Question 640 - The Enlightening Answer Across the Ether, Vol 6

Supporters Response:

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah for His trial and His immense blessings, and may Allah send abundant prayers upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, the Imams and the Mahdis, and grant them peace. The following is stated in the narration of the sacred Will: ‘… O Abu al-Hasan, bring a sheet and an inkwell.’ The Messenger of Allah (s) dictated his will until he reached this point, then said, ‘O Ali, after me there will be twelve Imams, and after them twelve Mahdis. You, O Ali, are the first of the twelve Imams …’ The narration continues until he said, ‘Al-Hasan (a) is to hand it over to his son M H M D, the Preserver from the family of Muhammad (a). Those are twelve Imams. Then after him there will be twelve Mahdis. When death comes to him, he is to hand it over to his son, the first of the Mahdis. He has three names: a name like my name and my father’s name, Abdullah and Ahmed; and the third name is al-Mahdi. He is the first of the believers’ (^[93]). Ahmed, then, is the son of Imam al-Mahdi (a), his successor, and the first to believe in him. His being the first to believe in him requires that he be present at the time of the Appearance and that his belief in Imam al-Mahdi precede that of the 313 companions. Imam al-Baqir (a) said, ‘The rise of the Sufyani, the Yamani, and the Khurasani will be in one year, in one month, and on one day, in an order like a string of beads, one following another. Hardship will come from every direction. Woe to those who oppose them. Among the banners there is no banner more guided than the banner of the Yamani. It is a banner of guidance because he calls to your Companion. When the Yamani rises, the sale of weapons to the people and every Muslim will be forbidden. When the Yamani rises, advance toward him, for his banner is a banner of guidance. It is not permissible for a Muslim to turn away from him; whoever does so is among the people of the Fire, because he calls to the truth and to a straight path’ (^[94]). Reflect upon the following: ‘It is not permissible for a Muslim to turn away from him; whoever does so is among the people of the Fire.’ This means that the Yamani possesses divine authority. A person cannot be a proof over the people such that turning away from him causes them to enter Hell, even if they pray and fast, unless he is one of Allah’s vicegerents on His earth. They are those who possess divine authority among the prophets, messengers, Imams, and Mahdis. Abu Abdullah (a) said, ‘Allah is not ashamed to punish a nation that professes obedience to an imam who is not from Allah, even if in its deeds it is righteous and mindful; and Allah is ashamed to punish a nation that professes obedience to an Imam from Allah, even if in its deeds it is unjust and sinful’ (^[95]). There are other narrations on the same page of Al-Kafi. Since disobeying the Yamani necessitates the Fire, he is therefore a just Imam from Allah, the Exalted. ‘Because he calls to the truth and to a straight path.’ Calling to the truth and the straight path means that this person does not err, thereby bringing people into falsehood or taking them out of truth; that is, he is infallible and his infallibility is explicitly designated. With this meaning, this qualification or limit serves to identify the Yamani’s character. Assuming any other meaning for their words, ‘He calls to the truth and to a straight path,’ would render those words useless, providing neither a qualification nor a limit for the Yamani’s character-and far above that are they. This is confirmed by what is stated in the Noble Quran: ‘They said, “O our people, we have heard a Book sent down after Moses, confirming what came before it. It guides to the truth and to a straight path. O our people, respond to Allah’s caller and believe in him; He will forgive you some of your sins and protect you from a painful punishment”’ (^[96]). It has now become clear to us that the Yamani is a proof whose infallibility is explicitly designated. The sacred Will mentioned above acquaints us with the proofs: the twelve Imams and the twelve Mahdis. The Yamani prepares the way for Imam al-Mahdi, so he must be his son Ahmed. There are other proofs of this reality which you will find in the books of the Supporters-may Allah preserve them. To be reassured that Sayyid Ahmed Alhasan (a) is the Yamani, the successor and messenger of Imam al-Mahdi, reflect upon this narration: Muhammad ibn al-Fadl narrated from al-Rida (a), in a long narration, that he attended a great gathering in Basra which included a group of scholars, the Catholicos of the Christians, and the Exilarch. Al-Rida (a) turned to the Catholicos and said, ‘Does the Gospel indicate the prophethood of Muhammad (s)?’ He said, ‘Had the Gospel indicated that, we would not have denied it.’ He (a) said, ‘Tell me about the pause you have in the third Book.’ The Catholicos said, ‘It is one of the names of Allah which we are not permitted to disclose.’ Al-Rida (a) said, ‘What if I establish for you that it is the name Muhammad …’ After the Imam (a) mentioned what the Gospel and Torah contained regarding the Messenger (s), they-that is, the Catholicos and the Exilarch-said, ‘By Allah, he has brought what we cannot refute or repel except by denying the Gospel, the Torah, and the Psalms. Moses and Jesus both gave glad tidings of him. But it has not been established as true for us that he is this Muhammad. As for his name being Muhammad, it is not right for us to acknowledge his prophethood while we doubt that he is your Muhammad.’ Al-Rida (a) said, ‘You have argued with doubt. Has Allah sent, before or after, from Adam to this day, a prophet named Muhammad?’ They refrained from answering him … etc. (^[97]). The point of inference from this narration: Imam al-Rida (a) argues to the Christian Catholicos and the Jewish Exilarch that the prophethood of the Noble Messenger Muhammad (s) is established. His evidence is that the Messenger’s noble name appears in their books, and he mentions to them the places where his name (s) is stated. They acknowledge that the advent in the End Times of a prophet named Muhammad is something they cannot deny except by denying the Gospel, the Torah, and the Psalms. Yet despite acknowledging this, they doubt whether the intended person is the Prophet of Islam (s). That is, they accept the concept but doubt its referent. They say that they cannot acknowledge the prophethood of Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (s), merely because his name is Muhammad. Here Imam al-Rida (a) answers them, ‘You have argued with doubt,’ meaning that they possess no positive proof; their argument is merely negative. He then cuts off this negative argument by saying, ‘Has Allah sent, before or after, from Adam to this day, a prophet named Muhammad?’ They refrain from answering, and their feeble doubts are cut off. In other words, Imam al-Rida (a) tells them: Survey history from the time of Adam (a) to your present day. Do you find in it a man named Muhammad who claimed to have been sent by Allah, the Exalted? If you do not-and you will not-then you have no escape from acknowledging that our Prophet (s) is the prophet intended by your books. Naturally, we must always remember that the Messenger of Allah was mentioned in the books of the previous divine religions by way of explicit designation and testamentary appointment. We are therefore dealing with an argument from the testamentary appointment for the prophethood of the Messenger Muhammad. The way to establish the claimant’s truthfulness and that he is the intended person is to survey history, which testifies that no one has claimed the testamentary appointment except its rightful possessor. Nor is that all: we can add another important dimension to Imam al-Rida’s inference. We understand it once we know that Imam al-Rida’s argument is complete and correct, with falsehood unable to come upon it from before or behind, for it is the argument of a man who does not speak from desire; it is only revelation revealed. Knowing this, we now ask: What if the Catholicos and the Exilarch had answered Imam al-Rida (a), saying, ‘Yes, no one previously claimed to be the one intended by what appears in our books, but this does not prevent someone from coming in future days and making that claim’? I say: Would such a hypothetical answer invalidate al-Rida’s inference? We stated above that Imam al-Rida’s argument is complete and correct. None doubts this except one ignorant of the reality of Imam al-Rida (a) and the reality of the Imamate. Starting from this belief in the soundness of the Imam’s argument, we can understand his argument as intending to establish the reality that the testamentary appointment can never be claimed by anyone other than its rightful possessor. With this understanding, we know that the hypothetical answer does not constitute a refutation of Imam al-Rida’s inference. In truth, it would constitute only a continuation of the logic of empty doubt unsupported by any real, positive proof. The truth is that sound minds perceive the unavoidable necessity of preserving the testaments of the prophets-indeed, the divine designation of them-from the manipulation of falsifiers and false claimants. Assuming it possible for a falsifier to usurp the testaments of the prophets and proofs, or their divine designation, would throw the door wide open for doubt to enter and spread through minds and hearts. Once this assumption of false usurpation were realized, no person could ever be reassured about someone claiming to be a prophet or successor, and the first and strongest proof with which they argue would fall. This contradicts the premise. Abu Muhammad al-Ansari 5/4/2010 CE