SHAYKH AL ISLAM

Ahl al-Bayt



The blessed and pure family of the Most Beloved Prophet
Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam

The Beloved Messenger of Allah Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam
said:  " I am going, while leaving two things amongst you:
One, the Kitab of Allah, and the other, my Ahl al-Bayt."

Love the Ahl al-Bayt and the Ashab al-Kiraam

Tazkiya i Ahl al-Bayt

The Ahl al-Bayt and its Progeny 

The Ahl al-Bayt & Sayyads 

Love of the Prophets Family NEW
(written by Shaykh al-Islam)





Please also visit the history of Karbala page, and our new Muharram page too.

May hamd be to Allahu ta'ala! May salaat and salaam be to Rasulullah! May benedictions be over each of his pure Ahl al-bayt and his just and faithful Ashab, champions of Islam!

Our Most Beloved Prophet 'Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam' stated that his Umma (Muslims) would break into seventy-three different groups, that seventy-two of these groups would go to Hell, and that the remaining one group would not enter Hell owing to the correct belief they would hold. Al-Imam ar-Rabbani, on the other hand, informs in his book Maktubat that the worst among these seventy-two groups are those who traduce the Ashab al-kiram. These people harbor a grudge against most of our Prophet's Ashab 'ridwanullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain', and vituperate them. What these people are, when and how they appeared, what methods they have followed, and the harms they have done to Islam are explicated in this book of ours.

These sacrilegious people, who set brothers against brothers and provoked a number of bloodbaths in the Islamic history, culminated in their gruesome atrocities from time to time, only to be intercepted just in time by the Islamic Sultans such as Timur Khan (Tamerlane) and Yavuz Sultan Salim Khan, who inflicted on them such punitive blows that they never regained their energy to go on with their malignant activities. Nevertheless, "Water may sleep, but the enemy never will. Therefore, always keep an eye on your enemy." For many centuries, we have been doing our worships peacefully in this blessed country of ours (Turkey), yet in recent years it has been seen that these people have appeared in different new appellations here and there, making speeches and writing books. They have been striving to mislead the people and surreptitiously spoil the entirely pure belief of the younger generation. They have been perpetrating separatist activities. They have been sowing discord among the people. Our religion, however, commands us to love one another and to be kind to all people.

Of all the books and newspapers sent to us by our brothers in Islam, two were the most consternating. Their contents were the disgusting calumniations and lies fabricated by people called Hurufi, who are, in actual fact, the followers of a Jewish convert of Yaman named Abdullah bin Saba'. We shuddered as we read them. The thought that Muslims, especially our young and callow children, might hear these profane slanders, their pure hearts might be blemished and their true belief might be shocked, compelled us to spend many a sleepless night. Therefore we decided to disclose their harmful writings, confuting them one by one by means of powerful and authentic documents which we borrowed from most valuable books. The result was a book of forty-four paragraphs. We strongly hope that upon reading this book of ours, wise, reasonable and discreet youngsters will follow the sacred advice emanating from their conscience and thus will not believe these separatists. People who had fallen for the subversive and destructive allegations of Abdullah bin Saba' had been gradually decreasing in number, when an Iranian heretic named Fadlullah, adding some more blasphemous elements to his sacrilege and giving it the name Hurufi sect, began to spread it again, and this new catastrophic trend was supported by Shah Ismail Safawi. Fortunately, Sunnite and Shiite Muslims would not be taken in by them.

May Allahu ta'ala keep us true to the belief taught by scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' and steady in the lightsome way guided by these superior people! May He protect us from falling for the lies and slanders of those nescient people who exploit our sacred religion as a means for their worldly advantages! May He bestow on us the fortune of loving one another, working together in the way shown by our religion and laws, and thus living in peace and comfort and in mutual brotherhood in this blessed country of ours! Amin.

OH MY BROTHER! IF YOU WISH TO DIE IN IMAN

YOU MUST LOVE THE AHL AL-BAYT AND THE ASHAB

We have received possession of a magazine and a book. The former was a magazine printed in the Autumn of 1967. Its pages contained political and historical articles. These articles were not surprising, inasmuch as there is freedom of thought. However, some of its pages consisted of lies and slanders told by a Jewish convert of Yaman who was contemporary with hadrat 'Uthman. The slanders were directed towards the Ashab al- kiram 'ridwanullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain'. The purposeful allegations, which were like venomous daggers thrust into Muslims' hearts, were by far more of destructive, deleterious and condemnatory propaganda than of mere statements of thoughts. They were bare criminal activities. They were reminiscent of the story of "a wolf in sheep's clothing." They were intended to mislead young people who would, so to speak, read and believe them to be true and thus brothers would be inimical towards one another. We realized how right our friends and acquaintances had been in trying to persuade us. We knew that the tasks of awakening our darling compatriots and separating right from wrong had been awaiting us.

As for the book; it was printed on first quality paper, covered with cloth binding, and it had a gilded and interesting title. It had been printed in Istanbul in 1968. Its contents page was in no way informative about the book. So we had to go through its pages. It was a book of 'Ilm-i-hal (book teaching about Islam, its tenets, worships, etc.). And it went into some delicate matters, too. It was a subject of curiosity as to how it was going to cover all those matters. And all of a sudden the real subject came into our sight. It was those old allegations of the Jewish convert contemporary with hadrat 'Uthman, and they were disguised in such a way that few people could recognize them. They were staged insidiously. Ya Rabbi! What a grisly murder! They were like poison offered in a sweet covering. They had been prepared elaborately with utmost diligence. Yet the dose administered was considerably too much! It seemed necessary to answer them. In fact, it was a religious obligation. For a hadith ash-Sharif, which is recorded in the first page of the book Sawa'iq-ul-muhriqa, states, "When fitna and fasad (mischief, instigation, tumult) become widespread, when Muslims are misled, let those who know the truth tell it to others! Otherwise, may the curse of Allahu ta'ala, of angels, and of all people be on them!"

Trusting ourselves to Allahu ta'ala, we begin with the Autumn magazine and answer the lies of its Hurufi writer:

1- "As Hadrat Muhammad (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam) fought against the likes of Abu Sufyan (on the one hand) and against the irreligious Meccan notables on the other hand, so hadrat Ali struggled against the same types of irreligious people contemporary with him. As a matter of fact, the unbelievers had been harboring a grudge and animosity towards hadrat Ali since the so- called earliest times," he states.

Islamic scholars have given valuable answers to Hurufis' slanders and innumerable books have been written to this effect. One of them is the book Izalat-ul-hafa an khilafat-il-khulafa, by Shah Waliyyullah Dahlawi, one of India's greatest Islamic scholars. Together with its Persian and Urdu versions, it comprises two books. It was reproduced in Pakistan in 1382 [A.D. 1962]. It explains in a splendid style and in detail how superior each and every one of the Ashab al-kiram was. We shall give our response with the translation of a passage from the book Tuhfa-i-Isna Ashariyya, which was written in Persian by Abd-ul-'aziz 'Umari Dahlawi. This scholar was Shah Waliyyullah Ahmad Dahlawi's son. He passed away in Delhi in 1239 [A.D. 1824]. The book Tuhfa exists in the library of the University of Istanbul with the code number 82024. Its Urdu version was printed in Pakistan. Abd-ul-'aziz Dahlawi states:

In a hadith ash- Sharif reported by hadrat Abu Said-i-Hudri, our Prophet 'salla allahu ta'ala alaihi wa sallam' says to hadrat Ali, "As I fight over the revelation of Qur'an al-karim, so you will fight over its interpretation." This hadith ash-Sharif shows that Sunnites are right. For it informs that in the combats of Camel and Siffin there will be disagreements in the interpretation of Qur'an al-karim, that is, there will be different ijtihads. Their quoting this hadith ash-Sharif for refuting Sunnites is an indication of sheer ignorance. For this hadith ash-Sharif shows that those who fought against hadrat Ali (in the combats of Camel and Siffin) were wrong in their interpretation of Qur'an al-karim. And it is a fact admitted by Shiites as well that wrong interpretation of Qur'an al-karim is not a cause of disbelief.

2- "While one of them was vying for the office of caliphate, putting forward his old age, another was fighting to bring others into subjection," he says.

With the expressions 'old age' and 'vying for the office of caliphate', he casts allusions to hadrat Abu Bakr. That hadrat Abu Bakr was elected Khalifa by the unanimous vote of the Sahaba and that hadrat Ali said, "I know Abu Bakr is superior to us all," are naked facts written in full detail in books by all scholars. Many a time the Messenger of Allah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as the Amir. After the Holy War of Uhud some intelligence arrived informing that Abu Sufyan was going to attack Medina. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' sent forth hadrat Abu Bakr for a counteroffensive. During the Holy War of Bani Nadir, in the fourth year of the Hegira, one night he (the beloved Messenger of Allah) appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as the commander and he (himself) honored his home with his blessed presence. In the sixth year he (the Prophet) appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as the Amir and sent him forth against the tribe of Kura'. During the preparations for the Holy War of Tabuk, he (Rasulullah) first commanded that the army should assemble outside Medina. He appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as their commander. His blessed head ached during the Holy War of Hayber. He therefore rested and sent forth hadrat Abu Bakr to deputize him (as the commander-in-chief) and conquer the fortress. That day hadrat Abu Bakr displayed great heroism. In the seventh year he (Rasulullah) sent an army under hadrat Abu Bakr's command onto the tribe of Bani Kilab. There was a bloody combat, whereupon hadrat Abu Bakr killed many unbelievers and captured many others. After the Holy War of Tabuk, intelligence arrived that heathen troops were concentrating in the valley of Reml for a sudden raid into Medina. The Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' gave the banner to hadrat Abu Bakr, appointing him as the Amir over the army. Hadrat Abu Bakr took on the task and routed the enemy utterly. They received intelligence reporting insurrection among the tribe of Bani Amr. So Rasulullah honored the place with his blessed presence in the afternoon. He stated to Bilal (Habashi), "Should I be late for the namaz, tell Abu Bakr to conduct the namaz (in jamaat) for My Sahaba." In the ninth year he sent his Sahaba for Hajj, appointing hadrat Abu Bakr as their Amir. There is no one unaware of the fact that towards his (Rasulullah's) death he appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as the imam for his Sahaba and the latter carried on this task from Thursday evening till Monday morning.

When the Prophet did not appoint hadrat Abu Bakr as Amir, he would at least make him his vizier and field marshal. He would not manage religious affairs without his counsel. Hakim, a scholar of Hadith, reports from hadrat Huzaifat-ebni-Yaman: One day Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said, "As Isa 'alaihis-salam' sent his Hawaris far and wide, so I want to send my Ashab to distant countries so that they teach Islam and its injunctions." When we suggested, "O the Messenger of Allah! You have Sahabis who are capable of doing this task, such as Abu Bakr and 'Umar," he stated, "I cannot do without them. They are like my sight and hearing." He stated in another hadith ash-Sharif, "Allahu ta'ala has bestowed four viziers on me. Two of them, Abu Bakr and 'Umar, are on the earth. The other two, Jabrail and Mikail, are in heaven." If having not been appointed as Amir frequently had been indicative of inaptitude for being an Imam, hadrat Hasan and Husain would not have qualified as Imams. Hadrat Ali never sent them away on any expeditions or wars during his caliphate. On the other hand, he would frequently appoint their paternal brother Muhammad bin Hanafiyya as Amir. When Muhammad was asked the reason for this he said, "They are like my father's eyes. I am like his hands and feet."

Muhammad bin Uqayl bin Abi Talib relates: One day my (paternal) uncle hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh' said as he was making a (speech called) khutba, "O Muslims! Who is the bravest one among the Sahaba?" "O Amir al-Muminin! It is you," was my answer. "No," he said. "Abu Bakr as-Siddiq is the bravest one among us. During the Holy War of Badr we made a brushwood shelter for Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. We were asking one another which one of us was to stand guard in front of the shelter to protect it against the unbelievers' attacks, when Abu Bakr sprang up in such alacrity as to leave hardly any time for anyone else to volunteer, drew his sword, and began to beat around the shelter. The enemy concentrated its attacks on the shelter. Yet Abu Bakr would not let any unbeliever approach the shelter, killing or wounding anyone who would try to do so."

On the other hand, with the expression, "struggling to bring others into subjection," he casts an allusion to hadrat 'Umar. However, hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' was influential in hadrat Abu Bakr's becoming Khalifa not by fighting but owing to his effective speech. Thus he protected Muslims against great catastrophic events. Later, upon hadrat Abu Bakr's will and with the people's unanimous vote, he became Khalifa despite his disinclination.

3- "One of them was hearing hadrat Ali, hadrat Hasan, hadrat Husain and Salman Farisi as witnesses for the case of (the date orchard called) Fedek, and then seizing the orchard from hadrat Fatimat-uz-Zahra, discrediting the testimonies given by the Ahl al-bayt," he says.

These remarks are intended to attack hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh'. Would it be possible to cover the sun with mud? See below how elegantly the book Tuhfa confutes this slanderous fabrication and reproaches Hurufis:

When a Prophet passes away, the property he leaves behind is not inherited by anybody. This fact is written in Shiite books as well. It would have been irrational to make a will on uninheritable property. Consequently, it would be wrong to say that Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' bequeathed the orchard called Fedek to hadrat Fatima. For Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' would not have done something which would have been wrong. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "What we leave behind is to become alms." The so-called allegation of will could not be true in spite of this hadith ash-Sharif. If there had been such a will and hadrat Abu Bakr had not heard about it, he would have been held excusable unless it had been proven by testimony. If there had been such a will and hadrat Ali had known about it, it would have been necessary and permissible for him to fulfill it during his caliphate. However, he followed hadrat Abu Bakr's example and dealt the property out to poor, destitute and stranded people. If it should be maintained that he dealt out his share, then why did he deprive hadrat Hasan and Husain 'radi-allahu anhuma' of the property they were to inherit from their blessed mother? Shiites answer this question in four different ways:

1) "Members of the Ahl al-bayt will not resume property usurped from them. As a matter of fact, when Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' conquered Mecca, he did not take his home back from the Meccans who had usurped it from him," they say.

This answer of theirs is not sound. 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz, during his caliphate, gave the orchard called Fedek to Imam Muhammad Baqir, who accepted it, so that it was possessed by the Imams until it was seized by Abbasid Khalifas. Then, in the two hundred and third year of the Hegira, Khalifa Mamun wrote to his official Qusam bin Jafar and thus the orchard was given again to one of the Imams, namely to Imam Ali Rida, and upon his death the same year, it was given to Yahya, a grandson of Zayd, who was hadrat Husain's grandson. This person should not be mistaken for his namesake, Zayd, who was hadrat Sayyidat Nafisa's grandfather and at the same time hadrat Hasan's son. The orchard was usurped again by Khalifa Mutawakkil, who was Mamun's grandson. Later on Mu'tadid gave it back again. If members of the Ahl al-bayt would not take back their usurped property, why did these Imams, (who were members of the Ahl al-bayt), take the orchard back? By the same token, it is asserted that hadrat Abu Bakr usurped the office of caliphate which belonged to hadrat Ali by rights 'radi-allahu anhuma'. Why did hadrat Ali accept this usurped right later? Furthermore, why did hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' try to win his usurped right of caliphate back from Yazid so earnestly that he attained martyrdom in the end?

2) "Hadrat Ali imitated hadrat Fatima 'radi-allahu anhuma' and did not accept any share from Fedek," they say.

This answer of theirs is even more unsound. Then why did the Imams who accepted Fedek (afterwards) not imitate hadrat Fatima? If it was a fard to imitate her, why did they ignore this fard? If it was supererogatory and not fard, then why did hadrat Ali do this supererogatory act at the cost of omitting an act that was fard? For it is fard to give everyone his or her due. Moreover, it might be reasonable to imitate someone's optional behavior. If this behavior is a result of coercion it should not be imitated. If hadrat Fatima's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha' not utilizing Fedek was due to someone else's oppression, then she had to waive her right because she had no other way. In this case it would have been senseless to imitate her.

3) "Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala' had witnessed Fedek's being bequeathed to hadrat Fatima. In order to show that this witnessing was done for Allah's sake and not for worldly advantages, he did not accept any advantage from Fedek," they say.

This answer of theirs is weak, too. Those who knew about hadrat Ali's witnessing and those who rejected it were dead by the time he became Khalifa. Furthermore, some Imams' accepting the orchard named Fedek made the group called Khariji consider that hadrat Ali might have done this witnessing in order to obtain advantages for his children. In fact, in matters concerning real estates, such as fields, houses, vineyards and orchards, one thinks of one's children's advantages rather than one's own. Perhaps, hadrat Ali might have advised his children not to utilize Fedek lest his witnessing be tarnished. And his children might have refused Fedek both to imitate hadrat Fatima and to fulfill this secret advice. Such is scholars' comments on the matter.

4) "Hadrat Ali's not accepting the orchard called Fedek was intended for Taqiyya. Taqiyya is necessary for Shiites," they say. Taqiyya means to get on well with people one does not like.

This statement of theirs is untenable, too. For, according to Shiites, "when an Imam takes the battlefield and begins to fight it is haram for him to do Taqiyya. It was for this reason that hadrat Husain did not do Taqiyya." To say that hadrat Ali did Taqiyya during his caliphate would mean to say that he committed haram.

Ibni Mutahhir Hulli, a Shiite scholar, states in his book Menhej-ul-kerama, "When Fatima said to Abu Bakr that Fedek had been bequeathed to her, Abu Bakr wrote an answer asking for witnesses. When no witnesses were produced he dismissed the case." If this report is correct, the case of Fedek, like any other case pertaining to inheritance, gifting or bequeathing, lapses from hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh'. So there is no reason for blaming hadrat Abu Bakr. At this point two questions occur:

A- The cases of inheritance, gift and will pleaded by hadrat Fatima were found wrong by hadrat Abu Bakr, but why did he not prefer to please her by giving her the orchard she demanded? Thus the problem would have been settled by mutual concession, she would not have been offended, and there would not have been so many rumors.

This matter cost hadrat Abu Bakr very much hard thought and heavy excruciation, and he really did want to solve it in the manner suggested above. If he had chosen to appease hadrat Fatima's blessed heart by this way, two grave wounds would have gaped in Islam: people would have gossiped about him, saying, for instance, that "The Khalifa shows favoritism in religious affairs. He prefers pleasing his acquaintances to doing justice. He fulfills his friends' wishes in a case that has been lost. When it comes to workers and peasants, he makes all sorts of difficulty with respect to documents and witnesses before they win a case." Such gossips, when widespread, would have caused tumults that would last till the end of the world. Moreover, judges and Qadis would have followed the Khalifa's example, showing indulgence and partiality in their decisions. As for the second wound; if he had donated the orchard of Fedek to hadrat Fatima, he would have made her repossess something of which the Messenger of Allah had dispossessed his inheritors of by saying that property left from Prophets is alms. He did not do so because he knew about the hadith ash-Sharif that warned, "A person who takes the alms (he has given before) back is like a dog eating its tale." He would not commit such a dreadful act deliberately. Aside from these two wounds which the Islamic religion would have suffered, a number of worldly problems would have emerged, too. Hadrat Abbas and Rasulullah's blessed wives would have sued for their rights, too, each demanding a similar orchard or farm. All these problems would have produced other problems which in turn would have been too difficult for hadrat Abu Bakr to cope with. He therefore risked the grief of having been unable to please hadrat Fatima than venture upon these various catastrophic adventures. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "When a believer confronts a dilemma, let him choose the alternative which seems less unwelcome." Hadrat Abu Bakr did so. For this alternative was remediable. And it was remedied, too. The other alternative, on the other hand, would have caused incurable wounds. Religious matters would have become complicated.

B- As for the second question: It is stated in both Sunnite and Shiite books that this disagreement between hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat Fatima 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' was settled. Yet why did Fatima-t-uz-Zahra wish that hadrat Abu Bakr not attend her funeral? And why did she request in her last will that hadrat Ali bury her at night (after her death)?

This we would answer as follows: hadrat Fatima's wish to be buried at night was a result of her excessive feeling of shame. As a matter of fact, she stated towards her death, "I feel very much shame whenever I remember that when I die they will take me among men without any cover." In those days it was customary to wrap a dead woman's corpse in a shroud only, so that the corpse in the shroud would be taken out of the coffin without any cover. Esma binti Umeyr relates: "One day I told her that I had seen people interlace date branches like weaving tents in Abyssinia. Hadrat Fatima said, 'Let me see you do it.' When I did it to show her, she liked it very much and smiled. She had never been seen smiling since Rasulullah's passing away. She made this will to me: 'When I am dead, you wash me. Let Ali be present too. Do not let anyone else in.' " It was for this reason that hadrat Ali did not invite anyone to her funeral. According to a narration, after performing the namaz of janaza for her, (hadrat Ali), hadrat Abbas and a few other members of the Ahl al-bayt buried her at night. According to other narratives, the following day Abu Bakr Siddiq, 'Umar Faruq and many other Sahabis came to hadrat Ali's house to pay a visit of well-wishing. When they knew that hadrat Fatima had passed away and had already been buried, they expressed their sorrow, saying, "Why didn't you send for us so that we could perform the (janaza) namaz for her and help the funeral services?" Hadrat Ali apologized and said that he had done so to carry out her will to be buried at night lest other men should see her. It is stated in the book Fasl-ul-hitab: Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and 'Uthman Zinnureyn and Abd-ur-rahman bin Awf and Zubair bin Awwam were in the mosque for night prayer, when (they heard that) hadrat Fatima had passed away some time between evening and night prayers. It was the second day of the blessed month of Ramadan and the following day was Tuesday. She was twenty-four years old and the Messenger of Allah (her blessed, beloved father) had passed away only six months before. Upon hadrat Ali's request, hadrat Abu Bakr became the imam and conducted the namaz (of janaza) for her with four takbirs:

Hadrat Abu Bakr's not being present at the burial was for the reasons explained above. If there had been disagreement between them, hadrat Abu Bakr would not have conducted the namaz of janaza for her. According to a report, which is written in Shiite books as well as in Sunnite ones, hadrat Husain beckoned to hadrat Said bin As, who was hadrat Muawiya's governor in the blessed city of Medina, to conduct the namaz of janaza for (his elder brother) Imam Hasan, and said, "Were it not the sunnat of my grandfather (Rasulullah) that the Amir should conduct the namaz of janaza, I would not let you conduct it." Hence, hadrat Fatima did not state in her last will that hadrat Abu Bakr should not conduct the namaz for her. If she had made such a will, hadrat Husain would not have done something contrary to this will of hadrat Fatima's. It is obvious that Said bin As was thousands of times lower than hadrat Abu Bakr in being an imam. Only six months earlier hadrat Fatima's superior father, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had appointed hadrat Abu Bakr as the imam (to conduct the namaz in jamaat) in front of all the Muhajirs and Ansars. Hadrat Fatima could not have forgotten this in such a short time as six months.

4- "One of them broke the ribs and the arm of this beloved child of the Messenger of Allah. Not only that. Attacking our mother hadrat Fatima because she refused to see his black face and tried to shut the door to him, he said, "I will burn and destroy your house if you do not pay homage." Pressing that defenseless mother between the door and the wall, he caused the (expected) innocent and pure baby, which had already been named Muhsin, to be lost," he says.

Hasan Qusuri attributes these lies to two books titled Najm- ul-qulub and Qumru and alleged to have been written by a person named Dislikli Hasan Effendi.

Through these slanders he strives to give a shock to those hearts that are full with love and respect for the noble Amir of Muslims, i.e. for our master hadrat 'Umar-ul-Faruq 'radi-allahu anh', who is very much loved by Muslims, who is praised and lauded in ayat al-karimas, who was given the good news through hadith ash-Sharifs that he would go to Paradise, and whose justice, honor and fame occupy vast spaces in the world's histories. Since the person he puts forward is not among scholars, neither Sunnite nor Shiite, and the two books he names appear to exist only in his repertory, we shall not smear our pen with them. Let us harken to what the book Tuhfa says in answer to these sordid lies:

These lies of Hurufis meet with outright objection, not only by the Ahl as-sunnat, but also on the part of Shiites, who acknowledge that they have been spread by a few lowly, ignoble, shameless heretics. Shiites, however, have insisted in their aberrant credo by saying, "He wished to burn the house, but he did not attempt to do it." On the other hand, wishing is a feeling, which in turn is the heart's business. No one except Allahu ta'ala can know this. If these aberrant people mean to say that "He said he would burn the house in order to threaten them," yes, hadrat 'Umar threatened a few people by saying so. These people had crowded around hadrat Fatima's house. "No one can harm us a long as we are here," they were saying. Their purpose was to disarray the caliphate election by arising fitna and tumult. Their noise annoyed hadrat Fatima very much. Yet her excessive feeling of shame would not let her hold out her head and tell them to leave the place. At that moment 'Umar-ul-Faruq, who was passing by, saw them and knew at once what was going on. In order to frighten them away, he said, "I'll pull the house down on you." This type of threat was customary in Arabia. As a matter of fact, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "If they do not rid themselves of this remissness I shall pull their houses on them," in order to warn those who would not attend public prayers of namaz. Hadrat Abu Bakr had been appointed by our master the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' as the imam to conduct the public prayers of namaz. Some people, who considered that they might as well not follow him, did not join the jamaat. So Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' threatened them. Therefore, this statement of hadrat 'Umar's possesses expressive subtlety. Moreover, on the day when Mecca was conquered, an unbeliever named Ibn Hatal was reported to have been reciting poems of vituperation against our master the Prophet. Lest he should be punished, the heathen took asylum in Kaba-i- muazzama and hid himself under its cover. "Do not hesitate. Kill him there, right away!" was the blessed Prophet's order. When people who were against the religion of Allahu ta'ala could not take asylum in the home of Allah, how could they take shelter behind hadrat Fatima's wall? How could it be possible for hadrat Fatima not to feel worried about their sheltering there? For that pure daughter of the Messenger of Allah 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha' had equipped herself with the beautiful moral values exemplified by Allahu ta'ala. Also, authentic reports show that hadrat Fatima, too, ordered them to leave the place.

When hadrat Ali became Khalifa upon hadrat 'Uthman's 'radi-allahu anh' martyrdom, a few people from Mecca went to Medina in order to cause tumult. Taking refuge in the home of hadrat Aisha the mother of believers, they demanded retaliation against hadrat 'Uthman's murderers and stated that they were ready for combat. There was not a single member of the Ashab al-kiram among them. As soon as hadrat Ali was reported to about this, he had these men killed there. He did not consider that doing so would be an act of irreverence towards the blessed wife of the Messenger of Allah. The statement which hadrat 'Umar made as a mere threat would be quite insignificant when compared with this behavior against the sacred wife of the Messenger of Allah were it considered as a sacrilege. Yes, hadrat Ali's action was quite appropriate. He could not be expected to observe such insignificant subtleties while suppressing a fitna and instigation which would otherwise have infected all Muslims. If he had observed these trivialities at the cost of not nipping the fitna in the bud, all the religious and worldly states of affairs would have been jumbled into a mess. Respect was due not only to hadrat Fatima's house but also to the blessed wife of the Messenger of Allah. All hadrat 'Umar did was to make a few dissuasive remarks. He did not take action. Hadrat Ali, on the other hand, took the gravest action. Since hadrat 'Umar's remarks were far less momentous than hadrat Ali's action, censuring him on account of his remarks could be nothing but sheer bigotry and obduracy. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat say that hadrat Ali was the Khalifa and therefore did not observe the respect due to hadrat Aisha because the people's future was at stake. They do not justify criticizing him. According to Hurufis' lies, on the other hand, because hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate was not rightful it was a very grave sin to defend him at the sacrifice of the respect due towards hadrat Fatima's house. This opinion of theirs is the expression of an extremely ignorant and idiotic thought. For both caliphates were rightful according to the Ahl as- Sunnat. Furthermore, hadrat 'Umar knew that hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate was rightful and no one was against his caliphate. It was the earliest days of Islam yet and the young tree of religion and faith was sprouting. Those who attempted to impair this rightful caliphatic order and thus to raise fitna and confusion deserved to be killed. And yet hadrat 'Umar only tried to dissuade them by verbal threat. Why should he be blamed for it? Another appalling paradox is some Shiite scholars' stating that Zubair bin Awwam, the son of Rasulullah's paternal aunt, was among those youngsters who were threatened by hadrat 'Umar. Do not these people ever think? How could it be possible that Zubair bin Awwam, who was some time later killed on account of the harsh talks he made concerning the retaliation he and his friends demanded upon the martyrdom of hadrat 'Uthman, not be blamed for being among the mutinirs? While his arousing fitna and attempting instigation in hadrat Fatima's house is tolerated, why is it considered a grave felony for him to complain about hadrat 'Uthman's murderers in the presence of hadrat Aisha and to demand retaliation against them 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'? These inconsistencies are all results of wrong beliefs.

Performing the namaz in jamaat is for one's personal benefit. A person's not joining the jamaat will not harm any other Muslim. However, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' threatened those who would not join the jamaat with pulling their houses down on them. Then, why should it not be permissible for hadrat 'Umar to threaten with burning their houses those instigators whose mutiny would have otherwise infected all Muslims and damaged Islam thoroughly? Our master the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' did not honor hadrat Fatima's house with his blessed presence till after the curtains with pictures of living creatures on them had been removed. In fact, he would not enter Kaba al-muazzama unless the statues which were said to be of hadrat Ibrahim and hadrat Ismail were taken out. Why should hadrat 'Umar be blamed for threatening the instigators with "pulling the house down on them" in order to dissuade them from arousing a strife near hadrat Fatima's blessed and sacred house? If it should be said that he should have observed the rules of manner and should not have done this threat; no one can observe the rules of manner at times of very important problems and serious dangers. For instance, hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' did not observe the rules of manner due to hadrat Aisha-i- Siddiqa. As it is seen, even the Shiite sect does not justify vituperating or criticizing hadrat 'Umar on account of behavior agreeable with that of the innocent imam (hadrat Ali).

5- "The oppressors carried on their cruelty. Another one conferred governorship on his step brother, the ignoble and frothy-mouthed person named Uqba bin Walid, who had spat at the face of the Messenger of Allah. On the other hand, he promoted people who had been banished by the Messenger of Allah to positions secondary to caliphate. He revenged for all these by throwing, and having others throw, arrows at the coffin of hadrat Hasan-i- Mujtaba," he says.

This time he attacks 'Uthman Zinnureyn 'radi-allahu anh'. Fortunately, the loop he tries to put round the neck of the Ahl as-sunnat catches him by the feet and destroys him. He reveals his ignorance by attacking the third Khalifa through the false accusation that he appointed his step brother Uqba bin Walid as a governor although that person had spat at Rasulullah's face. For one thing, the person who threw his filthy saliva at the blessed face of the Messenger of Allah was Utayba, Abu Leheb's son. Abu Leheb, who was hadrat Ali's paternal uncle, was an implacable enemy of the Messenger of Allah. When the Tabbat yada sura was revealed to inform that this person and his wife Umm-i- Jamil, who had heaped thorns in front of the door of Rasulullah's house, would go to Hell, he went all the more berserk. He sent for his sons Utba and Utayba and ordered them to divorce Rasulullah's daughters. These two villains were polytheists and missed the very high honor of becoming sons-in-law to the Messenger of Allah. Utayba not only divorced Umm-i-Ghulthum 'radi-allahu anha', but also entered the blessed presence of the Messenger of Allah and said, "I do not believe you. I do not like you. And you do not like me, either. So I divorce your daughter." He attacked the Messenger of Allah, pulled his blessed collar and tore his shirt. Pouring down his repulsive saliva, he went away. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' supplicated to Allahu ta'ala, "Ya Rabbi! Send one of Thine wild beasts onto this man!" Janab-i-Haqq accepted the prayer of His Prophet. This abominable person was traveling to Damascus, when his caravan stopped to spend the night at a place called Zerqa. As everyone was asleep, a lion smelled him out and tore him to pieces, and only him in the group. It was before their wedding when these ignoble people divorced the two beautiful girls. Their purpose was to put the Messenger of Allah into financial straits. Yet hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' seized the opportunity, marrying hadrat Ruqayya divorced by Utba virginal as she was and attaining the honor of becoming Rasulullah's son-in-law. Hadrat 'Uthman was very good looking. He was blonde haired and white complexioned. And he was much richer than Abu Leheb's bastards. Another person who tormented Rasulullah very much was Uqba bin Abi Muayt. The Messenger of Allah was performing namaz in the Masjid al-Haram, when this villain came and put animal stomachs on his blessed head. At another time he attacked him and squeezed his blessed throat with his blessed shirt. Hadrat Abu Bakr, who was passing by, saw this and helped the Messenger of Allah, reproaching the unbeliever, "Are you killing a person who says: Allah is my Rabb?" Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' named the unbelievers being there and supplicated to Allahu ta'ala, "Ya Rabbi! Put these people into a hole of torment in the ground!" Abdullah Ibni Masud relates, "In the Holy War of Badr I saw all these people being killed and thrown into a hole in the ground. Only Uqba bin Abi Muayt was killed on his way back from the Holy War." As is seen, the unbelievers named Utayba and Uqba, who persecuted Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' very much, did not live long enough to see the times of Khalifas. They went to Hell before. The allegation that the Khalifa promoted them to caliphate is an acknowledgement of ignorance.

Yes, hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' appointed his brother Utba's son as the governor of Medina. Yet his name was Walid bin Utba. After Walid became governor in the year 57, he respected hadrat Husain and many other Sahabis very highly. In fact, when Yazid became Khalifa, he dismissed Walid from office for failing to execute his order that the people of Medina be made to obey him and setting hadrat Husain free.

It is obvious that this writing in the autumn magazine is an aspersion cast on hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh'. For hadrat 'Uthman appointed his step brother, that is, his brother from the same mother, as the Amir of Kufa. Yet, contrary to this author's allegation, he was not Uqba bin Walid. He was Walid bin Uqba. That is, he was the son of the unbeliever named Uqba. He writes the name the other way round. This Walid became a believer at the conquest of Mecca. He was not the person who committed the despicable deed. In the ninth year (of the Hegira) the Messenger of Allah gave him the duty of collecting zakat from (the tribe of) Bani Mustalaq. Supposing that the author confuses names, we shall answer this, too.

Sad Ibni Abi Waqqas 'radi-allahu anh' borrowed some property from Abdullah Ibni Masud 'radi- allahu anh', who was in charge of the Bayt-ul-mal (Treasury Department of the Islamic government). He failed to pay it back. This matter became a public rumor that spread throughout the city of Kufa. Upon hearing about this, 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh', who was the Khalifa at that time, dismissed hadrat Sad from office as the Amir. He appointed Walid, whom he trusted, for his place. Walid was a person gifted with administrative talents. He put an end to the gossips. He managed to become popular among the people. The people of Azarbaijan rose in rebellion. Walid recruited soldiers and appointed competent commanders for the dispatch of troops. Hadrat Huzaifa-i-Yamani, the Amir of Medayn, joined the army, too. Walid himself commanded the army and quelled the insurrection. Performing ghaza against disbelievers, he obtained many booties. Intelligence came that a great Byzantine army was approaching towards Sivas and Malatya. Walid sent forth Iraqi forces to help the Damascene forces. Many places were conquered in Anatolia. In the thirtieth year of the Hegira, those who envied Walid brought a complaint against him to hadrat Abdullah Ibni Masud, saying that he was addicted to alcohol. When Abdullah Ibni Masud rejected the complaint he said that he "would not take action against a person who did not sin in public," they made another complaint, this time to the Khalifa. Hadrat 'Uthman called Walid to Medina. An investigation was conducted and it was found out that Walid was a wine drinker. He was chastised with what was termed Hadd in the Islamic penal code, and Said bin As was appointed for his place. Earlier, Walid had been assigned a duty in Jazira by hadrat 'Umar. Later on we shall give detailed information about the governors appointed by hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh'. As for the slander that they threw arrows at hadrat Hasan's coffin; it is one of the blatant lies fabricated by Hurufis, enemies of the Ahl as-Sunnat. The truth is as follows, as it is communicated in the book Qisas-i-Anbiya:

In the forty-ninth year of the Hegira Hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu anh' was preparing to bury (the corpse of) his elder brother hadrat Hasan in the Hujra-i- saadat, when Marwan, who had been dismissed from some office and was dwelling in Medina, said that they would not let anyone to be buried there. He gathered around himself all the Umayyads living in Medina. Upon this the Hashimites took up arms to fight them. So hadrat Husain, advised by Abu Huraira 'radi-allahu anhuma', took his brother to the cemetery of Baki', thus preventing a tumult. Said bin As, the governor of Medina, who was an Umayyad, attended the funeral. As it was customary, he conducted the namaz of janaza.

Another writer who criticizes hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' is an Egyptian named Sayyid Qutb, whose style of criticism betrays the fact that he was misled by the Hurufi publications. This man, who is being represented as an Islamic scholar, a mujtahid, and whose books are being translated into Turkish (and English) and proposed to the younger generation by a certain group of people, calumniates this blessed Khalifa, who is loved very much by Muslims, through a very sordid and profane language in the hundred and eighty-sixth and later pages of his book Al-adalat-ul-Ijtima'iy-yat-u-fi-l-islam, printed in 1377 (A.D. 1958). Our Islamic education would not let us quote all his slanders. We shall therefore translate only a few lines from a few pages:

"'Uthman's taking the office of caliphate at such an old age was an unfortunate event. He was incapable of administering Muslims' matters. He was vulnerable to Marwan's tricks and to the stratagems of Umayyads. He spent Muslims' property in a haphazard way. This conduct of his was often a subject of common gossip. He appointed his relatives to positions to preside over the people. Among them was Hakem, who had been dismissed by Rasulullah. When he married his son to the daughter of this man's son Haris, he gave them two hundred dirhams as a gift from the Bayt-ul-mal. The following morning the treasurer of Bayt-ul-mal Zayd bin Erqam came to him, weeping, and asked to be dismissed from office. Realizing that Zayd decided to resign because he (hadrat 'Uthman) was transferring property from the Bayt-ul-mal to his relatives, he asked him, 'Are you weeping because I am doing favors to my relatives?' 'No,' was Zayd's answer. 'I am weeping because I think you are taking these things in return for the property you donated for the sake of Allah when Rasulullah was alive.' Angered by this answer, 'Uthman said, 'Leave the keys belonging to the Bayt-ul-mal and go! I shall find someone else.' There are many other events exemplifying 'Uthman's extravagance. He gave six hundred thousand dirhams to Zubair, two hundred thousand to Talha, and one - fifth of the taxes collected from Africa to Marwan. He was reproached for this behavior by the Sahaba, particularly by Ali bin Abi Talib.

"He enlarged Muawiya's personal property and gave Palestine to him. He appointed Hakem and his foster brother Abdullah bin Sad and his other relatives as governors. Seeing that he was gradually getting away from Islam's essence, the Sahaba assembled in Medina. The Khalifa was very old and weary and things were in Marwan's control. The people sent Ali bin Abi Talib to advise 'Uthman. There was a long talk between them. 'Uthman asked, 'Wasn't Mughira, who is a governor now, a governor in 'Umar's time, too?' 'Yes, he was,' was Ali's answer. 'Uthman asked again, 'Didn't 'Umar appoint Muawiya as a governor throughout his caliphate?' Ali answered, 'Yes, he did. But Muawiya feared 'Umar very much. Now he is carrying on intrigues without you knowing. He is doing all these by saying that they are your orders. You hear about all these but do not say anything to Muawiya.' In the time of 'Uthman right and wrong, good and bad were mixed with each other. If 'Uthman had become Khalifa earlier he would have been young enough. If he had held the office later, that is, if Ali had become Khalifa instead of him, it would have been better because in that case the Umayyads would not have interfered," he says. Then he vituperates the Islamic Khalifas, particularly hadrat Muawiya, asserts that they squandered the Bayt-ul-mal for their personal pleasures and dissipations, and adds that all these things were caused by hadrat 'Uthman.

It is proven with documents in the book Tuhfa that these allegations of Sayyid Outb's are false and wrong. Hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' was elected Khalifa through the unanimous vote of the Ashab al-kiram. And hadrat Ali was among those who voted for him. By censuring hadrat 'Uthman, Sayyid Qutb opposes the unanimity of the Ashab al- kiram and even the hadith ash-Sharif which states, "My Ummat (Muslims) will not agree on something wrong."

It is stated as follows in the book Mirat-i-kainat: "Hadrat 'Uthman bin Affan bin Ebil'as bin Umayya bin 'Abd-i-Shams bin 'Abd-i-Menaf bin Quzay, who was the third Khalifa, was the fourth man to have iman in the Messenger of Allah. When hadrat 'Uthman's paternal uncle Hakem bin Ebil'as tied him and told him that he was not going to untie him unless he returned to his grandparents' religion, he said he would rather die than go back (to the former false religion). Upon this his uncle gave up hope and untied him. He was Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' clerk of Wahy, (that is, it was his duty to write down the ayats revealed to the Prophet). The Messenger 'alaihis-salam' married his daughter Ruqayya to him with the command of Allahu ta'ala. When Ruqayya passed away in Medina during the Holy War of Badr, the Prophet gave him his second daughter Umm- i-Ghulthum. When she, too, passed away, in the ninth year of the Hegira, the Messenger stated, 'If I had other daughters I would give them, too, to 'Uthman!' When he gave his second daughter Umm-i-Ghulthum, he said to her, 'O my daughter! Your husband 'Uthman resembles your ancestor Prophet Ibrahim and your father Muhammad 'alaihim-as-salam' more than anyone else does.' No one except hadrat 'Uthman has had the lot of marrying a Prophet's two daughters. When hadrat 'Uthman came near the Messenger 'alaihis-salam' the Prophet covered his blessed feet with his skirts. When hadrat Aisha asked him why he did so he stated, 'Angels feel shame in front of him. Should I not?' He stated in a hadith ash- Sharif, ''Uthman is my brother in Paradise and will always be with me.' In the Holy War of Tabuk the number of Muslim soldiers was too high for the food and equipment available. Trouble was ahead. Hadrat 'Uthman brought three thousand camels, seventy horses and ten thousand golds out of his own commercial property. After distributing these to the soldiers, Rasulullah stated, 'From today on, no sins will be recorded for 'Uthman.' It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, which exists in the book Jami'us-saghir by hadrat Imam-i- Suyuti 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih': 'With 'Uthman's intercession, seventy thousand Muslims who are to go to Hell will enter Paradise without any questioning.' Hadrat 'Uthman possessed very much religious lore. He and hadrat 'Umar would have such ardent discussions on religious knowledge that people who heard them would think they were quarrelling."

It is stated in the book Tuhfa: During his caliphate hadrat 'Uthman would employ everyone at a place suitable for his personality. He would assign everyone a duty within his capability. The Khalifa is not supposed to know the unknown. Hadrat 'Uthman appointed people he trusted, people he knew as good businessmen, people he considered to be trustworthy and just, and people he thought would obey his commands to administrative positions. No one has the right to censure him on account of this. People who are against him are trying to misrepresent his rightful behavior as unrighteous. Hadrat 'Uthman's governors and commanders were the choicest people in their attachments to him, in doing his commandments, in military skills, in conquering countries, and in their studious habits. In his time they widened the Islamic countries to Spain in the west and to Kabel and Balh in the east. They carried the Islamic armies from one victory to another at sea and on land. Iraq and Khorasan had become hubs of fitna and instigation during the reign of the second Khalifa. They purged these places so efficiently that it was impossible for the mischief makers to recover. If some of these governors displayed behavior contradictory with hadrat 'Uthman's expectations, why should the blame be put on him? He would never be silent when he saw such behavior. Or he would make an investigation to find out whether it was only a matter of slander spread by the enviers. For statesmen naturally have many enemies and those who envy them. Replacing officials upon a mere complaint will throw a country's administrative system into disorder. Therefore, he would first investigate and, if the complaints proved true, immediately dismiss the official concerned. Indeed, he dismissed Walid. Hadrat Muawiya did not revolt against him. He was very popular in Damascus. No one under his authority suffered the smallest harm. He was governing Muslims with justice and performing Jihad against disbelievers. Who would dismiss such a hero? Why should he have dismissed Abdullah bin Sad, the governor of Egypt? After hadrat 'Uthman, this person resigned and stood away from commotions. The complaints against him which Medina received from Egypt were all fabrications of the Jew named Abdullah bin Saba'. In short, hadrat 'Uthman did his duty perfectly. However, destiny's disposition acted against his proposition and he failed to extinguish the fire made by Jews.

The case with hadrat 'Uthman is similar in many respects to that of hadrat Ali. Various precautions taken by hadrat Ali, for instance, came to naught. Only, hadrat 'Uthman's governors were always attached and obedient to him. They regularly sent the booties to the Khalifa. All Muslims had sufficient property and lived in peace and comfort. In fact, these well-to-do conditions contributed to the arising of fitna. Hadrat Ali's governors, on the other hand, revolted against him. They did not do their duties. State administration was impaired. Hadrat Ali's own relatives, e.g. his paternal first cousins, joined this remiss. If those people who attempt to vilify hadrat 'Uthman will not believe Sunnite scholars, let them read Shiite books. Then they will realize the facts. The book Nahj-ul-belagha, which is valued very highly by Shiites, quotes a letter which hadrat Ali wrote to his paternal first cousin. In this letter he expresses the trust he put on that munafiq. Then the book Nahj-ul- belagha goes on and gives a detailed account of that man's acts of treason. Munzir bin Jarut, another governor appointed by hadrat Ali, proved to be a traitor. The letter of threat which the Khalifa wrote to him exists in most Shiite books. Hadrat Ali could not be vilified on account of these governors of his. Even Prophets fell for the soft words of munafiqs. However, Wahy would be sent to Prophets and thus the inner malice of most munafiqs would be revealed. Shiites maintain that Imams have to be aware of the unknown. And they blame hadrat 'Uthman for failing to do so. With this conviction of theirs, they denigrate hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah', too. According to their fallacy, hadrat Ali appointed traitors to positions over Muslims although he knew that they would turn into treason. The infamous villain named Ziyad bin Abih was another governor appointed by hadrat Ali.

Another event they use as a ground for casting aspersions on hadrat 'Uthman is his admitting Marwan's father Hakem bin As into Medina. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had deported Hakem from Medina because he had made friends with munafiqs and aroused fitna among Muslims. During the reigns of the first two Khalifas disbelievers were purged and there were no munafiqs left. Therefore, it was not necessary for Hakem to live in exile any longer. The former two Khalifas would not allow him to return home. For he was likely to resume his former mischievous acts. Hakem belonged to the Bani Ummayya tribe. And the two Khalifas belonged to the Tamim and Adiy tribes. They could relapse into the tribal hostilities prevalent in the era of nescience (before Islam). Hadrat 'Uthman, however, was Hakem's brother's son. There was therefore no longer any reason for such anxiety. Hadrat 'Uthman explained this decision as follows: "I had had Rasulullah's permission to bring him back to Medina. When I told Khalifa Abu Bakr, he asked me to prove it by witnesses. I was silent because I did not have any witnesses. Hoping that Khalifa 'Umar would accept my statement, I told him, too. Yet he, too, asked for witnesses. When I became Khalifa, I gave him permission (to return to Medina) because I knew." Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated during his illness, "I wish someone pious came to me and I said something to him." When they asked if they should send for Abu Bakr, the Messenger said, "No." They asked if he would like to see 'Umar, he said, "No" again. Their third suggestion was Ali and the Prophet's answer was again, "No." Finally they suggested to send for 'Uthman. This time the answer was, "Yes." When hadrat 'Uthman came, Rasulullah said something to him. In the meantime, perhaps he interceded for Hakem and his intercession was accepted. It is a known fact that Hakem gave up his habits of instigation and mischief and made tawba towards his death. Besides, he was too old to do anything when he was back in Medina.

On the other hand, the gifts he gave to his relatives were not from the Bayt-ul-mal as is alleged by Hurufi books and by Sayyid Qutb. They were from his personal property. Hadrat Abd-ul-Ghani Nabulusi states as follows in the seven hundred and nineteenth page of the second volume of his book Hadiqa: "Three of the four Khalifas received their salaries from the Bayt-ul-mal, that is, from the state treasury. Hadrat 'Uthman would not accept a salary because he was very rich. He did not need a salary." The book Bariqa, after giving the same information in its fourteen hundred and thirty-first page, adds the following statement: "On the day when 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' was martyred, one hundred and fifty thousand dinars of gold, one million dirhams of silver and clothes that were worth two hundred thousand golds were found among his servant's personal belongings." He was a cloth-merchant. His gifts were not only to his relatives. He was generous to everybody. He would do many charitable deeds for Allah's sake. He would emancipate a slave every Friday. He would give a feast to the Ashab al-kiram every day. No one would say that property given for Allah's sake is property squandered. And it is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif that alms given to one's relatives will earn one twice as much thawab. Hadrat 'Uthman convened the Ashab al- kiram. Ammar bin Yaser was among them. Hadrat 'Uthman said, "I call you to witness that the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' granted precedence to the Quraish and Bani Hashimi (tribes) among people who deserve kindness. If they gave me the keys to Paradise I would put them all into Paradise. I would not leave any one of them outside." The Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain said nothing in response to these statements of hadrat 'Uthman's. It would be sheer bigotry and pertinacity to suppose that he gave all his gifts from the Bayt-ul-mal. It is a symptom of enmity against him. When he was asked, his answer was, "Do not burden me with something incompatible with justice and taqwa." When hadrat 'Uthman married his son to Marwan's brother Haris' daughter, he sent one thousand dirhams of silver out of his own property. As he married his daughter Ruman to Marwan he gave them one thousand dirhams, too. Neither of these gifts were from the Bayt-ul-mal.

The allegation, "He donated one-fifth of the booties coming from Afrikiyya to Marwan," which Sayyid Qutb adopts from Hurufi books and Abbasid histories, is another falsification. In the (Hijri) year 29 hadrat 'Uthman sent Abdullah bin Sad to Africa with one thousand strong army of cavalry and infantry troops under his command. Upon this, bloody combats took place in the Tunisian capital city Afrikiyya. Muslims won and obtained many booties. Abdullah Marwan went to the Khalifa with one- fifth of the booties. The number of coins alone was more than five thousand golds. It was a distance of several months' traveling and therefore it would be difficult and dangerous to transport all these booties to Medina. Marwan sold one thousand dirhams of these and brought the remainder to Medina. He also reported the good news, which in turn earned him earnest benedictions. In return for Marwan's onerous trek and the good news he gave, the Khalifa forgave him for failing to deliver all the money he had received for the property sold on the way. It was within the Khalifa's authority to do so. Moreover, all this happened in the presence of the Sahaba 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. If a person is sent one thousand golds and he donates one or more golds as a tip to the person who brings them, no one will call this extravagance. As a matter of fact, Allahu ta'ala commands that the zakat-collector be paid as much as he needs. Another slanderous allegation is that "he gave Abdullah bin Khalid one thousand dirhams." He ordered that this person be lent some money. Abdullah paid his debt later. When he heard that his son-in-law Haris was doing injustice in collecting the zakat from the merchants in Medina, he dismissed him from office and punished him.

