Shattering the Mirage: A Response to ‘Abdul Hussain Sharaf al Din’s al Muraja’at: Letter 87 and 88

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Letter 87

 

Rabi’ al Awwal 9, 1330

I. Justifying and Discussing the Calamity

 

When he, peace be upon him, ordered them to bring him a blank sheet of paper and an ink-pot, he did not really intend to write anything in particular; he intended only to test them, that’s all.

Therefore, Allah guided al Faruq, from among all other companions, to forbid them from bringing them to him. Such an opposition, therefore, must be considered to be in agreement with his Sublime Lord, and be counted among his divinely-endowed spiritual powers, may Allah be pleased with him. This is the argument of many renown personalities. But his statement, peace be upon him, “… you shall never stray,” rejects such an argument if the principle of fairness is to be implemented, for it is a supplementary command which means “If you bring me the blank sheet and the ink-pot, and if I write you something, then you shall never stray after it.” It is obvious that interpreting such an order as being indicative of a test is a sort of flagrant lying from which Prophets are immune, especially where bringing the blank sheet and the ink-pot is more fit for the one who receives the order than his seeking such an excuse; therefore, another alibi is needed.

All that can be said is that the issue is not an invitation to a party, so that whoever refuses may simply be blamed, but it is an issue of consultation. They used to consult him [‘Umer], peace be upon him, in a few matters. And ‘Umer knew that he deep down in his heart was successful in choosing what is best for the interest of Muslims, and that itself was inspired by Allah Almighty. He simply desired not to let the Prophet burden himself with the pain resulting from writing something in the state of sickness and agony, and he, peace be upon him, thought that it would be better not to bring the blank sheet and the ink-pot. He may also have feared that the Prophet might write things that would be quite impossible for people to carry out, thus making them liable for punishment, since such things would be texts for which the principle of ijtihad is not possible. Or he may have feared that the hypocrites might cast doubts about the authenticity of such writing due to its being done under the influence of sickness, thus becoming a cause of dissension; therefore, he said: “The Book of Allah suffices us,” supporting the verse of the Almighty: “We have not left aught (without explaining it) in the Book (Qur’an, 6:38)” and also “Today have I completed your religion for you (Qur’an, 5:4),” out of his own concern, peace be upon him, for this nation against straying after Allah had completed His religion for it and complemented His blessing unto it.

Such was their answer. His saying “… you shall never stray” indicates determination and a positive attitude. The endeavour to bring about security against straying, whenever possible and without any doubt, is a must. His disappointment with them and his telling them to leave him since they did not carry out his order is another proof that the matter was simply a response to a consultation.

So, if you say that had it been a must, the Prophet, peace be upon him, would not have repealed it simply because they disobeyed him, just like he did not stop preaching due to the opposition of the unbelievers…, if you say all this, then we would say that the case is so had the order been carried out, for it indicates that the writing of that matter was not obligatory on the Prophet, peace be upon him. This of course does not imply that they should not have brought him the sheet and the ink-pot when he ordered them to, explaining to them that its benefits would include security for them against straying and a source of continuous guidance. The main point is that those receiving his order should have obeyed it, especially when the benefit was for the one receiving the order, and it is the reason for the statement, not for its enforcement.

Yet it is also possible that it was obligatory on him, too, and such an obligation was removed due to their insubordination and their saying that he was speaking in delirium, for the fate of such writing was then reduced to dissension, as you yourself have wisely stated.

It is also possible that some people may say that ‘Umer, may Allah be pleased with him, did not take the meaning of the Prophet’s statement to imply that such writing would result in protecting each and every member of the nation from straying, so much so that none of them at all would be misguided. Rather, he understood “… you shall never stray” to mean “… you shall never agree all of you to walk the path of misguidance, nor will misguidance, after such writing, would inflict anyone among you.” Rather, he, may Allah be pleased with him, was convinced that they would never all concede to tread the path of misguidance. This is why he found no reason why the Prophet should write anything else, thinking that the intention of the Prophet was simply an additional precaution in the matter, since he was so well-known to be overflowing with kindness and compassion.

