Imamah of `Ali a historical reading

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« on: September 23, 2014, 11:18:26 PM »
al-Salamu `Aleykum,

This is a topic for an idea of a research I have in mind related to the topic of Imamah. To be more precise, to research the alleged appointment of `Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) as a successor and leader for this nation by the Prophet (saw). If such an event really did take place, it must be popular and famous in the books of history from his actions and words so it deserves a closer look.

There are two matters in this research that I would like to hear the brothers' opinions concerning them:

A- Since this is a historical matter, I would like to review all the biggest and most popular books of history, even the controversial ones, I do not want to dive into books of Sunan and Hadith, ONLY the books that are categorized as "History book". I would like the brothers to give me a good list of such books, I already know some but love to hear suggestions.

NOTE: I decided to rely only on traditional history books, especially the early ones (Maximum 7th century), which is why Ibn Katheer and al-Dhahabi and al-Suyuti will not be included even though they have amazing history books.

Tareekh of ibn Jarir al-Tabari
Tareekh Khalifah bin Khayyat
Al-Kamil fil-Tareekh by ibn al-Athir
Al-Imamah wal-Siyasah (falsely attributed to Ibn Qutaybah)
And more... (I am researching this)

B- Going through an entire book of history is a huge task, and also going through Ibn abi Talib's (ra) life from beginning to end is too hard although very beneficial. My plan is to look at specific points in history where it would be really clear if our companion was appointed or not from his behavior and words, such as:

-Period of allegiance to Abu Bakr (ra). (year 11)
-Period of consultation of the six.  (year 24)
-Period after `Uthman's (ra) martyrdom. (year 35)

These are the pivotal periods where `Ali (ra) was actively speaking, when he should've spoke about his divine right and declared it or mentioned it (if at all). As for why I never included the time of `Umar's (ra) appointment, it's because I do not recall `Ali (ra) having anything to say at that time as opposed to the other events.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 03:49:38 PM by Hani »
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2014, 11:21:52 PM »
This is an old research I translated regarding the book al-Imamah wal-Siyasah, it proves that the author is not the popular Ibn Qutaybah al-Dinawari as he does not narrate from the same scholars as him, it also proves that the book itself is unreliable as a whole:

Let me translate a small part of the research done on al-Imamah wal-Siyasah by al-Ustath Dr. Khaled Kabir 'Alal "الأستاذ الدكتور خالد كبير علال" in his book "Naqd Kitab al-Imamah wal-Siyasah al-Mansoub li Ibn Qutaybah".

'Abdullah ibn Qutaybah al-Dinawari (born 213 - died 276 AH).

Part one: Studying the Asaneed of the book.

The author mainly relied in his history book on two narrators in which he declared hearing from them directly, the first is: Sa'eed bin Katheer bin 'Ufayr al-Masri (d.226 AH) and he relied on him a lot in most of his narrations. The second is: Ibn abi Mariam, and he relied on him a lot less than the previous narrator . While relying on those two he did not mention their Isnad a lot in the narrations that he narrated from them, he mentioned some of them in five locations, and often he would find it enough to simply say: ((And he said: they mentioned...)).

(1) The first Isnad in the book was mentioned by the author:
عن ابن أبي مريم ، قال : حدثنا العرياني ، عن أبي عون بن عمرو بن تيم الأنصاري رضي الله عنه
((From ibn abi Mariam that he said: al-'Ariyani told us, from abi 'Aoun bin 'Amro bin Taym al-Ansari may Allah be pleased with him))

And the author is considered the first man in this chain because he used " 'An'anah " when he said: FROM ibn abi Mariam, and since this book is attributed to ibn Qutaybah then we must mention his condition in the light of Jarh and Ta'adeel, he is 'Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaybah al-Dinawari, born in 213 Hijri, he was on the Madhab of the Salaf, he lived in Baghdad and narrated his works in it until his death in 276 Hijri, one can not find among his Shuyoukh (those whom he narrated from) anyone holding the name "ibn abi Mariam".

As for the second man or second narrator in this chain, he is Ibn abi Mariam and he is mentioned in a vague and unclear way, the author should have specified because there are a group of narrators who hold the name or Kuniyah of "ibn abi Mariam" such as Sa'eed ibn abi Mariam and Saleh ibn abi Mariam and 'Ubeid ibn abi Mariam and Malik ibn abi Mariam [refer to al-Dhahabi's al-Kashif]. What is clear to me is that he means the first one and he is abu Muhammad Sa'eed bin abi Mariam al-Masri (b.144 - d.224 AH), he lived in Egypt and he is trustworthy. It was never mentioned anywhere that ibn Qutaybah narrated from this man nor is there anyone that goes by the name of al-'Ariyani among his shuyoukh [refer to al-Mezzi in Tahtheeb al-Kamal]. Although it is not very likely that ibn Qutaybah who was born in 213 hijri would narrate from ibn abi Mariam who died in 224 hijri as he was only 11 years old at the time, also it was never mentioned anywhere that ibn Qutaybah went to Egypt or anywhere else to seek knowledge, he spent his entire life in Baghdad and died there [al-Khatib al-Baghdadi in the previous source].

As for the third narrator he is al-'Ariyani and the author never specified who he was, and I only came across one narrator that holds this name and he is: Muslim bin Mikhraq al-'Ariyani, he was one of the followers and he narrated from some of the Sahaba [al-Mezzi in the previous source]. So this third man is either Majhool (unknown) or he is Muslim bin Mikhraq and he is from the Tabi'een (followers) and Ibn abi Mariam who was born in 144 hijri could not have caught up to him nor is al-'Ariyani mentioned among his shuyoukh, so the Isnad is disconnected here.

The fourth narrator in the first chain is abu 'Aoun bin 'Amro bin Taym al-Ansari, it is apparent from the words of the author that this man was an eye witness to the events and that he was a companion and this is why he followed his name with "may Allah be pleased with him", I searched a lot and never found any companion or follower holding such name but I found a narrator and he is most likely to be the man and his full name is: abu 'Aoun 'Amro bin 'Amro bin 'Aoun bin Tamim al-Ansari, ibn Hajar mentioned him in "Lisan al-Meezan" and said: Majhool.

So the first Isnad is incorrect because of a disconnection between the first and second narrators and another disconnection between the second and third narrator and because the fourth narrator is unknown and his narrations are unacceptable in the light of Jarh wal-Ta'adeel.

(2) The second Isnad in the book was mentioned by the author:
و حدثنا سعيد بن كثير ، عن عفير بن عبد الرحمن ، قال
((Sa'eed bin Katheer told us, from 'Ufayr bin 'Abdul-Rahman, he said:...))

Here the author declares hearing directly from Sa'eed bin Katheer and his full name is: Sa'eed bin Katheer bin 'Ufayr al-Masri al-Ansari (b.146 - d.226 AH) he was trustworthy and he specialized in history [al-Dhahabi in al-Siyar and Tathkirat al-Huffadh]. Since the author declared hearing this means that he met this man and directly heard from him and this is not proven because ibn Qutaybah never left Baghdad and nor did Sa'eed bin Katheer enter Baghdad and narrate in it at any point in ibn Qutaybah's life or before it (If he did al-Khatib al-Baghdadi would have wrote his biography in Tareekh Baghdad). Ths is why we don't find among the Shuyoukh of ibn Qutaybah anyone with the name: Sa'eed bin Katheer bin 'Ufayr [check al-'Awasem min al-Qawasem researched by Muhibb al-Deen al-Khateeb].

The second narrator is 'Ufayr bin 'Abdul-Rahman and it appears that he is Majhool, I found absolutely no trace of him in the books of Tarajim and History nor in the compilations of Jarh and Ta'adeel. This narrator was not an eye witness to the Baya'ah of Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (ra), since Sa'eed bin Katheer narrated from him and he was born in 144 hijri, so if we assume that he heard from him in 156 hijri then this unknown narrator 'Ufayr can not be an eye witness to the Baya'ah of the first Caliph in 11th Hijri. This Isnad is considered incorrect because it is disconnected and the narrator is unknown.

(3) The third Isnad in the book was mentioned by the author:
و حدثنا قال : حدثنا ابن عفير ، عن أبي عون ، عن عبد الله بن عبد الرحمن الأنصاري رضي الله عنه
((And he told me and said: ibn 'Ufayr told me, from abi 'Aoun from 'Abdullah bin 'Abdul-Rahman al-Ansari may Allah be pleased with him))

And this chain is obscure, since the author never mentioned who told him "And he told me and said".

The second narrator is Sa'eed bin Katheer bin 'Ufayr and we discussed him previously and said that he never met ibn Qutaybah.

