Then I Was Guided

Muhammad al Tijani Samawi (m)

The Beginning of the Change


I stayed unsettled and perplexed for three months, even when I was asleep, my mind was
overwhelmed by doubts and fears about myself regarding the Companions whose lives I was
researching. I found many astonishing contradictions in their behaviour, because throughout my life
I had received an education based on the respect and the veneration of those sages who would
hurt anybody that spoke badly about them or disrespected them in their absence, even if they were
dead.

I had read once in "Hayat al-Haywan al-Kubra" by alDamiri [60]: There was a man riding in a
Caravan with his friend, and during the journey he kept insulting Umar, and his friend tried to
prevent him from doing so. When he was in the toilet, a black snake bit him, and he died
immediately. When they dug his grave, they found a black snake inside it; they dug another one,
and the same thing happened. Every time they dug a new grave, they found a snake inside it. Then
a learned man told them, "Bury him anywhere you wish, even if you dig the whole earth, you will
find a black snake. This is because Allah wants to chastise him in this life before the hereafter, for
insulting our master Umar."

[60]Hayat al Haywan al Kubra, al Damiri

Thus, while I was forcing myself through this difficult research, I felt fearful and confused,
especially as I had learnt in al-Zaytuna that the best caliphs were Abu Bakr al-Siddiq then Umar
ibn al-Khattab al-Farooq, whom Allah will use to divide right from wrong. After that comes
Uthman ibn Affan Dhul-Noorayn, from whom the angels of the Merciful felt shy, and after him
comes Ali ibn Abi Talib, the gate to the city of knowledge. After these four come the remaining six
of the ten who were promised Paradise, and they are Talhah, al-Zubayr, Sa'ad, Sa'eed,
Abdul-Rahman, and Abu Ubaydah. After them come all the Companions, and after we were
recommended of the Holy Qur'anic verse "We do not differentiate between any of His
messengers" as a premise on which we should base the assumption that we should not differentiate
in our respect for all the Companions.

Because of that I feared for myself, and asked my Lord for forgiveness on many occasions, and
indeed I wanted to leave the issues that made me doubtful about the Companions of the
Messenger of Allah, and then made me doubtful about my own religion.

During that period, and throughout my conversations with a few learned people, I found many
contradictions that could not be accepted by sensible people, and then they started to warn me
that if I continued with my research about the Companions, Allah would take His grace from me
and finish me off.

Their continuous stubbornness and their denial of whatever I said, coupled with my scientific mind
and eagerness to reach the truth, forced me to resume the research, because I felt an inner force
urging me to do so.

A dialogue with a Scholar


I said to one of our scholars: When Muawiah killed the innocent and disgraced the honourable,
you judge him as being an interpreter of Islam who got it wrong, and therefore has one reward.
When Yazid killed the descendants of the Messenger and authorized the sacking of al-Medinah
al-Munawwarah by his army, you judge him as an interpreter of Islam who got it wrong, and
therefore has one reward. Some of you even said about him that "al-Husayn was killed by the
sword of his grandfather." Why should I not then interpret Islam through this study, which is forcing
me to doubt the intentions of the Companions and to blow the cover of some of them. which
would not be equated with killings done by Muawiah and Yazid of the Prophet's family? If I am
right I deserve two rewards, and if I am wrong, I would have only one reward. However, my
criticism of the Companions is not for the sake of insulting them or cursing them, but it is a means
through which I hope to reach the truth. Who is the right group, and who is the wrong group. This
is my duty and the duty of each Muslim, and Allah - praise be to Him - knows what is inside
ourselves. The scholar then answered me, ' O my son, Ijtihad (the interpretation of Islamic religion)
has not been allowed for some time."

l asked, "Who disallowed it?"

He said, "The four Imams."

I said liberally, "Thanks be to Allah! Since neither Allah disallowed it, nor His Messenger or the
rightly guided caliphs, whom we are ordered to follow, then there are no restrictions on me to
interpret Islam, as they did.

He said, "You may not interpret Islam unless you know seventeen disciplines, among them: Tafsir
[commentary on the Holy Qur'an], Linguistics, Grammar, Sarf [Morphology], Rhetoric, Hadiths [
Prophetic traditions], History and others."

I interjected by saying, "My Ijtihad is not to show the people the rules of the Qur'an and the
Prophet's tradition, or to be a religious leader of a new creed. Nay! All that I want to know is who
is right and who is wrong. For example, to know whether Imam Ali was right or Muawiah, I do
not need to master seventeen disciplines. All I need to do is to study the life and works of each
one of them to know the truth.

He said, "Why do you want to know all that?" "This is a people that have passed away; they shall
have what they earned and you shall have what you earn, and you shall not be called upon to
answer for what they did" [Holy Qur'an 2:134]

I asked, "Do you read Tusaloon [the Arabic word for Questioned] with Dammah [the vowel point
upon the letter ta] or with Tasaloon with Fathah [the vowel] point a]?"

He said, "Tusaloon, with Dammah."

I said, Thanks be to Allah, if it was with Fathah, then there would be no research. As it is written
with Dammah, then it means that Allah - praise be to Him - will not make us accountable for what
they have done, similarly, He, the Most High, said,: "Each soul is pledged to what ever it has
earned" [Holy Qur'an 74:38].

Also He said: "There is nothing for man except what he has strived for." [Holy Qur'an 53:39].

And the Holy Qur'an urged us to know about the earlier nations and to learn lessons from their
histories. Also, Allah told us about the Pharaohs, Haman, Nimrod, Quaroon, and about the early
prophets and their nations, not for the sake of pleasure, but to show us what is right and what is
wrong. As for your question as to why I want to know all that? Because it is important for me to
know all that. Firstly, to know who is the friend of Allah. so that I may befriend him, and to know
who is the enemy of Allah, so that I may oppose him, and that is what the Qur'an asked me, or
indeed, ordered me to do.

Secondly, it is important for me to know how I should worship Allah and draw near to Him by
obeying His commands, in the way He - the Majesty - wants them to be, not as Malik or Abu
Hanifah or any other interpreter of Islam wants them to be.

I found that Malik does not prefer the saying of "In the name of Allah the most Merciful and the
most Compassionate" during the prayers, whereas Abu Hanifah considers it a "must". Others say
that the prayers are not valid without them. Because prayers are a pillar of Islam, if accepted other
deeds would be accepted; but if they were rejected. other deeds would be rejected. Therefore, I
do not want my prayers to be invalid. The Shiites say that during the ablution we must rub our feet
with wet hands, whereas the Sunnis say that we must wash them. But when we read the Holy
Qur'an we find "rub your hands and feet" which is clear about the rubbing. So how do you expect
any sensible Muslim to accept this and reject the other without research and analysis?"

He said, "You can take what you like from each creed, because all of them are Islamic creeds, and
all of them came from the Messenger of Allah."

I said, l am afraid that I may become one of those about whom Allah said:

"Have you then considered him who takes his low desire for his god and Allah has made him err
having knowledge and has set a seal upon his ear and his heart and put a covering upon his eye.
Who can then guide him after Allah? Will you not then be mindful?" [Holy Qur'an 45:23].

Sir, I do not think that all the four lslamic religious schools (Madhahib) are correct, as long as one
of them allows something while the other forbids it; and it does not seem logical for one thing to be
allowed and frobidden simultaneously. The Messenger of Allah (saw) did not question the rules of
the Holy Qur'an because they are revelation:

And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy. [Holy
Qur'an 4:82].

Because of the vast differences between the four religious Islamic schools, they cannot be from
Allah or from His Messenger, for the Messenger did not contradict the Holy Qur'an.

When the scholarly Shaykh found my argument logical and sound, he said, "I advise you, for the
sake of Allah, that no matter how doubtful you may be, do not doubt the rightly guided caliphs,
because they are the four pillars of Islam, if one of them collapses, the whole building will
collapse."

I said, "God forbid Sir, but what about the Messenger of Allah if those people were the pillars of
Islam?"

He said, "The Messenger of Allah is that building He is the whole of Islam."

I smiled when I heard his analysis, and said, "I ask Allah for forgiveness, yet again! Sir, you are
saying, indirectly, that the Messenger of Allah (saw) would not be able to stand without the
support of those four, whereas Allah - the Most High says: "He it is Who sent His messenger with
guidance and a true religion that He may make it prevail over all the religions; and Allah is enough
for a witness" [Holy Qur'an 48:28].

He sent Muhammad with the Message and did not involve any of the other four, or anybody else,
and Allah said with regard to this: "We have sent among you a messenger from among you who
recites to you Our communications and purifes you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and
teaches you that which you did not know." [Holy Qur'an 2:151].

He said, "That is what we have learnt from our religious leaders and teachers, and we did not
argue about what they taught us, as you the new generation do today. You doubt everything, even
the religion itself. This is one sign of the nearness of the Hour - that is the Day of Judgement - and
the Messenger of Allah said: the Hour will come as a result of the evil in people."

I said, "Sir, why all this exaggeration? God forbid if I doubt the religion, I believe in Allah, Who is
unique and Has no partner. I believe in His angels, Books and Messengers. I believe in our master
Muhammad as His servant and Messenger, and that he is the best of all the prophets and the last
of the messengers, and that I am one of the Muslims. So how could you accuse me of all that?"

He said, "I accuse you of more than that, because you doubt our masters Abu Bakr and Umar,
and the holy Prophet said: If the faith of my nation and the belief of Abu Bakr were put on a
balance, the faith of Abu Bakr would have weighed heavier. The holy Prophet also said in honour
of Umar: I was shown my nation, and each one of them was wearing a shirt that came to the chest,
and I was shown Umar and he was pulling his shirt. They said: O Messenger of Allah! How do
you interpret this? He said: The Religion.

And you come today, in the fourteenth century (Hijri) and doubt the righteousness of the
Companions and especially Abu Bakr and Umar. Don't you know that the people of Iraq are the
people of disunity, blasphemy and hypocrisy!"

What could I say to this man who claimed knowledge and scholarship, and who became so
arrogant that he changed a well structured dialogue into a disordered talk full of lies and
propaganda. He said it in front of people who admired him, and I noticed that their faces lit up with
excitement and evil.

I quickly went home and brought back two books, "al-Muwatta of Imam Malik" and "The Sahih
of al-Bukhari". Then said, "Sir, what made me doubt Abu Bakr was the Messenger of Allah
himself." I opened al-Muwatta and read: He said to the martyrs of Uhud, "Those, I bear witness
against." Abu Bakr then said, "O Messenger of Allah, are we not their brothers? Did we not
become Muslims as they did? Did we not fight as they did?"

The Messenger replied, "Yes, but I do not know what you are going to do after me."

On hearing that, Abu Bakr cried bitterly and said, "We are going to alter many things after your
departure." [61]

[61]Muwatta, Malik, vol 1 p 307
Maghazi, al Qawidi, p 310

After that I opened the "Sahih" of al-Bukhari and read: Once Umar ibn al-Khattab came to Hafsah
and found with her Asma bint Umays. When he saw her, he asked, "Who is she?" Hafsah
answered, "Asma bint Umays." Umar said, "Is she that Ethiopian?" Asma replied, "Yes." He said,
"We emigrated [that is to say from Mecca to Medinah] before you, so we are more entitled to the
Messenger of Allah than you." She became very angry, then she said, "No, by Allah, you were
with the Messenger of Allah, who fed your hungry people and advised the ignorant among you;
whereas we were in a foreign land, in Abyssinia, for the sake of Allah and His Messenger, and
whenever I ate or drank anything, I remembered the Messenger of Allah (saw) and we were hurt,
and we were frightened. By Allah I will mention this to the Prophet without Iying, adding anything
or deviating from the subject." When the Prophet came, she said, "O Prophet of Allah, Umar said
such and such." He asked, "What did you say to him?" She answered, "Such and such." He said,
"I am not more entitled to him than to you." He and his companions had one emigration, but you,
people of the ship, had two emigrations." She said, "I found Abu Musa and the people of the ship
coming to me in groups and asking me about the Hadith, very much delighted with what the
Prophet (saw) had said to them." [62]

[62]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 3 p 307

After having read the Hadiths, the looks on the faces of the scholarly Shaykh and that of the
audience changed. They looked at each other and waited for the scholar, who was too shocked at
what he had heard, to reply. All he did was to raise his eye brows, as a sign of astonishment and
then said, "O my God grant me more knowledge."

I said, "If the Messenger of Allah (saw) was the first to doubt Abu Bakr, and did not bear witness
against him, because the Messenger did not know what would happen after him; and if the
Messenger of Allah did not approve of the preference of Umar over Asma bint Umays, but indeed
preferred her to him; then it is within my right to doubt and not to have a preference for anybody
until I know the truth. Evidently, these Hadiths contradict and nullify all the known Hadiths in
favour of Abu Bakr and Umar, because they are more realistic than these which mention their
alleged virtues."

The audience said, "How could that be?" I said, "The Messenger of Allah (saw) did not bear
witness against Abu Bakr and said: I do not know what they will do after me! This sounds very
reasonable. History has proved that, and the Holy Qur'an and history bear witness that they did
change after him. Because of that Abu Bakr cried for he changed and angered Fatimah al-Zahra,
daughter of the Messenger as we explained before, and he changed until he repented and wished
that he was not a human being. As for the Hadith: If the faith of my nation and the faith of Abu
Bakr were put on balance, the faith of Abu Bakr would weigh heavier", it is invalid and
implausible. It is not possible for the faith of a man, who spent forty years of his life believing in
polytheism and worshipping idols, to be greater than the faith of the entire nation of Muhammad,
which has many God-fearing and pious people and martyrs and Imams, who spent all their lives
fighting for the sake of Allah.

How could Abu Bakr fit into this Hadith? If it was true, he would not, in later life have finished that
he was not a human being. Further, if his faith was greater than the faith of the entire nation of
Muhammad, Fatimah, the daughter of the Messenger of Allah and the leading lady, would not have
been angry at him or asked Allah to punish him in each prayer she prayed."

The scholar did not say anything, but some of the men said, "By Allah! This Hadith made us
doubtful". Then the scholar said to me, "Is that what you wanted? You have made these people
doubt their religion." It sufficed me that a man from the audience replied by saying, "No, he is right.
we have not read a whole book in our life, we followed you blindly and without any argument, and
now it appears to us that what al-Hajj has been saying is right, and it is our duty to read and
research!" Other people agreed with him, and that was a victory for truth and justice. It was not
victory by force, but by logical deduction and proof. Allah says: "Say, bring your proof, if you are
telling the truth" [Holy Qur'an 27:64].

That is what encouraged me to undertake the study and opened the door for me, so I entered it in
the name of Allah by Allah and tracing the footsteps of the followers of the Messenger of Allah. I
hope that Allah, praise be to Him, the Most High, grants me success and enlightenment, for He
promised to enlighten anyone who searches for the truth, and He does not break His promises.

The study went on for three years, because I often re-read the books, right from the first page to
the last.

I read "al-Muraja'at" by Imam Sharaf al-Din several times, since it opened new horizons for me
and enlightened me and pleased me for the love and the fellowship of Ahl al-Bayt.

I read "al-Ghadeer" by Shaykh al-Amini three times because of the clear cut facts it contained. I
also read Fadak in History" by al- Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr and al-Saqifah" by Shaykh
Muhammad Rida al-Muzaffar, which explained so many vague issues.

I read "al-Nass wal Ijtihad" - the Text and the Interpretation - and became more convinced. Then
I read "Abu Hurayra" by Sharaf al-Din and Shaykh al-Mudira" by Shaykh Mahmud Abu Rayyah
al-Misri, and learnt that the Companions who changed after the departure of the Messenger of
Allah were two types. The first, changed the rules. because of its power and authority. The
second, changed the rules by attributing false Hadiths to the Messenger of Allah.

I read lmam al-Sadiq the four Madhhabs" by Asad Haydar and learnt about the differences
between gifted knowledge and acquired knowledge. I also learnt about the differences between
Allahs wisdom which He grants to whom He pleases, and the intrusion on knowledge and the
belief of personal interpretation (of Islam) which kept the nation away from the spirit of Islam.

