SAYYIDAH ZAYNAB BINT RASULILLAH RADIYA LLAHU ‘ANHA
August 11, 2026
SAYYIDAH RUQAYYAH AND SAYYIDAH UMM KULTHUM RADIYA LLAHU ‘ANHUMA
September 10, 2026BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Letter 107
Rabi’ al Thani 19, 1330
I. When did they Mention the Will?
When did they mention the will to the Imam, and when did they use it in their argument? I do not think that they mentioned it other than in the presence of the mother of the believers who denied it, as we explained before, Wassalam.
Sincerely,
S
Letter 108
Rabi’ al Thani 22, 1330
I. The Recommendation as Evidence
Yes, indeed, they did. The Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam mentioned it while preaching from the pulpit, and we have in Letter No. 104 quoted its text. Anyone who quotes the tradition of the Household on the day of warning has done so, quoting ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam. We have also quoted it in Letter No. 20. It contains the explicit text recommending him for the caliphate. Imam Abu Muhammad al Hasan ‘alayh al Salam, grandson of the Prophet (pbuh), and master of all the the young of Paradise, delivered a sermon when his father the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam was assassinated in which he said: “I am the descendant of the Prophet (pbuh), and the son of his vicegerent,” as quoted by al Hakim on page 172, Vol. 3, of his authentic Mustadrak. Imam Ja’fer al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam, as on page 254, Vol. 3, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, at the end of the commentary on the qasi’a sermon, has said: “Even before the [Islamic] Message became public, ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, while in the company of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), used to see the light and hear the voice [of angels].” He also quotes him (pbuh) saying: “Had I not been the seal of Prophets, you [‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam] would have been made a partner in my Prophethood; yet since you cannot be a prophet, you certainly are the wasi and the heir of a Prophet ,” according to Buraydah. Such usage is common among all the Imams of Ahlul Bayt, and it is a necessity among them and their followers from the time of the sahabah till now.
Salman al Farisi is reported saying that he heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) saying: “The one who is my wasi, confidant, the best I leave behind me to execute my will and cancel my debts, is ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib ‘alayh al Salam.” Abu Ayyüb al Ansari has reported a tradition in which he says that he heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) saying to Fatima ‘alayh al Salam: “Have you not come to know that Allah, the Exalted and omni-Scient, cast a look at the inhabitants of the earth and chose your father for His Messenger, then He cast a second look and chose your husband, then He inspired me to marry you to him and take him as my vicegerent?” Buraydah has narrated a tradition in which he says that he heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) saying: “For every Prophet there is a vicegerent and heir, and my vicegerent and heir is ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib ‘alayh al Salam,” and both ahadith of Abu Ayyüb and Salman have already been quoted above in Letter No. 68. Whenever Jabir ibn Yazid al Ju’fi narrated a tradition from Imam al Baqir ‘alayh al Salam, he used to say, as stated in Jabir’s biography in al Thahbi’s Al Mizan, “The wasi of wasis has narrated a tradition to me…, etc.” Umm al Khayr daughter of al Harish al Bariqi delivered an eloquent speech in Siffin urging the Kufians to fight Muawiyah in which she said: “Hurry, may Allah be merciful unto you, to support the just Imam, the faithful wasi, the greatest truthful,” as quoted by Imam Abul-Fadl Ahmed ibn Abu Tahir al Baghdadi on page 41 of his work Balaghat al Nisa’ stating his source to be al Sha’bi.
This is what some ancestors have quoted while lauding the recommendation in their sermons and speeches, and whoever researches their biographies will find them applying the title “wasi” to the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam as freely as they would call anything by its name, so much so that the author of Taj al ‘Arüs says on page 392, Vol. 10, while explaining the term “wasi”: “[Pronounced] like ghani, wasi is the title of ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, may Allah be pleased with him.”
As regarding dealing with this theme in their poetry, this cannot all be cited here due to its abundance, but we quote of it what serves the purpose to make a point. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul-Muttalib has described him as:
The Messenger’s wasi, chosen from his Household;
His valiant knight when a challenge is posed.
