{"collection":"Islam","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/isl/mub/mub.htm","path":"isl/mub/mub.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/isl/mub/mub.htm","text":"Mu'tamar `Ulam\u00e1' Baghd\u00e1d\n\"The Conference of Baghdad's Ulema\"\nTranslator's Word:\nThis is a humble translation for the famous story of \"Mu'tamar\n`Ulam\u00e1' Baghd\u00e1d\" which occurred at the time of the Seljuk\nking Malikshah I (Maliksh\u00e1h Seljuqi), the son of the Seljuk king\nAlp Arsalan. Along in this story, the minister or Vizier as was he called,\nNizam Al-Mulk, was the minister of Malikshah I and helped him to organize\nthis event. Both of them, the king and the minister were assassinated in\nthe same year of 1092 AD (around 485 AH in Islamic calendar). For more\ninformation about the Vizier and the king and also this story, you can\nrefer to wikipedia.\nIt is interesting to see that the entry in wikipedia\ncontains 3 versions for the story of the assassination of the vizier and\nthe king, and the last version is linked to this story which you are about\nto see its translation.\nBefore proceeding in reading, it is better to see some\nterms:\nUlema: it is used to denote religious scholars who gained\na deep insight into religion and its teachings and laws. In modern language\nUlema can have the same concept of \"Scientists.\" For this reason I will\nuse the word \"Ulema\" to denote religious scholars and nothing else.\nBen: A term means \"the son of.\" It was mainly used in\nold names and still used in some countries to tell the full name of someone.\nPronunciations:\n\" ' \" : Simply, a glottal stop.\n\" ` \" : A hard glottal stop. Like the above but voiced.\n\u00c1: Long vowel like in \"car\" or \"father.\"\nGh: Like french \"R\" sound.\nKh: Like \"CH\" in \"Bach\" or \"Loch.\"\n\u00d0,\u00f0: Like \"TH\" in \"there\"\n[...]: These brackets to add my own comments.\n(PUH): Peace Upon Him. It is an expression used by Muslims\nfor every holy person like the prophet or Jesus or the Household of prophet\nMohammed.\n(PUT): Peace Upon Them\nX:Y : denotes a phrase from Quran. X is the number or\norder of the chapter, and Y is the number of the phrase.\nSecond Edition\nwith corrections and important comments\nWe've found this precious book written in the library of\nR\u00e1j\u00e1 Mahmood \u00c1b\u00e1d written by the author's own\nhand, and we got this precious pearl in the year of 1300 after the immigration\nof the prophet may peace be upon him [meaning 1300 AH].\nIn the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful\nThanks be to God alone and peace be upon him he who was sent\nas a mercy for the worlds, Mohammed the arabic prophet and upon his Household,\nthe purified and upon his true followers.\nAnd after that: This is the book of (The conference of\nthe Ulema of Baghdad) that was held between the Sunnis and Shiites that\nwere gathered by the great king (Maliksh\u00e1h Seljuqi) under the supervision\nof the great scholar and vizier (Nizam Al-Mulk), and the story was like\nthis:\nThe king was not an extremist and a blind man, who follow\nthe ancestors with blindness and racism, but he was a young man with an\nopen mind who loves wisdom and Ulema and in the same time he used to like\nentertainment and hunting.\nHis Minister (Vizier) was a virtuous wise man who did\nnot indulge in life, with a strong will and liked the goodness and its\npeople,\nalways investigates after the truth, and liked the Household\nof the prophet so much, and he established the Nizamiyyah school -in Baghdad-\nand he made for the people of science (wisdom) monthly salaries, and used\nto be kind over the poor and the needy.\nOnce upon a time, a great scholar named (Al-Husayn ben\nAli Al-`Alawi) entered before the Malikshah and he was one of the greatest\nShiites Ulema. When the scholar got out from the court of the king some\nof the attendance mocked at him, so the king said: why did you mock at\nhim? The man said: Don't you know O king that he is one of the disbelievers\nthat God spread his wrath and damnation over them? The king said -surprised-:\nand why is that? isn't he a muslim? The man said: no, he is a shiite! The\nking said then: and what is the meaning of Shiite? aren't shiites one part\nof muslims' creeds? The man said: no, they don't recognize Abu-Bakr and\n`Umar and `Uthm\u00e1n as caliphs, the king then said: and is there a\nmuslim that do not recognize those three as caliphs? The man said: yes,\nthese are the shiites, the king then said: if they don't recognize those\nthree companions of the prophet as caliphs then why do people call them\nmuslims? The man said: that's why I said they are disbelievers.... The\nking then thought about it for a moment and then said: we should call the\nvizier Nizam Al-Mulk to see the situation.\nThe king called Nizam Al-Mulk and asked him about the\nshiites: are they muslims? Nizam Al-Mulk said: Sunnis differed in that,\nsome of them said that they are muslims because they -the shiites- testify:\nthere is no other god save but Allah, and Mohammed is the prophet of Allah\nand they pray and fast (in Ramadan), and some of them say that they are\ndisbelievers.\nThe king said: and how many are they? Nizam Al-Mulk\nsaid: I can't count them precisely but they make up almost half of the\nmuslims. The king said: is half of the muslims are all disbelievers? The\nvizier said: some scholars claim that they are disbelievers but I don't.\nThe king said: then can you O vizier call the scholars of shiites and sunnis\nto elaborate this matter? The vizier said: this is a difficult task and\nI'm afraid over the king and the kingdom! The king said: why? The vizier\nsaid: because the case of shiites and sunnis is not a simple case,\nbut it is a case of truth and falsehood and many bloodshed ran for this\nmatter and libraries were burnt and women were taken captives and there\nwere many books that were made and wars were started for this matter!!\nThe young king was surprised for this weird case, then\nhe thought for a moment and said: O vizier, you know that God gave us the\nwide kingdom and the mighty army so we must thank God for this gift and\nour thank should be in the form of investigating about the truth and guide\nthe astraying person to the rightful path, and one of these two creeds\nmust be rightful and the other must be wrong, so we must know the truth\nand follow it and know the wrong path and leave it, so if you - O vizier\n- prepared such a conference with the attendance of the shiites and sunnis\nulema along with the generals and the writers and the rest of the heads\nof the state, so if we found out that the truth is with sunnis we should\nthen force the shiites to get into that creed by force.\nThe vizier said: and if the shiites refused to get into\nthe creed of sunnis then what shall you do? The young king said: we kill\nthem! The vizier said: is it possible to kill half of the muslims? The\nking said: then what is the cure and the solution for this? The vizier\nsaid: it is to leave this matter.\nThe conversation finished between the king and his wise\nminister, but he remained that night with a busy mind and worried and didn't\nsleep until next morning, for how come he can't find a solution for this\nproblem. And in the early morning he called Nizam Al-Mulk and said to him:\nwe shall call upon the ulema of the both creeds and we shall see from the\narguments and conversations which one is true, and if the truth was with\nthe sunnis then we shall invite the shiites by the wisdom and the good\nadvice and attracted them with money and fortune like how the prophet (PUH)\nused to do with non Muslims, and in that way we shall be able to serve\nIslam and muslims. Then said the vizier: your opinion is good, but I'm\nafraid of this conference! The king said: why the fear? The vizier said:\nbecause I'm afraid the shiites will win over the sunnis and their clues\nwill rule over us and people will fall in doubt! The king said: is that\npossible? The vizier said: yes, because shiites obvious clues from Quran\nand the Sunna [Sunna means the acts of the prophet that were reported by\nhis companions and followers] that their creed is correct and true! But\nthe king was not convinced by such an answer from his minister (Nizam Al-Mulk)\nand said to him:\nIt is a must to bring the ulema from both creeds to discover\nthe truth and make it distinct from falsehood. Then the vizier asked for\na time limit of month to prepare the matter, but the young king refused\nthat... and finally it was decided that the time limit should be of fifteen\ndays.\nIn these days, the vizier (Nizam Al-Mulk) gathered ten\nmen from the greatest sunni ulema that are dependable for history and laws\nand hadith [hadith: reported speech of the prophet] and the basics and\narguing, and brought as well ten of the greatest shiites ulema, and that\nwas in the month of Sha`b\u00e1n [Sha`b\u00e1n: 8th month of islamic\ncalendar] in the Nizamiyyah school in Baghdad, and the conference was held\nupon these conditions:\nFirst: The research should go on from morning until evening\nwith exception to the time of prayers, food and break.\nSecond: The arguments should depend on assured resources\nand dependable books and not on what is heard and rumors.\nThird: The arguments that go on in this conference shall\nbe recorded.\nAnd on the assigned day, the king sat down and his vizier\nand his generals and the sunni ulema sat on his right and the shiites ulema\nsat on his left, and the vizier made the opening for the conference (by\nsaying): In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful and peace be\nupon Mohammed and his Household and his companions, then he said: the argument\nshould be just and asking for the truth\nshould be the goal of everyone and none of the companions\nof the prophet (PUH) should be insulted.\nSaid the great scholar of the sunnis (and his title was\nAl-`Abb\u00e1si): I can't argue with a creed that make all the companions\nas disbelievers.\nSaid the great scholar of the shiites (and his title\nwas Al-`Alawi and his name was Al-Husayn ben Ali): and who are they who\nmake the companions as disbelievers?\n`Abb\u00e1si: you shiites make all the companions as\ndisbelievers.\n`Alawi: this talk of you is against the reality. Is not\nAli ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH) and Al-`Abb\u00e1s and Salm\u00e1n and\nIbn `Abb\u00e1s and Al-Maqd\u00e1d and Abu-\u00d0ar and others are all\nof the companions, so do we shiites make those companions as disbelievers?\n`Abb\u00e1si: I meant by all companions Abu-Bakr and\n`Umar and `Uthm\u00e1n and their followers.\n`Alawi: you rescinded yourself by yourself, did not the\npeople of logic say that (the partial positive is against the total negative),\nso you once say that shiites consider all companions disbelievers and once\nyou say that shiites consider some companions disbelievers.\nAnd here the vizier wanted to talk but the shiite scholar\ndidn't give him the chance to do so and said: O great vizier, no one has\nthe right to talk unless we are unable to answer, otherwise it would be\na mix up in the research and astraying the argument from its path without\nany results.