What shall I write about one, on whose deviation there was consensus of all
the scholars of his time and who have all condemned him and they warned people
from interacting with him?
And because of deviations and nonsense present in his books and writings,
they issued verdict that they should be burnt, in such a way that it is mentioned in
Lesaanul Meezaan1, and Alusi has mentioned the following in his biography:
“He was deviated and he misguided others.”2
“And what shall I say regarding his writings, which consist of attributing
falsehood to God and His Prophet and his audacity regarding the sanctified
aspects of the law of Shariah and did not exercise any restraint in attributing
lewdness and corruption to Muslims, issuing invalid statements and nonsensical
viewpoints.”
“What shall I say regarding an excessive talker, whose statements are
baseless and viewpoint beyond the bounds of Quran and Sunnah and when he
gives a verdict, it is an unjust one and when he issues a verdict, it is based on
falsehood and he attributes issues to Islamic Ummah from which they are
immune; he attributes statements to Imams and Hafiz scholars, which they are
remote from and books and writings of this person are indications of his
deviation from Islamic viewpoint.
Following are some of his viewpoints:
In his book of jurisprudence (Fiqh), entitled Al-Muhalli3, he says:
Question
If the heirs of the killed one are absent or they are young or insane, jurists
have different viewpoints regarding that.
Then he quotes from Abu Hanifah that he said: The elder heir has the right
of eliminating the killer and it is not necessary to wait for the children to grow
up.
He narrates from Shafei that if one of the heirs of the slain is of age he
cannot demand retaliation till his heir comes of age. Then he has doubted the
statement of Shafei and says: Hasan bin Ali, inspite of the fact that Ali had young
children, took retaliation from Abdur Rahman (and did not wait for them to come of age).
After that he says:
The condemnation of killing of Ibne Muljim returns to them in the same
condition that Hanafis condemn the Shafeis, because in this matter they have
agreement with Malikis and they say: One, who kills on the basis of whim or
independent judgment (Ijtehaad), does not have retaliation. And the whole
Ummah is having consensus that Abdur Rahman Ibne Muljim slain Ali (a.s.) on
the basis of independent judgment (Ijtehaad) and the belief that his act was
correct.
And Imran bin Hattan, poet of the Safooriya sect, says regarding this:
‘I sometimes ponder on the slash, which a pious man delivered only seeking
divine pleasure and I find that his pan of deeds is the heaviest of all in the view of
God.’
Hanafis in opposition to Hasan bin Ali, fabricated this same accusation,
which the Shafei fabricated and the arrow they shot returned to them and they fell
into the ditch they had dug for others.”4
Come to me and we can ask Muslim whether this statement is in conformity
with the statement of the Prophet to Imam Ali (a.s.) that:
“Your killer is the most wretched of the people of the last age,” and in other
words: “The most wretched of the people,” and in the third version: “The most
wretched of this Ummah, like the killer of the she-camel of Prophet Salih.”?
Prominent Hafiz scholars, the elders and the imams have narrated this
tradition and according to Ibne Hazm’s definition of wide narration (Tawatur),
this tradition reaches the point of wide narration (Tawatur) as among narrators of
this tradition are Ahmad, imam of Hanbalis in Musnad,5
Nasai in Khasais,6 Ibne Qutaibah in Al-Imamah was Siyasah7 and Hakeem in Mustadrak8
Is this statement compatible with the address of the Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.a.) to Imam Ali (a.s.)? When he asks:
“Do you want me to inform you about one, who is punished on Judgment
Day most severely?”
I said: “Yes, O Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.).”
He said: “The most severe punishment on Judgment Day would be that of
the killer of the she-camel of Salih and of one, who dyes your beard with the
blood of your head.”