Al-Ijtihad

Agus Subandi,Drs.MBA

AL-NASS
WEL-IJTIHAD
By: Abdul Husayn Sharafuddeen Al-Musawi
Translated by: Abdullah al-Shahin
Publisher: Ansariyan Publications – Qum
First Edition 1425 -1383 - 2004
Ofuq Press
Quantity: 2000
Number of Pages: 432
Size: 1162 x 229 mm
ISBN: 964-438-584-5
ALL RIGHTS RECORDED AND RESERVED FOR THE PUBLISHER

Ansariyan Publications
P.O. Box 187
22 Shohada St., Qum
Islamic Republic of Iran
Tel: 0098 251 7741744 Fax: 7742647
Email: ansarian@noornet.net
www.ansariyan.net & www.ansariyan.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Glance At The Author’s Biography
13
Introduction
55
An-Nass wel-Ijtihad
81
Preface
91
Chapter One
Interpretations Of Abu Bakr And His Followers
95
Chapter Two
Interpretations Of Umar And His Followers (part 1)
183

(part 2)

206

(part 3)

224

(part 4)

262

(part 5)

296
Chapter Three
Othman And His Followers’ Interpretations
333
Chapter Four
Aa’isha And Her Interpretations
341
Chapter Five
Interpretations Of Khalid Bin Al-Waleed
373
Chapter Six
The Violations Of Mo’awiya
377
Chapter Seven
The Slips Of The Public (The Sunni)
395
Conclusion
411

(13)
A Glance At The Author’s
Biography
Written by Allama Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq as-Sadr
The previous head of the Legal Ja’fari Cassation counsel
The Islamic world today highly appreciates the personality of the late great mujtahid[1] Sayyid Abdul Husayn Sharafuddeen, who has made himself as an entail for the sake of the public Islamic benefit.
This beloved personality, with its greatness and fame, has filled the sights and hearings when the life has been flourished with the useful existence of this great man.
The time has folded this bright page but its fragrance is still spreading with its abundant knowledge, great effects, benevolent works and august services for the sake of Allah, the religion and the nation.
This great man strove and endeavored as possible as he could along his life inviting the Muslims to unite, to agree with each other and to avoid the bad sectarianism through his eloquent speeches, crowded meetings and valuable eternal books.
The first work of him was before half a century. It was his book “Al-Fusool al-Muhimma fee Ta’leef al-Umma”, which he had written in 1327 A.H.
He thought of the solidarity of the umma, in a time when no one thought of it except a very few learned persons of that age. He
________________________________________
[1] Mujtahid is a person accepted in Shiism as an authority on the interpretation of Islamic law.


(14)
discussed then in his “al-Fusool al-Muhimma” the obstacles that acted as stumbling blocks in the way of the unity of the umma. He uncovered those obstacles in a clear eloquence and decisive proofs, which did not let any way to suspicion and doubt.
Al-Fusool al-Muhimma was a book of clear scientific facts, which the imam of the knowledge and eloquence had formed in his bright Alawite literary style in order to unite the umma under the banner of monotheism and solidarity. Those discussions were accurate in thinking and eloquent in expressing that they were as something new for the Islamic studies before that date.
Those studies, in their noble Islamic aim, are to be in every house to guide the straying, to lead the confused and to direct people to the way of Ahlul Bayt,[1] whom Allah has purified from uncleanness and who have been the equivalents of the Book and the leaders of the umma to the truth and to the straight path.
Two years after his book had been published, Sayyid Sharafuddeen traveled to Egypt to invite for the Islamic unity through his speeches and moving sayings. His hopes had been refreshed by the Egyptians discussions and the Azharite “muraja’at”,[2] which had happened between him and the allama of Egypt Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri, the head of al-Azhar University. Those friendly meetings had solved many problems and questions.
They both had exchanged their passions to each other and each of them had found in his friend abundant knowledge, magnanimity and determination to invite for unity that had to be among the fair ulama. As a result of those discussions and reviews was the book of “al-Muraja’at” by Sayyid Sharafuddeen that had spread allover the Islamic world in several editions.
A very fine saying was said by Sayyid Sharafuddeen in the beginning of his book al-Muraja’at about these meetings. He said: “How well it is when the ulama meet with pure spirits, pleasing sayings and
________________________________________
[1] Ahlul Bayt: the Prophet’s progeny (s).
[2] Al-Azhar is a centre of Islamic and Arabic learning centered on the mosque of that name in Cairo, Egypt. Muraja’at means reviews.


(15)
prophetic morals! Whenever an aalim[1] is in this neat garment, he will be in goodness and blessing and people will be in safe and mercy. No one of people will refrain from telling such an aalim of his real opinion or what there is inside him.
Such was the aalim and imam of Egypt and such were our meetings, which we thanked infinitely.
I complained to him my passion and he complained to me the same thing. It was a lucky hour that inspired to us to think of something, by which Allah might reunite the umma. Among what we had agreed upon was that the two sects; the Shia and the Sunni were Muslims believing in pure Islam. They are equal in what the Prophet (s) has brought and there is no difference between them concerning a basic origin of the religion that may spoil their belief in pure Islam and there is no dispute between them except for the differences between the mujtahids concerning some verdicts due to their different points of views in interpreting those verdicts out of the Qur’an, the Sunna, the consensus and the fourth evidence (reason) and all these differences do not lead to separation (between the Muslims) nor to serious disputes. There is no any reason for this dispute, whose sparks have scattered since the existence of these two names; Sunni and Shia.”
In such a high Islamic spirit our master Sayyid Sharafuddeen acted throughout his life, whose long years did not add to him save determination and insistence on this path.
It was for this continuous Islamic jihad that we found the different Islamic sects had agreed on loving and appreciating him and on looking at him with admiration and respect.
And now his name is gratified by every tongue and his eternal books are in every house and are read by all people, who compete to have them and to present them to anyone looking forward to the high Islamic culture.
Libraries and presses here and there make reading these books easy and offer them to the readers in the best way that fits their
________________________________________
[1] Aalim is the singular form of ulama. Aalim is a jurisprudent or a scholar.


(16)
importance. May Allah make the all succeed in the way of goodness and righteousness.
Here we show in summary the biography of this great man, whose life has been filled with glory, lessons and examples, so that to make this bright page as lessons teaching the umma jihad, unity, sincerity, cordiality and devoutness for the sake of the general Islamic welfare, to which Sayyid Sharafuddeen has devoted his long life. We pray Allah to help us in serving Him and achieving His rights.
What we mention here is a drop from an ocean of what we have known about this man. May Allah benefit His people with this man’s knowledge and pen and make the umma walk in his guidance and act according to his sayings, maxims and instructions.
His birth and upbringing
Sayyid Sharafuddeen was born in Kadhimiyya[1] in 1290 A.H. from Alawite parents. His father was the great allama Sayyid Yousuf Sharafuddeen and his mother was Az-Zahra’ the daughter of ayatollah Sayyid Al-Hadi As-Sadr the father of the great religious authority Sayyid al-Hasan as-Sadr (may Allah have mercy upon them all).
The lineage of Sayyid Sharafuddeen[2] from his two parents reaches to Imam Musa al-Kadhim[3] (s). Muhammad al-Awwal (the first) is the
________________________________________
[1] In Iraq.
[2] He is Sayyid Sharafuddeen bin (the son of) Sayyid Yousuf bin Sayyid Jawad bin Sayyid Issma’eel bin Muhammad the grandfather of the two families aal (the family of) as-Sadr and aal Sharafuddeen bin Sayyid Ibraheem (surnamed as Sharafuddeen) bin Sayyid Zaynul Aabideen bin Sayyid Ali Nooruddeen bin Sayyid Nooruddeen Ali bin Sayyid Izzuddeen al-Husayn bin Sayyid Muhammad bin Sayyid al-Husayn bin Sayyid Ali bin Sayyid Muhammad bin Sayyid Tajuddeen (known as Abul Hasan) bin Sayyid Muhammad (surnamed as Shamsuddeen) bin Sayyid Abdullah (surnamed as Jalaluddeen) bin Sayyid Ahmad bin Sayyid Hamza bin Sayyid Sa’dullah bin Sayyid Hamza bin Abul Sa’adat Muhammad bin Abu Abdullah (the chief of the chiefs of the Talibites in Baghdad) bin Abul Harth Muhammad bin Abul Hasan Ali (known as Ibnul Daylamiyya) bin Abu Tahir bin al-Husayn al-Qat’iy bin Musa Abu Sibha bin Ibraheem al-Murtadha bin Imam al-Kadhim bin Imam as-Sadiq bin Imam al-Baqir bin Imam Zaynul Aabideen (as-Sajjad) bin Imam Abu Abdullah al-Husayn bin Imam Ali bin Abu Talib (peace be upon them all).
[3] He is the Seventh imam of the Shia.


(17)
son of the great mujtahid Sayyid Ibraheem (surnamed as Sharafuddeen), who is the common grandfather of the two families; aal[1] as-Sadr and aal Sharafuddeen. These two families were together in Baghdad known at that time as aal al-Husayn al-Qat’iy, from which was the family of the two great scholars Sharif al-Murtadha and Sharif ar-Radhiy.
In his honorable grandfather Sayyid al-Hadi’s house, Sayyid Sharafuddeen was born under the care of his grandfather. He was beloved and preferred by his grandfather and by the all.
His uncle (my father) Sayyid Muhammad al-Husayn as-Sadr[2] was his mate and friend. They learned together because they were near in age, aim and thinking.
Beside them (in the school of the house) was his (Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s) youngest aunt[3] participating them their learning, studying and discussing. Sayyid Sharafuddeen often mention that with too much pride.
________________________________________
[1] Aal means “the family of”.
[2] He was born in Kadhimiyya in 1288 A.H. and died in it in 1330 A.H.
[3] She (may Allah have mercy upon her) was an example of virtue, intelligence, good memory, quick-witted, honesty and piety. She composed poetry in standard and colloquial Arabic. She was interested in holding meeting of consolation in Ashura (the tenth day of Muharram when Imam al-Husayn had been martyred) and the anniversaries of the deaths of the infallible imams in her house. The reciters (women) used to recite her poetry, which she composed for those occasions, in those meetings. Women often referred to her about the legal questions. On every event, she quoted for the women the fatwa of her brother Imam al-Hasan as-Sadr, whom she followed in her taqlid.
She was buried in the private graveyard of aal as-Sadr beside her father and relatives’ tombs. Her death caused wide sorrow in Baghdad and Kadhimiyya and for Sayyid Sharafuddeen, who was in Aamila in Lebanon. He held a meeting of consolation there and many famous personalities of the country had attended the meeting, at the head of whom was the great mujtahid Sheikh Abdul Husayn aal Sadiq, who had recited his wonderful poem, in which he had mentioned the dead woman’s brother Imam al-Hasan as-Sadr. He recited:
An imam but if no “No” was there
We could say he was a prophet getting wisdom from the Best of the wise


(18)
His study
In the eighth year of his old his father Yousuf returned to Aamila[1] after he had finished his studies and got a certificate of absolute ijtihad[2] from the ulama of Iraq. His mother wished to stay near her family (in Iraq) to educate her only son (Sayyid Sharafuddeen) and to prepare for him the suitable sphere beside his grandfather and his uncle but his father did not agree to this wish because of his great love to him (to his son). He promised her that he himself would educate him and then he would send him back to Iraq in the proper time. She accepted this condition.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen kept to his father and learned from him what he needed of sciences of the Arabic language, logic, eloquence, Fiqh and Usool.[3] His name shone among his fellow boys and his superiority was known while he was too young yet.
When Sayyid Sharafuddeen became seventeen years old, his father married him to his uncle’s daughter (the mother of allama Sayyid Muhammad Ali[4]) and then sent him to Iraq to complete his studies.
In a few years Sayyid Sharafuddeen became very well-known in ijtihad and in accuracy and firmness of evidencing in arguments and deliberations. He became famous in deciding lessons of Fiqh and Usool profoundly, quick-wittedly and quick-derivationally. He solved difficult questions in a shortest way leading to the intended aim.
________________________________________
[1] In Lebanon.
[2] In Islamic law, the independent or original interpretation of problems not precisely covered by the Qur’an, Hadith (traditions concerning the Prophet's life and utterances), and scholarly consensus; therefore the mujtahids (qualified jurists) had the right to give their personal judgments on the problems, after trying their best in researching, depending on firm evidences and proofs derived from the legal sources of the Shariah.
[3] Fiqh: jurisprudence, Usool: basic principles of religion.
[4] He was one of the prominent scholars. He was born in Najaf (in Iraq) in 1318 A.H. and died in Mountain Aamil (in Lebanon) after a long disease. He wrote an important book called Sheikhul Abtah about the biography of Abu Talib (Imam Ali’s father) and the evidences that proved his faith and high position in Islam. It was one of the profoundest Islamic studies showing the great intelligence of its author and his high culture and wide knowledge. The book was published in Baghdad when the author was still in Iraq


(19)
He wrote many researches on fiqh while he was in holy Najaf in a style like the style of the book Madarikul Ahkam fee Sharh Shara’i’ul Islam, which had been written by his uncle Sayyid Muhammad bin Ali bin al-Husayn,[1] who was known of his great knowledge, his high ability in deriving verdicts and discussing the problems of fiqh in a scientific way showing his accuracy and discernment in dealing with difficult problems and vague matters. Sayyid Sharafuddeen had learned from other than the ulama of Iraq such as Aakhund Mulla Muhammad Kadhim al-Khurasani, Sheikh ash-Sharee’a al-Isfahani, Sayyid Kadhim al-Yazdi and the two great authorities Sayyid Issma’eel as-Sadr[2] and his uncle Sayyid Hasan as-Sadr and their likes of the ulama and leaders of the umma.
He asked his grandfather ayatollah Sayyid al-Hadi[3] too much questions about everything. Sayyid Sharafuddeen said in his book Bughyatur Raghibeen about his grandfather: “…as for the sciences of Arabic language, he was unequalled especially in meanings and rhetoric. I always made use of his knowledge about what I could not understand from the problems of (al-Mutawwal) by at-Taftazani. He guided me to them with the light of his eloquence and the brightness of his evidences and then those problems became to me as bright as the sun. How often I referred to him about the difficult matters in logic and sciences of the Arabic language and he pleased me and droved my doubts away. He, though lofty and old, came to argue with
________________________________________
[1] Sayyid Muhammad, the author of Madarikul Ahkam, died in 1206 A.H. when he was eighty-eight years old. He was the brother of our grandfather Sayyid Nooruddeen Ali from his father and our grandfather was the brother of Sheikh Hasan, the author of al-Ma’alim, from his mother.
[2] Sayyid Issma’eel as-Sadr died in 1338 A.H. Sayyid Hasan as-Sadr was born in Kadhimiyya in 1272 A.H. and died in 1354 A.H. Each of them was a general imam and authority for the Shia allover the Islamic world.
[3] He was born in 1235 A.H. and died in 1316. He was buried in his private graveyard in the yard of the holy shrine of Imam Kadhim (s) in Kadhimiyya-Baghdad. His biography had been mentioned in al-Bughya in details and also had been mentioned in Takmilatul Amal written by his son Imam al-Hasan as-Sadr. A’lam ash-Shia and Takmilatul Amal is a book including biographies of thousands of the Shia ulama of the different ages. This book shows the greatness of the Shia and their high position in knowledge and the eternity of their ulama in history. It is one of the best books of biographies.


(20)
me pleasantly, went on debating with me delightfully and forced me to argue with him. I swear by his high morals and his sacredness that I have never asked him about a problem or a question, unless I found the answer ready with him without needing to refer to any book as if he has prepared before and got ready to the answer.”
Sayyid Sharafuddeen studied and researched too much and asked too much about the difficult problems whenever he met a great jurisprudent. It showed his care, accuracy and his love to debate and to get use.
When arguing about a subject, he did not like to dispute, to refute or to criticize uselessly but he offered a matter in order to get benefit and to make other get benefit without priding before the others or trying to hurt the feelings of the others when a dispute flared-up.
He was known as abundant in knowledge and firm in evidence. He seldom participated in an argument, unless he was the winner. This had made a prestige for him among all people and a sanctum inside the hearts whenever scientific arguments flared-up.
Whenever he participated in arguments, he respected the others and listened to them carefully and he never made anyone feel that he was proud before him due to his knowledge or position but he treated him as an opponent to a rival even there was a great difference between them in all criteria.
When he became twenty-three years old, he became one of the notable mujtahids. He became well-known in the scientific milieu in a way that seldom a jurisprudent got such a position in these few years of old.
His infinite ijtihad was one of the agreed-upon facts among all of his fellows and those, who had been acquainted with him.
At his age there was no one in holy Najaf from the personalities of Aamila that had equaled him in his virtue, fame and being loved and respected by all people.
His learning was not limited in Najaf, but he often moved between Najaf, Kadhimiyya, Samarra’ and Kerbala’[1] and met with the ulama,
________________________________________
[1] Najaf, Kadhimiyya, Samarra’ and Kerbala’ are religious centers in Iraq.


(21)
mujtahids and brilliant students of those centers. This made his name be mentioned in every scientific forum or any meeting of literature.
Before he left Najaf, he had sent for his brother the great allama Sayyid Shareef in order to take care of him and to instruct him before going back to Aamila. He loved him very much besides that he set great hopes on him because he had found that he was brilliant and too eager to learn more and more.
Sayyid Shareef did not disappoint his brother. He got ready seriously to study and learn. Only a few years passed when the Sayyid began to feel his favors and high position in his emigrant abode.
He went back to Aamila and his absolute ijtihad was confessed by the great mujtahids.
Besides his abundant knowledge, he was a poet from the first class. His poetry was delicate, clear, firm, accurate in meaning, eloquent in wording and wonderful in style.
Sayyid Shareef went back to his father and brother and the all gathered together. The scientific debates were held again between the father and his two sons as if they were between brothers and friends. They reactivated with their debates their old times when once they were in their scientific place of emigration.
Dispute and disagreement about scientific matters might arise between them but their faces always appeared smiling and their hearts were full of indulgence. Some tears might fall down from the father’s eyes out of happiness and the two sons wiped them and bowed to kiss the father’s hands. The father seemed happy and contented. He began invoking Allah to benefit the umma with them and with their knowledge.
But alas! This happiness did not last long. Sayyid Sharafuddeen lost his father and soon after a short time he was afflicted by the loss of his brother Sayyid Shareef. This great loss took away his patience and endurance though he was a mountain that could not be shaken by violent storms.
He often recited his brother’s emotional poetry and tears fell down.


(22)
He became distressed with pains and greifs but he turned to Allah thanking Him in any case and resorting to His power. Glory Be to Him.
His return to Mountain Aamil
Sayyid Yousuf Sharafuddeen contacted with the ulama of Iraq, in whom he had trusted, asking them about his son to know their opinion about his knowledge and piety. They replied certifying his son’s abundant knowledge, high morals, wide information and unequalled piety that pleased the father’s heart, delighted his eyes and comforted his conscience.
The clear answers of the ulama which certified the absolute ijtihad of the son made the father ask the son to come back to his country because of the urgent need for his ijtihad, knowledge, teaching and reforming.
The son had not save to obey his father’s order although he was eager to stay longer or in fact forever in Iraq, the country of his uncles and cousins and the place of his birth, growing up and studying.
He returned to the country and the day of his return was a witnessed day in the history of Aamila. He was received by the ulama, the leaders and the public until the boundaries of the Mountain from the highway of Sham.[1] The people of the villages of Aamila came from everywhere until the city of Soor became overcrowded with the welcomers and the groups that had come to receive Sayyid Sharafuddeen acclaiming with la ilaha illallah and allahu akbar[2] as if they were like the first Muslims when they had received the Prophet (s) when he arrived at Mecca.
The moon shone to us from Thaniyyatul Wada’
Thanking (Allah) became due as long as a caller would
invite for Allah
________________________________________
[1] Nowadays Damascus. But then, Sham encompassed the present Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine.
[2] There is no God but Allah and Allah is great.


(23)
The coming of Sayyid Sharafuddeen to Soor was a cause for people to hold meetings and an incentive for Sayyid Sharafuddeen to visit his brothers of the great ulama, who recalled-by the return of the Sayyid- their previous days of learning and studying, and so they got ready again to debate and discuss the accurate useful matters.
Those debates showed his great scientific ability, which appeared via his correct opinions through the discussions and exchange of views.
People took a clear and live impression about the scientific personality of Sayyid Sharafuddeen and so his name was mentioned by every tongue.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen found some freedom near his father. The father sometimes went to Shahh00r and sometimes he was seen in Soor. The atmosphere of the meeting was a scientific atmosphere. They discussed the necessary matters together because people were in need to know how to deal with such matters.
At the first when returning to his country Sayyid Sharafuddeen stopped establishing legal verdicts (fatwa) and he just tried to end the disputes of people peacefully regarding the position of his father, who was so cautious in establishing verdicts although he was one of the great mujtahids. People were obliged to go to Shaqra’ to ask about their affairs the great religious authority at that time Sayyid Ali al-Ameen,[1] who wrote to Sayyid Yousuf telling him that his son was just and absolute mujtahid and that he had not found his equal among the ulama of Aamila. Then people began to go to Sayyid Sharafuddeen for their affairs regarding his high position. His father himself asked disputers to go to his son whenever it was necessary.
In a few years his name spread everywhere and his fame filled the country and he became a great authority in issuing fatwas and
________________________________________
[1] Sayyid Ali al-Ameen had gone to great mujtahid and highest authority at that time Sayyid Muhammad Hasan ash-Shirazi to get permission (in ijtihad) but Sayyid ash-Shirazi referred him to his disciple, who was entrusted with such tasks, ayatollah Sayyid Hasan as-Sadr. After some deliberations he was permitted to be as absolute mujtahid. The permission was offered to al-Mirza, who signed it. Sayyid al-Ameen was the only one among the ulama of Aamila, who had got certificate, which paved the way to him to have the absolute scientific and public leadership in Aamila after his return to it from Iraq.


(24)
answering different problems.
His travel to Egypt
Sayyid Sharafuddeen had traveled to Egypt twice. The first time was in 1329 A.H. and the second was in 1920 AD. after issuing his fatwa of jihad against the French and being sentenced to death by them.
In the first time he went to visit Egypt with his uncle (my father) Sayyid Muhammad Husayn as-Sadr. My uncle had told us about this visit when mentioning the biography of his uncle in his book Bughyatul Raghibeen. He said: “In 1329 A.H. he liked to tour. He began his tours with visiting the Kaaba to offer the hajj and to be honored by visiting good Medina. He was too eager to offer hajj and to visit the sacred places. Then he refreshed the old times and humored his loving fellows, who celebrated his being among them in an unequalled way. This made my mother so happy and glad that she found in him the delight of her eyes and the joy of her heart.
Then after sometime he sailed from Beirut to Egypt. I was with him to prepare all his affairs. Our travel got great results that served the religion and the belief of the Shia. It might be the best travel with best results and benefits.”
Sayyid Sharafuddeen had mentioned what had happened between him and the great professor Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri, the jurisprudent of Egypt and the sheikh of al-Azhar at that time.
As a result of those deliberations the book al-Muraja’at was written by Sayyid Sharafuddeen. It spread in seven editions throughout the Islamic world. It was one of the best works known in the present age in the field of the Islamic studies through its abundant knowledge, profundity of research, clarity of intention, firmness of style and eloquence of thinking and expressing.
The second time he resorted to Egypt after he had been sentenced to death by French authorities, that found his existence in Lebanon dangerous to their benefits and as an obstacle in the way of their imperial efforts and aims.
The ulama, the men of letters and the Islamic learned groups, who had known about him since before, welcomed him so warmly in


(25)
Egypt.
He invited for Islamic unity and mutual understanding between all the sects. It was he, who had said his eternal word about the two sects; the Shia and the Sunni: “Politics has separated them, so let politics gather them.” Allama Sayyid Rasheed Redha had recorded this word in his magazine (al-Manar) at that time regarding highly this Islamic spirit of Sayyid Sharafuddeen.
His national jihad
The jihad of Sayyid Sharafuddeen at the time of the Ottomans was limited to religious jihad because the government in Lebanon was a Muslim government offering religious rituals as they had been established by Islam. But when the French came, they occupied the country, spread corruption, annulled the Islamic laws and controlled people against their own will where no one could be remain silent before such a status.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen began warning people of that oppression and injustice and began holding meeting with those, whom he had trusted and felt their support and national magnanimity inciting to what honorable situations the nation was in need of.
No doubt that the spiritual class was the first to volunteer to undertake this duty where it had the public and absolute religious leadership.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen thought to begin with the ulama first, deliberating about a consolidated plan that should be regarded by the all. He invited them to a congress held in Wadi al-Hajeer. The ulama and leaders of the country had attended the congress. Sayyid Sharafuddeen issued a fatwa of announcing jihad. The all supported his fatwa and then they went back to their towns preparing their firm plans against the French as possible as the circumstances allowed to.
People began to come to Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s house signing protest notes confirming their objection to the French rule and requesting full independence.
The French knew about the matter. They sent Ibnul Hallaj, who was a Christian from Soor, to break into Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s house, to


(26)
assassinate him and to take whatever documents asking for independence he would find.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen knew that, so he gave all the documents he had to his mother. Ibnul Hallaj did not find anything he looked for. When he tried to attack Sayyid Sharafuddeen, Sayyid Sharafuddeen knocked him down to the ground so he went back disappointed and shameful.
People heard of breaking into Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s house. They gathered from all the villages of Aamila until the city of Soor became overcrowded with them. Sayyid Sharafuddeen thanked them for their high sentiment and national spirit. He asked them to go back to where they had come from. They came back waiting for his obeyed order.
When the crowd separated and the French knew the intents of Sayyid Sharafuddeen, they sent a great army toward the village of Shahhor, where Sayyid Sharafuddeen had gone to. They burned his house there. Before that, they had occupied his house in Soor and plundered his big library, which had the most valuable printed and manuscript books especially his own manuscripts that had been written by himself, which we referred to previously.
When the army entered Shahhor, Sayyid Sharafuddeen was there but he hastened to leave putting his aba over his turban and Allah blinded the army not to see him. He reached a cave[1] near the river and hid in it all the day and when he knew that the army had left he returned to Shahhor under the darkness. He spent the night there and then he left towards Sham disguisedly and he reached there peacefully. King Faysal the First welcomed his guest warmly and honored him in a good way.


________________________________________
[1] It is said that this is the same cave, in which one of Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s grandfathers has hidden when fleeing from al-Haza’ir, the famous tyrant, and Allah has saved him from the injustice of the arrogant when he has set out towards Iraq resorting to his infallible grandfathers.


(27)
In Damascus
When Sayyid Sharafuddeen settled down in Damascus, he sent for his family and relatives, who joined him soon. The name of Sayyid Sharafuddeen became so famous and known until he became one of the leaders of intellect and thinking. He made speeches in many occasions that raised his position among all classes of people. These speeches showed his great knowledge and apposite thinking.
His house in as-Salihiyya quarter in his country was always open for people. People of different classes always went to him.
People of Salihiyya found in this man benevolence and kindness as if he was their kind father, who carried out their affairs.
He found them in need for money and knowledge so he aided the poor and taught the children in a school established in a simple house to educate the rising generation.
What drew the attentions was the visits of the high officials to him in his hose where no one of them had ever visited any of the ulama before him.
Yousuf al-Adhma (the martyr of Maysaloon) often visited Sayyid Sharafuddeen and admired him and admired his situations too much.
After the French had occupied Sham, Sayyid Sharafuddeen was obliged to leave to Palestine and then to Egypt after he had sent his family and relatives to Mountain Aamil spreading here and there.
In Egypt
Sayyid Sharafuddeen arrived at Egypt disguising in ordinary Arabic uniform with a kaffieh and a headband like the usual uniform of the people in Iraq.
He attended one of the celebrations that was crowded with people. He was still in his formal Arabic uniform when he ascended the minbar and said:
“If I do not stop where the army of death crowds,
then let my feet not take me to the way of highness!”


(28)
People began clapofping so loudly. He felt that they thought it was him, who had said this verse. He followed up saying:
“May Allah have mercy upon the poet of Ahlul Bayt, Sayyid Haydar al-Hilli when saying:
If I do not stop where the army of death crowds,
then let my feet not take me to the way of highness!”
Then clapping rose again louder than before. Admiration increased from everywhere. He began his speech with his orotund voice and his prophetic manners and Alawite utterance. He pleased the crowds with his high eloquence and bright evidences. He controlled words and meanings however he liked.
This led people to ask and to insist on asking about the great personality of this man, whom they felt his great virtue even though he had disguised behind a kaffieh and a headband.
Whispers and inquiries increased until one of them announced that he (Sayyid Sharafuddeen) was the man of knowledge, patriotism and devotion. He was the brave hero. He was the fighter, who had fought against the imperialists. He was the son of Haydar al-Karrar.[1] He was Sayyid Abdul Husayn Sharafuddeen.
Among the attendants of the celebration there was the famous writer Mey Ziyada. Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s playing with his ring on his finger during making his speech drew her attention. She said: “I do not know whether the ring is more obedient to his finger or eloquence is more obedient to his tongue!”
In Palestine
Sayyid Sharafuddeen thought to be nearer to his country, so he left Egypt at the end of 1338 A.H. to a village in Palestine called Alma lying near the boundaries of Mountain Aamil and it was under the rule of the British.
His house there was as his house in Soor. It was always visited by people. It was the abode of guests and the destination of needy
________________________________________[1] It was one of Imam Ali's surnames.


(29)
people. Meetings were held in it besides deliberations on knowledge, literature, politics and different affairs.
It was a strange chance that Sayyid Sharafuddeen was in Alma fleeing from the rule of the French while Sayyid Muhammad as-Sadr was in Lebanon fleeing from the rule of the British and both of these two leaders had fought against the imperialists and had been sentenced to death.
Sayyid Muhammad as-Sadr found that the nearness of Alma to Mountain Aamil would give him a good opportunity to meet with Sayyid Sharafuddeen at the boundaries of Palestine. He sent his messenger and companion in jihad Mawlood Mukhlis[1] to Sayyid Sharafuddeen informing him of Sayyid Muhammad as-Sadr’s wish to visit him but Sayyid Sharafuddeen did not prefer this meeting for fear of the British and he put off this visit until a suitable time when the circumstances would permit that. You will see the details of this event later on inshallah.
His return to his country (Mountain Aamil)
Sayyid as-Sadr chose to live in Lebanon when he had been sentenced to death. The French knew his high position among the leaders and the public and knew the high position of his father Sayyid al-Hasan as-Sadr and his great religious authority, to which the Shia allover the Islamic world referred to. All that made them respect and regard Sayyid (Muhammad) as-Sadr so highly.
Sayyid Muhammad as-Sadr seized the opportunity and asked them (the French) to pardon Sayyid Sharafuddeen and to let him come back to his country, which was awaiting for him impatiently. Sayyid as-Sadr succeeded in his task.
Here we quote the saying of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in his book Bughyatur Raghibeen when talking about the history of that period. He said under the title of (as-Sadr in Damascus): “When he found
________________________________________
[1] Mawlood Basha came to Alma wearing ordinary Arabic cloths pretending as if he was a merchant of sheep. He went to Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s house as a guest. No one of the people of the village felt anything about this guest because they had accustomed to see guests from different classes in the house of Sayyid Sharafuddeen.


(30)
that he could not stand longer against the power of the British, Sayyid as-Sadr retreated from his lair with some ulama and leaders of intellect in Iraq and began roving in the deserts with no provisions save the provision of a faithful soul and a firm determination. Days and nights passed with these men following after the guides of sons of deserts.
When he reached Sham, he had in Damascus a house, which became as a house of a generous leader, who came and went high respectedly. Between the celebration of the patriots and the welcome of the French, he kept on his peaceful jihad and his leadership turned into an intellectual front, via which he wrote bills and sent telegrams to the League of Nations and to everyone having anything to do with the Iraqi case, which had to be settled in the bets way. During that time he had visited Mountain Aamil, which had been still looking forward to meet him and so eager to see him. The people crowded around him getting from his guidance and celebrating to welcome and glorify him. Wonderful celebrations were held in Sayda (Sidon), Soor, Nabatiyya, Bint Jubayl and Shahhor. Speechers and poets did well in praising him and showing his virtues and aspects of his rising. We then were like him. He had fled from Iraq and we had fled from Lebanon for the sake of Allah. He wished to meet with us when we were in Palestine but the caution for my self from the French and for him from the British prevented me from meeting him. He met the French leaders, who respected him, and interceded for me with them and so I could return to my country. The High Commissioner General Gorou regarded him too much. We returned to Lebanon after he had returned to Iraq.”
Thus Sayyid Sharafuddeen had recorded that period, which had preceded his return to his country with faithfulness and fidelity. It was not strange to the high morals of that great man.
The returns of the two Sayyids to their countries were celebrated by their peoples splendidly as if they were unequalled events.
Poets competed to show their feelings in live poetry, which was of the best poetry of the present age.
A group of great men of literature, who had not participated in any celebration of literature before, participated in those celebrations,


(31)
which were full of eternal Arabic literature, just because of their sentiments agitated with sincerity and allegiance that made them announce their sentiments before the public. That was because of the great patriotic sacrifices of these two men that had glorified the fame of their countries in the world of history.
Poetry in the two countries was the same in the aim and feelings towards these two leaders. Poets often congratulated with their poems the great religious authority Sayyid Hasan as-Sadr, who was the father of Sayyid Muhammad as-Sadr and the uncle of Sayyid Sharafuddeen.
When Sayyid Sharafuddeen returned to his country after his jihad, he became the absolute leader for people in their affairs of life and religion as one of the poets had said:
Leadership came to him submissively
It did not fit save him and he did not fit save it.
His delving in traditions
The ulama were interested in studying the prophetic traditions throughout all the ages. They distinguished the true ones from the fabricated ones. They knew the reliable and the unreliable narrators as well with no difference in that between the Shia and the Sunni but the Shia added to the traditions of the Prophet (s) the traditions narrated from Ahlul Bayt (s) because they were from their grandfather’s traditions. In fact Ahlul Bayt (s) were as copies of their grandfather Muhammad (s).
Sayyid Sharafuddeen was not limited to the traditions of his imams and their narrators only but also he studied thoroughly the traditions mentioned by our Sunni brothers. Whoever referred to any of his books or works would find this fact clearly.
The ones from among our Sunni brothers, whom he depended on in mentioning traditions, were too many. He mentioned them in his thesis Thabtul Athbat fee Silsilatur Riwat.
I think that what he has written to confirm the principles of his doctrine is nonesuch and unequalled in our present age.


(32)
The last of what he had written was his book an-Nass wel-Ijtihad, which if you read, you will feel that when he has written it, he was at the top of intellect and at the utmost skill of expression and description. He delved so deeply into research and argument until he made one feel that his ideas, expressions and patience in researching and inquiring had not known any meaning of weakness or being aged. This is the aspect of the exalted intellectual ulama of the progeny of Ahlul Bayt (s), whose bodies become old whereas their minds still supply the life with power and activity throughout the ages.
His letters
His letters were distinguished by eloquence, honest aims and variety of subjects such as knowledge, literature, guidance, sociology, jurisprudence, history, sermons and maxims.
Sometimes he sent to his sons in their institute in Holy Najaf[1] letters full of paternal and educational guidance and all what a student of religious studies needed of sermons, maxims and instructions to light his way and sometimes he sent letters to his followers in their countries of emigration, in which he sent to them paternal recommendations to unite on one aim and to be like a compact structure. His scientific institute (Ja’fari College) was the seed of these liberal emigrants.
Sometimes he sent letters to the kings, leaders, politicians and officials. He advised them as a responsible alim who had to advise the officials to act with justice among the people, to help wronged people and to take lessons from the past and from the experiences of the others.
His letter to King Husayn after losing his rule was one of the most eloquent letters that had ever been written by the Arabs. It was a long letter having a historical record of what Ahlul Bayt (s) had faced
________________________________________
[1] In Holy Najaf there were Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s sons; the great allama Sayyid Muhammad Ali and his two brothers the genius poet Sayyid Muhammad Redha and the famous writer of the Arabs Sayyid Sadruddeen and their cousin allama Sayyid Nooruddeen Sharafuddeen, who was the prime chancellor of the High Legal Ja’fari court of appeal in Beirut.


