Chapter Three – The Shia and their Reviling of the Possessor of Two Lights radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and the Corruption the Saba’iyyah spread during his time

Image of the Ahlus Sunnah, Civilization, and History
December 12, 2022

BACK Return to Table of contents


Chapter Three

The Shia and their Reviling of the Possessor of Two Lights radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and the Corruption the Saba’iyyah spread during his time


Before we discuss this matter, we would like to uncover some facts that have been concealed for far too long from many people, including the knowledgeable. Firstly, generally the Shia have made falsehood their salient feature and gave it a religious coat with the name of Taqiyyah, to such an extent that they say:


لا إيمان لمن لا تقية له

There is no faith in one who does not believe in Taqiyyah.[1]


They have slandered Muhammad al Baqir by falsely attributing this narration to him.

They boldly fabricated multiple lies about Sayyidina ‘Ali and the Ahlul Bayt radiya Llahu ‘anhum causing them much sorrow. These were the very people who considered them their leaders, which in itself caused them grief. One of their great biographers, al Kashshi, narrates from Ibn Sinan:


قال أبوعبد الله (ع) إنا أهل بيت صادقون لا نخلو من كذاب يكذب علينا ويسقط صدقنا بكذبه علينا عند الناس كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله أصدق الناس لهجة وأصدق البرية كلها وكان مسيلمة يكذب عليه وكان أمير المؤمنين (ع) أصدق من برأ الله بعد رسول الله وكان الذي يكذب عليه ويعمل في تكذيب صدقه ويفتري على الله الكذب عبد الله بن سبأ لعنه الله وكان أبوعبد الله الحسين بن علي (ع) قد ابتلي بالمختار ثم ذكر أبوعبد الله الحارث الشامي وبنان فقال كانا يكذبان على علي بن الحسين (ع) ثم ذكر المغيرة بن سعيد وبزيعا والسرى وأبا الخطاب ومعمرا وبشارا الأشعري وحمزة اليزيدي وصائدا النهدي فقال لعنهم الله إنا لا نخلو من كذاب يكذب علينا كفانا الله مؤنة كل كذاب وأذاقهم الله حر الحديد

Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam said, “We belong to an honest family. However, there will always be a fabricator who spreads lies about us and hides our true statements from people with the lies he spreads about us. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was the most truthful of people in speech and was the most honest amongst all creation, yet Musaylamah would spread lies about him. The Leader of the Believers ‘alayh al Salam was the most truthful person of Allah’s creation after the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The person who would spread lies about him, try to alter his statements, and falsely attribute statements to Allah was ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’. ‘Abdullah ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali was tested with al Mukhtar. He then mentioned Abu ‘Abdullah al Harith al Shami and Bannan saying, “They used to attribute falsities to ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ‘alayh al Salam.” He then mentioned Mughirah ibn Sa’id, Bazi’, Sari, Abu al Khattab, Ma’mar, Bashshar al Ash’ari, Hamzah al Yazidi and Sa’id al Nahdi and said, “May Allah’s curse be upon them. We are never free from a liar that attributes lies to us. Allah is enough for us against every liar. May Allah give them a taste of the heat of iron.[2]


Secondly, most of the narrators who mentioned the false claims and slanders, which led to the assassination of Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the opening of the door of corruption amongst the Believers, were Shia. They blew things out of proportion, exaggerated the matter, and kindled the fire. Historians narrated random narrations from them without verification and evaluation. They did not differentiate fact from fib, right from wrong, and scrawny from plump. Historians and narrators took all of these fabricated narrations from them in order to call towards their falsehood, support their opinions, and realise their goals and motives.

Thirdly, they did not narrate these incidents from those who witnessed them. Instead, it was mere hearsay, fabrications, and falsehood. Many a time, the narrators related details about incidents that took place decades before they were even born. This will be explained later on.

Fourthly, the narrators along with their dishonesty, treachery, and invitation towards their school of thought showed bias when relating these narrations and incidents. They followed the group who blew into the ashes and kindled the fire of corruption. They strove and made a conscious effort to spread corruption using their pens and tongues, as their predecessors strove with their bodies and souls. Due to this, it is necessary for every author who wishes to understand the facts about accepting their narrations to exercise caution, with a vigilant eye, being sure to avoid doubtful matters. One should exercise caution concerning those narrations that are not supported by other narrations which have been related by reliable narrators who are not involved in fabrication in any way. It is for this reason that the narrations that have been narrated only by Abu Mikhnaf, al Waqidi, and the two al Kalbis are not considered when deducing and deriving rulings.

Unfortunately, they have been relied upon for narrations that relate incidents about the Companions of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam—the supporters and guides of this Ummah. The former are the heirs of their predecessors, who were the heads of the rebels and transgressors. They were the servants of the materialistic Jews and fire worshippers or were deceived by them. Nonetheless, they followed their way and completely adopted their beliefs and ideologies attributed to them. They treaded the path that was later known as the Goebbels Way [the summary of which was]:

Lie as much as you can until you yourself believe it to be true without hesitation, shame, and modesty.

It is amazing how much they lied, how ridiculous their statements were, and how bold they were when making them. We have made sure to mention only that which is factual and has been proven by clear evidence. We did not merely mention our assumptions, but rather considered trustworthy records and other reliable sources. The sources are listed below:


Abu Mikhnaf

Muhsin al Amin mentions in his book, A’yan al Shia, under the title: Those amongst the Shia that wrote about expeditions, history and wars. He says:


أبومخنف لوط بن يحيى الأزدي الغامدي قال النجاشي من أصحاب الأخبار بالكوفة ووجههم وصنف كتبا كثيرة منها فتوح الشام العراق خراسان الجمل صفين النهر الغارات مقتل الحسين (ع) وغيرها وقال ابن النديم في الفهرست قرأت بخط أحمد بن الحارث البزاز قال العلماء أبومخنف بأمر العراق وأخبارها وفتوحها يزيد على غيره والمدائني بأمر خراسان والهند وفارس والواقدي بالحجاز والسيرة وقد اشتركوا في فتوح الشام واثنان من الثلالة شيعة أبومخنف والواقدي

Abu Mikhnaf, Lut ibn Yahya al Azdi al Ghamidi. Al Najashi says about him, “He was one of the narrators of Kufah and was also their representative. He wrote many books, some of which are Futuh al Sham, al Iraq, Khurasan, al Jamal, Siffin, al Nahr, al Gharat, Maqtal al Hussain, etc.”

Ibn al Nadim says in al Fihrist, “I read in the handwriting of Ahmed ibn al Harith al Khazzaz that the scholars said, ‘Abu Mikhnaf narrates more than anyone else about the news and conquests of Iraq, al Mada’ini with regards to Khurasan, India, and Persia, and al Waqidi concerning Hijaz and Sirah. They all shared the credit of writing about the conquests of Syria and two out of the three of them were Shia: Abu Mikhnaf and al Waqidi.”[3]


As you know, al Najashi has mentioned him amongst those who authored books for the Shia. He has added the following to the list of books mentioned by al Muhsin: Kitab al Saqifah, Kitab al Shura, Kitab Qatl ‘Uthman, Kitab al Hakamayn, Maqtal Amir al Mu’minin, Qatl al Hussain, Maqtal Hujr ibn ‘Adi, Akhbar al Mukhtar, Akhbar al Zayyat, Akhbar Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, Maqtal Muhammad, and other books besides these. As he mentioned that he was the most profound scholar of the narrators regarding Kufah and was also the representative. He would be content with his narrations. He has narrated from Jafar ibn Muhammad ‘alayh al Salam.[4]

Al Tusi mentions that his father was one of the companions of ‘Ali, as he mentions in his Rijal.

