Objection 8 and 9
April 26, 2016The Virtues of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr radiya Llahu `anhu Deduced From These Verses
April 26, 2016BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
The Objections of the Shia of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba’
I will list the objections in the same sequence I listed the virtues so that the readers can understand the objections and doubts of the Shia in contrast to every virtue.
Objection on the First Virtue
I had mentioned that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam took Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu with him by the command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. The Imamiyyah claim that neither did Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala give permission for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to take Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu with him nor did Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam take him with happily. Rather, he joined Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam without the happiness of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the permission of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, I will quote whatever the Shia scholars have written regarding this.
The great mujtahid, i.e. the qiblah and ka’bah of the Shia, writes in Dhu al Fiqar:
احتجاج بایں آیت موقوف است کہ بہ ثبوت رسد کہ ہجرت ابو بکر باجازت حضرت نبوی واقع شدہ و شیعہ ایں را قبول نکںد
To use this verse as a proof rests on whether Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu hijrah was with the permission of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, which the Shia do not accept.[1]
Qadi Nur Allah Shostari has written the exact same thing in Majalis al Mu’minin and his other articles, as is mentioned in Muntaha al Kalam:
قاضی نور اللہ شوستری در مجالس المومنین و بعضے از رسائل دیگر ذکر می کںد کہ ابو بکر از منافقین بود و بر خلاف امر اقدس نبوی صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم در اثناء راہ اسیتا دو حضرت محمد صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم بعد زجر شدید اورا ہمراہ گرفت تا کفار را دلالت نکند
Qadi Nur Allah Shostari has written in Majalis al Mu’minin and his other articles that Abu Bakr was among the hypocrites. Without Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam command, he stood as an obstacle on his path. After much threatening, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allowed him to come with so that he does not tell the kuffar.
Another ‘great mind’ writes in another article which is related to the Hussainiyyah:
چوں پارۂ راہ برفت دید کہ شخصے برابر آنحضرت می آید حضرت توقف نمودہ چوں نزدیک رسید بشناخت کہ ابو بکر است فرمود کہ اے ابو بکر کہ نہ من امر خدا بشمار ساندم و گفتم کہ از خانہ خود ہا بیروں میائید تو چرا مخالفت امر الہی کردی؟ گفت یا رسول اللہ کہ دل از بہر تو خائف بود و ہراساں بودم نخواستم کہ در خانہ قرار گیرم پیغمبر صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم متحیر ماند بواسطہ آنکہ امر الہی نبود کہ کسی در ہمراہی خود برد در ساعت حضرت جبرئیل باز رسید و گفت یا رسول اللہ بخدا سوگند کہ اگر ایں را می گزاری و ہمراہ نہ گیری کفار را از عقب تو گرفتہ بیاید و ترا بقتل رساند
After travelling some distance, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam noticed someone approaching him. He thus stopped. When he came close, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam recognised him to be Abu Bakr. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “O Abu Bakr! Did I not inform you of the divine command and ordered you not to leave your house? Why did you oppose the divine command?” Abu Bakr replied: “My heart was restless regarding you. Hence, I did not deem it appropriate to stay at home.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam grew uneasy since it was not the command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala to take someone with him. Jibril ‘alayh al Salam descended immediately and said: “O Rasulullah! By Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, if you leave him and do not allow him to accompany you, he will join up with the kuffar from behind and kill you.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was thus forced to take him with and went to the cave.
In short, it is evident from this objection that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu left his home with the intention of getting Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam captured and prevented him from continuing his journey. Notwithstanding Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam prohibition for him to leave his house, he disobeyed the order and became an obstacle in his path with the intention to harm Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with the instruction of Jibril ‘alayh al Salam was forced to take him with. Had he not taken him, he would have definitely brought the kuffar to capture Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
Those with sound understanding can think over this. What a shame! What is the need to think over this? The absurdity of this objection is evident and its preposterousness is clear from its words and meanings. I will nevertheless write about the fallaciousness of this objection and establish the farcicality of the claim that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu came to harm Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and have him captured.
1. Ponder! At that time, was Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu the friend or enemy of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? If he was his friend, then what is the meaning of harming and getting him captured? If he was his enemy, then why did he not go with the other enemies like Abu Jahl etc. to the house of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to kill him? Why did he separate himself from them?
2. Did Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam inform Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu of his emigration, the time he will leave his house and the plan to hide in the cave or not? If he did not, then how did Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu manage to locate Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on his path and stop him so precisely? If Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had informed Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu beforehand, then was taking him with not part of the plan? If it was not, then what was the benefit of disclosing the secret to the enemy besides apprehending harm? If this was part of the plan, then the objection is baseless.
3. If we for argument’s sake except that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu stood as an obstacle on Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam pathway with the intention to kill him and was so firm on his evil intention that Jibril ‘alayh al Salam feared his intent, thus immediately descending from sidrah and informing Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam,
یا رسول اللہ بخدا سوگند کہ اگر ایں را می گزاری و ہمراہ نہ گیری کفار را از عقب تو گرفتہ بیاید و ترا بقتل رساند
O Rasulullah! By Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, if you leave him and do not allow him to accompany you, he will join up with the kuffar from behind and kill you.
