The above quote gives evidence to the fact that according to Shi’a, human has option either to obey God’s rules, or disobey. To make it clear, it should be explained here, that man’s conditions or actions are of two kinds

(i) Those actions about which he can be advised, ordered, praised or blamed. Such actions are within his power and are dependent upon his will.

(ii) Such conditions about which he cannot be praised or blamed, like life, death, etc. Such conditions are outside of his sphere of will or power.

For example, we can advise a patient to consult this or that doctor and remain under his treatment; but we can not advise him to become cured. Why this difference? Because getting treatment is under his power, but getting cured is not in his power. It is something which comes from Allah.

Freedom of action is a gift of Allah. He has given us power, freedom, strength, limbs, wisdom and everything with which we do any work.

Therefore, we are not independent of Allah, because our freedom is not only given but even sustained by Him. However our actions are not compelled by God, because He, after His showing us the right and wrong ways, and after His encouraging us to do right, has left us to our own free will. If we go wrong, it is our own choice. Shaykh Saduq stated:

"Our belief in this respect is what has been taught by Imam Jafar al- Sadiq (the sixth successor/grandson of Prophet): There is no compulsion (by God) and no relinquishing the authority (of God); but a condition between these two conditions. Then Imam was asked: How is it? He said: Suppose you see a man intending to commit a sin; and you forbade him; but he did not listen to you; and you left him; and he did commit that sin. Now when he did not pay attention to you and you left him, nobody can say that you ordered him or allowed him to sin."

Shi’i reference: Shi’ite Creed (al-Itqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq

In other words, we believe that God has given us power and will and then has left us free to do what we like. At the same time, He has taught us through prophets, what is right and what is wrong. Now, as He is Omniscient, He knows what will be our actions in different times of our life. But this knowledge does not make Him responsible for our actions more than a meteorologist can be responsible for cyclones and storms, if his forecasts comes true. True forecasts are the result, not the cause of the impending event. The Sunni scholars on the other hand say that Allah is the

Creator of all of our acts:

"No act of any individual, even though it is done purely for his benefit is independent of the will of Allah for its existence; and there does not occur in either in physical or extra terrestrial world

the wink of an eye, the hint of a thought, or the most sudden glance, except by the decree of Allah...of His power, desire and will. This includes evil and good, benefit and hurt, success and failure, sin and righteousness, obedience and disobedience, and polytheism or belief."

Sunni reference: al-Ghazali (as quoted in Shi’a of India, p43)

Prophethood

Based upon their belief of Lutf (Grace), the Shiats believe that it is incumbent upon Allah to send prophets and their successors in this world to put people on right path. The Sunni scholars say that it is not incumbent upon Allah, because they do not accept necessity of Grace.

Sinlessness

The Shiats and Sunnis in first instance, and then the Sunnis among themselves, disagree about the theory of Ismah (sinlessness; protection) of the prophets. What is our conception of sinlessness? It is the Grace of Allah which helps a person to refrain from sins, without effecting in any way his will and power. A Masum (sinless person) has power to commit sins; but he does not even think about sins because his spiritual standard is so high that such inferior things do not enter his mind.

The Sunni scholars do not speak with one voice in this subject:

1. They first differ about the point when sinlessness of prophets begins. Some Sunnis say it is after the declaration of prophet-hood; others say that it is since childhood.

2. The scope of sinlessness before declaration of prophet-hood: Some Sunni scholars say that it covers all sins; the majority say that they are protected from KUFR (infidelity) only.

3. The scope of sinlessness after declaration of prophet-hood: It is agreed that the prophets do not tell lie after prophet-hood. But what about other sins? Some Sunni scholars say that they commit other sins either intentionally or unintentionally; but the majority say that they could commit it unintentionally, but not intentionally.

4. The minor sins: Some Sunni scholars say it was possible for prophets to commit minor sins, even intentionally. But that they were protected from such minor sins which might have degraded them in the eyes of people.

The Shi’a point of view about sinlessness is that all the prophets were sinless and infallible; they did not commit any sin, whether capital or minor, and whether intentionally or unintentionally; and that they were sinless from the beginning of their life till their last breath. About the prophets, Shaykh Saduq wrote:

"Their word is the word of God, their order is the order of God, their forbidding is the forbidding by God And that the Chiefs of the prophets are five, and they are (called) ‘Ulul-Azm’ and they are Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (be blessings of Allah upon them all) and that Muhammad is their Chief and best of all."