Al Hilli has mentioned in al Thiqat that his father was amongst the companions of al Baqir and he is from the companions of Jafar.[5]

Al Qummi mentions him in his book, saying:


لوط بن يحيى بن سعيد بن مخنف بن سليم الأزدي شيخ أصحاب الأخبار بالكوفة ووجههم كما عن جش وتوفي سنة 157 يروي عن الصادق (ع) ويروي عنه هشام الكلبي وجده مخنف بن سليم صحابي شهد الجمل في أصحاب علي (ع) حاملا راية الأزد فاستشهد في تلك الوقعة سنة 36 وكان أبومخنف من أعاظم مؤرخي الشيعة ومع اشتهار تشيعه اعتمد عليه علماء السنة في النقل عنه كالطبري وابن الأثير وغيرهما وليعلم أن لأبي مخنف كتبا كثيرة في التاريخ والسير منها كتاب مقتل الحسين (ع) الذي نقل منه أعاظم العلماء المتقدمين واعتمدوا عليه

Lut ibn Yahya ibn Sa’id ibn Mikhnaf ibn Salim al Azdi was the senior narrator and representative in Kufah as reported from al Najashi. He died in the year 157 AH. He narrates from al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam and Hisham al Kalbi narrates from him. His grandfather, Mikhnaf ibn Salim, was a Companion who took part in the Battle of Jamal alongside ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, holding the flag of the Azd. He was martyred in that battle, in 36 AH. Abu Mikhnaf was one of the greatest Shia Historians. Despite being a famous Shia, many Sunni scholars relied on his narrations, such as al Tabari, Ibn al Athir, and others. Abu Mikhnaf authored many books on history and biographies. One of these was the book Maqtal al Hussain ‘alayh al Salam, which many great scholars of the past have quoted from and relied upon.[6]


This is what the Shia scholars have mentioned about his Shi’ism. The names of his books suggest what an ardent Shia he was. [A list of] these books has previously been quoted from al Najashi.

As for the opinion of the Ahlus Sunnah about him, it has been narrated by Ibn Hajar al ‘Asqalani rahimahu Llah:


لوط بن يحيى أبومخنف أخباري تالف لا يوثق به تركه أبوحاتم وغيره وقال الدارقطني ضعيف وقال يحيى بن معين ليس بثقة وقال مرة ليس بشيء وقال ابن عدي شيعي محترق صاحب أخبارهم قلت روى عن الصعقي بن زهير وجابر الجعفي ومجالد وروى عنه المدائني وعبد الرحمن بن مغراء ومات قبل السبعين ومائة وقال أبوعبيد الآجري سألت أبا حاتم عنه فنفض يداه وقال أحد يسأل عن هذا وذكره العقيلي في الضعفاء

Lut ibn Yahya, Abu Mikhnaf: A worthless Akhbari, unreliable. Abu Hatim and others have discarded him [suspecting him of forgery].

Daraqutni says, “He is da’if.”

Yahya ibn Ma’in says, “He is not reliable.”

In another instance he said, “He is nothing.”

Ibn ‘Adi says: He is an extremist Shia, reporter of their narrations.

I say: He narrates from al Sa’qi ibn Zuhayr, Jabir al Ju’fi, and Mujalid. Al Mada’ini and ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Maghra’ have narrated from him. He died before 170 AH.

Abu ‘Ubaid al Ajurri says, “When I asked Abu Hatim about him, he shook his hand and said, ‘Does anyone ask about him?’”

Al ‘Uqayli includes him amongst the weak narrators.[7]


Al Dhahabi mentions a similar text in his al Mizan.[8]

Al Dhahabi mentions the same in al Muntaqa quoting from Ibn Taymiyyah’s al Minhaj, under the chapter of those who are known for lying. After mentioning him, he includes the report of Ash-hab ibn al ‘Aziz al Qaisi, who says:


سئل مالك رضي الله عنه عن الرافضة فقال لا تكلمهم ولا ترو عنهم فانهم يكذبون وعن حرملة بن يحيى أنه قال سمعت الشافعي رضي الله عنه يقول لم أر أحدا أشهد بالزور من الرافضة وعن مؤمل بن إهاب الربعي أنه قال سمعت يزيد بن هارون يقول يكتب عن كل مبتدع إذا لم يكن داعية إلا الرافضة فانهم يكذبون وعن محمد بن سعيد الأصفهاني أنه قال سمعت شريك بن عبد الله النخعي يقول أحمل العلم عن كل من لقيته إلا الرافضة فانهم يضعون الحديث ويتخذونه حديثا وعن أبي معاوية أنه قال سمعت الأعمش يقول أدركت الناس وما يسمونهم إلا الكذابين (يعني الروافض) ثم قال نقلا عن شيخ الإسلام ومن تأمل كتب الجرح والتعديل رأى المعروف عن مصنفيها بالكذب في الشيعة أكثر منهم في جميع الطوائف والرافضة يقرون بالكذب حيث يقولون بالتقية

Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu was asked about the Rafidah, so he replied, “Do not speak to them nor narrate from them as they lie.”

It has been narrated from Harmalah ibn Yahya that he said, “I heard al Shafi’i radiya Llahu ‘anhu saying, ‘I never saw anyone more brazen in false testimonies than the Rafidah.’”

It is narrated from Mu’ammal ibn Ihab al Rib’i that he said, “I heard Yazid ibn Harun saying, ‘[Information attained] from any innovator can be written as long as he does not call towards it, except for the Rafidah, as they lie.’”

It is narrated from Muhammad ibn Sa’id al Asfahani that he said, “I heard Sharik ibn ‘Abdullah al Nakha’i saying, ‘Attain knowledge from whoever you meet except the Rafidah, as they fabricate narrations then consider them as [authentic] narrations.’”

It has narrated from Abu Muawiyah that he said, “I heard al A’mash saying, ‘I met some people who were called nothing but liars; meaning the Rawafid. He then mentioned on the authority of Sheikh al Islam, ‘Whoever researches the books of Criticism and Praise will find that most of the scholars that are known by authors for fabricating belong to the Shia sect more than any other sect… The Rafidah attest to lying as they believe in [the doctrine of] Taqiyyah.’”[9]


These are the opinions the scholars, who specialize in the science of Jarh wa Ta’dil (hadith narrator criticism) and in the science of evaluation of narrators, maintain about Abu Mikhnaf. These are the statement of the Scholars, Huffaz and Muhaddithin regarding relying on them.

