Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy

Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy8%

Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy Author:
Translator: Sayyid Akhtar Husain S.H. Rizvi
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
Category: Imam Hussein

Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 146 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 31178 / Download: 5085
Size Size Size
Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy

Misbah-uz-Zulam; Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy

Author:
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
English

www.alhassanain.org/english

Misbah-uz-Zulam;

Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy

Author(s): Sayyid Imdad Imam

Translator(s): Sayyid Athar Husayn S.H. Rizvi

Publisher(s): Ansariyan Publications - Qum

This book discusses the causes of the tragedy of Karbala’ and it will also throw light on numerous other matters, which are yet unknown to the vast majority of Muslims.

www.alhassanain.org/english

Miscellaneous information:

Misbah-uz-Zulam Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy Author: Sayyid Imdad Imam Translated by: Sayyid Athar Husayn S. H. Rizvi Publisher: Ansariyan Publications First Edition: 1388 – 1430 – 2009 ISBN: 978-964-219-103-1

Notice:

This version is published on behalf of www.alhassanain.org/english

The composing errors are not corrected.

Contents

Dedication 12

Arab Civilization on the Eve of the Prophet’s Arrival 13

Religion of Arabs at the time of Prophet Muhammad 15

Notes 16

Worship And Dealings during the Prophet’s Time 17

Notes 18

Violation of Orders about Usamah’s Army 19

Notes 20

A Look at The Phrase: “We Have The Book Of Allah With Us” 22

Notes 24

Beginning Of Imamiyah and Non-Imamiyah Ways and a Brief Description Of Both 26

Notes 27

Quranic Affairs 28

Notes 33

Fadak Affair 34

Notes 35

A Discussion About the Phrase of ‘She Frowned’ (Ghadhibat) 36

Note 37

Lady Fatima’s Sorrow and the Author 38

What Does Umar’s Behavior Show? 39

Note 40

Legal Viewpoint in the Fadak Affair 41

Notes 42

Helpers Of Judgment On Fadak 43

The Rest of the Fadak Tragedy 44

Notes 44

Opponents Make Light of the Fadak Affair 45

Note 46

Causes Of Aale Muhammad’s Dishonor 48

Notes 52

Atrocities on Muhammad’s Progeny and how they Bore Them Patiently 53

Note 53

A Glance at the Religious Leadership of Muhammad’s Progeny 54

Compilation of Quran and Its Harmful Effect On The Religious Leadership Of Bani Hashim 55

Notes 56

Second Cause Of The Decrease Of Religious Significance Of Bani Hashim 57

A Discussion About Sunni and Imamiyah Faith 59

Examples Of Dissociation Of The Two Sects 61

Imams of the Prophet’s Family 62

Important Warning 63

Examples of Religious Differences Between The Two Sects 64

Need Of Unity Among Muslims 66

The Religion of Imamites is The Religion of Ahlul Bayt 67

The Desired Success Of Ahlul Sunnat Faith 68

Differences Of The Principles With Regard To The Tragedy Of Karbala’ 69

Beliefs Of Ahlul Sunnat And Imamiyah With Regard To Caliphate 70

The Arson 73

After The Arson 74

Decrease in the Respect Of Ahlul Bayt From The Aspect Of The Rule Of Consensus 75

Inappropriate Titles That Decreased The Respect Of Muhammad’s Progeny 76

Notes 76

A Glance At The Title Of Siddiq Akbar 77

Notes 78

A Glance At The Title Of Farooq Aazam 79

Notes 80

A Glance At The Title Of Saifullah 81

Notes 81

Siddiqa, An Exclusive Title Of Lady Fatima 82

Notes 83

Decrease in the Respect Of Amirul Mo-Mineen In Relation To The Marriage Of Umme Kulthum 84

Note 87

Belief in The Holy Five is The Exclusive Belief Of Shias 88

Caliphate Cannot Be Divorced From Imamate 89

Writings Based On The Superiority Of Ali And The Proof Of His Caliphate 90

Notes 100

The Greater Battle Of Badr 101

Battle Of Uhud 103

Notes 108

Battle Of The Ditch 109

Notes 110

Battle of Khaybar 111

Notes 113

Battle Of Hunayn 114

Notes 134

The Tragedy of Karbala’ Is the Natural Consequence of Some Unnatural Factors 135

Note 139

Yazeed’s Allegiance and the Tragedy of Karbala’ 140

Note 144

Justification Of The Martyrdoms Of Imams Hasan And Husayn 145

Infallibility and Fallibility of Imam Husayn 146

The Absurd Belief Of Tafzeeliya Sect 148

Notes 149

Piranepir And Sadaat Hasani 150

Notes 152

Caliphate is From Allah or Caliphate is From People – Its Connection with Composition of Marsiya (Elegy) Writing 153

Note 154

‘Devotion’ Of Maulavi Nazir Ahmad to the Holy Prophet and His Family 155

Note 160

Tragedy Of Karbala’ Demands Close Attention 161

Husayn’s Side 162

Yazeed’s Side 163

Destruction of the Imam’s Enemies 164

Philosophy of Karbala’ Tragedy And Distribution Of Wisdom 165

Manners And Etiquettes 166

Determination 168

Civic Sense 169

Revolutionary Condition of Bani Hashim 170

Writer’s Belief 174

Notes 184

Abu Bakr’s Caliphate in the View of Ali 185

Value Of Abu Bakr’s Caliphate 186

Notes 189

Caliphate From People Or Caliphate From Allah 190

A Close Look At The Present Situation Of The World 191

Caliphate Of The Prophet In The View Of The Two Sects 192

Verse Of The Cave 194

Notes 199

A Glance At The Verse Of “Wallazeena Ma-Ahu” (And Those With Him) 200

Notes 223

A Glance At The Prevalent Sufism 224

Notes 225

Abu Bakr’s Leading Of Prayer 226

Notes 230

Descendants Of Ahlul Bayt (Sadaat) Were Slave Children 232

Notes 235

Islam and the Two Caliphs 236

Note 237

The Verse Of Surah Noor Discussed 238

Notes 239

Analysis Of The Tradition, “My Companions Are Like Stars; You Will Be Guided, If You Follow Any Of Them.” 240

Note 240

Existence Of Mahdi, Master Of The Age 241

Notes 242

Lineage Of Imam Mahdi 243

Note 245

Some Important Topics: Abdullah Ibn Saba And Shiaism 246

Note 246

Superiority Of Abu Bakr And Umar According To Zaidiya Traditions 247

Sahifa Kamila And Merits Of The Two Caliphs 249

Martyrdom Of Imam Husain And Yazeed’s Desire 250

Note 250

Lady Khadija And ‘A’ysha 251

Notes 255

Ja’far, The Liar (Kazzab) 256

Muhammad Ibn Hanafiya And Imam Zainul Aabideen 257

Note 257

Ahlul Sunnat And Lady Shaharbano 258

Note 258

Parents Of The Holy Prophet And The Imams 259

Was Abu Talib a Disbeliever? 260

Notes 263

Why Ali Did Not Take Up Arms Against The Caliphs? 264

Allegation That Abdullah Ibn Umar Paid Allegiance To Yazeed 266

Note 266

Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan 267

Notes 273

Yazeed Bin Muawiyah Bin Abu Sufyan 274

Notes 276

A Thirty-Year Caliphate 277

Notes 278

Jurisprudence Based On Personal Opinion and Analogy 279

Notes 281

Seeing Allah 282

Notes 283

According To Ahlul Sunnat It Is Permitted To Curse The Imamiyah Sect 284

Notes 285

Is Ali Inferior To Abu Bakr And Umar Even From The Lineage Point Of View? 286

Note 287

To The Kind Attention Of Muslims 288

Note 288

Zaid Ibn Ali Ibn Husayn, Or Zaid The Martyr 289

Khalid Bin Walid 290

Notes 292

Ahlul Sunnat And Bani Abbas Caliphs 293

Note 294

Objection Against The Counting Of Imams As Counted By Mulla Abdul Rahman Jami 295