Imam (Leader)

Shiats say that Imam must be appointed by God; that appointment may be known through the declaration of the Prophet or the preceding Imam. The Sunni scholars say that Imam (or Caliph, as they prefer to say) can be either elected, or nominated by the preceding Caliph, or selected by a committee, or may gain the power through a military coup (as was in the case of Muawiyah).

Shi’a scholars say that Imam must be sinless. The Sunni scholars (including Mutazilites) say that sinlessness is not a condition for leadership. Even if he is tyrant and sunk in sins (like in the case of Yazid, or Today’s King Fahd), the majority of the scholars from the shools of Hanbali, Shafi’i, and Maliki discourage people to rise against that Caliph. They think that they should be presevered.

Shiats say that Imam must possess above all such qualities as knowledge, bravery, justice, wisdom, piety, love of God etc. The Sunni scholars say it is not necessary. A person inferior in these qualities may be elected in preference to a person having all these qualities of superior degree.

Shiats say that ‘Ali was appointed by Allah to be the successor of the Prophet, and that the Prophet declared it on several occasions. More than one hundred of those occasions are recorded in the history. The Sunni scholars believe that the Prophet did not appoint anybody to be his successor. This is despite the fact that there are many traditions in the six authentic Sunni collections which support this assignment.

Wassalam.

Development of History and Hadith Collections

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Let us read the following tradition very carefully and judge for ourselves if we can ever give a possibility that such words have been uttered by the messenger of Allah. The tradition is in Sahih Muslim, and is written in the section of necessity of joining to the majority of people, and is as follows:

Narrated Hudayfh Ibn al-Yaman:

Prophet said: "There will come rulers after me who do not guide to my guidance and do not practice my Sunnah, and the hearts of some them are the hearts of Satans but they are in the body of human.”I said: "What should we do at that time?”Prophet (S) said: "You should just listen to them and obey those rulers. No matter if the hurt you and take your wealth, you should follow them and obey them."

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of al-Imaarah (chapter 33 for the Arabic version), Section of necessity of joining the majority, 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1476, Tradition #52.

This is the Arabic text of the above tradition narrated by Sahih Muslim:

يكون بعدي أئمة لا يهتدون بهداي ولا يستنون بسنتي، وسيقوم فيهم رجال قلوبهم قلوب الشياطين، في جثمان إنس، قال قلت: كيف أصنع يا رسول الله إن أدركت ذلك؟ قال: تسمع وتطيع، وإن ضرب ظهرك وأخذ مالك فاسمع وأطع

The above was just one example. There are more than 12 traditions similar to this in the same section of Sahih Muslim. Who sold such traditions as Sahih (authentic) to us? Aren’t they those who wanted to make their kingdom strong and away from any possible opposition? Any complaint is against the above alleged word of prophet, and those people are sentenced to death. In another tradition in the following section in Sahih Muslim, prophet has ordered to kill those who disobey these unjust rulers. Let us see where the origins of these books are, and who controlled the writing of them.

Muawiyah was the first one who turned his attention to write the history and collecting the fabricated Hadiths (traditions). He got a history of the ancients written by a person in the name of Ubayd whom he called him from Yemen.

Marwan who had been exiled by the Prophet for his anti-Islamic activities and who had a great influence with Uthman, was the implacable foe of ‘Ali. His son, Abdul Malik ascended the throne in year 65 AH, reestablished himself in year 73, and died in year 86. Abdul Malik was the one under whose funding finally a set of Islamic History, Hadith (tradition), and Tafsir (interpretation of the Qur’an) was provided. al-Zuhri was the first historian who wrote the history of Islam under the direct order and fund of Abdul Malik. He also wrote Hadith collection. The works of al-Zuhri was one of the main source for al-Bukhari. al-Zuhri was attached to the royal family of Abdul Malik, and was the tutor of his sons. (See "al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah,”by Shibli who is a great Sunni historian, part I, pp.13-17).

Among the students of al-Zuhri, two persons, namely Musa Ibn Uqbah, and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq became famous historians. The former was a slave of the house of Zubair. Although his history is not available today, it had been the most popular work on history for a long time. You will find its references in many history books on different subjects.

