Wahabism And Monotheism

Wahabism And Monotheism23%

Wahabism And Monotheism Author:
Publisher: www.alhassanain.org/english
Category: Debates and Replies

Wahabism And Monotheism
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 20 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 16655 / Download: 4869
Size Size Size
Wahabism And Monotheism

Wahabism And Monotheism

Author:
Publisher: www.alhassanain.org/english
English

This book is corrected and edited by Al-Hassanain (p) Institue for Islamic Heritage and Thought


1

2

3

Chapter: 7 Scholars' Rebuttals On The Wahabists' Corporalism Al-­Hafiz Ibn Hajar

Ibn Hajar's Fetihul­-Bari Fi Sharhi Sahihil Bukhari part 3 page 23:

Adopters of trend of God's having a locality cited the Prophet's saying "Our Lord descends to the lowest heavens " as their evidence. Majority of scholars denied so since it leads to the Lord's demarcation. Allah be exalted against so. Various opinions were cited in respect of meaning of the Lord's descending. Anthropomorphists rested upon its extrinsic material meaning. Allah be exalted against their misallegation. Kharijites and Mutazilites denied the whole matter; authenticity of such hadiths. This is indeed an exaggeration. While they have been finding suitable interpretation for Quranic texts respecting such a subject they either ignorantly or inflexibly denied hadiths involving the topic. The worthy ancestors passed such texts as they are believing in them generally and promoting Allah the Exalted against conditions and anthropomorphism. Like many others Al-­Beihaqi relate this viewpoint to the four masters the two Sufians the two Hemmads Al-­Awzai Al-­Leith and others. Others interpreted meaning of the hadith into a proper form common in Arabic. Others opted for an interpretation too exaggerative to evade distortion. Others discerned what is interpreted in a form near to Arabic from what is rarely used. Hence some was interpreted and the rest was commended. This is Malik's trend. Ibn Daqiq Al-­Abd followed this trend lately.

Al-­Beihaqi: The most secure trend is that of believing without seeking conditions and suspending the intended meanings saving those communicated by authentic narrators. They agreed upon nonobligation of resting upon the identified interpretation. Only then commendation ­to Allah­ becomes safer…

Ibnul­-Arabi: It is said that the heretics refute such texts while the worthy ancestors passed them as they are. A third group ruled of finding interpretation

for them. The latter however is the most suitable for me. God's sayings are referred to His deeds not Essence. It is also an indication to the angel who descends with His orders and instructions. Like corporealities descending can be through mental meanings. Providing the material meaning is adopted it will be alluded to the angel conveyed. Supposing the mental is adopted that is called a descending to a lower rank. It is also an accurate style of Arabic.

Ibnul-­Arabi intends to say that there are two sorts of interpretation. First the extrinsic meaning that is descending of God's affair or angels. Second metaphoric meaning that is the Lord's kindness to His supplicators and responding them.

Abu Bakr Bin Fawrak records some scholars utter the text in a way inciting that the angels not the Lord are concerned. As an evidence on the forecited reciting is An­Nisai's narrative ascribed to Al-­Aghar Abu Hureira and Abu Sa'eed. The hadith then should be in this form "Allah respites till midnight. After that He orders a declarant to announce if there is a supplicator so that he will be responded…" Othman Bin Abil­Aas relates it in the following form "Is there a supplicator so that he will be responded?"

Al-­Qurtubi: Only in this way this problem should be solved. It is also not defeated by Refa'a Al-­Juheni's narrative "Allah descends to the lowest heavens and declares that His servants should not ask but Him." since this does not deny that interpretation.

Al-­Beidhawi: As long as it is certified by decisive proofs that Allah is promoted against having corporeity or being restricted in a definite space it is impracticable for Him to descend which hints at moveableness to a lower point. Illumination of His mercy is intended. In other words He shifts from attribute of glorification which requires ire and reprisal into attribute of benevolence which requires lenience and compassion.

Al­HAFIZ IBNUL­JAWZI

A 300 page book allocated to this topic was written by Ibnul­-Jawzi named Defu Shubehit Tashbeeh Bi Ekuffit­Tanzeeh ­Obviating heresies of anthropomorphism by hands of promotion­. Sheik Hassan As­-Saqaf revised this book which was published by Darul­Imam An­Nawawi Publication Oman. As­-Saqaf's two essays named Traditional statements of scholars in explication of falsity of the hadith of 'I have seen my Lord' in the most handsome look and The sufficient evidential explication of falsity of imputing Kitabur Ruyeh to Ad­Darqutni are appended to the third edition published in 1413.

Describing the Hanbalite corporalists Ibnul-­Jawzi states on page 99:

… By their books they offended against their sect. They slipped to level of ordinary people when they rested upon extrinsic meanings of aspect of the divine attributes texts…

Within the words of Sheik Mohammed Abi Zuhra cited later on Ibnul­-Jawzi's words shall be provided.

Ibnul-­Jawzi rebutes corporalists' exegeses of the allegorical Verses. He criticizes sixty false and mistranslated texts. They are bases on which Wahabists and their forefathers constructed their sect.

AS­-SIBKI AND Al--HALABI

As­Sibki's Tabaqatus Shafiiya part 9 page 34:

Ahmed Bin Yahya Bin Ismail; Sheik Shihabuddin Al-­Jelabi Al-­Halabi…He was deceased in 337… I could obtain one of his books consecrated to rebutting Ibn Teimiya's claiming Allah's occupying a locale. The book comprises about fifty pages. The following is quoted from page 40­1 of that book:

Ashafii when asked about God's attributes says "It is haram ­forbidden­ for intellects to present Allah the Exalted. It is haram for illusions to limit Him. It is haram for conjectures to decide Him. It is haram for selves to think about Him. It is haram for minds to deepen in Him. It is haram for senses to cognize Him. Only what He Has ascribed to Himself in the words of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is excluded." …

The following is Ahlus­-Sunna's opinion in this subject:

Allah is anterior and eternal. Nothing is alike Him and He is not equivalent to anything. He enjoys neither locality nor space. He is not influenced by a time or an age. It is impracticable to ask or say 'where' about Him. He is seeable not by means of meeting or any ordinary means. He was when there was no space. He made the cosmos and arranged the time. Now He is as He was.

Page 43:

Monotheists agreed upon denial of the Lord's occupying a locality. A faction like Ibn Teimiya is excluded.

Page 53­4:

Hadith of amulet Ibn Teimiya cites as an evidence on Allah's existing in a definite point seems to be excerpted from texts of the Torah or the Bible. It is "Our Lord Allah sanctified be Thy Name. Thy affair in the heavens is like Thy affair on the earth. Thy bestowal is in the heavens." From the hadith "… The Throne is above all of that and Allah is above all of that." Ibn Teimiya the dissident understands that Allah is materially above the Throne.

Page 83:

… Promoting Allah against having a locality is evidenced by reports and traditions and sayings of scholars… Nullity of Ibn Teimiya's deceitful ideas. This nullity is proved by Quranic and prophetic texts…

As­Sibki's Tabaqatus­Shafiiya part 9 page 36:

Heretics misallege that they are following course of the worthy ancestors which is monotheism… How is it reasonable to believe that the worthy ancestors adopted faiths of anthropomorphism and keep still before emergence of origins of heresy? God says (And do not mix up the truth with the falsehood.)

AZ­ZAHAWI; AN IRAQI SCHOLAR

Az­Zahawi's Al-­Fajrus Sadiq page 28:

Corporalism of Wahabists:

Wahabists decide atheism of those who visitate the Prophet's tomb and judge seeking his intercession to Allah the Exalted as citing associates in Allah's godhood. They also rule obligation of promoting God against such deeds. In the same time they were highly confused in promoting God against unfitting matters. It is they who emphasized on considering Allah's settling a physical firmness settlement and elevation on the Throne. It is they who ascribed material face and hands to the Lord and divided His touchable missions by holding the heavens to a finger the earth to another trees to a third and royalty to a fourth. In a like fashion they made him occupy locality. They claimed the Lord's being above the heavens constant on the Throne and can be physically pointed to by material fingers and can descend and ascend to and from the lowest heavens. Their poet composes:

If asserting His settling on His Throne is corporalism I am then a corporalist.

If proving His attributes is anthropomorphism I am keeping on anthropomorphism.

If denying His settling and attributes and speaking is promoting Him exaltedly.

I promote our Lord against that promotion by His support. He is higher and more proficient.

From Addinul Khalis the following statements involving the topic are quoted:

"If it is intended that corporealities are compound of material and form or of atoms Allah the Exalted is definitely promoted against so. It is correct to negate possible things from Him too. A created corporeality is not compound of such things."

This statement is filled up with confusion. The writer denies existence of necessary or possible corporealities according to the form he refers to. It seems he intends at negating corporeality that is a principal in his belief in Allah the Exalted. In order to avoid being accused of anthropomorphizing the Creator the writer negates corporeality from creatures. Indisputably if a corporeality is not compound of material and form it is most surely compound

of atoms. Stupidity however is boundless. It is not strange that such an individual achieves such a record in hideous confusion. He should have mentioned things from which corporealities are compound. I do not see him too tedious to state that corporealities are composite from infinite things. The total scholars deny such a claim. Modern sciences and decisive evidences proved nullity of such an ill claim. He then added "If corporealities that are described capable of seeing speaking addressing hearing observing pleasing and being irate these are proved for the Lord the Exalted. Such attributes are ascribed to Him. We do not negate so even if you dedicate such attributes to corporealities…"

As much as we know we cannot name anyone defining corporeality as the thing speaking addressing hearing seeing pleasing and being irate. These are specifications of lively sane beings. We admit that corporealities can see through eyes but ascribing corporeality to Allah the Exalted in this very sense is degrading Him to levels of His creatures in a way denying His godhood. Allah's being a corporeality in this sense is a defect against which Allah is obligatorily highly promoted. Intellectually Allah's being a corporeality is denied since scientists of optics proved that vision occurs when light rays fall on surface of the visible object and becomes thrown back to the eye. Accordingly visible things necessarily have surfaces. This requires partitioning of that surfaced thing. The idea as a whole nullifies godhead of Allah since corporeality in this sense is identical to that the writer has previously negated from Allah the Exalted and possible beings. Reportedly denial of Allah's being a corporeality is proved by God's saying (Visions comprehend Him not and He comprehends all visions;). This Verse is not contradictory to the other (Some faces on that day shall be bright. Looking at [waiting for] their Lord.) Condition of Seeing God the Exalted on Resurrection Day is unfamiliar. This is the most acceptable faith. It is possible that vision on Resurrection Day shall be by a sort of revealing and divine manifestation that is in no need for an organ of vision. God's selecting the word 'faces' instead of 'eyes' proves that that vision shall be away from processes of material organs of visions. Likewise the word 'bright' expresses attaining perfect blissfulness for that divine revealing.

The writer adds "If corporealities that are materially pointed to are intended the most cognizant creature did actually refer to Allah by raising his finger upward towards the heavens…"

Intellectual intuition rules that every entity materially indicated should be occupying a definite locality and space and should be seeable. All these are impracticable for Allah the Exalted. Providing Allah was in a definite space or locality anteriority of that space or locality should be necessarily decided. Evidences on Allah's being the only Anterior have been decisively cited. He would have been lacking the space He occupies had He been in a definite point.