\nThen the shiite scholar said: I make it clear to you\nO `Abb\u00e1si that your claim that shiites consider all the companions\ndisbelievers is an apparent lie.\n`Abb\u00e1si couldn't answer and his face turned red\nand then he said: leave that and tell me, do you shiites insult Abu-Bakr\nand `Umar and `Uthm\u00e1n?\n`Alawi: some shiites insult them and some others do not.\n`Abb\u00e1si: and you, `Alawi, in which side are you?\n`Alawi: I don't insult, but my opinion that those who\ninsult have their point, and their insults to these three is not a crime\nand not a disbelief or a heresy and it is not one of the small sins.\n`Abb\u00e1si: did you hear O king what this mean is\nsaying?\n`Alawi: O `Abb\u00e1si, directing the speech to the\nking is astraying, and the king brought us here to talk about the clues\nand proves\nand not to judge by the force and the weapon.\nThe king: it is true what `Alawi is saying, what is your\nanswer O `Abb\u00e1si?\n`Abb\u00e1si: it is obvious that he who curses the\ncompanions is a disbeliever.\n`Alawi: it is obvious for you and not me. What is the\nclue that everyone who curses the companions after investigating and knowing\nthe truth is a disbeliever? Don't you agree that he who is cursed by the\nprophet deserves to be cursed?\n`Abb\u00e1si: I do.\n`Alawi: then the prophet cursed Abu-Bakr and `Umar.\n`Abb\u00e1si: when did he do that? this is an apparent\nlie against the prophet.\n`Alawi: historians of sunnis mentioned that the prophet\nprepared an army under the command of Us\u00e1mah and he made in the\narmy Abu-Bakr and `Umar, and he said: God damns he who lags back from the\narmy of Us\u00e1mah, and then Abu-Bakr and `Uthm\u00e1n lagged from\nthe army of Us\u00e1mah, so they were included in the damnation of the\nprophet, and he who is damned by the prophet can be damned by any muslim.\nThen `Abb\u00e1si looked down and did not say a word.\nThen the king said (to his vizier): is it true what `Alawi\nsaid?\nVizier: historians did mention that.(1) `Alawi: And if insulting the companions was a taboo and\na disbelief, then why don't you say that Mu`\u00e1wiyah ben Abi Sufy\u00e1n\n[Muawiyah I, the first ruler of the Umayyad dynasty] that he is a disbeliever\nand you don't consider him a heretic for cursing imam Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib\n(PUH) for 40 years and that extended even further to 70 years!?\nThe king: cut that discussion and talk about another\nsubject.\n`Abb\u00e1si: one of you innovations you shiites that\nyou don't believe in Quran!\n`Alawi: it is but one of your own innovation you sunnis,\nand the clue is that you say that Quran was gathered by `Uthm\u00e1n,\nso was the prophet unwise to do what `Uthm\u00e1n did, so that he didn't\ngather the Quran until `Uthm\u00e1n comes and gather it? Then, how come\nthe Quran was not gathered at the time of the prophet and the prophet used\nto order his followers and companions to\n(1): in Tabaq\u00e1t Ibn Sa`ad, the second section,\nPart 2, page41 and in T\u00e1reekh Ibn `As\u00e1kir Part 2, page. 391\nand Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l Part 5, page 312 and Al-K\u00e1mil for Ibn\nAl-Atheer Part 2, page 129.\nread all the Quran and he said: he who reads all of the\nQuran gets this and that of such rewards, so is it possible that he orders\nto read all of the Quran if it was not already gathered, and were muslims\nall astraying until `Uthman came and saved them? (1) The king (to the vizier): is `Alawi true about what\nsunnis said about `Uthm\u00e1n gathering Quran? Vizier: that's what the interpreters and the historians\nsaid. `Alawi: you should know O king that shiites say\nthat the Quran was gathered at the time of the prophet as you see it now,\nand no single letter was missed nor added to it, but sunnis say that Quran\nwas added to and some of it was dropped and the prophet didn't gather it\nbut it was gathered by `Uthm\u00e1n when he became a ruler.\n(1): historians mention that `Uthm\u00e1n gathered\nthe holy books and then burnt it - to mock at it - and so did Al-Bukh\u00e1ri\nmention in his book in the section of virtues of Quran, and Al-Bayhaqi\nin his book [Al-Sunan] part 2, page 41, and Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l part\n1, page 281, and Al-Tah\u00e1wi in Mashkal Al-\u00c1th\u00e1r part\n3, page 4. And Oh my God, is the burner of the Quran deserves to be a ruler?\nWhat crime can be more awful than this? (the publisher)\n`Abb\u00e1si (and he wanted to take the opportunity):\ndid you hear O king? This man doesn't call `Uthm\u00e1n a caliph, but\nhe calls him a ruler [meaning a ruler like any ruler and not a legal caliph\nassigned by muslims].\n`Alawi: yes, `Uthm\u00e1n was not a caliph.\nThe king: why?\n`Alawi: because shiites believe that the rule of Abu-Bakr\nand `Umar and `Uthm\u00e1n is illegal!\nThe king (surprised): why?\n`Alawi: because `Uthm\u00e1n became a ruler by the\nvotes of six men designated by `Umar and all of them didn't vote for `Uthm\u00e1n\nexcept of two or three of them, so the legitimacy of `Uthm\u00e1n depends\non `Umar, and `Umar became a ruler by the will of Abu-Bakr, so the legitimacy\nof `Umar depends on Abu-Bakr, and Abu-Bakr became a ruler depending on\nthe votes a small group by threatening and force, so the legitimacy of\nAbu-Bakr depends on force and for this `Umar said about him: the agreement\nof people for Abu-Bakr to be a ruler was something of the age of ignorance\n[meaning something barbarous from the era before Islam], may God protect\nmuslims against it and if someone did it again then kill him(1)\nand\nAbu-Bakr himself used to say:\n(1): Al-Saw\u00e1`iq Al-Muhriqah for Ibn Hijr page.\n8. Al-Milal Wal-Nihal for Al-Shahrest\u00e1ni and others.\nspare me for I'm not the best of you and Ali is the best\nwithin you(1) and\nfor this reason shiites believe that the rule of these is illegal in origin.\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi is saying\nabout the talk of Abu-Bakr and `Uthm\u00e1n?\nVizier: yes, this is what the historians mentioned!\nThe king: then why do we respect these three?\nVizier: following the steps of the good ancestors!\n`Alawi (to the king): O king, say to the vizier: is truth\nworthy to be followed or the ancestors? Is not following the ancestors\nis against the truth as it is included in God's saying (Nay, for they say\nonly: Lo! we found our fathers following a religion, and we are guided\nby their footprints, 43:22)!?\nThe king (to `Alawi): if these three are not the successors\nof the prophet of God then who is the (rightful) successor?\n`Alawi: the successor of the prophet is imam Ali ben\nAbi T\u00e1lib.\nThe king: and why he is a caliph?\n(1): this speech was mentioned by Al-Qawshaji, the sunni\nscholar in his book \"Sharh Al-Tajreed.\"\n`Alawi: because the prophet assigned him to be a caliph\nafter him(1) where\nhe (the prophet PUH) pointed out that he (imam Ali) shall be the caliph\nmany times, and one of these times is when he (PUH) gathered people in\na place between Mecca and Medina called \"Ghadeer Khum\" and then he raised\nthe hand of Ali and said to muslims: he whoever I'm his ruler, then this\nis Ali his ruler, O God be on the side of he who is on his side and be\nan enemy to him who becomes his enemy and be helps who helps him and let\ndown who lets him down, and the he (the prophet) got down from the pulpit\nand said to muslims -who counted as much as 120,000 persons- : greet Ali\nby the name of the caliph of believers, so muslims came one by one and\nthey said to Ali: peace upon you O prince of believers, and then came Abu-Bakr\nand `Umar and greeted Ali (PUH) by the name of the prince of believers\nand `Umar said: peace upon you O prince of believers, Bakhin Bakhin [bakhin\nbakhin is an expression of congratulating in Arabic] for you O son of Abu\nT\u00e1lib, you became my prince and the prince of every believing man\nand woman(2). Then:\nthe rightful caliph\n(1): sources that mention that the prophet assigned imam\nAli ben Abi T\u00e1lib as a caliph are so much and some of them are:\nT\u00e1reekh Ibn Jurayr part 2, page 62. Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l part 6,\npage392. Saheeh Al-Tarma\u00f0i and Saheeh Ibn M\u00e1jah and Musnad Ahmad\nben Hanbal and Mustadrak Al-Saheehayn and Tafseer Al-R\u00e1zi and Al-Saw\u00e1`iq\nAl-Muhriqah and other of hundreds of dependable books.\n(2): Mentioned by a large number of historians like: Ahmad\nben Hanbal in his Musnad part 4, page281. Al-R\u00e1zi in his interpretation,\nand Al-Khateeb Al-Baghd\u00e1di in T\u00e1reekh Baghd\u00e1d part\n8, page 280, and Ibn Hijr in his book Al-Saw\u00e1`iq Al-Muhriqah page107.\nafter the prophet (PUH) is Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib.\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what was mentioned\nby `Alawi?\nVizier: so it was mentioned by interpreters and historians.\nThe king: leave this topic and talk about something else.\n`Abb\u00e1si: shiites claim that Quran was edited (changed).\n`Alawi: it is so famous among you - O sunnis - that you\nsay that the Quran was edited.\n`Abb\u00e1si: this is a lie.\n`Alawi: didn't you say in your own books that some phrases\nabout the idols were revealed upon the prophet and then these phrases were\nerased and canceled out of Quran?\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi is claiming?\nVizier: yes, that is what was mentioned by historians.\nThe king: then how come we depend on a Quran that was\nchanged?\n`Alawi: you should know O king that we don't say such\na thing, but this is the claim of sunnis, and thus Quran for us is dependable\nbut\nfor sunnis it is undependable.\n`Abb\u00e1si: some reported speeches (from the prophet)\nwere mentioned by your own ulema and in your books.\n`Alawi: first of all these speeches are few, secondly:\nthey are fake and were made up by the enemies of shiites to lower down\nthe reputation of shiites, and thirdly: the reporters of such speeches\nand their chains are incorrect, and what is mentioned by some ulema is\nundependable, but our great ulema that we depend on do not say such a thing\nand never mention that God praised the idols and said (and forbid that\nHe might say such a thing): these are the great idols, from which forgiveness\nis asked.\nThe king: leave this topic and talk about something else.\n`Alawi: also sunnis say about God what is not appropriate\nfor him.\n`Abb\u00e1si: like what?\n`Alawi: like they say: God is a body, and He, like the\nhuman being, laughs and cries and He has a hand and a leg and an eye and\na private part and will get His leg into the hell in judgment's day, and\nHe will come down from heaven to the earth on a donkey!\n`Abb\u00e1si: and what's wrong with that, and Quran\nsays (And thy Lord shall come, 89:22) and also says (On the day when it\nHe uncovers a leg, 68:42) [the English translation of Quran does not mention\nthe word \"leg\" but original Quran says the word \"leg\"] and also (The Hand\nof Allah is above their hands 48:10), and the Sunna mentioned that God\nwill put His leg into hell!