'Uthman-i-Zinnureyn 'radi-allahu anh' would give the uncultivated lands in Hijaz and Iraq to people he trusted and to his relatives, buy them agricultural implements and have them cultivate these lands, thus providing arable land for the people. He improved agriculture and reared vineyards and orchards. He had wells dug and canals opened. The arid lands of Arabia became the most fertile places in his time. This consequently brought safety and peace to the country. Thieves and wild beasts were now historical subjects. Guest-houses and inns were built in the places formerly occupied by their dens. And all these gave birth to consequent facilities in traveling and transportation. These were tremendously wonderful events for Arabia. These feats cannot be accomplished with the motorized tools of the twentieth century. It seemed as if the hadith ash-Sharif, "Crack of doom will not happen unless rivers flow in Arabia," had been uttered to point to the degree of civilization that would be attained in the time of hadrat 'Uthman. In another hadith ash-Sharif the Messenger of Allah had stated to Adi bin Hatem Tai: "If your life is long enough, you will see how a woman travels from the city Hira to Kaba easily and without fearing anyone except Allah." There are many hadith ash-Sharifs foretelling that in the time of hadrat 'Uthman, there will be an increase in property and wealth and improvements in business life. When the Ashab al-kiram saw this prosperity and peace they admired hadrat 'Uthman's administration and accomplishments. They began to work like the Khalifa. Hadrat Ali tilled fields and made vineyards at places called Yenbu' and Fedek and Zuhra, Talha followed his example at Ghabed, and Zubair did so at Zihasheb. The land of Hijaz became prosperous. If hadrat 'Uthman's caliphate lasted a few years longer, the rose gardens of Shiraz and the woods of Hirat would have been surpassed. It is permissible for any person to till dead lands as if they were his own property, provided he be granted permission by the Khalifa. Why should it not be permissible for the Khalifa himself, then? And why should the crops he thus raises not be halal for him? Hadrat 'Uthman enlivened many lands with his own property. He made vineyards and orchards. He had many wells dug. He had many irrigation systems built. He set an example for others. He provided business for people. He established a new precedent. As it is expressed in the saying, "Property will breed property," the people's revenues became many times more. In his time there was no one who did not cultivate the land or rear vineyards. If Mawdudi of India or Sayyid Qutb of Egypt had read Islamic histories, or at least the book Tuhfa, which was written in India, they would feel shame to defame Rasulullah's Khalifas 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Realizing that they could not even praise and laud those great people in due manner, they would mind their manners.

The allegation that "he donated one thousand dirhams to Zayd bin Thabit 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' from the Bayt-ul-mal" is an expression of looking at the events from the evil side. One day he (hadrat 'Uthman) ordered distribution of property from the Bayt-ul-mal to those who deserved payment. His order was carried out. When it was seen that one thousand dirhams was in excess, he ordered that this money be used in public services. Zayd used this money in repairing the Masjid an-Nabi.

A hadith ash-Sharif, which exists in the book Mashihat written by Hafiz Ahmad bin Muhammad Abu Tahir Silafi, a Shafi'i scholar who passed away in 576, and which is reported also by Ibni Asakir Ali bin Muhammad, states, "Loving Abu Bakr and thanking him is wajib for all my Ummat." Imam-i-Munawi also quotes this hadith ash-Sharif from Dailami. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, which exists in the book Wasila by Hafiz 'Umar bin Muhammad Erbili, "As Allahu ta'ala has made namaz, zakat and fasting fard for you, so He has made it fard for you to love Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman and Ali." Another hadith ash-Sharif, which is reported by Abdullah Ibni Adi and written in Munawi, states, "Loving Abu Bakr and 'Umar is from iman. And enmity towards them is being munafiq." According to a report given by Imam-i-Tirmuzi, a janaza (dead person ready for interment) was brought to the Messenger of Allah. He would not perform the namaz of janaza for him, and said, "This man felt animosity towards 'Uthman. Therefore, Allahu ta'ala bears animosity towards him." The hundred and first ayat of Tawba sura purports, "Allah loves the early believers among the Muhajirs and Ansar and those people who follow them. And they love Allah. Allah has prepared Gardens of Paradise for them." The first three Khalifas are among the early believers. And hadrat Muawiya and Amr Ibni As are among those people who followed them. Those who malign these great Islamic leaders are opposing the ayat al-karima and the hadith ash-Sharifs by doing so. And a person who opposes an ayat al-karima or a hadith ash-Sharif, in his turn, will go out of Islam and become a disbeliever. His claiming to be a Muslim will only betray the fact that he is a munafiq or a zindiq.

6- "Another old woman fabricated a story of a lost bracelet, with an attempt to cover the desert love affair she had had with Safwan. While doing so, she imposed the cause of divorce on hadrat Ali. This gave birth to the event of Camel," he says.

At this point the magazine shamelessly assails hadrat Aisha-i-Siddiqa 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha', believers' mother and Rasulullah's beloved wife. See what hadrat Abd-ul-haqq Dahlawi, a scholar of Hadith, says in his book Medarij-un-nubuwwa:

The merits and virtues possessed by Aisha-i-Siddiqa 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha' are innumerable. She was one of the scholars of fiqh among the Ashab al-kiram. She would speak very clearly and eloquently. She would give fatwa to the Ashab al-kiram. According to most scholars, one- fourth of the knowledge of fiqh was communicated by hadrat Aisha. It was stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "Learn one-third of your religion from Humeyra!" Because Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' loved hadrat Aisha very much, he called her Humeyra. Most people among the Ashab al-kiram and the Tabiin reported the hadith ash-Sharifs they had heard from hadrat Aisha. Hadrat Urwat-ubni Zubair states: I have not seen anyone more learned in the meanings of Qur'an al-karim, in halals and harams, in Arabic poetry, or in genealogy. The following two couplets eulogizing the Messenger of Allah (translated into English) belongs to her:

Had the Egyptians heard about the beauty of his cheeks,

They would not have paid money for buying Yusuf 'alaihis-salam'.

(That is, they would have kept all their money for being able to see his cheeks.)

Had the women who blamed Zaliha seen his luminous forehead,

They would have cut their hearts instead of their hands.

(And they would not have felt pain at all.)

Another honor hadrat Aisha had was that she was Rasulullah's darling. Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' loved her very much. When Rasulullah was asked who he loved most, his answer was: "Aisha." When he was asked who was the man he loved most, he said: "Aisha's father." That is, he stated that he loved hadrat Abu Bakr most. When hadrat Aisha was asked who the Messenger of Allah loved most, she said (he loved) Fatima (most). When she was asked who was the man he loved most, she said it was Fatima's husband. This comes to mean that among his wives, hadrat Aisha was the one he loved most; among his children he loved hadrat Fatima most; among his Ahl al-bayt hadrat Ali was most beloved to him; and among his Sahaba hadrat Abu Bakr was his most beloved companion 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Hadrat Aisha relates, "One day Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' was unfastening the thongs of his blessed sandals and I was spinning yarn. I looked at his blessed face. Sweat was dropping from his bright forehead. And each drop of sweat was spreading light all around. They were dazzling my eyes. I was bewildered. He turned to look at me. "What is the matter with you? What makes you so pensive,' he asked. I said, 'O the Messenger of Allah! looking at the brightness of the haloes on your blessed face and the lights spread by the drops of sweat on your blessed forehead, I have lost myself.' Rasulullah stood up and came near me. He kissed between my eyes and said, 'Ya Aisha (O Aisha)! May Allahu ta'ala bless you with goodness! I have not been able to please you the way you have pleased me.' That is, he said, 'Your pleasing me has been more than my pleasing you'." His kissing between hadrat Aisha's blessed eyes meant awarding and honoring her for her loving the Messenger of Allah, seeing and recognizing his beauty. A line:

I congratulate my eyes on seeing thine beauty!

And a couplet:

How good those eyes are for looking at the beauty.

How fortunate that heart is for burning with His love!

Imam-i-Mesruq, one of the greatest members of the Tabiin, whenever he was to give a report from hadrat Aisha, would begin as follows: "Hadrat Siddiqa the beloved one of the Messenger of Allah and the blessed daughter of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, states that... ." Sometimes he would say, "The darling of the beloved ones of Allahu ta'ala and of the inhabitants of heaven states that... ." Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' would say that she was the highest one of the Azwaj-i-tahirat (the Prophet's pure wives) and boast about the blessings Allahu ta'ala had bestowed on her. She would say, for instance, "Before the Messenger of Allah (told my father that he) wanted to marry me, Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' showed (him) a picture of me and said: This is your wife!" Drawing pictures of living beings had not been made haram yet. Besides, the picture was not drawn by a human being. Why should it be a sinful act, then? In a hadith ash-Sharif which exists in the books Bukhari and Muslim, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said to our mother Aisha 'radi-allahu anha', "For three nights I saw you in my dreams. The angel showed me your picture drawn on white silk. He said: This is your wife. I do not forget the picture the angel showed me in my dream. It is you, exactly." Our mother Aisha states, "Rasulullah was performing tahajjud (after midnight) namaz and I was lying by his side. This honor was peculiar to me only. [She would boast with this honor.] As he prostrated, his blessed hands would touch my feet and I would pull my feet back." One of the honors conferred on hadrat Aisha was that they (Rasulullah and she) made ghusl together and used the same container. This shows the degree of love the Messenger of Allah had for hadrat Aisha. Rasulullah did not receive Wahy in any of his wives' beds except hadrat Aisha's. And this shows the degree of value Allahu ta'ala has attached to hadrat Aisha. Hadrat Umm-i-Salama said something about Aisha to the Messenger of Allah. He stated, "Do not hurt me through Aisha. I have received Wahy in her bed." Upon this Umm-i-Salama, "I shall never hurt you again. I make tawba, o the Messenger of Allah." One day he asked hadrat Fatima, "Will you love someone whom I love?" When she said she would, the Messenger stated, "Then, love Aisha!" 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'.

Hadrat Aisha would boast that "It was revealed by Allahu ta'ala that the slander spread against me was a lie." Allahu ta'ala sent down the seventeen ayats in the Nur sura to declare that those who calumniated hadrat Aisha would go to Hell. These ayat al-karimas are another indication of the greatness and very high honor of hadrat Aisha.

Calumniation of hadrat Aisha took place during the Holy War of Mureysee' in the fifth year of the Hegira. This Holy War is also called Bani Mustaliq. Rasulullah left for this Holy War with a thousand strong army. He took hadrat Aisha and Umm-i-Salama along. A number of munafiqs joined in order to get booties. The Messenger appointed hadrat 'Umar as the commander of the army. After a bloody combat, five thousand sheep and ten thousand camels were taken in addition to more than seven hundred captives. Juwayriyya was among them. Rasulullah bought her and married her. Upon seeing this, the Ashab al- kiram said, "How can we keep relatives of the Messenger of Allah as our captives?" and emancipated the captives they had been keeping 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Juwayriyya must have been a very fortunate girl, for she caused her tribe to be saved from captivity. It was in the same year when the blessed Messenger bought Selman-i-Farisi from his Jewish owner and emancipated him. Hadrat Selman became a Muslim in the first year of the Hegira.

The following account is given in the book Alti-Parmak, which is the Turkish translation of the Persian book Me'arij-un-nubuwwa: Before leaving for a Holy War Rasulullah would draw lots among his wives and would take along the winner. Hadrat Aisha relates, "It was after the revelation of the ayat commanding women to cover themselves. A tent was made for me and I rode my camel in this tent. On our way back from the Holy War we made a halt at a place close to Medina. At dawn the noises we heard meant that we were to move again. I left the encampment for a short while to relieve nature. When I was back I found out that I had lost my bracelet. I went back, looked for it, and found it. When I was back at the encampment I could not find the army. They were gone. They must have put my tent on the camel, thinking that I was in the tent. At that time I used to eat very little. I was weak. I was fourteen years old. I was confused. Then, saying to myself that they would soon notice my absence and come back to look for me, I began to sit and wait, falling asleep after a short while. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' ordered Safwan bin Mu'attil Sulemi to go back and look for me. When this person found me sleeping he shouted. His shouting woke me. When I saw him I covered my face. He made his camel kneel down, walked away, and said, "Mount the camel!" I did. Safwan held the halter. It had already become hot when we caught up with the troops. The first people we met were a group of munafiqs. They had some unpleasant conversation among themselves. They were provoked by Ibni Abi Selul. Of the Muslims, Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah joined them, too. When we were back, I became ill. The rumor spread everywhere. Yet I did not know about it. Only, Rasulullah would not visit me as frequently as he had done before, nor at least would he come to see how I was. And I did not know why. One night I went out to the toilet, accompanied by Mistah's mother. Her skirts entangled her feet and she fell down. She cursed her son [Mistah]. When I asked why she was swearing, she would not say why. I asked the same question several times. She said, 'O Aisha! Haven't you heard the rumors he is spreading?' When I asked her what they were, she told me all about the calumniation, whereupon my illness was aggravated at once. My fever was augmented, so that I felt as if my head were emitting fire. I became unconscious and fell down. When I recovered I went back home. I asked for Rasulullah's permission to go to my father's home, which he accepted. My purpose was to find out what was going on. I asked my mother. She said, 'My dear! Don't worry! Things are easy for you. Every woman who is pretty and who is loved by her husband may undergo such calumniations.' I was astonished. I wondered if these rumors had reached Rasulullah's blessed ears, and what was going to happen if my father had heard about them? These thoughts made me so sad that I sobbed bitterly. My father was reading Qur'an al-karim in the room. He heard my sobbing and asked my mother why. My mother told him how deeply distressed I had felt upon hearing for the first time about the gossips being spread. Upon this my father, too, began to weep. Then he came near me and said, 'My dear child! Be patient! Let us wait for the ayat which Allahu ta'ala will reveal.' That night I did not sleep till morning. Nor did my tears come to an end."

Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' sent for hadrat Ali and Usama 'radi-allahu anhuma' and said, "How is this matter going to end?" Usama said, "O the Messenger of Allah! We have only a good opinion of your wife." And hadrat Ali said, "There are many women on the earth. Allahu ta'ala has not made the earth narrow for you. Ask Aisha's jariya Burayda about Aisha!" When she was asked she said, "I swear by Allah that I have never seen her do anything wrong. From time to time she took some sleep. When the sheep came, she kneaded dough with some flour and ate it. Most of the time I was with her. I did not see anything wrong with her. If the rumors had been true Allahu ta'ala would have let you know." One day the Messenger of Allah was sitting in his home. He was very sad. Hadrat 'Umar-ul-Faruq came. The Messenger of Allah asked him what he thought. He said, "O the Messenger of Allah! I know very well that the munafiqs are lying. Allahu ta'ala does not let a fly alight on your body. He protects you lest it should alight on something filthy and then smear the filth on you. Allahu ta'ala, who protects you against a small filth, will definitely protect you against the worst filth." These statements of hadrat 'Umar's pleased Rasulullah. His blessed face smiled. Then he sent for hadrat 'Uthman and asked him. He said, "I do not doubt that this rumor is a lie spread by munafiqs. It is a slander completely. Allahu ta'ala never lets your shadow fall on the ground. He protects even your blessed shadow from falling on a dirty place or being trodden on by an abominable person. Would He let such a dirt enter your blessed home?" These statements also relieved his blessed heart. Then he sent for hadrat Ali and asked him. Hadrat Ali said, "These rumors are lies, slanders. They are munafiqs' fabrications. (One day) you and we were performing namaz. You took off your blessed sandals during the namaz. And we took off ours, too, to follow you. You said, 'Why did you take off your sandals?' When we answered that we had done so in order to follow you, you said, 'Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' came and informed me that there was some najasat (Any sort of dirt which must be cleaned from one's clothes before performing namaz.) on my sandals. So I took them off.' Is it possible for Allahu ta'ala, who protects from dirts by sending you Wahy even during namaz, to allow your blessed wives to smear themselves with such a dirt? Had such an atrocity been committed, He would have let you know immediately. Let your blessed heart not feel sad. Allahu ta'ala will definitely send the Wahy and inform you that your blessed wife is pure." These statements pleased Rasulullah all the more. He immediately honored hadrat Abu Bakr as-Siddiq's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' home with his presence.

Hadrat Aisha relates: That day I wept continuously. I had a woman visitor from the Ansar. She was weeping, too. My mother and father were sitting with me. All of a sudden Rasulullah came and greeted us. He sat beside me. He had never come to see me since that event, which had taken place a month before. Nor had any Wahy been revealed. Sitting down, the Messenger of Allah paid hamd-u-thena (thanking, praising and lauding) to Allahu ta'ala. He said the Word Shahadat. Then he turned to me and said, "O Aisha! They told me so about you: If you are not as they say, Allahu ta'ala will inform soon that you are true. If a sin has taken place, then make tawba and istighfar! Allahu ta'ala will accept the tawba of those people who make tawba for their sins." Upon hearing Rasulullah's blessed voice, I stopped weeping. I turned to my father and told him to answer. My father said, "Wallahi (I swear on the name of Allah that) I do not know how I should answer the Messenger of Allah. We were idolaters in the era of nescience. We used to worship human statues. We did not know how to worship properly. No one could say such things about our women. Now our hearts have been brightened with the halo of Islam. Our homes have been illuminated with the light of Islam. And yet all people are spreading such rumors about us. What should I say to Rasulullah?" Then I turned to my mother and told her to answer. She said, "I am astonished. I am at a loss as to what to say. You explain it." Then I began to talk. I said: I swear by Allahu ta'ala that the rumors that have reached your blessed ears are all lies. If you believe them, you will not believe me whatever I say. Allahu ta'ala knows that I am quite innocent. If I say 'Yes' about something I have not done, I will have slandered myself. Wallahi I have nothing else to say. Only, I would like to quote Yusuf's (Joseph) 'alaihis-salam' statements: "Patience is good. I hope for help from Allahu ta'ala against what they say." I was so badly confused that I said Yusuf 'alaihis-salam' instead of Yaqub (Jacob) 'alaihis-salam'. Then I turned my face and leaned. I was always hoping for the sake of Allah that my Rabb would rehabilitate my reputation. For I was certain about myself. I was innocent. Yet I did not think Allahu ta'ala would send ayat al-karimas for me. I could not imagine that ayat al-karimas would be read (and recited) for me everywhere till the end of the world. Because I was conscious about the greatness of Allahu ta'ala versus my humility, I never expected that He would reveal an ayat al-karima for me. I only hoped that He would inform His Prophet in his dream or inspire into his blessed heart that I was sinless, that my heart was clean. In the name of Allah I am telling the truth that Rasulullah had not yet stood up from where he had been seated, and no one had left the room, when signs of Wahy appeared on his blessed face. All the people sitting in the room knew that Wahy had arrived. We had a leather cushion. When my father saw what was happening, he put this cushion under Rasulullah's blessed head. He covered him with a muslin bed-sheet. When the revelation was over, he took the cover off his blessed face. He wiped the drops of sweat, which were shining like pearls, off his rose-red face with his blessed hands. Smiling, he said, "good news to you, o Aisha! Allahu ta'ala has proven you innocent. He has borne witness to the fact that you are pure." Presently, my father said, "Stand up, o my daughter! Thank the Messenger of Allah right away!" I said, "Wallahi I shall not stand up! Nor shall I thank anyone except Allahu ta'ala! For my Rabb has revealed ayat al-karimas for me." Then Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' recited ten ayat al-karimas, which are now the ones beginning with the eleventh ayat al-karima of Nur sura. My father got up at once and kissed my head.

Before the revelation of ayat al-karimas about Aisha 'radi-allahu anha', Abu Ayyub Khalid's wife had asked hadrat Khalid what he thought about the rumors being spread about hadrat Aisha. Hadrat Khalid said, "For Allah's sake, these rumors are lies. Would you do a vice of this sort against me?" When his wife, answered, "No, never, may Allah protect me against it," hadrat Khalid said, "Then, could Aisha, whose faith is firmer than ours, do a vice of this sort against the Messenger of Allah? We have not said so. These rumors are slanders." And Haqq ta'ala sent down ayat al-karimas exactly agreeable with these statements of hadrat Khalid's. Presently, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' convened his Sahaba in the Masjid (or masjid=mosque): He recited the ayat al-karimas revealed to him. With the barakat of these ayat al-karimas, the believers were relieved from the doubts pestering their hearts. Mistah was a relative of hadrat Abu Bakr's. He was poor. Formerly hadrat Abu Bakr used to help him with his subsistence. When Mistah joined the munafiqs in this squalid act, he (hadrat Abu Bakr) took an oath not to help him any longer. Upon this, Allahu ta'ala sent down the twenty-second ayat al-karima of Nur sura. When Abu Bakr as-Siddiq heard this ayat al-karima, he said, "I would love Allahu ta'ala to forgive me," and helped Mistah as he had done before. When the ayat al-karimas restoring hadrat Aisha's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha' reputation came, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' ordered that the slanderers be chastised with the punishment called Hadd for the Qazf (accusing a woman with fornication). Four people were flogged with eighty stripes each. One of them was a woman and Rasulullah's wife's sister. This is the end of the part we have borrowed from the book Me'arij.

The book of Tafsir called Mawakib explains the first of the ayat al-karimas about hadrat Aisha as follows: "Slanderers of Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' are only a few among you. Do not take this slander as a harm inflicted on you! It will be auspicious for you. [You have attained much thawab because of this slander. Their falsification has been divulged and your honor has been promoted. The ayat al-karima has declared your innocence]. The slanderers deserve punishment equal to the sin they have acquired. Those who cast the grave aspersion and say the very abhorrent thing shall be tormented bitterly in this world and in the Hereafter." After these people were clogged in accordance with (the prescribed punishment called) Hadd, Abdullah bin Abi fell into utter disrepute. Hassan became blind and remained so till his death. And Mistah became one-handed. The twelfth ayat al-karima purported, "Upon hearing about this slander, Muslim men and women should have an optimistic opinion of their families. They should say that it is an obvious lie and slander." The nineteenth ayat al-karima purported, "Those who mean disrepute for believers shall be tormented bitterly in the world and in the Hereafter." And the twenty-sixth ayat al-karima purported, "Uttering foul words is worthy of foul men. Foul speech befits foul men." Rasulullah and hadrat Aisha and Safwan are far from the allegations of those ignoble people. They deserve (Allah's) forgiveness and compassion, and blessings in Paradise. Safwan is praised in a hadith ash-Sharif. He was martyred at the conquest of Erzurum in (the Hijri year) 17.

Allahu ta'ala states that He will subject the slanderers of hadrat Aisha to very painful torments. Since Allahu ta'ala answers these base people exactly in a manner they deserve, we need not add anything. However, we shall present a fatwa, which exists in the two hundred and ninety-second page of the book Mirat-i-kainat:

It is stated in the book Hasais ul-habib that hadrat Abdullah Ibni Abbas has given the fatwa that "A person who commits 'Qazf' against one of Rasulullah's blessed wives, (that is, who accuses one of them with an act of impurity), becomes a disbeliever, and his tawba will not be acceptable." Accusing hadrat Aisha with impurity, on the other hand, means contradicting Qur'an al-karim, which, in its turn, is disbelief according to a unanimous report. And imputing immodesty on the mother of one of the Sahaba, [e.g. on Hind] deserves chastisement double the punishment for Qazf. May Allahu ta'ala protect our Alawi and Shiite brothers and all Muslims from falling into such a disastrous error! Amin.

7- "Utba's daughter Hind, the notorious heroine of numerous men's love adventures, chewed hadrat Hamza's lungs during the amorous hours she shared with an Abyssinian slave. She had been divorced by her husband Ibni Mughira on account of her prostitution and admitted as a wife by Abu Sufyan. Hind's marriage with Abu Sufyan could not make her cease from other men. She continued her notorious way of life. This marriage gave birth to Muawiya the accursed, who of all the probable fathers was finally ascribed to Abu Sufyan. This man grew to be a cruel tyrant and oppressed the people ruthlessly," he says.

One would feel shame to use such dirty and squalid language even against Abu Jahl and Iblis (Satan), the two most implacable and accursed enemies of the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. Yet it is stated in Qur'an al-karim that "Foul speech befits foul men." One's speech is one's mirror. We could not expect fragrance from sewerage! The dirty, repulsive, slanderous writings quoted above cannot defame those people whom Allahu ta'ala has forgiven and promised Paradise and blessings. They cannot be completely disignored, however, inasmuch as they betray the abject characters of their utterers. The hadith ash-Sharif, "Iman cleans, extirpates (one's) past sins," is an unshakable evidence proving the fact that hadrat Muawiya and his blessed father Abu Sufyan 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma', and the blessed woman Hind 'radi-allahu anha', who proved her chastity and nobility in the presence of the Messenger of Allah on the day when Mecca was conquered, are extremely pure people.

There are innumerable books writing about the greatness and superior virtues of these three Sahabis. At this point we shall quote a few lines from Qisas- i-Anbiya (A History of Prophets), since it is a book available for anybody:

"Among the Arabs, family life was very important and spirit of kinship was very strong. Every Arab would demonstrate wonderful zeal in guarding the honor of his tribe and relatives." "The Arabs would recite poems and preach sermons at market places and meetings." "Fakhr-i- 'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' climbed mount Safa and sat there. Hadrat 'Umar-ul- Faruq sat beside and below him. First men and then women came and became Muslims one by one. Hadrat 'Ali's sister Umm-i-Hani and hadrat Muawiya's mother Hind was among the women. When Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said to the women to 'Promise not to steal,' Hind came forward and said, 'If I were the person to steal, I would have stolen a lot from Abu Sufyan's property.' Upon this, Fakhr-i-'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' recognized Hind and said, 'Are you Hind?' 'I am Hind. Forgive (for) the past (offenses) so that Allah will forgive you,' she said. When Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said the injunction of not committing fornication, Hind said, 'Does a free woman commit fornication?' And when the Messenger said that another injunction is not to kill one's children, Hind said, 'They were small and we raised them. They were grown up and you killed them at Badr. It is between you and them now.' Hadrat 'Umar was a stern and serious person. Yet he could not help laughing at these words of Hind's. When the Messenger enjoined not to slander, Hind said, 'Wallahi, slandering is a wicked deed. You enjoin beautiful morality on us.' And finally, when he enjoined not to revolt, Hind promised, 'We have not entered this exalted presence with the intention of revolting' Thus Hind, who was to be killed according to an earlier directive, attained forgiveness and became a true believer. Presently, she went home and broke to pieces all the idols and icons, saying, 'We have been idiotically believing you for such a long time.' Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' pronounced benedictions over the women being there." Hind's attaining forgiveness and iman provided encouragement for all the other people who were considering to seek safety in flight. They came back and asked for forgiveness. Their request was accepted. It was so lucky for Hind that she caused many people to escape death and to become believers. Another line from Qisas-i-Anbiya states, "Abu Sufyan and his sons became staunch Muslims. Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' employed them as clerks." 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum'

Hurufis, being at a loss as to how to traduce hadrat Muawiya despite the services he rendered to Islam and his being praised through the Prophet's blessed utterances, rake his past and nag at his family life, thus to revile him. No matter how successful they could be in their efforts of vilification, they could not lower his father to the grade of the unbeliever named Abu Lahab (or Leheb)! Utba, who was the son of this unbeliever named Abu Lahab, (who was such an avowed enemy of the Messenger of Allah that) an ayat wherein his name was mentioned was revealed, would formerly persecute the Messenger of Allah very much. And not only that: He divorced his blessed daughter in order to put him into financial straits. As is stated in Qisas-i Anbiya, "This very Utba became a believer and begged for forgiveness of the day of Conquest (of Mecca). Rasulullah forgave him and pronounced a benediction over him. Even at the hottest moments of the Holy War of Hunayn, Utba would not leave his guarding position in front of Rasulullah." Now these people do not even criticize the disbeliever named Abu Lahab. Nor do they blame Utba for having been a son of that foul being or for having tormented the Messenger of Allah so much. For Utba was (one of those people who were) of the opinion that hadrat 'Ali should be the first Khalifa. He would express this opinion of his in poetry. This comes to mean that the criteria applied by the author (of the calumniatory statements written in the so- called magazine) are not based on the essential matters such as Islam, disbelief, serving Rasulullah, or persecuting him. They are based on the matter of voting for hadrat 'Ali. What he is after, then, is a political cause and has nothing to do with Islam. Or rather, all his endeavour stems from his obnoxious desire to misrepresent the Ashab al-kiram as nasty people hard to get on with.

The above-quoted statements which we have borrowed from various pages of the book Qisas-i Anbiya, show clearly that the slanders in the autumn magazine are sheer falsifications. It is stated in the book Kamus-ul-alam that "Hind bin Utba binti Rabi'a bin Abd-i-Shams was one of the nobility of Quraish. She was Abu Sufyan's wife. Before Abu Sufyan, she was Faqih bin Mughira's wife. She persistently remained a Muslim and always conducted herself as a good one. She was a prudent, far-sighted administratrix. She and her husband Abu Sufyan joined the Holy War of Yermuk and encouraged the Muslims to make Jihad against the Byzantines."

It is written in all books how firm an iman Hind 'radi-allahu anha' had and what a noble feeling of chastity she had. Marriage and family life existed in Arabia before Islam, too. Please see the thirty-sixth paragraph! The author of the autumn magazine confuses family life with his own life of cohabitation termed Mut'a. He compares other people to himself and supposes that they are fornicators, too. It is stated in the book Me'arij-un-nubuwwa, "After Hind 'radi-allahu anha' became a believer and broke all the statues in her house, she sent two lambs as a gift to Rasulullah. The Messenger of Allah accepted the presents and pronounced a benediction over Hind, asking a blessing on her. Haqq ta'ala blessed her sheep with such barakat that it was impossible to know their number. Hind would always acknowledge that they were a blessing coming through the Barakat of the Messenger of Allah." Abd-ul-Ghani Nabulusi states in the hundred and twenty-sixth page of Hadiqa, "Everyone who has iman in Rasulullah realizes his greatness to some extent and bears a degree of love for him. Yet the amount of this realization and love varies. Many a heart overflows with this love. It has been reported unanimously that Abu Sufyan's 'radi-allahu anh' wife Hind 'radi-allahu anha' said to Rasulullah, 'O the Messenger of Allah! I never used to like your blessed face. But now, that beautiful face of yours is more beloved to me than anything else'."

The author alleges that hadrat Muawiya oppressed the people. On the contrary, hadrat Muawiya's caliphate brought peace, order and quietude to the country and put an end to misunderstandings. Jihad and conquests began. His justice and kindnesses spread far and wide. History books give detailed accounts of these facts.

8- "Seeds of a mentality which caused superstitions for the purpose of reigning and thus turned the beautiful Islamic religion into a mere system of fanaticism and ummat (community) sprouted in the minds and hearts of some Ottoman emperors. All these things were intended for Shiites. For Shiites suggested unity. They knew that unity began with (Muhammad-Ali). Their aim was to love the Ahl al-bayt. When the trend of ummat (community) became dominant, the intellectuals and Shiites stood against it. Wasn't hadrat Ali the first Khalifa (rightfully) elected?" he says.

Allahu ta'ala calls Muslims 'My Messenger's Ummat (Community)." Our master, the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' states that Muslims are his Ummat. For instance, he says, "I shall intercede (shafaat) for the grave sinners of my Ummat," and "The learned ones of my Ummat are like the Israelite Prophets," and uses the expression 'My Ummat' in many other hadith ash-Sharifs. This author, on the other hand, censures Muslims' Khalifas by saying that the Ottoman Sultans 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' turned the Islamic religion into a mere system of Ummat. He rejects the system of Ummat and misrepresents it as if it were a system forged afterwards. These statements of the author's are diametrically opposed to Islam and advocate the Hurufi doctrines. All the stratagems of Hurufis are based on attacking Islam in disguise of Muslims. Their suggesting unity, for instance, is like the butcher's saying, "I love you very much. I hate having to hurt you," to the lamb he is going to slaughter. The author is trying to cloak the fact that he is a Hurufi, that is, he is following in the footsteps of Abdullah bin Saba', who is the first instigator of all the so many events in which brothers killed one another. History books give long written accounts of the thousands of Muslims massacred by Hassan Sabbah, a follower of Ibni Saba'. It only takes reading Hassan Sabbah's murders and treacheries to realize that this Hurufi is quite wrong in his writings.

It is stated as follows in the eight hundred and eighty-seventh page of Qisas-i Anbiya: Hassan Sabbah was a heretic, a mulhid following Ibni Saba'. Calling harams 'halal', he mislead many people. The fortress called Elemut (or Alamut) and its neighborhood were infested with his adherents, most of them highwaymen. They called the Ahl as-Sunnat 'Yazidis'. With the conviction that killing one Yazidi would deserve more thawab than killing ten unbelievers, they would slay hajjis, judges, scholars and soldiers by stabbing them. These people are called Batiniyya or Ismailiyya. They were godless, ferocious people. For thirty-five years Hassan Sabbah took many lives and mislead many others out of their faith. Eventually he went to Hell in 518 [A.D. 1124]. Of his successors, his grandson Ahund Hassan, who became their chief in 557, was a zindiq, more base than all the others. It is this villain who first called his adherents Alawi in order to deceive Muslims. In 559, on the seventeenth of Ramadan, which was when hadrat Ali had been martyred, he mounted the minber and said, "I have been sent by Ali. I am the imam of all Muslims. Islam does not have a foundation. Everything depends on the heart. If a person's heart is clean, sinning will not harm him. I have made everything halal. Live as you wish!" Then they drank wine, men and women altogether. It was made their new year's day. This heretic was slain by his wife's brother in 561. His grandson Jelal-ad-din Hassan gave up this aberrant way. He reported to the Khalifa that he had entered the Madhhab of Ahl as- Sunnat. He collected the heretical books written by Hassan Sabbah and had them burnt. He died in 618. He was succeeded by his son Ahund Aladdin Muhammad, the seventh ruler of the state of Ismailiyya. This person chose his ancestors' heretical way and made harams halal. His son Ahund Ruqn-ad-din had this foul person killed in his bed in 652 and appointed the Shiite scholar Nasir-ad-din Tusi, who had been imprisoned by his father, as his vizier. However, he was executed by Hulaghu's brother in Transoxiana in 654. Hulaghu put the heretics of Ismaili to the sword and relieved Muslims from these zindiqs. Thus the saying, "To an ungodly fellow, a faithless brute," manifested itself once more.

The (encyclopedic) book Kamus-ul-alam gives the following definition of the entry 'Ismailiyya': "One of the heretical groups who infiltrated among Shiites. They have been called so because they recognized Ismail, Imam Jafar Sadiq's eldest son, who died as the noble Imam was alive yet, as the last imam. They follow Ibni Saba'. They believe in reincarnation. They call harams 'halal'. They commit all sorts of immoral acts without feeling slightest shame. The heretical group called Qaramitis, who shed much Muslim blood, and the villain named Hassan Sabbah, and the State of Fatimis, who strove to demolish Islam in Egypt, were all Ismailis. The extreme ones of heretical groups and Druzis and Hurufis are their continuations." It is written in the book Munjid that they call themselves Alawi (Alevi).

Hurufis claim to come together in the unity of (Muhammad- Ali). Accordingly, the Ashab al-kiram, who are praised and lauded in Qur'an al-karim and in hadith ash-Sharifs, must have been without this unity. The three Khalifas, who were blessed with the good news that they would enter Paradise, and all those heroic fighters who spread Islam over three continents must have belonged to other unities. However, the author betrays his own insincerity in his using the term (Muhammad-Ali). For hadrat Ali loved very much the other three Khalifas and even all the Sahabis he fought against. He would acknowledge in the speeches he made as well as during all his conversations that those people were valuable believers and praised and lauded them. A person honored with the name Alawi should be so, too. They say that they follow the Ahl al-bayt. They use the blessed name Alawi, which is loved by both Sunnites and Alawis in our country, as a mask for themselves. All their writings and attitudes show, however, that they are not Alawis. The book Tuhfa, which was written at that time, gives the following information with a view to divulging their inner purposes:

1- Under the pretext of (Muhammad-Ali unity), Hurufis hold the Messenger of Allah and hadrat Ali equal.

2- They say that "Everybody who loves hadrat Ali will enter Paradise, be he a Jew or a Christian or a polytheist. On the other hand, those who love the Ashab al-kiram will go to Hell, however good worshippers they may be and even if they love the Ahl al-bayt."

3- "Sinning will not harm those who love Ali," they allege.

4- They call the Ahl as-sunnat, who are the Ummat-i-merhuma (people who have attained Allah's compassion), the Ummat-i-mel'una (people accursed by Allah.).

5- Asserting that Qur'an al-karim was changed by hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh', they deny many ayats.

6- Cursing hadrat 'Umar deserves, according to them, more thawab than dhikring or reading Qur'an al-karim.

7- It is a worship, in their view, to curse the Ashab al-kiram and Zawjat-i-zawil ihtiram (the blessed and honorable wives of our Prophet). "It is fard to curse these people daily," they say.

8- "Cursing (hadrat) Abu Bakr or (hadrat) 'Umar once is equal to seventy worships," they believe.

9- According to them, hadrat Ruqayya and Umm-i-Ghulthum are not Rasulullah's daughters, because they married hadrat 'Uthman.

10- They say that hadrat Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anhum' "were munafiqs." Thus they deny the hadith-i,Sharifs praising these three Khalifas. These hadith ash-Sharifs are written together with their documents in the book Izalat-ul-hafa, by Shah Waliyyullah Dahlawi.

11- Because hadrat Abu Bakr belonged to the tribe called Tamim and hadrat 'Umar was from the tribe called Adi, they say that Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' "worshipped idols secretly." However, hadrat Ali gave his daughter to hadrat Abu Bakr's son Muhammad and appointed him as a governor. And he gave his other daughter to hadrat 'Umar. While maintaining on the one hand that "hadrat Ali is free from errors," they vituperate on the other hand the great religious leaders to whom hadrat Ali gave his daughters and Rasulullah's father-in-law and son-in-law, and say that these people were munafiqs.

12- They think that Sunnite Muslims are inimical towards hadrat Ali and Ahl al-bayt. On the contrary, Sunnites love hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' and the Ahl al-bayt very much and say that loving these people will cause one to die in iman, (as a believer, that is). Sunnites believe that being a Wali (a person loved by Allahu ta'ala) requires loving these people (hadrat Ali and the Ahl al-bayt) and following them.

13- They allege that Sunnites look on Ibni Muljam, hadrat Ali's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' murderer, as a just person and that "Bukhari reports hadiths coming through him." This allegation is untrue. The book Bukhari does not contain any hadiths narrated by Ibni Muljam.

14- Because they feel animosity towards the Ahl as-sunnat, they curse the word 'Sunnat', too.

15- They say that if a person says, "wa ta'ala jad-duk," when performing the namaz, his namaz will be annulled.

16- They say that Sunnites 'rahmat-ullahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain' "are worse and fouler than Jews and Christians."

17- They claim that all their groups, inimical as they are towards one another, will enter Paradise owing to their love for hadrat Ali.

18- "It is not necessary to do the worships taught by the Ahl as-sunnat," they maintain.

19- When they begin doing something, they curse the three Khalifas instead of saying the word Basmala. They argue that "a sick person who bears on himself a piece of paper containing a written curse against the first two Khalifas, or drinks the water in which this paper has been dipped, will recover."

20- According to them, cursing hadrat Aisha and hadrat Hafsa 'radi-allahu anhuma' five times daily "is fard."

21- They say that the Messenger of Allah "gave proxy to divorce his wives. So Ali divorced Aisha (from Rasulullah) by proxy." On the contrary, ayat al-karima did not even give the right to divorce even to Rasulullah himself.

22- They say that "Prophets would not have been created had it not been for Ali." They cannot think that a person who says that "a non-Prophet is higher than a Prophet" becomes a disbeliever.

23- They say that "on the rising day everything will depend on Muhammad and Ali's decision."

24- According to them, when 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was slain, "angels did not record sins for anybody for three days."

25- They say that the stones thrown on Mina during every hajj are actually thrown towards Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma'.

26- "The ayat about Dabbat-ul-ard was intended to inform that hadrat Ali will come back to earth," they maintain.

27- According to them, and it is at the same time the twenty-second article in their false credo, it is a very thawab-deserving act for the host to offer his wife and daughters to another Hurufi who visits him. In Iran the Hurufi fathers pay visits as they wish, and the families they visit offer them women to choose as they wish. Thus, they believe, the children conceived on Friday nights (nights between Thursdays and Fridays) are (called) Persian Sayyids. Therefore the so called Sayyids are abundant in Iran.

28- The eighteenth of Zilhijja (month) is their greatest day of celebration. It is the day when hadrat 'Uthman was martyred.

29- Another day they celebrate is the ninth of Rabi'ul-awwal, the day when hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was martyred.

30- Another day they hold sacred is the Nevruz Day, which is actually a day celebrated by Magians.

31- According to them, prayers of namaz except those which are fard can be performed in any direction. For instance, when they visit Imam-i-Ali Rida's tomb in Mashhad they perform namaz towards the grave on whichever corner of the grave they are. It is stated as follows in the three hundredth page of the summary of Tuhfa: "They perform namaz with their faces towards the graves of imams, without even considering that they may be turning their backs to the qibla (Kaba) by doing so."

32- They say that namaz can always be performed naked as you are. It is written in a frank language in their book Minhaj-us-salihin that according to them no part of one's body, with the exception of the saw'atayn (the two private parts, the urinatory and the excretory organs), is awrat (parts of the body one has to cover). Fifteenth edition of the book was published in Nejef (or Najaf) in 1386 [A.D. 1966].

33- They maintain that eating and drinking (during namaz) will not abrogate the namaz.

34- It is written in the two hundred and eighteenth page (of the book cited above, i.e. Tuhfa) that they do not perform Friday prayer and that they perform noon, afternoon, evening and night prayers all at the same time.

35- Their seventeenth credal tenet is that things touched by the innocent imam are thousands of times as valuable as Kaba.

36- "Immersing oneself in water will nullify one's fasting," they say.

37- On the tenth of Muharram they fast until afternoon.

38- "Jihad is not a worship, nor is it permissible," they say.

39- They call it Mut'a Nikah to cohabit with a woman for a certain period of time in return for money. According to them, this kind of nikah (marriage) causes much thawab. It is written in the two hundred and twenty-seventh page that life in brothels, which they call 'Mut'a-i-dawriyya (devriyye)', is permissible.

40- "It is sahih (acceptable canonically) to hand over a jariya to other men," they say.

41- It is stated as follows in the three hundred and twenty-fifth page of the Arabic book Muhtasar-i-Tuhfa-i-Isna-ashariyya, which was prepared by Sayyid Mahmud Shukru Alusi in (the Hijri year) 1302 and printed in Cairo in 1373: According to these people, "Meat or any similar kind of food cooked in water that has been used for cleaning after stool is edible and permissible to eat." It is written in their book Minhaj that water used in istinja (cleaning oneself canonically) is clean. Likewise, they say that "Water that has been used by a number of people for cleaning themselves or into which a dog has urinated is clean; it is permissible to drink it or to cook something in it. So is the case with water half of which is blood or urine."

42- "It is permissible for a hungry person to kill another person who has bread enough but will not give him any," they say.

43- Their seventy-fifth stratagem, which is written in the second chapter of the book, (Tuhfa) is their saying that "Prostration in namaz must be done on earthen sun-dried bricks. Sunnites are like devils because they do not do their prostrations on earth."

44- It is stated as follows in the two hundred and ninety-ninth page of the abridged version of Tuhfa: "As Christians forge pictures of Isa 'alaihis-salam' and hadrat Maryam (Mary) and prostrate themselves in front of these pictures in churches, so Hurufis draw or paint imaginary pictures of imams and venerate, and even prostrate themselves in front of, these pictures." It is still observed in Iran and Iraq today that they hang forged pictures of bearded people wearing turbans on walls in mosques, in their homes and shops and worship them, saying that they are pictures of hadrat Ali.

45- It is stated in the fourteenth page of the abridged version of Tuhfa that the most excessive groups of Hurufis say that hadrat Ali is a god. These excessive groups have been broken into twenty-four sub-groups. The twentieth group says that "God has entered Ali and his children. Ali is a god." People belonging to this group are mostly in Damascus, Aleppo, and Lazkiyya. Votaries of this group do not exist in Turkey.

The book Tuhfa-i- Isna-ashariyya gives a detailed account of the Hurufi beliefs explained shortly in the forty- five paragraphs above, names the books in which most of these beliefs are recorded, and proves through corroboratory documents that each and every one of these beliefs is wrong and aberrant. Alawis, who are aware of hadrat Ali's honor and value and the services he rendered to Islam, are Muslims who love that lion of Allah in a manner advised by our master, the Prophet. On the other hand, we Sunnite Muslims are Alawis, too, because we love hadrat Ali in this manner. We love other Alawis who share this same love. We know them as our brothers. It should be our debt of conscience to cooperate and love one another on these lands, which offer us freedom of worship and peace.

It has been explained in the lines above that one of the groups of religion reformers who endeavour to demolish Islam from within, and perhaps the most dangerous one, is the group called Hurufis. These people are not Shiites. Being a Shiite means disliking the three Khalifas; it does not mean feeling hostility against them. Shi'ah means jamaat, community, group, party. People belonging to this party are called Shiis. Qisas-i- Anbiya gives the following information:

The first inventor of the fitna of bearing hostility against the Ahl as-Sunnat is a Jew of Yaman named Abdullah bin Saba'. This Jew pretended to be a Muslim. First he went to Basra, where he began to spew his venomous malice, which can be outlined as "Isa (Jesus) 'alaihis-salam' will return to earth. Why should it not be possible for Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' to do so, too. He also will come back. He and Ali will rescue the world from disbelief. Caliphate belonged to Ali by rights. The three Khalifas used force to deprive him of his rights." He was deported from Basra. He went to Kufa and began to mislead the people. Then, being deported from Kufa, too, he went to Damascus. The Sahabis in Damascus would not tolerate him. So he fled to Egypt, where he managed to gather a number of ignoble and eccentric bandits around himself, such as Khalid bin Muljim, Sudan bin Hamran, Ghafiki bin Harb and Kinana bin Bishr. He presented himself as a lover of the Ahl al-bayt. The first step he took to deceive people around him was to advise them to "Love hadrat Ali and bear animosity towards people who are opposed to him." When people began to believe him, he would go a step further and say that "Hadrat Ali is the highest man after Prophets. He is the Prophet's protector, brother, and son-in-law." He would convince these people by giving wrong meanings to ayat al-karimas and fabricating hadith ash-Sharifs. People who do so are called Zindiq. And the final step he took with people who went on believing him would be to convince them that "The Prophet commanded that hadrat Ali should be Khalifa after him. The Sahaba disobeyed the Prophet. They deprived Ali of his right. They traded their faith for worldly advantages." While doing all these, he was cautious enough to warn his adherents not to reveal these secrets to strangers for his purpose was "not to make fame, but to guide people to the right way." Thus he caused hadrat 'Uthman's martyrdom. Then he tried to spread feelings of animosity against the three Khalifas among hadrat Ali's army. He was successful in this, too. People who believed him were called Saba'iyya, [and later, they began to be called Hurufis]. Upon hearing about the rumors, hadrat Ali mounted the minber and castigated the slanderers of the three Khalifas in a heavy language. He threatened some of them with flogging. Seeing his own success, Ibni Saba' managed to exploit this situation, too. He secretly intimated hadrat Ali's miracles to people he chose, interpreting "these extraordinary accomplishments (of hadrat Ali's)" as symptoms of "the fact that he is a god" and putting forward the words which hadrat Ali uttered when he was in an ecstacy called Sakr-i-tariqat as evidences. Hadrat Ali was wise to this, too. He declared that he would burn Ibni Saba' and his believers. He exiled them to the city of Medayn. Ibni Saba' would not give up there, either. Sending his men forth to Iraq and Azarbaijan, he promulgated enmity against the Ashab al-kiram. Hadrat Ali was too busy fighting Damascene rebels to struggle against these people or to carry out his administrative duties as the Khalifa.

9- Question: If hadrat Ali had made an agreement with the Sahabis who were against him in the events of Camel and Siffin, if he had not made war against them, if he had united and cooperated with those beloved Muslim brothers of his and together they had fought the disbeliever named Ibni Saba' and the munafiqs who had gathered around him, he would have added another one to the services he had rendered to Islam. Thus the Saba'iyya group, who have shed Islamic blood throughout history, would have been annihilated. How would this question be answered?

Answer: His ijtihad was not so. The destiny foreordained by Allahu ta'ala was inspired into his blessed heart. So he submitted himself to the qadar-i-ilahi. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat explain that hadrat Ali's ijtihad was correct. The same was experienced by Abd-ul-Hamid Khan II 'rahmatullahi alaih'. As an army of pillagers prepared with Masonic plans were on their way towards the palace to dethrone the Sultan, the generals in Istanbul suggested to resist. The barracks in Istanbul were full of trained soldiers. Yet Abd-ul-Hamid Khan imitated hadrat Ali's 'radi-allahu anh' ijtihad. He submitted himself to qadar-i-ilahi (Allah's divine foreordination). He did not resist the rebels. Thus he thwarted the Party of Union's plans to avenge on him and thousands of Muslims.

Day after day the number of separatists increased and consequently hadrat Ali's 'radi- allahu anh' army was broken into four groups:

1- The first group was the Shiah, who followed hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. They did not criticize any of the Ashab al-kiram. On the contrary, they spoke about them with love and respect. They were free from the doubts inspired by the devil. They knew the group they were fighting against as their brothers. (After a very short time) they stopped fighting them. Hadrat Ali accepted their judgements. The name Shiah was attached to this group first, and people who followed this group were called Ahl as-Sunnat wal-jamaat.

2- The group who held hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' higher than all the other Sahabis were called Tafdiliyya. Hadrat Ali tried to dissuade them by threatening them with flogging. The word Shiah represents this group today.

