Discourse One: Criticism and Investigation about Propaganda of Silence of Amirul Momineen (a.s.)
Doubts Created Regarding Silence of Amirul Momineen (a.s.)
Deviated analyses regarding the silence of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) can be divided into three categories:
First Category: Conjectures that claim ‘Letting go of Caliphate linked with consent’
One of the most important deviated consequences of this conjecture is release of Abu Bakr’s regime from the circle of usurpation and granting legitimacy to his Caliphate.
This partiality in the sources of Ahle Sunnat has succeeded in giving false coverings based on ‘immediate Bay’at’ of His Eminence, to Abu Bakr.
By the same argument, sometimes instead of ‘Letting go of Caliphate linked with consent’ they talk about ‘Willful Bay’at of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) to Abu Bakr’ and that also in the initial period of his Caliphate!
Style of criticizing the first category of conjectures
Absurd claims of ‘Willing renouncement of Caliphate’ can be reviewed on the basis of two kinds of authentic documents:
A) Documents indicating ‘efforts of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) in bringing down the usurped caliphate of Abu Bakr’.
B) Documents indicating ‘Forced demand of Bay’at’ and ‘severe opposition of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) from accepting it’.
[Documents and sources of siege on the house of Fatima (s.a.)]
Second Category: Conjectures that claim ‘Detachment of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) from Caliphate and overlooking it, after six months of Abu Bakr’ Caliphate’
One of the most important evil results of these doubts is forgetting the historical documents regarding attack on the house of Fatima (s.a.).
Because in this deviated partiality that talks of the allegiance of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) to Abu Bakr after some months they have very cleverly put a lid on the oppressions and plots that were the highlights of the initial period of Abu Bakr’s rule.
In the same way among the other deviated repercussions of this conjecture is that it becomes the basis to subsequent claims of ‘good relations of Ali and Caliphs’. This also goes a long way in making all forget the terrible crimes committed by usurpers of Caliphate in the initial period.
Style of criticizing the second category of conjectures
Absurd claim of ‘gradual withdrawal of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) from Caliphate and overlooking it’ although after passing of some months in the Caliphate of Abu Bakr can be evaluated in the following two ways:
A)
Criticism and analysis of ‘False narrations about the willful allegiance of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) to Abu Bakr after six months’.
Criticism and analysis of ‘Conjectures regarding the co-operation of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) with Caliphs’.
Third Category: Conjectures that claim ‘Absence of plan of right of Caliphate and not proving the School of Imamate’.
These conjectures, sometimes are posed in an indirect way and under the ‘conjectures of two previous categories’ and sometimes also regarding ‘refusal to prove the Alawi Imamate and Wilayat’.
The aim of posing such types doubts is ‘To invite Shias to observe silence from planning discussions related to Caliphate and Successorship of Amirul Momineen (a.s.)’.
Style of criticizing the third category of conjectures
Absurd claims of ‘Refusal of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) from plan of the right of Caliphate and his remaining silent from explaining the School of Imamate’ can be criticized on the basis of ‘debates of Amirul Momineen Ali (a.s.)’ with support of ‘statements of His Eminence (a.s.) in the matter of his severe struggle of having his claim recorded in History’.
Did Amirul Momineen (a.s.) Leave Caliphate and Overlook his Rights?
Analyses of unity-seekers regarding the political and social stances of Amirul Momineen (a.s.) after passing away of Prophet are quite untrue and far from reality because they have compared it to ‘silence’.
The prime aim of those who inject this suspicion about the silence is to interpret it to effect of foregoing his right and overlooking to demand it. They sketch in a way that the reader concludes that His Eminence (a.s.) did not take any action against usurpation of his right. He also impeded others to take any action in this respect.
The scope of these conjectures has spread to such an extent that they claim:
“Caliphate was the very first issue on which Imam Ali (a.s.) maintained silence in his attitude towards it. He did not allow anyone to make Caliphate a ground for difference in the Ummah or utilize the situation to their own benefit.”!
To check and scrutinize this suspicion first it is necessary to see that the conjecture-coiner has so misused events of history that he has reached to this deviation:
“He did not allow anyone to make Caliphate a ground for difference”!
Study of historical events that occurred after Saqifah Bani Saada show that:
“When Abu Sufyan became aware of the event of Saqifah. He voiced national and racial motives and said to Ali: Extend your hand so that I may pay allegiance to you. I swear by God if you want I will fill up Medina with warriors and horses…Ali rejected the offer. By this he showed that in his political school it was not correct to take advantage of everything for the sake of aim. Ali had no doubt that the right was his. But to reach it he did not see proper to use whatever means possible. So understanding Abu Sufyan’s intention, he refused him. The aim of Abu Sufyan was to create differences, corruption and battle among Muslims. Therefore Ali terms this act of Abu Sufyan as malefic and mischievous.”