This contradicts necessity of God's Being. Likewise had He been in a certain space He would have been there either for a considerable period or permanently. Regarding the earlier it is null since times are equal to each other and ascribing Him to definite times should be also equal. Dedicating definite times to Him then should be a sort of giving a casting vote to improbabilities. This is in case nonexistence of an extrinsic dedicating matter is concerned. If there is an extrinsic dedicating matter the Lord's occupying a certain space should be requiring an accessory matter. Regarding the latter if nullity of God's being occupying the entire times in the same time is not proved it requires involvement of matters occupying spaces in points engaged by corporealities. Naturally this is impossible. Moreover it was permissible to point at the Lord materially it should be possible to point to him from every point on the earth. As the earth is globular it would be necessary that Allah the Exalted was encircling it totally. Lest it is improper to point to Him with material indicators and consequentially He should not be settling on His Throne as Wahabists claim. If His Throne encompassed the seven heavens it would be imperative for Him to decrease His corporeality when He descends to the lowest heavens and increase it during ascending. If so He should be variable. Allah be highly promoted against sayings of the ignorant. Reported sayings adhered by Wahabists as evidences on their claims of validity of the material pointing to the Lord are conjectural phenomena that are not contradicting ascertained matters. Such sayings should be interpreted in two ways. First general interpretation and commending details to Allah. This opinion is adopted by majority of the worthy ancestors. Second opting for detailed interpretation. Majority of scholars adopted this trend.

Reports appertained to pointing to the heavens as an indication to the Lord are tokens of His creating the heavens or the heavens that contain such tremendous worlds that our earth is but one of their tiny fragments are one of appearances of His divine competence. Ascending to the Lord can be interpreted into seeking a place allocated for worshipping Him. At any rate there are several sorts of interpretation.

Az­-Zahawi's Al-­Fajrus Sadiq page 31:

Wahabism and discarding intelligence:

Because intellectuality and sound reasoning contradict their faiths completely Wahabists had to cast mentality off and adhere to extrinsic aspects of reports even if impracticability tyranny and deviation are the effects. Due to such an adherence to extrinsic aspects of Verses they believe that Allah was physically settling on His Throne and lying over it. They also believed that He could have a face and two hands and could perform material descending to the lowest heavens and returning to His place. They believed that He could be pointed to. Allah be highly exalted against sayings of the wrong.

Wahabists who decided visitators of the Prophet's tomb as pagans are pagans indeed. They worship a god having a corporeality of an animal sitting on a material throne descending to a lower grade ascending and having physical face hand leg and fingers. The Right God is promoted against physical matters.

If they are disputed that intellectual proofs verify that ascribing physical matters to the Lord does indeed contradict His godhead they will answer that such disgraced mentality cannot occupy any space in field of divinity which is in a rank exceeding mentality of mankind. Hence they form no difference from trinitarianists who claim recognizing trinity is a matter exceeding mentalities of mankind so largely that it is illicit to think about.

It is indisputably rational that reports should be interpreted when contradicting mentality since it is impossible to prove both of them because the inadmissible concurrence of antinomous matters will befall. In the same way it is impossible to deny both of them because nullity of both antinomous matters will befall. Hence there is one way only which is admitting one and denying the other. Shunning mentality and opting for reports is null since it is unreasoning to depend on secondary matters for invalidating principals.

Explicating this matter we are to say that reported tidings should be certified by mental devises. Validity of reporting affairs such as existence of an absolute creator and recognition of divine prophecy and the like can be credited exclusively by mentality which is principal and reliable evidence on reported things. Supporting reported matters are preceded to mental both will be invalidated since when principals are null branches are null sequentially. Validity of reporting is a branch of mental judgment which is deniable and voidable. Hence preferring reported matters to mental results is nullity of the two. Inconsistency which leads to nullity is the effect of correcting a branch by invalidating the principal. Pursuant to the previous it is necessary to prefer mental proofs to reported.

Relying upon the above obligation of finding suitable interpretation to texts the extrinsic meaning of their aspects contradicts intellectuality is clearly evident. Such texts should be interpreted in two ways. First general interpretation and commending details to Allah. This is the opinion adopted by majority of the worthy ancestors. Second opting for detailed interpretation. Majority of scholars adopted this trend. God's settling on the Throne stands for predominance on cosmos. The Arabic tongue confirms such an interpretation. Likewise God's coming mentioned in the Verse (And your Lord comes and the angels in ranks. 89:22) stands for approaching of God's affair. Regarding His saying (To Him do ascend the good words) this means that Allah admits the good wording. Words however are incapable of ascending by themselves. Coming mentioned in God's saying (They do not wait aught but that Allah should come to them in the shadows of the clouds along with the angels.

2:210) implies coming of His anguish. God's saying (Then he drew near then he bowed so he was the measure of two bows or closer still) indicates that the Apostle becomes near to his Lord owing to his extraordinary compliance with Him. The measure indicated is a sort of depicting the mental things by visions of materiality. The Prophet's statement "Allah the Exalted descends to the lowest heavens every night …" refers to descending of His mercy. Night however is the time usually consecrated to loneliness adoration and worshipping. Alike interpretations are cited for the like texts.

ABU ZUHRA IN TARIKHUL METHAHIBIL ISLAMIYA

Mohammed Abu Zuhra's Tarikhul Methahibil Islamiya part 1 page 225:

Salafites ­modern radicalists­ are those who ascribed ensuing the worthy ancestors' trends to themselves. Later on we shall discuss some of their beliefs. They came forth in the fourth Hijri century. They were Hanbalites. They claimed their beliefs are accredited to Ahmed Bin Hanbal who had enlivened and fought for the sake of the worthy ancestors' beliefs. In the seventh Hijri century they re came forth. Sheikul­Islam Ibn Teimiya was extremous in advocating those beliefs. As a matter of fact he added new matters originated due to ideologies of his time to the sect. In the twelfth Hijri century Mohammed Bin Abdil-­Wahab enlivened these beliefs in the Arab Peninsula. Wahabists as well as some Muslims have been fanatically soliciting to these beliefs. Hence it is necessary to provide these beliefs.

Those Hanbalites discussed affairs of monotheism and connected it to shrines of the pious. They also controverted Quranic texts appertained to interpretation and anthropomorphism. This was first originated in the fourth Hijri century and ascribed to Ahmed Bin Hanbal. However some virtuous Hanbalite scholars argued their ascribing the beliefs to Ahmed Bin Hanbal.

Fatal combats against Asharites were occasionally broken out by those Salafites. Litigious dispute about whose party had been being the real followers of the worthy ancestors was always arisen… The following is a scrutinizing critique to beliefs of the Salafites who ascribed this name to themselves. However we are to discuss whether there is a relation between name and reality of its bearers.

Mohammed Abu Zuhra's Tarikhul Methahibil Islamiya part 1 page 232:

They recognize attributes and affair of God the Praised mentioned by Quranic or prophetic texts. They recognize God's liking ire rage satisfaction calling wording and descending to people in shadows of clouds. They also recognize the Lord's settling on the Throne having a face and a hand without any interpretation or non­extrinsic exegeses. Without attempting to finding a

suitable interpretation or condition Ibn Teimiya saw that the worthy ancestors recognize God's having a hand and a face and enjoying descending and ascending and the like affairs inferred from the extrinsic meanings of aspects of Quranic texts. He claimed that had been aiming at referring to the literal not metaphorical phenomena. He nevertheless claimed being neither corporalist nor Tatilite. He states "Sect of the worthy ancestors is between Tatilism ­depriving the Lord of the entire attributes for attaining denying His Existence­ and anthropomorphism. They do neither compare the Lord's attributes to these of His creatures nor compare His Essence to His creatures' entities. In the same time they do not negate attributes and affairs the Lord has used for Himself or the Prophet has used through describing his Lord. They claim they opt for so in order that they would not deprive the Lord of His divine names and excellent attributes alter words from their proper places and blaspheme God's Names and Verses. As a matter of face Tatilites and anthropomorphists are joining Tatilism to anthropomorphism.

Asserting the faith that Allah descends and occupies the top space and may be beneath without a definite condition Ibn Teimiya in his Al-­Hamawiyatul Kubra Fi Majmu'etir Resailul Kubra page 419 adds:

"There is no single letter whether in Book of Allah the Prophet's traditions the worthy ancestors' statements the Prophet's companions' words the followers' sayings or words the scholars who coincided in time of caprices and dispute contradicts these faiths whether in meaning or in aspect. No single one from the forecited categories has been claiming Allah's being not in the heavens not on the Throne not in everywhere not for Him all spaces are equal not being neither in nor out of this cosmos not connected not disconnected and not indicated by material signs."

On that account Ibn Teimiya decides that course of the worthy ancestors is shunning interpretation and recognizing the literal extrinsic meanings of aspects of Quranic and prophetic texts referring to God's being descending and ascending and having a face and a hand and feeling affectionate and irate. Is this by God course of the worthy ancestors?

As an answer we should emphasize that in the fourth Hijri century Hanbalites arouse the same claim. Scholars of that time argued them and proved that their beliefs would have been leading to anthropomorphism and corporalism. They could never deny so since even material indication according to their faith was applicable to Allah! The Hanbalite master jurisprudent and orator Ibnul­Jawzi undertook the mission of opposing these beliefs and asserted that course of the worthy ancestors should in no way be taking in these false principals. He also denied accrediting that school to Ahmed.

He stated "I could cognize some improper ideas rendered by some of our acquaintances regarding principals of Islam. They wrote a book

in which they offended the sect. They were so lowly that they rested upon the material meanings of the divine attributes. As they perceived the text 'Allah created Adam on his look.' they recognized Allah's having a ­definite­ look. They also accredited a face added to the Essence a mouth uvulas dents facial flash hands fingers a palm a little finger a thumb a chest a thigh legs and feet. Finally they claim they had not been acquainted whether He had a head or not!! They rested upon the extrinsic meanings of aspects of the divine attributes and names texts. Heretically they ascribed such false things to the divine attributes. They could cite no single proof neither mentally nor reportedly. They turned their faces against texts shunning the extrinsic meanings of aspects and proving meanings inciting God's necessary attributes. They also disregarded cancellation of the extrinsic meanings leading to attributes of contingency. They transcended limits to the degree that they overstepped attributes of Essence in addition to attributes of acts. When they proved these meanings' being attributes they reject resting upon their interpretative linguistic meanings; such as 'hand' stands for grace and aptitude 'coming' stands for forms of benevolence and compassion and 'leg' stands for incisiveness. On the contrary they rested upon the familiar extrinsic meanings. Extrinsic meanings imply the familiar descriptions of people. Extrinsic meanings of aspects are rested upon only when it is mentally possible. If not metaphoric meanings should be adopted.

While their words evidently refer to anthropomorphism they shunned and scorned confessing of it. They claim their being Ahlus-­Sunna. A number of ordinary people ensued them. I did advise the heads and followers when I said "O acquaintances! You are depending upon reports and traditions. While he was suffering lashes Ahmed Bin Hanbal the grand master was shouting 'How should I say what was not said?!' Hence I warn you against ascribing false things to his sect. Then you claim resting upon the extrinsic meaning of aspects of texts. This means that the word 'foot' alludes to that organ. Maintaining that Allah settles by His Essence hints at accrediting materiality to Him the Praised. You ought not to disdain the devise of recognizing principal; intellectuality. By our minds we recognized Allah the Exalted and decided His anteriority. None would have censured you had you been sufficed by reading the texts and keeping peace! The unacceptable matter is your resting upon the extrinsic meaning of aspects of texts. You should not add new things to the sect of that Salafite ­follower of the worthy ancestors­ man."