Al Mughirah ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul-Muttalib has said these verses in which he encourages the people of Iraq to fight Muawiyah in Siffin:
The wasi of the Messenger of Allah is your chief,
His son-in-law, promoted Allah’s Mushaf Sharif.
‘Abdullah ibn Abu Sufyan ibn al Harth ibn ‘Abdul-Muttalib has said:
Among us is ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, hero of Khaybar, now in ruin,
The hero of Badr, too, when troops retreated;
He is wasi of the Chosen Prophet (pbuh) and his cousin,
So, who can attain his lofty status, only to him meted?
Abul-Haytham ibn al Tihan, one of the heroes of Badr, composed verses to recite during the Battle of the Camel in which he said:
The wasi is our Imam and wali in word and deed,
No secret left; what was hidden is now revealed.
Khuzaymah ibn Thabit, of the two Shahadas, a hero of Badr, recited verses which he, too, composed during the Battle of the Camel in which he said:
O wasi of the Prophet! The battle has shaken the foes,
And caravans have been dispatched to deal blows.
He, may Allah be pleased with him, has also said:
O ‘Ayesha! Leave ‘Ali and the names you call him, too,
For what you call him is certainly not true;
He is but the wasi from the Prophet’s clan,
The one to testify to that is but you, says everyone.
‘Abdullah ibn Badil ibn Warqa’ al Khuza’i, a hero among the sahabah, who was martyred in Siffin together with his brother ‘Abdul-Rahman, said the following on the incident of the Battle of the Camel:
O my people! What a great calamity Satan brought,
Battle the enemy, for the wasi of the Prophet is fought.
Among the verses said by the Commander of the Faithful himself in Siffin were these:
If Ahmed were told that his wasi is indeed
Equalled to a wretch, he would surely be displeased.
Jarir ibn ‘Abdullah al Bijli, a sahabi, sent verses to Shurhabil ibn al Samt in which he mentioned ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam saying:
Among all other members of the Prophet’s clan,
He is wasi of the Messenger of ar-Rahman,
His Messenger’s protecting knight,
A man proverbial in courage and might.
‘Umer ibn Harithah al Ansari, in a poem lauding Muhammad son of the Commander of the Faithful, better known as Ibn al Hanafiyya, said:
Like the wasi, and after the Messenger named,
The colour of his standard is crimson red.
When people swore the oath of allegiance to ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam after ‘Uthman, ‘Abdul-Rahman ibn Ja’il said these verses:
I swear you have allied yourselves to one
Whose concern about the faith is well-known,
Supported by the Almighty: virtuous, with no sin,
‘Ali, wasi of the Chosen one and his cousin,
The first to offer ritual prayers,
One endowed with piety and honours.
A man of the Azd tribe said the following during the Battle of the Camel:
This is ‘Ali;
The Prophet’s wasi
On the Day of Salvation;
The Prophet told the nation:
“This is a brother of mine!
“And successor when my sun ceases to shine.”
The wise heeded and kept it in mind,
The wretch forgot and left it behind.
During the Battle of the Camel, a young man from the tribe of Zabbah, who was trained in ‘Ayesha’s camp, came out and said:
We are children of Zabbah, enemies of ‘Ali,
The one who is known for long as the wasi,
A brave knight during the time of our Nabi,
I am not blind about the virtues of ‘Ali,
I only mourn the murder of the son of ‘Uthman, the taqi.
Sa’id ibn Qais al Hamadani, who fought in ‘Ali’s camp, said the following on the Battle of the Camel:
What a battle that has kindled a fire!
Breaking the spears of every knight,
Tell the wasi: Qahtan approaches in desire,
Call upon them to aid Hamadan with their might,
They are their kin,
They are their children.
Ziyad ibn Labid al Ansari, one of ‘Ali’s companions, composed these verses during the Battle of the Camel:
How do you see the Ansar in a fierce battle faring?
We are people never afraid to die;
In supporing the wasi, we attack with daring,
The Ansar are serious, their spirits high.
‘Ali son of ‘Abdul-Muttalib do we support
Against those who, about him, lied in their import.
