TwelverShia.net Forum

Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Moin

Bismillah

All praises due to Allah and may His mercy and blessings be upon the last and final Messenger Muhamad, and on his family and companions.

A good portion of it has already been refuted which may be read here: http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/t1929/msg17989/#msg17989

Here I will start posting the reffutation from page 159 of the book. Insha Allah


Admin note: Link updated
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 09:14:30 PM by MuslimK »

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2014, 10:36:18 PM »
Then to refute the statement of Ibn Taimiyyah that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were most ascetic persons he (from page 159 onwards) quotes few narrations. Firstly he quotes from the “Al-Mustadrak” (6121) of Al-Hakim a narration as follows:

فحدثنا بشرح، هذا الحديث الشيخ أبو بكر بن إسحاق، أنا الحسن بن علي بن زياد السري، ثنا حامد بن يحيى البلخي بمكة، ثنا سفيان، عن إسماعيل بن أبي خالد، عن قيس بن أبي حازم، قال: كنت بالمدينة فبينا أنا أطوف في السوق إذ بلغت أحجار الزيت، فرأيت قوما مجتمعين على فارس قد ركب دابة، وهو يشتم علي بن أبي طالب، والناس وقوف حواليه إذ أقبل سعد بن أبي وقاص فوقف عليهم، فقال: «ما هذا؟» فقالوا: رجل يشتم علي بن أبي طالب، فتقدم سعد فأفرجوا له حتى وقف عليه فقال: «يا هذا، علام تشتم علي بن أبي طالب؟ ألم يكن أول من أسلم؟ ألم يكن أول من صلى مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ ألم يكن أزهد الناس؟
Abū Bakr b. Isḥāq – al-Ḥasan b. ‘Alī b. Ziyād al-Sirrī – Ḥāmid b. Yaḥyā al-Balakhī –Sufyān – Ismā’īl b. Abī Khālid – Qays b. Abī Ḥāzim: I was in Madīnah. While I was moving around in the market, oil stones arrived. So, I saw some people crowding around a Persian man who was riding an animal and cursing ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib. People stood round him when Sa’d b. Abī Waqqāṣ turned and stood in front of them and he asked, “What is this?” They replied, “A man cursing ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib.” So, Sa’d moved forward and they made way for him until he stood before him and said, “O you! On what basis do you curse ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib? Is he not the first to accept Islām? Is he not the first to perform Ṣalāt with the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him? Is he not the most ascetic of mankind?”


I say: Although it was authenticated by Al-Hakim but Muqbil al-Wadi’i pointed out that Hasan bin ‘Ali bin Ziyad as-Sirri was Majhool al-Haal. [Al-Mustadrak (3/614)] Probably that is the reason Toyib couldn’t dare to discuss the reliability of each of its narrators as he did many other times while trying to establish his argument.

Besides that there is opposing statement from Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas:
Ibn Abi Shaibah narrates in Musannaf (32012, 34460) and Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (44/287)through Muhammad bin ‘Amr bin ‘Alqamah from Abu Salamah bin ‘Abdur-Rahman that Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas said:

أَمَا وَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَ بِأَقْدَمِنَا إِسْلَامًا وَلَا أَقْدَمِنَا هِجْرَةً وَلَكِنْ قَدْ عَرَفْتُ بِأَيِّ شَيْءٍ فَضَلَنَا كَانَ أَزْهَدَنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا يَعْنِي عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ

“By Allah ‘Umar was not the earliest of us to accept Islam and to migrate but I know why he is better than us; He was the most abstemious of us towards worldly matters.”


Next, he brought a narration in which ‘Umar bin Abdul ‘Aziz said the same thing. He quotes from Al-Bidayah [(8/6) Ihya at-Turath and (11/109) Hijr)] of Ibn Katheer:

وقال يحيى بن معين: عن علي بن الجعد عن الحسن بن صالح قال: تذاكروا الزهاد عند عمر بن عبد العزيز فقال قائلون: فلان، وقال قائلون: فلان، فقال عمر بن عبد العزيز: أزهد الناس في الدنيا علي بن أبي طالب
Yaḥyā b. Ma’īn – ‘Alī b. al-Ja’d – al-Ḥasan b. Ṣāliḥ: They mentioned ascetism in the presence of ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz. Some people said, “So-and-so (is the most ascetic)”. Others said, “So and- so (is the most ascetic)”. So, ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz said, “The  most ascetic of mankind - as far as this world (i.e. material possessions, power, and worldly pleasures) is concerned - is ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib.”

Then he discusses each and every narrator one by one to prove that this is authentically established narration from ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz.

I say: Although its narrators are reliable but this is not the only factor to be analyzed while judging a narration. In fact the first factor to be analyzed is the connectivity of the Isnad. Here in the above chain Hasan bin Salih narrates from ‘Umar bin Abdul ‘Aziz which is disconnected unlike the blanket claim of Toyib that there is no disconnection in this narration. Umar bin Abdul ‘Aziz died in the year 101 AH while Hasan bin Salih was born in the year 100 AH. [Tahdheeb al-Kamal (6/190) and (21/446)]

One thing which is to be remembered in this regard is that these kinds of narrations in matters of Fadail are generally reported by scholars without critiquing them. But when they are taken as evidence for an act of worship or belief or judging something then they are to be judged in the same way as the narrations of Ahkam are judged.

These are the only considerable argument he could bring in his regard. Next (from page 162) he started to belittle ‘Umar bin Khattab (ra) so as to prove that he was not an ascetic person while ‘Ali (ra) was. He brings a narration from Sahih Bukhari as follows:

Abū Mūsā al-Ash’arī sought permission of ‘Umar b. al-Khattaab, may Allāh be pleased with him, to enter his house. But, he (‘Umar) did not give him permission. It was as though he (‘Umar) was busy. So Abū Mūsā went back. When ‘Umar finished his job, he asked, “Didn't I hear the voice of ‘Abd Allāh b. Qays (i.e. the real name of Abū Mūsā)? Allow him to come in.” It was said, “He (Abū Mūsā) has returned.” So, he (‘Umar) sent for him and (on his arrival), he (Abū Mūsā) said, “We were ordered to do so”. ‘Umar told him, “Bring witness in proof of that.” Abū Mūsā went to the assembly of the Anṣār and asked them. They said, “None amongst us will testify to that except the youngest of us, Abū Sa’īd Al-Khudrī.” Abū Mūsā then took Abū Sa’īd Al-Khudrī (to ‘Umar) and ‘Umar said “Has this order of the Messenger of Allāh been hidden from me? I used to be busy trading in markets.”

Then he quotes the same narration from Sahih Muslim:

I was sitting in Madīnah in the assembly of the Anṣār when Abū Mūsā came to us trembling with fear. We said, “What is the problem with you?” He replied, “’Umar sent for me. So, I went to his door, and said as-salām ‘alaikum three times and he did not reply me. Therefore, I returned. On that, he said, “Why did you not come to us?” I said, “I came to you and said as-salām ‘alaikum three times at your door but I was not given any response. So, I returned. The Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, had said, ‘When any of you seeks permission to enter three times, and he is not permitted, he must turn back’”. So, ‘Umar said, “Bring evidence to support it. Otherwise, I will take you to task.” Ubayy b. Ka’b said, “None shall stand with him (to testify) but the youngest of the people.” Abū Sa’īd said, “I am the youngest”. He (Ubayy) said, “Then go with him.”