Ibnul-­Jawzi however provided abundant explication and proofs on nullity of their beliefs and argumentation.

The judge Abu Yali the famous Hanbalite jurisprudent died in 457 was one of the adopters of beliefs criticized and contradicted by Ibnul-­Jawzi. His opinions were the basic reason beyond the harsh criticism and reproach addressed at

that Hanbalite judge. A Hanbalite jurisprudent said "Abu Yali contaminated Hanbalism in such a way that waters of the entire oceans cannot clear away." An alike statement is expressed by Ibnuz­-Zaghawani the Hanbalite died in 527. A Hanbalite scholars says "Abu Yali's statements of anthropomorphism are too bizarre to be understood by the exceptional intelligent."

Owing to the general denial especially that declared by the master Hanbalites these faction hid themselves during the fourth and fifth Hijri century till Ibn Teimiya relived it so daringly and importunately.

It is important to mention that the claim of being followers of the worthy ancestors is problematic. Previously Ibnul-­Jawzi's opinion respecting the subject has been forecited.

Linguistically we should wonder whether expressions such as (The hand of Allah is over their hands ) and (Everything is perishable except His face ) allude to material meanings or they refer to other meanings fitting the Essence of Allah the Exalted. It is quite true to interpret the hand of Allah into His might or grace and His face into His Entity. Likewise the Lord's descending to the lowest heaven can be interpreted into intimacy of His judgment and approach to His servants. Language is so extensive to subsume such interpretations. Majority of theologists jurisprudents and researchists opted for such interpretations. Indisputably interpretation is favored to opting for the extrinsic literal meanings of aspects of texts and neglecting their conditions. They claim that Allah has a hand but they neglect its trimming. Finally they recognize that it is different from hands of contingent beings. Correspondingly they declare there is an act of descending belonging to Allah but they claim its being distinct from ours. Such claims are classified as committing to unknown substances purports and purposes of which are inconceivable. On the other hand had such texts had been translated into familiar meanings admitted by language we would have attained satisfactory results that lead to promoting the Lord against unbecoming affairs and revealing any unreachable matters.

Al-­BISHRI AND Al-­QAZAI

Al-­Qazai's Furqanul Quran Beinè Sifatil Khaliqi Wè Sifatil Akwan page 72 (Printed in the margin of Al-­Beihaqi's Al-­Asma'u Wes­Sifat):

Unanimously the worthy ancestors and descendants of this nation agreed on evading resting upon the extrinsic material meaning of aspects of the allegorical Verses. Reckoning such courses with forsaken nonsense and irreliable redundant speech exegesists and hadithists as well as the worthy ancestors and descendants of this nation named adopters of such physical meanings as corporalists and Hashawites.

We close this chapter by citing the verdict of the actual 'Sheikul­Islam' ­master of Islam­ head of proficient scholars mentor of mentors Sheik Salim Al-­Bishri

(May God embrace him to His mercy and elevate his rank in the uppermost Paradise) regarding this topic.

The following problem and its answer is literally quoted from the master prompter and the prosperous infallible teacher Ahmed Sheik Ali Badr's Shamsul Haqiqeti Wed Diraya Firreddi Ela Ehlid Dhelaleti Wel Ghiwaya. The question is addressed at Sheikul­Islam Al-­Bishri:

Q. What do you see about a scholar reckoned with jurisprudents who shows his belief in recognizing Allah's ­material­ elevation? Meanwhile he claims following the worthy ancestors' course. Few people followed him while majority of scholars deny his claims. I could hear from him personally that the reason beyond his acceding to this sect is that he had read a statement ascribed to Ibn Teimiya in a book written by an Indian scholar regarding substantiating the Creator's occupying a locality.

Moreover this man believes in the in essence elevation of Allah the Glorified. In other words he believes that Allah is physically over the Throne but in a way becoming Him. He also decides falsity of Abul­-Barakat Ad­Dirdir's saying "­Allah be­ promoted against incarnation occupancy connection disunion and ill­mindedness." He also decides Sheik Al-­Liqai's saying "It is impractical to the Bearer of the divine attributes to be like this universe in having locality." Generally he decides falsity of any scholar disregarding his objective status who may deny Allah's having a locality. In addition to the forecited book this scholar exhibits Al-­Alusi's Rouhul­-Me'ani (Exegesis of the Holy Quran) as his evidence. Al-­Alusi's exegesis of God's saying (And He is the Supreme above His servants. 6:18) is revealing such an indication into having a definite locality but as a matter of fact the exegesist expresses inaccuracy of this exegesis. He also cited Quranic Verses; such as (And He is the Supreme above His servants. 6:61) (They fear their Lord above them. 16:50) (To Him do ascend the good words) and their likes as other evidences. He also cites the deaf bondmaiden's indication towards the heavens as a sign to Allah when the Prophet's asked her about the place of the Lord as another evidence. He also refers to some books of Hijjetul­Islam Al-­Ghezzali (God please him) as evidences on accuracy of his sect. Truly Mohammed Murteda at clarifying Al-­Ghezzali's Ihya'u Uloumiddin hints at such points. He also mentions the hadith that the Prophet (peace be upon him) pointed to the heavens with his finger when he said "O Allah! Be the witness." in the Farewell pilgrimage. He also quotes the Karramites' saying "Denial of Allah's being in one of the six directions is an assertion of His nonexistence". As your excellency realizes discussions about the Lord's having locality is commonly familiar. Still the decisive judgment in this topic is your excellency's wording. God save you and support you as long as you are backers of Ahlus-­Sunna sect.

A. To Sheikh Ahmed Ali Badr the virtuous scholar and servant of honorable Islamic mastery in Bilsfoura:

On 22nd of Moharram 1325 I received your missive comprising questioning about the judgment should be issued on those who substantiate Allah's occupying a locality. Hence we write the following answer. It is however sufficient for followers of the right and fair. God may reward you good on behalf of Muslims.

It is to notice may God give you His support and lead you as well as us to paths of equity that course of the saved party and unanimity of Sunnis is promoting Allah the Exalted against being likened to the contingent beings. They rule that the Lord is far away from specifications of contingency. Likewise He is highly promoted against being occupying a locality and a space. This is evidenced by conclusive proofs. God's being in a definite locality requires ruling of anteriority of that locality or space. Localities and spaces are part of this cosmos which is different from Allah the Exalted. Ultimate credentials on contingency of all beings saving Allah the Exalted have been positively cited by both deniers and adopters of Allah's occupying a locality. Since entities of occupying substances is impossibly existed unless there is a space comprising while it is possible for spaces to exist without occupying substances because of permissibility of vacuums this will require probability of necessary beings and necessity of probable beings. Both are void. Supposing the Lord has a definite point to occupy He then shall inevitably be an atom since it is impracticable for Him to be an accident. Supposing so He shall be either divisible or indivisible. Both are void. Indivisible substances are the most diminutive. Allah is highly promoted against being a diminutive being. Divisible substances are compound corporealities. Complexity contradicts the intrinsic necessity. Compound substances are possible beings that lack influential cause. It is positively provable that Allah the Exalted is essential Aseity Self­sufficient and Requisite by all beings. Allah be praised (Nothing like the likeness of Him and He is the Hearing the Seeing.)

Allah has disgraced some people who were deceived and mislead by the Satan. They ensued their caprices and adhered to unavailing things. This occurred only when they substantiated Allah's occupying a locality. Allah be exaltedly promoted against such a thing. They agreed upon identifying that locality. They claimed Allah's being occupying an elevated point. Soon afterward they disagreed. Some believed that Allah is a corporeality touching the upper surface of the Throne. Jews and Karramites whose atheism is indisputably decided opted for so. Others substantiated the locality but with promoting God against unbecoming matters. They ruled that God occupies the locality in a way different from corporealities' occupation. Those are also deviant and lacking true faith. The legislator impermitted such a sort of accreditation to Allah. In

effect faith irreverence is uglier and more unacceptable than limb irreverence especially for leaders and masters.

Besides many personal misbeliefs contradicting unanimity of Muslims and inadmitted by the current scholars who issued decisive scandalous verdicts that attained to deciding atheism Ahmed Bin Abdil­-Halim Bin Abdis­Selam Bin Teimiya Al-­Harrani Ad­Dimeshqi the Hanbalite one of scholars of the eighth Hijri century adopted the misbelief of Allah's occupying a locality. This man suffered miscellaneous sorts of humiliation and ignominy for such ill beliefs. Some of his partisans however aimed at supporting and defending him by releasing him from the accusals addressed. He accredited some statements to his master clarifying their purports and people's misunderstanding him. He also cited evident statements said by his master for refuting that accusal. He tried to prove that the man for his honorable esteem and mastery had not broken unanimity of Muslims.

Impotent illusory details scholars adequately nullified have been provided as evidences on the misbelief of Allah's occupying a locality. They adhered to extrinsic meanings of aspects of Quranic and prophetic texts; such as God's saying (The Beneficent settled on the Throne) (To Him do ascend the good words;) (To Him ascend the angels and the Spirit; 70:4) (Are you secure of [that] in the heavens that He should not make the earth…) (He is the Supreme over His servants) the Prophet's saying "Our Lord descends to the lowest heavens" and the deaf bondmaiden's indication towards the heavens as a sign to Allah when the Prophet's asked her about the place of the Lord. The Prophet certified her being a believing individual.

As an answer of such texts we may say that conjectural extrinsic meanings of aspects do not injure the persuasive decisive evidences referring to denial of Allah's occupying a definite space or locality. Such texts should be interpreted and made becoming true meanings certified by indications and doctrinal texts. Interpretation may be of two sorts. First general interpretation without identifying the intended meaning. This is the worthy ancestors' course. Second detailed interpretation by identifying the purports. This is the worthy descendants' course.

The latter interpreted 'settling' into prevalence depending upon an example from Arabic poetry. They interpret 'ascending of the good wording' into the Lord's satisfaction and pleasingness. The rely upon impracticability of ­material­ ascending of words. They interpret 'that in the heavens' into God's affair predominance or an angel undertaking the charge of irritating. Likewise they interpret 'ascending of the angels and the Spirit' into their arising to a definite rank in which they seek favor of the Lord. God's being above His servants is an indication to His supremacy and power since the supreme and powerful is in a rank higher than the overcome. By the same token God's

descending to the lowest heavens alludes to descending of His mercy and kindness. It also indicates that Allah does not deal with His servants out of His elevation might and supremacy. The Prophet's asking about the Lord with 'where' is a way of descrying whether that bondmaiden had believed in the Lord's having a certain point like the pagans or not. As she pointed at the heavens the Prophet understood that she had intended to refer to the Creator of the heavens.

Relying upon decisive convictional evidences and inclining the conjectural scholars could find suitable interpretative construction for the entire Quranic and prophetic texts regarding the topic involved.

