Hadith-e-Tayr: The Tradition of the Bird
The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said,
“O Allah! Send me the one who loves You and loves me most from Your creatures so that he may share with me this (roasted) bird.” Then Ali (a.s.) came and shared the meal with him.
This hadith is recorded in all the Sihah. The majority of Muslims have accepted this hadith to be reliable. The full hadith is as follows: One day a lady brought a roasted bird for the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.). Before he could partake it, the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) prayed to the Almighty: “O Allah! Send to me one who is most loved by You and who loves me and You the most. So that he may accompany me in relishing this roasted bird.” In the due course, Ali (a.s.) came and shared the meal (with the Prophet).
No Shia and Sunni scholar has omitted this hadith in his writings. There is no doubt in the proof of the superiority of this hadith. For the sake of clarity let us observe some important conclusion derived from this: Did the Almighty answer the Prophet's prayer or did He reject it? Indeed the Almighty Allah always fulfilled the wishes and prayers of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). In this case the Almighty sent the favorite of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and Himself to share the roasted bird. This person was none but Hazrat Ali ibne abi Talib (a.s.).
Nevertheless some skeptics ask, 'Is it necessary that the most beloved of Allah and Prophet (s.a.w.a.), has to be the most superior?' Indeed, leaving the superior one to prefer the inferior is not expected from common people, so how could it be possible by Allah and the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)? If one is the most beloved of the Almighty and the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), it is necessary that he be the best of all the people. In this way Ali (a.s.) was the best of the creatures.
Hadith-e-Muwakhaat: Tradition of Brotherhood
This tradition has been recorded by Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal from Zaid bin Awfa, the writer of Mishkat from Ibne Umar, by Tirmidhi from Ibn Abi Awfa, Abdullah bin Ahmad Hanbal from Saeed bin Jubair, Ahmad from Abu Huzaifah Yamani, Nawfal from Jabir bin Abdullah, Hamveeni from Ibne Abbas, Akrama from Ibne Abbas and Zaid bin Arqam, Saeed bin Musayyib and Abi Umamah from Jumee bin Umayr. All the Shia and Sunni scholars have accepted the hadith of brotherhood. The writer of Mishkatul Anwaar and others, like the great Shaykh Muhiyuddin Arabi has certified it in his book Musamera. So much so that there hasn't been a single person to cast aspersions on this matter. The meaning of the hadith is as follows: At the time the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had established ties of brotherhood between the companions, Ali (a.s.) was seated near him. Ali (a.s.) said: O Messenger of Allah! You have made all the people brother of one or the other but you have not specified any person for my brotherhood?” The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said:
“O Ali! You are my brother in this world and the hereafter.” The tradition is worded as follows: “O Ali! You are my brother in the world and the hereafter. And you are my legatee and you are the one who would fulfill my promise and the one who would repay my debts.” Let us now consider the effect of this hadith on the proof of the superiority of Hazrat Ali (a.s.).
Did the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) announce this brotherhood from his own side or was it a divine command? Obviously it was by Allah's command because any announcement from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is not possible without Allah's permission.”
“Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed.” (Surah Najm: 3-4)
In the event of establishing brotherhood, does the person chosen for the brotherhood of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has to be the most superior of the Ummah or it could be some inferior one? Indeed anyone chosen as the brother of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) has to be the best of the creatures because the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had announced brotherhood among the companions, keeping in mind their compatibility and matching status. In this way it was necessary that Ali (a.s.) had to be the most superior of the Ummah.
Hadith Madinatul Ilm: Tradition of the City of Knowledge
he Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said,
“I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate.” None among the Ummah has rejected this hadith because it is well known and reliable among all Muslims and bears utmost importance in proving his superiority.
So, please note that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said, “I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate.” What is the importance of this prophetic saying? What was the aim of this lofty personality? Yes! It is well known that whenever a person intends to enter a city, he has to come through the door and any other alternative will be considered illegal. Likewise, the followers of Islam are in need of the knowledge and wisdom of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) for the good of their world and the hereafter. And the key to this gate of mercy is Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.). In this way, if anyone wishes to benefit from the knowledge and wisdom of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), it is necessary that he make Ali (a.s.) the channel, because to enter a great town without going through the proper entrance is both difficult and illogical. Similarly it is senseless to derive any gain from the traditions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) without the medium of Amirul Momineen (a.s.). Yes! This is a general principle! Rationality and traditions do not contradict each other in proving this principle.
Thus there remains no scope to deny that Muslims are in need of Ali's knowledge and wisdom. Ali (a.s.) is the source of (explanation of) the Shariah as well as Marefat (Divine Recognition). Hadith-e-Zarbat: Tradition of the Sword-strike The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said:
“A sword strike of Ali (a.s.) on the battle of Khandaq (ditch) was superior to the combined worship of men and jinns till the day of Qiyamat.” Thus it is clear that on the day of recompense, the reward of the combined worship of all men and jinn will be one side and, leave alone the total deeds, a single sword strike of Ali (a.s.) on Amr ibne Abdawod will be more superior. If at all a little thought is given to the correctness of this hadith, everything will be clear.