Tell the liars, whose conscience is cheap,
A miserable harvest shall they forever reap.
Hajar ibn ‘Adi al Kindi said on the same occasion:
Lord! Protect ‘Ali whose deeds You bless,
The pious believer, the caller for Your Oneness.
This is the view not of a depraved nor a deceiver,
He is but a divinely inspired and guided leader,
Protect him, Lord, and protect Your Prophet’s Call
Through his wali and the wasi of each and all.
‘Umer ibn Ahjiyah composed a poem lauding the address of al Hasan, delivered after that of Ibn al Zubair, during the Battle of the Camel saying:
Hasan of goodness, like your father in virtue and grace,
Among us you have taken a lofty, exemplary place.
You have delivered a speech whereby Allah exposed
The lies of the enemies of your father who posed
Prattling, like Ibn al Zubair, the man of shame.
Ask even skeptics, and they will tell you his name.
Allah has insisted to lower in infamy his head,
And raise that of the clement son of al wasi instead.
Thou hast undoubtedly chosen Thy own Nabi,
And Thou also appointed his honourable wasi.
Zajr ibn Qais al Ju’fi composed these verses also during the Battle of the Camel:
The Lord salutes Ahmed, Messenger of the King
Who grants him many a blessing,
After the Messenger of the King our Caliph will succeed,
A man worthy of authority-a knight true in word and deed:
Ali I meant, the Prophet’s wasi, bringing to the Path
All the depraved and strayers who incurred the divine Wrath.
Al Ash’ath ibn Qais al Kindi has said:
The messenger of the Imam has come to us, so be it
That every Muslim in Ali’s army speedily enlist,
He is messenger of the wasi, the wasi of the Messenger,
Foremost in feats, virtues, piety of every believer...
and also:
A message from the Imam we have received
From Ali the virtuous, Ali of Hashim,
Son-in-law of the Prophet (pbuh), his vizier indeed,
The best in the nation and in every realm.
Al No’man ibn al ‘Ajlan al Zarqi al Ansari said the following during the Battle of Siffin:
Since the wasi is our leader, how can there be division?
Nay! No bewilderment, no confusion, do not slacken;
So, leave the depraved Muawiyah and follow the religion
Of the wasi, and praise the Lord of man and jinn.
‘Abdul-Rahman ibn Thu’ayb al Aslami has said the following in a poem threatening Muawiyah with the Iraqi troops:
They are led by none other than the wasi
To rid you of misguidance and uncertainty.[1]
‘Abdullah ibn Abu Saufyan ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul-Muttalib has said:
The one in charge after Muhammad is ‘Ali who
On all occasions did defend, support and stand.
He is the wasi of the Messenger, nothing is new;
His peer, the first to pray with him and lend him hand.
Khuzaymah ibn Thabit, of the two shahadas, has said:
He is wasi of the Messenger out of all his clan
His defending knight since the very beginning,
The first to pray, preceded by no man
Save the Lady chosen by the One Who Grants blessing.
Zafar ibn Huthayfah al Asdi has said:
Surround Ali, O men, and support him,
For he is the wasi and the first Muslim.[2]
Abul-Aswad al Du’ali has said:
I love Muhammad passionately, and to me
Very dear are: ‘Abbas, Hamzah, and the wasi.
Al No’man ibn ‘Ajlan, an Ansar poet and dignitary, said these verses in a poem addressed to Ibn al ‘As narrated by al Zubair ibn Bakkar in his Muwaffaqiyyat. It is transmitted by the Mu’tazilite scholar on page 13, Vol. 3, of his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, but Ibn ‘Abdul Birr quotes this poem stating the biography of al No’man in his Isti’ab, omitting the name of the witness from it (“… and thus do they behave (Qur’an, 27:34)”:
You underestimated Ali who is the most fit,
Albeit if you knew, or did not know it;
For he, assisted by Allah, guides unto Him and indeed
Forbids debauchery, oppression and every wrongful deed;
The wasi of the Chosen Prophet (pbuh) and his cousin
Killer of knights who are misguided, unbelieving.