The gist of what we have said is that both parties, the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah as well as the Shia, agree that Abu Mikhnaf was an unreliable, untrustworthy Shia. As for al Qummi’s statement, “Despite being a famous Shia, many Sunni scholars relied on his narrations, such as al Tabari…” it is nothing but a lie as per the habit of his people. This is because it is well known to those who have researched al Tabari that he has neither written everything that he considered authentic in his Tarikh, nor does he claim that all that he quoted is authentic. He explicitly mentions this in the foreword of his book:


فما يكن في كتابي هذا من خبر ذكرناه عن بعض الماضين مما يستنكره قارئه أو يستشنعه سامعه من أجل أنه لم يعرف له وجها في الصحة ولا معنى في الحقيقة فليعلم أنه لم يؤت في ذلك من قبلنا وإنما أتي من قبل بعض ناقليه إلينا وأنا إنما أدينا ذلك على نحو ما أدي إلينا

Some of the narrations that lay in this book of mine which I have sourced from those of the past would be unacceptable and appalling to one reading or listening to it as it cannot be reconciled nor does it hold any intrinsic correct meaning. Know well, that such narrations do not emanate from us, it is from those whom we have narrated from. We have merely quoted them as they were transmitted to us.[10]


As for Ibn al Athir, he has also mentioned in the foreword of his book that he quotes from al Tabari and transmits from him the narrations that he himself quotes from others:


أني قد جمعت في كتابي هذا ما لم يجتمع في كتاب واحد، ومن تأمله علم صحة ذلك فابتدأت بالتاريخ الكبير الذي صنفه الإمام أبوجعفر الطبري إذ هو الكتاب المعول عند الكافة عليه، والمرجوع عند الاختلاف إليه، فاخذت ما فيه من جميع تراجمه لم أخل بترجمة واحدة منها

In this book of mine, I have compiled points that have never before been compiled in a single book. Whoever ponders over it will know that to be true. I began with al Tarikh al Kabir of Imam Abu Jafar al Tabari, as it is the book that is depended on by the one who considers it sufficient for him and that which is referred to when there is any dispute. I copied all of its titles without leaving a single one out.[11]


This is the reality of Abu Mikhnaf and the reality of al Tabari and Ibn al Athir considering him reliable.


Al Waqidi

As for al Waqidi, al Muhsin al Shia mentions about him:


ومحمد بن عمر الواقدي قال ابن النديم كان يتشيع حسن المذهب يلزم التقية وهو الذي روى أن عليا عليه السلام كان من معجزات النبي (ص) كالعصا لموسى (ص) وإحياء الموتى لعيسى بن مريم عليه السلام وغير ذلك من الأخبار عالما بالمغازي والسير والفتوح والأخبار خلف 600 قمطر كتبا كل قمطر حمل رجلين وقبل ذلك بيع له كتب بألفي دينار وكان له غلامان مملوكان يكتبان الليل والنهار له، التاريخ الكبير المغازي المبعث أخبار مكة فتوح الشام فتوح العراق الجمل مقتل الحسين عليه السلام السيرة الى غير ذلك من الكتب الكثيرة في السير والتاريخ

As for Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Waqidi, Ibn al Nadim says [about him], “He would observe Shia tendencies; sound in religion. He strongly observed Taqiyyah. He is the one who narrates that ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam was a miracle of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam just as the staff was the miracle of Musa ‘alayh al Salam and reviving the dead the miracle of ‘Isa ibn Maryam ‘alayh al Salam. [He narrated] other narrations as well. He possessed knowledge of war, expeditions, conquests, and narrations. He left behind six hundred bookshelves; each bookshelf had to be carried by two men, and before that, some of his books were sold for two thousand gold coins. He had two slaves that would write day and night. He has written al Tarikh al Kabir, al Maghazi, al Mabath, Akhbar Makkah, Futuh al Sham, Futuh al Iraq, al Jamal, Maqtal al Hussain ‘alayh al Salam, al Sirah, and many other biographies and books on history.[12]


Al Qummi mentions:


أبوعبد الله محمد بن عمر بن واقد المدني كان إماما عالما له التصانيف والمغازي وفتوح الأمصار وله كتاب الردة وغير ذلك كان من أقدم مؤرخي الإسلام وكتاب مغازيه له مقدمة وشروح باللغة الانجليزية يروي عنه كتابه محمد بن سعد وجماعة من الأعيان وكان الواقدي مع ما ذكرناه من سعة علمه وكثرة حفظه لا يحفظ القرآن ثم روى عن المأمون أنه قال للواقدي أريد أن تصلي الجمعة غدا بالناس قال فامتنع قال لا بد من ذلك فقال لا والله يا أمير المؤمنين ما أحفظ سورة الجمعة حتى يبلغ النصف منها فإذا حفظه بدأ بالنصف الثاني فإذا حفظ النصف الثاني نسي الأول فأتعب المأمون وتعس فقال لعلي بن صالح يا علي احفظه أنت فذكر أنه مثل المأمون لم يقدر على أن يحفظه فقال المأمون اذهب فصل بهم واقرأ أي صورة شئت وروى عن غسان قال صليت خلف الواقدي صلاة الجمعة فقرأ إن هذا لفي الصحف الأولى صحف عيسى وموسى… كان يتشيع حسن المذهب يلزم التقية وهو الذي روى أن عليا عليه السلام كان من معجزات النبي (ص) كالعصا لموسى (ص) وإحياء الموتى لعيسى بن مريم عليه السلام وغير ذلك من الأخبار

Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn Waqid al Madani was an Imam and Scholar. He wrote books about wars and conquests. He also wrote Kitab al Riddah and other books. He is amongst the first historians in the history of Islam. His Kitab al Maghazi has an English foreword and commentaries. Muhammad ibn Sa’d and a group of people narrate his book from him…

Despite what we have mentioned of the knowledge and memory that he possessed, al Waqidi could not memorise the Qur’an. It has been narrated from al Ma’mun that he said to al Waqidi, “I want you to lead the people in Friday prayer tomorrow.” He refused, however al Ma’mun said, “You must do so.”

He then said, “No, O Leader of the Believers. I have not memorised Surah al Jumu’ah.” He had memorised half of it. When he wished to continue learning it, he began from the second half. However, by the time he was done memorising the second half, he forgot the first half.

Al Ma’mun became upset, so he said to ‘Ali ibn Salih, “O ‘Ali, you should memorise it.” It is mentioned that he too, like al Ma’mun, did not manage to memorise it. Al Ma’mun then said, “Go and recite whichever Surah you wish.”

It is narrated from Ghassan that he said, “I performed the Friday Prayer behind al Waqidi, and he recited:

إن هذا لفي الصحف الأولى صحف عيسى وموسى

Indeed, this was mentioned in previous scriptures; the scriptures of ‘Isa and Musa [instead of the scriptures of Ibrahim and Musa].

He would observe Shia tendencies; sound in religion. He strongly observed Taqiyyah. He is the one who narrates that ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam was a miracle of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam just as the staff was the miracle of Musa ‘alayh al Salam and reviving the dead the miracle of ‘Isa ibn Maryam ‘alayh al Salam.[13]


Al Khuwanasari also mentions him in his book[14] and gives him the title of al Imam al ‘Allam (the knowledgeable leader).

The Shia claim that he was a Shia who possessed poor memory and was unable to memorise. The Qur’an would not remain in his memory and heart.

The statements of the experts on biographies and specialists of Jarh wa Ta’dil amongst the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah are mentioned below.

Ibn Hibban says:


كان يروي عن الثقات مقلوبا وعن الاثبات معضلات… وكان أحمد بن حنبل يكذبه…وكان يقول المديني الواقدي يضع الحديث

He would narrate from reliable scholars but change the meaning and mentioned mysterious narrations on the authority of authentic narrators.