Notes 295

Speech And Activities Of Muawiyah Ibne Yazeed 297

Types Of Traditions Of The Pure Imams 299

Note 299

Use Of Analogy And Personal Opinion Are Not Shia Practices 300

Note 300

Merits Of Abu Dharr Al-Ghifari, Ammar Bin Yasir, Abdullah Bin Masood, Owais Qarni And Salman Farsi 301

Notes 302

Excellence Of Chief Of Ladies, Fatima Zahra 303

Notes 306

Types Of Sunni Traditions 307

Bashir, An Opponent Of Ali Among The Narrators Of Ahlul Sunnat 309

Muawiyah and the Derogatory Remarks For His Eminence Ali 310

Notes 310

Lovers of Muawiyah Today 312

Note 312

Similarity of Circumstances of the Prophet’s Family with That of Moosa and Isa 313

Note 314

Fifteen Traditions That Prove the Caliphate and Imamate of the Twelve Imams 315

Verses Of The Holy Quran Proving The Caliphate Of His Eminence, Ali 317

Notes 320

Verses Proving The Caliphate Of Three Caliphs 321

Verse 1 321

Verse 2 322

Verse 3 322

Verse 4 323

Verse 5 324

Verse 6 325

Verse 7 326

Verse 8 326

Verse 9 327

Tradition no. 1 328

Objection no. 1 328

Objection no. 2 328

Objection no. 3 328

Objection no. 4 328

Objection no. 5 328

Objection no. 6 328

Tradition no. 2 330

Tradition no. 3 331

Tradition no. 4 331

Tradition no. 5 331

Tradition no. 6 331

Tradition no. 7 332

Tradition no. 8 332

Tradition no. 9 333

Tradition no. 10 333

Tradition no. 11 333

Tradition no. 12 333

Tradition no. 13 333

Tradition no. 14 334

Tradition no. 15 334

Tradition no. 16 335

Tradition no. 17 335

Tradition no. 18 336

Tradition no. 19 337

Tradition no. 20 337

Tradition no. 21 337

Tradition no. 22 337

Tradition no. 23 338

Tradition no. 24 339

Tradition no. 25 339

Notes 339

Unlawful Matters of Abu Bakr and Umar’s Caliphate 341

Notes 346

Unlawful Acts Of Umar 347

Notes 351

Islam And The Faith Of Three Caliphs 352

Notes 352

Matter Of Inheritance 353

Notes 354

Debate Of Good And Evil, Compulsion And Free Will 355

Notes 355

Piety Of His Eminence, Ali 357

Notes 359

Excellence Of Shias 360

Notes 362

Dissimulation (Taqayyah) 363

Note 364

Causes That Compelled the Imamiyah Sect to Adopt Dissimulation 366

Value Of Dissimulation 367

Notes 369

Tabarra 370

Mourning For Imam Husain 371

Notes 373

Mutah (Temporary) Marriage 374

Notes 381

First Case Of False Testimony In Islam 382

Note 384

Umar And Bravery 385

How This Writer Converted To Shiaism? 387

Note 390

Reason of Leaving the Hanafite Faith 391

A Few Examples of Abu Hanifah’s Analogy 392

Notes 393

Faith And Jurisprudence Of Abu Hanifah 394

The Author’s Dreams 398

Note 400

Important Points Regarding Dreams 401

An Important Letter 402

Dedication

In The Name of Allah The Beneficent, The Merciful

Praise be to Allah the Lord of the worlds. And benedictions upon His beloved, Muhammad and his purified Progeny

I humbly state that this book, Misbah-uz-Zulam, is written with the sole intention of research and it is not intended to hurt anyone’s feeling. Through its perusal, unprejudiced people will easily understand the causes of the tragedy of Karbala’ and it will also throw light on numerous other matters, which are yet unknown to the vast majority of Muslims.

I rely on Allah and He is sufficient for me, the best of the masters and the best protector.

The Author

Arab Civilization on the Eve of the Prophet’s Arrival

When the Holy Prophet (S) arrived, a part of the Arab land was under Iran’s rule and a part under the Byzantine government. The remaining areas were ruled by tribal Chiefs (Shaykhs). Mecca and Medina were similarly under the rule of their respective Shaykhs. The Sheikhdom of Mecca was in the family of the Holy Prophet (S), who were called Bani Hashim; but their other relatives, Bani Umayyah, were having more power and wealth. There was no love lost between Bani Umayyah and Bani Hashim. Yet there had been no major bloodshed either before or after the arrival of the Holy Prophet (S).

The ways of life of these two tribes were not similar. Normally the Bani Hashim were faithful, brave, kind, generous and sincere, whereas the Bani Umayyah were remote from all these attributes. Though both belonged to Quraish tribe, their behavior was very different from one another. If a comparison between to people each from the said two clans is made, the difference will be quite obvious. For this purpose let’s take up the case of Abdul Muttalib from Bani Hashim and Abu Sufyan from Bani Umayyah. All knew about the courage, faithfulness, kindness, truthfulness, foresight, generosity and thoughtfulness of Abdul Muttalib.

On the other hand, Abu Sufyan had nothing to do with these virtues. He was a selfish, evil, greedy, a malicious drunkard and a mischievous fellow. Besides many other virtues, the generosity of Abdul Muttalib was so great that he was prepared to fulfill the need of the needy before the latter could even describe it fully. It had also happened that this chief of Bani Hashim was once about to leave for Syria with trade goods, when at the last moment a needy fellow came to his door and asked for a big amount in charity. Abdul Muttalib at once complied with his request and could not undertake his trade journey due to lack of funds.

Even the greatest enemy of Abdul Muttalib is unable to show that he had on any occasion grabbed anyone’s wealth or had ever fled from the battlefield or behaved badly and unjustly with anyone or wished evil of anybody or drank wine or committed adultery etc. Undoubtedly, such evil deeds can never be committed by a man from whose loins, the two divine radiances, viz. the radiance of Muhammad (S) and the radiance of Ali (a.s.) were to be transferred to the loins of Abdullah and Abu Talib (r.a.). Doubtlessly, Abu Sufyan did not posses these graces.

Obviously, this book is not aimed to abuse anyone, otherwise, many sour affairs would have to be recalled; then if Abu Sufyan is to be compared with Abdul Muttalib it will be asked: Can a dead lamp be compared with the bright sun?

Similarly, if a comparison is made between Muawiyah and His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and of Imam Husayn (a.s.) with the son of Muawiyah, the distance between the behaviors of Bani Hashim and Bani Umayyah will become all the more obvious, even to the unaware. Lastly, if a comparison is made between Marwan bin Hakam, Abdul Malik bin Marwan, Walid bin Abdul Malik, Sulaiman bin Abdul Malik, Hisham bin Abdul Malik and Walid bin Yazeed bin Abdul Malik and people like Imam Zainul Aabideen, Imam Muhammad Baqir, Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) and other members of the holy family of the Prophet, the difference between good and evil will become crystal clear.

In Bani Umayyah tribe, a man named Marwan looks like the head of all mischief- makers of the world. Then Hakam bin Aas, Walid bin Uqbah etc. were also outstanding examples of the character of Bani Umayyah. The truth is that almost all the people in this tribe, with the sole exception of Umar bin Abdul Aziz, are such that to call them humans is like killing humanity.

Religion of Arabs at the time of Prophet Muhammad

Three religions were prevalent in Arabia at the time of the arrival of the Holy Prophet (S). One was the religion of polytheistic Arabs, who worshipped idols in the worst way. Another was the religion of Christianity, which was in a very bad condition as it had ceased to be a divine religion and the third was the religion of Prophet Moosa (a.s.) (i.e. religion of the Jews) which had also deteriorated like Christianity. In short, the entire land of Arabia had gone completely astray. In these circumstances, it was a demand of Divine Mercy that the Holy Prophet (S) should be appointed by Allah.