Let us try to understand this tradition. The day of Khandaq (ditch) is referred in Quran as the day of the confederates (Ahzaab). All the polytheistic tribes joined hands with the infidels of Quraysh to wage a war against the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). The best warriors were gathered for this purpose. The holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) found it difficult to confront the great might and he ordered a ditch to be dug around Madinah. Well-known warriors and fighters were present among the infidels, the most famous being Amr ibne Abdawod.
Amr jumped into the ditch with his horse and challenged the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) sought the permission of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) but he did not immediately permit; just for the sake of testing his companions. Amr challenged again, tauntingly. The companions remained silent! Once again Ali (a.s.) requested the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) to allow him to accept the challenge of Amr. The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) again refused permission to check the reaction of other companions. In the meantime, Amr began to recite the war poems (Rajaz) in his own praise! After getting permission from the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), Ali (a.s.) wore the Prophet's turban, tied the Prophet's sword to his waist and jumped in the battlefield in fury.
The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) said, “Faith personified is facing disbelief incarnate.” Thus, faith and disbelief faced each other and the Lion of God slew Amr. Faith triumphed over infidelity.
“A single sword strike of Ali (a.s.) on the day of ditch is superior to the combined worship of Jinn and men till the day of Qiyamat.” Yes! It was possible that if Ali's sword hadn't been there, Amr ibn Abdawod might have destroyed the foundation of nascent Islam. Of what use had been the combined worship acts of men and jinn? Thus they are right who give Ali (a.s.) the title, “The second founder of Islam.”
But Alas! How sad! What happened in the Ummah was just the opposite. And this controversial behavior resulted in great calamities. Astonishing! Why did such a tragic situation develop? Apart from the traditions quoted, there are thousands of authentic traditions that are accepted by all Muslims and considered reliable by them. We do not see any need to quote all such ahadith, reports and verses. Rather the superiority of Ali (a.s.) is proved for all the Ummah. If at all we try to present all the traditions and Quranic verses in favor of the superiority of Ali (a.s.), even a book equal to the size of Qamoos Al-Lughat or Qamoos al-A'laam will not suffice. Rather a book of the size of Qamoos al-Uloom or a multi-volume book like Dairatul Ma'rif would be required. The apt name of such a book would be Al-Behrul Zakhair fi Khizril Jawahir. But the matter that we are discussing and one which we consider important is as follows: Ahmad bin Abde Rabb, a well-known and established scholar of Ahle-Sunnat, in the third volume of his book, Iqdul Farid, under the heading of “Discussion of Mamoon with the scholars of Baghdad regarding the superiority of Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.),” mentions as to how Mamoon, the Abbasid caliph, debated with the scholars of Baghdad regarding the superiority of Ali (a.s.).
Ibne Abde Rabb has recorded the complete debate in his book and this humble writer presents the gist of the same. Ibne Abde Rabb relates that Ishaq bin Ibrahim bin Ismail bin Hammad bin Zaid, who was among the well-known scholars and jurists of Baghdad, said, “One day Yahya bin Aksam, a judge of Haroon Rashid's time, came to my house and said, 'The caliph has ordered that forty scholars of Baghdad be selected for a debate and discussion on religious problems and Shariat. So could you suggest some names that I can note down?” Ismail bin Hamad says that I mentioned some names but Yahya only jotted down the scholars regarding whose caliber he was certain. At last forty names were listed. Yahya took their word to report at his house early the next morning. They arrived at Yahya's place and recited their morning prayers there. In reply to our question Yahya said, “The caliph has invited you forty gentlemen to discuss and debate an important matter.” In due course we departed to the Caliph's palace and entered his presence and seated ourselves by his permission. Mamoon was dressed in a resplendent garment while the people wore black.
When we sat down, the caliph took off his turban and robe and ordered us to do the same so that we are comfortable. He ordered many kinds of luxuries to make us feel at ease. Thereafter, he asked us questions regarding the rules of Shariah and we replied to the questions accordingly. Finally, the caliph said, “The purpose of our calling you all here was not this; we have invited you to prove an important matter by discussion.”
And he said, “I am Mamoon the Caliph, the follower of Islam and I consider Hazrat Ali to be the most superior among all creatures and most deserving of caliphate. I invite all of you to accept this belief and to express your opinion here.”
Ishaq bin Ibrahim says, “I said: Caliph! Please tell us why you consider Ali (a.s.) most superior so that others may also know about it.” Acceding to the request, Mamoon said, “O Ishaq! What factors prove superiority? In other words, what qualities are required to establish the preeminence of a person over another?” “Good deeds are very much necessary,” replied Ishaq. “What was the best deed on the day the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) invited people to Islam?” the Caliph asked. Ishaq said: “Sincerity in testimony is most superior for it had preference over Islam.”
“It is correct,” said the Caliph, “Wasn't Ali bin Abi Talib the foremost in accepting Islam?” Ishaq said, “Yes! But at that time he was not mature (baligh). The first matured person to accept Islam was Abu Bakr.” Upon this, Mamoon said, “Did Ali accept Islam due to divine inspiration (ilhaam) or on the Prophet's invitation?”