Ahmed ibn Hambal considered him a liar.

Al Madini would say, “Al Waqidi fabricates hadith.”[15]


Al Dhahabi says:


مجمع على تركه وقال النسائي: كان يضع الحديث

It is agreed that he be abandoned as a narrator [due to being suspected of forgery].

Al Nasa’i says, “He would fabricate hadith.”[16]


As for Ibn Hajar, he has gathered the opinions of the scholars about him:

  • Al Bukhari rahimahu Llah said, “Al Waqidi was born in Madinah, lived in Baghda Matruk al Hadith (suspected of forgery in hadith); Ahmed, Ibn al Mubarak, Ibn Numair, and Ismail ibn Zakariyya have abandoned him.” He said elsewhere, “Ahmed deemed him a liar.”
  • Muawiyah ibn Salih said, “Ahmed ibn Hambal said to me, ‘Al Waqidi is a kadhdhab (liar). And Yahya ibn Ma’in said to me, ‘[He is] da’if (weak).’ He once said, “He is nothing.”
  • Ibn al Madini said, “Al Haytham ibn ‘Adi is more reliable and his ahadith are more pleasing than al Waqidi in my opinion.”
  • Al Shafi’i said, “All of al Waqidi’s books are lies.”
  • Al Nasa’i said [in his book on weak narrators], “There are four narrators that are liars and well known for attributing false ahadith to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam: al Waqidi of Madinah, Muqatil of Kufah, Muhammad ibn Sa’id al Maslub of Syria,” and he mentioned a fourth person.
  • Ibn ‘Adi said, “His narrations are not reliable.”
  • Ibn al Madini said, “I have twenty thousand narrations that are baseless. Ibrahim ibn Yahya is a kadhdhab (liar), yet, he is better in condition than al Waqidi in my opinion.”
  • Abu Dawood said, “I do not write his narrations, nor do I narrate from him. I have no doubt that he would fabricate narrations.
  • Bundar said, “I have not seen a bigger liar than him.”
  • Ishaq ibn Rahawayh said, “In my opinion, he is amongst the fabricators.”
  • Ibn al ‘Arabi narrated the following from al Shafi’i, “There were seven men in Madinah who used to fabricate asanid; al Waqidi was one of them.”
  • Abu Zur’ah, Abu Bashir al Dulabi, and al ‘Uqayli said, “Matruk al Hadith (suspected of forgery in Hadith).”
  • Abu Hatim al Razi said, “We found that he related narrations from unknown Madani scholars who were munkar.”
  • Ibn al Jawzi narrated from Abu Hatim that he said, “He would fabricate.”
  • Al Nawawi said, “Al Waqidi is da’if with the consensus of the scholars.”
  • Al Dhahabi says in al Mizan, “There has been continuous consensus of the scholars that al Waqidi is weak.” Some of our scholars have mentioned that which does not agree with his statement.
  • Al Daraqutni said, “Weakness is apparent in his narrations.”
  • Al Juzajani said, “He was not reliable.”


Ibn Hajar thereafter related an incident, which indicates his audacity to lie and deceive:


حدثنا عمرو الناقد قال قلت للواقدي تحفظ عن الثوري عن ابن خيثم عن عبد الرحمن بن نبهان عن عبد الرحمن بن حسان بن ثابت عن أبيه في لعن زوارات القبور فقال حدثنا سفيان فقلت أمله علي فأملاه علي بالمسند فقال حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن ثوبان فقلت الحمد لله الذي أوقعك أنت تعرف أنساب الجن و مثل هذا يخفى

‘Amr al Naqid narrated to us that he said to al Waqidi, “Have you memorised from al Thawri the hadith that he narrates from Ibn Khaytham, who narrates from ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Nabhan from ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Hassan ibn Thabit, who narrates from his father about the curse upon those women who visit the graveyard?”

He said, “Sufyan narrated it to us.”

I said to him, “Dictate it to me,” so he did so with the entire chain.

He said, “‘Abdur Rahman ibn Thawban narrated to us.”

So, I said, “All praise be to Allah, Who defeated you. You know the lineage of the jinn yet this unknown to you?”[17]


This is al Waqidi and this is his position in the opinion of many great scholars of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah. Despite what can be considered to be slight Shia leanings, the Shia attempt to claim him as one of their own is unfounded.

As for Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib and his son, Hisham, Muhsin al Amin has mentioned them in Tabaqat al Mu’arrikhin min al Shia.[18]

Ibn al Nadim al Shia has also mentioned them in his al Fihrist.

Al Najashi also mentions Hisham ibn Muhammad in the following statement:


هشام بن محمد بن السائب بن بشير بن زيد من عمرو بن الحارث بن عبد الحارث بن عزى بن امرئ القيس عامر بن النعمان بن عامر بن عبد ود بن عوف بن كنانة بن عوف بن زيد اللات رفيده بن ثور بن كلب بن وبرة المنذر الناسب العالم بالأيام المشهور بالفضل والعلم وكان يختص بمذهبنا وله الحديث المشهور وقال اعتللت علة عظيمة نسيت علمي فجلست إلى جعفر بن محمد عليه السلام فسقاني العلم في الكأس فعاد إلى علمي وكان أبو عبد الله عليه السلام يقربه ويدينه ويبسطه وله كتب كثيرة منها كتاب مثالب ثقيف كتاب مثالب بني أمية كتاب مقتل عثمان كتاب مقتل أمير المؤمنين كتاب حجر بن عدي كتاب الحكمين كتاب مقتل الحسين عليه السلام كتاب أخبار محمد بن الحنفية وغيرها

Hisham ibn Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib ibn Bashir ibn Zaid ibn ‘Amr ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Harith ibn ‘Uzza, ibn Imra’ al Qais ‘Ᾱmir ibn al No’man ibn ‘Ᾱmir ibn ‘Abd Wudd ibn ‘Awf ibn Kinanah ibn ‘Awf ibn Zaid al Lat Rufaydah ibn Thawr ibn Kalb ibn Wabarah al Mundhir. The genealogist, with knowledge of history. He was well known for his virtue and knowledge and specialised in our sect. He narrated the [following] famous narration. He said, “I became so ill that I forgot and lost all my knowledge. I then sat in the company of Jafar ibn Muhammad ‘alayh al Salam. He granted me knowledge in a single cup thus causing all of my knowledge to return to me.” Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam considered him close, included him in his intimate gatherings and pleased him. He had written many books, amongst which some are; Kitab Mathalib Thaqif, Kitab Mathalib Bani Umayyah, Kitab Maqtal Uthman, Kitab Maqtal Amir al Muminin, Kitab Hujr ibn Adi, Kitab al Hakamayn, Kitab Maqtal al Hussain ‘alayh al Salam, Kitab Akhbar Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah. He had written other books besides these as well.[19]


Ibn Dawood al Hilli mentions his father in the first chapter of his Rijal and mentions that he was amongst the companions of al Baqir.[20]

He mentions his son, Hisham, as well and states that Jafar used to keep him close and considered him one of his close-knit companions.[21]

Sayed al Ta’ifah al Tusi, in his Rijal, has considered Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib one of the companions of al Sadiq.[22]

He also considers him one of the Companions of al Baqir.[23]