This is the only case where Ali has shown his disagreement with support expressed to him. So it seems that the suspect has based his suspicion thereat; and makes it a proof to support the idea. In fact the reaction of Ali was against military support of Abu Sufyan. It also was to defeat his intention of seizing complete power or taking share for Bani Umayyah.
According to this analysis, the reaction of Ali cannot be attributed to his agreement to usurpation of Caliphate.
Correct Analysis about Ali’s reaction to Usurpation of Caliphate
Why Ali did not show negative reaction (similar to one referred) to his friends’ support, had his purpose been silence against usurpation of his right? If the aim of Imam Ali (a.s.) was silence what about the program that accompanied his claim to take back his right; what would it mean?
“Ali did not accept allegiance of Abu Sufyan. On the other hand he strongly refrained from paying allegiance to the new authority of Abu Bakr. So he showed his rejection.”
“Acquisition of power and uniting his friends, were his other steps. When Bay’at of Abu Bakr took place, Ali (a.s.) began to mobilize his friends, and in this matter he was morally and personally supported by his wife, Fatima, the daughter of Prophet (s.a.w.s.).”
“From this stage onwards the campaign of Ali appears more serious and ardent. It takes to itself a special feature against the new regime. The house of Prophet’s daughter defended him; Fatima herself came out as a powerful support to Ali. On some cases, she takes the initiative to express her opposition to the extent of physical brawl.”
“In order to take back his lost right Ali even invited people to pay allegiance to him.”
Among the actions that Imam Ali (a.s.) undertook was that he and wife kept visiting the gatherings of Ansaar and asking for their support.”
In order to finalize his argument on Muslim and not to leave any room to posterity to interpret wrongly his silence as concurrence with new order and his withdrawal willingly from his right to lead Islamic Mission, he kept visiting the houses of Muslims in Medina. He reminded them about the words and recommendations of Prophet concerning succession after him. He insisted on them to give him a hand in returning Caliphate to its real and correct tract.”
“In the very early days when the Ummah had gone astray and perverted he took his sons, Hasan and Husain and his wife, Fatima and kept knocking door after door of Ansaar (Helpers). It is remarkable to mention here that he was blamed for being too greedy for Caliphate because of his persistence on his right, which he wanted history to record.”
“Therefore from each step he took, it becomes evident that his uprising was against backward movement to days of ignorance prior to Islam.”
“If actions of Imam (a.s.) had not been there in this regard it might have happened that people would have doubted in his being immediate Caliph of Prophet and the possibility would have strengthened that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) has abrogated his insistence on Caliphate of Amirul Momineen (a.s.).”
“He knew very well that his silence might cause the people, under the influence of false propaganda of usurpers, to think that he was supporting the Saqifah matter hence in order to put into record his actual stance he broke his silence.”
“In this matter the close friends of His Eminence (a.s.) cooperated with him. And the close companions of Prophet like Abu Zar, Salman, Khalid bin Saeed, Abu Ayyub Ansaari, Uthman bin Haneef, Baraa bin Azib - all these gathered in the mosque. They sincerely declared their support to Ali bin Abi Talib (a.s.).”
“They launched arguments and put forth such reasoning advocating the right of Ali that Abu Bakr could not dare to come out of his house for three days. Till on the third day his colleagues went to his house with naked swords and brought him out at the point of sword. They seated him at the pulpit of the Prophet. They threatened others by sword that no one had a right to talk about the subject. In modern terms a censorship was imposed.
From this point no one moved or spoke.”
All these historical evidences show that the Imam did not leave any stone unturned in defending Alawi School and Imamate. According to conditions of those times, he did whatever was possible to him. He did not sit idle to see his right usurped. But Muslims had gone somnolent and sluggish. They stooped to wrong but did not erect their backs to support the truth.
Historical evidences regarding his sharp debates prove this point:
“Abu Bakr in the early days of Caliphate sent the following message to the Imam: Do comply with request of Caliph of the Prophet of Allah and pay allegiance to him. Imam told the messenger: How soon you attribute a lie to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.). He and his supporters know well that Allah and His Messenger has not installed as Caliph anyone except me.
When they took the Imam to the Mosque he began the dialogue and asked Abu Bakr: Did you not pay allegiance to me yesterday at the command of the Prophet of Allah?