(33)
of ordeals and disasters.
The reply of King Husayn was full of sentiments and appreciations. He began his letter with the following verse of one of the poets:
“If the notables of my tribe were pleased with me,
The mean would still be displeased”.
Many of his letters were spread here and there. Some of their copies were collected by his cousin and secretary Sayyid Ali Sharafuddeen, who was trusted and reliable in saving his letters and valuable works. We hope that he may permit to publish them so that the Arabic library may be enriched with bright Alawite literature.
His prose
His prose was too eloquent and bright and firm in style and each part confirmed the other that no writer whatever ability of eloquence he had could not omit even a word of it or replace it by another one because Sayyid Sharafuddeen thought and thought before he began to express his thoughts. He chose the best after he thought best.
He tried a sentence by his sharp sense before he dictated it to his clerk. His expressions always had a sense of good poetry.
His prose has a special nature that a reader will know whose prose it is before he sees the name of the writer.
His eloquence was clear in all what he had written and his style transmigrated into his accurate scientific meanings to make them brighter and more glamorous. We know no one in our present time that may be compared with him in eloquence, accuracy of meanings and clearance of intent in all what he has written whether scientific or Islamic subjects.
His speeches
His speeches were distinguished by firm expression, accurate description and bright style. He always improvised his speeches and this did not prevent him from concentrating on his concept and showing his meanings in high eloquence.
His speeches were too far from affectation and mannerism. So were


(34)
his books, works, lectures and daily talks.
Thus was his ordinary life. His pure soul wished goodness to all people whether friend or enemy, near or far. His big heart was full of love and sympathy toward everyone. He was a great example in his Alawite morals and his pure manners throughout his eternal life.
This high Alawite soul had its great effects on his sayings and doings. He rushed into actions to a degree that his likes were rare and rushed into his speeches like a flood until it had been said that no one equalled him among his likes.
Once I traveled to Lebanon in 1350 A.H. and I saw him making a speech in the big Mosque every afternoon of the first ten days of Muharram. The title of his speeches of every day was (Aal[1] Muhammad and who aal Muhammad is). Every day he talked about an hour showing people the greatness of Ahlul Bayt (s) in the Book, the Sunna and among people. He specified the tenth day for Imam Husayn (s). The meeting was in the morning in the house of one of the notables of Soor, who was a close relative of Sayyid Sharafuddeen. He talked about the rising of Imam Husayn (s), its reasons, aims and great results in supporting Islam and confirming the religion. He ended his speech with the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (s). He mixed his speech with crying and made people cry bitterly until they were about to lose their consciousness.
His speech lasted for three continuous hours. If that subject (aal Muhammad) was recorded and published, it would be a great book collecting the virtues of Ahlul Bayt (s) and their biographies that every Muslim had to know.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen had great speeches in Beirut, Damascus, Palestine and Egypt that could not be forgotten. The journalists had recorded many of them at that time. Some of them were published in the newspapers. They were available with his secretary, who had added them to the letters we mentioned previously.


________________________________________
[1] Aal means the family or the progeny of.


(35)
His criticizing poetry
He was too sensitive, accurate in criticizing and understanding poetry and he had memorized too many verses of good poetry. Whenever he talked about a subject he evidenced his subject with chosen verses of poetry to confirm his opinion.
Once he noticed my astonishment about his acute memory of many subjects of literature that might slip away because of his old age and his many public affairs. He said to me: “This is from the age of youth but now I memorize something and after some hours I forget it.”
He had a good faculty to compose good poetry. He practiced this during his youth but then he gave it up to the scientific subjects, to which he devoted his mind and pen. He permitted no one to narrate any poetry of his.
It was said that he had a good poem, in which he had elegized the great allama Skeikh Musa Sharara. It affected people too much. Sayyid Sharafuddeen was then in the first stage of his youth.
His sense in recognizing poetic meters was so sharp that he did not mistake any of the meters even they were too near and this was due to his acute sensitivity and not his knowing of metrics. I noticed that from him many times.
His generosity
He was a high example of generosity of morals and hand (giving). His morals were morals of a generous Alawite man. He respected the old, pitied the young, sympathized with the poor and pardoned badly doers.
As for his liberality, he was an example of that throughout his life, which was full of great acts. This aspect was clear in him. It was well-known by his relatives and friends since he had been a student in Holy Najaf, the capital of knowledge and religion. The examples on this matter were many but we mentioned here just a few of them:


(36)
1. Once he saw one of the students of the Hawza[1] of Najaf in ragged clothes that did not fit a student of religious studies, who had to have a special dignity. He was in the yard of the shrine of Imam Ali (s). Sayyid Sharafuddeen put off his own cloths and offered them to that student and came back home wrapped in his aba. He was then in the first month of his marriage.
2. One day he entered the house and found that his family had served good food for an occasion. He took all the food to his neighbor preferring his neighbor to himself. Those, who were familiar with him, said that his mother accepted that from him delightfully and always prayed Allah to make him succeed.
3. When he was in Najaf his expenditure came to him from his father and from his grandfather ayatollah Sayyid al-Hadi as-Sadr. It was more than his need and so he always spent the further amount on some of his study-mates.
4. Sheikh Imran Hadeeda an-Najafi said that once he had been in Mecca in the year when Sayyid Sharafuddeen had gone to offer the hajj.[2] He complained to Sayyid Sharafuddeen that he was in need of a jubba. Sayyid Sharafuddeen pointed to his own jubba hanged on the wall and said to him: “Take it with all what it has.” There were ten Ottoman liras in its pocket.
5. Sheikh Imran said too: “Sayyid Sharafuddeen had a big tent, in which he used to held religious ceremonies. Many hajjis of ulama and high classes used to attend his meetings. Some merchants of Muscat saw how much money Sayyid Sharafuddeen had spent. They offered to him one hundred Ottoman liras, which Sayyid
________________________________________
[1] Hawza is a theological college, where students can specialize in Islamic law, philosophy, theology, and logic.
[2] It was in 1340 A.H. He went by sea to offer the hajj. With him there were a great number of people from his country Aamila. He led those people crowded in al-Masjid al-Haram in offering the prayer. He might be the first Shia imam who could lead the great masses of people in Mecca in offering the prayer. This made him as a famous religious authority, about whom people began to talk here and there. King Husayn welcomed him warmly and they both washed the Kaaba. He met with him many times. In honor of him, King Husayn invited famous ulama and leaders from different countries in a big invitation.


(37)
Sharafuddeen spread at once among the needy and for the public affairs. The next day they offered to him another hundred liras and said to him that they were not of the legal rights and they were as a gift and they insisted on him to spend them on his own affairs. He accepted the liras from them and spent them on the affairs of the meeting itself, which was as a forum that hajjis came to from everywhere.
His dignity
All his life showed that he had a high dignity and a great personality.
I remember two events showing clearly this deep-rooted aspect in his high Alawite soul.
1. Sayyid Sharafuddeen was in Damascus during the reign of King Faysal the First when he had been exiled from his country and had been sentenced to death by the French. Among those, who had been included by this sentence was the leader of Mountain Aamil Kamil Beg al-As’ad, the sincere patriot.
Because he (the leader of Mountain Aamil) was away from his country, he became in financial straits. He became obliged to send his messenger to Bint Jubayl to borrow from one of the rich people three hundred Ottoman liras in order to pay for some of his needs. The rich man sent to him thirty liras and apologized for not sending the rest. The leader became very angry and sent the money back with the messenger at once.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen heard of this matter. He went to visit the leader and offered to him three hundred liras. He refused to accept them because he knew that Sayyid Sharafuddeen was also in a financial strait. Sayyid Sharafuddeen told him that he had enough money at that time. The leader accepted the amount and thanked him.
When the two leaders returned to their countries and the situation returned normal, Kamil Beg al-As’ad visited Sayyid Sharafuddeen in his house and with him there was the amount of money. He offered it to Sayyid Sharafuddeen gratefully but Sayyid Sharafuddeen refused to take it and told him that they were one self that could not be divided and they had spent the money on their united selves. The


(38)
leader returned to his country after he had become certain that Sayyid Sharafuddeen would never accept the amount.
The leader Kamil Beg al-As’ad visited Sayyid Sharafuddeen again having with him a document of entailment showing that he had entailed a property to Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s elder son Sayyid Muhammad Ali Sharafuddeen, who was then in Holy Najaf. Kamil al-As’ad thought that matter had been concluded firmly and could not be revoked because an entail could not be changed or recanted. Sayyid Sharafuddeen smiled and said: “An entail does not become compulsive except by its conditions and among these conditions are delivering and receiving. Neither delivering by you nor receiving by my son have taken place and so this entailment is not compulsive. And thus the leader came back for the second time after he had become certain that Sayyid Sharafuddeen was serious.
The second event was that one day Sayyid Sharafuddeen with a delegation of some ulama went to visit King Faysal the First in Damascus. When the visit finished and he wanted to go back to Mountain Aamil, the king sent to him with al-Jabiry an amount of five thousand Ottoman liras as a gift. Sayyid Sharafuddeen accepted the gift gratefully and then he gave it back to al-Jabiry to be offered to the Arabic army in Syria as a gift from him. Then he said: “I wish I was a dirham to put myself in the bursary of the Arabic army to defend Islam and the Arabs”.
Professor al-Jabiry often mentioned this event when he mentioned Sayyid Sharafuddeen with honor and glorification. He narrated this event in every occasion.
These two events showed Sayyid Sharafuddeen’s liberality and highness of soul at the same time.
His life always gave lessons of knowledge, morals, sincerity and generosity of manners and nature to the umma.
His assist to people of knowledge and pen
He cared too much for the people of study and talented writers and poets and he helped them as possible as he could. In fact many times he burdened himself with more than he could to help them. I


(39)
remember that I have seen him, during one of my visits to Mountain Aamil, taking much care of an occasion of the coming back of one of the ulama of Mountain Aamil, who had finished his studies and was coming back to his country to begin his task in teaching and guiding people. I saw him (Sayyid Sharafuddeen) visiting a village after a village that neighbored the village of that coming back jurisprudent.
He made speeches before the people of those villages informing them of the high position of an alim and inciting them to take much care of him and to prepare all suitable circumstances for him to step toward a good future.
His encouraging authors and poets, in whom he found the ability to serve the welfare of people, was a famous matter that all people talked about in every occasion.
Once it happened that a famous learned poet had composed a divan, in which he had praised Ahlul Bayt (s), and offered a copy to Sayyid Sharafuddeen, who accepted it from him gratefully and offered to the poet an amount of money that befitted his own position and the poet’s position. When the poet wanted to pay the costs of publishing his book, the publisher said to him that Sayyid Sharafuddeen had paid all the amount and that the poet had not had to pay anything.
His works
Sayyid Sharafuddeen in his works reminds us of the age of Alamul Huda Sayyid al-Murtadha. Their aims met together and their intents were the same. They both had the same aspect of insight, accurate thinking, firm evidence, right opinion, getting to conclusion in a shortest way, deep research, bright style, fidelity in quoting and avoiding all what was far from the scientific facts.
He also looked like him in the high religious authority and he was near to him even in age.
It was no wonder because they were from one lineage and one dynasty. They belonged to the same grandfather Musa Abu Sibha, who was one of Imam Musa al-Kadhim’s grandsons.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen followed the same way that had been followed by the teacher’s son and the first teacher Sheikh al-Mufeed, his


(40)
disciple Sayyid al-Murtadha and the graduate of their school, the chief of the sect (the Shia) Sheikh at-Toossi (may Allah have mercy upon them).
This holy scientific trinity had offered to the religion of Islam and to the doctrine of the Shia great services, which history had perpetuated inside the souls of the generation throughout the ages.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen absorbed the souls of all these men inside his Alawite soul so he was from them and they were from him and then all these men together formed this flowing flood of knowledge that came out via this Alawite eloquent tongue and this firm pen that had formed these immortal books in eloquent expression, accurate depiction, deep meaning, clear aim and wonderful style, with which this pen had acted as it liked and as the truth and fact liked. It was this that had led people to regard and appreciate this man during his life and to keep his mention alive after his death.
He will remain alive and immortal in the people’s minds throughout the ages as long as his works are recited and his books are read and published.
Here are the titles of his immortal works:
1. Al-Muraja’at: it is a sign and a miracle with its high eloquence, irrefutable evidences and honorable aim. It has been published twice during the lifetime of Sayyid Sharafuddeen and six times after his death. It has been translated into Persian, English and Urdu.
2. Al-Fusool al-Muhimma fee Ta’leef al-Umma: it is a loud cry in the way of uniting the umma. It has been published twice in Sayda (Sidon-Lebanon) and twice in Najaf (Iraq).
3. The Answers of Musa Jarullah: it is as answers on twenty questions offered by Musa Jarullah to the ulama of the Shia in the Islamic countries. These answers show his abundant knowledge and great information that suffice everyone looking for the truth. It has been published in Sayda in 1355 A.H./1936 AD. And another time in Sayda too in 1373/1953.


(41)
4. Al-Kalima al-Gharra’ fee Tafdheel az-Zahra’: It has been published in Sayda attached with the second edition Al-Fusool al-Muhimma. It shows the high position of Lady Fatima az-Zahra’[1] (s) and why she has been preferred to the all women of the world with irrefutable evidences.
5. Al-Majalis al-Fakhira fee Ma’atim al-Itra at-Tahira: it has been published in Sayda and Najaf. It shows the facts of the revolution of Imam Husayn (s) and the favors of this revolution on Islam and the Muslims. Also it has sayings quoted from great foreign personalities, who have discovered the greatness of Islam via Imam Husayn (s) in his eternal revolution against the arrogants and injustice.
6. Abu Hurayra: It has been published in Sayda and then in Najaf twice. It is a new gate for understanding the prophetic traditions and interpreting them in the right way. He followed, in this way, the virtuous Egyptian allama Abu Riyya in his nonesuch book Sheikhul Madheera. How this umma is in need to approach to the truth and to be away from bad fanaticism!
7. An-Nass wel Ijtihad (this book): it is one of the profoundest Islamic studies in the present age. It has been published for the first time by the Society of Muntada an-Nashr in Najaf during the life of the author. Sayyid Sadruddeen Sharafuddeen (the author’s son) has published the second edition in Beirut with additions added by his father after leaving to the better world. It has been published by Darul Nahj Publications.
8. Falsafatul Meethaq wel Wilaya: published twice in Sayda. Although it is small in size, it is great in meaning and subject.
9. Masa’il Fiqhiyya (juristic questions): juristic subjects with profound research and accurate concepts showing the magnanimity and the abundant knowledge of the author. It has been published during the author’s life in Sayda and
________________________________________[1] The Prophet’s daughter (s).


(42)
then in Egypt, Beirut and Kerbala.
10. Hawla ar-Ru’ya: a religious thesis discussing the matter of the impossibility of seeing Allah in a scientific way and by convincing evidences. It has been published in Sayda in 1370 A.H.
11. Ila al-Majma’ al-Ilmi (to the scientific convention): In this book he refutes the fabrications ascribed to the Shia and sends advices to the scientific convention inciting it towards agreement and to avoid disagreement and separation. It has been published in Sayda in 1369 A.H.
12. Bughyatur Raghibeen (manuscript): includes biographies of the famous personalities of the family of as-Sadr and Sharafuddeen with biographies of their teachers and students besides photos from those ages. It is one of the good books that is considered to be at the head of the books of biographies.
13. Thabtul Athbat fee Silsilatur Riwat: In this book he talks about his teachers and the great ulama of the Islamic sects in a wonderful style. It has been published in Sayda twice.
14. Zaynab al-Kubra (great Zaynab): a good thesis, in which he has talked about the high position of Lady Zaynab (Imam Ali’s daughter) (s) and her eternal situations in Islam. It was a speech he had made in the holy shrine of Lady Zaynab (s). It had been recorded and then published in Sayda.
His lost works
Sayyid Sharafuddeen had written many books other than these mentioned above, which would have enriched the Arabic library with great knowledge, but the storm of France willed to blow them away during the events of the twentieths. The French burned them as they had burned the house before them. Whenever Sayyid Sharafuddeen remembered them, his soul was about to leave his body because of regretting.
In order to immortalize those books, we mention them here:


(43)
1. Sharh at-Tabsira: in jurisprudence and in three volumes about purity, judgment, witnesses and inheritance.
2. Ta’leeqa ala al-Istis~hab: from the theses of Sheikh al-Ansari in Usool, one volume.
3. A thesis about the will of a sick man (who is about to die).
4. Sabeel al-Mu’mineen: about imamate, three volumes. Sayyid Sharafuddeen told me once that this book was the best of what he had ever written at that time.
5. An-Nusoos al-Jaleela: about imamate too. It had forty traditions agreed upon by all the Muslims and forty traditions from the sources of the Shia.
6. Tanzeel al-Aayat al-Bahira: about imamate, one volume depending on one hundred verses from the Holy Qur’an revealed about the imams according to the Sunni Sihah of traditions.
7. Tuhfatul Muhaditheen feema kharaja feehi as-Sunna minal Mudha’afeen: a unique book that no book had ever been written like it.
8. Tuhfatul Ass~hab fee Hukm Ahlil Kitab.
9. Ath-Tharee’a fir-Radd ala al-Badee’a: Badee’a of an-Nabhani.
10. Al-Majalis al-Fakhira: four volumes; the first about the life of the Prophet (s), the second about the life of Imam Ali, az-Zahra’ and Imam Hasan (peace be upon them), the third one about Imam Husayn (s) and the fourth about the other nine imams (s).
11. The writers of the Shia in the first age of Islam: some of its chapters have been published in al-Irfan Magazine.
12. Bughyatul Fa’iz fee Naql al-Jana’iz: most of it has been published in al-Irfan Magazine. It refuted those, who thought of the prohibition of transferring dead bodies (from a tomb to another).
13. Sir Bughyatus Sa’il an Lathm al-Anamil: including


(44)
eighty traditions from the Sunni and the Shia.
14. Zakatul Akhlaq: some of its chapters have been published in al-Irfan Magazine.
15. Al-Fawa’id wel Fara’id.
16. A comment on Sahih of al-Bukhari.
17. A comment on Sahih of Muslim: these two books show clearly the abundant knowledge of Sayyid Sharafuddeen about the traditions and his great ability in refuting and concluding.
18. Al-Asaleeb al-Badee’a fee Rijhan Ma’atim ash-Shia: depending on rational and traditional evidences that prove the permissibility of practicing the obsequies by the Shia on their occasions.
These are the books that have had different Islamic studies in jurisprudence, traditions, biographies and distinguishing the narrators of the prophetic traditions. The French have burned these books out of their grudge against them and against Sayyid Sharafuddeen, who has fought them with his heart, tongue and hand.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen regretted bitterly whenever he remembered his burnt books and often said: “The sorrow when losing a son may disappear but the sorrow of losing the product of intellect remains and continues until the last moment of one’s life.”
But Sayyid Sharafuddeen has recompensed this great loss with what he has written of great immortal books that will remain as long as there is life on the earth.
His projects and heritage
When Sayyid Sharafuddeen came to live in Soor, the Shia had no even one mosque to gather them and to offer their obligations in it. He possessed a house and entailed it as a (Husayniyya) mosque, in which he led the Shia in offering the prayers, taught the believers religious lessons and principles and met with them to settle their problems.
After that he established a mosque, which was one of the stateliest


(45)
and most perfect and beautiful mosques. It had two big domes, a high minaret and a wide yard in front of a wonderful hall connected with the gates of the mosque. In the middle of the mosque there were two pillars from Phoenician ruins.
Every year on the twelfth of Rabee’ul Awwal[1] Sayyid Sharafuddeen celebrated the blessed anniversary of the Prophet’s birth in this mosque and people gathered from everywhere of Mountain Aamil. When Sayyid Sharafuddeen finished his eloquent speech and scholars and poets finished their words and poems, the crowds went towards the house of Sayyid Sharafuddeen to have lunch, which consisted of various and delicious kinds of food due to his Hashemite and Alawite generosity.
Every year he stressed on the brotherly connections and relationships between the two great sects; the Shia and the Sunni.
Choosing the twelfth of Rabee’ul Awwal[2] as the day of the Prophet’s birth was a clear evidence showing his truthful Islamic spirit that he always invited to.
When finishing the celebration, he used to go to the mosque of his Sunni brothers to congratulate them and to participate them in the general Eid of the Muslims. In their turn they thanked him for his prophetic morals and paternal kindness towards all the people of Soor that he always did and with no differentiating between a sect or another.
The horizon of his thinking was so wide and his magnanimity was so great that he undertook all that might raise the society and did not object to the religion. He expressed his opinion through his wonderful saying “Guidance does not spread except from where deviation has spread”; therefore he determined to fight deviation by himself to spread guidance among people. He determined to walk in
________________________________________
[1] It is the third month in the Islamic calendar.
[2] Some Shia ulama thought that the birth of the Prophet (s) was on the twelfth of Rabee’ul Awwal whereas most of them believed that the birth was on the seventeenth of the same month. Sayyid Sharafuddeen preferred the first opinion, which most of the Sunni ulama believed in. Sayyid Sharafuddeen celebrated on this day in order to unite between the different sects of the Muslims.


(46)
the way in order to make the Muslims safe from the barriers and obstacles that might block their way or puzzle their true Islamic culture. He established schools for them to learn the contemporary culture, with which the present age has armed, the culture that had to be mixed with the Islamic culture in order to be real Muslims as Islam willed for them.
He thought, in order to pave this way, to do the following:
First: He established a school called the Ja’fari[1] School to educate the new generation. It was a primary school consisting of fifteen classrooms besides the halls and yards. It was built on the roof of six big stores, which were to be the source of revenue to run the affairs of the school in the future.
Second: He established a club and called it “Imam as-Sadiq Club” for religious celebrations and cultural lectures.
Third: He added to the school and the club a mosque in the first floor and made it especially for the school and its pupils to offer their daily obligations in it. By this he ensured for the rising generation a primary culture based on religion and science. Undoubtedly if the base of a child was good, it would have a great effect on fixing beliefs and religion in the future.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen (may Allah have mercy upon him) thought that those pupils had to keep on studying in the secondary stage so that their bases would be firm and fixed that no effects could change their beliefs in the university. But what was the way for that whereas the matter needed a great assistance from Allah and supports from the people, who had to carry out this task and undertake its burdens, because the governments would not carry out such special projects although they were public educational projects?
Then who would do that?
No one came to his mind save his followers in the African countries of emigrations, who were as sons for him and he was for them as a father and a higher religious authority.
________________________________________
[1] Referring to the Shia and the name “Ja’fari” is derived from the Name of Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (s), the founder of the Shiite school.


(47)
He sent to them his two sons Sayyid Sadruddeen and Sayyid Ja’far. Each of these two sons was as an example of his father. Sayyid Sadruddeen made speeches with the knowledge and eloquence of his father and Sayyid Ja’far came to them with the morals, politeness and kindness of his father. The two seas mixed and the place of emigration took out pearls and corals and then the edifice arose and it was the eternal Ja’fari College.
Sayyid Sadruddeen when making speeches, his voice reminded the people of his father’s voice when talking with wisdom, knowledge and high politeness. He captivated the hearts and returned to the attendants the days of Sayyid Sharafuddeen, which had still been as a blaze on the front of time. People thanked this blessing with their tongues and hands. The delegation came back to Sayyid Sharafuddeen successfully with two hundred and fifty thousand Lebanese Liras that had formed that great edifice with its three floors and each floor with two wings, the first of which was sixty-eight meters long and the second was forty-one meters whereas both were ten meters wide. In the middle of the building there was a big tower having a big clock. In front of the building there was a yard of ten thousand square meters connected with the old school. There was a fence that made the buildings of the college as one unit that might be called as “the town of knowledge in Soor”.
This Ja’fari College has become one of the best schools in Lebanon in the field of knowledge, culture and high morals. This was the hope of Sayyid Ja’far, who ran its affairs in the past and supervises it nowadays.
The Ja’fari College does not get fees from the poor but it gets fees just from the rich in order to carry out its duties towards the needy and their affairs.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen had established this school just to educate the rising generation of the rich and the poor equally.
Because of his too much care for the needy, Sayyid Sharafuddeen had established the Society of Charity to help the poor and to look after them and to carry out the procedures of burying their deads and because of this there was no beggar or needy in Soor.


(48)
His visiting the sacred places
In 1355 A.H. Sayyid Sharafuddeen visited the sacred places in Iraq and visited his uncles and relatives of Aal[1] as-Sadr. A group of ulama, ministers, lords, deputies and chiefs had received him until the bridge of Fallouja. At the head was the chief of Iraq Sayyid Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr, who was the chief of the House of Lords at that time.
At honor of Sayyid Sharafuddeen, Sayyid Muhammad Baqir as-Sadr[2] invited the ulama, ministers, lords, deputies and famous personalities to three invitations.
The house was crowded with ulama, leaders and ordinary people every day.
The learned Muslim class seized the opportunity of the availability of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in Iraq and began to put forth different religious questions and whatever ununderstandable traditions narrated from the infallible imams (s) and he answered every question in clear eloquence and irrefutable evidences.
I still remember that splendid meeting, in which many questions about conflicting traditions that each of them contradicted the other were put before him. Sayyid as-Sadr asked Sayyid Sharafuddeen permission to answer the questions. He began to answer the questions one after the other explaining with clear eloquence and bright evidences and removing the clouds of that contradiction from those traditions that drew all the attentions towards him and made all the believers regard him highly and admire his accuracy, quick-wittedness and firm evidencing.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen confirmed the answers of Sayyid as-Sadr showing his admiration and high regards.
The attendants admired Sayyid as-Sadr very much for they thought
________________________________________
[1] Aal means the family of.
[2] He was born in Kadhimiyya in 1300 A.H. and died in 1375. He was buried in the graveyard of Aal as-Sadr beside the tomb of his father ayatollah Sayyid Hasan as-Sadr, the patriot leader, who was well-known of his bright situations towards his country and people. He was really a religion in politics and good politics in religion.


(49)
that he had been interested in politics totally and turned away from the religious subjects although they knew about his excellent scientific degree he had got when studying in Holy Najaf during his youth.
When the meeting ended, the people left and Sayyid Sharafuddeen became alone with us, he said: “If a tradition has two meanings; a primary meaning that comes to people’s minds and a secondary meaning that dose not come to mind except after long pondering, the second meaning will be as the first meaning in the mind of Sayyid as-Sadr.”
Sayyid Sharafuddeen visited the shrines of the infallible imams in Kadhimiyya, Samarra’, Kerbala’ and Najaf. People received and welcomed him in all these sacred placed in a splendid way that befitted his high position.
Before receiving him in Holy Najaf, the capital of knowledge and religion, his book “al-Muraja’at” in its first edition had reached there. It occupied the highest position inside the selves of the ulama and scholars of Najaf. The all were waiting for the author of al-Muraja’at impatiently.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen became the guest of his aunt’s son, the great religious authority ayatollah Sheikh Muhammad Redha Aal Yaseen, whose house was full of the people of knowledge and virtue. The scientific talks prevailed over the meeting and Sayyid Sharafuddeen had witnessed rounds that showed his great rank in branches and basic principles (Usool) of religion. The ulama of Najaf said then: “The good ability of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in scientific evidencing, mentioning traditions and accuracy of conclusions make us feel that as if he is still among us and has not left the hawza.”
Sayyid Sharafuddeen recalled his memories in Najaf and Najaf began anew talking about his favors during his youth, about his virtues during his old age and his lofty services throughout the ages of his life.
The members of Literature League seized the opportunity of the existence of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in Najaf during the occasion of Eid al-Ghadeer and held a big celebration on this occasion, to which they


(50)
invited him besides the ulama and notables of Najaf. The poets recited poems talking about the Eid and about the virtues and favors of Sayyid Sharafuddeen. The poem of Professor al-Habboobi was the best in its high literature and abundant feelings among the other poems, which were full of tender feelings and sentiments.
After visiting Iraq, Sayyid Sharafuddeen kept on his travel towards Iran to be honored by visiting the shrine of Imam ar-Redha (s) and the shrine of Fatima al-Ma’ssooma (s) in Qom. He was the guest oh his aunt’s son ayatollah Sayyid Sadruddeen as-Sadr, who had emigrated from Iraq to Qom in order to run the Hawza there.
Many scientific meetings were held between Sayyid Sharafuddeen and the ulama of Qom, who regarded him highly and admired his great knowledge and his clear Arabic eloquence.
In every city in Iran he passed by, he was received and welcomed splendidly due to his high position among the faithful Iranian people.
Najaf was in need of him
The great religious authority ayatollah Sayyid Abul Hasan al-Isfahani before his death had traveled to Lebanon for recreation. He settled down in Ba’albak.[1] The ulama and scholars of Lebanon competed to visit him. At the head was Sayyid Sharafuddeen. He was pleased very much to meet with him. Sayyid Abul Hasan found it a good opportunity to talk with Sayyid Sharafuddeen about the matter that Najaf was in need of him to be there and showed the utmost readiness to arrange his affairs and the affairs of everyone, who would be with him in a way that would befit his rank and position. Sayyid Sharafuddeen thanked him for his generous sentiment and apologized with convincing excuses that prevented him from leaving his country.
Those, who were close to ayatollah Abul Hasan, said that he often said in the last week of his life: “Najaf is in need of Sayyid Sharafuddeen”.
________________________________________[1] A city in Lebanon.


(51)
We understand from his previous request and mentioning the name of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in the last days of his life that Sayyid Sharafuddeen have had all what a religious authority has to have of great knowledge, firm evidences and wide comprehension of everything about traditions, narrators and Islamic jurisprudence that may not be easy except to very few of the ulama especially that Sayyid Sharafuddeen has clear eloquence, fluency in his speeches and a great ability of composition, which are necessary for a religious authority in the present age.
It was no wonder that Sayyid Sharafuddeen got all this regard from Sayyid Abul Hasan because a virtue would not be known except by its people and who was worthier than Sayyid Abul Hasan of virtues and of appreciating them?
His death and burial
The man of that big heart that beat with life and was full of knowledge and faith became silent after passing eighty-seven years of old, which had been spent in continuous jihad for the sake of Allah in spreading the pure sharia, making the umma familiar with the two weighty things; the Book of Allah and pure progeny of the Prophet (s), guiding people towards their purity and welfare and leading them on the right path as Allah and His Messenger had ordered.
He wanted, some years before his death, to go back to Iraq, the place of his birth, of his growing up, of his study and the nation of his family and relatives to renew the age he had spent near them and to recall those happy days he had lived with them and to be, at the last moment of his life, beside the sanctum of his grandfather, the guardian (Imam Ali (s)), whom he hoped to be buried in his pure soil and to be joined with him in his sanctum!
Became silent that voice, which sounded with the truth and spread the mention of Allah. Calmed down those eyes, which stayed up to achieve justice and to look after the general Islamic welfare.
Went out that burning torch inside that genius mind, which kept on thinking of anything that might bring goodness to the umma.
Sloped those hands that stood against the untruth and stretched with


(52)
goodness to fulfill the needs of the needy. Stopped that continuous movement of that pure body, which was a source of goodness and mercy all the time.
He left to the better world on Monday, the thirtieth of December, 1975 AD. / the eighth of Jumada ath-Thaniyya,[1] 1377 A.H.
When the news of his death was announced, the people of the villages of Mountain Aamil gathered in Beirut to farewell their great religious leader. Beirut, with all its ulama, scholars, chiefs, politicians and the rest of people, went out. At the head were the ulama and the rulers.
The honored coffin was put in a special airplane to Baghdad. The crowds of the Muslims were waiting for him. Baghdad and Kadhimiyya escorted him and then we went on towards Kerbala. Every village on our way took its share of escorting.
Kerbala did the best in carrying funeral rites in a way that befitted the high position of the deceased man. When the coffin reached Najaf before the sunset, Najaf went out with all its people; ulama, scholars, poets, notables and all classes of people. It was a memorable day that Najaf had never seen its like before. All that was because of the high position of the man inside the selves of all the classes of people due to his valuable works, his nonesuch scientific fame and his great favors on Islam and the Muslims.
The funerals were distinguished with quality and quantity in comparison with the other deceased ulama, who had been escorted before this man, although among them were some ulama, who had resided in Najaf and had the general authority of taqlid.[2]
He was buried in one of the rooms in the holy shrine of Imam Ali (s) on Wednesday, the first of January, 1958/ the tenth of Jumada ath-Thaniyya, 1377 A.H. with crying and moaning.
The crowds of people cried and sighed bitterly over the great loss of this great man.
________________________________________
[1] The sixth months in the Islamic calendar.
[2] Taqlid: accepting and following the opinions of a mujtahid or a religious authority concerning the religious affairs.


(53)
Najaf expressed its deep sorrow on the fortieth day of the great loss by holding two solemn celebrations by the two societies; Muntada an-Nashr and the Literature League. The poets and scholars praised the deceased man and his valuable works. In the first of their speeches they mentioned the sayings of the great ulama and religious authorities about the deceased man. Obsequies were held in Iraq, Lebanon and the rest of the Islamic countries continuously until the fortieth day after his death.
We pray Allah to have mercy upon this great deceased man and make the umma take advantage of his works and make us patient before this great loss. (The contentment of Allah is our contentment; Ahlul Bayt. We became patient before His affliction and He will reward us with the reward of the patient).

7-1-1964 AD. / 1383 A.H.
Kadhimiyya-Baghdad
Muhammad Sadiq as-Sadr

(55)
Introduction
By: Allama Sayyid Muhammad Taqi al-Hakeem
Professor of Usool in the college of Muntada an-Nashr
and the secretary general of the society of Muntada an-Nashr
I am now before a book that has a great scientific value. It has been written by a man having the favor of teachership and education on the most of the researchers of doctrinism of this generation. The cultural assembly of Muntada an-Nashr wanted me to be honored by writing an introduction for this book to shed some lights on the contents of some of its scientific words and then to evaluate it and to show its aspects and main characteristics and after that to talk about the personality of the author to show some of his immortal qualities.
As I am confined to obey the will of the assembly, so I have no choice to avoid this decision though I think that I do not deserve this honor.
-1-
Writing an introduction to this book to define some of its idioms and to clear the importance of its researches takes us in the first to a group of the teachers of the science of Usool al-Fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) to get their opinions on defining some concepts mentioned in the book, whose author has used the same idioms that they use.
The first thing that faces us is the title of the book “an-Nass wel Ijtihad”. What has the author meant by the word “an-Nass” and what has he meant by “al-Ijtihad” and what does the comparison between them lead to?
I think that answering these three questions with all their


(56)
surroundings will be enough to understand all the concepts mentioned in the book.
The professors answer the question of “an-Nass”[1] that it is “the literal evidence that expresses the legal verdict and that has been proved from the legislator (Allah or His prophet) in irrefutable way or according to supposition that is regarded legally and rationally whether the source is the Book or the Sunna”. Of course the author of this book has not intended other than this meaning as it appears from his researches.
As for the question of “ijtihad”, they answered with many answers different according to their different thoughts and points of view although the differences between them had nothing to do to the essence.
It seems from their words that they have two idioms about this word; one is more specified than the other. Ijtihad in its general concept according to al-Aamudi is “trying the best to suppose something of the legal verdicts in a way that it is felt that that one is unable to get more than it”.[2] Some jurisprudents of Usool adopted this definition with doing some reform to it and changing some of its words. Ad-Dahlawi defines it as: “trying the best to understand the legal sub-verdicts from their detailed evidences that all belong to four sources; the Book, the Sunna, consensus and analogy”.[3] Muhammad al-Khudhari defines it as: “trying the best by a jurisprudent to know the verdicts of the Sharia” then he adds “full ijtihad is to try all that he can until he feels that he is unable to get anything more”.[4]
All these definitions and their likes are not skilled if they have meant to define the concept logically but if they have intended to explain the word like the linguists so it is no matter to depend on any of them. Perhaps the closer skilled definition that is away from criticism somehow is “the ability, by which one can join the little

________________________________________
[1] Nass means proviso, text or wording.
[2] Refer to al-Ahkam, vol.4 p.218.
[3] The thesis of al-Insaf fee Bayan al-Ikhtilaf by allama Shah Waliyullah ad-Dahlawi mentioned in the Encyclopedia of Fareed Wajdi. This definition is in vol. 3 p.236.
[4] Usool al-Fiqh by Muhammad al-Khudhari p.357.


(57)
matters to the greater ones in order to produce a legal verdict or a legal or rational practical function” and it somehow avoids the defects of the previous definitions.
Being limited to demand supposing the legal verdict, as in al-Aamudi’s definition, excludes analogy,[1] which produces the legal conclusions, if its little and greater matters are certain and being limited to knowledge as in al-Khudhari’s definition excludes the results that lead to the real verdict if its premises or some of them lead to accepted supposition legally and rationally because the result -as it is said- follows in its verdict the least of premises. And being limited to legal verdicts- as in all definitions-excludes the results, to which a mujtahid reaches via trying some rules and usools and especially the ones that annul its obligation like the legal acquittance derived from this tradition “the people of my umma are not responsible for what they do not know” and the rational acquittance derived from the decision of mind that decides the ugliness of punishing without an evidence and the likes. Of course these matters and their likes are not from the legal verdicts at all but they are practical functions determined by mind or legislation when a mujtahid becomes desperate to get a legal verdict by the means of knowledge or accepted supposition.
Anyhow the meaning of ijtihad in general is clear even if the previous definitions fail to give all its limits.
Ijtihad in its special meaning is a synonym of analogy according to ash-Shafi’iy’s thought. He says: “…what is analogy? Is it ijtihad or they are different? I said: they are two names for one meaning”.[2] They might make it as a synonym for approval, opinion, conclusion and analogy as different names for one meaning. Mustafa Abdur Razaq says: “The opinion that we talk about is dependence on intellect in concluding the legal verdicts that is what we mean by ijtihad and analogy and it is also a synonym for approval and conclusion”.[3] It is clear for one, who studies these researches and
________________________________________
[1] Analogy here means logical analogy that depends on Usool.
[2] Ar-Rissala by ash-Shafi’iy, p.477.
[3] Introduction to the History of the Islamic Philosophy by Mustafa Abdur Razaq, p.138.