Toyib derived following conclusions from the above incident:

1.   ‘Umar accused Abu Musa of not reaching him while he knew that he actually came to him.
2.   ‘Umar did not know about a hadith which Abu Musa and Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri were aware of.
3.   Money had more priority over Sunnah in the sight of ‘Umar.


Answer to first contention
1.   Umar did not accuse Abu Musa in any way. Toyib had a habit of making issue out of nothing. Umar only inquired why Abu Musa did not enter in his assembly. It seems Toyib has no idea of differences between accusing someone and questioning someone.
2.   Toyib’s contention is based on his misunderstanding that the phrase “not coming to us” means that he totally denied the coming of Abu Musa. While in reality ‘Umar asked him why he did not come in his assembly after reaching his door. Toyib’s assumption that “‘Umar proceeded to accuse him of NOT having come to his door at all despite his message” is based on his false understanding. ‘Umar only questioned Abu Musa as to why he did not come to him, not that he was denying he had reached his door at all.  This is clear if we compare different version of this incident all which are collected by Imam Muslim in Baab al-Isti’dhan under kitab al-Adab of his Sahih.
3.   A problem with Toyib is that he took a sentence from a version of this incident then he chose another sentence from a different version of this hadith then based on that he made his argument. This is a known fact to even any student of hadith that in many cases narrations were narrated “with meaning” rather than “with wording” and this is the reason we have different version of the same incident having different wording. But still there is no contradiction between those two versions as I have explained.


Answer to the second contention

Umar not knowing about that specific hadith is not a big deal. A lot of companions were not aware of some specific narrations. Not having heard some sayings of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) does not mean ‘Umar (ra) did not have enough knowledge while Ibn Mas’ud, who himself was a great Jurist and a scholar of Qur’an, said about ‘Umar as Ibn Abi Shaibah reports in Musannaf (31988) and Al-Tabrani in “Al-Kabeer” (9/161) through Zaa’idah from Abdul Malik bin ‘Umair from Zaid bin Wahb from him:
إِنَّ عُمَرَ كَانَ أَعْلَمَنَا بِاللهِ وَأَقْرَأَنَا لِكِتَابِ اللهِ، وَأَفْقَهَنَا لِدِينِ اللهِ
“Indeed ‘Umar was most knowledgeable of us regarding Allah, the most learned of the Book of Allah and the best in understanding the religion of Allah.”

At-Tabrani reports in “Al-Kabeer” (9/162) (9/163), Ibn Abi Shaibah in Musannaf (32003) Ibn Sa’d in Tabaqat (2/256) through Al-A’mash from Shaqeeq that Abdullah said:
وَاللهِ إِنِّي لَأَحْسِبُ عِلْمَ عُمَرَ لَوْ وُضِعَ فِي كِفَّةِ الْمِيزَانِ، وَوُضِعَ سَائِرُ أَحْيَاءِ أَهْلِ الْأَرْضِ فِي كِفَّةِ الْمِيزَانِ لَرَجَحَ عَلَيْهِ عَلْمُ عُمَرَ رَضِي اللهُ عَنْهُ
“By Allah, I expect that if the knowledge of ‘Umar is kept in one side of the balance and all the living beings are placed in the other side then the knowledge of ‘Umar would overcome it.”
Ibn Abi Shaibah (31987) through Abdul Malik that Qabisah bin Jabir said:
مَا رَأَيْتُ رَجُلًا أَعْلَمَ بِاللَّهِ، وَلَا أَقْرَأَ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ، وَلَا أَفْقَهَ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ مِنْ عُمَرَ
“I have not seen a person more knowledgeable regarding Allah, learned of the Book of Allah and who had more understanding of the religion of Allah than ‘Umar.”
Al-Fasawi reports it “Al-Ma’rifah wa at-Tarikh” (1/457) through Mujalid bin Sa’eed from Ash-Sha’bi from Qabisah.

Besides that it was not ‘Umar (ra) only who could not hear some sayings of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam); hence it has been narrated through ‘Uthman bin Mughirah from ‘Ali bin Rabi’ah al-Walibi from Asma bin Hakam al-Fazari from ‘Ali (ra) that he said:

كُنْتُ إِذَا سَمِعْتُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَدِيثًا، يَنْفَعُنِي اللَّهُ بِمَا شَاءَ مِنْهُ وَإِذَا حَدَّثَنِي عَنْهُ غَيْرُهُ، اسْتَحْلَفْتُهُ فَإِذَا حَلَفَ صَدَّقْتُهُ، وَإِنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ حَدَّثَنِي وَصَدَقَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «مَا مِنْ رَجُلٍ يُذْنِبُ ذَنْبًا فَيَتَوَضَّأُ فَيُحْسِنُ الْوُضُوءَ ثُمَّ يُصَلِّي رَكْعَتَيْنِ - وَقَالَ مِسْعَرٌ ثُمَّ يُصَلِّي - وَيَسْتَغْفِرُ اللَّهَ إِلَّا غَفَرَ اللَّهُ لَهُ»

“If I heard a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), Allah benefited me with it as much as He willed, and if I heard it from anyone else, I would ask him to swear an oath, then if he swore an oath I would believe him. Abu Bakr told me and Abu Bakr spoke the truth that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: “There is no man who commits a sin then he performs the ablution and he does it well, then he performs two Rak’ah and seeks forgiveness of Allah, but Allah will forgive him.” [Ahmad (2), Ibn Majah (1395)]

This narration indicates that:
1.   ‘Ali was unaware of the specific narration which is also called Salat at-Tawbah and it was informed to him by Abu Bakr.
2.   It was a habit of ‘Ali to seek an oath before he relies on a hadith which he did not hear directly from the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

Answer to third contention

As for the conclusion drawn by Toyib that ‘Umar (ra) gave priority to money over Sunnah then it is the most laughable Toyib has uttered regarding ‘Umar (ra). Any person having a little knowledge of ‘Umar’s life would know that he was one most abstemious person.

Ibn Sa’d reports in Tabaqat (3/209) through Sufyan from Abu Ishaq from Harithah bin Mudharrib that ‘Umar said:
إِنِّي أَنْزَلْتُ نَفْسِي مِنْ مَالِ اللَّهِ مَنْزِلَةَ مَالِ الْيَتِيمِ. إِنِ اسْتَغْنَيْتُ اسْتَعْفَفْتُ وَإِنِ افْتَقَرْتُ أَكَلْتُ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ. قَالَ وَكِيعٌ فِي حَدِيثِهِ: فَإِنْ أَيْسَرْتُ قَضَيْتُ
“I place myself in relation to the money of Allah like that of the money of an orphan. If I can live without it then I leave it and if need it then I eat from it in rightful manner.”

Ibn Abi Shaibah narrates in Musannaf (32012, 34460) and Ibn ‘Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (44/287)through Muhammad bin ‘Amr bin ‘Alqamah from Abu Salamah bin ‘Abdur-Rahman that Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas said:

أَمَا وَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَ بِأَقْدَمِنَا إِسْلَامًا وَلَا أَقْدَمِنَا هِجْرَةً وَلَكِنْ قَدْ عَرَفْتُ بِأَيِّ شَيْءٍ فَضَلَنَا كَانَ أَزْهَدَنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا يَعْنِي عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ
“By Allah ‘Umar was not the earliest of us to accept Islam and to migrate but I know why he is better than us; He was the most abstemious of us towards worldly matters.”