It is so strange for a Muslim to shun the unanimous sayings of Muslims and their masters and consent to deviation and heresy of the dissidents. Has such an individual not heard God's saying (And whoever acts hostilely to the Apostle after that guidance has become manifest to him and follows other than the way of the believers We will turn him to that to which he has himself turned and make him enter hell; and it is an evil resort. 4:115) I advise such individuals who have been stained with such filthy things to repent to Allah the Exalted and avoid ensuing steps of the Satan who enjoins obscenity and evil. I also warn them against being so obstinate that they would transgress in insisting on erroneous beliefs. The best correctness is returning to correctness. Indulging to excess in wrong is resulting in the most severest sort of torture. (Whomsoever Allah guides he is the rightly guided one and whomsoever he causes to err you shall not find for him any friend to lead aright. 18:17)

We do implore our Lord to guide us all to the right path. On Him we do hold fast and He is the best reliable. God's peace and blessings be upon Mohammed our master and his companions entirely and their virtuous followers to Day of Judgment.

The needy to God's mercy;

Salim Al-­Bishri servant of scholarship and Malikite mastery in Al-­Azhar.

Al-­Qazai comments:

Sheik Al-­Bishri's saying "for his honorable esteem and mastery" reveals his good impression toward plea provided by that disciple.

It is indisputable for deep viewers in books of Ibn Teimiya and Ibnul-­Qeyim to ascertain that they believe in corporalism anthropomorphism and Allah's occupancy. Those two men release themselves from clinging to the terms and claim adopting for promoting the Lord against unfitting affairs. At any rate they utter the word of promotion while they are so remote from its meanings. The current scholars of that man ­Ibn Teimiya­ are the most familiar of his

personality. The pious master of Islam Ali Bin Abdil-­Kafi who coincided in time of Ibn Teimiya wrote various books in refutation of Ibn Teimiya's misbeliefs. In his Ad Durretul Mudhiya Firraddi Elebni Teimiya this pious master refuted ideas of that heretic deviant man who decides invalidity of suspended divorcement on oath and reckons it with violation to unanimity of Muslims and forging lies against the Prophet's companions and their followers.

The master scholar says "Ibn Teimiya breached principals of Islamic doctrine and repealed pillars of Islam while he was hidden under curtains of followership of the holy Book and the prophetic traditions and proclaiming of soliciting the right and leading to the Paradise. He dissented from followership to heresy and gainsaid the Muslims' unanimity. He advocated affairs of corporalism and complexity in the divine Essence. He ruled that lacking parts is not impossible. He also claimed incarnation of contingency in the Essence of Allah the Exalted. He decided that the Quran is contingent that Allah spoke through it after it had been nothing and that it might utter or keep peace. He also determined contingency of the Lord's Essence according to the creatures. He surpassed exceedingly when he ruled of anteriority of this cosmos. This required the claim of eternality of creatures. He affirmed that the anterior attribute had been contingent and the contingent creature had been anterior. No single follower of any nation or creed had ever combined these two beliefs. Hence he was out of the seventy three parties of this nation. Hence he depended upon no single nation or creed. All the previous can be seen as nothing if measured to the ill matters he attached to branches of the religion."

It is a precious essay in which Sheik Ali Bin Abdil-­Kafi refuted Ibn Teimiya's misbeliefs and exhibited the right creeds. The essay however was printed in Damascus.

Moreover In his Tekmiletur Raddi Ela Nuniyatibnil Qeyim Al-­Kawthari provides adequate exhibition on this man and his faction. Allah may protect Muslims and us from following caprices.

Al-­Qazai's Furqanul Quran Beinè Sifatil Khaliqi Wè Sifatil Akwan page 17:

This faction was highly fond of forging false affairs and imputing them to the supreme scholars of this nation. Since first emergence till now followers of this faction have been agitating and falsifying nearly in every century. On the other side there have been troops of Ahlus­-Sunna defending and exposing the right in private and general sessions of dispute and argumentation as well as writings that used the illumination of logic reasons for removing darkness of such heretic confusedness. For seekers of guidance these writings are reckoned as unexhausted fortune and interminable treasures. One of such ceaseless inheritance is the book of Abu Bakr Ahmed Bin Hussein Bin Ali Al-­Beihaqi the trustful supreme hadithist and jurisprudent who died in 458. In his time

unbecoming discussions about the divine names and attributes were far­reaching; therefore he wrote his book Al-­Asma'u Wes­-Sifat. Tajuddin As­Sibki states "I have never seen a written work equivalent to Al-­Beihaqi's." This is quite true since the writer gathers every single text upon which the heretic anthropomorphists and Hashawites rested. He features perplexity of each text and removes every problematic affair by referring to the allegorical object and attaching the fitting Quranic Verses. In addition he records sayings of scholars preceded him. God may reward him the best on behalf of the religion and nation of Mohammed (peace be upon him). It seems that Al-­Beihaqi records this book as removing away the dishonor Ibn Khuzeima did pertain to hadithists. This man wrote a book named At­Tawhid in which he combined and misrepresented the allegorical texts in a way unfitting believing in Allah the Exalted and sayings of the worthy ancestors and descendants. Fakhruddin Ar­Razi threw at him a fatal shot. Through providing the exegesis of God's saying (Nothing like the likeness of His;) Ar­Razi comments "In his At­Tawhid Mohammed Bin Isaaq Bin Khuzeima records our acquaintances' bringing this Verse as their evidence. Ibn Khuzeima's book is in fact a book of atheism. I am to comment on his wording since he was an unsound speaker and ill­minded man." Immediately Ar­Razi affixes Ibn Khuzeima's wording. Since it is such an ill wording that it is unseemly for a sane believer who recognizes his Lord to utter we shun recording it here so that a feeble would not be influenced. Ar­Razi then comments "This poor ignorant adopted such fables since he lacked knowledge of analogy. Scholars of monotheism talked adequately about real monotheism. Because of his being remote from recognizing realities that man ensued words of ordinary people and took pride in his wording. We do seek the Lord's granting us with the acceptable end result."

Readers of Ibn Khuzeima's At­Tawhid find excuses for Ar­Razi's sayings. We have already stated that mastery in hadithology does not necessarily lead to mastery in other fields of religious sciences. Hence scholars should be taken in only in their field of specialization. Gainsaying this rule results in occurrence of flaws in principals and branches of religion. As much as I am concerned I do advise seekers of safety to hold fast to books of Abu Mansur Al-­Materidi and Abul­-Hassan Al-­Ashari in affairs respecting principals and creeds of Islam since these two books demonstrate the path to which Book of Allah and the Prophet's tradition lead without inclination exaggeration or blemish.

In Ar­Razi's book of exegesis of the holy Quran part 27 pages 150­3 third edition Ihya At­-Turath Al-­Arabi publication a detailed exposition of Ar­Razi's refuttal on Ibn Khuzeima An­Nisapuri's claims in his At­Tawhid is rendered. Like defects regarding God's seeableness already mentioned in the first chapter of this survey Ar­Razi exhibits Ibn Khuzeima's defects regarding definitions of semblance and analogy aimed at proving God's corporeity.

Ar­Razi pierced in such a way equivalent to Ibn Khuzeima's ugly failing. He paraphrased the actual definition of analogy of corporealities and proved God's being not analogous to such corporealities. In the next chapter Ar­Razi's thesis in negating corporalism shall be rendered. It is worthy mentioning here that supreme scholars of Wahabism guide Muslims to Ibn Khuzeima's At­Tawhid because of its comprising ideas of corporalism.

Al-­Qazai's Furqanul Quran Beinè Sifatil Khaliqi Wè Sifatil Akwan page 61:

It is necessarily provable that Allah is promoted against being compound or divisible or enjoying any quality of materiality and corporeality. This is averred by Verses of the holy Quran and addressed at hearing people and at those who give ear while they are witnesses. Ahlus­-Sunna who were unlike whimsical people and Jews and Christians who have been affected by unsoundness of anthropomorphism and corporalism did thoroughly adopt this course.

It is a funny thing to see Ahmed Bin Abdil-­Halim Ibn Teimiya the supporter and master of corporalists Karramites and ignorant hadithists who misunderstand what they retain consider Imamul­Haramein and Hujjetul­-Islam Al-­Ghezzali as more heretic than Jews and Christians because of their opting for promoting God against unfitting affairs. This is mentioned in his Al-­Muwafaqa printed in the margin of Minhajus­-Sunna. At any rate principal of promoting God against corporeity and the like material affairs is not adopted exclusively by these two masters. As a matter of fact it is the principal adopted by majority of Muslim scholars since the Prophet's companions time up to the current till Resurrection Day. The Prophet (peace be upon him) states in an authentic hadith "A party of this nation is still keeping the right uninfluenced by dissidents or opposers till the coming of God's affair." This party forms the greatest majority of the nation. This fact is averred by some ways of narrating the previous hadith. Further discussion of danger pursuance of this man his written works and his faction as well as opinions of master scholars regarding his misbeliefs shall be rendered later on.

Parable exaltation is a common metaphorical style in Arabic:

Expressive exaltation is widespread in the holy Quran and common in Arabic. It is ordinarily used for accrediting suitable qualities to the Creator and His creatures. The following Quranic texts are examples. (And be not infirm and be not grieving and you shall have the upper hand. 3:139) (Saying; exalt not yourselves upon me. 27:31) (For surely if they prevail [above] you; 18:20) (And that do not exalt yourselves against Allah; 44:19) (Surely Pharaoh exalted himself in the land. 28:4) (And that they might destroy whatever they gained in ascendancy; 17:7) and (Fear not you are the uppermost. 20:68). When the polytheists tasted temporary victory upon Muslims one of them shouted "Exalt Hubal ­a pagan­." The Prophet ordered Muslims to reply "Allah is more

Exalted and glorified." Arabic poetry comprises such expressions. At any rate a volume may not contain the entire expressions of metaphorical exaltation used in God's Book and Arabic texts. It is quite understandable that there is a difference between exaltation of a place and exaltation of power. Spatial exaltation is a corporal accidental perfection which is definitely different from the origin essential perfection. Allah be exalted against theses of the afield.

Through rendering exegesis of God's saying (Everything is perishable except His face) Abu Jafar At­Tabari according the ancestors demonstrates that 'face' stands for the entity.

Al-­Bukhari through rendering exegesis of the same Verse rules that 'face' stands for God's property or deeds intended exclusively for His sake. Hence Al-­Bukhari whose being the best of the worthy ancestors is never suspected asserts that 'face' stands for God's property. He also interprets God's holding creatures by their forelock mentioned in the Verse (There is no living creature but He holds it by its forelock. 11:56) into the Lord's property and prevalence.

God says (And Allah is Ample Knowing). It is familiarly known that 'ample' stands for material extension. However no single scholar opted this meaning.

At­Tabari states "From God's saying (Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth; 24:35). No single individual from the worthy ancestors did refer to that light reflecting on walls and widespreading in air as the intended in the Verse. Master scholars and exegesists are far away from taking in such an extrinsic odd meaning."

According to the authentic documentation of At­Tabari Ibn Abbas explains the light in the forecited Verse as guidance. Anas Bin Malik opts for the same exegesis. Mujahid however interprets the light into superintendence. At­Tabari selects the earlier exegesis and shuns the other. He also interprets the Lord's encircling things into awareness willingness and prevalence. None renders the material meaning of encircling. Allah be exalted against qualities of corporealities and specifications of contingency.