I read more books by al-Sayyid Ja'far Murtada al-Amili, and al-Sayyid Murtada al-Askari, and Al
Sayyid Al-Khusi,and al-Sayyid al-Tabatabai, and Shaykh Muhammad Amin Zain al-Din, and
al-Fayroozabadi, and Ibn Abi al-Hadid al-Mu'tazili in his commentary on "Nahj al-Balagha", and
Taha Husayn's "al-Fitna al-Kubra".

From the history books I read the following Annals written by al-Tabari, Ibn al-Athir, al-Masudi
and al-Ya'qubi. And I read more, until I became convinced that the Shia Imamiyya were right.

Thus, with the help of Allah, I boarded Ahl al-Bayt's ship and sought their fellowship, because I
found - thanks be to Allah - the alternative to the Companions, who, to the best of my knowledge,
regressed and only a few of them were saved.

I exchanged them for the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, the Prophet's Family, whom Allah cleansed and
purified and made it our duty to seek their fellowship.

The Shiites are not, as some of our religious scholars claim, the Persians and the Magus whose
power and glory were destroyed by Umar in al-Qadisiyyah war, and that is why they hate them!

My answer to these who are ignorant is that following the creed of the Prophet's Family is not
restricted to the Persians, for there are Shiites in Iraq, Hijaz, Syria, Lebanon, and all of them are
Arabs. In addition to that, there are Shi'tes in Pakistan, India, Africa, America, and all of those are
neither Arabs nor Persians.

If we confine ourselves to the Shiites of Iran, the issue becomes clearers because I found that the
Persians believe in the leadership of the twelve Imams, all of whom were Arabs from Quraysh
from Bani Hashim, the family of the Prophet(saw). If the Persians were prejudiced and hated the
Arabs, as some people claim, they would have been taken Salman al-Farisi as their Imam, for he
was a great Companion and respected by both Shiites and Sunnis. On the other hand I found that
most of the leading Sunni Imams were Persians, such as Abu Hanifa, al-Nisa'i, al-Tirmidhi,
al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Maja, al-Ghazali, Ibn Sina, al-Farabi and many others. If the Shiites were
all Persians who rejected Umar ibn al-Khattab because he destroyed their power, then how can
we explain the rejection of the Arabs who were not Persians? Therefore, this is an illogical claim.
These people refused Umar because of his role in excluding the Commander of the Believers, Ali
ibn Abi Talib, from the caliphate after the departure of the Messenger of Allah, and because of the
tragic civil wars and decline of this nation. It is high time that the truth was unveiled to everv
free-thinking scholar so that he may refute the allegation without any prior animosity. It is true that
the Shiites, whether they were Arabs or Persians or any other nationality, followed closely the
Qur'anic Texts and the tradition of the Messenger of Allah and his Family, and refused to accept
the alternative despite the oppressive policies of the Umayyads and later the Abbasids for seven
centuries. During that period, they pursued the Shiites everywhere; they killed them, they made
them homeless, they denied them their rightful grants. they removed their cultural and intellectual
heritage and they spread all sorts of rumours about them in order to keep people away from them.
The legacy of these policies is still felt up to the present day.

However, the Shiites stood their ground, remained patient and took the blame for their
commitment to Allah and they are paying the price of their defiance to this very day. I challenge
any of our religious scholars to enter a debate with their religious scholars without coming out of it
overwhelmed by their enlightened way.

Yes, I found the alternative, and thanks be to Allah Who guided me to this. because I would not
he there without His Guidance. Thanks and praise be to Allah Who led me to the saved group, for
which I was eagerly searching.

I have no doubt that the commitment to Ali and Ahl al-Bayt is the commitment to the unbroken link
- the link to Allah. There are many sayings by the Messenger of Allah agreed by all Muslims,
which bear witness to that. The sensible mind is, perhaps, the best proof for anybody who is
prepared to listen. Ali was the most knowledgeable companion and certainly the bravest, as the
entire nation testified. This is a sufficient condition to support the lawful claim of Ali, alone and no
one else, to the succession of the caliphate.

Allah the Most High said: 'And their prophet said to them, "Surely Allah has raised Talut to be a
king over you. " They said, "How can he hold kingship over us while we have a greater right to
kingship than him, and he has not been granted an abundance of wealth?" He said, "Surely Allah
has chosen him in preference to you, and He has increased him abundantly in knowledge and
physique, and Allah grants His kingdom to whom He pleases, and Allah is Ample giving,
knowing." [Holy Qur an 2:247].

And the Messenger of Allah said. "Ali is from me, and I am from Ali, and he is the master of every
believer after me." [63]

[63]Sahih, al Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 296
Khasai's, al Nisai, p 87
Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 110

Al-Zamakhshari said in some of his poetry:

Doubt and differences have increased. Every one claims that he is the right way. But I have
committed myself to: there is no other god but Allah. and my love to Ahmed (Muhammad) and Ali.
A dog won the love of the companions of the cave, how could I be ever distressed with the love of
the Prophet's Family.

Yes I found the alternative, praise be to Allah. and I became a follower of - after the Messenger of
Allah - The Commander of the Believers, master of all guardians, leader of the chosen elite, the
victorious lion of Allah Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib; and the two masters of Heaven's youth, and the
Prophet's two followers, Imam Abu Muhammad al-Hasan al-Zaki, and Imam Abu Abdullah
al-Husayn; and the daughter of al-Mustafa (Muhammad), mother of the Imams. the essence of the
Message, she, for whom Allah feels angry if she is angered. the most honourable lady Fatimah
al-Zahra.

I have changed Imam Malik for the leader of all Imams, and teacher of the nation, Imam Ja'far
al-Sadiq.

I have committed myself to the nine infallible men from the posterity of al-Husayn, Imams of all
Muslims and the good friends of Allah. I have changed the Companions who turned back on their
heels, like Muawiah, Amr ibn al-As, al-Mughira ibn Shu'ba, Abu Hurayra, Ikrima, Ka'b al-Ahbar
and others, for the grateful Companions who never broke the promise they gave to the Prophet,
like Ammar ibn Yasir, Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad.
Khuzayma ibn Thabit - Dhu al-Shahadetain - and others, and praise be to Allah for this
enlightenment.

I have changed the religious leaders of my people, who discouraged us from thinking and whose
majority followed the rules and the sultans, throughout time. I changed them for the devoted
religious leaders of the Shia who never closed the opportunity for studying and interpreting Islam,
and who neither rose to oppose nor submitted to the oppressive rulers.

Yes, I changed dogmatic beliefs, full of contradictions for new enlightened and liberal ones based
on logical deductions and reasoning.

As they say now a days "I have washed my brain" of the dirt that had accumulated over thirty
years; lies of the Umayyads. I purified it with the ideology of the infallibles, those whom Allah
cleansed and purified. I have done that for the remainder of my life.

O Allah ... please let us live our lives following their footsteps, and let our nation follow their
tradition, and gather us with them, for Your Prophet (saw) said: Man is placed together with those
whom he loves.

Thus I have returned to my origin. For my father and uncles used to talk to us about our family
tree. and often told us that we were from al-Sada (plural of Sayyid: a descendant of the Prophet)
who escaped from Iraq under Abbasid pressure and found refuge in North Africa until they settled
in Tunisia where their marks remain up to the present day. There are many people like us in North
Africa who are descendants from the purified posterity, and are called "Sada", but they went
astray through the oppression of the Umayyads and the Ahbasids, and now they have nothing of
the truth except the people's respect for them. Priase be to Allah for his guidance ... and praise be
to Allah for my enlightment and for opening my eyes to see the truth.

The Reasons behind the Enlightment


The reasons behind my enlightenment are many, but I shall only mention a few of them here:

1. The text regarding the succession to the Caliphate

I have committed myself, before embarking on this study, to never depending on any reference
unless it is considered authentic by the two parties, and to discarding those references that are
solely referred to by only one of the parties.

Thus, I shall investigate the idea regarding the preference between Abu Bakr and Ali ibn Abi Talib,
and that the succession of the caliphate was by written text [Dictate] for Ali, as the Shiites claim,
and not by election and Shura [consultation] as the Sunnis claim.

Any researcher in this subject, if he considers nothing but the truth, will find that the text in support
of Ali is very clear, like the following saying by the Messenger of Allah: Whoever considers me his
master, then Ali is his master. He said it at the end of the Farewell Pilgrimage, when it was
confirmed that Ali would succeed, and many people congratulated him on that, including Abu Bakr
and Umar who were among the well-wishers, and who were quoted as having said to the Imam,
Well done, Ibn Abi Talib, overnight you have become a master of all the believers." [64]

[64]Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, vol 4 p 281
Siyar al Amin, al Ghazali, p 12
Tadhkirat al Awas, Ibn al Jawzi, p 29
Al Riyadh al Nazarah, al Tabari, vol 2 p 169
al Bidayah wan Nihayah, vol 5 p 212
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 2 p 50
Tafsir, al Razi, vol 3 p 63
al Hawi lil Fatawi, al Suyuti, vol 1 p 112

This text has been agreed on by both Shiites and Sunnis, and in fact I have only referred in this
study to some Sunni references. and not to all of them, for they are so many.

If the reader wants more information, he may read "al- Ghadir" by al-Amini (thirteen Volumes) in
which the writer classifies the sayings of the Prophet according to the Sunnis.

As for the alleged popular election of Abu Bakr on "The Day of al-Saqifah" and his subsequent
acclamation in the mosque; it seems that it was just an allegation without foundation. How could it
be by popular agreement when so many people were absent during the acclamation? People like:
Ali, al-Abbas, most of the house of Bani Hashim, Usama ibn Zayd, al-Zubayr, Salman al-Farisi,
Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad, Ammar ibn Yasir, Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman,
Khuzayma ibn Thabit, Abu Burayd al-Aslami, al-Bura ibn Azib, Abu Ka'b, Sahl ibn Hanif, Saad
ibn Ubada, Qays ibn Saad, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, Jabir ibn Saad, Khalid ibn Saad, and many
others. [65]

[65]Tarikh, al Tabari
Ibn al Athir
Suyuti
Baghdadi

So where was that alleged popular agreement? The absence of Ali alone from the acclamation is
sufficient to criticize that meeting because he was the only candidate for the caliphate, nominated
by the Messenger of Allah, on the assumption that there was no direct text regarding such a
nomination.

The acclamation of Abu Bakr was without consultation, in fact it took the people by surprise,
especially when the men in charge of the Muslim affairs were busy preparing for the funeral of the
Messenger of Allah. The citizens of al-Medinah were shocked by the death of their Prophet, and
then they forced the acclamation [66] on the people. and even threatened to burn the house of
Fatima if those who were absent from the acclamation refused to leave it. So how could we say
that the acclamation was implemented through consultation and popular agreement?

[66]Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 18

Umar ibn al-Khattab himself testified that that acclamation was a mistake - may Allah protect the
Muslims from its evil -, and that whoever repeated it should be killed, or he might have said that if
someone called for a similar action there would he no acclamation for him or for those who
acclaimed him. [67]

Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 127

Imam Ali said about that acclamation: By Allah, Ibn Abi Quhafa has got it! And he knows that my
position [regarding the caliphate] is like that of the pole in relation to the millstone! The torrent
flows from me, and the bird will never reach me! [68]

[68]Sharh, Muhammad Abduh, vol 1 p 34, Sermon as Shaqshaqiyah

Saad ibn Ubada, a prominent man from al-Ansar, attacked Abu Bakr and Umar on the day of
"al-Saqifah", and tried hard to keep them away from the caliphate, but could not sustain his efforts,
for he was ill and unable to stand, and after al-Ansar paid homage to Abu Bakr, Saad said: "By
Allah I shall never pay homage to you until I cast my last arrow at you, and pierce you with my
lance, and attack you with my sword, with all the power in my hand, and fight you with all the
members of my family and clan. By Allah, even if all the Jinns [invisible beings] and the human
beings gathered to support you, I will never acclaim you, until I meet my God." He never prayed
with them, he never sat in their company, he never performed the pilgrimage with them, and if he
found a group of people willing to fight them, he would give them all his support, and if somebody
acclaimed him to fight them, he would have fought them. He remained thus until he died in Syria
during the caliphate of Umar. [69]

[69]Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 17

If that was a mistake (may Allah protect the Muslims from its evil) as Umar put it (and he was one
of its architects, and knew what happened to the Muslims as a result of it), and if that succession to
the caliphate was illegal (as Imam Ali described it when he said that he was the lawful nominee for
it), and if that acclamation was unjust (as according to Saad ibn Ubada the leader of al-Ansar who
left al-Jamaah because of it), and if that acclamation was unlawful due to the absence of the leading
figures of the Companions, including al-Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet, so what is the evidence
and proof which supports the legality of the Abu Bakr's succession to the caliphate?

The answer, is that there is no evidence or proof with the Sunnis and al-Jamaah.

Therefore, what the Shiites say regarding this issue is right, because it has been established that the
Sunnis have the text which proves the succession of Ali to the caliphate, but they deliberately
misinterpret it to maintain the Companion's honour. Thus, the just and fair person has no choice but
to accept the text, especially if he knows the circumstances that surrounded the case. [70]

[70]al Saqifah wal Khulafah by Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsood
al Saqifah by Muhammad Rida al Muzaffar

2. The disagreement between Fatimah and Abu Bakr

The subject is agreed upon by the two parties, and the fair and sensible person has no choice but
to judge Abu Bakr as being wrong, that is if he did not admit his injustice and bad treatment of the
leading lady.

Anyone who cares to follow the events of that tragedy and studies its various facts will recognize
that Abu Bakr deliberately hurt al-Zahra and denied her argument so that she could not protest
against him - supported by the texts of al-Ghadir and others - regarding the lawful right for her
husband and cousin to the succession of the caliphate. There are many indications that have been
mentioned by historians which lead us to believe in accounts of these events, this is one of them:

Al-Zahra - may Allah's peace be upon her - went around the meeting places of al-Ansar, asking
for support for her cousin and husband and they said, "O daughter of the Messenger of Allah, we
have already acclaimed that man, and if your husband and cousin had approached us before him,
we would have supported him." Ali - may Allah honour his face - said, "Would I leave the
Messenger of Allah (saw) in his house unburied and go to argue with people about his authority?"
Fatimah said, "Abu al-Hasan did what was expected from him, and for what they did Allah will
hold them responsible and accountable." [71]

[71]Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 19
Shahrah, Ibn al Hadid

If Abu Bakr was wrong, either unintentionally or through good-will, Fatimah al-Zahara would have
persuaded him; but she was angry with him, because he refused to accept her argument and
rejected her testimony and the testimony of her husband. She became so angry, she even
prevented him in her will from being present at her funeral. When she died, her husband buried her
secretly during the night. [72]

[72]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 3 p 36
Sahih, Muslim, vol 2 p 72

As for her secret burial (as) during the night, it is worth mentioning here, that during my years of
research and investigation, I went to al-Medinah to check for myself certain points, then I
discovered the following:

Firstly, the grave of al-Zahra is unknown and nobody knows exactly where it is; some say it is in
the Prophet's chamber, others say it is in her house opposite the Prophet's chamber, and there are
people who think that it might be in al-Baqi', in the midst of Ahl al-Bayt's graves.

This is the first fact that I deduced: al-Zahra (as) wanted the Muslims, through generations to
come, to know why she asked her husband to bury her secretly during the night, and that not one
of them attend her funeral ! Thus, every Muslim could reach certain interesting facts when
researching into historical events.

Secondly, I discovered that the visitor who wants to visit Uthman ibn Affan's grave has to go a
long way until he reaches the end of al-Baqi', and there he finds it by a wall. By contrast, he will
find the burial places of most of the Companions at the beginning of al-Baqi', near the entry. Even
Malik ibn Anas, the famous jurist, who was a follower of the Followers, is buried near the burial
places of the Messenger's wives. It became clear to me what the historians meant when they said
that he was buried in "Hash Kawkab". which was Jewish land, because the Muslims refused to
bury him in the Baqi' of the Messenger of Allah. When Muawiya seized power, he bought that land
from the Jews and included it in al-Baqi', so that it contains the grave of his cousin Uthman. He
who visits al-Baqi' today will see this fact very clearly.

