With attention to this condition, on which the whole community has
consensus, what is the position of one, who does not know and is not needful of
people? On the contrary, people were needless of his knowledge and stories of
his asking for verdicts and his inquiries have filled all books of traditions,
Sunnah, history and biography?
فَمَاذَا بَعْدَ الْحَقِّ إِلَّا الضَّلَلُ
“And what is there after the truth but error?”1
With attention to the above mentioned points, you will recognize the value
of the statement of Ibne Hazm Andulusi in his book.2
“Every discerning person knows that the knowledge of Umar was many
times knowledge of Ali.”
And the value of Ibne Taymiyyah’s statement in Minhajus Sunnah:3
“Jurists have collected the verdicts related to Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and
Ali and concluded that the most accurate and most clear from them, which show
the level of knowledge of its owner, are issues related to Abu Bakr and then
Umar.
Because of this, verdicts, which are clearly contradicted by traditional
reports, are seen to be very less from Umar than Ali. As for Abu Bakr, they are
basically not seen. Abu Bakr and Umar and other senior companions did not
learn anything from Ali; on the contrary it is well known that Ali obtained his
knowledge from Abu Bakr.”
It is strange that this man has deceived himself and imagines that he can also
cheat and deceive others by this!
How is it possible to believe that Ali (a.s.), being the gate of the city of
knowledge of Prophet (s.a.w.a.), as mentioned before,4 and inheritor of his
knowledge and wisdom,5 should have obtained knowledge from Abu Bakr! Such
a thing is impossible even though Ibne Taymiyyah, who claims to be Shaykhul
Islam, has invented it. Evaluate his other falsehoods as well from this statement
and derive your conclusion. And after statements of Ibne Hazm and Ibne
Taymiyyah come the above mentioned statements6 of author of Washiya.
2. Also, with attention to the above mentioned points, the value of
interpretation and justification of Ahle Sunnat regarding this traditional report
will be understood: “Follow my Sunnah and practice of righteous Caliphs and
guided ones; and protect it through remaining attached to them and protect it with
earnest and keep away from innovations (as opposed to Book and Sunnah),
because every innovation is heresy and every heresy is misguidance;”7 as Ahle
Sunnat apply this tradition to one, who sat on the seat of Caliphate through
choice of people, or by appointment of Abu Bakr or by appointment of Shura
committee, and they are compelled to mention Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) also
with them.
Because it is not logical that Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) should command following the practice of someone, who has no practice. And everything that he
has from jurisprudence, Book and Sunnah, he has heard it from others or
delivered verdicts according to his personal view. And he says: “I present my
view herewith; if it is correct, it is from Allah and if it is a mistake, it is from me
and Shaitan.”8
Thus, in this case the Prophet has ordered following the view of people and
personal conjectures in the religion of God. And this has no similarity to the
command of following jurists, who derive their verdicts on the basis of Book,
Sunnah and consensus or even analogy; because jurists derives laws through
matter, which they have understood.
Now, one who has no discernment, who fails to reply to even the clearest
issues, swears that he does not know what to do,9 and is unaware of every day
issues regarding Tayammum, doubts in prayer, ritual bath, secondary issues of
prayer, fasting, Hajj and its like; it is not possible for him to guide the Ummah
and discharge responsibilities of Caliphate.
The correct meaning of the tradition is that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.)
mentioned the names of his Caliphs and specified their names and deemed them
to be equals of Quran in this statement: “Indeed, I leave two Caliphs among you
– or: I leave two heavy things among you: Book of Allah and my progeny, my
Ahle Bayt (a.s.); they will not separate till they arrive at the Pool”.10 He deemed
them equals of Holy Quran and has not implied anyone else due to the use of
Arabic ‘laam’ (definite article); those who are ascribed guidance.
They are folks, whose practice was exactly and without any difference,
practice of Prophet, and not persons, whom His Eminence (s.a.w.a.) neither
introduced or attributed or made bequest for them; nor did he appoint them as his
successors; nor mentioned their number that it may apply to them.
On the contrary, he mentioned qualities, which do not fit anyone, except the
infallible Caliphs of Ahle Bayt (a.s.) and to rely on this tradition to prove
Caliphate in whose pursuit the Ahle Sunnat are, is relying on doubts.
3. Fabricated traditions are present in Ahle Sunnat books, which mention
merits of Umar, which are not at all compatible with authentic traditions we
mentioned and each of these traditions falsify those fabricated traditions.
Following are some reports falsely attributed to the Prophet:
“If I had not been appointed as a Prophet, Umar would have been appointed
as one.”11