But the religion of Muhammad (S) could not spread and grow easily and many calamities befell the Holy Prophet (S) in Mecca. Bani Umayyah people were bent on opposing God. They could not kill the Holy Prophet (S) so long as Abu Talib (r.a.) was alive. But after the death of this kind and caring uncle, the idol-worshippers made all preparations to kill the Holy Prophet (S). Among the apostates of Mecca, the greatest enemies of the Prophet were these very Bani Umayyah.

At last, after suffering many troubles, he left Mecca and migrated to Medina. The people of Medina gave him a warm welcome and accepted the Divine religion in large numbers. Against all hopes, Islam gained roots and flourished in Medina and the people of the native Mecca remained deprived of this blessing. Strange are the affairs of Allah! How strange that a deadly enemy like Abu Jahl was from the native place of Mecca! The Holy Prophet (S) did get refuge and peace in Medina and many Medinites also became Muslims with a sincere heart, but this flourishing of Islam became extremely intolerable for Bani Umayyah and other unbelievers of Mecca.

So Bani Umayyah did everything to harm both the Holy Prophet (S) and the religion of Allah. Abu Sufyan advanced to Medina many times, accompanied with an army, and also fought the Muslims of Medina in several battles, but always failed. Almighty Allah did not allow His religion to be destroyed.

Finally, Abu Sufyan and other apostates of Mecca became tired and sat put at home. The Battle of Hunayn shook the Bani Umayyah severely and made the devil powerless. We should remember that it took ten years for the Prophet to weaken Bani Umayyah and it was only his military acumen and intelligence, which controlled such a rebellious tribe. But alas and again alas! After a little while, Bani Umayyah not only regained their lost strength but also gradually became the rulers of all the territories of Islam and it was as a result this, that one of their rulers caused the massacre, which is now remembered as the Tragedy of Karbala’.1

It is recorded in history, how Bani Umayyah became powerful once again and I have recounted those events in my book Kashful Haqaiq Vol. 12 and will again mention them wherever necessary in this book. But before I narrate the events of Karbala’, it is necessary to explain the religious conditions of the Muslims of those days so that the events of Karbala’ may also be understood easily. This is essential, because without knowing this, no one can understand the truth about Karbala’.

For instance, one could ask in astonishment: “My God! What is this? When Husayn (a.s.) was the grandson of the Holy Prophet (S), how and why did the Muslims killed him so mercilessly?” But when this questioner knows the facts, his bewilderment will go away and the Karbala’ incident will appear to him natural according to the law of cause and effect. This is a world where every happening must have a cause.

Notes

1. Refer to books of History

2. This book is now out of stock and perhaps not available anywhere.

Worship And Dealings during the Prophet’s Time

Verily, during the days of the Holy Prophet (S), the rituals and dealings of the followers of Islam must have been like that of the Prophet. For example, if he prayed with folded hands, all Muslims must also be doing likewise. The rituals of Hajj and Zakat etc. also should be on this line, because in those days, the Prophet himself must have led them in these matters. Likewise, in the matter of social interaction, Muslims must have been doing as they saw the Prophet do. No doubt, this continued till the end of the life of the Prophet. But when he fell on the deathbed, two great differences arose between him and his followers.

One is called “The story of the paper” (Qissa Qirtas) and another “Opposition to join Usamah’s army” (Takhalluf Jaish Usamah). What happened in the first, according to the author of Sharh Mawaqif,1 was when the moment of departure neared, the Holy Prophet (S) asked those around him: “Bring to me paper, so that I may write down some such things whereby you may not go astray after my passing away.”2

Umar was not pleased with this. So he said: “This man is overpowered by illness. We have the Book of Allah, and it is sufficient for us.” And in Sahih Bukhari, it is written: Due to this dispute, voices rose high, which made the Prophet very unhappy. So he said: “Get up and go away from me. This quarrelling is not good before me.”

In short, the Holy Prophet (S) could not leave any written order after him. A thoughtful look at this story makes it clear that at that moment the Prophet was in perfect senses and wanted to write something. It was never so that due to illness he had begun to utter senseless things.

No, at that time also, he was so conscious and alert that he knew that he was a prophet and was of the opinion that because of his rank, it was not becoming for his followers to raise their voices in his presence. It is not known what he wanted to write. But it must have been something related to religion and was also very serious and important.

The very words of the Prophet indicate that he wanted to do something to save his followers (Ummah) from misguidance. Shias say that he wanted to issue a written order appointing Ali (a.s.) as his successor while Sunnis say he wanted to make Abu Bakr his successor.

But alas! When nothing could be put in writing, there was no other way except to make guesses. If the guess of Ahlul Sunnat is correct, Umar did very much against not only Abu Bakr but also against the entire Ummah, because, had Abu Bakr been appointed as the Caliph in writing, no Muslim could have ever disputed it and there would not have been any tussle about Caliphate in the Muslim world and all the Muslims would have followed one and the same way.

Shias say that the Prophet intended to appoint Ali (a.s.) as his successor in writing and it was so because, only a few months earlier, the Holy Prophet (S) had orally made Ali (a.s.) his successor at a place called Ghadeer Khumm.3 The author intends to give details of Ghadeer Khumm in the following pages, which will show that the claim of Shias does not appear baseless.

Anyway, whatever the fact may be, it does not appear that Umar did anything against the Caliphate of Abu Bakr. If Umar was certain that the Prophet was about to make Abu Bakr his Caliph in writing, he would have, instead of preventing the Prophet from such a writing, all the more tried for the conclusion of such a written document, because such writing would surely have resulted in what had happened at the gathering of Saqifah Bani Saada with the support of Umar. But as a matter of fact, Umar too was certain that the Prophet wanted to make Ali his successor in writing.

Ahmad bin Abi Tahir has, in Tarikh Baghdad, quoted a narration of Ibn Abbas that Umar himself had said that the Prophet wanted to mention the name of Ali clearly during his last illness, but that “I prevented it.” That is why he objected. It will be seen henceforth that Umar had always tried to keep His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) away from Caliphate. All know that Umar kept Ali away from Caliphate during his (Umar’s) lifetime very successfully and even after his death, Umar, with his unparalleled political diplomacy, did not allow Ali to succeed as a Caliph. There is no doubt that non-realization of the Prophet’s intention was a great misfortune for the Muslim Ummah, sorrow for Islam and followers of Islam.

“Surely we belong to Allah and to Him we shall return.”4

Had that writing come into effect, Islam would have remained safe from thousands of mischief-makers and would not have suffered any of the calamities, which it is facing?

Notes

1. He is one of the great Sunni scholars.

2. Ref. Sahih Muslim, Kitabul Wasaya and Sahih Bukhari, Chapter I of Kitabul Ilm (Pg. 18) and Mishkat after Babul Karamaat.

3. Refer to books of History.

4. Surah Baqarah, 2:185.

Violation of Orders about Usamah’s Army

Another event, which occurred at the time of the passing away of the Holy Prophet (S) and due to which the Prophet’s intention remained unfulfilled is the problem with Usamah’s army. The Prophet wanted to send an army against the apostates under Usamah’s command, insisting for this so much, that he said: “Anyone who fails to join Usamah’s army, will be cursed.”1

No doubt, had the Holy Prophet (S) lived for a few more days, the said army of Usamah would have confronted the enemies of Islam. But some great companions and so also other Muslims of the time opposed the order totally and therefore the army could not proceed to the apostates and the Prophet did not succeed in his plan. How astonishing that those Muslims preferred to be cursed and sit at home!