He was an extremist Shia. His baseless narrations are so famous that they need not be mentioned.[24]

A Shia scholar of biography, ‘Abbas al Qummi, mentioned them in the following statement:


الكلبي النسابة ويقال له ابن الكلبي أيضا أبو المنذر هشام بن أبي النضر محمد بن السائب بن بشر الكلبي الكوفي كان من أعلم الناس بعلم الأنساب وقد أخذ بعض الأنساب عن أبيه أبي النضر محمد بن السائب الذي كان من أصحاب الباقر والصادق عليهم السلام وأخذ أبو النضر نسب قريش عن أبي صالح عن عقيل بن أبي طالب قال ابن قتيبة وكان جده بشر وبنوه السائب وعبيد الرحمن شهدوا الجمل وصفين مع علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وقتل السائب مع مصعب بن الزبير وشهد محمد بن السائب الكلبي الجماجم مع ابن الأشعث وكان نسابا عالما بالتفسير وتوفي بالكوفة وعن السمعاني أنه قال في ترجمة محمد بن السائب أنه صاحب التفسير كان من أهل الكوفة قائل بالرجعة وانبه هشام ذا نسب عال وفي التشيع غال وفي الرجال الكبير هشام بن محمد بن السائب أبو المنذر الناسب العالم المشهور بالفضل والعلم العارف بالأيام كان مختصا بمذهبنا قال اعتللت علة عظيمة نسيت نسيت علمي فجئت إلى جعفر بن محمد (ع) فسقاني العلم في كأس فعاد إلى علمي وكان أبو عبد الله (ع) يقربه ويدنيه وينشطه قلت حكى المعاني وغيره عن قوة حفظه أنه حفظ القرآن في ثلاثة أيام وأنا أقول لا بدع في ذلك فإن من سقاه الصادق (ع) العلم في كأس يحفظ القرآن بأقل من ثلاثة أيام توفي سنة 206 أو 204

Al Kalbi, the Genealogist. He is also called Ibn al Kalbi, Abu al Mundhir Hisham ibn Abi al Nadr Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib ibn Bishr al Kalbi al Kufi. He was amongst the greatest genealogists. He learnt some of this from his father, Abu al Nadr Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib, who was amongst the Companions of al Baqir and al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam. Abu al Nadr learnt about the ancestry of Quraysh from Abu Salih who learnt it from ‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib.

Ibn Qatadah says, “His grandfather was Bishr, whose sons were al Sa’ib and ‘Ubaidur Rahman. They participated in the Battles of al Jamal and Siffin alongside ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib ‘alayh al Salam. Al Sa’ib was martyred along with Mus’ab ibn al Zubair. Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib al Kalbi participated in al Jamajim with Ibn al Ash’ath. He was a great genealogist and possessed knowledge of Exegesis. He passed away in Kufah.”

It has been narrated from al Sam’ani that he mentioned under the discussion of Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib that he possessed knowledge of Exegesis. He was amongst the people of Kufah and he was of the opinion of Rajah. His son, Hisham, was of noble descent and was an extremist Shia.

It is mentioned in al Rijal al Kabir that Hisham ibn Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib Abu al Mundhir, the great, Genealogist and scholar who was known for his expertise and knowledge, and had knowledge of historic events, was an expert in our [Shia]school of thought. He said, “I became so ill that I lost all of my knowledge. I then came to Jafar ibn Muhammad ‘alayh al Salam. He granted me knowledge in a single cup, thus causing all of my knowledge to return to me.”

Abu ‘Abdullah would keep him close, consider him one of his close-knit companions and would encourage him. I said, “He explained the meanings [of words] as well as other things.”

The fact that he memorised the Qur’an in three days proves that he had a very strong memory. I say, “That is nothing strange. In fact, one whom al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam grants knowledge to in a single cup can memorise the Qur’an in less than three days.”

He passed away either in the year 206 or 204 AH.[25]


I say that this is enough to expose the true state of Hisham and his father, Muhammad, and proves that they were from a family that strictly practiced Shi’ism for generations.

As for what some have said, Imam Ibn Hajar al ‘Asqalani quoted their statements when he mentioned Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib:

  • He narrates from Ma’mar ibn Sulaiman from his father that he said, “There were two liars in Kufah; one of them was al Kalbi.”
  • Layth ibn Abi Salim said, “There were two liars in Kufah; one of them was al Kalbi and the other is al Suddi.”
  • Al Duri mentions from Yahya ibn Ma’in, “He is nothing.”
  • Muawiyah ibn Salih narrates from Yahya, “[He is] da’i”
  • Abu Musa, “I have never heard Yahya or ‘Abdur Rahman narrating anything from Sufyan from them.”
  • Al Bukhari says, “Yahya and Ibn Mahdi discarded them (suspecting then of forgery).”
  • Al Duri narrated from Yahya ibn Ya’la al Muharibi that he said, “It was said to Za’idah, ‘Three people should not be narrated from: Ibn Abi Layla, Jabir al Ju’fi, and al Kalbi. As for Ibn Abi Layla, I do not mention him. As for Jabir, by Allah, he was a liar who believed in Raj’ah; and as for al Kalbi, I had a doubt about him then I heard him say [the following] which caused me to abandon him: I became very ill and had forgotten all that I had memorised, so I came to the family of Muhammad and they spat in my mouth causing me to remember whatever I had forgotten.’”
  • Al Asma’i narrated from Abu ‘Awanah, “I heard al Kalbi uttering a statement which when uttered causes one to enter the state of disbelief. I asked him about it and he denied it.”
  • ‘Abdul Wahid ibn Ghiyath narrated from Ibn Mahdi: Abu Juz’ sat by us at the door of Abu ‘Amr ibn al ‘Ala’. He said, “I testify that al Kalbi is a disbeliever.” He said, “I related this to Yazid ibn Zuray’.” He said, “I heard him saying, ‘I testify that he is a disbeliever.’” He asked, “What does he claim?” He said, “I heard him saying that Jibril used to deliver revelation to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went to relieve himself and ‘Ali sat, so he conveyed the revelation to ‘Ali.” Yazid said, “I never heard him saying this; however, I saw him hitting his chest and saying, ‘I am a Saba’i. I am a Saba’i.’” Al ‘Uqayli clarifies they are part of the Rafidah sect, the companions of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’.
  • Ibn Fudayl narrated from Mughirah from Ibrahim that he said to Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib, “Do not come close to us as long as you are of this opinion,” and he was amongst the Murji’
  • Zaid ibn al Hubab said, “I heard al Thawri saying, ‘How strange are the narrations of al Kalbi.’”
  • Ibn Abi Hatim said, “I said to my father, ‘Al Thawri has narrated from him.’ He said, ‘He did not intend to narrate from him. Rather, he would relate his incidents out of amazement. Those who were present would write it down and consider it a narration.’”
  • ‘Ali ibn Mus-hir narrated from Abu Janab al Kalbi, the ally of Abu Salih, “I never narrated any exegesis to al Kalbi.”
  • Abu ‘Asim said, “Sufyan al Thawri claimed that I said that al Kalbi said that whatever I have narrated from Abu Salih from Ibn ‘Abbas is a lie, so do not narrate it.”
  • Al Asma’i narrated from Qurrah ibn Khalid, “They believed that al Kalbi used to adorn meaning; he used to lie.”
  • Yazid bin Harun said, “Al Kalbi became old and was overpowered by forgetfulness.”
  • Abu Hatim said, “Everyone agrees that his narrations will be abandoned as his [memory of] hadith has faded. Do not be bothered with him.”
  • Al Nasa’i said, “He is not reliable. His hadith cannot be written.”
  • Ibn ‘Adi said, “Besides the narrations that have been mentioned, he has some authentic narrations related from Abu Salih. He was well known for exegesis. No one has a book lengthier in the field of exegesis than his. Multiple reliable people have narrated from him and have considered his exegesis acceptable. With regards to the field of hadith, he has some munkar narrations. As he is famous amongst the weak narrators, his narrations have been recorded.”
  • Ibn Abi Hatim said, “Al Bukhari writes at another place that Muhammad ibn Bishr heard ‘Amr ibn ‘Abdullah al Hadrami and Muhammad ibn Ishaq narrate from him that Ibn Abi Hatim said, “He is al Kalbi.”
  • Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al Hadrami said, “He passed away in Kufah in the year 146 AH.” I said Ibn Sa’d says his lineage goes back to Kalb ibn Wabarah. He said his grandfather was Bishr and his sons were al Sa’ib, ‘Ubaid and ‘Abdur Rahma They participated in the Battle of Jamal with ‘Ali; and Muhammad ibn al Sa’ib took part in Jamajim alongside Ibn al Ash’ath. He possessed knowledge of exegesis, ancestry, and narrations of the Arabs. He passed away in Kufah in the year 146 AH. His son Hisham informed me of this. He said: This was not the case; he was very weak in narration.
  • ‘Ali ibn Junaid, Hakim Abu Ahmed, and al Daraqutni said he was matruk (suspected of forgery).
  • Al Juzajani said, “He was a corrupted liar.”
  • Ibn Hibban said that his falsehood is so apparent that it need not be mentioned when describing him.
  • He narrated exegesis from Abu Salih whereas Abu Salih did not narrate from Ibn ‘Abba Therefore, it is not permissible to take it as a proof.
  • Al Saji said his narrations are matruk (suspected of forgery) and he was very weak due to his extremism in Shi’ism.
  • The reliable scholars of transmission have agreed upon censuring him and regarding his narrations in the matters of rulings and applied jurisprudence to be abandoned.
  • Hakim Abu ‘Abdullah said, “He related fabricated narrations from Abu Salih.”[26]