Ibn Abi Shaibah (32010) narrates through Muhammad bin Marwan from Yunus bin ‘Ubaid that Hasan al-Basari said:

وَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَ بِأَوَّلِهِمْ إِسْلَامًا وَلَا أَفْضَلِهِمْ نَفَقَةً فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ، وَلَكِنَّهُ غَلَبَ النَّاسَ بِالزُّهْدِ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالصَّرَامَةِ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَخَافُ فِي اللَّهِ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ
“By Allah he was not the first one to enter Islam and the greatest in spending in the way of Allah but he took over others through asceticism regarding worldly matter and decisiveness in the commandment of Allah. He would not fear from the criticism in issues related to Allah.”

Ibn Sa’d (3/249) through Sulaiman bin Mughirah and Hammad bin Zaid from Thabit from Anas that he said:

لَقَدْ رَأَيْتُ بَيْنَ كَتِفَيْ عُمَرَ أَرْبَعَ رِقَاعٍ فِي قَمِيصٍ لَهُ
“I have seen between shoulders of ‘Umar four patches in his shirt.”

Ibn Sa’d narrates (3/211) through ‘Abdullah bin ‘Aamir bin Rabee’ah that he said:

صَحِبْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ مِنَ الْمَدِينَةِ إِلَى مَكَّةِ فِي الْحَجِّ ثُمَّ رَجَعْنَا فَمَا ضَرَبَ فُسْطَاطًا وَلا كَانَ لَهُ بِنَاءٌ يَسْتَظِلُّ بِهِ إِنَّمَا كَانَ يُلْقِي نِطْعًا أو كساء على الشجرة فَيَسْتَظِلُّ تَحْتَهُ

“I accompanied ‘Umar from Madinah to Makkah during Hajj and then we returned back. During all this no tent was set up for him. He used to put cloak or mat under a tree and shade himself beneath it.”

These are only few selected narrations proving abstemious life of ‘Umar.

Hani

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2014, 10:50:51 PM »
Barak-Allahu Feek, is the book completely refuted? Or is there still a portion left?
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #3 on: November 30, 2014, 11:03:11 PM »
It has around 300 pages and I have done near around 200. But 100 is not too lengthy considering the useless description in footnotes and and other irrelevent details.

Hani

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2014, 02:28:49 AM »
It has around 300 pages and I have done near around 200. But 100 is not too lengthy considering the useless description in footnotes and and other irrelevent details.


JazakAllah Khayr, I recall he wastes a lot of pages with Arabic texts and repeated narrations in his books.


Insha-Allah, we'll re-organize your replies on this forum and the other one when it is complete and make it into a PDF book.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

al-kulayni

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #5 on: December 01, 2014, 07:09:26 PM »
Masha'Allah !What agreat work you have done Muhammad and Hani, may Allah help you to continue to refute these rawafidh

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2014, 05:09:54 AM »
Verses of Najwa

Allah, the Mighty and Majestic says in the Qur’an:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نَاجَيْتُمُ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدِّمُوا بَيْنَ يَدَيْ نَجْوَاكُمْ صَدَقَةً ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ لَكُمْ وَأَطْهَرُ فَإِنْ لَمْ تَجِدُوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ (12) أَأَشْفَقْتُمْ أَنْ تُقَدِّمُوا بَيْنَ يَدَيْ نَجْوَاكُمْ صَدَقَاتٍ فَإِذْ لَمْ تَفْعَلُوا وَتَابَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمْ فَأَقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتُوا الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَاللَّهُ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ (13)

“O you who believe if you (want to) consult the Messenger in private, spend something in charity before your consultation. That will be better and purer for you. But if you find not (the means for it), then verily, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most-Merciful.”
“Are you afraid of spending in charity before your private consultation (with him)? If then you do it not, and Allah has forgiven you, then perform Salat and give Zakat and obey Allah and His Messenger.” [Al-Mujadilah 58:12-13]
The above mentioned verses are called the verses of Najwa which Toyib brought in twenty third chapter of his book from page 170. Before the arguments of Toyib are refuted the following points must be clear:
1.   The word “Najwa” literally means “private counselling”.
Ibn Manzur says in Lisan al-‘Arab:
والنَّجْوَى والنَّجِيُّ: السِّرُّ. والنَّجْوُ: السِّرُّ بَيْنَ اثْنَيْنِ، يُقَالُ: نَجَوْتُه نَجْواً أَي سارَرْته، وَكَذَلِكَ ناجَيْتُه، وَالِاسْمُ النَّجْوى
“Najwa and Najiyyu means secret. And Najw is the secret between two person. It is said: Najautuhu najwan that is, I secretly informed him. Likewise, Naajaituhu. Its Ism is An-Najwa."
2.   The verse 12 was revealed and was applicable for a short time and then it was abrogated by the next verse.

Taking these above mentioned points into consideration the whole arguments of Toyibs sinks down to mere accusation. Interestingly, Toyib himself did not objected to these facts even though he quoted Ibn Taymiyyah who pointed them out.

Toyib claims that Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman may Allah be pleased with them could not spend even a Dirham to have discussion with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Before that he summarized the answer of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah as follows:

Quote
Our dear Shaykh confirms the authenticity of the narration stating that Amīr al-Mūminīn, ‘alaihi al-salām, was the only one who ever complied with the Verse of al-Najwā before its abrogation. However, he has made excuses for the failures of Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmān to fulfill the instruction in the verse, despite Sunnī claims about their unmatched generosity and selflessness. According to the Shaykh, the verse was shortlived. When it was revealed, Amīr al-Mūminīn enforced it. But, before anyone else could have a reason or chance to do likewise, it was cancelled. So, others did not have the opportunity. Besides, it was not obligatory upon Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmān to comply with the verse anyway unless they intended to have private discussions with the Messenger of Allāh, ṣallallāhu ‘alaihi wa ālihi. Since they might not have intended to privately talk with the Prophet, none can blame them for not having complied with the verse before its abrogation.

Although he rightly summarized the answer of Imam Ibn Taymiyyah but later on he, instead of answering it, took a totally irrelevant route. This is either because he couldn’t understand the issue at all or he couldn’t understand the answer given by Shaykh al-Islam or because he has taken the task of deliberately deceiving the common readers. Toyib accepts that the verse was short lived but he still has the audacity to claim that thousands of companions were being miserly just because they did not see any need of private consultation with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Was it possible in the Mantiq of Rawafidh for thousands of companions to have private discussion with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) within that short period?

Private consultation are not always needed but after the verse was revealed it was only ‘Ali (ra) who had a requirement of Najwa so he gave charity before it. Other than that it is pure speculation and speaking without knowledge to claim that such and such person did not do Najwa only because they were misers. To claim such a thing for Abu Bakr (ra), ‘Umar (ra) and ‘Uthman (ra) is a lie because their spending of money in the way of Allah is much well known than that of ‘Ali (ra).

Let us discuss it one by one:

The Early Migrants
Allah says in Qur’an:
لِلْفُقَرَاءِ المُهَاجِرِينَ الَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا مِنْ دِيَارِهِمْ وَأَمْوَالِهِمْ يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا وَيَنْصُرُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ أُولَئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُون

“And for the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their properties, seeking Bounties from Allah and to please Him…” [Al-Hashr 59:8]

Allah praises here the early emigrants who left their homes and property for the sake of Allah. How could such peoples be misers or niggard?