What kind of faith is it that the Holy Prophet (S) orders something, but he is disobeyed? Doubtlessly, this disobedience had some special reasons. Apparently, it so appears that had Usamah proceeded with the Islamic army, the gathering, which was held at Saqifah Bani Saada, could not have been held and the matter of Caliphate would have taken and different shape.

In short, only these two events, which occurred near the time of the Prophet’s death, project a picture of serious difference between the intention of the Prophet and the attitude of his followers. No other event of difference seems to have happened at that time, but after the passing away of the Holy Prophet (S), a very serious disunity came up among Muslims as is even now apparent from the differences in the matter of prayers and social dealings etc.

The first difference to rise among Muslims after the Holy Prophet’s departure was about Caliphate. Dispute arose between the Emigrants (Muhajir) of Mecca and the Helpers (Ansar) of Medina. The Helpers said: “Appoint a chief from among you and one from us.” But Abu Bakr told the Helpers: Did you not hear the words of the Holy Prophet (S)? He had said: “My successor will be a man of Quraish.” This silenced the Helpers.

Then Umar intended to make Abu Bakr the Caliph, but Abu Bakr said Umar should be the Caliph. Umar did not agree to it and hastened to hold the hand of Abu Bakr and announced his allegiance to him.2 Along with this, all those who were present in Saqifah began to give allegiance to Abu Bakr.

Thus, the affair of Caliphate had been decided at Saqifah. But Bani Hashim were not there at all. So the Saqifah people were in serious apprehension regarding Bani Hashim. But as Ali (a.s.) did not appear to intend any serious act [the reason of it seems to be that the Holy Prophet (S) had, in his last moments, asked Ali not to rise against his opponents, so that Islam which was then in its initial stage might not be harmed] Bani Hashim too, like Ali (a.s.) remained calm.

Despite this, the people of Saqifah thought it essential to obtain allegiance from Ali (a.s.). So Umar went to His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and took the latter to Abu Bakr. There, His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) said to Abu Bakr: “You obtained the right from Helpers telling them that, as per the Holy Prophet’s words, the Caliph should be a man of Quraish. Now I demand from you what you obtained from the Helpers, because besides being a Quraishi, I am also a Hashimi and a brother as well as the son-in-law of the Holy Prophet (S) etc.”3 What could the people of Caliphate reply?

Anyhow, when Ali (a.s.) was asked to pay allegiance, he did not comply. Ahlul Sunnat say that Ali (a.s.) paid the allegiance after the death of Lady Fatima (s.a.)4 but Shias deny this claim totally. After looking into all the aspects of Ali (a.s.); moral, monetary and social etc. it appears to me that even after the demise of Lady Fatima (s.a.) Ali (a.s.) did not pay any kind of allegiance to Abu Bakr, because Ali was very truthful and sincere. Had he paid any kind of allegiance he would not have, in his sermon of Shiqshiqya5 , shown so much disgust against the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and thereafter, nor would he have shown so much grief.

It is obvious that had Muawiyah, after paying allegiance to anybody, made such a speech against that fellow, it would not have been considered contrary to his nature, because he was quite able and ready to do anything when needed. In a way though Muawiyah was fully trained by the first Caliph yet, when necessary, he would deliver two thousand orations against his teacher very easily in self-interest.

Similar seems to be the attitude of Talha and Zubair, as they themselves have actually shown. That is to say they paid allegiance to His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and then broke it and rose against the Caliph. But the nature of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) was never of this type. It was never possible for him to pay allegiance to Abu Bakr and then getting opportunity, condemn his Caliphate so bitterly as seen in the said sermon. Whoever has looked carefully at the character of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) can very well say that he was very straight-forward and that he could never give allegiance to Abu Bakr and then on another occasion, oppose him in bitter words.

Hence deep thought over this matter shows that even after the demise of the Lady of Paradise, Lady Fatima (s.a.), Ali did not give allegiance to Abu Bakr. Here, I am not concerned with the question of whether the Caliphate was enacted rightly or not. What is intended here is to see what was the effect of this Caliphate on the holy progeny of the Holy Prophet (S)? The immediate effect was that rulership was taken away from Bani Hashim as a result of which, the status which the holy progeny enjoyed during the time of the Holy Prophet (S) remained no more.

In my view, the active beginning of the apparent downfall of the status of the holy progeny commenced from this point. We will be able to show gradually that this disrespect to the holy progeny increased so much that after the insults at Karbala’, the ladies of the holy family were paraded with utter disrespect in the bazaars of Damascus very mercilessly.

Thereafter too, the holy blood continued to be shed and Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) descendants (Sadaats) were readily killed. Here, I don’t want to inquire whether or not the Sadaats deserved such treatment. But there is no doubt that the worst behavior was meted out to the holy progeny as can be seen in books of biography and history.

Notes

1. Refer Milal Wan Nihal by Allamah Shahristani. Also see the last part of Sharhe Mawaqif, Chapter Tanzeelal Kitab (Pg. 746) printed at Naval Kishor Press, Lucknow.

2. Ref. Sahih Bukhari, Kitabul Muharibeen and Fathul Bari etc.

3. Ref. Rauzatul Ahbab, Vol. II, Pg. 33-34

4. Ref. Sahih Muslim, Pg. 125.

5. Sermon no. 3 of Nahjul Balagha.

A Look at The Phrase: “We Have The Book Of Allah With Us”

It should be remembered that though the insulting of the holy progeny began from the Caliphate affair, it preceded in action with the words of “We have the book of Allah with us” (Hasbona Kitabullah) of Umar. It was because the effect of these words created problems, which were never even imagined before and which confronted Islam thereafter.

Of course, the Holy Prophet (S) had already said before his demise that, “I am leaving behind me two weighty things; if you cling to them, you will never deviate from the right path and these two are the Quran and my household.” Yet strangely, these words could not create even one-tenth of effect of what Umar’s words of, “We have the book of Allah with us” (Hasbona Kitabullah) did.

No doubt, these words of the Prophet, which are authentic, both in the view of Shias and Sunnis viz. “I leave among you…(Innee Taarikun…)1 are the words of the one about whom Allah Himself says:

“Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed.”2

So all his words were in accordance with divine revelation. Knowledgeable people very well know that it is about this tradition that Shah Abdul Aziz, in his Tohfa, writes: “Verily, the command of the Holy Prophet (S) indeed was such that the nation (Ummah) of Muhammad must cling to these two things viz. Quran and Ahlul Bayt.”3 But the author will now show to what extent did the Ummah do so.

Here, I don’t want to examine whether the words were proper or not, but theaim of this book is to look at the effect of these words of Umar. Apparently, it seems that had the clinging to the holy Ahlul Bayt also been considered as absolutely necessary along with the clinging to the holy book, the history of Islam would certainly have taken a very different turn from both, the religious and political angle. But these three or four words of Umar created a new Islamic world, which still exists in full form.

Though the words of the Prophet give a stern warning, Umar’s words did not allow the Prophet’s words to be acted upon and its scope remained limited to oration (without being acted upon). Had the words of the Prophet been acted upon, neither the event of Saqifah would have taken place nor Bani Hashim would have had to suffer various oppressions, nor would have its respect decreased among the Ummah nor any sects against the beliefs of Bani Hashim would have appeared. So also no events would have ever taken place, which concluded in the martyrdoms of Ali, Hasan, Husayn (a.s.) and many other family members and friends of the Holy Prophet (S).

Apparently, it seems the words of, “We have the book of Allah with us” (Hasbona Kitabullah) freed the common Sunni Muslims from clinging to the holy family of the Holy Prophet (S) and even though, the tradition of Two Heavy Things is, according to the words of the author of Tohfa, a popular tradition among both Sunnis and Shias; Sunnis did not act upon it either in the past nor are they doing so today. This tradition has remained almost like a dead letter in books and nothing more than that. So it is known to all the knowledgeable people that none, except the Bani Hashim and their friends ever cling to Muhammad’s Progeny. If for Sunnis, Muhammad’s Progeny means Lady Fatima, Imam Ali, Imams Hasan and Husayn (a.s.), I could not find from any book what Sunni do about clinging to these four persons.