Ishaq says, 'I became immersed in deep thought.' Mamoon said, “O Ishaq. You can't say that he accepted it by Ilham, because revelation had descended only upon the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.). You must say that Ali (a.s.) entered the fold of Islam upon invitation of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).” The Caliph repeated, “Ishaq, did the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) not impose a duty on a young child who was not yet capable of carrying it out?” Ishaq says: I again sunk into the ocean of thoughts while the caliph said, “Allah has said: And I am not of the Mutakallafeen. That is I do not impose duties on those who are incapable of fulfilling them. So it is clear that Ali (a.s.) entered the fold of Islam at an age when he was mature enough to bear responsibilities. Ishaq said: The caliph repeated the question, “O Ishaq! Have your scholars and jurists written and recorded traditions to prove the superiority of anyone in the way they have written about Ali (a.s.)?”
Ishaq said, “Traditions indicating the superiority of Ali (a.s.) easily outnumber others.” Mamoon further said, “Are the traditions in support of the superiority of Abu Bakr comparable to the reports indicating the superiority of Ali (a.s.)?” Ishaq said, “No, they are not as much.” The caliph again asked, “Are all the traditions in praise of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman put together equal to the merits of Ali (a.s.)?” “They are not equal,” they confessed. On this juncture the caliph asked, “Do you read the Quran?”
“I do,” said Ishaq. The caliph asked, “Have you not read Surah Hal Ataa (also called as Surah Dahr)?” Ishaq said, “I began to recite the surah till I reached, “And they give food out of love for Him to the poor and the orphan and the captive.” (Verse 8) The Caliph asked, “O, Ishaq, regarding whom was this verse revealed?” Ishaq said, “For Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.).” Mamoon said, “Do you know the hadith of those who were given the glad tidings of Paradise?” “Yes, I know”, he replied. Mamoon said, “Wouldn't a person who doubts this hadith become a disbeliever?” Ishaq said, “God forbid! He will not be a disbeliever because it is a solitary report.” He said, “O Ishaq! What would happen to a person who doubts Surah Hal Ata?”
“He would become a disbeliever,” Ishaq replied. Mamoon said, “Then how do you give preference to solitary doubtful report in comparison to a clear and manifest verse of the Holy Quran?” Ishaq says, 'I became silent'. The caliph asked another question, “Are you familiar with the Hadith-e-Tayr (Tradition of the roasted bird)?” He said, “Yes I know”, and recited the hadith. Caliph asked, “Is this hadith authentic?” “It is authentic,” they all replied in unison. He said, “O Ishaq, did the Almighty accept the Prophet's prayer?” I said, “God forbid! He did not reject it! He accepted it.” Mamoon said, “In such an such event did the Almighty answer the Prophet's prayers and sent His most beloved creature to share the bird which was gifted to him? “Yes,” replied Ishaq. Mamoon said, “O Ishaq! Who was sent in response to the prayer of the Prophet (s.a.w.s) to partake the roasted bird?” Ishaq said, “It was Ali (a.s.).” Again Mamoon asked, “O Ishaq! Did the Almighty and the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) know who the most superior person of the Ummah was?” “Yes, they were aware of it,” replied Ishaq.
Mamoon asked, “In the event of the Almighty and the Prophet knowing the most superior person of Ummah would they give him preference or not?” Ishaq said, “They preferred the most superior one.” Mamoon said, “In this way Ali (a.s.) was the most superior of all creatures.”
Ishaq said, “But Abu Bakr also possessed merits. Mamoon said, “He had but here we intend to prove the most superior one! Nevertheless, tell me what merit of Abu Bakr you intended?” Ishaq said, “The fortieth verse of Surah Taubah says:
He being the second of the two, when they were both in the cave, when he said to his companion: Grieve not, surely Allah is with us. (Surah Taubah: 40) The caliph said, “Companionship does not prove superiority, because it is possible that the two people have contrary beliefs. Have you not seen the verse? “His companion said to him while disputing with him.” (Surah Kahf: 37) Ishaq said: This verse is important because it says, “Do not grieve, indeed Allah is with us.” The caliph said, “O Ishaq! I thought you preferred truth and were free of all bias. But now that you have come to rebellion and bias, tell me if the grief of Abu Bakr was from Allah or from his own side? In case you say it was from Allah, why did the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) told him to desist from it? If you say it was of his own what was his merit?”
Ishaq said, “The verse, “Then Allah sent down peace” is revealed in the Quran.” The Caliph asked, “On who did the Almighty send peace, the Prophet (s.a.) or Abu Bakr?” Ishaq said: I said, “Peace descended on the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).” Mamoon said, “In the 26th verse of Surah Tauba the Almighty says: Allah sent down His tranquility upon His Apostle and upon the believers. Do you know who were the recipients of peace along with the Prophet (s.a.)?” Ishaq said, “O caliph! You tell us.” Mamoon said, “During the Battle of Hunain, all the companions were routed due to their flight from the battlefield. Only seven persons from Bani Hashim remained with the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib was holding the rein holy Prophet's (s.a.w.a.) camel. And five people surrounded the Prophet. Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) was fighting the infidels single handedly. If it is so, then peace descended only upon the Messenger of Allah (s.a.) and on Ali ibn Ibne Talib (a.s.).