\n`Alawi: what was mentioned in Sunna and Hadith is false\nfor us and bunch of lies, because Abu-Hurayrah and his likes lied about\nthe prophet (PUH) and even `Umar banned Abu-Hurayrah from reporting Hadith\nand restrained him.\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true that `Umar banned\nAbu-Hurayrah from reporting Hadith?\nVizier: yes he did as was mentioned by historians.\nThe king: then how come we depend on the reported speeches\nof Abu-Hurayrah.\nVizier: because the ulema depended on his reported speeches.\nThe king: then, ulema must know better than `Umar because\n`Umar banned Abu-Hurayrah from reporting Hadith because he told the lies\nabout the prophet but the ulema take his fabricated hadith?!\n`Abb\u00e1si: suppose - O `Alawi - that the speeches\nabout God are not true, but what do you do with the quranic phrases?\n`Alawi: Quran contains complete phrases and others that\nare similar and it has the apparent and the hidden, so the apparent complete\nis worked with, but the similar should be interpreted according to the\nbasics of the language and the figurative speech and antonomasia, otherwise\nthe meaning will not be acceptable by the mind and the law, so for example:\nif you considered the phrase (And thy Lord shall come, 89:22) by its apparent\nmeaning then you came against the mind and the law, because mind and law\nsay that God is everywhere and there is no place that is without God, and\nthe apparent meaning of the phrase tells that God is a body, and the body\noccupies a space and a place, and that means if God is in heavens then\nHe is not on earth and if He is on earth, then heavens shall be out of\nHim, and this is not true neither by mind nor the law.\n`Abb\u00e1si got confused by this rightful logic and\nwas puzzled to answer and then he said: I don't accept this talk, we should\ntake the apparent meaning of the phrases of Quran.\n`Alawi: then what do you do with the similar phrases??\nThen, you can't take the apparent meaning of the whole Quran, otherwise\nyour friend sheikh Ahmad `Uthm\u00e1n (and he was one of the sunni\nulema and he was blind) who is sitting beside you should be in hell?\n`Abb\u00e1si: why?\n`Alawi: because God says (Whoso is blind here will be\nblind in the Hereafter, and yet further from the road, 17:72), and since\nsheikh Ahmad is blind now in this life then he shall blind in the Hereafter\nand yet further from the road, so do you accept that sheikh Ahmad?\nSheikh Ahmad: no, no, what is meant by \"blind\" in this\nphrase is the one who is astraying away from the path of truth.\n`Alawi: then, it is proved that one cannot work with\nthe apparent meaning of the whole Quran.\nHere, the debate was fierce about the apparent meanings\nof the Quran, and `Alawi gave many clues to `Abb\u00e1si that made him\nspeechless, until the king said: leave this topic and move to another.\n`Alawi: and one of your innovations -you sunnis- about\nGod that you say that God forces the slaves (humans) to make the sins and\nthe taboo and then judge them for it?\n`Abb\u00e1si: that is true, because God say (He whom\nAllah sendeth astray, 4:88 and others) and also (Allah hath sealed their\nhearts, 9:93).\n`Alawi: about what you said that is it in Quran, the\nanswer to that is: Quran has many figurative language usages that must\nbe explained,\nso the meaning of \"astraying\" is that God leaves\nthe wicked person and does not care about him until he goes astraying,\nand this is like when we say (the government spoiled the people), and that\nmeans that the government left the people and did not take care of them\n, this is first. Secondly, didn't you hear God's saying (Allah, verily,\nenjoineth not lewdness, 7:28) and also (Lo! We have shown him the way,\nwhether he be grateful or disbelieving, 76:3) also (And guide him to the\nparting of the mountain ways, 90:10). Thirdly, it is not acceptable logically\nthat God orders people to do the sin and then punish for it, because this\nis even far away from the habit of the normal people then how come it is\nsomething for God the Exalted and the Just, Exalted He is and Sanctified\nfrom what the disbelievers and the unjust say and High Exalted above what\nthey say.\nThe king: no, no, is it impossible that God forces the\nhuman to do the sin and then punish him, this is exactly the wrong, and\nGod is Exalted from being unjust and corrupt (Allah is no oppressor of\n(His) bondmen), but I don't think that sunnis follow the argument of `Abb\u00e1si?\nThen he asked the vizier and said: do sunnis follow that?\nVizier: yes, this is what is known among the sunnis!\nThe king: how come they say what is against the logic?\nVizier: they have interpretations and clues.\nThe king: whatever interpretation and clue is that it\nis impossible\nfor me to see and accept except of what `Alawi said about\nthat God never forces anyone to do the sin and then punishes for it!\n`Alawi: then, sunnis also say that the prophet (PUH)\nwas doubtful about his prophecy.\n`Abb\u00e1si: this is an apparent lie.\n`Alawi: don't you say in your own books that the prophet\nof God said \"every time that Gabriel does not come down for me, I think\nthat he got down on Ibn Al-Khatt\u00e1b [meaning `Umar],\" and you should\nknow that there are many holy phrases that points out that God made a covenant\nwith the prophet Mohammed (PUH) for his prophecy?\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi is saying\nabout this hadith being in the books of sunnis?\nVizier: yes, it is in some books(1).\nThe king: this is truly a disbelief.\n`Alawi: and sunnis also say in their books that the prophet\n(PUH) used to carry `\u00c1'ishah [one of the prophet's wives] on his\nshoulders to watch the flute players and drum players, so is that suitable\nfor the situations and the level of the prophet of God?\n(1): mentioned by Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed Al-Mu`tazali in Sharh\nAl-Manhaj, and others\n`Abb\u00e1si: this is not harmful.\n`Alawi: do you do that and you are a normal person, do\nyou carry your wife upon your shoulders to watch the players?\nThe king: he who was the least shyness and jealousy won't\nallow such a thing, then how is it with the prophet with all his faith.\nIs it true that such a thing is there in the books of sunnis?\nVizier: yes, it is in some books!\nThe king: how come we believe in a prophet that doubts\nabout his prophecy?\n`Abb\u00e1si: this hadith should be interpreted?\n`Alawi: does this hadith require an interpretation? Do\nyou know now O king that sunnis believe in such innovations and lies?\n`Abb\u00e1si: what lies do you mean?\n`Alawi: I've explained to you now that you say:\n1. God is like human who has a hand and a leg and moves\nand settles down.\n2. Quran had been edited.\n3. The prophet does what even normal people never do\nlike carrying `\u00c1'ishah on his shoulders.\n4. The prophet was doubtful about his prophecy.\n5. Who came to the throne before Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib,\nused force and the sword to prove themselves and they are not legitimate\n(to be rulers).\n6. Your books tell hadith from Abu-Hurayrah and his likes\nof liars and such lies.\nThe king: leave this topic and move to another.\n`Alawi: and then, sunnis claim about the prophet (PUH)\nwhat is not appropriate even for the normal man!\n`Abb\u00e1si: like what?\n`Alawi: like claiming that the phrase (He frowned and\nturned away, 80:1) [the holy phrases continue and talk about a blind man]\nwas revealed about the prophet!\n`Abb\u00e1si: and what is wrong with that?\n`Alawi: it is wrong because God said (And lo! thou art\nof a tremendous nature, 68:4) [and in my own translation the phrase would\nbe more like: thou art of great manners] and also (We sent thee not save\nas a mercy for the peoples, 21:107). Is it reasonable that the prophet\nwho is described by God to be of a tremendous nature (manners) and also\na mercy for the peoples, is it reasonable that he does such a inhumane\nthing with the faithful blind man??\nThe king: it is impossible that such a thing could be\ndone by the messenger of humanity\nand the prophet of mercy, then `Alawi about whom these\nphrases were revealed?\n`Alawi: the correct hadiths that we have and are reported\nby the way of the Household of the prophet, them who Quran was revealed\nin their houses, all these hadiths say that it was revealed about `Uthm\u00e1n\nben `Aff\u00e1n [the third caliph], and that was when Ibn Um Maktoom\n[who was a blind man] met `Uthm\u00e1n and `Uthm\u00e1n turned back\nat him.\nHere, Sayed Jam\u00e1l Al-Deen (and he is one of the\nshiite ulema and was in the court) said: an incident happened with me about\nthis phrase and that was when a christian scholar said to me: our prophet\nJesus is better than your prophet Mohammed, so I said: why? He said: because\nyour prophet was ill mannered and frowned for the blind men and turns back\nat them, while Jesus was good mannered and healed the blind and the leper.\nI said: O christian, you should know that we shiites say this phrase was\nrevealed about `Uthm\u00e1n ben `Aff\u00e1n and not about the prophet\n(PUH) and our prophet was good mannered with beautiful manners, and God\nsaid about him (And lo! thou art of a tremendous nature, 68:4) and also\n(We sent thee not save as a mercy for the peoples, 21:107). The christian\nsaid: I heard this talk I said to you from a preacher in a mosque in Baghdad!\n`Alawi: what is known among us is that some of the ill\nnarrators and those who have no conscious claimed that this story happened\nwith the prophet to clean the record of `Uthm\u00e1n ben `Aff\u00e1n\n, so they lied about the prophet just to make their caliphs and rulers\nlike innocents!\nThe king: leave this topic and talk about another.\n`Abb\u00e1si: shiites deny that the three caliphs were\nbelievers, and this is not true, because if they were not then why did\nthe prophet allow them to marry his daughters?\n`Alawi: shiites believe that these -three- were not believers\nin heart and they got into Islam just by the tongue, and the great prophet\n(PUH) used to accept the Islam of anyone who testifies the two [meaning:\ntestify that God is one and Mohammed is a prophet] even if he was a hypocrite\nand he used to treat all like muslims, so the relation between them and\nthe prophet was in the way of this logic!\n`Abb\u00e1si: what is your clue that Abu-Bakr was not\na faithful?\n`Alawi: the apparent clues are a lot, and one of them\nis: he betrayed the prophet many times like when he disobeyed the prophet\nand didn't join the army of Us\u00e1mah, and Quran foretold that he who\ndisobeys the prophet is not a believer, God says (But nay, by thy Lord,\nthey will not believe (in truth) until they make thee judge of what is\nin dispute between them and find within themselves no dislike of that which\nthou decidest, and submit with full submission, 4:65). So, Abu-Bakr disobeyed\nthe command of the prophet and went against it so he is included in this\nholy phrase. Add to that, the prophet (PUH) damned him who lags behind\nfrom the army of Us\u00e1mah and we mentioned before that Abu-Bakr lagged\nbehind from the army of Us\u00e1mah, so does the prophet damn a believer?