Al Fadl ibn al ‘Abbas has said these verses which are quoted by Ibn al Athir at the end of the latter’s discussion of ‘Uthman, on page 43, Vol. 3, of his work Al Tarikh al Kamil, commenting that ‘Uthman is “the best of people besides the three men of the [Prophet’s] house.”
The best of people and of every believer
After the one chosen to be Messenger
Is the wasi according to people who remember.
And he is first to perform the rite of prayer
And the like of the Messenger;
The first at Badr to deal a deadly blow
To those who broke the divine Law.
Hassan ibn Thabit has said these verses in which he praises Ali on behalf of all the Ansar. They are quoted by al Zubair ibn Bakkar in his Muwaffaqiyyat, and recorded by Ibn Abul-Hadid on page 15, Vol. 2, of his work Sharh Nahjul Balaghah:
You are the most faithful to the Prophet among us
Worthy of his recommendation; for who else surapss
You in it, who else? Aren’t you his brother
In true guidance, and his wasi,
The best scholar of the Qur’an and all other
Ahadith of the blessed Nabi?
Some poets said these verses addressing al Hasan ibn ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam, peace be upon both of them, as quoted by Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Hashshu al Hanafi al Saydawi in the footnote to page 65 of his book A’thar Thawat al Siwar, when he discussed both Ghanima daughter of ‘Amir, and Muawiyah, saying that she recited this verse before Muawiyah in a statement she made responding to his own:
The most dignified of men, son of the wasi,
Grandson of the Prophet, son of Ali.
Umm Sinan daughter of Khayth’amah ibn Kharsha’ah al Mathhaji has said the following verses addressing and lauding Ali ‘alayh al Salam; they are mentioned by Imam Abul-Fadl Ahmed ibn Abu Tahir al Baghdadi when he discusses Umm Sinan on page 67 of Balaghat al Nisa’. They are also quoted from Umm Sinan by Sheikh Muhammad ‘Ali Hashshu al Hanafi al Saydawi at the end of page 78 of his Athar Thawat al Siwar.
You were among us, after Muhammad, his trusted successor
He selected you, and of his trust you proved a protector.
This much of the poetry contemporary to the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam is what we have been able to quote in such a short letter. If we review the poetry composed after him, then we will be authoring a voluminous book beyond the writing of which we would still apologize for our work being incomplete. Yet to quote all such poetry may become boring, and it may cause us to digress from the main subject-matter. So, let us be satisfied with quoting only the most famous poets, and let us judge the rest according to what is quoted here.
In his celebrated poem, al Kumait ibn Ziyad has thus lauded the descendants of Hashim:
He is the wasi protecting the throne of the nation
Against collapse and disintegration,[3]
The embodiment of virtue, glory and goodness,
Solving the problems with order and firmness.
The wasi, the wali,[4] the knight
Courageous, brave: his star was bright,
The wasi of the wasi, determined and wise
In battle-fields, you hear his enemy’s agony cries.
Kuthayyir ibn ‘Abdul-Rahman ibn al Aswad ibn ‘Amir al Khuza’i, better known as Kuthayyir ‘Azza, has said:
The wasi of the Chosen Prophet and his cousin; he
Emancipates those in bondage, and judges with equity.
Abu Tammam al Ta’i has said the following in one of his poems the rhyme of which rhymes with “r’s”:[5]
You plotted against his wasi and deceived before;
You cooked it, unprecedented, unmatched in lore,
Against the Prophet’s brother, son-in-law, who bore
Feats of valour, while your plots opened the door
To mischief: peerless in brother, son-in-law…; say no more;
To the Prophet he was like Aaron to Moses of yore…
Du’bal ibn Ali al Khuza’i has said the following in his euology of the Master of Martyrs [Imam Hussain (pbuh)]:
The head of the son of Muhammad’s daughter and his wasi,
O men, is being raised atop a spear for all to see…!
Abul-Tayyib al Mutanabbi, when rebuked for stopping his praise of Ahlul Bayt, as recorded in his diwan (collection of poems) said:
I have no pretext for leaving the praise of the wasi
His light dominates, his shade expands unto you and me:
For when something elongates, it stands on its own,
Attributes of the sun’s light are never gone.