3- The group who said that all the Sahaba 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' were sinners and disbelievers. These people were called Saba'iyya or Hurufi.

4- The group called Ghulat, who were the most unreasonable, were the most heretical of the four groups. They asserted that Allah had entered hadrat Ali.

When hadrat Husain's son Imam Zaynalabidin Ali passed away when he was forty-eight years old in the ninety-fourth year of the Hegira, his son Zayd bin Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' revolted against Khalifa Hisham and marched to Kufa with an army. Yet, when hadrat Zayd heard that his soldiers were swearing at the Ashab al-kiram, he advised them to stop doing so. This made most of his soldiers abandon him. Having to defend himself with the very few soldiers who remained faithful to him, he was finally martyred in 122. Those who left him called themselves Imamiyya. And the faithful ones who stayed with Zayd were called Zaydiyya.

According to the Ahl as-sunnat, who were Ali's Shiah, hadrat Ali was the highest of his time. Caliphate was his right. Those who disagreed with him were wrong and became baghis (rebels against the Khalifa). Hadrat Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Muawiya, Amr Ibni As and the other Sahabis 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' who fought hadrat Ali did not do so for the office of caliphate. They protested him because hadrat 'Uthman's murderers had not been found and retaliated against. They were about to come to an agreement, when Abdullah bin Saba' and his men started the fight, and everything happened after that. All the Sahabis fighting hadrat Ali were saying that caliphate was his right and that he was higher than themselves. They were praising him. And hadrat Ali loved and praised those Sahabis who fought him.

10- Hurufis say that "The Ahl al-bayt castigated the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' and lamented over the persecutions inflicted by them." They add that "Most of the Sahaba, especially (hadrat) Muawiya and his father and (hadrat) Amr bin As, were apostates, and that those who love and praise those apostates will go to Hell together with them." It is true that after the Ashab al-kiram there were governors who perpetrated cruelty and persecution. The torments inflicted in the time of Abbasids were very much worse than those done in the time of Umayyads. Some imams of the Ahl al-bayt criticized those governors. Yet these people (Hurufis) distorted these criticizations of the imams of the Ahl al-bayt and represented them as if they had been intended for the Ashab al-kiram. This act of theirs is treacherous both against the Ahl al-bayt and against the Ashab al-kiram.

They misled ignorant people by misrepresenting books censuring the Ashab al-kiram as literature belonging to the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. For example, the author of the book of interpretation is a supporter of the groups called Tafdiliyya (see the second group explained above) and Mutazila. Ahtab Harazmi, on the other hand, is an unbridled Zaydi. Ibni Qutayba, the author of the book Marif, and Ibni Ebilhadid, who wrote an explanation of the book Nahj-ul-balagha, are in Mutazila sect. Hisham Kelabi, a writer of Tafsir, is a bidat holder. Masudi, the author of Murawwij-uz-zeheb, Abulferej Isfehani, author of the book Eghani, and Ahmad Tabari, author of Riyad-un-madara, are a few of the fanatical adversaries of Ahl as-sunnat. These people are being presented as scholars of Ahl as- sunnat and thus younger generations are being deceived. In order to practice their deceit easily, they withhold the fact that they are holders of bidat. Most of them masquerade completely. They pretend to be Sunnites. They praise scholars of Ahl as-sunnat and yet vituperate the greater ones of the Ashab al-kiram. And, in the name of documents, they refer to such books as the ones we have named above. Then, Muslims will have to be extremely vigilant. They should not read books and magazines quoting or translating from these corruptive books. No matter how earnestly they may seem to be praising Islam and the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, any religious book containing the names of the so-called books should be known as a venom, a snare prepared behind the scenes by zindiqs, whose sole purpose is to destroy Islam from within.

There are two men of religion named Suddi. One of them is Ismail Kufi. He is Sunnite. The other man, who is better known with his nickname Saghir, is a vulgarly bigoted holder of bidat. Also, there are two Ibni Qutaybas. Ibrahim ibni Qutayba is a bidat holder. Abdullah bin Muslim bin Qutayba, on the other hand, is Sunni. Each of these people has a book titled Me'arif. Another name shared by two people is Muhammad ibni Jarir Tabari. One of these two people is Sunni and wrote a great history book. The other is a bidat holder. The history book named Tabari was abridged by a bidat holder named Ali Shimshati.

The book Tuhfa quotes the twenty-seventh falsification of Hurufis:

11- "A black maiden, a jariya, praised the Shi'ah and censured the Ahl as-sunnat in Harun-ur-rashid's palace. There were scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, particularly Qadi Abu Yusuf. None of them could answer her," they say. The maiden's name, as they forge, was Husniya. Now a book named after her, Husniya, is being sold throughout Anatolia. This story, contrary to their expectations, is depreciatory to those scholars of their own aberrant way. For it naturally leads one to the conclusion that "for many centuries none of these people had been able to do what the jariya did. In no debate had they managed to refute the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' as did the jariya. They had always been beaten. Had they learned the jariya's methods earlier, they would have saved themselves from embarrassment." It has been clear that the stories in the book Husniya were written by a person named Murtada. And that this Murtada was a Jewish convert is written in the book Esma-ul-muallifin.

12- After hadrat Ali's martyrdom, followers of the Jew named Ibni Saba' infiltrated among the Muslims supporting hadrat Hasan. Forty thousand people elected him Khalifa among themselves and provoked them to fight hadrat Muawiya. Their aim was to do the same thing with him as they had done with hadrat Ali and to martyr him. They were showing disrespect to him. In fact, in one of such occasions Mukhtar Saqafi pulled his prayer rug from under his blessed feet. At some other time another accursed villain hit him on the foot with a pickaxe. When the two armies met, they saw that hadrat Muawiya was going to win and deserted hadrat Hasan's army. One of their own men, a zindiq named Murtada, writes about these treacheries of theirs shamelessly in his book Tanzih-ul-enbiya. In fact, it is stated in their book Kitab-ul-fusul that followers of Ibni Saba', who were on hadrat Hasan's side in the beginning, wrote a letter to hadrat Muawiya, saying, "Attack now! We shall leave Hasan to you." Being wise to these villains' intentions, Hasan 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' offered peace. So hadrat Muawiya 'radi- allahu ta'ala anh', who had been anxious that hadrat Hasan's blessed body should not be hurt, answered that he was ready to make peace on any terms hadrat Hasan would propose.

13- These people would not give up their mischievous activities after Muawiya's 'radi- allahu ta'ala anh' time, either. For it was the right time for them to deal Islam the destructive blow from within. They sent a message to hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh', promising their support for his caliphate. They invited him to Kufa from Mecca. Let us see what the book Qisas-i-Anbiya has to say in this connection:

Abdullah bin 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' tried to dissuade him deprecatingly from going to Kufa. Yet hadrat Husain would not listen to him. So Abdullah bid farewell to him in tears. Then Abdullah bin Abbas took his turn and said, "O my (paternal) uncle's son! I fear that the people of Kufa may hurt you. They are malicious people. Don't go there! Go to Yaman if you must go somewhere!" Hadrat Husain answered him, "You are right. But I have decided to go there." Abdullah deprecated, "At least, do not take your household! I am afraid you will be martyred in front of the eyes of your children like hadrat 'Uthman." Hadrat Husain would not listen to this advice either. These statements cited from Qisas-i Anbiya show that the Sahabis in Mecca knew that people who invited hadrat Husain to the city of Kufa were malevolent and that their purpose was to dupe him into their snare.

14- Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat state that after hadrat Ali's martyrdom caliphate belonged to hadrat Hasan by rights. On his own volition he demitted his right to hadrat Muawiya. For at that time he was the person suitable for caliphate. Hadrat Hasan abdicated the office of caliphate not out of fear or because he was left alone, but to protect Muslims from a grave bloodbath, and out of his magnanimous compassion for believers. It is not permissible to make peace with disbelievers or renegades in order to prevent fitna. It is the worst fitna to give up fighting them at the cost of offering the victory to them. Yet it is permissible to make peace with rebels (in such circumstances). Until that time hadrat Muawiya's position was that of a rebel. That year he became Khalifa rightfully. A baghi (rebel) cannot be cursed. Instead, benedictions must be pronounced over him and one must supplicate to Allahu ta'ala to "forgive this person." An ayat al-karima in Muhammad sura purports, "Make istighfar for believers' wrongdoings!" Commanding istighfar (invoking Allahu ta'ala for forgiveness) means prohibiting cursing. This ayat al-karima commands to make istighfar for those who commit grave sins. It may be permissible to curse wrongdoing, yet this does not mean that wrongdoers can be cursed, too. The tenth ayat of Hashr sura purports, "Do not feel hostility towards earlier believers. Pronounce benedictions over them." It is a fact written even in Shiite books that hadrat Ali prohibited to curse Damascenes. This indicates that they were Muslims. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif addressed to hadrat Ali, "Fighting you is fighting against me." Yet this hadith ash-Sharif is intended to alarm against the risk of fighting against those great people. This hadith ash- Sharif is explained in detail in the forty-first paragraph. In reality, the position occupied by hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' and his successors was that of a Ruler, a Sultan. They were doing only one of the three different duties of a Khalifa.

Hurufi books state that hadrat Muawiya's governor's oppressed the people. One of them was Ziyad, the governor of Shiraz. He was Abu Sufyan's illegitimate son, whom he had from a concubine named Sumayya belonging to a doctor named Haris in the time of Nescience (before Islam). As he grew up, he became legendary for his noble conduct, eloquence and intelligence. Amr ibni As, who was one of Arabia's geniuses, said about him, "If this child were a Quraishi, he would become a great man." Hadrat Ali was there, too. Abu Sufyan said, "He is my son." When hadrat Ali became Khalifa, he appointed Ziyad the governor of Iran. He managed perfectly and conquered a number of lands. Hadrat Muawiya heard about these accomplishments of his brother's and invited him. Yet Ziyad did not leave office till hadrat Ali's martyrdom. After hadrat Muawiya became Khalifa lawfully, he declared, in the forty-fourth year (of the Hegira), that Ziyad was Abu Sufyan's son and appointed him governor of Basra. Thus he protected hadrat 'Uthman and hadrat Ali from being criticized for having appointed someone without a father as a governor. Ziyad was intending to take revenge on Qadi Shureyh's son Said for (what he had done against) hadrat Ali. To this end he seized his house and property. Said went to Medina and complained to hadrat Husain about him. Hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu anh' wrote a letter to Ziyad, advising him to return the property he had seized from Said. In his reply to hadrat Husain, Ziyad wrote rather insolently and said, for instance, "O the son of Fatima! You wrote your name above mine. Yet you are the petitioner and I am the Sultan." Hadrat Husain sent this letter to the Khalifa in Damascus, adding a file of complaint against the governor. Upon reading the letters, Muawiya became very sad. He sent a harsh order to Ziyad: "O Ziyad! Know that you are a son of both Abu Sufyan and Sumayya! Abu Sufyan's son will be mild and discreet, and so will Sumayya's son be. You slander Husain's father in your letter. I swear that you have all the attributes you impute to him. And he is pure from all such stains. Your name's being below that of Husain is more of an honor than of a disgrace for you. As soon as you receive my order give Said's property back to him! Build him a house better than the one he had before. I am reporting this order of mine to Husain, too, apologizing to him and requesting him to inform Said, too. He may stay in Medina if he likes. Or he may go to Kufa if he chooses to do so. Never molest them, neither with your hands nor with your tongue! You wrote to Husain 'radi-allahu anh' addressing him with his mother's name. Shame on you! Do not forget that his father is Ali bin Abi Talib. And his mother is Rasulullah's daughter Fatima 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha.' Can anyone else have the same honor he has? Why do you not think?"

Everybody knows about the harms Ziyad and his son Ubaidullah caused to Muslims. Yet it would never be correct to blame hadrat Muawiya for appointing him as a governor. He had been appointed as a governor earlier, both by hadrat 'Uthman and by hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Please read the thirty-sixth paragraph!

16- Question: Our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "He who torments Ali will have tormented me (by doing so)." Some people exploit this hadith ash-Sharif in their reasoning that "Since it is disbelief to hurt the Messenger of Allah, all those people who fought hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' are disbelievers."

Answer: Munafiqs who came together in Kufa and Egypt marched to Medina and martyred hadrat 'Uthman. Hadrat Ali, who became Khalifa upon this event, thought it would be wiser not to hurry in trying to find the murderers for retaliation. This delay spoiled the raiders and caused them to go on with their eccentricities. They began to curse hadrat 'Uthman and propagate the statements expressing their rightfulness everywhere. This state of affairs was a source of deep grief for the greater ones of the Sahaba, such as Talha, Zubair, Numan bin Bashir, Qa'b bin Ajra, and others. They expressed their sorrow by saying, "If we had known that the results would be so bad, we would have protected hadrat 'Uthman against these bandits." Upon hearing about this, the murderers decided to martyr these Sahabis, too. So the Sahabis went to the blessed city of Mecca, where hadrat Aisha, who had come to Mecca earlier for the purpose of making hajj, gave them asylum. They told her what was going on in Medina and said, "The Khalifa has to tolerate the bandits till he has suppressed the mutiny completely. This spoils them and causes them to aggravate their inimical and oppressive conduct. bloodshed will not be prevented unless a retaliation is realized and the oppressors are punished." Hadrat Aisha advised them, "It will not be wise for you to go back to Medina as long as these bandits remain in Medina and around the Amir-ul-Muminin. Go to a safer place for the time being. Wait for a favorable opportunity and in the meantime search ways of rescuing Ali from the hands of these bandits. Exploit the first situation offering you the opportunity to cooperate with the Khalifa and march against the bandits. Then it will be easy for you to arrest the murderers for retaliation. Thus you will teach the cruel a lesson whose effects will remain till the end of the world! It will not be easy now. Do not hurry." The Sahabis approved these words of hadrat Aisha's. They decided to go to places such as Iraq and Basra, where were the assembly areas for Muslim troops. They begged hadrat Aisha, "Please protect us until this fitna has been eliminated, the tumults have been suppressed and we have joined the Khalifa. You are the mother of Muslims and the venerable wife of the Messenger of Allah. You are closer and more beloved to him than anyone else is. Since everybody respects you, the bandits cannot march against you. Stay with us and support us!" For the sake of convenience for Muslims and to protect Rasulullah's Sahaba, hadrat Aisha joined them and together they left for Basra. On the other hand, the murderers, who had been surrounding the Khalifa and meddling with many administrative matters, gave hadrat Ali quite a different and false report of this movement. They persuaded the Khalifa to go to Basra. Some Sahabis such as Imam-i-Hasan, Imam-i-Husain, Abdullah bin Jafar Tayyar and Abdullah bin Abbas advised the Khalifa not to hurry and not to believe the munafiqs' reports. Yet the munafiqs overpowered and managed to take hadrat Amir to Basra. First he sent someone named Qa'qa' to ask the people with hadrat Aisha what they thought. They answered that their purpose was peace and to prevent fitna and that the murderers should be arrested first. The Khalifa accepted their wishes. Upon this, Muslims from both sides rejoiced and agreed to come together three days later. As the time of their meeting became closer, the murderers heard about this agreement. At a loss as to what to do, they assembled around their leader, the Jew named Abdullah bin Saba', and asked him what they should do to prevent this meeting. "Our last resort is to attack the Khalifa's army tonight and then go to the Khalifa and tell him that people with Aisha did not keep their promise and raided us," was the Jew's plan. The plan was executed successfully and then, as it was planned, another troop of horsemen raided the other party. Upon this the spies who had infiltrated among them beforehand clamored as if they were their friends: "The Khalifa did not keep his promise. We have been raided." So the war began. This was how the event called Camel war broke out. Qurtubi and other Sunnite historians write so, and it is true. Enemies of the Ashab al-kiram, on the other hand, falsify the facts in order to defend the murderers. Their lies should not be believed.

Another person who was of the opinion that the murderers should be arrested and retaliated against, was Muawiya 'radi- allahu anh', the governor of Damascus. Because the tumult had not been suppressed yet and the Khalifa was too busy with the event of Camel to do anything else, he had to refuse his suggestion. And Muawiya, in his turn, refused to recognize him as the Khalifa. As it is written also in the Shiite book Nahj-ul-belagha, the Khalifa stated, "We shall (have to) fight our brothers in Islam. They have deviated from the right way." As is seen, those who fought the battles of Camel and Siffin never thought of hurting hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah'. The only feeling fostered by both parties was obeying the commandments of Allahu ta'ala and preventing the fitna. Yet talons of Zionism managed bloodbaths on both sides.

In the hundred and twenty-third page of the book Tezkire-i Kurtubi Muhtasari, a hadith ash-Sharif reported by Muslim is quoted. It reads as follows: "If Muslims fight one another, the ones who are killed as well as their killers will go to Hell." According to scholars, this hadith ash-Sharif means those who fight for worldly advantages. It does not mean fighting for an Islamic cause, for eliminating vices or for subduing rebels. As a matter of fact, another hadith ash-Sharif states, "If you fight for worldly advantages, both the killer and the one killed will be in Hell." This is not the case with the war between hadrat Ali and hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'. It was not fought for worldly advantages. It was done for the purpose of executing Allah's command. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, which exists in Muslim, "Fitnas will arise among my Ashab. Allahu ta'ala will forgive them for the sake of the Sohbat they have had with me. However, people who come later will criticize my Sahabis involved in these fitnas and will go to Hell (because of their criticisms)." This hadith ash-Sharif indicates that all the Ashab who fought one another will be pardoned.

17- Hurufis, who are bitter enemies of the Ashab al-kiram, say that all the Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' are accursed. The hundred and tenth ayat of 'Imran sura purports, "You are the best of Ummats." And these people (Hurufis) call this Ummat (Muslims) 'accursed'. They consider it a great worship to curse the greater ones of the Ashab al-kiram after every prayer of namaz. It does not even occur to them to curse such people as Abu Jahl, Abu Leheb, Pharaoh and Nimrod, who are enemies of Allahu ta'ala and Prophets. They say that ayat al-karimas praising the three Khalifas and the Ashab al- kiram are (among those ayats called) Mutashabihat and therefore they cannot be understood.

18- They look on the Ahl as-sunnat as enemies of the Ahl al-bayt. On the contrary, books written by scholars of Ahl as-sunnat teem with writings advising to love the Ahl al-bayt and commending the great virtues they have. Baha-ud-din Amili, a Sunnite scholar, states in his book Keshkul that a person who denies the Ahl al-bayt is not a believer. All the tariqats of Ahl as-sunnat receive fayd (or faidh) from the Ahl al-bayt. Imams of the four Madhhabs of Ahl as-sunnat are the disciples of the Ahl al-bayt. Ibni Mutahhir Hulli, a Shiite scholar, acknowledges in his books Nahj-ul-haq and Minhaj-ul- kerama that Abu Hanifa and Malik bin Anas were taught by Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq. Imam-i- Shafi'i was a disciple to Imam-i-Malik as well as to Imam-i-Muhammad Shaibani. Imam- i-azam Abu Hanifa attended the Sohbats of Imam-i-Muhammad Baqir, too, and acquired religious lore from him. Ibni Mutahhir acknowledges this fact plainly. Consequently, Imam-i-azam must be a mujtahid capable of ijtihad according to the Shiite credo. It is according to them, again, that a person who denies his testimony must be a disbeliever. As Imam-i-Musa Kazim was a prisoner in a dungeon belonging to the Abbasids, Imam-i-Abu Yusuf and Imam-i-Muhammad Shaibani would come to his dungeon and he would teach them. This fact is written in Shiite books, too.

It is fard for every Muslim not to like disbelievers. There are many ayat al-karimas commanding this. believers, on the other hand, have to love one another even if they are sinful. Every believer should love Allahu ta'ala more than anything else. Love and hatred have degrees. After Allahu ta'ala, a believer has to love His Messenger most. And who he loves third best must be those believers who are close to the Messenger. Three classes of people are closest to him:

1- His children and relatives 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'.

2- His blessed wives 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Janab-i-Haqq mentions relation through genealogy and relation through nikah (marriage) together in Qur'an al-karim.

3- His Ashab 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. These people would run for his help even at the sacrifice of their lives. This type of closeness is superior to all other types.

Next comes loving all the other believers 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain'. If any one of these people loses his iman he will no longer deserve this love. Iman and kufr (disbelief) are determined at one's final breath, (that is, whether a person is a believer or a disbeliever) becomes certain at the time of death. A believer's sinning is not something liked. But he himself is loved.

It has been reported unanimously that after Rasulullah's passing away none of his blessed wives and none of his Ashab 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' became a disbeliever. Nasir-ad-din-i-Tusi, a Shiite scholar, asserts that "Those who opposed Imam-i- Ali became sinners. And people who fought him became disbelievers." According to the unanimous report mentioned above, however, those who revolted against the Amir and disobeyed him must be loved, too.

19- The combats of Camel and Siffin were not the fruits of an intention to fight against hadrat Ali. Their motive was the (Islamic) thought that the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman should be retaliated against. These wars would have been fought even if hadrat Ali had not been among them. None of the people who took part in these battles felt any feeling of animosity whatsoever towards hadrat Ali. A person who commits a forbidden act will be remunerated in accordance with his intention. For instance, supposing a person said, "If someone breaks this glass I shall punish him," and someone walking by tripped over something and broke the glass. Now the first person should not punish him. So is the case with those who fought hadrat Ali. Hadrat Aisha's opposing hadrat Ali is like hadrat Musa's (Moses) rebuking hadrat Harun (Aaron). Qur'an al-karim declares that hadrat Aisha is believers' mother. A mother cannot be blamed for chastising her son even if it is a mistake. The Sahabis who fought hadrat Ali are praised through ayats and hadiths. There is the hope of shafaat (intercession) and salvation for each and every one of the Ashab al-kiram, and even for all believers. If a person feels enmity towards hadrat Ali, curses and swears at him, he becomes a disbeliever. However, none of the Sahabis (who fought him) is reported to have done so. A person who calls hadrat Ali a disbeliever or asserts that he will not enter Paradise or alleges that he cannot be a Khalifa on account of his shortcomings in knowledge, justice, wara' and taqwa, becomes a disbeliever himself. Kharijis and Yazidis (Yazidis) hold such a belief about him, yet this belief of theirs originate from their erroneous interpretation of dubious evidences. If a person fights him out of sensuous desires such as property and position or as a result of erroneous ijtihad, he will not become a disbeliever. In the former case, the person concerned will become a sinner, and in the second case he will become a bidat holder. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "Cursing a believer is like slaying him." To curse someone means to wish that he be far from Allah's compassion. Feeling of hatred felt against a person will continue after his death, too. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "Do not swear at the dead."

20- As it is seen, there is a Jewish finger in the wars of Camel and Siffin. They are disasters manipulated by Zionism. They are consequences of atrocious plans conceived to set brothers against one another and to demolish Islam from within by arousing a civil war. As it was Jews who arranged hadrat 'Uthman's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' martyrdom, so it was these same people again who organized and dispatched the army which dethroned Sultan Abd-ul-Hamid Khan II 'rahmatullahi alaih'.

Muslims still do not wake up. They cannot see these facts. Books written by the enemies of Islam, who martyred hadrat 'Uthman, (and) who caused the Ashab al-kiram to destroy one another, and who caused the freemasons called the Union Party to become a nuisance to Muslims and thus dragged thousands of religious men to gallows or into dungeons, are selling in great numbers and being sent even to villages. Religion reformers supported by freemasons and communists are endeavoring assiduously. Muslims, on the other hand, are quite oblivious and sound asleep. They are translating and advertising books written insidiously for the purpose of demolishing Islam from within.

21- We saw an advertisement being run for a religious book in a daily newspaper. We were told that the newspaper had been praising the book for several days. A Muslim brought us a copy of the book. It is richly embellished with praisals of the Ahl as-sunnat, very probably intended to camouflage the lies and slanders placed here and there. We would like to announce these to our brothers in Islam. Thus we will have rendered a great service to our faith and to our people if we can save our younger generations from falling into bottomless chasms.

22- "It is stated in books that even Aisha-i-Siddiqa remained penitent till the end of her life for having erred in her ijtihad," he says.

On the contrary, books do not contain any writings stating that such and such a scholar repented of his ijtihad. For it is not sinful to perform ijtihad on religious teachings which require ijtihad. There is at least one thawab (reward) for ijtihad. Those great people 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' were sorry not because they had erred in their ijtihad but because Muslim blood had been shed.

23- He writes such things as "After a long and insistent period of fitna, mischief, warfare and devastation, it was finally realized that the Ashab had been erroneous in their ijtihad." As we have stated earlier, the ijtihad reached by the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' indicated that the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman should be retaliated against, that the bandits in Medina should be deported, and that peace and order should be restored as soon as possible. Their ijtihad had nothing to do with warfare. The so-called combats were caused by munafiqs. Later, the same munafiqs said that the combats had been consequences of differences in ijtihad. Thus they managed to break Muslims into two groups.

24- He quotes a hadith ash-Sharif which quotes, "Some people from my Ashab will come near me (as I rest) by my Pond (in Paradise). I will see them and recognize them. Then they will separate them from me. I will say, "Ya Rabbi! These people are my Ashab.' Upon this, I shall be replied, 'These people did this and that after you.' " Then he names various books in order to prove that it is a true hadith ash-Sharif.

A longer form of this hadith ash-Sharif exists in Sunnite books called Sahih, [that is, books of hadith whose authenticity have been ratified unanimously by scholars of Hadith]. All the sahih hadith ash-Sharifs of this sort point to the munafiqs among the Ashab al-kiram. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif that a few people among the Ashab al-kiram turned renegades in the time of the Messenger of Allah. They are not included in the honor of being Sahabis. These people were dispatched as envoys by tribes such as Bani Hanif and Bani Saqif, said that they had become Muslims, and left. Afterwards, they lapsed back into apostasy. Another person in the category is Harqus bin Zubair, who was with hadrat Ali in the combats of Camel and Siffin and joined the group Kharijis afterwards. Scholars of Ahl as- sunnat unanimously agree that all the Sahabis who performed pious deeds and made Jihad against disbelievers passed away as believers. The Sahabis who took part in the wars of Camel and Siffin on both sides are included in these fortunate people. None of them called another a disbeliever. The hadith ash-Sharif that states, "Ammar bin Yaser will be slain by rebels," and hadrat Ali's statement, "Our brothers have revolted against us," prove that hadrat Muawiya and all the Ashab al-kiram who were with him were Muslims. In our (Turkish) book Ashab-i-Kiram, we quote the statements which hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr Ibni As made towards their deaths, and give detailed examples of the excessive love and the deep respect they had for the Messenger of Allah. Those who read the book will realize that both of them had very firm iman and will never speak ill of them. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat do not defend renegades. On the contrary, they state the superior merits possessed by those people who fought against renegades in the time of Abu Bakr. They explain how honorable those heroic people were who routed renegades, fought Iranian and Byzantine armies for Allah's sake and beat them to the ground. These heroes caused thousands of people to become believers. They taught them the Qur'an, the namaz, and Islam. Qur'an al-karim gives them the good news that they shall all go to Paradise and promises them infinite blessings. Allahu ta'ala declares that He is pleased with them all. This good news and promise testify that all the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' passed away as believers and none of them became a renegade.

Shah Waliyy-ullah-i-Dahlawi 'rahima-hullah' quotes this hadith ash-Sharif and explains it at the end of his book Qurrat-ul-aynayn. We have summarized and translated this book from Persian into Turkish and titled it Ashab-i Kiram.

25- "In the interpretation of the ayat, 'You are a beneficent Ummat produced for (the good of) humanity,' Imam Ibni Jarir-i-Tabari quotes (through authentic narration) 'Umar-ul- Faruq as having said, 'This noble attribute includes the earlier ones among us, not the later generations.' According to Ahmad bin Hanbel and Ibni Shirin, the earlier ones are those who performed namaz towards two qiblas. According to Shabi, on the other hand, they are people who paid and promised homage (to the Prophet) under the tree of Ridwan," he says.

Thus he tries to pave the way to a position whence to attack hadrat Muawiya. Yet the fulcrum whereon he bases his theory is quite untenable. By writing that the people called Sabiqun and praised in the ayat al-karima are the early believers, he tries to hint that hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr Ibni As, being among later believers, are not included in the group praised. He quotes only the former part, which reads as "Sabiqun-al-awwalun", of the hundred and first ayat of Tawba sura, and withholds the latter part. After beginning as "Sabiqun al-awwalun," the ayat al-karima purports, "Allahu ta'ala is pleased with those who follow these people in iman and ihsan. And they are pleased with Allahu ta'ala, too. Allahu ta'ala has prepared Gardens for them." All books of Tafsir unanimously state that all the Ashab al-kiram and people who will follow them till the end of the world are included among them. The Tafsir named Tibyan, after stating this fact, quotes Muhammad bin Qa'b as having said, "All the Ashab al-kiram, including the ones who committed sins, are in Paradise," and adds that he quoted the aforenamed ayat al-karima after making this statement. A Hurufi father was asked why he did not perform namaz at all. His answer was that he obeyed the ayat, "Do not be close to the namaz!" By withholding the final part of the ayat al-karima, which terminates as, "... when you are drunk," he changed the commandment of Allahu ta'ala quite the other way round and thus became a disbeliever. Likewise, the author of the aforenamed book writes only the beginning part of the ayat al- karima and conceals the fact that hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr Ibni As are among those people who are to go to Paradise.

26- Then he launches his first offensive by saying, "The leaders of disbelief are Abu Sufyan, who was Hind's husband and Muawiya's father, and his coterie." He seems to forget that in those days Abbas, Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' paternal uncle, was among the unbelievers, too. He was one of the commanders of the troops marching towards Badr to fight the Messenger of Allah. When he was taken as a captive, he boasted to hadrat Ali that they were "repairing the Masjid al-Haram, providing covers for the Kaba, and supplying water for the Hajjis." Upon this, Allahu ta'ala revealed an ayat al- karima, which purports, "Polytheists' repairing mosques is not sahih (valid, acceptable). We shall annihilate the deeds they boast about and put them into Hell." Thus Abbas received the answer he deserved. Later, however, Allahu ta'ala continued His revelation, which purports, "There are high grades for those who believed, migrated from Mecca to Medina, and performed Jihad for Allah's sake. I offer the good news of My Rahmat (Compassion and forgiveness), My Ridwan (Being pleased and loving), and My Gardens of Paradise. They shall attain eternal blessings in Paradise." Abbas and Abu Sufyan 'radi- allahu ta'ala anhuma' became believers. They migrated from Mecca to Medina in the year of the Fat-h (conquest). Abu Sufyan lost his eye in the Holy War of Taif. Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' gave him the good news that he will go to Paradise. In the Holy War of Yermuk, which was fought during Abu Bakr's 'radi-allahu anh' caliphate, he lost his second eye and attained martyrdom a short time later in the same battle.

27- "In the combat of Siffin, seventy thousand people died from each army. Twenty-five thousand of these people were supporting Aliyy-ul-murtada. Who is the cause of this horrendous fight," he asks.

Translating a chapter from the book Tuhfa, we explained in detail in the sixteenth chapter above that this war was a result of the provocations perpetrated by a Jew named Abdullah bin Saba' and a group of zindiqs led by him and named after him as Saba'iyya. Nevertheless, followers of the Saba'iyya group are endeavoring to impute this Jewish turpitude to hadrat Muawiya, thus to break Muslims into groups.

28- "Talha and Zubair, two members of the Ashara-i-mubashshara, who were on the side of Aisha-i-Siddiqa in the war of Camel, retracted their earlier erroneous ijtihad and left the battle area," he says.

These two Sahabis, who had been given the good news that they will go to Paradise, did not perform ijtihad for fighting hadrat Ali. With this allegation, these people are trying to blemish these two noble persons, whom the Messenger of Allah loved very much and gave the good news of Paradise. When hadrat Ali met them and said that he did not want to fight Muslims, they realized that they had been duped by Jews. So they gave up fighting.

29- "As Talha was dying, he recognized a follower of Aliy-ul-murtada passing by and said to him, "Hold out your hand! I shall pay homage (to you) in the name of Ali," he says.

Hadrat Aisha and those who were with her said that they were in Basra not to fight hadrat Ali but to make an agreement with him, to pay homage to him, and to put an end to fitna and mischief. It is stated as follows in the four hundred and eighteenth page of Qisas-i- Anbiya: "After Rasulullah's passing away, it was being discussed who would take office as the Khalifa, when Zubair bin Awwam drew his sword and said he was not going to put his sword back into its sheath unless Ali is done homage to." It was this same Zubair, one of the ten fortunate people given the good news of Paradise, who was among those who accompanied Aisha-i-Siddiqa against hadrat Ali". This writing quoted from Qisas-i- Anbiya proves that all those Sahabis whose ijtihad disagreed with that of hadrat Ali knew hadrat Ali as higher and more suitable for caliphate than they were and wished to make an agreement with him. We explained in the sixteenth paragraph how the event of Camel started as a result of Jewish intrigue. The writing quoted from the book shows that this translation of ours is true. It is not a sin for mujtahids to perform ijtihad. Then why should it be a virtuous act for them to change their ijtihad?

30- "It is advised in the ayat al-karima to 'Stay in your homes. Do not go out. Do not engage in warfare.' She realized her mistake from this ayat al-karima," he says.

If this ayat al-karima commanded never to go out, the Messenger of Allah would not have taken along his wives when he went on Hajj, 'Umra or Holy War after the revelation of this ayat al-karima. Nor would he have permitted them to visit their parents, sick people or bereaved families. It is obvious that the fact is quite to the contrary. Then, the ayat al-karima commands them (women) not to go out without covering themselves. It does not prohibit them to go out for religious reasons, provided that they will cover themselves. Hadrat Aisha was one of the greatest ones of the Ashab al- kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. Upon the requests of the Ashab, she went out to demand retaliation for the rightful Khalifa (hadrat 'Uthman). According to Shiite books, during hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate, hadrat Ali made hadrat Fatima mount an animal and took her out for a tour in Medina. In the time of the second Khalifa Sahabis would take the Zawjat-i-tahirat (the Messenger's pure wives) on hajj.

31- "Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stroked Ammar bin Yaser's face and said, 'You will be slain by a group of rebels.' This report shows that Muawiya and his coterie were rebels. When Ammar was martyred, those who knew about this report deserted Muawiya and sided with Aliyy-ul- Murtada. Baghi means rebel, insurgent," he says, and adds that he borrowed this information from Qisas-i-Anbiya.

We have looked up the matter in the book Qisas-i- Anbiya. We have not seen any writing stating that those who heard about hadrat Ammar's death transferred to hadrat Ali's side. The book writes that the combat became even more heated and some differences began in hadrat Ali's army. The hadith ash-Sharif about hadrat Ammar, which is quoted by this author, too, proves that hadrat Muawiya and other Sahabis like hadrat Amr Ibni As were not disbelievers. All these people had joined the Messenger of Allah in his Jihad against unbelievers.

It is stated in Qisas-i-Anbiya: The same year when Mecca was conquered, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' wrote a letter to Jafar, the ruler of Amman, and sent it through hadrat Amr Ibni As 'radi-allahu anh'.

When the people of Taif became Muslims, Rasul-i-akram sent Abu Sufyan bin Harb to Taif and had him break the idol called Lat. Abu Sufyan and his sons Yazid and Muawiya were Rasulullah's secretaries. Khalid ibni Zayd Aba Ayyub al-Ansari and Amr Ibni As, too, were two of the honorable people who served as secretaries (to the Messenger of Allah). Amr Ibni As was appointed as the army commander by the Messenger of Allah. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' also appointed Abu Sufyan as governor of Najran and his son Yazid as a judge in Teyma 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'.

Hadrat Amr Ibni As was in Amman when Rasulullah passed away. Upon his arriving in Medina, the Sahaba crowded around him and asked him to tell them what he had seen on his way. He said, "I saw that Arabs living in places from Amman to Medina had already become renegades and ready to fight us." Hadrat Abu Bakr sent forth different groups of Sahabis against different groups of renegades. He sent a troop under Amr Ibni As' command 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' against the renegades of Huda'a.

In the period of Saadat, hadrat Amr Ibni As was formerly assigned the duty of collecting zakat from the tribes of Sad and Huzaifa and Uzra. Later he was appointed as a judge in Amman and was promised that on his return he would be given his former position again. When he was back from Amman, hadrat Khalifa sent him out to collect zakat as he had been doing before, thus fulfilling the promise made by the Messenger of Allah. When the number of renegades increased, the Khalifa wanted to give him command over a community. He wrote to him, saying, "I gave you your former duty so that the promise made by the Messenger of Allah be fulfilled. Now I plan to assign you a duty which will be more useful for you both in the world and in the Hereafter." Amr Ibni As' answer was: "I am one of Islam's arrows. After Allah, you are the person who will throw and recollect these arrows. Throw the one which is more powerful and more effective." So hadrat Khalifa appointed him commander over a community. He sent him to Palestine via Eyla. And Abu Sufyan's son Yazid was given command over another community and sent to a region in the vicinity of Damascus by way of Belqa. Abu Sufyan's second son Muawiya was made Amir over another community under his brother's command. Emperor Heracles sent his brother with a hundred thousand strong army against hadrat Amr Ibni As and another powerful army commanded by a general named Yorgi against Yazid. He remained in Hums. The Islamic troops, upon the orders they received from the Khalifa, assembled in Yermuk. The Byzantine troops also assembled against the Muslim troops. The Muslims preferred defense and in the meantime sent messengers to the Khalifa, asking for help. Upon the orders sent by the Khalifa, hadrat Khalid, who was (called) The Sword of Allah, left Iraq with a ten thousand strong army to reinforce Amr Ibni As' army under his command. After a bloody battle fought in Ejnadin, the Byzantine army suffered a humiliating defeat. Then in Yermuk another difficult battle took place between a two hundred and forty thousand strong Byzantine army and a forty-six thousand strong Islamic army, among whom were a thousand Sahabis. And one hundred of these noble people were heroes who had been in the Holy War of Badr. Hadrat Khalid was unanimously voted as the Commander-in-chief. Amr Ibni As and Sharhabil commanded the right wing and Yazid bin Abi Sufyan and Qa'qa' commanded the left wing. Abu Sufyan bin Harb encouraged the soldiers with his heroic accomplishments. The battle cost much blood. One hundred thousand Byzantines, including the Emperor's brother, were put to the sword. An arrow pierced through Abu Sufyan's blessed eye and made him blind. The Byzantines launched another offensive with an eighty thousand strong army in Jordan. Khalid took his place in the center, while Amr Ibni As and Abu Ubaida shared the two wings 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. The Byzantines were routed. Very few of them survived.

During the caliphate of hadrat 'Umar ul-Faruq, Muslims besieged Damascus. One gate was held by Khalid bin Walid, another by Amr Ibni As, and a third one by Yazid bin Abi Sufyan. Yazid appointed his brother commander of the forward column. So he conquered the cities of Sayda (Sidon) and Beirut, while Amr Ibni As conquered Palestine. Hadrat Amr Ibni As was the commander of the army in Palestine. Hadrat Amir ul-Muminin frequently sent help to Amr Ibni As. Amr Ibni As was a well-known genius and a clever administrator. He sent a troop to Jerusalem, and one to Ramla. On the other had, Muawiya besieged the city of Qaysariya. There were many soldiers in the city. They went out to attack the siege forces. Yet hadrat Muawiya broke all their offensives. In the meantime, Amr Ibni As fought the Byzantine commander-in-chief and gave him an utter rout. He conquered the cities of Ghazza and Nablus. Hadrat 'Umar left for Jerusalem, bidding hadrat Ali to take his place in his absence. He was met by Khalid, Amr Ibni As and Sharhabil, all of whom hugged him cordially. The Byzantines surrendered Jerusalem to hadrat 'Umar. The booties taken in Iran were transported to Medina by Ziyad bin Abih. He gave the Khalifa a very clear and eloquent report about the combats in Iran. Yazid was appointed governor of Damascus. Muawiya conquered the city of Qaysariya. Yazid, the governor of Damascus, died of plague. His brother Muawiya was appointed to take his place as the governor of Damascus. Also, Abu Ubaida, the commander of Syria, and Muaz bin Jabal, who took his place, died of plague. When hadrat Amr Ibni As became commander-in-chief, he made all the people to go to the mountains, thus putting an end to the epidemic. Hadrat Amr Ibni As was appointed commander for the military expedition to Egypt. The Byzantine army was routed after a war of one month. The Muslims entered Egypt. Hadrat Amr Ibni As used mangonels in this war. Heracles had prepared a great army in Istanbul and was marching against Amr Ibni As, when he died on the way. Amr Ibni As conquered Alexandria after a war which lasted for three months. Then he moved towards Trablus (Tripoli), which he conquered after one month's war. When hadrat 'Umar was martyred, his son Ubaidullah killed Hurmuzan, a former Persian Shah, thinking that he was the murderer (of his father). Hadrat Ali said that a retaliation should be inflicted on Ubaidullah. The governor of Egypt Amr Ibni As, who was on leave at that time, disagreed with him, saying, "How could it be justifiable to kill a son only a short time after the murdering of his father?" 'Uthman 'radi- allahu anh', who was the Khalifa, approved this statement and extenuated the punishment from retaliation to indemnification, paying the indemnity from his personal property. This was a disagreement of ijtihad. Hadrat Muawiya launched a series of Holy Wars in Asia Minor and marched up to the city of Amuriyya. The Khalifa dismissed Amr Ibni As from the governorship of Egypt. The Khalifa's plan was to conquer Istanbul by way of Andalusia (Spain). He landed troops in Andalusia. Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh', who was the commander of the army in Damascus, sent ships transporting troops to Cyprus. These troops, reinforced by the forces sent as an aid from Egypt, conquered the island after incessant battles.

Constantine III, the kaiser of Istanbul, became the Byzantine Emperor in 47 [A.D. 668] and died in 66 [A.D. 685]. Organizing a great fleet, he hoisted the sails into the Mediterranean. On the other hand, hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' and Abdullah the governor of Egypt formed a fleet each and set sails. An illustrious sea war ended in the Muslims' victory. In the thirty-third year of the Hegira, hadrat Muawiya, who was the governor of Damascus at that time, fought his way through Byzantine territories till he came to the Bosphorus. This Muawiya bin Abi Suyan 'radi-allahu anhuma' was an honorable Sahabi who had served as a secretary to the Messenger of Allah.

Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' risked his life and fought like a lion against enemies for the establishment and implantation of Islam. Many an unbeliever succumbed to his sword. Hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' was another hero who did not hesitate to put his life in jeopardy for the promulgation of Islam and fought the Byzantine armies so that Islam spread its luminous lights in the west as well as in the east. Many a country yielded to his conquests.

A Jewish convert named Abdullah bin Saba' misled many people in Egypt. He provoked the people into insurrection by instilling into them the idea that the office of caliphate belonged to hadrat Ali by rights. If Amr Ibni As had been the governor of Egypt in those days he would not have let this fitna arise. A few people in Kufa, taking offense with their governor for some reason, began to backbite hadrat 'Uthman. The Khalifa banished them to Damascus, and wrote to Muawiya the governor of Damascus to "Admonish these people!" Muawiya praised the Quraishis to these people and said, "Rasul-i-akram employed me in his service. Then his three Khalifas appointed me as a governor and were pleased with me." He advised them very earnestly. They would not listen to him. So he sent them to the city of Hums. Abd-ur-rahman bin Walid, the governor of Hums, treated them harshly and threatened them to make tawba. The Khalifa summoned Muawiya, Amr Ibni As and the other three governors to Medina and asked them their opinions. Muawiya was of the opinion that the Khalifa should "Give the governors initiative." However, Amr Ibni As 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' said, "O Khalifa! You and Bani Umayya (Umayyads) have placed your trust in the people. You have been rather (too) compassionate to them. Either oppress or withdraw or wield more authority!"

Meanwhile, Ibni Saba', who was in Egypt, was conducting timely correspondence between himself and his men in other provinces. They were fabricating lies, such as "Governor so and so is oppressing the people", multiplying these slanders by thousands, and promulgating them far and near. The Khalifa heard about the (fabricated) complaints (most of them about the governors). He convened the governors and asked them the reasons for the complaints. Muawiya said, "You appointed me governor. And I appointed many people as officials. You will receive goodness from them. Everybody knows and governs his country better." Said said, "The rumors are all slanderous. They are being spread secretly. And people believe them. Those who fabricate them ought to be found and killed." Amr Ibni As said, "You have behaved too softly. You have to be harsh when necessary." The Khalifa went to Medina together with the governors. He sent for Ali and Talha and Zubair. (When they met), Muawiya began to talk, "You are the highest members of the Ashab. You have elected the Khalifa. He is old now. Do not rush forward." Grieved over these statements, hadrat Ali said, "Be quiet." They dispersed. Muawiya invited the Khalifa to Damascus. The Khalifa refused. "Then, let me send a detachment to protect you," was Muawiya's next suggestion, which the Khalifa replied, "I do not want to oppress Rasulullah's neighbors." When Muawiya finally tried to warn, saying, "I fear that they might contrive to kill you," the Khalifa said, "Whatever Allah decrees will happen." Upon this, Muawiya put on his traveling clothes, talked with Ali and Talha and Zubair and other Sahabis, entrusted the Khalifa to their care, bid farewell to them, and set out for Damascus. As he left, he said, "Abu Bakr did not wish the world. Nor did the world attempt to approach him. The world approached 'Umar. He refused the world. 'Uthman received a little of the world. As for us; we have dived into the world."

Ibni Saba's men assembled in Egypt and Kufa and several thousand of them left for Medina under the pretext that they were going to make hajj. After their arrival in Medina, hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was martyred. The rescue forces sent from Damascus and Kufa were too late.

The writings above, which we have borrowed from the First World War edition of Qisas-i- Anbiya, show clearly how faithful and true Muslims hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr Ibni As were, how high their statuses among the Ashab al-kiram were, how greatly they served Islam and how zealously they fought against unbelievers. Although the book Qisas-i- Anbiya was written under the influence of false stories in the histories written by prejudiced Abbasid historians whose motive was to censure the Umayyads and ingratiate themselves with their government, it provides the true information we have given above. In its account of the events called Camel and Siffin, it adds the slanders that exist in Abbasid histories and which are quite incompatible with the honors of these two Sahabis and hadrat Abu Sufyan 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh'. However, the selections we have written above should suffice for people keen-sighted and understanding enough to recognize the greatness of the Ashab al-kiram and realize that allegations that exist in Qisas-i-Anbiya and which blemish them are forgeries and calumniations.

32- "Muawiya bin Hadidj, who was a Sahabi and one of the commanders whom Muawiya had sent to Egypt in company of Amr Ibni As, slew Muhammad bin Abi Bakr, one of the messengers of Aliyy-ul-murtada, placed him in a donkey's carcass and burned him. One cannot decide what to say about this monstrosity," he says, and adds that he borrows this information from the book Rawdat-ul-Abrar.

Now let us see what Qisas-i-Anbiya has to say in this connection: "Muhammad bin Abi Bakr, hadrat Ali's governor of Egypt, perpetrated so much oppression on the people that the people finally took up arms. On the other hand, Muawiya bin Hadidj 'radi-allahu anh', one of the Sahaba, who was in Egypt in those days, attempted to conduct feud for the blood of hadrat 'Uthman and gathered many people around himself. Hadrat Muawiya sent hadrat Amr Ibni As to resume control of Egypt. Yet Muhammad bin Abi Bakr put up a military resistance. Muawiya bin Hadidj arrived and joined his forces into the army led by Amr Ibni As. The Egyptians were routed and Muhammad bin Abi Bakr hid himself. Muawiya bin Hadidj found and killed him. He put his body into a donkey's carcass and burned it. For Muhammad bin Abi Bakr had joined the bandits marching from Egypt to Medina and provoked the people against hadrat 'Uthman. He was one of those who had crowded around hadrat 'Uthman's house. Hadrat Hasan bin Ali, who was among the people guarding hadrat 'Uthman, was wounded by an arrow. Panicking at the blood running from hadrat Hasan's body, Muhammad bin Abi Bakr said, "If the sons of Hashim see this, they will attack us and spoil everything. Let us try and find a shorter way." He took two people with him and together they climbed over the wall of an adjacent house and entered hadrat 'Uthman's room. Muhammad bin Abi Bakr was the first to enter. Saying, 'Muawiya cannot save you,' he held the Khalifa by the beard. The Khalifa, who was reading the Qur'an, looked at Muhammad on the face and said, 'If your father saw you in this manner, how sorry he would be.' Being ashamed, Muhammad left the place. Then his friends entered the room and martyred the Khalifa." As is seen, this retribution was visited on him for having caused the Khalifa's martyrdom. The author of the so-called book laments over the burning of this person and relates the event to young people. However, if he wrote how most of the Umayyad Khalifas had been burnt by the Abbasids and how Hurufis had burnt scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, especially Shirwanshah and the governor of Baghdad Bekir Pasa, both of whom were burnt alive, and how they had exhumed hadrat Baidawi's bones and burnt them, it would be easier to decide which people were more savage. When hadrat Muawiya took control of Egypt, he appointed Amr Ibni As governor of the province. Amr had already served as the governor of Egypt, for four years during hadrat 'Umar's caliphate, and for another four years in the time of hadrat 'Uthman. When Amr passed away in the year forty-three, hadrat Muawiya appointed Amr's son Abdullah as the governor for his place. Two years later he dismissed him and appointed Muawiya bin Hadidj as the governor. In the year 50, he dismissed Muawiya bin Hadidj and for his place appointed Maslama, one of his men and at the same time a Sahabi, as the governor of Egypt and Afrikiyya. Hadrat Muawiya bin Hadidj passed away in the seventy-third year (of the Hegira).

33- "Muawiya sent a troop under Busr bin Ertad's command onto the Harameyn (the blessed cities of Mecca and Medina and their territories) and had women and innocent children put to the sword. In this event, Abbas' grandsons, Abd-ur-rahman, who was five years old, and Qusam, six years old, were martyred. These children were slain in front of the eyes of their mother Aisha. Terrorized by this horrendous murder, the helpless mother, Aisha, went mad and rambled around with naked head and feet till the end of her life," he alleges, and says that he has acquired this information from the books Al-kamil and Al-Bayan wat-tabyin.