(58)
what definitions they have mentioned for these idioms, to find that this speech has come out according to the requirements of this subject and its idioms. Its reason might be an ambiguity that the general concepts have imposed their confirmation upon this great researcher.
Apparently that one, who observes their sayings about the subject of ijtihad in its special meaning, will find it as a synonym of “opinion” for them and analogy, approval, benefits and the likes are just confirmations for this concept.
When comparing between “nass” and “ijtihad” mentioned in the title of the book, we understand that the author has meant by ijtihad here its special meaning, which is trying one’s opinion to derive the legal verdict with ignoring the “nass” that contradicts the verdict.
As for these evidences that have been mentioned repeatedly in some definitions of ijtihad in its general meaning and ad-Dahlawi has ascribed to it in his previous definition “the whole verdicts”, they are four- as he has mentioned-three of which the Muslims have agreed on and they are: the Book, the Sunna and consensus. The jurisprudents of the Shia have added to them “reason” while their Sunni brothers have added “analogy” and perhaps some of them have added approval, benefits and others.
With regard to the importance of the research on these evidences and preferring some of them to the others and the important relation with the researches of this book, we shall talk about in some details as necessary as the subject requires.
The Book means the Book of Allah that has been revealed to His messenger Muhammad (s), who has informed his umma of it and it has circulated among the Muslims until this day with no increase and no decrease. Its verses that concern the legal verdicts whether worships or dealings such as personal law, civil law, criminal law, procedure or others, have been collected to be about five hundred verses; a little more or a little less. These verses are considered as the first source of legislation according to the consensus of all the Islamic sects. These verses have been collected and classified into the chapters of jurisprudence and have been attached with their comments by some scholars like al-Miqdad as-Siyori in his book


(59)
Kanzul Irfan fee Fiqh al-Qur’an and al-Jaza’iry in his book Qala’id ad-Durar fee Bayan Aayat al-Ahkam bil-Athar and others.
Some of these verses need to be explained as general or special, absolute or confined, in summary or in details and then to show the annulling and the annulled ones etc. Besides that there are some actions, whose verdicts have not been legislated by the Qur’anic verses, so we are in need to the second source, which is the Sunna. The Sunna is the sayings of the infallible ones,[1] their doings and their accepting and confirming others’ sayings and doings. This is to complete the legislation on one side and to interpret the unclear texts of the Book on the other side.
Then the Sunna is the complement of the Holy Book. In fact both of them are but one since they belong to the First Legislator “Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed. Qur’an, 53:3-4” The Muslims have agreed unanimously upon considering the Sunna as a source of legislation. Abdul Wahab Khallaf says: “The Muslims have agreed unanimously upon that all what the Prophet (s) has said or done or confessed of sayings and doings that have been conveyed to us correctly and truthfully and by which the Prophet (s) has intended to be as the essence of legislation and imitation, will be irrefutable proof for the Muslims and a source of legislation, from which the mujtahids are to conclude legal verdicts that manage the actions of the ordinary Muslims. This means that the verdicts derived from the Sunna will be, in addition to the verdicts mentioned in the Holy Qur’an, as the law that must be followed”.[2]
Consensus is joined to the Holy Qur’an and the Sunna as the third source of legislation. Since we are Muslims and we believe that we have a divine Sharia, which has defined all what we need to manage our relations whether with Allah or among ourselves with one another and that this Sharia, which Allah has made flexible to keep pace with the time with its rules and principles, is the perfect Sharia
________________________________________
[1] The infallible ones according to the Shia are the Prophet (s) and the twelve imams, the first of whom is Imam Ali (s) and the last one is Muhammad bin al-Hasan (Imam al-Mahdi (s)).
[2] Ilm Usool al-Fiqh wa Khulasat Tareekh at-Tashree’ al-Islami, p.37.


(60)
that has ended all the previous laws. And as we believe that the Sharia is really so; therefore we do not have to violate its legal texts (nass) and we have no right to determine according to our own thoughts. This is about to be one of the agreed upon usool determined by the most of the ulama of usool; the ancient and the recent ones, the Sunni and the Shia”.
Professor Khallaf says in his book “the Sources of the Islamic Legislation”: “The event that an irrefutable verdict has come out of its text I wording and its meaning…” It means that mind cannot recognize out of this text except a definite verdict that there is no way for ijtihad in it and that the verdict of this very text must be followed.
Hence there is no chance for ijtihad about prayers because offering prayers is obligatory. The same is said about the shares of the heirs concerning the matter of inheritance. Therefore the jurisprudents of Usool say that ijtihad is not permissible on matters with texts having clear and irrefutable verdicts.
The fact, whose verdict is derived from a text having suppositional meaning (that it may lead to two verdicts or more and that reason can recognize which of the verdicts is more suitable), can be submitted to ijtihad but this ijtihad must be bound to the meanings included by the text and then to prefer one of these meanings. The mujtahid has to try his best in preferring one of the meanings relying on the linguistic and legislative principles and whatever result he gets, he has to act according to it. For example Allah has said in the verse of wudu’[1]: (and wipe your heads)[2] and it is possible to refer either to wiping all the head because of the preposition (mentioned in the Arabic wording) or to wiping a part of the head. He adds: “The event that neither a text nor consensus has determined a verdict on can be submitted to ijtihad.”[3]
Some of the legislated verdicts can be got by knowledge either by using reason or depending on the true traditions and some of them
________________________________________
[1] Wudu’ : ritual ablution as a prerequisite for offering prayers.
[2] In the Arabic wording there is a preposition before “your heads”.
[3] The Sources of Islamic legislation, p.8-9.


(61)
cannot be got by knowledge but by supposition. Supposition is one of the ways that may not give the exact reality in order to be relied on. Allah has mentioned a kind of blame and scolding for absolute (unjustified) supposition when saying in this verse: “they do not follow anything but conjecture, and surely conjecture does not avail against the truth at all. Qur'an, 53:28” and “O you who believe! avoid most of suspicion, for surely suspicion in some cases is a sin. Qur'an, 49:12” and other verses.
But the Holy Legislator (Allah) has given a permission to depend on some of the conjectures to be considered as trusted evidences out of His kindness to his people to make their affairs easy and not difficult. So a tradition narrated by one narrator, consensus and other ways can be depended on in legislating legal verdicts if they are considered as trusted sources; otherwise people should resort to precaution.
Analogy means- as ad-Dawaleebi says: “applying a legal verdict of a matter to another matter when there is a same cause behind them both.”[1] For example wine has been prohibited because it causes intoxication (if this justification agrees with the Book and the Sunna when prohibiting wine or other things) so this verdict will be applied to other things, which cause intoxication, even if they are not wine. The Shia do not regard analogy as one of the sources of legislation because it has been proved that the infallible imams of Ahlul Bayt (s) had forbidden from depending on it in concluding legal verdicts and because the evidences of analogy are not sufficient to make analogy accepted as a source of legislation.
What is said about analogy can be said about approval, whose evidences are more ambiguous than those of analogy.
As for the “suitable benefits” as called by the scholars of Usool and “the general benefits” as called by the Malikites and “istislah-regarding (something) good” as called by al-Ghazali,[2] the Muslims have disagreed on defining it or depending on it or preferring it to the first sources. Professor Khallaf defines it by saying: “It is the
________________________________________
[1] The Entrance to the science of Usool and Fiqh, p.261.
[2] Ilm Ussol al-Fiqh wa Khulasat at-Tashree’ al-Islami, p.92.


(62)
benefit that the Legislator (Allah) has not legislated a verdict on it and there is no legal evidence on regarding it or annulling it.”[1] The Shia do not accept it nor do they believe that it is permissible to rely on it in legislating legal verdicts or in preferring it to the first sources of legislation. In fact they believe that legislation is impermissible according to this source of legislation and they say: “adding something, which is not of the Sharia, to the Sharia”.
The strange thing is that some researchers have ascribed this matter to the Shia and said that they have practiced it and preferred it to the clear texts. The author of this book has refuted this fabrication in his book al-Irfan and then in this book and he has corrected their view about this subject.
Some of them have explained it in another way. They said: “Istislah in its real meaning is a kind of legislating a legal verdict according to the opinion based on the benefit on every matter that the Sharia has had no text on and that there is no another matter like it in order to submit it to analogy but the verdict is derived according to the general bases of the Sharia that any matter, which has no benefit, is not from the Sharia. These general bases are like what has been said by Allah: “Surely Allah enjoins the doing of justice and the doing of good. Qur'an, 16:90” and by the Prophet (s): “No harm or damage should be done (to anyone)”[2]
If we add to this explanation the word “special” after the word “nass” to accommodate its parts to each other and to remove the contradiction between them and we say that they mean by “the general benefit” this thing then the Shia will have no excuse to refrain from depending on this source in their legislation as long as it depends on the general bases determined by the Holy Legislator and refers to the legal principles. This is not acting according to the general benefit nor is it a kind of legislation but it is doing according to the Book and the Sunna.
In fact this research has made some researchers unable to define a certain concept on it and the examples mentioned on it do not
________________________________________
[1]The Entrance to the science of Usool and Fiqh, p.216.
[2] The Entrance to the science of Usool and Fiqh, p.274.


(63)
concern it alone. Al-Ghazali gives an example by saying: (…like some unbelievers protecting themselves by some Muslim captives by making them as a shield; if we give up and leave them alone, they will attack us and defeat Islam and kill all the Muslims and if we shoot at the shield, we will kill an innocent Muslim, who is not guilty and who must not be killed, and this is not from the Sharia. If we give up, we will let the unbelievers prevail over all the Muslim and they will them all and then they will kill the captives too. So we may shoot at the shield (the Muslim captives) in order to save the rest of the Muslims. Achieving this aim in this way (killing innocent people) has not been determined by a certain source (of legislation).”[1] This example is one of the clearest points of (Tazahum) which means that when two different legal verdicts meet by accident at the same time and that one cannot achieve them both because he will have no enough time to do that and that he cannot give up them both because he has to obey them; therefore one must use reason to choose one of the two verdicts and certainly one must choose the more important and the most useful verdict of them. If one does not know which of them is better or they are equal, one can choose any of them and acts according to it and ignore the other verdict.
The two verdicts mentioned in the example of al-Ghazali show the impermissibility of killing a Muslim and the necessity of keeping all the Muslims safe. Executing the two verdicts together in this case is impossible because executing one of them requires ignoring the other. Choosing the more important one of the two and doing according to it means choosing one of the two texts and doing according to it and this is like doing according to the Book or the Sunna and not doing according to the concept of “istislah”.
It appears from some of the other examples that they have been submitted to verdicts after comparing the texts with each other. I think that those, who have said that the Shia prefer general benefits to the texts and considered them as excessive in practicing that, have thought of that after referring to the subject of “preference”[2] mentioned in the principles of the Shia and considered that as
________________________________________
[1] Usool al-Fiqh by al-Khudhari, p.303.
[2] Preferring the more important verdict to the important one.


(64)
“Istislah”.
Allah has said: (He has chosen you and has not laid upon you any hardship in religion). The Prophet (s) has said: “No harm or damage should be done to others” besides the tradition that shows “necessities permit prohibited things”. All these evidences and their likes show that Allah has permitted his people to make use of the prohibited things in case of necessity or of facing serious dangers.
If there is no remedy to a sick man except by drinking an impure or a prohibited substance, then he should drink that prohibited substance and he will neither be sinful nor will he be punished by Allah because Allah is too kind to His people and He does not cause them any harm so He will not punish for drinking that prohibited substance (as remedy) in the necessary cases.
This is not in the way of preferring “istislah” to the text but it is preferring a text to another text and ignoring an evidence from the Book or the Sunna in special cases. The Shia ulama of Usool have many accurate studies about preferring some verdicts to others in the special cases. Let the reader refer to their books to see their opinions on the subject.
I have found after studying their (the Sunni’s) definitions and examples on the matter of “istislah” that they are classified into three classes; two of them belong to the concept of preferring some verdicts to others, the first of them concerns the matter of “tazahum” and the second concerns he matter of “preference”, which the Shia believe in, and the third class does not depend on a text whether special or general it is and the Shia do not believe in this principle. I think that the author of this book has discussed this class (of innovating verdicts) especially.
It has been mentioned that this kind of legislation has been adopted under the excuse of “the change of the verdicts according to the change of the time”. The Shia do not believe in subjecting the legal verdicts to the development that takes place. The Sharia with its divine verdicts, as the Shia believe, keeps pace with the different ages of time. It is full of vital power that makes it live forever. Its principles and evidences are enough to make it keep pace with every development that has taken place or will take place by concluding


(65)
legal verdicts out of its texts or by following certain steps when it is not possible to derive a legal verdict.
The Shiite books of Usool and jurisprudence have a great legislative supply that has been produced because the Shia have opened the gate of ijtihad. If these books are read, many reformers, who call for “subjecting the verdicts to the changes of time and ignoring the first legal verdicts by replacing them with new verdicts that do not rely on any legal source but just rely on what they call as general benefit”, will make great use of them. We hope that the jurisprudents, who are interested in such researches, and the scholars of our Sunni brothers to make use of the experiences of the Shia in opening the gate of ijtihad.
In short, the Book and the Sunna (with consensus) are preferred to the all other sources of Ijtihad like, analogy, approval, general benefits and others because they are numerous evidences and a mujtahid cannot do according to these bases when there is a clear text from the Book and the Sunna contradicting those bases.
Since this research, which we write this introduction to, is about verdicts and fatwas that have been issued in the first age of Islam, so we have no right to impose our opinions in preferring the rank of one evidence to the other before studying the subject fully.
Some historians have mentioned that when the Prophet (s) had sent Ma’ath bin Jabal to Yemen (as the wali), he asked him: “How will judge if cases are offered before you?” Ma’ath said: “I judge according to the Book of Allah.” The Prophet (s) asked him: “If you do not find an answer in the Book of Allah?” he said: “Then I will judge according to the Sunna of the messenger of Allah (s).” The Prophet (s) said: “If you do not found an answer in the Book of Allah and in the Sunna of the messenger of Allah?” He said: “I will judge according to my own opinion.”[1] It has been mentioned that the Prophet (s) had approved Ma’ath’s saying and praised him and said at the end of the tradition: “Praise be to Allah who has guided the messenger of the messenger of Allah to what pleases the messenger
________________________________________
[1] Introduction to the History of the Islamic Philosophy, p.145.


(66)
of Allah.”[1]
Maymoon bin Mihran narrated: “When litigants came to Abu Bakr, he referred to the Book of Allah to judge between them. If he could not find a judgment in the Book of Allah, he would refer to the Sunna of the Prophet (s). When he could not find something in the Book and the Sunna to judge according to it, he went out to ask the Muslims if any of them knew that the Prophet (s) had judged on such cases. Many Muslims came to him mentioning the judgments of the Prophet (s) on such cases. Abu Bakr said: “Praise be to Allah, Who has made among us some ones who keep the knowledge of our Prophet for us.” If he failed to find something in the Sunna of the Prophet (s) to judge with it, he gathered the chiefs and the notables of the people to consult with them and when they agreed unanimously on something, he would judge with it.”[2]
Umar said to Shurayh the Judge from among his instructions to him: “…if a case is offered before you and there is no verdict on it in the Book of Allah or in the Sunna of the messenger of Allah nor has it been judged by anyone before you, then you may choose one of two things; either to judge according to your own opinion if you like to give a quick judgment or to suspend your judgment if you like. I think that suspending your judgment is better to you.”[3]
Ibn Mass’ood said: “Whoever of you happens to judge between people, let him judge according to the Book of Allah. If he cannot find any judgment in the Book of Allah, let him judge according to the Sunna of the Prophet (s). If it happens that a case is offered before him that has judgment neither in the Book of Allah nor in the Sunna of the Prophet (s), let him judge according to what the righteous people have judged with. If a matter comes to him that it is neither in the Book of Allah nor in the Sunna of the Prophet (s) nor has it been judged by the righteous people, let him judge according to his own opinion but if he cannot, let him give up without feeling shy.”[4] The traditions like these ones that have been narrated by the
________________________________________
[1] Introduction to the History of the Islamic Philosophy, p.145.
[2] Encyclopedia of Fareed Wajdi, vol.3 p.212.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Introduction to the History of the Islamic Philosophy, p.177.


(67)
companions are too many. Refer to the books of Hadith.
Dr. Goldzeher, the famous orientalist, has suspected the traditions saying that ijtihad has been found at the days of the Prophet (s) and then at the time of Umar after him. Among those traditions was the tradition of the Prophet (s) with Ma’ath bin Jabal when sending him to Yemen and the instructions of Umar to Shurayh the Judge and his letter to Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, in which he had showed him many systems of judgment and how to judge when there were no texts (from the Book or the Sunna) and especially the idiom of “analogy” was mentioned in this letter which had not been known except later on.”[1]
This orientalist-as Muhammad Yousuf Musa says-who has been interested in the Islamic studies, thinks that ijtihad has been practiced by the first generation of the Muslims but ijtihad in this stage was ambiguous and without positive guiding and it was away from the sect and its special doctrine. Later on it acquired certain limits and began to take a fixed direction and then it took the logical form which was “analogy”.[2]
Dr. Musa has refuted the opinion of Dr. Goldzeher and his other orientalist historians because they were far away from understanding the essence of Islam and because the traditions mentioned by ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya were enough to prove that. But then he came back to say: “Indeed Ijtihad in that period of the history of the Islamic jurisprudence was not the analogy that was known later on at the time of the jurisprudents of the four famous sects but the ijtihad that had been practiced by some of the companions were not too far from this analogy if it was not the same even nothing had been mentioned about the cause, the manners and other researches which must be used in practicing analogy as we have found in the age of those jurisprudents.”[3]
Whatever value this suspicion has and how scientific the disproval is, it doesn’t matter. What is important to us is that what concerns the
________________________________________
[1] Lectures on the History of Islamic Jurisprudence, p.23.
[2] Ibid. p.24.
[3] Ibid. p.25.


(68)
situations of the companions towards the verdicts determined by the Book and the Sunna. They have not permitted themselves to depend on other than these two sources especially when they often recited this verse: “and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back. Qur'an, 59:7” except if some of them violated the normal condition by committing some contradictions either because of special psychological cases or certain circumstances that led them to do that. They might be pleased with the opinions of some of them on the matters that there were no texts dealing with and so they formed the seed of consensus that was adopted by the scholars later on. I think that they resorted to the duty of one who doubted about a matter and then he should resort to reason and ijtihad even if they had not been as they had become later on as these two researchers have said.
Of course they did not resort to this duty before they had looked for a text concerning the matter in the Book and the Sunna. Ibn Hazm said: “The Prophet (s) was in Medina and his companions were busy working to get their livelihood because life was too difficult in Hijaz. The Prophet (s) often gave his fatwas and verdicts at the presence of some of his companions, who could attend his meetings. These few companions, who might be sometimes one or two, should convey the Prophet’s verdicts to the absent companions who had to act according to these verdicts.”[1] He also said: “We know that when the Prophet (s) wanted to give a fatwa or to determine a verdict, he did not gather all the people of Medina for that but he declared his verdicts before those who could attend his meetings and then the present companions should inform the absent ones. There is no doubt in this and it cannot be denied by any one who has reason and good sense.”[2]
As ibn Hazm has said that the present companions should inform the absent ones of the Prophet’s verdicts and this would an authority on them, which was really so, then the absent companions had no right to neglect searching for the legal texts. They had to search until they
________________________________________
[1] Al-Ihkam fee Usool al-Ahkam, vol.1 p.114. Refer to Introduction to the History of the Islamic Philosophy, p.123.
[2] Ibid.


(69)
would fail to find any. Some traditions showed that the companions had kept on doing so. The tradition narrated by Maymoon bin Mihran mentioned this matter. He said: “…if he does not find an evidence in the Book of Allah, he has to judge according to the Sunna of the Prophet (s) but if he fails to find he any, he has to consult with the Muslims…”
Let us now come back to the book (this book) to understand its researches and to know its scientific value.
-2-
This book is an excellent study on doings, judgments and fatwas done by some of the great companions at the time of the Prophet (s) and after him. These doings, judgments and fatwas had contradicted the clear texts of the Book and the Sunna in spite that the doers had done them intendedly and they had known well that their doings were against the Book and the Sunna. If these doings had not been justified by some scholars and if the doers had not been excused in a way or another, these doings would have been considered as challenge and not ijtihad. Some other doings were clear in their contradiction to the texts of the Qur'an and the Sunna but they were different from the previous ones because the doers had done them while unknowing of the divine texts and when they were warned of their mistakes, they gave up and repented. These kinds of doings would not be blamed because the doers had tried their best to look for the legal evidences and when they failed to find any, they gave fatwas according to their own opinions.
And since these doings, fatwas and judgments, which this book has discussed here, had been done intendedly and without paying any attention to the legal texts or without trying to look for the legal texts especially the aware people of these texts were close to the doers, although the doers themselves were aware of the texts, so they would be blamed and responsible for these doings.
The third kind of these doings were considered as ijtihad on the meaning of the texts and then choosing what contradicted the real intention of the texts which normally came to mind and could be understood by all people. This kind of ijtihad annulled the apparent


(70)
meaning of the text and chose another instead. The common thing between these fatwas and verdicts has been showed by the author of this book in two words, which they are the title of the book; “an-Nass wel-Ijtihad” for all these doings belonged to personal ijtihad and opinions although there were clear divine texts, that could be obtained easily, contradicting those doings and fatwas.
The book has wonderful historical chapters discussing these fatwas and shedding lights on them to make them clear or to explain the view of the author in criticizing them. The author has distinguished these historical events from the researches of the book by putting them in independent chapters.
The style of the author in his researches depends on showing the events in a historical point of view after taking them from the most reliable sources. Then he analyzes the event in a pure objective manner with showing the opinions of the people of those events if they have had opinions mentioned by the historians or showing the opinions of the later scholars who have justified the faults of those people. After that he gives his opinion after discussing all the views about the event in an accurate scientific discussion.
One glance at any of the important matters discussed in the book makes you feel how great efforts the author has made in getting these matters from their sources in the books of history and Hadith or the wide intellectual power that the author has given to these matters which shows the great knowledge and the scientific abilities he has which are seldom available among the writers of this generation.
As for the style of the book, it is not different from the style of the author in most of his books; brightness, genuineness, easiness besides giving the events what they deserve whether in brief or in details. We can say about these researches that they express the power of the great souls in challenging the heavy burden that time puts on their shoulders for the author has written this book while he was about eighty-five years old. He has put in it the extract of his experiences of more than half a century which he has spent in studying, researching and inquiring. This book is the most recent work that has been written by the author’s honored pen and we do


(71)
not say that it is the last one. May Allah make him live more and more to produce such great books and useful researches.[1]
-3-
Talking about the great personality of Sayyid Sharafuddeen and shedding some lights on some aspects of this personality may take use back more that half a century to study some of the factors that have had effects on forming his personality and have participated in making him straight with no bit of deviation.
I mean by “some of the factors” the environment that has had the greatest favor on developing his talents. The environment was the holy Najaf, the Islamic university which has been established since more than one thousand years and it is still having its important scientific position. Sayyid Sharafuddeen was one of the most famous students of this university at that time. The university was, as it had been throughout its ages, rich with its cultural heritage in the sciences of the Arabic language, jurisprudence, philosophy, literature and poetry. To this university and to the University of al-Azhar belongs the greatest favor in connecting the circles of the Islamic culture with each other and in keeping the chain of this culture pure throughout the dark ages where ignorance and inactivity had prevailed over most of the cultural institutes. The University of Najaf might have been distinguished from the other institutes by opening the door of ijtihad for its students and leaving the way free for the minds to struggle in order to reach the truth via the scientific arguments to get out of the fruits of this struggle experiences full of life and activity.
Whenever the motive of the intellectual struggle is to reach the truth, it will be one of the most important tools of development and progress in every field of science and literature. This development that has joined jurisprudence and its principles in this university, whether in the programs or the methods, was one of the best fruits of that intellectual struggle. If we could study jurisprudence throughout its different ages, we would get, as I think, to a series of experiments
________________________________________
[1] This introduction has been written while the author was still alive.


(72)
successive in their simplicity and depth and each of them taking you to the next one to study it deeply and to add to it the new thoughts and experiences and so on.
The familiarity of Najaf with these kinds of arguments and struggles during its long scientific life has imparted to it the aspects of objectivity and humbleness and kept it away from the bad aspects of disputes such as hatred, grudge and clinging to one’s opinion even if it appears to be wrong. These bad aspects often exist in people whose aim behind arguments is just to get personal advantages or is out of a psychological complex. But if the aim is to get to the truth and if the concept, which is the point of argument, is separate from persons, objectivity and submitting to the truth will be the axis of the arguments among most of the arguers.
Quite often we have found great teachers submitting to the opinions of their students when they find them true besides their submission to their teachers or to each other. The teachers themselves often encourage their students to argue with them in order to sharpen their minds on the one hand and to strengthen their personalities and to accustom them to genuineness and leaving imitating the opinions of their schools and their teachers, as weak students often do, on the other hand. In this sphere of mental freedom and intellectual dispute the author has spent his youth in Najaf moving between its institutes and great teachers to receive different sciences and knowledge. He, with his natural and acquired talents, was ready to receive all that knowledge and to comprehend it in the best way. He has been affected by this environment very much until his struggle for the sake of the truth has become as a nature to him. These effects might pass his mind to reach his conduct in his social life and so he has become a struggler in the different fields of life. I think that the clue of his personality after his graduation from the university might be known in the light of this nature more than any other aspect of his eternal aspects.
In order to see the effect of that on his mental and social life we show some sides of his life in which the nature of dispute and struggle for the sake of the truth has appeared in the most wonderful way.


(73)
The first of these sides was his struggle against the French colonists in Lebanon when he was young then. He had completed his religious study in Najaf and then he went to Aamila to carry out his duty in educating the people there. His fame in the field of knowledge had preceded him to there and concentrated his position inside the souls and since then he had become the leader of that country and the greatest educator there. He made use of his wonderful talent of making speeches to move the public opinion and to spread knowledge among the submissive people and to incite their zeal to ask for their rights. This had made him liable to the grudge of the French, who sent one of their mercenaries (ibn al-Hallaj) to assassinate him and this story became very famous in Lebanon.
After that he had been exiled from his country, his house had been plundered and his library had been burned besides the different forms of torment he had faced. Due to these doings the Islamic library had lost about twenty books written by the author besides many valuable and rare books he had in his library after being devoured by fire. He could not rewrite those burnt books after that.
Another side of his life was his struggle against some social diseases like appropriating the rights of weak people by some luxurious feudatories in the country. He found in that appropriation what contradicted the principles of Islam and so he made his famous rising against the feudatories. Murtadha aal Yaseen said when mentioning some scenes of the struggle of Sayyid Sharafuddeen in the introduction of al-Muraja’at: “Feudalism was spread then and the public did not have any control over their affairs. They did not understand from life save the meaning of injustice and slavery or they were not allowed to understand something other than of their mean lives which were subjected to serve the powerful people and the tyrants. When he (Sayyid Sharafuddeen) resided in Aamila, he could not bear this unjust system of life. He found that his soul, his faith and his piety did not let him keep silent before this feudalism, before these powerful tyrants and colonists and their mercenaries; therefore he revolted against feudalism and its people and denied it and denied them…”
Among the defects he found in his people was separation and the


(74)
weak religious spirit. the first thing he had done was making his house, which he possessed in the village, as a Husayniyya (mosque) for people to gather in on the religious occasions and to be as a minbar for him to achieve his mission. Then he built them a big mosque to gather them at the times of prayers. There was no mosque in the village at that time in which people might offer their prayers. He kept on preaching his people until he prepare a faithful generation that could recognize the reality of the society, the value of cooperation and rapport and could keep to the essence of the Islamic principles.
Some of my friends and I had the honor of visiting him two years ago in Yathir. We saw him instructing his followers to seize the opportunities to do good for people. While he was telling us about some of his reformatory projects and while we were listening to him carefully, we heard loud noises of delight coming from a far place. Sayyid Sharafuddeen stopped his talk and said: “I think that this approval was to so-and-so. He has succeeded to cut or to lift the biggest rock. The workers of the village have gone to build a mosque for them. I have encouraged them to compete in working. The encouragement you just heard was as a medal given to the first one of them who could succeed in carrying out his duty.” Then he said: “If they come, you should congratulate them for their blessed work and praise the successful one of them because this will have an effect on them because you are from holy Najaf, their religious capital and the city of the master of the guardians.” They came and we congratulated them after Sayyid Sharafuddeen had introduced us to them with a kind of praise that made us feel shy before this great man and his companions. It was a good situation of him to encourage those people to compete in doing good.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen (may Allah have mercy on him) had a short word but it had a great meaning showing his reformative tendency and one of his manners in his struggle against the defects of the society. He said: “Guidance is not spread except from where deviation spreads.”[1] Sayyid Sharafuddeen thought that strongest motive of deviation in his society was the programs of the
________________________________________
[1] The Introduction of al-Muraja’at, p.2.


(75)
imperialists which they had issued to teach them in their colonies. They had built modern schools to educate a generation far away from the essence of the religion that they would be able to revenge themselves on the hard struggle they had faced before during their missionary wars. It seemed that the missionary policy of the imperialists was the same everywhere. The word of Miss Bell, the famous English spy, was a clear proof on this matter although her activity was in Iraq especially. She said: “The clergymen were the most active propagandists for the revolution in Iraq during the First World War and after it and this had led the rulers to establish modern schools to weaken the religious principles inside the souls of the new generations and so they would pluck up the roots of revolution out of its base.”[1]
The clergymen then felt the danger of this policy and what subservience and surrender it would bring to the country; therefore they broke out in their famous rising against the policy of education and called for boycotting the modern schools but this call was unfortunately misunderstood at that time because of the effect of the opponents and then the clergymen divided into two groups; one group adopted the negative situation by being satisfied with calling for the boycott and uncovering the plots of the rulers as possible as they could and the other group thought that they should add to the boycott a positive action as it had been showed by the word of Sayyid Sharafuddeen “Guidance is not spread except from where deviation spreads.” The base of this call was to establish modern schools imitating those schools in their programs and sciences which did not affect the Islamic principles besides teaching religious programs to concentrate the religious spirit inside the rising generation.
Among the propagandists of this group in Iraq was a great number of the scholars of Najaf. They tried many times to establish modern schools to achieve their aims but they faced many troubles that they could not solve then. After some time of their tries and thoughts the Society of Muntada an-Nashr tried to establish primary, secondary and high schools. These tries succeeded sometimes and failed other times according to their special circumstances. I think they will be
________________________________________
[1] Wu’aadh as-Salateen, Ali al-Wardi, p.398.


(76)
more successful in the next years inshallah if more accurate systems and programs derived from the previous experiences and the most modern programs of the other schools are followed.
In Syria Sayyid Muhsin al-Ameen had untaken this positive movement by establishing schools having his name which they are still carrying out their reformatory mission. The author of this book Sayyid Sharafuddeen had undertaken this task in Lebanon by establishing the Ja’fari School in Soor and had run it with the modern programs. He took much care of it by adding to the programs religious lessons and he entrusted his son Ja’far Sharafuddeen with the school to run it and to develop its religious concept and aim.
At the time of al-Alwah Magazine I often read on its pages that Sayyid Sharafuddeen had determined to establish an edifice (Ja’fari School) and I saw its designs and maps published on the pages of the magazine. I thought that such a project could not be carried out by one individual. It might be nearer to imagination than to reality. In my visit To Soor I saw this imagination as a fact. I saw the school matching with its high building the surrounding mountains. It was really more wonderful than all the colleges we had seen in Lebanon. It was big and large and included all the utilities that a modern school required. At that moment I understood that determinations should not be measured with certain criteria; there might one person who could equal with his struggle and power many groups of people!
Sayyid Sharafuddeen intended-as he had told us-to join a secondary department to its primary and intermediate departments to prepare the pupils to specialize in the religious sciences and then to set out from it to holy Najaf to complete the high studies and to get the degree of ijtihad or to specialize in the Islamic missionary affairs like what the Society of Muntada an-Nashr had done.
As for his struggle and intellectual dispute to get to the truth from the shortest ways, it can be felt in his works; al-Fusool al-Muhimma, al-Muraja’at, a Word about Vision, to the Scientific Convention, the Answers on the Questions of Musa Jarullah and other works. All of these works deal with scholastic matters that have been discussed in the way of arguing and discussing previous opinions deeply and


(77)
impartially as the author always has done and has been known with these aspects from among the writers of his generation.
These books, besides their scientific value, have excellent method in research and argument with humbleness that is seldom available except in the great ulama, whose souls are free from defects, and so they do not need to resort to haughtiness or flattery at the expense of the truth.
The best example on that is his book “al-Muraja’at” which is a collection of letters have been exchanged between the author and the head of al-Azhar University Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri on doctrinal subjects, which had been and are still objects of disagreement and dispute between the two greatest Islamic sects; the Sunni and the Shia.
These letters show wide knowledge, deep thinking and wonderful performance on the one hand and the firmness of argument and mental dispute besides being away from the emotional methods on the other hand. How wonderful it is when you see one of them (Sayyid Sharafuddeen and Sheik al-Bishri) submit to the other when he finds that his friend is nearer to the truth. He submits to the other without resorting to crooked ways or confused speech as some arguers do in order to satisfy their pride and haughtiness and to acquire the sympathy of their followers of simple people. I think that the researches of this book represent the best manners of arguments and intellectual disputes and if they are studied deeply and regarded impartially by the scholars of this generation, they will do away with most of the points of disagreement between the two great Islamic sects and they will make them closer to each other in order to achieve the unity that all the reformers seek nowadays.
Sayyid Sharafuddeen is one of the propagandists for the unity but not in its negative form that calls for forgetting the past and ignoring it totally and drawing the curtain on all its tragedies as some scholars believe. They forgot that keeping silent before those tragedies and drawing the curtain on them would not remove their dregs from the souls but they would remain active inside the souls until they would appear in exclusion. Sayyid Sharafuddeen thinks that many points of disagreement between the Sunni and the Shia do


(78)
not come out of basic evidences but they are as results of fabrications and propagandas that have been created by some circumstances and have been encouraged by some governments and authorities in the old ages and if they have been studied objectively and impartially, the two sects would believe that they are far away from reality. As for the other points of disagreement, they are just as any simple disagreement between a doctrine and another or between a mujtahid and another and they do not deserve to cause separation and hatred. Even if these points of disagreement have been discussed in al-Muraja’at by the two scholars, they would make the different points of views near to each other.
Whenever arguments and intellectual disputes are away from sophism and away from affecting the public opinion by artificial speeches and they are close to the modern scientific methods, they will be the best ways to unite the different sects. The invitation of Sayyid Sharafuddeen is a positive and a fruitful invitation that he has followed in all his works and especially his two books al-Fusool al-Muhimma and al-Muraja’at. Even in his book Abu Hurayra, which is as a biography of this companion who has narrated (and fabricated) too many prophetic traditions, he has not ignored this positive invitation.
In jurisprudence I have found many researches written by Sayyid Sharafuddeen having the same method of argument. He has written them out of this invitation. They are not less than the previous books in being as high examples on the good manners of arguments and debates. He has collected some of them under the title of “Juristic Questions” and published them in a special thesis. When I had the honor of visiting him, I expressed to him my admiration to these researches and to their wonderful method in argument and discussion and I begged him to keep on supplying the Arabic library with such jurisprudential researches.
His reply was too pleasing where he told us that he had begun writing a book about the matters of disagreement (in jurisprudence) among the Muslims since the first age of Islam until the time when the different Islamic doctrines had been formed in the middle of the Abbasid age. The book was supposed to be called as “al-Ijtihad fee


(79)
Muqabil (against) an-Nass” but later on it was called as “an-Nass wel-Ijtihad” after Sayyid Sharafuddeen had added more details to it. He told us that he had finished the researches concerning some companions of the first age of Islam and that he would complete the rest of the book inshallah.
When we returned to Iraq, we brought this good news to our brothers of the members of “the Cultural Convention” who looked forward to reading this book.
23rd of Ramadan, 1375 A.H. / 4-5-1956 A.D.
Muhammad Taqiy al-Hakeem
Holy Najaf

(81)
An-Nass wel-Ijtihad
A word written by: Sadruddeen Sharafuddeen
(1)
I followed up this book step by step and found its firm structure when growing little by little with the deliberateness of innovation, improvement and discernment.
I often came to the author at the hours of travail to find him merged in his subject, enlivening a theme with long pondering and when his mold straightened up, he began to fill his mold with his high art and then to dedicate it to his clerk. He referred to his clerk many times before his work would be ready to appear with its final form. He did not finish his work until it harmonized before his ears, became firm in structure and convinced his eyes with its lines and colors.
A word near my father[1] was as a sixth sense. It did not please him, unless it acquired, besides the conditions of the truth, the criteria of beauty and the virtue of clearness.
I always saw him surrounded by masses of reference books; some were left open and others were turned over while he was reading in one of them sticking his face into its pages narrowing his left eye and closing the right one. Then he threw the book and combed his beard to spend moments in pondering while his sight swam in high spheres and hidden worlds. If you talked to him during these moments of inspiration, he would not hear you or he would not understand what you said.
________________________________________
[1] The writer of this word is the author’s son.