He also said the following verses in his praise of Abul-Qasim Tahir ibn al Hussain ibn Tahir al ‘Alawi, as also recorded in his diwan:
He is son of the Messenger of Allah and of his wasi,
Alike unto them when I diligently compare and see.
Verses such as these are innumerable, uncountable, Wassalam.
Sincerely,
Sh
=====================
[1] This verse, and all the poetic verses and martials which precede it, are quoted in the books of biographies and chronicles, especially the ones dealing with the battles of the Camel and Siffin. They have been quoted in their entirety by the researching scholar Ibn Abul-Hadid on page 47 and its following pages up to page 50, Vol. 1, of his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, Egyptian edition, where he explains the khutba of the Commander of the Faithful ‘alayh al Salam referring to Muhammad’s progeny ‘alayh al Salam and to what they have said about him, including the following: “They have the distinction of being divinely granted the right to rule, and in them the Prophet’s will is preserved, and they are the ones who inherit his legacy.” Having quoted these verses and martials, he says verbatim: “The verses containing this word ‘wasiyya’ [will] are numerous, but we have mentioned here some of them where there is reference to the two parties (meaning Abu Mikhnaf’s book dealing with the Battle of Camel, and Nasr ibn Muzahim’s book dealing with the Battle of Siffin); besides these, the references are uncountable and innumerable. We would have filled many pages of them had we not feared boredom and monotony.”
[2] Zafr’s verse, and both couplets composed by Khuzaymah before it, in addition to the couplets composed by Abu Sufyan which preceded them, are all narrated by Imam al Iskafi in his book Naqd al ‘Uthmaniyya, and they are transmitted by Ibn Abul-Hadid at the end of his commentary on the qasi’a sermon on page 258 and the pages following it, Vol. 3, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, Egyptian edition.
[3] When scholar Sheikh Muhammad Mahmüd al Rafi’i came to the conclusion of his commentary on this verse in his own commentary on the verses composed by the poet al Kumait in praise of the descendants of Hashim, he said: “Meaning ‘Ali, may Allah glorify his countenance, who is named wasi because the Messenger of Allah awsa [left a will] regarding him.” The same is narrated about Ibn Buraydah who quotes his father citing the Prophet (pbuh) saying: “For every Prophet there is a wasi, and ‘Ali is my wasi and the heir of my legacy.” Al Tirmithi states that the Prophet (pbuh) is quoted saying: “To whomsoever I have been a master, this ‘Ali is his master.” Al Bukhari quotes Ibn Sa’d saying that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) headed to Tabük, leaving ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam behind. ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam asked him: “Do you thus leave me with children and women?” He said: “Are you not pleased that your status to me is like that of Aaron to Moses, except there will be no prophet after me?” Ibn Qais al Raqiyyat has said: Among us are: Ahmed the Prophet, the truthful, the pious, the man of wisdom; And ‘Ali and Ja’fer with two wings: They are the wasi, and the man of martyrdom. This is something which poets used to always say about ‘Ali ‘alayh al Salam with a great elaboration. Then he testifies to the poetry we have first quoted by Kuthayyir ‘Azzah.
[4] Muhammad Mahmüd al Rafi’i, the commentator, says verbatim: “Meaning vicegerent after the Messenger of Allah.”
[5] The poem starts with: “Gazelles that made the dusty dunes glitter like stars,” which is included in his diwan (collection of poems).
Discussions
We have repeatedly demonstrated that, rather than serving as an objective work of enquiry conducted with scholarly integrity, al Muraja’at is nothing short of a masterclass in subterfuge and propaganda. The reader must therefore remain alert to the manner in which its case is constructed. Anyone who has reached this far into the correspondence without recognising the true purpose and actual nature of the book will, in all likelihood, have gradually lowered his guard. Reassured by the apparent courtesy of the exchange, the abundance of citations, and the ready concessions repeatedly placed in the mouth of Sheikh al Bishri, he may well have begun accepting arguments that ought first to have been subjected to scrutiny.
