Sunnism versus cults and sects


Shia scholar Ayatullah Fadlullah said



Download 237.65 Kb.
Page6/12
Date04.02.2017
Size237.65 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12
Shia scholar Ayatullah Fadlullah said: “It has reached my attention that many of our scholars have reported in their books that lady Fatima was viciously attacked while she was staying at her home with Imam Ali, and their children along with some of the sahaba of Rasoul Allah, some of our scholars agree that “the attackers” who attacked the house of Imam Ali did actually do so as we arrogate to the massesbut the truth is that “the man” only threatened her. In his speech “the man” said: “wa in lam yakhrojoo”, the words in arabic “wa in” shows “ee7aa2″/”shame” of Alzahraa, so how can we say that he broke her rib while he showed shame towards her? I personally reject the stories regarding the attack on her house along with breaking her ribs since our shia history doesn’t prove that this incident has occurred to sayeda Alzahraa”. [Sayed Fadhulla, a speech that was given on mothers day, 1999, Beirut lebnan. This is recorded in: “Almula7azat” by Sayed Yaseen Almusawi, Published by “Dar Al9eddeqa Alkubra” in Beirut Lebanon, 2000]
caliphate of abu bakr:
Source Used: Authoritative Sunni compendium comprising concise answers presenting the opinions of Ahlus Sunna without sectarian bias, intended for general use of public who wished to avoid lengthy research into historical reports, etc, compiled by senior student of famous Indian Sufi scholar, Ahmed Rida Khan: Mufti Ahmed Amjadi's 'Madina to Karbala'; 'Chapter on Abu Bakr as Siddiq':
"After the demise of the Master of creation, Sayyiduna Muhammad, the question arose as to who would be appointed as his successor. In the famous Hadith collection of al Bayhaqi, Abu Saeed al Khudri narrated that the Companions gathered in the house of Sa'd Ibn Ubadah. Present in this gathering were Abu Bakr and Umar as well as other companions.
One of the Ansar stood up and gave a speech, commending one of the Ansar for the position of caliphate. 
Zayd Ibn Thabit argued in favour of electing a caliph from the Muhajirin, he then took the hand of the Abu Bakr and gave pledge of allegiance to him.
After Zayd, Umar also pledged allegiance. Abu Bakr noticed that Zubayr was not present, he requested his arrival, the caliph said to him, "I hope you will not create a division among the Muslims", to which he replied, "You need not worry" and gave allegiance. He noticed Ali's absence, he invited him and said, "I hope you will join me in protecting Islam from weakness." Ali also replied, "You need not worry" and gave allegiance. (citing Tarikh al Khulafa, Suyuti, p.23)
From 'Defence Against Disaster', (PDF Copy: p.3)
Muhammad Izza Daruza said in his book, 'The Arab Race':
"At Tabari related from Abdullah Ibn Said az Zuhri that Amr Ibn Harith asked Said Ibn Zayd and said: "When was Abu Bakr given the oath of allegiance? Were you present at the death of the Prophet?". He said, "Yes, on the day that the Messenger died they did not want even part of a day to pass without meeting together". Amr asked, "Did anyone oppose him?". He said, "No, except for the one who was an apostate or who would have apostatized if Allah had not delivered them from the Ansar'. He said, "Did any of the Muhajiroun abstain?". He said, "No, they followed in his homage without being summoned". (part 2, p.447)
It is evident that what the speaker was describing was how Sad Ibn Ubada and his helpers were striving for leadership on the Day of Saqifa, and how they were made to accept Abu Bakr's leadership rather than bring about division, opposition, and contention. The idea that Abu Bakr's election caused a division/split is itself a myth, since his election was historically the event that maintained unity and stable leadership. This report/incident is useful in indicating the speed at which the companions rushed to choose a leader, and also shows the nature of Islamic law, how all held different opinions and united them for a common cause. It also indicates that the Hashemites were included among those who followed in allegiance, since they too are from the Migrants, e.g. "none abstained except a hypocrite".
At Tabari related the tradition of Ali giving homage to Abu Bakr immediately and openly. It is related with his chains of transmission from Habib Ibn Thabit that Ali was in his house when the news came to him that Abu Bakr was sitting for the oath of homage. He went out in his shirt without buttons or cloak in haste, not liking to delay giving him allegiance. Then he sat with him and sent for his garment to be brought to him and he put it on and stayed at the assembly." (Tabari 2: 447)
The popular narrative among the Shia is that either a) Ali did not give allegiance (Resulting in Umar's 'attack' on Fatima) b) Ali gave allegiance after being tied up and dragged, c) Ali gave allegiance begrudgingly after 6 months (due to the Fadak incident/grudges).
All of these narratives are rejected due to their obvious elements of propaganda.
The proper way of understanding these events minus exaggerations inserted for cult agendas is as follows:
1) Preferred understanding: Ali gave allegiance immediately, without coercion, as per Tabari.