This is all that has been said in the manner of finding an excuse for that initiation. Whoever scrutinizes it will be positive in thinking that it is far from being rational, for the simple fact that his statement, peace be upon him, “… you shall never stray” indicates that the matter required proper attention, as we have said, and his disappointment with them is a proof that they became derelict regarding one of their obligations. It is, therefore, more fitting to say that such an incident took place when they, indeed, behaved contrarily to their custom, just like their previous slip, and it is one mistake that is not at all typical of them, and we do not really know how accurate the whole story is. Allah is the Guide to the Straight Path, Wassalamo Alaikom.

 

Sincerely,

S

 

Letter 88

 

Rabi’ul-Awwal 11, 1330

I. Pretexts Refuted

 

Any fair-minded person ought to yield to the truth and utter what is right. There are other views regarding the rejection of these arguments which I desired to put forth to you, so that the final judgment will be left entirely to you.

Their first pretext states that he, peace be upon him and his progeny, having ordered them to bring the ink-pot, did not really intend to write something but rather desired to test them, that’s all. We say, in addition to what you yourself have stated, that this incident took place shortly before his demise, as the tradition itself suggests; there was simply no time for testing, but there was time for a last minute warning and justifying, time for a will containing a very significant matter, a piece of complete advice for the nation. Anyone who is dying is certainly far from testing or jesting; he would be concerned about his affairs and those of his own kin, especially if he is a Prophet.

If he, as long as he lived, did not have enough time to test them, how could he have found time to do so when he was about to die? His statement, peace be upon him and his progeny, telling them to get away from him when they fussed and argued in his presence, is surely indicative of his disappointment with them. Had those who opposed him been right, he would have appreciated their opposition and expressed his pleasure therewith.

Anyone who studies this tradition, especially their saying that the Messenger of Allah was delirious, will be positively sure that they were aware of his intention to do something they hated; so, they surprised him with such a statement, and they persisted fussing, arguing, and disputing, as is quite obvious. Ibn ‘Abbas’s tears, and his labelling the incident a catastrophe disprove this argument.

Those who seek excuses by arguing that ‘Umer was divinely inspired in assessing the public interest of Muslims, that he was inspired by Allah, are talking nonsense, and their argument is dismissed in such a discussion since it suggests that he, not the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, was on the right track in this incident, and that his so-called “inspiration” was more accurate than the revelation which he (pbuh), the truthful and trustworthy that he was, uttered.

They say that it was intended to relieve the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, from the burden of writing while feeling sick. You, may Allah support the truth through your person, know that writing such matters would only bring the Prophet peace of mind, tranquility, and the pleasure of his eyes. He would feel happy for ensuring a security for his nation, peace be upon him and his progeny, against misguidance. The commands to be obeyed, the divine will, and the physical presence were all his. He, being more precious than my parents, wished to have access to a sheet of paper and an ink-pot; he issued an order and nobody was supposed to oppose his wish; “Neither a believing man nor a believing woman has any right, when Allah and His Messenger decree a matter, to follow their own views, and whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger is surely in manifest misguidance (Qur’an, 33:36).”

Yet their insubordination in such an extremely significant matter, and their fussing, arguing, and disputing in his presence, were to him more painful than writing what he wished to write in order to protect his nation against misguidance. How can anyone who feels pity for him because of the pain of writing something oppose him and surprise him by saying that he was speaking in delirium?

They say that ‘Umer thought that not to bring the sheet and the ink-pot was wiser. This is a most odd statement. How can it be wiser while the Prophet himself had ordered that they should be brought forth? Did ‘Umer think that the Messenger of Allah would order something which would be better left out?

Yet even more strange is their argument that ‘Umer feared that the Prophet might write things which would be impossible to implement and whose abandoning would require chastisement. How can it thus be feared in spite of the Prophet’s statement “…you shall never stray”? Do people who thus argue think that ‘Umer assesses the consequences more correctly than the Prophet himself, and that he is more cautious about and compassionate to his nation than the Prophet (pbuh)? Certainly not. They also say that it is possible that ‘Umer feared the hypocrites might cast doubts about the authenticity of such writing, since it would be written during the Prophet’s sickness, and that it would be a cause for dissension. You, may Allah support the truth through your person, know that such an insinuation is impossible since the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, has stated: “… you shall never stray,” thus clearly stating that such writing would bring them security against straying; so, how can it be a reason for dissension just because the hypocrites might cast doubts about its authenticity? Had he [‘Umer] feared such hypocrites and their casting doubts about the authenticity of what the Prophet wished to write, why did he then plant the seed of such doubts himself when he opposed and objected and even said that the Prophet was delirious?