The third narrator is: abu 'Aoun, and it is very hard to say who he is since many narrators hold the Kuniyah of "abu 'Aoun" and I found more than five [ibn Hajar in Taqreeb al-Tahtheeb]. Apparently he most likely means abu 'Aoun bin 'Amro who was mentioned in the first Isnad because he is from the Shuyoukh of Sa'eed bin Katheer bin 'Aoun and he is Majhool.

The fourth narrator is: 'Abdullah bin 'Abdul-Rahman al-Ansari and he is a companion but none of those who narrated from him are called "abu 'Aoun" [ibn 'Abdul-Barr in al-Istee'ab and al-Mezzi in Thatheeb al-Kamal]. So after studying the third Isnad it is incorrect because of disconnection and the unknown narrators.

(4) The fourth Isnad in the book was mentioned by the author:
قال عبد الله بن مسلم : حدثنا ابن أبي مريم ، و ابن عفير قالا : حدثنا ابن عون ، قال : أخبرنا المخول بن إبراهيم ،و أبو حمزة الثمالي
(('Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaybah said: ibn abi Mariam and ibn 'Ufayr told me: ibn 'Aoun told us: al-Mukhawwal bin Ibrahim and abu Hamza al-Thamali told me...))

This Isnad is also incorrect because ibn Qutaybah whom the book is attributed to, never heard from ibn abi Mariam or from ibn 'Ufayr and this was discussed earlier. And because of the third narrator whom the author named: ibn 'Aoun and he is abu 'Aoun 'Amro bin 'Amro bin 'Aoun al-Ansari one of the unknown Shuyoukh of ibn 'Ufayr. As for the third and fourth narrators they were criticized, al-Mukhawwal bin Ibrahim is an extremist Rafidhi  who attacks the senior companions, and abu Hamza al-Thamali is a weak narrator [Al-'Uqayli in al-Du'afa and al-Dhahabi in Meezan al-I'itidal and al-Kashif].

(5) The fifth Isnad in the book was mentioned by the author:
قال عبد الله بن مسلم : و ذكر ابن عفير ، عن عون بن عبد الله بن عبد الرحمن الأنصاري ، قال
(('Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutaybah said: ibn 'Ufayr mentioned from 'Aoun bin 'Abdullah bin 'Abdul-Rahman al-Ansari that he said...))

This is also an incorrect Isnad because of what we stated earlier regarding ibn 'Ufayr and because the third narrator was not an eye witness to the event he narrated because he never declared it, it is very unlikely that he would be an eye witness to the death of 'Uthman bin 'Affan (ra) since ibn 'Ufayr was born in 144 hijri had narrated from him. Also the narrator himself is unknown as we previously mentioned.

We observe from our study of the Asaneed(Chains) that none of them are authentic, including those in which the author declared hearing from ibn 'Ufayr and ibn abi Mariam because he never actually heard from them, this shows that the author was not honest when he declared hearing.

Secondly it appears to me that the author was making Tadlees in the chains and manipulating them, in the first Isand he mentioned abu 'Aoun bin'Amro bin Taym al-Ansari as an eye witness and he follows his name by "May Allah be pleased with him". In the third Isnad however, he called the second narrator abu 'Aoun while in the fourth Isnad he called the narrator whom ibn abi Mariam and ibn 'Ufayr narrated from as ibn 'Aoun. It is clear that this narrator is one man whose full name is: abu 'Aoun 'Amro bin 'Amro bin 'Aoun bin Tamim al-Ansari and he is an unknown narrator from the Shuyoukh of ibn 'Ufayr.

To clarify more, I say: the author removed the name of this narrator from the first Isnad and mentioned him with his Kuniyah and Nasab: "Abu 'Aoun bin 'Amro bin Taym al-Ansari" and he mentioned him as a companion who was an eye witness to the event. In the third Isnad he mentioned him with his Kuniyah only "abu 'Aoun" and ibn 'Ufayr narrated from him without declaring hearing and not as an eye witness. In the fourth Isnad he mentioned him with his Nasab: "ibn 'Aoun" and stated that ibn 'Ufayr heard from him directly. This proves that the author is not honest as he makes Tadlees and manipulates the Asaneed and corrupts them, sometimes he makes a narrator a companion and an eye witness, then he makes him one of the Shuyoukh of ibn 'Ufayr.

Finally this book does not follow a scientific and academic Manhaj, the author mentions the full chain in five locations and then for the rest of the narrations he is simply satisfied with stating:
قال : و ذكروا
((He said: and they mentioned...))

So who are "They" and how can we grade his narrations if he doesn't even mention the chains? other historians such as al-Tabari and ibn 'Asakir and al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi would mention the full chain to every narration but in this obscure book the author leaves us with absolutely nothing, and by not mentioning a chain he also leaves a wide area for himself where he can manipulate the  contents of the narrations. A book like this cannot be relied upon it contains many falsehoods and suspicious narrations, this is why it is condemned and so is its unknown author.
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2014, 01:20:09 AM »
There's some narrations in Ansab al-Ashraf by al-Baladhuri regarding this topic, I think.
إن يتبعون إلا الظن وما تهوى الأنفس


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2014, 10:33:32 PM »
I finished my first history book, I was correct in choosing these three points in time as they were rich in content in relation to `Ali and leadership as you shall see. The first history book I chose is popular and big, it took a lot of reading and a lot of writing to finish this.

My work:

Read the related sections from beginning to end.
Find anything in relation to `Ali ibn abi Talib, his opinions, his words and his actions.
Summarize it and write what is important.
Translate some full quotes word for word.

So I want you guys to read this, not taking into consideration the authenticity or even the fact that some stories sound a bit odd or that some narratives contradict others, rather only concentrate on `Ali's divine right of Imamah, and keep in mind that the Shia claim that this man was publicly appointed as successor in front of thousands, try reconciling this with his words and actions in history.

(I'll start with a new book after I get your feed back InshaAllah)

By al-Imam abu al-Hasan `Ali bin abi al-Karam ibn al-Atheer al-Jazari (d. 630h)

1st print, Dar-ul-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, Lebanon.

Year 11 (Vol 2 / Pages 182-195):

-While mentioning the death of the Prophet (saw), he records the Hadith of `Abbas and `Ali wondering who would be the successor and leader after Rasul-Allah (saw) passes away. `Abbas advises `Ali to ask but `Ali refuses out of fear that other men might be chosen.
-The Ansar gathered in Saqifah and wished to appoint Sa`d bin `Ubadah, Abu Bakr and the Mouhajiroun followed and tried to change their opinions and told them that the leaders are from Quraysh, Abu Bakr proposed `Umar and abu `Ubaydah but they refused and appointed him instead.
-Some of the Ansar said: “We’ll only give allegiance to `Ali.” Banu Hashim and `Ali and Zubayr and Talhah refrained from Bay`ah and gathered in Fatimah’s house.
-He mentions two stories, one says that they refrained and `Umar ordered them to go and give Bay`ah and he ordered that al-Zubayr’s sword be broken, another story says that `Ali when he heard that Abu Bakr received Bay`ah hurried to him in order to give him Bay`ah. He says both stories are incorrect and no Bay`ah was given for six months.
-He mentioned that abu Sufiyan wished to give `Ali Bay`ah and promised to overthrow Abu Bakr by force, but `Ali accused him of enmity towards the Muslims and refused to accept.
-He mentioned many reports of the conversations that took place between the Mouhajiroun and the Ansar with no sign of any of them having heard anything about an appointed man, rather they discussed who had more merit and more value in Islam, and they discussed whether it should go to the Mouhajiroun or the Ansar and who was most deserving.
-When the Ansar gave Bay`ah to Abu Bakr, a man from them called Bashir bin Sa`d said: “I hated to compete with them(Quraysh & the Mouhajiroun) about a matter(Leadership) that Allah has reserved for them.” Sa`d bin `Ubadah was his cousin and he held it against him.
-He mentions that Sa`d bin `Ubadah went into his house and refused to give Bay`ah as he saw that he had more right to it. They ignored him since he was alone in his decision.