Moreover, we are unaware as to whether Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was alone or he had a kafir accomplice and whether he was armed or not. It cannot be said that another kafir was present since the Shia do not accept this. And if Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu had no kafir accomplice then it is puzzling that being fully aware of the bravery and strength of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he goes singlehanded without any weapons to capture and kill Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and does not take any accomplices. If it is said that he only prevented Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in order to spy on him which is clear from the words “he will join up with the kuffar from behind”. Now, it is not known whether the kuffar were so close from where Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu stood that he could just shout out to them or whether they were some distance away that he had to go to call them. If they were close, then amazingly Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not shout out and call them and remained silent. Why? And if they were far away, why did he not run to tell Abu Jahl etc. as soon as he saw Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? What was he waiting for? More astonishing is that Jibril ‘alayh al Salam advised Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to take that enemy along but did not advise him, “Wait a little. When he goes to inform or to call your enemy then get away and by the time he returns, you would reach your destination.” Only Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala knows what happened to Jibril — Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala forbid — that at such a crucial time he advises Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to take along his enemy but did not advise of a plan to save himself from him!
4. It is amazing that when Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu sole purpose was to capture Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, then why did he accompany Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and hide in the cave? Why did he not devise a plot to capture Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam? The unbiased should think that just as Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu had intercepted Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and intended to kill him, if it had been Abu Jahl or any other kafir of the Quraysh, then what would he have done if he had spotted Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and what would Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam do? If anyone thinks that he would spare Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would allow him to accompany him then I would accept the thought of the Shia regarding Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to be correct. I am totally shocked at how the Shia’s intelligence has been shadowed. They cannot even understand that hijrah was such a time that all the kuffar of Makkah were out to assassinate Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and surrounded his house to reach their goal but none of them was aware that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had already left. All were under the misconception that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was asleep therein. The person to accompany Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam at this time; they think that he was the enemy? If this companion did not accompany Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with his explicit command and happiness then would he not have been part of that group who surrounded his house in order to kill him or the one to intercept Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam without a clue or sign?
Whatever I have written thus far is in accordance to Shia narrations, yet they even prove the truthfulness and friendship of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. I will now prove my claim using reported evidences instead of rational proofs, and I will debunk this objection from reliable Shia books and confirm that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu accompanied Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in accordance to divine revelation and with the happiness and consent of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
Al Kashani the commentator who is among the high ranking Shia scholars writes in Khulasat al Manhaj:
امیر المومنین را بر جاۓ خود خوابانید و خود از خانہ ابو بکر برفاقت او در ہماں شب بیروں امدہ بایں غار متوجہ شد
He made Amir al Mu’minin sleep on his bed; left his home the very night accompanied by Abu Bakr and went towards the cave.
The Shia should compare the words of this mufassir,
خود از خانہ ابو بکر برفاقت او در ہماں شب بیروں امدہ
He left his home the very night accompanied by Abu Bakr
to the words of Mulla Shostari,
ابو بکر از منافقین بود و بر خلاف امر اقدس نبوی صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم در اثناء راہ اسیتا دو حضرت محمد صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم بعد زجر شدید اورا ہمراہ گرفت
Abu Bakr was among the hypocrites. Without Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam command, he stood as an obstacle on his path. After much threatening, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allowed him to come with) and decide who is speaking the truth.
If the Shia are not happy with one narration and do not accept it, then listen to another narration of not any ordinary scholar or mujtahid but of a special Imam.
It is written in Surah al Baqarah of Tafsir Imam al ‘Askari ‘alayh al Salam. If I do not quote the original text of this tafsir, no one will believe that such a narration is recorded in the Tafsir of Imam Hassan al ‘Askari rahimahu Llah which conforms to Shia narrations. Hence, I quote his text verbatim from Muntaha al Kalam:
ان الله تعالى اوحى اليه يا محمد ان العلى الاعلى يقرء عليك السلام يقول لك ان ابا جهل و الملأ من قريش قد بروا عليك قتلك الى ان قال و امرك ان تصتحب ابا بكر فانه ان انسك و ساعدك و ارزرك و ثبت على تعاهدك و تعافدك كان فى الجنة من رفقائك و فى غرفاتها من خلصائك الى ان قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم ابى بكر ارضيت ان تكون معى يا ابا بكر تطلب كما اطلب و تعرف بانك انت الذى تحملنى على ما ادعيه فتحمل على انواع العذاب قال ابو بكر يا رسول الله اما انا لو عشت عمر الدنيا اعذب جميعا اشد العذاب لا ينزل على موت مريح و لا فرح و كان ذلك فى محبتك لكان ذلك اشنعم فيها و انا مالك لجميع مماليك ملوكها فى مخالفتك و هل انا و مالى و ولدى الا فدائك فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم لا جرم ان اطلع الله على قلبك و وجد ما فيه موافقا لما جرى على لسانك جعلك بمنزلة السمع و البصر و الرأس من الجسد و بمنزلة الروك من البدن كعلى الذى هو منى كذلك و على فوق ذلك لزيادة فضائله و شرف خصاله يا ابا بكر ان من عاهد الله ثم لم ينكث و لم يغير و لم يحسد من فد ابانه الله على التفصيل و هو معنا فى الرفيق الاعلى
Jibril ‘alayh al Salam came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and said: “Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala sent you salam and states that the Quraysh especially Abu Jahl have made a firm intention to kill you. Thus, leave ‘Ali on your place for he is like Ismail ‘alayh al Salam who will sacrifice his life and let Abu Bakr accompany you because if he is harmonious and remains steadfast on his pledge, he will be your companion in Jannat; in fact in the highest stages of Jannat.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thus informed ‘Ali of the situation who was happy to sacrifice his life. Thereafter, he turned to Abu Bakr and said: “O Abu Bakr! Are you pleased to travel with me on this journey notwithstanding that the kuffar of the Quraysh will be out to kill you just as they are out to kill me? It is common that you instigated me to do this and due to you accompanying me various types of afflictions might come your way.” Abu Bakr said: “O Rasulullah! I am such a person that if due to love for you I am afflicted with the worst of afflictions until Qiyamah it is better in my sight than abandoning you and accepting the kingdom of the world. May my life, wealth and family be sacrificed for you. Where will I go leaving you?”