It is astonishing to know that Fatimah al-Zahra (as) was the first of the Prophet's children to die
after him, and at the most there were six months between the departure of the father and his
daughter, and despite that, she was not buried beside her father.

Fatimah al-Zahra, as I mentioned earlier, stated in her will that she should be buried secretly,
therefore, she was not buried beside her father. But what about her son, al-Hasan, why was he not
buried beside his grandfather? Aisha (Umm al-Mumineen) prevented that. When al-Husayn
brought his brother to bury him by his grandfather, the Messenger of Allah, Aisha rode a mule and
went around saying, "Do not bury someone I do not love in my house." Then, the houses of Bani
Umayya and Hashim stood opposite each other ready to fight, but al-Husayn told her that he
would only take the coffin of his brother around the grave of their grandfather then he would bury
him in al-Baqi'. That was because Imam al-Hasan requested from his brother, that no blood should
be shed for his sake. Ibn Abbas said a few verses regarding this event:

"She rode a camel [73], she rode a mule [74], if she had lived longer, she would have ridden an
elephant, you have the ninth of the eighth, and you took everything."

[73]With reference to her mounting the Camel during the War of the Camel.

[74]With reference to her mounting the mule on the day when she prevented the burial of al
Hasan next to his grandfather.

This is another interesting fact: How could Aisha inherit everything, when the Prophet had nine
wives? Ibn Abbas transmitted to us: If the Prophet was not to leave any inheritance, and Abu Bakr
bore witness to that and prevented al-Zahra from inheriting anything from her father, how then
could Aisha? Is there any text which states that the wife could inherit, but not the daughter? Or
was it perhaps politics that changed everything, so it denied the daughter everything, and gave the
wife everything?

It is worth mentioning here a story related to the subject of inheritance that has been cited by many
historians:

Ibn Abi al-Hadid al-Mutazili said in his commentary on Nahj al-Balagha: Aisha and Hafsa came to
see Uthman, during his caliphate, and asked him to give them their shares of what they had
inherited from the Messenger of Allah (saw). Uthman was stretched on the sofa, so he sat up and
said to Aisha: You and that woman sitting next to you brought a man who cleansed himself with his
urine and testified that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "We, the prophets, do not leave an
inheritance." If the Prophet truly did not leave any inheritance, why do you ask for it now, and if he
left an inheritance, why did you deprive Fatimah of her legal share? After that, she left him feeling
very angry and said: Kill Na'thal, for he has become an unbeliever. [75]

[75]Sharh of Nahj al Balagha, Ibn al Hadid, vol 16 p 220-223

3. Ali was more entitled to the leadership

One of the reasons which led to my enlightenment and ultimately made me leave the tradition
[Sunna] of my forefathers was the comparison between the positions of Ali ibn Abi Talib and that
of Abu Bakr, based on logical deductions and historical references.

As I started in earlier parts of this book, I only included in my research the references which have
been agreed on by both, the Shiites and the Sunnis.

I searched in the books of both parties and found that only Ali received total support, and both
Shiites and Sunnis agreed on his leadership in accordance with the texts they approved of.
However there is neither support nor agreement on the leadership of Abu Bakr except by a small
group of Muslims, and we have mentioned what Umar said about his succession to the caliphate.
Furthermore. there are many virtues and good deeds attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib by the Shiites
and cited as authentic references in the Sunni books. The sayings are full of the virtues of Ali, more
than any other Companion ever received, and even Ahmed ibn Hanbal said: No one among the
Companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) had more virtues than Ali ibn Abi Talib. [76]

[76]al Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 107
al Manaqib, al Khawarizmi, p 3 and 9
Tarikh, Suyuti, p 168
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p 72
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 3 p 63
Shawahid at Tanzil, al Haskani al Hanafi, vol 1 p 19

Qadi Ismail, al-Nasa'i and Abu Ali al-Naisaburi said: No Companion had as many virtues
attributed to him as Ali. [77]

[77]al Riyadh al Nazarah, Tabari, vol 2 p 282
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, p 118, 72

We notice that the Umayyads tried hard to force people to curse him and insult him and not to
mention any of his virtues, and even they prevented anybody from being named after him, but
despite all that hatred, his virtues and good deeds (as) continued to spread.

Regarding that Imam al-Shafi'i says: I am surprised about a man whose virtues were kept secret by
his enemies, out of envy, and were kept secret by his followers, out of fear, but nevertheless, an
enormous amount of them spread."

As for Abu Bakr, I searched in the books of the two parties, and found that the virtues attributed
to him by the Sunnis were much less than that attributed to Ali. The virtues of Abu Bakr that have
been mentioned in historical books were narrated either by his daughter Aisha, whose position
vis-a-vis Ali is well documented, and she tried hard to support her father, even by fabricating
sayings, or by Abdullah ibn Umar, who was never close to Ali, and he was one of those who
refused to pay homage to Ali despite the popular support he had received. Abdullah ibn Umar
used to say that the best people after the Prophet were Abu Bakr then Uthman, and after that
everybody was equal [78]. Thus, he made Imam Ali like any other ordinary person, without
preferences or virtues.

[78]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 2 p 202

What was Abdullah ibn Umar's attitude towards the facts that had been mentioned by the leading
personalities of the nation that "No companion had as many virtues attributed to him as Ali". Had
Abdullah ibn Umar not heard about even one of Ali's virtues? Yes, by Allah, he had heard and
understood, but political intrigues tend to distort the facts.

The virtues of Abu Bakr were also mentioned by Amr ibn al-'As, Abu Hurayrah, Urwa and
Ikrima, and all of them hated Ali and fought him either with arms or by plotting against him and
attributing virtues to his enemies.

Ahmed ibn Hanbal said, "Ali had many enemies who searched hard to find a fault attributable to
him, but they could not, so they brought a man whom Ali had-fought and battled with, and praised
him because of their hatred towards Ali." [79]. But Allah said: "Surely they will make a scheme,
and I too will make a scheme so glad the unbelievers a respite: let them alone for a while" [Holy
Qur'an 86:15-17].

[79]Fath al Bari (Sharah al Sahih Bukhari), vol 7 p 83
Tarikh, Suyuti, p 199
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, p 125

It is a miracle from Allah - praise be to Him - that the virtues of Imam Ali spread after six centuries
of oppression and injustice against him and Ahl al-Bayt, and the Abbasids were not less evil than
their predecessor the Umayyads in their treatment of Ahl al-Bayt. The poet Abu Firas al-Hamdani
wrote the following verses:

What Banu Harb have done to them is nothing in comparison to what you did to them,

How many times have you clearly violated the Religion?

And how much of the Prophet's [family's] blood Has been spilt by you?

You pretend to be his followers, but on your hands Is the blood of his purified sons.

After having finished with all these sayings, and having came out from the darkness, I leave the last
judgement to Allah, and there will be no more excuses from the people after all that.

Despite the fact that Abu Bakr was the first caliph, and had all the power and authority, despite the
bribes and gifts that the Umayyads gave to every one who praised Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman,
and despite all the alleged virtues and good deeds that they invented for Abu Bakr, which filled
many books ... despite all that, they did not amount to a fraction of the true virtues of Imam Ali.

Furthermore, if we analyze the alleged sayings that were in favour of Abu Bakr, we find them
incompatible with the historical facts, and no sensible man or creed could accept them. Earlier on
we explained the saying attributed to the Prophet: "If the faith of Abu Bakr and the faith of my
nation is put on the balance, the faith of Abu Bakr will be heavier".

If the Messenger of Allah was aware of this high degree of faith in Abu Bakr, he would not have
appointed Usama to command the army; nor would he have refused to bear witness for him as he
did for the martyrs of Uhud, and then said to him that he did not know what he was going to do
after him", so that Abu Bakr [80] cried. In addition to that, the Prophet would not have sent Ali ibn
Abi Talib to take "Surat Bara'a" from him and prevented him from transmitting it. [81]

[80]Muwatta, Malik,. vol 1 p 307
Maghazi, al Waqidi, p 310

[81]Sahih, al Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 339
Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, vol 2 p 319
Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 51

Nor would the Prophet have said in Khayber while presenting the flag: "Tomorrow I will give my
flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, ever going forward and never retreating, Allah
had tested his heart with the faith" then he gave it to Ali and no one else. [82]

[82]Sahih, Muslim (Chapter on the virtues of Imam Ali (as))

If Allah knew that Abu Bakr had such a high degree of faith, and that his faith exceeded the faith of
all Muslims, Allah - praise be upon Him - would not have had to threaten him that He would spoil
his work when he raised his voice above the Prophet's voice. [83]

[83]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 184

If Ali and the Companions who followed him knew that Abu Bakr had this high degree of faith,
they would not have hesitated to pay homage to him. If Fatimah al-Zahra, the leading lady, knew
that Abu Bakr had this high degree of faith, she would not have been angry with him, nor would
she have refused to talk to him or return his greetings, or cursed him in her prayers [84], and even
banned him - according to her will - from attending her funeral.

[84]al Imamah was Siyasah, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 14
Treatise, al Jahiz, p 301
A'alam al Nisa, vol 3 p 1215

He who had such a degree of faith, and whose faith was greater than the faith of all Muslims.
would not have regretted, in the last moments of his life, his attitude towards Fatimah, and his
burning of al-Fuja'ah al-Salami and his succession to the caliphate [85]. Also, he would not have
wished not to be a human being but to be a hair or animal droppings. Is this man's faith equal to, or
even greater than the faith of the entire Islamic nation?

[85]Tarikh, Tabari, vol 4 p 52
al Imamah wa Siyasah, vol 1 p 18
Tarikh, Masudi, vol 1 p 514

Let us consider the saying: If I was taking a close companion, I would have chosen Abu Bakr.
This saying is like the previous one. Where was Abu Bakr on the day of the small Brotherhood" in
Mecca before the Hijra, and on the day of the great Brotherhood" in Medinah after the Hijra;
when in both of them the Messenger of Allah (saw) chose Ali as his brother then said to him, You
are my brother in this life and in the Hereafter" [86] and did not turn to Abu Bakr, thus depriving
him of the brotherhood in the Hereafter and from the close companionship. I do not wish to go on
about this subject, and it is sufficient to bring the above mentioned examples which I have found in
the Sunni books. As for the Shiites, they do not recognize these sayings at all, and they have their
own clear proof that they were invented some time after the death of Abu Bakr.

[86]Tadhkirat al Khawass, Sibt ibn al Jawzi, p 23
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 1 p 107
al Manaqib, al Khawarizmi, p 7
Al Fusul al Muhimmat, Ibn al Sagh al Maliki, p 21

If we leave the virtues aside and concentrate on the sins, we will never find a single sin committed
by Ali that has been mentioned in historical books (both Shiite and Sunni), whereas we find that
many other people have committed sins and were mentioned in the Sunni books such as al-Sihah,
the various books Sirah and annals.

Thus, we find total agreement from both parties regarding Ali alone, also historical facts point out
that the correct acclamation was for Ali alone.

He abstained, but the Muhajireen and Ansar insisted on his acclamation; then when he was finally
nominated, some people refused to pay homage to him, but he never forced them to change their
minds.

On the other hand we find that the acclamation of Abu Bakr was a "mistake" - as Umar ibn
al-Khattab put it - "may Allah protect the Muslims from its evil." The acclamation of Umar was
based on a promise given to him by Abu Bakr. The acclamation of Uthman was a historical
comedy: Umar nominated six people for the caliphate and told them to choose one candidate, and
said if four agreed and two disagreed, then the two should be killed, however, if the six were
divided into two equal camps, then the camp which was supported by Abdul Rahman ibn Awf
should be considered. but if after a certain time passed and no agreement had been reached, the
whole six should be killed. The story is long and rather strange, but the important thing is that
Abdul Rahman ibn Awf chose Ali on the condition that he should rule in accordance with the Book
of Allah [the Qur'an] and the tradition of His Messenger and the tradition of the two Shaykhs: Abu
Bakr and Umar. Ali refused these conditions but Uthman accepted them, so he became caliph. Ali
came out from the conference of the acclamation and knew in advance the result, and talked about
it in his famous speech known as al-Shaqshaqiyya.

After Ali, Muawiya took over the caliphate and changed it to a hereditary system within Bani
Umayya, and after them came Bani al- Abbas where the caliphs succeeded one after the other
either by personal nomination [from the previous caliph] or by means of force and seizure of
power. From the beginning of the Islamic era until Kamal Ataturk - who abolished the Islamic
caliphate - there has been no correct acclamation [87] except that for the Commander of the
Believers Ali ibn Abi Talib.

[87]i.e by the consensus of the Muslims

4. The Prophetic traditions which indicate that Ali should be followed

The prophetic traditions which persuaded me to follow Imam Ali were those I have read in the
Sihahs of the Sunnis and were approved by the Shiites, and they have many more. But as usual I
only referred to the prophetic traditions that have been agreed on by both parties, and here are
some of them:

A. The Prophetic tradition: "I am the city of Knowledge and Ali is its gate."

This tradition [88] alone should be sufficient to indicate the example that has to he followed after
the Messenger of Allah (saw) because the educated man ought to be followed.

[88]Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 127
Tarikh, Ibn Kathir, vol 7 p 358

Allah - the Most High - said:

Say: "Are those who know and those who do not know alike?"
[Holy Quran 39:9]

He also said:

"Is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go
aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge?" [Holy Quran
10:35]

History has recorded many facts telling us that Ali was the most knowledgeable man among all the
Companions and they used to consult him on every important matter, and we do not know of any
event in which he declined to give his advice.

Abu Bakr said, "May Allah never put me in a predicament that Abu al-Hasan cannot solve. " And
Umar said, "If it was not for Ali, Umar would have perished." [89]

[89]al Isti'ab, vol 3 p 39
Manaqib al Khawarizmi, p 48
al Riyadh al Nadirah, vol 2 p 194

And Ibn Abbas said, "My knowledge and the knowledge of the Companions of Muhammad(saw)
is but a drop in seven seas if compared with Ali's knowledge."

And this is what Imam Ali said about himself, "Ask me before you lose me. By Allah, if you ask
me about anything that could happen up to the Day of Judgement, I will tell you about it. Ask me
about the Book of Allah, because by Allah there is no [Qur'anic] verse that I do not know whether
it was revealed during the night or the day, or whether it was revealed on a plain or on a
mountain." [90]

[90]al Riyadh al-Nadirah, vol 2 p 198
Tarikh, Suyuti, p 124
al Itqan, Suyuti, vol 2 p 319
Fath al Bari, vol 8 p 485
Tadhib al Tadhib, vol 7 p 338

Abu Bakr was once asked about the meaning of the word "Abb" [herbage] in the words of Allah,
the Most High:

"And fruits and herbage, A provision for you and for your cattle" [Holy Quran 80:31-32]

Abu Bakr replied, "Which sky would give me shade, and which land would carry me if I say
something I do not know about the Book of Allah." And this is Umar saying. "All people are more
knowledgeable than I am, even women." He was once asked about the meaning of a Qur'anic
verse, and his reaction was to rebuke the man and beat him until he bled, then he said, "Do not ask
about matters which may appear bad to you." [91]

[91]Sunan, al Darimi, vol 1 p 54
Tafsir, Ibn Katheer, vol 4 p 232
Tafsir, Suyuti, vol 6p 111

Also he was asked about "al-Kalalah" but he did not know what it meant.

In his "commentary", al-Tabari stated that Umar once said the following, "My knowledge of
al-Kalalah is more valuable to me than owning a palace similar to those in Syria."

In one of his books, Ibn Maja quoted Umar as saying "There are three things, if they were
explained by the Messenger of Allah, I would have loved them more dearly than anything in the
world: Al-Kalalah, usury and the caliphate." God forbid that the Messenger of Allah stayed silent
on these subjects!