As regarding their interpretation of verses cited in support of ‘Umer’s statement: “The Book of Allah suffices us,” such as the verse: “We have left nothing unexplained in the Book (Qur’an, 6:38),” and “Today have I completed for you your religion (Qur’an, 5:4),” it is erroneous, for neither verse suggests a security against misguidance, nor do both verses guarantee guidance for people; so, how can relying on these verses justify abandoning the implementation of the texts whose writing the Prophet wished to record? Had the presence of the dear Qur’an been to bring security against misguidance, then neither misguidance nor dissension, the removal of which is as hopeless as can be, would have ever taken place.[1]

In their final argument, they say that ‘Umer did not understand the tradition to imply that such writing would be a cause for protecting each and every member of his nation from misguidance; and that rather he understood that it would, after its writing, safeguard them against erring in their consensus. They claim that ‘Umer, may Allah be pleased with him, knew that the error in their consensus would never occur, albeit if such writing had taken place or not, and that for this reason he opposed its writing thus.

Besides what you have said, we may add that ‘Umer did not lack such a degree of understanding, and he was not blind to the implication of the tradition which became obvious to all people. Urban residents as well as bedouins understood the intention of the Prophet (pbuh) that it would be a complete prescription for the protection of every individual against misguidance… only had it been written. This is the meaning which anyone can comprehend of this tradition. ‘Umer knew for sure that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his progeny, was not worried about his nation making an error in its consensus views, since he, may Allah be pleased with him, had heard him, peace be upon him and his progeny, saying: “The consensus of my nation shall never be in misguidance nor in error,” and his statement: “One group from my nation shall always stand opposing what is just,” and he was aware of the verse saying: “Allah has promised those who believe among you and do good deeds that He will let them inherit the earth just as He let those before them be the successors, and He will firmly set the roots of the faith which He has approved, and He will exchange their fear with security; they shall worship Me, without associating anything with Me (Qur’an, 24:55),” in addition to many such texts in both the Book and the Sunnah. They all are clear in implying that NOT the entire nation shall err in its consensus views; so, it is not feasible, in spite of all this, that ‘Umer or anyone else would conceive that when the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, asked for a blank sheet of paper and an ink-pot, was worried about his nation erring in its consensus views. What ‘Umer is liable to have understood of this hadith is what anyone else would, not what is contrary to the authentic Sunnah, nor to the perfect verses of the Qur’an. But the disappointment of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, was obvious when he told them to get away from him, and it proved that what they had shunned was indeed a sacred obligation. Had ‘Umer’s objection been due to his misunderstanding of this hadith, as they claim, then the Prophet would have helped him remove his misunderstanding, and he would have clarified his objective to him. Nay, even if the Prophet was convinced that he would be able to convince them to carry out his order, he would not have ordered them out. Again, Ibn ‘Abbas’s tears and genuine agony provide the greatest rebuttal to such claims.

Justice refuses to find an excuse for those who had permitted such a calamity to take place. Had it been, as you described, a simple slip like another one before it, and a rare occurrence, the matter would have been a lot more tolerable, but it was the catastrophe of the century that split the nation’s spine; so, we are Allah’s, and to Him is our return.