The books he puts forward to corroborate his allegation betray his own shame. Al-Bayan wat-tabyin was written by a Mutazili hostile to the Ahl as-sunnat. The abridged version of Tazkira-i- Qurtubi gives a true account of this matter on its hundred and thirty-first page, as follows: "After hadrat Muawiya was elected Khalifa by the unanimous vote of the arbitrators, he sent Busr bin Ertad Amiri with a three thousand strong army to Hijaz in order to exact obedience from its people. His first stop was in Medina. In those days hadrat Khalid Aba Ayyub al-Ansari was the governor of Medina appointed by hadrat Ali. This governor secretly left for Kufa to take his place with hadrat Ali. Busr mounted the minber and said, 'What have you done to the Khalifa, [that is, hadrat 'Uthman], to whom I paid homage here at one time? I would put all of you to the sword if Muawiya had not forbidden me to.' People of Medina, led by hadrat Jabir, paid homage. Then Busr exacted obedience from Meccans, too. Busr's stating that he was commanded by hadrat Muawiya 'not to kill anyone' shows that he did not kill anybody in Mecca or Medina. Then he went to Yaman. Ubaidullah bin Abbas, who was the governor of Yaman at that time, fled to Kufa, hadrat Ali's dwelling place. According to scholars, upon Ubaidullah's flight, Busr slew his two sons. Hadrat Ali sent a two thousand strong force under Harisa-t-abni Qudama's command to Yaman against Busr. [Busr was not a Sahabi]. Harisa came to Yaman and stayed here as governor until hadrat Ali's martyrdom. He killed many people. When he went to Medina, hadrat Abu Huraira, who was the Amir there, took flight. Harisa said, 'I would kill that father of cats if I found him.' " As is seen, hadrat Ali's commander meant to kill a Sahabi loved very much and praised by the Messenger of Allah and made fun of his nickname (father of cats), which had been given by the Messenger of Allah. It would be extremely unfair to attempt to blemish hadrat Ali and hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' on account of the cruel acts perpetrated by governors appointed by those great people and to exaggerate the events through fabricated stories.

34- "Muawiya sent circulars to all his governors, wherein he commanded them to curse Aliyy-ul-murtada and his children on minbers. 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz put an end to this business of cursing. Hajar bin Adi, one of the Sahaba, and seven companions were martyred on account of their refusing to curse Ali," he says, and puts forward as documents the book Eghani, and Nahj-ul-belagha and Aqd-ul-Farid, two commentaries written by Abulhadid.

This is a peerless degree of shamelessness and an unprecedented sordidness in vilification. For one thing, the books he puts forward as documents are, as we have stated earlier in our translation from Tuhfa, among Hurufis' publications. It is written in the book Asma ul- muallifin that the author of the book Aghani, namely Abul-faraj Ali bin Husain Isfahani, is a holder of bidat. This man assails the greater ones of the Ashab al-kiram and vituperates them in an insolent language in his book Muqatil-i-al-i-Abi Talib. We have stated in the tenth paragraph that Ibni Abdulhadid is an eccentric Mutazili. It is seen with regret that these slanders have infiltrated into Sunnite books as well. Hadrat Imam-i-Muhammad Mathum-i-Faruqi 'qaddas-allahu sirreh-ul-'aziz', a great Sunnite scholar and at the same time one of the leaders of Awliya-i-kiram, confutes these slanders very well through documents. Translating this valuable answer of his, we added it to the second part of our book. Please reread it.

To say that hadrat Muawiya cursed hadrat Ali would mean to slander hadrat Muawiya. It is not permissible to censure hadrat Muawiya. Yes, a few of the Umayyad Khalifas had certain people cursed. Yet, Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' cannot be blamed for this only on account of his being one of the Umayyad Khalifas. Hurufis vituperate the three Khalifas and hadrat Muawiya and those who followed him. They say that all the Ashab al-kiram became renegades afterwards. They censure all of them. According to the Ahl as-sunnat, however, no statements except praisals can be made of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'.

Hadrat Amir (Ali) said about hadrat Muawiya and his supporters, "Our brothers do not agree with us. But they are not disbelievers or sinners. They act on their ijtihad." This statement of his clears them of disbelief and sinfulness. Cursing is not among the worships prescribed by the Islamic religion, and cursing the worst of unbelievers is no exception. Is it possible for any of the Ashab al-kiram to have engaged his tongue with cursing instead of praying at the end of each of the five daily prayers of namaz? Who on earth would believe such a monstrous lie?

If it were a pious act, a worship to curse a person, it would be one of the Islamic requirements to curse the accursed devil, Abu Jahl, Abu Leheb and the other implacable unbelievers of Quraish, who hurt, tormented and molested our master the Prophet 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' and did harms and treacheries to this true religion. When it is not a commandment to curse the enemies, could it be thawab to curse the friends? There is more detailed information in this respect in the twenty-second chapter of the second part of the (Turkish) book Se'adet-i ebediyye.

35- "Muawiya had hadrat Hasan martyred by giving his wife plenty of jewelry and cajoling her into poisoning her husband," he says. In the tenth paragraph we touched upon the slanders in the history book named Tabari. The grand book titled The History of Tabari (or Tabari) is very valuable. It was written by a scholar of Ahl as-sunnat, namely Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari 'rahmatullahi alaih', who passed away in 310 (H.). A Hurufi came forward under the same name, wrote an abridged version of the book, and titled it Tarih-i-Tabari (the History of Tabari). The existing Turkish version of the History of Tabari is a translation of the abridged version. The original version of the book is much larger. As we explained in the passage we translated from the book Tuhfa and added in the tenth paragraph, Murawwij-uz-zahab is a history book full of slanders. Is it worthy of a Muslim to dirty a religious book with such abhorrent and wicked lies which are quite counter to hadrat Muawiya's 'radi-allahu anh' honor and to add the two (abovenamed) gutter publications in the name of documentation?

An ayat al-karima in Fat-h sura purports, "Thine Ashab are always very compassionate with one another. They are always very vehement towards unbelievers." Islam's enemies, on the other hand, assert that the Ashab al-kiram were inimical towards one another, that they had one another poisoned. Certainly, Muslims will (prefer to) believe Allahu ta'ala. We say that the Ashab al-kiram loved one another very much. The Ashab al-kiram performed ijtihad on the question whether retaliation was necessary against the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman. This was a religious matter. They disagreed in their ijtihad. Such disagreements of ijtihad took place in Rasulullah's time as well. In fact, their ijtihad would sometimes disagree with that of Rasulullah. And this disagreement would not be considered a sin. On the contrary, it was informed that all of them would be given thawab (for their ijtihad). A couple of times the ayat al-karimas revealed through Wahy informed that the ijtihad contrary to Rasulullah's ijtihad was correct. For Islam has granted men the freedom of thought and the freedom to express their thoughts. Islam is the source of human rights and human freedoms. The disagreement among the Ashab al-kiram was based on their ijtihad on the question of retaliation. Disagreement of this sort is not considered a sin, neither by Allahu ta'ala, nor by His Messenger, nor by a person with common sense. They consider it a right conferred on humanity. Those who disagreed with one another in their ijtihad did not think of fighting, nor even of offending, one another. For it was not the first time that such disagreements took place. Disagreements had taken place several times before. And it had not even occurred to them that they should hurt one another. Some of their children, misunderstanding the disagreements of ijtihad among their fathers, had had tiffs with one another from time to time. Yet their fathers, who could not tolerate even such petty huffs among their children, had stopped them, each father rebuking his own child. This fact is known very well by Shiites as well. Yet zindiqs are trying to convince other people that the Ashab al-kiram felt enmity against one another and that they perpetrated sordid and abominable deeds. Thus, they plan, they will manage to spread the conviction that the Ashab al-kiram were thoughtless, unlearned and bad- tempered people, which consequently will give them the chance to demolish, extirpate Islam. For Islam consists of the total of the narrations reported by the Ashab al-kiram. Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs were conveyed to us by the Ashab al-kiram. All the teachings of Islam were derived from Qur'an al-karim, from hadith ash-Sharifs, and from the statements and behaviors of any one of the Ashab al-kiram. The sources and the documents of Islamic lore are the words of the Ashab al-kiram. Vilification of the Ashab al-kiram would naturally lead to rejection and degradation of what they conveyed to us, i.e. Islam. All the Ashab al-kiram are higher than all the past, present and future people in all respects, with the exception of Prophets. For recognizing the value of Islam and being a true Muslim one has to discern this subtlety very well. A person who knows Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' superiority, value and honor and who is able to comprehend what it means to be the Messenger of Allah, will easily realize the fact that these distinguished people, whom that exalted Prophet 'sall-allahu ta'ala alaihi wa sallam' educated and employed in all his services, must have occupied very high grades.

Neither hadrat Ali nor hadrat Muawiya, nor any of the Sahabis who were with them thought of hurting one another. Both in the event of Camel and in the event of Siffin, their meeting was intended to make an agreement and to secure peace and comfort among Muslims. Members of both sides stated their purposes as such. Books of Kalam and history written by Sunnite scholars are in the open. Stories fabled by Hurufis and books and magazines published by upstart men of religion are of no value. A close search into history will show that the Sahaba never killed one another. They always felt sorrow and wept over one another's death.

It is written in the hundred and seventieth page of Qisas-i-Anbiya: That hadrat Hasan was poisoned by his wife Ja'da is a widely known fact. Hadrat Hasan 'radi- allahu ta'ala anh' had made a habit of entering into marriages and divorcing his wife soon after each marriage, so much so that his father (hadrat Ali) had to warn the people in (a speech he made in) Kufa, saying, "Do not give your daughters to Hasan! He will divorce them." The answer he received from the audience was, "We shall give them the girl he likes. Let him live with her or divorce her." Hadrat Hasan was extremely good looking. He resembled Rasulullah (his grandfather). A girl he married would fall in love with him. For some reason whatsoever, she decided to kill him. It is stated in the book Mirat-i- kainat: Hadrat Muawiya decided to see to it that hadrat Hasan should succeed him as Khalifa. He announced his decision to the people. Yazid, (hadrat Muawiya's son), was expecting to succeed his father to caliphate. He sent some poison to hadrat Hasan's wife Ja'da, saying, "If you poison Hasan with this, I shall marry you and overwhelm you with jewelry and property from head to foot." Falling for this false promise, the woman administered poison several times. Yet hadrat Hasan recovered each time. He would not say anything though he knew that it was his wife who was doing this. He separated his bed and began to take good care of his food. One night Ja'da secretly entered his room and put diamond powder in his drinking glass. When hadrat Hasan drank the water at night, his stomach began to break into pieces. In his dying bed, hadrat Husain, (his brother), tried in vain to make him name the person who had given him the poison. Hadrat Hasan asked, "Would you retaliate if you knew who it was?" "Certainly," was the brother's answer. "I would kill him." Upon this, hadrat Hasan said, "The punishment he has deserved will suffice," without hinting in the least that it was his wife's perfidy. He passed away forty days later. He was buried near his mother hadrat Fatima 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha' in Baki' cemetery. Imputing the murder committed by Yazid to his father is a felony no less wicked than the murder itself. For this slander is identical with imputing the disbelief of Nuh's 'alaihis-salam' son Ken'an (Canan) to his father, the exalted Prophet.

36- He says, "Muawiya, as a stage for his extremely perfidious and cruel future aims, took into his family an extremely cruel, treacherous and murderous villain, namely Ziyad bin Abih, his father Abu Sufyan's illegitimate child. By appointing this villain's son, Ubaidullah, a master of banditry, as a governor as he himself was still alive, he intentionally, purposely prepared him for the planning and execution of the horrendous Karbala slaughter. How can these tricks and schemes be errors of ijtihad?" He states that he is quoting these statements from Qisas-i-Anbiya.

Unfortunately, Qisas-i-Anbiya contains some disrespectful and ill-mannered criticisms and comments made about Muawiya. The insolent words quoted above could not find their way through Jawdat Pasha's 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih' faithful pen, nor was he the kind of person to let them foul the pages of his book. Let us see how he expresses these events in Qisas-i-Anbiya:

The people of Faris revolted against hadrat Ali. They refused to pay (taxes called) Ushr and Kharadj. In the thirty-ninth year of the Hegira, hadrat Ali appointed Ziyad bin Abih, who was an official of Bayt-ul-mal in Basra, as governor of the provinces of Faris and Kerman. Abdullah bin Abbas, who was the Amir of Basra, sent Ziyad to Faris with some forces under his command. Ziyad was a very clever, talented, far-sighted administrator. Owing to his skillful management, he handled the affairs without having to use the forces under his command. In a short time he restored peace and order in the provinces of Faris and Kerman. He subdued the rebels. When hadrat Ali received some complaints about the Amir of Basra Abdullah bin Abbas, he asked Abdullah to send him the book of accounts for the property of Jizya. Offended, Abdullah Ibni Abbas wrote him an answer saying that he 'might as well send someone else for his service.' He left Basra. After hadrat Ali's martyrdom, Ziyad would not pay homage to Muawiya. Ziyad was an extremely intelligent and most eloquent orator. Formerly he was a secretary to Abu Musa- l-Ashari, the governor of Basra. Hadrat 'Umar, during his caliphate, assigned him some duties. After the event of Camel, hadrat Ali appointed him head of the finance office in Basra and then Amir of Faris. Being a good administrator, he established order in the province. Seeing his accomplishments, hadrat Muawiya declared him his real brother. Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' wrote a letter to Ziyad, warning him as follows: "I have appointed you governor to this province. You are the expert of this job! Yet you cannot attain Abu Sufyan's genealogy or inheritance only on a word he expresses. Muawiya (is a person who) will cleverly approach a person from the opposite direction, from his back, from his right and left. Guard yourself against him." In the pre-Islamic period there were various types of marriage in Arabia. Islam prohibited them. Ziyad was born from a marriage established according to the customs valid in those days.

In the year 45 (H.), hadrat Muawiya appointed Ziyad governor to Basra, Khorasan and Sijistan. That year debauchery was widespread in Basra. Ziyad mounted the minber. He made an extremely eloquent and clear speech. He admonished the people against sinning, debauchery and vices. He threatened them with heavy punishments. (Whenever it was time for night prayer), he would conduct the namaz (in jamaat) very slowly and reciting long suras and then send them to their homes late, prohibiting them to go out after that time of night. By means of this martial law he established order in Basra, thus consolidating hadrat Muawiya's government. He established such strict discipline that a person who dropped something in a street would find it there if he came back a long time later. No one would lock his doors. He established a ten thousand strong police organization. He established order and security in rural areas and on highways, too. All people enjoyed safety, as it had been in the time of hadrat 'Umar. He appointed many notables of the Sahaba, such as Anas bin Malik, to important positions. Thus he utilized them. Meanwhile, the Kharijis, i.e. enemies of hadrat Ali, rose in rebellion. Having no mercy on them, Ziyad forestalled them and had most of them killed, including their chief. Their names were forgotten. Hadrat Muawiya sent an army to Istanbul in the (Hijri) year 49. He ordered his son Yazid to join the army. A spoilt child brought up in riches, Yazid was too late. Hadrat Muawiya forced Yazid to catch up with the moving army. Abdullah Ibni Abbas, Abdullah Ibni 'Umar, Abdullah Ibni Zubair and Abu Ayyub al-Ansari Khalid were in this army. In the year 53, Ziyad passed away in Kufa, when he was fifty-three years old. Upon Ziyad's death, his son Ubaidullah came to Damascus. Hadrat Muawiya appointed him commander of the forces of Khorasan. Ubaidullah was twenty-five years old at that time. He went to Khorasan. Crossing the Oxus river (Amu Darya), he made numerous conquests in Bukhara. He brought many booties back with him. In the year 55, he became governor of Basra. Basra was an assembly area of Kharijis. The new governor of Basra, Ubaidullah bin Ziyad, marched against them and routed them.

When Yazid became Khalifa in the year 60, Ubaidullah bin Ziyad was governor of Basra. People of Kufa wrote to the Khalifa, petitioning for an authoritative governor. So Yazid sent Ubaidullah bin Ziyad to Kufa. Upon arriving in Kufa, Ibni Ziyad found the city in utter disorder. He called the people to obedience. In the meantime, upon an invitation he received from the people of Kufa, hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' had sent his paternal first cousin Muslim to Kufa. Nearly thirty thousand people convened in Kufa and elected hadrat Husain Khalifa. They crowded around Ibni Ziyad's house. Ibni Ziyad dispersed them and had their chief Muslim executed. The same day hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu anh' left Mecca for Kufa.

'Umar, who was a son of Sad Ibni Abi Waqqas, one of the Ashara-i-mubashshara, was appointed Amir to the city of Rey. 'Umar was about to set out with four thousand people, when it was heard that hadrat Husain was on his way to Kufa in order to become Khalifa. Ibni Ziyad told 'Umar to march against Husain, which 'Umar refused. Upon this Ibni Ziyad threatened him with revoking the order of his governorship of Rey. 'Umar asked for a day's permission to consider the matter and came back with an affirmative answer. The two parties met at Karbala (or Karbala). Hadrat Husain said that he was ready to "go back." Ibni Ziyad's answer was that he could go back provided he should "pay homage to Yazid" and that "otherwise he should not be given any water." Hadrat Husain refused to pay homage. So 'Umar drove forward his forces. In the year 61, on the tenth of Muharrem, hadrat Husain and seventy other people with him attained martyrdom. Two days later, 'Umar bin Sad took the women and Zaynalabidin Ali to Kufa. Ibni Ziyad convened the people in the mosque. Mounting the minber, he addressed, "Thanks and praise be to Allah for making the right prevalent and helping the Amir al-Muminin Yazid." When the women and the report of hadrat Husain's martyrdom arrived in Damascus, tears filled Yazid's eyes. "May Allah curse Ibni Sumayya," he said. Ubaidullah bin Ziyad was called 'Ibni Sumayya' and 'Ibni Merjana', too. He pronounced a benediction over hadrat Husain, and added, "I would have forgiven Husain if he came to me." He did not give any presents to Zubair, who had brought him the news. "May Allah damn him. Ibni Ziyad hasted and killed him," he said. Then, inviting the people brought from Kufa to his place, he had the following conversation with them: "Do you know why Husain lost his life? Husain said, 'My father Ali is better than his (Yazid's) father Muawiya. My mother Fatima is better than his mother and my grandfather Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' is better than his grandfather. Therefore, I am better than he. Caliphate belongs to me by rights.' His father and my father left the solution to arbitrators. Everybody knows who was elected. Let me say this for Allah's sake: His mother Fatima is better than my mother. As for his grandfather; a person who has iman in Allah and in rising after death will not hold anyone equal with the Messenger of Allah. However, Husain said (and acted) on his knowledge of fiqh and on his ijtihad, forgetting about the ayat that purports, 'Allahu ta'ala is the owner of everything. He will bestow sovereignty on anyone He chooses.' " People in Yazid's palace mourned and wept very much for hadrat Husain. The property taken away from him was paid back in multiples. In fact, hadrat Husain's daughter Sukayna acknowledged, "I have not seen a person more beneficent than Muawiya's son Yazid." [This fact cannot be denied even by people without a certain Madhhab. Yet in their quotation of this statement they substitute the word 'person' with the word 'disbeliever']. Yazid would invite hadrat Zeynel- 'abidin to eat with him every morning and every evening, and they would have breakfast and dinner together. As they bid farewell to each other, he said, "May Allahu ta'ala curse Ibni Merjana! Wallahi, if I had been in his place, I would have accepted all your father's wishes. It was Allah's foreordination, after all! Write to me if you need something. I will send it immediately whatever it is." Yazid died in the year 64, when he was thirty years old. And Ibni Ziyad was slain by the chief of bandits Mukhtar during the bloody combats he fought in the month of Muharrem of the year 67. Hadrat Abdullah bin Zubair 'radi- allahu ta'ala anh', who occupied the seat of caliphate at that time, appointed his brother Mus'ab governor of Basra. And Mus'ab sent one of his Emirs, one named Muhalleb, against Mukhtar. At the end of a bloody battle, Mukhtar was killed in 67.

If these writings borrowed from Qisas-i-Anbiya are read with reason, it will be seen that hadrat Husain's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' martyrdom was not a result of a grudge against him or his blessed father, but it was a consequence of worldly ambitions. Whatsoever the reason, even Yazid would not shoulder accountability for this ignominious savagery. He cursed Ibni Ziyad for this abominable deed. Grave as Yazid's felony is, it would be injustice equally grave to attempt to blemish his father on account of this guilt. It would be like blaming Adem 'alaihis-salam' for his son Cain's slaying his brother Abel.

To allege that hadrat Muawiya's appointing Ubaidullah Ibni Ziyad a governor was intended to have hadrat Husain martyred, would mean to gainsay the events. As it is stated in Qisas-i-Anbiya, he appointed him governor because he had fought against disbelievers successfully and suppressed the Kharijis, who were hostile to hadrat Ali. Seeing that he was serving Islam, he appointed him to Basra. Hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu anh' was in Medina then. If hadrat Muawiya had had malice towards hadrat Husain, he would have appointed Ibni Ziyad governor of Hijaz. Why do not those people who blame hadrat Muawiya for (his son) Yazid's guilt, put the blame for 'Umar's martyring hadrat Husain, instead of setting him free, on his father? 'Umar's father Sad Ibni Abi Waqqas is one of those fortunate people who were given the good news that Allahu ta'ala promised Paradise to them (Ashara-i-mubashshara). They know that if they criticized this person their secret plans and lies would be noticed.

Abd-ul-wahhab-i-Sharani states as follows in the hundred and twenty-ninth page of the abridged version of Tazkira-i-Qurtubi: Yazid sent hadrat Husain's blessed head and the captives from Damascus to Medina. Upon the order of 'Umar bin Sad, the governor of Medina, his blessed head was shrouded and buried beside the blessed grave of hadrat Fatima-t-uz-Zahra in the cemetery of Baki'. Faid, the thirteenth Fatimi (Fatimid) ruler, was brought to the throne in 549 [A.D. 1154], when he was five years old, and died in 555. In his time the state was under the control of his vizier Talayi' bin Ruzayk. When this person had the cemetery called Mashhad (or Meshhed) built in Cairo, he had hadrat Husain's blessed head brought from Medina to Cairo by spending forty thousand golds. It was wrapped in green atlas, put in a coffin made of ebony, and buried beside the tomb of Imam-i-Shafi'i 'rahmatullahi alaih' and the grave of Sayyid-at- Nefisa in Mashhad.

This event also has been distorted by Hurufis. They say that forty days after the martyrdom his blessed head was brought to Karbala and buried beside his body.

Mawlana Hafid Hakim Abd-ush-shekur Ihahi Mirzapuri Hanafi, a great scholar of Pakistan, wrote a book titled Shehadat-i-Husain (Husain's Martyrdom) 'radi-allahu anh'. This book, which was originally in the Urdu language, was translated into Persian by Mawlawi Ghulam Haydar Faruqi, a student in the Madrasa-i-Islamiyya in Karachi. This great madrasa, which is located at Newtown 5 in Karachi, offers a higher education in the Islamic sciences. Students come here from all over the world and are educated and trained as scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Muhammad Yusuf Benuree, a great scholar and at the same time the founder of the Madrasa, wrote an eulogy commending the information provided in the book. Yusuf Benuree passed away in Karachi in 1400 [A.D. 1980]. The book contains one hundred and two pages. The author states that enemies of Islam have been disguising themselves as Muslims in order to destroy Islam from within and arousing hostility against the Ahl al-bayt by pretending to be "lovers of the Ahl al-bayt." Throughout the pages of the book, he presents documents from Shiite books and corroborates this fact. He states in the eleventh page: Muhammad Baqir Khorasani, a Shiite scholar better known by the name Molla Muhsin, died in Mashhad in 1091 [A.D. 1679]. He says in the three hundred and twenty-first page of his book Jila ul-uyun, "Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' gave his son Yazid the following advice as he was passing away: You know Imam-i-Husain's closeness to Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and that he is of the Messenger's sacred blood. The people of Iraq will call him to their country, promising that they will help him. Yet they will not help him. They will leave him alone. If you should be victorious over him, pay him due respect. Never hurt him in retribution for his offenses towards you! Do him the same favors I have done to him!" Muhammad Taqi Khan, a Shiite historian, passed away in 1297 [A.D. 1879]. He says in his Persian book Nasikh-ut- tawarih, "His advice was as follows: My son, do not follow your nafs! Do not enter the presence of Allahu ta'ala with your hands smeared with Husain bin Ali's blood! Otherwise, you will suffer eternal torment! Do not forget the hadith ash-Sharif, 'Allahu ta'ala will not give barakat to a person who violates the veneration due to Husain.' " It is written in the thirty-eighth page of the same Shiite history book, "Sympathizers of Imam-i-Ali, that is, Shiites, would come to Damascus and speak ill of hadrat Muawiya. Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' would do nothing to punish his censurers. Instead, he would give them plenty of gifts from the Bayt-ul-mal." It is stated in the three hundred and twenty-third page of the book Jila-ul-uyun, "Imam-i-Hasan bin Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma' said: Wallahi, hadrat Muawiya is better than those people who gather around me in the name of supporters. These people claim to be Shiites on the one hand, and await an opportunity to kill me and lay their hands on my property on the other hand."

As for Yazid; he did not forget his father's advice. So he did not call Imam Husain 'radi- allahu ta'ala anh' to Kufa. He did not command to kill him. Nor did he rejoice at his death. On the contrary, he wept when he heard about the sad news, and commanded mourning. He respected the Ahl al-bayt. It is stated in the three hundred and twenty-second page of the Shiite book Jila-ul-uyun, "Yazid appointed Walid bin Aqaba, who was well-known for his love for the Ahl al-bayt, governor of Medina. He dismissed Marwan, an enemy of the Ahl al-bayt, from governorship. One night Walid sent for Imam-i-Husain and said that Muawiya had died and that Yazid was to be obeyed. Imam-i-Husain said: You would not be contented with my paying homage to him secretly. You would like me to pay homage in public." This writing from the Shiite book shows that Imam-i-Husain did not call Yazid a sinner, a debaucher or a disbeliever. If he had considered him as such, he would not have accepted to pay homage to him secretly. His avoiding homage in public was because he did not want to incur Shiites' animus. As a matter of fact, they had deserted his father and become Kharijis on account of his making peace with Muawiya. They had fought against his father. And they had become hostile to his (elder) brother hadrat Hasan because he had relinquished caliphate to Muawiya.

It is stated in the same Persian book of history: "When Zejr bin Qays brought the news of hadrat Husain's death to Yazid, he bowed his dead and remained so for a while. Then he said, 'Your having paid homage to him would be better news for me than your having killed him. If I had been there I would have forgiven him. When Mahdar bin Salaba began to censure Imam-i-Husain, Yazid frowned and said, 'I wish Mahdar's mother had not delivered a child so cruel and so mean. May Allah destroy Merjana's son [Ibni Ziyad]!' Shemmer brought hadrat Husain's blessed head to Yazid and said, 'I have killed the son of the best of mankind. Therefore you must fill the saddle-bags of my horse with gold and silver.' Exasperated, Yazid exclaimed, 'May Allah fill your saddle-bags with fire! For what reason have you killed the best of mankind? Get out of here! Clear out! You won't be given anything.' " It is written as follows in the three hundred and ninety-third page of Hulasat-ul-mesaib, a Shiite book: "Yazid wept bitterly, not only in the presence of other people, but also when he was alone. His daughters and sisters also wept with him. Putting Imam-i Husain's blessed head in a gold bowl, he said, 'O Husain' May Allah have mercy on you! How sweet is your smile!' " As it is seen clearly from this acknowledgement in the Shiite book, some people's allegation that "Yazid hit Imam-i Husain's blessed teeth with a stick," is a whopping lie. It is stated in Jila-ul-uyun, "Yazid accommodated Imam-i Husain's household in his palace. He showed them very kind hospitality. He would have his breakfast and dinner with Imam-i-Zaynalabidin." It is stated in Hulasat-ul-mesaib, "Yazid asked Imam-i-Husain's household, 'Would you like to be my guests and stay here in Damascus or go back to Medina?' Umm-i-Ghulthum said that they wanted to mourn in seclusion. Yazid gave them a large room in his palace. They mourned one week in this room. The eighth day Yazid sent for the Ahl al-bayt and asked them what they wished. They said they wanted to go to Medina. He gave them much property, decked animals, and two hundred golds. He said, 'Let me know whatever you need. I will send them immediately.' Giving Numan bin Bashir and five hundred horsemen under their command he saw them off in the direction of Medina after a respectful and grand farewell ceremony due to their honor."

As is shown in the writings above, and many other books written by reasonable and unbiased Shiite scholars, hadrat Muawiya was never inimical towards Imam-i-Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'. Yazid did not command that Imam-i-Husain should be killed, nor did he wish such a thing. Enemies of the Ahl al-bayt and people who martyred Imam-i-Husain slandered these two Khalifas, thus to cover their own animosity.

Abd-ur-rahman Ibni Muljem was a Shiite formerly. Later he joined Kharijis, and martyred Imam-i-Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh'.

There were no soldiers from Damascus among those people who martyred Imam-i- Husain in Karbala. These people were from Kufa. Qadi Nurullah Shushtari, a Shiite scholar, writes this fact plainly. It is written in Jila-ul-uyun as well that when Imam-i- Zaynalabidin 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was brought to the city of Kufa, he said that the murderers were Shiites.

In order to demolish Islam from the inside, enemies of Islam drifted the Ahl al-bayt-i-nabawi 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' into disasters and calamities. Imputing these murders of theirs to the Ahl as-sunnat, they assailed the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain', the strongholds of Islam, and via them their followers, i.e. scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Muslims have to be extra careful lest they should fall victims to their traps.

37- "Muawiya's governor to Egypt, Amr bin As, during his stay in office, which lasted four years plus four months, embezzled three hundred and fifteen thousand golds and appropriated the territory called Reht," he asserts, adding that he has acquired this information from the Shiite books titled Murawwij-uz-zahab an Al-ijaz.

The lines quoted above are naked examples of how these people without a certain Madhhab insert their lies into books in the name of religious information like amusing a child. He tries to blemish hadrat Amr Ibni As by saying that he was a governor of hadrat Muawiya. The fact, on the other hand, is that he served as governor of Egypt for four years in the time of hadrat 'Umar and for four more years during the caliphate of hadrat 'Uthman. Hadrat Muawiya appointed Ziyad, who had been one of hadrat Ali's governors, as a governor again. Likewise, he appointed hadrat Amr, chosen as a governor of Egypt by these great people, as a governor again. Besides, Amr Ibni As had been one of his military colleagues in the Holy Wars he had made in Syria. Unable to find a tangible fault or shortcoming to impute to hadrat Muawiya, they are trying to distort his entirely right deeds and accomplishments into faults. Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and his Khalifas' employing hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr in choicest duties would suffice as an indication for their high value. Imam-i-Rabbani 'rahmatullahi alaih' states in the hundred and twentieth letter of the first volume of his Maktubat, "Hadrat Muawiya's mistakes, owing to the barakat of the sohbat he had had with the Messenger of Allah, were more useful than the right deeds accomplished by Weys al-Qarani and 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz, (who had not had the fortunate honor of seeing the Messenger of Allah during his lifetime). By the same token, a mistake made by Amr Ibni As was more virtuous than a discreet act managed by these two people." The Turkish version of the hundred and twentieth letter exists in the (Turkish) book Mujdeci Mektublar Tercemesi. The only reason for such heavy criticisms levelled at these two Sahabis is their having disagreed with hadrat Ali in their ijtihad. So these people represent all their deeds, and even their worships, as vices.

Hadrat Amr Ibni As 'radi-allahu anh' never appropriated the people's rights in Egypt. He left masterpieces for the Islamic history in Egypt. Let us give an example of these services, each of which would be a surprise for friends and slanderers alike. This great service is his opening the Amir ul-Muminin Canal, connecting the Nile and the Red Sea. In the eighteenth year of the Hegira Arabia was stricken by a widespread famine. The Khalifa, 'Umar ul-Faruq 'radi-allahu anh', sent orders to provinces, demanding food provisions from them. Aid from Egypt and Damascus was considerably late because these two provinces were rather distant. The Khalifa summoned the governor of Egypt, hadrat Amr Ibni As, and his assistants to Egypt. "If a canal is opened between the Nile and the Red Sea, this will put an end to the dearth in Arabia," he said. Hadrat Amr Ibni As returned to Egypt. He began to have a canal opened from the city of Fustat, twenty-four kilometers from Cairo, in the direction of the Red Sea. The hundred-and-thirty-eight kilometers long canal was completed in six months' time. Ships sailing through this Amir ul-Muminin Canal arrived in the Red Sea from the Nile, and docked alongside of the wharf named Jar in Medina. The first cargo they brought from Egypt to Medina was twenty big shiploads of cereals, which amounted to sixty thousand Irdebs. One irdeb is equal to twenty-four Sa's. And sa' is a unit of volume equal to 4.2 liters. One irdeb is (around) one hundred liters. Accordingly, the first cargo transported from Egypt to Medina by way of sea was six million liters, that is, six thousand cubic meters of cereals. After 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz, this canal was stopped up for lack of care. In 155 (H.) Khalifa Mensur had it cleaned and it was used for many long years. Amr Ibni As 'radi-allahu anh' was considering to connect the Mediterranean and Red Seas. He let the Khalifa know about this thought of his. Hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' would not give permission for military considerations. There is detailed information about the canal in the book Faruq, written by Shibli Numani, an Indian professor. We have borrowed the information above from its Persian translation printed in 1351.

It should not be presumed that these zindiqs' incessant endeavors to vilify hadrat Muawiya and the Sahabis with him originate from their love for the Ahl al-bayt! They say so; yet their purpose is to use this lie as a means for reviling thousands of Sahabis whose ijtihad did not agree with hadrat Ali's ijtihad, to disgrace those superior religious leaders, and thus to shock the trust in Islam's foundations and essential sources and destroy them piecemeal. At one time Jews demolished hadrat Isa's religion with the same insidious methods. They annihilated the Injil (original form of the Bible). They forged false Gospels. They turned the Isawi religion, which had been sent by Allahu ta'ala, into today's wrong, ridiculous Christianity. The genuine form of Injil, called (the Gospel of) Barnabas, which re-appeared in 1393 [A.D. 1973], divulges the fact that Christianity is a human fabrication. The (Turkish) book Herkese Lazim Olan Iman, which was printed in Istanbul and translated into English, French and German, contains detailed information about Christianity. Their aim was to change Islam into a similar system of absurdities by using the same methods. Fortunately, Muslims of the right way were wise to these base Jewish plans. Writing hundreds of thousands of books for fourteen centuries, they promulgated Rasulullah's religion all over the world. They announced the Jewish turpitudes and lies, and refuted them with documentary evidences. These enemies of Islam may call themselves Alawi's (or Shiites). Our benevolent Alawi (or Shiite) brothers should be extra careful not to fall into the traps of these enemies who may be using this sacred appellation as a cloak for themselves.

Alawi (Alevi) means a true Muslim who loves hadrat Ali. Hadrat Ali is a foundation pillar of Islam. He is the leader of those fighters and heroes who spread Islam. During the most difficult, the most horrendous, the darkest moments of Rasulullah's Holy Wars, he rushed forward like a lion, thus pleasing the Prophet of Allah and rescuing Islam and Muslims from dangerous situations. Islam's enemies do not like hadrat Ali, who was a lion of Allah. True Muslims, who are called Ahl as-sunnat, love him. Every Sunnite Muslim's heart is full with love of hadrat Ali. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat inform unanimously that love of Ahl al-bayt is a sign that one will die as a believer. Then, the appellation Alawi would befit the Ahl as-sunnat. This blessed name belongs to the Ahl as-sunnat. It is property of Ahl as-sunnat. Zindiqs, who are enemies of Islam, are stealing this sacred name Alawi from the Ahl as-sunnat. They are trying to hide themselves under this valuable name.

O our brothers who are called Alawi! Be conscious of the value of your name. A person who loves this name sincerely, who knows what this name means, and who realizes the high honor contained in this name, will also love the Ahl as-sunnat, who are the real and true owners of this name! The only true and sincere lovers of hadrat Ali and the truthful followers of that exalted imam are scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Then, a person who wishes to be Alawi has to learn hadrat Ali's way by reading books written by scholars of Ahl as- sunnat. A Muslim who learns hadrat Ali's way well, will see easily that some books and magazines being written under the designation Alawi are wrong and heretical.

38- "The fitna and mischief caused by Muawiya himself, by his children and grandchildren, by his kith and kin, by his officials and supporters, had their evil effects not only in their time but throughout centuries. Muawiya, especially, appointed his son (Yazid), who was an alcoholic, a dissolute idiot, a next heir to the office of caliphate, (although he was aware of his bad habits), thus causing a nuisance to Muslims," he says.

Jawdat Pasha also is influenced by these statements and says, "This was one of the greatest mistakes Muawiya made." On the other hand, in Qisas-i-Anbiya, he treats the matter quite impartially, as follows:

"Hadrat Muawiya was considering to dismiss Mughira from governorship of Kufa. Upon hearing about this, Mughira went to Damascus, saw Yazid, and said to him, 'The greater ones of the Ashab and the Quraish are dead now. Their sons are alive. You are the most superior of them and you know the Sunnat and politics best. Wouldn't your father like you to become the Amir-ul-Muminin?' Yazid told his father about this. Hadrat Muawiya sent for Mughira and asked him. Mughira was one of the greatest of the Sahaba and one of those who promised homage (to the Prophet) under the tree. Mughira said, 'O Amir al- Muminin! You have seen all the so many tumults that have broke out and so much blood that has been shed after hadrat 'Uthman. Make Yazid Khalifa! He will be an asylum for people. It will be an auspicious deed. You will have prevented fitna.' Mughira chose ten people from Kufa and sent them to Damascus with his son. They persuaded the Khalifa. When Ziyad heard about this, he gave advice to Yazid. Yazid corrected his manners, habits and attitudes. Hadrat Muawiya convened many of his governors in Damascus and consulted with them. One of them, Dahhak by name, asked for permission and said, 'O Amir al-Muminin! After you, a person will be needed for the protection of Muslims. Thus Muslims' blood will not be shed. They will live in peace and comfort. Yazid is very clever. In knowledge and mildness he is superior to us all. Make him Khalifa!' A few other outstanding Damascenes made similar talks. Damascenes and Iraqis agreed in Yazid's caliphate. Upon hearing these statements, hadrat Muawiya thought it would be auspicious to do so. He came to Mecca, where he had sweet conversations with hadrat Husain, Abdullah bin Zubair and Abdullah bin 'Umar. After making hajj, he called them again and said to them, 'You see how much I love you. Yazid is your brother. He is your paternal cousin. I want you to accept his caliphate for the salvation of Muslims. Yet I shall put the following stipulations: Appointment and dismissal of governors, collecting zakat, ushr and other taxes, and delivering the arriving property to the right places shall be under your control. Yazid shall not interfere with any of these procedures.' [This meant to say that he was going to make a constitution]. They were quiet. He asked them once more to answer him. They would not answer this time, either. Then the Khalifa mounted the minber and made a speech: 'Eminent ones of this Ummat have accepted Yazid as Khalifa. (I offer you to) accept him, too.' So they accepted him. Then hadrat Muawiya came to Medina and made the same proposition to its people. They, too, agreed. Then he went back to Damascus."

As it is seen, hadrat Muawiya did not think of making Yazid Khalifa. It was first suggested to him by people he trusted, then advised by the eminent ones, and eventually approved by the people. Only after these stages did he make his final decision. For he had experienced the tumults that had happened after hadrat 'Uthman and seen the Muslim blood shed. And now the number of those who supported the Jewish plans had increased, Kharij'is, who were the enemies of Ahl as-sunnat, had gained strength and become a grave nuisance to Muslims. He thought this out and obtained the people's approval. If the constitution he conceived had been supported, a perfect Islamic democracy would have arisen. And consequently all Muslims would pronounce benedictions over him till the end of the world on account of this service.

To assert that "The fitna and mischief caused by hadrat Muawiya's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' children and grandchildren lasted for centuries," would mean to deny history. For his grandson Muawiya II was renowned for his wisdom, piety, attachment to Islam, and justice. Unfortunately, he passed away after only two months' service in the office of caliphate. Because he had no children left alive, he was succeeded by Marwan bin Hakem, again by military force. Marwan was hadrat Muawiya's paternal cousin, yet they were not close to each other. No other attitude could be so senseless as blaming hadrat Muawiya for the blunders committed by this person or by some Umayyad rulers succeeding him. The oppressions and cruelties inflicted on the Ahl al-bayt by the Abbasids were much heavier than those perpetrated by the Umayyads. Readers of history are well aware of this fact. As it would be a very base slander to blame and curse the Abbasids' great grandfather hadrat Abdullah and his father hadrat Abbas on account of the barbarous felonies which Abbasids perpetrated against the Ahl al-bayt, so it would obviously be an even more stupid and baser vilification to blame hadrat Muawiya for the less significant mismanagement executed by those Khalifas who were Marwan's descendants. Another fact we would like to impart to those who allege that hadrat Muawiya's sons and grandsons carried on their atrocities for centuries, is that none of that great Sahabi's relatives occupied a commanding position after his celebrated grandson, (Muawiya II), who made a fame for his justice and fear of Allah. Hadrat Muawiya had another son, who was named Khalid. This person was not fond of sovereignty. He had been raised as a scientist by his father. Jabir, the celebrated chemist, was a disciple of this Khalid's. He learned chemistry from his master Khalid. Then these wicked calumniators, thinking that there was no one to stop them, insolently assailed this innocent Khalifa and cast aspersions incompatible with mind and knowledge on him.

Allahu ta'ala created thousands of Sunnite scholars 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' to defend that innocent Khalifa and to disgrace his foes. These great scholars wrote numerous books defending hadrat Muawiya's right and announcing throughout the world the virtues and values possessed by this great Sahabi.

39- "It is not something believable that Muawiya did not plan or know or estimate or at least imagine when he was alive the inconceivably horrendous and hideous turpitude that would later be inflicted on hadrat Husain," he alleges.

It is impossible to imagine a Muslim not deeply grieved over the disaster of Karbala caused by Ziyad's son Ubaidullah. Each and every individual Sunnite Muslim sheds bitter tears whenever he recollects those gloomy days. (Some people) mourn over the catastrophe of Karbala on the tenth of (the month of) Muharram. So, while these people mourn only for one day in a whole year, we mourn all the year round. While these people mourn for hadrat Husain only because he is hadrat Ali's son, we mourn because he is a grandson of Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam', the Messenger of Allah. We Sunnis love hadrat Ali because he was Rasulullah's son-in-law and because at the Messenger's command he fought disbelievers like an angry lion. And we love hadrat Muawiya because he was Rasulullah's brother-in-law and because he made Jihad against disbelievers for the sake of Allah. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "Love my Ashab! He who loves them does so because he loves me. Do not be hostile towards my Ashab! He who is hostile towards them is hostile towards me." We love hadrat Ali and hadrat Muawiya very much because they are Sahabis. We have explained in the previous matter that it would be a very loathsome calumniation to impute the calamities that happened in the time of Yazid to hadrat Muawiya. It would be a more loathsome and baser vilification to assert that hadrat Muawiya arranged these calamities before his death. Muawiya's attitudes indicating his love and respect for hadrat Hasan and hadrat Husain and his generous kindnesses towards them are recorded in books. Those who have the habit of reading should know these facts well. If hadrat Muawiya had considered to hurt Rasulullah's beloved sons, who had been blessed with the glad tidings of Paradise by their hallowed grandfather, he could have done so quite easily during his caliphate, when everything was under his command. Or, at least, he would have said so. On the contrary, he always did them good. He always respected them. He always praised them for their value and honor wherever he was. For asserting that the bloody events that occurred after hadrat Muawiya's passing away were the consequences of hadrat Muawiya's clandestine prearrangement, one has to be either hard- hearted or mortally inimical or stark raving mad. Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' appointed Qays bin Sad governor of Egypt and told him to fight those who would not accept him (hadrat Ali) as Khalifa. Among those Egyptians who were opposed to hadrat Ali's caliphate were Sahabis such as Yazid bin Haris and Maslama, - the latter had joined the Holy War of Badr -, who were outstanding members of the tribe of Hazraj. Qays wrote an answer to hadrat Ali, saying, "You order me to fight people who are not harmful to you. It would be more appropriate not to annoy those who sit silently." The Khalifa dismissed Qays from governorship of Egypt and appointed Muhammad bin Abi Bakr for his place. Muhammad told those who were impartial to "Either obey or leave the country!" They said, "Do not disturb us! Let us wait till the end." When Muhammad refused their excuse, they took up arms, thus dragging the country into a catastrophic nuisance, which ended in Muhammad's being killed and burned. At one time, this Muhammad had cooperated with Ibni Saba's men, revolted against the Khalifa hadrat 'Uthman, entered his house through a window by climbing over the wall of the house next door, attacked the Khalifa with his sword drawn, and left, leaving the business of martyring the Khalifa to his friends, as we have related in the thirty-second paragraph. After writing about hadrat Ali's appointing this Muhammad as governor of Egypt for Qays' place, the book Qisas-i-Anbiya adds, "Hadrat Ali was cajoled into making this mistake by his brother Jafar's son." Now, let us be reasonable. Could hadrat Ali, the exalted Imam loved very much by the Messenger of Allah, be censured for appointing as governor of Egypt a person who had had an abhorrent role in the martyrdom of hadrat 'Uthman? It could not devolve on us, who are very much inferior to those exalted Sahabis in religious lore and by far the more sinful, to call hadrat Ali to account by imitating those who attempt to hold hadrat Muawiya responsible for the unsightly events that took place after his death. Our duty is not to judge those great people, but to love and respect them. This is what becomes a Muslim. It is natural, however, that people who have fallen into the snares set by Islam's enemies and become Islam's enemies themselves, cannot think as we do. They have taken the way of demolishing Islam by reviling the Ashab al-kiram.

40- "His governing and enlarging the country successfully and establishing peace and order would not alleviate or make excusable his innumerable murders. The atrocious, cruel and base treatment which the Ahl al-bayt-i-Nabawi and Muslims supporting them were subjected to by Muawiya's officials, relatives and supporters continued for centuries. These fitnas, mischiefs, treacheries, murders and turpitudes went on in a deplorable, blood-curdling manner," he says.

As we have stated earlier, zindiqs stigmatize all the deeds of hadrat Muawiya as cruel and murderous. They do not feel shame to impute even those incessant murders committed in the time of Abbasids to that blessed person. It is clear that those who invent the writings quoted above are sources of depravity who form suds like dry wine and who dirty whatever they come into contact with. Books written by Islamic scholars give long and detailed accounts of the events which testify to the fact that that exalted Sahabi, whom they stigmatize as a source of fitna, mischief, treason, murder and perfidy, is as untainted as pure water. The following citation from the book Mirat-i-kainat is a good example:

Hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' is a son of Abu Sufyan, who is a son of Harb, who is a son of Umayya, who is a son of Abd-u-Shams, who is a son of Abd-u-menaf. Abd-u- menaf is Rasulullah's fourth grandfather. Hadrat Muawiya was born when Rasulullah was thirty-four years old. He was nineteen years old when he and his father Abu Sufyan became believers on the day when Mecca was conquered. The belief they had was firm. He was tall, white, good-looking, and majestic. He was Rasulullah's brother-in-law and one of the secretaries employed in the job of writing copies of Qur'an al-karim. Several times he attained the fortune of being blessed with Rasulullah's benedictions. Examples of these benedictions are, "Ya Rabbi (O my Allah)! Keep him in the right way and make him a guide leading others to the right way!" and "Ya Rabbi! Teach Muawiya how to write and calculate well! Protect him from Thine torment! Ya Rabbi! Make him dominant over countries!" Furthermore, by giving him the advice, "O Muawiya! Do good to all people when you become a ruler!" the Messenger hinted the good news that he was going to be a ruler. The following statement is his own observation: "After hearing this good news from he Messenger of Allah, I was hoping to become Khalifa." One day Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' was riding an animal with hadrat Muawiya sitting behind him, when the Messenger asked, "O Muawiya! Which of your limbs is closest to me." When the latter answered that it was his stomach, the Prophet asked a blessing on him, saying, "Ya Rabbi! Fill this with knowledge and make him a mild person!" Hadrat Ali said about hadrat Muawiya, "Do not criticize Muawiya's administration! When he is gone, you will see that heads are gone." Hadrat Muawiya was a person of wisdom, intelligence, forgiveness, kindness and circumspection. He had the prowess and excellence of tackling matters of great importance and difficulty. His mildness and patience made an epigrammatic fame. His forgiveness and kindness constituted episodes, so much so that two books were written about these episodes. Four geniuses made fame in Arabia. They are hadrat Muawiya, Amr Ibni As, Mughira-t-abni Shuba and Ziyad bin Abih. Our superiors state that Muawiya was majestic, brave, skillful in managing, studious, generous, zealous and persevering. It was as if he had been created for presidency. In fact, whenever hadrat 'Umar looked at hadrat Muawiya he would say, "What a beautiful Arab Sultan this man is." He was so generous that one day, when hadrat Hasan said that he was badly in debt, he presented him eighty thousand golds. He rewarded Amr Ibni As with governorship of Egypt and six years' revenue of Egypt for having won the battle of Siffin. He would ride pulchritudinous horses, wear valuable garments, and enjoy sovereignty. Yet, owing to the barakat of having attained the sohbat of the Messenger of Allah, he would never deviate from the way prescribed by the Shariat. One day the Messenger of Allah sent for Muawiya. They said he was eating. So the Messenger waited for some time and sent for him again. "He is eating," was what he heard again. Upon this the Prophet said, "May Allahu ta'ala never make him full (with eating)!" And hadrat Muawiya always ate enormously ever since. He served as governor of Damascus for four years in the time of hadrat 'Umar, for twelve years in the time of hadrat 'Uthman, five years in the time of hadrat Ali, and six months in the time of hadrat Hasan 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain' and, after hadrat Hasan abdicated caliphate, he became the lawful Khalifa of all Muslim countries, occupying the caliphate and reigning for nineteen and a half years.