Sources of the worthy ancestors' sayings reveal the meanings becoming Allah the Exalted identifiably. Unidentification is communicated by illiberal researchers. Al-­Bukhari's book of hadith and Ibn Jarir At­Tabari's book of exegesis ­of the holy Quran­ do assert what we have been suggesting. We have only shown examples for concluding our claims. Al-­Beihaqi's Al-­Asma'u Wes­Sifat is adequately enough in discussing this topic. Scholars rendered abundant explanation of the allegorical texts. We have already provided Abu Bakr Bin Al-­Arabi's narration regarding Malik's interpreting the Lord's descending mentioned in the Prophet's saying "Allah descends to the lowest heavens;" into descending of His mercy not moveableness. At any rate Malik might have not been acquainted of the other prophetic saying explaining the

previous. He might have suspected the hadith documentation; therefore he evaded citing it as an evidence. The Hadith however is "Allah respites till midnight. After that he orders a declarant of expounding whether there is…"

Thus it is explicative that God's descending is metaphorical expression. It is not unusual to use metaphor in documentation not in the party. Meaning of God's saying (When we have recited it) indicates to Gabriel's reciting it out of the Lord's order. Al-­Bukhari in the hadith related to Ibn Abbas removes perplexity of such a topic. Pursuant to an authentic narration Ibn Abbas opted for exaltation not material sitting as the exegesis of God's saying (The Beneficent settled on the Throne.)

Moreover we have previously demonstrated sayings of At­Tabari and At­-Thehbi referring to unanimity of scholars on denying conditions of Allah's settling. We have also explained this point so evidently that any confusion should be eliminated.

Master scholars preceded us in this field. They wrote a good deal of valuable concised and elaborate books appertained to the allegorical texts. Thus readers should fill in their hearts with creed of promoting Allah the Exalted against corporeity and material phenomena.

Al­KAWTHARI REFUTES CORPORALISTS AND THEIR FALSE ACCREDITATION TO MASTERS OF THE ISLAMIC SECTS

In the introductory of Al-­Beihaqi's Al-­Asma'u Wes­Sifat Al-­Kawthari the reviser writes down:

Al-­Beihaqi wrote a book in which he freed Ahmed the master from matters of anthropomorphism and corporalism ascribed to him falsely. This book refutes words falsely accredited to Ahmed by some of his followers.

Abul-­Fadhl At­-Tamimi head of Hanbalites in Baghdad stated that Ahmed contradicted those who accredited corporeality to the Lord. He said "Names are inferred from the doctrine and language. Linguists assign 'corporeity' to beings having length width density structure picture and complexity. Allah the Praised is out of all these things. Hence it is illicit to assign corporeity to Him since He is out of being a corporeality. The Doctrine also did not mention such a thing."

Al-­Beihaqi states "Al-­Hakim: Abu Amr Bin As­Semmak: Hanbal Bin Isaaq:

Ahmed my uncles said 'On that day day of argumentation in the presence of the caliph they contended that suras of Baqara and Tebarak will materially come on Resurrection Day as the Prophet had told. I say that this stands for reward of these suras. God's competence is intended by God's saying (Your Lord will come.) Quran is a set of examples and admonition.'

Documentation of this narrative is not doubtful. At any rate it proves that Ahmed had not believed in material coming and descending mentioned in Quranic and prophetic texts. He presumed that such matters were expressions of advent of God's marvels and competence. They claimed that it would be unfit for the Quran to practice material coming and going if it was one of the Lord's attributes of Essence. Abu Abdillah answers that it is the reward which will appear on that day. Hence appearance of the reward was expressed by using coming and going. Saving the most intelligent masters who promote the Lord against unfitting affairs none would be guided to such an answer."

Al-­Beihaqi's Al-­Asma'u Wes­Sifat is an unparalleled book. The writer does not criticize those who claim Allah's being in the heavens or on the Throne resting upon texts supporting this meaning but he deprives the Lord's being in the heavens or on the Throne of all meanings of materiality unlike anthropomorphists. This is proved by his wording while he discusses the Lord's settling on the Throne. We provided a considerable commentation there. He adjudges believers in Allah's being materially in the heavens as deviant. Meanwhile he permits this saying linguistically if it is alluded to the Lord's being so exalted and elevated without referring to a definite point or locality. Doctrinally there are some legal phenomena permitting such a saying. Since some hadiths such as that of Abu Zurein and the ibex reveal to some extent unacceptable remarks it is precautious not to speak of so even if promoting the Lord against unbecoming affairs is declared. Moreover it is obligatory not to publicize such hadiths at all for sake of blocking doors into anthropomorphism so firmly. As a matter of fact there is no single authentic hadith regarding this topic plainly. Hadith of the deaf bondmaiden comprises a bewilderment so consequential that it is unbefitting to rest upon in topic of beliefs. Acceders to God's saying (Are you secure that Who is in the heavens…) as their argumentative evidence are totally wrong. Later on this will be proved. Statements of Al-­Beihaqi and his corollaries respecting permitting claiming Allah's being in the heavens as a signification of His exaltation and glorification do not flow in the good of those assigning material exaltation and space to the Lord. In miscellaneous places of this book Al-­Beihaqi assures this fact. It is quite wrong to reckon such statements of Al-­Beihaqi and his corollaries with evidences on substantiating the Lord's physical exaltation. Within narrators of relations respecting the divine attributes ascribed to Abu Haneefa is Nueim Bin Hemmad and his maternal grandfather.

Abdullah Bin Nafi Al-­Assem the doubtful narrator is within the series of narratives ascribed to Malik regarding this topic. Likewise Abul­-Hassan Al-­Hekari Ibn Kadesh and Al-­Ashari are within series of narratives related to Ashafii regarding the same topic involved. Those three men are notorious doubtful narrators. Some however were deceived by such reports. Depending upon the previous it is unacceptable to ascribe the faith of Allah's being in the heavens to the three masters of the sects.

(1) The Holy Prophet (S)’s Succession Was Raised During His Lifetime

Clear evidences and logic prove that the Holy Prophet (S) raised the question of his succession since the first stages of his Divine Mission until the last sparks of his life. This point was also acceptable and normal, yet it stands out against Sunni reference books claiming that he did not nominate any for his succession and that Muslims never discussed or put forth such an idea before him. Anyhow, numerous Hadiths have shown that the Holy Prophet (S) referred to the Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt. Let us refer to some of these evidences.

First Evidence

Many texts bear out that the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to the new religion at the beginning of his Divine Mission and asked them to protect him during the promulgation of his Lord’s epistle. Some of these tribes accepted this invitation provided that they would have the leadership after him. The Holy Prophet (S)’s answer was that he was no more than a messenger who had no choice in the affair for which they were asking. It was Almighty Allah only Who may nominate anyone He desires. The most evident points in this regard are the story of the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and that of the tribe of Kindah both of which had occurred on the first days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s promulgation, while the story of `Amir ibn al-Tufayl occurred on the last days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s lifetime.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn Sa`sa`ah

The following is quoted from Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/289:

The Holy Prophet (S) came to the [tribe of] `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and invited them to the “new” religion. A man called Baiharah ibn Firas addressed to him, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I only assent to this Qurayshite young man. If we will support you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ ‘This matter is decided by Allah only,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S), ‘He holds it to whomever He desires.’ Hence, they rejected saying, ‘We will make our necks the target of whatsoever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for you.’ After they had returned from that season of Hajj, they told a man who was too old to accompany them and to whom they used to refer all their affairs about the story of the Holy Prophet (S) and their rejection to his call. The old man struck his head with both hands and shouted, ‘Oh for the `Amir! Can you catch him and change your situation? I swear by Him Who prevails on my soul, no single son of [Prophet (S)] Ishmael can lie in this affair. It is the very truth. Where were your minds when you rejected his offer?”1

Story of the Tribe of Kindah

This is the story as quoted from Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/159:

`Abdullah ibn al-Ajlah said that his father, relating the story of the tribe of Kindah to his chiefs, said: As the Holy Prophetsought the tribe of Kindah’s support in the promulgation of his Mission, they stipulated that he should hold them the position of authority after his death. ‘Authority is Allah’s,’ he answered, ‘He hands it over to whomever He desires.’ Therefore, they rejected his request.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn al-Tufayl

Ibn Kathir, in al-Sirah 4/114, records the following:

[`Abdullah] Ibn `Abbas reported that Arbad ibn Qays ibn Juz` ibn Khalid ibn Ja`far ibn Kalab and `Amir ibn al-Tufayl ibn Malik came to al-Madinah and sat before the Holy Prophet (S) asking, ‘O Muhammad! What will you give me if we accept Islam?’ ‘You will be given what Muslims are given and forbidden from what Muslims are forbidden,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). ‘Will you hold me your position after you?’ asked `Amir. ‘This position is neither yours nor your people’s. I may give you the commandments of the army,’ said the Holy Prophet (S). ‘I am now the commander of the armies of Najd. You may give me the leadership of the Bedouins exclusively,’ `Amir said, but the Holy Prophet (S) rejected. ‘I will fill in your area with horses and fighters,’ `Amir threatened as he went out. ‘Allah will protect against you,’ commented the Holy Prophet (S).

Second Evidence

The second evidence is that Ansar paid homage to the Holy Prophet (S) on three terms,

(1) to protect him against anything they protect themselves against,

(2) to protect his people and progeny as same as they protect their peoples and progenies and

(3) not to contend on matters of leadership with the worthy, because Muslims are not given the right to choose personally for this position. In other words, they must comply with the one selected by the Lord for this position.

The third term shows obviously that the principle of the divine selection of the Imams following the Holy Prophet (S) was admissibly settled since the first stages of the Mission. Ansar however fulfilled the first term completely but unfortunately they breached the two others very badly. These three terms have been mentioned in the most reliable reference books of Hadith. Let us refer to some of such narrations hereinafter:

Al-Bukhari, in al-Sahih 8/122, records the following:

It has been narrated that `Abadah ibn al-Samit said: We paid homage to the Messenger of Allah to listen to and obey him in good and bad conditions, not to contended with the worthy of leadership, to practice and say the truth wherever we are and to scorn any blame for sake of Allah.2

Al-Bukhari, in 8/88, records:

…The Holy Prophet (S) asked us to pay homage, and we did. We submitted to his stipulations that we should listen and comply with him in auspicious and misfortunate situations, should prefer him to ourselves and should not contend for the leadership unless we see a notorious evidential atheism.3

Ahmad (ibn Hanbal), in al-Musnad 5/321, records the following:

`Abadah ibn Al-Samit narrated that the Holy Prophetstated, “You should listen and obey in auspicious and misfortunate situations, prefer me to yourself and avoid contending against the people of leadership even if you conceive it as your right.”

These two additions are suspicious since homage occurred before the Holy Prophet (S)’s immigration when there was no single exception from obedience. The question of the priority of people of Quraysh came to existence only after the compulsory declaration of loyalty to Abu-Bakr and the objection of Sa`d ibn `Abadah. This demonstrates that the two additions were the result of the new relationship between Ansar and the Qurayshite leadership after the Holy Prophet (S)’s decease. Moreover, no single narration refers to the Holy Prophet (S)’s stipulating the term of avoiding contending against the people of leadership.

