Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Shi'ism: Imamate and Wilayat

By Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi

Published by: Al-Ma'arif Books

PO Box 30507, Richmond Hill, Ontario

Canada L4C 3C7

First Edition 1420 / 1999

ISBN 0-920675-11-5

Reproduced with permission by the

Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project team

www.alhassanain.org/english

Table of Contents

Preface 4

Chapter 1: Origin of Shí'ism: Political or Religious? 5

1. Introduction 5

2. The Beginning of Islam 6

3. The Origin of Shí'ism 6

Chapter 2: Self-Censorship in Muslim History 10

A case study of Da'wat dhu 'l-'Ashira 10

1. Introduction 10

2. The First Open Call to Islam 10

3. Why Doesn't Ibn Hishãm Mention this Da'wat? 11

4. Self-Censorship by At-Tabari 12

5. Self-Censorship In Modern Times 13

6. The Isnãd of "Summoning the Family" 15

7. Conclusion 16

Chapter 3: Ghadir Khumm and the Orientalists 17

1. Introduction 17

2. Study of Shí'ism by the Orientalists 17

3. Ghadír Khumm: From Oblivion to Recognition 19

4. Shaban & His New Interpretation 22

5. The Meaning of "Mawla" 25

6. Conclusion 27

Chapter 4: Appointment of 'Ali: Explicit or Implicit? 29

1. Introduction 29

2. The Explicit vs Implicit 30

3. The First Explicit Appointment 31

4. Abu Sufyãn Knew But Others Didn't? 32

5. Why Didn't 'Ali Use These Arguments? 33

The Circumstances: 33

The Opponents: 34

Chapter 5: The Concept of Ahlul Bayt: Tribal or Islamic? 37

1. The Meaning of Ahlul Bayt 37

2. Who Are the "Ahlul Bayt"? 37

3. "Ahlul Bayt Not A Tribal Concept 39

Chapter 6: Wilãyat and Its Scope 42

1. What is Wilãyat? 42

The First Dimension: The Right of Love 42

The Second Dimension: The Spiritual Guidance 42

The Third & Fourth Dimensions: Socio-Political & Universal Authority 43

2. The Universal Wilãyat 44

3. Wilãyat: Spiritual vs Political 46

The Hadíth of 'Abdullãh bin Mas'ûd 48

4. Do Najaf & Qum Have Different Views on The Role of the Imams? 51

5. Is Not Wilãyat Part of the Faith? 53

6. The Final Correction 54

Chapter 7: Knowledge of the Ahlul Bayt 57

1. Introduction 57

2. The Qur'ãn & 'Ilmu 'l-Ghayb 57

3. 'Ilmu 'l-Ghayb of the Prophets 58

4. 'Ilmu 'l-Ghayb of the Imams 59

5. 'Ilmu 'l-Ghayb & Personal Life 63

6. The Concept of "al-Qur'ãn an-Nãtiq" 64

Chapter 8: Conclusion 66

Chapter 9: Bibliography 67

Notes 72

Preface

In the name of Allãh, the Beneficent, the Merciful

O Allãh, send Your blessings upon Muhammad & his Progeny

This treatise deals with some fundamental issues of the Shí'a Islamic faith. Although not all the chapters were written at the same time, they are inter-related and connected by the theme of imãmate and wilãyat of the Imams of Ahlul Bayt. Chapter 2 was written in 1998, chapter 3 in 1990, chapter 4 in 1997, while the first and last three chapters have been written this year. While revising chapter 3, I have added the section 'The Meaning of Mawla' in order to complete the discussion on Ghadír Khumm.

It is hoped that the reader will gain some insight into the Shí'a Islamic point of view on the most fundamental issue that has defined its existence in the past as well as in the present. This book also reflects some issues that are being discussed among some sections of the Shí'a community in North America. Such discussions and debates, at the least, provide the opportunity to further study and clarify the essential beliefs of Shí'a Islam.

May Allãh, subhãnahu wa ta'ãla, bestow upon us the ability to open our hearts to the Divine guidance, and may He lift the veils of academic arrogance and tribal solidarity from our hearts and minds when we see the truth. Amin.