B. The Prophetic tradition: O Ali! You hold in relation to me the same position as Haroon held in
relation to Moses, except that there shall be no prophet after me.

This tradition, as should be apparent to every sensible person, shows the special quality of the
Commander of the Believers, Ali, which made him the right person to be the supporter, the
guardian and the deputy [or successor] of the Messenger of Allah as Haroon was the supporter,
guardian and deputy of Moses when he went to meet his God. There is also the position of Ali
vis-a-vis the Prophet which is absolutely equal to the relation between Haroon and Moses, except
for the prophethood, which was excluded in the same tradition.

Furthermore, we find in the tradition the fact that Imam Ali was the best Companion, who only
came second after the Messenger of Allah (saw).

C. The Prophetic tradition: Ali is the master of all those of whom I am master. O Allah! Love him
who loves him and hate him who hates him, help him who helps him, forsake him who forsakes
him, and turn justice with him wherever he turns.

This tradition alone is sufficient to reply to the allegations concerning the seniority of Abu Bakr,
Umar and Uthman to Ali, who was appointed by the Messenger of Allah as the guardian after him
of all the faithful. It is of no consequence for whoever tried to interpret the saying as the friend or
the support in order to divert it from its original meaning so that the integrity of the Companions
may be kept intact. The Messenger of Allah stood up in the terrible heat addressing the people,
saying, "Do you witness that I have a prior right to and superior authority over all the faithful?"
They replied, "Yes, O Messenger of Allah. " Thereupon he said, "Ali is the master of all those
whom I am a master. . . etc." This is a clear text indicating that the Messenger of Allah had
appointed Ali as his successor to lead the nation [of Islam], and the fair and sensible person could
not but accept this interpretation and refuse that of the others, thus preserving the integrity of the
Messenger of Allah before preserving the integrity of the Companions. Those who give an
alternative interpretation to the saying are in fact ridiculing the wisdom of the Messenger of Allah,
who gathered the multitude of people, in that unbearable heat, to tell them that Ali was the friend
and supporter of the faithful. And what do those, who misinterpret the text in order to preserve the
integrity of their masters, say about the procession of congratulation that the Messenger of Allah
organised for Ali? It started with the wives of the Messenger, the mothers of the faithful, then Abu
Bakr and Umar came and said to him, "Well done Ibn Abi Talib, Overnight you became the
guardian [master] of all the faithful."

In fact all the historical evidence gives clear indications that those who misinterpret the above
tradition are liars. Woe to those who wrote what they wrote, and woe to them for what they are
writing. Allah - the Most High - said. "...a party of them most surely conceal the truth while they
know it" [Holy Qur'an 2:146].

D. The Prophetic tradition: Ali is from me and I am from Ali and no one can discharge my duty
except myself or Ali.

This honourable tradition [92] is another clear indication that Imam Ali was only one whom the
Messenger authorized to discharge his duties. The Messenger said it on the day of the great
pilgrimage when he sent Ali with Surat Bara'a instead of Abu Bakr, who came crying and asked,
"O Messenger of Allah ! Reveal something for me." The Messenger answered, "My Lord ordered
me that nobody can discharge my duty except myself or Ali."

[92]Sunan, Ibn Majah, vol 1 p 44
Khasais, al Nasai, p 20
Sahih, al Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 300
Jami al Usul, Ibn Kathir, vol 9 p 471
al Jami al Saghir, al Suyuti, vol 2 p 56
al Riyadh al Nadirah, Tabari, vol 2p 229

There is another supporting tradition that the Messenger of Allah, said on another occasion in
honour of Ali, "O Ali! You will show them the right path when there will be dissension among them
after me." [93] If nobody could discharge the Messenger of Allah's duty except Ali, and if he was
the one who would show them the right path after dissension appeared among them after him; then
how could a person who did not know the meaning of "al-Abb" and "Kalalah" be more senior to
Ali? This is sadly one of the tragedies that have been inflicted on our nation and prevented it from
doing the duties that Allah has chosen for it. We could not blame Allah or the Messenger of Allah
or the Commander of the Believers Ali ibn Abi Talib for that, but the blame falls squarely on those
who rebelled and changed, and Allah - the most High - said: "And when it is said to them, "Come
to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger. They say, "That on which we found our fathers
is sufficient for us. " What! Even though their fathers knew nothing and did not follow the right
way" [Holy Qur'an 5:104].

[93]Tarikh, Ibn Askir, vol 2 p 488
Kunuz al Haqa'iq, al Mauawi, p 203
Kanz al Ummal, vol 5 p 33

E. The Prophetic tradition of the House on the day of Warning.

The Prophet of Allah (saw) said, indicating Ali. This is my brother, my trustee and my deputy
[caliph] after me, so listen to him and obey him." [94]

[94]Tarikh, al Tabari, vol 2 p319
al Sirah al Halabiyah, vol 1 p 311
Shawahid al Tanzil, vol 1 p 371
Kanz al Ummal, vol 15 p 15
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 1 p 85
Tafsir, Ala al Din al Shafi'i, vol 3 p 371
The Life of Muhammad by Hasanyn Haykal, First Edition (Section on: And admonish your
nearest, your kinsmen)

This is yet another correct tradition cited by many historians at the beginning of the prophetic
mission, and considered as one of the Prophet's miracles. However, political intrigues distorted the
facts. Then there is no wonder that the oppression which took place then is coming back again in
our lifetime. For example, Muhammad Husayn Haykal reproduced the saying in its entirety in his
book "The Life of Muhammad", (Page 104, First Edition 1334 Hijri). From the Second Edition
onward, the part of the tradition where the Prophet says, "He is my trustee, my deputy [caliph]
after me" has been removed.

Also, in al-Tabari's commentary [Tafsir], Volume 19. Page 121, when the Prophet says "My
trustee and my deputy [caliph]" was changed to "This is my brother etc. etc", but they failed to
recognize that al-Tabari had cited the tradition in its entirety in his Annals Volume 2, Page 319.
Look how they change the words and distort the facts ... they want to put out the light of Allah
with their mouths, but Allah is spreading His light.

During my investigation I wanted to see the truth, so I searched for the first edition of "The Life of
Muhammad". and after some hard work - praise be to Allah - found it, although it cost me
considerably. The important thing is that I looked at the distortion and became convinced that the
evil people are trying the best they can do to remove the facts. because there is strong evidence in
the hands of their "enemies".

When the fair investigator comes across such a blatant distortion, he will no doubt begin to keep
away from them and become convinced that they have no evidence except lies and distorted facts.
They hire writers to whom they give money, titles and false university degrees in order to write for
them books and articles through which they insult the Shiites and accuse them of blasphemy, while
at the same time they defend the position, even if it is unjust, of some of the Companions who
turned on their heels and exchanged right for wrong after the departure of the Messenger of Allah.

Allah says: "Even thus said those before them, the like of what they say; their hearts are all alike.
Indeed We have made the verses clear for a people who are sure." [Holy Quran 2:118]

The correct Prophetic Traditions which indicate the fact that it is
Compulsory to follow the Ahl al Bayt


1. The Prophetic tradition of the two weighty things

The messenger of Allah (saw) said,

O People, I leave amongst you two things which if you follow, you will never go astray. They are
the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt [family].

He also said: The messenger of my God is about to come to me and I shall answer. I am leaving
with you the two weighty things: The first is the Book of Allah, in which you find guidance and
enlightenment, and the people of my household. I remind you, by Allah, of the people of my
household... I remind you by Allah of the people of my household." [95]

[95]Sahih, Muslim, Chapter on the Virtues of Imam Ali (as), vol 5 p 122
Sahih, al Tirmdhi, vol 5 p 328
Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 148
Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, vol 3 p 17

If we examine with some care this honourable tradition, which has been cited by the Sihahs of the
Sunnis and al-Jamaah, we will find that the Shiites alone followed the two weighty things: "The
Book of Allah and honourable members of the Prophet's Household". On the other hand, the
Sunnis and al-Jamaah followed the saying of Umar "The Book of Allah is sufficient for us", but I
wish they had followed the Book of Allah without interpreting it in their own ways. If Umar himself
did not understand the meaning of al-Kalalah and did not know the Qur'anic verse regarding the
Tayammum and other rules, so how about those who came later and followed him without the
ability to interpret the Qur'anic texts?

Naturally they will answer me with their own quoted saying, and that is: "I have left with you the
Book of Allah and my tradition [Sunnah]." [96]

[96]The saying is cited in al Nisa'i, al Tirmdhi, Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood

This tradition, if it were correct - and it is correct in its general meaning - would correspond to the
tradition of the two weighty things, because when the Prophet(saw) talked about his Household
(Ahl al- Bayt) he meant that they should be consulted for two reasons. Firstly, to teach the
tradition [Sunnah], or to transmit to people the correct tradition because they are cleared from
telling any lies, and because Allah - praise be to Him - made them infallible in the purification verse.
Secondly, to explain and interpret the meanings and aims of the tradition, because the Book of
Allah is not enough for guidance. There are many parties who claim to follow the Qur'an but in
actual fact they have gone astray, and the Messenger of Allah said, "How many are the readers of
the Qur'an whom the Qur'an curses!. The Book of Allah is silent and could be interpreted in
various ways, and it contains what is vague and what is similar, and to understand it we have to
refer to those who are well endowed with knowledge as regards the Qur'an, and to Ahl al-Bayt,
as regards to the Prophet's traditions.

The Shiites referred everything to the infallible Imams of Ahl al-Bayt [the Prophet's Household],
and they did not interpret anything unless it had a supporting text.

We refer in every case to the Companions, whether it concerns Qur'anic commentary or the
confirmation of the Sunnah and its explanation, and we know about the Companions and their
interpretations and their personal opinions vis-a-vis the clear texts, and there are hundreds of them,
so we cannot rely upon them after what they have done.

If we ask our religious leaders, "Which Sunnah do you follow?" They answer categorically, "The
Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah!"

But the historical facts are incompatible with that, for they claim that the Messenger of Allah said,
"Take my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs after me. Hold firmly to it." But
the Sunnah they follow is often the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs, and even the
Messenger's Sunnah which they claim to follow is in fact transmitted by those people.

However, we read in our Sihahs that the Messenger of Allah prevented them from writing his
Sunnah so that it was not confused with the Qur'an. Abu Bakr and Umar did the same thing during
their caliphate, we therefore have no proof for the saying, "I left you my Sunnah" [97]

[97]The term 'my Sunnah' does NOT appear in all the six sihahs. It appears in al Muwatta by
Malik ibn Anas, some of the subsequent writers, such as al Tabari and Ibn Hisham referred
to the saying as transmitted by Malik.

The examples that I have cited in this study - besides many that I have not mentioned - are enough
to refute this saying, because there are elements in the Sunnah of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman
which contradict and negate the Prophet's Sunnah, as is so apparent.

The first incident that took place immediately after the death of the Messenger of Allah, which the
Sunnis as well as the historians recorded, was the argument between Fatimah al-Zahra and Abu
Bakr regarding the alleged saying, "We, the prophets, do not leave an inheritance, all that we leave
behind should go to charity."

Fatimah denied and refuted this saying, with the support of the Book of Allah, and protested
against Abu Bakr's allegation and said that her father, the Messenger of Allah, could not contradict
the Book of Allah which was revealed to him, for Allah - praise be to Him the Most High - said:
'-Allah enjoins you concerning your children. The male shall have the equal of the portion of two
females ... " (Holy Qur'an 4:11).

This Qur'anic verse is general and is applicable to prophets and non-prophets alike.

She also protested with the following words of the most High: "And Sulaiman was Dawood's heir"
(Holy Qur an 27:16), and both of them were prophets.

Allah - Glory be to Him - also said: "... Grant me from Thyself an heir, who should inherit from me
and inherit from the children of Yaqub, and make him, my Lord, one with whom You are well
pleased" (Holy Qur'an 19:5-6).

The second incident that involved Abu Bakr during the early days of his caliphate, which the Sunni
historians recorded, was his disagreement with the nearest of all people to him, Umar ibn
al-Khattab. The incident evolves around Abu Bakr's decision to fight those who refused to pay
Zakat [alms] and kill them, but Umar protested and advised him not to fight them because he had
heard the Messenger of Allah saying: I have been ordered to fight the people until they say, "There
is no other god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." And he who says it can
keep his wealth to himself and I have no right to his [blood], and he is accountable to Allah.

This is a text cited by Muslim in his Sahih: "The Messenger of Allah (saw) gave the flag to Ali on
the Day of Khayber, and Ali said, "O Messenger of Allah, what am I fighting them for?" The
Messenger of Allah replied, "Fight them until they testify that there is no other god but Allah and
that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and if they do that then they will prevent you from
killing them and taking their wealth, except by justice, and they will be accountable to Allah." [98]

[98]Muslim, Sahih, vol 8 p 151

But Abu Bakr was not satisfied with this tradition and said, "By Allah, I will fight those who
differentiate between the prayers and Zakat because Zakat is justly charged on wealth." And also
said, "By Allah if they refuse me a rope which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah. I will
fight them for it." After that Umar ibn al-Khattab was satisfied and said, "As soon as I saw Abu
Bakr determined I felt very pleased. "

I do not know how Allah could please somebody who is preventing the tradition of the Prophet.
This interpretation was used to justify their fight against Muslims although Allah had prohibited
making war against them, and Allah said in His Glorious Book:

O You who believe! When you go to war in Allah's way, make investigation, and do not say to
any one who offers you peace, "You are not a believer." Do you seek the goods of this world's
life? But with Allah there are abundant gains, you too were such before, then Allah conferred a
benefit on you; therefore make investigation surely Allah is aware of what you do" (Holy Qur'an
4:94) .

Those who refused to give Abu Bakr their Zakat did not deny its necessity, but they only delayed
it to investigate the matter. The Shiites say that these people were surprised by the succession of
Abu Bakr, and some of them had been present with the Messenger of Allah at the Farewell
Pilgrimage and had heard the text in which he mentioned Ali ibn Abi Talib. Therefore they decided
to wait for a while until they obtained a clarification as to what had happened, but Abu Bakr
wanted to silence them lest they spoke the truth. Because I do not reason with nor protest against
what the Shiites say, I will leave this issue to somebody who is interested in it.

However, I should not forget to note here that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had an encounter
with Tha'alabah who asked him repeatedly to pray for him to be rich and he promised Allah to
give alms. The Messenger of Allah prayed for him and Tha'alabah became so rich that his sheep
and camels filled al-Medinah, and he started to neglect his duties and stopped attending the Friday
Prayers. When the Messenger of Allah sent some officials to collect the Zakat, he refused to give
them anything saying that it was a Jiziah [head tax on free non-Muslims under Muslim rule] or
similar to it, but the Messenger of Allah did not fight him nor did he order his killing, and Allah
revealed the following verse about him:

"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"(Holy Qur'an
9:75-76).

After the revelation of the above Quranic verse. Tha'alabah came to the Messenger of Allah crying
and asked him to accept his Zakat, but the Messenger of Allah refused to accept it, according to
the story.

If Abu Bakr and Umar were following the tradition of the Messenger why did they allow the killing
of all these innocent Muslims just because they refused to pay the Zakat?

As for those apologists who were trying to correct Abu Bakr's mistake when he interpreted the
Zakat as a just tax on wealth, there is no excuse for them nor for Abu Bakr after considering the
story of Tha'alabah who with held the Zakat and thought of it as "Jiziah". Who knows, perhaps
Abu Bakr persuaded his friend Umar to kill those who refused to pay the Zakat because otherwise
their call would have spread throughout the Islamic world to revive al-Ghadir's text in which Ali
was confirmed as successor [to the Messenger of Allah]. Thus Umar ibn al-Khattab wanted to
fight them, and it was he who threatened to kill and burn those who remained in Fatimah's house in
order to extract the acclamation from them for his friend.