In Majma` al-Zawa`id 6/49, the following is recorded:

`Abadah ibn al-Samit narrated that As`ad ibn Zurarah shouted, “O people! Do you realize what you are giving Muhammad? You are swearing that you will wage wars against the Arabs and the foreigners and the jinn and mankind.” However, Ansar declared, “We are rivals of his foes and friends of his adherents.” Then they asked the Holy Prophet (S) to speak out his stipulations. He spoke, “You should declare that there is no god but Allah and that I be His messenger, and you should perform prayers, defray the zakat, listen and obey, avoid contending against the people of leadership and protect me as same as you protect your souls and people.”

Husayn ibn `Ali narrated that in al-`Aqabah, Ansar came to pay homage to the Messenger of Allah. `Ali was ordered to acknowledge their homage: “What should they swear for, Allah’s messenger?” asked `Ali. The Holy Prophet (S) instructed, “You should stipulate obedience to the Lord and protection of the Holy Prophet (S) and his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls and progenies.”

The pro-Qurayshite books of Hadith have concentrated on the point of avoiding contending against the people of leadership so as to use it as a proof on depriving Ansar of positions of leadership. On the other hand, they have avoided recording the term of protecting the Holy Prophet (S), his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls, households and progenies since this stipulation disagrees with the benefits of the Qurayshite leaders who attacked and set fire on the house of Fatimah and `Ali because they had objected against the illegal leadership of Abu-Bakr.

Third Evidence

The third evidence is the famous narration of ‘al-Dar.’ Reference books of Tafsir and history refer to this narration as they pass through Allah’s saying,

‘And warn your nearest relations.( 26:214)’

This holy verse indicates that the Lord ordered the Holy Prophet (S) to invite the Hashimites exclusively to the religion at the first stages of the Mission. So, what procedures did the Holy Prophet (S) take in this stage?4 How long did this private invitation last? Was it a number of months or years, until a divine commandment of expanding the Mission was revealed? What was the purport of the divine commandment of dedicating Muhammad’s Prophethood to the Hashimites before it was extended to include people of Quraysh, the Arabs and all humankind? What was the purport of the Qurayshite’s decision of laying siege to the Hashimites who, after the enforcement of this decision, surrounded the Holy Prophet (S) and tolerated that six-year siege? The Hashimites, despite their various classes of faithfulness, showed no weakness at all. What was the purport of the fact that except the Hashimites, none could endure the misfortunes that Muslims had suffered?

During the Battle of Uhud, all Muslims absconded, but the Hashimite struggled alone.

During the Battle of al-Khandaq, no single Muslim had the courage to face the champion who had challenged them, except the Hashimite hero-Imam `Ali (a.s.).

During the Battle of Hunayn, ten thousand Muslims absconded while the Hashimites alone stood firm.

These facts and events suggest a satisfactory explanation for the Hadiths related in Shiite reference books quoting the Holy Prophet (S)’s saying, ‘I have been sent to my household in private and to people in general.’

The aforementioned holy Verse points out that warning the Hashimites was a matter outlined by the Lord. It also refers to the fact that the Holy Prophet (S)’s nominating his successor from among them was a step within that divine plan.

Al-Suyuti, in al-Durr al-Manthur 5/97, records the following:

… `Ali narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations,’ was revealed, the Holy Prophetsummoned me and said, ‘`Ali: Almighty Allah ordered me to warn my nearest relations, but I was depressed since I had realized that they would answer me disgracefully whenever I would call them to this matter. Hence, I tried to evade it until Archangel Gabriel came and threatened my Lord’s chastisement if I would not carry out. Now, I ask you to prepare some food on which you should cook a leg of a sheep and make us a skin of milk. Then, you should invite sons of `Abd al-Muttalib so that I will speak to them and convey this mission.’ I carried out the Holy Prophet (S)’s orders completely and invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men. Abu-Talib, Hamzah, al-`Abbas and Abu-Lahab were also invited. As they all were present, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them the food I had prepared. With his teeth, he incised that piece of meat, threw its parts on the edges of that trencher and said, ‘Here you are, by the Name of Allah.’ They all ate to excess. By Allah I swear, each one ate as much as I had cooked for them all. Then, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them with that milk. They all drank from that skin. I swear by Allah, each one drank full skin of milk. As soon as the Holy Prophet (S) tried to speak, Abu-Lahab interrupted and said, ‘See how your man cast witchcraft on you.’ Therefore, they left before he could speak to them.

The next day, the Holy Prophet said to me, ‘You saw how that man interrupted me. Today, you should prepare food as same as you did yesterday and invite them again.’ I did the same and invited them, and they came, ate and drank. The Holy Prophet (S) then spoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! By Allah, I do not know an Arab man who can bring to his people a matter better than what I am bearing to you. I am conveying to you the welfare of this world as well as the Hereafter. Almighty Allah has ordered me to invite you to this matter. Who will support me in this affair?’ I was the youngest among them when I shouted, ‘I will,’ but they began to laugh at me and left the place.

Relating the same report to another series of narrators, al-Suyuti says:

…Al-Barra` ibn `Azib narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations’ was revealed, the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men…etc.

Hence, al-Suyuti interrupts the report at this point so that he would not mention the rest of the Holy Prophet (S)’s words. This style is commonly followed by the pro-Qurayshite reporters as they refer to the Narration of al-Dar, which shows that the Lord and the Holy Prophetselected the successor from among the nearest clan since that day.

Al-Amini, in al-Ghadir 1/207 records the following:

The following is a literal quotation of al-Tabari’s narration that distinguishes the right from the wrong. In Tarikh 2/217 (first edition), he records: … ‘Who will support me in this regard and he will be my brother, successor and inheritor amongst you?’ said the Holy Prophet (S). They all stopped talking when I, the youngest among them, said, ‘I will, Prophet (S) of Allah! I will be your backer in this affair.’ Hence, the Holy Prophet (S) took me from the neck and stated, ‘This is my brother, successor and inheritor. You should listen to and obey him.’ They all went out laughing and saying to Abu-Talib, ‘Well, he orders you to listen to and obey your son.’ [Al-Amini, al-Ghadir; 2/279]

In this very form, Abu-Ja`far al-Iskafi, a Mu`tazilite5 theologist who died in 240, records the same report in Naqd al-`Uthmaniyyah confirming its authenticity: It is also recorded in Burhan al-Din’s Anba` Nujaba` al-Abna` 46-8, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi’l-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida `Imad al-Din al-Dimashqi’s Tarikh 1/116, Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji’s Sharh al-Shifa 3/37 (though he interrupts the last sentences of the narration and says: It is recorded in al-Bayhaqi’s Dala`il al-Nubuwwah and other reference books in authentic documentation), and Ala` al-Din al-Baghdadi’s Tafsir al-Khazin 390, and al-Suyuti’s Jam` al-Jawami` 6/392. On page 397, he also relates the narration to the six famous Hadithists-Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu-Hatam, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu-Na`im and Al-Bayhaqi. Ibn Abi’l-Hadid, in Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, records the same report.

Al-Amini then protests against those who have distorted this narration for sake of seeking the satisfaction of people of Quraysh. Though he records the narration in his Tafsir, al-Tabari, in Tarikh, confuses the last words of the Holy Prophet (S) regarding `Ali (a.s.): “… he then said, ‘This is my brother…’ and so on.” Imitating al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir mentions the narration in the same form.6

From the margin of Bihar al-Anwar 32/272, the following is quoted:

The bond of fraternity between `Ali and the Holy Prophet (S)-that was concluded according to a divine commandment in the beginning of Islam when Almighty Allah revealed the Verse ‘And warn your nearest relations’7-was fallen in a form of a covenant. The Holy Prophet (S) would not betake a brother, representative, associate and successor other than `Ali. Likewise, `Ali would not show any blemish in supporting, backing and advising for the Holy Prophet (S) and the religion. It is as same as Prophet (S) Aaron’s support to Prophet (S) Moses mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. When the Holy Prophet (S) held bonds of fraternity between each couple of his companions, he took in consideration the relationship linking each two.

He fraternized `Umar and Abu-Bakr, `Uthman and `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, al-Zubayr and `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, `Ubaydah ibn al-Harith and Bilal, Mus`ab ibn `Umayr and Sa`d ibn Abu-Waqqas, Abu-`Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah and Salim the slave of Abu-Hudhayfah and Hamzah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib and Zayd ibn Harithah al-Kalbi.8 At these moments, he said to `Ali, “I swear by Him Who has sent me with the truth that I delayed you so that you will be dedicated to me. For me, your standing is as same as Aaron’s to Moses is. Yet, no Prophet (S) will come after me. You are my brother and successor. You will be with me in my palace in Paradise. If any disputes you, say: I am the servant of Allah and the brother of His Messenger. Except fabricators and liars, none should claim it after you.”9

Likewise, when the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to accept his Mission, none admitted him except the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah. Their spokesman, Bayhara, stated, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I assent to this Qurayshite young man. Providing we will pay homage to you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ The Holy Prophet (S) answered, ‘This is Allah’s affair. He holds it to whomever He desires.’ ‘We will make our necks the target of whatever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for your promulgation,’ they answered.10

As a result, supposing the Holy Prophet (S) had not concluded that bond of fraternity and inheritance with `Ali according to a divine commandment, he would not have wasted this opportunity and refuted them in such despairing words while he was in urgent need for the support of such tribes.

Al-Nu`man al-Maghribi, in Daa`im al-Islam 1/15, writes down the following:

We have already recorded the following narration of `Ali: When Almighty Allah revealed the Verse (And warn your nearest relations), the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib to a leg of a sheep and a cup of milk. They were more than forty men. Among them, there were at least ten men who used to have a whole slaughtered animal and drink a large pot of drink. They ate and drank to excess. After that, the Holy Prophetspoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! Comply with me and you will be kings and rulers of the lands. The Lord selected a successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter for each Prophet (S) that He sent. Which one of you should be my successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter?’ They all stopped talking. He passed by them individually, but they all rejected. I was the youngest among them when I answered him, ‘It is I, Allah’s messenger!’ ‘Yes, it is you, `Ali!’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). When they left, Abu-Lahab said to them, ‘He served you with a single leg of a sheep and a cup of milk and you had to excess. This is an enough proof on his sorcery.’ They also laughed at Abu-Talib saying, ‘See how he preferred your son to you.’

Without doubt, the news of the Holy Prophet (S)’s invitation was spread among people of Quraysh as well as the Arabs. They for sure told each other that the ‘new’ Prophet (S) had gathered his relatives and warned them as he invited them to the new religion. He also asked for a supporter and successor, but none accepted except his young cousin; therefore, he betook him as supporter and successor.

The previous three evidences assert that the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession was a matter widely common for people since the earliest stages of his Divine Mission up to the last moments of his life. Furthermore, everybody recognized that Muhammad’s Prophethood was a practical contrivance of a formation of a state governed by him and need for a successor. Hence, all tribes, from a material viewpoint, conceived his mission as a desirable plan that they should take a part in by gaining his promise of handing his leadership over to them.

