Translator: Dr. Hassan Najafi
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
Category: Imam Ali
ISBN: 978-964-438-976-8


Author: Ali Labbaf
Translator: Dr. Hassan Najafi
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum

ISBN: 978-964-438-976-8
visits: 6515
Download: 1344


Volume 1 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4
search inside book
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 38 /
  • Next
  • End
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 6515 / Download: 1344
Size Size Size


Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
ISBN: 978-964-438-976-8


A Victim Lost In Saqifah

Vol. 1






Labbaf, Ali,

A Victim Lost in Saqifah/ Ali Labbaf; Translated by Hassan Najafi.-Qum: Ansariyan, 2008.

ISBN: 978-964-438-976-8

Original Title: مظلومي گمشده در سقيفه

1. Saqifeh Bani Sa’edeh. 2. Ali ibn Abitaleb, Imam I. 599 - 661 - Proof of Calihpate. I. Najafi, Hasan, Tr.

294.452 BP 223.54 .L32

مظلوم السقيفة باللّغة الانجليزية

Revised Edition with Comprehensive Additions


Author: Ali Labbaf

With an introduction by Sayyid Muhammad Dhiyabaadi

Translator: Dr. Hasan Najafi

Publisher: Ansariyan Publications

First Edition: 2008 -1429 - 1387

ISBN: 978-964-438-976-8



Qum, Islamic Republic of Iran

Email: ansarian@noornet.net & Int_ansarian@yahoo.com

www.ansariyan.org & www.ansariyan.net


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

The composing errors are not corrected.

Table of Contents

Dedicated to: 10

Acknowledgement 11

Preface 12

Introduction: Fundamentals of Evaluation and Criticism of Writings on Islamic Unity 15

First Introduction: Necessity of thought for Islamic unity 15

Second Introduction: Valuable Standards of Worksheet of the Thought of Islamic Unity 17

Third Introduction: Familiarity with Writings on Thoughts of Islamic Unity 20

Beginning of Discussion: Awareness of Basics of Intellectual Movement - Research towards Creating Islamic Unity 21

Introduction to Applications of Two Tendencies by way of Criticism and Narration 23

Discourse One: Keeping Quiet and Prohibiting Difference-Creating Activities 24

Introduction 24

Criticism and Analysis 25

Invitation to Silence as Open-mindedness 30

Invitation to Keep Quiet as Mark of Sympathy 31

Invitation to Keep Quiet for Confidentiality 32

Discourse Two: Adopt Common Things and Ignore Differences between Islamic sects 34

Introduction 34

Criticism and Analysis 34

Discourse Three: To Make Difference between Two Schools so light as to appear depthless 36

Introduction 36

Criticism and Analysis 37

Deviation in Principles and Branches of Faith 42

Introduction 42

Criticism and Analysis 42

Conclusion 44

Conclusion 45

Reminder 46

Deviated Side-effects of this Conjecture 47

First Wrong Result 47

Second Wrong Result 48

Third Wrong Result 48

Fourth Wrong Result 49

1 - This Difference must be acknowledged: 49

2 - This Difference in Religion is neither rejected nor blamed: 49

3 - This Difference is desirable and useful: 50

4 - This Difference is not Harmful, it solves difficulty: 50

5 - This Difference is Good - there is nothing wrong in it: 50

Discourse Four: Excusing those who turn away from Imamate and School of Ahle Bayt (a.s.) 51

Introduction 51

Criticism and Analysis 55

Another Criticism and Analysis 60

Discourse Five: Alterations in Beliefs of Shia Ja’fari Twelve Imamite Faith 62

First Alteration: Imamate and Rulership 63

Introduction 63

First Batch: Three types of Separations between Imamate and Rulership 64

Introductory conjecture 64

Type A):Separation of Imamate from Rulership in the sense of setting aside Caliphate and considering it out of discussion: 64

Type B): Separation of Imamate from Rulership in the sense of Caliphate being independent of Imamate: 64

Deviated Repercussions of this Conjecture 66

First Wrong Result 66

Second Wrong Result 67

Third Wrong Result 68

Type C): Separation of Imamate from rulership in a frame of Great Imamate and Great Caliphate: 69

