Objection
14: Ali (a) conceded his right; why you Shia do not concede it?
It is mentioned as follows in this objection of Wahabis:
If according to the claim of Shia, rightfulness was with Ali (a),
Ali himself conceded it; now, why you Shia do not concede it like Ali (a)?
This objection can be studied from two angles:
1- Amirul Momineen (a) conceding his right.
2- Followers of Ali (a) and defenders of the school of Ahle Bayt
Stance of Amirul Momineen (a) to the Caliphs is clearly mentioned
and identified in history in numerous discussions; even though the initial
usurpation of Caliphate was through efforts to erase, distort and conceal the
facts, but despite this, through the miracle of Ahle Bayt (a), numerous facts
yet remain in the books of opponents and have reached us.[1]
Traditional sources and historical records are replete with the
protests and objections of Amirul Momineen Imam Ali (a) addressed to the
nominees of Saqifah.
Muslim has narrated in his Sahih:
Umar bin Khattab addressed Abbas and Amirul Momineen Ali (a) and
said:
When the Messenger of Allah (peace be on him) passed away, Abu
Bakr said: “I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (peace be on him).”
Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the
Messenger of Allah). (Referring to His Eminence, Abbas), he said: You demanded
your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to Ali) demanded
a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah
be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be on him) had said: “We
do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So
both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest. And
Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth.
When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of
Allah (peace be on him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you thought
me to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest…[2]
In this quotation, according to the personal admission of Umar,
Amirul Momineen (a) considered the first and the second Caliphs to be liars,
dishonest, deceptive and sinners. On the basis of this, can it be claimed that
Amirul Momineen (a) conceded his right and put up no objection and opposition?
The matter does not end here and there are other instances as
well of the same confession mentioned in the most authentic books of Ahle
Sunnat after the Holy Quran. For example Amirul Momineen Ali (a) addressed Abu
Bakr thus:
“…we have got a right in it due to our near relationship to Allah’s
Apostle.” Thereupon Abu Bakr’s eyes flowed with tears. Ali added, “But we used
to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that
he (i.e. Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore, caused us
to feel sorry.”[3]
Can opposition and objection be clearer than this that His
Eminence with all daring and bravery rejected the condition of transfer of
Caliphate, which was according to the practice of Abu Bakr and Umar and
declared unlawfulness of their practice? Taftazani says in Sharh Maqasid:
[On the last day of the life of Umar and in six-member Shura
committee] discretion was given to Abdur Rahman bin Auf. He took the hand of
Ali (a) and asked: Do you accept Caliphate on the condition that you will act
on the Book of Allah, practice of the Prophet and practice of Abu Bakr and
Umar? Ali (a) replied: I accept Caliphate on the basis of the Book of Allah,
practice of the Prophet and on my personal view and jurisprudence. After that
Abdur Rahman mentioned the same conditions to Uthman and he accepted. Abdur
Rahman repeated this statement three times and he heard the same reply. So he
paid allegiance to Uthman and people paid allegiance to him and were pleased at
his Caliphate.[4]
Tabari has also said in his Tarikh:
When Khawarij staged an uprising in Kufa, Shia and followers of
Ali (a) came to him, paid allegiance to him and said: We are friends to all you
befriend and inimical to all your enemies. Ali (a) put a condition to them to
act according to the practice of the Holy Prophet (s). Rabia bin Abu Shaddad –
who was present in the battles of Jamal and Siffeen as the standard bearer of
Khatham tribe, came to the Imam. Ali (a) said: O Khatham, give allegiance on
the basis of the Book of Allah and practice of His Prophet. Khatham said: I give
allegiance on the basis of practice of Abu Bakr and Umar. Ali (a) said: Woe be
on you, if Abu Bakr and Umar had acted against the practice of the Messenger of
Allah (s), they have no right.[5]
When Amirul Momineen (a) did not accept the practice of Abu Bakr
and Umar, how Wahabis claim that he conceded his right, paid allegiance to them
and considered them as Caliphs of the Messenger of Allah (s)?
But in reply to the second part of objection, it should be said:
When it becomes clear that His Eminence never conceded and lost
no opportunity in defending his usurped rights, it is necessary for the Shia of
His Eminence also that in following their Imam and Master they should not fall
short in explaining the facts.
On the other hand, we ask: Why Wahabis do not concede and do not
refrain from audacity, threats, distortion, destruction, verdicts of infidelity
on Shia and slaying them?
On the basis of this, it would be inappropriate for you to expect
the Shia to keep quiet and refrain from stating the facts.
[1]
Some steps of the first and second Caliph in censoring and controlling the
traditions of the Prophet and order of prohibition of narrating traditions of
the Prophet and their burning down can be studied in the fourth part of the
book of Adaab Manzira ba Wahabism (collection of ethical, technical and
specialized rules in discussions and debates based on four chapters, Pg. 325
and verso page) from the same author.
[2] Sahih
Muslim, Vol. 3, Pg. 1378, Tr. no. 1757, Kitabul Jihad wa Sayr, Baab Hukm
al-Fayy, Muslim bin Hajjaj Abul Husain Qashiri Nishapuri (d. 261 A.H.), Edited:
Muhammad Fawad Abdul Baqi, Darul Ahya Turath Arabi, Beirut.
Al-Jami as-Sahih
al-Mukhtasar (Sahih Bukhari), Vol. 5, Pg. 2049, Tr. no. 5043, Kitabul
Nafaqaat, Baab 3, Baab Habsi Nafqatur Rajul, Muhammad bin Ismail Abu Abdullah
Bukhari Jofi (d. 256 A.H.), Edited: Dr. Mustafa Dibul Bagha, Daar Ibne Kathir,
Yamama, Beirut, 3rd edition, 1407 – 1987.
[3] Al-Jami
as-Sahih al-Mukhtasar (Sahih Bukhari), Vol. 4, Pg. 1549, Tr. no. 3998, Book
no. 67, Kitabal Maghazi, Baab 36, Baab Ghuzwa Khyber, Muhammad bin Ismail Abu
Abdullah Bukhari Jofi (d. 256 A.H.), Edited: Dr. Mustafa Dibul Bagha, Daar Ibne
Kathir, Yamama, Beirut, 3rd edition, 1407 – 1987.
In another report, which has
come in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, Amirul Momineen Ali (a) sent
someone to Abu Bakr saying, “Come to us, but let nobody come with you,” as he
disliked that Umar should come. Umar said (to Abu Bakr), “No, by Allah, you
shall not enter upon them alone “
Ali (a) sent for Abu Bakr
to meet him alone, but said as we don’t like the presence of Umar in our
gathering don’t not bring anyone with you. When Umar came to know about this he
adjured Abu Bakr not to meet Amirul Momineen (a) alone.
Al-Jami as-Sahih al-Mukhtasar
(Sahih Bukhari), Vol. 4, Pg. 1549, Tr. no. 3998, Kitabul Maghazi, Baab 36,
Baab Ghuzwa Khyber, Muhammad bin Ismail Abu Abdullah Bukhari Jofi (d. 256
A.H.), Edited: Dr. Mustafa Dibul Bagha, Daar Ibne Kathir, Yamama, Beirut, 3rd
edition, 1407 – 1987.
[4] Sharh
Maqasid fee Ilmul Kalam, Vol. 2, Pg. 296, Saaduddin Masud bin Umar bin
Abdullah Taftazani (d. 791 A.H.), Darul Marif Nomaniya – Pakistan, First
edition – 1401 A.H. 1981 A.D.
[5] Tarikh
Tabari, Vol. 3, Pg. 116, Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari, (d. 310
A.H.), Darul Kutub al-Ilmiyya, Beirut .