Category: Hadith of shi’a


This article investigates the usage of the word “Imam” in the Qur’an to see whether the Qur’an provides any support to the Shi‘i concept of Imamah. In it a description is first given of Imamah as conceived of by the Shi‘ah, and that is followed by a detailed scrutiny of every place in the Qur’an where the word “Imam” or its plural “A’immah” has been used by Allah Ta‘ala.
There is no gainsaying that of all differences that exist between the Ahl as-Sunnah and the Shi‘ah, the issue of Imamah is by far the most serious. It is in fact quite within the limits of reason and logic to say that the question of Imamah is the root of all Sunni-Shi‘i differences; all other differences will upon closer scrutiny be found to result from the difference that exists on that central point.
Therefore, no person or organisation who is serious about bringing Shi‘is and Sunnis closer to one another can afford to ignore the doctrine of Imamah. All endeavours aimed at removing the barriers that separate the Ahl as-Sunnah from the Shi‘ah must start from this point. Starting from anywhere else would be similar to treating the symptoms, and not the cause, of a disease. For a while the symptoms might disappear, only to be reactivated at a later stage by the dormant cause. Likewise, attempting to solve Sunni-Shi‘i differences from any perspective other than that of its root, Imamah, might for the immediate moment create the impression of removing obstacles to Muslim unity. In reality those very same obstacles will return as soon as the euphoria at the creation of that unity subsides.

 

As Muslims we are obliged to refer the differences that exist amongst us to Allah and His Rasul. In this series of articles we refer the doctrine of Imamah to the Qur’an, with the purpose of ascertaining whether this doctrine as conceived of and believed in by the Ithna ‘Ashari (or Ja‘fari) Shi‘ah is justified by Divine Revelation or not.

The Doctrine of Imamah

Before going any further it would be well-advised, for the benefit of those who may not be fully aware of what the Imamah of the Shi‘ah means, to expand somewhat upon the detail of the issue. Once the reader has a proper focus of what Imamah means to the Shi‘ah, and what its position in the belief structure of the Shi‘ah is, we will continue with our discussion of that doctrine in the light of the Qur’an.
Essentially, Imamah is about leadership of the Ummah after the demise of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam. The Shi‘ah believe that just as Allah chose Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam as His Messenger to mankind, he chose and appointed a line of twelve men to succeed him as the leaders of the Ummah in all matters, spiritual as well as temporal. The first of these leaders, or Imams as they are called, was ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiyallahu ‘anhu. He was succeeded by his eldest son Hasan, and he by his brother Husayn. After Husayn the Imamah continued in his progeny until the year 260AH, when the twelfth Imam, a child of five, disappeared upon the death of his father. He is believed to be the Awaited Mahdi who will return from occultation to establish justice upon the earth. To these twelve men from amongst the family of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam alone belongs the right to assume leadership of the Ummah. There are two aspects to Imamah that need to be looked at with attention. The first is the nature of the appointment of the Imams, and the second is the nature of their office.

The nature of the appointment
of the Twelve Imams

As far as the nature of their appointment is concerned, it is a matter of consensus amongst the Shi‘ah that the right of their twelve Imams to lead the Ummah was bestowed by Allah Ta‘ala Himself. No distinction is made between the appointment of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam as the Messenger of Allah and the appointment of the twelve Imams as his successors. Underscoring this vital aspect of Imamah, ‘Allamah Muhammad Husayn Kashif al-Ghita, who was the most prominent Shi‘i ‘alim of Najaf in Iraq during the seventies, writes in his book Asl ash-Shi‘ah wa-Usuluha:
Imamah is a divine station, just like Nubuwwah. Just as Allah chooses whomsoever He wants to for Nubuwwah and Risalah … similarly, for Imamah too, He selects whomsoever He wishes.1
It is interesting to note that the book from which this statement is drawn was written for the express purpose of correcting contemporary misconceptions about the Shi‘ah. Since Imamah is then for all practical purposes on exactly the same plane as Nubuwwah and Risalah, consistency would dictate that the rejection of Imamah be censured with the same severity as the rejection of Nubuwwah and Risalah. If rejection of the Nubuwwah of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam cast the likes of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab outside the fold of Islam, then it is only logical to expect that rejection of the Imamah of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiyallahu ‘anhu should cast the likes of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and the rest of the
Sahabah radiyallahu ‘anhum out of the fold of Islam. For one who views the problem from this perspective it thus comes as no surprise to find the Shi‘ah narrating from their Imams that “all the people became murtadd after the death of Rasulullah, except three,”2 since it is consistent with the principle that equates Imamah with Nubuwwah in the sense that each of them is a position appointed by Allah.
What is surprising is the opinion the Shi‘ah of today express about the Ahl as-Sunnah in general. One would expect them to say about the Ahl as-Sunnah as they have said about the Sahabah: that they are unbelievers, out of the fold of Islam. After all, there are many non-Muslims who believe in the oneness of Allah, but do not believe in the prophethood of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, and for that reason we all regard them as unbelievers. If Imamah is then a “divine station, like Nubuwwah,” Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams must also be unbelievers. There have been many ‘ulama of the Shi‘ah in the past who have displayed consistency in this regard and declared all those who deny the Imamah of the Twelve Imams—like the Ahl as-Sunnah—unbelievers. For example, Ibn Babawayh al-Qummi (died 381AH), the author of one of the four canonical hadith collections of the Shi‘ah, Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, states in the treatise in which he expounds the creed of the Shi‘ah:
It is our belief about one who rejects the Imamah of Amir al-Mu’minin (Sayyiduna ‘Ali) and the Imams after him that he is the same as one who rejects the Nubuwwah of the Ambiya’.
It is our belief concerning a person who accepts (the Imamah of) Amir al-Mu’minin but rejects any one of the Imams after him, that he is similar to one who believes in all the Ambiya’ but rejects the Nubuwwah of Muhammad sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam. The Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam said: “The Imams after me are twelve. The first is Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and the last is the Qa’im (the Mahdi). Obedience to them is obedience to me, and disobedience to them is disobedience to me. Thus, whoever rejects one of them has rejected me.”
Whoever wrongfully claims the Imamah is an accursed oppressor. Whoever places the Imamah in anyone besides its rightful repositories is an accursed oppressor. The Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam said: “Whoever shall deny ‘Ali his Imamah after me has denied my Nubuwwah, and whoever denies me my Nubuwwah has denied Allah His divinity.” Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said: “Whoever doubts the kufr of our enemies is himself a kafir.”3
His student Shaykh Mufid (died 413AH) writes:
There is consensus amongst the Imamiyyah (the Ithna ‘Ashari or Ja‘fari Shi‘ah) that whoever denies the Imamah of anyone of the Imams, and denies the duty of obedience to them that Allah has decreed, that such a person is a kafir, misguided, and that he deserves everlasting torment in Hell.4
The prolific Abu Ja‘far at-Tusi, called Shaykh at-Ta’ifah, (died 460AH), who is the author of two of the four canonical hadith collections, has the following to say:
Rejection of Imamah is kufr, just as rejection of Nubuwwah is kufr.5
The mujaddid of Shi‘ism in the eighth century after the Hijrah, Ibn Mutahhar al-Hilli (died 726AH) expresses similar sentiments in the following terms:
Imamah is a universal grace (lutf ‘amm) while Nubuwwah is a special grace (lutf khass), because it is possible that a specific period in time can be void of a living Nabi, while the same is not true for the Imam. To reject the universal grace is worse than to reject the special grace.6
This is the opinion held by four of the most eminent classical scholars of the Shi‘ah, and if seen from the angle of consistency, it is a commendable position indeed. Yet, if one has to ask the Shi‘ah of today (especially recent converts to Shi‘ism) whether they believe Sunnis are Muslims are not, they will respond with surprise, and might even appear grieved at such a question. As far as recent converts to Shi‘ism are concerned, this is to be expected, since it is in the interest of any propaganda scheme that certain facts be kept secret from neophytes. However those who are more knowledgeable about the technicalities of Shi‘ism will know that in the eyes of the Shi‘ah a distinction is made between a Muslim and a Mu’min. All those who profess Islam outwardly are Muslims: Sunnis, Zaydis, Mu‘tazilis, and all other sects. A Mu’min, however, is only he who believes in the Twelve Imams. By this clever ruse the fuqaha of the Shi‘ah kill several birds with one stone. By accepting all other sects as Muslims they protect themselves against the ridiculousness of casting out of the fold of Islam over 90% of its adherents, and the same men who carried the banner of Islam to all corners of the world. At the same time they avoid the antagonism of Sunnis and others, which facilitates proselytisation for them. On the other hand, by the subtle measure of distinguishing Muslim from Mu’min they effectively excommunicate their opponents. Muslims are those to whom the laws of Islam apply in this world. It is therefore permissible to intermarry with them, to pray behind them, to eat what they slaughter, etc., while Mu’mins are those to whom salvation in the hereafter belongs exclusively, and that depends upon belief in the Twelve Imams. This distinction between Muslim and Mu’min can be found throughout classical Shi‘i literature. The seventh century faqih, Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Hilli (died 690AH), for example writes in his manual on fiqh, al-Jami‘ lish-Shara’i‘:
It is correct for a Muslim to make an endowment (waqf) upon Muslims. Muslims are those who utter the two shahadahs, and their children. But if a person makes something waqf upon the Mu’minin, it will be exclusively for the Imamiyyah who believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams.7
Eight centuries later, exactly the same view is propounded by Ayatullah Khomeini. In his own manual of fiqh, Tahrir al-Wasilah, he states:
If a person makes a waqf upon the Muslims it will be for all those who confess the two shahadahs … If an Imami makes a waqf upon the
Mu’minin it will be restricted to the Ithna ‘Ashariyyah.8
Some amongst the contemporary spokesmen for Shi‘ism, like Kashif al-Ghita, have realised that even this ruse is not sufficiently subtle. He thus devised another terminology. He speaks of being a Mu’min in the special sense, and of being a Mu‘min in the general sense. Whoever believes in Imamah is regarded as a Mu’min in the special sense, while those who do not believe in it are regarded as being Mu’min in the general sense, as a result of which all the temporal laws of Islam are applicable to him. The result of this difference, he says, will become apparent on the Day of Judgement, in the degrees of Divine proximity and honour that will be bestowed upon the believers in Imamah.9
To us this reveals much more than what the author intended. It reveals to us that when the Shi‘ah say they regard Sunnis as Muslims, it is in strict reference to worldly matters. In eschatological matters, matters of the hereafter, Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams are just like Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or any other rejectors of the Nubuwwah of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam. The only reason for saying that Sunnis are Muslims is expedience and convenience. Without professing such an opinion the Shi‘ah would have had to retreat into seclusion and bear ostracism from the rest of the Muslim world. This reason is given by Sayyid ‘Abdullah Shubbar (died 1232AH) in his commentary of az-Ziyarat al-Jami‘ah, the comprehensive du‘a read at the graves of the Imams. At the point where the ziyarah reads:
Whoever denies you is a kafir,
he comments upon it, saying:
There are many narrations that indicate that the opponents are kafir. To document all of them would require a separate book. Reconciling such narrations with that which is known about the Imams, viz. that they used to live, eat and socialise with them, leads to the conclusion that they (the opponents) are kafir, and that they will dwell in Hell forever, but that in this world the laws of Islam are applied to them as a gesture of mercy and beneficence to the True Denomination (the Shi‘ah), since it is impossible to avoid them.10

The nature of the office of the Imams

On this point it would be sufficient to say that the Shi‘ah bestow upon their Imams all the perfections and accomplishments of the Ambiya’, and even more. It would be impossible to document here all the narrations that deal with the status of the Imams, but it might be just as informative to quote the chapters under which they have been documented in a source that is described as a “veritable encyclopaedia of the knowledge of the Imams”: Bihar al-Anwar of ‘Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (died 1111AH), widely reputed to be the greatest and most influential Shi‘i scholar of the
Safawid era. During his lifetime he occupied the office of Shaykh al-Islam in Isfahan, capital of the Safawids, and even to this day his works are indispensable to the Shi‘i clergy as well as their lay public. We quote here the name of the chapter, as well as the number of narrations he documents in each chapter:
1. The Imams possess more knowledge than the Ambiya’ (13 narrations)11
2. The Imams are superior to the Ambiya’ and the entire creation. The Covenant of the Imams was taken from them (the Ambiya’), the Mala’ikah and the entire creation. The (major prophets called) ulul-‘Azm (Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa and ‘Isa ) attained the status of ulul-‘Azm on account of loving the Imams. (88 narrations)12
3. The du‘as of the Ambiya’ were answered because they invoked the wasilah of the Imams. (16 narrations)13
4. The Imams can bring the dead back to life. They can cure blindness and leprosy. They possess all the miracles of the Ambiya’ (4 narrations)14
5. Nothing of the knowledge of Heaven, Earth, Jannah and Jahannam is hidden from them. The Kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth was shown to them. They know all that happened and that will happen upto the Day of Resurrection. (22 narrations)15
6. The Imams know the truth of a person’s faith or hypocrisy. They possess a book that contains the names of the inmates of Jannah, the names of their supporters and their enemies. (40 narrations)16
The titles of these chapters create quite a vivid impression of the narrated material upon which the Shi‘ah base their faith. The office of Imamah can thus be seen to incorporate more than just the political leadership of the Ummah. The Imams are more than just heads of state with a divine right to rule. They are the repositories of every branch of knowledge and perfection possessed by the Ambiya’. The existence of the world depends upon their presence. They are the intermediaries upon whose intercession acceptance of the prayers of even the Ambiya’ depends. Their office is one that combines political, religious, scientific, cosmological and metaphysical supremacy over the entire creation. From this one can understand the reason for al-Khomeini’s statement in the book al-Hukumat al-Islamiyyah, upon which rests the entire philosophy of his revolution:
It is of the undeniable tenets of our faith that our Imams possess a status with Allah that neither Angel nor Messenger
can aspire to.17
After this introduction to the concept of Imamah, the nature of the appointment of the Imams, and the nature of their office, we pose the question: Is belief in such a concept justified and upheld by the Qur’an? Surely a belief of such momentousness, an article of faith with such far reaching consequences, that supercedes even belief in the Ambiya’, must be rooted in the Qur’an, the book which was revealed by Allah
as an explanation of all things, a guide, a mercy,
and glad tidings to the Muslims. (an-Nahl:89)
It is with the purpose of answering this question that this article is written.

Imamah and Prophethood in the Qur’an

In this article we investigate the Qur’anic foundations of the Shi‘ite concept of Imamah. By analysis of the usage of the word imam and its plural form a’immah in the Qur’an we will investigate whether the Qur’an provides any basis for the doctrine of Imamah as formulated in Shi‘ite theology.
In limiting our investigation to the Qur’an, it is not our contention that the Sunnah is inconsequential in issues of doctrine. Instead, it is out of the conviction that a doctrinal issue like Imamah, which Shi‘ite theology places above Nubuwwah, must find textual support from the Qur’an. After all, the “secondary” issue of Nubuwwah finds more than ample support in the pages of the Qur’an. No one, after reading the clear and unambiguous Qur’anic texts wherein Allah makes mention of His Messengers and Prophets, their status,
And each (of them) we favoured above all the worlds. (al-An‘am : 86)
their stories,
And has there come to you the story of Musa? (Taha : 9)
And recite to them the story of Ibrahim. (ash-Shu‘ara : 69)
We relate unto you you the most beatiful of stories. (Yusuf : 4)
the explicit mention of their names,
Such was the argument we gave Ibrahim against his people. We raise in degree whomsoever We will, and your Lord is Wise, All-Knowing. We gave him Ishaq and Ya‘qub; each of them We guided. And before that, We guided Nuh, and among his (Ibrahim’s) progeny (We guided) Dawud, and Sulayman, and Ayyub, and Yusuf, and Musa, and Harun; thus do We reward those who good. And (We guided) Zakariyya, and Yahya, and ‘Isa, and Ilyas; all of them of the Righteous. And Isma‘il, and Alyasa‘, and Yunus, and Lut; each of them We favoured above all the worlds. (al-An‘am : 83-86)
and the importance of belief in them as an integral part of faith in Islam,
And whoever denies Allah, His Messengers, His Books and the Last Day has clearly gone astray. (an-Nisa’ : 136)
can reasonably doubt that the Qur’an supports, or rather enjoins, belief in Nubuwwah. The question now is: Does the same hold true for Imamah? If Imamah is superior to Nubuwwah, as the theology of the Ithna ‘Ashari Shi‘ah teaches, it would be only reasonable to expect that the Qur’an would deal in equally explicit terms with Imamah; and if not, that at least a clear, unambiguous picture what Imamah is and who the Imams are, would be drawn by the Qur’an.

Usage of the word Imam in the Qur‘an

In what follows we will investigate how the word Imam and its plural A’immah have been used in the Qur’an. From the way Allah has used the word in the Qur’an it will then be seen whether the Shi‘i concept of Imamah that has been explained above, finds any sort of Qur’anic support.
A book
The word imam recurs 7 times in the Qur’an, while its plural form, a’immah, appears 5 times. In 3 of these cases it refers explicitly to a book:
And before it was the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy. (Hud : 17)
And before it was the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy. (al-Ahqaf : 12)
Verily, we will restore the dead to life, and we write that which they sent forth, and that which they left behind; and of everything we have taken account in a Clear Book. (Yasin : 12)
The champions of kufr
In another 2 cases it refers to the champions of kufr:
Fight the leaders of kufr. (at-Tawbah : 12)
And We made them leaders who call towards the Fire. (al-Qasas : 41)
A road
One reference is to a clearly discernible road:
And verily, the two (cities) lie next to a clear road. (alHijr : 79)

Leadership of the Israelites

In the remaining six places where the word is used, it is used in terms of its literal meaning, i.e. leadership. In Surah al-Ambiya’ it is stated:
We said: O fire, be cool and (a means of ) safety unto Ibrahim. And they planned against him; but We made them the greater losers. And We delivered him and Lut to the land which We blessed for the nations. And We gave him Ishaq, and Ya‘qub as an additional gift; and all of them We made righteous men. And We made them leaders who guide by Our command; and We revealed to them the doing of good, the establishment of prayer and the giving of alms. And they were men who served Us. (al-Ambiya’ : 69-73)
In this extract, which had to be extended somewhat in order that the reader may see the full context in which the word a’immah is used, one clearly sees its association with the function of the Ambiya’ as the leaders of men, who guide them towards Allah. This unequivocal identification of a’immah as Ambiya’ leads us to conclude that the reference in Surah as-Sajdah too, is to the Ambiya’, and not to any other category of men:
Indeed, We gave Musa the Book, so be not in doubt about meeting him; and We made it a (source of) guidance for the Children of Isra’il. And We made from amongst them leaders who guided by Our command, when they persevered. And they had full certainty in Our signs. (as-Sajdah : 23-24)
Even if the scope of a’immah in this verse were to be extended to include people other than the Ambiya’, there is nothing to justify its identification with the elaborate doctrine of Imamah as conceived of by the Shi‘ah.
In a third verse Allah speaks of His plans for the oppressed Israelites in Egypt:
And We wished to be gracious to those who were oppressed in the land, and to make them leaders, and to make them heirs. (al-Qasas : 5)
In order to see who the word a’immah refers to in this verse one only has to look at the persons in whom this divine wish came to fulfilment. It was primarily in Nabi Musa and the other prophet-kings of Bani Isra’il like Nabi Dawud and Nabi Sulayman ‘alayhimus salam that the leadership referred to in this verse, came to be vested. If at times they were ruled by men other than the Ambiya’, the status of those leaders was never seen to be superior to the rank of the Ambiya’. Verses like the above three, apart from dealing specifically with the Ambiya’ of Bani Isra’il, are not in the least indicative of the existence of a rank like that of Imamah as conceived of by the Shi‘ah.