The third incident which took place during the early days of Abu Bakr's caliphate in which he
found himself in disagreement with Umar, and for which certain Qur'anic and Prophetic texts were
interpreted, was that of Khalid ibn al-Walid who killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah and took his wife and
married her on the same day. Umar said to Khalid, O enemy of Allah, you killed a Muslim man,
then you took his wife ... by Allah, I will stone you." [99]

[99]Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 280
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110
Tarikh, al Fida, vol 1 p 158
al Isabah fi Marifat as Sahabah, vol 3 p 336

But Abu Bakr defended Khalid, and said, "O Umar, forgive him, he made a mistake, but do not
rebuke him."

This is another scandal that history has recorded for a prominent Companion, and when we talk
about him, we talk with respect and reverence, we even gave him the title 'The ever drawn sword
of Allah." What can I say about a Companion who did all that? Who killed Malik ibn Nuwayrah,
the honourable Companion, leader of Bani Tamin and Bani Yarbu, famous for his courage and
generosity, and furthermore the historians tell us that Khalid killed Malik and his followers after
they put down their arms and stood together to pray. They were tied by ropes and with them was
Leyla bint al-Minhal, wife of Malik, who was considered to be one of the most beautiful Arab
ladies of her time, and Khalid was captured by her beauty. Malik said, "O Khalid, send us to Abu
Bakr and he will be our judge."And Abdullah ibn Umar together with Abu Qutadah al-Ansari
intervened and urged Khalid to send them to Abu Bakr, but he refused and said, "Allah will never
forgive me if I do not kill him."

Malik then turned to his wife Leyla and said, "This is the one who will kill me." After that Khalid
ordered his execution and took his wife Leyla and married her that very night. [100]

[100]Tarikh, al Fida, vol 1 p 158
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110
Tarikh, Ibn al Shinanah, vol 11 p 114 (On the margin of al Kamil, vol 2 p 114)

What can I say about those Companions who trespassed on what Allah deemed to be forbidden;
they killed Muslims because of personal whims and permitted themselves to have women that
Allah had forbidden us to have. In Islam, a widow cannot be wed by another man before a definite
period of time had elapsed, and this period of time has been specified by Allah in His Glorious
Book. But Khalid followed his whims and debased himself, for what would this period of time
['Iddah] mean to him after he had already killed her husband and his followers despite the fact that
they were Muslims. Abdullah ibn Umar and Abu Qutadah have testified to this, and the latter
became so angry about Khalid's behaviour that he returned to al-Medinah and swore that he
would never serve in an army led by Khalid ibn al-Walid. [101]

[101]Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 280
Tarikh, al Fida, vol 3 p 336
Tarikh, al Yaqubi, vol 2 p 110

As we are talking about this famous incident, it is worth looking at what Haykal said in his book
"al-Siddiq Abu Bakr" in a chapter entitled "The opinion of Umar and his reasoning on the subject
matter": Umar, who was an ideal example of firm justice, saw that Khalid had dealt unjustly with
another Muslim man and took his widow before the end of her ['Iddah], therefore he should not
stay in command of the army. So that no such incident would be repeated again and spoil the
affairs of the Muslims and give them a bad name amongst the Arabs, he said, "It is not right to
leave him unpunished after his affair with Leyla."

Let us suppose that it was right that he passed a judgement on Malik but got it wrong, which was
something Umar would not permit, what he had done with his widow alone would have meant that
he had to be brought to justice. Furthermore, being the "sword of Allah" and the commander of the
victorious army, did not give him the right to do what he had done, otherwise people like Khalid
would abuse the law. Worse still, they would be bad examples for all Muslims on how to respect
the Book of Allah. Thus Umar kept the pressure on Abu Bakr until he recalled Khalid and
rebuked him." [102]

[102]Al Siddiq al Akbar, Haykal, p 151

May we ask Mr. Haykel and his like from our scholars, who would compromise in order to
preserve the honour of the Companions: Why did Abu Bakr not bring Khalid to justice? And if
Umar was an ideal example of firm justice, as Haykel puts it, why did he only remove him from the
command of the army, and not bring him to justice so that he would not be a bad example for all
Muslims of how to respect the Book of Allah, as he said. And did they respect the Book of Allah
and discharge the laws of Allah? Nay! It was politics! It does wonders, it changes the truth and
throws the Qur'anic texts over the wall.

Some of our scholars tell us in their books that the Messenger of Allah (saw) once became very
angry when Usamah tried to mediate on behalf of an honourable woman accused of stealing, and
the Messenger said, "Woe unto you! Do you mediate about one of the laws of Allah? By Allah if it
was Fatimah the daughter of Muhammad, I would cut her hand. He destroyed those before you
because they would let the thief go if he was an honourable person, but would bring him to justice
if he was a weak one." How could they be silent about the killing of the innocent Muslims, and the
marriage of their widows on the same night despite the tragic loss of their husbands? I wish they
had remained silent ! But they try to justify Khalid's misdeed by inventing various virtues for him,
they even called him "The ever drawn sword of Allah" I remember being surprised by a friend of
mine, who used to like joking and changing the meaning of the words, when I mentioned the
virtues of Khalid ibn al-Walid during my days of ignorance and called him "The ever drawn sword
of Allah". He replied, "He is the crippled sword of the devil!"

I was surprised then, but after my research, Allah has opened my eyes and helped me to know the
true value of those who seized the caliphate, changed the laws of Allah and violated the boundaries
of Allah.

There is a famous story about Khalid which happened during the lifetime of the Prophet who sent
him on a mission to Bani Judhaymah to call them to Islam, but did not order him to fight them. But
they did not declare their Islam very well, instead they said, "We are turning to... we are turning [to
Islam]". As a result Khalid started to kill them and took prisoners from them, and pushed them
towards his friends whom he ordered to kill those prisoners. But some of his friends refused to do
what they were told because they realized that these people had been truly converted to Islam, and
they went back and told the Prophet what had happened. He said. "O Allah I am innocent of
Khalid's deed." He said it twice [103], then sent Ali ibn Abi Talib to Bani Judhaymah with money
to pay compensation for their dead and for the loss of their wealth, even down to a dog. The
Messenger of allah stood up and faced the Qiblah [the direction of al- Ka'ba] and raised his hands
to the sky then said, 'O Allah, I am innocent of Khalid's deed three times". [104]

[103]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 171

[104]Sirah, Ibn Hisham, vol 4 p 53
Tabaqat, Ibn Sa'd
Usud al Ghabah, vol 3 p 102

May we ask where the alleged fairness of the Companions, which these people claim to have had
is ? If Khalid ibn al-Walid who is considered to be one of our greatest military leaders was the
sword of Allah, does that mean that Allah drew his sword to kill the innocent Muslims and to
violate the integrity of people? There is a clear contradiction here, because Allah forbids the killing
of human beings and prohibits the committing of vile deeds, but Khalid seems to have drawn the
sword of injustice to kill innocent Muslims and to confiscate their wealth and to take their women.

There is a blatant lie and a clear deception. Praise and thanks he upon You, our God ... Blessed
be You the Most High ... Praise be upon You, You did not create the skies and the earth and
what is in between them unjustly. These are the doubts of those who blaspheme. Woe to those
who committed blasphemy, for Hell is awaiting them. How did Abu Bakr, who was the caliph of
the Muslims, allow himself to listen to all these crimes and be silent about them? Moreover he
asked Umar to stop attacking Khalid and was very angry at Abu Qutadah because he protested
strongly about Khalid's action. Was he convinced that Khalid had passed a judgement but got it
wrong? What excuse could be given to those corrupt criminals who violated human integrity and
claimed to have passed judgement. I do not think that Abu Bakr was trying to pass judgement on
Khalid who Umar ibn al-Khattab called "The enemy of Allah". Umar thought that Khalid should be
killed because he had killed an innocent Muslim, or be subjected to a hell of stones because he
had committed adultery with Leyla, the widow of Malik. But nothing like that happened to Khalid,
rather he defeated Umar because he had the full support of Abu Bakr who knew the whole truth
about Khalid more than anybody else. Historians have recorded that after this terrible misdeed,
Abu Bakr sent Khalid on a mission to al-Yamamah, from which he came out victorious and
subsequently married a girl from there in the same way as he had Leyla, before the blood of those
innocent Muslims and the blood of the followers of Musaylama had dried. Later, Abu Bakr
rebuked him about what he had done and used stronger words than those he used during the affair
of Leyla [105]. Undoubtedly, this girl's husband was killed by Khalid who took her for himself, in
the same way as he had Leyla, the widow of Malik. It must have been so, otherwise Abu Bakr
would not have rebuked him using stronger words than the previous event. The historians mention
the text of the letter which Abu Bakr sent to Khalid ibn al-Walid in which he said, "O Ibn Umm
Khalid. Upon my life you are doing nothing but marrying women, and in the yard of your house
there is the blood of one thousand two hundred Muslims yet to dry!" [106]. When Khalid read the
letter, he commented, "This must be the work of al-A'sar" meaning Umar ibn al-Khattab.

[105]Al Siddiq al Akbar, Haykal. p 151
[106]Tarikh, Tabari, vol 3 p 254
Tarikh al Khamis, vol 3 p 343

These are the strong facts that made me shun these types of Companions, and their followers who
support them and defend them eagerly and invent various texts and stories to justify the deeds of
Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Muawiyah, Amr ibn al-As and their brethren. O
Allah! I am innocent of the deeds and the sayings of those people who opposed Your rules,
violated Your prohibitions and trespassed on Your territories. I am innocent of their followers and
their supporters despite their full knowledge of the latter's misdeeds. Forgive me for my previous
support for them because I was ignorant and Your Messenger said, "He who does not know [the
ignorant] cannot be excused for his ignorance."

O Allah! Our leaders have led us astray and veiled the truth from us and presented us with
distorted pictures of those renegade Companions and led us to believe that they were the best
people after Your Messenger. There is no doubt that our forefathers were victims of the deception
and the intrigues of the Umayyads and later the Abbasids.

O Allah! Forgive them and forgive us hecause You know what is in our inner souls. They loved
and respected those Companions out of goodwill assuming that they were supporters of Your
Messenger, may Your blessings and peace be upon him and upon those who love him. You know,
my Lord their and our love for the purified family, the Imams whom You cleansed and purified.
and at their head. the master of all Muslims. the Commander of the Believers, chief of the singularly
radiant, Imam of all those who fear Allah. our lord Ali ibn Abi Talib.

O Allah ! Let me be one of their followers who have committed themselves to their cause amd
followed their path. Let me be on their ship and help me to hold on to their strong link. Let me
enter their doors and assist me in dedication to their love, help me to follow their words and their
deeds, and let me be grateful to their virtues. O Allah! Let me be with them, for Your Prophet
(saw) said, "Man is assembled together [on the day of Judgement] with those whom he loves."

2. The Prophetic tradition of the Ship

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said,

Behold! My Ahl al-Bayt are like the Ark of Noah, whoever embarked in it was saved, and
whoever turned away from it was drowned. [107]

[107]Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 151
Yanabi Muwaddah, Qundoozi Hanafi, p 30, 370
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p 184, 234
Majmaa al-Zawaed, al-Haithami, v9, p168

He also said,

My Ahl al-Bayt are like the Gate of Repentance of the children of Israel; whoever entered therein
was forgiven. [108]

[108]1. Majmaa al-Zawaed, al-Haithami, v9, p168
2. al-Sawaeq al-Muhriqa, ibn Hajar al-Haithami, p193
also in:
3. Noor al-Absar, al-Shiblinji
4. al-Ifrad, al-Darqutni

Ibn Hajar cited the above tradition in his book "Al-Sawa'iq al-Mahriqa" and gave the following
commentary: The idea behind comparing them with the Ark [ship] is to say that whoever loves
them and reveres them as a sign of his gratitude for their graces, and whoever is guided by their
learned people, will be saved from the darkness of contradictions. On the other hand whoever
decides to stay behind, will sink in the sea of ingratitude and will be destroyed in the wilderness of
tyranny. The reason for comparing Ahl al-Bayt with the Gate of Repentance is that Allah - the
Most High - made the Gate of Repentance [the Gate of Jericho or Jerusalem] a sign of His
forgiveness. Similarly, Ahl al-Bayt are the means of Repentance for this nation.

I wish I could ask Ibn Hajar if he was one of those who went on board the ship and entered the
door and was guided by the religious leaders [Ulama], or was he one of those who order what
they do not do in practice. and contradict their belief. There are many of those unfair people when
I ask them or argue with them they say. "We are in a more favourable situation vis-a-vis Ahl
al-Bayt and lmam Ali than others, we respect and appreciate Ahl al Bayt and nobody can deny
their graces and their virtues."

Yes, they say with their tongues what is not in their hearts, or they respect them and appreciate
them but follow and imitate their enemies who fought them and contradicted them, or even perhaps
on many occasions do not know who Ahl al-Bayt are, and if you ask them who Ahl al-Bayt are,
they answer you immediately, "they are the Prophet's wives from whom Allah kept the dirt away
and purified them." When I addressed the question to one of those people, he solved the puzzle by
giving me the following answer, "All the Sunni people and al-Jama'ah follow Ahl al-Bayt." I was
surprised and said, "How could that be?" He answered, "The Messenger of Allah said that we
should take half of our religion from this Humayra, meaning Aisha, therefore we took half of the
religion from Ahl al-Bayt."

On this basis one could understand their respect and appreciation for Ahl al-Bayt, but when you
ask them about the twelve Imams they would only know Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn from them,
and they would not accept the Imamate of al-Hasan nor al-Husayn. Besides, they respect
Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan who poisoned al-Hasan and killed him [they call Muawiyah "The writer
of the Revelations"], and they also respect Amr ibn al-As in the same way as they respect Imam
Ali.

This is nothing but contradictions and confusion and an attempt to cover the right with the wrong
and the light with darkness. For how could the heart of the believer contain the love of Allah and
the devil at the same time, and Allah said in His Glorious Book: "You shall not find a people who
believe in Allah and the Latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His
Messenger, even though they were their (own) fathers, or their sons or their brothers or their
kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith and whom He has strengthened
with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow
abiding therein; Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him; these are
Allah's party: now surely the party of Allah are the succesful ones. (Holy Qur'an 58:22).

Allah also said: "O You who believe! Do not take My enemy and your enemy for friends. Would
you offer them love while they deny what has come to you of truth?" (Holy Qur'an 60:1).

3. The Prophetic tradition: "He who wishes to live like me."

The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Who ever wishes to live and die like me, and to abide in the
Garden of Eden after death should acknowledge Ali as his patron and follow Ahl al-Bayt after me,
for they are my Ahl al-Bayt and they have been created out of the same knowledge and
understanding as myself. Woe unto those followers of mine who will deny the Ahl al-Bayt their
distinctions and who will disregard their relationship and affinity with me. May Allah never let them
benefit from my intercession." [109]

[109]Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 128
Kanz al Ummal, vol 6 p 155
al Manaqib, Khawarizmi, p 34
Yanabi al Muwaddah, p 149
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 2 p 95
Hilyat al Awlia, vol 1 p 86
Al Jami al Kabir, al Tabrani and
al Isabah, Ibn Hajar

As you can see, the above tradition is one of those clear sayings which do not require any
interpretation, nor indeed gives any scope for the Muslims to choose, rather, it eliminates any
excuse. If he does not follow Ali and acknowledge Ahl al-Bayt, the Prophet's Family he will be
deprived of the mediation of their grandfather, the Messenger of Allah (saw). It is worth noting
here that at the early stage of my research, I felt doubtful about the authenticity of this tradition and
I thought it carried a great threat to those who are not in agreement with Ali and Ahl al-Bayt,
especially when the tradition does not allow any scope for interpretation. I became rather worried
when I read the book "Al- lsabah" in which Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani gives the following commentary
on the tradition: ". . .I based the tradition on what Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharibi had said, and he is
feeble." In fact Ibn Hajar removed some of the doubt that remained in my minds for I thought that
Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharihi fabricated the tradition and could not be a reliable transmitter. But
Allah - Praise be to Him the Most High - wanted to show me the whole truth. I read a hook
entitled Ideological discussions on the writings of Ibrahim al-Jabhan [110]. This book clarified the
situation and it became apparent to me that Yahya ibn Ya'la al-Muharibi was a reliable transmitter
of Hadith and the two Shaykhs, Muslim and al-Bukhari. depended on what he transmitted. I
myself followed his case and found that al-Bukhari cited a few traditions transmitted by him
regarding the batttle of al-Hudaybiyah, and they were put in Volume 3, Page 31. Muslim also cited
a few traditions in his Sahih Volume 5 in a chapter entitled "The Boundaries" Page 119. Even
al-Dhahabi, with all his restrictions, considered him a reliable transmitter, together with the Imams
of al-Jurh and al-Ta'deel (criteria applied to Hadiths to find out the reliable and unreliable
transmitter), and of course the two Shaykhs [Muslim and al-Bukhari] used him as a reliable
reference. So why all this intrigue, falsification and deception about a man who was considered to
be a reliable transmitter by the authors of al-Sihah? Is it because he told the truth regarding the
necessity to follow Ahl al-Bayt, and was therefore branded by Ibn Hajar as feeble and weak?