Ishaq said: “This has become clear to all of us and we accept your argument.” Mamoon again asked, “O Ishaq! After the sincere acceptance of belief, the next great deed is Jihad. Do you know anyone equal to Ali (a.s.) with regard to Jihad? Ishaq said, “I asked which battle you mean? Let us consider Badr.” Mamoon said, “How many infidels were killed at Badr.” “Sixty two,” replied Ishaq.
The caliph asked, “Of these how many were slain at the hands of Ali (a.s.)?” “Twenty of them were killed by Ali (a.s.) alone,” replied Ishaq, “And the rest were collectively killed by the companions.” At this juncture Mamoon asked, “Shall I give the example from the battle of Hunain?” “Yes,” replied Ishaq. The Caliph said, “The companions were defeated in the battle of Hunain. Only seven people remained. It was only Ali (a.s.) who faced the infidels. Where were the rest of the companions?” Ishaq said, “At that time Abu Bakr was in conference with the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).” Mamoon said, “Was the Prophet (s.a.) in need of Abu Bakr's advice regarding that matter?” Ishaq said, “Whatever the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did was based on revelation and he was not in need of anyone's advice.” Now Mamoon said, “In case there was no necessity of advice or interference of Abu Bakr and other companions, what was the difference whether a person was a warrior or not?”
Ishaq said: I said, “Anyone who is present in a battle qualifies for reward, whether he fights or not.” Mamoon said, “Ishaq! Don't you see that the Almighty says in Holy Quran: “Allah has made the strivers with their property and their persons to excel the holders back a (high) degree.. (Surah Nisa: 95) Ishaq said, 'I could offer no reply'. But Mamoon continued, “Are you familiar with Hadith-e-Mawaddah?” Ishaq said, “Yes,” and related the text of the hadith exactly as it is. Mamoon said, “This hadith clearly proves that while none has a right of Wilayat over Ali (a.s.), the Wilayat of Ali (a.s.) will be obligatory forever upon all the people including Abu Bakr and Umar. In this way how is it possible, O Ishaq, what can make anyone excel Ali (a.s.)?” Ishaq said: Since I could not reply to this objection I remained silent. Mamoon again said by way of argument, “O Ishaq! Do you know about Hadith-e-Manzilah?” “Yes,” replied Ishaq.
Mamoon said, “Do you know that Haroon was the real and blood brother of Hazrat Moosa (a.s.)?” “Yes, I know,” replied Ishaq. Mamoon said, “And you also know that brotherhood existed between Ali bin Abi Talib and the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)?” “Yes, I know,” replied Ishaq. Mamoon said, “What other position did Haroon have with Moosa?” Ishaq said, “The position of legatee and vicegerency.” Now Mamoon said, “The relation of Ali (a.s.) with the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was not but of Vicegerency and legatee.”
Ishaq relates: We, the forty selected scholars of Baghdad had no way but to agree to the absolute reality. We all accepted this inwardly and outwardly. But Mamoon looked towards the sky and said, “O my God, be a witness that I have proved the superiority and Wilayat (guardianship) of Ali ibne Abi Talib and invited the people to the right path but only You are the Guide.”
The humble writer Qazi Bahjat says: The report of Allamah Ibne Abde Rabb is famous among the jurists of Ahle Sunnat. It is mentioned in the third volume of his book Iqdul Farid pg. 37 under the heading: Discussion of Mamoon with the scholars of Baghdad.
But here it is necessary to clarify a few points. Firstly: Though Mamoon proved the superiority of Ali (a.s.), at the same time, he oppressed the eighth grandson of Ali (a.s.), Imam Reza (a.s.) to such an extent that ultimately he caused the Muslim nation to mourn from the great Imam (a.s.). Yes! How effective and lightning is the role of history in depicting the evil deeds and crimes.
What Mamoon had said was correct: Allah is the only One to guide. Secondly: According to the report of Ibne Abde Rabb, among the people present in the assembly of Mamoon were forty accomplished scholars of that time who witnessed the debate and discussion. Now we have a question: In such clear matters, which are easily comprehended even by the masses, how is it that the learned scholars of the centre of learning (Baghdad) were in need of the debate of Mamoon to understand it? Actually, if there is an important problem, it is the duty of the religious scholars to solve it for the public. It was not the duty of Mamoon because after all the scholars were the religious judges, and not Mamoon, who was a military and dynastic ruler.
Pity! Indeed, a great pity! In order to conceal the obvious realities, elaborate mazes have been constructed for the succeeding generations so that even now people are confused and can't reach the truth. Yes! Many accomplished scholars who were in cahoots with the ruler and caliphs of their time in order to fulfill their desires issued numerous religious decrees. In this the helpless ummah was continuously subjected to eat the poisonous fruits of the evil trees.