Abu Bakr

The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said addressing people in the Masjid, “Indeed the most favorable person to me with his companionship and wealth is Abu Bakr…” [Agreed upon]

The beloved Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) also said regarding Abu Bakr, “Allah sent me (as a Prophet) to you (people) but you said to me, ‘You are telling lie’, while Abu Bakr said to the people, ‘He has said the truth,’ and he consoled me with himself and his wealth.” He then said twice, “Won’t you then give up harming my companion for my sake?” The narrator said, “After that nobody harmed Abu Bakr. [Bukhari]

Imam Bukhari reports in his “Al-Jami’ As-Sahih” (3666):

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو اليَمَانِ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعَيْبٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ عَوْفٍ، أَنَّ أَبَا هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، يَقُولُ: «مَنْ أَنْفَقَ زَوْجَيْنِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ مِنَ الأَشْيَاءِ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ، دُعِيَ مِنْ أَبْوَابِ، - يَعْنِي الجَنَّةَ، - يَا عَبْدَ اللَّهِ هَذَا خَيْرٌ، فَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الصَّلاَةِ دُعِيَ مِنْ بَابِ الصَّلاَةِ، وَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الجِهَادِ دُعِيَ مِنْ بَابِ الجِهَادِ، وَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الصَّدَقَةِ دُعِيَ مِنْ بَابِ الصَّدَقَةِ، وَمَنْ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الصِّيَامِ دُعِيَ مِنْ بَابِ الصِّيَامِ، وَبَابِ الرَّيَّانِ» ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ: مَا عَلَى هَذَا الَّذِي يُدْعَى مِنْ تِلْكَ الأَبْوَابِ مِنْ ضَرُورَةٍ، وَقَالَ: هَلْ يُدْعَى مِنْهَا كُلِّهَا أَحَدٌ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ؟ قَالَ: «نَعَمْ، وَأَرْجُو أَنْ تَكُونَ مِنْهُمْ يَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ»

"Anybody who spends two things in Allah's Cause will be called from all the gates of Paradise, '0 Allah's slave! This is good.' He who is amongst those who offer Salat (prayer) will be called from the gate of the Salat (prayers) (in Paradise) and he who is from the people of Jihad, will be called from the gate of Jihad, and he who is from those who give As-Sadaqa (charity, Zakat , etc.) will be called from the gate of As-.Vadaqa, and he who is amongst those who observe Saüm (fast) will be called from the gate of As-Siyam the gate of Ar-Raiyan ." AbU Bakr said, "He who is called from all those gates will need nothing." He added, "Will anyone be called from all those gates, 0 Allah's Messenger?" He (k;) said, "Yes, and I hope you will be among those, 0 AbU Bakr."


‘Umar bin Khattab

Imam Bukhari reports:

أَصَابَ عُمَرُ بِخَيْبَرَ أَرْضًا، فَأَتَى النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَقَالَ: أَصَبْتُ أَرْضًا لَمْ أُصِبْ مَالًا قَطُّ أَنْفَسَ مِنْهُ، فَكَيْفَ تَأْمُرُنِي بِهِ؟ قَالَ: «إِنْ شِئْتَ حَبَّسْتَ أَصْلَهَا وَتَصَدَّقْتَ بِهَا» ، فَتَصَدَّقَ عُمَرُ أَنَّهُ لاَ يُبَاعُ أَصْلُهَا وَلاَ يُوهَبُ وَلاَ يُورَثُ فِي الفُقَرَاءِ، وَالقُرْبَى وَالرِّقَابِ وَفِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَالضَّيْفِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ، لاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَى مَنْ وَلِيَهَا أَنْ يَأْكُلَ مِنْهَا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ، أَوْ يُطْعِمَ صَدِيقًا غَيْرَ مُتَمَوِّلٍ فِيهِ

“‘Umar acquired some property at Khayber, so he came to the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and said, “I have acquired some land in Khaiber and I have never acquired any property that is more precious than it. So what do you command me to do with it? He replied, “If you wish you can have control of its right and then you can give it in charity.” So ‘Umar gave it in charity –  on the condition that it will not be sold, gifted or inherited – for the poor, the kinsmen, the slaves, in the way of Allah, the guest and the wayfarers…”

‘Umar (ra) gave the most precious wealth he acquired in Waqf, so was it hard on him to spend a small amount before privately consulting with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) if he wanted to? Rather the fact he, like many other Sahabah, he did not see any need of private consultation on that particular day.
Other quotes which testifies to the great asceticism of ‘Umar (ra) has already been quoted in the refutation of previous chapter.


‘Uthman

قَالَ عَبْدَانُ: أَخْبَرَنِي أَبِي، عَنْ شُعْبَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، أَنَّ عُثْمَانَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ حِينَ حُوصِرَ أَشْرَفَ عَلَيْهِمْ، وَقَالَ: أَنْشُدُكُمُ اللَّهَ، وَلاَ أَنْشُدُ إِلَّا أَصْحَابَ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، أَلَسْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: «مَنْ حَفَرَ رُومَةَ فَلَهُ الجَنَّةُ» ؟ فَحَفَرْتُهَا، أَلَسْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: «مَنْ جَهَّزَ جَيْشَ العُسْرَةِ فَلَهُ الجَنَّةُ» ؟ فَجَهَّزْتُهُمْ، قَالَ: فَصَدَّقُوهُ بِمَا قَالَ وَقَالَ عُمَرُ فِي وَقْفِهِ: «لاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَى مَنْ وَلِيَهُ أَنْ يَأْكُلَ وَقَدْ يَلِيهِ الوَاقِفُ وَغَيْرُهُ فَهُوَ وَاسِعٌ لِكُلٍّ»

AbU 'Abdur-Rahmän narrated: When 'Uthmn i was circled (by the rebels), he looked upon them from above and said, "I ask you by Allah, I ask nobody but the companions of the Prophet, don't you know that Allah's Messenger j. said, 'whoever will (buy and) dig the well of RUma will be granted Paradise,' and I (bought and) dug it? Don't you know that he said, ‘Whoever equip the army of 'Usra (i.e., Tabuk's Ghazwa) will be granted Paradise,' and I equipped it?" They attested whatever he said. [Sahih Bukhari (2778) and others]

The generosity of ‘Uthman (ra) was so famous that he was given the title “Al-Ghani”.

So how could these people be accused of misery or niggardliness just because they did not see any need of private consultation with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) within that short period of the day and hence it was not an obligation on them to give charity for that purpose while ‘Ali (ra) did? By Allah this is a great accusation.[/size]

Farid

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2014, 11:08:06 AM »
Mashallah brother Moin, may Allah reward you.

Good idea Hani. I'll leave the reorganization to you. >=D

Hani

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2014, 02:20:17 PM »
Mashallah brother Moin, may Allah reward you.

Good idea Hani. I'll leave the reorganization to you. >=D


InshaAllah I will organize it, assuming the brother finishes at the right time. It's definitely a worthy project.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Optimus Prime

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2014, 02:34:10 PM »
This will be an awesome read when it's all finished.

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2014, 10:47:36 AM »
Mashallah brother Moin, may Allah reward you.

Good idea Hani. I'll leave the reorganization to you. >=D


InshaAllah I will organize it, assuming the brother finishes at the right time. It's definitely a worthy project.

You can even start it now in ms-word so that it can be updated later on

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2014, 10:40:47 PM »
Chapter 24
Response to “Hadith Ar-Rayat: A truly messy one”

He started off by quoting (on pg 177) Ibn Taymiyyah’s rejection of the claim of Al-Hilli that ‘Ali (ra) was the bravest. Let me give a brief description of the Ibn Taymiyyah’s objection on Al-Hilli’s statement.