The Holy Prophet (S) was not yet buried when Saqifah was held with a great hue and cry. No right-thinking person can call it ‘clinging to the Progeny’. Rather, this event appears to be a direct consequence of Umar’s words. Immediately thereafter, was the hue and cry about taking allegiance from Ali (a.s.), rushing of people to the house of Lady Fatima to burn it down, ugly actions regarding the Fadak property and disrespectful addresses to Ali and Fatima (s.a.) etc. They are all such barbarous deeds, which to a truthful man, look very far from ‘clinging to the holy progeny’!

Similarly, all actions taken during the Caliphates of the three Caliphs (according to followers of the three Caliphs) have nothing to do with the clinging to the Ahlul Bayt. What clinging to Ali was done at the time of the collection of Quran by the first Caliph? How did the second Caliph cling to Progeny in his personal exertions (Ijtihaadaat)? How did the third Caliph follow the Progeny? How did Muslims cling to Imam Hasan’s Imamate? What kind of clinging was observed in the affairs of Muawiyah, when he was the Caliph of the time? How did his successor, Yazeed follow the said tradition? Likewise, what was the manner of following of this tradition upto the time of Imam Askari (a.s.) in obedience of the command of the Holy Prophet (S)? What is apparent is that no one ever cared even to remember the subject of clinging to the holy family.

All the actions after the demise of the Holy Prophet (S) have nothing to do with the command of the Holy Prophet (S) at all. What was done was that the members of the holy family were unjustly imprisoned and their blood was mercilessly shed in different periods. In spite of the Ahlul Bayt’s being fully knowledgeable and wise, the non-Imamiyah scholars remained aloof from the orders of the Imams of Ahlul Bayt and are still doing so, details of which will come up hereafter.

O lovers of truth! Can these deeds be called ‘clinging to Progeny’? The fact is that the subject of clinging (Tamassuk) has been only a dead letter in the eyes of non-Imamiyah Muslims. Books show that the non-Imamiyah Muslim have, ever since the first Caliphate until today, clung to the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” This is the phrase, which has left no stone unturned to destroy the holy Ahlul Bayt. It also founded, after disassociating with the Ahlul Bayt, a particular sect which involves all non-Imamiyah and these non- Imamiyah have many different groups which are separately named by Abdul Qadir Jilani in Ghaniyatu Talibeen.

This phrase has created a big difference in belief between the Imamiyah and the non-Imamiyah regarding Imamate. It is a part of main belief in the view of Imamiyah, while it is secondary in the opinion of non-Imamiyah. The cause for this difference in belief, it seems, is that being the followers of the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Thaqalayn), the Imamiyah are of the opinion that Imamate is a divine command, on the basis of an argument that when the Holy Prophet (S) passed away from this world, in view of the said tradition, his progeny’s succession is also from Allah and it cannot be otherwise.

The fact of the matter too appears to be so that when his Progeny is included in Thaqalayn there can be no dispute about their being assigned by Allah. In accordance with this tradition (Thaqalayn) the Holy Prophet’s Progeny is either at par with Quran or only a little lower than it. Even if it is lower in rank than the Holy Quran, it certainly is one of the two great things. Despite this lower rank, the holy Progeny is surely not worth total abandonment and so may not be clung to along with the Holy Quran.

The truth is that the Holy Quran and the holy Ahlul Bayt can never be separated from one another. In my opinion, Progeny is higher than Quran because Quran is the argument of Quran whereas Progeny is talking Quran (Quran Natiq). That Ali (a.s.) has said that he is Quran Natiq is a profound evidence for a faithful man to appreciate Progeny as very graceful. Only one who is an opponent or enemy of Ali (a.s.) can deny this.

In short, the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) shows that Imamate is a divine affair. The reason why non-Imamiyah consider it a branch of belief (secondary) seems to be that by the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona…) the subject of Imamate, which is based on the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Thaqalayn) has been removed altogether. So no wonder if Imamate (which is from Allah) is considered as a dead issue because of the said phrase.

Obviously, when Imamate is not regarded to be from Allah, according to the belief of non-Imamiyah sect, there remains no superiority of rank for the twelve Imams over the four Sunni Imams. Rather, the value of the four is greater than that of the twelve, because all the jurisprudential needs of non-Imamiyah are solely related to those four Imams and they have neither a basic nor a secondary relationship with the twelve Imams. So in their view, the Imamates of twelve Imams cannot be considered higher than the Imamates of Ghazzali and Fakhruddin Razi.

Briefly speaking, the Imamate based on the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona…) can only be an Imamate, which is from people (as it is in Sunni circles). No doubt, these words of Umar bin Khattab succeeded in their aim and this phrase has virtually negated the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) in practice.

Therefore, the claim of non-Imamiyah, if at all, about clinging to Ahlul Bayt, by the Muslims of the time of Umar or thereafter, or even today is only on lips. This is not astonishing because when the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona…) makes it essential to cling only to Quran, it would naturally result in aloofness from Ahlul Bayt.

Quite opposite is the state of those Muslims in whose belief, clinging to Ahlul Bayt is as binding as clinging to Quran. Obviously, they cannot give up the holy family. Such Muslims, till today, cling to Ahlul Bayt in every matter and they are ever eager to obey the commands of the Holy Prophet (S) fully. But the number of such Muslims was small in the beginning and it is not large even today.

Notes

1. Ref. Tohfa Ithna Ashariyah, by Shah Abdul Aziz, Vol. IV, Pg. 201.

2. Surah Najm 53:3-4

3. Ref. Tohfa, Pg. 201.

Beginning Of Imamiyah and Non-Imamiyah Ways and a Brief Description Of Both

In the opinion of the writer, the root cause of sectarian difference among Muslims is this phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah). If these words had not been uttered by Umar after the demise of the Holy Prophet (S), Muslims would have equally clung to the Holy Quran and the holy Progeny as per the Prophet’s command, but these words took a large number of Muslims away from the holy Progeny and very few Muslims acted according to the Prophet’s tradition. They mainly belonged to Bani Hashim and their friends.

History books show that such Muslims, who had acted according to the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) kept themselves aloof from Umar’s phrase. They not only did not dissociate with Umar’s supporters but also kept a distance from them in every religious affair. Accordingly, when during the time of the first Caliph, they began to collect Quran as per his order, believers in the leadership of Ahlul Bayt remained aloof from them.

Similarly, during the days of Umar’s Caliphate, when personal exertions (Ijtihaad) were being made, they did not join the committees. In short, having clung to the words of the Prophet, these people followed in every affair, only the holy Progeny. Accordingly, they followed the religious commands given by His Eminence, Ali (a.s.)

The above events clearly show that the rift created by Umar’s words became wider with the passage of time and gradually two different ways of life (sects) came into being among the followers of Holy Prophet (S), one initiated with the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) and the other with the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah). The first is the Imamiyah path, because the natural consequence of following the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) is that one should not follow any leader or Imam of any other community or sect or family but the Imams belonging to the family of the Prophet.

Likewise, the path founded by the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah) made it compulsory for its followers to be ruled by non- Ahlul Bayt leaders or rulers; and to be led by the verdicts of non-Ahlul Bayt jurisprudents in religious matters. So, as seen from the books of both the sects, this latter is the sect which, in the second century of Hijra, came to be known as the religion of Ahlul Sunnat and which has not the least connection with the Imams from the family of the Prophet as will be explained in more detail afterwards.