Leadership of the pious

There remain three places where the word imam is mentioned in the Qur’an. In one of these three places Allah speaks of the prayer of His exemplary worshippers:
(They are) those who say: Our Lord, grant us the coolness of (our) eyes in our wives and children, and make us leaders of the pious. (al-Furqan : 74)
This verse speaks of normal people who do not belong to a special class like the Ambiya’, asking Allah to make them imams, in the sense of paragons of virtue, whose example others would strive to emulate. It is very obvious that it cannot refer to a group of “divinely appointed Imams”, for the reason that the Imams’ elevation to the rank of Imamah is not on account of their prayers. Since their appointment, like that of the Ambiya’, is supposedly divine in origin, it not attainable by any amount of exertion or devotion.
It is interesting to note that this verse proved to be so unpalatable to certain of the early Shi‘ah that they declared it to have been corrupted. The following narration appears in the tafsir of ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi, the teacher of Abu Ja‘far al-Kulayni:
It was read to Abu ‘Abdillah (i.e. Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq):
And make us leaders of the pious.
He said: “It would be an enormous thing for them to ask Allah to make them Imams of the pious.” [The Shi‘i concept of an Imam is intended, of course, since the Imams are appointed, and no one can become an Imam by praying for it.]
Someone enquired: “How was it then revealed, O son of Rasulullah?”
He replied: ‘It was revealed:
…and make for us leaders from amongst the pious.18
This narration, documented in a tafsir of great repute amongst the early tafsirs of the Shi‘ah, (a tafsir, in fact, that is described by its twentieth century editor as being “in reality the commentary of the Imams al-Baqir and as-Sadiq,”19 and each one of whose narrators is regarded as reliable and credible by Shi‘i hadith experts,20 which vouches for its authenticity by Shi‘i standards) obviates the need for further discussion around the meaning of the word Imam as it appears in this ayah.

On the Day of Judgement

There remains one place in the Qur’an where the word Imam is used. It is in Surah al-Isra’ where Allah Ta‘ala says:
The day when we will call all people by their leaders. (al-Isra’ : 71)
The Imam spoken of in this ayah is recognised by the mufassirun of the Ahl as-Sunnah as either the book of deeds or the prophet to whose Ummah the person belonged. The first meaning is preferred by Ibn Kathir,21 who mentions in support of his preference the ayat where the word Imam was used in the sense of a book (see above). This meaning is further supported by the rest of the ayah:
So those who are given their book in their right hand will read their books.
The second meaning also finds ample support in the Qur’an. In another ayah Allah says:
How will it be when We bring forth from every Ummah a witness, and bring you (O Muhammad) as a witness over these? (an-Nisa’:41)
From the way in which the position of the Nabi sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam is compared to the position of the “witnesses” of the other Ummahs we can only conclude that the reference is to the Ambiya. It therefore follows that those Ummahs will be called by the names of their Ambiya. Calling the Ummahs of the past by the names of the Ambiya who were sent to them is further a common thing in both the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The ‘Ad, for example, are commonly referred to as “the people of Hud”, just like Banu Isra’il are called “the people of Musa”. Identifying the Imam mentioned in the ayah under discussion with the Ambiya is therefore warranted by both the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
As for the claim of the Shi‘ah that it refers to the Twelve Imams,22 this claim not only lacks Qur’anic support, it also curtails the general scope of the ayah. The lack of Qur’anic support is evident from the above discussion on the usage of the word Imam in the Qur’an. The restriction of the general scope of the ayah arises from the chronological disparity between the times when the Twelve Imams lived, and the periods during which previous Ummahs flourished. If we say that all Ummahs will be called by the names of the Twelve Imams, then what about the Ummahs that existed before them? By whose name will they be called? After all, the ayah says that all people will be called by their leaders.
In addition, when for argument’s sake we do assume that the reference is to the the Twelve Imams, we are left with a somewhat incongruous situation. Sayyiduna ‘Ali, the first of the Twelve Imams, died in the year 40. His son Sayyiduna Hasan died nine years later, in 49. If Sayyiduna ‘Ali is the Imam for the people of his time, Sayyiduna Hasan is left with only those people who were born during his nine years. All the other people of his time who were alive during his father’s time will form part of his father’s group, and not his. The tenure of the 3rd Imam lasted for 22 years; the 4th for 34 years; the 5th for 19 years; the 6th for 34 years; the 7th for 35 years; the 8th for 20 years; the 9th for 17 years; the 10th for 34 years; and the 11th for only 6 years. Suddenly, with the 12th Imam, the Awaited Mahdi, we have a tenure of Imamah that has been running for over 1200 years. The group that will supposedly be called by the name of the 11th Imam, for example, will only include people that were born during his Imamah that ran from 254 up to 260, while the numbers of those who will be called by the name of the 12th Imam will be practically incalculable.
Compare this incongruous scenario with the much more orderly and Qur’anic system of having the various Ummahs called by the names of their Ambiya on the Day of Qiyamah, and the absurdity of using the 71st ayah of Surah al-Isra’ to substantiate the doctrine of Imamah as conceived of by the Shi‘ah will be fully exposed. There can be no question that the word Imam in this ayah does not refer to the Twelve Imams.

SUMMARY

We have discussed here each and every place in the Qur’an where the word Imam and its plural A’immah were used in the Qur’an. It was demonstrated how Allah Ta‘ala used this word to refer variously to
a book (thrice)
the Champions of Kufr (twice)
a road (once)
the leaders of the Israelites
the leaders of the Pious
the Prophets or the Book
Any attempt by the Shi‘ah to identify their idiosyncratic notion of Imamah with the Imamah of the Qur’an is totally incongruous. The closest they could come to it would be to draw a similarity between their own Imamah and the leadership of the Israelites. However, such a similarity is immediately rejected when one considers that this leadership of the Israelites is clearly identified in the Qur’an with the Ambiya of Bani Isra’il. The Qur’an provides no grounds whatsoever to identify this leadership of the Israelites with anyone but the Ambiya. It is not uncommon to find the Shi‘ah quoting verses such as the 5th verse of Surah al-Qasas to substantiate their belief of Imamah. If they only took the trouble of reading the verse in its proper context, without adding to it the excrescences of their own theology, they
will see just how far fetched their identification of Qur’anic Imamah with Shi‘i Imamah really is. In al-Qasas:5 for example, the reference is clearly to Musa and his people. Just how, one wonders, is that verse extended to Ali ibn Abi Talib and eleven persons from his progeny?
The attempt to draw a comparison between the Qur’anic Leadership of the Pious and the Imamah of the Shi‘ah is similarly fraught with problems. It has been seen above how this form of leadership is a favour sought from Allah by His ideal servants. The Imamah of the Shi‘ah of the Shi‘ah, on the other hand, is like Nubuwwah, divinely granted, and cannot be aspired to by any person. The utter lack of harmony between this form of leadership and Shi‘i Imamah is nowhere more clearly brought to light than in the authentically narrated saying of Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq which points at the corruption of the text of the Qur’an at the hands of the Sahabah radiyallahu ‘anhum as the reason for the disparity.
The only other Qur’anic meaning of the word Imam left to the Shi‘ah is the one which refers to the Day of Qiyamah, when nations will be called by their “Imams”. Is it possible that the word “Imam” here could be referring to the Shi‘i concept of Imamah? Unfortunately for the Shi‘ah, once again that is not possible. It is not possible for two reasons:
Firstly, because a holistic reading of the immediately following verses, as well as of other verses of the Qur’an point unmistakably to the fact that the Imamah spoken of here refers either to the Ambiya, by whose names nations are called not only in the Hereafter, but in the Qur’an and Sunnah too, or to their books of deeds by which they will be called to account.
Secondly, because identifying the verse with the Shi‘i concept of Imamah leads to a very problematic distribution of nations for the various Imams.
In conclusion, in the usage of the word “Imam” in the Qur’an there is nothing whatsoever to support the belief of Imamah as conceived of by the Shi‘ah.
___________________________
REFERENCES
1. Asl ash-Shi‘ah wa-Usuluha p. 58 (Mu’ssasat al-A‘lami, Beirut)
2. al-Kafi vol. 8 (Rawdat al-Kafi) p. 167 (Dar al-Adwa’, Beirut, 1992)
3. Risalat al-I‘tiqad pp. 111-114, quoted by al-Majlisi: Bihar al-Anwar vol. 27 p. 62 (Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah, Tehran, 1387)
4. al-Masa’il, quoted in Bihar al-Anwar vol. 8 p. 366
5. Talkhis ash-Shafi vol. 4 p. 131 (Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah, Qum, 3rd ed. 1394)
6. al-Alfayn p. 3 (al-Maktabah al-Haydariyyah, Najaf, 3rd ed. 1388)
7. al-Jami‘ lish-Shara’i‘ p. 371 (Mu’assasat Sayyid ash-Shuhada’ al-‘Ilmiyyah, Qum, 1405)
8. Tahrir al-Wasilah vol. 2 p. 72 (Mu’assasat Isma‘iliyan, Qum 1408)
9. Asl ash-Shi‘ah wa-Usuluha pp. 58-59
10. al-Anwar al-Lami‘ah Sharh az-Ziyarat al-Jami‘ah p. 176 (Mu‘assasat al-Bi‘thah, Mashhad, 1st ed. 1457)
11. Bihar al-Anwar vol. 26 pp. 194-200
12. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 267-318
13. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 319-332
14. ibid. vol. 27 pp. 29-31
15. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 109-107
16. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 117-132
17. al-Hukumat al-Islamiyyah p. 52 (Ministry of Guidance, Iran. )
18.Tafsir (‘Ali ibn Ibrahim) al-Qummi vol.1 p. 10 (ed. Sayyid Tayyib al-Musawi, 2nd edition, Kitabfarosh ‘Allameh, Qum 1968)
19.ibid., editor’s introduction.
20.Abu Talib at-Tajlil at-Tabrizi: Mu‘jam ath-Thiqat p. 224 (Mu’assasat an-Nashr al-Islami, Qum 1404AH). In this book the author has compiled a list of all reliable hadith narrators of the Shi‘ah. One of his sources is the tafsir of al-Qummi. In the third chapter of this book he gives a list of the narrators upon whom al-Qummi has relied in narrating the material contained in his tafsir, quoting al-Qummi’s statement in the introduction to his book, that “we will mention and inform about that which reached us, which our mentors and reliable narrators have narrated”. He then quotes the author of Wasa’il ash-Shi‘ah who states that “‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi has testified that his tafsir is narrated from the Imams by reliable narrators.” (Wasa’il vol. 3 p. 524)
21.Tafsir Ibn Kathir vol. 3 p. 52 (Maktabah Dar at-Turath, Cairo n.d.)
22.In the first volume of al-Kafi this ayah is used thrice in relation to the Imams.

THE MARRIAGE OF UMME KULSUM BINT ALI(RA) WITH HZ UMAR IBN AL KHATTAB(RA)—-FROM SHIA SOURCES

1. The famous shia historian yaqoobi recorded in his book tareeq yakhoobi:

That year umar ibn al khattab sent the proposal to marry kulsum bint ali to Ali bin abi talib, her mother was fatima bint rasool allah(saw), hazrat umar said I want to marry umme kulsum because I heard prophet(Saw0 saying: “Every tie of kinship, and every association will be cut off on the Day of Qiyamah, except my kinship and my association.” ['Umar said,] “I have had the companionship of Rasulullah r ; I would like also to have this kinship, so he )hz ali) married his daughter to him and the decided the mehr to be 10,000 dinar.( tareeq al yakhoobi, vol 2, page 149, 150)

similarly tabari has recorded the similar narration in , “tareekh al ummam wal malook” vol 5, page 16, misr )

Ibn al atheer noted this in “al kaamil” vol 3, page 29 , darul kitab beirut)

Ibn saad noted this in “tabqaat al kubra” vol. 8 p. 338, Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, Beirut.

similar abu al fida in his tareek and other renowned historians have recorded this incident.

In this work(I.E Furu’ al-Kafi ) the author has documented at least FOUR traditions to the Imams which affirm the marriage of Umm Kulthum to ‘Umar. In fact, he has devoted the 23rd chapter in the Book on Marriage (Kitab an-Nikah) in Furu’ al-Kafi to the marriage of Umm Kulthum (bab tazwij Umm Kulthum). Two of the four traditions are contained in this chapter, while the other two are found in a related chapter on where a widow whose husband has died should spend her waiting period, or ‘iddah (bab al-mutawaffa ‘anha zawjuha al-madkhul biha ayna ta’taddu wa ma yajibu ‘alayha).

2. Mu’awiyah ibn ‘Ammar says: I asked him about a woman whose husband died: Should she spend her ‘iddah in her house, or where she wants to? He replied, “Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali u came and took Umm Kulthum to his house.” (Furu’ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117)

3. Sulayman ibn Khalid, who says:I asked Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq about the woman whose husband has died: Where should she spend her ‘iddah? In her husband’s house, or where she wants to? He said: “Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali u came, took Umm Kulthum by the hand, and took her to his house.” (Furu’ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117)

Abu Ja’far al-Tusi relates from imam Ja’far and he from his father imam Baqir :
He said: “Ali’s daughter Umme-Kulthum and her son Zaid bin Umar bin al-Khattab, died at the same time. No one knew who died first. Therefore none of them was made the inheritor of the other, and their funeral prayers were offerred simultaneously.(tehzeeb al ahkaam, kitab al meeras, chapter meeras al garkhi wal mahdoom, vol 9 , page 262)

Further References of the shia scholars who agree with the Marriage

4. syed murtada alam ul huda recorded in his book( “al shaafi”)and he discussed it at considerable length.(al shaafi , page 116)

He later incorporated into his other book Tanzih al-Ambiya wal-A’immah, where he writes:

As for giving his daughter in marriage, we have mentioned the answer to this in the book ash-Shafi in detail, and that he only consented to give his daughter after he had been threatened and menaced and after there had been altercations at length. ( Tanzih al-Ambiya wal-A’immah page 141, iran)

5. Arbili, “Kashaf al-Ghumma fi Ma’arifat-ulA’immah”, P.10, Published in Iran (Ancient)

6. Ibn abi al-Hadid, “Sharh Nahj ul-Balagha”, Vol.3,P124, Published in Iran

7. Mulla Baqir Majlisi, “Bihar-ul-Anwar”, Chapter Ahwaal Aulad wa Azwaj, P.621, Published in Tehran

8. Mirza Abbas Ali Quli, “Tarikh Taraz Mazhib Muzfari”, Chapter Hikaya Tajwiz Umme-Kulthum min Umar bin al-Khattab”, Persian Ed

9. Moghaddas Ardebili, “Hadiqat al-Shi’a” page 277, iran

10. Qazi Nurullah Shustari in his book Masaib-uin-Nawasib agreed with this marriage. (Masaib-uin-Nawasib , page 170, Tehran)

11. Muhammed jawad shiri in his book , “Ameer ul momineen”, page 217, under title ali fi ahad umar, Beirut)

12. Sheikh Abbas Qummi agreed about this marriage in Muntahi al-Aamal , vol 1, page 186, fasal 6, under title zikr aulad ameer ul momineen)

13. Qazi Nurullah Shustari who is known as the Shaheed e Saalis (The Third Martyr) wrote about this marriage that: Prophet(saw) gave his daughter to usman and Ali married his daughter with umar.( majalis ul momineen, page 85)

14. Ibn Shahr Ashob mentions: “Ali had the following children from Fatima: al-Hasan, al-Husain, al-Muhsin, Zainab the elder and Umme-Kulthum whom Umar married” ( Manaqib al-abi Talib Vol.3,P.162,Published in Bombay, India )

15. Ibn Shahr Ashob – “Rashid-ud-Din Abu Ja’far Mohammed b. Ali b. Shahr Ashob as-Sarvi al-Mazindarani”. The shia confer on him the same distinction as the sunni’s confer on Khatib Baghdadi. He died in Halab in 588 (Al Kina wal Alqab, Vol.1,P.321)]

Shia jurispudents use the wedding as an argument that a Hashmi woman can marry a non-Hashmi man.

16. Hilli writes in Shara’i-ul-Islam: “It is legal for a free woman to marry a slave, an Arab woman to marry a non-Arab, and a Hashmi woman to manny a non-Hashm” (Shara’i-il-Islam” Fi Fiqh al-Ja’fri , under Kitab un-Nikah )

17. Zain-ud-din ‘Amili in the commentary to Shara’i-ul-Islam writes:

The Prophet married one of his daughters to Uthman and the other to Abu-al-As bin Rab’i, and both of them were non-Hashmis. Similarly Ali married Umme-Kulthum to Umar. Abdullah bin Umar bin Uthman married Fatima, the daughter of Hussain and Musa’b bin al-Zubair married her sister Sakina. All of the were non Hashmis. (Masalik al-Ifham “Sharh Shara-il-Islam”, Chapter Lawahiq-al-’Aqd, Vol.1, Iranian Edition 1282 A.H)

18. Umar bin al-Khattab sent a messenger to the emporer of Rome. Umar’s wife Umme-Kulthum bought a (bottle of) scent which was worth a few dinars. She poured it into two bottles and sent it as a present to the wife of the Roman emperor. When the messenger returned, he brought with him two bottles filled with jewels.

When Umar cam into her room, he found the jewels scattered all over the place.

He asked her: Where did you get them? Umme-Kulthum explained to him (the whole story). Umar held them (in his hands) and said: all of the belong to the Muslims.
She inquired: how? they have been sent to me in exchange for my present.

He replied: I leave the decision to your father.