\nOf course: no.\nThe king: so the argument of `Alawi about him [Abu-Bakr]\nthat he was not a believer!\nVizier: sunnis got interpretations about his lagging.\nThe king: does interpretation push away what is prohibited?\nIf we opened this door then every criminal shall have the excuse for his\ncrime. So the thief shall say: I've stolen because I'm poor, and the drunk\nshall say: I've drunk because I have so much troubles, and the adulterer\nsay this and that, and so the whole system will be shaken up and the people\nwill dare more to disobey, no... no... interpretations are not useful for\nus.\nThe face of `Abb\u00e1si turned red and was puzzled,\nwhat shall he say, and finally he said hardly: and what is the clue that\n`Umar was not a believer?\n`Alawi: there are many clues, one of them is that he\nhimself declared that he is not faithful!\n`Abb\u00e1si: when?\n`Alawi: when he said (I was not doubtful about the prophecy\nof Mohammed like I was at the day of Hudaybiyyah) [Hudaybiyyah, a place\nin Saudi Arabia at which the prophet made a truce with the idolaters of\nMecca] and his talk denotes that he was always doubtful about the prophecy\nof our prophet, and his doubt at the day of Hudaybiyyah was even deeper,\nso tell me -O `Abb\u00e1si- by God, he who is doubtful about the prophecy\nof Mohammed (PUH) is considered a believer?\n`Abb\u00e1si went silent and looked down.\nThe king (to the vizier): is `Alawi right about what\n`Umar said?\nVizier: this is what was said by the narrators!\nThe king: amazing... so amazing... I used to consider\n`Umar one of first muslims, and used to consider his faith to be a unique\none and now I see that his faith was mixed with doubt!\n`Abb\u00e1si: hold on O king and stay on your creed,\nand don't be tricked by this lying `Alawi.\nThe king turned his face away from `Abb\u00e1si and\nsaid with anger: the vizier\nNizam Al-Mulk say that `Alawi is true about his argument,\nand the talk of `Umar is mentioned in the books and this idiot -`Abb\u00e1si-\nsay that he is a liar, isn't that exactly what is meant by stubbornness?\nThe court went under a deep silence, because the king\nwas greatly annoyed by what `Abb\u00e1si said... and `Abb\u00e1si looked\ndown with the rest of the sunni ulema... and the vizier went silent...\nand `Alawi remained looking up at the face of the king to see the result.\nThey were hard moments for `Abb\u00e1si, and he wished\nthat earth would split and swallow him down, or the angel of death would\ncome down and take his soul out for the embarrassment and the critical\nsituation, for the falsehood of his creed showed up in front of the king\nand the vizier and the rest of ulema and generals... but what shall he\ndo? The king brought him here to ask and answer and to know truth from\nthe falsehood, and for this, he gathered his power and looked up and said:\nand how do you say O `Alawi that `Uthm\u00e1n was not a believer at heart\nwhile the prophet made him marry both his daughters Ruqayyah and Um-Kalthoom?\n[notice that recent studies point out that probably the prophet never hard\nthese daughters but they are merely made up names].\n`Alawi: the clues about his ill faith and it is enough\nto say that muslims -including the companions- gathered and killed him,\nand you say\nthat the prophet said: my nation never gathers upon a\nwrong matter, so do muslims -including the companions- gather to kill a\nbeliever? And `\u00c1'ishah used to compare him with jews and ordered\nto kill him and said: kill Na`thal -a name of a jew man- because he is\na disbeliever, kill Na`thal may God kill him(1),\ndamned he may be. Also, `Uthm\u00e1n beat `Abdullah ben Mas`ood the great\ncompanion until he got hernia and made him remain in bed until he died.\nAlso, he deported Abu-\u00d0ar Al-Ghif\u00e1ri, that great companion that\nthe prophet said about him (no green cover made a shade for nor the desert\ncarried someone that has a truthful tongue more than Abu-\u00d0ar), and\nhe deported him away from Medina to Sh\u00e1m [Sh\u00e1m: lands of\nSyria and the surroundings] for once or twice and then to Al-Raba\u00f0ah,\nand it is a dry land between Mecca and Medina - until Abu-\u00d0ar died\nout of hunger and thirst - at the time that `Uthm\u00e1n was spreading\nthe treasury of muslims over his relatives of umayyads and marwanids!\n(1): Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed Al-Mu`tazali said in Sharh Nahj\nAl-Balaghah part 2, page77: everyone who wrote history and made classifications\nabout it mentioned that `\u00c1'ishah was one of the fiercest people\nover `Uthm\u00e1n and she got one of the prophet's shirts and made\na stand for it in her house and used to say to whoever comes in: this is\nthe shirt of the prophet did not decay and `Uthm\u00e1n made his own\nclothes decay.\nThe king (to the vizier): is `Alawi true about what he\nsaid?\nVizier: historians mentioned that!(1) The king: how come then muslims claimed him a caliph?\nVizier: by voting.\n`Alawi: wait O vizier, don't say what is untrue!\nThe king: what are you saying O `Alawi?\n`Alawi: the vizier made a mistake in his talk, because\n`Uthm\u00e1n came to the throne by the will of `Umar and the votes of\nthree hypocrites and they are: Talhah, and Sa`ad ben Abi Waq\u00e1s and\n`Abdul-Rahm\u00e1n ben `Awf, so do these three resemble all muslims?\nAnd then, historians mention that these who voted, changed their minds\nabout `Uthm\u00e1n\n(1): Historians mentioned that `Uthm\u00e1n gave `Abdullah\nben Kh\u00e1lid ben Usayd 400,000 dirham, and Al-Hakam ben Al-`\u00c1s\n-who was deported by the prophet- 100,000 dirham, and gave the land of\nFadak to Marw\u00e1n ben Al-Hakam, and the land of Fadak was for Fatima\n[the daughter of the prophet] but it was taken by force by Abu-Bakr and\n`Umar, and then it was given by `Uthm\u00e1n to Marw\u00e1n - and also\ngave `Abdullah ben Ubay the fifth of Africa in the same day that he gave\nMarw\u00e1n 100,000 dirham, and all of that was out of the treasury of\nmuslims. Get back to the details in Sharh Nahj Al-Balaghah for Ibn Abi\nAl-Hadeed Al-Mu`tazali part 1, to find the details. (the publisher)\nwhen they saw his tyranny and his disrespect for the\ncompanions of the prophet (PUH) and how he asked for advice about the matters\nof muslims from Ka`b Al-Ahb\u00e1r the jew [the great rabbi] and how\nhe spread the treasury of muslims among the marwanids, so these three started\nto stir up people to kill `Uthm\u00e1n!\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi just\nsaid?\nVizier: yes, this is what historians mentioned!\nThe king: then how come you said he ruled by voting?\nVizier: I meant the votes of these three!\nThe king: and is choosing three men makes the voting\ncorrect?\nVizier: these three were testified to be in paradise\nby the prophet (PUH)!\n`Alawi: wait O vizier, don't say what is untrue, the\nhadith of the (10 people in paradise) is just a lie about the prophet (PUH)!\n`Abb\u00e1si: how come you say it is a lie and assured\nnarrators mentioned this?\n`Alawi: there are lot of clues that tell this hadith\nis a lie\nand not true, and I shall mention three of them:\nFirst: how come the prophet testifies that someone is\nin paradise for someone who hurt him and that is Talhah? Some historians\nand interpreters mentioned that Talhah said: if Mohammed died we shall\nmarry his wives after him -or- I shall marry `\u00c1'ishah, so the prophet\nwas hurt a lot by the talk of Talhah and God revealed the phrase (And it\nis not for you to cause annoyance to the messenger of Allah, nor that ye\nshould ever marry his wives after him. Lo! that in Allah's sight would\nbe an enormity, 33:53).\nSecond: Talhah and Al-Zubayr fought against imam Ali\nben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH) and the prophet (PUH) said about Ali (O Ali,\nyour war is my war and your peace is my peace)(1),\nand also said (he who obeyed Ali had obeyed me and he who disobeyed Ali\nhad disobeyed me)(2),\nand also said (Ali is with the Quran and the Quran is with Ali never separated\nuntil they come back to me at the Fountain) [the Fountain, a place at the\ntime of the judgment day when the prophet of Muhammad is believed to wait\nfor his followers](3),\nand also said (Ali is with the truth and the truth is with Ali ...\n(1): mentioned by Al-Khateeb Al-Khaw\u00e1rizmi in the\nbook of Al-Man\u00e1qib page76, and mentioned by Ibn Hasnaweh and mentioned\nby Al-Qandoozi in his book Yanabee` Al-Mawaddah page130, and lot of other\ngreat ulema of sunnis.\n(2): Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l Hadith #1213, and others.\n(3): Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l Hadith # 1152, and Al-Saw\u00e1`iq\npage75 and Mustadrak Al-H\u00e1kim page124.\nand it revolves with him wherever he goes)(1),\nso, is the one who fights against the prophet and disobeyed him shall be\nin paradise? Is the fighter against the truth and Quran is considered a\nbeliever?\nThird: Talhah and Zubayr prepared the way to kill `Uthm\u00e1n,\nso is it possible that `Uthm\u00e1n and Talhah and Zubayr are all in\nparadise and they fought against each other, and the prophet (PUH) said\n(the killer and the killed are all in hell)??\nThe king (surprised): is all what `Alawi said true?\nand here the vizier went silent and didn't say a thing,\nand `Abb\u00e1si went silent and didn't say a thing. What shall they\nsay? Would they say the truth? Does Satan allow them to admit the truth?\nDoes the soul who orders with badness allow itself to be under the truth?\nDo you think admitting the truth is an easy task?\nNo... it is a hard thing, because it requires neglecting\nracism\n(1): T\u00e1reekh Baghd\u00e1d part 14, page321, and\nAl-H\u00e1fidh Al-Haythami in Majma` Al-Zaw\u00e1'id part 7, page236,\nand Ibn Qutaybah in Al-Im\u00e1mah Wal-Siy\u00e1sah part 1, page68\nand Mustadrak Al-H\u00e1kim part 3, page125, and J\u00e1mi` Al-Tarma\u00f0i\npart 2, page213 and others. (publisher)\nof the ignorance age and going against the will of the\nsoul, and the people usually go after the soul and the falsehood except\nof the faithful and how few are they!\n... `Alawi torn out the curtain of silence and said:\nO king, the vizier and `Abb\u00e1si and all of these ulema know the truth\nin my speech and talk and how true is my argument, and if they denied this,\nthen in Baghdad there are ulema that testify for my argument to be true,\nand in the stores of this school there are books that testify that my argument\nis true, and resources that announce apparently how truthful is my argument\nis... so if they admitted that my argument is true, then this is what is\nrequired, otherwise I'm ready now to bring you the books and the resources\nand the witnesses!\nThe king (to the vizier): is the talk of `Alawi about\nthe truthfulness of his argument in books and resources true?\nVizier: yes.\nThe king: why were you silent in the beginning then?\nVizier: because I hate to stab in the reputation of the\ncompanions of the prophet (PUH)!\n`Alawi: amazing! you hate that and God with His prophet\n(PUH) did not hate that when God identified some of the companions as \"hypocrites\"\nand He ordered His prophet to fight them like he fights\nagainst the disbelievers, and the prophet himself damned some of his companions!