2) Second Preference:  Ali giving allegiance after 6 month period due to illness of Fatima/ Giving allegiance after 6 month period due to compiling

Quranic commentary (Suyuti, Tarikh, p.205)
First Preference:
"In any case, that which is agreed upon in the riwayats of the Shia and elsewhere is that Ali and the Banu Hashim immediately gave homage to Abu Bakr or, as at Tabari related from one riwaya of the Shia, after some hesitation they supported him. This indicated a decisive proof that there was no implicit bequest from the Prophet that the authority should belong to Ali after him." p.3
Ibn Abi Dawud and others narrated that Muhammad Ibn Sirin said: "When the Prophet died, Ali was slow to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr, who met him and said: "Do you dislike my having the authority? He said, "No. but I have sworn not to don my mantle, except for the prayer, until I have collected the Quran." They claimed that he wrote it in the order of its revelation. Muhammad Ibn Sirin thus said: "If that book were come across, there would be knowledge in it." (Suyuti, p.205-6).
Second alternative report:
"At Tabari related the same as that with other isnads in the report that Ali and the Banu Hashim refused to offer allegiance to Abu Bakr as long as Fatima was alive because Fatima and Al Abbas came asking for inheritance, consisting of Fadak and the Prophet's share of Khaybar. Abu Bakr refused as is well known, and also mentioned "The Family of Muhammad will have provision from this money, I will not leave anything that I saw the Messenger do". Fatima parted from him, not speaking with him until she died; Ali saw people turning their faces from him and neither he nor any of the Banu Hashim gave allegiance. In the end, he gave allegiance after the death of Fatima." p.3
"One notes that the text of the report of at Tabari makes the question of the inheritance the cause for the refusal of Ali and the Banu Hashim to give allegiance. Their seeking the inheritance from him means that they must have first recognised his caliphate. This contains a contradiction which makes the (shia) story break down. If it has any root at all, all that is possible is that after they gave allegiance, then they tried to get what they considered as their inheritance from the Prophet. Abu Bakr refused citing a hadith which he heard, and the business stopped at this point. Anything beyond that is an addition of the Shia and one of their intrigues because it is not possible that Ali, Fatima and the Banu Hashim disagreed with Abu Bakr's argument or persisted because they did not continue the exchange after they heard it." (p.4)
"There are other mixed and false riwayats about Ali and the Banu Hashim rejecting the homage of Abu Bakr. We have ignored them since they are discredited. There are many riwayats which confirm that Ali hastened to give his allegiance and to help him in the affairs of the caliphate. He of all people knew the virtue of Abu Bakr." (p.4. Defence Against Disaster).
The Islamic society, under the direction of these two khalifs,

was the happiest society history has known because people from the rulers to the common people were dealing with each other by preferring others. One of them would be content with what would fulfil his needs and would expend from himself as much as he could bring out from it, striving to establish the truth in the earth and to make good between people universal.