Thirdly: The well-known book Aqaid Nasafi, after the mention of Caliphs in a serial order says: “The superiority of Ali (a.s.) was according to the order of the Caliphate.” That is, the first Caliph was superior to the second the second to the third and the third superior to the fourth. According to Nasafi, the status and position in the eyes of Allah is according to the choice of the people and according to the order of Caliphate! Please note how illogical this statement is! It is nothing but a rigid dogma thrust upon us. If it were true, the first caliph would have been superior to the second one, and the second superior to the third and third superior to Amirul Momineen Ali ibne Abi Talib (a.s.)! This view is absolutely absurd and false!
This book, Aqaid Nasafi is the work of Allamah Nasafi a well-known Sunni scholar. This humble writer was also a Sunni and had been a religious judge of the Hanafi School of jurisprudence. He had studied the book of Nasafi in detail many times and also regularly taught it to students. In spite of this he refutes the views expressed therein and hopes that the readers must not object to his opinion at first glance and must not say that he is against the opinion of past senior scholars. For, the sayings of senior scholars are not the ultimate proof for us except if they are proved with or supported by authentic arguments and reliable documentation.
Now this servant will disprove the statement that superiority is based on the order of Caliphate. It is a statement without any proof and foundation. Yes, Nasafi says, “Superiority is based on the order of succession.” Meaning that the merit and status of the caliphs was based on the order in which they were made caliphs!
But yours truly demands proof for this statement. Blind following is vulgar, and dogmatism an ignorant act! In order to prove any article of Islamic act, it is necessary to support it with a concrete proof because to prove a command without argument is first of all a useless pursuit. Secondly it is preference without reason, and in this there are two problems.
In order to establish a decree, two kinds of proofs may be given: Rational and traditional. But a rational proof is not independent of a traditional evidence, whereas the latter alone can establish an Islamic law. We have thus proved through arguments based on reason that Ali (a.s.) was the superior most person. Readers are requested to refer to the preceding discussion. Secondly there are the traditional proofs about which the Muslim nation has no doubt whatsoever and they are accepted by all without exception: The first of these are the verses of Holy Quran and secondly the prophetic traditions. Other sources of Islamic laws like Qiyas, Ijtehad and Ijma are beyond the scope of our discussion. The verses of holy Quran say:
Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives. …to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! And to purify you a (thorough) purifying. In this book we were content to quote only two verses of the Holy Quran, one of which has made it compulsory for the Muslims to love Ali (a.s.), his pure spouse Fatima Zahra (s.a.) and their two sons (a.s.). It is not possible to imagine anyone else possessing such a merit. The second verse has certified the purity and infallibility of the 'Ahle Kisa' (people of the cloak). They were five in all, Ali (a.s.) being one of them; that is, he was next to the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Whatever merits were present in the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), the same should be expected to be present in Ali (a.s.). Such as the virtues of infallibility and inerrancy were parts of the personality of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). It is such a merit that nothing greater is possible in human beings.
Now let us consider the traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.): Indeed one kind of the traditional proofs is the traditions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). We have mentioned the traditions that prove the superiority of Ali (a.s.) and are accepted by the Muslims. All the scholars have accepted their authenticity. But since it is not possible to quote all such traditions, we are content to quote only a few of them; mainly those recorded in the books of Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari. These traditions conclusively prove that Ali (a.s.) was the most superior personality of the Ummah. Also from the aspect of the art of argumentation, it is confirmed that a proof is not higher to the thing that it proves.
Apart from this we have delved further into our study and quoted the discussion of Mamoon with the scholars of Baghdad. In this discussion, Mamoon succeeded in proving the superiority of Ali (a.s.) to the scholars present in the assembly. It was age of religious Scholars and jurists of the Ahle Sunnat. Especially the period of Scholars like Abu Yusuf Muhammad bin Hasan Shaibani, Rafar, Shafei, Ahmad bin Hanbal etc, who were the religious judges of their time and jurisprudence was developed by them.
Here, we would like to pose a query to rational and judicious people: On what proof has Allamah Nasafi based his assertion? Any claim without proof is nothing but dogmatism. What merit was not present in Ali (a.s.) that was found in some other person and that could make him superior to Ali (a.s.)? There was no such merit and reason and tradition both testify to it.
The statement of Allamah Nasafi that superiority of the Caliphs is in the order of succession is a claim without proof and a dictum without evidence. Let us consider this in detail: Yes! We see that so and so is a learned person and such and such is Caliph while another one is a King. As these qualities are obvious and can been seen and heard, you decide and pass a judgment on them. But to say that a certain person is superior to another is a difficult claim because if superiority denotes nearness to Allah and the reward of the hereafter, then only Allah is aware of such a person. We human beings are not at all qualified to make such announcements (as it is beyond the scope of our limited knowledge). However if Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) have issued such statements in favor of a certain person, we have to believe in it. For in this case, it is the knowledge and assertion of Allah, and we are only acting upon it.