کف پا بہر زمینے کہ رسد تو نازنیں را بلب خیال بوسم ہمہ عمراں زمیں را
Whichever piece of land the foot of a beloved like you touches
I will continue kissing it lifelong thinking it to be lips
Hearing this Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam commented: “If your tongue conforms to your heart then certainly Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala will give you the status of my sight and hearing and you will have such a connection with me just as the connection between the head and body and the body and soul.”
After studying this narration I am unable to understand the reason for the Shia blurting out, “without the permission of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu stopped him from continuing.” Imam al ‘Askari ‘alayh al Salam himself is attesting to the fact that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam took Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu along in accordance to divine command and revelation. Reflect over the words of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and realise the deep love Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu possessed for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the compassion Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had for him by likening him with his sight and hearing and his soul and heart.
It is interesting to know that when Molana Haydar ‘Ali[2] rahimahu Llah extracted this hadith from the Tafsir of Imam Hassan al ‘Askari and wrote a response to Subhan ‘Ali Khan, the latter lost his senses and was dumbfounded. And it was appropriate for him to lose his senses because if the statement of the Imam verifies that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu emigrated with Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in accordance to divine revelation and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam likened Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to his sight and hearing then there remains no doubt in the falsehood of the Shia creed.
It is interesting to read the letter Subhan ‘Ali Khan wrote after seeing this narration to Molana Nur al Din — the apple of the eye of Shahid Thalith — which Risalat al Makatib quoted verbatim in Riwayat al Tha’alib wa al Gharabit (line 9 page 189 printed in 1268). I will also quote that text verbatim for the benefit of those interested.
لکن اشکال ہمیں ست کہ ناصب احادیث طریقۂ امامیہ را التقاط کردہ بالفعل پنج جز و بغلط از کتاب ابرام بصارت العین باچہ نام دارد فرستادہ دراں حدیثے مبسوط از تفسیر منسوب بہ حضرت امام حسن عسکری علیہ السلام بقصہ ہجرت جر مدح ابو بکر نقل کردہ پس اگر تالیفش و تالیف بندہ بدست کسی از متمذہبین بمذہبے غیر اسلام افتد واحسرتا و وااسفاہ یعنی معاذ اللہ حکم یتعارضا و تسا قطا کند مدبر عالم جلت قدرتہ زمان ظہور صاحب الامر و الزمان زود برساندتا ایں اختلاف از میاں بر خیزد
One problem is that one nasibi located a narration from the Shia chain and compiled a book of 5 volumes named Ibram Basarat al ‘Ayn and sent it to me. He quoted therein a lengthy narration referenced to the Tafsir of Imam Hassan al ‘Askari ‘alayh al Salam which is in praise and admiration of Abu Bakr in the hijrah incident. If his book and my book have to get into the hands of any non-Muslim then how remorseful and how regretful that he will apply the ruling of ta’arud and tasaqut (i.e. when two things contradict then both are unreliable.) May Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala expose the Imam quickly so that this difference can be settled.
Subhan ‘Ali Khan can have thousands of regrets and make millions of supplications for the emergence of the Imam but he is unable to belie Imam Hassan al ‘Askari rahimahu Llah and is incapable of refuting the virtues of Sayyidina Abu Bakr Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu established from the Imam’s statement.
Brothers! Evaluate the situation. When the Imam rahimahu Llah is affirming that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam took Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu along in accordance to divine revelation and Mulla Nur Allah Shostari and his obstinate colleagues claim that Abu Bakr posed as an obstacle to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, should we accept the statement of the Imam or the words of Mulla Nur Allah Shostari? The reality is that Mulla Shostari outwardly claimed love for the Imams but inwardly labelled them as liars and tainted iman and Islam under the guise of Shi’ism.
دامن فشاں گزشت و او را بہانہ ساخت خاکم پاد داد و صبا را بہانہ ساخت
He shook the skirt and made it an excuse
He made the dust fly and blamed the wind for it
If are you not satisfied with this narration and it is difficult for Persian and Urdu people to locate this Tafsir then listen to the narration of a book which is easily available and whose author is a famous extremist Shia. Have a look at it and have a little self-honour and amaze over how the friendship and loyalty of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam companion in the cave is acknowledged by his own mujtahidin and scholars notwithstanding their enmity, hatred and doggedness. The antidote of their sickness of hatred is written in their own books. If this disease of yours is still not treated and you destroy yourself thereby then it is your choice. Study this narration of Hamlah Haydariyyah:
| چو سالم بحفظ جہاں آفریں | چنیں گفت راوی کہ سالار دیں |
| بسوۓ سراۓ ابو بکر رفت | زنزدیک آں قوم پر مکر رفت |
| کہ سابق رسولش خبر دادہ بود | پے ہجرت او نیز آمادہ بود |
| بگوشش نداۓ سفر در کشید | نبی بر در خانہ اش چوں رسید |
| زخانہ بروں رفت و ہمراہ شد | چوں بو بکر زاں حال آگاہ شد |
| نبی کند نعلین از پاۓ خویش | گرفتند پس راہ یثرب بہ پیش |
| پۓ خودز دشمن نہفتن گرفت | بسر پنچہ آں راہ رفتن گرفت |
| قدوم فلک سای مجروح گشت | برفتند چندی ز دامان دشت |
| ولے زیں حدیث ست جاۓ شگفت | ابو بکر آنگہ بدوشش گرفت |
| کہ بار نبوت تواند کشید | کہ در کس چناں قوت آید پدید |
| چوآ گردید پیدا نشان سحر | برفتند القصہ چندے دگر |
| زچشم کساں دور یکسوز راہ | بجستند جائیکہ باشد پناہ |
| کہ خواندی عرب غار ثورش لقب | بدید ند غارے دراں تیرہ شب |
| ولے پیش بنہاد بو بکر پاۓ | گرفتند در جوف آں غار جاۓ |
| قبارا بدید و آں را بچید | بہر جاکہ سوراخ یار خنہ دید |
| یکے رخنہ نگرفتہ ماند از قضا | بدیں گونہ تاشد تمام آں قبا |
| کف پاۓ خودرا نموداستوار | براں رخنہ گویند آں یار غار |
| کہ دور از خرمدی نماید بسے | نیا مدجز او ایں شگرف از کسے |
| چناں دید سورا خہار اتمام | بغار اندروں در شب تیرہ فام |