\nVizier: didn't you hear O `Alawi that ulema said: all\nthe prophet's companions are equal?\n`Alawi: I heard that, and I know it is a lie, because\nhow come all of them are equal and God damned some of them and the prophet\ndamned some of them and some of them damned each other and fought against\neach other and some of them cursed each other and some of them killed each\nother?\nHere, `Abb\u00e1si found the door closed in his face,\nso he came through some other door and said: O king, ask this `Alawi, if\nthe caliphs were not believers then how come muslims chose them to be so\nand followed them?\n`Alawi: first, not all muslims followed them and only\nsunnis did so. Second, those who believed in their ruling are divided into\ntwo: an ignorant and a stubborn, as for the ignorant one he does not know\ntheir realities but imagine them as good kind and faithful people, and\nas for the stubborn one, clues and proves are not useful with him as long\nhe insisted on being stubborn and arguing\nGod said (Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not,\nit is alike for them, for they believe not, 36:10)!\nThird: those who chose these to be caliphs made a mistake\nlike how christians made a mistake when they said (the Messiah is the son\nof God) and like how jews made a mistake when they said (`Uzair [Ezra]\nis the son of God), so the human should obey God and the prophet and follow\nthe truth, not follow the people with their falsehood and wrong, and God\nsays (Obey Allah and obey the messenger, 5:92).\nThe king: leave this topic and talk about something else.\n`Alawi: and one of the mistakes of the sunnis and their\ninnovations that they didn't follow Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH) and\nfollowed others.\n`Abb\u00e1si: and why is that?\n`Alawi: because Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH) was appointed\nby the prophet (PUH) and the other three were not; and he (`Alawi) continued:\nO king, if you appointed someone to succeed you, should the ministers and\nthe members of the government follow you? or they have the right to isolate\nyour successor and place someone else in his place?\nThe king: no but they should follow my successor who\nwas appointed by me, and follow him and obey my command about him.\n`Alawi: this is what shiites did, they followed the successor\nof the prophet (PUH) who was appointed by the prophet (PUH) by a command\nfrom God the Exalted, and that is Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib, and they (shiites)\nleft others.\n`Abb\u00e1si: but Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib was not\nappropriate to be a caliph, because he was young while Abu-Bakr was older,\nand Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib killed the bravest arabs, so arabs wouldn't\naccept him, while Abu-Bakr was not like that!\n`Alawi: did you hear O king? `Abb\u00e1si is saying\nthat people know more than God and His prophet in appointing the best,\nbecause he doesn't follow what was appointed by God and His prophet (PUH)\nabout Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib, but follows what some people say about\nAbu-Bakr. Like if God does not know what is best, until some ignorant people\ncome and choose the best? Did not God say (And it becometh not a believing\nman or a believing woman, when Allah and His messenger have decided an\naffair (for them), that they should (after that) claim any say in their\naffair; and whoso is rebellious to Allah and His messenger, he verily goeth\nastray in error manifest, 33:36)?\nDid not God say (O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and the\nmessenger when He calleth you to that which quickeneth you, 8:24)?\n`Abb\u00e1si: no I didn't say that people know better\nthan God and His prophet (PUH).\n`Alawi: then your argument has no meaning, if God and\nthe prophet appointed one person for the caliphate and to be an imam, so\nyou should follow it, either you are satisfied with it or not!\n`Abb\u00e1si: but the qualifications in Ali ben Abi\nT\u00e1lib were few.\n`Alawi: first, the meaning of your argument is that God\ndid not know who is Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib exactly, so he didn't know\nthat his qualifications were few and for this He appointed him as a caliph\nand this is obvious disbelief. Secondly, in reality, the qualifications\nto be a caliph and an imam were abundant in Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib, while\nothers did not have such qualifications!\n`Abb\u00e1si: and what are these qualifications -for\nexample-?\n`Alawi: his qualifications are so much, and first of\nall is that he was appointed by God and His prophet (PUH). Secondly, he\nwas the most wise of all the companions, and thus the prophet...\nsaid (Ali is the most just) and `Umar ben Al-Khatt\u00e1b\nsaid (Ali is the most just among us)(1),\nand the prophet said (I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate, whoever\nwanted the city shall enter from its gate)(2),\nand he himself (PUH) said (the prophet taught me one thousand sections\nof knowledge, from each section I get one thousand sections opened)(3),\nand obviously the wise one is advanced over the ignorant, and God says\n(Are those who know equal with those who know not?, 9:39). Thirdly, he\nwas not in need of others, and others were in need of him, did not Abu-Bakr\nsay (spare me for I'm not the best of you and Ali is the best within you)?\nDid not `Umar say in more than 70 occasions (if it wasn't for Ali,...\n(1): Saheeh Al-Bukh\u00e1ri about the interpretation\nof God's saying (Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we\nabrogate or cause be forgotten... 2:106), and Tabaq\u00e1t Ibn Sa`d part\n6, page102, and Al-Istee`\u00e1b part 1, page8, and part 2, page461,\nand Hilyat Al-Awliy\u00e1' part 1, page65, and lot of others.\n(2): Mustadrak Al-H\u00e1kim part 3, page126, T\u00e1reekh\nBaghd\u00e1d part 4, page348, and Asad Al-Gh\u00e1bah part 4, page22,\nKanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l part 6, page152, and Tah\u00f0eeb Al-Tah\u00f0eeb for\nIbn Hijr part 6, page 320, and others.\n(3): Nahj Al-Balaghah\n`Umar surely was doomed)(1)\nand (may God never leave me for a problem that you are not in it O Abul-Hasan\n[meaning imam Ali])(2)\nand also (no one shall judge in the mosque while Ali is present)? Fourthly,\nAli ben Abi T\u00e1lib never disobeyed God and never worshipped something\nelse other than God, and never prostrated for an idol in his life, and\nthese three disobeyed God and worshipped someone other than God and worshipped\nidols and God said (My covenant includeth not wrong-doers, 2:124), and\nobviously, he who disobeys (God) is a wrong-doer, so he is not qualified\nto take the covenant of God, that is, the prophecy or being caliph. Fifthly:\nAli ben Abi T\u00e1lib was one of right mind and an open mind and a right\nopinion that originated from Islam, while others had opinions originating\nfrom Satan, and so Abu-Bakr said (I have a satan that wears me) and `Umar\ndisobeyed the prophet in many occasions, and `Uthm\u00e1n was of weak\nopinion and affected by his bad companions like: Al-Wazagh ben\n(1) Al-H\u00e1kim fi Al-Mustadrak, Kit\u00e1b Al-Sal\u00e1t\npart 1, page358, Al-Istee`\u00e1b part 3, page39, and Man\u00e1qib\nAl-Khaw\u00e1rizmi page48, and Ta\u00f0kirat Al-Sibt page87, and Tafseer\nAl-Nays\u00e1boori in the interpretation of Surat Al-Ahq\u00e1f [that\nis Quran, chapter 46] and others.\n(2): Ta\u00f0kirat Al-Sibt page87, Man\u00e1qib Al-Khaw\u00e1rizmi\npage60, and Faydhul-Qadeer part 4, page357.\nAl-Wazagh [wazagh: an arabic name for some type of lizards]\nwho was damned by the prophet and he damned his descendants - except of\nthe believers and how few are they - (Marw\u00e1n ben Al-Hakam) and also\nKa`b Al-Ahb\u00e1r the jew and others.\nThe king: is it true that Abu-Bakr said (I have a satan\nthat wears me)?\nVizier: this is found in the books of history! (1) The king: and is it true that `Umar disobeyed the prophet?\nVizier: we shall ask `Alawi what he means by this?\n`Alawi: yes, sunni ulema mentioned in assured books that\n`Umar disobeyed the prophet in many occasions, like:\n1. when the prophet wanted to pray upon `Abdullah ben\nUbay, when `Umar replied back the prophet with a harsh answer and the prophet\nwas hurt from that and God says (Those who vex the messenger of Allah,\nfor them there is a painful doom, 9:61).\n(1): Tabaq\u00e1t In Sa`d part 3, section 1, page129,\nand T\u00e1reekh Ibn Jurayr part 2 page 440, and Al-Im\u00e1mah\nWal-Siy\u00e1sah for Ibn Qutaybah page6, and others. (the publisher)\n2. when the prophet (PUH) ordered to separate `Umrat\nAl-Tamattu` and Hajj Al-Tamattu` [two duties of pilgrimage] and he (PUH)\nallowed that a man can reach his wife between the both duties, then `Umar\nrefused that and said this hideous sentence (shall we prepare for pilgrimage\nand our organs are still dropping the semen?) and the prophet answered\nhim: you never believed in it, and by that sentence the prophet (PUH) made\nhim know himself that he is one of those who believe in some and neglect\nsome.\n3. about the Mut`ah marriage [Mut`ah marriage is a type\nof temporal marriage] when he did not believe in it, and when he came to\nthe throne by force he said (2 Mut`as that were at the time of the prophet\nand now I ban them and punish for them) while God says (And those of whom\nye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a\nduty, 4:24) [the English translation doesn't bring the real meaning as\nin the original Arabic text where the action of Mut`ah is obvious], and\ninterpreters said that it was revealed about allowing Mut`ah marriage,\nand muslims used to do that until the days of `Umar, and when `Umar banned\nit, adultery increased among muslims(1),\nand by doing this `Umar stopped working with one law of God and His prophet\n(PUH) and made the way open for adultery! and got himself included in the\nphrases (Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are\ndisbelievers...wrong-doers...evil-livers, 5:44,45,47).\n(1): as reported from imam Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH)\nthat he said: if it was not for `Umar banning Mut`ah, then no one would\ncommit adultery except of the unblest.\n4. in the occasion of Hudaybiyyah as mentioned before.\nand in some other occasions where `Umar used to refuse\nthe commands of the prophet and hurt him with his harsh words.\nThe king: truly, I don't also accept the idea of Mut`ah\n(of women)!\n`Alawi: do you admit that it is an islamic law or not?\nThe king: I don't.\n`Alawi: then what's the meaning of the phrase (And those\nof whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions\nas a duty, 4:24)? and what is the meaning of `Umar's saying (2 Mut`as..etc)?\nDoes not the saying of `Umar point out that the marriage of Mut`ah was\nallowed during the time of the prophet, and even at the days of Abu-Bakr,\nand part of the time of `Umar and then he banned it? Adding to that other\nclues and they are a lot, O king, `Umar himself used to marriage in Mut`ah\nand `Abdullah ben Al-Zubayr was born from Mut`ah!