Wa mã tawfíqí illa billãh.

Toronto Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi

12 Rabi II 1420 / 26 July 1999

Chapter 1: Origin of Shí'ism: Political or Religious?

1. Introduction

In the polemical writings of the Sunnis, it is asserted that Sunni Islam is the "Orthodox Islam" whereas Shí'ism is a "heretical sect" that began with the purpose of subverting Islam from within. This idea is sometimes expressed by saying that Shí'ism began as a political movement and later on acquired religious emphasis.

This anti-Shí'a attitude is not limited to the writers of the past centuries, even some Sunni writers of the present century have the same views. Names like Abul Hasan 'Ali Nadwi, Manzûr Ahmad Nu'mãni (both of India), Ihsãn Ilãhi Zahír (of Pakistan), Muhibbu 'd-Dín al-Khatíb and Musa Jãr Allãh (both from Middle East) come to mind.[1] It is not restricted to the circle of those that graduated from religious seminaries and had not been in touch with the so-called academic world. Ahmad Amin (of Egypt) and Fazlur Rahman (of Pakistan) fall in this category.

Ahmad Amin, for example, writes:

"The truth is that Shí'ism is a refuge wherein which everyone who wishes to destroy Islam on account of enmity or envy takes shelter. As such, persons who wish to introduce into Islam the teachings of their Jewish, Christian or Zoroastrian ancestors achieve their nefarious ends under the shelter of this faith."[2]

Fazlur Rahman is an interesting case. After graduating from the Universities of Punjab and Oxford, and teaching at the Universities of Durham and McGill, he worked as the Director of the Central Institute of Islamic Research in Pakistan till 1968. He lost his position as the result of the controversy arising from his view of the Qur'ãn. Then he migrated to the United States and became Professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Chicago. In his famous book, Islam, used as a textbook for undergraduate levels in Western universities, Dr. Fazlur Rahman presents the following interpretation about the origin of Shí'ism:

"After 'Ali's assassination, the Shí'a (party) of 'Ali in Kufa demanded that Caliphate be restored to the house of the ill-fated Caliph. This legitimist claim on behalf of the 'Ali's descendants is the beginning of the Shí'a political doctrine...

"This legitimism, i.e., the doctrine that headship of the Muslim Community rightfully belongs to 'Ali and his descendants, was the hallmark of the original Arab Shí'ism which was purely political...

"Thus, we see that Shí'ism became, in the early history of Islam, a cover for different forces of social and political discontent...But with the shift from the Arab hands to those of non-Arab origin, the original political motivation developed into a religious sect with its own dogma as its theological postulate...Upon this were engrafted old oriental beliefs about Divine light and the new metaphysical setting for this belief was provided by Christian Gnostic Neoplatonic ideas."[3]

He further comments: "This led to the formation of secret sects, and just as Shí'ism served the purposes of the politically ousted, so under its cloak the spiritually displaced began to introduce their old ideas into Islam."[4]

It is in this background that I find it extremely difficult to understand how a learned scholar, from Shí'í background, could echo somewhat similar ideas about the origin of Shí'ism by writing:

"Most of these early discussions on the Imamate took at first sight political form, but eventually the debate encompassed the religious implications of salvation. This is true of all Islamic concepts, since Islam as a religious phenomenon was subsequent to Islam as a political reality."[5]

"From the early days of the civil war in A.D. 656, some Muslims not only thought about the question of leadership in political terms, but also laid religious emphasis on it."[6]

Referring to the support of shi'a of Kufa for the claim of leaders for 'Alids, the learned author writes:

"This support for the leadership of the 'Alids, at least in the beginning, did not imply any religious underpinning...The claim of leadership of the 'Alids became an exaggerated belief expressed in pious terms of the traditions attributed to the Prophet, and only gradually became part of the cardinal doctrine of the Imamate, the pivot on which the complete Shí'ite creed rotates."[7]

After explaining the failures and the martyrdom of the religious leaders who rose against the authorities, he writes:

"This marked the beginnings of the development of a religious emphasis in the role of the 'Alid Imams..."[8]

2. The Beginning of Islam

The Sunnis as well as the Shí'as believe that Islam is primarily a religion whose teachings are not limited to the spiritual realm of human life but also encompass the political aspect of society. Inclusion of political ideals in the religion of Islam does not mean that Islam started or was basically a political movement. Look at the life of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.). The Prophet's mission began in Mecca. There is nothing in the pre-hijra program of the Prophet that looks similar to a political movement. It was primarily and fundamentally a religious movement.