This is the reality of the man and this is his status. These are the opinions of the scholars about him. These are his fabrications and lies that led him to this belief.

As for his son, Hisham, he takes after him and is a matruk Shia just as his father, as al Dhahabi and others have mentioned.[27]

As for al Kalbi, he has authored a book about the allegations against the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum, as Ibn Mutahhar al Hilli narrated in his book Minhaj al Karamah.[28]

Ibn Taymiyyah has criticised him and has quoted the statements of knowledgeable seniors about him:


هشام الكلبي وهو من أكذب الناس وهو شيعي يروى عن أبيه وعن أبي مخنف لوط بن يحيى وكلاهما متروك كذاب وقال الإمام أحمد ما ظننت أن أحدا يحدث عنه إنما هو صاحب سمر ونسب وقال الدارقطني هو متروك وقال ابن عدي هشام الكلبي الغالب عليه الأسمار ولا أعرف له في المسند شيئا وأبوه أيضا كذاب ساقط وقال زائدة والليث وسليمان والتميمي هو كذاب وقال يحيى ليس بشيء كذاب ساقط وقال ابن حبان وضوح الكذب فيه أظهر من أن يحتاج إلى الإغراق في وصفه

Hisham al Kalbi: he was one of the greatest liars and he is a Shia who narrates from his father and from Abu Mikhnaf Lut ibn Yahya—who are both matruk and kadhdhabs (liars). Imam Ahmed said, “I do not think there is anyone who narrates from him. He is a mere talebearer and fabricator.” Al Daraqutni said that he is matruk.

Ibn ‘Adi said, “Tales have overpowered Hisham al Kalbi. I do not know of any reliable narration from him. His father is also a corrupted liar.”

Za’idah, Layth, and Sulaiman al Tamimi agree that he is a liar.

Yahya said, “He is nothing. [He is] a corrupted liar.”

Ibn Hibban said, “His falsehood is so apparent that it need not be mentioned when describing him.”[29]


These four are those who the historians depend upon when relating the narrations and tragic events that took place during the time of Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and when describing the battles that took place between Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and those who demanded justice for Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu—that qisas be taken immediately—up until the martyrdom of Sayyidina Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the events and consequences that followed. They gave it a special coat of paint and exaggerated it in order to promote the Saba’iyyah and their beliefs from the onset of history, after they deceived many people in the name of love for the Ahlul Bayt. They opened a new door for the attack and reproach of the honourable, righteous Companions of Prophet Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and caused negligence to enter the people in matters of their religion. This was all introduced by none other than ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ and his supporters. None besides them laid down and constructed its foundation and principles. It is for this reason that we discussed these people before mentioning the incidents and accusations so that the worth of the narrations can be recognised through their narrators. Moreover, so that it is known that every incident and narration that has only been related by the Saba’iyyah and the Shia cannot be relied on or considered.

After mentioning these important matters, we would like to say that the Saba’iyyah plotted to divide the Believers, destroy Islam, and attack the Islamic Khilafah.

Firstly, they accomplished this by spreading Jewish beliefs and the ways of others amongst the Believers, and then by spreading the false statements that were supposedly made by the rulers and governors. We therefore repeat the statement of Jarir al Tabari that we had mentioned in the discussion of the Saba’iyyah, to expose the reality of their claims against the third Rightly Guided Khalifah of the Prophet of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Sayyidina ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and to show that Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu was popular for his nobility and forbearance. He was the generous, honourable, bashful son of the daughter of the paternal aunt of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the husband of two of his daughters. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, his family, as well as Sayyidina ‘Ali and his children radiya Llahu ‘anhum praised him.[30] We will mention his statement so that it can be known how conspiracies were hatched against him, and how the winds of trials were blown in his direction and who orchestrated all of this. Al Tabari says:


