The Protest of Hazrat Ali (a.s.) And the Theory of the Justice of the Companions
Preface
Some say that Ameerul Mo’meneen Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.) has raised
an objection in Nahjul Balagha against a few companions of the Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and that he (a.s.) was deprived of his right to
caliphate. On the other hand, since the companions of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) were just, it is not possible that a sermon of this tenor,
found in Nahjul Balagah, be attributed to Imam Ali (a.s.).
However, we can silence this objection by establishing the corrupt
and hypocritical nature of some companions through irrefutable proofs
and clear evidences.
Firstly: ‘Sohbah’ means to spend some time with someone, be it for a short
while or for a longer duration.
All Islamic sects are unanimous in their view that the word ‘Sahaabah’ in
common parlance includes all those who converted to Islam, or at least
apparently exhibited Islam.
A majority of the Ahle Sunnat, on the basis of this broad
definition, claim that all the companions are just (عادل). However,
some Muslims do not share this view. This is simply because there is no
conclusive proof which automatically establishes that all companions
were just.
Rather, amongst the other communities of the world, as also similar
to the companions of the previous Prophets (a.s.), those individuals
who loved the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) included both the good and the
evil, the pious and the irreverent, the virtuous, the hypocrites and
the corrupt.
Almighty Allah has drawn our attention to all three groups in the
Holy Quran. In fact, amongst the chapters of the Holy Quran, one
chapter was revealed with the name of The Hypocrites (سورة المنافقون).
On this basis, the companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) can be
divided into three groups (the just, the corrupt and the hypocrites).
The view that “all companions were just” is incorrect for the following reasons:
1. This view is against the Holy Quran as also it is in disagreement
with its verses. A few examples are given below:
The First Example
Allah says in the Holy Quran,
وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَى عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُوَ
يُدْعَى إِلَى الْإِسْلَامِ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ
“And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah
and he is invited to Islam, and Allah does not guide the unjust
people”. [1]
This verse was revealed with reference to Abdullah Ibn Ubayy (who
was later elevated to the post of Governor of Egypt by Usman – the
third Caliph). He is the one who had accused and vilified Allah. The
Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had made his blood permissible for the Muslims.
He (s.a.w.a.) had said that his blood is permissible even if he may be
clutching the cloth of the Holy Kaabah.
The compiler of Seerah Halabiyyah (Chapter of Fateh Makkah,
Conquest of Mecca) writes that on the day of the triumph of Makkah,
Usman brought him to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and sought immunity
for him. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) remained silent for some time,
perhaps that someone would kill him during that interval, as he himself
said later – but nobody killed him. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)
considered it as the will of Allah and granted him immunity.
The Second Example
Allah, The Almighty says in the Holy Quran,
وَمِنْهُم مَّنْ عَاهَدَ اللّهَ لَئِنْ آتَانَا مِن
فَضْلِهِ لَنَصَّدَّقَنَّ وَلَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ فَلَمَّا
آتَاهُم مِّن فَضْلِهِ بَخِلُواْ بِهِ وَتَوَلَّواْ وَّهُم مُّعْرِضُونَ
فَأَعْقَبَهُمْ نِفَاقًا فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ إِلَى يَوْمِ يَلْقَوْنَهُ بِمَا
أَخْلَفُواْ اللّهَ مَا وَعَدُوهُ وَبِمَا كَانُواْ يَكْذِبُونَ
“And there are those of them who made a covenant with Allah: If
He gives us out of His grace, we will certainly give alms and we will
certainly be of the good. But when He gave them out of His grace, they
became niggardly of it and they turned back and they withdrew. So He
made hypocrisy to follow as a consequence into their hearts till the
day when they shall meet Him because they failed to perform towards
Allah what they had promised with Him and because they told lies.”[2]
This verse of Surah Taubah is a reminder towards the incident of
Thaalabah Ibn Hateb who approached the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) with a
plea that he (s.a.w.a.) should seek wealth for him from Allah. The Holy
Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said, “O Thalabah! Woe be upon you! It is better
to express gratitude for less wealth. Perhaps, you may not have the
strength to thank for more wealth.” Thalabah responded, “I promise
by Allah Who sent you – if Allah grants me wealth, I will definitely,
most definitely fulfil the right of those who have a right upon me.”
After this, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) supplicated and sought
wealth for him. Allah granted him substantial wealth and he prospered.
When the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) asked him to offer Zakat on his wealth, he
refused and behaved miserly. He retorted, “This is some kind of tax or Jiziya,
I am a Muslim and will not pay Jiziya.” Saying this, he refused to pay Zakat on
his wealth. (Subsequently, a verse of the Majestic Quran was
revealed and he was informed about the same). It is written that after
the demise of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), he sent in an amount to Abu
Bakr as Zakat, who refused to accept it. During the era of Umar, he
sent in an amount once again but Umar returned it.. Finally, he died
during the period of Usman.[3]
The Third Example
Allah questions in the Holy Quran,
أَفَمَن كَانَ مُؤْمِنًا كَمَن كَانَ فَاسِقًا لَّا يَسْتَوُونَ
“Is he then who is a believer like him who is a transgressor? They are not
equal. [4]”
Shiah and Sunni traditionalists and commentators are unanimous in their opinion
that the word “Mo’men” in the above verse refers to Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (as),
while the word “Faasiq”
refers to Waleed Ibn Uqba (the same corrupt Waleed who was appointed as
the governor of Kufa by Usman. After him, he was appointed as the
governor of Medina by Moawiyah)[5].