Al-Hilli [Minhaj as-Sunnah (8/75)] said:
الرَّابِعُ: أَنَّهُ كَانَ أَشْجَعَ النَّاسِ، وَبِسَيْفِهِ ثَبَتَتْ قَوَاعِدُ الْإِسْلَامِ، وَتَشَيَّدَتْ أَرْكَانُ الْإِيمَانِ، مَا انْهَزَمَ فِي مَوَاطِنَ قَطُّ، وَلَا ضَرَبَ بِسَيْف إِلَّا قَطَّ، طَالَمَا كَشَفَ الْكَرْبَ عَنْ وَجْهِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - وَلَمْ يَفِرَّ كَمَا فَرَّ غَيْرُهُ

“Fourth: He was the bravest of mankind. Through his sword the Islamic principles were established and the pillars of Belief were constructed. He never fled from the battle and he never hit through the sword except cut (it). He would often recognize the sorrow from the face of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). He never fled from the battlefield like others did.”

One can see that according to Al-Hilli it was ‘Ali (ra) who, with his sword, established Islam and constructed its pillars. His description portray the Messenger of Allah (sallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) as a person behind the veil [We seek refuge of Allah] who would only convey the truth and then ‘Ali (ra) would do the job of implementing it, fighting for it and constructing it and likewise protecting the Prophet (‘alaihissalatu wassalam). In light of such description if al-Hilli, or anyone who agrees with him, says that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) was braver than ‘Ali (ra) then he is only contradicting his own statement.

After this if Ibn Taymiyyah contradicted Al-Hilli then it was his right to do so. Toyib said Ibn Taymiyyah misrepresented Al-Hilli’s comment while the objection should have been raised against Al-Hilli who in reality portrayed ‘Ali literally as the real hero in the propagation of Islam and not the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).


Toyib quoted a statement narrated from Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas that he said ‘Ali is the bravest of all. If this is authentic then also it cannot be taken to defend the generalization made by Al-Hilli for the reason explained above. However, this narration from al-Mustadrak has some issue with its Isnad which I have notified earlier under chapter 22 under the discussion on Zuhd.

Ibn Taymiyyah describes bravery as follows [Toyib’s translation]:
"And “bravery” is explained with two things. One of them is strength of the heart, and its firmness in the face of fear. The second is great strength in physical fighting, to kill a lot of people. Only the first is bravery. As for the second, it (only) proves physical strength. And, not everyone who is physically strong has a strong heart, and not vice versa."

On this, Toyib respond in his typical frustrated way:
"So, “bravery” is only to have a fearless heart. Whether this translates into action on the battlefield or not is irrelevant. Rather, the warrior who firmly faces multiple enemy fighters in battle, and kills them is not brave at all. He is only “physically strong”."

I say: Ibn Taymiyyah did not say that a brave person never fights or faces his enemies, rather he was saying that a person might have been a strong one and have killed thousands but this is not bravery. While on the other hand a weak person who struggles but could not kill any enemy will be considered a brave person. So, ‘Ali was brave, not because he was able to kill so many disbelievers but rather because he did not have fear to face his enemies. This is the bravery. Therefore if anyone wants to judge the bravery of a person then he must look at his stable and fearless heart not the might with which he killed hundreds and thousands of enemies, for the Pharoah and Nimrod would then be bravest of all.

Besides that let us look at the meaning of Shuja’ah [Arabic of bravery] in Arabic dictionary. Al-Jawhari says in “As-Sihaah” (3/1235):
شدَّة القلب عند البأس
“It is the stability of heart during trial.”
Even the English word bravery means ‘able or ready to face and endure danger, disgrace or pain’. So basically Ibn Taymiyyah’s description very much correct and Toyib’s frustration on it is because of his ignorance. May Allah guide him to the right path.

Responding to the fact that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) himself did not kill any person on the battlefield except Umayyah bin Khalaf, Toyib said (pg.179):
"The Messenger of Allāh was the ruler of Arabia at that time. Heads of state are not expected anywhere to participate in battle like foot soldiers. Rather, they are to be shielded from the enemy as much as possible. As for Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmān, they were ordinary soldiers. Therefore, they had every obligation and chance to participate in multiple combats with enemy fighters. But what happened?"

Basically Toyib is saying that bravery is to have physical power in battles and the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) was the bravest of all. But since he was the leader therefore he could not show his bravery and was to remain under protection of other companions.
This is what Toyib clearly implying in opposition to the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah, while on the other hand ‘Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) said:
لَمَّا حَضَرَ الْبَأْسُ يَوْمَ بَدْرٍ اتَّقَيْنَا بِرَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، وَكَانَ مِنْ أَشَدِّ النَّاسِ، مَا كَانَ - أَوْ: لَمْ يَكُنْ - أَحَدٌ أَقْرَبَ إِلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ مِنْهُ
“When the fighting grew intense on the day of Badr we sought shelter by drawing closer to the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), who was one of the strongest of men, and no was closer to the disbeliever than him.” [Musnad Ahmad (1042) (654)]
This was the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). However coming to the issue Toyib did not understand the point mentioned by Ibn Taymiyyah or he simply avoided it. The point of Ibn Taymiyyah was that Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman cannot be declared coward just because their killing of disbelievers are not reported. This is because the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) also did not kill any disbeliever except Ubayy bin Khalaf during Badr. So such kind of attacks on Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman also falls on the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

If Toyib still claims that the person who has killed most disbelievers is bravest then we will let Ibn Taymiyyah himself answer this. Ibn Taymiyyah said:
فَإِنْ كَانَ مَنْ قَتَلَ أَكْثَرَ يَكُونُ أَشْجَعَ، فَكَثِيرٌ مِنَ الصَّحَابَةِ أَشْجَعُ مِنْ عَلِيٍّ، فَالْبَرَاءُ بْنُ مَالِكٍ - أَخُو أَنَسٍ - قَتَلَ مِائَةَ رَجُلٍ مُبَارَزَةً، غَيْرَ مَنْ شُورِكَ فِي دَمِهِ. وَأَمَّا خَالِدُ بْنُ الْوَلِيدِ فَلَا يُحْصِي عَدَدَ مَنْ قَتَلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ، وَقَدِ انْكَسَرَ فِي يَدِهِ فِي غَزْوَةِ مُؤْتَةَ تِسْعَةُ أَسْيَافٍ، وَلَا رَيْبَ أَنَّهُ قَتَلَ أَضْعَافَ مَا قَتَلَهُ عَلِيٌّ
“If the person who has killed more (disbelievers) is the bravest then many of the companions would be braver than ‘Ali. So Bara’ bin ‘Aazib – the brother of Anas – killed hundred people alone leaving aside those whom he killed in association with others. As for Khalid bin Walid then only Allah knows the number of whom he killed. During the battle of Mu’ta nine sword was broken in his hands while fighting. There is no doubt that the number of people he killed was more than those whom ‘Ali killed.”