 

Sincerely,

Sh

=====================

[1] You, may Allah support the truth through your person, know that the Prophet (pbuh) did not say: “I would like to write down the tenets,” so that it may be said to him: “Suffices us the Book of Allah, the Exalted One.” Even if we suppose that he wished to write down those tenets, it could very possibly be that his own writing thereof would be a cause for security against misguidance; therefore, there is no reason to avoid his text and be satisfied with the Qur’an alone. If the text he wished to write was only to safeguard them against misguidance, it would not be appropriate to leave it, shun it, and rely on the fact that Allah’s Book includes everything. You know very well how the Muslim nation has no option besides referring to the sacred Sunnah in spite of the fact that it holds the Book of Allah, the Exalted, as indispensable, and although it is inclusive and is divinely protected, for deriving injunctions from it is not within the reach of every ordinary person. Had the Book of Allah been completely sparing us from referring to its own explanations as put forth by the Prophet (pbuh), then Allah Almighty would not have commanded him to explain it to people when He said: “We have revealed unto you the Book so that you may explain to people what has been revealed for them.”

 

Discussions

 

This round of discussions commences with a pathetic counter written for the part of the Sheikh al Azhar. When the leading argument is as feeble as the one presented here, all other arguments appear, at least psycologically, desperate.

What we need to understand is that this is not the first time that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam requested writing materials. Let us present a few other occasion where he requested the same.

‘Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha relates:

 

عن عروة عن عائشة قالت قال لي رسول الله ﷺ في مرضه ادعي لي أبا بكر وأخاك حتى أكتب كتابا فإني أخاف أن يتمنى متمن ويقول قائل أنا أولى ويأبى الله والمؤمنون إلا أبا بكر

The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, during his illness, said to me, “Call for me your father [Abu Bakr] and your brother, so that I may write a document. For I fear that someone will desire [leadership] or someone will say, ‘I am more deserving.’ But Allah and the believers will not accept anyone but Abu Bakr.”[1]

 

This is the version narrated by ‘Urwah, one of ‘Aisha’s main students and nephews. The other version, narrated by al Qasim ibn Muhammad, her other student and nephew—and the maternal grandfather of Jafar al Sadiq—affirms this.

 

عن يحيى بن سعيد سمعت القاسم بن محمد قال قالت عائشة رضي الله عنها وارأساه فقال رسول الله ﷺ ذاك لو كان وأنا حي فأستغفر لك وأدعو لك فقالت عائشة واثكلياه والله إني لأظنك تحب موتي ولو كان ذاك لظللت آخر يومك معرسا ببعض أزواجك فقال النبي ﷺ بل أنا وارأساه لقد هممت أو أردت أن أرسل إلى أبي بكر وابنه فأعهد أن يقول القائلون أو يتمنى المتمنون ثم قلت يأبى الله ويدفع المؤمنون أو يدفع الله ويأبى المؤمنون

‘Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha said, “My head is aching!”

The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam replied, “If it happens while I am still alive, (that you die), I would seek Allah’s forgiveness for you and pray on your behalf.”

‘Aisha responded, “Woe to me! By Allah, I think that you wish for my death. If that were to occur, you would spend the last portoin of your day with one of your other wives.”

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam replied, “In fact, I too feel pain in my head. Indeed, I had considered—or he said ‘intended’—to send for Abu Bakr and his son, and to make a directive, so that no one could say or wish otherwise. Then I said, Allah will refuse [anything else], and the believers will prevent it, [or he said,] Allah will prevent it and the believers will refuse it.”[2]

 

These narrations set a clear precedent showing that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam initially sought to write down something crucial for the Ummah but ultimately refrained, confident that what he intended would still come to fruition. It is not for us to be brazen about what the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intended as it is our contention that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam left the decision to choose its leader to the Ummah, though he had indicated his preferred candidate in the form of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and Allah had fulfilled his desire and the Ummah united under the most virtuous individual after the Prophets.

From the perspectice of the Ahlus Sunnah, had ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu been chosen as the first Khalifah, instead of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, then this would have been the decision of the Ummah and his Caliphate would have been valid. It is not a surprise that he was nominated as one of the committee of six potential candidiates from whom the decision to lead the Ummah after ‘Umar’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu stabbing would be taken, just as he was most definitely the leader of the Ummah without valid contention after the murder of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

The other occasion where the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam requested writing materials was in the presence of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu himself. The following narration appears in the Musnad of Imam Ahmed:

 