Ali explained: Your portion out of it is the value of just one dinar; the rest of it belongs to the Muslims as it is the messenger of the Muslims who has brought it”,.(Ibn abi al-Hadid “Sharh Nahj-ul-Balaga”, Vol.4, P.575, Published in Beirut 1375)

19. Dr. Sayyed Ja’far Shahidi agreed about this marriage in his book “Life of Fatemeh Zahra(SA)” Pp.263-265

Dr. Shahidi is one of the most distinguished contemporary Shia Historian

Some other, Historians, Biographers & Geneologists who agreed with this marriage are:

* Balazri, “Insab-ul Ashraf”, Vol.1, P.428, Published in Egypt

* Ibn Hazm, “Jamhura Insab-ul-’Arb”, P.37-38, Published in Egypt

* Baghdadi, “Al-Muhabbar”, Captioned: “Ashar-i-Ali” (Ali’s son-in-law), P.56 and P.437, Published in Deccan

* Dinwari, “al-Mu’arif”, Captioned: “Binat-i-Ali” (Ali’s daughters), P.92, and under title “the children of Umar bin al-Khattab, P.79-80

taken from the Shia book “Al Khisal” by Al Saduq on page 924:

THE REASONING OF IMAM ALI WITH ABU BAKR CITING FORTY-THREE ISSUES:

22-30 Ahmad ibn al-Hassan al-Qat’tan narrated that Abdul Rahman ibn Muhammad al-Hassani quoted Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Hafs al-Khas’ami, on the authority of Al-Hassan ibn Abdul Vahid, on the authority of Ahmad ibn al-Taqlabi, on the authority of Ahmad ibn Abdul Hameed, on the authority of Hafs ibn Mansoor al-At’tar, on the authority of Abu Sa’id al-Var’raq, on the authority of his father, on the authority of Ja’far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq (MGB), on the authority of his father (MGB), on the authority of his grandfather (MGB), “When Abu Bakr became the Caliph and the people pledged allegiance to him and abandoned Ali (MGB), Abu Bakr treated Ali (MGB) pleasantly and with a smiling face, but Ali (MGB) did not show happiness. This was hard on Abu Bakr. Therefore, he wanted to visit Ali (MGB) in private, ask him the reason for this, apologize to him for the people having gathered around him and having delegated the task of Caliphate for him. He wanted to tell Ali (MGB) that he had just obeyed them in accepting the rule over the nation, and that he was not that eager to do so. Thus, Abu Bakr went to see Ali (MGB) in private and said, ‘O Abal-Hassan! I swear by God that I had no plans for the Caliphate nor did I have any desires for it. I am not eager for that position and do not trust myself to be able to fulfill the needs of this nation. I have no wealth or power; do not have a supporter; and I did not want to get it from someone by force. Why are you upset with me? Why do you look upon me with disdain?’ Then Ali (MGB) told him, ‘If you had no desire for the position of Caliphate and you were not sure whether you could carry it out, then why did you accept the responsibility for being the Caliph?’

Abu Bakr said, ‘The reason for this was a narration which I had heard from the Prophet (MGB) who said, ‘Indeed God would not let all my nation unite on an issue that opposes guidance’ I accepted the call of the nation. Had I known that there was someone who opposed me, I would not have accepted.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘You cited a narration from the Prophet (MGB) stating ‘Indeed God would not let all my nation unite on an issue that opposes guidance’. But wasn’t I one of the members of this nation or not?’

Abu Bakr said, ‘Yes, you were.’

Ali (MGB) added, ‘What about the others who opposed you such as Salman, Ammar, Abuzar, Al-Miqdad, Ibn Ebada and those of the Helpers (Ansar) who were with him?’

Abu Bakr said, ‘Yes. They were all members of the nation.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘Then how could you rely on that narration from the Prophet (MGB) and the like, while you knew well that the people who opposed you were all of the great companions of the Prophet (MGB)? They are recognized by the nation and have never neglected in wishing well for the cause of the Prophet (MGB).’

Abu Bakr said, ‘I did not know at the beginning that they are opposed to me. Later on, after I took charge of the affairs I realized that they are opposed to me. However, I feared that the people might turn back from the religion if I resign. I thought that it would be easier to change your mind and bring you in line with me, rather than have an outbreak of a civil war and some of the people return to atheism. I knew that you are not any less interested in protecting the Muslims and their religion than I am.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘Fine. Can you tell me what attributes should the person who is worthy of the position of Caliphate have?’

Abu Bakr said, ‘He should be a well-wisher and loyal person, and he should not be unduly generous. He should be polite, just, knowledgeable of the Book, the traditions and the Divine Decrees. He should abstain from the world with little interest in it. He should take the rights of the oppressed from the oppressors, whether they be his relatives or strangers.’

Then Abu Bakr remained silent.

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Do I possess these attributes or do you?’

Abu Bakr said, ‘O Abal-Hassan (Ali)! Certainly you possess them.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was it I who accepted the Prophet’s invitation to Islam before anyone else considered Islam or was it you who did this?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was it you who accepted God’s Prophet’s (MGB) call to Islam before any other men or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was it you who recited the Bara’at Chapter (Declaration of Immunity) for the pilgrims and the whole nation during the Hajj season, or was it you who did it?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was it I who sacrificed myself to protect the life of God’s Prophet (MGB) when he (MGB) took refuge in a cave, or was it you who did it?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was it I who is the subject of the following verse regarding giving my ring in charity ‘your real friends are (no less than) Allah, His Messenger, and the (fellowship of) believers,- those who establish regular prayers and regular charity, and they bow down humbly (in worship)’[991] or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was revealed regarding you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Am I the Master of you and all the Muslims according to what God’s Prophet (MGB) said on the Day of Qadir Khum, or you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Am I the Prophet’s vizier[992] and do I have the same rank as Aaron had to Moses (MGB) in relation to the Prophet (MGB), or do you have it?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course for you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Did the Prophet (MGB) take me, my family and my children out for the imprecation of the Christian unbelievers, or did he take you and your family out for the imprecation of the unbelievers?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then, Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was the verse of purity from all abominations ‘…And God only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless’[993] revealed for me, my family and children, or was it revealed for you and your family?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was revealed for you and the members of your family.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! On the Kasa assembly day did the Prophet (MGB) supplicate for me, my family and my children and say, ‘O God! These are the members of my Family! Please keep them far away from the fire’ or did he supplicate for you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course the Prophet (MGB) supplicated for you, your family and children.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Does the following Quranic verse refer to me ‘They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day whose evil flies far and wide’[994] or does it refer to you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it refers to you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Are you the knight about whom the following was announced from the Heavens ‘There is no sword like Zulfaqar and there is no true knight but Ali’, or me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it refers to you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person who missed his prayer so the sun was returned for you to pray, and then it set, or was it me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person to whom God’s Prophet (MGB) handed his flag on the day of the Battle of the Trench and by whom God brought victory in that Battle, or was I that person?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person who relieved the Prophet’s sorrow by killing Amr ibn ‘Abd Wudd[995] , or was I that person?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person whose leadership of the genies God’s Prophet (MGB) acknowledged and the genies accepted it, or was I that person?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person whose legitimacy the Prophet praised from Adam to his own father by saying ‘Your lineage and mine starting from Adam to Abdul Mutalib and are all the result of wedlock’, or was I that person?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was I the person who was chosen by God’s Prophet (MGB) to whom he (MGB) married off his daughter Fatimah and said, ‘God married you off’, or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Am I the father of Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein who are the two sweet basils of the Prophet (MGB) about whom he (MGB) said, ‘These two are the Masters of the Youth in Paradise. Their father is better than them’, or are you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Is the person who is adorned with two wings with which he flies in Paradise along with the other angels your brother or my brother?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course he is your brother.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was it I who pledged to pay off the Prophet’s obligations and declared that during the Hajj pilgrimage season or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was I the person about whom God’s Prophet (MGB) prayed to ‘O my Lord! Please send me your most beloved creature to share this bird with me’ when he (MGB) wanted to eat a roasted bird, or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was I the person about whom the Prophet (MGB) brought the good news of killing the perfidious party (Nakiseen), the deviators, and the apostates[996] according to the interpretations of the Quran, or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, it was you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was it you who heard the last words of God’s Prophet (MGB), performed his ritual ablutions (wuzu) for the dead, and buried him (MGB) or was it me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Were you the person about whom God’s Prophet said, ‘Ali is the best of the judges amongst you’, or did that refer to me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Was I the person about whom the Prophet (MGB) ordered his companions to call as the Commander of the Faithful during his own lifetime, or was it you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you closer in ties of kinship to God’s Prophet (MGB), or was I?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person who gave a Dinar to the Prophet (MGB) when he (MGB) needed it and Gabriel pledged allegiance to you? Were you the one who kept the Prophet (MGB) and his family as guests, or was that me?’ Then Abu Bakr cried and said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person whom the Prophet (MGB) put on his shoulders to bring down and break the idols of the Ka’ba and could even extend his hands to the heavens if he willed, or was it me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the one about whom God’s Prophet (MGB) said, ‘You are the one to uphold my flag in this world and the Hereafter’, or was it me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the one whose door[997] was left open from the mosque when all the other doors of the companions of family members of the Prophet were shut and the Prophet (MGB) allowed what God had allowed for him, or was it me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Ali (MGB) said, ‘I swear to you by God! Was it you who gave charity before having a private consultation with God’s Prophet (MGB), or was it me? It was at that time that the Honorable the Exalted God blamed a group of people and revealed the following verse, ‘Is it that ye are afraid of spending sums in charity before your private consultation (with him)? If, then, ye do not so, and God forgives you, then (at least) establish regular prayer; practise regular charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.’[998]’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) said, ‘O Abu Bakr! I swear to you by God! Were you the person about whom God’s Prophet (MGB) explicitly referred to in what he (MGB) told Fatimah, ‘I married you off to the first person to have believed and his faith is the most superior of all’, or did that refer to me?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Of course, you.’

Then Ali (MGB) kept on mentioning the characteristics which the Honorable the Exalted God had given to him and no one else and Abu Bakr kept on saying, ‘Of course, you.’

Abu Bakr said, ‘That is right. Such are the required characteristics for one to be in charge of the affairs of the nation of Muhammad (MGB)!’

Then Ali (MGB) told him, ‘Then what fooled you so much that you turned away from God, His Prophet (MGB) and His religion? You lack what those who abide by His religion need.’

Then Abu Bakr cried and said, ‘O Abal-Hassan!. You are right. Give me today to think about my affairs and what you said.’ Then Ali (MGB) told him, ‘O Abu Bakr! Fine. Do as you wish.’

Then Abu Bakr left Ali’s presence. He went home and closed the doors upon himself and did not let anyone come in until night time. Umar kept walking amongst the people, since he had heard that Abu Bakr and Ali had held a private meeting.

When Abu Bakr slept he dreamed of the Prophet (MGB) who was sitting in his own place. Abu Bakr rushed to the Prophet (MGB) to greet him, but the Prophet (MGB) turned his face away from him. Abu Bakr asked, ‘O Prophet of God! Have you issued any orders which I have not followed?’ God’s Prophet (MGB) replied, ‘You want me to greet you back even though you act against God and His Prophet? And even though you act against the one who is the friend of God and His Prophet? Return the right to its possessor!’ Abu Bakr asked, ‘Who is its possessor?’ The Prophet (MGB) answered, ‘It is the same person who blamed you. It is Ali.’ Abu Bakr said, ‘O Prophet of God! I shall entrust the Caliphate to him according to your orders.’

Then when the morning came Abu Bakr cried and told Ali (MGB), ‘Give me your hand.’ Then Abu Bakr pledged allegiance to him and entrusted the Caliphate to him and told him (MGB), ‘I shall go to the Prophet’s mosque, inform the people about the dream I had last night and tell them what was exchanged between me and the Prophet (MGB) in my dream. I shall resign from the position of the Caliphate in the presence of the people and submit the affairs to you.’ Then Ali (MGB) told him, ‘Fine.’

Abu Bakr left while he was pale and ran into Umar who was looking for him. Umar told him, ‘O Caliph of God’s Prophet! How are you?’ Then Abu Bakr informed him of what had been exchanged between him and Ali (MGB). Then Umar said, ‘O Caliph of God’s Prophet (MGB)! I swear to you by God not to be deceived by the Hashemites[999] witchcraft! This is not the first time which they have used witchcraft.’ Umar kept tempting him until he changed his mind, gave up his decision, and became inclined to rule. Umar forced him to return and keep his previous position. When Ali (MGB) went to the mosque at the appointed time he (MGB) did not see either one of them and realized their wicked plans. Then he (MGB) went and sat at the grave of God’s Prophet (MGB). Umar passed by and said, ‘O Ali! You will never get what you want.’ Thus, Ali (MGB) realized what he had done. He (MGB) got up and returned home.”

ابن كثير في تاريخه (5/244) :
[ فأول زوجة تزوجها علي ـ رضي الله عنه ـ فاطمة بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم بنى بها بعد وقعة بدر، فولدت الحسن وحسيناً ويقال: ومحسناً ومات وهو صغير وولدت له زينب الكبرى وأم كلثوم وهذه تزوج بها عمر بن الخطاب... ].

Ibn Katheer in his tareekh (5/244): “The first wife of Ali (RA) was fatima bint Rassul Allah peace be upon him after the battle of Badr and she gave him al Hassan wal Hussein and they say: Muhassan and he died while he was young, Also Zeinab al Kubrah and Umm Kulthoum and she married Umar bin al Khattab…”

A brainwashed Shia seems to have been told on one of their Forums that There are no Authentic Narrations in the books of the Muslims (Ahlul Sunnah) about the Marriage of Ameer Ali’s RA daughter from Ameer Umar Bin al Khattab RA.

We Shut Him Up Below!!!

1 – إن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه قسم مروطا بين نساء من نساء أهل المدينة ، فبقي منها مرط جيد ، فقال له بعض من عنده : يا أمير المؤمنين ، أعط هذا بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم التي عندك ، يريدون أم كلثوم بنت علي ، فقال عمر : أم سليط أحق به . وأم سليط من نساء الأنصار ، ممن بايع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، قال عمر : فإنها كانت تزفر لنا القرب يوم أحد .
الراوي: ثعلبة بن أبي مالك القرظي المحدث: البخاري – المصدر: صحيح البخاري – الصفحة أو الرقم: 4071
خلاصة حكم المحدث: [صحيح]

Narrated Tha’laba bin Abi Malik: ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab distributed some garments amongst the women of Medina. One good garment remained, and one of those present with him said, “O chief of the believers! Give this garment to your wife, the (grand) daughter of Allah’s Apostle.” They meant Um Kalthum, the daughter of ‘Ali. ‘Umar said, Um Salit has more right (to have it).” Um Salit was amongst those Ansari women who had given the pledge of allegiance to Allah’s Apostle.’ ‘Umar said, “She (i.e. Um Salit) used to carry the water skins for us on the day of Uhud.”
[Sahih al-Bukhari 4071 - Hadith is SAHIH]


2 – إن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه قسم مروطا بين نساء من نساء المدينة ، فبقي مرط جيد ، فقال له بعض من عنده : يا أمير المؤمنين ، أعط هذا ابنة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم التي عندك ، يريدون أم كلثوم بنت علي ، فقال عمر : أم سليط أحق . وأم سليط من نساء الأنصار ، ممن بايع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم . قال عمر : فإنها كانت تزفر لنا القرب يوم أحد .
الراوي: ثعلبة بن أبي مالك القرظي المحدث: البخاري – المصدر: صحيح البخاري – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2881
خلاصة حكم المحدث: [صحيح]

‘Umar bin Al-Khattab distributed some garments between some of the women of Madinah. A good garment had remained, and one of those present with him said, “O chief of the believers! Give this garment to your wife, the (grand) daughter of Allah’s Apostle.” They meant Um Kalthum, the daughter of ‘Ali. ‘Umar said, Um Salit is more deserving of it.” Um Salit was amongst women of Ansars who had given the pledge of allegiance to Allah’s Apostle.’ ‘Umar said, “She (i.e. Um Salit) used to carry the water skins for us on the day of Uhud.”
[Sahih al-Bukhari 2881 - Hadith is SAHIH]


3 -كان بين أولاد الجهم بن حذيفة العدوي شر ومقاتلة فتعصبت بيوتات بني عدي بينهم فأتى الغلام المذكور ليلا والضرب قد وقع بينهم في الظلام وهذا الغلام هو زيد بن عمر بن الخطاب وأمه أم كلثوم بنت علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنهم فأصابه حجر لا يدرى من رماه وقد قيل ظنا إن خالد بن أسلم أخا زيد بن أسلم مولى عمر بن الخطاب هو الذي ضربه وهو لا يعرف من هو في الظلمة وكان ابن عمر أخوه يقول له عند الموت اتق الله يا زيد فإنك لا تعرف من أصابك فإنك كنت في ظلمة واختلاط
الراوي: – المحدث: ابن حزم – المصدر: المحلى – الصفحة أو الرقم: 10/489
خلاصة حكم المحدث: قصة مشهورة

Ibn Hazm said: There was a feud between the children of al Jahm bin Huthayfah al ‘Adawi and there were conflicts and the households of Bani ‘Uday became extremely hateful of each other, the boy came one night and there was fighting amongst them in the dark, the boy was Zaid bin Umar bin al Khattab and his mother was Umm Kulthoum bint Ali bin Abi Talib may Allah be pleased with them so he was hit with a stone and the one who hit him was not known, they guessed that it was Khaled bin Aslam the brother of Zaid bin Aslam the Mawla of Umar bin al Khattab and he threw the stone not knowing who he targeted in the darkness of the night, his Ibn Umar used to tell him at the time of his death “Fear Allah O Zaid, you are not sure who was behind this it was dark and there was chaos”.

source: Al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 10/489, Hadith grading: Very famous story.


4 – أن ابن عمر – رضي الله عنه – صلى تسع جنائز رجال ونساء فجعل الرجال مما يلي الإمام ، وجعل النساء مما تلي القبلة ، وصفهم صفا واحدا ، ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت علي امرأة عمر بن الخطاب – رضي الله عنه – وابن لها يقال له : زيد بن عمر – رضي الله عنه – والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس يومئذ ابن عباس ، وأبو هريرة ، وأبو سعيد ، وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام
الراوي: نافع المحدث: النووي – المصدر: الخلاصة – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/969
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده حسن


Nafi’i narrated: Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) lead nine combined funerals, males and females. He placed the males closest to the Imam and then the females in the direction of the Qiblah. He placed all of them in one row. This included the funeral of Hadhrath Umme Kalthum binte ‘Ali the wife of Umar bin al Khattab (RA) and her son called Zaid bin Umar (RA). This was during the governorship of Sa’eed bin Aas. Her funeral and that of her son were read at one and the same time. Participants in the funeral included Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas, Abu Hurayra, Abu Saeed and Abu Qatadah. Ibn Umar lead the congregation.

source: Al Khulasah by al Imam al Nawawi 2/969 – Hadith grading: Chain of narrators is good.