كان عبد الله بن سبأ يهوديا من أهل صنعاء أمه سوداء فأسلم زمان عثمان ثم تنقل في بلدان المسلمين يحاول ضلالتهم فبدأ بالحجاز ثم البصرة ثم الكوفة ثم الشام فلم يقدر على ما يريد عند أحد من أهل الشام فأخرجوه حتى أتى مصر فاعتمر فيهم فقال لهم فيما يقول لعجب ممن يزعم أن عيسى يرجع ويكذب بان محمدا يرجع وقد قال الله عز وجل إِنَّ الَّذِيْ فَرَضَ عَلَيْكَ الْقُرْآنَ لَرَادُّكَ إِلىٰ مَعَادٍ فمحمد أحق بالرجوع من عيسى قال فقبل ذلك عنه ووضع لهم الرجعة فتكلموا فيها ثم قال لهم بعد ذلك أنه كان ‏ألف نبي ولكل نبي وصي وكان علي وصي محمد ثم قال محمد خاتم الأنبياء وعلي خاتم الأوصياء ثم قال بعد ذلك من أظلم ممن لم يجز وصية رسول الله ﷺ وتناول أمر الأمة ثم قال لهم بعد ذلك أوصى رسول الله ﷺ فانهضوا في هذا الأمر فحركوه وابدأوا بالطعن على أمرائكم وأظهروا الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر وجعلوا يكتبون إلى الأمصار بكتب يضعونها في ولاتهم ويكاتبهم إخوانهم بمثل ذلك ويكتب أهل كل مصر منهم إلى مصر آخر بما يصنعون فيقرأه أولئك في أمصارهم وهؤلاء في أمصارهم حتى تناولوا بذلك المدينة وأوسعوا الأرض إذاعة يريدون غير ما يظهرون ويسرون فيقول أهل كل مصر أنا لفي عافية مما ابتلى به هؤلاء إلا أهل المدينة فإنهم جاءهم ذلك عن جميع الأمصار فقالوا إنا لفي عافية مما فيه الناس وجامعه محمد وطلحة من هذا المكان قالوا فأتوا عثمان فقالوا يا أمير المؤمنين أيأتيك عن الناس الذي يأتينا قال لا والله ما جاءني إلا السلامة قالوا فإنا قد أتانا وأخبروه بالذي أسقطوا إليهم قال فأنتم شركائي وشهود المؤمنين فأشيروا علي قالوا نشير عليك أن تبعث رجالا ممن تثق بهم إلى الأمصار حتى يرجعوا إليك ‏بأخبارهم فدعى محمد بن مسلمة وأرسله إلى الكوفة وأرسل أسامة بن زيد إلى البصرة وأرسل عمار بن ياسر إلى مصر وأرسل عبد الله بن عمر إلى الشام وفرق رجالا سواهم فرجعوا جميعا قبل عمار فقال أيها الناس ما أنكرنا شيئا ولا أنكره أعلام المسلمين ولا عوامهم قالوا جميعا الأمر أمر المسلمين إلا أن أمرائهم يقسطون بينهم ويقومون عليهم واستبطأ الناس عمارا حتى ظنوا أنه قد اغتيل فلم يفجأهم إلا كتاب من عبد الله بن سعد بن أبي سرح يخبرهم أن عمار قد استماله قوم مصر وقد انقطعوا إليه منهم عبد الله بن السوداء وسودان بن حمران وكنانة بن بشر

‘Abdullah ibn Saba’ was a Jew from San’a’ whose mother was a black woman. He accepted Islam during the era of ‘Uthman, then began to move around the lands of the Believers trying to misguide them. He first began with Hijaz then Basrah, Kufah, and Syria. He was unable to have his way with anyone amongst the people of Syria, and they eventually exiled him. He then travelled to Egypt and lived there.

One of the things he said to them was, “How strange is he who believes that ‘Isa will return but denies that Muhammad will return, whereas Allah has said, Indeed, [O Muhammad], He who imposed upon you the Qur’an will take you back to a place of return. Muhammad is more deserving to return than ‘Isa.” This was accepted from him, the doctrine of Raj’ah was established in their minds and they began discussing it.

After that, he told them that there were one thousand Prophets and each Prophet had a deputy and ‘Ali was the deputy of Muhammad. He said, “Muhammad is the Seal of all Prophets and ‘Ali is the seal of all deputies.” After that he said, “Who is more unjust than the one who does not practice upon the advice of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and pounces on the deputy of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and seizes control over the matters of the Ummah? He then said to them, “Indeed, ‘Uthman took control unjustly. This [‘Ali] is the deputy of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, so rise up in this matter and raise awareness to it. Begin by reviling your leaders and openly call towards goodness and prohibit evil, for indeed this will attract people. Then call them to support this matter.”

He spread out his preachers and wrote to those who spread corruption in different cities, and they too wrote to him. They secretly called towards their cause and they openly commanded good and prohibited evil. They began writing to different cities about faults that they falsely attributed to their leaders. They would write to their brothers about this and the people of those cities would write to other cities about what they were doing. The people of this city and that city would read these letters until eventually this news reached Madinah. They spanned the earth trying to publicise this, with motives besides what they made apparent and hiding that which was not evident. The inhabitants of each city would say, “We have been saved from what these [people of this city] have been afflicted with,” except the people of Madinah as this news only came to them from the rest of the cities. They therefore said, “We have been saved from what everyone has been afflicted with.”

Muhammad and Talhah [narrate the same until this point.] From here onwards, they say, “They came to ‘Uthman and said, ‘O Leader of the Believers, does the news that reaches us from the people reach you too?’

He said, ‘No, by Allah, only news of their peace has reached me.’

They said, ‘Some news has indeed come to us,’ and they informed him of the news that reached them.

He said, ‘You are my partners and witnesses over the Believers, so advise me!’

They said, ‘We advise you to send men that you trust to these cities, so that they may bring information to you about them.’ So, he called Muhammad ibn Maslamah and sent him to Kufah. He sent Usamah ibn Zaid to Basrah, ‘Ammar ibn Yasir to Egypt, and ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar to Syria, and sent other men besides them.

They all returned before ‘Ammar and said, ‘O people, neither did we, nor the high-ranking Believers, nor the ordinary Believers find anything wrong.’ All of them said that the affairs were in the hands of the Believers and that their leaders would deal with them with justice and look after them. The people found that ‘Ammar delayed to such an extent that they thought that he was abducted. They were uninformed until a letter from ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh came to them informing them that ‘Ammar had been inclined towards the people of Egypt and that they sent towards him from amongst them ‘Abdullah ibn al Sawda’, Khalid ibn Muljam, Sawdan ibn Hamran, and Kinanah ibn Bishr.[31]


To give complete benefit, we will mention the reaction of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum that al Tabari mentioned:


ثم كتب عثمان إلى أهل الأمصار أما بعد فإني آخذ العمال بموافاتي في كل موسم وقد سلطت الأمة منذ وليت على الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر فلا يرفع علي شيء ولا على أحد من عمالي إلا أعطيته وليس لي ولعيالي حق قبل الرعية إلا متروك لهم وقد رفع إلي أهل المدينة أن أقواما يشتمون وآخرون يضربون فيأمن ضرب سرا وشتم سرا من ادعى شيئا من ذلك فليواف الموسم فليأخذ بحقه حيث كان مني أو من عمالي أو تصدقوا فإن الله يجزي المتصدقين فلما قرئ في الأمصار أبكى الناس ودعوا لعثمان وقالوا إن الأمة لتمخض بشر وبعث إلى عمار الأمصار فقدموا عليه عبد الله بن عامر ومعاوية وعبد الله بن سعد وأدخل معهم في المشورة سعيدا وعمرا فقال ويحكم ما هذه الشكاية وما هذا الإذاعة إن والله لخائف أن تكونوا مصدوقا عليكم وما يعصب هذا إلا بي فقالوا ألم تبعث ألم نرجع إليك الخبر عن القوم ألم يرجعوا ولم يشافههم أحد بشيء لا والله ما صدقوا ولا بروا ولا نعلم لهذا الأمر اصلا وما كنت لتأخذ به أحدا فيقيمك على شيء وما هي إلا إذاعة لا يحل الأخذ بها ولا الانتهاء إليها قال فأشيروا علي فقال سعيد بن العاص هذا أمر مصنوع يصنع في السر فيلقى به غير ذو المعرفة فيخبر به فيتحدث به في مجالسهم قال فما دواء ذلك قال طلب هؤلاء القوم ثم قتل هؤلاء الذين يخرج هذا من عندهم وقال عبد الله بن سعد خذ من الناس الذي عليهم إذا أعطيتهم الذي لهم فإنه خير من أن تدعهم قال معاوية قد وليتني فوليت قوما لا يأتيك عنهم إلا الخير والرجلان أعلم بناحيتيهما قال فالرأي قال حسن الأدب قال فما ترى يا عمرو قال أرى أنك قد لنت لهم وتراخيت عنهم وزدتهم على ما كان يصنع عمر فأرى أن تلزم طريقة صاحبيك فتشد في موضع الشدة وتلين في موضع اللين إن الشدة نتبغي لمن لا يألو الناس شرا واللين لمن يخلف الناس بالنصح وقد فرشتهما جميعا اللين وقام عثمان فحمد الله وأثنى عليه وقال كل ما أشرتم به علي قد سمعت ولكل امر باب يؤتى منه إن هذا الأمر الذي يخاف على هذه الأمة كائن وأن بابه الذي يغلق عليه فيكفكف به اللين والمؤاتاة والمتابعة إلا في حدود الله تعالى ذكره التي لا يستطيع أحد أن يبادى بعيب أحدها فإن سده شيء فرفق فذلك والله ليفتحن وليست لأحد علي حجة حق وقد علم الله أني لم آل الناس خيرا ولا نفسي ووالله إن رحى الفتنة لدائرة فطوبى لعثمان إن مات ولم يحركها كفكفوا الناس وهبوا لهم حقوقهم واغتفروا بهم وإذا تعوطيت حقوق الله فلا تدهنوا فيها