The second student, Muhammad Ibn Ishaq is the most famous historian for Sunnis. His biography of the Prophet, called "Sirah Rasul Allah", is still the accredited authority on the subject in the shape that was given to it by Ibn Hisham, and is known as "al-Sirah of Ibn Hisham".

al-Zuhri is the first who compiled the Hadith also. (See "al-Sirah al- Nabawiyyah,”by Shibli, part I, pp.13-17). All Sunni History and Hadith books written afterwards by other people were in great influence of these works.

The above gives evidence to the following facts:

1- Sunni Hadith and History books were first compiled under the direct order of Umayyah Kings,

2- The first authors were al-Zuhri, and his two students Musa and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq,

3- These authors were attached to the royal family of the Umayyah kings.

The hatred of the house of Umayyah against Bani Hashim (the house of Prophet and ‘Ali) is well-known. The wars of Abu Sufyan and his son Muawiyah against Prophet and ‘Ali respectively, also the horrible massacre of the grandson of prophet at Karbala by the grandson of Abu Sufyan, are only some of top items among the long list of such crimes. These are the criminals who FIRST wrote the history and Hadith books. (The books written afterwards by other people were in great influence of these works.) They fabricated many traditions to justify their deeds, and to say that prophet has ordered us to obey them even if they are unjust. What I quoted above was just one example of such traditions.

Who was the first one that used the term "Ahlussunnah and al-Jama’ah"? If one searches through the history books, he will find that they agreed to call the year in which Muawiyah seized the power as "The Year of al- Jama’ah”meaning the majority of people. It was called so, because the nation had already become divided into two factions after the death of Uthman: The Shi’a of ‘Ali and the followers of Muawiyah. When Imam ‘Ali (as) was martyred and Muawiyah took over the power, the year was called "al- Jama’ah". Out of these two parties, the majority leading by Muawiyah won the throne, and the other party was considered as a dangerous rival.

Therefore the name of "Ahl al-Sunnah and al-Jama’ah”indicates the Sunnah of Prophet merged by the innovations by Muawiyah, and the agreement on his leadership.

The Imams and members of Ahlul-Bayt who are the descendants of the Prophet, know more than anybody else about the Sunnah of their grandfather and what it entails, for as the proverb goes: "The people of Mecca know its paths better than anyone else". But the majority of people did/do not follow the 12 Imams whom prophet has mentioned their numbers (see Sahih al-Bukhari) and their names (see Sunni books like "Yanabi’ul Mawaddah”by al-Qunduzi al-Hanafi). Despite the acknowledgment of al-Bukhari and Muslim about 12 Imams, they always stop at the four Caliphs.

Shi’a-Sunni And Scrutinizing Hadith

One major difference between the Shi’a and the Sunnis is that Sunnis accept any tradition from any companions no matter if these companions fought each other, abused each other, rebelled against their righteous Caliph, and or innovate new things in to the religion.

The Shi’a, however, believe that all the narrators in the chain of a document should have been just. If they have done any injustice in the history (such as those mentioned above) their narrations are void for us unless the same tradition has been narrated with another chain of narrators who all of them are proven to be trustworthy.

One of the Wahhabi friends said that Shi’a, when narrating a Hadith, only say the Imam so and so said, one of our friends said...Now how we can authenticise the Hadith?

If a person has heard something directly from the 12 Imams, and that person is trustworthy for the Shi’a and his narration is not against Qur’an, then the tradition is authentic for us, since we believe in the infallibility of Imams as well as Prophets. The knowledge of Imam has been derived from the knowledge of their fathers and forefathers up to the Prophet (S).

However, the chain of narrators should be evaluated. If the chain turns out to be broken (i.e., one element in the chain is missing), then the tradition is considered weak in Isnad. Thus all the narrators should be named, and this is the case for the majority of Shi’i collections of traditions.

Nevertheless, there are only a number of traditions in Usul Kafi in which the last element in the chain is missing, i.e., the name of the person who reported to Kulaini in person. In stead of mentioning his name, Kulaini has used the phrase "a group of our associates". But Kulaini has mentioned all other elements in the chain.