Our responses have sought to draw attention to precisely this. They have not merely attempted to produce a counterclaim for every claim, nor to dismiss every report simply because of the polemical nature of the work. Rather, we have acknowledged and accepted authentic reports as well as recognised legitimate historical positions where they are proven. However, in doing so, we subjected them to academic rigour and rejected any reframing of them to bear meanings they simply do not contain.
It is no exaggeration to describe our responses as having consistently invited the objective reader to pause to examine the evidence, then to distinguish the authentic from the unauthentic, and finally to reflect carefully what an authentic report actually establishes and compare it to what ‘Abdul Hussain requires it to establish.
As ‘Abdul Hussain now approaches his endgame, the full significance of his method becomes increasingly apparent. Over the course of the preceding correspondences, he has carefully assembled a mosaic. Its individual pieces consist of a spectrum of what he advances as evidences for his claims. These range from authentic reports, weak reports, ambiguous expressions, disputed historical accounts, later recollections, and polemical poetry, some of which might genuinely contain fragments of truth but are embellished with anachronisms. Each piece has been carefully positioned so that, when viewed from the angle he prescribes, they appear to form one coherent historical picture.
The outcome he is working for does not rely upon any single report being capable of establishing the entire claim. Rather, he relies upon the assumed cumulative force of his argument. One report speaks of closeness, another of knowledge, another of wilayah, another of Ghadir, another of inheritance, another of Wasiyyah, and yet another of a later protest or poem. Although these reports differ in subject, context, authenticity and meaning, they are arranged so as to appear like independent witnesses all pointing towards the same underlying conclusion.
At first glance, the method bears a superficial resemblance to tawatur ma’nawi, to which he appeals. The individual expressions differ, yet a common thread is said to emerge from their combined testimony. The resemblance, however, is only superficial. In genuine tawatur ma’nawi, the common meaning is itself transmitted by the reports. It cannot first be assumed as doctrine and then read back into a body of disparate material.
However, the architecture of al Muraja’at is carefully designed to obscure this distinction. Once the reader has been persuaded to view every virtue as an indication of authority and an appointment to immediate succession, the final narrative appears to have been transmitted by the collective evidence, when, in reality, it has largely been created through the arrangement and interpretation of that evidence.
It is here that the fictional role of Sheikh al Bishri becomes indispensable. He does not subject each incremental claim to the scrutiny that a competent Sunni scholar would naturally demand. Instead, he repeatedly expresses admiration, accepts the cumulative impression, and asks the next question from within premises that have never actually been established. His concessions allow disputed inferences to be carried forward as though they were settled conclusions. By the time the discussion reaches the closing letters, the reader is no longer expected to ask whether the alleged designation has been proven, but only how such a clear designation could have been ignored and where traces of its recognition may still be found.
Letters 107 and 108 must therefore be read against this carefully prepared background. They do not merely introduce further reports concerning the term wasi. They seek to supply what remains the most obvious missing component of the narrative: evidence that the alleged testamentary appointment was not only pronounced by the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, but was publicly known, remembered, and invoked by the earliest generations.
It is at this point that ‘Abdul Hussain gathers together the remaining pieces of his mosaic and invites the reader to see in them the surviving outline of a single, universally recognised Wasiyyah. Whether those pieces genuinely form that picture, or whether the picture has instead been imposed upon them, is the question that must now be examined
The first difficulty is epistemological. Tawatur does not operate by collecting later beliefs about an event and then back-projecting them, alleging thereby that the event itself becomes certain. Its force lies in multiplicity at the level of transmission from the occurrence itself: numerous independent witnesses conveying knowledge of what they observed in a manner that ordinarily excludes collusion upon falsehood.
The certainty produced by tawatur therefore attaches to the event transmitted, not merely to the later circulation of a belief concerning that event. A belief may become widespread without the event upon which it rests ever having been established in this manner.
This distinction is elementary, but undeniably relevant here. There is no difficulty in conceding that, by the time of ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu caliphate and thereafter, there were people who believed him to be the wasi. Such a belief may itself have become widespread. Yet widespread belief in an event is not the same thing as mass transmission of the event.