(82)
His old age that was overburdened with heavy loads did not affect his young mind and youthful determination. His age did not weaken him to dive or to fly and his complicated public responsibilities did not divert him from his intellectual activities as if he had devoted himself to this field only. His sitting between the books at his last days was his meeting for people to judge among them and to settle their problems with his familiar aspects of joy, happy mien and accurate criteria. When he carried out the affairs of people, he came back to complete his work (book), which he often stopped. His memory was very accurate in keeping and recording all his affairs.
(2)
He often asked me to discuss his complete works. He might want me, out of this discussion, to understand and concentrate on intellectual matters more and more. He always encouraged me when seeing a good notice or a correct idea from me.
Once he said to me when this part of this book was about to be completed: “The introduction of this book will be written by you, O my son! I like you to show its right intention to serve the intellect because the real motives of research in this field may be unclear for many readers and that many biased persons may distort them and make them dangerous against the unity of the umma and may destroy the relations between its people”.
Then he ordered me again and again to write a suitable introduction for the book. I got ready to undertake this task. I pondered on the subject, determined its headlines and explained the summary of its content orally one evening to my father, who became pleased with it and admired it at that day. Then many distresses happened that prevented me from writing the introduction. The bitterest of those distresses was the loss of my father, the author, besides many other distresses that everywhere of Lebanon was afflicted with their corruption. The country faced many crises in morals, economics and politics that history had never faced evil and corruption before. Our matter in this concern was the bitter loss of the author, to whom and to his likes of the true leaders we were in urgent need; those leaders, towards whom hearts and hopes would turn in the moments of


(83)
terror.
(3)
After three years I went out[1] to find that my father was no longer there, alas! But I found that the book had been published with a rich and judicious introduction written by allama Sayyid Muhammad Taqiy al-Hakeem. I found in the research of Sayyid al-Hakeem a full satisfaction that might make me curious if I tried to (show its right intention to serve the intellect…) because Sayyid al-Hakeem had clarified, in his bright and clear style, the bases and principles of the book in their scientific and Islamic course. Although the research of Sayyid al-Hakeem had left no chance to anyone to misunderstand or to fabricate the real intentions of the book, I found that I had to be sincere to the will of my father, when he had ordered me to put an introduction for the book. If I succeeded in this word, it would be a bit of service, and if not, it would just carry out an obligation from among many obligations I had towards my father.
(4)
Nass and ijtihad are two idioms from among the idioms of the Islamic jurisprudence. Sayyid al-Hakeem has explained them in details in the light of Usool. They both are two bases, on which legal verdicts, whether traditional or derivational, depend. Nass, which includes the evidences of the Qur'an and the Sunna, is a main base that cannot be violated because it has offered many verdicts and solutions to many events and cases whether concerning the belief or the obligations and whether concerning the social and economical cases or any other human activity. Ijtihad moves from the main base that comprehends the postulates and rules that lead to conclude a verdict on a case that the nass has generalized or ignored. This means that ijtihad acts after being armed with its scientific tools and means in accordance with the nass and walking in its (nass’s) circle- as the jurisprudents say-otherwise it will be a heresy. In order that an opinion is to be right according to a certain custom, it must be
________________________________________[1] He might be in prison then.


(84)
confirmed by the basic systems and principles of that custom.
This is the question that the title of the book raises but as for the motive behind this question, it is the judgments and verdicts the author has collected, through his wide research, which have been innovated by famous companions of the Prophet (s) and by their successors that have contradicted the basic rules of ijtihad.
(5)
It would be better in this situation to put forth this question:
What use is got from reviving an intellectual problem, whose time has elapsed long ago? Does reviving it not cause a sedition that may delay the progress of the umma and may part its unity?
The question is notable especially if we permit caution to control our thinking; the caution of the worry of general life, suspicion and illusion but if we try the question out according to the fixed practical criteria, we shall interpret it as the following: what use is got from paying attention to jurisprudence and its principles? It is a question that if its meaning becomes more than a joke, it will do wrong to the reality and will remove an important intellectual matter from its place that has been deep-rooted in our present life. Rectifying ijtihad and managing the ways, in which it is used, is a valuable intellectual act and it will have great importance when being applied according to its real bases since it has been founded until now on condition that is to be differentiated between the innovation of ijtihad and the crooked heresies. In fact many groups of people have been tried during the abundant mental activities since the day of the battle of al-Jamal (the day of the perfidious) and the day of the Kharijites (the apostates) until the golden Abbasid age in the Middle Ages.
The importance of this research is not limited to the historical method but it exceeds it to include the methods of knowledge and action, which are connected with our basic system, which is Islam. The “nass” and defining the situation of ijtihad due to it are not from the ordinary heritage or from the extinct languages but they are bases, on which the reality of millions and millions of Muslims depends and around whose axis their lives turn in their wide


(85)
horizons.
The “nass” is the existence of the Islamic jurisprudence and the “ijtihad”, armed with its mental bases, stands instead of the law of “mutability” if we do not say that it is itself. In order that the existence (nass) not to cause inactivity that may hinder progress, ijtihad comes out to soften the nass, to make it subdued to life and to supply it into the way of the civilizational progress and not to annul it or deviate from it because annulling the nass and being deviate from it lead to annul the fixed bases and to innovate a new sharia that will be strange to us, will not depend on our philosophy and will not come out of our characteristics and customs.
Hence it is clear that raising this question in this time of awakening will be a step inciting the specialized class of the Muslim ulama to revive the true soul of Islam and to define our situation towards the new matters in a way to prove our private Islamic personality among the modern invading trends.
It is not reactionism when intending to define the concept of ijtihad in discussing it through the conducts of the Muslims in the first age of Islam but it is freedom that helps to correct this concept according to the best opinion related to the true source and to make it easy in order to develop with it in our present time. But as for what is feared that it may lead to bad sectarianism, it will not come except to the narrow-minded, the diseased and those, who are affected by the ism of imperialism. The learned Arabs and Muslims have been free from the party spirits of history and have become as one umma. They do not look at history except from its scientific angle considering it as a test offering to them the experiences of their past to benefit from its virtues and to get lessons from its bad deeds in building their present and future. But as for its events that have been cutting out the shirts of Othman[1] and producing out of them sentimental tendencies covered with religious dresses, they have gone with their elapsed days. Any of us, who discusses these events now, just wants to research on history to know the stages of the dispute in order to
________________________________________
[1] He was the third caliph, who had been killed by the rebels. His bloody shirt had been used as an excuse to achieve personal greeds and that had caused a great sedition among the Muslims.


(86)
reform the faults and not to widen them, in order to make use of this reform at present and to make it grow in the future and not to recall a past that has elapsed and will never come back again.
Perception and reasonability the Arabs and the Muslims have got are about to match the progress of the age. This reasonability is enough to study the problem with objective spirit to restore the morals of our independent intellect that is connected with our civilizational bases, which have stopped giving their offers because of well-known reasons. This reasonability is also enough to study the nass and ijtihad since they have been founded until they have been codified in a spirit free from grudges and personal tendencies to make our present active and productive. It will connect our movement with the productive movements of the past before they have been separated from their true origins.
(6)
Many people think that connecting ijtihad to the nass will weaken its ability of progressiveness and prevent it from keeping pace with the advancement of all activities in the present age.
This is not right. The connection of ijtihad with the nass is necessary not because it is just a religious tradition or it is inevitable according to a rule acquired from a scientific decision, but because it is-before this and that-the source of our originality and a fixed partition that does not allow violating our basic constituents and does not allow to wrong the other cultures. In fact it orders to benefit from the cultures provided that those cultures are to be subjected to our principles, manners and morals. Ijtihad has this great gate; the gate that is open towards international meeting. No one is to think that this gate is narrow! It is a gate wide enough to receive every useful thing coming from the material civilization. It has been so in the Middle Ages when it has received the Greek, Persian and Indian civilizations but according to our conditions in a way that has given our civilization an aspect of superiority in the world. The reason behind this great flexibility in our ijtihad is the great flexibility of the nass, on which ijtihad has relied and has not separated from. Whoever refers to it, will find its comprehensiveness that has


(87)
become, really, the last of all the laws and the eternal Sharia of life forever. This means that the nass has made, since the beginning, a good adobe for progress. It has been noticed that since it has been issued, it has been complied with all the needs of its age and it has been applied to the new and progressive matters after that.
In more details we draw the attention to the integration of the Holy Qur'an when being revealed little by little complying with the nature of progressiveness according to experiments. The same is said about the Sunna; the mate of the Book in its revelations. It has shed lights on the clear (decisive) and ambiguous[1] verses of the Book and has formed with the Book the essence of this Sharia, which Allah has issued to manage all the affairs of the world with all its creatures in a perfect structure with great contents and eternal surviving.
(7)
When has ijtihad been determined as a principle?
It is time to put forth this question because of its close relation to the theme of the book “an-Nass wel-Ijtihad” and to refute the sayings showing that this principle has not been determined at the time of the Prophet (s).
We find, before all, that determining this principle at the time of the Prophet (s) is a matter, whose answer is with it. The wise legislator would not ignore such necessary basis like ijtihad, which would develop his Sharia that e had made to live forever and knew well that life would not stop after him.
It has been proved by true traditions and correct historical facts that the Prophet (s) has sent his messengers and deputies to the far countries and has instructed them to act according to their opinion on the matters that they would not find their direct answers in the Book and the Sunna. This was no doubt the foundation of ijtihad. Some of the orientalists and their disciples think that ijtihad has been founded after the first age of Islam and that which has led to found it is the complexities of life after the arising of some needs that have not been before and that the wide spreading of knowledge
________________________________________
[1] It can be interpreted into more than one meaning.


(88)
has led to it.
This may be right if it has been submitted to the conditions and tools of ijtihad, which has been limited to the complexity of life but the real ijtihad that has relied on the nass according to our concept has been founded at the time of the Prophet (s) no doubt. Besides the conduct of the Prophet (s) with his messengers and deputies, the ijtihad of Imam Ali (s) on the day of shura confirms the foundation of ijtihad at that time. Imam Ali (s) has insisted on his opinion when he has refused to add the policies of Abu Bakr and Umar during their reigns to the Book and the Sunna when Abdurrahman has put this condition for Imam Ali (s) in order to be chosen as a caliph. If ijtihad, in its special meaning, has not been issued before Abu Bakr and Umar, Imam Ali (s) would not refuse this condition. If it has been possible to give the sacredness of the Book and the Sunna to other than the Book and the Sunna, then this would have raised the position of those two caliphs to a high degree but he has intended to equal between the minds of the mujtahids and their opinions besides keeping the Book and the Sunna as the actual gravity. He has not intended by that save to emphasize on ijtihad as a principle having the banner of reason to go high with its dignity and to enrich the true legislation with its innovation.
Imam Ali (s) has followed by his will a custom having got used to ijtihad even it has had another idiom rather than ijtihad. It has been called “acting according to one’s opinion”.
(8)
After this I ask myself:
Have I put “an-Nass wel-Ijtihad” in its real frame of showing the true intention to unite the umma and to serve the intellect?
Have I been sincere to my first introduction that has made my father satisfied and pleased?
But there is an inner answer interrupting my chain of inquiries to say:


(89)
It is enough to a debtor his trying the best to repay his debt and his excused failure will be forgiven by the generous people. I have left commenting on the book because my comments will not suffice not to read it or to ponder on its words!
Sadruddeen Sharafuddeen

(91)
Preface
In The Name Of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful
Praise be to Allah, Who has distinguished His slave and messenger Muhammad with the high dignity and high position near Him, has taught him the knowledge of the first and the last and has given him virtues that He has never given to any other one in the worlds. (Allah best knows where He places His mission) so He has ended with Muhammad prophethood and revelation and has annulled with his Sharia all the previous sacred Sharias concerning the actions of people.[1] What has been permitted by Muhammad (s) is permissible until the Day of Resurrection and what has been prohibited by him is impermissible until the Day of Resurrection. All his verdicts are valid until the Day of Resurrection. This has been agreed upon unanimously by all the Muslims like their consensus on his prophethood. None of them has ever said a word opposite to this.
They have known that the Islamic Sharia has encompassed the worldly life and afterlife with all their systems and laws. It (the Islamic Sharia) is wise in all its verdicts and just in all its criteria. It is the wise civilization, which is kind and good to the people of the earth in everywhere and every age with all their different races, colors and languages.
The Legislator of Islam (the Aware of the unseen, the Almighty) has not left any aim unless He has declared its way and showed to the men of understanding its guide. Far be it from Him to leave His
________________________________________
[1] Not the basic principles of religion like monotheism, justice, prophethood, resurrection, paradise, hell, rewarding and punishment. These principles have been adopted by all the prophets (s) since Adam (s) until Prophet Muhammad (s)


(92)
people to their own opinions or to let them rove in His religion vigorously. He has bound them via His messenger (s) with His two “ropes” and preserved them with His two “weighty things”.[1] His messenger has promised them of guidance if they would keep to them “the two weighty things” and warned them of deviation if they would turn away from them. He has told them that these two weighty things would never separate nor would the earth be empty of them until they would come to him at the pond (in Paradise). Whoever turns his back to them, the Prophet (s) will turn his back to him.
Their (the Prophet’s progeny’s) example in this umma is like the gate of Hitta “repentance” of the Israelites and like the Ark of Prophet Noah (s) for his people. No one, whatever high position he has, is to follow other than their path:“And whoever acts hostilely to the Messenger after that guidance has become manifest to him, and follows other than the way of the believers, We will turn him to that to which he has (himself) turned and make him enter hell. Qur'an, 4:115”[2] No one, when interpreting a Qur'anic verse or a prophetic tradition, is to deviate from the apparent meaning that comes to mind except if there is a clear evidence. If there is a clear evidence, one has to interpret a verse or a tradition according to that evidence; otherwise he will be deviate and heretic.
This has been agreed upon by all the Muslim nation, the umma of Muhammad (s) with all its sects. They have followed the apparent meanings of the Qur'an and the Sunna besides their clear texts (nusoos).[3]
They have done like the all peoples of the different languages, who interpret their wordings with the apparent meanings that come to mind. They do not interpret them according to their tendencies and
________________________________________
[1] The “two ropes” or the “two weighty things” refer to the Qur'an and the Prophet’s progeny.
[2] Ibn Mardwayh mentioned when interpreting this verse: “…acts hostilely to the messenger and “guidance” mentioned in the verse concern Ali (s) and what he faces from people”. Al-Ayyashi in his Tafseer mentioned the same. The true traditions narrated from Ahlul Bayt (s) have confirmed that “the way of the believers” is the way of Ahlul Bayt (s).
[3] Plural form of “nass”.


(93)
advantages whether personal or general.
Yes! I have found, regretfully, some of the rulers and notables of those past ages preferring their ijtihad, due to their advantages, to the apparent meanings of the Qur'an and the Sunna and their clear texts. They have interpreted those texts according to their tendencies audaciously and led people to contradict them (the Qur'an and the Sunna) willingly or unwillingly with all their powers. This cannot be excused in any case. We are Allah’s and to Him we shall surely return!
Allah has said: “… and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is severe in retributing (evil). Qur'an, 59:7” and: “And it behooves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he surely strays off a manifest straying. Qur'an, 33:36” and “But no! by your Lord! they do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with entire submission.Qur'an, 4:65” and “Most surely it is the Word of an honored messenger. The processor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Dominion. One (to be) obeyed and faithful in trust. And your companion is not gone mad. Qur'an, 81:19-22” and “Most surely, it is the Word brought by an honored Messenger. And it is not the word of a poet; little is it that you believe. Nor the word of a soothsayer; little is it that you mind. It is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds. Qur'an, 69:40-43” and “Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed. The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him. Qur'an, 53:3-5”
The sayings of the Prophet (s) are like the speech of the Holy Qur'an:“Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One. Qur'an, 41:42” One, who believes in these Qur'anic verses and believes in Muhammad’s prophethood, must not deviate from his sayings even by a hair’s breadth or less. Those people have not deviated from the Prophet’s


(94)
sayings but they have become mujtahids interpreting his sayings by themselves(…while they thought that they were acquiring good by their works). We are Allah’s and to Him we shall return!
Here are some examples of interpreting the clear texts by those people according to their own opinions. They have preferred their personal benefits to those verses and traditions.
This is what I could collect in hastiness and due to my old age and in spite of the distresses, grudges, seditions and the ordeals of time surrounding us. And with none but Allah is the direction of my affair to a right issue; on Him do I rely and to Him do I turn.
Here they are; one hundred examples in seven chapters. Let you listen to them and then you have the right to give your opinion about them. Allah is the Guide to the truth and to the right path and to Him is our return. Allah is Sufficient for us! Most Excellent is He, in Whom we trust. Most excellent is the Patron and most excellent is the Helper.

(95)
Chapter One
Interpretations Of Abu Bakr And His Followers
1. The day of saqeefa
When Abu Bakr stretched his hand to be paid homage as the caliph after the Prophet (s), some people paid him homage willingly and others-later on-paid homage unwillingly although they knew well that the Prophet (s) had entrusted his brother and cousin Ali bin Abu Talib (s) with the caliphate after him. They had seen the Prophet (s) and heard him mentioning this matter many times since the beginning of his prophethood until the end of his blessed life. The Prophet (s) had mentioned this tradition in different ways and all of them were clear in declaring that Ali (s) would be the caliph after him. Whoever wants to know more details about this subject, let him refer to our book “al-Muraja’at”, in which we have mentioned a full research on these traditions and all what have been said about them by the two sects; the Shia and the Sunni. We have exchanged deliberations with the sheikh of Islam and the teacher of the ulama Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri al-Maliki, the sheikh of al-Jami’ al-Azhar (al-Azhar University) at that time when I have been studying there.[1] He was then the sheikh (dean) of al-Azhar University. He took much care of me as he always did to his students. Arguments and written deliberations began between us about the caliphate after the Prophet (s) and the traditions concerning it. We tried our best to go deep in research and to be fair to the truth and because of the good soul of
________________________________________
[1] In the year 1329 A.H. and later after we have returned from the hawza of holy Najaf.


(96)
Sheikh al-Bishri, the result was the useful book “al-Muraja’at”, in which guidance shone in its brightest signs. Praise be to Allah for this success.[1]
I hope that you scrutinize into the aims and the intents of the Prophet’s sayings and doings, which are the point of deliberation between us (the Shia) and the Sunni. Let passion not overcome your minds like those, who have dealt with the clear texts like their dealing with general or ambiguous sayings without caring for their (the texts’) rightness and clearness. Allah says: (Most surely it is the Word of an honored messenger. The processor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Dominion. One (to be) obeyed and faithful in trust. And your companion is not gone mad) then whereto do you go, O you the Muslims! (It is naught but revelation that is revealed. The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him).
I have not seen clear and recurrent traditions more than the traditions talking about the caliphate but they have been confiscated by the most of the umma while the wound has not recovered yet and the Prophet (s) has not been buried yet.
The life of the Prophet (s) after his prophethood was full of traditions that had talked about the caliphate of Imam Ali (s) clearly since the (day of the warning)[2] in Abu Talib’s house and throughout the days after that until he had lain in the bed of death whereas his room was crowded with people when he said: “O people, I am about to die and to be taken hastily. I have informed you. I have left among you the Book of Allah and my progeny”. Then he raised Ali’s hand and said: “This is Ali. He is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with him. They will never separate until they will come to me at the pond (in Paradise)”. The traditions of thaqalayn (two weighty things) are enough to be the judge between the two sects; the Shia and the Sunni. “Most surely there is a reminder in this for him who has a heart or he gives ear with full intelligence. Qur'an, 50:37”
________________________________________
[1] The deliberations (muraja’at) were one hundred and twelve ones.
[2] The Prophet (s) had invited his close relatives to warn them. The last of his speech to them was that when he held Ali’s hand and said: “This is my brother, my vizier, my guardian and my caliph among you. Listen to him and obey him!” Refer to muraja’a no. 20 and the one after it in the book “al-Muraja’at”.


(97)
They (the companions) had appropriate the matter (the caliphate) to themselves on the day of Saqeefa[1] interpreting some prophetic traditions according to their own opinions without caring for anything else. They had determined their matter among them without informing anyone of the Hashemites[2] nor any of their followers; the Hashemites, who were the family of the Prophet (s), the place of the divine mission, the descendance of the angels and the descendance of Gabriel and revelation. As if they had forgotten that the Hashemites were the weighty thing the Prophet (s) had left, the equal of the Book of Allah,[3] the protection of the umma from separation,[4] the ship of rescue for the umma from deviation[5] and the gate of repentance for the umma.[6] As if they had forgotten that the Prophet’s family was to the umma as the head to the body and as the two eyes to the head.[7] In fact they were as they had been meant by the saying of the poet:
________________________________________
[1] Saqeefa means a shed. They (most of the Prophet’s companions) have gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’ida on that day to determine that caliphate after the Prophet (s).
[2] Hashem was the Prophet’s ancestor.
[3] With reference to the clear traditions mentioned in the reliable books of traditions; those traditions that have made the Prophet’s progeny as the equal of the Qur'an to be the example that must be followed by the men of understanding. Refer to Muslim’s Sahih (book of Hadith), at-Tarmithi’s Sahih, an-Nassa’iy’s Sahih, Ahmad’s Musnad, at-Tabarani in his al-Kabeer, al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, ath-Thahabi’s Talkhees al-Mustadrak, ibn Abu Shayba’s Sunan, Abu Ya’la’s Sunan, ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat and many others. For details refer to muraja’a no.8 in our book “al-Muraja’at”.
[4] Referring to the Prophet’s saying: “My family is security for my umma from being separated. If a tribe of the Arabs objects to them, it will separate and then become the party of Iblis”. Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3 p.149.
[5] Referring to the Prophet’s saying: “The example of my progeny among you is like the Ark of Prophet Noah. Whoever rides on it will be saved and whoever lags behind it, will drown”. Refer to al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3 p.151.
[6] Referring to the Prophet saying: “The example of my progeny is like the Ark of Prophet Noah. Whoever rides on it will be saved and whoever lags behind will drown. The example of my progeny among you is like the gate of repentance of the Israelites. Whoever enters into it will be forgiven”. Mentioned by at-Tabarani in his al-Awsat.
[7] Imam as-Sabban in his book Is’af ar-Raghibeen and Sheikh Yousuf an-Nabhani in his book ash-Sharaf al-Mu’ayyad and others mentioned that Abu Tharr had narrated the Prophet’s saying: “Make my family among you as the head to the body and as the two eyes to the head. The head is not rightly guided without the eyes”. For details refer to our book al-Muraja’at, muraja’a no.6 -13.


(98)
The matter is determined when Taym[1] is absent
And they[2] are not asked permission when they are present.
Yes! The matter had been determined in the Saqeefa[3] while the Prophet (s) was lying between his family and his close companions for three days. They were around him mourning bitterly and their hearts were about to be cut into pieces with sorrow that might tear the livers and with fear that might move the mountains. The world, with all its wideness, had become too narrow before them.
And those people were away from the ordeal for three days being busy preparing their determinations to seize his (the Prophet’s) authority and to plunder his rule. They did not pay any attention to any affair of him until they had determined their matter without caring for anything else.
As soon as they finished burying him, they surprised his guardians and lovers with asking them either to pay homage or to be burned with their houses.[4]
The poet of the Nile, Hafidh Ibraheem had said in a famous poem:
And a saying to Ali said by Umar,
Honored is the listener and great is the sayer
I burn your house and let you not alive longer in it
If you do not pay homage
________________________________________
[1] One of the great families of Quraysh.
[2] The people of Taym.
[3] Saqeefa means shed.
[4] They had threatened Imam Ali (s) to be burned unless he would pay homage. Refer to Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz al-Jawhari in his book as-Saqeefa, p. 130, Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 1, p. 134, Ibn Jareer at-Tabari in his book Tareekh al-Umam wel Mulook, ibn Qutayba in his book al-Imama wes-Siyasa, ibn Abd Rabbih al-Maliki, in al-Iqd al-Fareed, vol.2, al-Mass’oodi in Murooj ath-Thahab, ibn ash-Shuhna in Rawdhatul Manadhir, Abul Fida’ in al-Mukhtasar fee Akhbar al-Bashar, ash-Shahristani in al-Milel wen-Nihal, allama al-Hilli in Nahj as-Sidq quoted from al-Mahasin wa Anfas al-Jawahir, ibn Khanzabah in al-Ghurar and Abu Makhnaf in a detailed book talking about the homage of the Saqeefa.


(99)
Even if the daughter of al-Mustafa[1] is in it.
No one save Abu Hafs[2] that has said it
Before the knight and protector of Adnan[3]
If it has been supposed that there was no clear tradition showing that the caliphate was to be for one of the Prophet’s family and if it has been supposed that no one of them had good ancestry, rank, morals, knowledge, favors, jihad, faith, sincerity or excellent virtue but they were just like the rest of the Prophet’s companions, then was there any legal, rational or traditional excuse that prevented the companions from putting off their homage until the funerals of the Prophet (s) would finish??? Even if they would have ordered the army to control the situation temporarily until the matter of the caliphate would be settled???
Would it be not better for them to be somehow kind to the Prophet’s family, who were distressed with the great loss, if they had waited a little? The Prophet’s family was his deposit and his leftover among the Muslims. Allah has said: “Certainly a Messenger has come to you from among yourselves; grievous to him is your falling into distress, excessively solicitous respecting you; to the believers (he is) compassionate. Qur'an, 9:128” Had this Prophet, who became so grievous when his umma fell in distress, who strove for its prosperity and who was so kind to his people, not had a right on them that his family would not be constrained or surprised with what it had faced while the wound was not yet healed and the Prophet (s) was not yet buried?!
It was enough for his progeny, then, to worry, to pillow on insomnia, to suffer griefs, to chat with the stars, to bear pangs and to struggle against agonies. Waiting a little would have been worthier to console the Prophet’s progeny, to regard the Prophet’s dignity, to unite the umma and would have been nearer to wisdom. But the people had determined to turn the caliphate away from the Prophet’s family at any cost. They feared that waiting a little might lead them to other
________________________________________
[1] One of the Prophet’s surnames.
[2] It is the surname of Umar bin al-Khattab.
[3] Adnan is the ancestor of the Hashemites.


(100)
than what they had determined because if Muhammad’s family had attended the deliberations, their evidences and proofs would prevail; therefore they had hastened to carry out the homage and seized the opportunity when the Hashemites were busy with their ordeal and with the ceremonies of the funeral. What helped those people in achieving their plan was the astonishment of the Muslims and their fear and confusion besides the meeting of the most of the Ansar[1] in the Saqeefa to nominate Sa’d bin Obada, the chief of al-Khazraj,[2] for the caliphate but his cousin Basheer bin Sa’d bin Tha’laba and Osayd bin al-Khudhayr, the chief of al-Owss,[3] competed with him for the rule. They envied him and feared that he might be the caliph. They agreed among themselves to turn the caliphate away from him with all means. Owaym bin Sa’ida al-Owssi and Ma’an bin Adiy, who were from the Ansar, agreed with them on that. These two men had been planned secretly with Abu Bakr and Umar and their party to act so. They had been from among the followers of Abu Bakr during the time of the Prophet (s) besides that they had had grudge against Sa’d bin Obada. Owaym hastened towards Abu Bakr and Umar inciting them to oppose Sa’d. He hastened with them, Abu Obayda, Salim the freed slave of Hudhayfa and then followed by others from their party of the Muhajireen[4] to the Saqeefa.
The dispute flared up between the Muhajireen and the Ansar. The quarrel became serious and their shouts loudened until sedition was about to happen. Abu Bakr made a speech, in which he praised the Ansar and acknowledged their favors softly and leniently. Then he protested against them saying that the Muhajireen were the people of the Prophet (s) and the result of his efforts. He told them that they would be the viziers if the Muhajireen became the rulers. Then he held Umar and Abu Obayda’s hands and ordered the attendants to pay homage to one of them. As soon as he said so, Umar and Basheer hastened to pay homage to Abu Bakr himself. Then he was paid
________________________________________
[1] Ansar means helpers: the people of Medina, who had assisted (and believed in) the Prophet (s) and his companions when had emigrated from Mecca.
[2] One of the greatest tribes in Medina.
[3] The other greatest tribe in Medina.
[4] Muhajireen means the emigrants: the first Muslims, who had emigrated from Mecca to Medina.


(101)
homage by Osayd bin al-Khudhayr, Owaym bin Sa’ida, Ma’an bin Adiy, Abu Obayda bin al-Jarrah, Salim and Khalid bin al-Waleed and then these men tried their best to force the people to pay homage. The extremist among them was Umar and then Usayd, Khalid and Qunfith bin Umayr bin Jad’an at-Tameemi.[1] As soon as Abu Bakr was paid homage, the group that paid him homage came escorting him towards the Prophet’s mosque as in a wedding procession[2] whereas the Prophet (s) was still lain down among his pure lovers. Imam Ali (s) then could not but to recite this verse of one of the poets:
Some people began saying whatever they like
And tyrannized when Zayd was afflicted with calamities[3]
Imam Ali (s) knew well that people had determined to turn the caliphate away from him and that if he had asked for his right (the caliphate) they would have disputed against him and if he had fought them they would have fought him and that would lead to a sedition in the religion and would bring dangers over the umma; therefore he chose to retire preferring the general welfare and preferring the most important thing to the important thing in order to keep Islam safe from any danger. It was a covenant from the Prophet (s). Ameerul Mo’mineen[4] became patient unwillingly and restrained himself from
________________________________________
[1] These persons were among the ones, who had broken into the house of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter (s), when intending to set fire to it. Refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.19. Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz al-Jawhari narrated, as mentioned in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 1 p.130, that: “When Abu Bakr had been paid homage, Az-Zubayr, al-Miqdad and some other people often visited Ali in the house of Fatima (s). Umar went to Fatima and said: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, none of the people in the world has ever been more beloved to us than your father and than you after your father. By Allah, this will not prevent me, if these people meet here in your house, from ordering to burn the house over them...”
[2] Mentioned by az-Zubayr bin Bukar in his book al-Muwaffaqiyyat. Refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.8.
[3] Mentioned by Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz al-Jawhary in his book as-Saqeefa. Refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.5.
[4] “Ameerul Mo’mineen” means the commander of the believers. It is the title of Imam Ali (s).


(102)
carrying out the covenant.[1] Yes! He remained at home. He was discontented with what they had done until they took him out by force.[2]
He protested against those, who had extorted his right, and how eloquent his protest was when he said to Abu Bakr:
If you protested against your opponents with kinship,
The others were worthier of the Prophet and closer than you
And if you ruled them by the shura,
________________________________________
[1] For details refer to our thesis Falsafatul Meethaq wel-Wilaya (The Philosophy of the Covenant and guardianship) and refer to al-Muraja’at, muraja’a no.82, 84, and refer to chap.8 in our book al-Fusool al-Muhimma.
[2] Abu Bakr al-Jawhari mentioned in his book as-Saqeefa-as in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.19- a tradition narrated by ash-Shi’bi saying: “Umar and Khalid bin al-Waleed went to Fatima’s house. Umar came into and Khalid stayed at the door. Umar said to az-Zubayr: “What is this sword for?” He said: “I have prepared it to pay homage to Ali.” There were many people in the house. Among them were al-Miqdad and some of the Hashemites. Umar snatched the sword from az-Zubayr, struck it against a rock and broke it. They took az-Zubayr out to Khalid and his companions. There were many people with Khalid. Abu Bakr had sent them to support Umar and Khalid. Then Umar said to Ali: “Get up and pay homage!” He lagged and hesitated. Umar caught his hand and said to him: “Get up!” He refused. They carried him by force and delivered him to Khalid as they did with az-Zubayr. Umar and his companions drove Ali and az-Zubayr violently. People gathered looking at the scene. The streets of Medina became full of people. When Fatima (s) saw what Umar had done, she cried and shouted. Many women of the Hashemites and others gathered with her. She went out of her room and shouted: “O Abu Bakr, how hasty you attacked the Prophet’s family. By Allah, I will not talk with Umar until I meet Allah.”
Whoever examines the events of those days will find the clear truth in Abu Bakr’s saying when he was about to die: “I wished I had not broken into Fatima’s house even if it would lead to war.” Abu Bakr al-Jawhari mentioned in his book as-Saqeefa another tradition narrated by Luhay’a from Abul Aswad: “Umar and his companions broke into the house while Fatima (s) was crying and adjuring them before Allah. They took Ali and az-Zubayr out being driven by Umar”. Al-Jawhari mentioned too that: “Umar came to Fatima’s house with people of Ansar and some men of Muhajireen and said: “I swear by Him, in Whose hand my soul is, either you come out to pay homage or I shall burn the house over your heads.” Az-Zubayr came out drawing his sword but they gathered against him until his sword fell from his hand. Umar struck the sword against a rock and it broke and then he took them out of the house drawing them violently with their collars...” Refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.19.


(103)
How is that while the people of the shura were absent?[1]
________________________________________
[1] These two verses are in Nahjol Balagha, the book, in which the speeches, the letters and the maxims of Imam Ali (s) have been collected. Abdul Hameed bin Abul Hadeed and Sheikh Muhammad Abda had commented on these two verses in their books. It would be better to the researchers to refer to. I have mentioned them in al-Muaraja’at no. 80. Al-Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib once had protested against Abu Bakr with something that as if its meaning had been taken from these two verses. He said to Abu Bakr through an argument between them: “If you have pretended that the Prophet (s) is from you, then you have extorted our right and if you have evidenced with the believers, then we are the first and the best of the believers so if this matter (the caliphate) would not be legal to you unless with the agreement of the believers then it would not be legal while we were unwilling”. In another argument, as mentioned in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.1, he said to him: “As for your saying “we are the tree of the Prophet” you are its neighbors and we are its branches
This was the meaning of Imam Ali’s saying “You have argued about the tree but lost the fruit”. Al-Fadhl bin al-Abbas said, as narrated by az-Zubayr bin Bukar in his Muwaffaqiyyat and mentioned in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.8: “O people of Quraysh and especially you bani Taym, you have taken the caliphate by means of the prophethood whereas we are its people rather than you but if we ask for this matter, which is our right, people will hate us more than to hate the others because of their envy and grudge towards us. We have known well that our man (Imam Ali) has a covenant that must be carried out.”
Otba bin Abu Lahab said, as mentioned in Mukhtasar of Abul Fida’ and in the last page of vol.2, Sharh Nahjol Balagha:
I have not thought that the matter (caliphate)will be turned away
From Hashem (the Hashemites) and then from Abu Hasan (Ali)
Was he not the first who had offered prayers toward your Qibla
And the most aware of the Qur'an and the Sunna among all people,
And the closest one to the Prophet and to Gabriel
When helping him (Gabriel) in washing and preparing his coffin?
He has had nothing to be doubted
And none of them has had a bit of his virtues
What made them deny him? Let us know
It was injustice that no else was greater than
Az-Zubayr bin Bukar, when mentioning these verses in his al-Muwaffaqiyyat, said: “…Ali sent for him (Otba bin Abu Lahab) and ordered him not to say such a thing again and said to him: “The safety of religion is more important for us than anything else”. Az-Zubayr also mentioned in al-Muwaffaqiyyat as in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.7 that once Abu Sufyan had passed by Ali’s house. He stopped before the house and recited:
O bani Hashem, do not let people deem you weak


(104)
Their homage was a slip that Allah had saved the Muslims from its evil as they had pretended but its cost was on the expense of Ameerul Mo’mineen when he became patient before harm, silent before injustice and when he sacrificed his right for the sake of Islam. Allah may reward him for his favors on Islam and the Muslims with the best of His reward.
2. The second situation
When Abu Bakr was about to die, he entrusted Umar with the caliphate! How odd! (How wonder! As he has extorted it in his life, he has entrusted it to another one after his death. How much they have participated in its two udders!).[1] How wonder! As if the man has given the other a piece of his own properties! He has entrusted it to whoever he wished without fearing any punishment, blaming or criticizing. How wonder! As if he has forgotten or pretended that he has forgotten the covenant of the caliphate the Prophet (s) had given to Ali and then after him to the infallible imams of his progeny, who were one of the two weighty things that whoever kept to would never deviate and whoever turned away from their path would never be guided to the path of the truth. They were equal to the Qur'an. They (the Qur'an and the Prophet’s progeny) would never separate until they would come to him at the pond in Paradise. They were like the Ark of Noah (s). Whoever rode on it would be rescued and whoever lagged behind it would drown. They were like the gate of repentance.
________________________________________
Especially Taym bin Murra and Adiy
For the matter is just among you and for you
No one deserves it save Abu Hasan Ali
O Abu Hasan, be determined for it
For you are the only well-qualified one for the hoped matter

His speech had no any effect on Imam. Ali said: “The messenger of Allah has promised me with something and I am still keeping to it”. Abu Sufyan left Ali and went to al-Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib in his house. He said to him: “O Abul Fadhl, you are the well-qualified one for it (the caliphate) and worthier of the heritage of your nephew (the Prophet). Give me your hand to pay homage to you!” Al-Abbas laughed and said: “Ali refuses it and al-Abbas asks for it, how far!!!” Abu Sufyan went out disappointedly”.
[1] This is a part of one of Imam Ali’s speeches.


(105)
Whoever entered through it would be forgiven. They were the security for the people of the earth from being tortured and they were the security of the umma from separation (in religion). If a tribe opposed them, its people would disagreed among themselves and become the party of Iblis…etc. to the rest of the clear traditions that had declared their right of the caliphate and made that compulsory on the whole peoples. We have mentioned many of such traditions in our book al-Muraja’at.[1]
3. the third situation
The battle of Mu’ta: it took place in Jumada al-Oola, the eighth year of hijra, in which the Prophet (s) had appointed Zayd bin Haritha as the leader of the army. The Prophet (s) said: “If Zayd is struck, then Ja’far bin Abu Talib will be the leader and if he is struck then Abdullah bin Rawaha will be the leader”. This has been said by all the Sunni whereas the Shia say that the first leader, according to the Prophet’s tradition, is Ja’far, the second is Zayd and the third is Abdullah bin Rawaha. Our traditions on this subject are true and recurrent from the pure infallible imams (s).
Muhammad bin Iss~haq has confirmed this in his Maghazi when mentioning the poems of Hassaan bin Thabit and Ka’b bin Malik on praising and elegizing Ja’far when he has been martyred.[2]
However the order of these three leaders was, the fact was that the Prophet (s) had appointed Zayd as a leader whether he was the first or the second one. The army and the rest of the companions had heard the Prophet (s) appointing Zayd as the leader. After that there was no any excuse for those who had objected to this order unless it was possible for non-infallible one to interpret (change), according to his own opinion, a tradition said by an infallible one!!!
________________________________________
[1] You find them in muraja’a no.8 p.20 (the third edition) until muraja’a no.14. The dispute through the muraja’at between me and Sheikh al-Bishri flared up until he said to me in the last of his letters he had written about this subject: “You have sublimated and corrected my thinking in your last letter, from whose contents the lights of your star shone and the signs of your victory appeared”. I said: “Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, for granting success and victory”.
[2] Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 3 p.607-.