Year 23 (Vol 2 / Pages 459-475):

-He starts off by stating what the people told `Umar, that he must appoint a successor, `Umar said if abu `Ubaydah or Salim were alive he would’ve nominated them to succeed. The people then told him to select `Abdullah ibn `Umar but he rejected as he cannot face Allah having chosen his own son.
-`Umar said: “If I appoint then one who was better than I did, and if I do not choose a successor then one better than I did.” `Umar said that he thought of the matter and had intended to nominate a worthy successor who can carry them on the correct path and he pointed to `Ali, but he saw in a dream a matter which made him reconsider his decision to appoint anyone, he said that if he chose a person then all responsibility would fall on his shoulders, so he left the nation in the hands of six men whom Rasul-Allah (saw) was pleased with.
-`Abbas advised `Ali: “Don’t enter the consultation with them.” `Ali said: “I hate to cause a difference between the people.”
-`Umar advised them to consult for three days, and he told them what to do in order to reach a decision and not cause a conflict, he told them to go with the majority always, after that he said: “I do not think anyone will be given authority except these two” and he pointed to `Ali and `Uthman, then mentioned the qualities of each of the six.
-`Abbas told `Ali: “I never tell you to do anything except you come back when it’s too late with bad news! I told you to ask Rasul-Allah (saw) when on his deathbed if the leadership was ours but you refused, I told you after he passed away to be quick when dealing with this matter but you refused, and now I told you to refrain from entering the consultation but you refused.”
-`Abdul-Rahman said that he was willing to remove himself from the nominees and judge between them, all of them accepted including `Ali who told him: “Promise me that you shall follow truth and leave your desires (when judging), and never favor a relative nor leave the advice of the Ummah.”
-`Abdul-Rahman spoke to them one by one and when he reached `Ali he told him: “You say that you are the most worthy of this matter (leadership) because of your close blood relation to the Prophet (saw), your earliness in Islam and your good efforts in support of the religion, but if this matter ends up in possession of another man, who would it be?” `Ali said: “`Uthman.”
-`Abdul-Rahman then spoke to `Uthman and said: “You say you are a Shaykh(honored leader) of the tribe of bani `Abd-Manaf (from the biggest tribes in Quraysh), husband of the Prophet’s (saw) daughters, his cousin (saw), and a man who acquired both earliness and virtue (in Islam), who should be in charge of this affair in case you were not chosen?” He said: “`Ali.”
-`Abdul-Rahman spoke to both al-Zubayr and Sa`d similarly and they both selected `Uthman. `Ali met Sa`d and told him: “Fear Allah, by this son that I have from the Prophet (saw) (through Fatimah), and by my uncle Hamzah’s close relation to you, do not side with `Uthman and `Abdul-Rahman against me.” `Abdul-Rahman consulted the companions and army generals for several nights.
-`Abdul-Rahman called on al-Zubayr and Sa`d again and asked them, this time al-Zubayr said: “My share I give to `Ali.” Sa`d seemed undecided so `Abdul-Rahman told him: “Give me your share.” Sa`d said: “Only if you select yourself. However, should you select `Uthman then I shall not give you my share as `Ali is more beloved to me. Relieve us and just give Bay`ah to yourself.” `Abdul-Rahman refused to choose himself as he did not want the responsibility and burden, and he told him that the people will not be pleased with anyone after Abu Bakr and `Umar.
-`Abdul-Rahman called al-Miswar and he had no doubt that it would be in `Ali’s possession, so al-Miswar called on `Ali and they discussed for a long time, then they called `Uthman and they discussed for a long time, on the next day `Abdul-Rahman gathered the companions and the army commanders and asked for their opinions, `Ammar said: “If you do not wish for the Muslims to differ among themselves, choose `Ali.” Al-Miqdad said: “He speaks truth, if you select `Ali we will say: We listen and we obey.” However, ibn abi al-Sarh said: “If you choose to create division and conflict within Quraysh, you would choose other than `Uthman.” `Abdullah ibn abi Rabee`ah said: “He speaks truth, if you choose `Uthman we will listen and obey.” Bani Umayyah and Bani Hashim disputed and `Ammar advised that they keep this matter in the family of the Prophet (saw).
-`Abdul-Rahman asked `Ali: “Do you promise by Allah, to work according to Allah’s book and the Sunnah of the messenger (saw) and to follow the example of Abu Bakr and `Umar?” `Ali said: “I hope I can, with my knowledge and ability.” He repeated the same question to `Uthman and he replied more confidently: “Yes, I will.” Thus `Uthman was chosen.
-`Ali told `Abdul-Rahman that this isn’t the first time his tribe opposed Banu Hashim and that he only chose `Uthman so he may succeed him in leadership so `Abdul-Rahman was angry at `Ali’s words.
-Al-Miqdad said: “O `Abdul-Rahman, you left him? He was one who judged with justice.” Meaning `Ali. `Abdul-Rahman replied: “O Miqdad, by Allah I did my Ijtihad for the benefit of the believers.” Miqdad ibn al-Aswad said: “If that is the case then may Allah reward you.”
-Talhah came late from his travels, he asked if all of Quraysh had agreed on `Uthman and gave him Bay`ah, after he saw this he then went and gave `Uthman Bay`ah.
-He quoted another narration from abu Ja`far al-Tabari, which that of `Umar’s death, and from it he quoted the part relevant to the consultation, and in it that the six men spoke each giving an eloquent sermon, until it was `Ali’s turn and from what `Ali said was that he praised the prophetic household, both their virtue and knowledge, then said: “We have a right to this matter (of leadership), if we are offered it then we shall take it, but if we were denied then we shall be like the rider of the old camel through the long night, if Rasul-Allah (saw) had promised us anything (with regards to leadership) we would have fulfilled it, and if he had ordered any of us (to be leaders) then we would have disputed with our opponents until death, no one will beat me to declaring the truth and honoring the blood-relation (by obeying the prophet)” Then he warned them of Fitan and advised them to follow wisdom.
-Then he mentions `Uthman’s Khilafah and from the first matters he had to deal with was the crime of `Ubaydullah ibn `Umar who attacked the killers of `Umar, and `Ali was near `Uthman and from his advisers.

Year 35 (Vol 3 / Pages 46-88):