Particulars of this Oblique new thought about the Great Caliphate 70

Deviated Repercussions of this Conjecture 72

First Wrong Result 72

Second Wrong Result 72

Third Wrong Result 72

Reminder 72

Criticism and Opinion 74

Guardianship and Imamate is inseparable from apparent Caliphate 74

Reminder 76

Another Criticism 77

The Result 78

Second Batch: To show Rulership of less value than Imamate 80

Introduction 80

Criticism and Analysis 80

Second Alteration: Removing Imamate from Principles of Faith and making it a Fundamental of School 82

Introduction 82

Criticism and Analysis 83

Third Alteration: Aim of Eschewing Shia teachings 86

Introduction 86

A question that arises in the mind is that: 87

A - Taking benefit of a deviated thought, silence, an excuse to maintain Islamic demeanor? 87

B - To show differences between Ali and Caliphs as friendly 87

C - Denial of Enmity in a sense of blame, to show relations were intimate between Ali and Caliph 88

D - To Show Rulership Worthless from Ali’s Viewpoint 88

E - Mending the Method of Shia Propaganda 88

Closing Reminder 88

Discourse Six: Deviation in the Meaning of Divinely-Granted Caliphate of Ali 90

Introduction 90

Criticism and Analysis 90

First Conjecture: Imamate and Guardianship in Islam are only for the sake of Rulership! 90

Second Conjecture: Rulership in Islam is an Elected post! 91

How to utilize these Conjectures to Create Deviation in the Meaning of Divinely-given Caliphate of Ali 91

Conjecture A: Deviation in the Sense of Guardianship by Separating Imamate and Rulership 92

Conjecture B: Deviation in the Sense of Text following Deviation in the Meaning of Imamate 92

Result of this Manipulation 93

Deviated Repercussion of these Conjectures 94

First Wrong Result: Caliphate is not a Monopoly of Amirul Momineen (a.s.)! 94

Second Wrong Result: Caliph cannot be Exclusively Ali after the Prophet 94

Third Wrong Result: Usurpation of Ali’s Caliphate is no more in Question! 94

Fourth Wrong Result: Caliphate of Caliphs is not illegitimate! 94

Warning: Propagation of these Conjectures in the Name of Open-mindedness 95

Relation of Imamate and Caliphate from Shia Viewpoint 95

The wrong framing of the issue: 95

Discourse Seven: Denial of Differences between Ali and Caliphs 98

Introduction 98

Criticism and Analysis 102

What History says? 102

The Result 104

Reminder 104

A Note 105

Deviation in Criticism of Ali about Caliphs 106

Introduction 106

Criticism and Scrutiny 106

Discourse Eight: To Acknowledge the Legitimacy of Caliphs’ Government 109

Introduction 109

Scrutiny and Criticism 110

Unanswered Questions 111

Addendum: Solution of Shia to Create Islamic unity 113

First Point 113

Second Point 115

End: Reflection on Shia Ideal of Islamic Unity in the Zahra’s speech (s.a.) 117

Notes 118

Dedicated to:

Zahra (s.a.) who bore most pains until the moment of her martyrdom because of Saqifah.

Fatima Research and Study Group


The Ansariyan Publications would like to express acknowledgement to Syed Athar Rizvi and Dr. Hasan Najafi for their contributions to the translation of this work into English.


By: Ustad Sayyid Muhammad Dhiyabaadi

for the First and Second Editions

In His Exalted Name

I have read this book with care and attention and found it a collection compiled with a motive emanated from an ardent belief in the fundamentals of Shia school, which is the only clear manifestation of Islam. The great deal of constancy and research is much appreciable, which is further espoused with truth, sincerity and openness in dealing with the doubts by way of evaluation and review. Furthermore, it rises from staunch love and affection to defend the sanctity of divinely ordained authority of Ahle Bayt of Prophet, peace be on them.

Regretfully it is being witnessed that there are individuals having long been fed at the widespread table of the Prophet’s Ahle Bayt who are under mandate of reason and religion to strengthen the foundation of the school of those sacred rays of divine throne. However, they have no regard to the bread they have grown upon. They have weakened, rather ruined the very pillars of Shia school disguised as if adhering to truth and defending the sanctity of Islamic unity which is only a deceptive show and a polite blow. Tabarra; that is distancing oneself from enemies of the Prophet’s Ahle Bayt and despising them is one of the two keystones of religion. They have created a question mark against it. They claim that it is against Quran and tradition.