This leads to the supposition that within the foremost Muslims there were hypocrites attracted by that contrivance, which seemed to be achieving victory in the future. Each of them might look forward to obtaining a leading position in that state. This is the only way by which we can find a suitable interpretation of Allah’s saying revealed in Makkah:

“And We have not made the wardens of the Fire other than angels, and We have not made their number but as a trial for those who disbelieve, that those who have been given the Book may be certain and those who believe may increase in faith, and those who have been the Book and the believers may not doubt, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the unbelievers may say: What does Allah mean by this parable? Thus does Allah makes err whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases, and none knows the hosts of your Lord but He Himself; and this is naught but a reminder to the mortals. 74/31”

From the above, it is hard to believe the chieftains of Quraysh who claimed that Muslims had not discussed the question of the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession during his lifetime, even in a form of lawful or unlawful. Correspondingly, it is unacceptable to conclude that Muslims, who asked the Holy Prophet (S) frequently about their future and narrated several reports in this regard, did not ask him about their next leader.

Notes

1. Al-Tabari, Tarikh 2/84 and Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/158. In al-Ghadir 7/134, the story is related to Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/32, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Imad al-Din al-`Amiri, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah 2/3, Zayni Dahlan: al-Sirah 1/302 and Muhammad Hasanayn Haykal, Hayatu Muhammad.

2. Also, Muslim: al-Sahih 6/16, al-Nassa`i’s al-Sunan 7/137, Ibn Majah: al-Sunan 2/957, Ahmad: al-Musnad 5/316, Al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

3. Also, al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

4. An important topic is to be mentioned in this regard; historians and biographers have attempted to obscure the stage of inviting the Hashimites exclusively and, instead, they have invented the stages of pre-Arqam’s house and post-Arqam’s house, using doubtful and authentic, and irrational and reasonable reports.

5. Mu`tazilah (Arabic: Those Who Withdraw, or Stand Apart) is an Islamic school of speculative theology that flourished in Basrah and Baghdad (8th-10th centuries AD).

6. Ibn Kathir al-Bidayah wa’l-Nihayah 3/40 and Tafsir 3/351.

7. See, for more details, al-Tabari’s Tarikh 2/321, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida’s Tarikh 1/116, Ibn Abu al-Hadid Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, Ahmad’s al-Musnad 1/159, Jami` al-Jawami` 6/408, and Kanz al-`Ummal 6/401.

8. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/504, al-Muhabbar 70-1 and Al-Baladhiri’s al-Sunan 1/270.

9. Al-Riyad al-Nadirah 2/168 and Kanz al-`Ummal 5/45-6.

10. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/424, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, Zayni Dahlan’s 1/302 and al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah; 2/3.

(1) The Holy Prophet (S)’s Succession Was Raised During His Lifetime

Clear evidences and logic prove that the Holy Prophet (S) raised the question of his succession since the first stages of his Divine Mission until the last sparks of his life. This point was also acceptable and normal, yet it stands out against Sunni reference books claiming that he did not nominate any for his succession and that Muslims never discussed or put forth such an idea before him. Anyhow, numerous Hadiths have shown that the Holy Prophet (S) referred to the Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt. Let us refer to some of these evidences.

First Evidence

Many texts bear out that the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to the new religion at the beginning of his Divine Mission and asked them to protect him during the promulgation of his Lord’s epistle. Some of these tribes accepted this invitation provided that they would have the leadership after him. The Holy Prophet (S)’s answer was that he was no more than a messenger who had no choice in the affair for which they were asking. It was Almighty Allah only Who may nominate anyone He desires. The most evident points in this regard are the story of the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and that of the tribe of Kindah both of which had occurred on the first days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s promulgation, while the story of `Amir ibn al-Tufayl occurred on the last days of the Holy Prophet (S)’s lifetime.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn Sa`sa`ah

The following is quoted from Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/289:

The Holy Prophet (S) came to the [tribe of] `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah and invited them to the “new” religion. A man called Baiharah ibn Firas addressed to him, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I only assent to this Qurayshite young man. If we will support you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ ‘This matter is decided by Allah only,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S), ‘He holds it to whomever He desires.’ Hence, they rejected saying, ‘We will make our necks the target of whatsoever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for you.’ After they had returned from that season of Hajj, they told a man who was too old to accompany them and to whom they used to refer all their affairs about the story of the Holy Prophet (S) and their rejection to his call. The old man struck his head with both hands and shouted, ‘Oh for the `Amir! Can you catch him and change your situation? I swear by Him Who prevails on my soul, no single son of [Prophet (S)] Ishmael can lie in this affair. It is the very truth. Where were your minds when you rejected his offer?”1

Story of the Tribe of Kindah

This is the story as quoted from Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/159:

`Abdullah ibn al-Ajlah said that his father, relating the story of the tribe of Kindah to his chiefs, said: As the Holy Prophetsought the tribe of Kindah’s support in the promulgation of his Mission, they stipulated that he should hold them the position of authority after his death. ‘Authority is Allah’s,’ he answered, ‘He hands it over to whomever He desires.’ Therefore, they rejected his request.

Story of the Tribe of `Amir Ibn al-Tufayl

Ibn Kathir, in al-Sirah 4/114, records the following:

[`Abdullah] Ibn `Abbas reported that Arbad ibn Qays ibn Juz` ibn Khalid ibn Ja`far ibn Kalab and `Amir ibn al-Tufayl ibn Malik came to al-Madinah and sat before the Holy Prophet (S) asking, ‘O Muhammad! What will you give me if we accept Islam?’ ‘You will be given what Muslims are given and forbidden from what Muslims are forbidden,’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). ‘Will you hold me your position after you?’ asked `Amir. ‘This position is neither yours nor your people’s. I may give you the commandments of the army,’ said the Holy Prophet (S). ‘I am now the commander of the armies of Najd. You may give me the leadership of the Bedouins exclusively,’ `Amir said, but the Holy Prophet (S) rejected. ‘I will fill in your area with horses and fighters,’ `Amir threatened as he went out. ‘Allah will protect against you,’ commented the Holy Prophet (S).

Second Evidence

The second evidence is that Ansar paid homage to the Holy Prophet (S) on three terms,

(1) to protect him against anything they protect themselves against,

(2) to protect his people and progeny as same as they protect their peoples and progenies and

(3) not to contend on matters of leadership with the worthy, because Muslims are not given the right to choose personally for this position. In other words, they must comply with the one selected by the Lord for this position.

The third term shows obviously that the principle of the divine selection of the Imams following the Holy Prophet (S) was admissibly settled since the first stages of the Mission. Ansar however fulfilled the first term completely but unfortunately they breached the two others very badly. These three terms have been mentioned in the most reliable reference books of Hadith. Let us refer to some of such narrations hereinafter:

Al-Bukhari, in al-Sahih 8/122, records the following:

It has been narrated that `Abadah ibn al-Samit said: We paid homage to the Messenger of Allah to listen to and obey him in good and bad conditions, not to contended with the worthy of leadership, to practice and say the truth wherever we are and to scorn any blame for sake of Allah.2

Al-Bukhari, in 8/88, records:

…The Holy Prophet (S) asked us to pay homage, and we did. We submitted to his stipulations that we should listen and comply with him in auspicious and misfortunate situations, should prefer him to ourselves and should not contend for the leadership unless we see a notorious evidential atheism.3

Ahmad (ibn Hanbal), in al-Musnad 5/321, records the following:

`Abadah ibn Al-Samit narrated that the Holy Prophetstated, “You should listen and obey in auspicious and misfortunate situations, prefer me to yourself and avoid contending against the people of leadership even if you conceive it as your right.”

These two additions are suspicious since homage occurred before the Holy Prophet (S)’s immigration when there was no single exception from obedience. The question of the priority of people of Quraysh came to existence only after the compulsory declaration of loyalty to Abu-Bakr and the objection of Sa`d ibn `Abadah. This demonstrates that the two additions were the result of the new relationship between Ansar and the Qurayshite leadership after the Holy Prophet (S)’s decease. Moreover, no single narration refers to the Holy Prophet (S)’s stipulating the term of avoiding contending against the people of leadership.

In Majma` al-Zawa`id 6/49, the following is recorded:

`Abadah ibn al-Samit narrated that As`ad ibn Zurarah shouted, “O people! Do you realize what you are giving Muhammad? You are swearing that you will wage wars against the Arabs and the foreigners and the jinn and mankind.” However, Ansar declared, “We are rivals of his foes and friends of his adherents.” Then they asked the Holy Prophet (S) to speak out his stipulations. He spoke, “You should declare that there is no god but Allah and that I be His messenger, and you should perform prayers, defray the zakat, listen and obey, avoid contending against the people of leadership and protect me as same as you protect your souls and people.”

Husayn ibn `Ali narrated that in al-`Aqabah, Ansar came to pay homage to the Messenger of Allah. `Ali was ordered to acknowledge their homage: “What should they swear for, Allah’s messenger?” asked `Ali. The Holy Prophet (S) instructed, “You should stipulate obedience to the Lord and protection of the Holy Prophet (S) and his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls and progenies.”

The pro-Qurayshite books of Hadith have concentrated on the point of avoiding contending against the people of leadership so as to use it as a proof on depriving Ansar of positions of leadership. On the other hand, they have avoided recording the term of protecting the Holy Prophet (S), his household and progeny as same as they protect their souls, households and progenies since this stipulation disagrees with the benefits of the Qurayshite leaders who attacked and set fire on the house of Fatimah and `Ali because they had objected against the illegal leadership of Abu-Bakr.

Third Evidence

The third evidence is the famous narration of ‘al-Dar.’ Reference books of Tafsir and history refer to this narration as they pass through Allah’s saying,

‘And warn your nearest relations.( 26:214)’

This holy verse indicates that the Lord ordered the Holy Prophet (S) to invite the Hashimites exclusively to the religion at the first stages of the Mission. So, what procedures did the Holy Prophet (S) take in this stage?4 How long did this private invitation last? Was it a number of months or years, until a divine commandment of expanding the Mission was revealed? What was the purport of the divine commandment of dedicating Muhammad’s Prophethood to the Hashimites before it was extended to include people of Quraysh, the Arabs and all humankind? What was the purport of the Qurayshite’s decision of laying siege to the Hashimites who, after the enforcement of this decision, surrounded the Holy Prophet (S) and tolerated that six-year siege? The Hashimites, despite their various classes of faithfulness, showed no weakness at all. What was the purport of the fact that except the Hashimites, none could endure the misfortunes that Muslims had suffered?

During the Battle of Uhud, all Muslims absconded, but the Hashimite struggled alone.

During the Battle of al-Khandaq, no single Muslim had the courage to face the champion who had challenged them, except the Hashimite hero-Imam `Ali (a.s.).

During the Battle of Hunayn, ten thousand Muslims absconded while the Hashimites alone stood firm.

These facts and events suggest a satisfactory explanation for the Hadiths related in Shiite reference books quoting the Holy Prophet (S)’s saying, ‘I have been sent to my household in private and to people in general.’

The aforementioned holy Verse points out that warning the Hashimites was a matter outlined by the Lord. It also refers to the fact that the Holy Prophet (S)’s nominating his successor from among them was a step within that divine plan.