-The Fitnah of the trouble makers began against `Uthman, so he consulted three men: `Ali and Talhah and al-Zubayr, and he told them that people are criticizing their rulers and governors, and they advised him to cut some of the salaries or gifts which he might be giving to relatives such as Marwan bin al-Hakam and `Abdullah bin Khalid. `Uthman then returned all of which he had given them, so the three men praised him and said: “Correct, you have done a good thing.” Mu`awiyah was also present and we saw the first argument between him and `Ali during this event.
-Mu`awiyah asked `Uthman to move to al-Sham where it is safer for him but `Uthman refused to leave the presence of the Prophet (saw). Mu`awiyah then told al-Zubayr and `Ali and a couple of the Mouhajiroun to support `Uthman and aid him as he shall be returning to al-Sham, `Ali and the rest of the men accepted the advice and were satisfied with it.
-Khawarij came from different locations to Madinah, they used Hajj as an excuse to leave in big numbers and confront `Uthman, groups from Basarah favored Talhah, groups coming from Kufa favored al-Zubayr, and groups coming from Misr favored `Ali.
-The Khawarij who favored `Ali went to him to try and give him Bay`ah, they found him with a small army outside Madinah holding his sword and he had sent his son al-Hasan to defend `Uthman in Madinah, they told him what they wished to tell him so he screamed at them and said: “The righteous know that the army of Dhi al-Marwa and the army of Dhu-Khushb and al-A`was have been cursed by Rasul-Allah (saw)” These were location where the Khawarij had set up camp. Talhah also sent his two sons and chased away the Basris who came to his Bay`ah, and so did al-Zubayr who had sent his son `Abdullah to guard `Uthman.
-After they spoke to `Uthman and were silenced by his arguments, they left each in the direction of their cities only to return shortly, The Egyptians claimed they had received a letter ordering their execution by `Uthman, `Ali exposed their plan by asking them: “How did you all receive the same letter when each group went in a different direction?”
-The trouble makers remained in the city and `Uthman was on the pulpit delivering a sermon in which he said that Rasul-Allah (saw) had cursed their likes and several of the Sahabah stood and testified to this, so the trouble makers were enraged and they threw stones at the dwellers of the Masjid and injured `Uthman badly and was carried to his house. Sa`d bin abi Waqqas, al-Husayn bin `Ali, Zayd bin Thabit and abu Hurayrah accompanied him until `Uthman asked them to leave.
-`Ali, Talhah and al-Zubayr visited `Uthman to check on his condition, and to complain to him about what they are dealing with because of the Khawarij. A group from banu Umayyah were in `Uthman’s house, from them was Marwan so they started saying to `Ali: “You’re going to cause us all to perish by what you did!” As if accusing him of being behind this, so he left angrily.
-`Uthman was apparently following the advice of some of his relatives which made things worse, so when the folks decided to kill him, he went to `Ali and said: “O my cousin, my relation to you is close, and I have a right upon you, and these people plan to come to me in the morning, and your word is heard among these people, so ride to them and stop them, because if they enter upon me they will lower my value (as Khalifah) and they will take me lightly.” `Ali said: “Why should I stop them!?” `Uthman said: “I will begin following your advice and counsel.” `Ali said: “I have talked to you and advised you time and again, every time we agree on something and we decide to do it, you turn back! This is surely the doing of Marwan and ibn `Amir and Mu`awiyah and `Abdullah ibn Sa`d, you keep obeying them and you never listened to me.”
-`Ali rode with some of the Mouhajiroun and the Ansar and talked to the Egyptians, he was able to convince them to return back and abandon this matter and guaranteed them that `Uthman will fulfill their wishes. `Ali then returned to `Uthman and informed him of this and had a discussion with him about it. However, Marwan came the next day and convinced `Uthman to stand and tell the people that the Egyptians went back and that he never promised to fulfill their wishes, Marwan told `Uthman: “If you keep accepting everything they tell you to do, then many others will come to you and will ask you for things you cannot handle!”
-`Amro bin al-`Aas is said to have been from those who turned people against `Uthman, and he tried to turn `Ali and Talhah and al-Zubayr against him.
-In another narration `Ali told `Uthman after he had convinced the Egyptians, he advised him to tell the people that he shall go back on some of his policies and that he repents to Allah from this, and `Uthman accepted and he stood on the pulpit and spoke eloquent words about his repentance and he cried and they cried as opposed to the previous narration. `Ali told him: “Otherwise we can’t be safe from others coming from Kufa and Basarah, then you’ll tell me to ride to them and convince them to turn back and if I don’t you’ll tell me that I cut the ties of blood-relation between us and didn’t give you your due right.”
-When `Uthman returned home, a group from Banu Umayyah were there among them Marwan who was not pleased with what `Uthman did and thought of it as disgraceful, he started a fight with `Uthman’s wife. Meanwhile, a large group of people came to `Uthman’s door to see what more he had to say, so `Uthman told Marwan: “Go and talk to them in my place for I feel shy to face them.” So Marwan went outside `Uthman’s door and instead of talking to them kindly, he started insulting them and accusing them of wanting to steal “Our kingdom from our hands” and he said horrible things.
-Some of the people told `Ali of what Marwan did, so `Ali was not pleased and said that after a long time `Uthman spent as a companion of Rasul-Allah (saw) and due to his very old age, he has become a toy in the hands of Marwan, he plays with him as he wishes. `Ali went to `Uthman and reproached him and told him what he thinks of Marwan.
-`Uthman’s wife told him that the main reason people began to dislike him was because of Marwan being by his side, and she advised him to send after `Ali and reconcile with him. `Ali was too angry and he refused to come. Marwan heard of this matter and went to `Uthman and insulted `Uthman’s wife in front of him so `Uthman shut him up and told him: “Stop and do not mention anything with regards to her unless you wish for me to darken your face! By Allah she is better in advice to me than you.”
-`Uthman went to `Ali that night and talked to him, `Ali said: “After you stood on the Mimbar of Rasul-Allah (saw) and humbled yourself in front of the people and returned home, then Marwan stood at the door of your house insulting the people and harming them!” Meaning, how will they be able to fix things after what Marwan did. `Uthman then accused `Ali of abandoning him, to which `Ali said: “By Allah out of all the people I am the one who defended you the most, but whenever I come to you with something which I believe will please you, you instead take what Marwan has to say over my word.” `Ali stopped trying to help `Uthman until the incident where the Khawarij and the trouble makers cut the water from him.
-The Egyptians returned as previously stated with a message saying that they should be killed, `Uthman denied and some narrations pointed to Marwan. Maslamah and `Ali who had previously talked the Egyptians into going back, they said regarding `Uthman: “He is truthful.” While the trouble makers ordered `Uthman to leave leadership or die, they said they would kill him if he does not. `Uthman said that he shall not give it up as it is a trust from Allah and said: “I do not order anyone to fight against you, whoever fights you then it is not by my orders, if I had wished to fight I would have wrote to the armies to come or went into safer lands (Syria).”
-The author repeated similar versions of some stories with the exact same content, and he mentions a narration where `Uthman asks for Talhah and `Ali and Zubayr, and delivers a sermon, bidding them farewell and wishing for his successor to be better than he, also reminding them of his right and earliness in Islam and virtue, and the sanctity of the blood of a Muslim. They replied by saying that he was right about what he said regarding his earliness and virtue and they said: “You were like this and you were worthy of leadership” but then they said that he changed his way and that corruption spread and that this is a punishment for what he did. `Uthman then entered his house in silence and ordered the people of Madinah to stop defending him, and they all went back except al-Hasan bin `Ali, `Abdullah bin al-`Abbas, Muhammad bin Talhah, `Abdullah bin al-Zubayr and their likes.
-The Khawarij cut-off `Uthman from the people of Madinah and the water, so he secretly called for `Ali and Talhah and Zubayr as well as the wives of the Prophet (saw). The first who responded to him was `Ali and Umm Habibah, `Ali told them: “No believer nor even a Kafir does what you men are doing, for even the Persians and Romans feed their prisoners!”
-When the savages heard that the people from all over the lands were coming to break the siege, they hurried and broke `Uthman’s door and attempted to kill him, they were prevented by al-Hasan, ibn Talhah, ibn al-Zubayr, Marwan, Sa`eed bin al-`Aas and some young Sahabah. `Uthman told them: “You are not responsible for supporting me!” but they insisted to help him.
-`Uthman was killed and from those who witnessed his Janazah were `Ali, Talhah, Ka`b bin Malik, Zayd bin Thabit and the companions in general.
-He mentions a narration in which the companions including Talhah and al-Zubayr gather after `Uthman’s death and ask `Ali to receive the Bay`ah: “The people must have a leader” but he responded by saying: “I need not be your leader, I am satisfied with whoever you choose.” They said: “We don’t know from among us anyone who has more right to it than you nor as early in his Islam and closer to Rasul-Allah (saw) than you.” He responded: “I am better for you as an adviser than a ruler.” They insisted so he accepted to receive it at the Masjid.
-Ansar all gave Bay`ah except a few such as Hassan bin Thabit, Ka`b bin Malik, Maslamah bin Makhlad, abu Sa`eed al-Khudari, Muhammad bin Maslamah, al-Nu`man bin Bashir, Zayd bin Thabit, Rafi` bin Khadij, Fadalah bin `Ubayd, Ka`b bin `Ajrah and they were `Uthmaniyyah (loyal to `Uthman).
-From those who never gave him Bay`ah were also `Abdullah bin Salam, Suhayb bin Sinan, Salmah bin Salamah bin Waqsh, Usamah ibn Zayd, Qudamah bin Madh`oun and al-Mugheerah ibn Shu`bah.
-It was also narrated that Talhah and al-Zubayr only gave Bay`ah because they were compelled and they disliked it. This is because when `Uthman died the rebels were confused as to who must succeed, some went for Talhah, some for al-Zubayr and some for `Ali. All three men chased them away, and so did Sa`d and ibn `Umar, and they feared that the state would collapse if there was no leader so they gathered the people of Madinah and told them to choose a man, and they will follow whomever they chose, and if they do not choose one then they will kill al-Zubayr and Talhah and `Ali and other leaders in Madinah.
-People went to `Ali and tried to convince him but he said: “Leave me and find someone else, we will be facing a matter with many faces and colors” They insisted on him so he finally said: “I will accept, and I shall lead you to the best of my knowledge, but if you leave me for someone else, then I shall be like any of you and I shall listen and obey to whomever you grant authority.”
-al-Ashtar sent armed men to force a Bay`ah out of al-Zubayr and Talhah thus making sure that their followers do the same.
-`Ali stood on the Mimbar saying: “O people, this matter of leadership is up to you, no one has a right to it except one whom you choose. Yesterday we parted ways and I had hatred for this matter of leadership but you insisted…”
-After his sermon, `Ali returned home and Talhah and al-Zubayr came to him alongside a group of companions, they said: “O `Ali, we had placed as a condition that punishments be executed (for `Uthman’s killers) etc…” He responded: “O brothers, what can we do? They own us and we do not own them etc…” Later al-Mugheerah and ibn `Abbas advised `Ali to keep `Uthman’s governors until things cool down, otherwise he might be accused of `Uthman’s blood but `Ali did not listen and what happened happened.

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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2014, 11:22:59 PM »
This is a book falsely attributed to Ibn Qutaybah al-Dinawari that the Shia love quoting, it appears to be a regular book of history at first but then inside it are some reports which are so odd that they make certain respectable companions appear in a very bad way, thus the Rafidah quote it all the time.