(106)
The reason of this battle was that the Prophet (s) had sent his companion al-Harth bin Umayr to the king of Busra[1] inviting him to be a Muslim. When he was on his way, Shurahbeel bin Amr stopped him and asked him: “Where are you going to?” Al-Harth said: “To Sham”. He said: “Are you one of Muhammad’s messengers?” Al-Harth said: “Yes, I am.” Shurahbeel ordered his mates to tie al-Harth and then he killed him. No one of the Prophet’s messengers had been killed except this one. When the Prophet (s) had been informed of this, he ordered the army to march and appointed these three leaders according to the order we have mentioned before.
The Prophet (s) sent this army and another army under the leadership of Ussama bin Zayd to conquer Sham. Their hearts were full of the dignity of Islam and the Muslims and the hearts of the Romans were filled with fear and regard when they saw the seriousness, steadfastness, devotedness and competing towards martyrdom among the two armies.
How brave Ja’far bin Abu Talib was with his three thousand soldiers when they attacked bravely Hercules and his two hundred thousand soldiers.[2] Ja’far recited:
How nice Paradise is and its becoming near!
How good it is with its cold drinks
And the Romans are waiting for their near torment
They are unbelievers and strangers for me
I will strike them in the meeting
When the fighting became so violent, Ja’far broke into on his horse. He slaughtered his horse and attacked the enemy. His hands were cut and then he was killed. Ja’far was the first one, who had slaughtered his horse in Islam. More than eighty wounds were found on his body.
It was narrated that the Prophet (s) had said: “Last night (in dream) Ja’far and some angels passed by me. He had two wings. His
________________________________________
[1] In Syria.
[2] One hundred thousand soldiers from the Romans and one hundred thousand from the Arabs from Najm, Jutham and other tribes as mentioned by Ibnul Atheer in his al-Kamil and by others.


(107)
primaries were dyed with blood”.[1]
How great the situation of Zayd bin Haritha was when he broke through the spears of the enemy! May Allah high his position as he has been honored in this life.
And how great the situation of Abdullah bin Rawaha was when he encouraged himself to face an army of two hundred thousand soldiers! He recited:
O my soul, if you are not killed, you will die
This is the death you are in now
Whatever you have wished, you have been given
If you do one of them, you will be guided then
He also recited:
O my soul, I swear that you must submit to death
Willingly or you will be forced to it
As people have got ready to meet the hope
So why you hate Paradise
How long you have been reassured
Then he got off his horse. One of his cousins came to him with a piece of meat and said: “Support yourself with this for you have got much tiredness.” He ate a bit and then he heard a clamor coming from a side of the army. He said to himself: “Do hear this and you are still alive?” He threw the piece of meat and approached to fight until he was martyred.
Some Muslims of this army, after founding that the enemy army was about two hundred thousands, thought to inform the Prophet (s) about that but Abdullah bin Rawaha encouraged them to keep on by saying: “By Allah, we do not fight by equipments, powers or numbers. We fight by this religion, with which Allah has honored us. Go on! It is not but one of two good things; either victory or martyrdom”. The people said: “By Allah, he is right”. They went on without feeling weak or submissive. By Allah, it is the honor that goes high on the wing of the eagle and competes with the Gemini.
________________________________________
[1] Al-Kamil by Ibnul Atheer (the battle of Mu’ta) and other books of Hadith and history. The surname of Ja’far among all the Muslims is “the two-winged” man.


(108)
Yes! It is the real faith in Allah and His messenger. I wish I were with them to get the great victory!
4. The army of Ussama bin Zayd
The Prophet (s) had cared much for this army. He ordered his companions to get ready and incited them too much to join this army. He himself mobilized them in order to sharpen their determinations and to awaken their ardors. He let no one of the Muhajireen and Ansar, like Abu Bakr, Umar,[1] Abu Ubayda, Sa’d and their likes, unless he mobilized him for the army.[2] This was in Safar, the eleventh year of hijra. The next day the Prophet (s) sent for Ussama and said to him: “Go (with the army) to the place where your father has been killed. Let your horses tread on them (the Romans and the people of Sham). I have appointed you as the emir of this army. Attack the people of Ubna[3] in the morning. Set fire to them. Hasten to precede the news. If Allah makes you defeat them, do not stay long there. Take some guides with you and send spies and pioneers before you”.
On the twenty-eighth of Safar, the Prophet (s) began to feel ill. He got fever and headache. In the morning of the twenty-ninth he found that his companions (the army) were sluggish. He went to them and
________________________________________
[1] The historians agreed upon that Abu Bakr and Umar were in this army and they proved that as an irrefutable fact. Refer to at-Tabaqat by ibn Sa’d, At-Tabari’s Tareekh, Ibnul Atheer’s Tareekh, as-Seera ad-Dahlaniyya and others. Al-Halabi mentioned in his Seera, vol.3: “When al-Mahdi (the Abbasid caliph) came to Basra, he met Iyas bin Mo’awiya, who was very clever and intelligent. He was a young boy and behind him there were four hundred of ulama and notable men. Al-Mahdi said: “Woe to these beards! Is not there among them a notable man to be at the head other than this boy?” Then al-Mahdi turned toward the boy and said to him: “How old are you, boy?” The boy said: “O Ameerul Mo'mineen, may Allah make you live long! My old is as the old of Ussama bin Zayd bin Haritha when the Prophet (s) has appointed him as the leader of an army, in which Abu Bakr and Umar were.” Al-Mahdi said: “Come on! May Allah bless you”. Al-Halabi mentioned that Ussama was seventeen years old then.
[2] Umar often said to Ussama: “The Prophet (s) died and you were the emir over me”. Some historians mentioned this like al-Halabi in his Seera when talking about the army of Ussama.
[3] It is a village in Syria between Asqalan and ar-Ramla near Mu’ta, where Ja’far bin Abu Talib, Zayd bin Haritha and Abdullah bin Rawaha have been martyred.


(109)
urged them to move. He himself gave the banner to Ussama with his honored hand in order to motivate their zeal and to awaken their determination. Then he said: “Move in the name of Allah and for the sake of Allah! Fight those who have disbelieved in Allah!” Ussama moved with the army. He gave the banner to Burayda. They camped in al-Jurf and they became sluggish there. They did not leave there in spite of the clear orders they had heard from the Prophet (s) ordering them to hasten like his saying “Attack the people of Ubna in the morning…” and “Hasten to precede the news…” and many other orders that they did not obey.
Some of them rejected the leadership of Ussama as they had rejected the leadership of his father before. They criticized him too much and argued too much although they saw that the Prophet (s) himself had appointed him as the leader and had given him the banner of the emirate while he was ill. All that did not prevent them from rejected the leadership of Ussama until the Prophet (s) became very angry. He went out wrapped with his plush and his head was bandaged suffering from fever and headache.[1] It was Saturday, the tenth of Rabee’ul Awwal, two days before his death (according to the date mentioned by the Sunni). He ascended the minbar, praised Allah and said (as mentioned by the Sunni and the Shia and by all the Historians): “O people, what is this saying, which I have been informed of, said by some of you criticizing my appointing Ussama as the emir of the army? As you criticize my appointing Ussama as the emir, you have criticized my appointing his father as the emir before. By Allah, he (Ussama’s father) was well-qualified for the emirate and his son after him is well-qualified for it too”. He urged the people to progress as quickly as they could. They began to farewell him and they went to the camping in al-Jurf. His case (illness) became worse. He kept on saying: “Prepare the army of Ussama…let the army of Ussama move…send the army of Ussama…” He repeated that while they were still inactive. On Sunday, the twelfth of Rabee’ul Awwal Ussama came from his camp to the Prophet (s). The Prophet (s) ordered him by saying: “Move in the morning with the blessing of Allah”. Ussama farewelled the Prophet
________________________________________
[1] Refer to Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, al-Halabi’s Seera, ad-Dahlani’s Seera and all the books that talked about the army of Ussama.


(110)
(s) and left to his camp and then he returned with Umar and Abu Ubayda. They came to the Prophet (s) while he was about to die. He died on that same day. The army came back to Medina. They determined to cancel sending the army this time. They talked with Abu Bakr about that and insisted on him too much in spite of that they had seen the Prophet (s) caring much for this army and insisting on sending it. They decided to cancel sending the army but the Caliph Abu Bakr was determined and he insisted on sending the army. Then Umar came to Abu Bakr requesting him to depose Ussama and to appoint another one instead of him.
It was not a long time after the anger of the Prophet (s) when they rejected his appointing Ussama as the emir and his going out of his house angrily while he was too ill and his legs were about to fail him and it was not a long time after he had confirmed his orders by swearing, when they decided to turn over everything but the caliph Abu Bakr refused to respond to them to depose Ussama and he refused to cancel sending the army. He got up, caught the beard of Umar[1] and said: “Your mother may lose you O you ibn al-Khattab! The Prophet (s) has appointed him and you want me to depose him!”
When they sent the army-and they were about not to do-Ussama moved with three thousand warriors, among whom there were one thousand knights.[2] Some people, whom the Prophet (s) had ordered to join the army, did not join the army. The Prophet (s) had said: “Prepare the army of Ussama! Allah may curse whoever does not join this army!”[3]
They lagged behind the army at the first and refused to join it finally in order to firm the bases of their policy and to establish its pillars preferring their benefits to obeying the clear orders of the Prophet (s). They thought that their doing would be better to be carried out and worthier to be cared for because the army would not stop if they
________________________________________
[1] Al-Halabi in his Seera, ad-Dahlani in his Seera, ibn Jareer at-Tabari in his Tareekh, the events of the eleventh year of hijra and other historians.
[2] He attacked the people of Ubna, burnt their houses, cut their palm-trees, made the horses tread on their properties, killed many of them and captured the rest. On that day he killed his father’s killer. No one of the Muslims was killed on that day.
[3] Ash-Shahristani in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal, the fourth introduction.


(111)
lagged behind or if they did not join it whereas the caliphate would be turned away from them to others if they went to the battle before the death of the Prophet (s).
The Prophet (s) wanted the capital to be empty of them so that the situation would be clear and safe for Ameerul Mo'mineen Ali bin Abu Talib (s). If they came back after the covenant of the caliphate would have been determined to Ali, they would have no good chance to dispute or disagree then.
The Prophet (s) had appointed Ussama, who was seventeen years old,[1] as the emir over them in order to degrade the haughty ones, to control the fancy of others and to be safe in the future from the disputing of the competitors if he had appointed one of them as the emir but they realized what the Prophet (s) had planned to, so they rejected the emirate of Ussama and refused to go with him to fight. They did not leave their camping in al-Jurf until the Prophet (s) went to the better world and then they intended to cancel the battle one time and to depose Ussama in another time. At last they did not join the army of Ussama and at the head of them were Abu Bakr and Umar.[2]
These were five things in the matter of the army of Ussama, which they (the companions) had not obeyed whereas they (these things)
________________________________________
[1] This was the most certain saying. It was also said that he was 18, 19 or 20 years old but no one had said more than that.
[2] He was not in the army of ibn Zayd (Ussama)
to be led by ibn Zayd
nor was he afraid on the day of the cave
nor hid himself on the day of al-Fareesh
nor was he deposed on the day of Bara’a
nor was he led behind in a prayer
a young man who has not got a root from Taym bin Murra
nor from the evil Abdul Lat
an imam of guidance who preferred the others to have his disc of bread
and so the red disc of the sun was returned white to him
Gabriel competed with him under the garment
Composed by ibn Abul Hadeed al-Mu’tazily al-Hanafi (about Imam Ali (s))


(112)
were declared clearly by the prophetic sayings, preferring their fancies and their own ijtihads to the clear traditions of the Prophet (s).
Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri justified the companions’ doing in some of our arguments (muraja’at). He said: “Yes, the Prophet (s) urged them to hasten with the army of Ussama and ordered them many times until he said to Ussama: “Attack the people of Ubna in the morning…” and he did not give him time even to the evening and he said to him: “Hasten…” He did not accept from him except hastening but immediately after that the Prophet (s) became so ill until it was feared for him. Their selves did not allow them to leave him while he was in such a case. They remained in al-Jurf waiting to see how he would become. This was because of their pity for him and their love to him. The aim behind their sluggishness was just waiting for one of two things; either to be delighted if he would restore his health or to win the honor of carrying out his funerals and to establish the affairs of the one, who would rule over them after him. They were excused and would not be blamed for that.
As for rejecting the emirate of Ussama before the death of the Prophet (s) in spite of the clear sayings and orders of the Prophet (s), it was just because Ussama was too young while they were middle-aged and old men and the souls of the middle-aged and old men would refuse-in their natures-to be led by the young and hate to submit to the orders of the youth so their rejecting his emirate was not a heresy but it was due to the human nature”.
And as for their request to depose Ussama after the death of the Prophet (s), some of the ulama justified that in a way that the companions might think it would be permissible if the caliph Abu Bakr would have preferred to depose him due to the general welfare according to their own opinions.
Sheikh Saleem al-Bishri added: “Indeed I do not know any justification that mind may accepts concerning their request to depose Ussama especially after the Prophet (s) has become so angry when they have rejected his appointing Ussama as the emir and he has come out, although he was seriously ill, wrapped with his plush and his head was bandaged because of fever and headache and he


(113)
has reproached them in his speech from above the minbar. It was one of the famous historical events, that has spread everywhere. Justifying their doing, after all that, is something unknown save by Allah.
As for their intention to cancel sending the army after they have seen the Prophet (s) caring too much to send it and insisting on hastening to send it and his many traditions about this matter, it was because of their precautions that the capital of Islam might be overcome by the polytheists after it would be empty of the forces. After the death of the Prophet (s) hypocrisy appeared, the Jews and the Christians became powerful, many tribes apostatized and other tribes refused to pay the zakat. The companions asked our master Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq to prevent Ussama from moving with the army but he refused and said: “By Allah, if I am snatched away by birds, is better to me than to change anything before carrying out the order of the messenger of Allah (s)”. This is what has been mentioned by our ulama about the situation of Abu Bakr but as for the others, they are excused because they have had no intention save their fearing for Islam.
As for when Abu Bakr, Umar and others had abstained from joining the army of Ussama, when it went to fight, it was just to establish the Islamic rule and the Muhammadan state and to save the caliphate, which the religion and its people would not be saved then except with.
We found what you have quoted from ash-Shahristani in his book al-Milal wen-Nihal as mursal and not musnad.[1] Al-Halabi and ad-Dahlani said in their Seeras: “No tradition has been narrated about the subject at all”. If you, may Allah assist you, have a tradition narrated by the Sunni, please guide me to it and thanks be to you”.
We said when replying to the sheikh: “You have-may Allah keep you safe-acknowledged that those companions have been sluggish in al-Jurf and then they have not joined the army when moving to fight
________________________________________
[1] Mursal is a tradition narrated without a series of narrators or the narrators are unknown or unreliable. Musnad is a tradition narrated by truthful and reliable narrators.


(114)
although they have been ordered by the Prophet (s) to hasten in doing that.
You have acknowledged too that they rejected the emirate of Ussama in spite of the clear sayings and orders of the Prophet (s).
You have acknowledged that they have requested Abu Bakr to depose Ussama after the Prophet (s) has been so angry for that and that he has come out wrapped and bandaged because of illness. And then he has reproached them in his speech he made on the minbar that you have said it was a famous historical event. It was the speech, in which the Prophet (s) had declared that Ussama and his father, before him, were well-qualified for the emirate.
You have acknowledged their requesting the caliph to cancel sending the army, which the Prophet (s) has ordered to be sent, although they have seen the Prophet (s) insisting on that and inciting his companions to hasten moving toward Sham and his sayings were too clear and firm.
You have acknowledged that some companions, whom the Prophet (s) has ordered to join the army, had not joined the army.
You have acknowledged all these things, which have been mentioned by all the historians, and you have said they (those companions) were excused for doing that. The conclusion of what you have mentioned as a justification for their doings was that they have just preferred the welfare of Islam as they have thought and not according to the sayings and orders of the Prophet (s). We have not said, in this concern, more than this.
In another word, we want to ask: have they offered their worships according to all of the prophetic traditions or not? You have chosen the first and we have chosen the second. Your acknowledgment, now, that they have not acted in these matters according to the prophetic traditions confirms what we have chosen and whether they were excused or not, certainly has nothing to do with the subject of the research.
Since it has been proved that they have preferred the benefit of Islam, concerning the matter of the army of Ussama, by acting according to their own opinions rather than to act according to the


(115)
Prophet’s orders, then why do you not say that they have preferred, in the matter of the caliphate after the Prophet (s), the benefit of Islam according to their own opinions too rather than to follow the prophetic traditions of al-Ghadeer and their likes?!
You have justified the doing of those companions, who have rejected the emirate of Ussama, by saying that they have rejected his emirate because he was too young and they were middle-aged and old men and you have said that the souls of the middle-aged and old men would refuse in their nature to be led by a young man. Then why have you not said the same about those who have not carried out the prophetic traditions of al-Ghadeer that have determined the caliphate of Ali, who was a young man then, over the middle-aged and old men of the companions for they-in the same way-have considered him as too young as they have considered Ussama when the Prophet (s) has appointed him a leader over them in that army? What difference between the emirate of an army and the caliphate is! If their souls-according to their human nature-refused to be led by a young man in an army for a short period of time, they would, no doubt, refuse to be ruled by a young caliph throughout his lifetime and in all the worldly and afterlife affairs!
You have mentioned that “the souls of the middle-aged and old me refuse-according to their human natures-to be led by the young”. It is not probable that you have meant to generalize this criterion because the faithful souls of the sincere old men will never refrain from obeying Allah and His messenger in being led by the young or in anything else. Allah says: “But no! by your Lord! they do not believe (in reality) until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with entire submission. Qur'an, 4:65” and “…and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back. Qur'an, 59:7” and“And it behooves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he surely strays off a manifest straying. Qur'an, 33:36”


(116)
As for the word of ash-Shahristani concerning those, who had refused to join the army of Ussama, it has come in a musnad tradition mentioned by Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz al-Jawhari in his book Kitab as-Saqeefa. Here I quote the tradition as it has been mentioned:
“Ahmad bin Iss~haq bin Salih narrated from Ahmad bin Yasaar from Sa’eed bin Katheer al-Ansari from his companions that Abdullah bin Abdurrahman had said: “The Prophet (s), during his illness that led to his death, appointed Ussama as the leader of an army, which consisted the most of the Muhajireen and the Ansar, among whom were Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Ubayda bin al-Jarrah, Abdurrahman bin Owf, Talha and az-Zubayr. He ordered him to attack Mu’ta where his father Zayd had been killed and to invade the valley of Palestine. Ussama lagged and all the army lagged with him. The Prophet’s health changed between a day and another but he still insisted on carrying out the task of the army of Ussama until Ussama said to him: “O messenger of Allah, may my father and mother die for you! Would you please allow me to stay some days until Allah restores your health?” The Prophet (s) said to him: “Go and set out with the blessing of Allah!” Ussama said: “O messenger of Allah, if I leave while you are still in this case, I will leave and my heart will be full of pain”. The Prophet (s) said: “Set out with victory and good will!” He said: “O messenger of Allah, I hate to ask the travelers about you”. The Prophet (s) said: “Do what I have ordered you!” Then the Prophet (s) fainted and Ussama left and got ready to set out. When the Prophet (s) regained his consciousness, he asked about Ussama and his army. It was said to him that Ussama and his army had been preparing to move. The Prophet (s) said: “Let the army of Ussama set out. Allah may curse whoever does not join Ussama.” He repeated that many times. Ussama set out with the banner fluttering over his head and the companions around him until he arrived at al-Jurf. He camped there and with him there were Abu Bakr, Umar and most of the Muhajireen and from the Ansar there were Usayd bin Khudhayr, Basheer bin Sa’d and many other notable personalities. Then the messenger of Umm Aymen[1] came saying to Ussama: “Come back to
________________________________________[1] She was the Prophet’s nursemaid.


(117)
Medina! The messenger of Allah is dying”. Ussama immediately came back to Medina and the banner was with him. He came and fixed the banner at the door of the Prophet’s house where the Prophet (s) had died then”.
This tradition has been mentioned by several historians like ibn Abul Hadeed al-Mu’tazili in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 2 p.20, Egypt Edition.
5. The share of those whose hearts are made to incline (to the truth)
Allah, in His holy Book, has assigned a share from the zakat for a certain group of people when saying: “The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is Knower, Wise. Qur'an, 9:60”
The Prophet (s) used to give those people, whose hearts had been reconciled (to the Truth) this share from the zakat. They were different kinds of people. Among them there were notable men of the Arab tribes, whom the Prophet (s) gifted to become Muslims in order to be safe from their dangers and others who had become Muslims but their determinations were weak; therefore the Prophet (s) attracted them by gifting them profusely like Abu Sufyan and his son Mo’awiyya, Uyayna bin Hissn, al-Aqra’ bin Habis and Abbas bin Mirdass, and among them there were those people, who were waiting for their equals of the Arab personalities to become Muslims so that they themselves, then, would become Muslims. The first kind of those people might be those people, whom the Prophet (s) gifted from the sixth of the khums[1] (fifth), which was his own pure share, and he had prepared some of those people, by gifting them with a part of the zakat, to fight the unbelievers.
Thus was the conduct of the Prophet (s) towards those, whose hearts had been reconciled to Islam, since this verse had been revealed to him until he left to the better world. He had never ordered anyone to
________________________________________
[1] A type of religious levy, equivalent to one fifth of taxable income.


(118)
annul it after him at all. All the umma has agreed unanimously upon this.
When Abu Bakr became the caliph, those people came to receive their shares as it was usual during the time of the Prophet (s). Abu Bakr wrote them a book confirming their right. They took the book to Umar to be signed by him. Umar tore the book and said to them: “We are not in need of you. Allah has strengthen Islam and made us no longer need you. Either you become Muslims or the sword will be between us and you.” They went back to Abu Bakr and said to him: “Are you the caliph or he?” Abu Bakr said: “It is he inshallah” and he agreed to what Umar had done.[1]
The matter had been settled by the two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, and those, who had adopted their opinion, and they determined to deprive those people, whose hearts had been reconciled to Islam, of their share and turned it from them to the other classes mentioned
________________________________________
[1] Refer to al-Jawhara an-Nayyira ala Mukhtasar al-Qaddoori on Hanafite jurisprudence, vol.1 p.164. Also it has been mentioned by other historians when talking about the qualities of the two caliphs.
How many cases like this one Umar had done! One of them, for example, as mentioned by the historians, was: “Once Uyayna bin Hissn and al-Aqra’ bin Habiss came to Abu Bakr and said to him: “There is a piece of inarable land that has neither plant nor any advantage”. Abu Bakr said: “I see to grant it to you that Allah may make it useful”. Abu Bakr asked the people around him: “What do you say?” They said: “It is ok.” He wrote them a book about that. They took the book to Umar to witness on it. Umar took the book from them, spit on it and erased it. They became so angry and said to him bad words. Then they came back to Abu Bakr complaining. They said to Abu Bakr: “By Allah, we do not know who the caliph is, you or Umar!” Abu Bakr said: “It is he!” Umar came and stopped before Abu Bakr while he was angry. He said to Abu Bakr: “Tell me about this land that you have granted to these tow ones. Is it yours or it is for the Muslims?” Abu Bakr said: “It is for the Muslims.” Umar said: “So what made you grant it to these two ones?” Abu Bakr said: “I consulted with the people around me.” Umar said: “Did you consult with all the Muslims and get their consent?” Abu Bakr said: “I have said to you before that you are better than me in this matter (the caliphate) but you forced me to it”. Mentioned by ibn Abul Hadeed in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 12 p.108, al-Asqalani in his Issaba when mentioning the biography of Uyayna and it has mentioned by others.
Would that they had consulted all the Muslims on the day of as-Saqeefa and would that they had waited a little until the Hashemites would have finished the funerals of the Prophet (s) to be able to attend that consultation for they no doubt were the worthiest of that among the umma!


(119)
in the Qur'anic verse.
Some virtuous ulama have talked about this subject that it would be better to quote their speech and to test it because it has some advantages.
Professor ad-Dawaleebi[1] said in his book Usool al-Fiqh:[2] “The ijtihad of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) on stopping the gift that the Holy Qur'an had determined for the people, whose hearts had been reconciled to Islam, might have been the first of the verdicts that Umar had done according to “the change of benefits due to the change of time” although the Qur’anic text about the subject was still valid and had not been annulled just because he had preferred his own opinion, which had led to his ijtihad.” Let you ponder on what he has said and scrutinize his following speech.
He added: “Allah, the Almighty has assigned, at the beginning of the advent of Islam and when the Muslims were still weak somehow, a gift to be given to some people, whose dangers against the Muslims were feared and whose goodness was expected, to reconcile their hearts to Islam. They were among the groups, whom the Qur'an had mentioned to be gifted from the charities of the treasury. Allah said: (The alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah, and (for) the wayfarer). Thus the Holy Qur'an had put those people, whose hearts were reconciled, among the groups of people, who received their shares of the charities, and had assigned for them certain allowances as some countries do nowadays when assigning some expenses from their budgets for the political propaganda.”[3] He added: “But when
________________________________________
[1] He is Sheikh Muhammad Ma’roof, the professor in jurisprudence and Roman laws in the College of Laws-Syrian University.
[2] Where he has mentioned examples about changing the verdicts according to the changes of the ages in p.239.
[3] They (the countries) might have learnt this from the Qur’anic verse talking about those, whose hearts have been reconciled to Islam. England, U.S.A. and their likes supply the poor and needy people of the weak countries with food and clothes and reformative projects although these countries are not in need of those weak countries or their peoples but they follow the maxim, which is the aim of the Qur'an out of giving those people to reconcile their hearts.


(120)
Islam became strong and its rule became firm, Umar determined to deprive those people of their gifts, which the Qur'an had assigned for them”.
I say: The professor has repeated his saying that Umar had stopped the gift of those people that the Qur'an had determined as a fixed right in a clear verse just to prefer his own opinion and then the professor has justified the doing of the caliph Umar by saying:
“…That did not mean that Umar had annulled a Qur'anic verdict but he had noticed the cause of the text (verse) and not its apparent form and he considered gifting those people as was related to temporary circumstances when Islam was weak yet and to be safe from their evils but when Islam became strong and the circumstances requiring to gift those people were changed then it became obligatory to act according to the cause[1] of the verse and to stop that gift”.
I say: there is no doubt that the verse talking about gifting those people is absolute and not limited and this is clear in the Qur'an without any disagreement or ambiguity. We are not to limit it to some conditions or to justify it according to something unless there is an authority from Allah or His messenger. It is certain that there is no authority on this concern.[2]
Then how could we consider gifting those people as being justified according to temporary circumstances of a certain time, when it was to reconcile their hearts to Islam when Islam was still weak and not in other times?
________________________________________
[1] There was no cause here, on which the verdict relied, that following it would be required by the text (verse). Reconciling those people, whom Allah had assigned this share from the charities for, was not a cause for this legal verdict but it was from among the maxims and benefits that had been noticed in legislating it. The ulama know well that the cause of a certain verdict is something and the maxim, which is the benefit in legislating it, is something else. Have you not seen that the benefit behind the obligatory iddah (a prescribed period, during which a widow or a divorcee may not remarry, beginning from the death of her husband or from the divorce) on the divorced women is to keep the lineages of the fetuses that may be in their mothers’ wombs? In spite of that the iddat of a woman is obligatory even if it becomes certain that she is not pregnant!
[2] The revelation of the Qur'an at the beginning of Islam and when Islam was still weak was not limited to any restrictions.


(121)
If the Muslims became safe from the evils of those people, whose hearts would be reconciled, in a certain time, their becoming Muslims because of gifting them would not stop. In fact this might increase due to the powerful authority of Islam and this hope would be sufficient to reconcile their hearts by gifting them. The Prophet (s) reconciled many classes of people by giving them gifts; some to be Muslims and consequently their peoples would be Muslims, some had become Muslims but their faith was somehow weak and so the Prophet (s) wanted to strengthen their faith by gifting them and some were gifted in order that the Muslims would be safe from their evils. Let us suppose that we were safe from the dangers of the evil ones; nevertheless this gift should be given to those, whose followers would be Muslims when they themselves became Muslims, or to those, whose weak faith would be strengthen and fixed, imitating, by that, the Prophet (s) and whoever imitated his prophet, surely would be the most beloved one to Allah among His people.
The power of Islam that had defeated the enemies of the Muslims and made them safe from their dangers changed into the opposite situation. The foreigners conquered the Muslims and forced them to flatter the foreigners and to attract their pity by paying them gifts or by other things as it is seen nowadays or it has been seen some time ago. Hence it became clear that annulling the share of those people, whose hearts had been attracted to Islam by being gifted, when Islam had become strong was just due to their being deceived by their state at that time but the Holy Qur'an is from Allah, the Knowing, the Wise.
Now we come back to our research on the absolute text and limiting it to the benefit that changes according to the changes of the different ages and due to that a legal verdict changes. We research on this principle according to its conditions.
We, the Shia, all in all and unanimously do not pay any attention to the benefit in specializing a general verdict or limiting an absolute verdict except if the Sharia has a clear text confirming this regard. If there is no source in the Sharia confirming this matter (specializing a general verdict or limiting an absolute verdict) whether positively or negatively it will have no any value near us. If there is a benefit or


(122)
not it will be the same for us.[1] This opinion is adopted too by the two sects; the Shafiites and the Hanafites.
As for the Hanbalites, although they have taken in their consideration the benefits that have no source in the Sharia, they do not make the benefits stand against the clear texts of the Sharia but they put the benefits after the texts.[2] Thus they do not limit the clear verse talking about the people, whose hearts have been attracted to Islam by gifts. Then they may be added to the Shia, the Shafiites and the Hanafites in this concern.
The opinion of the Malikites towards the text talking about the people, whose hearts have been reconciled to Islam, is also like the others’, although they have taken the benefits in their consideration and made them oppose the text but they oppose with that the traditions narrated by single narrators (not proved by others) and the traditions that have not been proved definitely and they also oppose, with the benefits, the general verse of the Qur'an, which have not had definite meanings. But as for the texts that have been proved to be true and the ones that have assigned definite meanings like the verse talking about the people, whose hearts have been attracted to Islam by gifts, they do never make the benefits stand against such texts at all[3] because they are definite in being true and definite in meaning as well.
After all, the principles of jurisprudence according to all these sects do not permit to justify depriving those people of their shares as Professor ad-Dawaleebi has justified it.
If the two caliphs (Abu Bakr and Umar) had not annulled-after the Prophet’s death-the share of that class of people, whose hearts had been reconciled to Islam, and stopped their right, which had been determined by the Holy Qur'an, we could have said that the two caliphs (Abu Bakr and Umar) had not contradicted the Qur'anic verse even if they had not given those people their shares then
________________________________________
[1] The details of this matter are available in the books of the Shia jurisprudence, which are widespread everywhere.
[2] Ad-Dawaleebi in his book Usool al-Fiqh, p.294.
[3] Usool al-Fiqh by ad-Dawaleebi, p.206.


(123)
because Allah had made those eight classes of people, mentioned in the verse, as the only ones, on whom the charities were to be spent just to limit the spending of the charities to them and not to other than them. The verse had not made it compulsory to spread the charities among all the eight classes mentioned. That is to say: if someone gives all his charity to only one class from among these eight classes, he will act correctly and will not be blamed exactly as if he has spread the charity among the eight classes. This has been agreed upon unanimously by all the Muslims and such they have done after the Prophet (s). So the doing of Abu Bakr and Umar would have been accepted if they had not annulled this right and invalidated it in spite of the clear Qur'anic text, which has been still fixed and not annulled.
Before we end this research, we think that we have to draw the attention of Professor ad-Dawaleebi to review what he has quoted about the Shia[1] that they believe in the benefits and prefer them to the definite texts. This is no true and no one of the Shia has ever said it. Sulayman at-Touffi was one of the fanatic people, who had been ascribed unjustly to the Shia by the opponents.
The opinion of the Shia in this concern is as what we have mentioned previously. All the Shia have agreed upon this unanimously. Their books are available everywhere. Let the professor refer to them and quote from them directly instead of quoting from the books of Ahmad bin Hanbal (may Allah forgive him).
________________________________________
[1] p.207, 209 in his book Usool al-Fiqh.


(124)
6. The share of the relatives
It is the share that has been mentioned by this verse: “And know that whatever thing you gain, a fifth[1] of it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for the near relatives and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, if you believe in Allah[2] and in that which We revealed to Our servant, on the day of distinction, the day on which the two parties met; and Allah has power over all things. Qur'an, 8:41”
The Muslims have agreed unanimously that the Prophet (s) has taken a share of the khums for himself and given another share to his near relatives and he has never changed this matter nor has he ordered any one to change it until he has been invited by Allah to be in the better world.
When Abu Bakr became the caliph, he interpreted the verse according to his own thinking and he omitted the share of the Prophet (s) and the share of his relatives after his death.[3] He prevented the Hashemites from getting their right of the khums and he considered them as same as the orphans, the poor and the wayfarers of the other Muslims.
Fatima (s) sent a messenger to Abu Bakr asking him for her inheritance of what her father (s) had left in Medina and Fadak and what had remained of the khums of Khaybar but Abu Bakr refused to
________________________________________
[1] The two sheikhs al-Bukhari and Muslim mentioned in their Sahihs (books of Hadith) a tradition narrated by ibn Abbas that the Prophet (s) had said to the delegation of Abdul Qayss when ordering them to believe in Allah, the One and the Only: “Do you know what believing in Allah alone is?” They said: “Allah and His messenger are more aware”. He said: “Witnessing that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, offering the prayers, paying the zakat, fasting in Ramadan and giving the fifth of one’s income”.
[2] The meaning of this conditional phrase is that the khums (fifth) is a legal right that must be paid to the ones mentioned in the verse. The verse said: Do not be greedy for this right and pay it to its deserving ones if you have believed in Allah.
[3] Refer to al-Kashshaf when talking about the verse of the khums. The author mentioned a tradition narrated by ibn Abbas: “The khums is six shares; two shares for Allah and His messenger and a share for the messenger’s relatives…but Abu Bakr made it three shares”. He mentioned the same about Umar and the caliphs after him (except Imam Ali). He mentioned that Abu Bakr had prevented the Hashemites from getting their share of the khums.


(125)
give her anything of that. She became very angry with him. She deserted him and did not talk to him until she died. She lived for six months after the death of the Prophet (s). When she died, her husband Ali (s) buried her at night without letting Abu Bakr know or attend the funerals….[1]
Muslim mentioned in his Sahih a tradition narrated by Yazeed bin Hurmuz saying: “Najda bin Aamir al-Harawri the Kharijite wrote a letter to ibn Abbas. I was there when ibn Abbas read the letter and when he wrote his reply. Ibn Abbas said: “By Allah, I want just to prevent him from being in error; otherwise I will not write to him even one word.” He wrote to him: “You have asked about the share of the relatives that Allah has mentioned in His Book… and who they are! We have seen that we are the relatives of the Prophet (s) but our people denied that…”[2]
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal mentioned this tradition in his Musnad, vol.1 p.294. The tradition has been mentioned in many books of Hadith in true ways and by reliable narrators. What has been mentioned in the tradition expresses the real opinion of Ahlul Bayt (s).
But most of the Sunni imams have adopted the opinion of the two caliphs (Abu Bakr and Umar) without assigning a special share from the khums to the relatives (of the Prophet (s)).
Malik bin Anass had determined that all the khums would be spent according to the opinion of the imam, who would spend it on the benefits of the Muslims as he liked, and there was no shares for the relatives (of the Prophet (s)), the orphans, the poor or the wayfarers at all.
Abu Haneefa and his followers had omitted the share of the Prophet (s) and the share of his relatives and divided them among the orphans, the poor and the wayfarers of the rest of the Muslims where there was no difference, according to their opinion, between the Hashemites and the other Muslims.
________________________________________
[1] Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3 p.36, Muslim’s Sahih vol.2 p.72 and mentioned in other places of their Sahihs.
[2] Vol.2 p.105.


(126)
Ash-Shafi’iy had made it five shares; a share for the Prophet (s) to be spent in the same ways that the Prophet (s) had been used to spend on the benefits of the Muslims like supplying the army with horses (equipments), weapons and the likes and a share for the relatives from bani Hashem and bani Abdul Muttalib and not bani Abd Shams and bani Nawfal to be divided in a way that a male would get as double as the share of a female. The rest of the khums was to be divided among the other three classes; the orphans, the poor and the wayfarers.
We , the Shia, divide the khums into six shares;[1] two for Allah and His messenger, and these two shares besides the share of the relatives (the Prophet’s progeny) are for the (disappeared) imam, who represents the Prophet (s), and the rest three shares are to be given to the orphans, the poor and the wayfarers of the Prophet’s progeny especially where no one of the common people has a right to be given from the khums because Allah has made charities impermissible for the Prophet (s) and his progeny and so He has compensated them for that by giving them the khums. This has been mentioned by at-Tabari when talking about Imam Ali bin al-Husayn as-Sajjad (s) and his son Imam Muhammad bin Ali al-Baqir (s).
Our ulama have agreed unanimously that the khums is obligatory to be deducted from every benefit one gets from business, trade, crafts, agricultural products, cattle and others. It is also obligatory on found (by chance) treasures, minerals, precious things got from the bottom of the sea by diving and other sources of wealth. This is mentioned in our jurisprudence and traditions narrated from the Prophet (s) and the infallible imams. Our evidence in that is he Qur’anic verse(And know that whatever thing you gain, a fifth of it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for the near relatives and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer). “Gain” includes all that man can make use of. The lexicons have shown this meaning clearly and the point of discussion here is the ijtihad to omit the share of the relatives (of the Prophet) although the verse has confirmed it so clearly.
________________________________________[1] Al-Jihad wes-Siyyer, vol.2 p.105.