حدثنا بكر بن عيسى الراسبي حدثنا عمر بن الفضل عن نعيم بن يزيد عن علي بن أبي طالب قال أمرني النبي ﷺ أن آتيه بطبق يكتب فيه ما لا تضل أمته من بعده قال فخشيت أن تفوتني نفسه قال قلت إني أحفظ وأعي قال أوصي بالصلاة والزكاة وما ملكت أيمانكم

‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates, “The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commanded me to bring him a writing tablet so he could write something that would prevent his Ummah from going astray after him. I feared that his soul might depart before I could do so, so I said, ‘I will memorise and retain it.’ He then advised, ‘I enjoin you to observe prayer, give Zakat, and to fulfull the rights towards those whom your right hands possess.’”[3]

 

This particular isnad includes an anonymous narrator, Nuaim ibn Yazid,[4] which would generally present a concern regarding the authenticity of the hadith. That said, this narration undeniably carries greater epistemological weight than any of the so-called ‘mutawatir reports from the ‘Itrah’ that ‘Abdul Hussain repeatedly cites as evidence throughout al Muraja’at if we are to use his own criteria against him. However, there is tangible evidence that this hadith enjoys a degree of external corroboration which provides reasonable albeit not entirely compelling grounds for establishing a rebuttal against his contentions.

Another version of this hadith—transmitted by Umm Musa[5], the concubine of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who, according to Imam al Daraqutni, is reliable enough for corroboration—retells the same scene about the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam advices in his final illness.[6] Similarly, supporting versions exist for the general advices given by the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam during his final illness that match those given in this hadith; these are narrated by Anas ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu[7], and Umm Salamah radiya Llahu ‘anha.[8]

So, whatever excuse is deemed worthy to exonorate ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu for having not carried out the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam command to write down something without opposition, exists for those who debated it in his presence. The only difference is that on that occasion the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam addressed a group whereas here he addressed ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu specifically, yet he desisted from writing.

We might add that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam initially indicated that he wanted to write something for Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu but desisted. This is a clear indication that the notion of writing down any advice was to reinforce that which had already been conveyed or understood, not to establish something new.

‘Abdul Hussain, and like him many Shia, finds ‘Umar’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu statement, that the Qur’an is sufficient, deeply objectionable. Their grievance, however, becomes perplexing when considering their own belief that ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu nomination to leadership is allegedly mentioned in the Qur’an itself. If the nomination of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is already part of the Qur’anic revelation—according to their worldview—then why the objection to the sufficiency of the Qur’an?

The absence of any credible historical evidence supporting this claim has led some of their scholars to advance the egregious and heretical theory that the Qur’an was subject to interpolation. Among the many notorious proponents of this theory is ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi, whose Tafsir audaciously presents passages that he alleges have been altered. In his commentary, he asserts:

 

وأما ما هو محرّف منـه فهو قوله لكن الله يشهد بما أنزل إليك – في علي – أنزله بعلمه والملائكة يشهدون وقوله يا أيها الرسول بلغ ما أنزل إليك من ربك – في علي – فإن لم تفعل فما بلغت رسالته

“As for what has been altered from it, it is His statement, ‘But Allah bears witness to what He has revealed to you—about ‘Ali—He has sent it down with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness.’ And His saying, ‘O Messenger, convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord—about ‘Ali—if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message.’”[9]

 

The gravity of this assertion—that verses of the Qur’an were altered to obscure ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu divine right—betrays a desperation to reconcile the theological position of Imamah with the absence of direct scriptural support. While ‘Abdul Hussain attempts to portray a defence for the Ahlus Sunnah that makes them appear desperate, he conveniently ignores the statements of blasphemy that have blotted so many pages of Shia intellectual discourse from antiquity. If anything, it is no more than a reflection of their own desperation which he wishes to cast upon his opponents.