The good man among them would meet a man who had evil inclinations towards him and he would continue with him until he numbed the elements of evil which attacked him and awakened in him the elements of good that were concealed, until he became one of the people of good. In those ascribing to Islam up until this very day, there are groups whose hearts are filled with malice, even towards Abu Bakr and `Umar, let alone those from whom

Abu Bakr and `Umar sought help among the people of excellence and ihsan. From false reports, they fabricated personalities for them other than their real personalities, so that they are satisfied that they hate some people among them who deserved this hatred. For this reason, Islamic "history" is full of lies. There will be no new renaissance for the muslims unless they recognise the reality of their predecessors and take them as a model. They will not realise the reality of their predecessors except by purifying Islamic history of what is



attached to it." (Defence, p.14)
More useful reports in this regard:
Ibn Asakri narrated that Al Hasan said: When Ali came to Basra, Ibn al Kawwa and Qais Ibn Abbad stood before him and said to him, 'Will you not inform us about this course which you are set upon, taking charge of the ummah, so that some of them are striking others; is it a covenant of the Messenger of Allah which he made with you? Tell us, for you are the trusted one in whom we have confidence about that which you have heard.' (Suyuti, p. 194)
He said, "As for my having a covenant about that from the Prophet then no. By Allah, if I was the first to affirm , I will not be the first to attribute a lie to him. If I had a oovenant from the PROPHET ABOUT THAT, i WOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED THE BROTHER OF bAnu taim ibn murrah and umar ibn al khattab to stand upon the minbar, i would have fought them with my own hand, even if i could find nothing but this garment of mine. however the messenger of allah was not killed, and he did not die suddenly rather he lingered in his illness for days and nights, with the muaddhin coming to him to announce the time of prayer to him. he would order abu bakr, who would lead the people in prayer, while he knew my standing. one of his wives wanted to turn him from abu bakr, and he refused and became angry. he said, "YoU ARE The female companions of Yusuf! Tell Abu Bakr to lead the people in prayer!" 
When Allah took His prophet, we considered our affairs and we chose for our worldly affairs he whom the prophet of allah was satisfied with for our deen. the prayer is the root of islam and the leader of the deen, and the support of the deen, so we pledged allegience to abu bakr, for he was worthy of that, no two of us disagreed about him, none of us bore testimony against others, and nor did we deny his privelege. i discharged what was due to abu bakr, acknowledged the obedience that was his right, went on military expeditions with him in his troops. i would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and i would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
When he died, Umar undertook the khilafah and he took it according to the sunnah of his companion and that which he knew of his affair. we pledged allegiance to umar, no two of us disagreeing about him, nor any of us bearing testimony against any others, nor did we deny his privelege. I discharged what (p.195) was due to Umar, acknowledged the obedience that was his right and went on military expeditions with him in his armies. I would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and I would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
When he died, I recalled within myself my close relationship to the prophet, my priority, my precedence and my merit, thinking that nobody would hold another equal to me. however, umar was afraid that, if the khalifah after him would do a wrong ation, it would attach to him in his grave. he withdrew himself and his son from it, for if there had been any partiality in him he would have preferred his son for the khilafah. he quit himself of it, passing it on to a group of six from quraysh of whom i was one. when the group met, i thought that they would not consider anyone equal to me. abdar rahman ibn awf took a compact from us that we would listen to and obey whomever Allah gave authority over us. then later he took the hand of uthman ibn affan and put his hand in his.
i considered my affair, and saw that my obedience had preceded my oath of allegiance, and my covenant had been taken for another. we therefore pledged allegiance to uthman. i discharged what was due to him, acknowledged the obedience that was his right, and went on military expeditions with him in his armies. i would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and i would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
when he was struck down i considered my affair. the two khalifahs, who had taken hold of it through the covenant of the messenger of allah, to the two of them regarding the prayer, had gone. this one, with whom the covenant had been taken, had been killed. the people of the two harams pledged allegiance to me, and the people of these two provinces (kufa and basra). one sprang into it who is not the like of me, his relationship is not as my relationship, nor his knowledge like my knowledge, nor does he have priority like my priority, and i have more right to it than him." (p.197).
Abd ar Razzaq narrated that Hujr al Madari said: "Ali Ibn Abi Talib said to me, 'What will you do when you are ordered to curse me?' I said, 'Will that happen?' He said, 'yes'. I said, 'What should I do?'. He said, 'Curse me, but do not forsake me'. He (Hujr) said: Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, the brother of al Hajjaj- and he was the amir of Yemen- ordered me to curse Ali, so I said, 'The amir has told me to curse Ali, so you curse him! may Allah curse him!' Nobody understood it except for one man. (197)
Said Ibn Mansur said in his sunan: Hushaym narrated to us: Hajjaj narrated to us: A Shaykh from Farazah told me: I heard Ali saying, 'prause belongs to Allah who made our enemy ask us about something that had occurred to him in the matter of his din. Muawiya wrote to me, asking me about the ambiguous hermaphrodite (does it inherit property as a man or woman?). I wrote to him that he should make him inherit according to how he urinates'. Hushaym said the same from Mughirah from ash Sha'bi from Ali.
More useful reports in this regard:
Ibn Asakri narrated that Al Hasan said: When Ali came to Basra, Ibn al Kawwa and Qais Ibn Abbad stood before him and said to him, 'Will you not inform us about this course which you are set upon, taking charge of the ummah, so that some of them are striking others; is it a covenant of the Messenger of Allah which he made with you? Tell us, for you are the trusted one in whom we have confidence about that which you have heard.' (Suyuti, p. 194)
