Section 2 – Discussion 1: The Rafidah’s stance on the Sahabah briefly

Discussion 3 – Relationship between Abu Dharr al Ghifari and the remaining Sahabah
February 29, 2024
SAYYIDUNA ‘UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB RADIYA LLAHU ‘ANHU
March 12, 2024

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Section 2

Abu Dharr al Ghifari according to the Rafidah

This section contains two discussions

Discussion 1: The Rafidah’s stance on the Sahabah briefly.

Discussion 2: Abu Dharr al Ghifari’s position according to the Rafidah and the reasons for them pretending to defend him.

 

 

Discussion 1

The Rafidah’s stance on the Sahabah briefly

 

The Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah are unanimous on the virtue and integrity of the Companions of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[1] The Rafidah oppose them in this by labelling the Companions disbelievers and renegades from din after the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise except for a few. Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

 

وأصل قول الرافضة … أن المهاجرين والأنصار كتموا النص وكفروا بالإمام المعصوم واتبعوا أهواءهم وبدلوا الدين وغيروا الشريعة وظلموا واعتدوا بل كفروا إلا نفرا قليلا

The original stance of the Rafidah is that the Muhajirin and Ansar concealed the textual evidence, disbelieved in the infallible Imam, followed their passions, adulterated the religion, distorted the Shari’ah, oppressed, transgressed, and in fact disbelieved, except a small group.[2]

 

‘Abdul Qahir al Baghdadi[3] rahimahu Llah writes:

 

وأما الإمامية فقد زعم أكثرهم أن الصحابة ارتدت بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم سوى علي وابنيه ومقدار ثلاثة عشر منهم

As for the Imamiyyah, the majority of them believe that the Sahabah apostatised after the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam besides ‘Ali, his two sons, and thirteen others.[4]

 

The Rafidah have circulated this belief in their most relied upon books. There is no book of theirs except that it contains excommunication, abuse, and cursing. In fact, they worship Allah after every Salah by cursing the three Khalifas and other eminent Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[5] They apply the verses on disbelief, the disbelievers, polytheism, and the polytheists to all the Sahabah. They create doubt in their faith, intentions, and their assistance to Islam and the Muslims to plant malice, spread rancour, and create hatred and to firmly establish this belief in the hearts of their followers, to the extent that it became an evident belief which cannot be concealed behind Taqiyyah[6], especially in the present day and age when their reports are replete with this disbelief. In fact, they consider the verdict of their Islam to be the worst disbelief and deviance as they pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum. They consider these Sahabah their most staunch enemies, relying on reports documented in their sources falsely and wrongly attributed to some of the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt. Some of these are:

It appears in al Kulayni’s[7] Usul al Kafi from Humran ibn A’yan who says:

 

قلت لأبي جعفر جعلت فداك ما أقلنا لو اجتمعنا على شاة ما أفنيناها فقال ألا أحدثك بأعجب من ذلك المهاجرون والأنصار ذهبوا إلا وأشار بيده ثلاثة

I asked Abu Jafar, “May I be sacrificed for you. How little are we! If we gather to eat one sheep, we would not finish it.”

He said, “Should I not tell you something more amazing than this? The Muhajirin and Ansar reneged besides three,” indicating with his hand.[8]

 

Nuri al Tabarsi[9] emphatically declares the apostasy of the Sahabah saying:

 

إن من وقف على شطر قليل من حال القوم وكيفية تواطئهم على إطفاء الحق وسترهم ما هو أحق بالنشر مما ذكر كيف يستغرب منهم ذلك وما ورد في ارتدادهم ورجوعهم إلى قواعد الجاهلية أكثر من أن يخفى

Indeed, whoever is cognisant of a small portion of their condition and the manner they colluded in extinguishing the truth and concealing that which deserves to be disseminated more than what was mentioned, how can this ever be considered farfetched for them? The reports on their apostasy and returning to the rules of Ignorance are more than can be concealed.[10]

 

The Imams of the Rafidah have elucidated upon this small number at other places. It is reported that Abu Jafar said:

 

كان الناس أهل ردة بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلا ثلاثة فقلت ومن الثلاثة فقال المقداد بن الأسود وأبو ذر وسلمان الفارسي … ثم عرف الناس بعد يسير وقال هؤلاء الذين دارت عليهم الرحا وأبوا أن يبايعوا لأبي بكر حتى جاؤوا بأمير المؤمنين مكرها فبايع

“People turned apostate after the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam besides three.”

“Who are they,” I asked.

He explained, “Miqdad ibn al Aswad, Abu Dharr, and Salman al Farisi.” After a little while, he explained to the people saying, “It was against these people that [all hell] broke out and they refused to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr until the people brought Amir al Mu’minin forcefully and he pledged allegiance.”[11]

 

The Rafidah exclude these three from the Sahabah and include them among the believers as they believed in ‘Ali’s Wilayah and disbelieved in Abu Bakr’s Imamah—as apparent from this text. They cite Allah’s following statement as evidence for this fundamental:

 

إِنَّمَا ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ إِذَا ذُكِرَ ٱللَّهُ وَجِلَتۡ قُلُوبُهُمۡ وَإِذَا تُلِيَتۡ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ءَايَٰتُهُۥ زَادَتۡهُمۡ إِيمَٰنٗا وَعَلَىٰ رَبِّهِمۡ يَتَوَكَّلُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَمِمَّا رَزَقۡنَٰهُمۡ يُنفِقُونَ أُوْلَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُونَ حَقّٗاۚ لَّهُمۡ دَرَجَٰتٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمۡ وَمَغۡفِرَةٞ وَرِزۡقٞ كَرِيمٞ

The believers are only those who, when Allah is mentioned, their hearts become fearful, and when His verses are recited to them, it increases them in faith; and upon their Lord they rely. The ones who establish prayer, and from what We have provided them, they spend. Those are the believers, truly. For them are degrees [of high position] with their Lord and forgiveness and noble provision.[12]

 

They claim: This verse was revealed concerning Amir al Mu’minin, Abu Dharr, Salman, and al Miqdad.[13]

There are other texts on the number of persons the Rafidah exclude, which reach seven. It is reported from ‘Abdul Malik ibn A’yan:

 

أنه سأل أبا عبد الله مرة عن حال الناس بعد وفاة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال له هلك الناس إذا فقال أي والله يا ابن أعين هلك الناس أجمعون فقال أهل الشرق والغرب قال إنها فتحت على الضلال إي والله هلكوا إلا ثلاثة نفر سلمان الفارسي وأبو ذر والمقداد ولحقهم عمار وأبو ساسان الأنصاري وحذيفة وأبو عمرة فصاروا سبعة

He asked Abu ‘Abdullah once about people’s condition after the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise saying, “People were then destroyed?”

“Yes, by Allah, O Ibn A’yan! All of the people were destroyed.”

“The people of the East and West?”

“Indeed, it was opened to misguidance. Yes, by Allah, they were all destroyed besides three individuals, viz. Salman al Farisi, Abu Dharr, and Miqdad. ‘Ammar, Abu Sasan al Ansari, Hudhayfah, and Abu ‘Amrah joined them, making them seven.”[14]

 

Abu ‘Abdullah would state on oath:

 

فوالله ما وفى بها إلا سبعة نفر سلمان وأبو ذر وعمار والمقداد بن الأسود الكندي وجابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري ومولى لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقال له الثبيت وزيد بن أرقم

By Allah, none was loyal to it besides seven individuals, viz. Salman, Abu Dharr, Miqdad ibn al Aswad al Kindi, Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah al Ansari, the Messenger of Allah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam slave al Thabit, and Zaid ibn Arqam.[15]

 

Abu Jafar affirms:

 

وكانوا سبعة فلم يكن يعرف حق أمير المؤمنين إلا هؤلاء السبعة

They were seven. None recognised Amir al Mu’minin’s right besides these seven.[16]

 

They dedicate a thorough share of excommunication, curse, and disparagement to the three Khalifas, viz. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman, as well as Muawiyah and Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anhum, either through emphatic clear texts, as is the condition of the contemporary Rafidah, or texts in which they employed particular terminologies, as was the practice of the early Rafidah—due to the power of the Islamic state at the time.[17]

Al Majlisi dedicates a chapter to this, titling it: chapter on the disbelief, hypocrisy, scandalous actions, and dreadful effects of the three and the virtue of dissociating from them and cursing them.[18]

It appears in Usul al Kafi that Abu ‘Abdullah stated:

 

ثلاثة لا يكلمهم الله يوم القيامة ولا يزكيهم ولهم عذاب أليم من ادعى إمامة من الله ليست له ومن جحد إماما من الله ومن زعم أن لهما في الإسلام نصيبا

Three persons, Allah will neither look at them on the Day of Qiyamah nor purify them and they will have a severe punishment: Whoever claims he is an Imam and is not, whoever rejects the Imamah of an Imam from Allah, and whoever thinks that they two [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar] have a share in Islam.[19]

 

Hassan al Hilli[20] comments on Abu Bakr and ‘Umar:

 

ومما يدل على ما قلناه من أنهما كانا منافقين غير مؤمنين ما سمع من قنوت مولانا أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وهو هذا اللهم العن صنمي قريش وجبتيهما وطاغوتيهما وإفكيهما وابنتيهما الذين خالفا أمرك وأنكرا وحيك وجحدا إنعامك وعصيا رسولك وقلبا دينك وحرفا كتابك وعطلا أحكامك وأبطلا فرائضك وألحدا في آياتك وعاديا أولياءك وواليا أعداءك وخربا بلادك وأفسدا عبادك اللهم العنهما وأتباعهما وأشياعهما ومحبيهما

What indicates to what we affirmed, that they were hypocrites and not believers, is the supplication heard from our master Amir al Mu’minin which is: O Allah curse the two idols of Quraysh, its two Jibts, Taghuts, lies, and their daughters who opposed Your order, rejected Your revelation, denied Your bounty, disobeyed Your Rasul, altered Your Din, distorted Your Book, rendered Your laws useless, nullified Your mandated tenets, were guilty of heresy in Your verses, opposed Your friends, befriended Your enemies, ravaged Your lands, and corrupted Your bondsmen. O Allah, curse them, their followers, supporters, and lovers.[21]

 

Khomeini[22] writes:

 

ولم يؤمن أبو بكر وعمر إيمانا نابعا من القلب بل الإسلام في الظاهر فقد طمعا في الحكم والسلطة وقد التصقا بالرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم

Abu Bakr and ‘Umar did not believe with faith originating from the heart. Rather, they embraced Islam outwardly. They indeed desired rulership and authority and thus stuck with the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[23]

 

Muhammad al Khalisi[24] writes:

 

وإن قالوا أن أبا بكر وعمر من أهل بيعة الرضوان الذين نص الله على الرضا عنهم في القرآن لَقَدْ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ تَحْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ قلنا لو قال لقد رضي الله عن الذين يبايعونك تحت الشجرة أو عن الذين بايعوك لكان في الآية دلالة على الرضا عن كل من بايعه ولكن لما قال لَقَدْ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ فلا دلالة فيه على الرضا إلا عمن محض الإيمان

If they say that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were from the participants of Bay’at al Ridwan, for whom Allah categorically declared happiness in the glorious Qur’an: Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you [O Prophet] under the tree, we say that had Allah said: ‘Allah was certainly pleased with those who pledged allegiance to you under the tree,’ or ‘those who pledged allegiance to you,’ there would be indication in the verse towards happiness with all those who pledged allegiance. However, since Allah said: Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you [O Prophet] under the tree. There is no indication to happiness except with those sincere in iman.[25]

 

It appears in Bihar al Anwar:

 

ومن أعداء الله أصلحك الله قال الأوثان الأربعة قال قلت من هم قال أبو الفصيل ورمع ونعثل ومعاوية ومن دان دينهم

“Who are Allah’s enemies? May Allah keep you well.”

He answered, “The four idols.”

“Who are they?”

He explained, “Abu al Fasil[26], Ramu’, Na’thal[27], Muawiyah and whoever follows their religion.”[28]

 

Al Majlisi expounds on these terminologies saying:

 

أبو الفصيل أبو بكر لأن الفصيل والبكر متقاربان في المعنى ورمع مقلوب عمر ونعثل هو عثمان كما صرح به في كتب اللغة

Abu al Fasil is Abu Bakr because fasil and bakr (young camel) are close in meaning. Ramu’ is ‘Umar reversed. Na’thal refers to ‘Uthman as spelt out in the books on language.[29]

 

An indication appears in Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi[30] to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar with the words: Fulan wa Fulan. Abu Basir reports that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah saying:

 

يَأَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوا ادْخُلُوْا فِي السِّلْمِ كَافَّةً وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوْا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِيْنٌ قال أتدري ما السلم قال قلت أنت أعلم قال ولاية علي والأوصياء من بعده قال وخطوات الشيطان والله ولاية فلان وفلان

O you who have believed, enter into silm (Islam) completely [and perfectly] and do not follow the footsteps of Shaitan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.[31]

He asked, “Do you know what silm is?”

I answered, “You are more knowledgeable.”