Why would the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam need to test their commitment here when they had already proven themselves at Badr, Uhud, Ahzab, Hudaybiyyah—for which they were crowned with divine pleasure, Khaybar, Fath, and Tabuk, among many other testing situations. Anas ibn Malik radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates that, in his final illness, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam reminded the Ummah of their duty towards the Ansar:

 

عن أنس بن مالك قال مر أبو بكر والعباس رضي الله عنهما بمجلس من مجالس الأنصار وهم يبكون فقال ما يبكيكم قالوا ذكرنا مجلس النبي ﷺ منا فدخل على النبي ﷺ فأخبره بذلك قال فخرج النبي ﷺ وقد عصب على رأسه حاشية برد قال فصعد المنبر ولم يصعده بعد ذلك اليوم فحمد الله وأثنى عليه ثم قال أوصيكم بالأنصار فإنهم كرشي وعيبتي وقد قضوا الذي عليهم وبقي الذي لهم فاقبلوا من محسنهم وتجاوزوا عن مسيئهم

Abu Bakr and al ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma passed by a gathering of the Ansar, and they were weeping.

Abu Bakr asked, “What makes you weep?”

They replied, “We remember the recent gathering of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with us.”

So Abu Bakr went to inform the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of this. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came out, with his head wrapped in a piece of cloth, and ascended the pulpit—he never ascended it again after that day. He praised and glorified Allah, then said, ‘I enjoin you to be good to the Ansar, for they are my close companions and confidants. They have fulfilled their obligations, and what remains is for them to receive their rights. So, accept the good of those who do good among them and overlook the faults of those who err.’”[10]

 

The Prophets salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam final interactions with the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhu demonstrate that he not only recognised and honoured their unparalleled service but also trusted their ability to carry out his teachings. The suggestion that he would “test” them by requesting writing materials is entirely unnecessary in light of their demonstrated commitment. The reason for the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam requesting writing materials was to reinforce some specific advices, which he eventually communicated verbally.

Among his final advices were the following:

• Deputising Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to lead the prayer[11]
• The rights of the Ansar[12]
• The Qur’an[13]
• Expulsion of the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula[14]
• Honouring delegations[15]
• Exhortation towards Salah[16]
• Zakat[17]
• Duties towards slaves[18]
• Prohibiting taking his grave as a place of worship[19]
• Closing of all doors leading to the Masjid except that of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu[20]
• Taqwa[21]
• Unity and obedience to leaders[22]
• Remaining steadfast upon his Sunnah, and that of his Rightly Guided successors[23]
• Avoiding innovation[24]
• Deploying the army under Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu[25]

 

Which of these did the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum not fulfill? Had the written document been an absolute prophetic duty, he had ample time between Friday and Monday to write it down. The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam clearly chose to forego a written will, leaving his ‘written’ Wasiyyah to be the Qur’an itself, which was written in a fragmented form during his lifetime and gathered in a single record during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

Any continued suspicion regarding this matter stems from underlying ill-will towards the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Companions. Such deliberate attempts to discredit them reveal hidden animosity, a sentiment at odds with the Qur’an, wherein Allah has declared His pleasure with them. Should we not also be pleased with those whom Allah Himself is pleased with?

 

NEXT⇒ LETTER 89 and 90 

---

[1] Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 2387.

[2] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 7217.

[3] Musnad Ahmed, vol. 2 pg. 105, Hadith: 693.

[4] Tahdhib al Kamal, vol. 29 pg. 499.

[5] Musnad Ahmed, vol. 2 pg. 24, Hadith: 585; Sunan Abi Dawood, Hadith: 5156; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 2698.

[6] Su’alat al Barqani, pg. 151; Tahdhib al Kamal, vol. 35 pg. 388-389.

[7] Musnad Ahmed, vol. 19 pg. 209, Hadith: 12169; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 2697.

[8] Musnad Ahmed, vol. 44, pg. 84, Hadith: 26483; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 1625.

[9] Tafsir al Qummi, vol. 1 pg. 10, we have retained the passage in a regular font as it is an interpolation of the Qur’an and not the actual revealed words to Nabi Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

[10] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 3799.

[11] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 678; Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 418.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 4460; Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 1634.

[14] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 3053, 3168, 4431; Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 1637.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Musnad Ahmed, vol. 44, pg. 84, Hadith: 26483; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 1625.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 1330, 1390, 4441; Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 529; Sunan Abi Dawood, Hadith: 2042.

[20] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 467.

[21] Sunan Abi Dawood, Hadith: 4607, Jami al Tirmidhi, Hadith: 2676; Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith: 42.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 4 pg. 67.