Sometimes according to them, the office of Imamate is a separate entity independent from Caliphate. Sometime in principles of belief also they have created a base and a branch. They introduce belief in Imamate as a branch, as a subsidiary thing liable to personal jurisprudence. As such, it does not constitute any obligation on the part of the person in event of his denial.

Sometimes the words and deeds of Amirul Momineen Ali (a.s.), in his dealings with Caliphs is a ground to them to justify their allegation that Ali was totally in agreement with their Caliphate.

It seems that they have not heard the painful cries of that oppressed Imam that used to come out of his aching heart as he says:

“When Allah took the Prophet (to himself) a group of men went back on their tracks. The ways (of misguidance) ruined them and they placed trust in deceitful intriguers, showed consideration to other than kinsmen, abandoned the kin whom they had been ordered to love and shifted the building from its strong foundation and built it in other than its (proper) place. They are the source of every shortcoming and the door of gropers in the dark. They were moving to and fro in amazement and lay intoxicated in the way of the people of the Pharaohs. They were either bent on this world and taking support on it or away from faith and removed from it.”

(Nahjul Balagha, Faid, Sermon 150 End of Part Two)

Attention to it is a matter of absolute necessity. Research about a true religion is the most essential element of life for Islamic society. A tangible proof of its salubrity and originality of being from divine should be brought home to people. The minds of young generation should be enlightened with regard to its principles and fundamentals as well as to defend the precincts of its sanctity. This does not mean sedition among groups or creating differences in thoughts of people. It is a matter of regret that there are individuals who refrain from discussing facts about religion and analyzing issues pertaining to beliefs and its literature. Their excuse is to preserve unity. Those who discuss and debate such matters perhaps are accused of sedition causing disunity and creating crevices in a concrete block of unity. It seems that this fact has escaped their sight. Unity appreciated by reason and religion - and at the same time a sacred one - is unity that should be framed over the pivot of truth rotating around truth. Otherwise it will be a unity at wrong (supposing if it comes into being). It will be unholy unity resulting in nothing but loss, havoc and emptiness.

It is natural first to know the truth. Then people should be invited towards unity based on truth. This needs to undergo a discussion and all-sided research in religion to find out what is there after truth except losing the way and going astray.[1]

Now the present collection which is an output of a year-long labor of a group of learned, believer youths and committed persons; to do justice to it, one should say honestly that it has originated from faith and a staunch love towards the most sacred position of divinely authorized Guardianship (Wilayat) of Amirul Momineen Ali (a.s.) and Ahle Bayt of Prophet. Peace be upon them all.

Those who are acquainted with the task of writing books know that constancy in discourses and in scattered writings of speculators is not easy. Grouping and collecting the doubted data from spoken words and writings and then their orderly arrangement and classification, then to make it coherent is not an easy job. Obvious it is as to what could be the corrupt aftermaths begotten by a doubtful belief. They have not allowed this to escape without replying. In this regard, they have made full use of books of great scholars of religion and faith. Considering all this, one should honestly acknowledge the difficulty and labor involved in it. One cannot undergo this burden unless one is blessed with moral impetus and love to defend the true faith.

Therefore all who love Shia faith, particularly the youths, will read this collection with interest in order to know how conjectures and allegations are spread which should not go without answering.

In the end, I beseech the Lord to bless the author and his colleagues with prosperity in both the worlds and bestow upon him bounty of service to religion in future also.

1-10-80 (9th Shawwal 1422)

Sayyid Muhammad Dhiyabaadi

By the Grace of the Almighty, this valuable book: A Victim Lost in Saqifah[2] is being published for the second time, revised and with additional data on some parts of original text. After reading the additional matter, I realized that it was necessary for the original text as it completes it.

I hope for continuation of such a service to religion on the part of the author by the grace of God.

12-8-83 (18th Ramadan al-Mubarak 1425)

Sayyid Muhammad Dhiyabaadi

Introduction: Fundamentals of Evaluation and Criticism of Writings on Islamic Unity

First Introduction: Necessity of thought for Islamic unity

We are impelled to notice a particular sort of religious thinking named ‘revival’ as we go back a recent century and look into schools of Islamic thought.

These days revivalism is a term applied to opinions and views of many Muslims thinkers.

Most of us are acquainted with this term without having full knowledge of it.

If we want to simply describe this term on the basis of existing writings in this field, we must say that contemporary tendency of thought among Muslims aims at revival of religious system, which they consider either of these two: Comprehension of faith or practice of faith.