| یکے کامد افزوں بروپا فشرد | دراں تیرہ شب یک بیک چوں شمرد |
| بدینساں چوں پر داخت از رفت و رو | نیا مد چنیں کارے از غیر او |
| نشستند یکجا بہم ہر دو یار | در آمد رسول خدا ہم بغار |
The narrator relates: “When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam passed peacefully and unharmed by that deceiving and cunning people in Allah’s protection and went to the house of Abu Bakr, he was already prepared to emigrate since Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had already informed him. Once Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam reached his house, he whispered to him to prepare for journey. After Abu Bakr learnt about this, he left his home and accompanied Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and they began their journey to Madinah. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam removed his sandals from his blessed feet to hide away from the enemy and began tip toeing. The blessed feet of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were injured due to walking barefoot like this in the desert. Thus, Abu Bakr lifted Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on to his shoulders. However, there is uncertainty here for how can a person have so much strength to lift the weight of nubuwwah. Nevertheless, they continued walking ahead. When the light of dawn began to appear, they searched for a place which was out of people’s sight and away from the pathway wherein they could hide. A cave appeared in that night’s darkness which the Arabs call the Cave of Thowr. They made this cave their sanctuary. First, Abu Bakr stepped in and closed all the holes he found by tearing his shawl and covering them. Like this, his entire shawl was finished yet one hole remained open. It is said that the cave companion placed his foot on that hole. However, this is something astonishing and beyond comprehension as to how did he manage to see all those holes in the cave in the darkness of night? To locate all the holes on such a dark night and place his foot on the last hole is not possible for anyone besides him. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then entered the cave and both companions stayed therein.”[3]
It is learnt from this narration that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam himself went to Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu house and took him along. All the services Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu rendered, viz. lifting Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on his shoulders, going first into the cave and cleaning it, tearing his shawl and closing all the holes and closing the last hole with the sole of his foot all display deep love and affection not hypocrisy and hatred. If these services rendered by him on the night of hijrah are signs of hypocrisy, what are the signs of love and affection then?
It is appropriate to note that the claim made by some Shia that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam prevented all the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum from leaving their houses and that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu violated this command is totally erroneous. This is because their own historians acknowledge that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allowed all the other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum to proceed before him and only kept two persons behind, viz. Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu for him to sleep in his place and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to accompany him on the journey. Which other Sahabi remained behind whom Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam prevented from leaving his house and who he addressed:
نہ من امر خدا بشمار ساندم و گفتم کہ از خانہ خود ہا بیروں میائید تو چرا مخالفت امر الہی کردی
I informed you of the command of Allah not to leave your house. Why did you violate this divine commandment?
This fact that all the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum emigrated beforehand and only Sayyidina ‘Ali and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuma remained behind is verified by the acknowledgement of the Shia historians. Accordingly it appears in Hamlah Haydariyyah:
| چنیں داد فرمان ز لطف و کرم | حبیب خدا چوں بدید آں ستم |
| نہاں یکیک از چشم اعدا روند | کہ اصحاب ہجرت بہ یثرب کںد |
| برفتند پنہاں بدنبال ہم بدنبال ہم | نہادندیاراں بفرمان قدم |
| علی ماند و ابو بکر و خیر الانام | بدینگونہ رفتند یاراں تمام |
When Allah’s beloved saw this oppression and persecution, out of his compassion and kindness he commanded all the Sahabah to emigrate to Madinah in secrecy from the enemy. The friends of Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam left in secrecy to comply with this command. Like this all the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam left and only ‘Ali, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuma and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam remained behind.
It is proven beyond doubt that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam allowed Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to accompany him by the permission and command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu fulfilled this responsibility in a proficient way.
Objection to the Second Virtue
I mentioned in the second virtue that if Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was not the ardent lover of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and not happy to sacrifice his life and wealth for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he would not have accompanied Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on such an arduous journey.
The Shia scholars object that Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu intention was not sincere. Accordingly, the author of Dhu al Fiqar:
ہم چیں باتفاق فریقین شرط ترتب ثواب بر ہجرت صحت نیت ست الی قولہ پس مادا میکہ مارا علم بہ صحت نیت ابو بکر بہ ثبوت نہ رسد دخول اورا در مدلول ایں آیۃ متیقن نمی شود و تا متیقن نہ شود احتجاج بایں آیۃ بر علو مرتبت او نمی تواندشد
With the consensus of both sects, sincerity is a condition for one to be rewarded for emigrating. Thus, until we are not certain about the sincerity of Abu Bakr, his inclusion in the virtue of this virtue is not certain. When this is uncertain, this verse cannot be used to prove his virtue.
