12. Twelfth objection
He says: Although Shia do not regard the faith, fairness, being in Paradise
and imamate of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman to be valid, they cannot prove the
faith, fairness, being in Paradise of Ali, what to say of proving his imamate. If
they want to only prove his Imamate, they cannot do so, as evidences and proofs
do not support; like reasoning of Christians for prophethood of Isa will be not
effective without proving prophethood of Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a.).1
And he says:2 As long as the Shia continue to follow their religion, they are
helpless from proving the faith and fairness of Ali; and if they argue through
widely narrated traditional reports regarding Islam, migration and Jihad of Ali,
Islam, migration and Jihad of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman is also proved
through widely narrated traditional reports. On the contrary, the Islam of
Muawiyah, Yazid, Bani Umayyah and Bani Abbas caliphs; and their prayer and
fasting and their Jihad against infidels is also proved through widely narrated
reports.
Reply to the twelfth objection
As long as you are alive, time shows amazing things to you!
Alas, if I only knew, since when was the faith and fairness of Ali in need of
proof and evidence? When did he express disbelief that proof for his belief
should be sought? Did the Prophet at the beginning of his mission had anyone
else as his brother and supporter? Whereas the above-mentioned persons were yet
not Muslims. Is it not that Islam was established only through his sword and
sacrifice? Is it anything, except that infidels were routed through his awe and
power? Is it except that through the sword of his discourse and evident dagger of
proof, he slashed through the veils of apostasy and doubts?
Did God purify the Holy Kaaba from idols by the hands of anyone else? Has
God mentioned in Quran the purification of any family, except the family, whose
chief he is? Is anyone other than him, according to declaration of Quran, the self
of the Prophet? Is there anyone other than him, who sold his life during the night
of migration? Is there anyone other than him, who, like the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.a.), is having more authority on the lives of believers than they have on
themselves? By God, no!
Indeed, Shia traditions on this subject are widely narrated and it is the same
wide narration (Tawatur), which satisfied them that they should accept this
excellence and special qualities. Although the important point here is that during
debate with Ahle Sunnat, Shia argue through their own traditions in order to
establish arguments against them, because their own traditions are most likely to be accepted by Ahle Sunnat; otherwise Shia have no need of their traditions.
The most accepted method of debate is that you reason through the texts
accepted by opponent, but Ahle Sunnat always, in every issue, argue through
traditions and books of their elders and such reasoning is out of the rules of
debate.
Alas, if I only knew what connection is there between faith and justice Ali
and faith of above persons? Does he think that Ali Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) was
same as them, and no difference can be imagined between them? Or he thinks
that the same spirit flows through them that they should be regarded equals?
Or this invention of Ibne Taymiyyah’s mind remained concealed for
companions and companions of companions, Imams, scholars and Shia elders in
the past centuries in innumerable religious debates and discussions in gatherings? Or opponents of Shia forgot this connection in defending those three persons?!
Although, there is no one from them, who on one hand, compared Shia to
Christians and on the other hand equates the faith of Ali (a.s.) with faith of
Muawiyah the impostor, Yazid the profligate, Bani Umayyah tyrants and false
claimants of Bani Abbas. This is the level of his knowledge, morals and piety.
13. Thirteenth objection
He has attributed negative traits and selfishness3 like: omitting prayer,
committing sinful acts and regarding them lawful, and not abstaining from wine
and wantonness, even during the blessed month of Ramadhan, and preferring
polytheism over worship of God and other sins to the teacher Ummah and
supporter of religion and community, Shaykh Tusi and his followers, and against
all Shia; and he believes that Shia are always as such. But every researcher knows
that all these are allegations to defame the Shia and believers, forgetful that one
day the criterion would be established and he would be questioned and on that
day the only judge would be Almighty Allah:
قُلْ لَّا اسْلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا الْمَوَدَّةَ فِي الْقُرْبِي
“He utters not a word but there is by him a watcher at hand.”4
14. Fourteenth objection
He says: Enemies of Abu Bakr and his followers, like Musailima Kazzab
and his followers and others, are the most well known apostates. In spite of that
Shia and their Imams – Allamah Hilli and others – believe that they were on truth
that Abu Bakr fought them unjustly.5
Reply to the fourteenth objection
Alas, if someone had asked him who told him that Shia are supporters of Musailima and his followers? Is it not that Shia always regard him as a liar, and
have narrated his calumnies? Shia books, from beginning till date, have exposed
his falsehood? Shia have firm belief that prophethood ended with Muhammad,
seal of prophets, and whoever claims prophethood after that is a disbeliever.
If he would only mention to us the names of scholars, who he claims follow
this belief. Why has he not mentioned their names? Has he seen this in their
books? What are those books? Has he seen any such point in books of Allamah
Hilli. If he has, he should mention those books specifically, as numerous books of
Allamah Hilli are available, some are printed and some are manuscripts. Please
note that none of his books mention this illogical matter!