It is written as follows in Qisas-i-Anbiya: After making the (speech called) khutba in the sixtieth year of the Hegira, hadrat Muawiya terminated his speech as follows: "O men! I have governed you long enough. I have made you tired of me. And I am tired of you, too. I want to leave. And you want me to leave, too. Yet no one better than me will come after me. As a matter of fact, those people who were prior to me were better than me. If any person wishes to be with Allahu ta'ala, Allahu ta'ala, too, will wish to be with him! Ya Rabbi! I wish to be with Thee. Bless me with the fortune of being with Thee! Make me blessed and happy!" A few days later he became ill. He sent for his son Yazid and said to him, "My son! I did not tire you in wars or on roads. I softened the enemies. I subdued the Arabs to obey you. I collected the amount of property which very few people have managed to collect. Protect the people of Hijaz well! They are your origin. They are the most valuable of those who will come to you. Take care of the people of Iraq, too! If they ask you to dismiss your officials, do as they wish! Take care of the people of Damascus, too, for they are your helpers. I do not fear anyone for you. Yet Husain bin Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma' is an airy person. The people of Kufa may provoke him against you. When you beat him, forgive him. Treat him well! For he is close to us, he has rights over us, and he is Rasulullah's grandson." As his illness became worse, he said, "Hadrat Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' made me wear a shirt. I have preserved this shirt till today. One day I put the pieces of finger nails he had cut into a bottle. I have kept the bottle ever since. When I die, put the shirt on me. And put the nails on my eyes and in my mouth. Perhaps Allahu ta'ala will forgive me for the sake of these valuable articles." Then he added, "After my death there will not be any generosity or kindness left. Incomes of many people will be cut off. People in need will go back empty-handed." His final statement was the following, which expresses his regrets: "I wish I had been a Quraishi living in the village named Zi-tuwa, rather than having busied myself with such things as commandership or governorship." He passed away in the month of Rajab. His blessed grave is in Damascus 'radi-allahu anh'.

As is seen, hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was a blessed Sahabi.

41- "It is the safest and the firmest way for every Muslim to know these facts exactly as they are, to take lessons, and to act upon the hadith ash-Sharif, 'Do not criticize my Ashab'. It is obvious that the treacherous and murderous events, the sources of which have been shown above, could not be interpreted in terms of genuine ijtihad. There is no doubt as to the fact that acts and behaviors of this sort would incur vehement divine retribution. It cannot be thought that having attained the Prophet's sohbat would protect one from the divine reproach," he says.

See how he babbles nonsense! On the one hand, he quotes the hadith ash-Sharif, "Do not swear at my Ashab!" And on the other hand he imputes inconceivably base motives to the greater ones of the Ashab al-kiram and casts aspersions which others would feel shame to express. Strict dieting on the one hand, and pickled cabbage on the other! He knows that he could hardly blemish an Islamic hero such as hadrat Muawiya, who was one of those people closest and most beloved to the Messenger of Allah and whose goodness and virtues, as we have cited above, are undeniably well-known. He therefore attempts to impute the son's atrocities and murders to the father, i.e. to that exalted Sahabi, disignoring the hadith ash-Sharif he himself quotes. During the war of Siffin hadrat Ali said, "Our brothers have revolted against us." It is written in Qisas-i- Anbiya that during the hottest phase of the combat hadrat Ali, with his sword in his hand, broke through the forces of the other side like a lion, entered hadrat Muawiya's tent, and talked with him. It is not something a Muslim would do to attack that noble Sahabi by putting forward the disagreement between his ijtihad and that of hadrat Ali. Some other malicious intentions must be underlying this attitude. To stir up the feelings by relating in a sad language the murders committed by Yazid, by Ibni Ziyad, and by Sad Ibni Abi Waqqas' son 'Umar, and then to attack and blemish that virtuous and innocent Sahabi, who has nothing to do with those unfortunate events and yet who is defenseless because he is dead; what could all this be if it were not the executional step of a clandestine plan? And it is such a plan as to blur a person's mind and make him so blind that he fails to follow Rasulullah's hadith ash-Sharif. We would like to stress one point lest we should be misunderstood: We do not mean that hadrat Muawiya is a faultless person as innocent as Prophets. On the contrary, as every Sahabi, including hadrat Ali, may have made mistakes, so hadrat Muawiya cannot be said to have had no mistakes. Yet Allahu ta'ala purports that "Those Sahabis who performed pious deeds and made Jihad against disbelievers for the sake of Allah have been forgiven their past and future sins. Those selected and loved people will not become disbelievers; they shall enter Paradise." These demented people contradict ayat al-karimas. They say that the Prophet's sohbat will not save him. Some ayat al-karimas revealed by Allahu ta'ala about people who have attained the Prophet's sohbat purport:

"Allahu ta'ala is pleased with them. And they are pleased with Allahu ta'ala, too."

"I have prepared Paradise for them. They shall stay in Paradise eternally."

"Those who suffer troubles and who die or get killed in their Jihad against disbelievers for My sake, shall be forgiven their sins." The hadith ash-Sharif quoted at the end of the sixteenth paragraph gives the good news that the Prophet's sohbat will save hadrat Muawiya from the divine reproach.

Because they cannot directly contradict these ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs, they assert that the good news purported in them does not include hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh'. They say that he became a disbeliever because he tormented hadrat Ali. As a proof for their allegation, they put forward the hadith ash-Sharifs, "He who torments Ali will have tormented me." and "He who annoys you will have annoyed me." The book Tuhfa confutes their thesis as follows:

The events termed Camel and Siffin were never results of animosity against hadrat Ali. They never considered to hurt him. The real causes of these wars are written correctly in books of Kalam and Islamic histories. [We have explained them in a brief and concise manner in the sixteenth paragraph]. Nasir-ad-din Tusi, a Shiite scholar, states in his book Tajrid that "It is sinful to disobey Ali. It is disbelief to fight him," and adds that "A person who denies his imamat (religious leadership) will not become a disbeliever." For hadrat Ali's grandsons also denied one another. One of his sons, namely Muhammad bin Hanafiyya, denied the imamat of Zaynal Abidin, hadrat Husain's son. He did not give him any of the booties sent by Mukhtar. Zayd-i-Shahid, who declared himself as the Imam, rejected the imamat of hadrat Muhammad Baqir. After his martyrdom, his sons Yahya and Mutawakkil did not get on well with Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq's children. This Yahya, who was hadrat Sayyid-at-Nafisa's paternal uncle, was martyred in the battle he fought against Walid's forces in 125 (H.). Also, hadrat Imam-i-Jafar's children struggled with one another over imamat. Deplorable events took place between Abdullah Eftah and Ishaq bin Jafar. If we were to write about the struggles for imamat among hadrat Hasan's sons, a separate book would come into being. Muhammad Mahdi bin Abdullah bin Hasan Musenna, better known by his nickname Nafs-i-Zekiyya, declared his imamat in Medina in 145, denying other imams. He was martyred as he was fighting Mensur's forces. If it were disbelief to deny imamat like denying prophethood, all these imams would necessarily be called disbelievers. They (the slanderers mentioned above) could not say that "Hadrat Ali's grandsons do not become disbelievers when they deny one another's imamat. Yet others will become disbelievers if they deny these people's imamat." However, denial will cause fighting. In other words, (these) wars are the results of (the) denials. For, when the lawful Imam uses his authority, the other party will not like this. Thus fighting will follow. Unable to answer this, they had to say, "It is not disbelief to fight a person who is denied (as the Imam), either. Yet the case is not so with those who fought hadrat Ali." They put forward the hadith ash-Sharif, "To fight you is to fight me." However, this hadith ash-Sharif means, "To fight you is like fighting me." Obviously, fighting hadrat Amir could not be fighting the Messenger of Allah. This hadith ash-Sharif signifies that fighting hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' is an offensive and wicked deed. Yet it does not mean that it is disbelief. Two things compared to each other are not necessarily identical in all respects. As a matter of fact, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said this hadith ash-Sharif about other Sahabis as well, and even about the tribes named Eslem (or Aslam) and Ghifar, too. And yet, according to a unanimous report, it is not disbelief to fight them.

Accordingly, this hadith ash-Sharif means, "To fight you out of animosity without any good reason to do so, means to fight me. Fighting the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman at a time when hadrat Ali was among them would not mean to fight the Messenger of Allah. Supposing a person said to another person, "Whoever is your enemy, is my enemy." A third person who had a row with a group over something in which the second person also were involved, would not necessarily be an enemy of the first person. None of the Sahabis who were against hadrat Ali in the events of Camel and Siffin had an intention of fighting hadrat Ali. They demanded retaliation against the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman. The war was made because the murderers had gathered around hadrat Ali.

The hadith ash-Sharif, "To fight you is to fight me," means, "Animosity towards you is animosity towards me." It is quite evident that people who partook in the events of Camel and Siffin were not hostile towards hadrat Ali. They did not fight out of animosity. All they wanted was to eliminate the faction that had been aroused among Muslims and to enforce the duty of talion. It ended in war. Voluntary actions are done of one's intention and free will. An action's being good or bad depends on the intention's being good or bad. For instance, if a person said, "I shall beat anyone who breaks this container," and if another person walking by the container slipped and fell down, breaking the container, it would not be appropriate for the first person to beat the second person. The case with those who fought hadrat Amir "karram-allahu wajhah' was similar to this example.

Even if we were to admit that fighting hadrat Ali would be fighting the Messenger of Allah, then fighting the Messenger would not always be disbelief. It would be disbelief if it were done in denial of his prophethood. Yet it would not be disbelief if it were done out of worldly ambitions, such as for obtaining property. For Qur'an al-karim contains an ayat al-karima which purports about highwaymen, "They are fighting Allah and the Messenger of Allah and striving to arouse turbulence on the earth." On the other hand it has been reported unanimously that highwaymen are not necessarily disbelievers. The ayat al-karima uses the expression, "fighting Allah and the Messenger of Allah." The hadith ash-Sharif, on the other hand, contains the phrase, "fighting the Messenger of Allah." When it is not disbelief to fight Allah and His Messenger, how can it be disbelief to fight only against the Messenger? Yes, it is definitely disbelief to fight the Messenger in order to deny the religion and to affront Islam. Yet any war not made with an intention of this sort would not be disbelief. Hadrat Musa's (Moses') holding (his brother) hadrat Harun's (Aaron's) hair and beard with anger is a kind of fight. Such things happen in warlike situations. What would be said if a person came forward and lodged the hadith ash-Sharif, "Your position with me is like that of Harun with Musa," against the background of this warlike situation? Rasulullah's beloved and blessed wife (hadrat Aisha) was of the opinion that hadrat Ali was indulgent towards the murderers (of hadrat 'Uthman) and slack in executing the law of talion. So she was offended with him. Likewise, hadrat Musa, seeing that hadrat Harun was indulgent towards the people who had been worshipping a calf and slack in punishing them, hurt his brother, who was a Prophet. If any kind of war against a Prophet were disbelief, hadrat Musa would have become a disbeliever then and there (may Allahu ta'ala protect us from saying so)! By the same token, Yusuf's (Prophet Joseph's) 'alaihis-salam' brothers hurt their father, Yaqub 'alaihis-salam', by committing the known offense against their brother. This was a behavior no less serious than fighting. Therefore, one should be reasonable in matters concerning those superior people's actions.

Hadrat Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' is a mother of Muslims and a wife of the Messenger of Allah. It is stated in Qur'an al-karim that she occupies a position on a par with mothership to hadrat Ali. If a mother scolds or hurts her child, will it be justifiable for the child to make a retort even if the mother's behavior is unfair? As a matter of fact, no one has criticized hadrat Musa or Yusuf's 'alaihis-salam' brothers. In addition, relations between brothers is not comparable with relations between a mother and a son. A line:

A person who fails to observe the values is a heretic!

As is seen, the hadith ash-Sharif, "To fight you is to fight me," cannot be put forward as a supporting document for calling the Ashab al-kiram disbelievers. It is neither logical nor Islamic. Those who fought him did not lose their iman or pious deeds for having done so. Their iman, their pious deeds, their being Sahabis, their being praised and lauded through ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs are all factors deterrent to being hostile towards them or swearing at them. Qadi Nurullah Shushtari, a Shiite scholar who has realized these subtleties, states in his book Mejalis-ul-Muminin, "Shiites do not curse the three Khalifas. Ignorant Shiites' cursing is not important."

We would like to add that some Shiite scholars, such as Abdullah Mashhadi and others, after a thorough study of Sunnite and Shiite books and a judicious reasoning of the matter, said that "Those who fought hadrat Ali did not become disbelievers. They became sinners. For they did not deny the hadith ash-Sharif. They interpreted it." Because Shiites consider Nasir-ad-din Tusi a very great scholar, they have to explain the statements made by this scholar and other similar scholars. They say that "According to the hadith ash-Sharif, 'To fight you is to fight me,' fighting hadrat Ali must be disbelief. However, those who fought him did not become disbelievers because they had not planned it. On the other hand, it is a sin, not disbelief, to revolt against the time's Imam. If it results from a doubt or misinterpretation, it is not a sin, but only a mistake of ijtihad."

Thus far, we have quoted from Shiite scholars. Now we shall make some quotations from scholars of Ahl as-sunnat:

It is never disbelief to disagree with hadrat Ali's ijtihad in the teachings of fiqh. It is not a sin, either. For hadrat Ali, like all the Ashab al-kiram, was mujtahid. In the (religious) teachings which require ijtihad, it is permissible for mujtahids to disagree with one another, and in this case each mujtahid will earn one thawab. A person who fought out of animosity would certainly become a disbeliever. In fact, some scholars of Ahl as-sunnat called Kharijis 'disbelievers' on account of this principle. The hadith ash-Sharif, "To fight you is to fight me," is intended for Kharijis. After all, these people could not be said to be 'definitely disbelievers'. For their fighting was not intended as an acknowledgement of disbelief. For this reason, these people cannot be called renegades. Nevertheless, their doubts were idiotic, and because they contradicted those ayat al-karimas and hadith ash- Sharifs with clear meanings, they will not be excused, since it is not permissible to interpret ayats with overt meanings. According to the Ahl as-sunnat, Kharijis will stay with disbelievers in the Hereafter. It is not permissible to pray for their being pardoned or to perform the namaz of janaza for them. This is not the case with those who were against hadrat Ali in the combats of Camel and Siffin. They fought him as a result of their doubts and interpretation. Because theirs was a mistake of ijtihad, they did not become disbelievers. Nor can they be blamed for this. For they are praised in ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs. These people struggled not to fulfill the desires of their nafs, but for the sake of Allah. A person who will not admit this fact should at least hold his tongue, keep quiet. Thinking that these people were the Ashab al-kiram and the Mujahidin-i-Islam, he should avoid committing an act of disrespect against them. In fact, ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs praise all believers. The hope of attaining shafaat (intercession) and salvation through the forgiveness of Allahu ta'ala includes every Muslim. If any one of the Damascenes who joined the combats of Camel and Siffin is known definitely to have been hostile towards hadrat Ali, to have called him a disbeliever and to have cursed him, we will call that person a disbeliever. Yet no one has been reported to have done so until now. Ignorant people's fabrications cannot be of scientific or documentary capacity. Since those Sahabis are definitely known to have been believers in the beginning, we have to know them as such. If a person disbelieves the fact that the four Khalifas will go to Paradise or says about any one of them that he is not worthy of being a Khalifa or denies his knowledge or justice or taqwa, this person becomes a disbeliever. Yet if a person fights these blessed people as a result of his sensuous indulgence or for worldly advantages such as property or out of doubts or because of misinterpreting ayats and hadiths whose meanings are not clear or definite, he will not become a disbeliever. He will become a sinner.

Hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Amr Ibni As' 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' fighting hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' was never based on base motives or malicious reasons. They said that they were of the opinion that the murderers of hadrat 'Uthman should be arrested and retaliated against and acknowledged that hadrat Ali was higher and more virtuous than themselves. Whatever they did and said till their death was an indication of a strong iman. All their thoughts and toils were for Allah's sake, for Islam. It is explained clearly in the hadith ash-Sharifs quoted in the four hundred and ninety-fourth page of the book Izalat-ul- hafa that both parties fought for the same purpose.

42 - It is stated in the book Tariqat-i-Muhammadiyya, by Imam-i-Muhammad Birghiwi, and in the two books Bariqa and Hadiqa, which are explanations of the former: A hadith ash-Sharif quoted by Imam-i-Bukhari and Imam-i-Muslim states, "Certainly there will come a time when my Ummat will be like the sons of Israil, [Jews and Christians]. They will resemble them like a pair of shoes, which are exactly identical with each other; to the extent that if one of them (Jews and Christians) commits fornication with his mother, there will be people doing the same among my Ummat. Sons of Israil parted into seventy-two groups. My Ummat will part into seventy- three groups. Seventy-two of these groups will go into Hell on account of their heretical creeds. Only one group will not enter there." When the Messenger was asked who were in that group, he said, "They are those people who follow me and my Ashab." It is written in the books Milal ve Nihal and Bariqa that sons of Israil parted into seventy-one groups after Musa 'alaihis-salam' and seventy-two groups after Isa 'alaihis-salam'. This unique group, who will be safe from entering Hell owing to their (correct) belief, are called the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat wal-jamaat. Each of the seventy-two groups claim to be the group of Ahl as-sunnat and believe that they will go to Paradise. However, this is not something to be judged by sheer words or suppositions. It is judged in accordance with words' and deeds' being agreeable with ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs.

The Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat parted into two sub-groups called Maturidi and Ashari. Yet, since they are of the same origin and do not criticize each other, they can be said to be the same. On the other hand, the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat parted into four Madhhabs in matters pertaining to worships and deeds. All these four Madhhabs hold the same belief; in actual fact, they are one Madhhab. These four Madhhabs disagreed with one another in their interpretation of matters that are not explained clearly in ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs. All of them performed ijtihad to understand these matters, exerted themselves, and arrived at different conclusions. They do not disagree in matters that are explained clearly in Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs. Ijtihad is not performed in ayats and hadiths with clear definite meanings. If a person errs in his ijtihad of principles of belief that are not stated clearly (in ayats and hadiths), he will not be pardoned. The seventy-two groups who have deviated from the right way as a result of erroneous ijtihad are called holders of Bidat or people of Dalalat (aberration) or Heretics. However, these people are not to be called disbelievers. If a person denies only one of the tenets of belief stated clearly by Islam, he loses his iman and becomes a disbeliever. People who lose their iman as a result of erroneous ijtihad are called Mulhid. It is written in the books Radd-ul- mukhtar and Nimat-i-Islam that, of the seventy-two aberrant groups, some members of the groups called Batini, Mujassima, Mushabbiha and Wahhabis, and the group called Ibahis are mulhids.

The hadith ash-Sharif quoted above shows that a person is either a Muslim or a disbeliever. And a Muslim is either in the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat or a holder of bidat, that is, a heretic. This means to say that a person who is not in the Madhhab of Ahl as- sunnat, that is, who is without a certain Madhhab, is either a heretic or a disbeliever.

Iman means to be fearless and Islam means submission and salvation. Yet iman and Islam are the same in Islam. The heart's believing all the information which Muhammad 'alaihis- salam' brought from Allahu ta'ala through Wahy, is called Iman and Islam. All this information has been summarized in six tenets. A person who believes in these six tenets will have believed all the information. These six tenets are expressed in the credo termed Amantu. Every Muslim has to memorize the Amantu and have his children memorize it, teaching them the meanings it purports. To this end, he should send his children to authorized courses of Qur'an al-karim. The meaning of Amantu is explained in detail in the (Turkish) book Herkese Lazim Olan Iman. A person who believes these tenets is called a Mumin (believer) or a Musliman (Muslim). Performing the (prescribed) worships and avoiding the harams (all acts, behaviors, thoughts, statements forbidden by Islam) is called Obedience to Islam. Muslims who obey Islam are called Salih (pious) and Adil (just). All the Ashab al-kiram were adil and salih believers. A person who disobeys Islam out of sloth is called Fasiq (sinner, sinful). A fasiq also is a Muslim. In other words, a Muslim will not lose his iman by sinning or by not doing the worships. However, if a person slights the concepts of worship and sin, that is, if he does not respect Islam in due manner, he will lose his iman. And a person who does not have iman is not a Muslim, that is, is called a Kafir (disbeliever, unbeliever). A person who is not in the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat is called out of Madhhab, or without (a certain) Madhhab. A person without a certain Madhhab is either a heretic or a disbeliever.

Qadi-zada Ahmad Effendi 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih', in his explanation of the book Birghiwi Vasiyetnamesi, gives the following account, beginning on the forty-fourth page: We believe in the fact that Allahu ta'ala has human Prophets on the earth. All Prophets taught the people in their times the Ahkam, i.e. the commandments and prohibitions which Allahu ta'ala conveyed to them by Wahy, that is, taught them through the angel. People living in a Prophet's time and being taught by him are his Ummat. People who believe a Prophet are called Ummat-i-ijabat, and those do not believe him are termed Ummat-i- da'wa(t). The final Prophet is Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'. No Prophet will come after him. He is the Prophet of all people, wherever and in whatever time they live, and of all genies. All of them have to believe him.

A Prophet who brought a new religious system is called a Rasul. On the other hand, a Prophet who invites people to adapt themselves to the religious system brought by the Prophet previous to him is called a Nabi. Every Rasul is a Nabi at the same time. Yet, every Nabi is not a Rasul. According to some (scholars), the number of Rasuls is three hundred and thirteen. The number of Prophets in general, however, is not known. It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif termed Haber-i-wahid that their number is one hundred and twenty-four thousand. A hadith reported by only one person is of suppositional capacity. Therefore, it would be more judicious not to comment on their number. It is stated at the end of the thirty-sixth letter of the second volume (of Maktubat) by Muhammad Mathum-i-Faruqi, and also in the book of eulogy titled Emali as well as in the books Bariqa and Aqaid-i-Nesefiyya and Hadiqa, that saying the number of Prophets may mean to make a non-Prophet a Prophet or to deny the prophethood of a Prophet, which, in its turn, is disbelief. For it is written in all books that denying one Prophet means denying all of them. Furthermore, it is written in the commentary of the eulogy of Emali and in the three hundred and nineteenth page of Bariqa, "No Wali can attain the grade of prophethood. To belittle a Prophet is disbelief and aberration."

Mawdudi of Pakistan, who died in 1399 [A.D. 1979], interprets the twenty-fourth ayat of Fatir sura in his book, Islamic Civilization, as follows:

"Among each and every Ummat, without any exception, has there come a threatening Prophet." Then he adds, "A Prophet has come for every Ummat. The hadith ash-Sharif, 'One hundred and twenty-four thousand Prophets have come,' confirms this fact. Some passed Prophets are known about partly. It is very well possible to know the countries of some of them, such as hadrat Ibrahim, hadrat Musa, Confucius, Zoroaster (Zarathustra) and Krishna. Each of them was sent to his own tribe. None of them claimed that his prophethood was universal."

It is written in Baidawi and Mawakib and in many books of Tafsir that the word 'threatening' used in the ayat al-karima signifies Prophets or scholars, not (only) Prophets. This person strives to corroborate the wrong meaning he attaches to the ayat al-karima by means of a weak hadith. No Islamic scholar has treated this weak hadith in documentary capacity. Also, inserting the names of some disbelievers such as Confucius, Zoroaster and Krishna, he attempts, as it were, a stratagem to impress young people with the conviction that these people were Prophets. All corrupt religions are the remnants that came about as a result of interpolations and defilements of true religious systems which Allahu ta'ala had revealed to Prophets. Likewise, Confucius (d. 479 B.C.) made a fame for his commendations of such ideas as worship and ethical values, which he had somehow appropriated out of what had remained from the ancient true religions prevalent in China. Consequently, his philosophy became a sect. Books teaching his sect were translated into various languages. One of them is the German book Worte des Konfuzius (Statements of Confucius). This book is not only devoid of the six tenets of iman, which are commonly taught by all celestial religions, but also contains many statements indicating sheer disbelief. A person whose disbelief is evident cannot be said to be a Muslim, none the less for calling him a Prophet. Krishna is one of the ancient gods of Hindu disbelievers called Brahmins. Formerly, they used to worship a stream by the same name. Later they began to worship this man, about whom there are long legends.

It is stated in the book Bariqa, "The number of Prophets 'salawat-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' is not certainly known. For the hadith ash-Sharif stating that their number is one hundred and twenty-four thousand or two hundred and twenty-four thousand is reported by only one person. And then it is not known whether this hadith is (in the authentic category called) sahih. If the number of Prophets is stated definitely, people who are not Prophets may have been made Prophets, or some Prophets may have been denied. Both cases are disbelief. Even if this hadith were sahih, it would be of suppositional capacity. Supposition is of no value in matters pertaining to belief, especially when the information is given in two alternatives like in this example."

There are two main groups of disbelievers: Disbelievers with a holy book; disbelievers without a holy book. Disbelievers who believe a certain Prophet and the holy book revealed to him are called Ahl-i-kitab (people of the Book), or Disbelievers with a holy book. Even if their book is an interpolated and defiled one, the animals they have killed by cutting their throats and uttering the name of Allah in the manner prescribed by their religion can be eaten, with the exception of pork, which can by no means be eaten. A Muslim may marry their daughters. Yet a Muslim girl cannot be married to them. Of today's Jews and Christians, those who are attached to their changed religion are disbelievers with a holy book.

Those disbelievers who do not believe any Prophet's book or any celestial book are called Disbelievers without a holy book. Animals slaughtered by these people cannot be eaten. Their daughters cannot be married, nor can Muslim girls be married to them. Polytheists, Atheists, Idolaters, Magians, Brahmins, Buddhists, Mulhids, Zindiqs, Munafiqs, renegades are all disbelievers without a holy book. People who worship beings other than Allahu ta'ala are called Mushriks (polytheists). Mushriks are of two types: Mushriks in divinizing, and mushriks in worshipping. A group of mushriks in divinizing are Magians. These people (divinize and) worship fire. They say, "There are two creators: One of them, Yezdan (or Ahura Mazda=Ormazd), is the creator of goodness. The other one, Ahriman, creates evils." Ancient naturalists said that nature itself was the creator of all beings. Mushriks in worshipping are Idolaters, who worship statues (idols and icons) they themselves have made. They believe that these idols will intercede for them with Allah. Most Christians believe in Trinity, which means belief in three gods. Many of them divinize Isa 'alaihis-salam'. On the other hand, a group of Jews say that "Uzeyr is the son of God." All these people become mushriks. However, they believe that the book they possess is heavenly. Communists, freemasons, and the nescient atheists of the modern era are disbelievers without a holy book. A person who is not a Muslim though he is borne from Muslim parents is called a Murtad (renegade). A person who does not believe in the prophethood of Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' and yet who pretends to be a Muslim among Muslims for worldly interests, is called a Munafiq. A munafiq may belong to another religion. Yet when he is among Muslims he worships like Muslims, always utters the name of Allah, and conceals his wrong belief. A person who is not a Muslim and yet who pretends to be a Muslim, tries to change Islam and to spread irreligiousness in the name of Islam, is called a Zindiq. A zindiq says that he believes in the existence of Allah and in the prophethood of Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' and that he agrees with the Qur'an and hadiths. Yet he interprets Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs in accordance with his ignorant mentality and short sight. He tries to spread his erroneous interpretations in the name of Islam. He dislikes the correct statements made by scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. He calls the Islamic scholars ignoramuses. Today's people call these zindiqs 'enlightened men of religion', 'mujaddids' and 'religion reformers'. We should not believe these ignorant zindiqs, these fake men of religion, and we should never read their books and magazines.

A person who says that he is a Muslim and utters the statement called Kalima-i-shahadat can not be stigmatized as a disbeliever only on suspicion. As the book Ibni Abidin explains in its discourse on renegades in the third volume, it is written in Hulasa and other books that "If a person says that he is a Muslim and yet one of his actions or words shows numerous signs of disbelief with only one element that signifies belief or which is at least not certainly disbelief, this person should not be called a disbeliever. For we have to have a good opinion of a Muslim." The book of fatwa called Bazaziyya adds that "If it is understood clearly that this person does or says that thing which causes disbelief intentionally, he becomes a disbeliever. It would be futile for us to interpret his action or statement otherwise."

Lexical meaning of the word Din (religion) is way, work and reward. Millet (nation, people), on the other hand, means 'to write'. Tenets of belief which a Prophet has brought from Allahu ta'ala are called Din and Millet, or Usul-i-din. Every Prophet brought the same Din and Millet in this sense. Din means source of water. Commandments and prohibitions enjoined by a Prophet are called Ahkam-i-sher'eeyya or Furu'i din. Each Prophet has a different religion in this sense. (In other words, each Prophet brought a different code of commandments and prohibitions). Today the word Din (religion) covers the tenets of belief and Islam altogether. Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' religion is called the Islamic religion or Islam.

It is wajib (compulsory) for every Muslim to learn the tenets of iman and to accord his belief to them. A person who believes them in summary becomes a true believer. Yet he becomes sinful because he has not learnt their reasons. On the other hand, it is not an Islamic command to learn the evidences and reasons of the commandments and prohibitions. It is not sinful not to know their reasons.

A person who commits a grave sin does not lose his iman. However, if he calls a haram 'halal', his iman is gone. There are two categories of sins: (I) Grave sins, called Kabair. The seven gravest sins are 1- To attribute a partner to Allahu ta'ala. This sin is called shirk (polytheism). irk is the worst type of disbelief. 2- Homicide or suicide. 3- To practice sorcery. 4- To appropriate an orphan's property. 5- To accept or to give interest. 6- To desert the combat area when one is face to face with the enemy. 7- To commit (the offense called) Qazf against a chaste woman. In other words, to impute an unchaste motive to her. Any sin may be grave. All kinds of sins must therefore be avoided. Committing a venial sin continuously will develop it into a grave sin. A grave sin will be pardoned when the sinner makes tawba. If the sinner dies without having made tawba, Allahu ta'ala may forgive him through or without intercession (of a Prophet or another person He loves), depending on His Will. If the sinner is not forgiven, he will go to Hell.

It is disbelief to abhor anything held sacred by Islam or to respect anything which is to be scorned, such as to wear a rope girdle called Zunnar, which is worn by priests, or similar things, to respect idols, to scorn religious books, to make fun of religious scholars, to utter an expression that causes disbelief. These things signify denial of the Islamic religion. They are signs of disbelief.

Allahu ta'ala loves those who make tawba. He forgives them. If the sinner (who has made tawba) sins again, his tawba will not be cancelled. However, he will have to make tawba again. If a person remembers a sin with pleasure although he has made tawba for that sin, he will have to renew his tawba. It is fard to pay back the debts and dues one owes to other people, to apologize to people one has backbitten, if any, and to perform all sorts of prayers one has omitted in their prescribed times, if any. These things, however, are not the tawba itself, but the conditions for tawba. Returning one pound to its owner is better than performing supererogatory worships for a thousand years or making supererogatory hajj seventy times. It is not right not to make tawba for the fear that one's tawba will be cancelled if one sins again. It is ignorance. It is a delusion instilled by the devil. It is fard to make tawba after each sin. When the tawba is delayed for one hour, the sin is doubled. This comes to mean that the sins of those people who postpone the performance of the prayers of namaz they have omitted become doubled as each spare time as long as to permit the performance of namaz is spent.

Tawba is not made only by saying that one has made tawba (or that one is sorry about one's sin). Acceptability of tawba is dependent on fulfillment of three conditions:

1- The sinner has to cease from the sin concerned.

2- Fearing Allahu ta'ala, the sinner must feel shame and repentance for having sinned.

3- The sinner must make a heartful promise not to commit again the sin concerned. Allahu ta'ala promises that He shall accept the tawba made properly and observing its conditions.

Habits can change. One should do one's best to develop good habits.

Whether a person will migrate to the Hereafter as a believer is a matter which will be certain at his last breath (the time of death). If a person who has lived as a disbeliever for sixty years becomes a Muslim only a short time before his death, he will rise as a believer in the Hereafter. With the exception of Prophets 'alaihim-us-salawatu wattaslimat' and a number of certain people who have been blessed with the promise (of Allahu ta'ala) that they will definitely go to Paradise, no one can be said to be 'due for Paradise'. For it cannot be known beforehand how a person will be at his last breath.

If a believer who has migrated to the Hereafter has left in the world a permanent fruit of piety or useful books or pious children to pray for him after him, he will go on receiving thawabs. When a person dies, the book wherein his goodness and vices are recorded will not be closed. Sad bin Ubada 'radi-allahu anh', one of the Ashab al-kiram, asked (our Prophet), "Ya Rasulallah (O the Messenger of Allah)! My mother is dead. How can I still please her?" The blessed Prophet replied: "It is good to give water as alms." When praying, one should ask blessings on the souls of all believers. All of them will receive the blessings. Praying will ward off an approaching catastrophe. Giving alms will appease the wrath of Allahu ta'ala, protect one from afflictions, and help an ill person whose time of death has not come yet to heal. Allahu ta'ala does not like a person who does not pray.

Every Muslim has to learn his Madhhab in Creed and that which pertains to Deeds. Madhhab means way. Islamic teachings told in a covert language in Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs are clarified through (an extremely painstaking and knowledge- requiring process called) ijtihad by profoundly learned scholars, who are called Mujtahid. Our Madhhab in creed is the Madhhab termed Ahl as-sunnat wal-jamaat(t). 'The Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat wal-jamaat' means 'the credo, the belief held by Rasulullah's Ashab and their jamaat (people following them)'. Each and every one of the Ashab al-kiram is a Mujtahid, a halo, a light of Islam. They are Muslims' imams, leaders, guides, and documents. Any person who strays from the way shown by them will end up in Hell. The group of Ahl as-sunnat have two imams, leaders: One of them is Abu Mansur Maturidi 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih'. He is a profound scholar raised in the Madhhab of hadrat Imam- i-azam Abu Hanifa 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih'. The scholars of Hanafi Madhhab are in his Madhhab. The other leader is Abul Hasan-i-Ashari 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih'. He is one of the greatest scholars in Shafi'i Madhhab. He is a very profound scholar. There is very small difference between these two Madhhabs.

Today, there is no scholar so profoundly learned as to perform ijtihad. Every Muslim has to learn one of the four Madhhabs by reading one of the books that are called 'Ilm-i-hal and which teach the requirements of the Madhhab and then adapt his belief and all his actions to that Madhhab. Thus he will have affiliated himself with that Madhhab. A person will not be a Sunnite Muslim unless he enters one of the four Madhhabs. He will be a person without a Madhhab. And a person without a Madhhab, in his turn, is either in one of the seventy-two miscreant sects, or a disbeliever. The book of Tafsir titled Es-Sawi gives the following account in its explanation of the twenty-fourth ayat of Kahf sura: "It is not permissible to follow a person who is not in any one of the four Madhhabs even if his statements are agreeable with the statements of Sahabis or with hadith ash-Sharifs that are sahih (authentic) or with ayat al-karimas. A person who is not in one of the four Madhhabs is aberrant. He will mislead others as well. Deviating from the four Madhhabs will finally lead one to disbelief. It is a custom of disbelievers to give those figurative ayat al-karimas termed Mutashabihat their facade meanings." If a man of religion states that he is in the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat and spreads the teachings of his Madhhab, his statements and books will be of value. Those who read them will acquire use from them. Religious books written by people without a Madhhab are harmful. They will spoil the faith and iman of those who read them. Our advice to our friends and brothers in Islam is this: Try to learn the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat and to teach it to your children! Each of the books listed in the final pages of our books were translated from the books of scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. You must buy these books, read and learn them, recommend them to your acquaintances, and try to spread them to all Muslims. Thus you will earn thawab for Jihad.

Jihad does not mean to stage a coup d'etat, to disobey one's commanders, to revolt against the government, to beat, to destroy, to break, or to curse. Such things would serve no end but arouse fitna. In other words, doing such things means separatism. It will bring oppression and imprisonment to Muslims and cause prohibition of the teachings of religion and iman. Our master the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' has cursed people who arouse such fitna. Imprisonment is not an honor to be desired by a Muslim. The honor to be yearned for by a Muslim should be to equip himself with the beautiful moral qualities commended by Islam, to do good to everybody, to adapt himself to Islam, and to be useful to all creatures. It is idiocy, a sinful behavior, to expose oneself to dangers. Allahu ta'ala declares, "Do not expose yourselves to dangers!"

Jihad means to try to convey the religion of Allahu ta'ala to His born servants. There are three ways of making Jihad. The first way is to fight, overcome and annihilate cruel tyrants who dominate people, use them like slaves, prevent them from hearing about the Islamic religion and persecute and oppress them, and thus to help people hear about the Islamic religion. Once people have heard about Islam, it will be up to them whether or not they should accept it. Depending on their free choice, they may become Muslims or go on doing their own worships, provided that they should observe Islam's rules and regulations. This type of armed Jihad is performed only by the (Islamic) government, (if there is any). The state's army is in charge of this duty. All Muslims will join this duty by doing the duties assigned by the state and thus attaining the thawab for Jihad. The state performs Jihad also to defend our religion and nation against those disbelievers attacking in order to annihilate them, as well as against heretical, aberrant and seditious forces who prepare traps for defiling and demolishing Islam. All Muslims will attain thawab of Jihad by contributing to the government's services.

The second type of Jihad is to propagate Islam's teachings, the beautiful moral qualities it infuses, and the rights and freedoms it confers on humanity through preaches, books, radio and television broadcasts.

The third type of Jihad is to support those who carry on the first two types of Jihad by praying for them. Doing the armed Jihad for the promulgation of Islam is fard-i-kifaya. (Islam's definite commandments are called fard. When a commandment is incumbent on every individual Muslim, it is termed fard-i-ayn. There are those types of commandments, however, which lapse from other Muslims when it is carried out by one Muslim or by a group of Muslims. They are termed fard-i-kifaya.) When the enemy attacks, however, it becomes fard-i-ayn for every man, and even for women and children when the number of men is inadequate. If they still cannot stop the enemy, it becomes fard-i-ayn for Muslims all over the world to help them. The second type of Jihad is fard-i-ayn for Muslims who are able to do so, and the third type is always fard-i - ayn for everybody. For performing the second type of Jihad, it is necessary to try to spread the books of Ahl as-sunnat within the laws. We are working for this world incessantly. A Muslim should work ceaselessly for the Hereafter, too. Enemies of Islam are exerting themselves to destroy Islam. For surviving their attacks, Muslims have to do two things: First, they should send their children to courses where they teach Qur'an al-karim. Second, they should try to spread books written by scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi alaihim ajmain'. It is stated as follows in the fourteenth paragraph of the chapter about Waqf in the book Fatawa-yi- Hindiyya: "For people who wish to do pious acts of charity, it is better to construct buildings of public use, [such as hospitals], than emancipating slaves. Publishing useful books [teaching Islam, morals and science] is the best of all. To prepare and publish books of fiqh is better than doing supererogatory worships."

43- Another insidious enemy who attacks Islam's foundation with sly methods and tries to mislead Muslim children is an Egyptian named Muhammad Qutb. See how nonsensically he writes in an article which he names 'Line of Deviation':

"The first chink in Islam's basis showed itself in the Umayyad policy in administrative and financial areas. For the 'Malik-i-adud' established a hereditary system (of sovereignty) and began to perpetrate a series of cruelties. Sultans' and governors' relatives became sort of feudal chieftains.

"Then came the Abbasid era. Buildings of caliphate and governorship became drinking and fornication dens instead of offices for civil services. They were arranging musical revels with belly dancers and carrying their injustice and egoism to their lower extremities."

The book Tuhfa states as follows in its answer to the seventieth lie fabricated by people without Madhhab: "If a person's caliphate is declared clearly through Nass, that is, by ayats and hadiths, this kind of caliphate is called Khilafat-i-Rashida. It is for this reason that the four great Khalifas are called Khulafa-i-rashidin. If a person's caliphate is inferred through reasoning or through implication of Nass, his caliphate is termed Khilafat-i-'adila. If a person whose caliphate is neither declared clearly nor implied seizes power by using force, his caliphate is called Khilafat-i-Jaira, and this kind of Khalifa is called Malik-i-adud."

A hadith ash-Sharif, which exists in the five hundred and twenty-eighth page of the book Izalat-ul-hafa, by Shah Waliyyullah Dahlawi, states, "We began this work with prophethood and with Allah's compassion. After now there will be caliphate and (Allah's) compassion. Then will come the (time of) Malik-i-adud. Then there will be torments, cruelties and mischiefs among my Ummat. Wearing silk clothes, drinking alcohol and fornication will be made halal and (this state) will be supported by many people. Things will go on like this till the end of the world." This hadith ash-Sharif states clearly that hadrat Muawiya will seize power by force and that cruelty and mischief will begin after him, not in his time. Shah Waliyyullah, by writing that the cruelty and mischief began with the establishment of the Abbasid state, foils Muhammad Qutb's slander.

Hadith-Sharifs imply that hadrat Muawiya will become a Ruler. Therefore, hadrat Muawiya became the Khalifa-i-adil after hadrat Hasan abdicated caliphate to him and the Ashab al-kiram voted for him. It would be a very grave calumniation to call this great Sahabi Malik-i-adud and to attach wrong meanings, such as oppressor, disbeliever, to this word. And a person who translates this word as 'king' must be quite unaware of Islam.

Sovereigns in disbelievers' countries are called 'kings'. King of France, King of England, King of Bulgaria were examples of this. To call a Muslim Malik 'King' would mean to belittle a blessed person Muslims respect, love and call Khalifa and to say that that Malik (Ruler) and all his people are disbelievers. Our master, the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', called hadrat Muawiya 'Malik'. And billions of Muslims call him Malik and Khalifa. No one ascribed cruelty to this honorable Sahabi, to this renowned fighter for Islam, hadrat Muawiya, one of those fortunate people who are praised and prayed for in hadith ash-Sharifs and who, as it is stated in ayat al-karimas, have been forgiven and will go to Paradise. To compare these fighters for Islam, these lions of those auspicious times praised in hadith ash-Sharifs, to Europe's cruel and faithless feudal chieftains, would mean to thrust a dagger into the soul of Islam. These hadith ash-Sharifs are well-known: "In the Hereafter, the angels of torment will torture those men of religion whose knowledge is useless before torturing disbelievers." And "In the Hereafter, the worst torment will be inflicted on that man of religion whose knowledge is useless." These hadith ash-Sharifs warn younger generations. They state that people who are presented as religious scholars by false religious magazines are thieves of iman and wretched sinners who will be subjected to vehement torment in Hell.

The writing above reminds of Lawrence, the notorious spy during the First World War. This perfectly Arabic-spoken bearded British spy, who wore a turban and a long gown (worn by Muslim religious men), pretended to be an Islamic scholar and reviled great scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Blemishing the Ashab al-kiram, the Islamic Khalifas and the Ottoman Turks, he misled hundreds of thousands of Muslims. Thus he helped people who tried to change and defile Islam to separate themselves from the Turks and establish an independent state. Wahhabite books call true Muslims 'polytheists'. They stigmatize us Sunnite Muslims as disbelievers. The spy named Lawrence is dead now. He is in Hell. They are employing their native spies for his place now. Distributing thousands of golds, they are publishing magazines and books praising them in every country. In these books of theirs, they are censuring scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain'. However, Islamic scholars have unanimously affirmed the high grade of those scholars, thus settling this matter and leaving not even a smallest particular for the later generations to discuss. To attempt to rake up past events that have already been discussed, agreed on and settled from both historical and religious points of view, is an indication of destructiveness rather than that of service. It is a sign of malevolence.

All the Umayyad, Abbasid and Ottoman Khalifas were believing, good-charactered, just and blessed people. Yes, a very few of them succumbed to their nafs and fell for the temptations of the devil. Yet these people did not harm Islam. Their harm was to their own nafs. The worst of them abandoned the Sunni way and became a Mutazili. And then this was caused by aberrant men of religion. The fiends who misled them were degenerated members of mankind, rather than descendants of the accursed devil. Imam-i-Rabbani 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih' states in his book Maktubat that "Muslims' and statesmen's deviation from the right way has always been caused by malicious men of religion." A worse act of immorality is to try to stigmatize Islamic Khalifas as immoral and irreligious people by publicizing their private lawful harem lives in books and newspaper columns. It is something that will shock and perturb honest people. A person may have read the lies and calumniations in European histories or books written by priests and freemasons and believed them. We recommend them that they also read at least a few Islamic histories and books written by scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Thus the truth will be known. In fact, an article which is a collection of sheer judgements without any documentary events or evidences must have been written by a person with no background in Islam's teachings. They write that people in the times of Umayyads, Abbasids and Ottomans observed Islam. This shows that statesmen in those times were believing and just people. For our master, the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', stated, "People's religion is like their president's religion." Throughout history we Muslims have taken many warning lessons from mendacious, slanderous men of religion. At one time Ibni Taymiyya attempted to ruin the iman of the middle east. Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat taught him his lesson. Thousands of books of knowledge refuted his untenable ideas and disgraced him. Later, someone named Abdoh of Egypt cooperated with freemasons. Like the mongrel sect which was produced with the name Protestantism in Christianity, this heretic attempted to eliminate the Ahl as-sunnat, which he disliked, and to insert the West's irreligious philosophy into Islam. This man, too, was given the answer he deserved. Yet, shameful to say, on the one hand president of Cairo Masonic lodge Abdoh's venomous ideas spread in Egypt's Jami'ul azhar. Thus a number of Religion Reformers appeared in Egypt. Rashid Rida, Mustafa Maraghi, who was the rector of the madrasa of Azhar, Abd-ul-Majid Salim, who was Mufti of Cairo, Mahmud Sheltut, Tantawi Jawhari, Abd-ur-raziq Pasha, Zaki Mubarak, Farid Wajdi, Abbas Aqqad, Ahmad Amin, Doctor Taha Husain Pasha and Qasim Amin were only a few of them. On the other hand, like their teacher Abdoh, these people were represented as modern Islamic scholars and their books were translated into Turkish, thus causing many religious men to slip out of the right way.

Sayyid Abd-ul-hakim Effendi 'rahmat-ullahi alaih', the great Islamic scholar and the mujaddid of the fourteenth (Islamic) century, stated, "Abdoh, Mufti of Cairo, did not recognize the greatness of Islamic scholars, sold himself to Islam's enemies, and eventually became a freemason, joining those unbridled disbelievers atrophying Islam from within. Ismail Hakki of Izmir, Omer Riza Dogrul, Hamdi Akseki, Sharafeddin Yaltkaya, Shamseddin Gunaltay, Mustafa Fevzi, Vahbi of Konya, Muhammad Akif, and many other men of religion read their books, were badly influenced by them, and deviated into various ways."

Abdoh and other people like him, who had drifted into disbelief or aberration, raced with one another in their efforts to mislead younger generations of religious men, thus pioneering the disasters predicted in the hadith ash-Sharif, "Catastrophes befalling my Ummat will be through heretical [aberrant] men of religion."

In the meantime, Abdoh's disciples would not sit still. They published very many harmful books in a nature to incur divine wrath and vengeance. One of them is Rashid Rida's book Muhawerat, which was translated into Turkish by Hamdi Akseki, given the title Islamda Birlik (Unity in Islam), and published in Istanbul in 1332 [A.D. 1914]. In this book of his he followed his teacher's example, attacked the four Madhhabs of the Ahl as-sunnat and, thinking that the Madhhabs originated from differences of opinions and representing the Madhhabs' differing methods and conditions as bigoted controversies, went so far in aberration that he accused them of "deranging Islam's unity." This attitude of his means to deride millions of true Muslims who have been imitating one of the four Madhhabs for fourteen hundred years, and to turn away from Islam and look for the ways of coping with the time's requirements in changing Islam and iman. What is common about these religion reformers is that they represent themselves as highly intellectual Islamic scholars who have comprehended real Islam perfectly and are at the same time quite aware of the time's requirements, while calling those truly pious Muslims who have read and learned Islam's books and who have been following scholars of Ahl as-sunnat praised in the hadith ash- Sharif, "The best of times is their time," 'mobbish-minded imitators'. That these religion reformers are vulgarly ignorant people who are quite unaware of Islam's credal and technical teachings is completely blatant in their own oral and written statements. To clarify this point, let us see what our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' states in the following hadith ash-Sharifs: "The highest people are scholars with iman." "Religious scholars are Prophets' inheritors." "Knowledge pertaining to heart is one of the secrets belonging to Allah." "Scholars' sleep is a worship." "Respect my Ummat's scholars! They are stars of the earth." "Scholars will intercede (for sinful Muslims) in the Hereafter." "Scholars of fiqh are valuable. It is a worship to be in their company." "A scholar among his disciples is like a Prophet among his Ummat." Who do these hadith ash-Sharifs praise; scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, who have been teaching Islam for fourteen hundred years, or Abdoh and his disciples, who have appeared recently? This question also is answered by our master, the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam': "Every century will be worse than the one previous to itself. Thus they will be all the worse by the end of the world." "As the end of the world draws near, men of religion will be worse and more putrid than a donkey's carrion." These hadith ash-Sharifs are written in the abridged version of Tazkira-i-Qurtubi. As it is unanimously stated by all the Islamic scholars praised and lauded by Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and confirmed by all the Awliya, the only group of Muslims promised to be free from Hell are those who are in the Madhhab of scholars termed Ahl as-sunnat(t) wal jamaat(t). People who are not in the Sunnite group shall go to Hell. Another fact they state unanimously is that unification of Madhhabs is wrong. In other words, the scholars and the Awliya mentioned above state unanimously that it would be an iniquitous and ridiculous attempt to try to make one unified Madhhab by selecting the facilities offered by the four Madhhabs.

There is detailed information in this respect in the (Turkish) book Faideli Bilgiler.

Which case will a person with wisdom prefer; to adapt himself to the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat, which has been commended unanimously by so many Islamic scholars for one thousand years, or to believe these cultured (!), modern, religiously ignorant parvenus, whose existence is a matter of the recent hundred years? The prominent and loquacious ones among the seventy-two groups of people who it is stated in hadith ash-Sharifs will go to Hell, have always assailed scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' and did their utmost to tarnish these blessed Muslims. Yet they have been answered and disgraced through ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs. Seeing that knowledge could not be the way recommendable for them to follow for the attainment of their vicious ends, they have had recourse to banditry and violence, thus causing innumerous Muslim bloodbaths in every century. On the other hand, Muslims in the four Sunnite Madhhabs have always loved one another and lived as brothers.

Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' states that "Muslims' parting into Madhhabs (in daily worships and procedures) is compassion of Allahu ta'ala (over Muslims)." However, religion reformers, e.g. Rashid Rida, who was born in 1282 [A.D. 1865] and died suddenly in Cairo in 1354 [A.D. 1935], say that they will establish unity in Islam by unifying the Madhhabs. In actual fact, our Prophet 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' commanded Muslims throughout the world to be united in one belief, the true way of iman guided by his four Khalifas. Islamic scholars studied hand-in- hand and discovered the true way of belief taught by the four Khalifas and recorded it in their books, naming this way commanded by our Prophet Ahl as-sunnat wal jamaat. Muslims all over the world have to be united in this unique way called Ahl as-sunnat. And those who claim to be aspirant after unity in Islam ought to join this already existent unity, if they are sincere in their claim.