The reason for this was that, as I mentioned, Shi’a have always been under prosecution of unjust rulers including the Abbasids. If Kulaini (ra) have mentioned the names of those who reported to him and were still alive, and if the book could have found his way to the officials, then all those reporters would have been killed. To protect them, he did not mention their names and codified it by saying "a group of our associates". However he mentioned the name of those who reported to him but died during Kulaini’s life.

But the good news is that since Kulaini knew the regulations of scrutinizing of the traditions by the Shi’a, he told some of his students how the names of the last narrators are codieifed. More specifically, it was mentioned that:

I. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Isa", then the group here means the following five persons:

1.Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Yahya al-Attar al-Qummi

2.’Ali Ibn Musa Ibn Ja’far al-Kamandani

3.Abu Sulayman Dawud Ibn Kawrah al-Qummi

4.Abu ‘Ali Ahmad Ibn Idris Ibn Ahmad al-Ash’ari al-Qummi

5.Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hashim al-Qummi.

II. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khalid al-Barqi", then the group here means the following four persons:

1.Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Hashim al-Qummi

2.Muhammad Ibn Abdillah Ibn Udhaynah

3.Ahmad Ibn Abillah Ibn Umayyah

4. ‘Ali Ibn al-Husayn al-Sa’d Abadi.

III. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Sahl Ibn Ziyad", then the group here means the following four persons:

1. Abul Hasan ‘Ali Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Aban al-Razi, who is known as Allan al-Kulaini

2. Abul Husayn Muhammad Ibn Abdillah Ja’far Ibn Muhammad Ibn Awn al- Asadi al-Kufi, resident of ray.

3. Muhammad Ibn al-Husayn Ibn Farrukh al-Saffar al-Qummi

4. Muhammad Ibn Aqil al-Kulaini.

IV. Whenever you read in Usul Kafi, that "a group of our associates narrated from Ja’far Ibn Muhammad who narrated from al-Hasan Ibn ‘Ali Ibn al-Faddal", then the group here consists of the following person:

1. Abu Abdillah al-Husayn Ibn Muhammad Ibn Imran Ibn Abi Bakr al- Ash’ari al-Qummi.

Thus the narrators of those traditions are known and can be evaluated accordingly. Nontheless, we do not claim that al-Kafi is an all authentic book of traditions for the Shi’a. There are certain traditions in al-Kafi which are reported by weak narrators who are known to the Shi’a scholars of Hadith.

Imam ‘Ali (as) said: Be the enemy of the oppressor and the helper of the oppressed one.

قالَ الإمام علي عليه السلام: كونو للظالم خصماً و للمظلوم عوناً

(Nahjul Balagha, the sayings of Imam ‘Ali)

Please compare this tradition of Imam ‘Ali with the tradition of Sahih Muslim given at the beginning of the article.

Islam of Abu Talib Part 1

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

It would be interesting if we analyze the verses that some Sunni commentators have aleged to have revealed for the disbelief of Abu Talib (ra). The first one is:

And they prohibit (others) from it and go far away from it, and they only bring destruction upon their own souls while they do not perceive it. Surah 6- The Cattle (An’aam) - Verse 26

- Tabari relates from Sufiyan Soori who relates it from Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit who narrated it from somebody saying that Ibn Abbas said ‘that this verse came down for Abu Talib, because he used to

protect Muhammad from the Kufar but he never recited the Kalima.’

Sunni References:

- Tabaqat of Ibne Sa’ad, v 2 p 105

- History of Tabari, v 7 p 100

- Tafseer Ibn Katheer, v 2 p 127

- Tafseer Kashaf, v 1 p 448

- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 6 p 406

- and many many more

Now let us see for ourselves if the ideology behind the above interpretation is correct or not, so that we would have no doubts in our minds. Further scrutiny of the above interpretation would lead us to believe that it is nothing but a futile effort to discredit Abu Talib:

- The verse talks about living people, since the verse mentions that ‘ people who prevent others from doing it and neither do it ‘. Of course a dead person can’t think of preventing others from a course of action, and they have to be living to do so. This convinces us to believe that this verse can’t be for Abu Talib.

The chain of narrators terminates after Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit and Sufyan doesn’t mention who narrated it from Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit, and all he says that he (Habeeb) narrated it from some one who heard it from Ibn Abbas. This criterion is not acceptable according to the standards of hadeeth, since the chain of narrators is incomplete, therefore this hadeeth is unacceptable.