(127)
7. Bequeathing by the Prophets
Allah has said: “Men shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave, and women shall have a portion of what the parents and the near relatives leave, whether there is little or much of it; a stated portion.Qur'an, 4:7” and “Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females. Qur'an, 4:11” These verses are general in concerning the Prophet (s) and the rest of the peoples equally. They are like the other general verses such as “O you who believe! fasting is prescribed for you, as it was prescribed for those before you… Qur'an, 2:183” and “but whoever among you is sick or on a journey, then (he shall fast) a (like) number of other days. Qur'an, 2:184” and “Forbidden to you is that which dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that on which any other name than that of Allah has been invoked, and the strangled (animal) and that beaten to death, and that killed by a fall and that killed by being smitten with the horn, and that which wild beasts have eaten, except what you slaughter… Qur'an, 5:3” and many other verses that concern the legal verdicts, which includes the Prophet (s) and the rest of the peoples with no difference but the orders are addressed to the Prophet (s) to act according to them and to inform the others of them to act according to them too. In this case the verses just show that the Prophet (s) is worthier than the others in keeping to the verdicts.
Allah has said: “…and those who are akin are nearer one to another in the ordinance of Allah. Qur'an, 8:75” In this verse Allah has determined that the right of inheritance is for the relatives of the bequeather. Before the revelation of this verse, bequeathing was among the rights of wilayah (guardianship) in religion, but when Islam and the Muslims became powerful and prevailing, the rights of those, who were among the inheritors previously, were annulled by this verse. The right of inheritance became limited to the relatives of the bequeather; the nearest, the nearer and so on, whether the bequeather was the Prophet (s) or any of the other people according to the apparent meaning of the verse.
Besides these verses, Allah has said when talking about Zachariah: “When he called upon his Lord in secret; he said: My Lord! surely my bones are weakened and my head flares with hoariness, and, my Lord! I have never been unsuccessful in my prayer to Thee, and surely I


(128)
fear my cousins after me, and my wife is barren; therefore grant me from Thyself an heir, who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased.Qur'an, 19:3-6”
Fatima az-Zahra’ (s) and the infallible imams of her progeny have protested with this verse when asking about their extorted inheritance. Definitely this verse shows that the prophets bequeath wealth and properties and the word “inherit” mentioned here refers to inheriting properties and not inheriting knowledge or prophethood. All the Shia ulama have adopted this opinion and said that the word “inheritance” in the language and the Sharia does not refer except to movable wealth and properties and it is not used to refer to other than properties except figuratively and metaphor does never change a certain fact into a metaphor without a clear evidence.
Zachariah has said in his invocation: (and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased). This means: O my Lord, make the one, who will inherit me, pleased near You and make him obedient to Your orders. So if we interpret “inheritance” as inheriting prophethood, then the saying of Zachariah will be nonsense and vain. Do you not think that it is nonsense when someone invokes Allah by saying: “O Allah, send us a prophet and make him sane and well-mannered”? Definitely all the prophets, whom Allah has sent to guide His people, are the highest examples of morals.
What evidences our opinion is that Zachariah (s) has declared that he feared that his cousins might extort his properties after his death when saying: (I fear my cousins after me) so he has invoked Allah to grant him a child to inherit him. Surely he feared his cousins for his properties and not knowledge and prophethood because Prophet Zachariah (s) was aware and did not fear a bit that Allah might entrust someone, who was not qualified, with prophethood nor would Allah make bad people inherit His knowledge and wisdom.
Someone may say that this argument ascribes stinginess to Prophet Zachariah (s).
God forbid! We do never believe so. Wealth is granted (by Allah) to a believer and to a disbeliever, to a good man and to a bad man. Prophet Zachariah (s), because his cousins were bad, feared that they


(129)
would spend his wealth on corruption. This was the wisdom of Prophet Zachariah (s) because supporting corrupt people and assisting them to keep on their bad doings is prohibited by religion and reason. He, who considers this as stinginess, will be unfair.
His saying (I fear my cousins after me) means that he fears their immorality and bad doings. So he fears that his cousins may inherit his wealth and spend it on disobedience; therefore he invokes Allah to grant him a good child to spend his wealth on what will please Allah.
In short, we are to interpret “inheritance” in this verse to mean wealth and not prophethood or other things according to the real meaning of the word, which comes to mind, without supposing other meanings for there is no any context referring to prophethood or other things. In fact all the evidences in the verse lead to the real meaning of the word “inherit” and not a figurative meaning.
This is the opinion of the infallible imams (s) about this Qur’anic verse and no doubt that the infallible imams (s) are equal to the Qur'an and they both, the Qur'an and the infallible imams, will not separate until the Day of Resurrection. All people have known what there was between Fatima az-Zahra’ (s), the head lady of the worlds’ women, and Abu Bakr. She had sent a messenger to Abu Bakr asking him for her inheritance of her father’s properties. Abu Bakr said: “The messenger of Allah said: “We (the prophets) do not bequeath. What we leave is to be considered as charity”.[1] Aa’isha said: “Abu Bakr refused to give Fatima anything of her inheritance and he appropriated all the Prophet’s properties to the treasury; therefore Fatima became very angry with Abu Bakr. She turned away from him and did never talk to him until she died. She lived after the Prophet (s) for six months and when she died, her husband Ali buried her in the night according to her own will[2] …and Abu Bakr did not attend the funerals…”[3]
________________________________________
[1] This tradition has been refuted by Fatima (s) and the infallible imams. Refer to al-Bukhari’s Sahih, chap. The battle of Khaybar.
[2] Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, vol.8 p.157, al-Qastalani’s Irshad, al-Ansari’s Tuhfa.
[3] Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.3 p.37, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2 p.72, Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.1 p.6.


(130)
Yes! She became very angry…she put on her veil and gown and came, with her maids and some of her fellow-women walking exactly like her father’s gait, to Abu Bakr, who was among a crowd of the Muhajireen, the Ansar and other people. A curtain was put between her and the people. She moaned in a way that all the people began to cry and the meeting shook. She waited until they stopped crying and became quiet. She began her speech with praising Allah and then her eloquence streamed…
She preached the people in the best of speeches
As if she talked with the tongue of al-Mustafa[1]
The sights submitted and the souls surrendered. If politics was not prevailing over the minds at those days, she would turn back the strayed tendencies and bridle the worldly greed, but it was politics that had gone too far with its tendencies without caring for anything.
He, who reads her speech on that day,[2] will find what there was between her and those people[3] (the caliph Abu Bakr and his
________________________________________
[1] Al-Mustafa is one of the Prophet’s surnames; Fatima’s father.
[2] The progeny of Ali and Fatima narrated the speech of Fatima, which she had speechified on that day, one after the other until it reached us. We, the Fatimites, narrate this speech from our fathers and our fathers narrate it from their fathers and so on for all generations until the times of the infallible imams. To see this speech, refer to al-Ihtijaj by at-Tabarsi, Biharul Anwar by al-Majlisi and refer to the Sunni books like as-Saqeefa and Fadak by Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz al-Jawhari, in which there are many traditions about this speech, some of which are narrated from Zaynab, the daughter of Ali and Fatima (s), Imam Muhammad al-Baqir(s) and Abdullah bin al-Hasan bin al-Hasan. Refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 4 p.78, 93, 94. Zayd bin Ali bin al-Husayn bin Ali bin Abu Talib said: “I have heard the notables of the Talibites narrating this speech from their fathers and teaching it to their children”.
[3] She said to Abu Bakr when he deprived her of her right (inheritance): “O Abu Bakr, if you die, who will inherit you?” He said: “My children and family”. She said: “Then why have you inherited the messenger of Allah instead of his children and family?” He said: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, I have not done that”. She said: “Yes, you have! You have extorted Fadak, which was the Prophet’s pure property. You have dared to take it from us and you have dared to change what Allah has revealed concerning us.” It has been mentioned in as-Saqeefa and Fadak by Abu Bakr al-Jawhari; refer to Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 4 p.87. Abu Bakr al-Jawhari mentioned in his book a tradition narrated by Abu Salama saying: “When Fatima asked for her inheritance, Abu Bakr said to her: “I have heard the messenger of Allah saying: “A prophet does not bequeath”. But I will sustain whomever the messenger of Allah has


(131)
followers). She quoted many clear verses to evidence her inheritance. They were irrefutable evidences that could never be denied. Among what she had said on that day was this passage: “Have you intendedly turned away from the Book of Allah and left it behind your backs? Allah says in His Book: “And Solomon was David's heir. Qur'an, 27:16” and He says when talking about Prophet Zachariah: “therefore grant me from Thyself an heir, who should inherit me and inherit from the children of Yaqoub, and make him, my Lord, one in whom Thou art well pleased.” He also says: “…and those who are akin are nearer one to another in the ordinance of Allah” and “Allah enjoins you concerning your children; the male shall have the equal of the portion of two females” and “It is prescribed for you, when death approacheth one of you, if he leave wealth, that he bequeath unto parents and near relatives in kindness. (This is) a duty for all those who ward off (evil). Qur'an, 2:180” Has Allah distinguished you with a verse that He has excluded my father from? Or are you more aware of the special and general verdicts of the Qur'an than my
________________________________________
been sustaining and I will spend on whomever he has been spending on”. She said: “O Abu Bakr, do your daughters inherit you whereas the Prophet’s daughters do not inherit him?” He said: “It is so”. Another tradition like this one has been mentioned by Ahmad in his Musnad, vol. 1 p.10. Al-Jawhari mentioned in his book as-Saqeefa and Fadak-as in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 4 p.81-a tradition narrated by Umm Hani bint Abu Talib: “Fatima said to Abu Bakr: “Who will inherit you when you die?” He said: “My children and family.” She said: “Then why do you inherit the messenger of Allah instead of us?” He said: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, your father has not bequeathed anything.” She said: “Yes, he has. It is the share (Fadak) that Allah has given to us and it is in your hand now.” He said: “I have heard the messenger of Allah saying: “It is but nourishment that Allah has granted to us and when I die it will be for the Muslims.” Al-Jawhari mentioned another tradition like this one narrated by Abut Tufayl. The traditions talking about this speech are so many and especially those, which have been narrated by the infallible imams. She has another speech concerning the caliphate after the Prophet (s). It has been mentioned by al-Jawhari in his book as-Saqeefa and Fadak-as in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 4 p.87-narrated from Abdullah bin al-Hasan bin al-Hasan that his mother Fatima bint al-Husayn has said: “When Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet) became so badly ill, the women of the Muhajireen and the Ansar gathered around her. They said to her: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, how have you become now?” she said: “By Allah, I have disliked your world and hated your men…” It is one of the most eloquent speeches among the speeches of Ahlul Bayt (s). It has also been mentioned by Imam Abul Fadhl Ahmad bin Abu Tahir in his book Balaghaatun Nissa’. It has been mentioned by al-Majlisi in Biharul Anwar, at-Tabarsi in al-Ihtijaj and by others.


(132)
father and my cousin (Ali)? Or do you say: “People of two (different) religions do not inherit each other”?
She protested against the caliph and evidenced her protest by quoting the clear Qur’anic verses (of Zachariah and Solomon) that had confirmed bequeathing by the prophets. By Allah, she is more aware of the meaning of the Qur'an than those, who have come a long time after the revelation of the Qur'an and who have distorted the real meaning of inheritance into inheriting wisdom and prophethood instead of wealth and properties. They have just preferred the figurative meaning to the real meaning without any evidence at all to drive the real meaning to another one. This is impermissible. If it was probable, then Abu Bakr or any one of that crowd of the Muhajireen and the Ansar would refute Fatima’s claim on that day.[1]
She also protested against the caliph, when asking for her inheritance, by referring to the general verses concerning inheritance and especially this general verse “Allah enjoins you concerning your children: The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females… Qur'an, 11:11” She denied his limiting the
________________________________________
[1] They had not opposed her on that day with this excuse but they had just confiscated her inheritance. Abu Bakr said to her: “O daughter of the messenger of Allah, I swear that Allah has not created anyone more beloved to me than your father. I wished the sky fell over the ground on the day when your father died. By Allah if Aa’isha (Abu Bakr’s daughter) becomes needy is much better to me than to see you being needy. Do you think I give white and red people their rights and I deprive you of your right whereas you are the daughter of the messenger of Allah? This wealth was not for the Prophet (s) but it was among the wealth of the Muslims, with which the Prophet (s) used to spend on the armies and to spend for the sake of Allah and when he died I managed it as he had been managing it.” She said: “By Allah, I will not talk with you for ever.” He said: “By Allah, I will never desert you at all.” She said: “By Allah, I will invoke Allah against you.” He said: “By Allah, I will invoke Allah for you.” When she was about to die, she recommended that Abu Bakr should not offer the prayer (for the dead) for her. It has been mentioned by Abu Bakr al-Jawhari in his book as-Saqeefa and Fadak as mentioned in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 4 p.80. You see here that Abu Bakr has not opposed Fatima (s) by refuting her evidence of bequeathing out of the two verses of Prophet David (s) and Prophet Zachariah (s) but he has pretended that the wealth was not the Prophet’s. She was not satisfied with his pretense anyhow for she was more aware of her father’s affairs than the others. We are Allah's and to Him we shall surely return!


(133)
general verdicts without any legal evidence from the Qur'an or the Sunna. She said denyingly: “Has Allah distinguished you with a verse that He has excluded my father from?” She confirmed by this saying that there was no any evidence in the Qur'an that might limit these general verdicts. Then she said: “Or are you more aware of the special and general verdicts of the Qur'an than my father and my cousin (Ali)?” By this saying she confirmed too that there was no any evidence in the Sunna that might limit these general verdicts. In fact she denied any kind of limitation at all because if there was something of that, then the Prophet (s) or his guardian Ali (s), would declare it to her and they would not let her unaware of it because that would be a kind of negligence in informing of the Sharia, dilatoriness in warning, hiding the truth, encouraging ignorance, inciting to ask for the untruth, injuring her dignity and would make her argue and confront and would expose her to enmity and hatred without having the right of what she would ask for. Definitely this is impossible for the prophets and for their guardians.
In short, the Prophet’s love and kindness to his daughter was over any love of the kind fathers towards their dutiful children. He covered her with the shadow of his great mercy, sacrificed himself for her[1] and delighted greatly when being with her. He tried whatever he could to educate her and to honor her to the utmost. He taught her the knowledge of Allah and the knowledge of His laws. He didn’t spare any effort in that until he made her at the top of every virtue and honor. After that, was it possible for him to conceal such a verdict without letting her know her legal obligation? God forbid! Would he expose her, by this concealment, to all of the troubles she had got after his death because of her inheritance? In fact all the umma faced a bad sedition, which was the consequence of depriving her of her inheritance.
And was her husband, the Prophet’s guardian and spiritual brother, in spite of his abundant knowledge, wisdom, precedence in Islam,
________________________________________
[1] Once the Prophet (s) mentioned his daughter Fatima (s) and said: “Her father may die for her! Her father may die for her!” He repeated that three times. This tradition has been narrated by Ahmad bin Hanbal and others as mentioned by Ibn Hajar in his book as-Sawa’iqul Muhriqa, chzp.11, p.159.


(134)
kinship to the Prophet (s), honor, high position and guardianship, unaware, too, of this tradition “We, the prophets, do not bequeath”? And why the Prophet (s) had concealed that from his spiritual brother, his guardian, the guard of his secrets, the gate of the city of his knowledge, the best judge among his umma; the gate of repentance, the ship of rescue and the safety of the umma from being separated? And why had his uncle al-Abbas and the rest of the Hashemites not heard of this tradition until they were surprised with it after the death of the Prophet (s)? And why had the Prophet’s wives not known about it so that they sent Othman to ask for their inheritance after the Prophet’s death? How had the Prophet (s) dared not to inform his wives of this legal verdict? Definitely the Prophet (s) was not indifferent a bit at all! He used to announce the verdicts of Allah openly. His morals were not so towards his relatives. He was so kind and mindful as he had been ordered by Allah: “And warn your nearest relatives.Qur'an, 26:214”
One word remained for Fatima (s), by which she provoked the zeal of people and excited their anger to the utmost. She said: “Or do you say: “People of two (different) religions do not inherit each other”? She meant that the general verdicts of inheritance were not to be limited according to those people’s own pretenses. The Prophet (s) had said: “People of two (different) religions do not inherit each other”. She wanted to say to them: “You deprive me of my inheritance to say that I am not on my father’s religion and so you will have a legal evidence on that!” We are Allah’s and to Him we shall return!
8. The donation of Fatima
When Allah the Almighty assisted the Prophet (s) to conquer Khaybar and cast horror into the hearts of the people of Fadak, they submitted to the Prophet (s) servilely. They made peace with him by giving him a half of their land[1] and the Prophet (s) accepted that from them and so a half of Fadak became a pure property for him where “whatever Allah restored to His Messenger from them you did not press forward against it any horse or a riding camel but Allah
________________________________________
[1] It is mentioned that they have given the Prophet (s) all of their land.


(135)
gives authority to His messengers against whom He pleases. Qur'an, 59:6” and upon this all the umma had agreed unanimously with no any objection by anyone.
When Allah revealed “And give to the near of kin his due,” the Prophet (s) donated Fadak to his daughter Fatima (s). It was still in her hand[1] until it had been extorted from her to be added to the treasury.
This was what Fatima (s) had claimed after the death of the Prophet (s) and because of this she had been subjected to trial.
Al-Fakhr ar-Razi said: “When the messenger of Allah died, Fatima (s) claimed that the Prophet (s) had donated Fadak to her. Abu Bakr said to her: “It hurts me to see you needy and it delights me to see you needless but I do not know whether your saying is true or not;[2] therefore I can not judge for you.” Umm Aymen and another mawla (follower) of the messenger of Allah[3] witnessed for Fatima but Abu Bakr wanted a witness, whose witnessing would be accepted
________________________________________
[1] The infallible imams and their followers have not had any doubt that the Prophet (s) had donated Fadak to Fatima (s) and that it had been in her hand until it had been extorted from her. Imam Ali (s) said to his administrative official on Basra, Othman bin Hunayf: “...Yes, Fadak was in our hands out of all what was under the sky but some people felt greedy for it and others withheld themselves from it but the best of judges is Allah...” Refer to Nahjol Balagha. There are many traditions narrated from the infallible imams talking about the same matter. The reliable narrators have narrated a tradition from Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri saying: “When Allah has revealed (And give to the near of kin his due), the messenger of Allah gave Fadak to Fatima.” Refer to Majma’ul Bayan by at-Tabarsi when interpreting this verse 17:26. You will find there that it is this tradition that has made al-Ma’moon, the Abbasid caliph, give Fadak back to the progeny of Fatima.
[2] By Allah O you Abu Bakr, have you really not known whether Fatima’s claim was true or not after Umm Aymen (the Prophet’s nursemaid) and Imam Ali (s) had witnessed it was true? Have you considered them all to be liars, aggressive or mistaken? Certainly not! But (Nay, but your minds have beguiled you into something. (My course is) comely patience. And Allah it is Whose help is to be sought in that (predicament) which ye describe). [3] The other witness besides Umm Aymen was Ameerul Mo’mineen Ali bin Abu Talib (s) undoubtedly. As if ar-Razi found the rejection of Imam Ali’s witness by Abu Bakr abominable so he did not mention the name of Imam Ali (s) respecting Imam Ali and Abu Bakr together so he said “a mawla of the messenger of Allah”.


(136)
according to the Sharia”.[1]
Ibn Hajar al-Haythami in his book as-Sawa’iq said: “Fatima, in her claim that the Prophet (s) had donated Fadak to her, did not bring except Ali and Umm Aymen as witnesses and so the quorum was not complete…”[2]
The same has been said by Ibn Taymiyya, ibnul Qayyim and other Sunni ulama concerning this case.
May Allah forgive them and us and may He be pleased with Abu Bakr and make Fatima, her father, her husband and her son forgive him! Would he have preferred a suitable decision in order not to put Fatima (s), the prophet’s trust, who had recently lost her father, in those bad situations; once because of her inheritance, another time because of her donation of Fadak, a third time, a fourth time…worries and griefs…would he have not let her go angry and disappointed and then to die on her anger and to recommend in her will what she had recommended!
Glory be to Allah! Where was the deliberateness of the caliph (Abu Bakr)? Where was his patience? Where was his insight about the ends of the affairs and where was his caring for the benefits of the Muslims?
Would he have avoided the fail of Fatima (s) in her situations as possible as he could with all wisdom he had! Had he done so, it would have been much better for him and it would have kept him away from regretting and being blamed and it would have been better to unite the umma!
He could have protected the trust of the Prophet (s) and the only daughter of him, Fatima (s), from being disappointed and then to go back upset stumbling with her garment. What would he have lost, where he had occupied the position of her father, if he had given Fadak to Fatima (s) without a trial? An imam could do that due to his general guardianship and what the value of Fadak was before the general advantage of the Muslims and before avoiding evils!
________________________________________
[1] Tafseer Mafateehul Ghayb by ar-Razi, vol.8 p.125.
[2] P.21 in his book Shubah ar-Rafidha.


(137)
This is what many earlier and later scholars have wished that Abu Bakr had done.
Here we quote a word concerning this subject said by Professor Mahmood Abu Riyya, the Egyptian coeval scholar: “There is a matter that we have to say a frank word about; it is the situation of Abu Bakr towards Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her), the daughter of the messenger of Allah, and what he has done to her concerning the inheritance of her father. Let us suppose that we submit to the traditions narrated by a single narrator and submit that they may limit the general verdicts of the Qur’an and that the Prophet (s) has said: “We, the Prophets, do not bequeath”; nevertheless Abu Bakr could give Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her) some of her father’s inheritance and that Fadak might be considered as a part of that inheritance. This would be his right that no one could refute because he was the caliph and the caliph could give whatever he liked to whomever he liked. The caliph himself had donated some of the Prophet’s inheritance to az-Zubayr bin al-Awwam,[1] Muhammad bin Maslama and others.[2] This very Fadak itself had been donated to Marwan by the caliph Othman after a short time!”[3]
Ibn Abul Hadeed mentioned in his book Sharh Nahjol Balagha some speech of some earlier scholars, who had criticized the two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, due to their situations toward Fatima az-Zahra’ (s) after her father’s death: “It would be better for them to be more generous, besides their faith, than to commit what they had committed toward the daughter of the messenger of Allah”. Ibn Abul Hadeed commented: “This speech has no answer!”[4]
Let us away from generosity and let us discuss the matter of the trial. The legal evidences were sufficient to make it obligatory to judge for
________________________________________
[1] He was the caliph’s son-in-law. His wife was Asma’, the daughter of Abu Bakr.
[2] Abu Bakr had given his daughter Aa’isha the prophet’s house, in which she buried him beside the tomb of the Prophet (s) after his death and in which she buried Umar later on but when Imam Hasan (s), the Prophet’s beloved grandson, died she refused to let him be buried in his grandfather’s house and then a sedition was about to happen! Just to Allah we resort!
[3] Refer to ar-Risala al-Misriyya magazine, vol.518, 11th year, p.457.
[4] vol.4, p.106.


(138)
Fatima (s) in order to get her donation back. These evidences, besides that they were sufficient, were numerous. This was clear to the fair people of understanding.
It was enough that the ruler (the caliph), at that time, had already been certain that the claimer (Fatima), with her holiness, was equal to the Virgin Mary[1] or better than her[2] and that she and Mary, Khadeeja (the Prophet’s wife) and Asiya (the Pharaoh’s wife) were the best of the women of Paradise[3] and that she and these three women were the best of the women of the worlds[4] and it was she, to whom the Prophet (s) had said: “O Fatima, are you not satisfied to be the head lady of the believing women or the head lady of the women of this umma?”[5]
________________________________________
[1] According to the true traditions; ibn Abdul Birr said in his book al-Istee’ab when mentioning the biography of Fatima (s): “The Prophet (s) visited Fatima when she was ill and said to her: “O my daughter, how are you today?” She said: “I feel pain and what hurts me more that I have nothing to eat.” He said: “O my daughter, are you not satisfied that you are the head lady of the women of the worlds?” She said: “O father, what about Mary the daughter of Imran?” He said: “She is the head lady of the women of her world and you are the head lady of your world. By Allah, I have married you to a master in this world and in the afterworld”. Many such traditions have been mentioned by other scholars and historians.
[2] The infallible imams and their followers have agreed unanimously that Fatima (s) is better than the Virgin Mary (s). Many Sunni scholars have declared that she is better than all the women of the worlds even the Virgin Mary (s), such as at-Taqiy as-Sabki, al-Hallal as-Sayooti, al-Badr, az-Zarkashi, at-Taqiy al-Maqreezi, ibn Abu Dawood and al-Mannawi. Refer to ash-Sharaf al-Mu’ayyad by Allama an-Nabahani, p.59 when talking about the virtues of Fatima (s). The same has been said by Ahmad Zayni Dahlan, the mufti of the Shafiites when talking about the marriage of Fatima and Ali in his book as-Seera an-Nabawiyya.
[3] It has been mentioned by Ahmad bin Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.1 p.293, by Abu Dawood as in al-Istee’ab, the biography of Khadeeja and by Qasim bin Muhammad as in al-Istee’ab, the biography of Fatima (s).
[4] Narrated by Abu Dawood from Anass as mentioned in al-Istee’ab when talking about Khadeeja’s biography and narrated by Abdul Warith bin Sufyan as in al-Istee’ab, biographies of Fatima (s) and Khadeeja.
[5] Al-Bukhari’s Sahih, vol.4 p.64, Muslim’s Sahih, vol.2, the virtues of Fatima (s), at-Tarmithi’s Sahih, al-Jam’ bayna as-Sahihhayn, al-Jam’ bayna as-Sihah as-Sitta, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal’s Musnad, vol.6 p.282, ibn Abdul Birr’s Istee’ab, Muhammad bin Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol.2, vol.8. Al-Bukhari said in his Sahih, vol.4 the last page of chap. al-Isti’than: “Musa bin Owana narrated from Firas from Aamir from Masrooq that


(139)
All the Muslims have known well that Allah the Almighty has chosen Fatima (s) from among the women of the umma, chosen her two sons from among all the sons and chosen her husband from among the near people to be the elite with the Prophet (s) on the day of Mubahala (supplication) where Allah has revealed:“But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars. Qur'an, 3:61”
Ar-Razi said in his book at-Tafseer al-Kabeer when interpreting this Verse: “The Prophet (s) came out wearing a black garment of wool while he was embracing al-Husayn and leading al-Hasan with his hand. Fatima was walking behind him and behind her was Ali. He said to them: “If I invoke Allah, you say Amen”. The bishop of
________________________________________
Aa’isha (the Prophet’s wife) had said: “We, the wives of the Prophet, were all with him and none of us left him when Fatima came walking like the walking of the messenger of Allah (s). When the Prophet (s) saw her, he said: “O my daughter, welcome!” Then he seated her beside him. He whispered in her ears and she began crying bitterly and when he saw her crying, he whispered in her ears again and she smiled. I, from among the Prophet’s wives, asked her: “The Prophet (s) confided a secret to you from among all of us but you began crying!” When the Prophet (s) left, I asked her: “What secret did the Prophet (s) confide to you?” She said: “I would never disclose the Prophet’s secrets”. When the Prophet (s) died, I said to her: “I adjure you with my right on you to tell me what the Prophet (s) has whispered in your ears”. She said: “Yes, now I shall do. The first time he told me that Gabriel was used to dictate the (entire) Qur'an to him once a year but that year Gabriel had dictated the Qur'an to him twice and so he thought that he would die soon. He said to me: “Fear Allah and be patient. I have been to you the best of fathers.” So I began crying as you saw. When he saw me crying, he said to me: “O Fatima, are you not satisfied to be the head lady of the believing women… or the women of this umma?” Ibn Hajar in his book al-Issaba and other authors mentioned: “…are you not satisfied to be the head lady of the women of the worlds?” However the tradition is true and preferring Fatima (s) to all of the other women is clear. Ibn Sa’d in his book at-Tabaqat, vol.2 mentioned a tradition narrated by Umm Salama saying: “When the Prophet (s) was about to die, I asked Fatima about her crying and smiling on that day. She said: “He (the Prophet (s)) told me that he would die within a short time and then he told me that I was the head lady of the women of Paradise”. It has been mentioned by Abu Ya’la and other scholars of Hadith.


(140)
Najran[1] said: “O Christian people, I see faces, which if ask Allah to remove a mountain, He will remove it for them. Do not defy them; otherwise you will perish and no Christian will remain on the earth until the Day of Resurrection”.[2]
Also the Muslims have agreed unanimously that Fatima (s) was one of those, about whom Allah has revealed this Verse: “Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying. Qur'an, 33:33” and she was one of those, whom Allah has ordered the Muslims to love as a reward for (informing of) the mission when revealing this Verse: “Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives. Qur'an, 42:23” and she was one of those, whom Allah has imposed upon His people to pray for in their prayers as He has imposed upon them shahada.
Imam ash-Shafi’iy said, as mentioned in as-Sawa’iqul Muhriqa:
“O people of the Prophet’s family,
loving you is an obligation imposed by Allah in His Qur'an.
It suffices you, with your high position,
that whoever dose not pray for you (in his prayer)
his prayer will not be accepted”.
Sheikh ibnul Arabi said, as in as-Sawa’iqul Muhriqa:
“I find my allegiance to the progeny of Taha[3] an obligation
that, in spite of my farness, will make me near to Allah.
The Beneficent has not asked for a reward in return to informing of guidance
except to love the relatives (of the Prophet (s))”.
Allama an-Nabhani said in his book ash-Sharaf al-Mu’abbad: “O progeny of Taha, you are a progeny of the best of the Prophets.
Your grandfather is elite and you are elite.
________________________________________
[1] A place between Saudi Arabia and Yemen. It was a centre for the Christians before Islam.
[2] This tradition has been mentioned by the interpreters, the narrators, the historians and by everyone, who has recorded the events of the tenth year of hijra, in which this event has taken place.
[3] Prophet Muhammad (s).


(141)
Allah has purified you from uncleanness, O you Ahlul Bayt, since long before, so you are the purest.
Your grandfather has not asked for reward, when informing the mission, save loving and kindness to his relatives”.
And also Fatima (s) is the best of the righteous, about whom Allah has said:(Surely the righteous shall drink of a cup the admixture of which is camphor. A fountain from, which the servants of Allah shall drink; they make it to flow a (goodly) flowing forth. They fulfill vows and fear a day the evil of which shall be spreading far and wide. And they give food out of love for Him to the poor and the orphan and the captive. We only feed you for Allah's sake; we desire from you neither reward nor thanks. Qur'an, 76:5-9”[1]
In short, Fatima (s) was so holy near Allah, near the Prophet (s) and near the believers that would impose upon the all to trust in whatever she said. She would not need a witness to prove what she claimed. Her tongue was too far above every untruth. She would never say but the truth. Her very claim showed her definite truthfulness without a bit of doubt. No one of those, who had known her, would doubt this at all. Abu Bakr had known her very well and believed in whatever she said but the fact was as Ali bin al-Fariqi, who was one of the famous scholars of Baghdad, a teacher in the western school (in Baghdad) and one of the teachers of ibn Abul Hadeed (the author of Sharh Nahjul Balagha), had said when being asked by ibn Abul Hadeed if Fatima (s) had been truthful in her claim about her donation of Fadak: “Yes”. Ibn Abul Hadeed said to him: “Then why did Abu Bakr not give her Fadak while he knew well she was truthful?” He smiled and said nice words and then he added:
________________________________________
[1] The Shia have agreed, following their imams, unanimously that these Verses have been revealed to concern Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn because of a charity (food) they have paid to a poor one, an orphan and a prisoner of war in three successive nights whereas they themselves have been badly in need of that charity. They have kept on fasting during those three days without having except some water for they have been offering a vow. Az-Zamakhshari in his book al-Kashshaf has mentioned this matter in a tradition narrated from ibn Abbas. It has been also mentioned by al-Wahidi in his book al-Baseet, Abu Is~haq ath-Tha’labi in his book at-Tafseer al-Kabeer and by Abul Mu’ayyad Muwaffaq bin Ahmad in his book al-Fadha’il. Many other scholars and authors have considered it as a reliable tradition.


(142)
“If he had given her Fadak that day just according to her claim, she would ask him the next day for the caliphate to be given to her husband (Imam Ali) and she would move him away from his position and then he would not find any excuse for that because he would have confirmed that she had been truthful in all what she had claimed without any need for witnesses”.
Hence Abu Bakr has allowed himself to deny the witness of Ali bin Abu Talib (s), when witnessing for Fatima (s) concerning her donation, whereas the Jews of Khaybar, in spite of their meanness and in spite of that Imam Ali (s) has destroyed them, have considered him (Ali) too exalted for committing a false testimony. And so the matters were mixed together that Abu Bakr considered Fatima (s), in whose possession Fadak was, as a claimer, who had to have evidences to prove her possession. It was clear that this matter had been planned under darkness!
If we forgot many things, we would not forget Abu Bakr’s saying to Fatima (s) “I do not know whether your saying is true or not” whereas her saying was merely the truth and the clearest evidence, due to which he had to judge for her as she had claimed.
If we gave up all that and we admitted that Fatima (s) was like any other good believing woman, who had to prove her claim with a true evidence, then what about Imam Ali (s), who had witnessed to her? It was Ali (s), who was the Prophet’s spiritual brother and who was to the Prophet (s) as was Aaron to Moses. Imam Ali (s) was the lofty witness of the truth, with whose witnessing the lights of certainty shone. Was there anything beyond certainty that a judge would seek in his judgments? Therefore the Prophet (s) had considered the witness of Khuzayma bin Thabit as a witness of two truthful persons. By Allah, Imam Ali (s) was worthier of such a witness than Khuzayma and the others and he was worthier of every virtue than the rest of the Muslims.
If we gave up this too and admitted that the testimony of Imam Ali (s) was like the testimony of one man of the fair Muslims, then was it not possible for Abu Bakr to ask Fatima (s) to swear to be as the second witness? If she swore, he would accept her claim and if she did not, he would reject her claim. But he did not do that! He


(143)
rejected the claim disregarding the testimony of Imam Ali (s) and Umm Aymen.[1]
Imam Ali (s) was the equivalent of the Qur'an. He was with the Qur'an and the Qur'an was with him. They would not separate.[2] In the Verse of Mubahala he was considered as the very self of the Prophet (s). But alas! In spite of all that, his testimony in this trial was considered as null! What a misfortune in Islam we have received that we cannot but say: we are Allah’s and to Him we shall return!
9. Hurting Fatima (s)
Rejecting Fatima’s claim about her inheritance was against the clear traditions rather than its reasons and environments.[3]
Among those traditions is the one that has been mentioned by ibn Abu Aasim (as in al-Issaba-Fatima’s biography). He mentioned that the Prophet (s) had said to his daughter Fatima (s): “Allah becomes
________________________________________
[1] Umm Aymen was the woman, who had brought up the Prophet (s) after the death of his mother. Her name was Baraka bint Tha’laba. The Prophet (s) said about her: “Umm Aymen is my mother after my (real) mother”. The Prophet (s), when looking at her, often said: “She is one of my family”. He said that she would be in Paradise. She had been mentioned in al-Issaba by ibn Hajar, al-Istee’ab by ibn Abdul Birr and by all the authors, who had mentioned the biographies of the Prophet’s companions. They had mentioned her virtues, good faith, reason and loyalty. Her son Aymen had been martyred during the battle of Khaybar when fighting with the Prophet (s). She did not worry for that but she became patient hoping for the divine reward in the Hereafter.
[2] With reference to the famous tradition of (ath-Thaqalayn-the two weighty things), which has been mentioned in the books of Hadith (Sihah) and many other books. The Prophet (s) said: “I have left among you what if you keep to, you will never go astray at all; the Book of Allah and my family”. Definitely the head of his family was Imam Ali (s).
[3] With reference to the Prophet’s saying narrated by Umm Salama that she said: “I have heard the messenger of Allah saying: Ali is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with Ali. They do never separate until they will come to me at the pond (in Paradise)”. It has been mentioned by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol.3 p.124 and by ath-Thahabi in his Talkhees. The Prophet (s), during the illness that led to his death, said while the room was crowded of his companions: “O people, I am about to die soon and I will inform you of something so that I will be excused before you. I have left among you the Book of my god, the Almighty, and my family.” Then he lifted Ali’s hand and said: “This is Ali. He is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with Ali. They do never separate”. Refer to as-Sawa’iqul Muhriqa, chap.2 p.75.