Here it should be understood that when differences began after the demise of the Prophet and non-Bani Hashim people went away from the Prophet’s Progeny and started deriving meanings freely, and religious verdicts (Fatwas) began to be issued accordingly, a path different from the path of the Ahlul Bayt was established.

This school came into being due to a committee of personal exertions (Ijtihaad) founded by Umar, but at that time, it was not given any specific title; similarly, it remained nameless during the time of Muawiyah’s Caliphate also. But after him, in the beginning of the second century of the Hijri era, the followers of this path named it People of the Year and Congregation (Ahlus Sunnat Wal Jamaat). The reason of this naming is that Muawiyah had named the year (sanah) in which he had taken away Caliphate from Imam Hasan, as the year of the people (Aamul Jamaat) and the name of the year in which he had initiated cursing Ali (a.s.) in sermons as year of tradition (Aamus Sunnat).

Consequently, the opponents of the Progeny, like the Kharijis, Nawasib and Motazela sects, who had deep differences with His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), began to call themselves Ahlus Sunnat Wal Jamaat since the second century Hijri with an intention that the treaty enacted between Muawiyah and Imam Hasan and the tradition of cursing His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), which was initiated thereafter, may not be forgotten.1

It is not unexpected from today’s illiterate Ahlul Sunnat to become furious on learning this, but what is mentioned above is the truth. So an Ahlul Sunnat scholar, Ibn Abde Rabb writes in Kitab Al Uqd: “When Muawiyah entered into a treaty with Imam Hasan (a.s.), he named that year (Sana) Jamaat.” Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in Tarikhul Khulafa:2 “Muawiyah became Caliph from the month of Rabius Thani or Jamadiul Oolaa and he named that year (Sana) Jamaat because now the Ummah had agreed on one Caliph.” Similarly, research about “Aamus Sunnat” shows and Yahya Ibnul Hasan Qarshi, in his Minhaj Ut Tahqeeq, writes:

“When Muawiyah began cursing of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), he named that year Sunnat, which thereafter became Ahlul Sunnat.” Similarly, Hasan Suhail also has repeated this statement in Anwarul Badaayah and Shaykh Askari also writes in Kitabur Rivaaj: “Muawiyah named that year Sunnat.”

In short, the term Sunnat Wal Jamaat is made up of two names of years given by Muawiyah. But thousands and thousands of poor Ahlul Sunnat people today are totally unaware of the cause of the naming of their sect.

Notes

1. Ref. Tarikh Abul Fida, Vol. 1, Pg. 212.

2. Pg. 136

Quranic Affairs

It should be noted that the Holy Prophet (S) had very emphatically called upon all Muslims, through the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn), that they must cling to both Quran and Ahlul Bayt, but Umar considered it sufficient to cling only to Quran. Now let the Muslims see how the ‘clingers’ to Quran behaved with the Quran. During the time of Abu Bakr, copies of Quran were collected. For this task the first Caliph had appointed Zaid bin Thabit, Ubayy bin Kaab etc. So they collected. That collected Quran continued to be read during the days of the first two Caliphs.

But when the turn of Uthman came, he began fresh correction and compilation such a manner that the God-given leadership or Imamate of Ali, the chief of Ahlul Bayt, became a matter of dispute. Generally, Sunnis say that no member of Ahlul Bayt is mentioned in the Quran by name, then how can the leadership or Imamate of Ali or anyone from Ahlul Bayt can ever be proved from Quran?

No doubt, such discarding has also decreased the formal beauty of the Holy Quran.1 Rational thinking never considers this Uthmani arrangement as perfect. It should be remembered that this rearrangement of the Quran was ordered by Uthman with an intention of removing whatever differences etc. were found in the copies arranged by Abu Bakr through this new rearrangement and correction. But Ali (a.s.) and Muhammad’s Progeny were put to a big loss by this work.

For this correction and compilation, Zaid bin Thabit, Abdur Rahman bin Zubair, Saeed bin Aas and Abdullah bin Harith bin Hisham were employed and Ali (a.s.) had an apparent enmity with these persons. On the ground of differences in pronunciation, these gentlemen removed words in favor of Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny, which were in the Holy Quran.

Doubtlessly, this deed too, like the word of Umar, proved to be the remover of the effect of the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn), because, when the divinely appointed status of Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny did not remain, why one would thereafter, cling to these members of the holy family? Therefore, Muawiyah and his son, and all others of the same thought never turned to Imam Ali, Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s.). It is noteworthy that, as a consequence of the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah), one of the two great things, viz, turning to Ahlul Bayt had already been suspended, now the other great thing, that is, Quran too was curtailed in such a manner that the God-given leadership or Imamate of Ali, the chief of Ahlul Bayt, became a matter of dispute. Generally, Sunnis say that no member of Ahlul Bayt is mentioned in the Quran by name, then how can the leadership or Imamate of Ali or anyone from Ahlul Bayt can ever be proved from Quran?

Now, I want to show that during the Caliphate of Uthman, changes were made in Quran, which resulted in making the God-given Imamate to Ali Murtadha’ (a.s.) a matter of dispute. It should be kept in mind that the verse 67 of Chapter 5 was being recited as:

“O Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord, that Ali is the Master of believers2 ….

This phrase, “that Ali is the Master of believers” has been removed from the present Quran. Everything about this discarding is known from commentaries of Quran. Refer to Durre Manthur of Suyuti and Miftahun Najah by Mirza M. K. Badakhshani. Similarly, commentators have written that in the recitation of Ibn Masood, there was also a phrase: “Bi Ali Ibn Talib.”

Moreover Thalabi, in his Tafseer, quotes his teacher Abi Waail, that “We have read the copy of Quran of Abdullah bin Masood and have found that in the verse:

“Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations.”3

After “the descendants of Imran”, the phrase, “Muhammad’s Progeny” was also there by way of explanation. This goes to show that till the time of the existence of Ibn Masood’s copy, the words of “Muhammad’s Progeny” were there in Quran and that the reciters used to recite so. But how strange that Uthman and his trusted fellows considered them unauthentic and removed them from Quran. Was the correction of Quran dependent on the removal of the words Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny? People of justice should decide!

I need not write more than this. But extremely sorrowful indeed is the black day, which Ibn Masood had to see in connection with this story of Quran. When this great companion refused to part with his own copy of Quran to the effect of the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn), because, Uthman, he was severely beaten.4 Poor Ibn Masood! He lost that Quran and when the divinely appointed status of Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny did not remain, why one would thereafter, cling to these members of the holy family?

Therefore, Muawiyah and his son, and all others of the same thought never turned to Imam Ali, Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s.). It is noteworthy that, as a consequence of the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah), one of the two great things, viz, turning to Ahlul Bayt had already been suspended, now the other great thing, that is, Quran too was curtailed in also got severely beaten.

How could Ibn Masood reply to this merciless behavior? He just kept quiet. But when a similar attitude was shown to the copy of ‘A’ysha’s father, she became furious and the writer need not repeat what she said to the Caliph. But what was the benefit of such verbal anger? By the order of the Caliph, the copy of her father was also destroyed along with the copies of Ibn Masood and others.

Allamah Qaushiji, in his Sharhe Tajreed, has narrated the event of Ibn Masood in detail and there is no doubt about its factuality. It is noteworthy that what was done in the name of removal of differences was done only to remove the names of Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny.

This clearly shows that the aim behind all the performances of Uthman was to remove the God-given status of Ali and Muhammad’s Progeny so that the Imamate of the leader of Bani Hashim, that is Ali (a.s.) and his progeny, may never be established after the Prophet. These things can be termed by the just observer as despicable. In order to remove blame from Uthman, commentary- related words like “rare recitation” and “abrogated recitation” were coined. In the eyes of just persons, such excuses are worse than the crime.