5 – أن ابن عمر – رضي الله عنه – صلى تسع جنائز رجال ونساء فجعل الرجال مما يلي الإمام ، وجعل النساء مما تلي القبلة ، وصفهم صفا واحدا ، ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت على امرأة عمر بن الخطاب – رضي الله عنه – وابن لها يقال له : زيد بن عمر – رضي الله عنه – والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس يومئذ ابن عباس ، وأبو هريرة ، وأبو سعيد ، وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام
الراوي: – المحدث: النووي – المصدر: المجموع – الصفحة أو الرقم: 5/224
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده حسن


[Same as Above narration]

source: Al Majmu’u by al Nawawi 5/224 – Hadith grading: Good chain of narrators.

6 – أنه صلى على تسع جنائز جميعا رجال ونساء ، فجعل الرجال مما يلي الإمام ، وجعل النساء مما يلي القبلة ، وصفهم صفا واحدا ، ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت علي امرأة عمر بن الخطاب وابن لها يقال : زيد بن عمر بن الخطاب ، والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس يومئذ ابن عباس ، وأبو هريرة ، وأبو سعيد ، وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام ، فقلت : ما هذا ؟ فقالوا : السنة
الراوي: عبدالله بن عباس و أبو سعيد الخدري و أبو قتادة و أبو هريرة المحدث: ابن الملقن – المصدر: البدر المنير – الصفحة أو الرقم: 5/385
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده حسن

Abdullah ibn Abbas and Abu Sa’eed al Khudri and Abu Qatadah and Abu hurairah all narrated that: he prayed on nine funerals at once, Men and Women and he made the men behind the Imam and the women in the direction of Qiblah and he arranged them all in one row. The funeral of Umm Kulthoum bint Ali the wife of Umar bin al Khattab was set up and her son who was called: Zaid bin Umar bin al Khattab. The governorship at that time was for Sa’eed bin Aas and amongst those attending were Ibn Abbas and Abu Hurairah and Abu Sa’eed and Abu Qatadah, I said: What is this? They replied: “This is the sunnah of the Prophet, peace be upon him.”

source: Ibn al Mulaqin in al Badr al Muneer 5/385 – Hadith grading: Has a sound chain of narrators.


7 – عن سعيد بن العاص أنه صلى على زيد بن عمر بن الخطاب وأمه أم كلثوم بنت علي فوضع الغلام بين يديه والمرأة خلفه وفي القوم نحو من ثمانين نفسا من أصحاب النبي صلى الله تعالى عليه وسلم فصوبوه وقالوا : هو السنة
الراوي: أصحاب رسول الله المحدث: ابن الملقن – المصدر: خلاصة البدر المنير – الصفحة أو الرقم: 1/280
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح


The companions narrated from Sa’eed bin al Aas that he prayed (in the funeral) on Zaid bin Umar bin al Khattab and his mother umm Kulthoum bint Ali so he made the boy in front of him and placed the woman behind his back and there were around eighty from the companions of the prophet PBUH present so they guided him (In his funeral prayer) and told him: this is the Sunnah.

source: Ibn al Mulaqin in Khulasat al Badr al Muneer 1/280 – Hadith grading: SAHIH.

18-أن عبد الله بن عمر صلى على سبع جنائز جميعا فجعل الرجال يلون الإمام والنساء يلين القبلة فصفهن صفا واحدا ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم ابنة علي امرأة عمر بن الخطاب وابن لها يقال له زيد وضعا جميعا والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص وفي الناس بن عباس وأبو هريرة وأبو سعيد وأبو قتادة فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام فقال رجل فأنكرت ذلك فنظرت إلى ابن عباس وأبي هريرة وأبي سعيد وأبي قتادة فقلت ما هذا قالوا هي السنة الراوي: نافع المحدث: ابن القيم – المصدر: تهذيب السنن – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/422
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

Ibn al Qayyim said: Nafi’i narrated that: Abdullah ibn Umar prayed on seven combined funerals and he made the men behind the Imam and the women towards the Qiblah then he made them (Women) in one row and he set up the funeral of Umm Kulthoum bint Ali the wife of Umar bin al Khattab and a son of hers called Zaid. The governor at the time was Sa’eed bin al Aas and amongst those attending was Ibn al Abbas and Abu Hurairah and Abu Sa’eed and Abu Qatadah then the boy was placed after the Imam so a Man said that he disagrees with this then I looked at Ibn Abbas and Abu huraira and Abu Qatadah and Abu Sa’eed and I asked “What is this?” They said: “It is the Sunnah”.

source: Tahtheeb al Sunan by Ibn al Qayyim 2/422 – Hadith grading: SAHIH.

9- أنه سمع عمر بن الخطاب يقول للناس حين تزوج بنت علي ألا تهنئوني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول ينقطع يوم القيامة كل سبب ونسب إلا سببي ونسبي
الراوي: عمر بن الخطاب المحدث: الهيثمي – المصدر: مجمع الزوائد – الصفحة أو الرقم: 9/176
خلاصة حكم المحدث: رجاله رجال الصحيح غير الحسن بن سهل وهو ثقة‏‏


Umar bin al Khattab told the people when he married the daughter of Ali: Won’t you congratulate me? I heard the Prophet PBUH saying: “On the day of judgement every cause and relation shall be cut except my cause and relation”.

source: Mujama’a al Zawa’ed by al Haythami 9/176 – Hadith grading: The Narrators are those of the SAHIH except al Hassan bin Sahl and he is trustworthy.

10- عن ابن عمر أنه صلى على سبع جنائز جميعا رجال ونساء ، فجعل الرجال مما يلي الإمام ، وجعل النساء مما يلي القبلة ، وصفهم صفا واحدا ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت علي امرأة عمر وابن لها يقال له : زيد ، قال : والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس يومئذ ابن عباس ، وأبو هريرة . وأبو سعيد . وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام فقلت : ما هذا ؟ فقالوا : السنة
الراوي: عبدالله بن عمر المحدث: ابن حجر العسقلاني – المصدر: التلخيص الحبير – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/716
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح


Abdullah ibn Umar narrated that: he prayed on seven funerals at once, Men and Women and he made the men behind the Imam and the women in the direction of Qiblah and he arranged them all in one row. The funeral of Umm Kulthoum bint Ali the wife of Umar was set up and her son who was called Zaid. The governorship at that time was for Sa’eed bin al-’Aas and amongst those attending were Ibn Abbas and Abu Hurairah and Abu Sa’eed and Abu Qatadah, they placed the boy after the Imam so I said: What is this? They replied: “This is the sunnah.”

source: Al Talkhees a Habir fi Takhreej Ahadith al Rafi’i al Kabir by Ibn Hajar al Asqalani 2/716 – Hadith grading: SAHIH.

11- أن ابن عمر صلى على تسع جنائز جميعا ، فجعل الرجال يلون الإمام ، والنساء يلين القبلة ، فصفهن صفا واحدا ، ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت علي ، امرأة عمر بن الخطاب ، وابن لها يقال له : زيد ، وضعا جميعا . والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس ؛ ابن عمر ، وأبو هريرة ، وأبو سعيد ، وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام . فقال رجل : فأنكرت ذلك ، فنظرت إلى ابن عباس ، وأبي هريرة ، وأبي سعيد ، وأبي قتادة فقلت : ما هذا ؟ قالوا : هي السنة .
الراوي: نافع المحدث: الألباني – المصدر: صحيح النسائي – الصفحة أو الرقم: 1977
خلاصة حكم المحدث: صحيح


Ibn Umar prayed on nine combined funerals, he made the men behind the Imam and the women in the direction of Qiblah and he arranged them all in one row. The funeral of Umm Kulthoum bint Ali the wife of Umar bin al Khattab was set up and her son who was called Zaid. The governorship at that time was for Sa’eed bin al-’Aas and amongst those attending were Ibn Abbas and Abu Hurairah and Abu Sa’eed and Abu Qatadah, I said: What is this? They replied: “This is the sunnah.”

source: Al Albani in Sahih Sunan al Nasa’ee #1977 – Hadith is SAHIH.

12- أنه صلى على تسع جنائز جميعا ، فجعل الرجال يلون الإمام ، والنساء يلين القبلة ، فصفهن صفا واحدا ، ووضعت جنازة أم كلثوم بنت علي امرأة عمر بن الخطاب وابن لها يقال له : زيد ، وضعا جميعا ، والإمام يومئذ سعيد بن العاص ، وفي الناس ابن عباس وأبو هريرة وأبو سعيد وأبو قتادة ، فوضع الغلام مما يلي الإمام ، فقال رجل : فأنكرت ذلك ، فنظرت إلى ابن عباس وأبي هريرة وأبي سعيد وأبي قتادة ، فقلت : ما هذا ؟ قالوا : هي السنة .
الراوي: عبدالله بن عمر المحدث: الألباني – المصدر: أحكام الجنائز – الصفحة أو الرقم: 132
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح على شرط الشيخين

Ibn Umar Narrated that he prayed on nine combined funerals all at once and he made the Men after the Imam and the women after the Qiblah while placing them (Women) in one row and the funeral of Um Kulthoum bint Ali the wife of Umar bin al khattab was arranged and a son of hers called Zaid, all were placed and the governor then was Sa’eed bin al ‘Aas, amongst those attending was Ibn Abbas and abu huraira and abu Sa’eed and abu Qatadah, the boy was placed after the Imam then a Man said: “I disagree with it” I looked at the companions and I said: “What is this?” They said: “this is the Sunnah”

source: al Albani in Ahkam al Janaez p132 – Hadith is SAHIH on the condition of Bukhari and Muslim.

13- أن أم كلثوم بنت علي رضي الله عنهما توفيت هي وابنها زيد بن عمر بن الخطاب في يوم فلم يدر أيهما مات قبل فلم ترثه ولم يرثها وأن أهل صفين لم يتوارثوا وأن أهل الحرة لم يتوارثوا
الراوي: محمد الباقر بن علي بن الحسين المحدث: الألباني – المصدر: إرواء الغليل – الصفحة أو الرقم: 6/154
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

Muhammad al Baqir bin Ali bin al Hussein (RA) narrated: Umm Kulthoum bint Ali may Allah be pleased with them died and her son Zaid bin Umar bin al Khattab in one day and no one knew who died first so she did not inherit him nor did he inherit her and that the Ahel of Siffin never inherited and the Ahel of al Hurrah never inherited.

source: Irwaa al Ghalil by Sheikh al Albani 6/154 – Hadith grading: SAHIH.

14-عن علي أنه نقل ابنته أم كلثوم بعدما استشهد عمر بسبع ليال
الراوي: – المحدث: ابن الملقن – المصدر: خلاصة البدر المنير – الصفحة أو الرقم: 2/247
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

From Ali (RA) that he took his daughter after seven nights from the martyrdom of Umar.

source: Khulasat al badr al muneer by ibn al Mulaqin 2/247 – Hadith grading: SAHIH.

And many Others found in the books of the Muslims…

As for the Shia narrations they also mention this marriage in countless places, they couldn’t hide this fact so they also fabricated quite a few horrible narrations such as this one:

الكافي الكليني (329 هـ) الجزء5 صفحة 346 باب تزويج أم كلثوم
علي بن إبراهيم عن أبيه عن ابن أبي عمير عن هشام بن سالم وحماد عن زرارة عن أبي عبد الله (ع) في تزويج أم كلثوم فقال: إن ذلك فرج غصبناه
حسنه المجلسي : مرآة العقول في شرح أخبار آل الرسول، ج 20، ص: 42 (الحديث الأول) : حسن

the book Al Kafi by Shia scholar al Kulayni 5/346, chapter “Marriage of Umm Kulthoum” he narrates:

Ali bin Ibrahim from his Father from ibn abi umayr from hashim bin Salim and Humad from Zurarah from Imam Abu Abdullah PBUH about the marriage of Umm Kulthoum bint Ali he said: “This was a vagina forcibly taken“.

Shia scholar of Hadith al Majlisi says this narration has a Good chain of narrators in his book “Miraat al Uqool Fi Sharh Akhbar al Rassul” 20/42.

I had already provided Two Authentic Shia narrations from the Main Shia book al Kafi in post #205 found here:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show…Shias&p=489581

many other Shia narrations proving this marriage here:
http://www.alrad.net/hiwar/omar/5.htm

Salam Aleykum,

May Allah reward the brother much, for he does extensive work mashaallah.

 

Salaamun alaykum w rahma

This article is about the love that the companions had for each other. I am no scholar neither a student of knowledge, so may Allah help me in this work.

When Ahlul-sunnah say ‘as-sahabah’ what we mean is both the household and the companions, as they were the generation of the FIRST Muslims, who accepted Islam within the Prophet’s life.

The linguistic definition of ‘sahabah’ is from the root word ‘sahiba’ which means ‘to accompany’.

A’immah An-nawawi, Bukhari and Ibnu-salih, (RH- may Allah have mercy on them) had and held the definition was: ‘Whoever saw the Prophet (SAW) while believing in him, and died upon that state.’

Ibn Hajr (RH) came after them and challenged this understanding, by saying that there were companions who were blind so what is the case with them? Such as Ibn Umm Makhtum RA. So he formed another and more precise definition.And this is the most correct one according to majority of the scholars, if not all of them.

‘Whoever met the Prophet while believing in him, accompanied him even for a short while, and died upon belief in him.’

One scholar had the opinion that it is accompanying him for a year or two. But this was an unpopular view and even his name is not known.

Scholars then talked about the age someone could be classified a companion. Some scholars said that s/he must be past the age of puberty, but this again is refuted, as scholars considered his (SAW) own son to be a companion, Ibrahim (RA) but not his other son Qaasim (RA), as well as Muhammed Ibn Abi Bakr (RA) and Mahmood bin Rabi’ (RA) who narrated a narration at the age of five, he remmebered an incident with the Prophet (SAW) where the Prophet put water he was making wudhu with into his mouth and blew it out on the boy as a joke, so he is also classified a companion.

So the part ‘whoever met the Prophet (SAW)’ is as follows, it includes any form of companionship, regardless of duration, includes blind people, includes children except infants. However excludes creation of the unseen world (namely; angels and jinn), and excludes mukhadramoon, those who witnessed jahilliyyah and Islam without physically meeting the Prophet (SAW). This last catagory includes Uwais Al Qarni (RA) who couldn’t go to meet the Prophet due to his taking care of his wife.

‘While believing in him…’

Those who met the Prophet (SAW) before his Prophethood such as Zaid ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayr (RA). And this excludes any kafir who met him and then accepted Islam afterwards and did not see him again. Such as Al-Ash’ath ibn Qays.

“…and died as a muslim.”

Even if there was a period of riddah (apostasy) in between, and this excludes those who apostated and did not return, or died on their apostasy.

The issue of ranking the companions began due to the shi’a. Otherwise this issue would not have been mentioned, as the shi’a were excessive in insulting and reviling the companions, there are many sources for this. Both Shi’a and Sunni, I will only quote a few of the shi’a sources then only a few of the ahlul-sunnah ones.

1. Taken from commentary of shia scholar Ayashi, narration #148:

From Khannan ibn Sadeer from his father from Abu Jafar (alaihi salam): “People became apostates after (death of) prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam)”. And I said: Who are these three?”. He said: “al-Miqdad, Abu Dharr and Salman al-Farese”…

2. In “Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays” written:

Ali (alayhi salam) said: “All people apostated after prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) except 4 of them”.

Also this narration which is reported to have more than 80(!) ways of narration:

Shareek Ibn Abdullah (who was a tabi’i, and this further proves the point that this ranking business was started by the shi’a) was asked ‘Who is better Abu Bakr or Ali?’ He answered ‘Abu Bakr,’

The questioner then asked ‘You say this even though you are shi’i?’ He replied, ‘Whoever does’nt say this is not shi’a, by Allah! Ali rose upon this pulpit and addressed the people of Kufah and said, ‘The best after its messenger amongst the ummah is Abu Bakr thumma Umar.’

For the ahlul-sunnah this is narrated by way of Bukhari and many others. And amongst the shi’a this is narrated in ‘Talkheesu shafie’ – Vol.2, page 428.

In the first generation, those who were known as shi’i most exclusively were those who preferred Ali (RA), over Uthmaan (RA) and were in fact known as ‘Shi’i’ &’Uthmaani’, but even these shi’a were from Ahlul sunnah. Due to this being not within the fundamentals. We know about shareek bin Abdullah (RA). It is suprising to know that the major imams of ahlul-sunnah, are sometimes referred to as shi’a, this is carrying the original and clear undistorted meaning of tashayu’.

But anyways, the ranking began by the shi’a. So Ahlul-sunnah agreed on a single principle, and whoever was against this principle, was against the ‘ijma of the ahlulsunnah (being the main body of muslims, are sometimes referred to as the orthodox muslims). This ‘ijma was that the best of this Ummah after it’s Prophet SAW, was Abu Bakr and Umar RA on them both.

Then after this, the majority of the muslims consider Uthmaan over Ali RA,as Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf RA said, ‘I have consulted the people in Madinah and I could not find anyone that favors ‘Ali over Uthmaan’ in Sahih Bukhari

And Ayyub As-Sukhtiyaani (RH) said, ‘whoever favours Ali over Uthmaan has not given the opinions of the muhajirun and the ansar their due respect.’Al bidaaya wan-nihaayah li’Ibn Katheer RH.

Shi’as have this in their books also to quote one, which really shows the message, in Nahjul Balagha.

“Verily, those who took the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman have sworn allegiance to me. Now those who were present at the election have no right to go back against their oaths of allegiance and those who were not present on the occasion have no right to oppose me. And so far as Shura (limited franchise or selection) was concerned it was supposed to be limited to Muhajirs and Ansars and it was also supposed that whomsoever they selected, became caliph as per approval and pleasure of Allah. If somebody goes against such decision, then he should be persuaded to adopt the course followed by others, and if he refuses to fall in line with others, then war is the only course left open to be adopted against him and as he has refused to follow the course followed by the Muslims, Allah will let him wander in the wilderness of his ignorance and schism.”

http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/letters/letter6.htm#letter6

This was stated in Nahjul balagha letter 6.

The authenticity of this book is deemed as mostly or all fabricated and weak, and the author wished to compile sayings and things Ali RA used to say long after his death, and did not add or barely added any chains for this book. So his main aim was showing the eloquence of arabic, so it is a wonder as to how the shi’a scholars took it to be highly authentic. The point of me referring to this book, is to show what our shi’a brothers take and use as a point of reference, for a stronger argument in this topic.