It is a shame, however, that this book of Rashid Rida's, whose real purpose is to sow discord among Muslims and to annihilate Islam from the inside, was printed with the title Islamda Birlik ve Fikh Mezhebleri (Unity in Islam and the Madhhabs of Fiqh) and the publication number in 1394 [A.D. 1974] by some miscreant political party members who had infiltrated into Ministry of Religious Affairs in order to mislead younger generations of religious men. Thanks be to Allah that Ministry of Religious Affairs was purged of these people without a Madhhab, leaving their place to reasonable, pure-hearted, knowledgeable scholars 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain'. These people have been writing books to warn youngsters against such miscreant publications. An example of these books is Islam Dinini Tehdid Eden En Korkunc Fitne Mezhebsizlikdir (The Most Horrendous Threat Against the Islamic Religion Is The Fitna of Being Without A Madhhab), by Durmus Ali Kayapinar, a member of Islam Enstitusu Teaching Staff in Konya, Turkey. The book was printed in Konya in 1976. Zindiqs have always tried to deceive Muslims through falsely-adorned statements and to destroy (Islam's unity) under the mask of (unification). For more detailed information, please see the (Turkish) book Faideli Bilgiler (Useful Information)! Zindiqs, lurking under various Islamic appellations, have been striving to defile, to atrophy Islam. Although they are fruitless with respect to knowledge and mental capacity, they have enough money to be in the limelight by means of mercenary men of religion.

44- We would like to embellish our book by appending a letter by Imam-i-Rabbani, Mujaddid-i-alf-i-Thani Ahmad Faruqi Sarhandi 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih', thus receiving barakat from the blessed soul of the exalted imam, who was loved so much by Islamic scholars and who was and is the guide of Awliya and of all the people walking in the paths of Tasawwuf and who has been selected from among selected people:

This letter, written to Molla Murad-i-Keshmi, explains the greatness of the Ashab al-kiram and the fact that they loved one another:

Allahu ta'ala declares at the end of Fat-h sura, "Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the Prophet whom Allahu ta'ala has sent to mankind. Those who are in his company are very harsh towards disbelievers and extremely compassionate towards one another." This ayat al- karima is fairly long and ends as "Lest disbelievers should resent them... ." Allahu ta'ala praises the Ashab al-kiram by stating that they loved one another very much. The word 'Rahim' used in the ayat al-karima signifies exceeding mutual love. Such words are called Sifat-i-mushabbiha in the Arabic grammar. They signify both muchness and continuance. It shows that the Ashab al-kiram loved one another permanently, and that they always loved one another after the Messenger of Allah honored the Hereafter with his presence as well as when he was alive. It is inferred from this ayat al-karima that anything incompatible with mutual love never existed or happened among the Ashab al-kiram. Allahu ta'ala states plainly in this ayat al-karima that such unloving feelings as grudge, hatred and jealousy toward one another did not even occur to them. Each and every one of the Ashab al-kiram possessed this common attribute. The expression "Wallazina' in the ayat al-karima indicates this fact. When this is the case with all of them, how can anything be said against the highest ones? Certainly, these great people had the most and the highest of virtues. It is for this reason that the Sarwar 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' is the most merciful of my Ummat!" He stated in another hadith ash-Sharif, "No Prophet shall succeed me. If there were a Prophet to come after me, 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' would certainly be the Prophet." This hadith ash-Sharif is recorded in Dailami and Kunuz- ud-daqaiq. This hadith ash-Sharif shows that hadrat 'Umar possessed all kinds of superiority peculiar to Prophets. The only virtue he was not given was the rank of prophethood, and this was because Rasulullah was the final Prophet. One of the virtues possessed by Prophets is to love Muslims very much and to have mercy on them. Such bad habits as envy, grudge, enmity, resentment are quite incompatible with love and mercy. Could these bad habits be thought to have existed in those people who were spiritually educated by the best and the highest of mankind, Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', and who were the highest members of the best of all Ummats? The Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' are ahead of all these people (Muslims), who, in their turn, have replaced all (past) peoples. The century in which they lived is the best of all times. Their educator is the highest of Prophets 'sall-allahu ta'ala alaihi wa sallam'. The lowest individual in this Islamic Ummat would be disgusted with these bad habits. If the Ashab al-kiram had had these bad habits, could they have been the best of this Ummat, and then could this Ummat be said to be the best of Ummats? Could such merits as having been the earliest believers, the earliest alms-givers, having made Jihad and sacrificing their own lives for the sake of Allah be said to be honors and superiorities? How could their time have been the best of times? And what would be the significance, the value of having been educated by the Messenger of Allah? While a person educated by a Wali or by a scholar of this Ummat gets rid of bad habits and becomes extremely clean, could it ever be possible for these bad habits to have remained on those people who spent all their lives in Rasulullah's company, serving him, sacrificing their property and lives for helping and supporting him and his religion, and who were always ready to dive into death upon a signal he would give? To believe it would mean to deny the greatness of the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. [May Allahu ta'ala protect us from such denial]. It would mean to hold his educating inferior to the educating of a Wali or any other educator. On the other hand, it is stated unanimously by scholars that no Wali in an Ummat can be as high as any of the Sahabis of that Ummat. Then, how could they ever be as high as the Prophet of that Ummat? Abu Bakr-i-Shibli states that a person who does not respect a Prophet's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab has not become a believer of that Prophet.

Many people think that Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab parted into two groups. They say that one group were against hadrat Ali while the others sided with him. According to these people, "These two groups were nursing a grudge against each other. Most of them withheld their inimical feelings for worldly interests. They were doing Taqiyya, which means hypocrisy. These atrocities continued for a hundred years." Because of this bad opinion, they vilify those Sahabis who they think were against hadrat Ali, and accuse them of atrocities quite incompatible with their high honor. It would take only a little reasoning, a little consideration to realize that people who think or say so are reviling both groups of Sahabis and accusing them of being bad-tempered by doing so. People who make such allegations are striving to represent all the best people of this Ummat as the worst of this Ummat, even as the worst of all people. They are trying to change an era which was praised as "the best era" in a hadith ash-Sharif into the worst era. What sort of wisdom or reason should one have to let hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar, the two archstones of Islam who are loved and respected so much by Muslims, to be censured and stained? Qur'an al-karim informs that hadrat Abu Bakr is the most valuable, the most virtuous member of this Ummat. It is stated unanimously by Abdullah Ibni Abbas and other Sahabis and all scholars of Tafsir that the ayat al-karima that purports, "He who fears Hell's fire very much will give his property for the sake of Allah for attaining the blessings Allah promises," in Wal-layl sura, denotes hadrat Abu Bakr. It needs no stretch of the imagination to discern the fact that it would be an utterly despicable attitude to impute disbelief, wickedness or aberration to a person who it is declared by Allahu ta'ala is the most pious and the most valuable member of this Ummat, the best of Ummats. Hadrat Imam-i-Fakhr-ad-din Radi, one of the greatest scholars of Tafsir, states that "This ayat al- karima shows that hadrat Abu Bakr is the highest member of this Ummat (Muslims)." For the thirteenth ayat of Hujurat sura purports, "The highest one among you is the one who fears Allah most." Since it is declared in the former ayat al-karima that in this Ummat hadrat Abu Bakr is the one who fears Allahu ta'ala most, this second ayat al-karima denotes that he is the highest of this Ummat. It is stated unanimously by the Ashab al- kiram and by the Tabiin that hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar are the highest ones among this Ummat. This unanimity is reported to us by the greatest ones of our religious imams. One of the reporters is hadrat Imam-i-Shafi'i. Another person who acknowledges that hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar are the highest ones in this Ummat is hadrat Ali. Imam Zehabi, a great scholar of Hadith, states in his book that "This statement of hadrat Ali's has been reported to us by more than eighty people." Therefore, that hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar are the highest ones of this Ummat has been acknowledged even by some Shiite scholars, e.g. by Abd-ur-razzaq, who is one of the most prominent. He made this statement: "I say so because hadrat Ali stated that hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar were superior to him. Otherwise, I would not say so. It would be very sinful if I did not agree with hadrat Ali as a person who loved him." That these two people (hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar) are the highest ones of this Ummat, the best of Ummats, is denoted by the Book, i.e. Qur'an al-karim, explained by the Sunnat(t), i.e. hadith ash-Sharifs, confirmed by the Ijma', i.e. unanimity of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain', and acknowledged by hadrat Ali. So, it is not something a Muslim or any reasonable person would do to blemish or revile these people. If these people are reviled, what goodness will be left in this Ummat for us to praise? If it were a good deed, a worship to curse or vituperate a person, it would be a commandment to curse Abu Jahl and Abu Leheb, who are declared to be evil, accursed people in Qur'an al-karim. Cursing these people would deserve much thawab. It is something unpleasant to curse a person. It means repugnance towards him. What good could there be in such behavior? And if it is done unjustly, if the person who is cursed is a good one, it would mean to put something in the wrong place, which is cruelty. No two things, no two places are the same as each other. And each kind of cruelty is different from another.

Hadrat 'Uthman Zinnureyn also was elected Khalifa by the unanimous vote of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain'. All of them, men and women alike, agreed to his caliphate. It is for this reason that Islamic scholars said, "The degree of unanimity in the voting for hadrat 'Uthman's caliphate was not reached in the election of any of the other three Khalifas." For at that time there were various rumors and therefore the election was important for everybody. All the Ashab al- kiram joined the election. [If the writer named Sayyid Qutb had realized this truth, he could not have said, "'Uthman's becoming Khalifa was an unfortunate event for Muslims."]

The Book and the Sunnat(t), i.e. Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs, were taught to us by the Ashab al-kiram. Ijma'i ummat, which is one of the four sources of Islamic knowledge, means the unanimity of the Ashab al-kiram. Censuring all or some of these people, or saying that they turned bad afterwards, means mistrusting all or some of the Islamic knowledge. And this, in its turn, means denying the ultimate divine cause in Allahu ta'ala's sending the final Prophet and the highest Messenger. Qur'an al-karim was arranged by hadrat 'Uthman. Or, rather, it was arranged by hadrat Abu Bakr Siddiq and hadrat 'Umar Faruq 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum'. Now, if these people are vituperated and accused with injustice, will Qur'an al-karim have any authenticity left? And will there be any Islam left? We have to realize how unsightly this attitude is. All the Ashab al-kiram are just people. And all the teachings of Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs they reported to us are true.

The disagreements and disputes that took place among the Ashab al-kiram in the time of hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' were not intended to satisfy the desires of nafs, for pleasure or for obtaining posts and positions. They originated from disagreements in ijtihad. They were based on differences of reasoning. The ijtihad reached by one of the parties was wrong. These people could not reach a correct decision. Scholars of Ahl as- sunnat wal jamaat state that hadrat Ali was right and those who fought against him were wrong. However, since their mistake was based on ijtihad, none of them can be criticized. None of them can be castigated. We say that hadrat Ali was right and those who were opposed to him were wrong. For scholars of Ahl as-sunnat say so. Yet it would be an outrageous behavior to curse or criticize those who were against him. It would serve no useful purpose, in addition to the most likely harm it would cause. For these people, too, are Rasulullah's Sahabis. Among them were people who had been blessed with the good news of going to Paradise directly after death, as well as those who had partaken in the Holy War of Badr. Those who had joined this Holy War were forgiven their sins. It is informed that these people will not be tormented (in the Hereafter). It is stated in a hadith- i,Sharif that "Allahu ta'ala said to those who joined the Holy War of Badr: Do whatever you like! I have forgiven you all your deeds." Among these people were also those who had been present in the solemn covenant termed Bi'at-i-ridwan. Our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated that none of the people who had joined this covenant would go to Hell. According to Islamic scholars, it is inferred from Qur'an al-karim that all the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' will go to Paradise. The tenth ayat of Hadid sura purports, "Those who gave their property and performed Jihad for the sake of Allah before the conquest of Mecca are unlike those who did so after the conquest. These people (the former ones) occupy higher grades. Allahu ta'ala has promised the Husna to those who did so, before or after the conquest." Husna means Paradise. As is seen, those who gave their property and made Jihad before or after the conquest of the blessed city of Mecca are blessed with the good news that their destination is Paradise. The expressions 'giving property' and 'performing Jihad' in this ayat al-karima are not put as stipulations for entering Paradise. They are laudatory additions intended to praise these blessed people. For these qualifications were shared by all the Ashab al-kiram. All of them gave their property and made Jihad for the sake of Allah. Consequently, all the Ashab al-kiram are blessed with Allah's promise of Paradise. It must be realized now that it would be quite far from common sense and from Islam to vituperate or execrate these great religious guides.

Question: Some people say and write that after Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' death a few Sahabis abandoned the right way, degenerated, had recourse to atrocities for becoming Khalifa or for seizing posts and positions, and deprived hadrat Ali 'karram- allahu ta'ala wajhah' of his right to caliphate. They say that some of those people turned disbelievers. According to such oral and written statements, many Sahabis will be deprived of Paradise. Attaining the honor of being a Sahabi requires being a Muslim. Can a person who is said to have turned a non-Muslim or deviated from the right way still have the honor of being a Sahabi?

Answer: That these three Khalifas 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum' will go to Paradise is informed through the most authentic hadith ash-Sharifs termed 'Sahih'. No one can contradict these hadith ash-Sharifs. Nor can anyone think of the possibility of these people's having turned disbelievers or deviated from the right way. Furthermore, hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma' were blessed with the honor of having joined the Holy War of Badr. It is informed through hadith ash-Sharifs that people who fought in the Holy War of Badr would be forgiven all their past and future sins. On the other hand, these two Khalifas were also among those fortunate people who took the so-called solemn oath called Bi'at-i-ridwan. And that those people who were present at the place of this covenant will go to Paradise is informed through 'Sahih' hadith ash-Sharifs. Hadrat 'Uthman did not join the Holy War of Badr, because he had been ordered by the Messenger of Allah to stay in Medina and look after his ailing wife Ruqayya, [Rasulullah's daughter]. The Messenger had told him that (by staying in Medina to help with his wife's medical treatment) he would attain the same blessings as if he had joined the Holy War. Also, his failing to join the solemn oath called Bi'at-i-ridwan was because he had been sent on a mission to Mecca by the Messenger of Allah, who deputized him in the covenant and took the oath on his behalf. This is a generally known fact. Greatness of these three Khalifas is informed in Qur'an al-karim. Their high grades are apprized in ayat al-karimas. Sheer stubbornness of those people who are unaware of Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash- Sharifs is of no value. A couplet:

If a person is unconscious of the Qur'an and Hadith,
He deserves no answer; no other answer could be better!

Shame on those people who speak ill of hadrat Abu Bakr! If that great Sahabi had had doubts of disbelief or aberration, thousands of Rasulullah's Sahabis, with all their knowledge and justice, would not have elected him as Rasulullah's representative by unanimous vote. To deny hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate would mean to deny the thirty-three thousand people living in that time which has been declared in a hadith ash-Sharif to be the best of all times. A person with the smallest thinking capacity could not make such a false accusation. A time in which thirty-three thousand Muslims agreed on an erroneous decision and elected an aberrant and sinful person for Rasulullah's place could not be a good time, let alone being the best of times. Such an accusation would mean to say that the hadith ash-Sharif which declared it as the best of times is nonsensical. [May Allahu ta'ala protect us from saying so!] May Allahu ta'ala give those people who say or write so enough sense and reason to give up traducing these great Islamic persons! May He give them the understanding to realize the value of having attained Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu ta'ala alaihi wa sallam' sohbat and teaching! It is stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, "Fear Allah as you talk about my Ashab! Fear Allah lest you should show any disrespect in a conversation about my Ashab! After me, never have a bad opinion of them. He who loves them does so because he loves me. And he who bears hostility towards them is my enemy." What more should I write? What else should I say to explain something so manifest? Qur'an al-karim is full of laudatory statements praising hadrat Abu Bakr. Wal-layl sura was revealed as a whole to inform about his superior virtues. 'Sahih' hadiths reporting his high merits are innumerable. His beautiful moral character, his valuable demeanor, and the distinguishing goodness possessed by all the Ashab al-kiram had also been mentioned in the heavenly books revealed to past Prophets. Allahu ta'ala informs about this fact at the end of Fat-h sura, which purports, "goodness of thine Ashab were stated also in the Torah and in the Injil." Hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' is the best and the foremost member of this Ummat, who are the best of all people and who have been blessed with the compassion of Allahu ta'ala. If he is called a 'disbeliever' or a 'miscreant', what are the bad names that cannot be attached to others? What level of language can be used to talk about them? O my Allah, who created earths and heavens from nothing and who knows all, secret and open alike! You know the right one in the disagreements among Your born servants! May our salutations be to those people who are in the right way.

Do not take pride in your property!
Don't ever say, "No one is like me!"

A disastrous wind will winnow all,
Making only a defenseless chaff of thee!

top

May hamd be to Allahu ta'ala, who is the Rabb of everything, that is, who creates and raises all beings! May goodness and salvation be upon our Most Beloved Prophet, Muhammad Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam who has guided us to the right way. May benedictions be over his close relatives and over his Ashab, who had the honor of believing in him and seeing his beautiful and luminous face!

Of all the seventy-two different miscreant groups who have deviated from the right way in this world, which is a place of examination for mankind and an open space of ground whereon the good are distinguished from the bad, haters of the Ashab al-Kiram are the most staunch followers of the devil and the most miserable victims of the deceitful human nafs, so much so that they have already surpassed the devil in this respect. These people make a show of excessive love for the close relatives and the children of our Beloved Prophet 'salla Allahu alaihi wa sallam', and say that loving them is the greatest worship. They claim to be adherent to the ayat al-karima that purports, "I do not demand any return for having brought you the Islamic religion. All I want from you is to love my Ahl al-bayt, who are close to me." Yet the evil cult they actually adhere to is based on vituperating, cursing Rasulullah's 'salla allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain', who are Islam's greatest teachers. Some of them go even further, so that they censure our master the Messenger of Allah 'salla allahu alaihi wa sallam' and even Jabrail 'alaihissalam', the trustworthy Archangel who carried the Wahy from Allahu ta'ala. They consider this wicked behavior of theirs as a worship.

Leaders of these heretics strive day and night to mislead others, boasting of their "endeavors to save humanity". The very clever ones disguise themselves as hodjas or Shaykhs and travel incognito through villages, where they disseminate their obnoxious, poisonous assertions. The rich ones spend all their property and money for this goal. In fact, hadrat field marshal Muhammad Namik Pasha [1219-1310], who was aide-de-camp to Sultan Abd-ul-Hamid Khan II, Muslims' Khalifa and the great Padishah of the Ottoman Turks, [1258 (1842)-1336 (1918), in the graveyard of Sultan Mahmud], related to this faqir, ('Uthman Effendi means himself): "During my governorship of Baghdad I saw these eccentric miscreants disseminate a hundred thousand books in a clandestine way in the villages of Iraq. I had the books collected and thrown into a river. I prevented them from writing and disseminating such mischievous books." Despite so many efforts to prevent them, it has not been quite possible to stop these base- natured people causing turmoil and misdirecting people. So far, they have not hesitated to sacrifice their property and lives for this purpose.

[One of the harmful books, and probably the worst, which these heretics have written with all sorts of lies and are trying to disseminate far and near, is a pamphlet titled Husniyya. Originally written in the Persian language, the book has been translated into Turkish and disseminated in a surreptitious way in Istanbul and almost all over Anatolia. When a lithographic copy of the book was obtained and scanned, it was seen that it did not contain any true writings. It was understood that it was a spurious, mendacious pamphlet fabricated with preposterous, impracticable illusory ideas. It is observed with consternation that this writing, circulating among the Hurufi fathers in Iran, was printed in Istanbul in 1958 and has been being sold freely and contaminating, misleading some wretched people happening to read it. We have seen with gratitude on the other hand that our noble and pure people avoid buying this pamphlet, so that it does not sell much.

It is an obvious fact that those pure Muslims belonging to the group of Ahl as-Sunnat wal-Jama'at and people with average mental capacity and a smattering of general knowledge will not believe such writings; yet falsifications disguised in good, true statements and covered under ornamented, falsely-adorned writings may confuse the readers. The introductory section of the so-called book has been decked deceitfully].

According to the Ahl as-Sunnat, it is necessary to love very much the Ahl al-Bayt-i- Nabawi, that is, Hadrat Ali and his children 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain'. Loving them will cause one to die in iman (to die as a believer). Books written by the savants of Ahl as-Sunnat teem with writings commending their love. The Iranian Jew named Murtada, the author of the so-called book Husniyya, must have known this fact very well; it was shrewd of him to write in the beginning about his exuberant love for the Ahl al-Bayt so that the ignorant people reading these falsely adorned statements should consider Islam to consist of loving the Ahl al-Bayt, which is certainly something beautiful in itself, and thus take the whole book for granted and, consequently, deviate from the right way, believing that the book is rightful in its criticism of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' and the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat.

The book Tuhfa-i-isna Ashariyya, written in the Persian language and printed in India in order to refute mentally and scientifically the writings in the so-called book and in other similarly poisonous books, has been translated into Turkish and printed in order to protect Muslims from falling into such a grave, bottomless, abysmal disaster with the command of Hadrat Sultan Abd-ul-Hamid Khan II, our master and Padishah 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih', a protector of the Islamic religion and a rescuer of Muslims, and this Turkish version is already being disseminated. Yet we have considered it appropriate to write another refutation to the book Husniyya, and named this refutation of ours Tazkiya-i-Ahl al-bayt.

[The book Tuhfa-i-isna ashariyya, in Persian, was printed in India in 1266 [C.E. 1850]. A copy of the book exists in the library of Istanbul University. It was written by Ghulam Halim Shah Abd al-'Aziz Dahlawi, who passed away in India in 1239 [C.E. 1823]. The book, which tells about Shiis, was printed again in 1309. Abd-al-'Aziz Dahlawi is the son on Waliyy-ullah Ahmad bin Abd-ur-Rahim Dahlawi (1114-1180), the celebrated (Islamic) scholar].

A closer look at the book Husniyya betrays the fact that its translator was not a Persian but he must have been an Ottoman clerk in Istanbul who, though being of the Sunni ancestral origin, had wandered away from the right way. In order to rescue both this person and those young people who might have had the unlucky chance of reading this book from meeting endless disaster, we are beginning to write this refutation of ours, trusting ourselves to Allahu ta'ala. This refutation of Tazkiya-i-Ahl al-bayt was printed in Istanbul in 1295 (C.E. 1878). It has been discovered that the refutation was written by 'Uthman (Osman) bin Nasir Effendi, the Shaykh of Yenikapi Mevlevihane in Istanbul. It is written in Qamus-ul-alam that his father, Nasir Effendi, passed away in 1236 (C.E. 1821)].

1- It is related as follows at the beginning of the book Husniyya: "A merchant, who was a devoted friend of Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq's [83-148, in Madinah] 'radi-allahu anhu', had a very pretty jariya (Woman slave captured in a Holy War. Muslims treat their slaves and jariyas as they treat their brothers and sisters.) named Husniyya. This jariya stayed with the Imam until she reached the age of twenty, learning in the meantime all the branches of knowledge. After the Imam's death the merchant went bankrupt and wanted to sell the jariya to Harun-ur-Rashid, the Khalifa. [Harun-ur-Rashid is the fifth Abbasi (Abbasid) Khalifa. He was born in 148, and passed away in 193 in Tus city. He became the Khalifa in 170]. Petrified by the beauty of the girl, the Khalifa asked the price. Fifty thousand golds, was the answer. When the Khalifa asked what skills the jariya had to be worth that much, the merchant told him all about the knowledge and the virtues she had. She was given an examination in the presence of scholars. She proved to be superior to the scholars. She rebutted all of them. The scholars and mujtahids present for the occasion, among whom were Imam-i-Abu Yusuf Yaqub bin Ibrahim [113-182, in Baghdad] and Imam-i-Muhammad bin Idris Shafi'i [150-204, in Egypt], could not answer her. They knew a scholar who they believed was superior to them all. This scholar, Ibrahim Khalid by name, lived in Basra and was the author of numerous books. They sent for him, yet he, too, proved short of coping with her and became completely baffled."

According to some Madhhabs, it is not permissible for this jariya to stay with another man while being in the possession of the merchant. There are some scholars who say that it is not permissible in Hanafi Madhhab, either. It is written in the two hundred and thirty-fifth page of the fifth volume of Ibni Abidin. To say that such a pious personage as Imam-i-Jafar-i-Sadiq 'radi- allahu anhu', who is well-known for his wara' (Wara' means to abstain from acts, behaviors, words, foods, drinks, and all things that are dubious, that is, anything about which one cannot be sure whether it is forbidden or permitted.) and taqwa (Taqwa means to abstain from all sorts of forbidden acts, behaviors, thoughts, words. (Ibni Abidin).), continuously committed a forbidden or (at least) dubious deed by keeping another man's young and pretty jariya in his service and teaching her for years, means to calumniate that great Imam. It might be thought that the Imam, being a mujtahid himself, might have had the ijtihad that such an act would be permissible; but how could we presume that this great Imam would have been so indifferent as to acquiesce in a jariya's being deprived of freedom for many years and being put up for sale at the end of all these years in his service and after attaining such a perfect level in knowledge and integrity owing to his tutorship? Learning all the branches of knowledge so much as to beat and rebut all the other religious scholars and mujtahids is an indication of a profound mental and intellectual capacity and skill. Therefore, to write that hadrat Imam could not realize the value of such a dexterous jariya and did not put an end to her slavery but acquiesced to her being sold from one person to another, would mean to accuse that exalted Imam of atrocity. And this, in its turn, would signify animosity, let alone love, towards the Ahl al- bayt. This allegation in the book Husniyya is a stupid method no less ludicrous than the humorous anecdote of a man who "kills his friend inadvertently while trying to kill the fly on his forehead with a big stone," which is related in the Masnawi of Jalaladdin Rumi 'qaddas-allahu sirrah-ul-'aziz'. Furthermore, it is haram for women to raise their voice so high as to let men hear them. According to some scholars, they are permitted to (talk to men) in case of strong necessity, but even in this case they must be careful not to exceed the prescribed limits, i.e. they must talk in a low and rough tone, and stop it as soon as the necessity is over. This fact is explained in full detail in the book Durr-ul-mukhtar, and also in the two hundred and seventy-second page of its explanatory commentary. In light of this fact, a woman's sitting on a raised platform in front of hundreds of men and talking to them for hours, while it was possible for them to carry on this debate in a written form, would raise doubts as to her concept of chastity and decency. Not only that; this situation would also put hundreds of religious scholars and mujtahids into a position of sinfullness. No Muslim would believe such nonsense.

2- "Husniyya quoted ayats from Qur'an al-Karim and explained them by means of Hadith ash-Sharifs with such competence that the scholars in her presence were unable to answer her and had to remain silent. This state exasperated Harun-ur-Rashid. Husniyya's silencing the scholars of Baghdad caused far-reaching repercussions in the city for many days." While making this allegation, the book does not say what the so-called questions that could not be answered were, so that we might see for ourselves whether they were really so profound and difficult that the so-called mujtahids were unable to answer. On the other hand, the innumerable books that still exist today reveal the fact as apparently as the sun that not only the scholars of Ahl-i-Sunnat themselves 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' but also every one of the thousands of pupils educated by them gave various answers to all the slanderous allegations of the many miscreants, thus inflicting a humiliating defeat on them. Everybody sees this fact. Obviously these profound scholars, who had educated such superior disciples and proved their powerful competence by establishing essential methods and principles for belief and worships and laying the religious problems on firm, unshakable foundations, could not be expected to have fallen into such a shameful position by falling short of answering a jariya's questions; a person with common sense could not believe this derogatory allegation. Another fact known by all groups of Muslims is that there has not been a scholar superior to mujtahids so far. Nor does any (Islamic) book make mention of a superior scholar named Ibrahim Khalid of Basra. The Jewish author of the book Husniyya should have heard of Abu Sawr Ibrahim bin Khalid and fabricated his story over his name. Yet Abu Sawr was born in Baghdad, lived in Baghdad, and passed away in Baghdad in 240 (H.). He, let alone having taught five hundred scholars in Basra, took lessons formerly from Imam-i-azam's disciples and later from Imam-i-Shafi'i in Baghdad.

3- The book quotes the jariya as having said, "The Ashab al-Kiram became disbelievers because they made Abu Bakr (radi Allahu ta'ala anhu) their Khalifa after Rasulullah's (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam) death. Therefore the Ashab deserves being cursed. Rasulullah (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa sallam) stated: After me my Ashab will quote many hadiths. Most of these Hadiths will be false. Do not believe in the statements of my Ashab unless they are one of my Ahl al-bayt!" Modifying the hadith ash- Sharif, "After me my Ummat (Muslims) will part into seventy-three groups. One of them will attain salvation. The remaining seventy-two groups will go to Hell. This one group is those who follow me and my Ashab," he (the author) transforms (the last clause) into "those who follow me and my Ahl al-bayt." Then the jariya is made to lapse into the heretical theory called Mutazila with the following assertion:

"The jariya, in order to prove that Qur'an al-Karim is a creature and is not eternal, asked various questions, which could not be answered by the mujtahids. Upon this, thousands of people who attended the debates as auditors, Sunnite as they were, spat in the mujtahid's faces, all the people of Baghdad applauded the jariya by clapping their hands. As the Khalifa (Harun-ur-Rashid) was listening to the debate, she said that only the twelve imams of the Ahl al-Bayt, and no one else, were rightful to caliphate and that the Sunni Muslims would make anyone their Khalifa sinful and evil as the person might be, and she cursed the thousands of Sunni Muslims who were present. When she said in front of all those people that Hadrat Ali and six other Sahaba had been opposed to hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate, that this disagreement had led to wars, that the number of Ali's supporters had reached twenty two, that all the Ashab, with the exception of these twenty-two people, and those who loved them and all the mujtahids and scholars who followed them and all the Sunni Muslims were disbelievers and even worse than disbelievers, and that it would be the most valuable worship to curse them, the Khalifa, Harun-ur-Rashid, became so jubilant and admired her so much that from time to time he scattered golds on her." These fake events are related in a sordid, derisive, extravagant language in the book.

The hundredth ayat of Tawba sura purports, "Allahu ta'ala loves them. And they love Him." Here, He (Allahu ta'ala) declares that He likes and loves all the Ashab al-kiram, all the Muhajirs and Ansars alike. The sixth ayat of Ahzab sura purports, "His wives are Muslims' mothers." Here, He (Allahu ta'ala) praises and lauds Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' blessed wives 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihima ajmain'. It is not something a person with adequate wisdom would do, to resist these ayat al-karimas, to call these religious superiors disbelievers, and to say that the hadiths reported by these people are not dependable. Statements such as these could be made only by the insidious enemies striving to denigrate and demolish the Islamic religion.

The questions, which were actually copied from the Mutazila group and which are alleged to have been asked in order to prove that Qur'an al-karim is a creature and that men's actions are not creatures, have been answered in a most pulchritudinous and indubitable way by every one of the disciples educated by mujtahids, thousands of valuable books have been written to this end, and most of them have been translated into various languages, winning the admiration of the world's scientists. Therefore, only idiots can be deceived by alleging in a falsely adorned, circumlocutory language that the mujtahids could not answer the questions asked by the jariya. A person with common sense will see at once that these writings are lies and vilifications which the enemies of Islam use as weapons in their behind-the-scenes attacks in order to demolish Islam.

While writing the questions that the Mutazila group posed to the Ahl as-sunnat in order to prove that Qur'an al-karim is a creature and that men's bad deeds are not created by Allahu ta'ala but men create all their wishes themselves, he withholds, conceals the express and confuting answers which the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat (rahmatullahi alaihi)' gave them. However, these answers of the Ahl as-Sunnat are written in detail in our books of Kalam.

Harun-ur-Rashid was the most learned, the most courageous, and the most equitable of the Abbasi Khalifas. In the presence of such a Khalifa and in front of scholars and statesmen a jariya disparages the Khalifa by saying to his face that he is not the rightful Khalifa and then turning to the thousands of distinguished people being there and saying to them that they have made an atrocious sinner their Khalifa; this is not something the human mind could accept. And his allegation that these words (of the jariya's) made the Khalifa laugh and he was so pleased that he scattered golds on the jariya's head, is as ludicrous and as farcical as to arouse one's puerile feelings of mockery. His writing that "with these statements of hers the jariya silenced the Scholars and no one was able to answer her; people being there and all the Sunnite Muslims of Baghdad were pleased and they manhandled the mujtahids", shows that the mujtahids, the Khalifa, and all the people being there accepted the Mutazila sect and hated the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat. On the other hand, all books and historical records unanimously state that Harun-ur-Rashid was in the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat throughout his life, that he had very deep respect for the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, that he would commune with them before going into any action. There is no written record, not even a sign, to show that the people of Baghdad swerved into the Mutazila way during his time. Yes, it is recorded that one or two of the Khalifas after Harun meant to urge the people to join the Mutazila group; yet it is a plain fact that such efforts proved futile and that all the Iraqis and Iranians maintained their Sunnite guidelines up until the time of Shah Ismail. The reappearing of the Shi'ah sect, which was actually brewed by Shah Ismail Safawi [born in 892, dead in 930 (C.E. 1524)] as a stratagem to break Muslims into sects and thus to hold his ground against the Ottoman Empire, was hundreds of years after Harun-ur-Rashid. As it is seen, Harun and the people's applauding the jariya is a downright lie deliberately fabricated for sheer vilification.

4- The jariya is made to say, "Formerly, the mut'a nikah was a common practice. Later it was forbidden by hadrat 'Umar." However, Rasulullah (Salla Allahu alaihi wa sallam) prohibited the mut'a nikah on the day when he conquered Mecca. The mut'a nikah means an agreement made by a man and a woman to cohabit for a certain period of time. As any fallen woman, let alone a highly virtuous one, could not be so shameless as to talk about this matter amidst thousands of men, it is an abominable slander to allege that a mature, chaste, young and very pretty woman educated by hadrat Imam Jafar Sadiq talked about it so frankly. [There is detailed information on the prohibition of the Mut'a Nikah in the (Turkish) book Ashab-i Kiram, and also in the fifth part of this book].

5- The jariya is supposed to say, "Rasulullah (Salla Allahu alaihi wa Sallam) ordered his Ashab on the night of his migration to Medina from Mecca that no one should leave his home. Disobeying this order of Rasulullah's, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq went out his home and followed the Messenger of Allah. Rasulullah did not want him to follow, and was thinking of telling him to go back, when Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' (the Archangel Gabriel) came and warned Rasulullah, saying that Abu Bakr meant mischief and might betray him (Rasulullah) to the disbelievers of Quraish should he be made to go back. The fortieth ayat of Tawba sura, which purports, 'Don't be afraid! Allah is with us," shows that Abu Bakr was a disbeliever." [May Allahu ta'ala protect us against saying so!]

On the contrary, according to the unanimous report of history books, day by day the unbelievers of Quraish augmented their animosity against our master, Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam', and the Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan', and eventually laid siege to them. During this three years' siege some Sahabis migrated to Medina-i- munawwara and some to Abyssinia. For example, as 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' [martyred in Medina in 35 (H.), when he was eighty-two years old], who was the compiler of Qur'an al-karim, and his blessed wife hadrat Ruqayya [passed way in Medina in the second year of Hijrat] were leaving for Abyssinia, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' saw them and said to them, "Of Prophets 'alaihimu-s-salam', Lut 'alaihis-salam' was first to migrate together with his wife. And among my Ashab you are the first to migrate with your wife. Allahu ta'ala shall make you a companion to Lut 'alaihis-salam' in Jennet (Paradise)." Ruqayya 'radi-allahu anha' was Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' second daughter. Thus there was no one left in Mecca al-mukarrama' with the exception of hadrat Abu Bakr and Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma'. Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anhu' asked several times for permission to migrate. Yet he was not given the permission (by the Messenger of Allah, who said), "You will migrate with me." So he began to wait for Allahu ta'ala's permission to migrate. Meanwhile, upon the suggestion advanced by Abu Jahl, the chief of Quraish and the notorious enemy of Islam, they decided to kill the Messenger of Allah. [The real name of Abu Jahl is Amr bin Hisham bin Mughira. He belongs to the Bani Mahzum tribe of Quraish. He is a descendant of Mahzum bin Yaqnata bin Murra. Quraish is the name of Fihr, Rasulullah's eleventh father. Murra is Rasulullah's seventh father. Abu Jahl was killed in the Holy War of Badr in the second year of Hijrat]. Lest the murderer should be identified, they selected twelve vagrants, one from each tribe, and besieged Rasulullah's home on the night between Wednesday and Thursday. They were about to attack, for killing Rasulullah, when Allahu ta'ala ordered him to migrate. He made hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh' to lie in his blessed bed and left home before sunrise, reciting the eighth ayat al- karima of Yasin sura and walking by the unbelievers, who did not see Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' leave his house and walk by. Staying at some so far undiscovered place till noon, he went to Abu Bakr as-Siddiq's place at noontime. He ordered Abu Bakr's son Abdullah [joined many Holy Wars; passed away in the eleventh year] to walk amongst the unbelievers every day and take the information he would find and also some food and drink to a certain cave every night. That night he and Abu Bakr Siddiq left the latter's house and went to a cave in the mountain called Sawr. In the mountain Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' put his blessed head on Abu Bakr's knee and fell asleep. Lest a poisonous animal come out of one of the holes in the cave and hurt the Messenger of Allah, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq doffed the shirt he was wearing, tore it to pieces, and packed each piece into a whole. There being one piece too few, one of the holes was left unplugged. A snake appeared in this hole, holding its head out. To prevent the snake from going out and hurting Rasulullah, Abu Bakr Siddiq put his blessed foot on the hole. The snake bit his blessed foot, yet he would not draw his foot back. However, the pain caused by the biting brought tears into his blessed eyes and when they fell on Rasulullah's Sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' blessed luminous face, the best of mankind woke up. Seeing what had happened, he put his blessed spittle on the bitten place. It stopped the pain at once. After spending three nights in the cave, they left there on the first Monday of the month of Rabi'ul-awwal, setting out for Medina on camels and using the coastal route, which was shorter. When they reached the place called Qudayd, they came across a tent, wherein lived a woman. They asked the woman if she had something (to eat) for them to buy. She said she had nothing to eat but a skinny, milkless ewe. The Messenger of Allah asked for her permission to milk it. He rubbed his blessed hand gently on the sheep's back, said the Besmele (The word 'Bi-s-m-illah-ir-rahman-ir-rahim,' which means, briefly, 'In the name of Allah, (who is very) merciful, compassionate.' Every Muslim should utter this word before doing anything unless it is something sinful), and began to milk it. Very much milk came out, so that all the people being there drank plenty of it and they filled all the containers she had. When the woman's husband came and was told about this miracle, he and his wife became Muslims.

All books give this same account about the Hijrat (Hegira). Since there was no one left in Mecca city except Abu Bakr and Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma', the allegation that "Rasulullah ordered his Ashab not to leave their homes" proves to be an open falsification. Abu Bakr-i- Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh' was two years younger than Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. When they were young they were very close, loving friends. This mutual love between them lasted increasingly as long as they lived. They were always together, day and night. When Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' traveled to Damascus and honored the place with his blessed presence twice, he accompanied him. To disignore all this love, attachment and self sacrifice and assert that Rasulullah did not trust him, is a very evident lie, an abominable slander. He says that Rasulullah did not tell Abu Bakr that he was going to migrate. The unbelievers who had besieged the house did not perceive Rasulullah's leaving the house. If Abu Bakr sensed this and followed the Messenger of Allah, this must be a sign of kashf (seeing, understanding, perceiving, sensing through one's heart) and karamat (miracle happening on Awliya, i.e. people loved very much by Allahu ta'ala). Accordingly, would it be logical to state that a person with kashf and keramet would betray Rasulullah? Supposing he would betray him, then did not he have the opportunity to betray him to the unbelievers when they came to the mouth of the cave (wherein Rasulullah and hadrat Abu Bakr were hiding) on Friday and saw the spider's web completely covering the mouth of the cave and gave up entering the cave saying, "It seems as if no man has entered here since the creation of the earth"? Would he miss this chance?

To distort the meaning of the ayat al-karima that purports, "Don't worry! Allahu ta'ala is with us," and to attempt very sordidly to use it as a ground for condemning Abu Bakr Siddiq 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh', is the most disgusting way of ignorance and enmity towards Islam. It is not worth answering at all.

6- "Husniyya talked with Ibrahim Khalid for a long time. She asked him questions on subtle matters. Like the other mujtahids, he could not answer any of her questions. Placed in a quandary, he asked Husniyya who was rightful to the caliphate. When Husniyya replied that the caliphate rightfully belonged to the earliest Muslim, he asked who was the earliest Muslim, to which Husniyya answered, 'Hadrat Ali was.' When he objected to this answer, saying, 'Hadrat Ali was a child when he became a Muslim. Since a child's becoming a Muslim is not important in this sense, the earliest Muslim was Abu Bakr Siddiq,' Husniyya recited the ayat al-karimas telling about Hadrat Isa (Jesus) and Musa (Moses) and Ibrahim (Abraham), said that those (Prophets) had become Muslims in their childhood, and vituperated Ibrahim Khalid and the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat. Hadrat Imam-i-Shafi'i, who was present there, asked the Khalifa to punish the jariya. The Khalifa just shelved the notion, ordering that she must be beaten through knowledge."

On the contrary, the Hadith ash-Sharif, "Every child comes to the world in a nature well fitted for becoming a Muslim. Later their parents turn them into Jews or Christians or atheists," is widely known among the Sunnite Muslims, so that everyone has heard it. While there is this hadith ash-Sharif, to believe the assertion that Ibrahim Khalid or any other man of religion said, "Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was a child when he became a Muslim. So his being a Muslim cannot be taken into consideration," and that hundreds of scholars who heard this eccentric statement accepted it and remained mum, would be as droll as believing a person who calls white 'black', which would even make children laugh. The assertion betrays the fact that it has been written by an Iranian Jew.

7- The jariya is alleged to have confuted the scholars by saying, "Though it was hadrat Ali's right to become the Khalifa, the three Khalifas divested him of his right by using force. Selman Farisi and five to six other Sahabis remained with hadrat Ali and would not vote for the three Khalifas. They struggled against those cruel people for twenty-five years. For this reason, the three Khalifas and the ten people [who had been given the good news that they would enter Paradise] and thousands of Sahabis who voted for them became disbelievers [may Allahu ta'ala protect us from saying so]." Then she, so to speak, uttered ugly, rude terms about the superior men of Islam.

In an effort to make a show of excessive love for Hadrat Ali, the Hurufis mix caliphate into the matter. Thus in this matter also they go beyond the Islamic limits and sink into heretical thoughts. When due attention is paid, it will be seen that they think of caliphate, which is in fact a commandment of Islam, as a means for worldly pomp. Having read about the historical stratagems and intrigues carried on and the murders perpetrated by fathers and sons against one another in their endeavors for sovereignty and presidency, they compare Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' four Khalifas to them. Histories give a detailed account of how the four Khalifas served humanity. And this is the real import of caliphate.

One day during the caliphate of our master Abu Bakr Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh', hadrat 'Umar saw him carrying a sack of flour on his back, and asked him why he was doing so. His answer was: "Ya 'Umar! Don't I have to earn for my household?" Hadrat 'Umar, admire as he did this answer of the Khalifa's, was surprised at the same time. He proposed that Rasulullah's Khalifa should be paid a salary from the Bayt-ul-mal, that is, from the State budget, so that he could carry out his duty of serving all people in due manner. This proposal was accepted by all the Ashab al-kiram, and it was decided that the Khalifa would be allotted the necessary share from the Bayt-ul-mal. Hadrat Abu Bakr would take from this share only so much as to lead a life equal to that of any average person, returning any extra amount, if there was any. So was the case with the second Khalifa, 'Umar 'radi- allahu anh'. When the Islamic armies conquered the blessed city of Jerusalem and its vicinity, the European States sent forth a very knowledgeable and experienced ambassador to Jerusalem. After an audience with the Khalifa, he went back home with the following report, though his requests had been refused: "He is such a Padishah (king) that, with all his high knowledge and awe-inspiring appearance, he does not have a palace or ornamented attirements. I paid attention to his clothes. There were eighteen patches on them. It is impossible to stand against such an unadorned hero who is always ready for war." This fact is recorded in the unbiased ones of the records of European histories. The book Masnawi, which is composed of more than forty-seven thousand distichs, by Jalaladdin Rumi [born in Balh city in the Hijri year 604 and passed away in Konya in 672 (C.E. 1273)], has been translated into all the world's popular languages. The book gives the following information: The ambassador sent forth by the Byzantine Emperor arrives in Medina and asks where the Khalifa's palace is. Shown a cottage, he makes for it, enters the yard, and there he sees the Khalifa, lying on dry land using a piece of stone as a cushion. Hadrat 'Umar Faruq 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' wakes up and looks at the ambassador, who begins to shudder at the feeling of dread and the verve inspired by this first look. Then he recovers, talks with the Khalifa, and leaves. As he leaves, the Khalifa's blessed wife gives the ambassador a present, which she has prepared by borrowing eighteen dirhams of silver coins from an acquaintance and which she asks him to take to the emperor's wife. In return, the emperor's wife sends her a very valuable gift ornamented with precious jewels. The Khalifa, who has never done injustice in anything he has done, gives his wife only an eighteen dirham worth silver piece, sending the remainder to the Bayt-ul-mal.

'Umar 'radi-allahu anhu' would eat all his meals from an earthenware bowl. One day the Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' begged the Khalifa's daughter hadrat Hafsa and sent her to the Khalifa with he request, "O my father, the Amir of believers! Hadrat Abu Bakr, the first Khalifa, struggled with the munafiqs until his death, so much so that he did not even have time for relief. Now you have conquered innumerous lands in the east and west. Ambassadors from the world's universal emperors come to you and are fed in your generous kitchen. Mightn't you as well give up those earthenware bowls and use sets of copper or other metal in the presence of these visitors?" This, of course, was the Sahaba's suggestion. Hadrat Khalifa's answer to this was, "O my daughter Hafsa 'radi- allahu anha'! I would chide anyone else for this statement. As I have heard from you, our master Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had a mattress stuffed with grasses. Seeing that his blessed body was not comfortable on this bed, one night you laid out a soft bed and made Rasulullah lie and sleep on it, thus depriving him of getting up and praying that night (because the new bed was too comfortable for him to wake up for his regular midnight prayers). He expressed his regrets to you, remonstrating, 'Do not do so again!' The second ayat of Fat-h sura purports, 'In order to cover your past and future faults... .' This being the style of life led by a Prophet who has been given the good news that he shall be pardoned and forgiven, can a poor 'Umar, who is not sure about his future, leave the way of life led by Rasulullah and lead a luxurious life by eating from copper plates?"

In daytime 'Umar Faruq 'radi-allahu anh' was busy in Medina conducting his armies in Asia and supplying and dispatching their needs, and he would spend the whole night patrolling the city for protecting the Muslims' property, lives, and chastity. As he was out on his patrol one night, he heard a voice crying. He went there and asked why. A poor woman said, "I have no one to subsist me. It has been two days since I came here. My children have been crying of hunger for two days. I made a fire, so that I have been making them sleep by putting only water in the pot and telling them that I am making them food!" The Khalifa felt so sorry that he began to weep. Saying, " 'Umar has been ruined! 'Umar has perished," he condemned himself, and left. He had some meat with him when he came back. As he was blowing the fire to make it burn faster, his blessed beard caught fire. These events are not tales. They are true events recorded in history books. Today, some people watch the fabricated films produced by film makers and call the Islamic histories mythologies, myths, and stories.

So was the case with hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh', the fourth Islamic Khalifa. As he was passing away, the worldly property he had was no more than the mule named Duldul, which was a keepsake from the Messenger of Allah, his sword called Zulfikar, and his blessed shirt. And these things had been pawned to a Jew. Likewise, Muhammad 'alaihis- salam', who was the final Prophet and the master of worlds, left behind a bedstead made of teak timber, a shirt, and a set of clothing. He would give the milk he obtained from twenty camels, one hundred sheep and seven goats to the poor ones of the Ashab al-kiram. He did not even have a house of his own. All the four Khalifas lived like Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. They never deviated from the way led by him. All four of them accepted the caliphate as it was Islam's commandment, in a fashion like shouldering a burden, and because the Ummat (Muslims) wished them to be their Khalifa and elected them on a unanimous vote. For it was declared as follows in the hadith ash-Sharifs of our master Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam': "The votes of my Umma will not come together on aberration." "Whatever believers find beautiful is beautiful to Allahu ta'ala." To assert that the four Khalifas seized the office of caliphate by using force, when it is a fact that they were elected by the Ummat, is a very grave oddity and a detestable defamation. The following event shows plainly that hadrat Abu Bakr Siddiq was not at all eager for caliphate: Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' would give some disbelievers worldly goods from the Bayt-ul-mal in order to appease them and to conciliate them with Muslims. Those disbelievers who were given such goods were called 'Muellefa-i-qulub'. When Abu Bakr Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh' became the Khalifa, he gave one of the muellefa-i-qulub a piece of land from the Bayt-ul-mal. This person, sensing the vast popularity 'Umar had been enjoying among the Ashab al-kiram and expecting him to be the next Khalifa, took the title deed he had been given to 'Umar and asked him to undersign it. Upon seeing the title deed, hadrat 'Umar took it and went with it to the Khalifa to ask him how come the person had been given land from the Bayt-ul-mal. When the Khalifa explained that the muellefa-i-qulub had been given land from the Bayt-ul-mal in Rasulullah's time, too, hadrat 'Umar stated, "It was because Muslims were not powerful enough yet. Now we are not weak, and therefore that necessity does not exist any longer. Even if it were still necessary, the decision to execute it could be made only after communing with six or seven of the Ashab al-kiram." The Khalifa found this statement well put and said, "Ya 'Umar! When I was elected the Khalifa, I said I was not fit for the office and suggested that you would be a better choice. But the Ashab al-kiram would not listen to me. It has been seen once again on this occasion that you are superior to me. I want to resign from caliphate. And I request that you accept this service." 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' replied in due respect that he was not superior at all, that he did not think of becoming the Khalifa, and that his purpose was to remind (the Khalifa) of what he ('Umar) thought would be right. Thereupon hadrat Khalifa commanded that from then on nothing should be put into practice without a foregoing consultation in matters pertaining to the Bayt-ul-mal.