He explained, “The Wilayah of ‘Ali and the Awsiya’ after him. The footsteps of Shaitan—by Allah—is the rule of so and so and so and so.”[32]

 

Abu ‘Abdullah commentates on Allah’s statement:

 

إِنَّ الَّذِيْنَ ارْتَدُّوْا عَلىٰ أَدْبَارِهِمْ مِّنْ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُمُ الْهُدَى الشَّيْطَانُ سَوَّلَ لَهُمْ وَأَمْلىٰ لَهُمْ … قال فلان وفلان وفلان ارتدوا عن الإيمان في ترك ولاية أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام

Indeed, those who reverted back [to disbelief] after guidance had become clear to them, Shaitan enticed them and prolonged hope for them.[33] He explained, “So and so, so and so, and so and so apostatised from faith by abandoning the Wilayah of Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam.”[34]

 

Furthermore, they specifically disparaged, cursed, and fervently dissociated from Umm al Mu’minin Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha, claiming her disbelief, being out of the fold of iman, and being from the inmates of Hell. They accuse her of immorality and give her the most despicable titles. They accuse her of being the mother of all evil, a female devil, the red-cheeked one, and other lies and fabrications.[35] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi documents a report of Jafar al Sadiq on Allah’s statement:

 

وَلَا تَكُوْنُوْا كَالَّتِيْ نَقَضَتْ غَزْلَهَا مِنْ بَعْدِ قُوَّةٍ أَنْكَاثًا تَتَّخِذُوْنَ أَيْمَانَكُمْ دَخَلًا بَيْنَكُمْ أَنْ تَكُوْنَ أُمَّةٌ هِيَ أَرْبىٰ مِنْ أُمَّةٍ إِنَّمَا يَبْلُوْكُمُ اللهُ بِهِ وَلَيُبَيِّنَنَّ لَكُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ مَا كُنْتُمْ فِيْهِ تَخْتَلِفُوْنَ قال التي نقضت غزلها من بعد قوة أنكاثا عائشة هي نكثت أيمانها

And do not be like she who untwisted her spun thread after it was strong [by] taking your oaths as [means of] deceit between you because one community is more plentiful [in number or wealth] than another community. Allah only tries you thereby. And He will surely make clear to you on the Day of Resurrection that over which you used to differ.[36]

He explained, “The one to untwist her spun thread after it was strong: Aisha is the one who broke her oath.”[37]

 

It appears in Bihar al Anwar from Salim ibn Mukrim from his father who said that he heard Abu Jafar commenting on Allah’s statement:

 

مَثَلُ الَّذِيْنَ اتَّخَذُوْا مِن دُونِ اللهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ كَمَثَلِ الْعَنْكَبُوْتِ اتَّخَذَتْ بَيْتًا وَإِنَّ أَوْهَنَ الْبُيُوْتِ لَبَيْتُ الْعَنْكَبُوْتِ لَوْ كَانُوْا يَعْلَمُوْنَ قال هي الحميراء

The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home. And indeed, the weakest of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew.[38]

He said, “It is Humaira’ [Aisha].”[39]

 

Al Majlisi adds an explanatory footnote to this saying:

 

إنما كنى عنها بالعنكبوت لأنه حيوان ضعيف اتخذت بيتا ضعيفا أوهن البيوت وكذلك الحميراء حيوان ضعيف لقلة حظها وعقلها ودينها اتخذت من رأيها الضعيف وعقلها السخيف في مخالفتها وعداوتها لمولاها بيتا مثل بيت العنكبوت في الوهن والضعف

She was only referred to as a spider because it is a weak insect which built a weak house, the weakest of homes. Similarly, Humaira’ is a weak creature due to her little fortune, intelligence, and religion, who took from her weak view and despicable intelligence in opposing and showing animosity to her master, a house like the spider’s house in despicability and weakness.[40]

 

Al Qummi[41] writes in the commentary of Allah’s statement:

 

ضَرَبَ اللهُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا امْرَأَتَ نُوْحٍ وَامْرَأَتَ لُوْطٍ كَانَتَا تَحْتَ عَبْدَيْنِ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا صَالِحَيْنِ فَخَانَتَاهُمَا فَلَمْ يُغْنِيَا عَنْهُمَا مِنَ اللهِ شَيْئًا وَقِيْلَ ادْخُلَا النَّارَ مَعَ الدَّاخِلِيْنَ والله ما عنى بقوله فخانتاهما إلا الفاحشة وليقيمن الحد على عائشة فيما أتت في طريق البصرة

Allah presents an example of those who disbelieved: the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut. They were under two of Our righteous servants but betrayed them, so those prophets did not avail them from Allah at all, and it was said, “Enter the Fire with those who enter.”[42]

By Allah, He did not refer to by His words: but betrayed them except the immoral woman and he will most definitely mete out the hadd upon Aisha for what she perpetrated on the road of Basrah.[43]

 

They spoke lies and falsehood by claiming that Aisha and Hafsah killed the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam by poisoning him.[44]

The Rafidah reckon hatred for Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, cursing him, and dissociating from him are among the essentials of their religion and believe that he will have nothing but a painful punishment in the Hereafter.[45] Al Majlisi says:

 

ومما عد من ضروريات دين الإمامية استحلال المتعة وحج التمتع والبراءة من أبي بكر وعمر وعثمان ومعاوية

Regarding Mut’ah and Hajj al Tamattu’ as permissible, as well as dissociating from Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and Muawiyah is considered among the essentials of the Imamiyyah creed.[46]

 

Khomeini says:

 

معاوية ترأس وتأمر لفترة طويلة إلا أنه لم يجن لنفسه سوى اللعن والذم وعذاب الآخرة

Muawiyah held authority and ruled for a long period, but that he never secured for himself except curse, blame, and the punishment of the Hereafter.[47]

 

It appears that Abu Jafar al Baqir said:

 

كنت خلف أبي وهو على بغلته فنفرت بغلته فإذا هو شيخ في عنقه سلسلة ورجل يتبعه فقال يا علي بن الحسين اسقني فقال الرجل لا تسقه لا سقاه الله وكان الشيخ معاوية

I was behind my father who was on his mule. His mule ran and he met up with an old man who had a chain on his neck while a man was following him. The old man said, “O ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, give me water.”

The man said, “Do not give him water. May Allah never quench his thirst.”

The old man was Muawiyah.[48]

 

Just as they specifically targeted these Sahabah with abuse and excommunication, they criticised the others and declared them hypocrites. It appears in Tafsir al Safi from al Sadiq:

 

لما أقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم غدير خم كان بحذائه سبعة نفر من المنافقين وهم أبو بكر وعمر وعبد الرحمن بن عوف وسعد بن أبي وقاص وأبو عبيدة وسالم مولى أبي حذيفة والمغيرة بن شعبة قال عمر أما ترون عينه كأنما عين مجنون يعني النبي الساعة يقوم ويقول قال لي ربي فلما قام قال أيها الناس من أولى بكم من أنفسكم قالوا الله ورسوله قال اللهم فاشهد ثم قال ألا من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه وسلموا عليه بإمرة أمير المؤمنين فنزل جبريل وأعلم رسول الله بمقالة القوم فدعاهم وسألهم فأنكروا وحلفوا فأنزل الله يَحْلِفُوْنَ بِاللهِ مَا قَالُوْا وَلَقَدْ قَالُوْا كَلِمَةَ الْكُفْرِ وَكَفَرُوْا بَعْدَ إِسْلَامِهِمْ وَهَمُّوْا بِمَا لَمْ يَنَالُوْا وَمَا نَقَمُوْا إِلَّا أَنْ أَغْنَاهُمُ اللهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ  فَإِنْ يَتُوْبُوْا يَكُ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَإِنْ يَتَوَلَّوْا يُعَذِّبْهُمُ اللهُ عَذَابًا أَلِيْمًا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَمَا لَهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ مِنْ وَلِيٍّ وَلَا نَصِيْرٍ

When the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam stationed on the day of Ghadir Khumm[49], he was face to face with seven hypocrites, viz. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Awf, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, Abu ‘Ubaidah, Salim Mawla Abi Hudhayfah, and Mughirah ibn Shu’bah.

Umar said, “Do you not see that his—referring to the Nabi—eyes resemble the eyes of a crazy man? He will just now stand up and say that his Rabb told him.”

When he stood up, he said, “O people, who has more right over you than yourselves?”

They replied, “Allah and His Messenger.”

He said, “O Allah, bear witness.” He continued, “Harken! Whoever’s friend I am, ‘Ali is his friend. Hand over to him the leadership of Amir al Mu’minin.”

Jibril descended and informed the Messenger of Allah of what the people said. He summoned them and questioned them, but they denied upon oath. Upon this Allah revealed: They swear by Allah that they did not say [anything against the Prophet] while they had said the word of disbelief and disbelieved after their [pretense of] Islam and planned that which they were not to attain. And they were not resentful except [for the fact] that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His bounty. So, if they repent, it is better for them; but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.[50][51]

 

Khomeini says:

الصحابة الذين يسمونهم المنافقين

The Sahabah whom they label hypocrites.[52]

 

Al Khu’i[53] writes:

 

إن بعض الصحابة لم يؤمنوا بالله طرفة عين وإنما كانوا يظهرون الشهادتين باللسان وهو صلى الله عليه وسلم مع علمه بحالهم لم يحكم بنجاستهم ولا بكفرهم

Certainly, some Sahabah did not believe in Allah for even the blinking of an eye. They only expressed the two testimonies with the tongue. Despite knowing their condition, the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not declare their impurity and disbelief.[54]

 

Al Kashani[55] claims in reference to the Sahabah:

 

أن أكثرهم يقصد الصحابة كانوا يبطنون النفاق ويجترئون على الله ويفترون على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في عزة وشقاق

Majority of them concealed hypocrisy, were daring against Allah, and fabricated in the Messenger’s name in pride and dissension.[56]

 

Al Mamaqani[57] says:

 

إن من المعلوم بالضرورة وبنص الآيات الكريمة وجود الفساق والمنافقين في الصحابة بل كثرتهم فيهم وعروض الفسق بل الارتداد لجمع منهم في حياته صلى الله عليه وسلم والآخرين بعد وفاته

It is known essentially and through the emphatic texts of the noble verses, the presence of transgressors and hypocrites among the Sahabah—in fact, they being the majority, the exhibitions of transgression, and further than that apostasy of a large group of them during his lifetime and others after his demise.[58]

 

Al Zanjani[59] pronounces:

 

من الصحابة المنافق والفاسق والباغي والزاني وشارب الخمر وقاتل النفس … وكيف يجب تعظيمهم جميعا وقد ذمهم الله في كتابه العزيز آحادا وجماعات في مواضع كثيرة

Among the Sahabah are hypocrites, transgressors, rebels, adulterers, consumers of alcohol, and murderers. How can honouring all of them be obligatory whereas Allah has dispraised them in His Magnificent Book on an individual and collective basis in plenty places.[60]

 

Al Tustari[61] confirms the belief of the Rafidah concerning the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum saying:

 

كما جاء موسى للهداية وهدى خلقا كثيرا من بني إسرائيل وغيرهم فارتدوا في أيام حياته ولم يبق منهم أحد على إيمانه سوى هارون عليه السلام كذلك جاء محمد صلى الله عليه وآله وهدى خلقا لكنهم بعد وفاته ارتدوا على أعقابهم

Just as Musa ‘alayh al Salam came for guidance and guided a large number of the Banu Isra’il and others, but they apostatised during his lifetime and none remained on his faith except Harun ‘alayh al Salam, similarly Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came and guided a nation, but they apostatised after his demise.[62]

 

Al Mufid, while discussing the Jarudiyyah[63], indicates to the Sahabah’s radiya Llahu ‘anhum apostasy:

 

وهذا مع ما بيناه لكم من قولنا في القوم وأوضحنا عن معناه ما لا يمكننا وإياكم مثله في المتقدمين على أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ومن اتبعهم في الضلال وهو عند جميع الناصبة بدع في المقال يقارب الردة عن الإسلام

This, added to what we explained to you regarding the people and elucidated on the meaning, which does not allow us and you the like concerning those who preceded Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam and those who followed them in deviation. And it, according to all the Nasibah, is innovations in speech which are close to apostasy from Islam.[64]

 

Based on what has been mentioned before, the Rafidah do not accept the integrity of the Sahabah[65] and cite consensus on this issue. Al Mamaqani states:

 

قد اتفق أصحابنا الإمامية على أن صحبة النبي بنفسها وبمجردها لا يستلزم عدالة المتصف بها ولا حسن حاله وأن حال الصاحبي حال من لم يدرك الصحبة في توقف قبول خبره على ثبوت عدالته أو وثاقته أو حسن حاله ومدحه المعتد به مع إيمانه

Our Imamiyyah scholars are unanimous that companionship of the Nabi by itself and independently neither necessitates the integrity of one qualified by it nor his good condition. The condition of a Companion is the same as the condition of one who did not attain companionship, in the acceptance of his report being conditional upon the establishment of his integrity, his veracity, or his good condition coupled with worthy praise for him with his iman.[66]

 

Al Majlisi says:

 

وذهبت الإمامية إلى أنهم أي الصحابة كسائر الناس من أن فيهم العادل وفيهم المنافق والفاسق والضال بل أكثرهم كذلك

The Imamiyyah opine that they—the Sahabah—are like the rest of the people, in the sense that among them are the trustworthy as well as the hypocrite, transgressor, and deviant. In fact, majority of them are such.[67]

 

Al Shirazi[68] affirms:

 