Only after the hijra, when the majority of the people of Medina accepted Islam, the opportunity for implementation of Islamic social order arose and so Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) also assumed the position of the political leader of the society. He signed agreements with other tribes, sent ambassadors to kings and emperors, organized armies and led Muslim forces, sat in judgement, appointed governors, deputees, commanders, and judges, and he also collected and distributed taxes. Nonetheless, Islam was first a religious movement that later on encompassed political aspects of society. So to say that "Islam as a religious phenomenon was subsequent to Islam as a political reality" is historically an incorrect statement.

3. The Origin of Shí'ism

The origin of Shí'ism is not separate from the origin of Islam since the Prophet himself sowed its seed by proclaiming the wisãya (successorship) and khilãfat (caliphate) of 'Ali bin Abí Tãlib in the first open call to Islam that he made in Mecca.

Islam began when the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) became forty years old. Initially, the mission was kept a secret. Then three years after the advent of Islam, the Prophet was ordered to commence the open declaration of his message. This was the occasion when Almighty Allãh revealed the verse "And warn thy nearest relations." (The Qur'ãn 26:214)

When this verse was revealed, the Prophet organized a feast that is known in history as "Summoning the Family - Da'wat dhu 'l-'Ashira". The Prophet invited about forty men from the Banu Hãshim and asked 'Ali bin Abi Tãlib to make arrangements for the dinner. After having served his guests with food and drinks, but the Prophet wanted to speak to them about Islam, Abu Lahab forestalled him and said, "Your host has long since bewitched you." All the guests dispersed before the Prophet could present his message to them.

The Prophet then invited them the next day. After the feast, he spoke to them, saying:

O Sons of 'Abdu 'l-Muttalib! By Allãh, I do not know of any person among the Arabs who has come to his people with better than what I have brought to you. I have brought to you the good of this world and the next, and I have been commanded by the Lord to call you unto Him. Therefore, who amongst you will support me in this matter so that he may be my brother (akhhí), my successor (wasiyyí) and my caliph (khalifatí) among you?

This was the first time that the Prophet openly and publicly called the relations to accept him as the Messenger and Prophet of Allãh; he also uses the words "akhí wa wasiyyí wa khalífatí- my brother, my successor, my caliph" for the person who will aid him in this mission. No one answered him; they all held back except the youngest of them - 'Ali bin Abí Tãlib. He stood up and said, "I will be your helper, O Prophet of God."

The Prophet put his hand on the back of 'Ali's neck and said:

"Inna hadhã akhhí wa wasiyyí wa khalífatí fíkum, fasma'û lahu wa atí'û - Verily this is my brother, my successor, and my caliph amongst you; therefore, listen to him and obey."[9]

This was the first explicit statement because the audience understood the appointment of 'Ali very clearly. Some of them, including Abu Lahab, even joked with Abu Tãlib that your nephew, Muhammad, has ordered you to listen to your son and obey him! At the least, this shows that the appointment of 'Ali bin Abí Tãlib was clear and explicit, not just implied.

After that, the Prophet at various places emphasized the issue of loving his Ahlul Bayt, seeking guidance from them, and drew the attention of the people to the special status that they had in the eyes of God and His Messenger.

Finally, just two months before his death, the Prophet clearly appointed 'Ali in Ghadir Khumm as the leader (religious as well as political) of the Muslims. He said, "Whomsoever's Master I am, this 'Ali is his Master." He also said, "I am leaving two precious things behind, as long as you hold on to them both you will never go astray: the Book of Allãh and my progeny."[10]

A lot has been discussed and written on these events. The reader may refer to the following works in English:

•A Study on the Question of Al-Wilaya by Sayyid Muhammad Bãqir as-Sadr, translated by Dr. P. Haseltine. (This treatise was first translated in India under the appropriate title: "Shí'ism: the Natural Product of Islam".)