For me it's one of four cases as the style of the book is not that of ibn Qutaybah nor is this his method (refer to all his other books to see this clearly) nor are these narrators his teachers (this was discussed above) nor is he of these opinions because the man was a hardcore Salafi to the extent of being accused of Nasb:

1-Another less known scholar called Ibn Qutaybah wrote this book and he gathered in it ridiculous matters and fabrications as well as authentic material. (very likely)

2-A Rafidi wrote the book to fool people and attributed it to Ibn Qutaybah who was one of the top scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah, he began it with praise for Abu Bakr and `Umar calling them masters of the men of paradise then after a couple of pages accused them of incurring Allah's wrath as you shall see. (likely)

3-Ibn Qutaybah actually wrote this book and it was later altered and its contents were tampered with by some Rafidah. (possible)

4-Ibn Qutaybah wrote the whole thing as it is, but clarified in his introduction that he only collected all the rumours and stories he came across and recorded the strange tales, then a Rafidi crossed out his introduction and replaced it with a small weak paragraph that a person of the eloquence and value of Ibn Qutaybah can't have written. (unlikely)

Two comment before I post the contents of this research:

A- This book contains the fabricated tale of the attack on Fatimah's house, I almost cracked up laughing more than once while trying to summarize it, because it makes no sense and the characters appear to have a split personality as you will see.

B- This is from the major historical books that Shia use to spread their own version of history, look closely and forget all this mixture of stories and their authenticity, concentrate only on `Ali's Imamah, does he act like he is divinely appointed in front of thousands or not?

Attributed to the Imam `Abdullah bin Muslim ibn Qutaybah al-Dinawari (d. 276h)

1st Print, Dar-ul-Adwa', Beirut, Lebanon.

Year 11 (Page 20-30):

-`Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz asks al-Hasan al-Basri if the Prophet (saw) appointed Abu Bakr as successor, al-Hasan confirms.
-Rasul-Allah (saw) tells `A’ishah and his wives “Call my beloved” and then he appoints Abu Bakr as leader of prayer.
-Abu Bakr gives instructions on the burial of the messenger (saw) after his passing. `Abbas asks `Ali to ask the messenger (saw) who will be his successor, he says: “If it is ours then he will clarify it, and if it goes to someone else then he will advise them to be kind towards us.”
-Right after the Prophet (saw) passed away, `Abbas tells `Ali: “Give me your hand and I shall pledge allegiance to you, the people will say: The uncle of Rasul-Allah (saw) gave Bay`ah to his cousin. Your household will also give you allegiance and then this matter will surely be ours.” `Ali asked: “Is anyone other than us seeking this matter for himself?” `Abbas had previously asked Abu Bakr and `Umar if the messenger (saw) had appointed any of them and they each said: “No”.
-News reached Abu Bakr that some honored leaders from the Ansar gathered in Saqifah to elect Sa`d bin `Ubadah as Khalifah. He hurried there with `Umar and abu `Ubaydah followed.
-Mouhajiroun praised the Ansar and their virtue and faith, Abu Bakr said that the Mouhajiroun are more worthy of this so he gave them the choice between `Umar and abu `Ubaydah. Ansar admitted the superiority of the Mouhajiroun but they said that they feared that a man might be appointed who would oppress them, so they proposed that there should always be two leaders, an Ansari and a Mouhajir.
-They negotiated about virtue and superiority and merit, finally Bashir who was an Ansari gave Bay`ah to Abu Bakr and he was the first to give him Bay`ah. Habbab told Bashir: “Did you do this out of jealousy for your cousin (Sa`d)?” Bashir said: “No by Allah, I did not wish to compete with them (Mouhajiroun) on a matter that is rightfully theirs.”
-Habbab was angry at the decision and refused to accept, he told the Ansar that they did a mistake and their children will pay for it in the future when they become servants for the Mouhajiroun. Abu Bakr told him: “Do you fear that I would do such a thing!?” Habbab answered: “No, but those who would come after you.” Abu Bakr said: “If this is the case then you are free from our obedience.” Habbab said: “O Aba Bakr, this is between you and me but when you pass away the ones after you will make us taste misery!”
-Sa`d was angry as well but he was sick, lying in bed, and he did not accept but the people rushed towards Abu Bakr to give him Bay`ah and some started stepping over Sa`d’s body so he said angrily: “You’re about to kill me!” they said: “Kill him may Allah kill him!” then he told them: “Carry me out of this place.” And he left. Abu Bakr later proposed for him to give Bay`ah like everyone else but he still refused so they left him alone.
-Meanwhile, Banu Hashim and al-Zubayr gathered around `Ali and they used to consider al-Zubayr as one of their own. Banu Umayyah also gathered around `Uthman. Banu Zahrah gathered around Sa`d and ibn `Awf. They all gathered in the prophetic Masjid when Abu Bakr and abu `Ubaydah and `Umar entered upon them. The people had given their Bay`ah to Abu Bakr so `Umar told them: “Why are you all sitting in groups? Come forth and give allegiance just as I and the Ansar did.”
-Everyone gave Bay`ah except al-`Abbas and `Ali and the rest of Bani Hashim as well as al-Zubayr. `Umar and a group of companions followed them and insisted that they give Bay`ah but they refused and al-Zubayr took out his sword then `Umar ordered the men to take it from him and hit it against the wall. They accompanied al-Zubayr and he gave Bay`ah and then the rest of Banu Hashim also went and gave Bay`ah.
-`Ali was brought to Abu Bakr to give Bay`ah but he refused and said that just like the Mouhajiroun were more worthy than the Ansar by their closeness to Rasul-Allah (saw), then also Banu Hashim are the closest to the Prophet (saw) and that he had more right to this matter than they did. Abu Bakr told him: “If you do not wish to give Bay`ah, then I shall not compel you.” Abu `Ubaydah then said: “O cousin, you are still far too young and these men are the elders of your people, you do not have their experience and knowledge, I see Abu Bakr as stronger than you in this matter and more patient, so submit to him and if you live long enough then you will be worthy of this matter and suited for it, due to your virtue and religion and understanding and earliness and close relation (to the Prophet (saw)).” But `Ali refused and urged them by Allah to keep the matter with the household as long as there are religious people among them who were suited for it, the people said that if he had told them this before they gave their Bay`ah to Abu Bakr then no two would have differed on him. `Ali left with Fatimah who was riding on a mule and she urged the Ansar to aid them but they said the same thing and `Ali replied: “Should I have left the messenger (saw) without burial and went after his authority instead?”
-He mentions the story of how `Umar brought wood and wished to threaten burning the house, Fatimah came to meet him and `Ali was busy compiling the Qur’an. Then `Umar returned and told Abu Bakr that `Ali refuses, so Abu Bakr sent Qunfudh to `Ali and `Ali told him “How quickly you have lied against Rasul-Allah (saw).” Qunfudh returned with this message and Abu Bakr cried for a long time. Then `Umar went and they broke the door and Fatimah screamed and when they heard this they cried and returned except for `Umar and a couple of men who took `Ali out and brought him to Abu Bakr. `Umar threatened to kill him if he does not give Bay`ah and Abu Bakr said: “I shall not force anything on him as long as Fatimah is by his side.” They let him go and `Ali went to the Prophet’s (saw) grave and cried and shouted and asked for help. `Umar told Abu Bakr: “Let’s go to Fatimah and seek her pleasure for we have angered her.” They went but Fatimah never answered them, then they asked `Ali and he permitted them to enter upon her, so they spoke to her and Abu Bakr said: “O beloved of the messenger (saw), by Allah the relatives of the messenger are more beloved to me than my relatives! I love you more than my daughter `A’ishah etc…” She told them that they angered her and whoever angers her shall anger Rasul-Allah (saw) then Abu Bakr said: “I seek refuge from your anger O Fatimah etc…” And he cried and left, and told the people he no longer wishes to be their leader, but the people said: “O successor of Rasul-Allah (saw), this religion cannot thrive without a leader etc…” He said that if it weren’t for this he would not sit for one day as a Khalifah after he heard what he heard from Fatimah. After she died, `Ali called on Abu Bakr, and Abu Bakr came so `Ali told him: “O Aba Bakr, we did not refuse to pay allegiance to you because we deny your virtue, nor out of jealousy for you, but we saw that we had a right to this matter and you left us out.” Then Abu Bakr cried and praised `Ali and said that he was only following the Sunnah, so `Ali said: “Tomorrow I shall give you my oath of allegiance.” Al-Mugheerah advised Abu Bakr to make a share for al-`Abbas and his progeny in this matter as they can use this as argument against `Ali.
-Abu Bakr Mugheerah `Umar and abu `Ubaydah all went to `Abbas, Abu Bakr praised Allah and mentioned in his praise that Allah left the people the freedom of choosing whom they wish to take charge of their affairs, and that the people chose him willingly, and he proposed to him to take a share in leadership. Al-`Abbas also praised Allah and said the same as Abu Bakr mentioning that Allah did in fact leave the choice for the believers, as long as they chose correctly and never followed desires, and he refused the offer and insisted that leadership only belongs to them.
-Finally, Abu Bakr stood in front of the people and excused `Ali from delaying his Bay`ah, and `Ali stood and greatly praised the right of Abu Bakr (in leadership), and mentioned his virtues and earliness in Islam, then gave him Bay`ah. Abu Bakr remained for three days asking people to relieve him of his duty as Khalifah and leader, he would say: “You are all free from the Bay`ah which you had given me! Does anyone not accept?” And `Ali would be from the first to stand up and say: “By Allah we will not relieve you nor replace you! It was the messenger of Allah (saw) who placed you where you are to unite us in our religion, who then could push you back for worldly matters!?”