Qadi Nur Allah writes in Ihqaq al Haq:
و قد ظهر من جزعه و بكائه ما يكون من مثله فساد الحال فى الاختفا الى قوله فافضليته فى الغار يفتخر بها لابى بكر لولا المكابرة و اللداد
From his (i.e. Abu Bakr) fear and weeping it is clear that his internal condition was evil and his intention was corrupt.
The answer to this objection has already been given in the Tafsir of Imam Hassan al ‘Askari ‘alayh al Salam which was mentioned previously. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked him:
ارضيت ان تكون معى يا ابا بكر تطلب كما اطلب الى قوله قال ابو بكر يا رسول الله اما انا لو عشت عمر الدنيا اعذب جميعا اشد العذاب
“Abu Bakr! Are you pleased to travel with me on this journey notwithstanding that the kuffar of the Quraysh will be out to kill you just as they are out to kill me?” Abu Bakr said: “O Rasulullah! If due to accompanying you I am afflicted with the worst of afflictions until Qiyamah then I accept it.”
What do we learn from here? Did Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu have a good or bad intention? Since the reality of intention is visible from actions and the state of the heart is learnt from behaviours and deeds, so the service rendered by Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu on the night of hijrah shows his good intention or bad intention?
Objection to the Third Virtue
I stated under the third virtue that from the time they left home until they reached Madinah, the kind and gentle words spoken by Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu show that he had deep rooted love for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The Shia object that the actions of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu display his hypocrisy and hatred. I will therefore list his services on the night of hijrah so that it becomes certain that the assistance offered by Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu can only be offered by a true lover and no one else.
1. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu began the journey, the latter would watch here and there. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked, “O Abu Bakr! What is the matter?” Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu replied: “O Rasulullah! My only purpose is to protect you.”
The author of Muntaha al Kalam Riyad al Nazrah writes the gist of this in the following words:
چوں صدیق ہمراہ آنجضرت بارشاد شریف متوجہ غار شد گاہے پیش می رفت و گاہے در عقب و زمانے بہ جانب راست توجہ می کرد و ساعتے بہ طرف چپ قطع راہ می نمود جضرت پر سید کہ اے ابو بکر گاہے ترا چنیں ندیدہ بودم چہ افتاد کہ در رفتن راہ اختلاف می کنی عرض کرد کہ مقصود من نگاہبانی حضرت از شر دشمنان است مبادا کہ ازیں جہات در رسند و حضرت را از راہ تا غار بردوش برد
When Abu Bakr walked towards the cave (of Thowr) by the command of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, he would sometimes walk ahead of him, sometimes behind him, sometimes to his right and sometimes to his left. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked: “O Abu Bakr! I did not see you doing this before. Why are you moving all over while walking?” Abu Bakr replied: “My purpose is your protection. The enemy should not come from these directions and harm you.” He then carried Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on his shoulders till they reached the cave.
2. When Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu learnt that Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam feet were tired, he lifted Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on his shoulders — without Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saying a word — until they reached the cave. How fortunate is Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu on whose shoulders Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam placed his blessed foot! I have already quoted this from Hamlah Haydariyyah.
3. When they reached the cave, Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu entered the cave first and cleaned it and closed all the holes. He then called Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and made him sleep on his thigh. I have already quoted this above. Qadi Nur Allah Shostari also acknowledges that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu entered the cave first.[4]
4. A snake bit that foot of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu which he placed on the last hole. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam comforted him thereafter.
5. As long as they remained in the cave, Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu son would bring food from home and feed Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
6. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ordered two camels from Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu son which he brought. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mounted one and allowed Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to mount with him while ‘Amir — the shepherd of Bayt al Haram and driver — mounted the other. I will pen these points down just as the author of Hamlah Haydariyyah did.
Proof for Point 4
| رسیدند کفار باپے براں | چوں شد کار پردا ختہ آں چناں |
| کہ بر روی سوراخ بوداستوار | در اندم کف پاۓ آں یار غار |
| و زاں جرج افغان و شد بلند | رسیدش زدندان مارے گزند |
| رسیدند اعدا مکن راز فاش | پیمبر با و گفت آہستہ باش |
| کہ از زخم افعی نیا بے گزند | مخور غم مگر داں صدارا بلند |
When everything transpired in this manner, the kuffar followed the footprints and reached (the cave). At that time, a snake had bitten the foot of the cave companion (Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu) which he had placed on the hole. He scram aloud due to the pain. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam told him, “Keep silent. The enemy is here. Do not disclose the secret. Do not grieve and do not scream because the snake bite will not harm you.”[5]
Proof for Point 5
| بسر برد آں شہ بفرفان رب | بغار اندروں تاسہ روز و سہ شب |
| بہ بردی دراں دراں غار آب و طعام | شدی پور بو بکر ہنگام شام |
| حبیب خدای جہان را خبر | نمودی ہم از حال اصحاب شر |
Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam remained for three days and three nights in the cave in conformity to the divine command. Abu Bakr’s son would bring food and drink to the cave at night. He would also inform the beloved of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of the condition of the plotters (kuffar).[6]
Proof for Point 6[7]
| کہ اے چوں پدر اہل صدق و صفا | نبی گفت پس پور بو بکر را |
| کہ مارا رساند بہ یثرب دیار | دو جمازہ باید کنوں راہ وار |
| بدنبال کاری کہ فرمودہ بود | برفت از برش پور بو بکر زود |
| برو کرد رازے نبی آشکار | ہم از اہل دین بدیکی جملہ دار |
| دو جمازہ بہر پیمبر پر | بگفتش فلاں روز وقت سحر |
| دو جمازہ در دم مہیا نمود | از و جملہ دار ایں سخن چوں شنود |
| رسول خدا عازم راہ گشت | تہی شد ازاں قوم آں کوہ دشت |
| دو جمازہ آوردہ بد جملہ دار | بصبح چہارم بر آمد ز غار |
| ابو بکر را کرد با خود قرین | نشست از بریک شتر شاہ دین |
| بہمراہ او گشت عامر سوار | بر آمد برآن دیگرے جملہ دار |
Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam told Abu Bakr’s son, “O truthful and faithful one like your father![8] There is now a need for two camels which can take us to Madinah.” Abu Bakr’s son moved swiftly to complete the task. There was a driver among the believers. He disclosed to him Nabi’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam secret and told him to take two camels for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on a certain morning. When the driver heard this, he immediately arranged two camels. When the desert was clear from that nation (the road was clear), Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam began his journey. He left the cave on the fourth morning while the driver had brought two camels. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mounted one camel and let Abu Bakr mount with him while the driver ‘Amir mounted the other camel and left with them.[9]
Objection 7 to the Seventh Virtue
I mentioned previously that by the words “صَاحِبِه” (his companion), the companionship of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu is proven. This status has been attained by none besides him since Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala did not specifically mention the companionship of any other person. The Shia scholars object to this in various ways.