If in case superiority implies the fulfillment of some deeds like sincere testimony to the oneness of God, fighting jihad for the sake of Allah and possessing extensive knowledge, piety and nearness to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), then from all these aspects, we have proved that Ali (a.s.) was way ahead of the people of this Ummah. His good deeds were much higher than those of other Muslims. Traditions that are accepted and considered reliable by all scholars are presented by us for the readers. The holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said, “A single sword strike of Ali on the day of the ditch was superior to the combined worship acts of men and jinn till the day of Qiyamat.” We have quoted this hadith previously to prove our point but here we consider it a necessary duty to mention again.
Just as the Ahle Sunnat scholars read this treatise, they will raise objections and cry foul, “Fie on him! He has opposed the early scholars and refuted the Book of Aqaid (beliefs), falsified the statements of scholars and Mujtahids! O people, you can see that this person has become a 'Rafidi'. He has denied the virtues and status of the Caliphs and not accepted their superiority.” Such allegations will be piled on me and accusations like, 'O people do not believe a word of what he says because whatever the early scholars have stated must be accepted without reservation', will fly fast and hard. It is obligatory on us to follow the early scholars in toto. What they did not say, does not qualify to be accepted by you because the door of Ijtehad is closed! And so on and so forth.” All the objections mentioned above shall be replied as follows:
Firstly: At the outset, I plead to all the Muslim brothers to forgo blind imitation and bias, and strive to analyze and research in a judicious manner. Secondly: If they say, 'This person has opposed and objected to the early scholars.' We reply, 'Statements of faith and belief are brought to us by the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and he brought them to us from the Almighty. No one could refute them. But what we have objected to is not received from the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), as proved by us many times. On the basis of this we have not dared to disprove them.
Thirdly: If they say: He had rejected and refuted the Book of Aqaid. In reply I say: The actual Islamic beliefs have been explained and expounded by the Holy Prophet (s.a.) and no one can deny and refute them because they were brought to us from the Creator of the Universe. However, whatever we have refuted was not brought by the Holy Prophet (s.a.). So our rejection does not amount to the rejection of Islamic beliefs.
Fourthly: If our objecting is deemed to be 'Rafd' (turning away)3, we reply as follows: All those who were even slightly inclined to Ahle Bait (a.s.) were given the tag of 'Rafidi' by the cahoots of Bani Abbas and Bani Umayyah. This ignorant practice continues to this day. Such allegations were also heaped upon Imam Shafei, the well-known Sunni scholar. Even if it is proved correct, far from being a crime, 'Rafd' should be considered a great virtue. The following report is quoted regarding Shafei:
Sharif Noorudddin Ali Samhoodi in the book Jawahirul Aqdain writes: (I have quoted the text of the report and later quoted exactly the couplets of Imam Shafei). The great Khwaja Sulayman Qandoozi has recorded on page 45 of Yanabinul Mawaddah the same. Baihaqi has quoted from Rabee Ibne Sulaiman that he said, “I said to Imam Shafei, 'Some people could not stand to hear the praise of Ahle Bait (a.s.), and when they see one of us mention their virtues they say, “He is a Raafedi”. In reply Shafei recited the following couplets: If in a gathering is a mention of Ali, his sons and Fatima. Some people start talking about other characters instead.
Be sure that what they say is rubbish. When Ali and his sons are remembered, these people mutter far-fetched reports. And they say, “Beware these were the traditions of Raafedis.” I dissociate myself from such people who consider the love of Fatimah 'Raafediyat.' Praise of my Lord on the progeny of the Prophet. A derogatory term used for Shiism. (Raafedi for Shias). And his curse be on such ignorance.
Hafiz Jamaluddin has recorded the following couplets from Imam Shafei: They said have you become a Raafedi and I said 'No.' Rafd is neither my religion nor my belief. But I am devoted to the best of guides. If love of the legatee of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) is Rafd, Then I am the greatest of Raafedi.
Similarly Imam Fakhruddin Razi related from Imam Muzni that Imam Shafei composed the following couplets: Always conceal that secret in such a way That you are not helpless in replying to the objections. And I hide my love with the purity of my devotion, So that my belief and I are safe from them. In the same way scholars like Baihaqi and Sahal bin Muhammad and Abde Rabb have related from Sulayman bin Qutaybah many other poems from Imam Shafei.
Yes! This allegation is only due to hatred and bigotry of ignorance. Muslims who do not regard the Caliphs highly, are labeled as Raafedi and blamed for following an innovation (bida't), while these people have never denied the genuine virtues of the Caliphs. These people consider every person on the basis of his true worth.
On the other hand we have Mu'awiyah, who initiated the cursing of Ali (a.s.) from the pulpit of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). This practice continued for seventy years. He himself cursed Ali (a.s.) and ordered all the people to do the same. He cursed the grandsons of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) at the very tomb of their grandfather and this was witnessed by thousands of the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), who saw and heard it with their own eyes. Seeing this vile act, the mother of the faithful, Umme Salama left the holy mausoleum in disgust! In spite of this, Mu'awiyah is not labeled as a Raafedi. Far from it! Mu'awiyah is bestowed the honorific of 'Amirul Momineen'! He is remembered with respect and reverence! People used to pray behind him! While the books of history are replete with the misdeeds of this villainous character so that the coming generations could see what sort of a person he was.