Year 23 (Pages 41-45):

-`Umar was asked to appoint a successor, he said: “If I do then one better than has and it is Abu Bakr, and if I don’t then one who was better than I did and it is Rasul-Allah (saw).” Then he wished to not have the responsibility of appointing anyone.
-`A’ishah grants `Umar permission to be buried in her house and tells him to not leave the nation without appointing a leader, `Umar mentions abu `Ubaydah, Mu`adh ibn Jabal and Khalid bin al-Walid but they are all dead. He decides to select six men whom Rasul-Allah (saw) died while being pleased with them. He also ordered that ibn `Abbas and al-Hasan attend out of nearness to Rasul-Allah (saw) as well as his own son `Abdullah but he has no right to it (leadership).
-They advised him to appoint his son but he refused and told `Abdullah: “Don’t ever seek authority.” Then he spoke to each of the men, he told Sa`d: “I did not appoint you because of your harshness and severity.” He told `Abdul-Rahman: “I did not appoint you because you are like Pharaoh in this nation (he was rich).” He told al-Zubayr: “I did not appoint you as you are a believer when pleased and a disbeliever when angry.” He told Talhah: “I did not appoint you because you think you’re great and should you receive leadership you will place the ring in your wife’s hand.” He told `Uthman: “I did not appoint you because of your tribalism and because you love your relatives.” He told `Ali: “I did not appoint you because you love authority although you’re the most likely to lead them on a clear path.”
-`Umar prayed with his wound bleeding, he turned towards them and said: “I have opened a straight path for you so do not corrupt it.” He told `Ali: “Maybe the people will recognize your right and honor and blood-relation to Rasul-Allah (saw), and what Allah had given you from knowledge and understanding so they might give you Bay`ah. Fear Allah O `Ali with regards to this matter and do not support anyone from Bani Hashim who oppresses the people.” He told `Uthman: “Maybe the people will recognize that you’re the husband of his daughters (saw), and they respect your age, and accept your honor and earliness then they appoint you. If you are given authority, do not support anyone from Bani Umayyah who oppresses the people.”
-The three days that `Umar specified passed, `Abdul-Rahman proposed to drop his right and in return he would choose one of them based on his own Ijtihad. They accepted and each selected a man from among them to represent him.
-`Abdul-Rahman disguised himself and went to Madinah asking every person for his opinion and he left no one. Every person he asks for advice or opinion would tell him: “`Uthman.” `Abdul-Rahman then consulted with the five men and made each of them give him their oath that they would follow the path of the prophet (saw) and his two companions. `Ali however, did not accept the condition that he should not appoint people from Banu Hashim and he said that it is his own decision and he does what he sees fit. Ibn `Awf went to the Masjid and spoke and announced that the people do not equate anyone with `Uthman, so he gave him Bay`ah. `Uthman during the first six years of his Khilafah was more beloved to the people than `Umar, as `Umar was harsh he restricted Quraysh and blocked them from worldly benefits and they followed his example out of respect, whereas `Uthman was soft and lenient.

Year 34 (Pages 56-66):

-The Khawarij from Misr and Kufa had surrounded `Uthman, they also went to `Ali and said: “Did you not see what the enemy of Allah (`Uthman) wrote concerning us!? Come and rise against him with us because Allah has permitted the spilling of his blood!” `Ali said: “No by Allah, I shall not go with you!” They said: “Then why did you write to us and ask us to come here?” `Ali said: “No by Allah, I did not write to you ever!” They then looked at each other in confusion.
-The trouble makers cut the water from `Uthman and his family, so he wrote to `Ali who sent him three jugs filled with water. `Uthman was also being protected by a hundred men, from them Ibn al-Zubayr, Marwan, Hasan bin `Ali, `Abdullah bin Salam and abu Hurayrah.
-The rebels heard that an army from al-Sham was coming so they set fire to `Uthman’s house and the young men outside prepared to battle the rebels but `Uthman told them to leave as he did not wish for blood to be spilled in his sake. `Abdullah ibn `Umar was among them, so he asked `Uthman: “If what is to happen happens, who do you wish for me to follow?” `Uthman said: “Stay with the majority.” Ibn `Umar said: “If it turns out that the majority were against you?” He said: “Stick to the majority!” al-Hasan bin `Ali then entered and told him: “Order me, for I will listen and obey!” `Uthman said: “O son of my brother, return to your home and sit there until Allah decides this matter.” `Uthman refused to escape and refused to fight or renounce his right for Khilafah because of Rasul-Allah’s (saw) Hadith.
-When `Ali saw that the matter got worse (with the letter they claimed to have found) he sent after Talhah and Zubayr and `Ammar and Sa`d and several people from Badr, they entered on `Uthman and `Ali told him that they found this messenger boy with a letter, and `Uthman recognized the boy, and he recognized the seal as his own but he said: “No, I never wrote this letter” `Ali and his companions were suspicious and they knew that `Uthman would never make a false oath in Allah’s name. Some men started asking for Marwan, they had suspicions towards him, but `Uthman feared they would kill his relative so he refused to hand him over. `Ali sent al-Hasan and al-Husayn to `Uthman’s door to protect him and told them: “Go both of you with your swords until you stand in front of `Uthman’s door, do not let anyone reach him” other companions also sent their children.
-al-Hasan was struck by an arrow and injured, Marwan was hit by an arrow inside the house, Muhammad bin Talhah was bloodied, and Qunbur the servant of `Ali had his head open by a blow, so Muhammad bin Abi Bakr feared that Banu Hashim might be angered by al-Hasan’s injury.
-`Uthman was killed inside his house, al-Hasan and al-Husayn entered and found him dead and mutilated, so they rushed to his body and started crying. The news quickly reached `Ali and Talhah and Zubayr and whoever was in Madinah from the companions, they went crazy over this and they entered his house and sat around him crying and `Ali told his sons: “How did Ameer al-Mu’mineen die while you were at the door!?” He hit al-Hasan and shouted on Muhammad bin Talhah and cursed `Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr, and he went out while enraged. `Ali said that `Uthman was killed without any strong evidence presented against him.
-People accused Talhah and al-Zubayr of killing `Uthman, and a consultation happened, and al-Zubayr said: “O people, Allah has accepted for you consultation to decide your affairs, and we have consulted and chosen `Ali” Then the people (rebels) went to `Ali and said: “Extend your hand and we will pay allegiance to you, people must have a leader and you have the most right to it.” He refused and said: “This is not up to you to decide, it is only in the hands of the people of consultation (Mouhajiroun and the Ansar) as well as the people of Badr, when the people of consultation and Badr accept a man then he shall be the successor.” They left him at that time.
-The trouble makers led by al-Ashtar returned to `Ali and told him: “Let us offer you Bay`ah otherwise you will cry your eyes out for a third time (because someone else was chosen).” He remained trying to convince him and scare him from the Fitnah until `Ali accepted.
-`Ali tried to ask `Uthman’s wife and investigate the identity of his killers, he called on Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr and asked him and he repented from participating but he didn’t know who the killers were.

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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2014, 01:17:04 AM »
Looking at Murouj al-Dhahab by al-Mas`oudi, who is a Mu`tazili in his religious doctrine but Sunni in his political beliefs, he mentions in an important section in the intro of his book, a list of most of the biggest scholars who wrote history books both in his time and before his time, he lists them and the names of their history books, funnily enough he mentions ibn Qutaybah but only mentions his book al-Ma`arif and never mentions "al-Imamah wal-Siyasah" although it is a history book while al-Ma`arif isn't.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2014, 11:50:52 AM by Hani »
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2014, 06:00:47 PM »
This is the first honest purely Shia history book that I'll review, the author al-Ya`qoubi is a writer for the Caliphs of banu al-`Abbas, so he went out of his way to please them writing the worst possible material and attributing it to `Uthman and Banu Umayyah, in this sense the book exceeds "al-Imamah wal-Siyasah" in its anti-Umayyad propaganda.

I find it very strange that Rafidah in our days blame banu Umayyah for writing a corrupt history when in reality some of the biggest history books were all written in the time of the `Abbasiyyah and they made the Umawiyyah look very bad and transgressed in doing so.

Three of the biggest history books for instance, Ansab-ul-Ashraf by al-Baladhuri (Sunni) makes Bani Umayyah look very bad and fabricates chains for anti-Umayyad Hadiths not found in any other book but his, this Baladhuri was really close to the Caliphs of banu al-`Abbas and was their historian. Murouj-ul-Dhahab by al-Mas`oudi (Mu`tazili but politically a Sunni) also ruins the image of bani Umayyah greatly, and al-Mas`oudi was a writer for Banu al-`Abbas. Now this book as well as others also follow the same path.