Firstly, the word “صَاحِبِه” means companion, and no virtue is proven from this word. In fact, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has referred to a kafir being the “صَاحِب” of a believer. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala says:
قَالَ لَهصَاحِبُهوَ هُوَ یُحَاوِرُهٓ اَکَفَرْتَ بِالَّذِیْ خَلَقَكَ مِنْ تُرَابٍ
His companion said to him while he was conversing with him, “Have you disbelieved in He who created you from dust?”[10]
At another place, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala relates that Nabi Yusuf ‘alayh al Salam said to his companions in the jail who were disbelievers:
یٰصَاحِبَیِ السِّجْنِ
O [my] two companions of prison.[11]
Forget any virtue being proven from this word, Islam cannot even be proven. And iman is necessary for the technical companionship to be established which Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not possess.
The answer to the first verse is that definitely in the verse:
قَالَ لَهصَاحِبُهوَ هُوَ یُحَاوِرُهٓ
His companion said to him while he was conversing with him.
Allah referred to a kafir as the sahib of a believer but Allah couples that with humiliating him and exposing his disbelief by stating:
اَکَفَرْتَ بِالَّذِیْ خَلَقَكَ مِنْ تُرَابٍ
Have you disbelieved in He who created you from dust?
On the other hand, when Allah referred to Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as sahib, such a word is mentioned which indicates love and comfort. Allah says quoting Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “لَا تَحْزَنْ اِنَّ اللّٰهَ مَعَنَا” (Do not grieve; indeed Allah is with us.) Is there any semblance between the two?
The answer to the second verse is that the word sahib in
یٰصَاحِبَیِ السِّجْنِ
is connected to “السِّجْنِ” (prison) and not to Nabi Yusuf ‘alayh al Salam, whereas in the verse under discussion the word sahib is connected to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
With regards to Sayyidah Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu accepting iman, it is verified through authentic Shia narrations. Qadi Nur Allah Shostari writes in Majalis al Mu’minin:
خالد بن سعید از سابقین اولین بودہ اسلام او مقدم بر اسلام ابو بکر بلکہ ابو بکر بہ برکت خوابے کہ او دیدہ بود مسلمان شدہ بود بالجملہ سپ اسلام خالد آں بود کہ در خواب دیدہ بود کہ بر کنار آتشے افروختہ ایستادہ است و پدر اومی خواہدکہ کہ اورا در آتش اندازد کہ ناگاہ رسالت پناہ گریبان او گرفتہ بجانب خود کشید و باو گفت کہ بجانب من بیاتا بآتش نیفتی خالد ازیں خواب خوفناک بیدار شد و قسم یاد کرد کہ ایں خواب میں صحیح ست و آنگاہ متوجہ خدمت حضرت رسالت گردید در راہ ابو بکر باو ملاقات نمود و از حال او پرسید خالد صورت واقعہ را باو بیان نمود ابو بکر نیز باو موافقت کرد و بخدمت آنحضرت آمد ندو بشرف اسلام فائز گردیدند
Khalid ibn Sa’id is among the first forerunners and accepted Islam before Abu Bakr. The reality is that due to the blessings of the dream of Khalid, Abu Bakr accepted Islam. The story of Khalid ibn Sa’id’s Islam is that he saw himself in a dream standing on the edge of a blazing fire. His father was about to fling him into the fire when Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam suddenly caught hold of his shirt and pulled him towards himself saying, “Come to me so that you do not fall into the fire.” Khalid woke up from this nightmare and said on oath that his dream was true. He thus went Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Abu Bakr met him en route and asked his condition. Khalid narrated his dream. Abu Bakr joined him and both of them came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and were blessed with the wealth of Islam.[12]
Those who read this narration can come to a sensible conclusion that the person who accepts Islam due to divine inspiration and whom Allah inspired to accept iman through a true dream, who can blurt out regarding him that he was ignorant about iman? For Allah’s sake, honestly assess this statement of Qadi Nur Allah Shostari: “Abu Bakr accepted Islam due to the blessings of the dream that Khalid saw with the statement of Mujtahid[13], “It is the consensus of the Shia scholars that Abu Bakr did not accept iman from the very beginning.”
Their enmity and hatred have blinded them to such an extent that they reject the iman of such a truthful person whom Allah guided towards Islam by means of a true dream.
Mujtahid said that he rejected iman. I will answer this in different ways.