Revivalists consider revivalism a necessity towards preserving religion in this new world.

As such, it could be said that all religious revivalists in the beginning intellectually endeavor leaning on the belief that religion is workable in present society. It can attend or mend basic human difficulties, of whatever depth it be, in various dimensions. Therefore we can depend on it or desire it since it is a need.

But how?!

An immediate question that strikes the mind is how to prove it in practice and display worth and capability.

The real issue, from this stage onward, for this category of new thinkers of religion shall be to reply this query:

How it is possible to raise the issue of faith once more in these days of competition that has gripped human thought? Besides, how to face other schools fraught with consummate ability and respond to all other important ones of the day in a useful analysis. And this is the need.

Hence it is befitting to say that the most important efforts of new religious thinkers can be summed up in one sentence - in the present age, religion renovated by themselves is returned to appear on the social stage in a status of a powerful and energetic school.

Thought of Islamic unity is related to the same category of revivalist thoughts. Such can be understood from what in brief is told about the endeavors of revivalists.

Therefore it has always been the point of focus of those who desire to tread the path of revival in a way to provide a variety to the outlook.

This group of revivalists is mindful of the extent of influence of faith in individual and social life. Dispute and the fight of religious people and coming into being of divisions among Muslims has become a cause to move towards Islamic unity. This practical revival guarantees a kind of revisal in fundamentals of Muslim thought or in the outlook of Islamic theory towards creating a change in social relations of Muslims.

It depends upon the activity of a revivalist as to its kind towards achieving Islamic unity whether by means of a social or cultural movement. Fundamentals of its theory shall differ accordingly.

Basically, a revivalist is a political and social activist. However he is also an intellectual and cultural activist. He spends his revivalist life in changing the beliefs of individuals of the society by way of presenting theatrical views and spreading them among public.

Of course a seeker of unity too can adjust himself among various subjects of this group and at the same time exert his efforts in society through propaganda activities.

Second Introduction: Valuable Standards of Worksheet of the Thought of Islamic Unity

A perusal of various indicators of Islamic unity shows that advocates of this theory have utilized different methods for its achievement. Several methods, including occasionally contradictory ones, have found room in the worksheet of revivalists.

Exact knowledge of each of these methods is very much important. Type of practice in behavior and action is more useful than directing the belief of individuals and more important than seeking unity.

As we said, thought of Islamic unity is similar to that of revivalism. Therefore it follows the governing principles.

Hence it seems natural that we too, as a Shia analysts, should consider Islamic unity subordinate to principles and regulations pertaining to revivalism and standards of critical evaluation. Accordingly we must be able to evaluate these values.

In a critical evaluation of Islamic unity, we must treat each indicator independently. We must take the grounds of evaluation of worksheet of revivalism into consideration and set it for evaluation.

From here onward, we shall try to comment in brief about these standards and state our position.

Revivalists in their intellectual endeavors should maintain two important and fundamental rules because of their claim in this respect. A revivalist in the run of his activities is liable to observe:

First rule: ability and forwardness

Second rule: originality and sincerity

Though these two rules form the whole, yet through this whole itself difference is apt to appear. This makes the trend of criticism rather difficult. On the other hand it can be said that through Shia viewpoint in the whole history of revivalism these two real bases give ground to criticism and explanation. A revivalist cannot overlook the deep peeping eye of a critic of Shia society nor be indifferent towards the inquiry regarding the extent of consideration of the rule touching originality.

Because every religious thinker at least in a position of claim is willing to show that his religious thought is pristine and based on original teachings of religion and pure from irreligious conjectures or unauthentic additions. And on the other hand he wishes to attain a strong platform among religions and a stronghold enabling him to answer problems.

Therefore in the trend of revivalism these two distinguishing indicators should be pursued and sought.

In this analysis whatever we Shias employ under the title of standard of scaling originality and sincerity it is either in accordance with teachings of Quran or Prophet’s Ahle Bayt; in other words beliefs that govern the Shiite school; because the real and true Islam is reflected in teachings of this school alone.

We, Shias, believe on the basis of teachings of the Prophet.

Whoever wants to lay his hand on religious literature or know about teachings of Islam must refer to Ahle Bayt (a.s.) after the Prophet. There is no source at all to focus the light of truth of this religion except by direct contact with Prophet’s progeny through their teachings.