Al-Suyuti, in al-Durr al-Manthur 5/97, records the following:

… `Ali narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations,’ was revealed, the Holy Prophetsummoned me and said, ‘`Ali: Almighty Allah ordered me to warn my nearest relations, but I was depressed since I had realized that they would answer me disgracefully whenever I would call them to this matter. Hence, I tried to evade it until Archangel Gabriel came and threatened my Lord’s chastisement if I would not carry out. Now, I ask you to prepare some food on which you should cook a leg of a sheep and make us a skin of milk. Then, you should invite sons of `Abd al-Muttalib so that I will speak to them and convey this mission.’ I carried out the Holy Prophet (S)’s orders completely and invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men. Abu-Talib, Hamzah, al-`Abbas and Abu-Lahab were also invited. As they all were present, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them the food I had prepared. With his teeth, he incised that piece of meat, threw its parts on the edges of that trencher and said, ‘Here you are, by the Name of Allah.’ They all ate to excess. By Allah I swear, each one ate as much as I had cooked for them all. Then, the Holy Prophet (S) asked me to serve them with that milk. They all drank from that skin. I swear by Allah, each one drank full skin of milk. As soon as the Holy Prophet (S) tried to speak, Abu-Lahab interrupted and said, ‘See how your man cast witchcraft on you.’ Therefore, they left before he could speak to them.

The next day, the Holy Prophet said to me, ‘You saw how that man interrupted me. Today, you should prepare food as same as you did yesterday and invite them again.’ I did the same and invited them, and they came, ate and drank. The Holy Prophet (S) then spoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! By Allah, I do not know an Arab man who can bring to his people a matter better than what I am bearing to you. I am conveying to you the welfare of this world as well as the Hereafter. Almighty Allah has ordered me to invite you to this matter. Who will support me in this affair?’ I was the youngest among them when I shouted, ‘I will,’ but they began to laugh at me and left the place.

Relating the same report to another series of narrators, al-Suyuti says:

…Al-Barra` ibn `Azib narrated that when the Verse, ‘And warn your nearest relations’ was revealed, the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib who were about forty men…etc.

Hence, al-Suyuti interrupts the report at this point so that he would not mention the rest of the Holy Prophet (S)’s words. This style is commonly followed by the pro-Qurayshite reporters as they refer to the Narration of al-Dar, which shows that the Lord and the Holy Prophetselected the successor from among the nearest clan since that day.

Al-Amini, in al-Ghadir 1/207 records the following:

The following is a literal quotation of al-Tabari’s narration that distinguishes the right from the wrong. In Tarikh 2/217 (first edition), he records: … ‘Who will support me in this regard and he will be my brother, successor and inheritor amongst you?’ said the Holy Prophet (S). They all stopped talking when I, the youngest among them, said, ‘I will, Prophet (S) of Allah! I will be your backer in this affair.’ Hence, the Holy Prophet (S) took me from the neck and stated, ‘This is my brother, successor and inheritor. You should listen to and obey him.’ They all went out laughing and saying to Abu-Talib, ‘Well, he orders you to listen to and obey your son.’ [Al-Amini, al-Ghadir; 2/279]

In this very form, Abu-Ja`far al-Iskafi, a Mu`tazilite5 theologist who died in 240, records the same report in Naqd al-`Uthmaniyyah confirming its authenticity: It is also recorded in Burhan al-Din’s Anba` Nujaba` al-Abna` 46-8, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi’l-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida `Imad al-Din al-Dimashqi’s Tarikh 1/116, Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji’s Sharh al-Shifa 3/37 (though he interrupts the last sentences of the narration and says: It is recorded in al-Bayhaqi’s Dala`il al-Nubuwwah and other reference books in authentic documentation), and Ala` al-Din al-Baghdadi’s Tafsir al-Khazin 390, and al-Suyuti’s Jam` al-Jawami` 6/392. On page 397, he also relates the narration to the six famous Hadithists-Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu-Hatam, Ibn Mardawayh, Abu-Na`im and Al-Bayhaqi. Ibn Abi’l-Hadid, in Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, records the same report.

Al-Amini then protests against those who have distorted this narration for sake of seeking the satisfaction of people of Quraysh. Though he records the narration in his Tafsir, al-Tabari, in Tarikh, confuses the last words of the Holy Prophet (S) regarding `Ali (a.s.): “… he then said, ‘This is my brother…’ and so on.” Imitating al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir mentions the narration in the same form.6

From the margin of Bihar al-Anwar 32/272, the following is quoted:

The bond of fraternity between `Ali and the Holy Prophet (S)-that was concluded according to a divine commandment in the beginning of Islam when Almighty Allah revealed the Verse ‘And warn your nearest relations’7-was fallen in a form of a covenant. The Holy Prophet (S) would not betake a brother, representative, associate and successor other than `Ali. Likewise, `Ali would not show any blemish in supporting, backing and advising for the Holy Prophet (S) and the religion. It is as same as Prophet (S) Aaron’s support to Prophet (S) Moses mentioned in the Holy Qur’an. When the Holy Prophet (S) held bonds of fraternity between each couple of his companions, he took in consideration the relationship linking each two.

He fraternized `Umar and Abu-Bakr, `Uthman and `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf, al-Zubayr and `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, `Ubaydah ibn al-Harith and Bilal, Mus`ab ibn `Umayr and Sa`d ibn Abu-Waqqas, Abu-`Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah and Salim the slave of Abu-Hudhayfah and Hamzah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib and Zayd ibn Harithah al-Kalbi.8 At these moments, he said to `Ali, “I swear by Him Who has sent me with the truth that I delayed you so that you will be dedicated to me. For me, your standing is as same as Aaron’s to Moses is. Yet, no Prophet (S) will come after me. You are my brother and successor. You will be with me in my palace in Paradise. If any disputes you, say: I am the servant of Allah and the brother of His Messenger. Except fabricators and liars, none should claim it after you.”9

Likewise, when the Holy Prophet (S) invited the tribes to accept his Mission, none admitted him except the tribe of `Amir ibn Sa`sa`ah. Their spokesman, Bayhara, stated, ‘By Allah I swear, I will overcome the Arabs if I assent to this Qurayshite young man. Providing we will pay homage to you in this matter and Allah will give you victory over your opponents, will you hold us your position thereafter?’ The Holy Prophet (S) answered, ‘This is Allah’s affair. He holds it to whomever He desires.’ ‘We will make our necks the target of whatever is thrown at you and when Allah gives you triumph it goes to others? Nay, we are not in need for your promulgation,’ they answered.10

As a result, supposing the Holy Prophet (S) had not concluded that bond of fraternity and inheritance with `Ali according to a divine commandment, he would not have wasted this opportunity and refuted them in such despairing words while he was in urgent need for the support of such tribes.

Al-Nu`man al-Maghribi, in Daa`im al-Islam 1/15, writes down the following:

We have already recorded the following narration of `Ali: When Almighty Allah revealed the Verse (And warn your nearest relations), the Holy Prophet (S) invited sons of `Abd al-Muttalib to a leg of a sheep and a cup of milk. They were more than forty men. Among them, there were at least ten men who used to have a whole slaughtered animal and drink a large pot of drink. They ate and drank to excess. After that, the Holy Prophetspoke, ‘O sons of `Abd al-Muttalib! Comply with me and you will be kings and rulers of the lands. The Lord selected a successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter for each Prophet (S) that He sent. Which one of you should be my successor, vicegerent, inheritor, brother and supporter?’ They all stopped talking. He passed by them individually, but they all rejected. I was the youngest among them when I answered him, ‘It is I, Allah’s messenger!’ ‘Yes, it is you, `Ali!’ answered the Holy Prophet (S). When they left, Abu-Lahab said to them, ‘He served you with a single leg of a sheep and a cup of milk and you had to excess. This is an enough proof on his sorcery.’ They also laughed at Abu-Talib saying, ‘See how he preferred your son to you.’

Without doubt, the news of the Holy Prophet (S)’s invitation was spread among people of Quraysh as well as the Arabs. They for sure told each other that the ‘new’ Prophet (S) had gathered his relatives and warned them as he invited them to the new religion. He also asked for a supporter and successor, but none accepted except his young cousin; therefore, he betook him as supporter and successor.

The previous three evidences assert that the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession was a matter widely common for people since the earliest stages of his Divine Mission up to the last moments of his life. Furthermore, everybody recognized that Muhammad’s Prophethood was a practical contrivance of a formation of a state governed by him and need for a successor. Hence, all tribes, from a material viewpoint, conceived his mission as a desirable plan that they should take a part in by gaining his promise of handing his leadership over to them.

This leads to the supposition that within the foremost Muslims there were hypocrites attracted by that contrivance, which seemed to be achieving victory in the future. Each of them might look forward to obtaining a leading position in that state. This is the only way by which we can find a suitable interpretation of Allah’s saying revealed in Makkah:

“And We have not made the wardens of the Fire other than angels, and We have not made their number but as a trial for those who disbelieve, that those who have been given the Book may be certain and those who believe may increase in faith, and those who have been the Book and the believers may not doubt, and that those in whose hearts is a disease and the unbelievers may say: What does Allah mean by this parable? Thus does Allah makes err whom He pleases, and He guides whom He pleases, and none knows the hosts of your Lord but He Himself; and this is naught but a reminder to the mortals. 74/31”

From the above, it is hard to believe the chieftains of Quraysh who claimed that Muslims had not discussed the question of the Holy Prophet (S)’s succession during his lifetime, even in a form of lawful or unlawful. Correspondingly, it is unacceptable to conclude that Muslims, who asked the Holy Prophet (S) frequently about their future and narrated several reports in this regard, did not ask him about their next leader.

Notes

1. Al-Tabari, Tarikh 2/84 and Ibn Kathir, al-Sirah 2/158. In al-Ghadir 7/134, the story is related to Ibn Husham, al-Sirah 2/32, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Imad al-Din al-`Amiri, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah 2/3, Zayni Dahlan: al-Sirah 1/302 and Muhammad Hasanayn Haykal, Hayatu Muhammad.

2. Also, Muslim: al-Sahih 6/16, al-Nassa`i’s al-Sunan 7/137, Ibn Majah: al-Sunan 2/957, Ahmad: al-Musnad 5/316, Al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

3. Also, al-Bayhaqi: al-Sunan 8/145.

4. An important topic is to be mentioned in this regard; historians and biographers have attempted to obscure the stage of inviting the Hashimites exclusively and, instead, they have invented the stages of pre-Arqam’s house and post-Arqam’s house, using doubtful and authentic, and irrational and reasonable reports.

5. Mu`tazilah (Arabic: Those Who Withdraw, or Stand Apart) is an Islamic school of speculative theology that flourished in Basrah and Baghdad (8th-10th centuries AD).

6. Ibn Kathir al-Bidayah wa’l-Nihayah 3/40 and Tafsir 3/351.

7. See, for more details, al-Tabari’s Tarikh 2/321, Ibn al-Athir’s al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh 2/24, Abu’l-Fida’s Tarikh 1/116, Ibn Abu al-Hadid Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah 3/254, Ahmad’s al-Musnad 1/159, Jami` al-Jawami` 6/408, and Kanz al-`Ummal 6/401.

8. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/504, al-Muhabbar 70-1 and Al-Baladhiri’s al-Sunan 1/270.

9. Al-Riyad al-Nadirah 2/168 and Kanz al-`Ummal 5/45-6.

10. Ibn Husham’s al-Sirah 1/424, al-Rawd al-Anif 1/264, Bahjat al- Mahafil 1/128, Zayni Dahlan’s 1/302 and al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah; 2/3.


7

8

9

10

11

12

13