These are two very different things. A belief can spread widely without the event, which gave rise to that belief, ever having been established, let alone through mass eyewitness transmission. The example of the crucifixion of ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam illustrates the distinction clearly. There can be no doubt that belief in the crucifixion became extraordinarily widespread. Entire communities, across successive generations and different lands, transmitted that belief. Yet the sheer number of people who later believed in the crucifixion does not amount to tawatur of the crucifixion itself. For that, one would have to demonstrate a mass of independent transmission reaching back to those who actually witnessed ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam being placed upon the cross. The widespread transmission of the belief is one thing; mass transmission of the actual occurrence is another.
The difficulty becomes even greater when we turn from later reports to the generation that would actually have witnessed the alleged Wasiyyah. If the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had publicly and repeatedly appointed ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu as his successor, and if this appointment was known through the kind of transmission ‘Abdul Hussain now claims, then those closest to the event ought to have possessed the clearest knowledge of it. Their conduct should reflect that certainty.
Yet this is precisely what we do not find. When the question of succession actually arose, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not appeal to an already established testamentary appointment. He did not present the matter as one that had already been settled by the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Instead, he pledged allegiance to those who preceded him, participated in the political order that followed, and later publicly acknowledged the rank of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.
This is not the first time the surviving historical record places ‘Ali and al ‘Abbas in a posture quite different from that required by the later doctrine of a Wasiyyah. We have already encountered the remarkable exchange during the Prophet’s final illness in which al ‘Abbas proposed that they ask him directly in whom authority would lie after his death, only for ‘Ali to refuse, fearing that an express refusal would permanently close the matter to them. There is little need to rehearse the implications again. What matters here is the state of uncertainty presupposed by the conversation itself: they speak as men contemplating what the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam might yet decide, not as custodians of a succession already publicly and unequivocally settled.
The point acquires an additional dimension in the reports concerning what followed the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam death. Ibn Sa’d relates from al Sha’bi that al ‘Abbas then urged ‘Ali to extend his hand so that he might pledge allegiance to him and others would follow. ‘Ali did not accept the proposal. The significance is somewhat different from that of their earlier conversation. Before the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam death, the question was what he might determine; after his death, al ‘Abbas was thinking in terms of securing the bay’ah before events moved elsewhere. Neither scene naturally reads as the conduct of men proceeding from an already promulgated Wasiyyah.
Nor does the picture end with the events surrounding the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam death. There is yet another strand of the early memory of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu that runs in the opposite direction to the retrospective portrait Sharaf al Din is constructing. Among the reports preserved even within Imami literature is the famous statement attributed to ‘Ali from the pulpit of Kufah:
لئن أتيت برجل يفضلني على أبي بكر وعمر لأجلدنه حد المفتري
If a man were brought before me who preferred me over Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, I would flog him with the punishment of the slanderer.[1]
One may therefore ask, with some irony: when ‘Abdul Hussain tells us that ‘Ali proclaimed his position from the pulpit, which picture of ‘Ali are we being asked to remember? The ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu who is retrospectively reconstructed as publicly announcing a Wasiyyah, or the ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu who is himself reported from the pulpit to have threatened punishment for preferring him over Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma?
We now return to Hadith al Dar, which ‘Abdul Hussain had already cited in Muraja’ah 20. There is little need to repeat what has already been discussed in detail. The point that matters here is that ‘Abdul Hussain requires a very particular version of the report. It is this wording that allows him to describe the report as an explicit text establishing both the terms Wasiyyah and Khilafah.
We have already demonstrated that versions containing this wording revolve around chains containing either ‘Abdul Ghaffar ibn al Qasim or ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abdul Quddus, both of whom were severely criticised by the Hadith scholars.[2]
The wording of the khutbah that he cites is found in a lengthy narration recorded by al Hakim:
Al Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Akhi Tahir al ‘Aqiqi al Hasani — Ismail ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hussain — his uncle ‘Ali ibn Jafar ibn Muhammad — al Hussain ibn Zaid — ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali — his father ‘Ali ibn al Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[3]
The narration is severely weak, if not a forgery in terms of aspects appended to it.