•The Origin of Shí'a and Its Principles by Muhammad Husayn Kãshiful Ghitã'.

•Imamate: the Vicegerency of the Prophet by Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi.

•Origins and Early Development of Shí'a Islam by S. Hussain M. Jafri.

•The Right Path by Syed 'Abdulhussein Sharafuddin al-Musawi.

•"The Meaning & Origin of Shí'ism" by Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi in The Right Path, vol.1 (Jan-Mar 1993) # 3.[11]

Anyone who reads these materials will see that the beginning of Islam and Shí'ism was at the same time and that, just like Islam, Shí'ism was a religious movement that also encompassed social and political aspects of society. As Dr. Jafri writes,

"When we analyse different possible relations which the religious beliefs and the political constitution in Islam bear to one another, we find the claims and the doctrinal trends of the supporters of 'Ali more inclined towards the religious aspects than the political ones; thus it seems paradoxical that the party whose claims were based chiefly on spiritual and religious considerations, as we shall examine in detail presently, should be traditionally labelled as political in origin."[12]

It is indeed unthinkable that the famous companions of the Prophet like Salmãn al-Fãrsi and Abu Dharr al-Ghifãri thought of 'Ali primarily as a political leader, and only later on started thinking of him as a religious leader also.

In his academic work, Islamic Messianism, the learned scholar counts the civil war as the beginning of "religious Shí'ism": "From the early days of the civil war in A.D. 656, some Muslims not only thought about the question of leadership in political terms, but also laid religious emphasis on it."[13] But in his article that was presented in a community gathering and published by one of the religious centers, he places the beginning of Shí'ism from the time of Ghadir Khumm. He writes, "The proclamation by the Prophet on that occasion gave rise to the tension between the ideal leadership promoted through the wilaya of Ali ibn Abi Talib and the real one precipitated by human forces to suppress the purposes of Allãh on earth."[14]

This dichotomy between "the academician" and "the believer" is indeed disturbing. May Almighty Allãh grant all workers of the faith the confidence to stand for their faith in all gatherings, of insiders as well as outsiders (fis sirri wa 'l-'alãniyya).

4. The Name "Shí'a"

A follower of Islam is known as "Muslim" whereas a Muslim who believes in Imam 'Ali as the immediate successor and caliph of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) is known as "Shí'a". The term "Shí'a" is a short form of Shí'atu 'Ali - follower of 'Ali".

Muslims take great pride in being affiliated to Prophet Ibrãhím (a.s.), and rightly so. It is also a known fact among Muslims that Prophet Ibrãhím was himself named as a "Muslim" by Almighty Allãh.

"Ibrãhim was neither a Jew nor a Christian but he was a sincere 'Muslim' (one who submits to Allãh), and he was not one of the polytheists." (3:67)

What the people do not notice is that Almighty Allãh has named Prophet Ibrãhím as a "Shí'a" also; of course, not "Shí'a of 'Ali" but "Shí'a of Nûh". He says:

"Peace and salutation be to Nûh in the worlds...and most surely among his followers ('shí'a') is Ibrãhím..." (37:79-83)

So those who call themselves as "Muslims" and "Shí'as" are actually following the tradition established by Almighty Allãh in being called as "followers" of pious believers just as Prophet Ibrãhím has been described as a follower of Prophet Nûh.

* * *

Chapter 2: Self-Censorship in Muslim History

A case study of Da'wat dhu 'l-'Ashira

1. Introduction

Many students of Islamic history begin with the assumption that if an event or a statement has not been reported in the earliest sources of Muslim history or hadith like as-Sirah an-Nabawiyya of Ibn Hishãm or Sahíh of al-Bukhãri, it must be a later fabrication and therefore not credible. They tend to ignore the biases and limitations that are imposed on the writer by the ruling powers as well as by self-inclination. Biases are not only relevant in fabrication of mythical persons, events and statements, they are equally relevant in ignoring and silently bypassing certain historical figures and stories.