So ijma’ of the companions is established, and as Ali RA said it what is upon the pleasure of Allah.

To quickly finish the topic of ranking, Ahlul sunnah had four opinions, regarding the khulafaau rashideen. We mentioned 2 so far, one being Abu Bakr and Umar were the best, then silence., this was third greatest. Second opinion being, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan, then Ali. And this latter one is the greatest amongst ahlulsunnah. And these two do not contradict.

Another opinion which was lesser in popularity was Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan then silence. And lastly, Abu Bakr, Umar, ALI then Uthmaan, this was held by a few from the tabi’un and ahlul-kufa. However It was reported that Abu Hanifa RH had this view and the narration is questioned.And even if this is the case, this view was reported by the scholars to be only in virtue, not in being worthy of the khilafah. Also there are refutations against this view, that I maybe will go into later.

So in rank of strength, it was as follows: first was Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan then Ali. Second was Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan then silence. Third was Abu Bakr then Umar and silence. Lastly was the view that it was Abu Bakr, Umar, then Ali, then Uthmaan. May parents be sacrificed for them and may Allah be pleased with them all.

I felt it necassary to begin in introducing how the companions are seen by ahlul sunnah. Although I have not finished in the next post I will delve further into the proofs of the status of the companions and what we say about them, and inshaallah go into what the other sects say about the companions and what the ruling is according to the scholars using proofs from the Qur’an and Sunnah.

May Allah make it easy for me. And May Allah reward the brothers who I took from in terms of references, and sources.

any evil I have said is from myself and shaytan, any good I have done is from the blessing of Allah.

Wslm

- end of part 1 -

 

As-Salamu alaikum

I remember when i watched debates at channel “Mustakillah”, shia speaker dr. al-Mosawi made a face and said that in Buhari there is hadith, that prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) urinated while he was standing. Sometimes they are leaving issues of tawhid, takfir, and discussing such narrations.

The talk was about this narration:

Narrated Hudhaifa’:

The Prophet and I walked till we reached the dumps of some people. He stood, as any one of you stands, behind a wall and urinated. I went away, but he beckoned me to come. So I approached him and stood near his back till he finished.

Well first of all i would like to present shias fatwa from one of their top clerics, ayatolla Sistani.

Question 26 says:
“Is it permissible to urinate while standing with the assurances of being safe from tarnishing the body or the garment with impurity (Najasa)?
Answer:
It is permissible”

After this fatwa, i would like to present shias hadith.

Muhammad ibn Yaqub al-Kulayni reported in “al-Kafi” vol 6, p 500, #12808, and Hurr al-Amili in “Wasael ush-shia” vol 1, p 352, #933:

علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن رجل، عن أبي عبدالله (عليه السلام) قال: سألته عن الرجل يطلي فيبول وهو قائم؟ قال: لا بأس به.

(Chain) imam Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) was asked about man who urinated when he was standing, and he replied: No problem.

Muhammad Baqir Majlisi in “Miratul uqul” 22/402,  said narration is hasan or said that it’s muwathaq.

Anyways the hadith itself may need explanation which I would like to research here.

Also in Bukhari, vol.1 book 4, hadith 226

Narrated Abu Wail: Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari used to lay great stress on the question of urination and he used to say, “If anyone from Bani Israel happened to soil his clothes with urine, he used to cut that portion away.” Hearing that, Hudhaifa said to Abu Wail, “I wish he (Abu Musa) didn’t (lay great stress on that matter).” Hudhaifa added, “Allah’s Apostle went to the dumps of some people and urinated while standing.”

Or more explicitly here: Bukhari, vol.3, book 43 hadith no.651

Narrated Hudhaifa: I saw Allah’s Apostle coming (or the Prophet came) to the dumps of some people and urinated there while standing .

These narrations firstly show it is preferable to stand while urinating in places of dirt or places where garbage is disposed.

This is according to the narration of A’isha RA, where she said that the Prophet SAW always sat when urinating. This seemingly contradicting narration, is what many shi’a and other accusers seem to ignore, the concept of reconciliation.

This was according to A’isha’s  knowledge and what she saw. So she wouldn’t be lying if she said this. One incident that comes quickly to mind is the confusion about fadak and Abu Bakr and so on. According to the love of our messenger (SAW), her narration states that Fatimah died angry with Abu Bakr RA, but as we know this isn’t true. And again they would assume that A’isha was either lying, or any narration which is contrary to this one is fabricated. So what does someone who loves the Prophet and whoever he and his Lord loved do? We reconcile these, and we assume the best of our mother RA. She only spoke according to the version she had heard, and what she knew. And we know how the companions trusted each other. I will write about that also in another post.

Having the understanding and belief that if Fatimah RA was angry with someone, it doesn’t mean the person she is angry with has to enter punishment and so on, she thought they didn’t reconcile. So she stated what she heard and knew.

So the issue of standing while urinating is clear inshaallah and that fiqh and common sense dictates that you stand, and not sit in dirt and rubbish while urinating.

A last point to mention here is that someone might come along and say how come the Prophet beckoned for Hudaifa to come while he RA was walking away?

There are several things here.

1. He was behind him, so he couldn’t see anything.

2. Nowhere suggests he was facing his back, in fact it is more likely for him to be facing away due to the next point.

3. The Prophet beckoned for him, mainly for two primary reasons, one could be that for protection from the eyes of people, and make sure no-one came that way. The other could be that he was meant to hold the container that the Prophet extracted water from in order to clean himself.

So no-one could claim this is a disgusting narration or that this is a lie against the Prophet SAW.

And Allah knows best.

 

Answer of the office of Ayatullah Fadlullah:

ج) لعل ذلك يشير إلى الوصية التي يتحملها الإمام (ع) من سلفه والعهد الذي يعهد به إليه، والله تعالى أعلم، إضافة إلى أن الروايات غير تامة سنداً، فلا تكون موثوقة بالنظر إلى مضمونها وسندها

Maybe it is the Wasiyah or the promise which the Imam PBUH gives to the Imam which comes after him, Allah knows best. Keep in mind that the narrations are incomplete in Sanad and they(narrations) are not Mawthouqah(Trusted) based on the Matn and the Sanad.

- end -

comment: No one said anything about the Sanad, the point was if these were inserted later, don’t change the topic to the Sanad because for all I care Most of your Main Book is Garbage in terms of Sanad.

Answer of Ayatullah Ali Sistani:

From Imam-US (it’s basically the U.S liason office for Ayatullah al-Sistani):
السلام عليكم
مصطلح (دقيقة) وارد في اللغة العربية حتى قبل الاسلام. كما كلمة (ساعة)
ايضا. وهذه الكلمات لا يراد بها المعنى المتخذ اليوم وهو ان الدقيقة تعادل
ستين ثانية. بل بمعناها العام، مثلا (بقي الحسين يجود بنفسه ساعة) وتفاصيل
الحوادث لا تشير الى انها كانت ستين دقيقة، فالمعنى هو (فترة) و(وقت) محدد
وقليل. اما احتمال وضع الاحاديث بعد الائمة فهذا احتمال غير وارد، لان
الشيخ الكليني هو ثقة الاسلام وجميع الفقهاء يوثقونه ويعتمدون كتابه
الكافي، وهو كتاب ورد فيه اشادة من الامام المنتظر عجل الله تعالى فرجه.
لكن يبقى هو خاضع للتقيم ومعرفة الرواة والسند والدلالة. فهو ليس قرانا.
ودمتم.

The Term “Daqiqah” is found in the Arabic language even before Islam. Like the word “Sa’ah”(Hour) also. And these words are not understood like they’re understood today as in 1 min is 60 sec. But they are understood in a General sense for example (Hussein remained at home for one hour) and the details of the narrations do not prove that it is 60 minutes, but it means a short amount of time.
As for the possibility of inserting these Hadiths after the Imams, this is not possible because Kulayni is thiqat-al-Islam(trustworthy in islam) and all Faqihs adopt his book al Kafi and this is a book Which the Awaited Imam (Mahdi) has praised, but still there is room to study the Sanad of the narrations and the narrators of such hadith because it is not a Quran.

- end -

comment: We all All Know the term hour was used back then, It’s in The Quran even and this is common knowledge and it means a short amount of time. WE’RE TALKING ABOUT MINUTE!!!

Firstly this Guy admits that Daqiqah(minute) is used in the narration to specify time and he is a LIAR! and I challenge him to bring me one Arabic dictionary which says that The word Daqiqah was used to specify time in the era of the Imams (And if he could he would have done so).

Secondly, He changes the topic Again to the Sanad, I don’t care about the Sanad, whether it is weak or strong doesn’t matter with me, Which Arab would understand the term minute in 140 hijri? this is unheard of, Who inserted this narration later into al Kafi?

Thirdly Notice That Ayatullah Sistani says that the Book al Kafi was PRAISED BY the Mahdi himself!!! Does anyone know what this means? it means that this book which is FULL of narrations of tahreef al Quran and full of the dumbest most ridiculous nonsense is praised by Mahdi, thus we can use any Hadith in this Book al Kafi as a Hujjah on the Twelvers and they can’t use the excuse of the Sanad being weak or not BECAUSE THE INFALLIBLE MAHDI PRAISED THIS BOOK!

here are a few examples:

اصول الكافي ج1 ص414
علي بن إبراهيم، عن أحمد بن محمد البرقي، عن أبيه، عن محمد بن سنان عن عمار بن مروان، عن منخل، عن جابر عن ابي جعفر عليه السلام قال: نزل جبرئيل عليه السلام بهذه الآية على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله هكذا: ” بئسما اشتروا به أنفسهم أن يكفروا بما أنزل الله (في علي) بغيا(2) “.

Usool al Kafi 1/417
Ali bin Ibrahim from Ahmad bin Muhammad al burqi from his Father, from Muhammad bin Sinan, from Ammar bin Marwan from Mankhal from Jabir from Abu Ja’afar PBUH that he said: Gabriel PBUH revealed this verse for the prophet PBUH like this: {{They bartered their lives ill denying the revelation of God in ALI out of spite}} Surat 2 Verse 90.

الحسين بن محمد، عن معلى بن محمد، عن علي بن أسباط، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في قول الله عزوجل: ” ومن يطع الله ورسوله (في ولاية علي [وولاية] الائمة من بعده) فقد فاز فوزا عظيما(1) ” هكذا نزلت.

Usool al Kafi 1/414
Hussein bin Muhammad, from Ma’ala bin Muhammad, from Ali bin Asbat, from Ali bin Abi Hamza, from Abu Baseer, from Abu Abdullah PBUH about the saying of Allah: {{and he who obeys God and His Prophet in the Wilayah of Ali and the Wilayah of the Imams after him will be successful.}} Surat 33 Verse 71, This is How it was revealed.

علي بن إبراهيم، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن محمد بن خالد، عن محمد بن سليمان عن أبيه، عن أبي بصير، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في قول الله تعالى: ” سأل سائل بعذاب واقع * للكافرين (بولاية علي) ليس له دافع(1) ” ثم قال: هكذا والله نزل بها جبرئيل عليه السلام على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله.
المصدر السابق ص422

Usool al Kafi 1/422
Ali bin Ibrahim from Ahmad bin Muhammad from Muhammad bin Khalid from Muhammad bin Suleiman from his Father from Abu Baseer from Abu Abdullah PBUH about the saying of Allah: {{AN INQUIRER ASKED for the affliction that is to come (1) Upon the Kouffar In The Wilayah of Ali — which none would be able to repel –}} Surat 70 Verses 1 & 2, Then he said: By Allah it was revealed like this, this is how Gabriel PBUH revealed it to the Prophet PBUH.

Now the Question is, Did the Imam al Mahdi miss those and the hundreds of others by any chance? How can this “creature” praise such God awful disgusting kufri book!?

Al Salamu Aleykum,

Narration.Whoever died and in his soul was hate towards Ali, died like Jew or Christian.

Shaukani in “Favaid al majmua” (p 373, #72) said:
. رواه العقيلي عن بهز بن حكيم عن أبيه عن جده مرفوعا وقال في إسناده علي بن قرين كان يضع الحديث والجارود بن يزيد وكان يضع أيضا
“Narrated by Ukayli via Bahz ibn Hakim, from his father, from grandfather “marfuan”. In the chain is Ali ibn Qarin, he fabricated, and Jarud ibn Yazeed, he also use to fabricate (narrations)”.

Ali ibn Qarin. Zahabi in “Mizan” #5913 wrote:
قال يحيى: لا يكتب عنه، كذاب خبيث. وقال أبو حاتم: متروك الحديث. وقال موسى بن هارون، وغيره: كان يكذب. وقال العقيلى،: كان يضع الحديث. وقال الدارقطني: ضعيف
Yahya said: “Don’t record his narrations, he is wicked liar”. Abu Hatim said: “Matrook ahaeedth”. Musa ibn Harin and others said: “He use to lie”. Ukayli said: “He fabricated narrations”. Daraqutni said: “Weak”.

As for Jarud ibn Yazeed. Zahabi in “Mizan” #1428:
كذبه أبو أسامة. وضعفه على. وقال يحيى: ليس بشئ. وقال أبو داود: غير ثقة. وقال النسائي والدارقطني: متروك. وقال أبو حاتم: كذاب.
Abu Usama said he’s liar. Ali (ibn Madini) said he’ weak. Yahaya said he’s nothing. Abu Daud said: “Not truthful”. Daraqutni and Nasai said: “Matrook”. Abu Hatim said: “Liar”.

Now let us examine the Hadith again:

“Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla. O Allah, befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him.”

The Definition of the Word “Mawla”

The Shia claim that the word “Mawla” here means “master.” It is based on this erroneous translation of the word that they claim that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) nominated Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as his successor. In fact, the word “Mawla”–like many other Arabic words–has multiple possible translations. The Shia lay-person may be shocked to know that indeed the most common definition of the word “mawla” is actually “servant” and not “master.” A former slave who becomes a servant and who has no tribal connections was referred to as a Mawla, such as Salim who was called Salim Mawla Abi Hudhayfah because he was the servant of Abu Hudhayfah.

One only needs to open up an Arabic dictionary to see the various definitions of the word “Mawla.” Ibn Al-Atheer says that the word “Mawla” can be used to mean, amongst other things, the following: lord, owner, benefactor, liberator, helper, lover, ally, slave, servant, brother-in-law, cousin, friend, etc.
The word “Mawla” here cannot refer to “master”, but rather the best translation of the word “Mawla” is “a beloved friend”. It is clear that “Mawla” here refers to love and close relation, not Caliphate and Imamah. Muwalat (love) is the opposite of Mu`adat (enmity). This definition of the word “Mawla” makes most sense due to the context, because the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) immediately says “O Allah, befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosever is hostile to him.”
The Shia may refuse to believe that Mawla here means “beloved friend” but the reality is that it cannot be translated in any other way when we take into account that the very second addition is about befriending him, not about being ruled by him or anything like that. It is in fact unbelievable that the Shia can translate it to mean Caliph and Imam when the context has nothing to do with that.

The Thaqalayn Muslim Association says:
The Meaning of Mawla:
The schools of thought differ on the interpretation of the word “Mawla.” In Arabic, the world “Mawla” has many meanings. It can mean master, friend, slave, or even client. If a word has more than one meaning, the best way to ascertain its true connotation is to look at the association (qarinah) and the context. There are scores of “associations” in this hadith which clearly show that the only meaning fitting the occasion can be “master”. Some of them are as follows.

source:http://www.utm.thaqalayn.org/files/ghadeer.pdf

Al-Jazari said in al-Nihaayah:

“The word Mawla is frequently mentioned in the Hadith, and this is a name that is applied to many. It may refer to a lord, to an owner, to a master, to a benefactor, to one who frees a slave, to a supporter, to one who loves another, to a follower, to a neighbor, to a cousin (son of paternal uncle), to an ally, to an in-law, to a slave, to a freed slave, to one to whom one has done a favor. Most of these meanings are referred to in various Hadith, so it is to be understood in the manner implied by the context of the Hadith in which it is mentioned.”

Imam Shafi’i said with regards to Mawla in this particular Hadith of Ghadir Khumm:
“What is meant by that is the bonds (of friendship, brotherhood, and love) of Islam.”

Allah says in the Quran:

“So today no ransom shall be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire; it is your beloved friend (Mawla) and an evil refuge it is.” (Quran, 57:15)

No translator on earth–not even the staunchest Shia–has ever translated this to mean “Imam” or “Caliph”, as that would make the verse meaningless. The Hell-fire above is referred to as Mawla to the disbelievers because of their extreme closeness to it, and it is this definition of Mawla that is being referred to in the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm (i.e. extreme closeness to the Prophet, Ali, and the believers). Indeed, the word “Mawla” comes from “Wilayah” and not “Walayah”. Wilayah refers to love and Nusrah (help and aid), and is not to be confused with Walayah, which refers to the leadership.

Allah says in the Quran:
“That is because Allah is the Mawla (i.e. protecting friend, patron, etc) of those who believe, and because the disbelievers shall have no Mawla for them.” (Quran, 47:11)

This verse is not referring to Caliphate or Imamah, but rather it is referring to a close protecting friend. Otherwise, the verse would make no sense. The Shia commentators seem to ignore the second part of this verse in which Allah says: “the disbelievers shall have no Mawla for them”. Does this mean that the disbelievers will have no leader? Of course the disbelievers have a leader, such as today the American disbelievers have George Bush as their leader. This fact is mentioned in the Quran itself:

“Fight the leaders (imams) of kufr.” (Quran, 9:12)

“And We made them leaders (imams) who call towards the Fire.” (Quran, 28:41)

And so when Allah says “the disbelievers shall have no Mawla for them”, this refers to a protector of extreme closeness, not that they don’t have a leader. This verse is not using Mawla to mean Imam or Caliph at all, but rather it is referring to a close protecting friend.

The Hadith of Ghadir Khumm is meant to be interpreted in the same manner. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was advising the people to love Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and be close to him. And this is exactly what Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه), Umar (رضّى الله عنه), and Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) did (i.e. they were beloved friends of Ali). In fact, Umar (رضّى الله عنه) was so beloved to Ali (رضّى الله عنه) that he (Ali) wed his daughter to him (Umar). Ali (رضّى الله عنه) served as a vizier and close confidante for all Three Caliphs, such was the mutual love and admiration between the Three Caliphs and Ali (رضّى الله عنه). In other words, the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm has nothing to do with the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) nominating Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be his successor, but rather it was for the people to stop criticizing Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and to love him.