He said, "As for my having a covenant about that from the Prophet then no. By Allah, if I was the first to affirm , I will not be the first to attribute a lie to him. If I had a oovenant from the PROPHET ABOUT THAT, i WOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED THE BROTHER OF bAnu taim ibn murrah and umar ibn al khattab to stand upon the minbar, i would have fought them with my own hand, even if i could find nothing but this garment of mine. however the messenger of allah was not killed, and he did not die suddenly rather he lingered in his illness for days and nights, with the muaddhin coming to him to announce the time of prayer to him. he would order abu bakr, who would lead the people in prayer, while he knew my standing. one of his wives wanted to turn him from abu bakr, and he refused and became angry. he said, "YoU ARE The female companions of Yusuf! Tell Abu Bakr to lead the people in prayer!" 
When Allah took His prophet, we considered our affairs and we chose for our worldly affairs he whom the prophet of allah was satisfied with for our deen. the prayer is the root of islam and the leader of the deen, and the support of the deen, so we pledged allegience to abu bakr, for he was worthy of that, no two of us disagreed about him, none of us bore testimony against others, and nor did we deny his privelege. i discharged what was due to abu bakr, acknowledged the obedience that was his right, went on military expeditions with him in his troops. i would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and i would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
When he died, Umar undertook the khilafah and he took it according to the sunnah of his companion and that which he knew of his affair. we pledged allegiance to umar, no two of us disagreeing about him, nor any of us bearing testimony against any others, nor did we deny his privelege. I discharged what (p.195) was due to Umar, acknowledged the obedience that was his right and went on military expeditions with him in his armies. I would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and I would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
When he died, I recalled within myself my close relationship to the prophet, my priority, my precedence and my merit, thinking that nobody would hold another equal to me. however, umar was afraid that, if the khalifah after him would do a wrong ation, it would attach to him in his grave. he withdrew himself and his son from it, for if there had been any partiality in him he would have preferred his son for the khilafah. he quit himself of it, passing it on to a group of six from quraysh of whom i was one. when the group met, i thought that they would not consider anyone equal to me. abdar rahman ibn awf took a compact from us that we would listen to and obey whomever Allah gave authority over us. then later he took the hand of uthman ibn affan and put his hand in his.
i considered my affair, and saw that my obedience had preceded my oath of allegiance, and my covenant had been taken for another. we therefore pledged allegiance to uthman. i discharged what was due to him, acknowledged the obedience that was his right, and went on military expeditions with him in his armies. i would take when he gave me, go on military expeditions when he sent me on them, and i would lash with my whip for the hadd punishment for him.
when he was struck down i considered my affair. the two khalifahs, who had taken hold of it through the covenant of the messenger of allah, to the two of them regarding the prayer, had gone. this one, with whom the covenant had been taken, had been killed. the people of the two harams pledged allegiance to me, and the people of these two provinces (kufa and basra). one sprang into it who is not the like of me, his relationship is not as my relationship, nor his knowledge like my knowledge, nor does he have priority like my priority, and i have more right to it than him." (p.197).
Abd ar Razzaq narrated that Hujr al Madari said: "Ali Ibn Abi Talib said to me, 'What will you do when you are ordered to curse me?' I said, 'Will that happen?' He said, 'yes'. I said, 'What should I do?'. He said, 'Curse me, but do not forsake me'. He (Hujr) said: Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, the brother of al Hajjaj- and he was the amir of Yemen- ordered me to curse Ali, so I said, 'The amir has told me to curse Ali, so you curse him! may Allah curse him!' Nobody understood it except for one man. (197)
Said Ibn Mansur said in his sunan: Hushaym narrated to us: Hajjaj narrated to us: A Shaykh from Farazah told me: I heard Ali saying, 'prause belongs to Allah who made our enemy ask us about something that had occurred to him in the matter of his din. Muawiya wrote to me, asking me about the ambiguous hermaphrodite (does it inherit property as a man or woman?). I wrote to him that he should make him inherit according to how he urinates'. Hushaym said the same from Mughirah from ash Sha'bi from Ali.
'The pledge of Allegiance to Ali for the khilafah and what came about from that':
Ibn Sad said: Ali was pledged allegiance as khalifah the morning after the killing of Uthman in Madina. All of the Companions who were there pledged allegiance. It is said that Talha and az Zubayr pledged allegiance with displeasure and unwillingly. Then they went to Makka, and Aisha was there. They took her and went with her to Basra seeking retaliation for the blood of Uthman. That reached Ali so he went to Iraq and at Basra met Talha, az Zubayr, Aisha and whoever was with them, which is known as the Battle of the Camel, and which occurred in Jumadah al Akhirah of the year 36 AH. Talha, az Zubayr and others were killed there, the dead reaching thirteen thousand. Ali spent fifteen nights at Basra and then he went to Kufa. (p.191)
Then Muawiya ibn abi sufyan and those with him in syria came out against him. that reached ali and he went out to meet him. they met at siffin in safr of the year 37AH/ The fighting continued there for some days, until the poeple of Syria raised the msuhafs calling to that which is in them, which was a truck of Amr Ibn al Aas. People hated the war and they called each other to negotiate and appointed two arbiters. Ali appointed Abu Musa al Ashari and Muawiya appointed Amr Ibn al Aas. They signed a decree between them that they should meet at the beginning of the year at al Adruh where they would conisder seriously the command of the ummah. people seperated, Muawiya returning to Syria and Ali to Kufa.
Then a group of the Khawarij from among his companions (Shia) and those with him, went out against him. They said, 'There is no judgement but that of Allah', and they set up a military camp at Harura. He sent Ibn Abbas to them, who argued with them and convinced them, so that many of them returned. A group of them stayed firm, went to an Nahrawan and obstructed the roadway. Ali went to them there and killed them at an Nahrawan, killing Dhu Thudayyah, the man foretold to be among the KHawarij. (191)
That was in the year 38 AH.
People gathered in al Adruh in Shaban of this year, among them Sa'd Ibn Abi Waqqas. Ibn Umar and other Companions. Amr allowed Abu Musa to go first, as a trick he had devised. He spoke and removed Ali from office. Then Amr spoke and confirmed Muawiya in office and pledged allegiance to him. People split up over this. Ali disagreed with his companions to such an extent that he began to bite his fingers saying, I am disobeyed and Muawiya is obeyed?'