1. We have to prove that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu understood the nubuwwah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to be true and accepted his invitation from his heart — whether Mujtahid refers to this as Islam or iman. All praise is due to Allah, this has been proven from the acknowledgement of Qadi Nur Allah Shostari. And if Mujtahid has differentiated between iman and Islam in this way that iman refers to believing with the heart while Islam refers to verbal acknowledgement and he rejects the iman of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu thinking that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not accept the nubuwwah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from his heart, then the attestation of the third martyr is sufficient for his rebuttal.
ابو بکر بہ برکت خوابے کہ او دیدہ بود مسلمان شدہ بود
Abu Bakr accepted Islam due to the blessings of the dream that Khalid saw.
2. I accept that there is a difference between iman and Islam and that Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu Islam — not his iman — is proven by the narration of the third martyr. Nevertheless, I will prove Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu iman from the statement of Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali al Murtada radiya Llahu ‘anhu which utterly razes the entire argument of Mujtahid sahib to the ground. The believers should listen to this from their heart and regret over the ignorance of their seniors. ‘Allamah al Hilli writes in Sharh Tajrid:
قال عليه السلام يوما على المنبر انا الصديق الاكبر انا القاروق الاعظم اسلمت قبل ان اسلم ابو بكر و امنت قبل ان امن
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu announced on the pulpit one day: “I am al Siddiq al Akbar (the most truthful). I am al Faruq al A’zam (the greatest criterion). I accepted Islam before Abu Bakr accepted Islam and believed before he believed.”
‘Allamah al Hilli has certified the Islam and the iman of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu on the tongue of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. If Mujtahid’s statement was not falsified by Nur Allah Shostari’s statement, then his statement that “Abu Bakr did not accept iman from the very beginning” is most definitely debunked by the statement of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. And all praise belongs to Allah for this.
Furthermore, it is realised from this narration that the Islam and iman of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was so honoured, revered and famous that Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu boasts that he brought Islam and iman prior to him. Had Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu not been perfect in Islam an iman or a hypocrite or he accepted iman for worldly benefits, Allah forbid, as claimed by the Shia then why does Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu boast about accepting iman before him?
3. The fallaciousness of the Shia scholars’ statement that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu brought Islam only externally and according to the fortune tellers he became a Muslim out of greed for the khilafah is proven from this verse. Qadi’s testimony wherein he testified to Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu being among the first forerunners debunks everything what he wrote before that and after. No one should think that Qadi’s statement has only falsified the statement of the Shia scholars and mujtahidin. In fact, it has also refuted the statement of the Shia Imam Mahdi since he also claims that Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu accepted iman out of greed for the world and he would hear about the kingdom and dominance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from the Jews, thus he accordingly pronounced the kalimah externally. Mulla Baqir Majlisi has quoted in Bihar al Anwar with reference to Risalah Raj’iyyah on the authority of Sheikh Saduq Muhammad ibn Babuwayh al Qummi:
اسلام ابو بکر طوعا نبود اما براۓ طمع دنیا زیراکہ ایشاں باکفرۂ یہود مخلوط بودند الی قولہ چوں حضرت دعوی رسالت فرمود ایشاں از گفتۂ یہود بہ ظاہر کلمتین گفتند و در باطن کافر بودند
Abu Bakr was forced to accept Islam and it was polluted with worldly greed since he had met the disbelieving Jews. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam announced his nubuwwah, he (Abu Bakr) pronounced the two kalimahs (clauses) externally in accordance to what the Jews told him but he was a disbeliever internally.[14]
In conclusion, Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu Islam and iman has been thoroughly proven. When this has been thoroughly proven, then by the word sahib, it is verified by the Qur’an that he was the Sahabi of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thus making him deserving of the virtues and status of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam which the Shia also accept. Notwithstanding this, if a person denies his Sahabiyyat and does not accept his virtues, he has rejected the Qur’an.
NEXT⇒ The Objections continued
[1] Dhu al Fiqar pg. 57 line 9