Allah says in the Quran:

“Certainly your Mawla (beloved friends) are Allah and His Messenger and the believers–those who establish regular prayers and regular charity, and they bow down humbly. As to those who turn (for friendship) to Allah, His Messenger, and the believers, (let them know that) it is the party of Allah that will be triumphant.” (Quran, 5:55-56)

In this verse of the Quran, Allah refers to all of the believers as being Mawla. How then can the Shia claim that the word Mawla refers to Caliphate or Imamah, unless all of the believers are suddenly Caliphs or Imams? (To this, the Shia will make the outrageous claim that this verse refers to Ali alone, despite the fact that it refers to believers in the plural. No doubt, Ali–like many other righteous believers–was included in this verse, but it cannot refer only and exclusively to him since it is clearly in the plural.) Indeed, the word “Mawla” here refers to love, extreme closeness, and help. In fact, there is not a single instance in the Quran in which the word “Mawla” is used to refer to Imamah or Caliphate.

In another verse of the Quran, Allah says:

“No Mawla will benefit his Malwa on the Day of Judgment.”

Does this mean that “no leader will benefit his leader on the Day of Judgment”? Surely this makes no sense. Rather, we see in this verse of the Quran that Allah refers to two people and calls both to be Mawla; if Mawla were to mean leader, then only one of them could be the leader of the other. But if Mawla means beloved friend, then indeed they could be Mawla of each other and it would be linguistically correct to refer to both of them as Mawla as Allah does in the Quran.

The word “Mawla” is used in the Hadith to mean beloved friend; let us examine Sahih al-Bukhari (Volume 4, Book 56, Number 715). The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) says:

“The tribes of Quraish, Al-Ansar, Juhaina, Muzaina, Aslam, Ghifar and Ashja’ are my beloved helpers (Mawali), and they have no protector except Allah and His Apostle.”

Does the word “Mawla” here refer to Caliphate or Imamah? Are these various tribes the Caliph or Imam over the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم)? Of course not. It makes more logical sense that they are in extreme closeness and love to the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and are thus referred to as Mawali (plural of Mawla).

It is also important to point out that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not say “after me” in the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm. He only said “whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla” without giving any time frame. This means that this fact is timeless. If the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had meant “whomsoever’s leader I am, this Ali is also his leader”, which is the meaning that our Shia brothers imply, then there would be a very big problem for the Muslim Ummah. There can never be two Caliphs in the same land at the same time, and there are many Hadith in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) warns against having two Caliphs. Without the words “after me”, it would become a very confusing sentence that would cause a great deal of Fitnah. Of course, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not mean it that way and none of the Sahabah understood it that way. On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to have more than one Mawla (beloved friend) at the same time. One can love the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and be close to him, and at the same time love and be close to Ali (رضّى الله عنه).

If the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) meant to nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه), then why would he use such ambiguous phrasing? Instead of saying something vague such as “whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla”, why didn’t the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) say something clearer such as “I nominate Ali to be the Caliph after I die” or “Ali is my successor and the first Caliph of the Muslims after me.” Surely, this would have cleared up the matter. The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was commanded to be clear in delivering the Message, and none of the Sahabah interpreted his statement at Ghadir Khumm to mean that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was nominated as Caliph.

Now the Shiite propagandists have came up with the following explanation when faced with this solid hard truth:

“The prophet (SAW) did in fact say clearly that IMAM ALI (A.S.) was his successor and the next Caliph and many other clearer things but these hadeeth were not transmitted by the sahaba and the sunnis because they wished to deny the imamate of IMAM ALI (A.S.). The sahaba and sunnis didnt remove the mawla hadeeth because it could be misinterpreted to deny the imamate of IMAM ALI (A.S.).
Some even say that the prophet (SAW) used intentionally vague wording otherwise people would have tampered his words. Had he used a more direct and clear term, then the sahaba would know that the people would think that it is about the IMAMATE of IMAM ALI (A.S.) and they would then take it out. In fact, in other SHIA hadeeths, the prophet (SAW) did in fact say it clearly that IMAM ALI (A.S.) is the successor and the next Caliph but the Sunnis reject those.”

This argument is actually conceding the entire debate. Here, the Shia is saying:

1) The clear sayings of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) were removed by the Sunnis.

2) The Hadith of Ghadir Khumm about Ali (رضّى الله عنه) being Mawla was not removed because it was not as direct and clear about the matter of Imamah or Caliphate.

Well then, isn’t the entire debate over? Was it not the Shia who was arguing this entire time that the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm is a clear and definite proof for the Imamah and Caliphate of Ali (رضّى الله عنه)? Indeed, this argument is admitting the fact that the Hadith about Ghadir Khumm does not talk clearly about Imamah/Caliphate; the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) saying that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is Mawla of the believers does not in any way prove that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was to be Caliph. In fact, had it been clear, then the Sahabah would not have transmitted it, correct? Therefore, we see–based on this line of thinking–that the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm could not have been clear about the Imamah of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), otherwise it wouldn’t have been narrated by the same Sahabah who sought to usurp his Caliphate. Indeed, this Hadith of Ghadir Khumm was never interpreted to mean that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was Caliph and instead it was simply in reference to the virtues of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). If the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) praises somebody, this does not automatically make this person the Caliph of the Ummah. As for the Shia Hadith on the matter, those are irrelevant to us because the Shia are known to be liars and mass fabricators when it comes to Hadith.

This is merely Shia guesswork and conjecture; the Shia imagination knows no bounds and he (the Shia) can read into the text amazing things. It is almost as if the Shia has some sort of special power or perhaps super goggles with which only he can read what is in between the lines that normal human beings cannot read, and it is this pair of goggles he uses when reading into both Quranic verses and Hadith. Perhaps aliens from Mars were about to attack and they would hate Ali (رضّى الله عنه), so this is why the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said this! And look, the word “aliens” even has the word “Ali” in it!
There is no need for this Shia guesswork and conjecture when we already know why Ali (رضّى الله عنه) had many enemies. There have been multiple narrations about how Ali (رضّى الله عنه) had angered his soldiers by taking back their spoils of war and these people were complaining about Ali (رضّى الله عنه). It was in this atmosphere of unrest that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) wanted to defend Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and urged these men to be friends with Ali (رضّى الله عنه) because Ali (رضّى الله عنه) should be loved by the entire Muslim Ummah, as indeed all of the Ahlus Sunnah loves Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to this day.

Let’s take more narrations this time from the books of the twelver shiites as usual:

So there is not dispute over the fact that Ali was in Yemen when the Prophet PBUH went to Pilgrimage Ali followed him to make Hajj, some Shia sources:

Al irshad(89), I’ilam al Wara(137), Al kafi, (2/233), Amali Al Tusi(252), Al Bihar (21/373…)
الإرشاد: (89)، إعلام الورى: (137)، الكافي: (2/233)، أمالي الطوسي: (252)، البحار: (21/373، 383، 384، 389، 391، 396).

A few examples:

رواه عمرو بن شاس الأسلمي: أنه كان مع علي بن أبي طالب في اليمن، فجفاه بعض الجفاة فوجد عليه في نفسه، فلما قدم المدينة اشتكاه عند من لقيه، فأقبل يوماً ورسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جالس في المسجد، فنظر إليه حتى جلس إليه، فقال: يا عمرو بن شاس، لقد آذيتني، فقلت: إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون، أعوذ بالله وبالإسلام أن أؤذي رسول الله، فقال: من آذى علياً فقد آذاني
إعلام الورى: (137)، البحار: (21/360).

Translation: Amro bin Shas Al salami that he was with Ali in Yemen Then Ali treated him harshly so he went to Medinah and complained to everyone he saw, He came once when the prophet PBUH was in the mosque then he sat with him and Said: O Amro bin Shas you have hurt me, I said: I seek refuge with allah from doing such a thing as hurting you, He said: He who hurts Ali has hurt Me.
I’ilam al Wara (137), al bihar(21/360).

وعن الباقر قال: بعث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم علياً إلى اليمن، فذكر قضاءه في مسألة فيها أن علياً رضي الله عنه قد أبطل دم رجل مقتول، فجاء أولياؤه من اليمن إلى النبي يشكون علياً فيما حكم عليهم، فقالوا: إن علياً ظلمنا وأبطل دم صاحبنا، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: إن علياً ليس بظلام

البحار: (21/362)(38/101) (40/316) (104/389، 400)، أمالي الصدوق: (348)، الكافي: (7/372).

Translation: Al Baqir said: Prophet PBUH sent Ali to Yemen and then a conflict occurred between him and the Family of a certain individual who was killed, They later came to the Prophet PBUH from Yemen and complained about Ali and said: Ali has oppressed us and took our right, The Prophet Said: Ali is not an oppressor.

Al Bihar(21/362)…, Amali al Saduq(348), Al Kafi(7/372).

أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لما أراد التوجه إلى الحج كاتب علياً رضي الله عنه بالتوجه إلى الحج من اليمن، فخرج بمن معه من العسكر الذي صحبه إلى اليمن ومعه الحلل التي كان أخذها من أهل نجران، فلما قارب مكة خلف على الجيش رجلاً، فأدرك هو رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، ثم أمره بالعودة إلى جيشه، فلما لقيهم وجدهم قد لبسوا الحلل التي كانت معهم، فأنكر ذلك عليهم، وانتزعها منهم، فاضطغنوا لذلك عليه، فلما دخلوا مكة كثرت شكايتهم من أمير المؤمنين رضي الله عنه، فأمر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مناديه فنادى في الناس: ارفعوا ألسنتكم عن علي بن أبي طالب؛ فإنه خشن في ذات الله عز وجل، غير مداهن في دينه
الإرشاد: (89)، إعلام الورى: (138)، البحار: (21/383)، المناقب: (2/110).

Translation: Prophet PBUH when he wanted to go to pilgrimage he wrote Ali and told him to go to Hajj from Yemen, Ali set out with his army from yemen with the booty he acquired from the people of Najran So when he reached Mecca he left the army and went to the prophet PBUH then he was ordered to go back and Then he found out that his army had taken all the gold and armor that they had acquired from Nijran So he opposed this and took everything from them, as a result they hated him and when they entered Mecca their complains had risen and their tone got sharper as they criticized Ali Then the Prophet PBUH ordered The Companion to Say: Do not insult Ali with your Tongues for he is a Man loved by Allah and devoted to his religion.

Al irshad(89), I’ilam al Wara(138), Al bihar(21/383), Al manaqib(2/110).

وعن عمران بن حصين رضي الله عنه قال: بعث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جيشاً واستعمل عليهم علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه، فمشى في السرية وأصاب جارية، فأنكروا ذلك عليه، وتعاقد أربعة من أصحاب رسول الله، فقالوا: إذا لقينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أخبرناه بما صنع علي.. فذكر شكوى الأربعة وإعراض رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عنهم، وقولـه: (من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه)
البحار: (37/320)(38/149).

Translation: imran bin Haseen RAA said: The prophet PBUH dispatched an army led by Ali Bin abi talib RAA and he marched with them then he had a problem with a female slave So the Men were displeased with him and four of the companions of Muhammad PBUH said: if we meet the prophet PBUH we will tell him what ali had done.. then they complained to the prophet PBUH and he said: (Ali is the Mawla of whomever I’m his Mawla).

Bihar al anwar (37/320)(38/149).

وعن بريدة رضي الله عنه قال: بعثنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في سرية، فلما قدمنا قال: كيف رأيتم صحابة صاحبكم؟ قال: فإما شكوته أو شكاه غيري، قال: فرفعت رأسي وكنت رجلاً مكباباً، قال: فإذا النبي قد احمر وجهه وهو يقول: من كنت وليه فعلي وليه
البحار: (37/220).

Translation: Buraidah RAA said: The prophet PBUH sent us in an army and he asked us when we returned about our friend(Ali) I said: Either I complained about him and others complained, Then the prophet PBUh got angry and his face was red as he said: Ali is the Wali of Whomever I’am his Wali.
Bihar (37/220).

وفي رواية عنه أيضاً رضي الله عنه قال: غزوت مع علي اليمن، فرأيت منه جفوة، فلما قدمت على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم تنقصته، فرأيت وجه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يتغير، فقال: يا بريدة، ألست أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم؟ قلت: بلى يا رسول الله، قال صلى الله عليه وسلم: فمن كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه
البحار: (37/187)، الطرائف: (35)، العمدة: (45).

Translation: buraidah May Allah be pleased with him said: I went to war with Ali In Yemen But I felt that he was cold to us and when I went to the prophet PBUh I criticized him Then I saw his face change, he said: O’Buraidah Do I not have more authority (awla) upon you than you have yourselves? I said: Yes O prophet of Allah, He said: I’am the Mawla of whomever ali is his Mawla.
Al bihar (37/187), al tara’ef(35), Al umdah(45).

So hopefully the image is getting clearer for the Shiite propagandists who love to twist things and take them out of context:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) mentioned that he had authority over the believers so that they would listen to him and befriend Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as was his wish. The Muslims under Ali’s command hated him, so the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was using his influence to cause them to love Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and take him as a beloved friend. An analogy to this is if a mafioso was about to hurt a baker, but that baker turned out to be a good friend of the mafia don. So the mafia don asks the mafioso: “Are you loyal to me and do you obey my commands?” The mafioso replies in the affirmative. So the mafia don says: “If you obey my command, then be nice to this baker. This baker is my good friend, and if you are my good friend, then you should also be friends with this baker.” This in no way means that the Baker is the successor of The Mafia Don after his death… so contemplate.

أن رجلاً كان باليمن فجفاه علي بن أبي طالب، فقال: لأشكونك إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فقدم على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فسأله عن علي فشنا عليه، فقال: أنشدك بالله الذي أنزل علي الكتاب واختصني بالرسالة عن سخط تقول، ما تقول في علي بن أبي طالب؟ قال: نعم يا رسول الله، قال: ألا تعلم أني أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم؟ قال: بلى، قال: فمن كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه
أمالي الطوسي: (610)، البحار: (33/218)(38/130).

Translation: Ali had oppressed a Man in Yemen, The Man said: I will Tell the Prophet of Allah about This, Then he went to the prophet PBUH who asked about Ali then the Man criticized him severely Then The prophet PBUH said: By Allah tell me, do you say what you say out of hatred for Ali bin abi talib? The Man Said: Yes o prophet of Allah, The Prophet PBUH then said: Do you not know that I have more authority (awla) upon you than you have yourselves? He said: Yes, The Prophet PBUH said: I’am the Mawla of whomever ali is his Mawla.

Amali al Tusi(610), Bihar al anwar (33/218)(38/130).

So now that you know why the Prophet PBUh said what he said and from their own books, there is something else you should notice, The Twelver Shiite books have so many occasions before Ghadeer khum in which the prophet PBUh tells the People “I’am the Mawla of whomever ali is his Mawla” as we just saw So why do they make a big deal out of Ghadeer khum? What makes it more special than all their other narrations? I’am sure everyone knows the answer by now.

Let’s give a few examples from their books about this:
حيث آخى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بين المهاجرين والأنصار وترك علياً فبكى فذهب إلى بيته، فأرسل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بلالاً رضي الله عنه في طلبه، فقال: يا علي، أجب النبي، فأتى علي النبي، فقال النبي: ما يبكيك يا أبا الحسن؟ فقال: آخيت بين المهاجرين والأنصار يا رسول الله وأنا واقف تراني وتعرف مكاني ولم تؤاخ بيني وبين أحد، قال: إنما ذخرتك لنفسي، ألا يسرك أن تكون أخا نبيك؟ قال: بلى يا رسول الله، أنَّى لي بذلك؟ فأخد بيده فأرقاه المنبر، فقال: اللهم إن هذا مني وأنا منه، ألا إنه مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى، ألا من كنت مولاه فهذا علي مولاه
الروضة: (11)، البحار: (37/186)(38/344).

Translation: In the event where the prophet PBUH made brotherhood between the Muhajirun and the Ansars after reaching Medinah, he left Ali aside so Ali cried and went home then the prophet PBUh sent bilal RAA to get him: O Ali come answer the Prophet PBUH, then ali came and the prophet PBUH told him: What Makes you cry Abu Al Hassan? He said: You made the Muhajirun and the Ansars brothers and I was standing there and you saw me but you never introduced me or made me their brother, The prophet PBUH said: I saved you for myself do you not like being the brother of your Prophet? He said: Yes O messenger of Allah can I be that? Then he took his hand and climbed the Minbar with him and said: O Allah he is from me and I’am from him like the rank of Aaron from Moses and whomever I’am his Mawlah Ali is also his Mawlah.

Al Rawdah(11), Al bihar(37/186)(38/344).

As you can see from the above narration firstly it is way before Ghadeer khum and secondly it is clear that he is saying it out of compliment and to make Ali feel better as he was late in reaching Madinah, so what’s so special about Ghadeer khum? …nothing according to this one.

ما كان يوم التصدق بالخاتم بزعمهم، فعن زيد بن الحسن، عن جده رضي الله عنه قال: سمعت عمار بن ياسر رضي الله عنه يقول: وقف لعلي بن أبي طالب سائل وهو راكع في صلاة تطوع، فنزع خاتمه فأعطاه السائل، فأتى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فأعلمه ذلك، فنزل على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم هذه الآية: ((إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمْ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ)) [المائدة:55]، فقرأها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم علينا، ثم قال: من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه، اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه
العياشي: (1/356)، البرهان: (1/482)، البحار: (35/187).

Translation: in the fabricated story when Ali gave the ring while in prayer, Zaid bin al Hassan narrated from his grandfather RAA: I heard Ammar bin Yasser RAA say: A Man stood next to Ali when in Ruku’u in prayer so he took his ring off and gave it to him Then the prophet PBUH came and it was revealed to him “Your Wali can be only Allah; and His messenger and those who believe, who establish worship and pay the poordue, and bow down.” [5:55] after he read it he said: Ali is the Mawla of Whomever I’am his Mawla, Allah befriends his friends and …
Al Ayyashi (1/356), Al burhan (1/482), Al Bihar (35/187).

Isn’t this more important than Ghadeer khum? Why make a big deal of Ghadeer of this happened way before it?

Also there are others like the Narration of the Bird:

ما جاء في حديث الطير وقول الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم: اللهم ائتني بأحب خلقك إليك، فجاء علي، فقال: اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه
بشارة المصطفى: (202)، البحار: (38/354).

Translation: when the Prophet PBUh said just as he was about to eat a Bird: O Allah get me your best and most beloved creation, Then Ali came so the prophet PBUH Said: O Allah be the Wali of His Wali and The Enemy of His Enemy.
Bisharat al Mustafa(202), Al bihar(38/354).