حكم الصحابة عندنا في العدالة حكم غيرهم ولايتحتم الحكم بالإيمان والعدالة بمجرد الصحبة ولا يحصل بها النجاة من عقاب النار وغضب الجبار إلا أن يكون مع يقين الإيمان وخلوص الجنان فمن علمنا عدالته وإيمانه وحفظه وصية رسول الله في أهل بيته وأنه مات على ذلك كسلمان وأبي ذر وعمار واليناه وتقربنا إلى الله تعالى بحبه ومن علمنا أنه انقلب على عقبه وأظهر العداوة لأهل البيت عليهم السلام عاديناه لله تعالى وتبرأنا إلى الله منه ونسكت عن المجهول حاله

The verdict of the Sahabah’s integrity according to us is the verdict of others besides them. The ruling of faith and integrity is not incumbent merely due to companionship. Acquisition of salvation from the chastisement of Hell and wrath of al Jabbar (the Omnipotent) is not acquiring by it, unless it is coupled with conviction of faith and sincerity of the heart. Those regarding whom we are convinced of their integrity, faith, and preservation of the Messenger of Allah’s bequest regarding his household, and his death upon this, like Salman, Abu Dharr, and ‘Ammar, we befriend him and seek closeness to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala by loving him. Conversely, those regarding whom we know they turned on their backs and expressed hatred for the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam, we declare enmity for him for the sake of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and exonerate ourselves to Allah from him. We remain silent regarding those whose condition is unknown.[69]

 

Their stance on the Sahabah results in their rejection of the Sahabah’s reports from the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, except those on the authority of the Ahlul Bayt. Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif[70] affirms:

 

إنهم لا يعتبرون من السنة إلا ما صح لهم من طريق أهل البيت عليهم السلام عن جدهم يعني كما رواه الصادق عن أبيه الباقر عن أبيه زين العابدين عن الحسين السبط عن أبيه أمير المؤمنين عن رسول الله سلام الله عليهم جميعا أما ما يرويه مثل أبي هريرة وسمرة بن جندب ومروان بن الحكم وعمران بن حطان الخارجي وعمرو بن العاص ونظائرهم فليس لهم عند الإمامية من الاعتبار مقدار بعوضة وأمرهم أشهر من أن يذكر كيف وقد صرح كثير من علماء السنة بمطاعنهم ودل على جائفة جروحهم

They do not consider from the Sunnah except that which is authentic for them from the chain of the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam from their grandfather, i.e. as narrated by al Sadiq from his father al Baqir, from his father Zayn al ‘Abidin, from Hussain al Sibt, from his father Amir al Mu’minin, from the Messenger of Allah—Allah’s peace be upon them all.

As regards the reports of Abu Hurairah, Samurah ibn Jundub, Marwan ibn al Hakam, ‘Imran ibn Hattan al Khariji, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, and their like—they are not considered by the Imamiyyah, not even to the extent of a mosquito. Their matter is popular, and does not need mention. Many scholars have clearly disparaged them and pointed out the stench of their wounds.[71]

 

‘Abdul Hadi al Fadli[72] states:

 

إن تعميم الحكم وهو اعتبار قول الصحابة سنة كسنة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى جميع أفراد الصحابة مما لا يجوز نسبته إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا يصح القول به وذلك أن الواقع الذي أبان عنه القرآن الكريم ينفي صحة نسبة العدالة لجميع الصحابة … وبعد هذا كله ما هو موقفنا من مرويات أقوال الصحابة التي هي نتائج اجتهاد ورأي إن الموقف يتمثل في عدم جواز الأخذ بها للسببين التاليين الأول وفرة الأحاديث المروية عن طريق أهل البيت التي تغطي كل مسائل الفقه وحيث تتوفر النصوص الشرعية لا يلتجأ على اجتهاد الرأي الثاني منع أئمة أهل البيت عليهم السلام من الأخذ باجتهاد الرأي وشجبه بكل قوة

The generalisation of the verdict—and that is considering a Sahabi’s statement Sunnah like the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Sunnah—to all the individuals of the Sahabah is not permitted to be attributed to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and is not correct to state. This is because the reality which the Glorious Qur’an explained negates the correctness of attributing integrity to all individuals of the Sahabah… After all this, what is our stance on the reports of the Sahabah’s statements which are the product of ijtihad (independent judgment) and opinion? Our stance is the non-permissibility of adhering to them due to the following two reasons:

Firstly: the abundance of narrations reported from the chain of the Ahlul Bayt which cover all the issues of Fiqh. When categorical Shar’i texts are abundant, ijtihad and opinion are not considered.

Secondly: The Ahlul Bayt’s Imam ‘alayhim al Salam prohibiting adhering to ijtihad and opinion and vehemently condemning it.[73]

 

NEXT⇒


[1] A number of scholars have documented their consensus, including Ibn Mandah in Ma’rifat al Sahabah, pg. 10; Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al Isti’ab, vol. 1 pg. 19; Ibn al Salah in his al Muqaddamah, pg. 294; Ibn Kathir in Ikhtisar ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 181-182; Ibn Hajar in al Isabah, vol. 1 pg. 18; al Suyuti in Tadreeb al Rawi fi Taqrib al Nawawi, vol. 2 pg. 214; and others.

[2] Majmu’ al Fatawa, vol. 2 pg. 221.

[3] He is ‘Abdul Qahir ibn Tahir ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al Baghdadi al Tamimi al Isfara’ini al Shafi’i, Abu Mansur, the perfect scholar, among the masters of fundamentals. He was born and nurtured in Baghdad. He mastered many sciences, particularly inheritance and grammar. He passed away in Isfara’in in 429. He authored Usul al Din, Tafsir Asma’ Allah al Husna, al Milal wa al Nihal, al Farq bayn al Firaq. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 17 pg. 572-573; al Safdi: al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 19 pg. 31-33.)

[4] Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 277.

[5] Hurr al ‘Amili dedicates a chapter with the heading: chapter on the desirability of cursing the enemies of religion by name after every Salah. One of the reports is:

عن الحسين وأبي سلمة السراج قالا سمعنا أبا عبد الله عليه السلام وهو يلعن في دبر كل مكتوبة أربعة من الرجال وأربعة من النساء وفلانا وفلانا وفلانا ويسميهم ومعاوية وفلانة وفلانة وهندا وأم حكم أخت معاوية

From Hussain and Abu Salamah al Sarraj who narrate they heard Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam cursing after every fard Salah four men and four women, so and so … taking them by name and Muawiyah, and so and so, Hind, and Umm Hakam—Muawiyah’s sister. (Al ‘Amili Wasa’il al Shia, vol. 6 pg. 462.)

[6] Taqiyyah lexically in the various forms: ittaqaytu al shay’, taqaytuhu, atqihi, attaqihi, tuqa, taqyah, and tiqa’ means to be cautious of something. (Lisan al ‘Arab, pg. 4901.) Hafiz Ibn Hajar defines it as: To be cautious of exposing the beliefs etc., in the heart. (Fath al Bari, vol. 12 pg. 329.) The scholars are unanimous that Taqiyyah is a concession at the time of need. Ibn al Mundhir says, “They unanimously agree that one who is forced to disbelieve to the extent that he fears losing his life, while his heart is content with faith, the verdict of disbelief will not be passed against him and his wife will not be separated from him (if he outwardly expresses disbelief). (Fath al Bari, vol. 12 pg. 329.) Al Taqiyyah according to the Rafidah is very different. It is not a concession for them; rather, it is one of the pillars of religion. Ibn Babawayh writes:

اعتقادنا في التقية أنها واجبة من تركها بمنزلة من ترك الصلاة

Our belief in Taqiyyah is that it is obligatory. One who discards it is on the level of one who discards Salah. (Al I’tiqadat, pg. 82)

[7] He is Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Yaqub ibn Ishaq al Kulayni, the Shia Imami. He is from Kulayn, a village of Rayy. He died in Baghdad in 328 AH. He wrote al Kafi fi ‘Ilm al Din and al Radd ‘ala Qaramitah, etc. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 15 pg. 280; al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 5 pg. 147; Ibn al Athir: al Lubab fi Tahdhib al Insan, vol. 3 pg. 108.)

[8] Al Kafi, book on faith and disbelief, chapter on the small amount of believers, vol. 2 pg. 244.

[9] He is Hussain ibn Muhammad Taqi ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Taqi al Nuri al Tabarsi, from the scholars of the Rafidah. He was born in Tabaristan in 1254 AH and died in Kufah in 1320 AH. He has a number of books, like Mustadrak al Wasa’il wa Mustanbat al Masa’il, Nafs al Rahman fi Fada’il Salman, and Fasl al Khitab fi Ithbat Tahrif Kitab Rabb al Arbab. (Al A’lam, vol. 2 pg. 257; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 1 pg. 191.)

[10] Muhammad Habib: Fasl al Khitab fi Ithbat Tahrif Kitab Rabb al Arbab ‘Ard wa Naqd, pg. 189-190.

[11] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 199; al Kafi, vol. 8 pg. 245; al Tusi: Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 26-27; Ibn Shahrashub: Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol. 2 pg. 374; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 21 pg. 11, vol. 22 pg. 331; al Huwayzi: Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 1 pg. 396; al Darajat al Rafi’ah, pg. 213.

[12] Surah al Anfal: 2-4.

[13] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 1 pg. 255; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 268; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 22 pg. 318.

[14] Al Mufid: al Ikhtisas, pg. 2; al Khu’i: Mujam Rijal al Hadith, vol. 19 pg. 340.

[15] Al Himyari al Qummi: Qurb al Isnad, pg. 79; al Ikhtisas, pg. 63; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 22 pg. 318, vol. 23 pg. 230; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 4 pg. 570; Mujam Rijal al Hadith, vol. 8 pg. 343.

[16] Al Kafi, vol. 2 pg. 244-344; al Ikhtisas, pg. 10; Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 52; A’yan al Shia, vol. 2 pg. 352.

[17] Usul Mazhab al Shia, vol. 2 pg. 879; Zaid ibn ‘Abdullah al Hummam: al ‘Alaqah bayn al Sufiyyah wa al Imamiyyah, pg. 322.

[18] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 30 pg. 145, 404.

[19] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 178; al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 371, chapter on one who claims Imamah but is not worthy; Wasa’il al Shia, vol. 28 pg. 349; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 25 pg. 111; Mustadrak al Wasa’il, vol. 18 pg. 173.

[20] He is Hassan ibn Sulaiman ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid al Hilli al ‘Amili. He is originally from ‘Amil and settled in Hill. He studied under Muhammad ibn Makki al ‘Amili. He died around 802 AH. Al Mukhtasar, al Mi’raj, al Raj’ah, Mukhtasar Basa’ir al Darajat, Risalat Ahadith al Dharr, etc. are his works. (Al Dhari’ah ila Tasanif al Shia, vol. 10 pg. 162; Muqaddamat Muhaqqiq al Mukhtasar, pg. 9.)

[21] Al Mukhtasar, pg. 111; al Majlisi: Bihar al Anwar, vol. 85 pg. 260-261; al ‘Amili (‘Ali al Kurani al ‘Amili): al Intisar, vol. 6 pg. 456.

[22] He is Ruh Allah ibn Mustafa al Musawi Khomeini, leader of the Rafidah in Iran. He was born in 1320 AH and studied at the Hawzah ‘Ilmiyyah. He became a teacher of philosophy at the institute. He later got involved in politics until he toppled the Shah’s rule. He died in 1409 AH. He wrote Ahkam al Islam bayn al Sa’il wa al Imam, Risalat al Sayyidah Zainab, and al Jihad al Akbar. (Mujam al Mu’allifin al Mu’asirin, vol. 1 pg. 230; ‘Adil Ra’uf: Kitab al Imam al Khumayni.)

[23] Al Thawrah al Iraniyyah fi Mizan al Islam, pg. 69-70.

[24] He is Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Mahdi al Khalisi, among the leading Fuqaha’ of the Imamiyyah from Kazimiyyah. He was born in 1307 AH and died in 1383 AH. He wrote Ihya’ al Shari’ah fi Mazhab al Shia, al Islam fawq Kull Shay’, and al Ra’samaliyyah wa al Shuyu’iyyah fi al Islam. (Al A’lam, vol. 7 pg. 86; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 3 pg. 693-694.)

[25] Ihya’ al Shari’ah fi Mazhab al Shia, vol. 1 pg. 86.

[26] Abu al Fasil: This agnomen does not appear in the books on agnomens and none of the authors on the Sahabah mentioned it. It is only one of the terminologies of the Rafidah. They named Abu Bakr with it. This is part of their Taqiyyah. This is so they may answer the Ahlus Sunnah when questioned about their allegations against Abu Bakr saying: we intended Abu al Fasil, not Abu Bakr. (Dr. Muhammad ‘Ata Sufi: Mawqif al Shia al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah min al Sahabah, pg. 378.)

[27] They called ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu Na’thal, likening him to an Egyptian man with the name Na’thal who had a long beard. The first to apply this name to ‘Uthman were the very ones to rebel against him and kill him, led by Jabalah ibn ‘Amr al Sa’idi and aped by Jahjah al Ghifari. (Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 4 pg. 365-366; al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam wa Wafayat al Mashahir, vol. 3 pg. 444; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 10 pg. 282-284; ‘Abdul Malik ibn Hussain al Makki: Simt al Nujum al ‘Awali fi Abna’ al Awa’il wa al Tawali, vol. 2 pg. 525.)