Three men of the Khawarij hastened to act: 'Abd ar Rahman Ibn Muljam, al Burk Ibn Abdullah at Tamimi and Amr Ibn Bukayr at Tamimi. They gathered in Makkah and made a covenant with each other that they three would kill: Ali ibn abi talib, muawiya ibn abu sufyan, and amr ibn al as, and that they would give the people rest from them. Ibn Muljam said 'I will take Ali for you'. Al Burk said' I will take Muawiya for you'. Amr Ibn Bukayr said, 'I will suffice you for Amr Ibn al Aas'. They made a covenant on that one night, either the eleventh or the seventeenth of ramadan, and then each of them directed himself to the land in which his intended victim was. Ibn Muljam went to Kufa, met his companions of the khawarij and told them secretly of what they intended to do.


On the night preceding the Jumah of the 17th Ramadan of the year 40 AH, Ali woke up before dawn. He said to his son al Hasan, 'This night I saw the Messenger of Allah and I said 'What distress and argumentation I have received from your nation!' He said, 'Supplicate Allah against them'. I said, 'Allah, give me in exchange for them what is better for me, and give them in exchange for me what is worse for them'.
Then the muaddhin Ibn adh Dhabbah came in to Ali and said, 'The prayer'. Ali went out proclaiming 'The prayer, the prayer', Ibn Muljam stood before him and struck him with the sword, and it hit the top of his forehead reaching the brain. People rushed upon him from every side, and he was held and bound. Ali lingered for the Friday and Saturday, and died the night before Sunday. Al Hasan, Husayn., and Abdullah Ibn Jafar washed his body, al Hasan lead the prayer over him, then he was buried in the house of the Amirate in Kufa at night. Later they cut off the limbs of Ibn Muljam, he was put in a reed basket, and they burnt him in a fire.
All of the above are the words of Ibn Sad. (Suyuti, 191-193). He summarised all of these events and battles excellently well, and he didnt expand on them greatly as others did. This is more befitting to the purpose. THe Prophet said' When my companions are mentioned, restrain yourselves from speaking, and he said 'it is sufficient for my companions to mention their killing'.
There is in al Mustadrak that as Suddi said: Abdar Rahman Ibn Muljam fell passionately in love with a woman of the Khawarij called Qatam, and he married her and gave her as a dowry three thousand dirhams and the killing of Ali.
Abu Bakr Ibn Ayyash said: The grave of Ali was concealed so that the Khawarij would not dig up his body, and Sharik said: His son al Hasan carried him to Madinah. Al Mubarrad said from Muhammad Ibn Habib: The first to be transferred from one grave to another was Ali.

(He had 19 women slaves)