Still, leaving aside all the stories and fables collected in this book, we find that in the sections we researched, `Ali never claimed to be appointed, nor did he behave in that way, nor did anyone else claim this for him, even those from his allies announced that he deserved it for his earliness and knowledge and family ties with Rasul-Allah (saw). Only two quotes seemed to use Shia terminology and we commented on them below, while both quotations are unclear in declaring that he was appointed by text, yet it is very obvious that the author has adopted some texts from the Imamiyyah of his time.

By Ahmad ibn Wadih al-Ya`qoubi (d. 284h)

Editado por Th. Houtsma, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1883

Year 11 (Volume 2 / Pages 136-144):

-On the day the Prophet (saw) died, the Ansar gathered in Saqifah, Abu Bakr and `Umar and abu `Ubaydal rushed there. Mouhajiroun said: “We are closer to the messenger (saw) and the most worthy of his place.” Ansar said: “From us an Ameer and from you an Ameer.” They praised each other but the Mouhajiroun insisted that Quraysh has more right to it. Abu Bakr proposed `Umar or ibn al-Jarrah but they refused and spoke of his superiority so they began giving Abu Bakr Bay`ah, `Abdul-Rahman ibn `Awf said: “O men of Ansar, you have much virtue but none among you is equal to Abu Bakr and `Umar and `Ali.” Al-Mundhir bin Arqam said: “We do not reject the virtue of those you mentioned and among them [The Mouhajiroun] is a man [Meaning `Ali] that if he asked for it no two would differ on him.”
-Bara’ bin `Azib knocked on Banu Hashim’s door and told them what happened, some Hashimites said: “The Muslims should not conduct a matter such as this in our absence as we have more right to Muhammad (saw).” `Abbas said: “By the Lord of the Ka`bah they did it!” At that time the Mouhajiroun and the Ansar did not doubt that the matter would go to `Ali.
-Some of the Hashimites and `Utbah bin abi Lahab started saying that they did not imagine that the matter would not be given to Banu Hashim especially `Ali as he has the most right to it, they said that he deserves it as he was the first to believe, and the most knowledgeable in Qur’an and Sunnah, and the last of the people to be with the Prophet (saw) before his departure from this world.
-`Ali sent to them and stopped them from saying what they were saying; he also skipped Abu Bakr’s Bay`ah. From those who skipped the Bay`ah with `Ali were: `Abbas, Fadl bin `Abbas, Zubayr, Khalid bin Sa`id, abu Dharr, Miqdad, Salman, al-Bara’ and Ubay.
-Abu Bakr consulted `Umar and ibn al-Jarrah and Mugheerah, they said: “Meet `Abbas and give him and his progeny a share in this matter so he may side with you, this way you weaken Ibn abi Talib’s argument.” Abu Bakr and his companions went to `Abbas and he spoke to him and told him that Allah gave the Muslims the freedom of consulting and choosing their leaders, and that he was chosen and so on… then he proposed to him a share in the matter. `Abbas gave a sermon and said similarly to Abu Bakr and that Allah gave the Muslims the freedom to choose their leader but they must choose well and not shy from what is correct, and he rejected the offer.
-Abu Sufiyan also skipped the Bay`ah, he told Banu `Abd Manaf: “Do you accept to be under his authority!?” He then told `Ali: “Extend your hand so I may give you Bay`ah.” And he told `Ali to not let Taym (Abu Bakr’s tribe) and `Adi (`Umar’s tribe) be greedy for the leadership is a right of Bani Hashim. Khalid bin Sa`eed was also absent, when he came he told `Ali: “Stand so I may give you Bay`ah, by Allah no one is more worthy of standing in Muhammad’s (saw) place than you.” `Ali told them to come to him tomorrow with their heads shaved (ready for battle) but no one came except three men.
-Abu Bakr and `Umar heard that a group of the companions are gathered with `Ali in Fatimah’s house, so they went to them and `Ali came out with a sword but `Umar fought him and defeated him and broke his sword, they then entered the house so Fatimah screamed and threatened to expose her hair! They all left her house when they heard this, and after a while everyone decided to give Abu Bakr Bay`ah except `Ali who gave it after six months or forty days.
Note: In this book is written that `Ali collected the Qur’an and arranged it and he said “A fourth of it is about us, a fourth of it is about our enemies, a fourth of it is stories and a fourth is Muhkam and Mutashabih.”

Year 23 (Volume 2 / Pages 184-200):

-`Umar selected six men for consultation and he removed Sa`eed bin Zayd because they are relatives and he also removed `Abdullah ibn `Umar because he is his son.
-The six accepted that `Abdul-Rahman remove himself and select one of them, he asked `Ali: “Do you accept to rule based on the Qur’an and the Sunnah and follow the path of Abu Bakr and `Umar?” `Ali said: “I will rule based on the Qur’an and the Sunnah to the best of my ability and they are sufficient.” `Uthman on the other hand said: “I promise you to rule by the Qur’an and the Sunnah and follow the path of Abu Bakr and `Umar.” And so `Uthman was finally chosen.
-Some folks sided with `Ali and criticized `Uthman, and they said that they entered the Masjid and saw a man say: “How strange it is for Quraysh to keep this matter away from the family of their Prophet (saw), while among them is the first believer, the cousin of the messenger (saw), the most knowledgeable man in religious matters and the closest of them to the straight path, by Allah he is a guided guide.” It turns out this was al-Miqdad, and then they met abu Dharr and he said: “He speaks truth.”
-He mentions that adu Dharr said that Muhammad (saw) inherited the knowledge of the Prophets and `Ali is the one who received the Will of the Prophet and inherited his knowledge, then he advises the nation to place forth the one whom Allah places forth and place back the one whom Allah placed back.
NOTE: The above is the closest text so far in this Shia book to someone being appointed, still it is very far linguistically (let alone authenticity), and the term Wasiy refers to many things related to advice and receiving someone’s will or testament, or being in charge of dividing inheritance or in charge of an affair that someone charged you with, in this context though it is very unclear. As for Allah placing people before people, this can also be understood in many ways, not necessarily an appointment by a text, rather Allah honoring people by making them religious and loved and respected and clearly above others in knowledge and virtue.
-When `Uthman heard how abu Dharr was criticizing him and telling people how he changed the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and the Sunnah of Abu Bakr and `Umar he sent him away.
-The author mentions what angered the people towards `Uthman and it was a long list that did not contain `Ali’s Imamah or that he usurped it.

Year 34 (Volume 2 / Pages 203-208):

-`Uthman was under siege and he called on the army of Syria and `A’ishah, Talhah and al-Zubayr were turning the people against him.
-`Ali receives Bay`ah without much detail, then the author mentions loads of praise for `Ali and among the praise are the words of al-Ashtar al-Nakh`ee: “O people this man is the Wasiy of the Awsiya’ and the heir of the prophets etc…”
NOTE: Just like the previous quote by abu Dharr, this quote shows terminology only used in Imami Shia narrations, and through them one knows that al-Ya`qoubi the author might as well have been an Imami. As for Wasiy al-Awsiya’, I do not understand what this even means in any context, what comes to mind is that he is the best of those who receive a Wasiyyah from a prophet.
-The he mentions `A’ishah cursing `Uthman and being pleased with his death and other Shia stories…

« Last Edit: September 28, 2014, 08:09:21 PM by Hani »
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2014, 11:36:49 PM »

By al-Mutahhar ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi (d. 355h)

Al-Maktabah al-Thaqafiyyah, Egypt.