[28] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 116; Hisham al Bahrani: Ghayat al Maram, vol. 3 pg. 53; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 27 pg. 57; al ‘Amili: Muqaddamat al Burhan, pg. 529.

[29] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 27 pg. 57; Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 116; ‘Ali al Nimazi: Mustadrak Safinat al Bihar, vol. 1 pg. 232.

[30] He is Muhammad ibn Mas’ud al ‘Ayyashi, Abu al Nazar, from the senior Imamiyyah. He is from Samarqand while some suggest he is from the Banu Tamim. It is reported that the number of his books reached two hundred and eight books. His books became popular in Khorasan. The most prominent of these is his exegesis named Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi. He died in 320 AH. (Al Fihrist, pg. 246.)

[31] Surah al Baqarah: 208.

[32] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 102; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 1 pg. 242; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 1 pg. 205.

[33] Surah Muhammad: 25.

[34] Al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 420; ‘Ali al Nimazi: Mustadrak Safinat al Bihar, vol. 1 pg. 216.

[35] Ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah says:

وقد أجمع أهل العلم قاطبة على أن من سبها بعد هذا ورماها بما رماها به بعد هذا الذي ذكر في هذه الآية فإنه كافر معاند للقرآن

The scholars are unanimous, all without exception, that whoever insults her after this and accuses her [of immorality], after what is mentioned in this verse, is a disbeliever, obstinate against the Qur’an. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. 3 pg. 304; Ibn al ‘Arabi: Ahkam al Qur’an, vol. 6 pg. 41; Ibn Taymiyyah: al Sarim al Maslul, pg. 566; al Haytami: al Sawa’iq al Muhriqah, vol. 1 pg. 144.)

[36] Surah al Nahl: 92.

[37] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 269; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 7 pg. 454.

[38] Surah al ‘Ankabut: 41.

[39] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 32 pg. 286; Sharaf al Din al Hussaini: Ta’wil al Ayat, vol. 1 pg. 430.

[40] Ibid.

[41] He is ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashim al Qummi, Abu al Hassan, the Mufassir, Faqih, and Akhbari. Al Kulayni transmitted from him. He died in 329 AH. He has written a few books on Tafsir, including al Nasikh wa al Mansukh and Akhbar al Qur’an wa Riwayatuh. (Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 20 pg. 6; Mujam al Udaba’, vol. 4 pg. 1641; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 2 pg. 389-390.)

[42] Surah al Tahrim: 10.

[43] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 2 pg. 377; al Bahrani: al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, vol. 4 pg. 357-358; al Huwayzi: Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 5 pg. 375.

[44] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 2 pg. 375-376; al Bayadi: al Sirat al Mustaqim, vol. 3 pg. 168; al Tustari: Ihqaq al Haqq, pg. 307-308; Muhammad Tahir al Qummi: Kitab al Arba’in, pg. 626; al Jaza’iri: al Anwar al No’maniyyah, vol. 4 pg. 336; al Bahrani: al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, vol. 1 pg. 320.

[45] They cite as evidence for him remaining eternally in Hell what they report falsely and deceptively from the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

إن الله عرض علي في المنام مني القيامة وأهوالها والجنة ونعيمها والنار وما فيها وعذابها فاطلعت في النار فإذا أنا بمعاوية وعمرو بن العاص قائمين في جمر جهنم يرضخ رؤوسهما الزبانية بحجارة من جمر جهنم يقولان لهما هلا آمنتما بولاية علي بن أبي طالب

Indeed, Allah presented to me in my sleep Qiyamah and its horrors, Jannat and its blessings, and Hell and its punishments. I glanced into Hell and saw Muawiyah and ‘Amr ibn al ‘As standing on the live coals of Hell. The Zabaniyah (angels of Hell) were crushing their heads with rocks from the live coals of Hell and telling them, “If only you believed in ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib’s Wilayah.” (Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol. 3 pg. 7; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 33 pg. 165.)

[46] Al Majlisi: al I’tiqadat, pg. 17; quoting from Dr. Ziyad al Hammam: Kitab al ‘Alaqah bayn al Sufiyyah wa al Imamiyyah, pg. 331.

[47] Khomeini: al Jihad al Akbar (Jihad al Nafs), pg. 30.

[48] Al Saffar: Basa’ir al Darajat al Kubra, pg. 304-307; al Mufid: al Ikhtisas, pg. 275-277; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 491; Hurr al ‘Amili: al Iqaz min al Haj’ah, pg. 203-204; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 5 pg. 408.

[49] Ghadir Khumm: The name of a man to whom the pond is attributed. It is a place between Makkah and Madinah, close to Juhfah. The Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam alighted there on Monday, the eighteenth of Dhu al Hijjah and delivered an address there in which he expressed the merit of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, his trustworthiness, and integrity as well as the merit of the Ahlul Bayt. (Muhammad ibn Musa al Hamdani: al Amakin aw ma ittafaqa Lafzuhu wa iftaraqa Musammah, vol. 1 pg. 715; Mujam al Buldan, vol. 2 pg. 389; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 5 pg. 208; Shadharat al Dhahab, vol. 5 pg. 377; Simt al Nujum, vol. 2 pg. 379; Ibn ‘Uthaymin: Sharh al ‘Aqidah al Wasitiyyah, vol. 2 pg. 275.)

[50] Surah al Tawbah: 74.

[51] Al Kashani: Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 358-359.

[52] Al Hukumah al Islamiyyah, pg. 69.

[53] He is Abu al Qasim ibn ‘Ali Akbar ibn Hashim Taj al Din al Musawi al Khu’i, the Mufassir, Faqih, Usuli, and religious authority among the Rafidah. He was from Azerbaijan. He was born in 1317 AH. He later travelled to Najaf and died there in 1413 AH. He has written plenty books, the most significant of which are al Bayan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, Dirasat fi al Usul al ‘Amaliyyah, Durus fi Fiqh al Shia, Manzumah fi Manaqib Ahlul Bayt, etc. (Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 2 pg. 640; Mujam al Mu’allifin al Mu’asirin, vol. 2 pg. 498.)

[54] Al Tanqih fi Sharh al ‘Urwah al Wuthqa, book on purity, vol. 2 pg. 69.

[55] He is Muhammad ibn Murtada ibn Mahmud, called Fayd al Kashani, the Shia Muhaddith and Akhbari. He was from Kashan, born in 1008 AH. He read the books of Abu Hamid al Ghazali and was inspired by them, so he treaded his methodology. He died in 1091 AH. He has about eighty books including Tafsir al Safi, Mu’tasam al Shia, and al Usul al Asliyyah. (Al A’lam, vol. 5 pg. 290; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 3 pg. 710.)

[56] Tafsir al Safi, vol. 1 pg. 9.

[57] He is ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad al Mamaqani, among the last of the Imamiyyah to write on the sciences of Hadith. He was born in Najaf in 1290 AH and died there in 1351 AH. He wrote Tanqih al Maqal fi ‘Ilm al Rijal, Mir’at al Kamal fi al Adab wa al Sunan, and other books. (Al A’lam, vol. 4 pg. 133; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 6 pg. 116.)

[58] Tanqih al Maqal, vol. 1 pg. 213.

[59] He is Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Tusi, among the Imamiyyah scholars. He was born in 597 AH and died in 672 AH. He has written many books including Sharh al Isharah, Tahrir al ‘Aqa’id, al Tadhkirah, as well as other books and articles. (Mustafa al Hussaini: Kitab Naqd al Rijal, vol. 4 pg. 313.)

[60] Al Zanjani: I’tiqad al Imamiyyah al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah, vol. 3 pg. 66-67.

[61] He is Nur Allah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Nur Allah ibn Muhammad al Mar’ashi al Tustari (al Shustari) then al Dihlawi, from the Imamiyyah scholars, from Tustar. He was born in 956 AH and travelled to India thereafter. Akbar Shah appointed him chief justice in Lahore and stipulated upon him that he does not exit the four schools of thought. However, after a while, he publicised other than this and was thus killed under whips in the city of Akbarabad in 1019 AH. He wrote Ihqaq al Haqq wa Izhaq al Batil, Majalis al Mu’minin fi Mashahir Rijal al Shia, and Masa’ib al Nawasib. (Al A’lam, vol. 8 pg. 52; Ismail al Baghdadi: Idah al Maknun, vol. 1 pg. 34; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 4 pg. 44-45.)

[62] Ihqaq al Haqq wa Izhaq al Batil, pg. 316.

[63] The Jarudiyyah: They are the followers of Abu al Jarud, Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad who died in 150 AH. They believe that the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam appointed ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu by reference to his qualities, not by name, and that he is the Imam after him. However, people fell short in this and did not recognise his qualities and appointed Abu Bakr, thus falling into disbelief. The Jarudiyyah disagree regarding stopping or continuation of Imamah. Some extend Imamah from ‘Ali to Hassan, then to Hussain, then to ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, then to his son Zaid ibn ‘Ali, then to Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. They affirm his Imamah but differ about him, with some claiming he was not killed and is alive and will soon emerge and fill the earth with justice. Others accept his death and take Imamah to Muhammad ibn al Qasim ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali. He was jailed during the days of al Mu’tasim who kept him in his home until he died. Others believe in the Imamah of Yahya ibn ‘Umar, the man of Kufah who rebelled and invited people and around whom a large group gathered. He was later killed. (Maqalat al Islamiyyin wa Ikhtilaf al Musallin, vol. 1 pg. 140-141; al Farq bayn al Firaq, vol. 1 pg. 41-42; Tahir ibn Muhammad al Isfara’ini: al Tabsir fi al Din wa Tamyiz al Firqah al Najiyah ‘an al Firaq al Halikin, vol. 1 pg. 27-28; al Shahrastani: al Milal wa al Nihal, vol. 1 pg. 126-127.)

[64] Al Masa’il al Jarudiyyah, pg. 37.

[65] Al ‘adalah lexically: justice, the opposite of oppression. It is said: he passed a just ruling upon him, he is thus ‘adil (just). So and so is from the men of justice. Rajul ‘adl: just man i.e. pleased and content with in testimony. (Mukhtar al Sihah, vol. 4 pg. 1760.) Al ‘Adl in the terminology of the Muhaddithin: One who is a Muslim, mature, sane, free from the reasons of transgression and imperfections of manhood. (Usul al Sarakhsi, vol. 1 pg. 350-351; Muqaddamat Ibn al Salah, pg. 104; Tadreeb al Rawi, vol. 1 pg. 300.)

As regards the definition of ‘adalah according to the Rafidah, Yusuf al Bahrani states, “In the definition of men of wisdom and men of cognisance, it is equilibrium of physical/mental powers and rectifying of actions in the sense of some not being absent from others. As regards the definition of men of the Shari’ah it is an objective in itself, common among our latter scholars—Allah perfume their resting places. It is a mental expertise which urges adhering to piety and manhood. By expertise—conditions that change quickly are excluded like the redness of embarrassment and yellowness of fear in the meaning that being qualified with the above quality should definitely be among the grounded expertise which is difficult to remove. (Al Durar al Najfiyyah, pg. 282-289.)

[66] Tanqih al Maqal, vol. 1 pg. 213.

[67] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 8 pg. 8.

[68] He is ‘Ali Khan al Shirazi al Madani al Hussaini, known as Ibn al Ma’sum. Among his books is Sulafat al ‘Asr in which he compiled his marvellous poetry and commentated on it. It is printed with the commentary with the name Anwar al Rabi’ wa al Darajat al Rafi’ah. He died in 1120 AH. (Muhammad Bahr al ‘Ulum: Al Fawa’id al Rijaliyyah, vol. 3 pg. 45; A’yan al Shia, vol. 1 pg. 166.)

[69] ‘Ali al Shirazi: Al Darajat al Rafi’ah fi Tabaqat al Shia, pg. 11.

[70] He is Muhammad ibn Hussain ibn ‘Ali al Rida ibn Musa ibn Jafar Kashif al Ghita’, from Iraq. He was born in Najaf in 1294 AH. He was the authority in passing verdicts and observing ijtihad. He died in Najaf in 1373 AH and is buried in the special graveyard in Wadi al Salam (Valley of Peace). Asl al Shia wa Usuluha, al Din wa al Islam, al Ayat al Bayyinat, and al Mathal al ‘Ulya fi al Islam are some of his works. (Al A’lam, vol. 6 pg. 106-107; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 9 pg. 250.)

[71] Asl al Shia wa Usuluha, pg. 164-165.

[72] He is Dr. ‘Abdul Hadi al Fadli, the Iraqi Shia. He was born in the village of Sabkhat al ‘Arab near Basrah in 1354 AH and died in Qatif in Jumada al Ula in 1434 AH at the age of 78. He wrote Mabadi’ Usul al Fiqh, Khulasat al Mantiq, and Mafkarat al Mantiq. (Free encyclopaedia on the website: htp://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki.)

[73] Durus fi Usul Fiqh al Imamiyyah, pg. 176-178.

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Section 2

Abu Dharr al Ghifari according to the Rafidah

This section contains two discussions

Discussion 1: The Rafidah’s stance on the Sahabah briefly.

Discussion 2: Abu Dharr al Ghifari’s position according to the Rafidah and the reasons for them pretending to defend him.