Who was the bravest companions?
With regards to the first point, Toyib did not actually touched the arguments given by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah. This is the reality of the book of Toyib which is supposed to be a refutation of Ibn Taymiyah but in reality he select a sentence from the Minhaaj and then starts replying to it leaving aside the arguments given by him.
Basically Ibn Taymiyyah (8/87-89) countered the claim of Al-Hilli by quoting Ibn Hazm from “Al-Fisal fi milal ahl al-Ahwa wa An-Nihal” (4/107). I will quote and translate the portion quoted in Minhaj:

We see that they claim that ‘Ali was the greatest in waging Jihad against disbelievers and attacking and fighting them among all the companions.
Abu Muhammad (Ibn Hazm) said: This is wrong as the Jihad is classified in three categories;

1.   one of them is calling towards Allah,
2.   second is to do Jihad during war by ideas and strategies
3.   And the third is to do jihad with hands by killing and hitting.

We find that with regards to the first type of Jihad no person supersedes Abu Bakr and ‘Umar after the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). As for Abu Bakr then we find that the senior companions accepted Islam by his hands. As compared to him, ‘Ali does not have much share in this. As for ‘Umar then we see that the day he became Muslim Islam was strengthened and the worship of Allah was being done openly. This is the greatest Jihad and these two were alone in such Jihad of the first two categories (during the early days) whereas ‘Ali has no participation in it.

With regards to the second category then we find that it is specifically for Abu Bakr and then for ‘Umar.
As for the third category which is stabbing, hitting and combating then we find that it is the lowest level of Jihad because of the obvious reason that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), with the agreement of Muslims, was selective in doing the most virtuous of acts and we see that his – may Allah sends Salaat and salutation upon him – Jihad in most of the cases was restricted within the first two categories which is to call towards Allah – the Mighty and Majestic – and planning strategically and carefully. His least involvement (among the three categories) was in stabbing, hitting and combating. This is not because of cowardice but in reality he was absolutely the bravest of all earthly beings with his hands and soul and the most complete to attain succor. But he would look for the best and then next after it from the acts, and then he would prefer it and get involved with it. We find that, during Badr and other battles, Abu Bakr would not leave him and sometimes even ‘Umar was included in it. They were distinguished in this case unlike ‘Ali and all other companions, except in rare cases.

Then after that we ponder over the third category of Jihad which is to stab, to hit and to combat. We see that ‘Ali was not alone in this, but many other companions also had the same share like Talha, Zubair and Sa’d and those were killed in early Islam like Hamza, ‘Ubaidah bin Harith  and Mus’ab bin ‘Umair, and from Ansar Sa’d bin Mu’adh, Simak bin Kharshah Abu Dujanah and others. Also Abu Bakr and ‘Umar do have good share in it even if they did not get involved in it like these people which is because of their participation in a better Jihad in association with the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and to aid him during battles. And he sent them for war more than he sent ‘Ali. He sent Abu Bakr towards Bani Fazarah and elsewhere and he sent ‘Umar towards Bani Fulan. On the other hand we do not know ‘Ali was sent for any battle except at some fort of Khaibar which he conquered [and he had sent Abu Bakr and ‘Umar there, before ‘Ali, but they could not conquer it]. So Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were involved in the highest level of Jihad and besides that they have their share with ‘Ali in the lower category of Jihad. – End Quote –
This response from Ibn Hazm is sufficient against the claim that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were coward and that ‘Ali was the bravest of all. May Allah be pleased with all of them.
======================

Struggle of Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman for Islam
Here I will quote some narrations which speak about the struggle and hardship they borne while serving this religion.

The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said addressing people in the Masjid:
إِنَّ مِنْ أَمَنِّ النَّاسِ عَلَيَّ فِي صُحْبَتِهِ وَمَالِهِ أَبَا بَكْرٍ
“Indeed the most favorable person to me with his companionship and wealth is Abu Bakr…” [Bukhari (3654) and others]
It is agreed upon among Muslims that it was Abu Bakr (ra) who accompanied the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) during his migration towards Medina while the blood thirsty disbelievers were following them. The disbelievers of Makkah had put a prize on both the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and Abu Bakr as-Siddiq. Hence, Imam Bukhari (3906), Abdur-Razzaq (5/392), Ahmad (17591) and others narrate through Suraqah bin Ju’sham who said:
“The Messengers of the disbelievers of Quraish came to us declaring that they had assigned for one who would kill or arrest Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and Abu Bakr, a reward equal to their bloodmoney.”

Describing this Allah said in His Book:
إِلَّا تَنْصُرُوهُ فَقَدْ نَصَرَهُ اللَّهُ إِذْ أَخْرَجَهُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا ثَانِيَ اثْنَيْنِ إِذْ هُمَا فِي الْغَارِ إِذْ يَقُولُ لِصَاحِبِهِ لَا تَحْزَنْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَنَا فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ سَكِينَتَهُ عَلَيْهِ وَأَيَّدَهُ بِجُنُودٍ لَمْ تَرَوْهَا وَجَعَلَ كَلِمَةَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا السُّفْلَى وَكَلِمَةُ اللَّهِ هِيَ الْعُلْيَا وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

“If you do not aid him – Allah has already aided him when those who disbelieved had driven him out as one of two, when they were in the cave and he said to his companion, “Do not grieve, Indeed Allah is with us.” And Allah sent down His tranquility upon him and supported him with His soldiers you did not see and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowest, while the word of Allah – that is Highest. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” [Surah Tawbah 9:40]
Imam Sufyan bin ‘Uyainah [d.198 AH] said: ‘Allah admonished all of Muslims for His Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) except for Abu Bakr alone.’ And then he recited the above verse. [Tarikh Dimashq (30/93)]

Imam Bukhari narrates in his Sahih (3678, 3856 and 4815) as well as many other scholars of hadith through ‘Urwah bin Zubair who said:
سَأَلْتُ ابْنَ عَمْرِو بْنِ العَاصِ: أَخْبِرْنِي بِأَشَدِّ شَيْءٍ صَنَعَهُ المُشْرِكُونَ بِالنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، قَالَ: «بَيْنَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُصَلِّي فِي حِجْرِ الكَعْبَةِ، إِذْ أَقْبَلَ عُقْبَةُ بْنُ أَبِي مُعَيْطٍ، فَوَضَعَ ثَوْبَهُ فِي عُنُقِهِ، فَخَنَقَهُ خَنْقًا شَدِيدًا» فَأَقْبَلَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ حَتَّى أَخَذَ بِمَنْكِبِهِ، وَدَفَعَهُ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، قَالَ: {أَتَقْتُلُونَ رَجُلًا أَنْ يَقُولَ رَبِّيَ اللَّهُ} [غافر: 28] الآيَةَ

I asked (‘Abdullah) Ibn 'Amr bin Al-'Aas, "Tell me of the worst thing which Al-Mushrikün [polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in his Messenger Muhammad ()] did to the Prophet 40." He said, "While the Prophet was offering Salãt (prayer) in the Hijr of the Ka'bah, 'Uqba bin Abi Mu'ait came and put his garment around the Prophet's neck and throttled him violently. Abü Bakr came and caught him by his shoulder and pushed him away from the Prophet and said, "Would you kill a man just because he says, 'My Lord is Allah?'"
Abu ‘Abdullah al-Hakim reports this in “Al-Mustadrak” (4424) through Muhammad bin Abi ‘Ubaidah from his father from A’mash from Abu Sufyan [Talha bin Nafi’] from Jabir bin ‘Abdullah (ra).

Struggles of Abu Bakr (ra) in Makkah is well known and no other companions get closer to him in this regard. His efforts during early Islam were of following nature:
1.   He testified for the truthfulness of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and defended him physically and verbally against disbelievers.
2.   He spent his money to help those helpless Muslims who were being tortured by their masters. He manumitted many slaves who accepted Islam after buying them. Bilal (ra) was one of such slaves.
3.   He worked for the propagation of Islam and hence many senior companions accepted Islam through his effort. For example, ‘Uthman, Talha, Zubair, ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Awf and Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas.
Abu Bakr was unique in this regard that no one reaches his status after the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).