(The event concerning him is as follows – There was an argument
about some point between Imam Ali (a.s.) and Waleed. Waleed said to
Imam Ali (a.s.), “My tongue is more eloquent than yours; my sword is
sharper than yours and my strength to fight is firmer than yours.” To
his arrogance, Imam Ali (a.s.) retorted thus, “Silence, O transgressor
(Faasiq)!” Subsequently, the above verse was revealed clearly indicating that a
believer and a transgressor cannot be at par.)
So, is the view that all the companions were just still acceptable
to us while in the first example, it is sufficiently established that
Abdullah Ibn Ubayy was the most oppressive and repulsive amongst all
creatures and it is difficult to accept that he would have been guided.
This is because Allah does not guide the oppressors.
The second example was that of Thaalabah who was a miser and a miser can never
be close to Allah and His Prophet (s.a.w.a.).
The third example is of Waleed, a transgressor and amongst the
dwellers of Hell. There is no path to salvation for him (he is such a
vile creature that during his governorship in Kufa, he recited four
rakats of Namaze’ Subh in an inebriated state and then remarked, if you
wish we can recite even more…).
However, despite these undeniable truths, members of the Ahle Sunnat
maintain that these three – Abdullah Ibn Ubayy, Thaalabah Ibn Haatib
and Waleed Ibn Uqbah – as ‘just’ simply because they enjoyed the
position of companionship and maintain that it is incorrect to deny or
decry them. They assert that the three were without a blemish, are from
the dwellers of Paradise and none sof them will enter Hell.
Isn’t the Command of Allah more punishable if it is not accepted or spite and
blind following? For instance:
1. “Zul Thadiyyah” was a companion of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) apparently known as a worshipper and counted amongst the
devout. People were amazed and astonished by the degree of his worship.
This is a prime example of how the view that “all companions were just”
contradicts the traditions of the Holy Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a.).
This is because, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) used to remark that he is
such a fiend that the signs of the devil are apparent on his face. Ibn
Hajar Athqalani reports in volume 1, page 439 of “Kitab al-Esatato Fee
Tafseeril Ashaab”
that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had sent Abu Bakr with instructions to
kill hm. However when Abu Bakr saw him in the condition of prayer, he
returned without completing the order. Thereafter the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) summoned Umar to kill him, but he too failed to carry out
the order of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Subsequently, the Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) despatched Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.) for the task. However,
Imam Ali (a.s.) could not find Zul Thadiyyah since he had left the
mosque.
Question: Is it possible that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a) make a
comment (about his just companion) that the signs of the devil are
visible on his face and order that he should be killed?
Nevertheless, this Zu al-thadiyyah was the same companion who
ultimately turned out to be a severe enemy of Ameerul Mo’meneen Ali Ibn
Abi Taalib (a.s.) and was the leader of the accursed Khawaarij. He was
killed in the battle of Naharwan [as was prophesised to Imam Ali (a.s.)
by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w..a.)].
1. Ahmed Ibn Shoaib Nesaai narrates from Abu Saeed on page 238 of his
book “Khasaaes-e-Ameeril Mo’meneen”
(chapter 59, tradition 179) as follows, “We were sitting in the
presence of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). He was distributing the spoils
of war when a person related to Bani Tameem, “Zu Akhweesarah” entered and said:
“O Prophet! Treat us with justice!” The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) replied, “If I don’t
do justice, who will? If I don’t do justice, it will be an evil act and I will
be amongst the losers.”
Umar rose and sought permission from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) to
kill this person. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) declined and said, “He is the
companion of a group of people, (implying that his friends are such),
that you will consider your prayer inferior to their prayers and
fasting. This group recites the Quran but its recitation does not
descend beneath their throat. These people will go out of the fold of
Islam in the same manner as an arrow leaves the bow for a prey and
strikes its target, without any hesitation. If an archer tries to
observe them with the point of the arrow, he will not succeed in seeing
through them. A sign of these black-faced people is that on one of
their hands, there is a piece of breast-like flesh that keeps moving
(like Dhu al-thadiyyah). They will revolt against the best of creatures.”
Abu Saeed remarks, “I bear witness that I heard this tradition from
the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). I bear witness that Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.)
fought with them and I fought alongside him. During the war, he called
out and found him amongst the dead. The people searched for him and
brought him to Ali (a.s.). I looked closely at him and found him in the
same way as was described by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).