But alas, aforesaid words were removed from the Quran. Had Uthman kept those words which were found in the Holy Quran right from the days of the Holy Prophet (S) at their places, the problem of Imamate would never have become a matter of dispute and the followers of Islam would have been protected from a very serious misguidance. So the consequence of the removal of the said words in this world, which the just people see now with their own eyes, are indeed very sorrowful.

It is obvious that the removal of the said words was a strategy of the opponents. I do not know whether this plan of self-interest was found by Uthman himself or somebody else had shown him the way. But my guess is that it was shown to him. There were some cunning people with him who were staunch enemies of the holy family of the Holy Prophet (S). No wonder if people like Marwan had shown this intrigue.

Anyway, whatever be the case, this deed shows the foresight of the three Caliphs combined. Doubtlessly, these tricks appear to be intended to complete the effect of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah). Umar had, through these words shown the way of keeping away from the Holy Family, but the mention of the Ahlul Bayt was there in the Quran.

The Quran was, unequivocally, commanding us to turn to Ahlul Bayt, so until these words were removed it was not easy to act on “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah). But when these words were removed, Umar’s words got total upliftment, that is, this Quranic affair conveniently separated the Ahlul Bayt from the mainstream of Muslims. Of course, it is a fact that since the Progeny and the Quran are closely related, it was never possible to make Umar’s phrase effective without separating Ahlul Bayt from Quran.

In short, it was in Uthman’s Caliphate that the aim of Umar’s words was fully attained. Now those who are just may decide whether through this process, the status of Ahlul Bayt has been lowered or not? In my opinion, not only this process lowered the status of Ahlul Bayt but also it was the reason of all the calamities, which befell Ahlul Bayt after the demise of the Prophet and all this got support through Uthman’s action.

Doubtlessly, such verbal and practical deeds removed the matter of the leadership (Imamate) of Ali and Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) from the minds of common Muslims. So when Imamate no more remained a divinely ordained thing, it cannot be considered astonishing if the Muslims of the time behaved harshly, mercilessly and insultingly with the Imams of the holy family of the Holy Prophet (S). After the subject of clinging to Ahlul Bayt being eaten away by a quadruped and after the removal of the mention of Ali and Ahlul Bayt from the Holy Quran, every kind of bad behavior by Muslims with the holy family was not unexpected as it so happened on different occasions.

It won’t be an exaggeration to say that had there been two thousand Husains, Muslims could have enacted two thousand Karbala’s due to the aforesaid teachings. But since there was only one Husayn, Karbala’ was also enacted only once. Had it been considered compulsory to cling to Ahlul Bayt as desired through the tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) and had the God-given status of Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn (a.s.) not been lowered systematically, what was done to these holy persons, by Muslims of the time would never have been done. All that the holy personalities had to suffer was only due to the fact that these faultless people were not considered divinely appointed for leadership of the Ummah.

Due to the aforesaid faulty teaching, the Muslims of those days as well as of the following days considered Ahlul Bayt as almost lifeless and hence not worth obeying. This will be explained henceforth. Had all Muslims considered them so, as they were indeed worth obeying, Muawiyah would not have fought with His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), nor would he have made Hasan (a.s.) to abdicate Caliphate, nor Muawiyah’s son, Yazeed would have dared to ask for allegiance from Imam Husayn (a.s.).

Doubtlessly, due to this phrase, what Uthman had done to Quran and the status of Ahlul Bayt had been lowered so much that Ahlul Sunnat scholars began to consider Ahlul Bayt as “who could make mistakes”(Jaiz-ul-khata) as Ibn Taymiyyah writes about Ali (a.s.) that the latter erred seventeen times. Maulavi Abdul Ali says that Lady Fatima (s.a.) had erred.

Ghazzali says that the mention and narration of Karbala’ Tragedy and martyrdom of Husayn (a.s.) and his companions is prohibited. On Pg. 117 of Sharh Aqaide Nasafi, Abu Shakoor Salami writes in the margin of Lam Yuqtal that it was compulsory for Imam Husayn to give allegiance to Yazeed. These are his actual words! His argument is that the Caliphate of Yazeed was by way of Muawiyah’s appointment, and the companions and non-companions had obeyed Yazeed.

It should be noted that in the view of non-Imamiyah, appointment is one of the conditions of Caliphate and it was due to this important condition that Umar was considered as the successor of Abu Bakr. What consequence could ever result because of the distancing from Ahlul Bayt and following of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah), except that scholars like Abdush Shakoor should say that Imam Husayn should have given allegiance to Yazeed? How is it that the sky does not split and fall on the discarders of Ahlul Bayt?

But, yes, oppressors are always given a long respite and a day will come to stand before Allah Almighty for giving account, when it will be known whether following Husayn was compulsory or following Yazeed. One may say whatever one likes against Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) but the Greatest Revenger has not disappeared and the day is not very far when each and every one of us all will get the recompense of our deeds. Allah is the Greatest!

These are the holy Ahlul Bayt, who, because of their inclusion in the Holy Quran are holding a God-given status and about whom the Holy Prophet (S) has said that they are one of the two heavy things (Thaqalayn) and also added in this very tradition that these two, viz Quran and Ahlul Bayt will not separate from one another till they arrive at Kauthar in Paradise. The meaning of these prophetic words is that Quran and Ahlul Bayt are two great things, which will never get away from one another either in this world or in the Hereafter. But how this tradition was followed was that they (Ahlul Bayt) were totally isolated and clinging only to Quran was considered sufficient. Thereafter, it also was considered strategic to remove the names of Muhammad’s Progeny and Ali (a.s.) from the Holy Quran. What an excellent obedience of the Prophet’s command!

Now see where did the clinging to Quran reach? The knowledgeable do know that, after the burning down of copies of Quran, Muawiyah raised hundreds of its copies on the points of spears and after him, Walid also shot arrows at the Quran.

We should know that Abdullah bin Umar is also of the opinion that Quran has been tempered with as he says that much of the Quran has gone out of hand. So this is the story of Quran! Neither the Quran could remain safe from the hands of the enemies or the holy Ahlul Bayt.5 But what can be done? Both Shias and Sunnis have clung to whatever is now before us in the form of Holy Quran. I also consider this Quran as my guide. But had the copy compiled by Ali (a.s.) been available or even if that which was with Ibn Masood, I would have to give up the present Quran. My research shows that nothing at all has been added in the original Quran. The Quran, now in our hands is all in all the Divine script and Allah’s Word, not the word of man. But it is also doubtless that Allah’s word has been rendered incomplete as shown above.

As regards those who say that Allah is the protector of Quran, it is doubtlessly true that Allah is Quran’s protector but it does not necessarily mean that Allah must also be the protector of the writing. Had Allah been the protector of even the written copies not a single copy of the holy book could have been burnt during the time of Uthman nor could have been harmed in any way even thereafter. But it is not so!

Recently a disbeliever entered a mosque and burnt a copy of the holy book! Had the divine protection meant so, that wretched man would never have been able to do that. So it should be understood that though Allah is the protector of His holy Book, but it is not in a sense that even paper books, copies of it cannot be harmed. Quran is the Word of Allah and is indeed preserved in the Divine Knowledge and no one or thing can harm it in this sense whereby Quran can become defective.

Finally, it would not be out of place if I ask how weighty the phrase of “We have the Book of Allah…” (Hasbona Kitabullah) was. Allaahu Akbar! How many different changes did this phrase create in Arab history! The truth is that had this phrase not come to the lips of Umar bin Khattab, not only the history of Arab civilization, but also the culture would have appeared in a different color. What a cunning fellow cannot do in the world! The fact is that the political ability of Umar was indeed extraordinary.

Though Muawiyah, son of Abu Sufyan, also was a clever troublemaker, he cannot come to the level of the political brain of Umar, son of Khattab. It was the ability of only Umar that, with the power of few words, he rendered the Holy Prophet’s tradition of Two Heavy Things (Hadith Thaqalayn) ineffective, as a result of which Bani Hashim, who had considerable respect in those days, were easily driven away from power and could never gain it thereafter.