Yes! To believe in the superiority of Ali (a.s.), which is proved beyond doubt, is not Rafd. No one could allege that following the truly superior personality is Rafd and innovation. But it's a pity that this terrible bigotry is perpetrated in consonance with the wishes of people like Mu'awiyah and Marwan.
Fourthly: If they say: He has not accepted the virtues and status of the Caliphs. I would reply as follows: No one can deny the virtues and merits certified by the Almighty and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.). But, whatever has not been certified by Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.) can be rejected and such rejection will not tantamount to be a folly. To consider a myth as reality is against justice. Fifthly: If they say: He has not accepted the superiority of the Caliphs. I reply: We are not the first to do so because the first one to deny this was the Caliph himself. Thus, the Ahle Sunnat report that during the tenure of Abu Bakr ibne Qahafa, a few days after assuming the post of Caliphate he announced from the pulpit:
“Excuse me from the responsibility of Caliphate. I am not the best of you while Ali is amongst you.”
Similarly on the day of Ghadeer, when Umar ibne Khattab heard the tradition of mastership he said, “Congratulations O, Ali! You have become my master and the master of all believing men and women.”
If we study the corpus of traditions, we shall find numerous such narrations. However, we must read them with an unprejudiced and unbiased mind. Sixthly: If they say: Whatever has been uttered by the early scholars must be accepted by the successive generations in toto. We reply: This is not correct because if it were necessary for the successive generations to accept the statements of their predecessors without any change, then why did Abu Yusuf, the student of Abu Hanifah, when he succeeded his teacher, issued his own decrees rejecting almost half the decrees of Abu Hanifah? Similarly, when Muhammad bin Hasan Shaibani came a little after Abu Yusuf, he rejected most of the rulings of the latter. In the same way Abu Abdillah Shafei, who came fifty years after Abu Hanifah, refuted most of the laws of Abu Hanifah. For example, some scholars who came after him subsequently rejected Qiyas, which was considered valid by Abu Hanifah. For, these laws regarding whom no traditional proof existed were promulgated on the basis of conjecture. And to accept them on the basis of conjecture is the prerogative of another Mujtahid.
Seventhly: They will say: The door of Ijtehad is now closed. In reply we say: a) our intention is not to refute Ijtehad because it is against the rules of debate. That is, only we will refute a statement, which is not proved by concrete arguments. As we are not capable to fully do justice to Ijtehad and taqlid by this method we refrain from this.
b) The statement that the doors of Ijtehad are closed is not based on proof and argument. Let us study this matter in more detail:
i) Let us clarify that to study this problem in a way deserved by it is beyond our capacity. Still we shall try to unravel the facts in the following paragraphs: 1) It is clear that every law in Islam must be supported with concrete evidence. And such a law cannot be denied by anyone. 2) It is also confirmed that two types of proofs frame an Islamic decree, reason and tradition. But a rational proof by itself cannot prove a law. But here we will study this argument with some reasoning experience: Was Ijtehad necessary during the early period of Islam? If it was not necessary, then why did they make it compulsory? If it was necessary, then why after the first three centuries it began to be considered unnecessary or even impossible? How could the latter view be substantiated by proofs? If they say: In the early period it was necessary to formulate the laws of Shariat through Ijtehad, but after that there was no need of it. In reply I say: The laws of Islam were complete in the life of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) as evident from the verse,
“This day I have perfected for your religion.” (Surah Maidah: 3)
Then how is it that Ijtehad was required to frame the Islamic laws? Now let us understand that Ijtehad was not needed to frame the Islamic laws. It was required for another purpose. Consider this statement: Laws that are derived on the basis of conjecture and Ijtehad are mutable with the passage of time. Yes, if the passage of forty or fifty years can subject to change a law derived by Ijtehad, why couldn't laws formulated a thousand years ago remain unmodified? It is but a natural thing! However, we do not see the need to prove everything by logical proofs and it is not our duty to do.
Let us now consider the traditional proofs:
Before the discussion on the traditional proofs, we quote some lines from the well-known book of Ahle Sunnat, Daairatul Ma'arif (Religious Encyclopaedia) to show that 'the door of Ijtehad is closed' is a claim unsubstantiated by proof. Muhammad Wajdi, who had penned the 22 volumes of Daairatul Ma'arif writes in the third volume thus: “Ijtehad denotes the system of deriving the laws of Shariat according to the needs of a particular age. Therefore, it is necessary to have a Mujtahid in every period of time. In the early period of Islam, the scholars practiced Ijtehad from the first to the third century. They used to derive laws for every new problem that arose. In this venture, they did not heed the conflicting views of their contemporaries. Later, however there descended upon the people of the Ummah sloth and carelessness in this regard. They failed to derive the laws of Shariat. Thus in order to conceal their defect, they invented the excuse of the closing of the door of Ijtehad and expressed their inability to do anything about it. Although according to verses of Quran and traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) the door of Ijtehad is open till the day of Qiyamat.”