During the caliphate of 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh', several Sahabis came to him with the request that he make a will to advise that after him Abdullah bin 'Umar should be made the Khalifa on the grounds that he was, they thought, the second most deeply learned scholar among the Ashab al-kiram, and that "Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' loved him very much." 'Umar's 'radi-allahu anh' answer to them was: "Being a Khalifa is a heavy burden. I cannot put my son under it." 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' was martyred with a sword by a disbeliever named Abu Lu'lu, who was the slave of the Sahabi Mugira, in the twenty- third year of the Hegira. When he received the fatal wound, he was asked to appoint a Khalifa (to take his place). He nominated six Sahabis as candidates because these six people, he said, "gained Rasulullah's love more than anyone else did." The six Sahabis he named were 'Uthman (Osman), Ali, Talha, Zubair, Abd-ur-rahman bin Awf, and Sad ibni Abi Waqqas 'ridwan-ullahi alaihim ajmain'. Among themselves, these people elected 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' the Khalifa. Thus 'Uthman bin Affan was the third Khalifa. In his time insurrections and seditions provoked by munafiqs broke out here and there. When a group of ignorant and ignoble people advanced towards the city and finally reached Madinah, some Sahabis advised the Khalifa to resign. Replying that "Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' informed me that I shall attain martyrdom while reading Qur'an al-Karim," he proved to have the merits of compliance with the fate (foreordained by Allahu ta'ala) and patience in times of disasters. In the thirty-fifth year of the Hijrat, some wicked people attacked the Khalifa's house. When Imam-i-Ali 'radi-allahu anh' heard the news of this assault, he sent his two sons, Hasan and Husain, like two lions to the Khalifa's house to help and protect the Khalifa. These two youngsters drew their swords and stood by the front door, so that not even a bird would fly in unseen. Yet five or six of the abject bandits entered the house through a back window by means of a ladder; and the Khalifa was martyred as had been divined by the Messenger of Allah. When Ali 'radi-allahu anh' heard about this deplorable news, he was so mad at his two sons for failing to protect the Khalifa that he scolded them harshly and even nearly hit them with his blessed hand. However, he forgave them afterwards when it was found out they had done their duty of protection perfectly and could not be blamed because the bandits had entered the house from the back.

Upon this tragedy, the Ashab al-Kiram assembled and unanimously elected hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh' the Khalifa. Most of the Ashab al-Kiram, including such notables as Talha and Zubair, asked the (new) Khalifa to arrest the murderers and punish them as prescribed by Islam. Hadrat Ali answered them that the situation was so chaotic that it would be impossible to find the murderers, that another mutiny might occur in case he tried to investigate, and that he could perform this commandment of Islam after the re- establishment of public order. They protested this answer, saying that a Khalifa who would not execute Islam's commandment was not to be obeyed. Imam-i-Ali's ijtihad was correct. On the other hand, the opposing party had to act upon their own ijtihad. And the Khalifa, in his turn, had to use force to subjugate the people disobeying him. Eventually the Jemel event, i.e. the war called 'Camel' took place, which cost a great deal of Muslim bloodshed. In the meantime, hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu anhum' was off in Damascus, where he had been appointed as governor. He therefore did not join the event of Jemel. Nor would he let any Damascene blood to be shed on account of this event. When hadrat Ali, the victor (of the battle of Camel), asked the Damascene people also to obey him, hadrat Muawiya followed his own ijtihad and asked him to arrest and punish the murderers; and this in its turn led to another war, i.e. the combat called Siffin.

As it is seen, none of the four Khalifas, and in fact none of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu anhum' thought of worldly advantages in the caliphate elections; they all endeavored to execute the commandment of Allahu ta'ala. The four Khalifas never thought of their own comfort, struggling day and night for serving Islam and Muslims and accepting the duty as a sine qua non which someone would have to undertake for Allah's sake.

Hurufis compare the caliphate institution to a kingdom, to sovereignty. And because they think so, they say that hadrat Ali was opposed to the caliphate of the other three Khalifas and therefore fought against them incessantly for twenty-five years. They presume that he vied for presidency for years and nursed a grudge and hostility against the Ashab al-kiram because they were against his caliphate. They allege that "therefore the three Khalifas and thousands of Sahabis who voted for them are to be cursed till the end of the world." In an effort to prove themselves to be right, they fabricate preternatural stories which are neither Islamic, nor logical, nor worthy of hadrat Ali's honorable renown.

8- The jariya is made to say, "When Abu Bakr Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh' became the Khalifa, he confiscated the date orchard belonging to hadrat Fatimat-uz-Zahra by force, and therefore hadrat Fatima, offended, harbored a grudge against Abu Bakr till her death. In fact, before her death she made a will that she should be interred at night lest Abu Bakr and 'Umar should attend her funeral."

The so-called orchard contained only a few trees. Supposing it were as vast and as lush as a jungle; what an ill-favored slander and how sound a sleep of nescience it is to assert that Fatimat-uz-Zahra 'radi-allahu anha', Rasulullah's daughter, the most honorable of all women, the Betul, called so because she would not even turn to look at worldly property, would bear hostility to the three Khalifas, who had been given the good news by her father that they would enter Paradise, and would even curse them and advise other Muslims to do so, on account of something worldly. [May Allahu ta'ala protect us from saying or believing so!] This slander, which would bring discredit on hadrat Ali and hadrat Fatima's universal high distinction, is perhaps a sign of hostility, let alone love, towards them.

The huge book Qisas-i-Anbiya (A History of Prophets), written by Ahmad Jawdat Pasha of Lofja 'rahmatullahi alaih', who was born in 1238, and passed away in Istanbul in 1312 [c.e. 1894] and was buried in the graveyard to the south of the blessed mosque of Fatih, was printed in Istanbul in 1331. The following information is given in its three hundred and sixty-ninth (369) page: "Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' devoted his date orchard named Fedek in Hayber to the pious foundation and dictated how it was to be utilized. He advised in his will that income from the orchard should be given to foreign ambassadors, to visitors, guests and travelers. Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' implemented this will during his caliphate. When Fatima 'radi-allahu anha' asked for it as (she thought it was) a share for her from the inheritance (her father had left behind), he said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say, 'No one can inherit (property) from us [Prophets]. Whatever we leave behind us is alms.' I can never change something established by Rasulullah. Otherwise, I fear I may deviate into an erroneous way. When hadrat Fatima wanted to know who his (hadrat Abu Bakr's) inheritors were, he replied: My wife and children are. Then she asked: Why am I not my father's inheritor, then? The Khalifa's answer was: I heard your father, the Messenger of Allah say, 'No one can be our inheritors.' Therefore you cannot be his inheritor. However, I am his Khalifa. Whoever he used to give when he was alive, I shall give. It is my duty to give you whatever you need, provide aid in your matters, and serve you. Upon this hadrat Fatima was quiet and never talked about inheritance again." This is the end of the passage from Qisas-i-Anbiya.

The number of the Sunni Muslims living on the earth has always been many times that of those people without a Madhhab in every century. Hurufis curse the Ahl as-Sunnat, who are much more numerous than themselves, and call them disbelievers. If the Ahl as-Sunnat Muslims respond to their bold and unfair inculpation in kind and say that they are heretics, the party whose number is overwhelmingly in the ascendant is more likely to be right.

Furthermore, it is thoroughly contradictory to Qur'an al-Karim to say that Hadrat Ali was inimical towards the three Khalifas 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain' or that hadrat Fatima cursed the Ashab al-kiram on account of an orchard. The second Ayat al-Karima of Maida sura purports, "Allahu ta'ala calls His born servants to help one another in birr and Taqwa and to get on well with one another. Do not help in sinning or enmity." If the Ashab al-Kiram did not love one another, if Muslims cursed one another and called one another disbelievers, this would be a sinful state, which is quite contrary to birr and taqwa. And this in turn would mean to say that Hadrat Ali and hadrat Fatima 'radi-allahu anhuma' disobeyed the Ayat al-Karima. Saying, on the other hand, that these people "did not know that by opposing to Hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate and bearing hostility towards the Ashab al-Kiram they would cause Muslims coming after them to call one another disbelievers, which in turn would lead to a convention quite counter to the Ayat al-Karima. If they had known, they would have given up this behavior," would mean to deny their superiority and their ability in kashf and karamat.

Ghawth al-A'zam Sayyad Abd al-Qadir Geilani [born in 471, and passed away in Baghdad in 561 (C.E. 1166)], who was one of the descendants of Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anhu' and at the same time one of the greatest Awliya, gives the following information in his book Gunyat-ut-talibin: "According to the Shiites, caliphate is the exclusive right of the twelve imams. These people are impeccable. They never commit sins. Kashf and keramet can be seen only on them. They know about everything that has happened and everything that will happen." On the other hand, it would be contradictory with this belief to say that hadrat Ali, who (they allege) knew everything down to the number of sand grains, did not know that his not voting for hadrat Abu Bakr would cause millions of Muslims to deviate from the right way.

We have already explained in our brief account of hadrat 'Umar's 'radi- allahu anh' caliphate that caliphate is a heavy burden. Now, which would be wiser for a Muslim to do; to feel sorry because the other Muslims did not elect him and to bear hostility against them for this reason, or to be happy because he was not given a heavy burden? In addition, if he knows that his hostility will cause mischief and instigation among Muslims till the end of the world, he will necessarily support the Khalifa by voting for him willingly.

The hundred and eighty-fifth ayat of Al-i-'Imran sura and the twentieth ayat of Hadid sura purport, "Worldly life consists of only such things as will delude the human beings." The thirty-second ayat of En'am sura purports, "Worldly life comprises amusement and trifling. For those who fear Allah, life in the Hereafter is more beneficial. Why don't you realize that this is so?" The twenty-eighth ayat of Enfal sura and the fifteenth ayat of Teghabun sura purport, "Be it known that you have been given property and children only to assay you. Allahu ta'ala shall give you very grand reward in return for your goodness." The thirty-eighth ayat of Tawba sura purports, "Do you like life in this world better than the Hereafter? Profits gained in this worldly life are much fewer than those in the Hereafter." The forty-sixth ayat of Kehf sura purports, "Property and offspring are the ornaments of worldly life. The thawabs (that are given) for the good deeds and which are eternal are better in the opinion of thine Rabb (Allah)." Some sixty-six other similar ayat al-karimas dissuade from setting the heart on worldly property and worldly position. Innumerous hadith ash-Sharifs have been expressed to emphasize this importation. For instance, it is declared in a hadith-i-qudsi, "O you the son of Adam! You have spent your life storing worldly goods. You have never desired Paradise." Certainly, hadrat Ali, who was the entrance to the town of knowledge, and Fatimat uz-Zahra, who was the highest of women, 'radi-allahu anhuma', knew these ayat al-karimas better than anyone else did. Could we ever expect these people to have been sorry about worldly positions or to quarrel over worldly property such as a date orchard?

Question: Their sorrows or quarrels did not originate from their fondness for the world. Seeing that hadrat Abu Bakr and 'Umar had committed a sin by seizing caliphate by force, they tried to rescue them from this sinful position.

Answer: The hundred and sixty-fourth ayat of En'am sura and the fifteenth ayat of Isra sura purport, "No sinner will also have the responsibility for someone else's sin." Supposing, [though impossible], hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' and most of Rasulullah's 'alaihis-salam' Sahaba somehow committed a sin, this sin would not have any effect on hadrat Ali according to this ayat al-karima, and it would still not be necessary for him to fight on account of it. Then, would it ever be possible for him to commence a fight that would cause hundreds of millions of people to be burned eternally in Hell?

This faqir, [that is, 'Uthman Effendi 'rahima-hullahu ta'ala], asked one of the Shii scholars, "Hadrat Fatima's 'radi-allahu anh' being offended with the Ashab al-kiram for not giving her the date orchard would mean fondness for the world, which in turn would be something impermissible." He replied,"Her being offended did not originate from fondness for the world. It was because she did not like a wicked deed." With this evasive answer he blemished Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' daughter, who was as clean as pure water. For something done in a manner compatible with Islam would sound wicked only to the nafs-i-ammara. I remembered this fact and made the following explanation. He was so stupefied that he could say nothing. My explanation was: Everyone reading history knows this event: In a Holy War Imam-i-Ali 'radi-allahu anh' threw an unbeliever down to the ground and was about to deal him the fatal blow, when his desperate opponent spat all the foul contents in his mouth out into his face. His face dirtied all over, the imam gave up killing the unbeliever. The unbeliever, who was already out of his mind, was bewildered all the more. "Why did you give up," he asked. "Are you afraid?" Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' let the unbeliever go, saying, "I was going to kill you with the commandment of Allahu ta'ala because you would not become a Muslim. But now my nafs is your enemy because of the foul act you have done. If I kill you now, I will have done so to do the wish of my nafs. Thus my killing you will earn me sinfulness instead of thawab." Upon hearing these statements, the unbeliever admired the superiority of the Islamic religion on which Imam-i-Ali's conscience was based and uttered the word kalima-i-shahadat with all his heart, thus becoming a Muslim willingly. The two people, who were mortal enemies a few minutes earlier, were now brothers hugging each other.

Ibrahim bin Ad-ham 'rahima hullahu ta'ala', one of the greatest Awliya, was born in Balh in 96, and passed away in Damascus in 162 [C.E. 779]. Formerly he was the Padishah (emperor) of Balh. He left his throne and came to Mecca al-mukarrama. He made a living carrying firewood on his back. He fought against his nafs till his death.

Fatih Sultan Muhammad Khan (Mehmed the Conqueror) 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih', the seventh Ottoman Padishah, was born in the hijri year 833. He conquered Istanbul from the Byzantines in 857 [C.E. 1453], thus ushering in a new era. He passed away in 886. His father, Sultan Murad Khan II, the sixth Ottoman Padishah, was born in 806, and passed away in 855 [C.E. 1451]. He was buried in Bursa. He became the Padishah in 824. In 847 he left the throne of his own accord to his son and retired to Maghnisa, where he spent the rest of his life worshipping in seclusion.

Since it is a fact as manifest as daylight that hadrad Ali and Fatimat uz-Zahra were no lower than the emperors mentioned above in realizing the fruitlessness of the world and struggling against the nafs, it would be virtually impossible for a Muslim to say that these people mourned, let alone harbor a grudge, on account of worldly property or rank. There is no doubt as to that these calumniations were produced by a hypocritical Jew named Abdullah bin Saba'. In the time of hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' this Jew left the Yaman for Egypt, and thence to Medina, where he settled under the pretense of a new Muslim and did Islam such irreparable harm as others have not been able to do so far.

The hundred and thirty-third ayat of Al-i-'Imran sura purports, "Run for asking for forgiveness from thine Rab (Allah) and for entering Paradise. Work for this end! Paradise is as large as heavens and earth. Paradise has been prepared for those who fear Allahu ta'ala. These people will give their property in the way shown by Allah, regardless of whether they have little or much. They will not let others sense their anger. They will forgive everyone. Allahu ta'ala loves those who are kind and generous." The tenth ayat of Hujurat sura purports, "believers are brothers to one another. Make peace among your brothers!" In about thirty other similar ayat al-karimas believers are commanded not to become angry with one another, to be kind and generous to one another, and to forgive one another. It is declared in a hadith ash-Sharif, "Allahu ta'ala will have mercy on those who have mercy on one another. He is merciful. Be merciful on those that are on the earth so that angels in heaven be merciful on you." Some fifty other similar hadith ash-Sharifs command overcoming one's wrath and being kind and generous and teach our duties as human beings.

Consequently, if hadrat Ali and Fatimat uz-Zahra 'radi- allahu anhuma' had been indignant about a worldly rank or a few date trees and had borne hostility against the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' throughout their lives instead of forgiving them, they would have disobeyed these ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs. Could this be at all possible? Such allegations would blemish their high honor.

In order to protect these two beloved ones of Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' against any probable disfigurement, the 'Ulama of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' have avoided making such absurd statements about them and specially advised to love them by stating that "Loving these superior people will cause one to die in iman (as a believer)." Whose love for these superior people is true; that which is claimed by the Shiis or the one recommended by the Ahl as-sunnat? Anyone with reason and logic will easily see the distinction.

It is a universally known fact that hadrat Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' Ummat are brothers and love one another very much. For instance, one day Abdullah ibni 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma' entered Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' blessed presence. The Messenger of Allah praised and lauded him highly by uttering this hadith ash-Sharif: "On the Judgement Day every person will be given his berat, i.e. warrant for his salvation, after all his deeds have been measured. Abdullah has already been given his berat (when he is) in the world yet." When he was asked the reason for this, he (Rasulullah) said, "He not only has wara' and taqwa, but also expresses the following supplication whenever he prays: 'Ya Rabbi! Make my body so big on the Judgement Day that I will suffice to fill up Hell. Thus the promise You have made to fill up Hell with human beings will be fulfilled and none of hadrat Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' Ummat will burn in Hell.' He has shown by this invocation that he loves his brothers in Islam more than himself." It is written in the book Menaqib-i-jihar yar-i-ghuzin that Abu Bakr as-Siddiq also would make an identical invocation in his prayers. It is beyond doubt that hadrat Ali's love for Muslims was several times stronger than that which was fostered by Abdullah Ibni 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum'. It would be impossible for him to have shown a dislike which would have caused eternal Hell fire to millions of Muslims only because he had not been made Khalifa.

The following event is written in the book Kimya-yi-saadat, by Imam-i-Ghazali, as well as in other books: During the Holy War of Tabuk a group of Sahabis were seriously wounded and were craving for water. Another Muslim came with a glass of water and offered it to one of them. The thirsty Sahabi would not take it and suggested to give it to one of his Muslim brothers whom he had heard asking for water. The water was thus passed from one Sahabi to another and they all attained martyrdom before having time to drink it. Such was the extent of love Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Sahaba 'ridwan-ullahi alaihim ajmain' had for one another. Could it ever be supposed that Imam-i- Ali (who risked his own life in all the Holy Wars, and Fatimat uz-Zahra 'radi-allahu anhuma', the beloved daughter of the Messenger of Allah, disliked the three Khalifas and most of the Ashab al-kiram? Such an allegation would be an accusation of a wicked and atrocious act prohibited by ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs, rather than an expression of admiration and praise. As these people were extremely pure and free from such atrocious and wicked deeds, it is quite obvious that assertions of this sort are lies and slanders fabricated by the enemies of Islam. For those who would like more detailed information, we recommend that they read part five, which is titled O My Brother; If You Wish To Die in Iman, You Should Love the Ahl al-bayt and the Ashab.

9- The jariya is alleged to say, "At the death of our master, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', as hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' was busy with funeral preparations, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and 'Umar Faruq 'radi-allahu anhuma' and five to six of the Ansar gathered under the bower belonging to the sons of Sakeefa and began to share the caliphate among themselves. At the end hadrat 'Umar held hadrat Abu Bakr's hand and said, 'You shall be the Khalifa. The other people being there agreed. Then hadrat 'Umar, with his sword drawn, roamed around the streets of Medina for three days, forcing anyone he came across to agree to Abu Bakr's caliphate. The second day hadrat Ali came to the place of meeting and said, 'Among you, I am the most knowledgeable, the most superior, and the bravest. How can you have the right to deprive me of caliphate?' Making other statements such as these, he insisted on his right, persuading twenty people to follow him. Later he agreed to Abu Bakr's caliphate, though unwillingly."

The truth, however, is this: When the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away, all the Sahaba were so deeply grieved that they were at a loss as to what to do. The disastrous affliction descended so heavily, so painfully on them that some of them became tongue-tied while some others felt so weak that they could not even stand up to go out. The fire of bereavement burned hadrat Ali, too, so he did not know what to do. Hadrat 'Umar was so confused that he took his sword and walked about in the streets, saying, "I shall behead anyone who says that the Messenger of Allah is dead." Malevolent munafiqs, on the other hand, attempted to exploit this perturbation. Seeing this tumult, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq entered the mosque, mounted the minbar, and made the following speech: "O the Sahaba of the Messenger of Allah! We worship Allahu ta'ala. He is always alive. He will never die. He will never cease to exist. The thirtieth ayat of Zumer sura purports, 'O my beloved Prophet! One day you shall certainly die. And certainly they, too, shall die.' As is declared by Allahu ta'ala, our master, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', has passed away." Making effective statements of this sort, he advised them. This speech eliminated the confused state among the Ashab al-kiram and made them to come to themselves. In fact, hadrat 'Umar, who was among the audience, said upon hearing the above-mentioned ayat al-karima from Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, "I had thoroughly forgotten this ayat al-karima, so much so that I thought it was a new revelation." Hadrat Abu Bakr as-Siddiq 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' was wise to the hypocrites' plan to stir up a tumult and thus to elect the Khalifa from among themselves and, leaving the job of making preparations for the funeral, he made for the place where the Ashab al-kiram were discussing the problem of caliphate election. At the end of the discussion all the people present voted for hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate. On the second Tuesday after Rasulullah's passing away hadrat Ali went to the mosque and paid homage to hadrat Abu Bakr. Thus hadrat Abu Bakr was made Khalifa by a unanimous vote.

Allahu ta'ala disapproves and prohibits vanity and arrogance in all the heavenly books He has sent to His born servants. For instance, the twenty-third ayat of Nahl sura of Qur'an al-karim purports, "Allahu ta'ala will absolutely not like the conceited!" According to a Biblical verse, on the other hand, the Apostles asked Isa 'alaihis-salam': O the Prophet of Allah! Who among us is the greatest and who is the smallest? In response to this question of theirs Isa 'alaihis-salam' stated, "The greatest one among you is the smallest; and the smallest one is the greatest." By this he meant, "He who thinks too much of himself is a mean person, and a modest person is a noble one." In addition, Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', the final and the highest Prophet, criticizes presumptuous people and praises modest ones in quite a number of his hadith ash-Sharifs. For instance, he states in a hadith ash-Sharif, "If a person condescends for Allah's sake, that is, if he does not consider himself superior to Muslims, Allahu ta'ala will heighten him." Scholars of Ahl as-sunnat state that Allahu ta'ala has endowed His born servants with a particle from each of His Attributes such as knowledge and power. Yet three of His attributes are peculiar to Him alone. He has not given any share from these three Attributes of His to any of His creatures. These three Attributes are Kibriya, being Ghani, and Creating. Kibriya means greatness, superiority. Being Ghani means not to need others and to be needed by all others. On the contrary, He has given His born servants three lowly, mean attributes. These are zul and inkisar, that is, being low and humiliated, being needy, and being fani, that is, ceasing to exist. Consequently, to be arrogant means to infringe on the Attribute (of Greatness) which belongs to Allahu ta'ala by rights. Arrogance does not become born servants. It is the gravest sin. It is declared in a hadith-i-qudsi, "Azamat (Pride) and Kibriya (Greatness) belong to me. I shall very bitterly torment those who wish to share these two Attributes with Me." It is for this reason that Islamic scholars and outstanding men of Tasawwuf have always advised Muslims to be modest. Muslims will not be selfish. Allahu ta'ala dislikes selfish people. Hadrat Abd-ul-Qadir-i-Geilani 'quddisa sirruh', one of the greatest Awliya and an outstanding leader of Tasawwuf, was born in the Gheylan city of Iran in 471, and passed away in Baghdad in 561 [C.E. 1166]. One day he, Sayyid Ahmad Rifai and a number of his disciples were sitting by the Tigris River. As they talked he displayed such karamats (miracles) as bewildered the audience. When one of them, entirely dazed with admiration, inadvertently let slip a laudatory remark, hadrat Abd-ul-Qadir-i-Geilani humiliated his self and woke the others from oblivion with the following modest reply: "I do not presume there could be a Muslim on earth lower than I am." Hadrat Ahmad Rifai was born in a village named (Umm-i-Ubaida), somewhere between Basra and Wasit, in 512, and passed away there in 578 [1183]. As is seen, arrogance, conceitedness is a wicked quality. Modesty, on the other hand, is good and beautiful. All Prophets were modest in everything they did. And certainly so were all the Ashab al-kiram. Their commending one another in the caliphate election and offering the office to one another shows that they were extremely modest. This being the case, it would have been vanity and arrogance for hadrat Ali to have challenged the Muslims by saying, "Is there anyone better learned, nobler and braver than I am?" to the Ashab al- kiram. It would have been a behavior reminiscent of the Iblis (Devil), who boasted and claimed to be better than He. As such statements would not have been compatible with that great and noble person, hadrat Ali, it is quite obvious that they are lies, aspersions fabricated and cast against Allah's Lion. Another absurdity is the statement alleging that hadrat 'Umar, in order to make sure that Abu Bakr become Khalifa, drew his sword and intimidated, forced the Ashab al-kiram. For the tribes called Bani Hashim and Bani Umayya, to which hadrat Ali was related, were the most powerful tribes among the Ashab al-kiram. Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and 'Umar ul-Faruq had few relations. It would have been impossible for hadrat 'Umar to draw his sword and compel these two tribes to make a choice agreeable to him. Furthermore, hadrat Ali was the Lion of Allah. It runs counter to logic to suppose that the Ashab al-kiram chose Abu Bakr instead of him merely because a single person, i.e. 'Umar, forced them to do so.

I heard the following story from one of the scholars of Kirkuk: I somehow went to the Iranian territory. I entered one of their mosques. A scholar was preaching there. During the preach he said, " One day hadrat Ali visited hadrat Abbas in his home. He saw him weeping and asked him why. He said, 'I nailed a few pieces of board above my front door for protection against the sun. 'Umar the Khalifa had them pulled down on the pretext that they might harm passers by. I cannot stand this insult.' Exasperated, hadrat Ali unsheathed his sword called Zulfikar and ran out, looking for 'Umar the Khalifa for revenge. However 'Umar was informed with the danger just in time to save his life." At this point one of his disciples asked for permission and said, "If hadrat Ali was the person to draw his sword against the Khalifa for a wooden curtain and frighten him into running away, why didn't he draw his sword as Abu Bakr was elected Khalifa and frighten away those who voted for him? If he had drawn his sword and walked over them, the Ummat-i-Muhammad (Muslims) would not have been broken into groups because of this and so many Muslims would not have deviated from the right way." Confused, the preacher vacillated for a while as to how to answer this. Then he began to shout, "This man's become an unbeliever. Beat him, kill him!" The helpless man was lucky enough to be merely thrown out of the mosque. So, these people are not only audacious enough to tell the open lie that hadrat 'Umar drew his sword and forced the Ashab al-kiram to vote for hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate, but they also have the face to allege that hadrat Ali drew a sword against hadrat 'Umar.

The events that took place among the Ashab al-kiram on the day when our master Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' honored the Hereafter with his presence are related in a mixture of very base and abhorrent slanders by some people. We therefore considered it appropriate to borrow from the book Qisas-i-Anbiya the following passage which narrates our master Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passing away and the events that the Ashab al-kiram experienced in the aftermath:

It was the twenty-seventh day of the (Arabic) month Safer in the eleventh year of the Hegira when our master Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' began to suffer a headache. He honored the room of his blessed wife hadrat Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' with his presence. He sent for Abd-ur-rahman bin Abi Bakr, told him he was going to dictate a written will recommending Abu Bakr as-Siddiq for the office of caliphate after him, and commanded him to bring an ink-well and a pen. As Abd-ur-rahman was to leave for the performance of the commandment, he (the blessed Prophet) said, "You will do it later. Let it wait now!" Then he honored the Masjid ash-Sharif with his blessed presence. The Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' heard the news and gathered together in the Masjid. Fakhr-i- 'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' mounted the minber, gave advice to his Sahaba, and asked them to forgive him if he had ever hurt them inadvertently. Then he commended Abu Bakr as-Siddiq for his superiority and high value among the Ashab and said that he liked him very much. A few days later his illness became more severe. The Ansar-i-kiram, i.e. the native people of Medina, were extremely grieved. They began to walk around the Masjid ash-Sharif like the wings of a propeller. Fadl the son of hadrat Abbas and hadrat Ali the son of Abu Talib informed Rasulullah about this state. The compassionate Prophet took the pains of walking to the Masjid ash-Sharif with the help of these two people, each of them supporting him under one arm. The Ashab al-kiram gathered together in the Masjid. The blessed Last Prophet mounted the minber. After making hamd-u-thena (thank, praise and laud) of Allahu ta'ala, he turned to the Ansar and declared; "O my Ashab! I have heard that you are worried about my death. Did any Prophet remain with his ummat eternally, so that you expect me to remain with you till eternity? Be it known that I am going to attain my Rabb (Allah). I advise you to respect the notables of Muhajirs." Then he stated, "O Muhajirs! My advice to you is this: Do good to the Ansar! They were good to you. They granted you asylum in their homes. Although they had difficulty in making their living, they held you prior to themselves. They shared their property with you. If any one of you takes command over them, let him take care of them and forgive them their faults." Then he gave them some beautiful, effective advice and stated, "Allahu ta'ala has granted a born servant of His the choice between staying in this world and attaining his Rabb (Allah). The born servant has preferred to attain his Rabb." This statement of his showed that he was going to pass away soon. Abu Bakr as-Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh' knew what this statement meant and began to weep, saying, "May our lives be sacrificed for your sake, o the Messenger of Allah!" Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' ordered him that he must be patient and enduring. Tears were falling from his blessed eyes. He declared, "O my Ashab! I am pleased with Abu Bakr, who sacrificed his property faithfully and with ikhlas for the sake of Din-i-Islam. Were it possible to acquire a friend on one's way to the next world, I would choose him." Then he ordered that those Sahabis whose doors opened into the Masjid ash-Sharif should close their doors, with the exception of Abu Bakr 'radi- allahu anh'. Then, out of kindness he made the following speech:

"O Muhajirs and o Ansar! When the time for something is known, it would be of no use hurrying for it. Allahu ta'ala does not hurry about any of His born servants. If a person attempts to change the qadha and qadar of Allahu ta'ala and overpower His Will, He will subdue him with His Wrath and ruin him. If a person tries to trick and deceive Allahu ta'ala, he will deceive himself and lose control of his own matters. Be it known that I am clement and merciful towards you. You will attain the blessing of meeting me again. The place you will meet me is by the pond (called) Kawthar. He who wishes to enter Paradise and attain the blessing of being with me there, should not talk idly. O Muslims! Disbelief and wrongdoing will cause change in the blessings and decrease in one's subsistence. If people obey the commandments of Allahu ta'ala, their presidents, commanders, governors will be merciful and benign towards them. If they are wicked, indecent, inordinate and sinful, they will not attain merciful presidents. As my life has been useful to you, so my death will bring you good and compassion. If I beat or insulted any one of you unjustly, I am ready for him to revenge by treating me in kind; or if I seized anyone's property unjustly, let him come forward and take it back; I am ready to pay back. For worldly punishment is far less vehement than that which will be inflicted in the Hereafter. It is easier to endure." He dismounted the minber. After performing the namaz he mounted the minber again, made his will, and gave some more advice. Finally he stated, "I entrust you to Allahu ta'ala," and honored his room with his blessed presence. During his illness, whenever the Adhan (Azan) was called he went out to the Masjid and performed the namaz in jamaat, he himself being the imam. Three days before his passing away his illness became more serious. He could no longer go out to the Masjid. So he ordered, "Tell Abu Bakr to (take my place as the imam and) conduct the namaz of my Ashab!" Throughout Rasulullah's lifetime Abu Bakr as-Siddiq assumed the duty of imam and conducted the namaz seventeen times. He ordered hadrat Ali to carry on the funeral services. He had received a few golds before his illness. He gave some of them to the poor, and the remaining few to hadrat Aisha 'radi-allahu anha'. On the tenth day, Saturday, of Rabi'ul-awwal, Allahu ta'ala sent him Jabrail (Gabriel) 'alaihis-salam' to ask him how he was. The following day, Sunday, the angel visited him again, asked him how he was and gave him the good news that Aswad-i-Anasi the liar, who had been claiming to be a Prophet in the Yaman, had been killed. And Rasul-i-akram, in his turn, gave the good news to his Ashab. On Sunday Rasulullah's illness became heavier. Hadrat Usama, who had been appointed Army Commander by the Messenger of Allah, arrived. Rasulullah was lying in his bed, subconscious. He did not say anything to Usama. However, he raised his blessed arms and rubbed them gently on him. This meant that he asked a blessing on him. On Monday the Ashab al-kiram were performing the morning prayer in lines behind hadrat Abu Bakr as-Siddiq in the Masjid ash-Sharif, when hadrat Fakhr-i-'alam came to the Masjid ash-Sharif. He saw his Ummat (Muslims) worshipping in lines. He was pleased and smiled. He, too, adapted himself to hadrat Abu Bakr and performed the namaz behind him. When the Ashab al-kiram saw Rasulullah in the Masjid they thought he had recovered from his illness and rejoiced. Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' honored hadrat Aisha's room with his presence and went to bed. "I want to enter the presence of Allahu ta'ala without leaving any worldly property behind myself. Give the golds you have to the poor, all of them!" Then his fever increased. After a while he opened his eyes again and asked hadrat Aisha 'radi-allahu ta'ala wa an Abiha' if she had dispensed the golds. She said she would. He ordered her again and again to distribute them immediately. When they were all dealt out immediately he stated, "I am relieved now."

Usama 'radi-allahu anh' came back. The Messenger of Allah said, "May Allahu ta'ala help you! Go out for war." So Usama went out to his army and immediately gave the order to move.

At that hour the illness became worse. He sent for his blessed and very much beloved daughter Fatima-tuz-Zahra. He said something into her ear. Hadrat Fatima wept. He said something again. This time she smiled. It was found out afterwards that the first thing he had said was: "I am going to die." This had made her cry. Then, when he had said, "Of my Ahl al-bayt, you will be the first one to join me (in the Hereafter)," she had rejoiced at the good news and smiled.

In the afternoon the same day Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' and Azrail 'alaihis-salam' (Angel of Death) came to the door together. Jabrail 'alaihis- salam' entered. He said that Azrail 'alaihis-salam' was at the door awaiting permission to enter. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' gave permission. Azrail 'alaihis-salam' entered, greeted, and informed with the command of Allahu ta'ala. Rasul-i-akram 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' looked at Jabrail's 'alaihis-salam' face. The Archangel said, "O the Messenger of Allah! The Mala-i ala is awaiting you." Upon this Fakhr-i-'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "O Azrail! Come and perform your duty!" So the Angel took Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' blessed soul and transported it to the Ala-yi illiyyin.

When signs of death were seen on Rasul-i-akram, hadrat Umm-i-Eymen 'radi-allahu anha' sent a message to his son Usama. Upon receiving this sad news, Usama and 'Umar Faruq and Abu Ubaida left the army and came back to the Masjid an-Nabi. When Aisha-i- Siddiqa and the other women began to weep, the Sahabis in the Masjid ash-Sharif were astonished, confounded, and paralyzed. Hadrat Ali was motionless as if he were dead. Hadrat 'Uthman was left speechless. Hadrat Abu Bakr was in his home at that moment. When he arrived at the place, running, he entered the Hujra-i-saadat. Opened the face of Fakhr-i-'alam, and saw that the Prophet had passed away. The blessed face and all the limbs of the Messenger of Allah were elegant, clean, and luminous like a halo. He kissed him, saying, "O the Messenger of Allah! You are so beautiful, dead or living!" He wept bitterly. He put the cover back on the Prophet's blessed face. He consoled the people in the house. He went to the Masjid ash-Sharif. He advised the dumbfounded Sahaba and restored everything back to normal. Thus all of them believed that Rasulallah was dead. In the meantime, the army under Usama's command entered the city. Hadrat Burayda-t-ibni Hasib set up the flag he was holding in his hand. Pain and sorrow, like a poisonous dagger, pierced the hearts of the Sahaba. Their eyes were weeping, their tears were cascading, and their hearts were grieved with the woe of separation.

Hadrat Abbas, his son Fadl, hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum', and the people in the house began in tears to make preparations for the funeral. Hadrat Abu Bakr stood by the door, weeping, lamenting, and helping with the services. Lamenting and moaning, however, would not serve the purpose; a president, a Khalifa was requisite for the management of Muslims' affairs and the performance of Islam's commandments. At that time Abu Bakr as-Siddiq was the most suitable person for this task.

Hadrat Abbas and Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma' were closer to Rasulullah. Yet Fakhr-i-'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had held Abu Bakr, his companion in the cave, higher than all the other Sahaba. During his illness, on the day he had made his farewell speech to his Sahaba, he had said that Abu Bakr had been the person he had been pleased with most. He had closed all the doors opening into the Masjid ash-Sharif and permitted only Abu Bakr's door to be left open. Three days before his passing away he had appointed him Imam for his Ashab, thus granting him a position ahead of all the others in the performance of namaz, which is Islam's basic pillar. All these facts denoted that Abu Bakr was to be made Khalifa. What remained to be done was for the Ashab al-kiram to come together and elect him.

On the other hand, some of the Ansar attempted to elect a Khalifa from among themselves. They gathered under Bani Saida's brushwood shelter. Sad bin Ubada 'radi-allahu anh', the leader of Hazraj tribe, was there, unwell as he was. He said to the Ansar:

"O Ansar! No other tribe has the superior qualities you possess. Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' called his tribe to Islam for thirteen years in Mecca. Very few of them believed him. And the few who believed him were not numerous enough to make Jihad. When Allahu ta'ala conferred on you the honor of becoming Muslims, he blessed you with the fortune of protecting His Messenger and his Ashab and consolidating and promulgating the Islamic religion by making Jihad. You were the people who subdued the enemies. It was the fear of your swords that convinced the peasants of Arabia to become Muslims. Rasul-i-akram was pleased with you when he passed away. It is your right to preside now. Do not give this right to someone else." Most of the Ansar being there said, "You are right. May Allah help you. We elect you Khalifa."

The Aws (Evs) tribe of the Ansar did not like this. They gathered around Usayyad bin Hudayr, their chief.

The Muhajirs, on the other hand, would not have elected the Khalifa from among either of the two tribes of the Ansar. For the Quraish tribe was the highest and the most honorable of all the tribes of Arabia. A great controversy was imminent among the Muslims.

It was at this very critical and dangerous time that Abu Bakr and 'Umar and Abu Ubaida arrived at the place like the miraculous life saver, hadrat Hidir. At that moment one of the Ansar had stood up and was saying, "We helped Rasulullah. We gave asylum to the Muhajirs. The Khalifa must be one of us."

On the contrary, Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' would have Abu Bakr on his right hand side and 'Umar on his left everywhere. And he would say about Abu Ubaida, "He is the trustworthy one of this Ummat." 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum.' When all three of them suddenly appeared on the scene, it was as if Rasul-i-akram resurrected and came to the place. Everyone was silent, waiting eagerly to hear what they were about to say. Hadrat Abu Bakr said:

"This Ummat used to worship idols formerly. Allahu ta'ala sent them a Messenger so that they should worship Him. Unbelievers found it difficult to abandon the religion of their forefathers. Allahu ta'ala blessed the Muhajirs with the honor of becoming believers. They became Rasulullah's companions and fellow-sufferers. They patiently shared with him the persecutions inflicted by the enemies of religion. They are the earth's first worshippers of Haqq (Allah) and believers of His Messenger. For this reason, the Khalifa will have to be from among them. No one can be their partner in this respect. It would only take cruelty to try to deprive them of this right. O Ansar! Your services to Islam could not be denied, either. Allahu ta'ala chose you as helpers to His religion and Prophet. He sent His Rasul (Messenger) to you. After the people who had the honor of being the first Muhajirs, no one is more valuable than you are. You embraced the Messenger of Allah. The honor of boasting about having helped him belongs to you. No one would dispute this. Yet all the people of Arabia wish that the Khalifa be from among the Quraish. They do not want to see someone else as the Khalifa. For everyone knows that the Quraish are the highest of the Arabs with respect to genealogy and virtue. And their land is in the middle of Arabia. Let us be the commanders, and you will be our viziers, counsellors. Nothing will be done without taking your counsel."

Then hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' said, "O Ansar! Rasulullah entrusted you to us during his illness. He would have entrusted us to you if you were to occupy the commanding position."

Being at a loss as to what to say, the Ansar-i-kiram began to think deeply. One of them, namely Hubab bin Munzir, stood up and suggested, "Let us have one Amir from among us and one from you." Hadrat 'Umar's answer was: "There cannot be two Emirs at the same time. The Arabs will not accept or obey the Khalifa unless he belongs to the same tribe as Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' did." Hubab protested, "O Ansar! The Arabs accepted this religion through your swords. Do not let anyone seize your right!"

Ubaida-tabnil-Jerrah 'radi-allahu anh' warned, "O Ansar! You are the people who served this religion in the beginning. Be careful lest you should be its first spoilers, too." Upon these statements, one of the Ansar, namely Bashir bin Sad bin Numan bin Ka'b bin Hazraj 'radi-allahu anh' of the Hazraj tribe stood up and said:

"O Muslims! Muhammad 'alaihis- salam' belongs to the Quraish tribe. It would be more appropriate for the Khalifa to be from among them, too. It would be correct. Yes, we were earlier to become Muslims. We had the honor of serving Islam with our property and lives. Yet we did all these because we love Allah and His Messenger 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. We do not expect any worldly recompense for this service of ours." Hubab questioned, "O Bashir! Are you jealous of your paternal first cousin?"

Bashir 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' replied, "I swear by the name of Allah that I am not. I only do not want anyone to infringe on the rights of the Quraish."

At that moment hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' said, "I nominate these two people for you. choose one of them," pointing to 'Umar and Ubaida. Both of them drew back and said, "Who could stand before a person whom hadrat Prophet placed before others?" Voices were raised. Everyone began to talk his way.

Hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' began to talk. Turning towards hadrat Abu Bakr, he said, "Rasul-i-akram made you his Khalifa in the namaz which is Islam's archstone. He placed you before all of us. Hold out your hand! I have chosen you Khalifa." Ubaida was about to hold out his hand to choose Abu Bakr, too, when Bashir sprang forward, held Abu Bakr's hand, and paid homage to him before the others did. "You are our new Khalifa," he said. 'Umar and Abu Ubaida paid homage, too. All the members of the Aws tribe, headed by their chief Usayyad bin Hudayr, came and paid homage. Upon seeing them, the Hazraj tribe paid homage, too.

If Abu Bakr, 'Umar and Abu Ubaida 'radi-allahu anhum' had not arrived on time, Sad bin Ubada would have been paid homage, which in turn would have given way to hostilities between the two tribes Aws and Hazraj. The Quraish tribe, on the other hand, would have been thoroughly against this and the Muslims would have been broken to factions. Abu Bakr as-Siddiq prevented this great danger. Owing to his being elected Khalifa, Islam weathered a crisis which would have let to its fracturing.

Hadrat Bashir bin Sad, who had a major role in this service, joined the Holy Wars of Aqaba II, Badr, Uhud and all the others and fought heroically. He attained martyrdom in the Yemama Holy War in the twelfth year of the Hijrat.

After being elected Khalifa on Monday, hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' went to the Masjid ash-Sharif on Tuesday and convened the Sahaba there. He mounted the minber, made hamd-u-thena (thanking, praising and lauding Allahu ta'ala), and made this speech: "O Muslims! I have become your governor and president. Yet I am not the best among you. If I do good, help me. If I do something wrong, show me the right way! Rectitude is trustworthiness. Lying is treachery. Someone who is weak among you is very valuable for me. I will save his right. And someone who depends on his power is weak to me. For I shall take others' rights back from him. Insha-allahu ta'ala, let none of you neglect Jihad. Those who cease from Jihad will become despicable. Obey me as long as I obey Allah and His Messenger. If I disobey Allah and His Messenger and deviate from the right way, you will no longer have to obey me. Get up, let us perform namaz! May Allahu ta'ala bless you all with goodness!"

Then they completed their duty pertaining to Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' funeral. Until evening they entered the room in groups and all of them, men, women, children and slaves alike, performed the namaz (prescribed for the funeral) without forming jamaats, (that is, each of them performed the namaz individually). It was in the darkness of Wednesday night that they buried the blessed Prophet in the same room.

The following account is given in the four hundred and tenth page of Qisas-i Anbiya: As long as Rasulullah lived, the Wahy was revealed to him and thus the Ummat (Muslims) were informed (with the commandments of Allahu ta'ala). Revelation of the Wahy was out of the question after him. Yet most of the Sahaba had committed Qur'an al-karim to their memories. And the matters that are not explained openly in Qur'an al-karim were being observed in accordance with the Sunnat-i-seniyya, that is, the records containing Rasulullah's utterances and actions as well as actions which he did not prohibit though he saw others do them. However, the Sunnat-i-seniyya and hadith ash-Sharifs were not in the memories of all the Sahaba. For some of them were busy with buying and selling at market places, some worked looking after their date orchards, and others were peasants working on farms. They therefore had not had time to attend all the Sohbats (of the Messenger of Allah). Those who had attended a Sohbat would tell what they had heard to the ones who had missed it. Thus a person would learn the hadith ash-Sharifs he had not heard by asking those who had heard them. In fact, it took them a lot of thinking to decide where to bury the Messenger of Allah. Following a hadith ash-Sharif narrated by Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, they buried him at the place where he had passed away. Likewise, they had to make painstaking inquiries about how they should deal out the property he had left among his inheritors. It was Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, again, who quoted the hadith ash-Sharif, "Prophets do not leave an inheritance behind them." So they acted accordingly.

Aisha-i-Siddiqa 'radi-allahu anha', the mother of Muslims, stated: "When Rasul-i-akram 'Salla-Allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away, the hypocrites rose in rebellion. The Arabs became renegades, that is, they abandoned Islam. The Ansar held themselves aloof. The disasters that befell my father would have crushed mountains had they befallen them. The case as this was, wherever there was a disagreement, my father would be there to solve it and reconcile the people concerned."

When the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' were confronted with something they did not know how to do, (they would look the matter up in the Sunnat-i-seniyya,) and if they did not find a solution in the Sunnat-i-seniyya, either, they would (decide how to) do it through a method called re'y (finding) and qiyas (comparison), that is, by comparing it with other matters they knew how to do. This paved the way to ijtihad. If the ijtihads of the Ashab al-kiram or other mujtahids agree on a matter, there will be no doubt left pertaining to that matter. This concurrence of ijtihads was called Ijma-i-ummat. Making ijtihad requires having profound knowledge. Scholars who possess this deep knowledge (and are therefore capable of making ijtihad) are called Mujtahid. If the ijtihads made by mujtahids do not agree with one another, it becomes wajib for each mujtahid to act upon his own ijtihad.

The caliphate election was a matter of ijtihad, too. There were hadith ash- Sharifs denoting that Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman and Ali 'radi-allahu anhum' would become Khalifa. Yet the time for any of them was not stated clearly. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' did not say, "Appoint so and so Khalifa after me." He left this job over to the Ashab al-kiram to decide on. The ijtihads made by the Ashab al-kiram pertaining to caliphate election did not agree with one another. There were three different ijtihads:

The first one was the Ansar's re'y [finding]; They said that the person "who has served Islam most must be Khalifa. The Arabs became Muslims in the shade of our swords. Therefore one of us must be Khalifa."

The second ijtihad was the re'y of most of the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain'; they said that the Khalifa "must be powerful enough to enforce the regulations among the Ummat. The most honorable and the most powerful tribe among the Arabs is the Quraish. The Khalifa will have to be one from among the Quraish."

The third ijtihad was the re'y of the Hashimis, who said that one of Rasulullah's relations must be Khalifa.

The correct one of these three ijtihads was the second one. Yes, the Ansar were of great help to Islam. And the relations of Rasul-i-akram, on the other hand, were very honorable. Yet caliphate was not a chair for rest granted as a reward for past services. Nor was it an inheritable property to be handed over to relations. The second ijtihad entailed that caliphate was to be given to the Quraish tribe not because Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' was from this tribe, but because the Quraish was a tribe renowned throughout Arabia for its honor, power, influence and dignity. For caliphate was an office to provide unity, loyalty and social order among Muslims. And doing this, in its turn, would necessitate being authoritative. The Khalifa's duty is to prevent mischief and instigation, to secure peace and freedom, to administer Jihad, and to maintain order so that Muslims carry on their affairs and businesses easily and smoothly. Doing all these things requires power.

What the Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' took into consideration in the caliphate election was to unite the Muslim tribes so as to establish a powerful state. Giving the office of caliphate to the Hashimis, who were only one out of the ten Quraishi tribes, would hardly provide this unity. The higher the number of the people establishing a government, the more powerful the government. For this reason, it would be necessary to elect one of the notables of the Quraish. And the person to be elected would have to be a superior one, not only in tribal identification and genealogy, but also from the Islamic point of view. The highest Quraishi tribe at that time was (Bani Umayya). And the most outstanding personage in that tribe was Abu Sufyan bin Harb. Yet the harms he had inflicted on the Muslims during the Uhud war had not yet been totally forgotten. He had already become a true and staunch Muslim. Yet the other Muslims could not fully trust him yet. Consequently, no one could be placed before Rasulullah's faithful companion in the cave, who had become a Muslim earliest and caused others to become Muslims, too, and who had been appointed (by Rasulullah) as the imam (to conduct public prayers). It was certain that everyone would vote for him. In addition, since the normal procedure was for all the Sahaba to come together and elect the Khalifa, the Ansar's attempt for an election among themselves could cause a commotion. Thus, by running to the place, hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' forestalled this danger and saved Muslims from a grave tumult.

During these events hadrat Ali was at his wife hadrat Fatima's home 'radi-allahu anhuma'. Zubair, who was Abu Bakr as-Siddiq's son-in-law, and Mikdad and Selman and Abu Zer and Ammar bin Yaser 'radi-allahu anhum' were there, too. Their ijtihad concurred with that of the third group. So Abbas came to hadrat Ali and held out his hand in homage to him. Yet the latter had heard that hadrat Abu Bakr had become Khalifa; he therefore refused the offer. Abu Sufyan said, "Hold out your hand and I shall pay homage to you. I shall fill everywhere with cavalrymen and infantrymen if you want me to." Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala' refused the notion, saying, "O Aba Sufyan! Do you want to cause faction among the Islamic nation?"

