The factor, which impelled us to undertake this discussion is that some
people1 from those, who truly confessed to the meaning of the tradition because
they found that meaning as clear as the light of the brilliant sun – or those, who,
in its meaning, have concurred or have consensus,2 have ignored that the
requirement of its meaning is it should be Caliphate without any gap
Because if it is accepted that the Caliphate of Prophet is proved for Ameerul
Momineen (a.s.), it would necessitate that it not be separated, but that immediate
Caliphate will also be accepted as in case of appointment of the crown prince by
the king, and successor by the deceased, and taking witness on it is also as such.
Whether the people in the gathering or others definitely think that rulership
is for the first person and bequest for the second person, a long time after the
death of the king or the bequest maker? Or after the appointment of Caliphate or
successorship through a second group of individuals, whose name was not
mentioned at the time of the pledge of Wilayat or mention of the will?!
Whether, inspite of this clarification from the king or the will maker, it is logical that another one is selected and they entrust this responsibility to him; as
in case of one, who did not leave any heir-apparent or did not specify a successor;
is the custom in such cases.
God knows that it is not so and none will do this, except one away from
logic and out of the ambit of truth.
Is there no one, who would stand before the selectors and ask: If the king
had someone other than the heir-apparent in mind, then why he did not specify
and clarify about him?!
Where are those people so that they may face those whose statements were
mentioned above? Those who say: The Mastership (Wilayat) proved for our
master on the day of Ghadeer, was realized for His Eminence during the period of
his apparent Caliphate after Uthman!
Was the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) not knowing persons superior to his cousin
and was aware of their status and was uninformed about the extent of their
experience and practice?!
Then why inspite of concern for death, he only specified Ali (a.s.) and
ordered people to pay allegiance to him and that those, who are present, should
convey it to those absent3. If he approved a share for them in Caliphate and
rulership for them why did he not announce it at its time? Is not Caliphate the
most important obligation of religion and the most important principle of
religion?
It is natural that viewpoints in these matters, [Caliphate and successorship]
would be different – as it was different – and how often instead of debate and
argument, obstinacy and instead of discussion and logic, battle would take place;
then by what motive and justification did the Prophet of mercy left his Ummah to
its own devices in the most important principle of religion?
Although the Prophet of mercy and kindness did not do this, but it is good
expectation of Ahle Sunnat from the past people, office bearers of Caliphate and
its usurpers from its owner on the pretext of young age and loyalty to sons of
Abdul Muttalib4, was the cause that they made the meaning of traditional report
to justify the vessel of sham Caliphate and make distortions.
But our certainty about the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) compels us to say that
His Eminence did not omit his religious obligation; of issuing a clear and
sufficient announcement, which would fulfill the need of Ummah.
May Allah guide us on the straight path.