But for argument sake if we still accept the chain of narrators, and the fact that Habeeb ibn Abu Sabit is the only person who narrates it, the books of Rijal testify to the fact that we can’t accept this tradition, for the following reasons

In the eyes if Ibn Habban, Habeeb is a ‘deceiver’, and Aqeeli Ibn Aun has ‘avoided’ Habeeb since Habeeb has copied hadeeths from Ata’a which are ‘ absolutely unacceptable ‘.

Qita’an says that Habeeb’s hadeeths other than Ata’a are also unacceptable and are not safe from being fake. Abu Dawood quotes from Ajri that the hadeeths narrated by Habeeb from Ibn Zamrah are not correct. Ibn Khazeema comments that Habeeb is a ‘deceiver’

Sunni Reference:

- Tahzeeb al-Tahzeeb, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v 2 p 179

Therefore the tradition narrated by Habeeb is his personal innovation, and after reading the views of so many Rijal experts how can we accept his hadeeth?

But this shouldn’t stop us from further investigating the issue, and if we accept the fact that Habeeb can be trusted, let us look at Sufyan who is the last narrator in the chain of the tradition against Abu Talib. We still have to declare this hadeeth void, because, al-Dhahabi writes about him that

"Sufyan narrations are lies”

Sunni Reference:

- Mizan al-Itidal, by al-Dhahabi, v 1 p 396

I find it very difficult to believe that despite the fact the commentators who have written down the traditions are respectable personalities, they have copied it down from cheap people such as above, without any hesitation.

Despite all these weak traditions that have been narrated by weak narrators, we find hadeeths related by Ibn Abbas that are genuine and state the opposite of what we find in the hadeeth mentioned above. Let see what they have to offer

Tabari states that the above verse came down for all the mushrikeen who used to stay away from the Prophet and used to advise others to stay away from him (the Prophet).

Sunni References:

- Tafseer Tabari, v 7 p 109

- Tafseer Durre Manthoor, v 3 p 8

The fact is that Abu Talib never advised others to stay away from Prophet (S). Even many of those who accused him for not uttering Shahadah, confess that he helped the Holy Prophet (S) during those days of tribulations of the young Islam with all his means. Also he raised the Prophet when he was child, and then accepted that Imam ‘Ali (as) to be raised by Prophet. He, in fact, was Muslim from the begining, but was ordered by Prophet to practice Taqiyya (to conceal his belief) so that he could play as a mediator between Prophet and chiefs of unbelievers in Mecca (like Abu Sufyan).

Also it is important to note that we do NOT believe that the parents of Prophets and Imams were necessarily perfect (Infallible). However we believe that their parents and all their forefathers were righteous and believers and monotheist during their entire life.

Islam of Abu Talib Part 2

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

A number of historians and hadith recorders reported that Abu Talib died while he was a pagan. Some of them reported the verse ‘ It is not permissible to the Prophet and the believers to ask God to forgive the pagans even if they were akin to them, after it became clear to them that those pagans are from the people of hell .’

Such false commentaries and statements were fabricated as a part of the smear campaign which the Omayyads and their allies waged against Imam ‘Ali (as). By fabricating such traditions they tried these to convince people that Abu Sufyan, father of Muawiyyah was better than Abu Talib, father of

Imam ‘Ali, claiming that Abu Sufyan died while he was a Muslim and Abu TAlib died while he was a pagan.

The recorders of the hadiths and the historians took these hadiths without paying attention to the evidence of their forgery. They did not try to examine these hadiths, yet the date of the revelation of the above mentioned verse testifies that it was not revealed about a matter pertaining to Abu Talib (May Allah be well pleased with him). Now coming to the hadith by itself, let see what the most authenticated book in the eyes of the Sunnis has to say. al-Bukhari in his Sahih writes

Narrated Al Musaiyab: When Abu Talibs death approached, the Prophet (saw) went to him while Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya were present with him. The Prophet (saw) said: ‘ O Uncle, say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, so that I may argue for your case with it before Allah. ‘ On that Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said: ‘ O Abu Talib! Do you want to renounce Abdul Muttalib’s religion ? ‘

Then the Prophet (saw) said, ‘ I will keep on asking (Allah for) forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden to do so. ‘ Then there was revealed

It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should pray for forgiveness for pagans even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are the companions of the fire. (9: 113)

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6

Page 158 Tradition no. 197

The above mentioned verse is a part of the Chapter of Baraat (number 9).