Notes

1.

2. By way of explanation

3. Surah Aale Imran 3:33

4. 3 Ref. Nihyatal Uqool by Fakhruddin Razi and Najatul Mo-mineen by Mulla Hasan Kashmiri and also Maarife Ibn Qutaibah.

5. Both Quran and Ahlul Bayt were torn into pieces – Publisher.

Fadak Affair

Only a few days after the establishment of Caliphate, Lady Fatima had to approach the court (Daarul Qaza) in the case related to Fadak. It should be understood that Fadak is a region in the Hijaz province, situated at a distance of three-days’ travel from Medina. The author of Saraah says that Fadak is a village of Khaybar. It should be remembered that Khaybar is in Hijaz and so it is correct to say that Fadak is a village of Hijaz. Previously this village was a property of the disbelievers of Khaybar, but after a treaty with them, it came in possession of the Prophet and became his personal property.

A look at Pg. 292 of Sharh Abil Hadid (Vol. 2) shows that Abu Bakr did not believe that Fadak was the property of the Prophet. But all commentators agree that it belonged to the Holy Prophet (S) and it was indeed so. There must have been something, which made the commentators to become unanimous in this matter. Otherwise, how would have they have agreed on this point? Anyway, Fadak was a well-populated and fertile village with a number of orchards and springs. It used to give a considerable income to the Holy Prophet (S). It is well known that the Prophet was not living a luxurious life. Yet Fadak’s income was of a considerable help to the poor and needy. In his lifetime, the Prophet had, in accordance with the divine verse:

“And give to the near of kin his due…”1

…given away this village to Lady Fatima (s.a.) and thus it was in her practical possession.

A look at Tafseer Durre Manthur of Suyuti shows that when, in accordance to a treaty, the village of Fadak came in the possession of the Prophet, Jibraeel descended with this verse and requested the Holy Prophet (S) to give away Fadak to his near and dear ones. The Prophet inquired who was that near and dear relative. Jibraeel (a.s.) said: “Lady Fatima, Hasan and Husayn (a.s.).” The Prophet complied with the divine command and gave Fadak in writing to Lady Fatima (s.a.),2 but when Abu Bakr became the Caliph, he confiscated it. A look at the above-mentioned books shows that at the time of the said confiscation, Fadak was in possession of Lady Fatima. Words of Jawaahirul Aqdain also make it clear that Fadak was taken away from Lady Fatima (s.a.).

Anyway, when in the court, Lady Fatima, gave a statement that: “My father had gifted this area to me,” Abu Bakr said softly: “I had imagined that you have claimed it as a share of your inheritance, whereas the words of the Holy Prophet (S) are: There is no inheritance among we, prophets. Whatever we leave behind is charity. But when your late father had gifted this area to you during his lifetime it’s being in your control cannot be called illegal.” Saying this, Abu Bakr was about to issue a written order to restore Fadak to Lady Fatima when Umar came forward to prevent the Caliph from issuing such an order and said: “Fatima is no more than a woman and she is like all other women. Ask for a witness from her.”

In response, Lady Fatima produced His Eminence, Ali (a.s.), Umme Aiman (r.a.), and Asma binte Umais (r.a.), whereafter the Caliph wrote an order returning Fadak. But Umar snatched the order from the Caliph and tore it down3 saying: “Fatima is wife of Ali. How can his testimony be accepted? Whatever Ali says will be in his own interest and as for the testimony of the other two ladies, it is unreliable.” Upon this, Lady Fatima said:

“O gentlemen! You have heard the Prophet say that ‘these two ladies are among the people of Paradise and hence they cannot lie’.”

But this reply of Lady Fatima was not considered cognizable and Fadak was taken away from her. Then Fatima raised a complaint: “O my father! O Muhammad” and returned to her house. A few days thereafter, she fell ill due to a feeling of disappointment and tiredness and left this world with a deep disgust towards the people in power.

It is written in Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 5 and Sahih Muslim, Vol. 3 that after this affair of Fadak, Lady Fatima became very much displeased with Abu Bakr and broke off relations with the Caliphate totally and never talked with him till she breathed her last and when she died, Amirul Mo-mineen (a.s.), as per her will, buried her in the darkness of the night and did not even inform Abu Bakr and Umar.

Notes

1. Surah Bani Israel 17:26

2. Ref. Maarijun Nubuwwah, Chapter 40, Pg. 221; Habibus Sayr; Rauzatus Safa, Pg. 135, Vol. 2.

A Discussion About the Phrase of ‘She Frowned’ (Ghadhibat)

It should be noted that the words of ‘she frowned’ are found in a tradition of Sahih Bukhari, which means ‘she became angry’ or ‘she frowned’. Doubtlessly, it was an occasion which called for frowning or anger, because, in her opinion, Fadak was her property which was confiscated by the first Caliph, but it is extremely shameless that Qadi Sanaullaah, in his Saiful Malool, translated it as, “she felt ashamed”!

Is this an occasion for feeling ashamed? Lady Fatima was considering Fadak her own property and had approached the court for the return of a property, which she claimed as hers. His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) and other witnesses too had, seeing her claim as genuine, testified in her favor.

Thereafter also, the members of the holy family considered Fadak as the property of Fatima and that is why this property had been, on a number of times, returned to Ahlul Bayt by the Umayyad Caliph, Umar bin Abdul Aziz as well as other Caliphs of Bani Abbas. In short, it nowhere appears that either Fatima or anyone else from Ahlul Bayt had ever thought that confiscation of Fadak was an act of justice or fairplay. In such circumstances, if Lady Fatima became displeased and angry with Abu Bakr, it was not out of place, because whenever someone is angry with anybody he or she expresses his or her anger and does not become ashamed! The tradition of Bukhari shows that Lady Fatima stopped talking to Abu Bakr.

Similarly, it is seen from Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid1 that Lady Fatima had desired in her will that Abu Bakr should not even attend her funeral prayer. These narrations show that Lady Fatima had become very angry with Abu Bakr and do not show that ‘she was ashamed’. The reason why Qadi Sanaullaah had to create such unrelated meaning appears to be that he was aware of the Prophet’s words:

“One who hurts Fatima, hurts Allah and His Messenger.”

Hence he felt the need, because of his love for Abu Bakr, of translating ‘she frowned’ (Ghazabat) as ‘she felt ashamed’ (Nadimat). O Allah! Please save us from those who misinterpret the words of the Prophet! Justice-loving people should ponder how Ghazabat here can mean Nadimat. The truth is that the Qadi had, by creating such extraordinary meaning, wanted to help Ahlul Sunnat people in a big way. It is obvious that if Ghazabat is to mean Nadimat then it will prove that Lady Fatima had made a false claim and that she failed in her case and so felt ashamed.

But falsehood can never flourish. Every just and truth-loving person knows that Fatima (s.a.) had distanced herself from Abu Bakr with anger and that till her death, she was extremely displeased with the Caliph so much that she also passed away with a disappointed heart and met her departed father within six months of the latter’s demise. It is very sorrowful that those scholars who know ‘darning’ (making desired mending in Quranic verses), very often close their eyes at any insult to Ahlul Bayt.

See what a serious insult Qadi Sanaullaah has hurled at Lady Fatima by translating Ghazabat as Nadimat. Thereby he intended to allege that the sinless lady was one who did not know the truth, who made a false claim because of greed etc. The truth, however, is that there is no dearth of such untruthful translators among Muslim scholars. They, very easily, twist the meaning of Quranic verses and the Messenger’s words without caring for insult to Ahlul Bayt, only to support the Caliphate of the triad. We will come across a number of such examples henceforth.

Note

1. Vol. 2, Pg. 292


3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24