‘Uthman then wrote to the people of various cities, “I appoint governors after communicating throughout the year. Indeed, since I came into power, I have encouraged the Ummah to command good and forbid evil. No request was made to me or any of my governors except that I fulfilled it. Neither myself nor my family had a right to something before the people except that it was left for their sake. The people of Madinah have complained to me that some people are being insulted and others beaten, so all those who have been beaten in seclusion and insulted in secrecy; whoever [amongst you] claims [that he has experienced] any of this, let him attend the Hajj and let him take his right from me or my governors wherever he may be, or he may forgo it with the intention of charity for indeed Allah rewards the charitable.”

When this was read in the cities, it caused the people to cry and pray for ‘Uthman. They said, “Indeed the people intend evil.” It was sent to the governors of various cities so ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Ᾱmir, Muawiyah, and ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d came to him. Sa’id and ‘Umar were also included in the discussion.

He [‘Uthman] said, “What are these complaints and this proclamation? By Allah, I fear that they might have spoken the truth about you and this will only make things difficult upon me.”

They replied, “Did you not send [people]? Did we not return them to you with good news from the people? Did they not return having no complaints with them? Nay, by Allah, they were not truthful or righteous and we do not know of any base for these claims. If you were to consider any one of them, you would realise that it was nothing besides a claim that would not be lawful to consider and would not be able to be traced.”

He [‘Uthman] said, “So give me your counsel.”

Sa’id ibn al ‘As said, “This is a matter which has been conspired in secrecy. Unknown people have spread it and mentioned it in their gatherings.”

‘Uthman asked, “What is the solution to this?”

Sa’id said, “Finding and killing the people who started this.”

‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d said, “Take from the people the rights that they owe you after you have fulfilled the rights you owe them as this is better than leaving them.”

Muawiyah said, “You made me the ruler of a people about whom nothing but good will reach you and these two men are more aware of their areas.”

‘Uthman said, “What is your opinion?”

Muawiyah said, “Good etiquette.”

‘Uthman asked, “What is your opinion, O ‘Amr?”

‘Amr answered, “I feel you have been lenient with them and gentler towards them than ‘Umar was, so I think that you should adhere to the ways of your two Companions and be stern where need be and gentle where need be. Indeed, sternness is needed for those who stop at nothing to spread evil amongst people, and gentleness is needed for those who succeed the people with goodness. However, you have dealt with both of them leniently.”

‘Uthman stood up, praised and glorified Allah and the declared, “I have heard whatever you have suggested to me. Every matter has a door that it comes from. The matter that is feared for this Ummah will surely come to be. [In the effort to keep its door closed,] kindness, favours, and compliance are being held back. [This of course refers to compliance in other matters] besides the limits set by Allah that none can find any defect in. If there were anything that could keep closed its door that is currently closed, it would be kindness. By Allah, it will surely be opened at a time when none will be able to charge me for not fulfilling a right. Indeed, Allah knows that I stopped at nothing, not even for myself, to benefit the people. By Allah, the wheel of corruption is turning, so glad tidings be for ‘Uthman if he is able to die without causing it to move. The people have been controlled, granted their rights, and pardoned. Once the rights of Allah are fulfilled, do not foil them.”[32]



[1] Al Kafi fi al Usul, Chapter with regards to Taqiyyah, 2/19, Iran.

[2] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 257-258.

[3] Ayan al Shia, pg. 127. [Al Waqidi being a Shia is a claim without proof. None of the early experts of transmitter biographies, despite pointing out his unreliability, ever made such an accusation. Translator’s note]

[4] Al Najashi: Fihrist Asma’ Musannifi al Shia.

[5] Rijal al Hilli, pg. 282.

[6] Al Kuna wa al Alqab, 1/148-149.

[7] Lisan al Mizan 4/492-493.

[8] Al Dhahabi: Mizan al Itidal, 2/360.

[9] Al Dhahabi: al Muntaqa min Minhaj al I’tidal, pg. 21-23, al Matba’ah al Salafiyyah, Cairo.

[10] Al Tabari: Tarikh al Umam wa al Muluk, 1/5, foreword of the book, Beirut.

[11] Ibn al Athir: al Kamil, 1/5, foreword.

[12] A’yan al Shia, the first discussion, part one, pg. 127.

[13] Al Kuna wa al Alqab, 3/230-232.

[14] Rawdat al Jannat, 7/268.

[15] Ibn Hibban: Kitab al Majruhin, 2/284, Deccan.

[16] Al Dhahabi: al Mughni, 2/619.

[17] Imam Ibn Hajar al ‘Asqalani: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, 9/363-368, he mentioned it concisely; al Dhahabi: Mizan al I’tidal, 3/110.

[18] Ayan al Shia, 1/127-128.

[19] Rijal al Najashi, pg. 305-306.

[20] Rijal Ibn Abi Dawood al Hilli, pg. 312.

[21] Ibid, pg. 368-369.

[22] Rijal al Tusi, pg. 289.

[23] Ibid, pg. 136.

[24] Ayan al Shia, 1/59.

[25] Al Kuna wa al Alqab, 3/94-96.

[26] Ibn Hajar: Tahdhib al Tahdhib, pg. 178-181.

[27] Mizan al I’tidal, pg. 304-305.

[28] Minhaj al Karamah fi Ithbat al Imamah, pg. 58, which has been written in the margin of Ibn Taymiyyah’s Minhaj al Sunnah.

[29] Minhaj al Sunnah, 3/19.

[30] For a detailed explanation refer to our book, al Shia wa Ahlul Bayt.

[31] Tarikh al Tabari, 5/98-99.

[32] Tarikh al Tabari, 5/99-100.