p.194.
Ibn Abbas said: 'Allah did not reveal an ayah beginning 'O you who believe' but that Ali is its amir and its eminence. Allah reproached the Companions of Muhammad in more than one place but He never mentioned Ali but with approval. 188.
Ibn Asakir narrated about Aisha, that Ali was mentioned in her presence and she said, 'As for him, he is the most knowledgable, of those who remain, in the Sunnah'. 187
At Tirmhidi narrated that Abu Said al Khudri said: We used to recognise the hypocrites by their hatred of Ali" 186
Ibn Sad narrated from Ibn Abbas: When a trustworthy person related to us a fatwa of Ali, we did not go beyond it.
Said Ibn al Musayyab said: Umar Ibn al Khattab used to seek refuge with Allah from every difficult question for which there was no Abu Hasan. 187
Ibn Asakir narrated that Abu Khaldah al Hanafi said: I heard Ali saying, 'Banu uMAYYAH claim that I killed Uthman. No, by Allah whom there is no god but he, I did not kill him, I did not abet it, I forbade it but they disobeyed me." 177
He narrated that Samurah said: Islam was in a well fortified fortress, and they made a breach in Islam with the killing of Uthman which will not be closed until the Day of Resurrection. The khilafah was among the people of Madinah and they drove it out and it did not return to them. 177
Ibn Asakri narrated that Abul Bakhtari said: Umar Ibn al Khattab used to give the Khutba on the minbar. Al Hussein Ibn Ali stood up before him and said, Come down from my father's minbar'. Umar said 'It is the minbar of your father and not the minbar of my father. Who told you to do this?' Ali stood and said, 'By Allah, nobody told him to do this. I will certainly cause you (Husayn) some pain, traitor'. He said, 'Dont hurt the son of my brother, for he has told the truth, it is the minbar of his father'. 150
The Jafari Madhhab has been promoted as equivalent to the Hanafi/Maliki schools, but did not originate or expand along the same historical timeline, and was rather an afterthought invented later as a subversive mechanism.
The legal philosophy of the Prophetic bloodline is reflected in the works of those scholars who wrote legal texts who were of that lineage, and it is seen that they are quite varying. 
The sources of a specifically Alawite legal philosophy are varying. What should be completely rejected as a source however are the Usul al Arbaa as a completely reliable legal source, a person will have to pick and choose from them that which accords with general legal understanding. Also, the statements of the Prophetic bloodline cited in those books have not been compiled into a maddhab, strictly speaking, in a sense that there is clear distinction between principles and branches. How it works is that a scholar interprets these various statements as it suits the situation, or relies on older jurists' books, this is common to the Hanbali school. 
Early sources for an Alawite legal philosophy could be the judgements of Ali, which were used by the Kufans. The beneficiary of this wave of legal thought was Abu Hanifa and his particular chain of teachers, who adapted their judgements to suit the environment of Kufa, which was directly governed by the judgements of Ali. This is one potential source of Alawite law, as well as suggests a portion of Sunni law that takes Alawite inspiration.
The earliest encounter that can be used as evidence to observe a connection is al Baqir's meeting with Abu Hanifa. A closer reading of this incident reveals that Abu Hanifa actually possessed a more sagacious and contextualised/holistic approach to law. The Kufan school, which Abu Hanifa was part of, were known for deriving verdicts based on guided reasoning, ray/ijtihad, and it is this school which grew the most popular, and upon which all sound judgements were based. Al Baqir, as portrayed in the incident, was opposed to this method, and  seemed to advocate a literal adaptation of the Hadith, similar to the later ahl al hadith movement that captured Al Shafii's attention, causing him to reject the legal method of the proto-Hanafis, consisting of ray/ijtihad/ijma and advocating a more literalist hadith-verification methodology. When he made that move, as is described in his legal treatise, ar Risala, jurists, who were more inclined to Abu Hanifa's 'guided reasoning'/contextualism, felt disinclined towards his methodology, and it was not for an entire generation after Shafii's death that his disciple, al Muzani, continued on from where his teacher left off, no commentaries were written on his treatise during his life. Commentaries were the main method of continuation of legal theory and displaying support for a legal method, and the fact that none were written for the Risala following its immediate publication speaks volumes to the historian. Al Baqir, therefore, did not demonstrate any legal superiority to Abu Hanifa that indicated a superior legal method for later students to continue on with,thus forming an Alawite madhab, and this also means that his son, Jafar Sadiq, inherited no legal method.