Appearing in this chain is al Hussain ibn Zaid. The critics have pointed out that he is not free of criticism. Al Dhahabi records that there was weakness in him.[4] Abu Hatim observed that some of what he narrated was recognised while some was objectionable. Ibn ‘Adi similarly remarked, “I found some objectionable material in his narrations, although I hope that there is no serious problem with him.”[5]
The significance of this criticism should not be overstated. Ibn ‘Adi did not reject al Hussain ibn Zaid outright, nor does the presence of some objectionable narrations mean that everything he transmitted is to be discarded. It does, however, mean that where a report through him contains material which is itself unusual or difficult to reconcile with more established evidence, there is good reason not to pass over that feature lightly.
Al Dhahabi flags it in his al Talkhisss. He also identifies al Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya in his al Mizan, suspecting him of forging narrations and identifying him as a Rafidi.[6]
The problems are not limited to the isnad. There are also reasons to be suspicious of the latter portion of the sermon itself.
The wording gathers together, in remarkably compact form, several claims which would later become central to Shia polemic: al Hasan radiya Llahu ‘anhu describes himself as the son of the Wasi, then invokes the purification of the Ahlul Bayt, and finally presents the verse of al mawaddah as an obligation upon every Muslim to love them, concluding that the “good deed” mentioned in the verse is precisely love for the Ahlul Bayt.
The last of these is especially difficult. Surah al Shura is Makkan. At the time this verse was revealed, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu had not yet married Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, and al Hasan radiya Llahu ‘anhu and al Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu had not yet been born. Yet the wording of the sermon reads the verse as though it had been revealed specifically concerning this household in its later form.
This is not the explanation preserved authentically from Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. When Sa’id ibn Jubayr understood the verse of al mawaddah as referring to the relatives of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Ibn ‘Abbas corrected him and explained that there was no clan of the Quraysh with whom. the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not share some bond of kinship; the meaning was that they should preserve that kinship between themselves and him.[7]
So, this sermon therefore carries more than an unreliable chain. Its wording itself bears signs of a later doctrinal formulation being read back into an earlier setting.
The remaining reports attributed to Salman, Abu Ayyub and Buraydah need not detain us for long. They are not new evidence. Each has already appeared in the preceding correspondences and their respective chains have been examined in detail.[8]
The passages of poetry cited by ‘Abdul Hussain require scrutiny before they are permitted to enter the discussion as historical evidence at all. The mere attribution of a poem to an early figure does not establish that it was actually composed by him. Much of this poetry is not preserved through anything resembling an early historical transmission, but appears in later compilations where poems are simply ascribed to particular individuals without any meaningful means of verifying the attribution. Before these lines can be counted among the witnesses to an alleged Wasiyyah, one must first establish that the men to whom they are attributed actually said them. Otherwise, the argument quietly converts the contents of later literary collections into the testimonies of the earliest generation.
Even if the attribution of these verses were conceded for the sake of argument, very little would follow from it. At most, such poetry would establish that the poet regarded ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu as the wasi, or chose to describe him by that title. It would not establish that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had actually made the specific testamentary appointment, which ‘Abdul Hussain seeks to prove. This is precisely the distinction already made between the transmission of an event and the later circulation of a belief concerning that event. A poem may provide evidence for the existence of that belief; it cannot be made to authenticate retrospectively the reports upon which the belief itself depends.
NEXT⇒ LETTER 109 and 110 – Coming soon…
[1] Al Majlisi: Bihar al Anwar, vol. 47 pg. 355.
[2] See Discussions under Letter 20.
[3] Al Mustadrak, vol. 3 pg. 188.
[4] Mizan al I’tidal, vol. 1 pg. 535.
[5] Al Kamil, vol. 3 pg. 218.
[6] Mizan al I’tidal, vol. 1 pg. 51.
[7] Sahih al Bukhari, book on Tafsir, Hadith: 4818.
[8] See our detailed treatment of the narrations on Wasiyyah under Letter 68. See Discussions under Letter 68.