Actually in this Narration it is clear what the word “Wali” means and it does not mean Caliph or Successor It is Obvious that Wali which has multiple meanings in this sentence it is the opposite of “Enemy” when the prophet PBUH allegedly says “O Allah be the Wali of His Wali and The Enemy of His Enemy” I hope it’s clear because the opposite of Enemy is not caliph, it is friend and Lover and Ally … Anyway this is not our point of research but the most important thing is the fact that this Bird Narration happened before ghadeer khum and is much more important than it, So why not make the Eid of the bird? Did the Prophet PBUh say anything new in ghadeer khum? According to this No he didn’t and why did allah have to Warn the messenger and why did they have to fabricate a billion narrations when he had already said that Ali is the Caliph and successor here?

And there is so much more from their fabrications which contradict Ghadeer khum and destroy its importance and place as the best of days and the day we should fast and the day our Soujoud is equal to 100,000 pilgrimages to Mecca and so on…

This reminds me of what their sheikh al Saduq says regarding ghadeer:

بقول الصدوق في حديث الغدير: ونظرنا فيما يجمع له النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الناس ويخطب به ويعظم الشأن فيه، فإذا هو شيء لا يجوز أن يكونوا علموه فكرره عليهم، ولا شيء لا يفيدهم بالقول فيه معنى، لأن ذلك صفة العابث، والعبث عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم منفي
معاني الأخبار: (67)، البحار: (37/225).

Translation: Al Saduq says about Hadith of ghadeer: The Issue which requires the Prophet PBUH to gather the Muslims in ghadeer should be an important one and one which they necessarily didn’t previously know or could have heard about otherwise this event wouldn’t be important and it should be something to benefit them because they never knew about it and the Prophet PBUh never fools around.
Souce: Ma’ani al Akhbar (67), Al bihar(37/225).

Sadly al Saduq knows and I know and I have hundreds of proofs from narrations Fabricated by them that the prophet PBUh assigned Ali as Ameer as well as his 11 children before Ghadeer Khumm which destroys the importance of Ghadeer for eternity as well as Shi’ism altogether.

And another thing is that no one understands the Hadeeth of Ghadeer khum the same way the Twelvers do, for example:

Al Hussein PBUH in their books tells the army of al Sham (Mua’wiyah RAA): Do you know that ali is the Wali of All believers? They said: YES.
Amali Al Saduq(135), al bihar(44/318).

Al Baqir said: Two wondering arabs came to Umar RAA and they had a conflict So the Caliph said: O Abu al Hassan You judge between those two, so He passed his judgment on one of them and the man wasn’t happy with it so he said: O Ameer(Umar) of Believers Do you leave this Man(Ali) to judge between us? Then Umar RAA stood up and said: How Dare you say this!? He is My Mawla and The Mawla of each Believer, and if he isn’t your Mawla than you’re not a believer.
Bihar al anwar(40/124).

Although The Narration above is not authentic because it is found in a shiite book and has no correct chain of narrators yet it is believable because Ameer Umar RAA used to appoint Ameer Ali RAA as head of judges in his absence.

Ok so It’s obvious no one understood this “Wali/Mawlah” as leader or ruler of all Muslims Which is why the Shiite Propagandists made up funny narrations like this in order to make their theory more believable and to show that the prophet PBUh meant Caliph when he said Wali/Mawla:

الصادق أيضاً قال: لما أقام رسول الله أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب يوم غدير خم، أنزل الله تعالى على لسان جبرئيل، فقال له: يا محمد، إني منزل غداً ضحوة نجماً من السماء يغلب ضوؤه على ضوء الشمس، فأعلم أصحابك أنه من سقط ذلك النجم في داره فهو الخليفة من بعدك، فأعلمهم رسول الله، فجلسوا كلهم كل في منزلـه يتوقع أن يسقط النجم في منزلـه، فما لبثوا أن سقط النجم في منزل أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب وفاطمة
فرات: (2/452)، البحار: (35/283).

Al Sadiq says: When the prophet PBUH assigned Ali as Ameer and wasi in ghadeer khum Gabriel came and Allah said: O muhammad I will send a Star from the sky tomorrow morning which shines brighter than the sun, So he told his companions that where the Star Falls is the house of the Caliph after him so they all sat at home each expecting the star to hit his house then it fell in the house of Ameerul mumineen Ali Bin abi talib and Fatima.
Furat (2/452), al bihar(35/283).

Now you see what I’m talking about? They’re just making stuff up and they want us to believe it and they have no Sahih narration to prove anything, These are the twelver Shiites, the new reverts who get tricked into joining them, the poor souls who are born in a Shiite house and never question their religion and the sly hypocrites who get paid to join them, they’re all ignorant of the truth.
The Position of Ali’s Grandson, Al Hasan ibn Hasan ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضّى الله عنه)
It is narrated in Ibn Saad’s “Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra”:

A Rafidhi (a person who rejects the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar) said to him (Al Hasan ibn Hasan), “Did not the Messenger of Allah say to Ali: ‘If i am Mawla of someone, Ali is his Mawla?’”
He (Al Hasan) replied, “By Allah, if he meant by that Amirate and rulership, he would have been more explicit to you in expressing that, just as he was explicit to you about the Salah, Zakat and Hajj to the House. He would have said to you, ‘Oh people! This is your leader after me.’ The Messenger of Allah gave the best good counsel to the people (i.e. clear in meaning).”

(Source: Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, Volume 5)

Besides we the Mainstream Muslims can say that anyone is Caliph and Imam For example Umar bin al Khattab RAA, I can take a few of the Narrations praising him and say that he is the Infallible Imam:
The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “The truth, after me, is with Umar wherever he is.” (Narrated ibn Abbas)

And yet, nobody uses this Hadith to say that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was nominating Umar (رضّى الله عنه) as his successor; not even Umar (رضّى الله عنه) himself interpreted it in this way, and it was he himself who nominated Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) to be Caliph instead. In yet another Hadith, we read:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “If a prophet were to succeed me, it would have been Umar ibn al-Khattab.” (Sunan al-Tirmidhi)
Had this been a Hadith in regards to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), then the Shia would have been quoting it left, right, and center; but a cool-headed understanding by the Ahlus Sunnah takes into account all of the various Hadith in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) praised many Sahabah in various ways. These are all proofs for the exaltation of Sahabah definitely but they do not entail Prophetic nomination to Caliphate and they definitely do not convey any sense of divine appointment by Allah.

In another Hadith, we read:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “The first one whom the Truth will shake hands with is Umar…” (narrated Ubay ibn Kaab)

And in yet another Hadith, we read:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There were in the nations before you people who were inspired, and if there is one in my Ummah it is Umar.” (narrated Abu Hurrairah)

Therefore, based on these Hadith and many other similar Hadith said to other Sahabah, we see that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) calling Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be “Mawla” (beloved friend) was not a Prophetic nomination for Caliphate because others were praised in a similar fashion. What the Shia do is reject all the Hadith in regards to those they dislike and then accept only those in relation to Ali (رضّى الله عنه); what is a bit amusing is that the Shia does not care to look at Isnad, but to the Shia a Hadith is authentic if it praises Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and it is forged if it praises other Sahabah. This is the Shia “science” of Hadith; indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that the Shia would accept a narration on the authority of Mickey Mouse if it praised Ali (رضّى الله عنه), and they would reject a Hadith narrated through Ali (رضّى الله عنه) himself if it meant praising Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه), Umar (رضّى الله عنه), etc.

Now let us look at the second addition to the Hadith, namely the following:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “Befriend whoever befriends him (i.e. Ali), and be the enemy to whoever antagonizes him.”

The Shia will then use this Hadith to criticize those Sahabah who argued with Ali (رضّى الله عنه), and yet do they not know that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) also said similar things of other Sahabah? For example, we read the following Hadith:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “Whoever is angry with Umar is angry with me. Whoever loves Umar loves me.” (At-Tabarani)

In fact, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said this not only about Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and Umar (رضّى الله عنه), but about all of his Sahabah:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “Allah, Allah! Fear Him with regard to my Sahabah! Do not make them targets after me! Whoever loves them loves them with his love for me; and whoever hates them hates them with his hatred for me. Whoever bears enmity for them, bears enmity for me; and whoever bears enmity for me, bears enmity for Allah. Whoever bears enmity for Allah is about to perish!” (Narrated from Abdallah ibn Mughaffal by Al-Tirmidhi, by Ahmad with three good chains in his Musnad, al-Bukhari in his Tarikh, al-Bayhaqi in Shu`ab al-Iman, and others. Al-Suyuti declared it hasan in his Jami` al-Saghir #1442).

Finally I say that the same people who nominated and gave allegiance to abu bakr, uthman and Umar in their Baya’ah also did the same for Ali after them.

وقال لمعاوية في موطنٍ آخر: إن بيعتي لزمتك بالمدينة وأنت بالشام؛ لأنه بايعني القوم الذين بايعوا أبا بكر وعمر وعثمان على ما بايعوهم عليه، فلم يكن للشاهد أن يختار، ولا للغائب أن يرد، وإنما الشورى للمهاجرين والأنصار؛ فإن اجتمعوا على رجل وسموه إماماً كان ذلك لله رضاً، فإن خرج عن أمرهم خارج بطعن أو بدعة ردوه إلى ما خرج منه، فإن أبى قاتلوه على اتباعه غير سبيل المؤمنين، وولاه الله ما تولى ويصليه جهنم وساءت مصيراً
البحار: (32/368)(33/76)، وانظر أيضاً: نهج البلاغة: (446)، نور الثقلين: (1/551).

Ali said to Mua’wiyah: …For the Ones who gave me Baya’ah are the same people who gave Baya’ah to abu bakr, Umar and Uthman and for the same reason. No one could refuse it after he had witnessed it and no one who is abscent has a choice of refusing it because the Shura(Mutual consultation) is for the muhajirun and the Ansars and if they agree upon a Man and wish to make him their leader and Imam Then Allah will be pleased with their decision and if one is to stray away and create innovation then they will stop him…

Source: Bihar al anwar (32/368)(33/76), Nahjul balagha(446), noor al thaqalayn(1/551).

Allah wishes for us to stay clear of innovations and remain on the true path of guidance, the answer to the innovators from the twelver Shiite sect is clear and simple so will they learn or will they stick to their falsehood and hatred? And Peace be upon Our Beloved prophet Muhammad the messenger of Allah and his family and companions.

Besides the word Mawla is used several times in the Quran and they all mean (Ally, Close friend, Supporter, Lover..) It never came even once in the sense of (Caliph/Ameer).

Also there are LOADS of Hadiths which prove that Ali RA wasn’t appointed as Caliph/Ameer by the Prophet PBUH… such as:

Sahih al Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59 (al Maghaazi), Chapter: Sickness of the Prophet PBUH and his death, Number 728:
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Abbas:

Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Apostle during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Apostle this morning?” ‘Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” ‘Abbas bin ‘Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of ‘Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Apostle and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.”
‘Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Apostle for it.”

Or this:

Narrated By Al-Qasim bin Muhammad : ‘Aisha said, “O my head!” Allah’s Apostle said, “If that (i.e., your death) should happen while I am still alive, I would ask Allah to forgive you and would invoke Allah for you.” ‘Aisha said, “O my life which is going to be lost! By Allah, I think that you wish for my death, and if that should happen then you would be busy enjoying the company of one of your wives in the last part of that day.” The Prophet said, “But I should say, ‘O my head!’ I feel like calling Abu Bakr and his son and appoint (the former as my successors lest people should say something or wish for something. Allah will insist (on Abu Bakr becoming a Caliph) and the believers will prevent (anyone else from claiming the Caliphate),” or “…Allah will prevent (anyone else from claiming the Caliphate) and the believers will insist (on Abu Bakr becoming the Caliph).”

[Sahih al-Bukhari]

Or this one in which some companions from the Ansars call Ali RA their Mawla (Close Ally, loved Friend, Supporter..) and He doesn’t understand what they’re talking about:

عن رياح بن الحارث قال : ( جاء رهط إلى على بالرحبة فقالوا السلام عليك يا مولانا قال كيف أكون مولاكم وأنتم قوم عرب قالوا سمعنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم غدير خم يقول من كنت مولاه فان هذا مولاه قال رياح فلما مضوا تبعتهم فسألت من هؤلاء قالوا نفر من الأنصار فيهم أبو أيوب الأنصاري ) .
رواه الإمام أحمد في المسند 5/419 قال شعيب الأرناؤوط إسناده صحيح ، وأورده في فضائل الصحابة 2/570 حديث رقم 967 .

Narrated Rayeh bin al harith: A Group of Ansars came to Ali RAA in al Rahbah and said: Al Salamu Aleykum Ya Mawlana, He replied: How Can I be your Mawla and you are Arabian people? They Said: We heard the Prophet of Allah PBUH say on the Day of Ghadeer Khum: Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this (Ali) is also his Mawla. Riyah said: When they left I followed them and asked whom they were, They said some folks from the Ansars and amongst them was Abu Ayoub al Ansari.

>Narrated Imam Ahmad in His Munad 5/419, Shu’eib al Arna’out said Its ISNAD IS SAHIH, and it was mentioned in the Virtues of companions 2/570 #967.

So this is Ali Bin Abi Talib RAA Who Did not understand the saying of Ansars ” Al Salamu Aekum Ya Mawlana” as ” Al Salamu Aleykum O CALIPH/AMEER”, Instead he understood it as a Muwalat of “Al Itq” meaning the ownership of a Slave or in other words “Freed slaves”, Then when they explained to him that it was the Muwalat of Lovers, Supporters and Allies Then he agreed with them.

These are the Ansars who were at Ghadeer khum and this is how they understood it, and this is Imam Ali RAA himself and this is how He Understands it, So until when will The Persian ignorants keep explaining the word Mawla as Caliph and Ruler?

Or these narrations from the Shia books of Hadith:

عن سالم قال: قيل (للخليفة) عمر: نراك تصنع بعلي شيئاً لا تصنعه بأحد من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ فقال: إنه مولاي.

وعن الباقر قال: جاء أعرابيان إلى (الخليفة) عمر يختصمان، فقال عمر: يا أبا الحسن، اقض بينهما. فقضى على أحدهما، فقال المقضي عليه: يا أمير المؤمنين، هذا يقضي بيننا؟ فوثب إليه عمر فأخذ بتلبيبه ولبّبه، ثم قال: ويحك ما تدري من هذا؟! هذا مولاي ومولى كل مؤمن، ومن لم يكن مولاه فليس بمؤمن

المصدر:
البحار: ص 124 ج 40

Narrated Salem: they said to caliph Umar: we see you treating Ali like you treat no other of the Companions of the Prophet PBUH? he said: He is my Mawla.

imam al Baqir said: Once two wondering Arabs came to the caliph Umar so that he may Judge between them, So umar said to Ali: O Abu al Hassan why don’t you Judge between them. So he made his ruling on one of the two, Then That wondering Arab said: o Ameer al mumineen(Umar) Do you let this(man) judge between us!? So Umar quickly stood up and shouted at the Man: How dare you, do you not know who this is? He is my Mawla and the Malwa of every believer and if he’s not your Malwa then you’re not a believer.

Source: bihar al Anwar 40/124.

So as you can see No one understood Mawla as “Caliph/Ameer/Ruler” They understood it as beloved friend and supporter and Ally…

Is there any rationale as to why the Muslims from Mecca, Taif, Yemen, etc. would travel towards Ghadir Khumm on the way back to their home cities in the completely opposite direction? We hope that the reader can understand how truly absurd this proposition is.
To give an analogy, let us assume that the President of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) lives in San Francisco and that he wishes to nominate his replacement in front of all the ISNA members. Each year, ISNA holds its largest conference in Chicago, in which thousands of ISNA members from ever city in America congregate. They come from San Francisco, Austin, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Washington D.C., etc.

Now that all the ISNA members are present at the yearly conference in Chicago, would it not seem fairly self-evident that this would be the most fitting place for the ISNA president to nominate his successor? After the conference, everyone heads back to their respective home cities, so the ISNA president heads back towards San Francisco with a stop-over in Cheyenne. Would it make any logical sense that the other ISNA members pass through Cheyenne on the way back to their home cities in the opposite direction?

No rational mind could accept such a thing. It would make little sense for the ISNA president to nominate his successor in Cheyenne as opposed to Chicago during the yearly conference. A person who lives in Washington D.C. would not travel West to go to Cheyenne, but rather he would travel in the opposite direction towards his home. A person who lives in Chicago certainly wouldn’t accompany the ISNA president to Cheyenne after the conference, but rather he would stay behind in Chicago where he lives.

In this analogy above, San Francisco is Medinah, Chicago is Mecca, and Cheyenne is Ghadir Khumm. It is clear that the only people passing through Cheyenne are those that are headed towards San Francisco or the West Coast. Therefore, it would not be wise for the ISNA president to deliver his nomination speech in Cheyenne because the Muslims from all the other cities would not be present. It would instead make much more sense that he deliver such a speech in Chicago, where the conference is held. Likewise, Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) would have appointed his successor in Mecca during his Farewell Sermon, not in the middle of nowhere on the way back to Medinah.

Now that the Muslims from all the cities have assembled in Mecca, would this not be the most appropriate time to declare the Prophet’s successor? The Shia propagandist would have us believe that the Muslims going to Taif and Yemen would travel an extra 500 km (round trip) to the watering hole of Ghadir Khumm and then head back in the opposite direction. As stated by the Shia themselves, Ghadir Khumm was a watering hole and a resting point for those travelling…the only thing they fail to mention is that it is a resting point for those passing through it, not those heading in the opposite direction altogether!

This is nothing short of nonsense. After the Hajj, everyone heads back to their home cities and the Meccans would stay put since they lived in Mecca. Why would they have head out towards a watering hole in the middle of nowhere? Considering the fact that the Muslims were on foot in the desert, this journey back and forth of 250 km to Ghadir Khumm and back would have added a few extra weeks in transit time. Does this not flout logic and rational thinking?

Therefore, the conclusion we reach is that the Shia claim that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) appointed Ali (رضّى الله عنه) in front of all the Muslims is highly unlikely due to the fact that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not address this point in his Farewell Sermon at all. As for the incident of Ghadir Khumm, we have seen how unlikely it is that this would be the place that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) would appoint Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as the next Caliph; indeed, the mainstream Muslim version of Ghadir Khumm just makes more sense.

You Know however The Shiites just might have a convincing explanation in their books as to why the Prophet PBUh would appoint Ali PBUH in the middle of nowhere and with almost no one present…you see according to them the Prophet PBUh was actually afraid of people…you’ll see what I mean in just a second:

Jafar al Sadiq says in Al Kafi 1/289 That When this verse [5:55] was revealed Allah ordered The Prophet PBUH to Announce the Wilayah of Ali PBUH, The Companions however never understood the verse So Allah ordered Muhammad PBUh to explain it like he explained Hajj and Salat ect… But When this Order came the Prophet PBUh was Uneasy and he feared that the Companions might reject This Religion (Did they hate Ali this much!?) Then The Prophet PBUH Turned to god for guidance Then Allah revealed “O Apostle! proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And God will defend thee from men (who mean mischief). For God guideth not those who reject Faith.”………….Until the End of The Hadith.