Jafar Sadiq was a scholar in his own right, but there was no methodology ascribed to him that can be historically traced and identified and thus used. Reports about Abu Hanifa studying with Jafar as Sadiq for two years are accurate ('without which Nu'man would have perished'), however, this can only be used to indicate spiritual training and not legal study. Jafar Sadiq did not adhere to the beliefs of the Shiites, nor did his uncle Zayd. He narrated many hadiths which are recorded in Sunni books, such as the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba and Abdur Razzaq.
The legal school of the Zaydis is attributed to Zayd ash Shaheed. Their manner of praying is similar to the Hanafis. Recently, a collection of narrations attributed to Imam Zayd has been published in Pakistan, and could be considered a worthy addition to the current legal corpus, as well as would be an authoritative source of verdicts connected with the Prophetic bloodline.
Abu Hanifa's method however gained popularity and we can accurately trace a steady historical development of legal philosophy, i.e. usul al fiqh, from the companions, to Abu Hanifa, and down through the ages until we reach modern times. Hanafism has historically been at the root of many innovative and revolutionary legal movements and represents the basis of usul that makes Islamic law adaptable and flexible as a legal system for mass utilisation. If people apply Islamic law in an ignorant and de-contextualised manner, it is to ignore the work of the Hanafi school, from which all legal thought schools are only a small branch/diversion. If there are jurists out there who wish to implement the law in an ignorant/de-contextualised manner, they should possess the requisite legal training to be able to refute the Hanafi school, its founder, and its principles, otherwise cease from ignorant legal activity.
The other sources from which an Alawite legal method can be identified is in the writing of those jurists who emerged after the 13th century down to the Colonial period, as there were none of repute before that era. That period signifies the origin of the major Sufi orders, whose founders are connected to that bloodline, and so any legal material that can be accurately traced to them is a valid source.
After this, there is the commentary of Ibn Abidin, a Hanafi jurist attached to the Prophetic bloodline, and following him there were many others closer to the Colonial period from which the general ethos of a specifically Alawite legal style can be derived.
The Sunni legal system exists primarily based on the recognition of an authoritative usul. The most authoritativeUsul comes from the Hanafi school, and every other school is just a departure from this, Shafii's Risala, as we mentioned, cannot be used in comparison to the Hanafi school due to his departure from the legal style of Kufa. Other than this, there are authoritative legal manuals and treatises which together represent a valid corpus from which people derive legal understanding, it is a shared activity without any sectarian bias, except for the permissible preference of one legal style over another. Shiite law however does not share in this system of mutual legal acceptance, and operates on a much more disparate basis, similar to a cult formation. Here, every jurist is given ultimate authority to make binding legal decisions, opposite to the fatwa of the Sunni jurists of the past, which were only presented as impartial research, and disobedience of the marja'/jurist is considered equal with disobeying God. Also, there is no uniform principles/method, every jurist follows his own calculation, a process which had ended in Sunni law near the 10th century when it was felt that satisfactory research had been completed, and that the stage of commentaries could begin. In Shiite law, an individual is bound to obey strictly the rulings provided by his own scholar, which is identical to priesthood, or a Sufi pir, who ties down his/her student/disciples to learn only from himself and no other, which is foreign to the Islamic method of education.
Accepting a Sunni legal method as a basis/framework for legal activity would eradicate all the problems that are associated with the culturally based Shiite legal system, jurists/individuals could be free from partisanship to one jurist and could benefit from a broader variety of legal rulings. Also, the problem of having too many 'authoritative mujtahids', a growing problem equally in the Salafi world, would be removed if they gave authority to an accurate methodology/set of principles rather than every individual that graduates from a Seminary, a disease rampant modern cultural disease.
Above all, these problems removed if people stopped following Islam as if it were a strange cult, and if they began to follow it in a more broad and healthy manner, and as a method to operate successfully in the world.