A few points on this Chapter

- this is a totally medinite Chapter, with the exception of the last two verses (128 and 129)

- the verse which is the subject of our discussion is Verse 113

- the Chapter of Baarat was revealed during the ninth (9th) year of Hijra.

The chapter speaks of the events that took place during the campaign of Tabuk, which was during the month of Rajab in the ninth Year. The Prophet (saw) had ordered Abu Bakr to announce first part of it during the days of the pilgrimage of that year when he sent him as an ‘ Amir Al Hajj ‘.

Then he sent Imam ‘Ali to take that part from him and announce it, because God commanded him that no one should deliver the revelation other than himself or a man from the members of his House. The chapter speaks of the events that took place during the campaign of Tabouk, which was during the month of Rajab in the ninth Year.

Many Sunni traditionist reported that:

The Messenger of Allah sendAbu Bakr to the people of Mecca with the Chapter of al-Bara’ah and when he proceeded, (the Prophet) sent for him and asked him to return the chapter and said: "No one takes it to them except one of my Ahlul-Bayt.”and thus he sent ‘Ali for this mission."

Sunni References:

- Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p183, v5, pp 275,283

- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, v1 pp 3,151, v3, pp 212,283

- Fadha’l al-Sahabah, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p562, Tradition #946

- Hakim in his Mustadrak, v 3 p 51

- Al Nisai in his Khasais al Awliyah, p 20

- Fadhail al Khamsah, v 2 p 343

- Siratun Nabi by Shibli Numani, v 2 p 239

Ahmad in his musnad added that Abu Bakr said: The Prophet (saw) had sent me with the chapter of Baarat to the people of Mecca

No pagan should make pilgrimage after this year. No naked shall circumnavigate around the Ancient House. No one shall enter paradise except a Muslim soul. Any pagan community that has been between them and the Messenger of God a peace accord, the accord will end by the end by the end of the specified period (without extension), and God and His Messenger are clear of pagans

Also Shibli Numani in his work on the Seera of the Prophet (saw) writes as follows (p 239 -- > p 240)

Now in the year 9th Hijri, the Kaaba was for the first time, consecrated as the central House of Worship for the followers of Abraham On return from Tabuk the Holy Prophet (saw) sent out a caravan of three hundred muslims from Mecca to Medina to perfrom the Hajj at Mecca.

Now coming back to the verse of (9: 113), the verse could not mean Abu Talib, because he died in Mecca at least two years before the Hijrah! I now quote Shibli Numani, in his most celebrated work on the Seera of the Prophet, Siratun Nabi (v 1, p 219 and 220)

Death of Khadija and of Abu Talib (10th Year Of Revelation)

On return from the mountain, the Prophet had hardly passed a few days in peace when Abu Talib and Khadija both died. He paid his last visit to Abu Talib when he was dying. Abu Jahl and Abd Allah ibn Ummaya were already there. The Prophet asked Abu Talib to recite the credo of Islam, so that he might bear witness to his faith in the presence of Allah. Abu Jahl and Ibn Umayya expostulated with Abu Taleb and asked if he was going to turn away from the religion of Abd Al Muttalib.

In the end Abu Talib said that he was dying with is belief in the religion of Abd Al Muttalib. Then he turned to the Prophet and said that he would have recited the creed but he feared lest the Quraish should accuse him of fear of death. The Prophet said that he would be praying to Allah for him till He forbade (Bukhari on the Chapter of Funeral. The last sentence has been taken from Muslim and not Bukhari). This is the version of Bukhari and Muslim. Ibn Ishaq says that while dying Abu Talib’s lips were in motion. al-Abbas who was till then a nonbeliever, put his ear to his lips and then said to the Prophet that he was reciting the KALIMA the Prophet had wanted of him. (Ibn Hisham, Cairo Edition, p 146).

(Please do bear in mind that all the references cited in the above para are “NOT “my adition, and “NEITHER “are the block letters my addition, they have been rendered by Shibli Numani himself)

Then Shibli Numani further writes

But from a traditionist’s point of view this report of Al Bukhari is not worthy taking as reliable because the last narrator is Musaiyyab who embraced Islam after the fall of Mecca, and was not himself present at the time of Abu Talib’s death. It is on this account that al Aini in his commentary has remarked that this tradition is MURSAL (Al Aini, Chapter Janaiz or Funeral, VOL IV, p 200).