[110]Mubaqasha Aqa diyya fi Maqdat Ibrahim al Jabhan, p 29

It seems that Ibn Hajar was unaware of the fact that his writings would become subject to the
security of some highly dedicated scholars and that he would be accountable to them for all what
he had written. These scholars were able to uncover his prejudice and ignorance because they
were guided by the light of the Prophet and Ahl al-Bayt.

I realized later that some of our scholars try hard to cover the truth so that the affairs of the
Companions and the caliphs, who were considered to be their leaders and mentors, remain
unknown. We see them trying to interpret the correct tradition in their own ways and give them
different meanings, or they deny the traditions that contradict their creed, even if they were
mentioned in their own books and Sihahs. At times they remove half or one-third of the prophetic
tradition to replace it with something else! Or they may throw doubts about the reliable narrators
[of the tradition] because they raise issues that are not to their liking, and on a few occasions they
publish them in the first edition [of a book] but remove it from the subsequent editions without
giving any indication to justify their action, in spite of the full knowledge of the intelligent readers as
to why the saying has been removed!

I have become aware of all these things after conducting meticulous research and investigation, and
I have convincing proof to support what I am saying. I wish they would stop giving me all these
excuses to justify the actions of those Companions who turned back on their heels, because their
views seem to contradict each other and contradict the historical fact. I wish they would follow the
just path, even if it was a bitter one, then they would leave their minds and the minds of others in
peace.

They claim that some of the early Companions were not reliable transmitters of the Prophet's
tradition, therefore they removed what they did not like, especially if these traditions included some
of the last instructions of the Messenger of Allah before his death.

Al-Bukhari and Muslim both write about the fact that the Messenger of Allah advised three things
on his death-bed:

Remove all the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula
Reward the delegation in the same way as I have done and the narrator then said, "I forgot
the third." [111]

[111]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 7 p 121
Sahih, Muslim, vol 5 p 75

It is possible that those Companions who were present at the death-bed and heard the three
instructions forgot the third one, when we know that they used to learn by heart a whole epic after
hearing it once? No. It is politics that forced them to forget it and not to mention it again. This is
indeed another of those comedies organized by the Companions, because there is no doubt vhat
the first instruction of the Messenger of Allah was to appoint Ali as his successor, but the narrator
did not recite it.

The person who is involved with the investigation about this issue will inevitably sense the
undoubtable recommendation for the succession of Ali despite all the attempts to cover it or to
remove it. Al-Bukhari cited it in his Sahih in a chapter entitled "Al-Wasaya" [The Legacies or the
Recommendations], Muslim also cited it in his Sahih and said that the Prophet recommended Ali
for the succession in the presence of Aisha [112]. Look how Allah shows His light even if the
oppressors try to cover it.

[112]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 3 p 68
Sahih, Muslim, vol 2 p 14

I repeat here what I said before; if those Companions were not reliable enough to transmit the
recommendations of the Messenger of Allah, then we cannot blame the followers and those who
came after them.

If Aisha, the mother of the faithful, could not bear mentioning the name of Ali and could not wish
him any good - as Ibn Sa'd writes in his Tabaqat [113], and al-Bukhari in his Sahih in a chapter
entitled "The illness of the Prophet and his death", and if she prostrated herself to thank Allah when
she heard the news of Ali's death, then how can we expect her to mention the recommendation in
favour of Ali, when she was known, publicly and privately, for her animosity and hatred towards
Ali and his sons and towards all the Family of the Prophet. Behold! There is no might or power
except in Allah the Most High, the Great.

[113]Tabaqat, Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 29

Our misfortune regarding Ijtihad against the texts

I gathered through my research that the misfortune which has befallen the Islamic nation has been
due to the Companions' interpretation of Islam against the clear texts. Thus they violated the
ordinances of Allah and obliterated the Tradition, and the religious scholars and leaders who
followed their example often contradicted the Prophetic Texts if they did not comply with what one
of the Companions had done before them. At times they even contradicted the Qur'anic Texts, and
I am not exaggerating here, and I mentioned earlier in this book the case concerning the
"al-Tayammum" verse. Despite the fact that there is a clear text in the Book of Allah as well as in
the Messenger's tradition about Tayammum, they still took the liberty of interpreting it, and said
that one should abandon the prayers if there was no water. Abdullah ibn Umar justified this
interpretation in the way we have encountered elsewhere in this hook.

One of the first Companions to open the door of Ijtihad [interpretation] was the second Caliph
who used his discretion vis-a-vis the Qur'anic Texts after the death of the Messenger of Allah
(saw) to stop the shares of those whose hearts inclined (to truth), although Allah had made its
payment compulsory out of the Zakat, and said, "We do not need you."

As for his interpretation of the Prophetic texts, they are numerous, and on many occasions he
contradicted the Prophet himself when he was alive. We have indicated in another chapter his
opposition during the peace treaty of al-Hudaybiah, and how strongly he opposed the writing of
the Messenger's last recommendation and said that the Book of Allah was sufficient. There is
another incident involving the Messenger of Allah and Umar which shows clearly the latter's
mentality and how he allowed himself to argue and oppose the Messenger. The incident was about
spreading the good news of Heavens. The Messenger of Allah sent Abu Hurayrah with the
instruction that whenever he met a man who is absolutely convinced that "There is no other god but
Allah" he was to give him the good news that he would end up in Heaven. Abu Hurayrah duly
went out to spread the good news until he met Umar who prevented him from continuing his
mission and beat him as he lay on the ground. Abu Hurayrah went back crying to the Messenger
of Allah and told him about his encounter with Umar, so the Messenger asked Umar, "What made
you do that?" Umar replied by asking the question,"Did you send him to spread the good news of
Heaven to whoever convincingly believes that there is no other god but Allah!" The Messenger of
Allah said, "Yes." Umar then said, "Do not do that, because I fear that all the people will rely on
there is no other god but Allah."

We also have his son Abdullah ibn Umar who feared that people would rely on al-Tayammum, so
he ordered them to abandon the prayers. I wish they had left the texts as they are and that they
had not changed them with their futile interpretations which could only lead to the eradication of the
Islamic laws, the violation of Allah's sanctity and the division of this nation into various creeds and
warring factions.

Looking at the various stances that Umar took regarding the Messenger of Allah and his Tradition
we could deduce that he never believed in the infallibility of the Messenger; and he thought of him
as any other man subject to right or wrong. Thus came the opinion adopted by the Sunni scholars
and al-Jamaah that the Messenger of Allah was infallible as regards the transmitting the Holy
Qur'an, but that apart from that he was like any other human being, sometimes wrong and
sometimes right.

Some ignorant people claim that the Messenger of Allah (saw) accepted the temptations of the
devil in his home. Once he was lying on his back surrounded by women playing their tambourines
and the devil sat joyfully next to him until Umar came, then the devil ran away and the women hid
their tambourines under their seats. The Prophet said to Umar, "As soon as the devil saw you, he
left by a different way from the way you came in."

It is not therefore surprising that Umar has his own views on the religion and allowed himself to
argue with the Messenger of Allah about political issues as well as religious ones, as we explained
before regarding the good news about Heaven. From the idea of Ijtihad and using one's own
opinion vis-a-vis the texts, a group of Companions, led by Umar ibn al-Khattab, started gathering
force, and we saw on "The Day of Misfortune" how they supported Umar's point of view rather
than the clear text. We can then also deduce that it was the same group that did not accept the
"al-Ghadir" text in which the Prophet (saw) made it clear that Ali would be his caliph [successor]
over all the Muslims, and that they waited for the right opportunity to reject it when the Prophet
died. The meeting at "al-Saqeefah" and the subsequent election of Abu Bakr was a result of that
Ijtihad, and when they completed their control over the affairs, people started to forget about the
Prophetic texts regarding the succession to the caliphate and started to interpret everything. They
challenged the Book of Allah, they violated the boundaries and changed the rules. There was the
tragedy of Fatimah al-Zahra after the tragedy of her husband and his removal from the caliphate.
There was also the tragedy in the payment of Zakat and the interpretation of that case despite the
clear texts. Then came the succession of Umar to the caliphate which was an inevitable result of
Ijtihad, because Abu Bakr implemented his own interpretation of the situation and dropped the
Shura [the consultative council] which always used to help him with the running of the caliphate's
affairs. After that Umar came and made things even worse, he permitted things which were
forbidden by Allah and His Messenger [114] and forbade what Allah and His Messenger had
permitted [115].

[114]As in the case of the divorce by three times Muslim, Sahih, Chapter on the divorce by three
times Sunan, Abi Dawood, vol 1 p 344
[115]As in the case of his prohibition of Muta al Hajj and Muta al Nisa Sahih, Muslim, Chapter
on Hajj Sahih, Bukhari, Section on al Hajj Chapter on al-Tamattu

When Uthman came to power after Umar, he went a long way in al-Ijtihad, and did more than any
on his predecessors had done, until his opinions started to affect political and religious life
generally, thus leading to the revolution, and he paid with his life as a price for his Ijtihad.

When Imam Ali took charge of the Muslims' affairs he encountered great difficulties in trying to
persuade people to go back to the honourable Prophetic Tradition and the Holy Qur'an, and tried
his best to rid Islam from all the new innovations, but some people shouted loudly, "Behold!
Umar's Tradition!"

I am convinced that those who fought and contradicted Imam Ali (as) did so because he forced
them to go back to the correct texts. Thus he eradicated all the new innovations and interpretations
that had been attached to the religion for the previous quarter of a century to which people had
become accustomed, especially those who had their own whims and greeds and who used the
wealth of Allah and the people for their own ends, and deprived the ordinary folks of the basic
rights of Islam.

We always find that self-opinionated individuals tend to favour Ijtihad because it allows them to
reach their end by any means to hand, and the texts appear as barriers in their way and prevent
them from achieving their goals.

It is worth noting here that Ijtihad may have its followers among the ordinary people, at any time
and at any place simply because it is easy to implement and has no firm commitments .

Because the text demands commitments and lacks freedom, politicians tend to call it theocracy,
which means the rule of Allah; but Ijtihad, with its freedom and its lack of commitment, is called
democracy, meaning the rule of people. The men who met in al-Saqeefah after the death of the
Prophet (saw) decided to abolish the theocratic government which was established by the
Messenger of Allah on the basis of the Qur'anic texts, and changed it to a democratic government
chosen by the people. However, these Companions were not aware of the word "democracy", for
it is not an Arabic word, but they knew the "Shura" system [116].

[116]In fact such thing doesn't happen even in this type of election, because those who are
elected are not entitled to represent any nation, in any form.

Those who do not at present accept the text regarding the succession to the caliphate are the
proud supporters of "democracy", claiming that Islam was the first to adopt such a system, and
they are the supporters of Ijtihad and reforms, and today they are considered to be the nearest
possible thing to the western system, and that is why the western governments glorify them and call
them the progressive and tolerant Muslims.

The Shiites, who support theocracy or the government of Allah, refuse Ijtihad vis-a-vis the text,
and differentiate between the rule of Allah and the Shura. They do not see any connection between
the Shura and the Texts, but their main concern is about Ijtihad and the Shura in issues that do not
have texts.

We see that Allah - praise be to Him - chose His Messenger Muhammad but He still said to him:
"And consult them about the matter" (Holy Qur an 3:159).

As for the choice of the leaders of the people, Allah said: "And your Lord creates and chooses
whom He pleases, to choose is not theirs" (Holy Qur'an 28:68). When the Shiites advocate for the
succession of Ali to the caliphate after the Messenger of Allah, they are actually committing
themselves to the text, and when they discredit some of the Companions, they do it with regard to
a few who replaced the text with Ijtihad and thus lost the rule of Allah and His Messenger and
opened a wound in Islam that has not yet healed.

As a result we find the western governments and their thinkers despise the Shiites and call them
religious fanatics and reactionaries because they want to go back to the Qur'an which rules that the
thief should have his hands cut off, and the adulterer should be stoned, and urge people to go and
fight in the name of Allah, but all that is haughtiness and barbarism, as far as they are concerned.

Throughout this study I started to comprehend the reason why some of the religious leaders of the
Sunni tradition and al-Jamaah closed the gate of Ijtihad as far back as the second Hijri century.
Perhaps they predicted the repercussions of Ijtihad on the Islamic nation from misfortunes to
bloody civil wars, and how it would change a nation, about which Allah said, "You are the best
nation that has come out to the people" to a nation of warring factions where anarchy rules and
eventually turns from Islam to the Jahiliya [pre-Islamic period].

Ijtihad continued with the Shiites, as long as the texts remained intact and nobody could change
them, and what helped them in that was the Twelve Imams who inherited their grandfather's
knowledge, and used to say that there was no problem that did not have Allah as its judge and that
the Messenger of Allah (saw) had made it clear.

We also understand that when the Sunni traditionists and al-Jamaah followed the Companions who
undertook Ijtihad and prevented the writing of the prophetic tradition found themselves compelled,
due to the absence of the texts, to use personal interpretation, Qiyas [analogy], Istishab
[association], as well as closing the field of Dhara'i [pretext] and many other measures.

We also understand that the Shiites gathered around Imam Ali, who was the gate to the city of
knowledge, and he used to say to them, "Ask me about anything, for the Messenger of Allah
taught me about one thousand [doors] of knowledge, each one of which opens one thousand more
doors." [117]. But the non-Shiites gathered around Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan who knew little about
the Prophetic Tradition.

[117]Tarikh Dimashq, Ibn Asakir, vol 2 p 484
Maqt al Husayn, al Khawarizmi, vol 1 p 38
al Ghadir, al Amini, vol 3 p 120

After the death of Imam Ali. the leader of the unjust faction became the commander of the
believers, and he abused Islam through the implementation of his own personal opinions, which
caused more damage to Islam than anybody else before him. But the Sunni traditionists and
al-Jamaah say that he was "The writer of the Revelations", and that he was one of the outstanding
scholars in the interpretation of Islam. How could they judge him like that when he was the one
who poisoned al-Hasan ibn Ali, leader of Heaven's youth? Perhaps they say, "This was an aspect
of his Ijtihad [interpretation], but he got it wrong!"

How could they judge his Ijtihad, when he was the one who took the nation's acclamation for
himself by force, then gave it to his son Yazid after him, and changed the Shura system to a
hereditary one?

How could they judge his Ijtihad and give him a reward, when he was the one who forced people
to curse Ali and Ahl al-Bayt, the offspring of the Prophet, in every mosque, so that it became a
followed tradition for sixty years?

And how could they call him "The writer of the Revelations" since the revelation came upon the
Messenger of Allah (saw) for twenty-three years, and Muawiyah was a polytheist for the first
eleven years of them, and later, when he was converted to Islam, did not live in Medina (for we
could not find any historical reference to support that), whereas the Messenger of Allah (saw) did
not live in Mecca after al-Fath [the conquer of Mecca by the Muslims]? So how could Muawiya
manage to write the Revelation?