 

 

Discussion 1

The Rafidah’s stance on the Sahabah briefly

 

The Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah are unanimous on the virtue and integrity of the Companions of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[1] The Rafidah oppose them in this by labelling the Companions disbelievers and renegades from din after the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise except for a few. Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

 

وأصل قول الرافضة … أن المهاجرين والأنصار كتموا النص وكفروا بالإمام المعصوم واتبعوا أهواءهم وبدلوا الدين وغيروا الشريعة وظلموا واعتدوا بل كفروا إلا نفرا قليلا

The original stance of the Rafidah is that the Muhajirin and Ansar concealed the textual evidence, disbelieved in the infallible Imam, followed their passions, adulterated the religion, distorted the Shari’ah, oppressed, transgressed, and in fact disbelieved, except a small group.[2]

 

‘Abdul Qahir al Baghdadi[3] rahimahu Llah writes:

 

وأما الإمامية فقد زعم أكثرهم أن الصحابة ارتدت بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم سوى علي وابنيه ومقدار ثلاثة عشر منهم

As for the Imamiyyah, the majority of them believe that the Sahabah apostatised after the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam besides ‘Ali, his two sons, and thirteen others.[4]

 

The Rafidah have circulated this belief in their most relied upon books. There is no book of theirs except that it contains excommunication, abuse, and cursing. In fact, they worship Allah after every Salah by cursing the three Khalifas and other eminent Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.[5] They apply the verses on disbelief, the disbelievers, polytheism, and the polytheists to all the Sahabah. They create doubt in their faith, intentions, and their assistance to Islam and the Muslims to plant malice, spread rancour, and create hatred and to firmly establish this belief in the hearts of their followers, to the extent that it became an evident belief which cannot be concealed behind Taqiyyah[6], especially in the present day and age when their reports are replete with this disbelief. In fact, they consider the verdict of their Islam to be the worst disbelief and deviance as they pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum. They consider these Sahabah their most staunch enemies, relying on reports documented in their sources falsely and wrongly attributed to some of the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt. Some of these are:

It appears in al Kulayni’s[7] Usul al Kafi from Humran ibn A’yan who says:

 

قلت لأبي جعفر جعلت فداك ما أقلنا لو اجتمعنا على شاة ما أفنيناها فقال ألا أحدثك بأعجب من ذلك المهاجرون والأنصار ذهبوا إلا وأشار بيده ثلاثة

I asked Abu Jafar, “May I be sacrificed for you. How little are we! If we gather to eat one sheep, we would not finish it.”

He said, “Should I not tell you something more amazing than this? The Muhajirin and Ansar reneged besides three,” indicating with his hand.[8]

 

Nuri al Tabarsi[9] emphatically declares the apostasy of the Sahabah saying:

 

إن من وقف على شطر قليل من حال القوم وكيفية تواطئهم على إطفاء الحق وسترهم ما هو أحق بالنشر مما ذكر كيف يستغرب منهم ذلك وما ورد في ارتدادهم ورجوعهم إلى قواعد الجاهلية أكثر من أن يخفى

Indeed, whoever is cognisant of a small portion of their condition and the manner they colluded in extinguishing the truth and concealing that which deserves to be disseminated more than what was mentioned, how can this ever be considered farfetched for them? The reports on their apostasy and returning to the rules of Ignorance are more than can be concealed.[10]

 

The Imams of the Rafidah have elucidated upon this small number at other places. It is reported that Abu Jafar said:

 

كان الناس أهل ردة بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلا ثلاثة فقلت ومن الثلاثة فقال المقداد بن الأسود وأبو ذر وسلمان الفارسي … ثم عرف الناس بعد يسير وقال هؤلاء الذين دارت عليهم الرحا وأبوا أن يبايعوا لأبي بكر حتى جاؤوا بأمير المؤمنين مكرها فبايع

“People turned apostate after the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam besides three.”

“Who are they,” I asked.

He explained, “Miqdad ibn al Aswad, Abu Dharr, and Salman al Farisi.” After a little while, he explained to the people saying, “It was against these people that [all hell] broke out and they refused to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr until the people brought Amir al Mu’minin forcefully and he pledged allegiance.”[11]

 

The Rafidah exclude these three from the Sahabah and include them among the believers as they believed in ‘Ali’s Wilayah and disbelieved in Abu Bakr’s Imamah—as apparent from this text. They cite Allah’s following statement as evidence for this fundamental:

 

إِنَّمَا ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ إِذَا ذُكِرَ ٱللَّهُ وَجِلَتۡ قُلُوبُهُمۡ وَإِذَا تُلِيَتۡ عَلَيۡهِمۡ ءَايَٰتُهُۥ زَادَتۡهُمۡ إِيمَٰنٗا وَعَلَىٰ رَبِّهِمۡ يَتَوَكَّلُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَمِمَّا رَزَقۡنَٰهُمۡ يُنفِقُونَ أُوْلَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنُونَ حَقّٗاۚ لَّهُمۡ دَرَجَٰتٌ عِندَ رَبِّهِمۡ وَمَغۡفِرَةٞ وَرِزۡقٞ كَرِيمٞ

The believers are only those who, when Allah is mentioned, their hearts become fearful, and when His verses are recited to them, it increases them in faith; and upon their Lord they rely. The ones who establish prayer, and from what We have provided them, they spend. Those are the believers, truly. For them are degrees [of high position] with their Lord and forgiveness and noble provision.[12]

 

They claim: This verse was revealed concerning Amir al Mu’minin, Abu Dharr, Salman, and al Miqdad.[13]

There are other texts on the number of persons the Rafidah exclude, which reach seven. It is reported from ‘Abdul Malik ibn A’yan:

 

أنه سأل أبا عبد الله مرة عن حال الناس بعد وفاة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال له هلك الناس إذا فقال أي والله يا ابن أعين هلك الناس أجمعون فقال أهل الشرق والغرب قال إنها فتحت على الضلال إي والله هلكوا إلا ثلاثة نفر سلمان الفارسي وأبو ذر والمقداد ولحقهم عمار وأبو ساسان الأنصاري وحذيفة وأبو عمرة فصاروا سبعة

He asked Abu ‘Abdullah once about people’s condition after the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam demise saying, “People were then destroyed?”

“Yes, by Allah, O Ibn A’yan! All of the people were destroyed.”

“The people of the East and West?”

“Indeed, it was opened to misguidance. Yes, by Allah, they were all destroyed besides three individuals, viz. Salman al Farisi, Abu Dharr, and Miqdad. ‘Ammar, Abu Sasan al Ansari, Hudhayfah, and Abu ‘Amrah joined them, making them seven.”[14]

 

Abu ‘Abdullah would state on oath:

 

فوالله ما وفى بها إلا سبعة نفر سلمان وأبو ذر وعمار والمقداد بن الأسود الكندي وجابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري ومولى لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقال له الثبيت وزيد بن أرقم

By Allah, none was loyal to it besides seven individuals, viz. Salman, Abu Dharr, Miqdad ibn al Aswad al Kindi, Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah al Ansari, the Messenger of Allah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam slave al Thabit, and Zaid ibn Arqam.[15]

 

Abu Jafar affirms:

 

وكانوا سبعة فلم يكن يعرف حق أمير المؤمنين إلا هؤلاء السبعة

They were seven. None recognised Amir al Mu’minin’s right besides these seven.[16]

 

They dedicate a thorough share of excommunication, curse, and disparagement to the three Khalifas, viz. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman, as well as Muawiyah and Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anhum, either through emphatic clear texts, as is the condition of the contemporary Rafidah, or texts in which they employed particular terminologies, as was the practice of the early Rafidah—due to the power of the Islamic state at the time.[17]

Al Majlisi dedicates a chapter to this, titling it: chapter on the disbelief, hypocrisy, scandalous actions, and dreadful effects of the three and the virtue of dissociating from them and cursing them.[18]

It appears in Usul al Kafi that Abu ‘Abdullah stated:

 

ثلاثة لا يكلمهم الله يوم القيامة ولا يزكيهم ولهم عذاب أليم من ادعى إمامة من الله ليست له ومن جحد إماما من الله ومن زعم أن لهما في الإسلام نصيبا

Three persons, Allah will neither look at them on the Day of Qiyamah nor purify them and they will have a severe punishment: Whoever claims he is an Imam and is not, whoever rejects the Imamah of an Imam from Allah, and whoever thinks that they two [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar] have a share in Islam.[19]

 

Hassan al Hilli[20] comments on Abu Bakr and ‘Umar:

 

ومما يدل على ما قلناه من أنهما كانا منافقين غير مؤمنين ما سمع من قنوت مولانا أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وهو هذا اللهم العن صنمي قريش وجبتيهما وطاغوتيهما وإفكيهما وابنتيهما الذين خالفا أمرك وأنكرا وحيك وجحدا إنعامك وعصيا رسولك وقلبا دينك وحرفا كتابك وعطلا أحكامك وأبطلا فرائضك وألحدا في آياتك وعاديا أولياءك وواليا أعداءك وخربا بلادك وأفسدا عبادك اللهم العنهما وأتباعهما وأشياعهما ومحبيهما

What indicates to what we affirmed, that they were hypocrites and not believers, is the supplication heard from our master Amir al Mu’minin which is: O Allah curse the two idols of Quraysh, its two Jibts, Taghuts, lies, and their daughters who opposed Your order, rejected Your revelation, denied Your bounty, disobeyed Your Rasul, altered Your Din, distorted Your Book, rendered Your laws useless, nullified Your mandated tenets, were guilty of heresy in Your verses, opposed Your friends, befriended Your enemies, ravaged Your lands, and corrupted Your bondsmen. O Allah, curse them, their followers, supporters, and lovers.[21]

 

Khomeini[22] writes:

 

ولم يؤمن أبو بكر وعمر إيمانا نابعا من القلب بل الإسلام في الظاهر فقد طمعا في الحكم والسلطة وقد التصقا بالرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم

Abu Bakr and ‘Umar did not believe with faith originating from the heart. Rather, they embraced Islam outwardly. They indeed desired rulership and authority and thus stuck with the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[23]

 

Muhammad al Khalisi[24] writes:

 

وإن قالوا أن أبا بكر وعمر من أهل بيعة الرضوان الذين نص الله على الرضا عنهم في القرآن لَقَدْ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ تَحْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ قلنا لو قال لقد رضي الله عن الذين يبايعونك تحت الشجرة أو عن الذين بايعوك لكان في الآية دلالة على الرضا عن كل من بايعه ولكن لما قال لَقَدْ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ فلا دلالة فيه على الرضا إلا عمن محض الإيمان

If they say that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were from the participants of Bay’at al Ridwan, for whom Allah categorically declared happiness in the glorious Qur’an: Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you [O Prophet] under the tree, we say that had Allah said: ‘Allah was certainly pleased with those who pledged allegiance to you under the tree,’ or ‘those who pledged allegiance to you,’ there would be indication in the verse towards happiness with all those who pledged allegiance. However, since Allah said: Indeed, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you [O Prophet] under the tree. There is no indication to happiness except with those sincere in iman.[25]

 

It appears in Bihar al Anwar:

 

ومن أعداء الله أصلحك الله قال الأوثان الأربعة قال قلت من هم قال أبو الفصيل ورمع ونعثل ومعاوية ومن دان دينهم

“Who are Allah’s enemies? May Allah keep you well.”

He answered, “The four idols.”

“Who are they?”

He explained, “Abu al Fasil[26], Ramu’, Na’thal[27], Muawiyah and whoever follows their religion.”[28]

 

Al Majlisi expounds on these terminologies saying:

 

أبو الفصيل أبو بكر لأن الفصيل والبكر متقاربان في المعنى ورمع مقلوب عمر ونعثل هو عثمان كما صرح به في كتب اللغة

Abu al Fasil is Abu Bakr because fasil and bakr (young camel) are close in meaning. Ramu’ is ‘Umar reversed. Na’thal refers to ‘Uthman as spelt out in the books on language.[29]

 

An indication appears in Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi[30] to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar with the words: Fulan wa Fulan. Abu Basir reports that he heard Abu ‘Abdullah saying:

 

يَأَيُّهَا الَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوا ادْخُلُوْا فِي السِّلْمِ كَافَّةً وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوْا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِيْنٌ قال أتدري ما السلم قال قلت أنت أعلم قال ولاية علي والأوصياء من بعده قال وخطوات الشيطان والله ولاية فلان وفلان

O you who have believed, enter into silm (Islam) completely [and perfectly] and do not follow the footsteps of Shaitan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.[31]

He asked, “Do you know what silm is?”

I answered, “You are more knowledgeable.”