Yes you see? It All makes sense to them now The Prophet PBUH hid it because he was scared and if he were to reveal it in Arafat in front of 124,000 Companions well they’ll just attack him and leave the entire Religion altogether. But he wasn’t only afraid when [5:55] was sent he was also afraid when [26:214] was revealed, listen to this:

عن علي رضي الله عنه قال: لما نزلت هذه الآية على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: ((وَأَنذِرْ عَشِيرَتَكَ الأَقْرَبِينَ)) [الشعراء:214] دعاني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فقال لي: ياعلي، إن الله أمرني أن أنذر عشيرتي الأقربين، قال: فضقت بذلك ذرعاً وعرفت أني متى أناديهم بهذا الأمر أرى منهم ما أكره، فَصَمتُّ على ذلك وجاءني جبرئيل عليه السلام، فقال: يا محمد، إنك إن لم تفعل ما أمرت به عذبك ربك عز وجل… الرواية
أمالي الطوسي: (20)، تفسير فرات: (1/301)، البحار: (18/191)(38/223).

Translation: Narrated By Ali RAA: When the verse “And warn your tribe of near kindred”[26:214] was revealed The Prophet PBUH invited me and told me: O Ali, Allah told me to warn my Tribe of near kindred. I’m very uneasy about this as I know that when I reveal this to them they will show me what I hate So I remained silent about it until Gabriel Came again and said: O Muhammad If you do this Not then Allah will Torture you…

Source: Amali al Tusi (20), Tafseer Furat (1/301), Bihar al anwar(18/191)(38/223).

I thought the twelvers believed That Muhammad PBUh was infallible? well at least in matters concerning Religion So how can he get a direct order and then Disobey and Hide the correct religion and keep it for himself? Is that infallible?

Another one but this time [3:128]:

وعن جابر الجعفي قال: قرأت عند أبي جعفر قول الله تعالى: ((لَيْسَ لَكَ مِنْ الأَمْرِ شَيْءٌ)) [آل عمران:128] قال: بلى والله، إن له من الأمر شيئاً وشيئاً وشيئاً، وليس حيث ذهبت، ولكني أخبرك، ثم ذكر أن الله عز وجل أمر رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم بإظهار ولاية علي رضي الله عنه، ففكر في عداوة قومه له ومعرفته بهم.. إلى أن قال: ضاق عن ذلك صدره، فأخبر الله أنه ليس له من هذا الأمر شيء
العياشي: (1/220)، البرهان: (1/314)، البحار: (17/11، 12)(25/337)، إثبات الهداة: (3/531)، الصافي: (1/296).

Translation: Jaber Al ju’fi Said: I read at Abu Ja’afar’s place The Saying of Allah “It is no concern at all of you (O’Muhammad)” [3:128] Then abu Ja’afar said: By allah This and This and This were all his concern…Then he mentions that allah ordered The prophet PBUh to reveal the Wilayah of Ali RAA Then He started thinking about how the people hated him and that he knew that Very well about them…Until he said: He was uneasy about it and his chest was tight Then Allah told him It is no concern at all of you.
Source: Al Ayyashi (1/220), Al burhan (1/314), Al bihar (17/11,12)(25/337), Ithbat al hudat (3/531), Al Safi (1/296).

First of all I just want to comment, Did the companions really hate him this much!? I mean is there proof that they hated him? Twelvers can believe anything they want but we as mainstream Muslims will stick to the true concrete evidence and the answer to the above is obvious and clear.
According to twelver Scholars he was also Afraid when [11:12] was revealed:

أن جبرئيل عليه السلام نزل على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بولاية علي، فقال: يا جبرئيل، أخاف مِنْ تشتت قلوب القوم -وفي رواية: وبكى- فقال له جبرئيل عليه السلام: مالك يا محمد أجزعت من أمر الله؟ فقال: كلا يا جبرئيل، ولكن قد علم ربي ما لقيت من قريش إذ لم يقروا لي بالرسالة حتى أمرني بجهادي، وأهبط إلي جنوداً من السماء فنصروني، فكيف يقروا لعلي من بعدي؟ فانصرف عنه جبرئيل، ثم نزل عليه: ((فَلَعَلَّكَ تَارِكٌ بَعْضَ مَا يُوحَى إِلَيْكَ وَضَائِقٌ بِهِ صَدْرُكَ)) [هود:12]
تفسير العياشي: (2/103)، البرهان: (2/135)، إثبات الهداة: (3/546).

Translation: Gabriel PBUH came to the prophet PBUH and revealed the Wilayah of Ali RAA, The prophet PBUH said: I fear that the people’s hearts will be lost – in another narration: He Cried – Then Gabriel said: What is wrong O Muhammad are you afraid from Allah’s orders? He said: No Gabriel, But Allah knows what I faced with Quraysh as they didn’t accept me as a messenger until I did Jihad and he aided me with hidden soldiers who granted me victory, How do you want them to accept Ali after me? So Gabriel Left him then Allah revealed: “a likely thing, that you would forsake anything of that which has been revealed to you, and that your breast should be straightened for it” [11:12]
Source: Tafseer Ayyashi (2/103), Al burhan(2/135), Ithbat al hudat(3/546).

And in another Shiite Narration related to ghadeer from al baqir he said: “فلم يبلغ ذلك وخاف الناس” => So he didn’t deliver the message and he feared the people.

And in another Narration “وامتنع رسول الله من القيام بها لمكان الناس” => He concealed this because of the people.

Sources:
البحار: (35/282)(37/127، 140، 151، 170)، فرات: (1/131)(2/450)، العياشي: (1/361)(2/103)، البرهان: (1/489)(2/145)، إثبات الهداة: (2/164) (3/544، 546).

So basically The Fabricators of these narrations want the people to think: Well the Companions Finally accepted That Muhammad PBUH is the messenger But Now he wants them to accept That Ali was the successor!? Surely that’s too much to ask! I mean they don’t love him that much!? Or do they? hmmm…

Now take a look at this narration as the grandson of Iblees (Satan) was more concerned about delivering this message than Muhammad PBUH was:

رووا أنه أتى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فسلم عليه، وقال: من تكون؟ فقال: أنا الهام بن الهيم بن لاقيس بن إبليس، فقال صلى الله عليه وسلم: بينك وبين إبليس أبوان؟ قال: نعم يا رسول الله، فذكر حديثاً طويلاً فيه: أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم سأل الهام حاجته؟ فقال: حاجتي أن تأمر أمتك أن لا يخالفوا أمر الوصي
البحار: (38/54)(63/100)، الروضة: (41)، البصائر: (28).

Translation: He came to the prophet PBUh who asked: Who are you? He replied: I’am Ilham bin Ilheem bin Laqees bin Iblees(Satan), The Prophet PBUH said: between you and Iblees are two fathers? He said: Yes O Messenger of Allah … After a long narration the Prophet PBUh finally asks him what he wants Then He says: What I want is for you to tell your nation that they should not Disobey your Successor Ali.

Source: Buharul Anwar (38/54)(63/100), al Rawdah(41), Al Basa’er(28).

Now some Twelver Shiite Scholars are actually smart so when they realized that no Quran was revealed on that day and that what was revealed had nothing to do with the Wilayah or Imamah and when they actually read the verses and realized that the context was completely different then what they had hoped they resorted to this:

قول القمي صاحب التفسير في مقدمته: وأما ما هو محرف، فمنه قولـه: [يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما أنزل إليك من ربك في علي وإن لم تفعل فما بلغت رسالته]
تفسير القمي: (1/23)، البرهان: (1/34).

Translation: The Big Shiite Scholar Al Qummi author of the Tafseer wrote in the intro of his book: As for what has been Corrupted (Tahreef) from it is his saying: “O Messenger! make known that which has been revealed to you from your lord regarding Ali, for if you do it not, you will not have conveyed his message.”

Source: tafseer al Qummi (1/23), al burhan (1/34).

عن زر، عن أبي عبدالله قال: كنا نقرأ على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: يا أيها الرسول بلع ما أنزل إليك من ربك أن علياً مولى المؤمنين، فإن لم تفعل فما بلغت رسالته، والله يعصمك من الناس
كشف الغمة: (1/326)، البرهان: (1/491)، البحار: (37/178).

Translation: From Zurr From Abu Abdullah: We used to read in the days of the prophet PBUH: “O Messenger! make known that which has been revealed to you from your lord That Ali is the Mawla of believers, for if you do it not, you will not have conveyed his message.”
Source: Kashf al ghimmah(1/326), al burhan (1/491), al bihar(37/178).

عن عيسى بن عبدالله، عن أبيه، عن جده في قولـه: يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما أنزل إليك في علي، وإن لم تفعل عذبتك عذاباً أليما، فطرح عدوي -أي: عمر- اسم علي
البحار: (35/58).

Translation: from Isa bin Abdullah from his father from his grandfather: “O Messenger! make known that which has been revealed to you regarding Ali, for if you do it not, you will be severely tortured.” Then our enemy Umar removed the word Ali.

Source: bihar al anwar (35/58).

And similar narrations in these sources:

للمزيد انظر: الصافي: (2/51)، نور الثقلين: (1/653)، الاحتجاج: (57)، البحار: (37/137، 201)، فصل الخطاب: (281)، محجة العلماء: (130).

At the end we come to realize that the only thing the prophet PBUH said back then was what is written in the authentic books of ahlul sunnah and the mainstream Muslims and that everything the Shiites wrote is just pure fiction and fairytales but the question is now, Why did he say this to Ali RAA.
What Really Happened at Ghadir Khumm

Nobody denies the incident of Ghadir Khumm; however, what we deny are the exaggerations of the Shia with regards to said event. The context of Ghadir Khumm must be taken into consideration. What happened at Ghadir Khumm was that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) was responding to certain individuals who were criticizing Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضّى الله عنه). The background behind this was that a few months earlier, the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had dispatched Ali (رضّى الله عنه) alongside 300 men to Yemen on an expedition. This is mentioned on the Shia website, http://www.ahlelbayt.com/articles/re…/www.najaf.org: “Ali was appointed the leader of the expedition to Yemen.” (http://www.najaf.org/english/book/20/4.htm)
The army led by Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was very successful in Yemen and they captured a lot of war booty. It was over this war booty that a dispute began between Ali (رضّى الله عنه) on the one hand and his soldiers on the other. It is narrated in Ibn Kathir’s “al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah”:
Amongst the state’s fifth of the spoils there was enough linen to clothe the whole army, but Ali had decided that it must be handed over to the Prophet untouched.

After the victory in Yemen, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) placed his deputy commander in charge of the troops stationed in Yemen, while he himself head out towards Mecca to meet the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) for the Hajj. We read:

In his (Ali’s) absence, however, the man he left in charge was persuaded to lend each man a new change of clothes out of the linen. The change was much needed for they had been away from home for nearly three months.

The troops stationed in Yemen then set out to Mecca to complete the Hajj with the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم

When they (the soldiers sent to Yemen) were not far from entering the city (of Mecca), Ali rode out to meet them and was amazed to see the transformation that had taken place (in regards to their clothing).

“I gave them the garments,” said the deputy commander, “that their appearance might be more seemly when they entered in among the people.” The men all knew that everyone in Mecca would now be wearing their finest clothes in honor of the Feast, and they were anxious to look their best. But Ali felt he could not countenance such a liberty and he ordered them to put on their old clothes again and return the new ones to the spoils. Great resentment was felt throughout the army on this account, and when the Prophet heard of it, he (the Prophet) said: “O people, blame not Ali, for he is too scrupulous in the path of Allah to be blamed.” But these words were not sufficient, or it may be that they were only heard by a few, and the resentment continued.

On the way back to Medina one of the troops bitterly complained of Ali to the Prophet, whose face changed color. “Am I not nearer to the believers than their own selves?” he said; and when the man assented, he added: “Whomsoever’s beloved friend I am, Ali is (also) his beloved friend.” Later on in the journey, when they had halted at Ghadir al-Khumm, he gathered all the people together, and taking Ali by the hand he repeated these words [i.e. whomsoever’s beloved I am, this Ali is (also) his beloved friend”], to which he added the prayer: “O Allah, be the friend of him who is his friend, and the foe of him who is his foe”; and the murmurings against Ali were silenced.

The soldiers under Ali’s charge were not only perturbed over the change of clothes but also over the distribution of the spoils of war in general. The Muslims, thanks to the great leadership of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), had conquered many camels, but Ali (رضّى الله عنه) forbade them from taking possession of these camels. Al-Bayhaqi narrates from Abu Saeed that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) prevented them from riding the camels of the war spoils that they had acquired. But when Ali (رضّى الله عنه) had left for Mecca, his deputy commander had succumbed to the pleas of the people and allowed them to ride these camels. When Ali (رضّى الله عنه) saw that, he became angry and he blamed the deputy commander. Abu Saeed (رضّى الله عنه) said: “When we were on the way back to Medinah, we mentioned to the Prophet the harshness that we have seen from Ali; the Prophet said: ‘Stop…By Allah, I have known that he (Ali) has done good for the sake of Allah.’”

A similar incident is described in Ibn Ishaq’s Seerah Rasool-Allah; we read:

When Ali came (back) from the Yemen to meet the Apostle in Mecca, he hurried to him and left in charge of his army one of his companions who went and covered every man in the force with clothes from the linen Ali had. When the army approached, he (Ali) went out to meet them and found them dressed in the clothes. When he asked what on earth had happened, the man (his deputee) said that he had dressed the men so that they might appear seemly when they mingle with the people. He (Ali) told him to take off the clothes before they came to the Apostle and they did so and put them back among the spoil(s). The army showed resentment at their treatment…when the men complained of Ali, the Apostle arose to address them and he (the narrator) heard him (the Prophet) say: “Do not blame Ali, for he is too scrupulous in the things of Allah, or in the way of Allah, to be blamed.”
(Ibn Ishaq, Seerah Rasool-Allah, p.650)

Ibn Katheer narrates that the people in the army (i.e. the contingent sent to Yemen) started to criticize Ali (رضّى الله عنه) because he prevented them from riding the camels and took back the new clothes that they had acquired. It was these men that accompanied the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to Medinah via Ghadir Khumm, and it is they who were being addressed in the famous Hadith of Ghadir Khumm.

In fact, in “Tareekh al-Islam”, the event of Ghadir Khumm falls under the heading “The Consolation of Ali”. We read:

The Consolation of Ali

During the Hajj, some of the followers of Ali who had been with him to Yemen complained to the Prophet about Ali. Some of the misunderstandings of the people of Yemen had given rise to misgivings. Addressing the Companions at Ghadir Khumm, the Prophet of Allah said admiring Ali: “The one who is my friend is the friend of Ali…” Following the address, Umar congratulated Ali saying: “From this day on you are a very special friend of mine.” The Prophet then came back to Al-Medinah and his son Ibrahim passed away.
(Tareekh al-Islam, Vol.1, p.241)

…The Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, had sent him (Ali), peace be upon him, to Yemen to collect the fifth share (khums) of their gold and silder and collect the breastplates and other things…Then the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, decided to go on the pilgrimage and to carry out the duties which God, the Exalted, had decreed…

He, may God bless him and his family, set out with them with five days remaining in (the month of) Dhu al-Qa’da. He had written to the Commander of the Faithful (Ali), peace be upon him, about going on the pilgrimage from Yemen…

Meanwhile, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, set out with the soldiers who had accompanied him to Yemen. He had with him the breastplates which he had collected from the people of Najran. When the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, was nearing Mecca on the road from Medina, the Commander of the Faithful (Ali), peace be upon him, was nearing it on the road from Yemen. He (Ali) went ahead of the army to meet the Prophet, may God bless him and his family, and he left one of their number in charge of them. He came up to the Prophet as the latter was looking down over Mecca. He (Ali) greeted him (the Prophet) and informed him (the Prophet) of what he (Ali) had done and what he (Ali) had collected [in Khums] and that he had hurried ahead of the army to meet him. The Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family, was pleased at that and delighted to meet him…

The Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, said farewell to him (the Prophet) and returned to his army. He (Ali) met them nearby and found that they had put on the breastplates which they had had with them. He (Ali) denounced them for that.

“Shame on you!” he (Ali) said to the man whom he had appointed as his deputy over them. “Whatever made you give them breastplates before we hand them over to the Apostle of God, may God bless him and his family? I did not give you permission to do that.”

“They asked me to let them deck themselves out and enter into the state of consecration in them, and then they would give them back to me,” he replied.

The Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, took them off the people and put them back in the sacks. They were discontented with him because of that. When they came to Mecca, their complaints against the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, became numerous. The Apostle of God ordered the call to be given among the people: “Stop your tongues (speaking) against Ali ibn Abi Talib, peace be upon him. He is one who is harsh in the interests of God, the Mighty and High, not one who deceives in His religion…”

When the Apostle of God carried out his rituals of the pilgrimage, he made Ali his partner in the sacrifice of animals. Then he began his journey back to Medina. (Ali) and the Muslims went with him. He came to a place known as Ghadir Khumm…
(Kitab al-Irshad, by Shaykh Mufid, pp.119-123)

all (or at least most) of Ali’s soldiers who were upset with him, not just one or two soldiers. Shaykh Mufid writes:

The Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, took them (the breastplates) off the people and put them back in the sacks. They were discontented with him because of that. When they came to Mecca, their complaints against the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, became numerous. The Apostle of God ordered the call to be given among the people: “Stop your tongues (speaking) against Ali ibn Abi Talib, peace be upon him. He is one who is harsh in the interests of God, the Mighty and High, not one who deceives in His religion…”

(Kitab al-Irshad, by Shaykh Mufid, pp.121-122)

The complaints against Ali (رضّى الله عنه) were “numerous” and it was the “people” who were discontented (not one or two individuals), and the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) ordered the call to the people in general. It is clear that the vast majority of Ali’s soldiers were discontented with him because he refused to allow them to wear the breastplates from the Khums. Therefore, it is improper to pinpoint the blame on one or two individuals; instead, the truth of the matter is that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) had angered all of his soldiers, and we seek Allah’s refuge from laying the blame on anybody, especially since the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself forgave Buraida (رضّى الله عنه) and the others. The bottom line point, however, is that many people were angry at Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and this is was the reason why the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had to make the declaration at Ghadir Khumm, to exonerate Ali (رضّى الله عنه)–not to nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as his successor.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.