Behold! There is no power except in Allah, the Most High, the Great. And the question comes
back, yet again: which group was right and which one was wrong? Either Ali and his followers
were wrong or Muawiyah and his followers were wrong.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) explained everything. but some of those who claim to follow the
tradition got it wrong, for it has become apparent to me through the research that the people who
defend Muawiyah could only be the followers of Muawiyah and the Umayyads and not, as they
claim, the followers of the Prophetic Tradition [Sunnah]. If we observe their positions, we find that
they hate the followers of Ali, and celebrate the Day of Ashura as being a festival and defend the
Companions who hurt the Messenger of Allah during his lifetime and after his death, and always
correct their mistakes and find justifications for their actions.

How could you love Ali and Ahl al-Bayt and at the same time you bless their enemies and their
killers? How could you love Allah and His Messenger and at the same time defend those who
changed the rules of Allah and His Messenger and interpret these rules in their own way?

How could you respect those who did not respect the Messenger of Allah and accused him of
Hajr and criticized his leadership?

How could you follow religious leaders that have been appointed by the Umayyads and the
Abbasids for political reasons, and leave other religious leaders although the Messenger of Allah
pointed out their number [118] and their names [119].

[118]Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 164
Sahih, Muslim, p 119
[119]Yanibul Muwaddah, al Qunduzi al Hanafi

How could you follow somebody who did not know the Prophet very well and leave the gate to
the city of knowledge, whose relation to the Messenger was the same as the position of Harun to
Musa?

Who was the first to use the term Ahl al-Sunnah [Sunni Traditions] and al-Jamaah? I have
searched through the history books and found that they agreed to call the year in which Muawiyah
seized power "the year of al-Jamaah". It was called thus because the nation became divided into
two factions after the death of Uthman: The Shia of Ali and the followers of Muawiyah. When
Imam Ali was martyred and Muawiyah seized power after his pact with Imam Hasan which
enabled him to become commander of the believers the years was then called "al-Jamaah".
Therefore the name Ahl al-Sunnah [Sunnah Traditionists], and al-Jamaah indicates the Sunnah
[tradition] of Muawiyah, and the agreement on his leadership, and does not mean the followers of
the Sunnah [tradition] of the Messenger of Allah.

The Imams and other members of Ahl al-Bayt, who are the descendants of the Messenger of
Allah, know more than anybody else about the Sunnah [tradition] of their grandfather and what it
entails, for as the proverb goes. The people of Mecca know its paths better than anyone else. But
we opposed the Twelve Imams whom the Messenger of Allah mentioned in his sayings and
followed their enemies. Despite our acknowledgement of the tradition in which the Messenger of
Allah mentioned twelve caliphs, all of them from Quraysh, we always stop at the four caliphs.
Perhaps it was Muawiyah who called us Ahl al-Sunnah and al-Jamaah, meaning the agreement on
his Sunnah [tradition] in which he made it compulsory to curse Ali and Ahl al-Bayt. This continued
for sixty years until Umar ibn Abdul Aziz - may Allah be pleased with him - stopped it. Some
historians inform us that the Umayyads themselves plotted to kill Umar ibn Abdul Aziz, and he was
one of them, because he killed the Sunnah, which was the cursing of Ali ibn Abi Talib.

O my people! Let us go - guided by Allah, the Most High - and search for the truth and rid
ourselves from that blind prejudice, because we are the victims of the Abbasids and the victims of
the dark history and the intellectual barrenness which we have been subjected to for a long time.
Undoubtedly we are the victims of the cunning and the shrewdness of people like Muawiyah, Amr
ibn al-As, al-Mughirah ibn Sh'bah and others. Research into our Islamic history in order to reach
the absolute truth and Allah will reward you twice. Let us hope that we can unite this nation which
was stricken by the death of its Prophet and then became divided into seventy-three factions.

Let us unite this nation under the banner of "There is no other god but Allah, and Muhammad is the
Messenger of Allah" and to follow Ahl al-Bayt, whom the Messenger of Allah commanded us to
follows and said, "Do not be in front of them, for you will perish, and do not keep away from
them, for you will perish, and do not teach them, for they know more than you do?" [120]

[120]al Durr al Manthur, Suyuti, vol 2 p 60
Usd al Ghabah, vol 3 p 137
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p 148, 226
Kanz al Ummal, vol 1 p 168
Majma az Zawaid, vol 9 p 163

If we do that, Allah will lift His anger from us, and He will change our fear to peace and tranquillity.
and will enable us to rule on this earth, and will make His friend Imam al-Mahdi - may peace be
upon him - appear to us, since the Messenger of Allah promised us with his re-appearance to fill
the earth with peace and justice after it had been filled with injustice and oppression ... thus Allah
will complete, through him, the enlightment of the whole world.

An Invitation to friends to join the Research

The change was the beginning of a spiritual happiness for me, and I sensed an inner silence with
great joy for the right creed that I had discovered, and had no doubt that it was the true Islam. I
felt ecstatic and proud of myself for what Allah had granted me from His guidance and direction. I
could not bear the silence and the secrecy about what was going on inside me, and I said to
myself, "I have got to tell the truth to people." "Talk about the graces of your Lord", and it is one of
the greatest graces, or indeed, it is the greatest grace in this world and the life hereafter, and "he
who keeps silent about the truth is a dumb devil" and "after the truth there is nothing to go astray "

What made me convinced that I should spread this truth was the innocence of those Sunni
traditionists and al-Jamaah who love the Messenger of Allah and Ahl al-Bayt, and all what needs
to be done is to remove that mist which was made by history and then they would follow the right
path, and that is what happened to me personally.

Allah, the Most High, said, "... You too were such before, then Allah conferred on you a
benefit" (Holy Qur'an 4:94).

Within a month we finished the book, and the three friends were enlightened and I supported them
and helped them along the way and gave them all that I had accumulated from experience and
knowledge during the years of investigation. I started to taste the sweetness of guidance and
became very hopeful about the future. Frequently, I invited friends from Gafsa who I used to know
through the mosque's school or the Sufi orders in addition to some of my faithful students. A year
passed, and praise be to Allah, we became a large number. We were all friends of Ahl al-Bayt.
We are the friends of their friends, and the enemy of their enemies, we celebrate their festivals and
mourn during Ashura.

Two of my early letters which carried the news of my enlightenment were sent to al-Sayyid
al-Khu'i and al-Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, during the festivity of al-Ghadir, which we
celebrated for the first time in Gafsa. Everybody got to know about my conversion to Shiism and
that I was calling people to follow Ahl al-Bayt, and all sorts of accusations and rumours started to
go around the country. I was accused of being an Israeli spy working to make people doubt their
religion, that I cursed the Companions and was planning to cause disturbances among the people
... etc. In the capital Tunis I approached two friends, Rashid al-Ghannushi and Abdul Fattah
Moro, who expressed strong opposition to my ideas. and in a conversation that took place in
Abdul Fattah's house I said that as Muslims, we ought to re-read our hooks and look again at our
history, and I gave Sahih al-Bukhari as an example, for it contains materials that any sensible
person would find difficult to accept. They became very angry with me and said, "Who are you to
criticize al-Bukhari?" I did my best to persuade them to be involved in the research, but they
refused, saying, "If you yourself have become Shii, that is your business, but do not try to convert
us to Shiism. We have a more important task than that: namely to resist the government which
does not work according to Islam."

I answered by saying, "What is the use? If you come to power, you will do more than they are
doing now, because you do not know the true Islam." Thus our meeting ended with a state of
aversion between us.

Some people from The Muslims Brotherhood ran a campaign against us, because they were not
aware at that time of the Islamic Trend Movement, and started to spread rumours among their
ranks that I was a government agent and that I was encouraging Muslims to doubt their religion in
order to keep them away from the main issue: namely resisting the government.

Gradually people started to make us feel isolated, especially the young members of the Muslims
Brotherhood and the Shaykhs who follow Sufi ways, and we experienced difficult times, living like
strangers in our own homes and among our own brothers. But Allah - praise be to Him - changed
our situation for the better, and many young people from various cities came to see us to
investigate the truth, and I tried my utmost to persuade them, and as a result many young men were
able to see the light; they were from Tunis, Kayrawan, Susa and Sidi Bu Zayd. During my summer
visit to Iraq I travelled through Europe and met friends in France and Holland and discussed the
subject with them, and praise be to Allah, they too saw the light.

I was absolutely delighted when I met al-Sayyid Muhammad al-Sadr at his house in Holy Najaf
where he was surrounded by a group of learned people. He introduced me to them as being the
seeds of Shi'ism (following Ahl al-Bayt) in Tunis. He also told them that he had cried when he first
received my letter which carried the news that we had celebrated the festival of al-Ghadir, and
how I complained about the difficulties we were facing including malicious rumours and isolation.

Al-Sayyid said: It is inevitable that we pass through difficult times because the path of Ahl al-Bayt
is a difficult one. A man once came to see the Prophet (s.a.w.) and said to him, "O Messenger of
Allah, I love you." He replied, "Then expect many tribulations. " The man said, "I love your cousin
Ali." He replied, "Then expect many enemies." The man said, "I love al-Hasan and al-Husayn. " He
replied, "Then get ready for poverty and much affliction." What have we paid for the cause of
justice for which Abu Abdullah al-Husayn (as) paid his life and the lives of his family's members
and companions; and for which the Shiis along the path of history have paid and are still paying up
to the present day as a price for their allegiance to Ahl al-Bayt? My Brother, it is inevitable that we
go through difficulties and give sacrifices for the cause of justice, and if Allah helped you in guiding
one man to the right path, it is worth the whole world and what is within it.

Al-Sayyid al-Sadr also advised me against isolating ourselves and ordered me to get even closer
to my Sunni brothers whenever they wanted to keep away from me, and to pray behind them so
that there would be no rupture in relations, and to consider them innocent victims of distorted
history and bad propaganda, because people are the enemy of what they do not know.

Al-Sayyid al-Khu'i also advised me on the same lines, and al-Sayyid Muhammad Ali al-Tabatabai
al-Hakim had always sent us letters full of advice that had a great influence on enlightened
brothers.

My visits to the Holy City of Najaf and its learned people became more frequent, and I committed
myself to spend each summer holiday near Imam Ali and attend the lessons of al-Sayyid
Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, from which I reaped great benefits. I also promised myself to visit the
graves of all the twelve Imams. and Allah helped me to realize my wish for I was even able to visit
the grave of al-Imam al-Rida which is situated in Mashhad, on the borders between the U.S.S.R.
and Iran. There I met some of the most outstanding scholars, from whom I benefited a great deal.

Al-Sayyid al-Khu'i, whom we follow in our religious affairs, gave me permission to use Khums and
Zakat to help our enlightened group, and to give them what they needed regarding books and
grants and many other things. I also was able to establish a small library which contained some
important references connected with the research which belonged to both parties [Sunnis and
Shiis]. I called it "Ahl al-Bayt Library" and benefited many people, praise be to Allah.

Fifteen years ago Allah doubled my joy when the clerk to the city council of Gafsa agreed to
naming the street where I live "Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (as) Street". I would like to take this
opportunity to thank him for that honourable gesture, for he is one of the hard-working Muslims
and has a great respect and love for Imam Ali, and I presented him with "al-Murajaat" by Sharaf
al-Din. He and our group have mutual respect and love for each other, so may Allah reward him
well and grant him whatever he wishes.

There were some wicked people who tried to remove the street's sign, but all their attempts were
in vain. and Allah willed it to stay where it was, and we received letters from all over the world
carrying the name of Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib's street, whose honourable name blessed our good
city.

In accordance with the advice of Ahl al-Bayt (as) and the advice of the learned scholars of the
holy city of Najaf we are determined to keep in touch with our brothers from the other madhahibs
and have maintained our relation with al-Jamaah by praying together. Thus people started asking
us about our prayers, ablution and our beliefs.

The Guidance of Truth

In a small village in the south of Tunisia, during a wedding ceremony, an old lady sat in the middle
of a group of ladies listening to them talking about a married couple. The lady expressed her
astonishment about what she heard, and when she was asked why, she said that she had
breast-fed both when they were babies. The ladies spread the news quickly among their husbands
who investigated the matter. The woman's father testified that the old lady had actually breast-fed
his daughter, and the man's father also testified that his son was breast-fed by the same old lady.

Inevitably the two tribes were agitated by the news and started fighting each other, and each tribe
accused the other of being the cause of this tragedy which would bring the wrath of Allah on them.
What made it worse was the fact that that marriage had taken place ten years earlier and had
produced three children. As soon as the woman heard the news she fled to her father's house and
refused to eat or drink anything, and she attempted suicide for she could not bear the shock of
being married to her brother and giving birth to three children without knowing the real situation.

As a result of the clashes between the two tribes, many people were injured until one particular
Shaykh intervened and stopped the fighting and advised them to consult the learned scholars and
ask them for their opinion in the matter and hopefully they could reach a solution.

The people concerned embarked on their journey around the big town asking the learned people
for a solution to their problems. However every time they explained the case to a learned scholar
and asked him for advice, he told them that the marriage was void and the couple should be
separated for as long as they lived, in addition to freeing a slave or fasting for two months and
various other legal opinions.

Eventually they arrived at Gafsa and asked the learned people there but the answer was the same,
because all the Malikis prohibit the marriage between a couple if they were fed even one drop of
milk from the same woman. They do so by following Imam Malik who treated milk and alcohol on
the same level and said, "When a great quantity of whatever makes you drunk is prohibited, then a
small amount of it must also be prohibited." Thus, marriage between a couple who were breast-fed
with one drop of milk from the same woman must be prohibited. One of the men who was present
at the hearing told them privately to come and see me, and he said to them, "Ask al-Tijani on these
matters for he knows all the Madhhabs, and on many occasions I had seen him arguing with these
learned scholars and beating them with his logical reasoning."

That is what the husband of that woman told me when I took him to my library where he told me
the whole case in detail, and said to me, "Sir, my wife wants to commit suicide and our boys are
neglected and we do not know how we can solve this problem, and people led us to you hoping
that you might have an answer to our problem, especially since I see all these books in your
possession, which I have never seen before in my life".

I brought him some coffee and thought about the case for a little while then I asked him about the
number of times that he was breast-fed from that old woman. He said, "I do not know, but my
wife was breast-fed by her twice or three times and her father testified that he took his daughter
two or three times to that old woman."

I said if that is right, then there is no problem and your marriage is legal and valid." The poor man
fell on me kissing my hands and head, saying, ' May Allah bring you good news for you opened
the gates of peace to me." Before even finishing his coffee or asking me for any reference, he
asked permission to leave my house and hurriedly went out to tell his wife and children and the rest
of his family about the good news.

But the day after he came back with seven men and introduced them to me saying, "This is my
father, this is my father-in-law, the third is the mayor of the village, the fourth is the Imam of the
Friday prayers, the fifth is the religious adviser, the sixth is the chief of the tribe and the seventh is
the headmaster of the school, and all of them came to investigate the case of the breast-feeding
and how you considered the marriage to be valid."

I took the whole party to the library, and greeted them and offered them coffee for I expected a
lengthy debate with them.

They said, "We came to discuss with you how you legalized a marriage in which the couple were
breast-fed from the same woman. Such a marriage has been forbidden by Allah in the Qur'an and
by His Messenger who said that it [marriage] is forbidden between a couple who have been
breast-fed (by the same woman) in the same way as it is forbidden between a couple who are
related (brother and sister). Imam Malik has forbidden it too."

I said, "Gentlemen, you are eight and I am one, and if I speak to all of you, I will not be able to
convince you and the discussion might well lose its aim. I suggest you choose one man from among
you to discuss the matter with me, and you will act as an arbitrator between us."

They liked the idea and chose the religious advisor as their representative because they thought he
was more knowledgeable and more able than anybody else. The man started his deliberation by
asking me how I allowed something that had been forbidden by Allah, His Messenger and by all
the Imams.

I said, "God forbid! I never did such thing. But Allah forbade the marriage [in case of common
breast-feeding] by stating it briefly in a Qur'anic verse and did not specify the details, rather, He
left it to His Messenger to explain how and how much."

He said, "Imam Malik forbids the marriage when one drop of milk has been taken through
breast-feeding."