He explained, “The Wilayah of ‘Ali and the Awsiya’ after him. The footsteps of Shaitan—by Allah—is the rule of so and so and so and so.”[32]

 

Abu ‘Abdullah commentates on Allah’s statement:

 

إِنَّ الَّذِيْنَ ارْتَدُّوْا عَلىٰ أَدْبَارِهِمْ مِّنْ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُمُ الْهُدَى الشَّيْطَانُ سَوَّلَ لَهُمْ وَأَمْلىٰ لَهُمْ … قال فلان وفلان وفلان ارتدوا عن الإيمان في ترك ولاية أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام

Indeed, those who reverted back [to disbelief] after guidance had become clear to them, Shaitan enticed them and prolonged hope for them.[33] He explained, “So and so, so and so, and so and so apostatised from faith by abandoning the Wilayah of Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam.”[34]

 

Furthermore, they specifically disparaged, cursed, and fervently dissociated from Umm al Mu’minin Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha, claiming her disbelief, being out of the fold of iman, and being from the inmates of Hell. They accuse her of immorality and give her the most despicable titles. They accuse her of being the mother of all evil, a female devil, the red-cheeked one, and other lies and fabrications.[35] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi documents a report of Jafar al Sadiq on Allah’s statement:

 

وَلَا تَكُوْنُوْا كَالَّتِيْ نَقَضَتْ غَزْلَهَا مِنْ بَعْدِ قُوَّةٍ أَنْكَاثًا تَتَّخِذُوْنَ أَيْمَانَكُمْ دَخَلًا بَيْنَكُمْ أَنْ تَكُوْنَ أُمَّةٌ هِيَ أَرْبىٰ مِنْ أُمَّةٍ إِنَّمَا يَبْلُوْكُمُ اللهُ بِهِ وَلَيُبَيِّنَنَّ لَكُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ مَا كُنْتُمْ فِيْهِ تَخْتَلِفُوْنَ قال التي نقضت غزلها من بعد قوة أنكاثا عائشة هي نكثت أيمانها

And do not be like she who untwisted her spun thread after it was strong [by] taking your oaths as [means of] deceit between you because one community is more plentiful [in number or wealth] than another community. Allah only tries you thereby. And He will surely make clear to you on the Day of Resurrection that over which you used to differ.[36]

He explained, “The one to untwist her spun thread after it was strong: Aisha is the one who broke her oath.”[37]

 

It appears in Bihar al Anwar from Salim ibn Mukrim from his father who said that he heard Abu Jafar commenting on Allah’s statement:

 

مَثَلُ الَّذِيْنَ اتَّخَذُوْا مِن دُونِ اللهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ كَمَثَلِ الْعَنْكَبُوْتِ اتَّخَذَتْ بَيْتًا وَإِنَّ أَوْهَنَ الْبُيُوْتِ لَبَيْتُ الْعَنْكَبُوْتِ لَوْ كَانُوْا يَعْلَمُوْنَ قال هي الحميراء

The example of those who take allies other than Allah is like that of the spider who takes a home. And indeed, the weakest of homes is the home of the spider, if they only knew.[38]

He said, “It is Humaira’ [Aisha].”[39]

 

Al Majlisi adds an explanatory footnote to this saying:

 

إنما كنى عنها بالعنكبوت لأنه حيوان ضعيف اتخذت بيتا ضعيفا أوهن البيوت وكذلك الحميراء حيوان ضعيف لقلة حظها وعقلها ودينها اتخذت من رأيها الضعيف وعقلها السخيف في مخالفتها وعداوتها لمولاها بيتا مثل بيت العنكبوت في الوهن والضعف

She was only referred to as a spider because it is a weak insect which built a weak house, the weakest of homes. Similarly, Humaira’ is a weak creature due to her little fortune, intelligence, and religion, who took from her weak view and despicable intelligence in opposing and showing animosity to her master, a house like the spider’s house in despicability and weakness.[40]

 

Al Qummi[41] writes in the commentary of Allah’s statement:

 

ضَرَبَ اللهُ مَثَلًا لِّلَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا امْرَأَتَ نُوْحٍ وَامْرَأَتَ لُوْطٍ كَانَتَا تَحْتَ عَبْدَيْنِ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا صَالِحَيْنِ فَخَانَتَاهُمَا فَلَمْ يُغْنِيَا عَنْهُمَا مِنَ اللهِ شَيْئًا وَقِيْلَ ادْخُلَا النَّارَ مَعَ الدَّاخِلِيْنَ والله ما عنى بقوله فخانتاهما إلا الفاحشة وليقيمن الحد على عائشة فيما أتت في طريق البصرة

Allah presents an example of those who disbelieved: the wife of Nuh and the wife of Lut. They were under two of Our righteous servants but betrayed them, so those prophets did not avail them from Allah at all, and it was said, “Enter the Fire with those who enter.”[42]

By Allah, He did not refer to by His words: but betrayed them except the immoral woman and he will most definitely mete out the hadd upon Aisha for what she perpetrated on the road of Basrah.[43]

 

They spoke lies and falsehood by claiming that Aisha and Hafsah killed the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam by poisoning him.[44]

The Rafidah reckon hatred for Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, cursing him, and dissociating from him are among the essentials of their religion and believe that he will have nothing but a painful punishment in the Hereafter.[45] Al Majlisi says:

 

ومما عد من ضروريات دين الإمامية استحلال المتعة وحج التمتع والبراءة من أبي بكر وعمر وعثمان ومعاوية

Regarding Mut’ah and Hajj al Tamattu’ as permissible, as well as dissociating from Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and Muawiyah is considered among the essentials of the Imamiyyah creed.[46]

 

Khomeini says:

 

معاوية ترأس وتأمر لفترة طويلة إلا أنه لم يجن لنفسه سوى اللعن والذم وعذاب الآخرة

Muawiyah held authority and ruled for a long period, but that he never secured for himself except curse, blame, and the punishment of the Hereafter.[47]

 

It appears that Abu Jafar al Baqir said:

 

كنت خلف أبي وهو على بغلته فنفرت بغلته فإذا هو شيخ في عنقه سلسلة ورجل يتبعه فقال يا علي بن الحسين اسقني فقال الرجل لا تسقه لا سقاه الله وكان الشيخ معاوية

I was behind my father who was on his mule. His mule ran and he met up with an old man who had a chain on his neck while a man was following him. The old man said, “O ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, give me water.”

The man said, “Do not give him water. May Allah never quench his thirst.”

The old man was Muawiyah.[48]

 

Just as they specifically targeted these Sahabah with abuse and excommunication, they criticised the others and declared them hypocrites. It appears in Tafsir al Safi from al Sadiq:

 

لما أقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يوم غدير خم كان بحذائه سبعة نفر من المنافقين وهم أبو بكر وعمر وعبد الرحمن بن عوف وسعد بن أبي وقاص وأبو عبيدة وسالم مولى أبي حذيفة والمغيرة بن شعبة قال عمر أما ترون عينه كأنما عين مجنون يعني النبي الساعة يقوم ويقول قال لي ربي فلما قام قال أيها الناس من أولى بكم من أنفسكم قالوا الله ورسوله قال اللهم فاشهد ثم قال ألا من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه وسلموا عليه بإمرة أمير المؤمنين فنزل جبريل وأعلم رسول الله بمقالة القوم فدعاهم وسألهم فأنكروا وحلفوا فأنزل الله يَحْلِفُوْنَ بِاللهِ مَا قَالُوْا وَلَقَدْ قَالُوْا كَلِمَةَ الْكُفْرِ وَكَفَرُوْا بَعْدَ إِسْلَامِهِمْ وَهَمُّوْا بِمَا لَمْ يَنَالُوْا وَمَا نَقَمُوْا إِلَّا أَنْ أَغْنَاهُمُ اللهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ  فَإِنْ يَتُوْبُوْا يَكُ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَإِنْ يَتَوَلَّوْا يُعَذِّبْهُمُ اللهُ عَذَابًا أَلِيْمًا فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَمَا لَهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ مِنْ وَلِيٍّ وَلَا نَصِيْرٍ

When the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam stationed on the day of Ghadir Khumm[49], he was face to face with seven hypocrites, viz. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Awf, Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas, Abu ‘Ubaidah, Salim Mawla Abi Hudhayfah, and Mughirah ibn Shu’bah.

Umar said, “Do you not see that his—referring to the Nabi—eyes resemble the eyes of a crazy man? He will just now stand up and say that his Rabb told him.”

When he stood up, he said, “O people, who has more right over you than yourselves?”

They replied, “Allah and His Messenger.”

He said, “O Allah, bear witness.” He continued, “Harken! Whoever’s friend I am, ‘Ali is his friend. Hand over to him the leadership of Amir al Mu’minin.”

Jibril descended and informed the Messenger of Allah of what the people said. He summoned them and questioned them, but they denied upon oath. Upon this Allah revealed: They swear by Allah that they did not say [anything against the Prophet] while they had said the word of disbelief and disbelieved after their [pretense of] Islam and planned that which they were not to attain. And they were not resentful except [for the fact] that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His bounty. So, if they repent, it is better for them; but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth any protector or helper.[50][51]

 

Khomeini says:

الصحابة الذين يسمونهم المنافقين

The Sahabah whom they label hypocrites.[52]

 

Al Khu’i[53] writes:

 

إن بعض الصحابة لم يؤمنوا بالله طرفة عين وإنما كانوا يظهرون الشهادتين باللسان وهو صلى الله عليه وسلم مع علمه بحالهم لم يحكم بنجاستهم ولا بكفرهم

Certainly, some Sahabah did not believe in Allah for even the blinking of an eye. They only expressed the two testimonies with the tongue. Despite knowing their condition, the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not declare their impurity and disbelief.[54]

 

Al Kashani[55] claims in reference to the Sahabah:

 

أن أكثرهم يقصد الصحابة كانوا يبطنون النفاق ويجترئون على الله ويفترون على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في عزة وشقاق

Majority of them concealed hypocrisy, were daring against Allah, and fabricated in the Messenger’s name in pride and dissension.[56]

 

Al Mamaqani[57] says:

 

إن من المعلوم بالضرورة وبنص الآيات الكريمة وجود الفساق والمنافقين في الصحابة بل كثرتهم فيهم وعروض الفسق بل الارتداد لجمع منهم في حياته صلى الله عليه وسلم والآخرين بعد وفاته

It is known essentially and through the emphatic texts of the noble verses, the presence of transgressors and hypocrites among the Sahabah—in fact, they being the majority, the exhibitions of transgression, and further than that apostasy of a large group of them during his lifetime and others after his demise.[58]

 

Al Zanjani[59] pronounces:

 

من الصحابة المنافق والفاسق والباغي والزاني وشارب الخمر وقاتل النفس … وكيف يجب تعظيمهم جميعا وقد ذمهم الله في كتابه العزيز آحادا وجماعات في مواضع كثيرة

Among the Sahabah are hypocrites, transgressors, rebels, adulterers, consumers of alcohol, and murderers. How can honouring all of them be obligatory whereas Allah has dispraised them in His Magnificent Book on an individual and collective basis in plenty places.[60]

 

Al Tustari[61] confirms the belief of the Rafidah concerning the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum saying:

 

كما جاء موسى للهداية وهدى خلقا كثيرا من بني إسرائيل وغيرهم فارتدوا في أيام حياته ولم يبق منهم أحد على إيمانه سوى هارون عليه السلام كذلك جاء محمد صلى الله عليه وآله وهدى خلقا لكنهم بعد وفاته ارتدوا على أعقابهم

Just as Musa ‘alayh al Salam came for guidance and guided a large number of the Banu Isra’il and others, but they apostatised during his lifetime and none remained on his faith except Harun ‘alayh al Salam, similarly Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came and guided a nation, but they apostatised after his demise.[62]

 

Al Mufid, while discussing the Jarudiyyah[63], indicates to the Sahabah’s radiya Llahu ‘anhum apostasy:

 

وهذا مع ما بيناه لكم من قولنا في القوم وأوضحنا عن معناه ما لا يمكننا وإياكم مثله في المتقدمين على أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ومن اتبعهم في الضلال وهو عند جميع الناصبة بدع في المقال يقارب الردة عن الإسلام

This, added to what we explained to you regarding the people and elucidated on the meaning, which does not allow us and you the like concerning those who preceded Amir al Mu’minin ‘alayh al Salam and those who followed them in deviation. And it, according to all the Nasibah, is innovations in speech which are close to apostasy from Islam.[64]

 

Based on what has been mentioned before, the Rafidah do not accept the integrity of the Sahabah[65] and cite consensus on this issue. Al Mamaqani states:

 

قد اتفق أصحابنا الإمامية على أن صحبة النبي بنفسها وبمجردها لا يستلزم عدالة المتصف بها ولا حسن حاله وأن حال الصاحبي حال من لم يدرك الصحبة في توقف قبول خبره على ثبوت عدالته أو وثاقته أو حسن حاله ومدحه المعتد به مع إيمانه

Our Imamiyyah scholars are unanimous that companionship of the Nabi by itself and independently neither necessitates the integrity of one qualified by it nor his good condition. The condition of a Companion is the same as the condition of one who did not attain companionship, in the acceptance of his report being conditional upon the establishment of his integrity, his veracity, or his good condition coupled with worthy praise for him with his iman.[66]

 

Al Majlisi says:

 

وذهبت الإمامية إلى أنهم أي الصحابة كسائر الناس من أن فيهم العادل وفيهم المنافق والفاسق والضال بل أكثرهم كذلك

The Imamiyyah opine that they—the Sahabah—are like the rest of the people, in the sense that among them are the trustworthy as well as the hypocrite, transgressor, and deviant. In fact, majority of them are such.[67]

 

Al Shirazi[68] affirms:

 