This paper intends to examine the way Muslim historians have dealt with the first open call to Islam known as Da'wat dhu 'l-'Ashira.

2. The First Open Call to Islam

Islam began when the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) became forty years old. Initially, the mission was kept a secret. Then three years after the advent of Islam, the Prophet was ordered to commence the open declaration of his message. This was the occasion when Almighty Allãh revealed the verse "And warn thy nearest relations." (26:214)

When this verse was revealed, the Prophet organized a feast that is known in history as "Summoning the Family - Da'wat dhu 'l-'Ashira". The Prophet invited around forty men from the Banu Hãshim and asked 'Ali bin Abi Tãlib to make arrangements for the dinner. After having served his guests with food and drinks, when the Prophet wanted to speak to them about Islam, Abu Lahab forestalled him and said, "Your host has long since bewitched you." All the guests dispersed before the Prophet could present his message to them.

The Prophet then invited them the next day. After the feast, he spoke to them, saying:

O Sons of 'Abdu 'l-Muttalib! By Allãh, I do not know of any person among the Arabs who has come to his people with better than what I have brought to you. I have brought to you the good of this world and the next, and I have been commanded by the Lord to call you unto Him. Therefore, who amongst you will support me in this matter so that he may be my brother (akhhí), my successor (wasiyyí) and my caliph (khalifatí) among you?

This was the first time that the Prophet openly and publicly called the relations to accept him as the Messenger and Prophet of Allãh; he also uses the words "akhí wa wasiyyí wa khalífatí- my brother, my successor, my caliph" for the person who will aid him in this mission. No one answered him; they all held back except the youngest of them - 'Ali bin Abí Tãlib. He stood up and said, "I will be your helper, O Prophet of God."

The Prophet put his hand on the back of 'Ali's neck and said:

"Inna hadhã akhhí wa wasiyyí wa khalífatí fíkum, fasma'û lahu wa atí'û - Verily this is my brother, my successor, and my caliph amongst you; therefore, listen to him and obey."[15]

This was a very explicit statement because the audience understood the appointment of 'Ali very clearly. Some of them, including Abu Lahab, even joked with Abu Tãlib that your nephew, Muhammad, has ordered you to listen to your son and obey him! At the least, this shows that the appointment of 'Ali bin Abí Tãlib was clear and explicit, not just implied.

3. Why Doesn't Ibn Hishãm Mention this Da'wat?

One of the questions raised in relation to this issue is why 'Abdu 'l-Malik Ibn Hishãm (d. 213 AH) does not mention this event in his as-Sirah an-Nabawiyya - The Biography of the Prophet? After all, he is the earliest of all historians.

What is known as the Sirah of Ibn Hishãm is actually the summary of the book of Muhammad Ibn Ishãq (born in 85 AH in Medina and died in 151 AH in Baghdad). The unabriged version of Ibn Ishãq's history book does not exist anymore. So the question has to be reformulated: "Did Ibn Ishãq mention the Summoning of the Family event?"

The political considerations that influenced Ibn Hishãm in deleting certain events and maintaining others is clear from his own statement. While listing the items that he has omitted, Ibn Hishãm writes, "...things which it is disgraceful to discuss; matters which would distress certain people...all these things I have omitted."[16] Editors of the 1955 Egyptian edition of the Sirah write that Ibn Ishãq had quoted events that would not have pleased the 'Abbãsids "like the participation of al-'Abbãs with the infidels in the battle of Badr and his capture by the Muslims-the narration that Ibn Hishãm later on omitted out of the fear of the 'Abbãsids."[17]

Praises of Imam 'Ali bin Abi Tãlib, especially the traditon of dãr, were among the items that Ibn Hishãm has deleted in summarizing the Sirah of Ibn Ishãq. "The tradition of dãr" is about the Summoning of the Family event mentioned above.