I said, "I know that. But Imam Malik is not an absolute authority over all Muslims, and what do
you say about the opinions of other Imams?"

He said, "May Allah he pleased with them, they all followed the steps of the Messenger of Allah."

I said, "What is then your reasoning before Allah about following Imam Malik who contradicted a
text by the Messenger of Allah (saw)?"

He looked bemused and said, "Praise be to Allah! I did not know that Imam Malik could
contradict the Prophetic texts.

The rest of the men looked even more puzzled and were amazed at my daring criticism of Imam
Malik, which they had never heard before. I continued by asking, "Was Imam Malik one of the
Companions?"

He replied, "No." I asked, "Was he one of the Followers?" He replied, "No, but he followed the
earlier Followers." I asked, "Who is nearer, him or Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib?" He replied, "Imam Ali
ibn Abi Talib was one of the rightly guided caliphs." One of the men added, "Our master Ali (a.s.)
is the gate to the city of knowledge." I said, "Why did you leave the gate to the city of knowledge
and follow a man who was neither a Companion nor a Follower, and he was born after the civil
war and after the city of the Messenger of Allah had been sacked by Yazid's forces who killed the
best of the Companions and violated all aspects of human morality and changed the Messenger's
tradition to some heretical doctrines of their own make. How could then for any man have
confidence in these Imams who pleased the authorities because they preached in accordance to
their policies?"

Another man started talking saying, "We heard that you are a Shii, and that you worship Imam
Ali." His friend who sat next to him kicked him and said, "Be quiet, are you not ashamed of
yourself saying that to such a learned man ? I have known many learned scholars in my life, but I
have never known any of them to possess a library like this one. Furthermore, this man's argument
is based on knowledge and he sounds sure about what he is saying." I answered, "Yes, that is
right, I am a Shii, but the Shiis do not worship Ali, but instead of following Imam Malik, they
follow Imam Ali because he is the gate to the city of knowledge, as you yourselves said.

The religious adviser asked, "Did Imam Ali permit the marriage between couples who have been
breast-fed by the same woman?"

I answered, "No, he forbids it if the babies were breast-fed fifteen full and consecutive times by the
same woman, or what could produce flesh and bone."

The woman's father was very pleased to hear what I had said, and his face lit then he said, "Praise
be to Allah! My daughter was breast-fed on two or three occasions by that old woman. The
saying of Imam Ali is a solution to our predicament and a mercy on us from Allah after we had lost
hope."

The religious adviser said, "Give us the authentic reference to the saying [of Imam Ali] so that we
may feel satisfied. I gave them "Minhaj al-Salihin" by al-Sayyid al-Khu'i, and he read aloud the
chapter concerning breast-feeding and what it entails.

The men were very pleased, especially the husband, who was afraid that I might not have the
reference. They asked me to lend them the book so they could take it to their village and use it as
a reference for their reasoning. I lent them the book, then they left me full of praises and apologies.

As soon as they left my house they met a sinister man who took them to some wicked religious
leaders and they for their part frightened them and warned them that I was an "Israeli agent" and
that the book "Minhaj al-Salihin" was all lies, that the people of Iraq were blasphemous and
hypocrites, that the Shiis were "Majus" who permitted the marriage between brothers and sisters
and that was why I allowed that man to continue with his marriage to his "sister" - having been
breast-fed by the same woman. In the end they persuaded the men to change their minds and
forced the husband to take legal action with regard to his divorce in Gafsa's Magistrate court. The
judge asked them to go to the Capital Tunis and approach the Mufti of the Republic, for he might
have a solution to the problem. The husband left for the Capital and waited there for a whole
month until he was able to have an interview with him.

During the interview the husband explained the case in detail then the Mufti asked him about the
religious scholars who accepted the marriage as being correct and legal. He told him that none of
them thought so except one called al-Tijani al-Samawi. Al-Mufti took a note of my name and said
to the husband, "Go back to your village and I shall write to the judge in Gafsa."

Shortly after that a letter from the Mufti of the Republic arrived, and the husband's lawyer read it
and found that the Mufti ruled that the marriage was void.

The husband who looked very tired and exhausted, was informed by his lawyer about the content
of the letter. He later came to see me and apologized for all the inconveniences that he had caused
me.

I thanked him for his feelings towards me, but expressed my surprise regarding the Mufti's rule to
consider the marriage in this case as void. I also asked him to bring the Mufti's letter to the
Magistrate court in Gafsa so that I could publish it in the Tunisian press and show that the
Republic's Mufti did not really know much about the four Islamic Madhhabs and did not
understand the jurisdical difference between them regarding the issue of brotherhood by
breast-feeding.

However, the husband told me that he could not see the file on his case, and therefore was unable
to bring me the letter, then he departed.

A few days later I received an invitation from the judge asking me to bring the book and other
proofs that allow the marriage between two people who have been breast-fed by the same
woman. I chose a number of references and prepared the chapters regarding brotherhood by
breast-feeding, so that I could produce the evidence quickly.

I went to the court at the agreed time and I was received by the clerk who took me to the judge's
office, and I was surprised to see the District Magistrate and the Republic's Attorney as well as
three other judges. I noticed that the judges were wearing their official regalia, as if they were
sitting to pass judgement, I also noticed that the husband was sitting at the end of the court room,
facing the judges.

I greeted everyone, but they looked at me with disdain, and when I sat the chief judge asked mew
"Are you al-Tijani al-Samawi?" I answered, Yes He asked, "Are you the one who passed a
judgement in which you legalized the marriage in this case?"

I answered, "No I did not pass a judgement, rather, the Imams and the religious scholars of Islam
passed that judgement by accepting the marriage as being correct and legal."

He said, "That is why we summoned you, and you are now in the dock. If you cannot support
your claim with the appropriate proof, then we will have to send you to prison, and you will never
come out of here a free man."

I knew then that I was actually in the dock, not because I had passed a judgement on that
particular case, but because some of those sinister religious leaders had told the judges that I was a
troublemaker and that I cursed the Companions and campaigned for the support of Ahl al-Bayt.
The chief judge asked them to bring two witnesses against me then he would have the authority to
throw me in prison.

In addition to that, the Muslim Brotherhood took advantage of my judgement in this case and
spread rumours that I had legalized the marriages between brothers and sisters. and that is, as they
claimed, what the Shiis believe!

I became absolutely sure about that when the chief judge threatened to throw me in prison, so I
was left with nothing but to challenge him and to defend myself with all my courage, and I said to
the chief judge, "Can I speak frankly and without any fear?"

He replied, "Yes you can do that, for you have no lawyer."

I said, "First of all, I would like to say that I have not appointed myself to pass judgement [Fatwa]
but this is the woman's husband before you, so ask him. He came to my house and asked me, and
it was my duty to provide him with whatever information I had. I asked him how many times his
wife had been breast-fed by that old lady, and when he said that it was only on two occasions, I
gave him the answer according to Islamic law. I was not trying to interpret Islam, nor indeed was I
trying to legislate."

The chief judge said, "What a surprise! Now you claim that you know Islam and that we do not
know it!"

I replied, "God forbid! I did not mean that. But everyone here knows the Maliki Madhhab stops
here. What I did was to search in the other Islamic Madhahibs and find a solution to this case."

The chief judge asked, "Where did you find the solution?"

I said, "Sir, may I ask you a question before I answer?"

He replied. "Ask what you like."

I asked, "What do you say about the Islamic Madhahib?"

He replied, "They are all correct for they all follow the teachings of the Messenger of Allah, and
there is mercy in their differing."

I said, "Well, have mercy on this poor man [pointing to the woman's husband] who has been away
from his wife and children for the past two months, when one of the Islamic Madhahib has a
solution for his problem."

The chief judge reacted angrily, "Give us your proof and stop all this nonsense. We allowed you to
defend yourself now you have become a lawyer defending others."

I took from my briefcase a book entitled "Minhaj al-Salihin" by al- Sayyid al-Khu'i, and said, "This
is the Madhhab of Ahl al-Bayt, and in it there is the absolute proof."

He interjected by saying, "Forget about the Madhhab of Ahl al-Bayt, we do not know it, and we
do not believe in it." I was expecting such an answer, so I had brought with me, after having done
some research, a number of references from the Sunni Traditionists and al-Jamaah, and I arranged
them according to my knowledge. I put Sahih al-Bukhari in the first line, then Sahih Muslim then
"al-Fatawa" by Mahmoud Shaltoot then "Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid" by Ibn
Rushd then "Zad al-Maseer fi Ilm al-Tafseer" by Ibn al-Jawzi and many other Sunni references.

When the chief judge refused to look at al-Sayyid al-Khu'i's book, I asked him which books he
trusted.

He said, "Al-Bukhari and Muslim."

I took Sahih al-Bukhari and opened it at the specific page, then said, "Here you are Sir, read it."

He said, "You read it."

I read, "So and so told us that Aishah, the mother of the believers, said that the Messenger of
Allah (saw) in his lifetime only prohibited the marriage, if the couple were breast-fed on five
occasions or more by the same woman."

The chief judge took the book from me and read it himself then gave it to the Attorney General,
and he too read the Hadith then he passed the book to the other judges. In the meantime I showed
the chief judge Sahih al-Bukhari, pointing out to him the same Hadith, then I opened "al-Fatawa"
by al-Azhar's Shaykh Shaltoot who mentioned the differences between the Imams about
"breast-feeding" issue, some of them prohibited the marriage if the breast-feeding was on fifteen
occasions, others said seven or even five except Malik who contradicted the text and prohibited
the marriage if there had been one drop of milk taken by the couple from the same woman.
Shaltoot added, "I tend to favour the middle solution and say seven or more."

After having looked at the references, the chief judge turned to the woman's husband and said to
him, "Go now and bring your father-in-law to testify that your wife was breast-fed twice or three
times by the old woman, then you can take your wife with you today."

The poor man was delighted. The Attorney General and the other judges excused themselves and
left the court, and when I was alone with the chief judge he apologized to me and said, "Forgive
me for the wrong information I have been given about you, now I know that they are biased and
envious people who wish to harm you."

I was very glad to hear about that quick change of heart and said, "O, Sir, Praise be to Allah Who
made me victorious through you."

He said, "I heard that you have a great library, and have you got "Hayat al-Haywan al-Kubra" by
al-Damiri?"

I said, "Yes."

He asked, "Could you lend me the book, for I have been looking for it for the past two years?" I
said, "It is yours Sir, whenever you want it."

He said, "Have you got time to come to my library sometimes, so we could discuss various issues,
and hopefully I may benefit from you."

I said, "God forbid! I will benefit from you. You are more senior to me, both in age and in position.
However, I have four days off-duty during the week, and I am at your service then."

We agreed to meet every Saturday, for he did not have court hearings on that day. After he asked
me to leave with him the Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim and "al-Fatawa" by Mahmud Shaltoot
to copy the relevant texts from them, he stood up and saw me out of his office.

I came out full of joy and thanking Allah, praise be to Him for that moral victory. I entered the
court full of fear and threatened with imprisonment, but came out with the chief judge becoming a
good friend of mine and asking me to meet him for discussion so that he could benefit from me. It
is the grace of Ahl al-Bayt's way. It does not let down those people who keep to it, and it is a safe
refuge for whoever comes to it.

The woman's husband talked about what happened to the people of his village, and the news
spread to the neighbouring villages when the wife returned to her husband's house, and the case
ended with the marriage being legal. The people started saying that I was more knowledge able
than anybody even the Republic's Mufti.

The husband came to my house with a big car and invited me and my family to his village and told
me that the people there were waiting for me and they would slaughter three calves to celebrate
the occasion. I apologized to him for mot being able to accept his invitation because I was busy in
Gafsah and told him that I would visit them some other time if Allah wished.

The chief judge also talked to his friends and the case became famous. Thus, Allah prevailed on
the cunning of those wicked people, some of them came to apologize, others were enlightened by
Allah and became one of the faithful This is truly the grace of Allah. He gives it to whoever He
likes. Allah is the Most Gracious.

Our last word is to say: Thanks be to Allah, Lord Of Creation, and may Allah bless our master
Muhammad and his purified Household.

The References

Books of Tafsir

1. The Holy Qur'an.
2. The Tafsir of al-Tabari.
3. Al-Durr al-Manthur fi al-Tafsir bi al-Ma'thur by al-Suyuti.
4. Tafsir al-Mizan by al-Tabatabai
5. Al-Tafsir al-Kabir by al-Fakhr al-Razi.
6. Tafsir Ibn Kathir.
7. Zad al-Maseer fi Ilm al-Tafsir by Ign al-Jawzi.
8. Tafsir al-Qurtubi.
9. Shawahid al-Tanzil by al-Hasakani.
10. Al-Hawi Lil Fatawi by al-Suyuti.
11. Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur'an.

Books on Hadith

1. Sahih al-Bukhari.
2. Sahih Muslim.
3. Sahih al-Tirmidhi.
4. Sahih Ibn Majah.
5. Mustadrak al-Hakim.
6. Musnad al-Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal.
7. Sunan Abi Dawood.
8. Kanz al-Ummal.
9. Muwatta' al-Imam Malik.
10. Jami' al-Usul by Ibn al-Athir.
11. Al-Jami' al-Saghir and al-Jami' al-Kabir by al-Suyuti.
12. Minhaj aleSunnah by Ibn Taymiyah.
13. Majma al-Zawa'id by al-Haythami.
14. Kunuz al-Haqa'iq by al-Manawi.
15. Fath al-Bari fi Sharh al-Bukhari.

Books on History

1. Tarikh al-Umam wa al-Muluk by al-Tabari.
2. Tarikh al-Khulafa by al-Suyuti.
3. Tarikh al-Kamil by Tbn al-Athir.
4. Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir.
5. Tarikh al-Masudi [Muruj al-Dhahab].
6. Tarikh al-Ya'qubi.
7. Tarikh al-Khulafa by Ibn Qutaybah. Known as Al- Imamah wa al- Siyasah.
8. Tarikh Abi al-Fida'.
9. Tarikh Ibn al-Shuhnah.
10. Tarikh Baghdad.
11. Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa'd.
12. Maghazi al-Waqidi.
13. Sharh Nahj al-Balagha by Ibn Abi al-Hadid.

Books on Sirah

1. Sirat Ibn Hisham.
2. Al-Sirah al-Halabiyah.
3. Al-Isti'ab.
4. Al-Isabah fi Tamyeez al-Sahabah.
5. Usd al-Ghabah fi Ma'rifat al-Sahabah.
6. Hilyat al-Awlia by Abi Nu'aym.
7. Al-Ghadir fi al-Kitab wa al-Sunnah by al-Amini.
8. Al-Ta'rif by Ibn Tawus.
9. Al-Fitnah al-Kubra by Taha Husayn.
10. The Life of Muhammad by Muhammad Hasanain Haykal.
11. Al-Riyadh al-Nadirah by al-Tabari.
12. Al-Khilafah wa al-Mulk by Abu al-Aala al-Mawdudi.

Miscellaneous Books

1. Is'af al-Raghibeen.
2. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib.
3. Tadhkirat al-Khawass by Ibn al-Jawzi.
4. Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah by Ibn Kathir.
5. Sirr al-Alamin by al-Ghazali.
6. Al-Sawa'iqal-Muhriqah by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami.
7. Al-Manaqib by al-Khawarizmi.
8. Yanabi' al-Mawaddah by al-Qanduzi al-Hanafi.
9. Al-Nasswa al-Ijtihad by Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi.
10. Al-Muraja'at by Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi.
11. Al-Saqifah by Shaykh al-Muzaffar.
12. Fadak by al-Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr.
13. Al-Saddiq Abu Bakr by Hasanain Haykal.
14. Munaqashah'Aqaidiyya fi Maqalat Ibrahim al-Jabhan.
15. Lisan al-Arab by Ibn Manzur.
16. Commentary on Nahj al-Balaghah by Muhammad Abduh.
17. Abu Hurayrah by Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi.
18. Al-Saqifah wa al-Khilafah by Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsud.
19. Shaykh al-Madirah by Mahmud Abu Rayyah.