حكم الصحابة عندنا في العدالة حكم غيرهم ولايتحتم الحكم بالإيمان والعدالة بمجرد الصحبة ولا يحصل بها النجاة من عقاب النار وغضب الجبار إلا أن يكون مع يقين الإيمان وخلوص الجنان فمن علمنا عدالته وإيمانه وحفظه وصية رسول الله في أهل بيته وأنه مات على ذلك كسلمان وأبي ذر وعمار واليناه وتقربنا إلى الله تعالى بحبه ومن علمنا أنه انقلب على عقبه وأظهر العداوة لأهل البيت عليهم السلام عاديناه لله تعالى وتبرأنا إلى الله منه ونسكت عن المجهول حاله

The verdict of the Sahabah’s integrity according to us is the verdict of others besides them. The ruling of faith and integrity is not incumbent merely due to companionship. Acquisition of salvation from the chastisement of Hell and wrath of al Jabbar (the Omnipotent) is not acquiring by it, unless it is coupled with conviction of faith and sincerity of the heart. Those regarding whom we are convinced of their integrity, faith, and preservation of the Messenger of Allah’s bequest regarding his household, and his death upon this, like Salman, Abu Dharr, and ‘Ammar, we befriend him and seek closeness to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala by loving him. Conversely, those regarding whom we know they turned on their backs and expressed hatred for the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam, we declare enmity for him for the sake of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and exonerate ourselves to Allah from him. We remain silent regarding those whose condition is unknown.[69]

 

Their stance on the Sahabah results in their rejection of the Sahabah’s reports from the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, except those on the authority of the Ahlul Bayt. Muhammad Hussain Al Kashif[70] affirms:

 

إنهم لا يعتبرون من السنة إلا ما صح لهم من طريق أهل البيت عليهم السلام عن جدهم يعني كما رواه الصادق عن أبيه الباقر عن أبيه زين العابدين عن الحسين السبط عن أبيه أمير المؤمنين عن رسول الله سلام الله عليهم جميعا أما ما يرويه مثل أبي هريرة وسمرة بن جندب ومروان بن الحكم وعمران بن حطان الخارجي وعمرو بن العاص ونظائرهم فليس لهم عند الإمامية من الاعتبار مقدار بعوضة وأمرهم أشهر من أن يذكر كيف وقد صرح كثير من علماء السنة بمطاعنهم ودل على جائفة جروحهم

They do not consider from the Sunnah except that which is authentic for them from the chain of the Ahlul Bayt ‘alayhim al Salam from their grandfather, i.e. as narrated by al Sadiq from his father al Baqir, from his father Zayn al ‘Abidin, from Hussain al Sibt, from his father Amir al Mu’minin, from the Messenger of Allah—Allah’s peace be upon them all.

As regards the reports of Abu Hurairah, Samurah ibn Jundub, Marwan ibn al Hakam, ‘Imran ibn Hattan al Khariji, ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, and their like—they are not considered by the Imamiyyah, not even to the extent of a mosquito. Their matter is popular, and does not need mention. Many scholars have clearly disparaged them and pointed out the stench of their wounds.[71]

 

‘Abdul Hadi al Fadli[72] states:

 

إن تعميم الحكم وهو اعتبار قول الصحابة سنة كسنة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى جميع أفراد الصحابة مما لا يجوز نسبته إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا يصح القول به وذلك أن الواقع الذي أبان عنه القرآن الكريم ينفي صحة نسبة العدالة لجميع الصحابة … وبعد هذا كله ما هو موقفنا من مرويات أقوال الصحابة التي هي نتائج اجتهاد ورأي إن الموقف يتمثل في عدم جواز الأخذ بها للسببين التاليين الأول وفرة الأحاديث المروية عن طريق أهل البيت التي تغطي كل مسائل الفقه وحيث تتوفر النصوص الشرعية لا يلتجأ على اجتهاد الرأي الثاني منع أئمة أهل البيت عليهم السلام من الأخذ باجتهاد الرأي وشجبه بكل قوة

The generalisation of the verdict—and that is considering a Sahabi’s statement Sunnah like the Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Sunnah—to all the individuals of the Sahabah is not permitted to be attributed to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and is not correct to state. This is because the reality which the Glorious Qur’an explained negates the correctness of attributing integrity to all individuals of the Sahabah… After all this, what is our stance on the reports of the Sahabah’s statements which are the product of ijtihad (independent judgment) and opinion? Our stance is the non-permissibility of adhering to them due to the following two reasons:

Firstly: the abundance of narrations reported from the chain of the Ahlul Bayt which cover all the issues of Fiqh. When categorical Shar’i texts are abundant, ijtihad and opinion are not considered.

Secondly: The Ahlul Bayt’s Imam ‘alayhim al Salam prohibiting adhering to ijtihad and opinion and vehemently condemning it.[73]

 

NEXT⇒


[1] A number of scholars have documented their consensus, including Ibn Mandah in Ma’rifat al Sahabah, pg. 10; Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al Isti’ab, vol. 1 pg. 19; Ibn al Salah in his al Muqaddamah, pg. 294; Ibn Kathir in Ikhtisar ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 181-182; Ibn Hajar in al Isabah, vol. 1 pg. 18; al Suyuti in Tadreeb al Rawi fi Taqrib al Nawawi, vol. 2 pg. 214; and others.

[2] Majmu’ al Fatawa, vol. 2 pg. 221.

[3] He is ‘Abdul Qahir ibn Tahir ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al Baghdadi al Tamimi al Isfara’ini al Shafi’i, Abu Mansur, the perfect scholar, among the masters of fundamentals. He was born and nurtured in Baghdad. He mastered many sciences, particularly inheritance and grammar. He passed away in Isfara’in in 429. He authored Usul al Din, Tafsir Asma’ Allah al Husna, al Milal wa al Nihal, al Farq bayn al Firaq. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 17 pg. 572-573; al Safdi: al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 19 pg. 31-33.)

[4] Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 277.

[5] Hurr al ‘Amili dedicates a chapter with the heading: chapter on the desirability of cursing the enemies of religion by name after every Salah. One of the reports is:

عن الحسين وأبي سلمة السراج قالا سمعنا أبا عبد الله عليه السلام وهو يلعن في دبر كل مكتوبة أربعة من الرجال وأربعة من النساء وفلانا وفلانا وفلانا ويسميهم ومعاوية وفلانة وفلانة وهندا وأم حكم أخت معاوية

From Hussain and Abu Salamah al Sarraj who narrate they heard Abu ‘Abdullah ‘alayh al Salam cursing after every fard Salah four men and four women, so and so … taking them by name and Muawiyah, and so and so, Hind, and Umm Hakam—Muawiyah’s sister. (Al ‘Amili Wasa’il al Shia, vol. 6 pg. 462.)

[6] Taqiyyah lexically in the various forms: ittaqaytu al shay’, taqaytuhu, atqihi, attaqihi, tuqa, taqyah, and tiqa’ means to be cautious of something. (Lisan al ‘Arab, pg. 4901.) Hafiz Ibn Hajar defines it as: To be cautious of exposing the beliefs etc., in the heart. (Fath al Bari, vol. 12 pg. 329.) The scholars are unanimous that Taqiyyah is a concession at the time of need. Ibn al Mundhir says, “They unanimously agree that one who is forced to disbelieve to the extent that he fears losing his life, while his heart is content with faith, the verdict of disbelief will not be passed against him and his wife will not be separated from him (if he outwardly expresses disbelief). (Fath al Bari, vol. 12 pg. 329.) Al Taqiyyah according to the Rafidah is very different. It is not a concession for them; rather, it is one of the pillars of religion. Ibn Babawayh writes:

اعتقادنا في التقية أنها واجبة من تركها بمنزلة من ترك الصلاة

Our belief in Taqiyyah is that it is obligatory. One who discards it is on the level of one who discards Salah. (Al I’tiqadat, pg. 82)

[7] He is Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Yaqub ibn Ishaq al Kulayni, the Shia Imami. He is from Kulayn, a village of Rayy. He died in Baghdad in 328 AH. He wrote al Kafi fi ‘Ilm al Din and al Radd ‘ala Qaramitah, etc. (Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, vol. 15 pg. 280; al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 5 pg. 147; Ibn al Athir: al Lubab fi Tahdhib al Insan, vol. 3 pg. 108.)

[8] Al Kafi, book on faith and disbelief, chapter on the small amount of believers, vol. 2 pg. 244.

[9] He is Hussain ibn Muhammad Taqi ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Taqi al Nuri al Tabarsi, from the scholars of the Rafidah. He was born in Tabaristan in 1254 AH and died in Kufah in 1320 AH. He has a number of books, like Mustadrak al Wasa’il wa Mustanbat al Masa’il, Nafs al Rahman fi Fada’il Salman, and Fasl al Khitab fi Ithbat Tahrif Kitab Rabb al Arbab. (Al A’lam, vol. 2 pg. 257; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 1 pg. 191.)

[10] Muhammad Habib: Fasl al Khitab fi Ithbat Tahrif Kitab Rabb al Arbab ‘Ard wa Naqd, pg. 189-190.

[11] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 199; al Kafi, vol. 8 pg. 245; al Tusi: Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 26-27; Ibn Shahrashub: Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol. 2 pg. 374; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 21 pg. 11, vol. 22 pg. 331; al Huwayzi: Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 1 pg. 396; al Darajat al Rafi’ah, pg. 213.

[12] Surah al Anfal: 2-4.

[13] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 1 pg. 255; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 268; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 22 pg. 318.

[14] Al Mufid: al Ikhtisas, pg. 2; al Khu’i: Mujam Rijal al Hadith, vol. 19 pg. 340.

[15] Al Himyari al Qummi: Qurb al Isnad, pg. 79; al Ikhtisas, pg. 63; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 22 pg. 318, vol. 23 pg. 230; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 4 pg. 570; Mujam Rijal al Hadith, vol. 8 pg. 343.

[16] Al Kafi, vol. 2 pg. 244-344; al Ikhtisas, pg. 10; Ikhtiyar Ma’rifat al Rijal, vol. 1 pg. 52; A’yan al Shia, vol. 2 pg. 352.

[17] Usul Mazhab al Shia, vol. 2 pg. 879; Zaid ibn ‘Abdullah al Hummam: al ‘Alaqah bayn al Sufiyyah wa al Imamiyyah, pg. 322.

[18] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 30 pg. 145, 404.

[19] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 178; al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 371, chapter on one who claims Imamah but is not worthy; Wasa’il al Shia, vol. 28 pg. 349; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 25 pg. 111; Mustadrak al Wasa’il, vol. 18 pg. 173.

[20] He is Hassan ibn Sulaiman ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid al Hilli al ‘Amili. He is originally from ‘Amil and settled in Hill. He studied under Muhammad ibn Makki al ‘Amili. He died around 802 AH. Al Mukhtasar, al Mi’raj, al Raj’ah, Mukhtasar Basa’ir al Darajat, Risalat Ahadith al Dharr, etc. are his works. (Al Dhari’ah ila Tasanif al Shia, vol. 10 pg. 162; Muqaddamat Muhaqqiq al Mukhtasar, pg. 9.)

[21] Al Mukhtasar, pg. 111; al Majlisi: Bihar al Anwar, vol. 85 pg. 260-261; al ‘Amili (‘Ali al Kurani al ‘Amili): al Intisar, vol. 6 pg. 456.

[22] He is Ruh Allah ibn Mustafa al Musawi Khomeini, leader of the Rafidah in Iran. He was born in 1320 AH and studied at the Hawzah ‘Ilmiyyah. He became a teacher of philosophy at the institute. He later got involved in politics until he toppled the Shah’s rule. He died in 1409 AH. He wrote Ahkam al Islam bayn al Sa’il wa al Imam, Risalat al Sayyidah Zainab, and al Jihad al Akbar. (Mujam al Mu’allifin al Mu’asirin, vol. 1 pg. 230; ‘Adil Ra’uf: Kitab al Imam al Khumayni.)

[23] Al Thawrah al Iraniyyah fi Mizan al Islam, pg. 69-70.

[24] He is Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Mahdi al Khalisi, among the leading Fuqaha’ of the Imamiyyah from Kazimiyyah. He was born in 1307 AH and died in 1383 AH. He wrote Ihya’ al Shari’ah fi Mazhab al Shia, al Islam fawq Kull Shay’, and al Ra’samaliyyah wa al Shuyu’iyyah fi al Islam. (Al A’lam, vol. 7 pg. 86; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 3 pg. 693-694.)

[25] Ihya’ al Shari’ah fi Mazhab al Shia, vol. 1 pg. 86.

[26] Abu al Fasil: This agnomen does not appear in the books on agnomens and none of the authors on the Sahabah mentioned it. It is only one of the terminologies of the Rafidah. They named Abu Bakr with it. This is part of their Taqiyyah. This is so they may answer the Ahlus Sunnah when questioned about their allegations against Abu Bakr saying: we intended Abu al Fasil, not Abu Bakr. (Dr. Muhammad ‘Ata Sufi: Mawqif al Shia al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah min al Sahabah, pg. 378.)

[27] They called ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu Na’thal, likening him to an Egyptian man with the name Na’thal who had a long beard. The first to apply this name to ‘Uthman were the very ones to rebel against him and kill him, led by Jabalah ibn ‘Amr al Sa’idi and aped by Jahjah al Ghifari. (Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 4 pg. 365-366; al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam wa Wafayat al Mashahir, vol. 3 pg. 444; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 10 pg. 282-284; ‘Abdul Malik ibn Hussain al Makki: Simt al Nujum al ‘Awali fi Abna’ al Awa’il wa al Tawali, vol. 2 pg. 525.)