1. The book of Seerat by Ibn Heshaam, narrates a tradition in
volume 3, page 235 that a group of companions of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) had gathered in a house and were preventing others from
meeting the Prophet (s.a.w.a.). Therefore the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)
ordered the house to be burned down.
2. Muttaqi Hindi writes in Kanzul Ummal – Hakam Ibn Aas Ibn
Umayyah was the uncle of Usman Ibn Affaan and the father of Marwaan Ibn
Hakam. He was cursed by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), who also cursed
his forefathers and his descendants. He (s.a.w.a.) said, “Woe be upon
those of my community who are found in the loins of Hakam Ibn Aas.”
A tradition reports that the Mother of the Believers, Ayesha said to
Marwaan, “I bear witness that the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) cursed your father
and you while you were yet in his loins.”
Hakam Ibn Aas was exiled by the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) from Madinah
al-Munawwarah to ‘Marj’ near Taef. He was forbidden to enter Madinah.
After the death of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.), Usman Ibn Affaan came to Abu
Bakr to recommend the case of his uncle Hakam Ibn Aas. He sought Abu
Bakr‘s permission to allow his uncle to return to Madinah who declined.
He approached Umar as well with the same request, but was once again
refused permission. However, when he ascended the seat of caliphate
himself, (in complete contravention of the order of the Holy Prophet
(s.a.w.a.) and the two preceding caliphs), he accorded permission to
his uncle Hakam Ibn Aas and with great respect brought him back to
Madinah. In addition, he also gifted him a hundred thousand dirhams and
appointed his son Marwaan as the advisor to the caliph. It was this
very Marwaan, who on accord of his deeds paved the way for the
assassination of the caliph. He became famous amongst the people as “Nahjul
Batil”
– the Peak of Wrongdoing. It was none other than this Marwaan who
seized the throne in Damascus and titled himself as the “Caliph of the
Muslims.”
1. The Seerah of Ibn Heshaam reports that during the era of
the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), there were twelve companions who were
hypocrites. With an intention to create a rift in the community, they
laid the foundation of a mosque – “Masjid al-Zeraar.” They
propagated the idea that this mosque was being built for the sake of
the pleasure of Allah and to seek goodness from Him. However, by the
order of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), this conspiracy against Islam and
Muslims was quelled.
All the above examples are from the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), and
there are several others documented in history, which essentially
negate the view that “all companions were just.” This is because those
people whom the Holy Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a.) pronounced a death
penalty, or the house which the Holy Prophet ordered to be destroyed or
burnt, surely cannot be counted amongst the just. Similarly, those
individuals who in line with the explicit verses of the Holy Quran
construct a mosque, albeit with the intention to create a rift amongst
the Muslims, while they are hypocrites, how is it possible that they
can be considered as just? For such people, their “equitable and just”
personalities are in direct contravention to the custom of the Holy
Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a..).
Let us ask ourselves – which of these should we accept:
1. The customs and traditions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)
2. The blind following of those who were blind and prejudiced
themselves.
To conclude, the above discussion makes it clear that the argument
that “all companions were just” is invalid. Along with this conclusion,
the objections and doubts raised with regard to Nahjul Balagha are void
as well. Thus, none can find fault and object that, on the basis of
specific circumstances, Ameerul Mo’meneen Ali (a.s.) raised his voice
in protest against some companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.); that
he condemned their evil actions and was displeased with their
despicable behaviour.
And along with this objection, Imam Ali (a.s.) also praised the
faithful and self-sacrificing companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)
and remembered them in high esteem. He said, “I witnessed the
companions of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in a state that in the
mornings, their faces were covered in dust; their nights passed in
prostration, in standing and in worship; they worshipped in a manner
that sometimes they rubbed their foreheads and sometimes their cheeks
on the ground before their Lord; they were in a state of fear and
unease concerning the Day of Judgement and Return as if one were made
to stand on fire; their foreheads bore such marks of prostration as the
sores on the knees of an animal; they wept much on hearing the name of
their Lord such that their chests would be wet with their tears; they
trembled with the fear of Allah as the shaking of a tree in the midst
of a fierce storm. Yet, they were hopeful or reward from their Lord.”
________________________________
[1] Surah Saff, verse 7
[2] Surah Taubah, verses 75-77
[3] Tafseer-e-Fathul Qadeer, Shoukani, volume 2, page 185. Also
Tafseer-e-Ibn-e-Katheer, printed in Damascus, volume 2, page 273,
Tafseer-e-Khan, volume 2, page 125. Also in Tafseer-e-Baghdadi and
Tafseer-e-Tabari, volume 2, page 131
[4] Surah Sajdah: Verse 18
[5] Shawaahed al-Tanzeel by Haakem Haskaani-e-Hanafi, pages 443-445,
610-626 and Manaaqebul Maghaazeli, pages 324, 370, 371. Also in
Al-Kashhaaf of Jaarullah Zamakshari, volume 3, page 514
Ref: seratonline.com
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"shiagroup" group.
To post to this group, send email to shiagroup@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
shiagroup+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/shiagroup?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