It is thus evident that the verses of holy Quran and sayings of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) authenticate Ijtehad, and the Islamic scholars have always acted upon it. This continued till the third century A.H. when the jurists and scholars, who were the stooges of tyrant rulers, saw in themselves no capability to derive the laws of Shariat and consequently, declared that the door of Ijtehad had closed. These people never opposed the Caliphs for fear of their life or a threat of monetary loss. But when the successive generations arrived, they began to consider this as a religious command and did not oppose it. Though, extensive authentic traditions prove to the contrary (that is, the door of Ijtehad has not closed).
The bida't (innovation) of declaring the closure of the door of Ijtehad was initiated at the behest of Mutawakkil. At that time, the wretched Ummah has just heaved a sigh of relief from the oppression of Bani Umayyah when the yoke of the slavery of Bani Abbas was thrust upon its neck. They also had to bear atrocities of Haroon, Mamoon and Mutawakkil. When Bani Abbas saw that Bani Umayyah were about to be finished and this would create a vacuum, wherein it was likely that people may incline toward the progeny of Fatimah (a.s.), they decided to seal the tongues of the truthful people by announcing that the door of Ijtehad has closed.
In these circumstances, the Shia scholars remained aloof or practiced dissimulation to save themselves from this calamity, while some bold Ahle Sunnat Scholars were subjected to untold tribulations. For example Malik Ibne Anas was instrumental in the expulsion of Muhammad Ibne Ibrahim, a descendant of Hasan al-Muthanna who was arrested and tortured on the orders of Caliph Mansur.
Abu Hanifah was arrested and imprisoned at Anbar. He was tortured to the extent that he finally died at the hands of Rabee', the personal bodyguard of Mansur. Ahmad Ibne Hanbal was also imprisoned and tortured by Motasim ibne Haroon.
However, many of the Ahle Sunnat scholars preferred the patronage of tyrant rulers and to please their whims, issued religions decrees and continued to manage their affairs as they wished.
Most of the Ahle Sunnat scholars quoted these materialist scholars and refrained from quoting the Imams and guides (a.s.) who were the true successors of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Gradually this became an established practice and a time came when the Ahle Sunnat evolved into a distinct sect. Now the factors of bias on the basis of partisanship came into play. This led to untold controversies and finally resulted in the disunity of the Muslim Ummah. Thus causing all sorts of problems leading to ultimate decadence and destruction. However, Taqaiyyah is one of the established principles of faith. It not only protected the lives and property of Muslims, but alone was instrumental in preserving the laws of Shariah.
Thus we have proved by traditional arguments that the door of Ijtehad is still open. In the same way we shall be content to quote the verse of holy Quran that says: “Then ask the people of remembrance if you do not know.” The Muslims have been ordered to ask the 'People of remembrance' if they are unable to understand the law of Shariat. And this is an express command. It will remain in force for the benefit of Muslim Community till the day of Qiyamat. How is it possible that during the early period of Islam anyone who was ignorant of Shariat has recourse to the religious scholars, whereas the same person is now prohibited from referring to the jurists?
Can anyone explain to us why this prohibition came into being? In the event of Ijtehad being proved as a necessity according to Quran and hadith people followed it and knew it well. Then after the third century A.H. what Quranic verse or hadith came to nullify this law? It was nothing but the arrival of tyrant rulers at the helm of Islamic affairs!
We said that in case a person is unaware of the law of Shariat it is incumbent on him to refer to an accomplished scholar. A scholar who is the most learned of his time and capable of issuing religious decrees. But as we have said before, we are not capable of solving the problem of Ijtehad. We only request the people of this Ummah to ponder upon it for a moment without bias so that they benefit by it.
Those who wish to study this topic in detail may refer the books, 'Al Aqdul Jayyed fi Ahkam al-Ijtehad wa Taqleed' written by Allamah Dehlavi; this book has referred to the book Al Insaaf fil Ijtehad Wal Khilaf by Allamah Shah Waliullah, the well-known Indian scholar. By referring to these books we can form an opinion about this matter.
In the course of our discussion we have only relied upon the writings of Ahle Sunnat scholars and have been content with it. Because our only aim here was to prove that Ali Ibne Abi Talib (a.s.) was the most superior person in the whole of Ummah. As per the rules of logical argumentation and debate, we have proved our claim with the help of authentic proofs and also fulfilled all the other necessary conditions. Firstly by logical reasoning we proved our claim and then we also presented traditional proofs that alone are considered sufficient to prove an Islamic matter. And from the traditional proofs, we quoted only the most important ones and which were considered authentic by all religious scholars and well known to the majority of the people. We were content to quote only two verses of Quran and a few traditions that all Muslims are obliged to have faith in.
Though hundreds of traditions are present on this topic, we have been content to quote only some of them and refrained from presenting others. As the saying goes, “A clue is sufficient for the wise.” After having proved conclusively that Ali (a.s.) was the most superior personality of the Ummah, next only to the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), we turn our discussion to the matter of Caliphate. It is such a serious problem that it has divided the Ummah and is the root cause of all the afflictions and controversies. We shall, to the best of our ability, examine this important matter in such a way that it can be understood by all.
0%
Author: Qadi Bohlool Afandi