Year 11 (Volume 5 / Pages 65-67):

-Ansar gathered at Saqifah to appoint the leader of Khazraj tribe, Sa`d as successor. `Ali, Talhah and Zubayr gathered in Fatimah’s house. The rest of the Mouhajiroun all sided with Abu Bakr. Each group claimed Imarah for themselves.
-A similar discussion as previously read took place between the Ansar and the Mouhajiroun, Abu Bakr proposed one of the two men but `Umar ended up giving him Bay`ah.
-When they return to the Masjid `Umar delivers a speech wherein he says: “…I had thought that the messenger (saw) would handle this affair for us and that he would be the last of us to die…” They all then gave Abu Bakr Bay`ah except `Ali who gave it after six months.
-When the Prophet (saw) was dying `Abbas asked `Ali to ask about the identity of the successor, `Ali said: “By Allah I won’t, if he doesn’t accept it for us then no one after him will give it to us.”
-Ibn Ishaq said: “If it weren’t for a sentence `Umar said on his deathbed, the Muslims would have all thought that he (saw) had appointed Abu Bakr.” (Meaning: “If I appoint then someone better than I did etc…”)
-Abu Bakr delivers his sermon and in it he says: “…I have been appointed as your leader… Obey me as long as I obey Allah, and if I disobey Him then you are not obliged to obey me…”

Year 23 (Volume 5 / Pages 189-194):

-`Umar appointed the six for Shura, he appointed Suhayb for prayer, he told his son `Abdullah to oversee the process, he advised the Ansar to encourage them so they may not remain without a head more than three days. `Umar told them that if a man is chosen or if the majority sides with one man, and another man refuses and divides the nation, then they must cut-off his head.
-`Umar had asked ibn `Abbas for his opinion on whom he could appoint as a successor, regarding `Uthman he said: “That is a man who loves his family too much, he will place Banu ibn abi Mu`ayt on top of the people’s necks.” Regarding ibn `Awf he said: “A weak Muslim and his leader is his wife.” Regarding Sa`d he said: “That man is a warrior, he should be in one of our regiments.” Regarding Zubayr he said: “A believer when pleased, a disbeliever when angry.” Regarding Talhah he said: “A man of ego, he believes himself to be great.” Regarding `Ali he said: “He has some humor, he is the most worthy of carrying them on the path.”
-`Umar said: “The way Abu Bakr received his Bay`ah was exceptional and Allah protected us from harm at that time, cut-off the head of anyone who tries the same without consultation.”
-In `Umar’s Janazah, `Uthman stood to lead the funeral prayer near his head, while `Ali stood to lead the funeral prayer near his legs, so `Abdul-Rahman told them: “How quickly have you two began to sow discord!?” And he ordered Suhayb to lead `Umar’s funeral prayer instead of them.
-They differed after his death and the Ansar tried to resolve matters between banu Hashim and bani Umayyah. `Ali asked them by his closeness to Rasul-Allah (saw), to remove him from the consultation but apparently his relatives wanted it for him.
-Ibn `Awf asked `Ali: “By Allah, you promise to abide by Allah’s book and follow the way of the Prophet (saw)?” `Ali said: “Yes, as best as my ability allows.” He said the same to `Uthman and he replied: “Yes, I will not abandon any part of it.”
-`Uthman was chosen in front of both tribes and he became happy, and `Ali went to his house in sadness as he was not appointed. The people of consultation went to `Ali and asked him to give Bay`ah, he said: “If I do not?” They said: “We struggle against you.” So he gave him Bay`ah.

Year 34 (Volume 5 / Pages 199-209):

-He mentions the siege of `Uthman and that it lasted twenty days and lists many reasons for this siege, such as `Uthman favoring his relatives and straying from the Sunnah of the Shaykhayn opposing what was agreed upon as a condition for his Bay`ah and so on…
-He mentions how `Ali was sent to the people to cool them down and make them turn back.
-After `Uthman fulfills many of the people’s wishes, Marwan asks the messenger of `Uthman and tells him: “This old man has grown senile (meaning `Uthman).” And he made him carry a message ordering the execution of all those who oppose `Uthman.
-The messenger was caught and the people were enraged and they came to `Ali who had previously guaranteed them that `Uthman would make reforms, then they confronted `Uthman who said: “May Allah curse the writer and the one who ordered him to write.” `Uthman only accused his own writer of this crime.
-The author mentions that many major Sahabah abandoned `Uthman at this point and criticized him for leaving the Sunnah. `Uthman stood on the pulpit wanting to speak but the people began cursing and abusing, and a man took his staff and broke it, so `Uthman left and stayed at home surrounded.
-`Uthman told the people that he repented from anything that he had done wrong but the people began to ask him to hand Marwan over to them, he refused and he also refused to step down as Rasul-Allah (saw) had told him to not abandon this matter.
-`Uthman wrote to `Ali: “Do you accept that your cousin be murdered and your kingdom be taken from you?” `Ali replied: “By Allah, No.” And he sent al-Hasan and al-Husayn to defend him.
-Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr climbed the wall of his house and grabbed him by the beard, `Uthman said: “Let go of me O son of my brother, for if your father were to see you in this position it would displease him.” So Muhammad ran out of the room but others killed `Uthman.
-The author says people had no doubt that after `Uthman, `Ali would succeed, then al-Zubayr. Some groups went to Talhah and others to `Ali.
-`Ali left them and went home and told them: “This matter is not up to you, it is only a right for the people of Badr.” Then all the people of Badr came to `Ali to offer him Bay`ah.
-`Ali sent to Talhah and Zubayr that: “If you wish I would offer Bay`ah to either of you.” They said: “No, we offer you Bay`ah.” Then the author lists Sahabah who never gave `Ali Bay`ah including Banu Umayyah.

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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2014, 08:52:12 AM »
Useful stuff man. Please do reorganize when you are done into an article.


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2014, 10:24:25 PM »
By al-Mutahhar ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi (d. 346h)

Al-Maktabah al-`Asriyah, Saida, Beirut.

I have checked this book and there is actually nothing I can benefit from it, the author sums up every matter and does not mention any details concerning the topic we are researching, he finds it sufficient to just say things as they are without including the conversations and discussions that took place in those days, he does say that he included them in another book of his but it is not fully printed.

I add, the author includes great praise for Abu Bakr and `Umar in their respective chapters from emphasizing their piety to describing their detachment from worldly pleasures. He also attacks Bani Umayyah harshly since he is a `Abbasi historian.

By Khalifah ibn Khayyat (d. 240h)

Dar-ul-Qalam, Mu'assasat al-Risalah, Beirut wa Dimashq.

While a valuable history book with connected chains, it is a shame that no details were mentioned in the chapters related to our topic.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 10:26:48 PM by Hani »
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2014, 11:52:24 PM »
I wish that I would get a narration in a history book which says:

A- Someone walks up to Abu Bakr after his appointment and says: Don't you remember that `Ali was chosen to be successor at Ghadeer when Rasul-Allah (saw) said "Man Kuntu Mawlahu"?

B- After `Ali recieved Bay`ah a man walks up to him and says: I am sorry and I repent from my sin when I gave Bay`ah to the three before you when you were the appointed successor!

Sadly, I still can't find any trace of this illusive Imamah in any of the popular history books, maybe in the next big book I'll find it.

By Ahmad ibn Dawoud (d.282 h)

Al-Sa`adah printing house, Cairo.

Year 11 (Page 110):

-Rasul-Allah (saw) died and Abu Bakr was given successor-ship.

Year 23 (Page 140):

-`Umar died and `Uthman was given Khilafah, he changed some governors including the governor of Kufah, `Ammar ibn Yasir, and the governor of Basarah, abu Musa al-Ash`ari then replaced them with relatives.

Year 34 (Page 142):

-`Uthman died and the people remain without an Imam for three days and al-Ghafiqi was leading people in prayer.

-`Ali was given Bay`ah and he said: “O people, you have given me allegiance for the same purpose you gave those before me allegiance. You had a choice only before the Bay`ah was established but now that it is, then it is for the leader to be on the straight path and it is for you to submit. This is a general Bay`ah so whoever rejects it has ignored the religion and it was not a sudden event.”
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 11:56:20 PM by Hani »
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2014, 02:54:49 AM »
assalamu aleykum,

Here is a study about the book falsely attributed  to ibn qutaybah :
arabic ->
english ->


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2015, 01:13:04 AM »
I read the events of the year 11 from Tareekh al-Tabari and found nothing that points towards `Ali's Imamah, from nobody's words or actions.

I cannot give this book the same treatment as the above books because of its large size and great number of narrations.

Also while browsing al-Mas`oudi's book I found additional evidence that he was a Mu`tazili in `Aqeedah and Manhaj but a Shia politically, he says in Murouj al-Dhahab:

وقد أتينا على سائر قولهم في أصولهم وفروعهم وأقاويلهم وأقاويل غيرهم من فرق الأمة من الخوارج والمرجئة والرافضة والزيدية والحشوية وغيرهم في كتابنا المقالات في أصول الديانات

Notice how he calls the Imami Shia as "Rafidah" and refers to Ahlul-Hadith as "Hashwiyyah", this is solid evidence of his Mu`tazilism.
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


Re: Imamah of `Ali a historical reading
« Reply #13 on: November 18, 2015, 04:26:43 AM »
Al-Akhbar al-Muwaffaqiyat is a project I may soon include, al-Tabari's book will be put on hold for now since it's huge. We'll start with another book nshallah.
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


Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
Last post February 21, 2015, 02:56:05 PM
by Husayn
2 Replies
Last post September 09, 2015, 12:52:17 AM
by Ibn Yahya
4 Replies
Last post November 08, 2015, 11:16:42 AM
by Bolani Muslim
6 Replies
Last post August 10, 2019, 12:21:40 PM
by fgss