Also he writes on page 221

Abu Talib made great sacrifices for the Prophet none can deny that. He would even sacrifice his own children for his sake. For his sake he had exposed himself to the odium of the whole country, and for his sake he had passed years in state of siege, suffering starvation as an exile, unprovided with food or drink. Will all this love, sacrifice and devotion go unrewarded ?

- asking God to forgive a deceased usually takes place at the time of the uneral prayer. The wording of the verse ‘ It is not permissible to the Prophet and the believers to ask God to forgive the pagans ‘ , indicates that the Prophet was with other believers (in a congregational prayer) when he asked forgiveness for the pagans.

- as a matter of fact, the funeral prayer was not instituted before the Hijrah (migration to Medina). The first prayer offered by the Messenger for a deceased was his prayer for Al Bura Ibn Maarour. it is likely that this verse was revealed after the Prophet offered a funeral prayer for one of the hypocrites who used to pretend Islam and conceal paganism. It is very likely that the verse was revealed when the Holy Prophet (saw) offered a funeral prayer for Abdullah bin Obai bin Salool who died during the ninth year and who was well noted in his hypocrisy, his hatred towards the Messenger of Allah and his adversary to the faith of Islam. About him and his followers, the Chapter of Al Munafiqoon (the Hypoctites) was revealed before that time. Had historians and hadith recorders thought with some depth and logic, they would not have commited this terrible historical error!

Here is another hadeeth from Sahih Bukhari that mentions the event similar to the previous hadeeth

Narrated Al Musaiyab: When Abu Talib was on his death bed, Allah’s Apostle same to him and found Abi Umaiya bin Al Mughira. Allah’s Apostle said: ‘ O uncle! say: None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, a sentence with which I will defend you before Allah. ‘

On that Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said to Abu Talib: ‘ Will now you leave the religion of Abdul Mutallaib ? ‘ Allah’s apostle kept on inviting him to say that senetnce while the other two kept on repeating their sentence before him till Abu Talib said as a last thing then he said to them , ‘ I am on the religion of Abdul Muttalib ‘ and refused to say: None has the righ to be worshipped except Allah. On that Allah’s Apostle said: ‘ By Allah I will keep on asking Allah’s forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so. So Allah revealed It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should invoke (Allah) for forgiveness for pagans (9: 113) And then Allah revealed especially about Abu Talib:

Verily! You (O, Muhammad) guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He will (28:56)

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6 page 278 -> 279

Tradition no. 295

Readers will be surprised to know that the two hadeeths cited above, prove that the two verses descended one after the other. But this is contrary to another hadeeth that Bukhari cites in his Sahih, and it proves that Surah Baarat was among the last revealed chapters. Here is the hadith

Narrated Al Bara: The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’a ...

Sahih Bukhari Kitabul Tafseer

Arabic English

Volume 6

Page 101 Tradition 129

Other Sunni references that affirm to the fact that Sura Baarat was among the last revealed chapters and a Medanite Sura, please refer to

- Tafseer Kashshaf, v 2 p 49

- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 8 p 273

- Tafseer Itqan, v 1 p 18

- Tafseer Showkani, v 3 p 316

But where is the fault in the Hadeeths? The verse cited from Surah Qasas, was revealed at least ten (10) years before Surah Baarat, and that it was revealed in Mecca, where as Surah Baarat was revealed in Medina. Please think about it, and you shall find out that in a futile effort to discredit

Abu Talib and declare him as an unbeliever, the order of the revelation of the Qur’an was not taken into consideration. Just imagine the time gap in between the revelation of the two chapters, and the matter will be very clear.

Also history tells us that Al Musaiyab

- disliked Imam ‘Ali

- refused to say the funeral prayers for the grandson of Imam ‘Ali, and the son of Imam Hussain, Imam Zainul Abidin

Sunni Reference

- Sharah of Ibn al Hadid, v 1 p 370

One could conclude that this fabrication was done to simply elevate Umayad over Hashimites. Also I came across a very ashtonishing commentary, by the most revered Sunni commentator, Fakr ar Din Al Razi in his Tafseer, with reference to Surah Qasas (28:56). He has mentioned this verse about Abu Talib, “not “because of his personal opinion; because of the opinion of some other scholars ‘. Surprisingly, he admits, that this verse could not be associated with Abu Talib’s beliefs ...