(144)
angry when you become angry and He becomes pleased when you become pleased”. It has also been mentioned by at-Tabarani and others as in ash-Sharaf al-Mu’abbad by an-Nabhani al-Beiruti.
Al-Bukhari and Muslim mentioned-as in al-Issaba and other books when talking about Fatima’s biography-a tradition that al-Musawwir had said: “I have heard the messenger of Allah saying from above the minbar: Fatima is a piece of me. Whatever hurts her hurts me and whatever distresses her distresses me”. Sheikh Yousuf an-Nabhani mentioned in his book ash-Sharaf al-Mu’abbad a tradition quoted from al-Bukhari that the Prophet (s) had said: “Fatima is a piece of me. Whatever makes her angry makes me angry”. In al-Jami’ul Sagheer it is mentioned that the Prophet (s) has said: “Fatima is a piece of me. Whatever depresses her depresses me and whatever pleases her pleases me”.
She has said to Abu Bakr and Umar: “I adjure you by Allah, have you not heard the messenger of Allah saying: “The contentment of Fatima is my contentment and her discontentment is my discontentment. Whoever loves my daughter Fatima loves me, whoever pleases Fatima pleases me and whoever discontents Fatima discontents me”? They said: “Yes, we have heard this from the messenger of Allah”.[1]
He, who ponders on these traditions and who appreciates the Prophet (s), will find that these traditions refer to the infallibility of Fatima (s) because they show that depressing her, discontenting her, pleasing her, displeasing her, her contentment or her anger do not occur inexcusably. It is as same as depressing, discontenting, pleasing or displeasing the Prophet (s) himself and this is the essence and reality of infallibility.
Some Sunni scholars, like Ahmad bin Hanbal, have mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Hurayra saying: “Once the Prophet (s) looked at Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Fatima and said: I am a war against whoever fights you and peace to whoever makes peace with
________________________________________
[1] Al-Imama wes-Siyasa by ibn Qutayba and other books of history.


(145)
you”.[1]
At-Tarmithi has mentioned a tradition narrated by Zayd bin Arqam-as in al-Issaba, Fatima’s biography-that once the Prophet (s) mentioned Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn and said: “I am a war against whoever fights them and peace to whoever makes peace with them”.[2]
Abu Bakr said: “Once I saw the messenger of Allah (s) erecting a tent.[3] He was leaning on an Arabic bow while inside the tent there were Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn. The messenger of Allah said: “O people, I am peace to whoever makes peace with the people in the tent, a war against whoever fights them and a guardian to whoever follows them. He, who loves them, is lucky and of a good origin and he, who hates them, is wretched and of a bad origin”.
Professor Abbas Mahmood al-Aqqad has mentioned this tradition in his book Abqariyyatu Muhammad under chapt. “The Prophet, the Imam and the companions”.
Ahmad bin Hanbal mentioned a tradition narrated by Abdurrahman al-Azraq that Imam Ali (s) had said: “Once the messenger of Allah (s) came to me while I was sleeping. Al-Hasan or al-Husayn asked for some water (or some milk). The Prophet (s) went to our ewe, which had no milk. He milked it and it gave much milk. Then al-Hasan came to the Prophet (s) but the Prophet (s) put him aside. Fatima said: O messenger of Allah, I think he is the most beloved one to you. He said: But he (al-Husayn) asked for some milk before him. Then the Prophet (s) added: I, you, these two boys and that sleeping one
________________________________________
[1] Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.2 p.442. It has also been mentioned by al-Hakim in his Mustadrak and by at-Tabarani in his al-Kabeer.
[2] It has been mentioned by ibn Habban in his Sahih, al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, ad-Dhiya’ in his Mukhtarat, at-Tabarani and ibn Shayaba from Zayd bin Arqam and by Abu Ya’la in as-Sunna and ad-Dhiya’ in al-Mukhtarat from Sa’d bin Abu Waqqas. Also mentioned by other famous scholars like allama Alawi in his book al-Qawl al-Fasl, vol.2 p.7.
[3] This tent might be the garment, with which the Prophet (s) covered them (Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn) when Allah revealed to him: (Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying). Refer to chapt.2 in this book for details.


(146)
will be in one place on the Day of Resurrection”.[1]
Among their (the Prophet’s progeny’s) rights on the umma and especially the men of authority was that they should not be surprised by extorting their position in the umma after the Prophet (s) and doing without them even in consultation besides being so severe to them in the matter of the caliphate and denying their rights, khums, inheritance and donation as well as considering them as the rest of the ordinary people while the wound had not yet recovered and the Prophet (s) had not yet buried!
The seizers of the umma and their assistants at that time had arranged their affairs in a way that they had not left any chance to any one to opposite them otherwise that one would separate the umma and so they had become safe from the opposition of Imam Ali (s) and his followers. For full details about this matter, please refer to al-Muraja’at.
Among the principles of the rulers at that time was to be strict in carrying out the verdicts without differentiating between this and that or between the noble and the low. They controlled the treasury and enriched it with wealth and monies and they equalized between the recidivists and the others in the judgments.
What assisted them in carrying out their principles was their satisfaction and being away from greediness and transient pleasures of this worldly life besides their asceticism and so they satisfied the public and therefore they ruled with no troubles. But when the matter became serious on the trial of Fatima (s), they considered Fatima, the Prophet’s piece, as any other woman, who was not purified from fabricating and lying.[2]
________________________________________
[1] Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.1 p.101.
[2] In fact she was not even treated as an ordinary Muslim woman, because when a Muslim woman, who was not purified from fabrication, had one witness (a fair Muslim man) on her claim, then it would be enough for her, instead of the other witness, to be put to oath and her claim would not be rejected unless she abstained from the oath. As for Fatima (s), her husband Imam Ali (s) had witnessed for her and so the rulers had to put her to oath and if she abstained from oath then they would reject her claim. They did not do that. They just hastened to reject her claim without asking her for any kind of oath.


(147)
10. The Prophet (s) orders Abu Bakr and Umar
The Prophet (s) had ordered Abu Bakr and Umar to kill Thu ath-Thadiyya but they did not kill him.
Thu ath-Thadiyya was al-Khusayra at-Tameemi Harqoos bin Zuhayr,[1] who was the head of the apostates. The Prophet (s) wanted to uproot the ravage and corruption of this apostate man when he ordered to kill him but the hypocrisy of this man and his false reverence in his praying deceived Abu Bakr and Umar and so they hated to kill him and they let him alive.
This has been mentioned by the scholars, the historians and the authors of the books of Hadith.
Abu Ya’la has said in his Musnad-as mentioned in al-Issaba by ibn Hajar, Thu ath-Thadiyya’s biography: “At the age of the messenger of Allah (s) there was a man, whose worship and loyalty we had admired too much. We mentioned his name to the Prophet (s) but the Prophet (s) did not know him. We described him to the Prophet (s) and he did not know him. After a little the man came towards us. We said to the Prophet (s): “It is him.” The Prophet (s) said: “You have told me about a man, in whose face there is a scorch of the Satan.” He came until he stopped before us but he did not greet us. The Prophet (s) said to him: “I adjure you by Allah, did you say, when you stopped before the people: there is no one among this people better than me?” He said: “Yes, I did.” Then he went in to offer prayer. The Prophet (s) said: “Who kills him?” Abu Bakr said: “I do.” Abu Bakr went to him and he found him offering prayer. He said: “Glory be to Allah, shall I kill a praying one whereas the messenger of Allah has prohibited killing a praying one?” He came
________________________________________
In fact she had Fadak in her possession and had full control over it and so she had not to have evidence to prove her possession but the opposite side had to have an evidence according to the saying of the Prophet (s) “Evidence is on him, who claims, and oath is on him, who denies”. This is one of the clear traditions that they have opposed depending on their own ijtihad.
[1] Ibnul Atheer mentioned his biography in his book Usdol Ghaba and mentioned another tradition narrated by Abu Sa’eed saying: “As the messenger of Allah was taking an oath one day, al-Khuwaysara at-Tameemi said: “O messenger of Allah, be just!” The Prophet (s) said: “Woe unto you! And who is just if I am not?” It was mentioned by Muslim too.


(148)
back. The Prophet (s) said: “What did you do?” Abu Bakr said: “I hated to kill him while he was praying and you have prohibited killing praying people.” The Prophet (s) said: “Who kills him?” Umar said: “I do.” He went to him and found him lying prostrate and his forehead touching the ground. Umar said to himself: “Abu Bakr is better than me” and he came back. The Prophet (s) said to him: “What did you do?” He said: “I found him prostrate before Allah and I disliked killing him.” The Prophet (s) said: “Who kills him?” Ali said: “I do.” The Prophet (s) said: “Yes, you do if you find him.” Ali went to him and found that he had gone. The Prophet (s) said: “If he was killed, then no two men of my umma would ever disagree.”
Al-Hafidh (memorizer) Muhammad bin Musa ash-Shirazi has mentioned this tradition in his book, which he had written according to the tafseers (interpretations) of Ya’qoob bin Sulayman, Yousuf al-Qattan, al-Qassim bin Salam, Muqatil bin Hiyad, Ali bin Harb, as-Sadiy, Qatada, Waqee’, ibn Jurayh and others.
Some scholars have mentioned this tradition and considered it as true like ibn Abd Rabbih al-Andalusi in his book al-Iqd al-Fareed. He mentioned at the end of the tradition that the Prophet (s) had said: “This is the first horn that appears in my umma. If you kill him, no two men will disagree after him. The Israelites have separated into seventy-two groups and this umma will separate into seventy-three groups, all of which will be in Hell except one group.”
11. The Prophet (s) orders Abu Bakr and Umar for the second time
The Prophet (s) ordered Abu Bakr and Umar to kill this apostate for the second time but they did as they had done in the first time.
A friend of mine, whom I trust in his virtue, piety and knowledge, told me that once Abu Bakr passed by this apostate (Thu ath-Thadiyya), after he had been ordered to kill him but he disliked to kill him, and he found him offering prayer in one of the valleys where no one could see him save Allah. He admired his devotedness and supplication. He thanked Allah that he did not kill him. He came to the Prophet (s) interceding for that man. He mentioned to the Prophet (s) the sincerity and submissiveness of that man while


(149)
offering his prayer where no one could see him save Allah. The Prophet (s) did not accept Abu Bakr’s intercession and he ordered him immediately to kill that apostate man. When Abu Bakr did not kill the man, the Prophet (s) ordered Umar and then ordered Imam Ali (s) and stressed on killing him and his companions. This is what I have been told by the one, whom I know well and know about his deep research and careful study.[1] He has confirmed it to me but I forgot to ask him about the source of the tradition. I began to research by myself until I found the tradition, and all thanks be to Allah, in Ahmad bin Hannibal’s Musnad, vol.3 that Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri had said: “Once Abu Bakr came to the Prophet (s) and said to him: “O messenger of Allah, I passed through the valley of so and so and I saw a good looking man offering prayer reverently.” The Prophet (s) said to him: “Go and kill him!” Abu Bakr went to him and when he saw him in that state, he disliked killing him and then he came back to the Prophet (s). Then the Prophet (s) said to Umar: “Go and kill him!” Umar went to him and he saw him in that state, which Abu Bakr had seen him in. he disliked to kill him and he returned to the Prophet (s). He said to the Prophet (s): “O messenger of Allah, I found him offering prayer reverently and I disliked killing him.” The Prophet (s) said to Ali: “Go and kill him!” Ali went but he did not find the man. He came back to the Prophet (s) and said: “O messenger of Allah, I did not find him.” The Prophet (s) said: “This man and his companions[2] recite the Qur'an but the Qur'an does not go past their clavicles. They get out of religion as an arrow that slips away from a hunted animal. Kill them for they are the worst of people.”
He, who ponders on these two traditions concerning this apostate man; the tradition mentioned by Abu Ya’la and narrated by Anass and the tradition mentioned by Ahmad bin Hanbal and narrated by Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri, will know that the Prophet (s) has ordered to kill this man two times in different events. The first tradition narrated by Anass shows that the Prophet (s) has not known this
________________________________________
[1] He is the pious Sheikh Mirza Husayn an-Noori, the author of al-Mustadrakat ala al-Wassa’il.
[2] Later on, during the rule of Imam Ali (s), they seceded from Imam Ali (s) and were called the Kharijites.


(150)
apostate man before. The Prophet’s companions mentioned and described the man to the Prophet (s) but he did not know him until he saw him and knew him because of the scorch in his face and because of his self-conceit and then the Prophet (s) ordered his companions to kill him. The prayer of that apostate, which pleased Abu Bakr and Umar on that day, was in the mosque whereas the second tradition mentioned by Ahmad and narrated by Abu Sa’eed showed that Abu Bakr had seen this apostate offering his prayer in one of the valleys and not in the mosque where Abu Bakr had admired this apostate’s devotion and reverence where no one saw him save Allah the Almighty. Abu Bakr told the Prophet (s) about that and the Prophet (s) immediately ordered him to kill that man without seeing the man. This was because the Prophet (s) had already ordered before to kill that man so the traditions talked about two events with a period of time between them. Here the clear orders of the Prophet (s) were opposed by Abu Bakr and Umar due to their own ijtihad.
The Kharijites
The Kharijites were the Muslims, who apostatized from religion when they rebelled against Imam Ali (s). They denied the arbitration (between Imam Ali (s) and Mo’awiya), which they themselves had forced Imam Ali (s) to accept. They were about eighty thousands or more. Imam Ali (s) sent for them to remind them of Allah and the hereafter and to show them their faults and mistakes in what they had thought and kept to “and most surely the frailest of the houses is the spider's house if they but knew. Qur'an, 29:41” but they refused to come to him and they asked him to acknowledge that he had become unbeliever and he had to repent. When they did not come to him, Imam Ali (s) sent to them Abdullah bin Abbas, who tried his best to refute their opinions with clear evidences but they insisted on their deviation as if there was deafness in their ears and there were veils on their hearts.
They agreed unanimously on considering every Muslim, who did not adopt their opinions, as unbeliever and that he and his family were to be killed and his properties were to be appropriated. They rebelled against the Muslims and they killed whoever passed by them. Among


(151)
those, whom they had killed, was Abdullah bin al-Khabbab bin al-Arth at-Tameemi. They cut open his wife’s abdomen while she was pregnant. Their evils spread everywhere. Imam Ali (s) came to them preaching them and showing them that they had mistaken when they rebelled against him. He refuted their excuses and warned them that if they insisted on their deviation, they would be killed and in the hereafter they would be in Hell.
They insisted on their transgression without intending to repent and they became like the people of Noah when “they put their fingers in their ears, cover themselves with their garments, and persist and are puffed up with pride.Qur'an, 71:7” and then Imam Ali (s) fought them and killed them.[1] Only ten of them escaped death and only ten of Imam Ali’s companions were killed. This was exactly what Imam Ali (s) had predicted when warning them but they did not desist from doing evil.
Then some deviate people, who believed in the opinions of the Kharijites concerning the arbitration and rebelling against the walis, joined the few Kharijites, who had not been killed. When Abdullah bin az-Zubayr became the wali, some of those people appeared with Nafi’ bin al-Azraq in Iraq and some appeared with Najda bin Aamir al-Harawri in Yamama (in the Arabia). Najda went too far in his opinions and he even exceeded the doctrine of the Kharijites themselves. He considered every one, who did not join him and his followers to fight the Muslims, as unbeliever. They annulled the verdict of stoning a married adulterer. They made it obligatory to cut a thief’s arm from the armpit. They made it obligatory on a woman to offer prayers during the period of menstruation and many other heresies that there was no need to mention here.
Until now there is a remainder of them spread here and there. The explorer ibn Batota has met some of them in Oman during his travel
________________________________________
[1] By doing that Imam Ali (s) just followed the orders of the Qur'an and the Sunna. Allah said:(fight that (group) which acts wrongfully until it returns to Allah's command) and: (The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered). As for the orders of the Sunna, I shall mention them in the main text of the book inshallah.


(152)
in the eighth century of hijra. He has mentioned them in his book Rihlat ibn Batota (ibn Batota’s travel)[1] and said: “They are Ibadhite in doctrine. They offer Friday prayer in four rak’as and when they finish it, their imam recites some verses of the Qur'an and then he praises Abu Bakr and Umar but he does not mention Othman and Ali. If they want to mention Ali, they nickname him by saying “the man”. They praise the cursed Abdurrahman bin Muljam (Imam Ali’s killer) and call him as “the good servant of Allah” in spite of the great sedition he has caused. Their women commit adultery too much and their men do not deny that nor have they jealousy. One day I was with their chief Abu Muhammad bin Nabhan, who was from the tribe of al-Azd. A young beautiful woman came and said to him: “O Abu Muhammad, the Satan has played with my mind (her sexual lust was provoked)”. He said to her: “Go and drive the Satan away from your mind!” She said: “I cannot do unless you protect me.” He said: “Go and do whatever you like.” When she left, he said to me: “This one, and whoever does like her, will be under my protection. She goes to commit adultery and neither her father nor any of her relatives will be able to show their jealousy. If they kill her they will be killed in return because she is under my protection”.
The messenger of Allah (s) has informed of the truth when he has said: “O Ali, no one hates you but a bastard, a child of menstruation[2] or a hypocrite”.
Killing the Kharijites
Many traditions have been narrated about killing the Kharijites especially from the infallible imams (s). Here we mention some of those traditions, which have been mentioned by the Sunni scholars. The Prophet (s) said describing the Kharijites: “They recite the Qur'an but it does not go past their clavicles. They kill the Muslims and set the idolaters free. They apostate from Islam like an arrow slipping out of a game animal. If I live until they appear, I shall kill them like the killing of the people of Aad.”[3]
________________________________________
[1] Vol.1 p.172.
[2] That he has been created out of making love during a period of menstruation.
[3] Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1 p.393.


(153)
In another tradition the Prophet (s) said: “If I live until they appear, I shall kill them.”[1]
In a third tradition the Prophet (s) said describing them: “They are young and foolish. They repeat the best of saying. They recite the Qur'an but it does not go past their clavicles. They apostate from religion like an arrow that slips away from a hunted animal. If you find them, you are to kill them. Whoever kills them will be rewarded by Allah on the Day of Resurrection.”[2] There are many other traditions like this mentioned in the books of Hadith. These traditions show that these people are unbeliever for killing them is like killing the people of Aad and Thamood.
They are the worst of people
The tradition narrated from the infallible imams (s) and showing that the Kharijites are the worst of people are clear and recurrent but here we mentioned the traditions mentioned by the Sunni scholars. Muslim mentioned in his Sahih a tradition narrated by Abu Tharr and Rafi’ bin Umar al-Ghifari that the Prophet (s) had said: “After me there will be some people of my umma who recite the Qur'an but the Qur'an does not go past their throats.[3] They get out of religion as an arrow that slips away from a hunted animal and then they do not go back to it (religion). They are the worst of people.”[4]
Muslim mentioned in his Sahih another tradition narrated by Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri that the Prophet (s) had mentioned some people, who would appear from among his umma, and said: “…They are the worst of people. They will be killed by the righteous people.” And then the Prophet (s) gave an example when saying: “…like a man, who shots his arrow at an animal and then he looks at the arrowhead
________________________________________
[1] Muslim’s Sahih, vol.1 p.394.
[2] Narrated from Imam Ali (s) and mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih, vol. 1 p.396.
[3] It means that their hearts do not perceive what they recite and they do not benefit from it. They do not do but uttering the words of the Qur'an in their mouths when reciting them. Their hearts are covered with the stain of the (ill) which they do! Nothing of the light of the Qur'an gets into their hearts. Neither their reciting the Qur'an nor any of their doings will be accepted by Allah.
[4] Vol.1 p.398.


(154)
but he does not see anything and he looks at the bowstring and he does not see anything.”[1]
Ahmad mentioned in his Musnad a tradition narrated by Abu Barza in two ways that the Prophet (s) had described the Kharijites and said: “…They recite the Qur'an but the Qur'an does not go past their clavicles. They get out of religion as an arrow that slips away from an animal and they do not go back to religion. They will still appear until the last of them will be killed with ad-Dajjal (the fraud). If you meet them, you are to kill them for they are the worst of people and the worst in nature. They are the worst of people and the worst in nature. They are the worst of people and the worst in nature.”[2]
If they were the worst of people and the worst in nature, then the idolaters and the unbelievers would not be worse than them and this would be a clear evidence showing their unbelief.
The Kharijites’ apostasy
There have been many clear prophetic traditions talking about the apostasy of the Kharijites. Here are some of them besides the ones we have mentioned above. Al-Bukhari and Muslim have mentioned in their Sahihs a tradition narrated by Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri saying: “While we were with the Prophet (s), who was taking an oath, Thul Khuwaysira, who was a man from the tribe of Tameem, said: “O messenger of Allah, be just!” The messenger of Allah said: “Woe unto you! And who is just if I am not? Surely I shall fail and lose if I do not do right.” Umar said (to the Prophet (s)): “Would you allow me to kill him?”[3] The messenger of Allah (s) said: “Let him alone! He has companions, who exaggerate in offering prayers and in fasting. They recite the Qur'an but it does not go past their clavicles. They apostatize from religion as an arrow that slips away from a game animal…their sign is a black man whose upper arm is like a woman’s breast or like a dangling piece of flesh…they will appear at the time of a good group of people.”[4] Abu Sa’eed said: “I witness that I have
________________________________________
[1] vol.1 p.395 and Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.3 p.5.
[2] Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.4 p.422, 424.
[3] Would he have killed him when he had been ordered to!
[4] The group of Imam Ali (s) and his followers.


(155)
heard this tradition from the messenger of Allah and I witness that Imam Ali (s) has fought them and I was with him. Imam Ali (s) ordered that man to be brought. When he was brought, I looked at him and I saw that he was as the Prophet (s) had described him.”[1]
The prophetic traditions talking about the evil doings and aspects of the Kharijites are true and recurrent whether have been narrated from the infallible imams (s) or the Sunni. These traditions were among the signs of the Prophet (s) and Islam due to the unseen that appeared like the light of morning to people after the death of the Prophet (s). People saw clearly the apostasy of that group (the Kharijites) from religion when they revolted against Imam Ali (s), who was the legal caliph.[2] Their rising was when people had separated into two groups.[3] They were killed and their killer was the imam of the truth.[4] They, as the Prophet (s) had predicted, killed the faithful people and let the idolaters free. They became too strict in religion where there was no necessity for strictness. They recited the Qur'an but it did not go past their clavicles because their hearts were covered with their apostasy. Nothing of the light of the Qur'an got into their hearts. They exaggerated in offering prayer and fasting but they ignored the rights of Islam by apostatizing and being away from its guidance. Their sign, as the Prophet (s) had predicted, appeared to the people. It was a black man whose upper arm was like a woman’s breast or like a dangling piece of flesh as the Prophet (s) had said. The Prophet (s) had confirmed, through his sayings about this apostate group, that the umma would remain prevailing unlike what the fabricators had fabricated. It was the unseen that Allah had revealed to the Prophet (s). Allah said: “The Knower of the unseen! So He does not reveal His secrets to any except to him whom He chooses as a messenger; for surely He makes a guard to march before
________________________________________
[1] Ahmad’s Musnad, vol.3 p.56.
[2] The Prophet (s) had predicted that: “They will revolt against the best group. (He means Imam Ali (s) and his followers).”
[3] Their appearance was in Siffeen when the people were in two groups; one with Imam Ali (s) and the other with Mo’awiya.
[4] The Prophet (s) said: “They will be killed by the one, who is the nearest to the truth” or “…the worthiest of the truth” in another tradition mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih.


(156)
him and after him. Qur'an, 72:26-27”
Let us finish our speech about this apostate group with a tradition narrated by Jundub[1] and mentioned by at-Tabarani in his book al-Awsat. Jundub said: “When the Kharijites parted with Ali, he decided to pursue them and we joined him. We moved until we reached their camp. There were noises like those of bees. They were busy reciting the Qur'an and among them there were notable and respected persons. When I saw them, I hesitated to fight them. I stepped aside, fixed my spear in the ground, got down of my horse, put off my burnoose, spread my armor on me, held the halter of my horse and began praying. I said in my prayer: “O Allah, if fighting these people is obedience to You, allow me to fight them and if it is disobedience to You, show me the truth.” As I was doing so, Ali bin Abu Talib came near to me and said: “O Jundub, ask Allah to protect you from His wrath!” I beseeched him. He began praying. Then a man came to him saying: “O Ameerul Mo’mineen, have you anything to do with the people?” He said: “What is there?” The man said: “They (the Kharijites) crossed the river and went away.” Ali said: “They have never crossed the river.” The man said: “Glory be to Allah!” Another man came and said to him: “They have crossed the river and went away.” Ali said: “They have not crossed the river and they will never cross it. They will be killed before it. It is a promise from Allah and His messenger.” Then he rode on his horse and said to me: “O Jundub, I will send to them a man to invite them to the
________________________________________
[1] Jundub bin Zuhayr bin al-Harith bin Katheer bin Sab’ bin Malik al-Azdi al-Ghamidi was one of Imam Ali’s close companions. Ibn Hajar has mentioned him in his book al-Issaba. There was a debate about his companionship with the Prophet (s) but there was no doubt that he was one of the great successors and he was one of their heads and ascetics. He fought with Imam Ali (s) in the battles of al-Jamal, Siffeen and an-Nahrawan. In the battle of an-Nahrawan he was the leader of the infantrymen. Abu Durayd mentioned in his book al-Amali a tradition narrated by Abu Ubayda that Younus had said: “Abdullah bin az-Zubayr had lined us up on the day (the battle) of al-Jamal. Salih came out to us saying: “O people of Quraysh, I warn you of two men; Jundub bin Zuhayr and (Malik) al-Ashtar because you cannot stand against their swords.” This Jundub bin Zuhayr was not Jundub, who had killed the magician. The one, who had killed the magician, was Jundub bin Ka’b al-Abdi and he had been killed in the battle of Siffeen when fighting with Imam Ali (s). This has been mentioned by az-Zubayr bin Bukar in his book al-Muwaffaqiyyat quoted from ibnul Kalbi and others.


(157)
Book of their god and the Sunna of their prophet but when he will come to them, they will shoot at him with arrows. O Jundub, less than ten persons from us will be killed and less than ten persons from them will escape death.” Then he said: “Who will take this Qur'an and go to the people (the Kharijites) to invite them to the Book of Allah and to the Sunna of His messenger but he will be killed and will go to Paradise?” A young man from bani[1] Aamir bin Sa’sa’a responded to him. The young man, holding the Qur'an, went towards the Kharijites. As soon as he became near to them, they began shooting at him with arrows. Then Ali said: “Attack them!” I (Jundub) myself had killed eight persons of them before I offered Dhuhr[2] Prayer. Less than ten persons from us were killed and less than ten from them escaped death as Ali had predicted. Praise be to Allah.”[3]
12. Fighting innocent people
Abu Bakr ordered to fight the people who had hesitated to pay him the zakat. They did so because they had doubted whether Abu Bakr was the legal guardian after the Prophet (s) or not.
Abu Bakr had gathered the companions to consult with them about fighting those people. Umar and many other Muslims thought that they were not to fight faithful people, who had believed in Allah and His messenger, and instead they were to make use of them to fight the enemy.[4] Those, who had adopted this opinion, were the most of the attendants whereas those, who had thought to fight against those people, were few. The debate about this serious matter might have taken a long time until Abu Bakr himself interfered supporting the opinion of the few companions. He insisted on this opinion and this was clear out of his saying: “By Allah, if they refused to give me even a headband that they were used to give to the messenger of Allah (s), I would fight them for that.” This saying did not deter Umar from seeing that such a fight would expose the Muslims to dangers and
________________________________________
[1] Bani means “the family of” or “the tribe of”.
[2] Dhuhr means noon.
[3] Kanzol Ummal, vol.6 p.71.
[4] As-Siddeeq by Ahmad Hasanayn Haykal, p.104.


(158)
bad ends. Umar said sharply: “How do you fight these Muslims whereas the messenger of Allah (s) has said: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight people until they say “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”. Whoever says that his life and monies will be safe except their due. It is Allah, Who will punish people.”
But Abu Bakr did not hesitate to answer Umar by saying: “By Allah, I will fight whoever separate between offering prayers and paying zakat. Zakat is the due on properties and he (the Prophet (s)) said: “except their due”.
I say: may Allah forgive Abu Bakr! He brushed aside this clear tradition and interpreted it as he liked according to his policy of fighting. No one of the believers, who had been fought and killed on that day, separated between prayer and zakat but they just hesitated to submit to Abu Bakr because they doubted (the legality of) his replacement for the Prophet (s)[1] and they were excused for that and in fact they would be rewarded for that.
They had the right not to obey except the orders of Allah and His messenger or the orders of the one, whose guardianship was determined by Allah and His messenger (s).
If Abu Bakr perceived those people’s excuse, he would consider it as an evidence against him but how would those oppressed people be treated fairly by Abu Bakr on that day!
The Sihah and books of Hadith are full of true traditions that show the impermissibility of shedding the bloods of those faithful people and their likes and there is no tradition that annuls this verdict; nevertheless their bloods were shed by the order of the caliph, who interpreted the prophetic traditions according to his own tendency.
As for the zakat that Abu Bakr had talked about it was just an obligation on the Muslims. The guardian, who replaced the Prophet (s), was to ask the Muslims for the zakat and he was to take it from them. If they refused to pay it obeyingly, he then had to force them to pay it unwillingly by using his power but without fighting or
________________________________________
[1] We shall explain this matter later on inshallah.


(159)
killing them.
Fighting them just to take the zakat from them contradicted the verdicts that had determined to protect their bloods and monies.
Here are some of these traditions that have been mentioned by Muslim in his Sahih[1] under the chapter of “Ali’s virtues”. The messenger of Allah (s) said to Ali when he gave him the banner on the day (the battle of) Khaybar: “Move and do not turn.” Imam Ali walked a little and then he stopped but did not turn. He cried: “O messenger of Allah, what for shall I fight the people?” The messenger of Allah (s) said: “fight them until they witness that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. If they do, they will spare their bloods and monies except for their due and they will be answerable before Allah.”
In al-Bukhari and Muslim’s Sahihs there is a tradition narrated by Usama bin Zayd saying: “The messenger of Allah (s) sent us (among an army) to al-Mahraqa. In the morning we reached there. We defeated the people. I and another man from the Ansar followed after a man from those people. When we caught him, he said: “There is no god but Allah.” My companion abstained from killing him but I stabbed him with my spear. When we came back, the Prophet (s) knew about what we had done. He said to me: “O Usama, did you kill him after he had said “there is no god but Allah”?” I said: “He just wanted to save his life.” The Prophet (s) kept on repeating this question until I wished I had not become a Muslim before that day.”
He did not wish that unless he thought that all what he had offered of faith, prayers, zakat, fasting, companionship (with the Prophet (s)), jihad and other things before that day would not compensate for this sin and that all his good doings had come to nothing because of this sin. His saying showed clearly that he feared that Allah would not forgive him for ever after that sin and so he wished he had not become a Muslim before that day in order to be included by the Prophet’s saying: “(Believing in) Islam forgives all the sins committed before.”
It is a sufficient evidence that shows the dignity of the people of
________________________________________[1] Vol.2 p.324.


(160)
“there is no god but Allah” and the protection of their bloods.
Al-Bukhari mentioned in his Sahih that a man had said to the Prophet (s): “O messenger of Allah, fear Allah!” The Prophet (s) said: “Woe unto you! Am I not the worthiest among all the people of the earth of fearing Allah?” Khalid (bin al-Waleed) said: “O messenger of Allah, do you allow me to kill him?” The Prophet (s) said: “No, he may offer prayers.”[1]
In al-Bukhari and Muslim’s Sahihs there is a tradition narrated by ibn Umar that the Prophet (s) has said in Mina while he was pointing at the Kaaba: “Do you know what country is this?” His companions said: “Allah and His messenger are more aware.” He said: “This is a prohibited country.” Then he said: “Do you know what day is this?” They said: “Allah and His messenger are more aware.” He said: “It is a prohibited day. Do you know what month is this?” They said: “Allah and His messenger are more aware.” He said: “It is a prohibited month. Allah has prohibited your bloods, your monies and your honors like the prohibition of this day in this month in this country.”
The Sihah and books of Hadith are full of such traditions, whose
________________________________________
[1] This tradition has been mentioned by Ahmad in his Musnad, vol. p.4 and by ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his book al-Issaba when talking about Sarhooq the hypocrite that he was brought to be killed. The Prophet (s) said: “Does he offer prayers?” It was said: “When people see him (it means when he thinks that people may see him during the time of prayers, he offers prayers).” The Prophet (s) said: “I have prohibited killing the prayers (ones who offer prayer).” Ath-Thahabi in his Mizan, when talking about the biography of Aamir bin Abdullah bin Yasar, mentioned a tradition narrated by Anass who said: “Once a man was mentioned to the Prophet (s) and it was said that he had been the head of the hypocrites. When people mentioned many bad things about him, the Prophet (s) allowed them to kill him and then he asked: “Does he offer prayers?” The companions said: “Yes, useless prayers.” The Prophet (s) said: “I have prohibited killing the prayers.”
Would Khalid bin al-Waleed have regarded the prayer of Malik bin Nuwayra and refrained from killing him although that Abdullah bin Umar and Abu Qatada al-Ansari had witnessed that Malik had offered Fajr (dawn) prayer with them! But Khalid had been charmed by Malik’s beautiful wife as his coeval the poet Abu Zuhayr as-Sa’di had said in his poem:
Khalid killed him aggressively just for his wife.
He had tended to her before that.


(161)
contents are clear to the Muslims. According to these traditions fighting a Muslim just because he has hesitated in paying the zakat to the imam is prohibited especially if his hesitation is due to his doubting about the real imam as what has happened among some tribes when the Prophet (s) has left to the better world. A great Sedition has happened at that time and its evils spread everywhere. Many Muslims apostatized. The Muhajireen and the Ansar disagreed about the matter of the caliphate. Each of them had two opinions and the Ansar might have three opinions. During this sedition and evils Abu Bakr was paid homage as the caliph and his homage was as a slip that Allah had protected the Muslims from its evil as Umar had said! It was naturally at that time that people might doubt about the legality of such homage and the unanimous agreement on it while people were in disagreement. In fact the state at that time was much worse than what had been mentioned. So there was no blame on those, who had doubted the caliphate of Abu Bakr, when they did not submitted to him concerning the matter of zakat and other things until they would become certain that he was the legal caliph after the Prophet (s).
13. The day of al-Bitah
It was the day of al-Bitah or the day of Malik bin Nuwayra and his people and what they had got from Khalid bin al-Waleed. Khalid was the absolute leader of the armies at that time so he ordered as he liked and he judged as he wished. He was satisfied with killing the believers but he exceeded in mutilation, capturing women and violating what Allah had prohibited of monies, honors and legal verdicts. He committed sins and evils that had never happened even in the pre-Islamic times.
Who was Malik?
Malik bin Nuwayra bin Hamza bin Shaddad bin Abd bin Tha’laba bin Yarboo’ at-Tameemi al-Yarboo’iy was the top of honor for bani Tameem and the peak of glory for bani Yarboo’. He was one of the famous notables among the Arabs and an example of magnanimity, generosity, courage and valor in all their meanings. He was like the kings. When he became a Muslim, all the people of his tribe became


(162)
Muslims. The Prophet (s) had entrusted him with the charities of his people because he had great confidence and trust in him.
What was the guilt of Malik?
Malik’s guilt, according to Abu Bakr’s thought, was his situation concerning the matter of zakat and other religious obligations. Malik was looking for his legal duty according what Allah and His messenger had legislated.
He did not intend, out of his situation, to cause a separation among the Muslims, to cause a sedition or to cause a fight. He was surprised by the raid led by Khalid bin al-Waleed at the beginning of Abu Bakr’s caliphate where disagreement was still burning about the caliphate. Ahlul Bayt (s) and their followers had their own opinion and Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Ubayda, Salim and their followers had their own opinion. The Ansar, who had protected and supported the Prophet (s), were defeated especially their chief Sa’d bin Ubada, who had sworn if he had assistants, he would fight against Abu Bakr and his party but he withdrew from the political life and he did not participate in those people’s occasions until he died lonely in Hawran. Add to that the disasters that were caused (by the ruling party) around the houses, about which Allah had said:“O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you. Qur'an, 33:53” and the distresses that were caused to the Prophet’s daughter Fatima (s) just because she asked for her inheritance, donation and khums although she faced them with clear evidences, besides many other matters that the Qur'an had warned of. Hence it was naturally for a man like Malik, who had a high position among his people, to look for the one, who would carry out the will of Allah and who would lead the people to the truth. Malik waited in order to see the true man, who was qualified to replace the Prophet (s), and then he would pay him the zakat so that he would achieve his covenant with Allah. The ruling party had to give him enough time to look for the ambiguous truth at that confused time. They had not to surprise him with those disasters for he was not among those, who had denied the zakat, nor was he among those, who had separated between the prayer and zakat, nor was he among those who had permitted fighting Abu Bakr or other Muslims.