As for ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab (ra) then the word of Ibn Mas’ud (ra) is sufficient here who said:
مَازِلْنَا أَعِزَّةً مُنْذُ أَسْلَمَ عُمَرُ
“We have been powerful since the time ‘Umar accepted Islam.” [Sahih Bukhari (3684) (3863)]

In fact, his entering into Islam was the result of the supplication made by the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Hence Imam Ahmad narrates in Musnad and Ibn Hibban in Sahih (6881) that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said:
اللَّهُمَّ أَعِزَّ الدِّينَ بِأَحَبِّ هَذَيْنِ الرَّجُلَيْنِ إِلَيْكَ: بِأَبِي جَهْلِ بْنِ هِشَامٍ، أَوْ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ
“O Allah provide strength to Islam through either of the two whom you love more: Abu Jahl bin Hisham or ‘Umar bin al-Khattab.”

It was Hudhaifah bin Yaman (ra) who after the death of ‘Umar (ra) said:
كَانَ الْإِسْلَامُ فِي زَمَانِ عُمَرَ كَالرَّجُلِ الْمُقْبِلِ لَا يَزْدَادُ إِلَّا قُرْبًا، فَلَمَّا قُتِلَ عُمَرُ كَانَ كَالرَّجُلِ الْمُدْبِرِ لَا يَزْدَادُ إِلَّا بُعْدًا
“The likeness of Islam during the days of ‘Umar is that of a person who keep coming closer and closer but when he was killed it started to move backward.”
It is reported by Ibn Abi Shaibah (32021), Ahmad in Fada’il (473) and Al-Hakim (4488) through Mansur from Rib’iy bin Hirash from Hudhaifah (ra). This isnad is authentic and all of its narrators are highly reliable.

Also, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) used Abu Bakr and ‘Umar for military expedition more than he used ‘Ali as it has been preceded under the statement of Ibn Hazm.
There are many such statement and incidents which establish what I said regarding the struggles of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar for Islam. I do not want to make this refutation to be a compilation on Seerah and Biography.

As for ‘Uthman (ra) then even though he ran away from the battlefield during Uhud for some time but there is no such activity was known in his later days. In fact when he was Caliph he never commanded his companions to wage war against those who were preventing him from even drinking water and finally he was killed by the rebels.

The issue of fleeing from the battle
This is one of the issue which Shi’ites often raise to ridicule companions and call them coward. Toyib did the same and in this regard he brought the case of ‘Uthman. He quotes an authentic narration from Sahih Muslim:
“None remained with the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, on some of the DAYS in which the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, was fighting apart from Ṭalḥah and Sa’d. They both (i.e. Ṭalḥah and Sa’d) narrated that to me.”

He concludes that everyone else fled leaving the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) alone except Talha and Sa’d. Interestingly he did not mention ‘Ali among those people even though this narration does not give exception to him as well.
If we take this narration as per the understanding of “Allamah” Toyib then we have to accept that even ‘Ali, ‘Ammar, Miqdad bin Aswad were among those who fled as they also took part in battle and are not mentioned in the above hadith. However the narration is about that time when the enemy attacked Muslims from behind and they were dispersed. All of them were dispersed and raided by disbelievers including ‘Ali (ra).

Those who fled from the battle include ‘Uthman and some others from Ansar. Many companions were dispersed after the fierce attack of enemies so much so that they couldn't find the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) in rush. For sometimes the rumor was on its peak that the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) was martyred. While most of them believed it and were disappointed to not find the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) among them but when they realized the truth they organized themselves against the enemy.
According to a narration even ‘Ali (ra) was not aware of life or death of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Hence, Abu Ya’la relates in his Musnad (546) and ‘Diya Al-Maqdisi in “Al-Mukhtarah” (675) through Muhammad bin Marwan al-‘Uqaili from ‘Umarah bin Abi Hafsah from ‘Ikrimah from ‘Ali (ra) who said:
لَمَّا انْجَلَى النَّاسُ عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَوْمَ أُحُدٍ، نَظَرْتُ فِي الْقَتْلَى فَلَمْ أَرَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَقُلْتُ: وَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَ لِيَفِرَّ، وَمَا أَرَاهُ فِي الْقَتْلَى، وَلَكِنْ أَرَى اللَّهَ غَضِبَ عَلَيْنَا بِمَا صَنَعْنَا فَرَفَعَ نَبِيَّهُ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، فَمَا فِيَّ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ حَتَّى أُقْتَلَ، فَكَسَرْتُ جَفْنَ سَيْفِي، ثُمَّ حَمَلْتُ عَلَى الْقَوْمِ فَأَفْرَجُوا لِي، فَإِذَا أَنَا بِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بَيْنَهُمْ
“When people disappeared away from the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) during the Uhud battle, I looked among the dead people but I did not see the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). I said: ‘By Allah he is not from those who flee and I do not see him among the dead people. But I think Allah is angry on us for what we have done so He has raised back His Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam)…till the complete narration.”
This narration is disconnected between ‘Ikrimah and ‘Ali, but such narrations are often cited especially when they are according to the scenario known already. And Allah knows best.

After all these, people recollected again near the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Those who stood beside the Messenger of Allah (salllahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to defend him were Abu Bakr,’Umar, ‘Ali, Sa’d, Talha, Zubair, Abu ‘Ubaidah and some other companions from Ansar. This is the brief scenario of the battle of Uhud.

As for the case of ‘Uthman (ra), who left the battlefield for some time and then returned back, then the word of Allah is sufficient:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ تَوَلَّوْا مِنْكُمْ يَوْمَ الْتَقَى الْجَمْعَانِ إِنَّمَا اسْتَزَلَّهُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ بِبَعْضِ مَا كَسَبُوا وَلَقَدْ عَفَا اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ حَلِيمٌ
“Those of you who turned back on the day when the two hosts met it was Satan who caused them to backslide because of some (sins) they had earned. But, Allah indeed has forgiven them. Surely, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Forbearing.” [Surah Aal ‘Imran 3:155]

So, when Allah has forgiven him then who is anyone else to raise question on him? Should we now wait until these Rawafidh forgive ‘Uthman (ra) after Allah has already forgiven him? These people accuse us of not following the second Thaqal while they can’t even accept the simple judgment of the greatest Thaqal (Qur’an).

Point of Benefit: Imam Bukhari narrates in Sahih (4043) a narration from Bara bin Malik that he said describing the incident of Uhud:
Ab Sufyan ascended a high place and said, "Is Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) present amongst the people?" The Prophet said, "Do not answer him." Abü Sufyãn said, "Is the son of Abu Quhafa present among the people?" The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said, "Do not answer him." Aba Sufyãn said, "Is the son of Al-Khattab amongst the people?" He then added, "All these people have been killed, for, were they alive, they would have replied." On that, 'Umar could not help saying, "You are a liar, O enemy of Allah! Allah has kept what will make you unhappy."

This incident shows that the disbelievers of Makkah were aware of the status of Abu Bakr (ra) and ‘Umar (ra) in Muslim army that is why Abu Sufyan the chief of Makkah did not inquire about anybody except Abu Bakr and ‘Umar besides the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).


