The above tradition was also narrated by important Sunni figures such as Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Abu Hatem, and Ibn Mardawayh. It is also recorded by many orientalists including T. Carlyle, E. Gibbon, J. Davenport, and W. Irving. As we see, Prophet ordered people to LISTEN AND FOLLOW ALI even in his first open speach, that is, when he declared his prophethood openly. The next tradition in the History of al-Tabari is as follows: Narrated Zakariyya Ibn Yahya al-Darir, from Affan Ibn Muslim, from Abu Awanah, from Uthman Ibn al-Mughirah, from Abu Sadiq, from Rabiah Ibn Najid: A man said to Ali: O Commander of believers, how did you become the heir of your cousin to the exclusion of your paternal uncle? Ali said:Ahem three times until every body craned their necks and pricked up their ears, and then said The Prophet invited the whole of the Banu Abd al-Muttalib, including his own closest relatives, to eat a year old lamb and to drink some milk. He also prepared a quantity of wheat for them, and they ate until they were full, while the food remained as it was, as though it had not been touched. Then he called for a drinking cup and they drank until they could drink no more, while the drink remained as though it had not been touched and they had not drunk. Then he said Banu abd al Muttalib, I have been sent to all men in general and to you in particular. Now that you have seen what you have seen, which of you will swear an oath of allegiance to me to become my brother, my companion, and my inheritor? Not one of them rose up, so I stood up before him even though I was the youngest there. He said Sit down. He repeated the words he had spoken for three times while I would rise up and he would say to me sit down. On the third occasion, he struck his hand on mine. In this way I became the heir of my cousin to the exclusion of my uncle. Sunni References: History of al-Tabari, English version, v6, pp 91-92 A brother mentioned that in the above incedent the Prophet was only addressing his own family Banu Abd al-Muttalib and not the whole of the Muslims. The most probable explanation here is that the Prophet intended Ali as his successor in taking care of the affairs that relate to the family of Banu Abd al-Muttalib only in his absence and after his demise and not as a successor to the leadership of all Muslims. Here I should state, first, that the Children of Abd al-Muttalib were not the family of Prophet. They were the relatives of Prophet. From the quoted tradition, we can not conclude that what he said was just for his relatives. He just started with his relatives. Now, do you honestly believe that the Prophet assigned a successor after him for the tribe of Abd al-Muttalib, but he forgot to assign any successor for the rest of community? the Prophet was not a nationalist. He was not sent only for the children of Abd al-Muttalib. He was sent to all mankind as he mentioned himself in the tradition. So why is this negligence (about forgetting other people)? If assigning a successor is duty of prophet, it can not be limited to a certain people, because the Prophet was not sent just to a certain people. Moreover, it was not the only time that the prophet declared Ali as his successor. However, it was the first time. There are many traditions inside Sunni collections of traditions which either implicitly or explicitly indicate whom the Prophet (PBUH) chose as his successor. The official announcement, however, was in Ghadir Khum as Sihah Sittah (the six Sunni collections of the traditions) testify. The Prophet (PBUH) said: Ali is with truth, and truth is with Ali. Sunni reference: Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi The two Shaikhs: al-Bukhari and Muslim did not mention the important event pertaining the first speach of the Prophet (PBUH) though it was reported by many historians and traditionists. Instead, Muslim and some other traditionists 4 reported an event that took place after this event. They reported the appearance of the Messenger on Al-Safa and his call to the Qureshite clans (the Meccans) and his invitation to them to believe in the new faith. Muslim and these reporters mentioned this late event and tied it with the verse of the warning of the closest relative of the Holy Prophet. Muslim recorded that Abu Huriarah reported the following: When this verse was revealed: And warn thy closest relatives, the Messenger of God called the Qureshites and they came together. He addressed them in general and in particular. He said: O children of Kaab Ibn Luay, save yourselves from Hell. O children of Murrah lbn Kaab, save yourselves from Hell. O children of Hashim save yourselves from Hell. O Fatimah, save yourself from Hell. For I do not possess any protection for you from God, except that you have relations to me which I would like to observe. Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, v3, pp 79-80 It is amazing that God commanded His Messenger to warn the closest of his relatives, who were the children of Abdul-Muttalib, but the Prophet called upon the children of Kaab Ibn Luay and the children of Murrah Ibn Kaab who are from the remotest of his relatives. It is inconceivable that the Messenger of God disobeys what his Lord commanded him to do. And what is more amazing is that the messenger called upon his daughter (Fatimah) publicly, to save herself from Hell, yet she was the purest Muslim girl whose father and mother were the purest parents. Fatimah, at the time of the revelation of the above verse was according to the historians, either two years or eight years old. al-Hakim in his al- Mustadrak, v3, p61 reported that she was born 41 years after the birth of her father. It would be illogical that the Prophet addresses himself to a two year old child or that he put a pure Muslim girl (who was still a minor, not exceeding eight years of age) on the same level with the pagans of Banu Kaab and Banu Murrah. And more curious is the Hadith of Aisha which Muslim recorded in his Sahih as follows: When the verse of warning was revealed, the Messenger of God said: O Fatimah, daughter of Mohammad, Safiya, daughter of Abdul-Muttalib, I have nothing in my power to protect you against God. Ask me from my wealth whatever you want. Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, v3, p79-80 This Hadith does not agree with the previous one. For this Hadith reported that the Holy Prophet addressed himself to the children of Abdul-Muttalib alone, while the other Hadith reported that the Holy Prophet publicly addressed himself mostly to other than the Prophets clan. And most weird in this Hadith is that the Messenger addressed himself publicly while on the Safa mainly to his youngest daughter Fatimah while she was living with him where he sees her every hour. It is also curious that the address which he directed to her and to the other members of the children of Abdul-Muttalib did not contain any message, such as calling upon them to worship God or to avoid idol-worshipping. Furthermore, Aisha was not born at the time of the event. The Messenger died when she was only eighteen years old. (See al-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sad, v8, p61). And this event took place ten years before the Hijrah (twenty years before his death). Abu Hurairah also was not an eye-witness to the event because he saw the Messenger for the first time when the Messenger was coming back from Khaibar in the 7th year after the Hijrah. (See al- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sad, v4, p327). And more curious than all is that Al-Zamakhshari reported that Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr and Hafsa, daughter of Omar, were among the ones whom the Holy Prophet addressed after the revelation of this verse of warning (which was revealed before the birth of Aisha). (See al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, by Ali Ibn Burhanuddin al-Halabi, v1, p321) This clearly indicates that recorders or the reporters of these traditions were seriously confused. They overlooked the fact that the verse commands the Prophet to warn his closest relatives, who were the children of Abdul- Muttalib, and that the Holy Prophet is not expected to disobey the order of God. What these traditions convey is opposed to the verse itself, and whatever disagrees with the Holy Quran has to be disregarded. The event which the historians and many Hadith recorders reported of holding a conference with his immediate relatives is the only logical course which the Holy Prophet was expected to follow after the revelation of the verse. 5 The Opinion of Imam Ali on Caliphate A contributor mentioned that, in one of the sermons of Nahjul Balagha it is written that Imam Ali mentioned consultation as one of the reason why he has the legitimate right for Caliphate. Here, Ali is contradicting the Shia thesis that Muhammad wanted to appoint Ali as the Imam. What you are referring to is not a sermon of Imam Ali to Muslims, and you have also taken it out of context. it was a part of his letter to Muawiyah when he refused to give his oath to Imam Ali (AS). Moreover, in contrary to your claim, in that letter Imam Ali did NOT say that he BELIEVES in the function of election for Caliphate. (Please see the full text of the letter below). He rather wanted to use the argument of his opponents against themselves. When all the people of Medina unanimously swore allegiance to Imam Ali (AS), Muawiyah refused to comply apprehending danger for his own power, and in order to provide an excuse for his disloyalty, he claimed that since he did not participate in the election, the election of Imam Ali (AS) was unlawful, and thus there should be another general election. This was while Abu Bakr was elected by a very few number of people and there was no national vote so that one could consider the caliphate of Abu Bakr as a result of peoples election. But the rulers who came after the Prophet imposed upon people that this is what election means, and this became a principle imposed on people and assumed to be their verdict that whoever the nobles of Medina elect would be deemed to represent the entire world of Islam, and no person has right to question it, whether he was present at the time of election or not, and that no one has right to reconsider the matter. People, from whom Muawiyah was later receiving support, were those who had clamoured the loudest about that argument. But when the rulership of the Muslim State in the form of caliphate came to Imam Ali, they rebelled against it, many of them were rebelling even after having sworn the oath of allegiance to him. Here, in this letter to Muawiyah, Imam Ali is quoting the argument which was once employed against him when he refused to give his oath to Abu Bakr. Imam Ali (AS) mentioned that if an election by people is the criterion to decide on the Caliphate, a general election took place in Medina to elect him as Caliph by Emigrants and Helpers and nobody can deny this fact. Therefore even according to the principles formulated by the opponents of Imam Ali (AS), his election was lawful, regular and bonafide. Thus Muslim who already accepted such principles to legitimize the election of the Abu Bakr, have no the right to speak or act against him (Ali). And Muawiyah had no right to propose re-election nor to refuse allegiance when, in practice, he recognized this principle for Abu Bakr.
Posted on: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 02:45:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015