\nThe king: what do you say O vizier?\nVizier: the clue of `Alawi is correct, but since `Umar\nbanned it, we should follow him.\n`Alawi: is God and the prophet are better to be followed\nor `Umar? Hadn't you read, O vizier, God's saying (And whatsoever the messenger\ngiveth you, take it 59:7) and (and obey the messenger, 5:92, and many others),\nand also (Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example, 33:21)\nand also the famous hadith (the allowed thing of Mohammed is allowed until\nthe judgment day and the taboo of Mohammed is taboo until the judgment\nday)?\nThe king: I believe in all of the laws of Islam, but\nI don't understand why Mut`ah is allowed, for does any of you desires to\ngive his daughter or his sister to a man, to enjoy with her for one hour,\nisn't that hideous?\n`Alawi: and what do you say about that O king: does someone\nwant to give his daughter or his sister for normal marriage for a man,\nwhile he knows that she will be divorced after one hour?\nThe king: I don't want that.\n`Alawi: although sunnis believe that such normal marriage\nis correct, and the divorce in that case is correct too, and the difference\nbetween Mut`ah and normal marriage is that Mut`ah is over when its assigned\ntime is up and the normal marriage is over by divorce, and in other words:\nMut`ah marriage is like a contract of renting, and normal marriage is like\na contract of ownership, when renting is over by the end of the assigned\ntime and the ownership could be over by selling -for example-! Then, allowing\nMut`ah is correct because it is for satisfying one of the needs of the\nbody.\nLike how the normal marriage which ends by divorce is\ncorrect because it is a way to satisfy one of the needs of the body. Then\nI shall ask you O king, what do you say about those widows who lost their\nhusbands and none came to marry them, isn't Mut`ah is the only solution\nfor them to protect them from adultery and mischief? Isn't it by Mut`ah\nthat they can get some money for themselves and to take care of their orphans?\nAnd what do you say about the young people and the men that their circumstances\ndoesn't allow them to get married, isn't Mut`ah is the only solution for\nthem to get rid of the tremendous sexual force?! And to protect them against\nmischief? Isn't Mut`ah better than adultery, and sodomy and the secret\nhabit [masturbation]? I think - O king - that every crime of adultery or\nsodomy or a masturbation that happens between people is because of `Umar,\nand he shares its badness, because he is the one who banned it! And there\nare many news that tells how adultery increased among people since `Umar\nbanned Mut`ah!\nand your saying - O king - that you don't want to ...etc,\nwell, Islam did not force anyone to do so, and did not force you to let\nyour daughter get married for someone that you know he will divorce her\nafter one hour of marriage, beside that, your desire and the desire of\npeople of not wanting this, that is not a base for making something a taboo,\nbecause the law of God is fixed and does not change by opinions and desires!\nThe king (to the vizier): the clue of `Alawi about Mut`ah\nis strong!\nVizier: but the ulema followed `Umar.\n`Alawi: first, the ulema who followed `Umar are the sunni\nones only and not all of them, second, the law of God and His prophet is\nthe one to follow or `Umar's? Third, your ulema went against the law of\n`Umar by themselves.\nVizier: how?\n`Alawi: because `Umar said (2 Mut`as that were at the\ntime of the prophet and I ban them: Hajj Al-Tamattu` and Mut`ah marriage),\nso if the argument of `Umar was right then why didn't your ulema follow\nhis argument in Hajj Al-Tamattu`? While your ulema went against `Umar and\nsaid that Hajj Al-Tamattu` is correct, although `Umar banned it! And if\nthe argument of `Umar is false then why did your ulema follow his argument\nabout Mut`ah marriage?\nThe vizier went silent.\nThe king (to the attendance): why don't you answer `Alawi?\nThen said one of the shiites ulema and his name was sheikh\nHasan Q\u00e1simi: the problem of `Umar and them who followed him is\nobvious, thus, these people - O king - have no answer for `Alawi, may God\nsave him.\nThe king: then leave this topic and talk about something\nelse.\n`Abb\u00e1si: these shiites claim that `Umar has no\nvirtue, and it is enough for him that he made all of these invasions for\nthe islamic state.\n`Alawi: we have answers for that:\nfirst: rulers and kings invade the land to expand their\nterritories, so is this a virtue?\nsecond: if we believed that his invasions were a virtue,\nbut do these invasions excuse him for taking the caliphate by force? And\nthe situation is that the prophet (PUH) did not assign him to be a caliph\nbut gave that position to Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH)... for if you\n- O king - assigned a successor for yourself, and then someone came and\ntook that place instead of your assigned successor, and then he\nmade the invasions and did the good deeds, would be satisfied\nwith his invasions or shall you be angry at him, because he took the place\nof your own successor and isolated your successor without your permission?\nThe king: I shall be angry at him and his invasions do\nnot wash his crime!\n`Alawi: and so did `Umar, he took the place of the caliphate\nand sat in the place of the prophet without the prophet's permission!\nthird: the invasions of `Umar were wrong and it had a\nnegative effect, because the prophet (PUH) never attacked anyone, but his\nwars were for defence only, and that's why people liked Islam and got into\nthe religion of God in large numbers because they knew that Islam is a\nreligion of peace, but as for `Umar he attacked the lands and got them\ninto Islam by force and the sword, and for this people hated Islam and\nclaimed that it is the religion of the sword and the force, and not the\nreligion of logic and easiness and that was the cause for the many enemies\nof Islam, so: the invasions of `Umar corrupted the reputation of Islam\nand gave a negative reversed effect. And if Abu-Bakr and `Umar and `Uthm\u00e1n\ndid not take the caliphate for themselves from the true imam, imam Ali\n(PUH), and if the imam was\ntaking care of the caliphate directly after the prophet,\nthen he would be walking on the steps of the prophet and apply his right\nmethods, and that would be a source for getting more people into Islam,\nand the expansion of Islam would reach the whole earth! But, there is no\nmight save but by Allah.\nHere, `Alawi took a deep breath and moaned from the depth\nof his heart and hit one hand over the other for his sorrow about Islam\nand what happened to it after the death of the prophet (PUH) because of\ntaking the caliphate from its rightful owner: imam Ali (PUH).\nThe king (to `Abb\u00e1si): what is your answer to\n`Alawi's talk?\n`Abb\u00e1si: I've never heard such a thing before!\n`Alawi: now since you've heard it and knew the truth,\nleave your caliphs and follow the rightful caliph for the prophet (PUH)\nAli ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH). Then he continued: amazing is your logic\nO sunnis, you forget the origin and take the branch.\n`Abb\u00e1si: how is that?\n`Alawi: because you mention the invasions of `Umar and\nforget the invasions of Ali (PUH)!\n`Abb\u00e1si: and what are the invasions of Ali ben\nAbi T\u00e1lib?\n`Alawi: most of the invasions of the prophet were done\nby the hand of Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib like Badr and Khaybar and Hunayn\nand Uhud and Al-Khandaq and others... and if it was not for these invasions\n(battles) that formed the base for Islam, there wouldn't be `Umar, nor\nIslam nor a faith, and the clue to that is when the prophet (PUH) said\n-when Ali went to fight `Amr ben `Abd-Wid at the battle of Khandaq- (all\nthe faith went to all of the disbelief, my Lord, if You want not to be\nworshipped then it shall be), meaning that if Ali was killed then the disbelievers\nshall dare to kill me and kill all the muslims, and thus there shall be\nno faith and no Islam. Also he (PUH) said (the strike of Ali at the day\nof Khandaq is better than the worshipping of the two created [meaning human,\nand djinn])(1), so\nit is rightful to say that Islam is Mohammedan in existence...\n(1): Al-Fakhr Al-R\u00e1zi in Nih\u00e1yat Al-`Uqool\npage104, Mustadrak Al-H\u00e1kim part 3, page32, T\u00e1reekh Baghd\u00e1d\npart 3, page19, Al-\u00d0ahabi in Talkhees Al-Mustadrak part 3, page32,\nArjah Al-Mat\u00e1lib page481.\nand Alawite in lasting, and thanks be to God and to Ali\nfor the lasting of Islam!\n`Abb\u00e1si: let's suppose that your talk about `Umar\nand that he did change and take the caliphate by force is true, but why\ndo you hate Abu-Bakr?\n`Alawi: we hate him for many reasons and I shall mention\ntwo:\nfirst: for what he did to Fatima the daughter of the\nprophet (PUH)\nsecond: for not applying the law over the criminal and\nadulterer: Khalid ben Al-Waleed.\nThe king (surprised): and is Khalid ben Al-Waleed a criminal?\n`Alawi: yes.\nThe king: and what is his crime?\n`Alawi: his crime is: Abu-Bakr sent him to the great\ncompanion M\u00e1lik ben Nuwayrah -the one who the prophet (PUH) told\nhim that he shall be in paradise- and he (Abu-Bakr) ordered hi (Khalid)\nto kill M\u00e1lik and his people, and M\u00e1lik was out of Medina,\nso when he saw Khalid coming to him with a small army, M\u00e1lik commanded\nhis people to carry the weapons,\nand so they did, and when Khalid reached them he tricked\nthem and lied and swore to them by God that he is not going to harm them,\nand said to them: we are not here to fight you but we are guests for tonight,\nand so M\u00e1lik got relaxed -because Khalid swore- and he put down\nthe weapons with his people, and when it was the time to pray and M\u00e1lik\nwith his people stood up to pray they were attacked by Khalid and his army\nand got them tied and then killed them all, and then Khalid got greedy\nfor the wife of M\u00e1lik (when he saw that she's beautiful) and he\nraped her in the same night in which he killed her husband, and he made\nthe head of her husband and his people as stones for the kettle to cook\nthe food of his crime and ate with his army! and when Khalid got back to\nMedina, `Umar wanted to apply the law against him for killing muslims and\nfor raping the wife of M\u00e1lik, but Abu-Bakr (the believer!) denied\nthat extremely, and by his deed he let go of the blood of the muslims and\nstopped a law of God!\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi said\nabout Khalid and Abu-Bakr?\nVizier: yes this is what historians said!(1) The king: then why some people call Khalid as \"the raised\nsword of God\" ?\n`Alawi: it is the paralyzed sword of the devil, but since\nhe was an enemy for Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib and was with `Umar in burning\nthe door of the house of Fatima, some sunnis called him the sword of God!\nThe king: and are sunnis enemies for Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib?\n`Alawi: if they are not then why did they praise the\none who took the caliphate by force from him and gathered around his enemies\nand denied his virtues, to the limit that they claim that Abu-T\u00e1lib\n[the father of Imam Ali] died as a disbeliever, while the truth is that\nAbu-T\u00e1lib was a believer and he pushed Islam further in the darkest\ndays and protected the prophet in his calling [to Islam]!\nThe king: did Abu-T\u00e1lib turn into Islam?\n`Alawi: Abu-T\u00e1lib was not a disbeliever to become\na muslim, but he was...\n(1): of them: Abu Al-Fid\u00e1' in his history part\n1, page158, and Al-Tabari in his history part 3, page241, and Ibn Al-Atheer\nin his history part 3, page149, and Ibn `As\u00e1kir in his history part\n5, page105, and Ibn Katheer part 6, page321, and others.\na faithful man that was hiding his faith, and when the\nprophet (PUH) was sent, Abu-T\u00e1lib showed his Islam and became the\nthird muslim: the first was Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib, the second was lady\nKhadeejah the wife of the prophet, and the third was Abu T\u00e1lib (PUH).\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi is saying\nabout Abu-T\u00e1lib?\nVizier: yes, some historians mentioned that(1).\nThe king: then why it is famous among sunnis that Abu-T\u00e1lib\ndied as a disbeliever?\n`Alawi: because Abu-T\u00e1lib is the father of imam\nAli, the prince of the believers, so the envy of sunnis for Ali ben Abi\nT\u00e1lib (PUH) made them say that his father died as a disbeliever,\nas well as their envy also made them kill his two sons (Ali's) Al-Hasan\nand Al-Husayn, the masters of youth of paradise, so much that even sunnis\nthat attended Karbala to kill Al-Husayn said:\n(1): Al-H\u00e1kim fil-Mustadrak part 2, page623, Sharh\nIbn Abi Al-Hadeed part 3, page313, and T\u00e1reekh Ibn Katheer part\n3, page87, and Sharh Al-Bukh\u00e1ri for Al-Qastalani part 2, page227,\nand Al-Seerah Al-Halabiyyah part 1, page125, and lot of others. (the publisher)\nwe fight you for our hate to your father and for what\nhe did to our ancestors in the day of Badr and Hunayn!\nThe king (to the vizier): did the killers of Al-Husayn\nsay this to Al-Husayn?\nVizier: historians mentioned that they said that to Al-Husayn!\nThe king (to `Abb\u00e1si): and what is your answer\nabout the story of Khalid ben Al-Waleed?\n`Abb\u00e1si: Abu-Bakr sought the (general) benefit\nfrom that!\n`Alawi (surprised): sanctified is God! and what is that\nbenefit that allows Khalid to kill the innocents and rape their women and\nthen remain without a punishment, and even get the leadership of the army,\nand Abu-Bakr says about him: he is a sword that God raised, so does the\nsword of God kills the disbelievers or the believers? and does the sword\nof God save the honor of muslims or rape the women of muslims??\n`Abb\u00e1si: suppose - O `Alawi - that Abu-Bakr made\na mistake, but `Umar saved the situation!\n`Alawi: saving the situation is by scourging Khalid for\nraping, and killing him for killing innocent believers, and `Umar did not\ndo that, so `Umar made a mistake like Abu-Bakr did before.\nThe king: you `Alawi said in the beginning that Abu-Bakr...\nhurt Fatima the daughter of the prophet (PUH) so what\ndid he do?\n`Alawi: when Abu-Bakr made himself a ruler by force and\nterror, he sent `Umar and Qunfu\u00f0 and Khalid ben Al-Waleed and Abu-`Ubaydah\nAl-Jarr\u00e1h and some others - from the hypocrites - to the house of\nFatima and Ali (PUT) and `Umar gathered the wood on the door of Fatima\n(that door that many times the prophet stood in front of it and said: Peace\nupon you O Household of prophecy, and didn't get inside unless he asked\nfor permission) and he burnt the door with fire, and when Fatima came behind\nthe door to stop `Umar from doing this with his followers, he squeezed\nher between the wall and the door so hard that she had abortion and a nail\nfrom the door planted in her chest and Fatima screamed: O father, O messenger\nof God, look what happened to us after you from Ibn Al-Khatt\u00e1b [meaning\n`Umar] and Ibn Abi-Quh\u00e1fah [meaning Abu-Bakr]! `Umar then looked\naround him and said: beat Fatima, so the lashes came down on the beloved\nof the prophet (PUH) until the blood gushed out from her body! And the\neffects of this squeeze and this shock remained drilling in the body of\nFatima, and she became sick and sad until she left this life after her\nfather within some days - thus, Fatima is the martyr of the Household of\nthe prophecy, and Fatima was killed...\nbecause of `Umar ben Al-Khatt\u00e1b!\nThe king (to the vizier): is what `Alawi saying true?\nVizier: yes, I saw in some history books what the `Alawi\nis talking about!(1) `Alawi: and that's why shiites hate Abu-Bakr and `Umar!\n`Alawi added: and the clue that this crime did happen\nby the hands of Abu-Bakr and `Umar, is that historians mentioned that Fatima\ndied and she was angry at Abu-Bakr and `Umar and the prophet (PUH) mentioned\nin many occasions the hadith (God is satisfied for the satisfaction of\nFatima and angry for her anger) and you O king know exactly what happens\nto someone that gets the wrath of God!?\nThe king (to he vizier): is that hadith true? and is\nit true that Fatima died and she was angry at Abu-Bakr and `Umar?\n(1) Kit\u00e1b Al-Saqeefah for Abu-Bakr Al-Jawhari and\nAl-Im\u00e1mah wal-Siy\u00e1sah for Ibn Qutaybah, and Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed\nin Sharh Nahj Al-Balaghah part 2, page19. (the publisher)\nVizier: yes, that was mentioned by scholars of Hadith\nand history!(1)\n`Alawi: and the clue for my argument: is that Fatima\ntold Ali ben Abi T\u00e1lib (PUH) to not let Abu-Bakr and `Umar and the\nrest of those who wronged her attend her funeral, so they don't pray upon\nher, and never attend her burial, and to hide her tomb so that they don't\nattend to her grave, and imam Ali (PUH) did exactly what she asked for!\nThe king: this is weird, was such a thing done by Ali\nand Fatima?\nVizier: so was mentioned by historians!\n`Alawi: also, Abu-bakr and `Umar hurt Fatima in another\nway!\n`Abb\u00e1si: and what is that?\n`Alawi: they took the land of Fadak by force.\n`Abb\u00e1si: what is the clue that they took it by\nforce?\n(1) Saheeh Al-Bukh\u00e1ri, kit\u00e1b Al-Khums, hadith\n#2. In it also in the section of Khaybar invasion and in Kit\u00e1b Al-Far\u00e1'idh,\nand Saheeh Al-Tirmi\u00f0i part 1, section of what is left of the inheritance\nof the prophet of God. Mustadrak Al-Saheehayn part 3, page153. Meez\u00e1n\nAl-I`tid\u00e1l part 2, page72. Kanz Al-`Umm\u00e1l part 6, page219,\nand others. (the publisher)\n`Alawi: the books of history mentioned that the prophet\nof God (PUH) gave Fadak to Fatima(1)\nso Fadak was in her hand -at the days of the prophet- and when the prophet\ndied, Abu-Bakr and `Umar sent people to deport the workers of Fatima from\nFadak by the sword and the force, and Fatima protested against Abu-Bakr\nand `Umar but they didn't listen to her, and even restrained her, and for\nthis she never talked to them until she died with anger on them!\n`Abb\u00e1si: but `Umar ben `Abdul `Aziz [an umayyad\nruler, almost ruled from 717AD-720AD] turned Fadak back to the children\nof Fatima -during his reign-?\n`Alawi: and what is the use of that? If someone took\nyour home by force and made you astray and then another man came after\nyou die and gave back the home to your children, does that clear out the\nsin of the first aggressor?\nThe king: it is apparent from your speech you two - `Abb\u00e1si\nand `Alawi - that you agree that Abu-Bakr and `Umar took by force the land\nof Fadak?\n(1): Fadak is a name for a land between Medina and Khaybar\nand it was owned by the prophet and he gave it to his daughter Fatima (PUH).\n`Abb\u00e1si: yes, history mentioned that(1).\nThe king: and why did they do so?\n`Alawi: because they wanted to take the caliphate by\nforce, and they knew that Fadak if it was to remain in the hands of Fatima\nthen its production will be distributed (120,000 golden dinars as mentioned\nby some historians) among the people, and in that way people will gather\naround Ali (PUH), and this is what Abu-Bakr and `Umar hate!\nThe king: if these sayings are true then how strange\nis the situation of those! And if the leadership of these three was false,\nthen who is the successor of the prophet (PUH)?\n`Alawi: the prophet himself -and by a command from God-\nassigned the successors after him, in the hadith that is mentioned in the\nbooks of hadith when he said (my successors after me are twelve, as much\nas the tribes of the Israelites and all of them from Quraysh) [Quraysh:\nthe name of the tribe of the prophet (PUH)].\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true that the prophet\nsaid that?\n(1): Al-Haythami in his book part 9, page39. Al-Im\u00e1mah\nwal-Siy\u00e1sah and Sharh Nahj Al-Balaghah for Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed and\nothers. (the publisher)\nVizier: yes.\nThe king: then who are these twelve?\n`Abb\u00e1si: four of them are known and they are:\nAbu-Bakr, `Umar, `Uthm\u00e1n and Ali.\nThe king: and the rest?\n`Abb\u00e1si: there is a debate between the ulema.\nThe king: tell me their names.\n`Abb\u00e1si went silent.\n`Alawi: O king, I shall mention their names for you as\nit was told in the books of sunnis, and they are: Ali, Al-Hasan, Al-Husayn,\nAli, Muhammad, Ja`far (Jafar), Musa, Ali, Muhammad, Ali, Al-Hasan, Al-Mahdi\n(PUT)(1).\n(1): 20 hadith from the prophet (PUH) were mentioned with\nthe names of the twelve successors, by the way of sunni books, some of\nthem: Faw\u00e1'id Al-Simtayn part 4. Ta\u00f0kirat Ibn Al-Jawzi page378,\nYanabee` Al-Mawaddah page442, Al-Arba`een for Al-H\u00e1fidh Abu Muhammad\nben Abi Al-Faw\u00e1ris, Maqtal Al-Husayn for Abi Al-Mu'ayyad, Minh\u00e1j\nAl-Fadhileen page239, Durar Al-Simtayn, and others. (the publisher)\n`Abb\u00e1si: listen O king: shiites say that Al-Mahdi\nis alive since 255AH, and is that possible [this story happened in 485AH]?\nAnd they say: he will re-appear at the end of time to fill earth with justice\nafter it had been full of unjust.\nThe king (to `Alawi): is it true you believe in that?\n`Alawi: yes that is true, because the prophet said that\nand it is mentioned by narrators of both shiites and sunnis.\nThe king: and how is it possible for a man to stay alive\nall that long time?\n`Alawi: for now, not a thousand year did pass even from\nthe age of Al-Mahdi [of course according to that time], and God says in\nQuran about the prophet Noah (and he continued with them for a thousand\nyears save fifty years, 29:14), so is God unable to make someone live that\nlong? Isn't God responsible for death and life and He is the Able over\neverything?\nthen the prophet said that and he is true and believed\nin.\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true that the prophet\nforetold about Al-Mahdi like `Alawi said?\nVizier: yes(1).\nThe king (to `Abb\u00e1si): then why do you deny the\nfacts that was mentioned by us sunnis?\n`Abb\u00e1si: because I'm afraid over the creed of\nthe public to be shaken up and their hearts might incline towards the shiites!