(163)
This was the truth of the situation of Malik and his companions; leading to it his advise to his people to keep to Islam and not to stand against Khalid. He ordered his people to separate in order not to clash with the army of Khalid and he forbade them from gathering in one place so that Khalid and his army might think that they were camping to be ready to fight.[1]
Khalid’s advance towards al-Bitah
When Khalid finished his fights against bani Asad and Ghatafan, he decided to move towards al-Bitah to meet Malik and his people but Malik had withdrawn from al-Bitah and had ordered his people to separate here and there-as we have said before-for he was looking forward to peace in order to protect Islam at that critical time. When the Ansar knew that Khalid would go to fight Malik and his people, they refused to go with him and they said: “This is not the order of the caliph. The caliph has ordered that when we finish fighting al-Buzakha we are to camp until he will write to us again.” Khalid said: “The caliph has not entrusted you with anything. He has ordered me to go on. I am the emir and the orders come to me. If no book or order comes to me, I will find any opportunity to seize and then I will inform the caliph. If we face something that the caliph has not sent his order about, we will decide the best to do. Malik bin Nuwayra is in view of us and I will go to face him with my men.”[2] Then he went with his men towards al-Bitah but when they arrived
________________________________________
[1] All that has been mentioned by Professor Muhammad Hasanayn Haykal in his book as-Siddeeq Abu Bakr, p.144. Professor Mahmood Abbas al-Aqqad in his book Abqariyat Khalid, p.131 said when talking about Malik’s situation: “It was not a situation of obstinacy or being ready to fight.” But Professor al-Aqqad has mistaken when he has interpreted Malik’s verses of poetry into other than their real meaning.
[2] As-Siddeeq Abu Bakr by Professor Haykal, p.143 and Abqariyatu Umar by Professor al-Aqqad, p.267. You see here through this dialogue that the caliph has not ordered the army to attack Malik but Khalid claimed that the caliph had entrusted him especially with the order of the attack and according to this the caliph had used trick to show the people that he was not responsible for the crimes that had been committed on the day of al-Bitah but it was Khalid who was responsible for that and then he would protect Khalid by justifying his doing by saying that he had interpreted the verdict but he had mistaken. This event showed that Abu Bakr was too skilful in politics.


(164)
there, they did not find anyone.[1]
Killing Malik and his people
When they did not find any one of Malik’s people in al-Bitah, Khalid sent his brigades to follow after them. They came back with Malik and some of his people. They were put in prison and then they were killed in a bad way which we will detail later on.
At-Tabari mentioned a tradition narrated by Abu Qatada al-Ansari, who was one of the leaders of the brigades of Khalid’s army. He said: “When we found Malik and his companions and it was night, they took their weapons and got ready. We said: “We are Muslims.” They said: “We are Muslims too.” We said: “Then why have you got your weapons ready?” They said to us: “And why have you got your weapons ready?” We said: “If you are as you say then put your weapons down.” Then we offered prayer and they offered prayer.”
But after the prayer they (Khalid’s soldiers) hastened to seize the weapons of Malik and his companions and then they tied Malik and his companions and drove them as captives to Khalid. Among them was Malik’s wife Layla bint al-Minhal Umm Tameem, who was (as Professor Abbas Mahmood al-Aqqad said in his book Abqariyatu Umar according to the historians) one of the most beautiful women among the Arabs especially her eyes and legs. It was said that no one had seen more beautiful than her eyes and legs.
Therefore Khalid was attracted by her beauty while he was debating with Malik where she was beside him.
Khalid said to Malik: “I will kill you.” Malik said: “Has your master (Abu Bakr) ordered you of this?” Khalid said: “By Allah, I will kill you.”
Abdullah bin Umar and Abu Qatada al-Ansari were present then. They talked with Khalid about this matter but he rejected their talks.
________________________________________
[1] The historians agreed upon that when Khalid occupied al-Bitah with his army, he did not find anyone of its people. That was because Malik had separated his people here and there and had ordered them not to fight against Khalid and his army. He had advised his people to keep to Islam and to remain separated until Allah would regather them. Refer to as-Siddeeq Abu Bakr by Haykal, p.144.


(165)
Then Malik said: “O Khalid, send us to Abu Bakr and he will decide what to do to us. You have sent to him other than us whose guilt is greater than ours.” Abdullah bin Umar and Abu Qatada insisted on Khalid to send Malik and his companions to the caliph but Khalid refused and said: “Let Allah not forgive me if I do not kill him.” Khalid asked Dhirar bin al-Azwar al-Asadi to kill Malik. Malik turned towards his wife and said to Khalid: “It is she who has killed me!” Khalid said: “It is Allah Who has killed you because you have apostatized from Islam.” Malik said: “I am still on Islam.” Khalid said to Dhirar: “Kill him!” Dhirar killed Malik. Khalid arrested Malik’s wife and married her in that very night.
Khalid ordered his companions to put the captives (Malik’s people) in prison. It was very cold. In a dark night Khalid’s caller called out: “Warm your prisoners!” According to the dialect of Kinana this was a metonymy to mean killing and so all the prisoners were killed.
Khalid had ordered the executioners of his men to kill the prisoners when they heard this call. This was a trick used by Khalid to show that he was not responsible for this crime but it was obvious to Abu Qatada and his likes of the acute people. It was unknown just for the ordinary people, who had been deceived by the powerful rulers and their prevailing policies.
This is the truth behind the event that has happened between Khalid and Malik. Whoever studies carefully what has been mentioned by the historians about the event of al-Bitah, will find this truth clearly.
Let not the contradicting sayings scattering here and there keep you away from the truth; those sayings which have been woven by the personal tendencies and the flattery to the caliph and to the general leader of his armies in order to justify their mistakes.
We studied this event carefully and we did not find except a clear evidence showing that the caliph tried to distort the truth due to his loyalty in his love to Khalid and in defending him. Allah is the witness over the all!


(166)
The anger of Abu Qatada and Umar
Professor Haykal says in his book as-Siddeeq Abu Bakr:[1] “Abu Qatada al-Ansari became too angry at the crime of Khalid when he killed Malik and married his wife. Abu Qatada left Khalid and went to Medina deciding that he would never be under the leadership of Khalid at all. Mutammim bin Nuwayra, Malik’s brother, went with him. When they arrived at Medina, Abu Qatada, who was still too angry, went to Abu Bakr and told him of what Khalid had done to Malik and his wife. He added that he had sworn by Allah not to be under the leadership of Khalid at all. But Abu Bakr was too pleased with Khalid and his victories and he became displeased with Abu Qatada. In fact he denied all what Abu Qatada said about the sword of Islam (Khalid)!”
Professor Haykal adds: “Do you think that Abu Bakr’s anger frightened Abu Qatada and made him keep silent? Certainly not! His revolt against Khalid was too violent; therefore he went to Umar bin al-Khattab and told him all the story and showed him Khalid as the man, whose tendencies prevailed over his duties and who ignored the orders of Allah in order to satisfy himself. Umar confirmed Abu Qatada’s opinion and participated with him in criticizing Khalid. Umar went to Abu Bakr and he was too angry at what Khalid had done. He asked Abu Bakr to depose Khalid. Umar said to Abu Bakr that Khalid’s sword had committed a sin and the caliph had to punish Khalid. But Abu Bakr would not have punished any of his officials![2] Therefore Abu Bakr said when Umar insisted on him many times to punish Khalid: “O Umar, let him alone. He interpreted but he mistook. Do not blame him any more!” But Umar was not satisfied with this answer and he did not refrain from asking to punish Khalid. When Abu Bakr became unable to bear the insistence of Umar, he said to him: “O Umar, no! I would not have to sheathe a sword that Allah has unsheathed against the unbelievers.”
Professor Haykal adds: “But Umar found that Khalid’s doing was
________________________________________
[1] p.147.
[2] In doing so Abu Bakr behaved according to his own ijtihad and ignored the order of Allah when saying: (And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life…) Qur'an, 5:45.


(167)
abominable and so his conscience was displeased. How, then, would he keep silent and let Khalid at ease feeling as if he had not committed any sin or crime? Umar had to repeat his request to Abu Bakr and to mention to him frankly that the enemy of Allah had killed a Muslim man transgressively and committed adultery with his wife and it was not fair at all not to be punished for his crime. Before the fiery anger of Umar, Abu Bakr could not but to send for Khalid and ask about what he had done. Khalid came to Medina. He came into the mosque with his war materiel wearing a garment, whose iron parts were rusty, and inserting some arrows into his turban. When Umar saw him coming into the mosque, he hastened to him, pulled the arrows out of his turban, destroyed them and said to him: “You have killed a Muslim man and committed adultery with his wife. By Allah, I will stone you until you die.” Khalid kept silent and did not apologize. He came to Abu Bakr and told him the story of Malik and his hesitation (in paying the zakat). Khalid justified his doing with some excuses and Abu Bakr excused him and forgave him but he blamed him for marrying a woman, whose husband’s blood had not dried yet. The Arabs hated sleeping with women during the wars and considered that as disgrace.”
I say: Islam prohibits marrying a woman, whose husband has died, until she finishes her iddah.[1] If a man gets married to a woman during her iddah, she will be prohibited for him forever. If we suppose that Khalid has considered Malik’s wife as a captive, also getting married to a captive woman is not permissible except after the legal absolution[2] whereas Khalid has killed Malik and married his wife in the same night.
Professor Haykal adds: “Umar did not change his opinion a bit about what Khalid had committed. When Abu Bakr died and Umar became the caliph, the first thing he did was sending a letter to Sham announcing the death of Abu Bakr and with it there was a book having a decree of deposing Khalid from the emirate of the army.”
Professor Haykal says: “The historians agreed unanimously that
________________________________________
[1] Woman’s prescribed waiting period after divorce or death of husband.
[2] Legal absolution here means that a woman has to pass at least one menstruation to be sure that she is not pregnant from the previous husband.


(168)
Umar had remained on his situation towards Khalid concerning the matter of killing Malik and marrying his wife and this situation had had its effect on the caliph when he had deposed Khalid.”
How wonder it is!
How wonder and odd it was that during the reign of Abu Bakr all those bloods, honors and properties were wasted in vain! Allah’s sacred rites were violated and His penalties were annulled. Khalid was not deposed in spite of all what he had committed! He kept on his extravagancy until the caliph died but when Umar became the caliph, he deposed him immediately.
Abu Bakr’s opinion about the criminals on the day of al-Bitah was the first of the opinions that contradicted the Qur'an and the Sunna. He preferred benefit to obeying Allah.
Showing the opinion
Professor Haykal says in his book as-Siddeeq Abu Bakr when talking about Abu Bakr’s opinion and excuse: “Abu Bakr thought that the situation was more dangerous than to regard such things.[1] Was there any importance of killing a man or a group of men due to a mistake in interpretation or even without a mistake where dangers surrounded all the state and the revolts had broken out throughout the Arab countries?[2]
________________________________________
[1] This is an exaggeration. Yes, the situation was too dangerous but this did not lead to ignore what was possible for the sake of what was not possible. The possible thing, which was the least thing that must be done, at that time was to depose Khalid from his position and to appoint a qualified one like Umar, Abu Ubayda, Ma’ath bin Jabal, Sa’d or any other one and to put off the trial of Khalid until the circumstances would become suitable and then to be punished according to the legal verdicts.
[2] This is an exaggeration too. His saying “due to a mistake in interpretation or even without a mistake” is just a fabrication. Malik’s faith in Islam was doubted neither by Khalid nor by Abu Bakr and marrying Malik’s wife while she was under her iddah deserved stoning according to the consensus of the Muslims. This was what Umar wanted to do if he could. His saying “was there any importance of killing a man or a group of men” shows indifference to killing whereas Allah says:(whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men) and (And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it) and (And they who do not call upon another god with


(169)
This leader, who was accused of being mistaken,[1] was one of the greatest powers, with which disasters and dangers were repelled.[2]
What was the problem in marrying a woman unlike the traditions of the Arabs if it was done by a conqueror, who had conquered countries and consequently had captive women who would be his possession?”[3]
Professor Haykal adds: “If we apply the Sharia, then we have not to criticize the great personalities like Khalid[4] especially if that will harm the state and expose it to dangers.[5]
The Muslims were in need to the sword of Khalid. They were in need to Khalid on the day when Abu Bakr sent for him and scolded him
________________________________________
Allah and do not slay the soul, which Allah has forbidden except in the requirements of justice, and (who) do not commit fornication and he who does this shall find a requital of sin. The punishment shall be doubled to him on the day of resurrection, and he shall abide therein in abasement).
[1] Khalid was really a killer and an adulterer. He intended to do prohibited things and he did not miss them. In fact he got them intendedly even after being forbidden by the caliph.
[2] He could be replaced by any other qualified man as we have mentioned above.
[3] I do not think that Professor Haykal has believed in this saying and the sayings before and after it nor has Abu Bakr! I do not think that Professor Haykal is indifferent to the honors when saying: “What was the problem in marrying a woman unlike the traditions of the Arabs if it was done by a conqueror…” and I do not think that he allows every conqueror to do what Khalid has done! This may be allowed to a Muslim conqueror, who conquers a country of Muslims, who do not believe in Allah, and most surely that Malik and his people were among the believers “who keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and of the hereafter they are sure”.
[4] Uttering such a word by one like Professor Haykal is something odd and astonishing. As long as you live, you see many wonders! How wonder! Professor Haykal says that the legal verdicts do not allow criticizing great persons like Khalid whereas Allah has created the Paradise to every one, who obeys Him even if he is a black Abyssinian, and has created the Hell to every one, who disobeys Him even if he is a Qurayshi master. There is no flattery between Allah and any of His creatures; people are equal before Him. A noble man is low until the others’ right is taken from him and he is punished and a low man is honorable until his right is restored to him.
[5] If carrying out the legal penalties causes dangers, then the penalties should be put off until the dangers disappear. But the caliph (Abu Bakr) did not put off executing the penalties nor did he wait for the dangers to disappear. Rather he forgave all those sins and crimes and became pleased to the full with those criminals.


(170)
more than their need to him before. Musaylama the Liar with forty thousand men revolted in Yamama near al-Bitah and their revolt was the worst against Islam and the Muslims.[1] Was it possible to let the Muslim armies be defeated by Musaylama and the religion of Allah be struck with many dangers just for the murder of Malik bin Nuwayra or for the sake of beautiful Layla who had captivated Khalid?[2] Khalid was the sign of Allah and his sword was the sword of Allah. It was the policy of Abu Bakr when he sent for Khalid to be satisfied with scolding[3] him and to order him at the same time to move with his army towards al-Yamama to meet Musaylama and his men.
When Abu Bakr ordered Khalid at that time to go to fight Musaylama, he might want to show the people of Medina, especially those who had adopted Umar’s opinion, that Khalid was the qualified man who would defeat the difficulties and that he (Abu Bakr) had thrown him into a hell which would swallow him and that would be the punishment for what he had committed with Layla and her husband Malik[4] or victory would purify him and then he would come back to the Muslims as triumphant and so he would calm their fears and then his doing committed in al-Bitah would be unmentionable thing beside his victory.
________________________________________
[1] This meaning has been repeated by Professor Haykal and here we say again that Khalid could be replaced with another leader and even if there was no one like Khalid, the orders of Allah could never be annulled for any reason. Executing the penalties could be put off but it could never be annulled at all. Abu Bakr behaved as if there were no crimes and no criminals!
[2] Yes, Khalid had to be deposed and to be killed immediately according to the verdict of Allah. A killer must be killed and an adulterer, who has a wife, must be stoned. If there is danger in executing the penalties, they will be put off until the danger disappears. The penalties can never be annulled for ever. All the Muslims have agreed on this matter unanimously.
[3] But Allah would not be satisfied with that! The legal verdicts that have determined to kill the killer and to stone the adulterer are clear but Abu Bakr interpreted them as he liked and he preferred his own opinion to those divine verdicts.
[4] Let us ponder on what Professor Haykal says as he quotes Abu Bakr’s thoughts. Do you think that Abu Bakr and Haykal have ignored that an adulterer, who has a wife, must be punished by the Muslim ruler? Have they ignored that the punishment must be stoning especially and not to throw the adulterer into the hell of Yamama or other hells?


(171)
Yamama has tested and purified Khalid[1] even no long after that he married a young girl as he had done with Layla while the Muslims’ bloods were not dried yet nor were the bloods of Musaylama’s followers. Abu Bakr scolded him for this doing more than he had scolded him for his doing with Layla before.[2]”[3]
Professor Haykal has showed clearly that Abu Bakr had preferred the benefits to the acting according to the verdicts of Allah and His messenger. Such was the opinion of many of the virtuous scholars of al-Azhar University about Abu Bakr. They themselves told me of that when I had met them in al-Azhar University in 1392 A.H. and later.
But Umar, even he himself had gone too far in interpreting the divine verdicts according to his own opinion, did not agree with Abu Bakr when he had forgiven Khalid. Professor Haykal declares Umar’s opinion in details when saying: “Umar was the exact example of Justice. He thought that Khalid had killed a man transgressively and committed adultery with his wife before she had finished her iddah and so Khalid could never remain as the leader of the army lest he would commit another sin like that and then he would defame the Muslims and dishonor their position among the Arabs. Khalid could never be left without punishment for what he had committed with Layla. If it was as Abu Bakr said that Khalid interpreted the verdict but he mistook in his interpretation when he killed Malik, which Umar did not accept at all, then Khalid would be punished for the sin he had committed with Layla. Even if Khalid was the sword of Allah and he was the victorious leader, this would not be an excuse to protect him from being punished or to justify his crimes. If it was so, then Khalid and every one like Khalid would be free to commit any crime and sin as they liked without being punished and this would be the worst example of the Muslims who had to submit to the Book of
________________________________________
[1] What purifies the sinners is returning to Allah by repenting and doing good deeds sincerely for the sake of Allah only. Allah says: (Save him who shall repent and believe and do right).
[2] This young girl might have had a husband and Khalid committed adultery with her as he had done with Layla; therefore Abu Bakr scolded him for that more than he had scolded him after his sin with Malik’s wife. If it had been not so, Abu Bakr would have not scolded him severely or in fact he would have not scolded him at all.
[3] As-Siddeeq Abu Bakr, p.152.


(172)
Allah absolutely. Therefore Umar insisted on Abu Bakr to punish Khalid until Abu Bakr sent for Khalid and scolded him.”
This is the very speech of Professor Haykal about Umar’s opinion and evidence about the matter of Khalid quoted from his book As-Siddeeq Abu Bakr, p.151.
Some fairness
Professor al-Aqqad, after mentioning the contradicted sayings about the murder of Malik to defend Khalid, says: “Out of all these sayings we have to consider the true and indisputable one among them. It was not clear or decisive that Malik bin Nuwayra had to be killed.[1] Malik was worthier to be sent to the caliph than the chiefs of Fazara tribe and others, whom Khalid had sent to Abu Bakr to judge how to deal with, after the battle of al-Buzakha. Khalid got married to Malik’s wife and took her with him to Yamama after meeting the caliph.[2]
After these facts, the truth imposed on us to say that the event of al-Bitah was a page in Khalid’s history. It would be better for him if this page would have been omitted and not mentioned with any of the
________________________________________
[1] In fact it was the impermissibility of killing Malik that was clear and decisive. This murder was one of the great sins that must lead the murderer to the legal punishment because Malik was a sincere Muslim with no doubt at all. This was a clear fact to every one who had known the truth of the event of al-Bitah and had known the secret behind the violent revolt of Umar, Abu Qatada and all the people of Medina against Khalid. The last thing that Malik had said was “I am on Islam”. Abu Bakr and Umar confessed that Malik was a Muslim when he died. Umar said to Abu Bakr: “Khalid has committed adultery and you have to stone him.” Abu Bakr said: “I will not stone him. He interpreted (the verdict) but he mistook.” Umar said: “He has killed a Muslim and you have to kill him.” Abu Bakr did not say to Umar that Khalid had killed an apostate but he said: “I will not kill him. He interpreted (the verdict) but he mistook.” This was a confession by Abu Bakr that Malik had been a Muslim; therefore Abu Bakr had paid the diyah (blood-money) to Malik’s family from the public treasury of the Muslims and he had considered the captives of Malik’s family as free people and so he had set them free besides that he had not accepted from Khalid his capturing them.
[2] Suppose that when Khalid committed adultery with Malik’s wife, he was mistaken in his interpretation, then what was the excuse of Abu Bakr when he kept Khalid as the leader of his armies especially after meeting him and scolding him and what was the excuse of Abu Bakr when he kept Khalid in his position after taking Malik’s wife with him to Yamama committing adultery with her while he had a wife?


(173)
justifications at all.”[1]
Conclusion
We end our speech about this subject with reference to those who have written about Malik concerning his position among the Arabs and among the Muslims and concerning the calamity that has afflicted Malik and his people on the day of al-Bitah. Here are some of the books that have detailed the matter of Malik; Tareekh al-Umam wel Mulook by Muhammad bin Jareer at-Tabari, Jamharat an-Nasab by ibnul Kalbi, al-Kamil by ibnul Atheer, Kitab ar-Riddah wel Futooh by Sayf bin Umar, al-Muwaffaqiyyat by az-Zubayr bin Bakar, al-Aghani by Abu Faraj al-Isfahani, ad-Dala’il by Thabit bin Qassim, Nuzhat al-Manadhir by ibn Shuhna, al-Mukhtasar by Abul Fida’, Sharh Nahjol Balagha by ibn Abul Hadeed and other books of history and biographies.
The judge ibn Khillikan said in his book Wafiyyatul A’yan when mentioning the biography of Wuthayma bin Musa bin al-Furat al-Washsha’ al-Farisi: “Malik bin Nuwayra was a noble man who accompanied the kings. Malik was mentioned in the proverbs; it was said: “No pasture like sa’dan,[2] no water like (that of) Sada’[3] and no youth like Malik.” He was a knight, a poet and an obeyed notable man among his people. He was somehow proud. He had a great group of companions. He was called al-Jafool.[4] He came to the Prophet (s) among the Arabs who had come to declare their faith in Islam. He became a Muslim and the Prophet (s) entrusted him with the zakat of his tribe…his situation with Khalid bin al-Waleed on the day of al-Bitah had been detailed. There had been a long argument between them. Khalid said to Malik: “I am going to kill you.” Malik said: “Has your friend (Abu Bakr) ordered you to do that?” Khalid said: “By Allah, I will kill you.” Abdullah bin Umar and Abu Qatada were present then. They mediated to solve the problem but Khalid
________________________________________
[1] Abqariyyatu Khalid, p.134.
[2] A kind of herbage.
[3] A famous spring whose water was very pure and palatable.
[4] Al-Jafool: the one who is always ready to help and aid the others; whenever he hears a call for help he hastens towards the caller.


(174)
paid no attention to their speech. Malik said to Khalid: “Send us to Abu Bakr and he will decide what to do with us for you have sent other than us whose guilt was greater than ours.” Khalid said: “Let Allah not forgive me if I do not kill you.” He asked Dhirar bin al-Azwar to behead Malik. Malik turned to his wife Umm Tameem and then said to Khaild: “It is she who has killed me!” Malik’s wife was very beautiful. Khalid said to Malik: “Allah has killed you because you have apostatized from Islam.” Malik said: “I am still on Islam.” Khalid said to Dhirar: “Behead him!” He cut his head and made it as an andiron under a pot.” Ibnul Kalbi said in his book Jamharat an-Nasab: “Malik was killed on the day of al-Bitah and Khalid captured his (Malik’s) wife and married her. About this matter the poet Abu Zuhayr as-Sa’di had composed a poem.”
After that ibn Khillikan mentioned Umar’s revolt against Khalid and his saying to Abu Bakr: “Khalid has committed adultery and you have to stone him.” Abu Bakr said: “I do not stone him. He interpreted (the verdict) but he mistook.” Umar said: “He has killed a Muslim man and you have to kill him for that killed one.” Abu Bakr said: “I do not kill him for that one because he interpreted but he mistook.” Umar said: “Then depose him!” Abu Bakr said: “I will not sheathe a sword that Allah has unsheathed against them.” Ibn Khillikan mentioned more details about the matter. He said that Mutammim bin Nuwayra, Malik’s brother, stood beside Abu Bakr leaning on his bow and began reciting his poem:
“The best one you have killed O you son of al-Azwar,
When the wind wept behind the houses.
Have you invited him by Allah and then you betrayed him?
If he has invited you with a pact,
He will never betray you.”
He made a sign to Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr said: “by Allah, I have neither invited him nor have I betrayed him.”
Then Mutammim bin Nywayra recited the rest of his poem. He wept and collapsed from his bow to the ground.
Ibn Khillikan talked too much about Malik’s qualities such as his courage, generosity, zeal and high position among his people.


(175)
Among the historians, who had talked about Malik in their books, was Abul Fadhl Ahmad bin Ali famous as ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. He said in the first part of his book al-Isaba fee Tamyeez as-Sahaba[1]: “His name was Malik bin Nuwayra bin Hamza bin Shaddad bin Abd Tha’laba bin Yarboo’ at-Tameemi al-Yarboo’iy. He was surnamed as al-Jafool. Al-Marzabani said that Malik was a noble poet, a great knight and one of the honored notables among his people in the pre-Islamic period. He was a companion of the kings. The Prophet (s) had entrusted him with the zakat of his people. When the Prophet (s) died, he stopped taking the zakat[2] and he spread (the zakat that had been already in his hand) among his people.[3] He recited:
“I said: Take back your monies.
I am not afraid nor expecting what tomorrow will bring.[4]
If a right one will undertake the religion,
We will obey[5] and say: the religion is that of Muhammad.”
________________________________________
[1] At-Tabari mentioned Malik in his Mu’jam and said: “He is Malik bin Hamza at-Tameemi. The Prophet (s) has entrusted him with the zakat of Bani Yarboo’ after he and his brother Mutammim had become Muslims…”
[2] He stopped taking the zakat from his people after the Prophet (s) had went to the better world because he wanted to be certain that the one, who would be the caliph after the Prophet (s), would be the right one and then he would carry out his duty concerning the zakat. You will find that clearly in his poetry which we have mentioned herein with our comment.
[3] He spread the zakat among the poor and needy people of his tribe because he had taken it from them as he had the guardianship over the zakat from the Prophet (s) when he was alive and so he thought that he had had the right to dispose of it according to its legal ways. Malik was known for his pity towards the orphans, the widows and the poor as it had been showed through the poem of his coeval poet as-Sa’di when saying: Who will be for the orphans and the widows after him? And who will be for the poor and needy people?
[4] He meant by this verse that he had not committed any wrong or a sin (when he took the zakat or when he spread it again) that he might fear on the Day of Resurrection.
[5] This verse has been mentioned with the phrase “we will obey” by al-Asqalani in his book al-Isaba, by ibn Sa’d and by Alamul Huda ash-Shareef ar-Radhiy in his book “ash-Shafi’iy” who had mentioned other verses when saying: “When Malik knew that the Prophet (s) had died, he stopped taking zakat from his people and he said to them: “Wait until a guardian will undertake the rule after the Prophet (s) and then we will see what to do.” He indicated that in his poetry when saying:
“Some men said: Malik has done right today.
Some men said: Malik has not done right.


(176)
Malik and his companions were killed. He was mutilated. His wife was raped. The verdicts of Allah were annulled. His sanctity was violated. The cause behind all that was that they (Abu Bakr, Khalid and their likes) had interpreted the divine verdicts according to their own opinion and they had mistaken. We are Allah’s and to Him we shall return!
14. Preventing from writing down the prophetic traditions
Al-Hakim mentioned in his Tareekh a tradition narrated by Abu Bakr that the Prophet (s) had said: “He, who has written down knowledge or a tradition from me, will be granted with (divine) reward as long as that knowledge or tradition will remain.”[1] In spite of that no
________________________________________
I said: let me alone. I have not done wrong.
I said: Take back your monies.
I am not afraid nor expecting what tomorrow will bring.
Here are the monies. They are yours.
I will defend you what you fear with my soul,
And I will achieve the truth as I say.
If a right one will undertake the religion,
We will obey[5] and say: the religion is that of Muhammad.”
But Professor Haykal in his book as-Siddeeq Abu Bakr and Professor al-Aqqad in his book Abqariyat Kkalid have mentioned the verse with the phrase “we will refrain (or stop)”. I think that they have quoted the verse from someone of the historians who has taken sides against Malik to defend Khalid or Abu Bakr. Anyhow there is nothing in the verse showing apostasy or something like that.
[1] The prophetic traditions that the umma has narrated from Abu Bakr are one hundred and forty-two which have been mentioned in a special chapter by as-Sayooti in his book Tareekh al-Khulafa’. This tradition is the eighty-ninth one among them. The narrators have confirmed its content by the traditions they have narrated from Imam Ali (s), Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Mas’ood, Abu Sa’eed al-Khidri, Abud Darda’, Anass bin Malik, Ma’ath bin Jabal and Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (s) had said: “Whoever has kept forty traditions for my umma, Allah will resurrect him on the Day of Resurrection among the jurisprudents and ulama.” In another tradition “…Allah will resurrect him as a jurisprudent and as an aalim.” In the tradition narrated by Abud Darda’ it has been mentioned as “…I will be his witness and his intercessor.” In the tradition of ibn Mas’ood “…he will enter into Paradise from any


(177)
tradition had been written down during the reign of Abu Bakr and Umar.
Abu Bakr, during his rule, had decided to write down the prophetic traditions. He had written down five hundred traditions but he had become upset. He could not sleep and he tossed about in his bed all that night. Aa’isha, his daughter, said: “I was uncomfortable because he was upset. In the morning he said to me: “O my daughter, bring me the traditions that are with you.” I brought them to him and he burnt them…”[1]
Az-Zuhri mentioned from Urwa that once Umar bin al-Khattab wanted to write down the prophetic traditions. He consulted with the Prophet’s companions about the subject and they counseled him to write them down. He went asking Allah to inspire him with the best decision. He kept on that for a month and then he said: “I wanted to write down the prophetic traditions but I remembered some peoples before you who had written some books and then they kept to their books and ignored the Book of Allah. By Allah, I will not corrupt the Book of Allah with anything at all.”[2]
Abu wahab said: “I have heard Malik (bin Anass) saying that Umar wanted to write down the prophetic traditions or he had already written them down but then he (Umar) said: “There is no book with the Book of Allah.”[3]
Yahya bin Ju’da said: “Once Umar wanted to write down the Sunna but then he changed his mind and decided not to write it down. He sent a decree to the countries saying: “Whoever has written down
________________________________________
gate he likes.” In the tradition of ibn Umar “…he will be considered as one of the ulama and he will be resurrected with the martyrs.” They might have confirmed this tradition by the tradition in which the Prophet (s) had said: “Let the present of you inform the absent…may Allah have mercy on one who has heard my saying and he perceived it and spread it as he has heard it.”
[1] Mentioned by Imadudeen bin Katheer in Musnad as-Siddeeq from al-Hakim bin Abu Abdullah an-Naysaboori and mentioned by Abu Umayya al-Ahwas bin al-Mufadhdhal al-Ghilabi. It has been mentioned in Kanzol Ummal, vol.5 p.237.
[2] Kanzol Ummal, vol.5 p.239, al-Mukhtasar by ibn Abdul Birr, p.33, it also has been mentioned by ibn Sa’d from az-Zuhri as in Kanzol Ummal, vol.5 p.239.
[3] Kanzol Ummal, vol.5 p.239, al-Mukhtasar by Ibn Abdul Birr, p.32.


(178)
some of the Sunna, has to delete it.”[1]
Al-Qassim bin Muhammad bin Abu Bakr said: “The (writing down of) traditions have been increased during the reign of Umar so he asked the people to bring him those (written) traditions. When the people brought him the traditions, he ordered to burn them.”[2]
Ibn Umar said: “Once Umar wanted to write down the traditions. He prayed Allah for a month to inspire him with the best choice. Then he said: “I remembered that there were peoples before you who had written some books and they kept to those books and ignored the book of Allah.”[3]
During the rule of Umar one of his companions came and said to him: “O Ameerul Mo’mineen, when we have conquered the different countries, we have got some books of the Persian sciences and other wonderful subjects.” Umar began striking those books with his stick until they were torn. Then he recited:(We narrate to you the best of narratives, by Our revealing to you this Qur'an) and then he said to the man: “Woe unto you! Are these stories better than the Book of Allah?”[4]
The news showing that Umar had prevented people from writing and collecting the prophetic traditions and everything of the Sunna were certain and recurrent. He might have prevented them from narrating any prophetic tradition at all and he might have detained the great
________________________________________
[1] Al-Mukhtasar by ibn Abdul Birr, narrated by Ibn Khaythama as in Kanzol Ummal, vol. 5 p.239.
[2] Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat, vol. 5 p.140.
[3] As-Salafi in his book at-Tuyooriyyat and as-Sayooti in his Tareekh al-Khulafa’.
[4] This tradition has been mentioned in the books of Hadith. Ibn Abul Hadeed has mentioned in Sharh Nahjol Balagha, vol. 3 p.122. The caliph Umar had to check those books to see which of them was useful and which was not and then he would tear useless ones. This was the right of the umma and the right of the books themselves. Islam does never permit to tear the useful books such as those of medicine, mathematics, geology and history of the previous and ancient nations. Imam Ali (s) has said: “Knowledge is the long-sought aim of the believers. Try to gain knowledge even from the polytheists.” He also has said: “Wisdom is the long-sought goal of the believers. They are to look for it even it is in the policemen’s hands.” These two traditions of Imam Ali (s) have been mentioned by ibn Abdul Birr in al-Mukhtasar, p.51


(179)
figures in Medina so that they would not spread the traditions in the other countries.[1]
No doubt that many corruptions had happened because of the decisions of the two caliphs (when preventing from writing down the Sunna) and those corruptions could not be avoided. Would have the two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, tried with Imam Ali (s) and Ahlul Bayt (s) to collect the Prophet’s traditions and Sunna and to write them down in a special book that the later Muslims and their successors of every generation in this umma would inherit! The holy Qur'an has analogous and ambiguous meanings. The Sunna explains the analogous and ambiguous meanings of the Qur'an and it details many of its special verdicts. It makes the scholars perceive the essence of the Qur'an and so it saves many verdicts of the Qur'an from being lost. It would have been better for the two caliphs if they had written down the Sunna because in doing that they would have saved the umma and the Sunna from the fabricators who had fabricated many lies against the Prophet (s). If the Sunna had been written down at that time in a book, which the umma would have sanctified, fabricators and liars would refrain from distorting or inserting any lie in the Sunna. And since the Sunna had not been collected in a special book, so the fabricators, who fabricated lies against the Prophet (s), were too active and politics played a great rule in distorting the Sunna especially during the reign of Mu’awiya and his oppressive party until imposture spread everywhere and vanities and trifles sold well.
The two caliphs and their followers could have saved the umma from the evil of those people if they had written down the Sunna. In fact they had known the great use of that and they had known that it was very necessary but their greed and tendencies, which they had prepared and got ready to achieve, did not meet with many of those
________________________________________
[1] Abdurrahman bin Ouff said: “By Allah, Umar, before he died, he had sent for the Prophet’s companions who were in the different countries. He sent for Abdullah bin Huthayfa, Abud Darda’, Abu Tharr and Uqba bin Aamir and said to them: “What are these traditions of the Prophet (s) that you have spread throughout the countries?” They said: “Do you prevent us from doing that?” He said: “No! You stay here! You will never be away from me as long as I am alive.” Refer to Kanzol Ummal, vol.5 p.239.


(180)
clear prophetic traditions.
As for the Prophet (s), he had entrusted the Book, the Sunna and the heritage of the prophets with his guardian Ali bin Abu Talib (s) and hence he had recorded them in a clear book which falsehood should not come to from before nor from behind. He asked Imam Ali (s) to entrust the infallible imams after him with this trust. Hence this trust, the Qur'an, the Sunna and the prophet’s heritage, would be guarded by the infallible imams (s) one after the other until they would come to the Prophet (s) at the pond (in Paradise) on the Day of Resurrection.
The Prophet (s) has said: “Ali is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with Ali. They will not separate until they will come to me at the pond.”[1]
A task
Some polytheists had come to the Prophet (s) for some task and he had referred to his two companions (Abu Bakr and Umar) in order to reject the polytheists’ task but they (Abu Bakr and Umar) behaved as intercessors for the polytheists.
The story was when some polytheists came to the Prophet (s) saying: “O Muhammad, we are your neighbors and allies. Some of our slaves have resorted to you neither for religion nor for jurisprudence but they have fled from our farms and properties. Please return them back to us.” The Prophet (s) did not respond to them lest they would spoil the faith of those slaves. The Prophet (s) did not want to tell them the truth openly so he referred to Abu Bakr saying: “O Abu Bakr, what do you say?” and he hoped that Abu Bakr would reject their request. Abu Bakr said: “O messenger of Allah, they are right.”
________________________________________
[1] Al-Hakim’s Mustadrak, vol.3 p.124 and ath-Thahabi’s Talkhees. We would like to attract the reader’s attention that this sacred accompaniment between Imam Ali (s) and the Qur'an has been continuous every moment until they will come to the Prophet (s) at the pond in Paradise without a moment of separation between them at all. Imam Ali (s) has died hundreds of years before coming with the Qur'an to the pond in Paradise so how would the inseparability between him and the Qur'an be valid? (Most surely, it is the Word brought by an honored Messenger. And it is not the word of a poet; little is it that you believe. Nor the word of a soothsayer; little is it that you mind. It is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds). Qur'an, 69:40-43.


(181)
The Prophet (s) blushed because Abu Bakr’s answer was not as Allah and His messenger wanted. Then the Prophet (s) asked Umar hoping that he would be frank with them: “O Umar, what do you say?” Umar said: “O messenger of Allah, they are right. They are your neighbors and allies.” The Prophet (s) blushed again…” this tradition has been mentioned by Ahmad bin Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.1 p.155 (traditions concerning Imam Ali) and by an-Nassa’iy in al-Khasa’is al-Alawiya, p.11. Here is the tradition as it has been mentioned by an-Nassa’iy: “…then the messenger of Allah (s) said: “O people of Quraysh, I swear by Allah that He will empower over you a man from you, whose heart Allah has tested with faith. He will strike you to keep to the religion.” Abu Bakr said: “O messenger of Allah, is it me?” The Prophet (s) said: “It is the one who is mending the shoes.” The Prophet (s) had given his shoes to Ali in order to mend them.”