[28] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 116; Hisham al Bahrani: Ghayat al Maram, vol. 3 pg. 53; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 27 pg. 57; al ‘Amili: Muqaddamat al Burhan, pg. 529.

[29] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 27 pg. 57; Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 116; ‘Ali al Nimazi: Mustadrak Safinat al Bihar, vol. 1 pg. 232.

[30] He is Muhammad ibn Mas’ud al ‘Ayyashi, Abu al Nazar, from the senior Imamiyyah. He is from Samarqand while some suggest he is from the Banu Tamim. It is reported that the number of his books reached two hundred and eight books. His books became popular in Khorasan. The most prominent of these is his exegesis named Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi. He died in 320 AH. (Al Fihrist, pg. 246.)

[31] Surah al Baqarah: 208.

[32] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 1 pg. 102; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 1 pg. 242; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 1 pg. 205.

[33] Surah Muhammad: 25.

[34] Al Kafi, vol. 1 pg. 420; ‘Ali al Nimazi: Mustadrak Safinat al Bihar, vol. 1 pg. 216.

[35] Ibn Kathir rahimahu Llah says:

وقد أجمع أهل العلم قاطبة على أن من سبها بعد هذا ورماها بما رماها به بعد هذا الذي ذكر في هذه الآية فإنه كافر معاند للقرآن

The scholars are unanimous, all without exception, that whoever insults her after this and accuses her [of immorality], after what is mentioned in this verse, is a disbeliever, obstinate against the Qur’an. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. 3 pg. 304; Ibn al ‘Arabi: Ahkam al Qur’an, vol. 6 pg. 41; Ibn Taymiyyah: al Sarim al Maslul, pg. 566; al Haytami: al Sawa’iq al Muhriqah, vol. 1 pg. 144.)

[36] Surah al Nahl: 92.

[37] Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi, vol. 2 pg. 269; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 7 pg. 454.

[38] Surah al ‘Ankabut: 41.

[39] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 32 pg. 286; Sharaf al Din al Hussaini: Ta’wil al Ayat, vol. 1 pg. 430.

[40] Ibid.

[41] He is ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashim al Qummi, Abu al Hassan, the Mufassir, Faqih, and Akhbari. Al Kulayni transmitted from him. He died in 329 AH. He has written a few books on Tafsir, including al Nasikh wa al Mansukh and Akhbar al Qur’an wa Riwayatuh. (Al Wafi bi al Wafayat, vol. 20 pg. 6; Mujam al Udaba’, vol. 4 pg. 1641; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 2 pg. 389-390.)

[42] Surah al Tahrim: 10.

[43] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 2 pg. 377; al Bahrani: al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, vol. 4 pg. 357-358; al Huwayzi: Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 5 pg. 375.

[44] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 2 pg. 375-376; al Bayadi: al Sirat al Mustaqim, vol. 3 pg. 168; al Tustari: Ihqaq al Haqq, pg. 307-308; Muhammad Tahir al Qummi: Kitab al Arba’in, pg. 626; al Jaza’iri: al Anwar al No’maniyyah, vol. 4 pg. 336; al Bahrani: al Burhan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, vol. 1 pg. 320.

[45] They cite as evidence for him remaining eternally in Hell what they report falsely and deceptively from the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

إن الله عرض علي في المنام مني القيامة وأهوالها والجنة ونعيمها والنار وما فيها وعذابها فاطلعت في النار فإذا أنا بمعاوية وعمرو بن العاص قائمين في جمر جهنم يرضخ رؤوسهما الزبانية بحجارة من جمر جهنم يقولان لهما هلا آمنتما بولاية علي بن أبي طالب

Indeed, Allah presented to me in my sleep Qiyamah and its horrors, Jannat and its blessings, and Hell and its punishments. I glanced into Hell and saw Muawiyah and ‘Amr ibn al ‘As standing on the live coals of Hell. The Zabaniyah (angels of Hell) were crushing their heads with rocks from the live coals of Hell and telling them, “If only you believed in ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib’s Wilayah.” (Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol. 3 pg. 7; Bihar al Anwar, vol. 33 pg. 165.)

[46] Al Majlisi: al I’tiqadat, pg. 17; quoting from Dr. Ziyad al Hammam: Kitab al ‘Alaqah bayn al Sufiyyah wa al Imamiyyah, pg. 331.

[47] Khomeini: al Jihad al Akbar (Jihad al Nafs), pg. 30.

[48] Al Saffar: Basa’ir al Darajat al Kubra, pg. 304-307; al Mufid: al Ikhtisas, pg. 275-277; Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 491; Hurr al ‘Amili: al Iqaz min al Haj’ah, pg. 203-204; Tafsir Nur al Thaqalayn, vol. 5 pg. 408.

[49] Ghadir Khumm: The name of a man to whom the pond is attributed. It is a place between Makkah and Madinah, close to Juhfah. The Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam alighted there on Monday, the eighteenth of Dhu al Hijjah and delivered an address there in which he expressed the merit of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, his trustworthiness, and integrity as well as the merit of the Ahlul Bayt. (Muhammad ibn Musa al Hamdani: al Amakin aw ma ittafaqa Lafzuhu wa iftaraqa Musammah, vol. 1 pg. 715; Mujam al Buldan, vol. 2 pg. 389; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 5 pg. 208; Shadharat al Dhahab, vol. 5 pg. 377; Simt al Nujum, vol. 2 pg. 379; Ibn ‘Uthaymin: Sharh al ‘Aqidah al Wasitiyyah, vol. 2 pg. 275.)

[50] Surah al Tawbah: 74.

[51] Al Kashani: Tafsir al Safi, vol. 2 pg. 358-359.

[52] Al Hukumah al Islamiyyah, pg. 69.

[53] He is Abu al Qasim ibn ‘Ali Akbar ibn Hashim Taj al Din al Musawi al Khu’i, the Mufassir, Faqih, Usuli, and religious authority among the Rafidah. He was from Azerbaijan. He was born in 1317 AH. He later travelled to Najaf and died there in 1413 AH. He has written plenty books, the most significant of which are al Bayan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, Dirasat fi al Usul al ‘Amaliyyah, Durus fi Fiqh al Shia, Manzumah fi Manaqib Ahlul Bayt, etc. (Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 2 pg. 640; Mujam al Mu’allifin al Mu’asirin, vol. 2 pg. 498.)

[54] Al Tanqih fi Sharh al ‘Urwah al Wuthqa, book on purity, vol. 2 pg. 69.

[55] He is Muhammad ibn Murtada ibn Mahmud, called Fayd al Kashani, the Shia Muhaddith and Akhbari. He was from Kashan, born in 1008 AH. He read the books of Abu Hamid al Ghazali and was inspired by them, so he treaded his methodology. He died in 1091 AH. He has about eighty books including Tafsir al Safi, Mu’tasam al Shia, and al Usul al Asliyyah. (Al A’lam, vol. 5 pg. 290; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 3 pg. 710.)

[56] Tafsir al Safi, vol. 1 pg. 9.

[57] He is ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad al Mamaqani, among the last of the Imamiyyah to write on the sciences of Hadith. He was born in Najaf in 1290 AH and died there in 1351 AH. He wrote Tanqih al Maqal fi ‘Ilm al Rijal, Mir’at al Kamal fi al Adab wa al Sunan, and other books. (Al A’lam, vol. 4 pg. 133; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 6 pg. 116.)

[58] Tanqih al Maqal, vol. 1 pg. 213.

[59] He is Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Tusi, among the Imamiyyah scholars. He was born in 597 AH and died in 672 AH. He has written many books including Sharh al Isharah, Tahrir al ‘Aqa’id, al Tadhkirah, as well as other books and articles. (Mustafa al Hussaini: Kitab Naqd al Rijal, vol. 4 pg. 313.)

[60] Al Zanjani: I’tiqad al Imamiyyah al Ithnay ‘Ashariyyah, vol. 3 pg. 66-67.

[61] He is Nur Allah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Nur Allah ibn Muhammad al Mar’ashi al Tustari (al Shustari) then al Dihlawi, from the Imamiyyah scholars, from Tustar. He was born in 956 AH and travelled to India thereafter. Akbar Shah appointed him chief justice in Lahore and stipulated upon him that he does not exit the four schools of thought. However, after a while, he publicised other than this and was thus killed under whips in the city of Akbarabad in 1019 AH. He wrote Ihqaq al Haqq wa Izhaq al Batil, Majalis al Mu’minin fi Mashahir Rijal al Shia, and Masa’ib al Nawasib. (Al A’lam, vol. 8 pg. 52; Ismail al Baghdadi: Idah al Maknun, vol. 1 pg. 34; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 4 pg. 44-45.)

[62] Ihqaq al Haqq wa Izhaq al Batil, pg. 316.

[63] The Jarudiyyah: They are the followers of Abu al Jarud, Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad who died in 150 AH. They believe that the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam appointed ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu by reference to his qualities, not by name, and that he is the Imam after him. However, people fell short in this and did not recognise his qualities and appointed Abu Bakr, thus falling into disbelief. The Jarudiyyah disagree regarding stopping or continuation of Imamah. Some extend Imamah from ‘Ali to Hassan, then to Hussain, then to ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, then to his son Zaid ibn ‘Ali, then to Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. They affirm his Imamah but differ about him, with some claiming he was not killed and is alive and will soon emerge and fill the earth with justice. Others accept his death and take Imamah to Muhammad ibn al Qasim ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain ibn ‘Ali. He was jailed during the days of al Mu’tasim who kept him in his home until he died. Others believe in the Imamah of Yahya ibn ‘Umar, the man of Kufah who rebelled and invited people and around whom a large group gathered. He was later killed. (Maqalat al Islamiyyin wa Ikhtilaf al Musallin, vol. 1 pg. 140-141; al Farq bayn al Firaq, vol. 1 pg. 41-42; Tahir ibn Muhammad al Isfara’ini: al Tabsir fi al Din wa Tamyiz al Firqah al Najiyah ‘an al Firaq al Halikin, vol. 1 pg. 27-28; al Shahrastani: al Milal wa al Nihal, vol. 1 pg. 126-127.)

[64] Al Masa’il al Jarudiyyah, pg. 37.

[65] Al ‘adalah lexically: justice, the opposite of oppression. It is said: he passed a just ruling upon him, he is thus ‘adil (just). So and so is from the men of justice. Rajul ‘adl: just man i.e. pleased and content with in testimony. (Mukhtar al Sihah, vol. 4 pg. 1760.) Al ‘Adl in the terminology of the Muhaddithin: One who is a Muslim, mature, sane, free from the reasons of transgression and imperfections of manhood. (Usul al Sarakhsi, vol. 1 pg. 350-351; Muqaddamat Ibn al Salah, pg. 104; Tadreeb al Rawi, vol. 1 pg. 300.)

As regards the definition of ‘adalah according to the Rafidah, Yusuf al Bahrani states, “In the definition of men of wisdom and men of cognisance, it is equilibrium of physical/mental powers and rectifying of actions in the sense of some not being absent from others. As regards the definition of men of the Shari’ah it is an objective in itself, common among our latter scholars—Allah perfume their resting places. It is a mental expertise which urges adhering to piety and manhood. By expertise—conditions that change quickly are excluded like the redness of embarrassment and yellowness of fear in the meaning that being qualified with the above quality should definitely be among the grounded expertise which is difficult to remove. (Al Durar al Najfiyyah, pg. 282-289.)

[66] Tanqih al Maqal, vol. 1 pg. 213.

[67] Bihar al Anwar, vol. 8 pg. 8.

[68] He is ‘Ali Khan al Shirazi al Madani al Hussaini, known as Ibn al Ma’sum. Among his books is Sulafat al ‘Asr in which he compiled his marvellous poetry and commentated on it. It is printed with the commentary with the name Anwar al Rabi’ wa al Darajat al Rafi’ah. He died in 1120 AH. (Muhammad Bahr al ‘Ulum: Al Fawa’id al Rijaliyyah, vol. 3 pg. 45; A’yan al Shia, vol. 1 pg. 166.)

[69] ‘Ali al Shirazi: Al Darajat al Rafi’ah fi Tabaqat al Shia, pg. 11.

[70] He is Muhammad ibn Hussain ibn ‘Ali al Rida ibn Musa ibn Jafar Kashif al Ghita’, from Iraq. He was born in Najaf in 1294 AH. He was the authority in passing verdicts and observing ijtihad. He died in Najaf in 1373 AH and is buried in the special graveyard in Wadi al Salam (Valley of Peace). Asl al Shia wa Usuluha, al Din wa al Islam, al Ayat al Bayyinat, and al Mathal al ‘Ulya fi al Islam are some of his works. (Al A’lam, vol. 6 pg. 106-107; Mujam al Mu’allifin, vol. 9 pg. 250.)

[71] Asl al Shia wa Usuluha, pg. 164-165.

[72] He is Dr. ‘Abdul Hadi al Fadli, the Iraqi Shia. He was born in the village of Sabkhat al ‘Arab near Basrah in 1354 AH and died in Qatif in Jumada al Ula in 1434 AH at the age of 78. He wrote Mabadi’ Usul al Fiqh, Khulasat al Mantiq, and Mafkarat al Mantiq. (Free encyclopaedia on the website: htp://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki.)

[73] Durus fi Usul Fiqh al Imamiyyah, pg. 176-178.