Question 277 - The Enlightening Answer Across the Ether, Vol 3

Supporters Response:

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Intensely Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send His prayers upon Muhammad and his family, the Imams and the Mahdis, and grant them abundant peace. Your statement: ‘Why do you declare yourselves infallible, lie, and fabricate against Allah in your interpretations?’ I say: Where are the lies and fabrication against Allah Most High in our interpretations?! I argued against you using the Quran and Sunnah and what your leading scholars and Imams-Ahmad, Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, and others-narrated. I did not argue using what is narrated in Shia sources, lest you say that you do not accept it. Instead of attributing lies and fabrication to us, answer what we wrote with rigorous scholarly evidence so that the unambiguous truth becomes clear, or defend your claim with clear evidence and proof. It was narrated: ‘The fairest of people is one who argues against his opponent using his opponent’s creed, book, prophet, and law’ (^[204]). I answered you with what your scholars and Imams narrated. Do as I did and be fair. May Allah Most High guide you to the good of this world and the Hereafter. Your statement: ‘You call Quran commentators such as Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari, and others liars.’ I say: In my previous answer, I did not discuss calling Ibn Kathir or al-Tabari liars. Moreover, calling someone a liar concerns an informer, whereas commentators are people with opinions that may be correct or mistaken. No commentator, Sunni or Shia, claims that all his interpretive opinions are correct-unless the interpretation is through narrations of Muhammad and the family of Muhammad (s), which is another matter. Ibn Kathir and other commentators are not infallible so that we must worship according to all their opinions and regard them as revelation that cannot be discussed. The commentators themselves disagree with one another in many places; is this considered calling one another liars?! We do not worship even according to the opinions of Shia commentators, who may err in interpretation. We do not reject the interpretations of Sunni scholars out of prejudice against them; our position includes Shia commentators as well. We accept no interpretation except from those whom Allah Most High protected from error and whom the Messenger (s) made the counterpart of the Quran: the Messenger’s progeny (s). Your statement: ‘You rely upon al-Hindi and al-Tabrisi.’ I say: I transmitted nothing from al-Tabrisi in my preceding answer. As for al-Hindi, I likewise did not rely upon his interpretation; rather, I transmitted narrations that he reports, and these are not his opinion. He is among your leading scholars, so even if I transmitted his opinion, it would be among the strongest proofs against you, under the principle: ‘Bind them by what they have bound themselves.’ It would have been more appropriate for you to discuss the evidence or submit to it if you seek the truth. Arrogance toward evidence is not among the qualities of scholars. Your statement: ‘We love everyone. Zayd or Ubayd does not matter to us; only our religion and Quran matter.’ I say: Loving everyone has nothing to do with religion. Every Muslim must love Allah’s allies and oppose Allah’s enemies and the enemies of His messengers, from the earliest and the latest. Yes, one quality of believers is that they desire guidance for everyone and call them to the religion of truth to save them from Allah Most High’s wrath and a Fire whose fuel is people and stones. But absolute love belongs only to believers in Allah Most High, His messengers, and their successors. Do you love Muawiyah, who fought Ali ibn Abi Talib (a)? Do you love Yazid, the wine-drinker who killed the fragrant flower of the Messenger of Allah (s) and the master of the youth of Paradise? And do you, and do you?! Narrations from the Messenger Muhammad (s) indicate the greatness of loving for Allah’s sake and hating for Allah’s sake: From Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (s) said: ‘Allah, Blessed and Exalted, says on the Day of Resurrection: Where are those who loved one another for My majesty? Today I shall shade them in My shade, on a day when there is no shade except My shade’ (^[205]). From the Messenger of Allah (s): ‘Allah, Blessed and Exalted, said: My love is due to those who love one another for Me, sit together for Me, visit one another for Me, and give to one another for Me’ (^[206]). From Amr ibn al-Jamuh, who heard the Prophet (s) say: ‘A servant does not realize the genuine reality of faith until he loves for Allah Most High and hates for Allah. When he loves for Allah, Blessed and Exalted, and hates for Allah, Blessed and Exalted, he deserves Allah’s guardianship. My allies among My servants and My beloved ones among My creation are those who are remembered when I am remembered, and I am remembered when they are remembered’ (^[207]). From the Messenger of Allah (s): ‘Whoever gives for Allah Most High, withholds for Allah Most High, loves for Allah, hates for Allah Most High, and marries for Allah Most High has perfected his faith’ (^[208]). If Zayd or Ubayd is among Allah’s allies and the believers, loving them is among the greatest virtues. If they are among Allah’s enemies, hating them is among the greatest virtues, and whoever loves them has defective faith. Your statement: ‘You followed interpretation seeking tribulation.’ I say: Where is the interpretation that leads to tribulation?! Why do you not mention it so that your words may be scholarly? The originators of interpretation are those who usurped the succession from Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (a), as they interpreted the hadiths in which the Messenger (s) designated Imam Ali’s succession (a). This is a subject with many ramifications whose details would take us beyond brevity. Your statement: ‘You said through a vision. Allah is my witness that I saw in a dream that it was a false call.’ I say: Visions are of categories: some are from Allah Most High, some from Satan, and some are self-talk. A vision containing the Messenger Muhammad (s) or one of his successors is certainly from Allah Most High, because Satan cannot come in their sacred forms or impersonate them. Relate your vision so that we may see to which category it belongs. If you are among those who believe in visions, we have another discussion with you. Your statement: ‘Far be it from me to interpret the Quran according to my desire. I rely upon interpretations by people concerned only with Allah, Glorious is He, not Ali or Umar.’ I say: If you do not interpret the Quran according to your opinion, then you interpret it either by relying upon the hadiths of the Messenger or upon commentators’ opinions. I mentioned to you the transmitted reports interpreting the verse you cited in the preceding question, and they conflict with what you said. As for commentators’ words, if they do not rely upon reports, they may be correct or mistaken and are not proof against us. You must mention the words of these commentators so that we may show you, through evidence from the Quran and Sunnah, that they are incorrect. Indeed, concerning the Messenger’s wives (s), I answered you with the Noble Quran, but you did not defend your statement at all and sufficed with words that made matters worse. Who are these people upon whose words you rely? Are they infallible and incapable of error in interpretation? If you say they are infallible, we demand evidence for that. Then how do you not rely upon Umar’s interpretation when you believe him to be the successor of the Messenger of Allah (s)? Your reliance upon others is either because they are better and more knowledgeable than he, or because he narrated nothing concerning interpretation of the Quran upon which you could rely. I do not know which you choose or how you justify this statement. Then how do you not take interpretation of the Quran from Imam Ali (a), when the Messenger Muhammad (s) designated him as the most knowledgeable of the people concerning the Quran and Sunnah? Even Aisha and others acknowledged Imam Ali’s superior knowledge (a). I will mention some narrations: From Abu Said al-Khudri: ‘I asked the Messenger of Allah (s) about Allah Most High’s words, “and whoever possesses knowledge of the Book.” He said: “That is my brother Ali ibn Abi Talib”’ (^[209]). From Said ibn Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas, concerning ‘and whoever possesses knowledge of the Book’: ‘He is Ali ibn Abi Talib’ (^[210]). From al-Amash, from Abu Salih, concerning ‘and whoever possesses knowledge of the Book’: ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib was knowledgeable of interpretation, deeper interpretation, the abrogating and abrogated, and the lawful and forbidden’ (^[211]). From Said ibn al-Musayyib: ‘Umar used to seek refuge in Allah from a difficult problem for which Abu al-Hasan-meaning Ali ibn Abi Talib-was not present’ (^[212]). From Abdullah ibn Masud, who said: The Messenger of Allah (s) said: ‘Wisdom was divided into ten parts. Ali was given nine, and the people one part’ (^[213]). Ibn Abbas said: ‘By Allah, Ali ibn Abi Talib was given nine-tenths of knowledge. By Allah, he shared with you even in the remaining tenth’ (^[214]). From the Messenger of Allah (s): ‘The most knowledgeable of my nation after me is Ali ibn Abi Talib’ (^[215]). From him (s): ‘Ali is the gate of my knowledge and will explain to my nation after me what I was sent with. Loving him is faith, hating him is hypocrisy, and looking at him is mercy’ (^[216]). From him (s): ‘O Ali, you will explain to my nation that over which they differ after me’ (^[217]). From him (s): ‘There will be a tribulation after me. When that occurs, adhere to Ali ibn Abi Talib, for he is the distinguisher between truth and falsehood’ (^[218]). From Aisha, who said: ‘Who gave you the ruling to fast Ashura?’ They said, ‘Ali.’ She said: ‘Indeed, he is the most knowledgeable of the people concerning the Sunnah’ (^[219]). From Abu al-Hamra, who said: We were with the Prophet (s) when Ali approached. The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Whoever would be pleased to look upon Adam in his knowledge, Noah in his understanding, and Abraham in his forbearance should look upon Ali ibn Abi Talib’ (^[220]). From Abu Said al-Khudri, from Salman, who said: ‘I said, “O Messenger of Allah, every prophet has a successor. Who is your successor?” He remained silent. Later, when he saw me, he said, “O Salman.” I hurried to him and said, “At your service.” He said: “Do you know who Moses’s successor was?” I said, “Yes, Joshua son of Nun.” He said, “Why?” I said, “Because he was the most knowledgeable of them.” He said: “My successor, the repository of my secret, and the best one I leave after me-who fulfills my promises and pays my debts-is Ali ibn Abi Talib”’ (^[221]). After everything above, you should repent and seek your Lord’s forgiveness for this statement. Acknowledging an error is a virtue. Your statement: ‘You followed Muawiyah’s law of insult and accuse us of following Muawiyah, while we love and respect everyone.’ I say: Muawiyah’s followers are known: whenever he is mentioned, they ask mercy for him. As for us, we regard him as among the fiercest enemies of Allah Most High. We have not insulted anyone; rather, we mention deeds and circumstances, and that is not insult. Where, in your opinion, is the insult?! I do not know how you became convinced by the phrase you repeat, ‘respect everyone.’ Do you even respect Muawiyah and his cursed bastard Yazid?! Regarding the crimes of the State of Israel-may Allah curse them-if the Sayyed possessed the equipment and numbers, he would not remain silent about them. But the discussion concerns those who possess the Arab lands and nevertheless flatter and accommodate the filthy monsters of Israel. They suffice with shameful protests that neither nourish nor avail against hunger. Most of them, if not all, are treacherous agents. The Iraqis who brought the occupier to Iraq and accepted it are likewise accursed traitors until they turn back from their error and collaboration. Sayyed Ahmad al-Hasan is the only one who confronted them and their American democracy. We do not flatter or accommodate anyone who opposes the Two Weighty Things, even if he is the person closest to us. No one is close to us except whoever draws near to the Quran and the progeny, the Two Weighty Things that the Messenger Muhammad (s) instructed us to hold fast to. Your statement: ‘I spoke harshly to you because you do not respect others.’ I say: We did not transgress against others without right. Your harshness toward us is without cause, and I ask Allah to guide you to the straight path. Your statement: ‘You mock our interpretations.’ I say: If you consider scholarly discussion to be mockery, this is a great calamity. I discussed your words in a scholarly and ethical manner, while you offered nothing but attack and accusations empty of evidence. Your statement: ‘Ask yourselves once why we pay no attention to your lies concerning the Ahl al-Bayt.’ I say: We have not fabricated lies against the family of Muhammad (s). Rather, we adhere to them in obedience to the Messenger Muhammad (s), who instructed us to hold fast to them and confined salvation to them and the Quran alone. Blame belongs to whoever abandoned them and adhered to others in obedience to desire and partisanship. What lies are these of which you speak? You must mention them rather than suffice with ready-made accusations. Your statement: ‘As for the will, it is woven from your imagination so that you may split the ranks of the Muslims, divide them into sects, acquire khums, and promote yourselves with the lies of the cellar and others.’ I say: The will is the will of the Messenger of Allah (s), established for us in the most reliable books of narrations. If you do not believe in it, the discussion returns to the foundational issue: who is the first successor of the Messenger Muhammad (s)? Let the discussion proceed through religious and rational evidence, calmly and without partisanship or attack and insult-the weapon of those who are incapable. As for the matter of the cellar, you speak about something you have not encompassed in knowledge. You heard it from mouths unaware of what they say. What do you know about the matter of the cellar? Please mention it so that I may explain to you the reality of a matter to which no person with even a trace of reason would object. Your statement: ‘Why do you arouse historical hatreds? What interest do you have? Leave creation to the Creator … Why do you not call to Allah?’ I say: The matter is not one of arousing hatreds or tribulation. It concerns our duty and creed. How can we recognize the rightful Proof over us after the Messenger of Allah (s) unless we return to the hadiths of the Messenger Muhammad (s), the words of his chosen Companions, and the correct history, so that we may save ourselves from the punishment of the Day of Resurrection and not be gathered among those who abandoned Allah’s allies and adhered to Allah’s enemies and the enemies of His Messenger? Far be it from the Messenger Muhammad (s) to depart this world and leave his nation without a shepherd or leader, abandoning it to opinions and desires that have never agreed. The successor whom the Messenger Muhammad (s) appointed and designated must be known, supported, and believed in, and every usurper and enemy of his must be disavowed. We must not equate the killer and the slain, or the usurper and the dispossessed, and say of both, ‘May Allah be pleased with them’! What reason or logic prevents people from knowing historical realities, and what is the aim behind that? Do we abandon researching the history of the prophets and messengers before the Messenger Muhammad (s)? Do we abandon asking mercy and pleasure for those who supported and were sincere to the messengers and prophets? Do we likewise abandon disavowing the enemies of the prophets, messengers, and their successors, and those who apostatized after their messengers, betrayed them, and turned back upon their heels? Would any rational person accept this logic, which does not even persuade children? Why do you flee from the truth when it conflicts with your desires? With what face will you confront the Messenger Muhammad (s) if he asks you what you did with his vicegerent and successor? Is there evidence for the infallibility of the Companions? Are all of them among the people of Paradise, when the Quran states that among them were hypocrites, liars, and so forth? The Sunnah likewise states this, and your sources are filled with it. Did this occur with every prophet, or only with the Messenger Muhammad (s)? Allah Most High related from the Messenger Muhammad (s): ‘Say, “I am not an innovation among the messengers, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you. I only follow what is revealed to me, and I am only a clear warner”’ (^[222]). Why must all the Companions of the Messenger Muhammad (s) be righteous and all his wives righteous, contrary to the messengers and prophets before him? Did the Quran state that, or did the Messenger state it?! Yes, those whose infallibility and purification from every impurity the Messenger designated are his Ahl al-Bayt (a), along with some Companions who remained firm upon the truth after his departure (s). So who, one wonders, is deceiving simple minds? Your statement: ‘Your concern is proving the right of the Ahl al-Bayt to the caliphate-and then where are they now? Was it not your Shia who betrayed them? Enough. Change your discourse and call to Allah alone, without partner. Even the Master of Creation called to Allah and did not call people to worship him.’ I say: Yes, our concern is proving the caliphate for the family of Muhammad (s), not because of our desire or partisanship, but because this is the religion of Allah and His Messenger, which He imposed upon the people, so that we may save people from the Fire of Hell. We choose for ourselves only what Allah and His Messenger (s) chose. As for the Shia, we do not declare them all pure. Most have now deviated from the path of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) and followed America and its tails. Even the Shia jurists now have no connection to the path of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) except empty outward forms. We disavow everyone who advocates election by the people, takes something other than the Quran as a constitution, and follows America. We do not consider him among the Shia of the family of Muhammad; rather, he is among their enemies even if he outwardly professes love for them. The Imams (a) were not fought only by their enemies; they were also fought by those who claimed Shiism. May Allah curse everyone who fought the family of Muhammad, whoever he was. We do not call to worshipping the family of Muhammad (s); we call to worshipping Allah Most High and to loyalty to the successors of the Messenger Muhammad (s), concerning whom he made a testament. Worshipping Allah is not realized without obeying the commands of His Messenger (s). How can a person worship Allah while disobeying His instruction and appointment of his vicegerent and successor, Ali ibn Abi Talib (a)? The Exalted said: ‘… Would you exchange what is inferior for what is better? …’ (^[223]). Finally, I say to you: I have answered you in detail for the second time, with scholarly and ethical evidence, out of concern for your guidance, while you confined yourself to accusations and claims without evidence. You must discuss the first response and this response without moving to something else, and you must discuss through rigorous scholarly evidence. Otherwise, discussion has no benefit if it consists only of insult and attack without evidence. I await your detailed reply to what has preceded. If you do not do so: ‘If you do not bring him to me, there will be no measure for you with me, and do not approach me’ (^[224]). Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send His prayers upon Muhammad and his family, the Imams and the Mahdis. The Scientific Committee Supporters of Imam al-Mahdi (may Allah establish him upon the earth) Sheikh Nazim al-Uqayli