Reference: Tafseer Kabir, v 25 p 3 (Fakhr ar Din al Razi)

Islam of Abu Talib Part 3

بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ الرَّحْمَـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Qur’an And The Unbelievers

It is not (fit) for the Prophet and those who believe that they should ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even though they should be near relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are inmates of the flaiming fire. (9: 113)

Now since we have already proved that the above verse was not revealed for Abu Talib, where the Prophet and the Muslims have been advised not to pray for the polytheists, it would help us to look at those verses that asked the Prophet and the Believers not to eshtablish relations for the polytheists, let alone pray for them, out of love and respect!

Surah 58 - The Pleading One (Mujadilah) - Verse 22

You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Apostle, even though they were their own fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him; these are Allah’s party: Surely the party of Allah are the successful ones.

This was revealed in the Battle of Badr and this event occured in the 2 year of the Hijra. However there are some commentators that relate its revelation with The Battle of the Uhud, that occured in the 3 year of the Hijra. How ever, the verse advises us not to make friends with the non believers or even love them. This Chapter was revealed well before Surah Baarat (Chapter 9, for the verse cited in the beginning)

Sunni References:

- Tafseer Ibn Katheer, v 4 p 329

- Tafseer Sho Kafi, v 5 p 189

- Tafseer Aloosi, v 28 p 37

Surah 4 - Women (Surah Al Nisa)- Verses 139 And 144

Those who take the unbelievers for guardians rather than believers. Do they seek honor for them ? Then surely all honor is for Allah. O you who believe! do not take the unbelievers as protectors instead of than believers; do you desire that you should give to Allah a manifest proof against yourselves ?

This is a Mecci Surah, where the above verses advise the believers not to take unbelievers as helpers or protectors. How could the Prophet get help from an unbeliever if we assume Abu Talib is unbeliever?! Ofcourse, this verse was revealed well before Chapter 9, that has been the focus our attention!

Sunni reference:

- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 5 p 1

Surah 3 - The Family Of Imran (Surah Ale Imran) - Verse 28

Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than the believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribition from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual journey.

According to reference (1) the first eighty (80) verses of this Chapter were revealed during the beginning of the Hijra. The latter references indicate that the above verse (verse 28) was revealed during the Battle of Ihzab (5 Hijra). The last reference indicates that Surah Ale Imran and Surah Baarat were revealed with a difference of four Surahs.

Sunni References:

- Seera of Ibn Hisham, v 2 p 207

- Tafseer Qurtubi, v 4 p 58

- Tafseer Khazan, v 1 p 235

- Tafseer Itqan, v 1 p 17

Surah 9 - Repentance - Verses 23 And 80 (Surah Baarat)

O you who believe! do not take your fathers and your brothers for guardians if they love unbelief more than belief; and who ever of you takes them for a guardian, these it is that are the unjust.

Ask forgiveness for them or do not ask forgiveness for them; even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times, Allah will not forgive them; this is because they disbelieve in Allah and the Apostle, and Allah does not guide the transgressing people.

These two verses were revealed before Verse 9:113 (the verse used against Abu Talib), and as I conclude this discussion, let me pose a question to these accusers:

- Is it possible that the Prophet (saw) would ask for forgiveness for Abu Talib (May Allah bless his soul), especially when these two verses declare that it is futile to do so, assuming that Abu Talib died as an unbeliever? If your answer is yes, then isn’t it against the text of the Holy Book and the Will of Allah, the Almighty?!!

- The fact is that the verse 9:113 is just a command to Prophets in general, and not apprehension for what Prophet Muhammad did not! This will become clear when one looks at the next verse that (i.e., 9:114) which shows this is the command of Allah to Prophet Abraham who prayed for his uncle Azar (not to be confused with his father whose name was Tarokh. This needs a separate discussion) before it was known to him that he is the enemy of Allah. Qur’an states:

.. But when it became clear to him that he (Azar) was an enemy to Allah he dissociated himself from him; for Abraham was most tender- hearted forbearing. (9:114)