The fact that Ibn Ishãq had mentioned the Summoning of the Family can be seen through those who have narrated events from Ibn Ishãq by sources other than Ibn Hishãm. For example, at-Tabari (d. 310 AH) narrates the same event through Ibn Ishãq. Shaykh Abu Ja'far at-Tûsi (d. 460 AH) also narrates the same event through two different chains of narrators: one of those two is on the authority of Ibn Ishãq through at-Tabari.[18]

This clearly shows that what has come to be recognized as the earliest and the most authentic historical account is not free from bias in ignoring certain events and in narrating others.

Ibn Ishãq himself has been accused of having Shí'ite leanings. If true, this could be one of the considerations that prompted Ibn Hishãm to omit the items that he thought supported the Shí'ite cause. However, al-Khatíb al-Baghdãdi in Ta'ríkh Baghdãd and Ibn Sayyidi 'n-Nãs in 'Uyûnu 'l-Athar, both Sunni historians, have defended Ibn Ishãq against all kinds of accusations including that of having Shí'ite leanings.[19]

4. Self-Censorship by At-Tabari

The case of Muhammad bin Jarír at-Tabari (d. 310 AH) is even more interesting. The event of Da'wat dhi 'l-'Ashira given above is based on the version of at-Tabari's monumental work in history: Ta'ríkhu 'l-Umam wa 'l-Mulûk. At-Tabari has also authored a famous commentary of the Qur'ãn: Jãmi'u 'l-Bayãn 'an Ta'wíl Ãyai 'l-Qur'ãn. It is interesting to compare the history of at-Tabari with his Qur'ãnic commentary in relation to the present topic.

In his Ta'ríkh, at-Tabari has quoted the words used by the Prophet for 'Ali in the Feast in its entirety:

"akhhí wa wasiyyí wa khalífatí:

my brother, my successor, my caliph."[20]

But in his at-Ta'wíl (vol. 19, p. 74), while discussing the relevant verse in which the Prophet was ordered to call his relations to Islam, at-Tabari exercises self-censorship and has concealed the clear and the explicit impact of the Prophet's words by recording it as follows:

"akhhi wa kadha wa kadha:

my brother, and so-and-so, and so-and-so."

Ibn Kathír, another famous Damascene author of al-Bidãyah wa an-Nihãyah (vol. 3, p. 40), has used the Ta'ríkh of at-Tabari as his main reference. However, when he comes to the event of the Feast, he abandons the Ta'ríkh of at-Tabari and uses the altered version of Jãmi'u 'l-Bayãn of at-Tabari! This is not surprising since it is known that Ibn Kathír had anti-Shí'a sentiments.

5. Self-Censorship In Modern Times

A modern writer of Egypt, Dr. Muhammad Husayn Haykal, wrote a famous book on the Prophet's biography known as Hayãt Muhammad. Haykal had first published the Prophet's biography in his weekly paper as-Siyãsa. The event of the Feast was published in the supplement of issue # 2751 (12 Dhu 'l-Qa'dah 1350) p. 5, column 2. One of his critics wrote a letter to the paper accusing Haykal of using Shí'ite sources for that statement about Imam 'Ali. Haykal responds to this accusation in the supplement of issue # 2758, p. 6, column 4, by denying that he used a Shí'ite source "since all traditions do speak of this behaviour of 'Ali;" and quotes the hadith from Sahíh of Muslim, Musnad of Ahmad and others.[21]

Haykal resisted the pressure to omit the Prophet's statement about 'Ali when the biography was finally printed in a book form. In the first edition of Hayãt Muhammad, Haykal narrates the event of the Feast as follows:

"...When they had finished eating, he [the Prophet] said to them, 'I do not know any person among the Arabs who has come to his people with something better than what I have come to you; I have come to you with the best of this world and the hereafter. My Lord has ordered me to call you unto him.

"'So who among you will help me in this matter, so that he may be my brother, my successor, and my caliph among you?'