[2] Molana Hafiz Haydar ‘Ali Faizabadi ibn Muhammad Hassan was born in Faizabad (UP) where he acquired knowledge from the Shia scholars there like Molana Najf ‘Ali, Mirza Fath ‘Ali and Hakim Mir Nawab.He then moved to Delhi where he learnt under Shah ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi rahimahu Llah, Shah Rafi’ al Din Dehlawi rahimahu Llah and Molana Rashid al Din Khan Dehlawi rahimahu Llah. He was outstanding among his contemporaries in debating and the science of belief. He had a deep understanding of Shia books. In his era, ‘Allamah Hakim Subhan ‘Ali Khan (d. 1268 A.H) the Shia centre pillar wrote an extremely harsh book in Persian in response to which Molana wrote a thoroughly verified book named Muntaha al Kalam which sent a shiver down the spines of the Shia scholars. All the mujtahidin from India until Iran could not produce a response to this book. Finally, Molana Hamid Hussain Lucknowi — a Shia mujtahid d. 1206 A.H — in answer to Muntaha al Kalam, according to him, wrote a voluminous book which he named Istiqsa’ al Afham. However, the truth is that this was a response to only 34 pages of Muntaha al Kalam. He did not answer the beginning 500 pages and the 300 odd pages after this. Molana Haydar ‘Ali Faizabadi rahimahu Llah wrote other splendid books in refutation of Shi’ism like Izalat al Ghayn ‘an Basarat al ‘Ayn (6 volumes), Nikah Umm Kulthum, ‘Amman Ikhraj Ahl Bayt al Fatimah, etc. He passed away in 1881 in Hyderabad and was buried there. (Sheikh Muhammad Firasat)
[3] Hamlah Haydari vol. 1 pg. 47 line 16 to pg. 48 line 2
[4] The Arabic text is as follows:
كما قال ان قوله تعالى ثانى اثنين بيان حال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم باعتبار دخوله فى الغار ثانيا و دخول ابى بكر اولا كما نقل فى السير
[5] Hamlah Haydari pg. 48 line 5
[6] Hamlah Haydari vol. 1 pg. 40 line 20
[7] I will answer the objections against the fourth, fifth and sixth virtue while answering the objections of the other virtues
[8] The Shia should ponder over this couplet. How clearly Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mentions the truthfulness and sincerity of Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
[9] Hamlah Haydari vol. 1 pg. 48 line 24
[10] Surah al Kahf: 37
[11] Surah Yusuf: 39
[12] Urdu translation of Majalis al mu’minin by Qadi Nur Allah Shostari pg. 384
[13] Mujtahid refers to Molana Sayed Dildar ‘Ali Nasirabadi/Nasirabadi. His father’s name is Sayed Muhammad Mu’in. He was born in Nasirabad (Ja’is) near Raebareli in 1166 A.H (1753).He gained preliminary knowledge in his hometown after which he went to Raebareli and Ilahabad to study secondary knowledge. He studied logical and traditional sciences under Molana Bab Allah in Raebarel, Sayed Ghulam Hussain Dakni in Ilahabad and Molana Haydar ‘Ali Sandelwi ibn Mulla Hamd Allah in Sandela near Lucknow. After completing his studies in India, he travelled to Iraq and Iran at the government’s expense and studied under Mulla Sayed Muhammad Baqir Bahbahani (d. 1208 A.H) and Sayed Mahdi Tabataba’i (d. 1212 A.H). Molana Dildar ‘Ali got permission from the teachers of Najaf, Karbala and Samura and then travelled to Iran where he sat in the lessons of Sayed Mahdi ibn Hidayatullah Isfahani. He also travelled to Qum and Mashhad and benefitted from the scholars there. (Matla’ Anwar pg. 220, 221)
In 1194, he returned to Lucknow and was pronounced a mujtahid and a leader of the Shia by the scholars of Farangi Mahal. The author of the Shia book Tadhkirat al ‘Ulama’, Sayed Mahdi ibn Sayed Najaf Ridwi said that Sayed Dildar ‘Ali was the first Indian mujtahid.
Sayed Dildar ‘Ali’s forefathers were from the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah. (Muqaddamah Waqa’i’ Dil Pazir pg. 102) Molana Sayed Muhammad Makhdum Hussaini — the author of Towdih al Sa’adat — stated that Sayed Dildar ‘Ali’s early forefathers were Sunni and were from the lineage of Jafar “al Kadhab”. Since Jafar ibn ‘Ali testified to his brother Hassan al ‘Askari rahimahu Llah leaving no offspring after his death — whilst the twelvers belief in the birth of the (bogus) twelfth Imam — he was hence labelled a kadhab (great liar), whereas in reality he was a very pious man.
Through the efforts of Molana Muhammad ‘Ali Faizabadi and Shah ‘Ali Akbar Mowdudi Ilahabadi (d. 1210 A.H), the secretary of state Sarfaraz al Dowlah Nawab Hassan Rida Khan arranged for Zuhr Salah to be performed in congregation at his place on Friday the 13th of Rajab 1200 A.H, corresponding to the 13th of May 1786, and performed Zuhr and ‘Asr Salah behind Molana Dildar ‘Ali. Two weeks thereafter on the 27th of that very month, Salat al Jumu’ah was performed in congregation behind Molana Dildar ‘Ali. Molana Hakim ‘Abdul Hayy Marhum — the former caretaker of Nadwat al ‘Ulama’ Lucknow and the author of Nazhat al Khawatir — has written: “Owing to the efforts of Shah ‘Ali Akbar Chishti Mowdudi and Mulla Muhammad ‘Ali Faizabadi, Nawab Hassan Rida Khan established the Jumu’ah and congregational prayer behind Molana Sayed Dildar ‘Ali on the 13th of Rajab 1200 A.H. This was the first day that the Shia made their own Jumu’ah and congregation in the middle of India.” (Gul Ra’na pg. 153, 154)
Molana Dildar ‘Ali has written many books. The author of Matla’ Anwar has enumerated the names of twenty-seven of his books amongst which are six books and treatises which he wrote in reply to Shah ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Dehlawi’s rahimahu Llah classic Tuhfah Ithna ‘Ashariyyah. Sawarim al Ilahiyyat, Husam al Islam and Ihya’ al Sunnah are answers to the following chapters of Tuhfah, viz. Ilahiyyat, Nubuwwah, Akhirah, and Hujjah. Dhu al Fiqar is an answer to chapter 12 of Tuhfah. Proof of imamah appears at the end of Sawarim. Risalah Ghaybat is a refutation of the statements of Shah rahimahu Llah regarding the absent 12th Imam. Asas al Usul and ‘Imad al Islam are among his famous works. Molana Dildar ‘Ali made great efforts in Western India to spread and establish Shi’ism. The bloom of Shi’ism today in Oudh is the fruits of his efforts. He passed away on the eve of the 19th of Rajab 1235 A.H corresponding to the 3rd of May 1820 in Ghazi al Din Haydar Lucknow. His eldest son, ‘the king of the scholars’, Sayed Muhammad performed the Salat al Janazah and buried him in his prayer room. From then, Molana Dildar ‘Ali has been called Ghufran Ma’ab. (Sheikh Muhammad Firasat)
[14] This is one of those narrations which majority of Shia books have whose ludicrousness and stupidity is laughable. Further on, I will quote the entire narration and please the believers where I will write about the iman of Sheikhayn.