Concluding, the statements of the Shiite scholars are traced back to Jafar Sadiq and offered as authoritative. This is a form of cult propaganda and should be rejected as such. That is not to say that the research of a Shiite scholar is completely devoid of import, but rather that it is his own research and not connected with Jafar Sadiq's legal philosophy.


Also, another form of cult propaganda is that the Sunni law schools are divided and the Shiite legal system is united because they follow 'One Caliph not four' and follow 'one law not four', but the reality is that their laws are much more scattered and variant than the differences between the Sunni law schools. They actually have a theological difference within their legal approaches, meaning the usuli scholars declare as disbelievers the akhbari scholars. This is a hugely embarassing historical fact that many do not take notice of. The Sunni jurists and their students on the other hand share differences of opinion only on legal philosophy and verdicts, which is as a result of research/science. A person who understands the legal philosophy of Abu Hanifa would most definitely argue for its superiority over the Shafiites out of sheer conviction of the superiority of his philosophy, however, he does declare his opponent out of Islam. The book 'Differences of Opinion in Islamic Law', a translations of Shah Waliallah's al Insaf is a recommended read for this purpose, to understand the flexibility and evolution of Islamic legal thought, and to clear a person's mind from cult thinking.
Shiites elevate their leaders to divine status, as some Sufi groups do, and this is an element of the cult which is most easily visible in Christianity/Catholicism, it is a transportation of the same aberrance within an Islamic garb. Sunnis, historically, treat their leaders as men who are fallible, and they are advisors and sources of research, but not divine guides, guidance is general, and a person attains it through personal effort. Boasting that an individual has an infallible guide is actually a source of embarrasment and weakness that he does not possess the acumen to search and strive for understanding himself, and requires to be spoon-fed answers by an infallible Imam or Shaykh.
Ibn Arabi has written that the Mahdi will possess his own legal method and will derive his own rulings without recourse to the four law schools, this does not however belittle their importance or relevance, its just that his verdicts will be more contextually sound.
Also, it is inside the Malfuzat of Ahmed Rida Khan that the Mahdi's verdicts are predicted by men of insight to eventually accord with the legal verdicts/philosophy of Abu Hanifa, i.e. that of ray/ guided reasoning/ ijtihad. So if a person does not have such a legal method, he would do well do strive to adopt a more sophisticated legal philosophy, otherwise he would not be a worthy candidate for the Mahdi's army.


Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12


The database is protected by copyright ©dentisty.org 2019
send message

    Main page