Any knowledge by name of religion of Islam, or on the whole any thought not supported by teachings of Prophet’s Ahle Bayt, in the end is doomed to deviation and destined to go astray. Ahle Bayt of Prophet are the only origins to obtain therefrom true knowledge of Islam. Besides, they are the only source to know a thought or a theory as to its being a religious one or in line with teachings of Shia school.[3] This is the only way of obtaining religious knowledge, which is knowledge of guidance. This is the only way to trust in correctness of thoughts on display in the name of religion.

Without any doubt, the very root of learnings of true religion is contained in teachings of Ahle Bayt of Prophet. If any knowledge or information with the label of Islam does not happen to be in line with their teachings, every certitude of it is wrong; it is a waste and rescinded.

Accordingly if a word about Islamic unity is put in, it should be based on very religion itself. In other words, it should originate from real teachers of religion; that is Ahle Bayt of Prophet. It must be so according to Shia belief. When this stage is still in dispute and the standard of sincerity and rule towards its achievement is yet unsettled, to enter into another theory; that is activities of revivalism, seems out of place and to no end.

In this criticism and analysis, the standard of truth is the wholesome and absolute application of thoughts without least leniency or a bent towards Shiaism or beliefs contained therein though this school is absolute truth.

The smallest slip or an overlook in application of thoughts of unity with fundamentals of Ja’fari Shiaism of twelve Imams has brought forward the ground that renders short the standard of originality and sincerity. This has further rendered the thought irreligious and without backing of Islam. No saying goes if there had been any deliberate amendment or departure from the basis of this school.

Although we have great respect for those who possess opinion and have moral duty towards critics and analysts, we never give sanction to ourselves to overlook truth or ignore the right being trespassed. In no condition and in no case we shall fall short. We have no right to do so. It does not serve as a platform to reach agreements thereupon for the sake of our or others’ interests.

The absolute truth belongs to Ahle Bayt of Prophet. It is found in their persons and rests with them. Therefore if we entertain any kind of thought or conjecture in the name of religion, which is not in accordance with this school, it is as though we have trampled truth and rightfulness, which is their concern and tribute, belonging to them alone.

Shias are after originality and sincerity of thought when they confront Muslim revivalism. They are also after the ability or strength in this regard. They believe if they sacrifice one for the sake of other, it will certainly result in shortage. One will lack the other. It will be an incomplete and unconsummated thought. In other words, we are taking refuge in an irreligious conjecture.

Ability or strength alone is not the concern of Shias. Sincerity in religious intention too is necessary. The excessive desire, on the part of newcomers to this thought, to exhibit strength could spoil sincerity and diminish its originality. Likewise, to create strength they might commit some additions to religion, which the true Islam is pure and purged of. As such, the brushstrokes they would apply could reduce elegance of real Islam or effect unwanted and undesired additions thereon making ugly the beautiful. Wrong feeding in a long run will result in the school losing its very entity. Such will be the consequence of revivalism taking to itself the twists and turns of deviation of belief.

Creating ability without sincerity and pristine originality shall result into a constant fear - not only in issue of Islamic unity but throughout the varieties of revivalism.

The output of revivalists must be a faith. Under pretext of revivalism, faith or religion should not be substituted by some other thought or conjecture.

First and foremost, sincerity and originality must be safeguarded in revivalism. Therefore the basic difficulty in confronting any type of revivalist thought is the religion to support these thoughts. Without purity and originality there will be confusion. This will be the case with all aspects of revivalism beyond Islamic unity.

To what extent these outlooks have been able to protect the real pillars of religion, remains to be seen. Further, originality of religion must be in association with it so that Shias could take it in account of religious values and call it Religious Thought.

Contemporary revivalists have taken great steps from the position of strength. The originality and purity of religious thought remains uncertain. There are great many questions, which still need to be answered reasonably.

Islamic unity too is not exempted from this rule.

Third Introduction: Familiarity with Writings on Thoughts of Islamic Unity

When we read the writings and opinions of supporters of Islamic unity, we easily understand the bulk done in this respect. However, very little is done towards classifying and differentiating them scientifically.

Perhaps it is one reason for difficulty one has to face in analyzing their outlook. Further, it gives room to mistake the stand of critic to the effect that he is intentional and deliberate in his motive. Absence of classification between viewpoints stands as a cause in this regard.