Then the Imam addressed the audience in the mosque reminding them of all that the Prophet had said about him. He also reminded them of the event of Ghadeer and the Prophet’s words regarding him on that occasion.
All agreed and acknowledged Ali’s veracity. Even Abu Bakr acknowledged having had paid allegiance to Ali.
Zaid bin Arqam says that twelve tribal chiefs were present there who attested the words of Imam Ali (a.s.). Gradually the argument got hotter and a row and din arose in the Masjid. Umar feared that people will go to Ali’s side. So he upset the gathering and people left the mosque.
”
These historical documents show that His Eminence (a.s.) in the most severe conditions; that is in the time when they demanded him to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr under threat to his life, argued the validity of his Caliphate and spoke in support of the School of Imamate and Alawi Caliphate. He tried to regain his usurped position in every way.
“Ali (a.s.) always during the Caliphate of Caliphs never refrained from expressing the matter that Caliphate was a right linked to him.”
Ali (a.s.) did not refrain from expressing and demanding his rights and complaining against those who had usurped it. He was very vocal about his demands and he did not consider it to be an impediment to Muslim unity.”
“To think that Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) did not mention anything about his rightfulness is a view opposed to historical reality.”
Careful scrutiny of recorded narrations clearly shows that His Eminence never abandoned his rights and did not overlook them at all and he never left them to the discretion of the Caliphs and he was not at all silent about them. Although it is a matter of regret that they have altered the public debates of His Eminence (a.s.) that took place among the Muslims. Thus it is said:
“Indeed during the period of Caliphs, in the consultant committees and among the special companions he debated about his rights, but he did not do so among the general populace of Muslims! Because he feared sedition and movement against the machinery of Caliphate and due to this in my personal view and confessions of some researchers of the story of Ghadeer, he remained silent about the divine right of the Wilayat of Ahle Bayt.”!
On the basis of this conjecture, firstly:
Obvious steps and repeated public debates of His Eminence (a.s.) are shown to be special and private discussions; as if His Eminence (a.s.) did not lay the foundation of awakening of the people!
Absence of an open and widespread revolt of the Imam (a.s.) and his refraining from a large scale attack on the regime is interpreted to be an effort for keeping the Caliphs safe!
Yes, this conjecture creates such a picture in the mind of readers that Imam (a.s.) was never vocal in public about the divine right of his Imamate and Wilayat.
Now that if continuous and repeated efforts of the Imam in creating awareness had not been witnessed its evidence would have needed to be obtained from somewhere else (other than silence before the usurpation of Caliphate).
Certainly, it must be asked:
“Did the people of that time forget all that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) had told about his cousin, Ali (a.s.)? And they were waiting for Ali (a.s.) to remind and awaken them to honor his rights?
They detachment from Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) was not due to their complete ignorance about the moral status of His Eminence so that on hearing about his victimization they would wake up and rise up in his support.
His mission was not like the proclamation of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) in the beginning that he should be in search for supporters in his mission of spreading Islam.
In the days following the demise of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) those who wanted made Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) their leader. They knew him as was necessary and those who followed others were not such that with a single call of Ali for help they would rise up in his support and harness the motives of his opposition.”
CONCLUSION
Interpretation of silence of His Eminence, Ali (a.s.) by the partiality regarding ‘overlooking Caliphate and abandoning willingly and also absence of his expression of his right of Caliphate’ is against historical evidences and realities and evidences for protecting Islamic unity cannot conceal these types of deviations in analysis of historical events. Yet they claim:
“The Imam according to his own account held his hand and kindly let go of his right! Because the wellbeing and benefit of the religion necessitated his painful silence and abandoning! A right whose eligibility was confirmed in his own view as well by others”!
“When some people usurped the absolute right of Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.), he could have risen up against them in an armed uprising, but only for the sake of complete wellbeing of Islam and guarding the unity and integration of Muslims and that the fresh converts do not go back to their infidelity and the enemies of Islam may not get a chance to benefit from the situation and that the new faith of Islam may not be destroyed in the nascent stage, he overlooked his absolute right”!
“Ali (a.s.) for the sake of Islamic unity abandoned his own right and that of his wife! He bore failures and hardships but in all his dealings preferred unity and oneness of Muslims and also made his wife and sons observe this.”!
“And in this way he renounced divine text (Nass) of his successorship, which his friends and relatives use as proof.”!
“Inspite of being obdurate on their rights till that time, they overlooked it.”!
0%
Author: Ali Labbaf