As it is seen, both Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma' were sensitive about a probable instigation or controversy among the Muslims. At first hadrat Ali was somewhat sorry because he had not been called to the election held under Sakeefa's brushwood shelter. As is explained in the book Musamarat, by Muhyiddin-i- Arabi, and in the book Daw 'us-sabah, by Hamid bin Ali Imadi (1175 [A.D. 1757]), Abu Ubaida came to the house where hadrat Ali was. He told him all the statements he had heard from hadrat Abu Bakr and 'Umar. [These statements, very long and effective, are quoted in Qisas-i-Anbiya]. Hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' listened. The statements were so impressive that he felt as if he had been penetrated to the marrow. He said, "O Aba Ubaida! My sitting in the nook in a house is not intended to become Khalifa or to protest against the Amr-i-maruf or to castigate a Muslim. Separation from the Messenger of Allah has shocked me out of my senses and driven me mad." The following morning he went to the Masjid ash-Sharif. Walking past all the others, he went near hadrat Abu Bakr, paid homage, and sat down. The Khalifa said to him, "You are blessed and honored to us. When you are angry, you fear Allah. And when you are happy you thank Him. How lucky for the person who will not demand any more than a position bestowed on him by Allah. I did not want to be Khalifa. I had to accept it lest there should arise a fitna (instigation, mischief). There is no resting for me in this duty. A heavy burden has been imposed on me. I do not have the strength to carry it. May Allah give me strength! Allahu ta'ala has taken this burden off from your back. We need you. We are aware of your superior qualities."

Hadrat Ali and Zubair said that Abu Bakr was more suitable than anyone else for the caliphate. They said they had been sorry for not having been informed about the election beforehand, and they apologized for this. The Khalifa accepted their apology. [The statements which hadrat Ali made in praise of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq that day are written with documents in the (Turkish) book Se'adet-i Ebediyya, in the twenty-third chapter of the second volume; that chapter is the translation of the ninety-sixth letter]. Then hadrat Ali asked for permission and stood up. Hadrat 'Umar very kindly saw him off. As hadrat Ali left, he said, "My being so late to come here was not intended to oppose (Abu Bakr as) the Khalifa. And my coming here now is not out of fear." All the Hashimis followed hadrat Ali's example and paid homage. Thus a unanimity was realized.

Both hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma' managed very vigilant and wise performances throughout the caliphate election. Hadrat Ali's not being called to the meeting under Sakeefa's brushwood shelter was a fortunate event. Had he been there that day, the discussions between the Ansar and the Muhajirs would have been doubled with the joining of the Hashimis, which in turn would have made things all the more complicated.

Differences of ijtihads pertaining to the caliphate election are not for us to discuss or to comment on. They are the best Muslims. Each and every one of them is a star guiding to salvation. It is from them that the meaning of Qur'an al-karim was acquired. It is through them that hundreds of thousands of hadith ash-Sharifs were heard. And it is via them that the commandments and prohibitions of Allahu ta'ala were learned.

It would not be worthy of us to attempt to use the teachings we obtained from them as criteria for assessing their behaviors.

Yes, erring is a human attribute. Mujtahids will err, too. Yet a mujtahid will be rewarded with thawab anyway; ten times for not erring, and one reward if he errs.

Each and every one of the Ashab al-kiram is a pillar of Islam. Differences among them were based on ijtihad. They knew one another's value even when they criticized one another. If hadrat Zubair had preferred his personal considerations to his religious conceptions, he would not have disagreed with hadrat Abu Bakr, his father-in-law. Hadrat 'Umar was the most eager supporter of hadrat Abu Bakr in the caliphate election. On the other hand, he, again, was the person who cherished and praised hadrat Ali most. One day hadrat 'Umar asked hadrat Ali a question. The latter answered the question. Upon this he said, "I entrust myself to Allah's protection from confronting a difficult question in hadrat Ali's absence." Hadrat Ali used to say, "After Rasul-i-akram, the most useful people in this Ummat are Abu Bakr and 'Umar." 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain.'

A month later hadrat Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' mounted the minber and said, "I want to resign from the office of caliphate. If you expect to see me following precisely the same way taken by the Messenger, this is impossible. For the devil could not approach him. In addition, he would be revealed the Wahy from heaven." Could the hearts of such noble persons harbor any ambitions for rank, positions? Could any tongue speak ill of them?

Actually, Fatima-t-uz-Zahra 'radi-allahu anha' was so deeply distressed with the bereavement of her father's death that she could not go out. Hadrat Ali also mostly stayed at home to keep her company in her bereavement; therefore he could not frequently attend the Khalifa's sohbat. However, after hadrat Fatima's passing away he paid homage again. He would often enter the Khalifa's presence, help him and make suggestions. 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain'.

As will be concluded from the abovementioned information which we have derived from Qisas-i Anbiya, the Shiite allegation that hadrat Ali and six other Sahabis did not pay homage to hadrat Abu Bakr, is ungrounded. To stand against the unanimity of the Ashab al-kiram by not accepting hadrat Abu Bakr (as the Khalifa) and to make immoderate statements in this subject would not only have been incompatible with Islam, but it would also have meant to disobey Rasulullah's command to his Sahaba: "be in unity and avoid controversies." To say that hadrat Ali and six other Sahabis and Fatima-t-uz- Zahra the highest of women did not carry out this command and disobeyed Islam would mean, let alone loving them, to controvert and belittle those great religious leaders. The controversy imputed to them is so grave that it has inflicted a fatal wound in Islam and caused millions of Muslims to deviate from the right way till the end of the world. The harms done to Islam and the bloodbath of millions of Muslims perpetrated by those who dissented from the Ahl as-sunnat by reading the lies and slanders fabricated by Hurufis, are the causes of Islam's status quo. The harms which groups named Ahmadi and Qadiyani inflicted on Muslims are in the open. Could a wise and reasonable person with a light of Islam and a love of iman in his heart say that hadrat Ali was the cause of this great malice?

Abd-ul-qadir-i-Geilani 'quddisa sirruh', one of the greatest Awliya, gives the following account in his book Gunya: "Of the seventy-two groups of bidat (aberration), nine are the most prominent. Shiites are one of these nine groups. They have parted into twenty sub- groups, all of which dislike one another. The group of Abdullah ibni Saba' are like Jewry. For instance, Jews say that the right to become an imam belongs to a certain class of people. Likewise, these people allege that caliphate is a right which belongs to Imam-i- Ali's descendants, and that it is not permissible for other people to preside over Muslims. According to Jews, Jihad [War] is not permissible until the emerging of Dajjal. And according to the Saba' group, Jihad is not permissible until the emerging of Mahdi. The twelfth imam, i.e. Muhammad Mahdi, who was the tenth grandson of hadrat Ali, was the son of Hasan Askari. He was born in 259. When he was seventeen years old he entered a cave and never came back out. The Saba' group think that he was the promised Mahdi who according Islam's teachings will appear in the latest time. Jews do not break their fast before stars appear in the sky. This is the case with the Saba' group, too. Jews make masah on their socks (in ritual ablution). The Saba' group do the same. It is permissible for a Jew to kill a Muslim. And it is permissible for the Saba' group to kill the Sunnite Muslims. A woman divorced by a Jew can marry (another man) without having to wait for the time of iddat (according to Islam, length of time during which a divorced woman cannot marry another man). The Saba' group also do not wait for the time of iddat. According to Jews, having divorced a woman three times will not prevent from marrying her again. The Saba' group also will marry a woman whom they have divorced three times. Jews changed the Torah. There is not a single copy of the Bible that has remained intact on the earth today; nor is there a true copy of the Torah. Likewise, the Saba' group wrote the defiled forms of some ayats of Qur'an al-karim in their heretical books. This they did because they thought there were deductions and additions in Qur'an al-karim."

This faqir, ['Uthman Effendi means himself], the author of the book Tazkiya-i-Ahl al-bayt, was attending the Ministry of Education, when a pile of drafts of tafsir (explanation of Qur'an al-karim) written by the Saba' group arrived in a couple of chests. Permission was not given for their printing. They asked the reason: "Is there anything incompatible with Islam in it?" "Yes," I replied. "You write that hadrat Ali was a disbeliever." He was exasperated. "Don't be angry," I pacified. "Listen! According to the allegation written in the introduction, hadrat Talha asked hadrat Ali, 'It has been rumored that hadrat 'Uthman deducted seventy ayats from Qur'an al-karim and that hadrat 'Umar deleted eighty ayats. Is this rumor true?' When hadrat Ali affirmed Talha queried again, 'It is said that you possess the unchanged copy of the Qur'an. Do you?' Hadrat Ali's answer was: 'Certainly. And the copy I have is twice as copious as the existing ones.' When he was asked why he did not reveal it to Muslims, he complained, 'I would have given it to them if they had elected me Khalifa instead of Abu Bakr. Because they did not elect me, I am not going to give it to them. I shall advise in my will that it should be kept in secrecy by my offspring till the end of the world.' These things are written in your tafsir. Now I ask you for Allah's sake: Because Jewry concealed the twenty Pentateuchal verses informing about Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', Allahu ta'ala declares in Qur'an al-karim that they are disbelievers: 'Could there be anyone more cruel, more heretical then one who conceals my ayats?' According to your allegation, hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh' concealed a copy twice as extensive as Qur'an al-karim, thus retaining more than three thousand ayats. Doesn't this allegation of yours impute worse cruelty and heresy to the Lion of Allah? For Allah's sake, answer this properly." Astounded, he could not find any answer. He said, "I am neither Shiite nor Sunnite. I am a freemason."

Jews feel hostility to Jabrail 'alaihis-salam'. Likewise, asserting that by mistake Jabrail brought the Wahy to Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' instead of revealing it to hadrat Ali, the Saba' group have become hostile to Jabrail 'alaihis-salam'.

These facts show plainly that the fabricator of these lies could not be Shiite or Sunnite. Actually, he is a Jew named Abdullah bin Saba'.

One day I asked Mirza Rida, a Persian scholar who had traveled in Muslim countries for thirty to forty years: "You know all the Shiite groups. What is your impression about those people called Mulhid who live around Syria and Antioch?" "They are unbelievers because they worship Imam-i-Ali." When I asked him about the group called kizilbas (Kisilbash) who lived in Iraq, he informed, "They, too, are disbelievers because they deny most of the ayats of Allahu ta'ala." Then I inquired about Hurufis, who covered themselves with the innocent name, Baktashis. His answer was: "These people camouflage their credal system, it is not known well what their cult is really like. However, they deny the fard (commandments of Allahu ta'ala stated clearly in Qur'an al-karim). They say 'halal' about harams. For this reason, Hurufis are unbelievers, too." [Hadrat Haji Baktash-i Vali (Haji Baktash Wali), a Sunni Islamic scholar and a Wali, was born in Nishapur, Iran. He was a descendant of Imam-i-Musa Kazim. He came to Anatolia, where he began to promulgate the teachings of Ahl as-Sunnat. The then Ottoman Padishah, namely Sultan Orhan Gazi [b. 680; d. 761 (A.D. 1359)] visited him and was blessed with his benediction. This great scholar asked a blessing on the Janissaries, too. He passed away in 773 [A.D. 1371], during reign of the third (Ottoman) Padishah Sultan Murad Hudavendigar [b. 726; martyred in 791 (A.D. 1389)]. His mausoleum is at a site called Haji Baktash in Kirsehir. His disciples and people who followed the true way guided by that great Wali were called Baktashi. The Baktashis in our country (Turkey) follow the way taken by those true Muslims. When Shah Ismail was routed in the Caldiran war and fled, the Kizilbas, or Hurufi, soldiers in his army spread in Anatolia. In order to survive they took asylum in Baktashi convents. In the course of time they infested these convents with their heretical Hurufi beliefs. As of today there is next to none of these indecent drunkards left in our country]. Upon this I said, "Now there is only one Shiite group left: the Imamiyya group. There are five to ten million of these people. Today the number of the Sunnite Muslims is well over three hundred and fifty thousand million. There is no controversy among them to cause faction among Muslims. They all obey Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs. They all have the same heart, the same iman. How could one's tongue and conscience condone imputing to hadrat Ali a controversy that would lead to a tumult so grave as to break Muslims into groups opposing towards one another?" He answered, "The Sunnites are right in every respect. The Shiites are wrong. Only," he added, "one mistake the Sunnis have been making is their fanatical advocacy of Muawiya." This faqir (I) said, "We, too, hate Yazid and those who tormented and cursed the Ahl al-bayt and say that they were wicked people. As for hadrat Muawiya; we acknowledge that he erred in his ijtihad and that hadrat Ali's ijtihad was correct. Hadrat Muawiya's disagreeing with hadrat Ali and fighting him was based on ijtihad 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'. Yet he never criticized or vituperated hadrat Imam (Ali). Even as he fought against him he respected him, acknowledged his superiority, praised and lauded that noble Imam. The person whom you suppose to be hadrat Muawiya's enemy is actually very munificent. And his Rabb (Allah) is very compassionate, too. We therefore do not comment on the wars that took place among them. Quoting the ayat al-karima at the end of Fat-h sura, we say that they were very merciful towards one another."

[The book Barakat, which is also named Maqamat-i- Serhendiyya or Zubda-t-ul-maqamat, was written in the Persian language by Muhammad Hashim-i-Kishmi in India in 1037 [A.D. 1627]. A copy of the book exists at number 1317 in the (Murad Molla) library, located in the district called Yavuz Sultan Salim in Istanbul. It was reproduced by offset process in Istanbul in 1977].

Karamats (miracles that occur through the Awliya or other pious Muslims) of Imam-i- Rabbani Ahmad Faruqi are written in the eighth chapter of the second section of the book Barakat. Muhammad Hashim narrates the seventh of these karamats as follows: I had a young Sayyid class-mate in madrasa. One day he came panting. He gasped out a wonderful event he had experienced. He had witnessed a great wonder through hadrat Imam-i-Rabbani. He said:

I used to dislike those people who had fought against hadrat Ali; of them, hadrat Muawiya was the one I hated most. One night I was reading the book Maktubat (Letters) written by your master, [i.e. Imam-i-Rabbani]. It read, "Imam-i-Anas bin Malik said that hating or censuring hadrat Muawiya is like hating or censuring hadrat Abu Bakr and hadrat 'Umar. If a person curses him, he must be punished as if he cursed these two great Sahabis." When I read this I felt rather annoyed and said to myself, "How come he wrote this nonsense here!" I dropped Maktubat on the floor, lay in my bed, and soon fell asleep. I had a dream: That exalted shaikh of yours came towards me, indignant. With his both blessed hands he pulled me by the ears and said, "You ignorant child! You don't like what we have written and dump our book unto the floor. You were consternate when you read my writing; and you don't believe it. Now I will take you to a noble person so that you see for yourself! Let him tell you how wrong you are hating his friends, who are the Ashab of the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'." He pulled me along till we reached a garden. Leaving me in the garden, he proceeded alone. He entered a large room seen in the distance. A luminous faced great person was seated in the room. Bashful and respectful, he greeted that great person, who in his turn acknowledged the greeting, smiling. Observing the rules of manner due at such places, he kneeled before him. He was telling him something and pointing to me at the same time. I could see him looking at me from the distance and I knew he was telling him about me. After a while, that noble shaikh of yours stood up and beckoned to me. "That exalted person sitting in there is hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. Listen well and see what he says," he warned. We entered. I greeted. The luminous faced person said, "Never, never harbor any resentment in your heart against Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab! Never speak ill of any one of those great people! We and those brothers of ours know what our intentions were in those deeds of ours which look like wars in their outward appearances." Then, mentioning the honorable name of that elevated shaikh of yours, he added, "And never be opposed to his writings!" After listening to his advice, I searched my heart and found that the discord, the hostility I had felt against those who had made the so-called wars was still there. He knew how I was and became angry. look at your noble shaikh, he said, "His heart needs better cleaning. Give him a slap in the face!" Hadrat Shaikh dealt me a good slap in the face, which made me think to myself, "It was my love for this person that made me hate those people. And now he was so badly offended with my grudge against them. He wants me to cease from this mood. So I must forget about this animosity!" When I searched my heart once again, I found it perfectly purified of the hostility it had had. At that moment I woke up. My heart is quite free of that hatred now. The spiritual flavor I received from the dream and words has actuated drastic transformations in me. Now my heart does not contain any sort of love except that of Allah and I have much more belief in your exalted shaikh and the marifats in his writings.

No one will be blamed in the Hereafter for not having cursed others or for having held one's tongue in the world.

We have not been commanded to curse or swear at anyone, be it those unbelievers who inflicted very bitter torments and persecutions on our master the Fakhr-i-kainat 'alaihis- salawatu wattaslimat' and the Sahaba for thirteen years, nor even the five or six ferociously cruel people who were their chiefs. Even the names of these exorbitant brutes have long been forgotten, with the exception of Abu Jahl. It is not an Islamic commandment to curse or vituperate any people belonging to any religion on the earth. If a person performs the commands of Allahu ta'ala and avoids His prohibitions, the harams, he will not be called to account for not having cursed the devil even once in his lifetime. Nor will he be accused of having been friendly with the devil. On the other hand, if a person neglects the commandments and curses the devil hundreds of times daily, he will be called to account in the Hereafter and his having cursed the devil will not save him from torment. This person will be considered not as an enemy of the devil, but as one of his friends. Consequently, cursing this person or that in order to prove one's love for the Ahl al-bayt would be both preposterous from the mental point of view and futile, and even peculiar, according to Islam. Nadir Shah, the Iranian Emperor, ascended to the throne in 1148. He captured Delhi in India in 1152 [A.D. 1739]. He tried to capture Baghdad, too. He was killed during a mutiny that broke out in 1160. When his Nadir Shah raised the siege of Baghdad, he convened an assembly of Sunnite and Shiite scholars and appointed Abdullah bin Husain Suwaydi [b. 1104; d. 1174 (A.D. 1760)] 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaih' to preside over the assembly ( See the first part, Documents of The Right Word.). This assembly took a unanimous decision to eliminate the beliefs that caused differences between the Sunnite and Shiite Muslims, and the decision was undersigned by all the scholars who took part in the debates. Upon Nadir Shah's death this useful attempt had to remain on paper. At this point I should like to relate an episode which this subject reminds me of:

Nadir Shah asked the Shii scholars, "Will Jews, Christians and magians (unbelievers without a heavenly book, e.g. communists and freemasons) go to Paradise or Hell?" The unanimous answer was that these disbelievers would go to Hell. And when he asked where the Sunnite Muslims would go, "They will go to Hell," they said. This made the Shah angry. He said, "Did Janab-i-Haqq (Allah) create the eight worlds of Paradise for only a group of Iranian people?"

This faqir (I) went on Hajj in 1282 [A.D. 1866]. On the way I met an Iranian scholar named Hasan Effendi. I said to him, "The Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' are praised through many hadith ash-Sharifs. While this is the case, why do you feel hostility towards them and curse all of them?" He said, "I am not hostile against them. However, according to the majority of Shiites, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq took caliphate from Ali by violence, and the Sahaba supported him, thus becoming renegades." In response to this I said, "Did not our master Rasul-i-akram 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' know that these people would some day become renegades when he praised and lauded them?" His answer was, "He did not know that they would do so at the end. If he had known, he would not have praised any of them. He would have cursed all of them." Then I questioned, "Allahu ta'ala praises the Ashab al-kiram through various ayat-i-jalilas. Did not Allahu ta'ala know, either?" The Shiite could not answer this. I pursued: "Would it not be denigratory towards hadrat Ali to allege that he rowed over a worldly position?" He replied, "Hadrat Ali's raising a row with the Sahaba was not intended for a worldly rank, position. Our Master, Fakhr-i-kainat, had advised that Ali be appointed Khalifa. The Sahaba became renegades because they disobeyed this command. And hadrat Ali fought against them for the execution of this command of Rasulullah's." Upon this I asked this counter-question: "Shiites disobeyed so many of Rasulullah's commands. They invented numerous bidats. Very few of them perform the Islamic commandments and sunnats. Aren't they renegades according to your syllogism?" He could not answer. I went on, "Supposing hadrat Ali and hadrat Fatima were offended with the Ashab al-kiram, the former being so because he was not elected Khalifa and the later because she was not given the date orchard. It is haram for a believer to be offended or to become angry with his Muslim brothers and to remain cross with them for more than three days. How could it be justifiable to allege that they remained cross till the end of the world?" "Their being cross was because the others did not perform the commandment," he said. Upon this I said, "If believers disobey Islam, it will be fard to be offended with them and to admonish them to observe their duties. This, in its turn, will be done by the state by using force and by scholars by preaching. Other people will be offended in their hearts, which is the lowest grade of iman. Now, hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' was the lion of Allah. Why did he not have the commandment executed by using force? Was he too weak to do that? Although a person has the right to demand that the murderer of his father, mother or child be given death penalty for retaliation, the two hundred and thirty-seventh ayat of Baqara sura purports, 'If you forgive, this will be closer to taqwa,' and the forty-eighth and the hundred and sixteenth ayats of Nisa sura purport, 'Allahu ta'ala will forgive the sins except shirk [disbelief] of anyone He likes,' and the thirty-eighth ayat of Maida sura purports, 'If a person commits zulm, that is, sins and then makes tawba and then performs pious deeds, Allahu ta'ala will certainly accept his tawba.' There are some thirty other similar ayats promising that tawba will be accepted. While an average born servant who has committed all sorts of sins and then made tawba attains Allah's forgiveness, how do you know that Rasulullah's Ashab 'ridwan-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' did not make tawba and attain forgiveness supposing we were to admit that they were wrong in their decisions pertaining to caliphate?" Once again, he could not answer.

Arus zada Effendi, the Mufti of Baghdad, told this faqir (me) the following episode which he had heard from the keeper of our master hadrat Husain's 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' mausoleum in Karbala (Karbala):

One night the keeper dreamt of hadrat Husain 'radi-allahu anh', who said to him, "Tomorrow a corpse will be brought from Iran. Never let him be buried anywhere close to me." The next day a corpse was brought from Iran. They wanted to bury him near the mausoleum. At first he would not let them. However, being very rich, they persuaded him to permit them to do so by giving him a large amount of money. So they buried the corpse at a distance of about two thousand steps from the mausoleum. That night the keeper dreamt of Imam-i-Husain 'radi-allahu anh' again. This time the Imam was angry with the keeper and shouted at him. The keeper said he was very sorry and begged for forgiveness. The following night the Imam came into his dream again and rebuked him. The keeper said he was going to exhume the corpse and bury it somewhere farther away. Yet the beloved grandson of the Messenger of Allah 'radi-allahu anh' said, "If a (dead) person lies somewhere close to us for two nights, he will be forgiven. He has been forgiven already, yet this has cost me a great deal of inconvenience." Thus he denoted that the keeper as well as the dead person had been forgiven. When the keeper related this event to Arus zada, the valuable Mufti asked the keeper, "While a sinner rejected by the Imam for his wickedness attains forgiveness by staying two nights at a distance of two thousand steps from his shrine, haven't the Shaikhhayn [Abu Bakr and 'Umar] 'radi-allahu anhuma', who have been lying side by side with Rasulullah in the Hujra-i-mu'attara-i-Nabawiyya (the Prophet's Shrine) for twelve hundred and sixty years, attained forgiveness yet?" He was appalled and could not answer. His incompetence and ignorance became apparent. What a lovely rebuttal, and how grave an embarrassment!...

Of the Shaikhayn, 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' conquered cities and countries during his caliphate in order to propagate Allah's religion and Rasulullah's fame all over the world. His armies spread heroically over the Arab peninsula and over the farthest places in the east and in the west, destroying the darkness caused by unbelief and immorality and illuminating those places with Islam's light. I wonder if hadrat Ali would not forgive him for the sake of all these services he did to Islam? As hadrat 'Umar left for the conquest of Qudus-i-Sharif (Jerusalem), he appointed hadrat Ali his deputy for the caliphate. Hadrat Ali undertook the duty as the acting Khalifa, carried on this duty until hadrat 'Umar's coming back, and returned the office to him when he came back. Does not this indicate the amount of mutual love between them? Had there been the tiniest amount of discord or row between them, would hadrat 'Umar have appointed him his deputy? Would hadrat Ali have so willingly returned the office of caliphate after having obtained it? If it should be said that "Afterwards he must have forgotten about caliphate. He would not have given it to 'Umar if he had not forgotten about it," then there must not have been any disagreement or discord left between him and the person he deputized, which in turn means that it is not permissible to criticize that person.

During the caliphate of hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh', hadrat Ali "karram- allahu wajhah' gave his daughter Umm-i-Gulthum in nikah (marriage as prescribed by Islam) to the Khalifa for forty thousand silver coins in the seventeenth year of the Hijrat. Hadrat 'Umar had a son named Zayd and a daughter named Ruqayya from Umm-i- Gulthum. Thus hadrat 'Umar became hadrat Ali and hadrat Fatima's son-in-law 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum', and the long-time mutual love between them became several times stronger. Most of the time they would be together day and night and search for ways of helping Muslims in their businesses. Did hadrat Ali reserve his grudge and hostility despite all this closeness? What a grave slander it would be towards that exalted Imam to say so.

I knew a person who had served as Pasha and Vizier and yet who had later swerved into the heresy of Hurufi, which had been disguised as the Baktashi way. After some time this person came to his senses and made tawba. When this faqir (I) asked him why and how he had made tawba, he told me the following story: A book highly esteemed by these false Baktashis calls hadrat 'Umar a disbeliever. To forestall the natural question how it happened that hadrat Ali gave his daughter to a disbeliever, the book gives the following account: One day 'Umar the Khalifa sent for hadrat Abbas and told him that he wanted to marry hadrat Ali's daughter. When the latter answered that the girl would be too young for him, he said, "Ali's answer was the same when I told him about my intention. Go and tell him! If he will not marry his daughter to me, I shall find two false witnesses, bring an action against him, decide that he is a thief, and mutilate his both hands." Helpless, hadrat Ali had to give his daughter to 'Umar. Upon reading this in the book, I said to myself, "If a cruel person tried to force me to give my daughter to a disbeliever and threatened to kill me if I should not obey him, I would rather die than give my daughter to a disbeliever although I am a black-faced, sinful person. Subsequently, hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah', the Lion of Allah, the beloved one of the Messenger of Allah, and a perfect, sinless Muslim, could not have thrown his daughter, who was at the same time Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu ta'ala alaihi wa sallam' beloved daughter, into an abominable, foul rubbish heap forbidden by Islam only for fear of a doubtful danger." I realized that I had been in the wrong way, made tawba for good, and saved myself from the heresy called Hurufi.

One of the (Ottoman) viziers, during his service as the governor of Baghdad, asked a Persian what he knew about this marriage of hadrat 'Umar's. The insolent man made some dirty, slanderous statements about hadrat Ali's 'radi-allahu anh' blessed daughter and left the place.

As it becomes clear from the detailed information given above, the great Wali Abd-ul-Qadir Geilani 'qaddas-allahu ta'ala sirrah ul'aziz' is very right in his comparing Hurufis to Jews in fifteen ways. It is obvious that the Hurufi sect was invented by a Jew named Abdullah bin Saba' with a view to breaking Islam. In order to sow hostility among Muslims, this Jew alleged that hadrat Ali was deprived of his right of caliphate by force, thus leading to a long era of blasphemy throughout which one hundred and twenty-four thousand Sahabis have been wrongfully blemished with disbelief.

[Jews are the descendants of the twelve sons of the Prophet Yaqub (Jacob) 'alaihis-salam'. Because Yaqub's 'alaihis-salam' name was Israil, these people were called Bani Israil, (Children of Israil, or Israelites). Israil means Abdullah. When Musa (Moses) 'alaihis- salam' went to Mount Sinai (Tur), these people abandoned their faith and began to worship a calf. Later they repented and made tawba. Therefore they were called Jews (Yahudi, Judah). Judah means person who finds the way to salvation. Jews caused a great deal of trouble to Musa 'alaihis-salam'. Their later generations martyred one thousand Prophets. They calumniated Isa (Jesus) 'alaihis-salam' because he did not have a father. They called his mother hadrat Maryem (Mary) unchaste. They assailed them and tried to kill them. They poisoned Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', the Prophet of the latest time. In the time of hadrat 'Uthman they aroused a fitna, which ended in the Khalifa's martyrdom. They invented the Hurufi sect and thus broke Muslims into groups hostile to one another. Throughout centuries they tried to annihilate the religions revealed and the Prophets sent by Allahu ta'ala. In order to destroy religions they established freemasonry. After the end of the First World War in 1336 [A.D. 1918] they founded communistic states which were inimical towards chastity, honesty and faith. In the meantime, Hayim Naum, who was the chief Rabbi, formerly of Istanbul and later of Egypt, carried on intrigues between the capitalistic and imperialistic states in order to demolish the world's unique Islamic (Ottoman) Empire. As a result, this great Empire, which was the leader of the Islamic world, collapsed. Muslims were called regressive people. Islam lost its power and was driven to the verge of extinction.].

Religious and history books unanimously state that Hadrat Abu Bakr was elected Khalifa on Monday. The following day, Tuesday, hadrat Ali and a few other people came to the Masjid and willingly paid homage to Abu Bakr. Hadrat Ali obeyed every command of the Khalifa until the Khalifa's passing away. He spared no effort, no help in the promulgation of Islam. For all these facts, these people impute wicked habits prohibited by Qur'an al-karim to this great Imam. Would not a Muslim shudder at the thought of slandering hadrat Ali in this manner? Hadrat Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anhum', as they were elected Khalifa, said there were people better than themselves; each of them thought of himself as a person not good enough for the office of caliphate. For they had the attribute of modesty commanded by Allahu ta'ala. Is the allegation that "The following day Hadrat Ali came forward with arrogance, one of the gravest sins, and defied others, asking if there was anyone better, braver, more learned than he was," something commensurable with being Muslim? Most of the paths of Tasawwuf begin with hadrat Ali. Leaders of Tasawwuf educate their disciples in accordance with hadrat Ali's instructions. And the first lesson they teach is modesty. While many Ayat al-Karimas advise us to forgive our brothers in Islam their faults, how could it ever be justifiable to refer the wickedness of nursing a grudge for thirty years and advising others to maintain this hostility till the end of the world to a mean sinner, let alone hadrat Ali? Great teachers of Tasawwuf educate their disciples by quoting the ayat al-karimas teaching that everything is made by Allahu ta'ala and advising contentment with qadha (fate, destiny). How could a person who advised this have been against qadha himself? Is it something believable? Is this allegation not a sheer slander? How could hadrat Ali be said to have been impatient with a problematic situation despite the ayat al-karimas advising patience at times of trouble? Could hadrat Ali have forgotten about all the ayat al-karimas warning against worldly ambitions and sowed seeds of instigation and faction among the Ummat-i-Muhammadiyya only for worldly ambitions? Could it be permissible to make such allegations about that honorable Imam, whose statements have been used as maxims of sagacity and virtue by Muslims?

The three Khalifas accepted caliphate unwillingly and only because it was fard for them to do so since the Sahaba of the Messenger of Allah elected them. They did not make a will to advise that they be succeeded by their sons in caliphate. Doesn't this fact prove that our statement is right? When the Sahaba unanimously appointed hadrat Ali Khalifa, he accepted the duty unwilling as he was. Yet upon hadrat Muawiya's (claiming to be the rightly-guided Khalifa as a result of his) erroneous ijtihad, he went to a great deal of trouble to subdue him to obedience because it was Islam's commandment. There is next to no one who does not know this fact. Furthermore, there are so many ayats and hadith ash- Sharifs commanding to have mercy and compassion for Muslims and for all the creatures on the earth, and hadrat Ali, who is a source of beautiful moral qualities, is famous for his kindness and mercy, a fact proven through many widely known events; so much so that Allahu ta'ala has given the good news that He will show his mercy and compassion to His born servants by making him deal out blessed water from the Kawther pond on the Judgement Day. Now, how could one ignore all these facts and allege that millions of believers will remain eternally in Hell because of him, a charge which could not be justified if it were, let alone hadrat Ali, made against a sordid sinner. For mercy for people means to try to secure their hereafter and to protect them against Hell fire. Helping them in their worldly affairs, when compared with helping them with their hereafter, is nothing. According to the charges concocted, millions, even billions of Muslims are to burn eternally in Hell because of Hadrat Ali.

With all the so many Ayat al-Karimas and Hadith ash-Sharifs warning against backbiting, calumniating, making fun of Muslims, how could it be a right way to vituperate day and night and impeach with disbelief all the Ashab al- kiram and all the Sunnite Muslims 'rahmat-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain', who have merely been obeying the Prophet's commandment? Is it worthy of a Muslim to assert that all this was because hadrat Ali, very much affected with the Sahaba's refraining from opposing him, commanded them to do that abominable deed? The Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur- ridwan' and the advanced ones among this Ummat deemed it their first duty to struggle against their nafs. Accordingly, it is beyond doubt that Hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' would not have committed such a grave sin even if his blessed nafs had been hurt. And it is a fact brighter than the sun that there was no reason for him to commit that sin since his nafs was not hurt at all.

We invite them to being reasonable, for among the Sahaba whom they consider to be their eternal enemies are Hadrat Ali's maternal aunt and first paternal cousin and many other relatives. With the existence of ayat al-karimas teaching that it is wajib to be kind and generous towards one's relatives and to visit them, is it something a person with iman could do to allege that that great person (hadrat Ali) advised in his will that all those people be looked on as enemies? While it has been declared through Ayat al-Karimas that Rasulullah's (Salla Allahu ta'ala alayhi wa Sallam) wives are believers' mothers and it is a commandment (of Islam) to obey and respect one's parents, how could a person with the light of iman shining in his heart admit the allegation that Hadrat Ali felt hostility against these blessed wives and called them disbelievers because they paid homage to Abu Bakr?

Since a person who arouses fitna is accursed according to hadith ash-Sharifs, can Hadrat Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' be said to have stirred up a fitna among the Ummat-i-Muhammad?

Hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhu' said, "When I meet a disaster, I am pleased for three reasons. First, the disaster has been sent by Allahu ta'ala. Anything coming from the beloved one will be sweet. Second, I thank Allahu ta'ala for not sending me a more serious disaster. Third, Allahu ta'ala will not send human beings something which is vain or useless. In return for disasters He will give blessings in the Hereafter. I am pleased with disasters because worldly disasters are insignificant when compared with the everlasting blessings in the Hereafter." Even today there are many Sunnite Muslims who take pleasure from troubles and disasters because they have purified their hearts by following hadrat Ali's path. Who on earth would believe the sophistry that hadrat Ali did not take pleasure from a troublesome situation, suffered the so-called trouble unwillingly for years, and before dying made a will advising hostility towards millions of Muslims and the Ashab al-Kiram 'ridwanullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain'?

Despite the various Ayat al-Karimas and Hadith ash- Sharifs commanding Hubb-i-fillah and Bughd-i-fillah, i.e. to love Muslims because they are Muslims and to dislike disbelievers and enemies of Islam, and while all the Ashab al- kiram have been blessed with good news through an ayat al-karima which purports, "Allah is pleased with them all. And they, too, are pleased with Allahu ta'ala," and with all the innumerous hadith ash-Sharifs praising and lauding the Muhajirin-i-kiram and the Ansar- i-izam 'ridwan-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain', and while ten of those people were honored with the name (Ashara-i-mubash-shara) because they had been given the good news that they would attain Paradise and it has been stated through various hadith ash-Sharifs that these people must not be treated with hostility, is there any likelihood that hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh', the highest member of the Ahl al-bayt and the gate to the town of knowledge, might have fostered rancor against them? Would such an extremely detestable imputation incur friendliness or resentment against that great Imam?

It is explained in Ayat al-Karimas and Hadith ash-Sharifs that one would be sinful for not joining the Jama'at for Friday prayer or for (any of) the five daily prayers of Namaaz. Everyone knows that the prayers of Namaaz that are Fard are performed in the Masjid an-Nabi in Madinah-i-Munawwara and the Khalifa conducts these prayers as the imam. Now, if hadrat Ali called these three Khalifas, (i.e. Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman) disbelievers, then he must have followed people he called disbelievers whenever he performed the Namaaz in jamaat behind one of these three imams. If a person performs the namaz (in jamaat) behind another person though he knows for certain that the latter, (who conducts the namaz as the imam), is a disbeliever, he himself will become a disbeliever. If hadrat Ali did not perform namaz behind these three imams, then he must have neglected Friday prayers and prayers that were performed in Jama'at, which, in its turn, would be a sinful attitude, too. It is impossible for hadrat Ali to have committed any of these sins.

Hadrat Ali gave Hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma' his daughter. A person who gave his daughter to another person whom he knew to be a disbeliever would become a disbeliever. Would that have been worthy of that noble person?

Thus far we have explained clearly how some Shiite groups have been polluted with Hurufi beliefs and lies. Now we shall give some information about how and why this pollution took place. The inventor of the Hurufi sect is a Jew of Yaman named Abdullah bin Saba'. He did this in order to confuse, mislead and break the Ummat of Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', and to wreak vengeance on the Ahl al-bayt, the source of Islamic light. To conceal his inner purpose by camouflage, he pretended to have extreme love for Hadrat Ali, alleged that he had been deprived of his right of caliphate, and asserted that the three Khalifas and the Sahaba were disbelievers. He concealed his hatred for Hadrat Ali under the cloak of excessive love for him. He fabricated a number of follies that are not only irreligious but also preposterous. And some half-witted, senseless people, quite unaware of faith and knowledge and as blind to light as a bat, fell into the trap set by this Jew, believed in slanders quite incommensurable with hadrat Ali's high merits, and bluntly supported his efforts to blemish the great Imam. [Valuable books, which were the fruits of the profound knowledge and powerful pens possessed by scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, awakened Muslims in every age and the heretical ideas of Abdullah bin Saba' were about to be forgotten for good, when a Persian Jew named Fadl-ullah Hurufi rekindled this fitna before he died in 796 (A.D. 1393)].

The wicked imputations which Hurufis besmeared this great imam with are written in the Bible and the Torah. It is for this reason that Jews and Christians acknowledge that these slanders bear hostility instead of friendliness towards Hadrat Ali.

Final Word
of
TAZKIYA-I-AHL AL-BAYT

We have thus confuted the spiteful and blasphemous slanders in the book Husniyya, torn the curtain behind which its author was hiding himself, and divulged his hideous purposes. The following is a brief account of the answers which an Islamic scholar, upon coming across the Arabic books (Haqayiq-ul-haqayiq), (Al-faz-i-qudsiyya) and (Ayn-ul-hayat) written by Hurufis, gave to the slanders they contained.

Upon reading the book Ayn-ul-hayat, this person saw that all its contents from beginning to end were loathsome calumniations, curses and vituperations against the three Khalifas and Hadrat Muawiya and Hadrat Aisha and scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain', and made a list of those lies, as follows:

The book alleges that "When our master, Fakhr-i-'alam 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away, all the Ashab al-kiram, with the exception of Selman and Abu Zer and Mikdad 'radi- allahu anhum', became disbelievers. It is necessary to curse hadrat 'Uthman and to say that Ka'b was a disbeliever." These fabrications cover the initial pages of the book up to the end of the ninth page.

It is alleged that "The three Khalifas and most of the Ashab al-Kiram were enemies of Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' religion and were polytheists. Imam-i-A'zam Abu Hanifa and Sufyan-i-Sawri and all Sunnite Muslims are disbelievers." The book showers slanders on scholars of Ahl as-sunnat and great leaders of Tasawwuf concerning matters of Wahdat-i- wujud (Unity of existence) up to the twenty-seventh page.

It is alleged that "Hadrat 'Uthman and the Sahaba in his time 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum ajmain' were disbelievers." The book casts vituperative aspersions on them and asserts that "Most Iraqi people have deviated from the right course. Allahu ta'ala sends His born servants' sustenance through the twelve Imams. It is necessary to curse, to swear at the three Khalifas. They were disbelievers, sinners, Jews. Sunnite Muslims became disbelievers on account of their love for these three Khalifas. In the Camel event (war) hadrat Ali acted as our Prophet's deputy and divorced hadrat Aisha. The existing tafsirs (explanations of Qur'an al-karim) are defiled. Abu Bakr, 'Umar, Talha and Zubair 'ridwanullahi alaihim' were disbelievers. Hadrat 'Uthman, Aisha, Talha, Zubair and Muawiya were impious, wicked and cruel people."

It is alleged that "As our master the Prophet learned from Jabrail, Mikail and Israfil and these angels learned from the Lawh and Kalam, being a Wali is indigenous only to hadrat Ali and the twelve Imams. Hadrat Ali will is the fortress of Allahu ta'ala. On the Judgement Day hadrat Ali will decide who are to go to Paradise and who are for Hell. The events and fights between hadrat Ali and the devil were revealed in ninety pages to hadrat Fatima. It was written in each page that the three Khalifas and the Ashab al-kiram were cruel, miscreant and sinful people. Hadrat Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq is higher than Musa (Moses) and Hidir (Hizir) 'alaihim-as-salam'. The Ruh, which is mentioned in the eighty-fifth ayat of Isra sura, is an angel appointed as a servant to the twelve Imams. Imam-i-Ali 'radi-allahu anhu', would enliven dead people." The book contains long vituperative statements alleged to be the insults directed towards hadrat Ali as he was forced to accept Hadrat Abu Bakr's caliphate, and goes on with its allegations: "High-ranking angels are servants under the command of the twelve Imams. Laws of Physics, Chemistry and Biology and the motions of atoms and celestial beings are controlled by the twelve Imams. Prophets will be questioned on the Judgement day and Noah (Nuh) 'alaihis-salam' will trust himself to hadrat Ali and will be saved owing to two witnesses sent forth by Hadrat Ali. Sunnite Muslims defiled Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' religion, called halal 'haram' and vice versa, deviated into heresies and sins, and became disbelievers. The Sunni way was invented by hadrat 'Umar. He spread it with the help of heretics and the devil. This led to hectic discussions between Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq and Sufyan-i-Sawri, whereupon it became clear that Sufyan-i-Sawri followed a course leading to disbelief and heresy."

"Scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat 'rahmat-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' were unable to see between ayats that are muhkam, mutashabih, nasih and mansuh. They disobeyed commandments and did not avoid harams. Thus they remained in ignorance and aberration. Sufyan-i-Sawri and Iyad-i-Basri tried to demolish Islam. Ibrahim bin Hisham was a zindiq. Sunnite Muslims sing and dance in the name of worship. Maruf-i-Karhi was a liar. The Sunnites will go to Hell. A Sodomite who confesses his sin to hadrat Ali will be pardoned. The namaz of Tarawih performed by the Ahl as-sunnat is ostentatious and heretical. It is like disbelievers' worships. A person who wishes to be a president will become accursed. On the Judgement Day Allahu ta'ala will apologize to Shiites like a person apologizing to his brother. Sunnite Muslims will remain in Hell eternally with disbelievers. They are renegades, disbelievers. Their excuses and requests will be rejected and they will never be taken out of Hell. The names Pharaoh, Haman and Qarun, who it is stated will enter through the gates of Hell, represent Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, and the sons of Umayya." The book makes lengthy descriptions on the vehemence of Hell fire, on how the torments in Hell will be executed, and on the bitter torments that will be inflicted on Cain the murderer of Abel, on Nimrod and Pharaoh, on the Jew who misled Jewry and the Jew named Paul who misled Christians, on Abu Bakr and 'Umar, who did not have iman in Allahu ta'ala, and compares the torment that will be inflicted on Pharaoh to that which Muawiya will suffer. Then, it carries on its fabrications: "Hadrat Fakhr-i-'alam would kiss and smell his daughter Fatima every day. His (blessed) wife Hadrat Aisha would see this and become jealous. The expression, 'La ilaha ill-allah, Ali Rasulullah,' is written everywhere in Paradise. It is permissible to perform namaz without ablution, yet in this case one should not expect thawab (reward in the Hereafter). Because the unbelievers of Quraish said angels were Allah's daughters, an ayat was revealed. It was stated in an ayat that Shiites, the only true group, would increase in number in the course of time and the other groups would gradually fade out. Because most Ayats of Ahzab Sura divulged the evil and atrocious deeds of Quraishi men and women, some of them were excised from the Qur'an and others were changed. Hadrat Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman continuously committed indecencies, forbidden acts, heresy and sins." The book tells long imaginary stories about how Hadrat Aisha was taken prisoner by Hadrat Ali in the Camel War and how she and seventy other captives were sent to Madinah and curses hadrat Aisha. Then it casts various aspersions, slanders, curses on hadrat Muawiya, and goes on: "Allah sold Paradise and Hell and also a jariya to Hadrat Ali for four hundred dirhams of silver. During the war between hadrat Muawiya and hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma', Hadrat Ali made a long speech, in which he explained that hadrat Muawiya was accursed. Sunnite Muslims wear woolen clothes in order to make a show of piety. They have been accursed for this reason. It has been informed through the Wahy that Sunnite Muslims are disbelievers and zindiqs. Imam Muhammad al-Ghazzali and Ahmad Ghazzali and Jalaladdin Rumi and Muhyiddin-i-Arabi were accursed disbelievers." The book showers curses and swearings on the three Khalifas, asserts that Hasan Basri, Mansur-i-Dawaniki, Mamun and Harun-ur-rashid were accursed, and adds, "Hallaj-i-Mensur and Abu Jafar Shalghamani and scholars of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' are all disbelievers and zindiqs."

When the list we have paraphrased is read, it will be realized that the whole book is a compilation of ridiculous statements and blasphemous stories of obscure origin. These things cannot have been written by a religious man. Especially, the allegations that Allahu ta'ala sold Paradise to hadrat Ali, that he will send anyone he likes to Paradise and those he hates to Hell, that worldly affairs are controlled by the twelve Imams, mean to deny (Allah's) Attribute of Will, which in turn indicates the gravest kind of polytheism. Hadrat Abu Bakr's refusing to give the date orchard called Fedek to Hadrat Fatima is told with such exaggeration that the irrational, preposterous Persian tales would fall far behind it. This date orchard called Fedek was in the vicinity of Hayber. Rasulullah would meet the needs of his household with the income from this orchard, and anything more than their subsistence would be dealt out as alms. Rasulullah 'Salla Allahu alaihi wa Sallam' dedicated this orchard to a pious foundation supporting the poor and travelers towards his death. Hadrat Abu Bakr would keep the accounts of the income from the orchard himself during his caliphate. When hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhu' became the Khalifa, he yielded its management to Hadrat Ali upon the latter's demand. These events are told (in the book) in a gross exaggeration and exploited in a manner as to vituperate hadrat Abu Bakr and Hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma', and these exalted people are blemished with such aspersions as could never be forgiven even through tawba.

In addition to the three books mentioned above, there are some ten other booklets, all of which teem with various blasphemous absurdities. These booklets are disseminated in Iraq and Iran. They are trying to mislead the Anatolian Muslims, too. Naming themselves Alawis (Alawi), they are endeavoring to deceive the Alawi Muslims in our country. Their purpose is to bring up a generation inimical towards scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat 'rahmatullahu alaihim ajmain', and thus to demolish Islam from within.

[To prevent this planned catastrophe, we have translated various parts of the book Tuhfa-i- isna ashariyya from Persian into Turkish and published a book titled (To Die in Iman). The book Tuhfa was translated into Arabic and an abridged version of the book was printed in Egypt and was titled Muhtasar-i-Tuhfa. It was reproduced by offset process in Istanbul. An Iranian scholar has stated that the so-called books (the heretical books mentioned above) were written by excessively heretical mulhids called Ghulats in India, that these people are trying to mislead ignorant Iranians, and that Iranian scholars are in the Imamiyya group but these eccentric people are disbelievers].

Shiites of the Imamiyya group living in Iran, mostly in Najaf and Karbala, should cooperate with the Ahl as-Sunnat to prevent these scurvy, groundless, untenable forgeries fabricated by the inexorable heretics. Negligence in this Islamic requirement will only serve these eccentric heretics to increase in number, which in turn will cost the Imamiyya group quantitative and qualitative shrinkage. The restrictions which had been imposed on these wicked heretics after Yavuz Sultan Salim Khan's victory at Caldiran in 920 [A.D. 1514] were maintained until recently, when fifteen years ago, [i.e. in 1280 (A.D. 1864)], they were abrogated and the harmful, vicious, base slanders reappeared all of a sudden. All this is the result of Muslims' slackness and negligence. This is the end of the book TAZKIYA-I-AHL AL- BAYT.

[If scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat do not answer and refute freemasons, communists, Christians, missionaries, the unbridled Hurufis in Iran and Iraq and Wahhabis, if they do not divulge their inner malevolent purposes and harms and inform the younger generations about them, if parents do not teach their children or at least have them read books written by scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, the future generations will be lost altogether. They will fall victims to the horrific talons of unbelief. Muslims will be driven into disasters and calamities similar to those experienced by the inhabitants of places such as Sammarkand, Bukhara and Crimea. Allahu ta'ala declares in the thirty-third ayat of Nahl sura, "Allahu ta'ala does not torment them. Yet they torment themselves."]

Born servant will never suffer from his Huda;
Whatever everyone suffers is his own deserts!

Every blessing you offer is faithless, o world;
All ranks you give perish with the cold wind of death!


Courtesy of Hizmet Books (1998)

top

There are numerous ahadith of the Beloved Messenger of Allah (Allah shower His Mercy upon Him), which favour the position, and the eliteness of his family (Ahl al-Bay'ah). In this day and age though, some people may claim to be Sayyid, wheras in reality they may not be. One of the ways in which this problem can be solved, is to see where they have a spiritual lineage identifying their authenticity, of being from the Noble Household.

There maybe cases where people have not even been given the light of Imaan, to identify who, and what status, rank, and position the Ahl al-Bay'ah have. Such people are the rebellions of Islam, and should be punished according to the Shar'iyyah. (See Imam Ahmad Rida Barelvis fataawaa-e-Ridwiyyah, for the determination of the punishment for the false claimants, amd for the deniers (munkirin) of the Ahl al-Bay'ah.

The punishment for the deniers of the Ahl al-Bay'ah, are the khawaarijites, whom once rebelled against Hadrat 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with Him), and who were dealt with in the proper manner, by the 'ulama' of the Ahl as-Sunnah wal Jamaa'ah, yet their ideology still seems to remain today. May Allah the Almighty save us from such false groups.

This hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon Him), states what love he had for Hadrat 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with Him), that Hadrat 'Ali is a part of Him, and He is a part of 'Ali.

No one can now deny that Hadrat 'Ali was not a Sayyid, or that the family of Hadrat 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with Him) were/are not sayyid.