"All of them turned away from him and wanted to leave him but 'Alí stood up although he was still a child who had not reached maturity and said, 'O Messenger of Allãh, I shall be your helper! I will help you against whomsoever you fight.' The Banu Hãshim smiled, some of them laughed, and their eyes moved from Abu Tãlib to his son; and then they left in the state of ridicule."[22]

Haykal has quoted the important words in the initial statement of the Prophet asking for support; but conveniently left out the Prophet's entire response to 'Ali's readiness to help him!

In the second edition, Haykal seems to have given into the pressure of the bigots and even deleted the crucial words of the Prophet and just wrote: "...he said to them, '...So who among you will help me in this matter? All of them turned away from him..."[23]

This clearly shows that he doesn't doubt the actual "Summoning of the Family" event but he lacked the intellectual courage to stand by the logical conclusion of his initial findings in the study of history.

6. The Isnãd of "Summoning the Family"

The opponents of the Shí'a view naturally have tried to question the credibility of some of the narrators of this famous event.

Ibn Taymiyya, well known for his anti-Shí'a sentiments, has adamantly declared it to be a fabricated hadíth. He has attacked the credibility of 'Abd al-Ghaffãr bin al-Qãsim known as Abu Maryam al-Kufi.[24] Abu Maryam is the source of Ibn Ishãq in narrating the event of "Summoning the Family". However, the only basis for questioning the credibility of Abu Maryam is his Shi'a links; but, as any unbiased person knows, that is not a sufficient ground to reject his narration. Shi'a biographers of narrators have counted him among the reliable narrators of hadíth from the fourth, fifth, and sixth Shi'a Imams (a.s.).[25]

Salma bin al-Fadhl (d. 191), the foremost disciple of Ibn Ishãq, is also recognized as credible in narrating the Prophet's biography from his master. He is quoted as saying, "I have heard the al-Maghãzi from Ibn Ishãq two times;" and he is well known among the scholars of hadith for historical narration from Ibn Ishãq.[26] According to Mutã' at-Tarãbíshí, Salma bin al-Fadhl's narration of historical nature are accepted by all.[27] Ibn Mu'ín says, "Salma [bin al-Fadhl] al-Abrash ar-Rãzi was a Shí'i as already written and there is no defect in him... Abu Zuhra says, 'The people of Ray did not like him because of his undesirable [i.e., Shi'í] beliefs.'"[28] Adh-Dhahabi writes the following about Salma: "He was steadfast in prayer and full of humility in his beliefs; he died in 191 A.H."[29]

Shaykh Salím al-Bishri had raised the issue why al-Bukhãri and Muslim do not mention this tradition in their Sahíhs. Sharafu 'd-Dín al-Musawi responded as follows:

"The tradition conflicts with the views of the two Shaykhs, Bukhari and Muslim, in respect of the Caliphate and that is why they have not recorded it in their Sahíhs. They have also scrupulously avoided recording a number of other genuine traditions which stipulated the Caliphate in favor of Amir al-Mu'minín lest the same serve as a weapon in the hands of the Shí'as, and so intentionally concealed the truth. Not only Bukhari and Muslim but also many other Shaykhs (i.e., senior traditionists) among the Ahl al-Sunnah followed this practice...They used to conceal everything of this nature and are well known for their creed of concealment of facts (favoring 'Ali and the Ahl al-Bayt). Hafiz Ibn Hajar has related this from them in Fath al-Bãri...

"Anyone who knows the behaviour of Bukhari towards Amir al-Mu'minín and other members of the Ahl al-Bayt also knows that his pen invariably omits mentioning the clear traditions of the Holy Prophet in their favor, and that his ink dries up before relating their distinguished, excellent qualities and one will not be surprised at his skipping over this and other similar traditions. There is neither might nor power but by Allah, the High and the Great."[30]

7. Conclusion

This brief review on the self-censorship that was exercised by the early historians and compilers of hadíth proves that absence of an event in the well known "early" books of Islamic history and hadíth does not necessarily mean that that event is a later invention by the Shí'as or is not considered credible. One must go beyond the artificial limits of "early" and official history of the Muslim people and also study the other "non-orthodox" sources to fully comprehend the real life drama that unfolded in the early days of the history of Islam.

* * *