Then Toyib mentioned the incident of Hunain which was the second occasion when Muslims were made to run away from the battlefield. He quotes the verse:
“Truly, Allāh has helped you on many battlefields, and on the Day of Ḥunayn when you rejoiced at your great number but it availed you naught and the earth, as vast as it is, was straitened for you. Then you fled away.” [Surah Tawbah 9:25]

He claims since the statement is general hence everyone must have fled except those regarding whom there is concrete evidence that they remained stable on the battlefield.
I say: We have “the concrete” evidence Toyib is looking for unless if by “concrete evidence” he mean a Qur’anic verse or a Mutawatir hadith. In that case there is no evidence even for ‘Ali that he remained on the battlefield.
Muhammad bin Ishaq, the Imam of Maghazi, narrates from ‘Aasim bin ‘Umar bin Qatadah from Abdur-Rahman bin Jabir bin ‘Abdullah from his father and in it he mentions those who remained with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam):
Among his family members:
1.   ‘Ali
2.   Abu Sufyan bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib
3.   Rabi’ah bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib
4.   Fadhl bin ‘Abbas
5.   ‘Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib
Among others:
1.   Abu Bakr
2.   ‘Umar
3.   Usamah bin Zaid
4.   Ayman bin ‘Ubaid
It was recorded by Ibn Hisham in Seerah (2/443), Ahmad bin Hanbal in Musnad (15027) and Al-Bayhaqi in Dalail an-Nubuwwah (5/126-127). Most of the authors on Seerah do mention it.
I say: There is an agreement that a group of companions remained with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) and they did not flee. In a tradition narrated by Tirmidhi (1689) – who declared it Hasan Sahih Gharib and Ibn Hajar said it is Hasan and Al-Albani considered it Sahih – through Ibn ‘Umar (ra) that less than hundred people remained with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) during Hunain. Hence, as long as there is a possibility that a companion could be among those who were steady with the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) one must abstain from speculating that such and such person fled from the battlefield. If Allah wanted to character-assassin someone He would have done so by taking names but rather He forgave them. We know from the above narration that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were steady in the battlefield but even those who are not mentioned should not be accused directly of fleeing unless if there is a proof that so and so person left the battlefield. This is the best and safe methodology based on Qur’anic principles.
Also, it is to be mentioned that after fleeing from the battlefield they returned back to the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). Hence, they were forgiven by Allah.

Another things is that they did not flee because they were coward. Qur’an never calls them coward. If they were coward then how come they come to face the enemy who was larger in number? Even when they left away they returned back again to fight with the enemy? A coward never endangers his life for someone else. We know the cases of hypocrites who used to left the battlefield or rather give excuses to not join the battle. The Hunain incident was in  when the army of Hawazin all of a sudden started shooting arrows the Muslims were shattered and dispersed to save their life leaving aside the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). This no doubt was a sin but Allah had forgiven them and they again went for Tabuk to fight for the cause of Allah.
Then to show that ‘Umar (ra) fled from the battlefield Toyib quoted a narrations as follows:
Al-Layth – Yaḥyā b. Sa’īd – ‘Umar b. Kathīr b. Aflaḥ – Abū Muḥammad, freed slave of Abū Qatādah – Abū Qatādah:
On the Day of Ḥunayn, I saw a Muslim fighting with one of the pagans and another pagan was hiding himself behind the Muslim in order to kill him. So I hurried towards the pagan who was hiding behind the Muslim to kill him, and he raised his hand to hit me but I hit his hand and cut it off. That man got hold of me and pressed me so hard that I was afraid, then I knelt down and his grip became loose and I pushed him and killed him. The Muslims fled, and I too fled WITH THEM. Suddenly, I met ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭāb AMONGST THE PEOPLE and I asked him, “What is wrong with THE PEOPLE?” He said, “It is the Command of Allāh.” Then THE PEOPLE returned to the Messenger of Allāh.

By highlighting the phrase “the people” Toyib here wants to show us that everyone from the companions fled without exception. The only exception he might give to anyone is ‘Ali (ra). This is a fact that by a generalized term many a times a large portion is also intended instead of each and every individual. This is something obvious, not only in Arabic, but in any language.
His second contention in the above hadith is that since Abu Qatadah found ‘Umar (ra) among the people that means he must be running away. I say: Abu Qatadah did not say ‘Umar was also fleeing with others. He only found ‘Umar in the rush of the people. This is all what the narration indicates and whatever these Rawafidh conclude from it is based on mere conjecture and speculation. It is possible that ‘Umar was stopping them and trying to make them silent and steady. Even the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) was calling them and stopping them from running away. This is besides the fact that there is a narration quoted earlier which shows that ‘Umar (ra) did not run away.

وما توفيقي الا بابلله

« Last Edit: December 22, 2014, 01:22:29 AM by AbuMuslimKhorasani »

Farid

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2014, 11:27:32 AM »
Brother, if we had two of you, I would retire. =)

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 210
  • +5/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2014, 03:24:24 PM »
Beautiful work as usual. May Allah reward you.

Quote
I said: ‘By Allah he is from those who flee and I do not see him among the dead people...”

A "not" is missing.
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Hani

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2014, 06:40:24 PM »
MashaAllah, you merged both pieces together
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2014, 09:40:17 PM »
Thank you all for appreciation...

Beautiful work as usual. May Allah reward you.

Quote
I said: ‘By Allah he is from those who flee and I do not see him among the dead people...”

A "not" is missing.

JazakAllah khairan... you should edit it as I can't.

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2014, 09:44:14 PM »
It is to be noted while reading that many a times I do not give grading on a narration but I do mention the Isnad. That means according to my study the hadith is authentic but since giving a specific judgement [Hasan, Sahih etc] is a difficult job hence I avoid it. Whenever I see a considerable problem with Isnad I do notify.

Optimus Prime

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2015, 08:32:35 PM »
It is to be noted while reading that many a times I do not give grading on a narration but I do mention the Isnad. That means according to my study the hadith is authentic but since giving a specific judgement [Hasan, Sahih etc] is a difficult job hence I avoid it. Whenever I see a considerable problem with Isnad I do notify.

Brother, pardon my ignorance, but isn't it the same thing?

If you state a certain narration is authentic you're saying it is sahih, right?

Moin

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #18 on: January 12, 2015, 07:27:48 PM »
Authentic as per english usage of the term. So here an authentic chain could either be Sahih or Hasan as per the terminology of Hadith scholars.

Ameen

Re: Refutation of the book "Ali: the best of the Sahabah" of Toyib Olawuyi
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2015, 12:00:16 AM »
Many reasons can be given for Hazrath Ali (as) for being the best of the Sahaba. But these two reasons are more than enough to settle and end this ridiculous argument,

The two Ayaath, 1 Ayath e Tatheer, 2 Ayath e Mubahila both apply to Hazrath Ali (as) and no other Sahaba. And Hazrath Ali (as) was part of and involved in both incidents, the Blanket and the Mubahila. No other companion was.

What more are we looking for??? What more do we what??? I guess we're desperate to somehow raise others above Ali (as).

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
81 Replies
10547 Views
Last post April 16, 2016, 10:55:15 PM
by Abubakar
2 Replies
2131 Views
Last post June 08, 2015, 11:36:16 PM
by MuslimK
1 Replies
455 Views
Last post November 08, 2015, 08:52:36 AM
by Hani
0 Replies
44 Views
Last post October 26, 2017, 10:55:37 PM
by Link