To arrive at a correct analysis about Islamic unity depends upon these two packages of information:

A) Acquaintance with standards of evaluation of output of revivalism. Locating the position in this regard.

B) Accurate knowledge of various writings about Islamic unity.

We revert to history of contemporary thought while trying to lay hands on the theory of Islamic unity and its application in our social life. We become aware that in the first step we could follow two ways to reach ‘unity’ and to have a discourse thereon.

In other words, there remain two routes to tally towards attaining the aspired Islamic unity. They are:

One: Political and social movement

Two: Movement of belief and thought

As mentioned before, both these lines depend on theoretical foundations - unique in their kind. We shall try to comment on the basis of these packages regarding particulars about Islamic unity from the angle of thought and belief.

Beginning of Discussion: Awareness of Basics of Intellectual Movement - Research towards Creating Islamic Unity

By the efforts of Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Qummi an institute, Darul Taqreeb, was founded in Egypt in recent years. It can be considered a starting point of this movement.[4]

We pursue the movements - scientific, intellectual and those of research since then. We come across irregular and contradictory views and outlooks. Taking into consideration originality and purity of thought, they can be classified into two categories.

First Tendency: Outlooks which desire to create ability and achieve Islamic unity. However they ignore to maintain the rule of originality and purity. They believe:

“We must not immediately pass judgment that this is right and that, wrong. We must rather control and check differences. We should specify its limits.”[5]

“We do not say this is right and that is wrong…”[6]

“It should not be the concern of one who calls for unity among religions to say which one is right and which wrong or which one is correct and which erroneous. Of course deviation from Islam can serve a reason for him to put in a word as was the practice with men of sagacity like Sayyid Jamaluddin and some of his pupils and fellow thinkers.

We have witnessed the climax of such an invitation launched by JAMA’ATUL TAQREEB BAIN AL-MAZAHAB AL-ISLAMIA (i.e. Society for Reconciliation of Islamic Sects). We must point out that the two obligations should not be combined. One: Invitation towards unity and two: protection or support to religion. Books and articles written in this regard have little to do with unity. Generally their motive is to prove their religion is right while the others’ is wrong. They add to confusion and block the way of unity.”[7]

They also believe:

“Nearness has its own demands...that is this distinction should always be kept in view in order to protect it from a decree (Fatwa) someone might issue against it…in all activities of culture, intellect, scholastic theology, philosophy, jurisprudence, traditions and study of narrators (Rijaal) this distinction should be above all.”![8]

Therefore the basis of thought of our predecessors was established on conjecture that reality can always be sacrificed for sake of unity.

Second Tendency: The outlooks have paid utmost attention to the rule of maintaining originality and sincerity as well as seeking truth. This is in addition to creation of ability, belief and adherence to necessary Islamic unity. In view of these two tendencies, it can be said that Islamic unity has two meanings - one, correct and the other, wrong.

Islamic unity in the correct meaning: It is to create a political unity, which is good and useful against common enemy. This keeps any type of dispute or war from taking place. Religious beliefs would not stand as a reason for bloodshed among Muslims.

There is no controversy between this type of Islamic unity, which should correctly be termed as Islamic unity and discussions of Shia beliefs. Therefore limits of right and wrong shall remain as they are. They cannot be abolished. However it gives ground for distinctly sketching the existing limits between right and wrong. Drawing of limits carries two benefits:

Firstly: The union overruns political boundary and that of interests. As such, it becomes real.

Secondly: In future - in a long run - protection of this political unity for the sake of interests cannot become a cause to forget or neglect right and wrong besides any deviation from beliefs from correct Shia faith. In addition to this, correct Islamic unity cannot give rise to any possibility of taking a wrong meaning to itself; that is Shia beliefs to melt into Sunni beliefs.[9]

Introduction to Applications of Two Tendencies by way of Criticism and Narration

Under this heading, we shall dwell on indications drawn with a motive of creating Islamic unity. However it has become a ground for serious criticism because of the standards of evaluation output.[10] It is of such a nature that we cannot see any religious origin in it; nor could it be turned into a religious thought. However in a particular period of time they might have shown a very good ability towards creating Islamic unity.

We shall introduce each of these indications. We shall treat the analysis done by religious scholars as source pertaining to second tendency.

These analyses are collected here to show correct outlooks and to scrutinize insincere writings.