\n`Alawi: then you `Abb\u00e1si are an example for God's\nsaying (Lo! Those who hide the proofs and the guidance which We revealed,\nafter We had made it clear to mankind in the Scripture: such are accursed\nof Allah and accursed of those who have the power to curse, 2:159) so you\nare included in the curse of God.\nthen `Alawi said: O king, ask this `Abb\u00e1si: should\nthe scholar...\n(1): many sources for that, like: Al-Mal\u00e1him Wal-Fitan,\nsection 19. `Aqd Al-Durar, hadith #26. Yanabee` Al-Mawaddah page491. Ta\u00f0kirat\nAl-Khaw\u00e1s section 6. Hilyat Al-Awliy\u00e1'. Arjah Al-Mat\u00e1lib\npage378. \u00d0akh\u00e1'ir Al-`Uqb\u00e1 for Al-Sh\u00e1fi`i.\nkeep the save the book of God and the sayings of the\nprophet of God, or should he save the creed of the public that is astraying\nfrom the book and sunna?\n`Abb\u00e1si: I save the creed of the public so that\nthey don't incline toward the shiites because shiites are people of innovation!\n`Alawi: the respected books tell us that your imam (`Umar)\nwas the first one to make an innovation in Islam and he declared that himself\nwhen he said (what a good innovation is this) and that was in the story\nof the prayer of Tar\u00e1weeh [Tar\u00e1weeh: a long prayer done during\nRamadan by sunnis in groups after the last prayer at night] when he ordered\npeople to pray the Nafilah [Nafilah: a type of prayer in Islam that is\nnot part of the five daily prayers but prayed as a donation] in groups,\nwhile God and the prophet prohibited praying a Nafilah in groups, so the\ninnovation of `Umar was an obvious disobedience for God and the prophet!(1)\nThen,\ndid not `Umar make an innovation in the A\u00f0\u00e1n [A\u00f0\u00e1n:\nthe call to pray] when he dropped (Come to the best of works)\n(1) Saheeh Al-Bukh\u00e1ri, section of Tar\u00e1weeh\nprayer, Al-Saw\u00e1`iq, and Al-Qastal\u00e1ni said in the book of\nIrsh\u00e1d Al-S\u00e1ri fi Sharh Saheeh Al-Bukh\u00e1ri part 5,\npage4, when he reached `Umar saying (what a good innovation is this): he\ncalled it an innovation because the prophet of God did not assign it and\nit was not there at the time of Abu-Bakr and it was not at the beginning\nof the night and not in that much [meaning not that much rak`as, or the\nnumber of bows done by the prayer while he prays]. I say: yes, the caliph\nof muslims (!) innovate in religion - congratulations -.\nand added (prayer is better than sleeping)?(1) did not he innovate when he canceled the share of non-muslims\nin opposition to God and His prophet?\ndid not he innovate in banning Hajj Al-Tamattu` in opposition\nto God and His prophet?\ndid not he innovate in banning Mut`ah marriage in opposition\nto God and His prophet?\ndid not he innovate in not applying the law over the\ncriminal and adulterer: Khalid ben Al-Waleed, in opposition to the command\nof God and His prophet about applying the law against the adulterer and\nthe murderer?\nand so on with your innovations sunnis who follow `Umar.\nSo, are you the people of innovation or is it us shiites?\nThe king (to the vizier): is it true what `Alawi mentioned\nabout the innovations of `Umar in religion?\n(1) Al-Qawshaji mentioned and he is one of the greatest\nsunni ulema that `Umar said: three were at the time of the prophet and\nI ban them and punish for them: Mut`ah marriage, and Hajj Al-Tamattu` and\n(come to the best of works), and imam M\u00e1lik [a sunni scholar who\nestablished a sub-school] said in Al-Mawte' that he got tidings saying\nthat the caller for the pray came to `Umar ben Al-Khatt\u00e1b to tell\nhim that morning prayer is up and he found him asleep, so he said to him:\npraying is better than sleeping, so `Umar ordered him to make it part of\nthe call to the morning prayer! I say: oh my God, is `Umar allowed to add\nand drop from the call to the prayer -which is a part of the religion-\nby his own desires and thought? (the publisher)\nVizier: yes, some ulema mentioned that in their books!\nThe king: then how do we follow someone that innovated\nin religion?\n`Alawi: for this reason, following a person like that\nis a taboo, because the prophet (PUH) said (every innovation is a misguide,\nand every misguide is in hell), so the people who follow `Umar in his innovations\n- and they know about it - they are - surely - people of hell!\n`Abb\u00e1si: but the imams of the (islamic) schools\n(creeds) admitted the deed of `Umar?\n`Alawi: this is another innovation O king!\nThe king: and how is that?\n`Alawi: because those who established these schools and\nthey are: Abu Haneefah, M\u00e1lik ben Anas, Al-Sh\u00e1fi`i, and Ahmad\nben Hanbal were not at the time of the prophet (PUH), but they came after\nhim by almost 200 years, so were the muslims in that time between the prophet\nand those people all misguided? and what is the necessity of gathering\nall the creeds and ways in these four only and neglecting others? did the\nprophet advise so?\nThe king: what do you say `Abb\u00e1si?\n`Abb\u00e1si: those were more wise than others!\nThe king: were there no wise man except of those?\n`Abb\u00e1si: but shiites also follow the creed of\nJa`far Al-S\u00e1diq [Jafar Al-S\u00e1diq: the 6th imam for twelve\nshiites]?\n`Alawi: we follow the school of Jafar because his way\nis the way of the prophet of God, because he is one of the Household whom\nGod said about them (Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from\nyou, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing,\n33:33), otherwise we follow all the twelve imams but since imam Jafar Al-S\u00e1diq\n(PUH) was able to spread the knowledge and the interpretations and the\nholy hadiths more than other imams (because of some of the freedom at his\ntime), and even 4000 pupils used to attend his school(1),\nand even he was able to renew the structure of Islam after the trials of\numayyads and abbasids to erase it, thus for this shiites were called \"jafarites\"\n[or Ja`fari] according to the one who restored the structure of the creed\nand that is imam Jafar Al-S\u00e1diq (PUH).\nThe king: what is your answer O `Abb\u00e1si?\n`Abb\u00e1si: following the 4 schools is a habit for\nus sunnis!\n(1): Al-Im\u00e1m Al-S\u00e1diq wal-Ma\u00f0\u00e1hib\nAl-Arba`ah, T\u00e1reekh Baghd\u00e1d, and others.\n`Alawi: you were but forced by some rulers, and you followed\nthem like blind people without a clue!\n`Abb\u00e1si went silent.\n`Alawi: O king, I testify that `Abb\u00e1si shall be\nin hell if he remained like that.\nThe king: and how did you know that he shall be in hell?\n`Alawi: because it is mentioned by the prophet (PUH)\nthat he said (he who died and did not know the imam of his time, he shall\ndie like an ignorant), so ask O king, who is the imam of `Abb\u00e1si's\ntime?\n`Abb\u00e1si: this hadith was not reported for the\nprophet.\nThe king (to the vizier): was this hadith reported or\nnot?\nVizier: yes it was!(1) The king (with anger): I thought you `Abb\u00e1si are\nworthy for my trust but I've found out you are but a liar!\n(1): sources: Al-H\u00e1fidh Al-Nays\u00e1boori in\nhis Saheeh part 8, page108. Yanabee` Al-Mawaddah page117. Nafah\u00e1t\nAl-L\u00e1hoot page3. Saheeh Muslim, and others.\n`Abb\u00e1si: I know the imam of my time!\n`Alawi: and who is he?\n`Abb\u00e1si: the king!\n`Alawi: you should know O king that he is lying, and\nhe is saying that to get closer to you!\nThe king: yes, I know he is lying, and I know myself\nthat I cannot be the imam of time for the people, because I don't know\nanything, and I spend most of my time in hunting and in managing affairs!\nthen said the king: O `Alawi, then who do you think is\nthe imam of time?\n`Alawi: the imam of time in my creed is imam Al-Mahdi\n(PUH) as we talked about him before as reported from the prophet (PUH),\nand whoever knew him shall die as a muslim and he is in paradise, and he\nwho didn't know him died as an ignorant and he shall be in hell with the\npeople of ignorance!\nHere, the face of the king shined, and the signs of happiness\nappeared on his face and looked upon the attendance and said:\nyou should know O people, that I'm satisfied with this\ndebate (which lasted for three days) and I am sure now that the truth is\nwith shiites in everything they say and believe in, and the sunnis are\npeople of a false creed and an astraying belief, and I am one man that\nwhen recognizes the truth, shall obey it and admit it, and I shall not\nbe a man of falsehood in this life and a man of hell in the Hereafter.\nFor this, I announce in front of you that I've become a shiite, and who\nloves to be with me let him follow me and be a shiite, by the blessings\nof God and His mercy, and let himself be out from the darkness of the falsehood\nto the light of the truth!\nVizier: and I knew that, and shiites are right, and that\nthe right school is the shiites' only. I knew that since I was a pupil,\nand for this I announce that I am too a shiite.\nThus, most of the ulema and the ministers and the generals\nwho attended in the court (and they counted almost as 70) got into the\ncreed of shiites.\nThe tidings of the turning of the king and the vizier\nNizam Al-Mulk and the ministers and the generals and the writers into shiites,\nreached all the lands, and many people got into the creed of shiites, and\nNizam Al-Mulk ordered - and he is the father of my wife - that teachers\nshould teach the creed of shiites in Nizamiyyah schools in Baghdad!\nBut some sunni ulema that insisted on the falsehood remained\non their creed like God said (became as rocks, or worse than rocks, for\nhardness, 2:74).\nAnd they started to plot against the king and Nizam Al-Mulk\nand blamed him for that because he was the planning mind for the land,\nuntil the dirty hand got him -by the orders of those stubborn sunnis- and\nthey assassinated him in the 12th of Ramadan, year 485AH, and after that\nthey assassinated Malikshah Saljuqi (Malikshah I).\nwe are to God and we shall get back to Him. They were\nkilled on the way of God and for the truth and faith, so congratulations\nfor them and for everyone that gets killed on the way of God and for the\ntruth and the faith.\nand I made a poem of lamentation for the great sheikh\nNizam Al-Mulk and this is some of it:\nthe vizier Nizam Al-Mulk was a pearl\nso dear made by the merciful from honor\nso dear and days did not know its value\nso He for jealousy turned it back to the shell\nhe chose the creed of right in a debate\nthat showed the truth in an obvious clue\nthe creed of shiites is a truth with no false\nand everything else is just a mirage with a false portiere\nbut a deep envy they moved for him\nand the full moon of the night remained in an eclipsed\nshade\nupon him shall be a thousand peace from God that follow\nthat are read over his soul in the eternity and the houses\n(of paradise)\nThat, and I was an attendant in the court and the debate,\nand I've recorded everything that happened in the court, but I've canceled\nadditions, and made the story short in this book.\nAnd thank be to God alone, and peace be upon Muhammad\nand his good Household and his true followers.\nI wrote it in Baghdad in Nizamiyyah school.","title":"The Conference of Baghdad's Ulema","type":"page"}